20171193 Ver 1_401 Application_20170920

4011404 PERMIT
FOR
GR.4NTYS CREEK PROJECT
('DUKE
E N E RGY.
PROGRESS
410 South Wilmington Street, NCO2
Raleigh, NC 27601
2
0
4011404 PERMIT
FOR
GR.4NTYS CREEK PROJECT
('DUKE
E N E RGY.
PROGRESS
410 South Wilmington Street, NCO2
Raleigh, NC 27601

%U K E
IsD
OE N E RGY,
PROGRESS
September 14, 2017
tachel Capito
US Army Corps of Engineers
t9 Darlington Avenue
Wilmington, NC 28403
2017
Gail Tyner
410 S. Wilmington Street
NCRH2
Raleigh, NC 27601
o 919.546.2974
c 919.630.4079
t 919.546.7175
Su.)ject: Duke Energy Progress, Proposed Grants Creek Substation and Associated Grants Creek —
Jacksonville 230kV North Transmission Line and Loop Lines, Onslow County, NC
Pre -Construction Notification Form
NWP 12 — courtesy copy
Water Quality Certification No. 4086
Dear Ms. Capito :
Duke Energy Progress (DEP) is governed by the North Carolina Utilities Commission (and in South
Carolina by the Public Service Commission), and is expected to provide electrical service to meet the
existing and expanding needs within its designated services area.
As per conversations with the Wilmington Field Office, DEP is submitting a courtesy copy of the PCN and
supporting information for verification that the proposed substation and transmission line do not trigger
Pre -Construction Notification requirements for NWP 12 because the total permanent wetland impacts
are < 0.10 acre. The project triggers Pre -Construction Notification requirement for the corresponding
NCDEQ Water Quality Certification No. 4086 due to 0.023 acre permanent impacts to wetlands.
Purpose/Need
DEP needs to increase capacity in the Grants Creek area of Onslow County in order to meet the electrical
reliability standards set by the North American Electric Reliability Corporations (NERC)/Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission (FERC). To increase capacity, DEP needs to install a new 230kV Substation and
approximately 13 miles of transmission line to increase the capacity and meet electrical demands.
Project Scope
Substation
The new substation will be located off of Old 30 Road (34.777653, -77.282569). The substation pad and
access drive will require clearing approximate 24.3 acres and 10.6 acres of grading.
Line
DEP conducted a transmission line siting study to site the transmission line and substation in order to
minimize impacts to residential, commercial, cultural, and environmental features. The proposed
transmission line alignment was approved by the NC Utilities Commission in August 2016.

PCN — Grants Creek — Jacksonville 230kV Substation/Transmission Line A.#
Project begins at the existing Jacksonville 230kV Substation off Gum Branch Road (34.803639, -
77.446563), parallels the existing Jacksonville — New Bern 230kV transmission line for approximately 2
miles before separating towards the new location. The new transmission line right-of-way runs
generally south/south east for approximately 10 miles before connecting with the proposed Grants
Creek Substation (34.777653, -77.282569). The 12 mile Grants Creek — Jacksonville North 230kV
Transmission line right-of-way is 125 feet in width.
The 115kV and 230kV loop lines run approximately 0.8 mile east/southeast to connect the proposed
substation with the existing 115kV and 230Kv transmission lines at Old 30 Road. The loop lines require
one 0.8 mile 115kV loop in/out line and one 0.8 mile 230kV loop in/out transmission line (total of four
0.8 mile transmission line corridors). The transmission line corridor for the four loop lines S
approximately 585 feet in width.
Environmental Concerns
Jurisdictional Areas
Environmental Services, Inc. (ESI) conducted a jurisdictional delineation of the proposed transmission
line right-of-way and two substation parcels in 2016 that was reviewed and approved by the USACE in
April 2017 (SAW -2016-00819 main line, SAW -2016-00819 original substation parcel, and SAW -2016-
02279 Trott Property). DEP has used the approved delineations to avoid and minimize permanent
wetland impacts associated with the substation pad.
The transmission line right-of-way crosses approximately 95 acres of wetlands and 4,679 linear feet of
stream. The DEP clearing and construction practices will minimize regulated activities to 0.10 ac of
permanent wetland impacts.
Transmission Line Impacts
The transmission line design dictated that there be two 10 -foot diameter single pole concrete
foundations (Structures 6 and 7) in wetland areas for a total of <0.01 acres of permanent fill (these are
accounted for in the impact table).
The transmission loop lines will cross 55.5 acres of wetlands with no permanent impacts and 0.0654
acres of temporary acres of temporary wetland impacts due to trenching for grounding the new
transmission line to the existing transmission line. These temporary impacts are also accounted for in
the wetland impact table.
There are no direct impacts to streams.
Substation Impacts
The substation parcel contains approximately 17.68 acres of wetlands. Permanent wetland impacts are
limited to 0.019 acres associated with the fill for the grading of the substation pad. Temporary wetlands
impacts are limited to 0.038 acres associated with the installation of erosion control measures. There
are no wetland impacts associated with the substation access drive.
There are no stream impacts associated with the substation and/or access drive

{ *`PCN —Grants Creek—Jacksonville 230kV Substation/Transmission Line 3
Avoidance and Minimization Efforts
DEP purchased the original 230 -acre substation parcel along Old 30 Road adjacent to existing 115kV and
230kV transmission lines. The majority of the site was determined to be wetland. Therefore, DEP
purchased a second substation parcel (Trott property) further northwest along the proposed
transmission line to avoid and minimize permanent wetland impacts associated with the substation.
The substation layout and access drive were designed to avoid and minimize wetland impacts to the
greatest extent possible without changing the transmission line route approved by the NC Utilities
Commission. DEP used the approved delineation to avoid and minimize impacts along the transmission
line to the greatest extent possible.
The DEP clearing and construction specifications discussed in later sections are implemented to avoid
and minimize impacts to wetland/streams, riparian buffers, and other sensitive areas.
Federally Protected Species
Based on data available through the Natural Heritage Program, there are no documented occurrences of
federally protected species within the proposed transmission line right-of-way or the proposed
substation parcels. Federally protected species habitat evaluation and surveys were conducted by ESI in
2016 and 2017. No federally protected species were observed during field investigations. DEP has
received concurrence from the USFWS that the line project ".....meets the criteria for the 4(d) rule. Any
associated take is therefore exempt. Based on the information provided and other information
available , it appears that the proposed action is not likely to adversely affect any other federally -listed
endangered or threatened species, their formally designated critical habitat, or species currently
proposed for listing under the Act at these sites." (see attached USFWS concurrence letter). DEP is
currently waiting on the USFWS concurrence on the substation parcel (Trott Property).
Cultural Resources
Research conducted by ESI in 2016 at the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) revealed no
previously recorded historic properties listed in, eligible, or potentially eligible for listing in the Nation
Register of Historic Places (National Register) are located directly within the proposed transmission line.
Research conducted by ESI in 2016 at the Office of State Archaeology (OSA) revealed that no previously
recorded archaeological sites are located directly within or immediately adjacent to the proposed
transmission line. DEP is currently waiting on the SHPO response on the substation parcel (Trott
Property).
Erosion Control Plan
DEP is actively preparing and will submit separate erosion control, clearing, grading, and access plans for
the substation parcel and the transmission line.
County Floodplain Permits
No floodplain permits are required for the substation project. DEP will submit all appropriate floodplain
information to Onslow County and City of Jacksonville for review and concurrence for the transmission
line work. Structures 16, 18, and 19 are in the floodway and therefore will require a "no -rise" submittal
with the floodplain development permit to the City of Jacksonville. Structures 50, 100, and 101 are
outside the floodway, therefore only a floodplain development will be required by Onslow County.

PCN —Grants Creek —Jacksonville 230kV Substation/Transmission Line 4f
Standard Line Clearing/Construction Procedures and Specifications
DEP will follow its internal specifications for line clearing and construction. These specifications are
incorporated into our vendor contracts. DEP will hold pre-bid and pre-clearing/construction meetings
with vendors, to ensure awareness of these requirements. The procedures that minimize the
environmental impacts for the line construction area described below.
Prior to clearing/construction, DEP conducts environmental surveys to identity the location and extent
of jurisdictional area, applicability of required riparian buffer rules, and the presence/absences of
federally protected species. DEP also conducts a preliminary archaeological site review with the State
Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) and Office of State Archaeology (OSA). Environmentally and
archaeologically sensitive areas are shown on project drawings and provided to contractors and
inspectors.
Clearing/construction projects are required to follow approved sediment and erosion control methods.
All sediment must be contained onsite and kept out of streams and wetlands. Necessary land disturbing
activities will comply with all appropriate regulations. All projects with more than 1 acre of disturbance
obtain an approved sediment and erosion control plan.
DEP has developed internal "buffers" and "sensitive areas" that require measures to protect these areas
and help prevent ground disturbance. These measures include additional riparian buffers (on non-
regulated streams) and buffers on all wetlands. These buffers require the use of commercially made
mats and/or use of low pressure ground equipment (such as flex track or float track vehicles), as
needed, to avoid impacts to the root -mat while working environmentally sensitive areas and
archaeological sites.
DEP's ROW clearing is designed to avoid and minimize impacts. DEP clearing specifications avoid
mechanized clearing in wetlands, wetland/stream buffers, and sensitive areas. All equipment working in
wetlands must be on commercially made matting and/or approved low pressure ground equipment to
avoid and minimize impacts to the root -mat.
DEP's ROW line construction process is designed to avoid and minimize impacts. For instance, DEP does
not change the topography of the ROW unless construction pads or access roads are needed. Under
new construction, placement of structures in wetlands is avoided, to the extent possible. To the extent
possible, the structures placed in wetlands will be a vibratory caisson (hollow steel pipe). These
structures are vibrated into the substrate without any digging, and the transmission structure are slip -
jointed onto the exposed end of the caisson. Depending on soil conditions, some of the structures
placed in wetlands will be "direct -embedded" (placed in an augured hole and backfilled with native
material with no foundation material, such as concrete, added. Excess soil from the augured holes will
be placed on matting, taken to uplands areas and stabilized.
During line construction, DEP attempts to avoid crossing wetlands and streams with equipment. Should
crossing be unavoidable , DEP utilizes commercial matting or low pressure ground equipment to cross
wetlands/buffers and temporary bridges to cross streams. There are no discharges associated with the
mats and bridging material. Bridges and matting are removed upon completion of the work. Low
ground pressure equipment may be used in wetland to construct transmission line structures if the
equipment does not cause "rutting", does not interrupt the natural flow of water, and does not disturb
the root -mat in the wetlands. If low ground pressure vehicles are not available to the contractor or
should the low ground pressure equipment cause rutting or disturb root -mat then DEP require that the
equipment be on commercially made mats while working in wetlands and/or buffers.

f % PCN — Grants Creek —Jacksonville 230kV Substation/Transmission Line 5
Stringing the conductor and overhead ground wire (top static wire) will require temporary guard
structures to hole the wire above any road crossings, stream crossings, and distribution line crossings.
These guard structures will be installed in a manner consistent with the transmission line structures
installation and will utilize erosion control measures to contain all sediment within the ROW.
During construction, DEP identifies project -specific environmental and health and safety inspectors to
oversee contractor performance. Additionally, DEP's central office staff work with field inspectors,
project managers, and permitting staff to evaluate and ensure compliance.
DEP has used the above process to construction transmission line over the years, has reviewed the
process with the Corps on a regular basis, and in several instances, has asked the Corps to visit a project
under construction to confirm that the project and construction methods, as described aboved are not
jurisdictional under CWA Section 404.
We have enclosed the following in the application packet:
1. Pre -Construction Notification
2. PJD approvals
3. Jurisdictional Maps
4. USFWS concurrence letter
5. Engineered drawings
Should you or others of the USACE, Wilmington Regulatory Office staff wish to visit this project,
please contact Ms. Gail Tyner (line) with Transmission Siting, Permitting and Engagement at
919-546-2974 / [e-mail] or Peter Sokalski with Substation Engineering at
919-546-6123 / [e-mail].
Sincerely,
Cc: Karen Higgins, DWR

o��"�oyWja�r��9�c
a lqiii� <
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.4 January 2009
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A.
Applicant Information
1.
Processing
1 a.
Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
❑X Section 404 Permit ❑ Section 10 Permit
1 b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 12 or General Permit (GP) number:
1c.
Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
❑ Yes ❑X No
1 d.
Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
❑X 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular ❑ Non -404 Jurisdictional General Permit
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification — Express ❑ 'Riparian Buffer Authorization
1 e.
Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWQ
401 Certification:
❑ Yes ❑X No
For the record only for Corps Permit:
❑X Yes ❑ No
1f.
Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for
mitigation of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank
or in -lieu fee program.
❑ Yes ❑X No
1g.
Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1h
below.
❑X Yes ❑ No
1 h.
Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ Yes ❑X No
2.
Project Information
2a.
Name of project:
Grant's Creek 230kV Substation and associated Transmission Lines
2b.
County:
Onslow
2c.
Nearest municipality / town:
Jacksonville
2d. Subdivision name:
2e.
NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state project no:
3.
Owner Information
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
Duke Energy Progress
3b.
Deed Book and Page No.
4554 / 646 (substation) - Transmission line will be easements
3c.
Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
3d.
Street address:
410 S. Wilmington Street, NCO2
3e.
City, state, zip:
Raleigh, North Carolina 27601
3f.
Telephone no.:
919-546-2235
3g.
Fax no.:
919-546-7175
3h.
Email address:
[e-mail]
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is:
❑ Agent ❑ Other, specify:
4b. Name:
4c. Business name
(if applicable):
4d. Street address:
4e. City, state, zip:
4f. Telephone no.:
4g. Fax no.:
4h. Email address:
5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name:
5b. Business name
(if applicable):
5c. Street address:
5d. City, state, zip:
,
5e. Telephone no.:
5f. Fax no.:
5g. Email address:
Page 2 of 10

B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
531700574891 (substation) see attached for line info
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
ILatitude: 34.772 Longitude: 77.283
1c. Property size:
78.76 acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water to proposed project:
Little Northeast Creek
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
C -NSW
2c. River basin:
White Oak
3. Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
The substation site is currently vacant/partially wooded. The general land use in the vicinity is a mix of vacant/agricultural/silvicultural/ and residential
uses. The land use along the transmission line mimics the general land use in the project vicinity. Project acreages/lengths below are for the
substation parcel only. see attached for transmission line information.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property: 17.68 '
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property: 0
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
DEP needs to construction of a new electric substation facility and associated overhead transmission lines in order increase capacity.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
new 230kV substation which will require clearing, grading, and construction of a substation pad, access drive, and associated transmission lines
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project (includingall prior phases)in the past?
❑X Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
Comments:
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
of determination was made?
Preliminary ❑ Final
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known):
Agency/Consultant Company: Environmental Services, Inc.
Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
SAW -016-00819 (line)
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
❑Yes ❑X No ❑ Unknown
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?
❑ Yes ❑X No
6b. If yes, explain.
Page 3 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1 a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
❑X Wetlands ❑ Streams —tributaries ❑ Buffers ❑ Open Waters ❑ Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a.
Wetland impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
2b.
Type of impact
2c.
Type of wetland
2d.
Forested
2e.
Type of jurisdiction
Corps (404,10) or
DWQ (401, other)
2.
Area of
impact
(acres)
W1 P
Fill
Pine Flat
No
Corps
0.002
W2 P
Fill
Pine Flat
No
Corps
0.002
W3 T
Land Clearing
Pine Flat
Yes
Corps
0.003
W4 P
Fill
Pine Flat
Yes
Corps
0.019
W5 T
Land Clearing
Pine Flat
Yes
Corps
0.035
W6 T
trenching
Non-Riverine Swamp Forest
No
DWQ
0.0654
2g. Total Wetland Impacts:
0.057
2h. Comments:
Impacts to W1, W2, and W6 are located within the existing transmission line right-of-way
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a.
Stream impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
3b.
Type of impact
3c.
Stream name
3d.
Perennial (PER) or
intermittent (INT)?
3e.
Type of
jurisdiction
3f.
Average
stream
width
(feet)
3g.
Impact
length
(linear
feet)
S1 -
Choose one
-
_
S2 -
Choose one
_
-
S3 -
Choose one
_
-
S4 -
Choose one
-
_
S5 -
Choose one
-
_
S6 -
Choose one
_
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
3i. Comments:
Page 4 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then indivi ually list all open water impacts below.
4a.
Open water
impact number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
4b.
Name of waterbody
(if applicable)
4c.
Type of impact
4d.
Waterbody
type
4e.
Area of impact (acres)
01 -
Choose one
Choose
O2 -
Choose one
Choose
03 -
Choose one
Choose
04 -
Choose one
Choose
4f. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments:
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, then complete the chart below.
5a.
Pond ID number
5b.5c.
Proposed use or
purpose of pond
5d. 5e.
Wetland Impacts (acres) Stream Impacts (feet) Upland
(acres)
Flooded
Filled
Excavated Flooded
Filled
Excavated
P1
Choose one
P2
Choose one
5f. Total:
5g. Comments:
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If any impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a. Project is in which protected basin?
❑ Neuse ❑ Tar -Pamlico ❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman ❑ Other:
6b.
Buffer Impact
number —
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Stream name
6e.
Buffer
mitigation
required?
6f.
Zone 1
impact
(square
feet)
6g.
Zone 2
impact
(square
feet
B1 -
Yes/No
B2 -
Yes/No
B3 -
Yes/No
B4 -
Yes/No
B5 -
Yes/No
B6 -
Yes/No
6h. Total Buffer Impacts:
6i. Comments:
Page 5 of 10

D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
DEP purchased an additional site for the substation parcel in order to minimize and avoid wetland impacts on the site originally purchased for the
substation. DEP minimized wetland greatest extent possible for the substation location. The substation access road has been routed to avoid wetland
impacts; location of substation has been adjusted to extent practical to minimize wetland impacts; Gearing in wetland areas to be accomplished
without mechanized clearing. No grubbing or grading will occur in wetlands excepted the permanent impacts accounted for in the impact table above.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
DEP has avoiding and minimized by avoiding mechanized clearing activities in wetlands ) no grubbing/grading). DEP using commercially made
matting during clearing and construction activities to avoid and minimize impacts to the wetland root mats.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
❑ Yes ❑X No
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
. ❑ DWQ ❑ Corps
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project?
El Mitigation bank
❑ Payment to in -lieu fee program
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type: Choose one
Type: Choose one
Type: Choose one
Quantity:
Quantity:
Quantity:
3c. Comments:
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached.
❑ Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested:
linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
Choose one
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4f. Non -riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4h. Comments:
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
Page 6 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) — required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
Yes ❑X No
buffer mitigation?
6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required.
6c.
6d.
6e.
Zone
Reason for impact
Total impact
Multiplier
Required mitigation
(square feet)
(square feet)
Zone 1
3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2
1.5
6f. Total buffer mitigation required:
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in -lieu fee fund).
6h. Comments:
Page 7 of 10

E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1 a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
Yes ❑X No
1 b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
1.74
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
❑ Yes ❑Q No
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why:
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which localgovernment's jurisdiction is thisproject?
3b. Which of the following locally-implemented stormwater management programs
apply (check all that apply):
❑ Phase II
❑ NSW
❑ USMP
❑ Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other:
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
attached?
El Yes ❑ No
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
4a. Which of the following state-implemented stormwater management programs apply
(check all that apply):
OCoastal counties
❑ORW
❑Session Law 2006-246
❑Other:
4b. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
attached?
Yes ZNo
5. DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a. Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
❑ Yes ❑ No
5b. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
❑ Yes ❑ No
Page 8 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

F.
Supplementary Information
1.
Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1a.
Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the
❑ Yes ❑X No
use of public (federal/state) land?
1 b.
If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State
❑ Yes ❑ No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1 c.
If you answered "yes' to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
❑ Yes ❑ No
letter.)
Comments:
2.
Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a.
Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
❑Yes ❑X No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .02001)?
2b.
Is this an after -the -fact permit application?
El Yes ❑X No
2c.
If you answered "yes' to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s):
3.
Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a.
Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in
❑Yes No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b.
If you answered `yes' to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
4.
Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a.
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non -discharge or disctfi%t ) df`w sl vtrifat�j�geher�f ►froth'
No
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
wastewater will be generated on-site for this site (un -manned site) `. j.
.?4�i!t•V = �' 14► =�� .
Page 9 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
❑Yes ❑X No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
❑ Yes ❑X No
impacts?
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
Raleigh
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
The USFWS and Natural Heritage Program data was consulted for known occurrences of federally protected species and Designated Critical Habitat.
Environmental Services, Inc. conducted habitat evaluation and surveys for federally protected species listed for Onslow County, NC.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
❑ Yes ❑X No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
7. Historic of Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
❑ Yes ❑X No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
Environmental Services, Inc. conducted a State Historic Preservation Office records review. No historic and/or archeological resources were
documented in the project study area.
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA -designated 100 -year floodplain?
❑ Yes ❑X No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
The substation is no located in a FEMA -designated 100 -year floodplain. The transmission line crosses numerous streams and floodplains. Only X
structures were located in the floodway zones and DEP is obtaining the required floodplain permits for these structures.
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?
FEMA Firm Mapping
f0f2hl" e41286AJ
r
-
I(Age's
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
icant/Agent's ignature Date
ature is valid only if an authorization
letter from the applicant is provided.)
Page 10 of 10

O VERA LL PROJECT MAP

,;t14r -
Also See ES , '' c `Topog y M
— 11
♦
•
1
�: iSa� • j. ..
' Grants Creek 230kV
• • Substation
1 }
4;/r
!'-+y � i`S �„" r^., "'•^y .w,,,�.,�T ���'."'"'"°'.,��.,..' � . =sem` ~�.
� • Win. �..,, �" �'" e '` , ...' � �,• �,
_ e14
LEGEND
Proposed Transmission Line Route
-- Proposed Substation Parcel (Trott Property)
Originally Purchased Substation Site
,oao 2000
Feet
s.)
A
12
to* DUKE
X111 11 ENERGY®
DEP Grants Creek -Jacksonville Transmission Project
Transmission Siting, Permitting and Engagement
LOcAmoN ONSLOW COUNTY, NC
DRAWN LOE
DATE 7/14/2017 nGURE 1 c (Revised)

I
Also See ESI, Inc. Transmission
Line Wetland Figures
\
\
\ 3
Originally Purchased
Substation Site
ti
Grants Creek \ \ \ \ \
230kV Substation \ \ \ \
(Trott Property) \ \ \ \
LEGEND
Proposed Transmission Line Route Evaluation Area
Proposed Substation Parcel (Trott Property)
Originally Purchased Substation Site
Wetlands
--- Proposed Transmission Line Right -of -Way
— — — Proposed Transmission Line Centerline
DUKE
ENERGY..
DEP Grants Creek -Jacksonville Transmission Project
Transmission Siting, Permitting and Engagement
LOCATION ONSLOW COUNTY, NC
DRAWN LOE
DATE 7/14/2017 nGURE 2 j—a (Revised)

WETLAND IMPACTS MAPS

PCN WETLAND IMPACT KEY MAP
PCN Wetland Impacts #t & #2
Concrete Foundations
See Detail Sheets 2 & 3
Existing Jacksonville
230kV Substation
d
,Jacksonville
p.
PCN Wetland Impacts
#3,4,5
New Grants Creek 230kV
Substation Property
See Detail Sheets 4 & 4A
PCN Wetland Impact #6
Temporary Trenching
See Detail Sheet 5
LEGEND
DUKE
Proposed Transmission Line Route
ENEY
Proposed Substation Parcel (Trott Property)
DEP Grants Creek -Jacksonville Transmission Project
Originally Purchased Substation Site
Transmission Siting, Permitting and Engagement
Miles
L;A 1! %11 3120

PCN Wetland Impact #1
Concrete Foundation
L11
7
M
Nil %k
g--
STR 6
G14e "All
G ,
Diameter Concrete Foundation
GV —0,002 ac. of permanent
\p Nk wetland impact
--77-
LEGEND
DUKE
Proposed Transmission Line
Proposed Transmission Line Night -of -Way
Wetlands
ENERGY
DEP Grants Creek -Jacksonville Transmission Project
Permanent Impacts to Wetlands
Transmission Siting, Permitting and Engagement
A % ON", N
Aw, LA
"Ali 7/21/201' ',)W(, NO SH 2 (A

- rN wetland Impact #2
'.oncrete Foundation
w W / N
0M
ON
* /
14/
3 -Pole Angled STR;
Vibratory Caissons
w
�• lP �0
STR 8
\O
ameter Concrete Foundation
0.002 ac. of permanent
wetland impact
LEGEND
Proposed Transmission Line
Proposed Transmission Line Right -of -Way
Wetlands
Permanent Impacts to Wetlands
if DUKE
ENERGY
DEP Grants Creek -Jacksonville Transmission Project
Transmission Siting, Permitting and Engagement
IMA. ON91 OW COUN TY, NC
DRAV,% 1.OE
Dart 7/21/201 -` M: NO. SH 5 01 5

STR 707 Proposed Substation Parcel Overview
pppp
LEGEND
WKE
�,. ENERGY:
Proposed Transmission Line
Proposed Transmission Line Right -of -Way Clear & Grub by Mechanized Methods
Tree Line u Clear by Mechanized Methods, No Grub
SutionAccess Drived Substation Parcel {Trott Property}
Pa Temporary Impacts to Wetlands
ro
Wetlands
Permanent Impacts to Wetlands
Q
Clear by Hand -Cutting, No Grub Originaily Purchased Substation Site
DEP Grants Creek -Jacksonville Transmission Project
Transmission Siting, Permitting and Engagement
- J^SLOW COUNTY, NC

PCN Wetland Impacts #3,4,5
Temporary and Permanent Substation Impacts
STR 110
STR 91�
i
II .�
STR�6
PCN Wetland Impact #3-0.003 AC /
(Temporary Erosion Control Measures)
STR 110 STR
--Clear b Hand -Cutting,
Y g,
No Grub.
�.. % "Non -Regulated" Activity
STR 129 S 111
Permanent PCN Wetland Impact #40.019 AC
(Permanent Fill)
I
Temporary PCN Wetland Impact #5-0.035 AC - STR 12
(Temporary Erosion Control Measures)
LEGEND DUKE
Proposed Transmission Line
Proposed Transmission Line Right -of -Way
Clear & Grub by Mechanized Methods ENERGY.
Substation Access Drive Clear by Mechanized Methods, No Grub
Proposed Substation Property Line Temporary Impacts to Wetlands DEP Grants Creek -Jacksonville Transmission Project
Wetlands
Clear by Hand -Cutting, No Grub Permanent Impacts 4o Wetlands Transmission Siting, Permitting and Engagement
ONS[ OW :;OUN1Y, NC;
LOE
Feet n�lf 7/21/2017 tin. '"11 4A OF 5

PCN Wetland Impact #6
Temporary Trenching
Structures Shown Will Be
(Direct Embedded &/or Vibratory
Caissions; There Will Be No
Regulated Activity Associated With
Pole Installations
Underground Temporary
Trenching for Ground Tie
Installations; Approx. 2'
Trench With 2' Side Cast
Typ. Transmission
•
•' Structure •
•
•
• '� PCN WETLAND
\ IMPACT # 6
LEGEND
Proposed and Existing Transmission Line Ditch
Proposed and Existing Transmission Line Right -of -Way
Temporary Impacts to Wetlands
Originally Purchased Substation Site
Wetlands
aClear by Hand -Cutting, No Grub
Stritlie--ture
AREA
ACREAG
A
0.0184
B
0.0100
i
0.0279
D
LEGEND
Proposed and Existing Transmission Line Ditch
Proposed and Existing Transmission Line Right -of -Way
Temporary Impacts to Wetlands
Originally Purchased Substation Site
Wetlands
aClear by Hand -Cutting, No Grub
Stritlie--ture
AREA
ACREAG
A
0.0184
B
0.0100
C
0.0279
D
0.0091
FOTAL
0.0654
1 d DUKE
ENERGY
DEP Grants Creek •Jacksonvilie Transmission Project
Transmission Siting, Permitting and Engagement
ONSI.OW COUNTY, W
nrnviti LOE
Dnir 7/21/20' I

NC UTILITIES COMMISSION

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
UTILITIES COMMISSION
RALEIGH
DOCKET NO. E-2, SUB 1102
BEFORE THE NORTH CAROLINA UTILITIES COMMISSION
In the Matter of
Application of Duke Energy Progress, LLC )
for a Certificate of Environmental ) ORDER ISSUING CERTIFICATE
Compatibility and Public Convenience ) OF ENVIRONMENTAL
and Necessity to Construct Approximately ) COMPATIBILITY AND PUBLIC
12.4 Miles of New 230 -kV Transmission ) CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY
Line in Onslow County, North Carolina )
BY THE COMMISSION: On March 28, 2016, Duke Energy Progress, LLC (DEP or
Company), filed an application pursuant to G.S. 62-100, et seq. and Commission
Rules R1-5 and R8-62, for a Certificate of Environmental Compatibility and Public
Convenience and Necessity (Certificate or CPCN) authorizing the construction of a new
12.4 -mile 230 -kilovolt (kV) transmission line in Onslow County, North Carolina. The
application included the testimony of Timothy J. Same, Lead Transmission Siting
Specialist for DEP.
On April 15, 2016, the Commission issued an Order Scheduling Hearings,
Requiring Filing of Testimony, Establishing Discovery Guidelines and Requiring Public
Notice (Scheduling Order). The Scheduling Order, among other things, scheduled a
public witness hearing on DEP's application to be held in Jacksonville on Tuesday,
July 12, 2016, and an expert witness hearing to be held in Raleigh on Wednesday,
July 13, 2016. Further, the Scheduling Order required DEP to publish a public notice
containing a summary of its application, the details of the public witness hearing, and
other information. The Scheduling Order and the public notice provided that the hearing
might be canceled if no significant protests were filed with the Commission.
On May 6, 2016, DEP filed a petition for Waiver of Time Limitation Regarding
Service of Application. DEP stated that due to an inadvertent oversight it did not serve
the City of Jacksonville and Onslow County within ten days of filing the application, as
required under G.S. 62-102. The City of Jacksonville and Onslow County did not object
to the waiver. On May 10, 2016, the Commission issued an Order granting the waiver.
On May 18, 2016, the Commission issued an Order Changing Time of Expert
Witness Hearing in which it changed the starting time of the expert witness hearing on
July 13, 2016, from 10:00 a.m.to 2:00 p.m.
On May 24, 2016, the State Environmental Review Clearinghouse of the
Department of Administration (State Clearinghouse) filed comments with the Commission.

In summary, the State Clearinghouse concluded that because of the nature of the
comments no further State Clearinghouse review is needed to determine compliance with
the North Carolina Environmental Policy Act.
On June 1, 2016, DEP filed an affidavit of publication demonstrating that the public
notice had been published once a week for four weeks in the Jacksonville Daily News.
On July 5, 2016, the Public Staff filed a letter stating that it investigated the
application filed by DEP and determined that the proposed transmission line meets the
requirements of G.S. 62-105. The Public Staff stated that the line is necessary, the
proposed location and estimated costs are reasonable, and the impact of the line on the
environment is justified considering the state of available technology. In addition, the
Public Staff stated that the environmental compatibility and public convenience and
necessity requires the construction of the transmission line. Finally, the Public Staff stated
that it recommends that the Commission issue the certificate requested by DEP.
The Commission did not receive any petitions to intervene or protests in this
docket, nor were any consumer statements of position or testimony filed in this matter. In
addition, the Commission Staff confirmed with the Public Staff that the Public Staff had
not received any protests regarding DEP's application. Therefore, on July 8, 2016, the
Commission issued an Order cancelling the public witness hearing that was scheduled
for July 12, 2016.
On July 11, 2016, DEP filed a motion requesting that the Commission cancel the
expert witness hearing scheduled for July 13, 2016. In that motion, DEP asserted that DEP
and the Public Staff were the only parties to this proceeding, that no party opposed approval
of the Certificate, and that unless the Commission required DEP's expert witness to testify
in person there appeared to be no necessity to conduct the expert witness hearing. Further,
DEP stated that the Public Staff did not object to cancelling the hearing.
On July 11, 2016, the Commission issued an Order cancelling the expert witness
hearing; accepting into evidence the application, testimony, exhibits and affidavits that had
been filed; and directing DEP to file a proposed order on or before August 12, 2016. On
August 9, 2016, DEP and the Public Staff filed a joint proposed order.
Based upon the Company's verified application, affidavit, testimony, and exhibits
received into evidence, and the record as a whole, the Commission makes the following:
E

FINDINGS OF FACT
1. DEP is a public utility providing electric service to customers in its service
area in North Carolina and is subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission.
2. The Commission has jurisdiction over this application. Pursuant to
G.S. 62-100, et seg. and Commission Rules R1-5 and R8-62, a public utility must receive
a Certificate prior to constructing a transmission line in North Carolina having a capacity
of 161 kV or more.
3. DEP is required by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to
comply with the reliability standards of the North American Electric Reliability Corporation
(NERC). NERC may impose stringent penalties for violations of its reliability standards.
4. According to DEP's testimony, during peak load conditions forecasted for
2020, a common tower outage of the existing Jacksonville — Havelock 230 -kV line and the
existing Jacksonville — Jacksonville City 115 -kV line could cause the voltages in the United
States Marine Corps (USMC) Camp Lejeune area to fall below the planning criteria. The
loss of the existing Jacksonville — New Bem 230 -kV line could also cause an overload of
the Jacksonville — Havelock 230 -kV line. In order to meet projected demand levels in a
reliable manner at all demand levels over the range of forecasted system demand, under
contingency conditions the new transmission line is needed to ensure that electricity
remains reliable and that the region does not suffer blackouts or other reliability issues.
5. DEP's application meets the requirements of G.S. 62-102.
6. DEP has carried its burden of proof under G.S. 62-105 by showing that:
(1) The proposed transmission line is necessary to satisfy the reasonable
needs of the public for an adequate and reliable supply of electricity;
(2) When compared with reasonable alternative courses of action,
construction of the transmission line in the proposed location is
reasonable, preferred, and in the public interest;
(3) The costs associated with the proposed transmission line are
reasonable;
(4) The impact that the proposed transmission line will have on the
environment is justified considering the state of available technology,
the nature and economics of the alternatives, and other material
considerations; and
(5) The environmental compatibility, public convenience and necessity
require the construction of the transmission line.
7. It is in the public interest, reasonable and appropriate to grant the requested
Certificate.
K3

EVIDENCE AND CONCLUSIONS FOR FINDINGS OF FACT NOS. 1-2
These findings of fact are essentially informational, jurisdictional, and procedural
in nature and are uncontroverted.
EVIDENCE AND CONCLUSIONS FOR FINDINGS OF FACT NOS. 3-7
The evidence supporting these findings of fact appears in DEP's Certificate
application, the direct testimony of witness Same, the comments of the State
Clearinghouse, and the letter filed by the Public Staff.
On March 28, 2016, DEP filed its CPCN application requesting authorization to
construct a new 230 -kV transmission line in Onslow County. The application stated that
DEP is required by the FERC to comply with NERC's reliability standards. NERC may
impose stringent penalties for violations of its reliability standards.
In accordance with these standards, DEP's application stated that it plans its
transmission system to supply projected demands in a reliable manner at all demand
levels over the range of forecasted system demand, under contingency conditions. DEP
stated that in compliance with the NERC reliability standards, it routinely conducts studies
of its transmission system to identify required improvements. DEP also stated that its
transmission system includes lines in every county that it serves and maintaining the
transmission backbone is critical to ensuring that electricity remains reliable in the future.
DEP witness Same testified that during peak load conditions forecasted for 2020,
a common tower outage of the existing Jacksonville — Havelock 230 -kV line and the
existing Jacksonville — Jacksonville City 115 -kV line could cause the voltages in the
USMC Camp Lejeune area to fall below the planning criteria. He stated also that the loss
of the existing Jacksonville — New Bern 230 -kV line could cause an overload of the
Jacksonville — Havelock 230 -kV line. Accordingly, witness Same testified that the new
transmission line is needed to ensure that electricity remains reliable and that the region
does not suffer blackouts or other reliability issues.
Witness Same testified further that the new transmission line will run to the existing
Jacksonville 230 -kV substation (which contains two 300 -MVA 230 -kV to 115 -kV
transformers feeding the 115 -kV transmission system) from a new DEP substation to be
located near the Grants Creek community. He stated that the Jacksonville 230 -kV
substation was built in the early 1970s and is part of a network and is a critical hub to
transmission lines that provide reliable delivery of electricity to communities throughout
the region and well beyond Jacksonville. To that end, he asserted that the new line will
provide benefits to the entire region, including USMC Camp Lejeune and Onslow County
residents and businesses, through enhanced reliability. The transmission system serves
DEP customers as well as customers of rural electric cooperatives and municipally owned
electric utilities.
4

Exhibit A of DEP's application is a Routing Study and Environmental Report
(Report), which stated that the study area for routing the proposed line is located in
eastern North Carolina, within Onslow County, and includes portions of Jacksonville and
Half Moon. The Report states that the area is about ten miles north of USMC Camp
Lejeune. The primary communities within the study area are Piney Green, Pumpkin
Center, Jacksonville, and Half Moon. These communities and the study area are shown
in Figure 2-1 of the Report.
The Report demonstrated that the preferred route for the transmission line begins at
the proposed Grants Creek 230 -kV substation in Onslow County, northeast of Piney Green.
It then heads northwest to just northeast of Riverstone Court. The preferred route turns to
the west for about 1.1 miles before heading northwest to the intersection with Halltown
Road. After crossing Halltown Road, the preferred route then crosses US Route 17 (New
Bem Highway) and continues northwest for about a half mile. The route tums west for about
0.6 miles, and then tums northwest for about 1.2 miles, where it enters Hofmann Forest
agricultural land and intersects a forest road north of Jim Parker Road. The preferred route
then continues northwest through Hofmann Forest until intersecting two forest roads
northeast of Sonoma Road, and a fourth forest road north of Merin Height Road where it
exits Hofmann Forest (having crossed about 1.6 miles of Hofmann Forest agricultural land)
and turns southwest. The route parallels the northwestern and southwestem borders of the
Carolina Plantations sub -division before its intersection with Ramsey Road. The route then
turns southwest and parallels the existing DEP Jacksonville -New Bem 230 -kV transmission
line for about 1.4 miles. For the last 0.6 mile the line will be double -circuited as it enters the
existing Jacksonville substation. This route is shown in Figure 2-2 of the Report.
The Report stated that the proposed in-service date for the new line is
November of 2019, and that the transmission project (including the new Grants Creek
substation) will cost about $40 million.
DEP fully described the transmission line routing process, studies and physical
properties in the Report. The Commission concludes that the Report satisfies of the
requirements of G.S. 62-102.
Exhibit B to DEP's application is a draft of the public notice that DEP published in
the Jacksonville Daily News, a newspaper of general circulation serving the portions of
Onslow County that would be impacted by the proposed line. DEP published this public
notice, after modifications made by the Commission, upon Commission approval and
served the parties identified in G.S. 62-102(b) with a copy of the application and a notice
stating the date the application was filed, the date by which parties were required to seek
intervention, and the statute and the rule governing intervention.
5

On July 5, 2016, the Public Staff submitted a letter in support of DEP's application.
The letter stated:
... the Public Staff believes that Duke Energy Progress has demonstrated, as
required by G.S. 62-105, that the proposed transmission line is necessary,
that when compared with reasonable alternative courses of action,
construction of the line in the proposed location is reasonable, preferred, and
in the public interest, that the estimated costs associated with the line are
reasonable, that the impact of the line on the environment is justified
considering the state of available technology, and that the environmental
compatibility, public convenience, and necessity requires the transmission
line. In short, the Public Staff recommends that the Commission issue the
certificate requested in this proceeding.
On May 24, 2016, the State Clearinghouse filed its comments with the
Commission. The letter from the State Clearinghouse stated that no further action is
required of the Commission for compliance with the North Carolina Environmental Policy
Act. The letter further stated that DEP should take all of the comments provided through
the Clearinghouse review into consideration when developing the project.
DEP witness Same testified that 50 landowners have some portion of the proposed
line's 125 -foot wide right-of-way on their property. Witness Same testified that on
January 29, 2016, DEP sent letters to all 84 individuals who own land that is within
250 feet of the proposed centerline of the preferred route. These letters included the
appropriate reference to G.S. 40A-11 and thus provided the necessary 30 -day notice for
DEP to enter the properties for the purpose of surveys, soil borings, appraisals, and
assessments.
None of the impacted landowners intervened or filed comments in this
proceeding. No party intervened in the docket, and no party or person has objected to
the requested CPCN.
Having carefully reviewed the application, and based on all the evidence of record
and the recommendation of the Public Staff, the Commission finds and concludes that
the proposed transmission line satisfies the environmental compatibility and public
convenience and necessity requirements of G.S. 62-100 et seg., and that a CPCN should
be issued for the proposed transmission line construction.
L

IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that pursuant to G.S. 62-100, et seq., a certificate
of environmental compatibility and public convenience and necessity to construct about
12.4 miles of new transmission line in Onslow County, North Carolina, as described in
DEP's application, is hereby issued, and the same is attached as Appendix A to this Order.
ISSUED BY ORDER OF THE COMMISSION.
This the 19th day of August, 2016.
NORTH CAROLINA UTILITIES COMMISSION
'tYwv;,o
Paige J. Morris, Deputy Clerk
7

APPENDIX A
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
UTILITIES COMMISSION
RALEIGH
DOCKET NO. E-2, SUB 1102
Known to All Persons By These Presents, That
DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC
410 South Wilmington Street
Raleigh, North Carolina 27601
is hereby issued this
CERTIFICATE OF ENVIRONMENTAL COMPATIBILITY AND PUBLIC CONVENIENCE
AND NECESSITY PURSUANT TO G.S. 62-100, et seg.
to construct approximately 12.4 miles of 230 -kV transmission line
to be located in
Onslow County, North Carolina
Subject to receipt of all federal and state permits as required by existing and
future regulations prior to beginning construction, and further subject to all other orders,
rules, regulations, and conditions as are now or may hereafter be lawfully made by the
North Carolina Utilities Commission.
ISSUED BY ORDER OF THE COMMISSION.
This the 19th day of August, 2016.
NORTH CAROLINA UTILITIES COMMISSION
Paige J. Morris, Deputy Clerk

TRANSMISSION LINE PROJECT

From: Jeff Harbour
To: Tyner, Gail
Subject: FW: Confirmation of Project Receipt Re: Online Project Review Certification Letter
Date: Tuesday, August 01, 2017 8:46:49 AM
*** Exercise caution. This is an EXTERNAL email. DO
NOT open attachments or click links from unknown
senders or unexpected email. ***
Receipt confirmation from FWS for the GC Alt Sub site
From: Raleigh, FW4 [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Tuesday, August 1, 2017 8:41 AM
To: Jeff Harbour <[e-mail]>
Subject: Confirmation of Project Receipt Re: Online Project Review Certification Letter
Thank you for submitting your online project package. We will review your package
within 30 days of receipt. If you have submitted an online project review request
letter, expect our response within 30 days. If you have submitted an online project
review certification letter, you will typically not receive a response from us since the
certification letter is our official response. However, if we have additional questions or
we do not concur with your determinations, we will contact you during the review
period.

E"' 00Fr� United States Department of the Interior
°} FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
-A • Raleigh ES Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
44""' Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
June 22, 2017
Jeff Harbour
Environmental Services, Inc.
4901 Trademark Drive
Raleigh, NC 27610
Re: Grants Creek 230kV Line — Onslow County, NC
Dear Mr. Harbour:
Thank you for using the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (Service) on-line project planning and
consultation process to determine whether a federally -listed species or designated critical habitat
may be affected by your proposed project. Our comments are submitted pursuant to, and in
accordance with, provisions of the Endangered Species Act.
The proposed project may affect the Northern Long-eared Bat (Myotis septentrionalis). Since the
proposed project site is greater than 150 feet from a known roost tree and your project does not
require prohibited intentional take, your project has met the criteria for the 4(d) rule. Any associated
take is therefore exempt. Based on the information provided and other information available, it
appears that the proposed action is not likely to adversely affect any other federally -listed
endangered or threatened species, their formally designated critical habitat, or species currently
proposed for listing under the Act at these sites. We believe that the requirements of section
7(a)(2) of the Act have been satisfied for your project. Please remember that obligations under
section 7 consultation must be reconsidered if: (1) new information reveals impacts of this
identified action that may affect listed species or critical habitat in a manner not previously
considered; (2) this action is subsequently modified in a manner that was not considered in this
review; or, (3) a new species is listed or critical habitat determined that may be affected by the
identified action.
We hope you find our online process to be beneficial. If you have any questions or comments,
please contact John Ellis of this office at [phone] ext. 26.
Sincerely,
V Pete Benjamin
Field Supervisor

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action Id. SAW -2016-00819 County: Onslow U.S.G.S. Quad: NC-KELLUM
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
Requestor: Environmental Services
Jeff Harbour
4901 Trademark Drive
Raleigh, NC 27610
Size (acres) 190 Nearest Town Jacksonville
Nearest Waterway Grants Creek River Basin Onslow Bav
USGS RUC 03020301 Coordinates Latitude: 34.7745322207274
Longitude: -77.2738679368903
Location description: The project area is for a proposed Gower line right of way starting at an existing substation
located at the intersection of Maynard Blvd and Gum Branch Road, Jacksonville, Onslow County, North Carolina and
ending at a proposed substation site on the north side of Old 30 Road at its intersection with Rocky Run Road,
Jacksonville, Onslow County, North Carolina. The project area is depicted in the attached maps.
Indicate Which of the Following Apply:
A. Preliminary Determination
X There are waters, including wetlands, on the above described project area, that may be subject to Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403). The
waters, including wetlands, have been delineated, and the delineation has been verified by the Corps to be sufficiently
accurate and reliable. Therefore this preliminary jurisdiction determination may be used in the permit evaluation process,
including determining compensatory mitigation. For purposes of computation of impacts, compensatory mitigation
requirements, and other resource protection measures, a permit decision made on the basis of a preliminary JD will treat all
waters and wetlands that would be affected in any way by the permitted activity on the site as if they are jurisdictional
waters of the U.S. This preliminary determination is not an appealable action under the Regulatory Program
Administrative Appeal Process (Reference 33 CFR Part 331). However, you may request an approved JD, which is an
appealable action, by contacting the Corps district for further instruction.
_ There are wetlands on the above described property, that may be subject to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403). However, since the
waters, including wetlands, have not been properly delineated, this preliminary jurisdiction determination may not be
used in the permit evaluation process. Without a verified wetland delineation, this preliminary determination is merely an
effective presumption of CWA/RHA jurisdiction overall of the waters, including wetlands, at the project area, which is
not sufficiently accurate and reliable to support an enforceable permit decision. We recommend that you have the
waters of the U.S. on your property delineated. As the Corps may not be able to accomplish this wetland delineation in a
timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that can be verified by the Corps.
B. Approved Determination
_ There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described property subject to the permit requirements of
Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403) and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC
§ 1344). Unless there is a change in law or our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period
not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
There are waters of the U.S., including wetlands, on the above described project area subject to the permit requirements
of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published
regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
Page 1 of 2

SAW -2016-00819
_ We recommend you have the waters of the U.S. on your property delineated. As the Corps may not be able to
accomplish this wetland delineation in a timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that
can be verified by the Corps.
_ The waters of the U.S., including wetlands, on your project area have been delineated and the delineation has been
verified by the Corps. If you wish to have the delineation surveyed, the Corps can review and verify the survey upon
completion. Once verified, this survey will provide an accurate depiction of all areas subject to CWA and/or RHA
jurisdiction on your property which, provided there is no change in the law or our published regulations, may be relied
upon for a period not to exceed five years.
_ The waters of the U.S., including wetlands, have been delineated and surveyed and are accurately depicted on the plat
signed by the Corps Regulatory Official identified below on . Unless there is a change in the law or our
published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this
notification.
There are no waters of the U.S., to include wetlands, present on the above described project area which are subject to the
permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our
published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this
notification.
The property is located in one of the 20 Coastal Counties subject to regulation under the Coastal Area Management Act
(CAMA). You should contact the Division of Coastal Management in Morehead City, NC, at [phone] to
determine their requirements.
Placement of dredged or fill material within waters of the US, including wetlands, without a Department of the Army permit
may constitute a violation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC § 1311). Placement of dredged or fill material,
construction or placement of structures, or work within navigable waters of the United States without a Department of the
Army permit may constitute a violation of Sections 9 and/or 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (33 USC § 401 and/or 403). If
you have any questions regarding this determination and/or the Corps regulatory program, please contact Brennan Dooley at
[phone] or Brennan.J.Dooley(a—�usace.army.mil.
C. Basis For Determination: The site exhibits wetland criteria as described in the 1987 Corps Wetland
Delineation Manual and appropriate Regional Supplement. The water bodies exhibit ordinary high water marks as
indicated by the absence of vezetation in the stream channel and the presence of bed and bank sediment deposition
and wrack lines.
D. Remarks:
E. Attention USDA Program Participants
This delineation/determination has been conducted to identify the limits of Corps' Clean Water Act jurisdiction for the
particular site identified in this request. The del ineation/determination may not be valid for the wetland conservation
provisions of the Food Security Act of 1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation
in USDA programs, you should request a certified wetland determination from the local office of the Natural Resources
Conservation Service, prior to starting work.
F. Appeals Information (This information applies only to approved jurisdictional determinations as indicated in
B. above)
This correspondence constitutes an approved jurisdictional determination for the above described site. If you object to this
determination, you may request an administrative appeal under Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331. Enclosed you will find a
Notification of Appeal Process (NAP) fact sheet and request for appeal (RFA) form. If you request to appeal this
determination you must submit a completed RFA form to the following address:
US Army Corps of Engineers
South Atlantic Division
Attn: Jason Steele, Review Officer
60 Forsyth Street SW, Room 1OM15
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
Page 2 of 2

SAW -2016-00819
In order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps, the Corps must determine that it is complete, that it
meets the criteria for appeal under 33 CFR part 331.5, and that it has been received by the Division Office
within 60 days of the date of the NAP. Should you decide to submit an RFA form, it must be received at
the above address by N/A.
**It is not necessary to submit an RFA form to the Division Office if you do not object to the determination in this
1 Digitally signed by DOOLEY.BRENNANJOHN.1512992613
correspondence.* * D 00 L E Y. B R E N N A N .JOHN .15
DN: c=US, o=U.S. Government, ou=DoD, ou=PKI, ou=USA,
2992613 cn=DOOLEY.BRENNANJOHN.1512992613
Corps Regulatory Official: Date: 2017.04.24 12:07.41-04'00'
Date: April 17, 2017 Expiration Date: N/A
The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure we
continue to do so, please complete our Customer Satisfaction Survey, located online at
http://corpsmapu.usace.army.mil/cm gRex/f?p=136:4:0.
Page 3 of 2

ATTACHMENT
PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL
DETERMINATION (JD): Af4k! Zt4, aoI}
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PRELIMINARY JD:
Duke Energy Progress
410 Wilmington Street, NC 02
Raleigh, NC 27601
C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: 5 AIn/- x016 - 00'3 � 9
D. PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
(USE THE ATTACHED TABLE TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE WATERBODIES
AT DIFFERENT SITES)
State: NC County/parish/borough.Onslow City: Jacksonville
Start coordinates of corridor (lat/long in degree decimal format): Let.
34.803730 N, Long, 77.446640 W.
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: UT of New River, Half Moon Creek, NE Creek,
Little NE Creek
Identify (estimate) amount of waters in the review area:
Non -wetland waters: linear feet: 4,697ft width (ft): 0.04 and/or acres.
Cowardin Class: Riverine
Stream Flow: Perennial
Wetlands: 39.6 acres.
Cowardin Class: Forested
Name of any water bodies on the site that have been identified as Section 10
waters:
Tidal: NA
Non -Tidal: NA
E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT
APPLY):
❑ Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
21 Field Determination. Date(s): j11 1 ,,
1. The Corps of Engineers believes that t ere may be jurisdictional waters of the
United States on the subject site, and the permit applicant or other affected party
who requested this preliminary JD is hereby advised of his or her option to
request and obtain an approved jurisdictional determination (JD) for that site.

Nevertheless, the permit applicant or other person who requested this
preliminary JD has declined to exercise the option to obtain an approved JD in
this instance and at this time.
2. In any circumstance where a permit applicant obtains an individual permit, or
a Nationwide General Permit (NWP) or other general permit verification requiring
"pre -construction notification" (PCN), or requests verification for a non -reporting
NWP or other general permit, and the permit applicant has not requested an
approved JD for the activity, the permit applicant is hereby made aware of the
following: (1) the permit applicant has elected to seek a permit authorization
based on a preliminary JD, which does not make an official determination of
jurisdictional waters; (2) that the applicant has the option to request an approved
JD before accepting the terms and conditions of the permit authorization, and
that basing a permit authorization on an approved JD could possibly result in less
compensatory mitigation being required or different special conditions; (3) that
the applicant has the right to request an individual permit rather than accepting
the terms and conditions of the NWP or other general permit authorization; (4)
that the applicant can accept a permit authorization and thereby agree to comply
with all the terms and conditions of that permit, including whatever mitigation
requirements the Corps has determined to be necessary; (5) that undertaking
any activity in reliance upon the subject permit authorization without requesting
an approved JD constitutes the applicant's acceptance of the use of the
preliminary JD, but that either form of JD will be processed as soon as is
practicable; (6) accepting a permit authorization (e.g., signing a proffered
individual permit) or undertaking any activity in reliance on any form of Corps
permit authorization based on a preliminary JD constitutes agreement that all
wetlands and other water bodies on the site affected in any way by that activity
are jurisdictional waters of the United States, and precludes any challenge to
such jurisdiction in any administrative or judicial compliance or enforcement
action, or in any administrative appeal or in any Federal court; and (7) whether
the applicant elects to use either an approved JD or a preliminary JD, that JD
will be processed as soon as is practicable. Further, an approved JD, a proffered
individual permit (and all terms and conditions contained therein), or Individual
permit denial can be administratively appealed pursuant to 33 C.F.R. Part 331,
and that in any administrative appeal, jurisdictional issues can be raised (see 33
C.F.R. 331.5(ax2)). if, during that administrative appeal, it becomes necessary
to make an official determination whether CWA jurisdiction exists over a site, or
to provide an official delineation of jurisdictional waters on the site, the Corps will
provide an approved JD to accomplish that result, as soon as is practicable.
This preliminary JD finds that there "may be"waters of the United States on the
subject project site, and Identifies all aquatic features on the site that could be
affected by the proposed activity, based on the following information:
SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for preliminary JD (check all that apply
- checked items should be included in case file and, where checked and
requested, appropriately reference sources below):
® Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the
applicant/consultant: Environmental Services, Inc.
7

® Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the
applicant/consultant.
Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:
❑ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data.
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:1:24,000
Jacksonville North and Kellum, NC
[]USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey.
Citation:
❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
❑ State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
❑ FEMA/FIRM maps:
❑ 100 -year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum
of 1929)
❑ Photographs: ❑ Aerial (Name $ Date):.
or ❑ Other (Name & Date):
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response tetter:
[] Other information (please specify):
later Jurisdictional determinations.
Signature and ate of
Regulatory Project Manager
(REQUIRED)
AignatUre and a e of
Person requesting pre i inary JD
(REQUIRED, unless o alning
the signature is impracticable)

r
i Estimated
- -
amount of
Site Latitude1
number
, Longitude f
Cowardin ! aquatic resource ;Class of
Class aquatic
in review area
_ .
resource
Linear 1
i Acres E
_i _ . _ _ _
_
ft-
W1
34.80466
; -77.44406
PSS
±
0.1
Non -Section
W2
-10 - Wetland
t Non
34 80747
! -77.43897
PSS
3.5
-Section
10 - Wetland
W3
1 34 80919
-77.43621
PSS
; 0 1
Non -Section
10 - Wetland
W5
34.81144
4-_._____7
1 -77.43145 !
PFO
i 0.3
Non-Section
tion
_- _ T
. .. _ _
_..._.�
10 and
_
W7
34-81359
-77.42818 i
PFO
I i <0_I
Non -Section
_
--- ---
10 - Wetiand `
W8
34.81714
-77-42049
PFO/PEM I 6.6
Non -Section
--
10 - Wetland_ ;
W9
34.81991
- _
-77 41696
PFO/PEM 0.7
Non -Section
10 - Weiland
W 10a
Non
34.82222 i
-77.41584 1
PFO,
0 2
-Section
( 10 - Wetiand
W11
34.82910
-77.41543 I
PFO0
g
Non -Section
1-10
W13
- Wetland
Non
34.83140
-77.40929
PFO
! 2.0i
-Section
10 - Wetiand
W14b
34.82004 ,
-77.37815
PFO01
(
Non -Section
10 - Wetland
W15
34.81406
-77.36753 i
PFO
31
No
W16
- ---
_-
10 -Wetland I
,
Non
34.81112
-77.35109
PFO_
0.1
-Section
W17
34.81009
10 - Wetiand
Non -Section
#
-77.34784
PFO
1 3
_W_
_
- ___4
!
} !
10 J
Wetland
18
34.80630 I
-77.34166
PFO
1.4
Non -Section
W19
34,80363
.__.
10 - Wetland
Non -Section
-77.33750
PSS
3.3
W2034.80085
10 - Wetland 1
Non
77.33426
PSS/PFO
I 1.7
-Section
10-Wetiand
Y
T
W21
i 34.79799
-77.33188
PFO
4.2
Non -Section'-
W22
! 34.79606
10 - Wetiand
_
Non-SBction
-77.33003
PFO
0.3
10 - Wetiand
W24
34.79333
-77.32703 i
PFO
Non -Section
_4.4
10 - Wetland -
W25
34 79031
-77.32060
PFO4.6
Non -Section
- ____
2634.79009
W27
+
-77.31769
PEM
i 0.1
Non -Section i
10 - Wetland
Non
34.79078
-77.31707
PFO
0.3
-Section
W28~34.79048
t
}
10 Wetland
Non
-77.30954
PFO
0.5
-Section j
i 1
1
1.10 -Wetland 1

W29
34.79073
-77.30415PFCCk
'
01
Non -Section
10 - Wetland
E W30
3478566
77.29710
Pi=p
1
2.7
tion
T
10
10 -
W31
34.78301
-77.29230
PFO
<Q1
_Wetiand
Non -Section
1
10 - Wetland
W32
34.78120
77.29005
; PEM
0.9
Nan -Section
t
t
1
;
10: Wetland
t W33
34.77917
-77.28676
PFO
03
Non -Section
f
a
4 1.
� 10 - Wetland
W34
34.77843
-77.28495 1
PSS
fl.9
Non -Section
�....
t _ _
1
10 Wetiand
i W35
i 34.77592
-77.27990
PSS
0.4
Non -Section
�
C
1
10 -Wetland.
F
S1
34.80930
-77.43624 '
Riverine
80
Non -Section
l
10 - Non -
Wetland
S2
34.81006
-77.4365Riverine
129
! Non -Section
10 - Non-
on-
Wetland
S3
34.81543
77.42407
Riverine
126
Non-Section
10 ._ Non -
II
Wetland
`
S4
t 34.81522 I
-77.42383
Riverine
°
29
! Non -Section
10 -Nan-
i,
-
Wetland
S5
j 3481585 ,
-77.42284
Riverine
476
Non -Section
! 10 -- Non- I
}
1
Wetland
S6
34.81831
-77.41841 =
Riverine
625
Non -Section
10 - Non -
Wetland
S7
34.81995
-77 41715t
Riverine
285
Non -Section
10 - Non-
1.
Wetland
S8
34.82337
-77.41579
Riverine
130
Non Section
i
1 10 -- Non-
i Wetland
{ S9
34.83122 j
77.41025
Riverine erine
j 140
10 - Non-
p
+
t
Wetland
r S10
3483198 1
-77.40747
Rivenne
136
Non -Section
10 Non
Wetiand
S11 134.83243
-77 40525
Riverine
129
Non-SN1
10 - Noon-
n
r
{
I
Wetland
' S12
34,83241
-77,40502Non-Section
Riverine
130
t
10 -- Non-
z
#
` __ Wetiand
S14
34 82081
-7738264
Riverine
1 147
Non -Section '
i
G 10 - Non-
d
i f
Wetiand
S17
34.82005
-77.37743
Riverine
139
Non -Section
jjj 10 - Non -
3
+
I Wetfand
s

I S19 34.82065 -77,37644 Riverine 14 Non -Section
10 - Non-
}. Wetland
No
S21 34.81125 t -7735093 Riverine 3 10 - Non-
__- Wetland
Non -Section
j
S22 34.80986 € -77.34885 Riverine ! 126 j 10 - Non-
- { j
____.__ _ _ Wetland
t_ _ _ --.__._--__w__ _
i 1 j j Non -Section
S24 i 34.80992 -77.34842 I Rivenne 1 130 ! 10 - Non-
Wettand,
Non-Section
S27 34.80518 , -77.34029 Riverine 120 10 - Non-
-_ Wetland V�
Non -Section
S28 34.80219 -77.33538 Riverine 226 10 - Non -
Wetland
Section
! S29 34.80070 -77.33442 j Riverine - 206 -10 -
Non -Wetland
_ ► Non -Section
S30 34.79676 -77.33026 Riverine 362 10 - Non -
1
Welland
Nan -Section
J
S31 34.79105 -77.30963 Riverine 163 f 10 - Non-
Wetland
1
—___--- Non -Section
S32 134.79074 1 -77.30371 Riverine 125 10 - Non-
. ,
Wetland
j Non -Section
S33 34.78560 -77.29650 Riverine ! 267 10 - Non-
__._. Wetland
Non -Section
S34 34.78273 -77.29257 Riverine 117 10 - Non-
AL
on-
1 ._ Wetland_
6

Source: High Resolution NC Statewide Orthotmagery,
DUKECGIA, 2010; Evaluation Area acquired from Duke Energy.
ENERGYDisclaimer The information depicted on this figure is for informational purposes only and was not prepared for.
.ono is not suitable for legal or engineering purposes. This information presented Is not for regulatory review and
is intended for use only by a Professional Land Surveyor prior to regulatory review.
ENVIRONMENTAL Project: ER15010.31
SERVICES, INC Delineated Features Date: Sept 2016
Grants Creek - Jacksonville 230 kV Line
Onslow County, North Carolina DrwnlChkd: KT/JH
....m..,�..�....R. Figure: 2b
Q c
m
m m
10
._.ted
' •
3
`
i k �! -
f _
m m
m
m
#'`'IV
>. ,.
71� a i;i; .
It
!S,al
ti
t n
� T t
A.
Source: High Resolution NC Statewide Orthotmagery,
DUKECGIA, 2010; Evaluation Area acquired from Duke Energy.
ENERGYDisclaimer The information depicted on this figure is for informational purposes only and was not prepared for.
.ono is not suitable for legal or engineering purposes. This information presented Is not for regulatory review and
is intended for use only by a Professional Land Surveyor prior to regulatory review.
ENVIRONMENTAL Project: ER15010.31
SERVICES, INC Delineated Features Date: Sept 2016
Grants Creek - Jacksonville 230 kV Line
Onslow County, North Carolina DrwnlChkd: KT/JH
....m..,�..�....R. Figure: 2b
._.ted
' •
l * a 4 •'
• fV
'al
`
i k �! -
f _
#'`'IV
>. ,.
71� a i;i; .
It
!S,al
ti
t n
� T t
A.
Source: High Resolution NC Statewide Orthotmagery,
DUKECGIA, 2010; Evaluation Area acquired from Duke Energy.
ENERGYDisclaimer The information depicted on this figure is for informational purposes only and was not prepared for.
.ono is not suitable for legal or engineering purposes. This information presented Is not for regulatory review and
is intended for use only by a Professional Land Surveyor prior to regulatory review.
ENVIRONMENTAL Project: ER15010.31
SERVICES, INC Delineated Features Date: Sept 2016
Grants Creek - Jacksonville 230 kV Line
Onslow County, North Carolina DrwnlChkd: KT/JH
....m..,�..�....R. Figure: 2b

9 o
o to 9 n m n n
y A N
to
M La aw I
i •a 1 1 _
717
I iAC
16
� N
J.
�_ •t_ . a
s��VSource: High Resolution NC Statewide Onhoimagery,
DUKE �sKE CGIA, 2010: Evaluation Area acquired from Duke Energy.
VVV�RRGYs Disclaimer: The inlormation depicted on this figure is for informational purposes only and was not prepared for,
and is not suitable for legal or engineering purposes. This information pr --ted is not for regulatory review and
is intended for use only by a Professional Land Surveyor prior to regulatory review.
ENVIRONMENTAI Project ER15010.31
uERVICES.
INCA Delineated Features Date: Sept2016
Grants Creek - Jacksonville 230 kV Line
Onslow County, North Carolina Dmn/Chkd: KT/JH
..M.�m Flgurc: 2c

)ENERGY r
ENERGY
�ERVISNtlR .ONMENTAL
CES�, INC
Source: High Resolution NC Statewide Orthmmagery, I
CGIA. 2010: Evaluation Area acquired from Duke Energy.
D ,claimer: The information depicted on this figure is for informational purposes only and was not prepared for,
and is not suitable for legal or engineering purposes. This information presented is not for regulatory review and
is intended for use only by a Professional Land Sumo or prior to re Watory review.
Project: ER15010.31
Delineated Features Date: Sept 2016
Grants Creek - Jacksonville 230 kV Line
Onslow County, North Carolina Drwn/Chkd: KT/JH
Figure: 2d
LL
¢
g
c
C
c c
C
•.
gg N
N
VI
� r j -
1 � R t, ] ,. 41
F
i_�.;
4is
)ENERGY r
ENERGY
�ERVISNtlR .ONMENTAL
CES�, INC
Source: High Resolution NC Statewide Orthmmagery, I
CGIA. 2010: Evaluation Area acquired from Duke Energy.
D ,claimer: The information depicted on this figure is for informational purposes only and was not prepared for,
and is not suitable for legal or engineering purposes. This information presented is not for regulatory review and
is intended for use only by a Professional Land Sumo or prior to re Watory review.
Project: ER15010.31
Delineated Features Date: Sept 2016
Grants Creek - Jacksonville 230 kV Line
Onslow County, North Carolina Drwn/Chkd: KT/JH
Figure: 2d

d 2
9.
I
OffElO
9
,
>
o
N
w
A
> 3
spm
_
s
0 N
4CiI
N
Source: High Resolution NC Statewide Onhoimagery, I
DUKECGIA. 2010; Evaluation Area acquired from Duke Energy.
ENERGY- ► Disclaimer The information depicted on this figure is for informational purposes only and was not prepared for,
and is not suitable for legal or engineering purposes. This information presented is not for regulatory review and
is intended for use only by a Professional Land Surveyor prior to regulatory review.
ENVIRONMENTAL Project: ER15010.31
�ERICESINC. Delineated Features Date: Sept 2016
Grants Creek -Jacksonville 230 kV Line
Onslow County, North Carolina Drwn/Chkd: KT/JH
Figure: 2f

Grants Creek — Jacksonville DOW Line
Onslow County, NC
Prepared for:
DUKE
. ENERGY.
Prepared by:
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC.
4901 Trademark Drive
Raleigh, North Carolina 27610
September 2016

Environmental Services, Inc.
Table of Contents
1.0
PROJECT DESCRIPTION & UNDERSTANDING............................................................. 1
2.0
METHODOLOGIES & QUALIFICATIONS........................................................................
1
3.0
PHYSICAL RESOURCES.......................................................................................................
1
3.1
Topography.............................................................................................................................
1
3.2
Soils.........................................................................................................................................
2
3.3
Water Resources......................................................................................................................
2
4.0
JURISDICTIONAL ISSUES....................................................................................................
2
4.1
Clean Water Act Waters of the U.S.........................................................................................
2
4.1.1
Wetland Data...................................................................................................................
3
4.1.2
Stream/Surface Water Data............................................................................................. 4
4.2
Clean Water Act Permits.........................................................................................................
6
4.3
Coastal Area Management Act................................................................................................
6
4.4
Construction Moratoria........................................................................................................... 6
4.5
N.C. River Basin Buffer Rules................................................................................................ 6
4.6
Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act...............................................................................
6
4.7
Endangered Species Act Protected Species.............................................................................
7
4.8
Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act..................................................................................
14
4.9
Federal Species of Concern ...................................................................................................
14
4.10
State Protected Species......................................................................................................15
4.11
Cultural / Archaeological Resources.....................................................................................
16
5.0
SUMMARY..............................................................................................................................16
Appendices
Appendix A
• Topographic and Aerial Figures
Appendix B
0 Data Forms
t ,

Environmental Services, Inc.
Grants Creek — Jacksonville 230kV Line
Onslow County, NC
September 2016
1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION & UNDERSTANDING
Duke Energy is evaluating a proposed transmission line corridor located north of Jacksonville in
Onslow County, North Carolina. The corridor is approximately 12.5 miles in length. The evaluated
corridor is 400 feet in width to account for the line and potential danger trees. The final proposed
right-of-way (ROW) is proposed to be 125 feet wide.
The study area is depicted on both a current U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) map (Figurel) and a
recent aerial photography (Figure 2) in Appendix A. The study area limits were provided by Duke
Energy.
Environmental Services, Inc., (ESI) was tasked by Duke to provide the following services for
the Grants Creek — Jacksonville 230kV Line:
• Jurisdictional wetland, stream, and surface water delineation,
• GPS data collection for any delineated wetlands or streams,
• Preliminary protected species habitat assessments for federally Endangered and Threatened
species,
• Preliminary cultural resources assessment, and
• Report and graphics preparation.
2.0 METHODOLOGIES & QUALIFICATIONS
Prior to the initiation of field efforts, available sources were reviewed, including the applicable U.S.
Geological Survey 7.5 -minute topographic quadrangles of Jacksonville North and Kellum, NC
(NGS/ESRI 2011), and U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Survey for Onslow County (USDA
1992). Additionally, records kept by the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP)
concerning any known occurrences of federally Threatened or Endangered species were reviewed
(NCNHP 2016).
3.0 PHYSICAL RESOURCES
The proposed new transmission line is located in the Coastal Plain physiographic province of North
Carolina. Specifically, the proposed transmission line is located in the River Bend Formation and the
Belgrade Formation, Undivided. (NCDENR 1985).
3.1 Topog_raphy
Topography in the study area is flat to gently sloping. Elevations range from a high of approximately
47 feet above mean sea level (MSL) down to approximately 25 feet above MSL through the study
area.
Grants Creek — Jacksonville 230kV Line

Environmental Services, Inc.
3.2 Soils
General soil associations occurring in the study area include the Norfolk -Goldsboro -Onslow
association. This association is described as nearly level and gently sloping, well drained, moderately
well drained, and somewhat poorly drained soils that have a loamy subsoil. There are also portions of
the study area that are included in the Muckalee-Dorovan association. This association is described as
nearly level, poorly drained soils that are loamy throughout and very poorly drained soils that are
muck throughout; occurs on flood plains.
3.3 Water Resources
Water resources in the study area are located within the White Oak River basin (USGS hydrologic unit
03020302) (NCCGIA 2001). A Best Usage Classification (BUC) is assigned to waters of North
Carolina based on the existing or contemplated best usage of various bodies of water. Table 1
contains the named water resources associated with features located within the study area, their Stream
Index Numbers, and their BUCs. The named streams represent the receiving waters of the individual
stream segments or tributaries that are located inside the study area. Unnamed streams and tributaries
carry the same BUC as their receiving waters, unless otherwise indicated by DWR.
Table 1. Named water resources and receiving waters (NCDWR 2013)
Stream Name
Stream Index #
BUC
Basin
Half Moon Creek
19-6
C;NSW
White Oak
Horse Swamp
19-16-2-1
QNSW
White Oak
Little Northeast Creek
19-16-2
QNSW
White Oak
Northeast Creek
19-16-(0.5)
SQNSW
White Oak
Poplar Creek
19-16-2-3
QNSW
White Oak
Wolf Swamp
19-16-1
QNSW
White Oak
Class C waters are used as secondary recreation such as fishing, wildlife, fish consumption, and
agriculture. The NSW supplemental designation indicates nutrient sensitive waters, which require
limitations on nutrient inputs. Class SC waters are tidal salt waters used as secondary recreation such
as fishing, boating, and other activities involving minimal skin contact.
There are no Primary Nursery Areas (PNAs) or Outstanding Resource Waters (ORWs) within the
project study area (NCDMF 2011).
The New River, downstream of the study area in Onslow County, is considered an Anadromous Fish
Spawning Area (AFSA) by the North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries (NCDMF 2007). The
proposed project should not have any effect on the New River.
4.0 JURISDICTIONAL ISSUES
4.1 Clean Water Act Waters of the U.S.
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) requires regulation of discharges into "Waters of the
United States". Although the principal administrative agency of the CWA is the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) has major responsibility for
implementation, permitting, and enforcement of provisions of the Act. The USACE regulatory
2
Grants Creek — Jacksonville 230kV Line

Environmental Services, Inc.
program is defined in 33 CFR 320-330. Water bodies such as rivers, lakes, and streams are subject to
jurisdictional consideration under the Section 404 program. However, by regulation, wetlands are also
considered "Waters of the United States".
According to the Regional Supplement to the ACOE Wetland Delineation Manual for the Atlantic and
Gulf Coastal Plain (USACE 2010), areas must exhibit three distinct characteristics to be considered
jurisdictional wetlands: 1) prevalence of hydrophytic (water tolerant) plants; 2) presence of hydric
soils; and 3) sufficient wetland hydrology indicators within 12 inches of the ground surface. When
present, intermittent and perennial stream channels are also considered Waters of the United States
under Sections 404 and 401 of the CWA.
The USACE "Rapanos" decision allows USACE and EPA to establish CWA jurisdiction under one of
two standards. The first standard upholds CWA jurisdiction if the water body is "relatively
permanent", and its adjacent wetlands directly about the water body. The second standard upholds
jurisdiction if a water body, in combination with all wetlands adjacent to that water body, has a
"significant nexus" with traditional navigable waters.
Presence of an ordinary high water mark (OHWM) and a continuous bed and bank define streams and
tributaries to waters of the U.S. under current USACE guidance. Perennial and intermittent streams
are considered relatively permanent waters (RPWs) and are defined by hydrologic regime. Tributaries
can be natural or man-made (ditches), but they must possess an OHWM and bed and bank to be
considered by USACE. The delineation results described in the following sections are considered
preliminary until reviewed or otherwise approved by USACE. Note that any land alteration activities
occurring in the study corridor can alter the wetland jurisdiction boundaries and a re-evaluation could
be required.
4.1.1 Wetland Data
Thirty five (35) wetlands were delineated within the project study area. The wetland types were
classified pursuant to the N.C. Wetland Assessment Method (NCWAM). Figures 2a -2j depict the
approximate extent and approximate location of the wetlands that were delineated. These graphics are
not intended to be a replacement for a traditional survey and are not intended to be used as such.
Table 2 contains wetland data collected within the project study area. Wetlands were flagged with
sequentially numbered blue and pink -and -black striped flagging.
Table 2. Wetland Data for the Grants Creek — Jacksonville 230kV Line.
Wetland
ID
Figure
No.
NCWAM
Classification
Acreage Acreage Within
Within 400' 125' Proposed
Corridor ROW
W1
2a
Headwater Forest
0.2 <0.1
W2
2a
Pine Flat
8.2 3.5
W3
2a
Headwater Forest
0.1 0.1
W4
2a
Headwater Forest
<0.1 --
W5
2a
Pine Flat
0.3 0.3
W6
2a -2b
Pine Flat
0.1 --
W7
2b
Headwater Forest
0.1 <0.1
W8
2b
Headwater Forest
19 6.6
3
Grants Creek — Jacksonville 230kV Line

Environmental Services, Inc.
Table 2. Continued.
Wetland
ID
Figure
No.
NCWAM
Classification
Acreage
Within 400'
Corridor
Acreage
Within 125'
Proposed
ROW
W9
2b
Headwater Forest
2.4
0.7
W l0a
2c
Headwater Forest
0.6
0.2
W lob
2c
Headwater Forest
<0.1
--
Wil
2c
Riverine Swamp Forest
1.4
0.3
W12
2c
Pine Flat
0.2
--
W13
2c
Pine Flat
5.9
2.0
W 14a
2e
Headwater Forest
0.2
--
W 14b
2e
Headwater Forest
6.4
0.1
W15
2e
Pine Flat
9.8
3.1
W16
2f
Headwater Forest
1.2
0.1
W17
2f
Headwater Forest
4.5
1.3
W18
2f -2g
Hardwood Flat
3.5
1.4
W19
2g
Hardwood Flat
9.8
3.3
W20
2g
Hardwood Flat
4.2
1.7
W21
2g
Pine Flat
13.4
4.2
W22
2g
Headwater Forest
1.1
0.3
W23
2g -2h
Pine Flat
0.1
--
W24
2h
Headwater Forest
1.2
0.4
W25
2h
Headwater Forest
14.3
4.6
W26
2h
Pine Flat
1.9
0.1
W27
2h
Pine Flat
1.3
0.3
W28
2h -2i
Headwater Forest
1.6
0.5
W29
2i
Headwater Forest
0.5
0.1
W30
2i
Riverine Swamp Forest
7.8
2.7
W31
2i
Headwater Forest
0.2
<0.1
W32
2i -2j
Pine Flat
0.2
0.1
W33
2j
Pine Flat
0.8
0.3
W34
2j
Pine Flat
2.2
0.9
W35
2j
Hardwood Flat
1.3
0.4
TOTAL:
126.2
39.6
4.1.2 Stream/Surface Water Data
Thirty four (34) stream channel segments and one (1) surface water occur within the project study
area. The streams were delineated with sequentially numbered solid blue and orange flagging. USACE
and NCDWR stream data forms were completed for the streams in the study area. Table 3 contains
the stream data collected within the project study area. Figures 2a -2j depicts the approximate extent
and approximate location of the stream channels and wetlands that were delineated. These graphics
are not intended to be a replacement for a traditional survey and is not intended to be used as such.
Grants Creek - Jacksonville 230kV Line

a
'b
N
CD
CD
CD
I
�
N
CD
�
w
N
W
CD
r
w
CD
a
w
C�
0
0
w
Ln
M.
C
c
W
O
\O
c
-.4
O�
(A
C
W
N
-
a
"O
00
--A
m
cncn�������rn�������rn�������
.
W
W
O
\O
00
-.4
O�
(A
p..
W
N
-
O
"O
00
--A
O*,
to
A
W
a\
ul
W
N
N
N
N
N
••.
OQ
dq
CIQ
N
.
.
.
.
.
.
M
A
N
A
Q.
Cl.
O.
(.•�
CD
CD
A
(7
(7
V
Cr
V
Cr
C
w
w
�
�
A
W
y
CD
,
�
�
cu
�,
c�
co
A
CD
co
(D
fD
fD
(D
fD
ti
�
fD
(D
.,
�
fD
�
co
CD
.,
�
CD
cu
(p
.,
�
CD
cu
cu
co
co
p-
co
co
co
0
0
co
�
cu
�
cu
�
co
CD
�
A
CD
C
�
C
C
CD
(D
•
y
w
w
p,
co
E.
y
co
c�
co
co
w
cu
m
c�
0—
W
sv
w
cv
cD
co
w
w
w
w
w
co
A
r
�
p
O�
O
O
O
^r
:
�
= �:�
O
B
O
O
O C
00
N
N
Vi
J
O�
00
�
r
�
N
• `
lh
a1
( j
DD
N
N
N
O Cy r
a\
J
a\
W
J
O
N
J
w
W
J
�--�
0\
W
W
�--•
W
W
In
O\
00
J
�O
--3
--j
00
00
0o
�-•
O
to
00
O\
�.
ON
O1
�O
011
W
Cn
O
�O
O
N
W
00
t.A
O
O
--j
O
Uh
O�
--j
A b
•A
N
W
I
I
W
I
W
N
W-g�'
W
00
N
J
N
N
N
00
O. A "r
fD
�l
v
In
w
O
O\
v
O
IC
O\
O
O
LA
cn
O\
O�
�0
O
G fJ�, m
•-
�-
W
W
N
N
N
to
N
N
J
N
•-
•-
--
N
W
W
(ll
--
«-•
•--•
N
N
•� O.
�N
(h
(h
lh
Vi
J
O
O
O
O
A
to
oo
O,
O
J
J
�
A
?
.P
Q\
�
"c
D\
'7\
D\
O
a,\
�O
J
J
a1
N
oil A
N
VI
N
N
l
-1
to
N
(A
N
Uh
N
(lA
N
(h
N
CA
N
111
N
CA
lh
lA
IV
(li
-1
to
--1
kA
�l
Vt
—1
(A
J
kA
—1
(A
�l
to
—1(-A
LA
t!i
to
Vi
l h
lh
J
(h
J
Chft
`..�
ZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzZzzZZzzzzzzzzzzzzz
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
A A
q ^�

Environmental Services, Inc.
4.2 Clean Water Act Permits
Dredge and fill activities in "Waters of the United States" must be authorized by USACE as a
regulated discharge pursuant to Section 404 of the CWA and also by NCDWR pursuant to Section 401
of the CWA. Activities authorized by the USACE are subject to further water quality requirements
per Section 401 of the CWA. In North Carolina, the NCDWR administers the Section 401 Water
Quality Certification process, which also must include plans on how the applicant proposes to manage
storm water.
Coordination is recommended with USACE in order to determine the permitting requirements for this
project, if any. Section 404 permitting may not be necessary if all wetland and stream impacts are
avoided; however, concurrence from USACE should be obtained prior to beginning any activities.
Hand clearing in wetlands is typically not a regulated activity if there is no ground disturbance.
Mechanized clearing in wetlands may be viewed as a regulated activity if heavy equipment disturbs
the natural ground surface or contours and if stump removal or grubbing occurs.
Compensatory mitigation can be required by USACE if the proposed project is determined to have an
adverse effect on Waters of the United States, including wetlands, as a result of a regulated discharge.
Nationwide Permit 12 -Condition 23(g) states that "where certain functions and services of waters of
the United States are permanently adversely affected, such as the conversion of forested or scrub -shrub
wetlands to a herbaceous wetland in a permanently maintained utility right-of-way, mitigation may be
required to reduce the adverse effect of the project to a minimal level'. Consultation with USACE is
recommended to determine if this condition is going to apply to this project. If it is determined that an
Individual Permit be required, this same USACE consultation should occur regarding the USACE
position on the wetland conversion resulting from the proposed project.
4.3 Coastal Area Management Act
North Carolina Division of Coastal Management (NCDCM) regulates certain wetlands and water
bodies in the twenty coastal counties of North Carolina under the Coastal Area Management Act
(CAMA). Areas subject to CAMA are identified as Areas of Environmental Concern (AECs). There
are no AECs in the study area that are subject to CAMA regulations
4.4 Construction Moratoria
It is anticipated that no in -water construction moratoria will apply to this project.
4.5 N.C. River Basin Buffer Rules
The study area is located in the White Oak River basin. No riparian buffer rules apply to this basin,
this study area is not subject to any riparian buffers.
4.6 Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act
Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act requires authorization from the USACE for the excavation
of material, alteration, obstruction, or construction of any structure in or over any "navigable water" of
the United States (33 U.S.0 410 et seq.). "Navigable water" is defined as waters that are subject to the
ebb and flow of the tide shoreward to the mean high water mark and/or waters that are presently used,
have been used in the past, or are susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce (33
CFR part 329). The study area is not subject to Section 10 regulations.
6
Grants Creek — Jacksonville 230kV Line

Environmental Services, Inc.
4.7 Endangered Species Act Protected Species
Species with the federal classifications of Endangered (E), Threatened (T) or Proposed (P) are
protected under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) list fifteen species for Onslow County as of March 25,
2015 (USFWS 2015). NCNHP data updated in July 2016 was accessed to determine if any of these
species have been documented inside of or within 0.5 mile of the study area.
Table 4. Federal listed species for Onslow County, NC.
a E — Endangered
T — Threatened
T (S/A) — Threatened due to Similarity of Appearance
Grants Creek — Jacksonville 230kV Line
Federal
Potential
Biological
Scientific Name
Common: Name
Status
Habitat
Conclusion
Present
Alligator
American alligator
T (S/A)
Yes
Not Required
mississippiensis
Chelonia mydas
Green sea turtle
T
No
No Effect
Eretmochelys
Hawksbill sea turtle
E
No
No Effect
imbricate
Lepidochelys
Kemp's ridley sea turtle
E
No
No Effect
kempii
Dermochelys coriacea
Leatherback sea turtle
E
No
No Effect
Caretta caretta
Loggerhead sea turtle
T
No
No Effect
Charadria melodus
Piping plover
T
No
No Effect
Picoides borealis
Red -cockaded
E
Yes
Unresolved
woodpecker
Trichechus manatus
West Indian manatee
E
No
No Effect
Thalictrum cooleyi
Cooley's meadowrue
E
No
No Effect
Carex lutea
Golden sedge
E
No
No Effect
Lindera melissifolia
Pondberry
E
No
No Effect
Lysimachia
Rough -leaved loosestrife
E
Yes
No Effect
asperulaefolia
Amaranthus pumilus
Seabeach amaranth
T
No
No Effect
Calidris canutus rufa
Red knot
T
No
No Effect
a E — Endangered
T — Threatened
T (S/A) — Threatened due to Similarity of Appearance
Grants Creek — Jacksonville 230kV Line

Environmental Services, Inc.
American alligator - In North Carolina, alligators have been recorded in nearly every coastal county,
and many inland counties to the fall line. The alligator is found in rivers, streams, canals, lakes,
swamps, and coastal marshes. Adult animals are highly tolerant of salt water, but the young are
apparently more sensitive, with salinities greater than 5 parts per thousand considered harmful. The
American alligator remains on the protected species list due to its similarity in appearance to the
Endangered American crocodile (Crocodylus acutus) (USFWS 2016a).
Habitat Present: Yes
Species listed as threatened due to similarity of appearance do not require Section 7
consultation with the USFWS. Suitable habitat for this species is present within the study
area. However, construction activities are not expected to have any permanent impacts to this
species or its habitat within the study area. A review of NCNHP records, updated July 2016,
indicates no known occurrence of American alligator within 0.5 mile of the study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: Not Required
Green sea turtle - The green sea turtle is found in temperate and tropical oceans and seas. Nesting in
North America is mostly limited to small communities on the east coast of Florida requiring beaches
with minimal disturbances and a sloping platform for nesting. The green sea turtle can be found in
shallow waters. They are attracted to lagoons, reefs, bays, mangrove swamps and inlets where an
abundance of marine grasses can be found, as this is the principle food source for the green sea turtle
(USFWS 2016b).
Habitat Present: No
Suitable habitat for the green sea turtle does not exist within the study area. The study area is
too far inland and lacks ocean/beach habitat associated with this species. A review of
NCNHP records, updated July 2016, indicates no known occurrence of green sea turtle within
0.5 mile of the study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
Hawksbill sea turtle — Hawksbill sea turtles are found in tropical and subtropical oceans. Sightings
have been reported on the east coast of the U.S. as far north as Massachusetts, although rarely north of
Florida. Sightings have been recorded from a handful of counties in North Carolina, but the turtle is
not known to breed here. Adult hawksbills are found in coastal waters, especially around coral reefs,
rocky outcrops, shoals, mangrove bays, and estuaries. Juveniles are often seen offshore, in floating
mats of seaweed. This species nests on a wide range of beach types and substrates, using both low -
and high-energy beaches on islands and mainland sites. The nest is typically placed near or under
some vegetation (USFWS 2015c).
Habitat Present: No
The study area does not contain suitable habitat for this species. The study area lacks the
beach, bay, and estuary habitat associated with this species. NCNHP data from July 2016
indicates no occurrences of the Hawksbill sea turtle within 0.5 mile of the study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
8
Grants Creek — Jacksonville 230kV Line

Environmental Services, Inc.
Kemp's ridley sea turtle — Kemp's ridley sea turtle is the smallest of the sea turtles that visit North
Carolina's coast, and has been sighted in most coastal counties. While the majority of this sea turtle's
nesting occurs in Mexico, the species is known to nest on North Carolina beaches infrequently.
Kemp's ridley sea turtle can lay eggs as many as three times during the April to June breeding season.
This species prefers beach sections that are backed up by extensive swamps or large bodies of open
water having seasonal narrow ocean connections and a well-defined elevated dune area. The species
prefers neritic area with sandy or muddy bottoms (USFWS 2015d).
Habitat Present: No
The study area does not contain suitable habitat for this species. The study area lacks the
beach, bay, and estuary habitat associated with this species. NCNHP data from July 2016
indicates no occurrences of the Kemp's ridley sea turtle within 0.5 mile of the study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
Leatherback sea turtle - The leatherback sea turtle is distributed world-wide in tropical waters of the
Atlantic, Pacific, and Indian oceans. They are generally open ocean species, and may be common off
the North Carolina coast during certain times of the year. However, in northern waters leatherback sea
turtles are reported to enter into bays, estuaries, and other inland bodies of water. Major nesting areas
occur mainly in tropical regions. In the United States, primary nesting areas are in Florida, however,
nests are known from Georgia, South Carolina, and North Carolina as well. Nesting occurs from April
to August. Leatherback sea turtles need sandy beaches backed with vegetation in the proximity of
deep water and generally with rough seas. Beaches with a relatively steep slope are usually preferred
(USFWS 2016e).
Habitat Present: No
Suitable habitat for the leatherback sea turtle does not exist within the study area. The study
area is too far inland and lacks ocean/beach habitat associated with this species. A review of
NCNHP records, updated July 2016, indicates no known occurrence of leatherback sea turtle
within 0.5 mile of the study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
Loggerhead sea turtle - The loggerhead sea turtle is widely distributed within its range, and is found
in three distinct habitats during their lives. These turtles may be found hundreds of miles out in the
open ocean, in neritic areas, or on coastal beaches. In North Carolina, this species has been observed
in every coastal county. Loggerhead sea turtles occasionally nest on North Carolina beaches, and are
the most common of all sea turtles that visit the North Carolina coast. They nest nocturnally, at two to
three year intervals, between May and September, on isolated beaches that are characterized by fine-
grained sediments. In near shore areas, loggerhead sea turtles have been observed in bays, lagoons,
salt marshes, creeks, ship channels, and the mouths of large rivers. Coral reefs, rocky places, and
shipwrecks are often used as foraging areas (USFWS 2016f).
Habitat Present: No
Grants Creek — Jacksonville 230kV Line

Environmental Services, Inc.
Suitable habitat for the loggerhead sea turtle does not exist within the study area. The study
area is too far inland and lacks ocean/beach habitat associated with this species. A review of
NCNHP records, updated July 2016, indicates no known occurrence of loggerhead sea turtle
within 1.0 mile of the study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
Piping plover - The piping plover breeds along the entire eastern coast of the United States. North
Carolina is uniquely positioned in the species' range, being the only State where the piping plover's
breeding and wintering ranges overlap and the birds are present year-round. They nest most
commonly where there is little or no vegetation, but some may nest in stands of beach grass. The nest
is a shallow depression in the sand that is usually lined with shell fragments and light-colored pebbles
(USFWS 2016g).
Habitat Present: No
Suitable habitat for the piping plover does not exist within the study area. The study area
lacks beach habitat associated with tlus species. A review of NCNHP records, updated July
2016, indicates no known occurrence of piping plover within 0.5 mile of the study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
Red -cockaded woodpecker - The red -cockaded woodpecker (RCW) typically occupies open, mature
stands of southern pines, particularly longleaf pine, for foraging and nesting/roosting habitat. The
RCW excavates cavities for nesting and roosting in living pine trees, aged 60 years or older, which are
contiguous with pine stands at least 30 years of age to provide foraging habitat. The foraging range of
the RCW is normally no more than 0.5 mile (USFWS 2016h).
Habitat Present: Yes
There is potentially suitable foraging habitat within the study area and throughout the
surrounding areas. The study area is dominated by loblolly pine timber tracts in varying
stages of succession and maturity. The study area also goes through, and borders, the
Hofmann Forest and various Weyerhaeuser tracts with Camp Lejeune and the Croatan
National Forest being in close proximity. The opportunity for foraging habitat within the
study area is vast and well connected to surrounding areas. Several of the areas evaluated
were estimated to be in 25+ year class and had recently been thinned. These areas provide a
suppressed understory which affords an open bole on the older pines left standing.
Consultation with Hofmann Forest staff indicates that there are pine stands with an age class
of 30 years throughout their holdings. Large older stands of pine are infrequent throughout
the study area thus limiting the nesting potential. However, given the volume of pine timber
managed in the immediate surrounding area, it is probable that nesting habitat could exist
within the nearby vicinity of the study area. Aerial surveys are recommended to document the
presence/absence of nesting habitat within 0.5 mile of the study area. A review of NCNHP
records, updated July 2016, indicates no known occurrence of RCW within 0.5 mile of the
study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: Unresolved
10
Grants Creek — Jacksonville 230kV Line

Environmental Services, Inc.
West Indian manatee - West Indian manatees have been observed in all the North Carolina coastal
counties. West Indian manatees are found in canals, sluggish rivers, estuarine habitats, salt water bays,
and as far off shore as 3.7 miles. They utilize freshwater and marine habitats at shallow depths of 5 to
20 ft. In the winter, between October and April, manatees concentrate in areas with warm water.
During the other time of the year habitats for the manatee are those with sufficient water depth, an
adequate food supply, and in proximity to freshwater. West Indian manatees require a source of
freshwater to drink. West Indian manatees are primarily herbivores, feeding on any aquatic vegetation
present, but they may occasionally feed on fish (USFWS 2016i).
Habitat Present: No
Suitable habitat for the West Indian manatee does not exist within the study area. The study
area is too far inland and lacks the direct open water connections to downstream coastal areas..
A review of NCNHP records, updated July 2016, indicates no known occurrence of West
Indian manatee within 0.5 mile of the study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
Cooley's meadowrue - Cooley's meadowrue, documented in the Pine Savanna natural community,
occurs in circumneutral soils in sunny, moist to wet grass -sedge bogs, wet -pine savannas over
calcareous clays, and savannah -like areas, often at the ecotones of intermittent drainages or non-
riverine swamp forests. This rhizomatous perennial herb is also found along plowed firebreaks,
roadside ditches and rights-of-way, forest clearings dominated by grass or sedge, and power line or
utility rights-of-way. The species requires some type of habitat disturbance (e.g., mowing, clearing,
periodic fire) to maintain its open habitat. The plant typically occurs on slightly acidic (pH 5.8-6.6)
soils that are loamy fine sand, sandy loam, or fine sandy loam; at least seasonally moist or saturated;
and mapped as Foreston, Grifton, Muckalee, Torhunta, or Woodington series (USFWS 1994).
Habitat Present: No
Suitable habitat for Cooley's meadowrue is not present within the study area. Wet areas
within the existing powerline right-of-way have a thick shrub layer, are not frequently
maintained, and do not exhibit the wet savanna -like conditions that could provide suitable
habitat for Cooley's meadowrue. Forested wetlands in the study area also do not exhibit the
wet savanna -like conditions that could provide suitable habitat for Cooley's meadowrue. A
review of NCNHP records, updated July 2016, indicates no known occurrences of Cooley's
meadowrue within 0.5 mile of the study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
Golden sedge - Golden sedge, a very rare endemic of the Atlantic Coastal Plain, grows in sandy soils
overlying calcareous deposits of coquina limestone, where the soil pH, typically between 5.5 and 7.2,
is unusually high for this region. The perennial prefers the ecotone between the pine savanna and
adjacent wet hardwood or hardwood/conifer forest. Most plants occur in the partially shaded
savanna/swamp where occasional to frequent fires favor an herbaceous ground layer and suppress
shrub dominance. Soils supporting the species are very wet to periodically shallowly inundated.
11
Grants Creek — Jacksonville 230kV Line

Environmental Services, Inc.
Other occurrences may occur on disturbed areas such as roadside and drainage ditches or power line
rights-of-way, where mowing and/or wet conditions suppress woody plants. Poorly viable
occurrences may occur in significantly disturbed areas where ditching activities that lowers the water
table and/or some evidence of fire suppression threatens the species (USFWS 2002).
Habitat Present: No
Suitable habitat for golden sedge is not present within the study area. Wet areas within the
existing powerline right-of-way have a thick shrub layer, are too frequently flooded, are not
frequently maintained, and do not exhibit the wet savanna -like conditions that could provide
suitable habitat for golden sedge. Wetlands outside of the powerline right-of-way are forested
and also do not exhibit the wet savanna -like conditions that could provide suitable habitat for
golden sedge. A review of NCNHP records, updated July 2016, indicates no known
occurrences of golden sedge within 0.5 mile of the study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
Pondberry - Pondberry occurs in seasonally flooded wetlands, sandy sinks, pond margins, and
swampy depressions. This deciduous, aromatic shrub occurs in bottomland hardwood forests with
perched water tables along inland areas of the southeastern United States. In the Coastal Plain of the
Carolinas, the species occurs at the margins of limestone sinks and ponds and in undrained, shallow
depressions of longleaf pine (Pinus palustris) and pond pine (Pinus serotina) forests. Known
occurrences in North Carolina occur in the Small Depression Pocosin natural community, grow in
soils with sandy sediments and high water table, contain high peat content in the subsurface, and
include a prevalence of shrubs due to historically frequent or intense fires. It generally grows in
somewhat shaded areas, but can tolerate full sun (USFWS 1993).
Habitat Present: No
Suitable habitat for pondberry does not exist within the study area. The study area lacks
limestone sinks and ponds or undrained, shallow depressions associated with this species. A
review of NCNHP records, updated July 2016, indicates no known occurrence of pondberry
within 0.5 mile of the study area. No areas designated as Critical Habitat occur in the study
area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
Rough -leaved loosestrife - Rough -leaved loosestrife, endemic to the Coastal Plain and Sandhills of
North and South Carolina, generally occurs in the ecotones or edges between longleaf pine uplands
and pond pine pocosins in dense shrub and vine growth on moist to seasonally satuarated sands and on
shallow organic soils overlaying sand (spodosolic soils). Occurrences are found in such disturbed
habitats as roadside depressions, maintained power and utility line rights-of-way, firebreaks, and trails.
The species prefers full sunlight, is shade intolerant, and requires areas of disturbance (e.g., clearing,
mowing, periodic burning) where the overstory is minimal. It can, however, persist vegetatively for
many years in overgrown, fire-supressed areas. Blaney, Gilead, Johnston, Kalmia, Leon, Mandarin,
Murville, Torhunta, and Vaucluse are some of the soil series that the plant occurs on (USFWS 1995).
12
Grants Creek — Jacksonville 230kV Line

Environmental Services, Inc.
Habitat Present: Yes
Potentially suitable habitat for rough -leaved loosestrife is present within the study area. Some
larger wetlands within the corridor are managed, recently thinned pine stands that provide the
disturbed habitat and sunlight preferred by this species. Other wetlands within the study area
are maintained powerline rights-of-way and regenerating areas of emergent/successional
vegetation that exhibit pocosin like characteristics. Sandy soils and organic soils were
observed within the aforementioned wetland habitats. ESI biologists Stuart Bryan and Wil
Vaughan surveyed areas of potential habitat for rough -leaved loosestrife August 15-16, 2016.
A reference population was reviewed prior to conducting the survey. No specimens of rough -
leaved loosestrife were identified. A review of NCNHP data, updated July 2016, indicates no
known occurrence of rough -leaved loosestrife within 0.5 mile of the study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
Seabeach amaranth - Seabeach amaranth occurs on barrier island beaches where its primary habitat
consist of overwash flats at accreting ends of islands, lower foredunes, and upper strands of
noneroding beaches (landward of the wrack line). In rare situations, this annual is found on sand spits
160 feet or more from the base of the nearest foredune. It occasionally establishes small temporary
populations in other habitats, including sound -side beaches, blowouts in foredunes, interdunal areas,
and on sand and shell material deposited for beach replenishment or as dredge spoil. The plant's
habitat is sparsely vegetated with annual herbs (forbs) and, less commonly, perennial herbs (mostly
grasses) and scattered shrubs. It is, however, intolerant of vegetative competition and does not occur
on well -vegetated sites. The species usually is found growing on a nearly pure silica sand substrate,
occasionally with shell fragments mixed in. Seabeach amaranth appears to require extensive areas of
barrier island beaches and inlets that function in a relatively natural and dynamic manner. These
characteristics allow it to move around in the landscape, occupying suitable habitat as it becomes
available (USFWS 2016j).
Habitat Present: No
Suitable habitat for the seabeach amaranth does not exist within the study area. The study area
lacks beach/dune habitat associated with this species. A review of NCNHP records, updated
July 2016, indicates no known occurrence of seabeach amaranth within 0.5 mile of the study
area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
Red knot — The rufa red knot is one of the six recognized subspecies of red knots, and is the only
subspecies that routinely travels along the Atlantic coast of the United States during spring and fall
migrations. It is known to winter in North Carolina and to stop over during migration. Habitats used
by red knots in migration and wintering areas are similar in character: coastal marine and estuarine
habitats with large areas of exposed intertidal sediments. In North America, red knots are commonly
found along sandy, gravel, or cobble beaches, tidal mudflats, salt marshes, shallow coastal
impoundments and lagoons, and peat banks. Ephemeral features such as sand spits, islets, shoals, and
sandbars, often associated with inlets can be important habitat for roosting (USFWS 2016k).
13
Grants Creek — Jacksonville 230kV Line

Environmental Services, Inc.
Habitat Present: No
Suitable habitat for the red knot does not exist within the study area. The study area lacks
beach/dune habitat associated with this species. A review of NCNHP` records, updated July
2016, indicates no known occurrence of red knot within 0.5 mile of the study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
4.8 Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act
Bald eagles typically feed on fish but may also consume birds and small mammals. In the Carolinas,
nesting season extends from December through May (Potter et al. 1980). Bald eagles typically nest in
tall, living trees in a conspicuous location near water and forage over large bodies of water with
adjacent trees available for perching (Hamel 1992).
The bald eagle was officially delisted and removed from the federal Endangered Species List on
August 9, 2007, but they are still protected under the federal BGPA and the MBTA. The National
Bald Eagle Management Guidelines (Guidelines) prohibit disturbance to a bald eagle. The Guidelines
define disturb as "to agitate or bother a bald or golden eagle to a degree that causes, or is likely to
cause, based on the best scientific information available: 1) injury to an eagle; 2) a decrease in its
productivity, by substantially interfering with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior; or 3)
nest abandonment, by substantially interfering with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior."
The definition also covers impacts that result from human -caused alterations initiated around a
previously used nest site during a time when eagles are not present, if, upon the eagles return, such
alterations agitate or bother an eagle to a degree that injures an eagle or interferes with normal
breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior.
Under the current Guidelines, USFWS recommends the following measures for roads, trails, canals,
power lines, and other linear utilities. If the eagle nest can be seen from the project site and there is no
similar activity within 660 feet, then USFWS recommends that the project: 1) maintain a buffer of at
least 660 feet between your activities and the nest; 2) maintain any established landscape buffers; and
3) if possible, create additional landscape buffers to screen the new activity from the nest. If these
recommendations cannot be adopted for the project, then coordination is recommended with the local
USFWS office. ESI did not identify any evidence of bald eagle activity while working inside the study
area. NCNHP data from July 2016 indicates no documented occurrences of bald eagle within 0.5 mile
of the study area.
4.9 Federal Species of Concern
The March 25, 2015 USFWS list for Onslow County also includes a category of species designated as
"Federal Species of Concern" (FSC). Federal species of concern are not afforded federal protection
under the Endangered Species Act and are not subject to any of its provisions, including Section 7,
until they are formally Proposed (P) or listed as Threatened (T) or Endangered (E). However, the
status of these species is subject to change, and so should be included for consideration. FSC are
defined as species that are under consideration for listing for which there is insufficient information to
support listing. The presence of potential habitat is based on the following NCNHP documents: List
14
Grants Creek — Jacksonville 230kV Line

Environmental Services, Inc.
of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina (NCNHP 2014a) and List of Rare Animal Species of North
Carolina (NCNHP 2014b).
4.10 State Protected Species
Some species that are listed as FSC by USFWS also receive limited state protection. Those species
that are listed as both FSC and as North Carolina state -listed Endangered (E), Threatened (T), and
Special Concern (SC) are identified in Table 5. These species receive limited protection under the
North Carolina Endangered Species Act (G.S. 113-331 et seq.) and the North Carolina Plant
Protection Act of 1979 (G.S. 106-202.12 et seq.).
Table 5. Federal Species of Concern for Onslow County, NC
15
Grants Creek — Jacksonville 230kV Line
N.C.
NCNHP
Common Name
Scientific Name
Status'
Potential
0.5 -Mile
T; E, SC
Habitat
Occurrence
American eel
Anguilla rostrata
--
No
No
Bachman's sparrow
Aimophila aestivalis
SC
No
No
Black rail
Laterallus jamaicensis
SC
No
No
Carolina gopher frog
Rana capito capito
T
No
No
Eastern henslow's
Ammodramus henslowii
No
SC
No
sparrow
susurrans
Eastern painted
No
bunting
Passerina ciris ciris
SC
No
Mimic glass lizard
Ophisaurus mimicus
SC
No
No
Southern hognose
Heterodon simus
SC
No
No
snake
Bucholz's dart moth
Agrotis bucholzi
--
No
No
A skipper
Atrytonopsis sp. 1
--
No
No
Awned
Rhexia aristosa
SC -V
No
No
meadowbeauty
Boykins lobelia
Lobelia boykinii
E
Yes
No
Carolina grass -of-
No
Parnassia caroliniana
T
No
parnassus
Carolina trillium
Trillium pusillum var. pusillum
E
Yes
No
Coastal beaksedge
Rhynchospera pleiantha
T
Yes
No
Coastal goldenrod
Solidago villosicarpa
E
No
No
Grassleaf arrowhead
Sagittaria weatherbiana
E
No
No
Loose watermilfoil
Myriophyllum laxum
E
No
No
Many -flowered
Calopogon multorus
E
No
No
grass -pink
Pineland plantain
Plantago sparsiflora
T
No
No
Pondspice
Litsea aestivalis
SC -V
No
No
15
Grants Creek — Jacksonville 230kV Line

Environmental Services, Inc.
Table 5. Continued.
N.C.
NCNHP
Common Name
Scientific Name
Status'
Potential
0.5 -Mile
T, E, SC
Habitat
Occurrence
Savanna onion
Allium sp. 1
__
No
No
Smooth -seeded hairy
Scleria sp. 1
__
No
No
nutrush
Spring -flowering
Solidago verna
__
Yes
No
goldenrod
Swamp forest
Rhynchospera decurrens
T
Yes
No
beakrush
Thorne's beakrush
Rhynchospera thornei
SC -V
No
No
Venus' fly -trap
Dionaea muscipula
SC -V
No
No
Wagner's spleenwort
Asplenium heteroresiliens
E
No
No
A quillwort
Isoetes microvela
T
No
No
T=Threatened, E=Endangered; SC=Special Concern; SC-V=Special Concern -Vulnerable
4.11 Cultural / Archaeological Resources
Research conducted by ESI at the Survey and National Register Branch of the North Carolina State
Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) on 29 March 2016 revealed that no previously recorded historic
properties listed in, eligible, or potentially eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic
Places (National Register) are located directly within the proposed project area. Research conducted
by ESI at the North Carolina Office of State Archaeology (OSA) on 29 March 2016 revealed that no
previously recorded archaeological sites are located directly within or immediately adjacent to the
proposed project area.
5.0 SUMMARY
The project study area contains thirty-five wetlands, thirty-four stream channels, and one surface
water. Impacts to jurisdictional areas should be avoided and minimized as much as practicable.
Potential habitat is present in the study area for the federally listed rough -leaved loosestrife. Surveys
were conducted for this species but none was observed within the study area. RCW foraging habitat is
present and aerial surveys are recommended to resolve this issue. Unavoidable impacts must be
coordinated with the applicable resource agency and permitting and mitigation could be required for
regulated discharged. No issues regarding cultural or archaeological resources were identified.
16
Grants Creek — Jacksonville 230kV Line

Environmental Services, Inc.
References
Hamel, P.B. 1992. Land Manager's Guide to the Birds of the South. The Nature Conservancy,
Southeastern Region, Chapel Hill, NC. 437 pp.
National Geographic Society/ESRI. 2011. I -cubed seamless USGS quadrangle (Jacksonville North
and Kellum, NC).
N.C. Center for Geographic Information and Analysis. 2001. State of North Carolina Hydrologic Unit
Map.
N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources. 1985. Geologic Map of North Carolina.
N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries. 2007. Anadromous Fish Spawning Areas, White Oak River Area
and New River Area, Map 1. http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/mf/ (Accessed August 2016).
N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries. 2011. Fishery Nursery Areas. http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/mf/
(Accessed August 2016).
N.C. Division of Water Resources. 2013. NC Water Quality Classifications by NC River Basin.
http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/ps/csu/classifications (Accessed August 2016).
N. C. Natural Heritage Program. 2014a. List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2014. North
Carolina Natural Heritage Program. 138 pp.
N. C. Natural Heritage Program. 2014b. List of Rare Animal Species of North Carolina 2014. North
Carolina Natural Heritage Program. 172 pp.
N. C. Natural Heritage Program. 2016. July 2016 NHP Element Occurrences. Raleigh, NC.
(Accessed July 2016).
Potter, E.F., J.F. Parnell, and R.P. Teulings 1980. Birds of the Carolinas. The University of North
Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC. 408 pp.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland
Delineation Manual: Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region (Version 2.0). Vicksburg, MS.
180 pp.
U.S. Department of Agriculture. 1992. Soil Survey of Onslow County, North Carolina. U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 139 pp. + maps
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1993. Pondberry Recovery Plan. Atlanta, GA. 56 pp.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1994. Cooley's Meadowrue Recovery Plan. Atlanta, Georgia. 29 pp.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1995. Rough -leaved Loosestrife Recovery Plan. Atlanta, GA. 32pp.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2002. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Endangered
Status for Carex lutea (Golden Sedge). 67 FR 3120-3126.
17
Grants Creek— Jacksonville 230kV Line

Environmental Services, Inc.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2007. National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2015. T&E species listed for Onslow County.
http://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/cntylist/nc_counties.html (Accessed August 2016).
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2016a. American alligators in North Carolina.
Http://www.fws.gov/nces/reptile/alligat.htnil (Accessed July 2016).
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2016b. Green Sea Turtles in North Carolina.
Http://www.fws.gov/nces/reptile/greensea.html (Accessed July 2016).
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2016c. Hawksbill Sea Turtles in North Carolina.
Http://www.fws.gov/nces/reptile/hawksbill.html (Accessed July 2016).
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2016d. Kemp's Ridley Sea Turtles in North Carolina.
Http://www.fws.gov/nces/reptile/ridley.html (Accessed July 2016).
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2016e. Leatherback Sea Turtles in North Carolina.
Http://www.fws.gov/nces/reptile/leather.html (Accessed July 2016).
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2016£ Loggerhead Turtles in North Carolina.
Http://www.fws.gov/nces/reptile/logger.html (Accessed July 2016.)
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2016g. Piping plover (Charadrius melodus) Species Profile.
Http:Hecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B079 (Accessed July
2016.)
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2016h. Red -cockaded Woodpecker (Picoides borealis).
http://www.fws.gov/rcwrecovery/rcw.html (Accessed August 2016).
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2016i. West Indian Manatees in North Carolina.
http://www.fws.gov/nc-es/mammal.html (Accessed August 2015).
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2016j. Seabeach Amaranth (Amarathus pumilus).
http://www.fws.gov/nc-es/plant/seabamaranth.html (Accessed August 2016).
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2016k. Rufa Red Knot (Calidris canutus rufa).
https://www.fws.gov/northeast/redknot/pdf/Redknot_BWfactsheet092013.pdf (Accessed
August 2016).
U.S. Geologic Survey. 2011. http://mrdata.usgs.gov/mrds/ (Accessed August 2016).
Webster, W.D., J.F. Parnell, and W.C. Biggs, Jr. 1985. Mammals of the Carolinas, Virginia, and
Maryland. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press. 255 pp.
18
Grants Creek — Jacksonville DOW Line

Environmental Services, Inc.
Appendix A
Figures
19
Grants Creek — Jacksonville 230kV Line

P.\GeoGra\Projects\2015\010\31\GIS\fig_topo. mxd Date. 9/7/20163.08.34 PM

c
� 4 w
w.
S1 CD J—
CD
+ t )
O
CD CD
♦ } # ► s �(f
-, tip.
•
C ti
'7 .. 4 • ,•^\� L�.... '"1� ` _ •R+. •spa /
fr
�..�� [ +,> •• _� .mom t �,., � •
}
s
1 .1 ., [ 1 i� .. m x �r�, • . • .
rAY
j1 • 1;•
}� • \
// ^.- / {jy�.. Twp.•.
` t•• .,.,,M' � \^+.,-.-. � �.,,(. s wad R ■ � R n. . ..t,i�; �,. � R • f `'
M1 / lit
• �, y 1sa8 •at g,'' s,98's ¢(,gyp } • `� J tt N •i`ps -
^� at •F � 4 . Cry ,i-t�Y��f �r� �•f �.` ,� a
.,
k
5 —
.%+•a1r__ �¢a�aaR......+j ®Ra° mR*a #ff a�, ! �' C=a •�
b0
n
+a,,, a y'•r,�• � `'��_.
or-
-.11/ • db
,......sn++ fd ti�u
10
m . 4
/ #! I T
«.
"'•, a - 7
� � ,>r '�;y d�' �� t4 �f�r'.�•aasu o -i a ti�f;f J � S�' f� �r".,.:~+`'.
a to ))
'' t x,g 4� !. `lll.34LCR1.1iiF •t'i OYY 3�]:5 J: +.RSR+d. � i# � -
� •��.P� alae ..j� 99°V �t �{'//'�1 .✓)//// iE;'44 Vit, �^ q
• /l
,
a
a
o /
.. as A
DUKE-
"'* ` ENERGY
`
Source:2011 National Geographic Society/ESRI, i -cubed seamless
USGS quadrangles (Jacksonville North and Kellum, NC), Project Study are acquired from Duke Energy.
Disclaimer: The information depicted on this figure is for informational purposes only and was not prepared for,
and is not suitable for legal or engineering purposes. This information presented is not for regulatory review and
is intended for use only by a Professional Land Surveyor prior to regulatory review.
,.. ENVIRONMI•:M AI.
SERVICES, INC.
4901 Trademark Drive
Raleigh. North Carolina 27610
.y `919,212-1760
[phone] Fez
env,r-meta serv;ces;nc nom
Project Location
Grants Creek -Jacksonville 230 kV Line
Onslow County, North Carolina
Project: ER15010.31
Date: Sept 2016
Drwn/Chkd: KT/JH
Figure: 1c
P 1GeoGma Projects\20151010\31\GIS\fig_topo—ol Date. 9/7/2016 3:08.34 PM

Z
goo� 0'(D
0
CD CDM O 9 C C C N < k,
(D (n- (n- (n-
� C 3 NQ Q Q
NON m n (i F)
0 T N
c o O- O. O. (n O.
O 7 7 7
CD v v v D
o
(.=Dl m (D
IDC (D
C 0 O ° (D Z1,0 y O 3 v
a a 0 m3
n 7
D o o m t (D Q
0 C F
a m >-
m
0 (D
y C
N (D
. y
rT
DUNCE
ENER%C%7Yr
ENVIRONMENTAL
SERVICES, INC.
4901 Trademark Drive
Raleigh, North Carolina 27610
(9191212-1760
..` [phone] Fax
ww enwronm enfalserwcesrnc com
zv-
>
y
y`y
y'y
y
y
1
>1
$ y
y
a � y
qF r
+1Aik yy .
P\G,,Gra\Projects\2015\010\31\GIS\FigJoris.mxd Date 8/31/201640237PM
N
Source: High Resolution NC Statewide Orthoimagery,
CLIA, 2010, Evaluation Area acquired from Duke Energy.
Disclaimer: The information depicted on this figure is for informational purposes only and was not prepared for,
and is not suitable for legal or engineering purposes. This information presented is not for regulatory review an
is intended for use only by a Professional Land Surveyor prior to regulatory review.
Delineated Features
Grants Creek - Jacksonville 230 W Line
Onslow County, North Carolina
Project ER 15010.31
Date: Aug 2016
Drwn/Chkd: KT/JH
Figure: 2a

d 2P. O^
`
Source: High Resolution NC Statewide Orthoimagery,
CGIA, 2010; Evaluation Area acquired from Duke Energy.
Disclaimer: The information depicted on this figure is for informational purposes only and was not prepared for,
and is not suitable for legal or engineering purposes. This information presented is not for regulatory review and
J
3.m-
is intended for use only by a Professional Land Surveyor prior to regulatory review.
I �� L CI'S, [.
�t 1 T,�do ('l:S, INC.INC•
;1Trallomark0olia
Delineated Features
Grants Creek - Jacksonville 230 kV Line
Project: ER15010.31
Date: Aug 2016
Faleigh, North Carolina 27610
�( 19, 212-1761
.__. ,P,9, 2,2-, 707 Fax
Onslow County, North Carolina
..
� N N
N, d
m o
(D (D
o
r
O°
m
o
7
M
L L L
CC C
2. �. 2.
in uI En
n a
N
Cil
;::p
rn
m
<
W
�
4
♦
} ..
' 1.
- �♦
W ° .. - - - -
a
.. !v
° CD
p m O O O O O ♦}
o,a a v v v 3 D `. ICDB
s cn cn v ', o N !. N
v
dn0
~ 7 .♦ ,
�
o m * (D Q .
o (D ♦*
m 0
ti.
i
a4
/• DUKE
ENERGY.
`
Source: High Resolution NC Statewide Orthoimagery,
CGIA, 2010; Evaluation Area acquired from Duke Energy.
Disclaimer: The information depicted on this figure is for informational purposes only and was not prepared for,
and is not suitable for legal or engineering purposes. This information presented is not for regulatory review and
is intended for use only by a Professional Land Surveyor prior to regulatory review.
I �� L CI'S, [.
�t 1 T,�do ('l:S, INC.INC•
;1Trallomark0olia
Delineated Features
Grants Creek - Jacksonville 230 kV Line
Project: ER15010.31
Date: Aug 2016
Faleigh, North Carolina 27610
�( 19, 212-1761
.__. ,P,9, 2,2-, 707 Fax
Onslow County, North Carolina
Drwn/Chkd: KT/JH
wan ;.o nantala,�a�;n� on
Figure: 2b
P'\Ge,Gra\P,,j,,ts\2015\010\31\GIS\FigJuris. mxd Date 6/31/20164'. 02'.37 PM

0 _Z
T C) I
� N N
a
m59
? tc
�c mm
r
� T. � m
c C) 9 C C C N <
-• m c c l v
m �m (1). C
m m o
< a y a C1 n m .-.
T N m^_ _ N
y 0 m O O O C O
R 7 7 C
m N v v 3 D
o at a (_n in C v
m
o O ° CD ::k (D
cC w 3 N a) N
a 0. 3. m 0
0= 3 CD a
2L
m5D CD
w a O
c
o
yt
Y
�.
z
NA
� a
41 Ak,
Source: High Resolution NC Statewide Orthoimagery,
DUKE
CGIA, 2010; Evaluation Area acquired from Duke Energy.
• ENERGY, Disclaimer: The information depicted on this figure is for informational purposes only and was not prepared for,
and is not suitable for legal or engineering purposes. This information presented is not for regulatory review and
is intended for use only by a Professional Land Surveyor prior to regulatory review.
ENVIRONMENTAL Project: ER15010.31
SERVICES, INC. Delineated Features Date: Aug016
4901 Tredemark NorthC
Raleigh, North Carolina 27610
li°
RaleGrants Creek - Jacksonville 230 W Line g
i
[phone] Drwn/Chkd: KT/JH
(919(212-1707 Fax Onslow County, North Carolina
wwwen�,.onmentalseme-me <om Figure: 2c
P\GeoGra\Prole,ts\2015\010\31\GIS\F,9_j—s. m,d Date 8/31/2016 4 02 37 PM

i
Source: High Resolution NC Statewide Orthoimagery,
ffti� DUKE CGIA, 2010; Evaluation Area acquired from Duke Energy.
'' ENERGY Disclaimer: The information depicted on this figure is for informational purposes only and was not prepared for,
and is not suitable for legal or engineering purposes. This information presented is not for regulatory review and
is intended for use only by a Professional Land Surveyor prior to regulatory review.
h:AN IRO11D1F.NTAL
Project: ER15010.31
Delineated Features
SERvI('l�s, INC. Date: Aug016
49leigh, .rlhkDnve Grants Creek - Jacksonville 230 kV Line s
Raleigh, Norih Caroline 27fi10
[phone] Drwn/Chkd: KT/JH
[phone] Fax Onslow Countv, North Carolina
P'\Geo Gra\Projects\2015\01031\GIS\Fig_juris.mxd Dale. 8/31/201640237 PM
f
0
C) m
C—
C
C— C
C C
N
m
<
f
t .
=
rn
a
to (n
a a
M
v
t
+
f.
0 CD
O
O O
(Df�
O
W�
CIS
v
�
v v
C
3
D
m
+f
1
CDCD
(D
71,
CD
Source: High Resolution NC Statewide Orthoimagery,
ffti� DUKE CGIA, 2010; Evaluation Area acquired from Duke Energy.
'' ENERGY Disclaimer: The information depicted on this figure is for informational purposes only and was not prepared for,
and is not suitable for legal or engineering purposes. This information presented is not for regulatory review and
is intended for use only by a Professional Land Surveyor prior to regulatory review.
h:AN IRO11D1F.NTAL
Project: ER15010.31
Delineated Features
SERvI('l�s, INC. Date: Aug016
49leigh, .rlhkDnve Grants Creek - Jacksonville 230 kV Line s
Raleigh, Norih Caroline 27fi10
[phone] Drwn/Chkd: KT/JH
[phone] Fax Onslow Countv, North Carolina
P'\Geo Gra\Projects\2015\01031\GIS\Fig_juris.mxd Dale. 8/31/201640237 PM

W a
,v
^1.
m
r'
O
L
L L
rri
o
m
CC
2
C
S.
N
(D <
m
.
(n
zi-
(n (n
C
E o
d
Q d
m
11)
m ? d
a
Q)
=
-'1
C 0 CD
N
n
cCD
o'
o' o
(n
O
o
m
F
°�1D
'
v
v v
D
CD �. 7
cil
X
CD
C m
C a o
3n
0 0 0
*
(D Q
D iv0
N
C O
�
19
i
r
e:E
'fa
r1' ¢
1
1
` 1
Cn
00
1 Al
t .
'1
4.
Vilt
J I�w o- e+ Y !!n Caw 1
I
{{
I ir
r
/
I
/
1
1
Source: High Resolution NC Statewide Orthoimagery,
DUKECGIA, 2010; Evaluation Area acquired from Duke Energy.
ENERGY, ` Disclaimer: The information depicted on this figure is for informational purposes only and was not prepared for,
and is not suitable for legal or engineering purposes. This information presented is not for regulatory review and
is intended for use only by a Professional Land Surveyor prior to regulatory review.
ENN IRONNIENTAI. Project: ER15010.31
SE,RVICEIS, INC. Delineated Features Date: Aug016
4901 TrahemsCX
RaleghNorth Cara hna 27610 Grants Creek - Jacksonville 230 kV Line g
i. lan
19,212-1760 Onslow County, North Carolina Drwn/Chkd: KT/JH
(_19) 212-1707 Fax
wwwanvir-m-false-cesmc <om Figure: 2e
P\GeoGra\Projects\2015\010\31\GIS\FigJuris.mxd ()ate. 8/31/20164.0237 PM

3 I Ij„�.. ;
J (� (D ®a IF ,
a
� m m
ffl 1
C) c c c iv < — -•-
m
N N J in V1 rA
3 D, a Iz_ 0- c 1 s
cn o 0 0
m o > > m
0 CD
Cn
0CL..
v
J J O \ * 1 1 l
D O
N = a I '-
to
1
f ♦
'AF,,
ff
r
f
6� rg A
` A-
-0
0"
`7
°
x
y
x
r_
s
-Ir IV
0 ♦.c, � p ,
11 �
a
to
N `
., 45,
'a
_ A
f? r slop
n,
x
a i t.1
a
s
Source: High Resolution NC Statewide Orthoimagery,
DUKECGIA, 2010: Evaluation Area acquired from Duke Energy.
ENERGY, ` Disclaimer: The information depicted on this figure is for informational purposes only and was not prepared for,
and is not suitable for legal or engineering purposes. This information presented is not for regulatory review and
is intended for use only by a Professional Land Surveyor prior to regulatory review.
ENVIRONMENTAL Project: ER15010.31
SERVICES, INC. Delineated Features Date: Aug 2016
4901Trademark
Carolina Grants Creek - Jacksonville 230 W Line
Raleigh, North Carolina 2761D
(919(212-1760 Onslow County, North Carolina Drwn/Chkd: KT/JH
(919( 212-1707 Fax
wwwan „o manlal=a, -m Figure: 2f
P \Ge,G,a\P,,I,,ts\2015\010\31\GIS\F,g_j,,,, m,d Date 8/31/2016 4 02 37 PM

P \Geo Gra\Prole,ts\2015\010\31\GIS\FigJuris,,,d Date 8/3112016 4 02 37 PM

P \Geo Gra\Prc)ects\2015\010\31\GIS\FgJuris.mxd Date 8/31/20164 0237 PM

�Z
a
r
E35
®o
a
r
�y.
�c
a
C
C- C-
m
ID
m y m
O
d
o
C
�.
C C
N
<
E-1
U1
a
in (n
a n
1<6
=
mO m N
c o
Na
cxo
_
.n-. �_
OL)
w v m
(.nO
O
7
O O
7 7
N
O
°'
v
v v
3
D
° C
"
C. 0
0
0cD
(n
(n
v
W
O
CD
a
N
n
o
3
C
_
f
CD Q
0
d 61 S
C
d N Q
y o
(D
y (p
1-
r
r
9rr. � rr
t.p s
a•
LtijJ i`J b „;. a
r^
rr
w'y r
Source: High Resolution NC Statewide Orthoimagery,
tV U KFCGIA, 2010, Evaluation Area acquired from Duke Energy.
ENERGY` Disclaimer: The information depicted on this figure is for informational purposes only and was not prepared for,
and is not suitable for legal or engineering purposes. This information presented is not for regulatory review and
is intended for use only by a Professional Land Surveyor prior to regulatory review.
Project: ER15010.31
ENVIRONMENTAL Delineated Features
SERVICES, INC. Date: Aug 2016
490, 27610
TrademarkCarol
Raleigh, NorthhCarolina Grants Creek - Jacksonville 230 W Line
[phone] Onslow County, North Carolina Drwn/Chkd: KT/JH
212-1707 Fax
(919)
wwwanwronmenta se -yes- cam Figure. 2j
P\G,,Gra\Projects\2015\010\31\GIS\F,g_j—s—d Date 8/31/2016 4 02 37 PM

TRANSMISSION LOOP LINE

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action Id. SAW -2016-00819 County: Onslow U.S.G.S. Quad: NC-KELLUM
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
Requester: Environmental Services, INC
Robert Turnbull
4901 Trademark Drive
Raleigh, NC 27610
Size (acres) 230
Nearest Waterway Grants Creek
USGS HUC 03020301
Nearest Town Jacksonville
River Basin Onslow Bay
Coordinates Latitude: 34.7745322207274
Longitude: -77.2738679368903
Location description: The project area for a proposed Duke Energy Substation is located on the north side of Old 30
Road at its intersection with Rocky Run Road, Jacksonville, Onslow County, North Carolina.
Indicate Which of the Following Apply:
A. Preliminary Determination
X There are waters, including wetlands, on the above described project area, that may be subject to Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403). The
waters, including wetlands, have been delineated, and the delineation has been verified by the Corps to be sufficiently
accurate and reliable. Therefore this preliminary jurisdiction determination may be used in the permit evaluation process,
including determining compensatory mitigation. For purposes of computation of impacts, compensatory mitigation
requirements, and other resource protection measures, a permit decision made on the basis of a preliminary JD will treat all
waters and wetlands that would be affected in any way by the permitted activity on the site as if they are jurisdictional
waters of the U.S. This preliminary determination is not an appealable action under the Regulatory Program
Administrative Appeal Process (Reference 33 CFR Part 331). However, you may request an approved JD, which is an
appealable action, by contacting the Corps district for further instruction.
_ There are wetlands on the above described property, that may be subject to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403). However, since the
waters, including wetlands, have not been properly delineated, this preliminary jurisdiction determination may not be
used in the permit evaluation process. Without a verified wetland delineation, this preliminary determination is merely an
effective presumption of CWA/RHA jurisdiction overall of the waters, including wetlands, at the project area, which is
not sufficiently accurate and reliable to support an enforceable permit decision. We recommend that you have the
waters of the U.S. on your property delineated. As the Corps may not be able to accomplish this wetland delineation in a
timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that can be verified by the Corps.
B. Approved Determination
_ There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described property subject to the permit requirements of
Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403) and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC
§ 1344). Unless there is a change in law or our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period
not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
_ There are waters of the U.S., including wetlands, on the above described project area subject to the permit requirements
of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published
regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
_ We recommend you have the waters of the U.S. on your property delineated. As the Corps may not be able to
accomplish this wetland delineation in a timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that
can be verified by the Corps.
Page 1 of 2

SAW -2016-00819
_ The waters of the U.S., including wetlands, on your project area have been delineated and the delineation has been
verified by the Corps. If you wish to have the delineation surveyed, the Corps can review and verify the survey upon
completion. Once verified, this survey will provide an accurate depiction of all areas subject to CWA and/or RHA
jurisdiction on your property which, provided there is no change in the law or our published regulations, may be relied
upon for a period not to exceed five years.
_ The waters of the U.S., including wetlands, have been delineated and surveyed and are accurately depicted on the plat
signed by the Corps Regulatory Official identified below on . Unless there is a change in the law or our
published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this
notification.
_ There are no waters of the U.S., to include wetlands, present on the above described project area which are subject to the
permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our
published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this
notification.
_ The property is located in one of the 20 Coastal Counties subject to regulation under the Coastal Area Management Act
(CAMA). You should contact the Division of Coastal Management in Morehead City, NC, at [phone] to
determine their requirements.
Placement of dredged or fill material within waters of the US, including wetlands, without a Department of the Army permit
may constitute a violation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC § 1311). Placement of dredged or fill material,
construction or placement of structures, or work within navigable waters of the United States without a Department of the
Army permit may constitute a violation of Sections 9 and/or 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (33 USC § 401 and/or 403). If
you have any questions regarding this determination and/or the Corps regulatory program, please contact Brennan Dooley at
[phone] or Brennan.J.Doolev(&usace.armv.mil.
C. Basis For Determination:
The site exhibits wetland criteria as described in the 1987 Corps Wetland Delineation Manual and appropriate
Rep-ional Supplement. The water bodies exhibit ordinary hi¢h water marks as indicated by the absence of veeetation in
the stream channel and the presence of bed and bank, sediment deposition and wrack lines.
D. Remarks:
E. Attention USDA Program Participants
This delineation/determination has been conducted to identify the limits of Corps' Clean Water Act jurisdiction for the
particular site identified in this request. The delineation/determination may not be valid for the wetland conservation
provisions of the Food Security Act of 1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation
in USDA programs, you should request a certified wetland determination from the local office of the Natural Resources
Conservation Service, prior to starting work.
F. Appeals Information (This information applies only to approved jurisdictional determinations as indicated in
B. above)
This correspondence constitutes an approved jurisdictional determination for the above described site. If you object to this
determination, you may request an administrative appeal under Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331. Enclosed you will find a
Notification of Appeal Process (NAP) fact sheet and request for appeal (RFA) form. If you request to appeal this
determination you must submit a completed RFA form to the following address:
US Army Corps of Engineers
South Atlantic Division
Attn: Jason Steele, Review Officer
60 Forsyth Street SW, Room 1OM15
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
Page 2 of 2

SAW -2016-00819
In order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps, the Corps must determine that it is complete, that it meets the criteria for
appeal under 33 CFR part 331.5, and that it has been received by the Division Office within 60 days of the date of the NAP.
Should you decide to submit an RFA form, it must be received at the above address by N/A.
**It is not necessary to submit an RFA form to the Division Office if you do not object to the determination in this
correspondence.** DOO(L1E1Y..BRENNAN.JOHN. DDiigliCallUSignedby .Go�meBRENNAN.JOHN151 92613
Corps Regulatory Official:
1512992613 cn=DO201L704.18 NAN.4OHN.1012992613
Date: April 18, 2017 Expiration Date: N/A
The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure we
continue to do so, please complete our Customer Satisfaction Survey, located online at
http://cornsmayu.usace.anny.mil/cm qpex/Pp=l36A:0.
Page 3 of 2

ATTACHMENT
PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL
DETERMINATION (JD): April 18, 2017
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PRELIMINARY JD:
Duke Energy Progress
410 Wilmington Street, NC 02
Raleigh, NC 27601
C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
SAW -2016-00819
D. PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
(USE THE ATTACHED TABLE TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE WATERBODIES
AT DIFFERENT SITES)
State: NC County/parish/borough: On slow City: Jacksonville
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 34.773640
N, Long. 77.275370 W.
Universal Transverse Mercator: 18S 291779 3850299
Name of nearest waterbody: Little Northeast Creek
Identify (estimate) amount of waters in the review area:
Non -wetland waters: linear feet: 7,244 ft width (ft): 4 and/or acres.
Cowardin Class: Riverine
Stream Flow: Perennial
Wetlands: 211.6 acres.
Cowardin Class: Forested
Name of any water bodies on the site that have been identified as Section 10
waters:
Tidal: NA
Non -Tidal: NA
E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT
APPLY):
❑ Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
® Field Determination. Date(s): 6/1/2016, 8/9/2016
1. The Corps of Engineers believes that there may be jurisdictional waters of the
United States on the subject site, and the permit applicant or other affected party
who requested this preliminary JD is hereby advised of his or her option to
request and obtain an approved jurisdictional determination (JD) for that site.
Nevertheless, the permit applicant or other person who requested this

preliminary JD has declined to exercise the option to obtain an approved JD in
this instance and at this time.
2. In any circumstance where a permit applicant obtains an individual permit, or
a Nationwide General Permit (NWP) or other general permit verification requiring
"pre -construction notification" (PCN), or requests verification for a non -reporting
NWP or other general permit, and the permit applicant has not requested an
approved JD for the activity, the permit applicant is hereby made aware of the
following: (1) the permit applicant has elected to seek a permit authorization
based on a preliminary JD, which does not make an official determination of
jurisdictional waters; (2) that the applicant has the option to request an approved
JD before accepting the terms and conditions of the permit authorization, and
that basing a permit authorization on an approved JD could possibly result in less
compensatory mitigation being required or different special conditions; (3) that
the applicant has the right to request an individual permit rather than accepting
the terms and conditions of the NWP or other general permit authorization; (4)
that the applicant can accept a permit authorization and thereby agree to comply
with all the terms and conditions of that permit, including whatever mitigation
requirements the Corps has determined to be necessary; (5) that undertaking
any activity in reliance upon the subject permit authorization without requesting
an approved JD constitutes the applicant's acceptance of the use of the
preliminary JD, but that either form of JD will be processed as soon as is
practicable; (6) accepting a permit authorization (e.g., signing a proffered
individual permit) or undertaking any activity in reliance on any form of Corps
permit authorization based on a preliminary JD constitutes agreement that all
wetlands and other water bodies on the site affected in any way by that activity
are jurisdictional waters of the United States, and precludes any challenge to
such jurisdiction in any administrative or judicial compliance or enforcement
action, or in any administrative appeal or in any Federal court; and (7) whether
the applicant elects to use either an approved JD or a preliminary JD, that JD
will be processed as soon as is practicable. Further, an approved JD, a proffered
individual permit (and all terms and conditions contained therein), or individual
permit denial can be administratively appealed pursuant to 33 C.F.R. Part 331,
and that in any administrative appeal, jurisdictional issues can be raised (see 33
C.F.R. 331.5(a)(2)). If, during that administrative appeal, it becomes necessary
to make an official determination whether CWA jurisdiction exists over a site, or
to provide an official delineation of jurisdictional waters on the site, the Corps will
provide an approved JD to accomplish that result, as soon as is practicable.
This preliminary JD finds that there "maybe" waters of the United States on the
subject project site, and identifies all aquatic features on the site that could be
affected by the proposed activity, based on the following information:
SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for preliminary JD (check all that apply
- checked items should be included in case file and, where checked and
requested, appropriately reference sources below):
2

E Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the
applicant/consultant: Environmental Services, Inc.
® Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the
applicant/consultant.
® Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:
❑ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data.
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
® U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:1:24,000 Kellum,
NC
®USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey.
Citation: NRCS digital Soil Survey of Onslow County, 2009
❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
❑ State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
❑ FEMA/FIRM maps:
❑ 100 -year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum
of 1929)
❑ Photographs: ❑ Aerial (Name & Date):.
or ❑ Other (Name & Date)
❑ Previous determination(s). File no, and date of response letter:
❑ Other information (please specify):
IMPORTANT NOTE: The information recorded on this form has not
necessarily been verified by the Corps and should not be relied upon for
later iurisdictional determinations.
Digitally signed by
DOOLEY.BRENNAN DOOLEY.BRENNANJOHN.1512992613
DN: c=U5, o=U.S. Government, ou=DoD,
PKI, ou=USA,
.JOHN.1512992613 cn=DOOLEYB ENNAN.JOHN.1512992613
Date: 2017.04.18 08:17:56 -04'00'
Signature and date of
Regulatory Project Manager
(REQUIRED)
Signatur-, and date of
person requesting preliminary JD
(REQUIRED, unless obtaining
the signature is impracticable)

Estimated
amount of
Class of
Site
Cowardin
aquatic resource
Latitude
Longitude
aquatic
number
Class
in review area
resource
Linear
Acres
ft.
W1
34.77524
-77.27991
PSS/PFO
211.6
Non-Section
10 — Wetland
Non-Section
T1
34.77302
77.27483
Riverine
3,308.5
0—Non-
10—Non-
Wetland
Wetland
Non-Section
T2
34.77093
-77.27586
Riverine
2,171.2
10—Non-
0—Non-
Wetland
Wetland
Non-Section
T3
34.76963
-77.27400
Riverine
467.8
10 — Non-
Wetland
Non-Section
T4
34.77473
-77.27383
Riverine
1,296.6
10 — Non-
Wetland

0
D7�:
, ,
m
o
O ]
Q
atc V, i
_
0 CD
°1 N
CTI4
(D
O_
p
6
��
iT)p~
v
D
m
m' 3
v
°'
CD
�.
s
�-
�.�
tea• �
�„��
Source: NAIP Orthoimagey, 2014;
�� — Project Study area acquired from Onslow County Parcel data, 2015.
T1+/
o"ENERGY,KEDisclaimer: The information depicted on this figure is for informational purposes only and was not prepared for,
and is not suitable for legal or engineering purposes. This information presented is not for regulatory review and
is intended for use only by a Professional Land Surveyor prior to regulatory review.
Project: ER15010.32
ENVIRONMENTAL Jurisdictional Features Map
SERVICES, INC. Date: Aug 2016
vi
4901 oriCarolinGrants Creek SubstationRaleigh. North Carolina 27610
(91 9)212-1760 Onslow County, North Carolina Drwn/Chkd: KT/RT
[phone] Fax
www enwronmenralsery—sine com Figure: 2
P\Ge oG ra\P role cls\2015\010',2\GIS\fq aenal 1.m.a Dale 10/12/2016 9 33 41 AM

Grants Creek Substation
Onslow County, NC
Version 2
Prepared for:
DUKE
ENERGY,
Prepared by:
91
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC.
4901 Trademark Drive
Raleigh, North Carolina 27610
August 2016

Environmental Services, Inc.
Table of Contents
1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION & UNDERSTANDING.................................................................. 1
2.0 METHODOLOGIES & QUALIFICATIONS............................................................................ 1
3.0 PHYSICAL RESOURCES......................................................................................................... 1
3.1 Topography............................................................................................................................. 1
3.2 Soils.........................................................................................................................................1
3.3 Water Resources...................................................................................................................... 2
4.0 JURISDICTIONAL ISSUES...................................................................................................... 2
4.1 Clean Water Act Waters of the U.S......................................................................................... 2
4.1.1 Wetland Data................................................................................................................... 3
4.1.2 Stream, Surface Water, and Tributary Data.................................................................... 3
4.2 Clean Water Act Pen -nits ......................................................................................................... 4
4.3 Coastal Area Management Act................................................................................................ 4
4.4 Construction Moratoria........................................................................................................... 4
4.5 N.C. River Basin Buffer Rules................................................................................................ 4
4.6 Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act............................................................................... 4
4.7 Endangered Species Act Protected Species............................................................................. 5
4.8 Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act ................ ............................. 10
.....................................
4.9 Federal Species of Concern................................................................................................... 10
4.10 State Protected Species.......................................................................................................... 10
4.11 Cultural / Archaeological Resources..................................................................................... 12
5.0 SUMMARY.............................................................................................................................. 12
6.0 REFERENCES..........................................................................................................................10
Appendices
Appendix A
• Topographic and Aerial Figures
Appendix B
0 Data Forms

Environmental Services, Inc.
Grants Creek Substation
Onslow County, NC
August 2016
1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION & UNDERSTANDING
The project study area is located east of Jacksonville, on Old 30 Road, at the intersection with Rocky
Run Road in Onslow County, North Carolina. Duke Energy is proposing a new Grants Creek
Substation. The study area is depicted on both a current U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) map
(Figure l) and a recent aerial photography (Figure 2) in Appendix A.
Environmental Services, Inc., (ESI) was tasked by Duke to provide the following services for
the Grants Creek Substation project:
• Jurisdictional wetland, stream, and surface water delineation,
• GPS data collection for any delineated wetlands or streams,
• Preliminary protected species habitat assessments for federally Endangered and Threatened
species,
• Agency review with Army Corps of Engineers and Division of Water Resources,
• Preliminary cultural resources assessment, and
• Report and graphics preparation
2.0 METHODOLOGIES & QUALIFICATIONS
Prior to the initiation of field efforts, available sources were reviewed, including the applicable U.S.
Geological Survey 7.5 -minute topographic quadrangle of Kellum, NC (NGS/ESRI 2011), and U.S.
Department of Agriculture Soil Survey for Onslow County (USDA 1992). Additionally, records kept
by the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) concerning any known occurrences of
federally Threatened or Endangered species were reviewed (NCNHP 2015).
3.0 PHYSICAL RESOURCES
The study area is located in the Coastal Plain physiographic province of North Carolina. Specifically,
the substation is located primarily in the Belgrade formation of the Coastal Plain (NCDENR 1985).
3.1 Topography
Topography in the study area is mostly flat with some areas of small elevation change. Elevations
range from a high of approximately 12 feet above mean sea level (MSL) down to approximately 10
feet above MSL through the study area.
3.2 Soils
The general soil associations occurring in the study area is the Rains-Woodington-Torhunta
Association. These are nearly level, poorly drained and very poorly drained soils that have a loamy or
clayey subsoil on uplands.
1
Grants Creek Substation

Environmental Services, Inc.
3.3 Water Resources
Water resources in the study area are located within the White Oak River basin (USGS hydrologic unit --
03020302) (NCDEQ 2016). A Best Usage Classification (BUC) is assigned to waters of North
Carolina based on the existing or contemplated best usage of various bodies of water. Table 1
contains the named water resources associated with features located within the study area, their Stream
Index Numbers, and their BUCs. The two named streams represent the receiving waters of the
individual segments or tributaries that are located inside the study area, given the study area is located
between these two drainages. Unnamed streams and tributaries carry the same BUC as their receiving
waters, unless otherwise indicated by DWR.
I able 1. Named water resources and receiving waters (NCDWR 2013)
Stream Name Stream Index # BUCBasin
Little Northeast Creek 19-16-2-1 C;NSW White Oak
Grants Creek 20-14-1 C White Oak
Class C waters are used as secondary recreation such as fishing, wildlife, fish consumption, and
agriculture. The NSW supplemental designation indicates nutrient sensitive waters, which require
limitations on nutrient inputs.
Portions of Little Northeast Creek, Grants Creek, and the White Oak River are considered an
Anadromous Fish Spawning Area (AFSA) by the North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries
(NCDMF 2007). The proposed project should not have any effect on these waters.
4.0 JURISDICTIONAL ISSUES
4.1 Clean Water Act Waters of the U.S.
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) requires regulation of discharges into "Waters of the
United States". Although the principal administrative agency of the CWA is the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) has major responsibility for
implementation, permitting, and enforcement of provisions of the Act. The USACE regulatory
program is defined in 33 CFR 320-330. Water bodies such as rivers, lakes, and streams are subject to
jurisdictional consideration under the Section 404 program. However, by regulation, wetlands are also
considered "Waters of the United States".
According to the Regional Supplement to the ACOE Wetland Delineation Manual for the Atlantic and
Gulf Coastal Plain Region (USACE 2010), areas must exhibit three distinct characteristics to be
considered jurisdictional wetlands: 1) prevalence of hydrophytic (water tolerant) plants; 2) presence of
hydric soils; and 3) sufficient wetland hydrology indicators within 12 inches of the ground surface.
When present, intermittent and perennial stream channels are also considered Waters of the United
States under Sections 404 and 401 of the CWA.
The USACE "Rapanos" decision allows USACE and EPA to establish CWA jurisdiction under one of
two standards. The first standard upholds CWA jurisdiction if the water body is "relatively
permanent", and its adjacent wetlands directly about the water body. The second standard upholds
2
Grants Creek Substation

Environmental Services, Inc.
jurisdiction if a water body, in combination with all wetlands adjacent to that water body, has a
"significant nexus" with traditional navigable waters.
Presence of an ordinary high water mark (OHWM) and a continuous bed and bank define streams and
tributaries to waters of the U.S. under current USACE guidance. Perennial and intermittent streams
are considered relatively permanent waters (RPWs) and are defined by hydrologic regime. Tributaries
can be natural or man-made (ditches), but they must possess an OHWM and bed and bank to be
considered by USACE. The delineation results described in the following sections are considered
preliminary until reviewed or otherwise approved by USACE. ESI is currently commencing with
USACE coordination to review the delineation results.
4.1.1 Wetland Data
One (1) wetland area was delineated within the project study area. The wetland type was
classified pursuant to the N.C. Wetland Assessment Method (NCWAM). Figure 2 depicts the
approximate extent and approximate location of the wetland that was delineated. These graphics are
not intended to be a replacement for a traditional survey and are not intended to be used as such.
Table 2 contains wetland data collected within the project study area. Wetlands were flagged with
sequentially numbered blue and pink -and -black striped flagging. The wetland complex has been
logged since ESI first visited the site in 2013. The removal of the trees has resulted in substantially
wetter site conditions than originally observed.
Table 2. Wetland Data for the Grants Creek Substation Proiect.
Wetland
ID
NCWAM
Classification
Approximate Size within Project
Study Area (acres)
W1
Pine Flat
211.61
TOTAL:
211.61
4.1.2 Stream, Surface Water, and Tributary Data
Four (4) tributary segments occur within the project study area. The tributaries are ditches that possess
an OHWM and were delineated with sequentially numbered solid blue and orange flagging. USACE
and NCDWR stream data forms were completed for these features in the study area. Table 3 contains
the tributary data collected within the project study area. Figure 2 depicts the approximate extent and
approximate location of the tributaries and wetlands that were delineated. These graphics are not
intended to be a replacement for a traditional survey and is not intended to be used as such.
3
Grants Creek Substation

Environmental Services, Inc.
Table 3. Jurisdictional Tributary Data for the Grants Creek VmhvtAfinn PrniPrr
Stream
ID
Perennial/
Intermittent
Approximate
Length (feet)
Approximate
Width (feet)
NCDWR
Stream ID
Form Score
Subject to
Buffer
(Y/N)
T1
Ditch w/OHWM
3,309
3
15.5
No
T2
Ditch w/OHWM
2,171
4
17
No
T3
Ditch w/OHWM
468
3
15
No
T4
Ditch w/OHWM
1,297
4
14
No
TOTAL:
7,245
4.2 Clean Water Act Permits
Dredge and fill activities in "Waters of the United States" must be authorized by USACE as a
regulated discharge pursuant to Section 404 of the CWA and also by NCDWR pursuant to Section 401
of the CWA. Activities authorized by the USACE are subject to further water quality requirements
per Section 401 of the CWA. In North Carolina, the NCDWR administers the Section 401 Water
Quality Certification process, which also must include plans on how the applicant proposes to manage
storm water.
Coordination is recommended with USACE in order to determine the permitting requirements for this
project, if any. Section 404 permitting may not be necessary if all wetland and stream impacts are
avoided; however, concurrence from USACE should be obtained prior to beginning any activities.
Compensatory mitigation can be required by USACE if the proposed project is determined to have an
adverse effect on Waters of the United States, including wetlands, as a result of a regulated discharge.
4.3 Coastal Area Management Act
North Carolina Division of Coastal Management (NCDCM) regulates certain wetlands and water
bodies in the twenty coastal counties of North Carolina under the Coastal Area Management Act
(CAMA). Areas subject to CAMA are identified as Areas of Environmental Concern (AECs). There
are no AECs in the study area that are subject to CAMA regulations.
4.4 Construction Moratoria
It is anticipated that no in -water construction moratoria will apply to this project.
4.5 N.C. River Basin Buffer Rules
The study area is located in the White Oak River basin. At this time no buffers exist for streams and
water bodies in the White Oak River basin.
4.6 Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act
Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act requires authorization from the USACE for the excavation
of material, alteration, obstruction, or construction of any structure in or over any "navigable water" of
the United States (33 U.S.0 410 et seq.). "Navigable water" is defined as waters that are subject to
the ebb and flow of the tide shoreward to the mean high water mark and/or waters that are presently
used, have been used in the past, or are susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce
(33 CFR part 329). The study area is not subject to Section 10 regulations.
4
Grants Creek Substation

Environmental Services, Inc.
4.7 Endangered Species Act Protected Species
Species with the federal classifications of Endangered (E), Threatened (T) or Proposed (P) are
protected under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) lists eighteen (18) species for Onslow County as of
April 2, 2015 (USFWS 2015). However, some of these listed species (*) require marine habitat that is
not present within the study area. As a result, the detailed descriptions of these marine species are not
included in this report. NCNHP data updated in October 2015 was accessed to determine if any of
these species have been documented inside of or within 0.5 mile of the study area.
Table 4. Federal listed species for Onslow County, NC.
' T -Threatened, E -Endangered, P -Proposed, T (S/A) — Threatened due to Similarity of Appearance
BGPA — Protected by Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act
Piping plover -The piping plover breeds along the entire eastern coast of the United States. North
Carolina is uniquely positioned in the species' range, being the only State where the piping plover's
breeding and wintering ranges overlap and the birds are present year-round. They nest most
Grants Creek Substation
Habitat
Federal
Biological
Common Name
Scientific Name
1
Status
Present
Conclusion
YIN
Piping Plover
Charadrius melodus
T
N
o ect
Red knot
Calidris canutus rufa
T
N
o Effect
Red -cockaded
Picoides borealis
E
Y
No Effect
woodpecker
Bald Eagle
Halianeetus
BGPA
N
No Effect
leucocephalus
Cooley's meadowrue
Thalictrum cooleyi
E
Y
Unresolved
Pondberry
Lindera melissifolia
E
N
No Effect
Rough -leaved
Lysimachia
E
Y
Unresolved
loosestrife
asperulaefolia
Seabeach amaranth
Amaranth pumilus
T
N
No Effect
Golden sedge
Carex lutea
E
Y
Unresolved
Atlantic sturgeon*
Acipenser oxyrinchus
E
N
No Effect
oxyrinchus
Shortnose sturgeon*
Acipenser brevirostrum
E
N
No Effect
West Indian manatee
Trichechus manatus
E
N
No Effect
American alligator
Alligator mississippiensis
T(S/A)
N
Not Required
Kemp's ridley sea
Lepidochelys kempii
E
N
No Effect
turtle*
Hawksbill sea turtle*
Eretmochelys imbricate
E
N
No Effect
Leatherback sea
Dermochelys coriacea
E
N
No Effect
turtle*
Green sea turtle*
Chelonia mydas
T
N
No Effect
Loggerhead sea turtle*
Caretta caretta
T
N
No Effect
' T -Threatened, E -Endangered, P -Proposed, T (S/A) — Threatened due to Similarity of Appearance
BGPA — Protected by Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act
Piping plover -The piping plover breeds along the entire eastern coast of the United States. North
Carolina is uniquely positioned in the species' range, being the only State where the piping plover's
breeding and wintering ranges overlap and the birds are present year-round. They nest most
Grants Creek Substation

Environmental Services, Inc.
commonly where there is little or no vegetation, but some may nest in stands of beach grass. The nest
is a shallow depression in the sand that is usually lined with shell fragments and lightcolored pebbles.
Habitat Present: No
Suitable habitat for the piping plover does not exist within the study area. The study area
lacks beach habitat associated with this species. A review of NCNHP records, updated
October 2015, indicates no known occurrence of piping plover within 0.5 mile of the study
area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
Red Knot- The red knot is a robin -sized shorebird that reaches nine inches in length with a 20 -inch
wingspan (USFWS 2013). The Rufa red knot (Calidris cancttats rufa) is one of the six recognized
subspecies of red knots, and is the only subspecies that travels along the Atlantic coast of the United
States during spring and fall migrations. The rufa red knot uses a variety of marine habitats, especially
those associated with inlets, including sandy beaches, tidal flats, mouths of bays and estuaries, peat
banks, and occasionally rocky substrates. During the northward migration, red knots prefer to stop to
refuel at sandy coastal habitats where they often feed on clams, crustaceans, and especially horseshoe
crabs eggs (Baker et al. 2013). On September 30, 2013, the rufa red knot was proposed by the US
Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS 2013) to be listed as a "threatened" species. A final rule to list the
rufa red knot as a Threatened species was published on December 11, 2014 with an effective date of
January 12, 2015 (USFWS 2014).
Habitat Present: No
Suitable habitat for the red knot does not exist within the study area. The study area lacks
beach habitat associated with this species. A review of NCNHP records, updated October
2015, indicates no known occurrence of red knot within 0.5 mile of the study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
Red -cockaded woodpecker (RCW) — Primary habitat consists of mature to over -mature southern
pine forests dominated by loblolly (Pinus taeda), longleaf (P. palustris), slash (P. elliotii), and pond
pines (P. echinata). Nest cavities are constructed in the heartwood of living pines, generally older
than 60 years that have been infected with red -heart disease. Nest cavity trees typically occur in
clusters, which are referred to as colonies (USFWS 2003). Pine flatwoods or pine savannas that are
fire maintained serve as ideal nesting and foraging sites for this species. Development of a thick
understory and midstory within a given area usually deters nesting and foraging. Potential nest sites
for RCW's include pine and pine/hardwood stands greater than 60 years of age. Hardwood/pine stands
(<50% pine) greater than 60 years of age may also be considered potential nesting habitat if adjacent
to potential foraging habitat. Foraging habitat is typically comprised of open pine/mixed hardwood
stands over 30 years of age. Pines must comprise at least 60 percent of the canopy in order to provide
suitable foraging for RCW's. Somewhat younger pine stands may be utilized if the trees have an
average diameter at breast height (DBH) greater than or equal to 9 inches (Henry 1989). Foraging
stands must be connected to other foraging areas or nesting areas in order to be deemed a viable
foraging site. Open spaces or unsuitable habitat 200 feet or more in width are considered barriers to
RCW foraging.
6
Grants Creek Substation

Environmental Services, Inc.
Habitat Present: Yes
The project does contain marginal foraging habitat for the RCW given the size and age of the
remaining Pine and Pine/Hardwood stands present with the project study area. ESI conducted
an RCW Habitat Evaluation in July 2013 and determined that the clearing of pines for the
proposed project will not impact the RCW. No cavity trees were found during the delineation
effort and a review of NCNHP (2015) records indicates no documented occurrences of the
RCW within 0.5 mile of the study area. The proposed project will have no effect on this
species. Concurrence from USFWS may be warranted since foraging habitat is present.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
Cooley's meadowrue-Cooley's meadowrue, documented in the Pine Savanna natural community,
occurs in circumneutral soils in sunny, moist to wet grass -sedge bogs, wet -pine savannas over
calcareous clays, and savannah -like areas, often at the ecotones of intermittent drainages or non-
riverine swamp forests. This rhizomatous perennial herb is also found along plowed firebreaks,
roadside ditches and rights-of-way, forest clearings dominated by grass or sedge, and power line or
utility rights-of-way. The species requires some type of habitat disturbance (e.g., mowing, clearing,
periodic fire) to maintain its open habitat. The plant typically occurs on slightly acidic (pH 5.8-6.6)
soils that are loamy fine sand, sandy loam, or fine sandy loam; at least seasonally moist or saturated;
and mapped as Foreston, Grifton, Muckalee, Torhunta, or Woodington series. The suitable survey
window for this species is mid -June -early July.
Habitat Present: Yes
Potentially suitable habitat for Cooley's meadowrue is present within the study area. The
existing powerline easement within the study area provides marginally suitable habitat for this
species. Species specific surveys should be conducted within the appropriate survey window.
A review of the mapped soil series for this site did not contain any of the series typically
associated with this species. A review of NCNHP records, updated October 2015, indicates
no known occurrences of Cooley's meadowrue within 0.5 mile of the study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: Unresolved
Pond berry-Pondberry occurs in seasonally flooded wetlands, sandy sinks, pond margins, and swampy
depressions. This deciduous, aromatic shrub occurs in bottomland hardwood forests with perched
water tables along inland areas of the southeastern United States. In the Coastal Plain of the
Carolinas, the species occurs at the margins of limestone sinks and ponds and in undrained, shallow
depressions of longleaf pine (Pings palustris) and pond pine (Pintis serotina) forests. Known
occurrences in North Carolina occur in the Small Depression Pocosin natural community, grow in
soils with sandy sediments and high water table, contain high peat content in the subsurface, and
include a prevalence of shrubs due to historically frequent or intense fires. It generally grows in
somewhat shaded areas, but can tolerate full sun. The suitable survey window for this species is
February -October.
Habitat Present: No
Potentially suitable habitat for pondberry does exist within the study area. The study area
lacks limestone sinks and the area surrounding the aforementioned habitats has been recently
7
Grants Creek Substation

Environmental Services, Inc.
clear-cut and significantly disturbed. A review of NCNHP records, updated October 2015,
indicates no known occurrence of pondberry within 0.5 mile of the study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
Rough -leaved loosestrife-Rough-leaved loosestrife, endemic to the Coastal Plain and Sandhills of
North and South Carolina, generally occurs in the ecotones or edges between longleaf pine uplands
and pond pine pocosins in dense shrub and vine growth on moist to seasonally satuarated sands and on
shallow organic soils overlaying sand (spodosolic soils). Occurrences are found in such disturbed
habitats as roadside depressions, maintained power and utility line rights-of-way, firebreaks, and trails.
The species prefers full sunlight, is shade intolerant, and requires areas of disturbance (e.g., clearing,
mowing, periodic burning) where the overstory is minimal. It can, however, persist vegetatively for
many years in overgrown, fire-supressed areas. Blaney, Gilead, Johnston, Kalmia, Leon, Mandarin,
Murville, Torhunta, and Vaucluse are some of the soil series that the plant occurs on. The suitable
survey window for this species is mid -May -June.
Habitat Present: Yes
Potentially suitable habitat for rough -leaved loosestrife is present within the study area. The
existing powerline easement within the study area provides marginally suitable habitat for this
species. Species specific surveys should be conducted within the appropriate survey window.
A review of the mapped soil series for this site did not contain any of the series typically
associated with this species. A review of NCNHP data, updated October 2015, indicates no
known occurrence of rough -leaved loosestrife within 1.0 mile of the study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: Unresolved
Seabeach amaranth-Seabeach amaranth occurs on barrier island beaches where its primary habitat
consist of overwash flats at accreting ends of islands, lower foredunes, and upper strands of
noneroding beaches (landward of the wrack line). In rare situations, this annual is found on sand spits
160 feet or more from the base of the nearest foredune. It occasionally establishes small temporary
populations in other habitats, including sound -side beaches, blowouts in foredunes, interdunal areas,
and on sand and shell material deposited for beach replenishment or as dredge spoil. Seabeach
amaranth appears to require extensive areas of barrier island beaches and inlets that function in a
relatively natural and dynamic manner. These characteristics allow it to move around in the
landscape, occupying suitable habitat as it becomes available.
Habitat Present: No
Suitable habitat for the Seabeach amaranth does not exist within the study area. The study area
lacks beach/dune habitat associated with this species. A review of NCNHP records, updated
October 2015, indicates no known occurrence of seabeach amaranth within 0.5 mile of the
study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
Golden sedge -Golden sedge, a very rare endemic of the Atlantic Coastal Plain, grows in sandy soils
overlying calcareous deposits of coquina limestone, where the soil pH, typically between 5.5 and 7.2,
is unusually high for this region. The perennial prefers the ecotone between the pine savanna and
adjacent wet hardwood or hardwood/conifer forest. Most plants occur in the partially shaded
8
Grants Creek Substation

Environmental Services, Inc.
savanna/swamp where occasional to frequent fires favor an herbaceous ground layer and suppress
shrub dominance. Soils supporting the species are very wet to periodically shallowly inundated.
Other occurrences may occur on disturbed areas such as roadside and drainage ditches or power line
rights-of-way, where mowing and/or wet conditions suppress woody plants. Poorly viable
occurrences may occur in significantly disturbed areas where ditching activities that lowers the water
table and/or some evidence of fire suppression threatens the species. The suitable survey window for
this species is mid-April to mid-June.
Habitat Present: Yes
Potentially suitable habitat for golden sedge is present within the study area. The existing
powerline easement within the study area provides marginally suitable habitat for this species.
Species specific surveys should be conducted within the appropriate survey window. The
project study area does not fall within the areas identified by the USFWS as critical habitat. A
review of NCNHP records, updated October 2015, indicates no known occurrences of golden
sedge within 0.5 mile of the study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: Unresolved
West Indian manatee -West Indian manatees have been observed in all the North Carolina coastal
counties. West Indian manatees are found in canals, sluggish rivers, estuarine habitats, salt water bays,
and as far off shore as 3.7 miles. They utilize freshwater and marine habitats at shallow depths of 5 to
20 ft. In the winter, between October and April, manatees concentrate in areas with warm water.
During the other time of the year habitats for the manatee are those with sufficient water depth, an
adequate food supply, and in proximity to freshwater. West Indian manatees require a source of
freshwater to drink. West Indian manatees are primarily herbivores, feeding on any aquatic vegetation
present, but they may occasionally feed on fish.
Habitat Present: No
Suitable habitat for the West Indian manatee does not exist within the study area. The study
area is too far inland and lacks marine habitats associated with this species. A review of
NCNHP records, updated October 2015, indicates no known occurrence of West Indian
manatee within 0.5 mile of the study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
American alligator -In North Carolina, alligators have been recorded in nearly every coastal county,
and many inland counties to the fall line. The alligator is found in rivers, streams, canals, lakes,
swamps, and coastal marshes. Adult animals are highly tolerant of salt water, but the young are
apparently more sensitive, with salinities greater than 5 parts per thousand considered harmful. The
American alligator remains on the protected species list due to its similarity in appearance to the
Endangered American crocodile (Crocodylus acutus).
Habitat Present: No
Species listed as threatened due to similarity of appearance do not require Section 7
consultation with the USFWS and there is no suitable habitat for this species present within
9
Grants Creek Substation

Environmental Services, Inc.
the study area. A review of NCNHP records, updated October 2015, indicates no known
occurrence of American alligator within 0.5 mile of the study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: Not Required
4.8 Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act
Bald eagles typically feed on fish but may also consume birds and small mammals. In the Carolinas,
nesting season extends from December through May (Potter et al. 1980). Bald eagles typically nest in
tall, living trees in a conspicuous location near water and forage over large bodies of water with
adjacent trees available for perching (Hamel 1992).
The bald eagle was officially delisted and removed from the federal Endangered Species List on
August 9, 2007, but they are still protected under the BGPA and the MBTA. The National Bald Eagle
Management Guidelines (Guidelines) (USFWS 2007) prohibit disturbance to a bald eagle. The
Guidelines define disturb as "to agitate or bother a bald or golden eagle to a degree that causes, or is
likely to cause, based on the best scientific information available: 1) injury to an eagle; 2) a decrease
in its productivity, by substantially interfering with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior;
or 3) nest abandonment, by substantially interfering with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering
behavior." The definition also covers impacts that result from human -caused alterations initiated
around a previously used nest site during a time when eagles are not present, if, upon the eagles
return, such alterations agitate or bother an eagle to a degree that injures an eagle or interferes with
normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior (USFWS 2007).
Under the current Guidelines, USFWS recommends the following measures for roads, trails, canals,
power lines, and other linear utilities. If the eagle nest can be seen from the project site and there is no
similar activity within 660 feet, then USFWS recommends that the project: 1) maintain a buffer of at
least 660 feet between your activities and the nest; 2) maintain any established landscape buffers; and
3) if possible, create additional landscape buffers to screen the new activity from the nest. If these
recommendations cannot be adopted for the project, then coordination is recommended with the local
USFWS office. ESI did not identify any evidence of bald eagle activity while working in the study
area. A review of NHP records (October 2015 data) indicates no documented occurrences of bald
eagle within 0.5 miles of the study area.
4.9 Federal Species of Concern
The March 25, 2015 USFWS list for Onslow County also includes a category of species designated as
"Federal Species of Concern" (FSC). Federal species of concern are not afforded federal protection
under the Endangered Species Act and are not subject to any of its provisions, including Section 7,
until they are formally Proposed (P) or listed as Threatened (T) or Endangered (E). However, the
status of these species is subject to change, and so should be included for consideration. FSC are
defined as species that are under consideration for listing for which there is insufficient information to
support listing.
The presence of potential habitat is based on the following NCNHP documents: List of Rare Plant
Species of North Carolina (NCNHP 2014a) and List of Rare Animal Species of North Carolina
(NCNHP 2014b). Twenty nine (29) FSC species are listed for Onslow County (Table 5). Potential
habitat may be present for sixteen (16) of these species based on a preliminary assessment using the
NCNHP habitat descriptions and the results of the onsite evaluation. We can make no definitive
10
Grants Creek Substation

Environmental Services, Inc.
survey recommendations since the FSC designation does not require any regulatory consultation.
However, if Duke determines that they would like to survey for any of these species, then ESI can
provide a study plan for that effort.
4.10 State Protected Species
Some species that are listed as FSC by USFWS also receive limited state protection. Those species
that are listed as both FSC and as North Carolina state -listed Endangered (E), Threatened (T), and
Special Concern (SC) are identified in Table 5. These species receive limited protection under the
North Carolina Endangered Species Act (G.S. 113-331 et seq.) and the North Carolina Plant
Protection Act of 1979 (G.S. 106-202.12 et seq.). One historic occurrence has been documented
within 0.5 mile of the study area (near the southeastern boundary of the site) for the (Linum
floridanum var. chrysocarpum) yellow -fruited flax. This species currently is not listed as FSC by
USFWS but is listed as Threatened by the State.
Table 5. Federal Species of Concern for Onslow County, NC
Common Name
Scientific Name
N.C.
Status'
T, E, SC
Potential
Habitat
NCNHP
0.5 -Mile
Occurrence
American eel
Anguilla rostrata
--
No
No
Bachman's sparrow
Peucaea aestivalis
SC
Yes
No
Black rail
Laterallus jamaicensis
SC
No
No
Carolina gopher frog
Rana capito capito
T
No
No
Eastern Henslow's
sparrow
Ammodramus henslowii
susurrans
SC
Yes
No
Eastern painted
bunting
Passerina ciris ciris
SC
No
No
Mimic glass lizard
Ophisaurus mimicus
SC
Yes
No
Southern hognose
snake
Heterodon simets
SC
No
No
Buchholz's dart moth
Agrotis buchholzi
--
No
No
A skipper
Atrytonopsis sp. 1
--
No
No
Awned
meadowbeauty
Rhexia aristosa
SC
No
No
Boykin's lobelia
Lobelia boykinii
E
Yes
No
Carolina grass -of-
parnassus
Parnassia caroliniana
T
Yes
No
Carolina Trillium
Trillium pusillum var.pusillum
E
Yes
No
Coastal beaksedge
Rhychospora pleiantha
T
No
No
Coastal goldenrod
Solidago villosicarpa
E
No
No
Grassleaf arrowhead
Sagittaria weatherbiana
E
Yes
No
Loose watermilfoil
Myriophyllum laxttm
E
No
No
Many -flowered
grass -pink
Calopogon multorus
E
Yes
No
Pineland plantain
Plantago sparsiora
T
Yes
No
Pondspice
Litsea aestivalis
SC
Yes
No
11
Grants Creek Substation

Environmental Services, Inc.
4.11 Cultural / Archaeological Resources
Research conducted by ESI at the Survey and National Register Branch of the North Carolina State
Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) on 29 March 2016 revealed that no previously recorded historic
properties listed in, eligible, or potentially eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic
Places (National Register) are located directly within the proposed project area. Research conducted
by ESI at the North Carolina Office of State Archaeology (OSA) on 29 March 2016 revealed that no
previously recorded archaeological sites are located directly within or immediately adjacent to the
proposed project area.
5.0 Summary
The project area contains seven wetland areas that are part of the same wetland complex plus four
tributaries that are ditches with an OHWM. USACE concurrence is recommended and ESI has been
tasked with submitting a site visit request to USACE. There are no riparian buffers associated with
this project. Impacts to jurisdictional areas should be avoided and minimized as much as practicable.
Unavoidable impacts must be coordinated with the applicable resource agency and permitting and
mitigation could be required. Habitat is present onsite for the federally protected red -cockaded
woodpecker, Cooley's meadowrue, rough -leaved loosestrife, and the golden sedge. A species specific
survey for these species may be warranted during the proper survey windows for each species
(outlined above in the habitat description for each species). No issues regarding cultural or
archaeological resources were identified.
12
Grants Creek Substation
N.C.
Potential
NCNHP
Common Name
Scientific Name
Status'
Habitat
0.5 -Mile
T, E, SC
Occurrence
Savanna onion
Allium sp.I
--
Yes
No
Smooth -seeded hairy
Yes
nutrush
Scleria sp.l
--
No
Spring -flowering
Yes
goldenrod
Solidago verna
—
No
Swamp forest
beakrush
Rhynchospora decttrrens
T
Yes
No
Thorne's beakrush
Rhynchospora thornei
SC
Yes
No
Venus' fly -trap
Dionaea muscipula
SC
Yes
No
Wagner's spleenwort
Asplenium heteroresiliens
--
No
No
A quillwort
lsoetes microvela
--
No
No
4.11 Cultural / Archaeological Resources
Research conducted by ESI at the Survey and National Register Branch of the North Carolina State
Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) on 29 March 2016 revealed that no previously recorded historic
properties listed in, eligible, or potentially eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic
Places (National Register) are located directly within the proposed project area. Research conducted
by ESI at the North Carolina Office of State Archaeology (OSA) on 29 March 2016 revealed that no
previously recorded archaeological sites are located directly within or immediately adjacent to the
proposed project area.
5.0 Summary
The project area contains seven wetland areas that are part of the same wetland complex plus four
tributaries that are ditches with an OHWM. USACE concurrence is recommended and ESI has been
tasked with submitting a site visit request to USACE. There are no riparian buffers associated with
this project. Impacts to jurisdictional areas should be avoided and minimized as much as practicable.
Unavoidable impacts must be coordinated with the applicable resource agency and permitting and
mitigation could be required. Habitat is present onsite for the federally protected red -cockaded
woodpecker, Cooley's meadowrue, rough -leaved loosestrife, and the golden sedge. A species specific
survey for these species may be warranted during the proper survey windows for each species
(outlined above in the habitat description for each species). No issues regarding cultural or
archaeological resources were identified.
12
Grants Creek Substation

Environmental Services, Inc.
6.0 References
Baker, Allan, Patricia Gonzalez, R.I.G. Morrison and Brian A. Harrington. 2013. Red Knot
(Calidris canutus), The Birds of North America Online (A. Poole, Ed.). Ithaca: Cornell Lab of
Ornithology; Retrieved from the Birds of North America
Online: http://bna.birds.comell.edu/bna/species/563doi:10.2173/bna.563.
Hamel, P.B. 1992. Land Manager's Guide to the Birds of the South. The Nature Conservancy,
Southeastern Region, Chapel Hill, NC. 437 pp.
Henry, V. G. 1989. Guidelines for Preparation of Biological Assessments and Evaluations for the
Red -Cockaded Woodpecker. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Southeast Region, Atlanta,
Georgia. 13 pp.
National Geographic Society/ESRI. 2011. I -cubed seamless USGS quadrangle (Kellum, NC).
N.C. Center for Geographic Information and Analysis. 2001. State of North Carolina Hydrologic Unit
Map.
N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources. 1985. Geologic Map of North Carolina.
N.C. Department of Environmental Quality. 2016. GIS Online — NCDEQ's Geospatial
Community. http://ncdenr.maps.arcgis.com/home/ (Accessed March 2016).
N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries. 2007. Anadromous Fish Spawning Areas, White Oak River, Maps
1 and 2. http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/mf/ (Accessed March 2016).
N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries. 2011. Fishery Nursery Areas. http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/mf/
(Accessed March 2016).
N.C. Division of Water Resources. 2016. NC Water Quality Classifications by NC River Basin.
http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/ps/csu/classifications (Accessed March 2016).
N. C. Natural Heritage Program. 2014a. List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2014. North
Carolina Natural Heritage Program. 138 pp.
N. C. Natural Heritage Program. 2014b. List of Rare Animal Species of North Carolina 2014. North
Carolina Natural Heritage Program. 172 pp.
N. C. Natural Heritage Program. 2015. October 2015 NHP Element Occurrences. Onslow County,
NC. (Accessed March 2016).
Potter, E.F., J.F. Parnell, and R.P. Teulings 1980. Birds of the Carolinas. The University of North
Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC. 408 pp.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2010. Regional Supplement to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual: Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region (Version 2.0). U.S.
Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, MS. 158 pp.
13
Grants Creek Substation

Environmental Services, Inc.
U.S. Department of Agriculture. 1992. Soil Survey of Onslow County, North Carolina. 139 pp. plus
maps.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1994. Cooley's Meadowrue Recovery Plan. Atlanta, Georgia. 29 pp.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1993. Recovery Plan for Pondberry (Lindera melissifolia). Atlanta,
Georgia. 56 pp.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1995. Rough -leaved Loosestrife Recovery Plan. Atlanta, Georgia.
32pp.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2014. Recovery Plan for Golden Sedge (Carex lutea). Atlanta,
Georgia. 48 pp.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2003. Recovery Plan for the Red -cockaded Woodpecker (Picoides
borealis): Second Revision. Atlanta, Georgia. 296 pp.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2007. National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2014. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Threatened
Species Status for the Rufa Red Knot. Federal Register, Vol. 79, No. 238. December 11, 2014.
http://www.fws. gov/northeast/redknot/pdf/2014_283 38_fedregisterfinalrule.pdf.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2015. T&E species listed for Onslow County.
http://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/cntylist/nc_Counties.html (Accessed March 2016).
U.S. Geologic Survey. 2011. http://mrdata.usgs.gov/mrds/ (Accessed March 2016).
14
Grants Creek Substation

Environmental Services, Inc.
Appendix A
Figures
15
Grants Creek Substation

CD
C
i Q
CL
tC�' fi
(D
c # T
Vr€
`
0 Creek
w
y
g'
•
8
E 1 1
ys ,... M... ..
S r
' �'n rr" w ,�•-K
. _ to
041
Ar
- 3
1
i { � � � +'� ♦ ''w,.rd I� , � • ..�,� ��`w A �, rte$. "�A.
*4.�
,
M J
s "
s 1 ys
it
-' rr
FGr��Gra'.Vrr��u�1s�2015',01C J2'r�I5�17g_1ayu.nrxA
Source:2011 National Geographic Society/ESRI, i -cubed seamless
DUKEUSGS quadrangles (Kelluir, NC); Project Study area acquired from Onslow County Parcel data, 2015.
�
ENERGY, � Disclaimer: The information depicted on this figure is for informational purposes only and was not prepared for,
and is not suitable for legal or engineering purposes. This information presented is not for regulatory review and
is intended for use only by a Professional Land Surveyor prior to regulatory review.
I;N�'IRONMENTAI, Project: ER15010.32
SERVICES, INC. Project Location
4901 trademark Dave Date: Apr 2016
Grants Creek Substation
Raleigh, Norlh Carolina 27610
• (",0)2,2,76U
I919) 21Onslow County, North Carolina Drwn/Chkd: DB/KT
2-1707 Fax
.J,v,v envrrcrimanfa/servrcesnrc cum
Figure
OW, 4r11201610:57:08AM
: �

C C)
D
Source: NAIP Orthoimagey, 2014;
Project Study area acquired from Onslow County Parcel data, 2015.
Disclaimer: The information depicted on this figure is for informational purposes only and was not prepared for,
and is not suitable for legal or engineering purposes. This information presented is not for regulatory review and
O
DC
s intended for use only by a Professional Land Surveyor prior to regulatory review.
ENVIRONJIFA-1-Al.
SFRVICEI`; IN('
Trademark Dove
Project: ER15010.32
Jurisdictional Features Map Date: Aug 2016
Grants Creek Substation
C7 m
Onslow County, North Carolina Drwn/Chkd: KT/RT
w,v, a „en ,entatse,� a„n«on
I I I I Figure2
m o'
o
o
Wc N
CD
CD
N
d
N in -n
N
(D
d
ca
0 CD
-C
<,
O
CD
—i
p (D
CD v
Q
m D
m
c
nt
CL
O
cD
a N
� w
Q
C
C
C1 a
z -
4F
j"r�C
�(EJJNERGY
Source: NAIP Orthoimagey, 2014;
Project Study area acquired from Onslow County Parcel data, 2015.
Disclaimer: The information depicted on this figure is for informational purposes only and was not prepared for,
and is not suitable for legal or engineering purposes. This information presented is not for regulatory review and
s intended for use only by a Professional Land Surveyor prior to regulatory review.
ENVIRONJIFA-1-Al.
SFRVICEI`; IN('
Trademark Dove
Project: ER15010.32
Jurisdictional Features Map Date: Aug 2016
Grants Creek Substation
Rale
Raleigh. North Carolina 27610
9'9'212-1760
(919212-1707 Fax
Onslow County, North Carolina Drwn/Chkd: KT/RT
w,v, a „en ,entatse,� a„n«on
I I I I Figure2
'\G,,-a\Nio�ects\Lf��”"n'11111119_1—A1 111— D111 w1111201o1 1:1 12V'M

Environmental Services, Inc.
Appendix B
Data Forms
Available Upon Request
Data Forms were provided to the USACE
16
Grants Creek Substation

TRANSMISSION SUBS TA TION
PROJECT

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action Id. SAW -2016-02279 County: Onslow U.S.G.S. Quad: NC-KELLUM
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
Property Owner/Applicant: Edward W. Trott Jr. Agent: Environmental Services, Inc
764 Old 30 Road 4901 Trademark Drive
Jacksonville, NC 28546 Raleigh, NC 27601
Size (acres) —79
Nearest Waterway Little Northeast Creek
USGS HUC 03020302
Nearest Town Jacksonville
River Basin Onslow Bay
Coordinates Latitude: 34.7758649422302
Longitude: -77.2831954132467
Location description: The project area is located on the north side of Old 30, Just west of its intersection with Rocky
Run Road, Jacksonville, Onslow County, North Carolina and is depicted on the attached may. PIN: 073746
Indicate Which of the Following Apply:
A. Preliminary Determination
X There are waters, including wetlands, on the above described project area, that may be subject to Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403). The
waters, including wetlands, have been delineated, and the delineation has been verified by the Corps to be sufficiently
accurate and reliable. Therefore this preliminary jurisdiction determination maybe used in the permit evaluation process,
including determining compensatory mitigation. For purposes of computation of impacts, compensatory mitigation
requirements, and other resource protection measures, a permit decision made on the basis of a preliminary JD will treat all
waters and wetlands that would be affected in any way by the permitted activity on the site as if they are jurisdictional
waters of the U.S. This preliminary determination is not an appealable action under the Regulatory Program
Administrative Appeal Process (Reference 33 CFR Part 331). However, you may request an approved JD, which is an
appealable action, by contacting the Corps district for further instruction.
_ There are wetlands on the above described property, that may be subject to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403). However, since the
waters, including wetlands, have not been properly delineated, this preliminary jurisdiction determination may not be
used in the permit evaluation process. Without a verified wetland delineation, this preliminary determination is merely an
effective presumption of CWA/RHA jurisdiction overall of the waters, including wetlands, at the project area, which is
not sufficiently accurate and reliable to support an enforceable permit decision. We recommend that you have the
waters of the U.S. on your property delineated. As the Corps may not be able to accomplish this wetland delineation in a
timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that can be verified by the Corps.
B. Approved Determination
There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described property subject to the permit requirements of
Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403) and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC
§ 1344). Unless there is a change in law or our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period
not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
There are waters of the U.S., including wetlands, on the above described project area subject to the permit requirements
of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published
regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
_ We recommend you have the waters of the U.S. on your property delineated. As the Corps may not be able to
accomplish this wetland delineation in a timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that
can be verified by the Corps.
Page 1 of 2

SAW -2016-02279
_ The waters of the U.S., including wetlands, on your project area have been delineated and the delineation has been
verified by the Corps. If you wish to have the delineation surveyed, the Corps can review and verify the survey upon
completion. Once verified, this survey will provide an accurate depiction of all areas subject to CWA and/or RHA
jurisdiction on your property which, provided there is no change in the law or our published regulations, may be relied
upon for a period not to exceed five years.
The waters of the U.S., including wetlands, have been delineated and surveyed and are accurately depicted on the plat
signed by the Corps Regulatory Official identified below on . Unless there is a change in the law or our
published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this
notification.
_ There are no waters of the U.S., to include wetlands, present on the above described project area which are subject to the
permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our
published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this
notification.
The property is located in one of the 20 Coastal Counties subject to regulation under the Coastal Area Management Act
(CAMA). You should contact the Division of Coastal Management in Morehead City, NC, at [phone] to
determine their requirements.
Placement of dredged or fill material within waters of the US, including wetlands, without a Department of the Army permit
may constitute a violation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC § 1311). Placement of dredged or fill material,
construction or placement of structures, or work within navigable waters of the United States without a Department of the
Army permit may constitute a violation of Sections 9 and/or 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (33 USC § 401 and/or 403). If
you have any questions regarding this determination and/or the Corps regulatory program, please contact Brennan Dooley at
[phone] or Brennan.J.Doolev aC )usace.armv.mil.
C. Basis For Determination: The site exhibits wetland criteria as described in the 1987 Corns Wetland
Delineation Manual and appropriate Regional Supplement. The water bodies exhibit ordinary hieh water marks as
indicated by the absence of vezetation in the stream channel and the presence of bed and bank sediment deposition
and wrack lines.
D. Remarks:
E. Attention USDA Program Participants
This del ineation/determination has been conducted to identify the limits of Corps' Clean Water Act jurisdiction for the
particular site identified in this request. The delineation/determination may not be valid for the wetland conservation
provisions of the Food Security Act of 1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation
in USDA programs, you should request a certified wetland determination from the local office of the Natural Resources
Conservation Service, prior to starting work.
F. Appeals Information (This information applies only to approved jurisdictional determinations as indicated in
B. above)
This correspondence constitutes an approved jurisdictional determination for the above described site. If you object to this
determination, you may request an administrative appeal under Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331. Enclosed you will find a
Notification of Appeal Process (NAP) fact sheet and request for appeal (RFA) form. If you request to appeal this
determination you must submit a completed RFA form to the following address:
US Army Corps of Engineers
South Atlantic Division
Attn: Jason Steele, Review Officer
60 Forsyth Street SW, Room 1OM15
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
Page 2 of 2

SAW -2016-02279
In order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps, the Corps must determine that it is complete, that it meets the criteria for
appeal under 33 CFR part 331.5, and that it has been received by the Division Office within 60 days of the date of the NAP.
Should you decide to submit an RFA form, it must be received at the above address by N/A.
**It is not necessary to submit an RFA form to the Division Office if you do not object to the determination in this
correspondence.**OLEY.BENANJOHN.1 512992613
DOOLEY.BRENNAN.JOHN.15129 DN1c=lUS,o=USly signed bGovOerrnment,ouNDoD,ou=PKI,ouu--USA,
6 q cn=DOOLEY.BRENNAN.JOHN.1512992613
Corps Regulatory Official: 92613 I Date: 2017.04.2812:19:43-04,00'
Date: April 25, 2017 Expiration Date: N/A
The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure we
continue to do so, please complete our Customer Satisfaction Survey, located online at
http://coEpsmapu.usace.army.mil/cm apex/Py=136:4:0.
Page 3 of 2

ATTACHMENT
PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL
DETERMINATION (JD): April 25, 2017
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PRELIMINARY JD:
Duke Energy Progress
410 South Wilmington Street, NC 02
Raleigh, NC 27601
919-546-2235
C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
SAW -2016-02279
D. PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
(USE THE ATTACHED TABLE TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE WATERBODIES
AT DIFFERENT SITES)
State: NC County/parish/borough: Craven City:
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 34.775450
Long. -77.28277°.
Universal Transverse Mercator: 18S 291106 3850515
Name of nearest waterbody: Little Northwest Creek
Identify (estimate) amount of waters in the review area:
Non -wetland waters: 0
linear feet: 0 ft width (ft): and/or
Cowardin Class:
Stream Flow:
Wetlands: 17.5 acres.
Cowardin Class: Forested. Scrub -Shrub
acres.
Name of any water bodies on the site that have been identified as Section 10
waters:
Tidal: NA
Non -Tidal: NA
E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT
APPLY):
[] Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
© Field Determination. Date(s): December 14, 2016
1. The Corps of Engineers believes that there may be jurisdictional waters of the
United States on the subject site, and the permit applicant or other affected party
who requested this preliminary JD is hereby advised of his or her option to

request and obtain an approved jurisdictional determination (JD) for that site.
Nevertheless, the permit applicant or other person who requested this
preliminary JD has declined to exercise the option to obtain an approved JD in
this instance and at this time.
2. In any circumstance where a permit applicant obtains an individual permit, or
a Nationwide General Permit (NWP) or other general permit verification requiring
"pre -construction notification" (PCN), or requests verification for a non -reporting
NWP or other general permit, and the permit applicant has not requested an
approved JD for the activity, the permit applicant is hereby made aware of the
following: (1) the permit applicant has elected to seek a permit authorization
based on a preliminary JD, which does not make an official determination of
jurisdictional waters; (2) that the applicant has the option to request an approved
JD before accepting the terms and conditions of the permit authorization, and
that basing a permit authorization on an approved JD could possibly result in less
compensatory mitigation being required or different special conditions; (3) that
the applicant has the right to request an individual permit rather than accepting
the terms and conditions of the NWP or other general permit authorization; (4)
that the applicant can accept a permit authorization and thereby agree to comply
with all the terms and conditions of that permit, including whatever mitigation
requirements the Corps has determined to be necessary; (5) that undertaking
any activity in reliance upon the subject permit authorization without requesting
an approved JD constitutes the applicant's acceptance of the use of the
preliminary JD, but that either form of JD will be processed as soon as is
practicable; (6) accepting a permit authorization (e.g., signing a proffered
individual permit) or undertaking any activity in reliance on any form of Corps
permit authorization based on a preliminary JD constitutes agreement that all
wetlands and other water bodies on the site affected in any way by that activity
are jurisdictional waters of the United States, and precludes any challenge to
such jurisdiction in any administrative or judicial compliance or enforcement
action, or in any administrative appeal or in any Federal court; and (7) whether
the applicant elects to use either an approved JD or a preliminary JD, that JD
will be processed as soon as is practicable. Further, an approved JD, a proffered
individual permit (and all terms and conditions contained therein), or individual
permit denial can be administratively appealed pursuant to 33 C.F.R. Part 331,
and that in any administrative appeal, jurisdictional issues can be raised (see 33
C.F.R. 331.5(a)(2)). If, during that administrative appeal, it becomes necessary
to make an official determination whether CWA jurisdiction exists over a site, or
to provide an official delineation of jurisdictional waters on the site, the Corps will
provide an approved JD to accomplish that result, as soon as is practicable.
This preliminary JD finds that there "may be"waters of the United States on the
subject project site, and identifies all aquatic features on the site that could be
affected by the proposed activity, based on the following information:
SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for preliminary JD (check all that apply
- checked items should be included in case file and, where checked and
requested, appropriately reference sources below):
2

N Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the
applicant/consultant:
® Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the
applicant/consultant.
® Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:
❑ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data.
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
® U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:1: 2,000 Kellum,
NC
NUSDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey.
Citation: NRCS digital Soil Survey of Onslow County, 2009
❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
❑ State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
❑ FEMA/FIRM maps:
❑ 100 -year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum
of 1929)
❑ Photographs: ❑ Aerial (Name & Date)%
or ❑ Other (Name & Date):
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
N Other information (please specify): 2007 Grid Elevation Data, NCDOT
LiDAR, Onslow County
IMPORTANT NOTE: The information recorded on this form has not
necessarily been verified by the Cor s and should not be relied upon for
later jurisdictional determinations
DOOLEY.BRENNAN D6911 11Y 09�td by
00LEY6HE N N JOHN 1 5 1 79916 1 7
.JOHN.1512992613 ON•c»US,0•US Govanmrnt eu•00D. ou•PN4
N
0u.USk cn-D00LEY aRENN.JOHN. 15 12992611
Drtr 7017 M 75 1191 15 _NW
Signature and date of
Regulatory Project Manager
(REQUIRED)
natVe and date of
perWh requesting preliminary JD
(REQUIRED, unless obtaining
the signature is impracticable)

Estimated amount
Site
Cowardin
of aquatic resource
Class of
number
Latitude
Longitude
Class
in review area
aquatic
Linear
Acres
resource
ft.
Non -Section
W 1
34.77205
-77.28423
Forested
0.09
10 - Wetland
Non -Section
W2
34.77224
-77.28510
Forested
0.95
10 - Wetland
Non -Section
W3
34.77327
-77.28519
Forested
0.17
10 - Wetland
Non -Section
W4
34.77313
-77.28452
Forested
1.01
10 - Wetland
Non -Section
W5
34.77547
-77.28457
Forested
2.28
10 - Wetland
Non -Section
W6
34.77503
-77.28253
Scrub/Shrub
0.42
10- Wetland
Non -Section
W7
34.77541
-77.28181
Forested
0.07
l0 -Wetland
Non -Section
W8
34.77615
-77.28093
Forested
6.11
10 - Wetland
Non -Section
W9
34.76677
•77.28282
Forested
0.3I
10 - Wetland
Non -Section
W 10
34.77673
-77.28394
Forested
0.15
10 - Wetland
Non -Section
W I I
34.77835
-77.28510
Forested
3.65
10 - Wetland
Non -Section
W12
34.77874
-77.28337
Forested
0.05
10 - Wetland
Non -Section
W13
34.77834
-77.28324
Forested
0.03
10 - Wetland
Non -Section
W14
34.77873
-77.28274
Forested
2.16
10 - Wetland

rr`
t.
QProject Boundary
Potential Wetland Waters of the US`
Potential Wetland Waters of the US
Locations and extents are approximate.
* ® 'Features are part of the proposed Grants Creek
transmission line .
Note: Vegetation removal or alteration of soils or
sIfa ���� hydrology after initial site evaluation can affect Source: High Resolution INC Statewide Imagery, CGIA, 2012;
jurisdictional status and may require re-evaluation Project Boundary acquired from Onslow County parcel data, 2015.
of wetland boundaries.
ENERGY D zoo 40o Disclaimer The information depidedonthisfigure isforinformah-1 purposesonlpyand wasnot
prepared for, and is not su table for legal or engineering purposes This information resented is not
for regulatory review and is intended for use only by s Professional Land surveyor prior to regulatory
do—
Feet
ENVIRONMENTAL Jursidictional Features Project: ER15010.59
SERVICES, INC. Date: Nov 2016
Raleigh. North Carolina 27810
%4901 ademhM Dove N Grants Creek Substation - Trott Site
leigh
(919>212-1760 Drwn/Chkd: KT/RT
[phone] FAX Onslow County, North Carolina
nv„onmenfalsarv;ceslnc. gem Figure: 2
Path P^,GeoGra.Pmjects�2015\010\59\GIS\fig ACOE juts. mxd Date 10/3V2016 125136 PM

rl!_`,�
y
tgRCH s ,s►
United States Department of the
Project Name
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Field Office
P.O. Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
Date: August 1,2017
Self -Certification Letter
Grants Creek Alternate Substation -Trott Property
Dear Applicant:
FUM & W,L9MVIN 1F8
Interior
Thank you for using the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) Raleigh Ecological
Services online project review process. By printing this letter in conjunction with your
project review package, you are certifying that you have completed the online project
review process for the project named above in accordance with all instructions
provided, using the best available information to reach your conclusions. This letter,
and the enclosed project review package, completes the review of your project in
accordance with the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531-1544, 87 Stat.
884), as amended (ESA), and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C.
668-668c, 54 Stat. 250), as amended (Eagle Act). This letter also provides
information for your project review under the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (P.L. 91-190, 42 U.S.C. 4321-4347, 83 Stat. 852), as amended. A copy of this
letter and the project review package must be submitted to this office for this
certification to be valid. This letter and the project review package will be maintained
in our records.
The species conclusions table in the enclosed project review package summarizes
your ESA and Eagle Act conclusions. Based on your analysis, mark all the
determinations that apply:
❑"no effect' determinations for proposed/listed species and/or
✓ proposed/designated critical habitat; and/or
F1"may affect, not likely to adversely affect' determinations for proposed/listed
species and/or proposed/designated critical habitat; and/or
❑ "may affect, likely to adversely affect' determination for the Northern long-
eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis) and relying on the findings of the January 5,
2016, Programmatic Biological Opinion for the Final 4(d) Rule on the
Northern long-eared bat;
7" no Eagle Act permit required" determinations for eagles.

Applicant Page 2
We certify that use of the online project review process in strict accordance with the
instructions provided as documented in the enclosed project review package results in
reaching the appropriate determinations. Therefore, we concur with the "no effect" or
"not likely to adversely affect" determinations for proposed and listed species and
proposed and designated critical habitat; the "may affect' determination for Northern
long-eared bat; and/or the "no Eagle Act permit required" determinations for eagles.
Additional coordination with this office is not needed. Candidate species are not
legally protected pursuant to the ESA. However, the Service encourages consideration
of these species by avoiding adverse impacts to them. Please contact this office for
additional coordination if your project action area contains candidate species.
Should project plans change or if additional information on the distribution of
proposed or listed species, proposed or designated critical habitat, or bald eagles
becomes available, this determination may be reconsidered. This certification letter is
valid for 1 year. Information about the online project review process including
instructions, species information, and other information regarding project reviews
within North Carolina is available at our website http://www.fws.gov/raleigh/pp.html.
If you have any questions, you can write to us at Raleigh(afws. ov or please contact
Leigh Mann of this office at 919-856-4520, ext. 10.
Sincerely,
/s/Pete Benjamin
Pete Benjamin
Field Supervisor
Raleigh Ecological Services
Enclosures - project review package

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office _
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
In Reply Refer To: July 31, 2017
Consultation Code: 04EN2000-2017-SLI-0808
Event Code: 04EN2000-2017-E-01950
Project Name: Grants Creek Alternate Substation
Subject: Updated list of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed
project location, and/or may be affected by your proposed project
To Whom It May Concern:
The species list generated pursuant to the information you provided identifies threatened,
endangered, proposed and candidate species, as well as proposed and final designated critical
habitat, that may occur within the boundary of your proposed project and/or may be affected by
your proposed project. The species list fulfills the requirements of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (Service) under section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended
(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
New information based on updated surveys, changes in the abundance and distribution of
species, changed habitat conditions, or other factors could change this list. Please feel free to
contact us if you need more current information or assistance regarding the potential impacts to
federally proposed, listed, and candidate species and federally designated and proposed critical
habitat. Please note that under 50 CFR 402.12(e) of the regulations implementing section 7 of the
Act, the accuracy of this species list should be verified after 90 days. This verification can be
completed formally or informally as desired. The Service recommends that verification be
completed by visiting the ECOS-IPaC website at regular intervals during project planning and
implementation for updates to species lists and information. An updated list may be requested
through the ECOS-IPaC system by completing the same process used to receive the enclosed list.
Section 7 of the Act requires that all federal agencies (or their designated non-federal
representative), in consultation with the Service, insure that any action federally authorized,
funded, or carried out by such agencies is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any
federally -listed endangered or threatened species. A biological assessment or evaluation may be
prepared to fulfill that requirement and in determining whether additional consultation with the
Service is necessary. In addition to the federally -protected species list, information on the

species' life histories and habitats and information on completing a biological assessment or
evaluation and can be found on our web page at http://www.fws.gov/raleigh. Please check the
web site often for updated information or changes
If your project contains suitable habitat for any of the federally-listed species known to be
present within the county where your project occurs, the proposed action has the potential to
adversely affect those species. As such, we recommend that surveys be conducted to determine
the species' presence or absence within the project area. The use of North Carolina Natural
Heritage program data should not be substituted for actual field surveys.
If you determine that the proposed action may affect (i.e., likely to adversely affect or not likely
to adversely affect) a federally-protected species, you should notify this office with your
determination, the results of your surveys, survey methodologies, and an analysis of the effects
of the action on listed species, including consideration of direct, indirect, and cumulative effects,
before conducting any activities that might affect the species. If you determine that the proposed
action will have no effect (i.e., no beneficial or adverse, direct or indirect effect) on federally
listed species, then you are not required to contact our office for concurrence (unless an
Environmental Impact Statement is prepared). However, you should maintain a complete record
of the assessment, including steps leading to your determination of effect, the qualified personnel
conducting the assessment, habitat conditions, site photographs, and any other related articles.
Please be aware that bald and golden eagles are protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle
Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668 et seq.), and projects affecting these species may require
development of an eagle conservation plan
(http://www.fws.gov/windenergy/eagle_guidance.html). Additionally, wind energy projects
should follow the wind energy guidelines (http://www.fws.gov/windenergy/) for minimizing
impacts to migratory birds and bats.
Guidance for minimizing impacts to migratory birds for projects including communications
towers (e.g., cellular, digital television, radio, and emergency broadcast) can be found at:
http://www. fws.gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdlssues/Hazards/towers/towers.htm;
http://www.towerkill.com; and
http•//www fws ov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdlssues/Hazards/towers/comtow html.
Not all Threatened and Endangered Species that occur in North Carolina are subject to section 7
consultation with the U.S Fish and Wildlife Service. Atlantic and shortnose sturgeon, sea
turtles,when in the water, and certain marine mammals are under purview of the National Marine
Fisheries Service. If your project occurs in marine, estuarine, or coastal river systems you should
also contact the National Marine Fisheries Service, http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/
We appreciate your concern for threatened and endangered species. The Service encourages
Federal agencies to include conservation of threatened and endangered species into their project
planning to further the purposes of the Act. Please include the Consultation Tracking Number in
the header of this letter with any request for consultation or correspondence about your project
that you submit to our office. If you have any questions or comments, please contact John Ellis
of this office atjohn—[e-mail].

1 3 1 7
t..: . -- " - I- ,t '. - � t , -) f" 1, 7 - ,
2
Attachment(s):
m Official Species List

Official Species List
This list is provided pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and fulfills the
requirement for Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary of the Interior information whether
any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of a proposed
action".
This species list is provided by:
Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
[phone]

Project Summary
Consultation Code: 04EN2000-2017-SLI-0808
Event Code: 04EN2000-2017-E-01950
Project Name: Grants Creek Alternate Substation
Project Type: TRANSMISSION LINE
Project Description: Alternate substation on Old 30 in Onslow County, NC
Project Location:
Approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps:
haps:/Jwww.google.com/maps/place/34,775389187362535N77,28311155922731W
Counties: Onslow, NC

Endangered Species Act Species
There is a total of 17 threatened, endangered, or candidate species on this species list. Species on
this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include species
that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species list
because a project could affect downstream species. See the "Critical habitats" section below for
those critical habitats that lie wholly or partially within your project area under this office's
jurisdiction. Please contact the designated FWS office if you have questions.
Mammals
NAME STATUS
West Indian Manatee Trichechus manatus Threatened
There is a final critical habitat designated for this species. Your location is
outside the designated critical habitat.
Species profile: htt 2s:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/4469
Birds
NAME STATUS
Piping Plover Charadrius melodus Threatened
Population: except Great Lakes watershed
There is a final critical habitat designated for this species. Your location is
outside the designated critical habitat.
Species profile: tips:Hecos.fws.goy/ecp/species/6039
Red Knot Calidris canutus rufa Threatened
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: httns://ecos.fws.gov/ecpZspecies/1864
Red -cockaded Woodpecker Picoides borealis Endangered
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: htips://ecos.fws.gov/ecIL/sl2ecies/7614

Reptiles
NAME
American Alligator Alligator mississippiensis
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/776
Green Sea Turtle Chelonia mydas
Population: North Atlantic DPS
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https:///ecos.fws.goy/ecp/species/6199
Hawksbill Sea Turtle Eretmochelys imbricata
There is a final critical habitat designated for this species. Your location is
outside the designated critical habitat.
Species profile: fps:/Iecos.fws.goy/ecp/species/3656
Kemp's Ridley Sea Turtle Lepidochelys kempii
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.goy/ecp/species/5523
STATUS
Similarity of Appearance
(Threatened)
Threatened
Endangered
Endangered
Leatherback Sea Turtle Dermochelys coriacea Endangered
There is a final critical habitat designated for this species. Your location is
outside the designated critical habitat.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gflv/ecp/species/1493
Loggerhead Sea Turtle Caretta caretta Threatened
Population: Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS
There is a final critical habitat designated for this species. Your location is
outside the designated critical habitat.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/ I 1 10/ I 1 10
Fishes
NAME STATUS
Atlantic Sturgeon Acipenser oxyrinchus oxyrinchus Endangered
Population: Carolina DPS
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.goy/ecp/species/3252
Shortnose Sturgeon Acipenser brevirostrum Endangered
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6635

Ev E1
Flowering Plants
%Ak!L STATUS
Cooley's Meadowrue Thalictrum cooleyi Endangered
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.goy/ecp/species/3281
Golden Sedge Carex lutea Endangered
There is a final critical habitat designated for this species. Your location is
outside the designated critical habitat.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.eov/ecp/species/6025
Pondberry Lindera melissifolia Endangered
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: httns://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1279
Rough -leaved Loosestrife Lysimachia asperulaefolia Endangered
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2747
Seabeach Amaranth Amaranthus pumilus Threatened
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.goy/ecp-/species/8549
Critical habitats
There are no critical habitats within your project area under this office's jurisdiction.

Species Conclusions Table
Project Name: Grants Creek Alternate Substation — Trott property
Date: August 1, 2017
Species / Resource
Conclusion
ESA Section 7 / Eagle Act
Notes /Documentation
Name
Determination
Atlantic sturgeon-
No suitable habitat
Habitat assessment indicates no
Acipenser oxyrinchus
present
No effect
potential habitat present
oxyrinchus
Shortnose sturgeon-
No suitable habitat
No effect
Habitat assessment indicates no
Acipenser brevirostrum
present
potential habitat present
American alligator-
No suitable habitat
Habitat assessment indicates no
Alligator
present
No effect
potential habitat present
mississippiensis
Green sea turtle-
No suitable habitat
No effect
Habitat assessment indicates no
Chelonia mydas
present
potential habitat present
Hawksbill sea turtle-
No suitable habitat
No effect
Habitat assessment indicates no
Eretmochelys imbricata
present
potential habitat present
Kemp's ridley sea turtle-
No suitable habitat
No effect
Habitat assessment indicates no
Lepidochelys kempii
present
potential habitat present
Leatherback sea turtle-
No suitable habitat
No effect
Habitat assessment indicates no
Dermochelys coriacea
present
potential habitat present
Loggerhead sea turtle-
No suitable habitat .
No effect
Habitat assessment indicates no
Caretta caretta
present
potential habitat present
Piping plover-
No suitable habitat
No effect
Habitat assessment indicates no
Charadrius melodus
present
potential habitat present
Red -cockaded
No suitable habitat
Habitat assessment indicates no
woodpecker-
present
No effect
potential habitat present
Picoides borealis
Red knot-
No suitable habitat
No effect
Habitat assessment indicates no
Calidris canutus rufa
present
potential habitat present

West Indian manatee-
No suitable habitat
No effect
Habitat assessment indicates no
Trichechus manatus
p resent
potential habitat present
Cooley's meadowrue-
No suitable habitat
No effect
Habitat assessment indicates no
Thalictrum coole i
y
p resent
potential habitat present
Golden sedge-
No suitable habitat
No effect
Habitat assessment indicates no
Carex lutea
present
potential habitat present
Pondberry-
No suitable habitat
No effect
Habitat assessment indicates no
Lindera melissi olia
f
p resent
potential habitat present
Rough -leaved
loosestrife-
No suitable habitat
No effect
Habitat assessment indicates no
L simachia
y
p resent
potential habitat present
asperulae olia
Seabeach amaranth-
No suitable habitat
No effect
Habitat assessment indicates no
Amaranthus pumilus
present
potential habitat present
Bald Eagle-
Unlikely to disturb
No nesting activity observed in study
Haliaeetus
nesting bald eagles
No Eagle Act permit required
area or within 660 feet of the
leucoce halzes
substation parcel
Critical habitat
No critical habitat
No effect
present
Acknowledgement: I agree that the above information about my proposed project is true. I used all the provided resources to make an infonned
decision about impacts in the immediate and surrounding areas.
Jeff Harbour, PWS — Technical Director
jib k) NUU,11,
Date: August 1, 2017

Atlantic sturgeon — Atlantic sturgeon are large fish that can reach 14 feet in length that occur in
major river systems along the eastern seaboard of the United States. The species prefers the near
shore marine, estuarine, and riverine habitat of large river systems. It is an anadromous species
that migrates to moderately -moving freshwater areas to spawn in the spring, but spends most of
its life within close proximity of the river's mouth. Large freshwater rivers that are unobstructed
by dams or pollutants are imperative to successful reproduction. Spawning occurs in areas with
hard substrate (e.g., cobble) (NOAA 2016).
Habitat Present: No
Potential habitat for the Atlantic sturgeon does not occur within the study area. The study
area lacks the large freshwater river habitat associated with this species. NCNHP data
from October 2016 indicates no occurrences of the Atlantic sturgeon within 0.5 mile of
the study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
Shortnose sturgeon — Shortnose sturgeon occur in most major river systems along the eastern
seaboard of the United States. The species prefers the near shore marine, estuarine, and riverine
habitat of large river systems. It is an anadromous species that migrates to faster -moving
freshwater areas to spawn in the spring, but spends most of its life within close proximity of the
river's mouth. Large freshwater rivers that are unobstructed by dams or pollutants are imperative
to successful reproduction. Distribution information by river/waterbody is lacking for the rivers
of North Carolina; however, records are known from most coastal counties (NMFS 1998).
Habitat Present: No
Potential habitat for shortnose sturgeon does not occur within the study area. The study
area lacks the large freshwater river habitat associated with this species. NCNHP data
from October 2016 indicates no occurrences of the shortnose sturgeon within 0.5 mile of
the study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
American alligator — In North Carolina, alligators have been recorded in nearly every coastal
county, and many inland counties to the fall line. The alligator is found in rivers, streams, canals,
lakes, swamps, and coastal marshes. Adult animals are highly tolerant of salt water, but the young
are apparently more sensitive, with salinities greater than 5 parts per thousand considered harmful.
The American alligator remains on the protected species list due to its similarity in appearance to
the Endangered American crocodile (Crocodylus acutus) (USFWS 2016a).
Habitat Present: No
Species listed as threatened due to similarity of appearance do not require Section 7
consultation with the USFWS. Potential habitat for American alligator does not occur
within the study area. The study area lacks the rivers, streams, canal, lakes and swamps

associated with this species. NCNHP data from October 2016 indicates no occurrences of
the American alligator within 0.5 mile of the study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: Not Required
Green sea turtle — The green sea turtle is found in temperate and tropical oceans and seas. Nesting
in North America is limited to small communities on the east coast of Florida requiring beaches
with minimal disturbances and a sloping platform for nesting (the do not nest in North Carolina).
The green sea turtle can be found in shallow waters. They are attracted to lagoons, reefs, bays,
mangroves swamps and inlets where an abundance of marine grasses can be found, as this is the
principle food source for the green turtle (USFWS 2016b).
Habitat Present: No
Potential habitat for the green sea turtle does not occur within the study area. The study
area lacks the lagoon, reef, bay, and beach habitat associated with this species. NCNHP
data from October 2016 indicates no occurrences of the green sea turtle within 0.5 mile of
the study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
Hawksbill sea turtle — Hawksbill sea turtles are found in tropical and subtropical oceans.
Sightings have been reported on the east coast of the U.S. as far north as Massachusetts, although
rarely north of Florida. Sightings have been recorded from a handful of counties in North Carolina,
but the turtle is not known to breed here. Adult hawksbills are found in coastal waters, especially
around coral reefs, rocky outcrops, shoals, mangrove bays, and estuaries. Juveniles are often seen
offshore, in floating mats of seaweed. This species nests on a wide range of beach types and
substrates, using both low- and high-energy beaches on islands and mainland sites. The nest is
typically placed near or under some vegetation (USFWS 2016c).
Habitat Present: No
Potential habitat for the hawksbill sea turtle does not occur within the study area. The
study area lacks the beach habitat associated with this species. NCNHP data from October
2016 indicates no occurrences of the hawksbill sea turtle within 0.5 mile of the study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
Kemp's ridley sea turtle — Kemp's ridley sea turtle is the smallest of the sea turtles that visit
North Carolina's coast, and has been sighted in most coastal counties. While the majority of this
sea turtle's nesting occurs in Mexico, the species is known to nest on North Carolina beaches
infrequently. Kemp's ridley sea turtle can lay eggs as many as three times during the April to June
breeding season. This species prefers beach sections that are backed up by extensive swamps or
large bodies of open water having seasonal narrow ocean connections and a well defined elevated
dune area. The species prefers neritic areas with sandy or muddy bottoms (USFWS 2016d).

Habitat Present: No
Potential habitat for the Kemp's ridley sea turtle does not occur within the study area. The
study area lacks the beach habitat associated with this species. NCNHP data from October
2016 indicates no occurrences of the Kemp's ridley sea turtle within 0.5 mile of the study
area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
Leatherback sea turtle — Leatherback sea turtles are distributed world-wide in tropical waters of
the Atlantic, Pacific, and Indian oceans. They are generally open ocean species, and may be
common off the North Carolina coast during certain times of the year. However, in northern waters
leatherbacks are reported to enter into bays, estuaries, and other inland bodies of water. Major
nesting areas occur mainly in tropical regions. In the U.S., primary nesting areas are in Florida,
however nests are known from Georgia, South Carolina and North Carolina as well. Nesting
occurs from April to August. Leatherbacks need sandy beaches backed with vegetation in the
proximity of deep water and generally with rough seas. Beaches with relatively steep slope are
usually preferred (USFWS 2016e).
Habitat Present: No
Potential habitat for the leatherback sea turtles does not occur within the study area. The
study area lacks beach habitat associated with this species. NCNHP data from October
2016 indicates no occurrences of the leatherback sea turtle within 0.5 mile of the study
area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
Loggerhead sea turtle — The loggerhead sea turtle is widely distributed within its range, and is
found in three distinct habitats during their lives. These turtles may be found hundreds of miles
out in the open ocean, in neritic areas, or on coastal beaches. In North Carolina, this species has
been observed in every coastal county. Loggerhead sea turtles occasionally nest on North Carolina
beaches, and are the most common of all sea turtles that visit the North Carolina coast. They nest
nocturnally, at two to three year intervals, between May and September, on isolated beaches that
are characterized by fine-grained sediments. In near shore areas, loggerhead sea turtles have been
observed in bays, lagoons, salt marshes, creeks, ship channels, and the mouths of large rivers.
Coral reefs, rocky places, and shipwrecks are often used as foraging areas (USFWS 2016f).
Habitat Present: No
Potential habitat for the loggerhead sea turtle does not occur within the study area. The
study area lacks the large freshwater river habitat associated with this species. NCNHP
data from October 2016 indicates no occurrences of the Atlantic sturgeon within 0.5 mile
of the study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect

Piping plover — The piping plover breeds along the entire eastern coast of the United States. North
Carolina is uniquely positioned in the species' range, being the only state where the piping plover's
breeding and wintering ranges overlap and the birds are present year-round. They nest most
commonly where there is little or no vegetation, but some may nest in strands of beach grass. The
nest is a shallow depression in the sand that is usually lined with shell fragments and light colored
pebbles (USFWS 2016g).
Habitat Present: No
Potential habitat for the piping plover does not occur within the study area. The study area
lacks beach habitat associated with this species. NCNHP data from October 2016
indicates no occurrences of the piping plover within 0.5 mile of the study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
Red -cockaded woodpecker — The red -cockaded woodpecker (RCW) typically occupies open,
mature stands of southern pines, particularly longleaf pine (Pinus palustris), for foraging and
nesting/roosting habitat. The RCW excavates cavities for nesting and roosting in living pine trees,
aged 60 years or older, which are contiguous with pine stands at least 30 years of age to provide
foraging habitat. The foraging range of the RCW is normally no more than 0.5 miles (USFWS
2016h).
Habitat Present: No
Potential nesting and foraging habitat for RCW does not occur within the study area. The
wooded areas within and surrounding the study area are predominately mixed hardwood -
pine, but pines are less than 30 years old and the communities include a dense hardwood
understory does not provide suitable foraging or nesting habitat for this species. A review
of historic aerial photography shows that the property has been clearcut in the previous 12
years. NCNHP data from October 2016 indicates no occurrences of the RCW within 0.5
mile of the study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
Red knot — The rufa red knot is one of the six recognized subspecies of red knots, and is the only
subspecies that routinely travels along the Atlantic coast of the United States during spring and
fall migrations. It is known to winter in North Carolina and to stop over during migration. Habitats
used by red knots in migration and wintering areas are similar in character: coastal marine and
estuarine habitats with large areas of exposed intertidal sediments. In North America, red knots
are commonly found along sandy, gravel, or cobble beaches, tidal mudflats, salt marshes, shallow
coastal impoundments and lagoons, and peat banks. Ephemeral features such as sand spits, islets,
shoals, and sandbars, often associated with inlets can be important habitat for roosting (USFWS
2016i).

Habitat Present: No
Potential habitat for the red knot does not occur within the study area. The study area
lacks the marsh, lagoon, and beach habitats associated with this species. NCNHP data
from October 2016 indicates no occurrences of the red knot within 0.5 mile of the study
area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
West Indian manatee — Manatees have been observed in all the North Carolina coastal counties.
Manatees are found in canals, sluggish rivers, estuarine habitats, salt water bays, and as far off
shore as 3.7 miles. They utilize freshwater and marine habitats at shallow depths of 5 to 20 feet.
In the winter, between October and April, manatees concentrate in areas with warm water. During
other times of the year habitats appropriate for the manatee are those with sufficient water depth,
an adequate food supply, and in proximity to freshwater. Manatees require a source of freshwater
to drink. Manatees are primarily herbivorous, feeding on any aquatic vegetation present, but they
may occasionally feed on fish (USFWS 2016j).
Habitat Present: No
Potential habitat for the West Indian manatee does not occur within the study area. The
study area lacks the freshwater and marine habitat associated with this species. NCNHP
data from October 2016 indicates no occurrences of the West Indian manatee within 0.5
mile of the study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
Cooley's meadowrue — Cooley's meadowrue, documented in the Pine Savanna natural
community, occurs in circumneutral soils in sunny, moist to wet grass -sedge bogs, wet -pine
savannas over calcareous clays, and savanna -like areas, often at the ecotones of intermittent
drainages or non-riverine swamp forests. This rhizomatous perennial herb is also found along
plowed firebreaks, roadside ditches and rights -of -ways, forest clearings dominated by grass or
sedge, and powerline or utility rights-of-way. The species requires some type of disturbance (e.g.
mowing, clearing, periodic fire) to maintain its open habitat. The plant typically occurs on slightly
acidic soils that are loamy fine sand, sandy loam, or fine sandy loam; at least seasonally moist or
saturated; and mapped as Foreston, Grifton, Muckalee, Torhunta, or Woodington series (USFWS
1994).
Habitat Present: No
Potential habitat for Cooley's meadowrue does not occur within the study area. The study
area lacks the wet -pine savannas and ecotones of intermittent drainages or non-riverine
swamp forest habitats. NCNHP data from October 2016 indicates no occurrences of the
Cooley's meadowrue within 0.5 mile of the study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect

Golden sedge — Golden sedge, a very rare endemic of the Atlantic Coastal Plain, grows in sandy
soils overlying calcareous deposits of coquina limestone, where the soil pH, typically between 5.5
and 7.2, is usually high for this region. The perennial prefers the ecotone between the pine savanna
and adjacent wet hardwood or hardwood/conifer forest. Most plants occur in the partially shaded
savanna/swamp where occasionally to frequent fire favor an herbaceous ground layer and suppress
shrub dominance. Soils supporting the species are very wet to periodically shallowly inundated.
Other occurrences may occur on disturbed areas such as roadsides and drainage ditches or power
line rights-of-way, where mowing and/or very wet conditions suppress woody plants. Poorly
viable occurrences may occur in significantly disturbed areas where ditching activities that lower
the water table and/or some evidence of fore suppression threatens the species (USFWS 2002).
Habitat Present: No
Potential habitat for golden sedge does not occur within the study area. The study area
lacks the ecotones between pine savannas and adjacent wet hardwood or
hardwood/conifer forests associated with this species. NCNHP data from October 2016
indicates no occurrences of the golden sedge within 0.5 mile of the study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
Pondberry — Pondberry occurs in seasonally flooded wetlands, sandy sinks, pond margins, and
swampy depressions. This deciduous, aromatic shrub occurs in bottomland hardwood forests with
perched water tables along inland area of the southeastern United States. In the Coastal Plain of
the Carolinas, the species occurs at the margins of limestone sinks and ponds and in undrained,
shallow depressions of longleaf pine and pond pine forests. Known occurrences in North Carolina
occur in the Small Depression Pocosin natural community, grow in soils with sandy sediments and
high water table, contain high peat content in the subsurface, and include a prevalence of shrubs
due to historically frequent or intense fires. It generally grows in somewhat shaded areas, but can
tolerant full sun (USFWS 1993).
Habitat Present: No
Potential habitat for pondberry does not occur within the study area. The study area lacks
pond margins, limestone sandy sinks, and longleaf/pond pine swampy drepressions
associated with this species. NCNHP data from October 2016 indicates no occurrences
of the pondberry within 0.5 mile of the study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
Rough -leaved loosestrife — Rough -leaved loosestrife, endemic to the Coastal Plain and Sandhills
of North and South Carolina, generally occurs in the ecotones or edges between longleaf pine
uplands and pond pine pocosins in dense shrub and vine growth on moist to seasonally saturated
sands and on shallow organic soils overlaying sand (spodosolic soils). Occurrences are found in
such disturbed habitats as roadside depressions, maintained power and utility line rights-of-way,
firebreaks, and trails. The species prefers full sunlight, is shade intolerant, and requires areas of
disturbance (e.g., clearing, mowing, periodic burning) where the overstory is minimal. It can,

however, persist vegetatively for many years in overgrown, fire -suppressed areas. Blaney, Gilead,
Johnston, Kalmia, Leon, Mandarin, Murville, Torhunta, and Vaucluse are some of the soil series
that the plant occurs on (USFWS 1995).
Habitat Present: No
Potential habitat for rough -leaved loosestrife does not occur within the study area. The
study area lacks wetland ecotonal habitats between longleaf pine uplands and pond pine
pocosins required by this species. NCNHP data from October 2016 indicates no
occurrences of the rough -leaved loosestrife within 0.5 mile of the study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
Seabeach amaranth — Seabeach amaranth occurs on barrier island beaches where its primary
habitat consists of overwash flats at accreting ends of islands, lower foredunes, and upper strands
of noneroding beaches (landward of the wrack line). In rare situations, this annual is found on
sand spits 160 feet or more from the base of the nearest foredune. It occasionally establishes small
temporary populations in other habitats, including sound -side beaches, blowouts in foredunes,
interdunal areas, and on sand and shell material deposited for beach replenishment or as dredge
spoil. The plant's habitat is sparsely vegetated with annual herbs (forbs) and, less commonly,
perennial herbs (mostly grasses), and scattered shrubs. It is, however, intolerant of vegetative
competition and does not occur on well -vegetated sites. The species usually is found growing on
a nearly pure silica sand substrate, occasionally with shell fragments mixed in. Seabeach amaranth
appears to require extensive areas of barriers island beaches and inlets that function in a relatively
natural and dynamic manner. These characteristics allow it to move around in the landscape,
occupying suitable habitat as it becomes available (USFWS 1996).
Habitat Present: No
Potential habitat for seabeach amaranth does not occur within the study area. The study
area lacks the beach habitat associated with this species. NCNHP data from October
2016 indicates no occurrences of the Seabeach amaranth within 0.5 mile of the study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
4.8 Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act
Bald eagles typically feed on fish but may also consume birds and small mammals. In the
Carolinas, nesting season extends from December through May (Potter et al. 1980). Bald eagles
typically nest in tall, living trees in a conspicuous location near water and forage over large bodies
of water with adjacent trees available for perching (Hamel 1992).
The bald eagle was officially delisted and removed from the federal Endangered Species List on
August 9, 2007, but they are still protected under the BGPA and the MBTA. The National Bald
Eagle Management Guidelines (Guidelines) (USFWS 2007) prohibit disturbance to a bald eagle.
The Guidelines define disturb as "to agitate or bother a bald or golden eagle to a degree that causes,
or is likely to cause, based on the best scientific information available: 1) injury to an eagle; 2) a

decrease in its productivity, by substantially interfering with normal breeding, feeding, or
sheltering behavior; or 3) nest abandonment, by substantially interfering with normal breeding,
feeding, or sheltering behavior." The definition also covers impacts that result from human -caused
alterations initiated around a previously used nest site during a time when eagles are not present,
if, upon the eagles return, such alterations agitate or bother an eagle to a degree that injures an
eagle or interferes with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior (USFWS 2007).
Under the current Guidelines, USFWS recommends the following measures for roads, trails,
canals, power lines, and other linear utilities. If the eagle nest can be seen from the project site
and there is no similar activity within 660 feet, then USFWS recommends that the project: 1)
maintain a buffer of at least 660 feet between your activities and the nest; 2) maintain any
established landscape buffers; and 3) if possible, create additional landscape buffers to screen the
new activity from the nest. If these recommendations cannot be adopted for the project, then
coordination is recommended with the local USFWS office.
ESI did not identify any evidence of bald eagle activity while working in the study area. A review
of NHP records (October 2016 data) indicates no documented occurrences of bald eagle within 0.5
mile of the study area.

A•#�� . M Grarfts'Cr+ k.
1477
••-
Is
i c +.
t3 ••e B r•
•a
HOotOevl'� •
Lit
50
i
i 6. o
7 tee• er'" S' 2y, �,
1423
17 6
��r• O
r �, 1 1 ,Smiths.
;130 • � - /,.� ! �'�-ts-,.,.-s`•,�M��.�„�.,---=ac.`;�Q� 'e,,
�� 3,f z .� 6 �,• a Gty 1413 r
i Q r
'roe
s
sc..o'��a t1e<roY � .� .r • Pz��
r �} 0 a
It
of
0
X S�o�aP �oc� 4v� vaaa��� s
ii q x W
is
Or
c a
A,� Q Project Boundary
- " Locations and extents are approximate.
i Copyrights©
Source:2011 National Geographic Society/ESRI, i -cubed seamless
•L� DUKE 0 1000 2000 USGS quagrangles (Kellum, NC): Project Boundary acquired from
Onslow County parcel data, 2015.
ENERGY Feet Disdaimer The information depicted on this figure Is for informational purposes only and was not
prepared for, and is not suitable for legal or engineering purposes. This information presented Is not
for regulatory review and is intended for use only by a professional Land Surveyor prior to regulatory
review
ENVIRONMENTAL Project: ER15010.59
SERVICES, INC. Project Location
Date: Nov 2016
TrademarkDove
Raleigh, North Carolina 27610 Grants Creek Substation - Trott Site
Rale
(9191212-1760 Drwn/Chkd: KT/RT
•,A,..
9'9'2'2 -"°'FAX Onslow County, North Carolina
www environmentalservicesinccom Figure: 1
Path:P:%GwGmIPmiects@015101015g1GISlfig_pmLlm.mxd Date: 101311201612:47:27 PM

Soil Mapping Units
GoA Goldsboro fine sandy loam 0-2 % Slopes
Mk Muckalee loam
NoB Norfolk loamy fine sand 2-6 % Slopes
On Onslow loamy fine sand
Ra Rains fine sandy loam
NoB
I
NoB
'G - r.,
I.
i
Nfi6 `
Q Project Boundary
NRCS Soil Survey
t ' ° A Locations and extents are approximate.
Source: High Resolution NC Statewide Imagery, CGIA, 2012;
%• DUKE 0 200 400 NRCS digital Soil Survey, Onslow County, 2009, Project Boundary
acquired from Onslow County parcel data, 2015.
ENERGENERGY Feet Disclaimer The Information depicted on this figure is for informational purposes only and was not
Y. prepared for. and is not suitable for legal or engineering purposes. This information presented is not
for regulatory review and is Intended for use only by a Professional Land surveyor prior to regulatory
review
ENVIRONMENTAL NRCS Soil Survey Project: ER15010.59
SERVICES, INC. Date: Nov 2016
RaleNorth Carolina 27610
4901 Trademark N Grants Creek Substation - Trott Site
(919;
North C)212-1760 Drwn/Chkd: KT/RT
(919'212-1707 FAX Onslow County, North Carolina
ww mentalserv,ees,nc com Figure: 3
Path P\GeoGra\Projects\20151010\59\GIS\tig_soils mxd Date 10/31/20161248.20 PM

Grants Creek Substation Alternative
Trott Site
Onslow County, NC
Prepared for:
DUKE
�. ENERGY,
Prepared by:
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC.
4901 Trademark Drive
Raleigh, North Carolina 27610
November 2016

Environmental Services, Inc.
Table of Contents
1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION & UNDERSTANDING............................................................. 1
2.0
METHODOLOGIES................................................................................................................ 1
3.0
PHYSICAL RESOURCES.......................................................................................................1
3.1
Topography.............................................................................................................................
1
3.2
Soils.........................................................................................................................................
1
3.3
Water Resources......................................................................................................................
2
4.0
JURISDICTIONAL ISSUES....................................................................................................
2
4.1
Clean Water Act Waters of the U.S.........................................................................................
2
4.1.1
Wetland Data...................................................................................................................
3
4.1.2
Stream/Surface Water, and Tributary Data.....................................................................
3
4.2
Clean Water Act Permits.........................................................................................................
3
4.3
Coastal Area Management Act................................................................................................
4
4.4
Construction Moratoria...........................................................................................................
4
4.5
N.C. River Basin Buffer Rules................................................................................................
4
4.6
Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act...............................................................................
4
4.7
Endangered Species Act Protected Species............................................................................. 4
4.8
Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act..................................................................................
11
4.9
Federal Species of Concern ...................................................................................................12
4.10
State Protected Species.........................................................................................................
12
5.0
CULTURAL/ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES...........................................................
14
6.0
SUMMARY..............................................................................................................................14
Appendices
Appendix A
• Figures
Appendix B
0 Data Forms

Environmental Services, Inc.
Grants Creek Alternative
Trott Site
Onslow County, NC
November 2016
1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION & UNDERSTANDING
Duke Energy is proposing construction of a new substation in Onslow County, North Carolina. The
project study area is located east of Jacksonville on Old 30 Road and is approximately 79 acres based
on Onslow County parcel data.
The study area is depicted on a current U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) map (Figure 1), a recent aerial
photograph (Figure 2), and Natural Resource Conservation Service (MRCS) Soil Survey (Figure 3) in
Appendix A.
Environmental Services, Inc., (ESI) was tasked by Duke to provide the following services for
the Trott Site:
• Jurisdictional wetland, stream, and surface water delineation,
• GPS data collection for any delineated wetlands or streams,
• Preliminary protected species habitat assessments for federally Endangered and Threatened
species,
• Preliminary cultural resources assessment,
• Preliminary jurisdictional determination, and
• Report and graphics preparation.
2.0 METHODOLOGIES
Prior to the initiation of field efforts, available sources were reviewed, including the applicable U.S.
Geological Survey 7.5 -minute topographic quadrangle of Kellum, NC (NGS/ESRI 2011), and U.S.
Department of Agriculture Soil Survey for Onslow County (USDA 1992). Additionally, records kept
by the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) concerning any known occurrences of
state and federally Threatened or Endangered species were reviewed (NCNHP 2016). Field work was
conducted by ESI staff on October 24-25, 2016.
3.0 PHYSICAL RESOURCES
The proposed project is located in the Coastal Plain physiographic province of North Carolina.
Specifically, the study area is located in the Belgrade Formation (NCDENR 1985).
3.1 Topography
Topography in the study area is flat. Elevations are approximately 40 feet above mean sea level
(MSL).
3.2 Soils
The general soil association occurring in the study area is the Rains-Woodington-Torhunta
Association. These are nearly level, poorly drained and very poorly drained soils that have a loamy or
clayey subsoil on uplands.
1
Trott Site

Environmental Services, Inc.
3.3 Water Resources
Water resources in the study area are located within the White Oak River basin (USGS hydrologic unit
03020302) (NCCGIA 2001). A Best Usage Classification (BUC) is assigned to waters of North
Carolina based on the existing or contemplated best usage of various bodies of water. Table 1
contains the named water resources associated with features located within the study area, its Stream
Index Numbers (SIN), and BUC. This named stream represents the receiving waters of the wetlands
that are located inside the study area. Unnamed streams and tributaries carry the same BUC as their
receiving waters, unless otherwise indicated by DWR.
Table 1. Named water resources and reeeivina watPre !Nt"nWR '7nI'll
Stream Name
SIN
BUC
Basin
Little Northeast Creek
19-16-2-1
C; NSW
White Oak
Class C waters are used for secondary recreation such as fishing, wildlife, fish consumption, and
agriculture. NSW is a supplemental classification indicating nutrient sensitive waters, which require
limitations on nutrient inputs.
No Outstanding Resource Waters (ORWs) are within the project study area (NCDMF 2011).
Portions of Little Northeast Creek and the New River, downstream of the study area, are considered
Primary Nursery Areas (PNAs) and Anadromous Fish Spawning Areas (AFSA) by the North Carolina
Division of Marine Fisheries (NCDMF 2007). The proposed project should not have any affect on
these waters. No essential fish habitat is present in the study area.
4.0 JURISDICTIONAL ISSUES
4.1 Clean Water Act Waters of the U.S.
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) requires regulation of discharges into "Waters of the
United States". Although the principal administrative agency of the CWA is the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) has major responsibility for
implementation, permitting, and enforcement of provisions of the Act. The USACE regulatory
program is defined in 33 CFR 320-330. Water bodies such as rivers, lakes, and streams are subject to
jurisdictional consideration under the Section 404 program. However, by regulation, wetlands are also
considered "Waters of the United States".
According to the Regional Supplement to the USACE Wetland Delineation Manual for the Atlantic
and Gulf Coastal Plain Region (USACE 2010), areas must exhibit three distinct characteristics to be
considered jurisdictional wetlands: 1) prevalence of hydrophytic (water tolerant) plants; 2) presence of
hydric soils; and 3) sufficient wetland hydrology indicators within 12 inches of the ground surface.
When present, intermittent and perennial stream channels are also considered Waters of the United
States under Sections 404 and 401 of the CWA.
Presence of an ordinary high water mark (OHWM) and a continuous bed and bank define streams and
tributaries to waters of the U.S. under current USACE guidance. Perennial and intermittent streams
are considered relatively permanent waters (RPWs) and are defined by hydrologic regime. Tributaries
can be natural or man-made (ditches), but they must possess an OHWM to be considered by USACE.
2
Trott Site

Environmental Services, Inc.
Often these tributaries may contain an OHWM, but receive a low NCDWR score suggesting an
ephemeral flow regime. These ephemeral tributaries may still be jurisdictional under Section 404.
4.1.1 Wetland Data
Fourteen (14) wetlands were delineated within the project study area. Figure 2 depicts the approximate
extent and approximate location of the wetlands that were delineated. These graphics are not intended
to be a replacement for a traditional survey and are not intended to be used as such. Table 2 contains
wetland data collected within the project study area. Wetlands were flagged with sequentially
numbered blue and pink -and -black striped flagging. The wetlands occurring within the study area can
be classified as Pine Flats based on the NCWAM method. These wetlands should be considered non -
riparian by USACE.
Table 2. Wetland data for the Trott Site.
Wetland No.
NCWAM Classification .
_Approximate Size in Project Study
Area (ac)
W1
Pine Flat
0.09
W2
Pine Flat
0.95
W3
Pine Flat
0.17
W4
Pine Flat
1.01
W5
Pine Flat
2.28
W6
Pine Flat
0.42
W7
Pine Flat
0.07
W8
Pine Flat
6.11
W9
Pine Flat
0.31
W10
Pine Flat
0.15
Wil
Pine Flat
3.65
W12
Pine Flat
0.05
W13
Pine Flat
0.03
W14
Pine Flat
2.16
TOTAL:
17.45
4.1.2 Stream/Surface Water, and Tributary Data
No jurisdictional streams, tributaries, or surface waters were delineated within the study area.
4.2 Clean Water Act Permits
Dredge and fill activities in "Waters of the United States" must be authorized by USACE as a
regulated discharge pursuant to Section 404 of the CWA and also by NCDWR pursuant to Section 401
of the CWA. Activities authorized by the USACE are subject to further water quality requirements
per Section 401 of the CWA. In North Carolina, the NCDWR administers the Section 401 Water
Quality Certification process, which also must include plans on how the applicant proposes to manage
storm water.
Coordination is recommended with USACE in order to determine the permitting requirements for this
project, if any. Section 404 permitting may not be necessary if all wetland and stream impacts are
avoided; however, concurrence from USACE should be obtained prior to beginning any activities.
Trott Site

Environmental Services, Inc.
Compensatory mitigation can be required by USACE if the proposed project is determined to have an
adverse effect on Waters of the United States, including wetlands, as a result of a regulated discharge.
4.3 Coastal Area Manaizement Act
North Carolina Division of Coastal Management (NCDCM) regulates certain wetlands and water
bodies in the twenty coastal counties of North Carolina under the Coastal Area Management Act
(CAMA). Areas subject to CAMA are identified as Areas of Environmental Concern (AECs). There
are no AECs in the study area that are subject to CAMA regulations.
4.4 Construction Moratoria
No in -water construction moratoria should apply to this project.
4.5 N.C. River Basin Buffer Rules
The study area is located in the White Oak River basin. No buffer rules apply to the study area.
4.6 Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act
Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act requires authorization from the USACE for the excavation
of material, alteration, obstruction, or construction of any structure in or over any "navigable water" of
the United States (33 U.S.0 410 et seq.). "Navigable water" is defined as waters that are subject to
the ebb and flow of the tide shoreward to the mean high water mark and/or waters that are presently
used, have been used in the past, or are susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce
(33 CFR part 329). The study area is not subject to Section 10 regulations.
4.7 Endangered Species Act Protected Species
Species with the federal classifications of Endangered (E), Threatened (T) or Proposed (P) are
protected under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) lists seventeen (17) species for Onslow County as of
March 25, 2015. NCNHP data updated in October 2016 was reviewed to determine if any of these
species have been documented inside of or within 0.5 mile of the study area.
Table 3. Federal listed species for Onslow Countv. NC.
4
Trott Site
Potential
Common Name
Scientific Name
Federal,
Habitat
Biological
Status'
Present
Conclusion
- (Y/N)
Atlantic sturgeon
Acipenser oxyrinchus
E
N
No Effect
oxyrinchus
Shortnose sturgeon
pener
s
Acipen er
E
N
No Effect
bre
American alligator
Alligator
T(S/A)
N
Not Required
mississippiensis
Green sea turtle
Chelonia mydas
T
N
No Effect
Hawksbill sea turtle
Eretmochelys
E
N
No Effect
imbricata
4
Trott Site

Environmental Services, Inc.
Table 3. continued
a E — Endangered, T — Threatened, T (S/A) — Threatened due to Similarity of Appearance
Atlantic sturgeon — Atlantic sturgeon are large fish that can reach 14 feet in length that occur in major
river systems along the eastern seaboard of the United States. The species prefers the near shore
marine, estuarine, and riverine habitat of large river systems. It is an anadromous species that migrates
to moderately -moving freshwater areas to spawn in the spring, but spends most of its life within close
proximity of the river's mouth. Large freshwater rivers that are unobstructed by dams or pollutants
are imperative to successful reproduction. Spawning occurs in areas with hard substrate (e.g., cobble)
(NOAA 2016).
Habitat Present: No
Potential habitat for the Atlantic sturgeon does not occur within the study area. The study
area lacks the large freshwater river habitat associated with this species. NCNHP data from
October 2016 indicates no occurrences of the Atlantic sturgeon within 0.5 mile of the study
area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
Trott Site
Potential
Habitat
Biological
Common Name ..
Scientific Name:Federal
Status'
Present
Conclusion
/N)
Kemp's ridley sea
Lepidochelys kempii
E
N
Mo Effect
turtle
Leatherback sea turtle
Dermochelys coriacea
E
N
No Effect
Loggerhead sea turtle
Caretta caretta
T
N
No Effect
Piping plover
Charadrius melodus
T
N
No Effect
Red -cockaded
Picoides borealis
E
N
No Effect
woodpecker
Red knot
Calidris canutus rufa
T
N
No Effect
West Indian manatee
Trichechus manatus
E
N
No Effect
Cooley's meadowrue
Thalictrum cooleyi
E
N
No Effect
Golden sedge
Carex lutea
E
N
No Effect
Pondberry
Lindera melissifolia
E
N
No Effect
Rough -leaved
Lysimachia
loosestrife
asperulaefolia
E
N
No Effect
Seabeach amaranth
Amaranthus pumilus
T
N
No Effect
a E — Endangered, T — Threatened, T (S/A) — Threatened due to Similarity of Appearance
Atlantic sturgeon — Atlantic sturgeon are large fish that can reach 14 feet in length that occur in major
river systems along the eastern seaboard of the United States. The species prefers the near shore
marine, estuarine, and riverine habitat of large river systems. It is an anadromous species that migrates
to moderately -moving freshwater areas to spawn in the spring, but spends most of its life within close
proximity of the river's mouth. Large freshwater rivers that are unobstructed by dams or pollutants
are imperative to successful reproduction. Spawning occurs in areas with hard substrate (e.g., cobble)
(NOAA 2016).
Habitat Present: No
Potential habitat for the Atlantic sturgeon does not occur within the study area. The study
area lacks the large freshwater river habitat associated with this species. NCNHP data from
October 2016 indicates no occurrences of the Atlantic sturgeon within 0.5 mile of the study
area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
Trott Site

Environmental Services, Inc.
Shortnose sturgeon — Shortnose sturgeon occur in most major river systems along the eastern
seaboard of the United States. The species prefers the near shore marine, estuarine, and riverine
habitat of large river systems. It is an anadromous species that migrates to faster -moving freshwater
areas to spawn in the spring, but spends most of its life within close proximity of the river's mouth.
Large freshwater rivers that are unobstructed by dams or pollutants are imperative to successful
reproduction. Distribution information by river/waterbody is lacking for the rivers of North Carolina;
however, records are known from most coastal counties (NMFS 1998).
Habitat Present: No
Potential habitat for shortnose sturgeon does not occur within the study area. The study area
lacks the large freshwater river habitat associated with this species. NCNHP data from
October 2016 indicates no occurrences of the shortnose sturgeon within 0.5 mile of the study
area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
American alligator — In North Carolina, alligators have been recorded in nearly every coastal county,
and many inland counties to the fall line. The alligator is found in rivers, streams, canals, lakes,
swamps, and coastal marshes. Adult animals are highly tolerant of salt water, but the young are
apparently more sensitive, with salinities greater than 5 parts per thousand considered harmful. The
American alligator remains on the protected species list due to its similarity in appearance to the
Endangered American crocodile (Crocodylus acutus) (USFWS 2016a).
Habitat Present: No
Species listed as threatened due to similarity of appearance do not require Section 7
consultation with the USFWS. Potential habitat for American alligator does not occur within
the study area. The study area lacks the rivers, streams, canal, lakes and swamps associated
with this species. NCNHP data from October 2016 indicates no occurrences of the American
alligator within 0.5 mile of the study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: Not Required
Green sea turtle — The green sea turtle is found in temperate and tropical oceans and seas. Nesting in
North America is limited to small communities on the east coast of Florida requiring beaches with
minimal disturbances and a sloping platform for nesting (the do not nest in North Carolina). The
green sea turtle can be found in shallow waters. They are attracted to lagoons, reefs, bays, mangroves
swamps and inlets where an abundance of marine grasses can be found, as this is the principle food
source for the green turtle (USFWS 2016b).
Habitat Present: No
Potential habitat for the green sea turtle does not occur within the study area. The study area
lacks the lagoon, reef, bay, and beach habitat associated with this species. NCNHP data from
October 2016 indicates no occurrences of the green sea turtle within 0.5 mile of the study
area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
Hawksbill sea turtle — Hawksbill sea turtles are found in tropical and subtropical oceans. Sightings
have been reported on the east coast of the U.S. as far north as Massachusetts, although rarely north of
6
Trott Site

Environmental Services, Inc.
Florida. Sightings have been recorded from a handful of counties in North Carolina, but the turtle is
not known to breed here. Adult hawksbills are found in coastal waters, especially around coral reefs,
rocky outcrops, shoals, mangrove bays, and estuaries. Juveniles are often seen offshore, in floating
mats of seaweed. This species nests on a wide range of beach types and substrates, using both low -
and high-energy beaches on islands and mainland sites. The nest is typically placed near or under
some vegetation (USFWS 2016c).
Habitat Present: No
Potential habitat for the hawksbill sea turtle does not occur within the study area. The study
area lacks the beach habitat associated with this species. NCNHP data from October 2016
indicates no occurrences of the hawksbill sea turtle within 0.5 mile of the study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
Kemp's ridley sea turtle — Kemp's ridley sea turtle is the smallest of the sea turtles that visit North
Carolina's coast, and has been sighted in most coastal counties. While the majority of this sea turtle's
nesting occurs in Mexico, the species is known to nest on North Carolina beaches infrequently.
Kemp's ridley sea turtle can lay eggs as many as three times during the April to June breeding season.
This species prefers beach sections that are backed up by extensive swamps or large bodies of open
water having seasonal narrow ocean connections and a well defined elevated dune area. The species
prefers neritic areas with sandy or muddy bottoms (USFWS 2016d).
Habitat Present: No
Potential habitat for the Kemp's ridley sea turtle does not occur within the study area. The
study area lacks the beach habitat associated with this species. NCNHP data from October
2016 indicates no occurrences of the Kemp's ridley sea turtle within 0.5 mile of the study
area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
Leatherback sea turtle — Leatherback sea turtles are distributed world-wide in tropical waters of the
Atlantic, Pacific, and Indian oceans. They are generally open ocean species, and may be common off
the North Carolina coast during certain times of the year. However, in northern waters leatherbacks
are reported to enter into bays, estuaries, and other inland bodies of water. Major nesting areas occur
mainly in tropical regions. In the U.S., primary nesting areas are in Florida, however nests are known
from Georgia, South Carolina and North Carolina as well. Nesting occurs from April to August.
Leatherbacks need sandy beaches backed with vegetation in the proximity of deep water and generally
with rough seas. Beaches with relatively steep slope are usually preferred (USFWS 2016e).
Habitat Present: No
Potential habitat for the leatherback sea turtles does not occur within the study area. The
study area lacks beach habitat associated with this species. NCNHP data from October 2016
indicates no occurrences of the leatherback sea turtle within 0.5 mile of the study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
Loggerhead sea turtle — The loggerhead sea turtle is widely distributed within its range, and is found
in three distinct habitats during their lives. These turtles may be found hundreds of miles out in the
open ocean, in neritic areas, or on coastal beaches. In North Carolina, this species has been observed
Trott Site

Environmental Services, Inc.
in every coastal county. Loggerhead sea turtles occasionally nest on North Carolina beaches, and are
the most common of all sea turtles that visit the North Carolina coast. They nest nocturnally, at two to
three year intervals, between May and September, on isolated beaches that are characterized by fine-
grained sediments. In near shore areas, loggerhead sea turtles have been observed in bays, lagoons,
salt marshes, creeks, ship channels, and the mouths of large rivers. Coral reefs, rocky places, and
shipwrecks are often used as foraging areas (USFWS 2016f).
Habitat Present: No
Potential habitat for the loggerhead sea turtle does not occur within the study area. The study
area lacks the large freshwater river habitat associated with this species. NCNHP data from
October 2016 indicates no occurrences of the Atlantic sturgeon within 0.5 mile of the study
area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
Piping plover — The piping plover breeds along the entire eastern coast of the United States. North
Carolina is uniquely positioned in the species' range, being the only state where the piping plover's
breeding and wintering ranges overlap and the birds are present year-round. They nest most
commonly where there is little or no vegetation, but some may nest in strands of beach grass. The nest
is a shallow depression in the sand that is usually lined with shell fragments and light colored pebbles
(USFWS 2016g).
Habitat Present: No
Potential habitat for the piping plover does not occur within the study area. The study area
lacks beach habitat associated with this species. NCNHP data from October 2016 indicates
no occurrences of the piping plover within 0.5 mile of the study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
Red -cockaded woodpecker — The red -cockaded woodpecker (RCW) typically occupies open, mature
stands of southern pines, particularly longleaf pine (Pinus palustris), for foraging and nesting/roosting
habitat. The RCW excavates cavities for nesting and roosting in living pine trees, aged 60 years or
older, which are contiguous with pine stands at least 30 years of age to provide foraging habitat. The
foraging range of the RCW is normally no more than 0.5 miles (USFWS 2016h).
Habitat Present: No
Potential nesting and foraging habitat for RCW does not occur within the study area. The
wooded areas within and surrounding the study area are predominately mixed hardwood -pine,
but pines are less than 30 years old and the communities include a dense hardwood
understory does not provide suitable foraging or nesting habitat for this species. A review of
historic aerial photography shows that the property has been clearcut in the previous 12 years.
NCNHP data from October 2016 indicates no occurrences of the RCW within 0.5 mile of the
study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
Red knot — The rufa red knot is one of the six recognized subspecies of red knots, and is the only
subspecies that routinely travels along the Atlantic coast of the United States during spring and fall
migrations. It is known to winter in North Carolina and to stop over during migration. Habitats used
8
Trott Site

Environmental Services, Inc.
by red knots in migration and wintering areas are similar in character: coastal marine and estuarine
habitats with large areas of exposed intertidal sediments. In North America, red knots are commonly
found along sandy, gravel, or cobble beaches, tidal mudflats, salt marshes, shallow coastal
impoundments and lagoons, and peat banks. Ephemeral features such as sand spits, islets, shoals, and
sandbars, often associated with inlets can be important habitat for roosting (USFWS 2016i).
Habitat Present: No
Potential habitat for the red knot does not occur within the study area. The study area lacks
the marsh, lagoon, and beach habitats associated with this species. NCNHP data from
October 2016 indicates no occurrences of the red knot within 0.5 mile of the study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
West Indian manatee — Manatees have been observed in all the North Carolina coastal counties.
Manatees are found in canals, sluggish rivers, estuarine habitats, salt water bays, and as far off shore as
3.7 miles. They utilize freshwater and marine habitats at shallow depths of 5 to 20 feet. In the winter,
between October and April, manatees concentrate in areas with warm water. During other times of the
year habitats appropriate for the manatee are those with sufficient water depth, an adequate food
supply, and in proximity to freshwater. Manatees require a source of freshwater to drink. Manatees
are primarily herbivorous, feeding on any aquatic vegetation present, but they may occasionally feed
on fish (USFWS 2016j).
Habitat Present: No
Potential habitat for the West Indian manatee does not occur within the study area. The study
area lacks the freshwater and marine habitat associated with this species. NCNHP data from
October 2016 indicates no occurrences of the West Indian manatee within 0.5 mile of the
study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
Cooley's meadowrue — Cooley's meadowrue, documented in the Pine Savanna natural community,
occurs in circumneutral soils in sunny, moist to wet grass -sedge bogs, wet -pine savannas over
calcareous clays, and savanna -like areas, often at the ecotones of intermittent drainages or non-riverine
swamp forests. This rhizomatous perennial herb is also found along plowed firebreaks, roadside
ditches and rights -of -ways, forest clearings dominated by grass or sedge, and powerline or utility
rights-of-way. The species requires some type of disturbance (e.g. mowing, clearing, periodic fire) to
maintain its open habitat. The plant typically occurs on slightly acidic soils that are loamy fine sand,
sandy loam, or fine sandy loam; at least seasonally moist or saturated; and mapped as Foreston,
Grifton, Muckalee, Torhunta, or Woodington series (USFWS 1994).
Habitat Present: No
Potential habitat for Cooley's meadowrue does not occur within the study area. The study
area lacks the wet -pine savannas and ecotones of intermittent drainages or non-riverine
swamp forest habitats. NCNHP data from October 2016 indicates no occurrences of the
Cooley's meadowrue within 0.5 mile of the study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
9
Trott Site

Environmental Services, Inc.
Golden sedge — Golden sedge, a very rare endemic of the Atlantic Coastal Plain, grows in sandy soils
overlying calcareous deposits of coquina limestone, where the soil pH, typically between 5.5 and 7.2,
is usually high for this region. The perennial prefers the ecotone between the pine savanna and
adjacent wet hardwood or hardwood/conifer forest. Most plants occur in the partially shaded
savanna/swamp where occasionally to frequent fire favor an herbaceous ground layer and suppress
shrub dominance. Soils supporting the species are very wet to periodically shallowly inundated.
Other occurrences may occur on disturbed areas such as roadsides and drainage ditches or power line
rights-of-way, where mowing and/or very wet conditions suppress woody plants. Poorly viable
occurrences may occur in significantly disturbed areas where ditching activities that lower the water
table and/or some evidence of fore suppression threatens the species (USFWS 2002).
Habitat Present: No
Potential habitat for golden sedge does not occur within the study area. The study area lacks
the ecotones between pine savannas and adjacent wet hardwood or hardwood/conifer
forests associated with this species. NCNHP data from October 2016 indicates no
occurrences of the golden sedge within 0.5 mile of the study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
Pondberry — Pondberry occurs in seasonally flooded wetlands, sandy sinks, pond margins, and
swampy depressions. This deciduous, aromatic shrub occurs in bottomland hardwood forests with
perched water tables along inland area of the southeastern United States. In the Coastal Plain of the
Carolinas, the species occurs at the margins of limestone sinks and ponds and in undrained, shallow
depressions of longleaf pine and pond pine forests. Known occurrences in North Carolina occur in the
Small Depression Pocosin natural community, grow in soils with sandy sediments and high water
table, contain high peat content in the subsurface, and include a prevalence of shrubs due to
historically frequent or intense fires. It generally grows in somewhat shaded areas, but can tolerant
full sun (USFWS 1993).
Habitat Present: No
Potential habitat for pondberry does not occur within the study area. The study area lacks
pond margins, limestone sandy sinks, and longleaf/pond pine swampy drepressions
associated with this species. NCNHP data from October 2016 indicates no occurrences of
the pondberry within 0.5 mile of the study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
Rough -leaved loosestrife — Rough -leaved loosestrife, endemic to the Coastal Plain and Sandhills of
North and South Carolina, generally occurs in the ecotones or edges between longleaf pine uplands
and pond pine pocosins in dense shrub and vine growth on moist to seasonally saturated sands and on
shallow organic soils overlaying sand (spodosolic soils). Occurrences are found in such disturbed
habitats as roadside depressions, maintained power and utility line rights-of-way, firebreaks, and trails.
The species prefers full sunlight, is shade intolerant, and requires areas of disturbance (e.g., clearing,
mowing, periodic burning) where the overstory is minimal. It can, however, persist vegetatively for
many years in overgrown, fire -suppressed areas. Blaney, Gilead, Johnston, Kalmia, Leon, Mandarin,
Murville, Torhunta, and Vaucluse are some of the soil series that the plant occurs on (USFWS 1995).
10
Trott Site

Environmental Services, Inc.
Habitat Present: No
Potential habitat for rough -leaved loosestrife does not occur within the study area. The study
area lacks wetland ecotonal habitats between longleaf pine uplands and pond pine
pocosins required by this species. NCNHP data from October 2016 indicates no
occurrences of the rough -leaved loosestrife within 0.5 mile of the study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
Seabeach amaranth — Seabeach amaranth occurs on barrier island beaches where its primary habitat
consists of overwash flats at accreting ends of islands, lower foredunes, and upper strands of
noneroding beaches (landward of the wrack line). In rare situations, this annual is found on sand spits
160 feet or more from the base of the nearest foredune. It occasionally establishes small temporary
populations in other habitats, including sound -side beaches, blowouts in foredunes, interdunal areas,
and on sand and shell material deposited for beach replenishment or as dredge spoil. The plant's
habitat is sparsely vegetated with annual herbs (forbs) and, less commonly, perennial herbs (mostly
grasses), and scattered shrubs. It is, however, intolerant of vegetative competition and does not occur
on well -vegetated sites. The species usually is found growing on a nearly pure silica sand substrate,
occasionally with shell fragments mixed in. Seabeach amaranth appears to require extensive areas of
barriers island beaches and inlets that function in a relatively natural and dynamic manner. These
characteristics allow it to move around in the landscape, occupying suitable habitat as it becomes
available (USFWS 1996).
Habitat Present: No
Potential habitat for seabeach amaranth does not occur within the study area. The study area
lacks the beach habitat associated with this species. NCNHP data from October 2016
indicates no occurrences of the seabeach amaranth within 0.5 mile of the study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
4.8 Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act
Bald eagles typically feed on fish but may also consume birds and small mammals. In the Carolinas,
nesting season extends from December through May (Potter et al. 1980). Bald eagles typically nest in
tall, living trees in a conspicuous location near water and forage over large bodies of water with
adjacent trees available for perching (Hamel 1992).
The bald eagle was officially delisted and removed from the federal Endangered Species List on
August 9, 2007, but they are still protected under the BGPA and the MBTA. The National Bald Eagle
Management Guidelines (Guidelines) (USFWS 2007) prohibit disturbance to a bald eagle. The
Guidelines define disturb as "to agitate or bother a bald or golden eagle to a degree that causes, or is
likely to cause, based on the best scientific information available: 1) injury to an eagle; 2) a decrease
in its productivity, by substantially interfering with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior;
or 3) nest abandonment, by substantially interfering with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering
behavior." The definition also covers impacts that result from human -caused alterations initiated
around a previously used nest site during a time when eagles are not present, if, upon the eagles
return, such alterations agitate or bother an eagle to a degree that injures an eagle or interferes with
normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior (USFWS 2007).
11
Trott Site

Environmental Services, Inc.
Under the current Guidelines, USFWS recommends the following measures for roads, trails, canals,
power lines, and other linear utilities. If the eagle nest can be seen from the project site and there is no
similar activity within 660 feet, then USFWS recommends that the project: 1) maintain a buffer of at
least 660 feet between your activities and the nest; 2) maintain any established landscape buffers; and
3) if possible, create additional landscape buffers to screen the new activity from the nest. If these
recommendations cannot be adopted for the project, then coordination is recommended with the local
USFWS office.
ESI did not identify any evidence of bald eagle activity while working in the study area. A review of
NHP records (October 2016 data) indicates no documented occurrences of bald eagle within 0.5 mile
of the study area.
4.9 Federal Species of Concern
The March 25, 2015 USFWS list for Onslow County also includes a category of species designated as
"Federal Species of Concern" (FSC). Federal species of concern are not afforded federal protection
under the Endangered Species Act and are not subject to any of its provisions, including Section 7,
until they are formally Proposed (P) or listed as Threatened (T) or Endangered (E). However, the
status of these species is subject to change, and so should be included for consideration. FSC are
defined as species that are under consideration for listing for which there is insufficient information to
support listing. The presence of potential habitat is based on the following NCNHP documents: List
of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina (NCNHP 2014a) and List of Rare Animal Species of North
Carolina (NCNHP 2014b).
Thirty (30) FSC species are listed for Onslow County (Table 4). Potential habitat is present for three
(3) of these species based on a preliminary assessment using the NCNHP habitat descriptions and the
results of the onsite evaluation. We can make no definitive survey recommendations since the FSC
designation does not require any regulatory consultation. However, if Duke determines that they
would like to survey for any of these species, then ESI can provide a study plan for that effort.
NCNHP documents no occurrence of these species within 0.5 mile southeast of the study area.
4.10 State Protected Species
Some species that are listed as FSC by USFWS also receive limited state protection. Those species
that are listed as both FSC and as North Carolina state -listed Endangered (E), Threatened (T), and
Special Concern (SC) are identified in Table 4. These species receive limited protection under the
North Carolina Endangered Species Act (G.S. 113-331 et seq.) and the North Carolina Plant
Protection Act of 1979 (G.S. 106-202.12 et seq.).
Table 4 indicates that there are twenty-one (21) species that are listed as FSC in addition to having a
state designation of T, E, or SC. The study area may provide potential habitat for two (2) state
protected species.
12
Trott Site

Environmental Services, Inc.
Table 4. Federal Species of Concern for Onslow County, NC
T=Threatened, E=Endangered; SC=Special Concem; SC-V=Special Concern -Vulnerable
13
Trott Site
N.C.
Potential
NCNHP
Common Name
Scientific Name
Status'
Habitat
0.5-Nlile
T, E, SC
Occurrence
American eel
Anguilla rostrate
--
No
No
Bachman's sparrow
Aimophila aestivalis
SC
No
No
Black rail
Laterallus jamaicensis
SC
No
No
Carolina gopher frog
Rana capito capito
T
No
No
Eastern Henslow's
Ammodramus henslowii
SC
Yes
No
sparrow
susurrans
Eastern painted
Passerina ciris ciris
--
No
No
bunting
Mimic glass lizard
Ophisaurus mimicus
SC
Yes
No
Southern hognose
Heterodon simus
SC
No
No
snake
Buchholz's dart moth
Agrotis buchholzi
--
No
No
A skipper
Atrytonopsis sp. I
--
No
No
Awned
Rhexia aristosa
SC -V
No
No
meadowbeauty
Boykin's lobelia
Lobelia boykinii
E
No
No
Carolina grass-of-
Parnassia caroliniana
T
No
No
pamassus
Carolina trillium
Trillium pusillum var. pusillum
E
No
No
Coastal beaksedge
Rhynchospora pleiantha
T
No
No
Coastal goldenrod
Solidago villosicarpa
E
No
No
Grassleaf arrowhead
Sagittaria weatherbiana
E
No
No
Hirst's panic grass
Dichanthelium hirstii
E
No
No
Loose watermilfoil
Myriophyllum laxum
E
No
No
Many -flowered
Calopogon multflorus
E
No
No
grass -pink
Pineland plantain
Plantago sparsiflora
T
No
No
Pondspice
Litsea aestivalis
SC -V
No
No
Savanna onion
Allium sp. I
--
No
No
Smooth -seeded hairy
Scleria sp. 1
--
No
No
nutrush
Spring -flowering
Solidago verna
--
Yes
No
goldenrod
Swamp forest
Rhynchospora decurrens
T
No
No
beakrush
Thome's beakrush
Rhynchospora thornei
SC -V
No
No
Venus' fly -trap I
Dionaea muscipula
SC -V
No
No
Wagner's spleenwort
Asplenium heteroresiliens
--
No
No
A quillwort
Isoetes microvela
--
No
No
T=Threatened, E=Endangered; SC=Special Concem; SC-V=Special Concern -Vulnerable
13
Trott Site

Environmental Services, Inc.
5.0 CULTURAL/ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Research conducted by ESI at the North Carolina Office of State Archaeology (OSA) on October 31,
2016 revealed that no previously recorded archaeological sites are located directly within or
immediately adjacent to the proposed project area. Research conducted by ESI at the Survey and
National Register Branch of the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) on October
31, 2016 revealed that no previously recorded historic properties listed in, eligible, or potentially
eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (National Register) are located directly
within the proposed project area.
6.0 SUMMARY
The project area contains fourteen non -riparian, pine flat wetlands. Impacts to jurisdictional areas
should be avoided and minimized as much as practicable. Unavoidable impacts must be coordinated
with the applicable resource agency and permitting and mitigation could be required. No issues
concerning cultural and archaeological resources and threatened or endangered species were identified
during the preparation of this report. The delineation results should be reviewed and approved by the
USACE prior to site design.
14
Trott Site

Environmental Services, Inc.
References
Hamel, P.B. 1992. Land Manager's Guide to the Birds of the South. The Nature Conservancy,
Southeastern Region, Chapel Hill, NC. 437 pp.
National Geographic Society/ESRI. 2011. I -cubed seamless USGS quadrangle (Kellum, NC).
National Marine Fisheries Service. 1998. Recovery Plan for the Shortnose Sturgeon (Acipenser
brevirostrum). Prepared by the Shortnose Sturgeon Recovery Team for the National Marine
Fisheries Service, Silver Spring, Maryland. 104 pages.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Fisheries, Office of Protected Resources. 2016.
Atlantic sturgeon (Acipenser oxyrinchus oxyrinchus).
Http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/fish/atlanticsturgeon.htm (Accessed October 2016).
N.C. Center for Geographic Information and Analysis. 2001. State of North Carolina Hydrologic Unit
Map.
N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources. 1985. Geologic Map of North Carolina.
N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries. 2007. Anadromous Fish Spawning Areas, Cape Fear River Area,
Map 4. http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/mf/ (Accessed October 2016).
N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries. 2011. Fishery Nursery Areas. http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/mf/
(Accessed September 2016).
N.C. Division of Water Resources. 2013. NC Water Quality Classifications by NC River Basin.
http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/ps/csu/classifications (Accessed October 2016).
N. C. Natural Heritage Program. 2014a. List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2014. North
Carolina Natural Heritage Program. 138 pp.
N. C. Natural Heritage Program. 2014b. List of Rare Animal Species of North Carolina 2014. North
Carolina Natural Heritage Program. 172 pp.
N. C. Natural Heritage Program. 2016. October 2016 NHP Element Occurrences. Raleigh, NC.
(Accessed October 2016).
Potter, E.F., J.F. Parnell, and R.P. Teulings 1980. Birds of the Carolinas. The University of North
Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC. 408 pp.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2010. Regional Supplement to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual: Atlantic Gulf Coastal Plain Region (Version 2.0). U.S. Army
Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, MS. 158 pp.
U.S. Department of Agriculture. 1992. Soil Survey of Onslow County, North Carolina. 138 pp. plus
maps.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1993. Recovery Plan for Pondberry (Lindera melissifolia). Atlanta,
Georgia. 56 pp.
15
Trott Site

Environmental Services, Inc.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1994. Cooley's Meadowrue Recovery Plan. Atlanta, Georgia. 29 pp
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1995. Rough -leaved Loosestrife Recovery Plan. Atlanta, GA. 32 pp.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1996. Recovery Plan for Seabeach Amaranth (Amaranthus pumilius)
Rafinesque. Atlanta, Georgia.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2002. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Endangered
Status for Carex lutea (Golden Sedge). 67 FR 3120-3126.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2007. National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2015. T&E species listed for Onslow County.
http://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/cntylist/nc_counties.html (Accessed October 2016).
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2016a. American alligators in North Carolina.
Http://www.fws.gov/nc-es/reptile/alligat.html (Accessed October 2016).
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2016b. Green Sea Turtles in North Carolina. Http://www.fws.gov/nc
es/reptile/greensea.html (Accessed October 2016).
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2016c. Hawksbill Sea Turtles in North Carolina.
Http://www.fws.gov/nc-es/reptile/hawksbill.html (Accessed October 2016).
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2016d. Kemp's Ridley Sea Turtles in North Carolina.
Http://www.fws.gov/nc-es/reptile/ridley.html (Accessed October 2016).
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2016e. Leatherback Sea Turtles in North Carolina.
Http://www.fws.gov/nc-es/reptile/leather.html (Accessed October 2016).
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2016£ Loggerhead Turtles in North Carolina.
Http://www.fws.gov/nc-es/reptile/logger.html (Accessed October 2016).
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2016g. Piping plover (Charadrius melodus) Species Profile.
Http:Hecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B079 (Accessed
October 2016).
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2016h. Red -cockaded Woodpecker (Picoides borealis).
http://www.fws.gov/rcwrecovery/rcw.html (Accessed October 2016).
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 20161. Rufa Red Knot (Calidris canutus rufa) Species Profile.
https://www.fws.gov/northeast/redknot/ (Accessed October 2016).
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2016j. West Indian Manatees in North Carolina.
Http://www.fws.gov/nc-es/mammal/manatee.html (Accessed October 2016).
16
Trott Site

Environmental Services, Inc.
Appendix A
Figures
17
Trott Site