20190432 Ver 2_More Info Received_20200401

Strickland, Bev
From: Mularski, Eric <[e-mail]>
Sent: Wednesday, April 1, 2020 7:39 PM
To: [e-mail]
Cc: Homewood, Sue; DePalma, Alicia ([e-mail]); Vena, Dave;
Johnson, Andrew; Baysden, Robert
Subject: [External] RE: Request for Additional Information - Duke Energy Pleasant Garden Road
Pipeline, Guilford County; SAW-2018-02075
Attachments: PNG Gas Line Project - Wetland SOA 03-31-2020.pdf,
PleasantGardenLoopingProject_FlareSitePCN 1-4-2009interactive-reader-
enabled2013-06.pdf, Pleasant Garden Flare Site Impacts _REV20200401.pdf
Importance: High
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an attachment to
[e-mail]
Hi David,
Thank you for reviewing our application. Please see responses to your request below.
1) a PCN (only for the new proposed impacts); See attached PCN. We utilized the form located on the USACE
Wilmington website https://www.saw.usace.ormy.mil/Portalsl591docs/regulatorylregdocs/PermitsIPCN1-4-
2009interactive-reader-enabled2013-06.pdf [saw.usace.army. mil
l
2) This project proposes to fill wetlands for a flare site access road. The need for such access is not disputed,
however you have not demonstrated avoidance and minimization to the maximum extent practicable as
required by NWP General Conditions 23(a) and (b). For example, it appears that such impacts could be avoided
by routing the access road to the east of the Wetland 1 complex. If the preceding is not practicable (provide
explanation), wetland impacts could be further minimized by routing the proposed access road farther to the
west, thereby avoiding parallel impacts to Wetland 1. Please update project plans accordingly, or provide
justification that either of the two options are not practicable based on costs, logistics, or technology; Review of
the site indicated that the most economical location of the drive and access corridor would be down the middle
of the Parcel 135409. This parcel provides a more acceptable access point for driveway separation from the
intersection of Pleasant Garden Road and Ritters Lake Road than the property to the east. However, this route
would bisect a major portion of the wetlands. The drive was shifted as for west as possible to 1) meet NCDOT
requirements that no portion of the driveway entrance may cross beyond the property line (includes radius) and
2) provide room for some buffer of the adjoining property owner from the drive.
3) Crossing the northernmost finger of Wetland 1 requires a culvert to allow continued hydrologic connectivity
within this wetland complex; A 15-inch HDPE culvert will be installed beneath the access road to promote
connectivity. See attached plans Drawing PNG C-330-000149.
4) Please provide a statement of availability from either a mitigation bank with credits available in the 03030002
HUC , or the same from the NCDMS. See attached statement of availability from Wildlands Holdings, LLC
After your review, please let me know if require any additional information to process our request.

Sincerely,
Eric Mularski, Pws
D 704-973-6878 M 704-806-1521
hdrinc.com/follow-us fhdrinc.coml
From: Bailey, David E CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, March 30, 2020 10:24 AM
To: Mularski, Eric <[e-mail]>
Cc: Homewood, Sue <[e-mail]>
Subject: Request for Additional Information - Duke Energy Pleasant Garden Road Pipeline, Guilford County; SAW-2018-
02075
CAUTION: [EXTERNAL] This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments
unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Hi Eric, and thanks for your email. I have reviewed the information you sent. To process this request, please submit the
following:
1) a PCN (only for the new proposed impacts);
2) This project proposes to fill wetlands for a flare site access road. The need for such access is not disputed,
however you have not demonstrated avoidance and minimization to the maximum extent practicable as
required by NWP General Conditions 23(a) and (b). For example, it appears that such impacts could be avoided
by routing the access road to the east of the Wetland 1 complex. If the preceding is not practicable (provide
explanation), wetland impacts could be further minimized by routing the proposed access road farther to the
west, thereby avoiding parallel impacts to Wetland 1. Please update project plans accordingly, or provide
justification that either of the two options are not practicable based on costs, logistics, or technology;
3) Crossing the northernmost finger of Wetland 1 requires a culvert to allow continued hydrologic connectivity
within this wetland complex;
4) Please provide a statement of availability from either a mitigation bank with credits available in the 03030002
HUC , or the same from the NCDMS.
Regarding general COVID-19 information: Wilmington District Regulatory field offices are closed for visits, staff are
teleworking, and site visits are currently not allowed. Otherwise, submittals of PCNs and JD requests should continue
electronically as normal. I would not advise submitting paper copies of anything until the COVID-19 situation changes
(unless otherwise directed by the Project Manager of that project), given sporadic access to snail mail during this time.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Dave Bailey
David E. Bailey, PWS
Regulatory Project Manager
US Army Corps of Engineers
CE-SAW-RG-R

3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
Phone: [phone], Ext. 30.
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
We would appreciate your feedback on how we are performing our duties. Our automated Customer Service Survey is
located at: http://corpsmapu.usace.army.mil/cm apex/f?p=136:4:0
Thank you for taking the time to visit this site and complete the survey.