Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20061203 Ver 2_Western Wake Comment Summary on 062807 PDT Materials (7-26-07)_20070726Western Wake Regional Wastewater Management Facilities NEPA EIS Comment Summary - Purpose and Need, Plan of Study, and Scope of Analysis Table [Comments on Materials Presented at June 28, 2007 PDT Meeting] a w aro a Commissioner George Lucier, Commissioner Patrick Barnes, and William Sommers - Chatham County As you know the construction plans for the proposed effluent force main have changed from their original depiction in the Corp's PUBLIC NOTICE of June 6, 2007. A full 64" pipeline is now being planned running through an 8.2 mile course within Chatham County to the effluent discharge structure and diffuser just below the Buckhorn dam. Scope of Impacts to the resources listed in the Scope of Analysis table will be 1 Analysis Table This will require a substantial deeper placement than the initially " applied to all components of the project, including the effluent force main proposed 48 force main proposed for Phase I. and discharge structure. From our perspective it is absolutely essential that the current 15 categories be applied to the full distance of new 64" pipeline since it is deeper and contains a new configuration that needs to be carefully examined within Table I. As you know, the Chatham County representatives on the Project Delivery Team are very conscious of the long term effects of this project, particularly its potential influence on extended annexation into Chatham County especially in the land area between the eastern shore of Jordan Lake and Wake County border. Thus we believe it is of great importance to define the "project service area" with more Purpose and concision than currently included in the paragraph under "Project " Map has been added to revised Purpose and Need statement. A 2 Need Purpose. reference to the map has been added. Our proposed rewriting of the phrase beginning after "forecast demand" in the second line of the Project Purpose paragraph is as follows: "...the project service area as identified in the official map accompanying this project as approved by the US Corps of Engineers and DENR?DWQ which may is titled "Western Wake Service Area." Dan Blaisdell - NCDWQ Construction Grants and Loans Section The fifth sentence of the Harris Lake Regulatory Mandate should be replaced with the following sentence, verbatim: The NCDENR has stated in a Finding of No Significant Impact and Environmental Assessment, dated February 16, 2007 that "Any Authorizations to Purpose and Construct or other necessary permits (orders, etc.) for expansion of 3 Need the Utley Creek WWTP will include a condition stating that the treated Concur effluent must be removed from Utley Creek by the date established in the Certificate Authorizing the Towns of Cary, Apex, and Morrisville and Wake County to Increase Their Transfer of Water from the Haw River basin to the Neuse River basin under the Provisions of G.S. 143 215.221." 4 Purpose and In the sixth sentence of the Harris Lake Regulatory Mandate, please Concur Need consider changing the words "...are needed to ..." to "... will ...". Purpose and If the sentence contained in comment No. 1, above, is incorporated 5 Need into the Purpose and Need the last paragraph of the Harris Lake Concur Regulatory Mandate can be eliminated. Page 1 7/26/07 Western Wake Regional Wastewater Management Facilities NEPA EIS Comment Summary - Purpose and Need, Plan of Study, and Scope of Analysis Table [Comments on Materials Presented at June 28, 2007 PDT Meeting] a w aro The revised statement now includes a new section entitled Project Goals and Objectives. My understanding is that this section is 6 Purpose and suggested for inclusion based on previous NEPA Environmental Concur Need Impact Statements. We have no objection to leaving this Section in the Purpose and Need statement, if the Corps determines it is appropriate. Michael Hosey - US Army Corps of Engineers, Operation Support Section Page 4 - Secondary and Cumulative Environmental Impacts: Paragraph references Secondary and Cumulative Impacts Plan. Any mitigation plan would need to address measures that will be taken to avoid, minimize, and mitigate for adverse cumulative and secondary Secondary and Cumulative Master Mitigation Plans have been prepared 7 Plan of Study impacts to public lands at Jordan Lake. Suggest that measures may to address mitigation for secondary and cumulative impacts. Additional include restrictions or requirements in areas adjacent to public lands analyses will be conducted as directed by USACE and the PDT in the implemented as part of the planning and approval process for N EPA EIS. residential and commercial development and associated infrastructure facilitated by this project. See discussion of potential impacts in comments on Table 1 below. Page 5 - Project costs: Last sentence references cost of mitigation for wetlands. Suggest that statement be broadened to address cost of mitigation/compensation for adverse impacts to federal property at Understand that Operations Division will make determination on use of Jordan Lake and/or other public lands. Understand based on government property only after written request is submitted. Because previous discussions that the Partners may be able to avoid and Partners' current alignment avoids or minimizes impacts to public lands 8 Plan of Study minimize impacts to public lands at Jordan lake and their designated at Jordan Lake, project costs already include costs for collocation and uses by methods such as directional drilling and collocation with directional drilling or similar type technology. Separate mitigation costs existing cleared rights of way. The Corps Operations Division will not will not be included at this time, but Partners recognize that mitigation be able to make any determination on the approval or denial of use of may be needed if impacts to public lands at Jordan Lake are changed. government property or what mitigation/compensation may be required until we have received a written request detailing the footprin and the impacts of the proposed use. Table does not appear to fully capture areas where impacts would occur. Information in the row labeled "public lands" under the column "immediate and cumulative secondary impacts" implies that secondary impacts to public lands will only be considered within the "WRF service area" . Suggest that public lands, specifically Jordan Lake and associated facilities, outside the service area as depicted on service area maps shown during the meeting will be affected by this project. Based on our preliminary review the preferred alternatives as currently proposed the location of facilities and pipelines would have a relatively small footprint on public lands at Jordan Lake. Secondary and Cumulative Master Mitigation Plans have been prepared 9 Scope of If the preferred alternative or an alternative that completely avoids to address mitigation for secondary and cumulative impacts. Additional Analysis Table public lands at Jordan Lake is chosen the greatest impact to public analyses will be conducted as directed by USACE and the PDT in the lands would come from the development of residential and NEPA EIS. commercial properties and associated infrastructure facilitated by this waste water facility. Impacts may include expansion of existing and location of new infrastructure such as roads and utilities on government property; loss and degradation of wildlife habitat; increases in illegal encroachment onto public lands; pressure for change or elimination of existing public use and management practices such as prescribed fire, timber harvest, hunting, etc.; increases in recreational use and strain on public facilities; further degradation of water quality in the reservoir and tributaries due to sedimentation and nutrient run off. Page 2 7/26/07 Western Wake Regional Wastewater Management Facilities NEPA EIS Comment Summary - Purpose and Need, Plan of Study, and Scope of Analysis Table [Comments on Materials Presented at June 28, 2007 PDT Meeting] NiiM OM: Paul Barth - New Hill Community Association Under Land Use, the second column reads: Location of WWRWMF " Cumulative direct impacts (2nd column) address location of WWRWMF Scope of and associated facilities. After the word facilities, add and areas " and associated facilities. Land Use impacts for areas adjacent to these 10 Analysis Table adjacent to WWRWMF and associated facilities . The comment facilities will be addressed in secondary and cumulative impact analysis should now read: Location of WWRWMF and associated facilities (3rd column). and areas adjacent to WWRWMF and associated facilities. Under Wetlands, the third columns reads: Subbasins/watersheds Scoping description for Wetlands category has been rewritten to clarify Scope of containing and downstream of the project WRF service area. Before " " that the EIS will address the subbasin/watershed containing the project 11 Analysis Table upstream/ . The comment should now the word downstream, add service area and downstream of the discharge. See maps for read: Subbasins/watersheds containing and upstream/downstream of clarfication. the project WRF service area. Under Surface Water, the third columns reads: Subbasins/watersheds containing and downstream of the project Scoping description for Surface Water category has been rewritten to 12 Scope of WRF service area (surface water). Before the word downstream, add clarify that the EIS will address the subbasin/watershed containing the Analysis Table "upstream/". The comment should now read: Subbasins/watersheds project service area and downstream of the discharge. See maps for containing and upstream/downstream of the project WRF service clarfication. area (surface water). Under Groundwater Resources, the second column reads: Location Cumulative direct impacts (2nd column) address location of WWRWMF Scope of of WWRWMF and associated facilities. After the word facilities, add " " and associated facilities. Groundwater resource impacts for areas 13 Analysis Table and areas adjacent to WWRWMF and associated facilities . The adjacent to these facilities will be addressed in secondary and comment should now read: Location of WWRWMF and associated cumulative impact analysis (3rd column). facilities and areas adjacent to WWRWMF and associated facilities. Under Forest Resources, the second column reads: Location of Cumulative direct impacts (2nd column) address location of WWRWMF Scope of WWRWMF and associated facilities. After the word facilities, add " " ' and associated facilities. Forest resource impacts for areas adjacent to 14 Analysis Table and areas adjacent to WWRWMF and associated facilities . The these facilities will be addressed in secondary and cumulative impact comment should now read: Location of WWRWMF and associated analysis (3rd column). facilities and areas adjacent to WWRWMF and associated facilities. Under Shellfish or Fish and their Habitats, the second column reads: Subbasin(s)/Watersheds(s) containing WWRWMF and associated " Scoping description for Shellfish and Fish category has been rewritten to Scope of facilities. After the word facilities, add and areas adjacent to " clarify that the EIS will address the subbasin/watershed containing the 15 Analysis Table WWRWMF and associated facilities . The comment should now project service area and downstream of the discharge. See maps for read: Subbasin(s)/Watersheds(s) containing WWRWMF and clarfication. associated facilities and areas adjacent to WWRWMF and associated facilities. Under Shellfish or Fish and their Habitats, the third columns reads: Scoping description for Shellfish and Fish category has been rewritten to Scope of Subbasins/watersheds containing and downstream of the project " clarify that the EIS will address the subbasin/watershed containing the 16 Analysis Table WRF service area. Before the word downstream, add upstream/g project service area and downstream of the discharge. See maps for The comment should now read: Subbasins/watersheds containing clarfication. and upstream/downstream of the project WRF service area. Under Introduction of Toxic Substances, the second column reads: Location of WWRWMF and associated facilities. After the word Cumulative direct impacts (2nd column) address location of WWRWMF 17 Scope of facilities, add "and areas adjacent to WWRWMF and associated and associated facilities. Toxic substances impacts for areas adjacent Analysis Table facilities". The comment should now read: Location of WWRWMF to these facilities will be addressed in secondary and cumulative impact and associated facilities and areas adjacent to WWRWMF and analysis (3rd column). associated facilities. Add another Resource - Community Churches, Playgrounds, and Cemeteries and churches will be covered under the cultural resources 18 Scope of Cemeteries. Second and Third columns should read: Location of category (Areas of Archaeological or Historic Value). Playgrounds will Analysis Table WWRWMF and associated facilities and areas adjacent to be covered under the recreational resources category (Public Lands and WWRWMF and associated facilities. Scenic, Recreational, and State Natural Areas). Page 3 7/26/07