20201305 Ver 1_401 Application_20201026

DWR
mrlslon of Water Resources
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
October 26, 2020 Ver 3.3
Initial Review
Has this project met the requirements for acceptance in to the review process?*
r Yes
r No
Is this project a public transportation project?*
C Yes r No
Change only if needed.
BIMS # Assigned
20201305
Is a payment required for this project?*
r No payment required
r Fee received
r Fee needed - send electronic notification
Reviewing Office *
Raleigh Regional Office - [phone]
Information for Initial Review
1a. Name of project:
Line 5 Exposed Main Remediation Project
1a. Who is the Primary Contact?*
Eric Mularski
1b. Primary Contact Email:*
[e-mail]
Date Submitted
10/26/2020
Nearest Body of Water
Tributary to Mill Creek
Basin
Neuse
Water Classification
Class C; NWS
Site Coordinates
Latitude:
35.303863
Pre -Filing Meeting Information
ID#
20201305
Pre -fling Meeting or Request Date*
9/25/2020
Longitude:
-78.335824
Attach documentation of Pre -Filing Meeting Request here:*
DWR Pre -Filing Meeting Request Form.pdf
Pre-Filing_Line5_20201026. pdf
A. Processing Information
Version#*
1
What amout is owed?*
IT $240.00
r $570.00
Select Project Reviewer*
Stephanie Goss:eads\sagoss
1c. Primary Contact Phone:*
[phone]
Version
1
55.27KB
65.8KB
County (or Counties) where the project is located:

Johnston
Is this a NCDMS Project
r Yes r No
Is this project a public transportation project?*
r Yes r No
1a. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
W Section 404 Permit (wetlands, streams and waters, Clean Water Act)
r Section 10 Permit (navigable waters, tidal waters, Rivers and Harbors Act)
1b. What types) of permits) do you wish to seek authorization?
W Nationwide Permit (NWP)
r Regional General Permit (RGP)
r Standard (IP)
1c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
r Yes r No
Nationwide Permit (NWP) Number: 12 - Utility Lines
NWP Numbers (for multiple NWPS):
'Id. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWR:
W 401 Water Quality Certification - Regular r 401 Water Quality Certification - Express
r Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit r Riparian Buffer Authorization
r Individual Permit
le. Is this notification solelyfor the record because written approval is not required?
For the record onlyfor DWR401 Certification: r Yes r No
For the record onlyfor Corps Permit: r Yes r No
1f. Is this an after -the -fact permit application?*
r Yes r No
1g. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
r Yes r No
1g. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
r Yes r No
Acceptance Letter Attachment
1 h. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties?
r Yes r No
1j. Is the project located in a designated trout watershed?
r Yes r No
B. Applicant Information
Ild. Who is applying for the permit?
r Owner W Applicant (other than owner)
le. Is there an Agent/Consultant for this project?*
r Yes r No
2. Owner Information
2a. Name(s) on recorded deed:
NIA- Existing Utility Line Right-of-way through Parcel ID: 02K17027A and #02K17011
2b. Deed book and page no.:
2c. Responsible party:
Piedmont Natural Gas (P.O.0 Kelsey Pace)
2d.Address

Street Address
4720 Piedmont Row Drive
Address tine 2
aty
Charlotte
Postal / Zip Code
28210
2e. Telephone Number:
[phone]
2g. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
3. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
3a. Name:
Kelsey Pace
3b. Business Name:
Piedmont Natural Gas
3c.Address
Street Address
4720 Piedmont Row Drive
Address tine 2
City
Charlotte
Postal / Zip Code
28210
3d. Telephone Number:
[phone]
3f. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
4. Agent/Consultant (if applicable)
4a. Name:
Eric Mularski
4b. Business Name:
HDR
4c.Address
Street Address
440 S. Church Street
Address Line 2
City
Charlotte
Postal / Zip (ode
28202
4d. Telephone Number:
[phone]
4f. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
Agent Authorization Letter*
002_Line5LineAgentAuthorization_sig ned.pdf
C. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Project Information
1b. Subdivision name:
(i appropriate)
1c. Nearest municipality/ town:
Newton Grove
State / Ravine / Rion
N
Country
United States
21'. Fax Number:
Slate / Rwince / Region
NC
Country
United States
3e. Fax Number:
State / Rmince / Region
NC
Country
United States
4e. Fax Number:
111.26KB
2. Project Identification

2a. Property Identification Number:
2b. Property size:
2c. Project Address
Street Address
Address Line 2
city
Postal / Zip Code
3. Surface Waters
3a. Name of the nearest body of water to proposed project:*
Tributary to Mill Creek
3b. Water Resources Classification of nearest receiving water:*
Class C; NWS
3c. What river basin(s) is your project located in?*
Neuse
3d. Please provide the 12-digit HUC in which the project is located.
HUC-030202011305
4. Project Description and History
State / Rovince / Fegim
Country
4a. 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 site is primarily located within an existing Piedmont Natural Gas right of way. The maintained gas pipeline easement is largely comprised of early successional woody, herbaceous,
and vine species. An environmental survey revealed the presence of several tributaries of Mill Creek and their adjacent wetlands. Land use in the vicinity of the proposed Project
consists of rural residential, agricultural areas, and undeveloped forested lands.
4b. Have Corps permits or DWR certifications been obtained for this project (including all prior phases) in the past?*
r Yes r No r Unknown
4d. Attach an 8 1/2 X 11 excerpt from the most recent version of the USGS topographic map indicating the location of the project site. (for DWR)
004_Figure 1_20200813.pdf
1.2MB
4e. Attach an 8 1/2 X 11 excerpt from the most recent version of the published County NRCS Soil Survey map depicting the project site. (for DWR)
006_NRCSmap15.pdf 1.2MB
4f. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
1.35
4g. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams on the property:
Approximately 187 linear feet of Stream 1 (Tributary to Mill Creek) and 191 linear feet of Stream 2
(Tributary to Mill Creek) have been identified within the property (Study Area).
4h. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:*
Line 5 (existing 10-inch diameter pipe) is currently exposed at its crossing with a tributary to Mill Creek which was found and identified during post Hurricane Florence patrols. The
project was created to retire and replace approximately 250 linear feet of 10-inch diameter natural gas pipeline with a new segment of 10-inch pipeline between Almon Road (SR 1191)
and Mill Creek Church Road.
4i. Describe the overall project in detail, including indirect impacts and the type of equipment to be used:*
The proposed remediation project includes the removal and replacement of approximately 250 linear feet of 10-inch diameter natural gas pipeline. The abandoned pipeline will be
excavated, removed, and replaced with new pipeline that will installed by open cut methods immediately to the north of the existing line and buried at least 5 feet belowthe existing
tributaries to Mill Creek. The Project Will include an offloading/turnaround area near Almond Road, 20-foot wide proposed access road adjacent to the existing right of way, and
temporary turn around area east of the tributary to Mill Creek. Temporary bridges will be installed over the tributaries to Mill Creek and timber mats will be placed in low areas
throughout the project area. See the Project Narrative and Notes on the Legends and Notes sheet of the attached plans for further details.
4j. Please upload project drawings for the proposed project.
007_90PercentDesign_wdthlmpacts.pdf 23.87MB
5. Jurisdictional Determinations
5a. Have the wetlands or streams been delineated on the propertyor proposed impact areas?*
r Yes
r No
Comments:
HDR conducted a field survey on May 28, 2020 and follow up survey on July 23, 2020 to investigate
the Study Area for potential impacts to natural resources, including wetlands and jurisdictional
waters of the U.S. regulated under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA). The survey was
conducted according to the methodologies and guidance described in the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (USACE) 1987 Wetland Delineation Manual, USACE Post-Rapanos guidance (USACE
1987), the 2012 USACE Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Regional Supplement (Version 2.0) (USACE
2012), and the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) Methodology for Identification of
Intermittent and Perennial Streams and Their Origins.
5b. If the Corps made a jurisdictional determination, what type of determination was made?*
r Preliminary r Approved r Not Verified r Unknown r WA
O Unknown

Corps AID Number:
5c. If 5a is yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known):
Agency/Consultant Company:
Other:
5dl. Jurisdictional determination upload
01_Line5_PJD_Form.pdf
02_Figure 1_ProjectVicinityMap.pdf
03_Figure 2_NRCSWebsoilSurvey.pdf
04_NRCSmapl5.pdf
O5_Figure 3_t1SFWS_NWl.pdf
06_Figure 4_FEMA.pdf
07_Figure 5_DelineationMap.pdf
08_PNG_MLV5_DataSheets_20200605.pdf
6. Future Project Plans
Jackson Garvey and Sara Easterly
HDR
117.62KB
385.56KB
357.39KB
1.2MB
356.69KB
333.64KB
1.79MB
331.86KB
6a. Is this a phased project?*
r Yes r No
Are any other NWP(s), regional general permit(s), or individual permits(s) used, or intended to be used, to authorize any part of the proposed project or related activity?
D. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1a. Where are the impacts associated with your project? (check all that apply):
W Wetlands W Streams -tributaries
r Open Waters r Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
V Buffers
U
2a1 Reason (?)
2b. Impact type * M
2c. Type of W.
2d. W. name *
2e. Forested *
2f. Type of
Jurisdicition*(?)
2g. Impact
area*
W1
Clearing/Matting
T
mland Hardwood Forest
ff
Wetland 1
Yes
Both
0.060
(acres)
W2
Clearing/Matting
T
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Wetland 1
Yes
Both
0.150
(acres)
W3
Clearing/Open Cut
P
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Wetland 1
Yes
Both
0.020
(acres)
W4
Excavation/Open Cut
T
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Wetland 1
�N.
Both
0.110
(acres)
WS
Fill (Timber Mats)
T
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Wetland 1
�No
Both
0.090
(acres)
W6
Fill (Timber Mats)
T
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Wetland 1
�No
Both
0.090
(acres)
W7
Excavation/Open Cut
T
ff.mland Hardwood Forest
Wetland 1
�N.
Both ]0.080
(acres)
W8
Clearing/Open Cut
P
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Wetland 1
Yes
Both
0.030
(Maintained Right -of-
(ac es)
Way)
2g. Total Temporary Wetland Impact 2g. Total Permanent Wetland Impact
0.580 0.050
2g. Total Wetland Impact
0.630
2h. Comments:
The proposed project will not result in a net loss of wetlands as no permanent fill is proposed. Permanent impacts will be a result of the conversion of
forested wetlands to maintain the existing PNG pipeline easement.
3. Stream Impacts

❑ 3a. Reason for impact (?) 3b.lmpact type * 3c. Type of impact* 3d. S. name * �3e. Stream Type * W. Type of 3g. S. width * 3h. Impact
(?) Jurisdiction* length*
S1
De -watering and Open Cut
Temporary
Excavation
Tributary to Mill Creek
Perennial
Both
10
Average (feet)
60
(lir�rfeet)
34
De -watering and Open Cut
Temporary
Excavation
Tributary to Mill Creek
Perennial
Both
3
Average (feet)
60
(linearfeet)
31. Total jurisdictional ditch impact in square feet:
0
31. Total permanent stream impacts:
0
31. Total stream and ditch impacts:
120
31. Total temporary stream impacts:
120
3j. Comments:
Temporary impacts to ebsting stream channels (tributaries to Mill Creek) are associated within the excavation of the exposed Line 5 gas pipeline and
open cut and de -watering (pump around) for the installation of new 10-inch pipeline. The proposed impacts are temporary in nature and will not result
in a net loss of stream bed.
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWR)
6a. Project is in which protect basirl
Check all that apply.
V Meuse r Tar -Pamlico
r Catawba r Randleman
r Goose Creek r Jordan Lake
r Other
6b. Impact Type
6c. Per or Temp
6d. Stream name
6e. Buffer mitigation required?
6f. Zone 1 impact
6g. Zone 2 impact
Clearing (temporary construction access)
T
Tributary to Mill Creek
No
900
610
Clearing (temporary construction access)
T
Tributary to Mill Creek
No
785
540
Clearing (maintained right of way)
P
Tributary to Mill Creek
Yes
440
210
Clearing (maintained right of way)
P
Tributary to Mill Creek
Yes
260
175
6h. Total buffer impacts:
Zone 1 Zone 2
Total Temporary impacts: 1,685.00 1,150.00
Zone 1
Zone 2
Total Permanent impacts: 700.00
385.00
Zone 1
Zone 2
Total combined buffer impacts: 2,385.00
1,535.00
61. Comments:
Permanent impacts will be associated with the tree removal activities within the 50-foot maintenance right of way. Temporary riparian buffers impacts
Will be associated with tree clearing impacts required for the construction workspace north of the proposed gas pipeline excavation and installation.
This area will not be permanently maintained and will be allowed to re -vegetate naturally after construction.
Supporting Documentation
PNG_Line 5 Project_ RiparianBufferlmpactDrawing.pdf 3.07MB
FE, Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
la. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing the project:
An onsite delineation was conducted to identify jurisdictional surface waters within the Study Area. Turn around and lay down areas were designed to
avoid impacts to ebsting jurisdictional features. Temporary construction easement width through the existing wetlands was minimized to greatest extent
possible in order to safely remove and replace the ebsting Line 5 pipeline. The new pipeline has been designed and will be installed perpendicular to
the Tributary to Mill Creek. An Erosion and Sediment Control plan was developed to project adjacent surface waters from sediment runoff during
construction.

1b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques:
• Stream and wetland crossings will be installed in the dry within a 24-hour period during low flow conditions. Water will be pumped through a sediment
filter bag before it is returned to the stream.
• Local weather conditions will be monitored, to the extent possible, to avoid high flow events during and immediately following construction.
Excavation of the trench line within the stream boundaries will be conducted from the top of bank on either side to prevent trench spills to be dropped
into the existing channel.
• Where possible, the top 6 to 12 inches of streambed substrate will be stockpiled separately from the subgrade material and kept saturated during
the pipeline installation. After pipe installation is complete, the stockpiled substrate will be replaced on the bottom of the stream channel and set at its
pre -construction streambed elevation.
Temporary bridges will be installed over the tributaries to Mill Creek to avoid impacts to the existing stream bed.
Temporary timber matting will be installed in wetlands for construction access minimize disturbance to existing wetlands.
Pumps shall be obtained and staged prior to executing the stream crossing. Back-up pumps shall be kept on -site in case of primary pump(s)
malfunction or to control high flows. All pumps will be placed in secondary -containment for the duration of the installation. In the event of unforeseen
weather (i.e., rain) during installation, pumps near the crossing will be monitored 24-hours a day until normal flow conditions return.
Removal of in -stream control devices will be conducted in such a manner as to allow a gradual re -introduction of flowing water into the channel.
• Any disturbed stream banks associated with the removal of the exposed pipe and installation of the new gas pipepline will be sloped back and
seeded with a native riparian seed mix Coir matting will be installed to anchor the seeding and stabilize the banks.
• Trees and shrub in wetlands and riparian areas will be hand cleared. Stumps shall be grubbed as needed to the install the proposed 12-inch pipe as
needed only. The remaining stumps will be cut off at grade level.
Wetlands will be re -graded to their pre -construction contours and seeded with a native wetland seed mix; no heavy mulching will occur in wetlands.
• Erosion & Sediment Control devices will be installed according to the most recent version of the "North Carolina Sediment and Erosion Control
Planning Design Manual" and approved by the local governing authority. All implemented measures for best management practices (BMPs) will be
inspected on a routine basis and operation and maintenance of devices will be in compliance with water quality standards.
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?
r' Yes r No
2b. If this project DOES NOT require Compensatory Mitigation, explain why:
Permanent wetland impacts (clearing) do not exceed 1/10 acre. According to Nationwide Permit General Conditions 23 (c), For losses of 1110 acre or less that require a pre -
construction notification, the district engineer may determine on a case -by -case basis that compensatory mitigation is required to ensure that the activity results in only minimal adverse
environmental effects.
F. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWR)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
r Yes f No
What type of SCM are you providing?
r Level Spreader
r Vegetated Conveyance (lower SHWT)
r Wetland Swale (higher SMNT)
r Other SCM that removes minimum 30 % nitrogen
W Proposed project will not create concentrated stormwater flow through the buffer
Diffuse Flow Documentation
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. Is this a NCDOT project subject to compliance with NCDOT's Individual NPDES permit NCS000250?*
r• Yes r No
2b. Does this project meet the requirements for low density projects as defined in 15ANCAC 02H .1003(2)?
r Yes r No
Comments:
G. Supplementary Information U
1. Environmental Documentation
1a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the use of public (federal/state) land?*
r Yes r No
2. Violations (DWR Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWR Water Quality Certification Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 211.1300), or DWR Surface Water or Wetland Standards or
Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)? *
r Yes r No

3. Cumulative Impacts (DWR Requirement)
3a. Will this project result in additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?*
r Yes r No
3b. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
This project is privately funded and will not require a cumulative impact analysis. Best management practices will be deployed through the duration of
the project. The completed project is not anticipated to result in incremental adverse effects to downstream water quality.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWR Requirement)
4a. Is sewage disposal required by DWR for this project?*
rYes r Nor WA
5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or habitat?*
r Yes r No
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act impacts?*
r Yes r- No
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
Raleigh
5d. Is another Federal agency involved?*
r Yes r No r^ Unknown
5e. Is this a DOT project located within Division's 1-8?
r Yes r No
5f. Will you cut any trees in order to conduct the work in waters of the U.S.?
r Yes r- No
5g. Does this project involve bridge maintenance or removal?
r Yes r No
Sh. Does this project involve the construction/installation of a wind turbine(s)?*
r Yes r No
5i. Does this project involve (1) blasting, and/or (2) other percussive activities that will be conducted by machines, such as jackhammers, mechanized pile drivers, etc.?
r Yes r No
5j. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical Habitat?
Program's (NCNHP) Data Explore database for protected species distribution and proximity to the Project Area was conducted (see attached Project
Report [NCNHDE-12068]). The USFWS's database revealed that there is no active critical habitat for federally protected species within the Project
Area. The resulting NCNHP Data Explorer Project Report indicated that no records for rare species or important natural communities, natural areas,
and/or conservation/managed areas occur within the Project Area. However, two natural areas and three managed areas were reported within a one
mile radius of the Project Area (See attached).
Potential habitat for the yellow lance is found the tributary to Mill Creek tributary. A species survey has not been conducted by certified biologists.
Suitable habitat for Michauxis sumac exists within the Project Area, however, no individuals were located during a survey conducted by qualified
biologists on May 28th, 2020.
No suitable habitat was located within the Project Area for red -cockaded woodpecker or bald eagle. Impacts to the federally listed species for Johnston
County are not anticipated. Correspondence (dated September 9, 2020) was sent to the USFWS requesting comments on any possible issues that
may emerge with respect to endangered species, migratory birds, or other resources from the proposed construction activities.
See attached correspondence from the USFWS dated 10/6/2020
Consultation Documentation Upload
20201006_LTRSNT_FWS_HDR_PNGLine5E)posedMainRemediation.pdf 164.89KB
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as an Essential Fish Habitat?*
r Yes r No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact an Essential Fish Habitat?*
hftps://wm.habitat.noaa.gov/protection/efh/efhmapper/
7. Historic or 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 status?*
r Yes r No
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?*

No architectural structures or archaeological artifacts were observed or noted during the preliminary survey of the site on May 28, 2020. Desktop data
reviews of the National Park Service NRHP GIS Public Dataset and the NC State Historic Preservation Office (NCSHPO) HPOWEB GIS Web Service
have been completed. There were no historic structures or National Register listed structures identified within the Study Area. A National Register
Historic District (Bentonville Battlefield JT1355) was identified within 1,000 feet of the Study Area and is located due east of the Project.
Correspondence (September 9, 2020) was sent to the NCSHPO requesting information on historictcultural resources that may be impacted by the
proposed project (see request attached).
To date, not response has been received.
7c. Historic or Prehistoric Information Upload
SHPO_PNG_Line_ConsultationLetter_20200929.pdf 2.35MB
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain?*
r Yes r No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
The proposed activities located within the existing floodplain are temporary and will not result in a rise in the existing designated floodplain elevation.
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?*
FEMA map number 3720158600K and 3720250600K
Miscellaneous
Comments
Miscellaneous attachments not previously requested.
Signature u
W By checking the box and signing below, I certify that:
• The project proponent hereby certifies that all information contained herein is true, accurate, and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief; and
• The project proponent hereby requests that the certifying authority review and take action on this CWA 401 certification request within the applicable reasonable period of time.
• I have given true, accurate, and complete information on this form;
• I agree that submission of this PCN form is a "transaction" subject to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
• I agree to conduct this transaction by electronic means pursuant to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
• I understand that an electronic signature has the same legal effect and can be enforced in the same way as a written signature; AND
• I intend to electronically sign and submit the PCN form.
Full Name:
Eric Mularski
Signature
a& 1 A�Me 6
Date
10/26/2020

AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
I, Kelsey Pace, hereby certify that I have authorized Eric Mularski, representing HDR
Engineering, Inc. of the Carolinas, to act on my behalf and take all actions necessary to
the processing and issuance of the Section 404 Nationwide Permit, Section 401 Water
Quality Certification, and USACE Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Request
associated with the Line 5 Exposed Main Remediation Project located in Johnston County,
North Carolina.
We hereby certify that the information submitted in this application is true and accurate to
the best of our knowledge.
Kelsey Pace
Applicant's Name
Kelse Digitally signed
Y by Kelsey Pace
Pace Date: 2020.09.16
14:48:43-04'00'
Applicant's Signature
9/ 16/2020
Date
hdrinc.conn
440 South Church Street Suites 900 & 1000, Charlotte, NC 28202-2075
T 704.338.6700 F 704.338.6760
Eric Mularski
Agent's Name
Agent's Signature
8/19/2020
Date

Appendix 2 - PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (PJD) FORM
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PJD:
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PJD: Eric Mularskl, HDR (on behalf of Duke Energy), 440 S. Church Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
D. PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
(USE THE TABLE BELOW TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE AQUATIC RESOURCES AND/OR
AQUATIC RESOURCES AT DIFFERENT SITES)
State: NC County/parish/borough:. Johnston City: Newton Grove
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format):
Lat.: 35.303863 Long.:-78.335824
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Tributary to Mill Creek
E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
❑ Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
❑■ Field Determination. Date(s): May 28 and July 23 2020
TABLE OF AQUATIC RESOURCES IN REVIEW AREA WHICH "MAY BE" SUBJECT TO REGULATORY
JURISDICTION.
Site
number
Latitude
(decimal
degrees)
Longitude
(decimal
degrees)
Estimated amount
of aquatic resource
in review area
(acreage and linear
feet, if applicable)
Type of aquatic
resource (i.e., wetland
vs. non -wetland
waters)
Geographic authority
to which the aquatic
resource "may be"
subject (i.e., Section
404 or Section 10/404)
W1
35.303702
-78.336136
1.35 acres
wetland
Section 404
S 1
35.303844
-78.336245
187 linear feet
non -wetland waters
Section 404
S2
35.303977
-78.335957
191 linear feet
non -wetland waters
Section 404

1) The Corps of Engineers believes that there may be jurisdictional aquatic resources in
the review area, and the requestor of this PJD is hereby advised of his or her option
to request and obtain an approved JD (AJD) for that review area based on an
informed decision after having discussed the various types of JDs and their
characteristics and circumstances when they may be appropriate.
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 AJD for the
activity, the permit applicant is hereby made aware that: (1) the permit applicant has
elected to seek a permit authorization based on a PJD, which does not make an
official determination of jurisdictional aquatic resources; (2) the applicant has the
option to request an AJD before accepting the terms and conditions of the permit
authorization, and that basing a permit authorization on an AJD could possibly result
in less compensatory mitigation being required or different special conditions; (3) 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) 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) undertaking any activity in reliance upon the subject
permit authorization without requesting an AJD constitutes the applicant's acceptance
of the use of the PJD; (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 PJD constitutes agreement that all aquatic resources in the
review area affected in any way by that activity will be treated as jurisdictional, and
waives 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 AJD or a PJD, the JD will be processed
as soon as practicable. Further, an AJD, 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. If, during an administrative appeal, it
becomes appropriate to make an official determination whether geographic
jurisdiction exists over aquatic resources in the review area, or to provide an official
delineation of jurisdictional aquatic resources in the review area, the Corps will
provide an AJD to accomplish that result, as soon as is practicable. This PJD finds
that there "may be" waters of the U.S. and/or that there "may be" navigable waters of
the U.S. on the subject review area, and identifies all aquatic features in the review
area that could be affected by the proposed activity, based on the following
information:

SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for PJD (check all that apply)
Checked items should be included in subject file. Appropriately reference sources
below where indicated for all checked items:
■❑ Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor:
Map:Delineation Map
0 Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor.
❑ Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report. Rationale:
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:
❑ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas: https://www.usgs.gov/core-science-systems/ngp/national-hydrography
0 USGS NHD data.
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
■❑ U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:
1:24,000 Newton Grove North
■❑ Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: hops://websoilsurvey.nros.usda.gov/app/
■❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name: https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/
❑ State/local wetland inventory map(s):
FEMA/FIRM maps: https://www.fema.gov/flood-maps/tools-resources/flood-map-products/national-flood-hazard-layer EN]
❑ 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: .(National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929)
■❑ Photographs: ❑ Aerial (Name & Date): http://goto.arcgisonline.com/maps/World_lmagery
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 jurisdictional
determinations.
Signature and date of
Regulatory staff member
completing PJD
Digitally signed by Mularski, Eric
u a rs I , r I C Date 2020.08.19 09 52 24-04'00'
Signature and date of
person requesting PJD
(REQUIRED, unless obtaining
the signature is impracticable)'
' Districts may establish timeframes for requestor to return signed PJD forms. If the requestor does not respond
within the established time frame, the district may presume concurrence and no additional follow up is
necessary prior to finalizing an action.

LEGEND:
Study Area F -
Study Area
y DATA SOURCE: http://goto.arcgisonline.com/ '
maps/USA _Topo_Maps
�-
CAM
L ptd5 _
0 Feet 2,000 f i
0 Miles 5
com
— .. ._ fFr — t LUf4
min
f _ Study Area f MUTE
WT WE)
Ka.�aY.vr
~4\ / Nw�if'
L _ y •i ttx
sw
i
Ov
f
_ I
i
LINE 5 EXPOSED MAIN REMEDIATION PROJECT
3S PROJECT VICINITY MAP/USGS TOPOGRAPHIC QUADRANGLE
FIGURE 1
PAIN: IICLTSMAINIGIS_OATAIGISIPROJECTS%3872_OUKEENERGY119226536_PNG LINE 5 EXPOSED MAINI].2_WORK_IN_PROGRESSIMAP_OOCSIMXOIWORKINGIPJOIFIGUREIPROJECWICINIWMAP.MXO-USER : EMULARSK - OATS: W1912020 PJD REQUEST

UcC
C. aB
Bb NOA FaA
NoB UcB
_
LEGEND
GeD WaB
Study Area
WaB
Ra
GOA
Wa6
UcC
BnA
_
GeD
NRCS Soils
ucc
WaB
Hydric (100%)
NoA
Bb
Hydric (66 to 99%)
RaMaA
"GoA
Hydric (1 to 32%)
GDA
NOB Wag
Not Hydric
A
+'
Ra Ly Ra
NoA
Water
CDC
Ly
r�
'f
WaB
GOA
NoA
LY
Ra Ra
Ra
NoA
0 Feet 2,000
WaB FaA
NoA GOA
DATA SOURCE: https://vvebsoilsurvey.nres.usda
I BnA
UDC
GeD
.gov/app/M
nA ..;
_ _
- .
Ly
NoA
WaB NoA
Ly
BnA
Study Area
;:
Ra
NoA
WaB
` BnA
GOA
NoA Ra
GOA
GeBUcB
Ud UcB
GeB
AuA
Wh
Ra
UcC
BnA
WaB
NoA
Pn
71V
-
Tn
NoA
LY GOA
GeB
LY
W GeD
Pn
GeD
ucC NoB
_
f4oA LY
UcB
GeD
BnA
GOA
BnA
Bb
NoA
NoA
AuA
WaB
GeB UcC
UcC
Ra BnA UcC
GOA Tn
NoB BnA NoA
Ud W
NoA NoA
GOA
GOA
Ra LY
UcB
BnA
BnA
NOB LY
GOA Ra
GeB
Wag
Ra
NoB
GeD
Bb
Ud WaB
NoA NoA
go WaB
W�A-
C
Ra Ly
Ly
RaRa
-
NoA
efi
NGe
NoA
L
GOAy
NoA
CDC
Ln
GOA
NoA
CDC NoA
Ra
GOA
LyGtC
-- Ly. ..
PATH: IICLTSMAINIGIS_OATAIGISIPROJECTSI3872_OUKEENERGY110226516_PNG LINE 5 EXPOSED MAINI].2_ WORK _IN_PROGRESSIMAP_OOCSIMXOIWORKINGIPJOIFIGURE2 NRCSWEBSOILSURVEY.MXO - USER: EMULARSK - DATE: 811912020 PJD REQUEST

LEGEND
Study Area
USGS National Hydrography Dataset t ;�
USFWS National Wetland Inventory
0 Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland 4.
0 Freshwater Pond
Riverine
0 Feet 1,000 A
DATA SOURCE: https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/,
https://www. usgs.gov/core-science-systems/ngp/national-hydrography
Study Area Or
i
l -
y 1
�F
f { fit
• 4 • V
�f T
J y
i�
MAIPiedmont LINE 5 EXPOSED MAIN REMEDIATION PROJECT
Natural Gas UFWS NWI AND USGS NHD
Energy that shows' FIGURE 3
PAIN: IICLTSMAINIG I S_DATAIG I SIPROJECTS10812_DUKEENERGY110225505- PING LINE 5 EXPOSED MAI 4I7.2_WORK-IN-PROGRESSIMAP_DOCSIMXDIWORKINGIPJDIFIGURE 2USFWS_NWI.MXD-USER: EMULARSK - DATE: 811912020 PJD REQUEST

LEGEND
Study Area
FEMA Flood Hazard Zone AE
0 FIRM Panel �+ #
f
0 Feet 1,000
i' ` T5
DATA SOURCE: https://msc.fema.gov/portal/home - ���► i 4
Study Ai
Mi
y 1
00 4W
y,
F
A { -�
AA
'.
011IPiedmont LINE 5 EXPOSED MAIN REMEDIATION PROJECT
Natural Gas FEMA NATIONAL FLOOD HAZARD LAYER
Energy that shows' FIGURE 4
PAIN: IICLTSMAINIGI S_DATAIGISIPROJECTS10812_DUKEENERGY110225505_PRO LINE 5 EXPOSED MAINI7.2_WORK_IN_PROGRESSIMAP DOCSIMXDIWORKINGIPJDIFIGURE 4_FEMA.MXD - USER: EMULARSK - DATE: 811912020 PJD REQUEST

U
M a
C
_a®
m
aO
> m
- a
N C
T �
a �
> ❑ ❑
a
� -O (C6
� m
d
T
N
� amok
(n W
Q7
LL ❑ 5
aa
a
••o
aim®EQE
we
so
0
•� i
tn
c: 3
C 2
-on�+s
N ra .
azI

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: - 2 - Project(Site:
Evaluator: � e County:
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent Stream Determination (circle one)
if>_ 19 or e+enmal if>:'30' Ephemeral Intermittent Perennial
Latitude: 3-5. 3G27 I?
Longitude: -')'Q N�_ � r 170
Other
e.g. Quad Name:
A. Geomor holo (Subtotal ` j Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1 a. Continuity of channel bed and bank 0
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg 0
1
F2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool se uence 0
12
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate 0
1
2
5. Active/relict floodplain 0
01
2T]3
6. Depositional bars or benches (V
1
2
7. Recent alluvial deposits
1
2
8- Headcuts i1
2
3
9. Grade control (01
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley 1 0
0.5
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel No =. 0
a
Yes = 3
o.uue�a� V­.. aie uu< <a.eu, see uiswssiuns in manual
B. Hvdroloov (Subtotal =
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
i
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
•Yes = 3
%_,. 0IU1Ugy tJULnufal = f
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (nale diversity and abundance)
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
1
2
3
22. Fish
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0.5
1
1.5
. Agae0
L
0.5
1
1.5
Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1%5 Other = 0
"pgrennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
i. Notes: ---- - _-• 1
Sketch: 12% g f
swa
sib
C

NC DWO Stream frientifiration Form Versinn 4.1 1 ,,
Date: O
Project/Site: L
Latitude:
Evaluator: .G 4
County: nr
Longitude:.. ���
Total Points:
is at intermittent � �
Stream Determination (circle an ey
Ephemeral Intermittent;P T"n
�
Other
e.g. Quad Name:
f2:19Strea
if > 19 or perennial if ? 30'
peren caif
A. Geornor halo (Subtotal =
Absent
Weak
Moderate
St ng
13. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
3
3_ In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
3
8_ Headcuts
A
1
2
3
9. Grade control
C0
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
11. Second or greater order channel
AEo - 0
Yes = 3
anmciai oncnes are not rarea; see aiscussions in manuai
B_ Hvdroloov fSuhtotaf = err ]
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
2
3
14. Leaf litter
U1
0.5
0'
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
-1-5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1 �_
1
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
( Yes = 3
U. tilaloav (Subtotal = *<7 1
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22. Fish
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0.5
1
1.5
24_ Amphibians
d
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 Other = 0
"perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual-
Notes, -
Sketch: 1 f WAWA -5 - 7
tau- VAW

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers OMB Control #: 0710-xxxx, Exp: Pending
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT:
See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R (Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a)
Project/Site: PNG MLV 5 City/County: Johnston Sampling Date: 5/28/20
Applicant/Owner: PNG State: NC Sampling Point: DP1
Investigator(s): J. Garvey, R.Dugger Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 2
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 133A Lat: 35.303576 Long:-78.336345 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: GeD - Gilead sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes NWI classification: None
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS —Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
—Surface Soil Cracks (136)
_Surface Water (Al) _Aquatic
Fauna (1313)
_Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
X High Water Table (A2) _
Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
X Drainage Patterns (1310)
X Saturation (A3) _Hydrogen
Sulfide Odor (Cl)
_Moss Trim Lines (1316)
_Water Marks (131) _Oxidized
Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
_Sediment Deposits (132) _Presence
of Reduced Iron (C4)
_Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_Drift Deposits (133) _Recent
Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_Algal Mat or Crust (134) _Thin
Muck Surface (C7)
X Geomorphic Position (D2)
_Iron Deposits (135) _Other
(Explain in Remarks)
_ShallowAquitard (D3)
—Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
X FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Water -Stained Leaves (139)
Sphagnum Moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes X No
Depth (inches): 6
Saturation Present? Yes X No
Depth (inches): 0
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116-2-SG, JUL 2018 Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: DP1
Absolute Dominant
Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )
% Cover Species?
Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
1.
Number of Dominant Species
2.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A)
3.
Total Number of Dominant
4.
Species Across All Strata: 3 (B)
5.
Percent of Dominant Species
6.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100.0% (A/B)
7.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
8.
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
=Total Cover
OBL species 100 x 1 = 100
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
FACW species 0 x 2 = 0
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
)
FAC species 0 x 3 = 0
1.
FACU species 0 x 4 = 0
2.
UPL species 0 x 5 = 0
3.
Column Totals: 100 (A) 100 (B)
4.
Prevalence Index = B/A = 1.00
5.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
6.
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
7.
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
8.
X 3 - Prevalence Index is :53.0'
=Total Cover
-Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 15 )
1. Persicaria hydropiperoides
50 Yes
OBL
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
2. Sagittaria latifolia
30 Yes
OBL
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
3. Saururus cernuus 20 Yes OBL
4.
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
5.
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
6
height.
7.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
8.
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
9.
10.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
11.
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
12.
100 =Total Cover
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
50% of total cover:
50 20% of total cover:
20
height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5
Hydrophytic
=Total Cover
Vegetation
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Present? Yes X No
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below.)
ENG FORM 6116-2-SG, JUL 2018 Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: DP1
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix
Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) %
Color (moist) % Type' Loc2
Texture Remarks
0-5 10yr 2/1 100
Sandy
5-10 10yr 6/1 100
Sandy
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
_ Histosol (Al)
_Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
_ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
—Barrier Islands 1 cm Muck (S12)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
_Black Histic (A3)
(MLRA 153B, 153D)
_Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
_Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O)
(outside MLRA 150A)
_Stratified Layers (A5)
_Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_Reduced Vertic (F18)
—Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
(outside MLRA 150A, 150B)
_5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, T)
_Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
_Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_Anomalous Bright Floodplain Soils (F20)
_ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
(MLRA 153B)
—Depleted Below Dark Surface (Al 1)
—Marl (F10) (LRR U)
—Red Parent Material (F21)
_Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
_Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
_Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)—Iron-Manganese
Masses (F12) (LRR O, P,
T) (outside MLRA 138, 152A in FL, 154)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)
Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
_Barrier Islands Low Chroma Matrix (TS7)
_Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151)
(MLRA 153B, 153D)
_Sandy Redox (S5)
Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 150B)
_Other (Explain in Remarks)
_Stripped Matrix (S6)
_Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
X Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
_Anomalous Bright Floodplain Soils (F20)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8)
(MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
(LRR S, T, U)
_Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
wetland hydrology must be present,
(MLRA 138, 152A in FL, 154)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
Remarks
ENG FORM 6116-2-SG, JUL 2018 Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain — Version 2.0

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers OMB Control #: 0710-xxxx, Exp: Pending
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT:
See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R (Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a)
Project/Site: PNG MLV 5 City/County: Johnston Sampling Date: 5/28/20
Applicant/Owner: PNG State: NC Sampling Point: DP2
Investigator(s): J. Garvey, R.Dugger Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): convex Slope (%): 2
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 133A Lat: 35.303467 Long:-78.336668 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: GeD - Gilead sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes NWI classification: None
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS —Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No X Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X within a Wetland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
—Surface Soil Cracks (136)
_Surface Water (Al) _Aquatic
Fauna (1313)
_Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
—High Water Table (A2) _
Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
—Drainage Patterns (1310)
_Saturation (A3) _Hydrogen
Sulfide Odor (Cl)
_Moss Trim Lines (1316)
_Water Marks (131) _Oxidized
Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
_Sediment Deposits (132) _Presence
of Reduced Iron (C4)
_Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_Drift Deposits (133) _Recent
Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_Algal Mat or Crust (134) _Thin
Muck Surface (C7)
_Geomorphic Position (D2)
_Iron Deposits (135) _Other
(Explain in Remarks)
_ShallowAquitard (D3)
—Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_ FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Water -Stained Leaves (139)
Sphagnum Moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116-2-SG, JUL 2018 Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: DP2
Absolute Dominant
Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )
% Cover Species?
Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
1.
Number of Dominant Species
2.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1 (A)
3.
Total Number of Dominant
4.
Species Across All Strata: 2 (B)
5.
Percent of Dominant Species
6.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 50.0% (A/B)
7.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
8.
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
=Total Cover
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
FACW species 0 x 2 = 0
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
)
FAC species 60 x 3 = 180
1.
FACU species 60 x 4 = 240
2.
UPL species 0 x 5 = 0
3.
Column Totals: 120 (A) 420 (B)
4.
Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.50
5.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
6.
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
7.
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
8.
3 - Prevalence Index is :53.0'
=Total Cover
-Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 15, )
1. Schedonorus arundinaceus
60 Yes
FAC
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
2. Trifolium pratense
40 Yes
FACU
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
3. Eupatorium capillifolium 20 No FACU
4.
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
5.
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
6
height.
7.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
8.
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
9.
10.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
11.
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
12.
120 =Total Cover
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
50% of total cover:
60 20% of total cover:
24
height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5
Hydrophytic
=Total Cover
Vegetation
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Present? Yes No X
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below.)
ENG FORM 6116-2-SG, JUL 2018 Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: DP2
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix
Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) %
Color (moist) % Type' Loc2
Texture Remarks
0-7 10yr 6/6 100
Loamy/Clayey
7-15 10yr 5/3 100
Loamy/Clayey
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
_ Histosol (Al)
_Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
_ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
—Barrier Islands 1 cm Muck (S12)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
_Black Histic (A3)
(MLRA 153B, 153D)
_Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
_Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O)
(outside MLRA 150A)
_Stratified Layers (A5)
_Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_Reduced Vertic (F18)
—Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
(outside MLRA 150A, 150B)
_5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, T)
_Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
_Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_Anomalous Bright Floodplain Soils (F20)
_ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
(MLRA 153B)
—Depleted Below Dark Surface (Al 1)
—Marl (F10) (LRR U)
—Red Parent Material (F21)
_Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
_Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
_Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)—Iron-Manganese
Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T) (outside MLRA 138, 152A in FL, 154)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)
Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
_Barrier Islands Low Chroma Matrix (TS7)
_Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151)
(MLRA 153B, 153D)
_Sandy Redox (S5)
Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 150B) _Other (Explain in Remarks)
_Stripped Matrix (S6)
_Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA
149A)
—Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
_Anomalous Bright Floodplain Soils (F20)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8)
(MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
(LRR S, T, U)
_Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
wetland hydrology must be present,
(MLRA 138, 152A in FL, 154)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
Remarks
ENG FORM 6116-2-SG, JUL 2018 Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain — Version 2.0

n'4A I
LEGEND
Q Study Area
DATA SOURCE: http://goto.arcgisonline.com/
maps/USA_Topo_Maps
0 Feet 2,000
-cd >
Study Area
C c'm
I I
j \ rah \ TON J INeMon Grove �— ® \
71*
104
� Cem
s f
CIO
Study Area Ho'lTOwnlz BArnEgagu!ID cem
_ (STATE HISTORIC ST E) 444
S
clam
\ ` 184
HInrW
—
IiaS -- —
1143
v /
C@>n
Qa �_ r Car
% a ,
170
011I Piedmont LINE 5 EXPOSED MAIN REMEDIATION PROJECT
FnNatural Gas PROJECT VICINITY
Energy that shows' FIGURE 1
PATH:GAGISIPROJECTS10B72_DUKEENERGY110226538_PNG LINE 5EXPOSED MAIN%7.2 WORK _IN_PROGRESSIMAP_DOCS%MXD%WORKING%MCHMEMO%FIGUREI.MXD-USER : JGAWEY - DATE: W1312020 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh ES Field Office
551-F Pylon Drive
Raleigh, North Carolina 27606
October 6, 2020
Eric Mularski
HDR
440 S. Church Street
Charlotte, NC 28202
Re: PNG Line 5 Exposed Main Remediation — Johnston County
Dear Mr. Mularski:
This letter is to inform you that the Service has established an on-line project planning and
consultation process which assists developers and consultants in determining whether a
federally -listed species or designated critical habitat may be affected by aproposed project. For
future projects, please visit the Raleigh Field Office'sproject planning website at
https://www.fws.gov/raleigh/pp.html. If you are only searching for a list of species that may be
present in the project's Action Area, then you may use the Service's Information, Planning, and
Consultation System (IPaC) website to determine if any listed, proposed, or candidate species
may be present in the Action Area and generate a species list. The IPaC website may be viewed
at https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/. The IPaC web site contains a complete and frequently updated list
of all endangered and threatened species protected by the provisions of the Endangered Species
Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.)(Act), a list of federal species of concern' that
are known to occur in each county in North Carolina, and other resources.
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
'The term "federal species of concern" refers to those species which the Service believes might be in need of
concentrated conservation actions. Federal species of concern receive no legal protection and their designation
does not necessarily imply that the species will eventually be proposed for listing as a federally endangered or
threatened species. However, we recommend that all practicable measures be taken to avoid or minimize adverse
impacts to federal species of concern.

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.
With regard to the above -referenced project, we offer the following remarks. Ourcomments are
submitted pursuant to, and in accordance with, provisions of the Endangered Species Act.
Based on the information provided and other information available, it appears that the proposed
action is not likely to adversely affect any 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.
However, the Service is concerned about the potential impacts the proposed action might have
on aquatic species. Aquatic resources are highly susceptible to sedimentation. Therefore, we
recommend that all practicable measures be taken to avoid adverse impacts to aquatic species,
including implementing directional boring methods and stringent sediment and erosion control
measures. An erosion and sedimentation control plan should be submitted to and approved by
the North Carolina Division of Land Resources, Land Quality Section prior to construction.
Erosion and sedimentation controls should be installed and maintained between the construction
site and any nearby down -gradient surface waters. In addition, we recommend maintaining
natural, vegetated buffers on all streams and creeks adjacent to the project site.
The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission has developed a Guidance Memorandum (a
copy can be found on our website at (http://www.fws.gov/raleigh) to address and mitigate
secondary and cumulative impacts to aquatic and terrestrial wildlife resources and water quality.

We recommend that you consider this document in the development of your projects and in
completing an initiation package for consultation (if necessary).
We hope you find our web page useful and informative and that following the process described
above will reduce the time required, and eliminate the need, for general correspondence for
species' lists. If you have any questions or comments, please contact John Ellis of this office at
[phone] ext. 26.
Sincerely,
Pete Benjamin
Field Supervisor
�� fr

F)2
hdrinc.com
September 29, 2020
Ms. Renee Gledhill -Earley
N.C. Historic Preservation Office
4617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-4617
RE: Environmental Review
Proposed Line 5 Exposed Main Remediation Project
Bentonville, NC
Dear Ms. Gledhill -Earley,
HDR Engineering, Inc. of the Carolinas (HDR), on behalf of Piedmont Natural Gas (PNG),
requests review and comment on any potential issues with respect to archaeological or
historical resources associated with the proposed Line 5 Exposed Main Remediation Project
(Project) in Bentonville, NC.
Project Description
The Project consists of replacing the existing Line 5 with approximately 250 linear feet of 10-
inch-diameter natural gas pipeline. Line 5 (existing 10-inch diameter pipe) is currently exposed
at its crossing with Mill Creek; the new 10-inch diameter pipe will be buried beneath the existing
Mill Creek stream channel. The approximate 3.7-acre Study Area (proposed limits of
disturbance) is located within PNG's existing gas utility line right-of-way and a private gravel
access road in Johnston County, North Carolina (Figure 1). The Project begins at Almon Road
(SR 1191), runs in a northeasterly direction, and terminates west of Mill Creek Church Road (SR
1188). The proposed construction corridor will be located within the existing PNG easement
(see attached Google Earth kmz file).
No architectural structures or archaeological artifacts were observed or noted during the
preliminary survey of the site on May 28, 2020. Desktop data reviews of the National Park
Service NRHP GIS Public Dataset and the NC State Historic Preservation Office (NCSHPO)
HPOWEB GIS Web Service have been completed. There were no historic structures or National
Register listed structures identified within the Study Area. A National Register Historic District
(Bentonville Battlefield JT1355) was identified within 1,000 feet of the Study Area and is located
due east of the Project (Figure 2).
This Project will require a Clean Water Act Section 404 permit authorized by the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, a 401 Water Quality Certification and Buffer Authorization authorized by
North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR) if potential impacts to on -site waters of
the U.S. are unavoidable. The USACE Nationwide 12 (Utility Lines) is expected to be the
applicable permit since the Project will involve the remediation of an exposed natural gas
pipeline that may result in minimal temporary or permanent impacts to waters of the U.S.
400 S. Church Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
T 704.338.6700 F 704.338.6760

September 29, 2020
Ms. Renee Gledhill -Earley
Page 2
We ask that you review this site based on the attached information to determine the presence of
any cultural resources within or near to the project area. If you have any questions or concerns,
please contact me at eric.mularski(d)hdrinc.com or at [phone] your earliest convenience.
Sincerely,
HDR Engineering, Inc. of the Carolinas
Eric Mularski, PWS
Environmental Project Manager
Attachment:
Google Earth KMZ of Limits of Disturbance
Figure 1 — Project Vicinity
Figure 2 — Environmental Resources
Cc: Alicia DePalma, PNG
Jessica Tisdale, HDR
Timothy O'Neill, HDR

LEGEND:
Study Area F -
Study Area
y DATA SOURCE: http://goto.arcgisonline.com/ '
maps/USA _Topo_Maps
�-
CAM
L Catd'S
0 Feet 2,000 f I
0 Miles 5
com
— .. ._ fFr — t LUfmin
4
f _ Study Area� eAtn "Room
` Cetn L152
x KwW
Sµ-
i
- - } ;Y-T •i Mg
LL I5' \ tv
}
i
N
LINE 5 EXPOSED MAIN REMEDIATION PROJECT
PROJECT VICINITY
FIGURE 1
PATH: IICLTSMAINIGIS_OATAIGISIPROJECTS13912_DUKEENERGYI19225535_ PRO LINE 5 EXPOSED MAINI7.2_WORK_IN_PROGRESSIMAPOOCSIMXOIWORKINGITECH MEMOIPIGURE I.MXD-USER: EMULARSK-DATE: 912912929 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM

OV !
� p
o �
� T N
` C
Edo
H II
a
K � �
E T 0) �t m s�� a Z
N Almon Rd
C >O
• � (6 � C C � � O (C6 C 00 0= JjQ
), O a ❑ ❑ -O in C U 0 Q O o m-
a
O O_ ❑ ❑ (n f6 f6 W O w : 1
o (q S S S S Z S Z Z d S N �� m'
1 0 00 D o aLLk
w o�