20120285_Gaston East-West Corridor Email_20111031

FW Gaston E W Connectoi (U 3321) Update
FW Gaston E -W Connector (U -3321) Update
Lespinasse, Polly
Sent Tuesday May 08 2012 3 16 PM
To Carrillo Sonia
Page 1 of 2
From Wrenn, Brian
Sent Monday, October 31, 2011 1 01 PM
To Shumate, Christy, Hair, Sarah E SAW, McLendon, Scott C SAW, Matthews, Monte K SAW, Lespinasse, Polly,
Chambers, Marla J, marella_buncick @fws gov, Militscher Chris @epamail epa gov, Gledhill earley, Renee
Cc Harris, Jennifer, Jill Gurak, George Hoops @dot gov, Karoly, Cyndi
Subject RE Gaston E W Connector (U 3321) Update
Christy
As we have discussed in the last few NCTA meetings regarding this project DWQ will not accept a 401
application with the designs proposed by NCTA for the Gaston E W connector The recent court decision on the
Monroe Bypass has no bearing on this decision It comes down to the fact that design build team which has yet
to be named has proprietary control over the design of the road We see it as a waste of staff time to review an
application with designs that likely will be thrown on the scrap heap in favor of the design build team s design
Any accommodations that were made regarding application submittal for the Monroe bypass project were
specific to that project and set no precedent as a way to do business for this or future projects We have
repeatedly informed NCTA of this fact and were told that a meeting would be arranged to discuss this matter
We have yet to hear from NCTA regarding any such meeting
It appears on the surface through your plans to submit a 404/401 application that you have ignored our issue
of concern In accordance with 23 USC Sec 139 (h)(3)(A) we request that you set up a meeting to resolve this
issue of concern If you have any questions regarding this matter please let me know Thanks and we look
forward to meeting with you soon
Brian
Brian Wrenn
Transportation Permitting Unit Supervisor
NC Division of Water Quality
brian wrenn @ncdenr gov
585 Waughtown Street
Winston Salem NC 27107 2241
336 771 4952 (Winston Salem no )
336 771 4631 (Fax)
or
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh NC 27699 1650
919 807 6365
919 807 6494 (Fax)
From Shumate, Christy
Sent Monday, October 31, 2011 11 19 AM
https //mail nc gov /owa/ ?ae= Item &t =IPM Note &id= RgAAAADMSzLcd9W2TJH14 %2bm 5/17/2012

FW Gaston E W Connector (U 3321) Update
Page 2 of 2
To Hair, Sarah E SAW, McLendon, Scott C SAW, Matthews, Monte K SAW, Lespinasse, Polly, Wrenn, Brian,
Chambers, Marla J, marella_buncick @fws gov, Militscher Chris @epamail epa gov, Gledhill earley, Renee
Cc Harris, Jennifer, Jill Gurak, George Hoops @dot gov
Subject Gaston E W Connector (U 3321) Update
All
We would like to provide an update on the Gaston E W Connector project since we last met in September
Now that the Judge has ruled on the Monroe case we will be pushing forward with completing the ROD for this
project We hope to have the ROD issued by the end of November
Permitting & Mitigation
Thanks to those of you who provided comments on the Water Quality Analysis report Your comments have
been incorporated into the report and responses and the revised report will be distributed this week
We are preparing a permit application for the project based on designs discussed at the 4B (June 2011) and 4C
(August and September 2011) meetings The application will include a conceptual mitigation plan for the
Linwood Springs Golf Course site which has officially been turned over to NCDOT Other onsite and nearby
mitigation opportunities are also being pursued and the latest status of this work will be included in the
application EEP has committed all credits from the Beaverdam Creek site to this project
Design Build
Shortlisted teams for the West and East design build contracts have been announced (see
http / /www ncdot gov /projects /gardenparkway/ then Contract Procurement) We are in the process of making
all project documentation available to the teams As part of this process we have updated the Section 6002
Project Coordination Plan As you know this project follows the Merger process Changes the coordination plan
are shown in the attached and are limited to updates to schedule project contacts and NCTA / NCDOT
relationship since the previous update in 2008
Please contact us at any time if you have questions or comments about this project
Thanks
Christy
Christy Shumate AICP
Senior Transportation Planner
NCTA General Engineering Consultant
1578 Mali Service Center
Raleigh NC 27699 1578
Tel [phone]
Dir [phone]
croshumate @ncdot gov
Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N C Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties
https //mail nc gov /owa/ ?ae= Item &t =IPM Note &id= RgAAAADMSzLcd9W2TJH14 %2bm 5/17/2012

{ , FW Gaston E W Connector (U 3321) Update
FW Gaston E -W Connector (U -3321) Update
Lespinasse, Polly
Sent Tuesday May 08 2012 3 16 PM
To Carrillo Sonia
Attachments Gaston-6002 Coordination P -1 pdf (490 KB)
From Shumate Christy
Sent Monday October 31 2011 11 19 AM
To Hair Sarah E SAW McLendon Scott C SAW Matthews Monte K SAW Lespinasse Polly
Marla 3 marella_buncick @fws gov Mllitscher Chris @epamail epa gov Gledhill earley Renee
Cc Harris Jennifer Jill Gurak George Hoops @dot gov
Subject Gaston E W Connector (U 3321) Update
All
Page 1 of 1
Wrenn Brian Chambers
We would like to provide an update on the Gaston E W Connector project since we last met in September
Now that the judge has ruled on the Monroe case we will be pushing forward with completing the ROD for this project
We hope to have the ROD issued by the end of November
Permitting & Mitigation
Thanks to those of you who provided comments on the Water Quality Analysis report Your comments have been
incorporated into the report and responses and the revised report will be distributed this week
We are preparing a permit application for the project based on designs discussed at the 4B (June 2011) and 4C (August
and September 2011) meetings The application will include a conceptual mitigation plan for the Linwood Springs Golf
Course site which has officially been turned over to NCDOT Other onsite and nearby mitigation opportunities are also
being pursued and the latest status of this work will be included in the application EEP has committed all credits from
the Beaverdam Creek site to this project
Design Build
Shortlisted teams for the West and East design build contracts have been announced (see
http / /www ncdot gov /projects /gardenparkwav/ then Contract Procurement) We are in the process of making all project
documentation available to the teams As part of this process we have updated the Section 6002 Project Coordination
Plan As you know this project follows the Merger process Changes the coordination plan are shown in the attached and
are limited to updates to schedule project contacts and NCTA / NCDOT relationship since the previous update in 2008
Please contact us at any time if you have questions or comments about this project
Thanks
Christy
Christy Shumate AICP
Senior Transportation Planner
NCTA General Engineering Consultant
1578 Mad Service Center
Raleigh NC 27699 1578
Tel [phone]
Dir [phone]
croshumate a)ncdot gov
Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N C Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties
https //ma11 nc gov /owa/ ?ae= Item &t =IPM Note &1d= RgAAAADMSzLcd9W2TJH14 %2bm 5/17/2012

Section 6002 Coordination Plan for the Gaston East -West Connector Protect
STIP Protect U -3321
COORDINATION PLAN
1 Purpose of Plan
1 1 Section 6002 Compliance This plan is intended to satisfy the requirement for a
Coordination Plan under Section 6002 of SAFETEA LU (23 U S C § 139) for the
Gaston E W Connector project (STIP No U 3321)
12 Section 404/NEPA Merger 01 Process Information This study to the extent possible
will follow an environmental review process consistent with the requirements for
Projects on New Location as described in the Section 404/NEPA Merger 01 Process
Information with the following modifications
• Agency Meetmg_s Turnpike Environmental Agency Coordination (TEAL) meetings
will be held monthly at NCTA These meetings serve the purpose of merger
meetings under Merger 01 but are held more frequently
• Study Initiation The Notice of Intent (NOI) for this study was issued on April 27
2006 after the project had transrtioned to NCTA (See Exhibit 1) The NOI described
this project as a candidate toll project
• Development of the Project Team and Agency Roles Participating and cooperating
agencies have been identified and engaged in the study through the monthly TEAC
meetings Agency roles and primary contacts are listed in Table 2 Since agency roles
are resolved invitation letters to participating and cooperating agencies are not
needed
• Opportunity for Involvement in Purpose and Need Range of Alternatives The
purpose and need (2002) and range of alternatives (2005) were initially developed by
NCDOT before Section 6002 of SAFETEA LU came into effect and before the
project transrtioned to NCTA The NCTA has updated the Purpose and Need
Statement with current data and has prepared an Addendum to the Alternatives
Development and Analysis Report to address the toll aspect and other updates to the
project NCTA has made the updated Purpose and Need Statement and Addendum to
the Alternatives Development and Analysis Report available for review and comment
by agencies and the public
• Concurrence on Purpose and Need and Detailed Study Alternatives Carried Forward
DSA NCTA intends to seek concurrence from the participating and cooperating
agencies consistent with Merger 01 procedures on the updated Purpose and Need
(Concurrence Point 1) and the Detailed Study Alternatives (Concurrence Point 2)
10/28/08 (reN ►sed 10/27/11)

Bridging decisions and alignment review (Concurrence Point 2A) have also been
agreed upon by the project team Concurrrence will be obtained on these three
concurrence points (1 2 2A) in a single concurrence form
1(-onc of i c,nc c jor c one uri c iic 4 )oiiit s 1 ? crud 2d � �a4 ac luc i (cI n Oc tob(i 7 2008
(sec Diaft l ntirtonrncntal InipacI 50h Mod 1131)c11dlr 1 -11 /
Signatures The signed concurrence form confirms that the project team have
participated in the environmental review process and are satisfied with the conclusions
reached at each key project milestone By signing the concurrence form the signatures
indicate that the team members comments on reports and information that are used for
achieving a particular concurrence point were adequately addressed and no issues of
concern remain on a particular concurrence point Once concurrence is reached
discussion on that particular concurrence point will not be revisited unless there is
significant new information or there are significant changes to the project the
environment constructability or laws and regulations
(C oncui i c rice Point 3 sjas t eac he d on 0(tohc i 13 2009 and Conr uy i (,n(( Point 4 1 on
1- chruary16 2010 (sec 1-wal Entiuontncntal hnpya Statcnicnt Appendt-L G) J
13 Integration of NEPA and Section 404 Requirements The process established in this
Coordination Plan is intended to ensure that the requirements of NEPA and Section 404
of the Clean Water Act can be satisfied as part of a single process Specifically this plan
is intended ensure that to the maximum extent practicable
• there is regular communication and collaborative discussion among all agencies
that have information experience and/or expertise relevant to issues considered
in Section 404 permitting
• NCDENR can issue Section 401 Riparian Buffer Authorizations Isolated
Wetland Permits and State Stormwater Permits based on information developed
as part of the NEPA process and
• the USACE can issue a Section 404 permit for the project promptly following the
end of the NEPA process, without the need for supplemental NEPA studies and
• any other required permits or approvals can be obtained without unexpected
issues or delays
14 Agency Communication This plan establishes a framework for regular communication
among all of the agencies involved in the environmental review process This
communication will include regular agency coordination meetings These meetings will
provide a forum for open discussion and dialogue among agencies Meetings with one
or more individual agencies also may occur as part of this process When possible all
Participating Agencies will be informed of a smaller meeting to ensure all appropriate
parties are included and will be updated after the meeting
10/28/08 (rc.N tsc,d 10/27/11) 2

2 Project Schedule
2 1 Schedule The NCTA will prepare a project schedule showing projected dates for
completing all environmental studies and permitting The schedule will conform to
SAFETEA LU time frames for comment periods and the FHWA Vital Few Goal of
achieving a median time frame of three years for completing an EIS A draft schedule
for the Gaston East West Connector project is shown in Table 1
Table 1 Draft Protect Schedule
Notice of Intent
April 27 2006
Identify Purpose and Need and Concurrence Achieved
July 24 2002
Identify Detailed Study Alternatives and Concurrence
September 20 2005
Achieved
Bridging Decisions & Alignment Review and Concurrence
April 8 2008
Achieved
Reconfirm Concurrence on Purpose and Need Detailed
October 7 2008
Study Alternatives and Bridging Decisions & Alignment
Review
DEIS
trim- aai-v- Al 2009
Identify Preferred Alternative /Lc, ist I ii-, ii iminciitalIN
June Oc lobcr 13 2009
Darn ring 1'r icticablc Att�-rnativE (I I DPA )
FEIS
fill "i'1-1 LL( -mbci 22
2010
ROD
Of-44Ner
?41 PNoNt mb.,i 2011
Execute Design Build Contract
Deeember-A) )2012
2 2 Agency Consultation The schedule will be shared with the agencies and discussed at a
TEAC meeting Agency comments will be considered and the schedule may be revised
as appropriate
2 3 Updating Schedules The project schedule may be revised from time to time by the lead
agencies during the environmental review process Schedule changes will be
communicated to all participating agencies and the public Under the statute the
schedule may be extended by the lead agencies for good cause and may be shortened
only with the consent of Cooperating Agencies
3 Agency Roles
3 1 Lead Federal Agency FHWA will be the lead Federal agency As lead Federal agency
in the Section 6002 process FHWA is responsible for making certain decisions as
specified in Section 6002 In addition FHWA has an overall responsibility for
facilitating the expeditious completion of the environmental review process
10/28/08 (re-, iced 1 0/27/11)

3 2 Joint Lead Agencies NCTA, -i d�vj5jon_of NCDO I will be a point lead agency and thus
will share with FHWA the responsibilities of the lead agency under the process defined
in Section 6002tzi`,��=
�d(_, D43-"(= iv�ll- pi- tr3�r- �- 1y- k�aae- a- r- e��tc��t -rile- iii-- tlie- pi��c,e�- c- on��5fei�-- � -it-13 t-kie
P-- fftkMT ruct1+,AA {ftlid-- l 1 -ant - W- 1Atm Ju-l�, -_ —2006
3 3 Project Team Participating / Cooperating Agencies The agencies listed in Table 2 will
be participating and/or cooperating agencies in the environmental review process
Primary contacts have been identified by each agency as shown in the table
Table 2 Agency Roles and Primary Agency Contacts
Agency
Role
Primary Contact
Federal Highway Administration
Joint Lead Agency
George Hoops
NC Turnpike Authority
Joint Lead Agency
Jennifer Harris
US Army Corps of Engineers
Participating /Cooperating
-,,4eve 1 ;n I i/
flair
US Environmental Protection Agency
Participating
Chris Militscher
US Fish and Wildlife Service
Participating
Marella Buncick
NC Department of Cultural Resources — Historic
Preservation Office
Participating
Renee Gledhill
Earley
NC Department of Environment & Natural Resources
�1"
Division of Water Quality
Participating
Polly Lespmasse
Wildlife Resources Commission
Participating
Marla Chambers
Gaston Urban Area Metropolitan Planning
Organization
Participating
Hank Graham
Mecklenburg Union Metropolitan Planning
Organization
Participating
Bob Cook
3 4 Identifying Issues of Concern
Pursuant to Section 6002 of SAFETEA LU participating agencies are responsible for
identifying as early as practicable any issues of concern regarding the project s potential
environmental or socioeconomic impacts that could substantially delay to prevent an agency
from granting a permit or other approval that is needed for the project Each agency s role in
the development of the Gaston East West Connector project should include the following as
they relate to your area of expertise
1) Provide meaningful and early input on defining the purpose and need determining the
range of alternatives to be considered and the methodologies and level of detail required
in the alternatives analysis
2) Participate in TEAC and other coordination meetings and field reviews as appropriate
10/28/08 (rLkised 10/27/11) 4

3) Timely review and comment on documents provided for your agency s input during the
environmental review process
4 Turnpike Environmental Agency Coordination (TEAL) Meetings
4 1 TEAC Meetings The principal method for agency coordination on turnpike projects
will be Turnpike Environmental Agency Coordination (TEAL) meetings which will be
hosted by NCTA These meetings will be used as a forum for discussing all turnpike
projects All TEAC meetings will be held at the NCTA office in Raleigh unless
otherwise specified in the meeting invitation
42 Meeting Dates The schedule for the TEAC meetings will be determined by! 11W
N( DO] and NCTAa -
11 ,� li clt l 11 1 c t-ablMied tip- if. ,extca4 po"i[& for 12 month periods The
schedule will be coordinated with NCDOT interagency meetings to avoid or minimize
conflicts and minimize travel Changes to the schedule will be provided to the
Participating Agencies as far in advance as possible I lac ,chedulc 4of -24 #48 i,, it+& -hed a,
Ex4ii +t 2
4 3 Meeting Agenda and Objectives The agenda for each TEAC meeting will be circulated
via e mail to all Participating Agencies The agenda will identify (a) any specific issues
that NCTA would like to resolve at the meeting and (b) any specific issues on which
NCTA is seeking comments from the Participating Agencies at the meeting
4 4 Meeting Materials NCTA will post the agenda and materials for each TEAC meeting on
a secure web site accessible to all TEAC members Guidelines for circulating meeting
materials are provided below
4 4 1 Timing of Circulation To the greatest extent possible NCTA will post the agenda
and materials at least two weeks in advance of the meeting In some cases
materials will be provided less than two weeks in advance or will be circulated in
the TEAC meeting itself NCTA will not seek to resolve issues or obtain
Participating Agency comments on materials that the Participating Agencies
received less than two weeks in advance of the meeting
442 Availability of Paper Copies In addition to posting documents on the TEAC web
site NCTA will make paper copies of TEAC meeting materials available to all
attendees at each TEAC meeting
443 Large Documents Documents that would be difficult or time consuming for
agencies to reproduce (e g large maps lengthy bound documents with color
fold out pages etc ) will be made available to Participating Agencies in hard copy
format at a TEAC meeting (or by mail two weeks or more in advance) for
discussion at a subsequent TEAC meeting NCTA will consult with the
Participating Agencies to determine when this type of distribution is appropriate
10/28/08 (rei ised 1 0/27/11)

45 Meeting Summaries After each TEAC meeting the NCTA will prepare a meeting
summary The summary will list the attendees topics discussed unresolved issues and
action items The Meeting Summary will be posted in draft form to the NCTA web site
for review and comment two weeks in advance of the next meeting Meetings may be
recorded on audiotape the recording will be used in preparing the meeting summaries
The meeting summaries will be included in the administrative record
4 6 Attendees Participating agencies (including cooperating agencies) will designate
primary contacts for each turnpike project These primary contacts will regularly attend
TEAC meetings Attendance may vary from month to month depending on the issues
being discussed Primary contacts for the Gaston East West Connector project listed
above in Table 2
4 7 Issues of Concern At any time in the process a Participating Agency may identify an
issue of concern as defined in SAFETEA LU which is an issue that in the agency s
judgment could result in denial of a permit or substantial delay in issuing a permit
4 7 1 Format Participating agencies will be strongly encouraged to submit any issues
of concern in writing to FHWA and NCTA on agency letterhead Issues of
concern submitted in other formats (e g e mail) will also be considered
472 Timing Participating Agencies are required by statute to identify any issues of
concern as early as practicable in the environmental review process but this
determination is based on information provided by the lead agencies In some
cases it may not be practicable to identify an issue of concern until late in the
process The statute does not set a specific deadline for raising these issues
4 7 3 Request for Comment At any point in the process the NCTA may ask the
Participating Agencies to state in writing whether there are any issues of concern
If such a request is made NCTA will consult with the Participating Agencies
before setting a deadline for a response If agreed by the Lead and Participating
Agencies a deadline longer than 30 days could be established
48 Monitoring and nd Updating NCTA will maintain a list of both general project issues
and issues of concern (if any) identified by the participating agencies Separate
meetings may be scheduled to resolve general project issues and/or any issues of
concern Additional issues may be added to the list based on new information or
changed circumstances at any point in project development This list will be posted to
the TEAC web site
49 Resolving General Project Issues General project issues that are not resolved among the
regular participants in the TEAC meetings can be elevated for consideration by the more
senior officials within the relevant agencies Any agency — lead or participating — can
invoke the elevation process The process is intended to be flexible with specific
procedures determmed on a case by case basis depending on the nature of the issue In
general the elevation process will involve the following steps
10/28/08 (reNiscd 10/27/11)

• A TEAC member requests elevation on an issue within the jurisdiction of that
agency This request can be made in a TEAC meeting or in a letter or e mail to
the other TEAC members
• The request for elevation is placed on the agenda for discussion at a subsequent
TEAC meeting
• If the issue is not resolved at that subsequent TEAC meeting the issue is elevated
to more senior officials within the TEAC agencies
• Each TEAC member is responsible for identifying the more senior official(s)
within his or her agency who will be directly involved in the elevation
• The TEAC members will work together to plan the logistics and timing of the
elevation process including any briefing materials or other documents that need
to be prepared prior to a resolution of the issue
410 Resolving Issues of Concern Under the statute NCTA or the Governor may
request a meeting at any time to resolve issues of concern If such a meeting is
requested FHWA will convene a meeting in accordance with SAFETEA LU to resolve
the specified issues of concern If an issue of concern is not resolved within 30 days
after such a meeting a report must be submitted to Congress and to the heads of certain
agencies as provided in SAFETEA LU If such a meeting is not requested FHWA and
NCTA will seek to address and resolve the agencies issues of concern as part of normal
agency coordination during the environmental review process NCTA anticipates that
this process will be invoked rarely
10/28/08 (res►scd 10/27/11) 7

Exhibit I
NOTICE OF INTENT

Exhibit 1
Federal Register/Vol 71 No 81/Thursday April 27 2006/Notices 24909
SUMMARY Pursuant to Section 10(a)(2) of
the Federal Advisory Committee Act
(Pub L 92-463 5 US C App 2) notice
is hereby given of a meeting of the
Commercial Space Transportation
Advisory Committee ( COMSTAC) The
meeting will take place on Wednesday
May 24 2006 starting at 8 a in at the
Federal Aviation Administration
Headquarters Building 800
Independence Avenue SW
Washington DC in the Bessie Coleman
Conference Center located on the 2nd
Floor This will be the forty third
meeting of the COMSTAC
The proposed agenda for the meeting
will feature an update on commercial
space transportation legislative
activities briefings on national space
and security policies new RLV
technology developments and the
Office of Space Commercialization in
the Department of Commerce and an
activities report from FAA s Office of
Commercial Space Transportation The
2006 Commercial Space Transportation
Forecasts on the geosynchronous and
non geosynchronous markets will also
be released at this meeting An agenda
will be posted on the FAA Web site at
http 11ast faa gov/COMSTAC Meetings
of the COMSTAC Working Groups
(Technology and Innovation Reusable
Launch Vehicle Risk Management and
Launch Operations and Support) will be
held on Tuesday May 23 2006 For
specific information concerning the
times and locations of the working
group meetings contact the Contact
Person listed below
Individuals who plan to attend and
need special assistance such as sign
language interpretation or other
reasonable accommodations should
inform the Contact Person listed below
in advance of the meeting
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
Brenda Parker (AST -100) Office of the
Commercial Space Transportation 800
Independence Avenue SW Room 331
Washington DC 20591 telephone (202)
267 -3674 E mail
Brenda parker@faa dot gov
Issued in Washington DC April 19 2006
Patricia Grace Smith
Associate Administrator for Commercial
Space Transportation
[FR Doc E6 -6306 Filed 4 -26 -06 8 45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910 -13-P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
Sixth Meeting RTCA Special
Committee 207 /Airport Security
Access Control Systems
AGENCY Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) DOT
ACTION Notice of RTCA Special
Committee 207 Meeting Airport
Security Access Control Systems
SUMMARY The FAA is issuing this notice
to advise the public of a meeting of
RTCA Special Committee 207 Airport
Security Access Control Systems
DATES The meeting will be held May
11 2006 from 10 5 p in
ADDRESSES The meeting will be held at
RTC A Inc Conference Rooms 1828 L
Street NW Suite 805 Washington DC
20036
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT (1)
RTCA Secretariat 1828 L Street NW
Suite 805 Washington DC 20036
telephone [phone] fax (202)
833 -9434 web site http //www rtca org
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION Pursuant
to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (P L 92 -463 5
U S C Appendix 2) notice is hereby
given for a Special Committee 207
meeting The agenda will include
May 11
Opening Plenary Session (Welcome
Introductions and Administrative
Remarks)
Agenda Overview
Workgroup Reports
Workgroup 2 System Performance
Requirements
Workgroup 3 Subsystem
Functional Performance
Requirements
• Workgroup 4 System Verification
and validation
Workgroup 5 Biometrics
• Workgroup 6 Credentials
• Workgroup 7 Perimeter
ICAO Update
Closing Plenary Session (Other
Business Establish Agenda Date
and Place for Seventh and Eighth
Meetings)
Attendance is open to the interested
public but limited to space availability
With the approval of the chairmen
members of the public may represent
oral statements at the meeting Persons
wishing to present statements or obtain
information should contact the person
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section Members of the public
may present a written statement to the
committee at any time
Issued in Washington DC on April 18
2006
Robert L Bostiga
RTCA Advisory Committee
[FR Doc 06 -3946 Filed 4 -26 -06 8 45am]
BILLING CODE 4910 -13-M
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Highway Administration
Environmental Impact Statement
Butler County PA
AGENCY Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) DOT
ACTION Cancellation of the notice of
intent
SUMMARY This notice rescinds the
previous Notice of Intent (issued
October 3 2001 —Vol 66 No 192) to
prepare an Environmental Impact
Statement for a proposed highway
project in Butler County
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
David W Cough P E Director of
Operations Federal Highway
Administration Pennsylvania Division
Office 228 Walnut Street Room 508
Harrisburg PA 17101 -1720 Telephone
(717) 221 - 3411 -OR -Brian Allen
Assistant District Engineer for Design
Pennsylvania Department of
Transportation District 10 -0 2550
Oakland Avenue P O Box 429 Indiana
PA 15701 Telephone [phone]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Additional traffic analyses have
indicated that all project alternatives
can be down scoped with little or no
significant impact to the environment
An Environmental Assessment will be
pursued based on a revised project
scoping
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
Program Number 20 205 Highway Planning
and Construction The regulations
implementing Executive Order 12372
regarding intergovernmental consultation on
Federal programs and activities apply to this
program )
James A Cheatham
FHWA Division Administrator Harrisburg
PA
[FR Doc 06 -3988 Filed 4 -26 -06 8 45am]
BILLING CODE 4910 -22-M
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Highway Administration
Environmental impact statement
Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties NC
AGENCY Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) DOT
ACTION Notice of intent

Exhibit 1
24910 Federal Register/Vol 71 No 81/Thursday April 27 2006/Notices
SUMMARY The FHWA is issuing this
notice to advise the public that an
environmental impact statement will be
prepared for a proposed highway project
in Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties
North Carolina
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
Clarence W Coleman P E Operations
Engineer Federal Highway
Administration 310 New Bern Avenue
Ste 410 Raleigh North Carolina 27601-
1418 Telephone [phone]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION The
FHWA in cooperation with the North
Carolina Department of Transportation
( NCDOT) and the North Carolina
Turnpike Authority (NCTA) will
prepare an environmental impact
statement (EIS) addressing proposed
improvements to east west
transporation mobility in the area
around the City of Gastonia and other
municipalities in southern Gaston
County As part of this proposed action
the NCDOT also proposes to improve
mobility access and connectivity
between southern Gaston County and
Mecklenburg County The proposed
project study area consists of the
following general boundaries I -85 to
the north the South Carolina State line
to the south the Charlotte Douglas
International Airport to the east and the
I -85 and US 29 -74 junction to the west
The proposed action is consistent with
the thoroughfare plans approved by the
Gaston Urban Area Metropolitan
Planning Organization (MPO) and the
Mecklenburg Union MPO
Alternatives to be studied in detail
include
1 No Build
2 Construction of a new location
highway Sixteen detailed study
alternatives or corridors will be studied
in the Draft EIS
The proposed project is being
developed as a candidate toll road
Accordingly in conjunction with
development of the Draft Environmental
Impact Statement and other on going
project development activities NCTA is
conducting a study to evaluate the
feasibility of developing the proposed
highway as a toll road and funding it
in whole or in part through the
issuance of revenue bonds
Letters describing the proposed action
and soliciting comments have been sent
to appropriate Federal State and local
agencies Citizens informational
workshops meetings with local
officials and a public hearing will be
held Information on the dates times
and locations of the citizens
informtional workshops and public
hearings will be advertised in the local
news media and newsletters will be
mailed to those on the project mailing
list The Draft EIS will be available for
public and agency review and comment
prior to the public hearing
To ensure that the full range of issues
related to this proposed action are
addressed and all significant issues
identified comments and suggestions
are invited from all interested parties
Comments or questions concerning this
proposed action and the EIS should be
directed to the FHWA at the address
provided above
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
Program Number 20 205 Highway Planning
and Construction The regulations
implementing Executive order 12372
regarding intergovernmental consultation on
Federal programs and activities apply to this
program )
Issued on April 20 2006
Clarence W Coleman
Operations Engineer Raleigh North Carolina
[FR Doc 06 -3949 Filed 4 -26 -06 8 45am]
BILLING CODE 4910 -22-M
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Highway Administration
Notice of Final Federal Ageny Actions
on Proposed Highway in Alaska
AGENCY Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) DOT
ACTION Notice of limitation on claims
for judicial review of actions by FHWA
and other Federal Agencies
SUMMARY This notice announces actions
taken by the FHWA and other Federal
agencies that are final within the
meaning of 23 U S C 139(1)(1) The
actions relate to a proposed highway
project the East Lynn Canal Highway
Alaska Route Number 7 from Echol
Cove to Katz Point in the Haines and
Juneau Boroughs State of Alaska Those
actions grant licenses permits and
approvals for the project
DATES By this notice the FHWA is
advising the public of final agency
action subject to 23 U S C 139(1)(1) A
claim seeking judicial review of the
Federal agency actions on the highway
project will be barred unless the claim
is filed on or before October 24 2006
If the Federal law that authorizes
judicial review of a claim provides a
time period of less than 180 days for
filing such claim then that shorter time
period still applies
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Tim
Haugh Environmental and Right of
Way Programs Manager FHWA Alaska
Division P O Box 21648 Juneau
Alaska 99802 -1648 office hours 7 a in -
4 30 p in (AST) phone [phone]
e mail Tim Haugh@fhwo dot gov You
may also contact Reuben Yost Special
Projects Manager Alaska Department of
Transportation and Public Facilities
DOT &PF) 6860 Glacier Highway P O
Box 112506 Juneau Alaska 99811-
2506 office hours 8 a in -5 p in (AST)
phone [phone] e mail
Reuben Yost@dot state ak us
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION Notice is
hereby given that the FHWA and other
Federal agencies have taken final agency
actions by issuing approvals for the
following highway project in the State
of Alaska FHWA Alaska Division
Project Number STP- OOOS(131) titled
the Juneau Access Improvements
Project involves construction of
approximately 51 miles of two lane
highway from the end of Glacier
Highway at Echo cover in the City and
Borough of Juneau to a point two miles
north of the Katzehin River in the
Haines Borough A ferry terminal will
be constructed at the north end of the
highway and new shuttle ferries will be
constructed to run from Haines and
Skagway Three major rivers will be
bridged as well as several streams The
actions by the Federal agencies and the
laws under which such actions were
taken are described in the Final
Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS)
for the project approved on January 18
2006 in the FHWA Record of Decision
(ROD) issued on April 3 2006 and in
other documents in the FHWA
administrative record The FEIS ROD
and other documents in the FHWA
administrative record file are available
by contacting the FHWA or the DOT &PF
at the addresses provided above The
FHWA FEIS and ROD can be viewed
and downloaded from the project Web
site at http 11dot alaska gov/
luneauaccess or viewed at public
libraries in the project area
This notice applies to all Federal
agency decisions as of the issuance date
of this notice and all laws and Executive
Orders under which such actions were
taken including but not limited to
1 General National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA) [42 U S C 4321-
4351] Federal Aid Highway Act [23
us C 109]
2 Air Clean Air Act [42 U S C 7401 -
7671(q)]
3 Land Section 4(0 of the
Department of Transportation Act of
1966 [49 U S C 3031
4 Wildlife Endangered Species Act
[16 U S C 1531 -1544 and section 1536]
Marine Mammal Protection Act [16
U S C 13611 Fish and Wildlife
Coordination Act [16 U S C 661 -
667(d)] Migratory Bird Treaty Act [16
U S C 703 -7121 Magnuson Stevens

FW Gaston Connector Project Catena Group
FW Gaston Connector Project Catena Group
Lespinasse, Polly
Sent Tuesday May 08 2012 3 16 PM
To Carrillo Sonia
Attachments Gurak Correspondence 1 pdf (61 KB)
From Ross Andrews [mallto Andrews @ecosclencenc com]
Sent Tuesday, May 08, 2007 5 03 PM
To <john hennessy @ncmall net >, Polly Lespinasse
Cc <jsgurak @pbsj com >, Michael Wood
Subject Gaston Connector Project Catena Group
Page 1 of 1
John
Per our conversation this afternoon here is the letter from the Catena Group to PBSU describing their
willingness to revisit their intermittent stream calls
If I can be of any more help please let me know
Sincerely
Ross Andrews M S M F
EcoScience Corporation
1 101 Haynes Sti eet Suite 101
Raleigh North Carolina 27604
919 828 3433
919 828 3518
andrews @ecosciencenc con;
https //mall nc gov /owa/ ?ae= Item &t =IPM Note &1d= RgAAAADMSzLcd9W2TJHI4 %2bm 5/17/2012

FW Gaston Connector Project
FW Gaston Connector Project
Lespinasse, Polly
Sent Tuesday May 08 2012 3 16 PM
To Carrillo Sonia
Attachments Gurak Correspondence 1 pdf (61 KB)
From Raymond, Louis [mailto Imraymond @pbsj com]
Sent Wednesday, May 09, 2007 9 19 AM
To <Steven w lund @saw02 usace army mil>
Cc <polly lespinasse @ncmail net >, Ross Andrews, Gurak, Jill S, Johnson, Ron
Subject FW Gaston Connector Project
Steve
Page 1 of 2
Per our conversation this morning I m forwarding you the letter from the Catena Group on the re evaluation of
selected streams in Segment 3 which will be completed by May 25 2007 We can discuss in more detail during
the next couple of days
Louis M Raymond P E
PBS &J
5200 Seventy -Seven Center Drive
Suite 500
Charlotte North Carolina 28217
Phone [phone] Ext 4405
Fax [phone]
E -mail lmraymond @pbsj com
From Gurak, Jill S
Sent Tuesday, May 08, 2007 4 11 PM
To mwood @thecatenagroup com
Cc Raymond, Louis, Ross Andrews
Subject RE Gaston Connector Project
Michael
I ve reviewed the letter and believe it addresses the concerns and topics we discussed in our teleconference this
morning We look forward to the updates and appreciate your quick response to correct the stream calls
Ross please let us know when you ve talked with John Hennessy
Thanks to all Jill
Jill Gurak PE, AICP
PBSU
1616 East Mlllbrook Road Ste 310
Raleigh NC
isgurak(a)pbsi com
Phone [phone]
Mobile [phone]
From Michael Wood [mallto mwood @thecatenagroup com]
Sent Tuesday, May 08, 2007 4 07 PM
To Gurak, JIII S
https //mail nc gov /owa/ ?ae= Item &t =IPM Note &id= RgAAAADMSzLcd9W2TJHI4 %2bm 5/17/2012

FW Gaston Connector Project
Cc Raymond, Louis, Ross Andrews, Chris Sheats , tim
Subject RE Gaston Connector Project
Page 2 of 2
Jill —Please find attached our response from our teleconference this morning Once you have reviewed the
letter please let me know if we have thoroughly addressed the concerns Thank you
Michael Wood
The Catena Group
410 B Millstone Drive
Hillsborough NC 27278
919 732 1300
https //mail nc gov /owa/ ?ae= Item &t =IPM Note &id= RgAAAADMSzLcd9W2TJHI4 %2bm 5/17/2012

The
Catena
Group
Ms Jill Gurak
PBS &J
1616 East Millbrook Road Suite 310
Raleigh NC 27609 6848
SUBJECT Gaston East West Connector Segment 3
Dear Ms Gurak
410 B Millstone Drive
Hillsborough NC 27278
[phone]
May 8 2007
The Catena Group (TCG) performed the Jurisdictional delineations for the Subject
project A field verification of the delineations with personnel from the US Army Corps
of Engineers and the NC Division of Water Quality ( NCDWQ) was held on April 12 13
Prior to the field verification NCDWQ personnel reviewed the jurisdictional delineation
report During this review they noted that several streams scored in the intermittent
range but were noted as having amphibians present and in some cases salamanders were
specifically listed Since Section 2 of the NCDWQ Identification Methods for the
Origins of the Intermittent and Perennial Streams the Revised DWQ Policy for the
Definition or Perennial Stream Origins states that a stream channel is considered
perennial when there are fish crayfish (in the channel) amphibians (larval salamanders
and large multi year tadpoles) and /or clams present these noted streams were selected as
particularly requiring field verification Twelve streams were reviewed during the field
verification In all cases the intermittent/ perennial (I /P) point was adjusted to varying
degrees mainly as the result of the presence of salamanders or caddisflies
As a result of the verification TCG has begun reviewing the stream delineations To this
end a list is attached of streams that will be re evaluated The streams were chosen
based upon the following criteria
1 Stream scored in the intermittent range but was noted that salamanders were
present
2 Stream scored in the intermittent range but was noted that amphibians were
present
3 Stream scored between 27 29 but no aquatic species were present
4 In an effort to ensure quality control six additional streams that scored between
19 and <27, but either had no or weak aquatic species present, were chosen by
the Project Manager They were chosen since they were either large systems or
scored such that a re evaluation was deemed appropriate
The re evaluation will be performed by Mr Chris Sheats the Project Manager and Mr
Tim Savidge who is the Environmental Supervisor for TCG If the I/P point is altered
due to the presence of one of the listed biological indicators then the new point will be

located via a GPS with sub meter accuracy and the stream classification data sheet noted
TCG will correct the electronic files accordingly and provide the new files figures and
data sheets by May 25 2007
We apologize for the errors in our delineation We are moving expeditiously to rectify
the situation If you have any questions please contact me (919 732 1300) or Chris
Sheats (919 417 2732)
Sincerely
The Catena Group, Inc
?�h� 6 OL
Michael G Wood NCLSS
President
Attachments Stream Re Evaluation Lists

(1) (1) (1) (1) (D a) a) (D a) (1) a)
aaaan.a aaa as
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Cl) N N w 0 to 0 to U U to U
0 0 a) w 0 0 d) N w (� C
Cw N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O a)
N
(2-.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O
a
Q IO M C C C C C C C C C cc
M
o c w - - -- w - y `� c c c c c
0 0 0 0 0
c
C
va=lam) 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 0 3 0 a) a) a) m a)
Qi
cu 0 aaa a N
U
2,0 C 0 0 0 N Cl) o C N U N U N a) N
a "O t_n
a U m a a 'O t_n a "to _n
N N a a 0 a
N 2 N N 0 C
o
i N i EIf
a a0-
a a
N
>
aaa
EL
c c c c c
1-0
-°
me c E�s�zs E cu -0 Sys E E aa)) aa)) (te) aa))
a)zc aaCL aa� La
L
aaaaaa
0� a) E E E E E E i5 E E E mE E rn� 0 0 0 0 0
0
V
cu
Z U aau)QQQQQQ 0<<< QQt0 cnda. ddm
0
N
cn
r
a -- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
CL — —
C
—
a)
V
E
U
CD
c�
o Ow;
a)
31,
C
C
10 ti CO LO N M N �-
d N N N N N
WIN N N N N N N N N 0 N N N N N N C
M N N N
a
N
+�' a
C:
t E
W
� N
U
z
a)
o;
-
m a)
O
V
(N
D M N
€ N N
N
4a
(1)
o
M r `-
.� .. 04
E O
m -
N £
a) O W LL. J O a CY C) )
m 0M LL
OM m M M cM M M M
70
'�
V
m M M M M LM m Cl) M M M M co co co M
--'

MO
U
N
v
a)
r)
0
Y
7
N
a)
a)
m
U
C
m
7
C �
� a)
m 5
E
L
L N
rn a
L
N -0
E �O
N
cn _a
N t �
wok
ca
N
Q s
O �
a) ;
C
C y'P,P
0
Q
d1
a C
M
M a)
O
U
Q
E a Q
M
_
E —PL c
m CD
fl da
>M E
)
a) Q a)
a) a)
c O M C 0(n
O O O
O O
CO N=
0 O O
C f0 C C
07 O O
Q C C
O) O O +J � fD
}' — c C a)
C N C C
O
CV)
.a)
3 a
�mm -m = O o
� � � �
E _ C
@ o co � � o
Es -L3 c
§ °' 3 3
" ern 3 3 w.
cio-cmuivi0i
dE�z��
�a�i�a�ia
N C C O NCO
Qo Qn?
m O O ID N a) O
QQ_
�n Q
L 0
c° c c
n$
m o° c c E c
aa))
fp
Qad d o ,o
m o- m m
a ca m
L
p �O O P-�, la
E �p E E
r O
z =_ E E C 0aa
as
maa �o
CL
` .„
co
or
G
AV
i+ Ta
u
co t,C)
_
C
Lo-'O, LO
ti(0r0)
N
NNtiN
N
NN � N � N � aN o �N
CO �
}r
`
0
d
N Q
N N
RIV
U CL
U
W
ke
O
.a.f
a)
M
v d
EQQCiJ aw_)�a
�1774�2n.MU'
V
C
m co M (M M MHM
z (n w (n (n fn (n
Cl) M m M
(n (n (n (n
M M M co Cl) M Cl)
(n U)., co (n (n (n (n
MO
U
N
v
a)
r)
0
Y
7
N
a)
a)
m
U
C
m
7
C �
� a)
m 5
E
L
L N
rn a
L
N -0
E �O
N
cn _a

FW #11 0166 Gaston E W Connector
FW #11 -0166, Gaston E -W Connector
Lespinasse, Polly
Sent Tuesday May 08 2012 3 18 PM
To Carrillo Sonia
Attachments GasEW NCTA FEIS2011 02 doc (63 KB)
From Chambers, Marla J
Sent Tuesday February 15 2011 1 15 PM
To Mcgee, Melba
Cc Lespinasse, Polly Buncick, Marella, Militscher Chris @epamail epa gov, Hair, Sarah E SAW
Subject RE #11 0166, Gaston E W Connector
Sorry I dumped the guns Here is the Final version ratherthan the draft
Page 1 of 1
Marla J Chambers
Western NCDOT Permit Coordinator
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
12275 Swift Road
Oakboro NC 28129
Office & Fax [phone]
Work cell 704 984 1070
marla chambers @ncwildlife org
ncwildlife org
Get NC Wildlife Update — news including season dates bag limits legislative updates and more delivered to
your Inbox from the N C Wildlife Resources Commission
Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N C Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties
From Chambers, Marla J
Sent Tuesday, February 15 2011 11 30 AM
To Mcgee Melba
Cc Lespinasse Polly, Buncick, Marella Militscher Chris @epamail epa gov, Hair Sarah E SAW
Subject #11 0166, Gaston E W Connector
Please accept the attached comments Let me know if you have any questions
Marla J Chambers
Western NCDOT Permit Coordinator
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
12275 Swift Road
Oakboro NC 28129
Office & Fax [phone]
Work cell 704 984 1070
marla chambers @ncwildlife org
ncwildlife org
Get NC Wildlife Update — news including season dates bag limits legislative updates and more delivered to
your Inbox from the N C Wildlife Resources Commission
Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N C Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties
https / /mall nc gov /owa/ ?ae= Item &t =IPM Note &1d= RgAAAADMSzLcd9W2TJH14 %2bm 5/17/2012

® North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
TO Melba McGee Environmental Coordinator
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
FROM Marla Chambers Western NCDOT Permit Coordinator �CuL
Habitat Conservation Program NCWRC
DATE February 14 2011
SUBJECT Review of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the proposed Gaston
East West Connector a toll road from 185 west of Gastonia to 1485 near the
Charlotte Douglas International Airport Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties TIP
No U -3321 DENR Project No 11 0166, due 02/09/2011, extended to
02/14/2011
The North Carolina Turnpike Authority (NCTA), now under the North Carolina Department of
Transportation ( NCDOT) has submitted a Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for the
proposed Gaston East West Connector Staff biologists with the North Carolina Wildlife
Resources Commission ( NCWRC) have reviewed the information provided and represent the
agency at Turnpike Environmental Agency Coordination (TEAL) meetings These comments
are provided in accordance with the provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act (42
• S C 4332(2)(c)) and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat 401 as amended 16
• S C 661 667d)
Comments regarding this project have been submitted to NCDOT and NCTA as appropriate
throughout the planning process through written comments emails and participation in
meetings Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) were submitted July
7, 2009 and the concerns and recommendations expressed regarding direct and indirect impacts
to the natural environment resulting from the project remain valid
NCTA proposes to construct a controlled access new location toll facility from 185 west of
Gastonia through southern Gaston County to 1485 near the Charlotte Douglas International
Airport in Mecklenburg County The Recommended Alternative identified in the DEIS, Detailed
Study Alternative (DSA) 9 was presented as the Preferred Alternative in the Final
Mailing Address Division of Inland Fisheries 1721 Mail Service Center Raleigh NC 27699 1721
Telephone [phone] Fax [phone]

Gaston East West Connector FEIS 2 February 14 2011
Gaston & Mecklenburg Co s
Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) and received concurrence by the interagency team as
the Least Environmentally Damaging Practicable Alternative (LEDPA) Several design
modifications have been made to the Preferred Alternative since the DEIS most as a result of
comments received and the addition of service roads As a result stream impacts were reduced
by approximately 25 percent (2 36 miles) to 36 416 linear feet and wetland impacts were reduced
by 6 percent (0 4 acres) to 7 0 acres Revision of the typical section was included in the design
modifications which reduces the project from a six lane facility to a four lane road east of US
321 with an additional auxiliary lane in each direction between NC 273 and 1 485 West of US
321 a two lane roadway is proposed initially with two additional lanes to be constructed later
We remain concerned about the considerable direct and indirect impacts expected to occur as a
result of the project Water quality in much of the project area is currently degraded as
evidenced by the number of streams on the State s 303(d) list of impaired waters that cross the
project or are in the study area Further degradation to area waterways appears to be likely from
both direct and indirect project impacts In the quantitative analysis of indirect and cumulative
effects in the FEIS, projected impervious cover was used to determine water quality effects
Considerable increases in impervious coverage are expected under the No Build scenario going
from 12 5 percent impervious area for current conditions of the study area to 19 3 percent
Additional increases are projected if the project is built to 19 8 percent impervious cover with
four of the eight watersheds exceeding 25 percent coverage The project accounts for
approximately 800 acres or about 6 8 percent of the cumulative increase
The quantitative analysis used tree cover and forest interior habitat to determine impacts to
wildlife and address habitat fragmentation A range of approximately 8 500 to 20 500 acres of
tree cover were projected to be lost as a result of future development under the No Build
scenario Approximately 1 000 acres of tree cover would be directly impacted by the refined
preliminary design of the Build alternative These direct impacts would include 290 acres of
forested interior habitat and would have the potential to reduce the quality of an additional 480
acres of forested interior habitat within about 300 feet of the right of way The changes in the
development pattern associated with the Preferred Alternative could increase tree cover loss by
100 to 1,400 acres and the cumulative loss of forest cover was projected to be between 9 500 and
22 900 acres over existing conditions a decrease of 10 to 24 percent This analysis appears to
reveal several locations where wildlife crossings may be appropriate to maintain some
connectivity between forest habitats fragmented by the project
With or without constructing the proposed project considerable changes in land use impervious
cover and wildlife habitat are projected to occur and construction of the project is expected to
incrementally increase these effects It appears that considerable efforts will be needed to reduce
the negative effects to water quality and wildlife in the project area even if the project is not
constructed and we strongly encourage the local officials NCTA, and NCDOT to work together
to implement protective actions The document provides a list of mitigation strategies that could
be used to reduce the magnitude of the indirect and cumulative impacts from the project Our
`Guidance Memorandum to Address and Mitigate Secondary and Cumulative Impacts to
Aquatic and Terrestrial Wildlife Resources and Water Quality (NCWRC 2002), also provides
measures to mitigate secondary and cumulative impacts

Gaston East West Connector FEIS
Gaston & Mecklenburg Co s
February 14 2011
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this project If you have any questions
regarding these comments please contact me at [phone] We look forward to continuing
our participation in the planning process for this project
Literature Cited
NCWRC (North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission) 2002 Guidance Memorandum to
Address and Mitigate Secondary and Cumulative Impacts to Aquatic and Terrestrial
Wildlife Resources and Water Quality NCWRC, Raleigh Available
http //www ncwildlife org /Wildlife_Species_Con /documents /pg7c3_impacts pdf
(February 2010)
cc Sarah E Hair, USACE
Marella Buncick USFWS
Christopher Militscher, USEPA
Polly Lespinasse NCDWQ

FW comments on Gaston E W 2A
FW comments on Gaston E -W 2A
Lespinasse, Polly
Sent Tuesday May 08 2012 3 00 PM
To Carrillo Sonia
From Matthews Kathy [mailto Matthews Kathy @epamail epa gov]
Sent Tuesday, March 04, 2008 10 30 AM
To Mllitscher Chris
Cc polly lespinasse
Subject comments on Gaston E W 2A
Chris
Page 1 of 2
I am still looking at the voluminous paper that we received on this project but wanted to share some of my
thoughts before the meeting this afternoon
In general the wetland ratings are not useful at all I have had to go look at the rating sheets to get decent
information about each wetland I was very annoyed to see that some forested wetlands rated a zero dust
because of their size Polly and I agree that only non wetlands should rate a zero I have already told George
that after the LEDPA is chosen I d like to see NCWAM run on all the wetlands in the LEDPA alternative
That said it doesn t appear that there are significant wetland impacts proposed at most of the mayor crossings
except for the ones we are already going to look at Of course the minor crossings may have alot of wetland
impact but that info is not provided Based on wetland impacts I don t think I will recommend any other crossings
for discussion of bridging
The streams concern me very much particularly because there are 3 different 303d listed streams in the corridors
(Crowders Creek Abernethy and Catawba Creek) They are all listed because of degraded biological integrity
due to urban runoff and storm sewers That s dust the kind of impact that the road is going to have which means
that it will be difficult overcoming the antidegradation requirements (cannot cause or contribute to continued
degradation of a waterbody) NCTA should begin examining how they will work toward ensuring that the project
does not contribute to the continued degradation
It may be a hard thing to show since I ran some of the impact numbers For example two of the corridors run
parallel to Crowders Creek and hits all of the tribs The western most corridor is a little farther away but still hits
most of the tribs Alternative 4 has about 26 000 linear feet of impacts dust to the Crowders Creek tributaries
Alternative 58 has over 23 000 linear feet of impacts to the Crowder Creek tribs I think NCTA should consider
bridging more of these smaller streams and make commitments for significant water treatment or show
development controls in these areas to ensure that they can comply with anti deg This is especially important
for Crowders creek although the same goes for Catawba Creek and Abernethy Creek This should be worked
out in the EIS prior to LEDPA since these commitments will potentially add significant costs to all three corridors
So based on what I said above I would recommend bridges /extended bridges for the following crossings
HD29 (Crowders Creek trib has high quality wetland not terribly expensive)
HD 31 (Crowders Creek trib)
HD 32 (Crowders Creek trib)
JB1 (Crowders Creek trib 1 7 acres of wetlands which would be a total take if not bridged Wetland
preservation will help the antideg issue)
JB2 (Crowders Creek trib 1 9 acres of wetlands)
https //mall nc gov /owa/ ?ae= Item &t =IPM Note &ld= RgAAAADMSzLcd9W2TJH14 %2bm 5/17/2012

FW comments on Gaston E W 2A
Page 2 of 2
JD6 (Crowders Creek tnb)
JD9 (Crowders Creek trib)
JD17 (Crowders Creek tabs multiple tribs and wetland)
JD19 (Crowders Creek tnb)
JD31 (Catawba Creek tnb)
KD2 (Catawba Creek tnb the stream table shows over 1200 If of impacts by culvert)
KD3 (Catawba Creek tnb extend to avoid wetland)
KD 17 (Same as above)
KD29 (Beaverdam Creek the impacts in the stream table are much larger than on the Hydraulic table (1200 If
2300 If ?) Also I think the wetlands are hi quality)
KD31 (Beaverdam Creek/Lake Legion again the impacts in the stream table are much larger than on the
hydraulic table and I think wetlands are Hi Q)
KD 54 (Catawba Creek high stream impacts and high quality wetland )
This is alot but as I said they have a high hurdle to get over with antideg and I think they at least bridge these
mayor crossings as a start
Thanks
Kathy Matthews
USEPA Region 4 Wetlands Section
109 T W Alexander Dr
Durham NC 27711
MAIL CODE E143 04
phone [phone]
cell 919 619 7319
https / /mail nc gov /owa/ ?ae= Item &t =IPM Note &id= RgAAAADMSzLcd9W2TJH14 %2bm 5/17/2012

FW question about DWQ ratings for Gaston e w
FW question about DWQ ratings for Gaston a -w
Lespinasse, Polly
Sent Tuesday May 08 2012 3 01 PM
To Carrillo Sonia
From Matthews Kathy [mallto Matthews Kathy @epamall epa gov]
Sent Tuesday, March 04, 2008 9 15 AM
To Polly Lespinasse
Subject Re question about DWQ ratings for Gaston e w
Page 1 of 2
Thanks Polly I agree it is annoying to have to pore through the data sheets to figure out what a site may really
provide Unfortunately the NRTR doesn t have any site specific Info except for the WRS data sheets I am
pretty much assuming that anything Identified as PF01 Is a high quality wetland dust because there Is no rhyme or
reason to the ratings here
That said there are really no crossings that have high Impact to wetlands (other than the ones we are already
supposed to look at) so I probably won t add any sites to our review based on wetlands I did tell George Hoops
that I would like for NCWAM to be run on all the wetlands after the LEDPA is chosen I think that would be
appropriate for 4A review
My main concern this morning is looking at the stream crossings particularly for the ones on the 303d streams
and their tribs Crowder s Creek has a particularly large number of small crossings on its tribs because one
corridor runs parallel and hits all the tribs They aren t proposing more than double culverts for any of these
crossings All of the 303d streams are listed for biological integrity due to urban runoff and storm sewers That
means that the road project could potentially exacerbate the degradation or would probably at least contribute to
the continued degradation in violation of antidegradation regs
Some of the culverts under the ramps are incredibly longl But they don t want to look at those today so I may be
getting ahead of myself
Are you coming up for the meeting? I hope you have a safe trip to Raleigh'
Kathy Matthews
USEPA Region 4 Wetlands Section
109 T W Alexander Dr
Durham NC 27711
MAIL CODE E143 04
phone [phone]
cell 919 619 7319
Polly Lespmasse <polly lespmasse @ncmad net>
03/04/2008 09 02 AM
To Kathy Matthews /RTP /USEPA/US @EPA
cc
Subject Re question about DWQ ratings for Gaston e w
https //ma11 nc gov /owa/ ?ae= Item &t =IPM Note &1d= RgAAAADMSzLcd9W2TJH14 %2bm 5/17/2012

FW question about DWQ ratings for Gaston e w
Kathy
My position on a wetland rating of a zero would be that it isn t a
wetland It has to provide at least some of the functions on the form
Unfortunately JCA did the better fob of stream classification so I am
kind of bummed about that It also proves to me that no matter how vast
the proDect I am going to have to go through everything Its very
disheartening really
I have been out to two other TIP proDect delineations recently and
noticed that both of the consultants scored all the wetlands really low
too I don t think anything scored higher than about a 25 and most
things were around a 10 (all forested systems) I made comments to both
of them that I believed the scores should be higher I m not sure what
is going on Hopefully NCWAM will cause people to look at things more
consistently
Any thoughts on the meeting this afternoon's
Matthews Kathy @epamail epa gov wrote
> Hi Polly
• I was looking at the Gaston info for tomorrow and noticed that some
• of the forested wetlands rated a big fat 0 under the DWQ rating
• system Do you know if that is possible? If something that is keyed
• out as a palustrine forested system can rate a 0
• I noted that the particular consultant (JCA) who gave out several
• zeros also gave alot of single -digit ratings and seemd to rate
• impounded wetlands the highest haha
> Thanks
• Kathy Matthews
• USEPA - Region 4 Wetlands Section
• 109 T W Alexander Dr
• Durham NC 27711
• MAIL CODE E143 -04
• phone [phone]
• cell 919 -619 -7319
Polly Lespinasse - Polly Lespinasse @ncmai.l net
Environmental Specialist
North Carolina Dept of Environment & Natural Resources
Div of Water Quality
610 E Center Ave Suite 301
Mooresville NC 28115
Ph 704 663 1699 Fax [phone]
Page 2 of 2
https //mail nc gov /owa/ ?ae= Item &t =IPM Note &id= RgAAAADMSzLcd9W2TJH14 %2bm 5/17/2012

FW Gaston E W parkway and EEP mitigation proposal for preservation Page I of 2
FW Gaston E -W parkway and EEP mitigation proposal for preservation
Lespinasse, Polly
Sent Tuesday May 08 2012 3 02 PM
To Carrillo Sonia
Attachments bobs pocket PACGTC memo doc (3 MB)
From Matthews Kathy @epamall epa gov [mailto Matthews Kathy @epamall epa gov]
Sent Friday, October 09, 2009 10 27 AM
To Lespinasse, Polly, Chambers, Marla I , Marella_Buncick @fws gov, Wrenn, Brian
Cc Steven W Lund @usace army mil
Subject Fw Gaston E W parkway and EEP mitigation proposal for preservation
FYI Please see the message below I would like to bring this up on Tuesday We told EEP that they should
probably come to a NCTA (Gaston) meeting this fall to talk about mitigation I have attached the Bob s Pocket
Info from EEP EEP is currently seeking a mitigation ratio of 2 1 for the preservation of streams on the site
Kathy Matthews
USEPA Region 4 Wetlands & Marine Reg Section
109 T W Alexander Dr
Durham NC 27711
MAIL CODE E143 04
phone [phone]
cell 919 619 7319
Forwarded by Kathy Matthews /RTP /USEPA/US on 10/09/2009 10 18 AM
From Kathy Matthews /RTP /USEPA/US
To Chris Mditscher /R4 /USEPA/US @EPA
Cc Tom Welborn /R4 /USEPA/US @EPA Linda Rimer /RTP /USEPA/US @EPA Heinz Mueller /R4 /USEPA/US @EPA Jennifer
Derby /R4 /US EPA/U S@ EPA
Date 10/09/2009 08 34 AM
Subject Gaston E W parkway and EEP mitigation proposal for preservation
Chris
attended an EEP PACG TC (technical committee) meeting yesterday One of the topics was a new proposed
preservation site In McDowell County called Bobs Pocket It is In the upper reaches of the Catawba 01 HUC
within one of EEP s Local Watershed Planning Areas It Is a 2 400 acre property with a (State significant)
Significant Natural Heritage Area on it There are perhaps 120 000 If of streams on the site that could be
preserved About 1/3 of the land has been timbered in the past 25 years the remaining 2/3 is about 80 years old
mixed pine /hardwood forest The site would preserve the headwaters of several watersheds and looks like a
very unique and good opportunity The PACG TC intends to visit the site on Nov 16
We have not come to an agreement on potential mitigation ratios for the site that is a big issue However
another big Issue Is that EEP was intending the site to be partial mitigation for Gaston E W parkway which as you
may know Is at the very bottom of the Catawba 01 HUC (and some of It is actually in Catawba 02 or Catawba
03) In a different ecoreglon and about 100 miles away
https //mail nc gov /owa/ ?ae= Item &t =IPM Note &id= RgAAAADMSzLcd9W2TJH14 %2bm 5/17/2012

FW Gaston E W parkway and EEP mitigation proposal for preservation Page 2 of 2
As you also know I have spoken several times in meetings about the importance of avoiding minimizing and
mitigating impacts to the streams along the project the vast majority of which are listed on the 303(d) list for
urban runoff and other similar activities Based on the Draft EIS we have to assume that they may have up to
60 000 If (11 miles) of direct impacts to these streams My intent was that the impacts to the 303(d) listed
streams would be compensated by mitigation that is relatively close to the project area and would provide
functional benefits to the waterbodies impacted Bob s Pocket project although it appears to be a really nice and
unique site would not provide any functional benefit to the impacted waterbodies and would not provide any
replacement of lost functions (since it is a preservation project)
Because NCTA apparently didn t understand that message or didn t bother to pass it on to EEP I have informed
EEP that as a member of the Gaston Merger team I would not likely approve the use of Bob s Pocket At our
Tuesday meeting I also intend to make sure that NCTA understands that they should talk to EEP about
opportunities in South Gaston County which should be available
Thanks
Kathy Matthews
USEPA Region 4 Wetlands & Marine Reg Section
109 T W Alexander Dr
Durham NC 27711
MAIL CODE E143 04
phone [phone]
cell 919 619 7319
https //mail nc gov /owa/ ?ae= Item &t =IPM Note &id= RgAAAADMSzLcd9W2TJHI4 %2bm 5/17/2012

sN
Memorandum
To PACGTC Chair Scott McLendon
From Marc Recktenwald
Cc Andrea Leslie Mike McDonald
Subject Proposed Preservation Project Bobs Pocket
Date September 30, 2009
This memo proposes the acquisition of Bobs Pocket, an approximately 2,400 acre property in
McDowell County that includes Bobs Creek Pocket Wilderness to satisfy stream restoration
equivalent needs in Catawba 01 If protected, this project will protect the entire watershed of a
number of streams in the Muddy Creek local watershed planning area, also insuring the preservation
of a Significant Natural Heritage Area Due to the project s scope (protecting an entire watershed)
and qualifications, we request that an alternative compensatory mitigation ratio of 2 1 be applied
Bobs Pocket — Background
Bobs Pocket is located on an approximately 2,400 acre property in southeastern McDowell County
which is within the Northern Mountains ecoregion It is in the Muddy Creek local watershed
planning area and is within targeted local watersheds 03050101040010 and 03050101040020 This
entire property has been identified as a priority preservation project by both the Muddy Creek
Restoration Partners in their 2003 restoration plan (2003) and in EEP s 2008 Phase IV effort for the
Muddy Creek Local Watershed Plan
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program identifies six hundred and ten acres as a Significant
Natural Heritage Area (SNHA) of state significance called Bobs Creek Pocket Wilderness (NC
Natural Heritage Program 2009 Figure 1) Most of these 610 acres are located on the northern
portion of the 2 400 acre Bobs Pocket property considered here For ease of discussion an this memo the
entire 2 400 acre property will called Bobs Pocket and the northern SHNA will be called Bobs Creek Pocket
Wilderness
Most of the forests in Bobs Creek Pocket Wilderness are mature second or third growth, with
communities typical of the southwestern foothills region namely Acidic Cove Forest Dry Mesic
Oak Hickory Forest, and Chestnut Oak Forest (NC Natural Heritage Program 2005) The
Wilderness hosts a number of Natural Heritage Element Occurrences (NHEOs), including balsam
ragwort, Sullivan s entodon, Appalachian golden banner round leaf serviceberry and sweet white
trillium

p�
N - �i" jam(( (� (,� i�\ '+��� � � -• `.� � �'^�8 > f, h� Yy���Y �.' � f � \� ��-�� X''�
r r—
� g
q r� _ � � yl- t � I` fr �✓ �� 1 t ��� �
ifs t 16
NN
v 7w
jw�yv �r f
I� ,erg s �' � ��"1 � — ��,� � �.,1 �_L ��s'� � i � `�.�.,�•` � � I —r•J
N
U
O
R-(
V
U
rn
O
pq
s�.
O
`4
U
O
.fl
O
t�
b�A

The ownership of the 2 400 acre Bobs Pocket has passed through a number of timber companies,
and in 2006, a local family owning several timber companies (including Gilkey Lumber Company
and Broad River Forest Products) acquired it for both timber and investment The property is
entirely forested and is a patchwork of forests of different ages Approximately 1 500 acres are 80+
years old, 200 300 acres were thinned in response to a southern pine beetle infestation about 10 15
years ago, 200 acres were thinned within the last 5 years and the remainder is a mix of planted pine
and mixed forest that was thinned more than 25 years ago (T Parton personal communication)
Where forests have been cut more recently forested buffers have been left intact Logging roads
were built to avoid stream crossings
Bobs Pocket is an ideal location for residential development with excellent views and numerous
relatively flat areas for homesites The landowners have entertained numerous inquiries by potential
buyers In 2008, the land was under contract for sale but the deal fell through An adjacent tract
that would allow easy road access to the property is currently for sale
Bobs Creek Pocket Wilderness is also valued locally as a wilderness This portion of the property
was set aside from timbering in the 1970s by then owner Bowaters Carolina Corporation An eight
mile trail system was developed and the area was opened to the public for hiking and back country
camping Now much of the larger 2,400 acre Bobs Pocket is leased for hunting
Bobs Pocket is on a small mountain and contains the headwaters of a number of class C streams that
are considered warm water by Wildlife Resources Commission Streams examined by EEP staff are
in excellent condition characterized by intact riparian buffers and stable channels (Figures 2 4)
Streams range in character from bedrock bottomed systems of slides and waterfalls to slow sand
gravel bed systems punctuated by bedrock mckpoints Those wetlands observed were seeps
Figures 2 4 Streams on Bobs Pocket Clockwise from upper left Bobs Creek UT to Stanfords
Creek, and Hemlock Falls
Local Watershed Plan Context
The Muddy Creek watershed has been the focus of a watershed planning and restoration strategy
since 1998 The Muddy Creek Restoration Partnership, a consortium of many local and regional
organizations including the McDowell County Soil and Water Conservation District, Duke Energy
and Trout Unlimited, developed a watershed restoration plan and feasibility study in 2003 Since

2004 a concentrated effort has been underway to implement priority restoration and preservation
projects EEP has been a key partner in project implementation
Although EEP did not develop the watershed plan itself, we consider the Muddy Creek effort a local
watershed plan because it has the key elements of a local watershed plan (including monitoring a
watershed plan, a stakeholder effort and project implementation) EEP has been very active in
project implementation (EEP, 2009) In 2008, we contracted with Equinox Environmental to
conduct a Phase IV planning effort to augment the existing plan, developing a detailed project atlas
of stream restoration and preservation projects and performing landowner outreach As of August
2009 EEP has eleven instituted projects and four projects in negotiation in the watershed We
project that the instituted projects will yield 56,546 SMU and 54 WMU The Partnership has
worked with other funding sources (Clean Water Management Trust Fund DOT Duke Energy
EPA EQIP NC Ag Cost Share NC Division of Water Resources) to implement 21 additional
projects consisting of a mix of stream restoration riparian buffer restoration, and livestock exclusion
projects Including EEP s projects, there has been more than $13 million spent on the
implementation of protects on more than 19 miles of stream in the watershed
Bobs Pocket is a headwater site of both South Muddy Creek and North Muddy Creek and it is
upstream of numerous EEP and non EEP projects in the watershed It is directly upstream of three
EEP projects currently in design acquisition or negotiation (Figure 5) including the following
1 Bobs Creek Patton a stream restoration and preservation project in design
2 UT to N Muddy Haney a preservation only project under option
3 Bobs Creek Cochran stream restoration site already constructed through NC Division of
Water Resources funds In need of repair and a conservation easement EEP is in
negotiation with the landowner to explore repair and easement opportunities
Figure 5 Bobs Pocket and adjacent EEP projects
2

Stream Assets and Mitigation Needs
Stream length on the parcel can be estimated using two GIS datasets The USGS 124,000
topographic dataset shows 55 292 ft of stream The detailed hydrography dataset recently developed
by the NC Center for Geographic Information and Analysis (CGIA) from LIDAR imagery shows
143,589 ft of stream almost three times that of the USGS dataset Field experience with both
datasets reveals that the USGS dataset severely underestimates stream length in the mountains and
foothills The CGIA dataset was derived from an assumed drainage area and stream origin
relationship Our experience has demonstrated that this dataset is a better estimate of streams on the
ground, but it can both overestimate and underestimate stream length
In order to get an accurate determination of the length of both perennial and intermittent streams it
is necessary to perform a field based stream survey Based on our experience with the different
stream datasets we believe that an estimate of 120,000 linear ft is conservative and reasonable for
this parcel
We intend to satisfy a portion or all of 45 000 SMU of restoration equivalents most of which would
be applied to a North Carolina Turnpike Authority project (Gaston East West Connector from 185
west of Gastonia in Gaston County to I 485/NC 160 southwest of Charlotte in Mecklenburg
County, North Carolina) which is projected to impact 37,850 linear ft of stream Mitigation for this
project must be instituted by June 30 2011
Proposed Credit Scenario
Due to the land s ecological importance and its location in relation to other projects in the Muddy
Creek local watershed planning area, EEP believes it is critical to protect the entire parcel, which
would ensure the preservation of the watershed of a number of headwater streams
Bobs Pocket has the following characteristics that qualify it as an excellent opportunity for
preservation
1 Site is a high quality intact riparian natural area composed of native vegetation (criterion
#10 in the High Quality Preservation (HQP) guidelines updated in 3/9/2004)
2 Site is a Significant Natural Heritage Area of state rank (criterion #8 in HQP guidelines)
3 Site is within a local watershed planning area
4 Site benefits restored and protected functions in immediately adjacent mitigation sites
5 Site is upstream of numerous other buffer restoration livestock exclusion, stream restoration
and preservation project sites in the watershed
6 Site contains numerous headwater streams
7 Site is under threat of development
We propose that a compensatory mitigation ratio of 2 1 be applied to preserved streams on Bobs
Pocket due to the land's ecological importance, location in relation to other projects in the
Muddy Creek local watershed planning area, and the protection of the subject streams' entire
watersheds
Stewardship
If Bobs Pocket is acquired by EEP it is our recommendation that it be turned over to the NC
Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC) for management as public gamelands due to the interest of
the public in maintaining recreational access to the property EEP staff have contacted Gordon
Warburton who oversees large tract acquisitions for WRC, he has indicated initial WRC interest in
acquiring the property WRC will need Commission approval in order to pursue the acquisition of
the property with EEP

References
Ecosystem Enhancement Program 2009 Muddy Creek Watershed Restoration Plan Fact Sheet
http / /www nceep net /services /lwTs /muddy creek /Muddy Creek Factsheet %20tan09 pdf
Muddy Creek Restoration Partners 2003 Feasibility Report and Restoration Plan for the Muddy
Creek Watershed December 2003
http / /www ncee_p net /services /lyMs /muddy creek /Muddy Creek plan 2003 pdf
NC Natural Heritage Program 2009 Significant Natural Heritage Area Report Bobs Creek Pocket
Wilderness From NHP database, July 17 2009
NC Natural Heritage Program 2005 An Inventory of the Significant Natural Areas of McDowell
County North Carolina November 2005
Parton Tim 2009 Phone conversation Gilkey Lumber Company and Bobs Pocket landowner
Con

III FW Comments on Field Tour Meeting Summary Gaston E W Connector Page 1 of 2
FW Comments on Field Tour Meeting Summary Gaston E -W Connector
Lespinasse, Polly
Sent Tuesday May 08 2012 3 01 PM
To Carrillo Sonia
From Matthews Kathy [mailto Matthews Kathy @epamail epa gov]
Sent Monday, March 03, 2008 11 29 AM
To Matthews Kathy
Cc Marla Chambers, Mllitscher Chris, Hoops, George, hankg, Marella Buncick, marla chambers,
polly lespinasse, Renee Gledhill Earley, Cook, Robert (Planning) , steven w lund
Subject Re Comments on Field Tour Meeting Summary Gaston E W Connector
Jennifer I found another comment on the Field tour summary On page 4 it states that Stream S131 is an
unnamed perennial tributary to Crowders Creek> It has a DWQ score of 26 However in my notes S131
scored a 44 (which is more appropriate for a perennial stream) and S132 scored a 26 S132 is a short
Intermittent trib to S131 and 26 would be a more appropriate score for an intermittent stream
Thanks
Kathy Matthews
USEPA Region 4 Wetlands Section
109 T W Alexander Dr
Durham NC 27711
MAIL CODE E143 04
phone [phone]
cell 919 619 7319
Kathy Matthews /RTP /USEPA/US To Hoops George <George Hoops @fhwa dot gov> Kathy
Matthews /RTP /USEPA/US @EPA Chris Militscher /R4 /USEPA/US @EPA
Marella Buncick <Marella Buncick @fws gov> <marla chambers @ctc net>
02/12/2008 04 55 PM Marla Chambers <chambersml @carolina rr com>
<steven w lund @saw02 usace army mil> <polly lespinasse @ncmail net>
<hankg @cityofgastoniacom> Cook Robert \(Planning \)
<rwcook @ci charlotte nc us> Renee Gledhill Earley <Renee Gledhill
Earley @ncmail net>
cc
Subject Comments on Field Tour Meeting Summary Gaston E W Connector
Jennifer
As I mentioned in the February 5 2008 meeting I have some comments on the Field Tour Meeting Summary
for the December 17 18 2007 field tour of the Gaston E W Connector
In particular I recommend that the following language be added to Site 4 Ms Matthews ( USEPA) expressed
concerns that the consultant appears not to have accurately portrayed Wetland 159 a forested wetland and that
the wetland scored so low using the DWQ s Wetland Rating System when it appears to be at least a medium
https //mail nc gov /owa/ ?ae= Item &t =IPM Note &id= RgAAAADMSzLcd9W2TJH14 %2bm 5/17/2012

FW Comments on Field Tour Meeting Summary Gaston E W Connector - Page 2 of 2
quality system
Also for Site 8 please add Ms Matthews expressed concerns with the use of the DWQ Ratings for Wetland 67
which appears to be a high quality forested wetland Ms Matthews expressed general concerns for the use of the
DWQ Rating system on this project because she believes it does not provide meaningful information on the
condition or quality of the wetland
Thanks
Kathy Matthews
USEPA Region 4 Wetlands Section
109 T W Alexander Dr
Durham NC 27711
MAIL CODE E143 04
phone [phone]
cell 919 619 7319
https //mail nc gov /owa/ ?ae= Item &t =IPM Note &id= RgAAAADMSzLcd9W2TJH14 %2bm 5/17/2012

FW Final Delineation Mapping and Data Forms for the Gaston E W Connector Page 1 of 2
FW Final Delineation Mapping and Data Forms for the Gaston E -W
Connector
Lespinasse, Polly
Sent Tuesday May 08 2012 3 02 PM
To Carrillo Sonia
From mcgloden @pbsj com [mailto mcgloden @pbsj com]
Sent Friday, May 07, 2010 12 57 PM
To Sarah E Hair @usace army mil, Lespinasse, Polly
Cc Dayton, Jeff, jsgurak,
Subject Final Delineation Mapping and Data Forms for the Gaston E W Connector
Liz and Polly
Please find attached the final mapping and data forms for streams and wetlands delineated within DSA 9
of the Gaston E W Connector project Mapping and data forms have been modified and updated based
on two on Site meetings to review Jurisdictional areas Also included are two summary tables for
streams and wetlands that provide projected impacts based on the preferred alternative refined design
Revisions include
Figure 2 3B W34 was expanded to include the entire area between S28 and S29
Figure 2 3C S50 was removed
Figure 2 3M W252 and W253 are now connected via a linear wetland
Figure 2 3R S318D was changed from intermittent to perennial
No isolated wetlands occur within DSA 9 Rapanos forms have been updated to reflect this change
Based on the delivery of the attached mapping and data forms PBS &J and NCTA request that the
USACE provide a jurisdictional determination for streams and wetlands delineated within DSA 9
Thank you for your attention to this very important project I look forward to meeting with you later this
month to review the delineation in Monroe I will send you the meeting location and time next week
Please let me know if you have any questions
Sincerely
Michael
Michael C Gloden
Senior Scientist
PBS &J
1616 E Millbrook Road Suite 310
Raleigh NC 27609
ol 919 876 6888 (Main)
l 919 876 6848
mcgloden @pbsj com
www pbsJ com
File(s) will be available for download until 12 May 2010
File NCDWQ Stream ID Forms Gaston EW_May2010 pdf 6 468 81 KB
File NCDWQ Wetland Rating Forms DSA9 Gaston EW May2010 pdf 3 118 89 KB
https //mail nc gov /owa/ ?ae= Item &t =IPM Note &id= RgAAAADMSzLcd9W2TJHI4 %2bm 5/17/2012

FW Final Delineation Mapping and Data Forms for the Gaston E W Connector Page 2 of 2
File Rapanos Forms_ DSA9_ Gaston EW_May2010 pdf 7 832 73 KB
File USACE Stream Rating Forms DSA9 Gaston EW_May2010 pdf 23,960 35 KB
File USACE Wetland Determination Forms DSA9 Gaston EW May2010 pdf 9 648 66 KB
File AttchmtB PrefAlt_ Stream Impacts Summary 050610 pdf 4167 KB
File AttchmtB_ PrefAlt_W_etland Impacts Suinmary_050610 pdf 28 55 KB
File FEIS_&2 3_DSA9PrelimDes April2010 pdf, 5 033 80 KB
You have received attachment link(s) within this email sent via PBSJ SendIT To retrieve the attachment
(s) please click on the link(s)
New Users Click on the attachment link to register and create a unique password To download a
userguide visit http //sendrt pbsj com
Accellion File Transfer
https //mail nc gov /owa/ ?ae= Item &t =IPM Note &>d= RgAAAADMSzLcd9W2TJHI4 %2bm 5/17/2012

FW parameters for WQ modeling Gaston and Monroe projects Page 1 of 1
FW parameters for WQ modeling, Gaston and Monroe projects
Lespinasse, Polly
Sent Tuesday May 08 2012 3 02 PM
To Carrillo Sonia
From Matthews Kathy @epamail epa gov [mailto Matthews Kathy @epamail epa gov]
Sent Friday, September 04, 2009 11 43 AM
To Harris, Jennifer, george hoops @dot gov, marella_buncick @fws gov, Steven w lund @saw02 usace army mil,
Lespinasse, Polly, Lespinasse, Polly, Chambers, Marla J , Mllitscher Chris @epamail epa gov, TBAllen @pbsj com
Subject parameters for WQ modeling, Gaston and Monroe projects
I finally took a good look at the 303(d) list for these areas Most of the streams are listed for Chlorophyll a
turbidity or failure of biological standards Therefore I think the proposed parameters for modeling are adequate
(nitrogen phosphorus and sediment)
Thanks
Kathy Matthews
USEPA Region 4 Wetlands & Marine Reg Section
109 T W Alexander Dr
Durham NC 27711
MAIL CODE E143 04
phone [phone]
cell 919 619 7319
https //ma11 nc gov /owa/9ae= Item &t =IPM Note &1d= RgAAAADMSzLcd9W2TJHI4 %2bm 5/17/2012

FW Gaston Water Quality Analysis
FW Gaston Water Quality Analysis
Lespinasse, Polly
Sent Tuesday May 08 2012 3 21 PM
To Carrillo Sonia
Attachments NCTA_Responseto_WRCComment -1 pdf (73 KB)
Page 1 of 2
From Gurak, JIII S [ mailto JIII Gurak @atkinsglobal com]
Sent Friday, December 09, 20114 01 PM
To Lespinasse, Polly
Cc Shumate, Christy, Allen, Thomas B
Subject RE Gaston Water Quality Analysis
Polly
Yes this is a revised edition Changes were made in response to comments from WRC I ve attached the WRC
comment /response letter for your use If you have additional questions please let me and /or Brad Allen know
Jill
Jill Gurak PE AICP
Project Director Transportation
ATKINS
1616 East Millbrook Rd Ste 310 Raleigh NC 27615 1 Tel [phone] Fax [phone] Cell [phone]
Email aiil gurak @atkinsglobai com I Web www atkmsgiobal com /northamerica www atklnsglobal com
From Lespinasse, Polly [mailto polly lespinasse @ncdenr gov]
Sent Friday, December 09, 2011 2 04 PM
To Gurak, JIII S
Subject Gaston Water Quality Analysis
Jill
I have downloaded the document at the link you provided Can you advise if this is a revised edition? If so, is
there any way to provide information on where the revisions occurred (maybe even the sections)? Right now I
would have to go through both documents concurrently to see where the changes occur
Thanks
Polly Lespinasse Polly Lespinasse @ncdenr gov
Environmental Senior Specialist
North Carolina Dept of Environment & Natural Resources
Div of Water Quality
https //mail nc gov /owa/ ?ae= Item &t =IPM Note &id= RgAAAADMSzLcd9W2TJHI4 %2bm 5/17/2012

FW Gaston Water Quality Analysis
610 E Center Ave Suite 301
Mooresville NC 28115
Ph 704 235 2190 Fax [phone]
Page 2 of 2
E mall correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records
Law and may be disclosed to third parties unless the content is exempt by statute or other regulation
This message has been checked for all known viruses by MessageLabs
This electronic mad communication may contain privileged confidential and /or proprietary information which is the property of The Atkins North
America Corporation WS Atkins plc or one of its affiliates If you are not the intended recipient or an authorized agent of the intended recipient please
delete this communication and notify the sender that you have received it in error A list of wholly owned Atkins Group companies can be found at
http / /www atkinsglobal com /site services /group company registration details
Consider the environment Please don t print this email unless you really need to
https //mail nc gov /owa/ ?ae= Item &t =IPM Note &td= RgAAAADMSzLcd9W2TJH14 %2bm 5/17/2012

M ST�o
w
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
TURNPIKE AUTHORITY
BEVERLY EAVES PERDUE
GOVERNOR
November 30 2011
Ms Marla Chambers
Western NCDOT Permit Coordinator
NC Wildlife Resources Commission
Division of Inland Fisheries
1721 Mail Service Center
Raleigh NC 27699 1721
Ms Chambers
EUGENE A CONTI JR
SECRETARY
Thank you for your memorandum of September 30 2011 in response to our request for
comments on the report titled Gaston East West Connector Indirect and Cumulative Effects
Water Quality Analysis — Draft (Atkins August 2011) (referred to in this letter as the Water Quality
Analysis)
We offer the following in response to the questions and concerns raised in your letter
1 Higher pollutant loads are anticipated as currently undeveloped unmanaged land uses
(namely forest lands) are converted to residential commercial and industrial uses Over 80
percent of the land consumed by the projects direct and indirect effects is forecasted to come
from forest and pasture lands
It was confirmed that when all undeveloped land uses are considered 83 percent of
percent of the direct and indirect impacts occur to forest and pasture lands
Undeveloped land uses included in this total are barren land agricultural land forest
grassland open water shrub land and pasture
2 Some of the report s projections seem counter intuitive and lead us to question some of the
model inputs and calibration For example the Build scenario was forecast to have
approximately 100 fewer acres of commercial /industrial /office development in the Study Area
as compare to the No Build scenario despite the projects close proximity to Charlotte and
the airport it s connection to 1 485 and US 321 and its ability to serve as an alternate route to
1 85
As discussed in Final EIS Section 2 5 5 6 the gravity model used to evaluate
projected changes in households and employment in the ICE Study Area estimates
there would be approximately 3 700 new households and 300 fewer jobs in the ICE
study area in the Build scenario compared to the No Build scenario This results in
an estimated difference of 1 200 more acres of residential development and 100
fewer acres of employment related development in the ICE Study Area in the Build
scenario These values are relatively small in comparison to the total growth in
households (42 200) and employment 33 100) expected between 2005 and 2035
NORTH CAROLINA TURNPIKE AUTHORITY
1578 MAIL SERVICE CENTER RALEIGH N C 27699 1578
PHONE [phone] FAX [phone]
http / /www ncturnplke org

under the No Budd scenario For households the difference is a 3 6 percent
increase and for employment the difference is a 0 3 percent decrease or
approximately no change in employment growth Based on the gravity model the
areas along the 1 85 corridor where employment and non residential uses are more
prevalent would not experience as large of an accessibility improvement as areas in
southern Gaston County and northern York County which have residential uses
more prevalent (existing and forecasted) As a result the areas along the 1 85
corridor show less growth under the Budd Scenario than under the No Budd
Scenario
Inputs to the gravity model were determined in consultation with area planners
Interviews were held with planners from GUAMPO MUMPO RFATS Gaston
County Mecklenburg County and York County All three of the MPOs with
responsibility for developing the demographic forecasts for the study area confirmed
that the Gaston East West Connector was assumed to be completed in the allocation
of future growth to specific zones (Note that this is was not the case for the Monroe
Connector /Bypass) During the demographic forecasting efforts for the Metrolina
model additional growth was added in areas that were expected to become more
attractive to development with the project including southern Gaston County and
northern York County This means that the indirect land use effect of the project is
already reflected in the forecasts Therefore the Metrolma model forecasts were
determined to represent the Budd condition All the participants concurred that the
forecasts represent the Budd condition and it was reasonable to use the gravity
model approach to redistribute households and employment for the No Build
condition
3 Also despite the increase in residential acreage the analysis assumed no changes to septic
areas between the future land use scenarios and assumed that the project will not make
southern Gaston County more attractive to group quarters types of facilities such as college
dorms prisons nursing homes etc
It is acknowledged that the number of residences in septic service areas should have
been increased in the future land use scenarios The watershed models were
revised accordingly It should also be noted that areas within the septic service area
transitioning to the Developed High Intensity land use category (apartment
complexes row houses and commercial /industrial areas with 80 to 100 percent
impervious cover) in the future land use scenarios were assumed to convert to sewer
service Typically the built upon area in such high density development does not
leave enough space for septic fields The results reported for the future land use
scenarios in the revised Gaston East West Connector Indirect and Cumulative
Effects Water Quality Analysis reflect the increased number of residences with septic
service A copy of the revised report will be transmitted to you
The septic population estimates assumed that the Project will not make southern
Gaston County more attractive to the types of facilities counted as group quarters
(r a college dorms prisons nursing homes etc ) and that the future group quarters
population is the same in the No Budd and Build scenarios The group quarters
facilities are assumed to be distributed proportional to land area for TAZs only
partially contained within the Study Area Southern Gaston County is projected in the
Comprehensive Plan to be primarily residential with focus area for more intense
development located at the interchanges of the Gaston East West Connector with US
321 and NC 279 There are no known current plans for large institutional uses such
as colleges or prisons in southern Gaston County
2

4 We also have concerns regarding the projections of sediment and other pollutants After the
GWLF calculated TN TP and TSS loads for a given HU the pollutant loads were reduced
according to the existing buffer characteristics within the legally protected areas of the HU
Only currently protected buffers were considered because the vegetated area beyond the
protected zone was not guaranteed to persist in the 2035 No Build and 2035 Budd scenarios
We see that as a good reason to use the legally protected buffer for the future scenarios but
are concerned that excluding the existing buffers that lie beyond the minimum protection from
the Baseline scenario and then calibrating the model based on actual existing streamflows
could skew the results It seems that linking minimum protection with flows emanating from
lands with greater buffer benefits might underestimate the impacts and /or overestimate the
effects of smaller buffers
Forested areas extending beyond the protected buffer zones are accounted for in the
average curve number and pollutant (TN TP TSS) export rates provided as input for
each hydrologic unit modeled The greater the proportion of forest in the hydrologic
unit the lower the average curve number and pollutant export rates Lower curve
numbers and pollutant export rates in turn translate to lower predicted runoff and
pollutant loads
5 In addition it is unclear if the model took into consideration sediment impacts during the
construction phases of the roadway and subsequent secondary development The model
estimated pollutant loadings for the various land uses and calculated the differences between
the baseline and future scenarios However the transition period between land uses when
most of the construction is occurring is likely to have the most severe sediment impacts to a
watershed and should be adequately accounted for in the model
The water quality analysis did not consider sediment impacts during construction
phases of the roadway or any subsequent secondary development Such impacts
have not been considered in past ICE water quality analyses for NCDOT
transportation projects as it is assumed that when properly implemented state and
locally mandated erosion and sediment control measures adequately address
sediment export from construction sites It should also be noted that the roadway
itself is to be constructed in accordance with the NCDOT s Design Standards in
Sensitive Watersheds Any subsequent secondary development in excess of one
acre occurring in Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties North Carolina or York County
South Carolina is subject to EPA Phase 11 Stormwater Rules These more rigorous
measures should provide additional assurance against sediment impacts for either
roadway or secondary growth construction
6 The document pointed out that since the analysis only considered riparian buffers for
reducing pollutant loads the watershed model overestimates pollutant loadings from areas
that would otherwise received other types of stormwater treatment We understand that
future levels of treatment would be difficult to predict and agree with the report s statement
that substantial pollutant load reductions beyond those provided by the simulated riparian
buffers could be realized if the EPA Phase I and II Stormwater Rules in effect through 99
percent of the Study Area and locally mandated stormwater treatment requirements are
enforced
• Additional information about implementation and enforcement of Phase I and Phase
II Stormwater Rules in Gaston County Mecklenburg County and York County is
provided in the attachment to this letter

7 The analysis reinforces our concerns and recommendations detailed in our earlier comment
letters Please see our comments on the Draft and Final Environmental Impact Statements
dated July 7 2009 and February 14 2011 respectively
WRC s comments on the Draft EIS are addressed in Appendix B 1 of the Final EIS
WRC s comments on the Final EIS will be addressed in Appendix C of the Record of
Decision NCTA believes NCWRC s comments have been adequately addressed
8 We continue to emphasize the importance of working with the local community to implement
additional protective measures and we encourage efforts to restore water quality and wildlife
habitat where currently degraded in the study area
NCTA can encourage local governments to adopt regulations and land use plans that
would help protect significant natural resources but NCTA lacks any enforcement
authority to ensure their adoption or adherence For their own part NCTA has made
a project commitment to implement Design Standards in Sensitive Watersheds for
the entire project NCTA also is working to implement adjacent and nearby mitigation
for impacts to jurisdictional resources including the purchase of the Linwood Springs
Golf Course for mitigation purposes as discussed in more detail in the Record of
Decision
We look forward to continued coordination with the NCWRC and other environmental agencies
for further minimize impacts of this project on resources in the area If you have additional
comments or need additional information please contact me at [phone] or
IhharrisU( ncdot gov
Sincerely
Jennifer Harris
cc Sarah E Hair USACE
Marella Buncick USFWS
Christopher Mditscher USEPA
Polly Lespinasse NCDWQ
Brian Wrenn NCDWQ
M

Summary of Stormwater Regulations in the Study Area of the Gaston
East Connector Indirect and Cumulative Effects Water Quality
Analysis
This document summarizes the stormwater ordinances of Gaston County the City of
Charlotte and Mecklenburg County North Carolina and York County South Carolina
These communities constitute 99 percent of the study area of the Gaston East West
Connector Indirect and Cumulative Effects Water Quality Analysis In all cases the
communities are subject to either EPA Phase I or Phase II Stormwater Rules The
established Stormwater ordinances meet the standards stipulated by the EPA rules
Summary of Gaston County Stormwater Ordinance
The Gaston County Stormwater ordinance applies to all areas of Gaston County except
the municipalities of Kings Mountain and Mount Holly and designated water supply
watersheds The Gaston County Natural Resources Department administers the
ordinance and is responsible for approving stormwater permits and enforcement of the
ordinance provisions Under the ordinance a stormwater permit is required for all
development and redevelopment exceeding one acre of disturbance for residential or
commercial development and projects less than an acre that are part of a larger common
plan of development or sale
Permit applications must demonstrate the inclusion of adequate natural drainage systems
or storm drainage facilities for transmitting stormwater flows into either existing drainage
facilities or natural drainage systems These systems must not unreasonably burden
adjacent properties with surface waters The ordinance establishes minimum design
standards for stormwater controls as follows
• Stormwater detention shall limit the rate of discharge from the site to the rate for
the 1 year 24 hour storm that existed prior to development
• No stormwater controls shall be located within 30 feet landward from any
perennial or intermittent surface waters
• Stormwater controls shall store and treat at a minimum the stormwater runoff
from the first inch of rainfall for a minimum of 48 hours but no more than 120
hours
• Structural stormwater treatment systems shall have a minimum of 85% average
annual removal for total suspended solids
• No stormwater controls shall be located within the floodway
• All stormwater controls shall be able to route at a minimum the 25 year 24 hour
storm

Summary of Charlotte Mecklenburg Stormwater Regulations
The Charlotte Mecklenburg Storm Water Services administer stormwater regulations in
the City of Charlotte and in unincorporated Mecklenburg County through certification of
final as built plans the issuance of a stormwater management permit and a documented
process for appeals and variances Stormwater regulations vary somewhat by watershed
district but primarily contain two components standards for low density projects whose
main requirement are enhanced Surface Water Improvement and Management
(S W I M ) stream buffers and standards for high density projects which identify
stormwater treatment requirements The Central Catawba and the Western Catawba
watershed districts occur within the study area The regulations in the watershed districts
differ by the threshold for built upon area defining projects as high density Projects in
the Central Catawba district are considered high density when their drainage area has
greater than 24 percent built upon area In the Western Catawba district the threshold is
defined as 12 percent
S W I M buffer requirements mandate the following buffer widths on all perennial and
intermittent streams
• 35 feet on streams draining greater than or equal to 100 acres and less than 300
acres
• 50 feet on streams draining greater than or equal to 300 acres and less than 640
acres
• 100 foot buffer plus 50 percent of the area of the flood fringe beyond 100 feet on
streams draining greater than or equal to 640 acres
In addition the Charlotte Mecklenburg post construction stormwater regulations require
all perennial and intermittent streams draining less than 50 acres have a minimum 30 foot
vegetated buffer including a ten foot zone adjacent to the bank The post construction
stormwater regulations also require streams that dram greater than or equal to 50 acres
and less than 100 acres to have the same requirements as S W I M buffers which drain at
least 100 acres
High density projects are subject to the design standards for stormwater management and
treatment systems established in the post construction stormwater regulations The
design standards are as follows
• Stormwater quality treatment systems must treat runoff generated from the first
inch of rainfall
• All structural stormwater treatment systems used to meet these requirements must
be designed to have a minimum of 85% average annual removal for total
suspended solids
• In the Western Catawba watershed district 70 percent average annual removal for
total phosphorus is required except for the I 1 and 12 zoned developments which
are exempt

For residential land disturbing activities exceeding the built upon area threshold
peak control shall be installed for the appropriate storm frequency as determined
by the Charlotte Mecklenburg Storm Water Services engineer based on a
downstream flood analysis or if a downstream analysis is not performed the peak
shall be controlled for the ten year and 25 year six hour storms
For commercial land disturbing activities exceeding the built upon area threshold
peak control shall be installed for the ten year six hour storm and additional peak
control provided for the appropriate storm frequency as determined by the
Charlotte Mecklenburg Storm Water Services engineer based on a downstream
flood analysis or if a downstream analysis is not performed the peak shall be
controlled for the ten year and 25 year six hour storms Controlling the one year
24 hour volume achieves peak control for the two year six hour storm For I 1
and 12 zoned developments peak control must be installed for the two year and
ten year six hour storms and additional peak control provided for the appropriate
storm frequency (i e 25 50 or 100 year six hour) based on a downstream
flood analysis or if a downstream analysis is not performed the peak shall be
controlled for the two year ten year and 25 year six hour storms
Summary of York County Stoi mwater Ordinance
The York County Stormwater ordinance applies to all lands within unincorporated York
County as well as municipalities of York County that have adopted the ordinance The
York County Engineering Department administers the ordinance and is responsible for
approving stormwater permits and enforcement of the ordinance provisions Under the
ordinance a stormwater permit is required for all development and redevelopment
exceeding one acre of disturbance for residential or commercial development and
projects less than an acre that are part of a larger common plan of development or sale
The ordinance establishes the following design standards for stormwater management
and treatment systems
• Post development peak discharge rates shall not exceed pre development
discharge rates for the two and ten year frequency 24 hour storm
• Discharge velocities shall be reduced to reduced to provide a nonerosive velocity
flow from a structure channel or other control measure or the velocity of the 10
year 24 hour storm runoff in the receiving waterway prior to development
Discharge velocities shall not exceed 20 feet /second
• When channel velocity is calculated to exceed sufficient stability armored (rip
rap or other) open channels shall be used in place of grass channels
• Sediment basins and traps are required to achieve 80% efficiency in the removing
of suspended solids
7

Temporary and permanent sediment basins for common drainage locations must
provide storage for the volume of runoff from the 10 year 24 hour storm
Temporary sediment basins within '/2 mile of Lake Wylie Catawba River and
Broad River or within 1 000 feet of a perennial stream must provide storage for
the volume of runoff from the 25 year 24 hour storm
Permanent water quality ponds shall store and release the first inch of runoff from
the site over a 24 hour period
Additional measures may be enforced if the site discharges to a receiving water on the
South Carolina 303(d) list If a TMDL applicable to stormwater construction discharges
is established for the water body the stormwater management plan must comply with the
South Carolina NPDES General Permit for Storm Water Discharges from Large and
Small Construction Activity If a TMDL is not established the stormwater management
plan must not all stormwater discharge that will contribute to violations of water quality
standards

1� f FW U 3321 Gaston E W Connector Request for compensatory mitigation Page 1 of 2
FW U -3321 Gaston E -W Connector -- Request for compensatory mitigation
Lespinasse, Polly
Sent Tuesday May 08 2012 3 23 PM
To Carrillo Sonia
Attachments U 3321 STR RW NCTA pdf (119 KB)
From Harmon, Beth
Sent Tuesday, January 24, 2012 4 11 PM
To Shumate, Christy
Cc Harris, Jennifer, Ferrell, Ronald E (Ronald Ferrell @atkinsglobal com), McCrain, Gerald R
Gerry mccrain @atkinsglobal com), Lespinasse, Polly, Hair, Sarah E SAW, Fitzpatrick, Linda F
Subject RE U 3321 Gaston E W Connector Request for compensatory mitigation
Christy Please see the attached mitigation acceptance letter for TIP U 3321 Please let me know if you have
any questions or need anything additional from EEP in regards to the mitigation for this project
Beth
getk Ftorvumow
NCADT Coordl,wator
DENR ecos�stew. eiAh61wceK&ewt Pror)ram
91.9) 715 -1929
1052 Mail. Service Cev,,ter
RaLt�ok NC 27C,99-1052
www wceep wet
pease vote tkot vw e -mcl�� address has cYiawged to -F�etk f-tarmow@in,odewr gov
E mad eoircsponchnce to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records
Latiti and may be disclosed to thaid paities
From Shumate, Christy
Sent Tuesday, January 24, 2012 8 31 AM
To Harmon, Beth
Cc Harris, Jennifer, Ferrell, Ronald E (Ronald Ferrel l @atkinsglobaI com), McCrain, Gerald R
(Jerry mccrain @atkinsglobal com), Lespinasse, Polly, Hair, Sarah E SAW, Fitzpatrick, Linda F
Subject U 3321 Gaston E W Connector Request for compensatory mitigation
Beth
Please see attached letter requesting confirmation of EEP s commitment to provide compensatory mitigation for
the subject project
If you have any questions please feel free to contact me or Jennifer Harris
Thanks
Christy
Christy Shumate AICP
Senior Transportation Planner
NCTA General Engineering Consultant
https / /mail nc gov /owa/ ?ae= Item &t =IPM Note &id= RgAAAADMSzLcd9W2TJH14 %2bm 5/17/2012

FW U 3321 Gaston E W Connector Request for compensatory mitigation Page 2 of 2
1578 Mall Service Center
Raleigh NC 27699 1578
Tel [phone]
Dir [phone]
croshumateCa-ncdot gov
Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N C Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties
https //mail nc gov /owa/ ?ae= Item &t =IPM Note &id= RgAAAADMSzLcd9W2TJH14 %2bm 5/17/2012

Ms Jennifer Harris P E
Director of Planning and Environmental Studies
North Carolina Turnpike Authority
1578 Mail Service Center
Raleigh North Carolina 27699 1548
Dear Ms Harris
os stem
a ee
PROGRAM
January 24 2012
Subject EEP Mitigation Acceptance Letter U 3321 Gaston East West Connector (Garden
Parkway) Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties
Reference EEP July 11 2011 Letter of Commitment for Beaverdam Creek Mitigation Site
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) will provide the
compensatory stream and riparian wetland mitigation for the subject project Based on the information supplied by
you on January 23 2012 the impacts are located in CUs 03050101 and 03050102 of the Catawba River basin in the
Southern Piedmont (SP) Eco Region and are as follows
Impacts / River Basin / CU / Eco region
Stream
Wetlands
Buffer
Cold
Cool
Warm
RW
NRW
CM
Zone
1
Zone
2
Impacts —Catawba 03050101 (SP)
15 823
363
15 409
10 169
Impacts — Catawba 03050102 (SP)
4 488
024
0
0
Impacts — Total Project
20,411
387
15 409
10,169
EEP commits to implementing sufficient compensatory stream and riparian wetland mitigation credits to
offset the final permitted impacts associated with this project in accordance with the N C Department of
Environment and Natural Resources Ecosystem Enhancement Program In Lieu Fee Instrument dated July 28 2010
Also please reference the EEP letter dated July 11 2011 that committed all of the stream mitigation credits
associated with the Beaverdam Creek mitigation site towards the stream mitigation needs associated with this
project (see attached) If the above referenced impact amounts are revised then this mitigation acceptance letter will
no longer be valid and a new mitigation acceptance letter will be required from EEP
1929
If you have any questions or need additional information please contact Ms Beth Harmon at 919 715
Sincerely
M1c ae Ellison
EEP eputy Director
cc Ms Liz Hair USACE — Asheville Regulatory Field Office
Mr Brian Wrenn Division of Water Quality Wetlands /401 Unit
Ms Polly Lespinasse Division of Water Quality Wetlands /401 Unit — Mooresville Regional Office
File U 3321
k torutg EKIWACZ49 Prot" Oar lta t&
'TV
OUR
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Proaram 1652 Mail Service Center Raleiah NC 27699 1652 / 919 715 0476 / www nceeo net

it
Mr Steve DeWitt P E
Chief Engineer
North Carolina Turnpike Authority
1578 Mail Service Center
Raleigh North Carolina 27699 1578
Dear Mr DeWitt
0SVS tem
a enet
PROGRAM
July 11 2011
Subject EEP Letter of Commitment
U 3321, Gaston East West Connector Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) will
provide compensatory stream and riparian wetland mitigation for the subject project as needed by the North
Carolina Turnpike Authority (NCTA) The total amount of stream and wetland mitigation needed from the
EEP has not yet been determined EEP s Beaverdam Creek mitigation project is located adjacent to the project
corridor and has been identified as a potential mitigation site for TIP U 3321 EEP commits all stream
mitigation assets associated with this mitigation site toward offsetting stream impacts associated with this
project The Beaverdam Creek mitigation site is located in Mecklenburg County on the eastern end of the
proposed roadway project in HUC 03050101 170040 of the Catawba River basin Currently the project has an
estimated 13 534 60 stream mitigation credits (13 014 restoration credits and 520 60 restoration equivalent
credits) and is in the fifth year of monitoring
EEP commits to implementing sufficient compensatory stream and wetland mitigation credits to offset
the impacts associated with this project in accordance with the N C Department of Environment and Natural
Resources Ecosystem Enhancement Program In Lieu Fee Instrument dated July 28 2010 as needed by the
NCTA To this effect EEP also has available 17 500 stream restoration equivalent High Quality Preservation
credits located in the Southern Piedmont Eco region and over 4 000 000 Riparian buffer restoration credits
available in Catawba 03050101 for potential use to offset impacts associated with the roadway project
If you have any questions or need additional information please contact Ms Beth Harmon at 919
715 1929
Sincerely
1,�
6n—
Mich e llison
EEP eputy Director
cc Ms Liz Hair USACE — Asheville Regulatory Field Office
Mr Brian Wrenn Division of Water Quality Wetlands /401 Unit
Mr Jerry McCraw PhD CEP PWS Atkins
Mr Michael Gloden PWS Atkins
Ms Linda Fitzpatrick NCDOT — PDEA
File U 3321
kutor Pro our Stag � E�
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program 1652 Mad Service Center Raleigh NC 27699 1652 / 919 715 0476 / www nceep net

it I FW Gaston E W Connector (U 3321) Agency Meeting for CP 4B Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 3
FW Gaston E -W Connector (U -3321) - Agency Meeting for CP 4113 - Meeting
Minutes
Lespinasse, Polly
Sent Tuesday May 08 2012 4 01 PM
To Carrillo Sonia
From Lespinasse, Polly
Sent Tuesday, June 21, 2011 12 31 PM
To Shumate, Christy
Cc Hair, Sarah E SAW, Chambers, Marla J, Marella_Buncick @fws gov
Subject RE Gaston E W Connector (U 3321) Agency Meeting for CP 413 Meeting Minutes
Christy
I have reviewed the draft minutes and have one comment The following statement was included
The construction segments may or may not match the permit sections exactly
I am not sure what is being conveyed with this statement it seems a little misleading at best and if it is a factual
statement it will need to be explained to me why the permit sections will not match the construction segments
Maybe I am reading too much into it? Please clarify
Thanks
From Shumate, Christy
Sent Monday, June 20, 2011 10 20 AM
To marella_buncick @fws gov, Chambers, Marla J, Gledhill earley, Renee, Hair, Sarah E SAW, Lespinasse Polly,
scott c mcclendon @usace army mil, militscher chns @epa gov, amy simes @ncmail net, Wrenn, Brian, Holder,
Michael L, Moose, Barry S, Houser, Anthony A, Taylor, Bryan D
Cc Harris, Jennifer, Jabyrd @hntb com, Ronald Ferrell (referrell @pbsJ com), George Hoops @dot gov, Pair,
Missy, Chang, David S, Clawson, Marshall W, Dewitt, Steve, Jill Gurak, Franklin, Spencer T, Sweitzer, Shannon,
Keener, Donna, Rochelle, Rodger D, Scherrer, Elizabeth (Elizabeth Scherrer @atkinsglobal com),
progers @hntb com
Subject Gaston E W Connector (U 3321) Agency Meeting for CP 4B Meeting Minutes
All —
Thanks to those who attended the CP 4B meeting for the Gaston E W Connector project (U 3321) on June 9
Attached are draft minutes from that meeting for your review and comment Please provide any comments on
the minutes by July 1 2011
Also for those who attended the meeting you have already been contacted about scheduling a field visit to
review the requested sites If you were unable to attend the meeting and would like to participate in the field
visit please let me know Dates are being considered during the weeks of July 5 and July 11
We will be having a CP 4C meeting on either August 10 or 11 to review final roadway plans and permit drawings
for the section of the project from NC 279 (New Hope Road) to the eastern end of the project at 1 485 /West
Boulevard (approximately 6 miles)
Thanks so much
https //mail nc gov /owa/ ?ae= Item &t =IPM Note &id= RgAAAADMSzLcd9W2TJH14 %2bm 5/17/2012

FW Gaston E W Connector (U 3321) Agency Meeting for CP 4B Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 3
Christy
Please note my email and phone number have changed
croshumate@ncdot gov
Phone [phone]
From Shumate, Christy
Sent Wednesday, June 01, 20118 05 AM
To Shumate, Christy, marella_bunack @fws gov, Chambers, Marla J, Gledhill earley, Renee, Hair, Sarah E SAW,
Lespinasse, Polly, scott c mcclendon @usace army mil, militscher chris @epa gov, amy simes @ncmail net, Wrenn,
Brian, Holder, Michael L, Moose, Barry S, Houser, Anthony A, Taylor, Bryan D
Cc Harris, Jennifer, jabyrd @hntb com, Ronald Ferrell (referrell @pbsj com), George Hoops @dot gov, Pair,
Missy, Chang, David S, Clawson, Marshall W, Dewitt Steve, Jill Gurak, Franklin, Spencer T, Sweitzer, Shannon,
Keener, Donna, Rochelle, Rodger D
Subject Gaston E W Connector (U 3321) Agency Meeting for CP 4B JUNE 9 @ 2pm
Good morning
The Gaston E W Connector (U 3321) Agency Meeting for CP 4B has been scheduled for Thursday June 9 at
2 OOpm in the Structure Design Conference Room at the Century Center (see attached agenda) Drawings are
ready and will be distributed today in pdf form Hard copies are also available upon request now or will be
distributed to everyone at the meeting next week
Please let me or Jennifer know if you have any questions
Thanks
Christy
Please note my email and phone number have changed
croshumate @ncdot gov
Phone [phone]
From Shumate, Christy
Sent Thursday, May 26, 20118 30 AM
To marella_buncick @fws gov, Chambers, Marla J, renee gledhill early @ncdcr gov, Hair, Sarah E SAW,
Lespinasse, Polly, scoff c mcclendon @usace army mil, militcher chris @epa gov, amy simes @ncmail net, Wrenn,
Brian, Holder Michael L, Moose, Barry S, Houser, Anthony A, Taylor, Bryan D
Cc jhharisl @ncdot gov, jabyrd @hntb com, Ronald Ferrell (referrell @pbsj com), George Hoops @dot gov, Pair,
Missy, Chang David S, Clawson, Marshall W, Dewitt, Steve, Jill Gurak, Franklin, Spencer T, Sweitzer, Shannon,
Keener Donna
Subject Gaston E W Connector (U 3321) Agency Meeting for CP 4B in JUNE
Good morning,
NCTA is planning for a 4B meeting for the Gaston E W Connector project on the June 8 or 9 Western Agency
Meeting date (agenda with time forthcoming) The purpose of this meeting is to present schematic hydraulic
plans and get comments on these plans We are preparing final roadway and hydraulic design plans for the
section of the project from NC 279 (New Hope Road) to the eastern end of the project at I 485 /West Boulevard
(approximately 6 miles) A package of drawings will be provided prior to the meeting We hope to receive
comments on these plans and have a 4C meeting in August Please note that this project will ultimately be a
design build project and these meetings may need to be revisited once a design build team is selected
As a general project update, we are currently working with FHWA to respond to comments received on the Final
EIS and issue a Record of Decision by the end of the summer (likely August) We hope to have permit
applications ready to submit soon after the 4C meeting and after the ROD is issued We are also keeping a close
https //mail nc gov /owa/ ?ae= Item &t =IPM Note &id= RgAAAADMSzLcd9W2TJHI4 %2bm 5/17/2012

FW Gaston E W Connector (U -3321) Agency Meeting for CP 4B Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 3
eye on the state budget proceedings and evaluating how the legislatures funding decisions might affect the
project
Please make a note on your calendar for these meetings (46 on June 8 or 9 and 4C on August 10 or 11) If you
have any questions, please feel free to contact Jennifer or me
Thanks,
Christy
Please note my email and phone number have changed
croshumate @ncdot gov
Phone [phone]
Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N C Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties
https //mail nc gov /owa/ ?ae= Item &t =IPM Note &id= RgAAAADMSzLcd9W2TJHI4 %2bm 5/17/2012

I I I FW Gaston E W Connector Meeting Summary Draft
FW Gaston E -W Connector Meeting Summary Draft
Lespinasse, Polly
Sent Tuesday May 08 2012 3 29 PM
To Carrillo Sonia
Page I of 4
From Wrenn, Brian
Sent Thursday, December 01, 2011 1149 AM
To Shumate, Christy, Monte Matthews, McLendon, Scott C SAW, Lespinasse, Polly, Hair, Sarah E SAW,
George Hoops @dot gov
Cc Sweitzer, Shannon, Jill Gurak, Gloden, Michael C (Michael Gloden @atkinsglobal com), Dewitt, Steve, Harris,
Jennifer
Subject RE Gaston E W Connector Meeting Summary Draft
Christy
Do you need comments on dust the minutes by Dec 9 or do you need our comments on your responses to the
Water Quality analysis as well? Thanks
B
Brian Wrenn
Transportation Permitting Unit Supervisor
NC Division of Water Quality
brian wrenn@ncdenr gov
585 Waughtown Street
Winston Salem NC 27107 2241
336 771 4952 (Winston Salem no )
336 7714631 (Fax)
or
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh NC 27699 1650
919 807 6365
919 807 6494 (Fax)
From Shumate, Christy
Sent Tuesday, November 29, 2011 3 48 PM
To Wrenn, Brian, Monte Matthews, McLendon, Scott C SAW Lespinasse, Polly, Hair, Sarah E SAW,
George Hoops @dot gov
Cc Sweitzer, Shannon, Jill Gurak, Gloden, Michael C (Michael Gloden @atkinsglobal com), Dewitt, Steve, Harris,
Jennifer
Subject Gaston E W Connector Meeting Summary Draft
Good afternoon
I hope everyone had a good Thanksgiving holiday)
Attached is a draft summary of the meeting last week (11/22) to discuss the Gaston E W Connector project
Please review and let me know if you have any questions or comments by next Friday December 9
https //mail nc gov /owa/9ae= Item &t =IPM Note &id= RgAAAADMSzLcd9W2TJH14 %2bm 5/17/2012

FW Gaston E W Connector Meeting Summary Draft
Page 2 of 4
Also as requested at the meeting you will be receiving an email from Jill Gurak with a link to the revised water
quality analysis report for your review If you have any trouble downloading the report or would like a hard
copy please let me know Also we would appreciate a response indicating that your comments have been
addressed or that you have additional comments
Thanks again
Christy
From Shumate, Christy
Sent Tuesday, November 22, 2011 7 42 AM
To Harris, Jennifer, Wrenn, Brian, Dewitt, Steve, Monte Matthews, McLendon, Scott C SAW
Cc Lespinasse, Polly, Karoly, Cyndi, Sweitzer, Shannon, Jill Gurak Gill gurak@atkinsglobal com), Gloden, Michael
C (Michael Gloden @atkinsglobal com)
Subject RE Gaston E W Connector Meeting 11/22 @ Elam
Good morning
For those electing to call in please dial 919 233 7091
Attached are materials to facilitate our discussion
• Map showing area of permit level design and design build project limits
• DWQ comments on water quality analysis and response letter
• Email correspondence with USACE regarding median width and project typical section west of US 321
Please let me know if you have trouble opening any of these files
Thanks
Christy
From Shumate, Christy
Sent Monday, November 21, 2011 1106 AM
To Harris Jennifer Wrenn Brian Dewitt Steve Monte Matthews
Cc Lespinasse Polly Karoly, Cyndi Sweitzer Shannon
Subject Gaston E W Connector Meeting 11/22 @ 8am
BE
Just a reminder about tomorrow morning s meeting to discuss permitting for Gaston E W Connector —11/22 @
8am in the NCTA Conference R000m on the 6th floor
Attached is an agenda of topics that we would like to cover at the meeting
Thanks
Christy
From Harris, Jennifer
Sent Wednesday, November 16, 2011 11 20 AM
To Wrenn, Brian, Dewitt, Steve, Monte Matthews
https //mail nc gov /owa/ ?ae= Item &t =IPM Note &id= RgAAAADMSzLcd9W2TJH14 %2bm 5/17/2012

FW Gaston E W Connector Meeting Summary Draft Page 3 of 4
Cc Lespinasse, Polly, Karoly, Cyndi Sweitzer, Shannon, Shumate, Christy
Subject RE Gaston E W connector application
Thank you for the email, Brian We look forward to seeing you next week on Tuesday 11/22 at 8 AM
in the NCTA Conference Room on the 6th floor of the Highway Building
Have a nice day
Jennifer
Jennifer Hams P E
Director of Planning and Environmental Studies
NC Turnpike Authority
an entity of the NC Department of Transportation
Please note changes in address phone and email address
1 South Wilmington Street Raleigh NC 27601
919 7072700
lhharrist @ncdot gov
From Wrenn, Brian
Sent Wednesday, November 16, 20119 27 AM
To Harris, Jennifer, Dewitt, Steve, Monte Matthews
Cc Lespinasse, Polly, Karoly, Cyndi
Subject Gaston E W connector application
Based on recent discussions within our agency NCDWQ will accept the Gaston E W connector 401 application
currently proposed by NCTA We would still like to meet on 11/22 to discuss modification coordination once the
Design Build team has been chosen This I think can be handled by project team staff from our respective
agencies and does not need to include management Of course they are welcome to participate but I sure
other commitments will take priority If you have any questions regarding this matter please let me know
Thanks
Brian
PLEASE NOTE THAT MY CONTACT INFORMATION HAS CHANGED
Brian Wrenn
Transportation Permitting Unit NCDWQ
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh NC 27699 1650
919 807 6365 (phone)
919 807 6492 (fax)
or
585 Waughtown St
Winston Salem NC 27107
336 7714952 (phone)
336 7714631 (fax)
brian wrenn @ncdenr gov
https //mail nc gov /owa/ ?ae= Item &t =IPM Note &id= RgAAAADMSzLcd9W2TJH14 %2bm 5/17/2012

FW Gaston E -W Connector Meeting Summary Draft
Page 4 of 4
E mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and
may be disclosed to third parties
Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N C Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties
https / /mail nc gov /owa/ ?ae= Item &t =IPM Note &id= RgAAAADMSzLcd9W2TJH14 %2bm 5/17/2012

FW U 3321 Gaston Conceptual Mitigation Plan
FW U -3321 Gaston Conceptual Mitigation Plan
Lespinasse, Polly
Sent Tuesday May 08 2012 3 28 PM
To Carrillo Sonia
From Wrenn, Brian
Sent Friday, March 02, 2012 1 41 PM
To Lespinasse, Polly
Subject RE U 3321 Gaston Conceptual Mitigation Plan
Page 1 of 5
I understand Chris concerns regarding preservation I guess the thing that concerns me the most is throughout
this project we have been asking NCTA to find onsite /local projects for mitigation They have actually done that
and now we re saying sorry not good enough It seems Ike we re asking them to hit a moving target For
streams our rules do not speak to any requirements for restoration over preservation It s really a permit
decision on what you think is best on site with a preservation component or off site restoration that may be
outside of the local area of the impacts I agree with your statement about keeping the mitigation close to the
impacts
The projects Chris was referring to in regards to road projects impacting mitigation sites were a mix preservation
and restoration /enhancement sites with third party management It s troubling that this has become a little
more common but I think we should deal with that as a separate issue That seems a discussion for alternatives
analyses or better environmental features mapping
Let me know if you need anything else
13
Brian Wrenn
Transportation Permitting Unit Supervisor
NC Division of Water Quality
brian wrenn @ncdenr gov
585 Waughtown Street
Winston Salem NC 27107 2241
336 7714952 (Winston Salem no )
336 771 4631 (Fax)
or
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh NC 27699 1650
919 807 6365
919 807 6494 (Fax)
From Lespinasse, Polly
Sent Friday, March 02, 2012 10 46 AM
To Wrenn, Brian
Subject Fwd U 3321 Gaston Conceptual Mitigation Plan
https //mail nc gov /owa/ ?ae= Item &t =IPM Note &id= RgAAAADMSzLcd9W2TJHI4 %2bm 5/17/2012

FW U 3321 Gaston Conceptual Mitigation Plan Page 2 of 5
Any thoughts9
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message
From Chris Militscher <Milrtscher Chris@epamail epa gov>
Date March 2 2012 10 25 18 AM EST
To ' Lespmasse, Polly' < polly lespinasse@a ncdenr gov>
Cc < mueller heinzg epa gov> Hair Sarah E SAW < Sarah E Hair@a usace army mil >,
< ag rnett,effrey@epa gov> < derby Jennifer&pa gov >, <fox rebeccanepa gov> Scott
McLendon < Scott C McLendon a USACE Army Mil>
Subject RE U -3321 Gaston Conceptual Mitigation Plan
Polly Regarding restoration vs preservation, again a project specific issue for EPA s
404 program Approximately 1/3 of the almost 7 miles of direct stream impacts are to
303(d) listed impaired waters I professionally don t believe that the Anti
degradation policy in the CWA can be met with preserving nice streams that are not
under the current threat of development impacts except for the highway projects
direct impacts and ICE Kathy Matthews during her several years involved with this
project did not believe that a large preservation component to the mitigation plan
would be acceptable for Gaston I deferred to her expertise in this matter
I am sharing our discussion with EPA s 404 program as this very significant Regional
issue will need to be coordinated through them now that FHWA has issued the ROD
Please let me know Brian s thoughts on the matter
Thanks again
Lespmasse, Polly <polly lespinasse @ncdenr gov> wrote
To Chris Militscher /R4 /USEPA /US @EPA
From Lespmasse, Polly < polly lespinasse @ncdenr gov>
Date 03/02/2012 10 03AM
Cc Hair, Sarah E SAW <Sarah E Hair @usace army mil >, Heinz
Mueller /R4 /USEPA /US @EPA, Jeffrey Ga rnett/R4/USEPA/US@ EPA, Jennifer
Derby /R4 /USEPA /US @EPA
Subject RE U 3321 Gaston Conceptual Mitigation Plan
Good information Chris I haven t had any of these issues come up in my region before I will try
to touch base with Brian and see if he has any ideas I think it is appropriate to express your
concerns in to NCTA /DOT Do you think providing restoration instead of preservation makes
any difference when it comes to new location or improvement projects?
Polly Lespmasse Polly Lespmasse @ncdenr gov
Environmental Senior Specialist
North Carolina Dept of Environment & Natural Resources
Div of Water Quality
610E Center Ave Suite 301
Mooresville NC 28115
Ph 704 235 2190 Fax [phone]
E mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina
https / /mail nc gov /owa/ ?ae= Item &t =IPM Note &id= RgAAAADMSzLcd9W2TJHI4 %2bm 5/17/2012

FW U 3321 Gaston Conceptual Mitigation Plan
Page 3 of 5
Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties unless the content is exempt by
statute or other regulation
From Chris Militscher [Militscher Chris@epamail epa gov]
Sent Friday March 02, 2012 9 59 AM
To Lespinasse, Polly
Cc Hair, Sarah E SAW, mueller heinz @epa gov, garnett Jeffrey a epa gov, derby Jennifer @epa gov
Subject RE U 3321 Gaston Conceptual Mitigation Plan
Polly In some cases I am all for preservation and turning over the property to third
parties for conservancy agreements as part of a comprehensive mitigation plan
Unfortunately, these agreements do not really seem to change NCDOT/FHWA s
emminent domain authority when it comes to future road projects Case in point is the
Needmore Tract, which NCDOT helped fund in addition to Clean Water Act Trust funds
and USFWS funds, and turned over to the NCWRC As currently proposed by NCDOT,
a small part of the NCWRC s Needmore Tract along the Little Tennessee River will be
impacted under their preferred alternative for R 4440
In the eastern part of the State, same thing on several other recent bypass
projects impacts to past mitigation /preservation properties (with conservation
agreements) that NCDOT used to offset direct impacts from past highway projects
As Kathy Matthews used to remind me, preservation only really works when the
properties are under a current threat from private development One of the unstated,
underlying purposes of the Gaston E W Connector is to provide additional access for
future development (their ICE predicts lots and lots of future development, especially
around the interchanges) There is very little current development going on in
southern Gaston County That will very quickly change with the new highway
I am still reviewing their mitigation plan I will discuss with Heinz and EPA s 404 office
on whether we will provide written comments on their mitigation plan and final
WQA As of today, I understand that their ROD has been issued by FHWA so
our written comments under NEPA may be moot Thanks, and III continue to
coordinate with you and Liz on EPA Region 4 s approach
Lespinasse, Polly <polly Iespinasse@)ncdenr gov> wrote
To Chris Militscher /R4 /USEPA /US @EPA
From Lespinasse Polly < polly IespinasseCa ncdenr gov>
Date 03/02/2012 09 21AM
Cc Hair, Sarah E SAW <Sarah E HairCcbusace army mil>
Subject RE U -3321 Gaston Conceptual Mitigation Plan
Chris,
I have reviewed the conceptual mitigation plan I understand your concerns and after a
discussion with a DOT PDEA person yesterday, it does seem like maybe preservation doesn t
mean the same thing to everyone On the other hand, I feel like trying to provide some on site
opportunities in Gaston County is important I would rather get preservation of good streams in
Gaston County than restoration in Burke County given the watershed problems in this area I
don t want to discourage DOT from continuing to look at these opportunities and surprisingly,
there are many willing landowners (at least preliminarily), but I haven t been to any of these sites,
so I am not sure whether we would agree to preservation anyway My understanding is that DOT
either typically buys the property or puts a very restrictive easement on it limiting what the
https //mail nc gov /owa/ ?ae= Item &t =IPM Note &id= RgAAAADMSzLcd9W2TJHI4 %2bm 5/17/2012

FW U 3321 Gaston Conceptual Mitigation Plan
Page 4 of 5
property owner can do In those cases where they buy the property, what are your thoughts on
asking them to turn it over to some sort of conservancy such as the Catawba Lands
Conservancy, in this case? This might help better identify the property when future projects come
on line and potentially direct new road locations to other areas I don t know if DWQ or the
ACOE can require such a thing but it might be worth talking about?
Let me know your thoughts
Thanks and have a good weekend'
Polly Lespinasse Polly Lespinasse @ncdenr gov
Environmental Senior Specialist
North Carolina Dept of Environment & Natural Resources
Div of Water Quality
610 E Center Ave Suite 301
Mooresville NC 28115
Ph 704 235 2190 Fax [phone]
E mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina
Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties unless the content is exempt by
statute or other regulation
From Chris Militscher [Militscher Chris @epamail epa gov]
Sent Friday, February 24, 2012 11 52 AM
To Lespinasse, Polly
Cc Hair, Sarah E SAW
Subject RE U 3321 Gaston Conceptual Mitigation Plan
Polly Yes On the initial look, full restoration /enhancement mitigation values for the
direct loss of streams is not proposed Glad to see the Golf site and Beaverdam
Creek but they still appear to fall short of compensatory mitigation Preservation
in lieu of restoration /enhancement is not something that EPA is currently prepared to
accept considering the magnitude of impacts to 303(d) listed systems in the project
study area
Preservation is also hard for me to accept as I currently have another Eastern project
where the Lead Federal Agency and NCDOT have a preferred alternative that impacts
existing mitigation sites that were purchased and preserved to mitigate for the US
17 /Wilmington Bypass /I 140 project Actually, there is a second Eastern project
where another preservation tract is being potentially impacted by I am dust starting
the review on that DEIS
I have other projects where NCDOTare potentially impacting National Wildlife Refuges
and U S National Forests (even they are not safe ) Preservation (on site
particularly) does not really seem to be working so good I would appreciate your
thoughts Thanks
https //mail nc gov /owa/ ?ae= Item &t =IPM Note &id= RgAAAADMSzLcd9W2TJHI4 %2bm 5/17/2012

FW U 3321 Gaston Conceptual Mitigation Plan
Lespinasse, Polly <polly IespmasseCcbncdenr gov> wrote
Chris Militscher /R4 /USEPA /US @EPA
>m Lespinasse, Polly <polly lespinasse @ncdenr gov>
to 02/24/201211 33AM
Hair, Sarah E SAW < Sarah E Hair(d)usace army mil>
bject RE U 3321 Gaston Conceptual Mitigation Plan
ris
I forgot they even sent it - I have been wrapped up in some other
issues I will try to take a look at it next week and get you some
thoughts
Is there something specific that is problematic for you'
Thanks
M
Polly Lespinasse - Polly Lespinasse @ncdenr gov
Environmental Senior Specialist
North Carolina Dept of Environment & Natural Resources
Div of Water Quality
610 E Center Ave Suite 301
Mooresville NC 28115
Ph 704 235 2190 Fax [phone]
Page 5 of 5
E -mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties
unless the content is exempt by statute or other regulation
From Chris Militscher [Militscher Chris @epamail epa gov]
Sent Thursday February 23 2012 2 33 PM
To Lespinasse Polly
Cc Wrenn Brian Hair Sarah E SAW
Subject U -3321 Gaston Conceptual Mitigation Plan
Polly Have you completed your review of the Gaston Conceptual
Mitigation Plan's I dust received the CD & started my review and it
appears that they are proposing the EEP s Beaverdam Creek site in
Mecklenburg County and the NCDOT s Linwood Springs Golf Course site
The balance of mitigation for the direct impacts appears to be
oreservation
The on -site preservation opportunities may provide up to 40 065 linear
feet of stream and 8 3 acres of
wetland resulting in 8 013 stream mitigation units and 1 7 wetland
mitigation units
I would appreciate NCDWQ s comments on the plan if you have had a
chance
to review it I plan to provide written comments to NCTA & FHWA thru
Heinz on this report as well as their final Water Quality Analysis We
will copy you as well as other Merger team representatives Thanks
Christopher A Militscher REM CHMM
919 - 856 -4206
or 404 - 562 -9512
https //mail nc gov /owa/ ?ae= Item &t =IPM Note &id= RgAAAADMSzLcd9W2TJH14 %2bm 5/17/2012

FW NCGA proposal
FW NCGA proposal
Lespinasse, Polly
Sent Tuesday May 08 2012 3 28 PM
To Carrillo Sonia
From Wrenn, Brian
Sent Friday, April 20, 2012 2 38 PM
To Lespinasse, Polly
Subject RE NCGA proposal
Page 1 of 5
The design of the psh should be so it provides diffuse flow If the velocities exiting the structure are greater than
2 f/s then I would question the design as diffuse flow I ve always assumed the psh has non erosive velocities
but never asked the question The flow to the psh can be >2cfs but it should be designed to provide the
appropriate velocities
Brian Wrenn
Transportation Permitting Unit Supervisor
NC Division of Water Quality
brian wrenn @ncdenr gov
585 Waughtown Street
Winston Salem NC 27107 2241
336 7714952 (Winston Salem no )
336 771 4631 (Fax)
or
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh NC 27699 1650
919 807 6365
919 807 6494 (Fax)
From Lespmasse, Polly
Sent Friday April 20, 2012 2 31 PM
To Wrenn Brian
Subject Re NCGA proposal
Yes Catawba So as long as there is a PSH the discharge out of the PSH doesn t have to be less than 2 f /s?
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 20 2012 at 2 27 PM Wrenn Brian < brian wrenn @ncdenr gov> wrote
We talking about diffuse flow requirements for Catawba buffers? They have to provide diffuse
flow (psh is a diffuse flow measure) outside of buffer or they have to provide treatment and
discharge at non erosive velocities to the stream
Brian Wrenn
Transportation Permitting Unit Supervisor
https / /mall nc gov /owa/ ?ae= Item &t =IPM Note &1d= RgAAAADMSzLcd9W2TJH14 %2bm 5/17/2012

FW NCGA proposal
NC Division of Water Quality
brian wrenn @ncdenr gov
585 Waughtown Street
Winston Salem NC 27107 2241
336 771 4952 (Winston Salem no )
336 771 4631 (Fax)
or
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh NC 27699 1650
919 807 6365
919 807 6494 (Fax)
From Lespinasse, Polly
Sent Friday, April 20, 2012 2 20 PM
To Wrenn, Brian
Subject Re NCGA proposal
So there is no pass it has to be 2 f/s correct?
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 20 2012 at 2 12 PM Wrenn Brian < brian wrenn @ncdenr gov> wrote
They should be able to get you the outlet velocities pretty easily
Brian Wrenn
Transportation Permitting Unit Supervisor
NC Division of Water Quality
brian wrenn @ncdenr gov
585 Waughtown Street
Winston Salem NC 27107 2241
336 771 4952 (Winston Salem no )
336 7714631 (Fax)
or
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh NC 27699 1650
919 807 6365
919 807 6494 (Fax)
From Lespinasse, Polly
Sent Friday, April 20, 2012 2 08 PM
To Wrenn, Brian
Subject Re NCGA proposal
Everything was provided in cfs
Page 2 of 5
https / /mail nc gov /owa/ ?ae= Item &t =IPM Note &id= RgAAAADMSzLcd9W2TJH14 %2bm 5/17/2012

FW NCGA proposal
Page 3 of 5
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 20 2012 at 2 05 PM Wrenn Brian < brian wrenn @ncdenr gov> wrote
The psh is supposed to be a diffuse flow measure so non erosive
velocities are supposed to be inherent in their design Is it 2 f/s or 2
cfs? Non erosive velocities is 2 f/s
Brian Wrenn
Transportation Permitting Unit Supervisor
NC Division of Water Quality
brian wrenn @ncdenr gov
585 Waughtown Street
Winston Salem NC 27107 2241
336 7714952 (Winston Salem no )
336 771 4631 (Fax)
or
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh NC 27699 1650
919 807 6365
919 807 6494 (Fax)
From Lespinasse, Polly
Sent Friday, April 20, 2012 2 03 PM
To Wrenn, Brian
Subject Re NCGA proposal
I am reviewing the Gaston Turnpike application Looks like all the PSI-Is
at the edge of the buffer are discharging at velocities greater than 2 cfs
Do they get a pass?
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 20 2012 at 1101 AM Wrenn Brian
< brian wrenn @ncdenr gov> wrote
Good times
Brian Wrenn
Transportation Permitting Unit Supervisor
NC Division of Water Quality
brian wrenn @ncdenr gov
585 Waughtown Street
Winston Salem NC 27107 2241
336 771 4952 (Winston Salem no )
336 771 4631 (Fax)
https //mail nc gov /owa/ ?ae= Item &t =IPM Note &id= RgAAAADMSzLcd9W2TJHI4 %2bm 5/17/2012

FW NCGA proposal Page 4 of 5
or
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh NC 27699 1650
919 807 6365
919 807 6494 (Fax)
From Lespinasse, Polly
Sent Friday, April 20, 2012 1101 AM
To Wrenn, Brian
Subject Re NCGA proposal
Looks like its going to be fun for you right up to your last
day
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 20 2012 at 10 34 AM Wrenn Brian
< brian wrenn @ ncdenr gov> wrote
I want you to hear this from me rather than
the rumor mill Some members of the
General Assembly are considering a proposal
to delegate to DOT the 401 program for
DOT projects I don t have specifics on who
is proposing this or on the details of the
proposal This has obvious implications on us
as a staff and the up coming contracts We
are developing some responses to this and
getting input from EPA and the Corps I will
keep you posted on any updates I get If you
have any questions let me know
F:3
Brian Wrenn
Transportation Permitting Unit Supervisor
NC Division of Water Quality
brian wrenn @ncdenr gov
585 Waughtown Street
Winston Salem NC 27107 2241
336 7714952 (Winston Salem no )
336 7714631 (Fax)
or
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh NC 27699 1650
919 807 6365
919 807 6494 (Fax)
https / /mail nc gov /owa/ ?ae= Item &t =IPM Note &id= RgAAAADMSzLcd9W2TJH14 %2bm 5/17/2012

FW NCGA proposal
Page 5 of 5
https //mail nc gov /owa/ ?ae= Item &t =IPM Note &id= RgAAAADMSzLcd9W2TJHI4 %2bm 5/17/2012

�I
FW Gaston E W Connector (U 3321) Agency Meeting for CP 4C August 11 @ 9am Page 1 of 2
i
FW Gaston E -W Connector (U -3321) - Agency Meeting for CP 4C - August
11 @9am
Lespinasse, Polly
Sent Tuesday May 08 2012 3 31 PM
To Carrillo Sonia
From Wrenn, Brian
Sent Monday, August 01, 20119 49 AM
To Lespinasse, Polly
Subject RE Gaston E W Connector (U 3321)
111 plan on being there Thanks for the heads up
Brian Wrenn
Transportation Permitting Unit Supervisor
NC Division of Water Quality
brian wrenn @ncdenr gov
585 Waughtown Street
Winston Salem NC 27107 2241
336 7714952 (Winston Salem no )
336 7714631 (Fax)
or
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh NC 27699 1650
919 807 6365
919 807 6494 (Fax)
From Lespinasse, Polly
Sent Monday, July 25, 2011 1 30 PM
To Wrenn, Brian
Subject FW Gaston E W Connector (U 3321)
Brian
Agency Meeting for CP 4C August 11 @ 9am
Agency Meeting for CP 4C August it @ 9am
Didn t know if you wanted to attend this and discuss the phased permitting they are proposing This is the 4C
meeting so if you want to discuss it this is probably a good time
Thanks
From Shumate, Christy
Sent Monday, July 25, 2011 1 13 PM
To marella_buncick @fws gov, Chambers, Marla J, Gledhill earley, Renee, Hair, Sarah E SAW, Lespinasse,
Polly, McLendon, Scott C SAW, militscher chris @epa gov, Wrenn, Brian, Holder, Michael L, Moose, Barry S,
Houser, Anthony A, Taylor, Bryan D, Matthews Monte K SAW
Cc Harris, Jennifer, jabyrd @hntb com , Ronald Ferrell (referrell @pbsj com) , George Hoops @dot gov , Chang,
David S, Clawson, Marshall W, Dewitt, Steve, Jill Gurak, Franklin, Spencer T, Sweitzer, Shannon, Keener, Donna,
https / /mail nc gov /owa/ ?ae= Item &t =IPM Note &id= RgAAAADMSzLcd9W2TJH14 %2bm 5/17/2012

111 I FW Gaston E W Connector (U 3321) Agency Meeting for CP 4C August 11 @ 9am Page 2 of 2
Rochelle, Rodger D, Bass, Kiersten R, progers @hntb corn
Subject Gaston E W Connector (U 3321) Agency Meeting for CP 4C August 11 @ 9am
Good afternoon
The Gaston E W Connector (U 3321) Agency Meeting for CP 4C has been scheduled for Thursday August 11
at 9 00am in the Structure Design Conference Room at the Century Center (see attached agenda)
Final minutes from the CP 4B meeting (June 9 2011) as well as a draft summary of the July 15 follow up field
visit are attached Draft permit drawings will be distributed in advance of the meeting
Please let me or Jennifer know if you have any questions
Thanksl
Christy
Please note my email and phone number have changed
croshumate @ncdot gov
Phone [phone]
Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N C Public Records Lain and may be disclosed to third parties
https //mail nc gov /owa/ ?ae= Item &t =IPM Note &id= RgAAAADMSzLcd9W2TJH14 %2bm 5/17/2012

FW Gaston E W Connector (U 3321) Agency Meeting for CP 4B Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 4
FW Gaston E -W Connector (U -3321) - Agency Meeting for CP 4B - Meeting
Minutes
Lespinasse, Polly
Sent Tuesday May 08 2012 3 26 PM
To Carrillo Sonia
From Shumate, Christy
Sent Thursday, June 23, 20118 35 AM
To Lespinasse, Polly
Cc Hair, Sarah E SAW, Chambers, Marla J, Marella_Buncick @fws gov, Harris, Jennifer, jabyrd @hntb com, Jill
Gurak, Bass, David W (David Bass @atkinsglobal com), George Hoops @dot gov
Subject RE Gaston E W Connector (U 3321) Agency Meeting for CP 4B Meeting Minutes
Polly
No final decisions have been made of the design build contracting for this project and how /if to split the project
up Initially four STIP numbers had been assigned for contracting purposes
• U 3321AA This project extends from 1 85 west of Gastonia to US 321 for a distance of
approximately 5 9 miles The project includes construction of a two lane two way facility
constructed on one side of the ultimate four lane divided freeway Design right of way
acquisition and utility relocation will accommodate the ultimate four lane divided facility
• U 3321B This project includes the design right of way acquisition utility relocation and
construction of a four lane divided freeway facility that extends from US 321 to a point just
west of SR 2428 (Wilson Farm Road) in Gaston County and is approximately 5 5 miles long
• U 3321C This project includes the construction of a four lane divided freeway that extends
from a point dust west of SR 2428 (Wilson Farm Road) in Gaston County to 1-485 near the
Charlotte Douglas International Airport in Mecklenburg County and is approximately 9 5 miles
long
• U 3321 DA This project includes the design and construction of certain ITS devices for the
entire length of the Garden Parkway (U 3321AA U 3321 B and U 3321 C)
At the time the plan was to have two separate design build contracts — one that included U 3321AA and U
33218 and a second that included U 3321C and U 3321DA However because of the delay in getting started on
the design build process and the budget constraints they are taking another look at how to split the project up
The section that we are preparing hydraulic designs and permit drawings for (NC 279 to 1 485) is a subset of U
3321C We determined what section to use for permitting prior to any decisions on the design build
contracting Our decision was based on traffic projections locations of jurisdictional resources and what we
thought would be a logical first section for construction However once the construction segments noted above
were proposed we determined that it would not be cost effective for us to prepare a permit application for the
entire U 3321C section which would be an additional 3 5 miles This is because it is likely that the design build
team will want to revise our design to optimize their costs We will likely limit the number of mayor permit
modifications for the project dust as we did on Monroe I expect we will tell the design build team(s) that they
can do one mayor modification for U 3321C and a second for U 3321AA & U 33218
We will keep everyone updated as decisions are made with regards to the design build contract(s)
https //mail nc gov /owa/ ?ae= Item &t =IPM Note &id= RgAAAADMSzLcd9W2TJH14 %2bm 5/17/2012

FW Gaston E W Connector (U -3321) Agency Meeting for CP 4B Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 4
Thanksi
Christy
Please note my email and phone number have changed
croshumateAncdot gov
Phone [phone]
From Lespinasse, Polly
Sent Tuesday, June 21, 2011 12 31 PM
To Shumate, Christy
Cc Hair, Sarah E SAW, Chambers, Marla J, Marella— Buncick @fws gov
Subject RE Gaston E W Connector (U 3321) Agency Meeting for CP 4B Meeting Minutes
Christy
I have reviewed the draft minutes and have one comment The following statement was included
The construction segments may or may not match the permit sections exactly
I am not sure what is being conveyed with this statement It seems a little misleading at best and if it is a factual
statement it will need to be explained to me why the permit sections will not match the construction segments
Maybe I am reading too much into it? Please clarify
Thanks
From Shumate, Christy
Sent Monday, June 20, 2011 10 20 AM
To marella— buncick @fws gov, Chambers, Marla J, Gledhill earley, Renee, Hair, Sarah E SAW, Lespinasse Polly,
Scott c mcclendon @usace army mil, militscher chris @epa gov, amy simes @ncmail net, Wrenn, Brian, Holder,
Michael L, Moose, Barry S, Houser, Anthony A, Taylor, Bryan D
Cc Harris, Jennifer, Jabyrd @hntb com Ronald Ferrell (referrell @pbsJ com) George Hoops @dot gov, Pair,
Missy, Chang, David S, Clawson, Marshall W, Dewitt, Steve, Jill Gurak, Franklin, Spencer T, Sweitzer, Shannon,
Keener, Donna, Rochelle, Rodger D, Scherrer, Elizabeth (Elizabeth Scherrer@atkinsglobal com),
progers @hntb com
Subject Gaston E W Connector (U 3321) Agency Meeting for CP 4B Meeting Minutes
All —
Thanks to those who attended the CP 413 meeting for the Gaston E W Connector project (U 3321) on June 9
Attached are draft minutes from that meeting for your review and comment Please provide any comments on
the minutes by July 1 2011
Also for those who attended the meeting you have already been contacted about scheduling a field visit to
review the requested sites If you were unable to attend the meeting and would like to participate in the field
visit please let me know Dates are being considered during the weeks of July 5 and July 11
We will be having a CP 4C meeting on either August 10 or 11 to review final roadway plans and permit drawings
for the section of the project from NC 279 (New Hope Road) to the eastern end of the project at 1 485 /West
Boulevard (approximately 6 miles)
Thanks so much
Christy
https //mail nc gov /owa/ ?ae= Item &t =IPM Note &id= RgAAAADMSzLcd9W2TJHI4 %2bm 5/17/2012

FW Gaston E W Connector (U 3321) Agency Meeting for CP 4B Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 4
Please note my email and phone number have changed
croshumateOncdot gov
Phone [phone]
From Shumate, Christy
Sent Wednesday, June 01, 20118 05 AM
To Shumate, Christy, marella_buncick @fws gov, Chambers, Marla J, Gledhill earley, Renee, Hair, Sarah E SAW,
Lespmasse, Polly, scott c mcclendon @usace army mil, militscher chris @epa gov, amy simes @ncmail net, Wrenn,
Brian, Holder, Michael L, Moose, Barry S, Houser, Anthony A, Taylor, Bryan D
Cc Harris, Jennifer, jabyrd @hntb com, Ronald Ferrell (referrell @pbsj com), George Hoops @dot gov, Pair,
Missy, Chang, David S, Clawson, Marshall W, Dewitt, Steve, Jill Gurak, Franklin, Spencer T, Sweitzer, Shannon,
Keener, Donna, Rochelle, Rodger D
Subject Gaston E W Connector (U 3321) Agency Meeting for CP 4B JUNE 9 @ 2pm
Good morning
The Gaston E W Connector (U 3321) Agency Meeting for CP 4B has been scheduled for Thursday June 9 at
2 OOpm in the Structure Design Conference Room at the Century Center (see attached agenda) Drawings are
ready and will be distributed today in pdf form Hard copies are also available upon request now or will be
distributed to everyone at the meeting next week
Please let me or Jennifer know if you have any questions
Thanks
Christy
Please note my email and phone number have changed
croshumate@ncdot gov
Phone [phone]
From Shumate, Christy
Sent Thursday, May 26, 20118 30 AM
To marella_buncick @fws gov, Chambers, Marla J, renee gledhill early @ncdcr gov, Hair, Sarah E SAW,
Lespinasse, Polly, scott c mcclendon @usace army mil, militcher chris @epa gov, amy simes @ncmail net, Wrenn,
Brian, Holder, Michael L, Moose, Barry S, Houser, Anthony A, Taylor, Bryan D
Cc jhhansi @ncdot gov, jabyrd @hntb com, Ronald Ferrell (referrell @pbsj com), George Hoops @dot gov, Pair,
Missy Chang David S Clawson, Marshall W, Dewitt, Steve, Jill Gurak, Franklin, Spencer T Sweitzer Shannon
Keener Donna
Subject Gaston E W Connector (U 3321) Agency Meeting for CP 4B in JUNE
Good morning,
NCTA is planning for a 4B meeting for the Gaston E W Connector project on the June 8 or 9 Western Agency
Meeting date (agenda with time forthcoming) The purpose of this meeting is to present schematic hydraulic
plans and get comments on these plans We are preparing final roadway and hydraulic design plans for the
section of the project from NC 279 (New Hope Road) to the eastern end of the project at I 485 /West Boulevard
(approximately 6 miles) A package of drawings will be provided prior to the meeting We hope to receive
comments on these plans and have a 4C meeting in August Please note that this project will ultimately be a
design build project and these meetings may need to be revisited once a design build team is selected
As a general project update, we are currently working with FHWA to respond to comments received on the Final
EIS and issue a Record of Decision by the end of the summer (likely August) We hope to have permit
applications ready to submit soon after the 4C meeting and after the ROD is issued We are also keeping a close
eye on the state budget proceedings and evaluating how the legislatures funding decisions might affect the
https //mail nc gov /owa/ ?ae= Item &t =IPM Note &id= RgAAAADMSzLcd9W2TJHI4 %2bm 5/17/2012

FW Gaston E W Connector (U 3321) Agency Meeting for CP 4B Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 4
I
project
Please make a note on your calendar for these meetings (413 on June 8 or 9 and 4C on August 10 or 11) If you
have any questions, please feel free to contact Jennifer or me
Thanks,
Christy
Please note my email and phone number have changed
croshumate(&ncdot gov
Phone [phone]
Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N C Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties
https //mail nc gov /owa/9ae= Item &t =IPM Note &id= RgAAAADMSzLcd9W2TJHI4 %2bm 5/17/2012