20140017 Ver 1_More Info Received_20140325

..0 --=4 " --
ENPIRONMENTAI,
PROFESSIONALS
PLANNING FOR
A BETTF_R
ENVIRONMENT
March 25, 2014
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Attn: Mr. William Wescott
2407 West Fifth Street
Washington, NC 27889
Dear Mr. Wescott,
This letter is with reference to SAW -2013- 00359, City of Greenville Airport and the request for permits to
authorize impacts to Section 404 wetlands. I have attached the Record of Decision regarding the matter
which resulted from the NEPA process that the applicant pursued over the last couple of years.
This letter is to ensure that you are aware of the extensive review that has occurred with the various
agencies resulting in a Finding of No Significant Impact.
Thank you for your consideration of this information.
Attachment: a/s
cc: Talbert & Bright /Attn: Ms. Amy McLane
NC Division of Water Quality /Attn: Ms. Jennifer Burdette
• *. CAROLINA
252-441-0721 - EMAIL. o

ez
U.S. Department
of Transportation
Federal Aviation
Administration
August 13, 2012
Mr. Jerry Vickers, Executive Director
Pitt County — City of Greenville Airport Authority
P.O. Box 671
Greenville, NC 27835
Dear Mr. Vickers:
Atlanta Airports District Office
1701 Columbia Ave., Campus Bldg.
Atlanta, GA 30337 -2747
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
Enclosed is a copy of the Environmental Assessment (EA) Cover Sheet and the Finding of No Significant
Impact (FONSI) /Record of Decision (ROD) for the proposed Runway 2/20 Safety Improvement Projects
(Runway Safety Area [RSA] and Runway Object Free Area [ROFA] improvements and Runway 2/20
extension) at the Pitt - Greenville Airport (PGV) in Greenville, North Carolina, in accordance with FAA standard
design criteria.
The associated development projects have been evaluated and environmentally approved. This is not an
obligation for funding.
The FONSI /ROD addresses the immediate proposed action as defined and analyzed in the corresponding
EA. If there are changes to the proposed action or if the improvements as described and analyzed in the EA
are not initiated within three (3) years, this FONSI /ROD and corresponding EA must be reevaluated to
determine if they are still adequate to fulfill the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act.
A Public Notice announcing the availability of the EA and FONSI /ROD and the location where they may be
reviewed should be made. A draft example of this notice is enclosed for your use. This notice is not to solicit
public comments but rather to notify the public that the Final EA and FAA decision document has been
issued and is available for review /information.
If you have any questions or require additional information please contact me at (404) 305 -7152.
Sincerely,
6 t k a
Dana L. Perkins
Environmental Program Manager
Enclosures:
1) 08 -13 -12 FAA Executed Acceptance of Final EA/Cover Page
2) 08 -13 -12 FAA Executed FONSI -ROD
3) Example Final NOA
cc
Pitt County — City of Greenville Airport Commission, ATTN: Mr. Donald Taylor, Chairman, P.O. Box 7207,
Greenville, NC 27834
Talbert & Bright, Inc., ATTN: Amy McLane, 4810 Shelley Drive, Wilmington, NC 28405

RECORD OF DECISION
and
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
Proposed Runway 2/20 Safety Improvements at Pitt - Greenville Airport
Greenville, Pitt County, North Carolina
August, 2012
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION
ATLANTA AIRPORTS DISTRICT OFFICE
ATLANTA, GEORGIA

Finding of No Significant Impact / Record of Decision
I. INTRODUCTION / BACKGROUND
In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), this Finding of No Significant
Impact (FONSI) and Record of Decision (ROD) announces final agency determinations and
approvals for those Federal actions by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) that are
necessary to support implementation of a capital improvement project for the Runway 2/20 Safety
Improvement Projects (Runway Safety Area [RSA] and Runway Object Free Area [ROFA]
improvements and Runway 2/20 extension) at the Pitt - Greenville Airport (PGV) in Greenville,
North Carolina, in accordance with FAA standard design criteria, as requested by the airport
Sponsor, the Pitt County -City of Greenville Airport Authority. Extending and improving the RSA,
ROFA, and runway will result in fee simple acquisition of properties located within the
Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) and 65 DNL contour. The Proposed Action also includes
obstruction removal of trees and the acquisition of avigation easements for the properties
associated with those obstructing trees.
This ROD provides the FAA's final determinations and approvals based on analysis described in
detail in the Environmental Assessment for Runway 2120 Safety Improvements prepared for the Pitt-
Greenville Airport, Greenville, North Carolina, July 2012. The agency decision is based on information
contained in the Final Environmental Assessment (EA), incorporated by reference, and all other
applicable documents available to the agency.
This ROD is issued in accordance with the requirements of the Council on Environmental Quality
(CEQ), 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) §1505.2.
II. PROPOSED FEDERAL ACTION
The Sponsor has requested FAA Airport Improvement Program (AIP) financial assistance and
approval to implement capital improvements to the airport's primary runway (Runway 2/20)
and its environs necessary to: meet FAA- mandated runway safety area (RSA) and runway
object free area (ROFA) requirements, enhance aircraft operational safety, remove approach
obstructions, and mitigate incompatible land uses resulting from aircraft operations.
Specifically, the proposed action will:
1. Bring the Runway 2 (south) end up to current FAA runway safety area (RSA) and
runway object free area (ROFA) design standards for the current critical aircraft (the
CRJ200). The Airport is required to bring the RSA into compliance with FAA Airport
Design standards per FAA Order 5200.8, "Runway Safety Area Program ".
2. Improve operational safety by increasing the length of Runway 2/20 to allow the
current critical aircraft to operate at full payload service capabilities, including during
hot weather.
3. Clear existing tree obstructions in the Runway 20 approach to improve operational
safety by allowing the lowest available approach minimums (1/2 mile visibility
minimums and 200 foot Height Above Touchdown [HAT]) for the existing Runway 20
(north) end ILS approach procedure. Per FAA AIP Grant Assurance 20, "Hazard
Removal and Mitigation ", the Airport Sponsor "will take appropriate action to assure
that such terminal airspace as is required to protect instrument and visual operations
1
Runway 2/20 Safety Improvement Projects at Pitt - Greenville Airport
Greenville, Pitt County, North Carolina

Finding of No Significant Impact / Record of Decision
to the airport (including established minimum flight altitudes) will be adequately cleared
and protected by removing, lowering, relocating, marking, or lighting or otherwise
mitigating existing airport hazards and by preventing the establishment or creation of
future airport hazards."
4. Clear existing tree obstructions in the Runway 2 approach to improve operational
safety by establishing new RNAV vertically - guided approaches to Runway 2 to allow
landings during inclement weather.
5. Enhance land use compatibility surrounding the airport associated with Runway 2/20,
including mitigation of existing incompatible land uses at the Runway 20 end. Per FAA
AIP Grant Assurance 21, "Compatible Land Use ", the Airport Sponsor "will take
appropriate action, to the extent reasonable, including the adoption of zoning laws, to
restrict the use of land adjacent to or in the immediate vicinity of the airport to activities
and purposes compatible with normal airport operations, including landing and takeoff
of aircraft."
III. PURPOSE AND NEED
The Sponsor has defined the purpose and need for implementing the Proposed Action as
being necessary because: the Runway 2 RSA and ROFA at the Pitt - Greenville Airport do not
currently meet standards; the obstructions related to the arrival and departure procedures for
both runway ends do not support optimum safety of approaching and departing aircraft; and
the current runway length (6,505') does not allow for optimum operational capabilities of
PGV's critical aircraft, especially during hot weather. Additionally, the proposed action
addresses land use compatibility issues associated with the Runway 20 RPZ and 65 DNL
contour. The need for the proposed obstruction removal was recognized as a result of the
recent FAA approach survey to identify obstructions to PGV's approach and departure
surfaces in accordance with Advisory Circular 150/5300 -13, Airport Design, Appendix 2; and
FAA Order 8260.36, United States Standard for Terminal Instrument Procedures ( TERPS) on
each runway end. The survey found obstructions to the Appendix 2 and TERPS imaginary
surfaces in need of removal to ensure safety.
IV. ALTERNATIVES
Federal guidelines concerning the environmental review process require that all reasonable
and practicable alternatives that might accomplish the objectives of a proposed project be
identified and evaluated. Such an examination ensures that an alternative that addresses the
project's purpose and that might enhance environmental quality, or have a less detrimental
effect, has not been prematurely dismissed from consideration. In the EA, reasonable and
practicable alternatives for the RSA improvements were carefully examined.
Runway Altematives
Four action alternatives were initially considered: 1) utilizing a displaced threshold within the
first 270 feet of the Runway 2 end with declared distances along both runway ends
(Alternative 1); 2) installing an Engineered Materials Arresting System (EMAS) in combination
with utilizing a displaced threshold within the first 180 feet of the Runway 2 end with declared
2
Runway 2/20 Safety Improvement Projects at Pitt - Greenville Airport
Greenville, Pitt County, North Carolina

Finding of No Significant Impact / Record of Decision
distances along both runway ends (Alternative 1a); 3) utilizing a displaced threshold within
the first 270 feet of the Runway 2 end, extending the runway 495 feet on the Runway 20 end,
and using declared distances along both runway ends (Alternative 2); and 4) utilizing a
displaced threshold within the first 270 feet of the Runway 2 end, extending the runway 670
feet on the Runway 20 end, and using declared distances along both runway ends
(Alternative 3). Application of the below preliminary screening criteria revealed that of the four
action alternatives considered, only Alternatives 2 and 3 would satisfy the Sponsor's overall
purpose and need of improving the RSA /ROFA, operational capabilities, and land use
compatibility:
• The action alternatives must meet FAA design and safety criteria for RSA/ROFA and
for Appendix 2 Threshold Siting clearances;
• The action alternatives should mitigate incompatible land uses by acquiring land in the
Runway 2/20 65 DNL and RPZ;
• The action alternatives should not result in a reduction of operational capabilities; that
is, landing, takeoff, and accelerate -stop distances for operations on either end of
Runway 2/20 should not be less than the current runway length of 6,505 feet;
• The action alternatives should increase the available TORA/TODA to permit the
current critical aircraft to operate at full payload service capabilities, including during
hot weather;
• The action alternatives should allow the lowest possible approach minimums for the
Runway 20 ILS (i.e., '/ mile visibility minimums and 200 foot HAT) by removing or
mitigating obstructions off airport property;
• The action alternatives should allow the establishment of vertically - guided RNAV (both
LPV and LNAV/VNAV) approaches to Runway 2 by removing or mitigating
obstructions off airport property;
• The action alternatives should be economically feasible in terms of initial construction
cost, mitigation costs and long -term maintenance cost; and
• Environmentally sound mitigation can be accomplished and is fiscally feasible.
Thus, only the No Action Alternative and Alternatives 2 and 3 were carried forward for full
analysis in the EA as described below:
No Action Runway Alternative
The No Action Alternative was evaluated pursuant to the CEQ Regulation 40 CFR §
1502.14(d). Under the No Action alternative, the runway thresholds would remain where they
are today, and would not provide a standard RSA or ROFA for Runway 2 and safe operating
environment as designated for C -II airports. Additionally, the instrument approaches to each
runway end would continue to be negatively impacted by tree obstructions. A No Action
alternative would entail no more than regular pavement maintenance (such as periodic
repaving or rehabilitation), no acquisition of existing incompatible land uses, and no land
disturbance. Insurance restrictions and or company policy may prohibit some aircraft from
future use of the airport if the proposed improvements are not completed and would result in
a loss of airport revenue. While the No Action Alternative would not impact the natural
environment, it would not meet the Sponsor's overall purpose and need.
Runway 2/20 Safety Improvement Projects at Pitt - Greenville Airport
Greenville, Pitt County, North Carolina

Finding of No Significant Impact / Record of Decision
Alternative 3 — 670' Runway Extension (Sponsor's Preferred Alternative)
Alternative 3 would bring the Runway 2 RSA/ROFA into compliance with FAA criteria, provide
a 670 foot extension of the Runway 20 end, remove approach obstructions at both runway
ends, and acquire incompatible land uses at the Runway 20 end. This alternative would result
in no reduction in LDA/ASDA from the current condition (minimum 6,505 feet) for operations
from both runway ends, and will provide 7,175 feet of TORA/TODA, exceeding the
recommended runway length of 7,000 feet for critical aircraft takeoff, best meeting the project
Purpose and Need. Alternative 3 consists of the following elements:
1. RSA/ROFA Improvements Element: Displace the Runway 2 threshold by 270 feet
This element would involve displacing the Runway 2 threshold 270 feet from its current
location at the physical end of the runway and imposing declared distances to meet
RSA/ROFA requirements. Additionally, it would involve removal of an earthen berm
approximately 2,475' long by 15' wide currently located in the ROFA southwest of the
Runway 2 end.
2. Runway 2120 Lengthening Element: Extend Runway 20 by 670 feet and move the
threshold to the new physical end of the runway
This element would involve constructing a 670 foot extension of the Runway 20 (north)
end in order to provide 7,175 feet of TORA/TODA for aircraft operating from both
runway ends. The Runway 20 threshold would be moved to the new physical end of
the runway and the ILS glide slope antenna, approach lighting system (MALSR) and
PAPI would be relocated based on the new threshold location. Additional runway edge
lights would be added to the extended runway pavement and the runway would be
remarked based on the new threshold location. The parallel taxiway would be
extended 670 feet to the new threshold location. Taxiway edge lights would be
installed for the extended taxiway. The extension of the runway will also require the
piping of approximately 880 linear feet of open drainage ditch on airport property within
the RSA /ROFA.
3. Runway 2 End Obstruction Removal Element: Remove existing Runway 20
departure obstructions and establish Runway 2 vertically- guided RNAV
approaches.
This element would clear trees from the existing Runway 20 departure surface as
described in Section 1.3.3 and shown on Figure 2 -3b. This alternative would also allow
the establishment of new vertically guided approaches (LNAV/VNAV, LPV) to
Runway 2.
4. Runway 20 End Obstruction Removal Element: Remove ILS approach
obstructions and Runway 2 departure obstructions for 670 foot extended
runway /relocated threshold.
This element would involve the clearing of trees that penetrate the Runway 20 ILS
approach surface and the Runway 2 departure surface at the Runway 20 (north) end
as shown in Figure 2 -3c, based on the extension of the runway and the relocation of
the threshold. The tree clearing will allow the full ILS minimums (200 foot HAT and 1/
mile visibility minimums).
4
Runway 2/20 Safety Improvement Projects at Pitt - Greenville Airport
Greenville, Pitt County, North Carolina

Finding of No Significant Impact / Record of Decision
5. Land Use Compatibility Enhancement Element: Acquire the properties
encompassed by the Runway 20 RPZ and 65 DNL contour for the extended
runway.
This element would include the fee simple acquisition of incompatible land uses within
the Runway 20 RPZ and 65 DNL contour for the runway extended 670 feet.
In summary, Alternative 3 provides a standard RSA and ROFA for both runway ends,
resolves land use incompatibilities through the fee simple acquisition of 32 properties (17
properties for the RPZ and 15 properties for the 65 DNL noise contour) in addition to
obtaining a total of approximately 35 acres in avigation easements near both runway ends.
Grading and drainage would be performed at each runway end to comply with design
requirements for the RSA /ROFA.
This alternative meets the C -II design standards and minimum usable runway length criteria
and removes obstructions from the Runway 2/20 approach and departure procedures which
ultimately improves safety on approach or departure.
V. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
As documented in the attached EA, two action alternatives (alternatives 2 and 3) and the No
Action Alternative were evaluated for potential impacts to all environmental resource topic
areas outlined in FAA Order 1050.1 E, FAA's Order implementing the NEPA.
Under the No Action Alternative, no action would be taken and there would be no associated
environmental impacts.
The following is a discussion of those resources identified as present and with potential to be
significantly affected under Alternative 3 (Sponsor's Preferred Alternative):
Compatible Land Use — To mitigate incompatible land uses, the Airport proposes to acquire
a portion or all of 32 properties in the area north of the Airport adjacent to the end of
Runway 20. Those properties proposed to be purchased fall into two categories: those
within the Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) and those within the 65 DNL noise contour.
RPZ Parcels: The Runway 20 RPZ currently encompasses 6 properties. Alternative 3
would result in an increase in the number of incompatible properties in the Runway 20 RPZ
from 6 to 17, 8 of which include residences. The RPZ for Runway 2 is entirely located on
airport property.
Mitigation to ensure less than significant impacts: Incompatible land uses in the RPZ
will be mitigated by offering voluntary fee - simple acquisition at fair market value for those
parcels within the RPZ. Relocation will be offered to residents in accordance with the
Uniform Act.
65 DNL Noise Parcels: Aircraft operations at PGV were modeled to determine the level
noise impacts created by Alternative 3 as described in detail in Chapter 3 of the EA. The
Integrated Noise Model (INM) input data can be found in Appendix E. For reference,
5
Runway 2/20 Safety Improvement Projects at Pitt - Greenville Airport
Greenville, Pitt County, North Carolina

Finding of No Significant Impact / Record of Decision
residential properties within the 65 DNL or greater contour are defined by the FAA and EPA
to be significantly impacted and therefore are deemed incompatible with airport operations
and eligible for mitigation. The 65 DNL contour on the Runway 2 approach end remained
within the Airport's property and thus did not identify any incompatible uses. On the north
end, Alternative 3 increases the number of properties within the 65 DNL contour from the
baseline existing conditions' 7 parcels /6 residences to 15 parcels /14 residences.
Mitigation to ensure less than significant impacts: Residential properties identified as
noise impacted (Within the 65DNL Contour) will be mitigated by offering voluntary fee -
simple acquisition at fair market value and relocation of residents in accordance with the
Uniform Act.
Socioeconomic and Environmental Justice Impacts — To achieve the necessary defined
operational safety and land use compatibility objectives for the Pitt - Greenville airport, some
socioeconomic impacts are unavoidable and are discussed above in "Compatible Land
Use." Due to the presence of minority- concentrated neighborhoods adjacent to and /or in
close proximity to the airport, the proposed action has disproportionately high and adverse
impacts to a low income or minority population. Twenty -two of the 32 potential fee - simple
land acquisition properties identified under Alternative 3 are located in a minority or low
income area. As documented in the report, preparation of the EA included an extensive
outreach and community /public awareness element consisting of a series of
community /neighborhood meetings and a public workshop. Impacts to the neighborhoods
are unavoidable due to their location. However, to properly mitigate or off -set the impacts to
all affected residents (owners and tenants), the airport would offer the benefits of a full -
scale assistance program under the auspice of the Uniform Relocation Assistance (URA)
and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970. The sponsor will offer fair market value
for each property and provide relocation assistance for displaced residents. Acquisition will
be voluntary, meaning residents located in the RPZ or 65 DNL will not be required to sell
their property.
Mitigation to ensure less than significant impacts: See mitigation comments above in
"Compatible Land Use"
Wetlands — Two of the man -made ditches to the north of Runway 20 have been determined
to be subject to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
Alternative 3 will impact 0.44 acres of wetlands located in these ditches, by placing
drainage pipe in the ditches to provide a compliant RSA and ROFA for the extended
runway. Based on cumulative wetlands impacts to date at PGV from previous projects, the
USACE has determined that any impacts to the ditches will require an Individual Permit and
associated mitigation.
Mitigation will be accomplished off site, per FAA Advisory Circular 150/5200 -33B. Mitigation
will occur at the ratio determined by the USACE. The USACE's Regulatory Division is
currently involved in developing a wetland function assessment methodology for use in N.C.
Ratios are based on the type and quality of aquatic resource impacted, temporal lag in
replacing lost functions, or the probability for success of a given mitigation proposal. For the
purposes of this EA, a ratio of 2:1 is assumed. The wetlands impacts associated with this
6
Runway 2/20 Safety Improvement Projects at Pitt - Greenville Airport
Greenville, Pitt County, North Carolina

Finding of No Significant Impact / Record of Decision
project will be associated with the Tar - Pamlico River Basin with a hydrologic unit code
(HUC) of 03020103. The N.C. Ecosystem Enhancement Program's (NC EEP) In -Lieu Fee
Program Coordinator has indicated that there are adequate credits available through their
program in the HUC as of June 11, 2012. All of NC EEP's mitigation sites are located at
least 10 miles from PGV.
Clearing of tree obstructions to approach /departure surfaces will be performed in riverine
and forested /shrub wetlands located south of Runway 2. These trees are proposed to be
selectively cut and no grubbing of stumps will be performed in the wetlands. Trees in these
areas will be cleared according to Corps guidelines to avoid impacts to wetlands as follows:
• Trees will be cut by hand or with low impact mechanized equipment, operating on
mats. Mechanized equipment will be operated in such a manner as to avoid casting
soil into wetland areas.
• Trees may be cut at the stump but the stumps will remain in place.
• There will be no land- leveling, grubbing, or any disturbance of the root mat.
• The use of tracked equipment will be prohibited unless on mats.
• The use of heavy mechanized equipment for cutting, windrowing, or other clearing
operations will be prohibited.
• Logging mats will be used any time heavy mechanized equipment is needed for
transport.
• The use of heavy mechanized equipment such as backhoes or bulldozers with sheer
blades, rakes, or discs will be prohibited.
• The construction of access roads will be prohibited in areas that would impact
wetlands.
• Permanent stockpiling of debris will be prohibited. All debris and felled trees will be
removed from the area and disposed of in an upland area.
Agency Coordination /Comments - The information presented in the EA, including
comments from Sovereign Nations, Federal, State and local agencies did not identify any
significant impacts to the environment.
VI. ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION
In addition to carrying out standard best management practices required by FAA grant
assurances outlined in FAA Advisory Circular (AC) 150/5370 -10, "Standards for Specifying
Construction of Airports," and minimization and mitigation measures mandated by permitting
requirements and /or other special purpose laws, the following mitigation measures are
necessary to ensure less than significant impacts:
• Incompatible land uses in the RPZ will be mitigated by offering voluntary fee - simple
acquisition at fair market value for those parcels within the RPZ. Relocation will be
offered to residents in accordance with the Uniform Act.
• Residential properties identified as noise impacted (Within the 65DNL Contour) will be
mitigated by offering voluntary fee - simple acquisition at fair market value and
relocation of residents in accordance with the Uniform Act.
7
Runway 2/20 Safety Improvement Projects at Pitt - Greenville Airport
Greenville, Pitt County, North Carolina

Finding of No Significant Impact / Record of Decision
As referenced above, there are regulatory permits or certifications that impose mitigation
requirements to minimize environmental impacts during implementation of the Proposed
Action. The Sponsor is responsible to acquire and comply with all applicable permits and
certifications throughout the implementation /construction of the Proposed Action.
Regulatory permits or certificates required for the Proposed Action include:
• Erosion & Sediment Control Certificate of Approval - NCDENR Division of Land
Quality,
• NPDES Stormwater Permit (Construction Activities) - NCDENR Division of Water
Quality,
• Section 404 Permit - US Army Corps of Engineers,
• 401 Water Quality Certification - NCDENR Division of Water Quality,
• Tar - Pamlico Buffer Authorization - NCDENR Division of Water Quality,
• Stormwater Management Permit - City of Greenville,
• FAA Notice of Proposed Construction (7460),
• FAA Notice of Landing Area Proposal (7480),
• Electrical Permit - Greenville Utility Commission; and,
• Temporary Driveway Permit - NCDOT.
VII. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION / PUBLIC COMMENT
The Airport issued a public notice of availability of an EA and notice of opportunity for a public
hearing for the proposed project as follows:
- On the Airport's website between Wednesday, June 27, 2012 and Thursday, July 26,
2012;
- In The Greater Diversity News (a minority- focused regional publication) on Thursday,
July 12, 2012; and
- In The Greenville Daily Reflector on Sunday, July 15, 2012.
On July 19, 2012, the Airport, with assistance from local elected officials and neighborhood
contacts, organized a community meeting. The purpose of this meeting was to engage the
affected communities prior to the public workshop on July 26, 2012. Invitations were sent out
by mail, email and phone calls. As a result of community interest, a story was run in the local
newspaper as well as a local television station prior to the meeting. The meeting was held in
the Barnes -Ebron -Taft Community Center in Greenfield Terrace (the neighborhood closest to
the airport). In excess of 80 persons were in attendance. The meeting was broadcast live on
a local television station, and several news organizations were in attendance.
Project information was presented, as well as the requirements for environmental justice, and
the requirements for airport land acquisition for FAA projects under the Uniform Relocation
Assistance (URA) and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act. The presentation was followed
by a question and answer session, and an opportunity for attendees to speak one -on -one
with the airport's representatives and to locate their property on project maps. Common
concerns expressed related to noise, aircraft fumes, and relocation assistance.
Runway 2/20 Safety Improvement Projects at Pitt - Greenville Airport
Greenville, Pitt County, North Carolina

Finding of No Significant Impact / Record of Decision
On July 26, 2012, the Airport hosted a public workshop in the Airport ARFF building to
discuss the purpose and conclusions of the Environmental Assessment as well as to provide
a forum for public comments and questions. Invitations were made by a notice published in
the local newspaper, on the airport's website, and posting of the meeting notice at various
public locations in the community. The meeting was well attended; attendees included
residents of Greenfield Terrace, Countryside Estates, North River Estates, and Hillsdale as
well as airport staff, elected officials and other concerned citizens.
The attendance rosters for the meetings are included in Appendix G of the EA, as are copies
of all advertisements and notifications related to the public outreach efforts associated with
this EA. Written comments received from the public during the period available for comment
are also included in Appendix G. No requests for a public hearing were made.
VIII. AGENCY FINDINGS
In accordance with applicable law, the FAA makes the following findings /determinations for
the Proposed Action, based upon the appropriate information and data contained in the EA.
• Certification under 49 U.S.C. §44502(b) (formerly Section 308 of the Federal Aviation
Act of 1958, as amended). I certify that the proposed improvement project is
reasonably necessary for use in air commerce or for national defense.
• Based on the EA, no significant environmental impacts would be incurred as a result of
the Federal action.
IX. DECISION AND ORDER
The FAA has determined that environmental and other relevant concerns presented by
interested agencies and private citizens have been addressed sufficiently in the EA, hereby
acknowledged and fully and properly considered in the decision - making resulting in this ROD.
The FAA concludes there are no outstanding environmental issues to be resolved by it with
respect to the proposed project.
The No Action Alternative fails to meet the purpose and need for the proposed project. For
reasons summarized earlier in this ROD, and supported by disclosures and analysis detailed
in the EA, the FAA has determined that Alternative 3, the Sponsor's preferred alternative, is a
reasonable, feasible, practicable and prudent alternative for a Federal decision in light of the
established goals and objectives. An FAA decision to take the actions and approvals required
by the Sponsor is consistent with its statutory mission and policies supported by the findings
and conclusions reflected in the environmental documentation and this ROD.
After reviewing the EA and all of its related materials, I have carefully considered the FAA's
goals and objectives in relation to various aeronautical aspects of the proposed development
actions discussed in the EA, including the purpose and need to be met by this project, the
alternative means of achieving them, the environmental impacts of these alternatives, the
mitigation necessary to preserve and enhance the environment, and the costs and benefits of
achieving the purpose and need.
9
Runway 2/20 Safety Improvement Projects at Pitt - Greenville Airport
Greenville, Pitt County, North Carolina

Finding of No Significant Impact / Record of Decision
While this decision does not approve Federal funding for the proposed airport development
and does not constitute a Federal funding commitment, it does provide the environmental
findings and approval for proceeding to funding actions in accordance with established
procedures and applicable requirements.
After careful and thorough consideration of the facts contained herein, the undersigned finds
that the proposed Federal action is consistent with the national environmental policies and
objectives as set forth in Section 101(a) of NEPA and that with the mitigation that is a part of
the project it will not significantly affect the quality of the human environment or otherwise
include any condition requiring consultation pursuant to Section 101 (2) (C) of NEPA.
This ROD presents the FAA's final decision and approvals for the actions identified, including
those taken under the provisions of Title 49 of the United States Code, Subtitle VII, Parts A
and B. These actions constitute a final order of the Administrator subject to review by the
Court of Appeals of the United States in accordance with the provisions of 49 U.S.C. Section
§46110.
Issued in College Park, Georgia
L 4� 13 August 2012
Scott L. Seritt Date
Manager
FAA, Atlanta Airports District Office
10
Runway 2/20 Safety Improvement Projects at Pitt - Greenville Airport
Greenville, Pitt County, North Carolina

PUBLIC NOTICE
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has assessed the potential environmental
impacts for the proposed capital improvement project for the Runway 2/20 Safety
Improvement Projects (Runway Safety Area [RSA] and Runway Object Free Area
[ROFA] improvements and Runway 2/20 extension) at the Pitt - Greenville Airport (PGV)
in Greenville, North Carolina, in accordance with FAA standard design criteria. The FAA has
determined the project as proposed would not significantly affect the quality of the
human environment and that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not necessary.
An Environmental Assessment (EA) was prepared and a Finding of No Significant
Impact (FONSI) /Record of Decision (ROD) was issued on August 13, 2012. The EA and
FONSI /ROD are available for review by the public for thirty (30) days at the following
locations:
and
FAA Southern Region
Atlanta Airports District Office
1701 Columbia Avenue, Suite 2 -260
College Park, GA 30337
Insert location(s) where the EA and FONSI /ROD are available for review in
Pitt County — City of Greenville
For additional information contact:
Dana Perkins
Environmental Program Specialist
Atlanta Airports District Office
(404) 305 -7152