20141150 Ver 1_401 Application_20141114

o � -r
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.3 Dec 10 2008
Page 1 of 15
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
Pre - Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A.
Applicant Information
1.
Processing
1a.
Type(s) of approval sought from the
Corps:
®Section 404 Permit ❑Section 10 Permit
1 b.
Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 14 & 39 or General Permit (GP) number: N/A
1 c.
Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
® Yes
❑ No
1d.
Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
® 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular ❑ Non -404 Jurisdictional General Permit
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification — Express ® Riparian Buffer Authorization
1 e.
Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWQ 401
Certification:
❑ Yes ® No
For the record only for Corps Permit:
❑ Yes ® No
1f.
Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation
of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank or in -lieu
fee program.
® Yes
❑ No
1g.
Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below.
❑ Yes
® No
1 h.
Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ Yes
® No
2.
Project Information
2a.
Name of project:
Biogen Idec Infrastructure Project
2b.
County:
Wake
2c.
Nearest municipality / town:
Research Triangle Park
2d.
Subdivision name:
N/A
2e.
NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state
project no:
N/A
3.
Owner Information
3a.
Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
Biogen Realty, LLC
3b.
Deed Book and Page No.
D.B. 9230, Pg. 450
3c.
Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
EstherA/egria
3d.
Street address:
PO Box 14627
3e.
City, state, zip:
RTP, NC 27709
3f.
Telephone no.:
919 - 993 -1140
3g.
Fax no.:
N/A
3h.
Email address:
N/A
Page 1 of 15
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

4.
Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a.
Applicant is:
❑ Agent ® Other, specify: Owner - please send correspondence to both
applicant and agent. Please issue any formal permits /Approvals to Owner.
4b.
Name:
EstherA/egria (Attn: Jack Kane)
4c.
Business name
(if applicable):
Biogen Realty, LLC
4d.
Street address:
5000 Davis Drive
4e.
City, state, zip:
RTP, NC 27709
4f.
Telephone no.:
919 - 993 -1411
4g.
Fax no.:
N/A
4h.
Email address:
N/A
5.
Agent /Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a.
Name:
Deborah Edwards Shirley
5b.
Business name
(if applicable):
Soil & Environmental Consultants, PA
5c.
Street address:
8412 Falls of Neuse Road, Ste. 104
5d.
City, state, zip:
Raleigh, NC 27615
5e.
Telephone no.:
919 - 846 -5900
5f.
Fax no.:
919 - 846 -9467
5g.
Email address:
DShirley(a-)SandEC.com
Page 2 of 15

B.
Project Information and Prior Project History
1.
Property Identification
Parcel ID: 0736 -98 -0221, 0736 -89 -5590, 0736-99 -
1a.
Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
3488 & 0737 -80 -5221 (Wake County) & 0737- 03 -91-
5193 & 0737 -04 -80 -7707 (Durham County)
1b.
Site coordinates (in decimal degrees): Impact Al -S1
Latitude: 35.8662 Longitude: - 78.8706
(DD.DDDDDD) (- DD.DDDDDD)
1 c.
Property size:
± 158 acres
2.
Surface Waters
2a.
Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc.) to
UT to Kit Creek 16- 41- 1- 17- 2 -(0.3)
proposed project:
2b.
Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
WS -V,- NSW
2c.
River basin:
Cape Fear 03- 06 -05; Hydrologic Unit Code 03030002
3.
Project Description
3a.
Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application: The existing conditions on site are wooded with the existing Biogen facility to the south. The site is bounded
by NC 147 to the east, Davis Drive to the west, and Kit Creek Road to the south. Three (3) perennial /important stream
systems bisect the property, with additional intermittent/unimportant (and isolated) streams flowing into these main
tributaries. The site is located within Wake County, with a small portion to the north located in Durham County. The
general land use in the vicinity of the project is predominantly industrial with an influx of residential.
3b.
List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
Approximately 0.38 acres
3c.
List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
Approximately 9,238 linear feet
3d.
Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
Biogen is expanding its operations in North Carolina which will require new road infrastructure and an expansion of the
manufacturing facility. The proposed manufacturing expansion will include new buildings, warehouse, storage, QA /QC
and electrical infrastructure facilities. The new facilities will require major utility relocations, including water, sewer, gas,
electric, telephone and communications; building modifications, parking and roadway infrastructure. The purpose of the
proposed impacts are to construct a new road (i.e. Loop Road) that will connect the existing Phil Sharpe Drive to Davis
Drive which will provide access to the northern portions of the property and new access off Davis Drive; extending the
existing Wally Gilbert Drive which will provide internal access within the South Campus and will dually act as a
construction access while the facility is under construction; and an expansion of the manufacturing facility to support the
product market.
3e.
Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
The overall project consists of three (3) roadway impacts, one of which is a proposed bridge, and lot fill associated
with facility expansion. Specifically the project will include new buildings, parking, roadways, warehouse, storage,
QA /QC, electrical infrastructure facilities and existing utility relocation. Equipment such as bull dozers, bucket
loaders, excavators and other typical equipment used for land disturbance and construction will be utilized for this
project.
Page 3 of 15
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

B. Project Information and Prior Project History
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
® Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
project (including all prior phases) in the past.
Comments:
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
of determination was made?
❑ Preliminary ® Final
Comments:
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Agency /Consultant Company: Soil & Environmental
Name (if known): Steven Ball
Consultants, PA Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
USA CE-site visit with Eric Alsmeyer on July 14, 2010 and September 11, 2014, Jurisdictional Determination dated
November 28, 2011 (AID SAW -2011- 00943); NCDWQ -site visit with Martin Richmond on July 30, 2010, Neuse Buffer
Determination letter dated August 11, 2010 (NBRRO 10 -129). In addition, a site visit was conducted with Lauren
Witherspoon on May 31, 2012 to evaluate the stream quality at Impact area A -1.
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
❑ Yes ❑ No ® Unknown
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
According to the project engineer, the road crossings on the south side of the property were done in two steps; 1)
Kenneth Murray (access from Kit Creek closest to Davis Drive) was done in the late 1990's (1998 -2000) and 2) the
second entrance was done in 2005 -2007 when the parking structure was built. At the time, both crossings were approved
as bottomless arch culverts so no impacts were applied for or needed.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?
❑ Yes ® No
6b. If yes, explain.
N/A
Page 4 of 15

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1 a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
® Wetlands ® Streams - tributaries ❑ Buffers
❑ Open Waters ❑ Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a.
2b.
2c.
2d.
2e.
2f.
Wetland impact number —
Type of jurisdiction
Permanent (P) or
Type of
Type of wetland
Forested
(Corps - 404, 10
Area of impact
Temporary T
impact
if known
DWQ — non -404, other
acres
W1 (A1 -W1) ® P ❑ T
Road
Crossing -Fill
Bottomland
® Yes
® Corps
0.040
slopes
Hardwood
El No
El DWQ
W2 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
W3 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
W4 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
W5 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
2g. Total wetland impacts
0.040
2h. Comments:
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a.
3b.
3c.
3d.
3e.
3f.
3g.
Stream impact number -
Type of
Stream name
Perennial
Type of jurisdiction
Average
Impact
Permanent (P) or
impact
(PER) or
(Corps - 404, 10
stream
length
Temporary (T)
intermittent
DWQ — non -404,
width
(linear
(INT)?
other)
(feet)
feet)
Road
S1 (A1 -S1) ® P ❑ T
Crossing-
Culvert &
UT to Kit Creek
❑ PER
® INT
® Corps
❑ DWQ
6
176
Dissipater
S2 (A2 -S2) ❑ P ® T
Bridge
Crossing
UT to Kit Creek
® PER
❑ INT
® Corps
❑ DWQ
22
198
S3 (A3 -S1) ® P ❑ T
Lot fill
UT to Kit Creek
❑ PER
® INT
® Corps
❑ DWQ
5
120
S4 (A3 -S2) ® P ❑ T
Road - Culvert
& Dissipater
UT to Kit Creek
® PER
❑ INT
® Corps
❑ DWQ
10
130
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
624
3i. Comments:
Total proposed permanent impacts to intermittent /unimportant stream = 296 linear feet; total proposed permanent
impacts to perennial /important stream = 130 linear feet; total proposed temporary impacts to perennial /important
stream= 198 linear feet. Temporary stream impacts will be restored by stabilizing the banks and bringing the stream
bed back to its pre- existing elevation. Please note impact Al -S1 was previously impacted and relocated by NCDOT
for the Davis Drive widening.
Page 5 of 15
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then individ ally list all open water im acts below.
4a.
4b.
4c.
4d.
4e.
Open water impact
Name of waterbody
number—
(if applicable)
Type of impact
Waterbody type
Area of impact (acres)
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
01 ❑P ❑T
02 ❑ PEI T
0. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments:
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, then com lete the chart below.
5a.
5b.
5c.
5d.
5e.
Wetland Impacts (acres)
Stream Impacts (feet)
Upland
Pond ID
Proposed use or purpose of
(acres)
number
pond
Flood
ed
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
P1
P2
5f. Total
5g. Comments:
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
Page 6 of 15

6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If any impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a.
❑ Neuse ❑ Tar - Pamlico ® Other: Jordan
Project is in which protected basin?
❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman
6b.
6c.
6d.
6e.
6f.
6g.
Buffer impact
number —
Reason for impact
Buffer
Zone 1 impact
Zone 2 impact
Permanent (P) or
Stream name
mitigation
(square feet)
(square feet)
Temporary T
required?
B1 (Al-BI & B2)
®P ❑T
Road Crossing
UT to Kit Creek
El Yes
®No
5,126
3,255
B2 (A2-BI & B2)
®P ❑T
Bridge Crossing
UT to Kit Creek
El Yes
®No
11,363
7,271
B3 ❑P ❑T
❑Yes
❑ No
B4 ❑P ❑T
❑Yes
❑ No
6h. Total buffer impacts
16,489
10,526
6i. Comments: Project located within multiple jurisdictions, No Practical Alternatives review requested through the
NC Division of Water Resources.
Page 7 of 15

D.
Impact Justification and Mitigation
1.
Avoidance and Minimization
1a.
Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
S &EC completed a wetland delineation and Jordan Watershed Buffer evaluation for the entire property in order to
identify natural resources so that the project engineer could design a site plan that would minimize impacts to the
maximum extent practicable. The parcel of land is bisected by three (3) important/perennial stream systems and
multiple tributaries flowing into these main streams. The project is proposing three (3) impact areas, one of which
will be temporary impacts associated with the construction of a bridge therefore avoiding permanent impacts to the
jurisdictional stream. The project entails the construction of a new road (i.e. Loop Road) that will connect the
existing Phil Sharp Drive to Davis Drive. The connection points for the Loop Road are set (i.e. existing
Development Drive on the northwest side of the property and the existing stub at rotary on south side of property).
In addition, a facility expansion is proposed within the South Campus. Impact Area A 1 is a road crossing
proposing permanent impacts to 176 linear feet intermittent/unimportant stream and 0.04 acres of wetlands. This
stream and wetland area was previously impacted by the NCDOT Davis Drive Road Widening project; this segment
of stream was relocated and lined with riprap. This road crossing has been designed to cross the stream and
wetland area at a 90° angle, therefore minimizing impacts to the stream. Impact Area A2 is a bridge crossing
proposing temporary impacts to 198 linear feet a perennial /important stream. The proposed stream crossing will be
constructed as a bridge but because of steep topography, along with the distance of the proposed bridge location in
relation to the existing access to the site, the temporary impacts are necessary for construction activities. This
proposed stream impact was minimized by crossing the stream below the confluence of the two tributaries and
designed to cross the stream at a 900 angle, therefore minimizing impacts to the stream. The temporary stream
impacts will be restored by stabilizing the banks and bringing the stream bed back to its pre- existing elevation. Impact
Area A3 is a road crossing and lot fill, proposing permanent impacts to 130 linear feet of perennial /important
stream, and 120 linear feet of intermittent/unimportant stream. The road crossing is necessary for the Wally Gilbert
Drive extension, which will provide internal access within the South Campus and will dually act as construction access
while the facility is under construction. Headwalls have been utilized to minimize impacts to the stream. The lot fill is
necessary for the manufacturing facility expansion. Biogen has worked diligently with their civil engineer, transportation
engineers and architectural firm to design a master plan of the South Campus, utilizing land and minimizing impacts to the
streams to the maximum extent practicable. To summarize this process and to provide different layouts reviewed by
Biogen and their team, the project engineer has provided a document that outlines five (5) different conceptual plans
(Options A -E) of the South Campus and the reasons why each option is or is not feasible. Please see attached `Biogen
Idec- Infrastructure Site Design" document provided by Peak Engineering & Design.
Furthermore, the applicant is aware of the regional conditions associated with the Nationwide Permits 39 and 14.
With respect to commercial /industrial development conditions (NWP 39- Regional Conditions section 4.0) the
applicant does not anticipate any impacts to streams or wetlands associated with stormwater facilities, there are no
impact associated with single - family recreation facilities, there are no permanent wetland or stream fills proposed
within the floodway/floodplain and the stream classification for this project is WS -V, NSW (i.e. not Outstanding
Resource Waters, High Quality Waters, Coastal Wetlands or wetland adjacent to these waters). With respect to
linear transportation crossings conditions (NWP 14- Regional Conditions section 4.0) this project is not proposing a
stream relocation; bank -full flows will be accommodated through the existing bank -full channel cross sectional area,
the proposed crossing is a bridge; this permit is not being used in conjunction with a NWP 18 to create an upland
area.
1 b.
Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
Erosion & Sediment Control plan that will be required by Wake County will provide measures to protect water
quality during construction activities.
2.
Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
Page 8 of 15
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

Page 9 of 15
E Yes ❑ No
Proposed permanent impacts to the streams are > 150
linear feet; therefore the applicant is proposing
compensatory mitigation for permanent stream impacts.
2a.
Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
Proposed permanent impacts to jurisdictional wetlands
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
are below 0.10 acres, as such the applicant is not
proposing compensatory mitigation for wetlands impacts,
other than minimization. The temporary stream impacts will
be restored by stabilizing the banks and bringing the stream
bed back to its pre- existing elevation.
2b.
If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
® DWQ ® Corps
❑ Mitigation bank
2c.
If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
®Payment to in -lieu fee program
project?
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3.
Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a.
Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b.
Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type
Quantity
3c.
Comments:
4.
Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program
4a.
Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached.
® Yes
4b.
Stream mitigation requested:
426 linear feet = USACE: 130 @ 2:1; NCDWR 426 @ 1:1
4c.
If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
® warm ❑ cool ❑cold
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
0 square feet
4e.
Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
0 acres
4f.
Non - riparian wetland mitigation requested:
0 acres
4g.
Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
0 acres
4h.
Comments: Please see attached NCEEP In -Lieu Fee Acceptance letter.
S.
Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a.
If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
Page 9 of 15

6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) — required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
buffer mitigation?
❑ Yes ® No
6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required.
Zone
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Total impact
(square feet)
Multiplier
6e.
Required mitigation
(square feet)
Zone 1
3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2
1.5
6f. Total buffer mitigation required:
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in -lieu fee fund).
6h. Comments:
Page 10 of 15

E.
Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1.
Diffuse Flow Plan
1 a.
Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
® Yes ❑ No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1 b.
If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
Comments: According to the project engineer. This project will be designed to
❑ Yes ® No
provide diffuse flow per Wake County Environmental Services. At this time, the
applicant requests a conditional Approval allowing the submittal of the diffuse flow
plan after it is approved by Wake County.
2.
Stormwater Management Plan
2a.
What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
<24%
2b.
Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
® Yes ❑ No
2c.
If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why:
2d.
If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative
description of the plan:
According to the project engineer. The Site Plan approval through Wake County will require a Stormwater Management
Plan (SMP) that is located within the Cape Fear River Basin. The conceptual BMP's have
been identified and shown on
sheet 4 of 10, the Overall Site Plan. At this time, the applicant requests a conditional 401 Approval allowing the submittal
of the SMP and its Approval after it is received by Wake County.
® Certified Local Government
2e.
Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
❑ DWQ Stormwater Program
❑ DWQ 401 Unit
3.
Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a.
In which local government's jurisdiction is this project?
Wake County
® Phase II
3b.
Which of the following locally - implemented stormwater management programs
® NSW
❑ USMP
apply (check all that apply):
® Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other:
3c.
Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ® No
attached?
4.
DWQ Stormwater Program Review
❑ Coastal counties
❑ HQW
4a.
Which of the following state - implemented stormwater management programs apply
❑ ORW
(check all that apply):
❑ Session Law 2006 -246
❑ Other:
4b.
Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
attached?
❑ Yes ❑ No
5.
DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a.
Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
❑ Yes ❑ No
Page 11 of 15
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

5b. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Page 12 of 15

F.
Supplementary Information
1.
Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1 a.
Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal /state /local) funds or the
❑ Yes ® No
use of public (federal /state) land?
1 b.
If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State
❑ Yes ❑ No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1 c.
If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
❑ Yes ❑ No
letter.) Comments:
2.
Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a.
Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
❑ Yes ® No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b.
Is this an after - the -fact permit application?
❑ Yes ® No
2c.
If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s):
3.
Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a.
Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in
❑ Yes ® No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b.
If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
We have reviewed the "Draft Internal Policy, Cumulative impacts and the 401 Water Quality Certification and
Isolated Wetlands Programs" document prepared by the NC Division of Water Quality on April 10, 2004, version
2.1. The draft states that many private developments are unlikely to cause cumulative impacts, including projects
such as urban in -fill, most residential subdivisions and small commercial developments as well as agricultural and
silvicultural operations. The Biogen Idec Infrastructure Project will be the construction of a road and facility
expansion within the highly developed Research Triangle Park. Additionally, the project is located within the Wake
County's jurisdiction, therefore the adjacent properties that have potential for development will have the following
regulations to protect downstream waters: 1) the Phase 11 NPDES Stormwater Permit Program, this program
includes permitting requirements for Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s) in addition to post -
construction stormwater management requirements; 2) Jordan Lake Watershed Riparian Buffer Protection
regulations, these regulations require limited development within the riparian buffer area in addition to "diffuse flow"
requirements at a minimum and could require Best Management Practices that control nitrogen if diffuse flow
cannot be achieved; and 3) the Water Supply, Watershed Protection Program which limits development densities
as well as requires protective riparian buffers. We anticipate that the NCDWR will advise us if any additional
information is needed.
4.
Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a.
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non- discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility. Wastewater generated by this project ultimately flows to
the Town of Cary's municipal service lines in and around the Biogen Idec Campus.
Page 13 of 15
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
❑ Yes ® No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
® Yes ❑ No
impacts?
® Raleigh
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
❑ Asheville
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat? In preparation for a request to the US Fish & Wildlife Services, S &EC performed a records check of all
documented Natural Heritage elements documenting federally listed species within a 2 -mile radius, the records
check indicated no occurrences of federally listed species were documented within the property boundaries or
within a 2 -mile radius On August 8, 2011, the US Fish & Wildlife Service was sent a letter requesting comments or
concerns regarding the Biogen project. The US Fish & Wildlife Services provided a response back on August 25,
2011 indicating the proposed project is not likely to adversely affect any federally - listed endangered or threatened
species, their formally designated critical habitat, or species currently proposed for listing under the Act, please see
attached letter.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
❑ Yes ® No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat? References:
(NOAH] National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 2014. Internet -based search: NOAA Fisheries Essential
Fish Habitat Mapper <http://sharpfin.nmfs. noaa. gov /website/EFH_Mapper /map.aspx> Accessed September 23,
2014.
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
❑ Yes ® No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
A Request for Environmental Review was submitted to the NC State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) requesting any
comments on the proposed project and site plan. The response provided by SHPO indicated that they are aware of no
historic resources which would be affected by the proposed project, therefore they have no comment (see attached).
Page 14 of 15

8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA- designated 100 -year floodplain?
® Yes ❑ No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
The Biogen Loop Road project proposes the construction of a new bridge, a paved sidewalk and associated fill within
the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) designated floodplain and floodway. As such the effect of
the proposed construction on flood water surface elevations, and the floodplain and floodway widths needed to be
evaluated through hydraulic analysis in the form of a flood study. Various alignment options (including a series of
crossing alternatives) were evaluated for hydraulic effect and resultant water surface elevations. It was determined
that a "no- rise" or "no- impact" condition was not achievable and as such a Conditional Letter of Map Revision
(CLOMR) application with supporting documentation was prepared and submitted to FEMA for review, see
attached CLOMR.
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? NC Floodplain Mapping Information System
http: / /f`loodmans. nc. govlfmis /Map. aspx ?FIPS =015
Deborah E. Digitally signed by Deborah E. Shirley
DN: cn= Deborah E. Shirley, o, ou,
Deborah E. Shirley
email= dshirley @sandec.com, c =US
Shirley Date: 2014.1 1.10 11:18:36 - 05'00
November
o
Applicant/Agent's Signature
Applicant /Agent's Printed Name
2014
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant
Date
is provided.)
Page 15 of 15