20221179 Ver 1_More Info Received_20221209

Strickland, Bev
From: Brad Luckey <[e-mail]>
Sent: Friday, December 9, 2022 4:15 PM
To: [e-mail]; Homewood, Sue
Cc: 'Ken Chavis'; Michael Brame; Catherine Carston
Subject: RE: [External] Request for Additional Information: SAW-2020-01862 (Brittway II / 4150
R1 Pleasant Garden Road / Greensboro / Guilford County)
Attachments: 7589_E Elmsley Dr_PCN_12.9.22.pdf
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an attachment to
Report Spam.
Good Friday Afternoon David and Sue,
On behalf of the applicant, please find the below and attached responses to your request for additional
information. Please let me know if you require additional information to complete your review.
USACE RFI #1: Thank you for your responses to items 1) and 4) of our request for additional information. These items are
resolved accordingly.
Applicant Response: The applicant acknowledges.
USACE RFI #2: Information provided in your response to item 3) does not adequately address our concerns. Based on
information from the landowner's website (https://www.carrollindev.com/inventory/brittway-ii-industrial-site/), as well
as the attached brochure, there are future plans for development within this area that the Corps would consider to be
part of the same single and complete project (see NWP General Condition 15) . Unless the currently proposed project
can be justified as having independent utility from the overall Brittway II Industrial Site, information is needed to justify
that all reasonably foreseeable impacts associated with full buildout of the Brittway II Industrial Site would not
cumulatively exceed NWP thresholds. Otherwise the project would require evaluation as an Individual (i.e. Standard)
Permit.
Applicant Response: The provided brochure, previously advertised on the applicant's website, is a conceptual site plan
utilized for marketing purposes of the property to a user or purchaser. Based on information from the landowner's
website, (https://www.carrollindev.com/inventory/brittway-ii-industrial-site/), due diligence activities including
stream/wetlands are "underway". Furthermore, the conceptually designed brochure depicts discrepancies for potential
site development including different number, size, shape, and orientation of industrial buildings located within the
Brittway II Industrial Center site. Neither of the site plans shown within the conceptually designed marketing brochure
are based on local planning/engineering requirements or other development constraints including wetlands as it was
completed prior to the applicant's due diligence to be utilized for marketing purposes.
The applicant is committed to avoiding an Individual Permit. The applicant has designed the proposed stream crossing
and 254,500 SF industrial building based on information obtained during due diligence, including stream and wetlands,
for a specified user's requirements. At this time, there are only conceptual grading plans to development the remainder
of the larger Brittway II Industrial Park. It should be noted that the remainder of the development within the larger
Brittway II Industrial Park can be completed without other impacts to WoUS. The proposed stream/wetland crossing
1

will access uplands located within the remainder of the south-central portion of the site that could be developed with up
to a 60,000 SF industrial building and additional trailer court storage without additional impact to WoUS. Additionally, if
at some time in the future there is a need to develop the eastern portion of the site, then the development of an
approximate 100,000 SF industrial building within the eastern portion of the larger Brittway II Industrial Park could be
constructed wholly in uplands with provided vehicular and industrial traffic access from an existing at grade railroad
crossing to Pleasant Garden Road, a State owned and maintained secondary road that borders the eastern portion of the
site. The site is bordered to the north with an existing industrial facility that currently utilizes an at grade industrial
railroad crossing for vehicular and industrial access to Pleasant Garden Road. The overall site plan, including conceptual
industrial buildings on the south-central and eastern portions of the larger Brittway Industrial Park have been designed
to return similar pre -construction hydrologic flows to unimpacted streams and wetlands.
The overall site plan is preferred by the applicant comparatively to construction of an access road and additional stream
crossing to provide access to the eastern portion of the larger Brittway II Industrial Park for numerous reasons.
Specifically, the applicant will avoid any future impacts to WoUS, associated permitting and mitigation
costs. Additionally, access from Pleasant Garden Road allows the applicant to avoid permitting, design and potential
relocation of existing overhead high tension powerlines and/or powerline towers with the power provider of the
site. The applicant has conceptually designed the south-central portion of the site to be accessed from the proposed
stream crossing with no other impacts to waters. Furthermore, the eastern portion of the larger Brittway II Industrial
Park can be accessed from an existing at grade rail crossing. While permitting and improvements to the existing at grade
rail crossing with the railroad provider would be necessary to accommodate industrial access to the eastern portion of
the site from Pleasant Garden Road, it would eliminate the aforementioned permitting, costs and time associated with
another stream crossing and/or relocation of existing overhead power lines and/or powerline towers on the site. While
there are no plans at this time to develop remaining portions of the site that would cause additional impact to WoUS,
the applicant acknowledges that should future development within the larger Brittway II Industrial Center were to
impact jurisdictional waters, then the impacts to WoUS would be cumulative with those proposed within this application
and those completed previously in the past.
USACE RFI #3) In the western half of the property, the wetland delineation shown on the provided "Overall Site Plan"
does not appear to match the delineation shown on the figures provided with the PJD dated 11/23/2021. Please correct
any discrepancies, update the plan sheet(s) accordingly, and/or provide explanations of the differences where they
occur. Importantly:
a. Based on the PJD, the proposed grading appears to impact the narrow portion of Wetland E extending
to the north of Stream A2.
b. Wetlands A-D, G, a large portion of Wetland E, and Streams V, W, and Z are not shown on the "Overall
Site Plan." This is especially problematic given proposed future development noted in item 2) above.
Applicant Response: The applicant has updated the proposed impact drawings to contain the USACE verified location of
WoUS. The subsequent use of the USACE verified stream/wetland locations has been utilized to update proposed
project impacts to WoUS contained within the attached PCN.
USACE RFI #4: Based on proposed grading and re-routing of drainage into stormwater ponds, the project appears to
eliminate the majority of the drainage areas/hydrology source for Wetlands L and M:
c. Please provide justification that hydrologic input will be maintained to these wetlands. Common designs
include routing approximately equivalent surface water/runoff area to these locations, altering locations
of stormwaters outlets, usage of French drains where appropriate, etc;
d. If maintenance of wetland hydrology is unable to be justified, the Corps would consider these areas as
reasonably foreseeable indirect impacts (see NWP General Conditions "District Engineers Decision")
resulting from a loss of hydrology. In such cases compensatory mitigation may be required for indirect
impacts resulting in a loss of hydrology and therefore aquatic function; compensatory mitigation is
typically required at a 1:1 ratio for such indirect impacts (although may be situationally up to 2:1),
depending largely on aquatic function (e.g. NCWAM);
2

e. A monitoring plan (typically including groundwater monitoring wells and visual observations for a period
of 5 years post -construction) to document maintenance of wetland hydrology may also be proposed for
Corps evaluation and approval; such monitoring plans would also include a contingency plan, typically
including compensatory mitigation, in the event that monitoring does not indicate maintenance of
wetland hydrology.
Applicant Response: The applicant proposes to discharge similar pre -construction hydrologic flows from stormwater
treatment devices to unimpacted streams or wetlands in areas that the proposed project will eliminate the majority of
existing surface water or drainage areas.
USACE RFI #5: Until item 2) above is resolved, item 5) from our request for additional information pertaining to scope
for compliance with Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act remains unresolved.
Applicant response: The applicant acknowledges.
USACE RFI #6) from our request for additional information is ongoing.
Applicant response: The applicant acknowledges.
Sincerely,
Bradley S. Luckey, PWS
336.708.4997 (c)
336.310.4527 (o)
PO Box 128
Kernersville, NC 27285
www.pilotenviro.com
bluckey@ pilotenviro.com
From: Michael Brame <[e-mail]>
Sent: Thursday, December 1, 2022 1:11 PM
To: Brad Luckey <[e-mail]>
Subject: FW: [External] Request for Additional Information: SAW-2020-01862 (Brittway II / 4150 R1 Pleasant Garden
Road / Greensboro / Guilford County)
Sincerely,
Michael T. Brame
336.708-4620 (c)
336.310.4527 (o)
PO Box 128
Kernersville, NC 27285
www.pilotenviro.com
[e-mail]
PILOT' 11�
PILOT E N V I R O N M E N T A L, I N C
From: Homewood, Sue <[e-mail]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2022 1:49 PM
To: Michael Brame <[e-mail]>; Ken Chavis <[e-mail]>; Catherine Carston
<[e-mail]>
Cc: [e-mail]
3

Subject: RE: [External] Request for Additional Information: SAW-2020-01862 (Brittway II / 4150 R1 Pleasant Garden
Road / Greensboro / Guilford County)
All,
Please copy me on your responses to the items requested by the USACE. DWR will consider the application on hold until
receipt of a complete response. Thank you.
Thanks,
Sue Homewood
Division of Water Resources, Winston Salem Regional Office
Department of Environmental Quality
336 776 9693 office
336 813 1863 mobile
[e-mail]
450 W. Hanes Mill Rd, Suite 300
Winston Salem NC 27105
Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
From: Bailey, David E CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <[e-mail]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2022 12:45 PM
To: Michael Brame <[e-mail]>
Cc: Catherine Carston <[e-mail]>; Ken Chavis <[e-mail]>; Homewood, Sue
<[e-mail]>
Subject: [External] Request for Additional Information: SAW-2020-01862 (Brittway II / 4150 R1 Pleasant Garden Road /
Greensboro / Guilford County)
CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an attachment to
Report Spam.
All,
Thank you for your additional information, received 10/28/2022, for the above referenced project. I have reviewed the
information and need clarification before proceeding with verifying the use of Nationwide Permit (NWP) 39
(https://saw-reg.usace.army.mil/NWP2021/NWP39.pdf). Please submit the requested information below (via e-mail is
fine) within 30 days of receipt of this Notification, otherwise we may deny verification of the use of the Nationwide
Permit or consider your application withdrawn and close the file:
1) Thank you for your responses to items 1) and 4) of our request for additional information. These items are
resolved accordingly.
2) Information provided in your response to item 3) does not adequately address our concerns. Based on
information from the landowner's website (https://www.carrollindev.com/inventory/brittway-ii-industrial-site/),
as well as the attached brochure, there are future plans for development within this area that the Corps would
consider to be part of the same single and complete project (see NWP General Condition 15) . Unless the
currently proposed project can be justified as having independent utility from the overall Brittway II Industrial
Site, information is needed to justify that all reasonably foreseeable impacts associated with full buildout of the
4

Brittway II Industrial Site would not cumulatively exceed NWP thresholds. Otherwise the project would require
evaluation as an Individual (i.e. Standard) Permit;
3) In the western half of the property, the wetland delineation shown on the provided "Overall Site Plan" does not
appear to match the delineation shown on the figures provided with the PJD dated 11/23/2021. Please correct
any discrepancies, update the plan sheet(s) accordingly, and/or provide explanations of the differences where
they occur. Importantly:
a. Based on the PJD, the proposed grading appears to impact the narrow portion of Wetland E extending
to the north of Stream A2.
b. Wetlands A-D, G, a large portion of Wetland E, and Streams V, W, and Z are not shown on the "Overall
Site Plan." This is especially problematic given proposed future development noted in item 2) above.
4) Based on proposed grading and re-routing of drainage into stormwater ponds, the project appears to eliminate
the majority of the drainage areas/hydrology source for Wetlands L and M:
a. Please provide justification that hydrologic input will be maintained to these wetlands. Common designs
include routing approximately equivalent surface water/runoff area to these locations, altering locations
of stormwaters outlets, usage of French drains where appropriate, etc;
b. If maintenance of wetland hydrology is unable to be justified, the Corps would consider these areas as
reasonably foreseeable indirect impacts (see NWP General Conditions "District Engineers Decision")
resulting from a loss of hydrology. In such cases compensatory mitigation may be required for indirect
impacts resulting in a loss of hydrology and therefore aquatic function; compensatory mitigation is
typically required at a 1:1 ratio for such indirect impacts (although may be situationally up to 2:1),
depending largely on aquatic function (e.g. NCWAM);
c. A monitoring plan (typically including groundwater monitoring wells and visual observations for a period
of 5 years post -construction) to document maintenance of wetland hydrology may also be proposed for
Corps evaluation and approval; such monitoring plans would also include a contingency plan, typically
including compensatory mitigation, in the event that monitoring does not indicate maintenance of
wetland hydrology.
5) Until item 2) above is resolved, item 5) from our request for additional information pertaining to scope for
compliance with Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act remains unresolved.
6) Item 6) from our request for additional information is ongoing.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Dave Bailey
David E. Bailey, PWS
Regulatory Project Manager
US Army Corps of Engineers
CE-SAW-RG-R
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
Mobile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
We would appreciate your feedback on how we are performing our duties. Our automated Customer Service Survey is
located at: https://regulatory.ops.usace.army.mil/customer-service-survey/
Thank you for taking the time to visit this site and complete the survey.
From: Michael Brame <[e-mail]>
Sent: Friday, October 28, 2022 2:43 PM
5

To: Bailey, David E CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <[e-mail]>; Homewood, Sue
<[e-mail]>
Cc: Catherine Carston <[e-mail]>; Ken Chavis <[e-mail]>
Subject: [URL Verdict: Neutral][Non-DoD Source] RE: Request for Additional Information: SAW-2020-01862 (Brittway II /
4150 R1 Pleasant Garden Road / Greensboro / Guilford County)
David and Sue,
Please see our responses in RED below. Thank -you.
Sincerely,
Michael T. Brame
336.708-4620 (c)
336.310.4527 (o)
PO Box 128
Kernersville, NC 27285
www.pilotenviro.com
[e-mail]
PILL "
PILOT E N V I R O N M E N T A L, I N C
From: Catherine Carston <[e-mail]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2022 2:20 PM
To: Michael Brame <[e-mail]>
Subject: FW: Request for Additional Information: SAW-2020-01862 (Brittway II / 4150 R1 Pleasant Garden Road /
Greensboro / Guilford County)
Sincerely,
Catherine Carston
336.712.7381 (c)
336.310.4527 (o)
PO Box 128
Kernersville, NC 27285
www.pilotenviro.com
[e-mail]
From: Bailey, David E CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <[e-mail]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2022 12:34 PM
To: Catherine Carston <[e-mail]>
Cc: Homewood, Sue <[e-mail]>
Subject: Request for Additional Information: SAW-2020-01862 (Brittway II / 4150 R1 Pleasant Garden Road / Greensboro
/ Guilford County)
All,
Thank you for your PCN, dated 8/29/2022, for the above referenced project. I have reviewed the information and need
clarification before proceeding with verifying the use of Nationwide Permit (NWP) 39 (https://saw-
reg.usace.army.mil/NWP2021/NWP39.pdf). Please submit the requested information below (via e-mail is fine) within 30
days of receipt of this Notification, otherwise we may deny verification of the use of the Nationwide Permit or consider
your application withdrawn and close the file:
6

1) Based on a file review, there are a older Corps actions in the vicinity of this project area; one of these was for the
property immediately to the west of this site: Action ID: SAW-2002-20166. The Corps reviewed a delineation for
this site and issued a JD (signed survey) on 12/3/2002. Although our files do not show that any permit was
verified/issued for the development that has taken place on this site, it is clear based on aerial photos that the
area was developed between 2003 and 2006 (East Elsmley Drive, Bantiff Way, Scounton Way, Fernhurst Way,
Chesham Dr, and Elton Way and associated businesses); these activities resulted in the filling of one wetland and
one stream. The wetland area in question was 1,382 s.f. and the stream reach was approximately 220 I.f. (660
s.f. if you estimate a 3-foot wide channel). Although the Corps is unlikely to enforce the apparent unauthorized
activity in this case, we would consider the total 2,042 s.f. of impacts to waters of the US as cumulative with any
future proposed impacts on the Brittway II site as these developments appear to be part of the same single and
complete project, both require access via East Elmsley Drive, and have/had the same general ownership. The
applicant acknowledges that the project will be considered single and complete with the previous project and
that impacts will be considered cumulative in regards to mitigation and permitting thresholds.
2) Please provide a plan view of the full development infrastructure (buildings, roads, utilities, stormwater, etc.)
overlaid on the verified stream and wetland delineation approved by the Corps (PJD issued 11/23/2021). This
plan is necessary to accurately evaluate avoidance and minimization measures (per NWP General Condition
23(A) and (B)) and potential indirect impacts (see NWP General Conditions "District Engineers Decision") for the
cumulative project; A revised plan view has been completed and is attached.
3) The purpose and need for the proposed project is construct an industrial/commercial facility. In order to
consider your proposal single and complete for the purposes of permitting, the project plans must show all of
the infrastructure required to facilitate construction and operation of the proposed project purpose. Although
the Elmsley Drive Extension plans show the detailed proposed stream/wetland crossing for site access, this plan
shows a hammerhead approximately 400 feet east of the crossing with no attachment/tie-in to any
industrial/commercial facility. Meanwhile, the Proposed Site Plan shows a building with future expansions that
may impact Wetland H, and the Brittway Conceptual Layout shows and apparent full development build -out
with proposed buildings, related infrastructure, and outparcels that would impact substantial portions of
Wetland D, G, K, N, 0, and P, and Streams D2, H2, I2, J2, and Z. The attached plan has been revised to address
these comncerns.
The Corps will consider all proposed/foreseeable impacts for this development as cumulative when considering
Nationwide Permit (NWP) thresholds. Based on your proposed impacts as well as the conceptual plans for
apparent future phases, the cumulative project would not fit within acreage thresholds for NWP 39. You may
apply for the entirety of this cumulative development via the Individual Permit process. Or, as an alternative,
you may further avoid or minimize impacts proposed and/or amend the conceptual design to show that full
build out of this development would fit within the NWP impact thresholds. The initial plan that was submitted
was conceptual. The plan has been revised and is included as an attachment.
4) The length of rip rap proposed within (-49 I.f.) and along (extends >20 feet on each side of the channel) Stream
A2 appears to remove aquatic function from this reach of the resource. Given that proposed stream loss
exceeds the compensatory mitigation threshold for streams, this reduction in aquatic function appears to
warrant additional compensatory mitigation; a 1:1 credit to impact ratio appears appropriate unless otherwise
justified based on evaluation of aquatic function. Additional mitigation for the proposed impacts is
necessary. Pilot has been informed that alternate designs have been considered and could not be designed to
avoid the impacts due to engineering constraints. Pilot has included a response letter from the NCDEQ-DWR
indicating that the additional credits are available.
5) Please note that for any increases in project scope per item 3) above, our scope for compliance with Section 7 of
the Endangered Species Act would likely increase as well. As such, please ensure that documentation is included
to enable the Corps to ensure compliance with NWP General Condition 18 upon any changes in project
plans. There is no increase in project scope as the impacts shown on the earlier plan have been removed from
the attached revised site plan.
6) It appears that an Individual 401 Water Quality Certification (WQC) is required from the North Carolina Division
of Water Resources (NCDWR) for this project; please note that the Corps cannot verify the use of any NWP
without a valid 401 WQC.
For NCDWR: After review of the submitted PCN for the above referenced project, and NWP 39 Water Quality
7

General Certification No. 4276, dated 12/18/2020 (https://saw-
req.usace.army.mil/NWP2021/NWP39 StateWQC.pdf), it appears an Individual 401 Water Quality Certification
(WQC) is required from the NCDWR for the proposed activities. The PCN received by our office appears to provide
the 9 required elements for an individual WQC and constitutes the Corps initial receipt of the WQC application
(note that this may not hold if project plans change based on the times above). The reasonable period of time
(RPOT) for you to act on this WQC request will begin is 120 calendar days from the date of the complete WQC
request. Unless NCDWR is granted a time review extension, the date upon which a waiver of the WQC will occur
if you do not act on the certification is 12/27/2022. Understood.
7) Please note that responses to the questions above may prompt additional information requests to allow full
evaluation of the proposed project. Understood.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Dave Bailey
David E. Bailey, PWS
Regulatory Project Manager
US Army Corps of Engineers
CE-SAW-RG-R
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
Mobile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
We would appreciate your feedback on how we are performing our duties. Our automated Customer Service Survey is
located at: https://regulatory.ops.usace.army.mil/customer-service-survey/
Thank you for taking the time to visit this site and complete the survey.
From: RaleighNCREG <[e-mail]>
Sent: Monday, August 29, 2022 1:45 PM
To: Catherine Carston <[e-mail]>
Cc: Bailey, David E CIV USARMY CESAW (USA)<[e-mail]>
Subject: SAW-2020-01862 (Brittway II / 4150 R1 Pleasant Garden Road / Greensboro / Guilford County)
Good afternoon,
We have received your Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) NWP request for the above project and forwarded it to Dave
Bailey for further processing.
Thank you,
Josephine Schaffer
From: Catherine Carston <[e-mail]>
Sent: Monday, August 29, 2022 12:19 PM
To: RaleighNCREG <[e-mail]>
Cc: Michael Brame <[e-mail]>
Subject: [URL Verdict: Neutral][Non-DoD Source] Pilot Project 7589 - Brittway Elmsley Drive Extension PCN Submittal
8

Please find the attached PCN for the Brittway Elmsley Drive Extension (Corps Action ID: SAW-2020-01864). Please let me
know if you have any questions or need anything further to complete your review. Thank you and have a great day.
Sincerely,
Catherine Carston
336.712.7381 (c)
336.310.4527 (o)
PO Box 128
Kernersville, NC 27285
www.pilotenviro.com
[e-mail]
9

STATE
3
u o
'tee auanv�t"k
NORTH CAROLINA
Environmental Quality
Water Resources
Office Use Only
Corps Action ID no. [Click to enter.] Date received: 8/29/2022
DWR project no.
Date received: [Click to enter.]
Site Coordinates:
Latitude (DD.DDDDDD): 36.003853'
Longitude (DD.DDDDDD): 79.783818'
Form Version 1.5, September 2020
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
(Ver. 1.5, September 2020)
For Nationwide Permits and Regional General Permits and corresponding Water Quality Certifications
Please note: fields marked with a red asterisk * are required. The form is not considered complete until all mandatory
questions are answered.
The online help file may be found at this link:
https://edocs.deg.nc.gov/WaterResources/O/edoc/624704/PCN%2OHelp%20File%202018-1-30.pdf
The help document may be found at this link:
http://www.saw.usace.army. mil/Missions/Regulatory-Permit-Program/Permits/2017-Nationwide-Permits/Pre-
construction-Notification/
Before submitting this form, please ensure you have submitted the Pre -Filing Meeting Request Form as DWR will not be
able to accept your application without this important first step. The Pre -Filing Meeting Request Form is used to satisfy 40
C.F.R. Section 121.4(a) which states "At least 30 days prior to submitting a certification request, the project proponent shall
request a pre -filing meeting with the certifying agency." In accordance with 40 C.F.R. Section 121.5(b)(7), and (c)(5), all
certification requests must include documentation that a pre -filing meeting request was submitted to the certifying authority
at least 30 days prior to submitting the certification request.
Attach documentation of Pre -Filing Meeting Request to this Application.
Date of Pre -filing Meeting Request (MM/DD/YYYY) *: 7/7/2022
DWR ID # Version (If applicable)
A. Processing Information
County (counties) where project is located: *
Guilford Additional (if needed).
Is this a public transportation project? *
(Publicly funded municipal, state, or federal road, rail,
❑ Yes ❑x No
or airport project)
Is this a NCDOT project? *
❑ Yes ❑x No
If yes, NCDOT TIP or state project number:
Click to enter.
If yes, NCDOT WBS number: *
Click to enter.
❑x Section 404 Permit (wetlands, streams, waters,
Clean Water Act)
1 a. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps: *
❑ Section 10 Permit (navigable waters, tidal
waters, Rivers and Harbors Act)
Page 1 of 21 PCN Form - Version 1.5, September 2020

❑x Nationwide Permit (NWP)
1b. Permit type(s)?
❑ Regional General Permit (RGP)
❑ Standard (IP)
This form may be used to initiate the standard/ individual permit process with the USACE. Please contact your Corps
representative concerning submittals for standard permits. All required items can be included as separate attachments
and submitted with this form.
1 c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
❑ Yes ❑x No
NWP number(s):
NWP 39
RGP number(s):
Click to enter
1 d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWR (check all that apply):
❑x 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular ❑ 401 Water Quality Certification— Express
❑ Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit ❑ Riparian Buffer Authorization
❑ Individual 401 Water Quality Certification
1 e. Is this notification solely for the record because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWR 401 Certification:
❑ Yes ❑x No
For the record only for Corps Permit:
❑ Yes ❑x No
1f. Is this an after -the -fact permit/certification application?
❑ Yes ❑x No
1 g. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for
mitigation of impacts?
® Yes ❑ No
If yes, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program.
1 h. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties?
❑ Yes ❑x No
1 i. Is the project located within an NC DCM Area of Environmental
Concern (AEC)?
❑ Yes ❑x No ❑ Unknown
1j. Is the project located in a designated trout watershed?
❑ Yes ❑x No
If yes, you must attach a copy of the approval letter from the appropriate Wildlife Resource Commission Office.
Trout information may be found at this link: http://www.saw.usace.army.miI/Missions/Regulatory-Permit-
Program/Agency-Coordination/Trout.aspx
Page 2 of 21 PCN Form - Version 1.5, September 2020

B. Applicant Information
1a.
Who is the primary contact?
CIP Construction
1 b.
Primary Contact Email:
[e-mail]
1 c.
Primary Contact Phone: (###)###-####
(336)2748531
1 d.
Who is applying for the permit/certification? (check
all that apply)
❑ Owner ❑x Applicant (other than owner)
1 e.
Is there an agent/consultant for this project?
® Yes ❑ No
2.
Landowner Information
2a.
Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
Brittway Investiments LLC
2b.
Deed Book and Page No.:
006580-00852, 886580-03039, 006580-03034
2c.
Responsible Party (for corporations):
Click to entE
2d.
Address
Street Address:
201 N. Elm Street
Address line 2:
Click to U1 IL
City:
Greensboro
State/ Province/ Region:
North Carolina
Postal/ Zip Code:
27401
Country:
U.S.
2e.
Telephone Number: (###)###-####
[phone]
2f.
Fax Number: (###)###-####
k-HUN uw 1-511L,
2g.
Email Address:
[e-mail]
3.
Applicant Information (if different from owner)
3a.
Name:
Ken Chavis
3b.
Business Name (if applicable):
CIP Construction
3c.
Address:
Street Address:
201 N. Elm Street
Address line 2:
�,HUN LU U11L
City:
Greensboro
State/ Province/ Region:
NC
Postal/ Zip Code:
27401
Country
US
3d.
Telephone Number: (###)###-####
[phone]
3e
Fax Number: (###)###-####
UICK io enier.
Page 3 of 21 PCN Form - Version 1.5, September 2020

3f. Email Address: [e-mail]
4.
Agent/ Consultant (if applicable)
4a.
Name: *
Bradley S. Luckey
4b.
Business Name:
Pilot Environmental, Inc.
4c.
Address: *
Street Address:
743 Park Lawn Court
Address line 2:
Click to entE
City:
Kernersville
State/ Province/ Region:
NC
Postal/ Zip Code:
27284
Country:
U.S.
4d.
Telephone Number: (###)###-####
[phone]
4e
Fax Number: (###)###-####
Click to entE
4f.
Email Address:
[e-mail]
Agent Authorization Letter:
Attach a completed/signed agent authorization form or letter. A sample form may be found at this link:
https://www.saw.usace.army. mil/Missions/Reg ulatory-Permit-Program/Permits/2017-Nationwide-Permits/Pre-
construction-Notification/
Page 4 of 21 PCN Form - Version 1.5, September 2020

C. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Project Information
1 a. Name of project: *
Brittway Elmsley Drive Extension
1 b. Subdivision name (if appropriate):
Click to enter.
1c. Nearest municipality/town: *
Greensboro, NC
2.
Project Identification
2a.
Property identification number (tax PIN or parcel ID):
7862618020-000, 7862913221-000, 7862812037-000
2b.
Property size (in acres):
115
2c.
Project Address:
Street Address:
E. Elmsley Drive
Address line 2:
Click to enter.
City:
Greensboro
State/ Province/ Region:
NC
Postal/ Zip Code:
27401
Country:
U.S.
2d.
Site coordinates in decimal degrees (using 4-6 digits
after the decimal point): *
Latitude (DD.DDDDDD): * 36.003853'
Longitude (-DD.DDDDDD): *-79.783818°
3. Surface Waters
3a. Name of nearest body of water to proposed project: *
South Buffalo Creek
3b. Water Resources Classification of nearest receiving
WS-V; NSW
water: *
The Surface Water Classification map may be found at this link:
https://ncdenr.maps.arcqis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=6e125ad7628f494694e259c80dd64265
Cape Fear
3c. In what river basin(s) is your project located? *
Choose additional (if needed)
3d. Please provide the 12-digit HUC in which the project is
0303000201
located: *
The Find Your HUC map may be found at this link:
htti)s://ncdenr.maps.arcqis.com/apps/Publiclnformation/index.html?appid=ad3a85aOc6d644aOb97cdO69db238ac3
Page 5 of 21 PCN Form - Version 1.5, September 2020

4.
Project Description and History
4a.
Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of
this application: *
The site contains fields, overhead high tension powerlines and an associated utility easement and
wooded land. The site is located in a residential/commercial area of Greensboro.
4b.
Have Corps permits or DWR certifications been obtained for this
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑x Unknown
project (including all prior phases) in the past? *
4c.
If yes, please give the DWR Certification number and/or Corps
[Click to enter.]
Action ID (ex. SAW-0000-00000):
jClick to enter.]
Attach any pertinent project history documentation
4d.
Attach an 8'h x 11" excerpt from the most recent version of the USGS topographic map indicating the location of
the project site.
4e.
Attach an 8'h x 11" excerpt from the most recent version of the published County NRCS Soil Survey map
depicting the project site.
4f.
List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the
14.79 acres
property:
4g.
List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent
7,218 linear feet
and perennial) on the property:
4g1.
List the total estimated acreage of all existing open waters on the
0 acres
property:
4h.
Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
The purpose of the proposed project is to provide access to proposed 254,500 square foot industrial facility.
4i.
Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used: *
The overall project includes the construction of a 254,000 square foot industrial facility. In order to facilitate the
proposed development and access the site, it is necessary to cross a stream and a wetland. To facilitate the
development of the site, clearing and grading the site is necessary. Graders, haulers, excavators and other heavy
equipment will be used during grading and construction of the site.
4j.
Attach project drawings/site diagrams/depictions of impact areas for the proposed project.
5.
Jurisdictional Determinations
5a.
Have the wetlands or streams been delineated on the property or in
® Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
proposed impact areas?
Comments:
The site was delineated by Timmons Group on September 22, 2020. The site was confirmed by Mr. David Bailey with
the USACE in the field on December 2, 2020 and via an email dated December 16, 2020 (USACE Action ID SAW-
2020-01862). The USACE concurred with the delineation as depicted on the attached Figure 6 Wetland and Waters
Delineation Map.
Name (if known): M. Gilbert/S. Law
5b.
If 5a is yes, who delineated the jurisdictional
Agency/Consultant Company: Timmons Group
areas?
Other: Click to enter.
5c.
If the Corps made a jurisdictional determination,
❑ Preliminary ❑ Approved ❑x Emailed Concurrence
what type of determination was made? *
❑ Not Verified ❑ Unknown
Corps AID number (ex. SAW-0000-00000):
SAW — 2020-01862
Page 6 of 21 PCN Form - Version 1.5, September 2020

5d. List the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determination or State determination if a determination was made by
either agency.
USACE — December 2, 2020 Site Visit— Concurrence Email dated December 16, 2020.
NCDEQ-DWR — December 2, 2020 Site Visit
5d1. Attach jurisdictional determinations.
Page 7 of 21 PCN Form - Version 1.5, September 2020

6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?
❑ Yes ❑x No
6b. If yes, explain.
The proposed project is not a phased project
Are any other NWP(s), regional general permit(s), or individual permit(s) used, or intended to be used, to authorize
any part of the proposed project or related activity? This includes other separate and distant crossings for linear
projects that require Department of the Army authorization but don't require pre -construction notification.
No.
Page 8 of 21 PCN Form - Version 1.5, September 2020

D. Proposed Impacts Inventory
Impacts Summary
❑x Wetlands ❑x Streams - tributaries
1 a. Where are the impacts associated with your project ❑x Buffers ❑ Open Waters
(check all that apply):
❑ Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, complete this table for each wetland area impacted.
2a.
2a1.
2b.
2c.
2d.
2e.
2f.
2g.
Site #*
Impact
Impact
Wetland Name*
Wetland Type*
Forested
Jurisdiction
Impact Area
Reason/Type*
Duration*
?*
Type*
(ac)*
W1
Road/
Permanent
E
Bottomland
Yes
Both
0.2621
Driveway
Hardwood
Crossing
Forest
W2
Draining/
Temporary
E
Bottomland
Yes
Both
0.0369
Dewatering
Hardwood
Forest
W3
Draining/
Temporary
E
Bottomland
Yes
Both
0.015
Dewatering
Hardwood
Forest
W4
Fill (Incl.
Permanent
E
Bottomland
Yes
Both
0.0084
Riprap)
Hardwood
Forest
W5
Choose one
Temp/
Click to enter
Choose one
r /N
Choose one
Click
Perm
ente,
W6
Choose one
Temp/
Click to enter
Choose one
"iN
Choose one
Click t^
Perm
ent(
2g1. Total temporary wetland impacts
0.0519 ac
2g2. Total permanent wetland impacts
0.2705 ac
2g3. Total wetland impacts
0.322 ac
2h. Comments:
In order to access the site from East Elmsley Street, it is necessary to impact 0.322 acres of wetland. The bulk of the
impact is from grading associated with the entrance road (W1 — 0.2621 Ac). Impacts due to dewatering devices will
temporarily impact 0.052 acres of wetland (W2 abd W3). An additional 0.0084 acres of wetland will be permanently
impacted due to the installation of rip rap (to be keyed -in).
Page 9 of 21 PCN Form - Version 1.5, September 2020

3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream/ tributary impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site,
complete this table for all stream/ tributary sites impacted.
** All Perennial or Intermittent streams must be verified by DWR or delegated local government
Site #*
3a.
Impact Reason/
Type*
3b.
Impact
Duration'
3d.
Stream Name*
3e.
Stream
Type*
3f.
Jurisdiction
Type*
3g.
Stream Width
(avg ft) *
3h.
Impact length
(linear ft)
S1
Crossing/ Culvert
Permanent
U
Perennial
Both
9.35
142.6
S2
Dewatering
Temporary
U
Perennial
Both
10.28
10.6
S3
Dewatering
Temporary
U
Perennial
Both
7.52
9.7
S4
Fill (Incl. Riprap)
Permanent
U/A2
Per/Int
Both
5.62
95.3
S5
Choose one
Temp/ Perm
Click to enter
Per/Int
Choose one
Click to enter
Click to enter
S6
Choose one
Temp/ Perm
Click to enter
Per/Int
Choose one
Click to enter
Click to enter
S7
Choose one
Temp/ Perm
Click to enter
Per/Int
Choose one
Click to enter
Click to enter
S8
Choose one
Temp/ Perm
Click to enter
Per/Int
Choose one
Click to enter
Click to enter
S9
Choose one
Temp/ Perm
Click to enter
Per/Int
Choose one
Click to enter
Click to enter
S10
Choose one
Temp/ Perm
Click to enter
Per/Int
Choose one
Click to enter
Click to enter
S11
Choose one
Temp/ Perm
Click to enter
Per/Int
Choose one
Click to enter
Click to enter
S12
Choose one
Temp/ Perm
Click to enter
Per/Int
Choose one
Click to enter
Click to enter
S13
Choose one
Temp/ Perm
Click to enter
Per/Int
Choose one
Click to enter
Click to enter
S14
Choose one
Temp/ Perm
Click to enter
Per/Int
Choose one
Click to enter
Click to enter
S15
Choose one
Temp/ Perm
Click to enter
Per/Int
Choose one
Click to enter
Click to enter
3i1. Total jurisdictional ditch impact:
Click to enter. linear ft
3i2. Total permanent stream impacts:
237.9 linear ft
M. Total temporary stream impacts:
20.3 linear ft
34. Total stream and ditch impacts:
258.2 linear ft
3j. Comments:
The proposed crossing will: temporarily impact 20.3 linear feet (0.0042 acres) of stream channel from the coffer
dam/pump around; permanently impact 95.3 linear feet (0.0123 acres) of stream channel with rip rap that is to be
keyed in; and, permanently impact 142.6 linear feet (0.0306 acres) of stream channel with the culvert/endwalls
and fill.
Page 10 of 21 PCN Form - Version 1.5, September 2020

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., individually list all open water impacts
in the table below.
4a.
4b.
4c.
4d.
4e.
4e1.
4f.
Site #*
Impact Reason/
Impact
Waterbody Name*
Waterbody
Jurisdiction
Impact area (ac)*
Type*
Duration*
Type*
Type*
01
Choose one
Temp
Click to enter.
Choose one
Choose one
Click to enter.
Perm
02
Choose one
Temp/
Click to enter.
Choose one
Choose one
Click to enter.
Perm
03
Choose one
Temp/
Click to enter.
Choose one
Choose one
Click to enter
Perm
04
Choose one
Temp/
Click to enter.
Choose one
Choose one
Click to enter
Perm
4g.
Total temporary open water impacts
Click to enter. ac
4g.
Total permanent open water impacts
Click to enter. ac
4g.
Total open water impacts
Click to enter. ac
4h.
Comments:
Open water impacts are not proposed.
5.
Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction is proposed, complete the table
below. (*This
does NOT include offline stormwater
management ponds.)
5a.
5b.
5c.
5d.
5e.
Pond ID
Proposed use or
Wetland Impacts (ac)
Stream
Impacts (ft)
Upland
#
purpose of pond
Impacts (ac)
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
P1
Choose one
Click to
Click to
Click to
Click to
Click to
Click to
Click to
enter.
enter.
enter.
enter.
enter.
enter.
enter.
P2
Choose one
Click to
Click to
Click to
Click to
Click to
Click to
Click to
enter.
enter.
enter.
enter.
enter.
enter.
enter.
5f.
Total
Click to
Click to
Click to
Click to
Click to
Click to
Click t-
enter.
enter.
enter.
enter.
enter.
enter.
ente
5g.
Comments:
Pond or lake construction is not proposed.
5h.
Is a dam high hazard permit required?
❑ Yes ❑ No
If yes, permit ID no.:
Click to enter.
5i.
Expected pond surface area (acres):
Click to enter.
5j.
Size of pond watershed (acres):
Click to enter.
5k.
Method of construction:
Click to enter.
Page 11 of 21 PCN Form - Version 1.5, September 2020

6. Buffer Impacts (DWR requirement)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. Individually list all buffer impacts.
❑ Neuse ❑ Tar -Pamlico ❑ Catawba
6a. Project is in which protected basin(s)?
❑x Jordan ❑ Goose Creek ❑ Randleman
* (Check all that apply.)
❑ Other: Click to enter
6b.
6c.
6d.
6e.
6f.
6g.
Site #*
Impact Type*
Impact Duration*
Stream Name*
Buffer
Zone 1 Impact*
Zone 2 Impact*
Mitigation
(sq ft)
(sq ft)
Required?*
B1
Crossing/ Culvert/
Permanent
U
No
Click to enter.
Click to enter
Bridge
B2
Crossing/ Culvert/
Permanent
U
No
''lick to ent-
Click to enter
Bridge
B3
Crossing/ Culvert/
Permanent
U
No
Click to enter
Click to enter.
Bridge
B4
Crossing/ Culvert/
Permanent
U
No
click to ente,
Click to enter.
Bridge
B5
Choose one
Temp/ Perm
Click to enter.
Y/N
Click to enter.
Click to enter.
B6
Choose one
Temp/ Perm
Click to enter.
Y/N
Click to enter
Click to enter.
B7
Choose one
Temp/ Perm
Click to enter.
Y/N
Click to enter
Click to enter.
B8
Choose one
Temp/ Perm
Click to enter.
Y/N
Click to enter
Click to enter.
B9
Choose one
Temp/ Perm
Click to enter.
Y/N
Click to enter
Click to enter.
B10
Choose one
Temp/ Perm
Click to enter.
Y/N
Click to enter.
Click to enter.
6h. Total temporary impacts:
Zone 1: Click to enter. sq ft
Zone 2: Click to enter. sq ft
6h. Total permanent impacts:
Zone 1: Click to enter. sq ft
Zone 2: Click to enter. sq ft
6h. Total combined buffer impacts:
Zone 1: Click to enter. sq ft
Zone 2: Click to enter. sq ft
6i. Comments:
Click to enter.
Please attach supporting documentation (impact maps, plan sheets, etc.) for the proposed project.
Page 12 of 21 PCN Form - Version 1.5, September 2020

E. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1 a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through project design:
The applicant has designed the proposed development to avoid impacts to the remainder of streams, wetlands and
buffers on the site. The road extension has been designed as narrow as practicable to minimize impacts. Headwalls
have been designed to further minimize the impacts. Additionally, 2:1 slopes are being used to minimize impacts. The
remaining roads, structures and utilities have been designed to avoid additional impacts to jurisdictional areas.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize proposed impacts through construction techniques:
The clearing limits will be surveyed, staked and silt fencing and clearing limit fencing will be used. Disturbed areas will
be seeded and mulched to limit sediment from entering downgradient waters. Slope matting will be used on steep
slopes.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S., Waters of the State, or Riparian Buffers
2a. If compensatory mitigation is required, by whom is it required? * ❑x DWR ❑x Corps
(check all that apply)
2b. If yes, which mitigation option(s) will be used for this ❑ Mitigation Bank
project? * (check all that apply) ❑x In Lieu Fee Program
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if using a Mitigation Bank (Must satisfy NC General Statute143-214.11 (d1).)
3a. Name of mitigation bank:
Click to enter.
3b. Credits purchased/requested:
Type: Riparian Wetland
Quantity 0.5242 ac
Type: Stream
Quantity 335 If
Type: Choose one
Quantity Click to ente,
Attach receipt and/or approval letter.
3c. Comments:
The applicant proposes mitigation for the unavoidable net loss permanent impact to wetlands from the road
crossing at a 2:1 ratio, the unavoidable direct loss permanent impact to 139 linear feet of stream channel at a 2:1
ratio and the unavoidable direct loss of function from the permanent impact of rip -rap to 49 linear feet of stream
channel at a 1:1 ratio.
At this time, private banks for not have the type or amount of credits to satisfy the mitigation proposal. According
to NCDMS letter dated 10.28.22 (attached), the NCDMS has the type of amount of credits to satisfy the mitiation
proposal.
4. Complete if Using an In Lieu Fee Program
4a. Attach approval letter from in lieu fee program.
4b. Stream mitigation requested:
335 linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, what is the stream temperature:
cool
Page 13 of 21 PCN Form - Version 1.5, September 2020

NC Stream Temperature Classification Maps can be found under the Mitigation Concepts tab on the Wilmington
District's RIBITS website: (Please use the filter and select Wilmington district)
https://ribits.usace.army.miI/ribits apex/f?p=107:27:2734709611497::NO:RP:P27 BUTTON KEY:O
4d.
Buffer mitigation requested (DWR only):
('fink to PntP square feet
4e.
Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
0.5242 acres
4f.
Non -riparian wetland mitigation requested:
Click to enter acres
4g.
Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
Click to ente acres
4h.
Comments:
The applicant proposed wetland mitigation includes 0.2621 acres at a 2:1 ratio and stream mitigation of 143
linear feet at a 2:1 ratio.
5. Complete if Providing a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If proposing a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan,
including the amount of mitigation proposed.
'lick to Pntar
5b. Attach mitigation plan/documentation.
6.
Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) — DWR requirement
6a.
Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer
❑ Yes ❑x No
that requires buffer mitigation?
If yes, please complete this entire section — please contact DWR for more information.
6b.
If yes, identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires
mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required in the table below.
6c.
6d.
6e.
Zone
Reason for impact
Total impact (square
Multiplier
Required mitigation
feet)
(square feet)
Zone 1
Click to enter.
Click to enter.
Choose one
Click to enter.
Zone 2
slick to enter.
Click to enter.
choose one
Click to enter.
6f. Total buffer mitigation required
Click to enter.
6g.
If buffer mitigation is required, is payment to a mitigation bank or
❑ Yes ❑ No
NC Division of Mitigation Services proposed?
6h.
If yes, attach the acceptance letter from the mitigation bank or NC Division of Mitigation Services.
6i.
Comments:
Buffer mitigation is not proposed.
Page 14 of 21 PCN Form - Version 1.5, September 2020

F. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (DWR requirement)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1 a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers
® Yes ❑ No
identified within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1 b. All buffer impacts and high ground impacts require diffuse flow or other forms of stormwater treatment. If the
project is subject to a state implemented riparian buffer protection program, include a plan that fully documents
how diffuse flow will be maintained.
All Stormwater Control Measures (SCM) must be designed in accordance with the NC Stormwater Design
Manual (https://deg.nc..qov/about/divisions/energv-mineral-land-resources/energv-mineral-land-permit-
guidance/stormwater-bmp-manual).
Associated supplement forms and other documentation must be provided.
❑ Level Spreader
What Type of SCM are you
❑ Vegetated Conveyance (lower seasonal high water table- SHWT)
providing?
❑ Wetland Swale (higher SHWT)
(Check all that apply)
❑ Other SCM that removes minimum 30% nitrogen
0 Proposed project will not create concentrated stormwater flow through the
buffer
For a list of options to meet the diffuse flow requirements, click here:
Attach diffuse flow documentation.
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. Is this an NCDOT project subject to compliance with NCDOT's
Individual NPDES permit NCS000250? *
El Yes 0 No
2b. Does this project meet the requirements for low density projects as
defined in 15A NCAC 02H .1003(2)? *
❑ Yes 0 No
To look up low density requirements, click here:
http://reports.oah. state. nc.us/ncac/title%2015a%20-%20environmental%20guality/chapter%2002%20-
%20environmental%20management/subchapter%20h/15a%20ncac%2002h%20.1003.pdf
2c. IS the project over an acre?
0 Yes ❑ No
2d. Does this project have a stormwater management plan (SMP)
reviewed and approved under a state stormwater program or state-
0 Yes ❑ No
approved local government stormwater program? *
Note: Projects that have vested rights, exemptions, or grandfathering from state or locally implemented
stormwater programs or projects that satisfy state or locally -implemented stormwater programs through use of
community in -lieu programs should answer "no" to this question.
2e. Which of the following stormwater management program(s) apply?
0 Local Government
(Check all that apply) *
❑ State
If you have local government approval, please include the SMP on their overall impact map.
Page 15 of 21 PCN Form - Version 1.5, September 2020

❑ Phase II ❑ USMP
Local Government Stormwater Programs *
❑x NSW ❑x Water Supply
Please identify which local government stormwater program you are using.*
Greensboro
❑ Phase II ❑ HQW or ORW
State Stormwater Programs *
❑ Coastal Counties ❑x Other
Comments:
A SWMP is required and is in the process of being submitted to the City of Greensboro for review and approval.
Page 16 of 21 PCN Form - Version 1.5, September 2020

G. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation
1a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local)
❑ Yes ❑x No
funds or the 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 (North Carolina) Environmental
El Yes El No
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
❑ Yes ❑ No
NEPA or SEPA final approval letter.)
Comments:
A NEPA or SEPA is not required.
2. Violations (DWR Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWR Water Quality Certification Rules (15A
NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), ❑ Yes ❑x No
DWR Surface Water or Wetland Standards or Riparian Buffer Rules
(15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b. If you answered "yes" to the above question, provide an explanation of the violation(s)
;lick to enter.
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWR Requirement)
3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future
impacts) result in additional development, which could impact nearby
❑ Yes ❑x No
downstream water quality?
3b. If you answered "no", provide a short narrative description:
Additional development as a result of the proposed development is not anticipated.
3c. If yes, attach a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis (.pdf) in accordance with the most recent
DWR policy.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWR Requirement)
4a. Is sewage disposal required by DWR for this project? 1 ® Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A
4b. If yes, describe in detail the treatment methods and dispositions (non -discharge or discharge) of wastewater
generated from the proposed project. If the wastewater will be treated at a treatment plant, list the capacity
available at that plant.
Sewage will be discharged into existing sewer lines that are located on the site. Additional impacts associated with
sewage disposal are not proposed.
Page 17 of 21 PCN Form - Version 1.5, September 2020

5.
Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a.
Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected
® Yes ❑ No
species or habitat? (IPAC weblink: https://www.fws.gov/ipac/ ffws.govl)
5b.
Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species
❑ Yes ❑x No
Act impacts? *
5c.
If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
Choose one
5d.
Is another federal agency involved? *
❑ Yes ❑x No ❑ Unknown
If yes, which federal agency?
Click to enter.
5e.
Is this a DOT project located within Divisions 1-8? *
❑ Yes ❑x No
5f.
Will you cut any trees in order to conduct the work in waters of the
U.S.? *
® Yes ❑ No
5g.
Does this project involve bridge maintenance or removal? *
❑ Yes ❑x No
Link to NLEB SLOPES document: http://saw-reg.usace.army.mil/NLEB/1-30-17-signed NLEB-
SLOPES&apps.pdf
5h.
Does this project involve the construction/ installation of a wind
turbine(s)? *
❑ Yes ❑x No
If yes, please show the location of the wind turbine(s) on the permit drawings/ project plans (attach .pdf)
5i.
Does this project involve blasting and /or other percussive activities
that will be conducted by machines, such as jackhammers,
❑ Yes ❑x No
mechanized pile drivers, etc.? *
If yes, please provide details to include type of percussive activity, purpose, duration, and specific location of this
activity on the property (attach .pdf)
Page 18 of 21 PCN Form - Version 1.5, September 2020

5j. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated
Critical Habitat? *
US Department of the Interior— Fish and Wildlife Service Official Species List from IPaC
3 listed species are identified on the IPaC report (attached). Small whorled pogonia, monarch butterfly and
Schweinitz's sunflower are federally listed species.
The areas where the impacts will occur (including areas within 100 feet of the proposed impact) consist of a 40 to 50
year old hardwood forest. The under -story and mid -story are moderately dense and intermingled with dense low-lying
vegetation that is dominated by green briar, microstegium, honeysuckle and grass species.
Schweinitz's Sunflower habitat is not present within 100 feet of the proposed impacts. Canopy coverage and low-lying
dense vegetation are not considered habitat for Schweinitz's Sunflower.
The monarch butterfly's habitat is open fields and meadows with milkweed. Habitat is not present within 100 feet of the
area of impact.
Small whorled pogonia can be limited by shade. The species seems to require small light gaps, or canopy breaks, and
generally grows in areas with sparse to moderate ground cover. Too many other plants in an area can be harmful to
this plant. This orchid typically grows under canopies that are relatively open or near features that create long -
persisting breaks in the forest canopy such as a road or a stream. It grows in mixed -deciduous or mixed-
deciduous/coniferous forests that are generally in second- or third -growth successional stages. The soils in which it
lives are usually acidic, moist, and have very few nutrients. The USFWS Fact Sheet indicates that: "This orchid grows
in older hardwood stands of beech, birch, maple, oak and hickory that have an open understory. Sometimes it grows
in stands of softwoods such as hemlock. It prefers acid soils with a thick layer of dead leaves, often on slopes near
small streams."
The forested areas are not considered potential habitat for Small whorled pogonia. The soils appear to be nutrient rich
based on the prevalence of healthy, low-lying vegetation. The mid and understory are moderate to dense. The
dominant hardwood species are poplar, sweetgum and maple. Based on our observations, the impact areas and
areas within 100 feet of the impact areas are not suitable habitat for this species.
Attach consultation documentation.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as
an Essential Fish Habitat? *
El Yes
❑x No
Are there submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) around
the project vicinity? *
El Yes
❑x No El Unknown
Will this project affect submerged aquatic vegetation?
❑ Yes
❑x No ❑ Unknown
*
Explain:
Click to enter.
6b. What data source(s) did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
Essential Fish Habitat Mapper — NOAA Fisheries
Page 19 of 21 PCN Form - Version 1.5, September 2020

7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
Link to the State Historic Preservation Office Historic Properties Map (does not include archaeological data):
htti)://gis. ncdcr.ciov/hi)oweb/
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural
preservation status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or
❑ Yes ❑x No
properties significant in North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data source(s) did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological
resources? *
NC Historic Preservation Office's HPOWEB 2.0. Historic properties were not identified on the site. A property
identified as eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Place (GF1254 John Tucker House 1991) is located
on an adjacent property east of the site, across Pleasant Garden Road. A local landmark (GF1154 Sidney Bumpass
House 1991) is identified 2,200 feet south of the site. Additionally, surveyed only and surveyed only, gone properties
are located within the vicinity of the site. A copy of the SHPO Map is included as an attachment. The proposed action
will be located in a generally commercial/residential area and will not have a significant impact on existing aesthetics.
Additionally, the proposed development will be separated from the John Tucker House by existing railroad tracks,
Pleasant Garden Road and wooded buffers. Therefore, the proposed project will not adversely affect the historic
resource.
7c. Attach historic or prehistoric documentation.
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
Link to the FEMA Floodplain Maps: https:Hmsc.fema.,qov/portal/search
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain? *
❑ Yes ❑x No
8b. If yes, explain how the project meets FEMA requirements.
Click to enter.
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?
National Flood Hazard Layer froom FEMA Web Map Service — Figure 3 (Attached)
Page 20 of 21 PCN Form - Version 1.5, September 2020

H. Miscellaneous
Comments:
Please let me know if you need additional information in order to process this application.
Attach pertinent documentation or attachments not previously requested
I. Signature *
❑x By checking the box and signing below, I, as the project proponent, certify to the following:
• The project proponent hereby certifies that all information contained herein is true, accurate, and complete, to
the best of my knowledge and belief;
• The project proponent hereby requests that the certifying authority review and take action on this CWA 401
certification request within the applicable reasonable period of time;
• The project proponent hereby agrees that submission of this PCN form is a "transaction" subject to Chapter
66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
• The project proponent hereby agrees to conduct this transaction by electronic means pursuant to Chapter 66,
Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
• The project proponent hereby understands that an electronic signature has the same legal effect and can be
enforced in the same way as a written signature; AND
• As the project proponent, I intend to electronically sign and submit the PCN/online form.
Full Name: Bradley S. Luckey
Bradley Digitally signed by Bradley Luckey
Signature: DN: cn=Bradley Luckey, o=Pilot
Enviromental, Inc., ou,
12.9.22 Luckey c=u5
Date: 2022.12.09 16:03:30-05'00'
Page 21 of 21 PCN Form - Version 1.5, September 2020

m y
Nt»d 31IS-nV'd]AO ����� M ryy
zz\eorzi _ a dNnoado H—N--noo a--no-oaoeSN—Ao
zzV°Ehi f f a " IDVdWI VAVI2lS - NOISN31X3 IMICI Al-lSW-13 ,lt/NU1I219
,�ooz9s9EE,3�
o.« vo4'3�.,00nos��3.n,,a�.ew,=�9� -1oHIn—Ia3,-DyNos,A-1 • .•• d o Ob J S N O W W I 1
,��. —
M, fist',,;;;� �•����, ��, / �1 , � _ �= y f __ `" ,` \,^ s ,
uk
"\OV,
v:=�_i
g
w '- w
_ aaw
Q z=
- oQ - Q o
o
w w - -
�o
_ �Q

wI z /60/zT
zziovTT f o f a
w
l
ly
ILLa,lo°oboe'"s,s�°ew',`� a �oH��obH,a3�3��yNo�s��a� •
3���tio�da�a��.M�Po=.�� ..,.
..•
Nt»d IE)VNInC] aNV 31IS M o
%NI�Ob%9H-N--noo O-Iino--09SN3tl0 AO ALI9 m ^ w N
IDVdWI VAVI2lS - NOISN31X3 ]MIC] ),I-lSW-13 AVNU1I210
dnomo SNOWWII
p
P�Pt
s
o
of
ol
o
Pw�
�p
oo 00
mo
-
op
m�
a
i
o
i
I
0
z
U)
U)
�O
C)
U
LU
w
J
C)
U
z
Q
0-
a0
O
O
ILL
I
I

ROY COOPER
Governor
ELIZABETH S. BISER
Secretary
MARC RECKTENWALD
Director
Ken Chavis
CIP Construction
201 N Elm Street
Greensboro, NC 27401
Project: E. Elmsley Road Extension
NORTH CAROLINA
Environmental Quality
October 28, 2022
Expiration of Acceptance: 4/28/2023
County: Guilford
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the NCDEQ Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) is willing to
accept payment for compensatory mitigation for impacts associated with the above referenced project as
indicated in the table below. Please note that this decision does not assure that participation in the DMS in -
lieu fee mitigation program will be approved by the permit issuing agencies as mitigation for project impacts.
It is the responsibility of the applicant to contact permitting agencies to determine if payment to the DMS will
be approved. You must also comply with all other state, federal or local government permits, regulations or
authorizations associated with the proposed activity including G.S. § 143-214.11.
This acceptance is valid for six months from the date of this letter and is not transferable. If we have not
received a copy of the issued 404 Permit/401 Certification within this time frame, this acceptance will
expire. It is the applicant's responsibility to send copies of the permits to DMS. Once DMS receives a copy
of the permit(s) an invoice will be issued based on the required mitigation in that permit and payment must
be made prior to conducting the authorized work. The amount of the in -lieu fee to be paid by an applicant is
calculated based upon the Fee Schedule and policies listed on the DMS website.
Based on the information supplied by you in your request to use the DMS, the impacts for which you are
requesting compensatory mitigation credit are summarized in the following table. The amount of mitigation
required and assigned to DMS for this impact is determined by permitting agencies and may exceed the
impact amounts shown below.
River Basin
Impact Location
8-di it HUC
Impact Type
Impact Quantity
Cape Fear
03030002
Riparian Wetland
0.524
Cape Fear
03030002
Warm Stream
335
Upon receipt of payment, DMS will take responsibility for providing the compensatory mitigation. The
mitigation will be performed in accordance with the In -Lieu Fee Program instrument dated July 28, 2010.
Thank you for your interest in the DMS in -lieu fee mitigation program. If you have any questions or need
additional information, please contact [e-mail].
Sincerely,
e�du,t�
FOR James. B Stanfill
Deputy Director
cc: Catherine Carston, agent
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Mitigation Services
217 West Jones Street 1 1652 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1652
h(h�TH :.AROI iRA IV
o �nmmmenni w�a 919,707,8976