20140957 Ver 1_Emails_20141027

From: Wade Hammer <[e-mail]>
Sent: Monday, October 27,2Ul43:09PM
To: Brown, Craig ] SAW; Spencer TricheU;[e-mail];Burdette, Jennifer a;
Bailey, David E SAW; Shaeffer, David L SAW; Greer, Emily C SAW; Wicker, Christine VV
SAW
Subject: RE: Atlantic Coast Pipeline SAVV-2014-01558;9-30-14 meeting (UNCLASSIFIED)
Craig,
A couple of points of clarification regarding the dimensions of the temporary construction corridor versus the
permanent easements that I wanted to make based on the notes that were sent out earlier this month include the
Nominal construction workspace in uplands where the 36 inch pipe will be installed would typically be 110 feet (may be
wider in some area where additional workspace is required), this would typically neck down to 75 feet through
vvet|ands.
The permanent easement will be 50 feet wide for the 36 inch pipe, however in wetlands only a 10-foot corridor centered
on the pipeline will be maintained in herbaceous vegetation, and 15 feet on either side (30 feet total) of the pipeline will
be maintained clear of trees to minimize tree root encroachment on the pipeline. The 1O foot herbaceous corridor will
be included within the 3O foot wide treeless corridor, this will not be additive to 40 feet as your meeting notes indicate.
In addition, I have a point of clarification regarding this paragraph in your notes: " Bailey expressed concerns (from past
experience) about hao+outs, and the possibility that pipeline may need to go deeper than the proposed 4'5'depth
through wetlands. Bailey stated that on the pipeline he worked with they went 40' in wetlands and were able to avoid
frac-ouis.NRG discussed limitations in pipe flexibi|ity." | wanted io comment that the 4O foot depth mentioned was
specific to use of the horizontal directional drill method, and thus the comment regarding frac-outs. The pipeline would
typically be buried with 3 feet ofcover. In agricultural land there would typically be 4 feet of cover, and typically 4-5 feet
atwaterbodycrossings. With standard construction methods the pipe would typically be buried 3feet in wetlands
unless there was an adjacent waterbody that would necessitate a deeper trench. The deeper trench at waterbodies is to
account for active channel erosion.
I hope this clarification is helpful. Please let me know if you have any questions regarding the clarifications.
Thank you for taking time to compile the notes.
Sincerely,
Wade
Wade Hammer
wade.hanmmer@nrg-Uccom
(612) 359-56Q4Direct
[phone] Cell(612) 347-6780 Fax
----- Original Message -----
From: Brown, Craig J SAW [mailto:[e-mail]]

Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2014 9:02 AM
Bailey, David E SAW; Shaeffer, David L SAW; Greer, Emily C SAW; Wicker, Christine W SAW
Cc: Beter, Dale E SAW; Gibby, Jean B SAW; Wicker, Henry M JR SAW; McLendon, Scott C SAW; Gibson, Steven W NAO
iubject: RE: Atlantic Coast Pipeline - SAW-2014-01558; 9-30-14 meeting (UNCLASSIFIED)
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE
Just wanted to send a short summary of our meeting on 9/30/2014 in the Raleigh Regulatory Field Office.
In attendance:
Spencer ThcheU (Natural Resource Grnup); phone: [phone] Wade Hammer (Natural Resource Group); phone: 612-
359-G6O4 Jennifer Brousn/64| Consultants, representing Dominiontphone: 724'516'116S Jennifer 8urdette(NCDVVR);
phone: 919-OO7'6364 David Bailey (USACE acting chief nf Raleigh ReX); phone: 91g-554-48O4x3O
Regulatory Specialists and their counties:
Craig ] Brown (Raleigh ReQ); 919-SG4-4O84x3G; Northampton, Halifax, Nash, Wilson David L Shaeffer (Raleigh Re8);91Q-
G54-48O4x3l; Johnston Christine VV Wicker (Wilmington Reg>;910-251-4637;Robeson
Emily Greer (Wilmington Reg);91O-251-4567; Cumberland, Sampson
Brief Notes:
In NC pipeline will be 36" (reduced from 42" through the Virginia)
Approx. 190 miles in NC
No laterals in NC; will tie in to valve in Robeson County; 92% of gas spoken for
300' wide review area; 75'will be work area once route is determined (notes also say 110' construction corridor); 50'
ROW for 36" pipe; 40'through wetlands; will maintain 10' corridor for aerial inspections.
ES| and Pilot Consulting doing JD work; which b well underway, and nearly complete insome counties; probably ready
for verification late fall nr winter in most counties
Website for information: dom.com/acpipeline Counties maps can be found on this website by going to "Additional
Details" at bottom of home page and choosing "Proposed Routes"
David Shaeffer will work with NRG to uploads county maps to Simsuite
Will apply for 404 & 401 August or September of next year- 2015 (before completion of FERC EIS); July 2016 expected
FERC order authorizing project; construction to begin late 2016 or early 2017; website says construction in 2017 & 2018,
with pipeline operational late 2018.
Discussion on whether an|PurNVVP12 can be used for project; decision dependanton impacts and (somevvhat) what
other districts are using. Final decision likely at the District level. Discussion of NWP expiring in March of 2017 and one
year extension for work underway. If construction not completed by this period, permit will need to be re-issued. There
is a possibility that terms and conditions of NWP can change for reissued permit.

Bailey expressed concerns (from past experience) about frac-outs, and the possibility that pipeline may need to go
deeper than the proposed 4-5' depth through wetlands. Bailey stated that on the pipeline he worked with they went 40'
in wetlands and were able to avoid frac-outs. NRG discussed limitations in pipe flexibility.
Shaeffer discussed alternative analysis requirements - especially for an IP
Discussion on directional boring required per Regional Conditions of NWP12 whenever practicable; need to justify why
directional boring was not used
Questions concerning FO|; especially during early stages of planning. USACE needs to consult with USACE legal
Burclette discussed buffers and pipeline running perpendicular to buffers (mitigation may be required if the pipeline
crosses or runs perpendicular tobuffers)
Brief discussion on how clearing in wetlands will be handled - need for clarification from NRG on this point.
NRG will coordinate with USACEtn provide impactinfonnationinexce|spneadxheet format for easy download into
USACE data base. Spreadsheet is attached to this email.
To be determined whether Burclette will accompany USACE on verifications; Brown requested that consultants that did
JD be present during verification. Each Regulator will be responsible for verification in her/his county.
There is a small percentage of landowners in NC that have not allowed access to their property. Corps will not be able to
verify nnthese properties, but may be able to do desktop JD. NRG/Dnminionto provide USACEo copy of release that
landowners sign to allow for determinations on their property. USACE emphasized the need for owner permission in
order to access property.
If I left anything out, let me know and I'll pass it on,
Craig
Craig ].Brown
USA[E Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
3331 Heritage Trade Drive
Wake Forest, NC27GO7
[phone] x35