The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20140957 Ver 2_Supplemental Response to AddInfo3_20171115Burdette, Jennifer a From: Spencer Trichell <Spencer.Trichell@dominionenergy.com> Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2017 4:54 PM To: Burdette, Jennifer a Cc: Higgins, Karen; Richard B Gangle Subject: [External] ACP - Revised ICI Assessment Attachments: 20171115 NCDEQ Revised ICI - Out.pdf CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless verified. Send all suspicious email as an attachment to Jennifer, In response to our phone conversation on November 7, 2017, 1 am providing a revised ICI Assessment Report to support the Water Quality Certification review of the Atlantic Coast Pipeline. I provided updated maps where you asked for changes, but did not include the larger map set since they were too large to email and there were no changes since the last submittal. Please let me know if you have any questions. Regards, Spencer Trichell Environmental Consultant - Atlantic Coast Pipeline Dominion Energy Services, Inc. 5000 Dominion Blvd Glen Allen, VA 23060 0:(804)-273-3472 M:(804)-263-5980 spencer.trichell(c�dominionenergy.com CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This electronic message contains information which may be legally confidential and or privileged and does not in any case represent a firm ENERGY COMMODITY bid or offer relating thereto which binds the sender without an additional express written confirmation to that effect. The information is intended solely for the individual or entity named above and access by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the contents of this information is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please reply immediately to the sender that you have received the message in error, and delete it. Thank you. North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality — Response to Information Request Dated October 26, 2017 Item 7 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ASSESSMENT FOR JOHNSTON, CUMBERLAND AND ROBESON COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA Cumulative Impacts Assessment for Johnston, Cumberland andRobeson Counties, North Carolina TABLE OF CONTENTS SCOPEAND PURPOSE...............................................................................................................1 SCREENING TOOL RESULTS.........................................................................................3 SCREENINGRESULTS..............................................................................................................3 SCOPEOF THE PROJECT.........................................................................................................3 JOHNSTONCOUNTY.......................................................................................................4 CUMBERLANDCOUNTY................................................................................................4 ROBESONCOUNTY.........................................................................................................4 POPULATIONGROWTH...........................................................................................................5 AVAILABLELAND.....................................................................................................................5 WATER/SEWER AVAILABILITY............................................................................................5 NATURAL GAS AVAILABILITY..............................................................................................6 MARKET FOR DEVELOPMENT..............................................................................................6 JOHNSTONCOUNTY: ...................................................................................................... 6 CUMBERLANDCOUNTY: ............................................................................................... 7 ROBESONCOUNTY: ........................................................................................................ 7 PUBLICPOLICY..........................................................................................................................8 JOHNSTONCOUNTY: ...................................................................................................... 8 CUMBERLANDCOUNTY: ............................................................................................... 8 ROBESONCOUNTY: ........................................................................................................ 9 NOTABLE WATER RESOURCES............................................................................................9 POTENTIAL IMPACT CAUSING ACTIVITIES...................................................................10 WATERBODIES AND WETLANDS..............................................................................10 INDIRECT EFFECTS CONCLUSION....................................................................................it INDIRECT SUMMARY STATEMENT..........................................................................11 WATER QUALITY STATEMENT..................................................................................12 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS STATEMENT.......................................................................13 REFERENCES.............................................................................................................................15 LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Indirect and Cumulative Effects Screening Matrix .......................................... 3 Table 2 Construction and Operational Impacts (in acres) in Johnston, Cumberland, and Robeson County, North Carolina...................................................................... 4 Table 3 Developed and Undeveloped Land By County ................................................ 5 Table 4 Waterbodies and Wetlands By County........................................................... 10 Table 5 Waterbody and Wetlands Affected by the Atlantic Coast Pipeline By County ......................................................................................................................... 11 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Cumulative Impacts Study Area....................................................................... 2 Cumulative Impacts Assessment for Johnston, Cumberland and Robeson Counties, North Carolina LIST OF ATTACHMENTS Attachment I Past, Present, and Reasonably Foreseeable Future Projects in Johnston, Cumberland, and Robeson Counties, North Carolina Attachment 2 Developed and Undeveloped Land in Johnston, Cumberland, and Robeson Counties, North Carolina Attachment 3 Wetlands and Waterbodies Crossed by the Atlantic Coast Pipeline in Johnston, Cumberland, and Robeson Counties, North Carolina ii INDIRECT AND CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ASSESSMENT Atlantic Coast Pipeline November 2017 SCOPE AND PURPOSE The purpose of this analysis is to supplement the qualitative cumulative analysis requested by the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ) in its September 14, 2017 and October 26, 2017 letters. In accordance with NCDEQ guidance, "Cumulative Impacts and the 401 Water Quality Certification and Isolated Wetland Permitting Programs," dated April 10, 2014, this analysis evaluates and describes secondary' (hereafter referred to as indirect) and cumulative impacts that could potentially result from construction and operation of those portions of the Atlantic Coast Pipeline (ACP or Project) within the Study Area, which has been defined by the NCDEQ as Johnston, Cumberland, and Robeson counties, North Carolina (see Figure 1). Consistent with North Carolina guidance, this analysis focuses on the cumulative impacts on downstream water quality standards and designated uses.3 The analysis addresses whether growth will be induced by the project, and how the water quality impacts of such growth will be managed. The categories listed on the Indirect and Cumulative Effects Screening Matrix below have been shown to influence land development decisions in numerous areas statewide and nationally. Each characteristic is assessed individually and the results of the table are analyzed to determine the indirect effects potential of the proposed project. This cumulative impacts analysis is focused on water quality, wetlands, and water resources. A cumulative impact assessment of other resources affected by the ACP was included in the previous submittal to the NCDEQ on September 29, 2017, and the final environmental impact statement for the Project prepared by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). Pursuant to guidance provided in the October 26, 2017, Information Request Letter from NCDEQ, projects included in the cumulative impacts assessment for the Project were limited to those within Johnston, Cumberland, and Robeson counties that would be constructed in a similar timeframe to the Project. Attachment I summarizes the components of the Project with potential cumulative impacts identified in each county. "Secondary impact" means actions, or actions directly linked to an activity, that may affect classified surface waters or wetlands that would not occur bu for the proposed activity. 2 "Cumulative impact" means environmental impacts resulting from incremental effects of an activity when added to other past, present, and reasonable forseeable future activities regardless of what entities undertake such other actions. 3 A cumulative impact assessment of other resources affected by the ACP was included in the previous submittal to the NCDEQ on September 29, 2017, and the final environmental impact statement for the Project prepared by the FERC. Cumulative Impacts Assessment for Johnston, Cumberland and Robeson Counties, North Carolina 'Wm Raleigh .14 tlGg M Ila w re j HoIY sp—A 80 Johnsto County Sri MR 54' A.j ContractorYar,X 90 100 E- caAelw36 110 120 Fayetteville ji IL -k 130 YIWy Contractor Yard,, NO Cumberlan'adf County Hep, M I b 150 Pembroke M&R Robesc?.jR COU LuabeHan -6w o Q-0 P� Wduew .= WirievtlG W I P- 0 milepost Mani ACP M.i.C, Atlantic Coast Pipeline Pipeline Above Ground Facility Figure 1 - Cumulative Impacts Study Area ERM HIM I REYISF 9MM171 5CFltE1 11,17 CFANN aY: Scot 00 Cumulative Impacts Assessment for Johnston, Cumberland and Robeson Counties, North Carolina In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act and North Carolina State Environmental Policy Act, the indirect and cumulative impacts of the Project and other projects or actions in the same areas are considered. This analysis uses an approach consistent with the guidelines set forth by the NCDEQ. Under these guidelines, the inclusion of actions within the analysis is based on identifying commonalities of impacts from other actions to potential impacts that would result from the Project. Screening Tool Results Based on the information gathered from local land use and development plans and information from mapping and data reviews, a screening tool was developed. SCREENING RESULTS The results of the screening tool are summarized in Table I and discussed in more detail below. TABLE 1 Indirect and Cumulative Effects Screening Matrix Notable Scope of Population Available Water/Sewer Natural Gas Market for Water Rating Project Growth Land Availability Availability Development Public Policy Resources Major > 3% annual 5000+ All services All services Development Less stringent, Targeted or More new population acres of existing/ existing/ activity no growth threatened Concern location growth land available available abundant management resources ? X X X T H X X X X X No No service Featured Very population Limited No service available Development More stringent, incorporated Less limited growth or land available now now or in activity growth in local Concern scope decline available or in future future lacking management protection SCOPE OF THE PROJECT Atlantic Coast Pipeline, LLC (Atlantic) is proposing to construct approximately 600 miles of mainline natural gas transmission underground pipeline, 81 miles of lateral underground pipeline, three compressor stations, nine metering and regulating (M&R) stations, and various appurtenant facilities in West Virginia, Virginia; and North Carolina. Approximately 100 miles of pipeline and 3 M&R stations would be constructed in Johnston, Cumberland, and Robeson Counties, North Carolina. The proposed route and facility locations within the 3 North Carolina counties under review are depicted in Figure 1, below. County - specific descriptions of proposed facilities are provided as follows: Cumulative Impacts Assessment for Johnston, Cumberland and Robeson Counties, North Carolina Johnston County The ACP enters Johnston County from the northeast and extends approximately 38 miles southwest to the border of Cumberland County. The proposed pipeline route passes near the towns of Kenly, Micro, Selma, Smithfield, Four Oaks, and Benson. Throughout Johnston County, 12 permanent and 4 temporary access roads would be utilized along the pipeline. Johnston County has one M&R station, the Smithfield M&R station, which is approximately 5.5 acre in size and located in central Johnston County. The M&R station is in a rural setting approximately 2.5 miles west from the town of Smithfield. The ACP would require approximately 616.4 acres of construction workspace in Johnston County, of which 254.8 acres would be maintained during operations for the permanent pipeline right-of-way, permanent access roads, and the Smithfield M&R station. Table 2 includes a summary of the construction and operations impacts. TABLE 2 Construction and Operational Impacts (in acres) in Johnston, Cumberland, and Robeson County, North Carolina Construction (Temporary and Permanent) Operation (Permanent) Johnston County 616.4 254.8 Cumberland County 589.1 270.7 Robeson County 313.5 144.3 Total 1,519.0 669.8 Cumberland County The ACP enters Cumberland County from the northwest and extends approximately 39.7 miles south, then east, to the border of Robeson County. The proposed pipeline route passes near the towns of Godwin, Wade, Fayetteville, and Stedman. Throughout the county, 16 permanent access roads would be utilized along the pipeline. In Cumberland County, the Project includes one M&R station, the Fayetteville M&R station, which is an approximately 7.3 acre site located in northern Cumberland County. The M&R station is approximately ten miles north of the city of Fayetteville and 1.5 miles west from the town of Wade. The area immediately surrounding the site is rural and contains agricultural fields. The ACP would require approximately 589.1 acres of construction workspace in Cumberland County, of which 270.7 acres would be maintained during operations for the permanent pipeline right-of-way, permanent access roads, and the Fayetteville M&R station (see Table 2). Robeson County The Project enters Robeson County from the northeast and extends 22.4 miles southwest to the southern terminus of the ACP. The proposed pipeline route passes by the towns of St. Pauls and Rennert, and ends approximately 3.3 miles northwest of the town of Pembroke. The Pembroke M&R station is an approximately 2.5 acre site. The area immediately surrounding the site is rural and contains agricultural fields. Throughout Robeson County, 12 permanent and four temporary access roads would be utilized along the pipeline. The ACP would require approximately 313.5 acres of construction workspace in Robeson County, of 4 Cumulative Impacts Assessment for Johnston, Cumberland and Robeson Counties, North Carolina which 144.3 acres would be maintained during operation for permanent pipeline right-of-way, permanent access roads, and the Pembroke M&R station (see Table 2). Since the Project would impact 1,519 acres and crosses through multiple counties, the potential for this project to contribute to growth and development was rated as High. POPULATION GROWTH According to the U.S. Census Bureau, Johnston, and Cumberland Counties have experienced an estimated population increase of 13.3 and 2.3 percent, respectively, from 2010 until early 2016. The population in Robeson County decreased an estimated 0.7 percent from 2010 until 2016. In comparison, the state of North Carolina had an estimated growth of 6.4 percent during this same period. In 2016, the total estimated population of the three counties was estimated to be 651,812; approximately 6.4 percent of the total population of North Carolina (U.S. Census Bureau, 2016). Based on the range of population growth from high in Johnston County to negative in Robeson County, the potential for this project to contribute to population growth was rated as Moderate. AVAILABLE LAND Table 3 summarizes the undeveloped land in Johnston, Cumberland, and Robeson Counties based on the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) gap data (USGS, 2011). Attachment 2 provides figures illustrating the extent of developed and undeveloped land in each county. Availability of land in Johnston, Cumberland, and Robeson Counties, does not appear to be limiting; therefore, the potential for this Project to contribute to development based on the availability of land is rated as High. TABLE 3 Developed and Undeveloped Land By County Total Land (Acres) Developed Land (Acres) Undeveloped Land (Acres) Johnston 372,241 30,754 341,487 Cumberland 369,271 69,063 300,208 Robeson 608,654 36422 572,232 WATER/SEWER AVAILABILITY Municipal water service is available for the majority of Johnston County; sewer services are mainly only available for the western portion of the county (Johnston County, 2017). Municipal water and sewer services are available for portions of Cumberland County, mainly in the areas in and around the City of Fayetteville (Cumberland County, 2017). In Robeson County, larger municipalities such as Lumberton, Pembroke, Fairmont, Red Springs, and St. Pauls, all have municipal water and sewer systems; however these services are lacking in unincorporated towns (Robeson County, 2014). The figures in Attachment 2 illustrate the general distribution of sewer and water services for the three counties. For Johnston and Cumberland Counties, this information is based on the Geographic Information System (GIS) mapping tools available online for each county (Johnston County, 2017; Cumberland County, 2017). Robeson County did not have available GIS data; as a result, the distribution of sewer Cumulative Impacts Assessment for Johnston, Cumberland and Robeson Counties, North Carolina and water services depicted in the Robeson County figure is based on the boundaries of municipalities identified as containing water and sewer service (Robeson County, 2014). Based on the availability of municipal water and sewer in the developed or developing areas of Johnston, Cumberland, and Robeson Counties, the potential for the Project to contribute to water/sewer availability is rated as Moderately Low. NATURAL GAS AVAILABILITY Natural gas service is currently available in larger municipalities of Johnston County such as Benson, Clayton, Smithfield, and Selma; expansion of these services is ongoing (Johnston County, 2017). Natural gas utilities are available in the large municipalities of Cumberland County such as Fayetteville; there is limited information available on the extent of distribution in other areas of the county (Cumberland, 2010). Natural gas availability is limited in Robeson County. In 2010, it was estimated that approximately 60 to 70 percent of homes in Robeson County are farther than 0.25 mile away from a gas distribution line (Robeson County, 2014). While county -specific data is limited, some data and analysis on a state-wide scale is available. Increased natural gas use by power generators is driving demand in North Carolina. The electric power sector is the state's largest natural gas -consuming sector. The industrial sector led the state in natural gas consumption until 2012, when the electric power sector became the largest user for the first time. The residential sector is the third-largest natural gas - consuming sector in the state. About one-fourth of North Carolina households use natural gas for home heating (U.S. Energy Information Agency, 2017). Existing interstate pipelines have historically transported natural gas into North Carolina, including Williams (Transco system), TransCanada (Columbia Gas system), and Enbridge (East Tennessee system). ACP would be an additional carrier of natural gas supply into North Carolina and would provide a new source of gas. According to the U.S. Energy Information Agency, the State of North Carolina utilized 522 MM cubic feet of natural gas in 2016. ACP would be capable of transporting up to 1.5 MM cubic feet per day to delivery points in Virginia and North Carolina. Based on the expected increase in availability of natural gas in the developed or developing areas of Johnston, Cumberland, and Robeson Counties, the potential for the Project to contribute to the availability of natural gas was rated as High. MARKET FOR DEVELOPMENT Johnston County: With transportation improvements, approved development, and availability of suitable land, The Johnston County 2030 Comprehensive Plan estimated 42,500 new dwelling units and accompanying non-residential growth would occur across the County. It is suggested that future growth demands should benefit from municipal planning initiatives, decisions and investments already in place (Johnston County, 2009). In northern Johnston County, a steady, long-term increase in economic activity due to the County's proximity to the Research Triangle Park in Durham and Wake Counties has Cumulative Impacts Assessment for Johnston, Cumberland and Robeson Counties, North Carolina transformed what had long been an agrarian area to a more diverse mix of urban, agricultural, and forested landscapes. Conversely, the southern portion of the county has seen little or no growth due to a limited real estate market, less available public transportation, and limited water and sewer infrastructure development. According to the County's 2009 comprehensive plan, Johnston County has experienced significantly high growth rates overall since 1990, a trend that has continued through 2017. Urban development is most intense in the western part of the County; however, residential developments are becoming increasingly dense in central Johnston County between the towns of Selma and Pine Level. According to the County Comprehensive Plan, additional development within these two communities "is both likely and desirable." The County Comprehensive Plan anticipates future municipal annexations (Johnston County, 2009). According to the Johnston County Planning and Zoning Department Annual Report (Johnston County Planning and Zoning Department, 2016), there have been 611 plats for new subdivisions reviewed and signed in 2016. This was the most plats signed in one year since the County assumed map review responsibility in 2009. In 2015, there were 523 plats signed. The County reported 1,200 subdivision lots recorded or permitted in 2016. Additionally, 1,637 single-family housing units are proposed in the near future. The Report indicates that development and housing demand is strong, due in -part to steady job and population growth, as well as, the replacement of existing aging homes (Johnston, 2017). Cumberland County: Cumberland County is within the Fayetteville Metropolitan Statistical Area. Existing and future development in the County is centered on Fayetteville and the surrounding area. Other towns where growth is likely to occur include those along the I-95 corridor. These towns include Eastover, Falcon, Hope Mills, Spring Lake, and Wade. Another driver for development stems from housing needs associated with Fort Bragg and Pope Air Force Base. The Cumberland County Community Development published the Housing Market Analysis in 2015 that gave a number of conclusions and recommendations regarding housing needs and developments goals. The Analysis found that housing costs are relatively inflated and workers in lower -wage jobs are priced out of affordable housing. The analysis acknowledges a housing shortage that needs to be addressed through new construction and rehabilitation of vacant properties (Cumberland County, 2015). Robeson County: Robeson County's future growth and market for development will likely occur near Lumberton, Maxton, Pembroke, Red Springs, and Saint Pauls. Development corridors in the County are generally adjacent to the I-95 and I-74 which bisect the County. Based on a review of city and county websites, press releases, and public documents, there is no information on major developments pending as of November 2017. Based on the current and planned development in Johnston, Cumberland, and Robeson Counties, the potential for the Project to support the market for development was rated as Moderate. Cumulative Impacts Assessment for Johnston, Cumberland and Robeson Counties, North Carolina PUBLIC POLICY Johnston County: Several public policy documents influence land use planning and development in Johnston County. In addition to the County Comprehensive Plan many of the municipalities in Johnston County have their own comprehensive plans to direct future growth. The towns of Four Oaks, Clayton, Smithfield, and Selma all have such plans. Planning efforts are coordinated between municipality governing bodies and the County. Johnston County and local municipal governments created the Municipal Transition District (MTD) to aid in land use planning and development. The MTD allows for greater residential densities in some areas to promote efficient development near existing urban areas. MTDs are more readily served by existing services and utilities and discourage sprawling suburban development into agricultural areas in rural Johnston County. Development in Johnston County is anticipated to occur in existing communities along the I-95 corridor that have established MTDs. These communities include Kenly, Micro, Selma, Smithfield, Four Oaks, and Benson. Other cities where development is likely to occur are Clayton and Princeton. The Annual Report (2016) indicates that the majority of building permits and recorded lots/subdivisions are within the MTDs of the aforementioned communities. This demonstrates the general trends of planned and realized development scenarios. Cumberland County: Cumberland County has adopted a 2030 Growth Vision Plan and a Land Use Policies Plan (Cumberland County, 2008). The Cumberland County Joint Planning Board divided the County into several land use planning study areas. The Cumberland County 2030 Growth Vision Plan shows that the Northeast part of the County includes open space, farmland, residential, commercial, and industrial land (Cumberland County, 2011). Rural residential and suburban tract development is relatively dense in some portions of this section of Cumberland County. The Draft Wade Study Area Detailed Land Use Plan addresses the City of Wade and surrounding areas. This includes the land -use designated "Farmland," and areas within the Wade City limits which are planned for low density residential use, but are currently undeveloped. The South Central Land Use Plan covers the section of the County south of the Cape Fear River to the Robeson County line. With the exception of a one -mile strip of land south of the Cape Fear River to Rainey Road, the land use is designated as "Farmland." Despite this designation, there are numerous housing tracts with parcels of less than one acre. The land between the Cape Fear River and Rainey Road is designated for "One Acre Mixed Housing Types." The Cumberland County zoning ordinance does not specifically address natural gas transmission pipelines; however, the ordinance contains a "Use Matrix" indicating that public/community utility stations/substations are allowable in all zoning districts (Cumberland County, 2010). Cumulative Impacts Assessment for Johnston, Cumberland and Robeson Counties, North Carolina The overarching goal of land use planning in Cumberland County is to concentrate development around Fayetteville and maintain traditional agricultural land use in the rural areas of the County. In general, the residents envision Southeast Cumberland Area remaining a rural farming community intermixed with some small concentrated residential areas, very limited commercial, and lots of natural areas. This is accomplished by establishing Farmland Protection Areas throughout the County and limiting services and utilities to rural areas to control urban development outside of established planning areas. Robeson County: Future development in Robeson County is directed, in part, by the goals stated in the Robeson County Comprehensive Plan (Robeson County, 2014). The Robeson County Comprehensive Plan was developed to outline goals for enhancing the quality of life for residents. The plan supports long-term economic growth and protection of natural areas while providing land -use patterns to support economic development. The Plan's future land use map seeks to direct growth in and near Municipal Planning Jurisdictions including Lumberton, Maxton, Pembroke, Red Springs, and Saint Pauls. Robeson County is largely undeveloped with the majority of existing lands classified as agricultural lands, rural residential, or vacant. There is no unincorporated land in the County that is zoned. As an estimated minimum, 4,500 new dwellings will be required by 2030 correlating with population growth (Robeson County, 2014). Based on the Public Policy designed to control expected growth for Johnston, Cumberland, and Robeson Counties, the potential for the Project to contribute to public policy goals was rated as Moderate. NOTABLE WATER RESOURCES Johnston, Cumberland, and Robeson Counties include portions of 6 major watersheds in the State of North Carolina: • Upper Cape Fear and Lumber Watersheds (Robeson and Cumberland Counties); • Little Pee Dee Watershed (Robeson County); • Upper Neuse Watershed (Johnston County); • Contentnea Watershed (Johnston County); • Black Watershed (Johnston and Cumberland Counties); and 0 Lower Cape Fear Watershed (Cumberland County). Cumulative Impacts Assessment for Johnston, Cumberland and Robeson Counties, North Carolina The major rivers flowing through the counties include the middle or lower reaches of the Neuse, Cape Fear, and Lumber rivers and their tributaries. Table 4 summarizes the wetlands and waterbodies in Johnston, Cumberland, and Robeson Counties based on National Wetlands Inventory data and the National Hydrography Dataset (USGS, 2017; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service [USFWS], 2017). The figures in Attachment 2 illustrate the wetland and waterbodies present in the three counties. Based on the amount of wetlands and waterbodies in Johnston, Cumberland, and Robeson Counties, this category is rated as Moderately -Low. POTENTIAL IMPACT CAUSING ACTIVITIES Waterbodies and Wetlands Waterbodies are defined by the FERC as "any natural or artificial stream, river, or drainage with perceptible flow at the time of crossing, and other permanent waterbodies such as lakes and ponds." The term "waterbodies," as used here, is best understood as those water features — excluding wetlands — that are potentially subject to jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and Environmental Protection Agency jointly define wetlands as "those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions." Atlantic corresponded with the USFWS to determine which streams are sensitive based on the presence, or anticipated presence of species protected under the Endangered Species Act (16 U.S. Code §1531 et seq.). The FERC (lead federal agency) and the USFWS determined that no North Carolina aquatic species would "likely be adversely affected" based on communication between the two agencies. A summary of waterbodies and wetlands delineated along the ACP in Johnston, Cumberland, and Robeson Counties is provided in Table 5. Figures illustrating the wetlands and waterbodies crossed by the ACP are included as Attachment 3. 10 TABLE 4 Waterbodies and Wetlands By County Johnston County Cumberland County Robeson County Waterbody Classifications Miles of Waterbodies Canal/Ditch 13 192 414 Intermittent 1,286 499 965 Perennial 748 812 1,031 Waterbody Total 2,047 1,503 2,410 Wetland Classifications Acres of Wetlands Open Water 7,538 7,241 3,306 Emergent 497 949 5,091 Scrub -Shrub 3,607 11,148 15,943 Forested 62,817 58,987 147,366 Wetland Total 74,459 78,325 171,706 The figures in Attachment 2 illustrate the wetland and waterbodies present in the three counties. Based on the amount of wetlands and waterbodies in Johnston, Cumberland, and Robeson Counties, this category is rated as Moderately -Low. POTENTIAL IMPACT CAUSING ACTIVITIES Waterbodies and Wetlands Waterbodies are defined by the FERC as "any natural or artificial stream, river, or drainage with perceptible flow at the time of crossing, and other permanent waterbodies such as lakes and ponds." The term "waterbodies," as used here, is best understood as those water features — excluding wetlands — that are potentially subject to jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and Environmental Protection Agency jointly define wetlands as "those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions." Atlantic corresponded with the USFWS to determine which streams are sensitive based on the presence, or anticipated presence of species protected under the Endangered Species Act (16 U.S. Code §1531 et seq.). The FERC (lead federal agency) and the USFWS determined that no North Carolina aquatic species would "likely be adversely affected" based on communication between the two agencies. A summary of waterbodies and wetlands delineated along the ACP in Johnston, Cumberland, and Robeson Counties is provided in Table 5. Figures illustrating the wetlands and waterbodies crossed by the ACP are included as Attachment 3. 10 Cumulative Impacts Assessment for Johnston, Cumberland and Robeson Counties, North Carolina Cumulative effects on surface water resources impacted by construction and operation of the Project in Johnston, Cumberland, and Robeson Counties, North Carolina would be limited to waterbodies that are affected by other projects located within the same watershed (see Attachment 1). Atlantic would minimize impacts on waterbodies and wetlands by implementing its sediment and erosion control plan (S&ECP) and adhering to all applicable state and federal permit conditions. Atlantic has developed the S&ECP using the FERC Plan and Procedures4, and the North Carolina Erosion and Sediment Control Planning and Design Manual. To further minimize impacts, USFWS identified sensitive waterbodies within the Project area. Atlantic would implement enhanced erosion and sediment control measures at these crossings. INDIRECT EFFECTS CONCLUSION Indirect Summary Statement The North Carolina Administrative Code adopts the federal definition of indirect impacts as impacts that "are later in time or further removed in distance." (Council on Environmental Quality 1986, 40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 1508.8). The majority of land development outside of the proposed Project is expected to occur within or near urban areas of Johnston, Cumberland, and Robeson Counties. The Project has been routed to avoid urban areas and areas with planned developments identified during the routing process. According to the counties' comprehensive plans, future development activities are anticipated for the areas around Selma, Pine Level, Fayetteville, and Lumberton, which the ACP largely avoids, but with additional infrastructure could be served by new sources of natural gas in the county. Customers of the ACP in North Carolina have indicated that the majority of the gas would be used for power generation, with the remainder for commercial, industrial, and residential customers. Natural gas transported by the ACP would provide an alternate source of fuel, increased reliability, and support projected growth, and would be but one of several factors 4 Refers to the 2013 versions of the FERC's Upland Erosion Control, Revegetation, and Maintenance Plan (Plan) and Wetland and Waterbody Construction and Mitigation Procedures (Procedures) 11 TABLE 5 Waterbody and Wetlands Affected by the Atlantic Coast Pipeline By County Johnston County Cumberland County Robeson County Waterbody Classifications Waterbody Affected Bank Length (Feet) Ephemeral 560 2,205 540 Intermittent 2,215 5,055 1,813 Perennial 1,493 3,430 1,232 Waterbody Total 4,268 10,690 3,584 Wetland Classifications Wetlands Affected (Acres)' Palustrine Emergent 1.2 4.6 2.6 Palustrine Forested 82.4 81.5 54.4 Palustrine Scrub -Shrub 4.5 21.2 18.0 Wetland Total 88.1 107.2 75.0 ' Acreage of wetland within the construction footprint. Cumulative effects on surface water resources impacted by construction and operation of the Project in Johnston, Cumberland, and Robeson Counties, North Carolina would be limited to waterbodies that are affected by other projects located within the same watershed (see Attachment 1). Atlantic would minimize impacts on waterbodies and wetlands by implementing its sediment and erosion control plan (S&ECP) and adhering to all applicable state and federal permit conditions. Atlantic has developed the S&ECP using the FERC Plan and Procedures4, and the North Carolina Erosion and Sediment Control Planning and Design Manual. To further minimize impacts, USFWS identified sensitive waterbodies within the Project area. Atlantic would implement enhanced erosion and sediment control measures at these crossings. INDIRECT EFFECTS CONCLUSION Indirect Summary Statement The North Carolina Administrative Code adopts the federal definition of indirect impacts as impacts that "are later in time or further removed in distance." (Council on Environmental Quality 1986, 40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 1508.8). The majority of land development outside of the proposed Project is expected to occur within or near urban areas of Johnston, Cumberland, and Robeson Counties. The Project has been routed to avoid urban areas and areas with planned developments identified during the routing process. According to the counties' comprehensive plans, future development activities are anticipated for the areas around Selma, Pine Level, Fayetteville, and Lumberton, which the ACP largely avoids, but with additional infrastructure could be served by new sources of natural gas in the county. Customers of the ACP in North Carolina have indicated that the majority of the gas would be used for power generation, with the remainder for commercial, industrial, and residential customers. Natural gas transported by the ACP would provide an alternate source of fuel, increased reliability, and support projected growth, and would be but one of several factors 4 Refers to the 2013 versions of the FERC's Upland Erosion Control, Revegetation, and Maintenance Plan (Plan) and Wetland and Waterbody Construction and Mitigation Procedures (Procedures) 11 Cumulative Impacts Assessment for Johnston, Cumberland and Robeson Counties, North Carolina potentially contributing to growth in the 3 counties. While it is not possible to identify specific growth or development that would be likely to result from the additional natural gas availability, it is assumed that the Project would support existing planned development. The Project would have direct wetlands/waterbodies impacts on the areas crossed, and could have indirect impacts on wetlands/waterbodies outside of the immediate vicinity of the pipeline right-of-way, aboveground facilities, and access roads depending on the scale and location of development activities undertaken as a result of increased natural gas availability. Atlantic has no commitment to potential customers or reasonably foreseeable plans to extend ACP beyond the current terminus. Because there is no planned expansion that can be scoped or analyzed, the potential for extension of the pipeline is not addressed in this report. Water Quality Statement Atlantic would avoid or minimize direct impacts on wetlands and waterbodies by implementing mitigation measures and requirements outlined in the federal, state, and local authorizations issued to the Project. This includes measures outlined in the USACE Section 404 permit and the S&ECP plan developed for the ACP that incorporates requirements from the FERC Plan and Procedures and the North Carolina General Permit to Discharge Stormwater under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System for Construction Activities, general permit NCGO10000. The S&ECP plan review is being coordinated with NCDEQ staff out of the Raleigh and Fayetteville Regions. Atlantic would follow the requirements of the Section 404 permit, the general permit NCGO10000, and the approved S&ECP plan to minimize potential impacts on wetlands and waterbodies. The ACP would cross one 303(d) impaired water, Moccasin Creek in Johnston County, which is impaired for benthos. As noted above, Atlantic would follow the requirements of general permit NCGO 10000 and the approved S&ECP plan to minimize potential impacts on waterbodies, including Moccasin Creek. It is unlikely that significant or permanent indirect effects to waterbodies would result from construction activities within the stream channels and adjacent banks of the waterbodies. Short term increases in sedimentation and turbidity could result from in -stream construction activities, trench dewatering, and storm water runoff from construction areas. These impacts are expected to primarily be limited to in -stream construction. Impacts are expected to be short- term, given that waterbody crossings would occur as quickly as possible and stabilization of the construction area would occur immediately after the crossing of each waterbody, so that conditions would be stabilized shortly after stream restoration activities are complete. Direct impacts to the majority of affected wetlands are anticipated to be short-term. Temporary impacts on wetlands would occur within the construction limits of disturbance, with long-term conversion of forested and scrub -shrub to emergent wetlands due to maintenance of the pipeline right-of-way according to the FERC Procedures and U.S. Department of Transportation requirements. The majority of the impacts would be temporary as revegetation would occur through reseeding with and reestablishment of native vegetation after construction. As a result, Atlantic does not anticipate significant direct and indirect impacts to water quality. 12 Cumulative Impacts Assessment for Johnston, Cumberland and Robeson Counties, North Carolina Some proposed access roads associated with the ACP would be built within floodplains. Atlantic would implement design criteria based on the No -Rise Certification required for construction projects within a designated Special Flood Hazard Area. Floodplain management regulations (44 CFR Section 60.3 (d)(3)) prohibit any encroachment or modification of regulatory floodways unless hydrologic and hydraulic analysis can demonstrate that the action would not increase flood levels. This analysis must be reviewed and approved by a professional engineer. Review of the application and analysis would be conducted by either the county or deferred to the State. The proposed pipeline for the ACP Project would be buried underground. As a result, floodplains along the pipeline route would not be modified except temporarily during construction. Following the completion of construction activities, contours would be restored to preconstruction conditions to the extent practicable. As noted in the sections above, there are various zoning restrictions, land use plans, and regulatory programs that serve to control impacts to water resources in the three impacted counties. These programs and instruments would apply to any direct or indirect development that would result from the proposed ACP Project. Cumulative Effects Statement As with most linear projects, water resources such as wetlands and streams cannot be completely avoided because of the extensive and reticulated nature of the waterbodies. Atlantic has worked with the FERC, USACE, USFWS, and North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission staff to incorporate adjustments to the pipeline route or adopt alternative construction measures to avoid waters of the U.S. with special ecological value where feasible. In addition, Atlantic has incorporated dry crossing methods at each waterbody crossing in North Carolina at the request of the NCDEQ, with an option of coordinating review of site-specific conditions where dry or difficult construction conditions are present. Loss of wetlands associated with the Project in the three Counties under review would be limited to 0.54 acre (0.17 acre in Johnston County and 0.37 acre in Cumberland County) which are all attributable to improvements to permanent access roads. Where a permanent loss of waters of the U.S. is unavoidable, Atlantic has proposed compensatory mitigation to offset impacts within the associated watershed and to mitigate impacts to a no more than minimal level. In addition, as part of the Section 404 review process, Atlantic has proposed compensatory mitigation for impacts that do not constitute a loss of waters of the U.S., but would result in a permanent conversion of forested or scrub/shrub wetlands (e.g., forested wetlands converted to emergent wetlands due to long term maintenance of the right-of-way). The direct impacts associated with construction are planned to occur in an expedient and efficient manner such that impacts on the waterbody and in the case of streams, the impacts to its banks are temporary in nature. Based on the short duration and nature of the waterbody crossings, Atlantic anticipates that cumulative impacts would result in minimal adverse impacts on the waterbodies within the watershed basin and sub -basins crossed. Atlantic has also identified other projects that are recent, underway, or planned within the three counties crossed by the ACP (Attachment 1). Among these projects, 4 proposed projects associated with Piedmont Natural Gas are connected to the ACP: 13 Cumulative Impacts Assessment for Johnston, Cumberland and Robeson Counties, North Carolina • Piedmont Natural Gas Facility Modifications at the Smithfield M&R Station in Johnston County; • Piedmont Natural Gas Facility Modifications at the Fayetteville M&R Station in Cumberland County; • Piedmont Natural Gas Facility Modifications at the Pembroke M&R Station in Robeson County; and • Piedmont Natural Gas 26 miles of 20 -in Diameter Pipeline in Robeson County. The three Piedmont M&R station projects would involve modifications to piping associated with connections to the ACP delivery and measurement of natural gas. The proposed pipeline addition would provide a connection to an existing power plant. All of these projects are subject to federal and state regulatory review and approval, which would address any impacts to water resources. It is expected that other projects, including housing and commercial developments, Department of Transportation projects, and other energy projects would all be subject to state and federal regulatory review and approval. Any project affecting wetlands or waterbodies within the three counties would be required to obtain permits from the USACE and NCDEQ Division of Water Resources and adhere to the permit requirements. Projects would also be required to obtain and adhere to local floodplain permit requirements. Stormwater permitting in Johnston, Cumberland, and Robeson Counties is mainly managed at the state level but development projects also need to adhere to applicable local programs, including the Johnston County Stormwater Management Program and the City of Fayetteville Stormwater Program. All three counties are participants in the North Carolina Water Supply Watershed Protection Program, which works to protect the States' drinking water supplies through inventorying and establishing critical areas, protected areas, and creating buffering requirements for protecting surface waters. Based on the permitting programs discussed above, the cumulative impacts on water resources from other projects would be adequately minimized. In summary, due to the need to comply with existing watershed protection regulations and programs, the implementation of specialized construction techniques, the relatively short construction timeframe at any one location and carefully developed resource protection and mitigation plans, minimal cumulative effects are anticipated when the impacts of the ACP are considered along with the projects identified in Attachment 1. The additional natural gas being brought to the area is expected to result in indirect development in Johnston, Cumberland, and Robeson County, particularly in areas where other utilities (i.e., municipal water and sewer) are already present. As with the ACP, these other projects would also be required to adhere to state and federal water quality regulations and permit requirements, limiting the potential for adverse cumulative impacts on water quality. In addition, many of the projects are spatially separated from the Project, reducing the likelihood of significant water quality impacts. 14 Cumulative Impacts Assessment for Johnston, Cumberland and Robeson Counties, North Carolina REFERENCES Council on Environmental Quality. 1986. 40 CFR 1508.8(b). Indirect effects. Cumberland County. 2008. 2030 Growth Vision Plan Policies and Actions. Available online at: htlps://www.co.cumberland.nc.us/pla,nning/downloads/growth/2030 Growth_ Vision PI an_Sept08_032709_P1Bdcopy.pdf. Accessed October 2017. Cumberland County. 2010. Cumberland County 2010 Land Use Plan. Available online at: http://www.co.cumberland.nc.us/plannin /2�growth plan.aspx. Accessed November 2017. Cumberland County. 2011. Cumberland County 2030 Growth Vision Plan. Available Online at: htlp://www.co.cumberland.nc.us/planning/downloads/land use/Northeast Study Vision Northeast Study 03-23-2011.pdf. Accessed October, 2017. Cumberland County Community Development Department. 2015. Consolidated Plan 2015-2020 Housing Market Analysis. Available online at: htlps://www.co.cumberland.nc.us/docs/ default-source/communi . -development-documents/housing market anal_ cumberland.pdVsfvrsn=d4cd0229_0. Accessed November 2017. Cumberland County. 2017. Cumberland County website. Available online at: htlp://www.co.cumberland.nc.us/. Accessed November 2017. Johnston County. 2009. 2030 Comprehensive Plan. Available online at: http://www.johnston nc.com/mainpage.cfm?category_level_id=766. Accessed October 2017. Johnston County Planning and Zoning Department. 2016. Johnston County Planning and Zoning Department Annual Report. Available online at: hLtp://www.johnstonnc.com/mainpage .cfm?category level_id=741&content id=4034. Accessed November 2017 Johnston County. 2017. Johnston County website. Available online at: Johnston County Public Utilities. 2017. Johnston County Public Utilities website. Available online at: hLtp://www.johnstonnc.com/. Accessed November 2017. North Carolina DEQ. 2017. Stormwater Program website. Available online at: htlps ://deq.nc. gov/aboutldivisions/energy-mineral-land-resources/energy-mineral-land- permits/stormwater-permits/phase-ii-designations. Accessed November 2017. Robeson County. 2014. Comprehensive Plan with a Health & Wellness Component. Available online at: http://publichealth.southemregionalahec.org/robeson/docs/3-10- 2014%20DRAFT%20Robeson%20County%20Comp%20Plan.pdf. Accessed October 2017. U.S. Census Bureau. 2016. Quickfacts Census Data. Available online at: https://www.census. gov/quickfacts/fact/table/NC,j ohnstoncountynorthcarolina,cumberla ndcountynorthcarolina,robesoncountynorthcarolina/POP060210. Accessed October, 2017. 15 Cumulative Impacts Assessment for Johnston, Cumberland and Robeson Counties, North Carolina U.S. Energy Information Agency. 2017. North Carolina Profile Data, State Profile and Energy Estimates. Available online at: https://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=NC. Accessed November 2017. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2017. National wetland Inventory. Available online at: https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/nwi/index.html. Accessed October 2017. U.S. Geological Survey. 2011. USGS Land Cover GAP Data: Vegetation Data. Available Online at: https://ggpanalysis.usgs.gov/data/ U.S. Geological Survey. 2017. National Hydrography Dataset. Available online at: http://nhd.usgs.gov/data.html. Accessed October 2017. C[: North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality — Response to Information Request Dated October 26, 2017 Item 7 Attachment 1 PAST, PRESENT, AND REASONABLY FORESEEABLE FUTURE PROJECTS IN JOHNSTON, CUMBERLAND, AND ROBESON COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA 1-1 ATTACHMENT 1 Past, Present, and Reasonably Foreseeable Future Projects in Johnston, Cumberland, and Robeson Counties, North U.S. Highway to Carolina Interstate Highway Closest Piedmont Facility Piedmont Johnston Piping Intersects at Construction in Distance and Modifications Potential modifications and the Winter of 2018 Direction Wetland / additions for Common From Waterbody Project Name Proponent Counties Description Project Status Impacts? Selma -Wake 230 Duke Energy Johnston Construction of line 12.6 miles In Progress - Yes kV Line Station tap west of MP Summer 2015 Duke Energy Johnston Line relocation 4.3 miles Anticipated 78.0 through Winter east of MP Spring 2016 2017 I-40 Widening — North Carolina Johnston Road widening 20.4 miles Anticipated in Yes Southeast Raleigh Department of Summer 2017; northwest of Fall 2018 to Clayton Project Transportation status unknown MP 86.5 Erwin -Selma 230 Duke Energy Johnston (NCDOT) 9.5 miles Anticipated No kV Line U.S. 70 Corridor NCDOT Johnston Raleigh to Intersects In development Yes 103.0 Morehead City near MP major road 92.2 1-1 expansion from U.S. Highway to Interstate Highway Piedmont Facility Piedmont Johnston Piping Intersects at Construction in No Modifications Natural Gas modifications and the Winter of 2018 additions for Smithfield interconnect at the M&R Smithfield M&R Station Station Lee -Selma 115 kV Duke Energy Johnston Line relocation 4.3 miles Anticipated Yes Line east of MP Spring 2016 95.0 through Summer 2017; status unknown Erwin -Selma 230 Duke Energy Johnston Line replacement 9.5 miles Anticipated No kV Line west of MP Summer 2015 103.0 through Winter 2016; status unknown Complete 540 North Carolina Johnston Completion of Location Anticipated Yes Department of Highway 540 toll unknown Spring 2018 to Transportation road Spring 2022 Solar Farm Robert & Johnston New solar farm Abutting Completed 2015 Yes Wellons Inc. Smithfield -2017 M&R Station R-3410 Road NCDOT Johnston Widening NC 42 17 miles Right-of-way Yes Widening from NC 50 to US northwest acquisition is 70 not scheduled to begin before 2023 I-4739 NCDOT Johnston Intersection 15 miles In Development, No Intersection Improvement at west Construction Improvement Cleveland Road and date unknown Cornwallis Road I-5111 NCDOT Johnston Widening 1-40 from 18 miles 2019 Yes I-440 to NC42 West 1-1 ATTACHMENT Past, Present, and Reasonably Foreseeable Future Projects in Johnston, Cumberland, and Robeson Counties, North Carolina Closest Distance and Potential Direction Wetland / Common From Waterbody Project Name Proponent Counties Description Project Status Impacts? U-3334 NCDOT Johnston Extending Booker 4 miles West In Development, Yes Dairy Road Construction date unknown Piedmont Facility Piedmont Cumberland Piping Within the Construction in No Modifications Natural Gas modifications and Fayetteville Winter 2018 additions for the M&R interconnect at the Station Fayetteville M&R Station Fayetteville Outer NCDOT Cumberland New road 6.3 miles In progress — Yes Loop construction and west of MP 2016 through existing road 133.0 2020 improvements Fort Bragg Duke Energy Cumberland Install reconductor 12.8 miles In progress — No Woodruff — line west of MP Fall 2014 Manchester 134.0 through Spring 2017; status unknown Erwin -Fayetteville Duke Energy Cumberland Relocate structures 7.7 miles Completed in Yes 115 kV — Change for NCDOT project northwest of Spring 2015 and Relocate MP 142.0 Fayetteville Fort Duke Energy Cumberland Line relocation 15.0 miles In progress — Yes Bragg 230 kV Line west of MP Winter 2014 — I-295 Bypass 142.0 through Spring 2016; status unknown Fayetteville Duke Energy Cumberland Install new tap line 2.7 miles In progress — No Vander 115 kV west of MP Summer 2014 Line — Tap to 142.0 through Spring Vander 2016; status unknown Fayetteville Duke Energy Cumberland Install new tap line 6.8 miles In progress — No Dupont 115 kV west of MP Winter 2014 Line — Cumberland 142.0 through Spring Solar 2016; status unknown Fayetteville Duke Energy Cumberland Install new tap line 6.8 miles Completed in No Dupont 115 kV west of MP Summer 2015 Line — Grays Creek 142.0 Tap Fayetteville Duke Energy Cumberland Install line switches 6.8 miles In progress — No Dupont 115 kV west of MP Winter 2014 Line — Line 142.0 through Winter Switches 2016; status unknown Fayetteville Fort Duke Energy Cumberland Line relocation 16.4 miles Completed in Yes Bragg 230 kV Line west of MP Winter 2015 — Clifdale Road 142.0 1-2 1-3 ATTACHMENT Past, Present, and Reasonably Foreseeable Future Projects in Johnston, Cumberland, and Robeson Counties, North Carolina Closest Distance and Potential Direction Wetland / Common From Waterbody Project Name Proponent Counties Description Project Status Impacts? Richmond — Fort Duke Energy Cumberland Install transmission 21.8 miles In progress — Yes Bragg 230 kV loop west of MP Summer 2015 147.0 through Fall 2018 U.S. 401 Corridor NCDOT Cumberland Road expansion Unknown Anticipated Yes Study study environmental impact statement date 2015; Not funded McClauren McClauren Cumberland 36 -lot residential Crossed Construction Yes Subdivision Subdivision development schedule unknown St. Pauls Johnson Johnson Robeson New asphalt plant 2.2 miles In progress — Yes Brothers Facility Brothers southeast of Phase I Utility and MP166.6 completed in Paving July 2014 Company Weatherspoon Duke Energy Robeson Install tap for solar 2.8 miles In progress — Yes Plant — Fayetteville facility southeast of Fall 2014 Solar Farm Tap MP 167.0 through Spring 2016; status unknown Weatherspoon Duke Energy Robeson Install tap for solar 2.3 miles In progress — Yes Plant — Solar Tap facility southeast of Fall 2014 MP 167.0 through Summer 2016; status unknown Weatherspoon Duke Energy Robeson Replace existing 10.6 miles Anticipated — No Plant — LOF 115 structures south of MP Winter 2016 kV Structure 170.0 through Spring Replace 2017; status unknown Weatherspoon- Duke Energy Robeson Line relocation 11.6 miles In progress — Yes Raeford 230 kV northwest of Summer 2015 Line Relocate MP 170.0 through Fall 2018 Weatherspoon- Duke Energy Robeson Line replacement May In progress — Yes Raeford 230 kV intersect Summer 2015 Line Replacement near MP through Spring 170.0 2017; status unknown I-95 Diverging NCDOT Robeson Intersection 9.2 miles In progress — Yes Diamond improvement south- anticipated Interchange in project southeast of completion in Lumberton MP 178.0 Spring 2016; status unknown 1-3 1-4 ATTACHMENT Summer 2016; Past, Present, and Reasonably Foreseeable Future Projects in Johnston, Cumberland, and Robeson Counties, North Weatherspoon Duke Energy Robeson Replace existing Carolina In progress — No Plant —Marion 115 structures south of MP Winter 2015 kV Structure Closest 180.0 through Spring Replace Distance and 2016; status Potential unknown Direction Piedmont Wetland / Intersects at Anticipated Yes Common Natural Gas From the Waterbody Project Name Proponent Counties Description Project Status Impacts? Weatherspoon — Duke Energy Robeson Convert to remote 3.2 miles Complete — No LOF 115 kV Piedmont Piedmont control south of MP Spring 2014 Aboveground Natural Gas modifications and Pembroke Winter of 2018 180.0 through Fall additions for the M&R interconnect at the 2015 Weatherspoon Duke Energy Robeson Replace structures 21.4 miles In progress — No Plant — Delco southeast of Winter 2015 MP 180.0 through 1-4 Summer 2016; status unknown Weatherspoon Duke Energy Robeson Replace existing 14.2 miles In progress — No Plant —Marion 115 structures south of MP Winter 2015 kV Structure 180.0 through Spring Replace 2016; status unknown Piedmont Pipeline Piedmont Robeson 26 miles of 20 -inch Intersects at Anticipated Yes Natural Gas natural gas pipeline the Winter of 2018 Pembroke M&R Station Piedmont Piedmont Robeson Piping Within the Construction in No Aboveground Natural Gas modifications and Pembroke Winter of 2018 Facilities additions for the M&R interconnect at the Station Pembroke M&R Station 1-4 North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality — Response to Information Request Dated October 26, 2017 Item 7 Attachment 2 DEVELOPED AND UNDEVELOPED LAND IN JOHNSTON, CUMBERLAND, AND ROBESON COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA _:_ - -• - ��-_: — aBunn Spring Hope spring Hope pod Rd ; • �d N.,*. % ` •� I �a g F ❑ RoIeSVlllea StricxlayyRa o"?,,,R,euseX64 { 98 F C 97 • s d 39 - (ANew Hopee N 1 g "s g„N�O• LL g Zebulon Zebulon y I 01: CC �• .o �`• t 'A6 - � a d C'�i .bss1 • Br Middlesex ? �, �a _ c °� " Raleigh �Knightdale: SWend"ell754At [ Bailey T - Vis' Baily ►R,� y�pSrR�� Raleigh°., a'`` s Inn o - - _= Sims { - m 12000 Rd 70 R� d r+YaM Q.�5B1� _ IR, Garner r. Ra 3 Garner cci Y Archer Lodge I _ e•y e +mbar Dr ? ■ ` 1 t ' 13 •a ' d 0 'l Rd Rund R Clayton / - r ,�6y I V 80 ,� ei 5■ do Kenly y Wilson's Willow Spring { Mills lWaM�OOM W2 —:��s[Ts��r�wi�+i`��i��:■■■■■■■i*r7�A7*�iili�i�_�rii'.��`.�.�1'i'■ts�. , vr`��!� ►� �•�■■+. �11,4 ■■■■■■ -o h n sto,' ?�nountw Nq i■■■■■■ 1190 1 FIRM -11 SO �`.��+��•.�1 a iF 'kik: 11�1 HIN 10 ISO IM '■fir e _ ��iv� �1 ` , ``'' �J[Alf ,r , '� i■ Centerline 95 ■ e • .e- ■ -F_,riMunicipal Water- - Atlantic Coast Pipeline Construction Ip •• •Streams Developed NWI Wetlands Coast Johnston County, North Carolina J, Undeveloped a Generalized Coverage Based on County Information FILE M .• r r• NCDEQ . • FiI Johnston.mxd I REVISED:11/10/2017 rrr when printed at 11x17 DRAWN BY JIML 1 l ►- I i lWaM�OOM W2 —:��s[Ts��r�wi�+i`��i��:■■■■■■■i*r7�A7*�iili�i�_�rii'.��`.�.�1'i'■ts�. , vr`��!� ►� �•�■■+. �11,4 ■■■■■■ -o h n sto,' ?�nountw Nq i■■■■■■ 1190 1 FIRM -11 SO �`.��+��•.�1 a iF 'kik: 11�1 HIN 10 ISO IM '■fir e _ ��iv� �1 ` , ``'' �J[Alf ,r , '� i■ Centerline 95 ■ e • .e- ■ -F_,riMunicipal Water- - Atlantic Coast Pipeline Construction Ip •• •Streams Developed NWI Wetlands Coast Johnston County, North Carolina J, Undeveloped a Generalized Coverage Based on County Information FILE M .• r r• NCDEQ . • FiI Johnston.mxd I REVISED:11/10/2017 rrr when printed at 11x17 DRAWN BY JIML - / —:..Bpd a4 Reck SLate Park � apdr. Ka - . V J'. t Four 40 a -Fayette" 11e t 421 - r G"sor,,M,am l-ilHwy nder Buies Creek C G � i _ L I Salemburg� r k 'a i ngton $ . 1` U, �\ AtatrtyuilleE �l afjo R / *45 � Hope�Mills n �P 1 64Ct, pe 87 Rd �I (�1 n R a `• ti� IK 6 gf• 't. • \ V . Lumber Bridge @39 210 Y 'Py 160 p.� CoharB 9d[sa j K a� �_ s; •3 a.. BunnIevel BLl�ilt�crci Dunn 2l •. 6.0 J r \ Rennert-0 �c•` Rennert St Pauls Saint Pauls mss' � 0 r —1~ 1/70 Spring Layke, _, ♦ � apdr. Ka oe4 V J'. Four 40 a -Fayette" 11e 2 - — i a� nder Buies Creek C G � _ L I Salemburg� QVC �rFti_ k 'a LillinLill ngton $ . 1` U, �\ AtatrtyuilleE �l Rockfish Benson aekfish Rd � Hope�Mills n �, 1 �. pe (�1 1 `• ti� SQN rp I Paul gf• 't. \ Parkton . Lumber Bridge Z Y Rex 160 Erwin j K Jerome �_ s; •3 a.. BunnIevel BLl�ilt�crci Dunn 2l •. 6.0 J r \ Rennert-0 �c•` Rennert St Pauls Saint Pauls mss' � 0 1/70 , 87 R N, r s Wni e�akic FaL 1 RW��B �Harnett(1,�„� r Linden 12 Plain View �rH air �' ',� - I r _b� ` � • `� �n 72 L8 d r yrs w } t31� P,6 6 R C° f. ,;• Godwin ' Dublin ✓ Spivey's ® rl .r Corner White Lake 70 2.5 5 Miles Falcon '-� W 6`61 }��❑" a 1301° O Milepost ® Municipal Sewage Servicea N - Wade a Municipal Water Services -Construction Impact Footprint /�i NHD Streams Atlantic Atlantic Coast Pipeline Developed NWI Wetlands Coast Land Use, Municipal Water and Sewage Distribution l �, �J Undeveloped Pipeline Cumberland County, North Carolina 1 =M 1:101 a Generalized Coverage Based on County Information FILE: M:\Clients\D-F\DOM\SRPP\ ArcGIS\2017\11\09 NCDEQ_water_for_Evan\ ACP NCDEQ_Fig6_Cumberland.mxd I REVISED: 11/10/2017 1 SCALE: 1:250,000 when printed at 11x17 DRAWN BY: JML Eastover �. 40 a -Fayette" 11e 2 - \Contractor Yard nder Pa _ Salemburg� Stedman Cumberland — �\ AtatrtyuilleE �l Rockfish aekfish Rd � Hope�Mills n �, 0Ro;eRoseboro� �. pe `• ti� SQN rp I Paul 't. 4i- _ Parkton . Lumber Bridge Rex 160 Shannon K Jerome �_ s; •3 a.. Rennert-0 �c•` Rennert St Pauls Saint Pauls mss' � 0 1/70 , 87 R m r s Wni e�akic FaL 1 RW��B Buie t Jft4 � �rH air �' ',� - 211 72 . ! } t31� P,6 6 R i ' Dublin Whit White Lake 70 2.5 5 Miles '-� W 6`61 }��❑" a y I kE�� envrronmen al review purposes only. O Milepost ® Municipal Sewage Servicea N /"**/ Centerline a Municipal Water Services -Construction Impact Footprint /�i NHD Streams Atlantic Atlantic Coast Pipeline Developed NWI Wetlands Coast Land Use, Municipal Water and Sewage Distribution l �, �J Undeveloped Pipeline Cumberland County, North Carolina =M 1:101 a Generalized Coverage Based on County Information FILE: M:\Clients\D-F\DOM\SRPP\ ArcGIS\2017\11\09 NCDEQ_water_for_Evan\ ACP NCDEQ_Fig6_Cumberland.mxd I REVISED: 11/10/2017 1 SCALE: 1:250,000 when printed at 11x17 DRAWN BY: JML • 95 - ee- � 4 a W i Y 'MEa0� • I■■t, .I■E<Zi■,!ME ■■E�: `� 'moi■■■� '' �`' 1■!�■r .. �iil■U`�l�iEi■errs ENSUE HOME !WN, Room TIME L r •7�11, _ - • • - i � � `y •- � -.PIP ° Si •ire Y�,""� �i / r ,� t .�_ . ( 1� t 1 SM NO Tam= ' ��'�! � ®�llr�ifl°iii�ri��■■�► '�■r��■�■��t� � '�"-'��ow ,e �.. ` . <y� .:► a ' .: 111111 MORK WNk 20 �M•NNO '182D ft— e on NEI MEMEMEEF NINE !IL#■; art `l` � y •il c��`��,,'4��1} .^ �� ' is w— � r I= tIy��• F,L`. `llc e ■ • • Milepost .■Imunicipal sewage Servicea Centerline F-'-9Municipal Water Servicea Atlantic Coast Pipeline Construction I• . • • •Streams Developed NWI Wetlands Coast Robeson County, North Carolina Undeveloped PipeUne North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality — Response to Information Request Dated October 26, 2017 Item 7 Attachment 3 WETLANDS AND WATERBODIES CROSSED BY THE ATLANTIC COAST PIPELINE IN JOHNSTON, CUMBERLAND, AND ROBESON COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA This attachment has not changed since the previous submittal