20201864_FW External RE R-5705 (NC 55 Corridor Study) Concurrence Point 3 Discussion_20180702

Carpenter,Kristi
From: Gillespie, Allyn K
Sent: Monday, July 02, 2018 6:00 PM
To: [e-mail]
Subject: FW: [External] RE: R-5705 (NC 55 Corridor Study)
Concurrence Point 3 Discussion
Thanks so much for the update, Amanetta. Let me know if you have other questions.
Kim Gillespie, PE
Project Manager
Project Management Unit— Divisions 1, 2, 3, 4, & 6 North Carolina Department of
Transportation
919-707-6023 office
klgi I lespie@ ncdot.gov
1582 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1582
1000 Birch Ridge Drive
Raleigh, NC 27610
Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public
Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
-----Original Message-----
From: Somerville, Amanetta [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2018 10:28 AM
To: Gillespie, Allyn K <[e-mail]>
Cc: Militscher, Chris <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [External] RE: R-5705 (NC 55 Corridor Study) Concurrence Point 3 Discussion
CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless verified. Send all
suspicious email as an attachment to Report Spam.<mailto:[e-mail]>
Good morning Kim,
Thank you for the additional information. EPA does not object to ending the merger
process post CP2.
Amanetta Somerville
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 4
61 Forsyth Street SW. Atlanta, Ga 30303
1

National Environmental Policy Act Program Office Resource Conservation and
Restoration Division
Phone: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]
-----Original Message-----
From: Gillespie, Allyn K [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2018 9:15 AM
To: Somerville, Amanetta <[e-mail]>
Cc: Hackler, Nicole M<[e-mail]>; Lovering, Gary R
<gloveri ng@ ncdot.gov>
Subject: FW: [External] RE: R-5705 (NC 55 Corridor Study) Concurrence Point 3
Discussion
Below is the conclusion of the discussion for the subject project. Let me know if you
have any questions.
Kim Gillespie, PE
Project Manager
Project Management Unit - Divisions 1, 2, 3, 4, & 6 North Carolina Department of
Transportation
919-707-6023 office
klgi I lespie@ ncdot.gov
1582 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1582
1000 Birch Ridge Drive
Raleigh, NC 27610
Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public
Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
-----Original Message-----
From: Gillespie, Allyn K
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2018 2:57 PM
To: Gledhill-earley, Renee <[e-mail]>; Hair, Sarah E CIV CESAW
CESAD (US) <[e-mail]>; Steenhuis, Joanne
<[e-mail]>;'[e-mail]' <[e-mail]>;
Wilson, Travis W. <[e-mail]>; James Caldwell
<[e-mail]>; Chris Militscher ([e-mail])
([e-mail]) <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]
Cc: Hackler, Nicole M<[e-mail]>; Lovering, Gary R
<[e-mail]>;'[e-mail]' <[e-mail]>;
Burns, Gregory W <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [External] RE: R-5705 (NC 55 Corridor Study) Concurrence Point 3 Discussion
Let me know if you have other questions.

Kim Gillespie, PE
Project Manager
Project Management Unit - Divisions 1, 2, 3, 4, & 6 North Carolina Department of
Transportation
919-707-6023 office
klgi I lespie@ ncdot.gov
1582 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1582
1000 Birch Ridge Drive
Raleigh, NC 27610
Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public
Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
-----Original Message-----
From: Gledhill-earley, Renee
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2018 2:27 PM
To: Hair, Sarah E CIV CESAW CESAD (US) <[e-mail]>; Gillespie, Allyn
K <[e-mail]>; Steenhuis, Joanne <[e-mail]>;
'[e-mail]' <[e-mail]>; Wilson, Travis W.
<[e-mail]>; James Caldwell <[e-mail]>; Chris Militscher
([e-mail]) ([e-mail]) <[e-mail]>;
[e-mail]
Cc: Hackler, Nicole M<[e-mail]>; Lovering, Gary R
<[e-mail]>;'[e-mail]' <[e-mail]>;
Burns, Gregory W <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [External] RE: R-5705 (NC 55 Corridor Study) Concurrence Point 3 Discussion
Indeed, it does clear things up.
So, merger will end post CP 2 due to lack of competing resources and not be restarted.
If this is the intent and the process into the future for the project, then I'm good with
Kim's proposal.
Renee
Renee Gledhill-Earley
Environmental Review Coordinator
State Historic Preservation Office
109 E Jones St MSC 4617 Raleigh, NC 27699
919 807 6579 office
Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public
Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.

Please Note: Requests for project review or responses to our review comments should
be sent to our Environmental Review emailbox at [e-mail]
Otherwise, I will have to return your request and ask that you send it to the proper
mailbox. This will cause delays in your project. Information on email project submittal is
at: http://www.hpo.ncdcr.gov/er/er_email_submittal.html
-----Original Message-----
From: Hair, Sarah E CIV CESAW CESAD (US) [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2018 2:18 PM
To: Gledhill-earley, Renee <[e-mail]>; Gillespie, Allyn K
<[e-mail]>; Steenhuis, Joanne <[e-mail]>;
'[e-mail]' <[e-mail]>; Wilson, Travis W.
<[e-mail]>; James Caldwell <[e-mail]>; Chris Militscher
([e-mail]) ([e-mail]) <[e-mail]>;
[e-mail]
Cc: Hackler, Nicole M<[e-mail]>; Lovering, Gary R
<[e-mail]>;'[e-mail]' <[e-mail]>;
Burns, Gregory W <[e-mail]>
Subject: [External] RE: R-5705 (NC 55 Corridor Study) Concurrence Point 3 Discussion
CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless verified. Send all
suspicious email as an attachment to Report Spam.<mailto:[e-mail]>
Hello everyone,
Hopefully I can clear up any confusion on this project regarding Merger status. I believe
when we (Corps, DWR, DOT) met to discuss this project the idea was that it would be
removed from the Merger process post CP 2 due to lack of competing resources and
only 2 build alternatives, and that DOT would come back to DWR and the Corps with a
'Merger-like" meeting to discuss avoidance and minimization and 30 % hydraulic review
prior to permit submittal. It was not the intent to circumvent the process. Hope this
clears things up.
Thanks,
Liz
-----Original Message-----
From: Gledhill-earley, Renee [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2018 12:11 PM
To: Gillespie, Allyn K<[e-mail]>; Hair, Sarah E CIV CESAW CESAD (US)
<[e-mail]>; Steenhuis, Joanne <[e-mail]>;
'[e-mail]' <[e-mail]>; Wilson, Travis W.
<[e-mail]>; James Caldwell <[e-mail]>; Chris Militscher
([e-mail]) ([e-mail]) <[e-mail]>;
[e-mail]
Cc: Hackler, Nicole M<[e-mail]>; Lovering, Gary R
<[e-mail]>;'[e-mail]' <[e-mail]>;
Burns, Gregory W <[e-mail]>
Subject: [Non-DoD Source] RE: R-5705 (NC 55 Corridor Study) Concurrence Point 3
Discussion

Thanks, Kim.
I do not see the impacts attachment. Will you please resend it?
Also, I am a bit concerned about the proposal to take the project as a merger project
through CP2a, out of inerger at CP, and then return to merger for CP4A and 4B. It seems
to set a poor precedent for the future of the merger process. Thus, I would like to hear
from the other team members.
In particular, why is this being suggested?
Why not simply decide that it is not a merger project and stop now?
What kind of precedent will this set for future merger projects?
Look forward to your and other agencies replies.
Renee
Renee Gledhill-Earley
Environmental Review Coordinator
State Historic Preservation Office
109 E Jones St MSC 4617 Raleigh, NC 27699
919 807 6579 office
Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public
Records Law
and may be disclosed to third parties.

Please Note: Requests for project review or responses to our review comments should
be sent to our Environmental Review emailbox at [e-mail]
<mailto:[e-mail]> Otherwise, I will have to return your
request and ask that you send it to the proper mailbox. This will cause delays in your
project. Information on email project submittal is at:
Blockedhttp://www.hpo.ncdcr.gov/er/er_email_submittal.html
From: Gillespie, Allyn K
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2018 11:38 AM
To: Hair, Sarah E SAW ([e-mail]) <[e-mail]>;
Steenhuis, Joanne <[e-mail]>; '[e-mail]'
<[e-mail]>; Wilson, Travis W. <[e-mail]>; Gledhill-
earley, Renee <[e-mail]>; James Caldwell
<[e-mail]>; Chris Militscher ([e-mail])
([e-mail]) <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]
Cc: Hackler, Nicole M<[e-mail]>; Lovering, Gary R
<[e-mail]>;'[e-mail]' <[e-mail]>;
Burns, Gregory W <[e-mail]>
Subject: R-5705 (NC 55 Corridor Study) Concurrence Point 3 Discussion
Hi to all,
The subject project has gone through the Merger Process, and the Merger Team was
ready to meet to discuss Concurrence Points 2A and 3(CP2A - Bridging Decisions, and
CP3 - LEDPA (Least Environmentally Damaging Practicable Alternative)). After meeting
internally and with the Corps and NC DWR, I thought the meeting issues could instead
be addressed by email. I would like to address each one here. If everyone is ok with
handling this by e-mail instead of having a meeting, let me know.
The items to be discussed are:
* Concurrence Point 2 Discussion
* CP2A Discussion
* LEDPA Discussion
* Future Merger Meetings
Concurrence Point 2 Discussion
The merger team meeting to discuss Concurrence Point 2(CP2; Alternatives Selected for
Detailed Study) was held on September 13, 2017. The merger team agreed to carry
forward Alternatives A(widening NC 55 along the existing alignment) and B(Western
6

Bypass). NCDOT requested concurrence from the merger team of choosing alternatives
from three corridors: the two alternatives mentioned earlier, and Alternative C(Eastern
Bypass). NCDOT staff noted that previous discussions occurred and had focused on
keeping Alternatives A& B and dropping Alternative C, since Alternative B is expected to
attract more traffic, and Alternative C impacts more wetlands. CAMPO mentioned
(from their prospective) selecting a bypass west of Angier could impact future plans for
US 401. This issue was and still is a concern for the future for CAMPO, but not enough
to impact the decision for this project. All signatory agencies of the Merger Team signed
the CP 2 form.
CP2A Discussion
The following proposed hydraulic structures were discussed. The size and locations are
based on preliminary data; drainage area, aerial mapping, and LIDAR. Minimization
opportunities will be looked at during the design phase when surveys are available:
For Alternative A:
* A existing 8' x 4' RCBC will be extended in kind, 30-feet upstream and 33-feet
down stream, at Station -L- 341+55 +/-.
For Alternative B:
* A new 7' x 6' culvert will be installed at Station -L- 197+74 +/-, approximately
212 feet in length, and
* Two 6' x 6' culverts will be installed at Station -L- 312+59 +/-, Approximately
208 feet in length.
For both Alternatives:
* An existing 30-inch RCP will be replaced by a 6'x6' at Station -L- 558+82 +/-,
approximately 106 feet in length, and
* An existing 8' x 4' RCBC will be replaced by an 8' x 6' RCBC at Station -L- 587+60
+/, approximately 177 feet in length.
LEDPA Discussion
Attached is an impact matrix for Alternatives A& B. Note the number of businesses,
wetlands and streams impacted by each alternative. Yes, Alternative B does impact
more wetlands than Alternative A(due to the Alternative B being a new location
option), but it impacts fewer businesses than Alternative A. There are also no
competing resources.
Future Merger Meetings

Due to the low number of impacts for each alternative, and lack of competing resources,
I would like to request removing this project from the Merger Process at the CP2 point
and return to the Merger Process at Concurrence Points 4A (CP4A; Avoidance and
Minimization) and 4B (30% Hydraulic Review). We will move forward with selecting the
western corridor (Alternative B) as the selected alternative. Right-of-way is scheduled
for January 2020 and construction is scheduled for January 2022.
Please let me know if you have any comments or questions regarding these measures.
Hopefully this email is not confusing, I wanted to make sure the above information sent
was correct.
Kim Gillespie, PE
Project Manager
Project Management Unit - Divisions 1, 2, 3, 4, & 6
North Carolina Department of Transportation
919-707-6023 office
[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
1582 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1582
1000 Birch Ridge Drive
Raleigh, NC 27610
Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.

Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N.C. Public Records Law
and may be disclosed to third parties.
Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N.C. Public Records Law
and may be disclosed to third parties.