20061010 Ver 1_Complete File_20060621

T
r'1
r re r
June 19, 2006 2 0 0 6 1 0 1 0
Mr. Tom Farrell
Wilmington Regulatory Field Office
US Army Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 1890 COURTESY
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890 COPY
Ms. Cyndi Karoly
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
401 Wetlands Unit
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1786
,r_1 [2 @PC?e
JUN 2 1 2006 U
?g1 v?'ar-ft QU?1 ITY
4YErt14;`?oEr1rfi
STC?nF??!,IER BR,?ir'GN
SUN ?; Zaoa
. U't'O'S
W?j
?;RruiCii
Subject: Preconstruction Notification for Relocated Overhead Electric Transmission
Lines - Brunswick Nuclear Plant Intake Canal
wOC????
Dear Mr. Farre 01
Carolina Power & light Company d/b/a Progress Energy Carolinas (PEC) is preparing to
relocate approximately 1,800 feet of an existing 230kV transmission line crossing the
intake canal at the Brunswick Nuclear Plant near Southport, NC, to facilitate other plant-
related construction. The relocation will involve first installing approximately 3,700 feet
of temporary transmission line parallel to the existing line to ensure continued reliability
of service to customers and other portions of the transmission system that cannot have an
outage. The relocated section of the line will then be constructed generally to the
northeast, as shown on Figure 1. After the new line is completed and energized, the
temporary line will be removed.
The intake canal is considered jurisdictional under both Section 10, and PEC is
requesting authorization from the Corps under Nationwide 12 for this relocated crossing.
PEC has met with Mr. Jim Gregson with the Division of Coastal Management, and he has
determined that the proposed work is exempt from CAMA jurisdiction.
The proposed relocation will cross four jurisdictional areas, including two non-coastal
wetlands, the intake canal, and one coastal wetland. Vegetation within those
jurisdictional portions on the transmission line right-of-way (ROW) will be hand cut; no
mechanized clearing or other heavy equipment will be allowed on those areas. The ROW
will be 100 feet wide, and the line will be constructed using primarily H-frame (two pole)
structures, with three, three-pole structures used where the line is angled. Poles will be
direct-embedded, i.e., the poles will be set directly into augered holes and backfilled with
native soil; no foundation material will be used.
Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc.
P.O. Box 1551
Raleigh, NC 27602
7
Depending upon the final design of the relocated line, one pole of the 3-pole structure
might have to be set in wetlands. That pole can be placed from adjacent high ground,
without machinery having to enter the wetlands. All other structures will be placed
outside of jurisdictional waters/wetlands.
In additional to surveying the project area for jurisdictional waters, PEC has determined
there is no likely impacts to threatened or endangered species or to cultural resources.
In support of this request, we are enclosing the following:
1. Preconstruction Notification.
2. Consultant's report, including vicinity map, aerial photos showing the proposed
ROW and jurisdictional areas, and discussion of threatened and endangered
species.
3. Plan and profile map, showing overhead clearance.
4. Letter from SHPO, indicating "no comment".
We would appreciate your review of the enclosed PCN. If you have any questions,
please contact Mr. Buzz Bryson in our Environmental Services Section at 919-546-6637
or buzz. b son ppanmail.com.
Thank you for this consideration.
Very truly yours,
? . t}u-cites,
Ray Davis, General Manager
Transmission Construction & Engineering
RD/wtb
Enclosures
c: Mr. Buzz Bryson
Ms. Erika Hess
Mr. Baxter Matheson
Z
Office Use Only: Form Version March 05
2oos?o
USACE Action ID No. DWQ No. 1 o
kit any particular item is not appucabte to tnis project, please enter "loot Applicable" or "N/A".)
L' Processing COMTESY
COPY
1. Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project:
? Section 404 Permit ? Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules
® Section 10 Permit ? Isolated Wetland Permit from DWQ
® 401 Water Quality Certification ? Express 401 Water Quality Certification
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested: Nationwide 12
3. If this notification is solely a courtesy copy because written approval for the 401 Certification
is not required, check here:
4. If payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) is proposed
for mitigation of impacts, attach the acceptance letter from NCEEP, complete section VIII,
and check here: ?
5. If your project is located in any of North Carolina's twenty coastal counties (listed on page
j 4), and the project is within a North Carolina Division of Coastal Management Area of
Environmental Concern (see the top of page 2 for further details), check he ?
m U,-J Ig 5
II. Applicant Information JUN ? X 2006
Owner/Applicant Information
Name: Carolina Power & Light Company d/b/a Progressi'>'g}Caroli?ia's??'?
Mailing Address: c/o Mr. Ray Davis
P.O. Box 1891 TPP 18
Raleigh, NC 27602-1891
Telephone Number: 919-546-4359 Fax Number: 919-546-7552
E-mail Address: ray.davis(a?pgnmail.com
2. Agent/Consultant Information (A signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization letter
must be attached if the Agent has signatory authority for the owner/applicant.)
Name: Internal contact is W. T. (Buzz) Bryson
Company Affiliation: Progress Energy Service Co.
Mailing Address: 410 S. Wilmington Street, PEB 4A
Raleigh, NC 27601
Telephone Number: 919-546-6637 Fax Number: 919-546-4409
E-mail Address: buzz.brysongpgnmail.com
Updated 11/112005
Page 1 of 9
III. Project Information
Attach a vicinity map clearly showing the location of the property with respect to local
landmarks such as towns, rivers, and roads. Also provide a detailed site plan showing property
boundaries and development plans in relation to surrounding properties. Both the vicinity map
and site plan must include a scale and north arrow. The specific footprints of all buildings,
impervious surfaces, or other facilities must be included. If possible, the maps and plans should
include the appropriate USGS Topographic Quad Map and NRCS Soil Survey with the property
boundaries outlined. Plan drawings, or other maps may be included at the applicant's discretion,
so long as the property is clearly defined. For administrative and distribution purposes, the
USACE requires information to be submitted on sheets no larger than 11 by 17-inch format;
however, DWQ may accept paperwork of any size. DWQ prefers full-size construction
drawings rather than a sequential sheet version of the full-size plans. If full-size plans are
reduced to a small scale such that the final version is illegible, the applicant will be informed that
the project has been placed on hold until decipherable maps are provided.
1. Name of project: Brunswick Nuclear Plant 230kV Transmission Line Relocation
2. T.I.P. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only): N/A
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN): Parcel No: 20600001; Acct. No: 30188840
4. Location
County: Brunswick Nearest Town: Southport
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number): N/A
Directions to site (include road numbers/names, landmarks, etc.):- Heading south from
Wilmington on NC 133/87, turn left onto Brunswick Plant entrance road approximately
1,500 feet after passing the Dosher cut-off where 133 turns to connect with NC 211, and just
before crossing the plant's discharge canal.
5. Site coordinates (For linear projects, such as a road or utility line, attach a sheet that
separately lists the coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody.)
Decimal Degrees (6 digits minimum): -78.00671 ON 33.96222 °W
6. Property size (acres): Approx. 2930 acres
7. Name of nearest receiving body of water: BNP Intake Canal and Cape Fear River
8. River Basin: Cape Fear
(Note - this must be one of North Carolina's seventeen designated major river basins. The
River Basin map is available at littp://li2o.enr.state.nc.us/admin/maps/.)
9. Describe the existing conditions on the site and general land use in the vicinity of the project
at the time of this application: - Project is within the boundaries of the existing Brunswick
Nuclear Plant. Site is used for the generation of electrical energy.
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 2 of 9
10. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used: Project
involves installing a temporary line immediately adjacent to the existing transmission line
and then constructing a new re-routed section of transmission line to be connected to the
original line. The temporary line and by-passed portion of the original line will then be
removed. Portions of the new right-of-way (ROW) crossing wetlands/waters will be cleared
by hand. All structure and line installation will be done from high ground. No hem
equipment will be allowed to work in jurisdictional wetlands/AEC. All structures except for
possibly one pole of a 3-pole angle structure will be set in upland areas. Poles will be direct-
embedded, i.e., holes will be augered, the poles set, and the holes backfilled with native
material. No foundation material will be used. There will be no change of existing contours
11. Explain the purpose of the proposed work: Proposed line relocation is needed to allow
construction of a spent fuel storage building at the BNP on a site currently occupied by a
portion of the transmission line.
IV. Prior Project History
If jurisdictional determinations and/or permits have been requested and/or obtained for this
project (including all prior phases of the same subdivision) in the past, please explain. Include
the USACE Action ID Number, DWQ Project Number, application date, and date permits and
certifications were issued or withdrawn. Provide photocopies of previously issued permits,
certifications or other useful information. Describe previously approved wetland, stream and
buffer impacts, along with associated mitigation (where applicable). If this is a NCDOT project,
list and describe permits issued for prior segments of the same T.I.P. project, along with
construction schedules.
Various permits were issued for the construction (late 1960s - early 1970s) and/or on-going
maintenance (primarily intake canal maintenance dredging) of the BNP itself. Initial
construction of transmission lines took place during that same era. Work since that time frame
has generally involved on-going maintenance of the generating facility and/or lines. Only minor
construction has taken place since then (small boat dock etc).
V. Future Project Plans
Are any future permit requests anticipated for this project? If so, describe the anticipated work,
and provide justification for the exclusion of this work from the current application.
No further transmission line work is anticipated in the foreseeable future at BNP
VI. Proposed Impacts to Waters of the United States/Waters of the State
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
wetlands, open water, and stream channels associated with the project. Each impact must be
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 3 of 9
listed separately in the tables below (e.g., culvert installation should be listed separately from
riprap dissipater pads). Be sure to indicate if an impact is temporary. All proposed impacts,
permanent and temporary, must be listed, and must be labeled and clearly identifiable on an
accompanying site plan. All wetlands and waters, and all streams (intermittent and perennial)
should be shown on a delineation map, whether or not impacts are proposed to these systems.
Wetland and stream evaluation and delineation forms should be included as appropriate.
Photographs may be included at the applicant's discretion. If this proposed impact is strictly for
wetland or stream mitigation, list and describe the impact in Section VIII below. If additional
space is needed for listing or description, please attach a separate sheet.
1. Provide a written description of the proposed impacts: Possibly one pole will be direct-
embedded in jurisdictional wetlands. All other work will be in uplands The proposed
overhead electric transmission line will cross over the BNP intake canal (a Section 10 water
2. Individually list wetland impacts. Types of impacts include, but are not limited to
mechanized clearing, grading, fill, excavation, flooding, ditching/drainage, etc. For dams,
separately list impacts due to both structure and floodina.
Wetland Impact
Site Number
(indicate on map)
Type of Impact Type of Wetland
(e.g., forested, marsh,
herbaceous, bog, etc.) vLocated within
100-year
(e es/no) Flos/no) Distance to
Nearest
Stream
(linear feet) Area of
Impact
(acres)
N/A

Total Wetland Impact (acres) N/A
3. List the total acreage (estimated) of all existing wetlands on the property: Several
hundred, including surface water and wetlands.
4. Individually list all intermittent and perennial stream impacts. Be sure to identify temporary
impacts. Stream impacts include, but are not limited to placement of fill or culverts, dam
construction, flooding, relocation, stabilization activities (e.g., cement walls, rip-rap, crib
walls, gabions, etc.), excavation, ditching/straightening, etc. If stream relocation is proposed,
plans and profiles showing the linear footprint for both the original and relocated streams
must be included. To calculate acreage, multit)ly lenath X width. then divide by 43.560.
Stream Impact
Number
(indicate on ma)
Stream Name
Type of Impact Perennial or
Intermittent? Average
Stream Width
Before Impact Impact
Length
(linear feet) Area of
Impact
(acres)
N/A

Updated 11/1/2005
Page 4 of 9
Y
Total Stream Impact (by length and acreage) N/A N/A
5. Individually list all open water impacts (including lakes, ponds, estuaries, sounds, Atlantic
Ocean and any other water of the U.S.). Open water impacts include, but are not limited to
fill, excavation, dredging, flooding, drainage, bulkheads, etc.
Open Water Impact
Site Number
(indicate on ma) Name of Waterbody
(if applicable)
Type of Impact Type of Waterbody
(lake, pond, estuary, sound, bay,
ocean, etc.) Area of
Impact
(acres)
N/A

Total Open Water Impact (acres) N/A
6. List the cumulative impact to all Waters of the U.S. resulting from the project:
Stream Impact (acres): N/A
Wetland Impact (acres): N/A
Open Water Impact (acres): N/A
Total Impact to Waters of the U.S. (acres) N/A
Total Stream Impact (linear feet): N/A
7. Isolated Waters
Do any isolated waters exist on the property? ® Yes ? No
Describe all impacts to isolated waters, and include the type of water (wetland or stream) and
the size of the proposed impact (acres or linear feet). Please note that this section only
applies to waters that have specifically been determined to be isolated by the USACE.
8. Pond Creation
If construction of a pond is proposed, associated wetland and stream impacts should be
included above in the wetland and stream impact sections. Also, the proposed pond should
be described here and illustrated on any maps included with this application.
Pond to be created in (check all that apply): ? uplands ? stream ? wetlands
Describe the method of construction (e.g., dam/embankment, excavation, installation of
draw-down valve or spillway, etc.): N/A
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stormwater requirement, etc.): N/A
Current land use in the vicinity of the pond: N/A
Size of watershed draining to pond: N/A Expected pond surface area: N/A
VII. Impact Justification (Avoidance and Minimization)
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 5 of 9
Specifically describe measures taken to avoid the proposed impacts. It may be useful to provide
information related to site constraints such as topography, building ordinances, accessibility, and
financial viability of the project. The applicant may attach drawings of alternative, lower-impact
site layouts, and explain why these design options were not feasible. Also discuss how impacts
were minimized once the desired site plan was developed. If applicable, discuss construction
techniques to be followed during construction to reduce impacts.
Wetlands/waters crossed by the proposed line relocation will be cleared by hand cutting. There
will be no discharge to waters/wetlands. One pole might have to be set in wetlands, depending
upon final line design. No heavy equipment will be allowed in waters/wetlands.
VIII. Mitigation
DWQ - In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0500, mitigation may be required by the NC
Division of Water Quality for projects involving greater than or equal to one acre of impacts to
freshwater wetlands or greater than or equal to 150 linear feet of total impacts to perennial
streams.
USACE - In accordance with the Final Notice of Issuance and Modification of Nationwide
Permits, published in the Federal Register on January 15, 2002, mitigation will be required when
necessary to ensure that adverse effects to the aquatic environment are minimal. Factors
including size and type of proposed impact and function and relative value of the impacted
aquatic resource will be considered in determining acceptability of appropriate and practicable
mitigation as proposed. Examples of mitigation that may be appropriate and practicable include,
but are not limited to: reducing the size of the project; establishing and maintaining wetland
and/or upland vegetated buffers to protect open waters such as streams; and replacing losses of
aquatic resource functions and values by creating, restoring, enhancing, or preserving similar
functions and values, preferable in the same watershed.
If mitigation is required for this project, a copy of the mitigation plan must be attached in order
for USACE or DWQ to consider the application complete for processing. Any application
lacking a required mitigation plan or NCEEP concurrence shall be placed on hold as incomplete.
An applicant may also choose to review the current guidelines for stream restoration in DWQ's
Draft Technical Guide for Stream Work in North Carolina, available at
littp:Hli2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetiands/strmgide.htnil.
Provide a brief description of the proposed mitigation plan. The description should provide
as much information as possible, including, but not limited to: site location (attach directions
and/or map, if offsite), affected stream and river basin, type and amount (acreage/linear feet)
of mitigation proposed (restoration, enhancement, creation, or preservation), a plan view,
preservation mechanism (e.g., deed restrictions, conservation easement, etc.), and a
description of the current site conditions and proposed method of construction. Please attach
a separate sheet if more space is needed.
No mitigation is proposed.
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 6 of 9
2. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (NCEEP). Please note it is the applicant's responsibility to contact the NCEEP at
[phone] to determine availability, and written approval from the NCEEP indicating
that they are will to accept payment for the mitigation must be attached to this form. For
additional information regarding the application process for the NCEEP, check the NCEEP
website at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/wrp/index.htm. If use of the NCEEP is proposed, please
check the appropriate box on page five and provide the following information:
Amount of stream mitigation requested (linear feet): N/A
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet): N/A
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
Amount of Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
IX. Environmental Documentation (required by DWQ)
1. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the use of
public (federaUstate) land? Yes ? No
2. If yes, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the
requirements of the National or North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
Note: If you are not sure whether a NEPA/SEPA document is required, call the SEPA
coordinator at [phone] to review current thresholds for environmental documentation.
Yes ? No ?
If yes, has the document review been finalized by the State Clearinghouse? If so, please
attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval letter. Yes ? No ?
X.? Proposed Impacts on Riparian and Watershed Buffers (required by DWQ)
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
required state and local buffers associated with the project. The applicant must also provide
justification for these impacts in Section VII above. All proposed impacts must be listed herein,
and must be clearly identifiable on the accompanying site plan. All buffers must be shown on a
map, whether or not impacts are proposed to the buffers. Correspondence from the DWQ
Regional Office may be included as appropriate. Photographs may also be included at the
applicant's discretion.
1. Will the project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233
(Meuse), 15A NCAC 2B .0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 02B .0243 (Catawba) 15A NCAC
2B .0250 (Randleman Rules and Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please
identify )? Yes ? No
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 7 of 9
2. If "yes", identify the square feet and acreage of impact to each zone of the riparian buffers.
If buffer mitigation is required calculate the required amount of mitigation by applying the
buffer multipliers.
* I Impact Required
Zone /..,...,.- F N Multiplier
I 1 I 13 (2 for Catawba)
2 1.5
Total I I I I
* Zone 1 extends out 30 feet perpendicular from the top of the near bank of channel; Zone 2 extends an
additional 20 feet from the edge of Zone 1.
3. If buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e.,
Donation of Property, Riparian Buffer Restoration / Enhancement, or Payment into the
Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as identified
within 15A NCAC 2B .0242 or .0244, or .0260.
XI. Stormwater (required by DWQ)
Describe impervious acreage (existing and proposed) versus total acreage on the site. Discuss
stormwater controls proposed in order to protect surface waters and wetlands downstream from
the property. If percent impervious surface exceeds 20%, please provide calculations
demonstrating total proposed impervious level.
Nonew_impervious surface will be created, other than the few square feet occupied by the
transmission poles themselves. The original contours will be maintained as well.
XII. Sewage Disposal (required by DWQ)
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of
wastewater generated from the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
N/A
XIII. Violations (required by DWQ)
Is this site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500) or any Buffer Rules?
Yes ? No
Is this an after-the-fact permit application? Yes ? No
XIV. Cumulative Impacts (required by DWQ)
Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in additional
development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality? Yes ? No
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 8 of 9
If yes, please submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with
the most recent North Carolina Division of Water Quality policy posted on our website at
http:/ih2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands. If no, please provide a short narrative description:
i
XV. Other Circumstances (Optional):
It is the applicant's responsibility to submit the application sufficiently in advance of desired
construction dates to allow processing time for these permits. However, an applicant may
choose to list constraints associated with construction or sequencing that may impose limits on
work schedules (e.g., draw-down schedules for lakes, dates associated with Endangered and
Threatened Species, accessibility problems, or other issues outside of the applicant's control).
1 `- d
Applicant/Agent' Signature Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 9 of 9

20061010
Natural Resource Assessment for the
Brunswick Plant Line Relocation
Brunswick County, North Carolina
Prepared for:
Prwress Energy
Raleigh, North Carolina
Prepared by:
®19pp ESI
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC.
524 South New Hope Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27610
April 2006
E
y
April 25, 2006
Mr. Baxter Matheson
Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc.
P.O. Box 1981
TTP 18
Raleigh, NC 27602-1981
Re: Brunswick Plant Line Relocation
Brunswick County, North Carolina ER06-039.02
Dear Mr. Matheson:
Thank you for contacting Environmental Services, Inc., (ESI) concerning the above referenced project.
At your request, we have conducted a jurisdictional wetland and stream delineation, Global
Positioning System (GPS) data collection, preliminary Threatened and Endangered species habitat
evaluation, preliminary SHPO coordination, and report preparation for the Brunswick Plant Line
Relocation project located in Brunswick County, North Carolina.
This letter report outlines our findings pertaining to the jurisdictional delineation and Threatened and
Endangered species habitat evaluation. At your request, ESI will contact the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers to determine if they wish to review the delineation effort. The results of the preliminary
cultural resources assessment will be submitted to you under separate cover.
Please call John Metrailer or myself if you have any questions or comments. As always, thank you for
allowing ESI to provide services to Progress Energy Carolinas.
Sincerely,
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC.
Jeff Harbour, PWS
Asst. Vice President
Ecology Division Manager
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC.
Natural Resource Investigation for the
Brunswick Plant Line Relocation
Brunswick County, North Carolina
April 2006
Proiect Description
The proposed Brunswick Plant Line Relocation project is located in Brunswick County, North
Carolina. Progress Energy Carolinas (PEC) proposes to create a new 230 kV line along approximately
1.7 miles of existing PEC transmission lines.
The project route is depicted on both U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) maps and aerial photograph
maps. The Brunswick Plant Line Relocation project is comprised of two sections. The first section
runs parallel to an existing 230 kV line and is located in the northeastern section of the Brunswick
Plant property off SR 87 approximately 1 mile north of Southport, NC. The project study area for this
first section is comprised of 50 feet (ft) on either side of the staked centerline. The second section
starts approximately 540 ft south of the northern end of the first line and extends until it crosses the
intake water canal. The line consists of one bend in its center at approximately a 110° angle, setting
the apogee at approximately 660 ft from the first section. The project study area for the second section
is comprised of 50 ft on either side of the staked centerline.
Proiect Understanding
Environmental Services, Inc., (ESI) was tasked by PEC to provide the following services for the
Brunswick Plant Line Relocation project:
• Jurisdictional wetland and stream delineation
• GPS data collection
• Preliminary protected species assessment
• Preliminary cultural resource assessment
• U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) field review (if deemed necessary)
• Report and graphics preparation.
ESI was asked to delineate all jurisdictional features within the proposed transmission line route
located throughout the two sections mentioned above. The centerline of both sections had been
previously identified and staked in the field by a registered surveyor.
Background Research
Prior to the initiation of field efforts, available sources were reviewed, including the USGS 7.5-minute
topographic digital raster graphics for Southport and Kure Beach, NC (USGS 1988 & 1992), National
Wetland Inventory (NWI) quadrangle (Southport, NC), aerial photographs of the proposed alignment
as obtained by ESI, and Natural Resource Conservation Service (MRCS) soils mapping for Brunswick
County (USDA 1986). Additionally, records kept by the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program
2
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC.
(NCNHP) concerning any known occurrences of federally Threatened or Endangered species were
reviewed on 24 March 2006.
Water Resources
The project study area is in the Cape Fear River basin and is located in USGS hydrologic unit 03030005.
A Best Usage Classification (BUC) is assigned to waters of North Carolina based on the existing or
contemplated best usage of various bodies of water. The Cape Fear River, Walden Creek, Gum Log
Creek, and Nancy's Creek are the four main streams associated with the project study area. The Cape
Fear River, Walden Creek, and Nancy's Creek are not in the project study area. However, all of these
bodies of water are adjacent to the project study area and connected to each other. The route directly
crosses Gum Log Branch.
Walden Creek [Stream Index Number 18-88-1], Nancy's Creek [SIN 18-88-1-3], and Gum Log
Branch [SIN 18-88-1-3-1] have been assigned a BUC of SC; Sw, HQW (NCDENR 2005). The Cape
Fear River [SIN 18-(87.5)] has been assigned a Best Usage Classification of SA; HQW (NCDENR
2005). Class SC waters are salt waters protected for secondary recreation, fishing, aquatic life
(including propagation and survival), and wildlife. Secondary recreation is any activity involving
human body contact with water on an infrequent and incidental basis. The Sw classification indicates
waters which have low velocities and other natural characteristics which are different from adjacent
streams. Class SA waters are suitable for commercial shellfishing and all other tidal saltwater uses.
The supplemental classification HQW indicates High Quality Waters, which are rated as excellent
based on biological and physical/chemical characteristics through Division monitoring or special
studies, native and special native trout waters (and their tributaries) designated by the Wildlife
Resources Commission, primary nursery areas (PNA) designated by the Marine Fisheries Commission
and other functional nursery areas designated by the Wildlife Resources Commission, critical habitat
areas designated by the Wildlife Resources Commission or the Department of Agriculture.
Section 404 and CAMA Wetlands and Surface Waters
Section 404
The ACOE and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) jointly define wetlands as:
"Those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water 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. Wetlands generally include
swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas."
According to the 1987 ACOE Wetland Delineation Manual (DOA 1987), areas must exhibit three
distinct characteristics to be considered jurisdictional wetlands: 1) display a prevalence of hydrophytic
(water tolerant) plants, 2) area dominated by hydric soils, and 3) possess sufficient wetland hydrology
indicators within 12 inches of the ground surface. Vegetation, soils, and hydrology data were
collected during the field surveys in order to determine whether the three criteria were satisfied within
3
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC.
each potential wetland area. The wetland delineation effort associated with this project occurred the
week of 28 March 2006.
Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA)
The North Carolina Division of Coastal Management (NCDCM) and the Coastal Resources
Commission (CRC) oversee LAMA, which affords additional protection to certain areas located
within any of the twenty (20) coastal counties. Activities that impact certain coastal wetlands that are
under the jurisdiction of CAMA, also known as Areas of Environmental Concern (AEC), typically
require CAMA approval as granted through the NCDCM. Pre-determined areas within the project
study area will qualify as AECs because they meet one or more of the following criteria defining
AECs: 1) public trust waters; 2) estuarine waters; 3) coastal shorelines; and 4) coastal wetlands.
Public trust waters are the coastal waters and submerged lands that every North Carolinian has the
right to use. These areas often overlap with estuarine waters, but also include many "inland" fishing
waters as defined by the North Carolina Marine Fisheries Commission. Estuarine waters are the
state's oceans, sounds, tidal rivers and their tributaries, which stretch across coastal North Carolina
and link to the other parts of the estuarine system: public trust areas, coastal wetlands and coastal
shorelines. Coastal shorelines include all lands within 75 feet of the normal high water level of
estuarine waters. Coastal wetlands include any marsh in the 20 coastal counties that regularly or
occasionally flood by lunar or wind tides, and includes one or more of the ten-listed CAMA plant
species (NCDCM 2002).
Wetland Delineation Results
Two (2) wetland areas subject to Section 404 jurisdiction and two (2) AECs under the jurisdiction of
CAMA were identified and delineated within the project study area. Wetland boundaries were flagged
with sequentially numbered pink-and-black striped and solid blue flagging. CAM wetlands were
delineated with sequentially numbered pink-and-black striped and solid orange flagging. Global
Positioning System (GPS) graphics depicting the approximate extent and location of the Section 404
wetlands and CAMA AECs were produced and are provided in Figures 2-4. ACOE Routine Wetland
Determination forms were completed during the delineation. Wetland data forms will be submitted to
the ACOE with our formal submittal for a site visit should PEC decide to proceed with a formal site
visit. ESI will provide PEC with copies of these forms at that time under separate cover.
Section 404 and CAMA Wetland Data
Three (3) wetland types occur along the project route: estuarine sub-tidal unconsolidated bottom
(EIUB), palustrine forested (PFO), and palustrine shrub-scrub (PSS) pursuant to the Cowardin
classification system (Cowardin et.al. 1979).
Dominant species within the estuarine subtidal wetlands include species such as common reed
(Phragmites australis) and smooth cordgrass (Spartina alterniora). These estuarine subtidal
wetlands are CAMA AECs and correspond to Wetlands 2a, 2b, and Wetland 4 as depicted on Figures
3 and 4. Wetlands 2a and 2b are the same system and consist primarily of open water associated with
the canal. A narrow fringe of tidal marsh vegetation occurs along each side. Wetland 4 consists of
Gum Log Braanch.
4
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC.
Palustrine forested and shrub-scrub wetlands correspond to Wetlands 1 and 3 as depicted on Figures 2
& 3. Dominant species within these wetlands include species such as common reed, wax myrtle
(Myrica cerifera), and loblolly pine (Pinus taeda). Table 1 contains the wetland data from the project
study area.
Table 1. Wetland data for the Brunswick Plant Line Relocation project.
Wetland
No. Cowardin Wetland
Classification Size
acres
1 PFO 0.05
2a EIUB 0.08
2b EIUB 0.08
3 PFO 0.14
4 E 1 UB 0.40
EIUB - Estuarine Subtidal Unconsolidated Bottom Total: 0.56 ac
PTO - Forested Wetland Total: 0.05 ac
PSS - Shrub-Scrub Wetland Total: 0.14 ac
TOTAL - 0.75 ac (includes open water attributed to canal)
Additional Features
The project study area route also contains several features that were not identified as currently
jurisdictional. Two small drainage ditches occur near Wetland 1. These man-made ditches appear to
be non jurisdictional and were not delineated. A separate feature along the route includes a man-made
spoil disposal pond along the south side of the canal (W2a &W2b). This feature appears to have been
previously used to temporarily hold water for industrial purposes and was likely created concurrently
with the adjacent canal. Soils in the feature are compacted, although hydric in nature, and evidence of
former hydrology is prevalent. ESI biologists did not classify this man-made area as jurisdictional
during this investigation. Additional information may be necessary to fully document this area to the
regulatory agencies.
Threatened and Endangered Species
Species with the federal classifications of Endangered (E), or Threatened (T), are protected under the
Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). The fifteen (15)
species listed in Table 2 carry the federal designation of E or T and are listed by the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS) as having ranges that are considered to extend into Brunswick County
based upon their most recent list dated 8 March 2006.
5
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC.
Table 2. Federal protected species for Brunswick County, NC.
Common Name Scientific Name Federal Habitat Biological
Status Present Conclusion
(T/E)' Y/N
American alligator Alligator misissippiensis T (S/A) Y Not Required
Bald eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus T Y Not Likely to
Adversely Affect
Eastern puma (=cougar) Puma concolor couguar E N No Effect
Green sea turtle Chelonia mydas T Y Not Likely to
Adversely Affect
Kemp's (=Atlantic) ridley Lepidochelys kempii E Y Not Likely to
sea turtle Adversely Affect
Leatherback sea turtle Dermochelys coriacea E Y Not Likely to
Adversely Affect
Loggerhead sea turtle Caretta caretta T Y Not Likely to
Adversely Affect
Piping plover Charadrius melodus T N No Effect
Red-cockaded Picoides borealis E N No Effect
woodpecker
Shortnose sturgeon Acipenser brevirostrum E Y Not Likely to
Adversely Affect
West Indian manatee Trichechus manatus E Y Not Likely to
Adversely Affect
Wood stork Mycteria americana E Y Not Likely to
Adversely Affect
Cooley's meadowrue Thalictrum cooleyi E N No Effect
Rough-leaved loosetrife Lysimachia asperulaefolia E N No Effect
Seabeach amaranth Amaranthus pumilus T N No Effect
'T-Threatened, E-Endangered, 5/A= l hreatened due to similarity of appearance
American alligator - The American alligator is a large reptile with a broad snout, a short neck, a
heavy body, and a laterally compressed tail. Adults are blackish or dark gray, but faint yellowish
crossbands are sometimes evident. The young are black with conspicuous yellow crossbands. The
American alligator inhabits fresh water swamps, marshes, abandoned rice fields, ponds, lakes, and
backwaters of large rivers. Females lay eggs in June and hatchlings emerge in late summer or early
fall (Martof et al. 1980). American alligator is listed as threatened based on the similarity in
appearance to other federally listed crocodilians; however, there are no other crocodilians within North
Carolina.
6
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC.
Habitat Present: Yes
Marginal habitat may occur within the project study area; however the saltwater environment
makes it much less desirable. NCNHP documents three occurrences of the American alligator
within 3.0 miles of the project study area from 1980, 1991, and 1994.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: Not Required
Bald eagle - Bald eagles typically feed on fish but may also take birds and small mammals. In the
Carolinas, the nesting season extends from December through May (Potter et al. 1980). Bald eagles
typically nest in tall, living trees in a conspicuous location near water and forage over large bodies of
water with adjacent trees available for perching (Hamel 1992). Preventing disturbance activities
within a primary zone extending 750 to 1,500 feet outward from a nest tree is considered critical for
maintaining acceptable conditions for eagles (USFWS 1987). The USFWS recommends avoiding any
disturbance activities, including construction and tree-cutting, within this primary zone. Within a
secondary zone, which starts at primary zone boundary and extends out to a distance of up to 1.3 miles
(6,864 feet) from a nest tree, construction and land-clearing activities should be restricted to the non-
nesting period. USFWS also recommends avoiding alteration of natural shorelines where bald eagles
forage, and avoiding significant land-clearing activities within 1,500 feet of roosting sites.
Habitat Present: Yes
Foraging habitat for the bald eagle occurs along the intake canal and Gum Log Creek. No nest
trees were observed nor were any eagles observed foraging. NCNHP does not document any
bald eagles as occurring within 3.0 miles of the project study area. Subsequent surveys for
nest trees should occur prior to any construction activities. This project is not expected to
adversely affect the bald eagle or its habitat.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: Not Likely to Adversely Affect
Eastern cougar - The eastern cougar is a possibly extinct eastern subspecies of the widespread
mountain lion species. This species was possibly extirpated from North Carolina by the late 1800s
although recent sporadic sightings have been reported from remote areas of the mountains and coastal
plain (Lee 1987). Mountain lions are large, long-tailed cats; adult males may measure 2.1 to 2.7
meters (7 to 9 feet) total length with females averaging 30 to 40 percent smaller (Handley 1991).
Adult mountain lion tracks measure approximately 9 centimeters (3.5 inches) (Lee 1987). Recent
specimens of mountain lion taken in North Carolina and elsewhere in mid-Atlantic states have proved
to be individuals of other subspecies that have escaped or been released from captivity (Lee 1987,
Handley 1991). The eastern cougar would require large tracts of relatively undisturbed habitat that
support large populations of white-tailed deer (Webster et al. 1985). The tracts of land in this project
area will be maintained and disturbed, therefore not suitable habitat.
Habitat Present: No
No large undisturbed tracks of land that support white-tailed deer are present in the project
study corridor. NCNHP has no records of this species within a 3.0 mile radius of the project
area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
7
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC.
Green sea turtle - The green sea turtle is a medium to large turtle (76 to 152 centimeters (30 to 60
inches) long, 100 to 295 kilograms (220 to 650 pounds) in weight) with a smooth, heart-shaped shell
(Martof et al. 1980). They are most commonly found in the Caribbean where they breed, although
individuals, usually immatures, are occasionally found along the North Carolina coast. Green sea
turtles are omnivorous, primarily eating jellyfish and seaweeds. Preferred nesting habitat is ocean-
fronting beaches.
Habitat Present: Yes
No coastal beaches are present in the project study area suitable for nesting. However, the
shallow estuarine waters do provide marginal foraging habitat, although it is unlikely that the
species would choose to utilize this area. NCNHP has no records of this species within a 3.0
mile radius of the project area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: Not Likely to Adversely Affect
Kemp's (=Atlantic) ridley sea turtle - The Kemp's ridley sea turtle is the smallest of the sea turtles
and is generally considered the most endangered species of sea turtle in the world (Palmer and
Braswell 1995). This species ranges from the Gulf of Mexico and the east coast, to Nova Scotia and
Europe. In addition to its small size, this species is discernible by the heart shaped carapace and gray
coloration. Kemp's ridley prefers shallow coastal waters, including sounds and the lower portions of
large rivers, where it feeds on crabs, shrimp, snails, clams, and some saltwater plants. Nearly all
members of this species are believed to nest on a short strand of ocean beach in the state of
Tamaulipas, Mexico. Only a single nesting record exists for North Carolina, on Long Beach in
Brunswick County (1992). The nearest suitable nesting habitat for this species is the Outer Banks
ocean beaches.
Habitat Present: Yes
No coastal beaches are present in the project study area suitable for nesting. However, the
shallow estuarine waters do provide marginal foraging habitat, although it is unlikely that the
species would choose to utilize this area. NCNHP has no records of this species within a 3.0
mile radius of the project area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: Not Likely to Adversely Affect
Leatherback sea turtle - The leatherback turtle is distinguished by its large size (46 to 70 inch
carapace, 650 to 1,500 lbs) and a shell of soft, leathery skin. This species is primarily tropical in
nature, but the range may extend to Nova Scotia and Newfoundland (Martof et al. 1980). The
leatherback is a powerful swimmer, often seen far from land; however, it sometimes moves into
shallow bays, estuaries, and even river mouths. Its preferred food is jellyfish, although the diet
includes other sea animals and seaweed. The leatherback generally nests on sandy, tropical beaches.
Habitat Present: Yes
No coastal beaches are present in the project study area suitable for nesting. However, the
shallow estuarine waters do provide marginal foraging habitat, although it is unlikely that the
species would choose to utilize this area. NCNHP has no records of this species within a 3.0
mile radius of the project area.
8
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: Not Likely to Adversely Affect
Loggerhead sea turtle - The loggerhead is the most common sea turtle on the coast of the Carolinas.
This species averages 79 to 120 centimeters (31 to 47 inches) in length and weighs from 77 to 227
kilograms (170 to 500 pounds) (Martof et al. 1980). The loggerhead is basically temperate or
subtropical in nature, and is primarily oceanic, but it may also be found in fresh water bays, sounds,
and large rivers. Bodies of water in the project area are probably not large enough to support this
species' foraging habitat. This species occurs along the coast of North Carolina from late April to
October. Preferred nesting habitat is ocean beaches, generally south of Cape Lookout. Traditionally,
the largest concentration of loggerhead nests each year is on Smith Island, at the mouth of the Cape
Fear River (Palmer and Braswell 1995).
Habitat Present: Yes
No coastal beaches are present in the project study area suitable for nesting. However, the
shallow estuarine waters do provide marginal foraging habitat, although it is unlikely that the
species would choose to utilize this area. NCNHP has no records of this species within a 3.0
mile radius of the project area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: Not Likely to Adversely Affect
Piping plover - Piping plovers are the smallest of the plovers found in South Carolina, measuring only
6 to 8 inches in length (Golder and Parnell 1987). These small birds occur along beaches above the
high tide line, sand flats at the ends of sand spits and barrier islands, gently sloping fore dunes,
blowout areas behind primary dunes, and wash-over areas cut into or between dunes (Dyer et al.
1987). Nests are most often on open, wide sandy stretches of beach similar to those associated with
inlets and capes.
Habitat Present: No
No coastal beaches are present in the project study area. NCNHP has no records of this
species within a 3.0 mile radius of the project area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
Red-cockaded woodpecker (RCW) - Primary habitat consists of mature to over-mature southern
pine forests dominated by loblolly (Pinus taeda), longleaf (P. palustris), slash (P. elliotii), and pond
pines (P. echinata). Nest cavities are constructed in the heartwood of living pines, generally older
than 60 years that have been infected with red-heart disease. Nest cavity trees typically occur in
clusters, which are referred to as colonies. Pine flatwoods or pine savannas that are fire maintained
serve as ideal nesting and foraging sites for this species. Development of a thick understory and
midstory within a given area usually deters nesting and foraging. Potential nest sites for RCW's
include pine and pine/hardwood stands greater than 60 years of age. Hardwood/pine stands (<50%
pine) greater than 60 years of age may also be considered potential nesting habitat if adjacent to
potential foraging habitat (Henry 1989). Foraging habitat is typically comprised of open pine/mixed
hardwood stands over 30 years of age (Henry 1989). Pines must comprise at least 60 percent of the
canopy in order to provide suitable foraging for RCW's. Somewhat younger pine stands may be
utilized if the trees have an average diameter at breast height (DBH) greater than or equal to 9 inches.
9
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC.
Foraging stands must be connected to other foraging areas or nesting areas in order to be deemed a
viable foraging site. Open spaces or unsuitable habitat 200 feet or more in width are considered
barriers to RCW foraging (USFWS 2003).
Habitat Present: No
No suitable nesting or foraging habitat for the RCW was identified within the project study
area. The areas containing live pine stems generally have a thick hardwood mid-story and
lack the clear "bole" necessary to be considered suitable nesting and/or foraging habitat for the
RCW. The lack and/or suppression of fire has also contributed to the thick understory and
mid-story. A review of NCNHP records indicates that three RCW records have been
documented within 3.0 miles of the proposed route (09/1992). No impact to this species is
expected as a result of this project due to the absence of suitable habitat.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
Shortnose sturgeon - The shortnose sturgeon is a bottom-feeding fish that occurs in Atlantic seaboard
rivers from the St. Johns River, Florida to eastern Canada. The sturgeon is anadromous, spending
most of the year in brackish estuarine environments and moving into freshwater only when spawning
(Gilbert 1989). Research suggests that the Lower Cape Fear River drainage area may contain the only
self-sustaining population of shortnose sturgeon in North Carolina.
Habitat Present: Yes
The intake canal presents possible habitat for the shortnose sturgeon. NCNHP records do not
document any occurrences of shortnose sturgeon in waters within 3.0 miles of the project
study area. Construction is not expected to alter the surface waters within the project study
area. Therefore, the project is not expected to have an adverse affect on the shortnose
sturgeon.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: Not Likely to Adversely Affect
West Indian manatee - The West Indian manatee is a large aquatic mammal that may wander from
Florida during summer to as far north as coastal Virginia (USFWS 1993). A vagrant manatee was
recently sighted (July 1994) in the Cape Fear River at the south end of the Wilmington port facility
(NCNHP records).
Habitat Present: Yes
The canal does represent suitable, although marginal habitat for this species. Due to the lack
of suitable aquatic vegetation for foraging, vagrant manatees visiting the lower Cape Fear
River system would not be expected within the study corridor. NCNHP has no records of this
species within a 3.0 mile radius of the project area. Therefore, the project is not expected to
have an adverse affect on the West Indian manatee.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: Not Likely to Adversely Affect
Wood stork - Wood storks do not breed in North Carolina, but a few disperse to southeastern North
Carolina following breeding season. During recent years, a small flock has been regularly present in
Brunswick County in mid- to late summer (NCNHP files). Storks are birds of freshwater and brackish
wetlands, primarily nesting in cypress or mangrove swamps. They feed in freshwater marshes, narrow
10
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC.
tidal creeks, or flooded tidal pools. Particularly attractive feeding sites are depressions in marshes or
swamps where fish become concentrated during periods of falling water levels.
Habitat Present: Yes
Due to the lack of mangrove or cypress swamps in the project area, nesting is unlikely. The
lower reaches of Gum Log Creek do offer the potential for foraging habitat in the mid- to late
summer months. It is unlikely that construction efforts will adversely affect the shallow
marsh areas. NCNHP has no records of this species within a 3.0 mile radius of the project
area. Therefore, the project is not expected to have an adverse affect on wood storks.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: Not Likely to Adversely Affect
Cooley's meadowrue - Cooley's meadowrue is a rhizomatous, perennial herb with a smooth stem; the
3-foot high plant is normally erect in full sun but lax in the shade. Leaves are ternately divided; the
leaflets, less than 1 inch long, are narrow, with untoothed margins. The small, petal-less, unisexual
flowers appear on an open panicle in June and the fruits, small ellipsoidal achenes, mature in August
and September. Moist bogs and savannas are the preferred habitat of Cooley's meadowrue. This
species is endemic to the southeastern Coastal Plain of North Carolina (11 locations) and one location
in Florida. Some form of disturbance is usually needed to sustain the open quality of the meadowrue's
habitat. Consequently, Cooley's meadowrue is sometimes found along utility corridors, roadside
margins, or other maintained areas. Cooley's meadowrue is threatened by fire suppression and land
disturbing practices such as silviculture or agriculture (USFWS 1994).
Habitat Present: No
The area immediately beneath the existing powerline does not lend itself as suitable habitat for
Cooley's meadowrue due to the absence of open, wet savannah- like areas. NCNHP has no
records of this species within a 3.0 mile radius of the project area. Therefore, the project will
have no effect on Cooley's meadowrue.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
Rough-leaved loosestrife - The rough-leaved loosestrife is a rhizomatous perennial that flowers from
late May to June with the seeds forming by August and capsules dehiscing in October. Rough-leaved
loosestrife typically occurs along the ecotone between long-leaf pine savannas and wetter, shrubby
areas, where lack of canopy vegetation allows abundant sunlight into the herb layer. The loosestrife is
endemic to Coastal Plain and Sandhill regions of the Carolinas. This species is fire maintained;
suppression of naturally occurring fires has contributed to the loss of habitat in our state. Drainage of
habitat may also have adverse effects on the plant (USFWS 1995).
Habitat Present: No
The existing powerline does not provide suitable habitat for rough-leaved loosestrife.
Ecotones between long-leaf pine savannah and pocosin or shrubby habitat is not present.
NCNHP has no records of this species within a 3.0 mile radius of the project area. Therefore,
the project is expected to have no effect on rough-leaved loosestrife.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
11
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC.
Seabeach amaranth - Seabeach amaranth is an annual that grows from seeds germinating from April
through July. The plant is succulent, sprawling or trailing, and may reach 2 feet in length. Its leaves
are succulent, rounded with an indented tip, and are clustered near the ends of the stems.
Inconspicuous flowers and fruits are produced in the leaf axils, typically beginning in July until frost.
This species occurs on barrier island beaches where its primary habitat consists of over-wash flats at
accreting ends of islands, and lower fore dunes and upper strands of non-eroding beaches. Seabeach
amaranth appears to be intolerant of competition and does not occur on well-vegetated sites. The only
remaining large populations of seabeach amaranth are in coastal North Carolina (USFWS 1996).
Habitat Present: No
The project area does not extend to any barrier island beaches; the preferred habitat of
seabeach amaranth. This species' general intolerance of well-vegetated sites would further
prevent it from growing in the project area. NCNHP has no records of this species within a
3.0 mile radius of the project area. The project is expected to have no effect on seabeach
amaranth due to lack of suitable habitat.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
Preliminary Cultural Resource Assessment
ESI submitted a letter to the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) on 3 April 2006 requesting
information regarding any known archaeological or cultural resources within the project study area.
No reply has been received as of the date of this submittal. ESI will forward the reply from SHPO to
PEC immediately upon receipt.
Summary
ESI identified and delineated four (4) wetland areas, two (2) of which are CAMA wetlands, within the
project study area. Wetlands and surface waters delineated within the project study area total
approximately 0.75 acres and consist of ElUB (including the open-water canal), PFO and PSS areas
under the jurisdiction of both Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and CAMA. The proposed project
will cross the canal in two locations, however direct impacts are not anticipated. Impacts to
jurisdictional wetlands and CAMA AECs should be avoided and minimized as much as practicable. A
site visit to verify the wetland delineation can be arranged if desired by PEC.
The project study area contains potential habitat for, but is Not Likely to Adversely Affect, the
following species: bald eagle, shortnose sturgeon, West Indian manatee, green sea turtle, Kemp's
ridley sea turtle, leatherback sea turtle, loggerhead sea turtle, and wood stork. The proposed project
will have No Effect on the Eastern puma, piping plover, red-cockaded woodpecker, rough-leaved
loosetrife, Cooley's meadowrue, and seabeach amaranth due to lack of suitable habitat.
Preliminary cultural resource information will be provided to PEC under separate cover once received
from SHPO.
12
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC.
REFERENCES
[DOA] Department of the Army Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands
Delineation Manual, Technical Report Y-87-1, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment
Station, Vicksburg, MS. 100 pp. + appendices.
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Goblet, and E.T. Laroe. 1979. Classification of Wetland and
Deepwater Habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, USFWS/OBS
79/31. U.S. Department of Interior. 131 pp.
Dyer, R.W., A. Hecht, C. Raithel, K. Terwilliger, and S. Melvin. 1987. Draft Atlantic Coast Piping
Plover Recovery Plan. Prepared for the Atlantic Coast Piping Plover Recovery Team for
Region 5, Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. 13 pp.
Gilbert, C.R. 1989. Species Profiles: Life Histories and Environmental Requirements of Coastal
Fishes and Invertebrates (Mid-Atlantic Bight)--Atlantic and Shortnose Sturgeons. Fish and
Wildlife Service Biological Report 82(11.122). U.S. Department of the Army Corps of
Engineers TR EL-82-4. 28 pp.
Golder, W.W. and J.F. Parnell. March 1987. The shorebird no one sees. Wildlife in North Carolina
51(3): 22-23.
Hamel, P.B. 1992. Land Manager's Guide to the Birds of the South. The Nature Conservancy,
Southeastern Region, Chapel Hill, NC. 437 pp.
Handley, C.O., Jr. 1991. Mammals. Pp. 539-616 in: K. Terwilliger (ed.), Virginia's Endangered
Species: Proceedings of a Symposium. The McDonald and Woodward Publishing Company,
Blacksburg, Virginia. 672 pp.
Henry, V. G. 1989. Guidelines for Preparation of Biological Assessments and Evaluations for the
Red-Cockaded Woodpecker. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Southeast Region, Atlanta,
Georgia. 13 pp.
Lee, D.S. 1987. Felis concolor True, Panther. Pp. 15-18 in M.K. Clark (ed.), Endangered,
Threatened, and Rare Fauna of North Carolina: Part I. A Re-evaluation of the Mammals.
Occasional Papers of the North Carolina Biological Survey 1987-3. 52 pp.
Martof, B.S., W.M.Palmer, J.R. Bailey, and J.R. Harrison, 111. 1980. Amphibians and Reptiles of the
Carolinas and Virginia. The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC. 264 pp.
[NCDENR] 2005. North Carolina Department of Environmental and Natural Resources. Accessed
January, 2006. http://h20.env.state.nc.us/bims.
[NCDCM] North Carolina Division of Coastal Management. 2002. CAMA Handbook for
Development in Coastal North Carolina. Internet Address: dcm2.enr.state.nc.us
Palmer, W.M. and A.L. Braswell. 1995. Reptiles of North Carolina. The University of North
Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC for the N.C. State Museum of Natural Sciences. 412 pp.
Potter, E.F., J.F. Parnell, and R.P. Teulings. 1980. Birds of the Carolinas. The University of North
Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC. 408 pp.
[USDA] United States Department of Agriculture. 1986. Soil Survey for Brunswick County, North
Carolina. 120 pp + maps.
13
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC.
[USFWS] United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 1987. Habitat Management Guidelines for the
Bald Eagle in the Southeast Region. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife
Service. 8 pp.
[USFWS] United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 1993. West Indian Manatee: Trichechus manatus
[Linnaeus]. In: Endangered and Threatened Species of the Southeastern United States (The
Red Book). U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Southeastern Region,
Atlanta, GA. 6 pp.
[USFWS] United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 1994. Cooley's Meadowrue Recovery Plan. U.S.
Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Atlanta, GA. 29 pp.
[USFWS] United Stated Fish and Wildlife Service. 1995. Rough-leaved loosestrife Recovery Plan.
U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Atlanta, GA. 32 pp.
[USFWS] United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 1996. Recovery Plan for Seabeach Amaranth. U.S.
Department of the Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Atlanta, GA. 59 pp.
[USFWS] United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 2003. Recovery plan for the red-cockaded
Woodpecker (Picoides borealis): second revision. U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service, Atlanta, GA. 296 pp.
[USGS] United States Geological Survey. 1988. Digital raster graphic of Kure Beach, NC.
[USGS] United States Geological Survey. 19992. Digital raster graphic of Southport, NC.
Webster, W.D., J.F. Parnell, and W.C. Biggs, Jr. 1985. Mammals of the Carolinas, Virginia, and
Maryland. The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC. 255 pp.
14
0:\Projects\2006\039\02\loc tion.dwg, 4/25/2006 8:36:41 AM
11 7
??,'} * ?, ,, . '3 ,?• , fit' €Will,
A 1 aY `? zv
of + .. r;``J • , ! ^ '
r "S"
, Match
• { il,? 0. Line
* t , f, ti , f Figure
3
1r < 7-- Forested 0.05 ac
st
It
t. w I
` I
%
Approximate Project ` 01t,
? I
Centerline
I= Approximate Project
Boundary* I
Jurisdictional Wetland
` ` CAMA AEC ''•
?r I
*Final cleared ROW limits may be
less than depicted study corridor.
0 100 200 "
.!
Feet f
1 inch equals 200 feet. ,;.

Progress Energy
Source: NC Fall 2003 Orthophoto,
Southport Quadrangle.
Fieldwork and Graphics by
Environmental Services, Inc. Disclaimer: Information represented on this map was derived
from secondary data sources and is to be used for general
planning purposes only. No warranties or representations of
accuracy are expressed or implied.
ENVIRONMENTAL Jurisdictional Area Detail Project: ER06039.02
SERVICES,
R
d R
524 Ne
H
tl Brunswick Plant Line Relocation Date: Apr 2006
+
oa
w
ope
oa
Raleigh,NOdh760 Carolina 27610
(919) 212-1 l
Wetland and Stream Identification Drwn/Chkd: AJS/JH
[phone] FAX
i Brunswick County, North Carolina
www.env
ronmentalservicesinc com Figure: 2 1 11111 0 :\Projects12 0 0 610 3 910 21details.dwg, 4125/2006 8:51:19 AM

-fie. ? ,? ? •.+._ ? ? «.
?" ,` y yyy??? ^
?? eke *A,
%
?* +
VV 2b**
AMA ?•*?.:?'"`' ,?, -*? ? ,? ? ?" ): ``?.
,?a = = 0.91 ac
I ?. S _ ? `• ??, ' ? 1, TRHw-?`?Y•R ,.? .1
t.'.T4' ?. Approximate Project
__ cR`r~`•.?''? Centerline
'?•'' T' y !1Y r j Approximate Project
A: ti Boundary"
W 3 Jurisdictional Wetland
W 2a"' _ . • Successional CAMA AEC
`? 9
CAMA - 0.14 ac Final cleared ROW limits may be
Y 0.79 ac = %,? * fi less than depicted study corridor.
-Includes fringe of coastal wetlands
and open water.
?? t r
0 100 200
i
Match Line ` 'A Feet
Figure 4i ??`' 1 inch equals 200 feet.
FE,,71-progress '. Disclaimer. Information represented on this map was denved
Source: NC Fall 2003 Orthopholo, Fieldwork and Graphics by from secondary data sources and is to be used for general
Energy Southport Quadrangle. Environmental Services, Inc planning purposes only. No warranties or representationsof
accuracy are expressed or implied.
ENVIRONMENTAL Jurisdictional Area Detail Project: ER06039.02
SERVICES, INC. Brunswick Plant Line Relocation Date: Apr2006
524 S. New Hope Road wT
Raleigh, Carolina 27610
(919) 21212--1176 760 lV Wetland and Stream Identification Drwn/Chkd: AJS/JH
_ (919'212-1707FAx Brunswick County, North Carolina
www.environmentalservicesinc. com Figure: 3
jects\2006\03902\details.dwg, 4125/2006 8:53:35 AM
, ,? ?• '1 '? t
?•i_,•_' ? . ? ? t - - - - - t1sf Match Line ems' ? a
'S------- _YS- - Figure3
a ^
e
-26
'-.:? _, ,
f`, `? ? ?..;...
, ;? . ? ? `gyp \\\ - ..? ;
?
.
4`. - .
T \\ '?•\\? -ham S I? 5 t I
4" •. .d

Man-made Temporary
Holding Pond
It. (Non-jurisdictional) ;
\
\ r
\\
,
\
r
\\ i
I
.w

_ ". 4'
\\ f

..? r ..
1 41
a

?1l
's. s A '.
CAMA
t
t Coastal Wetland
t{ 0
40 ac
,
.
S +
r.
r i
3 ? ' 4_ 4
'
Y 'r 1 ? {
o.d ' -?t1 ?1 a - ?4 '' -c7
? a
Ns a ? r.
0 ?
Approximate Project E?.
Centerline,
t
P
t
j A
i
ma
e
rojec
pprox
Boundary* , ,. d
Jurisdictional Wetland
CAMA AEC
'
Final cleared ROW limits may be
r,-
less than depicted study corridor. ,,; • , K '. °+t
0 100 200

Feet -,.
*
?
1 inch equals 200 feet.
+_%
!
I LOP)

Progress Energy I? I. -rl t: at. rp _ ]iths P as _ ?rl
Source: NC Fall 2003 Orthopho[o, Fieldwork and Gr phlcs 7 I ?•ro rry date sor rd s to t s d or y, eroi
Southport Quadrangle. Environmental Services, Inc. planning pposes only. N warranties or representat ons or
accuracy are expressed or pled.
ENVIRONMENTAL
SERVICES, INC.
524 5. New Hope Road
Raleigh,Nonh Carolina 27610
[phone]

wT
1V Jurisdictional Area Detail
Brunswick Plant Line Relocation

Wetland and Stream Identification Project: ER06039.02
Date: Apr 2006

Drwn/Chkd: AJS/JH
919'212-1707FAx
www. environmentalservicesinc. corn Brunswick County, North Carolina
Figure: 4
0:\Projects\2006\039\02\details.dwg, 4125/2006 8:55:04 AM
W
y
L
Y
O
M
N
?C:
w
O U
0-2
U ;J
.3
c
00
a
c?
U
N
cu
U
U)
C9971
nom:.,
LO
CO
N
T-
LO
H

,: v,

PERMANENT CROSSING
150
100
50
0
NOTE:
-MEAN HIGH WATER LEVEL IS 4.4'
Relolcate?' Line'.
off!
e
4n
Brun?Wck
r X11` .
VICINITY MAP
NOT TO SCALE
PROGRESS ENERGY CAROLINAS, INC. RALEIGH, NO
INTAKE CANAL CROSSING
BRUNSWICK PLANT UNIT 1 - DELCO
EAST 230KV LINE RELOCATION
LDCATIDN:SOUTHPORT, NC
DRAWN BY: EMH CHECKED BY: BAM
1-400' HORZ.
DATE:5/22/2006 SCALE: 1"=40' VERT.
DRAWING NO. TA-51252 SHEET NO. 1 OF 1
TEMPORARY CROSSING
MHWL = 4.4'
?,s StAT,y
6
-
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Peter 13. Sandbcek, Adminiorator
Michael F. Easley, Govcmor Office of Arcluves and F listory
l.isbeth C. Evans, Secretary Division of Historical Resources
Jeffrey J. Cron, Deputy Secretary David Drool:, Director
May 1, 2006
Scott Seibel
Environmental Services, Inc.
524 South New Hope Road
Raleigh, NC 27610
Re: Brunswick Plant Line Relocation, Brunswick County, ER 06-0995
Dear Mr. Seibel :
Thank you for your letter of April 4, 2006, concerning the above project.
We have conducted a review of the project and are aware of no historic resources that would be affected by
the project. Therefore, we have no comment on the project as proposed.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CFR
Part 800.
iThank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763. In all future
communication concerning this project, please cite the above-referenced tracking number.
Sincerely,
?eter Sandbeck

i
Location Mailing Addrm Telephone/Fax
ADMINISTRATION 507 N. Blount Street, Raleigh NC 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27 69 9461 7 [phone]/7338653
RESTORATION 515 N. Blount Street, Raleigh NC 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 276`194617 [phone]/715-0801
SURVEY & PLANNING 515 N. Blount Street, Raleigh, NC 4617 Mail Schice Center, Raleigh NC 276994617 [phone]/7154801