The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20181640 Ver 1_Draft PCN Support Document Nov. 29.SD_20181129 USACE Nationwide Permit 12 DWQ Water Quality Certification #4133 PRE-CONSTRUCTION NOTIFICATION & SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION FOR PIEDMONT NATURAL GAS LINE 24 REPLACEMENT PROJECT PITT COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA NOVEMBER 26, 2018 Prepared for: Piedmont Natural Gas Attn: Mr. Aaron Weldon 4720 Piedmont Row Drive Charlotte, North Carolina 28210 Prepared by: DRAMBY ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING, INC. A WOMAN MINORITY BUSINESS ENTERPRISE (WMBE) 8801 Fast Park Drive, Suite 301 Raleigh, North Carolina 27612 (757) 894-1673 www.drambyenv.com This page was intentionally left blank -i- TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................................... 1 1. PROJECT INFORMATION AND HISTORY .................................................................................................. 1 1.1 PROJECT LOCATION ....................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS ...................................................................................................................... 1 1.3 PROJECT PURPOSE AND DESCRIPTION .................................................................................................. 2 2. JURISDICTIONAL IMPACTS AND AVOIDANCE AND MINIMIZATION MEASURES .................. 2 3. COMPENSATORY MITIGATION PLAN ....................................................................................................... 4 4. ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION ............................................................................................................. 5 4.1 STREAM AND WETLAND DELINEATION ....................................................................................... 5 4.2 THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES ................................................................................ 8 4.3 CULTURAL AND HISTORIC RESOURCES ..................................................................................... 12 PCN and Permit Support Document Piedmont Natural Gas Line 24 Project -ii- LIST OF FIGURES FIGURES ARE LOCATED BEHIND FIGURE TAB, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED LIST OF APPENDICES APPENDIX A – PRE-CONSTRUCTION NOTIFICATION WITH PROJECT FIGURES APPENDIX B – THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES DATABASE INFORMATION APPENDIX C – CULTURAL RESOURCES INFORMATION APPENDIX D – WETLAND DELINEATION REPORT AND REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION APPENDIX E – COMPENSATORY MITIGATION AND RIPARIAN BUFFER CREDIT AVAILABILITY LETTERS APPENDIX F – HDD INADVERTENT RETURN CONTINGENCY PLAN PCN and Permit Support Document Piedmont Natural Gas Line 24 Project -ES-1- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The applicant, Piedmont Natural Gas (PNG), a subsidiary of Duke Energy, is an energy services company primarily engaged in the distribution of natural gas to more than 1 million residential, commercial, industrial and power generation customers in portions of North Carolina, South Carolina, and Tennessee including customers served by municipalities who are wholesale customers. PNG proposes to install 19 miles of 12-inch natural gas transmission line to replace an existing smaller transmission main to serve the Pitt County area (Figure 1, Appendix A). The approximate 650-acre transmission line corridor is located within the Tar-Pamlico and Neuse River Basins (Project Figures, Appendix A). Sections 401 and 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) require that any discharges of dredge or fill material into waters of the U.S. (WOUS), including wetlands, require a permit from the State and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). Based on the project activity and proposed impacts to jurisdictional resources, the applicant is required to submit a Pre-Construction Notification for verification of a USACE Nationwide Permit 12 and associated N.C. Department of Environmental Quality General Water Quality Certification #4133. The design team has attempted to avoid and minimize impacts to jurisdictional resources to the maximum extent practicable while still maintaining the project purpose and need. Despite avoidance and minimization efforts, temporary construction impacts to 12.831 acres of wetlands, 8,783 linear feet of stream channel, 0.159 acres of open water, and 244,610.53 square feet of riparian buffer are required. Additionally, permanent impacts within the maintained corridor are required to 21.324 acres of wetlands and 150,822.04 square feet of riparian buffer. Mitigation is proposed to offset unavoidable riparian buffer and forested wetland permanent conversion impacts. Converted forested wetlands are proposed to be mitigated at a 1:1 ratio via the N.C. Division of Mitigation Services State In-Lieu Fund. To mitigate for unavoidable permanent impacts to 150,822.04 square feet of riparian buffer, the applicant proposes to purchase 354,597.30 square feet from the state in-lieu fee fund via the N.C. Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) at the required ratios as depicted in the Pre-Construction Notification (PCN) in Appendix A. A letter from DMS is located in Appendix E. No federally threatened and/or endangered species or their habitats are known to exist within the project site. Database searches have been completed and are attached in Appendix B to assist with inter-agency coordination and review. Additionally, no known eligible historic structures or archeological features exist within the project site. Appendix C includes the results of a detailed Phase I Cultural Resources Survey completed by Circa Cultural Resources Management, LLC. The applicant is seeking authorization under the General Water Quality Certification #4133 from the NCDWQ and the USACE Nationwide Permit 12. The enclosed PCN and following sections of this permit support document provide a detailed description of the project and avoidance and minimization efforts. Also attached for review and approval is the detailed wetland delineation PCN and Permit Support Document Piedmont Natural Gas Line 24 Project - 3- https://drambyenv.sharepoint.com/TeamSite/Documents/Greenville PNG PCN Package Documents/For PNG Review 1 1.21/Draft PCN Support Document Nov. 26.SD.doc report and associated mapping and USACE data sheets completed by Dramby Environmental Consulting (DEC) and Vanasse Hangen Brustlin (VHB) staff. PCN and Permit Support Document Piedmont Natural Gas Line 24 Project -1- 1. PROJECT INFORMATION AND HIST ORY 1.1 PROJECT LOCATION The project area is comprised of approximately 650 acres of land along a proposed 19- mile project corridor in Pitt County, North Carolina in close proximity to the southern extent of the City of Greenville. The corridor begins near Nash Joyner Road to the west of the City and encircles southern Greenville from west to east before reaching the corridor terminus at Sunny Side Road. The project area is located in both the Tar-Pamlico and Neuse River Basins in HUC codes 03020202 and 03020103. Pitt County is in the Middle and Upper Atlantic Coastal Plain physiographic province. The project alignment runs through a broad, flat area with slopes generally less than 4 percent. The County spans the interstream divide separating the Tar-Pamlico and Neuse River Basins, and the interstream divide separating the Middle Neuse and Contentnea sub basins of the Neuse River Basin. 1.2 EXISTING SITE CO NDITIONS Most of the study area is comprised of existing agricultural land interspersed with residential developments, arterial and secondary roadways, utility lines, forested wood lots, and natural vegetation communities. Natural areas are early successional communities where previous land management occurred. The western portion of the study area also intersects the Greenville Southwest Bypass project, construction activities for which are ongoing. The project area is located on the Greenville SW and Greenville SE USGS Quadrangles (USGS 2018). The USGS maps show that more than half of the study area is com posed of agricultural “open” lands between various tracts of forested cover, residential development, or road networks. The study area crosses seven named streams and swamps, identified as Juniper Branch, Fork Swamp, Swift Creek, Horsepen Swamp, Indian Well Swamp, Gum Swamp, and the Tar River. Several unnamed headwater streams are also depicted as perennially flowing (as indicated by a solid blue line on the Quadrangles) tributaries to the above-referenced named systems. Although USGS maps show contour elevations that range between approximately 10 feet and 70 feet above mean sea level (msl), the higher end of that range is representative of the majority of the Line 24 project. Elevation decreases as the study area crosses natural drainageways, with the lowest elevation found along the expansive Tar River floodplain intersecting the eastern end of the project corridor. PCN and Permit Support Document Piedmont Natural Gas Line 24 Project -2- 1.3 PROJECT PURPOSE AND DESCRIPT ION The project purpose is to replace an existing smaller diameter natural gas transmission line (Line 24) with an approximate 19-mile, 12-inch natural gas transmission pipeline (Line 439) to increase the capacity to meet the natural gas demands of the growing Pitt County area. The Line 24 Replacement project consists of the installation of 19 miles of new 12-inch natural gas transmission pipeline (Line 439) to serve the Pitt County area. The project involves installing two valves settings along the route, tie-in's to Piedmont Natural Gas existing facilities, and also includes abandoning approximately 4 miles of existing smaller diameter transmission main (Line 24). A 4-mile portion of Line 24 will be grouted and capped during construction of Line 439. Line 24 is a smaller diameter, 7- mile transmission main, which will be fully retired in 2021 or 2022. Multiple roads are required along the proposed project corridor to provide adequate linkages to nearby roadways for construction equipment and machinery. The typical access road corridor will be 50-feet wide and will vary in length depending on proximity to main roads. Proposed access roads will utilize existing forest roads, farm roads, or other unpaved pathways to minimize impacts to existing natural areas, croplands and jurisdictional resources to the greatest extent possible. An upland 16.22-acre site was chosen at the eastern end of the proposed corridor as a required laydown yard for construction staging activities to avoid impacts to jurisdictional resources. Once all appropriate approvals and permits are received, the project will begin by clearing and grading the land. Then, crews will string, weld, and install the pipe via open cut installation, laying it on a gravel bed in the trench and then covering it with soil to natural grades. Pipelines typically are installed at a depth 3 feet or more in accordance with federal, state and local regulations. The Tar River crossing will be installed via HDD methods to avoid and minimize environmental impacts. Before operations begin, the pipe is carefully inspected and tested, as required by U.S. Department of Transportation regulations. The entire construction and installation process will be monitored by inspectors and will proceed as quickly and with as little impact as possible to the environment, landowners, and the community. State-approved erosion and sediment controls will be installed and monitored during construction to avoid and minimize erosion and sediment from leaving the site. 2. JURISDICTIONAL IMPAC TS AND AVOIDANCE AND MINIMIZATION MEASURE S Piedmont Natural Gas (PNG) carefully considers the following when planning a route: safety and reliability, environmental and cultural impacts, disruption to existing homes, businesses and local commuters. PNG is dedicated to finding the best possible route that causes the least amount of disruption and committed to work with property owners well in advance of construction to make as many reasonable accommodations as possible. PNG is committed to protecting significant cultural sites, environmentally sensitive areas PCN and Permit Support Document Piedmont Natural Gas Line 24 Project -3- and endangered species, and works with appropriate federal and state agencies to fully comply with all applicable laws and regulations. Beyond that, PNG has its own standards designed to minimize the impact of construction activities on surrounding areas. The design team has attempted to avoid and minimize impacts to WOUS to the maximum extent practicable, while still maintaining the project purpose. Despite avoidance and minimization efforts, the following jurisdictional impacts are required for this project: Selected Site Design Impacts: Impact Type Total Temporary Total Permanent Conversion Wetlands 12.831 acres 21.324 acres Streams 8,783 linear ft 0 linear feet Riparian Buffer 244,610.53 sq. ft 150,822.04 sq. ft Open Water 0.159 acres 0 acres Various design layouts were considered throughout the planning process in an attempt to avoid and minimize impacts to jurisdictional features to the maximum extent practicable, while maintaining an environmentally and economically feasible project. The applicant has reviewed potential options to offer the least environmentally damaging practicable alternative that still meets the project’s purpose and need. Initial design for the project required a 75-feet permanently maintained corridor and resulted in impacts as detailed in the table below. Initial Site Design Impacts: In an effort to reduce permanent impacts to wetlands and riparian buffers, the applicant re-evaluated site design and reduced the permanently maintained corridor to a width of 50-feet. The corridor width is required to maintain site lines and for maintenance protocols. In addition to reducing the permanent corridor width, temporary workspace has been eliminated in forested wetlands to reduce overall wetland impacts. Based on these site design changes, overall wetland impacts have been reduced by 8.975 acres and riparian buffer impacts by 80,039.51 square feet. Three horizontal directional drills (HDDs) have been included to avoid impacts to waters of the U.S., especially crossing the Tar River. Included in Appendix F is the HDD inadvertent return contingency plan. Permanent impacts to streams, rivers, or open water Impact Type Total Temporary Total Permanent Conversion Wetlands 20.85 acres 22.28 acres Streams 8,641.35 linear feet 0 linear feet Riparian Buffer 295,606.07 sq. feet 179,886.01 sq. feet Open Water 0.159 acres 0 acres PCN and Permit Support Document Piedmont Natural Gas Line 24 Project -4- is not anticipated as upon completion of the pipeline crossings, the sites will be returned to pre-existing conditions and contours. Wetlands impacted, with the exception of forested wetlands, will be restored to pre-existing conditions and contours. Forested wetlands will be restored to pre-existing contours but converted to PEM wetlands; however, will not result in permanent loss of wetlands. Additional avoidance and minimization measures included choosing a single laydown yard which does not impact any jurisdictional features. Additionally, proposed access roads utilize existing forest roads, farm roads, or other unpaved pathways to minimize new road construction within existing natural areas or croplands where feasible to avoid and minimize impacts to jurisdictional resources to the greatest extent possible. Further avoidance and minimization measures will be implemented during construction. PNG’s contractor will install all soil erosion and sediment control measures at the commencement of the project and provide maintenance and assure effectiveness throughout the duration of the project. Care will be taken to minimize downstream siltation. Raw banks will be seeded and mulched to prevent erosion and all spoils including organic soils, vegetation and debris will be removed from the site and properly disposed of in such a manner as to not erode into any body of water or wetland. Silt fencing will be placed where necessary to prevent sediment from leaving the work area. Wetland areas will have silt fencing and one layer of straw log installed no closer than 50 feet from point of wetland delineation. Topsoil stockpiles will be located to avoid erosion of said stockpile onto offsite areas. All environmental measures shall be per PNG design and construction standards. This project is not expected to impact public water supply, any shellfish harvesting areas, spawning grounds, waterfowl habitat; nor jeopardizes threatened or endangered species; nor disrupt the movement of aquatic life. Therefore, this activity should not cause or contribute to significant degradation of WOUS; adversely or substantially affect human health or welfare; life stages of organisms dependent upon the aquatic ecosystem; ecosystem diversity, productivity, or stability; or significantly degrade recreational, aesthetic, or economic values. 3. COMPENSATORY MITIGAT ION PLAN To offset unavoidable permanent conversion impacts to 21.324 -acres of PFO wetlands, the applicant proposes to purchase credits from the state in-lieu fee mitigation fund at a 1:1 ratio. To offset unavoidable permanent impacts to 150,822.04 square feet of riparian buffer, the applicant proposes to purchase 354,597.30 square feet from the state in-lieu fee fund at the required ratios as depicted in the PCN in Appendix A. A letter from the N.C. Division of Mitigation Services is attached in Appendix E. PCN and Permit Support Document Piedmont Natural Gas Line 24 Project -5- 4. ENVIRONMENTAL I NFORMATION 4.1 STREAM AND WETLAND DELINEATION A detailed wetland and stream investigation were conducted within the project study area. The delineation report is located in Appendix D. The onsite delineation of potential wetlands and other WOUS determined that non-tidal freshwater wetlands, perennial streams and waterbodies (including the Tar River), intermittent streams, open water features, and modified streams are present within the study area. Non-tidal Freshwater Wetlands Palustrine Forested (PFO) Wetlands PFO wetlands were the most abundant type of aquatic resource encountered within the Line 24 Project study area. PFO wetlands types were generally associated with three types of natural communities: 1) pine-dominated flatwoods; 2) mixed hardwood floodplains; and, 3) black willow/cypress swamps. Pine-dominated flatwoods with PFO wetlands were usually found on broad, temporarily-flooded interfluves with little to no topographic relief. Vegetation was typically characterized by trees such as loblolly pine (Pinus taeda), sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), and red maple (Acer rubrum). Understory species consisted of sweet pepperbush (Clethra alnifolia), coastal doghobble (Leucothoe axillaris), sweet bay (Magnolia virginiana), giant cane (Arundinaria gigantea), black highbush blueberry (Vaccinium fuscatum), and roundleaf greenbrier (Smilax rotundifolia). At times, floodplain wetland systems had overstory tree species similar to wet flatwoods, but with a higher abundance of red maple. Other hydrophytic trees commonly observed in floodplains included black gum (Nyssa sylvatica), swamp chestnut oak (Quercus michauxii), green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), and willow oak (Quercus phellos). Understory species included ironwood (Carpinus caroliniana), sweet bay, lizard’s tail (Saururus cernuus), and smallspike false nettle (Boehmeria cylindrica). Occasionally, floodplain systems encompassed broadly sloping transition zones before reaching lower-elevation riparian wetlands adjacent to perennial stream systems. Several cypress swamp wetlands were also found in the Tar River floodplain in the eastern portion of the project area. Conditions were very wet with deep surface water inundation extending to the edges of the swamp. Based on observations of stain lines 6 to 8 feet high along the bases of trees, overbank flooding of the Tar River provides a substantial volume of water on a regular basis to these floodplain wetlands. Dominant tree species include bald cypress (Taxodium distichum) and black willow (Salix nigra), overtopping a variety of sedges (Carex spp.) mixed with other herbaceous hydrophytes mentioned above. PCN and Permit Support Document Piedmont Natural Gas Line 24 Project -6- Palustrine Scrub-Shrub (PSS) Wetlands PSS wetlands in the study area were occasionally observed in recently cleared forest communities (e.g., cutovers) from 5 to 15 years in age, or as fringe communities in larger wetland complexes. Community composition was representative of that found in pine-dominated flatwoods, suggesting the eventual regeneration and succession back to a forested condition. Dense, low-diversity mixtures of loblolly pine, sweetgum, sweet bay, woolgrass (Scirpus cyperinus), and common rush (Juncus effusus) were prevalent in cutover PSS wetlands. In comparison, PSS wetland fringe communities had a higher diversity of hydrophytic species with additions such as elderberry (Sambucus nigra), wingleaf primrose-willow (Ludwigia decurrens), woolgrass, marsh seedbox (Ludwigia palustris), and several smartweed species (Persicaria spp.) Palustrine Emergent (PEM) Wetlands PEM wetlands were typically found within land use types where vegetation had been recently modified or clear-cut. For instance, several large PEM wetlands were in expansive “cutover” sites dominated by herbaceous species, with some vegetation regeneration (but usually less than 3 feet in height). Water was often found pooling in micro depressions associated with minor elevation changes. Examples of plant species observed in these recently cleared wetlands include common rush, woolgrass, Maryland meadowbeauty (Rhexia mariana), sweet bay, jewelweed (Impatiens capensis), arrowleaf tearthumb (Persicaria saggitata), cane (Arundinaria tecta), and roundleaf greenbrier. Other emergent wetlands were found as part of maintained yards or newly fallow fields with little to no woody vegetation. Hydrology was present either from groundwater discharge zones near the soil surface (via endosaturation), or from ponded water collecting after rain events on restrictive soils, creating episaturated conditions. Dominant hydrophytes observed to be present included rice cutgrass (Leersia oryzoides), common rush, tall yelloweyed grass (Xyris platylepis), and various beaksedges (Rhynchospora spp.). These areas are continually maintained either via mowing or agricultural practices and connect to larger wetland complexes. Non-tidal Streams and Waterbodies Palustrine Unconsolidated Bottom (PUB) Waterbodies PUB wetlands were less abundant than other aquatic resources found within the study area. These features were observed to be entirely unvegetated and had substrate conditions that met the Cowardin et al. (1979) parameters applied to open waterbodies under the PUB designation. Riverine Perennial (R2 and R3) Stream Channels Riverine upper perennial (R3) stream systems were usually found in association with drainageways in which USGS maps show named stream or swamp systems. As shown on the figure in Appendix A, these include Horsepen Swamp and Swift Creek (Figure 4-5 to Figure 4-7), Fork Swamp (Figure 4-11), Indian Well Swamp PCN and Permit Support Document Piedmont Natural Gas Line 24 Project -7- (Figure 4-14), and Juniper Branch (Figure 4-16). The Tar River (Figure 4-22) is classified as a riverine lower perennial (R2) system and is the only waterbody in the project area listed as a navigable waterbody. Most perennial streams onsite range from 5 to 15 feet in width and are found within historically channelized systems with near-vertical banks. Stream bed conditions in the thalweg are often dynamic (e.g., variable sediment deposition, with increasingly embedded substrates) because of high volume flow events and stream bank erosion. Nevertheless, stream flow was observed throughout summer site visits in 2017 and 2018. Riverine Intermittent (R4) Stream Channels Riverine intermittent streams identified onsite were mostly limited to headwater drainages between milepost 15 and milepost 19 (Figure 4-18 to Figure 4-21, Appendix A of Wetland Delineation Report), where the seasonal water table and base flow evidently drop below the stream bed during drier periods of the year. However, instream conditions were reflective of persistent stream flow occurring during spring-season increases in rainfall/water table levels. Similar to the perennial streams within the study area, intermittent streams were observed with a clearly defined OHWM reflective of physical characteristics associated with regularly flowing water (e.g., bed and bank, sediment sorting, etc.). Intermittent streams were assessed using the Identification Methods for the Origins of Intermittent and Perennial Streams from the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). Scoresheets are provided in Appendix C of the Wetland Delineation Report. Modified Streams Due to the active agricultural land use characteristic of the land within the proposed corridor, modified stream features were frequently identified in ditches that had connectivity to larger aquatic/wetland systems. The cumulative size of all modified stream features across the study was approximately 13,224 linear feet. Each modified stream identified was generally observed to have evidence of conveyance of surface water between palustrine and/or riverine systems, and an ordinary high water mark (OHWM). Modified streams were assessed using the Identification Methods for the Origins of Intermittent and Perennial Streams from the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). Scoresheets for each modified stream are provided in Appendix C of the Wetland Delineation Report. Upland Communities Upland community types identified within the study area predominantly consisted of existing agricultural fields currently used for soybean, peanut, and corn production. Residential areas scattered between agricultural land uses often had maintained lawns or were bordered by upland forest communities buffering the edges of wetlands. Occasional upland islands were located within wetlands where high points have persisted over time, supporting dominant upland species such as white oak (Quercus alba), black cherry (Prunus serotina), winged sumac (Rhus PCN and Permit Support Document Piedmont Natural Gas Line 24 Project -8- copallinum), and tulip tree (Liriodendron tulipifera). In recently cut forests, upland conditions were indicated by a prevalence of dense winged sumac and tulip tree growth in the shrub stratum, often densely intertwined with sawtooth blackberry (Rubus argutus). In most cases, upland soil conditions were reflective of aerobic substrate conditions in the upper 12 inches of the soil profile. With soil colors typically in the brown chroma range near the soil surface and a lack of soil saturation (and other wetland hydrology indicators) during normal precipitation conditions. DEC and PNG are requesting a Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination (PJD) of the delineation as part of the permit application review. A detailed wetland delineation report with USACE wetland determination data forms are provided in Appendix D. 4.2 THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES The U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Information, Planning and Conservation System (IPaC System) and North Carolina Natural Hertiage Program (NHP) Data Explorer was used to identify potential threatened and endangered species as well as critical habitats that may occur in and around the proposed project area. The results of the database search are included in Appendix B and a summary of the results is provided below. Further coordination with resource agencies will be conducted during permit review to determine if any surveys will be required. Based on IPaC search, the following 3 species are listed as federally threatened or endangered within or adjacent to the project study area: • West Indian Manatee (Trichechus manatus): The West Indiant Manatee is listed as a federally threatened species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Based on the habitat requirements, this project is not likely to impact this species. Habitat requirements are described by the USFWS as: “Manatees live in marine, brackish, and freshwater systems in coastal and riverine areas throughout their range. Preferred habitats include areas near the shore featuring underwater vegetation like seagrass and eelgrass. They feed along grass bed margins with access to deep water channels, where they flee when threatened. Florida manatees can be found throughout Florida for most of the year. However, they cannot tolerate temperatures below 68 degrees Fahrenheit for extended periods of time, and during the winter months these cold temperatures keep the population concentrated in peninsular Florida. Many manatees rely on the warm water from natural springs and power plant outfalls. During the summer manatees expand their range, and on rare occasions are seen as far north as Massachusetts on the Atlantic coast and as far west as Texas on the Gulf coast. Manatees may travel hundreds of miles during a year’s time, preferring to travel along channels and shorelines.” PCN and Permit Support Document Piedmont Natural Gas Line 24 Project -9- • Red-cockaded Woodpecker (Picoides borealis): The Red-cockaded Woodpecker is listed as a federally endangered species under the ESA. There are four historic Red- cockaded Woodpecker (RCW) populations ranging from approximately 7 to 13 miles away from the project area. Historic populations are defined as ones where no observation has been made for 25 years or greater. The RCW’s status for Pitt County is Historic, so surveys will not likely be required for this species. The habitat requirements are described by the USFWS as: “The red-cockaded woodpecker makes its home in mature pine forests. Longleaf pines (Pinus palustris) are most commonly preferred, but other species of southern pine are also acceptable. While other woodpeckers bore out cavities in dead trees where the wood is rotten and soft, the red-cockaded woodpecker is the only one which excavates cavities exclusively in living pine trees. Cavities are excavated in mature pines, generally over 80 years old. The older pines favored by the red- cockaded woodpecker often suffer from a fungus called red heart disease which attacks the center of the trunk, causing the inner wood, the heartwood, to become soft. Cavity excavation takes one to six years. The aggregate of cavity trees is called a cluster and may include 1 to 20 or more cavity trees on 3 to 60 acres. The average cluster is about 10 acres. Cavity trees that are being actively used have numerous, small resin wells which exude sap. The birds keep the sap flowing apparently as a cavity defense mechanism against rat snakes and possibly other predators. The typical territory for a group r anges from about 125 to 200 acres, but observers have reported territories running from a low of around 60 acres, to an upper extreme of more than 600 acres. The size of a particular territory is related to both habitat suitability and population density.” • Dwarf Wedgemussel (Alasmidonta heterodon): The Dwarf Wedgemussel is listed as a federally endangered species under the ESA. Habitat requirements are described by the USFWS as: “The dwarf wedgemussel appears to be a generalist in terms of its preference for stream size, substrate and flow conditions – it inhabits small streams less than five meters wide to large rivers more than 100 meters wide; it is found in a variety of substrate types including clay, sand, gravel and pebble, and sometimes in silt depositional areas near banks; and it usually inhabits hydrologically stable areas, including very shallow water along streambanks and under root mats, but it has also been found at depths of 25 feet in the Connecticut River. Dwarf wedgemussels are often patchily distributed in rivers. Historically, the dwarf wedgemussel was found from the Petitcodiac River in New Brunswick, Canada to the Neuse River in North Carolina, and was found in 15 major Atlantic slope river systems. It is now extinct in Canada, extirpated in the Neuse River, and present in low densities through-out much of its former range. It is known from 54 locations in 15 major watersheds, with the largest populations in the Connecticut River watershed. North Carolina supports the greatest number of PCN and Permit Support Document Piedmont Natural Gas Line 24 Project -10- known sites: Neuse River Basin: Orange County, Wake County, Johnston County, Wilson County, and Nash County; Tar River Basin: Person County, Granville County, Vance County, Franklin County, Warren County, Halifax County, and Nash County. Unfortunately, most of these populations are very small and isolated.” The NHP Data explorer (state listed species) was used to further examine potential protected species. The nearest occurrence of listed species in the NHP Data Explorer more than 1 mile away from the project area include: • West Indian Manatee (see above for habitat description). • Roanoke Slabshell (Elliptio roanokensis): The Roanoke Slabshell is listed as a state threatened species. Habitat requirements are described by the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) as: “In the Tar River, the Roanoke slabshell is usually found associated with the deeper channels near shore in relatively fast flowing water. The substrate consists of coarse to medium sized sands and small gravel. The species is also associated with coarser substrates, such as a mix of gravel and cobble seen in the Cape Fear River in Harnett County.” • Yellow Lance (Elliptio lanceolata): The Yellow Lance is a state threatened species. Habitat requirements are described by the USFWS as: “The yellow lance is a sand-loving species often found buried deep in clean, coarse to medium sand, although it can sometimes be found in gravel substrates. Yellow lances often are moved with shifting sand and eventually settle in sand at the downstream end of stable sand and gravel bars. This species depends on clean, moderate flowing water with high dissolved oxygen. This species is found in medium-sized rivers to smaller streams.” • Tidewater Mucket (Leptodea ochracea): The Tidewater Mucket is a state threatened species. Habitat requirements are described by the NCWRC as: “The tidewater mucket appears to be somewhat of a generalist in that it has been documented from lakes, ponds, canals, streams, and rivers. It is most often found in sand/silt substrates; in Lake Waccamaw, the highest density of this species was found in the "northwest shallow sand subregion" (Porter 1985).” Species listed in the vicinity of project area (~0.25 miles east of project area) include: • Star-nosed Mole (Condylura cristata): The Star-nosed Mole is a special concern species in North Carolina. Habitat requirements are described by North Carolina Parks as: “Almost strictly in wetland habitats; swamps, bottomlands, bogs, marshes, wet PCN and Permit Support Document Piedmont Natural Gas Line 24 Project -11- thickets, moist meadows, etc., are favored habitats. They can also be found along streams and springs in hilly topography, especially in the mountains.” • The Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) is protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGPA) and may occur within or adjacent to the study area. Summary of Recommendations for Federal and State Species Species Status Habitat Conclusion West Indian Manatee (Trichechus manatu)s FT, ST Manatees live in marine, brackish, and freshwater systems in coastal and riverine areas throughout their range. Preferred habitats include areas near the shore featuring underwater vegetation like seagrass and eelgrass No suitable habitat Red-cockaded Woodpecker (RBW) (Picoides borealis) FE The red-cockaded woodpecker makes its home in mature pine forests. Longleaf pines (Pinus palustris) are most commonly preferred, but other species of southern pine are also acceptable. While other woodpeckers bore out cavities in dead trees where the wood is rotten and soft, the red-cockaded woodpecker is the only one which excavates cavities exclusively in living pine trees Historic Status in Pitt County Dwarf Wedgemussel (Alasmidonta heterodon) FE The dwarf wedgemussel appears to be a generalist in terms of its preference for stream size, substrate and flow conditions – it inhabits small streams less than five meters wide to large rivers more than 100 meters wide; it is found in a variety of substrate types including clay, sand, gravel and pebble, and sometimes in silt depositional areas near banks; and it usually inhabits hydrologically stable areas. Not present within Pitt County Roanoke Slabshell (Elliptio roanokensis) ST In the Tar River, the Roanoke slabshell is usually found associated with the deeper channels near shore in relatively fast flowing water. The substrate consists of coarse to medium sized sands and small gravel. Suitable habitat present- nearest occurrence is greater than one mile from project area. Not likely to adversely affect. Yellow Lance (Elliptio lanceolata) ST The yellow lance is a sand-loving species often found buried deep in clean, coarse to medium sand, although it can sometimes be found in gravel substrates. Suitable habitat present- nearest occurrence is greater than one mile from project area. Not PCN and Permit Support Document Piedmont Natural Gas Line 24 Project -12- Species Status Habitat Conclusion This species is found in medium-sized rivers to smaller streams. likely to adversely affect. Tidewater Mucket (Leptodea ochracea) ST The tidewater mucket appears to be somewhat of a generalist in that it has been documented from lakes, ponds, canals, streams, and rivers. It is most often found in sand/silt substrates. Suitable habitat present- nearest occurrence is greater than one mile from project area. Not likely to adversely affect. Star-nosed Mole (Condylura cristata) SSC Almost strictly in wetland habitats; swamps, bottomlands, bogs, marshes, wet thickets, moist meadows, etc., are favored habitats. They can also be found along streams and springs in hilly topography, especially in the mountains Not likely to adversely affect. Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) FP The bald eagle prefers habitat near lakes, large rivers, and shorelines of sounds and bays. The bird requires tall, isolated trees for perching and nesting. Potential to occur; During nesting season, a buffer of at least 660ft around any nests will be maintained. FE- Federally Endangered, FT- Federally Threatened, FP- Federally Protected, SE- State Endangered, ST- State Threatened, SSC- State Species of Concern 4.3 CULTURAL AND HISTORIC RESOURCES Historic maps and records housed at the Library of Congress, city direct ories, census data, slave records, North Carolina site forms and reports and the County were reviewed to determine if cultural and historic resources were located in the project area. The background archives review indicated that there were not any previously identified resources in the project area. A phase I cultural resource survey was recommended following coordination with the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) (see Appendix C for letter). A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey was conducted by Circa Cultural Resources Management, LLC (Circa) in the project area to determine if cultural resources would be impacted by the project. The results of the Phase I Cultural Survey (draft report) are provided in Appendix C and a summary of conclusions are below. These findings are awaiting site numbers so the report can be finalized and submitted for concurrence that no further work is required. Architectural Resources No architectural resources were identified within the project alignment. Archaeological Resources Thirty-five isolated finds were identified within the project area. By definition, an isolated find is not eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, and PCN and Permit Support Document Piedmont Natural Gas Line 24 Project -13- Circa~ recommends that no further archaeological testing within these areas are warranted. The Phase I survey identified 11 archaeological sites within the project alignment. • Site PGN3 This domestic artifact scatter dates from the late-19th with occupation continuing into the 1940s. The surface scatter and shovel testing indicate a light density of artifacts recovered from a relic plowzone near a road. Circa~ recommends that the site as not eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion D. Accordingly, no further archaeological investigations appear warranted at the site, and it is recommended that the site be given clearance for any potential development projects. • Site PGN5 This domestic artifact scatter dates from the circa post 1920 with occupation continuing into the 1940s. The surface scatter and shovel testing indicate a light density of artifacts recovered from a plowzone. Circa~ recommends that the site located as not eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion D. Accordingly, no further archaeological investigations appear warranted at the site, and it is recommended that the site be given clearance for any potential development projects. • Site PGN6 This domestic artifact scatter dates from the circa post 1930 with occupation continuing into the 1940s. The surface scatter and shovel testing indicate a light density of artifacts recovered from a plowzone. Circa~ recommends that the site located as not eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion D. Accordingly, no further archaeological investigations appear warranted at the site, and it is recommended that the site be given clearance for any potential development projects. • Site PGN7 This domestic artifact scatter dates from the circa post 1900 with occupation continuing into the 1940s. The surface scatter and shovel testing indicate a light density of artifacts recovered from a plowzone. Circa~ recommends that the site located as not eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion D. Accordingly, no further archaeological investigations appear warranted at the site, and it is recommended that the site be given clearance for any potential development projects. • Site PGN8 This domestic artifact scatter dates from the circa post 1775 with occupation continuing into the 1820s. The surface scatter and shovel testing indicate a light density of artifacts recovered from a plowzone. Circa~ recommends that the site located as not eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under PCN and Permit Support Document Piedmont Natural Gas Line 24 Project -14- Criterion D. Accordingly, no further archaeological investigations appear warranted at the site, and it is recommended that the portion of the site within the project area be given clearance for any potential development projects. • Site PGN10 This domestic artifact scatter dates from the circa post 1900 with occupation continuing into the 1940s. The surface scatter and shovel testing indicate a moderate density of artifacts recovered from a plowzone. Circa~ recommends that the site located as not eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion D. Accordingly, no further archaeological investigations appear warranted at the site, and it is recommended that the site be given clearance for any potential development projects. • Site PGN11 This domestic artifact scatter dates from the circa post 1900 with occupation continuing into the 1940s. The surface scatter and shovel testing indicate a moderate density of artifacts recovered from a plowzone. Circa~ recommends that the site located as not eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion D. Accordingly, no further archaeological investigations appear warranted at the site, and it is recommended that the site be given clearance for any potential development projects. • Site PGN13 This domestic artifact scatter dates from the circa post 1950 with occupation continuing into the 1970s. The surface scatter and shovel testing indicate a light density of artifacts recovered from a plowzone. Circa~ recommends that the site located as not eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion D. Accordingly, no further archaeological investigations appear warranted at the site, and it is recommended that the site be given clearance for any potential development projects. • Site PGN14 This domestic artifact scatter dates from the circa post 1900 with occupation continuing into the 1950s. The surface scatter and shovel testing indicate a moderate density of artifacts recovered from a plowzone. Circa~ recommends that the site located as not eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion D. Accordingly, no further archaeological investigations appear warranted at the site, and it is recommended that the site be given clearance for any potential development projects. • Site PGN32 This domestic artifact scatter dates from the circa post 1950 with occupation continuing into the 1970s. The surface scatter and shovel testing indicate a light density of artifacts recovered from a plowzone. Circa~ recommends that the site located as not eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under PCN and Permit Support Document Piedmont Natural Gas Line 24 Project -15- Criterion D. Accordingly, no further archaeological investigations appear warranted at the site, and it is recommended that the site be given clearance for any potential development projects. • Site PGN44 This domestic artifact scatter dates from the circa post 1900 with occupation continuing into the 1960s. The surface scatter and shovel testing indicate a light density of artifacts recovered from a plowzone. Circa~ recommends that the site located as not eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion D. Accordingly, no further archaeological investigations appear warranted at the site, and it is recommended that the site be given clearance for any potential development projects. • Site PGN47 This site dates from the circa post 1920 with occupation continuing into the 1960s. The surface scatter and shovel testing indicate a light density of artifacts recovered from a plowzone. Circa~ recommends that the site located as not eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion D. Accordingly, no further archaeological investigations appear warranted at the site, and it is recommended that the site be given clearance for any potential development projects. PCN and Permit Support Document Piedmont Natural Gas Line 24 Project -16- Summary of identified resources and recommendations Site Type National Register Eligibility Recommendation IF-PGN1 Isolated find, c. post 1950 No No further work IF-PGN2 Isolated find, c. post 1930 No No further work IF-PGN4 Isolated find, c. post 1950 No No further work IF-PGN9 Isolated find, 20th century No No further work IF- PGN12 Isolated find, c. 1940 No No further work IF- PGN15 Isolated find, 20th century No No further work IF- PGN16 Isolated find, c. 1870 No No further work IF- PGN17 Isolated find, 20th century No No further work IF- PGN18 Isolated find, 1970 No No further work IF- PGN19 Isolated find, 20th century No No further work IF- PGN20 Isolated find, c. 1970 No No further work IF- PGN21 Isolated find, c. 1900 No No further work IF- PGN22 Isolated find, c. 1880 No No further work IF- PGN23 Isolated find, 20th century No No further work IF- PGN24 Isolated find, c. post 1795 No No further work IF- PGN25 Isolated find No No further work IF- PGN26 Isolated find, 20th century No No further work IF- PGN27 Isolated find, c. 1950 No No further work IF- PGN28 Isolated find, c. 1960 No No further work IF- PGN29 Isolated find, c. 1970 No No further work IF- PGN30 Isolated find, c. 1950 No No further work IF- PGN31 Isolated find, 20th century No No further work IF-Isolated find, 20th century No No further work PCN and Permit Support Document Piedmont Natural Gas Line 24 Project -17- Site Type National Register Eligibility Recommendation PGN33 IF- PGN34 Isolated find, 20th century No No further work IF- PGN35 Isolated find, 20th century No No further work IF- PGN36 Isolated find, 20th century No No further work IF- PGN37 Isolated find, 20th century No No further work IF- PGN38 Isolated find, 20th century No No further work IF- PGN39 Isolated find, 20th century No No further work IF- PGN40 Isolated find, 20th century No No further work IF- PGN41 Isolated find, 20th century No No further work IF- PGN43 Isolated find, c. 1930 No No further work IF- PGN44 Isolated find, c. 1940 No No further work IF- PGN45 Isolated find, 20th century No No further work IF- PGN46 Isolated find, Native American No No further work PGN3 Domestic, c. post 1880 No No further work PGN5 Domestic, c. post 1920 No No further work PGN6 Domestic, c. post 1930 No No further work PGN7 Domestic, c. post 1900 No No further work PGN8 Domestic, c. post 1775 No No further work PGN10 Domestic, c. post 1900 No No further work PGN11 Domestic, c. post 1900 No No further work PGN13 Domestic, c. post 1970 No No further work PGN14 Domestic, c. post 1900 No No further work PGN32 Domestic, c. post 1950 No No further work PGN44 Domestic, c. post 1900 No No further work PGN47 Domestic, c. post 1920 No No further work