20051044 Ver 1_Complete File_20050609

05-1730 and 05-1044
Subject: 05-1730 and 05-1044
From: Ken Averitte <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2005 11:57:33 -0400
To: Ian McMillan <[e-mail]>, Cyndi Karoly <[e-mail]>
I think these two numbers are for the same project. 1730 came in as an express, after
1044 was determined to be and IP. Impacts were reduced to NWP size and resubmitted as
express. CVDW sent out a 401 on 9/28 for 1730.
If I'm incorrect on this, please let me know. Otherwise, I'm filing them together,
and taking 1044 off my office tracking list.
thanks
Ken
Ken Averitte
Env. Specialist
Fayetteville Regional Office
NCDENR
1 of 1 10/3/2005 12:05 PM
Triage Check List
?5 . A )c Dy. C.
Date: Proied. Name:
DWQ#:
County: ?I m D ,?t cF/
1
To: ? - ARO Kevin Barnett ? WaRO Tom Steffens and Kyle Barnes
O---FRO Ken Averitte ? WIRO Noelle Lutheran
? MRO Alan Johnson ? WSRO Daryl Lamb
? RRO Mike Horan
From: TelePhone : [phone]VL
The file attached is being forwarded io l our for your evaluation.
Please call if you need` asst tance.
? Stream length impacted '?
? Stream determination
? Wetland determination and distance to blue-line surface,.waters on USFW topo maps
? Minimization/avoidance issues
? Buffer Rules (Meuse, Tar-Pamlico, Catawba, Randleman)
? Pond fill
? r?
Mitigation Ratios 5?
? Ditching
? Are the stream and or wetland mitigation sites available and viable?
? Check drawings for accuracy
? Is the application consistent with pre-application meetings? -
? Cumulative impact concern
Comments:
,5

[&%176 0, ?, 11 0'?
W_ t VIA U • ENSR International
7041 Old Wake Forest Rd, Suite 103
Raleigh, NC 27616
June 8, 2005
PAYPN T 919/872-600
7

19/872-
996
FAX 9
RECEIVED www.ensr.com
Ms. Cyndi Karoly
Supervisor, 401 Oversight and Express Permits Unit p @
N.C. Division of Water Quality Wetlands/401 Water Quality Certification Unit D
2321 Crabtree Blvd. JUN 9 2005
Raleigh, NC 27604
DENR • WATER QUALITY
RE: NCEMC Richmond County N.C. Generation Project Access Road V;=WyV3ANDSrOM'ATER M W4
ENSR Project Number 10597-002-323
Dear Ms. Karoly:
On behalf of North Carolina Electric Membership Corporation (NCEMC), ENSR Consulting and
Engineering (NC), Inc. (ENSR) is submitting a request for an Individual 401 Water Quality
Certification for the subject project. Along with the application fee of $200, we have enclosed two
copies of the application for an Individual Permit submitted to the Wilmington District, U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (Attachment A). The application was submitted to Ms. Lillette Granade and
Mr. Josh Pelletier at the Wilmington District on June 1, 2005.
NCEMC intends to construct a power generation facility in Richmond County south of Hamlet, NC.
The proposed construction of the facility at this site has been reviewed under the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) through an Environmental Assessment with Scoping (EA).
Notice of availability of the EA was published in the Federal Register on December 20, 2004 by
the Rural Utilities Service (RUS) of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the lead agency for the
NEPA review. A Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) was published in the Federal Register
on February 9, 2005 (Attachment B).
A copy of the EA for the project, along with an electronic version of the attached application for the
Individual Permit, has been included with this transmittal in compact disc format (Attachment C).
A letter to the NCEMC from Ms. Chrys Baggett at the State Clearinghouse dated February 11,
2005 indicates that provisions of the State Environmental Policy Act were met through the NEPA
review (Attachment D). NCEMC's response to agency questions received after the public
comment period but included in the Clearinghouse's February 11, 2005 letter were provided to
RUS in a letter dated April 1, 2005 (Attachment E).
The proposed activity is the construction of an access road across a wetland area associated with
an un-named tributary to Marks Creek. Coordinates for the center of the proposed crossing are
34.84120N, 79.73340W. At the time of the preparation of the Environmental Assessment, the
crossing was estimated to impact less than one-half acre and would therefore have been eligible
for a Nationwide Permit. The final engineering design has indicated that 0.75 acre will be
impacted by construction of the road crossing. The attached application for an Individual Permit is
Celebrating 35 Years of Excellence in Environmental Services
?? %-Q.
F1777 777T7=7
June 8, 2005
Ms. Cyndi Karoly
Page 2
based on this final design. As we discussed during our telephone conversation on June 6, 2005
there will be some hand-clearing of forested wetland west of the facility footprint for transmission
to access to the Progress Energy substation adjacent to the property, but no soil compaction or
alteration of hydrology will occur. Ms. Granade has indicated that this latter activity will not
constitute an impact and thus will not require a permit under §404.
The following were included in the IP application package:
• ENG Form 4345
• Attachment A, supplemental information to ENG Form 4345 and engineering drawings
Attachment B, Wetland Delineation Form
As indicated in the letter to Ms. Granade, NCEMC is prepared to mitigate for the 0.75-acre loss of
wetlands through either on-site mitigation (e.g., enhancement or preservation of wetland and
riparian habitat within the project property) or through payment into the N.C. Ecosystem
Enhancement Program.
Thank you in advance for your attention to this request for 401 Certification. If you have any
questions or require additional information, please call Steve at [phone], extension 226, or
Jennifer at extension 223.
Sincerely,
. l?
Stephen J. Cibik
Principal Technical Specialist
Attachments
?ennif3Cassaada
Wetland Scientist
cc: Ms. June Small/NCEMC Director of Environmental Affairs
??..._,L.
s
North Carolina Electric
Membership Corporation
Raleigh, North Carolina
Request for 401 Certification
USAECE Individual Permit for
Proposed Access Road
Richmond County Peaking
Generation Facility
Prepared for Submittal to the
N.C. Wetlands/401 Certification Unit
by
ENSR Consulting & Engineering (NC), Inc.
June 2005
Document Number 10597-002-323
C:7
f9[
ENSR Intemational
7041 Old Wake Forest Rd, Suite 103
Raleigh, NC 27616
919/872-6600
FAX [phone]
www.ensr.com
I
June 8, 2005
Ms. Cyndi Karoly
Supervisor, 401 Oversight
N.C. Division of Water Qua
2321 Crabtree Blvd.
Raleigh, NC 27604
ind Express Permits Unit
ity Wetlands/401 Water Quality Certification Unit
RE: NCEMC Richmond ?ounty N.C. Generation Project Access Road
ENSR Project Number 10597-002-323
Dear Ms. Karoly:
?O
BOA
On behalf of North Carolina Electric Membership Corporation (NCEMC), ENSR Consulting and
Engineering (NC), Inc. (ENSR) is submitting a request for an Individual 401 Water Quality
Certification for the subject project. Along with the application fee of $200, we have enclosed two
copies of the application for an Individual Permit submitted to the Wilmington District, U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (Attachment A). The application was submitted to Ms. Lillette Granade and
Mr. Josh Pelletier at the Wilmington District on June 1, 2005.
NCEMC intends to construct a power generation facility in Richmond County south of Hamlet, NC.
The proposed construction of the facility at this site has been reviewed under the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) through an Environmental Assessment with Scoping (EA).
Notice of availability of the EA was published in the Federal Register on December 20, 2004 by
the Rural Utilities Service (RUS) of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the lead agency for the
NEPA review. A Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) was published in the Federal Register
on February 9, 2005 (Attachment B).
A copy of the EA for the project, along with an electronic version of the attached application for the
Individual Permit, has been included with this transmittal in compact disc format (Attachment C).
A letter to the NCEMC from Ms. Chrys Baggett at the State Clearinghouse dated February 11,
2005 indicates that provisions of the State Environmental Policy Act were met through the NEPA
review (Attachment D). NCEMC's response to agency questions received after the public
comment period but included in the Clearinghouse's February 11, 2005 letter were provided to
RUS in a letter dated April 1, 2005 (Attachment E).
The proposed activity is the construction of an access road across a wetland area associated with
an un-named tributary to Marks Creek. Coordinates for the center of the proposed crossing are
34.84120N, 79.73340W. At the time of the preparation of the Environmental Assessment, the
crossing was estimated to impact less than one-half acre and would therefore have been eligible
for a Nationwide Permit. The final engineering design has indicated that 0.75 acre will be
impacted by construction of the road crossing. The attached application for an Individual Permit is
Celebrating 35 Years of Excellence in Environmental Services
/NT NAT/ONAG!
June 8, 2005
Ms. Cyndi Karoly
Page 2
based on this final design. As we discussed during our telephone conversation on June 6, 2005
there will be some hand-clearing of forested wetland west of the facility footprint for transmission
to access to the Progress Energy substation adjacent to the property, but no soil compaction or
alteration of hydrology will occur. Ms. Granade has indicated that this latter activity will not
constitute an impact and thus will not require a permit under §404.
The following were included in the IP application package:
• ENG Form 4345
• Attachment A, supplemental information to ENG Form 4345 and engineering drawings
Attachment B, Wetland Delineation Form

As indicated in the letter to Ms. Granade, NCEMC is prepared to mitigate for the 0.75-acre loss of
wetlands through either on-site mitigation (e.g., enhancement or preservation of wetland and
riparian habitat within the project property) or through payment into the N.C. Ecosystem
Enhancement Program.
Thank you in advance for your attention to this request for 401 Certification. If you have any
questions or require additional information, please call Steve at [phone], extension 226, or
Jennifer at extension 223.
Sincerely,
Stephen J. Cibik
Principal Technical Specialist
Attachments
?enn!ifCassLada
Wetland Scientist
cc: Ms. June Small/NCEMC Director of Environmental Affairs
n
U
:7
ATTACHMENT A
USACE INDIVIDUAL PERMIT APPLICATION
to
ic:+dd W??YVJLi {-10D
ENSR International
7041 Old Wake Forest Rd, Suite 103
Raleigh, NC 27616
919/872-6600
FAX [phone]
www.ensr.com
May 31, 2005
Ms. Lillette Granade
Mr. Josh Pelletier
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
69 Darlington Ave
Wilmington, NC 28402
RE: NCEMC Richmond County NC Generation Project Access Road
ENSR Project Number 10597-002-323
Dear Ms. Granade and Mr. Pelletier:
On behalf of the North Carolina Electric Membership Corporation (NCEMC), ENSR Consulting
and Engineering (NC), Inc. (ENSR) is submitting one original and three paper copies of the
attached application for an Individual Permit for the subject project. As discussed previously on
the telephone with Ms. Granade, the NCEMC intends to construct a power generation facility in
Richmond County south of Hamlet, NC.
The proposed construction of the facility at this site has been reviewed under the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) through an Environmental Assessment with Scoping (EA).
Notice of availability of the EA was published in the Federal Register on December 20, 2004 by
the Rural Utilities Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the lead agency for the NEPA
review. A Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) was published in the Federal Register on
February 9, 2005. A copy of the EA for the project, along with the attached application, has been
included with this transmittal in compact disc format.
The proposed activity is the construction of an access road across a wetland area associated with
an un-named tributary to Marks Creek. Coordinates for the center of the proposed crossing are
34.84120N, 79.73340W. At the time of the preparation of the Environmental Assessment, the
crossing was estimated to impact less than one-half acre and would therefore have been eligible
for a Nationwide Permit. The final engineering design has indicated that 0.75 acre will be
impacted by construction of the road crossing. The attached application for an Individual Permit is
based on this final design.
The following have been included in the enclosed application package:
• ENG Form 4345
• Attachment A, supplemental information to ENG Form 4345 and engineering drawings
0 • Attachment B, Wetland Delineation Form
Celebrating 35 Years of Excellence in Environmental Services
r?
[ 2 .
May 31, 2005
Ms. Lillette Granade
Mr. Josh Pelletier
Page 2
The NCEMC is prepared to mitigate for the 0.75-acre loss of wetlands through either on-site
mitigation (e.g., enhancement or preservation of wetland and riparian habitat within the project
property) or through payment into the N.C. Ecosystem Enhancement Program.
Thank you in advance for your attention to this application. If you have any questions or require
additional information, please call Steve at [phone], extension 226, or Jennifer at extension
223.
Sicerely,
Stephen J. Cibik
Principal Technical Specialist
40 Attachments
eWetland Scientist
cc: Ms. June Small/NCEMC Director of Environmental Affairs
APPLICATION FOR DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PERMIT OMB APPROVAL NO. 0710-0003
(33 CF?t 325) Expires December 31, 2004
The Public burden for this collection of information is sestimated to average 10 hours per response, although the majority of applications should require
5 hours or less. This includes the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and
completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of
information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Service Directorate of Information
Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302; and to the Office of Management and Budget,
Paperwork Reduction Project (0710-00031, Washington, DC 20503. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law,
no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control
number. Please DO NOT RETURN your form to either of those addresses. Completed applications must be submitted th District Engineer having
jurisdiction over the location of the proposed activity.
I ! t I t'I ???? I
PRIVACY ACT STATEMENT (? (f___I1 /F ?
Authorities: Rivers and Harbors Act, Section 10, 33 USC 403; Clean Water Act, Section 404, 33 USC 1344; tJlaiirie'f'fdtdetrbn , Research and
Sanctuaries Act, 33 USC 1413, Section 103. Principal Purpose: Information provided on this form will be used in evaluating the application for a
permit. Routine Uses: This information may be shared with the Department of Justice and other federal, state, and local government agencies.
Submission of requested information is voluntary, however, if information is not provided the permit application cannot be evaluated nor can a permit
be issued.
One set of original drawings or good reproducible copies which show the location and character of the proposed activity must be attached to this
application (sea sample drawings and instructions) and be submitted to the District Engineer having jurisdiction over the location of the proposed
activity. An application that is not completed in full will be returned.
NTFAfS 7 THRU 4 TO RF FILLED BY THE CORPS
1. APPLICATION NO. 2. FIELD OFFICE CODE 3. DATE RECEIVED 4. DATE APPLICATION COMPLETED
,/TFRA_4 RF/ nW Tt7 RF Fll / Fr) RV APPI /CANTI
CJ
5. APPLICANT'S NAME a. AUTHORIZED AGENT'S NAME AND TITLE ,.;, ea yns, ,r v;
NCEMC (Contact June Small) Steve Cibik (ENSR Project Manager)
6 APPLICANT'S ADDRESS 9. AGENT'S ADDRESS
3400 Sumner Blvd. 7041 Old Wake Forest Rd. Suite 103
Raleigh, NC 27616 Raleigh, NC 27616
7 APPLICANT'S PHONE NOS W/AREA CODE 10. AGENT'S PHONE NOS. WIAREA CODE
]. Residence a. Residence
b. Business (919) 875- 3116 I b. Business [phone]

APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE DATE
NAME, LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT OR ACTIVITY
12. PROJECT NAME OR TITLE IsreaSU,e ra,nc
.T1CEf1C Richmond County Peaking Plant Project
13. NAME OF WATERBODY. IF KNOWN ar ,..?;,?,. ,• I 14. PROJECT STREET ADDRESS rd y?,, r.,y
Unna;r,ed tributary to Marks Creek see Project Locator map (Figure 1)
15. LOCATION OF PROJECT
Richmond PJorth Carolina
COUNTY STATE
16. OTHER LOCATION DESCRIPTIONS, IF KNOWN, ,::cvronnu:L. sl
See Attachment A
17. DIRECTIONS TO THE SITE
From Hwy 1 in Rockingham take US Hwy 74 bypass to State Hwy 177 exit. Go northeast on State
Hwy 177 to Airport Road. Turn right onto Airport Road. Pass under US Hwy 74 bypass, site is
on right Between the Marks Creek bridge and the Progress Energy power transmission right-of-
way.
I hereby authorize, \J5V- to act in my behalf as my agent in the processing of this application and to
furnish, upon request, supplemental information in support of this permit application.
N H 4346, Jul 97 EDITION OF FEB 94 IS OBSOLETE. (Proponent; CECW-OR)
16. Nature of Activity W- a(?..ol ur(-, r, enn.wrre.m
1
See Attachment A
10. Project Purpose lb-l(v rn.,!(a -1 v (. (.,.,., (,, th, Jr.1-1, ..(< "or-r/......
See Attachment A
USE BLOCKS 20-22 IF DREDGED AND/OR FILL MATFRIAI IS TO BE DISCHARGED
20. Reason(s) for Discharge
Permanent fill associated with road construction.
21. Type(s) of Material Beinq Discharqed and the Amount of Each Tvoe in Cubic Yards
Soils and rip-rat). Exact amount unknown at this time.
.
22. Surface Area in Acres of Wetlands or Other Waters Filled .•.......u-,-,
See Attachment A and Wetland Delineation Report (Attachment t3)
23. Is Any Portion of the Work Already Complete? Yes = No ` IF YES. DESCRIBE THE COMPLFTFO WORK
24. Addresses of Adjoining Property Owners, Lessees, Etc., Whose Property Adjoins the Waterbody (If more than can be entered here,
please attach a supplemental list).
See Attachment A
25. List of Other Certifications or ApprovalsiDenials Received from other Federal, State or Local Agencies for Work Described in This Application.
AGENCY TYPE APPROVAL' IDENTIFICATION NUMBER DATE APPLIED DATE APPROVED DATE DENIED
'Would include but is not restricted to zoning, building and flood plain permits
See Attachment A
26. Application is hereby made for a permit or permits to authorize the work described in this application. I certify that the information in this
application is complete and accurate. I further certify that I possess the authority to undertake the work described herein or am acting as the
July autt orized agent of the applicant. )?
r 3 I- v ?' c? L? ?3! /C
.U S:t, '
I
SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT DATE SIGNATURE AGENT DATE
The application must be signed by the person who desires to undertake the proposed activity (applicant) or it may be signed by a duly
authorized agent if the statement in block 11 has been filled out and signed.
16 U.S.C. Section 1001 provides that Whoever, in any manner within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States
knowingly and willfully falsifies, conceals, or covers up any trick, scheme, or disguises a material fact or makes any false, fictitious or
fraudulent statements or representations or makes or uses any false writing or document knowing same to contain any false, fictitious or
fraudulent statements or entry, shall be fined not more than 510,000 or imprisoned not more than five years or both.
0
0
0

ATTACHMENT A
16. OTHER LOCATION DESCRIPTIONS
The facility is approximately 2.5 miles southwest of Hamlet, west of Airport Rd. and south of Marks
Creek near the intersection of Highway 74 bypass and Airport Road. Coordinates for the site are
34.8412°N, 79.7334°W.
18. NATURE OF ACTIVITY
North Carolina Electric Membership Corporation (NCEMC) proposes to build a simple-cycle electric
generation facility in central North Carolina's Richmond County. A 258-acre parcel will be purchased
for siting the facility, with approximately 15 to 20 acres required for facility construction. The property
borders a Progress Energy Corporation (PEC) existing transmission right-of-way and is opposite
PEC's Richmond County Generating Facility. The generation facility will be centrally located on the
property's southern portion which currently consists primarily of pine plantation. Access to the site will
be from the northeast from Airport Road.
Access to the site will require crossing the unnamed tributary to Marks Creek and its associated
wetlands. The proposed activity consists of filling of jurisdictional wetlands associated with the
intermittent stream and construction of the access road to the site. Drawing RICH-050-S100D' is a
plan view of the proposed crossing. The length of the wetland crossing is 210 feet. It will consist of an
asphalt surfaced road with an 8-inch deep aggregate base underlain by a12-inch prepared subgrade.
Drawing RICH-050-S104D is a typical cross-section of the road surface.
Two 6-foot diameter culverts of approximately 150 feet in length will be used to allow water movement
under the road. The culverts have been designed to pass the 100-year storm (8.1 inches of rainfall in
24 hours) flow 416 cubic feet per second. Drawing RICH-050-S103D is a cross-section view of the
road at the culverts. Drawing RICH-050-S105D is a table depicting the dimensions and locations of
the culverts, and Drawing RICH-050-S102D is an end-on view of the culverts. Drawing RICH-050-
S101 D depicts the culvert outlets in cross-section and plan view.
19. PROJECT PURPOSE
NCEMC, in response to the growing energy needs of its membership cooperatives, is proposing to
install, operate and maintain two simple-cycle generation facilities in central North Carolina. The
Richmond County site will be comprised of five pairs of combustion turbines with a total capacity of 280
MW. Each will be fired with natural gas with fuel oil as a backup supply. The facilities will function as
peaking plants that will operate on a limited annual basis, primarily during periods when short-term
electrical demand exceeds base load and intermediate supply. Hence, the facilities will run
intermittently, primarily during the peak demand hours of the summer months and to a limited extent
0
May,zoos

during winter periods. The projects may also operate in times of emergency supply situations such as
the loss of generating capacity within the system. The proposed activity entails construction of an
access road to the generation site, which will require filling approximately 0.75 acre of jurisdictional
wetlands.
Construction of the access road is tentatively scheduled to begin in October 2005. Construction of the
generation facility is scheduled to begin in March 2006, with completion of construction scheduled in
August 2007. The facility is expected to be operational by November 2007.
22. SURFACE AREA IN ACRES OF WETLANDS OR OTHER WATERS FILLED
The project will require filling of 0.75 acres of wetlands associated with an unnamed tributary to Marks
Creek. A description of the wetlands is included in Attachment B - Wetland Report. The construction
sequence will be as follows:
1. Clear and grub upland area on north side of access road from tie in point at Airport Road to a point
prior to reaching creek.
2. Provide erosion and sediment control features as indicated on approved ESC drawings.
3. Grade north side of road which will produce enough cut to place fill at creek crossing.
4. Ensure the bypass channels necessary to dewater the crossing site are stable before diverting the
stream. Upon completion of the crossing, fill, compact, and stabilize the bypass channel appropriately.
5. Remove beaver dam and reroute creek.
6. Excavate in creek and install approved subgrade for culverts and fill material.
7. Place culverts and riprap apron.
8. Finish filling area for road construction.
9. Install riprap on side slopes on both upstream and downstream ends at culverts.
10. Begin road work on the south side from the creek to the main project site.
E
24. ADDRESSES OF ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS, WHOSE PROPERTY ADJOINS THE
WATERBODY.
Carolina Power & Light (Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc.), 411 Fayetteville Street, Raleigh, NC 27602.
Alex Morrison, 1334 Airport Road, Hamlet, NC 28345.
Pate ZV Inc., PO Box 159, Laurel Hill, NC 28351.
James E. Standridge, 1511 Airport Road, Hamlet, NC 28345.
Walton Lee Standridge, 1511 Airport Road, Hamlet, NC 28345.
Annie L. Brady, 407 Bryan Street, Rockingham, NC 28379.
2 May, 2005

a

Henry J. Antos & Beth Weis, 2366 Hwy 73 East, Mt. Gilead, NC 27306.
25. List of Other Certifications or Approvals/Denials
Finding of No Significant Impact under NEPA issued by USDA, Rural Utilities Service
Clearance from State Historic Preservation Office
Clearance from U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Zoning Consistency Determination from Richmond County
Air Construction Permit
Richmond County - Erosion and Sediment Control permit (application to be submitted June 2005)
Richmond County - Street and Driveway Access permit (application to be submitted June 2005)
May, 2005
G
.7
C.
Lr)
0
Lri
II ?
O
0
4,0 J ED
ON
0<0

w
WETLAND

?
_ 78
•
•

WETLAND
DISTURBANCE=
0.75 ACRES
,N--es 0

- s
- NEA?ND

••
U

- -INSTALL STONE- CHEGK-,
__-DAMS- AT- INTEfZV L5
R TYP
19.16702
60' 30' 0 60' 120'

BLACK & VEATCH
INTERNATIONAL COMPANY
NORTH CAROLINA 27838
O
BOX 33388 RALEIGH
® P
.
.
.
E CINEER ORA
SKW SAC
A
05/26/05
ISSUED
FOR INFORMATION
SAC
SKW
SKW
JCD
CH CKEO DA
NO
DATE
REVISIONS AND RECORD OF ISSUE
DRN
DES
CHK
POE
APP
NCEMC PEAKING PLANT PROJECT PROJECT DRAWING NUMBER REV
138783-SK-S0001 R
CREEK CROSSING CODE
-050-S100D
RICH
RICHMOND SITE AREA

COL36621 ACAD 15.05
AlASLO11 A2 1=1
05/26/05 11.33:17
0 0
0
m
X In
n
M
;Q
C3
m pZC13
N -I
xm?
C5

V Z 0
o
M
90
m z

n .0
D
m P-4 >

O
C) +? (A ' k = ROAD
z ;u
0 O D
TYPICAL FILL SECTION I TYPICAL CUT SECTION
U) U r
m Z Z O D 3'-0' SHOULDER 1S'-a' 3'-D° SHOULDER
G>
o I EXISTING GRADE
2% 3 FINSHED GRADE

O
? rn
O
1? o":D O9D O::0-r, -0 "o.:D•o-DD Oj.?1

m
N J,
3
FINISHED GRADE Z s

N GRAVEL SURFACE CH-DOO-51440 SO=
y C
65

m 0
-0 Z ;Q
TYPICAL ASPHALT SURFACE ROAD SECTION
o
m W
Q m --nn NO SCALE
v m

c 0 0
O
W 0 ->
I

LA o
'
z
V1
N
LA D m 4' ASPHALT SURFACING MIN
m
C7 D z g' AGGREGATE BASE MIN
2 O
I Z m N XX/l X??? 12' PREPARED SUBGRADE MIN
O c ti
O ; _

CA
m cn SECTION 2
O NO SCALE
01
D A

n
0
• 0
COL36621 ACAD 15.05
AlASLO11 A2 1=1
05/26/05 11:33:17

X M
n o

rn o
cn ° z D

S?o
rn

g ° _r<
m
;R so
=O
D
DA
EW R>O

n jz=
<

Z
:U
. D
n
O
0 Q
1-

M Z Z

O D ?
5EE FlFARTWAO K r-TW CF RW/nmSi

CMDE ELEVA
FOR IEDARELEN(S
J
?
7 G?IO1E fOm]
?'
?''!
v
(ii
O
WLVE319 MRH RFSiAP (LLB 1C)
G CFIP
?}? pp \ ?
o?mo-eP Fll1I
MP RAP AFICIN
\ TABLE FOR SCE SEE CULVERT INVERT EL
c- N
S;m
TARLL
T V
TAaz
rn
A
?

(?_/1
C ANTI-SEEP CDLLAR
a-d SuAlEl -r.
L
0 m
/ia7Ap
- ?
l L AA IlIr LN1fRlIl 6?f£ALFEA Y
W EJi7ff'LL YRfN 7 SiDYE !EC EAMIR"R
? Si{'?FlG4TDM CUYPACLIOI RSDL1FtF7AWLL
0
O Z
Cu

J m m
r)
0
co 0

o D
Z
SECTION 1

x 5 NO SCALE
I c:
CA m
Z O N
O n
O n Z

O c: m ?

O m n
_
LA v
m En

O 13 o
• • s
COL36621 ACAD 15.05
AlASLO11 AZ 1=1
05/26/05 11:33:17

M 0
f7 -

Z
o M
M
A

C13

c-) m
Z
C)
Z
' D
O O O
U) U
? r
a
j a
Z
I Z o
--?

NO. TYPE DIAMETER MATERIAL
ELEVATION ELEVATION BARRELS
o
C!?
m C-2 8772.75 3744.13 9802.48 3599.01 148' 263.00 262.00 FLARED ENO B,-(r 1 CHIP
n

? N

O C
m
o
(A
p
D
o
p
Z7
m
A -n
J mm
co Q O 0
LA I
O
I
LA o
''
°z
N
i C

? (n m
z v cn

2
Q
p O z
n
CD z
O m
ti
m n
O M x
X
-0
o En
O m
D
O v 4m
CULVE RT TABL E
CENTERLINE COORDINATES INLET aUTLET NUMBER
CULVERT INLET END OUTLET END LENGTH INV INV END PIPE OF PIPE
NORTH EAST NORTH EAST
C-1 6785.54 3746.70 9814.58 3603.05 147' 263.00 262_DO FLARED END 8'-(T 1 CHIP

11
COL36621 ACAD 15.05
AlASLO11 A2 1=1
05/26/05 11:33:17
is is
i z
n

x
z

m
z
n o m
A
®.
10

'Zo
9

M x
$5O
Z 90
m
0 ?om

n .o
D
m
K M Z D3
R>
O
0 G7 D > z_
z;o
.
n
m
O 0
Q
<n Lf)
r
? a
mZ o a

-p o
cn C-1 C-2
N
p

L 0 2'-Ef THICK
RIPRAP (Q,o- 10")

A a
I
r] ??5r ?
?; x? S
'
S
N C OVER E)CCAVATE UNDER CULVERT/ROADWAY
g,

Z UNTIL A SUITABLE MATERIAL IS REACHED.
13ACKFILL WITW #57 STONE_ SEE EARTHWORK
In 5PECIFICATION FOR COMPACTION REQUIREMENTS
°

m

c
Z
? SECTION 3
o
li
o z
a
NO SCALE
m
Cry °
I
(A o
zz

I c
rn
m
C-) 00 z v
z cn
n
2 O
W C m 7c

cn
O m
x n
x
I
LA
o cl)
O m
N

O D >
*u
0
v o
0
E
n
ul
0
to
r
II
N?
Q ?
L0
?O
?o",
J L
,n N
O?uj
U Q 0
6,-OH
(MIN)
2'-0,0
(MIN)

SEE CULVERT TABLE AND
4
SEDIMENT BASIN TABLE FOR INV EL
2.5
TO BOTTOM F
AGGREGATE (ROAD) BASE
0% SLOPE
FLOW

~ FILTER FABRIC
CREEK CROSSING CULVERT OUTLETS
NO SCALE
BLACK & VEATCH
INTERNATIONAL COMPANY
NORTH CAROLINA 27938
O
BOX 33398 RALEIGH
0 P
.
.
,
ENGINEER DRAWN
SKW SAC
A
05/26/05
ISSUED FOR INFORMATION
SAC
SKW
SKW
JCD
CHECKED DATE
NO
DATE
REVISIONS AND RECORD OF ISSUE
DRN
DES
CHK
POE
APP
NCEMC PEAKING PLANT PROJECT PRDJECT DRAWING NUMBER REv
138783-SK-S0002 A
CREEK CROSSING CODE
0
S101
-
RICH-05
RICHMOND SITE AREA
ATTACHMENT B
Wetland Delineation Report
North Carolina Electrical Membership Corporation
Proposed Power Generation Facility
Richmond County, North Carolina
May 28, 2005
Introduction
ENSR performed a wetland delineation at the North Carolina Electrical Membership Corporation
(NCEMC) proposed Richmond County facility to ascertain whether jurisdictional wetlands or
other Waters of the United States occur on the property. NCEMC is proposing to build a new
power generation facility and has selected a site in Richmond County, southeast of
Rockingham. The proposed facility is approximately 2.5 miles southwest of Hamlet, west of
Airport Road and south of Marks Creek near the intersection of Hwy 74 Bypass and Airport Road
(Figure 1).
The facility footprint has been located in an upland area of the site south of the intermittent
stream indicated on the 7.5 Minute USGS Ghio, North Carolina, Quadrangle used to develop
Figure 1. No wetlands or waters of the U.S. are located within the facility footprint. The
proposed access road to the facility was selected to follow an existing unimproved road (i.e.,
jeep trail) depicted on the 7.5 Minute USGS Ghio, North Carolina, Quadrangle (Figure 1). This
location exhibits the narrowest part of the wetland/intermittent stream and would thus have the
least impact. Connection of power lines to an existing substation located adjacent to the
southwestern property boundary will require clearing a forested area west of the facility footprint.
Methods
ENSR visited the study area within the proposed NCEMC site on two separate trips, June 4,
2004 and April 28, 2005. The purpose of these visits was to make a field determination for the
presence or absence of jurisdictional wetlands and Waters of the United States. The
determination followed the protocol outlined in the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation
Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987), which includes an assessment of vegetation, soils,
and hydrology. The methods and findings of the wetland determination are provided below. The
determination was limited to areas that would potentially be disturbed by the proposed plant
construction, and focused on the proposed route for the access road to the facility from Airport
Road and the area for a power line crossing west of the generation facility (Figure 1).
Plant community types within the proposed study area were identified, and the wetland plant
indicator status for each plant species was recorded from the National List of Plants that Occur in
Wetlands: Southeast (Region 2). The wetland indicator status identifies the frequency with which
each plant species is estimated to be found within wetlands as opposed to uplands. Obligate
Wetland (OBL) plants are those believed to be found within wetlands more than 99 percent of the
10 time. Facultative Wetland (FACW) plants are found in wetlands from 67 to 99 percent of the time;
Facultative (FAC) plants are found in wetlands 33 to 66 percent of the time; Facultative Upland
plants are found in wetlands from 1 to 33 percent of the time; and Obligate Upland (UPL) plants are
found in wetlands less than 1.0 percent of the time. The wetland indicator status is further refined
by a + meaning it is on the wetter end of the probability range, or by a - indicating it is found in
wetlands with a probability near the drier end of the defined range of the probabilities. If more than
50 percent of the dominant species in a community are found to have a wetland indicator status of
OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC-), the vegetation is determined to be hydrophytic or wetland.
Soils were determined on-site with the use of a "sharpshooter" shovel, and by excavating test pits
at certain locations, and then were assessed as either hydric (wetland) or non-hydric per criteria
outlined in the Corps Manual. The hydrology within the construction area was also assessed per
protocol outlined in the Corps Manual. Areas within the site that were found to contain hydrophytic
vegetation, hydric soils, and exhibit wetland hydrology were determined to be wetlands. As
specified in the Corps Manual, any communities that lack one or more of these three mandatory
wetland parameters are determined to be non-wetland.
Waters of the United States include wetlands and tributaries to navigable waters. The latter may
include intermittent and ephemeral streams, which are characterized based on channel geometry,
morphology, and hydrology.
Results
Topography - The surrounding terrain is typical of the Sandhills region with rounded, gently
sloping hills. The elevation of the site ranges from 330 feet Mean Sea Level in the southeastern
corner of the property to about 230 feet near the northern property boundary near Marks Creek
(Figure 1).
Hydrology - An unnamed tributary to Marks Creek bisects the property, originating in the
southeastern portion of the property. It flows from southeast to northwest and is depicted on the
USGS Quadrangle as intermittent. Much of the area surrounding the tributary has evidence of
being periodically inundated, in large part due to beaver activity within the watershed. Wetland
hydrology indicators observed during the delineation include: locally inundated, saturated in
upper 12 inches, drift lines, sediment deposits, drainage patterns in wetlands, water stained
leaves, and oxidized root channels.
Vegetation - The vegetation within the subject site could be classified into two community types
described below.
Streamhead Pocosin: This community exists along the unnamed tributary to Marks Creek and in
the low areas of the site along ravines. The dominant trees in this community are Red maple (Acer
rubrum) FAC, Tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera) FAC, and Swamp tupelo (Nyssa biflora) OBL
and scattered Pond pine (Pinus serotina) FACW+, Atlantic white cedar (Chamaecyparis thyoides)
OBL, Loblolly pine (Pinus taeda) FAC, sweetbay magnolia (Magnolia virginiana) FACW+, and
Sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua) FAC+. There is a dense shrub layer present dominated by
Gallberry (Ilex glabra) FACW, Inkberry (Ilex coriacia) FACW, Fetterbush (Lyonia lucida) FACW,
Sweet pepperbush (Clethra alnifolia) FACW, and Ti-ti (Cyrilla racemiflora) FACW. Laurel-leafed
greenbriar (Smilax laurifolia) FACW+ is the dominant vine in this community. The herb layer is
dominated by Netted chainfern (Woodwardia areolata) OBL, Cinnamon fern (Osmunda
cinnamomea) FACW+, and various sedges (Carex spp.) FAC-OBL.
Upland Pine Plantation: This community exists in the upland areas both north and south of the
40 intermittent stream. The generation facility itself will be sited within the pine plantation to the south
of the intermittent stream. The dominant tree species in this community is loblolly pine (Pinus
taeda) FAC. The shrub layer in this community consists of patches of Chickasaw plum (Prunus
angustifolia) and scattered water oak (Quercus nigra), black cherry (Prunus serotina), sassafras
(Sassafras albidum), and flowering dogwood (Comus florida). Dominant vines are poison ivy
(Toxicodendron radicans) and Virginia creeper (Parteinocissus quinquefolia). The herb layer is
very sparse and consists mainly of patches of blackberry (Rubus argutus).
Soils
Soil Survey Data
The soil survey for Richmond County indicates that the majority of the site is underlain by
Wakulla and Candor soils. The wetland areas including the stream near the northern boundary
of the site are underlain by Johnston Mucky loam, with Ailey Loamy sand underlying the outer
wetland fringes.
Wakulla and Candor soils are nearly level to gently sloping, very deep and somewhat
excessively drained soils. Wakula soils were formed in sandy wind blown, marine, or fluvial
sediments and have a sandy surface and subsoil. Candor soils were formed in sandy and loamy
Coastal plain sediments and have a sandy surface layer and subsurface layer.
10 The Wakulla series consists of very deep, somewhat excessively drained, rapidly permeable soils
that formed in sandy Coastal Plain sediments on uplands and stream terraces.
A representative profile of the Wakula series has been described by the NRCS as:
Ap--O to 7 inches; dark grayish brown (10YR 4/2) sand
E--7 to 24 inches; light yellowish brown (1OYR 6/4) sand
Bt--24 to 42 inches; strong brown (7.5YR 5/8) loamy sand
C1--42 to 56 inches; yellowish brown (10YR 5/8) sand
C2--56 to 83 inches; yellow (10YR 7/6) sand.
The Candor series consists of very deep, somewhat excessively drained soils, with moderately
rapid permeability in the upper part and moderate to moderately slow permeability in the lower
part. They formed in the upper Coastal Plain (Sandhills) on uplands.
A representative profile of the Candor series has been described by the NRCS as:
A--O to 3 inches; dark grayish brown (10YR 4/2) sand
E--3 to 23 inches; light yellowish brown (10YR 6/4) sand
Bt--23 to 37 inches; yellowish brown (1OYR 5/6) loamy sand
BE--37 to 44 inches; brownish yellow (1OYR 6/6) coarse sand
E'--44 to 57 inches; pale yellow (2.5Y 7/4) sand
1311 --57 to 63 inches; light yellowish brown (1OYR 6/4) loamy sand
B't2--63 to 69 inches; strong brown (7.5YR 5/8) sandy loam
B't3--69 to 80 inches; strong brown (7.5YR 5/8) sandy clay loam.
Ailey Loamy sand is nearly level to gently sloping, deep and well-drained. They formed in
sandy and loamy marine sediments and have a sandy surface layer and loamy subsoil.
The Ailey series consists of deep to densic, well-drained to somewhat excessively drained soils
formed on uplands in the middle and upper Coastal Plain with slow permeability. Typical
landscape positions for Ailey soils are interfluves and side slopes.
A representative profile of the Ailey series has been described by the NRCS as:
Ap--O to 5 inches; dark grayish brown (10YR 4/2) loamy sand
E--5 to 24 inches; yellowish brown (10YR 5/4) loamy sand
Btl--24 to 29 inches; yellowish brown (10YR 5/8) sandy loam
Bt2--29 to 36 inches; yellowish brown (10YR 5/8) sandy clay loam
Btx--36 to 50 inches; mottled yellowish brown (10YR 5/8), strong brown (7.5YR 5/6) and
red (2.5YR 4/8) sandy clay loam
2Cd--50 to 72 inches; red (2.5YR 4/8) sandy loam and coarse sandy loam; common
coarse distinct strong brown (7.5YR 5/6) soft masses.
Johnston Mucky Loam is nearly level, very deep and very poorly drained. They formed in
stratified loamy fluvial sediments and have a loamy surface layer and subsoil.
® The Johnston series consists of very deep, very poorly drained, moderately permeable soils that
form in floodplains in the lower to upper Coastal Plain.
A representative profile of the Johnston series has been described by the NRCS as:
A--O to 30 inches; black (10YR 2/1) mucky loam
Cgl--30 to 34 inches; dark gray (10YR 4/1) loamy fine sand
Cg2--34 to 60 inches; gray (10YR 5/1) fine sandy loam.
Site-Specific Data
Soils across the study area were observed with the aid of a "sharphooter" shovel. Three test pits
were dug within the area of proposed construction. Soils observed on the site were observed to
closely match published descriptions for the aforementioned soil series as described in the Soil
Survey of Richmond County, North Carolina (NRCS 1999).
The first test pit was dug within the wetland area near the beaver pond where the proposed road
crossing will occur. Water filled up the pit to approximately 6 inches below the soil surface. The
test pit profile is described as follows:
® Oi-- +1 to 0 inches; black (10YR 2/1)
A-- 0 to 16 inches; black (10YR 2/1); mucky loam
The second test pit was excavated on the wetland fringe, near the power line right-of-way on the
western portion of the proposed site property. Water filled the pit to approximately 11 inches below
Ageft
the soil surface. The test pit profile was described as follows:
A-- 0 to 4 inches; dark gray (10YR 4/1); loamy sand
E-- 4 to 7 inches; grayish brown (10YR 5/2); loamy sand
Bt-- 7 to 16+ inches; yellowish brown (10YR 5/4); sandy clay loam
Few, medium, prominent (f2p) 5YR 5/8 mottles
The third and last test pit was dug in an upland position on the eastern portion of the subject
property approximately 200 feet west of Airport Road. The test pit profile was described as
follows:
A-- 0 to 4 inches; light olive brown (2.5Y 5/3); fine sandy loam
E-- 4 to 7 inches; pale brown (10YR 6/3); fine sandy loam
Bt-- 7 to 16+ inches; strong brown (7.5YR 5/6); sandy clay loam
Summary and Conclusion
There is an intermittent stream (an unnamed tributary to Mark's Creek) that drains adjacent
property to the south, enters the site at its boundary with the PEC transmission ROW, and
traverses the property from the southeast to the northwest. A series of beaver dams within the
intermittent stream on the property have resulted in ponding that has created hydrologic
conditions conducive to development of both emergent and forested wetlands along the entire
length of the stream.
The unnamed tributary to Mark's Creek and its associated wetlands were determined to be
jurisdictional waters. The wetland boundary was delineated with the use of a GPS (Figure 2).
The three mandatory wetland parameters were observed within the area delineated as a
wetland (see Appendix A for photos and data forms).
The wetland area in the vicinity of the proposed road crossing to access the generation facility
site was identified as Wetland 1 in Figure 2. Approximately 0.75 acres of this wetland will be
impacted by development of the site, for which an application for an Individual Permit has been
prepared. Connection to the Progress Energy substation located adjacent to the southwest
property boundary will require crossing the forested wetland area identified as Wetland 4 in
Figure 2. This area will be hand-cleared and will not be subject to any fill activity, thus no loss of
wetlands will occur.

•
11
Map Location NCEMC
vrv Richmond County Site
KY VA ? Site Layout
NC
TN 1 I ,?, Image Source: USGS Topographic Map, Ghio,
N i 0 1 250 2 500 Feet
0 120 240 360 48
SC
OA Meters
EWR..
Figure: 1
Date: September, 2004
Project Number: 10597-002

a

Wetland Line 1

,J
Wetland Line 4 1
Wetland Line 2
°°
o0
CQ
°
0
Wetland Line 3 1
0
? 'A 11 I&M.
Map Location NCEMC
KY wv VA Richmond County Generation Facility
IN 1-- J I f Wetlands
- ? l ?lISrC
l )C Figure: 2
1 rkl _ 0 255 510 1,020 1,530 2,040
Feet
Date: May 2005
Sc GA 0 125 250 375 500
Meters
?? ?, Project Number: 10597-002-323

Appendix A

E
Photos

View north toward Wetland 1 east of proposed crossing. Note upland area in foreground and
emergent wetland with open water in area impounded by old road and beaver dam.
•
View north toward Wetland 1 from southern end of proposed crossing. Emergent wetland area
with open water is to right.
0

View NE along old jeep trail and proposed crossing of Wetland 1. Emergent wetland with open
water is to right. Area to left is forested wetland.
U
View east toward emergent wetland area at proposed crossing.
0
11
Wetland Data Form
E
El
L-J
CJ

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Determination Manual)
Project / Site: NCEMC Richmond County Date: June 4. 2004
Applicant / Owner: County: Richmond
Investigator: State: NC

Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes X No Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical situation)? Yes No X Transect ID:
Is the area a potential problem area? Yes No X Plot ID: Wetland
(explain on reverse if needed)
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. I cer rabrunt T FAC 9. Smilax laurifolia V FACW+
2. Liriodeudron tali >r era T FAC 10. Woodwardia areolata H OBL
3. Nyssa bi/lora T OBL 11. Osmunda cinnamoinea H FACW+
4. llexglabra S FACW 12. Carex spp. H FAC-013L
5. //ex coriacia S FACW 13.
6. Lyonia hicida S FACW 14.
7. Clethra alnii olio S FACW 15.
8. Cyrilla race»riflora S FACW 16.
11
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC excluding FAC-).
100
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe In Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators
_ Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs Primary Indicators:
Other X Inundated (locally)
X Saturated in Upper 12"
X No Recorded Data Available Water Marks
Drift Lines
Field Observations: X Sediment Deposits
x Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth of Surface Water: localized (in.) Secondary Indicators:
Oxidized Roots Channels in Upper 12"
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 8 (in.) x Water-Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
_ FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: 8 (in.) Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): - Johnston mucky loam Drainage Class: very poorly drained
Taxonomy (Subgroup): thermic Cumulic Humaquepts Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No _X
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Colors Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
+1-0 Oi IOYR 2/1
0-16 A 10YR 2/1 mucky loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol Concretions
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor -Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moisture Regime Listed On Local Hydric Soils List
x Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
x Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors -Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes X No
Is the Sampling Point
Within a Wetland? Yes X No
Remarks:
Upland Data Form
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Determination Manual)
Project / Site: NCEMC/ Richmond County Date: June 4, 2004
Applicant / Owner: County: Richmond
Investigator: State: NC

Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes X No Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical situation)? Yes No X Transect ID:
Is the area a potential problem area? Yes No X Plot ID: Upland
(explain on reverse if needed)
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Pines taeda T FAC 9.
2. Parthenocissus 7uinquefolia V FAC 10.
3. Ouercus nigra S FAC 11.
4. Cornus Florida S FACU 12.
5. Prnnus serotina S FACU 13.
6. 14.
7. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC excluding FAC+ 60
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe In Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs Primary Indicators:
Other Inundated
-Saturated in Upper 12"
X No Recorded Data Available Water Marks
Drift Lines
Field Observations: Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth of Surface Water: 0 (in.) Secondary Indicators:
Oxidized Roots Channels in Upper 12"
Depth to Free Water in Pit: >18 (in.) Water-Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Depth to Saturated Soil: >18 (in.) FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
SOILS
El-
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Wakulla and Candor Soils Drainage Class: somewhat excessively drained
thermic Psammentic Hapludults
Taxonomy (Subgroup): thermic Grossarenic Kandiudults Confirm Mapped Typo? Yes_ No X
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Colors Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-4 A 2.5Y 5/3 fine sandy loam
4-7 E I0YR 6/3 fine sandy loam
7-16+ Bt 7.5YR 5/6 sandy clay loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_ Histosol _ Concretions
Histic Epipedon _ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor - Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moisture Regime Listed On Local Hydric Soils List
Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes
Wotland Hydrology Present? Yes
Hydric Soils Present? Yes
Remarks:
No X Is the Sampling Point
No X Within a Wetland? Yes_ No X
No X

L .J

ATTACHMENT B
RURAL UTILITIES SERVICE FONSI

0
Federal Register/Vol. 70, No. 26/Wednesday, February 9, 2005/Notices 6831
roads would be constructed and
decommissioned after use; 17 miles of
existing roads would be closed; 15 miles
of existing roads would be permanently
decommissioned; and 117 miles of
existing roads would be reconstructed to
sustain project use and reduce water
quality impacts.
Lead Agency
The USDA Forest Service is the lead
agency for this proposal.
Responsible Official
Plumas National Forest Supervisor
James M. Pena is the responsible
official. Plumas National Forest, PO Box
11500, Quincy, CA 95971.
Nature of Decision To Be Made
Forest Supervisor James M. Pena will
decide whether to implement the
Empire Project as proposed and
described above, implement the project
based on an alternative to this proposal
that is formulated to resolve identified
conflicts, or not implement this project
at this time.
Scoping Process
Public questions and comments
regarding this proposal are an integral
part of this environmental analysis
process. Comments will be used to
identify issues and develop alternatives
to the proposed action. To assist the
Forest Service in identifying and
considering issues and concerns on the
proposed action, comments should be as
specific as possible.
A copy of the Proposed Action and/
or summary of the Proposed Action will
be mailed to adjacent landowners, as
well as those people and organizations
that have indicated a specific interest in
the Empire project, individuals who
attended the two open houses held prior
to the development of a landscape
assessment for the watersheds
surrounding the project, people who
sent in previous comments, to Native
American entities, and federal, state,
and local agencies. The public will be
notified of any meetings regarding this
proposal by mailings and press releases
sent to the local newspaper and media.
There are no meetings planned at this
time.
Permits or Licenses Required
An Air Pollution Permit and a Smoke
Management Plan are required by local
agencies.
Comment
will guide development of the EIS. Our
desire is to receive substantive
comments on the merits of the Proposed
Action, as well as comments that
address errors, misinformation, or
information that has been omitted.
Substantive comments are defined as
comments within the scope of the
proposal, that have a direct relationship
to the proposal, and that include
supporting reasons for the Responsible
Official's consideration.
Early Notice of Importance of Public
Participation in Subsequent
Environmental Review
A draft environmental impact
statement will be prepared for comment.
The comment period on the draft
environmental impact statement will be
45 days from the date the
Environmental Protection Agency
publishes the notice of availability in
the Federal Register.
The Forest Service believes, at this
early stage, it is important to give
reviewers notice of several court rulings
related to public participation in the
environmental review process. First,
reviewers of draft environmental
statements must structure their
participation in the environmental
review of the proposal so that it is
meaningful and alerts an agency to the
reviewer's position and contentions.
Vermont Yankee Nuclear power Corp v.
NRDC, 435 U.S. 519, 553 (1978). Also,
environmental objections that could be
raised at the draft environmental impact
statement stage but that are not raised
until after completion of the final
environmental impact statement may be
waived or dismissed by the courts. City
of Angoon v. Hodel, 803 F.2d 1016,
1022 (9th Cir. 1986) and Wisconsin
Heritages, Inc. v. Harris, 490 F. Supp.
1334, 1338 (E.D. Wis. 1980). Because of
these court rulings, it is very important
that those interested in this proposed
action participate by the close of the 45-
day comment period so that substantive
comments and objections are made
available to the Forest Service at a time
when it can meaningfully consider them
and respond to them in the final
environmental impact statement.
To assist the Forest Service in
identifying and considering issues and
concerns on the proposed action,
comments on the draft environmental
impact statement should be as specific
as possible. It is also helpful if
comments refer to specific pages or
chapters of the draft statement.
Comments may also address the
adequacy of the draft environmental
impact statement or the merits of the
alternatives formulated and discussed in
the statement. Reviewers may wish to
refer to the Council on Environmental
Quality Regualtions for implementing
the procedural provisions of the
National Environmental Policy Act at 40
CFR 1503.3 in addressing these points.
Comments received, including the
names and addresses of those who
comment, will be considered part of the
public record on this proposal and will
be available for public inspection.
(Authority: 40 CFR 1501.7 and 1508.22;
Forest Service Handbook 1909.15, Section
21)
Dated: February 3, 2005.
Terri Simon-Jackson,
Acting Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 05-2494 Filed 2-8-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Notice of Southwest Idaho Resource
Advisory Committee Meeting
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of meeting.
SUMMARY: Pursuant to the authorities in
the Federal Advisory Committee Act
(Pub. L. 92-463) and under the Secure
Rural Schools and Community Self-
Determination Act of 2000 (Pub. L. 106-
393), the Boise and Payette National
Forests' Southwest Idaho Resource
Advisory Committee will conduct a
business meeting, which is open to the
public.
DATES: Wednesday, February 16, 2005,
beginning at 10:30 a.m.
ADDRESSES: Idaho Counties Risk
Management Program Building, 3100
South Vista Avenue, Boise, Idaho.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Agenda
topics will include review and approval
of project proposals, and is an open
public forum.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Doug Gochnour, Designated Federal
Officer, at 208-392-6681 or e-mail
dgochnou ,1 fs.fed.us.
Dated: January 3, 2005.
Richard DI. Christensen,
Engineering, Lands, and Minerals Officer,
Boise National Forest.
[FR Doc, 05-2485 Filed 2-8-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Rural Utilities Service: North Carolina
Electric Membership Corporation;
Notice of Finding of No Significant
Impact
AGENCY: Rural Utilities Service, USDA.
This notice of intent initiates the
scoping process which guides the
development of the environmental
impact statement under NEPA, which
6832 Federal Register/Vol. 70, No. 26 / Wednesday, February 9, 2005/Notices
s
E
11 telephone at [phone] or e-mail at
ACTION: Notice of Finding of No
Significant Impact.
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that
the Rural Utilities Service (RUS) has
made a Finding Of No Significant
Impact with respect to a request from
North Carolina Electric Membership
Corporation for financing assistance
from RUS to finance the construction of
a 336 megawatt (MIV), simple-cycle
combustion turbine electric generating
facility in Anson County North
Carolina, and a 280 MW simple-cycle
combustion turbine electric generation
facility in Richmond County, North
Carolina.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Lawrence Wolfe, Engineering and
Environmental Staff, RUS, Stop 1571,
1400 Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20250-1571, telephone
[phone], e-mail
lorry. ivol feC usda.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: North
Carolina Electric Membership
Corporation proposes to construct and
operate two sinnple-cycle combustion
turbine electric generation projects. A
336 MW facility is proposed at a site
located approximately 4 miles cast of
Lilesville, just to the north of Blewett
Falls Road (SR 1745) and south of
McCoy Creek in Anson County, North
Carolina. Approximately 20 acres of the
178 acre site will be needed for the
generation facility. The other project
consists of a 280 MW facility proposed
at a site approximately 2.54 miles
southwest of Hamlet ',vest of Airport
Road and south of Marks Creek in
Richmond County, North Carolina.
Approximately 20 acres of the 258 acre
site will be needed for the generation
facility. This facility will also require
the construction of 7.8 miles of 230 kV
transmission line between the
Rockingham Substation and the
Richmond Substation. The transmission
line will be constructed and operated by
Progress Energy. North Carolina Electric
Membership Corporation is expected to
finance the cost of the project through
an RUS guarantee. Specific information
on the facilities to be constructed and
their locations are provided in the
environmental assessment.
Copies of the Finding of No
Significant Impact are available from
RUS at the address provided herein or
from June Small, North Carolina Electric
Membership Corporation, P.O. Box
27306, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-
7300. Ms. Small may be contacted by
june.smal1c, 11 Celli Cs. coil].
Dated: February 4, 2005.
James K. Newby,
Assistant Administrator, Electric Program.
[FR Doc. 05-2515 Filed 2-8-05; 8:45 amt
BILLING CODE 3410-15-P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-475-8181
Notice of Final Results of the Seventh
Administrative Review of the
Antidumping Duty Order on Certain
Pasta from Italy and Determination to
Revoke in Part
AGENCY: Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On August 6, 2004, the
Department of Commerce published the
preliminary results and partial
rescission of the seventh administrative
review and revocation of the
antidumping duty order in part, for the
antidumping duty order on certain pasta
from Italy. The review covers eight
manufacturers/exporters of the subject
merchandise: (1) Barilla Alimentare,
S.p.A. (Barilla), (2) Corticella Molini e
Pastifici S.p.A. (Corticella) and its
affiliate Pasta Combattenti S.p.A.
(Combattenti) (collectively, Corticella/
Combattenti), (3) Pastificio Guido
Ferrara S.r.l. (Ferrara), (4) Industria
Alimentare Colavita, S.p.A. (Indalco)
and its affiliate Fusco S.r.l. (Fusco)
(collectively Indalco), (5) Pasta Lensi
S.r.l. (Lensi), (6) PAM S.p.A. (PAM), (7)
Pastificio Riscossa F. Illi Mastromauro,
S.r.1. (Riscossa), and (8) Pastificio
Carmine Russo S.p.A./Pastificio Di Nola
S.p.A. (Russo). The period of review
(POR) is July 1, 2002, through June 30,
2003.
As a result of our analysis of the
comments received, these final results
differ from the preliminary results. For
our final results, we have found that
during the POR, Barilla, Corticella/
Combattenti, Indalco, PAM, Riscossa,
and Russo sold subject merchandise at
less than normal value (NV). We have
also found that Ferrara and Lensi did
not make sales of the subject
merchandise at less than NV (i.e., they
have "zero" or de nlinimis dumping
margins). We have also determined to
revoke the antidumping duty order with
respect to subject merchandise
produced and also exported by Ferrara
and Lensi because cacti company sold
the subject merchandise at not less than
NV for a period of at least three
consecutive years. See 19 CFR
351.222(b)(2) and the "Revocation"
section of this notice. The final results
are listed in the "Final Results of
Review" section below.
EFFECTIVE DATE: February 9, 2005.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mark Young, AD/CVD Operations,
Office 3, Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce,
Washington, D.C. 20230; telephone:
[phone].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On August 6, 2004, the Department
published the preliminary results of the
seventh administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on certain pasta
from Italy. See Notice of Preliminary
Results, Partial Rescission of
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Reviety and Revocation of the
Antidumping Duty Order in Part: For
the Seventh Administrative Review of
the Antidumping Duty Order on Certain
Pasta from Italy, 69 FR 47880 (August
6, 2004) (Preliminary Results). Although
the Department initiated the review of
fifteen companies, we rescinded the
reviews of N. Puglisi & F. Industria
Pasta Alimentari S.p.A. (Puglisi), La
Molisana Industrie Alimentari S.p.a. (La
Molisana), Molino e Pastificio
Tomasello S.r.l. (Tomasello), Pastificio
Antonio Pallante S.r.l. (Pallante) and
Industrie Alimentari Molisano S.r.l.
(IAM) (collectively Pallante/IAM),
Pastificio Fratelli Pagani S.p.A. (Pagani),
Rummo S.p.A. Molino e Pastificio
(Rummel, and Pastificio Lucia, Garofalo
S.p.A. (Garofalo). See the "Background"
and "Partial Rescission" section of the
Preliminary Results, 69 FR at 47880,
47881. The review covers the remaining
eight manufacturers/exporters: Barilla,
Corticella/Combattenti, Ferrara, Indalco,
Lensi, PAM, Riscossa, and Russo.
We invited parties to comment on our
Preliminary Results. Petitioners' filed
case briefs on September 7, 2004,
regarding Barilla, Indalco, and Riscossa.
Barilla, Indalco, PAM, Russo, Riscossa,
and Lensi each filed case briefs on
September 7, 2004. On September 13,
2004, petitioners submitted rebuttal
briefs concerning Barilla and Indalco,
and Barilla, Riscossa, and Indalco
submitted rebuttal briefs. On October 6,
2004, a public hearing was held at the
Department of Commerce with respect
to Barilla. On November 4, 2004, the
Department published the notice of
extension of final results of the
antidumping administrative review of
pasta from Italy, extending the date for
'Petitioners are New World Pasta Company,
Dakota Growers Pasta Company, Borden Foods
Corporation and American Italian Pasta Company.
L.J

ATTACHMENT C
NEPA ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
(ELECTRONIC FILE IN CD FORMAT)

® ATTACHMENT D
N.C. STATE CLEARINGHOUSE LETTER

L]
a? swc •.y,
3
North Carolina
FL8 16 2005
Department of Administration
Michael F. Easley, Governor Gwynn T. Swinson, Secretary
February 11, 2005
Ms. June Small
NC Electric Membership Cooperation
POB 27306
Raleigh, NC 27616
Dear Ms. Small:
Re: SCH File # 05-E-0000-0190; EA; Proposal to construction approx. 620 MW of peak generating
facilities in Anson and Richmond Counties.
The above referenced environmental impact information has been submitted to the State Clearinghouse
under the provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act. According to G.S. 113A-10, when a
state agency is required to prepare an environmental document under the provisions of federal law, the
environmental document meets the provisions of the State Environmental Policy Act. Attached to this
letter for your consideration are additional comments made by agencies received after the review close
date. The Division of Water Quality had questions of the proposal (seen on DENR form.) If you would
a response to my office I will forward to DENR for their information.
Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call. Thank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
&44-n
Ms. Cloys Baggett
Environmental Policy Act Coordinator
Attachments
cc: Region F
Region N
Mailing Address: Telephone: [phone]
1301 Mail Service Center Fax[phone]
Raleigh, NC 27699-1301 State Courier 451-01-00
e-mail [e-mail]
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
Location Address:
116 West Jones Street
Raleigh, North Carolina
Michael F. Easley, Governor
NC®ENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
MEMORANDUM FFE
05 J
, d,
0
a c''• ???? '
TO: Chrys Baggett
State Clearinghouse
FROM: Melba McGee `4w
Project Review Coordinator
RE: 405-0190, Anson & Richmond Counties, Environmental Analysis for
Proposed Parking Generation Facilities
DATE: February 9, 2005
The attached comments were received by this office after the response due date.
These comments should be forwarded to the applicant and made a part of our previous
comment package.
Thank you for the opportunity to respond.
Attachment
1601 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1601
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: www.enr.state.nc.uslENR
An Equal Opportunity k Affirmative Action Employer- 50% Recycled 110% Post Consumer Paper
JJCPUrU11t;Ill ul Lllvlruninent, allu 11ULUI "I 11tZUUrCt:J
Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs
Project Revicw Form
0
•
Prolca Number. Coungr. Date Reeeivod: Date Response Due (firm dmdline):
This project is being reviewed as indicated below:

Regional Office Regional Ofrcc Area In-House Review
0 Asheville o Soil & Water o Marine Fisheries
-
-, 2
1
;0a
y
ettevtlle - Water 1
- C3 Coastal Management

C3 Mooresville Groundwa 4f
Wildlife Water Resources
?
"P-
'
r
2L LJO P 7/-
o Raleigh and Quality Engincc Ynvironutental Health
o Washington o Recreational Coa sultant orest Resources o Solid Waste Mgmt
a Wilmington I 8 910 / D Land Resources o Radiation Protection
o Winston-Salem /
6
f Parks & Recreation EL?1r?d4 VED
E
8 2005
s
N .?cFsvED con
0 W
ater Quality JAN 0 3 2005
?
*9
UQA cts
o Groundwater OEM
FAYMEVILLE RrGIONAL OFFICE
o Air Qualit
y
&tanager Sip -O Rc&n: Duc: la-House Rc%icuer:Agrncy:
Response (check all applicable)
o No objection to project as proposed.
a No Comment
C3 Insufficient information to complete review
o Other (specify or attach commcrits)
zwq- 1?A 'i:r ,4tti'tY1: Q uf,'„"TirMS
Oi }l?}i-thr'? :,.;* tvcur ?: ?'Nt? to SLpgrRldr 4p?r'
? t-{ow;s •?4tc oil ? wnsrG =u?M'? ?hk?-%af ?p? ?a?e
d; <IOosL >; pfi?
KG 1 U KS IV:
Melba McGee
Environmental Coordinator
Office of Legislative & Intergovernmental Affairs
State of North Carolina Reviewing Office: ?v f L? 2 O
A A
NCDENR Department of Environment and Natural Resources -
Project Number: ?? ? /9 fl Due Date:
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW - PROJECT COMMENTS
After review of this project it has been determined that the DENR permit(s) and/or approvals indicated may need to be obtained in order for this project
to comply with North Carolina Law. Questions regarding these permits should be addressed to the Regional Office indicated on the reverse of this form.
All applications, information and guidelines relative to these plans and permits are available from the same Regional Office.
E-11
411
PERMITS SPECIAL APPLICATION PROCEDURES or REQUIREMENTS Normal Process Time
(Statutory Time Limit)
? Permit to construct & operate wastewater treatment Application 90 days before begin construction or award of construction 30 days
facilities, sewer system extensions & sewer systems contracts. On-site inspection. Post-application technical conference usual. (90 days)
not discharging into state surface waters.
? NPDES-permit to discharge into surface water and/or Application 180 days before begin activity. On-site Inspection preapplication
permit to operate and construct wastewater facilities conference usual. Additionally, obtain permit to construct wastewater treatment 90 -120 days
discharging into state surface waters. facility-granted after NPDES. Reply time, 30 days after receipt of plans or Issue (N/A)
of NPDES permit-whichever is later.
? Water Use Permit Preapplication technical conference usually necessary 30 days
(N/A)
? Well Construction Permit Complete application must be received and permit issued prior to the 7 days
Installation of a well. (15 days)
? Dredge and Fill Permit Application copy must be served on each adjacent riparian property owner. 55 days
On-site Inspection. Preapplication conference usual. Filling may require Easement (? days}
- to Fill from N.C. Department of Administration and Federal Dredge and Fill Permit.
Permit to construct & operate Air Pollution Abatement
facilities and/or Emission Sources as per 15 A NCAC N/A 60 days
(2Q.0100, 2Q.0300, 2H.0600)
Any open burning associated with subject proposal
must be in compliance with 15 A NCAC 20.1900
Demolition or renovations of structures containing
asbestos material must be in compliance with
60 days
15 A NCAC 2D.1110 (a) (1) which requires notification N/A (90 days)
and removal prior to demolition. Contact Asbestos
Control Group 919-733.0820.
? Complex Source Permit required under 15 A NCAC
2D.0800
The Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 must be properly addressed for any land disturbing activity. An erosion & sedimentation 20 days
control plan will be required if one or more acres to be disturbed Plan filed with proper Regional Office (Land Quality Section) at least 30 (30 days)
days before beginning activity. A fee of S50 for the first acre or any part of an acre.
? The Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 must be addressed with respect to the referenced Local Ordinance. 30 days
? Sedimentation and erosion control must be addressed in accordance with NCOOrs approved program. Particular attention should be
given to design and installation of appropriate perimeter sediment trapping devices as well as stable stormwater conveyances and outlets.
? Mining Permit On-site Inspection usual. Surety bond filed with DENR. Bond amount varies with
type mine and number of acres of affected land Any are mined greater than 30 days
one acre must be permitted. The appropriate bond must be received before (60 days)
the permit can be issued.
? North Carolina Burning permit On-site inspection by N.C. Division of Forest Resources If permit exceeds 4 days 1 day
'
(N/A)
? Special Ground Clearance Burning Permit-22 counties On-site inspection by N.C. Division of Forest Resources required'if more than rive 1 day
in coastal N.C.with organic soils acres of ground clearing activities are Involved Inspections should be requested (N/A)
at least ten days before actual burn is planned'
? Oil Refining Facilities N/A 90-120 days
(N/A)
U I Dam Safety Permit
E
PERMITS
? I Permit to drill exploratory ail or gas well
? i Geophysical Exploration Permit
? I State Lakes Construction permit
?1 401 Water Quality Certification
CAMA Permit for MAJOR development
? I CAMA Permit for MINOR development
SPECIAL APPLICA11ON PROCEDURES or REQUIREMENTS
If permit required, application 60 days before begin construction. Applicant
constructionmust hiretN. IsGquali0edaccording englneerto to: preparepians,Inspectccnstruction,certify
DENR approved plans. May also require permit under
mosquito control program, and a 404 permit from Corps of Engineers.
An Inspection of site is necessary to verify Hazard Classification. A minimum
fee of $200.00 must accompany the application. An additional processing fee
based on a percentage or the total project cost will be required upon completion.
File surety bond of $5,000 with DENR running to State of N.C. conditional that any
well opened by drill operator shall, upon abandonment, be plugged according
to DENR rules and regulations.
--------------
Application riled with DENR at least 10 days prior to
Issue of permit. Application
by letter. No standard application form.
Application fees based on structure size is charged. Must include descriptions
& drawings of structure & proof of ownership of riparian property.
N/A
$250.00 fee must accompany application
$50.00 fee must accompany application
Several geodetic monuments are located in or near the project area. If any monument needs to be moved or destroyed, please notify:
N.C.Geodetic Survey, Box 27687 Raleigh, N.C.27611
? Abandonment of any wells,If required must be in accordance with Title 15A.5 ubchapter X.0100.
.
? Notification of the proper regional office it requested It 'orphan' underground storage tanks (USTS) are discovered during any excavation operation.
[] ] Compliance with I SA NCAC 2H 1000 (Coastal Stormwater Rules) is required.
* I Other comments (attach additional pages as necessary, being certain to cite comment authority)
Ell
k
K
r ? ' ?1
?c Z °°s
o
Normal Process Time
;Statutory Time Limit)
30 days
(60 days)
10 days
(N/A)
10 days
(N/A)
15.20 days
(N/A)
55 days
(130 days)
60 days
(130 days)
22 days
(25 days)
45 days
(N/A)
REGIONAL OFFICES
Questions regarding these permits should be addressed to the Regional Office marked below.
? Asheville Regional Office ? Mooresville Regional Office
59 Woodfln Place ? Wilmington Regional Office
919 North Main Street 127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Asheville, N.C.28801 Mooresville, N.C.28115
[phone] Wilmington, N.C. 28405
[phone] [phone]
? Fayetteville Regional Offico
225 Green Street, Suite 714
Fayetteville, N.C.28301
[phone]
? Raleigh Regional Office
3800 Barrett Drive, RO. Box 27687
Raleigh, N.C.27611
[phone]
? Washington Regional Office
943 Washington Square Mall
Washington, N.C. 27889
[phone]
? Winston-Salem Regional Office
585 Waughtown Street
Winston-Salem, N.C.27107
[phone]
E
ATTACHMENT E
® NCEMC RESPONSE TO AGENCY COMMENTS
RECEIVED AFTER PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD
C7

A vftn-
%? North Carolina Electric
? Membership Corporation
April 1, 2005
Ms. Stephanie Strength
RUS
1400 independence Ave., SW
Room 224.1
Washington, DC 20250-1571
Re: State Clearinghouse File# OS-E-0000-0190; EA
Proposal to Construct Approx. 6201111V ojPeak Generating Facilities
Anson and Riclnuord Counties
Dear Stephanie:
North Carolina Electric Membership Corporation (NCEMC) received a letter from the N.C.
Clearinghouse dated February 11, 2005. enclosing comments from the N.C. Division of Water
Quality (DWQ) (see attachment). Although the comments were filed aflet the close of the public
comment period, NCEMC wishes.to respond as well as update your files.
DWQ questioned the means of disposal for effluent from the oil/water separator, and for material
from the oily waste sump. At this point in time NCEMC's engineering contractor is developing
® design specifications for these facility components. Once the specifications are finalized, and the
volume of oily wastes and effluent discharge rate from the oil/water separator are established, a
determination will be made as to the means of disposal. In either case oily wastes and recovered
oil will be handled by a recycling and disposal contractor. Small quantities of effluent from the
oil/water separator will preferably be trucked to the local wastewater treatment facility. Should
effluent quantities be large enough to make this infeasible, an application for a discharge permit
will be submitted to DWQ..
i have copied Ms. Chrys Baggett of the Clearinghouse, and she has indicated she will be
forwarding this response to D11'Q.
Sincerely,
June M. Small
Director of Environmental Affairs
JMS/bp
Attachment
cc: C. Baggett
T. Ryan
® A Touchstone Energy Partner
P.O. Box 27306, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7306.3400 Sumner Boulevard, Raleigh. North Carolina 27616 • [phone] / Fax: [phone]