Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
DRAFT
Revised 1/14
ENVIRONMENTAL
EVALUATION
(Short Form Environmental Assessment)
for
AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT
PROJECTS
~ Aviation in Harmony with the Environment ~
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION
MEMPHIS AIRPORTS DISTRICT OFFICE-SOUTHERN REGION
AIRPORTS DIVISION
Airport Name: Piedmont Triad International Airport (GSO) Airport Location: Guilford County, NC Proposed Project: HAECO Facility Improvements Date: July 31, 2015
DRAFT
HAECO Facility Improvements Revised 1/14 Page 2 of 15
* * * * * *
FAA MEM-ADO, SOUTHERN REGION AIRPORTS DIVISION
ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION FORM
FOR SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTS
The Short Form Environmental Assessment (EA), is based upon the guidance in Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Order 5050.4B, "National Environmental Policy Act, Implementing Instructions for Airport Projects" or subsequent revisions, which incorporates the Council on Environmental Quality's (CEQ) regulations for implementing the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), as well as the US Department of Transportation environmental regulations (including FAA Order 1050.1E or subsequent revisions), and many other federal statutes and regulations designed to protect the Nation's natural, historic, cultural, and archeological resources. This version of the short form EA should be used only for projects at federally obligated airports that fall within the boundaries of the Memphis Airports District Office (MEM-ADO).
The Short Form EA is intended to be used when a project cannot be categorically excluded (CATEX) from formal environmental assessment, but when the environmental impacts of the proposed project are expected to be insignificant and a detailed EA would not be appropriate. Accordingly, this form is intended to meet the intent of a short EA while satisfying the regulatory requirements of an EA.
Proper completion of the Short Form EA would allow the FAA to determine whether the proposed airport development project can be processed with a short EA, or whether a more detailed EA must be prepared. The MEM-ADO normally intends to use a properly completed Short Form EA to support a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI).
Applicability The Short Form EA should be used if the sponsor’s proposed project meets the following two (2) criteria:
1) The proposed project is a normally categorically excluded action that may include extraordinary circumstances Table 6-3; paragraph 702.a. or the airport action is one that normally requires an EA but involvement with, or impacts to, the extraordinary circumstances are not notable in number or degree of impact, and that any significant impacts can be mitigated below the level of significance, 5050.4B, Table 7.1.
2) The proposed project must fall under one of the following categories of Federal Airports Program actions noted with an asterisk (*):
(a) Approval of an airport location (new airport). (b) Approval of a project on an airport layout plan (ALP). (c) Approval of federal funding for airport development. (d) Requests for conveyance of government land. (e) Approval of release of airport land. (f) Approval of the use of passenger facility charges (PFC). (g) Approval of development or construction on a federally obligated airport.
DRAFT
HAECO Facility Improvements Revised 1/14 Page 3 of 15
Do any of these listed Federal Airports program action(s), 2(b) - (g), apply to your project? Yes No** If “yes,” list them here (there can be more than one). Approval of development or construction on a federally obligated airport __
If “no,” see (**) below.
** If the proposed project does not meet 1) or 2) above, i.e., one or more answers to the
questions resulted in a (**), do not complete this Form. Rather, contact the Environmental
Protection Specialist at the Memphis Airports District Office for additional guidance.
Instructions Prior to preparing any NEPA documentation, including the Short Form EA, the MEM-ADO encourages you to contact the Environmental Protection Specialist or Program Manager to ensure that the Short Form EA is the proper Form for your proposed action. Completed forms without prior MEM-ADO concurrence may result in approval delays or rejected NEPA documentation.
To complete the Form, the preparer should describe the proposed project and provide information on any potential impacts of the proposed project. Accordingly, it will be necessary for the preparer to have knowledge of the environmental features of the airport. In addition, while the preparer should have knowledge of the airport and associated features, correspondence with federal, state, and local regulatory agencies should be completed, when appropriate, to ensure that protected environmental resources are identified in the study area. In cases where regulatory agency coordination is appropriate, the preparer should submit a project description and drawing to the Environmental Protection Specialist for concurrence prior to submitting the project proposal to outside agencies.
Correspondence from federal, state, and local agencies, project plans or maps, or secondary environmental studies, should be included as an appendix to this form.
It is important to note that in addition to fulfilling the requirements of NEPA through this evaluation process, the FAA is responsible for ensuring that airport development projects comply with the many laws and orders administered by the agencies protecting environmental resources. The Form is not meant to be a stand-alone document. Rather, it is intended to be used in conjunction with applicable Orders, laws, and guidance documents, and in consultation with the appropriate resource agencies.
DRAFT
HAECO Facility Improvements Revised 1/14 Page 4 of 15
Complete the following information:
1. Project Location: Airport Name: Piedmont Triad International Airport (GSO)
Airport Address: 1000-A Ted Johnson Parkway City: Greensboro County: Guilford State: NC
2. Airport Sponsor Information: Point of Contact: Mr. J. Alex Rosser, PE; Deputy Executive Director Address: Piedmont Triad Airport Authority 1000-A Ted Johnson Parkway; Greensboro, NC 27409 Telephone: 336.665.5620 Fax: 336.665.5694 E-mail: [email protected]
3. Evaluation Form Preparer Information: Point of Contact: Mr. Richard B. Darling, CE; Environmental Manager Address: Michael Baker Engineering, Inc. 8000 Regency Parkway, Suite 600; Cary, NC 27518 Telephone: 919.481.5740 Fax: 919.463.5490 E-mail: [email protected]
4. Proposed Development Action (describe ALL associated projects that are involved): Site preparation of approximately 20 acres of Airport land to be added to the existing Timco Aviation Services dba Haeco Airframe Services (HAECO) facility for aviation-related development (see Attached Page A-1), including clearing, grading, fill, and excavation for: 1. Extension of the existing concrete apron by approximately 211,424 sq. ft. with 25,600 sq. ft. connector throat to an existing Taxiway M connector (the connector throat will link the two sides of the HAECO complex); 2. Construction of an approximately 177,400 sq. ft. two-bay wide-body aircraft maintenance hangar; 3. Construction of an approximately 30,000 sq. ft. support annex; 4. Construction of a new fire pump and expansion of the existing hazardous materials (HazMat) facility; 5. Addition of approximately 300 parking spaces with vehicle and pedestrian access and fire lanes. Extension of utilities to the new structures including communications, electrical, natural gas, water, and sanitary sewer (land disturbance for utility extensions are anticipated to be within the proposed project grading limits and will not impact additional special resources). Stormwater management and off-site mitigation for unavoidable wetland and stream impacts are also anticipated.
5. Describe the Purpose of and Need for the Project: The proposed improvements would address the need to service wide-body aircraft by providing movement and hangar space; fire suppression capability; employee parking; and to connect the two sides of the existing HAECO complex. These improvements would increase operational capabilities and improve efficiency at HAECO’s GSO facility.
6. Alternatives to the Project: Describe any other reasonable actions that may feasibly substitute for the proposed project, and include a description of the “No Action” alternative. If there are no feasible or reasonable alternatives to the proposed project, explain why:
DRAFT
HAECO Facility Improvements Revised 1/14 Page 5 of 15
Alt #1 During early project planning, consideration was given to locating the proposed new hangar adjacent to HAECO Maintenance Hangar No. 1, at the southwest end of the HAECO facility (Attached Page A-2), but this alternative would have required removal and relocation of the fire suppression system for the existing HAECO facility and would have removed rather than added facility parking. This alternative involved significant relocation of utilities, did not provide sufficient parking, and complicated employee access. This alternative does not satisfy the purpose and need for the project and was not carried forward.
Alt. #2 There are no reasonable actions, other than the preferred alternative, that feasibly substitute for the proposed project. The project, requiring specific dimensions and orientation of components, must be located at the existing HAECO facility, at the area available between existing Hangars 3 and 4. Locating the project to the Northeast complex (the other side of Hangar 4) would remove rather than add parking and result in insufficiencies similar to those of Alt #1.
No Action Alt. HAECO would have to continue routing aircraft and vehicular traffic on airport taxiways or through security and along public roads in order to traverse from one side of its existing complex to the other. HAECO would be required to explore other sites, other airports, and/or construct entirely new facilities in order to address its operational need to service wide-body aircraft.
Explanation The preferred alternative is the only reasonable alternative that meets the project purpose and need. Due to the limited available space and location of streams and wetlands on both sides of and in the middle of the HAECO property, there is no project alternative which does not impact jurisdictional resources.
7. Describe the Affected Environment of the Project Area: (terrain features, level of urbanization, sensitive populations, etc). Attach a map or drawing of the area with the location(s) of the proposed action(s) identified. Attachment? Yes No The approximately 20-acre project area is entirely within the existing Airport property. The HAECO facility is predominantly developed (aprons, taxiways, parking, hangars, buildings, and other structures) with maintained in-field lawns and stormwater/fire management ponds. The project area includes approximately 10.72 forested acres; 1,601 linear feet unnamed stream tributaries to Horsepen Creek; and 0.81 acres abutting wetlands (Attached Pages A-3, A-4).
8. Environmental Consequences: Special Impact Categories (refer to corresponding sections in 5050.4B or 1050.1E , or subsequent revisions, for more information and direction to complete each category, including discussions of Thresholds of Significance Table 7-1).
(1) NOISE
1) Does the proposal require a noise analysis per Order 1050.1E, Appendix A? Explain. (Note: Noise sensitive land uses are defined in Table 1 of FAR Part 150). Yes No No significant increase in noise sources is anticipated with HAECO operations following project construction.
2) If “yes,” determine whether the proposed project is likely to have a significant impact on noise levels over noise sensitive areas within the DNL 65 dBA noise contour. NA
DRAFT
HAECO Facility Improvements Revised 1/14 Page 6 of 15
(2) COMPATIBLE LAND USE
(a) Would the proposed project result in other (besides noise) impacts exceeding thresholds of significance that have land use ramifications, such as disruption of communities, relocation of residences or businesses, or impact natural resource areas? Explain. No community disruption or business relocation will result from the project as it is located entirely within the Airport.
(b) Would the proposed project be located near or create a wildlife hazard as defined in FAA Advisory Circular 150/5200-33, "Wildlife Hazards on and Near Airports"? Explain. Streams, wetlands, and a non-jurisdictional pond will be impacted - eliminating the current wildlife hazard potential of these areas. The proposed stormwater system may include new and existing open water area(s), but would be managed to discourage waterfowl and/or other potentially hazardous wildlife.
(3) SOCIAL IMPACTS
(a) Would the proposed project cause relocation of any homes or businesses? Yes No Explain. The project is located entirely within the Airport property.
(b) If “yes,” describe the availability of adequate relocation facilities. NA
(c) Would the proposed project cause an alteration in surface traffic patterns, or cause a noticeable increase in surface traffic congestion? Explain. No significant alteration of surface traffic patterns is contemplated with the project. The addition of approximately 400 employees to staff the completed project facilities may add to peak hour traffic, but anticipated spread between work “shifts” would moderate any potential contribution to congestion. Minor additional traffic is anticipated for project construction workers, but this should not be noticeable.
(4) INDUCED SOCIOECONOMIC IMPACTS
Would the proposed project cause induced, or secondary, socioeconomic impacts to surrounding communities, such as change business and economic activity in a community; impact public service demands; induce shifts in population movement and growth, etc.? Yes No Explain Approximately 400 additional employees are anticipated by HAECO to staff the proposed facilities following completion. Based on data from the US Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics, the work force in the Greensboro-High Point metropolitan statistical area (MSA) as of April 2015 was approximately 367,800. The addition of 400 jobs would only increase the total workforce by a little more than 0.1%.
DRAFT
HAECO Facility Improvements Revised 1/14 Page 7 of 15
(5) AIR QUALITY
(a) Does the proposed project have the potential to increase airside or landside capacity, including an increase in capacity to handle surface vehicles? Explain No additional airport capacity is proposed with this project. Additional aircraft activity associated with the project is anticipated to be negligible. The scale of the project is small enough that significant roadway capacity increases will not be required. Additional truck traffic/diesel vehicle activity will not approach the levels in the examples of projects of local air quality concern for PM2.5 provided in EPA’s Transportation Conformity Guidance for Quantitative Hot-spot Analyses in PM2.5 and PM10 Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas.
(b) Identify whether the project area is in a non-attainment or maintenance area for any of the criteria air pollutants having National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) established under the Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA), and identify which pollutant(s) apply. If the proposed project is in an attainment area, no further air quality analysis is needed; skip to item (6). See EPA Green Book at www.epa.gov/oar/oaqps/greenbk for current attainment areas. Guilford County is listed as a maintenance area for fine particulate matter (PM2.5) under the 1997 Standard. EPA is currently implementing the 2012 PM2.5 standard for which Guildford County is recommended to be classified as attainment/unclassifiable. Implementation options for the 2012 PM2.5 standard include revoking the 1997 standard, which would allow the region to re-designate from maintenance to attainment, removing the associated air quality analysis requirements.
(c) Is an air quality analysis needed with regard to indirect source review requirements or levels of aircraft activity (See Order 1050.1E and the 1997 FAA Handbook "Air Quality Procedures for Civilian Airports and Air Force Bases"). Explain. If “yes,” comply with state requirements. No, see response to 5(d)(4), below.
(d)(1) Would the proposed action be an “exempted action,” as defined in 40 C.F.R Part 51.853(c)(2) of the General Conformity Rule? If exempt, skip to item (6). List exemption claimed. No
(d)(2) Would the increase in the emission level of the regulated air pollutants for which the project area is in non-attainment or maintenance exceed the de minimis standards? Yes No
(d)(3) If “no,” would the proposed project cause a violation of any NAAQS, delay the attainment of any NAAQS, or worsen any existing NAAQS violation? Explain. Proposed project would not violate or delay attainment of NAAQS, see response to 5(d)(4), below.
(d)(4) Would the proposed project conform to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) approved by the state air quality resource agency? Explain, and provide supporting documentation. Yes, the scale of the project would result in emission changes below de minimus levels and would therefore be assumed to conform to the SIP. In April 2015, air quality impacts were determined to be below de minimus levels for the nearby GSO Cross-Field Taxiway and Site Development Projects - construction well in excess of that proposed for this project along with a similar negligible increase in aircraft activity.
DRAFT
HAECO Facility Improvements Revised 1/14 Page 8 of 15
(6) WATER QUALITY
Describe the potential of the proposed project to impact water quality, including ground water, surface water bodies, any public water supply systems, etc. Provide documentation of consultation with agencies having jurisdiction over such water bodies as applicable. The project will impact as much as 1,601 linear feet jurisdictional stream channel (unnamed tributaries to Horsepen Creek, A-5). (See Section 8.11 for wetlands). Water quality impact thresholds and mitigation for any unavoidable, minimized impacts will be resolved through the CWA 401 and 404 process. The project was informally discussed with NCDENR in a meeting on 4/17/2015 at the USACE Raleigh Regulatory Field Office. The project will be designed consistent with State erosion and sedimentation control and stormwater management regulations. The project will also be subject to the Airport’s Individual NPDES Industrial Permit including the PTIA Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan and Discharge Monitoring program.
(7) DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SECTION 303/4(f)
Does the proposed project require the use of any publicly owned land from a public park, recreation area, or wildlife or waterfowl refuge of national, state, or local significance, or land of an historic site of national, state, or local significance? Provide justification for your response. Include concurrence of appropriate officials having jurisdiction over such land regarding the use determination. The project is located entirely within the Airport - No 303/4(f) resources are located in the project vicinity, or will be impacted by the project (A-7, A-8).
(8) HISTORIC, ARCHITECTURAL, ARCHEOLOGICAL, AND CULTURAL
RESOURCES
(a) Describe any impact the proposed project might have on any properties in or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places. Provide justification for your response, and include a record of your consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO), if applicable (attach correspondence with SHPO). No NRHP resources will be impacted by the project according to the HPOWEB map (A-9, A-10).
(b) Describe whether there is reason to believe that significant scientific, prehistoric, historic, archeological, or paleontological resources would be lost or destroyed as a result of the proposed project. Include a record of consultation with persons or organizations with relevant expertise, including the SHPO, if applicable. No significant resources will be impacted by the project (A-9, A-10).
(9) BIOTIC COMMUNITIES
Describe the potential of the proposed project to directly or indirectly impact plant communities and/or the displacement of wildlife. This answer should also reference Section 6, Water Quality, if jurisdictional water bodies are present. Approximately 4.95 acres of Piedmont bottomland forest, approximately 5.77 acres mixed pine/hardwood forest, perennial stream channels (Section 8.6), and jurisdictional wetlands (Section 8.11) would potentially be directly impacted by the project (see A-4). Two non-jurisdictional ponds may also be impacted. Wildlife potentially displaced include limited terrestrial and aquatic species typical of the area (A-11). Loss of this isolated potential habitat area will be mitigated in conjunction with the mitigation of wetland and stream impacts (Sections 8.6 and 8.11) and will not result in fragmentation or impacts to off-site habitat.
DRAFT
HAECO Facility Improvements Revised 1/14 Page 9 of 15
(10) FEDERAL AND STATE-LISTED ENDANGERED AND THREATENED SPECIES
Would the proposed project impact any federally- or state-listed or proposed endangered or threatened species of flora and fauna, or impact critical habitat? Explain, and discuss and attach records of consultation efforts with jurisdictional agencies, if applicable. As of March 25, 2015 the US Fish & Wildlife Service (FWS) lists Small Whorled Pogonia (endangered) as the only protected species for Guilford County (A-15). The project is anticipated to have No Effect on this species - suitable habitat is not present at the project site and review of Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) records indicated no known occurrences within 1 mile (A-17, A-23, A-24, A-28). No water body large enough and sufficiently open to be considered a potential feeding source for Bald Eagle (Bald & Golden Eagle Protection Act) is located within 1.13 miles of the project and there are no known occurrences of this species within 1 mile of the project. No Federal Candidate species are listed for Guilford County and there are no State-listed endangered or threatened species known to occur within 1 mile of the project (A-28).
(11) WETLANDS
Does the proposed project involve the modification of delineated wetlands (Delineations must be performed by a person certified in wetlands delineation)? Provide documentation of consultation with agencies having jurisdiction over wetlands and include wetland inventory maps when appropriate. Approximately 0.81 acres jurisdictional wetlands abutting the perennial streams (unnamed tributaries to Horsepen Creek) may be directly impacted by the project (A-31). Unavoidable wetland impacts will be minimized to the extent practicable and will be mitigated in coordination with the USACE and NCDENR through the CWA 404/401 process (A-36).
(12) FLOODPLAINS
(a) Would the proposed project be located in, or would it encroach upon, any 100-year floodplains, as designated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)? Yes No
(b) Would the proposed project be located in a 500-year floodplain, as designated by FEMA? Yes No
(c) If “yes,” is the proposed project considered a "critical action", as defined in the Water Resources Council Floodplain Management Guidelines? (see FR Vol. 43, No. 29, 2/10/78) Yes No
(d) You must attach the corresponding FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) or other documentation showing the project area. Map attached? Yes No If “no,” why not? (A-37, A-38)
(e) If the proposed project would cause an encroachment of a base floodplain (the base floodplain is the 100-year floodplain for non-critical actions and the 500-year floodplain for critical actions), what measures would be taken to provide an opportunity for early public review, in accordance with Order 1050.1E, Appendix A, Section 9.2.c? NA
(13) COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
(a) Would the proposed project occur in, or affect, a coastal zone, as defined by a state's Coastal Zone Management Plan (CZMP)? Explain. The project is not located in a coastal county.
DRAFT
HAECO Facility Improvements Revised 1/14 Page 10 of 15
(b) If “yes,” is the project consistent with the State's CZMP? Explain. If applicable, attach the sponsor's consistency certification and the state's concurrence of that certification. Early coordination is recommended. NA
(14) COASTAL BARRIERS
Is the location of the proposed project within the Coastal Barrier Resources System, as delineated by the US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) or FEMA coastal barrier maps? Explain. NA
(15) WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS
Would the proposed project affect any portion of the free-flowing characteristics of a Wild and Scenic River or a Study River, or any adjacent areas that are part of such rivers, listed on the Wild and Scenic Rivers Inventory? Consult the (regional) National Parks Service (NPS), U.S. Forest Service (FS), or other appropriate federal authority for information. Early consultation is recommended. The project, located in the Cape Fear River basin, is not located within the watershed of a listed river.
(16) FARMLAND
(a) Would the proposed project involve the use of federal financial assistance or conversion of federal government land? Explain The project is located entirely on existing Airport property and will not impact farmland.
(b) If “yes” would it convert farmland protected by the Farmland Protection Policy Act (FPPA) (prime or unique farmland) to non-agricultural uses? Yes No
(c) If “yes,” determine the extent of project-related farmland impacts by completing (and submitting to the Natural Resources Conservation Service) the "Farmland Conversion Impact Rating Form" (NRCS Form AD 1006). Coordinate with the state or local agricultural authorities. Explain your response, and attach the Form AD 1006, if applicable. NA
(17) ENERGY SUPPLY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
What effect would the proposed project have on energy or other natural resource consumption? Would demand exceed supply? Explain. Letters from local public utilities and suppliers regarding their abilities to provide energy and resources needed for large projects may be necessary. Project construction will involve energy and natural resource consumption. Proposed buildings will include improved thermal efficiency, more efficient HVAC and lighting equipment, and will include low flow plumbing fixtures. The project is expected to have minimal impact on operational energy and natural resource consumption. Local utility representatives have not indicated any supply issues.
(18) LIGHT EMISSIONS
Would the proposed project have the potential for airport-related lighting impacts on nearby residents? Explain, and, if necessary, provide a map depicting the location of residences in the airport vicinity in relation to the proposed lighting system. The project has no potential for light impacts to residential areas. Project lighting is separated from the nearest residences (approximately 1 mile away) by lighting associated with the existing industry along Radar Road.
DRAFT
HAECO Facility Improvements Revised 1/14 Page 11 of 15
(19) SOLID WASTE
Would the proposed project generate solid waste? Yes No If “yes,” are local disposal facilities capable of handling the additional volumes of waste resulting from the project? Explain. Project construction debris can be handled by local disposal facilities, as has been the case for recent larger projects. The NCDENR Solid Waste Section “has seen no adverse impact on the surrounding community and likewise knows of no situations in the community which would affect this project from a solid waste perspective” (A-39).
(20) CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS
Would construction of the proposed project: 1) increase ambient noise levels due to equipment operation; 2) degrade local air quality due to dust, equipment exhausts and burning debris; 3) deteriorate water quality when erosion and pollutant runoff occur; 4) or disrupt off-site and local traffic patterns? Explain. 1) Noise generated by construction is not expected to appreciably increase noise off airport
property above levels associated with day to day airport operations. 2) Debris burning will not be authorized for this project. Contractor will be required to control dust
and construction vehicle and equipment exhaust in accordance with applicable regulations.
3) Contractor will be required to implement the erosion and sedimentation control plan for the project and the requirements of the anticipated NPDES construction permit.
4) Local and off-site roadway networks serving the Airport are suitable for material and equipment deliveries and other construction traffic without disrupting local traffic patterns.
(21) OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
(a) Is the proposed project likely to be highly controversial on environmental grounds? Explain. Recent (2014) public coordination for significantly larger project(s) at GSO resulted in no public attendance or comments at the NEPA public hearing and workshop, so no environmental controversy is anticipated for this smaller project.
(b) Is the proposed project likely to be inconsistent with any federal, state or local law or administrative determination relating to the environment? Explain. No inconsistencies are anticipated for the project – the project is located entirely within the Airport.
(c) Is the proposed project reasonably consistent with plans, goals, policies, or controls that have been adopted for the area in which the airport is located? Explain Yes – the project is within the Airport area depicted by the City of Greensboro, and adjacent areas (across Radar Road) are zoned “heavy industrial” by the City.
DRAFT
HAECO Facility Improvements Revised 1/14 Page 12 of 15
(22) HAZARDOUS SITES/MATERIALS
Would the proposed project require the use of land that may contain hazardous substances or may be contaminated? Explain your response and describe how such land was evaluated for hazardous substance contamination. Early consultation with appropriate expertise agencies (e.g., US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), EPA-certified state and local governments) is recommended. The project site has been located within the Airport secure area since development of the HAECO facility and no significant or reportable spills or contamination incidents have been reported for the project site under the PTIA SPCC Plan, which was put into effect in 2004. HAECO (formerly Timco) is a large quantity generator of hazardous waste (NCD986186351). Because the proposed project will occur on the same property or contiguous property, the proposed project will utilize the same EPA Identification number if hazardous waste is generated (A-40). Four inactive CERCLIS sites within 1 mile of the project are located in adjacent watersheds or downstream (A-41).
(23) PERMITS
List all required permits for the proposed project. Indicate whether any difficulties are anticipated in obtaining the required permits. CWA Section 401, 402 (NPDES modification), 404, and NC Erosion & Sedimentation Control permits will be required (A-43). Based on preliminary discussion with USACE and NCDENR, no specific or unusual impediments are anticipated in obtaining these permits.
NOTE: Even though the airport sponsor has/shall obtain one or more permits from the appropriate federal, state, and/or local agencies for the proposed project, initiation of such project shall NOT be approved until FAA has issued its environmental determination.
(24) ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
Would the proposed project impact minority and/or low-income populations? Consider human health, social, economic, and environmental issues in your evaluation. Explain. The project is not expected to impact minority and/or low-income populations. The project is located entirely within existing Airport property.
DRAFT
HAECO Facility Improvements Revised 1/14 Page 13 of 15
(25) CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
When considered together with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future development projects on or off the airport, federal or non-federal, would the proposed project produce a cumulative effect on any of the environmental impact categories above? You should consider projects that are connected, cumulative and similar (common timing and geography). Provide a list of such projects considered. For purposes of this Evaluation Form, generally use 3 years for past projects and 5 years for future foreseeable projects. No cumulative project environmental effects are anticipated: Past projects have included the nearby Honda MRO and Connector Road and the extension of Taxiway M. Only the Connector Road project involved quantifiable impacts (Nationwide 404/401 Permit and minor buffer variance for stream crossing). Future projects are the Cross-Field Taxiway and Northwest Development Site on the opposite side of the Airport in the Brush Creek rather than Horsepen Creek Sub-basin, and NCDOT roadway improvement projects in the project vicinity (I-73 Connector, US 220/NC 68 Connector, I-840, widening US 220, and widening Market Street). No significant environmental impacts have been determined for these projects. Cumulatively, the HAECO Facility Improvements would not add significant impacts, rather, the roadway improvements anticipate such Airport development. NCDENR will also evaluate cumulative project impacts specific to water quality during the CWA Section 401 Individual Water Quality Certification process.
9. MITIGATION: (a) Describe those mitigation measures to be taken to avoid creation of significant impacts to a particular resource as a result of the proposed project, and include a discussion of any impacts that cannot be mitigated, or that cannot be mitigated below the threshold of significance (See 5050.4B & 1050.1E, Appendix A). Unavoidable impacts to jurisdictional wetland and stream resources will be appropriately mitigated through the CWA Section 404, 401, and State environmental permitting processes. In order to comply with FAA wildlife hazard avoidance protocols and EPA mitigation rules, it is anticipated that impacts will be mitigated off-site through the NC Department of Mitigation Services (NCDMS, formerly EEP).
(b) Provide a description of the resources that are in or adjacent to the project area that must be avoided during construction. Note: The mitigation measures should be incorporated into the project’s design documents. There are no adjacent resources which would be impacted or require mitigation as a result of the project. Impacts to jurisdictional streams and wetlands adjacent to the project will be avoided pursuant to the anticipated requirements of CWA permits.
10. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT: Describe what efforts would be made to involve the public with this proposed project. Discuss the appropriateness of holding public meetings and/or public hearings, making the draft document available for public comment, or the preparation of a public involvement plan, etc. Early regulatory comments (scoping) were solicited from Federal agencies and in the NC Environmental Bulletin (State agencies) on June 6, 2015 (A-45). Availability of the draft EA from the State Environmental Review Clearing House, from FAA, and from PTAA, according to the notice published on July 31, 2015 (A-46) provides appropriate opportunity for public review of the environmental impacts of the project.
DRAFT
HAECO Facility Improvements Revised 1/14 Page 14 of 15
11. PREPARER CERTIFICATION: I certify that the information I have provided above is, to the best of my knowledge, correct.
Signature Date
Mr. Richard B. Darling, CE; Environmental Manager Name, Title
Michael Baker Engineering, Inc. Affiliation
12. AIRPORT SPONSOR CERTIFICATION: I certify that the information I have provided above is, to the best of my knowledge, correct. I also recognize and agree that no construction activity, including but not limited to site preparation, demolition, or land disturbance, shall proceed for the above proposed project(s) until FAA issues a final environmental decision for the proposed project(s), and until compliance with all other applicable FAA approval actions (e.g., ALP approval, airspace approval, grant approval) has occurred.
Signature Date
Mr. J. Alex Rosser, PE; Deputy Executive Director Name, Title
Piedmont Triad Airport Authority Affiliation
DRAFT
HAECO Facility Improvements Revised 1/14 Page 15 of 15
Note: This page to be completed by FAA only
13. FAA DECISION: Having reviewed the above information, certified by the responsible airport official, it is the FAA decision that the proposed project(s) of development warrants environmental processing as indicated below.
The proposed development action has been found to qualify for a Short Environmental Assessment.
The proposed development action exhibits conditions that require the preparation of a detailed Environmental Assessment (EA).
The following additional documentation is necessary for FAA to perform a complete environmental evaluation of the proposed project:
*Action Reviewed/Recommended by:
(FAA Environmental Specialist) Date
*Approved: (FAA Approving Official) Date
* The above FAA approval only signifies that the proposed development action(s), as described by the information provided in this Evaluation Form, initially appears to qualify for the indicated environmental processing action. This may be subject to change after more detailed information is made known to the FAA by further analysis, or through additional federal, state, local or public input, etc.
8000 Regency Parkway, Suite 600 | Cary, NC 27518
Office: 919.463.5488 | Fax: 919.463.5490
Attachments (Short Form Environmental Assessment)
HAECO Facility Improvements Piedmont Triad International Airport (GSO), Guilford County, North Carolina
EA Section Attachment Page
4. Proposed Development Action Preferred Project Layout (Site Option 1) .............. A-1
6. Alternatives to the Project Alt. #1 (Hangar 5 Preliminary Scope) ................... A-2
7. Affected Environment Figure 1 Project Vicinity Map .............................. A-3 Figure 2 Affected Environment ........................... A-4
8. Environmental Consequences
(6) WATER QUALITY NCDENR Riparian Buffer Determination .............. A-5
(7) DOT SECTION 303/4(f) Greensboro Transportation Map ......................... A-7 NCDOT No Comment ............................................ A-8
(8) HISTORIC, ARCH., & CULTURAL HPOWEB Resource Map ....................................... A-9 SHPO No Comment ............................................ A-10
(9) BIOTIC COMMUNITIES NCWRC 6/23/2015 Comment ............................ A-11
(10) ENDANGERED & THREATENED SPECIES USFWS Guilford Listed Species ........................... A-15 USFWS Project Listed Species ............................ A-17 USFWS 5/20/2015 Comment ............................. A-23 USFWS 7/10/2015 Comment ............................. A-24 NCNHP Natural Heritage Data ............................ A-28
(11) WETLANDS USACE Jurisdictional Determination .................. A-31 USACE 6/19/2015 Comment .............................. A-36
(12) FLOODPLAINS FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map ....................... A-37 NCFMP No Comment ......................................... A-38
(19) SOLID WASTE NCDENR Solid Waste 6/24/2015 Comment ....... A-39
(22) HAZARDOUS SITES/MATERIALS NCDENR Haz. Waste 6/25/2015 Comment ........ A-40 NCDENR Haz. Sites 6/10/2015 Comment .......... A-41
(23) PERMITS NCDENR WSRO 6/25/2015 Permits ................... A-43
10. Public Involvement State Clearinghouse #15-E-0000-0648 ............... A-45 Public Notice 7/31/2015 .................................... A-46
11. Preparer Qualifications Richard B. Darling ............................................... A-47
HA
EC
O
MR
O
CO
NC
EP
T
DE
VE
LO
PM
EN
TC
onfi
den
tial
an
d P
rop
riet
ary
info
rmat
ion
of
Gh
afar
i Ass
ocia
tes,
LLC
2015
JU
LY 2
9
9S
IT
E
OP
TI
ON
1
R
EV
IS
IO
N
HA
NG
AR
177,
400
SF
15,0
00 S
F
HA
ZMAT
TO
BE
EXPA
ND
ED
EXTE
ND
ED A
PRO
N
NEW
FIR
E W
ATER
PR
OVI
SIO
N
211,
424
SF
EN
GIN
E R
UN
-UP
FUTU
RE
A
DD
ITIO
N
HA
NG
AR
1
HA
NG
AR
2H
AN
GA
R 3
HA
NG
AR
4
2,20
0 S
F(T
OTA
L= 6
,150
SF)
+/- 3
00 P
AR
KIN
G S
PAC
ES
(RE
DU
CE
D T
O 2
50 A
T E
XPA
NS
ION
)
RA
DA
R R
OA
D
SHIP
PIN
G &
R
ECEI
VIN
G
EX
ISTI
NG
HO
LDIN
G
PO
ND
EX
PAN
SIO
N F
OR
E
XTR
A C
APA
CIT
Y
PAR
KIN
G A
REA
25’-0
” SE
TBA
CK
CA
R/T
RU
CK
A
CC
ES
S R
AM
PW
ALK
WAY
+/- 1
80 P
AR
KIN
G
SPA
CE
S
PO
TEN
TIA
L C
ON
NE
CTO
R
THR
OAT
(25,
600
SF)
EN
GIN
E R
UN
-UP
15,0
00 S
FAT
ME
ZZA
NIN
E
60’-0
” M
IN
15,0
00 S
FSH
OPS
/SU
PPO
RT
FIRE LANE
FIRE LANE
FUTU
RE E
XPAN
SION
SHO
PS/
SUPP
ORT
25,0
00 S
F
326’
-0” M
IN T
O
RE
TAIN
ING
WA
LL
AD
VAN
TAG
ES
:
DIS
AD
VAN
TAG
ES
:
1 2 3
NE
W H
AN
GA
R A
CC
ES
S A
PR
ON
W
ILL
BE
CO
NTI
GU
OU
S W
ITH
TH
AT
OF
EX
ISTI
NG
HA
NG
AR
S 1
-3 (A
DD
ED
FL
EX
IBIL
ITY
).
AIR
CR
AFT
EN
GIN
E G
RO
UN
D R
UN
-U
P TO
BE
RE
LOC
ATE
D W
ITH
A
FUTU
RE
RU
N-U
P P
OS
ITIO
N A
T AT
TH
E S
OU
TH E
ND
OF
HA
NG
AR
1.
MIN
IMA
L R
ES
TRIC
TIO
NS
ON
B
UIL
DIN
G/H
AN
GA
R O
PE
RAT
ION
AL
ELE
VATI
ON
S.
4
OP
TIM
IZE
D H
AN
GA
R G
EO
ME
TRY
/ S
TRU
CTU
RA
L C
ON
FIG
UR
ATIO
N T
O
MA
XIM
IZE
EFF
EC
TIV
E C
APA
CIT
Y/
SQ
UA
RE
FO
OTA
GE
.
1PA
RK
ING
RE
QU
IRE
ME
NTS
WIL
L B
E F
ILLE
D O
N T
WO
SE
PAR
ATE
PA
RK
ING
AR
EA
S.
A-1
W
2521
8
20
24
11
24
20
25
162
SP
AC
ES
PR
OP
OS
ED
65656666
2
133
SP
AC
ES
35S
PA
CE
S
14
ESS
WW
WW
WW
WW
WW
WWWW
WW WW WW WW WW
WW
WWWW
WWWW
WW
WW
S
WWWW
WWWW
WWWWWW
88
ON
LY
BU
SE
S
BU
SS
ES
ON
LYB DO
NO
T E
NTE
R
SP
AC
ES
825
21
OS
ED
ES
2
PR
OP
SP
PPP
44
522
61
BU
SS
ES
ON
LYB
US
SE
SO
NLY
DO
NO
T E
NTE
R
Pre
limin
ary
Sco
pe
..
.
.Apri
l 13
, 20
15623 Radar RoadGreensboro NC 27410
54
32
1
ABCD
12
34
C B A
Dat
e:
She
et:
Revi
sio
ns
Mk
Dat
eD
escri
ption
Dra
wn:
Che
ck:
Job N
umber:
D
Arc
hite
ctur
e
Eng
inee
ring
In
terio
r Des
ign
5
Tria
d D
esig
n G
roup
, P.C
.
4807
-C K
oger
Bou
leva
rdG
reen
sbor
o, N
C
2740
7
Tele
phon
e 33
6-21
8-82
82Fa
cisi
mile
336
218
-801
0w
ww
.tria
d-de
sign
grou
p.co
m
NC
Arc
hite
ctur
e R
eg.
5070
9N
C E
ngin
eerin
g Li
c.
C-1
108
MW
JM
WJ
15-0
14.
P:\2015\PTIAA - HAECO 15-014\CIVIL\SKETCHES\BASE SKETCH 3.DWG4/14/2015 9:12 AM
GR
AP
HIC
SC
ALE 0
3060
6012
0
1"=6
0'
BU
SS
ES
ON
LY
Pro
pose
d H
anga
r 5P
ropo
sed
Han
gar5
Pro
pos
P Loca
tion.
Han
gar P
adgg
ogg
To S
ubgr
ade
for H
anga
raaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
raaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaau
oS
TTbg
raTo
Su
TTbg
rabbg
rr H
anga
raaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaC
onst
ruct
ionon
onst
oonstt
onst
oCCCCCCCCCC
oCCCCCCCCCCCC
oooCC
ooCCCCCCCCC
ooooC
oooC
oCCCCCCCC
ooCCCC
oCC
trCC
ttttCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC
onst
ruct
ion
CCCC
Pro
pose
d P
ump
Hou
se R
eloc
atio
n
Pro
pose
d Tw
in W
ater
Tan
kssssssssnkFo
r Fire
Sup
pres
sion
Sys
temmmmmmem
Pro
pose
d Tr
uck
Driv
e R
eloc
atio
n
Pro
pose
d G
uard
Hou
seR
eloc
atio
n
Pro
pose
d R
eloc
ated
Load
ing
Doc
k
Rel
ocat
e E
xist
ing
Bui
ldin
gA
s R
equi
red
Dem
o E
xist
ing
Stru
ctur
esn
xA
s R
equi
red
to P
repa
ree
qH
anga
r Sub
grad
e P
adu
a
Pro
pose
d G
uard
Hou
sesR
eloc
atio
nca
ti
Pro
pose
d S
torm
wat
erB
MP
Exi
stin
gH
anga
r No
1
Exi
stin
gH
anga
r No
2
Exi
stin
gR
amp
Pro
pose
dP E
ntra
nce
Driv
e
Pro
ject
Are
a of
Impa
ct
Dem
o P
avem
ents
As
AR
equi
red
irrereeed
Tem
pora
ry P
arki
ngD
urin
g C
onst
ruct
ion
THIS
SH
EE
T IS
PR
ELI
MIN
AR
Y A
ND
SH
OU
LDN
OT
BE
US
ED
FO
R T
AK
E O
FF P
UR
PO
SE
S.
PLA
N R
EFL
EC
TS G
EN
ER
AL
INTE
NT
FOR
PR
OJE
CT
(SC
OP
E M
AY
CH
AN
GE
BA
SE
D O
NFU
ND
ING
)
Pro
pose
d B
us D
rop
off
and
Pic
k U
pC
oncr
ete
Wal
k
Pro
pose
d Te
mpo
rary
Gra
vel P
arki
ngD
urin
g C
onst
ruct
ion
Tem
pora
ry F
ence
Dur
ing
Con
stru
ctio
n
Tem
pora
ryG
uard
Hou
seD
urin
g C
onst
ruct
ion
Exi
stin
gG
rave
lP
arki
n g
Pro
pose
d S
ecur
ity F
ence
Pro
pose
d Fu
elP Is
land
Pro
pose
d A
bove
Gro
und
Fuel
Sto
rage
Tan
ks
Pro
pose
d P
arki
ngA
dditi
on
Pro
pose
d P
arki
ngA
dditi
on
A-2
US Geological Survey 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle “Guilford, 2010”
Project Vicinity Map
July 31, 2015
HAECO Facility Improvements
Figure 1
Environmental Assessment
Approximate Scale in Feet
2000 0 2000
Project location
NE Complex Hangar 4
SW Complex Hangars 1,2,3
A-3
ProposedApron
Expansion
Proposed Support Buildings
ProposedStormwater
Management
Proposed HazMatExpansionProposed
Fire PumpM
ove
Jet
Bla
st D
efle
cto
r
Proposed Hangar
Affected Environment
HAECO Facility Improvements
Figure 2
Radar Road
GSO
Tax
iway
M4
GSO Taxiway M
0.39 ac. headwater
forest wetland
0.33 ac. bottomland hardwood
wetland
0.09 ac. seep
wetland
30
5’ p
eren
nia
l tri
bu
tary
to
Ho
rsep
en C
r.
18
7’ p
eren
nia
l tri
bu
tary
to
Ho
rsep
en C
r.
Approximate Scale in Feet
200 0 200
July 31, 2015Environmental Assessment
non-jurisdictional fire-suppression pond ~0.75 ac.
mixed pine/
hardwood forest
~3.92 ac.
mixedpine/
hardwoodforest
~0.72 ac.
mixed pine/hardwood forest
~1.13 ac.
Piedmont bottomland
forest ~4.95 ac.
48” CMP
GSO Perimeter Road
42” RCP
24” CMP(valve closed)
11
09
’ per
enn
ial t
rib
uta
ry t
o H
ors
epen
Cr.
Pro
po
sed
Gra
din
g Li
mit
Pro
po
sed
Gra
din
g Li
mit
non-jurisdictional stormwater management
pond ~1.62 ac.
9’x 6’ CMPs
Proposed Grading Limit
ProposedParking
Proposed Access
NORTHEASTCOMPLEX
SOUTHWESTCOMPLEX
A-4
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Charles Wakild, PE Dee Freeman
Governor Director Secretary
North Carolina Division of Water Quality, Winston-Salem Regional Office Location: 585 Waughtown St. Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27107 Phone: 336-771-5000 \ FAX: 336-771-4630 \ Customer Service: 1-877-623-6748 Internet: www.ncwaterquality.org An Equal Opportunity \ Affirmative Action Employer
August 20, 2012 Richard Darling Michael Baker Engineering 7800 Airport Center Dr, Suite 100 Greensboro, NC 27409 Subject Property: TIMCO Site at Piedmont Triad International Airport, Greensboro NC, Guilford County
On-Site Determination for Applicability to the Mitigation Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0506(h)
On-Site Determination for Applicability to the Jordan Lake Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 02B .0267)
Dear Mr. Darling: On August 16, 2012, at your request and in your attendance, I conducted an on-site determination to review the features located on the subject property for intermittent/perennial determinations with regards to the above noted state regulations. Andy Williams with the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) was also present during the site visit. The features that were reviewed are identified on the attached map. The Division acknowledges the areas and boundaries identified as jurisdictional wetlands by the USACE. The channels identified as AAB, AAA, AAC and AB on the attached map were determined to be perennial streams throughout the entire project boundary. The owner (or future owners) should notify the DWQ (and other relevant agencies) of this decision in any future correspondences concerning this property. This on-site determination shall expire five (5) years from the date of this letter. Please note that at the time of this letter, all intermittent and perennial stream channels and jurisdictional wetlands found on the property are subject to the mitigation rules cited above. These regulations are subject to change in the future. Landowners or affected parties that dispute a determination made by the DWQ or Delegated Local Authority that a surface water exists and that it is subject to the buffer rule may request a determination by the Director. A request for a determination by the Director shall be referred to the Director in writing c/o Cyndi Karoly, DWQ, 401 Oversight/Express Review Permitting Unit, 2321 Crabtree Blvd., Suite 250, Raleigh, NC 27604-2260. Individuals that dispute a determination by the DWQ or Delegated Local Authority that “exempts” surface water from the buffer rule may ask for an adjudicatory hearing. You must act within 60 days of the date that you receive this letter. Applicants are hereby notified that the 60-day statutory appeal time does not start until the affected party (including downstream and adjacent landowners) is notified of this decision. DWQ recommends that the applicant conduct this notification in order to be
A-5
Richard Darling August 20, 2012 Page 2 of 2
certain that third party appeals are made in a timely manner. To ask for a hearing, send a written petition, which conforms to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes to the Office of Administrative Hearings, 6714 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, N.C. 27699-6714. This determination is final and binding unless you ask for a hearing within 60 days. This letter only addresses the applicability to the mitigation rules and the buffer rules and does not approve any activity within Waters of the United States or Waters of the State or their associated buffers. If you have any additional questions or require additional information please call me at 336-771-4964
Sincerely,
Sue Homewood DWQ Winston-Salem Regional Office
Enclosures: USGS Topo Map Preliminary Jurisdictional Map - Baker cc: Andy Williams, USACE Raleigh Regulatory Field Office (via email)
DWQ, Winston-Salem Regional Office
A-6
City
of G
reen
sbor
o
Map
Sca
le1
inch
= 2
000
feet
Legend
Disclaimer: M
ap d
ata
are
belie
ved
to b
e ac
cura
te, b
ut
accu
racy
is n
ot g
uara
ntee
d. T
his
is n
ot a
lega
l doc
umen
t and
sh
ould
not
be
subs
titut
ed fo
r a
title
sea
rch,
app
rais
al, s
urve
y, o
r fo
r zon
ing
verif
icat
ion.
http
://im
ages
.gre
ensb
oro
nc.g
ov/m
aing
isvie
wer
/prin
tPre
view
.asp
x?Pr
intO
ptDa
ta=C
ity o
f Gre
ensb
oro|
10|0
|fal
se|t
rue|
false
|fal
se|t
rue|
1714
833.
9202
1686
|848
991.
05...
Tran
spor
tatio
n M
apPa
ge 1
of 1
7/29
/201
5
A-7
A-8
HAEC
O
HP
Ow
eb
Esri,
HER
E, D
eLor
me,
Map
myI
ndia
, © O
penS
treet
Map
con
tribu
tors
, and
the
GIS
use
r com
mun
ity
NR B
ound
aries
Nat
iona
l Reg
iste
r Bou
ndar
y
Boun
dary
of D
estro
yed/
Rem
oved
NR
Lis
ting
SL P
oints SL
Indi
vidu
al E
ntry
SL a
nd D
OE
ent
ry
Stud
y Li
st E
ntry
, Gon
e
SL a
nd D
OE
, Gon
e
SLH
D C
ente
r P
oint
SLD
OE
HD
Cen
ter
Poi
nt
SL B
ound
aries
Stud
y Li
st B
ound
ary
Both
SL
and
Det
erm
ined
Elig
ible
Bou
ndar
y
DOE P
oints
Det
erm
ined
Elig
ible
DO
E, G
one
SL a
nd D
OE
SL a
nd D
OE
, Gon
e
DO
EHD
Cen
ter P
oint
SLD
OE
HD
Cen
ter
Poi
nt
DOE B
ound
aries
Det
erm
ined
Elig
ible
Bou
ndar
y
Both
DO
E a
nd S
tudy
Lis
t Bou
ndar
y
Surve
yed P
oints
Surv
eyed
Onl
y
Surv
eyed
in N
RH
D
Surv
eyed
Onl
y, G
one
Surv
eyed
in N
RH
D, G
one
Bloc
kfac
e- M
ultip
le p
rope
rtie
s
Bloc
kfac
e in
NR
HD
Surv
eyed
Are
a, N
o de
sign
atio
n
Loca
l Lan
dmark
/Dist
rict P
oints
Loca
l Lan
dmar
k
Loca
l Lan
dmar
k, G
one
Loca
l HD
Cen
ter P
oint
Loca
l Dis
tric
t Bou
ndar
ies
NR B
ound
aries
NR
NR
D
SL B
ound
aries
SL SLD
OE
DOE B
ound
aries
DO
E
Loca
l Dis
tric
t Bou
ndar
ies
Cou
nty
Boun
darie
s
July
30,
201
50
0.4
0.8
0.2
mi
00.
651.
30.
325
km
1:24
,000
rd
arlin
g@m
bake
rintl.
com
A-9
A-10
A-11
A-12
A-13
A-14
Endangered Species, Threatened Species,Federal Species of Concern, and Candidate Species,
Guilford County, North Carolina
Updated: 03-25-2015
Common Name Scientific name Federal Status
Record Status
Vertebrate:Bald eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus BGPA CurrentCarolina darter Etheostoma collis lepidinion FSC Current
Invertebrate:Vascular Plant:Small whorled pogonia Isotria medeoloides T CurrentNonvascular Plant:Lichen:
Definitions of Federal Status Codes:E = endangered. A taxon "in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range."T = threatened. A taxon "likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range."C = candidate. A taxon under consideration for official listing for which there is sufficient information to support listing. (Formerly "C1" candidate species.)BGPA =Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. See below.FSC=Federal Species of Concern. FSC is an informal term. It is not defined in the federal Endangered Species Act. In North Carolina, the Asheville and Raleigh Field Offices of the US Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) define Federal Species of Concern as those species that appear to be in decline or otherwise in need of conservation and are under consideration for listing or for which there is insufficient information to support listing at this time.Subsumed under the term "FSC" are all species petitioned by outside parties and other selected focal species identified in Service strategic plans, State Wildlife Action Plans, or Natural Heritage Program Lists.T(S/A) = threatened due to similarity of appearance. A taxon that is threatened due to similarity of appearance with another listed species and is listed for its protection. Taxa listed as T(S/A) are not biologically endangered or threatened and are not subject to Section 7 consultation. See below.EXP = experimental population. A taxon listed as experimental (either essential or nonessential). Experimental, nonessential populations of endangered species (e.g., red wolf) are treated as threatened species on public land, for consultation purposes, and as species proposed for listing on private land.P = proposed. Taxa proposed for official listing as endangered or threatened will be noted as "PE" or "PT", respectively.
A-15
Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGPA):
In the July 9, 2007 Federal Register( 72:37346-37372), the bald eagle was declared recovered, and removed (de-listed) from the Federal List of Threatened and Endangered wildlife. This delisting took effect August 8,2007. After delisting, the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (Eagle Act) (16 U.S.C. 668-668d) becomes the primary law protecting bald eagles. The Eagle Act prohibits take of bald and golden eagles and provides a statutory definition of "take" that includes "disturb". The USFWS has developed National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines to provide guidance to land managers, landowners, and others as to how to avoid disturbing bald eagles. For mor information, visit http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/baldeagle.htm
Threatened due to similarity of appearance(T(S/A)):
In the November 4, 1997 Federal Register (55822-55825), the northern population of the bog turtle (from New York south to Maryland) was listed as T (threatened), and the southern population (from Virginia south to Georgia) was listed as T(S/A) (threatened due to similarity of appearance). The T(S/A) designation bans the collection and interstate and international commercial trade of bog turtles from the southern population. The T(S/A) designation has no effect on land management activities by private landowners in North Carolina, part of the southern population of the species. In addition to its official status as T(S/A), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service considers the southern population of the bog turtle as a Federal species of concern due to habitat loss.
Definitions of Record Status:Current - the species has been observed in the county within the last 50 years.Historic - the species was last observed in the county more than 50 years ago.Obscure - the date and/or location of observation is uncertain.Incidental/migrant - the species was observed outside of its normal range or habitat.Probable/potential - the species is considered likely to occur in this county based on the proximity of known records (in adjacent counties), the presence of potentially suitable habitat, or both.
A-16
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICERaleigh Ecological Services Field Office
551 PYLON DRIVE, SUITE FRALEIGH, NC 27606
PHONE: (919)856-4520 FAX: (919)856-4556
Consultation Code: 04EN2000-2015-SLI-0469 July 01, 2015Event Code: 04EN2000-2015-E-01011Project Name: HAECO Facility Improvements
Subject: List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed projectlocation, and/or may be affected by your proposed project
To Whom It May Concern:
The species list generated pursuant to the information you provided identifies threatened,endangered, proposed and candidate species, as well as proposed and final designated criticalhabitat, that may occur within the boundary of your proposed project and/or may be affected byyour proposed project. The species list fulfills the requirements of the U.S. Fish and WildlifeService (Service) under section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended(16 U.S.C. 1531 ).et seq.
New information based on updated surveys, changes in the abundance and distribution ofspecies, changed habitat conditions, or other factors could change this list. Please feel free tocontact us if you need more current information or assistance regarding the potential impacts tofederally proposed, listed, and candidate species and federally designated and proposed criticalhabitat. Please note that under 50 CFR 402.12(e) of the regulations implementing section 7 ofthe Act, the accuracy of this species list should be verified after 90 days. This verification canbe completed formally or informally as desired. The Service recommends that verification becompleted by visiting the ECOS-IPaC website at regular intervals during project planning andimplementation for updates to species lists and information. An updated list may be requestedthrough the ECOS-IPaC system by completing the same process used to receive the enclosedlist.
Section 7 of the Act requires that all federal agencies (or their designated non-federalrepresentative), in consultation with the Service, insure that any action federally authorized,funded, or carried out by such agencies is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of anyfederally-listed endangered or threatened species. A biological assessment or evaluation may beprepared to fulfill that requirement and in determining whether additional consultation with theService is necessary. In addition to the federally-protected species list, information on thespecies' life histories and habitats and information on completing a biological assessment or
A-17
evaluation and can be found on our web page at http://www.fws.gov/raleigh. Please check theweb site often for updated information or changes
If your project contains suitable habitat for any of the federally-listed species known to bepresent within the county where your project occurs, the proposed action has the potential toadversely affect those species. As such, we recommend that surveys be conducted to determinethe species' presence or absence within the project area. The use of North Carolina NaturalHeritage program data should not be substituted for actual field surveys.
If you determine that the proposed action may affect (i.e., likely to adversely affect or not likelyto adversely affect) a federally-protected species, you should notify this office with yourdetermination, the results of your surveys, survey methodologies, and an analysis of the effectsof the action on listed species, including consideration of direct, indirect, and cumulativeeffects, before conducting any activities that might affect the species. If you determine that theproposed action will have no effect (i.e., no beneficial or adverse, direct or indirect effect) onfederally listed species, then you are not required to contact our office for concurrence (unlessan Environmental Impact Statement is prepared). However, you should maintain a completerecord of the assessment, including steps leading to your determination of effect, the qualifiedpersonnel conducting the assessment, habitat conditions, site photographs, and any other relatedarticles.
Please be aware that bald and golden eagles are protected under the Bald and Golden EagleProtection Act (16 U.S.C. 668 ), and projects affecting these species may requireet seq.development of an eagle conservation plan(http://www.fws.gov/windenergy/eagle_guidance.html). Additionally, wind energy projectsshould follow the wind energy guidelines (http://www.fws.gov/windenergy/) for minimizingimpacts to migratory birds and bats.
Guidance for minimizing impacts to migratory birds for projects including communicationstowers (e.g., cellular, digital television, radio, and emergency broadcast) can be found at:http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdIssues/Hazards/towers/towers.htm;http://www.towerkill.com; and
.http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdIssues/Hazards/towers/comtow.html
Not all Threatened and Endangered Species that occur in North Carolina are subject to section 7consultation with the U.S Fish and Wildlife Service. Atlantic and shortnose sturgeon, seaturtles,when in the water, and certain marine mammals are under purview of the NationalMarine Fisheries Service. If your project occurs in marine, estuarine, or coastal river systemsyou should also contact the National Marine Fisheries Service, http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/
We appreciate your concern for threatened and endangered species. The Service encouragesFederal agencies to include conservation of threatened and endangered species into their projectplanning to further the purposes of the Act. Please include the Consultation Tracking Number inthe header of this letter with any request for consultation or correspondence about your projectthat you submit to our office. If you have any questions or comments, please contact John Ellisof this office at [email protected].
Attachment
2
A-18
http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac, 07/01/2015 02:17 PM 1
Official Species List
Provided by: Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office
POST OFFICE BOX 33726
RALEIGH, NC 27636
(919) 856-4520 Consultation Code: 04EN2000-2015-SLI-0469Event Code: 04EN2000-2015-E-01011 Project Type: DEVELOPMENT Project Name: HAECO Facility ImprovementsProject Description: Site preparation of approximately 20 acres of Airport land within the HAECOleasehold for aviation-related development, including clearing, grading, fill, and excavation for:Expansion of the existing 475-ft. wide concrete apron for approximately 350 ft. with connection toAirport Taxiway M4; Construction of an approximately 341 ft. by 505 ft. aircraft hangar; andConstruction of an approximately 15,000 sq. ft. fire suppression facility. Please Note: The FWS office may have modified the Project Name and/or Project Description, so itmay be different from what was submitted in your previous request. If the Consultation Codematches, the FWS considers this to be the same project. Contact the office in the 'Provided by'section of your previous Official Species list if you have any questions or concerns.
United States Department of InteriorFish and Wildlife Service
Project name: HAECO Facility Improvements
A-19
http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac, 07/01/2015 02:17 PM 2
Project Location Map:
Project Coordinates: MULTIPOLYGON (((-79.93149161338806 36.09473043432173, -79.92898106575012 36.09670702635998, -79.93194222450256 36.09909100762848, -79.93434548377991 36.09713181377247, -79.93149161338806 36.09473043432173))) Project Counties: Guilford, NC
United States Department of InteriorFish and Wildlife Service
Project name: HAECO Facility Improvements
A-20
http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac, 07/01/2015 02:17 PM 3
Endangered Species Act Species List
There are a total of 1 threatened or endangered species on your species list. Species on this list should be considered in
an effects analysis for your project and could include species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain
fish may appear on the species list because a project could affect downstream species. Critical habitats listed under the
Has Critical Habitat column may or may not lie within your project area. See the Critical habitats within your
project area section further below for critical habitat that lies within your project. Please contact the designated FWS
office if you have questions.
Flowering Plants Status Has Critical Habitat Condition(s)
Small Whorled pogonia (Isotria
medeoloides)
Threatened
United States Department of InteriorFish and Wildlife Service
Project name: HAECO Facility Improvements
A-21
http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac, 07/01/2015 02:17 PM 4
Critical habitats that lie within your project areaThere are no critical habitats within your project area.
United States Department of InteriorFish and Wildlife Service
Project name: HAECO Facility Improvements
A-22
From: Darling, RichardSent: Wednesday, May 20, 2015 2:23 PMTo: '[email protected]'Cc: '[email protected]'; Allen, LarrySubject: RE: Environmental Documentation Update
Gary Jordan confirmed that NLEB should not be an issue for project in Guilford County. Even though FAA cannot “piggyback” on the USFWS Programmatic Biological Opinion (PBO) issued for NCDOT Districts 1‐9 (Central & Eastern NC), Gary was confident that the lack of physical and other records from Guilford County (UNCG have done extensive searches) confirms a gap in the bat’s range in the NC Piedmont. We should proceed with regular NEPA project scoping through normal channels.
From: Darling, Richard Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2015 1:39 PM To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected] Subject: RE: Environmental Documentation Update FYI – I left voice message with Gary Jordan (USFWS NLEB contact) to call me if he foresaw any issues with a project involving forest impacts near Greensboro, though the bat is not listed for Guilford County. I added that NEPA scoping would proceed shortly for this project through regular channels.
A-23
A-24
A-25
A-26
A-27
NCNHDE-339
June 8, 2015Richard DarlingMichael Baker International8000 Regency Pkwy., Suite 600Cary, NC [email protected]
RE: HAECO Facility Improvements
Dear Richard Darling:
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) appreciates the opportunity to provide informationabout natural heritage resources from our database that have been compiled for the project referencedabove.
A query of the NCNHP database, based on the project area mapped with your request, indicates that thereare no records for rare species, important natural communities, natural areas, or conservation/managedareas within the proposed project boundary.
The attached ‘Potential Occurrences’ table summarizes rare species and natural communities that havebeen documented within a one-mile radius of the property boundary. The proximity of these recordssuggests that these natural heritage elements may potentially be present in the project area if suitablehabitat exists and is included for reference. Please note that although there may be no documentation ofnatural heritage elements within the project boundary, it does not imply or confirm their absence; the areamay not have been surveyed. The results of this query should not be substituted for site-specific surveyswhere suitable habitat exists.
In the event that rare species are found within the project area, please contact the NCNHP so that we mayupdate our records. Tables of natural areas and conservation/managed area within a one-mile radius of theproject area, if any, are also included in this report.
Please note that natural heritage element data are maintained for the purposes of conservation planning,project review, and scientific research, and are not intended for use as the primary criteria for regulatorydecisions. Information provided by the NCNHP database may not be published without prior writtennotification to the NCNHP, and the NCNHP must be credited as an information source in these publications. Maps of NCNHP data may not be redistributed without permission.
The NC Natural Heritage Program may follow this letter with additional correspondence if a Dedicated NaturePreserve (DNP), Registered Heritage Area (RHA), or Federally-listed species are documented near theproject area.
Thank you for your inquiry. If you have questions regarding the information provided in this letter or needadditional assistance, please contact Allison Schwarz Weakley at [email protected] or919.707.8629.
Sincerely,NC Natural Heritage Program
Page 1 of 3
A-29
A-28
Nat
ura
l Her
itag
e E
lem
ent
Occ
urr
ence
s, N
atu
ral A
reas
, an
d M
anag
ed A
reas
Wit
hin
a O
ne-
mile
Rad
ius
of
the
Pro
ject
Are
aH
AE
CO
Fac
ility
Imp
rove
men
tsJu
ne
8, 2
015
NC
NH
DE
-339
Ele
men
t O
ccu
rren
ces
Do
cum
ente
d W
ith
in a
On
e-m
ile R
adiu
s o
f th
e P
roje
ct A
rea
Tax
on
om
icG
rou
pE
O ID
Sci
enti
fic
Nam
eC
om
mo
n N
ame
Las
tO
bse
rvat
ion
Dat
e
Ele
men
tO
ccu
rren
ceS
tatu
s
Acc
ura
cyF
eder
alS
tatu
sS
tate
Sta
tus
Glo
bal
Ran
kS
tate
Ran
k
Cru
stac
ean
1745
5C
amba
rus
cata
gius
Gre
ensb
oro
Bur
row
ing
Cra
yfis
h19
93-0
6-16
Cur
rent
2-H
igh
---
Spe
cial
Con
cern
G2
S2
No
Nat
ura
l Are
as a
re D
ocu
men
ted
Wit
hin
a O
ne-
mile
Rad
ius
of
the
Pro
ject
Are
a
No
Man
aged
Are
as a
re D
ocu
men
ted
Wit
hin
a O
ne-
mile
Rad
ius
of
the
Pro
ject
Are
a
Def
initi
ons
and
an e
xpla
natio
n of
sta
tus
desi
gnat
ions
and
cod
es c
an b
e fo
und
at h
ttps:
//ncn
hde.
natu
rese
rve.
org/
cont
ent/h
elp.
Dat
a qu
ery
gene
rate
d on
Jun
e 8,
201
5; s
ourc
e: N
CN
HP
, Q2
Apr
il 20
15. P
leas
e re
subm
it yo
urin
form
atio
n re
ques
t if m
ore
than
one
yea
r el
apse
s be
fore
pro
ject
initi
atio
n as
new
info
rmat
ion
is c
ontin
ually
add
ed to
the
NC
NH
P d
atab
ase.
Pag
e 2
of 3
A-29
Pow
ered
by
TC
PD
F (
ww
w.tc
pdf.o
rg)
Pag
e 3
of 3
A-30
Page 1 of 2
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action Id. SAW-2015-00920 County: Guilford U.S.G.S. Quad: NC-GUILFORD
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
Applicant: Piedmont Triad Airport Authority attn: Kevin Baker
Address: 1000-A Ted Johnson Parkway Greensboro, NC, 27409
Agent: Michael Baker International. attn: Richard Darling Address: 8000 Regency Parkway, Suite 600
Cary, NC 27518
Size (acres) ~113 Nearest Town Greensboro Nearest Waterway UT to Horsepen Creek River Basin Haw. North Carolina. USGS HUC 3030002 Coordinates 36.096813 N, -79.931709 W
Location description: : The property is located on the north side of Radar Road, approximately 0.4 mile east of its intersection with Service Center Drive, at the Piedmont Triad International Airport, in Greensboro, Guilford County, North Carolina.
Indicate Which of the Following Apply: A. Preliminary Determination
Based on preliminary information, there may be waters of the U.S. including wetlands on the above described project area. We strongly suggest you have this property inspected to determine the extent of Department of the Army (DA) jurisdiction. To be considered final, a jurisdictional determination must be verified by the Corps. This preliminary determination is not an appealable action under the Regulatory Program Administrative Appeal Process (Reference 33 CFR Part 331). If you wish, you may request an approved JD (which may be appealed), by contacting the Corps district for further instruction. Also, you may provide new information for further consideration by the Corps to reevaluate the JD.
B. Approved Determination
There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described property subject to the permit requirements of Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
X There are waters of the U.S. including wetlands on the above described project area subject to the permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
We strongly suggest you have the wetlands on your property delineated. Due to the size of your property and/or our present workload, the Corps may not be able to accomplish this wetland delineation in a timely manner. For a more timely delineation, you may wish to obtain a consultant. To be considered final, any delineation must be verified by the Corps.
X The waters of the U.S. including wetlands on your project area have been delineated and the delineation has been
verified by the Corps. We strongly suggest you have this delineation surveyed. Upon completion, this survey should be reviewed and verified by the Corps. Once verified, this survey will provide an accurate depiction of all areas subject to CWA jurisdiction on your property which, provided there is no change in the law or our published regulations, may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years.
The waters of the U.S. including wetlands have been delineated and surveyed and are accurately depicted on the plat signed by the Corps Regulatory Official identified below on . Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
There are no waters of the U.S., to include wetlands, present on the above described project area which are subject to the permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
A-31
The property is located in one of the 20 Coastal Counties subject to regulation under the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA). You should contact the Division of Coastal Management to determine their requirements.
Placement of dredged or fill material within waters of the US and/or wetlands without a Department of the Army permit may constitute a violation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC § 1311). If you have any questions regarding this determination and/or the Corps regulatory program, please contact David Bailey at 919-554-4884 ext 30 or [email protected].
C. Basis For Determination: The project area exhibits water bodies with ordinary high water and wetland criteria as defined in the applicable regional supplement to the 1987 wetland delineation manual. The water bodies on the site include 4 Unnamed Tributaries (UTs) to Horsepen Creek, all Relatively Permanent Waters (RPWs), which flow via Horsepen Creek (RPW) and Reedy Fork (RPW) to the Haw River, a Traditionally Navigable Water – and abutting wetlands. This determination is based on a field verification by Andrew Williams (USACE) on 8/16/2012. D. Remarks: The wetlands and other Waters of the US on the property were flagged by Michael Baker Engineering and are approximated on the attached sheet titled “Jurisdictional Waters of the U.S. Including Wetlands for PTIA TIMCO Site, Guilford County, NC.” E. Attention USDA Program Participants This delineation/determination has been conducted to identify the limits of Corps’ Clean Water Act jurisdiction for the particular site identified in this request. The delineation/determination may not be valid for the wetland conservation provisions of the Food Security Act of 1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation in USDA programs, you should request a certified wetland determination from the local office of the Natural Resources Conservation Service, prior to starting work. F. Appeals Information (This information applies only to approved jurisdictional determinations as indicated in B. above) This correspondence constitutes an approved jurisdictional determination for the above described site. If you object to this determination, you may request an administrative appeal under Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331. Enclosed you will find a Notification of Appeal Process (NAP) fact sheet and request for appeal (RFA) form. If you request to appeal this determination you must submit a completed RFA form to the following address: US Army Corps of Engineers South Atlantic Division Attn: Jason Steele, Review Officer 60 Forsyth Street SW, Room 10M15 Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801 In order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps, the Corps must determine that it is complete, that it meets the criteria for appeal under 33 CFR part 331.5, and that it has been received by the Division Office within 60 days of the date of the NAP. Should you decide to submit an RFA form, it must be received at the above address by August 18, 2015. **It is not necessary to submit an RFA form to the Division Office if you do not object to the determination in this correspondence.** Corps Regulatory Official: ______________________________________________________ Date: June 19, 2015 Expiration Date: June 19, 2020 The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure we continue to do so, please complete our Customer Satisfaction Survey, located online at http://regulatory.usacesurvey.com/. Copy furnished: Sue Homewood, NCDENR-DWR, 450 W. Hanes Mill Rd, Suite 300, Winston-Salem, NC 27105
A-32
NOTIFICATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL OPTIONS AND PROCESS AND
REQUEST FOR APPEAL Applicant: Piedmont Triad Airport Authority File Number: SAW-2015-00920 Date: June 19, 2015 Attached is: See Section below
INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission) A PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission) B PERMIT DENIAL C APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION D PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION E
SECTION I - The following identifies your rights and options regarding an administrative appeal of the above decision. Additional information may be found at http://www.usace.army.mil/Missions/CivilWorks/RegulatoryProgramandPermits.aspx or Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331.
A: INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit.
ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit.
OBJECT: If you object to the permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may request
that the permit be modified accordingly. You must complete Section II of this form and return the form to the district engineer. Your objections must be received by the district engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice, or you will forfeit your right to appeal the permit in the future. Upon receipt of your letter, the district engineer will evaluate your objections and may: (a) modify the permit to address all of your concerns, (b) modify the permit to address some of your objections, or (c) not modify the permit having determined that the permit should be issued as previously written. After evaluating your objections, the district engineer will send you a proffered permit for your reconsideration, as indicated in Section B below.
B: PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or appeal the permit ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit.
APPEAL: If you choose to decline the proffered permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein,
you may appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.
C: PERMIT DENIAL: You may appeal the denial of a permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice. D: APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You may accept or appeal the approved JD or provide new information. ACCEPT: You do not need to notify the Corps to accept an approved JD. Failure to notify the Corps within 60 days of the
date of this notice, means that you accept the approved JD in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the approved JD.
APPEAL: If you disagree with the approved JD, you may appeal the approved JD under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the district engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.
A-33
E: PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You do not need to respond to the Corps regarding the preliminary JD. The Preliminary JD is not appealable. If you wish, you may request an approved JD (which may be appealed), by contacting the Corps district for further instruction. Also you may provide new information for further consideration by the Corps to reevaluate the JD. SECTION II - REQUEST FOR APPEAL or OBJECTIONS TO AN INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT REASONS FOR APPEAL OR OBJECTIONS: (Describe your reasons for appealing the decision or your objections to an initial proffered permit in clear concise statements. You may attach additional information to this form to clarify where your reasons or objections are addressed in the administrative record.) ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The appeal is limited to a review of the administrative record, the Corps memorandum for the record of the appeal conference or meeting, and any supplemental information that the review officer has determined is needed to clarify the administrative record. Neither the appellant nor the Corps may add new information or analyses to the record. However, you may provide additional information to clarify the location of information that is already in the administrative record. POINT OF CONTACT FOR QUESTIONS OR INFORMATION: If you have questions regarding this decision and/or the appeal process you may contact: District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division attn: David E. Bailey Raleigh Regulatory Field Office 3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105 Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
If you only have questions regarding the appeal process you may also contact: Mr. Jason Steele, Administrative Appeal Review Officer CESAD-PDO U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, South Atlantic Division 60 Forsyth Street, Room 10M15 Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801 Phone: (404) 562-5137
RIGHT OF ENTRY: Your signature below grants the right of entry to Corps of Engineers personnel, and any government consultants, to conduct investigations of the project site during the course of the appeal process. You will be provided a 15 day notice of any site investigation, and will have the opportunity to participate in all site investigations. ________________________________________ Signature of appellant or agent.
Date: Telephone number:
For appeals on Initial Proffered Permits send this form to: District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division, Attn: David Bailey, 69 Darlington Avenue, Wilmington, North Carolina 28403 For Permit denials, Proffered Permits and approved Jurisdictional Determinations send this form to: Division Engineer, Commander, U.S. Army Engineer Division, South Atlantic, Attn: Mr. Jason Steele, Administrative Appeal Officer, CESAD-PDO, 60 Forsyth Street, Room 10M15, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801 Phone: (404) 562-5137
A-34
WET
LAN
D A
AA
HEA
DW
ATER
FO
RES
TPF
01A
AB
UTT
ING
RPW
0.39
AC
.
WET
LAN
D A
AB
BO
TTO
MLA
ND
HA
RD
WO
OD
FO
RES
TPF
01A
AB
UTT
ING
RPW
0.33
AC
.
WET
LAN
D A
AC
SEEP
PF01
BA
BU
TTIN
G R
PW0.
09 A
C.
WET
LAN
D s
ASE
EPPF
01B
AB
UTT
ING
RPW
0.00
8 A
C.
WET
LAN
D A
AD
SEEP
PF01
BA
BU
TTIN
G R
PW0.
09 A
C.
WET
LAN
D A
AE
NO
N-T
IDA
L FR
ESH
WAT
ER M
AR
SHPE
M1B
AB
UTT
ING
RPW
0.02
AC
.
STR
EAM
AB
(PER
ENN
IAL)
RPW
(103
4' L
ON
G x
10'
WID
E, 0
.24
AC
.)ST
REA
M A
AC
(PE
REN
NIA
L)R
PW(3
05' L
ON
G x
5' W
IDE,
0.0
4 A
C.)
Rad
ar R
oad
STR
EAM
AA
B (P
ER
ENN
IAL)
RPW
(187
' LO
NG
x 5
' WID
E, 0
.02
AC
.)
STR
EAM
AA
A (P
ERE
NN
IAL)
RPW
(110
9' L
ON
G x
10'
WID
E, 0
.26
AC
.)
Fire
Man
agem
ent
Pond
Stor
mw
ater
Man
agem
ent
Pond
WA
-6
WA
-4W
A-1
WA
AE-
6W
AA
E-4
WA
AE-
3W
AA
E-1
9
WA
AD
-7W
AA
D-6
WA
AD
-5
WA
AD
-3W
AA
D-2
STR
M-4
STR
M-3
WA
AB
-1W
AA
B-2
WA
AB
-34
WA
AB
-6
7
WA
AC
-8
WA
AC
-7W
AA
C-6
WA
AC
-4W
AA
C-3
WA
AC
-2W
AA
C-1
CLO
SED
VALV
E
STR
M-2
WA
AB
-9
WA
AB
-8
UPL
AN
D
STR
M-1
9W
AA
A-8
WA
AA
-7W
AA
A-6
WA
AA
-5
WA
AA
-4
WA
AA
-1
60"
RC
P
WA
AD
-13
60"
RC
P
60"
CM
P
60"
CM
P
60"
RC
P
60"
RC
P
60"
RC
P60
" R
CP
60"
RC
P
WA
AB
-30
WA
AB
-29
WA
AB
-28
WA
AB
-27
WA
AB
-26
WA
AB
-25
WA
AB
-24
WA
AB
-23
WA
AB
-22
WA
AB
-21
WA
AB
-19
WA
AB
-18
WA
AB
-16
WA
AB
-15
WA
AB
-14
WA
AB
-13
WA
AB
-12
WA
AB
-11
WA
AB
-10
48"
CM
P
48"
CM
P
WA
AA
-17
60"
RC
P
WET
-AA
AW
AA
A-1
6
WA
AA
-14
WA
AA
-13
WA
AA
-12
WA
AA
-11
10
WA
-5
WA
-3W
A-2
WET
-A
52
84
WA
AD
-1
5
5
WA
AA
-3
WA
AA
-2
WET
-AA
E
WA
AD
-12
11 10
WET
-AA
B
60"
RC
P
WA
AB
-20
WA
AB
-17
WA
AA
-15
60"
RC
P
PIE
DM
ON
T TR
IAD
AIR
PO
RT
PIE
DM
ON
T TR
IAD
AIR
PO
RT
EM
PIR
E B
UIL
DIN
G L
LC
RA
B P
AR
TNE
RS
PIE
DM
ON
T TR
IAD
AIR
PO
RT
HA
RR
IS-T
EE
TER
SU
PE
RM
AR
KE
TS
PIE
DM
ON
T TR
IAD
AIR
PO
RT
PIE
DM
ON
T TR
IAD
AIR
PO
RT
PIE
DM
ON
T C
OR
PO
RAT
E P
AR
K L
LC
HA
RR
IS-T
EE
TER
SU
PE
RM
AR
KE
TS
PIE
DM
ON
T TR
IAD
AIR
PO
RT
CK
RA
DA
R R
OA
D L
LCC
UM
MM
ING
S L
EIL
A M
AE
&
PIE
DM
ON
T TR
IAD
AIR
PO
RT
880
875
870
865
860
855
850
845
840
835
830
825
885
820
890
830
845
880
885
850
875
880
875
840
875
850
845
845
845
870
870
845
830
870
850
875
830
850
850
845
850
840
875
840
020
040
060
010
0Fe
et
1 " =
200
'
JUR
ISD
ICTI
ON
AL
WAT
ERS
OF
THE
U.S
. IN
CLU
DIN
G W
ETLA
ND
S FO
RPT
IA T
IMC
O S
ITE,
GU
ILFO
RD
CO
UN
TY, N
C
This
cer
tifie
s th
at th
is c
opy
of th
is p
lat
accu
rate
ly d
epic
ts th
e bo
unda
ry o
f the
jurs
idic
tion
of S
ectio
n 40
4 of
the
Cle
an W
ater
Act
as
dete
rmin
ed b
y th
e un
ders
igne
d on
this
date
. U
nles
s th
ere
is a
cha
nge
in th
e la
w o
r our
publ
ishe
d re
gula
tions
, thi
s de
term
inat
ion
ofS
ectio
n 40
4 ju
risdi
ctio
n m
ay b
e re
lied
upon
for
a pe
riod
not t
o ex
ceed
five
yea
rs fr
om th
is d
ate.
This
det
erm
inat
ion
was
mad
e ut
ilizin
g th
e 19
87C
orps
of E
ngin
eers
Wet
land
s D
elin
eatio
nM
anua
l.R
egul
ator
y O
ffici
al _
____
____
____
____
___
Title
_
____
____
____
____
___
Dat
e
____
____
____
____
____
US
AC
E A
ctio
n ID
___
____
____
____
____
_
I, M
arsh
all W
ight
, cer
tify
that
this
pro
ject
was
com
plet
ed u
nder
my
dire
ct a
nd re
spon
sibl
e ch
arge
from
an
actu
al s
urve
y m
ade
unde
rm
y su
perv
isio
n; th
at th
is s
urve
y w
as p
erfo
rmed
to m
eet t
he re
quire
men
tsfo
r an
LIG
/GIS
sur
vey
[21
NC
AC
56.
1608
] to
the
accu
racy
of C
lass
B;
met
hod
used
to e
valu
ate
the
accu
racy
was
Sta
tistic
al R
MS
;m
etho
d of
mea
sure
men
t was
real
tim
e ki
nem
atic
diff
eren
tial G
PS;
date
(s) o
f sur
vey
July
25th
-26th
, 201
2;an
d al
l coo
rdin
ates
are
bas
ed o
n N
AD
83 (N
A 2
011)
;S
tream
line
s w
ere
deriv
ed fr
om a
eria
l pho
togr
aphy
and
fiel
d ve
rifie
d.
Witn
ess
my
orig
inal
sig
natu
re, r
egris
tratio
n nu
mbe
r and
sea
l thi
s__
____
day
of _
____
____
_, A
.D.,
____
____
.
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
Mar
shal
l Wig
ht, P
LS (L
-503
4)
Mic
hael
Bak
er E
ngin
eerin
g, In
c.78
00 A
irpor
t Cen
ter D
rive
Suite
100
Gre
ensb
oro,
Nor
th C
arol
ina
2740
9Ph
one:
336
.931
.150
0Fa
x: 3
36.9
31.1
501
Poin
tLa
tLo
ngPo
int
Lat
Long
WAA
A-1
36.0
9798
3-7
9.93
2515
WAA
B-26
36.0
9631
1-7
9.93
0705
WAA
A-2
36.0
9805
9-7
9.93
2463
WAA
B-27
36.0
9627
-79.
9306
21W
AAA-
336
.098
068
-79.
9324
11W
AAB-
2836
.096
188
-79.
9305
65W
AAA-
436
.098
193
-79.
9324
14W
AAB-
2936
.096
171
-79.
9305
15W
AAA-
536
.098
263
-79.
9323
98W
AAB-
3036
.096
09-7
9.93
0529
WAA
A-6
36.0
9835
-79.
9324
54ST
RM-2
36.0
9637
1-7
9.93
1332
WAA
A-7
36.0
9831
6-7
9.93
2516
WAA
C-1
36.0
9619
7-7
9.93
0051
WAA
A-8
36.0
9829
9-7
9.93
2586
WAA
C-2
36.0
9614
6-7
9.93
009
WAA
A-9
36.0
9827
4-7
9.93
2634
WAA
C-3
36.0
9609
7-7
9.93
0187
WAA
A-10
36.0
9821
5-7
9.93
2741
WAA
C-4
36.0
9601
3-7
9.93
0203
WAA
A-11
36.0
9813
7-7
9.93
2802
WAA
C-5
36.0
9592
8-7
9.93
0199
WAA
A-12
36.0
9804
1-7
9.93
2911
WAA
C-6
36.0
9593
6-7
9.93
02W
AAA-
1336
.097
983
-79.
9329
75W
AAC-
736
.096
098
-79.
9299
41W
AAA-
1436
.097
908
-79.
9329
03W
AAC-
836
.096
185
-79.
9299
63W
AAA-
1536
.097
891
-79.
9327
78W
ET-A
AB36
.096
964
-79.
9316
4W
AAA-
1636
.097
889
-79.
9327
57ST
RM-3
36.1
0056
5-7
9.92
655
WAA
A-17
36.0
9788
1-7
9.93
2579
WA-
136
.100
576
-79.
9265
54W
ET-A
AA36
.097
942
-79.
9327
43W
A-2
36.1
0062
7-7
9.92
6548
STRM
-136
.097
783
-79.
9328
35W
A-3
36.1
0065
9-7
9.92
6553
UPLA
ND
36.0
9768
9-7
9.93
3118
WA-
436
.100
648
-79.
9265
WAA
B-1
36.0
9689
3-7
9.93
1682
WA-
536
.100
579
-79.
9265
24W
AAB-
236
.096
911
-79.
9316
9W
A-6
36.1
0055
6-7
9.92
6518
WAA
B-3
36.0
9695
2-7
9.93
1731
WET
-A36
.100
591
-79.
9265
35W
AAB-
436
.097
018
-79.
9317
45ST
RM-4
36.0
9967
6-7
9.92
6082
WAA
B-5
36.0
9706
3-7
9.93
1765
WAA
D-1
36.0
9971
2-7
9.92
576
WAA
B-6
36.0
9706
9-7
9.93
1839
WAA
D-2
36.0
9966
5-7
9.92
5806
WAA
B-7
36.0
9717
4-7
9.93
1855
WAA
D-3
36.0
9962
7-7
9.92
587
WAA
B-8
36.0
9735
2-7
9.93
1829
WAA
D-4
36.0
9968
9-7
9.92
6013
WAA
B-9
36.0
9724
4-7
9.93
1769
WAA
D-5
36.0
9963
7-7
9.92
6047
WAA
B-10
36.0
9719
4-7
9.93
1751
WAA
D-6
36.0
9972
7-7
9.92
608
WAA
B-11
36.0
9713
3-7
9.93
172
WAA
D-7
36.0
9977
6-7
9.92
5957
WAA
B-12
36.0
9707
5-7
9.93
1657
WAA
D-8
36.0
9971
8-7
9.92
5963
WAA
B-13
36.0
9699
4-7
9.93
1574
WAA
D-9
36.0
9973
5-7
9.92
5897
WAA
B-14
36.0
9693
3-7
9.93
1525
WAA
D-10
36.0
9977
-79.
9258
56W
AAB-
1536
.096
855
-79.
9314
8W
AAD-
1136
.099
821
-79.
9258
8W
AAB-
1636
.096
832
-79.
9314
04W
AAD-
1236
.099
854
-79.
9258
72W
AAB-
1736
.096
75-7
9.93
1388
WAA
D-13
36.0
9987
6-7
9.92
5822
WAA
B-18
36.0
9669
7-7
9.93
127
WAA
E-1
36.0
9922
4-7
9.92
5825
WAA
B-19
36.0
9664
8-7
9.93
1202
WAA
E-2
36.0
9926
2-7
9.92
5749
WAA
B-20
36.0
9658
5-7
9.93
1139
WAA
E-3
36.0
9930
5-7
9.92
5689
WAA
B-21
36.0
9658
7-7
9.93
1087
WAA
E-4
36.0
9928
7-7
9.92
5656
WAA
B-22
36.0
9655
2-7
9.93
0997
WAA
E-5
36.0
9923
3-7
9.92
5719
WAA
B-23
36.0
9649
9-7
9.93
0938
WAA
E-6
36.0
9917
3-7
9.92
5794
WAA
B-24
36.0
9643
-79.
9308
64W
ET-A
AE36
.099
222
-79.
9257
97W
AAB-
2536
.096
344
-79.
9307
59
A-35
1
From: Bailey, David E SAW <[email protected]>Sent: Friday, June 19, 2015 3:08 PMTo: Darling, RichardCc: Alex Rosser; Lisa Elmore; Allen, Larry; [email protected]: RE: Proposed HAECO Facility Improvements at PTIA (UNCLASSIFIED)
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats: NONE Richard, Thank you for the opportunity to comment, pertaining to section 404 of the Clean Water Act and the National Environmental Policy Act, on the above referenced project in Greensboro, Guilford County, North Carolina. Please reference Action ID: SAW‐2015‐00920 in all future correspondence for this project. The proposed project areas are located within boundaries of waters of the US based on information submitted by Michael Baker Engineering on August 8 and 14, 2012, and field verification by this office on August 16, 2012. As stated in an April 29, 2015 e‐mail, I will honor the boundaries of waters of the US as agreed upon following the August 16, 2012 site visit. Given the Proposed Facility Layout, Figure 2 of the referenced scoping request, it is very likely that impacts proposed would be greater than the thresholds for wetland and stream impacts allowed under the existing Nationwide Permit terms and conditions; as such, review under the Standard Permit process should be anticipated. Note that, throughout this process, you will be required to 1) avoid impacts to waters and wetlands through the selection of the least damaging, practical alternative, 2) take appropriate and practical steps to reduce impacts on waters and wetlands, and 3) compensate for remaining unavoidable impacts to the extent appropriate and practical. As planning proceeds, we recommend that you schedule a pre‐application meeting with the US Army Corps of Engineers and NC Division of Water Resources to discuss items 1‐3 above. Further, significant time savings can be realized during the permit evaluation phase by including the above items, as well as an analysis of alternatives to include on‐site, off‐site, no permit, and no build alternatives in the information submitted with the permit application. Through the planning or permitting process, please feel free to call or email with any questions. Sincerely, Dave Bailey ‐‐‐ David E. Bailey, PWS Regulatory Project Manager US Army Corps of Engineers CE‐SAW‐RG‐R 3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105 Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587 Phone: (919) 554‐4884, Ext. 30. Fax: (919) 562‐0421 Email: [email protected] The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure we continue to do so, please complete the Customer Satisfaction Survey located at http://regulatory.usacesurvey.com/.
A-36
Nor
thin
g: =
857
,834
, Ea
stin
g =
1,7
21,8
40N
orth
ing:
= 8
57,8
34,
East
ing
= 1
,727
,944
Nor
thin
g: =
853
,117
, Ea
stin
g =
1,7
21,8
40N
orth
ing:
= 8
53,1
17,
East
ing
= 1
,727
,944
Th
is i
s a
n o
ffic
ial
co
py
of
a p
ort
ion
of
the
ab
ov
e r
efe
ren
ce
d f
loo
d m
ap
. T
his
ma
p i
nc
orp
ora
tes
ch
an
ge
s o
r a
me
nd
me
nts
wh
ich
ma
y h
av
e b
ee
n m
ad
e s
ub
seq
ue
nt
to
th
e d
ate
on
th
e t
itle
blo
ck
. F
or
th
e l
ate
st p
rod
uc
tin
form
ati
on
ab
ou
t N
ati
on
al
Flo
od
In
sura
nc
e P
rog
ram
flo
od
ma
ps
ch
ec
k t
he
FE
MA
Flo
od
Ma
p S
tore
at
ww
w.m
sc.f
em
a.g
ov
.
Prin
t
N
OR
TH C
AR
OLI
NA
Pan
el(s
):9
86
4,9
87
4
CON
TAIN
S:CO
MM
UN
ITY
CID
GU
ILFO
RD C
OU
NTY
3701
11
CITY
OF
GRE
ENSB
ORO
3753
51
Not
ice
to
Use
r: T
he
Map
Nu
mb
er(s
) sh
own
bel
ow s
hou
ld b
eu
sed
wh
en p
laci
ng
map
ord
ers;
th
e C
omm
un
ity
Nu
mb
er(s
)sh
own
ab
ove
sh
ould
be
use
d o
n in
sura
nce
ap
plic
atio
ns
for
the
sub
ject
com
mu
nit
y.
SELE
CTED
PA
NEL
S:M
AP
NU
MBE
REF
FECT
IVE
DA
TE37
1098
6400
J2/
2/20
07
3710
9874
00J
2/2/
2007
A-37
A-38
A-39
A-40
A-41
A-42
A-43
A-44
1
From: State Clearinghouse <[email protected]>Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2015 3:01 PMTo: Darling, RichardSubject: EMAIL NOTIFICATION: SCH# 15-E-0000-0648
Dear Mr. Darling, This is a notification to you that the N.C. State Environmental Review Clearinghouse has received the Piedmont Triad International Airport project. This project has been assigned State Clearinghouse #15‐E‐0000‐0648 and this number should be used in all inquiries or correspondence with this office. Copies of the environmental document are being sent to various governmental organizations for review and comment. In addition, notification of the availability of the document will appear on the North Carolina Environmental Bulletin at http://www.doa.nc.gov/clearing/ebulletin.aspx. The review of this project should be completed on June 30, 2015. After the review has concluded, the comments and signoff letter will be email to the email address used for this message. If you have an alternate email, please email it to me at [email protected]. Should you have any questions, please email [email protected] Sincerely, Crystal Best State Environmental Review Clearinghouse NC Department of Administration Office: (919) 807-2419 Email: [email protected] Notice: E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties by an authorized state official.
Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N.C. Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
A-45
From: Lisa Elmore <[email protected]>Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2015 3:22 PMTo: [email protected]; [email protected]; GREE Legal Ads
([email protected])Cc: Alex Rosser; [email protected]; Yuliya Panayotova; Linda McKenzie; Darling,
RichardSubject: Public NoticeAttachments: 2015.07.9 Public notice.doc
Please print the attached Public Notice in the legal section of Friday, July 31, 2015 paper. No website ads but will need Affidavit. Please confirm you received the email and attachment. Lisa L. Elmore Planning and Engineering Coordinator Piedmont Triad Airport Authority 1000 A Ted Johnson Parkway Greensboro, NC 27409 Phone: 336‐665‐5600 Fax: 336‐665‐5694
PUBLIC NOTICE
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is reviewing a Draft Environmental Assessment (EA) for a proposed development at the Piedmont Triad International Airport in Guilford County, North Carolina. The proposed development features improvements to an aviation tenant site. The purpose of the EA is to address the proposed action and whether it would potentially impact economic, social, and environmental resources. The Draft EA can be reviewed at the following locations: FAA, Memphis Airports District Office, 2600 Thousand Oaks Boulevard, Suite 2250, Memphis, TN 38118; Hours: Monday through Friday, 8:00 AM to 3:30 PM (CT). Piedmont Triad International Airport, Piedmont Triad Airport Authority Office, 1000-A Ted Johnson Parkway, Greensboro, North Carolina 27409; Hours: Monday through Friday, 8:30 AM to 5:00 PM (EST). Members of the public may issue comments on the EA within 30 days of this notice, and may also request a public hearing within 15 days of this notice, by contacting the following FAA representative: Aaron Braswell Environmental Protection Specialist FAA - Memphis Airports District Office (901) 322-8192
A-46
A-47
A-48
A-49
A-50
A-51
A-52
A-53
A-54
A-55
A-56
