Enviva - EA 3-28-14savethecape.org/stcwp1/wp-content/uploads/PDFs... · wood pellet energy market can lead to environmental benefits, such as healthier and better managed forests

Marc Ms. CState North116 WRalei(919) Dear

The NoperaexporIndusProjeinclustoragsystemproduappro

Envivproduresou(tree comma high

BasedManaEnvir(EA)documG.S. GeneGen. CAMinterefor th

ch 28, 2014

Crystal Best Environmen

h Carolina DWest Jones Sigh, NC 2760) 807-2425

Ms. Best:

North Carolations agreemrt facility cstrial Road aect). Major de the constge domes, am. The puction facilioximate 200-

va, through uced solid burces includi

tops, limbmercial thinnh density an

d on the stagement Actronmental P. N.C. Genment shall b113A 118 t

eral Statutes.Stat. § 113

MA Permit Nest of transphe Proposed

ntal Review Department oStreet, Suite 03-8003

lina State Poment with Ecapable of eat the Port oactivities an

truction of ta truck and rproposed exities located-mile radius

its subsidiaiomass fuelsing forest in

bs, and branings and othd low moistu

tatutory exet (CAMA) m

Policy Act (Sn. Stat. § 113be required ithat receive.” The prop3A-118(d)(1No. 47-87 pparency, the Project.

Clearinghouof Administr5106

orts Authoritnviva Holdiexporting tw

of Wilmingtond site imprtwo 175-foorail unloadinport facility

d in inland of the Wilm

aries, is one s. Enviva pndustry residnches), andherwise unmure content w

mption of mmajor permitSEPA) and 3A-12, Sessiin connectios a permit i

posed projec1), and the rior to undeAuthority v

use ration

ty (Authoritings, LP (Enwo million on in Wilmirovements a

ot diameter, ng station, coy would stoNorth Caro

mington area

of the worlroduces woodues (sawdud sustainablmerchantablewood produc

major develts, the propodoes not re

ion Law 201on with: . . .issued unde

ct is a “majoAuthority w

ertaking the voluntarily h

ty) has enternviva) to con

tons of woington, Northassociated w45,000 metronveyor sysore and exp

olina and Soa.

ld’s largest od pellets must and chiply harvestede pulpwood. ct.

lopments thosed project equire an En11-398, prov A major de

er Article 7 or developmwill obtain

proposed phas elected t

red into a lanstruct a newood pellets h Carolina (

with the Proptric ton capastems, and aport wood outh Carolin

producers omade from a ps), unproced round wo Enviva wo

hat receive is exempt fr

nvironmentavides: “No eevelopment of Chapter

ment,” as defa major mo

project. Howto prepare th

and lease anw wood pelle

annually, o(the Proposeposed Projecacity concreta ship loadin

pellets fromna, within a

of sustainablmix of woossed residueood such a

ood pellets ar

Coastal Arefrom the Statal Assessmenenvironmentaas defined i113A of th

fined by N.Codification owever, in thhis documen

nd et

on ed ct te

ng m an

ly od es as re

ea te nt al in he C. of he nt

susan_westberry

Rectangle

VoluntariStat. 113A

E

FI

N

ly Submitted A-1 et seq.)

WOODP

N

A

NVIRON

NDING

NORTH CA

DURS C

Pursuant to t

D PELLETPORT OF

NEW HANNORTH

ADMINIST

NMENTA

OF NO S

AROLINA S

DOCUMENTCORPORATI

MA

the North Car

T EXPORWILMIN

NOVER COH CAROL

TRATIVE A

AL ASSE

SIGNIFI

STATE POR

T PREPARATION – NORT

ARCH 2014

rolina State En

RT FACILINGTON OUNTY

LINA

ACTION

ESSMEN

ICANT IM

RTS AUTH

TION BY: TH CAROLIN

nvironmental

ITY

NT AND

MPACT

HORITY

NA

l Policy Act oof 1971 (N.C.

Gen.

Wood Pellet Export Facility – Port of Wilmington

Environmental Assessment

FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT

The Authority has determined that this project will have no significant impact on the environment. This Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) has been prepared and is being submitted in conjunction with the Environmental Assessment (EA) for the proposed project to document environmental review and evaluation in compliance with the North Carolina (State) Environmental Policy Act.


Environmental Assessment ES-1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

INTRODUCTION

The North Carolina State Ports Authority (Authority) has entered into a land lease and operations agreement pursuant to Enviva Holdings, LP (Enviva) would construct a new wood pellet export facility on Industrial Road at the Port of Wilmington in Wilmington, North Carolina (the Proposed Project). Pursuant to these agreements, which become effective once certain contingencies are satisfied, Enviva would build and operate the terminal facility on 7.17 acres of leased land. The proposed facility would store and export wood pellets from new production facilities likely located in inland North Carolina and South Carolina, within an approximate 200-mile radius of the Wilmington area. The Proposed Project’s design is based on Enviva's current operation in Chesapeake, Virginia and would ship 25-30 vessels loaded with wood pellets annually.

Based on the statutory exemption of major developments that receive Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) major permits, the Proposed Project is exempt from the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) and does not require any review under SEPA. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 113A-12. Nevertheless, the Authority voluntarily has elected to prepare this document for the Proposed Project. An application for a CAMA permit for the Proposed Project has been submitted.

The proposed site is currently being used as an industrial materials storage area. It has already been partially developed and consists of gravel, grassed lawns, and paved asphalt areas and existing infrastructure associated with port operations. Proposed site improvements include the construction of two storage domes, a truck and rail unloading station, conveyor systems, and a ship loading system. The Proposed Project would not impact the berths or water area, or require in-water work or dredging. It would impact 6.1 acres and add a total net impervious surface area of less than 0.25 acres.

PURPOSE AND NEED

The purpose of the Proposed Project is to allow the Authority to expand its ability to support the state’s wood pellet industry. The lease and operating agreement with Enviva will provide additional jobs and revenue in North Carolina and will allow the Port of Wilmington to realize a return on investments that have already been made to develop the proposed site for economic use.

The wood pellet industry has been identified by the State of North Carolina as one of the key industries that has the potential to enhance the State’s economy and to provide public benefits to North Carolina’s citizens. In addition to providing economic benefits such as jobs, revenue, and higher land values, the wood pellet energy market can lead to environmental benefits, such as healthier and better managed forests and greater baseline carbon sequestration on the land.

Global demand for wood pellets is growing, and a portion of this demand can be met with the Proposed Project at the Port of Wilmington. Enviva’s current production capacity at each of its existing facilities is fully contracted. Power companies, especially European utilities, are signing long term supply contracts with wood pellet producers to fulfill their fuel needs. Wood pellets are a cost effective source of reliable energy that can help reduce the negative environmental impacts associated with fossil fuels. Constructing the Proposed Project will allow the Authority to realize economic benefits of increased wood pellet traffic and will facilitate North Carolina’s role in meeting demand for wood pellets in Europe and other markets.

ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS

Three alternatives were considered for the Proposed Project. These include:

No Action Alternative; Alternative 1: Construction of Export Facility at the Port of Morehead City, North Carolina; and Preferred Alternative: Construction of Export Facility at the Port of Wilmington, North Carolina.



PREDICTED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

Direct Impacts

The Proposed Project is not anticipated to result in any significant negative direct impacts to the environment. The Proposed Project will be built within the boundaries of an already developed, industrial area. Through its experience in the design of export facilities, Enviva has developed a site plan that minimizes the footprint of the facility. Moreover, where possible, existing infrastructure and facilities will be used. No discharges, in-water work, or dredging would take place.

Secondary Impacts

Secondary impacts associated with the Proposed Project would include marginal increases in rail, truck, and vessel traffic at the Port of Wilmington. Estimates suggest that the Proposed Project will result in only incremental increases in vessel, rail, and truck traffic. Enviva projects roughly 25-30 vessels will arrive to be loaded with wood pellets annually, or approximately two vessel arrivals and departures per month. In Fiscal Year (FY) 2013, the Port of Wilmington reported 432 vessel arrivals and departures from existing operations; Enviva’s 25-30 vessels per year represent a marginal increase of approximately 6.9 percent. The Proposed Project would result in an increase of approximately 8.9 percent to ten percent more truck traffic on a daily basis. The Port of Wilmington predicts an annual growth rate between four and five percent. Increased truck deliveries resulting from the Proposed Project have been included in Authority growth predictions, and a ten percent increase in daily traffic over the next several years would be consistent with their projections. Additional rail traffic generated by the Proposed Project would be included on the existing daily train that services the Port of Wilmington.

Enviva plans to construct new production facilities with or without the Proposed Project. Wood pellets from the new production facilities in North Carolina could be processed through existing export facilities even in the absence of the Proposed Project. The Proposed Project, Enviva’s new production facilities, and Enviva’s procurement of wood pellets rarely, if ever, would cause timber harvests. As a result, any impacts associated with construction and operation of the wood pellet production facilities or timber harvests do not qualify as secondary impacts under SEPA, and there is no requirement under SEPA to consider such impacts. In any event, the wood pellet production facilities and timber harvests are not anticipated to result in any significant negative impacts to the environment.

Enviva will minimize any impacts from the construction of the wood pellet production facilities, including by choosing to locate them on pine stands. Similar habitat is present in many places outside of the plant locations. The construction of the facilities will be regulated by applicable local, state and federal laws, which will reduce impacts. Likewise, all production facilities will be required to obtain, and comply with, state and federally enforceable permits for any emissions to air or discharges to water associated with their operation. As a result, Enviva does not expect any significant secondary impacts from their construction or operation.

Similarly, the Proposed Project and the construction of Enviva’s new production facilities should not cause any significant impacts in the form of increased timber harvests. Enviva procures almost all of the wood materials it uses to produce wood pellets from timber harvests that were already planned in order to harvest higher value timber for sawmills and manufactured wood products; Enviva sources only low-value wood fiber from these harvests. The fiber that Enviva buys consists of mill residues (including sawdust), tops and limbs, branches, thinnings, “in-woods chips” and other low-quality wood that is unmerchantable to sawmills (collectively, “wood pellet feedstocks”). The only whole trees that would be used to produce wood pellets are not suitable for sawmills and manufactured wood products because they are too small, diseased, overly knotted, crooked, or otherwise unsuitable. The market Enviva creates for



wood pellet feedstocks does not drive harvests for higher value forest products industries, but rather involves fiber produced as a byproduct of those harvests. There may be rare circumstances where a tract of land contains no high-value timber and is harvested and sold to low-value markets, or where a landowner might consider a sale to Enviva as part of a decision to harvest; however, based on Enviva’s experience, these events are expected to seldom occur. In any event, impacts from harvesting activities are not expected to be significant. Forest inventories in North Carolina continue to increase. Enviva contributes to this positive trend line by providing a market for low-value wood that is not suitable for higher-value forest product industries (e.g., lumber and furniture), and might otherwise be left on the forest floor.

Cumulative Impacts

The Proposed Project is not anticipated to result in significant cumulative impacts. Because impacts associated with the production facilities and harvests are neither direct nor indirect impacts of the Proposed Project under SEPA, there is no requirement under SEPA to consider the cumulative impacts of the production facilities or timber harvesting generally. In any event, any such impacts relating to these activities are not expected to be significant.

Overall forest inventories in North Carolina continue to increase despite harvests of all kinds (USFS, 2009). Further, the wood pellet industry provides an economic incentive to remove wood that would otherwise be left on forest floors, and thus promotes reforestation. The industry creates economic incentives that can be expected to have a positive effect on forest inventories in the southeastern US, allowing for forest inventories to increase in size and number and to provide an economic use for the forested land that helps avoid the loss of forest land to development projects (USFS, 2012).

Significant impacts relating to emissions of GHGs or their impacts on global climate change are not anticipated. Emissions associated with the Proposed Project are only one small source of GHG emissions worldwide, and would not make a measurable contribution to cumulative global GHG emissions. Both the United Kingdom (UK) and the European Union (EU) have concluded that the GHG reductions that can be obtained from replacing fossil fuels with biomass sources such as wood pellets are vital to achieving those governments’ aggressive carbon reduction goals (European Commission, 2010; Department of Energy & Climate Change, 2011).

MITIGATIVE MEASURES

The proposed facility was located in a manner to maximize the use of existing infrastructure and previously developed land at the Port of Wilmington.

The truck and rail wood pellet unloading operations would be performed within a building vented to fabric filter baghouses.

All conveyors would be covered to minimize fugitive dust and protect the wood pellets from adverse weather while being transferred.

The shiploader would be equipped with a telescopic loading spout that would minimize drop distance when loading wood pellets into the ship holds to minimize fugitive dust emissions.

On-site measures to protect water resources would include the installation of rain gutters on the proposed dome structures, which would drain to an infiltration basin to allow for sufficient infiltration to reduce total suspended solids (TSS) exportation.

It is anticipated that drains would be installed around Dome 3, Dome 4 and the rail/truck load-out facility to allow percolation of stormwater runoff from the structures. The numbering of Domes 3 and 4 is an extension of the numbering of the domes at the existing Enviva export facility at the Port of Chesapeake, as Domes 1 and 2 are sited at the Port of Chesapeake.



Stormwater treatment for new and additional impervious surfaces associated with the Proposed Project would be handled via infiltration and retention on-site.

PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Public hearings were held on Monday, September 9, 2013 in Richmond and Sampson counties, North Carolina, to provide local stakeholders an opportunity to learn about the proposed manufacturing plants, to ask questions, and to provide comments. Enviva has also met with various groups in the Wilmington area regarding the Proposed Project. In addition, this document will be available for public review and comment through the State Clearinghouse and a link to the document will be available on the Port’s website, www.ncports.com. PERMITS REQUIRED

NPDES Stormwater: The proposed site is subject to the Port’s National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Stormwater General Permit Number NCS000174.

CAMA: The Proposed Project would require a major modification to the Authority’s existing CAMA permit (number 47-87) from the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR), Division of Coastal Management (DCM). An application for a CAMA permit for the Proposed Project has been submitted.

Section 401: The Proposed Project would not require a Water Quality Certification (WQC) from the NCDWR, as there would be no discharge to waters of the US. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act requires a WQC from the NCDWR for any federally permitted or licensed activity that may result in a discharge to waters of the US.

Section 404/10: The Proposed Project would not require a Section 404 or Section 10 permit as there would be no impacts to waters of the US and no work is being conducted within the Cape Fear River. The Cape Fear River is navigable water subject to Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of March 3, 1899, and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act.

Air: It is anticipated that the Proposed Project would require a minor source construction and operating air permit from the North Carolina Division of Air Quality (NCDAQ).

Erosion and Sediment Control/General Construction Stormwater: An Erosion and Sediment Control (ESC) Plan would be developed to include silt fence controls, inlet protection controls, sediment trap(s), and ground stabilization and basin design requirements to meet the North Carolina State Erosion Control Manual and the North Carolina General Permit requirements for Construction Activities (Permit No. NCG 010000).

City of Wilmington Stormwater: A Stormwater Permit would be required through the City of Wilmington. A post-construction operation and maintenance agreement would also be required by the City as part of the stormwater permitting. The operation and maintenance of Best Management Practice (BMP) devices would be included in this agreement. The post-construction permit and agreement would be valid for ten years from the date of issue.


Environmental Assessment i

Table of Contents 1.0 Project Description .......................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 General Description ..................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Proposed Site Improvements ....................................................................................................... 2 1.3 Proposed Stormwater Control Devices ........................................................................................ 2

2.0 Purpose and Need for Proposed Project ........................................................................................... 3 2.1 Purpose of Proposed Project ........................................................................................................ 3 2.2 Need for Proposed Project ........................................................................................................... 3

3.0 Alternatives Analysis ....................................................................................................................... 4 3.1 No Action Alternative ................................................................................................................. 4 3.2 Alternative 1 ................................................................................................................................ 4 3.3 Preferred Alternative ................................................................................................................... 4

4.0 Existing Environmental Characteristics of the Proposed site .......................................................... 5 4.1 Topography .................................................................................................................................. 5 4.2 Soils ............................................................................................................................................. 6 4.3 Land Use ...................................................................................................................................... 6 4.4 Wetlands ...................................................................................................................................... 6 4.5 Prime and Unique Agricultural Lands ......................................................................................... 6 4.6 Public Lands and Scenic, Recreational, and State Natural Areas ................................................ 7 4.7 Areas of Archaeological or Historical Value ............................................................................... 7 4.8 Air Quality ................................................................................................................................... 8 4.9 Noise Levels ................................................................................................................................ 8 4.10 Water Resources (Surface Water and Groundwater) ................................................................... 8 4.11 Forest Resources .......................................................................................................................... 9 4.12 Shellfish and/or Fish and their Habitats....................................................................................... 9 4.13 Wildlife and Natural Vegetation .................................................................................................. 9

4.13.1 Wildlife ............................................................................................................................... 9 4.13.2 Natural Vegetation .............................................................................................................. 9 4.13.3 Threatened and Endangered Species .................................................................................. 9 4.13.4 Federal Species of Concern/State-Protected Species ........................................................ 14 4.13.5 Significant Natural Heritage Areas ................................................................................... 14

5.0 Predicted Environmental impacts of Proposed Project .................................................................. 14 5.1 Topography ................................................................................................................................ 15 5.2 Soils ........................................................................................................................................... 16 5.3 Land Use .................................................................................................................................... 16 5.4 Wetlands .................................................................................................................................... 17 5.5 Prime and Unique Agricultural Lands ....................................................................................... 17 5.6 Public Lands and Scenic, Recreational, and State Natural Areas .............................................. 17 5.7 Areas of Archaeological or Historical Value ............................................................................. 17 5.8 Air Quality ................................................................................................................................. 17 5.9 Noise Levels .............................................................................................................................. 18 5.10 Water Resources (Surface Water and Groundwater) ................................................................. 19 5.11 Forest Resources ........................................................................................................................ 19 5.12 Shellfish and/or Fish and their Habitats..................................................................................... 20 5.13 Wildlife and Natural Vegetation ................................................................................................ 20 5.14 Introduction of Toxic Substances .............................................................................................. 20 5.15 Timber Harvesting ..................................................................................................................... 20 5.16 Climate Change ......................................................................................................................... 21 5.17 Cumulative Impacts ................................................................................................................... 22


Environmental Assessment ii

6.0 Mitigative Measures ...................................................................................................................... 22 6.1 Site Selection ............................................................................................................................. 22 6.2 Air .............................................................................................................................................. 22 6.3 Water Resources (Surface Water and Groundwater) ................................................................. 23

7.0 Public Involvement ........................................................................................................................ 23 8.0 References ...................................................................................................................................... 23 9.0 State and Federal Permits Required ............................................................................................... 25

List of Tables Table 1: Federally Protected Species Listed for New Hanover County ..................................................... 10

Figures Figure 1: Project Vicinity Figure 2: Proposed Site Figure 3: Proposed Site Plan Figure 4: Environmental Features

List of Appendices Appendix A: Site Images Appendix B: Scientific Names for Wildlife Species Appendix B: Federal Species of Concern Listed for New Hanover County Appendix C: Sustainable Forestry Certifications Appendix D: US Pulpwood Consumption


Environmental Assessment 1

1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The North Carolina State Ports Authority (Authority) has entered into a land lease and operations agreement pursuant to which Enviva Holdings, LP (Enviva) would construct a new wood pellet export facility, capable of exporting two million tons of wood pellets annually, on Industrial Road at the Port of Wilmington in Wilmington, North Carolina (the Proposed Project). Pursuant to these agreements, Enviva would build and operate the terminal facility on leased land. The proposed facility would store and export wood pellets from production facilities likely located in inland North Carolina and South Carolina, within an approximate 200-mile radius of the Wilmington area. The design of the Proposed Project is based on Enviva’s current operation at its Chesapeake, Virginia terminal facility and would ship 25-30 vessels loaded with wood pellets annually. Enviva anticipates ultimately shipping 1.5 million tons of wood pellets annually through the facility.

Enviva, through its subsidiaries, is one of the world’s largest producers of solid biomass fuels. Enviva purchases wood pellet feed stocks from low-value wood fiber. Enviva’s use of these low-value wood fibers provides an additional economic incentive for forest owners to keep land as a working forest, rather than converting it to non-forest uses. Enviva currently operates five production facilities in the southeastern United States: two in Mississippi, two in North Carolina, and one in Virginia. The Mississippi facilities export wood pellets out of the Port of Mobile, Alabama, and the North Carolina and Virginia facilities export out of the Port of Chesapeake, Virginia.

Based on the statutory exemption of major developments that receive Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) major permits, the Proposed Project is exempt from SEPA and does not require an Environmental Assessment. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 113A-12, Session Law 2011-398, provides: “No environmental document shall be required in connection with: . . . A major development as defined in G.S. 113A-118 that receives a permit issued under Article 7 of Chapter 113A of the General Statutes.”

The Proposed Project is a “major development,” as defined by N.C. Gen. Stat. § 113A-118(d)(1), and the Authority will obtain a major modification of CAMA Permit No. 47-87 prior to undertaking the Proposed Project. An application for a CAMA permit for the Proposed Project has been submitted. However, in the interest of full transparency, the Authority voluntarily has elected to prepare this document.

1.1 GENERAL DESCRIPTION

The proposed site consists of 7.17 acres within the Port of Wilmington located at 1 Shipyard Boulevard in Wilmington, North Carolina (Figure 1). The property is situated on a portion of New Hanover County Parcel Number R05908-003-002-000 and is currently being used as an industrial materials storage area. The proposed site has already been partially developed and consists of grassed lawns, gravel, and paved asphalt areas and existing infrastructure associated with Port operations. The proposed site is situated just east of the Cape Fear River (Figure 2). Site images are included in Appendix A.

Major activities and site improvements associated with the Proposed Project include the construction of two approximately 175-foot diameter, 45,000 metric ton capacity concrete storage domes, a truck and rail unloading station, conveyor systems, and a ship loading system (Figure 3). The northern portion of the proposed site where the domes would be located is approximately 4.34 acres. The storage domes are shown on Figure 3 as Dome 3 and Dome 4. Their numbering is an extension of the numbering of the domes at the existing Enviva export facility at the Port of Chesapeake, as Domes 1 and 2 are sited at the Port of Chesapeake. The Proposed Project would use the Authority's existing Berth 5. The Proposed Project’s scope would not impact the berths or water area, and would involve no in-water work or dredging. Domes 3 and 4 would be engineered structures made of concrete and rebar, designed to be well ventilated to protect the wood pellets by keeping them dry. The domes would be unheated and include a high capacity air handling system that introduces forced air into the bottom of the dome floor, to cool interior sections of the storage space by evacuating any built up heat from the pile. The domes would



stand a total of 172 feet high and have a 192,422-square-foot footprint. The total height of the domes includes the dome height of 157 feet and a 15-foot head house for the conveyors on top of the dome.

The southern portion of the proposed site where the receiving area would be located is approximately 2.83 acres. Overhead conveyors would connect the truck and rail receiving area to the storage domes, and transport wood pellets out to the shiploader. Container vessels navigating the Cape Fear River would dock at Berth 5. The conveyors would range in height from 172 feet at the top of the head house on the top of the dome, to seven feet at the transfer house. All conveyors would be equipped with covers to protect the wood pellets from the natural elements during transfer. Each conveyor would have a high speed spark detection and deluge system to protect the conveyors and wood pellets from fire and a dust collection system to capture fugitive emissions. The shiploader would travel along the dock rails to facilitate loading wood pellets into the storage holds of marine bulk handling ships at existing Berth 5. A spout on the shiploader would lower into the holds to gently load the wood pellets into the ship, and minimize fugitive emissions from the material transfer.

The northern portion of the proposed site is developed and contains gravel roads, stockpiles of timber pilings, staged steel beams, railroad tracks, and storage containers. There is an existing fertilizer warehouse and office building to the south and a garage to the west of the proposed domes. The southern portion of the proposed site is made up of a gravel parking lot with a concrete pad. There are two maintenance buildings, numbered 58 and 22, to the north of the proposed receiving area (Figure 1). A police department building is to the south and a warehouse is to the west of the proposed receiving area. The proposed overhead conveyor would travel along Myers Street toward the Cape Fear River. The proposed site is bounded on the east by railroad tracks. To the east of the Authority property is a residential neighborhood, Sunset Park. The remaining surrounding areas of the proposed site consist of industrial development. The total disturbed land area for the Proposed Project is 6.1 acres.

Wood pellets would be delivered to the Port of Wilmington by both train and truck from three production facilities. One facility would be located in Hamlet, Richmond County, North Carolina (Hamlet Site) and deliver wood pellets via rail. A second facility would be located in Sampson County, North Carolina (Sampson Site) and deliver wood pellets via truck. Enviva has also secured options on a site in Laurens County, South Carolina (Laurens Site) for a third production facility and is in the process of performing due diligence. If constructed, wood pellets from the Laurens Site would be delivered via rail.

1.2 PROPOSED SITE IMPROVEMENTS

The construction of the Proposed Project would involve general site grading, utility connections, and construction of the two domes, the conveyor system, and ship loading equipment. Dome foundations may require additional fill and compaction during the construction process. Additional fill may also be required when grading around the domes.

The Proposed Project would connect to the following existing utilities at the Port: Cape Fear Public Utility Authority Water; Cape Fear Public Utility Authority Sewer; and Duke Energy Progress Electric.

The Proposed Project would result in a total net added impervious surface area of less than 0.25 acres.

1.3 PROPOSED STORMWATER CONTROL DEVICES

A post-construction operation and maintenance agreement would be required by the City of Wilmington as part of the stormwater permitting. The operation and maintenance of Best Management Practice (BMP) devices would be included in this agreement. The post-construction permit and agreement would be valid for ten years from the date of issue.



2.0 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR PROPOSED PROJECT

2.1 PURPOSE OF PROPOSED PROJECT

The Authority maintains facilities at the Ports of Wilmington and Morehead City, plus inland terminals in Charlotte and Greensboro. The Port of Wilmington offers terminal facilities serving container, bulk, and breakbulk operations. The Port of Wilmington is one of the few South Atlantic ports with readily available berths and storage areas for containers and cargo served by a 42-foot deep navigational channel. CSX Transportation, Inc. (CSX) provides daily service to the Port of Wilmington for boxcar, tanker, and general cargo services. Additionally, the Port of Wilmington has access to Interstates 40 and 95 via US Highways 74/76, 117, and 421.

The purpose of the Proposed Project is to allow the Authority to support the state’s wood pellet industry. Entering into a lease and operating agreement with Enviva is consistent with and will further fulfill the Authority’s mission because it will provide additional jobs and revenue in North Carolina and will allow the Port of Wilmington to increase its return on investments to develop the proposed site for economic use. As stated in the Authority’s mission statement: “The mission of the North Carolina State Ports Authority is to enhance the economy of the State of North Carolina. The Ports Authority will be managed like a business focused on the requirements of our customers. North Carolina’s Ports will be recognized for their self-sustaining operations, environmental stewardship, highly efficient workforce, satisfied customers and modern, well-maintained facilities and equipment.”

As discussed in the North Carolina Maritime Strategy Final Report, ports play an important role in sustaining the State’s economy and also have important responsibilities to sustain the environment and communities (NCDOT, 2012). Targeted investments by the State in maritime transportation have the potential to enhance the State’s economy and to provide public benefits to North Carolina’s citizens. Because ports are an integral part of the global supply chain, they play a major role in industrial plant location. Thus, maritime infrastructure investments generate direct jobs through both the construction period and long-term industry employment.

Wood pellet exports from North Carolina are one of the key targeted investments identified in the North Carolina Maritime Strategy Final Report. Supported by North Carolina’s strength in timber production, a successful wood pellet industry requires export facilities that include covered on-port storage and bulk handling equipment, as well as rail access from wood growing regions to the port. Enviva plans to invest approximately $40 million in the Proposed Project. During the construction phase, estimates suggest that the Proposed Project will result in a total influx of $27.3 million, which can support 126 cumulative jobs. When completed and operational, the facility is expected to employ a total of 23 permanent workers in the State with an average yearly salary of $37,783 in 2015. The Proposed Project’s ongoing operation is estimated to have a total economic impact of $16.9 million annually and to support 34 jobs in North Carolina. The proposed facility is projected to result in annual tax revenue to local and state governments of roughly $425,000. Entering into a lease and operating agreement with Enviva would further the State’s maritime strategy and provide economic and environmental benefits to the State.

A new export facility at the Port of Wilmington would serve three new Enviva production facilities in North Carolina and South Carolina. The Proposed Project can be situated within existing, developed Authority property and utilize existing Port infrastructure, which minimizes impact to the environment. The proximity of the Port of Wilmington to CSX rail lines and I-40 would allow for direct transfer of materials from the future production facilities to further minimize impacts to the environment.

2.2 NEED FOR PROPOSED PROJECT

Global demand for wood pellets is growing, and a portion of this demand can be met with the Proposed Project. The European market is the most developed and continues to have a projected strong growth trajectory. Budding demand in Asian markets signals additional potential, and there are indications that the US will begin to take advantage of this fuel source in the foreseeable future. Enviva’s current



production capacity at each of its existing facilities is fully contracted. Power companies, especially European utilities, are signing long term supply contracts with wood pellet producers to fulfill their fuel needs. Wood pellets can be used in existing coal fired power plants either combined with coal, or as a coal replacement. Wood pellets are a cost effective source of reliable energy that can help reduce the negative environmental impacts associated with fossil fuels. The European Union (EU), where most wood pellets are consumed, has concluded that it is beneficial to use biomass to displace fossil fuels such as coal, when accounting for overall greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (European Commission, 2010). In the absence of a wood pellet export facility, the Authority will lose the benefits of wood pellet traffic through the Port of Wilmington.

3.0 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS

The Authority maintains two deep water facilities at the Ports of Wilmington and Morehead City. Enviva is proposing three new production facilities: the Hamlet Site, the Sampson Site, and possibly the Laurens Site. Enviva selected North Carolina and South Carolina for its planned expansion due to the states’ robust timberland and existing forestry infrastructure. The new production locations are sited such that they do not significantly overlap with areas from which Enviva procures fiber for its existing production facilities that export through the Port of Chesapeake, Virginia. The Sampson, Hamlet, and Laurens Sites have strong wood fiber dynamics as well as accessibility to existing road and rail infrastructure.

3.1 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE

The No Action Alternative consists of the Authority not entering into a lease and operating agreement with Enviva. Under the No Action Alternative, a new wood pellet export facility would not be constructed. The No Action Alternative does not satisfy the Project’s purpose or need and has been eliminated from further consideration.

3.2 ALTERNATIVE 1

Construction of Export Facility at the Port of Morehead City, North Carolina

The proposed Sampson Site is approximately 125 miles from the Port of Morehead City roadway and the proposed Hamlet site is approximately 200 miles from the Port of Morehead City via rail. The proposed Laurens Site is approximately 367 miles from the Port of Morehead City via rail.

All Enviva-owned wood pellet production facilities are audited annually by an independent third party, the Control Union, to assess GHG footprints. A GHG footprint is calculated from forest to end-user to ensure that the use of wood pellets for energy production results in reductions of GHG emissions. Transporting wood pellets produced in new manufacturing facilities in North Carolina and South Carolina to the Port of Morehead City would result in higher GHG footprints and increased transportation costs.

Because Alternative 1 is not the closest port under consideration and, therefore, would have greater environmental impacts, including higher GHG footprints, Alternative 1 has been eliminated from further consideration.

3.3 PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

Construction of Export Facility at the Port of Wilmington, North Carolina

Construction of an export facility at the Port of Wilmington is the Preferred Alternative for the Proposed Project. The Port of Wilmington provides the lowest GHG emissions profile for the three new production facilities. The Port of Wilmington is also the closest (in highway and rail miles) to the three new production facilities (75 miles from the Sampson Site; 125 miles from the Hamlet Site; 277 miles from the Laurens Site). The Port of Wilmington represents the most viable economic and environmentally favorable alternative. The Preferred Alternative satisfies the project’s purpose and need to enhance the State’s economy through a lease and operating agreement with Enviva.



4.0 EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE PROPOSED SITE

An assessment of the existing environmental characteristics of the proposed site was conducted on October 3, 2013. Walking surveys were undertaken to determine natural resource conditions and to document social, economic, cultural, and physical conditions. During the field assessment, wildlife identification involved a variety of observation techniques, including active searching, visual observations, and observing the characteristic signs of wildlife (sounds, scat, tracks, and burrows).

The presence of jurisdictional wetlands was evaluated using the three-parameter approach prescribed in the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory, 1987) and the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region (Version 2.0) (Environmental Laboratory, 2010).

A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) was conducted for the Proposed Project prior to the initiation of the Environmental Assessment document (ECS, 2013). The Phase I ESA was completed on August 23, 2013 and included a regulatory database search, property history determination, site reconnaissance, and a groundwater/soil contamination assessment. The Phase I ESA did not discover environmental limitations that would prevent the Proposed Project. The Phase I ESA document identified recognized environmental concerns (RECs) in the vicinity of the proposed site. All RECs of the site pertain to existing Port of Wilmington operations. Additional assessment was conducted at the site to determine whether the RECs identified during the Phase I ESA have adversely impacted the site (ECS, 2014). The assessment consisted of collecting soil samples using a Geoprobe® drill rig and the installation and sampling of temporary groundwater monitoring wells using a hollow-stem auger drill rig for groundwater sampling and aquifer testing. A Soil and Groundwater Management Plan will be prepared prior to construction which ensures that any soil or groundwater conditions required to be addressed by North Carolina law will be managed in compliance with North Carolina law.

4.1 TOPOGRAPHY

The proposed site straddles two ecoregions. The northwest portion of the proposed site lies within the Mid-Atlantic Floodplains and Low Terraces Ecoregion, and the southeast portion of the proposed site lies within the Carolina Flatwoods Ecoregion (Griffith et al., 2002). The Mid-Atlantic Floodplains and Low Terraces Ecoregion contains major river floodplains and associated low terraces; low gradient streams with sandy and silty substrates, oxbow lakes, ponds, and swamps. The Carolina Flatwoods Ecoregion contains flat plains on lightly dissected marine terraces, swamps, low gradient streams with sandy and silty substrates, and Carolina bays. Both ecoregions lie within the Lower Coastal Plain Physiographic Province of North Carolina. The Coastal Plain is composed of seven terraces, each representing a former level of the Atlantic Ocean. Soils in this area generally consist of sedimentary materials transported from other areas by the ocean or rivers (Daniels et al., 1999).

The sedimentary deposits of the Coastal Plain rest upon consolidated rocks similar to those underlying the Piedmont and Mountain Physiographic Provinces. In general, shallow unconfined groundwater movement within the overlying soils is largely controlled by topographic gradients. Recharge occurs primarily by infiltration along higher elevations and typically discharges into streams or other surface water bodies. The elevation of the shallow water table is transient and can vary greatly with seasonal fluctuations in precipitation (ECS, 2013).

The proposed site lies within the Port of Wilmington. The Port ranges in elevation from five to 15 feet above mean sea level (USGS, 1993). The proposed site has an elevation of approximately ten feet above mean sea level and is relatively flat, sloping slightly downward to the west, towards the Cape Fear River (Figure 2). The northern and western-most portions of the proposed site lie within the 100-year floodplain (Figure 4).



4.2 SOILS

The New Hanover County Soil Survey (USDA, 2013; Weaver, 1977) identifies two soil types within the proposed site, Urban Land (Ur) and Baymeade-Urban Land Complex (Bh). The majority of the proposed site is classified as Urban Land. The Urban Land soil type consists of areas where the original soil has been cut, filled, graded, or paved so that most soil properties have been altered to the extent that a soil series is not recognized. This type is typically found in areas used for shopping centers, factories, municipal buildings, apartment complexes, or parking lots, or for other purposes where buildings are closely spaced or soil is covered with pavement. This soil does not have any major limitations for building site development. The extreme eastern edge of the proposed site (near the proposed rail interchange and buildings) is classified as Baymeade-Urban Land Complex.

Baymeade-Urban Land Complex is found on the flats and low ridges of upland and in small areas along drainageways that are not subject to flooding. It consists of Baymeade soils and Urban Land that are in areas so small and intermingled that they were not mapped separately. Very low available water capacity, moderately rapid permeability, leaching of plant nutrients, droughtiness, and soil blowing are the main limitations in the use and management of these soils for agriculture. Soil properties within the proposed site would not pose limitations to Project construction. The majority of the Authority’s property is mapped as Urban Land per the New Hanover County Soil Survey.

4.3 LAND USE

The proposed site is contained within the Port of Wilmington. Land use within Authority property is industrial in nature and contains warehouses, conveyors, rail lines, roadways, cranes, storage facilities, and berth areas. It is located on the Cape Fear River, 26 miles from the Atlantic Ocean. According to the Phase I ESA, the site has been a shipyard and Port since 1941 (ECS, 2013). A maintenance garage and oil house was located near the proposed site in the 1960s. The proposed site has been used as an industrial materials storage area and contained an office building at one point. The proposed site and surrounding lands to the north, south, east, and west are zoned Industrial (IND) and Light Industrial (LI). Immediately outside of the Authority property to the east, the majority of the land is a residential district (R-7). Small parcels of special use district (SD) and office and institutional (O&I-1) are present along Burnett Boulevard and include Authority administrative buildings.

The 2006 Wilmington-New Hanover County CAMA Plan Update (Wilmington and New Hanover County, 2006) indicates a goal to grow the county’s economic base by growing the Port industry. This goal is supported by the North Carolina Maritime Strategy Final Report. The Land Classification Map identifies the Authority property as Urban and within the 2006 Urban Service Boundary. Choices, the Wilmington Future Land Use Plan 2004-2025 (City of Wilmington, 2004) shows no recommended land use changes for the Authority property per the Composite Map.

4.4 WETLANDS

On October 3, 2013, the proposed site was evaluated for wetlands. There are no jurisdictional wetlands within the limits of the proposed site. There are no wetlands in the general vicinity of the proposed site; however, the proposed site extends to the edge of the Cape Fear River. The Cape Fear River is a jurisdictional, navigable water of the US. There is no in-water work or dredging associated with the Proposed Project.

4.5 PRIME AND UNIQUE AGRICULTURAL LANDS

Three categories of important farmlands are recognized in North Carolina – prime, unique, and statewide importance. Criteria used for prime and unique farmlands were published on January 31, 1978 in the Federal Register and amended on June 17, 1994. These criteria are also in the General Manual, title 310-Land Use, Section 403.3 and Section 622 of the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) National Soil Survey Handbook (Title 430). Criteria for farmland of statewide importance were



developed in 1988 by the North Carolina NRCS State soils staff in consultation with soil survey cooperators, resource conservationists, and key soil survey customers (USDA, 2010). The NRCS, in cooperation with state and local agencies, has developed a listing of Prime and Statewide Important Farmland of North Carolina by county.

There are no soils considered Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, or Farmland of Unique Importance within or immediately adjacent to the proposed site (USDA, 2008). Additionally, the proposed site is industrial and no land is in use as farmland within or in the vicinity of the proposed site. “Prime farmland does not include land already in or committed to urban development or water storage” (7 CFR Part 658.3). Therefore, this Project is not subject to the requirements of the Farmland Policy Protection Act (FPPA).

4.6 PUBLIC LANDS AND SCENIC, RECREATIONAL, AND STATE NATURAL AREAS

There are four notable public parks within an approximate one mile radius of the proposed site (Figure 4). All are owned, operated, and maintained by the City of Wilmington. Greenfield Park is located approximately one mile north of the proposed site. The 250-acre park is located on Burnett Boulevard. Greenfield Park contains a 150-acre man-made lake and extensive natural areas. The park is equipped with a 4.5 mile biking and hiking trail, a skate park, and a 1,000 seat amphitheater. Greenfield Park offers a wide variety of recreational activities including tennis, picnicking, fishing, canoeing, paddle boating, and skateboarding. Legion Stadium is located approximately ¾ mile northeast of the proposed site. The 25-acre athletic facility is located on Carolina Beach Road and is near the southwestern portion of Greenfield Lake. This sports facility offers a wide variety of recreational activities including swimming, football, soccer, baseball, and tennis. Legion Stadium is home to the United Soccer League Professional Division Wilmington Hammerheads soccer team and the Coastal Plain League Wilmington Sharks collegiate summer baseball team. Optimist Park is located approximately one mile north of the proposed site. The 5-acre park contains baseball and softball fields and is located on South Front Street. Cameron Park is located approximately ½ mile east of the proposed site. The 3-acre park is bounded by Adams Street, Jefferson Street, and Southern Boulevard. The park contains open play areas, a basketball court, and playground equipment, primarily serving the adjacent neighborhood community.

4.7 AREAS OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL OR HISTORICAL VALUE

Archaeological resources at the North Carolina Office of State Archaeology were consulted on October 3, 2013. No previously recorded archaeological resources are located within the Port of Wilmington near the proposed site. Industrial development and redevelopment of the Port over the years has likely destroyed any potentially significant archaeological deposits or sites. Therefore, the proposed development would not have an adverse impact on significant archaeological resources.

A search of the databases maintained by the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (HPO) on October 4, 2013 identified no historic architectural resources within the proposed site that are listed in or have been determined eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), or that have otherwise been inventoried or recorded. The NRHP-listed Sunset Park Historic District (HPO survey number NH-2674) is located to the east of the proposed site (Figure 4). It is separated from the proposed site by Burnett Boulevard, a buffer of trees, Polk Street and, further west on the property of the Port of Wilmington, by six to 12 parallel pairs of active railroad tracks.



4.8 AIR QUALITY

The current Section 107 attainment status designations for areas within the State of North Carolina are summarized in 40 CFR 81.334. New Hanover County is classified as “better than national standards” for total suspended particulates (TSP, also referred to as particulate matter, PM, which includes particulate matter less than 10 microns, PM10) and for sulfur dioxide. The entire State of North Carolina is designated as “unclassifiable/attainment” for carbon monoxide. New Hanover County is designated as “unclassifiable/attainment” for ozone. New Hanover County is designated as “cannot be classified or better than national standards” for nitrogen dioxide. The Port of Wilmington is not located in an area currently designated as “nonattainment” for any compound regulated under the federal National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS).

Air regulations applicable to the Proposed Project include: 15A NCAC 02Q .0300 – Construction and Operation Permits; 15A NCAC 02D.0515 – Particulates from Miscellaneous Industrial Processes; 15A NCAC 02D .0521 – Control of Visible Emissions; 15A NCAC 02D .0535 – Excess Emissions Reporting and Malfunctions; 15A NCAC 02D .0540 – Particulates from Fugitive Dust Sources.

4.9 NOISE LEVELS

Noise levels can vary over a wide range of amplitude. The decibel (dB) is the standard unit for measuring the amplitude of sound because it accounts for the large variations of amplitude and the variability in the human perseverance of sound. Although sound levels are subjective, federal and local governments have established noise guidelines and regulations for the purpose of protecting citizens from potential hearing damage and from various other adverse physiological, psychological, and social effects associated with noise. Community noise levels usually change continuously during the day. However, community noise exhibits a daily, weekly, and yearly pattern. The Federal Interagency Committee on Urban Noise developed land use compatibility guidelines for noise in terms of day-night average sound level (DNL) metered in dB (USDOT, 1980). In general, residential units and other noise-sensitive land uses are “clearly unacceptable” in areas where the noise exposure exceeds DNL 75 dB, “normally unacceptable” in regions exposed to noise between DNL 65 and 75 dB, and “normally acceptable” in areas exposed to noise where the DNL is 65 dB or less. In general, the outdoor noise environment varies greatly in magnitude and character depending on the time of day, season of the year, human activity, land use, transportation networks, and degree of urbanization, industrialization, and forestation.

Ambient noise currently generated at the Authority includes heavy equipment, cranes, conveyors, large vehicle traffic, and an active rail line. The Proposed Project would not increase the ambient noise levels at the Port of Wilmington, and would not be a substantial source of Authority noise. Noise levels from the construction and operation of the Proposed Project will be in compliance with all applicable noise ordinances.

4.10 WATER RESOURCES (SURFACE WATER AND GROUNDWATER)

The proposed site lies within the Cape Fear River basin, US Geological Survey (USGS) Hydrologic Unit 03030005, North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR) Subbasin 03-06-17, just east of the Cape Fear River, approximately one mile upstream from the confluence with the Brunswick River. The Cape Fear River flows south to meet the Atlantic Ocean.

The Cape Fear River appears on the 2014 Draft 303(d) List of Impaired Waters (NCDWR, 2014). The NCDWR Index Number for the Cape Fear River is 18-(71)a3 and its Best Usage Classification is SC (NCDWR, 2013). The SC classification designates the water as tidal saltwater protected for secondary recreation, fishing, aquatic life to include propagation and survival, and wildlife. There are no High Quality Waters (HQW) or Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW) in the vicinity of the proposed site. There are no potable wells located within the proposed site. Depth to groundwater is approximately 3.0 to 6.4 feet below the ground surface.



4.11 FOREST RESOURCES

There are no forest resources within or near the proposed site. The proposed site is contained within the Port of Wilmington, which is a developed, industrialized area.

4.12 SHELLFISH AND/OR FISH AND THEIR HABITATS

The reach of the Cape Fear River adjacent to the proposed site appears on the 2014 Draft 303(d) List of Impaired Waters due to the presence of copper and low dissolved oxygen (NCDWR, 2014). The Cape Fear River is a designated Primary Nursery Area, but is closed to harvest (NCONEMAP, 2013). There is no Submerged Aquatic Vegetation designated within the Cape Fear River adjacent to the proposed site.

4.13 WILDLIFE AND NATURAL VEGETATION

4.13.1 WILDLIFE

Due to the disturbed and developed nature of the proposed site, wildlife use of the proposed site is limited to mainly urbanized and opportunistic species. Scientific names for wildlife species are located in Appendix B. Mammal species that could be found near the proposed site include Virginia opossum, river otter, gray fox, raccoon, marsh rabbit, muskrat, cotton mouse, and nutria.

A wide variety of bird species are likely to occur in the vicinity of the proposed site during certain times of the year. Since coastal North Carolina is part of the Atlantic Flyway, a large number of migratory birds use New Hanover County to rest. Common year-round resident birds may include great blue heron, osprey, great egret, snowy egret, red-tailed hawk, Northern cardinal, American crow, blue jay, Northern flicker, European starling, Eastern bluebird, turkey vulture, little blue heron, tricolored heron, glossy ibis, gull-billed tern, black skimmer, white ibis, herring gull, least tern, royal tern, common merganser, hooded merganser, cormorant, common loon, king rail, clapper rail, purple gallinule, moorhen, American woodcock, and common snipe.

Common migratory birds may include Canada goose, mallard, ruby-throated hummingbird, wood thrush, Eastern kingbird, song sparrow, white-throated sparrow, American goldfinch, mourning dove, black duck, redhead, canvasback, greater scaup, Northern pintail, American wigeon, green-winged teal, blue-winged teal, wood duck, gadwall, black scoter, brant, and American coot.

Reptiles and amphibians with the potential to occur within the proposed site include rat snake, Eastern glass lizard, Southern toad, slimy salamander, eastern box turtle, snapping turtle, and corn snake.

4.13.2 NATURAL VEGETATION

The proposed site does not contain natural vegetation. The entirety of the proposed site is already developed. The proposed site consists of concrete, asphalt, rail lines, gravel, and small areas of weedy grasses growing on soils dominated by sand and gravel that appear to be fill material.

4.13.3 THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES

As of January 9, 2014, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has identified 12 federally protected species for New Hanover County (Table 1) (USFWS, 2012). A brief description of each species’ habitat requirements follows, along with the Biological Conclusion rendered based on survey results for the proposed site. Habitat requirements for each species are based on the current best available information from referenced literature and past recorded occurrences within or near the proposed site maintained by the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP), (NCNHP, 2013).



Table 1: Federally Protected Species Listed for New Hanover County

Scientific Name Common Name Federal Status

Habitat Present

Biological Conclusion

Alligator mississippiensis American alligator T(S/A) No Not Required

Acipenser oxyrinchus oxyrinchus

Atlantic sturgeon E No No Effect

Chelonia mydas Green sea turtle T No No Effect

Caretta caretta Loggerhead sea turtle T No No Effect

Charadrius melodus Piping plover T No No Effect

Picoides borealis Red-cockaded woodpecker

E No No Effect

Acipenser brevirostrum Shortnose sturgeon E No No Effect

Trichechus manatus West Indian manatee E No No Effect

Thalictrum cooleyi Cooley’s Meadowrue E No No Effect

Carex lutea Golden sedge E No No Effect

Lysimachia asperulaefolia Rough-leaved loosestrife

E No No Effect

Amaranthus pumilus Seabeach amaranth T No No Effect

E – Endangered T(S/A) – Threatened due to similarity in appearance T – Threatened

American Alligator

USFWS optimal survey window: Year Round

Habitat Description: The American alligator inhabits freshwater swamps, marshes, abandoned rice fields, ponds, lakes, and the backwaters of large rivers. Although its range in North Carolina once extended north through the Coastal Plain to the Dismal Swamp, the American alligator is now absent in the area north of the Albemarle Sound and in much of the Upper Coastal Plain.

Female alligators build large nests in June. Nests are typically built in shaded areas close to water. Eight inch hatchlings emerge in late summer or early fall.

Biological Conclusion – Not Required: Species listed as threatened due to similarity of appearance do not require Section 7 consultation with the USFWS. There is no habitat for American alligator present within the proposed site. All work associated with the Proposed Project would occur land-side. A review of NCNHP records, updated July, 2013, indicates one known occurrence of American alligator within one mile of the proposed site. The occurrence is documented in the lower Cape Fear River.

Atlantic Sturgeon

USFWS optimal survey window: Not required; assume presence in appropriate waters

Habitat Description: Atlantic sturgeon occur in most major river systems along the eastern seaboard of the United States. The species prefers the near-shore marine, estuarine, and riverine habitat of large river systems. It is an anadromous species that migrates to faster-moving, upriver freshwater areas to spawn in the spring, but spends most of its life in saltwater. Large freshwater rivers that are unobstructed by dams or pollutants are imperative to successful reproduction. Distribution information by river/waterbody is lacking for the rivers of North Carolina; however, records are known from most coastal counties.

Biological Conclusion – No Effect: There is no habitat for Atlantic sturgeon present within the proposed site. All work associated with the Proposed Project would occur land-side. A review of NCNHP records, updated July, 2013, indicates no known occurrences of Atlantic sturgeon within one mile of the proposed site.



Green Sea Turtle

USFWS survey window: April to August

Habitat Description: The green sea turtle is found in temperate and tropical oceans and seas. Nesting in North America is limited to small communities on the east coast of Florida requiring beaches with minimal disturbances and a sloping platform for nesting (they do not nest in NC). The green sea turtle can be found in shallow waters. They are attracted to lagoons, reefs, bays, mangrove swamps and inlets where an abundance of marine grasses can be found, as this is the principal food source for the green turtle.

Biological Conclusion – No Effect: There is no habitat for the green sea turtle present within the proposed site. All work associated with the Proposed Project would occur land-side, and the proposed site lies approximately 26 miles upstream of the Atlantic Ocean. A review of NCNHP records, updated July, 2013, indicates no known occurrences of green sea turtle within one mile of the proposed site.

Loggerhead Sea Turtle

USFWS survey window: April to August

Habitat Description: The loggerhead sea turtle is widely distributed within its range, and is found in three distinct habitats during its life. These turtles may be found hundreds of miles out in the open ocean, in nearshore areas, or on coastal beaches. In North Carolina, this species has been observed in every coastal county. Loggerhead sea turtles occasionally nest on North Carolina beaches, and are the most common of all the sea turtles that visit the North Carolina coast. They nest nocturnally, at two to three year intervals between May and September on isolated beaches that are characterized by fine-grained sand. In nearshore areas, loggerhead sea turtle have been observed in bays, lagoons, salt marshes, creeks, ship channels, and the mouths of large rivers. Coral reefs, rocky places, and shipwrecks are often used as foraging areas.

Biological Conclusion – No Effect: There is no habitat for the loggerhead sea turtle present within the proposed site. All work associated with the Proposed Project would occur land-side, and the proposed site lies approximately 26 miles upstream of the Atlantic Ocean. A review of NCNHP records, updated July, 2013, indicates no known occurrences of loggerhead sea turtle within one mile of the proposed site.

Piping Plover

USFWS survey window: Year Round

Habitat Description: The piping plover breeds along the entire eastern coast of the US. North Carolina is uniquely positioned in the species’ range, being the only state where the piping plover’s breeding and wintering ranges overlap and the birds are present year round. They nest most commonly where there is little or no vegetation, but some may nest in stands of beachgrass. The nest is a shallow depression in the sand that is usually lined with shell fragments and light-colored pebbles.

Biological Conclusion – No Effect: Suitable habitat for piping plover does not exist within the proposed site. The proposed site is contained within the heavily developed Port of Wilmington. There are no beaches within or near the proposed site. The proposed site lies approximately 26 miles upstream of the Atlantic Ocean. A review of NCNHP records, updated July, 2013, indicates no known occurrences of piping plover within one mile of the proposed site.

Red-cockaded woodpecker (RCW)

USFWS survey window: Year Round; November to Early March (Optimal)

Habitat Description: The RCW occupies open, mature stands of southern pines, particularly longleaf pine (Pinus palustris), for foraging and nesting/roosting habitat. The RCW excavates cavities for nesting and roosting in living pine trees aged 60 years or older that are contiguous with pine stands at least 30 years of age to provide foraging habitat. The foraging range of the RCW is normally no more than ½ mile.



Biological Conclusion – No Effect: Suitable habitat for RCW does not exist within the proposed site. Large, mature pine stands are not present within the proposed site. A review of NCNHP records, updated July, 2013, indicates no known occurrences of red-cockaded woodpecker within one mile of the proposed site.

Shortnose Sturgeon

USFWS survey window: Surveys Not Required. Assume Presence in Appropriate Waters.

Habitat Description: Shortnose sturgeon occur in most major river systems along the eastern seaboard of the US. The species prefers the nearshore marine, estuarine, and riverine habitat of large river systems. It is an anadromous species that migrates to faster moving freshwater areas to spawn in the spring, but spends most of its life within close proximity of the river’s mouth. Large freshwater rivers that are unobstructed by dams and pollutants are imperative to successful reproduction. Distribution information by river/waterbody is lacking for the rivers of North Carolina; however, records are known from most coastal counties.

Biological Conclusion – No Effect: There is no habitat for shortnose sturgeon present within the proposed site. All work associated with the Proposed Project would occur land-side. A review of NCNHP records, updated July, 2013, indicates one known occurrence of shortnose sturgeon within one mile of the proposed site. The occurrence is documented in the Cape Fear River.

West Indian Manatee

USFWS survey window: Year Round

Habitat Description: West Indian manatee have been observed in all the North Carolina coastal counties. West Indian manatee are found in canals, sluggish rivers, estuarine habitats, salt water bays, and as far off shore as 3.7 miles. They utilize freshwater and marine habitats at shallow depths of five to 20 feet. In the winter, between October and April, West Indian manatee concentrate in areas with warm water. During other times of the year habitats appropriate for the West Indian manatee are those with sufficient water depth, an adequate food supply, and in proximity to freshwater. West Indian manatee require a source of freshwater to drink. West Indian manatee are primarily herbivorous, feeding on any aquatic vegetation present, but they may occasionally feed on fish.

Biological Conclusion – No Effect: There is no habitat for the West Indian manatee present within the proposed site. All work associated with the Proposed Project would occur land-side. A review of NCNHP records, updated July, 2013, indicates one known occurrence of West Indian manatee within one mile of the proposed site. The occurrence is documented in the Cape Fear River.

Cooley’s Meadowrue

USFWS optimal survey window: Mid June-early July

Habitat Description: Cooley's meadowrue occurs in circumneutral soils in sunny, moist to wet grass-sedge bogs, wet-pine savannas over calcareous clays, and savannah-like areas, often at the ecotones of intermittent drainages or non-riverine swamp forests. This rhizomatous perennial herb is also found along plowed firebreaks, roadside ditches and rights-of-way, forest clearings dominated by grass or sedge, and power line or utility rights-of-way. The species requires some type of disturbance (e.g., mowing, clearing, periodic fire) to maintain its open habitat. The plant typically occurs on slightly acidic (pH 5.8-6.6) soils that are loamy fine sand, sandy loam, or fine sandy loam; at least seasonally moist or saturated; and

Biological Conclusion – No Effect: Suitable habitat for Cooley’s meadowrue does not exist within the proposed site. The proposed site is contained within the heavily developed Port of Wilmington, and the proposed site does not contain areas of natural vegetation. A review of NCNHP records, updated July, 2013, indicates no known occurrences of Cooley’s meadowrue within one mile of the proposed site.



Golden Sedge

USFWS optimal survey window: Mid April–mid June

Habitat Description: Golden sedge, a very rare endemic of the Atlantic Coastal Plain, grows in sandy soils overlying calcareous deposits of coquina limestone, where the soil pH, typically between 5.5 and 7.2, is unusually high for this region. The perennial prefers the ecotone between the pine savanna and adjacent wet hardwood or hardwood/conifer forest. Most plants occur in the partially shaded savanna/swamp where occasional to frequent fires favor an herbaceous ground layer and suppress shrub dominance. Soils supporting the species are very wet to periodically shallowly inundated. Other occurrences may occur on disturbed areas such as roadside and drainage ditches or power line rights-of-way, where mowing and/or very wet conditions suppress woody plants. Poorly viable occurrences may occur in significantly disturbed areas where ditching activities that lower the water table and/or some evidence of fire suppression threatens the species.

Biological Conclusion – No Effect: Suitable habitat for golden sedge does not exist within the proposed site. The proposed site is contained within the heavily developed Port of Wilmington, and the proposed site does not contain areas of natural vegetation. A review of NCNHP records, updated July, 2013, indicates no known occurrences of golden sedge within one mile of the proposed site.

Rough-Leaved Loosestrife

USFWS survey window: Mid-May to June

Habitat Description: Rough-leaved loosestrife, endemic to the Coastal Plain and Sandhills of North and South Carolina, generally occurs in the ecotones or edges between longleaf pine uplands and pond pine (Pinus serotina) pocosins in dense shrub and vine growth on moist to seasonally saturated sands and on shallow organic soils overlaying sand (spodosolic soils). Occurrences are found in such disturbed habitats as roadside depressions, maintained power and utility line rights-of-way, firebreaks, and trails. The species prefers full sunlight, is shade intolerant, and requires frequent disturbance (clearing, mowing, periodic burning) and a minimal overstory. It can, however, persist vegetatively for many years in overgrown, fire-suppressed areas. Blaney, Gilead, Johnston, Kalmia, Leon, Mandarin, Murville, Torhunta, and Vaucluse are some of the more common soil series that support the species.

Biological Conclusion – No Effect: Suitable habitat for rough-leaved loosetrife does not exist within the proposed site. The proposed site is contained within the heavily developed Port of Wilmington, and the proposed site does not contain areas of natural vegetation. A review of NCNHP records, updated July, 2013, indicates no known occurrences of rough-leaved loosetrife within one mile of the proposed site.

Seabeach Amaranth

USFWS survey window: July to October

Habitat Description: Seabeach amaranth occurs on barrier island beaches where its primary habitat consists of overwash flats at accreting ends of islands, lower foredunes, and upper strands of non-eroding beaches (landward of the wrack line). In rare situations, this annual is found on sand spits 160 feet or more from the base of the nearest foredune. It occasionally establishes small temporary populations in other habitats, including sound-side beaches, blowouts in foredunes, interdunal areas, and on sand and shell material deposited for beach replenishment or as dredge material. The plant’s habitat is sparsely vegetated with annual herbs (forbs) and, less commonly, perennial herbs (mostly grasses) and scattered shrubs. It is, however, intolerant of vegetative competition and does not occur on well-vegetated sites. The species usually is found growing on a nearly pure silica sand substrate, occasionally with shell fragments mixed in. Seabeach amaranth appears to require extensive areas of barrier island beaches and inlets that function in a relatively natural and dynamic manner. These characteristics allow it to move around in the landscape, occupying suitable habitat as it becomes available.



Biological Conclusion – No Effect: Suitable habitat for seabeach amaranth does not exist within the proposed site. The proposed site is contained within the heavily developed Port of Wilmington. There are no beaches within or near the proposed site. A review of NCNHP records, updated July, 2013, indicates no known occurrences of seabeach amaranth within one mile of the proposed site.

4.13.4 FEDERAL SPECIES OF CONCERN/STATE-PROTECTED SPECIES

Federal Species of Concern (FSC) are not legally protected under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 and are not subject to any of its provisions, including Section 7, until they are formally proposed or listed as threatened or endangered. The Endangered Species Act does not formally protect federal candidate or state-listed species. An FSC is defined as a species that is under consideration for listing for which there is insufficient information to support listing. Organisms listed as threatened, endangered, or special concern (SC) on the NCNHP list of Rare Plant and Animal Species are afforded state protection under the Endangered Species Act and the North Carolina Plant Protection and Conservation Act of 1979. The North Carolina Wildlife Resource Commission (NCWRC) and the North Carolina Department of Agriculture (NCDA) are responsible for enforcing and administering species protection. No candidate or state-listed species listed for New Hanover County were observed during field investigations.

As of January 9, 2014, the USFWS lists 31 FSC species for New Hanover County. Habitat for each of the species was evaluated within the proposed site. A review of NCNHP records, updated July, 2013, indicates five known occurrences of a FSC within one mile of the proposed site (Appendix C).

4.13.5 SIGNIFICANT NATURAL HERITAGE AREAS

The NCNHP compiles a list of Significant Natural Heritage Areas (SNHA) as required by the Nature Preserves Act. The list is based on the program’s inventory of natural diversity in the state. Natural areas are evaluated based on the number and quality occurrences of rare plant and animal species, rare or high-quality natural communities, and special animal habitats. They represent areas of land or water important for the conservation of biodiversity. The global and statewide rarity of these elements and their quality at a site is compared with other occurrences to determine a site’s significance. Sites included on this list are the best representatives of the natural diversity of the state, and therefore, have priority for protection. However, inclusion on the list does not imply that any protection or public access to the site exists.

There are no SNHA within the proposed site; however, there are two SNHA within one mile of the proposed site (Figure 4). The Cape Fear River, immediately adjacent to the proposed site and Greenfield Lake, approximately ¾ mile northeast of the proposed site are both SNHA (NCNHP, 2013). The Cape Fear River is a SNHA due to its aquatic habitat properties. Greenfield Lake is a SNHA for its representation of cypress swamp habitat and other plant and animal habitat features.

5.0 PREDICTED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF PROPOSED PROJECT

Direct Impacts

As discussed in Sections 5.1 through 5.16, the Proposed Project is not anticipated to result in any significant direct adverse impacts to the environment. The Proposed Project will be built within the boundaries of an already developed, industrial area. No in-water work or dredging would take place.

Secondary Impacts

Secondary impacts associated with the Proposed Project would include increases in rail, truck, and vessel traffic at the Port of Wilmington caused by the Proposed Project. Enviva projects roughly 25-30 vessels will arrive to be loaded with wood pellets annually, or approximately two vessel arrivals and departures per month. In Fiscal Year (FY) 2013, the Port of Wilmington reported 432 vessel arrivals and departures from existing operations; Enviva’s 25-30 vessels per year represent a marginal increase of approximately 6.9 percent.



Enviva plans to ship two-thirds of the wood pellets by train to the proposed facility. All train traffic for the Port of Wilmington and other terminals along River Road are processed through Davis Yard in Leland. Current estimates suggest that the proposed facility would receive approximately 90 rail cars loaded with wood pellets every three days. On average, the Port of Wilmington receives a single train every weekday from Davis Yard. Additional trains are received as needed. Rail cars transporting Enviva’s wood pellets would be processed through Davis Yard and sent to the Port of Wilmington on their daily train. The daily train is received during off-peak rail and vehicle traffic hours, typically between 12am and 2am. The remaining one-third of the wood pellets will be shipped via truck to the proposed facility. The Port of Wilmington estimates that it currently receives approximately 700 trucks per day. Truck delivery of Enviva’s wood pellets will result in fewer than 80 trucks per day, even when Enviva’s wood pellet production plants become fully operational several years in the future. In the interim, the number of truck deliveries will be even lower. The Proposed Project would result in an increase of approximately 11 percent more truck traffic on a daily basis. The Port of Wilmington predicts an annual growth rate between four and five percent. Increased truck deliveries resulting from the Proposed Project have been included in Authority growth predictions, and an11 percent increase in daily traffic over the next several years would be consistent with their projections.

Enviva plans to construct new production facilities with or without the Proposed Project. Pellets from new production facilities in North Carolina could be processed through existing export facilities (e.g., in Chesapeake) even in the absence of the Proposed Project. In addition, the Proposed Project, Enviva’s production facilities, and Enviva’s procurement of wood pellets rarely, if ever, would cause timber harvests. As a result, any impacts associated with construction and operation of the wood pellet production facilities or timber harvests do not qualify as secondary impacts under SEPA, and there is no requirement under SEPA to consider such impacts. In any event, the wood pellet production facilities and timber harvests are not anticipated to result in any significant negative impacts to the environment.

Cumulative Impacts

Significant cumulative impacts are not anticipated as a result of the Proposed Project. The Authority has no current plans to construct similar export facilities at the Port of Wilmington.

Because impacts associated with the production facilities and harvest are neither direct nor indirect impacts of the Proposed Project under SEPA, there is no requirement under SEPA to consider the cumulative impacts of production facilities or timber harvesting generally. In any event, as discussed below, any such impacts relating to these activities are not expected to be significant.

5.1 TOPOGRAPHY

The Proposed Project would have minimal direct impact on the local topography. Localized site grading could occur during construction of Domes 3 and 4 and at support bases for conveyor belts; however, overall topography at the site would not change. Conveyors and ship-loading equipment would encroach within the 100-year floodplain, but no topographical changes would occur in the ship-loading area, as only existing infrastructure and facilities would be utilized.

Any impacts on topography associated with the production facilities are not indirect impacts of the Proposed Project. Facility plans at both the Sampson and Hamlet sites do not include major site grading. Minor grading to allow for foundations and access roads would occur. Neither site is located within a 100-year floodplain.

Enviva’s procurement of wood should help to preserve the topography in its harvest areas by providing an economic incentive for owners of working forests to continue their current land uses rather than developing their properties for non-forest uses and altering the topography. Enviva’s procurement of wood also removes wood debris from forest floors that could impede reforestation.



5.2 SOILS

Construction of the Proposed Project would involve general site grading. Soils within the proposed site are mapped as Urban Land (Ur) and Baymeade-Urban Land Complex (Bh). The Urban Land designation indicates that the underlying soils have been cut, filled, graded, or paved so that most soil properties have been altered to the extent that a soil series is not recognized. Significant direct impacts to soils are not anticipated as a result of the Proposed Project.

Any impacts to soils associated with the production facilities and harvests are not indirect impacts of the Proposed Project, but in any event are not expected to be significant. The majority of the soils at the Sampson Site are mapped Rains sandy loam (Ra). Other areas of Goldsboro loamy sand (GoA), Norfolk loamy sand (NoA), and Lynchburg sandy loam (Ln) are also present. Soils at the Hamlet Site consist mainly of Wakulla and Candor soils (WcB). Small areas of Ailey loamy sand (AcC) and Johnston mucky loam (JmA) are also present within the tract, but occur outside of the proposed footprint of the facility. Secondary impacts to underlying soils would occur as a result of the construction of the two facilities, but would be minimized to the greatest extent practicable.

5.3 LAND USE

The Proposed Project would not change the current land use at or around the proposed site. The Proposed Project is consistent with the current land use at the Port of Wilmington. It is also consistent with the current zoning. The Wilmington Future Land Use Plan (City of Wilmington, 2004) shows that the land uses in and around this area are intended to remain the same as they are today.

The 2006 Wilmington-New Hanover County CAMA Plan Update (Wilmington and New Hanover County, 2006) indicates a goal to grow the county’s economic base by growing the port industry. The Proposed Project would contribute to this goal by expanding the economic base at the Port of Wilmington. The proposed facility would allow the Port of Wilmington to expand its offerings, which ties to the Authority’s mission statement to enhance the economy of the State of North Carolina. Within the Authority property, there are no residences, and no businesses that would be impacted by the Proposed Project. As such, the Proposed Project would not involve any residential or business displacements and would not disproportionately impact any minority or low income populations.

Due to the site’s existing industrial nature and the Proposed Project’s relatively small size, the Proposed Project is not expected to have any secondary land-use impacts at the Port of Wilmington or the surrounding area.

Any impacts to land use associated with the production facilities and harvests are not indirect impacts of the Proposed Project, but in any event are not expected to be significant. The Sampson Site is in a rural area that is currently a pine stand. The property is a 180-acre tract of land, and the plant itself will occupy approximately 60 acres. Where possible, existing forest area surrounding the facility will be left as a buffer and the overall footprint of the facility will be minimized to the maximum extent practicable. The facility is consistent with the current zoning of the site, which is industrial. Sampson County does not have a comprehensive land use plan.

The Hamlet Site is also in a rural area that is currently a pine stand. The property is a 390-acre tract of land, of which the facility will occupy approximately 60 acres. The facility is consistent with the site’s current industrial zoning. A major rail yard is located across an adjacent highway. The project is consistent with the Richmond County Strategic Land Use Plan, which promotes economic development in the county. Similar to the Sampson Site, existing forest area surrounding the facility will be left as a buffer, and the facility’s overall footprint minimized, to the maximum extent practicable.



5.4 WETLANDS

There would be no direct wetland impacts associated with the Proposed Project.

Any impacts to wetlands associated with the production facilities and harvests are not indirect impacts of the Proposed Project, but in any event are not expected to be significant. There are no wetlands present at the Hamlet Site, and there are no wetlands within the proposed footprint of the Sampson Site. Isolated wetlands may exist at the Sampson Site outside the facility footprint. To the extent any construction activities at the Sampson Site may be conducted in the vicinity of any wetlands, Enviva will comply with all applicable laws and regulations concerning wetlands. No secondary impacts to wetlands associated with the Hamlet and Sampson Sites are anticipated as a result of the Proposed Project.

5.5 PRIME AND UNIQUE AGRICULTURAL LANDS

There are no soils associated with prime, unique, or statewide important farmland within or near the proposed site. There would be no direct impact to prime or unique agricultural lands.

Any impacts to prime and unique agricultural lands associated with the production facilities and harvests are not indirect impacts of the Proposed Project, but in any event are not expected to be significant. Soils considered prime farmland and farmland of statewide importance are present at the Sampson and Hamlet sites. Enviva has reduced impacts from the construction of these facilities by choosing to locate them on pine stands, a habitat that is present in many places outside of the plant locations. Construction of the Hamlet Site will not impact any soils considered prime farmland or farmland of statewide importance. At the Hamlet Site, these soils occur outside of the proposed footprint of the facility. Prime farmland soils will be impacted at the Sampson Site. The total size of the Sampson Site is 180 acres, and the proposed footprint of the facility would occupy approximately 60 acres of soils associated with prime farmland. Measures are being taken to minimize impacts to prime farmland soils, including siting of buildings and development associated with the Sampson Site within the smallest footprint feasible. Existing, forested lands within the remainder of the 180-acre site will be retained.

5.6 PUBLIC LANDS AND SCENIC, RECREATIONAL, AND STATE NATURAL AREAS

There are no public lands or scenic, recreational, or state natural areas within or directly adjacent to the proposed site. There would be no direct impact to public lands or scenic, recreational, or state natural areas.

Any impacts to these resources associated with the production facilities and harvests are not indirect impacts of the Proposed Project, but in any event are not expected to be significant. There are no public lands or scenic, recreational, or state natural areas within or near the Sampson site.

The Sandhills Gamelands, owned and operated by the NCWRC is present south of the Hamlet Site. The Gamelands are separated from the Hamlet Site by a railroad interchange. The Hamlet Site will not disrupt any continuity in habitat. No impacts to public lands or scenic, recreational, and state natural areas are anticipated.

5.7 AREAS OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL OR HISTORICAL VALUE

No archaeological or historical resources are present on the proposed site, the Sampson Site, or the Hamlet Site. There would be no direct or secondary impacts to areas of archaeological or historical value.

5.8 AIR QUALITY

The Proposed Project would require a minor source construction and operating air permit from the North Carolina Division of Air Quality (NCDAQ). The Proposed Project would be a new minor source of emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, particulate matter, carbon monoxide, and volatile organic compounds resulting from the beginning of natural decomposition of wood pellets during storage. The maximum potential emissions of each compound are all below major source levels; therefore, the



proposed facility would be considered a minor source. Based on assessments of the preliminary design of the Proposed Project, there would be no adverse air quality impacts associated with the Proposed Project.

The Authority anticipates increased truck, rail, and vessel traffic as a result of shipments to the proposed facility. Trucks, rail engines, and vessels will be subject to all applicable state and federal laws on registration and emission control, which would provide mitigative measures to reduce any potential effects from increased traffic. Estimates suggest that the proposed facility will receive approximately 25-30 vessels annually, or approximately two vessel arrivals and departures per month. The Proposed Project could also result in an average of approximately 78 trucks per day. Rail cars transporting Enviva’s wood pellets would be processed through Davis Yard and sent to the Port of Wilmington on their existing daily train. The proposed project is not anticipated to increase existing air emissions associated with rail deliveries. Use of excess export capacity at the proposed facility could increase the above-mentioned statistics proportionately (i.e., by approximately one-third). Any such excess capacity is not currently under contract to be used.

Any impacts to air quality associated with the production facilities and harvests are not indirect impacts of the Proposed Project, but in any event are not expected to be significant. The proposed wood pellet manufacturing facilities at the Sampson and Hamlet sites would be classified as “major” sources of criteria and hazardous air pollutants. Each facility must obtain a permit to construct and operate, and a Title V air permit. Pollutants exceeding thresholds that require a permit include nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, volatile organic compounds, acetaldehyde, formaldehyde, methanol, and phenol. Based on the proposed facility description, multiple control devices (cyclonic separators, wet electrostatic precipitators, and baghouses) will be utilized to mitigate particulate matter emission releases. There are no residences or business in the immediate vicinity (1,000 feet) of the Sampson Site. There are two residences in the vicinity of the Hamlet Site. Air emissions at the Sampson and Hamlet sites will be limited by state and federally enforceable air quality permits.

5.9 NOISE LEVELS

Ambient noise currently generated at the Port of Wilmington results from heavy equipment, cranes, conveyors, large vehicle traffic, and an active rail line. The Proposed Project would not increase ambient noise levels at the Port of Wilmington, and would not be a substantial source of noise. Noise levels from the construction and operation of the Proposed Project will be in compliance with all applicable noise ordinances. Noise levels would temporarily increase from the Proposed Project during construction, but are not expected to exceed the existing ambient noise levels at the Port of Wilmington. The primary noise from construction activities would be generated by vehicles and equipment involved in site clearing and grading, foundation preparation, facility construction, and finish work. Construction activities would be scheduled to occur only during daytime hours. Noise levels from construction of the Proposed Project will be in compliance with all applicable noise ordinances.

The Authority anticipates increased truck and rail traffic as a result of shipments between the production facilities and the Proposed Project. Enviva’s current estimates suggest that the Proposed Project will result in only 25-30 vessels loaded with wood pellets over an entire year, or approximately two vessel arrivals and departures per month. The Proposed Project may also result in an average of approximately 78 truck arrivals per day. Rail cars transporting Enviva’s wood pellets would be processed through Davis Yard and sent to the Port of Wilmington on their existing daily train. The proposed project is not anticipated to increase existing noise levels associated with rail deliveries. Noise associated with increases in truck traffic would not provide a measureable increase in the ambient noise generated by existing port operations.

Any noise impacts associated with the production facilities and harvests are not indirect impacts of the Proposed Project, but in any event are not expected to be significant. Noise levels during construction activities and operation of the Sampson and Hamlet facilities will be in compliance with all applicable



noise ordinances. Construction of the Sampson and Hamlet manufacturing facilities would increase ambient noise levels in both locations. There are no noise receptors within approximately 1,000 feet of the Sampson Site. There are two noise receptors within approximately 1,000 feet of the Hamlet Site. However, as discussed above, where possible, existing forest area surrounding the Sampson and Hamlet facilities will be left as a buffer and the overall footprints of the facilities will be minimized to the maximum extent practicable. Further, the two noise receptors in the vicinity of the Hamlet site are more than approximately 700 feet from the outside of the facility. Therefore, retention of forested areas around the sites will buffer any ambient noise that the facilities would produce. Although the manufacturing plants would increase noise levels in immediately adjacent areas, because noise levels dissipate quickly with distance, significant negative impacts as a result of increased noise levels are not expected. Both the Hamlet and Sampson facilities would operate in compliance with all applicable noise requirements. Although noise levels would temporarily increase during timber harvesting activities, sourcing of wood for Enviva’s use would rarely, if ever, occur unless a planned harvest is already occurring.


There would be no direct impacts to surface water associated with the Proposed Project. All construction would take place on existing developed land. The Proposed Project does not include in-water work or dredging. Temporary impacts to groundwater would be experienced during Project construction. BMPs would be used to dewater where needed during construction and installation of foundations associated with the Proposed Project. Depth to groundwater at the proposed site is shallow. As a result of the Proposed Project, there will less than a quarter acre of change to impervious surface. On-site measures to protect water resources would include the installation of rain gutters on the proposed dome structures, which would drain to an infiltration basin to allow for sufficient infiltration to reduce total suspended solids (TSS) exportation for the impervious surfaces associated with the Proposed Project. The infiltration basin has been sized to capture runoff generated from the water quality storm event (1.5-inch rainfall) per local and state ordinances. Runoff exceeding 1.5 inches will sheetflow to the existing storm drainage network. New storm drainage would be installed from the infiltration galleries to tie into the existing storm drainage network.

Any impacts associated with the production facilities and harvests are not indirect impacts of the Proposed Project, but in any event are not expected to be significant. There are no surface waters present in the vicinity of the Sampson or Hamlet sites. BMPs would be implemented during project construction to protect groundwater and prevent runoff from the sites. The construction and operation of both sites would comply with erosion and sediment control (ESC) plans and state stormwater regulations.

5.11 FOREST RESOURCES

There are no forest resources within the proposed site. There would be no direct impacts to forest resources resulting from the Proposed Project.

Any impacts associated with the production facilities and harvests are not indirect impacts of the Proposed Project, but in any event are not expected to be significant. The construction of the Sampson and Hamlet sites would result in the conversion of limited forest resources to industrial use. The Sampson Site is a 180-acre dense pine stand. The footprint of the facility would impact approximately 60 acres of the 180-acre site. The Hamlet Site is a 390-acre pine stand. The footprint of the facility would impact approximately 60 acres of the 390-acre site. These potential impacts are small in the context of the total forested acreage in the respective counties and in eastern North Carolina as a whole. Measures are being taken to minimize impacts to forest resources, including siting of buildings and development associated with the sites within the smallest footprint feasible and the retention of existing, forested lands within the remainder of the Sampson and Hamlet sites.



5.12 SHELLFISH AND/OR FISH AND THEIR HABITATS

There are no surface waters or wetlands within the proposed site. There would be no direct impact to aquatic habitats.

There are no current vessel traffic restrictions in place at or near the Port of Wilmington. Although Atlantic sturgeon, shortnose sturgeon, and less commonly West Indian manatee are known to inhabit the Cape Fear River, vessel traffic to and from the Port of Wilmington within the established navigational channel is not known to impact to the species. Restrictions and moratoriums are implemented for in-water work, dredging, and construction activities only. The Proposed Project does not involve any in-water work or dredging. Further, between July 2012 and June 2013, 482 ships docked at the Port of Wilmington. The Proposed Project anticipates the use of 25-30 ships annually. This would pose a net increase of five to six percent. Although Berth 5 is currently not in use, both adjacent berths are in use, and ships currently travel along the entirety of the docking area. Therefore, no direct impacts to marine mammals, shellfish and/or fish and their habitats are expected as a result of the Proposed Project.

Any impacts to these resources associated with the production facilities and harvests are not indirect impacts of the Proposed Project, but in any event are not expected to be significant. Because there are no surface waters or wetlands present within the footprint area at the Sampson or Hamlet site, there would be no impacts to shellfish, fish, or aquatic habitats as a result of the production facilities.

5.13 WILDLIFE AND NATURAL VEGETATION

Wildlife and natural vegetation utilizing the proposed site are opportunistic urbanized species that would not be impacted by the Proposed Project. Construction activities may temporarily relocate wildlife species, but they would be expected to return once construction is completed. No direct impacts to wildlife, natural vegetation, or state or federally protected species are expected as a result of the Proposed Project.

Any impacts to wildlife and natural vegetation associated with the production facilities and harvests are not indirect impacts of the Proposed Project, but in any event are not expected to be significant. Habitat, vegetative strata, and biodiversity are limited at the Sampson and Hamlet Sites. Both sites currently support pine stands. Removal of a portion of each of these stands should not cause a significant negative impact to the natural vegetation or wildlife habitat in the general area. Temporary impacts to wildlife species inhabiting the sites could be experienced during facility construction through avoidance of the construction area. However, large portions of both sites will remain forested post-construction and will provide retention of habitat and vegetative community features.

5.14 INTRODUCTION OF TOXIC SUBSTANCES

The Authority does not anticipate any introduction of toxic substances associated with the Proposed Project, production facilities, or timber harvesting.

However, any toxic substance impacts that may be associated with the production facilities and timber harvests would not be indirect impacts of the Proposed Project, and would not be expected to be significant.

5.15 TIMBER HARVESTING

Timber harvesting is not a secondary impact under SEPA because Enviva’s sourcing of low-value wood fiber to supply its new production facilities is not expected to result in increased timber harvests. The low-value fiber that is a byproduct of on-going harvests and goes to energy markets is the least valuable portion of the market. With low margins, wood pellet producers have little capability to pay higher prices for the biomass they purchase. The more valuable products, such as sawlogs, have the greatest influence on the decision to harvest.



With respect to forest resources and the ecological functions they provide, the US Forest Service (USFS) projects no negative impact at a regional level due to wood bioenergy facilities like the ones being developed by Enviva. A recent USFS study reported that higher demand for forest biomass in recent years has helped to counter rising pressures to convert land to other uses (USFS, 2012). Over the long term, standing biomass stocks in the Southeast have risen steadily, from about five billion cubic meters in 1963 to over 8.2 billion cubic meters by 2010 (Adams et al., 2006; Wear and Greis, 2012). Enviva’s three existing and three new production facilities in and around North Carolina would require approximately 6.2 million metric tons per year of fiber, a portion of which will come from Virginia and South Carolina. In 2011, North Carolina inventory was 1.3 billion metric tons, of which Enviva’s annual demand would represent only 0.5 percent. Further, although Enviva will own the storage and receiving portions of the proposed export wood pellet export facility, Enviva has certain obligations to the Authority to consider handling third party volumes. However, the Authority has no indications that the use of excess export capacity will result in timber harvest related impacts that would not already occur. Ample data exist showing that the wood energy market leads to healthier, better managed forests and higher land values (USFS, 2009). The market for low-value fiber for the wood pellet industry encourages forest owners to use their existing resources more efficiently by allowing utilization of previously unused residues and providing revenue to support thinning of stands that will lead to healthier, less fire-prone, and more productive forests.

Enviva is contractually obligated to its customers to sustainably source low-value fiber. Enviva is certified and independently audited to the world’s foremost forestry standards, such as the Forest Stewardship Council™ (FSC®), the Program for the Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC), and the Sustainable Forestry Initiative® (SFI®). These certifications require no less than annual independent third-party audits of Enviva’s supply chain. Additionally, all Enviva-owned facilities are certified to the Green Gold Label (GGL) program standard, a leading European-based sustainability program standard that covers chain-of-custody, processing, and GHG accounting. A copy of each of these standards and certifications is attached in Appendix D. In addition, Enviva is implementing a “track and trace” system to further monitor and audit its procurement activities with particular attention to land use change, use and effectiveness of BMPs, wetlands, biodiversity, and certification status. Enviva consistently exceeds GHG reduction targets set by governments such as the United Kingdom (UK).

Enviva requires that all of its wood fiber suppliers adhere to all applicable laws and regulations as well as state-developed BMPs in their activities to protect wetlands, water quality, and sensitive ecosystems. The few forested wetlands from which Enviva may source are working forests and have been harvested at least once if not several times over the previous century. Enviva does not accept wood sourced from forests that the landowner intends to convert to non-forested areas after harvest.

Appendix E illustrates the decline in fiber used by the pulp and paper industry in the US since 1995. Pulpwood consumption in the southeast would likely be higher than what this chart indicates, but the overall trend would remain similar. 2017 and 2020 wood pellet export projections do not even begin to fill the void left in the low-grade fiber market from the decline of pulp and paper.

5.16 CLIMATE CHANGE

Ongoing scientific research has identified the potential impacts of GHGs and their effects on global atmospheric conditions. These GHGs include carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, water vapor, and several trace gases. The National Academy of Sciences has acknowledged that there are uncertainties regarding how climate change may affect different regions.

The Authority believes that the total direct and indirect emissions associated with the Proposed Project would not make a measurable contribution to cumulative global GHG emissions. To the contrary, the UK and the EU have concluded that the GHG reductions that can be obtained from replacing fossil fuels with biomass sources such as wood pellets are vital to achieving those governments’ aggressive carbon reduction goals (European Commission, 2010; Department of Energy & Climate Change, 2011).



5.17 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

The Proposed Project is not anticipated to result in significant cumulative impacts. The Authority has no current plans to construct similar export facilities at the Port of Wilmington. Because impacts associated with the production facilities and harvests are neither direct nor indirect impacts of the Proposed Project under SEPA, there is no requirement under SEPA to consider the cumulative impacts of production facilities or timber harvesting. To the extent that other wood pellet production facilities are constructed in the state, they would be required to obtain and comply with state and federally enforceable permits for discharges to water, emissions to air, or other impacts.

With respect to any potential cumulative impacts on resources such as public lands or scenic, recreational, and state natural areas as a result of the wood pellet industry, Enviva does not purchase harvested material from such areas. Should another wood pellet manufacturer in the industry do so, any harvest affecting public lands, scenic, recreational, and state natural areas would be adequately regulated under applicable state or federal laws.

With respect to water resources, wildlife, and natural vegetation, sourcing of wood for use by the wood pellet industry would occur rarely, if ever, unless a planned harvest is already occurring. Planned harvests must comply with state stormwater laws and BMPs to protect sedimentation and/or runoff into nearby surface waters, when applicable. The Authority does not anticipate foreseeable significant cumulative impacts to topography, soils, land use, prime and unique agricultural lands, shellfish and/or their habitats, or introduction of toxic substances from the wood pellet industry.

Significant impacts relating to emissions of GHGs or their effects on global climate change are not anticipated. Emissions associated with the Proposed Project are only one small source of GHG emissions worldwide. While long-range regional changes might occur within the Proposed Project area, it is impossible to predict precisely when they could occur.

6.0 MITIGATIVE MEASURES

As discussed in Section 5, the Authority does not anticipate significant impacts associated with the Proposed Project. Moreover, the following mitigative measure will further minimize any potential impacts.

6.1 SITE SELECTION

The proposed facility was located in a manner to maximize the use of existing infrastructure and previously developed land at the Port of Wilmington. The storage domes were sited to facilitate the use of an existing rail line, existing rails along the shiploading area, and an existing ship berth so that environmental impacts were minimized to the greatest extent practicable. There would be no waterside development, in-water work, or dredging associated with the Proposed Project. All land disturbances would occur within areas previously disturbed and/or developed by the Authority.

6.2 AIR

The truck and rail pellet unloading operations would be performed within a building vented to fabric filter baghouses and all pellet storage would be contained within two large concrete storage domes. The truck/rail loadout building and storage domes are vented to fabric filter control devices to control particulate emissions during material transfer. All conveyors would be covered to minimize fugitive dust and protect the wood pellets from adverse weather while being transferred. Additionally, each conveyor transfer point would be vented to a fabric filter dust collector to capture fugitive emissions.

The shiploader would be equipped with a telescopic loading spout that would minimize drop distance when loading pellets into the ship holds. The spout would allow for gentle loading of the pellets in to the



ship to minimize fugitive dust emissions during loading and the pellet transfer to the loading spout would be vented to a fabric filter dust collector.


An ESC Plan would be developed for submission to, and approval by the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR) Division of Land Quality (DLQ). Included within the ESC Plan would be all necessary BMPs to control surface water runoff during construction. BMPs that may be implemented could include, but are not limited to, silt filter fences, flow reduction barriers, sediment traps (if necessary), and general good housekeeping practices.

To comply with City of Wilmington stormwater permit flood control requirements, it is anticipated that rain gutters would be installed on the proposed dome structures, which would drain to an infiltration basin to allow for sufficient infiltration to reduce total suspended solids (TSS) exportation for the impervious surfaces associated with the Proposed Project. The infiltration basin has been sized to capture runoff generated from the water quality storm event (1.5-inch rainfall) per local and state ordinances. Runoff exceeding 1.5 inches will sheetflow to the existing storm drainage network. New storm drainage would be installed from the infiltration galleries to tie into the existing storm drainage network.

7.0 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT

Public hearings were held on Monday, September 9, 2013 in Richmond and Sampson counties to provide local stakeholders an opportunity to learn about the proposed manufacturing plants, to ask questions, and to provide comments. Local leaders passed incentive packages for both locations. Enviva has also met with various groups in the Wilmington area regarding the Proposed Project. In addition, this document will be available for public review and comment through the State Clearinghouse and a link to the document will be available on the Ports website, www.ncports.com.

8.0 REFERENCES

Adams, D. and G. Latta. 2005. Timber harvest potential from private lands in the Pacific Northwest: biological, investment, and policy issues. Understanding key issues of sustainable wood production in the Pacific Northwest, Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-626. Deal, R. L.; White, S. M (eds), pp 4-12. http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/pnw_gtr626.pdf.

City of Wilmington. 2004. Choices, Wilmington Future Land Use Plan 2004-2025.

CAMA Land Use Plan, 2006 Wilmington-New Hanover County CAMA Plan Update

Daniels, R.B., Buol, S.W., Kleiss, H.J., and C.A. Ditzler. 1999. Soil Systems in North Carolina. Technical Bulletin314. Department of Soil Science, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC.

Department of Energy & Climate Change. 2011. UK Renewable Energy Roadmap. July 2011.

ECS. 2013. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Report. Proposed Enviva Facility, Port of Wilmington. Wilmington, New Hanover County, North Carolina. ECS Project No. 22-19184 for Enviva Holdback, LLC. August 23, 2013.

ECS. 2014. Report of Environmental Services. Enviva Pellet Domes – Port of Wilmington. Wilmington, New Hanover County, North Carolina. ECS Project No. 22-19163 for Enviva, Chesapeake, Virginia. January 17, 2014.

Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y-87-1, US Army Corps of Engineers, Waterways Experiment Station, Wetlands Research Program.

Environmental Laboratory. 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Atlantic and Coastal Plain Region (Version 2.0). Technical Report ERDC/EL TR-10-20. November 2010.



European Commission. 2010. Report from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on sustainability requirements for the use of solid and gaseous biomass sources in electricity, heating and cooling. Brussels, 25.2.2010, COM(2010)11 final. SEC(2010) 65 final.

Griffith, G.E., Omernik, J.M., Comstock, J.A., Schafale, M.P., McNab, W.H., Lenat, D.R., MacPherson, T.F., Glover, J.B., and V.B. Shelburne. 2002. Ecoregions of North Carolina and South Carolina (color poster with map, descriptive text, summary tables, and photographs): Reston, Virginia, US Geological Survey (map scale 1: 1,500,000).

IPCC. 2011. Bioenergy. In IPCC Special Report on Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation [O. Edenhofer, R. Pichs-Madruga, Y. Sokona, K. Seyboth, P. Matschoss, S. Kadner, T. Zwickel, P. Eickemeier, G. Hansen, S. Schlomer, C. von Stechow (eds)], Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA.

NCDOT, 2012. North Carolina Maritime Strategy Final Report. June 26, 2012.

NCDWR. 2014. 2014 Draft 303(d) List. NC 2014 Integrated Report Categories 4 and 5 Impaired Waters. Category 5-303(d) List Approved by EPA. January 13, 2014.

NCDWR. 2013. BIMS. North Carolina Waterbodies Reports. North Carolina Waterbodies Listed by Subbasin. Subbasin 03-06-17. December 9, 2013.

NCNHP. 2013. NC Natural Heritage Program. Element Occurrence Shapefile. Updated July 2013.

NCONEMAP. 2013. Shellfish Growing Areas shapefile. Last update June 27, 2013. http://data.nconemap.com/geoportal/catalog/main/home.page.

USDA. 2008. USDA, NRCS. Prime and Other Important Farmlands. New Hanover County, NC. Tabular Data Version: 9, Tabular Data Version Date: 01/14/2008.

USDA. 2010. USDA, NRCS. Important Farmlands of North Carolina. http://www.nc.nrcs.usda.gov/programs/soilsurvey/primefarmland.html.

USDA. 2013. USDA, NRCS. Soil Survey of New Hanover County, North Carolina.

USDOT. 1980. US Department of Transportation. Guidelines for Considering Noise in Land Use Planning and Control, Federal Interagency Committee on Urban Noise, June 1980.

USFS. 2009. US Forest Resource Facts and Historical Trends. USDA, USFS,Washington,D.C. http://www.fia.fs.fed.us/library/briefings-summaries-overviews/docs/ForestFactsMetric.pdf.

USFS. 2012. Future of America’s forest and rangelands: Forest Service 2010 Resources Planning Act Assessment. Gen. Tech. Rep. WO-87. USDA, USFS, Washington, DC. Washington, DC. 197 p. http://www.fs.fed.us/research/publications/gtr/gtr_wo87.pdf.

USFWS. 2012. Endangered Species, Threatened Species, Federal Species of Concern, and Candidate Species, New Hanover County, North Carolina. Updated December 26, 2012. US Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC.

USGS. 1993. Wilmington, North Carolina 24K Topographic Quadrangle.

Wear, D.N. and Greis, J.G. 2012. The Southern Forest Futures Project: Summary Report. USDA, USFS, Southern Research Station. General Technical Report SRS-168 http://www.srs.fs.fed.us/pubs/gtr/gtr_srs168.pdf.

Weaver, Arlin. 1977. Soil Survey of New Hanover County, North Carolina. USDA, NRCS. April 1977.

Wilmington & New Hanover County. 2006. 2006 Wilmington-New Hanover County CAMA Plan Update.



9.0 STATE AND FEDERAL PERMITS REQUIRED

NPDES Stormwater: The proposed site is included under the Authority’s National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Stormwater General Permit Number NCS000174.

CAMA: The Proposed Project would require a major modification to the Authority’s existing CAMA permit (number 47-87) from the NCDENR, Division of Coastal Management (DCM).

Section 401: The Proposed Project would not require a Water Quality Certification (WQC) from the NCDWR, as there would be no discharge to waters of the US. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act requires a WQC from the NCDWR for any federally permitted or licensed activity that may result in a discharge to waters of the US.

Section 404/10: The Proposed Project would not require a Section 404 or Section 10 permit as there would be no impacts to waters of the US and no work is being conducted within the Cape Fear River. The Cape Fear River is a navigable water subject to Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of March 3, 1899, and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act.

Air: It is anticipated that the Proposed Project would require a minor source construction and operating air permit from the NCDAQ. The regulations that are anticipated to apply to the proposed site include: 15A NCAC 02Q .0300 – Construction and Operation Permits; 15A NCAC 02D.0515 – Particulates from Miscellaneous Industrial Processes; 15A NCAC 02D .0521 – Control of Visible Emissions; 15A NCAC 02D .0535 – Excess Emissions Reporting and Malfunctions; and 15A NCAC 02D .0540 – Particulates from Fugitive Dust Sources.

Erosion and Sediment Control/General Construction Stormwater: In accordance with the North Carolina Sedimentation and Pollution Control Act of 1973, an ESC Plan would be required. The plan must be submitted and approved by the NCDENR, DLQ prior to construction. The law requires installation and maintenance of sufficient erosion control devices and practices to retain sediment within the boundaries of the proposed site. The ESC Plan would include silt fence controls, inlet protection controls, sediment trap(s), and ground stabilization and basin design requirements to meet the North Carolina State Erosion Control Manual and the North Carolina General Permit requirements for Construction Activities (Permit No. NCG 010000).

City of Wilmington Stormwater: A Stormwater Permit would be required through the City of Wilmington. The City has jurisdiction over non-publically funded stormwater projects within the City that are not associated with a previously NCDENR permitted area. A post-construction operation and maintenance agreement would be required by the City as part of the stormwater permitting. The operation and maintenance of BMP devices would be included in this agreement. The post-construction permit and agreement would be valid for ten years from the date of issue.



Figures

NC OneMap

Wood PelletExport Facility

Environmental AssessmentNew Hanover County, NC

Figure 1.Project Vicinity

Sources: USGS, ESRI, NCSPA, Enviva, URS

¹

URS CORPORATION - NORTH CAROLINA201 N FRONT STREET

SUITE 509WILMINGTON, NC 28401

910-763-8063FEBRUARY 2014

Cape

Fear

River

Brun

swick

Rive

r

GreenfieldLake

LegendProposed Site

NC Port Authority Property

_̂Wilmington

BRUNSWICKCOUNTY

NEWHANOVERCOUNTY

0 2 4 61Miles



Figure 2.Proposed Site


¹



910-763-8063FEBRUARY 2014

LegendProposed Site


0 0.1 0.20.05Miles



Figure 3.Proposed Site Plan


¹



910-763-8063FEBRUARY 2014

Not to Scale

Sunset Park

LegionStadium

OptimistPark

Cameron Park

NC OneMap



Figure 4.Environmental Features


¹



910-763-8063FEBRUARY 2014

Cape

Fear

River

Brun

swick

Rive

r

GreenfieldLake

LegendFloodplains

SNHA

Proposed Site


0 0.25 0.50.125Miles



Appendix A

Site Images

Wood Pell

Environme

Rail inter

Conveyor

et Export Faci

ental Assessme

rchange area,

r path to shipl

ility – Port of W

nt

facing east.

loading area.

Wilmington

Soil conditareas.

Proposed l

tion in rail inte

ocation for Do

erchange and

omes 3 and 4.

dome

Wood Pell

Environme

Cape Fe

Cape F

et Export Faci

ental Assessme

ear River adja

Fear River, fac

ility – Port of W

nt

acent to shiplo

cing west.

Wilmington

oading area.

Weedy

y vegetation in

n rail intercha

ange area.



Appendix B

Scientific Names for Wildlife Species



Mammals

Virginia opossum (Didelphis virginiana)

river otter (Lontra canadensis)

gray fox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus)

raccoon (Procyon lotor)

marsh rabbit (Sylvilagus palustris)

muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus)

cotton mouse (Peromyscus gossypinus)

nutria (Myocastor coypus).

Resident Birds

great blue heron (Ardea herodias)

osprey (Pandion haliaetus)

great egret (Ardea alba)

snowy egret (Egretta thula)

red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis)

Northern cardinal (Cardinalis cardinalis)

American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos)

blue jay (Cyanocitta cristata)

Northern flicker (Colaptes auratus)

European starling (Sturnus vulgaris)

Eastern bluebird (Sialia sialis)

turkey vulture (Cathartes aura)

little blue heron (Egretta caerulea)

tricolored heron (Egretta tricolor)

glossy ibis (Plegadis falcinellus)

gull-billed tern (Gelochelidon nilotica)

black skimmer (Rynchops niger)

white ibis (Eudocimus albus)

herring gull (Larus smithsonianus)

least tern (Sterna antillarum)

royal tern (Thalasseus maximus)

common merganser (Mergus merganser)

hooded merganser (Lophodytes cucullatus)

cormorant (Phalacrocorax carbo)

common loon (Gavia immer)

king rail (Rallus elegans)

clapper rail (Rallus longirostris)

purple gallinule (Porphyrula martinica)

moorhen (Gallinula chloropus)

American woodcock (Scolopax minor)

common snipe (Gallinago gallinago)

migratory birds

Canada goose (Branta canadensis)

mallard (Anas platyrhynchos)

ruby-throated hummingbird (Archilochus colubris)

wood thrush (Hylocichla mustelina)

Eastern kingbird (Tyrannus tyrannus)

song sparrow (Melospiza melodia)

white-throated sparrow (Zonotrichia albicollis)

American goldfinch (Spinus tristis)

mourning dove (Zenaida macroura)

black duck (Anas rubripes)

redhead (Aythya americana)

canvasback (Aythya valisineria)

greater scaup (Aythya marila)

Northern pintail (Anas acuta)

American wigeon (Anas americana)

green-winged teal (Anas carolinensis)

blue-winged teal (Anas discors)

wood duck (Aix sponsa)

gadwall (Anas strepera)

black scoter (Melanitta nigra)

brant (Branta bernicla)

American coot (Fulica americana)

Reptiles and amphibians

rat snake (Elaphe obsoleta)

Eastern glass lizard (Ophisaurus ventralis)

Southern toad (Bufo terrestris)

slimy salamander (Plethodon glutinosus)



eastern box turtle (Terrapene carolina)

snapping turtle (Chelydra serpentina)

corn snake (Elaphe guttata)



Appendix C

Federal Species of Concern Listed for New Hanover County



Federal Species of Concern Listed for New Hanover County

Scientific Name Common Name Habitat Present Within Proposed

Site

Anguilla rostrata American eel No Rana capito capito Carolina gopher frog No*

Passerina ciris ciris Eastern painted bunting No Ophisaurus mimicus Mimic glass lizard No

Pituophis melanoleucus melanoleucus Northern pine snake No Corynorhinus rafinesquii Rafinesque's big-eared bat No*

Myotis austroriparius Southeastern myotis No Heterodon simus Southern hognose snake No*

Agrotis buchholzi Buchholz's dart moth No Triodopsis soelneri Cape Fear threetooth No

Atrytone arogos arogos Eastern beard grass skipper No Helisoma eucosmium Greenfield rams-horn No*

Atrytonopsis loammi Loammi skipper No Planorbella magnifica Magnificent rams-horn No

Problema bulenta Rare skipper No Hypericum adpressum Bog St. John's-wort No

Ptilimnium ahlesii Carolina bishopweed No Amorpha georgiana var. confusa Carolina lead-plant No

Rhynchospora pleiantha Coastal beaksedge No Solidago villosicarpa Coastal goldenrod No Trichostema sp. 1 Dune blue curls No Pteroglossaspis ecristata False coco No

Sagittaria weatherbiana Grassleaf arrowhead No* Stylisma pickeringii var. pickeringii Pickering’s dawnflower No Litsea aestivalis Pondspice No

Ludwigia ravenii Raven’s boxseed No Astragalus michauxii Sandhills milk-vetch No

Thalictrum macrostylum Small-leaved meadow-rue No Solidago verna Spring-flowering goldenrod No

Sideroxylon tenax Tough bumelia No Dionaea muscipula Venus’ fly-trap No

* Occurrence within one mile of proposed site



Appendix D

Sustainable Forestry Standards and Certifications

a.

Wood Pell

Environme

Source: US

et Export Faci

ental Assessme

Census Bureau

ility – Port of W

nt

U

Statistical Abstr

Wilmington

Ap

US Pulpwo

ract of the US, 2

ppendix E

ood Consu

012

umption

Documents

Enviva - EA 3-28-14savethecape.org/stcwp1/wp-content/uploads/PDFs... · wood pellet energy market can lead to environmental benefits, such as healthier and better managed forests