Letter P-8 Responses to 

6-94 6.0 – Public Comments and Responses 
Letter P-8 Continued Responses to 

P8-1 Dehil Pecan Orchard

 Proximity to R

EEC has stated that, if practicable and feasible, variations to avoid mature trees and other landslandowners during easement negotiations. See and Mitigation - Upland Forest and Planted Pinesection 4.8.2, Landowner and Easement RequireWe note that commenter’s residence is about 20proposed construction work area and about 285 centerline. Based on an on-site meeting between EEC reprJune 12, 2007, EEC identified that adjustments tproperty could be implemented to minimize impaP8-2 Dehil Economic BenThe proposed project would benefit the local comto local markets and by paying tax revenues to epasses. First, we identified in section 2.2.2 and Pipeline would transport and deliver (through meexisting gas-fired electric power generation faciliin Effingham County, Georgia, and Rainey in Anthat supply electric power in the project area. Sethe pipeline during both the construction and opeconstruction, EEC would pay sales tax revenues During operation, EEC would pay an annual ad vfor the life of the project. Additional information valorem tax revenues has been included in sect

6-95 6.0 – Public Comments and Responses 
Letter P-9 Responses to Le

P9-1 Stubbs Wildlife See response to comment P5-31. P9-2 Stubbs Vegetation burning aThe air emissions associated with pipeline construction aAlthough pipeline construction is projected to require 9 to associated with the burning of vegetation typically occur may occur during construction; however, EEC would comopen burning. We have revised section 4.11.1.5 to incoP9-3 Stubbs ROW maintenance anSee response to comment P2-3 regarding ROW revegetEstablishment of a 50-foot-wide permanent ROW maintawithin an otherwise open field, scrub-shrub, or forested lincrease the risk or spread of fire over current conditionsfact act as an advantageous fire break for uncontrolled foeither lightning strikes, accidental fires, or an uncontrollemanagement of private or commercial forest lands. We 4.8.1.2 to incorporate this information. P9-4 Stubbs Eminent domain Comment noted. The constitutionality of the eminent doof this analysis. We discuss eminent domain and the aweasements obtained through condemnation in section 4.

6-96 6.0 – Public Comments and Responses 
Letter P-10 Responses to L

P10-1 Wright Atlantic right wThank you for your comment. P10-2 Wright Public Safety aThank you for your comment. P10-3 Wright DEIS Thank you for your comment. 

6-97 6.0 – Public Comments and Responses 
Letter A-1 Responses to 

6-98 6.0 – Public Comments and Responses 
Letter A-1 Continued Responses to 

A1-1 EEC Status Reports Thank you for your comment. However, we belienable us to more effectively monitor landowner you know, landowner issues were largely absenof the affiliates recent pipeline expansion, which of your affiliate. 

6-99 6.0 – Public Comments and Responses 
Letter A-1 Continued Responses to 

A1-2 EEC River Crossing The text in section 4.3.3 and section 5.5 has beeinformation. 

6-100 6.0 – Public Comments and Responses 
Letter A-1 Continued Responses to 

6-101 6.0 – Public Comments and Responses 
Letter A-1 Continued Responses to 

6-102 6.0 – Public Comments and Responses 
Letter A-1 Continued Responses to 

A1-3 EEC Warmwater strThe text in section 4.6.2.2 and section 5.5 has binformation. 

6-103 6.0 – Public Comments and Responses 
Letter A-1 Continued Letter A-1 Co

6-104 6.0 – Public Comments and Responses
Letter A-1 Continued Responses to 

A1-4 EEC Eastern indigo The text in section 4.7.1 and section 5.5 has beeinformation. 

6-105 6.0 – Public Comments and Responses 
Letter A-1 Continued Responses to 

A1-5 EEC Flatwoods sala

The text in section 4.7.1 and section 5.5 has beeinformation. 

6-106 6.0 – Public Comments and Responses 
Letter A-1 Continued Responses to 

A1-6 EEC Ogeechee Cree

We recognize both the FWS and GDNR have agHowever, the FWS (which has special expertise recommendation that we deem to be reasonabledisregarded if EEC can show that it has consultespecies, and the results of those consultations anot likely to be impacted. 

6-107 6.0 – Public Comments and Responses 
Letter A-1 Continued Responses to 

A1-7 EEC State-listed pla

The text in section 4.7.2 and section 5.5 has beeinformation. 

6-108 6.0 – Public Comments and Responses 
Letter A-1 Continued Responses to 

A1-8 EEC Vegetative mai

The text in section 4.8.3 and section 5.5 has beeinformation. 

6-109 6.0 – Public Comments and Responses 
Letter A-1 Continued Responses to 

A1-9 EEC Site-specific re

We have reviewed these drawings and believe Emeasures depicted on the drawings would lesseresidences. Table 4.8-4 detailing the distances construction work area and pipeline, and associabeen updated to reflect these changes.

6-110 6.0 – Public Comments and Responses 
Letter A-1 Continued Responses to 

A1-10 EEC Developer conSubdivision 

The text in section 4.8.4 has been revised to incaddition, we maintain the recommendation in sespecific construction and mitigation measures or consultation with the developer prior to construcA1-11 EEC Developer conThe text in section 4.8.4 has been revised to inc

6-111 6.0 – Public Comments and Responses 
Letter A-1 Continued Responses to 

A1-12 EEC Developer con

The text in section 4.8.4 has been revised to incaddition, we maintain the recommendation in sespecific construction and mitigation measures or consultation with the developer prior to construcA1-13 EEC Developer conThe text in section 4.8.4 has been revised to incaddition, we maintain the recommendation in sespecific construction and mitigation measures or consultation with the developer prior to construc

6-112 6.0 – Public Comments and Responses 
Letter A-1 Continued Responses to 

A1-14 EEC Developer con

widening proje

The text in section 4.8.4 has been revised to incaddition, we maintain the recommendation in sespecific construction and mitigation measures or consultation with the developer prior to construcA1-15 EEC Developer con

widening proje

The text in section 4.8.4 has been revised to incaddition, we maintain the recommendation in sespecific construction and mitigation measures or consultation with the developer prior to construc

6-113 6.0 – Public Comments and Responses 
Letter A-1 Continued Responses to 

A1-16 EEC COE managed 

construction a

We have revised the text in section 4.8.5, COE Minformation, and included the mitigation plan in Awas developed by EEC and COE for the crossin

6-114 6.0 – Public Comments and Responses 
Letter A-1 Continued Letter A-1 Co

6-115 6.0 – Public Comments and Responses 
Letter A-1 Continued Responses to 

6-116 6.0 – Public Comments and Responses 
Letter A-1 Continued Responses to 

A1-17 EEC Unanticipated 

The text in section 4.10.2 and section 5.5 has beinformation. 

6-117 6.0 – Public Comments and Responses 
Letter A-1 Continued Responses to 

A1-18 EEC Eastern Band o

We requested that EEC provide documentation Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians, rather than tCherokee. EEC has subsequently provided the 

6-118 

the text in section 4.10.3 to incorporate this infor

 6.0 – Public Comments and Responses 
Letter A-1 Continued Responses to 

A1-19 EEC HDD noise ana

We have revised the text in section 4.11.2.2 acc

6-119 6.0 – Public Comments and Responses 
Letter A-2 Responses to 

6-120 6.0 – Public Comments and Responses 
Letter A-2 Continued Responses to 

A2-1 SLNG Environmental InspectoComment noted. 

6-121 6.0 – Public Comments and Responses 
Letter A-2 Continued Responses to 

A2-2 SLNG Status Reports We concur with Southern LNG’s assessment of reports, and have revised the text in section 5.5 

6-122 6.0 – Public Comments and Responses 
Letter A-2 Continued Responses to 

A2-3 SLNG Turning basin Comment noted. We have reviewed EEC’s turn4.3.3 to incorporate the additional information. 

6-123 6.0 – Public Comments and Responses 
Letter A-2 Continued Letter A-2 Co

6-124 6.0 – Public Comments and Responses 
Letter A-2 Continued Letter A-2 Co

6-125 6.0 – Public Comments and Responses
Letter A-2 Continued Responses to 

6-126 6.0 – Public Comments and Responses 
Letter A-2 Continued Responses to 

A2-4 SLNG Pile driver nois mammals and 

Comment noted. The text in section 4.6.2.2 and incorporate this information. A2-5 SLNG Sheet pile bulkComment noted. The text in section 4.1.3 has binformation. A2-6 SLNG Pile driver noisThe text in section 4.6.2 and appendix J (EFH Aincorporate this information. 

6-127 6.0 – Public Comments and Responses 
Letter A-2 Continued Responses to 

A2-7 SLNG Atlantic right w

The text in section 4.7.1 and section 5.5 has beeinformation. 

6-128 6.0 – Public Comments and Responses 
Letter A-2 Continued Responses to 

A2-8 SLNG Security and S

As stated in section 4.12.5 of the EIS, Section 3Aby Section 311 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005authorizing an LNG terminal, the Commission shoperator to develop an Emergency Response PlGuard and state and local agencies. In additionEmergency Response Plan shall include a Cost-description of any direct cost reimbursements thany state and local agencies with responsibility fterminal and in proximity to LNG carriers that seAct of 2005 mandated that FERC must approve and associated Coast-Sharing Plan prior to any construction. The existing terminal has an Emergency Responthe existing facility and for current operations anproposed expansion. The Savannah Area LiqueManagement and Emergency Plan is a separate they may also update for the proposed expansioRegarding the “emergency coordinator”, we agreadditional person, but that Southern LNG must eship has the ability to perform this responsibility 

6-129 6.0 – Public Comments and Responses
Letter A-2 Continued Responses to 

A2-9 SLNG Security coord

The condition requires Southern LNG to coordin

such as under the MTSA and/or the FSP, rather 

enforcement.

6-130 6.0 – Public Comments and Responses
Letter A-2 Continued Responses to 

6-131 6.0 – Public Comments and Responses 
Letter A-2 Continued Responses to 

A2-10 SLNG Operational Re

Comment noted. A2-11 SLNG Temperature RComment noted. 

6-132 6.0 – Public Comments and Responses 
Letter A-2 Continued Responses to 

A2-12 SLNG Notification Pr

Comment noted. 

6-133 6.0 – Public Comments and Responses
Letter A-2 Continued Responses to 

A2-13 SLNG WSA Review 

On June 18, 2007, the Coast Guard sent a lettereview, providing input on the capability of the pomanagement measures necessary to responsibltraffic in the Port of Savannah. As described in tpreliminary determination that the Savannah Rivand additional conditions, is suitable for the largeLNG marine traffic associated with this expansio

• Throughout the period of construction 

facility goes into operation, the applicaof the WSA to identify changes that haand/or port community since submissiapplicant shall provide a written statemcoinciding with the date of this letter achanges have occurred. If this annua

project and/or port that may invalidate must describe the changes in detail anto update the WSA. If updating the Winclude a timeline for actions to take poperations, the applicant shall conducsubmit documentation to the COTP aton file with the COTP is current and ufinal review shall be submitted to the Cprior to the start of operations. 

The condition has been revised to apply until the go into operation. 

6-134 6.0 – Public Comments and Responses
Letter A-2 Continued Responses to 

A2-14 SLNG Control of Exclusion Zo

On June 13, 2007, Southern LNG was requesteunderstands Southern LNG would have exclusioareas, as defined in 49 CFR 193.2007, 193.2057

6-135 6.0 – Public Comments and Responses 
Letter A-2 Continued Letter A-2 Co

6-136 6.0 – Public Comments and Responses 
Letter A-2 Continued Letter A-2 Co

6-137 6.0 – Public Comments and Responses 
Letter A-2 Continued 

6-138 6.0 – Public Comments and Responses