HomeMy WebLinkAbout029-85 Potomac Edison Company - Opequon District - BackfileEXHIBIT F
Review of Historic Properties
A review of Frederick County's Department of Planning and Development
listings of historic sites was undertaken to determine if any historic properties
might be impacted by the construction of the Meadow Brook Substation. These
listings were compiled from survey forms and photographs in the archives of the
Virginia Landmark Commission.
A two-mile radius from the Meadow Brook Substation was considered
adequate for ascertaining the degree of impact. All measurements are straight-
line distances as measured from U. S. topographic maps. (See attached
Exhibit F-1 for map locating the historic properties.)
The proposed electric facilities should not be visible from any of
the listed historic properties. The rolling terrain, the scattered natural
vegetation, and the existing man-made features will minimize any potential
visibility.
Only three properties, map identification Nos. 1, 2, and 3, are
within one mile of the proposed substation. Properties 1 and 2 are located
on the opposite side of the Chessie System Railroad and U. S. Route 11 from
the substation. Property No. 3 is located in a valley area which maximizes
the screening ability of the rolling terrain.
None of the historic properties on Exhibit F-1 are on the National
Historic Register or listed as a Virginia historic landmark.
A AThe Potomac Edison Company
Part of the Allegheny Power System
Downsville Pike
Hagerstown, MD 21740
November 30, 1990
Evan A. Wyatt
County of Frederick
Department of Planning and Development
Box 601
Winchester, VA 22601
i
Dear Mr. Wya t;-Vh
Attached are four copies of our revision to Site Plan No. 029-85 (Meadow
Brook Substation).
In order to clarify the identity of facilities within the fenceline of
the substation, we have made Drawing No. 408-821 a part of the revised plan.
The scale of Drawing No. 408-821 is one inch equal 50 feet. This was done to
show the proposed facilities at a scale that would allow an accurate and
uncluttered drawing.
The original site plan has had the facilities removed and in their place
a reference to the ultimate arrangement Drawing No. 408-821 has been made.
Any changes in the future should refer to both drawings.
Should there be any questions concerning this information, please do not
hesitate to contact me.
DAN/rly
Most sincerely,
Dan Spofford
Real Estate Representative
NOV 2 81990
The Potomac Edison Company
Part of the Allegheny Power System
Downsville Pike
Hagerstown, Maryland 21740
Phone: (301) 790-6376
DAN SPOFFORD
Real Estate Representative
• i.
0
October 17, 1990
The Potomac Edison Company
Attn: Mr. Dan Spofford
Downsville Pike
Hagerstown, Maryland 21740
Dear Mr. Spofford:
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Department of Planning and Development
703/665-5651
FAX 703/667-037C
This letter reflects our conversation regarding the proposed
improvements to Potomac Edison's Meadowbrook Substation.
Hopefully, this letter will explain the additional information that
Frederick County must receive to allow these improvements.
Potomac Edison has applied for two building permits; one for a 1000
gallon underground fuel tank, and another for a 16 x 24 steel
building to house the emergency generator. Our department will
sign -off on the permits to allow construction to begin; however,
we will also require Potomac Edison to submit revised site plans
to show the new improvements. This submittal is necessary, as it
is important to keep existing site plans updated for public
informational purposes.
Please revise Site Plan #029-85 of Potomac Edison (Drawing Number
408-833) to include these improvements and submit four (4) copies
of this plan to our department for approval within the next thirty
(30) days. We will send you a copy of the approved revision at a
later date.
If I may answer any questions regarding this letter, please do not
hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Evan A. Wyatt
Planner II
EAW
9 Court Square - P.O. Box 601 - Winchester, Virginia - 22601
r
11
SITE PLAN #029-85
Potomac Edison
185.36 Acres, Zoned A-2 (Agricultural General)
LOCATION: West of US Route 11 (also west of the B&O Railroad) along the south
side of State Route 638.
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Opequon
ADJACENT LAND USE AND ZONING: Agricultural land use and A-2 Zoning.
PROPOSED USE AND IMPROVEMENTS: Electrical Substation
REVIEW EVALUATIONS:
Inspections Department - Proposed control building to be built in accordance
with the Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code and other applicable
standards for intended use.
Health Department - No objection. Use will be minimal, approximately two
hours per week. Alternate means of sewage disposal can be installed if
necessary.
Middletown Fire Company - No comment.
VA Dept. of Highways - The site plan appears satisfactory; however, before
any work is done on the State's right-of-way, please contact our area
superintendent, Mr. D. E. Lee at 869-1100 to obtain an entrance permit.
Planning and Zoning - Satisfactory.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Approval.
T041MAC
Aso
51 4 '52
2pworih � j
hapei /
Vauciuse
Spring
ti S
A 53'
54B', 3e
29 54
to
d
55
28
3
67
� Ss
so
27 2
29i-543
/ s3
6 A
A 3` 66A 62;
70 69 se Rt 633 BNVV 64
71 r- O 66
3691-300 _ f • • /Qf
90
96
3
80 4 �� 0
72 �� /
73 8480 87e6\/ B/ 95 \U/
' 74 as77T� <
85V
A � � a�A ao �'
ti
1.
• CONCRETE M Q N U N', -- N T
VICINITY MAP . Y. K ` }
SCALE: 1"=2000'
40417
408..
t
APPLICATION AND CHECKLIST FOR
SITE PLAN
IN THE
COUNTY OF FREDERICK, VIRGINIA
DATE: 2 OCT'013�� B�JJ APPLICATION NUMBER: Ual- 5J
A P P L I CANT/AGENT / O�ff1G 150,t%C o
� � ��� Sroar
ADDRESS:
_hfIGE�25io�uti, ,O .2/74b
PHONE: (�30/) ! ✓(� - �j�d0 X 437�
The following checklist serves solely to aid the staff, Planning
Commission, and Board of Supervisors in reviewing your application.
Please complete this checklist and submit it with your proposal.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
1. Location ,of_property,
v5?W0 U '/ 1if14.sZ)
2. Property tax map and identification number: 8,"—Pfeil J-5 ic: 7
3. Property zoning and present use: A - 2 (�QR'v
4. Adjoining property zoning and present use: 14
5. Proposed uses:
6. Magisterial District: �iOt=QI.10X.,J
7. Notes: 6cL 47774C-,-I&� R�1121X,11,
The Potomac Edison Company
Part of the Allegheny Power System
P. 0. Box 3200
Winchester, Virginia 22601
October 4, 1985
Mr. John Riley
County Administrator
9 Court Square
Winchester, Virginia 22601
Dear John:
As mentioned to you by telephone yesterday afternoon,
Potomac Edison Company will be filing their plans for our
proposed Meadowbrook Substation site for approval in your
comprehensive plan. Due to our incomplete information on
our most southern route for the 138 kV line proposed for
Frederick and Clarke counties, we will not be filing this
information for approval at the same time. As soon as this
information is completed, we will apply again for time on
the Planning Commission's agenda.
Thank you for your assistance in changing our agenda
items.
Sincerely,
C. I. Cather, Jr.
Manager, Southern Division
CICJr./djm
COUNTY of FREDERICK
IDepartment of Planning and Development
John T.P. Horne - Planning Director
M E M O R A N D U M Stephen M. Gyurisin - Deputy Director
703/662-4532
Kelp
Health Department , ATTN: Mr. Herbert L. Sluder
Inspections Department , ATTN: Mr. John W. Dennison
VA Dept. of Highways & Transportation , ATTN: Mr. William H. Bushman
Middletown Fire Company , ATTN: Mr. Henry Shiley Al
Planning Department , ATTN: Mr. John R. Riley
Zoning Department , ATTN: Mr. John R. Riley
FROM: John R. Riley, Administrator DATE: October 2, 1985
SUBJECT: Review Comments On: Conditional Use Permit Subdivision
Rezoning X Site Plan
We are reviewing the enclosed request by Potomac Edison Company
or their representative, Mr. Dan Spofford (301) 790-3400 X 4376 (call collect).
Will you please review the attached and return your comments to me as soon as
possible.
THIS SPACE SHOULD BE USED FOR REVIEW COMMENTS:
Signature
Date
9 Court Square
P.O. Box 601
Winchester, Virginia
22601
COUNTY of FREDERICK
IDepartment of Planning and Development
John T.P. Horne - Planning Director
M E M O R A N D U M Stephen M. Gyurisin - Deputy Director
703/662-4532
TO:
Health Department , ATTN: Mr. Herbert L. Sluder
Inspections Department , ATTN: Mr. John W. Dennison
VA Dept. of Highways & Transportation , ATTN: Mr. William H. Bushman
Middletown Fire Company , ATTN: Mr. Henry Shiley
Planning Department , ATTN: Mr. John R. Riley
Zoning Department , ATTN: Mr. John R. Riley
FROM: John R. Riley, Administrator DATE: October 2, 1985
SUBJECT: Review Comments On: Conditional Use Permit Subdivision
Rezoning X Site Plan
We are reviewing the enclosed request by Potomac Edison Company
or their representative, Mr. Dan Spofford (301) 790-3400 X 4376 (call collect).
Will you please review the attached and return your comments to me as soon as
possible.
THIS SPACE SHOULD BE USED FOR REVIEW COMMENTS:
(-" Pd J t`i _[ ' L_ '� , i (� r A C . -TC� ![- ' E-- (' 1 l___'r \ ni
�"7L�N f7 bra rz5 �t�, ►NTF_�(�E�C� l�S
Signature Datei5
9 Court Square - P.O. Box 601 - Winchester, Virginia - 22601
Dk 678 �0� � •
��' '!' COUNTY of FREDERICK
RECEIVED �
Department of Planning and Development
EIVED John T.P. Horne - Planning Director
n DEPT. OF PLANNING Stephen M. Gyurisin - Deputy Director
AND DEVELOPMENT ��� M E M O R A N D U M 703/662-4532
�.
TO:
Health Department , ATTN: Mr. Herbert L. Sluder
Inspections Department
ATTN:
Mr.
John
W.
Dennison
VA Dept. of Highways & Transportation
ATTN:
Mr.
William
H. Bushman
Middletown Fire Company
, ATTN:
Mr.
Henry
Shiley
Planning Department
, ATTN:
Mr.
John
R.
Riley
Zoning Department
, ATTN:
Mr.
John
R.
Riley
FROM: John R. Riley, Administrator DATE: October 2, 1985
SUBJECT: Review Comments On: Conditional Use Permit Subdivision
Rezoning X Site Plan
We are reviewing the enclosed request by Potomac Edison Company
or their representative, Mr. Dan Spofford (301) 790-3400 X 4376 (call collect).
Will you please review the attached and return your comments to me as soon as
possible.
THIS SPACE SHOULD BE USED FOR REVIEW COMMENTS:
The site plan appears satisfactory, however before any work is done on
the State's right-of-way please contact our Area Superindent, 1.4r. D. E. Lee
at 869-1100 to obtain an entrance permit.
Signature Date )Q -
9 Court Square - P.O. Box 601 - Winchester, Virginia - 22601
0
COUNTY of FREDERICK
IDepartment of Planning and Development
John T.P. Horne - Planning Director
M E M O R A N D U M Stephen M. Gyurisin - Deputy Director
703/662-4532
TO:
Health Department , ATTN: Mr. Herbert L. Sluder
Insvections Department ATTN: Mr. John W. Dennison
VA Dept. of Highways & Transportation
, ATTN:
Mr.
William H. Bushman
Middletown Fire Company
, ATTN:
Mr.
Henry Shiley
Planning Department
, ATTN:
Mr.
John R. Riley
Zoning Department
, ATTN:
Mr.
John R. Riley
FROM: John R. Riley, Administrator
DATE:
October 2, 1985
SUBJECT: Review Comments On: Conditional
Use
Permit Subdivision
Rezoning X Site Plan
We are reviewing the enclosed request by Potomac Edison Company
or their representative, Mr. Dan Spofford (301) 790-3400 X 4376 (call collect).
Will you please review the attached and return your comments to me as soon as
possible.
THIS SPACE SHOULD BE USED FOR REVIEW COMMENTS:
Signature
Date
9 Court Square - P.O. Box 601
Winchester, Virginia - 22601
j AUG 11 '96 12:31 POTOMAC IWON° • P.2
Stephen M. Gyurisin
Deputy Director
Department of Planning and Development
County of Frederick, Virginia
Nine Court Square
Winchester, Virginia 22601
Dear Mc. Gyurisin:
The Potomac Edison Company
Part of the Allegheny Power System
Downsville Pike
Hagerstown, Maryland 21740
.tune 12, 1986
RE: Meadow Brook Substation
Application for Pump and Haul
At this time, the Potomac Edison Company, in an effort to successfully
provide sewage facilities at the Meadow Brook Substation site near Vaucluse,
south of Stephens City, desires to proceed with its application to pump and
haul.
In our previous conversations, we have discussed the inability of the
ground at the substation site to pass the health department perk test. We
have, therefore, determined that the only satisfactory and economic method of
solving the problem to the advantage of the Health Department, County of
Frederick and the Potomac Edison Company is to pursue this permit.
It is the opinion of the company, that with the normal sparse usage of
substation sewage facilities, that the pump and haul system lends itself well
to this particular application and that the proposed holding tanks would only
require pumping three times per year.
With this letter. I would ask you please to proceed with acquiring the
signature of Mr. John R. Riley. Jr., County Administrator to the attached
documents and permit application.
Please let me thank you and the County for your cooperation in this
matter.
Most s4ncerely,
J1 +
,�an Spofford
Real Fstate Representative
Giffinemo/rIy
�AUG '11 '26 12:31 POTOMAC SON°
• P.3
A fication for Pump aid Haul '
Page
Commonwealth of Virginia
J
State Department of Health
t. OWNER �.
Print Nsme
810nature
COMPANY __TheT Potomac Edison Company
ADDRESS _-DOWnsville Pike
tlagerstawtn. MD Zip 91740
TELEPHONE (301) 790-3400 X-4376
does hereby apply for st permit to remove and transport sewage
from Meadow Brook Substation
at Vaucluse t0 Stephens Run Plant
(IF ADDITIONAL SPA091S REOUIRED USE
ATTACHMENT)
2. Justification ___Ground will not accept conventional septic
facilities and very low usage 7
adapts itself well to the-gutMp and haul condition.
r
I Brief description of storage or holding facilities (Type, capacity, etc.) Two 1,000 gallon concrete
holding tanks, one tank will act as a normal septic tank and one tank will function as
the fluid holding_ tank.
4, Plans and Specifications of holding facility (If required) prepared by Peter L .. _Broakey
Engineer
Address 800 Cabin Hill tariyes Greenabura,PA _ Date 7/26/86
5. Date of completion of permanent facilities NA _-- Describe facility to be complete+
N/A
A.W.L W
f RUG, 11 ' 8b 12: 32 POTOMRClISCV.11
P.4
t Page . of
6. Method of guarantee that facility will be completed. Attach documents as proof such as Bond, Contracts,
N/A
7. Sewage Handling Permit Holder _._ The Potomac Edison Company
Name and Number of Parmh Holder
Address Post Office Box 3200, Winchester, VA 22601 � Telephone (703) 665-0115
(Attach copy of Contract witty Sewage Handling Permit Holder)
S. Time period requested for pump and haul (maximum time one year) from
— to
Permanent
9. Method of banding to Insure pump and haul for the specified time period In 8 above
See Attached Auj ement� --__
10, Quantity of sewage to be hauled per day Approximately 750 .� gallons 3 times a year
11, Route(s) of transport ,North on Route 11 to Route 277, then East on Route 277 to Route 1065,
thezt South on Route 1065 approximately 0.2 miles to a private road,
12. Time of day for transport - Continue on to Stephens Run Plant.
13. Emergency response capability
14. Disposition of Sewage _... See C
15. Conference Date Requested
rtin
of Agreement between County and the Potomac Edison
(Attach copy of agreement with owner of receiving treatment faclllty)
Earliest Date Avakl-able— /-) 4
16. Concurrence of Local Political Subdivision
Tits•
DoptTt yw l'i Use
1, Contract with Handier having valid sewage handling permit Yea ❑ No ❑
2. Receiving facility satisfactory Yee ❑ No C]
Comments .
3. Bonding and/or assurances approved by Bureau and Attorney General Yes ❑ No ❑
Comments , ___ �__,
4. Plans and Specificatlons for storage facility satisfactory Yea CJ No ❑ Not Required ❑
S. Construction Permit Issued for storage facility Yes ❑ No ❑ Not Required ❑
Permit No. — Date
5. Storage Facilities Inspected Yea ❑ No
Comments
7. Recommend PUMP & Haul Permit Be issued
Sanliarldn
S. Authorize Pump & HaUI Permit To Be Issued
Date
any
Supervisory Sanitarian
B.W.E. M-8
Date
c AUG 11 '86 13:33 POTOMRGOISON"
• P.S
THIS AGREEMENT, made and darted the day of , 1986,
by and batween the Commonwealth of Virginia, Department, of Health,
("Department")l County of Frederick, Virginia, a Body politic,
("County"); and The ]Potomac Edison Company, a Maryland and Virginia
corporation ("Potomac") .
x
WHEREAS, Section 5.00 et seq., of the Virginia Sewage Handling and
Disposal Regulations permit the disposal of sewage on a "Pump and Haul"
basis by a government entity upon execution of a contract between the
government entity and the Department, and upon issuance of permits by the
Department for pumping and hauling and for each sewage facility; and
WHEREAS, no practical, economic method exists, under current
circumstances, for the disposal of;aewage from Potomac's Meadowbrook
Substation located south of Stephens City near Vaucluse, Virginia except
by pumping and hauling to a Department approved sewage disposal facility;
and
WHEREAS, Potomac has contracted or will contract with a private
contractor holding a sewage hauling permit to pump and haul sewage as
requiredr and
WHEREAS, County does guarantee to the Department that Potomac shall
comply with all applicable provisions of said regulations.
THEREF'OP.E, WITNESSETH: That for and in Consideration of the
requirements of said regulations, the issuance of pump and haul permits
and sewage storage facility permits, and in consideration of the benefits
accruing to Potomac as a result hereof, the parties agree as follows;
AUG 11 ' 86 12: S8 POTOMAC 9SON°
r
2 -
• P.6
(1) Potomac shall design and construct a sewage storage facility in
accordance with Section 14.00 of the Virginia Sewage Handling
and Disposal Regulations and shall apply to the Department for
a permit for the sewage disposal facility.
(2) Potomac shall apply to the Department for a pump and haul
permit to provide sewage collection and disposal services to
Potomac for so long as Potomac's Meadowbrook Substation is
operational and County agrees to guarantee compliance by
Potomac with all applicable regulations concerning sewage
collection and disposal services to Potomac's Meadowbrook
Substation.
(3) Potomac will provide pump and haul services to its Meadowbrook
Substation through a private contractor holding a sewage
hauling permit.
(4) The Department upon receipt of proper,application therefore,
and provided regulations are adhered to, will issue all permits
required for each sewage facility and pump aTid haul operation
required to provide sewage collection and disposal from
Potomac's Meadowbrook Substation.
(5) It is understood and agreed between the County and Potomac that
the County is not obligated to provide said guarantee and does
so only as a convenience to Potomac.
(6) Nothing herein shall be construed to restrict the Department's
ability to revoke the permit for failure to comply with
provisions of applicable statutes, the Sewage Handling and
Disposal Regulations, or other applicable regulations.
+ AUG 11 '8G 12:34 POTOMAC WON° P.7
r.
WITNESS the fallowing signatures and ,seals:
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
Date:
COUNTY OF FRZOERICK, VIRGINIA
By
Data:
THE POTOMAC EDISON COMPANY
$Y
Paul. M. Horst, Jr. �}
Vice President
pate: -�-/o,Z
M7
4 AUG 11 '86 12:84 POTOMAC EON°
P.8
MAY 211986
FREDERICK COUNTY SANITATION AUTHORITY
PONT OFrtcm ■ox gis
ooNALO R. HOn440N. CHAIRMAN WINCHX*TER, VIROINIA 22601 WKLLINOTON H. JONM r.t:.
ALLLN i. JONI. VICL-CHAIRMAN RNGIIN[cR - bimttCTOR
O. W. MORWM, ■ee.-TAKAS.
R. S. CARPWR PHONE 703 — 497.0000
N- J. HIRANaI!
May 28, 1986
Mr. Dan Spofford
Potomac Edison Company
Downsvi.11e Pike
Hageratown, MD 21740
Re: Pump and Haul from Vauclose Substation
Dear Mr. Spofford:
This will confirm that the Authority will accept septage from the
referenced substation at the Stepehens Run Plant until the Opequon Regional
water Reclamation Plant is in operation. This plant, presently under
construction, is .Located on Route 7 at the Clarke County line and is
scheduled for completion in 1988.
The route of travel to the SteDhena Run Plant is north on Route 11
to Route 277; ease on Route 277 to Route 1065; south approximately 0.2
mile to a private road; then along the private road to the plant.
The acceptance of this septasze is contingent uvon approval of such
an operation by the State Health Department and is subject to applicable
rates existing at the time of delivery.
Sincerely,
W. H, Janes, P. E.
Engineer -Director
/ pb
0
i
pany
21740
Substation
he location
ate, I
not received
sed septic
operation,
we proceed
r application
n or take
e needs of
ative
d
o
h
0
Herbert L. Sluder
Sanitation Supervisor
Frederick -Winchester Health Department
P. 0. Box 2056
Winchester, Virginia 22601
Dear Mr. Sluder:
The Potomac Edison Com
Part of the Allegheny Power System
Downsville Pike
Hagerstown, Maryland
March 25, 1986'
On Thursday, February 13, I met at our proposed Meadow Brook
with Brian Fox of your department for the purpose of pinpointing t
of a drain field for the septic system at that site. Also on that
applied for the necessary tests and a permit. At present, I have
official notification from your department as to whether our propo
system design is acceptable.
In light of our tight schedule for placing this facility into
it is of the utmost importance to the Potomac Edison Company that
with our plans.
I ask you to notify this office of your official action on ou
so that we may either proceed with letting the bids for constructs
the next steps required in providing a septic system suitable to t
this particular installation.
Most sind'erelyf
. P"�.... -,(jam
r Dan Sp�fford
Real Estate Represent
Gtlmemo/ r ly
cc: John R. Riley, Jr., Frederick County
Stephen M. Gyuri_sin, Frederick County ...�
Ronald B. Dombrosky, Cabin Hill
Alan J. Fleissner, Cabin Hill
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Department of Planning and Development
John T.P. Horne - Planning Director
Stephen M. Gyurisin - Deputy Director
703/662-4532
LAND DISTURBING PERMIT (4s_5,6)r1
For
/l land disturbing activity at /NENEAyoiy T3,2ooz,(,5oa5r 7-1ox)
N/E3%"�l= (JS�oc�T�'���Lo�JG �� SoyTK SID�OFSTAI"� %�ovT�G3�/„� Q��'guont �lsTfziCr
ISSUED TO: /HL PoTomAC ZD/Sol✓ Co.y&I o4AU y ,
tt
who has met all requirements of the Frederick County Erosion and
Sedimentation Control Ordinance as certified by the Frederick County
Department of Planning and Development.
Approving Signature
Date:
NOTICE OF RIGHT TO INSPECT
An agent of the Frederick County Department of Planning and
Development shall be permitted entry to the site of the land -
disturbing activity to inspect the control measures shown in the
approved plan.
Signature of Applicant -
)tau)�—
vice, President
Date:
NOTE: Issuance of this permit does not constitute approval of the
site plan. This permit is for land disturbance only.
9 Court Square - P.O. Box 601 - Winchester, Virginia - 22601
r
.-_
AGREEMENT
•
t
THIS AGREEMENT, made this 4LAI day of
by and between %yE o AC EL
, 1 9 9G
--- ,
party (parties) of the first part; and the COUNTY OF FREDERICK,
VIRGINIA, party of the second part;
WHEREAS, in consideration of the approval by the party of the second
part of this Virginia land disturbance plan and permit known as
i%EAToPU 0/200s-( S0/0-57-47-10IU and the party of the second
part requiring the following work to be completed during the land
disturbance construction & before final occupancy, the party
(parties) of the first part, his or its heirs and assigns agree to do
the following work.
1. Provide for the adequate control of erosion and sedimentation by
temporary and permanent control practices and measures which will
be implemented during all phases of clearing, grading, and
construction, all conformity with the Virginia Erosion and
Sediment Control Law, Title 21, Chapter 1, Article 6.1 of the
Code of Virginia and local code laws.
2. To provide Erosion and Sediment Control as per site plan # 029
SJ�
In testimony whereof, the party
its corporate names and seals to
behalf, by /�'.9UL N% Norzsr, c71L, ,
duly attested by k/. A /yicll-J
this agreement to be acknowledg
behalf.
M.
of the first part has hereunto caused
be hereunto affixed, for and in its
VICL D/ZE"SMI�cNT ►
�/LG�-n/ ,,5EC7ZE7'-4RY , and caused
ed and delivered for and in its
r,6�� f o i Olt-14C C0�-1p�1��
CORPORAT -CM
(SEAL) jay Paul 'VI Borst, Jr. (J\
i� `5 ice A're�uleiit r 'U
Attest: `
j
Ni; i %iiullen, Secretafy
STATE OF MAkYLAAID
COUNTY OF FREDERICK
I, 041M/E1- a Notary Public in and for
the State and County aforesaid, 1 /do hereby certify that
v /�i9vL /y0 ST vT� IC = 7:32,L=SJ1) 7-
whose names are signed to the foregoing agreement, this day
personally appeared before me in my State and County aforesaid and
ackn.owledged,the same.
Y} C1
r
Gx.v'eri . unoer--'my'•.,hand this day of ,
NO — - — --
My Co'mmiss"ion..,Expires
A
Agreement
Page 2
W
In testimony whereof, the party of the second part has hereunto
caused its body corporate names and seal to be hereunto affixed, for
and in its behalf, by `R0berW , W6-Ek)'n S
its Planning Director, duly attested by t)ia e�- (ern i)l,
its "' -- —' - and caused this agreement to be
acknowledged and delivered for and in its behalf by its said Director
and Deputy Director.
WITNESS THE FOLLOWING SIGNATURE AND SEAL:
COUNTY OF FREDERICK, VIRGINIA
�all",
N C��
BY ` G'� �z�
PLANNING DIRECTOR
Frederick County Department of
Planning and Development
(SEAL)
Attest:
j224
STATE OF VIRGINIA
COUNT,7,F FREDERICK
i
I , a Notary Public in and for the
State and C unty aforesaid, do hereby certify that this day
r onal}� ap eared before me in my said County,
C�/ ���it� , Planning Director of the Frederick
my D art ent of Planning and Development and
-D-ep +-y ni re or of the Frederick County
Department of Planning and Development, whose names are signed to the
for oing and he eunto annexed agreement dated
yh , and each then and there personally and
severally 66knowledged the said agreement for and on behalf of the
said County of Frederick, Virginia, and acknowledged that the seal
thereto affixed is the true and genuine seal of the County of
Frederick, Virginia.
Given under my
hand this lAd
day
of
19 IP/1
My commission
expires
day
of
, 19.
"4�-te j az:�65
NOT RY PUBIAC
• •
COUNTY of FREDERICK
IDepartment of Planning and Development
703/662-4532
October 22, 1985
tT
r.Dan Spofford
he Potomac Edison Company
ownsville Pike
agerstown, Maryland 21740
Dear Mr. Spofford:
This letter is to confirm the Planning Commission's action at
their meeting of October 16, 1985:
Approval of Site Plan #029-85 of Potomac Edison to construct an
electrical substation, west of US Route 11 along the south side of
State Route 638, in the Opequon Magisterial District.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate- to contact this
office.
JRR/dkg
Sinc. ely,
John R. Riley, Jr.
County Administrator
9 Court Square
P.O. Box 601
Winchester, Virginia
22601
0
0
LEGAL DEPARTM
George W. Bryant, Jr., Clerk
Virginia State Corporation Commission
Document Control Center
P.O. Box 2118 - Level B1
Richmond, VA 23216
Dear Mr. Bryant:
The Potomac Edison Company
Part of the Allegheny Power System
Downsville Pike, Hagerstown, MD 21740 (301) 790-3400
September 27, 1985
RE: Application for Approval of
Meadow Brook Substation
Enclosed for filing are the original and five copies of an Application
and exhibits under the utility facilities set for approval of the Meadow
Brook Substation. Please mark one copy "filed" and return it to me in the
enclosed stamped envelope. Additional copies of this filing have been
mailed to those State and local agencies listed in Exhibit G.
Included is a proposed order with recommended procedure and dates for
various filings and publication. We hope that this matter may be brought
to the attention of the Commission and a procedural order entered at the
Commission's earliest convenience. If there are any questions, please call
me at 301-790-3400, ext. 4284.
Veiry truly yours,
1
M rleen L. Brooks
A torney
MLB/ckb/VA1-1
Encl.
s
C�
VIRGINIA:
STATE CORPORATION COMMISSION
APPLICATION OF THE POTOMAC EDISON COMPANY
For Certification of Electrical Case No.
Facilities Under the Utility
Facilities Act
APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL AND CERTIFICATION
OF MEADOW BROOK 500 KV SUBSTATION
The Potomac Edison Company (PE) respectfully shows as follows:
1. PE is a public service corporation organized under the laws of
the State of Maryland and the Commonwealth of Virginia and furnishing
electric service to the public within its service territory in Virginia.
PE also furnishes electric service to the public in portions of Maryland
and West Virginia.
2. PE's electric system, consisting of facilities for generation,
transmission, and distribution of electric energy as well as associated
facilities, is interconnected with the electric systems of neighboring
utilities, and is a part of the interconnected network of electric
systems serving the continental United States. By reason of its
operation in three states and its interconnections with other utilities,
PE is engaged in interstate commerce.
3. In order to perform its legal duty to furnish adequate and
reliable electric service, PE must, from time to time, construct new
electric facilities. The need for new electric facilities is directly
related to the growth in demand for electricity on PE's system and the
greater that growth in demand, the greater the necessity for new capacity
in generation, transmission and distribution facilities.
0
0
- 2 -
4. PE is presently experiencing a growth in demand for
electricity on its system and, as a result, must construct several new
electric facilities. One of the new facilities is the proposed Meadow
Brook Substation.
5. The proposed substation is located in Frederick County. The
location of the proposed Meadow Brook Substation is indicated on the
topographic map attached to this Application as Exhibit A, and on the
Frederick County General Highway map attached as Exhibit A-1. PE has
owned this site since 1978.
6. The proposed substation is necessary to meet the growth in
demand for electricity in Frederick and Warren Counties and for continued
reliability of electric service. The necessity is described in greater
detail in Exhibit B to this Application.
7. A substation at the proposed location is the best means of
meeting the need described in Exhibit B. The factors influencing PE's
selection of the location of the substation are described in Exhibit C to
this Application. All applicable local permits will be obtained.
8. The general arrangement of the substation is indicated in the
following exhibits to this Application:
Exhibit D - Arrangement
Exhibit D-1 - Electrical Plan View
Initial Installation
Exhibit D-2 - Electrical Plan View
Potential Expansion
Exhibit D-3 - 500 kV Electrical Layout (Elevation A -A)
1]
- 3 -
0
9. A portion of the substation will be within the existing
transmission right of way which is cleared and maintained. Additional
clearing of existing trees will be kept to a minimum. Our proposed
screening and grading operations are described in Exhibits E-1 through
E-4.
10. Exhibit F-1 shows sites of historic interest in the area.
Exhibit F explains the significance of those sites and the effect of the
proposed substation on them.
11. Exhibit G lists the State and local agencies to whom copies of
this application have been sent.
WHEREFORE, The Potomac Edison Company respectfully requests that
the Commission promptly give notice of this Application and grant a
certificate of public convenience and necessity for Meadow Brook
Substation.
THE POTOMAC EDISON COMPANY
1
BY
PRESIDENT
Marleen L. Brooks
Attorney for Applicant
The Potomac Edison Company
Downsville Pike
Hagerstown, MD 21740
(301) 790-3400
VA1-1/MEADOW.3
0
0
STATE OF MARYLAND )
) TO WIT
COUNTY OF WASHINGTON )
a notary public in and for the State
and County aforesaid, hereby certify that on this day appeared before me
who, first being duly sworn, made oath and said that he is
of The Potomac Edison Company and duly authorized to
execute and file the foregoing Application, and that the matters
contained therein are true to the best of his knowledge, information and
belief.
Given under my hand and notarial seal this Vic -.—day of
1985.
Notary Public
My Commission Expires:
VA1-1/MEADOW
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
STATE CORPORATION COMMISSION
AT RICHMOND,
APPLICATION OF
THE POTOMAC EDISON COMPANY CASE NO.
For certification of facilities
under the Utility Facilities Act
ORDER FOR NOTICE AND HEARING
On The Potomac Edison Company (herinafter
"the Company") filed an application with the State Corporation Commission
for approval under the Utility Facilities Act to construct a 500-138 KV
substation to be known as Meadow Brook Substation in Frederick County.
The application states that a copy of the application has been
sent to the Department of Highways and Transportation; the Historic
Landmarks Commission, the Council on the Environment, the Department of
Conservation and Economic Development, the Commonwealth Attorney, the
Chairman of the Board of Supervisors and the Chairman of the Planning
Commission of Frederick County.
The Commission, having considered the Company's application, finds
that this case should be assigned a case number, that the Company should
give the public notice of its application and that a hearing date should
be established for the purpose of receiving evidence relevant to said
application if a formal hearing is requested; accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED:
(1) That this matter be assigned Case No.
(2) That the Company forthwith make a copy of its application and
exhibits available for public inspection during regular business hours at
the following Company offices:
and at
U.S. Route 11 South
Kernstown, Virginia
The Potomac Edison Company
General Office, Downsville Pike
Hagerstown, Maryland
(3) That any interested person who objects to the approval of the
Company's application shall file his or her objection in writing with the
Clerk of the Commission on or before December 1, 1985;
(4) That on or before December 1, 1985, any interested person
desiring a formal hearing in this matter shall file a request for a
formal hearing in writing with the Clerk of the Commission. If no such
request is received, an informal hearing only will be held at the date
and time set below;
(5) That if any interested person requests a formal hearing, a
formal hearing will be held before a Hearing Examiner beginning at 10:00
a.m. on February 3, 1986 in the Commission's Courtroom on the 13th Floor
of the Jefferson Building, Bank and Governor Streets, Richmond, Virginia.
In accordance with §12.1-31 of the Code of Virginia, a Hearing Examiner
shall conduct all further proceedings in this matter on behalf of the
Commission, concluding with the filing of the Examiner's final report to
the Commission. In the discharge of such duties, the Hearing Examiner
shall exercise all the inquisitorial powers possessed by the Commission,
including, but not limited to, the power to administer oaths, require the
appearance of witnesses and parties and the production of documents,
schedule and conduct pre -hearing conferences, admit or exclude evidence,
0 - 3 - •
grant or deny continuances, and rule on motions, matters of law and
procedural questions. Any party objecting to any ruling or action of
said Examiner shall make known its objection with reasonable certainty at
the time of the ruling, and may argue such objections to the Commission
as a part of its responses to the final report of said Examiner; provided
however, if any ruling by the Examiner denies further participation by
any party in interest in a proceeding not thereby concluded, such party
shall have the right to file a written motion with the Examiner for his
immediate certification of such ruling to the Commission for its
consideration. Pending resolution by the Commission of any ruling so
certified, the Examiner shall retain procedural control of the
proceeding. The following schedule will be in effect in the event a
formal hearing is requested;
On or before December 1, 1985, any interested person desiring to
participate in this matter as a Protestant, as defined in SCQ Rule 4:6,
shall file an original and fifteen copies of a Notice of Protest as
provided in SCC Rule 5:16(a) and shall serve a copy upon the Company.
Service upon the.Company shall be directed to Marleen L. Brooks, The
Potomac Edison Company, Downsville Pike, Hagerstown, Maryland 21740;
- On or before January 6, 1986, the Company shall file with the
Commission an original and fifteen copies of the prepared testimony and
exhibits which the Company intends to submit in support of its
application, serving a copy upon each Protestant and making copies
available for public inspection as is provided in paragraph (2) above;
- On or before January 23, 1986, each Protestant shall file with
the Commission an original and fifteen copies of a Protest (SCC Rule
5:16(b)) and an original and fifteen copies of the prepared testimony and
0 - 4 - 0
exhibits which the Protestant intends to submit in support of his or her
position, and shall serve a copy of such testimony, exhibits and Protest
upon the Company and upon other Protestants in this case;
- On or before January 30, 1986, the Company shall file with the
Commission an original and fifteen copies of any rebuttal testimony and
exhibits which the Company intends to submit at the hearing, serving a
copy upon each Protestant and making copies available for public
inspection as is provided in paragraph (2) above;
- That any person desiring to make a statement at the hearing (if
formal hearing is held), either for or against the application, need only
appear in the Commission's Courtroom at 9:45 a.m. on the day of the
hearing and identify himself or herself to the Commission's Bailiff as a
public witness;
- That within five days of receipt of any Notice of Protest, the
Company shall serve upon each Protestant a copy of all materials now or
hereafter filed with the Commission.
(6) That beginning on or before October 25, 1985; the Company
cause the following to be published as display advertising (not
classified), once a week for two consecutive weeks in newspapers of
general circulation in the area of the proposed substation;
NOTICE OF APPLICATION BY
THE POTOMAC EDISON COMPANY
FOR APPROVAL AND
CERTIFICATION OF THE PROPOSED
MEADOW BROOK 500-138 KV
SUBSTATION
CASE NO.
Notice is hereby given to the public that The
Potomac Edison Company ("the Company") has filed
with the State Corporation Commission an application
for approval to construct a 500-138 Kv substation in
Frederick County. The proposed Meadow Brook
- 5 - 9
substation is to be located northwest of U.S. Route
11 between Stephens City and Middletown on the route
of the existing Mt. Storm -Morrisville 500 Kv line.
The application and associated maps are on file
and may be seen at the Commission's Document Control
Center, Floor B1, Jefferson Building, Bank and
Governor Streets, Richmond, Virginia. This
application may also be reviewed at the following
offices of The Potomac Edison Company.
U.S. Rt . 11, South
Kernstown, Virginia
The Potomac Edison Company
Downsville Pike
Hagerstown, MD
The Commission has assigned this matter Case
No. and has scheduled a hearing at
10:00 a.m. on February 3, 1986, in the Commission's
Courtroom, 13th Floor, Jefferson Building, Bank and
Governor Streets, Richmond, Virginia. This hearing
will be an informal hearing only, unless a formal
hearing is requested.
Any interested person who objects to approval
of the application shall file his or her objection
in -writing with the Clerk of the Commission on or
before December 1, 1985.
Any interested person desiring a formal hearing
in this matter shall file a request for a hearing
with the Clerk of the Commission in writing on or
before December 1, 1985. If no request for a formal
hearing is received, an informal hearing only will
be held.
If a formal hearing is held, the following
schedule will be in effect:
(1) On or before December 1, 1985, any
interested person desiring to participate as a
Protestant, as defined in SCC Rule 4:6, to present
evidence and cross-examine witnesses, shall file an
original and fifteen copies of a Notice of Protest
pursuant to SCC Rule 5 : 16 (a ) with the Clerk of the
Commission. A copy of such Notice of Protest shall
be served upon counsel for the Company, Marleen L.
Brooks, The Potomac Edison Company, Downsville Pike,
Hagerstown, Maryland 21740.
- 6 - 0
(2) A copy of the Company's prefiled testimony
will be available for public inspection on or before
January 6, 1986 at the locations where the
application may be seen.
(3) On or before January 23, 1986, each
Protestant shall file an original and fifteen copies
each of a Protest (SCC Rule 5:16(b)) and of the
prepared testimony and exhibits which the Protestant
intends to present at the hearing. A copy of such
Protest, testimony and exhibits shall be served upon
Company counsel and upon other Protestants. The
Company's rebuttal testimony will be filed on or
before January 30, 1986.
Any person desiring to make a statement at the
hearing (if formal hearing is held), either for or
against the application, need only appear in the
Commission's Courtroom at 9:45 a.m. on the day of
the hearing and identify himself or herself to the
Commission's Bailiff as a public witness.
Within five days of receipt of any Notice of
Protest, the Company will serve upon the
Protestant a copy of all materials now or hereafter
filed with the Commission.
Written comments to the Commission regarding
this matter should refer to Case No.
and should be directed to William C. Young, Clerk,
SCC Document Control Center, P.O. Box 2118,
Richmond, Virginia 23216.
THE POTOMAC EDISON COMPANY
(7) That the Company forthwith cause a copy of this order to be
served upon each governmental official to which the Company sent a copy
of its application herein. Service shall be made by personal delivery at
the customary place of business or residence of the person served, or
shall be sent by certified mail, return receipt requested;
(8) That on or before January 6, 1986, the Company provide proof
of the notice and service prescribed herein; and
(9) That attested copies hereof be mailed to Marleen L. Brooks,
The Potomac Edison Company, Downsville Pike, Hagerstown, Maryland 21740;
9
- 7 -
to Anthony Gambardella, Esquire, Assistant Attorney General, 101 North
8th Street, 5th Floor, Richmond, Virginia 23219; and to the Commission's
Divisions of Energy Regulation.
VA1-1/UTIL/FAC/ACT
•
Map
Identification
No.
2
3
n
5
6
7
8
County
Identification
No.
34-80
34-75
34-1 38
34-84
34-141
34-65
34-47
34-44
Local Name
Indian Spring
Stickley
Vaucluse
Pleasant Green
Waveland
Zea House
Aunt Mary Smith's
Pine Top
Location of Historic
Site in Reference to
Meadow Brook Substation
2,600 feet southeast
1,200 feet south
3,200 feet north
8,300 feet north
10,400 feet north
9,300 feet northeast
10,400 feet south-
east
10,500 feet south-
east
Description of Property
Plantation house, limestone rubble
masonry, 2 stories, gable roof,
interior -end chimneys, constructed
in late Eighteenth Century,
vernacular style.
Not available.
Brick farmhouse, flemish bond facade
with American bond rear and end
walls, two stories, shallow hipped
roof interior chimneys, constructed
mid -Nineteenth Century.
Farmhouse, limestone course rubble
masonry, two-story gable roof,
constructed Circa 1780, late
Georgian vernacular style.
Farmhouse, brick, American bond,
two-story with pedimented center
bay, shallow hipped roof with
balustrade, constructed Circa 1846.
Frame farmhouse, two-story, gable
roof with bracketed cornice,
interior chimneys, constructed
Circa 1850.
Farmhouse, log under siding, two-
story, gable roof, constructed
Circa 1830, vernacular style.
Not available.
Map
Identification
No.
9
• 10
11
12
13
County
Identification
No.
34-45
34-73
34-81
34-74
34-131
Local Name
Easter House
Ridings-McClunn
House
Nixon House
Cooley House
Kendrick House
Location of Historic
Site in Reference to
Meadow Brook Substation
10,500 feet southeast
10,500 feet south
9,300 feet southwest
10,100 feet southwest
9,200 feet west
Description of Property
Farmhouse, log under weatherboard,
two-story, gable roof, constructed
mid -Nineteenth Century, vernacular
style.
Brick farmhouse, five course
American bond, two story gable roof,
constructed Circa 1830.
Frame farmhouse, two-story, gable
roof, exterior -end chimney,
constructed mid -Nineteenth Century,
vernacular style.
Brick farmhouse, American bond,
two-story, shallow hipped roof with
bracketed cornice, constructed
Circa 1875, Italiante style.
Brick farmhouse, flemish bond facade
with five -course American bond,
rear and end walls, two story,
gable roof, constructed mid -
Nineteenth Century, vernacular style.
--A
irk L*'4
• •
'fhe Potomac Edison Company
LEGAL DEPARTMENT
Part of the Allegheny Power System
Downsville Pike, Hagerstown, MD 21740 (301) 790.3400
November 1, 1985
Q(-VC440110
�°�4�111 ' J�
Y
C,George W. Bryant, Jr,, ClerkVirginia State Corporation CommissionDocument Control Center
P.O. Box 2118 - Level B1 6 BLL.J
Richmond, VA 23216
RE: Application for Approval of
Meadow Brook Substation
Document Control No. 851010081
Dear Mr. Bryant:
Enclosed for inclusion in the above -captioned application is a copy of
a letter confirming the approval of the site plan for this project by the
Frederick County Planning Commission.
I
Ve v truly yours,
Mirleen L. Brooks
Attorney
MLA/ckb/VA1-1
Encl.
cc: Dept. of Highways & Transportation
Dept, of Conservation & Historic Resources
Council of the Environment
DeDt. of Conservation 6 Economic Development
Commonwealth Attorney, Frederick County
Chairman of the Board of Supervisors, Frederick County
Chairman of the Planning Commission, Frederick County
RECEIVEINCT Z 31985
Mr. Dan Spofford
The Potomac Edison Company
Downsville Pike
Hagerstown, Maryland 21740
Dear Mr. Spofford:
COUNTY of I' REDERICK
Department of Planning and Development
703/662-4532
October 22, 1985
This letter is to confirm the Planning Commission's action at
their meeting of October 16, 1985:
Approval of Site Plan #029-85 of Potomac Edison to construct an
electrical substation, west of US Route 11 along the south side of
State Route 638, in the Opequon Magisterial District.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact this
office.
Sin e1y,
V
J hn R. Riley, Jr.
County Administrator
JRR/dkg
9 Court 1,duare - P.O. Box 601 - Winchester, Virginia - 21.l,OI
too" kj I IL NT
• ( .r
I ,
t w
, t
EINAU SITE PEA
!
,• • �:
A.1APPROVEo Y : �-
7
404,-384PROPERTY PLAN
722 GRAgING FLAN
0AAWN 9-12--95
,ALLEGHENY, POWER SERVICE FOR �.
''►•..
T . ANTFI
,
� THE POTO1•1AC ED I SON C u!P �' �••
.,,
Chit
0616 A.►p
.
: 7 -..MEADOW-BROOK SUBSTAT I0N''�
soulca
A.FIEI SSNE�i
1
P •S,I TE f,
LAN t
f,(tf of f?IcK r0. A VA.
•• Pit 01'ID •-
AI, 7HUGi1 Alto" A,1 h•nv.hG hli1M►I•
'
eA►f /yf'r'
3581 70 1" -;,00zi08-6 33 •I
0 0
EXHIBIT B
NECESSITY FOR
MEADOW BROOK 500-138 KV SUBSTATION
The proposed Meadow Brook Substation will serve the Winchester and
Front Royal, Virginia areas which are two of the major load centers of
The Potomac Edison Company. The station will be situated in the southern
part of Frederick County, Virginia. The area to be served by Meadow
Brook is entirely within Virginia with the exception of some small loads
in eastern West Virginia which are served through facilities located in
Virginia. The station will also provide a backup supply to loads in West
Virginia when normal supplies are interrupted.
The area is presently supplied by three 138 kV transmission lines
from the north. One from the Ridgeley Substation near Cumberland,
Maryland; the second from the Millville Substation just east of Charles
Town, West Virginia; and the third from the Stonewall Substation which is
located near the West Virginia border northeast of Winchester. These
three lines supply the Winchester and Front Royal areas as well as the
Shenandoah Valley area south to Elkton and Sperryville, Virginia.
When the total load in these areas exceeds 300 MW, loss of one of
the three 138 kV supply lines will result in thermal overloads on the
remaining two lines and cause the voltages to drop to unacceptable
levels. Assuming normal winter weather conditions, the 300 MW load level
is projected to occur in 1987. (During abnormally severe weather
conditions in January, 1985, the area load actually reached the 300 MW
level for a brief period.) After 1987, the winter peak load during
normal weather conditions is expected to regularly exceed the 300 MW
level. The construction of Meadow Brook Substation will avoid the above
overloading and voltage conditions.
Meadow Brook will be connected to the Mt. Storm -Morrisville 500 kV
line and will include one 350 MVA, 500-138 kV, three-phase power
transformer which will serve as the bulk power supply source to the area.
Power generated on the 500 kV bulk power system will be transformed at
the substation and delivered into the 138 kV area transmission supply
system, initially over five 138 kV lines, two existing and three to be
constructed. The existing line to Ridgely Substation has taps going to
the Strasburg and Bartonville Substations. The second existing line
terminates at Riverton Substation and will have a tap to the Bartonville
Substation. A double -circuit line to be built will terminate at the
Double Toll Gate Substation, and a second circuit will be added to the
Ridgely line to provide a separate feed to the Strasburg substation.
Meadow Brook will be designed for the potential future addition of three
500-138 kV transformers, two 500 kV lines, and five 138 kV lines, should
load growth require them.
The station will assure an economical and reliable power supply to
the Winchester and Front Royal, Virginia areas. The following system and
area benefits will be provided by the Meadow Brook 500-138 kV Substation
project:
Reduce line loadings into the area on existing lines.
Increase voltage levels and maintain acceptable levels during
contingencies.
Reduce power losses.
Provide backup to the Dominion Resources (Vepco) Edinburg
Substation by way of the Strasburg -Edinburg 138-115 kV
interconnection.
Provide backup for the loss of transformation at the Bedington
500-138 kV Substation located near Martinsburg, West
Virginia.
EXHIBIT C
MEADOW BROOK SUBSTATION SITING CONSIDERATIONS
Meadow Brook Substation is a 500-138 kV stepdown substation. It
will have the potential for four 500 kV line terminals, four 500/138 kV
transformers and ten 138 kV line terminals. A substation of this size
requires a graded area of approximately 600,000 square feet, with a
graded slope of 1 to 3%.
Potomac Edison purchased a site from John W. Henry (140.5 acres)
and William M. Stickley (43.5 acres) for the construction of Meadow Brook
Substation in 1978. The location of this site is ideal for a number of
reasons. The site is in the area determined to be the electrical load
center of the region. The site complies with the Federal Power
Commission Guideline, Paragraph 1, in that the site encompasses existing
transmission line corridors. One of these is a 200' wide 500 kV
transmission corridor between VEPCO's Mt. Storm and Morrisville
Substations. The other is a 100' wide 138 kV corridor between Potomac
Edison's Riverton and Ridgeley Substations. These two line corridors
overlap by 25'. Therefore, Meadow Brook Substation would encompass an
existing transmission corridor 275' wide. This is approximately one
third of the total area required for the substation. Other reasons why
the site is attractive are: 1. There is enough property to accommodate
any line structures that may be needed. 2. The site is adjacent to the
Baltimore and Ohio Railroad. This will enable a rail siding to be built
into the substation for delivery of heavy equipment, the largest of which
is a power transformer shipped on a railroad car with a combined weight
of approximately 700,000 lbs. 3. The site has an existing 12 kV
distribution line on the property which will be used for station service
facilities. 4. The site has good access to U.S. Route 11 via Virginia
EXHIBIT C
- Page 2 -
State Road #638 and is northwest of U.S. Route 11 and Interstate 81.
5. Most of the 138 kV lines exit the substation in a northwest or
northeast direction. 6. Due to contours, extensive limestone
outcroppings, and maximum allowable railroad grade, areas to the west of
Vaucluse were determined to be unsuitable.
The Company will provide screening of the substation from
vehicular traffic on U.S. Route 11 in the area of the existing 500 Kv
line crossing. Natural screening from the rolling terrain and vegetation
reduces the visual impact from other directions.
Meadow Brook Substation
Soil Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan
The soils involved in the project of constructing Meadow Brook
Substation are of the Carbo and Timberville series. The Carbo series,
with a K value of 0.37, is at the bottom range of high erodibility, while
the Timberville series, with K values ranging from 0.24 to 0.32, is
classified as having a medium erosion characteristic. The average drainage
slopes for the area of construction are less than 2%.
All cut and fill slopes, as a general standard, are constructed
to a 2:1 slope and are planted with crown vetch in accordance with the
attached specifications. The yard area will be graded to a maximum slope
of 1.5%, and will be covered with crushed aggregate in accordance with the
attached Specification MS 2400-1. Percolation is not stopped. The stone
acts as an energy dissipater and runoff is retarded.
Where required, ditch or culvert outflows will be rip rapped.
Filter fence and sediment basin will be installed as indicated on the
attached Engineering Drawing No. 408-722.
All seeding will be accomplished as stated in the General Criteria
of the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook which states that crown
vetch seeding periods are March 15 to May 1 and August 15 to October 1.
Construction is expected to start during April 1986 when timber
and other vegetation will be removed and grading will be started in the
yard area. Fencing will be installed during October 1986, and seeding will
be done during the interim period. The placement of stone aggregate will
also be started during the interim period and extend beyond the completion
of the fence. The railroad siding will be started during September 1986
and all work affecting soil erosion and its control should be completed by
December 1986.
All erosion and sediment control measures shall be checked
continuously and especially after each significant storm to locate damages
and conduct maintenance operations.
Other work such as the construction of the control building,
structures, and the installation of control cables, switches, breakers, and
transformers will be performed into the fall of 1987. In-service date is
projected to be December 1987 (see attached Exhibit A).
No unusual soil erosion problems are expected; however, should a
difficult soil situation occur, Mr. Mark R. Davis, District Conservationist,
SCS-USDA, may be contacted for assistance by calling (703) 662-3312.
Approved by: J/r
P. L. Bros e
Transmission Lines Xngineer
J. Frank Wag er
Transmission F� rester
October 2, 1985
MS 2400-1-R3
Page 1 of 6
ALLEGHENY POWER SYSTEM
SPECIFICATIONS FOR SUBSTATION AND ACCESS ROAD GRADING.
1.00 STATEMENT OF WORK
1.01 Contractor shall furnish all plant, materials, labor, and equipment
required for completing the grading work, roadway, and related
drainage facilities as shown on the contract drawings. Volumes
of fill and excavation are calculated as "solid volumes." All
work shall be conducted in strict accordance with these specifi-
cations and attached contract drawings.
2.00 GENERAL PROVISIONS
2.01 Classification
2.01.1 Fill - Approved fill material shall be considered clean soil,
free of large stone, rock, and organic matter. The maximum
dimension of any rock or stone, as placed, shall not exceed
a two and one-half (2-1/2) foot vertical dimension or not
exceed one fourth (1/4) the depth of fill at its point of
placement. Fragments or solid rocks more than six (6) inches
in maximum dimensions are not permitted in the upper two (2)
feet of fill. All fill shall be free of frost. Fill material
shall not be placed on frozen ground. If rock is used, it
shall be placed at the toe of the fill but shall not conflict
with other provisions provided for in this specification.
Before placing the fill, all topsoil and/or organic matter
shall be removed.
2.01.2 Excavation - Excavation will not be classified and will include
all materials encountered, regardless of nature.
2.02 Compaction - The maximum layer of fill shall not exceed nine (9)
inches. A minimum of three (3) passes with either a smooth
wheel roller of minimum ten ton capacity or a sheepsfoot roller
shall be used depending on the nature of soil encountered. The
sheepsfoot roller shall have a minimum bulb pressure per knob
of 200 pounds per square inch. The area of the knobs shall be
at least five (5) percent of the total peripheral area of the
drum, using the diameter measured to the faces of the knobs.
Fills shall be compacted to ninety-five (95) percent of Standard
Proctor Density. Moisture shall be controlled if necessary to
+ two (2) percent of optimum. The subgrade in both cut and
fill sections shall be compacted to ninety-five (95) percent of
Standard Proctor Density and shaped to conform to the typical
sections prior to placing stone. The Contractor shall provide
the Owner with access and necessary assistance to perform in -
place density tests of the compacted fill.
' 4 •
MS 2400-1-R3
Page 3 of 6
2.07.2 Continued - The material used for blending must meet the quality
requirements of the crusher -run stone, crusher -run gravel or
crusher -run slag as herein prescribed and must be proportioned
and uniformly blended with the crusher -run stone, crusher -run
gravel or crusher -run slag to conform to the gradation require-
ments of this item. Blending can be performed by the method of
pug mill operation, but not by road mixing. When the Contractor
elects to blend material, the gradation for the middle of the
band shall be attempted for the finished product. Each type of
crusher -run aggregate, whether used alone or in combination,
shall have a maximum Los Angeles Abrasion Loss of sixty-five
(65). The plasticity index of the material passing the No. 40
mesh sieve, on each type of aggregate used, shall not be greater
than six (6) reported to the nearest whole number and the liquid
limit of the material passing the No. 40 mesh sieve, on each
type of aggregate used, shall not be greater than twenty-five
(25) reported to the nearest whole number. The methods of tests
to be utilized in determining the above requirements shall be
as follows:
Type of Test Test Method
Sieve Analysis AASHO - T-27
Los Angeles Abrasion Loss AASHO - T-96
Liquid Limit AASHO - T-89
Plastic Limit AASHO - T-90
Plasticity.Index AASHO - T-91
2.07.3 Connection of Roadway to Main Road - The roadway shall join the
main road with a uniform transition from one pavement to the
other. When the roadway crosses a drainage ditch of the main
road, the roadway shall be depressed or a corrugated drain
pipe shall be installed to insure unobstructed flow in the
drainage ditch. The type of connection to the main road shall
be as specified and approved by the municipal authority having
jurisdiction over the main road.
2.07.4 Construction Equipment - Equipment for construction shall be
approved by the Owner's representative prior to construction
operations under this section. Any machine, combination of
machines or equipment which will handle the material without
undue segregation and produce the completed surface course
meeting these specifications for handling, spreading, moistening,
mixing, and compacting may be used on approval. If power graders
are used for spreading, the material shall be placed in windrows,
uniformly and thoroughly mixed, prior to final spreading and
compaction. Roller and method of rolling shall be such that
maximum density is obtained. After final compaction, the thick-
ness of the compacted stone shall be checked at random locations
by the Contractor in company with the Owner's representative.
A minimum of five (5) checks will be made. In the event that
deficiencies are found, additional checks shall be made to
define the limits of the deficient areas. Any deficiency in
excess of one-half (1/2) inch shall be corrected.
MS 2400-1-R3
Page 5 of 6
Surface Stone for Substations
The surface shall consist of a minimum of three (3) inches of
one and one-half (1 1/2) inch maximum size limestone or sand-
stone. All material shall be approved by the Owner prior to
use. All materials shall conform to the following gradation
limits:
Square Sieve Size
1 1/2 inches
1 inch
1/2 inch
No. 4
No. 8
Total Percent Passin
All other requirements shall be as stated in Section 2.07.2.
The surface stone shall be placed after all subgrade work,
foundations, duct work, etc. have been completed.
Blasting for Excavation - The blasting for excavation will be
permitted only by approval of the Owner's inspector and in
accordance with the applicable laws and regulations for storage,
handling, and use of explosives. Blasting shall be controlled
so as not to disturb the surrounding soil. The Owner will not
assume any liability at all for any damages resulting from
blasting operations.
Protection of Existing Facilities - Adjoining property structures,
public sidewalks, curbs, pavements, and the property of public
utilities which may be affected by the excavation must be main-
tained and restored by the Contractor.
Cleaning Up - The Contractor shall remove from the Owner's property
and from adjoining public and private property, all temporary
structures, rubbish, and waste materials resulting from his
operations.
Safety - it shall be the responsibility of the Contractor to
comply with all local and state building and safety requirements
pertaining to excavation operations.
Engineering - The following engineering services will be provided
by the Owner or it shall be stated otherwise in an attached addendum.
Original and final cross sections will be taken for determination
of the volumes placed or removed.
- .. ., 1 , 0
MS 2400-5
Page 1 of 1
ALLEGHENY POWER SYSTEM
EROSION CONTROL AND LANDSCAPING
APPLICATION TABLE
Material Per Acre
Ground Limestone
2,000
lbs.
Fertilizer 8-16-16
500
lbs.
Fertilizer 5-10-10
800
lbs.
Top Soil - 2" Gradual Slopes
265 cu.
yds.
Top Soil - 4" Steep Slopes
525 cu.
yds.
Grass - Berm Mix (See Below)
100
lbs.
Grass - Slope Mix (See Below)
100
lbs.
Crown Vetch
10
lbs.
Seed Formulas
Per 1,000 Square Feet
50 lbs.
12 lbs.
18 lbs.
6 cu. yds.
12 cu. yds.
2-1/2 lbs.
2-1/2 lbs.
1/4 lb.
Crown Vetch
Crown Vetch - Scarified . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 parts
Ryegrass - Domestic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 parts
100 parts
Berm Mix
Kentucky #31 Fescue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 parts
Pennlawn Fescue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 parts
Kentucky Blue Grass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 parts
Merion Blue Grass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 parts
100 parts
Slope Mix
Fescue - Kentucky #31. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 parts
Fescue - Red . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 parts
Ryegrass - Domestic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 parts
100 parts
Prepared By: J. F. Wagner
Date: ,June 22, 1973
Approved By: -Fk
T. L. Duff
Manager, Lines Engineering
0. L. Wallis
Director, Transmission Eng.
' MS 2400-6-Rl
Page 1 of 2
ALLEGHENY POWER SYSTEM .
EROSION CONTROL AND LANDSCAPING
CROWN VETCH SEEDING
Introduction - With the exception of certain minimum requirements described
in following paragraphs, the establishment of a stand of crown vetch shall
be done by the Contractor in such a manner that it will meet the guarantee
set forth in this specification. All slopes greater than 2:1 and, in some
(A) cases, slopes less than 2:1 should be seeded with crown vetch.
Grading - Areas where crown vetch is to be established shall be graded to
smooth contours. Any irregularities due to erosion or the Contractor's
operations shall be corrected before seeding.
If there are several areas in a project to be seeded to crown vetch, all
adjoining areas shall be graded so that the areas may be smoothly joined
whenever possible.
Drainage - Banks or other areas which are being graded preparatory to
seeding with crown vetch shall be graded in such a manner that there is
adequate and satisfactory drainage from the area.
Ground Preparation - If the area is covered with weeds, the weeds shall
be mowed to not more than 3" from ground level or they shall be sprayed
when specified in the Details of Work. Weed spraying shall be in accordance
with spray specifications. If weeds are mowed, they shall be removed from
the area. If weeds are sprayed, they shall be raked from the area as
completely as possible.
All debris and unsuitable material such as stones larger than 3" in any
direction shall be removed and disposed of.
Seed - When crown vetch seeding is specified, the mixture shall be as
follows:
Crown Vetch, Scarified (var. Penngift) -- 45 parts
Ryegrass, Domestic -- 55 parts
100 parts
Inoculant - All crown vetch seed must be inoculated prior to seeding.
Limestone - Ground limestone shall be applied at the following rate:
Ground Limestone - 2 tons/acre - 100#/1,000 square feet
Fertilizer - A low nitrogen fertilizer shall be used. Typical recommended
fertilizers and their application rates are:
8-16-16 Fertilizer - 500#/acre - 12#/1,000 square feet
OR
5-10-10 Fertilizer - 800#/acre - 18#/1,000 square feet
• MS 2400-6-Rl
Page 2 of 2
Fertilizer and Limestone Application - Both fertilizer and ground limestone
shall be distributed uniformly over the area and incorporated into the soil
to a depth of 2" by raking, discing, harrowing, or by other approved methods.
Seeding - Not less than 1/2 pound per 1,000 square feet of the specified
crown vetch formula shall be applied.
Mulch - Two types of mulch are acceptable:
Turf Fiber (paper mulch), if used, shall be applied in accordance with
manufacturer's instructions.
Wheat or Oats Straw or Crown Vetch Hay shall be applied in such quantities
and anchored in such a manner that the resulting stand of crown vetch will
meet the requirements of crown vetch which are stipulated in the guarantee.
Guarantee - Because of the slow rate of germination of crown vetch, a satis-
factory stand may not develop for at least one year. However, plants of
small size should be present after the first growing season.
After one year from the date the area is seeded to crown vetch, the Contractor
guarantees that there will not be less than two crown vetch plants per any
random square yard.
If, before a satisfactory stand of crown vetch is established, the surface
has become gullied or otherwise damaged, the affected areas shall be repaired,
relimed, refertilized, and reseeded as originally specified at no expense to
the Company.
Instead of reseeding, the Contractor may plant crown vetch crowns.
Prepared by: J. F. Wagner
Date: June 22, 1973
Rev. 1: May 27, 1983
Approved by:
. � �_ Q�—
H. E. Hutchinson
Manager, Lines Engineering
W. A. Richter
Director, Transmission Engineering
MS 2400-7-R1
Page I of 3
ALLEGHENY POWER SYSTEM
EROSION CONTROL AND LANDSCAPING
BERM AND SLOPE TYPE SEEDING
Introduction - With the exception of certain minimum requirements described
in following paragraphs, the establishment of a stand of berm type grasses
or slope type grasses is done by the Contractor in such a manner that it
will meet the guarantee set forth in this specification.
Berm type grasses may normally be used on flat or relatively flat areas.
Slope type grasses may be used on moderate slopes such as 4:1 to about 2:1.
In every case, the type of seeding will be in accordance with the Details
of Work.
Grading - Areas where berm type grass is to be established shall be graded
to smooth contours. Any irregularities due to erosion or the Contractor's
operations shall be corrected before seeding.
If there are several areas in a project, all shall be graded so that the
areas may be smoothly joined whenever possible.
Drainage - Banks or other areas which are being graded preparatory to
seeding shall be graded to afford adequate and satisfactory drainage from
the area.
Ground Preparation - If the area is covered with weeds, the weeds shall be
mowed not more than 3" from ground level or they shall be sprayed when
specified in accordance with spray specifications.
If weeds are mowed, they shall be removed from the area.
All debris and unsuitable materials such as stones larger than 2" in any
direction shall be removed and disposed of.
Seed - When berm type seeding is specified, seed mixture shall be as
follows:
Fescue, Kentucky 31 -- 50 parts
Fescue, Pennlawn -- 20 parts
Bluegrass, Kentucky -- 20 parts
Bluegrass, Merion -- 10 parts
When slope type seeding is specified, seed mixture shall be as follows:
Fescue, Kentucky 31 -- 60 parts
Fescue, Red -- 20 parts
Ryegrass, Domestic -- 20 parts
Total 100 parts
MS 2400-7-R1
Page 2 of 3
Limestone - Ground limestone shall be applied at the following rate:
Ground limestone - 2 tons/acre - 100#/1,000 square feet
Fertilizer - A low nitrogen NPK fertilizer shall be used. Typical recom-
mended fertilizers and their application rates are:
8-16-16 Fertilizer - 500#/acre - 12#/1,000'square feet
OR
5-10-10 Fertilizer - 800#/acre - 18#/1,000 square feet
Fertilizer and Limestone Application - Both fertilizer and ground limestone
shall be distributed uniformly over the area and incorporated into the soil
to a depth of 2" by raking, discing, harrowing, or by other approved methods.
Seeding - Not less than 21� lbs. per 1,000 square feet of the specified grass
seed formula shall be applied. (A nurse crop of oats, rye, or barley may
be sown when slope type seeding is done at a rate of 1/2 of a bushel per
acre.)
Mulch - Two types of mulch are acceptable:
Turf Fiber (paper mulch), if used, shall be applied in accordance with
manufacturer's instructions.
Wheat or Oats Straw or Timothy Hay shall be applied in such quantities
and anchored in such a manner that the resulting turf will meet the require-
ments for turf which are stipulated in the guarantee.
(D) Guarantee
Berm Type Seeding - The Contractor shall guarantee that the seeded area
will become a satisfactory turf. Maintenance shall begin immediately after
the area is seeded and shall continue until a satisfactory turf is
established.
If, before a satisfactory turf is established, the surface has become
gullied or otherwise damaged, the affected areas shall be repaired, relimed,
or refertilized, and reseeded as originally specified at no expense to the
Company.
A satisfactory turf shall be a close weed free stand of specified grasses
of good color and vigor.
Slope Type Seeding - The Contractor shall guarantee that the seeded
area will have a satisfactory stand of specified grasses after one full
growing season.
MS 2400-7-Rl
Page 3 of 3
If, before a satisfactory stand of grass is established, the surface has
become gullied or otherwise damaged, the affected areas shall be repaired,
relimed, refertilized, and reseeded as originally specified at no expense
to the Company.
Prepared by: J. F. Wagner
Date: June 22, 1973
Rev. 1: May 27, 1983
Approved b : N �- �1
PP Y
ZL=====-
H. E. Hutchinson
Manager, Lines Engineering
W. A. Richter
Director, Transmission Engineering
0
Meadow Brook Substation
Runoff Calculations for Stormwater Management
Method: Peak Discharge Method
Source: 1. SCS Technical Release No. 55
Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds
2. Ch. 5 & 6, Virginia Erosion and Sediment
Control Handbook
Design Storm: Type II 24 hour; Antecedent Moisture Condition II;
2-year Frequency
Reference Drawing: Grading/Erosion'Plan 408-722
Drainage Area I - Draining into Existing Pond
Calculate peak runoff rate for site before and after development.
Data: 21 total acres
Hydrologic Soil Group C ( Carbo)
2% Average Watershed Slope
1900 ft. - Hydraulic Length
1. Calculate Curve Number (weighted average)
Land Use (Acres) Percent Curve Number
Before Wooded (13.2) 63 70
Pasture ( 7.8) 27 74
Weighted CN = 7148 = 71.48, Use 72
I DU
Land Use (Acres) Percent
After Wooded (9.2) 44
Good Pasture (3.6) 17
Open Area, (8.2) 39
1% Slope,
Loose Gravel
Surface
Curve Number
70
74
80
Weighted CN = 7458 = 74.58, Use 75
-1FO-9
Product
4410
2738
148
Product
3080
1258
3120
7Tb$
- 2 -
2. Calculate Runoff Volume (Q) (2-year storm)
Rainfall = 3.0 in. (National Weather Service) (Plate 5-9, Ref. 2)
Before S = 1000 - 10 = 3.9
3
Q = [3.0-0.2 (3.9)]2 = 0.80 inches
+ ,
After S = 1000 - 10 = 3.33
Q = [3.0-0.2 (3.33)]2= 0.96 inches
3.0+3.3
3. Calculate Peak Runoff Rate
Before Account for Watershed Shape
Equivalent Drainage Area = 42 acres (Plate 5-8, Ref. 2)
Equivalent Peak Rate = 18 cfs/in. (Plate 5-13, Ref. 2)
Actual Peak Rate = 18 x 21 = 9 cfs/in.
4-2
Correct for 2% slope:
9 cfs/in x 1.24 = 11.16 cfs/in. (Table 5-4, Ref. 2)
Final Peak Rate (Before)
11.16 cfs/in x 0.80 in. = 8.93 ft.3/sec.
After Account for Watershed Shape
Equivalent Drainage Area = 42 acres
Equivalent Peak Rate = 19 cfs/in.
Actual Peak Rate = 19 x 21 = 9.5 cfs/in.
72
Correct for 2% slope:
9 cfs/in x 1.24 = 11.78 cfs/in.
Correct for 39% open area
11.78 cfs/in x 1.24 = 14.61 cfs/in. (Plate 5-16, Ref. 2)
Final Peak Rate (After)
14.61 cfs/in x 0.96 lin = 14.02 ft.3/ sec.
I*
- 3 -
Drainage Area II - Draining to the Southeast Along the Railroad Siding
Calculate peak runoff rate for site before and after development.
Data: 13 total acres
Hydrologic Soil Group C (Carbo)
2% Average Watershed Slope
1900 ft. - Hydraulic Length
1. Calculate Curve Number
Land Use Acres) Percent
Before Good Pasture (8.6) 66
Wooded (4.4) 34
Curve Number
74
70
Weighted CN = 7264 = 72.64, Use 73
100
After Good Pasture (7.6) 58 74
Open Area, (5.4) 41 80
1% Slope,
Loose Gravel
Surface
Weighted CN = 7572 = 75.72, Use 76
100
Product
4884
2380
7-2-6-T
4292
3280
5 2
2. Calculate Runoff Volume (Q) (2-year storm)
Rainfall = 3.0 in. (National Weather Service) (Plate 5-9, Ref. 2)
Before S = 1000 - 10 = 3.70
—7 T
Q = [3.0-0.2 (3.70)]2 = 0.86 inches
+ .
After S = 1000 - 10 = 3.16
Q = [3.0-0.2 (3.16)]2 = 1.01 inches
+ .
- 4 -
3. Calculate Peak Runoff Rate
Before Account for Watershed Shape
Equivalent Drainage Area = 42 acres (Plate 5-8, Ref. 2)
Equivalent Peak Rate = 18.5 cfs/in. (Plate 5-13, Ref. 2)
Actual Peak Rate = 18.5 cfs/in x 13 = 5.73 cfs/in.
4-2
Correct for 2% slope:
5.73 cfs/in x 1.24 = 7.1 cfs/in (Table 5-4, Ref. 2)
Final Peak Rate (Before)
7.1 cfs/in x 0.86 in = 6.11 ft.3/sec.
After Account for Watershed Shape
Equivalent Drainage Area = 42 acres
Equivalent Peak Rate = 19.2 cfs/in.
Actual Peak Rate = 19.2 cfs/in x 13 = 5.94 cfs/in.
T2
Correct for 2% slope:
5.94 cfs/in x 1.24 = 7.37 cfs/in.
Correct for 41% open area
7.37 cfs/in x 1.22 = 8.99 cfs/in. (Plate 5-16, Ref. 2)
Final Peak Rate (After)
8.99 cfs/in x 1.01 = 9.08 ft.3/sec.
Drainage Area III - Northeast Corner of the Substation
Calculate peak runoff rate for site before and after development.
Data: 2 total acres
Hydrologic Soil Group C (Carbo)
4% Average Watershed Slope
250 ft. - Hydraulic Length
1. Calculate Curve Number
Land Use (Acres) Percent Curve Number Product
Before Wooded
(2) 100
Weighted CN = 7000 = 70
100
After Open Area, (2) 100 80
1% Slope, Loose
Gravel Surface
Weighted CN = 8000 = 80
f06
70 7000
011111
- 5 -
2. Calculate Runoff Volume (Q) (2-year storm)
Rainfall = 3.0 in. (National Weather Service) (Plate 5-9, Ref. 2)
Before S = 1000 - 10 = 4.26
_7u—
Q = [3.0-0.2 (4.26)]2 = 0.72 inches
+ .
After S = 1000 - 10 = 2.5
3
Q = [3.0-0.2 (2.5)]2 = 1.25 inches
3.0+0. 2.S)
3. Calculate Peak Runoff Rate
Before Account for Watershed Shape
Equivalent Drainage Area = 10-acres (Plate 5-8, Ref. 2)
Equivalent Peak Rate 10 cfs/in. (Plate 5-14, Ref. 2)
Actual Peak Rate = 10 cfs/in x 2 = 2 cfs/in.
3
Correct for 40% slope:
2 cfs/in x 1.00 = 2 cfs/in
Final Peak Rate (Before)
3
2 cfs/in x 0.72 in = 1.44 ft./sec.
After Account for Watershed Shape
Equivalent Drainage Area = 10-acres
Equivalent Peak Rate 8.5 cfs/in. (Plate 5-13, Ref. 2)
Actual Peak Rate = 8.5 cfs/in x2 = 1.7 cfs/in.
TU
Correct for 1% slope:
1.7 cfs/in x 1.00 = 1.7 cfs/in.
Correct for 100% open area
1.7 cfs/in x 1.7 = 2.89 cfs/in.
Final Peak Rate (After)
3
2.89 cfs/in x 1.25 = 3.61 ft./sec.
- 6 -
Totals
Peak rate of runoff from the developed portion of the site:
Before After
Area I 8.93 ft. 3/sec. 14.02 ft. 3/sec.
Area II 6.11 ft. 3/sec. 9.08 ft. 3/sec.
Area III 1.44 ft. /sec. 3.61 ft. /sec.
Conclusions
There is a net increase in the peak runoff rate after development.
Stormwater Detention
Drainage Area I
Step 1 - Determine allowable release rate QA and select the appropriate
graph.
The peak discharge method was used to calculate the pre -development
and post -development peak flow rates and runoff depths for a 2-year
storm. The results were as follows:
Pre -development
Q = 8.93 cfs
V = .8 inch
r
Post -development
Q = 14.02 cfs
V = .96 inches
r
The allowable release rate (Qo) is therefore 8.93 cfs.
Q = 8.93 cfs = 272 CSM*
° acres)(I sq. mi.)
6 0 acres
*Since Qo is less than 300 CSM for pipe flow, Graph A (Plate 5-18)
may be used.
Step 2 - Determine required storage volume (Vs) in watershed inches.
Since Vr = .96 inches and Qo = 272 CSM, Vs can be read from Graph A
(Plate 5-18).
V = 0.2 inch
s
Step 3 - Transform watershed inches to acre-ft.'
V = .2 inch x 21 acres = 0.35 acre-ft. = 15,246 c.f.
s 12 inc hes ft.
Step 4 - The existing pond surface area is 20,400 S.F. at Elevation 754.5.
Therefore, the pond elevation will increase less than 9 inches
with a 2-year storm to about Elevation 755.2 which should remain
within the banks of the pond. As an additional measure, install
Virginia Standard 1.38 CD, check dam, to Elevation 757in the
outlet swale of this pond.
Runoff Calculations for Sediment Basin Design
Drainage Area II - Draining to the Southeast Along the Railroad Siding
Calculate peak runoff rate for site during construction.
13 acres
Hydrologic Soil Group C
2% Average Watershed Slope
1900 ft. - Hydraulic Length
Calculate Curve Number (during construction)
1 _--1 11-- I11,..,__\ fll,..._-. 4- ('.,—. Alum hor
Good Pasture (7.6)
Bare Soil (5.4)
Weighted CN = 7900 = 79
TO UO
Calculate Runoff Volume (Q) (10-year storm)
Rainfall = 5 in. (National Weather Service) (Plate 5-10, Ref. 2)
During Construction
S = 1000 - 10 = 2.66
T9—
Q = [5-0.2 (2.66)]2 = 2.8 inches
5+U.8 kZ.bb)
o 1
0 •
i
3. Calculate Peak Runoff Rate
During Construction
Account for Watershed Shape
Equivalent Drainage Area = 42 acres (Plate 5-8, Ref. 2)
Equivalent Peak Rate = 20 cfs/in. (Plate 5-13, Ref. 2)
Actual Peak Rate = 20 cfs/in x 13 = 6.19 cfs/in.
47
Correct for 2% slope:
6.19 cfs/in x 1.24 = 7.68 cfs/in.
Final Peak Rate (During Construction)
3
7.68 cfs/in x 2.8 in = 21.50 ft./sec.
Stormwater Detention
Drainaqe Area II
Step 1 - Determine allowable release rate Q and select the appropriate
graph.
The peak discharge method was used to calculate the pre -development
and post -development peak flow rates and runoff depths for a 2-year
storm. The results were as follows:
Pre -development
Q = 6.11 cfs
Vr= .86 inch
Post -development
Q = 9.08 cfs
V C 1.01 inches
The allowable release rate (Qo) is therefore 6.11 cfs.
Qo = 6.11 cfs = 300.8 CSM*
(13 acres (sq. mi.
Wacres)
*Since Qo is at 300 CSM for pipe flow, Graph A (Plate 5-18)
may be used.
Step 2 - Determine required storage volume (V ) in watershed inches.
Since Vr = 1.01 inches and Qo = 300.8 CSM, Vs can be read from
Graph A (Plate 5-18).
V = .2 inch
s
�Z
Step-3 - Transform watershed inches to acre-ft.
V = 0.2 inch x 13 acres = 0.22 acre-ft. = 9583 c.f.
s 12 inches/ft.
Step 4 - New detention pond along railroad siding at Station 3+00±.
Excavating the pond to Elevation 744 will provide in excess
of this storage below original groundline. Placing the pond
spillway at 746.5 will provide for a 10-year storm storage
capacity. Therefore, install Virginia Standard 1.26, SB,
temporary sediment basin, at R.R. Station 3+00± with a spillway
elevation at 746.5±.
- 10 -
Temporary Sediment Basin Design Data Sheet
Computed by: P. L. Broskey
Checked by:
Project: Meadow Brook Substation
Basin No. II Location: Frederick County, VA
Total Area draining to basin: 13 Acres
Date: 10-1-85
Date:
Basin Volume Design
1. Minimum required volume = 67 cu. yds. x 13 acres drainage = 871 cu. yds.
2. Volume of basin at Elevation 747.5 = 377 cu. yds.
3. Excavated 500 cu. yds to obtain required capacity. Total excavation is
1975 cu. yds.
Minimum volume before cleanout = 27 cu. yds. x 13 acres drainage = 351 cu. yds.
Elevation corresponding to scheduled time to clean out is 745.5.
Distance below top of riser is 1.0 ft.
Basin Shape
4. L/We = 3.93 Baffles needed? No X ; Yes Show location on site plan.
Design of Spillways
Runoff
5. Q10 = 21.50 cfs (see Chapter 5.)
Pipe Spillway (Qp)
6. There is no emergency spillway, then required Qp = Q1p = 21.5 cfs.
7. Riser: Diameter 30 inches; Height 2.5 ft.; h = 1.0 10.
8. H = 4.7 ft.; Barrel length = 70 ft.
9. Barrel: Diameter 30 inches
10. Trash Rack: Diameter 42 inches; A = 13 inches.
Design Elevations
11. Riser Crest = 746.5 Top of Dam = 749.5
Design High Water = 747.5
9
0
El. 747.5
!-�; n . 1 . C, J—/
30"
Sediment
Cleanout
P� p P 1 0
8' El,
'.in. 3.0'
—L 1
2
Riser ;,rest El . 7'
Dev,atering Outlet
�rn.Gn:nt oo El. 744. L—J 70 L.F., 30" CMP
Design Elevations Without Emergency SpiIlv.,ay
MEADOW BROOK SUBSTATION
Drainage Area II
Virginia Standard 1.26
Sediment Basin
7no 1�
.5
,El. 745.5
El. 742.8
- 12 -
Design of Parabolic Grass -Lined Channels
Drainage Area II
The channel must be designed for capacity and erosion resistance. Capacity
will be a minimum when the grass is long and unmowed. This condition
corresponds to V2 in Table 1.35b. Erosion will be most likely to occur when
the grass is short. This condition will correspond to V1 in Table 1.35b.
A design based upon Table 1.35b will result in a channel which will have
adequate capacity when the vegetation in the channel is long and thick,
which will remain stable when the vegetation is short or recently moved,
and which will have adequate freeboard for the design flow.
Use the following procedure to design a grass -lined parabolic channel based
upon Table 1.35b:
1. Determine the required channel capacity, Q. (Peak rate of runoff from
the selected design storm.)
2. Select an appropriate grass lining and note the permissible velocity
(Vl) from Table 1.35a.
3. Choose the appropriate sheet of Table 1.35b for the channel slope. Using
the permissible velocity (VI) and the required capacity (Q), read the top
width (T) and the depth (D) for the correct parabolic section.
Design a parabolic waterway to be lined with grass -legume mixture which will
carry 21.5 cfs on an 0.82% slope.
Solution:
1. Q = 21.5 cfs (given)
2. V1 = 4 ft/sec. for grass -legume mixture (from Table 1.35a).
3. From Sheet 4 of Table 1.35b (for 1% slope): Read the top width
(T) and depth (D) for Q = 25 cfs and VI = 3.5 fps.
T = 8.9 ft.
D = 1.87 ft.
•
- 13 -
Stormwater Detention
Drainage Area III
Step 1 - Determine allowable release rate Qo and select the appropriate
grapn.
The peak discharge method was used to calculate the pre -development
and post -development peak flow rates and runoff depths for a 2-year
storm. The results were as follows:
Pre -development
Q = 1.44 cfs
Vr= 0.72 inch
Post -development
Q = 3.61 cfs
Vr= 1.25 inches
This area is to be protected during construction by installing
Virginia Standard 1.06 SF, silt fence, modified as shown on the
drawings. Seeding practices will provide permanent protection.
Prepared by: P. L. Broskey
Date: 10-1-85
Meadow Brook Substation
Soil Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan
The soils involved in the project of constructing Meadow Brook
Substation are of the Carbo and Timberville series. The Carbo series,
with a K value of 0.37, is at the bottom range of high erodibility, while
the Timberville series, with K values ranging from 0.24 to 0.32, is
classified as having a medium erosion characteristic. The average drainage
slopes for the area of construction are less than 2%.
All cut and fill slopes, as a general standard, are constructed
to a 2:1 slope and are planted with crown vetch in accordance with the
attached specifications. The yard area will be graded to a maximum slope
of 1.51/0 and will be covered with crushed aggregate in accordance with the
attached Specification MS 2400-1. Percolation is not stopped. The stone
acts as an energy dissipater and runoff is retarded.
Where required, ditch or culvert outflows will be rip rapped.
Filter fence and sediment basin will be installed as indicated on the
attached Engineering Drawing No. 408-722.
All seeding will be accomplished as stated in the General Criteria
of the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook which states that crown
vetch seeding periods are March 15 to May 1 and August 15 to October 1.
Construction is expected to start during April 1986 when timber
and other vegetation will be removed and grading will be started in the
yard area. Fencing will be installed during October 1986, and seeding will
be done during the interim period. The placement of stone aggregate will
also be started during the interim period and extend beyond the completion
of the fence. The railroad siding will be started during September 1986
and all work affecting soil erosion and its control should be completed by
December 1986.
All erosion and sediment control measures shall be checked
continuously and especially after each significant storm to locate damages
and conduct maintenance operations.
Other work such as the construction of the control building,
structures, and the installation of control cables, switches, breakers, and
transformers will be performed into the fall of 1987. In-service date is
projected to be December 1987 (see attached Exhibit A).
No unusual soil erosion problems are expected; however, should a
difficult soil situation occur, Mr. Mark R. Davis, District Conservationist,
SCS-USDA, may be contacted for assistance by calling (703) 662-3312.
Approved by: 2
P. L. Bros e,
Transmission Lines ngineer
J. Frank Wager -
L��
Transmission Forester
October 2, 1985
MS 2400-1-R3
Page 1 of 6
ALLEGHENY POWER SYSTEM
SPECIFICATIONS FOR SUBSTATION AND ACCESS ROAD GRADING
1.00 STATEMENT OF WORK
1.01 Contractor shall furnish all plant, materials, labor, and equipment
required for completing the grading work, roadway, and related
drainage facilities as shown on the contract drawings. Volumes
of fill and excavation are calculated as "solid volumes." All
work shall be conducted in strict accordance with these specifi-
cations and attached contract drawings.
2.00 GENERAL PROVISIONS
2.01 Classification
2.01.1 Fill - Approved fill material shall be considered clean soil,
Tree of large stone, rock, and organic matter. The maximum
dimension of any rock or stone, as placed, shall not exceed
a two and one-half (2-1/2) foot vertical dimension or not
exceed one fourth (1/4) the depth of fill at its point of
placement. Fragments or solid rocks more than six (6) inches
in maximum dimensions are not permitted in the upper two (2)
feet of fill. All fill shall be free of frost. Fill material
shall not be placed on frozen ground. If rock is used, it
shall be placed at the toe of the fill but shall not conflict
with other provisions provided for in this specification.
Before placing the fill, all topsoil and/or organic matter
shall be removed.
2.01.2 Excavation - Excavation will not be classified and will include
all materials encountered, regardless of nature.
2.02 Compaction - The maximum layer of fill shall not exceed nine (9)
inches. A minimum of three (3) passes with either a smooth
wheel roller of minimum ten ton capacity or a sheepsfoot roller
shall be used depending on the nature of soil encountered. The
sheepsfoot roller shall have a minimum bulb pressure per knob
of 200 pounds per square inch. The area of the knobs shall be
at least five (5) percent of the total peripheral area of the
drum, using the diameter measured to the faces of the knobs.
Fills shall be compacted to ninety-five (95) percent of Standard
Proctor Density. Moisture shall be controlled if necessary to
+ two (2) percent of optimum. The subgrade in both cut and
fill sections shall be compacted to ninety-five (95) percent of
Standard Proctor Density and shaped to conform to the typical
sections prior to placing stone. The Contractor shall provide
the Owner with access and necessary assistance to perform in -
place density tests of the compacted fill.
• MS 2400-1-R3
Page 3 of 6
2.07.2 Continued - The material used for blending must meet the quality
requirements of the crusher -run stone, crusher -run gravel or
crusher -run slag as herein prescribed and must be proportioned
and uniformly blended with the crusher -run stone, crusher -run
gravel or crusher -run slag to conform to the gradation require-
ments of this item. Blending can be performed by the method of
pug mill operation, but not by road mixing. When the Contractor
elects to blend material, the gradation for the middle of the
band shall be attempted for the finished product. Each type of
crusher -run aggregate, whether used alone or in combination,
shall have a maximum Los Angeles Abrasion Loss of sixty-five
(65). The plasticity index of the material passing the No. 40
mesh sieve, on each type of aggregate used, shall not be greater
than six (6) reported to the nearest whole number and the liquid
limit of the material passing the No. 40 mesh sieve, on each
type of aggregate used, shall not be greater than twenty-five
(25) reported to the nearest whole number. The methods of tests
to be utilized in determining the above requirements shall be
as follows:
Type of Test Test Method
Sieve Analysis AASHO - T-27
Los Angeles Abrasion Loss AASHO - T-96
Liquid Limit AASHO - T-89
Plastic Limit AASHO - T-90
Plasticity Index AASHO - T-91
2.07.3 Connection of Roadway to Main Road - The roadway shall join the
main road with a uniform transition from one pavement to the
other. When the roadway crosses a drainage ditch of the main
road, the roadway shall be depressed or a corrugated drain
pipe shall be installed to insure unobstructed flow in the
drainage ditch. The type of connection to the main road shall
be as specified and approved by the municipal authority having
jurisdiction over the main road.
2.07.4 Construction Equipment - Equipment for construction shall be
approved by the Owner's representative prior to construction
operations under this section. Any machine, combination of
machines or equipment which will handle the material without
undue segregation and produce the completed surface course
meeting these specifications for handling, spreading, moistening,
mixing, and compacting may be used on approval. If power graders
are used for spreading, the material shall be placed in windrows,
uniformly and thoroughly mixed, prior to final spreading and
compaction. Roller and method of rolling shall be such -that
maximum density is obtained. After final compaction, the thick-
ness of the compacted stone shall be checked at random locations
by the Contractor in company with the Owner's representative.
A minimum of five (5) checks will be made. In the event that
deficiencies are found, additional checks shall be made to
define the limits of the deficient areas. Any deficiency in
excess of one-half (1/2) inch shall be corrected.
• MS 2400-1-R3
Page 5 of 6
2.08 Surface Stone for Substations
(R) 2.08.1 The surface shall consist of a minimum of three (3) inches of
one and one-half (1 1/2) inch maximum size limestone or sand-
stone. All material shall be approved by the Owner prior to
use. All materials shall conform to the following gradation
limits:
Square Sieve Size Total Percent Passing
1 1/2 inches 100
1 inch 90-100
1/2 inch 25-60
No. 4 0-10
No. 8 0-5
All other requirements shall be as stated in Section 2.07.2.
2.08.2 The surface stone shall be placed after all subgrade work,
foundations, duct work, etc. have been completed.
2.09 Blasting for Excavation - The blasting for excavation will be
permitted only by approval of the Owner's inspector and in
accordance with the applicable laws and regulations for storage,
handling, and use of explosives. Blasting shall be controlled
so as not to disturb the surrounding soil. The Owner will not
assume any liability at all for any damages resulting from
blasting operations.
2.10 Protection of Existing Facilities - Adjoining property structures,
public sidewalks, curbs, pavements, and the property of public
utilities which may be affected by the excavation must be main-
tained and restored by the Contractor.
2.11 Cleaning Up - The Contractor shall remove from the Owner's property
and from adjoining public and private property, all temporary
structures, rubbish, and waste materials resulting from his
operations.
2.12 Safety - It shall be the responsibility of the Contractor to
comply with all local and state building and safety requirements
pertaining to excavation operations.
2.13 Engineering - The following engineering services will be provided
by the Owner or it shall be stated otherwise in an attached addendum.
2.13.1 Original and final cross sections will be taken for determination
of the volumes placed or removed.
•
MS 2400-5
Page 1 of 1
ALLEGHENY POWER SYSTEM
EROSION CONTROL AND LANDSCAPING
APPLICATION TABLE
Material Per Acre
Ground Limestone 2,000 lbs.
Fertilizer 8-16-16 500 lbs.
Fertilizer 5-10-10 800 lbs.
Top Soil - 2" Gradual Slopes 265 cu. yds.
Top Soil - 4" Steep Slopes 525 cu. yds.
Grass - Berm Mix (See Below) 100 lbs.
Grass - Slope Mix (See Below) 100 lbs.
Crown Vetch 10 lbs.
Seed Formulas
Per 1,000 Square Feet
50 lbs.
12 lb s .
18 lbs.
6 cu. yds.
12 cu. yds.
2-1/2 lbs.
2-1/2 lbs.
1/4 lb.
Crown Vetch - Scarified . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 parts
Ryegrass - Domestic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 parts
100 parts
Berm Mix
Kentucky #31 Fescue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 parts
Pennlawn Fescue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 parts
Kentucky Blue Grass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 parts
Merion Blue Grass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 parts
100 parts
S lop e Mix
Fescue - Kentucky #31. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 parts
Fescue - Red . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 parts
Ryegrass - Domestic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 parts
100 parts
Prepared By: J. F. Wagner
Date: ,June 22, 1973
Approved By: T' ` L-
T.
L. Duff
Manager, Lines Engineering
1/4���%�G
0. L. Wallis
Director, Transmission Eng.
•
•
MS 2400-6-Rl
Page 1 of 2
(A)
ALLEGHENY POWER SYSTEM
EROSION CONTROL AND LANDSCAPING
CROWN VETCH SEEDING
Introduction - With the exception of certain minimum requirements described
in following paragraphs, the establishment of a stand of crown vetch shall
be done by the Contractor in such a manner that it will meet the guarantee
set forth in this specification. All slopes greater than 2:1 and, in some
cases, slopes less than 2:1 should be seeded with crown vetch.
Grading - Areas where crown vetch is to be established shall be graded to
smooth contours. Any irregularities due to erosion or the Contractor's
operations shall be corrected before seeding.
If there are several areas in a project to be seeded to crown vetch, all
adjoining areas shall be graded so that the areas may be smoothly joined
whenever possible.
Drainage - Banks or other areas which are being graded preparatory to
seeding with crown vetch shall be graded in such a manner that there is
adequate and satisfactory drainage from the area.
Ground Preparation - If the area is covered with weeds, the weeds shall
be mowed to not more than 3" from ground level or they shall be sprayed
when specified in the Details of Work. Weed spraying shall be in accordance
with spray specifications. If weeds are mowed, they shall be removed from
the area. If weeds are sprayed, they shall be raked from the area as
completely as possible.
All debris and unsuitable material such as stones larger than 3" in any
direction shall be removed and disposed of.
Seed - When crown vetch seeding is specified, the mixture shall be as
follows:
Crown Vetch, Scarified (var. Penngift) -- 45 parts
Ryegrass, Domestic -- 55 parts
100 parts
Inoculant - All crown vetch seed must be inoculated prior to seeding.
Limestone - Ground limestone shall be applied at the following rate:
Ground Limestone - 2 tons/acre - 100#/1,000 square feet
Fertilizer - A low nitrogen fertilizer shall be used. Typical recommended
fertilizers and their application rates are:
8-16-16 Fertilizer - 500#/acre - 1.2#/1,000 square feet
OR
5-10-10 Fertilizer - 800#/acre - 18#/1,000 square feet
MS 2400-6-Rl
Page 2 of 2
Fertilizer and Limestone Application - Both fertilizer and ground limestone
shall be distributed uniformly over the area and incorporated into the soil
to a depth of 2" by raking, discing, harrowing, or by other approved methods.
Seeding - Not less than 1/2 pound per 1,000 square feet of the specified
crown vetch formula shall be applied.
Mulch - Two types of mulch are acceptable:
Turf Fiber (paper mulch), if used, shall be applied in accordance with
manufacturer's instructions.
Wheat or Oats Straw or Crown Vetch Hay shall be applied in such quantities
and anchored in such a manner that the resulting stand of crown vetch will
meet the requirements of crown vetch which are stipulated in the guarantee.
Guarantee - Because of the slow rate of germination of crown vetch, a satis-
factory stand may not develop for at least one year. However, plants of
small size should be present after the first growing season.
After one year from the date the area is seeded to crown vetch, the Contractor
guarantees that there will not be less than two crown vetch plants per any
random square yard.
If, before a satisfactory stand of crown vetch is established, the surface
has become gullied or otherwise damaged, the affected areas shall be repaired,
relimed, refertilized, and reseeded as originally specified at no expense to
the Company.
Instead of reseeding, the Contractor may plant crown vetch crowns.
Prepared by: J. F. Wagner
Date: June 22, 1973
Rev. 1: May 27, 1983
Approved by: OIL-
H. E. Hutchinson
Manager, Lines Engineering
i1 l�W. A.)Richter
Director, Transmission Engineering
tl
MS 2400-7-R1
Page I of 3
ALLEGHENY POWER SYSTEM
EROSION CONTROL AND LANDSCAPING
BERM AND SLOPE TYPE SEEDING
Introduction - With the exception of certain minimum requirements described
in following paragraphs, the establishment of a stand of berm type grasses
or slope type grasses is done by the Contractor in such a manner that it
will meet the guarantee set forth in this specification.
Berm type grasses may normally be used on flat or relatively flat areas.
Slope type grasses may be used on moderate slopes such as 4:1 to about 2:1.
In every case, the type of seeding will be in accordance with the Details
of Work.
Grading - Areas where berm type grass is to be established shall be graded
to smooth contours. Any irregularities due to erosion or the Contractor's
operations shall be corrected before seeding.
If there are several areas in a project, all shall be graded so that the
areas may be smoothly joined whenever possible.
Drainage - Banks or other areas which are being graded preparatory to
seeding shall be graded to afford adequate and satisfactory drainage from
the area.
Ground Preparation - If the area is covered with weeds, the weeds shall be
mowed not more than 3" from ground level or they shall be sprayed when
specified in accordance with spray specifications.
If weeds are mowed, they shall be removed from the area.
All debris and unsuitable materials such as stones larger than 2" in any
direction shall be removed and disposed of.
Seed - When berm type seeding is specified, seed mixture shall be as
follows:
Fescue, Kentucky 31 -- 50 parts
Fescue, Pennlawn -- 20 parts
Bluegrass, Kentucky -- 20 parts
Bluegrass, Merion -- 10 parts
When slope type seeding is specified, seed mixture shall be as follows:
Fescue, Kentucky 31 -- 60 parts
Fescue, Red -- 20 parts
Ryegrass, Domestic -- 20 parts
Total 100 parts
0
MS 2400-7-R1
Page 2 of 3
(D )
Limestone - Ground limestone shall be applied at the following rate:
Ground limestone - 2 tons/acre - 100#/1,000 square feet
Fertilizer - A low nitrogen NPK fertilizer shall be used. Typical recom-
mended fertilizers and their application rates are:
8-16-16 Fertilizer - 500#/acre - 12#/1,000 square feet
OR
5-10-10 Fertilizer - 800#/acre - 18#/1,000 square feet
Fertilizer and Limestone Application - Both fertilizer and ground limestone
shall be distributed uniformly over the area and incorporated into the soil
to a depth of 2" by raking, discing, harrowing, or by other approved methods.
Seeding - Not less than 2!j lbs. per 1,000 square feet of the specified grass
seed formula shall be applied. (A nurse crop of oats, rye, or barley may
be sown when slope type seeding is done at a rate of 1/2 of a bushel per
acre.)
Mulch - Two types of mulch are acceptable:
Turf Fiber (paper mulch), if used, shall be applied in accordance with
manufacturer's instructions.
Wheat or Oats Straw or Timothy Hay shall be applied in such quantities
and anchored in such a manner that the resulting turf will meet the require-
ments for turf which are stipulated in the guarantee.
Guarantee
Berm Type Seeding - The Contractor shall guarantee that the seeded area
will become a satisfactory turf. Maintenance shall begin immediately after
the area is seeded and shall continue until a satisfactory turf is
established.
If, before a satisfactory turf is established, the surface has become
gullied or otherwise damaged, the affected areas shall be repaired, relimed,
or refertilized, and reseeded as originally specified at no expense to the
Company.
A satisfactory turf shall be a close weed free stand of specified grasses
of good color and vigor.
Slope Type Seeding - The Contractor shall guarantee that the seeded
area will have a satisfactory stand of specified grasses after one full
growing season.
MS 2400-7-Rl
Page 3 of 3
If, before a satisfactory stand of grass is established, the surface has
become gullied or otherwise damaged, the affected areas shall be repaired,
relimed, refertilized, and reseeded as originally specified at no expense
to the Company.
Prepared by: J. F. Wagner
Date: June 22, 1973
Rev. 1: May 27, 1983
Approved b : f�l
PP Y
H. E. Hutchinson
Manager, Lines Engineering
W. A. Richter
Director, Transmission Engineering
rj
0
Meadow Brook Substation
Runoff Calculations for Stormwater Mana
ent
Method: Peak Discharge Method
Source: 1. SCS Technical Release No. 55
Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds
2. Ch. 5 & 6, Virginia Erosion and Sediment
Control Handbook
Design Storm: Type II 24 hour; Antecedent Moisture Condition II;
2-year Frequency
Reference Drawing: Grading/Erosion Plan 408-722
Drainage Area I - Draining into Existing Pond
Calculate peak runoff rate for site before and after development.
Data: 21 total acres
Hydrologic Soil Group C ( Carbo)
2°o Average Watershed Slope
1900 ft. - Hydraulic Length
1. Calculate Curve Number (weighted average)
Land Use (Acres) Percent Curve Number
Before Wooded (13.2) 63 70
Pasture ( 7.8) 27 74
Weighted CN = 7148 = 71.48, Use 72
1-0
Land Use (Acres) Percent
After Wooded (9.2) 44
Good Pasture (3.6) 17
Open Area, (8.2) 39
1% Slope,
Loose Gravel
Surface
Curve Number
70
74
80
Weighted CN = 7458 = 74.58, Use 75
Tou
Product
4410
2738
714-8
Product
3080
1258
3120
77MT
- 2 -
2. Calculate Runoff Volume (Q) (2-year storm)
Rainfall = 3.0 in. (National Weather Service) (Plate 5-9, Ref. 2)
Before S = 1000 - 10 = 3.9
72
Q = [3.0-0.2 (3.9)]2 = 0.80 inches
+ .
After S = 1000 - 10 = 3.33
Q = [3.0-0.2 (3.33)]2= 0.96 inches
3. 0 + 0 . 3. 3
3. Calculate Peak Runoff Rate
Before Account for Watershed Shape
Equivalent Drainage Area = 42 acres (Plate 5-8, Ref. 2)
Equivalent Peak Rate = 18 cfs/in. (Plate 5-13, Ref. 2)
Actual Peak Rate = 18 x 21 = 9 cfs/in.
Correct for 2°o slope:
9 cfs/in x 1.24 = 11.16 cfs/in. (Table 5-4, Ref. 2)
Final Peak Rate (Before)
11.16 cfs/in x 0.80 in. = 8.93 ft.3/sec.
After Account for Watershed Shape
Equivalent Drainage Area = 42 acres
Equivalent Peak Rate = 19 cfs/in.
Actual Peak Rate = 19 x 21 = 9.5 cfs/in.
T2
Correct for 2% slope:
9 cfs/in x 1.24 = 11.78 cfs/in.
Correct for 39% open area
11.78 cfs/in x 1.24 = 14.61 cfs/in. (Plate 5-16, Ref. 2)
Final Peak Rate (After)
14.61 cfs/in x 0.96 lin = 14.02 ft.3/ sec.
- 3 -
Drainage Area II - Draining to the Southeast Along the Railroad Siding
Calculate peak runoff rate for site before and after development.
Data: 13 total acres
Hydrologic Soil Group C (Carbo)
2% Average Watershed Slope
1900 ft. - Hydraulic Length
1. Calculate Curve Number
Land Use Acres)
Before Good Pasture (8.6)
Wooded (4.4)
Percent Curve Number Product
66 74 4884
34 70 2380
MT
Weighted CN = 7264 = 72.64, Use 73
100
After Good Pasture (7.6) 58 74 4292
Open Area, (5.4) 41 80 3280
1% Slope, 7572
Loose Gravel
Surface
Weighted CN = 7572 = 75.72, Use 76
100
2. Calculate Runoff Volume (Q) (2-year storm)
Rainfall = 3.0 in. (National Weather Service) (Plate 5-9, Ref. 2)
Before S = 1000 - 10 = 3.70
TT
Q = [3.0-0.2 (3.70)]2 = 0.86 inches
+ 0
After S = 1000 - 10 = 3.16
Q = [3.0-0.2 (3.16)]2 = 1.01 inches
J.U+U.b.
-4-
3. Calculate Peak Runoff Rate
Before Account for Watershed Shape
quiva ent Drainage Area = 42 acres (Plate 5-8, Ref. 2)
Equivalent Peak Rate = 18.5 cfs/in. (Plate 5-13, Ref. 2)
Actual Peak Rate = 18.5 cfs/in x 13 = 5.73 cfs/in.
�2
Correct for 2% slope:
5.73 cfs/in x 1.24 = 7.1 cfs/in (Table 5-4, Ref. 2)
Final Peak Rate (Before)
7.1 cfs/in x 0.86 in = 6.11 ft.- sec.
After Account for Watershed Shape
Equivalent Drainage Area = 42 acres
Equivalent Peak Rate = 19.2 cfs/in.
Actual Peak Rate = 19.2 cfs/in x 13 = 5.94 cfs/in.
T2
Correct for 2°% slope:
5.94 cfs/in x 1.24 = 7.37 cfs/in.
Correct for 41% open area
7.37 cfs/in x 1.22 = 8.99 cfs/in. (Plate 5-16, Ref. 2)
Final Peak Rate (After)
8.99 cfs/in x 1.01 = 9.08 ft.j/sec.
Drainage Area III - Northeast Corner of the Substation
Calculate peak runoff rate for site before and after development.
Data: 2 total acres
Hydrologic Soil Group C (Carbo)
4% Average Watershed Slope
250 ft. - Hydraulic Length
1. Calculate Curve Number
Land Use (Acres) Percent Curve Number Product
Before Wooded (2) 100 70 7000
Weighted CN = 7000 = 70
100
After Open Area, (2) 100 80 8000
1% Slope, Loose
Gravel Surface
Weighted CN = 8000 = 80
FOT
Ii
- 5 -
2. Calculate Runoff Volume (Q) (2-year storm)
Rainfall = 3.0 in. (National Weather Service) (Plate 5-9, Ref. 2)
Before S = 1000 - 10 = 4.26
—7 G—
Q = [3.0-0.2 (4.26)]2 = 0.72 inches
+ .2
After S = 1000 - 10 = 2.5
Ta—
Q = [3.0-0.2 (2.5)]2 = 1.25 inches
3. +0. 2.
3. Calculate Peak Runoff Rate
Before Account for Watershed Shape
Equivalent Drainage Area = 10-acres (Plate 5-8, Ref. 2)
Equivalent Peak Rate 10 cfs/in. (Plate 5-14, Ref. 2)
Actual Peak Rate = 10 cfs/in x 2 = 2 cfs/in.
TO
Correct for 4% slope:
2 cfs/in x 1.00 = 2 cfs/in
Final Peak Rate (Before)
2 cfs/in x 0.72 in = 1.44 ft.3/sec.
After Account for Watershed Shape
Equivalent Drainage Area = 10-acres
Equivalent Peak Rate 8.5 cfs/in. (Plate 5-13, Ref. 2)
Actual Peak Rate = 8.5 cfs/in x2 = 1.7 cfs/in.
T
Correct for 1% slope:
1.7 cfs/in x 1.00 = 1.7 cfs/in.
Correct for 100% open area
1.7 cfs/in x 1.7 = 2.89 cfs/in.
Final Peak Rate (A.ter)
3
2.89 cfs/in x 1.25 = 3.61 ft./sec.
i
•
Totals
- 6 -
Peak rate of runoff from the developed portion of the site:
Before After
Area I 8.93 ft. 3/sec. 14.02 ft. 3/sec.
Area II 6.11 ft. 3/sec. 9.08 ft. 3/sec.
Area III 1.44 ft. /sec. 3.61 ft. /sec.
('r) n r I it i nnc
There is a net increase in the peak runoff rate after development.
Stormwater Detention
Drainaqe Area I
Step 1 - Determine allowable release rate Q and select the appropriate
graph.
The peak discharge method was used to calculate the pre -development
and post -development peak flow rates and runoff depths for a 2-year
storm. The results were as follows:
Pre -development
Q = 8.93 cfs.
V = .8 inch
r
Post -development
Q = 14.02 cfs
V = .96 inches
r
The allowable release rate (Q°) is therefore 8.93 cfs.
Q = 8.93 cfs = 272 CSM*
° acres (1 sq. mi.)
6 0
*Since Qo is less than 300 CSM for pipe flow, Graph A (Plate 5-18)
may be used.
Step 2 - Determine required storage volume (Vs) in watershed inches.
Since Vr = .96 inches and Qo = 272 CSM, Vs can be read from Graph A
(Plate 5-18).
V = 0.2 inch
s
- 7 -
Step 3 - Transform watershed inches to acre-ft.,
V = .2 inch x 21 acres = 0.35 acre-ft. = 15,246 c.f.
s 12 inches ft.
Step 4 - The existing pond surface area is 20,400 S.F. at Elevation 754.5.
Therefore, the pond elevation will increase less than 9 inches
with a 2-year storm to about Elevation 755.2 which should remain
within the banks of the pond. As an additional measure, install
Virginia Standard 1.38 CD, check dam, to Elevation 757in the
outlet swale of this pond.
Runoff Calculations for Sediment Basin Design
Drainaqe Area II - Draining to the Southeast Along the Railroad Sidin
Calculate peak runoff rate for site during construction.
Data: 13 acres
Hydrologic Soil Group C
2110 Average Watershed Slope
1900 ft. - Hydraulic Length
1. Calculate Curve Number (during construction)
Land Use (Acres) Percent Curve Number Product
Good Pasture (7.6) 58
Bare Soil (5.4) 41
Weighted CN = 7900 = 79
16
74 4292
88 3608
7 900
2. Calculate Runoff Volume (Q) (10-year storm)
Rainfall = 5 in. (National Weather Service) (Plate 5-10, Ref. 2)
During Construction
S = 1000 - 10 = 2.66
rT_
Q = [5-0.2 (2.66)]2 = 2.8 inches
5--+U. $—�Z.bb)
0
3. Calculate Peak Runoff Rate
During Construction
Account for Watershed Shape
Equivalent Drainage Area = 42 acres (Plate 5-8, Ref. 2)
Equivalent Peak Rate = 20 cfs/in. (Plate 5-13, Ref. 2)
Actual Peak Rate = 20 cfs/in x 13 = 6.19 cfs/in.
47
Correct for 2% slope:
6.19 cfs/in x 1.24 = 7.68 cfs/in.
Final Peak Rate (During Construction)
7.68 cfs/in x 2.8 in = 21.50 ft.3/sec.
Stormwater Detention
Drainage Area II
Step 1 - Determine allowable release rate Q and select the appropriate
graph.
The peak discharge method was used to calculate the pre -development
and post -development peak flow rates and runoff depths for a 2-year
storm. The results were as follows:
Pre -development
Q = 6.11 cfs
Vr= .86 inch
Post -development
Q = 9.08 cfs
V4= 1.01 inches
The allowable release rate (Qo) is therefore 6.11 cfs.
Qo = 6.11 cfs = 300.8 CSM*
(13 acres (1 sq. mi.)
0 acres
*Since Qo is at 300 CSM for pipe flow, Graph A (Plate 5-18)
may be used.
Step 2 - Determine required storage volume (V ) in watershed inches.
Since Vr = 1.01 inches and Qo = 300.8 CSM, Vs can be read from
Graph A (Plate 5-18).
V = .2 inch
s
- 9 -
Step 3 - Transform watershed inches to acre-ft.
V = 0.2 inch x 13 acres = 0.22 acre-ft. = 9583 c.f.
s 12 inc es ft.
Step 4 - New detention pond along railroad siding at Station 3+00±.
Excavating the pond to Elevation 744 will provide in excess
of this storage below original groundline. Placing the pond
spillway at 746.5 will provide for a 10-year storm storage
capacity. Therefore, install Virginia Standard 1.26, SB,
temporary sediment basin, at R.R. Station 3+00± with a spillway
elevation at 746.5±.
•
- 10 -
Temporary Sediment Basin Design Data Sheet
Computed by: P. L. Broskey Date: 10-1-85
Checked by: Date:
Project: Meadow Brook Substation
Basin No. II Location: Frederick County, VA
Total Area draining to basin: 13 Acres
Basin Volume Design
1. Minimum required volume = 67 cu. yds. x 13 acres drainage = 871 cu. yds.
2. Volume of basin at Elevation 747.5 = 377 cu. yds.
3. Excavated 500 cu. yds to obtain required capacity. Total excavation is
1975 cu. yds.
Minimum volume before cleanout = 27 cu. yds. x 13 acres drainage = 351 cu. yds.
Elevation corresponding to scheduled time to clean out is 745.5.
Distance below top of riser is 1.0 ft.
Basin Shape
4. L/We = 3.93 Baffles needed? No X ; Yes Show location on site plan.
Design of Spillways
n..-_ Cr
5. Q10 = 21.50 cfs (see Chapter 5.)
Pipe Spillway (Qp)
6. There is no emergency spillway, then required Qp = Q = 21.5 cfs.
7. Riser: Diameter 30 inches; Height 2.5 ft.; h = 1.0 l�.
8. H = 4.7 ft.; Barrel length = 70 ft.
9. Barrel: Diameter 30 inches
10. Trash Rack: Diameter 42 inches; A = 13 inches.
Design Elevations
11. Riser Crest = 746.5 Top of Dam = 749.5
Design High Water = 747.5
0
El. 747.5
�e tin r.i^,h b;3er
in. `
in. 1 D, —T �
3011
Sediment
Cl eanout 1 3---
_ 8' E1 , 7n o n
in.
T 1
2
— Riser Crest El. 71
— Dewatering Outlet
Permanent Pool El. 744.0 70 L.F., 30" CMP
Design Elevations '�dithout Eiger ency Sail1w3y
MEADOW BROOK SUBSTATION
Drainage Area II
Virginia Standard 1.26
Sediment Basin
.5
,El. 745.5
El. 742.8
0
- 12 -
Desiqn of Parabolic Grass -Lined Channels
Drainaqe Area II
The channel must be designed for capacity and erosion resistance. Capacity
will be a minimum when the grass is long and unmowed. This condition
corresponds to V2 in Table 1.35b. Erosion will be most likely to occur when
the grass is short. This condition will correspond to V1 in Table 1.35b.
A design based upon Table 1.35b will result in a channel which will have
adequate capacity when the vegetation in the channel is long and thick,
which will remain stable when the vegetation is short or recently moved,
and which will have adequate freeboard for the design flow.
Use the following procedure to design a grass -lined parabolic channel based
upon Table 1.35b:
1. Determine the required channel capacity, Q. (Peak rate of runoff from
the selected design storm.)
2. Select an appropriate grass lining and note the permissible velocity
(V1) from Table 1.35a.
3. Choose the appropriate sheet of Table 1.35b for the channel slope. Using
the permissible velocity (VI) and the required capacity (Q), read the top
width (T) and the depth (D) for the correct parabolic section.
Design a parabolic waterway to be lined with grass -legume mixture which will
carry 21.5 cfs on an 0.82% slope.
Solution:
1. Q = 21.5 cfs (given)
2. V1 = 4 ft/sec. for grass -legume mixture (from Table 1.35a).
3. From Sheet 4 of Table 1.35b (for 1% slope): Read the top width
(T) and depth (D) for Q = 25 cfs and VI = 3.5 fps.
T = 8.9 ft.
D = 1.87 ft.
,t
13 -
Stormwater Detention
Drainage Area III
Step 1 - Determine allowable release rate Qo and select the appropriate
grapn.
The peak discharge method was used to calculate the pre -development
and post -development peak flow rates and runoff depths for a 2-year
storm. The results were as follows:
Pre -development
Q = 1.44 cfs
Vr= 0.72 inch
Post -development
Q = 3.61 cfs
Vr= 1.25 inches
This area is to be protected during construction by installing
Virginia Standard 1.06SF, silt fence, modified as shown on the
drawings. Seeding practices will provide permanent protection.
Prepared by: P. L. Broskey
Date: 10-1-85
The Potomac Edison Company
LEGAL DEPARTMENT
Part of the Allegheny Power System
Downsville Pike, Hagerstown, MD 21740 (301) 790-3400
December 18, 1985
Mr. George W. Bryant, Jr., Clerk
Virginia State Corporation Commission
P. 0. Box 1197
Richmond, VA 23209
RE: Application for Approval of Meadow Brook Substation
Dear Mr. Bryant:
Enclosed for filing with the above application, which was filed on
September 27, 1985, are six copies of the Phase I Archaeological
Investigation prepared by Thunderbird Archeological Associates. Copies
have been sent to the persons and agencies on the attached list.
Very truly yours,
/
r ;
M&rleen L. Brooks
Attorney
MLB/pms/M4/L-BRYANT
Enclosures
d ' • 0
STATE AGENCIES AND CITY AND COUNTY
OFFICIALS THAT MAY HAVE INTEREST
IN THIS APPLICATION
1. Department of Highways & Transportation
1221 East Broad Street
Richmond, VA 23219
2. Department of Conservation and Historic Resources
1100 Washington Building
Capitol Square
Richmond, VA 23219
3. Mr. Bruce J. Larson, Review & Compliance Coordinator
Department of Conservation and Historic Resources
Division of Historic Landmarks
Research Center for Archaeology
Rt. 238, P.O. Box 368
Yorktown, VA 23690
4. Council on the Environment
9th Street Office Building
Richmond, VA 23219
5. Department of Conservation & Economic Development
1000 Washington Building
Richmond, VA 23219
6. Frederick County -
Commonwealth Attorney
Lawrence R. Ambrosi
5 North Kent Street
Winchester, VA 22601
Chairman of the Board of Supervisors
Kenneth Y. Stiles
9 Court Square
Winchester, VA 22601
Chairman of the Planning Commission
Frank Brumback
9 Court Square
Winchester, VA 22601
M4
Phase I Archeological Investigations
Meadowbrook Substation
prepared by
Thunderbird Archeological Associates
for
Potomac Edison Company
November, 1985
by
William M. Gardner
Kimberly Snyder
Timothy A. Thompson
Abstract
In November of 1985, an archeological resources reconnaissance
was conducted of the proposed Meadow Brook sub -station in Frederick
County, Virginia. This work was conducted by Thunderbird Archeological
Associates, Inc. for Allegheny Power Sustem and Potomac Edison. Archival
investigations and an historic map search revealed the possible presence of a
residential structure in the southwestern part of the study area. This
location corresponded to foundation remants observed in the field and
designated as Site 1. In addition, two other archeological sines were
discovered during the course of the survey. Site 2 consisted of lithic
debitage from prehistoric tool manufacturing; no cultural affiliation could be
assigned. In addition, a small amount of historic cultural debris was also
recovered. Site 3 consisted of a foundation and a chimney fall. This site
does not appear on historic maps. Impressionistically, this appears to be the
remains of a tenant house or a mill worker. None of the archeological sites
were in the area of immediate construction impact, which is located in the
northeastern portion of the study area. If construction impact is confined to
the northeastern portion of the study area, no additional archeological work
is recommended. If the impact extends into the area containing the
archeological sites, additional archeological investigations are recommended
for the historic components.
I.
ii
List of Figures
Figure 1 - Portions of the USGS 7.5' Middletown and Stephens City, VA.
Quadrangles Showing the Location of the Study Area, the Plant Site, Property
Tract Divisions and Archeological Sites.
Figure 2 - Copy of 1885 Lakes Atlas Showing Frederick County, Virginia.
From Surveys by J.M. Lathrop and A.W. Dayton.
Figure 3 - Site 1, Muse Site Plan and Profile.
L
Introduction
This report presents the results of a Phase I archeological resources
reconnaissance of the proposed Meadow Brook substation in Frederick
County, Virginia. The work was conducted by Thunderbird Archeological
Associates, Inc. (TAA) for Allegheny Power System and Potomac Edison. Dr.
William M. Gardner served as principal investigator on this project and
Timothy A. Thompson served as field supervisor. The field and lab crews
were drawn from TAA staff.
The project consists of the proposed construction of a substation which
will be on a tract of land located just off U.S. Route 11 in Frederick
County,Virginia (Figure 1). No archeological sites were discovered within
the actual construction boundaries (shown as Plant Site on Figure 1),
however, three archeological sites were found within the general study area.
These are designated as Sites 1-3 on Figure 1. State site numbers have not
yet been obtained for these sites, however, once they have been received, an
addendum to this report will be issued. All of the sites found within the
project area contained historic cultural components and one, Site 1, contained
a prehistoric cultural component as well.
Environmental Background
The project area is located in the section of the Ridge and Valley
province known as the Great Valley. The area is underlain by chert bearing
limestone and is locally referred to as 'cherty ground'. The chert occurs in
both small rounded nodules, apparently replacement, and small rectanguloid
linear pieces, apparently from irregular bedded material. The nodular chert
appears to be of higher quality and more varied in color, with less flaws or
irregularities. None of the material, however, was suitable for manufacture
of more than small flake tools or small bifaces ca. 2-4 inches in length and
width.
The topography can be characterized as the gently rolling topography
of the area's limestone terrain. The valley of Meadow Brook borders the site
to the northwest and much of the area is a high interfluvial location
j overlooking but somewhat removed from the stream valley. Within the
L'
•
Neadat Brat SaUtatiaa - rhme I "rt 2
project area, past streams, active or seasonal, have cut broad and low swales
which provide much of the undulation to the topography. It is probable,
based on work elsewhere in the Shenandoah Valley (cf. Gardner 1974,
1978), that some of these now extinct streams were active in the Pleistocene
but became extinct during the post -Pleistocene increase in evaporation, or
else went underground. During periods of heavy rains, these channels
probably act as run-off channels.
The project locality is currently in pasture with small, discontinuous
patches of woods. These woods are generally in areas where the horizontally
bedded limestone outcrops at the surface and made plowing difficult or
impossible. It is possible that these areas may have been cultivated in the
past, but were subsequently abandoned as surface erosion exposed the
limestone beds. The age of the trees in the woods is not more than 40-60
years at the most It is also possible that the woods were left as wind
breaks, cattle shade areas, or, wood lots.
Soil erosion in the uplands here, as elsewhere in the Valley since
Euroamerican deforestation and cultivation began in the 1720s to 1750s has
been considerable. Test excavations show a shallow sod zone (ca..2 5 inches
deep), underlain by a heavy loam plowzone which rests directly on top of
extremely old residual clay generally at a depth of between 1.0 to 1.3 feet
below the surface. Meadow Brook valley, however, has been the recipient of
sedimentation, primarily from slope erosion. Test excavations along the
lowest terrace revealed a shallow sod zone, a plowzone, and a gleyed clay
horizon. The valley is currently quite poorly drained and swampy, in part as
a result of the erosion of the uplands. It is in this setting that the major
prehistoric sites occurred.
Regional Culture History
The following presents a prehistoric culture history applicable to the
study area and to the Northern Shenandoah Valley in general.
Paleoindian Period ( 500-8 00 B>C>) - This period represents the
ErE earliest known inhabitants of the Shenandoah Valley and is characterized by
l- a hunting emphasis, although exploitation of available plant resources also
occurred. Traditionally, the focus of the hunt was thought to be now -extinct
Pleistocene megafauna such as mastodon, mammoth and bison. However, it
` now appears that these species were extinct by the time the Paleoindians
arrived in the Valley and that the hunting focus was on more modern
species such as moose, elk and deer. The tool kit is geared towards hunting
and the processing of hunt by-products such as skins, sinews, etc. A biface
and core technology prevailed and the earliest diagnostic of the period is the
•
2iaadaw Zr"k S"statiai - ?hmm I "rt ';
fluted, lanceolate projectile point type known as Clovis. Later diagnostic
styles include Mid-Paleo and Dalton (6500-8000 B. C.). An emphasis on
cryptocrystaWne lithic raw materials is evident and the settlement pattern
is geared towards the locations of these preferred materials, in addition to
poorly drained floodplains with nearby stream junctions (Gardner and
Rimmler 1980). The settlement pattern operative at this time consists of
household units moving through the Valley, returning periodically to
floodplain base camps in order to replenish their tool kits. The nuclear or
extended family was probably the basic social .unit during this time period,
although larger groups would have gathered at the base camps. it is difficult
to say how many households would gather at the base camps, although the
numbers would not have been great, as the local environment could not have
supported large populations.
Early Archaic (8000-6500 B.C.) - Initially the early part of this period
is identical to that of the Paleoindian, although this continuity lessens as the
period continues. A major change in the tool kit is evidenced by a shift to
comer notched points around 8000 B.C. These points are often serrated and
basally ground. Point types include Kirk Corner Notched, Palmer Corner
Notched and Amos Comer Notched There is a subsequent shift to side
notched types and finally to stemmed, slightly indented base points. Other
diagnostic points include Kirk Side Notched, Warren Side Notched and Kirk
Summed. The shift to notched points indicates a shift from the hand held
spear of the Paleoindians to an atlatl or spear thrower. Other additions to
the took kit include the flaked stone ax and the drill (Gardner 1984).
In the beginning of this period, there is considerable overlap in site
choice with the Paleoindian period and the Early Archaic populations favored
areas of limestone bedrock. Toward the middle of the period, sites are found
'. in areas of shale bedrock and, by the end of the period, there is little overlap
E,.. in site choice. In addition, there is some indication of a population increase
dureing the Early Archaic. There is an additional shift away from the
dependence on cryptocrystalline lithic raw materials. Hunting was still the
major subsistence fous but gathering was done as well.
y` Middle Archaic (6500-3000 B.C.1 - Although there are some
similarities with the Early Archaic, in general, the periods are markedly
different. Middle Archaic projectile point styles consist of several different
horizons, beginning with the bifurcate forms such as Lecroy and continuing
to the post -bifurcate forms such as Stanly, the contracting sum forms such
as Morrow Mountain and finally to Guilford and Halifax (Gardner 1964).
Adaptive strategies were geared towards general foraging dependent
upon seasonal change and hunting played a reduced role. The reduction is
•
IIeadow Brook sabstatioa - Phase I Report 4
hunting is probably the result of climatic change during this period. There is
an overall warming trend which results in the spread of deciduous forests
and a reduction of open grasslands (Gardner n.d.). Larger game animals
would have been reduced in number as a result of this forest closure,
although smaller game animals would have proliferated. The expansion of
the deciduous forests was accompanied by an increase in vegetable foods,
however, the distribution of these foods was constrained within a horizontal
and vertical pattern (Gardner 1978). Site choice was geared to localities
which provided access to a wide variety of resources, e.g. multiple habitat
zones. The tool kit becomes more generalized, reflecting the change in
subsistence patterns. New additions to the tool kit include ground stone
tools used to process plant foods and the atlatl weight. The de -emphasis on
cryptocrystalline lithic raw materials continues and propinquity seems to be
the overriding factor in lithic choice. There is evidence for a significant
population increase.
Late Archaic (3000-1000 B.C.} -At this time, the points of the Middle
Archaic are replaced by broadspears and the steatite or soapstone bowl
appears. A preference for quartzite as a lithic raw material is indicated for
the broadspear populations (Gardner 1978, 1984). There appears to be two
major settlement foci during the Late Archaic: the floodplains and the
uplands. The settlement pattern is one of seasonal shifts, depending upon
the foods resources available in a given area during a particular season. The
Late Archaic is a period of hot and dry conditions which led to an increased
productivity in the riverine environment including, in some areas, a
radiation in anadromous fish. It also led to a chestnut forest climax, which
provided another dependable, albeit seasonal, food resource (Gardner n.d.).
A greater degree of sedentism is indicated for the Late Archaic.
At between 1600-1200 B.C., perhaps slightly earlier, the Northern
Shenandoah Valley witnesses its first major stylistic division. This is
manifested in the Susquehanna Broadspears and the narrow bladed
Savannah River derivatives. Both forms are actually derived from the
earlier Savannah River Broadspear but may have evolved via separate
routes. The Susquehanna style zone's southern boundary runs east and west
along the Potomac River between the Fall Line near Washington, D.C. to just
beyond the edge of the Allegheny Front and the Appalachian Plateau with
southern extensions along streams tributary to the Potomac. The
relationship between the two groups is poorly known. A riverine orientation
with movement toward sedentism characterizes both groups. Some sort of
boundary exists because there is little overlap between the two components
despite similar adaptations and land use patterns.
2ieadot Brook Sabstation - Phase I Report 3
Woodland - The Woodland period is traditionally divided into three
sub -periods: Early, Middle and Late. Although recent research has indicated
periods of considerable flux, the changes will be only summarized here.
Early Woodland (1000-900 B.C.) - The Early Woodland period is
characterized by the introduction of pottery. The earliest type, Marcey
Creek Plain, is diagnostic of the Early Woodland I phase. It is characterized
by steatite tempering and trough shaped vessels which frequently have mat
or basket impressions on the vessel bottoms. At approximately 900 B.C., the
beginning of the Early Woodland II phase, the Marcey Creek vessels are
replaced by conoidal base, cordmarked forms belonging to the Seldon Island
series. The Seldon Island ceramics are also steatite tempered. The Early
Woodland III phase is characterized by Accokeek Cordmarked ceramics
which consist of sand tempered, conoidal base vessels.
Projectile point styles vary but generally consist of stemmed, narrow
bladed Savannah River drived points and side notched or fishtail types
derived from the Perkiomen-Susquehanna Broadspear styles (Gardner
1982). A general reduction is size is indicated. Early Woodland I -I I I
diagnostics are often mixed at sites, indicating a low rate of deposition
during this period (Gardner 1982).
With regard to Early Woodland settlement patterns, the seasonal shifts
of the Late Archiac are replaced by more permanent camps oriented towards
the exploitation of riverine and immediately adjacent resources (Gardner
and Carbone n.d.), as well as foray camps.
Middle Woodland (500 B.C.-AD. 9001 -The Middle Woodland sub -
period may be divided into two phases: Middle Woodland I (500 B.C:-
AD.300) and Middle Woodland II (AD.300-AD.900). The Middle Woodland
is the least well known of the sub -periods however, what is known appears
to indicate rapid change.
Middle Woodland I is characterized by participation in the Stone
Burial Mound Complex phenomenon which begins around 500 B.C. This
complex is characterized by clusters of stone mounds located on bluffs
` - overlooking the floodplains. The mounds are piles of stone capping one or
more burial pits. Artifacts from the burial mounds include tubular stone
_ pipes, platform pipes, copper beads and pendants, copper colts, hematite
paint cups, stone colts, bannerstones, projectile points, cache blades and
j gorgets (Gardner 1982). Differential placement of mound complexes,
t. placement of only certain individuals within the mounds and differential
distribution of grave goods within the mounds indicate a degree of socio-
cultural complexity not observed previously. Gardner feels that the
2ieadot Brook SKbstatioi - phase 1 Report i
development of the Stone Burial Mound Complex may be related to a
settlement shift from the levee to the inner filodplain from which backwater
swamps may be exploited.
Diagnostics of the Middle Woodland I phase include the replacement
of grooved axes by celts and small, stemmed points. The ceramics of the
Middle Woodland I phase show a gradual evolution from the Accokeek
ceramics to the crushed rock tempered Albemarle series. Cordmarked
surfaces are more common at the beginning of Middle Woodland I with net
marking becoming more common during the latter part of the phase.
The Middle Woodland I I phase is very poorly understood. There is a
sudden and widespread abandonment of the Stone Burial Mound Complex,
however, settlement and subsistence patterns remain unchanged. Projectile
point styles appear to be small, contracting stem types similar to Piscataway
or Rossville types. In addition, there are traces of corner notched types and
pentagonal variants in the late Middle Woodland (Gardner and Carbone n.d.).
Woodland I I ceramics are characterized by the replacement of net
marked surfaces with fabric impression. There is an indication of a gradual
decrease in the amount of crushed rock used as temper with large quantities
of crushed rock being replaced by predominantly sand tempered wares with
crushed rock inclusions.
Late Woodland A.D.{900-AD. 1700) - The Late Woodland sub -period
may be divided into five phases: Late Woodland I (AD..900-1100), Late
Woodland II (AD. 1100-1250), Late Woodland III (AD.1250-1350), Late
Woodland IV (AD. 1350-1450) and Late Woodland V (AD. 1450-1700). It is
a period of change marked by population migrations into the Norethern
Shenandoah Valley. Triangular points are characteristic of all Late Woodland
phases. This indicates the use of the bow and arrow.
Late Wwodland I is characterized by a shift around A.D. 900 from the
inner floodplain utilized by the Middle Woodland populations to the outer
levee of the floodplain. This shift is felt to be reflective of the introduction
of agriculture as it represents a shift to more fertile, more easily tilled lands
(Gardner 1984). The subsistence system was not enitrely composed of
farming, however, as agriculture would have only provided about 25% of the
food base and foraging and hunting would have still been necessary to
supplement the food base and to obtain other technologically necessary
items (Gardner and Carbone n.d.). The Late Woodland I settlement pattern
.. appears to be one of dispersed hamlets . The ceramic assemblage is
characterized by cordmarked and fabric impressed Albemarle ceramics.
Begninning around AD. 1000 is a period of population growth and expansion
Headot Brook Sabstatioa - Phase I Report 7
related to the developement of agriculture as a dependable food source. The
piopulation growth initially occurred in a linear fashion along the flooplains
(Gardner 1984).
The Late Woodland I I settlement pattern can be described as a series
of hamlets, each containing 6-8 houses, scattered along the floodplain (Fehr
1983). Some degree of relationship between the hamlets is likely. Evidence
for the exploitation of a wide variety of resource habitats is indicated by the
recovered floral and faunal remains.
The Late Woodland II ceramics assemblage is characterized by
Albemarle Cordmarked and Fabric Impressed as the dominant series with
minor amounts of limestone tempered Page ceramics appearing, as well as
incised wares. The incised wares consist of two types: less complex motifs on
locally manufactured vessels and complex zoned motifs on vessels imported
from the north (Gardner and Carbone n.d.).
The Late Woodland I I I phase is characterized by an increased
occurrence of limestone tempered (Page) wares. Cordmarked surfaces are
dominant and, along with fabric impressed surfaces, are present on both the
crushed rock tempered and the limestone tempered series. The incised
wares disappear from the ceramic assemblage. Applied rim strips and
pseudo collars are present on both series. Decoration on the collars includes
cord wrapped stick impressions, gashes and punctations. Gardner
hypotheses that the appearance of the Page ceramics in large number
reflects actual population migration into the Northern Shenandoah Valley
from the south (Gardner 1984).
There is. little information on community patterning for this phase,
although some indication of larger house sizes may be indicated. Acc retional
or floodplain mounds are found near the South Fork headwaters, however,
although some are reported to occur in the Northern Shenandoah Valley in
early historical accounts, none have been discovered to date (Gardner and
Carbone n.d.).
The Late Woodland IV phase is characterized by the disappearance of
Albemarle ceramics and their replacement by the Page series. Potomac
Creek ceramics occur as a minority ware. Surfaces are predominantly
cordmarked, although fabric impression is also present. Decorations, when
they occur, consist of cord warapped stick stamping on the vessel body, a
trait shared with the. Potomac Creek wares. The Potomac Creek ceramics
seem to represent another population migration westward from the Potomac
Coastal Plain (Gardner and Carbone n.d.). No clear evidence for community
patterning is present for the Late Woodland IV phase.
` Neado• Brook s0wtatiea - Phase I Report =
At the beginning of the Late Woodland V phase, there is an abrupt
appearance of the shell tempered geyser ceramic series and the virtual
disappearance of all other ceramic series. The geyser series is characterized
by globular vessels with cordmarked, plain or smoothed surfaces; lugs;
handles; and rarely, cord wrapped stick stamped and punctate decorations.
Gardner feels that the migration of the geyser populations into the Northern
Shenandoah Valley is related to environmental change (Gardner 1984). At
around AD. 1350-1400, the climate became cooler and drier, causing a
contraction of the forests and a spread of the grasslands. A shorter crop
season was indicated, accompanied by lower yields. This would result in
greater competition for agricultural lands. Hunting would assume greater
importance with the radiation in the deer population cause by the expansion
of the edge zones. This would result in increased competition over hunting
territories (Gardner and Carbone n.d.). One solution to the problem of
increased competition would have been migration.
Along with the appearance of the geyser ceramic series, a change in
settlement patterns is indicated for the Late Woodland V phase. There is a
shift from the dispersed hamlet patterns of the preceding periods to a
pattern consisting of large, stockaded villages with outlying farmsteads. This
contraction of the population and the appearance -of stockaded villages is
related to an increase in warfare assumed to be the result of increased
competition.
Contact Period (AD. 1700-?I - It is difficult t4 present any
information on the Contact period as the Northern Shenandoah Valley is
assumed to be devoid of aborginal populations at the time of the initial
Euroamerican settlement in the area. Only one site from a slightly later time
has been excavated. This site, Conrad Cemetary, appears to represent a raid
on one of the early European settlements as prehistoric ceramics, historic
ceramics, European weapons, harness parts, pig bones and deer bones were
found in a hearth.
After 1725, historic documentation and place names suggest a number
of groups moving through the area: the Susquehannocks, the Shawnee and
the Tuscarora. Gardner hypothesizes that the Northern Shenandoah Valley
served as a hunting ground or a 'sparsely populated no-man's land' for the
Iroquois and other groups (Gardner 1984:24).
The cause of the depopulation of the Northern Shenandoah Valley is
unclear, although recent research suggests one possibility (Gardner 1984).
The increasing importance of the European Fur Trade created inter -group
Pe -g P
competition for hunting territories from which to obtain these furs. Initially,
4.� raids into the Northern Shenandoah Valley for furs and the disruption of the
•
Hesdoi Brook Sabstatioi - ?tease I Report
indigneous populations were conducted by the Susquehannocks, who were
later driven out by the Iroquois (Gardner 1984). It is probable that
decimation due to the spread of disease by the Europeans was also a factor
in this depopulation.
Historic Background - In addition to general background research
concerning the project area, a deed search was made of the parcels within
the study boundaries. This investigation was conducted at the Frederick
County Courthouse and indicated that, with the exception of some small lots
at the periphery of and just outside the study area, the property has been
part of two large tracts since early in the I M century. These are noted on
Figure 1 as Tract A and Tract B. Tract A, a 45.3 acre tract in the northeast
corner of the study area, was purchased by Potomac Edison from William
Stickley I I I in 1977. This was part of the property that Mr. Stickley
inherited from his father, William M. Stickley II, and part of a larger tract
that the first William M. Stickley received in a partition between the heirs of
Abraham Stickley in 1871. Abraham Stickley had acquired the 390 acre
tract (which also included the old stone house at Chrisman's Spring just
across U.S. Route 11 from the study area) in 1826, purchasing it from Jacob
Stover's estate. Stover had acquired the same tract in 1805, buying it from
the estate of Jacob Christman (note change in the spelling of Chrisman) in
1805. Christman had died 30 years earlier and his widow, Mary Magdalena
Hite Christman, had continued to live at Chrisman's Spring. Jacob had come
to the Valley with Yost Hite, Mary Magdalena's father, in the first quarter of
the 18th century and he and Mary were married after their arrival. None of
the maps (Lakes Atlas 1885, Hotchkiss Sketch of the Battle of Cedar Creek
1864) of the area that show the locations of residential structures, suggest
that Tract A ever contained a house. Field survey also failed to locate any
evidence of a structure foundation or concentrations of historic artifacts. Mr.
William Stickley also indicated that his own researches and familarity with
the property suggest that no structure was ever present.
The remainder of the study area was acquired by Potomac Edison
from Mr. Henry. He had purchased what we are referring to as Tract B
f . (Figure 1) in 1967 from Laura E. Kinter whose husband, Daniel Kinter had
L: acquired it in 1951 from the heirs of Warren Rice. Rice had obtained a 143
acre tract, which includes Tract B, in 1930 by sale to settle a court case
Laganist Wade H. Guard. Katie J. Guard purchased the tract in 1914 from the
estate of A. Wade Muse. Lakes Atlas of 1885 (Figure 2) shows that name
next to the location of a structure that is probably identical with the house
foundation identified near the southern boundary of the project area,
marked as Site 1 on Figure 1.
L
Headaw Broot SabstaU*a - phase I Export 19
In addition to 'Chrisman's Spring" or 'Indian Spring' estate east of the
project area, the Vaucluse plantation on the west is of some historical
interest as the home of the "infamous" (translated as womanizing and
gambling in early histories) Strother Jones. After the Battle of Cedar Creek
in October of 1864, the Confederate Genaral, Jubal Early, retreated to the
New Market area. Early in November, he returned to Vaucluse to examine
Federal positions between Newtown (Stephens City) and gernstown to the
north. As a result of this foray, there were calvary engagements on the Back
Road to the west and on the Front Royal Road (presently U.S. Route 340) to
the east Jed Hotchkiss' journal and maps (Records of the filar of the
Rebellion) indicate that the headquarters were at Vaucluse, west of the
project area. The Confederate entrenchments were east of the Valley
Turnpike (U.S. Route 11) and the military engagements were some distance
to both the east and west of the study area. There is nothing in the maps or
the early histories to suggest that there was Civil War activity within the
project area, although undoubtedly more than one soldier ran or galloped
across the property. Files of earth, sometimes resembling embankments, do
occur in the wooded area of the study tract, but these contain rocks of all
sizes and are obviously piles left by heavy machinery in field clearing
operations. The Valley Turnpike and the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad on the
east side of the project area were important transportation corridors during
the nineteenth century, but no activities associated with them took place in
the project area.
Previous Archeological Research - No previous archeological research
has been conducted in the project area.
Predictive models developed for the Northern Shenandoah Valley
indicate that the larger and more permanent sites will be found on the major
rivers such as the Shenandoah and its forks. Expected site types at these
locations would be base camps from the earlier periods and the hamlets or
villages from the later periods. Sites which approximate these in size and
!. frequency will also occur with some frequency, according to predictive
models, on the lesser order streams in the area such as Cedar Creek, into
which Meadow Brook empties. Increasingly smaller and more transient sites
will be found on even lower order streams, especially in poorly drained
limestone areas. Meadow Brook is a classic example of such a stream. Even
smaller and more transitory sites may be found in especially favorable areas
radiating out from any of the sites on the varying order streams noted
above. The expectations are, for sites along creeks such as Meadow Brook,
that the most that will be found in the bordering uplands is an isolated
chipping station or a stray projectile point Such sites and finds have limited
EE information potential and indeed, often cannot be assigned to a time period
Neadow Brook Sabstatioa - ]Phase I Report 11
more specific than prehistoric. Given the presence of plowzones throughout
the uplands of the study area and the. intensive erosion, even if such sites
area found, they would most likely be redundant with information already
acquired and not significant, as well as disturbed somewhat by plowing.
Historic period site predictions were covered in some detail in the
discussion of the historical background and will not be repeated here.
Field Survey
Field Investigations were carried out to determine if there were any
archeological resources present in the project area that might need further
investigation. The first step was to make a complete walkover survey to
identify locations susceptible of surface survey and areas where subsurface
test units might be desirable. Although none of the project area was
cultivated, much of it was in pasture. Cattle trails provided considerable
surface exposure in the form of numerous 'transects' crossing the various
fields and different topographic settings in the project area. Much of the area
was relatively deflated, but a small floodplain was located on the southeast
end of the area at the intersection of Meadow Brook and a small,
intermittent unnamed tributary, northeast of route 633. The tributary
occuppied a small valley extending toward the northeast, and it looked like
there was a possiblity of some deposition there, in the form of colluvial
wash.
Walkover survey revealed the presence of two house foundations and
some other interesting topographic features. The first foundation was located
just south of the the above -mentioned tributary, about two hundred feet
east of route 633 and on the second of two low terraces adjoining Meadow
1.7, Brook. The foundation apears to be the structure labelled on the Lakes Atlas
Map as 'A. Wade Muse' (this is discussed further in the background
research) and as Site 1 on Figure 1. There is a small rubble -filled basement
within a larger depression which apparently represents the outline of the
structure. Grass was sparse on the terrace below the foundation and a broad
scatter of historic period artifacts, presumably associated with the
occupation of the house was present there. Also on this terrace were three
round 'humps' of earth about six feet in diameter and about twenty feet
apart. A two -foot -by -two -foot test pit was placed just back from the
alignment of these features. The dirt from the pit was screened and a
number of historic period sherds, a bullet and a noticeable quantity of flakes
E were recovered.
Site 2 was also discovered by the pedestrian survey. It was a scatter
Of mostly historic artifacts, though a few prehistoric flakes were present. It
0
I L
Ileadow Brook smbstatiai - rhase I Eeport I z
is located on the toe of a ridge which divides Meadow Brook from the
unnamed tributary which joins it southwest of the study area. This location
overlooks a small, swampy floodplain at the intersection of those two
streams. The artifacts were observed in bare areas created by Criss-crossing
cattle trails and the soil is deflated. In ephemeral hunting camp and general
historic field scatter are indicated, with no likelihood of undisturbed
remains, except possibly toward the base of the ridge toe.
The third site discovered in the study area is Site 3 which is also an
historic house foundation at the edge of the ridge, above Meadow Brook. It is
just outside (north) of the study area boundary. The dimensions of the
foundation are not clear, but there is a depression filled with water and a
chimney fall. Some quite modern looking ceramics were observed next to
this feature, suggesting that it may have been occupied in the twentieth
century.
In addition to the walkover survey which located the three sites, test
units were placed in two locations. The small valley containing the
intermittent stream was tested to see if there was any deposition which
might have preserved occupational evidence. A series of nine shovel tests
were placed to cover a cross-section of the valley. No cultural remains were
observed -- except for picnic garbage left in the last few years, according to
Mr. Henry. The profiles in the shovel tests showed a plowzone that was
slightly thicker than elsewhere in the study area, but a well -developed,
textured B-Horizon was encountered below the plowzone in each case,
indicating a long period of in -situ development without cultural activity.
Two test units were also placed in the Plant Site area (see Figure 1)
since this location would be subject to primary impact from project
construction. The soil was deflated and no cultural remains were observed
however. This is likely because the headspring for the small valley has not
been active since the end of the Pleistocene, obviating the advantage of this
location as a camp site. Another unit was placed near the power line just
west of the eastern boundary of the study area, also without result.
Summary and Conclusions
Background Study and Field Investigations were completed to
evaluate the Meadow Brook Substation site. Three archeological sites were
identified by the research (one turned out to be just outside the project area
boundary), but no archeological or historical resources were present in the
Plant Site Area. Numerous surface exposures were available in the study
area in the, created by cattle paths, and our first impression was that there
appeared to be a noticeable quantity of chert, whose original source would
.t
2iea"v Brook Sabstatiai - !base I Report 13
have been outcrops in the limestone bedrock. A careful examination of this
material revealed that it was of undesirable quality for the manufacture of
stone tools. This observation is reinforced by the fact that the prehistoric
artifacts encountered at Site i tended to be of lithic raw material from
elsewhere. There were no temporally diagnostic prehistoric artifacts
reovered by the survey, but it is likely that further work near the
intersection of Meadow Brook with the unnamed tributary would reveal
diagnostic material, though the occupations there were likely limited. The
foundation at Site 1, the 'Muse Site' suggest the possiblity that significant
archeological remains from the historic period might be present there. If
ground disturbing activities were planned in this area or the adjacent
floodplain, additional testing would be desirable.
Neither surface exposures nor sub -surface testing at the proposed
Plant Site suggested that there were any cultural resources at or near this
location. Background research likewise suggested that there was no liklihood
that historic resources were present. Accordingly, no further evaluation for
the Plant Site is recommended.
]Meadow Brook Substation - Phase I Report 14
References Cited
Fehr, April M.
1983 'Riverine Adaptive Phases and Environmental Stress During the
Woodland Period in the Northern Shenandoah Valley'. Paper presented at
the Annual Meeting of the Archeological Society of Virginia, Manassas.
Gardner, William M.
n.d. The Prehistory of the Shenandoah Valley. Ms. in preparation on
file at the Thunderbird Research Corporation, Front Royal, Virginia.
1974 'The Flint Run Paleo-Indian Complex: A Preliminary Report
1971-1973 Seasons'. Occasional Paper 1, Archeology Lab, The Catholic
University of America, Washington, D.C.
1978 'Comparisons of Ridge and Valley, Blue Ridge, Piedmont and
Coastal Plain Archaic Period Site Distribution: An Idealized Transect'. Paper
presented at the 1978 Middle Atlantic Archeological Conference, Rehoboth
Beach, Delaware.
1979 'Euroamerican Settlement Pattern in the Shenandoah Valley'.
Paper presented at the 1979 Middle Atlantic Archeological Conference,
Rehoboth Beach, Delaware.
1982 'Early and Middle Woodland in the Middle Atlantic: An
Overview'. Paper presented at the 1982 Middle Atlantic Archeological
Conference, Rehoboth Beach, Delaware.
1984 'External Cultural Influences in the Western Middle Atlantic: A
Neo-Diffusionist Approach'. Paper presented to the Second Conference on
Uplands Archeology in the East, Harrisonburg, Virginia.
Gardner, William M. and Victor A. Carbone
n.d. Environment and Prehistory in the Middle Atlantic. Ms. in
preparation for Academic Press.
Gardner, William M. and Suzanne Rimmler
1980 'Intensive Archeological Investigations (Phase II) of the Front
Royal Sewage Treatment Plant Connector System in Warren County,
Virginia'. Report prepared for the Town of Front Royal and on file at the
Virginia Research Center for Archeology, Yorktown.
I L
. dJp � `'•' — � �`,, � i i /� •.. � 1 � � � - - � � � tom, II ° ��t�p -.- e
EDaorfh
Chapel EIM,
=Vaud - _ , t _ ANT - �i ns
° -��. �- �, n ate•- _ : � L S I E
e
- _ • h ,a•- a
Meadow, Brook. - - Cuff
` A �4,
�bstat i on" X _ 737* VALUC ItR
y .
pring
1 ^- ``� - -- :ice.....,., � :�3i -p -_ o)' :• - - ' _ • ; .e«.�w}'L•Yh�bT � .
- ,..� � " -' - "`. � . �= i -•� ,ate '� '. it •„/ �ltlOn^J ` �. .
-� '•�� :�� _ guru-MEADO
IAL:BROOK SUBSTATIO
\ - ION MA ! Nam\
ScaWU24,00162
-
�;
.106
gs
• ..� Jam. ^ / I —J{��p "_ Y _ __ `- / - - s7
' / NTERCHANI:E
Figure 2 — D.J. Lake and Company
1885 Frederick County, Virginia— from surveys by J.M.Jathrop and A.W. Dayton
7 1 X
:AC!
peir
I-ri z
z�
p
Of
P12-6, - . - - -
'AL
J16
N'M
f7-
;A
jtp
IM
use
vk
0 TOT
W. Aft
S.-
ol fi AZI
SCALE: 2 in.=I mile
71.
NORTH I
Figure 3: Site 1, Muse Site Plan and Profile
Foundation Plan, Muse Site
3'
�-- 38'
`
basement step 12'
•
,..
Foundation outline
• defined by depression
.
................
.
................
.
................
•
. rubble -filled basement,`
.
................
.
.............
...eeeeeeee
.
................
.
................
chimney fall
0 s 10•
Test Pit Profile: Muse Site
surface
plow zone
.8' below surface
old B
—� 1.1 below surface
W-2')
• 0
•
n
Potomac Edison
Part of the Allegheny Power System
MEADOW BROOK
SUBSTATION
The Potomac Edison
Company Is Building To
Meet Growing Electrical
Needs
The 138 kV transmission network presently
serving The Potomac Edison Company's Southern
Area is becoming overloaded. This existing network
will not adequately and reliably meet the growing
demands for electricity. An extensive study was
conducted by The Potomac Edison Company to
determine alternatives to meet these increasing
demands. The study determined the electrical load
center for this area is located between Winchester
and Front Royal, Virginia, and would be best served
from a 500 kV source. The Potomac Edison Company
plans to construct a new 500/ 138 kV step-down
substation to serve this growing load.
The new substation, named Meadow Brook
Substation, would be located 2.5 miles south of
Stephens City, Virginia, just west of U.S. Route 11
and to the south of Virginia State Road 638. The
new substation would be built on a 185acre tract of
property purchased by The Potomac Edison
Company for this purpose. The site is located
beneath an existing 500 kV transmission line.
Meadow Brook will tap this line and provide a path
for distribution of power from the 500 kV system.
The new substation, scheduled to be in service by
December 1987, will allow The Potomac Edison
Company to continue supplying the Winchester -
Front Royal area with reliable electrical service.
The enclosed Figure 1 depicts the proposed
substation site.
•
SUBSTATION SITE SELECTION
Establishing a substation with a minimum impact
requires extensive engineering and planning. Alle-
gheny Power System (APS) engineers have applied
modern technology to select a suitable substation site
which will provide The Potomac Edison Company's
Southern Area customers with an adequate supply of
electricity now and in the future.
ACCESS
To every substation, there must be access from the
nearest public road. This will be accomplished via
Virginia State Route 638, located adjacent to the
substation site.
A railroad siding will be used for delivery of large
equipment.
CLEARING AND GRADING
The clearing of the substation site prior to grading
will be performed in a manner consistent with the
conservation of natural resources. Only areas being
graded will be cleared and a grading and soil erosion
control plan has been prepared. Provisions have been
made to control all erosion and sediment with
temporary structures and two existing ponds. One
small pond, located on the substation site, will be
enlarged and used for storm water control. Any
disturbed areas outside the substation fenced area
will be reseeded promptly.
RADIO AND TELEVISION
Satisfactory radio and television reception will
continue after the substation is placed in service. The
Potomac Edison Company's past experience with
such stations indicates little need for concern for
degradation of reception. However, if instances of
degraded radio or television reception occur, the
Company, at its cost and with the cooperation of the
property owner, will take steps to remedy the situation.
SUBSTATION DESIGN
An electrical substation is a facility which transforms
electrical energy from one voltage to another utilizing
special equipment.
Meadow Brook Substation will be an open air type
500 kV stepdown substation. It will supply power to
the 138 kV transmission system in the Southern Area.
i
�
•
625
INITIAL INSTALLATION (1987 In -Service)
631
STEPHENS� '
C I TY
The substation site will be graded to provide for the
the Facilities
628
ultimate size of substation. will be as
follows:
631
\
1. This station will consist of steel and concrete
\
f
structures with a maximum height of 1301.
Figure 2 is a photograph of the typical 500 kV
structures which support the electrical
.
'277
conductors.
2. A 50' x 100' metal control building will be
installed to house the necessary control and
/
/
monitoring equipment.
638
3. There will be no gases, fumes, or pollutants,
generated at this installation. Outdoor lighting is
/
\
provided for illuminating substation equipment
/
MEADOW BROOK
at night. These lights are utilized only when
personnel are working at the substation. Normally,
SUBSTATION
, 640
the substation is unmanned.
• ��
4. The substation graded area (600,000 sq. ft.) will
be covered with six inches of limestone and will
625
633
be enclosed by a six foot high, locked, chain link
/
:%
fence, topped by twelve inches of barbed wire.
Signs will call attention to the high voltage
7 3 5
within the fence.
\
5. A railroad siding will be built into the substation
11
from the railroad adjacent to the substation site.
This siding will be used for the delivery of large
(627
\
81
\
equipment.
\
6. Major electrical equipment includes a power
transformer, power circuit breakers and dis-
connect switches.
\
CONSTRUCTION
\
627
The construction for this project will encompass a
MID TO
�\
\
21 month period. It is planned to start in April of 1986
and be completed in December of 1987.
\
\
MEADOW BROOK SUBSTATION
LEGEND
EXISTING 500 KV LINE
----- EXISTING 138 KV LINES
.................. PROPOSED 138 KV LINE
FIGURE