Questions and Answers

• Carolinas Cement's permit application for Castle Hayne is based on the current mercury limits set by the EPA. If they are lowered, we will comply with the revised limits.
• We expect that there may be new regulations for mercury in the future beyond those being currently reviewed by the EPA. Carolinas Cement will continue complying with all regulations and look for opportunities to reduce mercury emissions as part of our on-going commitment to one of our core values, which is Continuous Improvement.

• Carolinas Cement has no current or future plans for burning hazardous waste.
• Coal is the primary fuel source considered at this time. Petcoke, a common fuel that is a coal-like residual from the petroleum refining process, could also be used.
• Carolinas Cement is investigating use of biomass and recycled tires at our existing facilities, but these options are not included in the initial permit for this facility. If a decision is ever made to burn something else, a public process would be followed.

• One of the benefits of modern cement plant designs and operations is that waste kiln dust is not generated, and for the Castle Hayne facility we will be able to recycle all kiln dust back into the process and the final product.

• We plan to produce up-to 2.4 million tons of cement annually. While the total amount of emissions is directly related to production, the cement plant that Carolinas Cement may build in New Hanover County will incorporate the latest available process and pollution control technology to produce cement in the most energy-efficent manner while limiting emissions.

• Yes, run-off water from rinsing trucks and placing water on roads for dust suppression will be directed to retention ponds. Whenever possible, water will be recycled for use in various applications, such as processing, washing and dust-control.

• There may be mothballed docks in Castle Hayne that could be rehabilitated.
• There are conceptual plans for barge load in and out of this facility and the feasibility still needs to be determined. If the river is utilized, appropriate Spill Prevention Safeguards will be implemented.
• It is not clear at this time, whether the Port may be utilized for trans-loading.

• Primary - Coal / Petcoke
• Secondary / Auxiliary - Fuel Oil and Natural Gas mainly for Start-up

• We have no current plans to use recycled materials to augment the main fuel; however, the cement industry is a leader in efficiently and effectively using recycled materials as fuels, which could reduce some emissions including Carbon Dioxide. Any new fuel materials would have to be approved by the regulatory agencies and comply with any new permit requirements.

• Not at this time, but we hope to incorporate recycled materials in the future.

• We have investigated the possibilities and are interested. In order to utilize any recycled materials as fuels, Carolinas Cement will work closely with State and Federal Permitting Agencies and comply with any current or future permit requirements.

• Fly Ash is incorporated in the production of the clinker as a component of the raw material fed into the kiln primarily to provide the necessary alumina in the cement composition.

• We are considering several options.
• It may be possible to work with a local power plant to receive some of our fly ash. However, we are in the preliminary stages of this process and are not sure that this approach will be viable.

• Yes, in an enclosed storage silo or dome with dust suppression mechanism.

• Carolinas Cement has no plans currently for a Fly Ash distribution center.

• Depending on production rates, we anticipate using 150,000 to 280,000 tons of coal per year. All of the coal quantity will be delivered by rail.

• Transportation plans have not been finalized.
• At this stage, we anticipate rail to be the preferred mode of transportation.
• Truck may be an additional mode.
• Barge is also being reviewed as a possibility.

• We do not plan to dredge.

• Carolinas Cement is currently working with the Corps of Engineers to identify and quantify the wetlands on the site. As we go through the federal and state permitting process for the wetlands, we will continue to look for opportunities to avoid, minimize and mitigate our wetland impacts.

• Based on testing requirements in our air permits and the data reported to the EPA for 2006 (the last records available), our Roanoke, VA plant had mercury emissions of less than six pounds and our plant in Medley, FL had mercury emissions less than 100 pounds.
• While our emissions are way under the allowable levels mandated by State and Federal laws, it is important to keep in mind that emissions are determined by natural occurrence of mercury in limestone found in different parts of the country.

• Both our plants in Virginia (upgraded in 1996 with a maximum production rate of 1.3 million tons per year of clinker) and Florida (upgraded in 2005 with a maximum production rate of 2.2 million tons per year of clinker) utilize coal as their primary fuel, along with some fuel oil and natural gas for kiln start-up. The plant in Castle Hayne may have similar emission points as our existing facilities, but will incorporate the best available process and pollution-control technology to produce cement in the most energy-efficient manner, while limiting emissions to meet the latest EPA requirements.

• The main air emissions from our proposed and current plants are those related to particulate emissions and fuel combustions, which can vary based on the differences in raw materials from plant to plant. The Castle Hayne plant will have similar types of emissions, but the latest regulations will require us to utilize the best available technology to meet current emission limits. The emissions at our plants are monitored using a Continuous Emissions Monitoring System (CEMS) for nitrous oxides (NOx), sulfur dioxide (SO2), carbon monoxide (CO), and particulate matter (PM) to ensure compliance with permit limits. A similar system will be used for the Castle Hayne facility.
• The quarrying process and water systems vary from plant to plant. In Florida, quarrying is conducted in the wet so there is no discharge from quarrying operations. In Virginia we mine in the dry and operate quarrying dewatering in accordance with a water discharge permit. For process water, we have no direct discharges. In Virginia, storm and process water goes to lined process water ponds and all water is recycled. The only discharge would be in a rare excessive storm event, in which case some water could be discharged in accordance with our permits. In Florida, process water goes to a non discharge retention basin and we are looking for additional ways to recycle water at that facility.
• We intend to develop a system at Castle Hayne that is similar to our system in Virginia to recycle as much water as possible.

• Please refer to the earlier question. We will have no discharges or impacts to groundwater that would be anticipated impact groundwater quality. Our operations will employ best practices to limit or eliminate water discharges and minimize the potential for spill or releases that could affect groundwater quality.

• Carolinas Cement is gathering information from existing plants and has commissioned a preliminary traffic study using our existing operations as a basis for modeling the traffic impacts of the Castle Hayne project. The existing Castle Hayne stone quarrying activities are expected to terminate in about the same time that the cement plant will be commissioned. The net effect will likely be a minimal impact to the local road traffic given our projection that the majority of shipments may be on rail.

• Carolinas Cement furnished required information through Wilmington Industrial Development, Inc. to Dr. William Hall of UNC-Wilmington Cameron School of Business. Dr. Hall used the IMPLAN system to arrive at the projections.