20060331 Ver 6_Information Letter_20091021

AMD
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPAR'T'MENT OF TRANSPORTATION
BEVERLY PURDUE
GOVERNOR
U.S. Army Corp of Engineers
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402
Attn: Ms. Kim Garvey
Regulatory Specialist
Subject: Request for Clarification of USACE permit modification dated September 3,
2009 for the construction of the US 311 Bypass from north of Spencer Road to
US 220, Randolph County, TIP No. R-2606B.
ACTION ID #: 2004-00340
Reference: NCDOT Permit Modification Request, dated April 21, 2009
USACE 404 Permit Modification issued September 3, 2009 Action ID 2004-00340
Dear Ms. Garvey:
On April 21, 2009 the NC Department of Transportation (NCDOT) submitted a permit
modification request for the continuation of the US 311 bypass in Randolph County. On
September 3, 2009 the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE) issued a permit modification for
the subject project. The impact and mitigation quantities in the permit modification request do
not correspond with the quantities provided in the modification request and the NCDOT is
unable to determine how the mitigation requirements were calculated.
October 21. 2009
EUGENE CONTI
SECRETARY
The NCDOT requests clarification for the discrepancies in stream impact quantities and
mitiq"tinv,rFnnirelTlPPtc-at egcli lmpact.s.te. Below.is a. tOl-.tom that Showsahe.mrtl^_<111^P
proposed by NCDOT for the entire projeci (R-601A, IB, R-2606A & B) in the permit
modification compared to the mitigation quantities proposed in the permit modification. A
second table is also provided that includes all sites where the impact quantities in the permit
modification do not correspond with the modification request, for which the NCDOT is unable to
determine the mitigation requirements, followed by a brief summary of each site.
MAILING ADDRESS:
INC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
1598 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699-1598
TELEPHONE: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
WEBSITE: WWW.N000T.ORG
LOCATION:
4701 ATLANTIC AVENUE.
SUITE 116
RALEIGH NC 27604
Table 1- R-6091A. IB. R-2606A. & B Proiect Mitigation Totals
Original Permit USACE Permit NCDOT Modification
Mitigable Impacts Modification Mitigable Request Mitigable
(feet) Impacts (feet) Impacts (feet)
Cape Fear River Basin 18,626 18,019 17,814
Yadkin River Basin 8318 6,928 5A44
Table 2- R-26068 Permitted sites with discrepancies
Permit Original USACE NCDOT Permit USACE Original NCDOT Permit
Drawing Permit Modification permit mod USACE Modification
Impact Impacts application impacts dated mitigation mitigation
Site Dutcd 3/i 5/07 impacts dated 9/3/09 (feet) rcciLured requested (feet)
Number (feet) 4/21/09 (feet) (feet)
Site 13 738 P 407 13 460 P 738 407
153 IN
Site 14 338 P 431 P 431 P 338 431
466 IN 27 IN 4661 _
Site 16 75 IN 0 75 IN 0 0
Site 18 466 IN 475 IN 475 1 0
Site 20 315 P 294 P 294 P 719 294
404 IM 404 E 4041
Site 23 1.050 P 480 PAM 967 P 1,050 480
121 IN 1651N 1651
Site 24 630 P 475 P 475 P 630 475
2561N 1.035 IN 1,0351
Site 25 1,723 P 1,290 P 1,910 P 1,723 1,290
620 IN
Stream Status: P-Perennial, IN-Intermittent Non-Mitigable, IM-Intermittent Miti=able. 1-Intermittent Mitigation
unknown, E-Ephemeral
• Site 13- The modification request states that stream impacts are comprised of 407 feet of
perennial mitigable streams and 153 feet of intermittent streams not requiring mitigation.
The USACE permit modification states,that all stream impacts are perennial and total 460
feet. No clarification is provided for the discrepancy or how much mitigation is required
at Site 13.
• Site 14- The modification request states that stream impacts are comprised of 431 feet of
perennial mitigable streams and 27 feet of impacts intermittent non-mitigable. The
USACE permit modification states that stream impacts are comprised of 431 feet of
perennial stream impacts. and 466 feet of intermittent stream impacts. No clarification is
provided for the discrepancy or how much mitigation is required at Site 14.
• Site 16- The modification request states that an ephemeral non-mitigable ditch was
originally shown as an intermittent stream requiring mitigation of 75 feet. The USACE
2
permit modification states that perennial stream impacts are 75 teet. No clarification is
provided for the discrepancy or how much mitigation is required at Site 16.
• Site 18- The modification request states that impacts are comprised of 475 feet of
intermittent non-mitigable stream impacts. The stream impacts on the USACE permit
modification correspond with the modification request however, no information is
provided that shows how much mitigation is required at Site 18.
• Site 20- The modification request states that stream impacts are comprised of 294 feet of
perennial mitigable stream impacts and 404 feet of non mitigable impacts to an
ephemeral ditch. The USACE permit states that impacts are comprised of 294 feet of
perennial stream impacts and 404 feet of intermittent stream impacis. Tfie permit
modification does not provide any information on how much mitigation is required at Site
20.
• Site 23- The modification requests states that impacts are comprised of 480 feet of
mitigable stream (Perennial and Intermittent) impacts and 165 feet, of intermittent non-
mitigable stream impacts. An additional 487 feet of a non-mitigable channel should not
require mitigation. The USACE permit modification states that stream impacts are
comprised of 967 feet of perennial stream impacts and 165 feet of intermittent stream
impacts. No clarification is provided for how much mitigation is required at Site 23.
• Site 24- The modification states that impacts are comprised of 475 feet of perennial
mitigable stream impacts and 1,035 feet of intermittent non-mitigable stream impacts.
The USACE permit modification reflects these numbers, however no information on how
much mitigation is required at Site 24 is provided.
• Site 25-The permit modification request states that the impacts are comprised of 1,290
feet of perennial mitigable stream impacts and 620 feet of intermittent non-mitigable
stream impacts. The USACE permit modification groups all of the stream impacts into
perennial stream impacts. No clarification is provided for the discrepancy or how much
mitigation is required at Site 25.
Prior to the submittal of the permit modification request on April 21, 2009 the NCDOT reviewed
the streams that were mapped as ;:.rt of the original permit application submitted February 28,
26oo. Some discrepancies were found between what was mapped and what wn? found in the
field. The NCDOT worked with Ms. Amy Euliss of the Division of Water Quality to resolve all
streams in question including reviewing the questionable streams in the field on November 17,
2008. Since the USACE had not reviewed the questionable stream calls in the field at the time of
the permit application, the mitigation determinations made in the field by DWQ were used. The
NCDOT attempted to coordinate a review in the field of any and all questionable streams with
the USACE (See below). To date the USACE has not provided a date of availability to conduct a
field review. The NCDOT is still prepared to conduct a review of any questionable streams with
the USACE in the field at their earliest convenience.
3
• October 23, 2008- Requested available times for Mr. Richard Spencer to review some of
the streams in the field. Mr. Spencer responded that he had nothing available in
November.
• . November 24, 2008- Provided Mr. Spencer with a copy of the completed stream
determination forms and a summary of the sites reviewed in the field with DWQ on
November 17, 2008.
• January 13, 2009- Requested in person again Mr. Spencer schedule a time to review the
stream sites in the field to confirm the mapping was correct and mitigation requirements
were correct. Also provided Mr. Spencer with a hard copy of all stream forms and a
summary of the sites reviewed in the field with DWQ on November' !7, 2008. Mr.
Spencer responded that he would get back with NCDOT with his availability.
• On approximately February 25, 2009- Spoke with Mr. Spencer on the phone to determine
if he had reviewed the stream information yet. Mr. Spencer requested an additional copy
of the stream forms.
• March 3, 2009- Provided Mr. Spencer via email a third copy of the stream forms and the
summary of sites reviewed in the field with DWQ on November 17, 2008.
By way of this letter the NCDOT requests that the USACE provide clarification of the mitigation
requirements required at each individual site and determine if they would like to review any of
the streams in the field. Thank you for you assistance with this project. If you have any
questions or need any additional information about this project, please contact Brett Feulner at
[phone].
S9 y
Greg Thorpe, P.E., Branch Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
GT/bmf
Mr. Brian Wrenn, NCDWQ Mr. Gary Jordan, USFWS
M.. Clarence W. Coleman. P.E.. FHWA Ms. Kathy Matthews. USF.PA
Mr. Victor Barbour, P.E., Project Services Unit Mr. Scott McLendon, USACE, Wilmineion
Mr. Travis Wilson, NCWRC
4