20070168 Ver 1_More Info Received_20081031

4rMACTEC MACTEC Engineering and Consulting
1 Patton Avenue
Asheville, North Carolina
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL °I " U1 LP 8
TO: Mr. Ian McMillan DATE: 10/29/2008
NC Division of Water Quality MACTEC PROJECT NO.: 6229-05-2914; Task 15
2321 Crabtree Boulevard; Suite 250 PROJECT NAME: Grandview Peaks
Raleigh, NC 27604 SUBJECT: DWQ Comments Response and Request for Issuance of
[phone] a 401 Permit
WE TRANSMIT TO YOU: HEREWITH ? UNDER SEPARATE COVER
SUBJECT: ACTION: SENT BY:
?DRAWINGS ?FOR YOUR INFORMATION ?MAIL
?SPECIFICATIONS ®FOR YOUR COMMENT OR APPROVAL ?CERTIFIED MAIL
?CALCULATIONS ?RETURNED FOR CORRECTION: RESUBMIT ®EXPRESS FED
®REPORT ?APPROVED AS NOTED ?COURIER
?COST ESTIMATE ?AS REQUESTED ?HAND DELIVERED
?AS NOTED ?FACSIMILE:
transmittal
COPIES DATE DESCRIPTION
2 10/29/08 DWQ Comments Response and Request for Issuance of a 401 Permit
REMARKS: Please find attached two copies- DWQ Comments Response and Request for Issuance of a 401 Permit. Should
you have any questions, please contact Robert Sain at (828)-252-8130 or Allen Conger (803)-798-1200
o?c LA
OCT 3 1 2008
DENft - WATER QUAL1 Ty
WETLANDS ArID STOR"'TER I
CC: Todd Black; Fall Creek Land Company By:
Dicky Harmon, MACTEC - Raleigh Office Robert L. Sain
Cyndi Karoly, NC DWQ 401 - Raleigh, NC
Kevin Barnett, NC DWQ 401- Asheville, NC Direct Phone: [phone]
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is
privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible
for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by telephone and return the original message to us at the above address via the U.S. Postal
Service. Thank you.
If transmission is not received in good order, please call Tracy Effler at [phone]
D-wmenI5 Form Revised !0;!8/02
;;1MACTEC
engineering and constructing a better tomorrow
October 27, 2008
Ms. Cyndi Karoly
' N.C. Division of Water Quality
401 Oversight/ Express Review Permitting Unit
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699
Subject: The Grandview Peaks Development
' DWQ Comments Response and Request for Issuance of a 401 Permit
USACE Action ID: 2007-200-359
DWQ Project # 07-0168
' McDowell County, North Carolina
MACTEC Project No. 6229052914
Dear Ms. Karoly:
' MACTEC Engineering and Consulting, Inc. (MACTEC), on behalf of the applicant, the Fall
Creek Land Company (FCLC):
1. Addresses Division of Water Quality (DWQ)'s recent comments from Kathy Stecker, emailed
via Ian McMillan on October 15, 2008 (see Attachment B) within this submittal, and
' 2. Requests that the DWQ 401 division move forward and issue or deny issuance of a 401 Permit
for Project # 07-0168.
This document addresses the comments made by Kathy Stecker and will provide a summary of
the FCLC's extensive efforts to comply with the DWQ, to accomplish the goal of preserving
water quality.
We would appreciate your timely review of this information and your written response regarding
this project either issuing or denying a Division of Water Quality, 401 permit.
1
MACTEC Engineering and Consulting, Inc.
1308 Patton Avenue • Asheville, NC 28806 • Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
www.mactec.com

t
1
DWQ comments response and request for 401 permit October 27, 2008
Grandview Peaks, McDowell County, North Carolina MACTEC Project No. 6229052914
Project Overview:
The Fall Creek Land Company's (FCLC) "Grandview Peaks (GP)" development contains 54,392
linear feet of jurisdictional, perennial, and intermittent stream channels. The north-western
portion of the property contains two networks of unnamed tributary streams that drain to
Hopper's Creek. The FCLC plans to impound these unnamed, tributary stream systems to create
two small reservoir lakes (27.1 acre and a 6.8 acre). Both lakes are down gradient from existing
development activity and are the most feasible location on the property-having the right
combination of drainage area, perennial stream flow, and constricted valleys (see Figure 1). Both
proposed impoundment(s) will be located in the upper Catawba River Basin (HUC 03050101;
sub basin 03-08-30) within the Northern Inner Piedmont Ecoregion.
Background Information:
The North Carolina DWQ 401 Division developed an analytical monitoring protocol to predict
how water quality will affect future impoundment(s) (March 2008, Predictability Study Protocol
for Sampling Reference Impoundment(s) NCDWQ, 2008). These guidelines currently state that
applicants wishing to build new impoundment(s) conduct rigorous monitoring of two "similar,
existing" lakes as reference for what to expect with regards to water quality. The Fall Creek Land
Company (FCLC) provided a proposed alternative to the DWQ's guidelines on July 8, 2008 (see
Appendix A); submitting the Proposed On-Site Modeling and Adaptive Management Plan to
model and maintain water quality on-site (see Appendix B). The FCLC alternative procedure
uses watershed loading analyses consistent with the recommended DWQ lakes modeling
procedures. In addition, the FCLC alternative procedure will ensure that appropriate BMPs are in
place to proactively mitigate changing nutrient loads as a result of residential development,
helping to establish and maintain impoundment(s) water quality.
A list of project milestones has been provided in Attachment I and in addition the most recent
milestones (2008 DWQ documents) have been provided in Appendices A and B. The DWQ
recently (October 15" 2008), via Kathy Stecker (see Attachment B), provided comments on the
FCLC "Proposed On-Site Modeling and Adaptive Management Plan," submitted September 23,
2008 (see Appendix B).
2
DWQ comments response and request for 401 permit October 27, 2008
Grandview Peaks, McDowell County, North Carolina MACTEC Project No. 6229052914
Purpose:
' The last meeting held on July 21, 2008 between the FCLC and the NC DWQ was held to discuss
a proposed modeling and monitoring of the proposed Grandview Lakes project. At that time,
' DWQ felt that the monitoring plan, as discussed, was not needed, and following this meeting the
DWQ requested a draft of the Fall Creek Land Company's proposed watershed modeling and
' adaptive management plan. This modeling and adaptive management plan was submitted and
reviewed, in part, by the NCDENR 401 Division, and by the Modeling and TMDL Unit. In
' response to the review of the proposed modeling and adaptive management efforts proposed by
FCLC, the purpose of this submittal is two fold: 1. To address comments made by Kathy Stecker
' (Attachment 1), NCDENR Modeling and TMDL Unit; 2. To request that the DWQ 401 division,
issue or deny issuance of a 401 Permit for this project, DWQ Project # 07-0168.
Our responses to comments provided by Kathy Stecker on the proposed modeling and adaptive
management plan are provided below:
Comment # 1
Kathy Stecker (NCDENR) commented: "We do not understand why the applicant would elect to
use an un-calibrated model rather then monitoring for a demonstration, when there are
' apparently numerous existing impoundments in the vicinity, including at least one on Hopper's
Creek."
FCLC Response# 1
A search, as reported previously, identified 5 impoundments within the 8-Digit HUC (Table 1,
Appendix C) Based on recommended reference site characteristics (Table 2), all of the existing
impoundments in Table 1 were determined to be within the same USGS hydrologic unit and level
IV Ecoregion (See Figure 1). Despite a thorough search for existing data on lakes and streams
within the region, no information on the design or contributing watershed was found for any on
the waterbodies identified as potential reference impoundments. Table 1 compares these 5
' candidate impoundments to the two proposed impoundments, and significant differences are
noted. Although this cannot be confirmed by information at hand, we do not believe than any of
' the 5 candidate impoundments have the proposed mechanism for water withdrawal, and
comparability of design cannot be determined. Thus, these impoundments do not meet the
criteria on this basis alone. Further, Lake James and Lake Tahoma are much larger in surface
' area, and not comparable to the proposed impoundments. The smaller impoundments (A-C) have
different land use and in most cases, different stream order. These impoundments do not meet the
3
Q Project Boundary
0 2 4 6 /
Proposed Lake Boundaries Miles
I
Source: USDA DRG Mosaic for McDowell County, North Carolina 2007 t
, IMPOUNDMENTS DEVELOPMENT
MACTEC GRANDVIEW
EXISTING, NEARBY, IMPOUNDMENTS WITHIN THE UPPER
CATAWBA BASIN (HUC 03050101)
MCDOWELL COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
[BY SJM - -- 10/24/08 1BY `-' - RLS F " - 10/24/08 1 °` "'" "" ? 6229-05-2914 1 F"""" 1 I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
DWQ comments response and request for 401 permit October 27, 2008
Grandview Peaks, McDowell County, North Carolina MACTEC Project No. 6229052914
necessary requirements based upon these factors. In any case, our point from the July meeting
was that "reference" impoundment was an ideal that cannot be truly met, and that modeling
provides sufficient predictive value upon which to base the analysis. Because water quality is
directly controlled by characteristics of the contributing watershed, site specific attributes of the
watershed will be the primary mechanism for fluctuations in water quality. Differences in land
use, soils, topography, and depth and size of the impoundment will prevent useful water quality
comparisons and limit the value of future water quality predictions at a separate location.
Therefore, adaptive management of a newly constructed pond cannot be accurately assessed
using comparisons from a separate existing impoundment, and better management practices may
be applied by focusing on reducing nutrient loads from selected basin areas to preserve water
quality after construction.
Table 1: Existing impoundments identified as potential reference impoundments for the
Grandview Peaks Development (Comparison topics based on DWQ Predictability Study as
shown below in Table 2).
Impoundments Proposed Proposed
Lake A Lake B Lake C Lake James Lake Tahoma Lake 2 Lake 3
Distance (Miles) from
GP 347 3.4 4 19 25 on-site on-site
8-Digit HUC 03050101 03050101 03050101 03050101 03050101 03050101 03050101
Level IV Ecoregion N. Inner N. Inner N. Inner N. Inner N. Inner N. Inner N. Inner
Piedmont Piedmont Piedmont Piedmont Piedmont Piedmont Piedmont
Comparable Design and

Type of Release Epilemnetic or Epilemnetic or
Hypo with Hypo with
Oxygenation, Oxygenation,
Unknown Unknown Unknown Hypolimnetic Epilimnetic as needed as needed
Land Use pasture Pasture pasture Medium to Low Density Low Density Low Density
lands lands lands High density Residential Residential Residential
Aproximate Mean
Depth feet < 20 < 20 < 20 46 30 21.5 11
Aproximate Volume
Acre-feet Unknown Unknown Unknown 313352 98549 585 77
Surface Area (Acres)
10 57 15 6812 3285 27 6.8
Stream Orders 2 3 2 3 3 2 1
Approximate Drainage
Area (Acres)
> 500 > 500 >5 00 243200 14720 329 74
Retention Time Unknown Unknown Unknown varies varies varies varies
I able ureatea by: KLS 10-08
Check by: ABS 10-08
4

1

1
DWQ comments response and request for 401 permit October 27, 2008
Grandview Peaks, McDowell County, North Carolina MACTEC Project No. 6229052914
Table 2: DWQ Predictability Study Protocol for Selecting Reference Impoundments, March 12,
2008.
The study sites shall be:
• Within the same 8-digit hydrologic unit (HUC) as defined by the USGS
(httr)://water.usg,,,,.gov/CTIO,/hiic.htmi);
• Within the same Level IV ecoregion (ftp://ftp.epa.aov/wed/ecoregionsine sc/nc eco pdf)
preferred;
• Of a comparable design, particularly in terms of type of release (e.g., epilimnion or
hypolimnion)
• Land use similar to what is anticipated in the built-out area surrounding and upstream of
the proposed project (cumulative impacts from housing development, etc. taken into
account), and has a comparable vegetated (woody) buffer (if present);
• Of comparable character in terms of size, primarily surface area, though mean depth and
volume should also be taken into consideration;
• The impounded stream will be of the same or similar stream order;
• Similar drainage area of the watershed;
• Have a similar retention time, if known.
Table 2 Source NCDWQ: Predictability Study Protocol for Sampling Reference Impoundments,
March 12, 2008.
Because site specific characteristics of the watershed and impoundment will determine how
impoundment related factors fluctuate among seasons, FCLC believes that the primary focus of
an adaptive management plan should rely on understanding the impacted watershed proposed for
construction. Watershed modeling proposed by FCLC will incorporate existing and future water
quality data collected on the site, widely accepted literature based loading calculations, and
predicted water quality improvements anticipated with the installation of structural BMPs within
the watershed. By incorporating anticipated loading sources to the proposed impoundments,
better BMP selection and design may be utilized to ensure the preservation of existing water
quality.
In general, FCLC believes that comparison of regional impoundments does not provide an
accurate prediction of future water quality anticipated on site. More efficient management of the
proposed impoundments may be achieved by incorporating site specific characteristics into BMP
selection and impoundment design.
Comment # 2
Kathy Stecker commented: "It is not clear how the proposed modeling is consistent with the
currently accepted and recommended DWQ lakes modeling procedures."
5
DWQ comments response and request for 401 permit October 27, 2008
Grandview Peaks, McDowell County, North Carolina MACTEC Project No. 6229052914

FCLC Response# 2
We met with DWQ and input was provided, including follow up conversations for additional
guidance. In good faith we have submitted the requested plan, and we feel it is technically
defensible and consistent with industry standards for both watershed and lake modeling
procedures. The models chosen are widely employed for the purposes stated, and routinely used
for predictive loading and water quality modeling, TMDLs, permitting, and other purposes by
USEPA and others. In fact, WASP, the proposed lake water quality model, is a USEPA, model.
Is WASP is inconsistent with DWQ lake modeling procedures? Please provide a copy of the
DWA lake modeling procedures.
Comment # 3
Kathy Stecker commented: "One round of sampling cannot adequately characterize existing
water quality."
FCLC Response# 3
The one sampling event was intended to capture an estimate of "worst case" stream water quality
during the hottest time of year. These data were proactively collected to avoid additional delays.
Additional sampling which may be used in the watershed model and for characterization of water
quality parameters of upstream tributaries is further outlined in FCLCs Proposed On-Site
Modeling and Adaptive Management Plan that was submitted July 8, 2008.
Comment # 4
Kathy Stecker commented: "Some parameters were not reported. Modeling results will be
dizcult to interpret because calibration is not possible and very little actual data is used."
FCLC Response# 4
The parameters reported included the analytes recommended for the "Up Stream and Down
Stream" of impoundment parameters recommended by DWQ, shown below in Table 3 of DWQ's
draft "Protocol for Sampling Reference Impoundments, March 12, 2008". Please explaiin wat is
meant by "some parameters were not reported"?
Actual data to be used with include relevant site-specific information such as land use, soils,
rainfall, flows, and stream water quality data. With regards to the validity of proposed modeling
results, FCLC believes that available water quality data from upstream tributaries, watershed
loading calculations, and continued monitoring of the constructed impoundments can be
successfully incorporated into BMP selection and adaptive management practices to ensure
preservation of water quality within the impoundment. Although no historic water quality data is
6
' DWQ comments response and request for 401 permit October 27, 2008
Grandview Peaks, McDowell County, North Carolina MACTEC Project No. 6229052914
available for use in calibrating the WASP model, inputs incorporated from the watershed model
and inflowing tributary will still provide an estimate of seasonal fluctuations in water quality
based on impoundment design as well as predetermined inputs and outputs. The model may
' therefore be used to determine when and if additional BMPs may need to be implemented to meet
state water quality guidelines. However, while watershed and water quality modeling are useful
' in predicting water quality in the impoundments based upon the land use changes and associated
BMPs, FCLC agrees that this modeling is predictive only. Therefore, FCLCs adaptive
management plan focuses on preservation of water quality through post construction monitoring
data as outlined in the DWQ predictability study protocols.
Ll

Table 3: Summary of water quality indicators to be measured.
Parameter Upstream of
impoundment
(1 station) Impoundment Cross section
(2-4 stations) Downstream of
impoundment
(1 station
Field measurements Yes, 0.1m only 0.1 m and every meter
to bottom Yes, 0.1m only
Depth to bottom N/A Yes N/A
Secchi transparency- N/A Yes N/A
Fecal coliform Grab Grab Grab
Total suspended
residue Grab Photic zone composite Grab
Turbidity Grab Photic zone composite Grab
Nutrients Grab
- Photic zone composite Grab
Chlorophyll a N/A _ ?P zone composite N/A
Table 3 Source NCDWQ: Predictability Study Protocol for Sampling Reference Impoundments,
March 12, 2008.
Comment # 5
Kathy Stecker commented: "It appears that only DO and temperature will be modeled:
chlorophyll a is also of concern in the impoundments."
FCLC Response# 5
Dissolved oxygen and temperature were specifically addressed in the proposed WASP model as
suggested by DWQ. WASP's Eutrophication Module includes phytoplankton as a state variable,
and estimated total biomass (Cp, phytoplankton carbon in mg/L). We agree that prediction of an
estimate of primary production is complex and will include uncertainties. Thus, chlorophyll a is
proposed for post construction monitoring.
7
t
' DWQ comments response and request for 401 permit October 27, 2008
Grandview Peaks, McDowell County, North Carolina MACTEC Project No. 6229052914
Comment # 6
Kathy Stecker commented: "'Pre-development existing water quality, can be used to set
baseline parameters which the Fall Creek Land Company (FCLC) may use to sE?t target
threshold indicators for water quality for after the lakes have been created' Does this
mean that the water quality in the lakes is expected to be similar to the streams' current
condition? There does not seem to be adequate recognition that the applicant must
demonstrate that the ponds themselves will meet water quality standards. The proposal
seems geared toward demonstrating only how BMPs will protect water quality after
development, with insufficient consideration of how the impoundments themselves will
' affect water quality. "
FCLC Response# 6
It is understood that impounding the water will change some water quality parameters. In
discussions with DWQ, temperature and DO were selected as appropriate indicators to represent
these changes within the impoundments. As discussed at the July 2008 meeting, proper design
(including watershed BMPs) and adaptive management are expected to achieve the goal of
' meeting water quality standards in the impoundments. The WASP model is complex and
designed specifically to predict water quality based upon a variety of input parameters and inlake
processes. This model is being used specifically to predict the water quality within the
impoundments, and the Eutrophication Module includes a variety of processes specifically to
predict how the waterbody itself and its external inputs result in the predicted water quality within
each impoundment. The water quality samples from upstream tributaries will be used as targets
for downstream water quality following release of surface water from the proposed
' impoundments.
' Comment # 7
Kathy Stecker commented: "BMP's within the impoundments implies in stream treatment. Is this
allowable? The applicant seems to anticipate that the impoundments will not meet DO standards
in the summer."
FCLC Response# 7
It is recognized that lentic and lotic waters will have potentially different temperature regimes
during the late summer. This difference is, in turn, linked with DO. This does not mean that
water quality standards cannot be met, but is a recognition of the physical factors governing these
state variables. Adaptive management techniques commonly used in lake management ]nay be
employed to mitigate this difference, especially for waters being returned to the lotic
environment.
1 8
DWQ comments response and request for 401 permit
Grandview Peaks, McDowell County, North Carolina
October 27, 2008
MACTEC Project No. 6229052914
Closing
The Fall Creek Land Company appreciates your timely review of our response to the Division of
Water Quality (DWQ)'s recent comments from Kathy Stecker sent via Ian McMillan on October
15, 2008 (see Attachment B) within this submittal, Also, our requests that the DWQ 401 division
move forward and issue or deny issuance of a 401 Permit for Project # 07-0168.
' Sincerely,
MACTEC ENGINEERING AND CONSULTING, INC.
/2_Z.
Robert L. Sain, CFM
Project Scientist
for waYl v, ) Q q D , W'11.
with permission Ann B. Shortelle, PHD
Limnologist/ Chief Scientist
cc: Todd Black, Fall Creek Land Company
Amanda Jones, Asheville Regulatory Field Office, USACE
Ian McMillan, Raleigh Headquarters, NC DWQ 401
Kathy Stecker, Raleigh Headquarters, NC DENR, Modeling and TMDL Unit
Kevin Barnett, Asheville Regional Office, NC DWQ 401
9
1

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
DWQ comments response and request for 401 permit
Grandview Peaks, McDowell County, North Carolina
October 27, 2008
MACTEC Project No. 6229052914
Attachment A: Recent Project Milestones
DWQ comments response and request for 401 permit October 27, 2008
Grandview Peaks, McDowell County, North Carolina MACTEC Project No. 6229052914
Recent Project Milestones:
January 16, 2007: The FCLC submitted a combined "Individual 404/401 Permit application" to
the USACE and DWQ.
September 25, 2007: The USACE, DWQ, commenting agencies, and public came back with
public notice comments to be addressed. FCLC's "Response to Pubic Notice Comments" was
submitted to the USACE and NC DWQ.
September 2007 through January 2008: consistent efforts were made by the Fall Creek Land
Company to contact regulators while the waiting for responses.
January 4,2008: The USACE responded, informally with an email dated.
January 10, 2008: A site meeting occurred with Ms. Amanda Jones, Asheville field office of the
USACE.
January 23, 2008: The DWQ responded formally to the "Response to Public Notice Comments"
with a letter stating that the application was "incomplete" pending analytical monitoring.
February 6, 2008: a follow-up office meeting took place with the USACE-the USACE
informally requested additional information. This additional information was submitted to the
USACE, Asheville Field Office on June 24, 2008.
February 2008 through June 2008: various correspondences took place between the FCLC and
regulators while drafting additional response documents to address concerns and new protocols.
' June 23, 2008: a brief follow-up meeting took place with the USACE to discuss the draft
Additional Comments Response document.

' June 24, 2008: The FCLC Draft - USACE Additional Comments Response document was
submitted to the USACE
d
an
copied to the DWQ.
July 8, 2008: the FCLC, On-Site Impoundment(s)s Sampling Protocol document was submitted
to the DWQ and copied to the USACE
July 21 2008: A meeting took place in Raleigh at the DWQ headquarters to discuss the FCLC
' sampling protocol document and the project status. Action to the FCLC to capture, on-site,
August water quality and to carryon with the FCLC proposed sampling protocol.
' August 6, 2008: Per the DWQ meeting, the FCLC conducted in-situ and analytical on-site
sampling at five locations adjacent to the proposed lakes.
August 29, 2008: On-Site Grandview Peaks, analytical sampling data results back from labs.
September 23, 2008: Impoundments Modeling and Adaptive Management Plan submitted to the
DWQ and copied to the USACE.
October 15, 2008: Email from Mr. Ian McMillan, a forwarded message from Kathy Stecker from
the NCDENR lakes.

DWQ comments response and request for 401 permit
Grandview Peaks, McDowell County, North Carolina
October 27, 2008
MACTEC Project No. 6229052914
Attachment B: Addresses Division of Water Quality (DWQ)'s recent comments from
Kathy Stecker, emailed via Ian McMillan on October 15, 2008

Sain, Robert
From: Ian McMillan [e-mail]]
' Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2008 4:08 PM
To: Sain, Robert
Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail]; Jones, Amanda D S;AW; tblack57
@charter.net; Conger, Allen; Shortelle, Ann; Jarvis, Brandon
' Subject: Grandview Peaks - McDowell County - Revised Proposed Impoundments, Watershed
Modeling and Adaptive Management Plan
' Robert, here is Kathy's review of the proposed modeling plan. - Ian McMillan
Ian,
' I reviewed the proposedplan and discussed it with my staff. We believe that monitoring two imilar existing
impoundments would yield more meaningful information than a model. We do not understangi why the
applicant would elect to use an uncalibrated model rather than monitoring for a demonstration, when there are
apparently numerous existing impoundments in the vicinity, including at least one on Hopper's Creek.
It is not clear how the proposed modeling is "consistent with the currently accepted and recommended DWQ
lakes modeling procedures. "
One round of sampling cannot adequately characterize "existing water quality. " Some parameters measured
' were not reported. Modeling results will be difficult to interpret because calibration is not possible and very
little actual data is used. It appears that only DO and temperature will be modeled; chlorophyll a is also of
concern in the impoundments.
' "Pre-development existing water quality, can be used to set baseline parameters which the Fall Creek Land
Company (FCLQ may use to set target threshold indicators for water quality for after the lakes have been
created. " Does this mean that the water quality in the lakes is expected to be similar to the streams' current
condition? There does not seem to be adequate recognition that the applicant must demonstrate that the ponds
themselves will meet water quality standards. The proposal seems geared toward demonstrating only how
BMPs will protect water quality after development, with insufficient consideration of how the impoundments
themselves will affect water quality.
'BMPs within the impoundments" implies instream treatment. Is this allowable? The applicant seems to
anticipate that the impoundments will not meet DO standards in the summer.
' Thank you for the opportunity to review this proposal. Please let me know ifyou have any questions about my
comments. I realize that you asked me about the modeling portion, but I have many years of lake monitoring
experience as well, so I looked at everything.
' -Kathy
H

DWQ comments response and request for 401 permit
Grandview Peaks, McDowell County, North Carolina
October 27, 2008
MACTEC Project No. 6229052914
Appendix A: Fall Creek Land Company proposed alternative to the DW'Q's
guidelines on July 8, 2008

OMACTEC
' engineering and constructing a better tomorrow
' July 8, 2008
Mr. Ian McMillan
' N.C. Division of Water Quality
401 Oversight/ Express Review Permitting Unit
1650 Mail Service Center
' Raleigh, North Carolina 27699
Subject: The Grandview Peaks Development
' On-site Impoundments Sampling Protocol
USACE Action ID: 2007-200-359
DWQ Project # 07-0168
' McDowell County, North Carolina
MACTEC Project No. 6229052914
' Dear Mr. McMillan:
MACTEC Engineering and Consulting, Inc. (MACTEC), on behalf of the applicant, the Fall
' Creek Land Company (FCLC), would like to address Division of Water Quality (DWQ)'s request
for analytical monitoring for the proposed impoundments. The DWQ letter dated January 23,
2008, sent by Mr. Kevin Barnett, stated that the Individual Permit Application was "incomplete"
pending "analytical monitoring" (see Attachment A). Mr. Ian McMillan, DWQ provided the
' FCLC with monitoring instructions via email dated June 6, 2008 (see Attachment B-1), Mr.
Kevin Barnett also provided instructions (see Attachment B-2). In both of these emails the DWQ
' recommends that the FCLC follow an abbreviated version of the "Predictability Stud) Protocol
for Sampling Reference impoundments" (see Attachment C). The purpose of this document is to
present a scientifically valid monitoring and analysis plan, a modification or alternative to the
DWQ predictability study, to accomplish the goal of preserving water quality.
' We would appreciate your timely review of this information and your written response regarding
the acceptability of this modified procedure for the required monito
12.??
Robert L. Sain 'Allen W. Conger
Project Scientist Senior Principal Scientist ro r jpLe am
cc: Todd Black, Fall Creek Land Company rm s
ission
Amanda Jones, Asheville Regulatory Field Office, USACE
Kevin Barnett, Asheville Regional Office, DWQ
I
MACTEC Engineering and Consulting, Inc.
' 1308 Patton Avenue • Asheville, NC 2 8806 e Phone: [phone] • Fax: [phone] www.mactec.com
Draft Response to DWQ Predictability Study July 8. 2008
McDowell Lakes Development Site. McDowell County, North Carolina
MACTEC Project No. 6229052914
' Brief Project Background to Date:
The FCLC submitted a combined "Individual 404/401 Permit application" to the USACE and
DWQ on January 16, 2007. The USACE, DWQ, commenting agencies, and public came back
with public notice comments to be addressed. FCLC's "Response to Pubic Notice Comments"
was submitted to the USACE and NC DWQ on September 25, 2007. The USACE responded,
informally with an email dated January 4, 2008. A site meeting occurred on January 10, 2008
with Ms. Amanda Jones, Asheville field office of the USACE. In addition, a follow-up office
' meeting took place with the USACE on February 6, 2008-the USACE informally requested
additional information. This additional information was submitted to the USACE, Asheville
Field Office on June 24, 2008.
The DWQ responded formally to the "Response to Public Notice Comments" with a letter dated
January 23, 2008, stating that the application was "incomplete" pending analytical monitoring
(Attachment A). The DWQ recently (March 2008) came out with an analytical monitoring
' protocol for predicting how water quality will affect future impoundments (Predictability Study
Protocol for Sampling Reference Impoundments NCDWQ, 2008) (see Attachment C). These
guidelines currently state that the applicant conduct rigorous monitoring of two "similar,
existing" lakes as reference for what to expect from a proposed impoundment.
The Fall Creek Land Company (FCLC) has reviewed the Predictability Protocol and recognizes
' that the DWQ has outlined a thorough water quality study for monitoring existing reservoirs.
However, the FCLC does not agree that the predictability protocol is feasible for use as a tool to
predict water quality for a future reservoir in a different watershed.
Watersheds are complex systems with a unique anthropological history and varying spatial and
temporal attributes such as: geology, soils, topography and aspect to the sun. Given the
unlimited, human caused and nafural variability possible within each watershed using an existing
' reservoir(s) as reference, whether within the basin or not, is not feasible or technically defensible
for the prediction of future water quality.
' As an alternative to the DWQ's reference impoundment approach, the FCLC proposes a
stand -a-
]one procedure for predicting water quality, on-site, at the Grandview Peaks development, and
technically sound monitoring for demonstration of upstream and downstream water quality
integrity. This procedure provides watershed loading analyses consistent with currently accepted
2

D
Draft Response to DWQ Predictability Study July 8, 2008
McDowell Lakes Development Site, McDowell County, North Carolina
MACTEC Project No. 6229052914
and recommended modeling procedures to predict impoundment water quality, and to provide
input to the engineering design to ensure that low impact development and BMPs are in place to
establish and maintain impoundment water quality. The Grandview Peaks Proposed
Impoundments Sampling Protocol-an alternative but compatible approach to the DWQ
Predictability Study Protocol for Sampling Reference Impoundments, procedure is outlined as
follows.
Grandview Peaks Proposed Impoundments Sampling and Analysis Protocol
1. Water Quality Data from nearby Existing Lakes and Stream Systems:
The Fall Creek Land Company's (FCLC) "Grandview Peaks (GP)" development contains 54,392
linear feet of jurisdictional, perennial, and intermittent stream channels. The north-western
portion of the property contains two networks of unnamed tributary streams that drain to
Hopper's Creek. The FCLC plans to impound these unnamed, tributary stream systems to create
small reservoir lakes, a 27.1 acre lake and a 6.8 acre lake. Both lakes are down gradient from the
existing development and are the most feasible location on the property-having the right
combination of drainage area, perennial stream flow, constricted valleys (that require less dam
footprints) (see Figure 1).
Both proposed impoundments will be located in the upper Catawba River Basin (HUC 03050101;
sub basin 03-08-30) within the Northern Inner Piedmont Ecoregion. The unnamed tributaries to
Hopper's Creek are 2.3 miles upstream of a privately owned "flood control impoundment."
Downstream of the flood control impoundment, Hopper's Creek joins Magazine Branch at 6.4
miles before joining South Muddy Creek at 9.1 miles; 14 miles to Muddy Creek proper which
drains 19 miles to the Catawba River. The nearest stream gage is 31 miles downstream on the
Catawba River after water outflow from Lake James joins the Catawba River.
The FCLC conducted a thorough preliminary search for existing lakes and streams data within the
area, per the DWQ protocol. Data from Lake James and Lake Tahoma were made available by
the lakes monitoring group (NCDENR-ESS-ISU-Debra Owen, Environmental Biologist, 6-10-
2008). Additional existing lakes data from another study located in the upper Piedmont were
provided by the NC Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ- Ian McMillan, 6-6-2008). Although
3

Draft Response to DWO Predictability Study
McDowell Lakes Development Site, McDowell County, North Carolina
MACTEC Project No. 6229052914
July 8, 2008

11

no suitable reference waterbodies were identified, the data for the above noted waterbodies will
be provided in our discussion also with the on-site monitoring results.
II. Baseline Data Collection: Existing hydrology/ Bathymetric data
To provide support to the watershed modeling, discussed in Section IV, baseline data for each
watershed will need to be gathered for each proposed impoundment. Data such as drainage area,
average slope, soil type, existing water conveyance, storage, and local rainfall data will be
calculated for the proposed lakes. Lakes data will be gathered and analyzed using the newest and
best available tools including programs such as GIS and AutoCAD. Some of these data have all
ready been gathered as part of the due diligence during the permitting process (see Table 1).
Table 1: Proposed Lakes #2 and #3; Example of Existing and Proposed Conditions.
Corresponding Approx. Approx. Acre Approx. Max length of Drainage Area Average
Watershed Pond acres feet height (ft) dam (ft) (acres) Slope
Lake #2 27.1 585.3 60.0 335.0 328.9 17
4
Lake # 3 6.8 76.7 40.0 390.0 73.9 .
17.3
i Sole t-reatea tsy: KL5 7-1-2008
Checked By: ABS 7-3-2008
III. On-Site Sampling Protocol
To ensure that construction of the proposed impoundments does not result in a degradation of
water quality within local tributaries and downstream at Hoppers Creek, water samples will be
collected at three intervals: 1. Prior to the construction of the impoundments-results to be used
in watershed modeling, and to establish stream baseline conditions; 2. During lake creation with
backfilled water (to document proper erosion control effectiveness during construction); 3. After
construction of the impoundments has been completed.
' Prior to construction samples will be collected weekly as recommended for this year (2008) using
an abbreviated sampling period of four weeks during the hottest period of the year between
August I" and August 30`' (NCDWQ, 2008) (see Attachment B-2) "growing season" as
recommended in the Predictability Study Protocol for Sampling Reference Impoundments. Two
' sampling stations for each perennial tributary will be monitored, once weekly, during this period;
including one upstream and one downstream sampling location for each of the proposed
impoundments (see Figure 1). Both upstream and downstream sampling stations will be placed
4
Draft Response to DWO Predictability Study July 8, 2008
' McDowell Lakes Development Site, McDowell County. North Carolina
AMCTEC Project No. 6229052914
' in a flowing (lotic) reach of the tributary to ensure accurate representation of existing water
quality parameters. Based on observations in the field, several of the tributaries entering the
proposed impoundments appear to be intermittent streams, and may not contain adequate flow
' during the entirety of the sampling period. Samples will be collected from these streams during
periods where adequate flow (approximately l CFS or greater) is present (see Figure 1). Should
' flows within a tributary drop below a measurable level, intermittent streams may be selectively
sampled following significant rain events that provide adequate flows. Results of prior to
' construction sampling will be used as discussed in Section IV.
' During construction samples will be collected bi-weekly throughout the "growing season" as
recommended in the Predictability Study Protocol for Sampling Reference Impoundments
(NCDWQ, 2008). If dam construction takes place before or after the growing season, samples
will still be collected on a bi-weekly basis.
' After the construction of the proposed dams sampling will continue on a biweekly basis in
accordance with the DWQ predictability study protocol (NCDWQ, 2008) (see Attachment C). In
' addition to samples collected at upstream and downstream reaches of each tributary, the newly
constructed impoundments will be sampled using two to four sampling transects running through
' the centerline of the impoundment from bank to bank (see Figure 1). This post construction
sampling period will include, at a minimum, one full growing season (May 1" through September
30"') after construction of the lakes is complete.
Water sampling protocols will adhere strictly to the requirements described in the Predictability
' Study Protocol for Sampling Reference Impoundments (NCDWQ, 2008) (see Attachrrient C).
Water quality parameters to be measured include water temperature, dissolved oxygen saturation,
' dissolved oxygen concentration, pH, specific conductance, Secchi depth transparency, total
suspended residue, turbidity, nutrients (total phosphorus, total Kjeldahl nitrogen, ammonia [NH3],
' nitrate + nitrite [N02+NO31), chlorophyll-a (corrected for pheophytin), and fecal coliform. Depth
to bottom measurements will also be collected within the impoundment following dam
' construction. As indicated in the Predictability Study Protocol (NCDWQ, 2008) (see Attachment
C), all field measurements, sampling methods, and QA/QC procedures will conform to the North
Carolina DWQ Intensive Survey Unit (ISU) Physical and Chemical Monitoring Standard
' Operating Procedure (SOP).
5
Draft Response to DWQ Predictability Study July 8. 2008
McDowell Lakes Development Site. McDowell County. North Carolina
AMCTEC Project No. 6229052914
IV. Modeling for Proposed Passive and Active BMP's
' Surface water data, as presented above in Section II, collected prior to construction of the
impoundments will be used to determine baseline water quality conditions within local streams,
as well as loading estimates (P, N and TSS) from contributing (upstream) portions of the
watershed. Once the load from upstream tributaries has been determined, additional watershed
modeling will be completed to determine the impacts (incremental change) of the proposed
residential construction and subsequent increase in impermeable surface area within the
' watershed. These loading estimates may then be compared to quantify loading from runoff from
the development and propose appropriate Best Management Practices (BMPs) to eliminate the
incremental loading difference.
Watershed modeling will be performed to quantify changes in water quality loading parameters
that are anticipated with the development of low-density residential housing on site. Modeling
will incorporate land use information, soils, existing water conveyance and storage, and local
rainfall data to determine the contribution of each sub-watershed to the total runoff load entering
the proposed impoundments. Results of the watershed model may then be combined with
1

sampling of upstream tributaries to determine a total influx of nutrients and other water quality
parameters that may affect downstream portions of the streams. Such information is useful in
effectively managing water quality within the impoundments by accounting for excess
stormwater runoff contributions as well as determining best management practices within the
impoundment prior to release of water downstream.
Appropriate BMPs must first be selected to account for additional loading entering through the
residential development. Construction of the proposed impoundments should provide adequate
storage and additional treatment of runoff loads that would otherwise enter local tributaries.
Because of this few detention catchments, if any, would be required to capture stormwater flow
within the watershed. If the results of the watershed model determine that additional BMPs are
needed, BMP selection and design criteria will be guided using the North Carolina Division of
Water Quality Stormwater Best Management Practices Manual (NCDWQ, 2007). A number of
BMP design options may be chosen to capture excess runoff prior to entering local streams or the
proposed impoundments, including, but not limited to:
6
Draft Response to DWQ Predictability Study July 8, 2008
McDowell Lakes Development Site, McDowell County, North Carolina
MACTEC Project No. 6229052914

r]

1

fl

a. Dry retention basins;
b. Wet detention basins;
c. Stormwater wetlands;
d. Bioretention;
e. Infiltration devices; and
f. Grassed swales (etc.)
Emphasis will be given to BMPs that are considered Low Impact Development (LID) and
sustainable for preservation of water quality and quantity.
To ensure that downstream portions of each tributary are not negatively impacted by the
construction of the proposed impoundments, out flowing water quality may be preserved through
best management practices within each impoundment. These practices are likely to focus of
temperature, dissolved oxygen and related constituents, and may include conditions of
management of water withdrawal from the impoundment, among other factors. BMP design and
implementation will utilize watershed loading estimates, upstream and downstream surface water
monitoring, and examples from similar impoundments within the regional area as guidance for
managing water quality exiting the impoundment. BMPs within the impoundments will be
designed and implemented to ensure that water quality flowing downstream of the impoundment
is not degraded from the water quality of upstream tributaries. Several BMPs may be utilized to
achieve this standard, including stirring mechanisms, oxygenation bubblers, and withdrawal of
bottom water to maintain ambient water temperatures during warmer periods of the year.
V. Reporting
Similar to the reporting requirements outlined in the NC Predictability Study protocol, the FCLC
will first provide a report of existing conditions. As described in Section 11, the existing
conditions report would provide a thorough analysis of the lotic stream systems that are to be
converted to lentic systems. An adaptive management plan will be drafted in accordance with the
current water quality. A long term, adaptive management agreement between the client and the
state can be agreed upon to ensure that the impoundments are managed "real time" to address any
changes in conditions, and maintain optimal water quality conditions. A comprehensive report of
all results and findings during both pre and post construction phases of the proposed
impoundments will be provided to NC DWQ 401 Oversight Unit for review.
7

Draft Response to DWQ Predictability Study
McDowell Lakes Development Site. McDowell County, North Carolina
MACTEC Project No. 6229052914
July 8, 2008
References:
NC DENR - Division of Water Quality "Redbook" Surface Waters and Wetlands Standards NC
Administrative Code 15A NCAC 02B .0 100, .0200 & .0300 Amended Effective: May 1, 2007;
Raleigh, North Carolina:
httn://l12o.eni•.state.ne.us/admin/ruies/documents/redl)ooli ImavO7 full with cover ndf
8

ATTACHMENT A
DWQ letter stating the Individual Permit Application was "incomplete pending Analytical
Monitoring" dated January 23, 2008.

?F W ATFR
\C) ?a

Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross h., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Coleen H. Sullins, Director
Division of Water Quality
SURFACE WATER PROTECTION SECTION
January 23, 2008
DWQ Project # 07-0168
McDowell County
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED - 7002 0460 0001 98989 6517
Todd Black
Fall Creek Land Company
Post Office Box 638
Hickory, North Carolina 28603
Subject Property: Grandview Peaks
McDowell County
' Project Return as Incomplete
Dear Mr. Black:
' On December 6, 2007, the Division of Water Quality (DWQ) received your additional
information responses in regards to your request to fill streams as part of your
residential development. As of today, the DWQ has not received a satisfactory
' response to all of the items discussed in the additional information requests. Therefore,
we are returning your' application as incomplete in accordance with 15A NCAC 2H
0506.
Should you decide to pursue your project, the following items must clear) be included
in any future application to the Division of Water Quality for filling Waters of the State:
• You must clearly show (through analytical monitoring) that the proposed
impoundments will not violate Water Quality standards in accordance with 15A
NCAC 02H .0506 (b).
As you have no authorization under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act for this activity,
' and work within waters of the state would be a violation of North Carolina General
Statutes and Administrative Code.
' North Carolina
North Carolina Division of Water Quality 2090 U.S. Highway 70 Swannanoa, NC 28778 Phone [phone] Customer Service JVaturallr?
Internet:: www,ncwaterquality.org FAX [phone]
' An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer - 50°6 Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper
' Grandview Peaks
Page 2 of 2
January 23, 2008
Once you have redesigned your project to address the problems and inadequacies with
your application as it was submitted, you will need to reapply for DWQ approval. This
' includes submitting a complete application package with the appropriate fee.
Please call Kevin Barnett at 828-296-4657 if you have any questions this matter.
' Sincerely,
Roger C. Edwards, Regional Supervisor
Surface Water Protection Section
Division of Water Quality
RCE
cc: Robert L. Sain, MACTEC Engineering and Consulting, Inc.
' 1308-C Patton Ave.
Asheville, NC 28806
Cathy Ball, P.E., City of Asheville
' Cyndi Karoly, DWQ, Wetlands / 401 Permitting Unit
Lori Beckwith, USACE Asheville Regulatory Field Office
David McHenry, Wildlife Resources Commission
Becky Fox, US EPA, Region 4
File Copy
Central Files
' Filename: 07-0168.GrandviewPeaks.return
ed
ATTACHMENT B-1
DWQ email form Ian McMillan with monitoring instructions, dated June 6, 2008.

Sain, Robert
From: Ian McMillan [[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, June 06, 2008 3:40 PM
' To: Sain, Robert
C c: [e-mail]; Conger, Allen; Cyndi Karoly
S ubject: Re: Protocol--Analytical monitoring for predictability
.
Robert, please sample once weekly in August of this year (four sampling events in
' August). I will be away next week. Thanks, Ian McMillan
Sain, Robert wrote:
> Ian,
> Per my conversation with Kevin Barnett on 6-5-08 he recommended that I
> call you to have the most recent "NC DWQ Predictability Study" sent to
> MACTEC (on behalf of the Fall Creek Land Company (FCLC)). I have
> received it. Thank you for forwarding me this protocol.
'
> As I understand--as explained by you and Mr. Barnett, this is the only
> lake predictability study available by the NC DWQ to date.

> MACTEC's client, the FCLC, submitted their permit application during
> last year (2007) when there was not an official predictability study.
> An abbreviated version of the current predictability study was
> required by another applicant in 2007.
'
> I understand that the FCLC will be allowed to follow an abbreviated
> version of this Predictability Study as well. This study will require
> the month of August be sampled in accordance with the 2008 Protocol.
' >
> Please respond with your recommended sampling protocol so as to make
> this request more official.

> Best regards,
> Robert

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ian McMillan [mailto:[e-mail]]
> Sent: Friday, June 06, 2008 11:19 AM
> To: Sain, Robert
> Subject: Protocol
' >
> attached

I

1
ATTACHMENT B-2
DWQ email form Kevin Barnett with monitoring instructions, dated June 9, 2008.
Sain, Robert
From: Kevin Barnett [[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, June 09, 2008 8:34 AM
To: Sain, Robert
Cc: Ian McMillan; Conger, Alien
Subject: Re: Protocol-Analytical monitoring for predictability.
Attachments: Kevin.Barnett.vcf
Kevin. Bamett.vcf
(658 B)
Good Morning Robert:
I would like to see (at a minimum) the monitoring to be 6 weeks (2 sampling periods during
the last 2 weeks of July and 4 sampling periods in August) in length.
All parameters in "NC DWQ Predictability Study" sampled for.
Best regards,
Kevin
Sain, Robert wrote:
>Ian,
>Per my conversation with Kevin Barnett on 6-5-08 he recommended that I
>call you to have the most recent "NC DWQ Predictability Study" sent to
>MACTEC (on behalf of the Fall Creek Land Company (FCLC)). I have
>received it. Thank you for forwarding me this protocol.
>As I understand--as explained by you and Mr. Barnett, this is the only
>lake predictability study available by the NC DWQ to date.
>MACTEC's client, the FCLC, submitted their permit application during
>last year (2007) when there was not an official predictability study.
>An abbreviated version of the current predictability study was required
>by another applicant in 2007.
>I understand that the FCLC will be allowed to follow an abbreviated
>version of this Predictability Study as well. This study will require
>the month of August be sampled in accordance with the 2008 Protocol.
>Please respond with your recommended sampling protocol so as to make
>this request more official.
>Best regards,
>Robert
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Ian McMillan [mailto:[e-mail]]
>Sent: Friday, June 06, 2008 11:19 AM
>To: Sain, Robert
>Subject: Protocol
>attached
' "The time is always right to do what is right"
Martin Luther King, Jr.
Kevin Barnett - [e-mail] North Carolina Dept. of Environment and Natural
' Resources Asheville Regional Office Division of Water Quality - Water Quality Section 2090
U.S. 70 Highway Swannanoa, NC 28778
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

u

11

G

e
2
ATTACHMENT C
' "Predictability Study Protocol for Sampling Reference Impoundments"

n
11

u
n
Background
Predictability Study Protocol for
Sampling Reference Impoundments
Prepared by North Carolina Division of Water Quality,
Wetlands and Stormwater Branch
March 12, 2008
NC has a regulatory Antidegradation Policy (15A NCAC 02B .0201) that states that it is
the "policy of the Environmental Management Commission to maintain, protect, and
enhance water quality within the State of North Carolina". Activities that may cause a
' degradation of water quality should be avoided unless the applicant can show that denial
of the proposed project will inhibit "important social and economic development".
' The NC Division of Water Quality receives requests to impound streams and rivers to
create amenity lakes, particularly in housing developments. These reservoirs do not serve
a great public need, such as serving as a water supply, and often do not provide
' "important social and economic development" sufficient to over-ride the primary policy
of the state to maintain and protect water quality. Lakes are not naturally occurring in the
majority of the state and impoundments often result in a degradation of water quality,
' mainly due to a high acceleration of the eutrophication process, so any impoundment
should come under additional scrutiny. Changing the character of a waterbody from a
lotic (flowing) to a lentic (impounded) system may result in:
• higher sensitivity to nutrient enrichment, with levels that may not cause issues in a
lentic system leading to overgrowths of algae and nuisance aquatic plants in a
lotic system;
' • increased nuisance growths, which can degrade water quality as reflected in
dissolved oxygen concentrations, pH, water temperature, chlorophyll-a, and total
dissolved gases, and may result in the waterbody no longer meeting NC numerical
' water quality standards (refer to 15A NCAC 2B .0200);
• degradation of water quality downstream of the impoundment (e.g., instream
dissolved oxygen and/or temperature can be increased or decreased to undesirable
' levels, depending on the type of release; concentrations of ammonia and TKN
may be increased, particularly in the case of bottom releases);
• negative impacts on channel morphology of the downstream reach, including a
' higher susceptibility to vertical downcutting and lateral (bank) erosion, resulting
in channel incision, streambank instability, and a long-term imbalance of the
sediment and flow regime;
' • deleterious impacts on instream fauna downstream of the impoundment due to the
cumulative effects of all the above factors.
' The rate of impoundment requests and the high potential for impoundments to degrade
water quality and to violate water quality standards has led to the need for additional
information from the applicant for use by DWQ staff in the permitting process.
' Protocol for Sampling Reference Impoundments, March 12, 2008
Page 1 of 5

Therefore, it is incumbent on the permit applicant to show that a proposed impoundment
' project is unlikely to cause a degradation in water quality within the affected reach,
which includes not only the impounded section of stream but also upstream and
downstream of the proposed project. The guidelines outlined in this document are to be
' used by applicants to collect appropriate water quality data to support their assertion that
the proposed project will not cause degradation of water quality.
I
ntroduction
In order to show that the proposed project will not cause a degradation of water quality
within the affected reach, the applicant shall collect appropriate water quality data in a
minimum of two existing impoundments that are similar to the project being proposed.
These data will be assessed by DWQ to ensure that numerical water quality standards are
' not being exceeded, and also to determine if a significant change in water quality exists
by comparing data from the upstream and downstream reaches.
' The applicant shall use the following guidelines to develop a written study plan and
sampling schedule, which will be submitted to DWQ staff for approval at least 30 days in
advance of the proposed start of monitoring.
Site Selection
' A minimum of two comparable impoundments will be selected by the applicant for
monitoring. It is unlikely that completely comparable impoundments will exist, and each
proposed project will likely have slightly different concerns; the following criteria are
' shown in relative order of importance and shall be used to select the most comparable
sites. The applicant shall specify why the proposed sampling sites meet these criteria,
and if not, what impact(s) that may have on the interpretation of the resulting data, and
' the relative importance of the impact(s).
The study sites shall be:
' Within the same 8-digit hydrologic unit (HUC) as defined by the USGS
(http: //water.us<„s.aov/GIS/huc.htrni);
• Within the same Level IV ecoregion
' (ftp:/,/ftL).epa.<.yov/wed/ecorecions!nc sc/nc eco pdt) preferred;
• Of a comparable design, particularly in terms of type of release (e.g., epilimnion
or hypolimnion)
' Land use similar to what is anticipated in the built-out area surrounding and
upstream of the proposed project (cumulative impacts from housing development,
etc. taken into account), and has a comparable vegetated (woody) buffer (if
' present);
• Of comparable character in terms of size, primarily surface area, though mean
depth and volume should also be taken into consideration;
' The impounded stream will be of the same or similar stream order;
• Similar drainage area of the watershed;
• Have a similar retention time, if known.
' Protocol for Sampling Reference Impoundments, March 12, 2008
Page 2 of 5

11

Ci

At the applicant's discretion, additional data may
be collected from nearby (within the same Level
IV ecoregion) natural lakes (where available, see
below for list) to show that conditions within the
study impoundments are not significantly
different from those found under natural
conditions with minimal impacts.
Sampling schedule
A minimum total of ten sample sets should be
collected. Sampling and measurements should
occur during the "growing season", defined as the
period from May 1 through September 30. All
sampling and measurements should be performed
during daylight hours. Data may be collected:
• every other week during the owin
Table 1: Natural lakes in NC
-
Lake Name
? - River Basin
Alligator Lake Pas uotank
Bay Tree Lake Cape Fear
Catfish Lake White Oak
Ellis Lake Neuse
Great Lake White Oak
Jones Lake Cape Fear
Lake Mattamuskeet Tar-Pamlico
Lake Phelps Pasuotank
Lake Waccamaw Lumber
Pun go Lake Tar-Pamlico
Salters Lake CE e Fear
Singletary Lake Cape Fear
Swan Creek Lake Pasuotank
ln' g
season within a single calendar year, or
• collected monthly during the growing season over two consecutive calendar
years.
Sampling stations
For each impoundment sampled, four to six specific sampling stations should be
identified as follows:
• one station on the stream located in a flowing (lotic) reach upstream of the
reference impoundment;
• two to four stations (depending on size and heterogeneity of the system under
study), evenly spaced across the centerline of the impoundment (i.e., bank to bank
transect) (lentic);
• one station on the project stream located in a flowing (lotic) reach downstream
(within 500 feet) of the reference impoundment.
Locations of all sampling stations should be georeferenced in the field using NAD83
datum.
Water Quality Indicators
The indicators to be measured include water temperature, dissolved oxygen saturation,
dissolved oxygen concentration, pH, specific conductance, Secchi depth transparency,
total suspended residue, turbidity, nutrients (total phosphorus, total Kjeldahl nitrogen,
ammonia [NH3], nitrate + nitrite [N02+NO31), chlorophyll-a(corrected for pheophytin),
and fecal coliform. Depth to bottom should also be recorded for the two to four lentic
stations (i.e., within the impoundment).
Protocol for Sampling Reference Impoundments, March 12, 2008
Page 3 of 5

Sampling methods
All sampling, field measurements, and QA/QC procedures should conform to the
methods outlined in the DWQ Intensive Survey Unit (ISU) Physical and Chemical
Monitoring Standard Operating Procedure (SOP), available online at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.usiesb/isu.html. Two different sampling methods will be used,
depending on whether the station is lotic (upstream and downstream reaches) or lentic
(within the impoundment), as described below and summarized in Table 2:
• Lotic stations: Field measurements (temperature, DO, pH, specific conductance)
will be taken in situ at a depth of approximately 0.1m below the surface. Water
samples for nutrients, total suspended residue, turbidity, and fecal coliform are to
be taken as grab samples at a depth of approximately 0.1 m below the surface. All
measurements and samples should be taken in a flowing, well-mixed area of the
stream, generally at or near the thalweg.
• Lentic stations: Field measurements (temperature, DO, pH, specific conductance)
will betaken at each station just below the surface (depth of approximately 0.1m),
and at lm intervals to the lake bottom. Secchi depth transparency should be taken
at each sampling location. Fecal coliform samples shall be collected as grab
samples at a depth of approximately 0.1m below the surface. Samples for
nutrients, total suspended residue, chlorophyll a, and turbidity shall be taken as
spatial composites of the photic zone, defined as twice the Secchi depth. The
preferred method of composite sampling is to use a LabLine (see ISU SOP for
description) or similar type sampler that allows continuous sampling as it is
lowered and raised throughout the photic zone. Less desirable but acceptable is
the use of a Van Dorn or similar sampler to collect multiple grab samples at
regular intervals throughout the photic zone, and composite them before
distributing into sample bottles.
Table 2: Summary of water quality indicators to be measured. All depths are measured from the water
surface.
Parameter Upstream of
impoundment
(1 station Impoundment Cross section
(2-4 stations) Downstream of
impoundment
(1 station)
Field measurements Yes, 0.1 m only 0.1 m and every meter
to bottom Yes, 0.1m only
Depth to bottom N/A Yes N/A
Secchi trans arenc N/A Yes N/A
Fecal coliform Grab Grab Grab
Total suspended
residue Grab Photic zone composite Grab
Turbidity Grab Photic zone composite Grab
Nutrients Grab Photic zone composite Grab
Chlorophyll a N/A Photic zone composite N/A
Protocol for Sampling Reference Impoundments, March 12, 2008
Page 4 of 5

Analytical methods
All measurements and analyses shall be performed by a laboratory with a current North
Carolina Wastewater Laboratory Certification for the parameters of interest (including
field parameters). A list of certified laboratories is available at
http:,/h2o.enr.state.nc.us/lab/cert.iitm. All sample handling, preservation, and analysis
should be performed using approved methods (see
ht!p://h2o.enr.stat,--.nc.us/lab/itior!znaram.htm).
Reporting
The applicant should provide an interpretive report summarizing all results and findings
to DWQ 401 Oversight Unit for review. Results from all samples and measurements
should also be provided in electronic form, e.g., Excel spreadsheet or delimited text file.
DWQ will review for completeness, comparison of raw values to appropriate surface
water quality standards included in the NC Administrative Code (15A NCAC .0200, see
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/admin/rules/codes statutes htm), and significant differences
between lotic sites.
Protocol for Sampling Reference Impoundments, March 12, 2008
Page 5 of 5

Appendix B: Proposed On-Site Modeling and Adaptive Management Plan; submitted
September 23
DWQ comments response and request for 401 permit
Grandview Peaks, McDowell County, North Carolina
October 27, 2008
MACTEC Project No. 6229052914
1
4MACTEC
engineering and constructing a better tomorrow
September 23, 2008
' Ms. Cyndi Karoly
N.C. Division of Water Quality
401 Oversight/ Express Review Permitting Unit
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699
' Subject: The Grandview Peaks Development
On-site Impoundments Modeling and Adaptive Management Plan
USACE Action ID: 2007-200-359
' DWQ Project # 07-0168
McDowell County, North Carolina
MACTEC Project No. 6229052914
Dear Ms. Karoly:
' MACTEC Engineering and Consulting, Inc. (MACTEC), on behalf of the applicant, the Fall
Creek Land Company (FCLC), would like to address Division of Water Quality (DWQ)'s request
' for a watershed modeling plan; request made during a meeting at the DWQ, Raleigh office July
21, 2008 (see Attachment A). The purpose of this document is to present a scientifically valid
watershed modeling plan, to accomplish the goal of preserving water quality.
' We would appreciate your timely review of this information and your written response regarding
the acceptability of this modified procedure for the required analyses.
cc: Todd Black, Fall Creek Land Company
Amanda Jones, Asheville Regulatory Field Office, USACE
Ion McMillan, Raleigh Headquarters, DWQ
Kevin Barnett, Asheville Regional Office, DWQ
' MACTEC Engineering and Consulting, Inc.
1308 Patton Avenue • Asheville, NC 28806 • Phone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]
www.mactec.com

Project Overview:
' The Fall Creek Land Company's (FCLC) "Grandview Peaks (GP)" development contains 54,392
linear feet of jurisdictional, perennial, and intermittent stream channels. The north-western
portion of the property contains two networks of unnamed tributary streams that drain to
Hopper's Creek. The FCLC plans to impound these unnamed, tributary stream systems to create
small reservoir lakes (27.1 acre and a 6.8 acre). Both lakes are down gradient from existing
development activity and are the most feasible location on the property-having the right
' combination of drainage area, perennial stream flow, constricted valleys (see Figure 1). Both
proposed impoundment(s) will be located in the upper Catawba River Basin (HUC 03050101;
sub basin 03-08-30) within the Northern Inner Piedmont Ecoregion.
Background Information:
' A list of project milestones has been provided in Appendix A. The DWQ recently (March 2008)
came out with an analytical monitoring protocol to predict how water quality will affect future
' impoundment(s) (March 2008, Predictability Study Protocol for Sampling Reference
Impoundment(s) NCDWQ, 2008). These guidelines currently state that applicants wishing to
build new impoundment(s) conduct rigorous monitoring of two "similar, existing" lakes as
reference for what to expect. The Fall Creek Land Company (FCLC) provided an alternative to
the DWQ's guidelines on July 8, 2008; FCLC proposing a stand-a-lone procedure for predicting
water
lit
i
Th
qua
y, on-s
te.
e GP alternative procedure uses watershed loading analyses consistent
with the currently accepted and recommended DWQ lakes modeling procedures. The GP
alternative
roced
ill
p
ure w
ensure that appropriate BMPs are in place to establish and maintain
impoundment(s) water quality.

Purpose:
' During a meeting held on July 21, 2008 to discuss the project, MACTEC provided a modified
monitoring plan, and the DWQ requested to see a draft of the Fall Creek Land Company's,
' proposed watershed modeling and adaptive management plan for the proposed reservoirs. The
plans initial step required on-site assessment of existing water quality prior to development of the
two proposed lakes. Pre-development existing water quality, can be used to set baseline
parameters which the Fall Creek Land Company (FCLC) may use to set target threshold
indicators for water quality for after the lakes have been created. The Draft Grandview Peaks
' Lakes watershed modeling and adaptive management plan is outlined as follows.
Grandview Lakes Monitoring Plan September 23, 2008
McDowell Lakes Development Site, McDowell County, North Carolina MACTEC Project No. 6229052914
2
i /
283
IF,
1
SS
r! ??
IA - y' ?7
Lake #3 Down stream
Sampling Station

Lake #2 Down stream'
Sampling Station
GP-L2-D1 GP-L3-D1

Lake #2 Up stream
Sampling Station I
?,fC? SAo
J

GP-L2-U1 ?
,
Creak=
Mt

r ' Lake #3 Up stream t
Sampling Station '
-
Lake #2 Up stream;,
9 i , Lake
S
i
S
ti t
#2 Up stream ?
on
ampl
ng
ta
r . GP-L2-U2 i, ?- J Eby . Sampling Station
R
Z
`\
.. ? tr --r
aw? Cc
7

r L 0 C' 4 M { !;

C e

LEGEND
Streams 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1
Miles t
Property Boundary
Feet
Proposed Lake Boundaries 0 1,250 2,500 3.750 5,000
Source: USDA DRG Mosaic for McDowell Co., North Carolina 2007

/J
tMACTEC GRANDVIEW PEAKS DEVELOPMENT
SAMPLING LOCATIONS FOR PROPOSED LAKES #2 AND #3

MCDOWELL COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
_
?
REPARED DATE
Y SJM 09/12/08 CHECKED
eY RLS DATE
09112/08 JOB NUMBER
6229-05-2914 FIGURE
1

I. Watershed Modeling
A detailed watershed model will be developed to quantify loading contributions from both
upstream portions of the watershed as well as changes to water quality loading parameters that
are anticipated (in the absence of appropriate BMPS) with the development of low-density
' residential housing on site. Estimates of annual nutrient contributions entering via runoff from
the residential community will be determined by identifying sub-basin drainage areas within the
' watershed. Watershed sub-basin delineation will be performed by incorporating aerial
photographs of the site, topographic contours, and proposed conveyance structures within the
community into a GIS platform for analysis. Calculation of annual runoff volumes and associated
' loading from the identified sub-basins will incorporate the following information into the
watershed model:
A. Precipitation
' Precipitation data will be collected from several local rain gauge stations near the proposed
development. Multiple years of daily rainfall data, up to a maximum of 10 years, will be
used in the model to most accurately reflect weather variations from drought, normal, and
significant storm event rainfall periods.
' B. Watershed Characteristics
Determination of surface water runoff during an individual rain event requires a known
amount of precipitation falling on the project site as well as generated runoff curve
' numbers (CN). To determine the CN for the project area, land use type and hydrologic soil
group values will be defined using Geographic Information Systems (GIS). Land use
within the project area will incorporate the proposed residential development and newly
' constructed reservoirs to reflect future loading characteristics following the completion of
construction.
Interconnected Pond Routing Stormwater (ICPR) or similar modeling platform will be used to
incorporate existing and proposed conveyance systems within the watershed. Using the
predetermined curve numbers and regional precipitation data as inputs to the ICPR model, annual
runoff volumes will be calculated for each sub-basin area within the watershed. Results of the
Grandview Lakes Monitoring Plan September 23, 2008
McDowell Lakes Development Site, McDowell County, North Carolina MACTEC Project No. 6229052914
3
ICPR model will provide accurate estimates of annual sub-basin runoff volumes based on
changing land use and conveyance systems anticipated with the proposed development.
Runoff volumes calculated within the watershed model will be used to estimate the annual
nutrient load entering the proposed reservoirs via the project site. Nutrient loads are estimated by
multiplying the annual runoff volume by the event mean concentration (EMC). EMCs are
established for specific parameters of interest (TSS, TN and TP for this analysis) and vary by land
use. Proposed BMPs developed during construction may also be incorporated into the annual
loading estimates by identifying the portion of stormwater runoff treated through a given BMP.
Characterization of existing water quality in several streams within the watershed was completed
to provide an assessment of baseline water quality conditions and upstream loading contributions.
Water quality monitoring was performed at six sampling stations in flowing portions of upstream
tributaries. Based on field observations, one of the possible locations entering proposed
impoundment(s) was found to be an intermittent stream, and did not have adequate flow for
sampling. Five stations were sampled on August 6, 2008 within "the hottest period of the year"
between the August I st and August 30th. The five stations included sample locations in two sub-
watersheds; the proposed Lake#2 impoundment(s) and the proposed Lake#3 impoundment(s) (see
Figure 1).
• Station GP-L2-U 1: Downstream of confluence at the dendriditic tributary split.
• Station GP-L2-U2: Located 105 stream meters up stream of gravel road (wet
crossing).
• Station GP-L2-U3: Located approx 80 meters up stream of culvert at gravel road.
• Station GP-L2-D1: Located in run section, just upstream of large bedrock pool.
30 meters up stream of waterfall section.
• Station GP-L3-U 1: Located 30 meters north of gravel road.
• Station GP-L3-D1: Located 20 meters downstream of flag line for dam.
Water sampling protocols adhered to the requirements described in the Predictability Study
Protocol for Sampling Reference Impoundment(s) (NCDWQ, 2008). Water quality parameters
measured included water temperature, dissolved oxygen saturation, pH, turbidity, nutrients (total
phosphorus, total Kjeldahl nitrogen, ammonia [NH3], nitrate + nitrite [NO2+NO3)), chlorophyll-a
(corrected for pheophytin), and fecal coliform.
Grandview Lakes Monitoring Plan September 23, 2008
McDowell Lakes Development Site, McDowell County, North Carolina MACTEC Project No. 6229052914
4

C
r

u

Water Quality results for August 6, 2008 monitoring data provided in Table 1.
Table 1: Draft On-site results; August 6,2W8.
Grandview Peaks / MACTEC Water Quality sampling
(August 6, 2006) prelim results.
On-Site Meter
--- Proposed Lake #2 Proposed Lake #3
Stream Monitoring Parameters GP4_2-U1 GP4Z4J2 GP-L2-U3 GP-L2-D1 GP-L3-U1 GP4_3-01
8.09 8.5 7.95 7.9 Na 8.04
Condu *- MS 22 0.39 0.036 0.05 n/a 0.03
DissoNed L 10.7 9.8 10.6 10.2 n/a 10.24
Ta rature- • nses C 21.6 21.4 21.4 21.1 Na 222
Salinity 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 n/a 0.00
Fecal Coliforms CFU/ 10DmL SM 9222D 112 12 152 304 n/a 104
Turbidity (?W EPA 180.1 16 2.6 4.2 13 Na 5.7
Total Suspended Solid (mg/L) SM 2540D 34 40.3 8 7.3 n/a 19.3
Ammonia m L A 350.1 rid rid rid rid Na rid
Ntiogen N02 plus N03 m PA 353.2 0.02 0.09 0.08 0.17 Na 0.04
TKN m L PA 3512 0.54 0.36 0.57 0.55 Na 0.41
Total N' n PA 353.2 0.55 0.45 0.66 0.73 n/a 0.45
Total Phosphorus ( PA 365.1) 0.028 0.015 0.006 0.016 Na 0.012
Estimated Gradient (% 1.8 3 to 6.8 4 0.7 Na 0.3
Wetted Width of stream ft 1.9 3.5 3.2 3.5 Ma 2.5
Max Depth of stream ft 0.9 0.3 028 0.65 n/a 0.14
Location GPS see ma seem see ma see ma see ma see ma
Weather des ' on
Air Temperature (degrees C) 1 sunny
32 sunny
32.6 sun'
31.6 sunny
32 sunny
33 sunny
33.5
Comments inkfla in inkfla i ink flagging pink flagging no water ink flagging
Created By: RLS, Sept, 2008
Checked By: ABS, Sept, 2008
This recent surface water monitoring data will be used to establish baseline water quality
conditions within local streams and upstream tributaries, and will serve as a target for future
stream water quality following construction. Existing water quality measurements recorded in
the streams will be incorporated into the watershed model to provide a benchmark for current
water quality conditions, which may then be compared to subsequent stream water quality
following residential construction.
Baseline water quality data provided in Table 1 will be used in the watershed model to develop
loading estimates from contributing (upstream) portions of the watersheds. Results of the loading
' estimates from the surrounding watershed will then be combined with the measured nitrogen,
phosphorus, and TSS load from these tributaries to determine a total annual load for the
1

impoundment(s). Estimates of the annual nutrient load within each reservoir may then be used to
determine appropriate Best Management Practices (BMPs) to eliminate the incremental loading
difference associated with the construction of the residential community.
Grandview Lakes Monitoring Plan September 23, 2008
McDowell Lakes Development Site, McDowell County, North Carolina MACTEC Project No. 6229052914
5

u
' Best Management Practices (BMPs) will be selected to account for loading entering through
additional residential development, as determined in the watershed model. If the results of the
watershed model determine that additional BMPs are needed, BMP selection and design criteria
will be guided using the North Carolina Division of Water Quality Stormwater Best Management
Practices Manual (NCDWQ, 2007). A number of BMP design options may be chosen to capture
excess runoff prior to entering local streams or the proposed impoundment(s), including, but not
' limited to:

' a. Dry retention basins;
b
W
t d
t
ti
b
i
.
e
e
en
on
as
ns;
c. Stormwater wetlands;
' d. Bio-retention;
e. Infiltration devices; and
' f. Grassed swales (etc.)
' Emphasis will be given to BMPs that are considered Low Impact Development (LID) and
sustainable for preservation of water quality and quantity. A number of LID alternatives for
' stormwater management are available, including, but not limited to:
a. Minimizing impervious area;
' b. Rainwater harvesting;
c. Incorporating permeable surfaces;
' d. Depression storage; and
e. Soil filtration
To ensure that portions of each tributary below the impoundments are not negatively impacted by
' the construction of the proposed impoundment(s), out flowing water quality may also be
preserved through best management practices within each impoundment(s). These practices are
' likely to focus on temperature, dissolved oxygen and related constituents, and may include
conditions of management of water withdrawal from the impoundment(s), among other factors.
' BMP design and implementation will utilize watershed loading estimates, upstream and
downstream surface water monitoring, and examples from similar impoundment(s) within the
regional area as guidance for managing water quality exiting the impoundment(s). BMPs within
Grandview Lakes Monitoring Plan September 23, 2008
McDowell Lakes Development Site, McDowell County, North Carolina MACTEC Project No. 6229052914
6

the impoundment(s) will be designed and implemented, if necessary, to ensure that water quality
flowing downstream of the impoundment(s) is similar to the water quality of upstream tributaries.
H. Adaptive Management Plan
The purpose of an adaptive management plan is to provide for flexible management of the
proposed reservoirs, based upon a feedback loop so that management strategies are adjusted to
address changing field conditions, to maintain downstream water quality. Watershed BMPs are
anticipated to be sufficient to maintain nutrient loading at current levels. Impoundment of the

water will, however, potentially cause changes in surficial water temperature during summer
months. Primary water quality indicator of the physical affects of impoundment may be captured
by measuring temperature and dissolved oxygen at the surface and at depth during summer. It is
anticipated that during seasons where water temperatures in the stream are similar to surficial
impoundment temperatures (spring, winter, and fall), surficial water may be gravity fed over a
spillway or other conveyance, to the stream. When the need arises (e.g. when the temperature
and/or DO differential from upstream and impoundment require action), water for downstream
replenishment will be pulled from cooler, deeper waters of the impoundment, and oxygenated, if
necessary. These parameters (temperature and DO) provide a quick and reliable method of
assessing water quality within the reservoir. Reports of impoundment(s) water quality may be
provided to the NC DWQ 401 Oversight Unit as requested.
This adaptive management plan focuses on the preservation of water quality both within the
constructed impoundment(s) and in downstream creeks. This management follows ex;ctinc,
recommendations from USEPA and the North American Lake Management Society. Existing
water quality conditions as sampled prior to construction may be used as baseline standards for
the preservation of water quality within downstream creeks. Select BMPs as described in Section
I also are anticipated to be utilized to ensure preservation of baseline and state water quality
standards.
Grandview Lakes Monitoring Plan September 23, 2008
McDowell Lakes Development Site, McDowell County, North Carolina MACTEC Project No. 6229052914
7
1

' Closing
The Fall Creek Land Company appreciates your timely review of our response to your request to
see a Watershed Modeling and Adaptive Management Plan for the Grandview Peaks
Development.

1
C
References:
EPA, 2000. Ambient Water Quality Criteria Recommendations. Lakes and reservoirs in Nutrient
Ecoregion IX. United States Environmental Protection Agency. EPA 822-B-00-011. December
2000
NC DENR - Division of Water Quality "Redbook" Surface Waters and Wetlands Standards NC
Administrative Code 15A NCAC 02B .0100, .0200 & .0300 Amended Effective: May 1, 2007;
Raleigh, North Carolina:
htti)://i.i2o.enr.state.nc.us/adminiruies/documentsiredbool, full with cover odf
Sincerely,
MACTEC ENGINEERING AND CONSULTING, INC.
lZ_L- 6te\
Robert L. Sain, CFM
Project Scientist for GU e, .sh nku,
with permission
?4 D
In'l
A B. Shortelle
, , VP
Limnologist/ Chief Scientist

Grandview Lakes Monitonng Plan
McDowell Lakes Development Site. McDowell Coant?, North Carolina
S /
September 23. 2008
MACTEC Project No. 6229052914

F

11

Attachment A:

Recent Project Milestones:
January 16, 2007: The FCLC submitted a combined "Individual 404/401 Permit application" to
the USACE and DWQ.
September 25, 2007: The USACE, DWQ, commenting agencies, and public came back with
public notice comments to be addressed. FCLC's "Response to Pubic Notice Comments" was
submitted to the USACE and NC DWQ.
September 2007 through January 2008: consistent efforts were made by the Fall Creek Land
Company to contact regulators while the waiting for responses.
January 4, 2008: The USACE responded, informally with an email dated.
January 10, 2008: A site meeting occurred with Ms. Amanda Jones, Asheville field office of the
USACE.
January 23, 2008: The DWQ responded formally to the "Response to Public Notice Comments"
with a letter stating that the application was "incomplete" pending analytical monitoring
(Attachment A).
February 6, 2008: a follow-up office meeting took place with the USACE-the USACE
informally requested additional information. This additional information was submitted to the
USACE, Asheville Field Office on June 24, 2008.
February 2008 through June 2008: various correspondences took place between the Fall Creek
p Land Company and regulators while drafting additional response documents to address concerns
and new protocols.
June 23, 2008: a brief follow-up meeting took place with the USACE to discuss the draft
Additional Comments Response document.
June 24, 2008: The FCLC Draft - USACE Additional Comments Response document was
submitted to the USACE and copied to the DWQ.
July 8, 2008: the FCLC, On-Site Impoundment(s)s Sampling Protocol document was submitted
to the DWQ and copied to the USACE
July 21 2008: A meeting took place in Raleigh at the DWQ headquarters to discuss the FCLC
sampling protocol document and the project status. Action to the FCLC to capture, on-site,
August water quality and to carryon with the FCLC proposed sampling protocol.
August 6, 2008: Per the DWQ meeting, the FCLC conducted in-situ and analytical on-site
sampling at five locations adjacent to the proposed lakes.
August 29, 2008: On-Site Grandview Peaks, analytical sampling data results back from labs.
Grandview Lakes Monitoring Plan September 23, 2008
McDowell Lakes Development Site, McDowell County, North Carolina MACTEC Project No. 6229052914
2