19970722 Ver 1_More Info Letter_19970819

* State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources YW7.9;VA
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary p E H N F=?
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
August 19, 1997
Andrea M. Spangler
Environmental and Special Projects Manager
Piedmont Triad Regional Water Authority
Wilmington Building, Suite 207
2216 West Meadowview Road
Greensboro, NC 27407-3480
Dear Ms. Spangler:
John Dorney and I have reviewed the maps and information that you sent us on the
proposed wetland mitigation sites for the Randleman Lake project. Most of the sites appear to
have potential for conversion into wetland mitigation sites. The Butke Farm site would appear to
have some limitations because of the lack of existing hydric soils. Our comments on the other
sites are listed below.
Richland Creek Site
1. The soils data for this site looks good since it has a predominance of hydric soils.
2. Your data show 13 acres of existing wetlands on the site, but the preliminary plan's
legend does not accurately depict those wetlands. We assume that it is shown by the plus symbols
on the map.
3. The legend shows the creation of marsh on the site. Although some marsh may be
created, the goal for mitigation as stated in DWQ's January 24, 1997, should be bottomland
hardwoods or headwater forest wetlands. Also, as we discussed on site, much of the western
portion of the site is already bottomland hardwood that needs to have the hydrology restored to
it, rather than marsh created.
4. We are also confused about the proposed winding channels, which the legend shows as
low marsh. The plans should try to sheet flow water across the wetland areas rather than direct it
out new channels across the site.
Environmental Sciences Branch 4401 Reedy Creek Road Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
Telephone [phone] FAX # [phone]
An Equal opportunity Afflrmatlve Action Employer 50% recycled/10% post consumer paper

5. There may also be an opportunity to divert some of High Point's treated wastewater
effluent into this wetland at times of low flow to let the wetland remove more of the nutrients
before they would enter the reservoir. This will need to be investigated as to its effect on
phosphorus loads to the lake versus biological effects on the wetland.
Hickory Creek Site
1. Again the existing wetlands are not clearly shown on the preliminary plans.
2. The legend again shows marsh whereas the target should be to improve upon the
existing bottomland hardwood forest not to create marsh.
3. Again, the plat shows winding channels through the site. Are these to be excavated?
The plans should try to sheet flow water across the wetland areas.
4. The soils are predominately hydric and this should make a good mitigation site if the
site plan is corrected.
Reddicks Creek Site
1. The existing wetlands show up mainly as creek channel on the plans. The creek
channel itself would not count as a wetland impact against the amount of wetlands to be created.
2. Again, the legend shows marsh creation when the target should be bottomland
hardwood forest wetlands.
3. The plans do not show a water control structure at the downstream end of the site. We
assume that one will be put there also.
4. The steeper slopes, low water table, and lack of predominately hydric soils will make
this site somewhat more difficult to make into a wetland mitigation site.
Upper Muddy Creek Site
1. This plan again shows meandering channels through the project site. We assume these
would be dug to get water into the floodplain. The placement of water control structures in the
channel should accomplish this with much less effort and destruction of the existing forest.
2. Again, the legend shows marsh creation when the target should be to restore the
hydrology to the existing bottomland hardwood forest wetlands.
3. The soils appear to be predominately hydric and this should make a good mitigation
site if you can get the plan right.

Overall, we believe that the four sites discussed above should work as wetland mitigation
sites. However, specific plans need to be put together with the appropriate target wetland
(bottomland hardwood forest) in mind. We strongly advise that you hire persons experienced in
wetland mitigation work and COE / DWQ protocols to develop detailed mitigation plans in order
to maximize your chance for success at these sites. From your calculations, it would appear that
another 10-15 acre site will be needed to meet the 120 acre total. A wetland consultant should be
able to assist you in locating another potential mitigation site. Should you have any questions
please fell free to give us a call.
Sincerely,
Peter B. Colwell
Environmental Specialist
cc: Ed Powell, DMP
Ron Linville, DWQ Winston-Salem Regional Office
David Franklin, US Army Corps of Engineers
John Dorney, DWQ Central Office
Ron Ferrel, Wetland Restoration Program