20140090 Ver 3_RE U-2579B Pond Complaint_20170516

Wanucha, Dave
From:Euliss, Amy
Sent:Tuesday, May 16, 2017 9:53 AM
To:Wanucha, Dave
Cc:Chapman, Amy; Wyrick, Scott D; [e-mail]; Smith, George; Guy, Jeremy M; Nifong,
Johnny R; Archer Sr, Wright; Knight, Sherri; [e-mail]; Latham, Tim; Gantt, Matt;
DeWit, Benjamin J; Suggs, Phillip H
Subject:RE: U-2579B Pond Complaint
Attachments:turbidity curtain specs U2579B.pdf
Thanks for taking the time to meet with us yesterday to discuss. Our responses to your questions are in blue below.

Please send us a letter stating your final compliance determination, and copy us on any correspondence with Mr. Tabor. If we
are deemed not in compliance, please tell us how we’re not in compliance and any necessary steps needed to bring the area in
compliance.

Our Division Construction Engineer requests that you notify us when you are going to be on the project. We have had 2
fatalities on the project, so from a safety perspective, we need to know who is on the project and where they are at any given
time.

Stephanie or I are usually available to review projects with you given a little notice. Joint site visits make it much easier for us to
understand any of your concerns and get them addressed by our folks in a timely manner.

Thanks.

Amy Euliss

Division 9 Environmental Officer

North Carolina Department of Transportation

336 747 7802 office

[e-mail]

375 Silas Creek Parkway
Winston Salem, NC 27127-7167

From: Wanucha, Dave
Sent: Monday, May 08, 2017 11:30 AM
To: Suggs, Phillip H <[e-mail]>; Euliss, Amy <[e-mail]>
Cc: Chapman, Amy <[e-mail]>; Wyrick, Scott D <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]; Smith,
George <[e-mail]>; Guy, Jeremy M <[e-mail]>; Nifong, Johnny R <[e-mail]>; Archer Sr,
Wright <[e-mail]>; Knight, Sherri <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]; Latham, Tim
<[e-mail]>; Gantt, Matt <[e-mail]>; DeWit, Benjamin J <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: U-2579B Pond Complaint

Thanks Amy and Phil for your responses to our concerns. I conducted a follow-up inspection on May 3 to review the inlet at Site
7, skimmer basins, drop inlets and Mr. Tabor’s pond. I also met with Mr. Tabor again to review his videos of EC measures
following the storm event on Monday evening (May 1).

1

Sediment was removed from the inlet at Site 7 and skimmer basins appeared to be maintained and cleaned of excess
sediment. We also walked in the perimeter of the pond on Mr. Tabor’s property with hip waders to determine the degree of
sedimentation by scraping a thin layer from bottom sediments. The evidence suggested that just a light dusting of red silt was
present in various locations. Some locations had none.

We understand that DOT is doing all it can to manage sediment on the project including those areas that drain to Mr. Tabor’s
pond, and for the most part (even during extreme storm events), EC measures are performing well. However, to ensure
continued compliance with permit conditions; and, that water quality standards are met and designated uses are not impacted,
degraded or lost, DWR requires that DOT provide the following in writing as soon as possible within the next 15 days \[per DOT’s
General Permit for Construction Activities (NCG010000) Section III, Condition 5, Additional Action\].

1.Please double check that Basin 8.1B is constructed properly. From Mr. Tabor’s video, it appears that the bottom is

sloped toward the overflow/outlet vs. level across the bottom. The skimmer did not seem to be functioning, water was
deeper at the outlet end vs. the inlet, and dirty water was discharging over the weir. We have confirmed that the basin
was constructed and is being maintained per erosion control plan.
2.Drop inlets along the grade in this area have accumulated various depths of sediment. It appears they all discharge to

Basin 8.1B. Please confirm that this is correct and explain if/when the inlets will be cleaned of sediment and how this
will be accomplished. Drop inlets are regularly maintained, and are routed according to the erosion control plan.
3.NPDES records on April 26 indicate that less than a 5-gallon bucket was lost to Site 7. Please confirm that that is the

correct amount. Less than a 5 gallon bucket of sediment was removed.
4.We request that DOT continue to monitor turbidity following storm events. To that end, prepare and submit a brief

monitoring plan that includes a simple map of sampling locations and a description of how samples are collected (depth
of sample collection, day and time of sample collection, type of sampling equipment, whether samples are collected
from the shoreline or a boat). Make sure the equipment is calibrated/standardized per the meter’s manual. Maintain
records of the turbidity data and meter calibration events. DWR WSRO may elect to split samples with you on occasion,
or collect samples themselves and submit to DWR’s lab in Raleigh for analysis. Our permits do not require turbidity
monitoring. We do not plan to regularly monitor turbidity.
5.Provide manufacturer’s information/specifications related to the turbidity curtains and any maintenance

records. Provide a brief description of how turbidity curtains are inspected and maintained. The curtains have been in
place for about a year and may be deteriorating. Mr. Tabor has video of three turbidity plumes escaping the first
curtain from a storm event on or around Dec 1, 2016 which indicates there may be tears. I’ve attached the contract
specifications for the turbidity curtain and the receipt with specifications. We visually inspect the curtain regularly. No
maintenance has been needed.
6.Explain how any sediment that remains within the culverts at Sites 6 and 7 will be removed following completion of the

project. There is no plan to remove material from the pipes.
7.Explain how DOT intends to manage the settled silt/sediment trapped in the PDE. Will the sediment be removed or left

in place following completion of the project? There is no plan to remove material from behind the curtain.

Let me know if you have any questions and we look forward to your response. We appreciate all the work you and DOT staff do
to ensure protection of water quality standards.

Dave W.

Dave Wanucha
Division of Water Resources
Transportation Permitting Unit
NC Department of Environmental Quality

336-776-9703 office
336-403-5655 mobile
[e-mail]

NC DEQ Winston Salem Regional Office
450 West Hanes Mill Road, Suite 300
Winston Salem, NC 27105
2

Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.

From: Suggs, Phillip H
Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2017 9:22 AM
To: Wanucha, Dave <[e-mail]>; Euliss, Amy <[e-mail]>; Gantt, Matt <[e-mail]>;
Latham, Tim <[e-mail]>; DeWit, Benjamin J <[e-mail]>
Cc: Chapman, Amy <[e-mail]>; Wyrick, Scott D <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]; Smith,
George <[e-mail]>; Guy, Jeremy M <[e-mail]>; Nifong, Johnny R <[e-mail]>; Archer Sr,
Wright <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: U-2579B Pond Complaint

Dave,
We are regularly reviewing this site and the EC devices around that area. After the recent rains it is not unusual to have turbidity
issues in the surrounding areas. Amy and the project staff have kept close watch on this pond site. There has been additional
use of polyacrylamide flocculants as well to aid in turbidity reduction. When we get 6” plus rain events in short time frames, we
lose some settling time and turbidity levels are higher in the discharges.
The turbidity curtains are functioning and have provided obvious protection for the pond especially during earlier phases where
there was much more disturbed area.
Most manufacturers provide curtains that are only suspended in the water. Our specs however require the curtains to reach all
the way to the bottom of the pond. This way they trap more suspended silt and it is slower to move out into the remainder of
the pond. There is some movement of water across the curtains and thru them but it is slow.
We will keep those curtains in place until the sediment source areas around the pond are sufficiently stabilized to minimize
impacts.
This site has been a difficult one due to not only the physical crossing of the pond but also the sensitivity of the owner who is
understandably concerned. We are making all efforts we can to minimize the impacts while constructing the roadway.
Stay safe!

From: Wanucha, Dave
Sent: Friday, April 28, 2017 10:51 AM
To: Euliss, Amy <[e-mail]>
Cc: Chapman, Amy <[e-mail]>; Wyrick, Scott D <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]; Smith,
George <[e-mail]>; Guy, Jeremy M <[e-mail]>; Nifong, Johnny R <[e-mail]>; Archer Sr,
Wright <[e-mail]>; Suggs, Phillip H <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: U-2579B Pond Complaint

Amy,
Thank you and everyone for the information and the extra effort to collect the data. We’ll review the information and get back
to you next week.

Dave W.

Dave Wanucha
Division of Water Resources
Transportation Permitting Unit
NC Department of Environmental Quality

336-776-9703 office
336-403-5655 mobile
3

[e-mail]

NC DEQ Winston Salem Regional Office
450 West Hanes Mill Road, Suite 300
Winston Salem, NC 27105

Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.

From: Euliss, Amy
Sent: Thursday, April 27, 2017 8:22 PM
To: Wanucha, Dave <[e-mail]>
Cc: Chapman, Amy <[e-mail]>; Wyrick, Scott D <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]; Smith,
George <[e-mail]>; Guy, Jeremy M <[e-mail]>; Nifong, Johnny R <[e-mail]>; Archer Sr,
Wright <[e-mail]>; Suggs, Phillip H <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: U-2579B Pond Complaint

Dave,
Thanks for your call and email. Thanks for the compliments to our staff. They do a great job out there considering the
magnitude of what they do, and they work really hard to do the required inspections on a project this size.

In response to your email, I reviewed the site today with NCDOT and Dragados personnel. The basin and SDO you
referenced were being cleaned today. The sediment deposited upstream of the pipe is also being removed. The
need for the repairs and the repairs are documented on our NPDES records per standard procedures. While this is a
reportable amount of sediment, I would say considering the over 6" of rain the project received from Saturday
evening until Tuesday night, it was quite minor and would be expected in such an event. We had widespread flooding
in Forsyth County. Overall the project held up remarkably well, and this was the only reportable sediment loss into
jurisdictional waters on the four mile long new location interstate project. Since the human eye has a really hard time
accurately detecting turbidity levels, I had them get some data to show us what the turbidity levels were. See the
email pasted below showing the levels today. The turbidity readings were taken this afternoon by DOT and Dragados
personnel. While there is a slight difference between the sides of the curtain, I would argue that there would be no
real difference if the numbers were analyzed statistically. Also, all readings are well within water quality standards,
and I would say it really shows what a good job they are doing maintaining the suspended sediments on the grade
with the addition of PAM products.

As for the curtain itself, manufacture recommendations say to visually inspect the flotation devices and the curtain
for tears. This is done regularly, but isn't recorded, because since its an erosion control device, we only record when
repairs are needed to the devices. If there was a tear in the curtain, immediately following a heavy rain (like in the
pictures I sent you on Monday), you would see an obvious plume of sediment, and that is not the case.

We have had several members of our upper management in Raleigh including
Thank you for your concerns.
our State Roadside Engineer and our Assistant State Hydraulics Engineer, our attorneys, DWR and
DEMLR staff out to review Mr. Tabor's area. I can assure you that NCDOT is going above and beyond in
complying with the 401, NPDES and erosion control regulations, especially adjacent to Mr. Tabor's
pond.

I'm out tomorrow but will be in on Monday if you need to discuss further.

-Amy
4

Email from Scott Gallman:

Amy,

Here are the results from the water samples we checked for turbidity earlier today. Roger Hurd was with me during the

sampling and testing.

Site 7 Tabor's Pond - Turbidity Testing 4/27/17 3:25pm

Reading Reading Reading Reading

Sample Location 1234

Inlet of Pipe (Stream - Project Left)25.824.924.825.1

Outlet of Pipe @ Pond30.228.82928.5
First turbidity curtain (between first

and second curtains)37.637.637.737.4

Second turbidity curtain38.538.337.937.8

Let me know if you have any questions.

Thanks,

Scott
From: Wanucha, Dave
Sent: Thursday, April 27, 2017 11:20 AM
To: Euliss, Amy
Cc: Chapman, Amy; Wyrick, Scott D; [e-mail]; Smith, George

Subject: U-2579B Pond Complaint

Amy,
Our office received a complaint from Mr. Tabor on April 24 concerning sediment entering his pond. I met with him
and his wife on April 26 and listened to their concerns. I then met with Scott Wyrick, Scott Gallman and Roger Hurd at
the project trailer to review NPDES records, obtain a status of project inspections related to the recent storm events,
and then reviewed the erosion control measures around Mr. Tabor’s pond (pictures attached). All staff were very
helpful and professional.

Major concerns at this point include:

Are the turbidity curtains functioning? They do not appear to be as the entire pond is turbid;


Skimmer 8.2B and the sediment lost at that location. Skimmer is full of sediment, as is the SDO. Both did a good job

of capturing sediment; however, sediment was lost at that location. It will be a guess as to the amount of sediment
lost, because it is at the bottom of the pond. We need to discuss options relative to removing sediment from the
pond, culvert and culvert inlet area;

Skimmer 7.3B was functioning well and discharging clear water; however, it too captured much sediment that may

need to be removed. Other skimmers in the area appear to be functioning, but may need to be cleaned out. DOT’s
erosion crews can make that call; and,

NPDES records are in order, but I did not see where any previous maintenance occurred relative to the turbidity

curtains. Has DOT developed a maintenance plan for the turbidity curtains?
5

Please let me know when you would like to discuss further.

Dave W.

Dave Wanucha

Division of Water Resources

Transportation Permitting Unit

NC Department of Environmental Quality

336-776-9703 office

336-403-5655 mobile

[e-mail]

NC DEQ Winston Salem Regional Office

450 West Hanes Mill Road, Suite 300

Winston Salem, NC 27105

Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the

North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.

6

Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N.C. Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
7

FLOATING TURBIDITY CURTAIN:
Description
This work cousists of furnishing a Floating Tz�rbidlty Curtain to deter silt suspension and
movement of silt particles during constniction. Tl�e floating turbidity eurtain shall be
constnicted at locations as directed.
Materials
The curtain material shall be made of a tightly woven nylon, plastic or other non-
deteriorating material meeting tlie following specifications:
Property Value
Grab tensile strength *md-370 lbs *cd-250 lbs
Mullen burst stength 480 psi
Trapezoid tear sh�ength *md-100 lbs �'cd-60 lbs
Apparent opening size 70 US standard sieve
Percent opeu area 4%permittivity 0.28 seo-1
�md - machine direction
�`cd - cross machine direction
In the event that more than one width of fabric is required, a 6" overlap of the material
shall also be required. •
The curtaiu material shall be supported by a flotation material having over 29 lbs/ft
buoyancy. The floating curtain shall have a 5/16" galvanized chain as ballast and dual
5/16" galvanizcd wire ropes with a heavy vuiyl coating as load lines.
Construction Methods
The Contractor shall mau�tain tl�e Floating Ti�rbidity Curtain ui a satisfactory condition
until its removal is requested by tlie Engineer. The cm�taui shall extend to the bottom of
the jurisdictional resource. Anchor the curtain according to manufacturer
recommendations.
Measurement and Payment
Floating Turbidiry Curtain will be measured and paid for as the actual number of square
yards of curtain furnished as specified and accepted. Such pricc and payment will be fiill
compeusation for the work as described in this section induding but not limited to
funiishuig all maYerials, tools, equipment, and all incidentals necessary to complete the
work.

Payment will be made under:
Pay Item Pay Unit
Floatuig Turbidity Curtain Square Yard

145
155
,., Y
N'OiL11EQ'FiCE ' � � �� � � . . . ..
5Dp N. MCLin CrAek Rd. ����
P. 0. BOX 457 � ' " .. .� �
coraQv€R, Nc: 2b613-0447
PFIONE �sza+) 46a-a��3 � HAN�S GECi COMPOM1lENTS
F?�X�$28_), q64-OA59 n�8r��r,'k'. coMrM,r
ANDREWS HAU�ING & GRADING IN
NANES GEO SOMPaNENTS
�&P FINANC7A1. 5ERU2GES CO3
P 0� BOX 609�4 � �
�H.ARLOTTE� 1�C 2Si6O ,
O 4640 BOILING SPRINGS RD ANDREWS HAULING & GRADING INC
p TOBACCOVILLE, NC 2%OSO � 775 RO88IN5 PERCH CT
p a 336-466-4487 SETH
N N KERNERSVILLE, NC 272$q
33 3/26/2015 NET 30 OUR TRUCK
�. CUSTUMEqORpERNO. lS.MOqSLSMAN, OqpEHDRE ppB
NCDOT C203484 80 729 3/1B/2p15 WiNsi
��pTM ���2 nF P710N
'�PRo]ECE NUMBER: NCOOT C2034
�TURB BAR 10'X 50' rypE 3 OO
�TURBIDITV BARRIER 12� % SO'
�TYpE 3 ❑OT 1802
�>/�RT NUM9ER 7.A'%50'
�—
I �6.]500�6 NC F00.5YTH COUNTY
I^ OLNOTeS iAJ(AeLE LINE ITEM.
1VN�
!THE SEL ER pOES�NOT C[RTIFY� E;ThVER IMPLI�ITLY OR
"�.TNE REQl1IREMENT$ OF ANY REGVLATORy qGENL'� OR
'CERTIFI�O q60VEjOR UNDER SEPARATE WRITTEN CER'flFl
SU0]ECT:TO T11E CONU2T;ON5 ON THE BEVERSE SIOE OF
OLIR TRUCK PROk OLIRT ,
NC
OEPTH IS 14
BILL i
DAYB 5/L
� THESE
CON FX
ALL.
1 � RL
2 j RL
1
12�*h
TO MEET
MAY BE
NS ARE
� � ';
07668 � '
9�S T�EUWSOF1HEStA1ELfNCPR�G4lCUNA6H4LLC/]VER'IiH,SiPA\SPC➢i+! ALq;EaAYMd.iGWIGEAtAPEHAtqp4FA� TQTALINVDICE'
COPY EpilA�TO➢iEFPIIAfFqTEOF{ry[�HAyE4UM1HAIIM1EAYiNAiHErT[CiCNTyEFiq�TOAYpFEACHI/pyiHPLOpyGOV18¢FEFWHU51 A'�UM
VAt pIEVER Mte iS IIIGFEB. V!LL Bc'�!/.i'CS W OH ThiE .�.RqT Gc :J1yi yqpq GN HL P/ST ppE IN'f�iCES iAlq DUfl.N,3 bIE 6iGNiV1
PAGE 1 LAST
42030
C
K8E

v_/� C��> --
� =lr� o� �-J
`,-�5--, ; -
,--,
t"�HANES �-�� ����:��� �� :�° -? -_
.;... C� _��'p��
� A �G'Gl�fyCiZllld� COMPANY
TerraGuard Turbidity Barrier
Hanes Geo Components Turbidity Barrier is manufactured to meet or exceed all
characteristics outlined below, as well as meet all NCDOT Standard Specifications:
PROPERTY VALUE
Seams Heated sealed seams
Edge Reinforcement 618" polypropylene twisted rope
Buoyancy 291bslft
5/16" galvanized chaln as ballast
5/16" galvanized wire ropes made of heavy vinyl
Fabric Speci£cations
Construction
Grab 7ensile
Trap Tear
Mullen �urst
AOS
Percent Open Area
Sincerely,
Keith Harris
Technical Director
Vinyl Laminate on 1300 Denier 9x9 scrim
350 x 250
100 x 60
480 psi
70 US Sieve
4% permittivity .28 sec-1
815 Buxton Street • Winston Salem, NC 27101
888-239-4539 Fax: [phone]
www.hanesaeo.com infoCa2hanesaeo.com

HANES �:ath:C=, ;::::r:.,i��'I�::,;:?I',,ii__f'�.;_1_�,
�i /% !.-�//n •
ii
3/6/2015
Andrews Hauling & Grading
REF: DOT Type 3 Turbidity Barrier — Forsyth Co. Project, C203484
To whom it may concern,
This is to certify that the Turbidity Barrier supplied for the above referenced
Project meets the requirements for Type 3 DOT Turbidity Barrier. See attached
specifications.
Sincerely,
Keith Harris
Technical Director
Hanes Geo Components
815 Buxtan Street Winston Salem, NC 27101
886 - 239 - 4539 • Fax: 336 - 747 -1852
wwrv.hanesgeo.com [e-mail]