The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutUmbrella Mitigation Banking InstrumentJ?\t ED ST,?T?S UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY s ?? W REGION 4 ATLANTA FEDERAL CENTER Z;F ,02 61 FORSYTH STREET tirq< PF01 ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303-8960 NOV ? r ?on Mr Mickey Sugg Wilmington Regulatory Field Office Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers P O Box 1890 Wilmington, NC 28402-1890 Subject North Carolina Department of Transportation, Umbrella Mitigation Banking Instrument (UMBI) and Addendum for the Privateer Farm Site Dear Mr Sugg This is in response to the North Carolina Department of Transportation's (NCDOT) Umbrella Mitigation Banking Instrument (UMBI), provided in an October 15, 2008 Public Notice The U S Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, Wetland Regulatory Section (EPA) has reviewed the UMBI and the Addendum for the Privateer Farm Site, and has the following recommendations The UMBI is acceptable There are several requirements spelled out in the April 10, 2008 revisions to 33 CFR Part 332 and 40 CFR Part 230 (2008 Mitigation Rule), which are basically provided in the UMBI Other requirements are expected to be provided in the addendum for specific mitigation bank sites, such as objectives, site selection factors, site protection instruments, service area, baseline information, and other information The addendum for the Privateer Farm Site lacks certain information required by the 2008 Mitigation Rule We recognize that the information is likely found elsewhere in the historical documentation for this site However, the required information should at a minimum, be summarized in the addendum Specifically, the following information was not included • Site selection factors • Site protection instrument • Maintenance plan • Performance standards • Long term monitoring plans, and • Adaptive management plans The information should be summarized from existing documents, or in the case of long- term monitoring plans and adaptive management plans, the plans should be developed and provided Intemet Address (URL) • http //www epa gov Recycled/Recyclable • Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on Recycled Paper (Minimum 30% Postconsumer) EPA participated in the North Carolina Interagency Review Team meeting on October 9, 2008 to discuss both the Croatan and Privateer mitigation sites and proposals for credits, credit release schedule, and geographic service area NCDOT is proposing to use North Carolina Wetlands Assessment Method (NCWAM) wetland types to reformulate the credit make-up of the Privateer site EPA agrees that the use of NCWAM wetland types is preferable to the wetland types currently listed for the site We look forward to reviewing the revised wetland types and credit summary in the future During the October 9, 2008 meeting, EPA expressed concerns with the proposed Geographic Service Area (GSA) NCDOT proposed to include portions of several different 8- digit Hydrologic Units (RUCs) in the region of the Privateer Mitigation Site, based upon the age and success of the site, the quality of the site, and the Level III Ecoregion However, EPA does not believe that the GSA should include areas outside of the River basin or Level III Ecoregion The GSA is typically limited to the 8-digit HUC in which the site is located This is based upon long-held policies which typically require the functions of the impacted wetlands to be replaced in the same watershed as the impact This long-standing policy is upheld by the 2008 Mitigation Rule, which states that "compensatory mitigation should be located within the same watershed as the impact site, and should be located where it is most likely to successfully replace lost functions and services " (see 230 93(b)(1) We note that the standard language for mitigation bank instruments in North Carolina includes a clause stating that use of the bank outside of the GSA may be considered on a case-by-case basis Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments If you have any questions, please contact Kathy Matthews at (9119) 541-3062, or matthews kathy@epa gov Sincerely, Duncan Powell Acting Chief Wetlands Regulatory Section cc USACE, Wilmington USFWS, Asheville USFWS, Raleigh NMFS, Beaufort NCWRC, Creedmoor NCWRC, Charlotte NCDWQ, Raleigh NCDCM, Raleigh NCDOT/PDEA, Raleigh J?\tED Srq,?s UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION 4 o Q ATLANTA FEDERAL CENTER 61 FORSYTH STREET Z??iTq< PROIeoo ATLANTA, GEORGIA 0303-8960 NOV Mr David M Lekson Washington Regulatory Field Office Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers P O Box 1000 Washington, NC 27889-1000 Subject North Carolina Department of Transportation, Umbrella Mitigation Banking Instrument (UMBI) and Addendum for the Croatan Site Dear Mr Lekson This is in response to the North Carolina Department of Transportation's (NCDOT) Umbrella Mitigation Banking Instrument (UMBI), provided in an October 15, 2008 Public Notice The U S Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, Wetland Regulatory Section (EPA) has reviewed the UMBI, and the Addendum for the Croatan Site, and has the following recommendations The UMBI is acceptable There are several requirements spelled out in the April 10, 2008 revisions to 33 CFR Part 332 and 40 CFR Part 230 (2008 Mitigation Rule), which are basically provided in the UMBI Other requirements are expected to be provided in the addendum for specific mitigation bank sites, such as objectives, site selection factors, site protection instruments, service area, baseline information, and other information The addendum for the Croatan site is lacking in certain information required by the 2008 Mitigation Rule We acknowledge that the information is likely found elsewhere in the historical documentation for this site However, the required information should at a minimum, be summarized in the addendum Specifically, the following information was not included • Site selection factors • Site protection instrument • Maintenance plan • Performance standards • Long term momtonnglplans, and • Adaptive management plans We recognize that for Croatan, which should be closed out soon, the need for a specific maintenance and adaptive management plans has passed However, the remaining information should be summarized from existing documents, or in the case of long-term monitoring plans and adaptive management plans, the plans should be developed and provided Intemet Address (URL) • http //www epa gov Recycled/Recyclable • Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on Recycled Paper (Minimum 30% Postconsumer) EPA participated in the North Carolina Interagency Review Team meeting on October 9, 2008 to discuss both the Croatan and Privateer mitigation sites and proposals for credits, credit release schedule, and geographic service area NCDOT is proposing to use Light Detection and Ranging (LIDAR) data and North Carolina Wetlands Assessment Method (NCWAM) wetland types to reformulate the credit make-up of the Croatan site Specifically, LIDAR data and NCWAM wetland types may demonstrate greater acreage of riparian wetlands, and may also elucidate stream mitigation which can be utilized under the 2007 Coastal Plain Stream Guidelines EPA agrees that the use of NCWAM wetland types is preferable to the wetland types currently listed for the site We are also willing to consider stream credit on portions of the site which can be documented to have flow We look forward to reviewing the revised wetland types and credit summary in the future During the October 9, 2008 meeting, EPA expressed concerns with the proposed Geographic Service Area (GSA) for the Croatan site NCDOT proposed to include the entire Middle Atlantic Coastal Plain within North Carolina's borders for Croatan's GSA, based upon the age and success of the site, the quality of the site, and the Level III Ecoregion However, EPA does not believe that the GSA should include areas outside of the River basin or Level III Ecoregion The GSA is typically limited to the 8-digit Hydrologic Unit in which the site is located This is based upon long-held policies which typically require the functions of the impacted wetlands to be replaced in the same watershed as the impact This long-standing policy is upheld by the 2008 Mitigation Rule, which states that "compensatory mitigation should be located within the same watershed as the impact site, and should be located where it is most likely to successfully replace lost functions and services " (see 230 93(b)(1) We note that the standard language for mitigation bank instruments in North Carolina includes a clause stating that use of the bank outside of the GSA may be considered on a case-by-case basis Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments If you have any questions, please contact Kathy Matthews at (919) 541-3062, or matthews kathy @ epa gov Sincerely, Duncan Powell Acting Chief Wetlands Regulatory Section cc USACE, Wilmington SFWS, Asheville USFWS, Raleigh NMFS, Beaufort NCWRC, Creedmoor NCWRC, Charlotte NCDWQ, Raleigh NCDCM, Raleigh NCDOT/PDEA, Raleigh