19961054 Ver 2_Emails_20091208

Mcmillan;' Ian
From: Coburn, Chad
Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2009 10:11 AM
To: Wakild, Chuck; Shiver, Rick; Karoly, Cyndi; Mcmillan, Ian; Matthews, Matt
Subject: RE: Bennett Brothers Yachts Maintenance Dredging CAMA #90-97 DWQ##96-1054v2
Chuck,
From what the DCM folks and our wetlands people have told me, the DWQ can't return this project because it came in
under the CAMA umbrella. We can put it on hold if needed, but then the applicant will not be able to go before the CRC
without first having the DWQ denial.
From: Wakild, Chuck
Sent: Monday, December 07, 2009 3:22 PM
To: Daniel, Louis; Gregson, Jim; Sullins, Coleen
Cc: Matthews, Matt; Shiver, Rick; Coburn, Chad; Karoly, Cyndi
Subject: RE: Bennett Brothers Yachts Maintenance Dredging CAMA #90-97 DWQ##96-1054v2
Louis and Jim,
After several conversations last week I believe the best DENR-coordinated course of action for these permits is as
follows:
• DWQ will put the 401 application on indefinite hold or possibly return pending a request from the applicant.
• CAMA will deny the permit application based on the DMF evaluation of impact to PNAs. This denial needs to
happen soon so that the applicant can file a variance request and be scheduled on the CRC asap.
• The applicant says their intention is to request a variance from the CRC at their January or February meeting
which would effectively overturn the staff denial and allow the dredging and other work.
• DWQ will act on the 401 application after the CRC variance proceeding and determine then if issuance or denial
is required. EPA requires that DWQ must act on this application within 1 year of initial receipt which was July 1,
2009.
Please confirm that this plan is acceptable or let's discuss modifications. If we all concur, I will solicit a request to hold
the 401.
From: Daniel, Louis
Sent: Monday, December 07, 2009 10:44 AM
To: Wakild, Chuck
Subject: RE: Bennett Brothers Yachts Maintenance Dredging CAMA #90-97 DWQ##96-1054v2
I'll call ASAP.
Louis
From: Wakild, Chuck
Sent: Friday, December 04, 2009 4:14 PM
To: Daniel, Louis
Subject: FW: Bennett Brothers Yachts Maintenance Dredging CAMA #90-97 DWQ##96-1054v2
Louis,
Sorry, I accidently sent this email to Lewis Ledford - it should have been sent to you. We in DWQ are trying to ensure a
coordinated DENR response to this application. I would like to talk with you briefly about it if you are still in this
afternoon. I will call.
From: Wakild, Chuck
Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2009 9:58 AM
To: Smith,' Robin
Cc: Knight, David; Gregson, Jim; Ledford, Lewis; Sullins, Coleen
Subject: FW: Bennett Brothers Yachts Maintenance Dredging CAMA #90-97 DWQ##96-1054v2
Robin,
I would like to ensure that we (DWQ, DCM, and DMF) are together as we make decisions to deny these two permit
applications. I suggest we meet or have a conference call as soon as possible.
Bennett Brothers Yachts is a boat building/full service marina business in downtown Wilmington. They built their
facilities in the 1990s along the NE Cape Fear River. Legend has it that they built with the understanding that they would
never be granted approvals for maintenance dredging because that area is primary nursery for certain aquatic life.
However, the waters around their docks and other facilities has filled in with sediment at a much more rapid rate than
expected and they have applied for permits (CAMA, 401, 404)to dredge the accumulated sediment. DMF has been
consistent in their PNA evaluation and we are now faced with denying their CAMA permit and 401 WQ Certification. I
think that Bennett Brothers believes the success path for them is to get the denials and then seek a variance from the
CRC. While this may get them a CAMA permit, I can't see how we could use that decision to issue a 401. In any event,
we want to be sure we (DENR) are together in the approach we take as individual divisions. Let me know your
thoughts.
From: Bruce Marek [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2009 7:30 PM
To: Wakild, Chuck
Cc: Tricia Bennett'; 'Brian - Bennett Brothers Yachts'; Gregson, Jim; [e-mail]
Subject: FW: Bennett Brothers Yachts Maintenance Dredging CAMA #90-97 DWQ##96-1054v2
Hi Chuck,.
I got an auto-reply that Ms. Sullins is out of the office until December 7, and that I should contact you if I needed
immediate assistance. So, it seems that another week will go by and by our count it will be 180 days since CAMA as lead
agency gave DWQ the project info, and approaching 100 days from our submittal of the August 13, 2009 DWQ request
for information that I submitted on Sept. 2, 2009. If you can't locate a copy of Mrs. Bennett's letter to Ms. Sullins, please
contact Tricia Bennett at 910-772-9277 or at her above e-mail address. I have field work Thursday and won't be in e-
mail contact until the evening.
Thanks for your kind assistance in this matter.
Bruce Marek, P.E.
From: Bruce Marek [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2009 5:19 PM
To: [e-mail]
Cc: Tricia Bennett'; 'Brian - Bennett Brothers Yachts'; 'Gregson, Jim'; [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Bennett Brothers Yachts Maintenance Dredging CAMA #90-97 DWQ##96-1054v2
Dear Ms. Sullins,
I just received a call from Chad Coburn of the Wilmington Regional DWQ Office in regards to the above project.
Obviously Mrs. Bennett's letter to you has elicited a response to our CAMA Major Permit application. We understand
that you are finally saying that you will issue a denial for 401 water quality certification for our project.
2
As noted in Tricia's letter, the last written correspondence/request for additional information was on August 13, 2009,
with my response back to Chad on Sept. 2, 2009.
We had not received any additional written requests from DWQ by the time we had our multi-agency meeting lead by
Jim Gregson, Director of CAMA on October 7 or since. In the next two weeks, I was in constant contact with Jonathon
Howell of CAMA, about the status of our project, and the need for him to put our project on CAMA hold if he didn't have
DWQ response by October 25, 2009.
We are at 175 days since our Project Application to CAMA was deemed complete on June 10, 2009 and at 91 days since
my September 2, 2009 response to Chad's request for additional project information.
We don't understand how you don't count that as our 60 day time clock that you are required to give a response. By
default, we should be approved for 401 certification.
With CAMA notifying us that they were going to have to put our project on hold, I did voluntarily write a letter to Mr.
Coburn on Mrs. Bennett's behalf on October 19th saying that we request/would accept a denial from DWQ if that would
hurry up the process so that we didn't get put on CAMA hold. We have waited a month and a half for a quick response.
To use this as a new starting date for resetting your 60 day clock is a bit bogus. We are now less than two weeks from
having to submit for a variance, if we have the CAMA paperwork in hand and time to respond to their specific issues. If
Mrs. Bennett sent nothing to you, would you still have waited till December 20, 60 days after that my October 19th
letter, after we missed the next CRC quarterly meeting deadline and then pulled out my letter and said that that is what
you are basing the denial on?
It would be nice if you could respond to Mrs. Bennett and tell her why your department doesn't feel that 60 days from
your last requested information was submitted didn't mean 60 days for her State Designated Clean Marina.
Bruce Marek, P.E.
5489 Eastwind Road
Wilmington, NC 28403
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avq.com
Version: 8.5.426 / Virus Database: 270.14.90/2540 - Release Date: 12/02/09 07:33:00