20000874 Ver 5_Complete File_20060209

F
( )0( soe 5TA7Fo
V
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA t:M; vy, O
?q??n0?
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION?'?S 4f 4;4/4,
MICHAEL F. EASLEY LYNDO '9'
41
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
Mr. William D. Gilmore, P.E.
EEP Transition Manager
Ecosystem Enhancement Program
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1652
Dear Sir:
February 9, 2006
Subject: Request for Additional Mitigation Confirmation for Ellerbe Bypass and
Ellerbe Connector (NC 73 Extension). Richmond and Montgomery
Counties, US 220, WBS No. 34527.1.1 and No. 34398.1.1, Federal Aid
Project No. NHF-45-1(49) and No. STP-73(4); TIP Nos2231=*(k, B,
CA, and CB) ahid R-3:3`03; NCDOT Division 8.
Permits issued for this project:
USACE 404 Individual Permit Action ID 199400590, issued July 11, 2003 and due to
expire on December 31, 2006; and DWQ 401 Major Water Quality Certification, Project
No. 000874 issued on April 1,2003 and due to expire on December 31, 2006.
The purpose of this letter is to request that the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (EEP) will confirm provision of compensatory mitigation for the above
referenced project. This project has had a change in mitigation strategy due to a failure of
full delivery sites that were designated to provide adequate mitigation
The NCDOT is constructing a full lane, full control of access highway on new location
from south of Ellerbe (Richmond County) to Emery, south of Candor (Montgomery
County). A connector road (R-3303) also known as the NC 73 Extension between the
existing intersection of US 220 and NC73, and the proposed Bypass is also being
constructed. The connector will be a two-lane road with exclusive turning lanes at various
intersections along the proposed roadway.
MAILING ADDRESS:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
1598 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699-1598
TELEPHONE: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
WEBSITE. WWW.DOH.DOT.STATE.NC.US
LOCATION:
2728 CAPITOL BOULEVARD
PARKER LINCOLN BUILDING, SUITE 168
RALEIGH NC 27699
RESOURCES UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF SECTIN 404 AND 401 OF THE
CLEAN WATER ACT
Impacts to jurisdictional resources have been avoided and minimized to the greatest
extent practical. This project has a total of 7,548 linear feet of impacts in the Yadkin and
Lumber River Basins. Impacts to the Lumber River Basin have been mitigated through
onsite stream relocation and offsite stream restoration. Impacts to streams in the Yadkin
River Basin have been mitigated for by onsite natural stream design and from the Key
Branch Mitigation Site. The remaining balance of stream impacts requiring mitigation for
this project is 3,429 linear feet in the Yadkin River Basin in Richmond County.
The following compensation is requested from the Ecosystem Enhancement Program:
Compensatory mitigation is proposed to consist of mitigation provided by the EEP
for 3,429 linear feet of impacts to perennial, warm water streams in the Yadkin
River Basin (Hydrologic Unit Code 03040104), Richmond County.
Please send the letter of confirmation to Mr. Richard Spencer (USACE Coordinator
Divisions 6 & 8) at U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Wilmington Regulatory Field Office
(PO Box 1890 Wilmington, NC 28402-1890), Mr. Spencer's FAX number is ((910) 251-
4025).
In order to satisfy regulatory assurances that mitigation will be performed; the NCDWQ
(North Carolina Division of Water Quality) requires a formal letter from EEP indicating
their willingness and ability to provide the mitigation work requested by NCDOT.
If you have any questions or need additional information please call Carla Dagnino at
[phone]
Sincerely,
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.,
Environmental Management Director
Project Development & Environmental Analysis Branch
Cc: Mr. John Hennessy, Division of Water Quality
Ms. Polly Lespinasse, Division of Water Quality
Mr. Richard Spender, USACE Divisions 6 & 8
Mr. Omar Sultan, Programming and TIP
Mr. Linda Fitzpatrick, NCDOT Natural Environment Unit
Mr. Todd Jones, NCDOT External Audit Branch
File: R-3303
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON. NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
AGENT oN OF: December 11, 2006
Regulatory Division
Subject: Action ID No. 199400590, TIP No. R-2231, Ellerbe Bypass, Richmond Counties,
North Carolina.
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
Environmental Management Director
Project Development & Environmental Analysis
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, N.C. 27699-1548
Dear Dr. Thorpe:
I am responding to the request by Division 8 dated December 5, 2006 for an extension of
time modification to the existing Department of the Army (DA) permit issued for the above
referenced project and modified on December 16, 2004.
I have determined that the proposed project modification described above is not contrary to
the public interest and therefore, the DA permit expiration date is hereby modified. The
proposed modification is as follows:
GENERAL CONDITION #1
The time limit for completing the work authorized ends on December 31, 2007. If you find
that you need more time to complete the authorized activity, submit your request for a time
extension to this office for consideration at least one month before the above date is
reached.
Please note that a modified Water Quality Certification shall be obtained from NCDENR-
DWQ. Furthermore, all unmodified terms and conditions of your original Department of the
Army permit and modifications of December 16, 2004 and August 26, 2004 shall remain in
effect.
,r
4-
2
Should you have any questions, please contact Mr. Richard Spencer, Wilmington Field
Office, Regulatory Division, at telephone [phone].
Sincerely,
John E. Pulliam, Jr.
Colonel, U.S. Army
District Engineer
Copies Furnished:
Mr. David Cox
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
512 N. Salisbury Street
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-1188
Mr. John Hennessy
NCDENR-DWQ
Wetlands Section
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1621
Mr. Pete Benjamin
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Fish and Wildlife Enhancement
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
Mr. Chris Militcher
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Raleigh Office
Office of Environmental Assessment
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, NC 27601
Mr. Art King
Division Environmental Officer, Division 8
North Carolina Department of Transportation
P.O. Box 1067
Aberdeen, North Carolina 28315
DEC-10-06 10:36AM FROM-NCDOT-DOH Division 8 Office Aberdeen NC 910-944-5623 T-995 P.001/005 F-386
r cT ???c? ?; ; -.
y
r '
Hr iF T?a???
North Carolina Department of Transportatioh
Division Eight Office
po E30x 1067, Aberdeen, NC 28315 - Phone [phone], FAX 13101944-5623
DATE:? ^ /r
Please deliver to:
Name-

Department.

This FAX is being sent by:
Name:
Department: ?1 Tit/
D 1v-
Number of pages (including cover)-
if you do not receive all pages clearly, call [phone] as soon as possible.
Notes:
DEC-15-2006 FRI 10:21 TEL:[phone] NAME:DWQ-WETLANDS P. 1
DEC-15-06 10:36AM FROM-NCDOT-DOH Division 8 Office Aberdeen NC 910-944-5623 T-995 P-002/005 F-386
6
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
m1GtujF,y F. EAsLEY DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS L'YNDo'nPPErT
GOVERNOR SCCMRY
December 15, 2006
MEMORANDUM TO: Brian Wrenn, DOT Project Coordinator
NCDWQ 401 wetland Unit
FROM: Art C. King, DEC
NCDOT Highway Division 8
SUBJECT: Request for an Extension of time for DWQ # 970454
COE Action ID # 199400590
NCDOT Highway Division 8 is formally requesting a time extension of the 401 water
finality certification for the above listed project. The reason for the extension is explained
in the attached letter from Darren R. Scott, PE Resident Engineer, to Mr. Richard
Spencer, USACOE dated September 19, 2006.
I am also including Mr. Spen= response to the request dated December 11, 2006.
F.O. BOX 1067, ABERDEEN, NORTH CAR0L2-z 28335
PFION8 (910) 944^2344 Fax [phone]
DEC-15-2006 FRI 10:22 TEL:[phone] NAME:DWQ-WETLANDS P. 2
DEC45-06 10:36AM FROM-NCDOT-DOH Division 8 Office Aberdeen NC 910-944-5623
er.7?ld
MICNAEL F. EASJ EY
GOVERNOR
PROJECT:
CONTRACT NO
T.I.P. NO.:
COUNTY'
DESCRIPTION:
SUBJECT :
USAED, Wilmington
Mr. Richard Spencer
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402
Dear Mr. Spencer:
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIMION OF HIGHWAYS
September 19, 2006
34398.3.8
C200873
R-2231 A, R-2231 B
RICHMOND
LYNDO TIPPETT
SECRETARY
US-220 BYPASS FROM SOUTH OF SR1448 TO NORTH O
NC.-73
permit Extension Request
This letter is requesting an extension of The Department of the Amry Permit, pennit number 199400590,
which ends on December 31, 2006. The extension is being requested because the abDve referenced
project is anticipated not to finish by the contract completion date of December 31, 20C 6. The Contractor
not completing the project by the completion date is due to the Contractor's failure to pursue the work
diligently and being shut down several times for failing to perform erosion control.
In order to complete the remaining work under this contract, it is requested that the permit be extended
until December 31, 2007. The project is anticipated to be complete by June 2007, however, unforeseen
circumstances could push this date back.
If you have any questions please advise.
Sincerely,
Darren R. Scott, Pt
RESIDENT ENGINEER
DRS:jad
CC' Mr. Tim Johnson, PE
Mr. E_ C. Powell, Jr_, PE
Mr. D.W. Jernigan, PE
Mr. Art C. King
Filename: Permit Extension Request
P.O. Box 1067 / Aberdeen, N.C. 28315 / 910-9447554 / Vax: 910-944-3742
T-995 P.003/005 F-386
DEC-15-2806 FRI 10:22 TEL:[phone] NAME:DWQ-WETLANDS P. 3
DEC-1.5-06 10:37AM FROM-NCDOT-DOH Division 8 Office Aberdeen NC 910-944-5623 T-995 P-004/005 F-386
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON. NORTH CAROLINA 38402-1890
REPLY TO
December 11, 2006
p'Cf2.YT(ON OF:
Regulatory Division
Subject: Action ID No. 199400590, TIP No. R-2231, Ellerbe Bypass, Richmond Counties,
North Carolina.
Gregory I. Thorpe, Ph.D.
Environmental Management Director
Project Development & Environmental Analysis
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, N.C. 27699-1548
Dear Dr. Thorpe:
I am responding to the request by Division 8 dated December 5, 2006 for an Extension of
time modification to the existing Department of the Army (DA) permit issued for the above
referenced project and modified on December 16, 2004-
I have determined that the proposed project modification described above is r.ot contrary to
the public interest and therefore, the DA permit expiration date is hereby modified. The
proposed modification is as follows:
GENERAL CONDITION #1
The tune limit for completing the work authorized ends on December 31, 2007. If you find
that you peed more time to complete the authorized activity, submit your request for a time
extension to this office for consideration at least one month before the above date is
reached.
Please note that a modified Water Quality CertiEcation shall be obtained from NCDENR-
DWQ.. Furthermore, all unmodified terms and conditions of your original Departrr. ent of the
Army permit and modifications of December 16, 2004 and August 26, 2004 shall r.-main in
effect.
DEC-15-2006 FRI 10:22 TEL:[phone] NAME: M-WETLANDS P. 4
DEq-1i-06 10:37AM FROM-NCDOT-DOH Division 8 Office Aberdeen NC 910-944-5623 T-995 P.005/005 F-386
2
Should you have any questions, please contact Mr. Richard Spencer, Wilmington Field
Office, Regulatory Division, at telephone [phone].
Sincerely,
John E. Pulliam, Jr.
Colonel, U.S. Army
District Engineer
Copies Furnished:
Mr. David Cox
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
512 N. Salisbury Street
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-1188
Mr. John Hennessy
NCDENR DWQ
Wetlands Section
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1621
MT. Pete Benjamin
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Fish and Wildlife Enhancement
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
Mr, Chris. Militcher
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Raleigh Office
Office of Environmental Assessment
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, NC 27601
Mr. Art King ?r
Division Environmental Officer, Division 8
North Carolina Department of Transportation
P.Q. Box 1067
Aberdeen, North Carolina 28315
DEC-15-2006 FRI 10:22 TEL:[phone] NAME:DWQ-WETLANDS P. 5
Minutes of the Permit Drawing Review Meeting (4C) on May 16, 2007 for A-0011BB on US64
in Clay County
Participant: Team Members:
Randy Henegar, NCDOT Hydraulics (present)
Dave Baker, USACE (present)
Brian Wrenn, NCDWQ (present)
Wilson Stroud, NCDOT PD&EA (present)
Marla Chambers, NCWRC (absent)
Marella Buncick, USFWS (present)
Kathy Matthews, USEPA (present)
David Harris, NCDOT REU (absent)
Jamie Wilson, NCDOT Division 14 (present)
Jimmy Goodnight, NCDOT Roadway (present)
Donnie Brew, FHWA (present)
Chris Militscher, USEPA (absent)
Brett Feulner, NCDOT NEU (lusk sub.)
Neb Bullock, NCDOT Structures (present)
Helen Rucker, TVA (absent)
C<<?y
^d(e-o
Other Attendees
Mark Davis, Division 14 DEO
Marc Shown, NCDOT Hydraulics
Rusty Lassiter, NCDOT Hydraulics
Steve Kendall, NCDOT Roadway
Elizabeth Lusk, NCDOT NEU
Carla Dagnino, NCDOT NEU
Zach McNeill, NCDOT NEU
Kent Caldwell, NCDOT PDEA
Mark Staley, NCDOT Roadside
Randy Griffin, NCDOT NEU
Jamie Lancaster, NCDOT NEU
Suriyati B. Supa'at, NCDOT TEA
Gene J Nocerino, NCDOT NEU
Keith Paschal, NCDOT STR
Randy C Henegar started the meeting with introductions and statement that we would review the drawings site by
site. He also stated that after the 4-B meeting a field review was held with NCDOT and Agency Personnel and
that many issues were resolved. The following are the comments from the permit drawing review.
Site 1 No Comments
Site 2 No Comments
Site 3 No Comments
Site 4 NCDOT will hand place rip rap at outlet of RCBC
Site 5 Rip rap will be placed at the outlet of the15" CSP on Creek Bank
Site 6 No Comments
Site 7 Division 14 commented that the rip rap in the culvert outlet will not stay and recommended not
burying the culvert one foot. DWQ indicated it would be preferable to have a countermeasure. If
needed, outside of the outlet even though the impacts would be increased. USACE commented that
one-foot burial of pipes and culverts was intended for new installations not extensions. NCDOT
Hydraulics will revise culvert to eliminate one-foot burial on outlet extension.
Site 8 NCDOT Hydraulics will revise the culvert design to eliminate one-foot burial on outlet extension.
DWQ voiced concerns about stability at the inlet to the RCBC. Division 14 commented that nets
would be used to keep birds from nesting in RCBC during construction and if they were there
already delay construction until the birds were no longer present.
Site 9 Division 14 commented on the need for coordination with TVA to get permit approved. NCDOT
Hydraulics will contact TVA.
Site 10 No Comments
Site 11 No Comments
Site 12 No Comments
Site 13 Division 14 commented that it might be preferable to realign proposed 42" pipe to go under NC
175 to facilitate construction. Agencies had no objections.
Overall Comments:
NCDOT Hydraulics identified sites that had previously been discussed but were determined to be non-
jurisdictional.
NCFWS commented about extending box culverts with pipes that were smaller.
Division 14 commented that at Sta. 164+50 R/W should be obtained to the Creek Bank similar to Sta. 155+00.
NCDOT commented that at the field meeting the possibility of stream enhancement through the planting of
woody vegetation was discussed.
NEU proposed stream restoration from Sta. 112+00 to 124+00 +/-, stated that stream was degraded and
undercutting roadway embankment and expressed concerns about slope failure.
Division 14 commented that the reason the alignment was shifted and the project was redesigned and delayed was
to avoid stream impacts. Concern about additional cost to project was also voiced and a request for additional cost
to the project was made. NCDOT Hydraulics indicated that they would supply the Division with the additional
cost information.
Concern was expressed about delaying the Let date.
NCDOT Hydraulics will arrange a field meeting with the Agencies to discuss potential stream restoration.
rch
A-0011BB Downing Creek Onsite Mitigation
Subject: A-0011BB D6wning Creek Onsite Mitigation
From: "Zachery B. McNeill" <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 15:25:31 -0400
To: "Brett M. Feulner" <[e-mail]>
CC: "Baker, David K SAW" <[e-mail]>, "R. C. Henegar PE"
<[e-mail]>, Marla Chambers <[e-mail]>, Marella Buncick
<[e-mail]>, Brian Wrenn <[e-mail]>, Kathy Matthews
<[e-mail]>, "Jamie Wilson, PE" <[e-mail]>, "James S.
Goodnight" <[e-mail]>, Donnie Brew <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail], Wilson Stroud <[e-mail]>, "David B. Harris, PE"
<[e-mail]>, Neb Bullock PE <[e-mail]>, [e-mail],
Mark Davis <[e-mail]>, "Carla S. Dagnino" <[e-mail]>, Randy
Griffin <[e-mail]>, "Jamie Lancaster, PE" <[e-mail]>, "Gene J.
Nocerino" <[e-mail]>, Elizabeth Lee Lusk <[e-mail]>, "Rusty E.
Lassiter" <[e-mail]>, "Steve D. Kendall" <[e-mail]>, Kent E Caldwell
<[e-mail]>, Mark Staley <[e-mail]>, Keith Paschal
<[e-mail]>, LeiLani Paugh <[e-mail]>
Attached is a memo concerning the A-11 onsite mitigation of Downing Creek.
Thanks
Zach
Content-Type: application/msword
A-11 Onsite Mitigation.doc
Content-Encoding: base64
---_
1 of 1 7/9/2007 10:47 AM

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
July 2, 2007
MEMORANDUM TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
During the June 28th 2006, 4B concurrence meeting of A-00I IBB (US 64 Widening in
Clay County) there was an agency request for NCDOT to investigate Sta.115+00 through
Sta. 130+00+/- for possible stream mitigation. In response to this request, the NCDOT
NEU reviewed the site, and made the recommendation to perform stream restoration of
Downing Creek Sta. 112+00 through Sta. 124+00+/- Lt.-L-. The Hydraulics Unit
proposed the restoration project during the May 16th 2007 4C meeting. This proposal was
followed up with a field meeting at the site on May 31, 2007. The agencies in attendance
deemed the site acceptable for restoration, however time and cost concerns, including the
identification of an archeological site in the area created questions as to the feasibility of
the project. According to a June 29th, 2007 email, archeologists from the NCDOT HEU
performed a two-week investigation and have concluded the site does exhibit
archeological integrity.
Based upon a cost analysis of archeological recovery, construction estimates, R/W
acquisition, property survey, and design costs coupled with time constraints of a
September 2008 let, the ICI/Onsite Mitigation Team concludes that this stream
restoration project should not be pursued.
Brett Feulner
Environmental Specialist
Zach McNeill
Environmental Specialist
A-0011BB Downing Creek Onsite Mitigation
LYNDo TIPPETT
SECRETARY
Please contact me at [phone] with any further questions.
MAILING ADDRESS:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
NATURAL ENVIRONMENT UNIT
1598 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699-1598
TELEPHONE: [phone] Of
919-715-1335
FAX: [phone]
LOCATION:
PARKER LINCOLN BUILDING
2728 CAPITAL BLVD. SUITE 240
RALEIGH NC 27604
WEBSITE. WWW.NCDOT.ORG
A-0011BB Stream Mitigation
Subject: A-0011BB Stream Mitigation
From: "R. C. Henegar PE" <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 17 May 2007 16:15:10 -0400
To: Marla Chambers <[e-mail]>, "'Marella Buncick"'
<[e-mail]>, "'Brian Wrenn"' <[e-mail]>, "'Kathy Matthews"'
<[e-mail]>, "'Brett M. Feulner"' <[e-mail]>, "Jamie
Wilson, PE" <[e-mail]>, "James S. Goodnight" <[e-mail]>, Mark
Davis <[e-mail]>, "Carla S. Dagnino" <[e-mail]>, Donnie Brew
<[e-mail]>, Randy Griffin <[e-mail]>, "Jamie Lancaster, PE"
<[e-mail]>, "Gene J. Nocerino" <[e-mail]>, ' Zachery B. McNeill"
<[e-mail]>, [e-mail], Elizabeth Lee Lusk <[e-mail]>,
David Baker <[e-mail]>, "Rusty E. Lassiter" <[e-mail]>, "Marc
T. Shown, PE" <[e-mail]>
All:
We will review the reach of Downing Creek between Stations 112+00
and 128+00 for potential on-site stream mitigation in the field
on May 31, 2007 at 10:00am. The review will be to decide if this
is a doable restoration site, do we have time to do the design,
and how much buffer will be needed adjacent to the proposed
stream.
The time frame to get this review and decision made is very
tight, therefore I am requesting that the key players in the
decision making process please try to attend. If you cannot, and
would like to visit the site on your own, please do so as soon as
possible and let me know what you think. I will include it in
the final meeting minutes.
Randy Henegar
1 of 1 5/21/2007 9:16 AM
Final minutes of the Permit Drawing Review Meeting (4C) on May 16, 2007 for A-0011BB on US64
in Clay County
Participant: Team Members:
Randy Henegar, NCDOT Hydraulics (present)
Dave Baker, USACE (present)
Brian Wrenn, NCDWQ (present)
Wilson Stroud, NCDOT PD&EA (present)
Marla Chambers, NCWRC (absent)
Marella Buncick, USFWS (present)
Kathy Matthews, USEPA (present)
David Harris, NCDOT REU (absent)
Jamie Wilson, NCDOT Division 14 (present)
Jimmy Goodnight, NCDOT Roadway (present)
Donnie Brew, FHWA (present)
Chris Militscher, USEPA (absent)
Brett Feulner, NCDOT NEU (lusk sub.)
Neb Bullock, NCDOT Structures (present)
Helen Rucker, TVA (absent)
Other Attendees
Mark Davis, Division 14 DEO
Marc Shown, NCDOT Hydraulics
Rusty Lassiter, NCDOT Hydraulics
Steve Kendall, NCDOT Roadway
Elizabeth Lusk, NCDOT NEU
Carla Dagnino, NCDOT NEU
Zach McNeill, NCDOT NEU
Kent Caldwell, NCDOT PDEA
Mark Staley, NCDOT Roadside
Randy Griffin, NCDOT NEU
Jamie Lancaster, NCDOT NEU
Suriyati B. Supa'at, NCDOT TEA
Gene J Nocerino, NCDOT NEU
Keith Paschal, NCDOT STR
Randy C Henegar started the meeting with introductions and statement that we would review the drawings site by
site. He also stated that after the 4-13 meeting a field review was held with NCDOT and Agency Personnel and
that many issues were resolved. The following are the comments from the permit drawing review.
Site 1 No Comments
Site 2 No Comments
Site 3 No Comments
Site 4 NCDOT will hand place rip rap at outlet of RCBC
Site 5 Rip rap will be placed at the outlet of thel5" CSP on Creek Bank
Site 6 No Comments
Site 7 Division 14 commented that the rip rap in the culvert outlet will not stay and recommended not
burying the culvert one foot. DWQ indicated it would be preferable to have a countermeasure. If
needed, outside of the outlet even though the impacts would be increased. USACE commented that
one-foot burial culvert would not be necessary at this site. NCDOT Hydraulics will revise culvert
to eliminate one-foot burial on outlet extension.
Clarification from David Baker on 5/18/2007
Marc- regarding culvert burials- As you are aware, our regional conditions, DWQ's 401
certifications, and WRC comments/recommendations all require burial of culverts. What I meant
at the meeting was that there are some situations where this may not be warranted. According to
r?
the information presented at the meeting, the outlet end at site 7 is not perched. As Mark and
Jamie explained based upon a similar situation, burial of a larger culvert extension downstream
likely will result in the bedload material being scoured out during a high water event. This would
result in a 1-foot+ impasse to aquatic life moving upstream. My feeling is that the extension on-
grade on this low gradient stream should be acceptable. This should not be construed to mean that
all culvert extensions do not require burial, normally burial is required. Apparently I was
misleading at the meeting. Sorry for any confusion. Please revise the meeting minutes to reflect
this. Thanks. Dave Baker
Site 8 NCDOT Hydraulics will revise the culvert design to eliminate one-foot burial on outlet extension.
DWQ voiced concerns about stability at the inlet to the RCBC. Division 14 commented that nets
would be used to keep birds from nesting in RCBC during construction and if they were there
already delay construction until the birds were no longer present.
Site 9 Division 14 commented on the need for coordination with TVA to get permit approved. NCDOT
Hydraulics will contact TVA.
NCDOT Structures Unit will coordinate with TVA through the normal permit process.
Site 10 No Comments
Site 11 No Comments
Site 12 No Comments
Site 13 Division 14 commented that it might be preferable to realign proposed 42" pipe to go under NC
175 to facilitate construction. Agencies had no objections.
Overall Comments:
NCDOT Hydraulics identified sites that had previously been discussed but were determined to be non-
jurisdictional.
NCFWS commented about extending box culverts with pipes that were smaller.
Division 14 commented that at Sta. 164+50 R/W should be obtained to the Creek Bank similar to Sta. 155+00.
NCDOT commented that at the field meeting the possibility of stream enhancement through the planting of
woody vegetation was discussed.
NEU proposed stream restoration from Sta. 112+00 to 124+00 +/-, stated that stream was degraded and
undercutting roadway embankment and expressed concerns about slope failure.
Division 14 commented that the reason the alignment was shifted and the project was redesigned and delayed was
to avoid stream impacts. Concern about, additional cost to project was also voiced and a request for additional cost
to the project was made. NCDOT Hydraulics indicated that they would supply the Division with the additional
cost information.
Concern was expressed about delaying the Let date.
NCDOT Hydraulics will arrange a field meeting with the Agencies to discuss potential stream restoration.
Minutes from field meeting.
On May 31, 2007 a field meeting was held to review the section of Downing Creek considered for onsite
mitigation between Stations 113+00 to 127+00. The following were the highlights from the meeting.
• NCDOT had concerns that the final design for the stream mitigation could not be completed prior to the
permit application date. NCDOT began work on this project prior to 1990 and that NCDOT could not afford
any delays of the project let date. Brian Wrenn with DWQ proposed applying for permits with 30% design on
the stream mitigation to prevent any delays in the let date. NCDOT will need to get approval from USACE
and EPA to determine if they are willing to allow NCDOT to apply for permits with 30% design. If NCDOT
applies for the permit with 30% design Brian requested that a narrative be included requesting a conditioned
permit that includes a schedule of dates for design milestones.
• The stream mitigation project would be handled separately from the roadway widening as a Purchase Order
Contract.
e A potential archeological site is located adjacent to the stream between stations 114+00 and 115+00, and
possibly extending eastwards a short distance. The Human Environment Unit (HEU) will conduct additional
studies of the, site to determine (1) the exact limits of the site and (2) if the site is eligible for the National
Register. If the site is eligible for the NR and if this section of Downing Creek is to be relocated and
enhanced/restored, mitigation will be required. This mitigation likely would be done by data recovery, but
that would need to be determined in consultation with the Eastern Band of the Cherokee and SHPO. HEU
indicated the ballpark estimate for that data recovery is $60,000 to $120,000. An approximate timeline of
excavation work will need to be determined.
• Marella Buncick commented that NCDOT had a stream mitigation project in Iredell County that was
excavated within a two-month period.
• Land values need to be determined in the project area from the Right-of-Way branch.
• Randy Henegar indicated that there is a driveway from US 64 to the adjacent parcel with two 72-inch pipes
that would need to be replaced, and would cost approximately $15,000.
• NCDOT Natural Environment Engineering Group will do a cost analysis of the project including the cost of
right-of way, design and. construction, and archeological studies to determine if the stream mitigation is
financially feasible.
The following attendees were present at the meeting
Randy Henegar
Mark Davis
Mike Parker
Marella Buncick
Zach McNeill
Gene Nocerino
Jamie Lancaster
Brian Wrenn
Bill Barrett
Brett Feulner
Randy Griffin
NCDOT Hydraulics
Div. 14 DEO
DWQ- Asheville Office
US Fish and Wildlife Service
NCDOT-NEU
NCDOT-NEU
NCDOT-NEU
DWQ-Raleigh Office
NCDOT-NEU
NCDOT-NEU
NCDOT-NEU
Additional comments from NEU's Zack McNeill on 7/2/2007:
During the June 28th 2006, 4B concurrence meeting of A-00I IBB (US 64 Widening in Clay County) there was.
an agency request for NCDOT to investigate Sta.115+00 through Sta. 130+00+/- for possible stream mitigation.
In response to this request, the NCDOT NEU reviewed the site, and made the recommendation to perform stream
restoration of Downing Creek Sta. 112+00 through Sta. 124+00+/- Lt.-L-. The Hydraulics Unit proposed the
restoration project during the May 16th 2007.4C meeting. This proposal was followed up with a field meeting at
the site on May 31, 2007. The agencies in attendance deemed the site acceptable for restoration, however time
and cost concerns, including the identification of an archeological site in the area created questions as to the
feasibility of the project. According to a June 29th, 2007 email, archeologists from the NCDOT HEU performed a
two-week investigation and have concluded the site does exhibit archeological integrity.
Based upon a cost analysis of archeological recovery, construction estimates, R/W acquisition, property survey,
and design costs coupled with time constraints of a September 2008 let, the ICI/Onsite Mitigation Team
concludes that this stream restoration project should not be pursued.
rch