20201102 Ver 1_C5d1.JD Verification_20200827

SAW-2019-01884--Pine Valley Solar Farm 4226 Camp Burton Road Guilford County McLeansville
NC
Thames, Joyce A CIV USARMY CESAW (US) <[e-mail]>
Thu 10/3/2019 7:48 AM
To: Nick Creidler <nick@ headwaterenvironmental.com>
Cc: Bailey, David E CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) < [e-mail] >
Good Morning / Afternoon,
On 01 Oct 2019, we received your Jurisdictional Determination (JD) request. We have assigned the request the file
number SAW-2019-01884 and forwarded project to David Bailey for further processing, please refer to this file
number on all correspondence.
Sincerely,
Joyce A. Thames
Joyce A. Thames
US Army Corps of Engineers
Raleigh Reg. Field Ofc.
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, NC 27587
[phone] Ext 21
The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure we
continue to do so, please complete the Customer Satisfaction Survey located at
http: corpsmapu.usace.army.mil/cm apex f?p=136:4:0.

Friday, November 29, 2019 at 1:32:24 PM Eastern Standard Time
Subject: RE: May Site
Date: Friday, November 22, 2019 at 2:34:37 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: Bailey, David E CIV USARMY CESAW (USA)
To: paul headwaterenvironmental.com
CC: Homewood, Sue, Nick Creidler
Hi Paul. Thanks for the emails and your time on the phone this afternoon. As we discussed, kudos on the quality
delineation given that the site had been cleared and replanted in fescue. Regarding the stream/wetland crossing:
The Corps would hesitate to agree that the crossing is subject to a farm road exemption, given that the area south of
the stream was forested essentially up to the time the road crossing was installed and the exemptions are for
activities involving ongoing farming operations. Also, as we discussed, converting the wetland area to pasture
required stumping which results in a discharge of dredged material, and also there is a windrow of cleared
vegetation/debris within the wetland that has at least the effect of fill within the wetland. Since these activities in
wetlands were not authorized by the Corps, it is unlikely that we would view access to those areas via a farm road as
an exempt activity.
Also, in order to qualify for an exemption, the farm road would have to be "constructed and maintained in
accordance with best management practices (BMPs) to assure that flow and circulation patterns and chemical and
biological characteristics of waters of the United States are not impaired, that the reach of the waters of the United
States is not reduced, and that any adverse effect on the aquatic environment will be otherwise minimized." As we
discussed the culvert is currently perched (1-2") such that water is seeping under the pipe; i.e. there was flow in the
stream above the pipe and flow in the stream below the pipe, but no flow in the pipe. Although this issue was
relatively minor compared to other perched culverts, it would not maintain the flow and circulation of waters as
intended.
Further, if the purpose of the crossing will be changed to providing access for construction and maintenance of the
proposed cellular tower, then we would not consider the road a farm road.
All of the above notwithstanding, this issue is rather easily resolved. Road access for construction and maintenance of
a cellular tower is a very straight forward purpose and need, and the Corps has no issue with the existing alignment
being used for that purpose. However, such a crossing would require after -the -fact authorization from the Corps;
typically we would use Nationwide Permit 39 for such a crossing, which would require notification via a PCN due to
the fill in a special aquatic site (e.g. wetlands). Also, the culvert pipe would need to be reset such that the pipe inverts
are placed at least at grade to fit NWP 39 Regional Condition 3.6, and my understanding is that the reciprocal Water
Quality Certification from NCDWR would require a 20% depth burial in the stream bed. These attributes would better
maintain flow and circulation patterns and chemical and biological characteristics of waters of the United States
above and below the crossing. As you know, the stream and wetland fill of a crossing similar to the existing would be
well below the applicable compensatory mitigation thresholds.
For any questions related to applicable stream buffers on this site, please refer to Sue Homewood (NCDWR).
Hopefully the information provided has been useful and spells out a path forward. Please reply as soon as you can
regarding proposed actions for this project, and feel free to call or email me if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Dave Bailey
David E. Bailey, PWS
Regulatory Project Manager
Page 1 of 3