20091070 Ver 1_Email_20100222

RE: R2612A
RE: R2612A
Euliss, Amy
Sent: Monday, February 22, 2010 12:38 PM
To: Carrillo, Sonia
Page 1 of 6
OR-Io7o
Could you update BIMS to reflect that you received the additional information below? Its showing the project's on
hold. I can also do it, but I wanted to make sure you got the info first. I'll probably try to issue this week. Also, do you
assign the IP number in BIMS? I've only done one IP, and I don't remember how I got that number. Thanks.
Amy
From: Euliss, Amy
Sent: Friday, February 19, 2010 1:02 PM
To: Carrillo, Sonia
Subject: FW: R2612A
Will you please add the attachments and the email below to 09-1070? Thanks.
Amy
From: Pflaum, James R
Sent: Friday, February 12, 2010 2:01 PM
To: Euliss, Amy
Cc: Williams, Andrew E SAW
Subject: RE: R2612A
Amy,
In response to your comments from site 3 stream 4:
Attached are plan sheet updates to permit drawing sheets 10 of 30, 11 of 30, 15 of 30, and 16 of 30. These are
all in reference to site site 3 and the ditch rerouting stream 4 (roadway storm water).
For the ditch at the outlet of the proposed culvert, coir fiber matting is not an adequate reinforcement option.
The velocity in this ditch is approximately 10 ft/s. Class B riprap(at a minimum)is required.
Maximum permissible velocity for ditch flow is approximately 4 ft/s. Anything above this rate has the potential
to produce erosion. If further documentation is needed as proof of the necessary ditch reinforcement, the
Erosion Control Manual produced by the NC Erosion Control Commission in conjunction with the Extension
Service at NC State can be used as a reference.
In response to your comment from site 5 wetland 1:
Detail 15 liner will be rip rap, see comment above for rip rap justification.
In response to your comments at Site 5 wetland 1:
See comment above for rip rap justification.
https://mail.nc.gov/owa/?ae=ltem&t=IPM.Note&id=RgAAAADMSzLcd9 W2TJH14°/u2bmA%2f... 2/22/2010
RE: R2612A
Please give me a call if you have questions.
Thanks
James Pflaum
NC Department of Transportation
PDEA Environmental Resource Center
4701 Atlantic Ave
Raleigh, NC 27604
919-431-6527
1598 MSC
Raleigh, NC 27699
Page 2 of 6
From: Euliss, Amy
Sent: Monday, February 01, 2010 12:03 PM
To: Pflaum, James R
Cc: Williams, Andrew E SAW
Subject: RE: R2612A
James,
Please see my response to the answers, as well as additional question concerns. Thanks.
Amy
Site 1:
Stream 5:
1. Is the stream intermittent or perennial? Table 1 says perennial, page 5 of the permit app says intermittent,
unimportant. Please determine the appropriate classification for this stream.
Miss labeled on Table 1, Stream 5 is intermittent, non-mitigable.
OK
Is bank stabilization around the outlet of the pipe? Is it included in the 145 linear feet? Please remember if
these impacts equal or exceed 150 linear feet, then mitigation will be required.
Bank stabilization was not included on Stream 5 - due to the non-mitigable status.
OK
Wetland 6:
1. Stream 5 appears to be the source of hydrology for Wetland 6. You are removing the flowing stream from the
wetlands, thus removing the hydrology. Please determine the source of the hydrology. If it is the stream, the
wetland should be a total take.
This question was posed by Cathy Mathews in the 4C meeting, but it does not show up on the minutes. The
stream is not the only source of hydrology for this portion of wetland 6. The pond, drainage from the hill to the
east, and drainage from the proposed US 421 (storm water pipe at Y1 +60.00) will provide hydrology.
OK
hups://mail.nc.gov/owa/?ae=ltem&t=l PM.Note&id=RgAAAADMSzLcd9 W2TJH14%2bmA%2f... 2/22/2010
RE: R2612A
Page 3 of 6
Site 3:
Stream 4:
1. Stream 4 is being filled. The source of the stream is being piped and outlets perpendicular to the road. At the
outlet of the pipe, the plans show no connection to the existing channel. You need to create a new channel that
connects the stream from the pipe outlet to the pond. This new channel should not be lined with rip rap unless
velocities warrant rip rap. If rip rap is proposed, please provide justification. No rock should be placed in
channel bottom.
Stream 4 has been ruled non-mitigable, hydrology source is storm water from US 421. The pipe that reroutes
stream 4 (structure 17) is shown oddly. It will connect to a lateral V ditch (detail 1) which will connect to a tail V
ditch in detail 11, both ditches are lined with rip-rap. Rip-rap is warranted due to erosive velocities and steep
topography (see topo lines permit drawings sheet 15 of 30). These ditches drain to a natural ephemeral feature
which discharges into the pond.
Please update the plans to reflect the connections.
Please reference the methods used to determine when rip rap is necessary. For example, is it a requirement of
the Sediment and Erosion control manual, or some other source? I don't need the exact calculations, but I do
need you to reference how you came to the conclusion that rip rap is warranted.
Site 4:
Wetland 5:
1. Excavation total shows <0.01 for the total. Please clarify if this is <0.005 or equal to or > than 0.005. If > or
equal to .005, then please add .01 to the mitigation total.
Impact is less than 0.005.
OK
Site 5:
Wetland 1:
1. It appears as though no channel flows through the wetland. Please state how the wetland will be connected to
the pipe. Will a channel be created to direct flow to the inlet of the culvert?
The wetland is a drained pond. Flow will be diverted into the culvert by breaching the dam at the location shown
and use of a base ditch, detail 15.
What type of liner does detail 15 have? If its rip rap, then please reference the methods used to determine when rip
rap is necessary. For example, is it a requirement of the Sediment and Erosion control manual, or some other
source? I don't need the exact calculations, but I do need you to reference how you came to the conclusion that
rip rap is warranted.
2. At the channel outlet, there is class 1 rip rap and the plans refer to detail 17. 1 don't see a detail 17. Please
provide.
PDF with detail 17 is attached.
Please reference the methods used to determine when rip rap is necessary. For example, is it a requirement of the
Sediment and Erosion control manual, or some other source? I don't need the exact calculations, but I do need
you to reference how you came to the conclusion that rip rap is warranted.
https://mail.nc.gov/owa/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note&id=RgAAAA DMSzLcd9 W2TJHI4%2bmA°/u2f... 2/22/2010
RE: R2612A
Page 4 of 6
3. Beyond the outlet, there is a constructed channel to reconnect with the original stream. It refers to detail 12.
Detail 12 shows rip rap in the stream bed. Please remove the rip rap from the stream bed, or provide
justification for it to remain in the stream bottom.
Rip-rap is warranted due to erosive velocities and steep topography (see topography permit drawings sheet 23 of
30).
Please reference the methods used to determine when rip rap is necessary. For example, is it a requirement of the
Sediment and Erosion control manual, or some other source? I don't need the exact calculations, but I do need
you to reference how you came to the conclusion that rip rap is warranted.
4. Project commitments from Hydraulics 4B show for 3, 1'sills in the culvert place @200' apart. Please clarify if
they are to be utilized, or provide justification for why they have been removed.
One foot sills are being used in the culvert at site 5.
OK
As an additional note, for all channels with rip rap placed in the channel bottom, there will be a condition on the permit
stating that rip rap shall be keyed into to the stream bed and banks, in order to not impede aquatic passage. Having this
stamped on the plans would increase the likelihood of compliance in the field.
Amy
From: Pfaum, James R
Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2010 1:47 PM
To: Euliss, Amy; [e-mail]
Subject: RE: R2612A
Amy - please see comments below each question.
James Pfaum
NC Department of Transportation
PDEA Environmental Resource Center
4701 Atlantic Ave
Raleigh, NC 27604
919-431-6527
1598 MSC
Raleigh, NC 27699
From: Euliss, Amy
Sent: Monday, January 11, 2010 2:54 PM
To: Pflaum, James R
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject: R2612A
https:Hmail.nc.gov/owa/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note&id=RgAAAADMSzLcd9 W 2TJH14%2bmA%2£.. 2/22/2010
RE: R2612A.
James,
Page 5 of 6
Here's a list of questions.' My official clock doesn't start until after the public notice closes (1-20-2010). That said, if I
don't have these answered by mid-February, I'll have to put the project on hold.
Site 1:
Stream 5:
1. Is the stream intermittent or perennial? Table 1 says perennial, page 5 of the permit app says intermittent,
unimportant. Please determine the appropriate classification for this stream.
Miss labeled on Table 1, Stream 5 is intermittent, non-mitigable.
2. Is bank stabilization around the outlet of the pipe? Is it included in the 145 linear feet? Please remember if
these impacts equal or exceed 150 linear feet, then mitigation will be required.
Bank stabilization was not included on Stream 5 - due to the non-mitigable status.
Wetland 6:
1. Stream 5 appears to be the source of hydrology for Wetland 6. You are removing the flowing stream from the
wetlands, thus removing the hydrology. Please determine the source of the hydrology. If it is the stream, the
wetland should be a total take.
This question was posed by Cathy Mathews in the 4C meeting, but it does not show up on the minutes. The
stream is not the only source of hydrology for this portion of wetland 6. The pond, drainage from the hill to the
east, and drainage from the proposed US 421 (storm water pipe at Y1 +60.00) will provide hydrology.
Site 3:
Stream 4:
1. Stream 4 is being filled. The source of the stream is being piped and outlets perpendicular to the road. At the
outlet of the pipe, the plans show no connection to the existing channel. You need to create a new channel that
connects the stream from the pipe outlet to the pond. This new channel should not be lined with rip rap unless
velocities warrant rip rap. If rip rap is proposed, please provide justification. No rock should be placed in
channel bottom.
Stream 4 has been ruled non-mitigable, hydrology source is storm water from US 421. The pipe that reroutes
stream 4 (structure 17) is shown oddly. It will connect to a lateral V ditch (detail 1) which will connect to a tail V
ditch in detail 11, both ditches are lined with rip-rap. Rip-rap is warranted due to erosive velocities and steep
topography (see topo lines permit drawings sheet 15 of 30). These ditches drain to a natural ephemeral feature .
which discharges into the pond.
Site 4:
Wetland 5:
1. Excavation total shows <0.01 for the total. Please clarify if this is <0.005 or equal to or > than 0.005. If > or
equal to .005, then please add .01 to the mitigation total.
Impact is less than 0.005.
Site 5:
Wetland 1:
1. It appears as though no channel flows through the wetland. Please state how the wetland will be connected to
https://mail.nc.gov/owa/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note&id=RgAAAADMSzLcd9 W2TJHI4%2bmA%2f... 2/22/2010
RE: R2612A Page 6 of 6
the pipe. Will a channel be created to direct flow to the inlet of the culvert?
The wetland is a drained pond. Flow will be diverted into the culvert by breaching the dam at the location shown
and use of a base ditch, detail 15.
2. At the channel outlet, there is class 1 rip rap and the plans refer to detail 17. 1 don't see a detail 17. Please
provide.
PDF with detail 17 is attached.
Beyond the outlet, there is a constructed channel to reconnect with the original stream. It refers to detail 12.
Detail 12 shows rip rap in the stream bed. Please remove the rip rap from the stream bed, or provide
justification for it to remain in the stream bottom.
Rip-rap is warranted due to erosive velocities and steep topography (see topography permit drawings sheet 23 of
30).
4. Project commitments from Hydraulics 4B show for 3, 1'sills in the culvert place @200' apart. Please clarify if
they are to be utilized, or provide justification for why they have been removed.
One foot sills are being used in the culvert at site 5.
Thanks,
Amy Euliss
Please note my new email address: [e-mail]
Amy Euliss
NC DENR Winston-Salem Regional Office
Division of Water Quality, Surface Water Protection
585 Waughtown Street
Winston-Salem, NC 27107
Voice: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N.C. Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
https://mail.nc.gov/owa/?ae=ltem&t=IPM.Note&id=RgAAAADMSzLcd9 W2TJHI4%2bmAd/o2f... 2/22/2010