20081770 Ver 4_Modifications_20100820

- ? A L j rrnz
TO
j
Kimley-Horn
and Associates, Inc. ?G
P.O. Box 33068. Raleiah, NC 27636
Phone 2000 Fax [phone] DSAND??iAR r
NCDENR Southeast Raleigh Expansion Reuse Pipeline
B
Division of Water Quality
401/Wetlands Unit
Attn: Ms. Amy Chapman
2321 Crabtree Blvd.
Raleigh, NC 27604
For aooroval
? For vour use
? As reauested
For review and comment
? FORBIDS DUE
WE ARE SENDING YOU Attached ? Under separate cover via the following items:
? Shoo drawinas ? Prints ? Plans ? Samoles ? Soecifications
? Coov of letter ? Chanoe order N Permit Docu mentation
COPIES DATE CITY. PAGE DESCRIPTION
5 8/20/2010 14 Permit Modification Request

THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below:
REMARKS
? Furnish as submitted
? Furnish as corrected
? Revise and resubmit
: August 20- 2010 JOB NO.
ENTION
Ms. Amy Chapman
RE:
Permit Modification Request

? Resubmit conies for aooroval
? Submit cooies for distribution
? Return corrected orints
20
COPY TO: FILE
SIGNED: p .
Julie D. Robinson, E.I.
If enclosures are not as noted, kindly notify us at once.
Kimfey-Horn
and Associates, Inc.
August 20, 2010
Amy Chapman
NCDENR/Division of Water Quality
401/Wetlands Unit
2321 Crabtree Blvd. Suite 250
Raleigh, NC 27604
Re: City of Raleigh Public Utilities Department
Southeast Raleigh Expansion Reuse Pipeline
Permit Modification
Wake County, North Carolina
Dear Amy:
v8-1"1-7a v??
p,,.
4*0 q,,e 0. 7/J
H4*os tiR ` C? it
P. 0. Box 33068
Raleigh, North Carolina
27636-3068
On behalf of the Public Utilities Department of the City of Raleigh, Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. is submitting
the enclosed permit modification request (DWQ Project #08-1770). This information is being submitted as we
discussed via email on 8/18/10 and in accordance with the attached email correspondence.
The original proposed project included the construction of approximately 38,800 linear feet of new reuse water
pipeline. This project would have resulted in temporary wetland impacts of 0.043 acres, permanent wetland impacts
of 0.081 acres, temporary impacts to 38 linear feet of stream channel, buffer Zone 1 Impacts of 6,441 SF, and buffer
Zone 2 Impacts of 10,516 SF. These impacts were later revised to 9,457 SF of Zone 1 Impacts and 11,323 SF of
Zone 2 Impacts.
As part of the City of Raleigh's ongoing installations, including a crossing of Walnut Creek, a bore and jack of a
36" steel casing was proposed and permitted. The obtained permits are attached for your reference. The casing
was designed and permitted to span the zone 1 buffers and the creek itself with the bore pits and alignment as
shown on the attached drawing sheet.
Upon commencement of the bore and jack operation, the contractor encountered a "split face" of rock material and
also extremely soft material. As the bore progressed in this material, the casing essentially deflected downward
severely at the 80' ft mark of the bore, causing the bore to deflect much deeper than desired due to the fluidity of
the soil and groundwater here. To remedy this situation, the contractor has inquired about being allowed to dig a
pit inside the buffers to expose a section of the bore and shore up underneath the casing with stone to provide
another point for the casing to rest upon. This would hopefully allow the casing to not deflect down as much until
they reach hopefully better materials (clay) further along the alignment. This excavation would be in the zone
buffers, but not in the stream itself. Again, this area is along a mowed power transmission line and vegetative
impacts would be very minimal and temporary. These additional impacts would bring the total Zone 1 Impacts to
12,284 SF and the Zone 2 Impacts to 13,605 SF as shown in the marked up summary table.
As such, we are requesting a permit modification for this activity as indicated in the attached impact summary table
markup and revised impact mapping.
The following information is included with this request:
0 Previous Permit Package/Approvals
• Updated Impact Figure
• Updated Impact Table
0 Associated e-mail correspondence on this issue
As we discussed, your quick help with this matter is much appreciated. If there is any additional information you
need to assist in the processing of this request, please do not hesitate to contact me at [phone].
Very truly yours,
KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
l.xe
Jeremy Rivenbark, P. E.
Project Manager
Enclosures
City of Raleigh
Page 2 of 4
June 7, 2010
The following impacts are hereby approved as long as all of the other specific and general
conditions of this Certification (or Isolated Wetland Permit) are met. No other impacts are
approved including incidental impacts:
T _Ype of Impact Amount Approved Units Plan Location or Reference
404/Wetland 0.154 [(acres) 0.81 acres permanent Project Narrative dated May 26, 2010
impact, and 0.073 acres temporary
impact)
Stream - perennial 91 (linear feet) - temp ora im act Project Narrative dated May 26
2010
Buffers Zone 1 14-57 s uare ft. 1 aB ,
Project Narrative dated Ma 26
2010
Buffers Zone 2 (square ft.) 13 o ,
Project Narrative dated Ma 2b, 201Q
2. No Waste, Spoil, Solids, or Fill of Any Kind
No waste, spoil, solids, or fill of any kind shall occur in wetlands, waters, or riparian areas beyond
the footprint of the impacts depicted in the Pre-Construction Notification. All construction
activities, including the design, installation, operation, and maintenance of sediment and erosion
control Best Management Practices, shall be performed so that no violations of state water quality
standards, statutes, or rules occur.
3. Erosion and sediment control practices must be in full compliance with all specifications governing
the proper design, installation and operation and maintenance of such Best Management Practices in
order to protect surface waters standards:
a. The erosion and sediment control measures for the project must be designed, installed,
operated, and maintained in accordance with the most recent version of the North Carolina
Sediment and Erosion Control Planning and Design Manual.
b. The design, installation, operation, and maintenance of the sediment and erosion control
measures must be such that they equal, or exceed, the requirements specified in the most
recent version of the North Carolina Sediment and Erosion Control Manual. The devices
shall be maintained on all construction sites, borrow sites, and waste pile (spoil) projects,
including contractor-owned or leased borrow pits associated with the project.
c. Sufficient materials required for stabilization and/or repair of erosion control measures and
stormwater routing and treatment shall be on site at all times.
4. Sediment and Erosion Control Measures
Sediment and erosion control measures shall not be placed in wetlands or waters without prior
approval from the Division. If placement of sediment and erosion control devices in wetlands and
waters is unavoidable, design and placement of temporary erosion control measures shall not be
conducted in a manner that may result in dis-equilibrium of wetlands or stream beds or banks,
adjacent to or upstream and down stream of the above structures. All sediment and erosion control
devices shall be removed and the natural grade restored within two (2) months of the date that the
Division of Land Resources or locally delegated program has released the project,
5. Diffuse Flow
An additional condition is that all stormwater shall be directed as diffuse flow at non-erosive
velocities through the protected stream buffers and will not re-concentrate before discharging into
the stream as identified within 15A NCAC 2B.0233(5).
'ON 'S3IVIOOSSV ONV NMOH-A 14DI Ol LLnl&n JnOH11M 39 IIVHS •ONI 'S3.lVIOOSSV ONV NMOH-),31141)4 AS NOLLVIdVOY ONY NOLLt212IORM1 N3 kLM InOKIM 1N3Wf7300 SIHl NO MNVMN U3dOMdWI ONV d0
3Sf13M 'Q3Wd3Md 9IM u HOIHM MA Iwo cm 3SOdund 3Hl MOd XlNO O3ON31NI 51 '3ovms d0 JN3pin&SNI NV SV 'NSUH 031NMUd SNOWO ONV S1d3ONOO 3Hl HMM M3K 3001 'JN3Y4no0O SIHl
L'Z 38noi3 SONISSOK Wd38iS ONV ©NVU3M 60/6Z/V 'OUl'SOMPO bPAWOH•f lwim
3NI13did 3sn3?J NOISNVdX3 H013?V1SV3Hinos 31VG
g o o? o? o
oa(A aocn aaN
°° d° \ \,, \ 1
Q
z o_? az ro m ? - 00
s - o r-
z CL n a
z z °zo °z? Q -? ' a
20 LL.
LL.
o _ cn
?-
w z
_ o `...
Z , o ? oz o - _ x © Is
a a pn'05 k'z v Y z ?;
I- w w F' w? w ? my w -' l v~iooe?a .?
w Q
-j F?
C4 cq
19
Lo 0. Ul W
71
?.N a
W,..
_ r T
X, d _ .n]IJ? ^. ??
?? r-7 iJ+
L
Jam„ ?, ? .` ,,,.i ?' -ii ,>+H y
p = - 1 t 1,>, /? ? w d v i
"V4 ,.»t„N rtl --6V ;j? - 6002 '6l IIjaV
fn In ?% ` ?- 1
"c. X" a \) "
%
W W
Ilk
?`5` / ` 9?? ^ \•? i ,t ((???ijj ` ?,°
J,,:;\vj
'?iIj??r,?
"N
-lip
cY tY N C o 0.i ` 1 'l' ;? i` 111 i? t\, \
Z ° 11 s -v
t' a N??N Nr \l,? \ i\''1?' C? I I N ? 1
aaw i ?;?. ?'hz I ?+, J
l N
NO a.
6µp•sajn6)j }oodwl lo}uawuoUlnu3 ;uaw6aS wolla),\Sajn6j s}oodwl-woaJ}S\)iu6l o} aulladld asnea\O(3VO\asnaa 46181oil 090£90LW\IoauawuaV,u3--IVa\:)q
AG`5L;,wA_A
DER
M
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Beverly. Eaves Perdue Coleen H. Sullins Dee Freeman
Governor Director
Secretary
June 7, 2010
DWQ Project # 08=1770, Ver..3
Wake County
Mr: Kenny Waldroup
City of Raleigh - Public Works Department
222 West Hargett Street.
Raleigh, NC 27602-0590
Subject Property: City of Raleigh. Southeast Raleigh Expansion Reuse Pipeline - MODIFICATION
Ut'to Walnut Creek [030402, 27-34-(4), C, NSW]
Approval of 401 Water Quality Certification and Authorization Certificate per the Neuse River
Buffer Protection Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0233) with Additional Conditions
Dear Mr. Waldroup:
You have our approval, in accordance with the attached conditions and those listed below; to place fill
within or otherwise impact 0.154 acres of 404,/wetland (0.081 acres permanent impact, and 0.073 acres
temporary impact), 91 linear feet perennial stream impact (temporary impact), and., 9,457, square feet: of
Zone 1 Neuse River basin protected riparian buffers and 11,323 square feet of Zone 2 Neuse River basin
protected riparian buffers, as described in your application dated May 26, 2010, and. received. by the
Division of Water Quality(DWQ) on May 28, 2010, to. construct the proposed reclairried water project at
the site. After reviewing your application, we have decided that the. impacts are covered by General
Water Quality Certification Number(s) 3819 (GC3.819). The Certification(s).allows you to use
.Nationwide Permit(s) NW 12 when issued by the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). In addition,
you should.obtain or otherwise comply with any other required federal, state or local permits before you
go ahead with your project including (but not.limited to) Erosion and Sediment Control, and Non-
discharge regulations., Also, this approval to proceed with your proposed, impacts or to conduct
impacts to waters as depicted in your application shall expire upon expiration of the 404. or CAMA
Permit.
This-approval is for the purpose and design that you described in your application. If you change your
project, you must notify us and you may be required to send us a new application. If the property is sold,
the new owner must be given a copy of this Certification and approval letter and is thereby responsible for
complying with all, conditions. If total fills for this project (now or in the future) exceed one acre of
wetland or 150 linear feet of stream, compensatory mitigation may be. required as described in 15A
NCAC 2H.0506 (h). This approval requires you to follow the conditions listed in the attached
certification and any additional conditions listed below.
The Additional Conditions of the Certification are:
1. Impacts Approved
401 Oversl$t/Express Review Permitting Unit
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699.1650
Location.2321 Crabtree Blvd;, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone]
Internet: http:llh2o.enr.state.nc.uslncwetiandsl
NorthCarolina
Nahlrall
An Equal Cp*Iunily %Aiiirmarive Action Employer
City of Raleigh
Page 2 of 4 -
June 7, 2010
The following impacts are hereby approved as long as all of the other specific and general
conditions of this Certification (or isolated Wetland Permit) are met. No other impacts are
approved including incidental impacts:
Type of Impact Amount Approved nits Plan Location or Reference
404/Wetland 0.154 [(acres) 0.81 acres permanent
impact, and 0.073 acres temporary
impact) Project Narrative dated May 26,2016'
Stream - perennial 91 (linear feet) - temporary impact Project Narrative dated.Ma 26, 2010
Buffers Zone 1 9,457 (square ft.) Project Narrative dated May 26, 2010
Buffers Zone 2 11,323 (square ft. Project Narrative dated May 26, 2010
2. No Waste, Spoil, Solids, or Fill of Any Kind
No waste, spoil, solids, or fill of any kind shall occur in wetlands, waters, or riparian areas beyond
the footprint of the.impacts depicted in the Pre-Construction Notification. All construction
activities, including the design, installation, operation, and maintenance of sediment and erosion
control Best Management Practices, .shall be performed so that no violations of state water quality
standards, statutes, or rules occur.
3. Erosion and sediment control practices must be in full compliance with all specifications governing
the proper design, installation and operation and maintenance of such Best Management Practices in
order.to protect surface waters standards:
a. The erosion and sediment control measures for the project must be designed, installed,
operated, and maintained in accordance with the most recent version of the North Carolina
Sediment and Erosion Control Planning and Design Mariuat,
b. The, design, installation, operation, and maintenance of the sediment and erosion control
measures must be such that they equal, or exceed,. the requirements specified in. the most
recent version of the North Carolina Sediment and Erosion Control 1lManual. The devices
shall be maintained on all construction sites, borrow sites, and waste pile (spoil) projects,
including contractor-owned or leased borrow pits associated with the project.
c. Sufficient materials required for stabilization and/or repair of erosion control measures and
stormwater routing and treatment shall be on site at all times.
4. Sediment and Erosion Control Measures
Sediment and erosion control measures shall not be placed in wetlands or waters without prior
approval from the Division. If placement of sediment and erosion control devices in wetlands and
waters is unavoidable, design and placement of temporary erosion control measures shall not be
conducted in a manner that may result in dis-equilibrium of wetlands or. stream beds or banks,
adjacent to or upstream and down stream of the above structures. All sediment and erosion control
devices shall be removed and the natural grade restored within two. (2) months of the date that the
Division of Land Resources or locally delegated program has released the project;
5. Diffuse Flow
An additional condition is that all stormwater shall be directed as diffuse flow at non-erosive
velocities through the protected stream buffers and will not re-concentrate before discharging into
the stream as identified within 1.5A NCAC 2B .0233(5).
City of Raleigh
Page 3 of 4
June 7, 201 Q,
6. Protective Fencing
The outside buffer, wetland or water boundary and along the construction corridor within these
boundaries approved under this authorization shall be clearly marked with orange warning fencing
(or similar high visibility material) for the areas that have been approved to infringe within the
buffer, wetland or water prior to any land disturbing activities;
7. Certificate of Completion
Upon completion of all work approved within the 401 Water Quality' Certification or applicable
Buffer Rules, and any subsequent modifications, the applicant is required to return the attached
certificate of completion to the 401 Oversight/Express Review Permitting Unit, North Carolina
Division of Water Quality, 1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC, 27699-1650.
Violations of any condition herein set forth may result in revocation of this Certification 'and may result in
criminal and/or civil penalties. The authorization to proceed with your proposed impacts or to conduct
impacts to waters as depicted in your application and as authorized by this Certification, shall expire upon
expiration of the 404 or CAMA Permit.
If you wish to, contest any statement in the attached Certification you must file a petition for an:
administrative hearing. You may obtain the petition form from the office of Administrative hearings.
You must file the petition with the office of Administrative Hearings within thirty (30) days of receipt of
this notice. A petition is considered filed when it is received in the office of Administrative Hearings
during normal office hours. The Office of Administrative Hearings accepts filings Monday through
Friday between the hours of 8:00am and 5:00pni, except for official state holidays. The original and one
(1) copy of the petition must be filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings.
The petition may be faxed-provided the original and one copy of the document is received by the Office
of.Administrative Hearings within five (5) business days following the faxed transmission.
The mailing address for the Office of Administrative Hearings is:
Office of Administrative Hearings
6714 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-6714
Telephone: [phone], Facsimile: (919)-733-3478.
A copy of the petition must also be served on DENR as follows:
Ms. Mary Penny Thompson, General Counsel
Department of Environment and Natural. Resources
1601 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1601
This letter completes the review of the Division of Water Quality under Section 401 of the Clean Water
Act and the Neuse riparian buffer protection rule as described within 15A NCAC 2B .0233: If you have
any questions, please telephone Ian McMillan or Amy Chapman, at.919-733-1786.
Sincerely,
Coleen H. Sullins
City of Raleigh
Page 4 of 4
June 7, 2010
CHSIUnz
Enclosures: GC 38M
Certificate of Completion
cc: Lauren Witherspoon; DWQ Raleigh Regional Office
USACE Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
File Copy _
DLR Raleigh Regional Office
Jeremy Rivenbark, Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., 3001 Weston Parkway, Cary, NC 275,13
filename: 081770Vei3CORaleighSERateighExoansiouReusePipeline(Wake)401 NBR
Rivenbark, Jeremy
From: Chapman, Amy [[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, August 18, 2010 3:12 PM
To: Rivenbark, Jeremy
Cc: Mcmillan, Ian
Subject: RE: Trenchless Creek Crossing
If it's just a buffer impact, a cover letter, plan sheet and the buffer impact table with the new and old buffer impacts
enumerated will suffice. No fee.
Amy Chapman
NC Division of Water Quality
401/Wetlands Unit
2321 Crabtree Blvd, Suite 250
Raleigh, NC 27604
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]
*Please note my email address has changed*
E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be
disclosed to third parties.
From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, August 18, 2010 3:06 PM
To: Chapman, Amy
Cc: Mcmillan, Ian
Subject: RE: Trenchless Creek Crossing
Amy,
Thanks ...One last question though.... Do we need to submit a package as we did previously for the open cut stream
crossing request (with a $240 check and supporting documentation) for a minor modification or can the authorization be
granted with an email reply as such since there are only additional buffer impacts?
Thanks for your help as always,
Jeremy A. Rivenbark, PE
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
[phone]
[e-mail]
From: Chapman, Amy [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, August 18, 2010 2:56 PM
To: Rivenbark, Jeremy
Cc: Mcmillan, Ian
Subject: RE: Trenchless Creek Crossing
Jeremy,
Since this is part of the line crossing (just additional impacts are being requested due to site constraints), buffer
mitigation will not be required, but the authorization would be.
If this does not answer your question, please let me know.
Thanks.
-Amy
Amy Chapman
NC Division of Water Quality
401/Wetlands Unit
2321 Crabtree Blvd, Suite 250
Raleigh, NC 27604
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
E-mail: amv.chapmanPncdenr.eov
*Please note my email address has changed*
E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be
disclosed to third parties.
From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2010 11:34 AM
To: Chapman, Amy
Cc: Mcmillan, Ian
Subject: RE: Trenchless Creek Crossing
Amy,
This area was planned and permitted to be bored and jacked in its entirety through this portion of the project. As such,
no clearing or buffer impacts beyond what was depicted was originally anticipated. However, the field conditions have
made this impossible given the sub-grade conditions encountered. Note that the additional impacted area would not be
maintained by the city in the future, as the casing would still be installed per plan (no City mowing between the pits).
This would indeed make the impacts temporary as shown in the attached figure (the approx. 1600 SF of bamboo and
grass clearing would be allowed to re-grow). Also note that the vegetation in the area is already disturbed with routine
power transmission line R/W mowing, the existing asphalt parking lot, general refuse dumping that accompanies this old
factory site (this is not in the best of areas). These uses occupy the area of the buffers not indicated by the 1600 SF of
additional clearing required as shown. See the attached figure for clarifications and note that the aerial sent before is
somewhat inexact and dated as related to site conditions. The survey design drawing excerpt is much more
representative of the field conditions.
Considering that the impact would indeed be temporary just to shore up the casing, can we proceed with a permit
modification and pay for additional impacts if necessary? If we can, how much would that be and I will get the funding
lined up for this to keep things moving. I have also included the original permit for this work for your reference.
Please call me with any questions and thanks for your help all along this troublesome crossing.
Jeremy A. Rivenbark, PE
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
[phone]
[e-mail]
From: Chapman, Amy [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, August 16, 2010 2:29 PM
To: Mcmillan, Ian; Rivenbark, Jeremy
Subject: RE: Trenchless Creek Crossing
Jeremy,
It doesn't appear from the plan sheet that the area of the line and the line's easement is being accounted for in the
buffer impacts. I may just be missing it, but jack and bore isn't a temporary impact in the buffers since trees cannot grow
in the footprint the utility line or associated easements.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Thanks.
-Amy
Amy Chapman
NC Division of Water Quality
401/Wetlands Unit
2321 Crabtree Blvd, Suite 250
Raleigh, NC 27604
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]
*Please note my email address has changed*
E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be
disclosed to third parties.
From: Mcmillan, Ian
Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2010 3:36 PM
To: Chapman, Amy
Subject: FW: Trenchless Creek Crossing
Ian J. McMillan, PWS, GISP
NCDENR/Division of Water Quality
Acting Supervisor - 401/Wetlands Permitting and Oversight Unit
2321 Crabtree Blvd. Suite 250
Raleigh, NC 27604
Office: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Email: ian.mcmillan(a),ncdenr.?ov
E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
From., [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 2010 5:30 PM
To: Mcmillan, Ian
Subject: RE: Trenchless Creek Crossing
Ian,
Per our phone conversation, please find the attached figures depicting the necessary additional impacts resulting from
the field conditions. The aerial and the survey are shown in opposite views and the aerial also is dated a little, but shows
the area for a better picture of the scene. At this time the contractor is planning to hopefully not impact this whole area
as shaded, but may require this much area depending on trench stability. Hopefully, you can preliminarily approve these
impacts and we will issue any follow documentation/information while the contractor proceeds to avoid any further
problems. Incidentally, these additional impacts are part of the same PCN package we referenced with our last round of
crossing issues with buried bridge pilings. Also, you will be happy to know this is the last creek crossing on this project,
all others have been completed per plan.
Please advise as soon as you can.
Thanks for your continued help,
Jeremy A. Rivenbark, PE
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
[phone]
jeremy.riven bark(cD-kimley-horn.com
Ian,
I was wondering if you had a chance to review our permitting request below any further. Additionally, we are
continuing to have construction issues with this crossing, given the environment below ground. We have now moved
past the rock obstructions (for now) and have encountered instead extremely soft material. As the bore is progressing
in this material, the casing is essentially deflecting downward severely at the 80' ft mark of the bore, causing the bore to
deflect much deeper than desired due to the fluidity of the soil and groundwater here. To remedy this situation, the
contractor has inquired about being allowed to dig a pit inside the zone 1 buffer to expose a section of the bore and
shore up underneath the casing with stone to provide another point for the casing to rest upon. This would hopefully
allow the casing to not deflect down as much until they reach hopefully better materials (clay) further along the
alignment. This excavation would be in the zone 1 buffer, but not in the stream itself. Again, this area is along a mowed
power transmission line and vegetative impacts would be very minimal and temporary.
Please advise on your view of these approaches as we try to complete this bore operation with as little impact as
possible. The contractor is anxious to proceed as he is delayed currently until we hear back from you on this issue.
Thanks as always for your help,
Jeremy A. Rivenbark, PE
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
[phone]
ieremy.riven bark cDkimley-horn.com
From: Rivenbark, Jeremy
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 2:29 PM
To: Mcmillan, Ian
Subject: Re: Trenchless Creek Crossing
No
Jeremy
4
On Jul 29, 2010, at 12:52 PM, "McMillan, Ian" <ian.mcmillan@ncdenr. og_v> wrote:
Will the drill rig be in the stream? - Ian McMillan
Ian J. McMillan, PWS, GISP
NCDENR/Division of Water Quality
Acting Supervisor - 401/Wetlands Permitting and Oversight Unit
2321 Crabtree Blvd. Suite 250
Raleigh, NC 27604
Office: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Email: ian.mcmillan6ncdenr.gov
E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
From: Jeremy.Rivenbark(cDkimley-horn com [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 9:40 AM
To: Mcmillan, Ian
Subject: Trenchless Creek Crossing
Ian,
We continue with the construction of the Raleigh Reuse system including several creek crossings. Some time
back, we corresponded on a crossing for the is project in which we ran into some old bridge pilings. This
obstacle forced us to utilize a more traditional open cut approach to install our pipeline across the creek. We
finished that crossing up and have since moved on to the last creek bore on the project. This bore is longer and
deeper. Thankfully, we have not hit any buried bridge pilings this time, but we have encountered
inconsistencies in the form of rock. A crossing like this is best accomplished when either the casing is
completely through rock or completely in soil. A "split face," meaning that the casing is boring through non-
uniform material (i.e. both rock and soil) causes difficulty for the operation. The casing can wander up or down
along the rock face, can bind and break the machine, or deform the casings. We have been encountering this
split face already on this bore and broken the machine a couple of times. That being the case, we wanted to
verify that it would be acceptable to perform addition surface to bore depth drills down to the planned bore and
jack depths, much like a geotechnical drill, within the creek buffers to ascertain better rock existence. At this
time, we do not anticipate excavation in this area, but would like to be able to plan and possibly adjust the
operation to avoid an open cut situation being required if at all avoidable. We do not plan to do additional
clearing, as this area is predominantly along a mowed power line and a dirt parking lot.
Please verify that performing the these investigative bores from the surface (2"-4" holes drilled vertically down)
will be acceptable within the buffers. I believe they are allowed without permit, much like preliminary geotech
investigation work, but wanted to verify and also keep you in the loop in case we run into difficulty that
necessitates more drastic measures depending on our finding and progress.
Please respond as soon as you can to help us keep the contractor moving without delays.
Thanks as always for your help and let me know if you have any further questions.
Jeremy A. Rivenbark, PE
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
[phone]
jeremy.riven barkCab-kimley-horn.com