20110745 Ver 1_More Info Letter_20111012

?? -?
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Beverly Eaves Perdue
Governor
Division of Water Quality
Coleen H. Sullins
Director
Dee Freeman
Secretary
October 12, 2011
CERTIFIED MAIL: 7010 0290 0003 0834 5374
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
US Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune
Attn: Carl Baker
PSC Box 20004
Camp Lejeune, NC 28452-0004
SUBJECT: Cogdels Creek Main Battle Tank Connector Road, Jacksonville
Project # 11 0745
Onslow County
Dear Mr. Baker:
This Office has reviewed your Individual Permit Application for the wetland impacts of 0.932 acres
permanent impacts and 0.39 acres of temporary wetland impacts. The Division of Water Quality
(DWQ) has determined that your application was incomplete as discussed below. The DWQ will
require additional information in order to process your application to impact protected wetlands and/or
streams on the subject property. Therefore, unless we receive the additional information requested
below, we will have to move toward denial of your application as required by 15A NCAC 21-1.0506 and
will place this project on hold as incomplete until we receive this additional information. Please provide
all of the following information so that we may continue to review your project.
1. The proposed impacts of placing pipes in wetlands/streams does not include the normal
temporary impacts of 5 to 10 feet on either side of the pipe to get the correct alignment. If
these temporary impacts will be necessary, please revise the application, impact calculations
and subsequent drawings to include them (See Sheet Permit 105);
2. The drawings indicate that in the wetland crossings the size of the pipes are 60". In the
calculations of the proposed water flow and tank trail design, was the use of smaller pipe
and more pipes considered? By lowering the fill (by using smaller pipes) for the trail, the
slopes would be reduced, henceforth the footprint of the trail would be reduced and the
impacts to wetlands could be avoided. Please justify why smaller pipes could not be used.
3. Where the tank connector road connects to the existing tank road the road is only 40 feet
wide. The question that comes to mind is, does the new road have to be 50 foot wide? If it
does, then will the existing road be required to be upgraded, potentially impacting the
wetlands located close to the intersection? If the road does NOT have to be 50 foot wide
then reduce the footprint. If the 40 foot wide road will need to be upgraded, please include
these plans the additional wetlands that will need to be impacted. (See Sheet Permit 107);
Wilmington Regional Office One
127 Cardinal Drive Extension Wilmington, NC 28405 NorthCarolina
Phone: [phone] /FAX: [phone] Vatura!l
Internet: www.ncwaterauality.orq
y
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer Customer Service 1-877-623-6748
50% Recycled/ 10% Post Consumer Paper
Page Two
US Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune
Attn: Carl Baker
DWQ Project # 11 0745
October 12, 2011
4. The drawings indicate that to protect the slopes in wetlands, articulated concrete matting
will be used. Please explain the purpose of having the additional 2 feet of the articulated
matting beyond the slopes (A2 on Sheet CP 503);
5. Please justify the fill for Wetland impacts 1 and 2 (See # 3 above);
6. Are the impacts indicated in the boxes for Wetland #1 and 2 reversed (Sheet Permit 105)?
The drawing indicates that all the impacts are permanent. Please check this and be sure that
the drawings separate out the temporary from the permanent impacts. Add an additional
sheet if you need to make a close up to distinguish the difference between the two different
types of wetland impacts
7. Wetland # 3 does not show the temporary impacts usually necessary for the alignment of
pipes. Only temporary hand clearing impacts are shown for the two 36" pipes and no
temporary impacts are included for the 4 60" pipes and headwall section of the crossing.
8. The drawings show `construction limits', is this the line that the silt fence will be placed? It
is the DWQ's experience that although only the hand clearing impact is proposed in the
wetlands adjacent to these limits. The reality of maintaining silt fences, particularly in
dealing with slopes, these wetlands will be impacted. Please re-evaluate these areas and
make the appropriate changes in the drawings and application.
9. Please re-evaluate the type of temporary wetland impacts for wetland #4. There will be
most likely additional impacts required to set the pipe and headwalls as well as area to allow
for the maintenance of the silt fences. Please re-evaluate these impactsand adjust the
application and drawings accordingly.
10. Wetland impacts to Wetland # 4 and Wetland # 3 are inconsistent. Wetland # 4 shows
temporary impact and Wetland #3 does not. Make sure the drawings are consistent and that
the necessary impacts (temporary or permanent) are documented in the application and
drawings.
11. On Sheet Permit 105 by Wetland #3 does not show a stream, but Figure 2 shows a stream in
the area of Wetland #3. If this is a stream impact, please correct the application and drawing
to include this.
12. By Wetland #5, there is an area indicated as wetland within the construction limits. This
wetland is not identified as being temporarily or permanently impacted. Please correct.
13. Wetland #5 does not show a pipe in the drawing on Sheet Permit 107, but on Sheet CP 107
there is a pipe. Please correct Sheet Permit 107 and make sure the pipe runs from wetland
to wetland.
14. Sheet CP 107 the pipe goes from wetland to high ground and does not keep the wetland
connected. If the wetlands do not remain connected, the potential of the isolated wetland
remaining wet decreases and therefore, may need to be included in the cumulative wetland
impacts Please correct this on the drawings.
15. The wetland on Sheet CP 107 is identified as Wetland #5 on Sheet Permit 107. On CP 107
the wetland crossing shows a pipe, on Sheet Permit 107 there is no pipe shown. Please
correct this and make the drawings consistent.
16. On Sheet CP 107 shows the pipe with a dissipater pad beyond the proposed fill on Sheet
Permit 107. Please add this to the proposed impacts and re-evaluate the remaining pipes to
see if additional impacts will be necessary for dissipater pads.
17. The DWQ feels that impacts to Wetland #6 can be avoided by pulling the road further down
the upland. Please provide justification as to why the impacts cannot be avoided.
Page Three
US Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune
Attn: Carl Baker
DWQ Project # 11 0745
October 12, 2011
18. On Sheet CP 205, at approximately Station 17+00, where the proposed pipes are to be
installed, the drawing indicates a hump in the stream bed on the existing ground line. Is this
correct? Please correct if it is not.
19. On Sheet CP 205, please show that only one (1) pipe is located in the main channel and that
the other pipes are located in the adjacent floodplain. The DWQ does not want the main
channel widened, this would cause a decrease in the flow at the pipes causing problems in
this area in the future.
20. On Sheet CP 205 the two 36" pipes at either end of the crossing are not shown, which is
inconsistent with the drawing for Wetland #3 impacts as shown on Sheet Permit 105. Please
correct this.
21. Please be clear about which Alternative is the preferred alternative. The discussion states
that 3A is the Preferred Alternative but on the map (Figure 2) it looks like 3B is what is
being permitted. Please correct this inconsistency.
Please copy Brad Shaver with the USACE on your response.
Please respond within three weeks of the date of this letter by sending this information to me in writing
and two copies to Ian McMillan c/o 401 Wetlands and Stormwater Branch, 1650 Mail Service Center,
Raleigh, NC 27699-1650. Please reference the DWQ Project # of 2011 0745 in all future
correspondence. If we do not hear from you within three weeks, we will assume that you no longer
want to pursue this project and we will consider the project as withdrawn.
This letter only addresses the application review and does not authorize any impacts to wetlands, waters
or protected buffers. Please be aware that these impacts requested within your application are not
authorized (at this time) by the DWQ. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at 910
796.7306.
Sincerely,
oanne Steenhuis
Senior Environmental Specialist
cc: Ron Johnson - AECOM
Marty Korenek - Camp Lejeune
Brad Shaver - USACE Wilmington
Ian McMillan -Wetlands Unit/Raleigh
WiRO