The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20141132 All Versions_Environmental Assessment Comments_20120319Department of Environment and Natural Resources Project Review Form Project Number 12 -0217 County Richmond Due Date 3/26/2012 Date Received 02/29/2012 Project Description Final Environmental Impact Statement - FEIS for Proposed Improvements to US 1 from Sandhill Road SR 1971 to North of Fox Road - SR 1606 in Richmond County, TIP #R 2501 This Project is being reviewed as indicated below Regional Office Regional Office Area In House Review Asheville Air Marine Fisheries Fayetteville Water Coastal Management Mooresville Aquifer Protection Water Resources Mgmt Raleigh Land Qualitv Enameer Water Supplv Section Washington ✓ Parks & Recreation Wilmington Water Quality Winston Salem ✓ Water Quality DOT Wildlife V Wildlife DOT Waste Mamt Air Quality Manager Sign Off/Region %F112 -- Response (check all applicable) In House Reviewer /Agency No objection to project as proposed No Comment Insufficient mformation to complete review 'Other (specify or attach comments) If you have any questions please contact Melba McGee, Environmental Coordinator at Melba McGee(&ncdenr aov R a Z0�2 Af71AZScfW A � NCDENR North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources Division of Water Quality Beverly Eaves Perdue Charles Wakild P E Dee Freeman Governor Director Secretary March 19 2012 MEMORANDUM To Melba McGee Environmental Coordinator Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs From David Wainwright Division of Water Quality Central Office Subject Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Statement related to proposed improvements to U S l from Sandhill Road (S R 197 1) to Marston Road (S R 100 1) Richmond County Federal Aid Project No NHF 1(1) State Project No 8 T580501 TIP R 2501 State Clearinghouse Project No 12 0217 This office has reviewed the referenced document dated December 2011 The NC Division of Water Quality ( NCDWQ) is responsible for the issuance of the Section 401 Water Quality Certification for activities that impact Waters of the U S including wetlands It is our understanding that the project as presented will result in impacts to jurisdictional wetlands streams and other surface waters NCDWQ offers the following comments based on review of the aforementioned document Proiect Specific Comments This project is being planned as part of the 404/NEPA Merger Process As a participating team member NCDWQ will continue to work with the team 2 Section 4 1 5 2 3 (Stream and Wetland Avoidance Minimization and Compensatory Mitigation) for Structure 4 it states that the median width was reduced to 46 feet However for avoidance and minimization purposes it is not stated what it was reduced from to meet avoidance and minimization efforts Section 3 3 6 (Hazardous Materials) and Table 3 4 discuss and list 12 underground storage tank and auto repair facilities located within the study area Typically these discussions include a risk assessment (low medium high) 4 Section 4 1 5 2 3 states that on site wetland and stream mitigation opportunities will be investigated once a final calculation of impacts has been determined The NCDWQ prefers on site mitigation where feasible and practicable and the NCDWQ is curious as to why the NCODT is waiting so long to investigate potential on site mitigation opportunities The most accurate final impact calculations will most likely not be available until the permit drawings are finalized This seems very late to be investigating on site mitigation opportunities The NCDWQ strongly encourages the NCDOT to begin on site opportunities as soon as the LEDPA Transportation and Permitting Unit 1650 Mail Service Center Raleigh North Carolina 27699 1617 One Location 512 N Salisbury St Raleigh North Carolina 27604 NorthCarohna Phone 919$07 -63001 FAX 919 - 807 -6492 �%1 %atura!!lf Internet www ncwaterouality org An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer is chosen The NCDOT is respectfully reminded that the NCDWQ and other resource agencies will need to approve any potential onsite mitigation sites and plans Additionally the NCDWQ prefers to see mitigation plans in advance of application submittal The NCDOT is encouraged to begin investigating any opportunities as soon as possible as to not delay the project unnecessarily 5 Page 4 35 referencing the SDEIS states The preferred alternative has the potential to adversely affect local water quality through increased stormwater runoff however due to the lack of proposed stream crossings and the limited number of streams along the corridor it is likely that water quality impacts will be minimal The NCDWQ does not agree with this statement It seems that impacts to surface waters from stormwater runoff would be more a factor of the method of treatment as well as the quantity treated rather than a lack of proposed stream crossings Also, this discussion is included in the Indirect and Cumulative Effects section of the document therefore it seems this particular discussion should also include other development induced by the project This other development is not dependent upon the number of stream crossings This statement seems to be based solely on the project itself not taking into account other induced development There are other factors such as concentration loading and assimilation rate of a given stream which affect water quality more than the number of streams being impacted by the project It is discussed on page 4 37 that three utility providers Richmond County (water) the City of Rockingham (water and sewer) and the City of Hamlet (water and sewer) would be willing to expand existing systems if development opportunities existed and extension(s) were feasible The following paragraph in the document states the Lack of a market for development, a depressed economy and limited availability of public utilities will likely limit the amount of development within the majority of the GISA Aside from the current lack of market for development the current depressed economy should be considered a temporary effect and may be affecting the lack of market Eventually and most likely in the coming years (1 e the foreseeable future) the economy will improve and the desire for development may increase as a result The statement regarding the utilities appears to be in direct conflict with the previous statement that the three utilities express a willingness to expand should development opportunities arise Given that the economy is expected to improve the three utilities are willing to expand there are mayor intersections of planned freeways and the area would welcome new development especially commercial and industrial the NCDWQ believes that there may be a potential in the future for development and hence water quality impacts This is echoed in the document as well When TIP Project R 2501 is combined with the US 74 Bypass and the proposed 173 / 174 corridor, the improved regional transportation network could generate new interest in development within the GISA particularly for industrial (distribution related) uses There seem to be many contradictory statements within the ICE section of the document The NCDWQ would like to review NCDOT s Qualitative Indirect and Cumulative Effects document dated October 3 2005 (referenced on page 4 30), and is hereby requesting a copy Although the new project design is incorporated into the FEIS discussion as noted in the footnote on page 4 30, ideally the ICE document itself should be updated to reflect the new project design as well General Comments Appropriate mitigation plans will be required prior to issuance of a 401 Water Quality Certification Environmental impact statement alternatives should consider design criteria that reduce the impacts to streams and wetlands from storm water runoff These alternatives should include road designs that allow for treatment of the storm water runoff through best management practices as detailed in the most recent version of NCDWQ s Stormwater Best Management Practices Manual July 2007 such as grassed swales buffer areas preformed scour holes retention basins etc After the selection of the preferred alternative and prior to an issuance of the 401 Water Quality Certification the NCDOT is respectfully reminded that they will need to demonstrate the avoidance and minimization of impacts to wetlands (and streams) to the maximum extent practical In accordance with the Environmental Management Commission s Rules (15A NCAC 2H 0506[h]) mitigation will be required for impacts of greater than 1 acre to wetlands or more than 150 feet to any single perennial or intermittent stream In the event that mitigation is required the mitigation plan should be designed to replace appropriate lost functions and values The NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program may be available for use as wetland mitigation 9 Future documentation including the 401 Water Quality Certification Application should continue to include an itemized listing of the proposed wetland and stream impacts with corresponding mapping 10 NCDOT is respectfully reminded that all impacts including but not limited to bridging fill excavation and clearing and rip rap to Jurisdictional wetlands streams and riparian buffers need to be included in the final impact calculations These impacts in addition to any construction impacts temporary or otherwise also need to be included as part of the 401 Water Quality Certification Application 11 Where streams must be crossed NCDWQ prefers bridges be used in lieu of culverts However we realize that economic considerations often require the use of culverts Please be advised that culverts should be countersunk to allow unimpeded passage by fish and other aquatic organisms Moreover in areas where high quality wetlands or streams are impacted a bridge may prove preferable When applicable NCDOT should not install the bridge bents in the creek to the maximum extent practicable 12 Bridges should allow for human and wildlife passage beneath the structure Fish passage and navigation by canoeists and boaters shall not be blocked Bridge supports (bents) should not be placed in the stream when possible 13 Bridge deck drains should not discharge directly into the stream Stormwater should be directed across the bridge and pre treated through site appropriate means (grassed swales pre formed scour holes vegetated buffers etc ) before entering the stream Please refer to the most current version of NCDWQ s Stormwater Best Management Practices 14 The 401 Water Quality Certification application will need to specifically address the proposed methods for stormwater management More specifically stormwater should not be permitted to discharge directly into streams or surface waters 15 Based on the information presented in the document the magnitude of impacts to wetlands and streams may require an Individual Permit (IP) application to the Corps of Engineers and corresponding 401 Water Quality Certification Please be advised that a 401 Water Quality Certification requires satisfactory protection of water quality to ensure that water quality standards are met and no wetland or stream uses are lost Final permit authorization will require the submittal of a formal application by the NCDOT and written concurrence from NCDWQ Please be aware that any approval will be contingent on appropriate avoidance and minimization of wetland and stream impacts to the maximum extent practical the development of an acceptable stormwater management plan and the inclusion of appropriate mitigation plans where appropriate 16 If multiple pipes or barrels are required they should be designed to mimic natural stream cross section as closely as possible including pipes or barrels at flood plain elevation floodplain benches and /or sills may be required where appropriate Widening the stream channel should be avoided Stream channel widening at the inlet or outlet end of structures typically decreases water velocity causing sediment deposition that requires increased maintenance and disrupts aquatic life passage 17 It should be noted that if foundation test borings are necessary that geotechnical work is approved under General 401 Certification Number 3687/Nationwide Permit No 6 for Survey Activities 18 Sediment and erosion control measures sufficient to protect water resources must be implemented and maintained in accordance with the most recent version of North Carolina Sediment and Erosion Control Planning and Design Manual and the most recent version of NCS000250 NCDWQ appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on your project Should you have any questions or require any additional information please contact David Wainwright at (919) 807 6405 cc Ronnie Smith US Army Corps of Engineers Wilmington Field Office (electronic copy only) Clarence Coleman Federal Highway Administration Chris Milrtscher Environmental Protection Agency (electronic copy only) Gary Jordan US Fish and Wildlife Service (electronic copy only) Travis Wilson NC Wildlife Resources Commission (electronic copy only) Mason Herndon NCDWQ Fayetteville Regional Office File Copy