20080879 Ver 2_401 Application_20130713

July 2, 2013
NC Division of Water Quality
Att: Eric Kulz
401[Wetlands Unit
2321 Crabtree Blvd., Suite 250
Raleigh, NC 27604
Tw4*�- og- 09-19 \/a
Michael Baker Engineering, Inc.
797 Haywood Road, Suite 201
Asheville, North Carolina 28806
Phone: 828 - 350 -1408
Fax: 828 -3 - (409
8 19 @IN V L5
JUL 1 0 2013
1N �nftw R..TM
Subject: Request for a Division of Water Quality review and concurrence with the Preconstruction
Notification and request for 404 and 401 permits for the construction of the EEP Full Delivery
Project called "Logan Creek Stream Restoration Project ". Logan Creek, Savannah River Basin
— CU# 03060101, Jackson County, NC.
Dear Mr. Kulz,
Enclosed with this letter are 4 copies of the Pre - Construction Notification, EEP approved restoration plan,
project plan set (2 -lg format and 2 11 x 17), EEP approval letter and other pertinent information that are
being submitted for regulatory review. I have also attached to the PCN a check for $570.00 to cover the
application fee. Please email a receipt for this check as soon as possible ( send receipt to:
mclemmons @mbakercorp.com). We have also submitted this information to the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (Corps), N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission, US Fish and Wildlife Service and Division of
Land Quality for their review. In addition I have sent one additional copy of this information directly to
Kevin Barnett in the Asheville Office to save your office the time and expense of forwarding it to him.
We are providing this information for your consideration and comments to the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers on behalf of the Division of Water Quality (DWQ).
As you may recall, an earlier draft of this Restoration Plan was approved by EEP in 2008 and we
submitted for permitting at that time. A part of this submission was a letter to the DWQ seeking your
concurrence with the permitting and implementation of this project. During the Corps review they
discovered that our project was compromised by actions of the landowner. Lonesome Valley had utilized
much of Baker's optioned stream footage for their mitigation needs. It has taken the intervening time to
resolve the resulting issues. These issues are now resolved and we are prepared to move forward with
this project. Because five years have passed and we are again trying to permit and implement this project,
we are requesting that you once more respond to the Corps with your concurrence as before. The project
as proposed now is similar to the first submission; however, there is less footage available and proposed,
minor design modifications have been made to address some of the original DLQ comments and other
minor changes relative to structure placement and pattern have been made.
Logan Creek is designated C, trout by the Division of Water Quality and this stream does support a
resident trout population. The attached plans should provide the information needed to evaluate this
permit request and we are prepared to meet with personnel from your office to further discuss the project,
if you so desire. We believe that the proposed activities are necessary to address existing erosion and
sedimentation problems and should provide long -term improvements that will greatly decrease the
possibility of future instability at this site. We have made great efforts to avoid impacting most of the

mature trees on this site. In addition, we will be planting diverse native herbaceous and woody vegetation
that should further improve long -term stability and increase shade on the site. As required by the EEP
program we have established a conservation easement on this site that will protect the stream corridor
from the on -going development in this watershed. We believe that the proposed project will improve the
habitat at this site for native aquatic and terrestrial species and provide long -term protection.
We recognize the need to adhere to the trout spawning moratorium on this project. We are trying to move
this project to construction as quickly as possible in order to implement part, or the entire project, prior to
the fall closure. Given your prior review we are asking for as quick a response as possible so that we can
move to implementation as quickly as possible. Your timely review will be much appreciated.
Thank you for your consideration of this request. If you have any questions, please contact me as soon as
possible at 828 - 350 -1408 ext. 2002 or 828 - 734 -7445.
Sincerely
Micky Cle Jons
Office Principal,
Michael Baker Engineering, Inc.

O
_D1.L1 Q 4. 0'3-08-79 v a.
0
Pre - Construction Notification PCN Form
A. Applicant Information
1. Processing
1 a. Type(s) of approval sought from the
Corps:
®Section 404 Permit ❑Section 10 Permit
1 b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 27 or General Permit (GP) number:
1c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
❑ Yes
® No
1d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
® 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular ❑ Non -404 Jurisdictional General Permit
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification — Express ❑ Riparian Buffer Authorization
1e. Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWQ 401
Certification:
❑ Yes ® No
For the record only for Corps Permit:
❑ Yes ® No
1f. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation
of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank or in -lieu
fee program.
0 Yes
® No
1g. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below.
❑ Yes
® No
1 h. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ Yes
® No
2. Project Information
2a. Name of project:
Logan Creek Stream Restoration Project
2b. County:
Jackson
2c. Nearest municipality / town:
Cashiers, NC
2d. Subdivision name:
Lonesome Valley
2e. NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state
project no:
3. Owner Information
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
Cow Rock Mountain, Inc.
3b. Deed Book and Page No.
Book 1592, Page 634 Jackson County Registry
3c. Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
N/A
3d. Street address:
PO Box 1459
3e. City, state, zip:
Cashiers, NC 28717
3f. Telephone no.:
828 - 743 -7696
3g. Fax no.:
828 - 743 -7934
3h. Email address:
Page 1 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is:
® Agent ❑ Other, specify:
4b. Name:
Mr. Jeff Jurek
4c. Business name
(if applicable):
NCDENR Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP)
4d. Street address:
217 West Jones St., Suite 3000A
4e. City, state, zip:
Raleigh, NC, 27603
4f. Telephone no.:
919 -707 -8976
4g. Fax no.:
919 - 715 -0710
4h. Email address:
Jeff.Jurek @ncdenr.gov
5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name:
Mr. Micky Clemmons
5b. Business name
(if applicable):
Michael Baker Engineering, Inc.
5c. Street address:
797 Haywood Rd.
5d. City, state, zip:
Asheville, NC 28704
5e. Telephone no.:
828.350.1408 ext. 2002
5f. Fax no.:
828.350.1409
5g. Email address:
mclemmons @mbakercorp.com
B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
7582 -58 -9244 and 7582 -67 -2206
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
Latitude: 35.134867 Longitude: - 83.062511
(DD.DDDDDD) (- DD.DDDDDD)
1c. Property size:
12.71 acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc.) to
Horsepasture River
proposed project:
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
HW
2c. River basin:
Savannah
3. Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
The general area surrounding the site is in the early stages of development as an exclusive residential community. Land
cover on the project site is forest with grassed fields along approximately half of the stream. Mowed areas are
maintained by Lonesome Valley as a recreation area for the development. Trees and rhododendrum thickets grow along
the stream corridor in other areas. Riparian buffers vary in with from 0 to over 100 feet. Most of the project reach
appears to have one of two problems: either over - widened with debris jams, aggradation and channel erosion or
accelerated meandering and erosion due to a lack of vegetation. As a result, Logan Creek is transporting an excessive
load of sediment downstream of the project site and to the Horsepasture River. Restoration and enhancement activities
proposed will stabilize the channel, halt over - widening, establish proper pattern, significantly diminish bank erosion and
establish a diverse riparian plant community.
Page 2 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
>2A
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
➢ 37,000 If
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
he purpose of this project is to establish a conservation easement on this section of Logan Creek, to restore a stable
!stream channel, allow the stream greater access to its floodplain, and improve fish and wildlife habitat. The stream ha_s,
and is currently actively eroding and widening. If left unchecked, the existing instability will continue to cause
�ncised
osses to private property and to public resources by degrading water quality and aquatic habitat. This work is an EEP full
delivery mitigation project and also has the objective of providing _mitigation credits for permitted impacts elsewhere in the
Watershed �
3e.
Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
Restoration and enhancement activities proposed for this site include: grading bankfull benches in areas where the
hannel can no longer access its floodplain, installing wood and stone based structures to protect unstable stream banks;
rading, planting and installing geotextiles on graded stream banks to provide long -term stability and establishing a
nservation easement along the left and right banks of Logan Creek to protect the stream corridor from future impacts'
oody debris will be added to improve habitat for resident, native trout and to improve sediment movement through( the
Site. This work will require the use of track -hoes with hydraulic thumbs, a skid -steer for moving materials and minor
rading and dump trucks to haul soil on site. Work will take place in the dry by constructing new channel reaches _offl_in_ e
n�a d usingpumps to pump water around areas where work will take place r
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
®Yes E] No Unknown
Comments: It is our understanding that Lonesome Valley
Development had the wetlands on site delineated when they
did permitting for their development.
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
❑ Preliminary ® Final
of determination was made?
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Agency /Consultant Company: Clearwater Environmental
Name (if known): Clement Riddle
Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
Yes El No Unknown
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
The developers of Lonesome Valley have received permits for culverts they installed and have mitigated there impacts
tnrith onsite restoration work and _protection o_f_property strre_am__s_. This has been managed through Clear Water
invironmental Consultants, Ina
aker applied for permits to do this restoration project in 2008 and found out that the owners had used the streams that
they had optioned to Baker as part of their own mitigation plan. This resulted in a prolonged legal dispute that was
resolved within the last 1.5 years with assistance of the Corps. All issues are now resolved and all parties are anxious to
see the project move forward .
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?
❑ Yes ® No
6b. If yes, explain.
Page 3 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1 a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
❑ Wetlands ® Streams - tributaries ❑ Buffers
❑ Open Waters ❑ Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a.
2b.
2c.
2d.
2e.
2f.
Wetland impact
Type of jurisdiction
number -
Type of impact
Type of wetland
Forested
(Corps - 404, 10
Area of impact
Permanent (P) or
(if known)
DWQ - non -404, other)
(acres)
Temporary T
W1 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No I
❑ DWQ
W2 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
El Corps
r-] No
❑ DWQ
W3 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
W4 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
W5 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
W6 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
2g. Total wetland impacts
0
2h. Comments:
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a.
3b.
3c.
3d.
3e.
3f.
3g.
Stream impact
Type of impact
Stream name
Perennial
Type of jurisdiction
Average
Impact
number -
(PER) or
(Corps - 404, 10
stream
length
Permanent (P) or
intermittent
DWQ - non -404,
width
(linear
Temporary (T)
(INT)?
other)
(feet)
feet)
Grading stream
channel
Installing log
S1 ❑ P ®T
structures 8�
1
bioengineering,
Reach 1 Logan
Creekr
® PER
❑INT
® Corps
®DWQ
269
3,650
reduce extent of
rhododendron
r
thickets, replant
S2 ❑ P ®T
Installing
structures to move
sediment,
Reach 2 Logan
®PER
Corps
22.6
11,050
narrowing of short
'Creek
❑ INT
® DWQ
-
channel section r
planting
S3 P T
Installing grade
control structures!
® PER
®Corps
6
56
planting
F_] INT
® DWQ
S4 ❑ P ®T
Installing grade
r-
control structures?
lJT2
® PER
® Corps
4,5
82
Page 4 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

Page 5 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
planting
INT
0 DWQ
S5 OPOT
rmtalling grade
ntrol structures!
end channel to
T3
® PER
® Corps
556
47
ew mainstem'J
E] INT
® DWQ
-
ocation, _planting
S6 P T
nstalling grad e
ntrol structures
blanting
T4
INTR
®pWq
4 8
66
S7 ❑ P ®T
installing -grade
i�ontrol structures
xtend channel to
QUO
® PER
® Corps
5.8
ew mainsten
INT
®DWQ
i14
ocation,_planting
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
4,965
3i. Comments: )n order to accomplish the restoration effort, impacts may be realized from temporarily increased turbidity w_ h_en
boulders or woody materials are installed, from temporary loss of vegetation, and from altering stream channel pattem f
Impacts from this work will be avoided or minimized whenever possible. We will utilize a pump around system to reduce
e_
impacts as much as possible. Also, there is a UT5 which is being preserved and no work will occur there F-----
4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then individually list all open water impacts below.
4a.
4b.
4c.
4d.
4e.
Open water
Name of waterbody
impact number —
(if applicable)
Type of impact
Waterbody type
Area of impact (acres)
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
01 ❑P ❑T
02 ❑P ❑T
03 ❑P ❑T
04 ❑P ❑T
4E Total open water impacts
4g. Comments:
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, then complete the chart below.
5a.
5b.
5c.
5d.
5e.
Pond ID
Proposed use or purpose
Wetland Impacts (acres)
Stream Impacts (feet)
Upland
(acres)
number
of pond
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
P1
P2
K Total
5g. Comments:
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
Page 5 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If any impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a.
❑ Neuse El Tar-Pamlico El Other:
Project is in which protected basin?
❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman
6b.
6c.
6d.
6e.
6f.
6g.
Buffer impact
number —
Reason
Buffer
Zone 1 impact
Zone 2 impact
Permanent (P) or
for
Stream name
mitigation
(square feet)
(square feet)
Temporary T
impact
required?
B1 ❑P ❑T
El Yes
❑ No
B2 ❑P ❑T
El Yes
❑ No
B3 ❑ PEI T
El Yes
❑ No
6h. Total buffer impacts
6i. Comments:
D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
la. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
To minimize potential impacts we will be disturbing only that amount of stream bank that can be graded, seeded and matted
by the end of the day. Mature trees on -site will be protected with fencing; removal of mature trees will be minimized to the
extent possible. I staging areas and soil stockpile areas will be separated from flowing water by grass buffer strips and sil�
fencing. Erosion control BMPs will be used throughout the project to avoid sedimentation of the stream. The attached plan
W shows details of these BMPs
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
he nature of stream enhancement and restoration work requires that the work be done as described. To minimize tempora
mpacts caused by in- stream channel restoration work or channel pattern alteration, grading will be done in the dry as much as
ossible by pumping flow around the work area. The pump will be removed when the area is stabilized using permanent and
emporary seed, mulched, and matted. All disturbed ground surfaces will be seeded with temporary and permanent seed and
ulched. When the area is sloping it may also be matted to prevent erosion
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
❑ Yes ® No
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
❑ DWQ ❑ Corps
❑ Mitigation bank
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
❑ Payment to in -lieu fee program
project?
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type
Quantity
Page 6 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

3c. Comments:
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In4ieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached.
❑ Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested:
linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
❑ warm ❑ cool ❑cold
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4f. Non - riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4h. Comments:
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
This project is being done as an EEP mitigation project.
6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) — required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
buffer mitigation?
❑ Yes ® No
6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required.
Zone
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Total impact
(square feet)
Multiplier
6e.
Required mitigation
(square feet)
Zone 1
3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2
1.5
6f. Total buffer mitigation required:
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in -lieu fee fund).
6h. Comments:
Page 7 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1 a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
❑ Yes ® No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1 b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
❑ Yes El No
Comments:
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
0%
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
❑ Yes ® No
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why:
The existing project site has no impervious surfaces. This project will not increase the impervious surface area of the site.
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
❑ Certified Local Government
2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
❑ DWQ Stormwater Program
❑ DWQ 401 Unit
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which local government's jurisdiction is this project?
Jackson County
❑ Phase II
3b. Which of the following locally- implemented stormwater management programs
❑ NSW
❑ USMP
apply (check all that apply):
❑ Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other:
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ® No
attached?
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
❑ Coastal counties
❑ HQW
4a. Which of the following state - implemented stormwater management programs apply
❑ ORW
(check all that apply):
❑ Session Law 2006 -246
❑ Other:
4b. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ® No
attached?
5. DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a. Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
❑ Yes ❑ No
5b. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
❑ Yes ❑ No
Page 8 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

F. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
la. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal /state /local) funds or the
® Yes ❑ No
use of public (federal /state) land?
1 b. If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State
❑ Yes ® No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1c. If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
letter.)
❑ Yes ❑ No
Comments:
2. Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
❑ Yes ® No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 26.0200)?
2b. Is this an after - the -fact permit application?
❑ Yes ® No
2c. If you answered 'yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s):
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in
❑ Yes ® No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b. If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a. Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non - discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility. /:A
Page 9 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
® Yes ❑ No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
® Yes ❑ No
impacts?
❑ Raleigh
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
® Asheville
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would Impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
USFWS and NC Natural Heritage Program ( NCNHP) species listings for Jackson County, NCNHP mapping tools and
correspondence with the USFWS and NCWRC. A response was issued from the USFWS that concurred with Baker's
finding of "no effect" for project impacts to federally listed species located In Jackson County (see attached mitigation
plan).
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
❑ Yes ® No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
http: // ocean .floridamarine.org /efh— coralfiims /viewer.htm, USFWS Information for Jackson County
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
❑ Yes ® No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), HPOWEB GIS Service (http: / /gis.ncdcr.gov /hpoweb /), Eastern Band of
Cherokee Indians' Tribal Historic Preservation Office (THPO). After a requested Phase I survey recommended by SHPO,
In which no significant archeological resources were located, SHPO and THPO concurred with no further archaeological
investigation be conducted in connection with this project.
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA- designated 100 -year floodplain?
® Yes ❑ No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
Channel dimensions and slope were designed such that any change in in BFEs is expected to be minimal (less than V
change); Baker will seek a No -Rise Certification for compliance and has discussed this with the County Floodplain
Manager, as detailed in Appendix B of the attached Mitigation Plan.
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? On -line NC floodplain mapping tools; FIRM 2010 (Panel
7582).
Micky Clemmons
Assistant Vice President,
„
July 2. 2013
Michael Baker Engineering, Inc.
V�1
Ap 'cant/Agent's Signature
Date
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
(Agent's signature Is va only If an authorization letter from the applicant
Is provided.)
Page 10 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

��
ftaleimffi t
PROGRAM
June 28, 2013
Micky Clemmons
Asheville Office Principal
Michael Baker Engineering, Inc.
797 Haywood Road; Suite 201
Asheville, North Carolina 28806
RE: Final Mitigation Plan Review
Logan Stream Restoration Plan
Full Delivery Project
Jackson County — Savannah River Basin — CU #03060102
Contract No. — D06046 -A
Dear Mr. Clemmons:
On June 28, 2013, The Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) received the final revised mitigation plan
for the Logan Creek Stream Restoration Site which was submitted by Michael Baker Engineering, Inc.
(Baker). The final mitigation plan proposes the restoration of 3,270 linear feet of stream; Enhancement
(Level I) of 1,301 linear feet of stream; and the preservation of 560 linear feet of stream.
The Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) has completgd its review of the final mitigation plan and
has no additional comments at this time. The Logan Creek project was implemented prior to the
NCDENR Ecosystem Enhancement Program In -Lieu Fee Instrument signed and dated July 28, 2010.
Please proceed with acquiring all necessary permits and/or certifications and complete the implementation
of the earthwork portion of the mitigation project (Task 4). A copy of this letter should be included with
your 401/404 permit applications.
For the purpose of obtaining approval of the erosion and sedimentation control plan for this project, I
have also attached a memorandum confirming that Michael Baker Engineering, Inc. is the Owner and
Financially Responsible Party, and has full operational control for all matters pertaining to construction of
this project. Please sign and attach this memorandum to the Financial Responsibility/Ownership form of
the erosion and sedimentation control plan application. Failure to do so may delay approval of the plan.
If you have any questions, or wish to discuss this matter further, please contact me at (828) 273 -1673 or
email at t)aul.wiesnerna.ncdenr.gov.
Sincerely,
61/8/13
Paul Wiesner
NCEEP Western Project Manager
cc: File
Xubrutg... Prote" our Stag &J.&',
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program, 1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 21699 -1652 / 919- 101 -8916 / httpV /portal.ncdenrorgAveb /eep

r Y
&gsystFnmi 1 cllt
June 28, 2013 PROORAM
Micky Clemmons
Asheville Office Principal
Michael Baker Engineering, Inc.
797 Haywood Road
Suite 201
Asheville, North Carolina 28806
RE: Mitigation Plan Review for the Logan Stream Mitigation Plan
Full Delivery Project
Jackson County — Savannah River Basin — CU #03060102
Contract No. — D06046 -A
EEP Project # 92515
Dear Mr. Clemmons:
This memorandum confirms the responsibility for compliance with the Sedimentation Pollution
Control Act of 1973 and North Carolina Administrative Code Title 15A, Chapter 4 on the project
that is the subject of the above - referenced contract between the Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (EEP) and Michael Baker Engineering, Inc.
Pursuant to the contract, the above - referenced project is a full delivery project. This means that
Michael Baker Engineering, Inc, has full operational control over the project. As the "developer
or other person who has or holds himself out as having ... operational control over the land -
disturbing activity" Michael Baker Engineering, Inc. will be responsible for compliance with or
any violation of the Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 or North Carolina
Administrative Code Title 15A, Chapter 4. See 15A NCAC 04A .0105(8) and (9). Accordingly,
any plan, revised plan, compliance request, notice of violation, fine, penalty or other enforcement
action associated with this project remains the responsibility of Michael Baker Engineering, Inc.
to resolve with regulatory or permitting agencies.
Please sign below and attach this memorandum to the Financial Responsibility/ Ownership form
of the erosion and sedimentation control plan application in order to obtain plan approval and
responsibility for erosion and sedimentation control solely in your name.
Respectively,
Paul Wiesner
NCEEP Western Project Manager
RatOYI.f�5... EGiZAuixg... Pro OGt.I' Sta &
cc
MR
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program, 1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699 -1652 / 919 -707 -8976 / http: / /portal.ncdenrorg/web /eep

To DENR Land Quality Section
Michael Baker Engineering, Inc. hereby certifies that it has full operation control of this project
for all matters pertaining to the construction of this project and that it constitutes the "Person
Who Violates" and the "Person Conducting Land Disturbing Activity" as defined in 15A NCAC
4A.0105(8) and (9). Michael Baker Engineering, Inc. also understands that it is responsible for
implementing any actions or measures necessary to comply with the Sedimentation Pollution
Control Act.
Signed,
Michael Baker Engineering, Inc.
[Person §th Authority to Bind Contract Signature, Printed Name and Title]
2