20060331 Ver 1_Emails_20101109

Herndon, Mason
From: Euliss, Amy
Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2010 8:53 AM
To: Herndon, Mason
Subject: RE: R -26068 Farlow Pond Study
There are recent sediments, but < 0.25 inches in the pond bottom. I wouldn't make someone clean
up a stream with so little sediment. I think Mr. Farlow will continue to have a turbidity problem, until
the channels have been flushed. Its pretty obvious from the numbers that turbidity is his only problem,
which is still a WQ violation, but not one I have seen enforced.
I would like to note that there were at least 2 sediment losses when I was covering the project and I
think there was at least one more when I turned it over to you. They only referenced 2 in their letter.
We documented 900 feet for clean up, but the sediment extended as a film for beyond that. Also,
thought they were going to compare it to the material from the road project to determine it came
from their site, but according to the letter they just looked at recent sediments, which doesn't
differentiate the sediments from the logging and the road project.
I would run it by Brian or your RO supervisor, in case, Mr. Farlow opts to get legal consul.
amy
From: Herndon, Mason
Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2010 8:07 AM
To: Euliss, Amy
Subject: FW: R -26068 Farlow Pond Study
FYI, NCQOT's investigation report from Mr. Farlow's pond on the NC 311 project. Any thoughts or comments?
Thanks & have great day!
MH
From: Loflin, Jeff B
Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2010 8:01 AM
To: Harrington, Barry W; Herndon, Mason
Subject: FW: R -26065 Farlow Pond Study
I plan to respond to Mr. Farlow with Dean's report attached, I don't think NCDOT or Barnhill has any responsibility.
1effrey B. L oflin, TE
Resident Engineer
NCDOT - Division 8
336.625.1309 (0)
336.625.2420 (F)