20210653 Ver 1_Additional Info Email_20210901

From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Daniel Zurlo <[e-mail]>
Wednesday, September 1, 2021 5:24 PM
[e-mail]
Carter Hubard; Danial Khan; Benson, Tyler G; John Nichols
[External] Mulberry Branch Water Reclamation Facility (Corps PCN
Review comments)
WOTUS-1-FEMA.pdf; FWS Comment.pdf; RCW_SurveyResults.pdf;
DEQ#1707 REV2_Brunswick_DEQ Comments.pdf; Riparian wetland
credit availability.pdf; 2021-09-01 Updated Impact Sheet -Check Valve
detail.pdf
CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as
an attachment to Report Spam.
Hi Gary,
Please see the responses to your comments (in blue). Relevant documents are attached. Let us know
if you need any other information.
Wetland 5 proposed impacts (0.176 acres) for the gravel road and crossing over Mulberry Branch.
- What are the dimensions of the proposed gravel road? 12 feet width
- Can the road be built in a different area to minimize wetland impacts? The gravel road is to improve
the surface of the existing dirt road, so the location cannot be changed. The proposed gravel road
route is the least impact
- Will water from the wetlands still be able to travel under the proposed gravel road, or will the road
act as a dam? The drainage will not be changed by the gravel surface as the existing road culverts are
to remain.
Proposed spray areas
- Will these be located in wetlands, based on the plan they appear to be in wetlands? Spray areas are
in uplands (attached WoTUS-FEMA figure).
Mitigation
- The Corps would prefer that you go through an approved local Mitigation Bank for purchasing credits
to offset the 0.324 acres of permanent wetland impacts. We are in communication with Stone Farm
Mitigation Bank and are in the process of acquiring their Credit Acceptance Letter (attached email
correspondence). We will forward the letter once we receive it.
Wetland 1 proposed impacts (0.018 acres and 0.032 acres)
- Why can these wetlands not be directionally bored like the one just to the north of these? We have
redesigned the route of the forcemain to avoid wetland area 1 and eliminate the 0.018 ac. impact
area (W1). We have a revised drawing for this work that includes revision of the route of the force
main towards the right of way to avoid impact to wetland area 1. Other revisions include relocated
connection point of the 24-inch forcemain and a check valve vault to be constructed in upland area.
This will result in the 0.032 ac temporary impact (W2) being reduced to 0.013 ac. of temporary impact
(See attached updated impact sheet).

100 year Flood Line
- The flood line is very hard to see on the submitted plans. Please send in a single page plan that
clearly shows the 100 year Flood Plain line. See the attached WoTUS-FEMA figure.
RCW
- Can you please send me coordination emails from the USFWS pertaining to the Red Cockaded
Woodpecker consultation and study that was done for this project. The USFWS and NCDEQ
coordination emails are attached.
Dan Zurlo
Staff Scientist
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
1213 W. Morehead Street, #300
Charlotte, NC 28208
Office: 704-227-3416
Mobile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
www.wkdickson.com
Connect with us: Facebook I Twitter I Linkedln I YouTube

FILE PATH:Z:\ Projects \ Environmental \Brunswick County \201702530OWL- Southport Wastewater Study and Design \CADD\Plan Set\ 20170253_C_SHT_FM CHECK VALVE DETAIL.dwg, DKHAN, 9/1/2021 2:25:20 PM
\ �i
/
53
=30-
\
\
/
/ v V�\
_//� \
31 -
\ U
TC&I TIMBER COMPANY,
*LC \
PID: 1820004201
D,82 2495, P.Gy 1247
PROPOSED 16" INFLUENT FORCE
MAIN CONNECTION TO EXISTING
24" FORCE MAIN, SEE SHEET C22
FOR PLAN AND PROFILE
-n-
NCDOT RIGHT OF WAY
ami
U
-n-
EXISTING
UNDERGROUND
UTILITY, SEE NOTE 3
\
I I
/
2a/
%--__n� /
27 -
* 1 * /
-1,O
C .
i .I EXISTING \
ill
11
�1 Ma1�1*1*1�1\.....___ _ POWER POLE
- - - - _ EXISTING 24" FORCE _ -N
N
125' MAIN, SEE NOTE 211 �'1��1
PROPOSED FORCE MAIN
BYPASS CONNECTION,
SEE DETAIL
NOTES:
EDGE OF PAVEMENT
R/W CENTERLINE
I/
GRAPHIC SCALE
20' 0 20'
40'
HORIZONTAL
1. LIMIT OF DISTURBANCE (LOD) LINE SHOWN FOR CLARITY, THE ACTUAL
LOD SHOULD NOT EXCEED TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT CONSTRUCTION
EASEMENTS.
2. CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY 24" FORCE MAIN IN THIS LOCATION.
3. CONTRACTOR TO FIELD VERIFY LOCATION OF UNDERGROUND UTILITY.
4. ALL BURIED PIPING TO BE RESTRAINED JOINT. ALL EXPOSED PIPING TO BE
FLANGED AND BOLTED.
FM
FM
LOD
/1/
TC
LEGEND
FM
FM
LOD
PROPOSED FORCE MAIN
RESTRAINED JOINT PIPE (PROFILE)
EXISTING FORCE MAIN
LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE
PERMANENT UTILITY EASEMENT
TCE- TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT
-ill- SILT FENCE
PROPERTY LINE
EXISTING CONTOUR
\ �
\
\
\
\
\ _I /
\
EXISTING 12" FORCE
MAIN FROM EXISTING
SHALLOTTE WWTP
All1/1ll4./ll040
WORK AREAS WITHIN /�7/al•I111141 \\
NCDOT R/W (RED) I �ll�
48'
I1114/Ii1l
�I 1�
US 17 (OCEAN HWY
250' RIGHT OF WA W)
LIMIT OF DISTURBANCE,
SEE NOTE 1
DISTURBED AREA= 0.02 AC
SURVEYED
VALVES
OE_ \
s I
lalail
...„... �1will I lit
OE-
NCDOT R/W LINE
(APPROX.)
OE-
WETLAND LINE
(NOT SURVEYED) _
OE-
1 �1 *l *1 �1
" ■1 /�1�1�1�1
�1
EXISTING 24" - - �1 �I �1/I�4�1�1
FORCE MAIN �1�1�1�1�1�1�1
��1�1�'�1�1
11�✓/I�I
L
/
OE-
INLET PIPE
1/4,
E
PLAN
SECTION X-X
OPTIONAL MANHOLE
x
SEE STANDARD 840.54
FOR MANHOLE COVER &
OPTIONAL
BRICK MAY BE USED
TO ADJUST FRAME &
COVER TO SURFACE
ELEVATION MAX. 1'
SECTION Y-Y
OUTLET PIPE
FRAME
. I EOR F jj1112„
SECTION
C-C OR D-D
GENERAL NOTES:
CHAMFER ALL EXPOSED CORNERS 1".
USE CLASS "B" CONCRETE THROUGHOUT.
OPTIONAL CONSTRUCTION - MONOLITHIC POUR, 2" KEYWAY, OR
#4 BAR DOWELS AT 12" CENTERS AS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER.
USE FORMS TO CONSTRUCT THE BOTTOM SLAB.
IF REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE IS SET IN BASE SLAB OF BOX,
ADD TO BASE AS SHOWN ON STANDARD NO. 840.00.
PROVIDE ALL JUNCTION BOXES OVER 3'-6" IN DEPTH WITH STEPS
12" ON CENTERS IN ACCORDANCE WITH STD. NO. 840.66.
ADJUST THE STEEL, CONCRETE AND BRICK MASONRY QUANTITIES
TO INCLUDE THE ADDITION OF THE MANHOLE (I.E. DIAGONAL BARS
SHORTENED AROUND OPENING IN TOP SLAB, ADDITIONAL VARIABLE
HEIGHT BRICK MASONRY, OPENING IN TOP SLAB.)
MAX. DEPTH OF THIS STRUCTURE FROM TOP OF BOTTOM SLAB TO TOP
ELEVATION IS 12 FEET.
F
N
L
6"
DOWEL
DIMENSIONS AND QUANTITIES FOR CONCRETE JUNCTION BOXES
DIMENSIONS OF BOX AND PIPE
REINFORCEMENT
BARS "A"
TOP SLAB
DIMENSIONS
CUBIC YARDS
IN BOX
TOTAL QUANTITIES
BOX AND SLABS
DEDUCTIONS FOR ONE
PIPE CU.YDS.
PIPE
SPAN
WIDTH
HEIGHT
D
A
B
H
NO.
LENGTH
E
F
TOP
SLAB
BOTTOM
SLAB
WALL/
FT. OF HT.
LBS.
REINF
CU. YDS.
MIN. "H"
C.S.
R.C.
12"
2'-0"
2'-0"
2'-3"
12
2'-9"
3'-0"
3'-0"
0.167
0.167
0.185
22
0.750
0.015
0.024
15"
2'-3"
2'-3"
2'-6"
12
3'-0"
3'-3"
3'-3"
0.196
0.196
0.204
24
0.902
0.023
0.036
18"
2'-6"
2'-6"
2'-9"
14
3'-3"
3'-6"
3'-6"
0.227
0.227
0.222
30
1.065
0.033
0.049
24"
3'-0"
3'-0"
3'-3"
16
3'-9"
4'-0"
4'-0"
0.296
0.296
0.259
40
1.434
0.059
0.085
30"
3'-6"
3'-6"
3'-9"
18
4'-3"
4'-6"
4'-6"
0.375
0.375
0.296
51
1.860
0.092
0.127
36"
4'-0"
4'-0"
4'-3"
20
4'-9"
5'-0"
5'-0"
0.463
0.463
0.333
64
2.341
0.132
0.178
42"
4'-6"
4'-6"
4'-9"
22
5'-3"
5'-6"
5'-6"
0.560
0.560
0.370
77
2.878
0.180
0.243
48"
5'-4"
5'-4"
5'-3"
26
6'-3"
6'-4"
6'-4"
0.743
0.743
0.407
111
3.623
0.235
0.317
54"
5'-10"
5'-10"
5'-9"
28
6'-7"
6'-10"
6'-10"
0.865
0.865
0.444
126
4.283
0.297
0.401
60"
6'-6"
6'-6"
6'-3"
30
7'-3"
7'-6"
7'-6"
1.042
1.042
0.481
145
5.090
0.367
0.495
66"
7'-1"
7'-1"
6'-9"
32
7'-10"
8'-1"
8'-1"
1.210
1.210
0.518
169
5.917
0.444
0.589
c./-)
}
¢Q
H-•
1-1
LLJ�Hz
LJJ CC
< <LL _
QUCCOH
�x�w
C/) I O
0V)Q
::
0 H
T L LI
T 0
LLI
H
a_
D
CC
F-
CV
7-
SHEET 1 OF 1
840.31
i
EXISTING 24" FORCE
MAIN, SEE NOTE 2
PROPOSED 24"X16"
TAPPING SLEEVE
PROPOSED 16"
RJDI PLUG VALVE
PROPOSED 16"
RJDI 45° BEND 17
PROPOSED 16" SWING CHECK
VALVE AND 8'-1"x8'1" (OUTSIDE
DIMENSION) VALVE VAULT,
SEE SECTION A -A FOR DETAIL
PROPOSED 16"
RJDI 45° BEND
PROPOSED 16"
RJDI FORCE MAIN
BYPASS PIPING,
SEE NOTE 4
EXISTING 24"
45° BEND
PROPOSED 16"
RJDI 45° BEND
EXISTING 24"
PLUG VALVE
±1.1'
PROPOSED 16"
RJDI PLUG VALVE
PROPOSED 24"X16"
TAPPING SLEEVE
FORCE MAIN BYPASS
CONNECTION DETAIL
SCALE: 3" - 1'-0"
PROPOSED 4'X4' ACCESS
HATCH WITH H2O LOAD
RATING AND SAFETY NET
/
/
PROPOSED 16" SWING
CHECK VALVE, SEE NOTE 4
3" MAX.
SEAL JOINTS WITH
JOINT COMPOUND AND -
EXTERIOR WRAP, TYP.
PROPOSED 16"
RESTRAINED FLANGED
COUPLING ADAPTER
PROPOSED 16" FORCE
MAIN BYPASS PIPING,
SEE NOTE 4
1
LINK -SEAL FOR WALL
PENETRATIONS
4
±3.5'
EXISTING
24" WYE
EXISTING 24"
PLUG VALVE
EXISTING 24"
FORCE MAIN
GROUND EL. = ± 29.5'
PROPOSED 8'-1"x8'-1"
(OUTSIDE DIMENSIONS)
PRECAST VALVE VAULT
PER NCDOT STANDARD
DETAIL 840.31
p APPROX. GROUND
4
1' MIN
VAULT INV. = ± 23.5'
/
4
4
4/
6"
STONE BEDDING,
TYP.
SECTION A -A
0
0
CC
0
0
CC
0
CC
0
0
0
WK
DICKSON
community infrastructure consultants
1213 W. MOREHEAD STREET
SUITE 300
CHARLOTTE, NC 28208
(t)704-334-5348
(f)704-334-0078
WWW.WKDICKSON.COM
NC LICENSE NO.F-0374
REVISION RECORD
DESCRIPTION
Lu
WASTEWATER TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL FOR THE CITY OF SOUTHPORT
DRAWING TITLE:
FORCE MAIN BYPASS AND CHECK VALVE DETAIL
PROJ. MGR.:
DESIGN BY:
DRAWN BY:
PROJ. DATE:
TCH
DK
DK
2021
DRAWING NUMBER:
C21 .1
WKD PROJ. NO.:

ROY COOPER
Governor
MICHAEL S. RAGAN
Secretary
JAMIE RAGAN
Director
MEMORANDUM
To:
From:
RE:
NORTH CAROLINA
Environmental Quality
Susan Kubacki
Division of Water Infrastructure
Facilities Evaluation Unit
Lyn Hardison
Division of Environmental Assistance and Customer Service Environmental
Assistance and Project Review Coordinator Washington Regional Office
Environmental Review/Engineering Report - 2nd Revised
City of Southport Wastewater Treatment - The City of Southport has
entered into an agreement with Brunswick County and the other partners
of the West Brunswick Water Reclamation Facility (WBWRF) for
constructing new treatment facilities for dedicated treatment and
disposal.
Brunswick County
Date: February 9, 2021
The NC Department of Public Safety Emergency Management requested to participate in
NC Department Environmental Quality internal review process and it was granted essentially to
help expedite the environmental document for the applicant.
Both departments have completed the review of the proposal referenced project. The
comments are attached for review.
We appreciate the the opportunity to respond during the the Department's internal review.
Thank you for the opportunity to respond.
Attachments
D_EQNORTH cnaaJN
w�w��rnar ra�menrr gwixr
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality 1 Division of Environmental Assistance and Customer Service
217 West Jones Street 11639 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1639
877.623.6748

ROY COOPER
Governor
MICHAEL S. REGAN
Secretary
MICHAEL SCOTT
Director MEMORANDUM
NORTH CAROLINA
Environmental Quality
TO: Michael Scott, Division Director through Sharon Brinkley
FROM: Drew Hammonds, Eastern District Supervisor - Solid Waste Section
DATE: January 29, 2021
SUBJECT: Review: SW DEQ#1707 — Brunswick County (2nd Revised ER — City of Southport
Wastewater Treatment facilities)
The Division of Waste Management, Solid Waste Section (Section) has reviewed the documents
submitted for the subject project in Brunswick County, NC. Based on the information provided
in these documents, the Section at this time does not see an adverse impact on the surrounding
communities and likewise knows of no situations in the communities, which would affect this
project.
As always for any planned or proposed projects, it is recommended that during any land clearing,
demolition and construction, the City of Southport and/or its contractors would make every
feasible effort to minimize the generation of waste, to recycle materials for which viable markets
exist, and to use recycled products and materials in the development of this project where
suitable. Any waste generated by and of the projects that cannot be beneficially reused or
recycled must be disposed of at a solid waste management facility permitted by the
Division. The Section strongly recommends that the City of Southport require all
contractors to provide proof of proper disposal for all generated waste to permitted
facilities.
Permitted solid waste management facilities are listed on the Division of Waste Management,
Solid Waste Section portal site at: https://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/waste-management/waste-
management-rules-data/solid-waste-management-annual-reports/solid-waste-permitted-facility-
list
Questions regarding solid waste management for this project should be directed to Ms. Liz
Patterson, Environmental Senior Specialist, Solid Waste Section, at [phone].
cc: Liz Patterson, Environmental Senior Specialist
D_E QNORTH CAROHNA
Department of Environmemal Quality
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Waste Management
Fayetteville Regional Office 1225 Green Street, Suite 714 I Fayetteville, North Carolina 28301
910.433.3300

ROY COOPER
Governor
MICHAEL S. REGAN
Secretary
MICHAEL SCOTT
Director
NORTH CAROLINA
Environmental Quality
January 28, 2021
To: Lyn Hardison, Environmental Assistance and SEPA Coordinator
Division of Environmental Assistance and Customer Service
From: Melodi Deaver, Administrative Specialist
Division of Waste Management, Hazardous Waste Section
RE: DEQ Review, Project #1707 REV, City of Southport/DWI (Brunswick County)
The Hazardous Waste Section has reviewed the revised Environmental Review for City of
Southport Wastewater Treatment. The City of Southport has entered into an agreement with
Brunswick County and the other partners of the West Brunswick Water Reclamation Facility
(WBWRF) for constructing new treatment facilities for dedicated treatment and disposal and
would like to make the following comment:
Any hazardous waste generated from the demolition, construction, operation, maintenance,
and/or remediation (e.g. excavated soil) from the proposed project must be managed in
accordance with the North Carolina Hazardous Waste Rules. The demolition, construction,
operation, maintenance, and remediation activities conducted will most likely generate a solid
waste, and a determination must be made whether it is a hazardous waste. If a project site
generates more than 220 pounds of hazardous waste in a calendar month, the HWS must be
notified, and the site must comply with the small quantity generator (SQG) requirements. If a
project site generates more than 2200 pounds of hazardous waste in a calendar month, the HWS
must be notified, and the facility must comply with the large quantity generator (LQG)
requirements.
Generators are required to determine their generator status and both SQGs & LQGs are required
to obtain a site EPA Identification number for the generation of hazardous waste.
Should any questions arise, please contact Melodi Deaver at 919-707-8204
Respectfully,
Melodi Deaver
Compliance Branch
Hazardous Waste Section
NORTH CAROUNAD_E
Department al Environmental quality
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Waste Management
217 West Jones Street 11646 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1646
919.707.8200

ROY COOPER.
Gowen,
MI HAEL S. REGAN
Secretary
MI HAEL SCOTT
DOrecror
Date: January 28, 2021
NORTH CAROLINA
EtivtrartinentolQuaty
To: Michael Scott, Director
Division of Waste Management
Through: Janet Macdonald
Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch — Special Projects Unit
From: Bonnie S. Ware
Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch
Subject: DEQ Project #1707_R2, City of Southport/DWI, Brunswick County, North Carolina
The Superfund Section has reviewed the proximity of sites under its jurisdiction to the City of
Southport/DWI project. Proposed project is for Environmental Review - City of Southport Wastewater
Treatment - The City of Southport has entered into an agreement with Brunswick County and the other
partners of the West Brunswick Water Reclamation Facility (WBWRF) for constructing new treatment
facilities for dedicated treatment and disposal.
No Superfund Section sites were identified within one mile of the project as shown on the attached
report.
Please contact Janet Macdonald at 919.707.8349 if you have any questions concerning the Superfund
Section review portion of this SEPA/NEPA inquiry.
North Carolina Department of Enwlror1menIal Qualrty I Division of Waste Management
217 West _loots $imet I I[a•46).011 Service Center 111.46 h. North Carolina 276 et•It,4b
9I9.7O7.620O

1/28/2021
IFQ SUPERFUND SECTION ONLY : SEPA/NEPA
Area of Interest (AOI) Information
Area : 10,617.83 acres
Jan 28 2021 15:47:49 Eastern Standard Time
* Pre Regulatory Landfill Sites
• Inactive Hazardous Sites
1:72,224
0.75 1.5
r
0 2
3 mi
4 km
State of North Grth SOT, Earl, HERE, Garrrun, INCREMENT P,
USGS, METIiNASA, NSA, EPA. USDA
1/2

1/28/2021
SUPERFUND SECTION ONLY : DEQ 1707_R2, Brunswick County
Summary
Name
Count
Area(acres)
Length(mi)
Certified DSCA Sites
0
N/A
N/A
Federal Remediation Branch Sites
0
N/A
N/A
Inactive Hazardous Sites
0
N/A
N/A
Pre -Regulatory Landfill Sites
0
N/A
N/A
Brownfields Program Sites
0
N/A
N/A
2/2

Department of Environmental Quality
Project Review Form
Project Number
DEQ # 1707 REV
County - Brunswick
Date Received
1-5-2021
Date Response Due
1-28-2021
2nd Revised - Environmental Review - City of Southport Wastewater Treatment - The City of Southport has entered into an agreement
with Brunswick County and the other partners of the West Brunswick Water Reclamation Facility (WBWRF) for constructing new
treatment facilities for dedicated treatment and disposal.
This project is being reviewed as indicated below:
Regional Office
Sections
In -House Review
1/
a
Programs
Stormwater
M
0
Air
DWR — All Water
Land Quality &
Programs
UST
Public Water
❑
I
UST)
❑
1Water
Planning
�DWR
Marine Fisheries
Waste Mgmt (Haz, solid,
Air Quality
Resources Management
& Water Quality
❑
aCC
Program)
Unit
Inactive,
Emergency
❑
Coastal Management
Superfund &
& PS Div. of
Mgmt
(Public Water,
USFWS
USAGE
❑
Asheville
❑
Fayetteville
❑
Mooresville
❑
Raleigh
Washington
XWilmington
❑
Winston-Salem
ZWildlife
Maria Dunn ❑ Cultural Resources
Wildlife (DOT)
Regional
Coordinator Sign -off:
Date:
01/26/2021
In -House Reviewer/Agency:
DWRIWRIVI David Wainwright
Response
(check all applicable)
❑
No objection to project as proposed
✓
No comment
Insufficient information to complete review
❑
Other (specify or attach comments)
RETURN TO:
Lyn Hardison — [e-mail], 252-948-3842
943 Washington Square Mall
Washington N C 27889
Courier No. 16-04-01

Department of Environmental Quality
Project Review Form
Project Number
DEQ # 1707 REV
County - Brunswick
Date Received
1-5-2021
Date Response Due
1-28-2021
2nd Revised - Environmental Review - City of Southport Wastewater Treatment - The City of Southport has entered into an agreement
with Brunswick County and the other partners of the West Brunswick Water Reclamation Facility (WBWRF) for constructing new
treatment facilities for dedicated treatment and disposal.
This project is being reviewed as indicated below:
Regional Office
Sections
In -House Review
1/
a
Programs
Stormwater
M
0
Air
DWR — All Water
Land Quality &
Programs
UST
Public Water
❑
I
UST)
❑
1Water
Planning
�DWR
Marine Fisheries
Waste Mgmt (Haz, solid,
Air Quality
Resources Management
& Water Quality
❑
aCC
Program)
Unit
Inactive,
Emergency
❑
Coastal Management
Superfund &
& PS Div. of
Mgmt
(Public Water,
USFWS
USACE
❑
Asheville
Fayetteville
Mooresville
Raleigh
❑
Washington
Wilmington
Winston-Salem
ZWildlife
Maria Dunn ❑ Cultural Resources
Wildlife (DOT)
Regional Coordinator Sign -off:
Liz Prue
Date:
O1,i 72021
In -House Reviewer/Agency:
DEQ-UST Section
Response (check all applicable)
No objection to project as proposed
❑
No comment
Insufficient information to complete review
✓
Other (specify or attach comments)
As this is a large project area, to view/find petroleum related incidents in the area please use the LINK TO UST Section GIS MAP:
http: //de q.nc.gov/about/divisions/waste-management/waste-management-rule s-data/waste-management-gis-maps
RETURN TO:
Lyn Hardison — [e-mail], 252-948-3842
943 Washington Square Mall
Washington N C 27889
Courier No. 16-04-01

Department of Environmental Quality
Project Review Form
Project Number
DEQ # 1707 REV
County - Brunswick
Date Received
1-5-2021
Date Response Due
1-28-2021
2nd Revised - Environmental Review - City of Southport Wastewater Treatment - The City of Southport has entered into an agreement
with Brunswick County and the other partners of the West Brunswick Water Reclamation Facility (WBWRF) for constructing new
treatment facilities for dedicated treatment and disposal.
This project is being reviewed as indicated below:
Regional Office
Sections
In -House Review
1/
a
Programs
Stormwater
M
0
Air
DWR — All Water
Land Quality &
Programs
UST
Public Water
❑
I
UST)
❑
1Water
Planning
�DWR
Marine Fisheries
Waste Mgmt (Haz, solid,
Air Quality
Resources Management
& Water Quality
❑
aCC
Program)
Unit
Inactive,
Emergency
❑
Coastal Management
Superfund &
& PS Div. of
Mgmt
(Public Water,
USFWS
USAGE
❑
Asheville
❑
Fayetteville
❑
Mooresville
❑
Raleigh
❑
Washington
XWilmington
❑
Winston-Salem
ZWildlife
Maria Dunn ❑ Cultural Resources
Wildlife (DOT)
Regional
Coordinator Sign -off:
Date:
In -House Reviewer/Agency:
Jintao Wen / Div. of Emergency Mgmt.
Response
(check all applicable)
❑
No objection to project as proposed
❑
No comment
❑
Insufficient information to complete review
Other (specify or attach comments)
The proposed project will require a Floodplain Development Permit issued by Town of Shallotte. Please coordinate with the Town's Floodplain
Administrator for permitting.
RETURN TO:
Lyn Hardison — [e-mail], 252-948-3842
943 Washington Square Mall
Washington N C 27889
Courier No. 16-04-01

Kubacki, Susan
From: Ellis, John <[e-mail]>
Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2021 4:25 PM
To: Kubacki, Susan; Mann, Leigh
Subject: Re: [External] shallotte
CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an attachment to
Report Spam.
Susan,
The Service has no additional comments re: this project.
John
From: Kubacki, Susan <[e-mail]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2021 6:55 PM
To: Ellis, John <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [External] shallotte
We've been working primarily with Carter Hubard:
T. Carter Hubard, P.E.
Vice President & Wilmington Regional Manager
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
300 N. Third Street, Suite 301
Wilmington, NC 28401
0 910-762-4200
Direct 910-442-1850
Mob 910-520-2734
Email: [e-mail]
Susan Kubacki
Program Development Coordinator
Division of Water Infrastructure
Department of Environmental Quality
919 707 9181 office
susan.kubacki(a)ncdenr.gov
Mailing Address - 1633 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina, 27699-1633
Street Address - 512 N. Salisbury St, Raleigh, North Carolina, 27604
- Nothing Compares—t.
1

Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
From: Ellis, John [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2021 5:01 PM
To: Kubacki, Susan <[e-mail]>
Subject: [External] shallotte
CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an attachment to
Report Spam.
do you have a contact for the Shallotte project you could share? Looks like the one I had worked with in the
past, Ward, has left the company.
Thanks
John
2

Red Cockaded Woodpecker Survey Results
Southport WWTP Expansion Project
Brunswick County, NC
Prepared for:
Brunswick County, NC
Prepared by:
Ward Marotti
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
616 Colonnade Dr.
Charlotte, NC 28205
704-334-5348
WKD Project Number 20170253.00.WL
August 2018

Executive Summary
Preliminary red cockaded woodpecker habitat assessments within the Southport WWTP
Expansion project area indicated that both potential nesting and foraging habitats are present
within and adjacent to the project area. Formal surveys for the presence or absence of red
cockaded woodpeckers indicated that no active or historic colonies are present within or
adjacent to the project area.
As a result, the proposed project will have no effect on the federally endangered red cockaded
woodpecker.
Methods
Preliminary red cockaded woodpecker (RCW: Picoides borealis) habitat assessments were
completed throughout the project area from October 2017 through May 2018, concurrent with
wetland delineations and spring rare plant surveys. Potential nesting and foraging habitats
were then mapped throughout the project area using a combination of desktop aerial
photography analysis and ground truthing (Figure 1). After it was determined that both
potential foraging and nesting habitat was present within the project's limits of disturbance
(LOD), particularly the northern spray fields and high rate infiltration areas, a formal survey for
active and historic RCW colonies (i.e. cavity trees and start holes) was completed within the
mapped nesting habitat areas within the LOD and up to 0.5 mile from it, pursuant to Guidelines
for Surveys to Assess Potential Project Impacts to Red -cockaded Woodpecker Nesting and/or Foraging
Habitat (Guidelines; USFWS;
www.fws.gov/rcwrecovery/files/RecoveryPlan/survey protocol.pdf):
The first step in the survey procedure is to determine if suitable
nesting or foraging habitat exists within the area to be impacted
by the project. If no suitable nesting or foraging habitat is
present within the project impact area, further assessment is
unnecessary and a "no effect" determination is appropriate. If
no suitable nesting habitat is present within the project impact
area, but suitable foraging habitat is present and will be
impacted, potential use of this foraging habitat by groups
outside the project boundaries must be determined. This is
accomplished by identifying any potential nesting habitat
within 0.8 km (0.5 mi) of the suitable foraging habitat is then
surveyed for cavity trees. This procedure is described in greater
detail below. If no active clusters are found, then a "no effect"
determination is appropriate. If one or more active clusters are
found, a foraging habitat analysis is conducted (see 8I) to
determine whether sufficient amounts of foraging habitat will
remain for each group post -project.

For nesting and foraging habitat surveys within project impact
areas and within 0.8 km (0.5 mi) of the project site, potential
habitat is assessed at the level of the stand. A stand is a term
often used to refer to a wooded area receiving past or current
silvicultural treatment as a single management unit. Here we
expand the term to include any subset of a tract of wooded land,
divided by biological community type, management history, or
any other reasonable approach. A small tract of land may be
considered a single stand.
Identification of Suitable Foraging Habitat
For the purpose of surveying, suitable foraging habitat consists
of a pine or pine/hardwood stand of forest, woodland, or
savannah in which 50 percent or more of the dominant trees are
pines and the dominant pine trees are generally 30 years in age
or older. These characteristics do not necessarily describe good
quality foraging habitat (see 2E, 81); rather, this is a conservative
description of potentially suitable habitat.
Identification of pine and pine/hardwood stands can be made
using cover maps that identify pine and pine/hardwood stands,
aerial photographs interpreted by standard techniques, or a
field survey conducted by an experienced forester or biologist.
Age of stands can be determined by aging representative
dominant pines in the stands using an increment -borer and
counting annual growth rings. Stand data describing size
classes may be substituted for age if the average size of 30-year-
old pines is known, i.e., at least 25.4 cm (10 in) dbh or larger, for
the local area and habitat type.
If no suitable foraging habitat is present within the project area
(that is, no pines 30 years or older will be impacted), then
further evaluation is unnecessary and red -cockaded
woodpeckers are considered absent. If the project area contains
any suitable foraging habitat that will be impacted by the
project, that habitat, if it contains any 60-year-old trees or older,
and all other suitable nesting habitat within 0.8 km (0.5 mi) of
the project site, regardless of ownership, must surveyed for the
presence of red -cockaded woodpeckers.
This project site contained many possible pine and
pine/hardwood stands that could be potential suitable foraging
habitat for red -cockaded woodpeckers. Aerial photographs
were used to assess the best possible locations. The project area

was broken down into a grid with a 0.5 mi buffer added, and
each row was 50 yards wide running north -south. The grid was
walked going east -west ensuring each possible pine and
pine/hardwood foraging tree was inspected. All possible
suitable foraging habitat was documented by a GPS point.
Possible foraging habitat outside, but adjacent to, the project
site was also inspected.
Identification of Suitable Nesting Habitat
For the purpose of surveying, suitable nesting habitat consists
of pine, pine/hardwood, and hardwood/pine stands that
contain pines 60 years in age or older and that are within 0.8km
(0.5 mi) of the suitable foraging habitat to be impacted at the
project site (see above). Additionally, pines 60 years in age or
older may be scattered or clumped within younger stands;
these older trees within younger stands must also be examined
for the presence of red -cockaded woodpecker cavities. These
characteristics do not necessarily describe good quality nesting
habitat (see 2D, 8E, 8F); rather, this is a conservative description
of potential nesting habitat.
Determination of suitable nesting habitat may be based on
existing stand data, aerial photo interpretation, and/or field
reconnaissance. All stands meeting the above description,
regardless of ownership, are surveyed for cavity trees.
This project site contained many possible pine and
pine/hardwood stands that could be potential suitable nesting
habitat for red -cockaded woodpeckers. The project site was
broken down into a grid with a 0.5 mi buffer added, and each
grid row was 50 yards wide running north -south. The grid was
walked going east -west ensuring each pine and pine/hardwood
in a row was inspected. Two pine trees were identified as
possible nesting habitat. Possible starter holes and fresh sap
were apparent on the two trees and were located roughly 12 —
13 ft up the two trees. The two possible nesting trees were
logged with a GPS, and two game cameras were installed and
set up to monitor the two trees. Possible nesting habitat outside,
but adjacent to, the project site was also inspected.
Surveying for Red -cockaded Woodpecker Cavity Trees

Once suitable nesting habitat is identified (above), it must be
surveyed for cavity trees of red -cockaded woodpeckers by
personnel experienced in management and/or monitoring of
the species. Potential nesting habitat is surveyed by running
line transects through stands and visually inspecting all
medium-sized and large pines for evidence of cavity excavation
by red -cockaded woodpeckers. Transects must be spaced so
that all trees are inspected. Necessary spacing will vary with
habitat structure and season from a maximum of 91 (100 yards)
between transects in very open pine stands to 46 m (50 yards)
or less in areas with dense midstory. Transects are run north -
south, because many cavity entrances are oriented in a westerly
direction and can be set using a hand compass.
When cavity trees are found, their location is recorded in the
field using a Global Positioning System (GPS) unit, aerial
photograph, and/or field map. Activity status, cavity stage
(start, advanced start, or complete cavity), and any entrance
enlargement are assessed and recorded at this time. Again, it is
extremely important to have all surveys and cavity tree
assessment performed by experienced personnel.
If cavity trees are found, more intense surveying within 457 m
(1500 ft) of each cavity tree is conducted to locate all cavity trees
in the area. Cavity trees are later assigned into clusters based on
observations of red -cockaded woodpeckers as described in 3A.
Any cavity trees or other evidence of red -cockaded woodpecker
activity is reported to the Fish and Wildlife Service, at either a
local office or the Clemson Field Office, Clemson, South
Carolina.
Surveys were completed within the potential nesting habitats during three site visits in June
and July 2018.
Results
Approximately 27 live pines 60 years in age or older, almost all longleaf (Pinus palustris), with
varying amounts of sap streaking on their trunks were observed. All streaking observed
appeared to be the result of relatively shallow holes (i.e. primarily within the bark (inner and
outer) and vascular cambium, with little extension into the trees' wood (secondary xylem)). The
holes were consistently round, approximately 0.25 inch in diameter and arranged in largely
uniform patterns (rows). Two of these trees (Figure 1, photos 1-4) had particularly dense and
prominent sap streaking. At these locations motion activated game cameras were installed on
adjacent trunks and pointed at the densest concentration of sap on the pines. The intent was to

photograph and document any bird species active on the subject trunks. After one month,
hundreds of photos were recorded, but no birds were observed. The photos appear to have
been activated in response to leaf movement adjacent to the subject trunks, which was likely
caused by wind.
P1. North Camera Tree: from ground
P2. North Camera Tree: from game cam
P3. South Camera Tree: from ground
P4. South Camera Tree: from game cam

Conclusions
After detailed surveys and analysis of the game camera footage were completed, no evidence of
active or historic RCW populations were observed within the study area.
While several live pine trees with significant sap streaking were observed, none have either
nesting nor start holes. Because of the relatively uniform hole size and distribution, it was
determined that yellow bellied sapsuckers (Sphyrapicus varius) are likely to be foraging on the
trees observed during their winter residency in the coastal plain. Because these birds are
migratory and typically present within Brunswick County only between late September and
late April, the lack of motion activated photos of their presence is to be expected.
Because no active or historic populations of RCWs are present within or adjacent to the LOD,
the proposed project will have no effect on the federally endangered bird.

Legend
• Sap Trees
o Camera Trees
Limits of Disturbance
LOD Half Mile Buffer
Potential Habitat Type
Foraging
Nesting
0
1,000
2,000
Feet
Figure 1
.N Red -cockaded Woodpecker Survey - Brunswick Co.
Southport Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion
1 inch = 1,200 feet

For the best experience, open this PDF portfolio in
Acrobat X or Adobe Reader X, or later.
Get Adobe Reader Now!

Legend
Waters Survey Limit (505.5 ac.)
Project LOD (37.6 ac.)
Stream
Wetlands
Limit Lines
SFHA / Flood Zone Boundary
1 % Annual Chance Flood Hazard
Regulatory Floodway
Special Floodway
Area of Undetermined Flood Hazard
0.2% Annual Chance Flood Hazard
Future Conditions 1%Annual Chance Flood Hazard
Area with Reduced Risk Due to Levee
Area with Risk Due to Levee
DICKSONw
community infrastructure consultants
Waters of the US + FEMA 0 350 700
Mublerry Branch Water Reclamation Facility Feet
Southport, Brunswick County, NC 1 inch = 700 feet