Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20130455 Ver 1_COE - Approval Letter and Comments_20131025Strickland, Bev From: Kulz, Eric Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2013 7:54 AM To: Strickland, Bev Subject: FW: Notice of NCEEP Mitigation Plan Approval - Twin Bays Restoration Project; Duplin County (SAW- 2012 - 01285) (UNCLASSIFIED) Attachments: Twin Bays Approval Letter and Comments.pdf 13 -0455 Eric W. Kulz Environmental Senior Specialist 401 and Buffer Permitting Unit NCDENR - Division of Water Resources - 1650 MSC Raleigh, NC 27699 -1650 Phone: (919) 807 -6476 Water Quality Permitting Section E -mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Crumbley, Tyler SAW [ mailto :Tyler.Crumbley @usace.army.mil] Sent: Friday, October 25, 2013 10:59 AM To: Tim Morris Cc: Tugwell, Todd SAW; Miguez, Kristin; Pearce, Guy; Bailey, David E SAW; Kulz, Eric Subject: RE: Notice of NCEEP Mitigation Plan Approval - Twin Bays Restoration Project; Duplin County (SAW- 2012 - 01285) (UNCLASSIFIED) Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats: NONE Tim, Thank you for the update on the land acquisition efforts. Sorry to hear that those have not worked out. We agree to proposal you have presented in response to the Approval Letter (attached). I would like to stress the need for strategic transect implementation (number of and locations of wells) in order to accurately reflect the diminished ditch effects you are proposing. I would also like to ask that the monitoring reports be explicit in the presentation of the collected data for those transects and areas proposed for credit. Ideally these sites would have all ditches plugged and some well data prior to submission of the Draft Mitigation plan and not rely so heavily on assumed results from drainage models, thereby reducing the uncertainty of the spatial and temporal effects of the hydrologic uplift suggested by your on -site work. Additionally, KCI and NCEEP should be aware that the agreement to allow this particular proposal on Twin Bays (and potentially Bear Basin) is being made as a case by case decision, unique to these sites and does not necessarily indicate that such a proposal will be accepted on future projects. Sincerely, -Tyler Tyler Crumbley Regulatory Division 1 Wilmington District U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 11405 Falls of Neuse Road Wake Forest, NC 27587 (919) 846 -2564 - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Tim Morris [mailto:Tim.Morris @kci.com] Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2013 10:15 AM To: Crumbley, Tyler SAW Cc: Tugwell, Todd SAW; kristin.miguez @ncdenr.gov; Pearce, Guy Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: Notice of NCEEP Mitigation Plan Approval - Twin Bays Restoration Project; Duplin County (SAW- 2012 - 01285) (UNCLASSIFIED) Tyler, I wanted to send you an email and fill you in on a few things regarding Twin Bays prior to submitting our 404 PCN. We have re- engaged the adjacent landowners at both this site and at Bear Basin to determine if we could secure drainage easements or obtain permission to fill their ditches. We were not successful in our negotiations with the adjacent landowner at Twin Bays so we will need to keep the southern ditch open. The modeled influence zone of that ditch, as per the MP, is 76'. In the Final Mitigation Plan we would like to request that the non - credit bearing zone of influence of that ditch be half of that, or 38'. We would request that the other 38' be monitored to determine if it is credit bearing. The ditch is approximately 850' long, so the credit impact would be approximately .75 WMU's, or about 7% of the contracted credits. If this is acceptable to you, we will move forward with modifying our MP and submitting for our 404/401. We are still negotiating with the two adjacent landowners on Bear Basin. While no formal agreement has been made, based on our conversations it is likely that we will be able to make something work out there so we can fill at least the western ditch on that property. We would anticipate proposing an identical strategy for the credit bearing zone along any ditches that we can't fill out there (50% of the modeled zone will be lost). Let me know your thoughts. If you are OK with this I would hope to get you the 404 -401 within a week or so. - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Crumbley, Tyler SAW [ mailto :Tyler.Crumbley @usace.army.mil] Sent: Friday, June 28, 2013 11:28 AM To: Ellison, Michael Cc: Tugwell, Todd SAW; Crumbley, Tyler SAW; bowers.todd @epa.gov; Cyndi Karoly (cyndi.karoly @ncdenr.gov); eric.kulz @ncdenr.gov; Jones, Scott SAW; Marella Buncick (Marella_Buncick @fws.gov); McLendon, Scott C SAW; David Cox (david.cox @ncwildlife.org); Jeff Jurek (jeff.jurek @ncdenr.gov); Pearce, Guy; 'Ellis, Eric'; Steve Sollod (Steve.Sollod @ncmail.net); Gibby, Jean B SAW; fritz.rohde @noaa.gov; Travis Wilson (travis.wilson @ncwildlife.org); Emily_Jernigan @fws.gov; Kathryn_Matthews @fws.gov; Schaffer, Jeff; Kristin.Miguez @ncdenr.gov; Bailey, David E SAW; Sugg, Mickey T SAW; Beter, Dale E SAW; Lori Montgomery (Lori.Montgomery @ ncdenr.gov); Tim Morris; Wicker, Henry M JR SAW Subject: Notice of NCEEP Mitigation Plan Approval - Twin Bays Restoration Project; Duplin County (SAW- 2012 - 01285) (UNCLASSIFIED) Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats: NONE Mr. Ellison, Attached is the approval letter for the Twin Bays mitigation project, along with all the comments that were generated during the IRT's review of the project on the Mitigation Plan Review Portal. *Please note that this approves the draft mitigation plan, but also identifies a major concern with the plan that must be addressed in the Final Mitigation Plan. When the permit application is submitted for Nationwide Permit #27 authorization, a copy of this letter should be included along with a copy of the Final Mitigation Plan. Also, please ensure that the Final Mitigation Plan is posted to NCEEP's documents portal so that all members of the IRT have access to the final plan. Please let me know if you have any questions about the process or the attached letter. Regards, Tyler Crumbley Regulatory Division Wilmington District U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 11405 Falls of Neuse Road Wake Forest, NC 27587 (919) 846 -2564 Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats: NONE Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats: NONE 3 DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS 69 DARLINGTON AVENUE WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28403 -1343 REPLY TO p ATTENTIONOF: 28 June, 2013 Regulatory Division Re: NCIRT Review of Twin Bays Draft Mitigation Plan; NCEEP# 95363; SAW 2012 -01285 Mr. Michael Ellison North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program 1652 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699 -1652 Dear Mr. Ellison: The purpose of this letter is to provide the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) with all comments generated by the North Carolina Interagency Review Team (NCIRT) during the 30 -day comment period for the Twin Bays Draft Mitigation Plan, which closed on 5 June, 2013. These comments are attached for your review. Additionally, this letter provides a brief account of further review by the USACE, NCEEP, and the contracted provider, KCI Associates of North Carolina, PC. Based on our review of these comments, we have identified one major concern with the Draft Mitigation Plan. This issue stems from the allowance of ditches adjacent to the project to remain open and the credit generation of those areas affected by the ditch drainage. The USACE requested that those areas subject to the permanent drainage be removed from credit generation as restoration, due to the known drainage effect of the ditches. This issue was also present on another KCI project under portal review at the same time (Bear Basin). Based on the concern, and comments provided by the USACE/NCIRT during the portal review process (comments attached), KCI provided an email response and a request to meet and discuss justification for the proposed credit generation on those affected areas for both projects. Subsequently, a meeting was conducted on 27 June, 2013. The discussion included a review of modeling results for pre -and post - construction ditch effect, lack of existing groundwater hydrologic data, hydrologic inputs /exports of the sites, and potential for movement of ditches or ditch alterations. It was agreed upon that a "non- credit generating" buffer be placed along all the ditches that are to remain open. This buffer represents a zone of influence from the remaining ditches and will be at a distance somewhere between the ditch edge and the previously modeled results of effective drainage (0'- 76' for Twin Bays) that will result in zero credit generation. There will be a secondary zone that may result in generation of restoration credits. This zone will be determined by monitoring transects of wells and the resulting data supporting the presumption that the work conducted will have a mitigating effect on the influence of the remaining permanent ditches. Furthermore this area will be held to the stated performance standard for hydroperiod in the Draft Mitigation Plan (8% of the growing season). Please note that prior to finalizing the mitigation plan, we must approve the width of the zones discussed above. The resolution of these issues must be included in the Final Mitigation Plan. The Final Mitigation Plan is to be submitted with the Preconstruction Notification (PCN) Application for Nationwide permit approval of the project along with a copy of this letter and a summation of the addressed comments. If it is determined that the project does not require a Department of the Army permit, you must still provide a copy of the Final Mitigation Plan, along with a copy of this letter, to the appropriate USACE field office at least 30 days in advance of beginning construction of the project. Please note that this approval does not preclude the inclusion of permit conditions in the permit authorization for the project, particularly if issues mentioned above are not satisfactorily addressed. Additionally, this letter provides initial approval for the Mitigation Plan, but this does not guarantee that the project will generate the requested amount of mitigation credit. As you are aware, unforeseen issues may arise during construction or monitoring of the project that may require maintenance or reconstruction that may lead to reduced credit. Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter, and if you have any questions regarding this letter, please call us at 919- 846 -2564. Sincerely, Enclosures Electronic Copies Furnished: NCIRT Distribution List CESAW -RG /Wicker CESAW -RG -L /Bailey Jeff Jurek, NCEEP Jeff Schaffer, NCEEP Kristin Miguez, NCEEP Digitally signed by CRUMBLEY.TYLER.AUTRY. 1007509975 _1 Date: 2013.06.28 11:17:35 - 04'00' Tyler Crumbley Regulatory Specialist Enclosures Electronic Copies Furnished: NCIRT Distribution List CESAW -RG /Wicker CESAW -RG -L /Bailey Jeff Jurek, NCEEP Jeff Schaffer, NCEEP Kristin Miguez, NCEEP REPLY TO ATTENTION OF: DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS 69 DARLINGTON AVENUE WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28403 -1343 CESAW -RG /Crumbley 5 June, 2013 MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD SUBJECT: Twin Bays- NCIRT Comments During 30 -day Mitigation Plan Review Purpose: The comments and responses listed below were posted to the NCEEP Mitigation Plan Review Portal during the 30 -day comment period in accordance with Section 332.8(g) of the 2008 Mitigation Rule. NCEEP Project Name: Twin Bays Restoration Site, Duplin County, NC USACE AID #: SAW- 2012 -01285 NCEEP #: 95363 30 -Day Comment Deadline: 5 June, 2013 1. Eric Kulz, NCDWQ, 8 May, 2013: The mitigation plan acknowledges that the ditch that is to remain open along the southern property boundary will have an effect on the hydrology of the site, but the various figures and wetland restoration totals do not take this effect into account. Some reduction of wetland credit is likely. The proposed placement of hydrology gauges should be adequate to determine this effect. 2. T. Crumbley and T. Tugwell, USACE, 4 June, 2013: • The goals and objectives for this project are specific, related, and appropriate for this site. • Please review the indicator statuses of red maple, tulip poplar and water oak in section 7.1 Pg 18 of the plan. Insert "live, planted stems" at 210 /acre and remove the word "mature" from the survivability discussion. • Sec. 7.3, Proposed Conditions: Please remove the area directly adjacent to open ditch (-76' based on modeling) from the acreage calculation at south portion of the site. Move paired wells back to the edge of potential wetland (i.e. 75' from ditch). • Sec. 9.0 Vegetation Success, Criteria for meeting performance standards should also include the terms "live, planted stems" criteria for success.