20211535 Ver 1_USACE More Info Requested_20211118

Strickland, Bev
From: Bailey, David E CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <[e-mail]>
Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2021 1:50 PM
To: [e-mail]
Cc: Homewood, Sue
Subject: [External] Request for Additional Information: SAW-2020-00795 (Poets Walk / 531 NC
Highway 61 South / Gibsonville NC / Guilford County)
CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an attachment to
Report Spam.
All,
Thank you for your PCN, dated 10/21/2021, for the above referenced project. I have reviewed the information and need
clarification before proceeding with verifying the use of Nationwide Permit (NWP) 29 (https://saw-
reg.usace.army.mil/NWP2021/NWP29.pdf). Please submit the requested information below (via e-mail is fine) within 30
days of receipt of this Notification, otherwise we may deny verification of the use of the Nationwide Permit or consider
your application withdrawn and close the file:
1) Project Wetland Impacts 4 and 9 involve proposed fill in wetlands for Lot fill (Lot 4) and a cul-de-sac. It is not
clear that you have demonstrated avoidance and minimization to the maximum extent practicable as required
by NWP General Conditions 23(a) and (b). For example, it appears that Wetland Impact 4 could be eliminated or
further reduced through the use of retaining walls or elimination of the Lot. Impact 9 could be eliminated or
further reduced through designing the cul-de-sac to terminate further to the west. It is not clear that project
viability is dependent on these design elements or the inclusion of one or more affected Lot, when the overall
development proposes 121. Please re -design the project accordingly, or provide documentation that such
avoidance and minimization measures are not practicable (i.e. available and capable of being done after taking
into consideration cost, existing technology, and logistics in light of overall project purposes);
2) It appears that proposed wetland fills due to stormwater management facilities could also be reduced or
eliminated per NWP General Conditions 23(a) and (b). For example Wetland Impact 2 is a minor amount of
wetland fill that could be eliminated by slightly steepening a fill slope or incorporating a retaining wall. Wetland
Impact 5 could be reduced or eliminated by pulling back the end of the culvert pipe to the edge of the fill slope,
perhaps adding a small headwall, and pulling the rip rap pad back towards the fill slope accordingly. Please note
that, per NWP 29 Regional Condition C.a., "Discharges in streams and wetlands for stormwater management
facilities are prohibited under this NWP."
3) Per NWP 29 Regional Conditions B.10 and 11, submit a wetland restoration plan for the temporary wetland
impact areas (Wetland Impacts 1, 6, and 8), including confirmation that the wetland impact areas will be
returned to pre -construction grade and contour with suitable soils, that the top 6-12 inches of the trench will
be backfilled with topsoil from the trench (specific to Impact 8) , and including a re -vegetation plan using native
wetland species;
4) Based on proposed upland grading, wetland fill, and re-routing of drainage into stormwater management
facilities, the project appears to eliminate the drainage area/hydrology source for a portion of Wetland E
downslope of Wetland Impact 7. Based on the landscape position of this affected area, the Corps would consider
the portion of Wetland E between Wetland Impact 7 and the southern edge of the geomorphic floodplain of
Stream A as indirect impacts (see NWP General Conditions "District Engineers Decision") to wetlands resulting
from a loss of hydrology. Unless the project is redesigned to continue hydrologic input into Wetland E on the
downstream side of Wetland Impact 7, compensatory mitigation would be required for indirect impacts
i

resulting in a loss of hydrology and therefore aquatic function; compensatory mitigation is typically required at a
2:1 ratio unless otherwise justified based on resource quality (NCWAM);
5) Sheet CWI-1.2 shows Kipling Lane stubbing at the east property line and Whitman Way stubbing at the south
property line, although Section G.3 of the PCN states that "This is a single phased project and this permit is to
provide impacts for the overall development of the project." Note also that JDs have recently been requested on
these adjoining properties (SAW-2021-00797 and SAW-2021-01544 for reference), and that both of them
contain potential waters of the US. With the reasonable assumption that these roads would be extended in the
future, would either of these future developments be considered a phase of the Poet's Walk development,
share any infrastructure, amenities, etc. that may cause the Corps to view any impacts on these properties as
part of the same single and complete project as Poet's Walk?
6) To enable coordination with US Fish and Wildlife Service pertaining to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act,
please provide the date(s) of your survey(s) for small whorled pogonia (Isotria medeoloides).
7) As you have likely heard, the Corps cannot currently verify the use of any NWP reliant upon a 401 WQC or
waiver under EPA's 2020 401 rule, including NWP 29. Specifically, and per Corps HQ, "Due to the decision of the
United States District Court for the Northern District of California on October 21, 2021 to remand EPA's 2020 401
WQC rule with vacatur, the Corps of Engineers is not finalizing permit decisions that rely on a 401 WQC or waiver
under EPA's 2020 rule at this time. The Corps is working to provide more refined guidance that provides a way
forward that allows us to finalize permit decisions." Note that we do not have a timeline for resolution of the
above -noted vacatur of EPA's 2020 401 rule and its current effects on the use of NWP 29 and other NWPs issued
at that time.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Dave Bailey
David E. Bailey, PWS
Regulatory Project Manager
US Army Corps of Engineers
CE-SAW-RG-R
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
Office: [phone], Ext. 30.
Mobile: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
We would appreciate your feedback on how we are performing our duties. Our automated Customer Service Survey is
located at: https://regulatory.ops.usace.army.mil/customer-service-survey/
Thank you for taking the time to visit this site and complete the survey.
From: RaleighNCREG <[e-mail]>
Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2021 1:46 PM
To: [e-mail]
Cc: Bailey, David E CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <[e-mail]>; Thames, Joyce A CIV USARMY CESAW
(USA) <[e-mail]>
Subject: SAW-2020-00795 (Poets Walk / 531 NC Highway 61 South / Gibsonville NC / Guilford County)
Good Afternoon,
2

We have received your Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) NWP request for the above project and forwarded it to Mr.
Dave Bailey for further processing.
Thank you,
Josephine Schaffer
3