20130743 Ver 1_More Info Received_20131112

\ t �b.w SfAiF
TA
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA f
� "� t fi•' r <Q
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATIOTc*,�s� 13
v, s -, 4��!L: ,
PAT L. MCCRORY ANTHONy�J: TATA
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
�a
November 7, 2013
North Carolina Division of Water Resources
Transportation Permitting Unit
512 N. Salisbury Street
Raleigh, NC 27604
Attn: Amy Chapman
NCDOT Coordinator
t 3 - o-7 Y">:
Subject: R -2519B NCDOT Response to NCDWR Fold Letter issued August 27, 2013
for NCDOT's 'Application for an Individual Section 404 Permit and Section
401 Water Quality Certification for the US 19E Widening from SR 1186 in
Yancey' County to multilane section west of Spruce Pine in Mitchell County.
State Project No. 6.909001T, Division 13, WBS Number 35609.1.1, TIP R-
251913.
Re: Application for Individual Permit, dated July 10, 2013.
DWR Hold Letter dated August 27, 2013.
USACE Post Public Notice Letter dated October 15, 2013.
Revised Individual Permit Application dated November 7, 20-13.
Revised Mitigation Plan dated November 4, 2013.
Dear Madam:
NC Division of Water Resources (NCDWR) issued an on -hold letter on August 27, 2013
to address additional information required for making a permit decision. Please see
below, NCDOT's response to items listed in the letter:
Permit application
`Y Site 2a: Are there bank stabilization impacts on the bank of Little Crabtree Creek
associated with the tie in?
No, the bank stabilization stops short of Little Crabtree Creek.
2. Site S: Table 4 doesn't list temporary stream impacts for the work pads. Please
update.
Temporary impacts have been added to Table 4 and updated in the Revised Permit
Application Cover Letter.
MAILING ADDRESS: LOCATION:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TELEPHONE [phone] CENTURY CENTER, BUILDING B
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS UNIT FAX [phone] BIRCH RIDGE DRIVE
1598 MAIL SERVICE CENTER RALEIGH NC 27610
RALEIGH NC 27699 -1598 WEBSITE NCDOT GOV

;73. Site 10: Are there bank stabilization impacts to Long Branch associated with the tie
in?
No, according to the NCDOT Hydraulics Unit, the rip /rap stops short of Long Branch.
D4. Site 11: All of the flow for Long Branch is being collected and emptied into a UT to
Long Branch at site 11. Can this smaller UT handle the increased flow?
Yes, the pipe was sized to adequately handle the additional flow and Class I Rip /Rap will
be placed at the bend in the channel to dissipate energy.
(Amy Euliss email response - September 16, 2013) I am not concerned about the pipe
being sized correctly. Rather I am worried that the channel is too small to handle the
rerouting of flow. I see that you have rip rap at the outlet and in the bend, but what
about the portion downstream before the tie in with the Long Branch.
The flow is following the existing drainage pattern — NCDOT is upgrading some of the
pipes (30" to 42 ") but no new flow is entering the system (roadway drainage currently
flows to .this stream as well). The hydraulic engineers have determined that the bank
stabilization at Permit Site 11 should help stop the erosion in this area, but had no
concerns about-the stability of the tie in to Long Branch (the tie in is also currently
outside of NCDOT's R/W).
05. Site 22: A pipe is being removed and replaced with a bridge and a rip rap lined
channel. DOT has proposed to subtract the 40' of day - lighting from the mitigable
total. DWR does not give credit for day- lighting channels that aren't natural channel
design.
There is no Natural Stream Design at this site; however, the US Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE) has given NCDOT credit for day - lighting in the past and NCDOT is operating
on this assumption unless dictated otherwise by the Corps.
C"6 Site 16: Cumulative impacts to Big Crabtree Creek are greater than 150' of stream 2
impact, so you'll need to mitigate for the additional 82' of impact at site 16 °
Site 16 is mislabeled — it should be UT Big Crabtree Creek
✓7. Sites 25 and 26 are the same stream. Mitigation is required at both sites.
'Mitigation will be provided for this stream.
J 8. Site 28 and 28A are different streams, and individual stream impacts are less than
150'. Therefore, no mitigation is required.
Table 4 in the Revised Permit Application Cover Letter has been updated to reflect this
change.
9. I need temporary stream impacts broken out in linear feet.
Table 4 in the Revised Permit Application Cover Letter has been updated with temporary
impacts in linear feet.
2
J

10. In an email to Lori dated August 7, 2013; you noted that there were some issues with
the permit application. Can you confirm that the permit application I received is
correct. If not, please provide me with the most up -to -date- information.
You have the correct permit application; Lori Beckwith (USACE) , was referring to a
discrepancy between the stormwater management plan and the permit application.
Mitigation Plans
1. Please provide utility overlays on the mitigation plans.
Please refer to Appendix B of the Mitigation Plan (revised November 4, 2013).
jSite 5a: Please quantify the extent of the buffer that will be impacted by the utility
line. Please discuss what efforts will be conducted to minimize the impacts on the buffer
from utility line maintenance.
Appendix B of the Mitigation Plan includes the overlay of utility impacts to streams and
buffers. Appendix C in the Mitigation Plan includes the signed Memorandum of
Agreement (MOA) between NCDOT and Duke Energy. Under #4 of that MOA, sensitive
areas including endangered species and other areas deemed appropriate (mitigation sites)
are discussed. Duke Energy has also been provided a copy of the NCDOT -NES
Mitigation Geodatabase for use in maintenance operations related to NCDOT -owned
properties and right -of -ways.
jSite 8: Please quantify the extent of the buffer that will be impacted by the utility
line. What methods will be taken to minimize the impacts on the buffer from utility line
maintenance?
Please see response to Question 2 above.
CX Site 9: DWR requires mitigation for rip rap lined channels, -and doesn't see this site
as a viable candidate for mitigation.
NCDOT will receive mitigation per U ACE at this location. Please refer to the
Mitigation Plan (revised November 4, 20 3)
J5. Site 18: Please provide channel slope.
The channel slope at Site 18 is 3.94 %.
,,16. Sites 18 and 25: Due to the very short length, DWR doesn't see sites 18 and 25 as
viable sites for mitigation.
NCDOT is unaware of anv minimum len tg h requirements for stream mitigation Please
refer to Sections 3.0, 5.0 and 9.0 of the Mitigation Plan (revised November 4, 2013) for
sites 18 and 25.
6ufi
�6r

7. Site 21: Please quantify the extent of the buffer that will be impacted by the utility
line. 4Please discuss what efforts will be conducted to minimize the impacts on the buffer
from utility line maintenance. Please provide channel slope.
The buffer will not be impacted by a utility line. It is being removed at this location. The
channel slope is 2 %.
8. Site 30: There's a small UT in the field that is being impacted from the stream
relocation. How will this channel impact the design? Jamie and I discussed this .issue
during our site visit. Also, you are currently proposing 1:2 mitigation. Our mitigation
rules only allow for 1:1 mitigation, therefore the DWR can only give you credit at 1:1.
Please refer to the revised Appendix A plan sheet for Site 30 which shows the tie -in of
the UT With the stream relocation site. Since there is minimal flow in this UT, the
channel dimensions will remain the same. In the initial conversations with USACE, it
was indicated that NCDOT should receive a 1:2 ratio for relocation of a poor quality
stream. After further discussions with USACE concerning mitigation ratios, NCDOT has
revised the ratio for this site .to 1:1.
NCDOT believes the above issues have been adequately addressed and changes have
been made to the original permit application and mitigation plan. If you have any further
questions or concerns please contact Jeff Hemphill (jhemphillancdot.Qov or 919 707-
6126).
Sincerel ,
Richard Hancock, P.E., Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Unit
Attachments
Cc: Ms. Marella Buncick (USFWS)
Mr. Chris Militscher (USEPA)
Ms. Amy Chapman (NCDWR
Ms. Marla Chambers (NCWRC)
4

Tyd.w 5u� d�
N
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PAT L. MCCRORY
GOVERNOR
November 7, 2013
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Field Office
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, NC 28801 -5006
Attn: Ms. Lori Beckwith
NCDOT Coordinator
ANTHONY J. TATA
SECRETARY
Subject: R -2519B NCDOT Response to USAGE Post Public Notice better issued
October 15, 2013 for NCDOT's Application for an Individual Section 404
Permit and Section 401 Water Quality Certification for the US 19E Widening
from SR 1186 in Yancey County to multilane section west of Spruce Pine in
Mitchell County. State Project No. 6.909001T, Division 13, WBS Number
35609.1.1, TIP R- 2519B.
Re: Application for Individual Permit, dated July 10, 2013.
DWR Hold Letter dated August 27, 2013.
USACE Post Public Notice Letter dated October 15, 2013.
Revised Individual Permit Application dated November 7, 2013.
Revised Mitigation Plan dated November 4, 2013.
Dear Madam
The US Army Corps of Engineers ( USACE) issued a post Public Notice Letter on
October 15, 2013 to address comments and to address requested changes to the
Mitigation Plan. The following responses correspond to the eight questions contained in
the Post Public Notice Letter (attached):
1. Please refer to the Mitigation Plan revised November 4, 2013.
2. For this project, NCDOT has elected not to utilize Stream Quality Assessment
Worksheets from the original jurisdictional determination and will default to a
rating of 2:1 for good quality impacted streams with the exception of Sites 5A and
30, which USACE has determined are fair quality streams.
MAILING ADDRESS: LOCATION:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TELEPHONE [phone] CENTURY CENTER, BUILDING B
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS UNIT FAX [phone] BIRCH RIDGE DRIVE
1598 MAIL SERVICE CENTER RALEIGH NC 27610
RALEIGH NC 276 99 -1 59 8 WEBSITE'NCDOT GOV

3. Compensatory mitigation requirements have been recalculated per the project
(TIP) specific guidance regarding permanent impacts, including relocations.
``Attached is the Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) acceptance letter that
provides for the additional mitigation requirements.
4. Please see the revised Mitigation Plan for site - details, monitoring information, and
credit ratios.
5. Attached is the Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) acceptance letter that
provides for the additional mitigation requirements.
6. Please refer to section- 7.0 of the revised Mitigation Plan for the revised
monitoring requirements.
7. Please refer to Appendix B of the revised Mitigation Plan for the utility overlay
on the mitigation sites.
8. A copy of the NCDOT response to NCDWR Hold Letter dated August 27, 2013
will be included with this submittal.
NCDOT believes the above issues have been adequately addressed and changes have
been made to the original permit application and mitigation plan. If you have any further
questions or concerns please contact Jeff Hemphill ([e-mail] or 919 707-
6126).
Sinc7rd
fcv Rich ancoc k, P.E., Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Unit
Attachments
Cc: Ms Marella Buncick (USFWS)
Mr Chris Militscher (USEPA)
Ms. Amy Chapman ( NCDWR
Ms Marla Chambers ( NCWRC)

Mr. Richard W. Hancock, P.E.
Manager,, Project Development and Environmental Analysis Unit
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699 -1548
Dear Mr. Hancock:
Subject: EEP Mitigation Acceptance Letter:
R- 2519B, US 19E from SR 1186 (Old US 19) in Yancey County to Multi -lane section
West of Spruce Pine, Mitchell and Yancey Counties
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) will provide the
compensatory stream and riparian wetland mitigation for the subject project. Based on the information supplied by
you on November 4, 2013, the impacts are located in CU 06010108 of the French Broad River basin in the Northern
Mountains (NM) Eco- Region, and are as follows:
French Broad
Stream
Wetlands
Buffer (Sq. Ft.)
06010108
Non-
Coastal
NM
Cold
Cool
Warm
Riparian
Riparian
Marsh
Zone 1
Zone 2
Impacts
5,246.0
0
0
0.15
0
0
0
0
(feet/acres
*Some of the stream and wetland impacts may be proposed to be mitigated at a 1:1 mitigation ratio. See permit application for
detai Is.
This mitigation acceptance letter replaces the mitigation acceptance letters issued on June 25 and
July 9, 2013. EEP commits to implementing sufficient compensatory riparian wetland mitigation credits to offset
the impacts associated with this project as determined by the regulatory agencies in accordance with the N. C.
Department of Environment and Natural Resources' Ecosystem Enhancement Program In -Lieu Fee ( NCDENR EEP
ILF) Instrument dated July 28, 2010. The stream impact and associated mitigation need were under projected by the
NCDOT in the 2013 impact data. EEP will commit to implement sufficient compensatory stream mitigation credits
to offset the stream impacts associated with this project as determined by the regulatory agencies using the delivery
timeline listed in Section F.3.c.iii of the NCDENR EEP ILF Instrument dated July 28, 2010. If the above referenced
impact amounts are revised, then this mitigation acceptance letter will no longer be valid and a new mitigation
acceptance letter will be required from EEP.
8420.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Ms. Beth Harmon at 919 -707-
Sincerely,
James B. Stanfill
EEP Asset Management Supervisor
cc: Ms. Lori Beckwith, USACE — Asheville Regulatory Field Office
Ms. Amy Chapman, Division of Water Quality, Wetlands /401 Unit
File: R -2519B Revised 2
K"torr�... E ... Protect Our ftia &
Fy 1
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program, 1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699 -1652 / 919 - 707 -8976 1 1 ti ',puitaf; i do t_o�`�rreh:eeo