20140193 Ver 1_Other Agency Correspondence_20140318

Strickland, Bev
From: Kukz,Eho
Sent: Monday, March 31.20148:45AM
To: Strickland, Bev
Subject: FYV:|RT Site Visit Henry Fork 3'17'14
Attachments: Henry Fork—IRT site walk-03-17-2014.pdf
Eric VV.Ku|z
Environmental Senior Specialist
4O1 and Buffer Permitting Unit
N[DENR DivisionofVVaterResources — VVaterQua|ityPermittingSection
1650 MSC
E-mail correspondence toondƒrom this address may besubject to the North Carolina Public Records Low and may be
disclosed to third parties
Here are yesterday's meeting minutes for your review and reference
Jake McLean, PE, CFM
Water Resources e»oinoo,
Asheville Team Leader
vWld|ands Engineering, Inc.
1x Possum Trot
Suite
Asheville, NC zuuos
Cell: 828-545-3865
www.wUd|andseno.com

March 18, 2014
Mr. Todd Tugwell
Special Projects Manager, Regulatory Division
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - Wilmington District
11405 Falls of Neuse Road
Wake Forest, NC 27587
sent via e -mail: [e-mail]
RE: Henry Fork Mitigation Site
Meeting Minutes of IRT Site Walk 3/17/2014
Catawba River Basin Cataloging Unit 0305o1o3 Expanded Service Area; Catawba County, NC
Dear Mr. Tugwell,
This letter is a follow up to our site walk with EEP and the Interagency Review Team (IRT) at the Henry
Fork Mitigation Site on Monday, March 17, 2014. The following representatives attended the site walk:
USACE: Todd Tugwell, David Brown, Scott Jones, Tasha McCormick
USEPA: Todd Bowers
USFWS: Marella Buncick
NCDENR: Eric Kulz
NC EEP: Mike McDonald, Harry Tsomides, Paul Weisner (EEP PM), Guy Pearce, Mac Haupt
Wildlands Engineering: John Hutton, Shawn Wilkerson (Project Principal), Jake McLean (PM)
The group walked the site and discussed the proposed restoration approaches outlined in Wildlands
Engineering's technical proposal dated September 12, 2013. Particular discussions around stream and
wetland jurisdiction and mitigation treatment types included:
1. Stream restoration and enhancement 1 credit will be pursued as stated in the Wildlands
Proposal. While streams UT2 and UT1A will be fully restored, enhancement I credit is
proposed. These components will be part of stream - wetland complexes and may have a more
intermittent hydrologic regime.
2. Wetland restoration will be pursued as stated in the Wildlands Proposal. All agencies were in
agreement that pursuing wetland restoration was appropriate given the history of site grading
and manipulation associated with the past agricultural practices and golf course construction.
It was discussed that overburden depths vary across the site but typically range from 6 " -24 ".
Soil cores were examined and there was agreement that soil profiles generally matched the

Page 2 of 2
description from the soil scientist's report included with the proposal. More detailed soil
analysis grid work will dictate grading depth.
3. There was no concern expressed with conversion of ponds to stream habitat in terms of
regulatory impacts. However, the concern for deleterious sediments (from prior potential
herbicide /pesticide application) to be released or re- exposed from pond removal was raised. It
was agreed that a prudent course of action would be to test pond sediments and incorporate
findings into the design approach, and document the same in the mitigation plan.
4. There were no objections to either of the two alternatives presented for UTi. There was some
agreement that the option that parallels Wetland i may be preferable to reduce site grading
and compaction (under present conditions, this area is topographically more suitable to routing
the stream through). Wildlands intends to pursue this option.
The downstream tie -in of this option (below where UTi and UTi.A) is more flexible now that the
property has been surveyed and the existing stream was found to be entirely within the parcel.
5. Wildlands stated that native wetland vegetation transplants will be used in lieu of coir fiber
matting wherever possible.
6. Wildlands stated that a ioo' buffer will be planted along the Henry Fork. Other areas outside of
the buffer and required stream and wetland buffers will be allowed re- vegetate naturally.
7. USACE recommended that a plan for siting of monitoring wells be included as information
provided in the mitigation plan.
8. USACE recommended that newer guidance allowing for buffers in excess of the minimum to be
given additional (stream) creditor an enhanced ratio would be applicable to this site. (The plan
is to place the entire site under conservation easement).
If you have any questions or revisions to these meeting notes, please contact me at
[e-mail] or 828 - 545-3865
Sincerely,
#401
Jacob P. McLean, PE, CFM
Project Manager
CC:
Todd Tugwell, USACE; David Brown, USACE; Scott Jones, USACE; Tasha McCormick, USACE; Todd
Bowers, USEPA; Mike McDonald, NC EEP; Harry Tsomides, NC EEP; Paul Weisner, NC EEP; Guy
Pearce, NC EEP; Mac Haupt, NC EEP; Marella Buncick, USFWS; Eric Kulz, NCDENR; John Hutton,
Wildlands Engineering; Shawn Wilkerson, Wildlands Engineering
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. ® phone [phone] ® fax [phone] ® 1430 S. Mint Street, # iO4 ® Charlotte, NC 28203