20120040 Ver 1_Mitigation Site Visit_20141212

Wainwright, David
From: Wainwright, David
Sent: Friday, December 12, 2014 10:06 AM
To: Sarah.E.Hair @usace.army.mil
Cc: King, Art C ; Baker, Virginia (virginia.baker @ncdenr.gov)
Subject: B-3680 Sediment Discharge and Mitigation Site
Attachments: 14.pdf, Sediment discharge to stream and mitigation site.pdf
Liz,
I visited the B-3680 last Monday, December 8, in response to the ICA that was issued the prior week. I have attached
some pictures.There were several things to note:
• There were about three places where sediment had been washed from under the coir fiber matting an into the
stream. Relatively speaking,these were minor discharges. Sediment was of heavy sand. A small plume of
sediment we released when I put my hand in it, but there was no apparent flow that day, and the plume,which
was of a much finer material than the actual discharge, dissipated/settled within a few minutes. I estimated this
to be less than 10 five gallon buckets worth and was the largest of the releases. I asked them to do what they
could to stabilize the bank and keep additional sediment releases from occurring.
• There was a waddle on the upper end that drained a low area that had some sediment from under the coir fiber
mat to be released. I estimated this to be less than 5 five gallon buckets.They were going to pull the mat back,
repair the erosion, and relay the mat taking it probably 15-20 back behind the waddle into the mitigation site.
• Because of the fairly small amount of sediment released and the nature of the environment, I decided that it
would be best to not mess with the discharged sediment. I think it would be difficult to remove it without doing
damage to the stream and/or mitigation site. One of those "leave well enough alone" situations. I asked when
the banks would be planted and was told it would be done with the mitigation site planting,which is expected to
be within the next few weeks. I told them to keep an eye on the banks to make sure that no additional issues
that could result in discharge arise.
• The areas around the trees that were left had a little bit of slope due to the elevation differences.They agreed
to lay some coir fiber matting along these slopes to help prevent sloughing and erosion until the spring when the
vegetation can become well established.
• The area that was excavated in the wet looked very good and you could not tell they had done it. It was along
the wing wall bank and had been stabilized with riprap as is typical. I didn't see anything that needed to be done
in this area.
• The mitigation site is getting close to being planted.There was water standing in many areas,which is good.
They seemed to have tied into the existing wetlands pretty good. I was not as pleased with the tie into the
stream banks, but we'll see.
• One of the questions posed was about the disking of the site.They kept asking me, and I kept telling that should
be up to DOT. The plans call for it, but none of them onsite thought it was necessary.Jason Elliot was going to be
out there the following day to review the site; ask him.
I think this is all. Overall it isn't looking too bad. Call me if you want to discuss anything further.
David Wainwright
NCDENR,Division of Water Resources
1617 Mail Service Center,Raleigh,North Carolina 27699-1617
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
David.Wainwright @ncdenr.gov
1

Email correspondence to and from this address/ssubject tn the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed
to third parties unless the content/s exempt uv statute o,other regulation.
��
��� Please consider the environment before printing this email.
2

North Carolina Department of Transportation
Erosion and Sedimentation Control/Stormwater Report
Roadside Environmental Unit
Report Type
�✓ Routine ❑ PCN
ICA ECPAR
❑ ICA Ex 1st
❑ ICA Ex 2nd
❑ CICA - SWO
Project Information
Project Number: 33222.3.1 Date of Inspection: 12/08/2014 Evaluator: Barry Harrington
Location: Bridge on US 15/501 over CSX.
Project Type: Contract
Length of Project: 0.40
Project Evaluation Installation of Maintenance Effectiveness Plan Overall Project
Length Section Description BMP's of BMP's of BMP's Implementation Evaluation
County: MOORE
Division: 8 TIP Number: B-3680
Disturbed Acreage: 2
HOW Zone: N Trout Zone: N
0.40
The Entire Project
8
8
8
8
8
Grading Scale: 10 = Excellent 9 = V. Good 8 = Good 7 = Fair 6-0 = Immediate Corrective Action Needed
Comments:
Remarks and Recommendations:
The "ICA" on this project has been lifted. A follow-up review was conducted on December 8, 2014 with Travis Morgan, RE, Jim
Dietrich, Assistant RE, Tracy Ingold, PI, David Wainwright with DWR, Art King, DEO, and contractor personnel. Corrective e. c.
measures have been installed and maintained to bring the project back into compliance. Please note the following comments:
1) The contractor has stabilized stream banks that were disturbed at time of last review. Before project completion, ensure live stakes
are driven into stream banks, as per detail.
2) Silt fence with wattle outlets have been installed between channel and the wetlands. NEU is scheduled to be on site, tomorrow.
Once the question of ripping wetland area is decided, please proceed with seeding area with native seed mix and stabilizing slopes
adjacent to wetlands with coir fiber matting, as discussed.
3) Need to repair wash on stream bank and seed/mat, as per DWR recommendations. David Wainwright, w/DWR looked at sediment
deposits in creek and indicated it would probably do more harm than good to remove sediment from channel at this time.
4) Disturbed fill slopes adjacent to headwall area of culvert have been seeded/matted. Repair small washes on slope, as discussed
and seed/mat.
Please address the following before project acceptance to ensure good stand of permanent vegetation.
-Y2-(US 1) - approx. sta.11+00 to sta.15+00 Lt. on -Y2- contractor has graded behind curb & gutter in this section. Permanent
seed/mulch disturbed areas or temp. seed/mulch to meet NCG01 seeding requirements. #*Sta.17+00 Lt. on -Y2- need to stabilize
headwall area at outlet end of pipe and repair seed/mat weakly vegetated slope.
-L- need to mow weeds Lt. & Rt. of -L- under and behind guardrail sections. #*Approx. sta.14+00 Rt. over culvert - repair seed/mat
weakly vegetated area on slope. #Approx. sta.21+00 to sta.23+00 Rt.- need to repair seed/mulch/mat weakly vegetated areas approx.
5-10 feet behind guardrail and area on slope where slope drain was removed recently. Approx. sta.19+00 to sta.23+00 Lt.- contractor
has constructed curb & gutter and has completed grading work. Seed/mat disturbed areas.
Ransdell Borrow site - continue to maintain skimmer basins/TRSD's on site. Need to final grade disturbed areas, esp. slopes and
permanent seed/mulch.
NPDES documentation was not reviewed. Continue to perform inspections on a weekly basis and after a .5" rainfall event within 24
hrs. Also, ensure e. c. plans are updated and initialed on a daily basis.
12/8/14 1:33 Page 1 of 1

SEDIMENT DISCHARGE TO STREAM
Largest discharge — probably 8-10 five gal bucket loads of heavy sand. Washed in from under coir fiber

Sediment washed in from behind waddle and from under coir7iber mat. Probably 3-4 five gallon buckets
Stream through mitigation area. Large release on left side above waddle; smaller release at far end on right (see arrows)

AREA NOT EXCAVATED IN THE DRY
Area excavated is approximated by the red lines. They say it wasn't much and no signs of it now

Y
`r
Opposite bank of excavation. I think they needed to reach this to finish the wingwall and had left an area for the
crane pad to do so. It was the crane pad area that was excavated in the wet on the opposite bank.

MITIGATION SITE
Whole site from near US 1
Lower end near US 1 tying into existing wetlands.

Upper end looking towards RR tracks from near stream
Looking towards US 1 from upper end. The stream is inside the S&EC fence.

Upper end tying into existing wetlands
Looking towards US 1 from near RR tracks.

Overview of lower end
Upper end

_yy
"! i .
Where mitigation site ties into stream bank.