The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20110645 Ver 1_USACE Correspondence_20141211Baker, Virginia From: Tugwell, Todd SAW <Todd.Tugwell @usace.army.mil> Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2014 10:38 AM To: Wiesner, Paul Cc: Baumgartner, Tim; Fritz Rohde (Fritz. Rohde @noaa.gov); Chapman, Amy; Baker, Virginia; bowers.todd @epa.gov; Crumbley, Tyler SAW; Karoly, Cyndi; Cox, David R.; Emily_Jernigan @fws.gov; Jones, Scott SAW; Higgins, Karen; Kathryn_Matthews @fws.gov; Marella Buncick (Marella_Buncick @fws.gov); McLendon, Scott C SAW; Wilson, Travis W.; Wicker, Henry M JR SAW; Wiesner, Paul; Brown, David W SAW; Beckwith, Loretta A SAW; Chuck Cranford (chuck.cranford @ncdenr.gov) Subject: RE: Notice of Intent to Disapprove NCEEP Draft Mitigation Plan with Comments / East Fork Pigeon River Mitigation Project / Haywood County / SAW - 2010 -01783 (UNCLASSIFIED) Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats: NONE Paul, Thanks for the update. From your email below, I understand that the plan is to go back to the original ratios for the purposes of credit generation, which addresses some of my main concerns. It does not look like any modifications were made to the mitigation plan for the site, correct? I guess my remaining concerns are regarding the monitoring and lack of any performance standards in the plan. It's not clear to me where the monitoring will be conducted or how much monitoring will be conducted (number and location of plots). I assume the monitoring will only take place in the planted areas using CVS plots, but how will monitoring for the invasives be conducted? Also, once we get to closeout for this site, how can we judge success of the project without any stated performance standards for the plantings or invasives removal. I don't know that the mitigation plan needs to be rewritten entirely, but can we get a an addendum, or even a proposal by email, that covers these issues? Otherwise I anticipate that we will be standing around the site at year 5 arguing about what constitutes success of the project if, for example, there are still some invasives present or not all of the planted areas have recovered satisfactorily. Thanks for addressing this. Todd Tugwell Special Projects Manager Wilmington District, US Army Corps of Engineers 11405 Falls of the Neuse Road Wake Forest, NC 27587 Office: 919 - 846 -2564 Mobile: 919 - 710 -0240 - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Wiesner, Paul [ mailto:paul.wiesner @ ncdenr.gov] Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2014 8:45 AM To: Tugwell, Todd SAW Cc: Baumgartner, Tim Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: Notice of Intent to Disapprove NCEEP Draft Mitigation Plan with Comments / East Fork Pigeon River Mitigation Project/ Haywood County/ SAW- 2010 -01783 (UNCLASSIFIED) Todd, As we have discussed, this project was instituted on 4/26/10 and is not applicable to the current instrument. As you know, the 2014 mitigation plan addendum was disapproved. Accordingly, EEP would like to move the project forward with the credit ratios originally established in the 2011 mitigation plan (Stream Preservation @ 5:1; Wetland Enhancement @ 2:1; and Wetland Preservation @ 5:1). The 2014 as -built report confirms that 2.26 acres of existing wetlands were planted in December 2013. These planted wetlands will be considered wetland enhancement. An additional 11.69 acres of wetlands are located on the project site and are considered wetland preservation. Lastly, 2,075 linear feet of stream channel (with at least 30' from TOB) are located on the project site and are considered stream preservation. The project is being monitored with CVS vegetation plots and photo points. Invasives will be treated across the site during the monitoring term as necessary. The MY 1 report will be finalized by 12/31/14. At project closeout, EEP will be requesting the following assets: 2,075 linear feet of stream preservation @ 5:1 = 415 SMUs 11.69 acres of wetland preservation @ 5:1 = 2.34 WMUs 2.26 acres of wetland enhancement @ 2:1 = 1.13 WMUs Total: 415 SMUs & 3.47 WMUs Project documents are located on the portal here: 2011 East Fork of the Pigeon River Mitigation Plan: http: / /porta1.ncdenr.org /c/ document _library /get_file ?p_I_id = 60409 &folderld = 7037682 &name = DLFE - 86908. pdf 2014 East Fork of the Pigeon River As -Built Report: http: / /porta1.ncdenr.org /c/ document _library /get_file ?p_I_id = 60409 &folderld = 7037682 &name = DLFE - 86725. pdf At your earliest convenience, please let me know if you concur with this approach. Feel free to call me directly if you would like to discuss. Thanks Paul Wiesner Western Project Management Supervisor N.C. Ecosystem Enhancement Program 5 Ravenscroft Dr., Suite 102 Asheville, NC 28801 (828)273 -1673 Mobile 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: Tugwell, Todd SAW [ mailto :Todd.Tugwell @usace.army.mil] Sent: Monday, August 18, 2014 12:09 PM To: Fritz Rohde (Fritz. Rohde @noaa.gov); Chapman, Amy; Baker, Virginia; bowers.todd @epa.gov; Crumbley, Tyler SAW; Karoly, Cyndi; Cox, David R.; Emily_Jernigan @fws.gov; Kulz, Eric; Jones, Scott SAW; Higgins, Karen; Kathryn_Matthews @fws.gov; Marella Buncick (Marella_Buncick @fws.gov); McLendon, Scott C SAW; Wilson, Travis W.; Wicker, Henry M JR SAW; Wiesner, Paul; Brown, David W SAW; Beckwith, Loretta A SAW; Cranford, Chuck Cc: Wiesner, Paul; Baumgartner, Tim Subject: Notice of Intent to Disapprove NCEEP Draft Mitigation Plan with Comments / East Fork Pigeon River Mitigation Project/ Haywood County/ SAW- 2010 -01783 (UNCLASSIFIED) Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats: NONE No The 30 -day comment review period for East Fork Pigeon River Mitigation Project in Haywood County closed on July 19, 2014. All comments that were posted on the Mitigation Plan Review Portal during the review process are attached for your records. We have evaluated the comments generated during the review period, and determined that there were significant concerns raised regarding some parts of the draft mitigation plan. In particular, the concerns related to changes in the mitigation plan addendum regarding the proposed crediting methodology for the site, which requested enhancement credit at a 3:1 ratio for portions of the site with mature vegetation where invasives treatment was the only proposed activity. (The original mitigation plan proposed to credit these areas as preservation at a 5:1 ratio.) Neither the addendum nor the original mitigation plan provided any discussion of the functional uplift to be provided through the invasives control. Additionally, no performance standards were established for the invasives control, and the monitoring proposal was inadequate to demonstrate successful eradication. Lastly, there was no discussion regarding the long -term maintenance of the site and if and how invasives would be continually treated. It should be noted that performance standards and long -term management of invasives are not typically requirements for mitigation sites, even though controlling invasives is a routine maintenance activity on most mitigation sites. What sets this project apart is that the treatment of invasives is identified as the sole source for functional improvements on this site in areas that are already forested. The mitigation plan needs to be modified to address these issues and explain why treating invasives on the site justifies the requested credit and how the uplift will be documented. Alternatively, please modify the addendum to treat these areas according to the credit structure proposed in the original mitigation plan (i.e., preservation at a 5:1 ratio). Accordingly, we do not intend to approve the Draft Mitigation Plan as currently proposed. Any NCIRT member who has concerns regarding this decision may initiate the Dispute Resolution Process, described in the Final Mitigation Rule (33 CFR Section 332.8(e)). Please note that initiation of this process requires that a senior official of the agency objecting to the approval of the mitigation plan (instrument amendment) notify the District Engineer by letter within 15 days of this email (by COB on September 3, 2014). Please notify me if you intend to initiate the Dispute Resolution Process. Provided that no NCIRT member initiates the Dispute Resolution Process, I will notify NCEEP of this decision at the conclusion of the 15 -day Dispute Resolution window. Should NCEEP decide to move forward with the project, we will work with NCEEP to revise the Draft Mitigation Plan to address identified concerns. The revised Draft Mitigation Plan will be reposted to the Mitigation Plan Review Portal for NCIRT review and comment using the same procedures used during the first review. You will be notified when the plan has been reposted for review. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks for your continued participation in this process, Todd TugwelI Special Projects Manager 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