20141127 Ver 1_Emails_20141107

Baker, Virginia
From: Eaton, Larry
Sent: Friday, November 07, 2014 8:09 AM
To: Baker, Virginia
Subject: RE: portal comments
Hey Ginny,
Good set of comments.
In reverse order 9. The term you are looking for is specific conductance 8. Since they are using DWR small stream
methods why don't you suggest to them that success be measured as an improvement of one bioclass above pre
restoration. If they don't like it, let them propose something else.
7. Rather than ask them which method, you could state that given the size of the stream that DWR Qual 4 method is
appropriate for sampling streams this size and refer to the small stream biocriteria memo for which metrics to monitor
(hint: Biotic Index).
The group writing this might be more clueless about DWR methods than you, so they may appreciate a suggestion from
you about what you think is appropriate.
Hope to see you soon.
Larry
- - - -- Original Message---- -
From: Baker, Virginia
Sent: Friday, November 07, 2014 7:37 AM
To: Eaton, Larry
Subject: FW: portal comments
Hi Larry,
Attached is my draft comments.
I had added to them last night after reading the method. Qual2 does seem to make sense based on the size of the
stream and watershed. However I think I would still need a better definition of how success is determined. Who will
process and ID the samples.
Ginny Baker
Transportation Permitting Unit
NCDENR- Division of Water Resources
Raleigh, NC 27699 -1650
Phone -(919) 707 -8788, Fax -(919) 733 -1290
From: Baker, Virginia
Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2014 11:14 AM
To: Baker, Virginia
Subject: portal comments
Ginny Baker
Transportation Permitting Unit
NCDENR- Division of Water Resources

1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699 -1650
Phone -(919) 707 -8788, Fax -(919) 733 -1290