20221625 Ver 1_More Info Requested_20221229

Baker, Caroline D
From: Homewood, Sue
Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2022 9:14 AM
To: Sullivan, Willie; Hopper, Christopher D CIV USARMY CESAW (USA)
Cc: Radford, Emma
Subject: REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION - Cherry Lane Industrial - Alamance
County - DWR#20221625
Good morning Willie,
I have reviewed the above noted project. Please copy me on your response to the USACE Request for Information email
below. As noted in Item #5 from the email below, DWR requires construction plans and profile drawings in order to
complete our review. Please note that upon review of this information, the Division may require additional information
again. The Division will consider this application on hold until receipt of a complete response to information requested.
Please also note that buffer impacts must be reviewed and approved by the local municipality, therefore DWR's review
and any future approval will not include buffer impacts.
Thanks,
Sue Homewood
Division of Water Resources, Winston Salem Regional Office
Department of Environmental Quality
336 776 9693 office
336 813 1863 mobile
Sue. [e-mail]
450 W. Hanes Mill Rd, Suite 300
Winston Salem NC 27105
Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
From: Sullivan, Willie <[e-mail]>
Sent: Monday, December 19, 2022 7:00 PM
To: Hopper, Christopher D CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <[e-mail]>; Homewood, Sue
<[e-mail]>
Cc: Radford, Emma <[e-mail]>
Subject: [External] Re: SAW-2022-01256 / Cherry Lane / Alamance County / NWP 39 Application - REQUEST FOR
INFORMATION
CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an attachment to
Report Spam.
Chris and Sue,
1

Just wanted to send an update here. We are drafting a response to these questions and plan to have it over to you this
week.
Thanks,
Willie
From: Hopper, Christopher D CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <[e-mail]>
Sent: Friday, December 9, 2022 4:35 PM
To: Sullivan, Willie <[e-mail]>; Homewood, Sue <[e-mail]>
Subject: SAW-2022-01256 / Cherry Lane / Alamance County / NWP 39 Application - REQUEST FOR INFORMATION
Good Afternoon, William:
Thanks for your application to utilize Nationwide Permit 39 to construct stream and wetland crossings associated with
construction of the proposed Cherry Lane Industrial site. We require some additional information to ensure the project
qualifies for this permit. Please see below and do not hesitate to call or reply with questions or concerns.
1. Please complete the Aquatic Resources tab of the attached ORM spreadsheet. I've attached the most recent
version for your convenience.
2. There is a lot of information shared on each impact exhibit. These would be attached to the verification and
should be clear to construction contractors building the project. Others with similarly complex impact areas
have submitted a 404 set of exhibits without buffers and simpler legends, as one possible solution to consider.
3. The impact to Wetland W5 occurs within an area marked as temporary buffer impact. Would fill be
introduced? The text provided states this would be for construction access. Please expand on the purpose and
need for this impact (what would this impact provide access to?), as well as any avoidance and minimization
that was considered.
4. Wetland W9 — same question. The text states the area would be impacted for construction access, but the
impact table lists the permanent impact as mechanized clearing and grading. Please expand on purpose, need,
avoidance, and minimization. Was a retaining wall considered here? Are fill slopes dictated by design standards
or could they be steepened in this area?
5. Nationwide Permit 39, Regional Conditions 8 and 9 detail considerations for design and construction of riprap
stabilization and culvert installation. Please provide construction details that contractors would reference at
each crossing. Please show the proposed burial of each stream impact via profile and cross -sectional views.
6. The 10-foot proposed utility crossing and easement isn't discussed much in the application. If I overlooked this
discussion, please accept my apology. The mitigation section refers to this as a non -electric crossing. Would this
be an open -cut / aerial / trenchless crossing? This crossing also traverses the Back Creek Floodplain.
Christopher D. Hopper
Regulatory Specialist
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Division
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, NC 27587

O: [phone], Ext. 35
M: [phone]
We would appreciate your feedback on how we are performing our duties. Our automated Customer Service Survey can
be accessed by copying and pasting the following link into your web browser:
https:Hregulatory.ops.usace.army.mil/customer-service-survey/. Thank you for taking the time to visit this site and
complete the survey.