RE_ _External_ RE_ BR-0048 Surry County_Corps

Wanucha, Dave
From:Cheely, Erin K
Sent:Wednesday, December 21, 2022 1:45 PM
To:Beckwith, Loretta A CIV USARMY CESAW (USA)
Cc:Turchy, Michael A; Matthews, Monte K CIV USARMY CESAW (USA); Wanucha, Dave
Subject:RE: \[External\] RE: BR-0048 Surry County_Corps
No problem I’ll submit a regular mod request which will also include request for renewal.

This one lists NLEB in IPaC, but is outside the AFO range. It’s No Effect for gray bats, and sunflower surveys were
updated this year for the renewal. No bog turtle habitat. Last bridge check found no evidence of bats, and Kevin Hining
said he can commit to a bridge check prior to demo just to cover our bases. All trees have been cut already. The project
manager said there is a slight chance 2-3 additional trees will be in the way when they do the old bridge demo, but if so,
the Division will cut them before April 1 or after Oct 15. I’ll include all this info in the mod/renewal application cover
letter.

Happy holidays!

-erin

From: Beckwith, Loretta A CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <[e-mail]>
Sent: Monday, December 19, 2022 7:12 PM
To: Cheely, Erin K <[e-mail]>
Cc: Turchy, Michael A <[e-mail]>; Matthews, Monte K CIV USARMY CESAW (USA)
<[e-mail]>
Subject: \[External\] RE: BR-0048 Surry County - Additional bank stabilization and permit renewal

CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an attachment to
Report Spam.

Hi Erin,

So, current bat issues have complicated many reverifications...

In general, before we issue a reverification, or modify what is authorized, we have to
make sure that all the requirements are (still) met.

For this project:

I just looked at our MFR for the original verification for this project (issued in January
2021). Assuming that we’re still the lead federal agency -

Unless all the trees have already been removed, there is a current bridge inspection
that shows no evidence of bat use, and no federally-listed species other than the NLEB
1

and Gray bat show up on a current IPaC review (or if they do, please provide
information as to why there would be no effect on these species), please submit a
formal permit modification and renewal request (with cover letter, etc.) to document this
additional bank stabilization and reverification request. This request should contain
updated ESA information and supported biological conclusions.

Some points to address:

1. If NLEB is still listed in IPaC, have all the trees been removed? If not, will
stth
NCDOT commit to removing them outside of the April 1 to October 15 time
period? Then I would need to consult with the USFWS.

2. When was the last bridge survey done? How much of the bridge work has been
completed?

3. Please address any other listed species/issues that show up on IPaC with valid
survey or inspection information.

I hope that you enjoy the holidays.

Regards,

Lori

From: Cheely, Erin K <[e-mail]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2022 2:13 PM
To: Beckwith, Loretta A CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <[e-mail]>; Wanucha, Dave
<[e-mail]>
Cc: Hining, Kevin J <[e-mail]>
Subject: \[Non-DoD Source\] BR-0048 Surry County - Additional bank stabilization and permit renewal

Lori and Dave,

I need to request renewal/reissuance of the NW 14 for BR-0048 in Surry County (Bridge 103 over the Mitchell River on
NC 268). However, I have recently been informed by the Division (Kevin Hining) that the project manager feels it would
be a good idea to stabilize the banks under the old and new bridge locations to protect the waters edge and immediate
bank area. The river seems to have migrated closer to the west/end bent one side, so additional protection would be
helpful, and given the sandy nature of the soils, it will be tough to pull out the concrete slope protection on the east/end
bent one side and regrade the banks with just coir fiber as the stabilization.

They would only be putting rip rap on the waters edge and up a few feet to the top of bank on the west/end bent one
side, and up the slope along the east/end bent two side to or near the bench for the proposed greenway. So, including
the greenway bench, there will still be a nice wide, rock-free bench on both sides for wildlife usage.

A good portion of the banks in this location are already hardened with concrete, so the only new impacts to the stream
would be 30 linear feet of bank stabilization. See the attached drawing showing the impact location. This would not be
a loss of water and no mitigation will be needed.
2

So my question for you is:
 Is this email documentation and a note to this effect in the renewal/Project Submittal form sufficient? The
attached drawing could also be included in the renewal attachments.
* or *
 Would you prefer a formal permit modification and renewal request (with cover letter, etc) to document
this additional bank stabilization?

Let me know what you’d prefer and I will proceed accordingly.
Thanks!

-erin

Erin Cheely
Environmental Coordinator
Environmental Coordination & Permitting
N.C. Department of Transportation

919 707 6108 office
919 323 5192 mobile
[e-mail]

1598 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1598

Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N.C. Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
3