20150180 Ver 1_More Info Received_20150305

t FD- -0L`�-43
Homewood, Sue
From: Rich Glover <rglover @jamestownengineering com>
Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2015 148 PM
To: Kevin Martin, Homewood, Sue, David E Bailey2 @usace army mil
Subject: Re High Point Univ
All,
Just to be clear, the limits of impacts have not changed from the original PCN and this response is just to
provide further explanation of the details, therefore there should be no need to change the actual PCN form or
requested impacts.
Thanks,
Rich
Thomas R (Rich) Glover, Jr, PE
Jamestown Engineering Group, Inc
PO Box 365
117 E Main St
Jamestown, NC 27282
(336) 886 -5523 (o)
(336) 886 -5478 (f)
rolover n iamestownenorneenno com
www iamestownengineenng com
- - - -- Original Message - - - -- ,4
To: Kevin Martin , Homewood, Sue, David E Bailey2CcD_usace army mil
Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2015 1 25 PM
Subject: Re High Point Univ
Sue,
We offer the following responses to your questions
1 I'll need to see that the City has approved the buffer impacts in order to issue the 401, so please forward that
as soon as you have it.
Terry Kuneff is reviewing the construction plans and PCN this week I spoke with him yesterday and he should be
able to forward us a buffer impact approval sometime next week He said with his initial review, everything looks
fine, but he wanted to give the other departments a chance to look at it as well He does not anticipate any
issues
2 It's also best if we get a copy of the approved SMP before I issue the 401. If that's not going to be feasible, I
can issue a conditional 401 that requires a copy be sent to us PRIOR to any impacts occurring on site That's
just more of a management /hassle issue for everyone to keep up with so if the SMP is close to approval it's
usually best for me to get it and then issue the 401. Let me know your thoughts /schedule on that
Terry Kuneff is also in the process of reviewing the latest modification to the Master Watershed Plan for the
campus This process will take longer, so we would likely need conditional approval We will forward the
approved plan to you prior to impacts We are sorry for any inconvenience this may cause
3 In my experience, the erosion control manual /approval process does not allow the riprap energy dissipater to
be designed "at grade" as proposed. In addition, 10 feet for a 90' pipe is much less than I typically see Have
you received your S &EC approval, or can you verify this design will likely be accepted? I ask because if we issue
the 404/401 and then the SUC plan isn't accepted then you'll have to come back in for a modification and I try
to help people avoid that whenever possible.
In order to minimize the impact lengths, we included pre -cast concrete endwalls There are several advantages to
the style we chose These have a concrete bottom that tie the full distance between the wingwalls over a length
of approximately 4' which gives the dissipation distance a length of 14' The pipe is also larger than necessary

which keeps headwater elevations negligible, thus reducing pipe velocity The exit of the pipe is where the
majority of the velocity change occurs in the transition from the constricted pipe flow, to the open flared larger
cross section within the area of the wing walls Doing this over the concrete portion of the end wall prevents any
channel scour in the worst velocity change area The energy dissipation is then continued over the next 10 feet
of riprap to further slow the velocity A plunge pool is always preferable from an energy dissipation standpoint,
however we understand the desire not to have them from an environmental standpoint We have submitted this
portion of the plan to the City for an early S &EC review They have stated that this design will be allowed
4. We need details /specs that show the culvert will be installed "in the dry". And can you confirm that the
dewaterng of the channel will be done at the limits of the permanent impact? Typically contractors want a few
feet on either end to install the dewatenng method. If that's the case here, please update the PCN to include
the temporary dewaterng impact beyond the permanent impacts
We have attached an exhibit detailing the installation "in the dry" Another advantage of the precast endwalls that
we chose allows us to use the area of the upper endwall for the cofferdam Utility contractors lay uphill. The
lower stone dam with washed stone face will be installed on the upper end on the riprap pad. The lower end of
the riprap pad will be used for energy dissipation for the pump water The lower endwall will be installed and
then the pipe will proceed heading upstream. The last action will be the removal of the cofferdam and the
installation of the upper endwall. This can occur in a very short amount of time. The contractor should be able
to excavate straight down for the endwalls without any over - excavation, however, we have allowed an
additional 3' in front of endwall, as indicated on the limits of disturbance and impact lengths, just in case there
is an issue, such as sloughing, during the installation.
David,
We offer the following responses to your questions
1) As Sue Homewood (DWR) pointed out in her 2/26/2015 email, the current proposal does not propose any stream impacts
outside of the footprint of the culverts and rip rap pad Typically a contractor will over - excavate a few feet on either side of
the culvert placement area in order to install the pipe The over excavated "hole" is accounted for as a temporary impact,
and a restoration plan is required specifying how the area will be brought back to original grade and contour Certainly on
the downstream side of the new culvert crossing the over - excavated area should fall within the footprint of the at -grade
np rap pad However, wouldn't a small temporary impact area be needed on the upstream end of the new culvert crossing
and the upstream end of the culvert extension? Further, as Sue pointed out, if dewatenng is required to install the pipes
then any additional footprint of the stream affected outside of the currently proposed impacts would require permitting as
temporary impacts Please update the PCN and plans accordingly if necessary
Please see our response to Sue's questions number 4
2) 1 will plan to issue a PJD with this project In order to sign the survey the survey requires a defined project area, complete
with metes and bounds As you noted in your email I would also need a Rapanos form
A PJD will be fine at this point
If either of you need any additional information, clarification, or a hard copy of these responses, please let me know
Thank you for your help on this matter
Rich
Thomas R (Rich) Glover, Jr, PE
Jamestown Engineering Group, Inc
PO Box 365
117 E Main St
Jamestown, NC 27282
(336) 886 -5523 (o)
(336) 886 -5478 (f)
rglover ,.,tamestownengineering com
www tames townengineering com
- - - -- Original Message - - - --
Froiri:
To: Homewood, Sue, Rich Glover (rglover(d,)iamestownengineermq com)
Cc: terry kuneff(a)-highpointnc gov
2

Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 11 08 AM
Subject: RE High Point Univ
I appreciate your comments Sue and I will let the engineer and client decide how to proceed and how to answer your
questions, so I would hold off on approval until we have those answers Once we know I will advise the Corps, if any
changes are proposed, and see what they say
il
Kevin C Martin
President
Soil & Environmental Consultants, PA
We've moved to:
North Quarter Office Park
8412 Falls of Neuse Road, Suite 104
Raleigh, NC 27615
(919) 846 -5900 Office Phone
(919) 846 -9467 Fax
(919) 270 -7941 Mobile
kmartin(a-)-sandec com
Visit us at SandEC com'
This electronic communication, including all attachments is intended only for the named addressee (s) and may contain confidential information This electronic
communication may not have passed through our standard review /quality control process Design data and recommendations included herein are provided as a
matter of convenience and should not be used for final design Rely only on final, hardcopy materials bearing the consultant's original signature and seal If you
are not the named addressee (s) any use, dissemination distribution or copying of this communication is prohibited If you have received this electronic
communication in error please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete the original communication from your system Thank you
From: Homewood, Sue [mailto:sue.homewood @ncdenr gov]
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 1102 AM
To: Kevin Martin, Rich Glover (rglover @jamestownengineering com)
Cc: terry kuneff @high poi ntnc.gov
Subject: RE: High Point Univ.
Thanks Kevin,
With regards to the riprap pad, I completely understand the USACE recommendation and agree with it completely. I
also know that there are some S &EC reviewers who will not accept that design to meet their requirements If you
prefer to worry about this later, that's fine, dust keep in mind that any changes to the dissipater may require a
modification of the 401 (including a fee for DWR). If you would rather take the time to resolve it before I issue the
401, dust let me know and I can hold off issuing the approval (once everything else is resolved) to allow you time to do
that and avoid a possible modification
All of our GC's have the following condition (this one is from GC3890) It's been there for years I have found that it's
much easier to ensure that the application and the plans show dewatering techniques clearly, and any additional
impacts rather than find violations /complaints /problems during construction, so I look for it in every application that
comes across my desk. I know that Rich has provided similar information on other projects so hopefully it's just a
matter of providing me some specifications and maybe tweaking the impacts If you do increase the impacts, they'll be
temporary and will not trigger the mitigation threshold even if the total impacts are >150.
Ps: I'm not arguing your point about extra disturbance etc, but unless you specifically request an exemption to this
condition and provide justification, then the project has to meet the conditions of the GC Maybe when we take the
GC's out to public notice next time we can further discuss this issue in detail.

6. Work in the Dry
All work to or adjacent to stream waters shall be conducted 60 that the flowing stream does
not come in contact with the disturbed area. ,Approved, bast management practices from the
most current version of the NC Sedirr ot'and Erosion Contral= Mahual, or thte NC DOT
G4nsbuctivtn and Maintenance activities Manual, such as sandbags, rock betmis, cofferdams,
and other diversion structures shall be used to m1nimiz4oxca'vation in flowing water.
Exceptions to this condition require application subm ttal to and written approval by'the
Division.
Please note my new contact information
Sue Homewood
NC DENR Winston -Salem Regional Office
Division of Water Resources — Water Quality Programs
450 W Hanes Mill Rd, Suite 300
Winston Salem NC 27105
Voice. (336) 776 -9693
Cell. (336) 813 -1863
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
From: Kevin Martin [maiito:kmartinC&sandec.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 10:48 AM
To: Homewood, Sue; Rich Glover ( rg love r (cbiamestownengineenng.com)
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject: RE: High Point Univ.
Sue, I am working too Thanks for the comments below I will pass them along to the engineer to respond to since they
are mostly in his ballpark (1)The complete application was sent to the city by the engineer for the buffer authorization
and I advised that you would need that before the 401 could be issued (2) as far as a conditional approval that will be
fine and we get those a lot, then once we get the city's approval on the SMP we will send to you. (3) The at grade rip
rap is something the Corps has been suggesting if we are close to 150' of impact, otherwise they may choose to
require mitigation if we are at say, 148' of impact like we are here with traditional rip rap They still consider the at
grade rip rap a permanent impact but not a loss so we are able to be well below the 150' cutoff.
It is my understanding is that the erosion control manual are "suggested" practices and not requirements and that
practices not in the manual can be proposed by the project engineer I also realize that some plan reviewers are not
aware of that and they assume it is the Bible
(4) On the "in dry requirement" I have never seen that required except on large streams and it has been discouraged in
most cases because of the additional disturbance to riparian area and destabilization that results, especially when the
adjacent topo is a bit steep
Rich please address all 4 of Sue's comments since my comments above are based on my experience with other
projects and of course are not based on engineering design requirements that you are handling for the project.
Kevin C. Martin
President
Soil & Environmental Consultants, PA
We've moved to:
North Quarter Office Park
8412 Falls of Neuse Road, Suite 104
Raleigh, NC 27615
(919) 846 -5900 Office Phone

(919) 846 -9467 Fax
(919) 270 -7941 Mobile
kmartin aC�.sandec com
Visit us at SandEC coml
This electronic communication, including all attachments is intended only for the named addressee (s) and may contain confidential information This electronic
communication may not have passed through our standard review /quality control process Design data and recommendations included herein are provided as a
matter of convenience and should not be used for final design Rely only on final, hardcopy materials bearing the consultant's original signature and seal if you
are not the named addressee (s) any use, dissemination distribution or copying of this communication is prohibited If you have received this electronic
communication in error please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete the original communication from your system Thank you
From: Homewood, Sue [ mailto.sue.homewood @ncdenr.gov]
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 10.17 AM
To: Kevin Martin
Cc: Bailey, David E SAW; terry kuneff @highpointnc gov
Subject: High Point Univ
Hi Kevin,
I hope you are enjoying the snow Snow days aren't as fun since I got a laptop for work Oh well, at least I won't get
behind in paperwork.
I have a couple quick items on this PCN.
1. I'll need to see that the City has approved the buffer impacts in order to issue the 401, so please forward that
as soon as you have it
2. It's also best if we get a copy of the approved SMP before I issue the 401 If that's not going to be feasible, I
can issue a conditional 401 that requires a copy be sent to us PRIOR to any impacts occurring on site. That's
just more of a management /hassle issue for everyone to keep up with so if the SMP is close to approval it's
usually best for me to get it and then issue the 401 Let me know your thoughts /schedule on that
3 In my experience, the erosion control manual /approval process does not allow the riprap energy dissipater to
be designed "at grade" as proposed. In addition, 10 feet for a 90' pipe is much less than I typically see Have
you received your S &EC approval, or can you verify this design will likely be accepted? I ask because if we
issue the 404/401 and then the S &EC plan isn't accepted then you'll have to come back in for a modification
and I try to help people avoid that whenever possible.
4 We need details /specs that show the culvert will be installed "in the dry" And can you confirm that the
dewatering of the channel will be done at the limits of the permanent impact? Typically contractors want a
few feet on either end to install the dewatering method If that's the case here, please update the PCN to
include the temporary dewatering impact beyond the permanent impacts.
Thanks.
Please note my new contact information
Sue Homewood
NC DENR Winston -Salem Regional Office
Division of Water Resources — Water Quality Programs
450 W Hanes Mill Rd, Suite 300
Winston Salem NC 27105
Voice. (336) 776 -9693
Cell: (336) 813 -1863
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.

PIPE INSTALLATION CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE:
1. INSTALL RIPRAP CHECK DAM WITH WASHED No. 57
STONE FACE.
2. INSTALL RIPRAP ENERGY DISSIPATER BELOW CHECK
DAM.
3. INSTALL IMPERIOUS DIKE ON UPSTREAM END OF
IMPACT.
4. INSTALL TEMPORARY BYPASS PUMP, DISCHARGE
LINE, AND SUCTION LINE. ENSURE PUMP AND LINES
ARE PROPERLY ANCHORED /SECURED.
5. INSTALL DOWNSTREAM ENDWALL.
6. INSTALL PIPE FROM ENDWALL PROCEEDING
UPSTREAM.
7. REMOVE IMPERVIOUS DIKE AND INSTALL UPSTREAM
ENDWALL.
li
to 60 1 �®
00 110 40 00 100 to 00 so
PIPE
INS T.4 L TION
DETAIL
yam%
RIPRAP CHECK
DAM W/ WASHED % 44,
#57 STONE FACE
PROPOSED ROADWAY
SCALE: 1 " = 20' \ \
LI I
U
ti
s