20230126 Ver 1_More Info Received_20230419 (5)

Baker, Caroline D
From:Michelle Savage-Measday, PWS <[e-mail]>
Sent:Wednesday, April 19, 2023 3:53 PM
To:Homewood, Sue
Subject:\[External\] FW: Request for Additional Information: SAW-2022-00168 (Nelsons Creek /
Country Lane / Mocksville NC / Davie County)
Attachments:Impact Exhibits-2.pdf; Impact Exhibits-4.pdf; Impact Exhibits-1.pdf; Impact
Exhibits-3.pdf; C2.0 General Notes.pdf
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Flagged
CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless verified. Report suspicious emails with the Report Message
button located on your Outlook menu bar on the Home tab.

Sue,
Attached is the submission to Dave. Sorry, I had everyone except you on the email.
~Michelle

MICHELLE SAVAGE-MEASDAY, PWS | Environmental Department Manager

ECS SOUTHEAST, LLP | T 919.861.9910 D 919.861.9821 C 919.441.2437

[e-mail] | www.ecslimited.com

Confidential/proprietary message/attachments. Delete message/attachments if not intended recipient.

From: Michelle Savage-Measday, PWS <[e-mail]>
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2023 4:30 PM
To: Bailey, David E CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <[e-mail]>
Cc: Homer, Seren M <[e-mail]>; Chandler, Rebecca D <[e-mail]>; Richard
Denzler <[e-mail]>; Brad Haertling <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Request for Additional Information: SAW-2022-00168 (Nelsons Creek / Country Lane / Mocksville NC / Davie
County)

Dave,

The attached sheets accompany the response to comments below:

Impact Exhibits-1: Impact Map – Full Site depicts location of impacts over the project site
Impact Exhibits-2: Impact Map Area 1 – Includes impacts to Stream 1 and Wetlands 7A, 7B, 8A and 8B
Impact Exhibits-3: Impact Map Area 2 – Includes impacts to Stream 2 and 3 and Wetland 1A
Impact Exhibits-4: Impact Map Area 3 – Includes impact to Stream S4
C2.0 General Notes: Details regarding seed mix for restored areas following construction

1) Stream Crossing 3A (Stream 4 on Impact Exhibit 4) includes a vertical drop of approximately 5 feet within the
culvert structure. This design does not appear to comply with NWP 29 General Condition 2 or Regional Condition
B.9.c. Please re-design this crossing to fit the NWP terms and conditions, or fully detail how such a design
complies with these terms and conditions.
Note also that such a design, even if justified, would effectively isolate the stream reach above the culvert
structure, estimated at approximately 60 linear feet (0.003 acre), reducing the aquatic function of this
1

length/amount of channel; such reasonably foreseeable indirect impacts are taken into account when
determining compensatory mitigation requirements per the NWP General Conditions “District Engineers
Decision.” Impact area 3A has been updated to remove the vertical drop in the pipe network. A single pipe at a
steeper slope has been included with the revised riprap pad to account for the revised velocity.
2) Proposed permanent loss stream impacts rely on rounding to the ten-thousandth place to reach figures
ostensibly below the compensatory mitigation threshold. However, stream length impacts taken to the sub-foot
as are shown on the plans, and then translated to acreage estimates as shown, are too precise to be relied on in
the field during construction based on the Corps experience. As such, and based on additional indirect losses of
stream function as described in item 1 above, the Corps would require compensatory mitigation for permanent
loss stream impacts as currently proposed, per NWP 29 Regional Condition B.7 and the NWP General Conditions
“District Engineers Decision.” If additional plan revisions are not practicable to further reduce permanent loss
stream impacts, please submit a compensatory mitigation plan. The mitigation rule generally prescribes
purchasing stream credits first through a mitigation bank with stream credits available in this 8-digit HUC
(03040101), or second through the NC Division of Mitigation Services. Please provide a mitigation acceptance
letter from your proposed compensatory mitigation provider. Typically, compensatory mitigation is required at a
2:1 credit to impact ratio unless otherwise justified based on evaluation of aquatic function (i.e. NCSAM). We
were able to make an adjustment to the permanent stream impact at area 1A (Impact Exhibit 3) to further
reduce the permanent stream impact as shown on the attached exhibits.
3) Based on Plan Sheet 1, Stream T1 would flow directly next to/between a proposed fill slopes for Lot 232 and a
retaining wall for Lots 383-385. How will these fills/structures be constructed while avoiding direct and indirect
impacts to Stream T1. Further, how will future secondary impacts be avoided, anticipating that Stream T1 could
predictably migrate into these fill/structures? An additional small retaining wall has been added to pull the
proposed fill slope off the existing stream bank (Impact Exhibit 2).
4) Per NWP 29 Regional Conditions B.11, please provide a restoration plan that thoroughly describes how all
temporary wetland and stream impacts will be removed, how pre-project conditions will be restored (should
involve use of biodegradable matting and seeding with regionally appropriate native wetland and riparian seed
mix), and include a timetable for all restoration activities. Additional notes have been added to Impact Exhibits 3
and 4 to identify the restoration and seed mix. See C2.0 General Notes sheet for details regarding the seed mix.

Total Permanent Wetland Impacts: 2,031 SF
Total Temporary Wetland Impacts: 916 SF

Total Permanent Stream Impacts: 849.237 SF (229.952 LF)
Total Temporary Stream Impacts: 437 SF (112.04 LF)
Total Permanent “No Functional Loss”: 407 SF (114.70 LF)

Please reach out with any further questions or comments.

Thank you,

Michelle

MICHELLE SAVAGE-MEASDAY, PWS | Environmental Department Manager

ECS SOUTHEAST, LLP | T 919.861.9910 D 919.861.9821 C 919.441.2437

[e-mail] | www.ecslimited.com

Confidential/proprietary message/attachments. Delete message/attachments if not intended recipient.

From: Bailey, David E CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <[e-mail]>
Sent: Friday, February 17, 2023 1:02 PM
To: Michelle Savage-Measday, PWS <[e-mail]>; Richard Denzler <[e-mail]>
Cc: Homer, Seren M <[e-mail]>; Chandler, Rebecca D <[e-mail]>
2

Subject: \[EXTERNAL\] Request for Additional Information: SAW-2022-00168 (Nelsons Creek / Country Lane / Mocksville
NC / Davie County)

All,

Thank you for your PCN, dated 1/20/2023, for the above referenced project. I have reviewed the information and need
clarification before proceeding with verifying the use of Nationwide Permit (NWP) 29 (https://saw-
reg.usace.army.mil/NWP2021/NWP29.pdf). Please submit the requested information below (via e
days of receipt of this Notification, otherwise we may deny verification of the use of the Nationwide Permit or consider
your application withdrawn and close the file:

1) Stream Crossing 3A includes a vertical drop of approximately 5 feet within the culvert structure. This design does
not appear to comply with NWP 29 General Condition 2 or Regional Condition B.9.c. Please re-design this
crossing to fit the NWP terms and conditions, or fully detail how such a design complies with these terms and
conditions.
Note also that such a design, even if justified, would effectively isolate the stream reach above the culvert
structure, estimated at approximately 60 linear feet (0.003 acre), reducing the aquatic function of this
length/amount of channel; such reasonably foreseeable indirect impacts are taken into account when
determining compensatory mitigation requirements per the NWP General Conditions “District Engineers
Decision.”
2) Proposed permanent loss stream impacts rely on rounding to the ten-thousandth place to reach figures
ostensibly below the compensatory mitigation threshold. However, stream length impacts taken to the sub-foot
as are shown on the plans, and then translated to acreage estimates as shown, are too precise to be relied on in
the field during construction based on the Corps experience. As such, and based on additional indirect losses of
stream function as described in item 1 above, the Corps would require compensatory mitigation for permanent
loss stream impacts as currently proposed, per NWP 29 Regional Condition B.7 and the NWP General Conditions
“District Engineers Decision.” If additional plan revisions are not practicable to further reduce permanent loss
stream impacts, please submit a compensatory mitigation plan. The mitigation rule generally prescribes
purchasing stream credits first through a mitigation bank with stream credits available in this 8-digit HUC
(03040101), or second through the NC Division of Mitigation Services. Please provide a mitigation acceptance
letter from your proposed compensatory mitigation provider. Typically, compensatory mitigation is required at a
2:1 credit to impact ratio unless otherwise justified based on evaluation of aquatic function (i.e. NCSAM).
3) Based on Plan Sheet 1, Stream T1 would flow directly next to/between a proposed fill slopes for Lot 232 and a
retaining wall for Lots 383-385. How will these fills/structures be constructed while avoiding direct and indirect
impacts to Stream T1. Further, how will future secondary impacts be avoided, anticipating that Stream T1 could
predictably migrate into these fill/structures?
4) Per NWP 29 Regional Conditions B.11, please provide a restoration plan that thoroughly describes how all
temporary wetland and stream impacts will be removed, how pre-project conditions will be restored (should
involve use of biodegradable matting and seeding with regionally appropriate native wetland and riparian seed
mix), and include a timetable for all restoration activities.

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Sincerely,

Dave Bailey

---
David E. Bailey, PWS
Regulatory Project Manager
US Army Corps of Engineers
CE-SAW-RG-R
3

3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
Mobile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]

We would appreciate your feedback on how we are performing our duties. Our automated Customer Service Survey is
located at: https://regulatory.ops.usace.army.mil/customer-service-survey/
Thank you for taking the time to visit this site and complete the survey.

From: RaleighNCREG <[e-mail]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 12:25 PM
To: Michelle Savage-Measday, PWS <[e-mail]>
Cc: Bailey, David E CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <[e-mail]>
Subject: SAW-2022-00168 (Nelsons Creek / Country Lane / Mocksville NC / Davie County)

Good afternoon,

We have received your Pre-Construction Notification (PCN) NWP request for the above project and forwarded it to Dave
Bailey for further processing.

Thank you,
Josephine Schaffer

From: Wallace, Nancy L CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <[e-mail]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 3:21 PM
To: Schaffer, Josephine L CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <[e-mail]>
Subject: FW: PCN - Davie - Non-DOT

Hey, Josephine. This project was too large to send to the RaleighNCREG mailbox (106 MB) so I saved it on
the y: drive for you to pick up. The location is:

Y:\\Common\\RG\\CESAW-RG-R\\E-PCNs From Charlotte\\Davie - Nelson's Creek at Mocksville - 1_20_2023
5_40 PM

Nancy Wallace
828-271-7980 Ext 4221
Office Schedule: Mon-Tues 0730-1530
Telework Schedule: Weds 0700-1500
[e-mail]
USACE Wilmington District
Asheville Regulatory Field Office
151 Patton Avenue RM 208
Asheville, NC 28801

From: [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
Sent: Friday, January 20, 2023 5:45 PM
To: CharlotteNCREG <[e-mail]>
Cc: SAW-PCN-RG <[e-mail]>
Subject: \[Non-DoD Source\] PCN - Davie - Non-DOT

A new project has been received on 1/20/2023 5:40 PM for Nelson's Creek at Mocksville. The link below will take you to
the project folder.
4

https://edocs.deq.nc.gov/Laserfiche/index.aspx?db=WaterResources#id=2650701;view=browse

This email was automatically generated by Laserfiche workflow. Please do not respond to this email address, as
responses aren’t monitored.
5