_External_ Re_ PCN Withdrawal_ Waterworks _ Moore County_ SAW-2017-01930

Baker, Caroline D
From:Adam Carter <[e-mail]>
Sent:Friday, May 12, 2023 11:37 AM
To:Martin, Matthew K CIV CESAW
Cc:Andy Bleggi; Turlington, Chad
Subject:\[External\] Re: PCN Withdrawal: Waterworks / Moore County; SAW-2017-01930
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.

Turlington, Elks
Please accept our request for the withdrawal of the Nationwide Permit for Waterworks SAW-2017 -01930 We will be submitting under the
request of the IP within the next 45 to 60 days. Impacts request exceed NW permit request. IP is necessary. Thank you for your assistance
in this matter.

b

On Mon, May 8, 2023, 3:38 PM Martin, Matthew K CIV CESAW <[e-mail]> wrote:
Dear Mr. Bleggi,

th
Please reference your Pre‐Construction Notification (PCN) Form and attachments, dated March 8, 2023, for
Department of Army (DA) authorization to expand commercial property and infrastructure. The proposed project is
located in Southern Pines, Moore County, North Carolina.

th
Please also reference our notice (see below) sent to you via e‐mail, on April 5, 2023, that your application was
incomplete. This notice listed several requirements to be submitted within 30 days of the date of the request. To date
we have not received the additional information necessary to proceed with your request; therefore, we now consider
your application withdrawn.

In order to allow us to process a DA authorization request, please resubmit the PCN and relevant attachments, using
th
guidance provided in our e‐mail dated April 5, 2023.

Please note that DA authorization must precede any discharge of dredged or fill material in waters of the US. Please let
me know If you have any questions.

Sincerely,
1

Matthew K. Martin, PWS
Regulatory Specialist
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
CE-SAW-RG-R
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, NC 27587
Mobile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]

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://regulatory.ops.usace.army.mil/customer-service-survey/. Thank you for taking the time to visit this site and
complete the survey.

From: Martin, Matthew K CIV CESAW
Sent: Wednesday, April 5, 2023 5:00 PM
To: [e-mail]; Adam Carter <[e-mail]>
Cc: 'Turlington, Chad' <[e-mail]>
Subject: Request for Additional Information: Waterworks / Moore County; SAW-2017-01930

All,

Good afternoon, my name is Matt Martin and I have been assigned as the project manager for your project. Thank you
th
for your PCN, dated March 8, 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‐mail is fine) within 30
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:
2

1. The applicant stated purpose and need for the proposed project is “to expand commercial property and
infrastructure for inter connectivity to community.” This stated purpose does not align with the identified uses
for the NWP requested by the applicant. The projects stated purpose would better fit NWP 39. Commercial and
Institutional Developments https://saw-reg.usace.army.mil/NWP2021/NWP39.pdf
2. In order to consider your proposal single and complete for the purposes of permitting, the project plans must
show all current phases, future phases, infrastructure required to facilitate construction and operation of the
proposed project purpose. The submitted application appears to only detail phase 1 of the project. A publicly
th
available Town of Southern Pines Planning Board document dated January 20, 2022, identifies a total of four
anticipated phases of the project.
https://www.southernpines.net/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Agenda/_01202022-689
a. Phase 1 (Watershed 1). Construction of new corporate headquarters and new fitness facility. A dry pond
shall be constructed in phase 1 shall be constructed to reduce the 1-year and 10year storm peaks to
preconstruction rates. This SCM shall be sized for the additional impervious areas planned for Phase 2.
b. Phase 2. (Watershed 1) Mixed Use Commercial & Residential Buildings and expansion of Vehicle Use
Areas. As previously stated the phase 1 SCM shall be sized to handle the planned Phase 2 impervious
areas to keep the 1-year and 10-year storm peaks to preconstruction rates.
c. Phase 3. Commercial/Mixed Use/Single Family Housing. Additional SCMs shall be constructed in Phase 3
to keep the 1-year and 10-year storm peaks to preconstruction rates.
d. Phase 4. 3 Single Family Homes. Each home site shall have a small peak reduction basin to keep post
development runoff for the 1 and 10 years storms to predevelopment rates.
The Corps will consider all proposed/foreseeable impacts for this development as cumulative when considering NWP
thresholds. Based on your proposed impacts as well as the conceptual plans for apparent future phases, the cumulative
project is unlikely to fit within acreage thresholds for any NWP. You may apply for the entirety of this cumulative
development via the Individual Permit process. Or, as an alternative, you may further avoid or minimize impacts proposed
and/or amend the conceptual design to show that full build out of this development would fit within the NWP impact
thresholds.
3. The purpose of fill immediately east of proposed building is not clear, and it appears that this fill slope could be
pulled back to minimize wetland impacts. Are additional avoidance and minimization efforts practicable in this
area (i.e., retaining wall)? Note that NWP General Conditions 23(a) and (b) require that the project be designed
and constructed to avoid and minimize adverse effects, both temporary and permanent, to waters of the United
States to the maximum extent practicable (i.e. available and capable of being done after taking into consideration
cost, existing technology, and logistics in light of overall project purposes);
4. Please provide justification for the size of the parking lot (i.e. number of spaces) in relation to facilities it services.
5. The southeastern portion of the site appears to include a stub out road directed at adjacent wetlands. Please
modify plans to show that secondary impacts are not likely to result as part of this project.
6. Indirect impacts
a. In the southeastern portion of the site, it appears that the top of a wetland area will be hydrologically
disconnected from downstream wetlands and only a remanent wetland will remain. Given the small size
of the upper extent of the wetland that would remain, the Corps would consider this wetland portion as
an indirect impact. Please modify project plans to avoid this indirect impact, or justify that such
minimization is not practicable and update the PCN, plans, and compensatory mitigation proposal
accordingly;
7. Please provide detail on how hydrology will be maintained to the portion of the wetland area immediately
downslope of the proposed wetland fill. Unless otherwise justified per the above, the Corps would consider the
remainder of the wetland drainage downslope of the toe of fill as a reasonably foreseeable indirect impact (see
NWP General Conditions “District Engineers Decision”) resulting from a loss of hydrology. Compensatory
3

mitigation is typically required for both direct impacts and indirect impacts resulting in a loss of hydrology and
therefore aquatic function; compensatory mitigation is typically required at a 2:1 ratio, depending largely on
resource quality i.e. NCWAM).Please ensure Section E-4h of the PCN specifies the compensatory mitigation ratio
for the proposed impacts. Further, note that the wetlands proposed for impact appear to classify as Headwater
Forest wetlands per the North Carolina Wetland Assessment Method (NCWAM), which would correspond to
riparian non-riverine (rather than non-riparian) wetlands as the appropriate wetland mitigation credit type.
Please provide an updated availability letter from your proposed compensatory mitigation provider.
8. The Figures 2b-2f provided with the PCN do not appear to be referenced in the document and the purpose of
those figures in unclear. Please provide context to adequately describe and integrate those figures into the
PCN/application.
9. Please note that for any increases in project scope per item 2) above, our scope for compliance with Section 7 of
the Endangered Species Act would likely increase as well. As such, please ensure that documentation is included
(RCW SLOPES Manual Appendix B) to enable the Corps to ensure compliance with NWP General Condition 18
upon any changes in project plans.
https://saw-reg.usace.army.mil/ESA/RCW_SLOPES_20220302.pdf
Note that the Corps cannot verify the use of a NWP until Section 7 consultation is complete
10. The following article in The Pilot states that the existing plant was built in 1925:
https://www.thepilot.com/news/conceptual-plan-for-waterworks-project-clears-first-hurdle/article_d0ea5f8a-
2e47-11e8-962c-f3b4ff1e1ae8.html. As the building is greater than 50 years old, it is therefore eligible for
listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Please provide coordination for the State Historic
Preservation Office (SHPO) to assist in evaluation of effects under Section 106. Note that the Corps cannot
verify the use of a NWP until consultation pertaining to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act is
complete.
11. It appears that an Individual 401 Water Quality Certification (WQC) is required from the North Carolina Division
of Water Resources (NCDWR) for this project. Per the 2020 CWA Section 401 Rule, the PCN must contain the 9
elements listed in Section 121.5(b) of the Rule. According to the 9/16/2022, Programmatic Agreement (PA)
between the USACE, Wilmington District, and the NCDWR, the Reasonable Period of Time (RPOT) for NCDWR to
act on a Section 401 certification request is 120 days after receipt of a certification request containing the 9
required elements. However, it appears that items 2 and 3 of the 9 elements are not met; as such, NCDWR’s
RPOT has not started yet. Please note that the Corps cannot verify the use of any NWP without a valid 401 WQC.
12. Please note that responses to the questions above may prompt additional information requests to allow full
evaluation of the proposed project.

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Sincerely,
Matt

Matthew K. Martin, PWS
Regulatory Specialist
4

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
CE-SAW-RG-R
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, NC 27587
Mobile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]

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://regulatory.ops.usace.army.mil/customer-service-survey/. Thank you for taking the time to visit this site and
complete the survey.

5