HomeMy WebLinkAbout20140338 Ver 1_USACE Correspondence_20150716
15 July, 2015
Regulatory Division
Re: NCIRT Review and USACE Approval of the Maney Farm Draft Mitigation Plan; SAW-2014-
01825; DMS Project #96314
Mr. Tim Baumgartner
North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1652
Dear Mr. Baumgartner:
The purpose of this letter is to provide the North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
(NCDMS) with all comments generated by the North Carolina Interagency Review Team (NCIRT)
during the 30-day comment period for the Maney Farm Draft Mitigation Plan, which closed on 3 June,
2015. These comments are attached for your review.
Based on our review of these comments, we have determined that no major concerns have been
identified with the Draft Mitigation Plan, which is considered approved with this correspondence.
However, several minor issues were identified, as described in the attached comment memo, which must
be addressed in the Final Mitigation Plan.
The Final Mitigation Plan is to be submitted with the Preconstruction Notification (PCN)
application for Nationwide permit approval of the project along with a copy of this letter. Issues
identified above must be addressed in the Final Mitigation Plan. All changes made to the Final
Mitigation Plan should be summarized in an errata sheet included at the beginning of the document. If it
is determined that the project does not require a Department of the Army permit, you must still provide a
copy of the Final Mitigation Plan, along with a copy of this letter, to the appropriate USACE field office
at least 30 days in advance of beginning construction of the project. Please note that this approval does
not preclude the inclusion of permit conditions in the permit authorization for the project, particularly if
issues mentioned above are not satisfactorily addressed. Additionally, this letter provides initial approval
for the Mitigation Plan, but this does not guarantee that the project will generate the requested amount of
mitigation credit. As you are aware, unforeseen issues may arise during construction or monitoring of
the project that may require maintenance or reconstruction that may lead to reduced credit.
REPLY TO
ATTENTION OF:
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
69 DARLINGTON AVENUE
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28403-1343
Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter, and if you have questions regarding this
letter, the mitigation plan review process, or the requirements of the Mitigation Rule, please call me at
919-846-2564.
Sincerely,
Andrea Hughes
Special Projects Manager
Enclosures
Electronic Copies Furnished:
NCIRT Distribution List
Jeff Schaffer, NCDMS
HUGHES.ANDREA.
WADE.1258339165
Digitally signed by HUGHES.ANDREA.WADE.1258339165
DN: c=US, o=U.S. Government, ou=DoD, ou=PKI, ou=USA,
cn=HUGHES.ANDREA.WADE.1258339165
Date: 2015.07.16 09:26:09 -04'00'
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
69 DARLINGTON AVENUE
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28403-1343
REPLY TO
ATTENTION OF:
CESAW-RG/Hughes June 26, 2015
MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD
SUBJECT: Maney Farm Mitigation Project - NCIRT Comments During 30-day Mitigation Plan
Review
PURPOSE: The comments listed below were posted to the NCDMS Mitigation Plan Review
Portal during the 30-day comment period in accordance with Section 332.8(g) of the 2008
Mitigation Rule.
NCDMS Project Name: Maney Farm Mitigation Project, Chatham County, NC
USACE AID#: SAW-2014-01825
NCDMS #: 96314
30-Day Comment Deadline: 3 June 2015
Ginny Baker, DWR, 1 June 2015:
1.The Division of Water Resources found the Maney Farm Mitigation Project to be
comprehensive and thorough in the design approach. Capturing these headwater
tributaries through restoration and enhancement areas that will remove cattle, stabilize
the stream, vegetate portions of the buffer will be highly beneficial for the watershed.
DWR had a few minor concerns and recommendations.
2.In Section 4.8 the restoration reaches along UT to South Fork Cane Creek (UTSF) are
described as having more lateral damage from cattle trampling as opposed to vertical
incision although page 33, Section 9.6.1, paragraph 1 did say the stream beds would be
raised through Priority 1 restoration to reconnect the stream with the floodplain. The
upper section of UTSF is rated as intermittent and has the potential to lose existing
baseflow if the stream bed is raised too much. One monitoring well should be installed
at the upper end of the thalweg of Reach 1 UTSF if the streambed is raised during
stream construction. Baseflow should be recorded for a minimum of 30 days during a
normal precipitation year.
3.Overall DWR found the planting plan to be appropriate for this site. DWR recommends
removing red maple (Acer rubrum) from the planting plan as this species will recolonize
easily on its own. DWR also recommends diversifying the one mid-story species
proposed for the supplemental understory planting plan as American hornbeam
(Carpinus caroliniana) is currently proposed at 50%. Perhaps this could be reduced by
10% and another mid-story species such as American holly (Ilex opaca), Dogwood
(Cornus florida), hop hornbeam (Ostrya virginia), or red cedar (Juniperus virginia) which
already occurs on the site, could be added.
4.During the April 11, 2014 field meeting there was discussion about planting understory
species in the areas under mature canopy that had been damaged by cattle however
there was understandable concern about survival rates. The proposal calls for planting
understory species at a lower rate; 300 stems/acre which is logical. It would be helpful
to mention in the mitigation plan and future monitoring reports that the planted
understory species are not expected to have the same success rate of 320 stems/acre at
year three and 260 stems/acre at year 7 (or average height of 10 feet) as was discussed
at the field meeting. It would also be helpful to indicate which vegetation plots on
Figure 11 will occur in the shrub/mid-story planting zone area.
Andrea Hughes, USACE, 26 June 2015:
1.Page 2, Section 2: Please provide latitude/longitude (decimal degrees) with the site
location.
2.Page 18, Section 5.2: The reserve credit percentage stated in this section (15%) is not
consistent with Table 12.
3.Page 20, Section 6.2: The second paragraph states that reference site UT to Cane Creek
is classified as a Rosgen E4 stream type. This is not consistent with the information
provided in Table 10.
4.Page 26, Section 9.2: According to the Technical Document dated October 30, 2013,
and field notes from the April 11, 2014 site visit, Reaches UT 1, UT2, UT3, and UT4 were
determined to be stable and proposed for enhancement (E2) at a ratio of 2:5 to 1. The
draft mitigation plan indicates that a total of 633 linear feet of these tributaries will be
changed to E1 at a ratio of 1:5 to 1 in order to “stabilize these reaches and connect
them to UTSF”. E1 ratios should not be applied to stable reaches for activities associated
with the restoration of UTSF.
5.Page 35, Section 9.6.2: Please note that typically we do not recommend inclusion of Red
Maple in planting plans as this species may currently be present onsite. At this time we
are not asking that the species be removed from the planting plan, however please be
aware that adaptive management may be required if Red Maple is determined to be a
dominant species at any time during the monitoring period.
6.Page 36, Section 11.0: The mitigation plan states: “If all performance criteria have been
successfully met and two bankfull events have occurred during separate years,
Wildlands may propose to terminate stream and/or vegetation monitoring.” This
statement must be amended to indicate that this may only be proposed after Year 5
monitoring.
7.Page 37, Section 11.1.6: The plan states that areas within the riparian zone which
currently support mature overstory will be enhanced through a supplemental planting
of shade tolerant shrub species spaced at an initial density of 300 plants per acre.
Please provide a vegetation performance standard for these areas.
8.Page 40, Section 12.1.6: The plan indicates that 14 monitoring plots will be installed
within the restoration and enhancement areas to monitor the survival of the planted
trees. In the areas that will be enhanced through supplemental planting of shrub
species, we recommend monitoring of the existing tree species as well as planted shrub
species.
9.Page 40, Section 13.0: This section should include a list of long-term management
activities required for site sustainability, annual cost for each activity, the party
responsible for conducting these activities, and details regarding the funding of these
activities. If no long-term management activities are anticipated for this site, please
include a statement to this effect in the mitigation plan along with an explanation.
10.Page 41, Section 14.0: In the event that a component of the mitigation site fails to
achieve performance standards, DMS should notify the Corps and work with the Corps
and the IRT to develop contingency plans and remedial actions. Nationwide 27 permit
general conditions do not specify USACE notification for corrective actions. Please
remove this statement from Section 14.0.
11.Appendix 2: Please provide a copy of the site protection instrument with the final
mitigation plan.
12.Appendix 7, Jurisdictional Determination: Please provide a map depicting all wetlands
located within the boundaries of the mitigation site.
13.Other: A surface water gauge should be installed on all intermittent reaches to
document at least 30 days of continuous flow.
14.Other: Temporary and permanent impacts to existing wetlands and streams must be
accounted for in the PCN and the loss or conversion of those waters must be replaced
on-site. Please include a map depicting the location of all impacts with the PCN.
15.Other: Please submit a map depicting the approximate locations of monitoring stations
with the final mitigation plan.
Andrea Hughes
Special Projects Manager
Regulatory Division
HUGHES.ANDREA.W
ADE.1258339165
Digitally signed by
HUGHES.ANDREA.WADE.1258339165
DN: c=US, o=U.S. Government, ou=DoD, ou=PKI,
ou=USA, cn=HUGHES.ANDREA.WADE.1258339165
Date: 2015.06.26 18:50:34 -04'00'