20231365 Ver 2_More Info Received_20240216 (3)

Baker, Caroline D
From: Scott Davis <[e-mail]>
Sent: Friday, February 16, 2024 2:54 PM
To: Thomas, Zachary T; Martin, Matthew K CIV (USA)
Cc: Allison Keith; Baker, Luke
Subject: RE: [External] RE: Notification of Consultation: SAW-2023-01202 (Beaverdam Creek
Rehabilitation / Princeton NC / Johnston County)
Attachments: Figure 2 - Beaverdam Creek Rehab - Impacts - v3.pdf
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.
Good afternoon Zach and Matt,
Please find attached a figure depicting the proposed locations of the cofferdams for the Princeton Beaverdam
Creek Rehabilitation Project.
Zach, to your questions, the cofferdams are situated to dewater one section at a time and remove daily rather than
attempt to perform all excavation at once. The Town would like to perform the work as soon as possible. There is
not a written contingency for a heavy rainfall, but since they are intended to be completed one at a time, won't be
left unsupervised. If you have recommendations, we will be happy to incorporate what we can.
Thanks to both of you for being willing to extend our timeframe to accommodate the time it takes us to get through
all the procedures. We will certainly get you the results of mussel surveys as soon as possible.
Thanks again and I hope you have a nice weekend,
Scott
Scott Davis
Senior Scientist/Project Manager
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
919-696-3045
From: Thomas, Zachary T <[e-mail]>
Sent: Friday, February 16, 2024 10:29 AM
To: Scott Davis <[e-mail]>; Martin, Matthew K CIV (USA) <Matthew.K.Marti [e-mail]>
Cc: Allison Keith <[e-mail]>; Baker, Luke <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [External] RE: Notification of Consultation: SAW-2023-01202 (Beaverdam Creek Rehabilitation / Princeton
NC / Johnston County)
You don't often get email from [e-mail]. Learn why this is important
Hi Scott,
Thank you for your responses to my 2/13/24 RFAI.
For Items 1 & 2: DWR will certainly allow for an extension for your responses. Please ensure that you copy me on the
response to the USACE by 4/14/24.

For Item 3: Thanks for clarifying this. I was mainly curious if you all were planning on dewatering in sections (X LF) at a
time or the large reach all at once with coffer dams set up throughout, if you have an anticipated timeline, and if you all
had a plan for if a heavy rain event occurred while the set up was in place.
For Item 4b: Thanks for the additional information on these plans. DWR is agreeable to the secured placement of the
removed logs/woody debris inside of Zone 2 as long as they are spaced out sufficiently so that the vegetation
surrounding the logs or diffuse flow is not compromised.
I will keep this application on hold until we receive the response for items 1 & 2.
If you have any questions, please let me know.
Thank you,
Zach Thomas
Environmental Program Consultant, Division of Water Resources
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
Office: [phone]
[e-mail]
Raleigh Regional Office
1628 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1628
Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law
and may be disclosed to third parties.
From: Scott Davis <sdavis@axiomenvironmental.o
Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2024 12:32 PM
To: Thomas, Zachary T <[e-mail]>; Martin, Matthew K CIV (USA)
<[e-mail]>
Cc: Allison Keith <[e-mail]>; Baker, Luke <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [External] RE: Notification of Consultation: SAW-2023-01202 (Beaverdam Creek Rehabilitation / Princeton
NC / Johnston County)
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.
Hi Zach,
Thank you for your comments. We have replies to them below.
1 and 2. We will ensure that you receive all correspondence from us and received from the USFWS regarding the
mussels and will provide you with the cofferdam locations. We should be able to provide you with the cofferdam
locations this week; however, since this project is beingfunded by the Town of Princeton, this will require approval
by the Town Board, which will not meet until the first of March. In order to get the change order approved, a
mussel specialist engaged, the site surveyed, and a report generated, we would appreciate a 60-day extension to
provide this information if possible.

3. Dewatering has been included in the project plans specifically to avoid any water quality violations from
sedimentation. Sheet C5.0 of the project plans with the designation "Division 2" depict the typical dewatering and
pump -around setups. Notes have been included to ensure that actions do not cause downstream issues and I have
pasted the text below. Are there any other considerations that you believe necessary, such as starting at the
downstream set of cofferdams and moving upstream?
4a. There have been no changes to the plans since receipt of the buffer authorization or additional impacts to the buffer
area. No fill, clearing, or construction of access roads will occur for the areas slated for hand -removal of accumulated
vegetative debris.
4b. I'm afraid that I'm not completely clear on the specific locations that you're mentioning. In the sediment removal
area, the sediment laydown areas are temporary and intended to allow the excavated sediment to dry prior to removal
and transport to a landfill facility. A small portion of one (of two) laydown area extends slightly into Zone 2. This was
quantified and approved as Site 10. Below the excavation area where vegetative debris will be removed by hand and is
identified as being secured in place outside the 100-year floodplain and at least 30 feet from the stream channel to be
completely out of Zone 1. We're not familiar with any part of the riparian buffer rules that regulate placement of woody
debris within the buffer and have been advised as such on other projects. All debris has been sited outside of Zone 1 in
any case to avoid vegetation suppression and outside of the 100-year floodplain to avoid impeding flood flows. These
specifications are included on Sheets 3.0 and 4.0 of the plan set with the designation "Division 1." Please let us know if
we have missed something here- we're happy to discuss it.
Thanks,
Scott
Temporary Pump Around Sequence
1. SETUP PUMP WITH SUCTION AND DISCHARGE HOSE.
2. INSTALL UP -STREAM SANDBAG DAM.
3. INSTALL DOWN -STREAM SANDBAG DAM.
4. THE PUMP MUST RUN CONTINUOUSLY WHILE WORKING IN THE STREAM.
5. STREAMBANKS MUST BE STABILIZED AT THE END OF EACH DAY.
Notes
1. SANDBAG DIKES SHALL BE SITUATED AT THE UPSTREAM AND DOWNSTREAM ENDS OF THE WORKAREA, AND STREAM FLOW
SHALL BE PUMPED AROUND THE WORKAREA. THE PUMP SHOULD DISCHARGE ONTO A STABLE VELOCITY DISSIPATER
CONSTRUCTED OF RIPRAP OR SANDBAGS.
2. WATER FROM THE WORKAREA SHALL BE PUMPED TO A SEDIMENT FILTERING MEASURE SUCH AS A SEDIMENT BAG OR OTHER
APPROVED DEVICE. THE MEASURE SHALL BE LOCATED SUCH THAT THE WATER DRAINS BACK INTO THE CHANNEL BELOW THE
DOWNSTREAM SANDBAG DIKE WITHOUT CAUSING FURTHER EROSION BETWEEN THE SEDIMENT FILTER BAG AND THE
STREAMBANK.
Sediment Filter Bag General Notes
3. CONTRACTOR SHALL EXERCISE CAUTION NOT TO BURST OR DAMAGE THE SEDIMENT FILTER BAG WHEN PUMPING.
4. THE LENGTH AND WIDTH OF THE TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BAG SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING MAY VARY PER VENDOR
SPECIFICATIONS. THE MINIMUM "FOOTPRINT" OF THE BAG SHALL BE 10x15 FEET.
5. SEDIMENT FILTER BAGS SHALL BE EQUIPPED WITH A SEWN -IN SLEEVE OF SUFFICIENT SIZE TO ACCEPT A MINIMUM 4 INCH
DIAMETER PUMP DISCHARGE HOSE. THE DISCHARGE HOSE SHOULD BE EXTENDED INTO THIS SLEEVE A MINIMUM OF 6
INCHES AND BE TIGHTLY SECURED WITH A HOSE CLAMP OR OTHER SUITABLE MEANS TO PREVENT LEAKAGE. HOSE
CONNECTION THROUGH A SLIT IN THE BAG WILL NOT BE ACCEPTABLE.
6. THE PUMP DISCHARGE HOSE CONNECTION SLEEVE SHALL BE SECURELY TIED OFF DURING DISPOSAL OF THE SEDIMENT
FILTER BAG IN ORDER TO PREVENT LEAKAGE OF COLLECTED SEDIMENTS.
7. SEDIMENT FILTER BAG SHALL BE MAINTAINED AND REPLACED WHEN ONE HALF FULL OF SEDIMENT OR IN ACCORDANCE WITH
THE MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS.
Scott Davis
Senior Scientist/Project Manager

Axiom Environmental, Inc.
919-696-3045
From: Thomas, Zachary T <[e-mail]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2024 12:40 PM
To: Scott Davis<[e-mail]>; Martin, Matthew K CIV (USA) <[e-mail]>
Cc: Allison Keith<[e-mail]>; Baker, Luke <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [External] RE: Notification of Consultation: SAW-2023-01202 (Beaverdam Creek Rehabilitation / Princeton
NC / Johnston County)
Hello,
I have reviewed the 401 application for the Princeton Streamflow Rehabilitation Project (DWR#20231365 V2) and
additional information is required to complete my review. Please respond to the items below within 30 days. This
application will be considered "on hold" until DWR receives a complete response to the items below:
1. DWR concurs with the USACE concerns regarding potential impacts to aquatic species. Please ensure that DWR
is copied on your response once the mussel and other surveys have been completed.
2. DWR also requires an updated impact map and description of the locations for each coffer dam.
3. The dewatering areas appear to be outside of the Neuse Riparian Buffer, but are there additional details on the
dewatering aspects? The dewatering method will need to ensure that a water quality standard violation does
not occur.
4. It appears that a buffer authorization was issued under 20231365 V1. Please confirm that there been no
changes or additional impacts to the buffer area that require a change to the previously issued buffer
authorization.
Bank stabilization is an allowable with authorization activity. If impacts are occurring outside of the
previously permitted areas, then these will need to be quantified and approved under a new
authorization.
b. The plan appears to show removed debris and vegetation being placed and secured inside of the 50 foot
riparian buffer area. It appears that this was not included in the V1 application. Please ensure that all
removed debris is placed outside of the 50 foot riparian buffer areas.
If you have any questions, please let me know.
Thank you,
Zach Thomas
Environmental Program Consultant, Division of Water Resources
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
Office: [phone]
[e-mail]
Raleigh Regional Office
1628 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1628
Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law
and may be disclosed to third parties.

From: Scott Davis <sdavis(@axiomenvironmental.o
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2024 4:08 PM
To: Martin, Matthew K CIV (USA) <[e-mail]>
Cc: Thomas, Zachary T <[e-mail]>; Allison Keith <[e-mail]>; Baker, Luke
<[e-mail]>
Subject: [External] RE: Notification of Consultation: SAW-2023-01202 (Beaverdam Creek Rehabilitation / Princeton NC /
Johnston County)
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.
Hi Matt,
We anticipate being able to provide you with mapping identifying the locations of the cofferdams later this week.
We would very much like to get you the requested information as soon as possible. However, since this project is
being funded by the Town of Princeton, this will require approval by the Town Board, which will not meet until the
first of March. In order to get the change order approved, a mussel specialist engaged, the site surveyed, and a
report generated, we would appreciate a 60-day extension.
Thanks for your help and consideration,
Scott
Scott Davis
Senior Scientist/Project Manager
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
919-696-3045
From: Martin, Matthew K CIV (USA) <[e-mail]>
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2024 9:05 AM
To: Scott Davis <[e-mail]>
Cc: Thomas, Zachary T <[e-mail]>; Allison Keith <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Notification of Consultation: SAW-2023-01202 (Beaverdam Creek Rehabilitation / Princeton NC / Johnston
County)
Scott,
On January 315Y the Corps provided comments from the consultation with the USFWS. In order to satisfy the following
conditions Please submit either a redesigned project that properly alleviates the USFWS concerns or provide the
requested surveys within 15 days of receipt of this Notification or we may consider your application withdrawn and
close the file. Please email([e-mail]) me if you have any questions/concerns or would like to
set up at time to discuss.
1. Per General Condition 18(a), no activity is authorized under any NWP which is likely to directly or
indirectly jeopardize the continued existence of a threatened or endangered species or a species
proposed for such designation, as identified under the Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA), or which
will directly or indirectly destroy or adversely modify designated critical habitat or critical habitat
proposed for such designation. The Corps has initiated informal consultation with The US Fish and
Wildlife Service and will not be able to render a decision until ESA Section 7 consultation is complete.
2. Per General Condition 18(c), if the non -Federal applicant has not heard back from the Corps within 45
days, the applicant must still wait for notification from the Corps.

General Condition 32(b)(2). Please provide a map identifying where each discharge is. In your PCN you
did not identify where the 5 coffer dams are and chose to supply only a typical of a coffer dam at one
of the locations.
Thank you,
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: matthew.k.martin(@usace.armv.mil
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://re_ uq latory.ops.usace.army.mil/customer-service-surveyl. Thank you for taking the time to visit this site and
complete the survey.
From: Scott Davis <sdavis@axiomenvironmental.o
Sent: Tuesday, February 6, 2024 8:42 AM
To: Martin, Matthew K CIV (USA) <[e-mail]>
Cc: Thomas, Zachary T <[e-mail]>; Allison Keith <[e-mail]>
Subject: [Non-DoD Source] RE: Notification of Consultation: SAW-2023-01202 (Beaverdam Creek Rehabilitation /
Princeton NC / Johnston County)
Hi Matt,
Thanks for clarifying.
We'll advise the Town of your requirements.
Regarding the cofferdam locations, there have been no specific locations designated for these except for the
upstream and downstream limits of the work. The placement of each is intended to be flexible by design and
accommodate the amount of work that can be done each day. Would you be open to discussing this
possibility? We'll discuss it with the engineer in the meantime.
Thanks,
Scott
Scott Davis
Senior Scientist/Project Manager
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
919-696-3045
From: Martin, Matthew K CIV (USA) <[e-mail]>
Sent: Monday, February 5, 2024 10:53 AM
To: Scott Davis<sdavis(@axiomenvironmental.oria>
Cc: Thomas, Zachary T <[e-mail]>; Allison Keith <[e-mail]

Subject: RE: Notification of Consultation: SAW-2023-01202 (Beaverdam Creek Rehabilitation / Princeton NC/Johnston
County)
Hi Scott,
In your PCN you identified habitat in Beaverdam creek, see below. In this case Section 7 is the Corps responsibility, see
General Condition 18(c). Based on the information the Corps has been provided we believe that suitable habitat may be
present.
5j. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated
Critical Habitat? r
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) wobsita and NC Natural Heritage
(NCNHP) website. Project reports for both are attached. The proposed project area contains low -quality habitat
for federally protected aquatic species and is anticipated to improve habitat quality. A review by the USFWS
Raleigh field office has been requested but a response has not been received.
Attach consultation documentation.
For the question of where is a survey required: For Section 7, if the qualified biologist determines that one ormore
reaches are suitable habitat then we need surveys 100 meters above and 400 meters below each of the 5 coffer dam
segments (that contain suitable habitat), the 100 meter should being above the highest point and the 400 meters
begin below the most downstream point.
In your PCN you did not identify where the 5 coffer dams are and chose to supply only a typical of a coffer dam at one of
the locations. The Corps will need to know the location of each discharge, please see General Condition 32(b)(2). Please
provide a map identifying where each discharge is.
Please follow these steps to move continue Section 7 consultation:
• Since there appears to be suitable habitat present for Atlantic pigtoe, it will require that the
applicant utilize a qualified (permitted) biologist to walk the length of the project and 100 m
upstream and 400 meters downstream to determine areas of suitable habitat.
If the qualified (permitted) biologist determines that one or more reaches are suitable habitat for
Atlantic pigtoe, then surveys would be recommended, particularly in reaches where instream work is
proposed and downstream of those areas (because of the potential for sedimentation). A qualified,
permitted biologist would be able to find any mussels that may be present, provide a professional
opinion on the habitat quality, sediment quality, and water quality, providing a better justification
for a determination.
Please let me know if you have any questions,
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://re_ uq latory.ops.usace.army.mil/customer-service-surveyl. Thank you for taking the time to visit this site and
complete the survey.
From: Scott Davis <[e-mail]>
Sent: Thursday, February 1, 2024 11:28 AM
To: Martin, Matthew K CIV (USA) <[e-mail]>
Cc: Thomas, Zachary T <[e-mail]>; Allison Keith <[e-mail]>
Subject: [Non-DoD Source] RE: Notification of Consultation: SAW-2023-01202 (Beaverdam Creek Rehabilitation /
Princeton NC / Johnston County)
Hi Matt,
Thanks for this. We have a few questions.
The Town of Princeton has also received this message and has asked for guidance. It has been our opinion that suitable
habitat does not exist- the amount of accumulated sediment from upstream and adjacent eroding banks has resulted in
exceptionally poor habitat at best and has most likely smothered all mussels that may have inhabited this reach of
stream. The downstream presence of beaver dams also reduces flow and oxygenation as well as blocking fish passage
and potential glochidia introduction. I've attached a figure and photographs of the stream below and a habitat
description. We observed no mussel shells during our field investigations though we're not certified for mussel surveys
to identify any in -stream mussels if any are present. Per the USFWS website (https://www.fws.gov/species/atlantic-
pigtoe-fusconaia-masoni) the descriptions of threats from sedimentation and dams very closely reflects on -site
conditions.
We can advise the Town that a certified mussel biologist will need to visit the site, but I wanted to also double-check
that the area of necessary surveys is limited to the red area below, even though you mentioned that the removal of
woody debris could release additional sediment. Removal of woody debris by itself is a non -regulated activity and
surveys for the entire orange reach below would represent a significant effort through a reach that is interspersed with
beaver dams and without suitable habitat.
We'd appreciate advice on resolving this so that the Town can perform repairs. If contracting a mussel biologist is the
only option, we'll advise the Town of such. However, if there are any discussions, descriptions, or other information that
would assist the USFWS concurrence, we're available. We have not received a response from the USFWS to the letter
that we provided on Nov 3, but I inadvertently sent it to Gary Jordan, who I typically work with on NCDOT projects. He
copied me on an email forwarding it elsewhere. It includes habitat descriptions and the figure below.
Please let me know if you'd like to discuss anything.
Thanks,
Scott
Habitat Description: Found in streams with substrate composed of coarse sand and gravel downstream from
riffle areas. High populations exist in small creeks to large rivers with excellent water quality. This reach of
Beaverdam Creek is composed of large amounts of accumulated coarse to fine sand and sediment, introduced
from adjacent bank failures and upstream sedimentation. In addition, a July 31, 2023 review of NCNHP records
indicates no occurrence of this species within 1.0 mile of the Site.

Beaver -dam Creek, looking; downstream
of
�•TJ �^.
Bank failure at Town of Princetoi
Wastewater Trea tment Pla 17 _
Scott Davis
Senior Scientist/Project Manager
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
919-696-3045
• � ��_ • �- .f•' •.tom a '�`�},�1
k
r,.
r
• • - - -• fin= gf
9

From: Martin, Matthew K CIV (USA) <[e-mail]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2024 11:12 AM
To: Scott Davis<[e-mail]>; [e-mail]
Cc: Thomas, Zachary T <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Notification of Consultation: SAW-2023-01202 (Beaverdam Creek Rehabilitation / Princeton NC / Johnston
County)
Scott,
The Corps initiated informal consolation with the USFWS on December 29, 2023, we received a response to
the consolation January 30, 2024, indicating that the USFWS is not able to concur with our determinations at
this time. Please respond to this email indicating that you have received it.
Since there appears to be suitable habitat present for Atlantic pigtoe, it will require that the applicant utilize a
qualified biologist to walk the length of the project and 100 m downstream to determine areas of suitable
habitat. If the qualified (permitted) biologist determines that one or more reaches are suitable habitat for
Atlantic pigtoe, then surveys would be recommended, particularly in reaches where instream work is
proposed and downstream of those areas (because of the potential for sedimentation). A qualified, permitted
biologist would be able to find any mussels that may be present, provide a professional opinion on the habitat
quality, sediment quality, and water quality, providing a better justification for a determination.
Dredging the sediment and/or accumulated vegetation would likely remove or kill any mussels present, and
removing woody debris may cause significant sediment disturbance, and / or remove or bury individuals that
may be in close proximity. Therefore, it is important to determine if any listed species are present.
Please note that consultation has not been completed and the following conditions still apply.
1. Per General Condition 18(a), no activity is authorized under any NWP which is likely to directly or
indirectly jeopardize the continued existence of a threatened or endangered species or a species
proposed for such designation, as identified under the Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA), or which
will directly or indirectly destroy or adversely modify designated critical habitat or critical habitat
proposed for such designation. The Corps has initiated informal consultation with The US Fish and
Wildlife Service and will not be able to render a decision until ESA Section 7 consultation is complete.
2. Per General Condition 18(c), if the non -Federal applicant has not heard back from the Corps within 45
days, the applicant must still wait for notification from the Corps.
Please reach out if you have any questions,
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: matthew.k.martin(@usace.armv.mil
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:
10

https://re_ uq latory.ops.usace.army.mil/customer-service-surveyl. Thank you for taking the time to visit this site and
complete the survey.
From: Martin, Matthew K CIV (USA)
Sent: Friday, December 29, 2023 4:59 PM
To: Scott Davis<[e-mail]>; [e-mail]
Cc: Thomas, Zachary T <[e-mail]>; Myers, Joseph M <[e-mail]>
Subject: Notification of Consultation: SAW-2023-01202 (Beaverdam Creek Rehabilitation / Princeton NC / Johnston
County)
0
Good afternoon, my name is Matt Martin and I have been assigned as the project manager for your project. Thank you
for your PCN, dated December 15Y, 2023, for the above referenced project. The USACE (Corps) will need consult with the
US Fish and Wildlife Service before rendering a decision. Please email ([e-mail]) me if you have
any questions/concerns or would like to set up at time to discuss.
1. Per General Condition 18(a), no activity is authorized under any NWP which is likely to directly or indirectly
jeopardize the continued existence of a threatened or endangered species or a species proposed for such
designation, as identified under the Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA), or which will directly or indirectly
destroy or adversely modify designated critical habitat or critical habitat proposed for such designation. The
Corps has initiated informal consultation with The US Fish and Wildlife Service and will not be able to render a
decision until ESA Section 7 consultation is complete.
2. Per General Condition 18(c), if the non -Federal applicant has not heard back from the Corps within 45 days, the
applicant must still wait for notification from the Corps.
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://re_ uq latory.ops.usace.army.mil/customer-service-survey[. Thank you for taking the time to visit this site and
complete the survey.
Email correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties by an authorized
state official.
11