20110825 Ver 1_Jurisdictional Determination_20160413

Strickland, Bev
From:Beasley, Troy <[e-mail]>
Sent:Wednesday, April 13, 2016 7:55 AM
To:Steenhuis, Joanne
Subject:FW: Beaufort East Village - Question Regarding Isolated and Non-Jurisdictional
Wetlands
Attachments:Bullock.pdf; Jones.pdf; Pace 1.pdf; Pace 2.pdf; Arrington.pdf
Good morning Joanne! I just wanted to follow up on my previous emails. We would like some form of documentation
for our records regarding the NCDWR regulatory authority over the wetlands that are non-jurisdictional to the Corps.

Thanks for your help, and feel free to call me if you have any questions.

Troy Beasley

1410 Commonwealth Drive, Suite 101 Wilmington, NC 28403
  |  
Office: 910.256.9277 Direct: 910.509.6512
  |  
Mobile: [phone]
[e-mail]

CONFIDENTIALITY AND NONDISCLOSURE

From: Beasley, Troy
Sent: Friday, March 04, 2016 9:51 AM
To: Joanne Steenhuis <[e-mail]>
Subject: FW: Beaufort East Village - Question Regarding Isolated and Non-Jurisdictional Wetlands

Good morning Joanne. Mickey Sugg with the Corps has signed the updated wetland surveys for the Beaufort East Village
project, which are attached. There are now several wetlands that were determined to be non-jurisdictional due to a lack
of significant nexus, along with the previous Isolated Wetlands.

Previously, these wetlands would have been regulated by the state under the isolated wetland rules. However, the
legislative revisions to the isolated wetland rules (IWGP100000) result in only “bog” and “basin” wetlands being
regulated. I believe this means that the wetlands previously classified as isolated, and the latest non-jurisdictional
wetlands due to a lack of significant nexus, would not be subject to regulation under the isolated wetland rules because
these wetlands are not classified as “bogs” or “basin” wetland in the “Dichotomous Key to General NC Wetland
Types”. So additional impacts to the “non-jurisdictional” and “isolated” wetlands would not be regulated by NCDWR,
and would not require authorization from NCDWR. Could you please confirm this by responding to this email, as I am
anticipating this question arising in upcoming submittals.

Thanks for your help!
1

Troy Beasley

115 MacKenan Drive Cary, NC 27511
  |  
Office: 919.469.3340 Direct: 910.509.6512
  |  
Mobile: [phone]
[e-mail]

CONFIDENTIALITY AND NONDISCLOSURE

From: Beasley, Troy
Sent: Friday, October 30, 2015 1:46 PM
To: Joanne Steenhuis <[e-mail]>
Subject: Beaufort East Village

Good afternoon Joanne. We are in the process of getting the JD re-issued for Beaufort East Village. Since the new
Waters of the US rule has been issued a stay by the courts, Mickey is using the old significant nexus policies for the
JD. There are several wetlands that Mickey has now agreed lack significant nexus and therefore are non-jurisdictional to
the Corps.

Previously, these wetlands would have been regulated by the state under the isolated wetland rules. However, with the
legislative change to the isolated wetland rules which result in only “bog” and “basin” wetlands being regulated. I
believe this means that the wetlands previously classified as isolated, and the latest non-jurisdictional wetlands (due to a
lack of significant nexus) would not be subject regulation under the isolated wetland rules because these wetlands do
not key out as “bogs” or “basin” wetland in the “Dichotomous Key to General NC Wetland Types”. So they could actually
fill the portions of the non-jurisdictional wetlands that are located within proposed lots without requiring an Isolated
Wetland permit from DWR. Could you please confirm that this is correct?

Thanks for your help. Have a great weekend.

Troy Beasley

115 MacKenan Drive Cary, NC 27511
  |  
Office: 919.469.3340 Direct: 910.509.6512
  |  
Mobile: [phone]
[e-mail]

CONFIDENTIALITY AND NONDISCLOSURE
2

3