20160335 Ver 1_More Info Received_20160504

Strickland, Bev
From:Natalie Carmen <[e-mail]>
Sent:Wednesday, May 04, 2016 2:37 PM
To:Smith, Cherri L
Cc:Roy Lorenzen
Subject:RE: Nationwide permit number
Hi Cherri,

Thank you for clarifying my questions about stream mitigation requirements over the phone. Since DWQ only requires
1:1 mitigation ratio on perineal streams, the current mitigation proposed in the PCN exceeds those requirements. The
updated PCN is attached for your review and reference. Please substitute it for the hard copy that you should be
receiving from your administrative assistant later this week.

Thank you for your time and please let me know if anything is unclear in the materials provided.

Natalie Carmen, EI | Civil Engineering Intern
STEWART

STRONGER BY DESIGN
Direct 919.866.4776

From: Natalie Carmen
Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2016 11:38 AM
To: 'Smith, Cherri L' <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Nationwide permit number

Hi Cherri,

Last Thursday morning I dropped off an updated hard copy exhibit and PCN form. Since then, I received a call from the
army corps with more information about mitigation requirements for rip rap. Based on this information our mitigation
requirements are significantly reduced. Please let me know what your policy is on mitigation ratios for riprap. Our intent
is to minimize stream impacts by detailing how to install rip rap such that the existing stream channel elevation is not
affected. My goal is to have a PCN that is compliant with both army corp and DWQ requirements.

I would very much appreciate the opportunity to hear your insights on this via a phone call.

Natalie Carmen, EI | Civil Engineering Intern
STEWART

STRONGER BY DESIGN
Direct 919.866.4776

From: Smith, Cherri L \[mailto:[e-mail]\]
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 1:39 PM
To: Natalie Carmen <[e-mail]>
Cc: Roy Lorenzen <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Nationwide permit number

Hi Natalie,

1

I’m heading out to the field this afternoon through tomorrow morning but will be in the office tomorrow afternoon if
you’d like to give me a call then. I’m definitely willing to answer any specific questions that you have, but I hope you
understand my position regarding reviewing information prior to it being submitted. I prioritize applications and
additional information based on the stamped received date because I think that’s fair to everyone.

Cherri

From: Natalie Carmen \[mailto:[e-mail]\]
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 11:33 AM
To: Smith, Cherri L <[e-mail]>
Cc: Roy Lorenzen <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Nationwide permit number

Hi Cherri,

My goal was to follow-up with questions via email and phone as it is requested in the letter from Danny Smith. Are you
willing to answer a question on the exhibits via phone? I expect it would require less than 5 minutes.

I apologize if email does not work with your current workload. My intent is to minimize the amount of time reviewing by
presenting the information as clearly as possible.

Natalie Carmen, EI | Civil Engineering Intern
STEWART

STRONGER BY DESIGN
Direct 919.866.4776

From: Smith, Cherri L \[mailto:[e-mail]\]
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 11:20 AM
To: Natalie Carmen <[e-mail]>
Cc: Roy Lorenzen <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Nationwide permit number

Hi Natalie,

I’m finding that the back and forth created by reviewing applications and additional information via email is problematic
with my current workload. Please go ahead and submit the paper copies of the additional information, and if I need
anything else, I’ll be sure to contact you directly as soon as possible to let you know. Thank you.

Cherri

From: Natalie Carmen \[mailto:[e-mail]\]
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 4:34 PM
To: Smith, Cherri L <[e-mail]>
Cc: Roy Lorenzen <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Nationwide permit number

Hi Cherri,

I just left you a voicemail because I think it might be easier to clarify over the phone, but I’ll write it out too in case that
helps the process.

2

Before new hard copy sets are delivered I want to ensure that we are adequately addressing your comments, largely
because I think the information is mostly already included.

1.NCDENR: The wetland, stream, and riparian buffer impacts requested in this \[PCN\] application need to be clearly

shown and enumerated on the site plan \[exhibit 1\]. These impacts need to correspond to the impacts requested
in the \[PCN\] application. The labels on the site plan \[exhibit 1\] should be clear and should match the labels of the
impacts listed in the \[PCN\] application. As the \[PCN\] application and impact maps \[exhibit 1\] currently stand, it is
not possible to match up what is in the \[PCN\] application with the site plan \[exhibit 1\]. \[15A NCAC 02H .0502(g)\]
a.Response: The site plan and other construction plan sheets were provided for reference, but the

colored exhibits were provided in an effort to make the impacts clear. The table on the exhibits breaks
out the buffer impacts in square feet by area on and off-site. The PCN application combines on and
offsite impacts for each impact area, but uses consistent language and total sum area as the buffer
exhibits. In past applications to your office I used a color hatch and label associated with tabulated
buffer impacts for easy reference. Please clarify if another method is preferred.
b.NCDENR: The letter was referring to the colored exhibits that are also labeled “Site Plan/Construction

Plan” so sorry for the confusion. Since I’m looking at applications in a vacuum and usually have little to
no familiarity with the site, I can’t really interpret information in the application and plans. It all has to
be presented so that I can understand what’s going on without interpretation. So thank you very much
for the revisions and please send in hard copies to the Central Office. Thanks again.
c.Response: The updated exhibits only changed the numbers on the stream impacts to be consistent

with USACE application. Is the summary table with labels corresponding to the plan on exhibits 1 and
2 sufficient to enumerate the buffer impacts? Please confirm you are able to match up what is in the
PCN application with the colored exhibits.
2.NCDENR: There are also inconsistencies with the stream impacts listed in the \[PCN\] application with those on

the site plan \[exhibit 1\]. For example, the \[PCN\] application lists Stream A impact as 113.3 linear feet, but the site
plan\[exhibit 1\] has on-site Stream Impact A as 93.3 and 30.7. Stream Impact C is listed as 133.7 linear feet in the
\[PCN\] application, but the site plan \[exhibit 1\] has the impact indicated as 22.5 linear feet. The offsite stream
impact on the site plan \[exhibit 1\] indicates an impact 41.4 linear feet, but the comment on the stream impact
table indicates an impact of 47 linear feet. In addition, all requested impacts in a \[PCN\] application should be
listed within the impact table and not in the comment section of the table. \[15A NCAC 02H .0502(g)\]
a.Response: Our reviewer at the USACE has already clarified how to account for on and offsite stream

impacts. The attached Exhibit includes the updated numbers. There are multiple impacts along Stream
A and Stream C. They are shown separately on the plan sheets and PCN.
b.Response: Can you please confirm the updated PCN with each section of stream impact listed

separately meets your requirements? The comment section was utilized to explain how the mitigation
credits were calculated. Addition stream assessment forms and spreadsheets were provided to USACE
for them to review their jurisdictional streams. Is the PCN provided on 04.21.2016 sufficient for your
review purposes?
3.NCDENR: The reservation of credits letter for the required stream mitigation needs to be included with the

\[PCN\] application. \[15A NCAC 02H .0502(h)\]
a.Response: An updated letter with stream mitigation credit availability was provided via email.

4.NCDENR: The overall imperviousness of the project is listed as 14.46%, but based on the site plan, the

imperviousness of the project appears much larger. \[15A NCAC 02H .0502(g)\]
a.Response: There are several ways to calculate impervious area (parcel, project area, drainage area).

The PCN application has been updated (attached) to be consistent with how the site impervious is
listed as 30% on sheet C3.00 (“OVERALL SITE PLAN”) See inset below:
3

The linked image cannot be displayed. The file may have been moved, renamed, or deleted. Verify that the link points to the correct file
and location.

Thank you for your time in reviewing this project. If the updated stream impact numbers clear up the earlier issues with
exhibit clarification, I will promptly drop off four hard copies of the updated colored exhibits, signed PCN application,
and stream credit availability letter.

I am happy to discuss by phone if that is more convenient for you.

Natalie Carmen, EI | Civil Engineering Intern
STEWART

STRONGER BY DESIGN
Direct 919.866.4776

From: Smith, Cherri L \[mailto:[e-mail]\]
Sent: Friday, April 22, 2016 2:37 PM
To: Natalie Carmen <[e-mail]>
Cc: Roy Lorenzen <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Nationwide permit number

Hi Natalie,

The letter was referring to the colored exhibits that are also labeled “Site Plan/Construction Plan” so sorry for the
confusion. Since I’m looking at applications in a vacuum and usually have little to no familiarity with the site, I can’t
really interpret information in the application and plans. It all has to be presented so that I can understand what’s going
on without interpretation.

So thank you very much for the revisions and please send in hard copies to the Central Office. Thanks again.

Cherri

From: Natalie Carmen \[mailto:[e-mail]\]
Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2016 3:23 PM
To: Smith, Cherri L <[e-mail]>
Cc: Roy Lorenzen <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Nationwide permit number

Hi Cherri,

I just received a copy of the letter sent by your office on Monday regarding the WTCC RTP PCN application. We are
concurrently being reviewed by the USACE and I have been sending them additional information as it is requested.

I can deliver updated buffer and stream impact exhibits (shown as Exhibit 1 and Exhibit 2 in your materials). The letter
from your office requesting additional materials cites the “site plan” as needing all of the buffer information. The site
4

plan and other construction plan sheets were provided for reference, but the colored exhibits were provided in an effort
to make the impacts clear. The table on the exhibits breaks out the buffer impacts in square feet by area on and off-site.
The PCN application combines on and offsite impacts for each impact area, but uses consistent language and total sum
area as the buffer exhibits. In past applications to your office I used a color hatch and label associated with tabulated
buffer impacts for easy reference. Please clarify if another method is preferred.

Our reviewer at the USACE has already clarified how to account for on and offsite stream impacts. The attached Exhibit
includes the updated numbers. There are multiple impacts along Stream A and Stream C. They are shown separately on
the plan sheets and PCN.

Can you please review the attached documents to let me know if these address your concerns in the letter? I am happy
to drop off additional hard copies, but wanted to reach out to make sure I am appropriately addressing your concerns.

Thank you for your time.

Natalie Carmen, EI | Civil Engineering Intern
STEWART

STRONGER BY DESIGN
Direct 919.866.4776

From: Natalie Carmen
Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2016 9:42 AM
To: Smith, Cherri L <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Nationwide permit number

Thank you Cherri, I appreciate the update.

Natalie Carmen, EI | Civil Engineering Intern
STEWART

STRONGER BY DESIGN
Direct 919.866.4776

From: Smith, Cherri L \[mailto:[e-mail]\]
Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2016 9:41 AM
To: Natalie Carmen <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Nationwide permit number

Natalie,

Yes, I did get the application.

Cherri

From: Natalie Carmen \[mailto:[e-mail]\]
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 2:14 PM
To: Smith, Cherri L <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Nationwide permit number

Hi Cherri,

I wanted to follow-up to make sure that you received all of our PCN documents. Can you please confirm receipt?

Thank you,
5

Natalie Carmen, EI | Civil Engineering Intern
STEWART

STRONGER BY DESIGN
Direct 919.866.4776

From: Natalie Carmen
Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2016 11:15 AM
To: 'Smith, Cherri L' <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Nationwide permit number

Good Morning Cherri,

I wanted to let you know that I dropped off our updated Wake Tech RTP Campus PCN applications and supporting forms
to Sheri Montalvo this morning. Electronic versions of the form and plans were also submitted so they should be
available to you soon.

Please let me know if I can clarify any information provided or if additional information is needed. I appreciate your time
in reviewing this application and answering my preliminary questions.

Thank you,

Natalie Carmen, EI | Civil Engineering Intern
STEWART

STRONGER BY DESIGN
Direct 919.866.4776

From: Natalie Carmen
Sent: Friday, March 11, 2016 1:39 PM
To: 'Smith, Cherri L' <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Nationwide permit number

Not at all. This is new to me, so it is helpful to receive feedback from an expert.

Natalie Carmen, EI | Civil Engineering Intern
STEWART

STRONGER BY DESIGN
Direct 919.866.4776

From: Smith, Cherri L \[mailto:[e-mail]\]
Sent: Friday, March 11, 2016 10:32 AM
To: Natalie Carmen <[e-mail]>
Cc: Roy Lorenzen <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Nationwide permit number

I’m afraid all I did was confuse the situation!

From: Natalie Carmen \[mailto:[e-mail]\]
Sent: Friday, March 11, 2016 10:22 AM
To: Smith, Cherri L <[e-mail]>
Cc: Roy Lorenzen <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Nationwide permit number

6

Thank you Cherri, we appreciate your help and clarification.

Natalie Carmen, EI | Civil Engineering Intern
STEWART

STRONGER BY DESIGN
Direct 919.866.4776

From: Smith, Cherri L \[mailto:[e-mail]\]
Sent: Friday, March 11, 2016 9:39 AM
To: Natalie Carmen <[e-mail]>
Cc: Roy Lorenzen <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Nationwide permit number

Natalie, all sounds good and thanks!

Cherri

From: Natalie Carmen \[mailto:[e-mail]\]
Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2016 1:25 PM
To: Smith, Cherri L <[e-mail]>
Cc: Roy Lorenzen <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Nationwide permit number

Cherri, I completely understand there are several demands on your time and I appreciate you being so helpful.

When I submitted back in December, Sheri Montevelo requested that we include the “Nationwide Permit number” to
coordinate with Army Corps. She suggested that I reach out to you for more information (see beginning of this thread)
and we coordinated with the Army Corps per your instruction.

Based on the Army Corp delineation we revised our site plan and reduced that amount of buffer impacts and minimized
stream impacts. For that reason I was planning on resubmitting hardcopies to the Central Office of the full application
with updated plan sheets and quantities on the PCN form.

Since we had coordinated earlier on this project, I wanted to reach out to you to confirm we are approaching the PCN
permitting process correctly before resubmitting to the Central Office.

Thank you,

Natalie Carmen, EI | Civil Engineering Intern
STEWART

STRONGER BY DESIGN
Direct 919.866.4776

From: Smith, Cherri L \[mailto:[e-mail]\]
Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2016 1:11 PM
To: Natalie Carmen <[e-mail]>
Cc: Roy Lorenzen <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Nationwide permit number

Natalie, yes – sorry I didn’t understand the situation. There are just way too many applications coming through here,
and I had no recollection of this project. Did I send a “more information” letter on this one? If so, are you going to be
sending this additional information in hard copy through the Central Office?

7

From: Natalie Carmen \[mailto:[e-mail]\]
Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2016 12:53 PM
To: Smith, Cherri L <[e-mail]>
Cc: Roy Lorenzen <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Nationwide permit number

Thank you Cherri for providing this information.

We already have an active buffer authorization for the property. When I submitted the PCN in December, it was not able
to be reviewed because the Army Corps had not completed a stream determination. My understanding is that both the
buffer authorization and stream determination need to be active. However, their methods for determining stream
classification vary and that explains the difference in the determination of Feature ‘F’/ Stream ‘C’ and why it is a
jurisdictional stream without a Neuse buffer. Now that we have both the buffer authorization and stream determination
active , would you be able to review our updated PCN?

Thank you,

Natalie Carmen, EI | Civil Engineering Intern
STEWART

STRONGER BY DESIGN
Direct 919.866.4776

From: Smith, Cherri L \[mailto:[e-mail]\]
Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2016 11:43 AM
To: Natalie Carmen <[e-mail]>
Cc: Roy Lorenzen <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Nationwide permit number

Hi Natalie,

From what you describe, someone from this office will need to go to the site to evaluate it terms of riparian
buffers. Often consultants will coordinate so that the Corps and DWR are at the site at the same time.

Also, you may not be aware of this, but DWR now has a process for consultants to request this site visit. I’ve attached
our Buffer Determination Request Form for your use. When you email the form back please also include the USGS and
Soils Maps with the project area delineated and the streams labeled.

Then someone from this office will be back in touch to coordinate the site visit with you.

Let me know if you need anything else.

Cherri

From: Natalie Carmen \[mailto:[e-mail]\]
Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2016 11:35 AM
To: Smith, Cherri L <[e-mail]>
Cc: Roy Lorenzen <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Nationwide permit number

Hi Cherri,

8

Thank you for the quick reply. Yes, Feature ‘F’ from the DWQ buffer determination was classified as an ephemeral
stream with no buffer. This same stream, labeled stream ‘C’ by the Army Corps was determined to be jurisdictional. All
streams are mapped with origin points and were surveyed after being flagged in the field. There are also two small (~70
LF) branches off buffered streams that the Army Corps determined to be jurisdictional streams. Both streams are
entirely within the Neuse Buffer.

I am also happy to meet in person if that is easier to talk through the different stream conditions.

Thank you,

Natalie Carmen, EI | Civil Engineering Intern
STEWART

STRONGER BY DESIGN
Direct 919.866.4776

From: Smith, Cherri L \[mailto:[e-mail]\]
Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2016 11:29 AM
To: Natalie Carmen <[e-mail]>
Cc: Roy Lorenzen <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Nationwide permit number

Hi Natalie,

Are there any origin points of mapped streams or mapped streams that are determined to be ephemeral and not subject
to the buffer rules?

From: Natalie Carmen \[mailto:[e-mail]\]
Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2016 11:17 AM
To: Smith, Cherri L <[e-mail]>
Cc: Roy Lorenzen <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Nationwide permit number

Good morning Cherri,

We now have a Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination from the Army Corps for the proposed Wake Tech RTP campus.
Based on the information provided by the Armp Corps, the Pre-JD may be used for additional permitting; by doing so we
are accepting the streams and wetlands determined to be potential waters of the US as jurisdictional features subject to
401 mitigation requirements.

Is the Pre-JD sufficient for your use in reviewing the PCN? From discussions with the Raleigh Army Corps Field officer, the
nationwide permit number 39 would be applicable for this property. Based on the Pre-JD all aquatic features are non-
section 10.

Before progressing with the permitting process, I would like to confirm that this method is acceptable for your office.

Thank you for your assistance.

Natalie Carmen, EI | Civil Engineering Intern
STEWART

STRONGER BY DESIGN
Direct 919.866.4776

9

From: Natalie Carmen
Sent: Monday, December 14, 2015 5:17 PM
To: 'Smith, Cherri L' <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Nationwide permit number

Thank you Cherri for clarifying. I will follow-up with the Army Corps.

Thank you for your time.

Natalie Carmen l Civil Engineering Intern
Direct 919.866.4776
STEWART

STRONGER BY DESIGN

From: Smith, Cherri L \[mailto:[e-mail]\]
Sent: Monday, December 14, 2015 4:42 PM
To: Natalie Carmen <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Nationwide permit number

The stream determination letter provided by DWR determines what streams are subject to the state’s regulated riparian
buffers. The Corps determines those streams and wetlands subject to 404/401 permitting.

From: Natalie Carmen \[mailto:[e-mail]\]
Sent: Monday, December 14, 2015 3:12 PM
To: Smith, Cherri L <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Nationwide permit number

Thank you Cherri for the quick reply. I have called David Schaeffer and Jean Gibby at the Raleigh field office and hope to
hear back soon. Based on the PCN application, question 4a, it sounds like jurisdictional determinations can be done by
the state. To clarify, is the stream determination letter provided by DWQ insufficient for the PCN review?

I appreciate your help.

Natalie Carmen l Civil Engineering Intern
Direct 919.866.4776
STEWART

STRONGER BY DESIGN

From: Smith, Cherri L \[mailto:[e-mail]\]
Sent: Monday, December 14, 2015 2:01 PM
To: Natalie Carmen <[e-mail]>
Cc: Montalvo, Sheri A <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Nationwide permit number

Hi Natalie,

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers determines what wetlands and streams are subject to 404/401 Permitting, and they
determine the appropriate Nationwide Permit number to use for a project. That permit number then dictates the 401
Certification the Division of Water Resources uses to authorize the project. Contact David Schaeffer with the Corps at
919-554-4884 ext. 31. I hope this information helps.

Cherri
10

From: Natalie Carmen \[mailto:[e-mail]\]
Sent: Monday, December 14, 2015 1:18 PM
To: Smith, Cherri L <[e-mail]>
Cc: Montalvo, Sheri A <[e-mail]>
Subject: Nationwide permit number

Hi Ms. Smith,

I’m contacting you about a Pre-Construction Application I delivered last week for the proposed Wake Tech RTP Campus.
Sheri Montevelo requested that we include the “Nationwide Permit number” to coordinate with Army Corps. The
subject intermittent stream was determined by DWQ staff, Lia Myott. To my knowledge, the property has not been
evaluated by the Army Corps.

Can you please let me know the best way to obtain a Nationwide Permit number if it is required for this review? I would
greatly appreciate you pointing me in the right direction.

Thank you for your time.

Natalie Carmen l Civil Engineering Intern
Direct 919.866.4776
Mobile [phone]
STEWART

STRONGER BY DESIGN
Visit us at www.stewartinc.com

11