20080200 Ver 1_WRC Comments_20080310

0 North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission 0
March 10, 2008
Ms. Loretta Beckwith
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Regulatory Branch
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801-5006
Ms. Cyndi Karoly
NCDENR, Division of Water Quality, 401 Unit
1628 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1628
SUBJECT: Eastern Band of the Cherokee Indians Nationwide Permit Application
Irrigation intake in Tuckaseegee River, Jackson County
DWQ No. 08-0200
Dear Ms. Beckwith and Ms. Karoly:
McGill Associates on behalf of the Eastern Band of the Cherokee Indians requested a letter of
concurrence from the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (Commission) for a 404 Permit.
The project involves construction of an irrigation intake in the Tuckaseegee River that would provide
water to a new golf course near Whittier in Jackson County. Comments from the Commission are
provided under provisions of the Clean Water Act of 1977 (33 U.S.C. 466 et. seq.) and the Fish and
Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667d).
A few trout may be found in the river near the site, but spawning is not expected. However, the river is
designated an Aquatic Significant Natural Heritage Area of national significance because of numerous
rare aquatic species. It also is designated critical habitat for the federally endangered Appalachian elktoe
(Alasmidonta raveneliana) under the Endangered Species Act. These mussels are found near and
possibly within the site. Other rare aquatic species in the project vicinity include hellbender
(Cryptobranchus alleganiensis, FSC, NC-SC), wounded darter (Etheostoma vulneratum, FSC, NC-SC),
olive darter (Percina squamata, FSC, NC-SC), and wavy-rayed lampmussel (Lampsdis fasciola, NC-SC).
The intake could harm mussels during its construction. During intake operation, early life stages of
sicklefin redhorse and other fish that serve as hosts for mussels may be entrained or impinged, though the
degree of this would depend on the intake withdrawal rate, duration, timing, and other factors not
Mailing Address: Division of Inland Fisheries - 1721 Mail Service Center - Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
Telephone: [phone] - Fax: [phone]
EBCI Page 2 March 10, 2008
Jackson County
specified in the application. Sicklefin redhorse have recently been reintroduced into the river in an effort
to restore a population. Their eggs seem to be cohesive, but larval stages would likely be vulnerable to a
withdrawal. If they become established in the river, then losses of larvae may occur if the intake is
operated during the spring spawning season and early summer.
Although the project meets the limits of a Nationwide Permit, the Commission believes that project
alternatives should be explored given the sensitive aquatic life in the river. These alternatives may
include upland run-off or off-line ponds, wells, treated wastewater, or combinations of those. If a surface
water withdrawal is necessary, then Crooked Creek, which runs through the golf course, should be
evaluated. Based on its watershed size, it presumably could supply a considerable amount of water while
maintaining a base flow during low flow periods. Discharge of this creek should be estimated to verify
this assumption. Moreover, using Crooked Creek instead of the river would reduce project costs since
directional boring hundreds of feet under a four-lane divided highway and the river would not be
necessary.
If there are no feasible alternatives, then additional information about the river withdrawal is needed to
ensure that it has minor, adverse effects on aquatic resources. Information such as the intake location
versus the river thalweg, range of operational flow rates, minimum monthly flows for the river, duration
and timing of intake operations (e.g., hours/week by season, comparison to Duke Energy releases), and
water need estimates for the irrigation are needed to understand the potential losses of aquatic life from
entrainment/impingement. Moreover, aquatic life impinged on intake screens do not survive unless there
are frequent flow stoppages or backwash mechanisms to release them. Cleaning is needed to remove
other debris as well, particularly in the fall. Information about back washing or cleaning methods is
needed to understand the potential losses of aquatic life from impingement.
The Commission cannot provide a thorough review of the project at this time and requests that the
information needs and issues outline above be addressed. The Commission also requests the opportunity
to comment further on this project if additional information becomes available or if the decision is made
to act on the permit request with the information that is currently available. Thank you for the
opportunity to review and comment on this permit action. If there are any questions regarding these
comments, please contact me at [phone] extension 24.
Sincerely,
Dave McHenry
Mountain Region Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program
Cc: A. Tarnawsky, Legal Counsel, Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians
B. Tompkins, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
K. Barnett, NC Division of Water Quality
M. Dowd, McGill Associates