20100752 Ver 4_R-2237C Modification--Mitigation question_20161017

Carpenter,Kristi
From:Barrett, William A
Sent:Monday, October 17, 2016 12:00 PM
To:Wanucha, Dave; Dagnino, Carla S
Subject:RE: R-2237C Modification--Mitigation question
Hi Dave,

I’ve reviewed your questions and provide the following responses:


In the original application, Site I impacts were to UT1 to Bailey Creek, not Bailey Creek itself ( I re-confirmed, to

address your concern that impacts at both sites may have been to Bailey Creek itself).


In the original application, Site II impacts were to Bailey Creek itself, which totaled 119 lf. This impact was

mitigated at the USACAE 2:1 mitigation ratio, so 238 lf of stream mitigation was provided for this impact (See
Table 3 in original application).


With the addition of 40 lf of bank stabilization impact to Bailey Creek from the 2016 Permit Mod application, the

total impacts to Bailey Creek increase to 159 lf. As this is above the 150 lf DWR threshold, mitigation would be
required by DWR at a 1:1 ratio. However, the 238 lf of stream mitigation already provided for the USACE
impacts exceeds the revised total of mitigation that would be required by DWR (159 lf). Also, the increase of 40
lf of impact that requires DWR mitigation, does not exceed those of the USACE basin-wide.

I believe this addresses your questions. Let me know if you would like to discuss further.

Thanks
Bill

William A. Barrett

Environmental Coordination & Permitting

PDEA-Natural Environment Section
North Carolina Department of Transportation

919 707 6103 office
[e-mail]

1598 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1598

1020 Birch Ridge Drive

Raleigh, NC 27610

Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the

North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
1

_____________________________________________________________

From: Wanucha, Dave
Sent: Monday, October 17, 2016 11:18 AM
To: Dagnino, Carla S
Cc: Barrett, William A
Subject: R-2237C Modification--Mitigation question

Hi Carla,
I need to verify that mitigation for bank stabilization is not required for the proposed impacts to Bailey Camp Creek.

In the original permit application of June 29, 2011, at Sites I and II, in the vicinity of Bailey Camp Creek, there were 294’
of impacts at Site I and 119’ of impacts at Site 2. What is not clear is whether or not these impacts were to Bailey Camp
Creek or its tributaries. Please confirm that these impacts were not to Bailey Camp Creek.

As I understand it, proposed impacts greater than 150’ to the mainstem may require mitigation by DWR assuming that
(1) DOT has already impacted 413’ of Bailey Camp Creek per the original application; and, (2) the Corps mitigation
requirements in the Yadkin/PeeDee Basin do not exceed DWR’s. Please confirm.

Thanks.

Dave W.

Dave Wanucha
Division of Water Resources
Transportation Permitting Unit
NC Department of Environmental Quality

336-776-9703 office
336-403-5655 mobile
[e-mail]

NC DEQ Winston Salem Regional Office
450 West Hanes Mill Road, Suite 300
Winston Salem, NC 27105

Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.

Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N.C. Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
2