20160196 Ver 1_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20170202

Wetland Inspection Report
Project Num: 20160196 Version: 1 Status: Issued
Project Name: Qorvo Project Type: Industrial / CommercialBusines
/
County: Guilford Region: Winston-Salem
Location: Qorvo
Latitude: +36° 04' Longitude: -79° 57'52"
SW Plan Location
Site Owner Name Carolina Investment Properties Inc of Lexington
Inspection Date: 2/2/2017
Reason for Inspection Routine
Inspection Type: Site Inspection (non -DOT)
Inspection Contact Person: Title: Phone:
On -Site Representative(s):
Primary Inspector: Sue L Homewood Phone: [phone]
Secondary Inspector(s):
Facility Compliance Status: ❑ Compliant 0 Not Compliant
Program Areas: 401 (includes isolated/non-404)
Question Areas:
0 Permit (401 WQC)
Inspection Summary:
page: 1

Site Number: 20160196 Owner: Team, Robert A
Inspection Date: 2/2/2017 Inspection Type: Site Inspection (non -DOT) Reason for Visit: Routine
Permit (401 WQC)
Does the impact(s) match what was approved in the 401 WQC or non 404 permit?
Are the culverts and/or filled areas installed properly?
Is the site compliant with additional conditions of the 401 WQC or non 404 permit?
Comment: Culvert was not buried as required. Riprap apron was 3 feet above stream bed.
Yes
No NA NE
■
❑
❑
❑
❑
■
❑
❑
■
❑
❑
❑
page: 2

002,02-20
M1
*
II
y
002,02-20
M1

P 1`
dx!

14 1
t+ y f A
g
7 J Jy �Pa ��i IF�V

Homewood, Sue
From:Bailey, David E CIV USARMY CESAW (US) <[e-mail]>
Sent:Friday, February 03, 2017 9:16 AM
To:Robin Team; Brad Luckey
Cc:Homewood, Sue
Subject:Compliance visit: Qorvo site, Thorndike Rd, Greensboro, Guilford Co.; SAW-2016-00439
Attachments:20170202_143920_1486130826937_resized.jpg
Robin and Brad,

Hello all. Sue Homewood (NCDWR) and I visited the above referenced site yesterday to determine compliance with the
Nationwide Permit 39 verified for use on 4/8/2016. Fill for the sidewalk above the pond (wetland impacts) and the road crossing
(stream impacts) have been installed. Two items were noted during the compliance inspection:

1) The 48" culvert shown on the permitted plans under the road crossing does not appear to be buried 1' below the bed of the
stream as shown on the permitted plans (Plan Sheet C2.2). Please explain this discrepancy;
2) The rip rap dissipater pad at the downstream end of the 48" culvert was not keyed into the stream bank, and is not placed such
that it is no higher than the previously existing stream bed elevation as shown on the permitted plans (Plan Sheet C2.2).
Specifically, the downstream ~13 l.f. of the rip rap pad includes rip rap piled between 1 and 2' higher than the stream bed
elevation (see attached picture). Please reset the rip rap pad such that it is placed no higher than the previously existing stream
bed elevation as shown on the permitted plans (Plan Sheet C2.2).

Please address the above items within 14 days of the date of this email, and let me know if you have any questions; response via
email is fine.

Sincerely,

Dave Bailey

---
David E. Bailey, PWS
Regulatory Project Manager
US Army Corps of Engineers
CE-SAW-RG-R
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
Phone: [phone], Ext. 30.
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]

The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure we continue to do
so, please complete the Customer Satisfaction Survey located at http://corpsmapu.usace.army.mil/cm_apex/f?p=136:4:0.

1