20161210 Ver 1_DOTs response to WRC concerns_20170208

Wanucha, Dave
From:Cail, William G
Sent:Wednesday, February 08, 2017 11:07 AM
To:Wanucha, Dave; Euliss, Amy; Chambers, Marla J
Cc:Lastinger, James C CIV USARMY CESAW (US) ([e-mail]); Fuchs, Eileen A
Subject:RE: 404 and 401 permit application for Br no 353 in Rowan
Yep, had bankfull in my mind.

So went back and ran discharges in the model adjusting to produce approximate normal water surface flow depth of approx 1
ft. A discharge of approx 25 cfs is needed to get 1 ft of depth in the channel. This discharge produces about 1 ft of depth in the
13 ft wide box also, at a velocity of approximately 4 ft/s. With the flat proposed slope of 0.4% and low velocity we would expect
material to aggrade in the box, possibly adjusting to form low flow as needed, especially if some of the larger existing bed
material is placed in the low flow box.

Sills are proposed at the inlet and outlet. We do not think baffles are needed and would not recommend due to these
conditions.

Thanks
Galen

From: Wanucha, Dave
Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2017 10:16 AM
To: Euliss, Amy <[e-mail]>; Chambers, Marla J <[e-mail]>
Cc: Lastinger, James C CIV USARMY CESAW (US) ([e-mail]) <[e-mail]>; Cail,
William G <[e-mail]>; Fuchs, Eileen A <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: 404 and 401 permit application for Br no 353 in Rowan

Forgive me for speaking out of turn, but I believe that Marla’s concerns are with respect to wetted width during baseflow, not
during bankfull discharge. Bankfull discharge is based on a 1.5 year storm interval. At low flows, water depth in a 13’ wide
culvert may not be sufficient to allow passage. Alternating baffles may be a good idea.

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
1

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

From: Euliss, Amy
Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2017 9:30 AM
To: Chambers, Marla J <[e-mail]>
Cc: Lastinger, James C CIV USARMY CESAW (US) ([e-mail]) <[e-mail]>;
Wanucha, Dave <[e-mail]>; Cail, William G <[e-mail]>; Fuchs, Eileen A <[e-mail]>
Subject: FW: 404 and 401 permit application for Br no 353 in Rowan

Sorry for the delayed response. See the explanation from our Hydraulics engineer.

From: Cail, William G
Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2017 9:13 AM
To: Euliss, Amy
Cc: Huff, Christy; Lewis, Christopher R
Subject: RE: 404 and 401 permit application for Br no 353 in Rowan

Amy

Sorry for delay in responding……

The existing stream width varies just up and downstream of the culvert anywhere from 6 ft to 17 ft. Based on bankfull discharge
per the Rural Piedmont curves/equations I checked the flow depth through the culvert. The bankfull discharge was 120 cfs and
the flow depth was 1.4 ft. We would anticipate this depth to be consistent for fish passage.

Thanks
Galen

From: Euliss, Amy
Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2017 3:04 PM
To: Cail, William G <[e-mail]>
Cc: Huff, Christy <[e-mail]>
Subject: FW: 404 and 401 permit application for Br no 353 in Rowan

Can you comment on Marla’s concern? We already have our permits.

From: Chambers, Marla J
Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2017 2:59 PM
To: Euliss, Amy; Thomas, John T JR SAW ([e-mail]); Wanucha, Dave
Subject: RE: 404 and 401 permit application for Br no 353 in Rowan

I’m trying to determine if the width of the low-flow barrel is appropriate. Each barrel is proposed to be 13’ wide, the C.3. table of
the application indicates a 10’ average stream width, and below the table, the temporary impacts are for the 5’ base channel for
dewatering. What is the natural wetted width of the stream during normal flows? It’s best to take measurements away from the
influence of the bridge and other development that has caused alterations to the natural conditions, whenever possible. If it’s
10’ or 5’ or somewhere in-between, it appears the barrel is over-widened. It seems like alternating baffles or notched sills may
be needed to maintain the appropriate stream width through the culvert.

Marla

Marla Chambers // NCDOT Coordinator

Habitat Conservation Program
2

NC Wildlife Resources Commission
c/o NCDOT

206 Charter Street

Albemarle, North Carolina 28001
office: 704-982-9181
mobile: [phone]
[e-mail]

ncwildlife.org

From: Euliss, Amy
Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2016 11:02 AM
To: Thomas, John T JR SAW ([e-mail]) <[e-mail]>; Wanucha, Dave
<[e-mail]>
Cc: Carpenter,Kristi <[e-mail]>; Harmon, Beth <[e-mail]>; Chambers, Marla J
<[e-mail]>; [e-mail]; Swicegood, Dale L <[e-mail]>; Huff, Christy
<[e-mail]>; Ben Crawford ([e-mail]) <[e-mail]>; Suggs, Phillip H
<[e-mail]>; Shaver, Larry B <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: 404 and 401 permit application for Br no 353 in Rowan

Replace with this one. Page 2 was wrong.

From: Euliss, Amy
Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2016 10:31 AM
To: Thomas, John T JR SAW ([e-mail]); Wanucha, Dave
Cc: Carpenter,Kristi; Harmon, Beth; Chambers, Marla J; [e-mail]; Swicegood, Dale L; Huff, Christy; Ben
Crawford ([e-mail]); Suggs, Phillip H; Shaver, Larry B
Subject: 404 and 401 permit application for Br no 353 in Rowan

See attached permit application for the replacement of bridge no. 353 on SR 1349 in Rowan County. Let me know if you need
any additional information. Thanks.

Amy Euliss

Division 9 Environmental Officer

North Carolina Department of Transportation

336 747 7802 office

[e-mail]

375 Silas Creek Parkway

Winston Salem, NC 27127-7167

Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the

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

3

Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N.C. Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
4