North Shore Road

Michael F Easley, Governor
William G Ross Jr, Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W Klimek, P E Director
Division of Water Quality
March 1, 2006
MEMORANDUM
To Melba McGee, Environmental Coordinator, Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental
Affairs
From Brian L Wrenn, Transportation Permitting Unit, NC DWQ ?w
Through John Hennessy, Supervisor, Transportation Permitting Unit, NC DWQ9
Subject Draft Environmental Impact Statement for North Shore Road in Swain County, State
Clearinghouse No 06-0214
This office has reviewed the referenced document The Division of Water Quality (DWQ) is responsible
for the issuance of the Section 401 Water Quality Certification for activities that impact Waters of the
US, including wetlands The Division of Water Quality offers the following comments
Document Specific Comments
1 In general, the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) reports that the proposed Partial
Build and Northern Shore Corridor alternatives would have mayor adverse impacts to wetlands,
streams, lakes, water quality, aquatic ecology and vegetation communities These alternatives
would not meet the stated goals of the proposed protect At this time, DWQ does not feel that the
potential benefits of the Purpose and Need justify the level of adverse impacts to these resources
2 The document states that the Partial Build and Northern Shore Corridor alternatives would
provide access for some cemeteries and remove access for others Based on removal of access of
some cemeteries, it is unclear how the Partial Build and North Shore Road alternatives would
meet the goal of protecting the tangible aspects of cultural resources Please provide additional
information to clarify this issue
3 In section 4 2 8, the document states that adverse impacts to cemeteries would occur as a result of
the Partial Build and North Shore Alternatives due to "cutting current NPS-provided vehicular
access " It is unclear what the NPS-provided vehicular access consists of Please describe the
NPS-provided vehicular access
4 DWQ is extremely concerned about the long-term impacts to water quality resulting from the
exposure of acid-producing (AP) rock formations during road construction Construction of
previous projects in areas with AP rock has resulted in degradation of water quality with no
practical solutions available to reverse the impairment The DEIS indicates sinular rock
formations are present throughout the study area, and the Northern Shore Corridor would involve
construction in the area with the highest potential for acid production Please provide a
discussion of the strategies that would be implemented to prevent water quality impairment due to
runoff from AP rock
One
tCarolina
No
Transportation Permitting Unit l ahlrally
1650 Mad Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699 1650
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone [phone] / FAX [phone] / Internet http //h2o enr state nc us/ncwetlands
An Equal opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper
March 1, 2006
Page 2 of 5
In section 4 3 12, the DEIS states that up to 2 9 mullion cubic yards of excavated material would
be produced by the Northern Shore Corridor alternative This is a significant amount of
excavated material Due to the geological setting, there is the potential for much of this material
to be unsuitable for fill material in the construction of embankments associated with the road
This is especially true for areas of AP rock The DEIS does not discuss a disposal plan for this
material Please describe how and where this material will be disposed of and what the costs
estimates of the disposal would be This description should include best management practices
for treatment and their associated costs Please be aware that the DWQ will not allow disposal of
excavated material in streams or wetlands In addition, any storm water drainage that contacts
excavated material identified to contain AP rock will not be allowed to discharge untreated to
surface waters
6 The DEIS states that up to half a mullion tons of limestone would be needed for encapsulation of
AP rock to be used in embankments, and that the nearest quarry is 85 mules away Do the
construction costs for the proposed alternatives include the limestone hauling costs9 If not, these
costs should be included in the cost analysis In addition, the cost analysis in Appendix E, only
discusses the treatment of embankment material for AP rock All excavated and exposed AP rock
would require treatment not just material used for embankment The cost analysis should reflect
additional costs of treating runoff from this material
7 In section 4 4 1 1, the methodology for assessing impacts to wetlands describes the impact
thresholds for negligible, minor, moderate, and mayor impacts DWQ feels that the impact
thresholds should be adjusted to reflect the rarity and the relative significance of wetlands in this
area DWQ feels that any impact to wetlands less than 0 1 acres is at least a moderate impact,
especially considering the rare plant and animal communities that occur in these wetlands
8 In Appendix M the DEIS presents the individual stream impacts for each alternative It is unclear
whether these impacts are direct, indirect, or the combined direct and indirect impacts for each
stream Please provide the impacts associated with each stream for each alternative broken down
into direct and indirect impacts In addition, please provide corresponding figures and maps that
show the location of each impact
9 In section 4 4 3 2, the document states that for the build alternatives, Water Quality Standard
violations may occur or are likely to occur A North Carolina 401 Water Quality Certification
can only be issued for a project that provides adequate assurances that Water Quality Standards
and discharge guidelines will not be violated Based on the information provided in the DEIS,
DWQ may not be able to issue a 401 Water Quality Certification for the build alternatives
associated with this project
10 Section 4 4 3 4, provides a discussion of the Impairment Evaluation "Impaired waters" is a term
related to surface waters that do not meet associated water quality standards These waters are
listed on the 303(d) list of Impaired Waters in accordance with the Clean Water Act It is unclear
whether use of the words "impairment" or "impaired waters" in the document corresponds with
the meaning of the words in the Clean Water Act Please provide a definition and a more in-
depth discussion of "impairment" in the DEIS
11 DWQ disagrees with the conclusion that Impairment of water quality is unlikely based on current
information At several points in section 4 4 3, the Draft EIS states the water quality standards
March 1, 2006
Page 3 of 5
violations are likely to occur if any build scenario is selected If these violations occur as
expected, water quality impairment is a likely outcome
12 It is worth noting that the Northern Shore Corridor alternative could potentially impact over 4
miles of streams in the project area much of which includes the Great Smokey Mountain National
Park and a nonunated Outstanding Resource Water (ORW) watershed It is our understanding
that impacts of this magnitude would not be in accordance with the National Park Service
Organic Act as stated in section 3 2 5 1
13 In August 2005, DWQ biologists completed a benthic macroinvertebrate survey of several
representative tributaries along the north shore of Fontana Lake to determine if the streams
qualified for Outstanding Resource Water (ORW) designation All benthic macroinvertebrate
collections evaluated scored an excellent bloclassification and indicates the tributaries to the north
shore of Fontana Lake qualify for ORW designation In addition, the biologists noted that every
sample collected from this study included at least one rare mayfly or caddisfly An extremely
rare caddisfly, Mayatrichia ayama, was collected at the Eagle Creek site This particular taxon
appears dust eight times in over 5,800 of DWQ's benthological collections throughout the State
The presence of such rare and diverse benthic communities demonstrates the pristine habitat and
water quality provided by streams along the north shore of Fonatana Lake DWQ is particularly
concerned about the potential loss of these unique communities if any of the Northern Shore
Corridor build alternatives are pursued
14 The streams along the northern shore of Fontana Lake have been nominated for ORW
designation The NC Environmental Management Commission - Water Quality Committee has
approved staff to distribute draft rules for public comment These rules include special
restrictions on construction activity within the affected area These restrictions may add
additional cost to construction projects It is unclear whether these additional costs have been
included in the cost analysis for the proposed project Please include the estimated costs of
meeting these additional restrictions in the cost analysis for the build alternatives
15 In the event that a construction alternative is selected, substantial mitigation will likely be
required It is unclear whether sufficient mitigation sites are available within the 8-digit
hydrologic unit code (HUC) and/or eco-region Little or no mitigation is available on-site, as the
project lies within a Biosphere Preserve, and most similar watersheds outside the park boundary
fall within National Forests Please provide a discussion of potential mitigation strategies for this
protect
General Comments
After the selection of the preferred alternative and prior to an issuance of the 401 Water Quality
Certification, the Applicant is respectfully reirunded that they will need to demonstrate the
avoidance and minimization of impacts to wetlands and streams to the maximum extent practical
Should the impacts to jurisdictional wetlands exceed 1 acre and/or to jurisdictional streams
exceed 150 linear feet, mitigation will be required in accordance with NCDWQ Wetland Rules
115A NCAC 2H 0506(h)(2) )
March 1, 2006
Page 4 of 5
2 As part of the 401 Water Quality Certification Application process, the Applicant is respectfully
reminded to include specifics for both onsite and offsite mitigation plans If mitigation is
required, it is preferable to present a conceptual (if not finalized) mitigation plan with the
environmental documentation While NCDWQ realizes that this may not always be practical, it
should be noted that for projects requiring mitigation, appropriate mitigation plans will be
required in conjunction with the issuance of a 401 Water Quality Certification We understand
that NC DOT will request compensatory mitigation through the NC Ecosystem Enhancement
Program for offsrte mitigation
3 Future documentation, including the 401 Water Quality Certification Application, should
continue to include an itemized listing of the proposed wetland and stream impacts with
corresponding mapping
4 An analysis of cumulative and secondary impacts anticipated as a result of this project is required
The type and detail of analysis should conform to the NC Division of Water Quality Policy on the
assessment of secondary and cumulative impacts dated April 10, 2004
5 The Applicant is respectfully reminded that all impacts, including but not limited to, bridging, fill,
excavation and clearing, to jurisdictional wetlands, streams, and riparian buffers need to be
included in the final impact calculations These impacts, in addition to any construction impacts,
temporary or otherwise, also need to be included as part of the 401 Water Quality Certification
Application
6 Where streams must be crossed, the DWQ prefers bridges be used in lieu of culverts However,
we realize that economic considerations often require the use of culverts Please be advised that
culverts should be countersunk to allow unimpeded passage by fish and other aquatic organisms
Moreover, in areas where high quality wetlands or streams are impacted, a bridge may prove
preferable When applicable, bridge bents should not be installed in the creek, to the maximum
extent practicable
7 Sediment and erosion control measures should not be placed in wetlands
8 Borrow/waste areas should avoid wetlands to the maximum extent practicable Impacts to
wetlands in borrow/waste areas will need to be presented in the 401 Water Quality Certification
and could precipitate compensatory mitigation
9 The 401 Water Quality Certification application will need to specifically address the proposed
methods for storm water management More specifically, storm water should not be permitted to
discharge directly into streams or surface waters
10 Based on the information presented in the document, the magnitude of impacts to wetlands and
streams may require an Individual Permit application to the Corps of Engineers and
corresponding 401 Water Quality Certification Please be advised that a 401 Water Quality
Certification requires satisfactory protection of water quality to ensure that water quality
standards are met and no wetland or stream uses are lost Final permit authorization will require
the submittal of a formal application by the Applicant and written concurrence from the
NCDWQ Please be aware that any approval will be contingent on appropriate avoidance and
minimization of wetland and stream impacts to the maximum extent practical, the development of
March 1, 2006
Page 5 of 5
an acceptable storm water management plan, and the inclusion of appropriate rmtigation plans
where appropriate
DWQ appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on your project Should you have any
questions or require any additional information, please contact Brian Wrenn at 919-733-5715
cc Steve Lund, US ACE Asheville Regulatory Field Office
Marla Chambers, NC WRC
Marella Buncick, USFWS
Chris Militscher, USEPA
Mike Parker, Asheville Regional Office, NC DWQ
Alex Marks, NC DWQ, Planning Branch
File Copy