20161239 Ver 1_20161239 request for more info (2)_20170518

ROY COOPER
MICHAEL S. REMGAN
Sen erw i
Water Resources
S. JAY ZIMMERMAN
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 0n, , 11-1
May 8, 2017
DWR # 16-1239
Cleveland County
Resource Environmental Solutions D
Attn: Brad Breslow, Cara Conder
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, NC 27605 ti1q y J
°�
^l. f/
Subject: REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATIONwrvaE' O
Mallard Water Quality Improvement Site 771'.
Dear Mr. Breslow:
On March 30, 2017, the Division of Water Resources (Division) received your application dated
March 28, 2017, requesting an Individual 401 Certification from the Division for the subject
project. The Division has reviewed the Final Mitigation Plan and has some questions that need
to be resolved, therefore your application cannot be processed at this time. The application is
on -hold until all of the following information is received:
1. On January 30, 2017 we sent an email (see attached) to RES emphasizing several items
which DWR believes are not reflected in the Final Mitigation Plan,
a. There should be a schematic of the tie-in where Reach 3 enters Reach 2 (and
some sort of structural protection) in the plans,
b. Groundwater monitoring gauges should be on site now, in addition, more gauges
need to be placed in the general vicinity adjacent to Reach 1 to document
hydrologic uplift and also show the new channel does not drain the existing
wetland.
c. DWR requires 7 years of monitoring for forested wetland projects.
2. DWR believes that the use of rock cross vanes in a low slope stream may not be
necessary, rather DWR suggests various rock or wood riffles (or combinations) to
maintain grade,
3. DWR believes the placement of the cross vane in upper Reach 1 (just downstream of the
culverts and in a meander bend) would be hazardous to the stability of the stream,
4. What is the drainage area of Reach 3?
5. DWR believes that for Reach 3 to receive enhancement credit, some bedform
enhancements should be considered,
State of North Carolina I Environmental Quality I Water Resources
1617 Mail Service Center I Raleigh. North Carolina 27699-1617
919 807 6300
Scanned by CamScanner

information for the proper consideration of the application. It all of the requesiea imuillICILIWIP
is not received in writing within 30 calendar days of receipt of this letter, the Division will be
unable to approve the application and it will be returned. The return of this project will
necessitate reapplication to the Division for approval, including a complete application package
and the appropriate fee.
Please respond in writing within 30 calendar days of receipt of this letter by sending three
copies of all of the above requested information to the 401 & Buffer Permitting Branch, 1617
Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617.
Please be aware that you have no authorization under the Section 401 of the Clean Water Act
for this activity and any work done within waters of the state may be a violation of North
Carolina General Statutes and Administrative Code.
Please contact Mac Haupt at 919-807-6476 or [e-mail] if you have any
questions or concerns.
Sincerely,
Karen Higgins, Supervisor
401 & Buffer Permitting Unit
cc: Daniel Ingram- RES (via email)
David Shaeffer-USACE, Charlotte Regulatory Field Office (via email)
Todd Tugwell- USACE, Raleigh Regulatory Field Office (via email)
Alan Johnson, DWR Mooresville Regional Office 401 files (via email)
DWR 401 & Buffer Permitting Unit
Scanned by CamScanner

From: Haupt, Mac
Sent:
To, Monday, January 30, 2017 10:59 AM
'Cara Conder'; Tugwell, Todd J CIV USARMY CESAW (US); Johnson, Alan; Shaeffer,
David Leigh (Dave) CIV USARMY CESAW (US); [e-mail]
Cc: Daniel Ingram; Brad Breslow
Subject: RE: Mallard Site Visit Notes
Ca ra,
I reviewed your notes and they are good for the most part, however, I want to add and emphasize a few items that were
discussed on site:
1. Beaver sign was seen on-site and DWR expects beaver to be managed during the monitoring period, (you did
state this in Table 10),
2. The placement of gauges on-site was discussed, this information would assist in the review for two
reasons:
a. Review of hydrologic uplift, currently on-site the area is a wetland, mostly a marsh -like wetland with a
prominent ditch and beaver present, therefore to show even a moderate functionafuplift d. That there entail
suld
be efforts to maintain a forested wetland ecosystem throughout the monitoring pe
three major efforts; one, good site prep for the trees and two, maintenance of the beaver on-site, and
analysis of the hydro data.
b. Review of hydrologic impact to the adjacent stream channel
3. Extending the enhancement portion of the stream above the tie-in. This would alleviate the stream loss
issue. In addition, I mentioned to Dani on-site that a tie-in would be necessary anyway (and shown on the
plans), given the hydrologic input into the stream. DWR believes this enhancement (above the tie-in) would be
necessary to offset the stream loss potential of the project.
4. The typical monitoring period for forested wetlands is 7 years. DWR believes that these projects, even though
termed, "water quality improvement projects" should be subject to the same standards as" typical wetland
MIAID ^^i dreic n -7 vaar mnnitorine oeriod for forested wetlands.
Scanned by CamScanner

�r
O�
Please find attached notes from the Mallard Water Quality Improvement project site visit on January 24, 2017. Can the
USACE confirm that our revisions to PCN application are extended past 2/13/17 due to determining status of potential
violation on site?
Thanks,
Cara
Cara ConderlNC Project Managerl Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110 f Raleigh, NC 27605
Direct: 919.209.1052 1 Cell: 843.446.2312
ores
Scanned by CamScanner