HomeMy WebLinkAbout20081462 Ver 1_Emails_20081027Re: UT'to Rocky River Stream Restoration (DWQ#08-1462)
a,-r,r as - ? to a.
A? hs
Subject: Re: UT to Rocky River Stream Restoration (DWQ#08-1462)
From: "Tammy.L.Hill" <Tammy.L.Hill@ncmail.net>
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2008 10:42:22 -0500
To: Lin Xu <Lin.Xu@ncmail.net>
CC: Laurie Dennison <laurie.j.dennison@ncmail.net>, Alan Johnson <Alan.Johnson@ncmail.net>, Eric Kulz
<eric.kulz@ncmail.net>
Hi, Lin. i ¦
Thank you for the information you provided on 10/15 and 10/23/08. I know Bev will appreciate the CMD
electronic format in addition to the written Restoration Plan corrections. I will add the information to
our file with the application materials, and DWQ will consider the 401 Certification deemed issued.
Best wishes with the project!
Tammy
Lin Xu wrote:
Tammy,
Thank you very much for your follow-up e-mail. I did get your voice mail message as well. I was
waiting to get some information back from our designer before I call you back. The following are
responses (not complete yet) to your questions or concerns:
1) Total wetland acreage and impacted wetland acreage
The impacted wetland acreage (permanent and temporary) listed in PCN is the correct one. The impact
acreage listed in the restoration plan was primary since the construction sheets included in the plan
are draft. When I was preparing the PCN, I asked the designer to produce the figure (which included
the application package) and to finalize impact acreage.
For total wetland acreage, the designer is checking the number today. And I will sent you another
e-mail with the correct information when I hear from the designer.
2) Monitoring frequency
Tammy, EEP is actually already doing what you suggest. The monitoring report for an project is
submitted to EEP annually. However, site visits are conducted somewhere from three to six times for
any giving year between EEP staffs and monitoring firms. We want to catch any potential problems
early, and we feel that will help us by visiting site more often. By the way, I thought that you
should like beavers as a wetland specialist.
3) Vegetation and education
For vegetation, we will certainly follow what you suggested. Robin Dolin (EEP project manage for this
project) is actively involving to develop education components of this project with the school. In
fact, she and an EEP watershed planner are meeting with the school to discuss this today.
I will send you the correct total wetland acreage within the project site late. Please.let me know if
you have any additional questions or concerns about this project. Thanks again for your help.
Lin
Tammy.L.Hill wrote:
Dear Lin:
The 401 Oversight and Express Permitting Unit has reviewed the PCN and Restoration Plan for the UT
to Rocky River mitigation project. This email is a follow-up to the voicemail I left for you on
10/10/2008. Although I haven't heard back from you yet, I wanted to follow up in hopes that the
project can be deemed issued within the 30-day clock (ending 10/24/2008).
We have a few concerns with the project. The only one that may impede issuance of the 401 permit is
#1 below. The others are mentioned for future reference and in hopes that they will contribute to
the project's success over the coming years.
1. Wetland acreage amounts appear to be inconsistent in the PCN and Restoration Plan. Appendix
details a 9.2-acre wetland delineation, but the PCN describes 6.5 acres of wetland present on the
site. The PCN indicates there will be 0.335 acres of permanent wetland impact, but the Plan
discusses 1.05 acres of impact. *Please clarify the beginning and ending wetland acreage on the
site, as well as temporary and permanent wetland impact acreage.*
2. The level of build-out around the site and beaver activity within the site may cause challenges
for maintaining stability of the stream restoration. Monitoring more frequently than once per year
may be necessary in order to identify and address problems prior to damage to the restoration
effort.
3. Wetland enhancement is tied exclusively to vegetation, and the performance criteria allow up to
20 percent coverage by invasive/nuisance species. This is a high percentage of the community
composition and should be considered an absolute maximum for evaluation of the project as
successful. We fully support observation of the project as an educational component for the
adjacent schools as long as such activities do not disturb the development of the targeted
ecosystem.
Thank you for your attention. We appreciate the opportunity to comment on the Restoration Plan and
to work with you toward a successful mitigation project.
1 of 2 10/27/2008 11:55 AM
Re: UT to Rocky River Stream Restoration (DWQ#08-1462)
Warm regards,
Tammy
Lin Xu
Environmental Engineer
NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699 - 1652
(919)715-7571 (Phone)
(919)715-2219 (Fax)
lin.xu@ncmail.net
www.nceep.net
Tammy Hill
Environmental Senior
NC Division of Water
2321 Crabtree Blvd.,
Raleigh, NC 27604
919-715-9052 (voice)
919-733-6893 (fax)
Tammy. L. Hi llc?ncmail.
Specialist
Quality (401/Wetlands)
Suite 250
net
2 of 2 10/27/2008 11:55 AM