20181416_4C Merger Meeting Minutes_20180605

Carpenter,Kristi
From: Williams, Andrew E CIV USARMY CESAW (US)
<[e-mail]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2018 2:44 PM
To: Lawing, Jason
Cc: Mellor, Colin; Norton, Apri) R; Matthews, Monte K CIV
USARMY CESAW (US)
Subject: [External] RE: R-2530B / B-4974 4C Merger Meeting
Minutes
Attachments: 20180518Corps_NCDOT_newlocation_info.pdf;
2018-05-16 R2530B 4C Merger Meeting
Minutes_aewcomments.pdf
CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless verified. Send all
suspicious email as an attachment to Report Spam.<mailto:[e-mail]>
Jason,
I have added some additional comments. There are three highlighted sections with
comments. Please take a look to see if you want to add them to the minutes for
clarification. Also, please contact me if you have any questions. Thanks.
Andrew Williams
Regulatory Project Manager
US Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington District, Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
919-554-4884 ext. 26
-----Original Message-----
From: Lawing, Jason [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Tuesday, June 5, 2018 2:04 PM
To: Morgan, Stephen R<[e-mail]>; [e-mail]; McDaniel,
Andrew H. <[e-mail]>; Key, Bryan C<[e-mail]>;
[e-mail]; Mellor, Colin <[e-mail]>; Hemphill, Jeffrey L
<[e-mail]>; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail];
[e-mail]; Williams, Andrew E CIV USARMY CESAW (US)
<[e-mail]>; [e-mail]; Braspennickx,
Nicholle M CIV USARMY CESAW (US) <[e-mail]>;
Hood, Donna <[e-mail]>; Stutts, David S<[e-mail]>;
[e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; Lee, Craig J
<[e-mail]>; Moore, Jeff <[e-mail]>; Vickery, Bryan
<[e-mail]>; Blanton, Vance <Vance.Blanton@kimley-
horn.com>; '[e-mail]' <[e-mail]>; [e-mail];
[e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail];

[e-mail]; [e-mail]; Travis.Sinclair@duke-
energy.com; [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Subject: [Non-DoD Source] R-2530B / B-4974 4C Merger Meeting Minutes
Everyone,
Attached are the meeting minutes from the R-2530B / B-4974 4C meeting that was held
on May 16th 2018 at NCDOT. Thank you so much to everyone that attended both in
person and on the phone. We did our best to capture everyone that attended and the
discussion points. Please review the minutes and let us know if we missed anyone that
attended or if we missed anything discussed. These minutes will also be posted to the
NCDOT Connect site.
Thanks again,
Jason Lawing
Jason Lawing, P.E., C.F.M.
Kimley-Horn � 200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200, Charlotte, NC 28202
Direct: 704 319 5683 I Mobile: [phone]

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
ROY COOPER
GOVERNOR
MEMO TO: All Attendees
FROM: Jason Lawing, P.E.
Hydraulics Project Design Engineer
DATE: May 16, 2018
JAMES H. TROGDON III
SECRETARY
SUBJECT: Project 34446.1.6 (R-2530B) and 39922.1.1 (B-4974)
Stanly and Montgomery Counties
NC 24-27 from NC 740 in Albemarle to the East of the Pee Dee River
MINUTES FOR INTERAGENCY CONCURRENCE 4C MERGER MEETING
Interagency Concurrence 4C Merger Meeting was held on May 16, 2018 at 10:00 AM in the Structures
Design Conference Room for the above referenced project. The following items were addressed:
1. The following persons attended:
Name
Stephen Morgan
Ray Lovinggood
Andy McDaniel
Bryan Key
Laura Sutton
Colin Mellor
Jeff Hemphill
John Olinger
Louis Pages
Trey Caddell
Reuben Blakley
Andy Williams
Nicholle BraspennickY
April Norton
Donna Hood
David Stutts
Donald Hampton
Michael Bright
Carla Dagnino
Craig Lee
Jason Lawing
Jeff Moore
Bryan Vickery
Vance Blanton
Bill Elam
MAILING ADDRESS:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
ROADWAY DESIGN UNIT
1582 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
Rn�ei�H NC 27699-1582
Representin�
NCDOT Hydraulics
NCDOT PMU
NCDOT Hydraulics
NCDOT PMU
NCDOT PMU
NCDOT EAU
NCDOT EAU
Division 8 DCM
Division 8 ROW
Division 8 ROW
Division 8 Resident Engineer
USACE
USACE
NCDWR
NCDWR
NCDOT SMU
NCDOT Utilities
NCDOT Utilities
NCDOT EAU
NCDOT PMU
Kimley-Horn (KH)
Kimley-Horn (KH)
Kimley-Horn (KH)
Kimley-Horn (KI�
NCDOT Hydraulics
TELEPHONE: J1J-7O7-6ZOO
FAX: [phone]
WEBSITE: WWW.NCDOT.GOV
Email
[e-mail]
rlovinggood(a�ncdot. gov
ahmcdaniel@ncdot. gov
bckey�a�ncdot.gov
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
jhemphill(a�ncdot. o�v
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
andrew.e.williams2(a�usace.army.mil
nicholle. m.braspennickx@usace. army. mil
april.norton@ncdenr. gov
donna.hood@ncdenr. gov
[e-mail]
dehampton(a�ncdot. o�v
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
j ason.lawing@kimley-horn. com
j ef£moore@kimley-horn. com
brvan.vickerx(a�kimley-horn. com
vance.blanton(�a,kiml ey-horn. com
[e-mail]
LOCATION:
CENTURY CENTER COMPLEX
BUILDING A
1000 BIRCH RIDGE DRIVE
RALEIGH NC

R-2530B/B-4974 Interagency Concurrence 4C Merger Meeting Minutes
Frank Fleming Ecological Engineering
The following persons attended by phone:
Name
Travis Wilson
Amy Chapman
Rick Baucom
Trent Culp
Jason Callicutt
Leslie Pomaville
Travis Sinclair
Mark Staley
Representin�
NCWRC
NCDWR
Division 10 DCE
Division 10 ROW
Division 10 ROW
Duke Energy
Duke Energy
NCDOT REU
2. Project overview was given and the following was discussed:
ffleming@ecologicaleng. com
Email
travis.wilson(a�ncwildlife.org
amy. chapman@ncdenr. gov
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
leslie.pomaville(a�duke-ener� .y com
travi s. sinclair@duke-energy. c om
[e-mail]
• Project map shown and limits were explained between the R-2530B, B-4974 and R-2527 projects.
• Project consists of widening on best fit alignment along NC 24-27 from Albemarle at intersection
of NC 740 to East of the Pee Dee River beyond the first crossing of Rocky Creek
• Project located in Stanly and Montgomery Counties, as well as, both Divisions 8 and 10. Pee Dee
River serves as the border. This will be a Division 10 managed project.
• Project is approximately 7.1 miles in length, the first 1.2 miles is urban (within City limits) and
remaining 5.9 miles is rural. Project extends through Uwharrie Mountains and therefore
encounters steep terrain and rock in many locations
o Urban typical section: 41ane divided with 23' raised grassed median, curb and gutter, 14'
outside lanes for bike accommodations, 12' inside lanes, 10' shoulders with sidewalk and
2:1 side slopes or flatter. Superstreet design incorporated with roundabout at intersection
of L and Y2/Y2A (Barnard Rd/Anderson Rd)
o Rural typical section: 4 lane divided with 46' grassed median, 12' lanes, 4' paved
shoulders, 2:1 fill slopes or flatter, 6:1 outside ditch front slopes, with 4:1 back slopes and
6:1 median ditch slopes
• R-2527
o EA and FONSI completed for the R-2530B / B-4974 and R-2527 projects. Originally only
R-2530B and B-4974 projects funded.
o Concern during 4B about project meeting the EA purpose and need if only R-2530B and
B-4974 were permitted.
o R-2527 project became funded and design started early 2017.
o Decision at 4B to include preliminary impacts from R-2527 in permit package.
o Drawings will be needed for the preliminary impacts. Ray Lovinggood and Bill Elam to
coordinate production of these drawings.
o R-2527 alignment in the process of revision. Anticipate design being far enough along for
permit drawings in fall of 2018.
o Preliminary impacts should include slopestakes plus 25 feet.
Current project timeline
o Environmental Assessment Approved December 23, 2011
0 4B Meeting held October 19, 2016
o FONSI Approved April 10, 2017
o FDFI Held May 3, 2017
o ROW Date May 19, 2017 (ROW currently being acquired)
o LET Date March 19, 2019
Page 2 of 7

R-2530B/B-4974 Interagency Concurrence 4C Merger Meeting Minutes
• Major streams crossings discussed; Mountain Creek, Jacobs Creek, Pee Dee River/Lake Tillery
and Rocky Creek. USGS topo map referenced.
3. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) permit was discussed, conversation was led by Colin
Mellor:
• FERC boundary located around Pee Dee River / Lake Tillery (water supply watershed)
• Pencils need to be down on design revisions prior to start of FERC application process
• Leslie Pomaville indicated they will need to know the volumes of rip rap bank stabilization below
the normallake level.
• Leslie Pomaville indicated that discharges directed to the lake would not normally be allowed
per the shoreline guidance.
o In particular, discussed the two outfalls on the begin bridge side. One in the median, is the
replacement of an existing outfall. The other is on the left side of the roadway, a base ditch
drains to the lake carrying runoff that is piped down the steep bridge embankment from an
upstream linear, base ditch, hazardous spill basin.
o Also discussed sites 40 and 41 of the permits. Site 40 replaces an existing 30" pipe with a
proposed 36" pipe. Impacts from this site stay out of the normal lake level but are located
within the FERC boundary. Site 41 replaces an existing 60" pipe with a proposed 1@ 6'
x 8' RCBC. Will discuss these sites further at future meeting.
• It was decided that a follow up meeting would need to occur with Duke-Energy and NCDOT to
discuss outfalls, impacts and FERC. Colin Mellor to set up the meeting. Donna Hood and Andy
Williams indicated they would like to be part of that meeting. Meeting will need to occur quickly
and could possibly be at the bridge site.
• It was mentioned that the bridge work would be pulled from the R-2530B / B-4974 project and
completed earlier as a separate project.
o Anticipate November 2018 LET for bridge project
o Eastbound Bridge 50 will have deck rehab and roadway resurfacing. This will be the initial
work completed on the project. No permitted activities will be needed for Bridge 50 work.
Anticipate finishing Bridge 50 work at a similar time that the R-2530B / B-4974 project
will LET in March of 2019 at which time all permits will be in place and Westbound Bridge
51 work can commence.
o Anticipate 401/404 permits in January or February of 2019 for R-2530B / B-4974.
o Westbound Bridge 51 superstructure will be rehabilitated. Bridge is a historical structure.
The existing arch structure will be retained. The bridge will be lengthened by
approximately 50' on the begin bridge side and by approximately 25' on the end bridge
side.
o The existing bridge consists of deck drains that drain down behind the existing bridge bents
and direct discharge into the water.
o There was an Effects meeting on 1/19/17 between Human Environment Section (HES,
Mary Pope Furr), SMU, Hydraulics, RDU, PDEA, and Renee Gledhill-Early of the State
Historic Preservation Office regarding the potential for a proposed deck drain system on
Bridge 51. It was determined that the proposed bridge will be allowed to have deck
drains to discharge over the water similar to the existing structure.
• Stephen Morgan mentioned a scheduled draw down of Lake Tillery later this year and trying to
time this with construction activities below the normal lake leveL It was decided it was most
likely not feasible to coordinate these efforts due to the project timeline.
4. Review of Stormwater Management Plan (SMP) and Permit Drawings
• A narrative was included with the SMP that documented all the avoidance and minimization
efforts that were taken on the project. Some of the efforts were highlighted at the meeting.
• Pipe burial was discussed. A pipe burial table is included in the SMP that includes all cross pipes
on the project and associated information that was used to make a determination to bury or not.
Page 3 of 7

R-2530B/B-4974 Interagency Concurrence 4C Merger Meeting Minutes
The pipe bury determination was based on guidelines developed between NCDWR and Division
10. They are as follows:
o Not a jurisdictional stream, don't bury
o Jurisdictional on one end, don't bury
o Jurisdictional on both ends and has a pipe slope over 4°/o, don't bury over concern of head
cut
o Jurisdictional on both ends and has a pipe slope less than 4%, bury
o Bedrock prevents burial, don't bury
� It was mentioned the general guidance used when determining impacts was the slope stakes plus
10 feet.
• Donna Hood will need a waiver from burial and reasoning in the official submittal of the permit.
It was discussed that the pipe burial table is included in the SMP and all cross pipes have been
labeled on the plans as either to be or not to be buried.
• Donna Hood requested that everyone be updated when there are revisions to the permit drawings.
• Donna Hood mentioned she will expect high measures of erosion control on the entire project. It
was responded that although only a portion of the project falls within the water supply reservoir
critical area, the entire erosion control design was based on the 25-year storm event in an effort
to further protect the surrounding watershed.
• All comments received from the 4B were addressed.
• Permit drawings include 51 sites. With respect to everyone's time, decided to focus on certain
areas that were discussed at 4B or any major changes that have occurred since 4B. Opportunity
to discuss any sites not mentioned below was also given.
• Site 1(Sheet 2 of 84) — Replacing existing 1@ 87" x 63" CMPA with 2@ 9' x 5' RCBC (Buried
1')
o No major changes from 4B. As discussed at 4B, proposed 15 degree bend in culvert
improves entrance angle for upstream channel into culvert and helps protect parking area
of nearby upstream business.
o As requested from 4B, barrels will be backfilled with stream bed material to help prevent
trapping wildlife.
o Only downstream side is jurisdictional.
o No comments made.
• Site 2 and 3(Sheet 6 of 84) — Replacing existing 1@ 6' x 6' RCBC with 1@ 8' x 7' RCBC
(Buried 1')
o Since 4B this culvert has been shifted to the east to align better with the downstream
channel and set up for ease of construction phasing
o Comment received to break rip rap pattern on upstream left bank to better show tie-in with
tributary that ties through a channel change from the east.
o Comment received to make sure channel change is not a v ditch. Responded that for
channel changes such as this one, the design of the channel change was based off the natural
channel geometry of the stream. In this case a 6' base ditch with 2:1 side slopes.
o Comment received to make sure the design is not impeding wildlife passage. Responded
that main channel does not have any rip rap in the channel bed and the culvert is buried 1'.
Also, the channel change to the east has rip rap in the channel but it is embedded to allow
wildlife passage.
� Site 7 and 8(Sheet 10 of 84) — Replacing existing 1@ 6' x 6' RCBC with 1@ 7' x 7' RCBC
(Buried 1')
o No major changes from 4B.
o Bulb out previously in this area shifted west to avoid additional wetland impacts
o Commented that this area will not constitute a total take on the wetland
o Commented that a new PUE added at 90+75 -L- (RT) will require some additional wetland
impacts (mechanized clearing).
Page 4 of 7

R-2530B/B-4974 Interagency Concurrence 4C Merger Meeting Minutes
Site 11 (Sheet 15 and 17 of 84)
o Existing pond to be filled in and replaced with 3' standard base ditch (matching the
upstream jurisdictional stream typical section).
o Revised during ROW negotiations with the property owner
o Required PUE was impacting pond. NCDOT did not want to maintain pond and
homeowner no longer wanted pond.
o Comment from Andy Williams that mitigation for the pond will not be required.
o Comment from Donna Hood to make sure proposed ditch is stable. Suggested either coir
fiber matting or rip rap in the channel bottom and side slopes. Make sure the rip rap would
be embedded to allow aquatic passage.
Site 14 and 15 (Sheet 17 of 84)
o Andy Williams said these wetlands would not be considered total takes.
Site 17 (Sheet 22 and 24 of 84)
o Discussed at 4B and decided to pipe this area due to the stream classification and desire
not to cut as far back in the wooded area as the open channel would have required.
Approximate 1,000 feet of stream impact.
o Not a high quality stream. Classified as intermittent.
o Open channel required a cut slope that would tie approximately 147' offset and potentially
impact a house on sheet 24 of 84.
o No comments made.
• Site 28 (Sheet 38 and 40 of 84)
o Approximate 300' of stream impact.
o Discussed at 4B and decided to design as open channel due to amount of water.
o Large drainage area (104 acres) would require 72" pipe if piped.
o No comments made.
Site 35 and 36 (Sheet 24 of 84)
o Use of fill slopes steeper than 2:1 with reinforced soil slopes from Sta. 298+00 -L- to
303+00 -L- (RT) to avoid impacts due to fill to the parallel jurisdictional stream.
o Andy Williams commented to document the avoidance and minimization efforts at this
location well in the SMP narrative
o Donna Hood commented that since the slopes were steeper than 2:1 that extra armoring
would be necessary in the erosion control plans so nothing gets into the jurisdictional
stream
� Site 36 and 37 (Sheet 24 of 84) — Replacing 1@ 7' x 7' RCBC Bottomless RCBC with 1@ 9'
x 7' RCBC.
o Decided not to bury and not to use bottomless structure due to impact of proposed culvert
footings and culvert alignment not matching up with stream alignment in the area of the
downstream widening.
0 4' long baffles will be used throughout the box on 25' centers with Class B rip rap between
baffles to provide a continuous low flow channel. Existing channel consists of rock
therefore excavated material is not anticipated from the stream bed at the project site
during construction.
o Retaining existing 1@ 8' x 6' RCBC immediately upstream of existing box. Good
condition.
o Donna Hood commented to make sure banks are heavily armored between the two
culverts. Responded that design calls for Class I rip rap on banks and the existing stream
bed channel consists of natural rock.
o Stephen Morgan commented to make sure wingwalls are drawn correctly. Responded
that wingwalls were drawn to avoid the existing culvert wingwalls. Need to provide skew
angle of wingwalls on CSR in order to communicate to structures.
• Site 38 and 39 (Sheet 54 of 84)
Page 5 of 7

R-2530B/B-4974 Interagency Concurrence 4C Merger Meeting Minutes
o Discussed earlier in meeting during FERC discussion.
Sheet 56 of 84 - Filtration basin
o Hazardous spill basin at Sta. 352+75 -L- (RT) was modified to filtration basin to provide
some long-term water quality benefits. Sized and designed to capture and treat the water
quality volume that will consist of all the runoff from the new built-upon area for 80 to
90°/o of the average annual rainfall. Resulting in a water quality design storm of 1.5
inches.
o Filtration basin placed in area of old roadbed of NC 73.
o Donna Hood commented that she wants to see a way to isolate in case of a spill.
Concerned the underdrain will allow the spill to continue to flow downstream. Andy
McDaniel and Bryan Vickery discussed an idea to possibly cap the underdrain pipe within
the outlet structure in the case of a spill.
Site 41 (Sheet 58 of 84) — Replacing existing 1@ 60" RCP with 1@ 6' x 8' RCBC
o Not buried due to the culvert being located in the backwater of Lake Tillery
o Culvert oversized (HW/D of 1.0) due to the tailwater condition.
o No comments made.
Site 47 and 48 (Sheet 62 of 84) — Replacing existing 2@ 10' x 7' RCBC with 2@ 11' x 9'
RCBC (Buried 1')
o FEMA Limited Detail Study Stream, MOA Type 2b proposed
o As requested from 4B, barrels will be backfilled with stream bed material to help prevent
trapping wildlife.
o Use of high flow sill to help maintain the natural stream width and depth through the main
barrel.
o No comments made.
Site 47A (Sheet 62 of 84) — Filtration Basin
o Hazardous spill basin at Sta. 380+00 -L- (RT) was modified to filtration basin to provide
some long-term water quality benefits similar to one mentioned above.
o Similar concern and potential solution to the filtration basin above.
Site 47 (Sheet 62 of 84) — Hazardous Spill Basin
o Donna Hood verified that the weir of the hazardous spill basin was to be constructed out
of Class I rip rap only. This was confirmed and was designed as such based on previous
concern from NCDOT about constant standing water and maintenance issues if the weir
were to be constructed of dirt.
o Donna Hood commented that she would prefer to see the weir constructed of dirt and lined
with rip rap to provide a way to stop the water in the case of a spill. Responded that the
flow could be stopped through the use of shoveled earth material or stacked bags per the
guidelines. Design to be discussed further to determine if weir will be revised.
o Donna Hood stated that all hazardous spill basins will need to provide a means to stop the
water in the case of a spill. While not her preference, Donna said sand bags would be
acceptable, but need to be sure they are on site.
Site 48 (Sheet 62 of 84)
o Andy Williams commented about the 10' of temporary surface impacts upstream of the
proposed channel improvements. Discussed extending the temporary surface impacts to
the limits of the PDE.
Site 50 and 51 (Sheet 67 of 84) — Replacing existing 2@ 48" CMP with 2@ 9' x 6' RCBC
(Buried 1')
o Downstream of first major crossing on -L-
o Added to project after 4B meeting, when improvements were needed along Hilco and
Barnard Street for superstreet design revision
o Use of high flow sill to help maintain the natural stream width and depth through the main
barrel.
Page 6 of 7

R-2530B/B-4974 Interagency Concurrence 4C Merger Meeting Minutes
o No comments made.
• Final Impact Summary Sheet
o Comment to remove the R-2527 totals from sheet 84 of 84
o Comment to remove the pond impacts from sheets 80 and 82. Instead provide a sum of
the pond impacts on sheet 84.
5. Action Items
See previous sections for action items.
Meeting adjourned at 12:00 PM.
Page 7 of 7

Williams, Andrew E CIV USARMY CESAW (US)
From: Williams, Andrew E CIV USARMY CESAW (US)
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2018 9:38 AM
To: Mellor, Colin
Cc: Norton, April R; Williams, Andrew E CIV USARMY CESAW (US); Matthews, Monte K CIV
USARMY CESAW (US)
Subject: CP 4C B4974/R2530 follow up from 16 May 2018
Colin:
This is regarding the NCDOT project R2527/B4974/R2530:
During the CP 4C meeting for NCDOT project 64974/R2530 information was provided by NCDOT that there would be a
new location, 2 mile section on the R2527 portion of the project. Also, at this point we have not had a 4A meeting for
the R2527 portion of the project.
Prior to scheduling a 4A meeting for R2527 NCDOT will need to do the following:
1. Delineate all waters of the US located within the new proposed portion of ROW associated with the new location
section of R2527.
2. Have the delineation verified by the Corps/DWR 3. Provide a table showing the difference in impacts to jurisdictional
waters for the new location section vs. the section that will be abandoned.
4. Provide a table showing the difference in impacts to jurisdictional waters of the entire new R2527 project (with new
location section) vs. the old R2527 project (with the replaced R2527 section) (slope stakes +25 feet).
Once all of the items in 1-4 are accomplished, we will provide the impact comparisons (From #s 3 and 4 above) to the
Merger Team to review. At that point, we can decide if we can agree that our CP 3 is still valid and proceed to CP 4A or if
we need to revisit CP 3.
Please email me or give me a call if you have any questions. Thanks.
Andrew Williams
Regulatory Project Manager
US Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington District, Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
919-554-4884 ext. 26