20021139 Ver 2_Public Notice_20180824

[ I
US Army Corps PUBLIC NOTICE
Of Engineers
Wilmington District
Issue Date: 08/24/2018
Comment Deadline: 09/24/2018
Corps Action ID Number: SAW -2017-01312
The Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers (Corps) received an application from the
Airport Commission of Forsyth County seeking Department of the Army authorization to
impact approximately 1. 13 acres of wetland and 4,079 linear feet of jurisdictional stream
channel associated with the following: 1) Extension of Taxilane L and new maintenance,
repair, and overhaul (MRO) facilities; 2) MRO auto parking and apron expansion; 3)
Runway 15-33 obstruction removal; 4) Runway 22 safety area extension; 5) New haul
road; and 6) Construction of an erosion control/stormwater basin for the Smith Reynolds
Airport in Forsyth County, North Carolina.
Specific plans and location information are described below and shown on the attached
plans. This Public Notice and all attached plans are also available on the Wilmington
District Web Site at:
http://www.saw.usace.army.mil/Missions/Re ug latoryPermitProgram.aspx
APPLICANT: Airport Commission of Forsyth County
Mr. Mark Davidson
3 801 N. Liberty Street
Winston-Salem, NC 27105
Mark. davidson(dsmithreynolds.org
336-767-6361
AGENT: Clear Water Environmental Consultants, Inc.
Mr. R. Clement Riddle
32 Clayton Street
Asheville, NC 28801
clementAcwenv.com
828-698-9800
Authority
The Corps evaluates this application and decides whether to issue, conditionally issue, or
deny the proposed work pursuant to applicable procedures of the following Statutory
Authorities:
® Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344)
F-1 Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 403)
Version 7.8.2014 Page 1

❑ Section 103 of the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972
(33 U.S.C. 1413)
Location
Location Description: The project site is located within Smith Reynolds Airport property,
which is located at 3801 N. Liberty Street, 4204, Winston-Salem (Forsyth County), North
Carolina.
Project Area (acres): —94 Nearest Town: Winston-Salem
Nearest Waterway: Brushy Fork River Basin: Yadkin
Latitude and Longitude: 36.143600 N, -80.221970 W
Existing Site Conditions
The Proposed Project area occurs within the Smith Reynolds Airport property boundary.
The airport property is mostly developed with aprons, taxiways, parking, hangers,
buildings, other airfield structures, and maintained in -field grassed lawns. Elevations on-
site range from approximately 952 above mean sea level (MSL) to 1,030 feet above
MSL. Seven community types were identified on the airport property: 1) Virginia Pine
(Pinus virginiana) Monoculture; 2) Virginia Pine Dominated Forest; 3) Mixed
Hardwood/Virginia Pine Forest; 4) Stream Bank and Riparian Forest; 5) Wetlands; 6)
Maintained Grass Fields; and 7) Abandoned Field/Early Successional Scrub Community.
Applicant's Stated Purpose
As stated by the applicant, the purpose of the Proposed Project is to enact several
development recommendations provided within the 2012 Master Plan Update and
Associated Layout Plant and those requested by the Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA). These recommendations include satisfying FAA standards and improving overall
efficiency and safety at Smith Reynolds Airport.
Project Description
The Proposed Project will consist of the following developments/improvements: 1)
Extension of Taxilane L and new MRO facilities; 2) MRO auto parking and apron
expansion; 3) Runway 15-33 obstruction removal; 4) Runway 22 safety area extension;
5) New haul road; and 6). Construction of an erosion control/stormwater basin.
Descriptions of the various Proposed Project developments/improvements are as follows:
1. Taxilane L and new MRO facilities — Construction of a 1,650 -foot Taxilane
extension and three aircraft hangars for use as future MRO facilities. Taxilane L
will be a new taxilane located on an existing concrete ramp and will provide
access to the proposed MRO facilities. Each MRO hanger would contain
Version 7.8.2014 Page 2

approximately 50,000 square feet of space (totaling 150,000 square feet). These
hangers may be utilized in the future for air cargo and corporate aircraft.
2. MRO Auto Parking and Apron Expansion — In support of the three planned MRO
facilities, an 85,000 square foot parking lot is proposed north and adjacent to the
hanger facilities. The proposed lot would provide up to 170 spaces or
approximately 56 spaces per hanger. In addition, a 242,000 square foot concrete
apron would provide aircraft space and mobility from the Taxilane L extension to
the MRO hanger facilities.
3. Runway 15-33 Obstruction Removal — Obstructions in the form of trees and
excess terrain currently penetrate the runway Object Free Area and imaginary
surface planes east of Runway 15-33. In total, approximately 24.2 acres of
property would be regarded to resolve this deficiency.
4. Runway 22 Safety Area Expansion — The existing runway safety area for Runway
22 does not meet current FAA requirements for the length of the runway safety
area, which extends past the end of the runway. The runway safety area would be
extended to a total of 300 feet from the end of Runway 22 using material from the
Runway 15-33 obstruction removal project.
5. Haul Road — The proposed construction of the haul road would occur entirely on
airport property and would utilize a portion of an existing gravel road network.
6. Erosion Control/Stormwater Basin — The construction of a new erosion
control/stormwater basin would be utilized for the Taxilane L Extension and new
MRO facilities with auto parking and apron expansion. This basin would be
converted to a stormwater retention basin upon completion of previously
mentions Projects 1-5.
Avoidance and Minimization
The applicant provided the following information in support of efforts to avoid and/or
minimize impacts to the aquatic environment:
"Smith Reynolds Airport considered a variety of constraints, including impacts to
wetlands and waters of the U.S. The applicant has avoided and minimized impacts to
wetlands to the greatest extent practicable and feasible while still accomplishing the
overall project purpose. The project as proposed avoids approximately 5,391 linear feet
of stream (57%) and 0.653 acre (37%) of wetlands."
Compensatory Mitigation
The applicant offered the following compensatory mitigation plan to offset unavoidable
functional loss to the aquatic environment:
The applicant has attempted to avoid and minimize impacts where possible and will
compensate to the extent practicable, for the remaining unavoidable losses with
mitigation. The applicant proposes the following mitigation for the unavoidable impacts
to water of the U.S. (Table 1):
Version 7.8.2014 Page 3

Table 1. Applicant's Mitigation Proposal
Impact
p
Feature
T e of
yp
Impact
Proposed
Mitigation
Ratio
Impact Amount
Required
q
Credits
Medium
Impact 42
Stream Impacts
Medium
Impact 43
Fill
1:1
1,888 linear feet
4,079 linear feet
Impact 47 Fill 1:1 1,363 linear feet
Impact 411 Fill 1:1 70 linear feet
Impact 412 Fill 1:1 98 linear feet
Impact 414 Fill 1:1 67 linear feet
Impact 415 Fill 1:1 526 linear feet
Impact 416 Fill 1:1 67 linear feet
Low
Impact 47
Wetland Impacts
High
Impact 41
Fill
1:1
0.01 acre
1.13 acres
Impact 42 Fill 1:1 0.003 acre
Impact 44 Fill 1:1 0.23 acre
Impact 45 Fill 1:1 0.07 acre
Impact 46 Fill 1:1 0.03 acre
Impact 48 Fill 1:1 0.02 acre
Impact 49 Fill 1:1 0.27 acre
Impact 410 Fill 1:1 0.12 acre
Impact 413 Fill 1:1 0.38 acre
The Applicant has rated/classified streams and wetlands within the Proposed Project area
using the North Carolina methodology for streams and wetlands (i.e., North Carolina
Stream Assessment Methodology and North Carolina Wetland Assessment Methodology)
and their findings are listed below in Table 2. It is the opinion of the Applicant that the
mitigation ratio for all stream and wetland impacts should not exceed a 1:1 ratio. The
applicant proposes to compensate for impacts associated with the Proposed Project by
offering payment into the NCDEQ-Division of Mitigation Services (DMS). Private
mitigation banks, within the watershed of the Proposed Project, did not have credits
available at the time of the Applicant's request.
Table 2. Applicant's Stream and Wetland Ratings/Classifications
Impact Feature
Stream or Wetland Type
Rating/Classification
Impact 41
Headwater Forest Wetland
Medium
Impact 42
Headwater Forest Wetland
Medium
Impact 43
Perennial Stream
Medium
Impact 44
p
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Wetland
Low
Impact 45
Headwater Forest Wetland
Medium
Impact 46
Headwater Forest Wetland
Low
Impact 47
Perennial Stream
High
Impact 48
Headwater Forest Wetland
Low
Impact 49
Headwater Forest Wetland
Low
Impact 410
Headwater Forest Wetland
Low
Version 7.8.2014 Page 4

Impact Feature
Stream or Wetland Type
Rating/Classification
Impact # 11
Perennial Stream
Medium
Impact # 12
Perennial Stream
Medium
Impact # 13
Headwater Forest Wetland
Low
Impact # 14
Perennial Stream
Medium
Impact # 1 5
p
Perennial Stream
Did not complete a NCSAM
Form
Impact # 16
p
Perennial Stream
Did not complete a NCSAM
Form
Essential Fish Habitat
Pursuant to the Magnuson -Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, this
Public Notice initiates the Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) consultation requirements. The
Corps' initial determination is that the Proposed Project would not affect EFH or
associated fisheries managed by the South Atlantic or Mid Atlantic Fishery Management
Councils or the National Marine Fisheries Service.
Cultural Resources
Pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Appendix C of
33 CFR Part 325, and the 2005 Revised Interim Guidance for Implementing Appendix C,
the District Engineer consulted district files and records and the latest published version
of the National Register of Historic Places and initially determines that:
F-1 Should historic properties, or properties eligible for inclusion in the National
Register, be present within the Corps' permit area; the proposed activity requiring
the DA permit (the undertaking) is a type of activity that will have no potential to
cause an effect to an historic properties.
® No historic properties, nor properties eligible for inclusion in the National
Register, are present within the Corps' permit area; therefore, there will be no
historic properties affected. The Corps subsequently requests concurrence from
the SHPO (or THPO).
F-1 Properties ineligible for inclusion in the National Register are present within the
Corps' permit area; there will be no historic properties affected by the proposed
work. The Corps subsequently requests concurrence from the SHPO (or THPO).
F-1 Historic properties, or properties eligible for inclusion in the National Register,
are present within the Corps' permit area; however, the undertaking will have no
adverse effect on these historic properties. The Corps subsequently requests
concurrence from the SHPO (or THPO).
F-1 Historic properties, or properties eligible for inclusion in the National Register,
are present within the Corps' permit area; moreover, the undertaking may have an
Version 7.8.2014 Page 5

adverse effect on these historic properties. The Corps subsequently initiates
consultation with the SHPO (or THPO).
❑ The proposed work takes place in an area known to have the potential for the
presence of prehistoric and historic cultural resources; however, the area has not
been formally surveyed for the presence of cultural resources. No sites eligible for
inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places are known to be present in
the vicinity of the proposed work. Additional work may be necessary to identify
and assess any historic or prehistoric resources that may be present.
The District Engineer's final eligibility and effect determination will be based upon
coordination with the SHPO and/or THPO, as appropriate and required, and with full
consideration given to the proposed undertaking's potential direct and indirect effects on
historic properties within the Corps-indentified permit area.
Endangered Species
Pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973, the Corps reviewed the project area,
examined all information provided by the applicant and consulted the latest North
Carolina Natural Heritage Database. Based on available information:
® The Corps determines that the proposed project would not affect federally listed
endangered or threatened species or their formally designated critical habitat.
F -I The Corps determines that the proposed project may affect federally listed
endangered or threatened species or their formally designated critical habitat.
F -I The Corps initiates consultation under Section 7 of the ESA and will not make
a permit decision until the consultation process is complete.
F -I The Corps will consult under Section 7 of the ESA and will not make a permit
decision until the consultation process is complete.
F -I The Corps has initiated consultation under Section 7 of the ESA and will not
make a permit decision until the consultation process is complete.
F -I The Corps determines that the proposed project may affect federally listed
endangered or threatened species or their formally designated critical habitat.
Consultation has been completed for this type of activity and the effects of the
proposed activity have been evaluated and/or authorized by the National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS) in the South Atlantic Regional Biological Opinion or
its associated documents, including 7(a)(2) & 7(d) analyses and Critical Habitat
assessments. A copy of this public notice will be sent to the NMFS.
F -I The Corps is not aware of the presence of species listed as threatened or
endangered or their critical habitat formally designated pursuant to the
Version 7.8.2014 Page 6

Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) within the project area. The Corps will
make a final determination on the effects of the proposed project upon additional
review of the project and completion of any necessary biological assessment
and/or consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and/or National
Marine Fisheries Service.
Other Required Authorizations
The Corps forwards this notice and all applicable application materials to the appropriate
State agencies for review.
North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR): The Corps will generally not
make a final permit decision until the NCDWR issues, denies, or waives the state
Certification as required by Section 401 of the Clean Water Act (PL 92-500). The receipt
of the application and this public notice, combined with the appropriate application fee, at
the NCDWR Central Office in Raleigh constitutes initial receipt of an application for a
401 Certification. A waiver will be deemed to occur if the NCDWR fails to act on this
request for certification within sixty days of receipt of a complete application. Additional
information regarding the 401 Certification may be reviewed at the NCDWR Central
Office, 401 and Buffer Permitting Unit, 512 North Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North
Carolina 27604-2260. All persons desiring to make comments regarding the application
for a 401 Certification should do so, in writing, by September 28, 2018, to:
NCDWR Central Office
Attention: Ms. Karen Higgins, 401 and Buffer Permitting Unit
(USPS mailing address): 1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Or,
(Physical address): 512 North Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
North Carolina Division of Coastal Management (NCDCM):
❑ The application did not include a certification that the proposed work complies
with and would be conducted in a manner that is consistent with the approved
North Carolina Coastal Zone Management Program. Pursuant to 33 CFR 325.2
(b)(2) the Corps cannot issue a Department of Army (DA) permit for the
proposed work until the applicant submits such a certification to the Corps and
the NCDCM, and the NCDCM notifies the Corps that it concurs with the
applicant's consistency certification. As the application did not include the
consistency certification, the Corps will request, upon receipt, concurrence or
objection from the NCDCM.
® Based upon all available information, the Corps determines that this application
for a Department of Army (DA) permit does not involve an activity which would
Version 7.8.2014 Page 7

affect the coastal zone, which is defined by the Coastal Zone Management (CZM)
Act (16 U.S.C. § 1453).
Evaluation
The decision whether to issue a permit will be based on an evaluation of the probable
impacts including cumulative impacts of the proposed activity on the public interest.
That decision will reflect the national concern for both protection and utilization of
important resources. The benefit which reasonably may be expected to accrue from the
proposal must be balanced against its reasonably foreseeable detriments. All factors
which may be relevant to the proposal will be considered including the cumulative effects
thereof; among those are conservation, economics, aesthetics, general environmental
concerns, wetlands, historic properties, fish and wildlife values, flood hazards, flood plain
values (in accordance with Executive Order 11988), land use, navigation, shoreline
erosion and accretion, recreation, water supply and conservation, water quality, energy
needs, safety, food and fiber production, mineral needs, considerations of property
ownership, and, in general, the needs and welfare of the people. For activities involving
the discharge of dredged or fill materials in waters of the United States, the evaluation of
the impact of the activity on the public interest will include application of the
Environmental Protection Agency's 404(b)(1) guidelines.
Commenting Information
The Corps of Engineers is soliciting comments from the public; Federal, State and local
agencies and officials, including any consolidated State Viewpoint or written position of
the Governor; Indian Tribes and other interested parties in order to consider and evaluate
the impacts of this proposed activity. Any comments received will be considered by the
Corps of Engineers to determine whether to issue, modify, condition or deny a permit for
this proposal. To make this decision, comments are used to assess impacts on endangered
species, historic properties, water quality, general environmental effects and the other
public interest factors listed above. Comments are used in the preparation of an
Environmental Assessment (EA) and/or an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Comments are also used to
determine the need for a public hearing and to determine the overall public interest of the
proposed activity.
Any person may request, in writing, within the comment period specified in this notice,
that a public hearing be held to consider the application. Requests for public hearings
shall state, with particularity, the reasons for holding a public hearing. Requests for a
public hearing will be granted, unless the District Engineer determines that the issues
raised are insubstantial or there is otherwise no valid interest to be served by a hearing.
The Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District will receive written comments pertinent to
the Proposed Project, as outlined above, until 5pm, September 24, 2018. Comments
should be submitted to Bryan Roden -Reynolds, Regulatory Project Manager, Asheville
Version 7.8.2014 Page 8

Regulatory Field Office, 151 Patton Avenue, ROOM 208, at [phone] or
bryan.roden-reynoldsAusace. army. mi 1.
Version 7.8.2014 Page 9

E
0

E*
IL
North
0' 100' 200' 400'
GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET
•
•
%
/'
• STREAM
LC �/'/Y.� ` LINEAR
WETLAND
♦ �I
�. 0
ti
v S7�J1M -�
Impact #3 - 1,888 LF
A0 Stream S menu
VJETLAND
Impact #1 - 0.01 AC
•% Impact #2.0.003 AC
\\ �/ %>\71
Impact #5 - 0.07 AC
0
t�
\\ e
AMiPORT PROPERTY LINE •
I /
1
00000'
ETRE
•
•
i
ZF til j
Impact 11G - 0.03 AC
Total Project Area:
94 AC
LEGEND
Jurisdictional Waters of the US
Stream:
9,470 LF
STREAMS
Wetland:
1.783 AC
WETLAND
Jurisdictional Impacts
Stream Impacts:
4,079 LF
Wetland Impacts:
1.13 AC
Avoidance
Stream:
5,391 LF (57%)
Wetland:
0.653 AC (37%)
ti
v S7�J1M -�
Impact #3 - 1,888 LF
A0 Stream S menu
VJETLAND
Impact #1 - 0.01 AC
•% Impact #2.0.003 AC
\\ �/ %>\71
Impact #5 - 0.07 AC
0
t�
\\ e
AMiPORT PROPERTY LINE •
I /
1
00000'
ETRE
•
•
i
ZF til j
Impact 11G - 0.03 AC