20090198 Ver 1_Staff Comments_20090512 (413)

Mcmillan, Ian
From: Witherspoon, Lauren
Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 9:32 AM
To: Sullivan, Shelton; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; Mcmillan, Ian;
Kulz, Eric
Cc: Hennessy, John
Subject: RE: DWQ Comments on Landis Inc-5-6-09
Attachments: DWQ Comments on Landis Inc-5-12-09.doc
I have added my comments highlighted in green to Shelton's. Shelton, thanks for taking the time to do this. Has anyone
looked at the actual stream restoration? I think John H. said he would.
Lauren
From: Sullivan, Shelton [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, May 11, 2009 6:08 PM
To: [e-mail]; [e-mail]; Mcmillan, Ian; Kulz, Eric
Cc: Hennessy, John
Subject: DWQ Comments on Landis Inc-5-6-09
Take a look at my comments. If somene would like to visit the site, let me know.
Shelton

DWQ Comments on Landis Inc.'s Response dated 4-29-09 DWQ # 20090198
Shelton's Comments 5-11-09
Question I
• The purpose should be listed as " expansion of the nursery facilities" _
. The current earthen fill on the site is impacting a
stream, wetlands and buffers. The USACE and DWQ was allowing Adcock to
keep no more than 0.10 acres of wetland fill - but requiring the other impacts to be
restored. They are not creating wetlands or increasing the amount on the property.
They are removing fill from a stream and from the wetlands and buffers that were
originally around that stream.
Question 2
• The temporary impacts should be listed as the existing fill of the stream, adjacent
wetlands and buffers - resulting from the ongoing violation. The earthen fill in
this area is to be removed and the area remediated/restored to properly resolve the
violation. As a result of remediation, there should be at least 255 linear feet of
stream restored, along with the adjacent wetlands and riparian buffers along the at
least 255 linear feet of stream.
Question 3
• Not sure what their response means. They should say that avoidance and
minimization will be accomplished by removing the fill from the stream, adjacent
wetlands and buffer and restoring these areas. Therefore, they are minimally
impacting 0.1 acres of wetlands while avoiding the remaining stream, wetlands
and buffers on the site......????
Question 4
• Sheet 1 of 6 shows the proposed level spreader in Zone 2 of the buffer. ??Are you
guys okay with the proposed level spreader - 5 inch pipe with % inch holes?? The
proposed level spreader should be outside of zone 2, and the whole pond could
shift right or west to avoid the buffer. The riser barrel as proposed should act as
the bypass for large storm events. I guess I am okay with their proposal, even the
placement within zone 2 but not my call. I am concerned with the maintenance of
this level spreader as opposed to a concrete fin stnicture_
uestion 5
This area was not previously filled. It was filled at or about the same time as the
violation. The whole area looked the same - cleared, red clay, no vegetation. The
Question 6
• The PCN should have been checked as DWQ 401 Unit to review the SW plan if
one is required. I do not think one is required for this project. Just needs to
reviewed for diffuse flow.
Question 7
• Sheet 4 of 6 does show wetland plantings. Please indicate on the plans, the area
of wetlands to be restored, not including the stream. Calculate and provide the
wetland acreage, again without the stream dimensions. The plans indicate 0.53,
0.62 acres etc. What is the actual number?
• Please indicate on the plans, the area of streams to be restored, not including the
wetlands or buffers.
• Please indicate on the plans, the area of buffers to be restored, not including the
stream. Calculate and provide the buffer areas to be restored again without the
stream dimensions. The plans indicate 0.53, 0.62 acres etc. What is the actual
number?
Additional Comments
• Is there any monitoring language we can add in the 401 or Settlement Agreement
to be more specific on Monitoring. If they or DWQ finds deficiencies, The issues
will be correct with 21 days of notification.
• Should they provide more detail of the plantings? A layout of the proposal? Are
you good with the proposed plans?
Shelton