20190229 Ver 1_R-3830_Wetland and Stream_Impacts_20190403

Carpenter, Kristi
From: Dilday, Jason L
Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2019 10:21 AM
To: Williams, Andrew E CIV USARMY CESAW (US)
Cc: Norton, April R; Rivenbark, Chris
Subject: RE: [External] SAW-2011-00310 (NCDOT/R-3830/NC
42/Division 8)-Lee County INCOMPLETE
NOTIFICATION
Attachments: R-3830_Wetland and Stream_Impacts.xlsx
Andy,
Attached is a revised Impact Summary Sheet that should clarify the impacts at each site.
There are no changes to the impacts with this. The impact numbers not accurately
depicting the work was a relic of the original drawings where the sites were not divided
into sub -sites. The sites that were affected were sites 2A/213 and 3A/313. In those
instances, the sites were split from one side of the road to the other. For sites 5A/513,
this is not the case. The stream on both sides of the road was considered site 5A. 5B
was used to illustrate the impacts to the tributary to Patchet Creek on the northwest
side. You can denote the impacts on either side of the road for 5A by the station
column where it is listed as either L 228+25 LT or RT for left or right.
To answer the questions from you, below are the responses:
1) For the temporary bank stabilization, all the temporary stream impact was shown on
the impact summary line denoting bank stabilization. The revised sheet should clarify
this. A portion of the temporary impact is due to the installation of the bank
stabilization, while the rest is attributed to the work needed for the replacement of the
pipes. It is essentially the total temporary dewatering for the proposed work at the site.
2) The revised impact summary sheet should rectify the discrepancies with the
drawings. Impacts for each side of the road have been broken out to accurately show
the work to be done. This revision did not change the impact numbers at any of the
sites.
3) 1 believe from our conversations that issues regarding Section 106 have been
addressed. If you need anything else, please let me know.
4) In an earlier email, I sent you a copy of the PJD for the project.
Let me know if you need anything else to proceed with the permit application for the
project.
Jason
-----Original Message -----
From: Williams, Andrew E CIV USARMY CESAW (US)
<[e-mail]>
Sent: Monday, March 25, 2019 1:41 PM

To: Rivenbark, Chris <[e-mail]>; Dilday, Jason L <[e-mail]>
Cc: Norton, April R <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [External] SAW-2011-00310 (NCDOT/R-3830/NC 42/Division 8)-Lee County
INCOMPLETE NOTIFICATION
CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send
all suspicious email as an attachment to
[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
Thanks, Chris.
Jason and I spoke and will get the additional information update/corrected.
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
The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the
public. To help us ensure we continue to do so, please complete the Customer
Satisfaction Survey located at our website at
http://corpsmapu.usace.army.mil/cm_apex/f?p=136:4:0
to complete the survey online.
-----Original Message -----
From: Rivenbark, Chris [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, March 25, 2019 10:30 AM
To: Williams, Andrew E CIV USARMY CESAW (US)
<[e-mail]>; Dilday, Jason L <[e-mail]>
Cc: Norton, April R <[e-mail]>
Subject: [Non-DoD Source] RE: [External] SAW-2011-00310 (NCDOT/R-3830/NC
42/Division 8)-Lee County INCOMPLETE NOTIFICATION
Andy,
Jason's email address is [e-mail] so please update your contact information
for him. He is out of the office and can help answer items 1 and 2 when he gets back
tomorrow. For item 2, just quickly looking at the impact summary sheet, it looks like all
stream impacts for site 2B were included with 2A (1-190 + 00 LT & RT) but I'll ask Jason to
confirm.
As for items 3 and 4, we included the signed PJD with the ePCN (Laserfiche) application.
I've placed another copy as well as the PJD mapping and Affects Letter under
Blockedhttps://xfer.services.ncdot.gov/pdea/Temp/R-3830/
Let me know if you have trouble downloading the files.
Chris Rivenbark
NCDOT- Environmental Analysis Unit

[phone]
-----Original Message -----
From: Williams, Andrew E CIV USARMY CESAW (US)
<[e-mail]>
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2019 11:40 AM
To: [e-mail]; Rivenbark, Chris <[e-mail]>
Cc: Williams, Andrew E CIV USARMY CESAW (US)
<[e-mail]>; Norton, April R <[e-mail]>
Subject: [External] SAW-2011-00310 (NCDOT/R-3830/NC 42/Division 8)-Lee County
INCOMPLETE NOTIFICATION
CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send
all suspicious email as an attachment to
[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
Jason/Chris:
The Pre -construction notification (PCN) for the proposed Widening of NC 42 from US
421 to SR 1579 and along SR 1579 from NC 42 to SR 1538 (Central) Project (SAW-2011-
00310), received on February 22, 2019 is incomplete.
In order for us to continue evaluating the proposed project, please provide the following
information:
1. Please provide clarification regarding all impacts described as "temporary bank
stabilization" in the PCN/project summary. Additionally, the plan sheets showing the
impacts do not clearly identify the areas proposed for temporary bank stabilization.
2. The proposed impacts listed in Section D.2 (Wetland Impacts) and D.3 (Stream
Impacts) and listed on the Wetland and Surface Water Impact Summary Table do not
appear to match the impacts shown on the project plans. For example, the PCN and
Summary Table only list mechanized land clearing (0.01/0.014 acre) for Site 213, but the
proposed project plans shows mechanized land clearing, a culvert extension and bank
stabilization, as well as some temporary stream impacts.
3. Please provide additional information regarding Historic Properties related to this
project. The last correspondence regarding Section 106 found in the NEPA
documentation is an April 26, 2013 letter from the SHPO stating that the Sloan House
and the Broadway Historic District were eligible for listing in the National Register of
Historic Places. Please provide any additional, updated information from either SHPO or
the NCDOT Human Resources Unit regarding any proposed impacts to this or any other
historic properties related to this project. Please be aware that under general condition
aa. Historic Properties, of the RGP 31, in cases where the district engineer determines
that the activity may affect properties listed, or eligible for listing, in the National
Register of Historic Places (NRHP), the activity is not authorized, until the requirements
of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) have been satisfied.
4. Currently, we do not have a copy of the Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination (PJD)
associated with this project. Please provide a copy of the PJD letter, final map and final
delineation report for R-3830.

Please provide the requested information within 30 days, or your application will be
withdrawn. Feel free to contact me with any questions or concerns. 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
The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the
public. To help us ensure we continue to do so, please complete the Customer
Satisfaction Survey located at our website at
Blockedhttp://corpsmapu.usace.army.mil/cm_apex/f?p=136:4:0
to complete the survey online.
Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N.C. Public Records Law
and may be disclosed to third parties.

WETLAND AND SURACE WATER IMPACTS SUMMARY
WETLAND IMPACTS SURFACE WATER IMPACTS
Site
No.
Station
(From/To)
Structure
Size /Type
Permanent
Fill In
Wetlands
(ac)
Temp.
Fill In
Wetlands
(ac)
Excavation
in
Wetlands
(ac)
Mechanized
Clearing
in Wetlands
(ac)
Hand
Clearing
in
Wetlands
(ac)
Permanent
SW
impacts
(ac)
Temp.
SW
impacts
(ac)
Existing
Channel
Impacts
Permanent
(ft)
Existing
Channel
Impacts
Temp.
(ft)
Natural
Stream
Design
(ft)
1
L 171+00 RT
Prop. 42" RCP
< 0.01
< 0.01
< 0.01
71
1
L 171+00 RT
Bank Stabilization
< 0.01
< 0.01
14
20
2A
L 190+25 LT
Prop. 54" RCP
< 0.01
18
2A
L 190+30 to 191+25 LT
Fill / Mech. Clearing in Wetlands &
Temp. Stream Impact
< 0.01
0.02
< 0.01
33
2B
L 189+95 RT
Prop. 54" RCP
< 0.01
60
2B
L 189+50 to 189+75 RT
Bank Stabilization & Mech. Clearing
in Wetland
0.02
< 0.01
< 0.01
18
10
3A
L 205+45 LT
Prop. 48" RCP
< 0.01
16
3A
L 204+65 to 205+60 LT
Channel Realignment & Mech.
Clearing /Excavation in Wetland
< 0.01
0.04
< 0.01
< 0.01
20
15
3B
L 205+45 RT
Prop. 48" RCP
< 0.01
52
3B
L 204+80 to 205+75 RT
Bank Stabilization, Temp. Stream
Impact, & Mech. Clearing in Wetland
< 0.01
< 0.01
< 0.01
16
10
4
L 225+50 RT
Fill & Mech. Clearing in Wetland
0.02
0.01
5A
L 228+20 LT
Prop. Ditch Tie-in to Stream & Mech.
Clearing in Wetland
< 0.01
< 0.01
< 0.01
24
18
5A
L 228+25 RT
Prop. 72" RCP
< 0.01
18
5A
L 228+25 RT
Rip -Rap in Stream at Pipe Outlet
< 0.01
< 0.01
38
14
5B
Y17 12+05 LT
Rip -Rap in Stream at Pipe Outlet
< 0.01
< 0.01
20
10
6
L 235+00 to 237+00 LT
Perm. /Temp Fill, & Mech. Clearing
in Wetland
< 0.01
0.02
0.02
TOTALS*:
0.03
0.02
< 0.01
0.14
0.02
0.01
385
130
0
*Rounded totals are sum of actual impacts
NOTES:
Revised 2016 09 09