20180854 Ver 1_Revised Mit Plan-DWR DMS correspondence_20190703

Strickland, Bev
From: Merritt, Katie
Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2019 1:58 PM
To: Crocker, Lindsay; Schaffer, Jeff
Subject: RE: Revised Mit Plan-Wingfoot
Hey Lindsay,
DMS is still at the stage where they need the DWR to approve the provider's Mitigation Plan in writing to comply with
15A NCAC 0213 .0295 (n)(2). At this time, I cannot confirm that the Mitigation Plan fully complies with 15A NCAC 02B
.0295 (1)(3) for diffused flow. The rule states that, "All mitigation proposals shall meet the following criteria...". One of
those criteria is diffuse flow. Here is what they need to do:
1) Address the diffused flow in the Mitigation Plan more specifically so DWR can confirm the plan is compliant with 15A NCAC
02B.0295 (1)(3) and can formally approve the Mitigation Plan —the Plan currently does not specifically address or detail how
the conveyances coming into the project area (B2 ditch & 83 ditch) will meet this Rule requirement other than this statement
in Section 2.1, "direct conveyances will be eliminated & flow converted to diffused flow". They have to show DWR "how"
they will do this and on what features/conveyances they will do this on. If they determine that they can't "eliminate" the
conveyance/ditch as the rule requires, then the rule requires they provide a justification to DWR. Currently, 1 don't know if
they want a backup plan or need one. 1 don't even know what they plan to do.
However, it is recommended by DWR that they have a "backup plan" aka "approval to use the clarification memo" noted in
the Mitigation Plan in the chance they don't "eliminate" the ditches. Therefore, to use the memo as a backup option, it has
to be referenced and written within the Mitigation Plan for DWR approval, not at AsBuilt.
If DMS wants to handle credit reductions at As -Built so the numbers in the Mitigation Plan don't change, that's your
decision. But, the provider is still required to get approval of their Mitigation Plan, and I can't approve the plan without
Item 1 above addressed in full.
Sorry for any confusion.
Thanks, Katie
From: Crocker, Lindsay
Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2019 12:43 PM
To: Merritt, Katie <[e-mail]>; Schaffer, Jeff <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Revised Mit Plan-Wingfoot
Thanks Katie,
Are you saying you would like me to amend the mitigation plan based on the as -built report at a later date or are you
saying I need to update the mitigation plan based on what the as -built results now? Just as a note, I have not discussed
as -built with them, and I did not approve them constructing it either.
When they do provide an as -built report, that is when DMS conducts a site visit and reviews that the site was
constructed as designed. If you want me to contact Kevin and Land Management to see if they installed anything, I can
and update the mitigation plan to indicate what was constructed/installed.
I have no issue removing this credit at this point or at the As -built plan, but the as built usually shows any deviations
from mitigation plan in that report and I have not previously amended the mitigation plan based on construction. I know
this is a special consideration project, and I appreciate your help figuring out how to fix this for what you need.
Lindsay

Lindsay Crocker
NC DEQ Division of Mitigation Services
217 West Jones St., Raleigh, NC 27603
Office 919.707.8944
Cell 919.594.3910
[e-mail]
Emoil correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public Records Low and may be disclosed
to third parties unless the content is exempt by statute or other regulation.
From: Merritt, Katie
Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2019 11:54 AM
To: Crocker, Lindsay <[e-mail]>; Schaffer, Jeff <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Revised Mit Plan-Wingfoot
Hey Lindsay,
Since they already planted the site, I assumed they would know how they dealt with the diffused flow for those two
ditches. If you want to handle it at Asbuilt, that's fine, but then they would need to add language in section 2.1 of this
Mit Plan acknowledging the reduction in credits if they end up not being able to diffuse the flow. They should include a
reference to the DWR clarification memo in section 2.1 as well, and include the memo in their appendix.
Does this help address your question?
Thanks,
Katie
Get Outlook for iOS
From: Crocker, Lindsay
Sent: Wednesday, July 3, 2019 9:30:14 AM
To: Merritt, Katie; Schaffer, Jeff
Subject: RE: Revised Mit Plan-Wingfoot
Thanks Katie,
Appreciate the review. We will make these changes in the as -built report and I will ask Christian and Kevin to be extra
diligent about the buffer terminology. Would you be open to us responding to the diffuse flow comment at the as -built
stage/report? If they did not install a structure to create the diffuse flow, then we can remove the credit for those two
ditches if that works for you? Or do you need the table removing the diffuse flow area at this stage regardless? My
understanding of the mitigation plan is that they would install something that would suffice for flow diffusion, but that
would certainly be something I inspected/confirmed during my as -built site visit.
Thanks for the clarification.
Lindsay
Lindsay Crocker
NC DEQ Division of Mitigation Services
217 West Jones St., Raleigh, NC 27603

Office 919.707.8944
Cell 919.594.3910
[e-mail]
Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed
to third parties unless the content is exempt by statute or other regulation.
From: Merritt, Katie
Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2019 5:41 PM
To: Crocker, Lindsay <[e-mail]>; Schaffer, Jeff <[e-mail]>
Subject: Revised Mit Plan-Wingfoot
Hey Lindsay,
I have reviewed both the comments and revised Mitigation Plan submitted for the Wingfoot project received
by DWR on June 13, 2019. 1 appreciate that all comments were acknowledged. With regards to comment 1(a),
DWR would support DMS if they chose to postpone or withhold payments/credit releases for failure of
providers to comply with the rule in the future. With regards to comment 1(b), some effort was made to
correct terminology, but wasn't fully addressed throughout the plan. DWR recommends that the provider
make more effort in using proper terminology in the As -Built report and subsequent monitoring reports.
Lastly, now that it is known where the ditch and stream begin, the provider will need to address the
conveyances coming into the project area (B2 ditch & B3 ditch), which do not meet diffused flow. As noted in
Section 2.1, 4th paragraph down, "direct conveyances will be eliminated & flow converted to diffused flow".
The DWR allows the usage of a clarification memo (see Diffuse Flow Through a Newly Restored Buffer) to
address this issue when a ditch or conveyance outside of the Conservation Easement cannot be eliminated.
The provider will need to apply this memo, reduce credits to comply with the memo (show this on tables and
corresponding figures), and adjust the Preservation credit totals.
Once DWR has received confirmation that this last item is addressed, DWR will issue approval of the
Mitigation Plan.
Thank you,
Katie