20180198 Ver 1_DWR Buffer Plan comments_20190827

ROY COOPER
Governor
MICHAEL S. REGAN
Secretary
LINDA CULPEPPER
Director
NORTH CAROLINA
Environmental Quality
August 27, 2019
DWR Project ID#: 2018-0198
Johnston County
Division of Mitigation Services
Attn: Jeremiah Dow
(via email: [e-mail] )
Re: DWR Comments
Sassarixa Swamp Appendix 1 - Buffer Mitigation Plan
DMS ID# 100040; DWR ID# 2018-0198
The Division of Water Resources (DWR) has reviewed the Sassarixa Swamp Riparian Buffer
Mitigation Plan in Appendix 1 of the Mitigation Plan and has provided the following
comments for your attention:
1. The use of the term "buffer' or "riparian buffer' is used too loosely throughout the
plan. These terms should only be used to describe an area that is within the Neuse
Riparian Buffer. For this site, only the first 50' adjacent to streams subject to the rule
are Neuse Riparian Buffers. Therefore, please correct applicable references to
"buffer" or "riparian buffer" and replace incorrect references with "riparian areas"
or "riparian restoration".
2. the plan describes this site as a "Buffer Restoration Project" throughout the text.
However, most of the site is actually buffer enhancement w/ some preservation. I
recommend "buffer mitigation project" or something other than "buffer restoration
project" to avoid confusion.
3. Section 2.2 page 6
a. This section is titled "Project Location", but includes references to the
Alternative mitigation options being proposed onsite. I recommend
separating this information out into its own section.
b. Some streams onsite are "not subject". Correct where applicable
c. Enhancement via Cattle Exclusion is also an alternative option that should be
added to this section.
d. For Ephemeral channels, last bullet, correct the rule reference to just be 15A
NCAC 02B .0295 (n). Currently, the reference to 0295 (o) is too inclusive. For
example, "enhancement" on Ephemerals can only be achieved by actually
planting an area deemed "Enhancement Site" under 0295 (n). Areas deemed
as "Enhancement" via cattle Exclusion are approved under 0295 (o) and
cannot be achieved adjacent to Ephemeral channels. T3 Ephemeral is
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Water Resources
512 North Salisbury Street 1 1617 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617

Sassarixa Buffer Plan Comments
DMS/Wildlands
August 27, 2019
currently proposed as "Enhancement via Cattle Exclusion' and instead,
should be Preservation according to viability letter
e. For Coastal HW Streams, add additional information.
■ the rule requires that the site meet success criteria for the stream
mitigation. Therefore, this area requires 7 years of monitoring instead
of 5.
■ The rule requires the creditable areas to be planted to get buffer credit
adjacent to HW streams. Therefore, areas currently forested on T5C
must be excluded from credit, and only the restoration areas in the
fields are viable
■ Text says the buffer will be measured based on valley length, but
where is that measurement provided or represented?
4. Section 2.5
a. The statement provided about the purpose of the internal crossings suggests
that there may should be fencing on both sides of Sassarixa creek. No fencing
is shown on the plan sheets or the figures for the right side of Sassarixa
Creek. If "agriculture" in this section implies cattle, then sassarixa creek will
require fencing on both sides of the easement in order to comply with 0295
(0)(6). Please explain
5. Section 5.2 & Plan Sheet 3.0 lists Green Ash to be planted. Based on concerns of the
Emerald Ash Borer and its ability to spread and attack saplings (>1 inch diameter),
DWR highly recommends this tree not be included in the planting plan.
6. Provide a reasonable justification to plant Cypress trees, a softwood, which are not
considered an appropriate species to meet performance standards per 0295 (n)(2)(B).
Provide specifics as to where Cypress will be planted in the Plan Sheets.
7. Section 5.3 -
a. The viability letter notes that there are two types of enhancement on this
project. Enhancement under 0295 (n) indicates that the area requires
plantings vs Enhancement under 0295 (0)(6) requires just the removal of
cattle. The upper reach of T4 was determined to be Enhancement under 0295
(n). Other Enhancement areas met .0295 (0)(6). Correct figures where cattle
exclusion is shown on the upper reach of T4 and show as "Enhancement".
Confirm that the planting sheets show plantings in this area as well.
b. How will cattle be "excluded" in the buffer enhancement areas?
c. Correct rule reference to be 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (o). It currently reads .0296
8. Section 6.2 Please revise plan to add that planted stems in the monitoring plots will
all be flagged.
9. Table 9 - add another parameter to account for T5C needing 7 years of monitoring.
l'ti 215

Sassarixa Buffer Plan Comments
DMS/Wildlands
August 27, 2019
10. Section 7.1 - Add that "height" will be measured to assess the vigor of stems.
11. Section 7.4 - Add a note about T5C and its additional monitoring to meet
performance standards. The rule also requires that the stream mitigation meets the
performance criteria by the USACE as well. Therefore, DWR cannot accept the
restoration area adjacent to T5C without knowing it meets the final performance
criteria at closeout by the IRT. Plesae indicate that closeout of credits adjacent to
T5C will be done at Closeout with IRT. If T5C is removed from the buffer plan all
together, then none of this applies.
12. Tables 7a & 7b
a. Use newer version of the table (request from DMS) and attempt to keep the
table all on one page. If needing to split 7a and 7b on separate pages that is
fine. This may require a larger paper size to accommodate this request.
Please do not reduce the font size in the table too much such that it makes the
table difficult to read as a hard copy.
b. Correct table based on comments provided with this letter.
c. T4 should be "Enhancement" and not "Enhancement via Cattle Excl". See
comment #7.
d. Breakout T5C credits separate from others and make it "not convertible to
Nutrient
e. T5C is not viable for Enhancement, remove from table
f. T3 Ephemeral reach is not viable for Enhancement via Cattle Excl. Change
this to Preservation
g. T4 & T5 Restoration 0-100' are both shown with " '. Explain why these two
are different than other Restoration areas 0-100' shown in the table. If the
explanation is due to widths, then why can't the Min -Max width be shown as
different?
h. Formulas may be off on table, so once the newer version of the table is
completed for this site, I will be able to decipher whether the subtotals and
totals are compliant.
i. T2 restoration area may need to be edited based on comment #15 below.
13. Paragraph below Table 7b will need to be edited based on comments made in this
letter. Specifically the viability of certain streams/reaches that are stated incorrectly
in the first sentence.
14. Table 7a -b shows nutrient offset conversions. However, there is no reference to this
in the introduction of the Plan. If this site is to be reviewed by DWR to generate
nutrient and/or buffer, please include language to the effect in the introduction
15. Figure 6 -
a. Identify the location of the Ephemeral channel along T3

Sassarixa Buffer Plan Comments
DMS/Wildlands
August 27, 2019
b. Show Preservation instead of Cattle Excl. along T3 ephemeral reach
c. Add Enhancement (non -cattle excl) along T4 (R1 & R2) (see plan sheet 3.3)
d. Remove Enhancement adjacent to T5C
e. T2 Restoration area should only be measured from Top of Bank of the Stream
Determination point by DWR or the "radius/ bubble" above the point. When
comparing this area to Figure 7, the top of bank appears to be measured from
the proposed stream alignment beyond the wood line. Please adjust.
f. T4 Preservation area needs to be excluded from credit unless the DWR has
confirmed this feature is a stream.
g. I prefer the legend also identify the Coastal HW credits (instead of blue, use a
different color)
16. Figure 8 -
a. Show the non -cattle exclusion Enhancement Area & Coastal HW area.
b. All plots along T1 are on the same side. Please move a plot to represent the
other side of T1 as well.
c. There is a plot located within Cattle Exclusion areas along T4. Why?
17. Figure 9 -
a. Remove T5C from being able to be converted to NOC. NOC is not viable
adjacent to coastal HW stream sites as shown in the viability letter
18. Service Area map - This map does not comply with Rule .0295. The service area for
buffer mitigation projects in the Neuse 01 below Falls Lake is the Neuse 01 below
Falls Lake and does not include the Falls Lake WS. Edit this map to exclude the Falls
Lake completely from
the service area.
19. There are no dates on the site photos. When were these photos taken?
20. Overall, if the riparian efforts are done according to the plan and addresses all
comments and corrections provided by DWR, the site should provide a good buffer
mitigation and/or nutrient offset project.
1'_L c 415

Sassarixa Buffer Plan Comments
DMS/Wildlands
August 27, 2019
Please provide a response to comments along with references to the changes made in the
Riparian Buffer Mitigation Plan. There are substantial changes needed to the crediting of
this site for buffer and/or nutrient offset, therefore; DWR will need to confirm that the
changes made to the revised plan are compliant with 15A NCAC 02B .0295,15A NCAC 02B
.0240 and the corresponding Site Viability Letter prior to issuing approval. A formal letter
from DWR will be issued to DMS when the plan has been approved.
Sincerely,
Katie Merritt
14-qoAj,:tt
401 & Buffer Permitting Branch
Attachments: Review Checklist
Pa`gc 515

Mitigation Plan Checklist for Riparian Restoration Mitigation Sites —created 7/15/13
VDWR Stream Determination
�-0' DWR Site Viability Letter
U---!�ite Location
o Directions including Lat & Long
o 8 -digit HUC &/or 14 digit (if applicable)
o County
o EMC approved Soil map, Topo and Aerial Maps
Project Name:
Reviewed By:
n t
�aL_J I
��l lqo-q -
DWR# S Cnj?-Olq
Date r7 h q
o Sub -watershed where applicable
!Existing Site Conditions w/ photos — C�__k4
91- �11 mitigation activities, including a brief summary of stream and/or wetland mitigation w/
a detailed planting plan - Cyt
Monitoring & Maintenance Plan ��LL L MZUj'�4 ( IAL�O_ T
--tt— Financial Assurance (if applicable)
Cl/Associated buffer and/or nutrient offset credit calcs, which shall include credit generation, service
area, etc. — SJ—)_ oc lY) n h'-L�
L --'"Credit Determination Table/Map
�i Verification that the site does not have an impact on threatened or endangered species
(o' -Verification that the site is not affected by on-site or nearby sources of contamination as provided
�by Environmental Data Resources, Inc.
� Verification that the site can be constructed on land if it is an archaeological site;
❑ A list of all permits that will be required and obtained prior to constructing the mitigation site for
nutrient offset and/or buffer mitigation (e.g. Sediment and Erosion Control Plan from Division of
Land Resources, NCGO10000 Stormwater Permit from NCDWQ, 404 permit from the Army Corps
of Engineers and corresponding 401 Water Quality Certification from NCDWQ).
Z-� A- (AUfU d +b err
coi J