20041138 Ver 1_Complete File_20050519

.. - > 0; ....

~ North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission ~
Richard B. Hamilton, Executive Director
\t Ol~- H3~
D\N&.

~~@~DW~@

MAY 1 9 2005

MEMORANDUM

TO: Mr. Brad Shaver, U.S. Anny Corps of Engineers
Wi' R atory Field Office

DENR - WATER QUALITY
WETI.ANOS AND STORMWATER BRANCH

FROM:

Shari L. Bryant, P' Region Coordjnator
Habitat Conservation Program

SUBJECT:

17 May 2005

Mitigation Plan for Republic Services of North Carolina, LLC, Uwharrie Regional
Landfill Facility, Montgomery County, North Carolina. Action ID No. 200200607

DATE:

Biologists with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) have reviewed the
subject document Our comments are provided in accordance with provisions olthe Clean Water Act of
1977 (as amended), the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat 401, as amended; 16 US.C. 661.
667d), and North Carolina General Statutes (G.S. 113-131 et seq.).

The applicant proposes to place fill material into 7.04 acres of wetlands and 2,735 linear feet (It)
of stream channel. These impacts are associated with the expansion of a solid waste landfill. The site
drains to Rocky Creek in the Yadkin-Pee Dee River basin. There are records for the federal species of
concern and state endangered brook floater (Alasmidonta varicosa), and Carolina creekshell (Villosa
l1aughaniana), the federal species of concern and state special ooncem Carolina darter (Etheostoma
.collis), and the state significantly rare Eastern creekshell (YilJosa delionbis) in Rocky Creek and there are
records for the state special concern mole salamander (Ambystoma talpoideum) and pygmy rattlesnake
(Sistrurus miliarius) near the project site. Additionally, portions of the Uwharrie Game Lands are located
south and east of the landfill.

The applicant investigated the feasibility of performing on-site stream and wetland restoration
and enhancement Approximately 2,300 linear feet of incised channel could be restored, but a narrow
floodplain and high amount of fractured rock made successful restoration unlikely. Enhancement of a
wetland/stream system that has poor vegetation was possible, but it was decided that enhancement would
be more destructive than allowing the system to undergo natural succession. Therefore, the applicant
proposes to purchase 8.0 credits from the N.C. Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) for impacts to
wetlands and preserve 18.16 acres of wetlands on site. In addition, the applicant proposes to purchase
808 linear feet of stream credits for impacts to perennial streams and preserve 14,008.4 linear feet of
stream channel on site. The wetland and stream preservation areas will be protected in perpetuity through
use of a restrictive covenant.

MaIOng Address: Division of Inland Fisheries · 1721 Mail Service Center · Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
Telephone: [phone] · Fax: [phone]

. ,.......

Page 2

11 May 2005
Republic Servi~ - Uwharrie Landfill
Action ID No.: 200200601

The Stream Mitigation Guidelines (April 2003) shows compensatory mitigation ratios (Table 1, p.
5) for poor-fair, good and excellent quality streams. Although there is some indication in the mitigation
plan that the streams to be impacted are not excellent quality (e.g., incised and impacted by agriculture), it
is unclear whether these streams would be classified as pom--tair or good. Since good quality streams
have a higher mitigation ratio (2:1), information on stream quality determination for the streams to be
impacted would filciJitate our review of the mitigation plan. Additionally, stream quality determinations
for streams to be preserved and the total linear feet of perennial and intermittent stream channel to be
preserved would be helpful.

We are concerned about the stream crossings within many of the preservation areas. Most are
existing crossings that the applicant proposes to improve and the impacted length is not included in
preservation length. However, there is a proposed new stream crossing for Rocky Creek. It is unclear the
need for this new stream crossing for Rocky Creek and the need for the proposed improvements on the
other streams.

While we are supportive of the applicant preserving existing wetland and streams on site, we
cannot complete our review of the proposed mitigation plan due to the following informational needs:

. Stream quality determination for the streams to be impacted by the project
. Stream quality determination fOf the streams to be preserved
. Total linear feet of perennial streams to be preserved
. Total linear feet of intermittent streams to be preserved
. Clarification of need for new stream crossing for Rocky Creek
. Clarification for proposed improvements to stream crossings on other preservation areas

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this mitigation plan. If we can provide further
assistance, please contact out office at [phone].

cc: Cyndi Karoly, DWQ
Howard Hall" USFWS

E-mail: Ryan Heise. WRC
Sarah McRae, NHP