20201025 Ver 2_USACE More Info Requested_20210701

Strickland, Bev
From: Fuemmeler, Amanda J CIV (USA) <[e-mail]>
Sent: Thursday, July 1, 2021 1:08 PM
To: Tyson Kurtz; Homewood, Sue
Cc: Clement Riddle
Subject: [External] RE: 011is Waste Area Expansion SAW-2011-01762 / DWR Project No.
20201025
Attachments: Pages from 671 IP Application - Resubmitted 6.14.21 - Reduced (002).pdf
CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an attachment to
Report Spam.
Thanks Tyson. I've taken a look again/refreshed my memory and still have some questions/comments from the last go
around that Sue may have as well:
- Regarding your request for a 1:1 mitigation ratio for the intermittent stream impacts, that determination is based on
stream quality and function which from what I can tell from your forms rated as a Medium (and that ratio can range
from 1:1 to 2:1 typically). Obviously there is a range/some subjectivity to determining this ratio but the justification that
this increased ratio/cost would prohibit other stream relocation initiatives on other parts of the mine can't be
considered. If you have any pictures you could forward of the stream that I can review with the NCSAM form to help
address this issue/discuss further or I can try and schedule another site visit to take a look/make a final decision.
- Regarding my concerns and your response about the stream being dewatered next to the last/most downstream
stormwater basin, you proposed to monitor to determine if hydrology is affected (see excerpt from the application with
my comments/and your response...)
"Sibelco is proposing to visually monitor the reach of S3 that is in question of drying up. Visual monitoring will be
analyzed to ensure that hydraulic flow and function is such to maintain biological integrity and provide passage for
aquatic life. Monitoring activities will start prior to construction of OL-2 and continue quarterly for one year post
construction. A memo will be provided to the US Army Corps of Engineers with the monitoring results. If the 610LF of S3
does not continuously flow with water for one year (or sooner) following construction of OL-2, Sibelco will change the
output of Basin OL-2 to discharge into S3 near the top end of S3 below Brushy Creek Road."
I have some issues/concerns with this approach that would probably be best to talk through but my initial thoughts are
that I'm not opposed to monitoring but interpreting those visual results with not enough baseline data for comparison
can be tricky/un-conclusive and very weather dependent. If we agree to monitoring then the period pre and post
construction should be longer and more quantitative. You also seem to mention that there could be the option to
relocate the outfall to address any negative effects pending monitoring results. Seems like it would be easier/cheaper
just to do that now so please provide some clarification as to why this couldn't be done now versus later and just avoid
this whole issue entirely.
Amanda
828-271-7980 ext. 4225
From: Tyson Kurtz <[e-mail]>
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2021 3:35 PM
To: Homewood, Sue <[e-mail]>
Cc: Fuemmeler, Amanda J CIV (USA) <[e-mail]>
Subject: [Non-DoD Source] 011is Waste Area Expansion SAW-2011-01762 / DWR Project No. 20201025
1

Good afternoon Sue and Amanda,
I just re -submitted the IP application for the 011is Waste Area project in Avery County due to 15A NCAC 02H
Section .1400 being in effect. I have attached a copy of the submitted application (20MB is the smallest file size I could
get) for your review. A couple of the last few projects I have submitted through the DEQ project portal did not make
their way to the Corps. If the same things happens again, I can submit to the AshevilleNCREG email.
Thank you,
Tyson Kurtz
Cj.eraer
145 7th Avenue West, Suite B
Hendersonville, NC 28792
Office: 828-698-9800 ext. 302
Mobile: [phone]
[e-mail]
WWW.CWENV.COM
2

Tyson Kurtz
From: Tyson Kurtz
Sent: Monday, February 01, 2021 4:41 PM
To: Fuemmeler, Amanda J CIV (USA)
Subject: RE: Action ID 2019-01042 011is Waste Area Expansion - Comment Responses
Amanda,
We received your November 2, 2020 email with proposed mitigation ratios for Stream S4 and concerns about the
potential hydrological effects of the proposed stormwater basin OL-2.
Stream S4 is an intermittent stream that was temporarily reclaimed to help improve runoff water quality, after the
entire study area was mined in the 1990s. The applicant holds an active mining permit with approval to disturb the study
area. All considered, S4 received a "Medium" functional rating on the NCSAM, which shows the functional benefits of
reclaimed streams on mining sites. A decision to increase the mitigation costs on a feature that was voluntarily
reclaimed at great expense, would deter the applicant from spending money to temporarily restore stream channels on
future mining projects. Sibelco North America Inc. (Sibelco) respectfully requests a 1:1 mitigation ratio for impacts to S4.
Basin OL-2A will collect surface water, direct it into OL-2B, and discharge into Stream S3. This basin layout was chosen to
avoid direct impacts to 361 LF of streams and 0.047 acres of delineated wetlands. The selected outlet location will
maximize the amount of settling time for suspended solids due to the geometry of the sediment basin. The remainder of
the 610 LF of stream and 0.054 acres of delineated wetlands that are to be avoided by the selected site plan were
avoided by revising the OL-3 layout and reducing the project boundary.
Surface water levels within S3 are tied to groundwater, as the stream is perennial. It is unlikely that the OL-2 basin
system will alter the groundwater table to the point of the 610 LF reach of S3 drying up. Wetlands W9, W11, W13, and
W14 abut and drain into S3. Surface water from S3 does not contribute hydrology to those wetlands.
Sibelco is proposing to visually monitor the reach of S3 that is in question of drying up. Visual monitoring will be
analyzed to ensure that hydraulic flow and function is such to maintain biological integrity and provide passage for
aquatic life. Monitoring activities will start prior to construction of OL-2 and continue quarterly for one year post
construction. A memo will be provided to the US Army Corps of Engineers with the monitoring results.
If the 610LF of S3 does not continuously flow with water for one year (or sooner) following construction of OL-2, Sibelco
will change the output of Basin OL-2 to discharge into S3 near the top end of S3 below Brushy Creek Road.
Thank You,
Tyson
CLearWaLer
145 7th Avenue West, Suite B
Hendersonville, NC 28792
Office: 828-698-9800 ext. 302
Mobile: [phone]
[e-mail]
WWW.CWENV.COM
From: Fuemmeler, Amanda J CIV (USA) <[e-mail]>
Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2021 2:16 PM
To: Tyson Kurtz <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Action ID 2019-01042 011is Waste Area Expansion - Comment Responses
1

From: Fuemmeler, Amanda J CIV (USA)
To: Clement Riddle; Tyson Kurtz
Cc: Homewood, Sue; Leslie, Andrea
Subject: 011is Waste IP - Comments and Corps Request for Additional Information
Date: Monday, November 2, 2020 1:27:00 PM
Attachments: 011is consolidated comments.pdf
Clement/Tyson,
Attached are the comments received in response to the Public Notice. As noted in DWR's letter, I will
work on finalizing the Approved JD so they can moved forward with finalizing their review. Please
submit the JD Form that I emailed the other day to assist me with finalizing that piece.
In regards to the comments received, please address WRC's comments relating to additional
information regarding sediment and erosion control measures for the tailings. With regards to their
request and USFWS's request that mitigation be increased to 2:1 for both stream and wetlands, I
believe your NCSAM documents the lower mitigation ratios with the exception of Stream S4. It has a
medium rating and was likely degraded by past mining activities. Please revise the ratio for this one
to 1.5:1.
With regards to the specifics of the plans, my only question/comment is related to the 610 linear
feet and 0.054 acre of wetland that will be avoided next to Basin OL-2B. Looking at the
stormwater/basin plans, it appears that water being collected in Basin OL-2A will be collected and
piped directly into OL-2B which won't discharge until the end of the stream reach. My concern is
that the hydrology of this channel/wetland will be negatively affected and essentially dry up and no
longer be jurisdictional and therefore should be considered an impact. Please review the plans for
this section and provide a response.
All responses/request for additional information should be received within 30 days to continue the
review of this application. Please contact me with any questions, thanks.
Amanda Jones
Regulatory Specialist
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Asheville Regulatory Field Office
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, NC 28801-5006
828-271-7980 ext. 4225