19920416 Ver al_Complete File_20100726

O Nl SrAG 4
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
P.O. BOX 25201
RALEIGH 27611-5201
JAMES G. MARTIN
GOVERNOR
THOMAS J. HARRELSON
SECRETARY
July 16, 1992
District Engineer
Army Corps of Engineers
P. 0. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402
ATTENTION: Regulatory Branch
Dear Sir:
11.11. 3 11992
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
WILLIAM G. MARLEY, JR., P.E.
STATE HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATOR
Subject: Replacement of Bridge No. 132 on NC 14 over the Dan River;
Rockingham County; Project No. 8.1511001; Federal Aid Project No.
BRF-47-1(3); T.I.P. No. B-2611
Attached for your information is a copy of the project planning report for the
subject project. The project is being processed by the Federal Highway Adminis-
tration as a "Categorical Exclusion" in accordance with 23 CFR 771.115(b).
Therefore, we do not anticipate requesting an individual permit but propose to
proceed under a Nationwide Permit in accordance with 33 CFR 330 Appendix A
(B-23) issued November 22, 1991, by the Corps of Engineers. The provisions of
Section 330.4 and Appendix A (C) of these regulations will be followed in the
construction of the project.
We do not anticipate that a permit will be required from the North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources for this project.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please call me at
733-3141.
LJW/pl r
Attachment
Sincerely,
OM
L. J. ard, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
cc: Mr. John Parker, Permit Coordinator, w/report
Mr. John Dorney, Environmental Management, w/report
Mr. C. W. Leggett, P. E.
Mr. J. T. Peacock, Jr., P. E.
Mr. A. L. Hankins, Jr., P. E.
Mr. John Watkins
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer

Rockingham County
Bridge No. 132 on NC 14
over the Dan River
State Project No. 8.1511001
Federal Aid Project No. BRF-47-1(3)
B-2611
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION HIGHWAYS
APPROVED:
i
ate L. J. Ward, P.E. Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch, NCDOT
?'-- Date Nic as L. Gra P.E.
I ee ivision Administrator, FHWA
f
i
Rockingham County
Bridge No. 132 on NC 14
over the Dan River
State Project No. 8.1511001
Federal Aid Project No. BRF-47-1(3)
B-2611
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
JUNE, 1992
Documentation Prepared in Planning and Environmental Branch By:
12
.u
Byro E. Brady-
Project Planning Engineer
D
Richard B. Davis, P.E.
Project Planning Engineer, Unit Head
??.?O?Z H CA (, U?
?'i?FESS?04
.
9
• / f
• SEAL
i
6944
I
Rockingham County
Bridge No. 132 on NC 14
over the Dan River
State Project No. 8.1511001
Federal Aid Project No. BRF-47-1(3)
B-2611
Bridge No. 132 has been included in the Federal-Aid Bridge
Replacement Program and will be constructed in conjunction with T.I.P.
Project No. R-2401. The R-2401 project consists of the widening of NC 14
from US 29 near Reidsville to NC 700/770 in Eden. The location of Bridge
No. 132 is shown in Figure 1. No substantial environmental impacts are
anticipated. The project has been classified as a Federal "categorical
exclusion."
I. SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENT
All standard procedures and measures will be implemented to avoid or
minimize environmental impacts. A significant striped bass fishery exists
in the vicinity of the Dan River crossing. For this reason, construction
activities which would add sediment to the Dan River impacting the striped
bass during its Spring spawning run, shall be suspended between March 15th
to June 1st to avoid impacting this resource.
II. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Bridge No. 132 should be replaced at (slightly west of) existing
location as shown in Figure 2.
The recommended width of the new structure is 87 feet. The structure
will accommodate a 5-lane cross section with 27 additional feet to
accommodate shoulders and rails. This 27 feet includes 12 foot shoulders
on each side and 1.5 foot each side for the rails.
Traffic will be maintained on-site by use of phase construction.
Estimated cost of the proposed bridge is $ 3,406,300.00.
III. EXISTING CONDITIONS
NC 14 is classified as a Principal Arterial in the Statewide
Functional Classification System and is a part of the Federal-Aid System.
Development is very light in the project area. Several business are
adjacent to the bridge in the northwest quadrant. On the south side
immediately adjacent to the bridge there is a natural gas line. In the
vicinity of the bridge, NC 14 has a pavement width of 24-feet and shoulder
widths of 10 feet including a 2-foot paved shoulder. The speed limit in
the project area is 55 MPH. The weight limit of the bridge is not
currently posted.
2

The 1991 traffic volume of 17,600 vehicles per day (VPD) is expected
to increase to approximately 30,900 VPD by the year 2010. The projected
volumes includes 3% truck-tractor semi-trailer (TTST) and 5% dual-tire
vehicles (DT).
The existing bridge, known as the Harry Davis bridge, is a
prestressed concrete girder superstructure and was constructed in 1957.
Bridge No. 132 has a sufficiency rating of 12.7 and has an estimated life
of 12 years. Its existing length is 518 feet and its roadway width is 28
feet. The substructure is in poor condition and has had to be
strengthened.
Seven accidents were reported in the vicinity of the bridge during
the period from January 1, 1987 to January 31, 1990 which did not result
in any fatalities.
IV. ALTERNATIVES
Two methods of replacing Bridge No. 132 were studied as follows:
Alternative 1 consists of the removal of the existing bridge and
rebuild it in p ace while constructing a detour structure over the Dan
River to keep NC 14 open to traffic. This method would result in an added
cost of a detour structure.
Alternative 2 (recommended) consists of the construction of a new
bridge dust West of the existing bridge in phases while using the existing
bridge to maintain traffic during construction.
The "do-nothing" alternative would not be feasible due to
improvements to NC 14 from Reidsville to Eden in which the existing 2-lane
highway will be widened to a 5-lane facility.
Rehabilitation of the old bridge is not feasible due to its age and
deteriorated condition.
V. TRAFFIC DETOUR
During the construction period, maintenance of traffic at the studied
bridge site is necessary. Otherwise, traffic would have to be detoured
along existing secondary roads. No acceptable detour route was found due
to the traffic volume using NC 14 and the length of additional travel.
In view of this factor, the existing bridge shall be used to maintain
traffic during construction of the proposed bridge adjacent to the
existing bridge.
3

VI. ESTIMATED COST
Estimated cost of the proposed bridge is as follows:
Structure
Structure Rem
Miscellaneous
Engineering &
Temporary and
VII. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS
Bridge No. 132 should be replaced at (slightly west of) existing
location as shown in Figure 2.
The recommended improvements will include 2-11 foot by 87 foot
approach slabs and 1,208 feet of roadway approach work. Improved
approaches to the bridge will be constructed under a separate project,
R-2401. The approaches under this project are proposed to include 13-foot
shoulders of which 2 feet are paved. A 5-lane 60-foot section should be
provided on the approaches with an 87-foot curb to curb section proposed
for the bridge.
Bridge No. 132 is to be phase constructed. This will allow traffic
to be maintained at the project site.
The length of the new bridge is proposed to be 520 feet.
VIII. RIGHT-OF-WAY
No additional right-of-way will be acquired for construction.
However, 0.5 acres of temporary easements and 0.2 acres of permanent
easements will be acquired to construct this project.
$2,352,000
Dval 102,000
& Mobilization 496,000
Contingencies 450,000
Permanent Easements 6,300
$3,406,300
IX. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
The project is considered to be a Federal "categorical exclusion" due
to its limited scope and insignificant environmental consequences.
The project is not in conflict with any plan, existing land use, or
zoning regulation. No significant change in land use is expected.
No adverse effect on public facilities or services is expected. The
project is not expected to adversely affect social, economic, or religious
opportunities in the area.
It was determined that this project will not acquire any Farmland.
This project is subject to compliance with Section 106 of the
National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, implemented by the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance
with Section 106, codified at 35 CFR Part 800. Section 106 requires that
4

if a federally-funded, licensed, or permitted project has an effect on a
property listed on or eligible for the National Register of Historic
Places, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation be given an
opportunity to comment.
The area of potential effect (APE) was surveyed by DOT staff. The
State Historic Preservation Office reviewed the aerial photographs and
agreed that there were no properties over fifty years old in the APE.
Therefore no properties in the APE are eligible for the National Register.
Since there are no properties in the APE, no further compliance with
Section 106 is required.
The bridge was included in the archaeological survey for the R-2401
project and was coordinated with the State Historic Preservation Office
(SHPO) in accordance with the procedures for compliance with the North
Carolina Environmental Act (GS 113) and the North Carolina Historical
Commission (GS 121.12). During the survey by the staff archaeologist, one
site was located in the vicinity of the project. It was determined that
this project will have no impacts upon this site or any other
archaeological sites that are eligible for or listed on the National
Register of Historic Places. A letter of concurrence from the SHPO is
included in the Appendix.
A site visit was made on April 15, 1992, by NCDOT biologist to
determine the total acreage of wetlands and a occurrence of protected
species for the project area.
WILDLIFE HABITAT: The aquatic communities vary primarily on the
basis o stream size, substrate and relationship to larger-order streams.
Small, intermittent streams contain characteristic populations of benthos
and other invertebrate fauna, which support vertebrate trophic layers.
Fish in these lower order streams include shiners, sunfish, dace and
suckers. Substrate varies from silt to gravel-cobble. The Dan River has
these smaller fish species in addition to catfish, Robin-Warmouth, sucker
and carp. A significant striped bass fishery exists in the vicinity of
the Dan River crossing. For this reason, it is recommended that
construction activities be suspended from March 15th to June 1st to avoid
impacting this resource during its Spring spawning run.
WETLANDS: The Corps of Engineers is responsible for regulating
activiti-'- in "Waters of the US". Any action that proposes to impact
these waters falls under the jurisdiction of the Corps of Engineers and a
federal permit is required. Generally, "Waters of the US" are subdivided
into "wetlands" and "surface waters".
Using current methodologies, no jurisdictional wetlands will be
impacted by the proposed project.
A Nationwide Permit 33 CFR 330.5(a)(23) is likely to be applicable
for proposed construction. This permit authorizes any activities
undertaken, assisted, authorized, regulated, funded, or financed, in whole
or in part, by another federal agency or department has determined
5

pursuant to the Council on Environmental Quality regulation for
implementing the procedural provisions of the National Environmental
Policy Act.
An individual Coast Guard bridge permit will not be required for
construction of the Bridge No. 132 over the Dan River (see May 8, 1991
letter to NC DOT from U.S. Coast Guard, Appendix).
A Section 401 General Water Quality Certification is required for any
activity which may result in a discharge and for which a federal permit is
required. State permits are administered through the Department of
Environment, Health and Natural Resources (DEHNR).
As of March 16, 1992, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) does
not list any federally protected species for Rockingham County. No
occurrence records of state protected species are located in the North
Carolina Natural Heritage program files.
The Dan River has a best usage classification of "C". No impacts to
High Quality Waters, Outstanding Resource Waters or water supply segments
classified WS-I or WS-II will be impacted by the proposed project. The
Dan River is classified as an "Ecologically Sensitive Freshwater Area" by
the N.C. Natural Areas Protection Planning Committee. Strict adherence to
the Sediment Control Guidelines and Best Management Practices are
recommended to minimize erosion and reduce impacts. This classification
carries no legal consequences and is based on the occurrence of several
rare fish species, including riverweed darter (Etheostoma odosteemmone) and
bigmouth jumprock (Moxostoma ariommum). Neither species are federally
protected but both are state listed as Proposed Special Concern (PSC) by
the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program and afforded state protection.
PSC is defined as any species of wild animal native or once-native to
North Carolina which is determined by the NC Wildlife Resources Commission
to require monitoring but which may be taken under regulations adopted
under the provisions of Article 25 of Chapter 113 of the General Statues.
There are no practical alternatives to crossing the floodplain area.
Any shift in alignment would result in a crossing of about the same
magnitude. The alignment of the proejct is perpendicular to the
flood-plain area. All reasonable measures will be taken to minimize any
possible harm.
The project is located within the Northern Piedmont Air Quality
Control Region. The ambient air quality for Rockingham County has been
determined to be in compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards. Since this project is located in an area where State
Implementation Plan (SIP) does not contain any transportation control
measures, the conformity procedures of 23 CFR 770 do not apply to this
project.
During construction of the proposed project, all materials resulting
from clearing and grubbing, demolition or other operations will be removed
from the project, burned or otherwise disposed of by the Contractor. Any
burning done will be done in accordance with applicable local laws and
6
0
ordnances and regulations of the North Carolina SIP for air quality in
compliance with 15 NCAC 2D.0520. Care will be taken to insure burning
will be done at the greatest distance practicable from dwellings and not
when atmospheric conditions are such as to create a hazard to the public.
Burning will be performed under constant surveillance.
The project will not substantially increase traffic volumes.
Therefore, its impact on noise levels and air quality will be
insignificant. Noise levels could increase during construction but will
be temporary. If vegetation is disposed of by burning, all burning shall
be done in accordance with applicable local laws and regulations of the
North Carolina SIP for air quality in compliance with 15 NCAC 2D.0520.
This evaluation completes the assessment requirements of FHPM 7-7-3
(highway traffic noise) and FHPM 7-7-9 (air quality) and no additional
reports are required.
On the basis of the above discussion, it is concluded that no serious
adverse environmental effects will result from implementation of the
project.
BB/plr

Putt
:,g /_ _
i en V t y u
r?
70 9 r Ru
N
65 I REIdi
220
1 Ills Oro 4
1 5 1 87
r¢ 158 15 d .alts
id ale -- - - /- -')--
Dry`'. 2 A
u

s
t
?' ... ?'
nanl
VER ?
`?
91 1752
s rrs .?
- - i
3474 s.
..
y 2713

ILl I. J .1 197
Ivy .V
4 `I
.
2.7
1 .1
1140
'° `

!L9A 1977 1947.

27°2 r ,

•
1977
?{
v --
2LU
J
o
H
^r 7077 Ij7V M1
?';'5
10i 6/1 / 1 Ma 'L

C??
3072 1 ? 7
19 0
SmNh
J414 19e1
- ? I 7?0 e
1 li2° 71 n e iw 1447 I444' n Ivn S to 1.0
. 2417/ uu i
Ii- su
]1425e 347! D . t e n7
I 1' of 's ??a 1?.
J 1177 212e 1743 5 _
94•
b 2131
hl
'2170 -112lk Lo 11 -19
e ? ?2417
/. .i ? V 'J 71:0 25LL4 IH
1141 ' r ? ??ac 274L 0 li L 3393 A
2 t .
2021 zu
1 BRIDGE NO. 132 9-7
s'q
2llc'/ 7,,, u o1{I 2m
?. -1111 I! -','I
I _ .1 (?/j 12Q1
lCnik 2117 2117
?.,
7jq\? 7
47
317 .1 1v ?•'. N°7 • Camp
0 7.0 Don
\-ds '.wENTWORiH es 4? Vall.Y,? -
p tr
22ee ?p 21e7 I / ?I _ .
I
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
BRANCH
BRIDGE NO. 132
ROCKINGHAM COUNTY
B-2611
APRIL 1992 FIGURE 1
O?
37 • :•?
;.;.
P
FAU DAN
3 '•
14 J
CONSTRUCT NEW
•? pQ' 5-LANE BRIDGE
BRIDGE OVER DAN RIVER
NO. 132
a 1973 1974
5
1533 2719
V
N ;3 1945
cam, 1976 2.3
2723
C'n
o. -
N 2705
87 2093 x.1.5
2021 2039.
- 2092 3r ?? 6 1977 ?
1974 ??k\' _?_? •-?.
.7 2702 2019 ® .o •I 1977
2203 +\
O 1
2115 0(9
" NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
2 201 TRANSPORTATION
• f ' DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
Creek 27 1 7 2117 ANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
BCH
.? .s, .2. 1
BRIDGE NO. 132
116 ? ROCKINGHAM COUNTY
2 2118 •
B-2611
1
0 mile 1/2
7_ •? ,. ,. ,. ,. ' ' FIG. 2
?CE?VF
• d? svvr o
O
.? SEP-1 4 1990, DIVISION OF V
y HIGHWAYS ?z
RESE- orth Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James G. Martin, Governor
Patric Dorsey, Secretary
Division of Archives and History
William S. Price, Jr., Director
September 12, 1990
mvmnR ANnum
TO: L. J. Ward, Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
Department of Tzansportation
FROM: David Brook ??? k-*4
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
SUBJECT: Archaeological study, NC 14 from US 29 at
Reidsville to NC 700-770 at Eden, Rockingham
County, State Project No. 6.511014, R-2401,
CH 90-E-4220-0523 and ER 91-7215
We have received the archaeological report for the above project from
Thomas Padgett of your staff.
During the course of the investigation no prehistoric or historic
archaeological sites were located within the project area. Due to the
absence of resources and the fact that site 31Rk67 will not be affected,
Mr. Padgett has recommended that no further archaeological investigation
be conducted in connection with this project. We concur with this
recommendation since this project will not involve significant
archaeological resources.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36
CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comments, please contact Ms. Renee Gledhill-Earley,
environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
DB:slw
cc: T. Padgett
State Clearinghouse
109 East Jones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807
d& Departtnenr
of Transportation
Untied States
Coast Guard
Fifth Coast Guard Discnci
Mr. Dennis Pipkin, PE
North Carolina Department of Transportation
P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Pipkin:
Portsmouth, VA 23704.5004
Staff Symbol: ( o b )
Phone:
[phone]
16590
08 May 91
GJ'
017
Our Bridge Staff has reviewed your letter dated February 15,
1991, regarding the replacement of the Harry Davis Bridge on NC
14 across the Dan River near Eden, North Carolina.
Our District Legal Officer has determined that based on the U.S.
Supreme Court decision of United States v. Virginia Electric &
Power Company, 365 U.S. 624, 81 S.Ct 784, 5 L.Ed.2d 838 (1961),
the Dan River is considered navigable for Bridge Administration
purposes. The Dan River also meets the criteria for advance
approval waterways set forth in Title 33, Code of Federal
Regulations, Section 115.70. Accordingly, an individual Coast
Guard bridge permit will not be required for construction of the
bridge across the Dan River.
The fact that a Coast Guard permit will not be required does not
relieve you of the responsibility for compliance with the
requirements of any other Federal, State, or local agency who may
have jurisdiction over any aspect of the project.
Sincerely,
T. BE ARD
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard
Chief, Aids to Navigation
and Waterways Management Branch
By direction of the Commander
Fifth Coast Guard District
F
k
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
IN REPLY REFER TO
Regulatory Branch
August 7, 1992
Action ID. 199203121 and Nationwide Permit No. 23 (Approved Categorical
Exclusions)
Mr. L. J. Ward, Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Ward:
WETLANDS GROIi
ro nilA? I(Y SLCTIOf?I.. .. ...
Reference your letter, with enclosures, of July 16, 1992, regarding
your plans to replace Bridge No. 132 over the Dan River on North Carolina
Highway 14, Rockingham County, North Carolina, State Project No. 8.1511001,
Federal-Aid Project No. BRF-47-1(3), T.I.P. No. B-2611.
For the purposes of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Regulatory Program,
Title 33, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 330.6, published in the
Federal Register on November 22, 1991, lists nationwide permits.
Authorization, pursuant to Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899
and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, was provided for activities
undertaken, assisted, authorized, regulated, funded or financed, in whole or
in part, by another Federal agency or department where that agency or
department has determined, pursuant to the CEQ Regulation for the Implementing
the Procedural Provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act, that the
activity, work or discharge is categorically excluded from environmental
documentation because it is included within a category of actions which
neither individually nor cumulatively has a significant effect on the human
environment, and the office of the Chief of Engineers has been furnished
notice of the agency's or department's application for the categorical
exclusion and concurs with that determination.
Your work is authorized by this nationwide permit (NWP) provided it is
accomplished in strict accordance with the enclosed conditions and provided
you receive a Section 401 water quality certification from the N.C. Division
of Environmental Management and, in the coastal area, a consistency
determination from the N.C. Division of Coastal Management. You should
contact Mr. John Dorney, telephone [phone], regarding water quality
certification, and Mr. Steve Benton, telephone [phone], regarding
consistency determination. This NWP permit does not relieve you of the
responsibility to obtain other required State or local approval.
I

-2-
This verification will be valid for 2 years from the date of this letter
unless the NWP authorization is modified, reissued, or revoked. Also, this
verification will remain valid for the 2 years if, during that period, the NWP
authorization is reissued without modification or the activity complies with
any subsequent modification of the NWP authorization. If during the 2 years,
the NWP authorization expires or is suspended or revoked, or is modified, such
that the activity would no longer comply with the terms and conditions of the
NWP, activities which have commenced (i.e., are under construction) or are
under contract to commence in reliance upon the NWP will remain authorized
provided the activity is completed within 12 months of the date of the NWP's
expiration, modification or revocation, unless discretionary authority has
been exercised on a case-by-case basis to modify, suspend, or revoke the
authorization.
Questions or comments may be addressed to Mr. John Thomas, Raleigh Field
Office, Regulatory Branch, telephone [phone].
Sincerely,
G. Wayne Wright
Chief, Regulatory Branch
Enclosure
Copies Furnished (without enclosure):
Mr. ,,/John Dorney
W or Quality Section
ivision of Environmental Management
North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health and
Natural Resources
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
Mr. John Parker
North Carolina Department
Environment, Health and
Natural Resources
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina
of
27611-7687