19941113 Ver 1_Complete File_19941206

t

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TkANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT, JR.
GOVERNOR
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201
December 5, 1994
District Engineer
Army Corps of Engineers
P. O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402
ATTENTION: Regulatory Branch
Dear Sir:
q, yI lI 3
R. SAMUEL HUNT III
SECRETARY
15 ? U f5 l;a
DEC-61994
Subject: Johnston and Wayne Counties, Bridge No. 77 over
Mill Creek, SR 1212, State Project No. 8.2330701,
Federal Aid No. BRZ-1212(3), T.I.P. No. B-2659.
Attached for your information is a copy of the project
planni the subject project. The project is
be" processed by th Federal Highway Administration as a
' ategorical Exclusi in accordance with 23 CFR 771.115(b).
efore, we d t 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.anticipate that 401 General Certification No. 2734
(Categorical Exclusion) will apply to this project, and are
providing one copy of the CE document to the North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources,
Division of Environmental Management, for their review.
If you have any questions or need additional
information, please call Gordon Cashin at 733-3141.
Sincerely,
'B. J. `Quin
tans anager
Planning and Environmental Branch
N
Tw.
BJO/gec
Attachment
cc: Mr. Mike Bell, COE, Washington
Ms. Jean Manuele, COE, Raleigh
Mr. John Dorney, P.E., DEHNR, DEM
Mr. Kelly Barger, P.E., Program Development Branch
Mr. Don Morton, P.E., State Highway Engineer-Design
Mr. A. L. Hankins, P.E., Hydraulics Unit
Mr. Tom Shearin, P.E., State Roadway Design Engineer
Mr. John L. Smith Jr., P.E., Structure Design
Mr. D. R. Dupree, Division 4 Engineer
Mr. Davis Moore, Planning and Environmental Branch

at
Johnston and Wayne Counties
SR 1212
Bridge No. 77
Over Mill Creek
Federal-Aid Project BRZ-1212(3)
State Project No. 8.2330701
T.I.P. No. B-2659
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
N.C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
APPROVED:
AT /H1Z_FiankIiif 'Vick, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch, NCDOT
84DA ?
Nicho L. Graf, P.E.
,FinObvision Administrator, FHWA

Vfchael E. Kranr
Project Manager
Johnston and Wayne Counties
SR 1212
Bridge No. 77
Over Mill Creek
Federal-Aid Project BRZ-1212(3)
State Project No. 8.2330701
T.I.P. No. B-2659
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
August 1994
,4
Documentation Prepared by Wilbur Smith Associates
CAR6,',*k..
.Z? wOE E SS

.E.
SEAL
10926 r=
For North Carolina Department of Transportation
L. G I rimes, ., Unit Head
Cons tant Engi eering Unit
_,J&,,V OQ Z?
Philip D. Edwards
Project Planning Engineer
Johnston and Wayne Counties
SR 1212
Bridge No. 77
Over Mill Creek
Federal-Aid Project BRZ-1212(3)
State Project No. 8.2330701
T.I.P. No. B-2659
Bridge No. 77 is located on SR 1212 over Mill Creek and is scheduled for replacement
in the NCDOT 1995-2001 Transportation Improvement Program. The location is
shown in Figure 1. No substantial environmental impacts are anticipated as a result
of this action. The project is classified as a Federal "Categorical Exclusion".
1. SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS
All standard procedures and measures including NCDOT's "Best Management
Practices for Protection of Surface Waters" will be implemented to avoid or
minimize environmental impact. Basic sedimentation and erosion control measures
in accordance with the NCDOT "Standard Specifications for Roads and Structures"
will be utilized throughout construction. High quality water sedimentation and
erosion control measures will be implemented.
II. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Bridge No. 77 will be replaced on the existing alignment as shown in Figure 2.
Traffic will be detoured along existing roadways as shown in Figure 1.
The existing alignment on the bridge will be maintained. Approach roadway
improvements will be limited to the 205 meter radius (8°-301 and 180 meter radius
(9°-301 curves on the north and south approaches, respectively. These curves will
be improved to 235 meter radius (7°30') curves to satisfy an 80 kilometers per
hour (50 miles per hour) design speed. Grade adjustments will be made to
accommodate an increased superstructure depth.
The replacement structure will have a length of 57.9 meters (190 feet) and provide
a deck consisting of a 7.2 meters (23.6 feet) clear roadway width. The travelway
is 6.0 meters (19.7 feet) with a 0.6 meter (2.0 feet) shoulder on each side.
The design speed for the project is 80 kilometers per hour (50 miles per hour).
The estimated cost based on current prices is $497,000. The estimated total cost
of the project as shown in the 1995-2001 TIP is $438,000.
1
ill. EXISTING CONDITIONS
SR 1212 is classified as a local roadway in the Statewide Functional Classification
System. The roadway serves as a crossing of Mill Creek connecting SR 1008 in
Wayne County to SR 1200 in Johnston County. The land use in the vicinity
consists of rural/residential, woodlands, and cultivated fields. SR 1212, in the
vicinity of the project, consists of an unpaved roadway providing a total pavement
width of 5.5 meters (18 feet) with 1.2 meters (4 feet) unpaved shoulders. The
existing structure has an overall length of 46 meters (150 feet - 10 inches) and
provides a clear roadway width of 5.2 meters 0 7 feet - 1 inch) and a total bridge
width of 5.4 meters (17 feet - 9 inches) face-of-rail to face-of-rail. The existing
right-of-way along SR 1212 near the bridge site is estimated to be 18.3 meters (60
feet).
The horizontal alignment across Bridge No. 77 is tangent with a 205 meter radius
(8°30') curve on the north approach. The south approach has a 180 meter radius
(9°30') curve reversing with a 135 meter radius (13°) curve. The south roadway
approach is on a low fill through the floodplain and rises approximately 1.5 meters
(5 feet) to the bridge deck elevation at the bridge. The north approach has a well
defined bank both upstream and downstream of the bridge and generally matches
the bridge elevation and grade. See Figure 3 and 3A.
The existing (1993) traffic volume is 100 Vehicles Per Day (VPD). The traffic
volume is projected to remain 100 VPD for 1995 and increase to 200 VPD for the
design year 2015. The volumes include one percent truck-tractor semi-trailer
(TT/ST) and three percent dual tired (DT) with a 60 percent directional split. There
presently is no posted speed limit. The bridge has a posted load limit of 6,350
kilograms (7 tons).
Bridge No. 77 was built in 1953. It has five spans with the superstructure
consisting of a deck with asphalt wearing surface on a timber stringer and steel
floor beam and girder system. The substructure consists of timber piles and caps.
End bents include vertical abutment walls of timber planks. Generally, all structure
units have experienced repairs.
The sufficiency rating for Bridge No. 77 is 19.1 out of a possible 100 for a new
bridge. This rating is below the minimum criteria level of 50 established by the
Federal Aid Bridge Replacement Program for structure replacement. The bridge has
an estimated remaining life of one year.
No utilities were noted at the site.
No traffic accidents occurred between January 1990 and March 1993 near the
bridge.
2
The Johnston and Wayne County School Systems report that no buses will be
affected by the project.
IV. ALTERNATIVES
Alternative alignments were not considered for replacement of Bridge No. 77 over
Mill Creek. The existing bridge location provides the best alignment and lowest
cost with minimal environmental impacts. See Figure 2.
The existing bridge will be closed during construction. Existing roadways will serve
as detour routes. The off-site detour length will be 5.6 kilometers (3.5 miles). See
Figure 1.
Roadway improvements were limited to the 205 meter radius (8°30') and 180
meter radius (9°30') curves on the north and south approaches, respectively. The
existing gravel roadway is not posted. An 80 kilometers per hour (50 miles per
hour) design speed was used. This was so an equivalent level of service would be
provided while limiting the amount of roadway approach work required. At some
point in the future, it is felt the existing roadway will be paved and then some
additional alignment adjustment will be made. The NCDOT Division Office
requested that the replacement structure be located such that it will accommodate
future alignment adjustments, particularly on the south approach. The bridge is
situated to accommodate future roadway alignment modifications. To provide an
equivalent hydraulic level of service, the replacement structure will maintain the
existing clearance above the streambed. The bridge elevation will be raised
approximately 0.8 meters (2.5 feet) to accommodate an increased superstructure
depth.
A relocation alternative is not reasonable due to additional costs, right-of-way
requirements, and greater environmental impacts resulting from the significant
increase in approach improvements that would be necessary to the gravel roadway.
Alternatives providing an on-site detour are undesirable due to the resulting
environmental impacts, higher costs, and low traffic volumes.
The "do-nothing" alternative will eventually require closure of the bridge. This is
not a desirable alternative due to the level of traffic service provided by SR 1212.
Investigations by the Bridge Maintenance Unit indicate that rehabilitation is not
feasible due to the age and deteriorated condition of the existing bridge.
3
The design criteria for this bridge site is as follows: See Figure 4.
The approach roadway width is a 6.0 meters (19.7 feet) travelway with
1.2 meters (4.0 feet) shoulders.
The clear roadway width across the bridge is 7.2 meters (23.6 feet).
The bridge width accommodates a 6.0 meters (19.7 feet) travelway with
0.6 meters (2.0 feet) shoulders.
The design speed is 80 kilometers per hour (50 miles per hour) with a
posted speed limit of 73 kilometers per hour (45 miles per hour).
V. ESTIMATED COST
The estimated cost of the alternative studied, based on current prices, is as
follows:
Structure Removal $ 15,500
New Structures 224,400
Roadway 94,700
Traffic Control 5,400
Miscellaneous and Mobilization 75,000
Engineering and Contingencies 60,000
Right-of-Way/Construction Easements 22,000
TOTAL $ 497,000
VI. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS
Bridge No. 77 over Mill Creek will be replaced on existing location as shown in
Figure 2. Traffic will be detoured on existing roadways during construction. The
205 meter radius (8030') curve and the 180 meter radius (9030') curve on the
north and south roadway approaches, respectively, will be improved to 235 meter
radius (7°-30') curves to satisfy minimum criteria for an 80 kilometers per hour (50
miles per hour) design speed. Grade adjustments will be made on the approaches
to accommodate an increased superstructure depth. Approximately 213 meters
(700 feet) and 183 meters (600 feet) of roadway work will be required on the
north and south approaches, respectively, to accommodate the alignment changes.
Additional right-of-way and temporary construction easements will be required.
The NCDOT Division. Engineer concurs with this recommendation.
4
A 6.0 meters (19.7 feet) wide pavement with 1.2 meters (4 feet) shoulders will be
provided on the approach improvements to the bridge. In accordance with current
NCDOT Bridge Policy, the replacement structure will provide a clear width of 7.2
meters (23.6 feet). This will allow for a 6.0 meters (19.7 feet) travelway and 0.6
meters (2.0 feet) shoulders across the structure.
Based on the field reconnaissance of the site and preliminary hydraulic analysis, an
estimated replacement structure with a length of 57.9 meters (90 feet) is proposed.
The proposed bridge opening is based on the historic performance of the existing
structure and on field observations. The proposed bridge opening may be adjusted
during hydraulic design as determined appropriate to accommodate design flows. The
replacement structure will improve flow characteristics at the site and will not impact
adjacent properties by altering the existing floodway from roadway encroachment.
VII. NATURAL RESOURCES
The proposed project replaces Bridge No. 77 on SR 1212 over Mill Creek in Wayne
and Johnston Counties. The preferred alternative places the proposed structure on
the existing location. Traffic would be maintained with an off-site detour.
The project area is in the Coastal Plain Physiographic Province, close to the
Piedmont. It lies south of the town of Princeton and the Neuse River. The site is
partially forested. The surrounding location is used for agriculture and a small
lumber mill.
METHODOLOGY
A natural resources investigation was undertaken to search for evidence of
protected plants and animals and unique or high quality natural communities, to
describe current vegetation and habitats, identify wetlands, and provide information
to avoid or minimize the adverse environmental effects of the proposed bridge
replacement project.
During the period of December, 1993 through March, 1994 correspondence
relative to the project was initiated with the North Carolina Natural Heritage
Program, the North Carolina Wildlife Commission, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service,
the U.S. Geological Survey, the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health
and Natural Resources, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the county Soil
Conservation Service office. Data on protected species, soil types, and stream
characteristics were gathered.
5
Biologists visited the bridge site on 7 February and 19 March, 1994 to gather data
and verify documented information to complete an assessment of potential impacts
incurred by the bridge replacement proposal. The study area is divided into four
quadrants, with the road dividing the east-west parameters and the water channel
dividing the north-south parameters. Information on tree ages was gained using a 5.15
millimeter increment borer. Basal Area data was gained using a ten factor prism. No
canopy cover estimations were made since the work was accomplished before the
leaves were fully open. Wetland determinations were made using the 1987 Corps Of
Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual and Munsell color charts. Precise delineations
were not performed, but area estimates and descriptions of wetlands are included.
Forest community types follow Schafale and Weakley (1990). Plant nomenclature
follows Radford (1981). Status of listed animals follows LeGrand (1993) and the
1993 US Fish and Wildlife Service "Listed and Candidate Species of North Carolina,
by County" publication. Status of listed plant species follows Weakley (1993) and the
US Fish and Wildlife Service list.
BIOTIC COMMUNITIES
Plant Communities
The site is basically composed of Coastal Plain Bottomland Hardwoods forest. The
areas on the north side of the river are different from those on the south side. The
north is drier upland, and is grazed. The northeast quadrant is utilized for a logging
road and for stacking milled lumber. The south is in the bend of the river, thus it is
much wetter. Within the southwest and southeast quadrants there is a matrix of
wetland and upland.
Coastal Plain Bottomland Hardwoods
This community type covers the majority of the project area. Trees include mixed
oaks (Quercus phellos, Q. laurifolia, Q. laevis, . ni r , Q. falcata), sweet gum
(Liouidambar styraciflua), river birch (Betula nigra), red maple (Acer rubrum). The
wetter areas are dominated by cypress (Taxodium distichum), with some gum
(Nyssa biflora). If the area was larger, it would develop into a Cypress--Gum
community. Ironwood (Caroinus caroliniana) and winterberry (Ilex laevigata) are
important understory trees. Dense greenbriar vines (Smilax sgp.) were present in
places, along with poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans) and Japanese honeysuckle
(Lonicera japonica).
6
Herbs include bluets (Houstonia caerulea), wild strawberry (Fragaria virginiana), panic
grass (Panicum sp.), dock (Rumex crisous), poke weed (Phytolacca americana), corn
salad (Valerianella radiata ), vetch (Vicia angustifolia), lyre leaf sage (Salvia lyrata),
field garlic (Allium vineale), evening primrose (Oenothera biennis), daisy
(Chrysanthemum leucanthemum), broomsedge (Andropogon virginicus), resurrection
fern (Polypodium polypodioides), goldenrod (Solidago spy), and asters (Aster son).
Trees were generally about 11-15 meters (36-50 feet) tall, with a basal area of 90
and an average diameter of 15 to 22 centimeters (6-9 inches), though there were
some fairly large trees present. Oak trees on the south side of the river close to the
road grew up to 96 centimeters (38 inches) in diameter at breast height. One cypress
tree in the southwest quadrant had a diameter of 91 centimeters (36 inches).
Wildlife
Numerous signs of wildlife were observed. Signs of white-tailed deer ( Odocoileus
virainiana), grey squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis), and raccoons (Procyon lotor) were
noted. Many trotlines for fishing were seen. Birds observed included an indigo
bunting (Passerina cyanea), a brown thrasher (Toxostoma rufum), towhees (Pi it
erythrophthalmus), juncos (Junco hyemalis), mourning doves (Zenaida macroura), and
a hairy woodpecker (Picoides villosus).
The general area is probably important for amphibians, including the spring peeper
(Hyla crucifer) and the southern leopard frog (Rana si2henocepha). Other wildlife likely
to occur in the project area include reptiles such as the banded water snake (N r i
f i a), rat snake (Elaphae obsoleta), black racer (Coluber constrictor), carolina anole
(Anolus carolinensis), eastern fence lizard (Scleropsis undulatus), five-lined skink
(Eumeces laticeps), snapping turtle (Chelydra serpentina), spotted turtle ( I mm
guttata) and eastern boxturtle (Terrapene caroling).
Birds include the indigo bunting (Passrina cyanea), common crow ( rv
brachyrhvncos), turkey vulture (Coragyps atratus), common grackle (Quiscalus
guiscula), towhee (Pipilo erythrophtyalmus), common flicker (Colagtes auratus), red-
eyed vireo (Vireo olivaceus) and yellow warbler (Dendroica getechia). Mammals
include the raccoon (Procyon lotod, opsossum (Didelphis virginiana), marsh rabbit
(Sylvilagus Dalustris), striped skunk (Mephitis mephitis), house mouse (Mus musculus),
grey squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis) and southeasten shrew (Longirostrus longirostrus).
Fish likely to be found in the project area include the bowfin (Amia calva), carp
(Cyprinus car iio), brown bullhead (Ictalurus nebulosus), yellow bullhead (Ictalurus
n li ), mosquitofish (Gambusia affinis) and pirate perch (Aphredoderus sayanus).
7
The presence of freshwater mollusks at this site has been documented by NCDOT
biologists in a recent study. Mill Creek was surveyed on May 25, 1994. Survey
methods included some snorkeling and wading as well as examination of shell
middens. Mussels were common in the stream, but none were abundant. A total of
25 living Elliptios, of the groups named eastern elliptio and variable spike (mussels
assigned to the Elliptio corn lanata and E. icterina complexes), 6 Roanoke slabshells
(E. roanokensis), 5 lanceolate elliptios (E. sgg.) and two yellow lance mussels (E.
lanceolata) were found. Shells of all species were also found. This stream was
revisited on June 3, 1994 by NCDOT biologists and the NC Wildlife Resources
Commission. Two additional species were found during this visit, the triangle floater
(Alasmidonta undulata) and the eastern lampmussel (Lampsilis r i ). No dwarf
wedge mussels were found.
Biotic Community Impacts
Small amounts of forested (bottomland hardwoods) areas will incur impacts from the
widening of the bridge. The total area impacted will be 0.28 hectares (0.7 acres).
NCDOT's "Best Management Practices for Protection of Surface Waters" will be
implemented.
PHYSICAL RESOURCES
it
This site occurs in the Coastal Plain Physiographic province. Soil present consists
of two series. Chewacla loam occurs on the south side of the river and Wehadkee
loam is on the north side (see table below). Chewacla loam is not a hydric series,
but has potential for inclusions of Kinston loam, which is a hydric soil. It is
somewhat poorly drained, with moderate permeability, occurring on 0 to 2%
slopes. It usually has a yellowish brown loamy surface layer that is 13 centimeters
(5 inches) thick. The subsoil extends to 203 centimeters (80 inches) and is
yellowish brown loam to greyish brown clay loam.
Wehadkee loam is a hydric series that is poorly drained. It is prone to flooding. It
occurs on nearly level floodplains. The surface layer is greyish brown fine sandy
loam to a depth of 20 centimeters (8 inches). The subsoil, to a depth of 101
centimeters (40 inches), is dark grey loam. The underlying layer, to a depth of 127
centimeters (50 inches), is grey sandy loam.
8

Table 1 Soil Series in Project Area
Series Hydric
status Hydric
Inclusions Locations
Chewacla loam no Kinston NE & NW quadrant
Wehadkee loam yes no SE & SW quadrant
Water Resources
Mill Creek is a small to medium sized tributary catchment of the Neuse River that
occurs several miles upstream of Goldsboro. The headwater reaches of Mill Creek are
formed by small tributaries and ponds in southeastern Johnston County. Land use
within this catchment is largely agricultural with row crops dominating.
Within the project area, Mill Creek has a Best Usage Classification of WS-IV NSW.
The WS-IV classification denotes that these waters are protected as water supplies
which are generally in moderately to highly developed watersheds; point source
discharges of treated wastewater are permitted pursuant to Rules .0104 and .0211
of the subchapter on water quality standards in the NC Division of Environmental
Management classifications; local programs to control nonpoint source stormwater
discharge of pollution are required. This water is suitable for all class C uses. The
"NSW" classification denotes that these are nutrient sensitive waters which require
limits on nutrient inputs.
The average flow rate for the water body at the project area is 6 cubic meters per
second (220 cubic feet per second) (U.S. Geological Survey).
The Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network (BMAN) is a program that is used to
monitor water quality. It has been incorporated into the Basin Wide program being
established by the state (DEM, 1992). There are no monitoring stations at this
location. An upstream monitoring point, at SR 1200, shows the water quality to be
fair, with 58 total taxa (genera, species or varieties) recorded.
The entire length of Mill Creek from Moorewood Pond to the confluence with the
Neuse River is recognized by the NC Natural Heritage Program as a significant site.
The Mill Creek Aquatic Habitat supports populations of the state protected Neuse
River water dog and several non-listed mussel species.
9
TABLE II Stream Characteristics
Substrate sand, mud
Current flow moderate
Channel width in meters 25.00 (82 feet)
Bank height in meters 0-1.5 (0-5 feet)
Water depth variable
Water color clear
Water odor none noted
Aquatic veg none noted
Adjacent veg hardwood, cypress, or cleared
Wetlands Assoc. SE & SW quadrants
Water Resource Impacts
Potential impacts to aquatic systems in the projects area include: increased
sedimentation and erosion, alteration of water levels and water flow, and some
changes in light and temperature (in the immediate area) due to vegetation removal.
Because of the diverse mussel fauna found in Mill Creek and the presence of a
candidate species and several State Protected Species, as well as a recognized natural
area, High Quality Water (HOW) sedimentation and erosion control guidelines in
addition to Best Management Practices (BMP's), to minimize potential impacts to these
populations will be implemented.
SPECIAL TOPICS
Jurisdictional Waters of the United States
Wetlands are designated as under "Waters of the United States" (33 CFR 328.3) and
are therefore regulated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (US COE). as to
discharge of dredged or fill material. Within the southwest and southeast quadrants
there is a matrix of wetland and upland.
10
The total area of direct impact to wetlands expected for this project is 0.28 hectares
(0.7 acres). Since the bridge will be built in place, with an off-site detour, the least
amount of wetlands will be disturbed for this project. Construction practices will be
utilized that will limit indirect impacts to wetland outside of, as well as within, the
above area tie, those caused by construction equipment, sedimentation, etc).
Permits
In accordance with the provisions of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 US COE
1344), a permit will be required from the US Army Corps of Engineers (US COE) for
the discharge of dredged or fill material into "Waters of the United States".
Since this project is classified as a categorical exclusion it is likely that this project will
be subject to the Nationwide Permit Provisions of 33 CFR 330.5 (A) 23. However,
final permit decisions are left to the discretionary authority of the US COE.
A 401 Water Quality Certification, administered through the N.C. Department of
Environment, Health and Natural Resources, may be required. This certificate is issued
for any activity which may result in a discharge into waters for which a federal permit
is required.
Erosion and sedimentation control measures will be strictly enforced during
construction activities to minimize unnecessary impacts to wetland ecosystems.
Mitigation
Compensatory mitigation is usually not be required under a Nationwide Permit . Final
authority rests with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
Rare and Protected Species
Under federal law, any federal action which is likely to result in a negative impact to
federally protected plants or animals is subject to review by the US Fish & Wildlife
Service (USFWS) under one or more provisions of the Endangered Species Act (ESA)
of 1973. Species listed as endangered (E), threatened (T), proposed endangered (PE),
or proposed threatened (PT) are protected.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has indicated that the following species (see Table
III below) occur in Wayne or Johnston Counties.
11
Table 111 Federally Protected Species
Scientific name Common name Status* Habitat
Picoides borealis red-cockaded woodpecker E mature long leaf
pines
Alasmidonta
heterodon dwarf wedge mussel E aquatic
• Federal status : E = endangered
Picoides borealis (red-cockaded woodpecker) E
The red-cockaded woodpecker (RCW) once occurred from New Jersey to southern
Florida, west to eastern Texas, including the states of Kentucky, Arkansas,
Tennessee, Oklahoma and Missouri. It is currently known only in coastal states of its
historic range, plus southeastern Oklahoma and southern Arkansas. North Carolina
populations are found in the sandhills and southern coastal plain.
The adult RCW's plumage is entirely black and white except for small red streaks on
the sides of the nape of the neck in the male. The back has horizontal stripes of black
and white and the breast and underside is white with streaked flanks. It has large
white cheek patches surrounded by a black cap, nape and throat.
This species uses open, mature stands of southern pines, particularly long leaf ( in
i2alustris), for nesting and foraging. Suitable habitat must contain at minimum 50%
pine and a fairly open understory. The birds nest only in trees that are 60 years or
older and are contiguous with pine dominated forest stands that are at least 30 years
in age. The RCW foraging range is about 0.8 kilometers (0.5 mile) and must be
connected to suitable nesting sites.
RCWs nest exclusively in living pine trees that are frequently infected with the fungus
that causes red-heart disease. Cavities are located in colonies and are found at 4-30
meters (12 to 100 feet) above the ground, with an average height of 9-15 meters
(30-50feet). Large incrustations of running sap on the tree trunk is an indicator sign
of a nest tree. This may be a defense against predators. A clan of RCWs consists
of one breeding pair and the offspring of previous years. Eggs are laid in April, May
and June. Clutch size varies from 3-5 eggs. All members of the clan share in raising
the young. Diet consists mainly of insects, but occasionally includes seasonal fruits.
Biological Conclusion: No effect. There is no suitable habitat within the project area.
No mature longleaf pine forests are present.
12
Alasmidonta heterodon (dwarf wedge mussel) E
The dwarf wedge mussel occurs in aquatic habitats in the Tar and Neuse River
drainages, mainly near the fall line. It is dependent on good water quality and lack of
sedimentation (see water resource impacts).
The project area was surveyed by NCDOT biologists on May 25 and June 3, 1994.
Biological Conclusion: Low Probability. Given the survey results, and the lack of
extensive root mats, it can be concluded that there is a low probability that a dwarf
wedge mussel (DWM) population occurs in Mill Creek, and that project construction
is not likely to impact this species.
Federal Candidate and State Protected Species
Federal Candidate (C2) species are not legally protected under the Endangered
Species Act. These species show evidence of decline or vulnerability and may
become listed in the future. Presently, there has not been sufficient data gathered on
many of these species to ascertain the correct status. State listed species with
designations of Endangered, Threatened, or Special Concern are granted protection
by the State Endangered Species Act and the North Carolina Plant Protection and
Conservation Act of 1979. Enforcement and administration falls under the jurisdiction
of the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission and the North Carolina
Department of Agriculture.
Federal Candidate and State Protected Species and their appropriate habitat were not
surveyed for in this study.
The yellow lance (E. lanceolata) is listed as a federal candidate (C2) species and is also
protected under North Carolina State law as a Threatened species. The Roanoke
slabshell (E. roanokensis) and the triangle floater (Alasmidonta undulata) are also listed
as Threatened in North Carolina and the eastern lampmussel is listed as a species of
Special Concern. Key indicators of water quality, freshwater mussel populations have
been declining in North Carolina.
The state protected Neuse River water dog (Necturus lewisi) is recorded as occurring
in the Mill Creek Aquatic Habitat, along with good populations of several non-listed
mussel species. Table IV (below) lists Federal Candidate species known to occur in
Wayne and Johnston Counties. Habitat may be somewhat appropriate for the
Carolina trillium, however, the area is greatly disturbed and no individuals were
observed during survey.
In general no impact is expected to the resources since the bridge will be built in
place.
13
Table IV Federal Candidate Species, Including State Protected Status
Scientific name Common name Federal
Status* State
Status"
Plecotus rafinesquii Rafinesque's big-eared
bat C2 SC
Procambarus medialis Albemarle crayfish C2
Elliptio judithae Neuse slabshell
mussel C2 E
Elliptio lanceolata yellow lance mussel C2 T
Fusconaia masoni Atlantic pigtoe mussel C2 T
Lampsilis cariosa yellow lampmussel C2 T
Lasmigona subviridis green floater mussel C2 E
Litsea aestivalis pondspice C2
Solidago verna spring-flowring
goldenrod C2 E
Tofieldia glabra smooth bog-asphodel C2
Trillium pusillum var.
pusillum Carolina trillium C2 E
E. Roanokensis Roanoke slabshell C2 T
Alasrnidonta undulata Triangle floater C2 T
Lampsilis radiata Eastern lampmussel C2 SC
• Federal status : C2 = candidate; "State Protection Status : E= endangered,
T = threatened, SC=special concern
14
VIII. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
The project is expected to have an overall positive impact.
The project is a Federal "Categorical Exclusion" due to its limited scope and
environmental consequences.
The project is not in conflict with any land use plans or zoning regulations. No
significant change in existing land use is expected to result from construction of
the project.
No adverse impact on families or communities is anticipated. Minimal right-of-way
acquisition and temporary construction easements will be required. No relocatees
will be involved with implementation of the proposed alternative.
No adverse effect on public facilities or services is anticipated. The project is not
expected to adversely affect social, economic, or religious opportunities in the area.
Impacts on utilities as a result of the proposed action will be low.
There are no publicly owned parks, or wildlife and waterfowl refuges of national,
state, or local significance in the vicinity of the project.
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 36
CFR Part 800. Section 106 requires that for federally funded, licensed, or
permitted projects having an effect on properties listed in or eligible for the National
Register of Historic Places, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation be given
an opportunity to comment.
In a letter dated January 6, 1994, the Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
indicated there are no properties either listed in or eligible for the National Register
within the area of potential effect (APE). Therefore, the Deputy State Historic
Preservation Officer has no comment on this project in regards to historic
architecture.
The Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer also indicated in a letter dated June
17, 1994, that it is unlikely that any archaeological sites which may be eligible for
inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places will be impacted by this project.
Therefore, an intensive archaeological survey is not recommended.
15
The Farmland Protection Policy Act requires all federal agencies or their
representatives to consider the potential impacts to prime and important farmland soils
by all land acquisition and construction projects. Prime and important farmland soils
are defined by the U.S. Soil Conservation Service (SCS). According to the SCS, the
proposed project will impact 0.10 hectares (0.25 acres) of soils in Johnston County
defined as prime, statewide or local important farmland soils. This accounts for very
little of the total 158,125 hectares (390,735 acres) of prime and important farmland
soils in Johnston County. Form AD-1006, Farmland Conversion Impact Rating, is
included in the Appendix.
The project is located within the jurisdiction for air quality of the Raleigh and
Washington Regional Offices of the NC Department of Environment, Health, and
Natural Resources. Johnston and Wayne Counties have been determined to be in
compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. This project is not
anticipated to create any adverse effect on the air quality of the attainment areas.
There are no residences in the project area. Traffic volumes will not increase or
decrease as a result of the project. The existing noise levels are not expected to
change significantly, therefore, no impacts will occur. Noise levels may temporarily
increase during construction. 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.05020. This evaluation completes
the assessment requirements for highway traffic noise (23 CFR Part 772) and for air
quality (1990 CAAA and NEPA) and no additional reports are required.
Records of the N.C. Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources,
Division of Environmental Management, Groundwater Section and the N.C.
Department of Human Resources, Solid Waste Management Section indicated that no
underground storage tanks or hazardous waste sites are known to exist in the project
area.
Johnston and Wayne Counties are participants in the National Flood Insurance
Program. The project limits for Mill Creek are located in a detailed FEMA study area.
Approximate limits of the 100 year floodplain in the project area are shown in Figure
5. Impacts to the floodplain as a result of roadway encroachment are not considered
to be significant.
There are no reasonable alignment alternatives which will avoid crossing the Mill
Creek.
On the basis of the above discussion, it is concluded that no adverse environmental
effects will result from implementation of this project.
16

REFERENCES
Soil Conservation Service. 1994 Personal communication with Wayne and
Johnston County SCS offices, North Carolina.
Brown, P.M. 1985. Geologic Map of North Carolina. NC Geologic Survey. Raleigh,
NC.
Bull, J. & Farrand, J. Jr. 1988. The Audubon Society Field Guide to North
American Birds, Eastern Region. Alfred A. Knopf, New York.
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual.
Tech. Rpt. Y-87-1, US Army Engineer Waterways. Experiment Stn.,
Vicksburg, MS.
LeGrand, H.E., Jr. 1993. Natural Heritage Program List of the Rare Animal Species
of North Carolina. NC Natural Heritage Program. Raleigh, NC.
Martof, B.S., W.M. Palmer, J.R. Bailey & J.R. Harrison. 1980. Amphibians and
Reptiles of the Carolinas and Virginia. The University of North Carolina Press,
Chapel Hill, NC.
North Carolina Department of Environmental Management. 1992. Basinwide
Assessment Report of the Neuse River Basin.
Radford, A.E., H.E. Ahles & C.R. Bell. 1981. Manual of the Vascular Flora of the
Carolinas. The University of North Carolina Press. Chapel Hill, NC.
Schafale, M.P. & A.S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities of
North Carolina, 3rd approximation. NC Natural Heritage Program. Raleigh,
NC.
State of North Carolina Dept. of Environment, Health & Natural Resources. 1993.
Classifications and Water Quality Standards Assigned to the Waters of the
Lumber River Basin. NCDEHNR. Raleigh, NC.
US Fish & Wildlife Service. 1993. Listed and Candidate Species of North Carolina,
by County.
Weakley, A.S. 1993. Natural Heritage Program List of the Rare Plant Species of
North Carolina. NC Natural Heritage Program. Raleigh, NC.
17
•? Q 1 ?
}?}?? DETOUR
NORTH APPROACH
LOOKING NORTH
SOUTH APPROACH
LOOKING SOUTH
FIGURE 3
BRIDGE NO. 77
WAYNE/JOHNSTON
COUNTIES
B-2659
ELEVATION LOOKING WEST
LOOKING DOWNSTREAM
(EAST)
LOOKING UPSTREAM
(WEST)
FIGURE 3A
m
C" L
Z Q N c"
?
N W
JO
Q ~ I
m
W
W
? x
ix 0 F- ? 0 Q H N
M f- x=
at m
m CL -J 2 W L;
(n
Otn
N Ma.
JW

3 m
o OW

? ?-+x
p
Q2'LN
E zp J
?
a LL
a ?
w =OJ
QwN? t-z
xo c
i _jQz
CY00rrim ?}
Z ~ a 0 ...
w 0 ~ a•,
cr
-
? cm
Q aw

acr.
N
Q F- Q
N m
? L LJ F-
n: w to
CO a U ° x z
o m Q m •-'
'
v~i W
z
°
c p O
m
N W
?
°
z W
a
p 0 a
cr O I a- z
O a
O N

U
M O 4. °N 0- L)
a
H
Q Z zz
O ...
0 O O 0 N N
1
N
LL r O U w
Clj o
.

W
OD z N °
O
I- Q J
a
a' - U o U
N Q LU EL ..

F -
z
Q
U

z
?o
I- z
N ?
... O
x m
W 0
FIGURE 4
WAYNE-JOHNSTON COUNTIES
B-2659
Skl
BRIDGE NO. 77
'%-?,100 YEAR FLOODPLAIN
FIGURE 5
G? i.+ 33
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hmt. Jr.. Governor Division of Ambives and History
Betsy Ray McCain. Secretary William S. Price, Jr.. Dimaor
June 17, 1994
Michael E. Krannitz, P.E.
Wilbur Smith Associates
P.O. Box 2478
Raleigh, NC 27602
Re: Replace Bridge No. 77 on SR 1212 over Mill
Creek, B-2659, Wayne and Johnston Counties, ER
94-8019
Dear Mr. Krannitz:
Thank you for your letter of May 20, 1994, forwarding additional information
concerning the above project.
Because of the location and topographic situation of the proposed project area, it
is unlikely that any archaeological sites which may be eligible for inclusion in the
National Register of Historic Places will be affected by the proposed construction.
We, therefore, recommend that no archaeological investigation be conducted in
connection with this project.
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 comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley,
environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
Sin-e- rely,
l
? r
Davi Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw
cc: N. Graf
H. F. Vick
T. Padgett
109 Bad Jooes Street • Baldeh. NW& Caadba 276012807
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Solid Waste Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
William L. Meyer, Director
February 7, 1994
1
MEMORANDUM
At-to
00% 010%
?EHNR
. ? wf a.i.•a>f?-i.1v?b...6-aJ
'uy•1
TO: Michael E. Krann' , P.E.
THROUGH: Doug Holyfield, Pead
Waste Management Branch
FROM: Larry D. Perry, Supervisor )Of
Eastern Area Compliance Unit

RE: RCRA Comments on the NCDOT Group V Bridge Replacement Report
The Hazardous Waste Section has reviewed the noted project and offers the following
comments:
There are numerous RCRA hazardous waste generating facilities in the counties where
the replacement projects are located, but we do not believe there are any located near
the proposed projects. I do not believe that these projects will cause any adverse
situation on any sites that might generate or handle hazardous waste nor any hazardous
waste generator facility cause an adverse situation on any project.
This review only considered hazardous waste sites or generators. By copy of this
memorandum, this packet is being referred to the Solid Waste Section and Superfund for
their review.
If a site is encountered that raises concerns or questions, please contact our office at
[phone].
LDP/lfb
cc: Solid Waste Section
Superfund
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611.7687 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
D
GROUNDWATER SECTION
January 25, 1994
Michael E. Krannitz
Wilbur Smith Associates
P.O. Box 2478
Raleigh Bldg., Suite 910
Raleigh, NC 27602
Dear Mr. Krannitz:
1t, ? 1 .1.
V 1 ??
The Groundwater Section has reviewed its records for the the items you requested in your
December 14, 1993, letter to Arthur Mouberry regarding thirteen bridges slated for replacement
in the State. All bridges, except for numbers 77 and 315, were reviewed with regards to
hazardous waste sites, hazardous waste generators, landfills, and underground storage tanks.
According to our records, none of the above situations were within 1000 feet of these
bridges. However, Solid Waste Management (SWM) for the State maintains complete records
for all landfills and hazardous waste sites and generators. I suggest contacting Doue Holvfield of
the Hazardous Waste Section of SWM, [phone], for more information. Fay Sweat, in our
Pollution Control Branch [[phone]], maintains the incident management database for all
reported underground storage tank incidents in the State.
If you have any questions, please call me at [phone], ext. 406.
Sincerely,
eL V'.?
Brian Warner
Hydrogeologist
cc: Arthur Mouberry
Ted Bush
Bob Cheek
Fay Sweat
Doug Holyfield
P.O. Box 29535. Raleigh. North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 1096 post-consumer paper
<
}
s
PO Box 1336 • Smithfield, NC 27577
Telephone: [phone]
Johnston County Board of Education
January 10, 1994
TO: MICHAEL E. KRANNITZ, PRINCIPAL ENGINEER
FROM: JOHN R. EVANS _
9
TRANSPORTATION DIRECTOR
i
1 l .. 1
JAN :+ v ;Ulna
RE: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT
The replacement of bridge #77 over Mill Creek on SR 1200 will in no Way
bus routes. We have only one bus traveling this road and it will turn around affect our
it gets to Mill Creek. before
Please keep me informed of any future bridge replacement plans that
school bus transportation system in Johnston County, could affect our
P

+?T?o
y?
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
January 6, 1994
Michael E. Krannitz, P.E.
Wilbur Smith Associates
P.O. Box 2478
Raleigh, NC 27602
Re: Replace Bridge No. 77 on SR 1212 over Mill Creek,
Johnston and Wayne Counties, B-2659, ER 94-8019
Dear Mr. Krannitz:
Division of Archives and History
William S. Price, Jr., Director
Thank you for your letter of December 14, 1993, concerning the above project.
We have conducted a search of our maps and files and determined that these structures are
not located in or adjacent to any property which is listed in or eligible for listing in the
National Register of Historic Places. In addition, the structures are neither listed in nor
eligible for listing in the National Register as an individual property. We, therefore, have no
comment on the project.
There are no recorded archaeological sites within the proposed project area. If the
replacement is to be located along the existing alignment, it is unlikely that significant
archaeological resources would be affected and no investigations would be recommended.
If, however, the replacement is to be in a new location, please forward a map to this office
indicating the location of the new alignment so we may evaluate the potential effects of the
replacement upon archaeological resources.
Please note under normal procedures, requests concerning federally-funded roadway
projects come from the Federal Highway Administration and are directed to the Deputy
State Historic Preservation Officer, David Brook.
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 comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review coordinator, at
919/733-4763.
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
sine e,Lely,
David Brook
DB:slw
cc: N. Graf
H. F. Vick
B. Church
T. Padgett
109 East Jones Street - Raleiab. North Carolina 27601-2807
X J1 ./

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
January 5, 1994
IN REPLY REFER TO
Regulatory Branch
FILE NO. CESAW-C-010
Mr. Michael E. Krannitz, P.E.
Wilbur Smith Associates
Post Office Box 2478
Raleigh Building, Suite 910
Raleigh, North Carolina 27602
Dear Mr. Krannitz:
Reference your letter dated December 14, 1993, concerning the proposed
replacement of 8 bridges by the North Carolina Department of Transportation
(NCDOT) in Bladen/fender, Columbus/Brunswick, Duplin, Onslow, Wake, and
Wayne/Johnston Counties, North Carolina.
Pursuant to 33 CFR 330, Nationwide Permit Program Regulations, dated
November 22, 1991, Categorical Exclusion determinations are "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... that the activity, work, or discharge is
categorically excluded from environmental documentation...." and that the
Corps of Engineers has been furnished notice of the agency's or department's
application for the categorical exclusion and concurs with that determination.
Our review of your information indicates that the work is eligible for
authorization under the terms and conditions of Nationwide Permit 23
(Categorical Exclusions). Temporary detours involving fills in wetlands or
waters of the United States or not authorized by this permit. However, such
temporary detours may be authorized under the provisions of Nationwide Permit
33 (Temporary Construction Access and Dewatering), Nationwide Permit 14 (Minor
Road Crossing), or NCDOT General Permit No. 31.
The request for our concurrence for Categorical Exclusions should be
submitted directly to this office by NCDOT or their designated authorized
agent. It should be accompanied by information in support of this
determination. Please refer to this file number and the date of this letter
when requesting the concurrence(s).
If you have questions please call Mr. Ernest Jahnke, Wilmington Area
Field Office Manager, telephone [phone].
Sincerely,
e Wrig
hie , Regulatory Branch
4
• U.S GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE. 1984-451-15911324
U.S. Department of Agriculture
FARMLAND CONVERSION IMPACT RATING
PART I (To be completed by Federal Agency) Date Of Land Evaluation Request '
Name Of Prot
I /e1 1) U-i T1` _ S Federal Agency Involved 1" r
Proposed Land Use i L
JA C
M e
e
l-?

County And State

}
1
PART 11 (To be completed by CS) _ Date Request Received By SCS Mf ! Zr
Does the site contain prime, unique, statewide or local important farmland? Yes No Acres Irri . ed Average Farm Size .
(If no, the FPPA does not apply - do not complete additional parts of this form). O 3
Major Crop s) Farmable Land In Govt. Jurisdiction Amount O ermland As Defined in FPPA
CQ V--,, Acres: Q 3 5 96 6, Acres: 3 71 f

96 .4
0
7
Name Of Land Evaluation System Used Name Of Local Site Assessment System Date Land Evaluation Returned By SCS
no None, .73 7- *z y
PART III (To be completed b
Federal A
enc
) Alternative ite Rating
y
g
y Site A Site 8 Site C Site 0
A. Total Acres To Be Converted Directly
B. Total Acres To Be Converted Indirectly Z
C. Total Acres In Site
PART IV (To be completed by SCS) Land Evaluation Information
A. Total Acres Prime And Unique Farmland v,2, 5
B. Total Acres Statewide And Local Important Farmland 1 0 D
C. Percentage Of Farmland In County Or Local Govt. Unit To Be Converted tD 1 00
D. Percentage Of Farmland In Govt. Jurisdiction With Same Or Higher Relative Value -39. %Do
PART V (To be completed by SCSI Land Evaluation Criterion
Relative Value Of Farmland To Be Converted (Scale of 0 to 100 Points)
PART VI (To be completed by Federal Agency)
Site Assessment Criteria (These criteria are explained in 7 CFR 658.5(b/ Maximum
Points
1. Area In Nonurban Use
2. Perimeter In Nonurban Use
3. Percent Of Site Being Farmed
4. Protection Provided By State And Local Government
5. Distance From Urban Builtup Area
6. Distance To Urban Support Services
7. Size Of Present Farm Unit Compared To Average
8. Creation Of Nonfarmable••Farmland
9. Availability Of Farm Support Services
10. On-Farm Investments
11. Effects Of Conversion On Farm Support Services
12. Compatibility With Existing Agricultural Use
TOTAL SITE ASSESSMENT POINTS 160
PART VII (To be completed by Federal Agency)
Relative Value Of Farmland (From Part V) 100
Total Site Asse$sment (From Part V1 above or a local
site assessment) 160
TOTAL POINTS (Total of above 2 lines) 260

Site Selected:
Date Of Selection Was A Local Site Assessment Used?
Yes U No 0
Reason For Selectlow