19940936 Ver 1_Complete File_19941006

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
APPROVAL of 401 Water Quality Certification
Mr. Barney O'Quinn
Planning and Environmental Branch
NC DOT
P. O. Box 25200
Raleigh, N.C. 27611-5201
Dear Mr. O' Quinn:
A14. ty-go I
?EHNR
June 19, 1995
Madison County
DEM Project # 94936
TIP # B-2582, Project 8.1863601
FILE COPY
You have our approval to place fill material in waters for the purpose of constructing a bridge at
Bridge # 16, Big Laurel Creek, as you described in your revised application dated 16 May 1995. After
reviewing your application, we have decided that this fill is covered by General Water Quality
Certification Number 2727. This certification allows you to use Nationwide Permit Number 33 when it
is issued by the Corps of Engineers.
This approval is only valid for the purpose and design that you described in your application. If
you change your project, you must notify us and you may be required to send us a new application.
For this approval to be valid, you must follow the conditions listed in the attached certification. In
addition, you should get any other federal, state or local permits before you go ahead with your
project.
If you do not accept any of the conditions of this certification, you may ask for an adjudicatory
hearing. You must act within 60 days of the date that you receive this letter. To ask for a hearing,
send a written petition which conforms to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes to the
Office of Administrative Hearings, P.O. Box 27447, Raleigh, N.C. 27611-7447. This certification and
its conditions are final and binding unless you ask for a hearing.
This letter completes the review of the Division of Environmental Management under Section 401
of the Clean Water Act. If you have any questions, please telephone John Domey at 919-733-1786.
Sincerely,
r ton 4ar Jr. P. .
Attachment
cc: Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Corps of Engineers Asheville Field Office
Asheville DEM Regional Office
Mr. John Domey
Central Files
94936.1tr
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper

y dSTATjO
AV a ya'?
au..,
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT. JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201
May 16, 1995
District Engineer
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402
ATTENTION: Regulatory Branch
R. SAMUEL HUNT III
SECRETARY
Dear Sir:
SUBJECT: Madison County, Replacement of Bridge #16 over Big Laurel
Creek on NC 208 (COE Action ID No. 199401747, TIP 8-2582,
Project 8.1860601)
Reference is made to the Nationwide permits issued for this project on
December 15, 1994, and our letter of March 14, 1995 which proposed a
modification to the project design. Upon further study, it has been decided
that a design alternative exists which further minimizes impacts to the
stream. This letter is provided to notify you and the N.C. Wildlife
Resources Commission (WRC) of this proposed change in the project design.
The proposed workpad on the south bank has been eliminated, leaving only the
workpad on the north bank. This change is depicted in the attached plan
sheets. The change should further minimize adverse impacts to the stream.
All other aspects of the project design will remain the same as previously
reviewed by your agency. Project construction can still be completed in
compliance with the WRC letter of November 21, 1994.
Enclosed you will find revised plan sheets which show the modification.
A copy of this information has been provided to the N.C. Wildlife Resources
Commission and the N.C. Division of Environmental Management for their
information. If you have any questions, please contact Mr. Gordon Cashin at
[phone] extension 315.
Sincere ,
H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
HFV/GEC/tp
9
May 10, 1995
Page 2
cc: Mr. Bob Johnson, COE, Asheville
Mr. David Cox, NCWRC
Mr. John Dorney, DEHNR
Mr. Kelly Barger, Program Development Branch
Mr. Don Morton, State Highway Engineer-Design
Mr. A. L. Hankins, Hydraulics Unit
Mr. John L. Smith, Jr., Structure Design Unit
Mr. Tom Shearin, State Roadway Design Engineer
Mr. W. D. Smart, P.E., Division 13 Engineer
`?7 .?: i.;li ?"•:i•?.?'Sy'J" ?• ? Ism i ? a`POO7 -
t ? Parrottsrill .7 "`t 'a r r 19W ?
t1w 7 •"`t`-^?, _,A•'e's?? Fiat PondfL? Situ Creen Pttrmt }}
l .:./? ?•-- t t amser 3 Mount - Bakersville h
t Ht ... =f'?y? ''r:c It `2? tyf:d7X+,. Day Book 18
r.. .J -.. ad :•'r;?.l.•?s Ie \ andan m
?• tit ..t'81d .y` WAilHOCk Bald 1) I7 fits
3 SI ??i'•Y Creek
o Fa ?( 5
? ,+. a 7u urns.ille . avilil tnla
1 1
•
' i - ? 2 - n ? t ? o I 19E ?
`. : MA `O N 19 ?. Y A E t t t 7
Walnut 1 U fell e e 1
inn y to. C
cosh i it `? Mars 'll
t ' ) I , I I ensaeola ittt t
leomill ter:-1 Watervi N - :.,; •, / M . ", , ,•,
2 Joe S it Gcek - Mrc'. %on y •_' w
.nl ' rr- 1 t +.ara Wood
)II , 70 , ?;ter itl 7 8a(7iard sville ,?esa I
°Mount / Trust y 7S illintba •+3 S li MCD n f
It t
Sterlint cx
` L t 1, 3 $txksvillt , ' 1tt S BM/G¢ 77 Lake 5
•?T.r.u Gra/ .. ^ J 77 I e ,,ID TaAam 2
arert•ilf Weavefvillt ,
ake Lan o Alesa r 7.N PlcasanI Garden
'.. {(r'- - ?6a71 ? wr t•.d.rq ?'? -?` IN ° t...b Gwd.••.
?•• 1 3173 \ B U S I`I ` O
; IS I " 81aclt, E ?. ?5.. 70 1
"• ^°i'" Leicester Wood n0 tt• t .3 1 tor3'treat
HAT. PARK t ountain 9 1
z. i • I -
r- r y /t 71 i Sv,annan '.2 111
G.. so. 1, ri.-trao? Cove reek Crabtree + - • t ) '
l.Asheyin' teen )0 70 >>
441. Ridteuesl (7.
.moot C)rEer7[Ef?.L. K, :: A Oa M , I t r S Sutar Nili
worw '\ty}. i attie 276 1nsl7
Valley r k+
,, V?t'1 74 7 t. l
e. . to 74

)T SPXVr .S
•or, 479
a _
ell?ood( rlydtt 9° u n' ter 25A Fw"e,. 9
• 1.78 Is It ? u1 It 1 Thermal 1
aynesvi y ) r rdw Skyland Garton
23 t r Hu Sprh4dale v 1 SSA,den / . s
nook tl PI AM \77. -- \ Z$l - Bat Cave?mne oak U T H
FlelcAer ??y{J S a« oA L.ree 4 Grtk
c?°. / vY? J 37!1
t?14.1 ri

X11
N.C. DEPT. OF. TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
MADISON COUNTY
PROJECT 81860601 8-2582)
BRLDGE 16 a VFR
BIG LAUREL CREEK
SHEET 1 OF 3 cT{ TrrT; rxTZ?rxz 10

o ,... w x
z
r?U- `wc
?'?O Jl
lit N
N
N Q< U•
O JJO Z?
00 ?. ava' o?

a
m
LL
0 cr
0 J
O 0-
cc: So
a -?
J wnN
U vi
J aU o \
0A,
`Spl? CR.
i
z
m
_ a
O

C
m
CO
O O
-, U
P)
O
i

B?
E C
UREL --
' - ?
?RE )

y?
59' ?i w
r- U-
? LL
a d
>O
tn0
U,
w<?J
>
Q
J
O

??? zwd
0
O
??
\\\ N - Oa•N
-o
w
o
Ln
cn -NU
2 +' Q M
OU• NUJI?,--
-
J N

C
c > xu- z
a Oo
O <U U
z
o
cr)
`

U w
v

C>o
O Q.
a J
J O V ?Nm
O a
h
m

Q ?
U C'"l
N
Q Q,
M (V. Q.
C? Q0
U
cr
an
as
(

aW

N J
V? L?
a 5
o
L)
0
v Ur o
m p V). co
CL O V) O
Uj
z O z cn
O
or o..^
C-
-j
O
¢ in 0_
w W }-
o
J Lo a z
CE -j w
W

O1
i °N p j?
r
(Ij - z O
`
° w °
- z
„ w a

N J
W
Ln
lD
"' ? +N39 'X3

N
W
1N3PX3
o o

r V)00

=o_

N
a: V)
O
F ,.,
W Lf)
0_ Vf W
zu
aW wp
X?
'
W
U O , W }..,
D
U
m =w a
- o<
J ° ::E 0
w
Z
?- or- a:
V) J< W
?W
X ~
<
W
,., J
n
N 0- J W
W = V O
rZ LL r
„ cr- QV,
vili p> zm
J p.

z
O
<3 o ?
??11 0
N0 z-
o. 0
0O
rl ?
U ^t ?
z q
0

Q

Co
U
Q
O
0

r r
U U
N
? M1
Q W N N
Q >- 1 I
z
T

W

N # J
O J
w
?
m

J
J }-
O

Q
W

Q
Q

Ln
W
0
a
V
X
W
'
Q Q Q

QO Qo Qo

O

O

O ? ? G7
? r--1
O p
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
November 1, 1994
Madison County
DEM Project # 94936
TIP# B-2582, Project 8.1860601
APPROVAL of 401 Water Quality Certification
Mr. Barney O' Quinn
Planning and Environmental Branch
NC DOT
P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh, N.C. 27611-5201
Dear Mr. O' Quinn:
FIL E e
You have our approval to place fill material in waters for the purpose of temporary access at
Bridge # 16, Big Laurel Creek on NC 208, as you described in your application dated 28 September
and 11 October 1994. After reviewing your application, we have decided that this fill is covered by
General Water Quality Certification Number 2727. This certification allows you to use Nationwide
Permit Number 33 when it is issued by the Corps of Engineers.
This approval is only valid for the purpose and design that you described in your application. If
you change your project, you must notify us and you may be required to send us a new application.
For this approval to be valid, you must follow the conditions listed in the attached certification. In
addition, you should get any other federal, state or local permits before you go ahead with your
project.
If you do not accept any of the conditions of this certification, you may ask for an adjudicatory
hearing. You must act within 30 days of the date that you receive this letter. To ask for a hearing,
send a written petition which conforms to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes to the
Office of Administrative Hearings, P.O. Box 27447, Raleigh, N.C. 276 1 1-7447. This certification and
its conditions are final and binding unless you ask for a hearing.
This letter completes the review of the Division of Environmental Management under Section 401
of the Clean Water Act. If you have any questions, please telephone John Domey at 919-733-1786.
Sincerely,
i . P stop Howard, JrlPi?
Attachment
cc: Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Corps of Engineers Asheville Field Office
Asheville DEM Regional Office
Mr. John Domcy
Central Files
94936.1tr
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 1 0% post-consumer paper
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

TRANSMITTAL SLIP DATE-.
Q;
moo
REF. NOJOR'' ROynnOMM, BLDG.
FROM: REF. NO. OR ROOM, BLDG.
ACTION
?-NOTE AND FILE ? PER OUR CONVERSATION
? NOTE AND RETURN TO ME 0 PER YOUR REQUEST
? RETURN WITH MORE DETAILS r --:? FOR YOUR APPROVAL
? NOTE. AND. SEE ME. ABOUT THIS -? FOR.YOUR INFORMATION
? PLEASE ANSWER - - ? FOR YOUR COMMENTS
? PREPARE REPLY. FOR MY SIGNATURE ? SIGNATURE
? TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION ? INVESTIGATE AND REPORT
COMMENTS:.
' cat ? LJ"

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
3 r
MAR ? 71995
DEPARTMENT OF TP ANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT. JR.
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201
March 14, 1995
District Engineer
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402
ATTENTION: Regulatory Branch
R. SAMUEL HUNT III
SECRETARY
Dear Sir:
County, Replacement of Bridge #16 over Big Laurel Creek on
COE Action ID No. 19940 1747, TIP B-2582, Project
SUBJECT: &80600(1)
Reference is made to the Nationwide permits issued for this project on
December 15 „ 199;4. This letter is to notify you and the N.C. Wildlife
Resources Commission (WRC) of a change in the project design. At the request
of the Tennessee Valley Authority, the bridge design has been modified from a
three-span to a two-span structure. Consequently, one bent will be
constructed in the stream instead of two. All other aspects of the project
will remain the same, including the work pads. This modification will
further minimize adverse impacts to the stream. Project construction can
still be completed in compliance with the WRC letter of November 21, 1994.
Enclosed you will find revised plan sheets which show the modification.
A copy of this information has been provided to the N.C. Wildlife Resources
Commission and the N.C. Division of Environmental Management for their
information. If you have any questions, please contact Mr. Gordon Cashin at
[phone].
Sincerely,
H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
HFV/gc
cc: Mr. Bob Johnson, COE, Asheville
Mr. David Cox, NCWRC
Mr. John Dorney, DEHNR
Mr. Kelly Barger, Program Development Branch
Mr. Don Morton, State Highway Engineer-Design
Mr. A. L. Hankins, Hydraulics Unit
Mr. John L. Smith, Jr., Structure Design Unit
Mr. Tom Shearin, State Roadway Design Engineer
Mr. W. D. Smart, P.E., Division 13 Engineer

V?, pool
t Parroltsv;l• .1 ^•.ti*^Zy' ,-[ r.? '' ,

_• t3,r
,3
i„ ''' ;"??
? Flat Pond ? $; Crest
7 ktwnt
t alpte
^ 7rF Plumt
ket Zvi it

,r` r
Nom`'
•, '
T
f0 [,??.tv_C. 1L Ii 23 : ??WY:..
oa1 Book ,
?? Sac ]Binaan
' ad:rT c'
at
U' ,?
Ott $r° ,:j, Wh;lerock
' J
•'! ` `
Bria It IT
Gee
t \ta
•::
71 !'
' ~r'= -
]0 t Fa Swt
] Burn w e avill `
• :
_
32 -
; eMa

. Nt Y 'A N? E I 1 9c t
': •
; is
~
?
•
., '=_f ?
* ?
'$• Walnut
?^
M t o If]
u r Ce
ll

i
a toter I • .
- 1
ar
.":.i II r
t Pensacola r
an•
'
TV.
.
32 riatervi Is
7
S [ Creek t3
/
11
Ll
r
r Mvrcnts co. .T•
'
? 5? n
^ 3 x
W
d

•32f

?' ?

*
;
: j,M,
1 +.
a
s
7 5 70
) t
`+ 73
/ Trutt
c•aa
H7
rier 7 BalTlarasnllc t, .. .,
t M, b ?.
iilin
hs
•`
wn 1
oo
D
M J

E

I
.
/
.
•.

q

`
2
t
1 U o
t
?
;dc S
Stocksvill! I:t
It
/
m
` ll If
77 t
1
o
',+acrr.C..r•r/
3..?
oren+77
olrc Alev r r-t
We
arervllc
• i?• ?'•d9v: Pleasa Tahom

nt Carden
.t. - 1 Sa)3 r
u ,5 B U 3 N _ O E?5??? .

NAT.
... r<........ `
"a I PARK '
113: 5 Leicester wood n
n c Black tor?u t
:. ; 1
c ountaln 9
' to
t ,rs c
LIl

7
IW
w so-
ul
'moot c
7
13
y /t t $winnin • 1
' Cove reek Crabtree + - • 1
?? w? ,? tb a a `.A$hedlei* 1 7'? teen 10 Ridteaeit
?n i S Q .
'c><(rOSrt??? .r, •. A I Or IF1
3
I
© 7
s
Su[ar M;11 ] `
at it 2
? 26 lake l
tf r
?"
Is
worer+
'rtvaucT t
/??s2 V ?rnal s _J I/ _• 2l ?_v_' !1 .._ ?
.u _ to N ?
ortee tt / ?{aynCSY? • 7 ,,t Orow
0 i »a'"t 23? r Hate?• _ Snr?1r
'`5 Isa ?{j?tlhoot PI AH 7
T
Fai vrow V Thermal r
.d Gerson
n 5 , \
' Bat Cave -C?h.mne ock U T H
Flee.er ?. .•?_^ nA Lure ? Gdk
a«r )r

i?
)T Srf4•rGS
or. as
7A
k i
?a. 1T7.
N.C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
MADISON COUNTY
PROJECT 8.1860601 8-2582)
B-- R-MGE 16 OVER
BIG EA VREL CREEK
SHEET i OF 5 SEPTRNIRRR 1"4
/,0
N ? ? H
J
..i 044
w
Gg o
W V) } tJi
V N N
p. JJO 2
00 0_U? O
L
IP
\\\ VVV
J?l
•. i??Q4 ;jet°
t
:

R: ? H )

ttCl-?1 O
e ?
co
O ?
o

O
O tO
Q
U C') 1'rV
\/J
M

U ?
J
rn ?
z ^ ?
i

/ U
W vi -U
-..
G'-.WO
4n0>W
V'4-6w
W < .t J
U C.M
<W W a0
Z V
Ny OO?N
O?
tn-NU
z<Z)
O- JC
UNUt-
_J N
< C x O L- Z
O
O N
C
2 -z W
CL O O
V La
W O C
C 4 NNO
0-
m

?~ m
J
Q ?
U ?
U
' C
m
C
LL!
WO=W
N?F-
Z J
F Q Ly
4n4o
r1 ?
W N N
<ao
J UO
C.. C3 ,\`
pIL 0RE-
a
r
O
rn
QO
O
N
U
C
co
O
UO
t C d
t Q ll.
a¢
CL
LW
_
C
N J
W NIL
W < U
i
V ?
p
U
O
? is r o
+ m pN. co
C
C
+ N
O NO
O? Z
N
c
O N y- p Q -? °i
W N
4 rnWW CN
Z

II W
N f3
w
W E X?
N
CL
J
Q W H
.

i)
/
Wm
?
G
N Z O
tD ? D
-' W Z

_
N J

V N

:Vll
C', +N39 'X3

+
C
r ( -?
' 1N38 X3 z
o t O.
1 NON

Q = 0-

V) = C to
O I- to
C N
Wt... M. V1W
6 Z W O U
-
'
+ X = >
U
4
w
v a l
Wj
o ?> u w©
? pW
co
?z

o
J m
dQ. ujO
V
? !Y W C 4
t
N_ JO'` C C W
S

Yom") -
X ¢
W Ba v1 J
N

liD W
N V
' J W .
tp St U O
4Z U-

N
? p
C J Z T
O
°
r c
, 3r-

O
O

c.
t
?
I
O ?

g+ t co

a a ? q ?
? *
%15
co a
H ° O, 125
0+ z ?
0. 0
?4 G ° O
A ? GL M
^i ? M
z M

co
U
a
O
O

r r
U U
O N
W r r
N N

C
T
a

N O
N ? J
O J

W W
M

J
J
-0
o
L,
O
O

Q

I?

Q v
1*
7?l

Q YK
x ?
o ,, o

0 0

JAMES B. HUNT, JR
GOVERNOR
P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201
March 14, 1995
District Engineer
U.S. Army Corps of
P.O. Box 1890
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Engineers
Wilmington, NC 28402
ATTENTION: Regulatory Branch
Dear Sir:
R.. SAMUEL HUNT III
SECRETARY
SUBJECT: Madison County, Replacement of Bridge #16 over Big Laurel Creek on
NC 208 (COE Action ID No. 19940 1747, TIP B-2582, Project
8.1860601)
Reference is made to the Nationwide permits issued for this project on
December 15, 1994. This letter is to notify you and the N.C. Wildlife
Resources Commission (WRC) of a change in the project design. At the request
of the Tennessee Valley Authority, the bridge design has been modified from a
three-span to a two-span structure. Consequently, one bent will be
constructed in the stream instead of two. All other aspects of the project
will remain the same, including the work pads. This modification will
further minimize adverse impacts to the stream. Project construction can
still be completed in compliance with the WRC letter of November 21, 1994.
Enclosed you will find revised plan sheets which show the modification.
A copy of this information has been provided to the N.C. Wildlife Resources
Commission and the N.C. Division of Environmental Management for their
information. If you have any questions, please contact Mr. Gordon Cashin at
[phone].
Sincerely,
H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
HFV/gc
cc: Mr. Bob Johnson, COE, Asheville
Mr. David Cox, NCWRC
Mr. John Dorney, DEHNR
Mr. Kelly Barger, Program Development Branch
Mr. Don Morton, State Highway Engineer-Design
Mr. A. L. Hankins, Hydraulics Unit
Mr. John L. Smith, Jr., Structure Design Unit
Mr. Tom Shearin, State Roadway Design Engineer
Mr. W. D. Smart, P.E., Division 13 Engineer
I I
??AR 7 X95
0
' ?; Coser
iana I
NAT. yU, ?PARX
Tnnmat
T H
, cak
N.C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
MADISON COUNTY
PROJECT 81860601 8-2582)
BRIDGE 16 OVER
BIG LA UR L CREEK
SHEET I OF 5 SEPTFMRFR 1"J
i
U
co
co
_cc
N" W
J
I?Q
r
IV)N
i N
c.

o
co
*
}
,t

a
H
°
o ?
m 1

03 O
U A ?., rn cv

z f-
Z -
)'cL` We
O C 0 -
WNr ?<
U N N
N « U?
O aUO ?I
8iG RE1.
WU7 W
O-U-
< <
NO>O
Uw=
< -j d O
< U
O O CL N ?
c
O? HWON1-
N - N U
z <?
°N?rC-
J N
rx?z
e o0
j < U U
C Opp 2 W
CL J ? 0
W O m
t- cli N m
m
If N
• ? CD
\x\4,3

CD
Ltl
J
Q IS)
U (Y)
LO

C) 0
^
N O 2
O

- co T

C) i
0. c
c ;.
p
1 CL
Qw -. O. >•-a
ti) Q M
CL - 0
O
C r- O
"
o W < U
c ° U° z
v r
c
w
o
m
v)
o

Ca
C
. M. p
. c
D vO
r,
w z o z ?? cq
wOn - O u Q
O to O<J,
W y
n .
W' T =V)
WH _
O .
OJ

1 30. wr• co
N
M -jy O >m
N - z o
o

w Q U
q

N J
W

tp I
n
3- I

I
O
`" ? 39 'X3 0
1 r '
, r r

d O y
W M1 M1
N N
f
o 1N3rX:
11

O O

I CL-
<?
y
CC y O J

-
w?
ao.v~icu J
w w
aw wov co
J
1- V'q J <
!
V W t `.
O

m
Z p
C
,
J
co

z ? 1 Q
z Wz
ma
i.
?
•
J 4 a:
n ~
w +
m Q

N U
.
U W ..
? •
1.+.1
O •
11 ? LLO? 1
o > z
In cr
J O_
-
0111

1 •
O Q v
Ln
' H
o

0
?
+
?Tt
?+1 >
. .. Ln
- C>

U ..
X
W
'
O O
O
I? N
C9 CD lO
O O
a

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TkANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT. JR.
GOVERNOR
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
P.O. BOX 2520L RALEIGH. N.C 27611-5201
October 11, 1994
District Engineer
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402
ATTENTION: Regulatory Branch
Dear Sir:
SUBJECT: Madison County,
Laurel Creek on
8.1860601)

RECEift
OCT 18 1994
EIVVIROHMEnZAL SCIENCES
Replacement of Bridge # 16 over Big
NC 208 (TIP B-2582, Project

Reference is made to an application dated%Se.p_temb?3"
1994/from the North Carolina Department of Transportation for
the subject project. It has
?- come to our attention that the
drawings provided with this
the i application did not depict all of
impacts to waters of the United States that are expected
during project construction.
Two temporary work pads will be needed at the stream
edges to construct the bridge. These pads will be 20' long
and 12' wide, and will consist of 12 tons of rip rap. These
pads will be entirely removed,.,after construction is
completed. These pads were mentioned in the first paragraph
of our September 28, 1994 letter, but were omitted from the
plan sheets.
information has been provided to the N.C. Wildlife Resources
Commission and the N.C. Division of Environmental Management
for their review. If you have any questions, please contact
Mr. Gordon Cashin at [phone].
Enclosed you will find revised plan sheets that include
the proposed work pads. Please replace the sheets in our
application, and proceed with your review. A copy of this
Sincerely, ,
B. O' u' -nn , P.E.
Assis ant Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
R. SAMUEL HUNT III
SECRETARY
9
.4 n 46
cc:
Mr. Bob Johnson, COE, Asheville
Mr. David Cox, NCWRC
Mr. John Dorney, DEHNR
Mr. Kelly Barger, Program Development Branch
Mr. Don Morton, State Highway Engineer-Design
Mr. A.L. Hankins, Hydraulics Unit
Mr. John L. Smith, Jr., Structure Design Unit
Mr. Tom Shearin, State Roadway Design Engineer
Mr. W.D. Smart, P.E., Division 13 Engineer
Mr. R.B. Davis, Planning and Environmental Branch
hF

..-; CosOYI?S
? v
I Mt
N AT.
Thermal
T H
\ cdk
IT StR"
'OP. 674

U?
2%..f

N.C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
MADISON COUNTY
PROJECT 81860601 (B-2582)

BRIDGE 16 OVER
BIG LAUREL CREEK
BET 1 OF 5 SEPTEMBER 1"4
F•
LL W n
QrQ. f`
F- Q LL LU
W
LW'? oa"O- ?
WN} LL
UNN
? JJO z
O aU- O
3

a
o
z
o x

w
E- ?
?
0 a
z ? 0 ?o

H ? o ?
W
o o Q

v A a
?? ?

/ WwiW
LL.
Q Q
zwo
00-W
N O
U>'L XLI a
ZWa:U
? ? Q O , f - N
? -o
z a:3
of Jw
L) L)
N
X
c O O
azzto
? OOZLAJ
0
W O
!-NNfO
m
N
c?0
J
\\\

U
K
00
Q
LL
~W
z
OQ4, LL.
M W O
C >-
W N N
Q (A
a -U M \\\
CO
^' m
w
LZ
J
Q m
CV Cl)
th

-11, .

0 o Z
O O 94
c9 C9

a H

Cl.
o z
o z ?.
?
°
Q •
'
n
w O
.
cr O
' ? a a a

w w
aLL
a o cJi O Z w

U

' LL >-
?]
m ON m

d

W Z O td
Z-
MW1
W
O ?M O tt -
i O In t p Q Ed N o
CL M;• w`? N.(V W0 O
?(X a,,! +
3d w? 00
z °vV) o
wm
r<i 2
N
w

MCI

11
I 0.'Q
U
4
J
N V
O
U
?' 3 N! 'X3
`e C -
It + J N39 v v
?
vwi N I ' . o N N
3 1 i .
I ' O Z
N- 3$7X3
T w + a
o
A
?R
rP ? o
t Q W
f a=a to 3 J
O
J
cr-
0.N
J •+
co
0.Z
w WOU
t- U a J
F
J
J
C.1
o,
Wt.- .
.
LLo

co W r ca

z
1 as :O
w z
Q
3
P 0Q W 0:
o 0.Q + o
~ r,
F- . - +

M x
If!
Q
w 3 N
a J
w

CD
C6 -
-Jw
QO
3~
Z LL
I1 O?
W QQ ZO
O
3 O
cr m3
' U
O ,,w
F
o
o

o

o •
Q

X
W
CD O

o
0
i
lY Q Qo 4= Q

r ? 3
obt?. g 94 btrATtR OAIt??,ily (1cr?p
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TI?ANSP0RTATI0N
JAMES B. HUNT, JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS R. SAMUEL HUNT III
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201. RALEIGH, N.G 27611-5201 SECRETARY
October 11, 1994
Wilmington, NC 28402
District Engineer
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 1890
ATTENTION: Regulatory Branch
Dear Sir:
SUBJECT: Madison County, Replacement of Bridge * 16 over Big
Laurel Creek on NC 208 (TIP B-2582, Project
8.1860601)
Reference is made to an application dated September 28,
1994 from the North Carolina Department of Transportation for
the subject project. It has come to our attention that the
drawings provided with this application did not depict all of
the impacts to waters of the United States that are expected
during project construction.
Two temporary work pads will be needed at the stream
edges to construct the bridge. These pads will be 20' long
and 12' wide, and will consist of 12 tons of rip rap. These
pads will be entirely removed..,after construction is
completed. These pads were mentioned in the first paragraph
of our September 28, 1994 letter, but were omitted from the
plan sheets.
Enclosed you will find revised plan sheets that include
the proposed work pads. Please replace the sheets in our
application, and proceed with your review. A copy of this
information has been provided to the N.C. Wildlife Resources
Commission and the N.C. Division of Environmental Management
for their review. If you have any questions, please contact
Mr. Gordon Cashin at [phone].
Sincerely, ,
B. 0' u' , P. E.
Assis ant Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
AT%
cc: Mr. Bob Johnson, COE, Asheville
Mr. David Cox, NCWRC
Mr. John Dorney, DEHNR
Mr. Kelly Barger, Program Development Branch
Mr. Don Morton, State Highway Engineer-Design
Mr. A.L. Hankins, Hydraulics Unit
Mr. John L. Smith, Jr., Structure Design Unit
Mr. Tom Shearin, State Roadway Design Engineer
Mr. W.D. Smart, P.E., Division 13 Engineer
Mr. R.B. Davis, Planning and Environmental Branch
3'

---
, 6`Po1N / •1 Is
0 1 P-ft. vil ) _ ha•> ?` / ? 19W
SY, 2. w; fla[ Pond` Sio GreM Plumt
_ - 6 NSeY t MWnI kgSVille?
• t !0 9 a 6 2 23 ?? 't+«..
NE 21 1e Day Book t
t. '"-'? ?? -t 3 rBandan er
7 "? -.*11 8 odds j1 Whiterock / Bald U it7 Is
?/ 9 : •?. k Creek + f
:.11 µ'S NS.: 70 ¢ 6 _ fp / Svn s 1 Burns" a awfl cola
r'
i ° - 11 f 0 1 19E ¢ "
MA ON 19 Y A N . E , e2
walnut ¢ 19 $
09 Mar II U) Ce
Cosby . 1 • i 11 1 I 1 t Pensacola, t
tan.' .a 410 MAeU tl 7 - ittl wi
. ° 9 ?.
to 3 atem la Joe S ¢ Creek 2S. t MWt.chison
1 -0.41
? Mari 112 / S pi. 668 5
321 1 + 1 70 U / 9 Mr fir
MCI W " 1
unt ( filer ! Ba arOSVilleµ N frS'
Trust 1S / 1 1 ' illin r °' ?n ick McD E
S
SI etlin¢ L 1 19 Stocksvi0e 12¢ S Ij Lake
20 - 11 27 1 Tah In 2.
ti ??}..,? ? ? ateroill Weavervifle 1 ` FCC
tlen
?aeT1 ake Aleza r • ve.ee 'O9°l Pleasant Garden
N M1 sew s° 15 ?/ B Uan ° N _ 1 O e... e°E . SGPt,
?? .+r ^'bb^ ` 1 2r t Leicester wood n° V• 6 filaek• er at ; IU NS 6.
NAT. a' , 1 PARK s OUnfaln g 7 m 1
C reek Crabtree z, + i _ Swannan • k • f v S? 3
v so+ r.?.r..v? a ?t 7 5 i
411 y 1 ® © Asheville f y? teen ° )U Ridgeges
Mont fNEaOKFEA ?t OpD .2 2 / 1 S 0 ?? Su¢a Mill
a¢¢1e 216 Ike 3 © / 'rl 19 1 ©
rr+01 19 VslleY t opal 74 23 • 0 ?. /
? I fn • I0 7E ?
t ° f »rv ew
a?pp`LAV s«. Cll.v 23 lytle It _ 'let 191 - 11 25A s J? f Tnermarl
'n C11lrOkee 12 .ayne5vl • l
rog kylsnd (((???
y Gerlon
' - •S . / K 23 • t M SMitS¢dal v .L Arden / 5 1. pl•7
Y?A a[
1 ' ' Isa PI AH w. `x...,57+ BstCave Mnne pCk U T H
nA1 't ?1J a Lure GA.
` - 1 a ?< - 6u30 ,>k Flelc er .__...__ i••,..... z«t ` 7
ALUM
a \ /.
1307
?--?
1 a •J 349 3.2
1314
u ` low •Mock r•-
`: 'ti ?
212 2,9
Nei, ?? \\ 1 :. Ctrs z ?-s o t lso g p Towe
l
131
/ UTSLE T{ _l Gvalerrown ;, ...9 .: .
y 'Q?? ? KNOD?rI si ''?I .9 •s y . ? '?:. 0 -' .i . i
31
1304 f ti
1317 1237
^?• ' Big
-.:` rasa !1
WFID IFE vs JXun:co :2 '' X112. .6
` ` t ) Creek d 7.1 l\a 1 • I DA
l"24 / s
X7 2m .22, 1
9
?• ? ? ,/ J? ? 1 1 '.t? ?7i: ? 139! 1+1
1.23
$OOOM IJ2. ..' lJ0£
n k. . ? 1` 0 ;? ,i?: MT. •? p ? .. uTS S
? 1 i_y.<i • ?6r J V LM4 :''n.[. ?L / Fes: u s 's t? 1.11 '
]2] 1 P 1 1
)T SIRa+GS E;;: !v \ ..._?.? Isl9? 'Y 1324
P. 678 1.3 xx
4; IN °
P , / I
f- ? Y fE
FR 14 / 1 1 s
N.C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
MADISON COUNTY
PROJECT 81860601 (B-2582)
BRIDGE 16 OFER
BIG L4 VREL
C' ?FEI
SHEET 1 OF 5 SEPTEMBER 1"4
VJ
a
o?
z
o x
\ ??i ?'b a k a -' H O z ac
V ?-a" O
° W I1 mao Z X4-1
(? 3 W W winv?i O ?O A Lit] to
Q(A
JJO W ~ ?Di O
CLUm
a^? ? x
? c
J Ux. i
90 m
11 1 ? 1?Rti?
w=``
Il B??R EK
N3W x w? ? LJ
-J az
oaf w ` U
rQLL fL X.? l ? Q
m4 WD Wj 0 69'---l wU;l?u
IS
JW wm Ntif-
tD
w U5
° JJO Z= a¢ I 4p NO?F
0- CLQM 0- a I ?a0 J
cc Uw>r?
+91 L M\\\ QWa0
00-
:3 MZ
N-Nv
tb'C' CfQ?/ - ?? U N U F'•
1 N
T } li
0 oQcr 00
:ZW
` 11 Q OOZW
JL-JQ
S/ / O a O O * woNao
m
•
F- - CL ` O S N
+ o ~
1
0
w
cn
w
J
Q
V ('7
N
0 0
I N O
Qo c9

U
c
co
aQ
aLL.
°m-w

' N J
N LL
W
q W Qu
UO
,
U r
r m O N ao
r
W io -
°°
z
V) o rn
o ?? .
r-
c

I m M3 >

N <V
a- w w xH

W !-
OWlD a2
NW Q.. W

O, °w O
Z yQ
N W z
It
tr Q
J
N N
I
"'

1
3
N N39 'X3
i2 cl?
It >-
N39 'Md
In
W N t
t? r

r l MVX3
r
RA W&
?t
1
Q o]
II m SW
U -j
h ?a
M x
w
N
?D
,
J
W
a
3
Ix
r
0
0
m
w

• z
O

wov'
0
a=a

ixwv)
_W}' mzu
E W W O U
W? M-UQ

u Wca
W
Q
CO O
WZ u

a (X< t
x
xw

N J
4 LL

U O
V)
N
O
W o
Z
x
mr
3:
O
O
+
O
+
00
U
Q
O
O

U U

O W N N
o .
z tt
w z
? h ? 3
•
x
o
to 3 J
O J
J +
W LL
m
J

J O
.
LL 1--
O
O

3y
0
Ln
6 1 W
0
Q

x
w
O O
rn N
Qo c9
O
CD
m
VJ
U
4 w
Q ?
x >
o
O p
r
N. C. DEPt1RTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

TRA ++TAL SHIP AT
D
/? la
/U?v
1W
RE
F: NO. R R 910M, BLDG.

FIROIfY.' - REF. NO. OR ROOM, BLDG.
ACTION
? NOTE AND FILE ? PER OUR CONVERSATION
? NOTE'AND RETURN TO: ME ? PER YOUR REQUEST
? RETURN WITH. MORE .DETAILS ? FOR YOUR APPROVAL
? NOTE AND SEE ME ABOUT THIS ? FOR YOUR INFORMATION
? PLEASE ANSWER ? FOR YOUR COMMENTS
? PREPARE REPLY FOR M Y'. SIGNATURE ?SIGNATURE
? TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION. ? INVESTIGATE AND REPORT
COMMENTS:
. A,
?. swco?
?e y.•
401
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT, JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS R. SAMUEL HUNT III
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C 27611-5201 SECRETARY
September 28, 1994
Engineers
Wilmington, NC 28402
District Engineer
U.S. Army Corps of
P.O. Box 1890
ATTENTION: Regulatory Branch
Dear Sir:
SUBJECT: Madison County, Replacement of Bridge # 16 over Big
Laurel Creek on NC 208 (TIP B-2582, Project
8.1860601)
Attached for your information is the project planning
report for the subject project. This project is being
processed 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. This
authorization will. be needed for the construction of the new
bridge and the placement of temorary rock pads in the river
for about four months.
A request was submitted on February 15, 1994 for
Nationwide 6 permit authorization to allow foundation test
borings for the proposed.project. The Nationwide 6 for this
activity was authorized September 6, 1994.
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.
We anticipate that concurrence will be required from the
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission since this
project occurs in trout waters. A copy of this information
is being supplied to them for their review.
K_4?
fi
A notification form and detailed plan drawings of the
bridge have also been included. If you have any questions,
please contact Mr. Gordon Cashin at [phone].
Sincerely,
J
O'Qui , P. E.
Assistant Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
cc: Mr. Bob Johnson, COE, Asheville
Mr. David Cox, NCWRC
Mr. John Dorney, DEHNR
Mr. Kelly Barger, Program Development Branch
Mr. Don Morton, State Highway Engineer-Design
Mr. A.L. Hankins, Hydraulics Unit
Mr. John L. Smith, Jr., Structure Design Unit
Mr. Tom Shearin, State Roadway Design Engineer
Mr. W.D. Smart, P.E., Division 13 Engineer
Mr. R.B. Davis, Planning and Environmental Branch
NOTIFICATION FORM
INFORMATION SHEET
Nationwide permits that require notification to the Corps of Engineers
Nationwide permits that require application for Section 401 certification
A. NOTIFICATION TO THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS DISTRICT ENGINEER. (REFER TO
ITEM B. BELOW FOR DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT APPLICATION RE-
QUIREMENTS AND SPECIFICALLY NOTE NWP 26 DIFFERENCE.)
Certain nationwide permits require notification to the Corps-of Engineers before work can proceed. They are as follows:
NWP 5 (only for discharges of 10 to 25 cubic yards)
NWP 7
NWP 13 (only for stabilization activities in excess of 500 feet in length or greater than an average of one cubic yard
per running foot)
NWP 14 (only for fills in special aquatic sites, including wetlands, and must include a delineation of affected special
aquatic sites)
NWP 17
NWP 18 (required when discharge exceeds 10 cubic yards or the discharge is in a special aquatic site and must include
a delineation of the affected special aquatic site, including wetlands)
NWP 21 (must include a delineation of affected special aquatic sites, including wetlands)
NWP 26 (only for greater than 1 acre total impacts and must include a delineation of affected special aquatic sites,
including wetlands)
NWP 33 (must include a restoration plan of reasonable measures to avoid and minimize impacts to aquatic resources)
NWP 37
NWP 38 (must include a delineation of affected special aquatic sites, including wetlands)
For activities that may be authorized by the above listed nationwide permits that require notification, the
applicant shall not begin work
a. Until notified that the work may proceed under the nationwide permit with any special conditions imposed by
the District Engineer, or
b. If notified that an individual permit may be required, or
c. Unless 30 days (calendar) have passed from the time a complete notification is received by the District Engineer
and no notice has been received from the District Engineer, and required state approvals have been obtained.
Required state approvals include: 1) a Section 401 water quality certification if authorization is requested for a
discharge of dredged or fill material, and 2) an approved coastal zone management consistency determination if
the activity will affect the coastal area.
Use of NWP 12 also requires notification to the District Engineer, but work may not begin until written
concurrence is received from the District Engineer. The time periods described above do not apply.
Furthermore, requirements to notify the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the National Marine
Fisheries Service (NU FS), and the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), as indicated below and on the
notification form, do not apply..
B. APPLICATION TO DEM FOR NATIONWIDE PERMIT SECTION 401 CERTIFICATION.
Certain nationwide permits require an application to DEM in order to obtain Section 401 water quality certification.
They are NWP 6, NWP 12, NWP 15, NWP 16, NWP 17, NWP 21, NWP 33, NWP 34, NWP 38, and NWP 40.
Certain nationwide permits were issued general certifications and require no application. They are NWP 3, NWP 4,
,NW 5, NWP 7, NWP 20, NWP 22, NWP 23 (requires notification to DEM), NWP 25, NWP 27, NWP 32, NWP 36,
and NWP 37.
The following nationwide permits were issued general certifications for only limited activities: NWP 13 (for projects
less than 500 feet in length), NWP 14 (for projects that impact waters only), NWP 18 (for projects with less than 10
cubic yards of fill in waters only), and NWP 26 (for projects with less than or equal to one-third acre fill of waters or
wetlands). Projects that do not meet these criteria require application for Section 401 water quality certifications.
C. NOTIFICATION/APPLICATION PROCEDURES.
The attached form should be used to obtain approval from the Corps of Engineers and/or the N.C. Division of
Environmental Management as specified above. The permittee should make sure that all necessary information is
provided in order to avoid delays. One copy of the completed form is required by the Corps of Engineers and seven
copies are required by DEM. Plans and maps must be on 8 1/2 x 11 inch paper.
Endangered species requirement: For Corps of Engineers notifications only, applicants must notify the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service and/or the National Marine Fisheries Service regarding the presence of endangered species that may
be affected ty the proposed project.
U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE
RALEIGH FIELD OFFICE HABITAT CONSERVATION DIVISION
P.O. Box 33726 Pivers Island
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726 Beaufort, NC 28516
Telephone [phone] Telephone [phone]
Historic resources requirement: For Corps of Engineers notifications only, applicants must notify the State Historic
Preservation Office regarding the presence of historic properties that may be affected by the proposed project.
STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE
N.C. DIVISION OF ARCHIVES AND HISTORY
109 East Jones Street
Raleigh, NC 27601
Telephone [phone]
Information obtained from these agencies should be forwarded to the Corps.
r
23 K
DEM ID:. ACTION ID`" Nationwide Permit Requested (Provide Nationwide Permit #):
JOINT FORM FOR
Nationwide permits that require notification to the Corps of Engineers
Nationwide permits that require application for Section 402 certification
WILMINGTON DISTRICT ENGINEER
CORPS OF ENGINEERS
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890
ATTN: CESAW CO-E
Telephone [phone]
WATER QUALITY PLANNING
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
NC DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH,
AND NATURAL RESOURCES
P.O. Bop 29535
Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
ATTN: MR. JOHN DORNEY
Telephone [phone]
ONE (1) COPY OF THIS COMPLETED APPLICATION SHOULD BE SENT TO THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS.
SEVEN (7) COPIES SHOULD BE SENT TO THE N.C. DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT.
PLEASE PRINT.
1. Owners Name: North Carolina Department of Transportation
2. Owners Address: P.O. Box 25201. Raleigh NC 27611
3. Owners Phone Number (Home): NSA (Work): [phone]
4. If Applicable: Agent's name or responsible corporate official, address, phone number:
Mr. B.J. O'Quinn
same as above
5. Location of work (MUST ATTACH MAP). County: Madison
Nearest Town or City: Guntertown
Specific Location (Include road numbers, landmarks, etc.): Bridge.-No. 16 over Big Laurel Creek on NC 208
6. Name of Closest Stream/River: Big Laurel Creek
7. River Basin: French Broad
8. Is this project located in a watershed classified as Trout, SA, HQW, ORW, WS I, or WS II? YES [X] NO [ ]
9. Have any Section 404 permits been previously requested for use on this property? YES [ ] NO Ex]
. If yes, explain.
10. Estimated total number of acres of waters of the U.S., including wetlands, located on project site:
Less than 0.33 acre
11. Number of acres of waters of the U.S., including wetlands, impacted by the proposed project:
Filled: See summary sheet
Drained:
Flooded:
Excavated:
Total Impacted:
12. Description of proposed work (Attach PLANS-8 1/2" X 11" drawings only):

13. Purpose of proposed work:
14. State reasons why the applicant believes that this activity must be carried out in wetlands. Also, note measures
taken to minimize wetland impacts.
15. You are required to contact the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and/or National Marine Fisheries Service
(NMFS) regarding the presence or any Federally listed or proposed for listing endangered or threatened species or critical
habitat in the permit area that may be affected by the proposed project. Have you done so? YES[ ] NO [ ]
RESPONSES FROM THE USFWS AND/OR NMFS SHOULD BE FORWARDED TO CORPS.
16. You are required to contact the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) regarding the presence of historic
properties in the permit area which may be affected by the proposed project? Have you done so? YES [ ] NO [ ]
RESPONSE FROM THE SHPO SHOULD BE FORWARDED TO CORPS.
17. Additional information required by DEM:
A. Wetland delineation map showing all wetlands, streams, and lakes on the property.
B. If available, representative photograph of wetlands to be impacted by project.
C. If delineation was performed by a consultant, include all data sheets relevant to the placement of the
delineation line.
D. If a stormwater- management plan is required for this project, attach copy.
E. What is land use of surrounding property?
F. If applicable, what is proposed method of sewage disposal?
CO 1`---
Owner' !Sign af?e Da
Panottsvil 2 a 19W
0 •.2 =` Fla! Pond Sio Gre ??u fr? Plumt
TSW 6 aIDStY T Mount` -Qakersvdle/
E a - r v,
11 wE.sadxrM. oar Book V r
o Ne 0 to a 12 23 •
c ...d a ?? ?Srd / 18andan yer
c? -rll 8104 / WMterotk ?E'y? Bald U s7 a is
Creek ' ' +, a
11 't's 10 6 _ frt £? S`?' s t Burns wUe avdl eMa
a pl ^
? I 19E
\ ???/? ?• PT ` ll `?.Y 'A N' ?E o MA ON 19 ; ` a a
• ?P,G Walnut 8 U ! u Cc g
COSpr _•,, . 1 • 11 P^ E 21 Mar 11 1 E Pensacola E
ran it
Mi i 9 iTTI w.
ter r Watervile ^ M./rcn.son
..?? toe ^ S g Creek 25 r - .e..d•.u g Y. 26
32t i 2 1 +Mars IQ 1 70 1) 1 1 Sr n eota J W wn 1
filet BaYlardsvill<rr, M. E
/rMoru Trust 2y. S / ,a 7 ' ill.n tum?O"""1?.5» ick CD 5 {
$lenng CCCCCC? 1. l 1
?• .-. - 11 19 Slocksv.lle 121 S 9 It Lake
20 23 1 Q t: 2
' G"W alerrill J Wesvemlle . ?t ToAo
B lJ ran o NAleaa r E O • e.;h'; - 'E Y SSG P`%ea Slot Gar en
,066)1 ` ,y. SeT oke 15 \, O .
l c•.d«•.
5
M. tr•.d•.o.• ` r L Leicester Wood ^ 1t• a . Biaek. 'treat a 70 NS 6
?oNAT 6. 1 PARK ? 2° a v ou11 am y 2 .. t >"? m a
Go-3 o. - Eti.w.ava? Cove reek Crabtree'' t + E _ 3Geatnnan 7U • 6 1 $7
I 7
®® `-.Asheville, Ridgecrest .
4{ '? - '1 * 2
c.rEapxEE 2 Sugar Hill
moot A ? OE ?? 1 •{ ir? 5
M014f.?? ) i",e 276 lake 3 19 wr © Ia \ ??
Valley E lunal s i °y ' 27 t I1 aE.. 10 7d , ..
i .!(I?jsll Ca E ..•c _.fa.rv.ew 9 ((?.
? rn«mal.
j .OU•u" Ea ell-00 25A
a v?oa. is•< 238 IrdeE tl d ter nl 5 0
n Cner ee ;' w.E, E ,Way02SYi E • 1 its rovi IS a la SkYland Gerton
23t Her viodd Snringdal vlr? 1 SSArden - A 5 1
WM e. a.,. Kd'ob 4c ?.r G.pok ^ ' Mmne ock U ? H
2 alss ?w PI GAH 7a \ ,. 25 Bat Cave ..
ay^ook }J+?? 3 't j, 5 E--.? 1 .a Lu.e G.Ik
ad w.m .. Crvso •>?':ik fletc er ... Sc.w br vii.
ALUM EN, ,i -3-?•/
i2oz
?? r<
?? r 7
` O
I All
`t. KNO6 <
IT S"a GS
'W. 676
LI7
.))6
'6
,
? a
b a
\'
dv
do
LL
O K
N3? -
c N
F= WI-
d Z
Z J _
w

?aLL \
3a: X?
¢ LL
cr 0 w
w
?w >a

G1
jNN J
LL2 :2O
?
W
0
JJO
O. U??
Z a:
U'
Q
0
3 1 ) .
o
`tom K
4
9
1

ti

* _U
\ d'
co
O Q
LL
v 1 O !_- W
vJ
Z_I
3
oQLL
Mao
r w
W N
WW W N

CL -j- JO
111
W J 1\1
f1? /
N
O
O
O
3

i
/S
??
CL
r
Z
-?a
/?REL
JO/
Ll

J
Q
IY
\ 0
II
LO C?)
O O c\o ?
O _O a
U co
\ O
I
Q
J
FQ
x
a
CE)
?- a
o?
+a
O
C? 3
m I
N
m
co
m
t0
W
J
Q ?
V M
N
^ .r
?
O O z
r? O
N o E•
Q9 QO
..

y O
z ? ? ?o
ti
o
O z ?
O 0 * w
+ ?.
o z
o .A
A
?
0')
w W ? 0
N a r
ca p?
a
W
° W QLL
J U Ey
a ° c
i ° z
O I >-
o v) CO
m
a ww z °o
O ?M oil-
v
a.
CL M wW ?N O
O t0
v
cc -j +
O j 2 W
N
th Z
N
tD
11
J
N
W
V
1
,D ?
`"

I '
Z 1N39 'X
Z IN-N-9 w,

N '
I
' aZ
Vf
I X
I I ' W O
m
r + IZN3$'X p Q +
I IN 9 -8, 1
,
w
in
co
w as
z } O
Q
N
Fr w O
M
W
M X F
W N J +

M
ao
?LL ? /?
?
N
c0 V O

o
w ZO
m
V) O
F- _
0013
? O

1 LO P-4
O

LC)

? O
Q
U
X
W
O O
N
LO Qo Q0 O O
A
T-
SITE
1
2
S U M M A R Y
STATION WETLAND FILL OPEN WATER FILL
AcS C.Yds.
+/- 16+50 0 2
+/- 16+95 0 5

7 Cyds.
Madison County
NC 208
Bridge No. 16 Over Big Laurel Creek
Federal-Aid Project BRSTP-208(1)
State Project 8.1860601
T.I.P. No. B-2582
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
N.C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
APPROVED:
T5-A-IY- H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch, NCDOT
03 3/ 94 1 / .
DATE FoA Nicholas L. Graf, P.E.
Division Administrator, FHWA
Madison County
NC 208
Bridge No. 16 Over Big Laurel Creek
Federal-Aid Project BRSTP-208(1)
State Project 8.1860601
T.I.P. No. B-2582
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
March, 1994
Documentation Prepared By ••``',, _ , ??0? ''
i
JBM Engineers and Planners -.•`• ????;?`• ?S
S E' AL
= 11320
_ oJ_ s s
K eth W. Smith, P.E. Ski?FfA? ??
•. yr??,?tt, s?
Project Manager N
'tofuWzlso
for North Carolina Department of Transportation
- li -
e A. Bissett, Jr., P.E., U ead
Consultant Engineering Unit
i.
Stacy Y. al 'n
Project Manager
Consultant Engineering Unit

Madison County
NC 208
Bridge No. 16 Over Big Laurel Creek
Federal-Aid Project BRSTP-208(1)
State Project 8.1860601
T.I.P. No. B-2582
Bridge No. 16 is included in the Federal-Aid Bridge Replacement Program. The location
is shown in Figure 1. No substantial environmental impacts are anticipated. The project is
classified as a Federal "Categorical Exclusion".
I. SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS
All standard procedures and measures, including Best Management Practices, will be
implemented to avoid or minimize environmental impacts. No special or unique
environmental commitments are necessary.
As required by Section 26a of the TVA Act, final plans for the replacement structure will
be submitted to the TVA for review (see Attachment C).
II. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Bridge No. 16 will be replaced at a new location as shown by Alternative 2 in Figure 2.
The recommended replacement structure consists of a bridge 155 feet long and 26 feet
wide. This structure will provide two 10-foot (nominal) travel lanes with three-foot
shoulders on each side. Lane widening to accommodate curvature will be required across
the bridge. The required additional lane width will be determined during final design.
The roadway grade of the new structure will be approximately the same as the existing
grade at this location.
The existing roadway will be widened to a 20-foot pavement width, to accommodate two
10-foot travel lanes, and four-foot usable shoulders on each side throughout the project
limits.
The existing structure will be used to maintain traffic during the construction period.
Estimated cost, based on current prices, is $520,750. The estimated cost of the project, as
shown in the 1994-2000 Transportation Improvement Program, is $721,000, ($700,000-
construction; $21,000-ROW).
1
III. EXISTING CONDITIONS
The project is located in the north-central portion of Madison County, approximately 5
miles east of the Town of Hot Springs (see Figure 1). The area is forested and rural in
nature.
NC 208 is classified as a rural major collector in the Statewide Functional Classification
System and is a Federal Aid Highway. There is no adopted Thoroughfare Plan for
Madison County.
In the vicinity of the bridge, NC 208 has an 18-foot pavement width with 3-foot unstable
shoulders (see Figures 3 & 4). The roadway grade is relatively flat through the project
area. The existing bridge is located in a 27 degree horizontal curve. The roadway is
situated about 14 feet above the creek bed.
The current traffic volume of 400 VPD is expected to increase to 800 VPD by the year
2015. The projected volume includes 1% truck-tractor semi-trailer (TTST) and 2% dual-
tired vehicles (DT). There is no speed limit posted through the project area.
The existing bridge (see Figure 3) was constructed in 1950. Bridge No. 16 is a three-span
structure that consists of a reinforced concrete deck on steel beams. The substructure is
comprised of reinforced concrete abutments and concrete post and beam interior bents.
The overall length of the structure is 98 feet. The clear roadway width is 26 feet. The
posted weight limit on this bridge is 24 tons for single vehicles and 31 tons for TTST's.
Bridge No. 16 has a sufficiency rating of 34.4, compared to a rating of 100 for a new
structure. The existing bridge is considered structurally deficient.
There are no utilities attached to the existing structure nor are there any utilities in the
vicinity of the bridge.
No accidents have been reported in the vicinity of Bridge No. 16 during the period from
May, 1989 to April, 1992.
Six school buses cross the bridge twice a day. Additionally, a county school fuel delivery
truck crosses the bridge every other day during the school year.
IV. ALTERNATIVES
Two alternatives for replacing Bridge No. 16 were studied. Each alternative consists of a
bridge 155 feet long and 26 feet wide. This structure width will accommodate two 10-
foot lanes with three-foot shoulders on each side. The approach roadway will consist of a
20-foot pavement width, to accommodate two 10-foot travel lanes, and four-foot usable
2
shoulders on each side. These lane widths are nominal and will be wider to provide the
required widening due to curvature. The actual widening due to curvature will be
commensurate with the degree of curve used in the final design of the project. Typical
sections of the proposed structure and approach roadway are included as Figure 4 and
Figure 5.
The alternatives studied are shown on Figure 2 and are as follows:
Alternative 1 - involves replacement of the structure along the existing roadway alignment.
Improvements to the approach roadways will be required for approximately 250 feet to
the north and 350 feet to the south. The design speed for this alternative is 30 mph. A
temporary on-site detour will be provided during the construction period immediately east
(upstream) of the existing structure. The temporary detour will consist of a bridge 135
feet long and 24 feet wide, located about 40 feet east of the existing structure. This
alternative is not recommended due to its higher estimated construction cost.
Alternative 2 (Recommended) - involves replacement of the bridge on new location
immediately east of the existing structure. Improvements to the alignment on the bridge
approaches include approximately 300 feet to the north and 400 feet to the south. The
design speed is 25 mph which is below the desirable standard for this type and
classification of roadway; therefore, a design exception will be required. The existing
structure will serve as an on-site detour structure during the construction period.
Alternative 2 is preferred because of its lower estimated construction cost. Additionally,
this alternative is better for hydrologic conditions at the site since the proposed structure is
located further away from the convergence of Shelton Laurel Creek with Big Laurel
Creek.
The "do-nothing" alternative will eventually necessitate closure of the bridge. This is not
acceptable due to the traffic service provided by NC 208.
The Division Office concurs that traffic be maintained on-site instead of closing the road
during construction because of the traffic volumes using NC 208 and the excessive length
of additional travel that will be required with an off-site detour.
The Madison County Assistant School Superintendent indicates that maintenance of traffic
on-site during the construction period is preferable.
The existing bridge is considered structurally deficient. The latest Bridge Inspection
Report rates the deck in "poor" condition and the superstructure and substructure in "fair"
condition. The existing bridge was designed for a H-15 loading. Replacement of the
superstructure and rehabilitation of the existing substructure is not considered feasible due
to the cost that would be required to: (1) widen and strengthen the existing two-column
bents and abutments as required for a HS-20 design load and the current seismic load
criteria; and (2) investigate and upgrade the existing foundations for the current scour
requirements.
3
V. ESTIMATED COST
The estimated costs for the two alternatives are as follows:
(Recommended)
Alternative 1 Alternative 2
Structure $ 263,500 $ 263,500
Roadway Approaches 119,370 161,020
Detour Structure & Approaches 145,650 --
Structure Removal 12,480 12,480
Engineering & Contingencies 84,000 63,000
Right-of-Way/Construction Easements/Utilities 20,750 20,750
Total $ 645,750 $ 520,750
VI. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS
Bridge No. 16 will be replaced at a new location, as shown by Alternative 2 in Figure 2,
with a new structure having a length of approximately 155 feet. Improvements to the
existing approaches will be necessary for a distance of about 300 feet north of the
replacement structure and 400 feet south of the new bridge. The Division Engineer
concurs with this recommended alternative (see Attachment A).
A 20-foot pavement width (two 10-foot travel lanes) with four-foot usable shoulders on
each side will be provided on the approaches (see Figure 4). A 26-foot clear width is
recommended on the replacement structure in accordance with the current NCDOT
Bridge Policy. NC 208 is'classified as a rural major collector; therefore, criteria for a rural
major collector was used for the bridge replacement. This will provide two 10-foot lanes
with three-foot shoulders across the structure. Lane widening due to curvature will be
required across the replacement structure.
The horizontal curvature of the project limits the design speed to 25 MPH, therefore, a
design exception will be required.
During the construction period, maintenance of traffic at the existing bridge is necessary.
Otherwise, traffic will have to be detoured along existing secondary roads. This detour
route is considered unacceptable due to the traffic volumes using NC 208 and the
excessive length of additional travel required.
Based on a preliminary hydraulic analysis, the new structure is recommended to have a
length of approximately 155 feet. The bridge will have a 0.3% minimum slope in order to
facilitate drainage. Also, the bottom elevation of the superstructure will be no lower than
that of the existing structure so that there will be no increase to the existing 100-year
4
floodplain elevation. It is anticipated that the elevation of the new structure will be
approximately the same as the existing bridge. The length and height of the new structure
may be increased or decreased as necessary to accommodate peak flows as determined by
further hydrologic studies.
VII. NATURAL RESOURCES
A biologist visited the project site on January 19, 1993 to verify documented information
and gather field data for a thorough assessment of potential impacts that could be incurred
by a proposed bridge replacement project.
The investigation examined the vegetation surrounding the highway bridge in order to 1)
search for State and Federally protected plants and animal species; 2) identify unique or
prime-quality communities; 3) describe the current vegetation and wildlife habitats; 4)
identify wetlands; and 5) provide information to assess (and minimize adverse)
environmental effects of the proposed bridge replacement.
Biotic Communities
Plant Communities
Two natural plant communities occur within the study area, Montane Alluvial Forest and
Mesic Mixed Hardwood. The riparian area immediately adjacent to Big Laurel Creek and
Shelton Laurel Creek is narrow, steeply grading into the mixed hardwood community.
Big Laurel Creek is contained within a well defined channel through the project area,
bordered by a well developed riparian community. Immediately downstream from the
existing bridge, Big Laurel Creek joins with Shelton Laurel Creek which flows from the
north. Downstream from the bridge, both Big Laurel Creek and Shelton Laurel Creek are
bordered by riparian communities. These areas, however, are more developed on the west
side of the watercourse, since the east side is the NC 208 roadway embankment.
The riparian vegetation associated with Big Laurel Creek and Shelton Laurel Creek
consists of sycamore (Platanus occidentalis), hemlock (Tsuga canadensis), and
ironwood (Carpinus caroliniana) in the tree layer. The understory consists of tag alder
(Alms serrulata), great rhododendron (Rhododendron maximum), umbrella tree
(Magnolia fraseri), privet (Ligustrum sinense), Christmas fern (Polystichum
arostichoides) and blackberry (Rubus sp.). Vines noted include greenbrier (Smilax sp.),
grape (Vitis sp.) and Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica). This community is
contained within well-defined floodplains of both streams but is most extensive to the east,
or upstream along Big Laurel Creek from the existing bridge. It grades to steep, mesic
mixed hardwood communities on all sides of the project.
5
The surrounding landscape contains a variety of hardwood species typical of mesic mixed
hardwood communities. White oak (Quercus alba), red oak (Q. rubra), red maple (Ater
rubrum), beech (Fagus grandifolia), poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera) and slippery elm
(Ulmus rubra) are prevalent in the tree layer. The understory includes laurel (Kalmia
latifolia), great rhododendron (Rhododendron maximum), privet (Ligustrum sinense), and
Christmas fern (Polystichum arostichoides). Other species noted include locust (Robinia
pseudo-acacia), redbud (Cercis canadensis), and ironwood (Carpinus caroliniana).
Wildlife (General)
Riparian communities are valuable habitat for reptiles and amphibians. Amphibians in
particular are highly water dependent for completion of larval stages in their life cycle and
some species are totally aquatic.
Reptiles and amphibians likely to occur in the project vicinity include eastern box turtle
(Terrapene carolina), five-lined skink (Eumeces fasciatus), queen snake (Regina
septemvittata), northern redbelly snake (Storeria occipitomaculata occipitomaculata),
black ratsnake (Elaphe obsoleta obsoleta), mountain dusky salamander (Desmognathus
ochrophaeus), northern dusky salamander (D. fuscus fuscus), seal salamander (D.
monticola), red salamander (Pseudotriton ruber), green frog (Rana clamitans), pickerel
frog (R. palustris), and wood frog (R. sylvatica).
The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission reports that Big Laurel Creek is
designated as hatchery-supported public mountain trout waters and that a wild trout
population will also be affected by stream disturbance. Other fish species likely to inhabit
Big Laurel Creek include stoneroller (Campostoma anomalum), river chub (Nocomis
micropogon), shiners (Notropis sp. and Luxilus sp.), dace (Rhinichthys sp.), darters
(Etheostoma sp. and Percina sp.), and banded sculpin (Cottus carolinae). The North
Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission recommends that a spanning structure be
constructed at this site to preserve instream and riparian habitat.
Riparian corridors also act as natural passageways for mammals. They also serve as
refuges for mammals forced from more disturbed upland sites. Mammals likely to inhabit
the area include opossum (Didelphis marsupialis), raccoon (Procyon lotor), eastern mole
(Scalopus aquaticus), bats (Lasiurus sp. and Myotis sp.), raccoon (Procyon lotor),
longtail weasel (Mustela frenata), mink (M. vison), striped skunk (Mephitis mephitis),
chipmunk (Tamias striatus), squirrels (Sciurus sp.), mice (Peromyscus sp.), cottontail
(Sylvilagus floridanus), and deer (Odocoileus virginianus).
Birds likely to inhabit the study area include the red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), red
shouldered hawk (B. lineatus), hairy woodpecker (Picoides villosus), blue jay (Cyanocitta
cristata), tufted titmouse (Parus bicolor), white breasted nuthatch (Sitta carolinensis),
and wood thrush (Hylocichla mustelina).
6
Physical Resources
Soil
The predominant soil in the vicinity of the project is Cleveland fine sandy loam, 40 to 90
percent slopes. This soil is a somewhat excessively drained soil formed from granite,
gneiss and schist. It is found on strongly sloping to very steep side slopes, primarily along
the French Broad River and its major tributaries in Madison County. Cleveland fine sandy
loam is not classified as a hydric soil and has no identified hydric soil inclusions.
Water
This bridge replacement project spans Big Laurel Creek, a tributary to the French Broad
River, and is contained within the French Broad River basin. Immediately downstream
from the existing bridge is the mouth of Shelton Laurel Creek, which flows into Big
Laurel Creek. Shelton Laurel Creek parallels NC 208 to the north.
Big Laurel Creek has a "best usage" classification of "C-Tr". Class C designates waters
suitable for secondary recreation, aquatic life propagation and survival, fishing, wildlife
and agriculture. The supplemental classification of Tr (Trout) indicates waters suitable for
natural trout propagation and maintenance of stocked trout.
The Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network (BMAN), managed by the North
Carolina Department of Environment, Health & Natural Resources, Division of
Environmental Management, addresses the long term trends in water quality at fixed
monitoring sites by the use of benthic macroinvertebrates. These organisms are sensitive
to very subtle changes in water quality. Specific data for Big Laurel Creek are not
available. However, the water quality in the Big Laurel Creek watershed has been
described as generally good to excellent.
Table 1 describes the stream characteristics of Big Laurel Creek observed in the vicinity of
the proposed bridge replacement project.
TABLE 1
Observation Point Upstream 100 ft) I Existing Crossing Downstream 100 ft.
Substrate Boulder, rubble, sand with bedrock outcrops
Current Flow Strong - Normal
Channel Width (ft.) 60 - 75 70-80 90-100
Bank Height (ft.) 10 12 15
Water Depth (ft.) 1-3 2-4 2-4
Water Color Clear Clear Clear
Water Odor None
A uatic Vegetation None
Adjacent Vegetation Hardwood fringe - sycamore, hemlock, ironwood
1
Wetlands Bank to Bank 1
7
The general gradient of Big Laurel Creek is moderate to steep and riffle-pool ratios are
generally high through the project area. Though some flats are developed behind the riffle
areas, sediment loads will, for the most part, be carried downstream from the project site.
The stream banks are steep and high enough to contain stone surges; therefore,
overtopping floods will be minimal.
Jurisdictional Topics
Wetlands
No wetland plant communities will be affected by this project. The stream banks are steep
and well drained and wetland hydrology does not occur in the adjacent communities.
Protected Species
Under federal law, any federal action which is likely to result in a negative impact to plants
and animals with federal classifications of Endangered (E), Threatened (T), Proposed
Endangered (PE) and Proposed Threatened (PT) is subject to review by the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (FWS) under one or more provisions of the Endangered Species Act of
1973. In the case of state-funded actions, where federal wetland permits are likely to be
required, for example, the FWS can require consultation to insure that the proposed action
does not jeopardize any endangered, threatened or protected species. Even in the absence
of federal actions, the FWS has the power, through provisions of Section 9 of the
Endangered Species Act, to exercise jurisdiction on behalf of a protected plant or animal.
The FWS and other wildlife resource agencies also exercise jurisdiction in this resource
area in accordance with the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended;
16 USC 661 et seq.). North Carolina laws are also designed to protect certain plants and
animals where statewide populations are in decline. Plants or animals with state
designations of Endangered (E), Threatened (T) or Special Concern (SC) are granted
protection by the State Endangered Species Act and the NC Plant Protection and
Conservation Act of 1979. These Acts are administered and enforced by the North
Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission and the NC Department of Agriculture.
The FWS and the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NHP) were consulted to
identify the potential for occurrences of protected species in the project study area.
Federally Listed Species:
Information from the FWS dated September 20, 1993, indicates that the American
peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus analum) is a federally listed endangered species and is
the only federally protected species listed in Madison County. This species and its
relationship to the proposed project are discussed on the following page.
8
American peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus anatum)
American peregrine falcons are found primarily near rocky cliffs, bluffs, pinnacles,
where they prefer to nest. They forage in a variety of habitats, including coastal
waters, open valleys, and even within cities. They eat almost any small- to medium-
sized bird, but more particularly rock doves, pelagic birds, songbirds and waterfowl.
Occasionally, the peregrine will take mammals, beetles, dragonflies and migrating
monarch butterflies. Populations of the peregrine falcon were reduced worldwide
during the 1950's and 1960's as a consequence of the use of DDT.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
No nesting sites will be affected by the proposed bridge replacement project; therefore,
no impacts to this species will occur.
The FWS also identified candidate species, (species that are currently under status
review), that may occur in the project study area. A list of these species is provided in
Table 2, below.
TABLE 2
COMMON NAME
SPECIFIC NAME
SUITABLE HABITAT
Rafinesque's big-eared bat
Hellbender *
Olive darter
Longhead darter
Lake sturgeon *
Sculpted supercoil
Piratebush
Gray's saxifrage
Mountain catchfly
Plecotus rafinesquii
Cryptobranchus allegamenms
Percina squamata
Percina macrocephala
Acipenser fluvescens
Paravitrea terraria
Buckleya distichophylla
Saxftaga caroliniana
Silene ovata
No
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
* Indicates no specimen from Madison County in at least 20 years.
State Listed Species:
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program for protected animal and plant species
reports that Big Laurel Creek contains populations of one state-listed Threatened species,
the logperch (Percina caprodes). Populations of the tangerine darter (Percina
aurantiaca), considered significantly rare in North Carolina, also occur in Big Laurel
Creek. Impacts to these species will be minimized by following all best management
practices for the control of erosion and runoff. Also recorded within a two mile radius of
the project site are two species of plants considered significantly rare in North Carolina.
9
These are climbing fumitory (Adlumia fungorum) and sweet white trillium (Trillium
simile). These species grow in rich cove forests or on cliffs. The project area consists of
similar habitat to that of rich cove forests. Therefore, NCDOT will coordinate with the
Natural Heritage Program to insure that interested agencies have an opportunity to
conduct surveys for the climbing fumitory and sweet white trillium prior to construction.
If specimens of the species are found in the project area, NCDOT will cooperate with the
Natural Heritage Program in their attempts to relocate the affected plants.
Impacts
The preferred alternative consists of replacement of the structure at a new location,
immediately upstream from the existing bridge. The existing bridge will be used to
maintain traffic during the construction period.
Construction of the new bridge and approach roadways will impact the ecological
community. Portions of the riparian and upland hardwood communities will be destroyed
by land clearing, excavation, filling, draining and paving. As a result, these communities
will be altered and, consequently, the habitat quality lessened to some degree. During
construction, efforts will be made to minimize impacts to the riparian and hardwood
forest communities.
Approximately 0.1 acre of riparian habitat and 1.0 acre of upland forest will be impacted
by the new construction. These losses are relatively small compared to the amount of
similar habitats that are found in the region.
Impacts due to the proposed project will mainly affect aquatic organisms. Dredging,
filling, pile-driving operations, slope stabilization, and land clearing are construction
activities which can result in the direct loss of benthic organisms due to an increase in silt
load. The removal of benthic organisms reduces the potential food supply for fish and
other vertebrates.
Project construction may result in a number of impacts to Big Laurel Creek. Construction
of the new bridge structure could create short-term increases in siltation and sedimentation
in Big Laurel Creek. Fill material placement for the approach roadway may enter the
stream, and pier and/or abutment excavation could result in increased turbidity both on-
site and downstream of the project area. Other impacts might include alterations to water
levels and flow due to interruptions or additions to surface and/or groundwater flow;
increased concentration of toxic compounds from construction, and reductions to sensitive
invertebrate species due to alterations in water clarity and light-incidence resulting from
increased turbity. However, these potential impacts are avoidable. Appropriate measures,
consistent with Best Management Practices, will be implemented during the term of the
project to minimize, control and/or contain the potential impacts.
10
Unique and/or Prime-Quality Habitat:
The Montane Alluvial Forest community is not uncommon but few examples remain
intact. The Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest community is common and because of its
occurrence on steeper slopes has escaped the development pressures that have taken place
in most other upland communities.
Nationwide Rivers Inventory Designation:
Big Laurel Creek is not currently a designated wild or scenic river. It is, however,
included in the National Park Service's (NPS) Nationwide Rivers Inventory (NRI). The
NRI is a list of waterways that the NPS has identified as having high scenic or aesthetic
values. A 32 mile long section of Big Laurel Creek is included in the NRI, beginning at its
confluence with the French Broad River (river mile 0), upstream to river mile 32, at its
headwaters, south of the Tennessee State line. It is listed by the NPS as having high
values in five of the seven scenic river parameters, including scenic, recreation, geological,
fish and wildlife. It is described as a "fast flowing stream with exceptional scenic values,
including a 1,200-foot deep gorge area."
The proposed project involves replacement of an existing bridge with a similar type
structure. The location of the proposed bridge will be immediately east (upstream) of the
existing bridge. After the proposed bridge is placed in service, the existing bridge,
including the substructure and foundations, will be removed.
This bridge replacement project will not diminish the free-flowing nature of Big Laurel
Creek. The character and natural setting of Big Laurel Creek will not be altered by the
project. The water quality of Big Laurel Creek will not deteriorate 'as a result of the
project. Strict erosion control measures and Best Management Practices will be
implemented during construction to avoid increases in siltation and sedimentation. The
project will have no adverse effects on Big Laurel Creek and will not foreclose the
potential for designation as a Wild and Scenic River.
Permit Coordination
In accordance with provisions of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C.O.E.
1344), a permit will be required from the Corps of Engineers for the discharge of dredged
or fill material into "Waters of the United States". In addition, the project is located in a
designated "trout" county where NCDOT is required to obtain a letter of approval from
the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission and provide it to the Corps of
Engineers.
Since the subject 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. This
permit authorizes any activities, work and discharges undertaken, assisted, authorized,
11
regulated, funded or financed, in whole or in part, by another federal agency and that the
activity is "categorically excluded" from environmental documentation because it is
included within a category of actions which neither individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the environment. However, final permit decisions are left to the
discretionary authority of the United States Army Corps of Engineers.
Foundation investigations will be required on this project. The investigation will include
test borings in soil and/or rock for in-site testing as well as obtaining samples for
laboratory testing. This may require test borings in streams and/or wetlands. These
activities will require authorization under Nationwide Permit No. 6.
A 401 Water Quality Certification, administered through the N.C. Department of
Environment, Health and Natural Resources, will also be required. This certificate is
issued for any activity which may result in a discharge into waters for which a federal
permit is required.
Compensatory mitigation is not required under a Nationwide permit. Erosion and
sedimentation control measures will be strictly enforced during construction activities to
minimize unnecessary impacts to stream and wetland ecosystems. Best Management
Practices will also be implemented.
VIII. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
The project is expected to have an overall positive impact. Replacement of an inadequate
bridge will result in safer traffic operations.
The project is considered to be a Federal "Categorical Exclusion" due to its limited scope
and insignificant environmental consequences.
The bridge replacement will not have an adverse effect on the quality of the human or
natural environment with the use of current NCDOT standards and specifications.
The project is not in conflict with any plan, existing land use, or zoning regulation. No
change in land use is expected to result from construction of the project.
No adverse impact on families or communities is anticipated. Right-of-way acquisition
will be limited. No relocatees are expected with implementation of the proposed
alternative.
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.
The proposed project is located within the indefinite boundary of the Pisgah National
Forest. However, the proposed project will not require right-of-way acquisition or
12
easements from publicly owned recreational land, as described in Section 4(f) of the
Department of Transportation Act of 1966.
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 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
project is also subject to compliance with Section 4(f) of the Department of
Transportation Act of 1966, as amended.
The area of potential effect (APE) of the project was reviewed in the field. The only
property within the APE was the bridge itself, built in 1950. The State Historic
Preservation Office searched their files and were aware of no structures of historical or
architectural importance within the general project area. A copy of the SHPO
memorandum is included as Attachment B.
In response to a scoping letter from the North Carolina Department of Transportation, the
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer, in a memorandum dated January 26, 1993
(Attachment B), recommended that "no archaeological investigation be conducted in
connection with this project." Therefore, no archaeological work was conducted for the
projected.
Since there are no properties either listed on or eligible for the National Register of
Historic Places within the APE, no further compliance with Section 106 is required with
respect to historic structures.
This project has been coordinated with the U.S. Soil Conservation Service. The Farmland
Protection Policy Act requires all federal agencies or their representatives to consider the
potential impact to prime farmland of all land acquisition and construction projects. There
is no soil mapping currently available for Madison County; therefore, Form AD-1006 was
not completed by the Soil Conservation Service.
The project is located within the jurisdiction for air quality of the Asheville Regional
Office of the N.C. Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources. The
ambient air quality for Madison County has 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 this attainment area.
This project will not substantially increase traffic volumes. Therefore, the 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 State
Implementation Plans for air quality in compliance with 15 NCAC 2D.0520.
13
This evaluation completes the assessment requirements for noise analysis of Title 23, Code
of Federal. Regulations (CFR), Part 772 and for air quality of the 1990 Clean Air Act
Amendments and the National Environmental Policy Act.
An examination of records at the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and
Natural Resources, Division of Environmental Management, Groundwater Section and the
North Carolina Department of Human Resources, Solid Waste Management Section
revealed no underground storage tanks or hazardous waste sites in the project area.
Madison County is a participant in the National Flood Insurance Regular Program. The
approximate 100-year floodplain in the project area is shown in Figure 6. The amount of
floodplain area to be affected is not considered to be significant.
There are no practical alternatives to crossing the floodplain area. Any shift in alignment
will result in a crossing of about the same magnitude. All reasonable measures will be
taken to minimize any possible harm.
In the vicinity of the project, there are no structures located within the limits of the 100-
year floodplain.
The project will not increase the upstream limits of the 100-year floodplain.
The project lies within the jurisdiction of the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA). The
TVA has requested that final bridge plans be submitted to them for review under Section
26a of the TVA Act (see Attachment Q.
On the basis of the above discussion, it is concluded that no serious adverse environmental
effects will result from implementation of the project.
14
N
i
1434
w 3.Za
r ?4re!
•.:::::: 212
'O ? ? b 131
4y ('? _ :_a:c _ 1317 1Lrl ["?
6WAN17663 13T9
BRIDGE NO. 16 7
1322.
1319 ? /?
•
? 6
1
4 Whiterock `?
_ _ aust% of pr S-1- N ,I- 11
00 7
MADISON 19
Walnut $ 1
1
• Hill1
21 3 Mars
213 7
Joe Spring Creek t 25
.Mar 112 1 70
2 Trust 25
?? Luck 11
't°F NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
BRANCH
MADISON COUNTY
NC 208
BRIDGE NO. 16 OVER
BIG LAUREL CREEK
B-2582
WALNUT ?? 1
B
KNO 1321
1224
ODOM
° MT. t
1440 721_ 1321
1319 '•? !?``?
1
1441
Itt ::?; ' U T
1 2

?r 1377
0
1 1
i 2
SCALE
(mi)
FIGURE 1
7%

C
O.
a ? d H ?
co ? ? C ?

Dm O
?1 QCZn0
O "" ? z O ? t
O
Rl ?m
N

j 0
.
a
-3 H O Y
O
N
00
C c
m0 z crG?07_
o
c m <
<
<
m d
1

``y a
T rt
z
n >
'?
c
? r
O

-53 D
M
n
O M
Do
? Z
m D
Z -?
<
m m
? N
I"` t,.'J
?c
?I

y;? D
1 ?
nj z
n ?? - 1
r:,R

C
f
DO
m
m
caz°
?AL? f y
BAs - 4`.?a+ ` t ..' .
At,
a s
r,
s i f t 4L
I
h
r.-
NC 208
MADISON CO.
BRIDGE NO. 16
B-2582
SIDE VIEW
NORTH APPROACH
LOOKING SOUTH
SOUTH APPROACH
LOOKING NORTH
FIGURE 3

A
1
N
a

C4J
3
31?
N
N a
a
1
I
y
F-
F-

A
1
N
a

Z
O
H
U
W
N
V C7
Z
F-
aN
X
CL
Q W
J
Q
U
a
F-
? a
F <
F
a
z
?O
W W
C (? W Z

O
n cc
w o 000
6
a [<. W Q
<aO? VN
WIn
ZVO¢N
V AOi Z r w _NZWam
F Z m z z O GC7
zC- Aa C1
*11

Z
O
F=
U
W
S O
W
Q ?
00
a
CL. cr.
Qa
J
V
a
}
H
de
w
C.
7
CD
u.

* *
> m
m ? C
1L0
L L
a 03
H
t

L
m ?
L

a0
m
? m

C •C
oa,

v~i •oM
W

C Q
m
m
m
o.
L
? L #
m
= 3
? O
t
3 •a N
L

n u n
a
y
a[I !
-
V
O
a
z F C
w u
F ?
ao
" a
0W ?W
aFx z c
a O Z C r
C 3 O 0-4
a o
Z
a ZFAaaa d V
Fp fsa
14
0
o, y
X Z O
?C
?i ???777 ? ?rl
O T ? !? ? .?1lls • C ''P??
O Z _ ?y
d
r t? 7
s t0 U o
O
a?
H?
m
z?
o;
V
z
0.4
O °
O
r, CD
Frl C
a
Or-
s U
° a J s.
O d ,o
0
U
0
's
v
i > > >
0; ~000
i
Lo co
9-w cc
d N La L9
e.?. of C7 C7 ?
'm m C) O
W r r N
.9 >
Q
0
w
v
a
a
w

"Ff ZONE A rel.:•' Y:•. L
ZONE .C ??•'•":?.4?u <Y: Cr x ?.. Graveyard
t
ZONE C Lt ?t Gap'
BRIDGE NO. 16 y _ e x: o?
to. T.
j,uuYe? BIG LAUREL CREEK."
` co ZONE
t+t N ZO NEC
.
100 YEAR FLOOD LIMIT
ZONE b
ZONE C A'
Cree
.wt
o

ZONE C
-
Hurricane p

Billy Gap
/" x
.
---- ?_?1
M`?e? aatts t4ol,I NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
sf?r ,r t*?BRANCH
MADISON COUNTY
NC 208
BRIDGE NO. 16 OVER
BIG LAUREL CREEK
B-2582
I FIGURE 61
i
• ' ..? STAR .; -'•,
s3 WT s`
STATI. OF NOR-1 I I CAW[] NA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Innu> B. I IuNi. Iii. DIVISION OF 1116I IWAYS Src S I IuNr
GcrvrtZ,uc?a artnaY
Post Office Box 3279
Asheville, North Carolina 28802
June 22, 1993
MEMORANDUM TO: L. J. WARD, P.E.
FROM: W. D. SMART, P.E.
SUBJECT: Planning Report Prepared
By CRSS Engineers, Inc.
B-2112, Burke County
B-2582, Madison County
B-2593, Mitchell County
This is to advise you of Division 13's concurrence of
the consultant's bridge replacement project(s) recommended
alternates.
JGB/lc
cc: CRSS Engineers, Inc.
ATTACHMENT A
sinrro / ?tp7
O
Y y? _
North Carolina Department of Cultural oums,,-..,. ..
James B. Hunt, Jr., Goventor idstnn oe Z&Vt , 6* History
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary Director
January 26, 1993
MEMORANDUM
TO: L. J. Ward, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
Department of T?anspo.rtation
` i
FROM: David Brook G
Deputy State storic Preservation Officer
•
SUBJECT: Replace Bridge No. 208 on NC 208 over Big Laurel
Creek, Madison County, B-2582, ER 93-7962
Thank you for your letter of December 18, 1992, concerning the above project.
We have conducted a search of our files and are aware of no structures of
historical or architectural importance located within the planning area. However,
please notify us if there are any structures over fifty years of age in the area of
potential effect.
There are no known archaeological sites within the proposed project area. Based
on our present knowledge of the area, it is unlikely that any archaeological
resources which may be eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic
Places will be affected by the project 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.
DB:slw
cc: Nicholas Graf
B. Church
T. Padgett
109 East Jones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2907
ATTACHMENT B
CU. L/,e" ll 56M ?L
311q M3
Tennessee Valley Authority. Norris. Tennessee 37828
March 8, 1993
Kr. L. J. - Ward, P .E.
Manager, Planning and Environmental Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
Dear Hr. Ward:
7?L?I?t7
GEI V
MAR 1 2 1993
ZON IC'v 0,
Cr G'HWAYS
N???-
NORT H CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION BRIDGE REPLACEMENT
PROJECTS: BRIDGE ON SR 1140 OVER ALARKA CREEK - SWAIN COUNTY; T.I.P.
NO.: B-2170, BRIDGE ON NC 208 OVER BIG LAUREL CREEK - MADISON COUNTY;
T.I.P. NO.: 8-2582, AND BRIDGE ON NC 261 OVER LITTLE ROCK CREEK -
MITCHELL COUNTY; T.I.P. NO.: B-2593
This responds to your January 8 request for TVA's comments on the
subject highway improvement projects.
The proposed bridge replacements crosses floodplains identified by
approximate methods for streams where we have no available flood data.
However, all counties are participants in the National Flood Insurance
Program. All bridges should be designed to meet the requirements of the
National Flood Insurance Program and for compliance with Floodplain
at 8 least Also, 70 feet three apart and no bentsd
Management Executive r bent o are 11988.
designed are
designed ned such that the
located in the deepest part of the riverbed.
Final plans for the bridges should be submitted to TVA for review undecopy
Section 26a of the TVA Act. Along with these plans, please
of a letter from the state Historic Preservation officer stating that the copy proposal complies with the the effects Preservation Act of
on the6100ayear flood
the hydraulic analysis of
elevation.
/ / . 7.
G/ (
ance L. Calvert
Land Resources
ATTACHMENT C