19980531 Ver 1_Complete File_19980615

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
NCDENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
June 24, 1998
Avery County
DWQ Project 980531
APPROVAL of 401 Water Quality Certification
Mr. David Robinson
NC DOT
PO Box 25201
Raleigh NC 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Robinson:
You have our approval, in accordance with the attached conditions and those listed below, to impact 0.20
acres of wetlands or waters for the purpose of replacing bridge 12 on SR 1525 over the Linville River, as you
described in your application dated June 15, 1998. After reviewing your application, we have decided that this
impact is covered by General Water Quality Certification Number 3127. This Certification allows you to use
Nationwide Permit Number-23 when it is issued by the Corps of Engineers. In addition, you should get any
other federal, state or local permits before you go ahead with your project including (but not limited to)
Sediment and Erosion Control, Coastal Stormwater, Non-Discharge and Water Supply Watershed regulations.
This approval will expire when the accompanying 404 or CAMA permit expires unless otherwise specified in
the General Certification.
This approval is only valid for the purpose and design that you described in your application except as
modified below. If you change your project, you must notify us and you may be required to send us a new
application for a new certification. If the property is sold, the new owner must be given a copy of this
Certification and approval letter and is thereby responsible for complying with all conditions. If total wetland
fills for this project (now or in the future) exceed one acre, compensatory mitigation may be required as
described in 15A NCAC 2H .0506 (h) (6) and (7). For this approval to be valid, you must follow the
conditions listed in the attached certification.
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 conforming 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 Water Quality under Section 401 of the Clean Water
Act. If you have any questions, please telephone John Domey at 919-733-1786.
incerely,
r n Howard,l E.
Attachment
cc: Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Corps of Engineers Asheville Field Office
Asheville DWQ Regional Office
Mr. John Domey
Central Files
980531.1tr
Division of Water Quality • Non-Discharge Branch
4401 Reedy Creek Rd., Raleigh, NC 27607 Telephone [phone] FAX # [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer • 50% recycled/10% post consumer paper
5T ATE k
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201
GOVERNOR
May 21, 1998
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Asheville Field Office
151 Patton Ave., Room 143
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
ATTENTION: Mr. Steve Lund
NCDOT Coordinator
Dear Sir:

E. NORRIS TOLSON
SECRETARY
SUBJECT: Avery County, Replacement of Bridge No. 12 over the Linville River on
SR 1525. TIP No. B-2917, State Project No. 8.2720801, Federal Aid
Project No. BRZ-1525(1).
Attached for your information is a copy of the project planning report for the subject
project. Bridge No. 12 will be replaced with a new bridge approximately 18.3 meters
(60 feet) east of the existing structure. The new bridge will be approximately 7.2 meters
(26 feet) wide and approximately 55 meters (180 feet) in length. Traffic will be
maintained on the existing structure during construction. There will be 183 meters
(600 feet) of new approach work to the south and 159 meters (520 feet) of new approach
work to the north. Pavement width will be 6.6 meters (22 feet) and will extend 110
meters (350 feet) south of the bridge and 60 meters (200 feet) north of the bridge.
Additionally, there will be 1.2-meter (4-foot) grassed shoulders widening to 2.2 meters
(7 feet) to accommodate guardrail in some areas. One jurisdictional wetland will be
affected by the recommended alternative. Impacts to this wetland have been minimized
to 0.08 ha (0.20 ac) by constructing a new spanning structure as close as possible
(60 feet) to the existing structure.
All standard procedures and measures will be implemented to avoid or minimize
environmental impacts. All practical Best Management Practices (BMP's) will be
included and properly maintained during project construction.
NCDOT will implement DWQ "Guidelines for Construction of Highway Improvements
Adjacent to or Crossing Trout Waters in North Carolina" (Joint Agency Committee 1997)
and "Design Standards in Sensitive Watersheds" (15A NCAC 04B .0024)

To minimize impacts to the alluvial thicket wetland, the alignment will stay as close as
possible to the existing structure as shown in Figure 2 of the attached CE document. Fill
will be minimized on the southeastern shore of the project.
NCWRC has commented that Linville River is a Hatchery Supported Designated Public
Mountain Trout Waters which also supports wild rainbow and brown trout. With a
spanning structure (bridge), a moratorium is not required. The following will be
implemented to minimize impacts to aquatic resources:
• Where concrete is used, work will be accomplished so that wet concrete does not
contact stream water.
• Where possible, heavy equipment should be operated from the bank rather than in the
stream channel to minimize sedimentation and reduce the likelihood of introducing
other pollutants into the stream.
• Temporary or permanent herbaceous vegetation should be planted on all bare soil
within 15 days of completion of ground disturbing activities to provide long-term
erosion control.
The project is being processed by the Federal Highway Administration 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 13 December 1996, 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 Water Quality Certification No. 3107 (Categorical
Exclusion) will apply to this project, and are providing one copy of the CE document to
the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water
Quality, for their review. Since this project occurs in a designated trout county, a copy of
this document is also being provided to the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission for
their review.
Foundation investigations, including test borings, will also be required prior to
construction of the project. The investigation will include test borings in soil and/or rock
for in-site testing as well as obtaining samples for laboratory testing. We have
determined that these activities may be authorized under Nationwide Permit 6 for survey
activities in accordance with 33 CFR Appendix A(B-6). This action would not require
notification if not for the fact that the project lies in a mountain trout county. Therefore,
NCDOT is requesting authorization of this activity from the Corps of Engineers under a
Nationwide Permit 6.
If you have any questions or need any additional information, please contact Mr. Lindsey
Riddick at [phone] extension 315.
Sincerely,
_?tcA-)
David C. Robinson, Ph.D., P. E.
Assistant Manager-Environmental Services
Planning and Environmental Branch
Attachments
cc: Mr. David Franklin, COE, Wilmington
Mr. John Dorney, NCDENR, DWQ
Mr. Joe Mickey, NCWRC
Mr. Whit Webb, P.E., Program Development Branch
Mr. R. L. Hill, P.E., State Highway Engineer - Design
Mr. A. L. Hankins, P.E., Hydraulics Unit
Mr. William J. Rogers, P.E., Structure Design Unit
Mr. Tom Shearin, P.E., State Roadway Design Engineer
Mr. W. E. Hoke, P.E., Division 11 Engineer
DEM ID: CORPS ACTION ID:
NATIONWIDE PERMIT REQUESTED (PROVIDE NATIONWIDE PERMIT #): 06
PRE-CONSTRUCTION NOTIFICATION APPLICATION
FOR NATIONWIDE PERMITS THAT REQUIRE:
1) NOTIFICATION TO THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS
2) APPLICATION FOR SECTION 401 CERTIFICATION
3) COORDINATION WITH THE NC DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
SEND THE ORIGINAL AND (1) COPY OF THIS COMPLETED FORM TO THE APPROPRIATE
FIELD OFFICE OF THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS (SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET).
SEVEN (7) COPIES SHOULD BE SENT TO THE N.C. DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL
MANAGEMENT (SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET). PLEASE PRINT.
1. OWNERS NAME:
NCDOT
2. MAILING ADDRESS
P 0 Box 25201
SUBDIVISION NAME:
CITY: Raleigh STATE: NC ZIP CODE: 27611-5201
PROJECT LOCATION ADDRESS, INCLUDING SUBDIVISION NAME (IF DIFFERENT FROM
MAILING ADDRESS ABOVE):
3. TELEPHONE NUMBER (HOME): (WORK): 919-733-3141
4. IF APPLICABLE: AGENT'S NAME OR RESPONSIBLE CORPORATE OFFICIAL,
ADDRESS, PHONE NUMBER: David C. Robinson, P.E.
5. LOCATION OF WORK (PROVIDE A MAP, PREFERABLY A COPY OF USGS
TOPOGRAPHIC MAP OR AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY WITH SCALE):
COUNTY: Avery NEAREST TOWN OR CITY: Crossnor
1
SPECIFIC LOCATION (INCLUDE ROAD NUMBERS, LANDMARKS, ETC.):
Bridae No. 12 over the Linville River on SR 1525
6. IMPACTED OR NEAREST STREAM/RIVER:
RIVER BASIN: Catawba
7a. IS PROJECT LOCATED NEAR WATER CLASSIFIED AS TROUT, TIDAL SALTWATER
(SA), HIGH QUALITY WATERS (HQW), OUTSTANDING RESOURCE WATERS (ORW),
WATER SUPPLY (WS-I OR WS-II)? YES [ ] NO [X] IF YES, EXPLAIN:
7b. IS THE PROJECT LOCATED WITHIN A NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF COASTAL
MANAGEMENT AREA OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN (AEC)?YES[ ] NO[X]
7c. IF THE PROJECT IS LOCATED WITHIN A COASTAL COUNTY (SEE PAGE 7 FOR
FIST OF COASTAL COUNTIES), WHAT IS THE LAND USE PLAN (LUP) DESIGNATION?
8a. HAVE ANY SECTION 404 PERMITS BEEN PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED FOR USE ON
THIS PROPERTY? YES [ ] NO [X] IF YES, PROVIDE ACTION I.D. NUMBER OF
PREVIOUS PERMIT AND ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (INCLUDE PHOTOCOPY OF 401
CERTIFICATION):
8b. ARE ADDITIONAL PERMIT REQUESTS EXPECTED FOR THIS PROPERTY IN THE
FUTURE? YES [ ] NO [X] IF YES, DESCRIBE ANTICIPATED WORK:
9a. ESTIMATED TOTAL NUMBER OF ACRES IN TRACT OF LAND:
N/A
9b. ESTIMATED TOTAL NUMBER OF ACRES OF WETLANDS LOCATED ON PROJECT
SITE:
0.20
Linville River
2
10a. NUMBER OF ACRES OF WETLANDS IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT BY:
FILLING: 0.20 EXCAVATION:
FLOODING: OTHER:
DRAINAGE: TOTAL ACRES TO BE IMPACTED: 0.20
10b. (1) STREAM CHANNEL TO BE IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT (lr
RELOCATED, PROVIDE DISTANCE BOTH BEFORE AND AFTER RELOCATION):
LENGTH BEFORE: N/A FT AFTER: N/A FT
WIDTH BEFORE (based on normal high water contours): N/A FT
WIDTH AFTER: N/A FT
AVERAGE DEPTH BEFORE: N/A FT AFTER: N/A FT
(2) STREAM CHANNEL IMPACTS WILL RESULT FROM: (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY)
OPEN CHANNEL RELOCATION: PLACEMENT OF' PIPE IN CHANNEL:
CHANNEL EXCAVATION: CONSTRUCTION OF A DAM/FLOODING:
OTHER:
11. IF CONSTRUCTION OF A POND IS PROPOSED, WHAT IS THE SIZE OF THE
WATERSHED DRAINING TO THE POND? N/A
WHAT IS THE EXPECTED POND SURFACE AREA? N/A
12. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED WORK INCLUDING DISCUSSION OF TYPE OF
MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT TO BE USED (ATTACH PLANS: 8 112" X 11" DRAWINGS
ONLY):
Construction of a new bridge over the Linville River
Road construction equipment
13. PURPOSE OF PROPOSED WORK: To improve safety of the traveling
public by replacing a sub-standard bridge
3
14. STATE REASONS WHY IT IS BELIEVED THAT THIS ACTIVITY MUST BE CARRIED
OUT IN WETLANDS. (INCLUDE ANY MEASURES TAKEN TO MINIMIZE WETLAND
IMPACTS): To prevent a curved alignment of the new bridge
17. DOES THE PROJECT INVOLVE AN EXPENDITURE OF PUBLIC FUNDS OR THE USE
OF PUBLIC (STATE) LAND
YES [X] NO [] (IF NO, GO TO 18)
a. IF YES, DOES THE PROJECT REQUIRE PREPARATION OF AN
ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT PURSUANT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NORTH
CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT?
YES [XI NO []
b. IF YES, HAS THE DOCUMENT BEEN REVIEWED THROUGH THE NORTH
CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION STATE CLEARINGHOUSE?
YES [X] NO [ ]
IF ANSWER TO 17b IS YES, THEN SUBMIT APPROPRIATE DOCUMENTATION FROM THE
STATE CLEARINGHOUSE TO DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT REGARDING
COMPLIANCE WITH THE NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT.
QUESTIONS REGARDING THE STATE CLEARINGHOUSE REVIEW PROCESS SHOULD BE
DIRECTED TO MS. CHRYS BAGGETT, DIRECTOR STATE CLEARINGHOUSE, NORTH
CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION, 116 WEST JONES STREET, RALEIGH,
NORTH CAROLINA 27603-8003, TELEPHONE [phone].
4
18. THE FOLLOWING ITEMS SHOULD BE INCLUDED WITH THIS APPLICATION IF
PROPOSED ACTIVITY INVOLVES THE DISCHARGE OF EXCAVATED OR FILL MATERIAL
INTO WETLANDS:
a. WETLAND DELINEATION MAP SHOWING ALL WETLANDS, STREAMS, LAKES
AND PONDS ON THE PROPERTY (FOR NATIONWIDE PERMIT NUMBERS 14, 18, 21,
26, 29, AND 38). ALL STREAMS (INTERMITTENT AND PERMANENT) ON THE
PROPERTY MUST BE SHOWN ON THE MAP. MAP SCALES SHOULD BE 1 INCH EQUALS
50 FEET OR 1 INCH EQUALS 100 FEET OR THEIR EQUIVALENT.
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. ATTACH A COPY OF THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN IF REQUIRED.
e. WHAT IS LAND USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTY? rural
L. IF APPLICABLE, WHAT IS PROPOSED METHOD OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL?
N/A
g. SIGNED AND DATED AGENT AUTHORIZATION LETTER, IF APPLICABLE.
NOTE: WETLANDS OR WATERS OF THE U.S. MAY NOT BE IMPACTED PRIOR TO:
1) ISSUANCE OF A SECTION 404 CORPS OF ENGINEERS PERMIT,
2) EITHER THE ISSUANCE OR WAIVER OF A 401 DIVISION OF
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT (WATER QUALITY) CERTIFICATION, AND
3) (IN THE TWENTY COASTAL COUNTIES ONLY), A LETTER FROM THE
NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT STATING THE PROPOSED
ACTIVITY IS CONSISTENT WITH THE NORTH CAROLINA COASTAL MANAGEMENT
PROGRAM.
OWNER'S/AGENT'S SIGNATURE DATE
(AGENT'S SIGNATURE VALID ONLY
IF AUTHORIZATION LETTER FROM
THE OWNER IS PROVIDED (18g.))
5

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. P.O. BOX 25201. RALEIGH. N.C. 27611-5201
GOVERNOR
May 21, 1998
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Asheville Field Office
151 Patton Ave., Room 143
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
ATTENTION: Mr. Steve Lund
NCDOT Coordinator
Dear Sirs,
E. [MORRIS TOLSON
SECRETARY
a JUN 23
SUBJECT: Avery County, Replacement of Bridge No. 12 over the Linville River on
SR. 1525. TIP No. B-2917, State Project No. 8.2720801, Federal Aid
Project No. BRZ-1525(1).
Attached for your information is a copy of the project planning report for the subject
project. Bridge No. 12 will be replaced with a new bridge approximately 18.3 meters
(60 feet) east of the existing structure. The new bridge will be approximately 7.2 meters
(26 feet) wide and approximately 55 meters (180 feet) in length. Traffic will be
maintained on the existing structure during construction. There will be 183 meters
(600 feet) of new approach work to the south and 159 meters (520 feet) of new approach
work to the north. Pavement width will be 6.6 meters (22 feet) and will extend 110
meters (350 feet) south of the bridge and 60 meters (200 feet) north of the bridge.
Additionally, there will be 1.2-meter (4-foot) grassed shoulders widening to 2.2 meters
(7 feet) to accommodate guardrail in some areas. One jurisdictional wetland will be
affected by the recommended alternative. Impacts to this wetland have been minimized
to 0.08 ha (0.20 ac) by constructing a new spanning structure as close as possible
(60 feet) to the existing structure.
All standard procedures and measures will be implemented to avoid or minimize
environmental impacts. All practical Best Management Practices (BMP's) will be
included and properly maintained during project construction.
NCDOT will implement DWQ "Guidelines for Construction of Highway Improvements
Adjacent to or Crossing Trout Waters in North Carolina" (Joint Agency Committee 1997)
and "Design Standards in Sensitive Watersheds" (15A NCAC 04B .0024)

t?/
To minimize impacts to the alluvial thicket wetland, the alignment will stay as close as
possible to the existing structure as shown in Figure 2 of the attached CE document. Fill
will be minimized on the southeastern shore of the project.
NCWRC has commented that Linville River is a Hatchery Supported Designated Public
Mountain Trout Waters which also supports wild rainbow and brown trout. With a
spanning structure (bridge), a moratorium is not required. The following will be
implemented to minimize impacts to aquatic resources:
• Where concrete is used, work will be accomplished so that wet concrete does not
contact stream water.
• Where possible, heavy equipment should be operated from the bank rather than in the
stream channel to minimize sedimentation and reduce the likelihood of introducing
other pollutants into the stream.
• Temporary or permanent herbaceous vegetation should be planted on all bare soil
within 15 days of completion of ground disturbing activities to provide long-term
erosion control.
The project is being processed by the Federal Highway Administration 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 13 December 1996, 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 Water Quality Certification No. 3107 (Categorical
Exclusion) will apply to this project, and are providing one copy of the CE document to
the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water
Quality, for their review. Since this project occurs in a designated trout county, a copy of
this document is also being provided to the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission for
their review. -
Foundation investigations, including test borings, will also be required prior to
construction of the project. The investigation will include test borings in soil and/or rock
for in-site testing as well as obtaining samples for laboratory testing. We have
determined that these activities may be authorized under Nationwide Permit 6 for survey
activities in accordance with 33 CFR Appendix A(B-6). This action would not require
notification if not for the fact that the project lies in a mountain trout county. Therefore,
NCDOT is requesting authorization of this activity from the Corps of Engineers under a
Nationwide Permit 6.
If you have any questions or need any additional information, please contact Mr. Lindsey
Riddick at [phone] extension 315.
Sincerely,

David C. Robinson, Ph.D., P. E.
Assistant Manager-Environmental Services
Planning and Environmental Branch
Attachments
cc: Mr. David Franklin, COE, Wilmington
Mr. John Dorney, NCDENR, DWQ
Mr. Joe Mickey, NCWRC
Mr. Whit Webb, P.E., Program Development Branch
Mr. R. L. Hill, P.E., State Highway Engineer - Design
Mr. A. L. Hankins, P.E., Hydraulics Unit
Mr. William J. Rogers, P.E., Structure Design Unit
,Mr. Tom Shearin, P.E., State Roadway Design Engineer
Mr. W. E. Doke, P.E., Division 11 Engineer
r
DE%] D: ,ORPS ACTON ID:
NATIONWIDE PERMIT REQUE;TED (PROVIDE NATIONWIDE PERMIT #) 06
PRE-CONSTRUCTION NOTIFICATION APPLICATION
FOR NATIONWIDE PERMITS THAT REQUIRE:
1) NOTIFICATION TO THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS
2) APPLICATION FOR SECTION 401 CERTIFICATION
3) COORDINATION WITH THE NC DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
SEND THE ORIGINAL AND (1) COPY OF THIS COMPLETED FORM TO THE APPROPRIATE
FIELD OFFICE OF THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS (SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET).
SEVEN (7) COPIES SHOULD BE SENT TO THE N.C. DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL
MANAGEMENT (SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET). PLEASE PRINT.
- OWNERS NAME:
NCD07
?. MAILING ADDRESS:
P 0 Box 25201
SUBDIVISION NAME:
CITY: Raleigh
STATE: NC ZIP CODE: 27611-5201
PROJECT LOCATION ADDRESS, INCLUDING SUBDIVISION NAME (IF DIFFERENT FROM
MAILING ADDRESS ABOVE):
3. TELEPHONE NUMBER (HOME): (WORK): 919-733-3141
4. IF APPLICABLE: AGENT'S NAME OR RESPONSIBLE CORPORATE OFFICIAL,
ADDRESS, PHONE NUMBER: David C. Robinson, P.E.
5. LOCATION OF WORK (PROVIDE A MAP, PREFERABLY A COPY OF USGS
TOPOGRAPHIC MAP OR AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY WITH SCALE):
COUNTY: Avery NEAREST TOWN OR CITY: Crossnor
1
I
SPECIFIC LOCATION (INCLUDE ROAD NUMBERS, LANCMARKS, ETC. :
Bridae No. 12 over the Linville River on SR 1525
6. IMPACTED OR NEAREST STREAM/RIVER:
RIVER BASIN: Catawba
7a. IS PROJECT LOCATED NEAR WATER CLASSIFIED AS TROUT, TIDAL SALTWATER
(SA), HIGH QUALITY WATERS (HQW), OUTSTANDING RESOURCE WATERS (ORW),
WATER SUPPLY (WS-I OR WS-II)? YES [ ] NO [X] IF YES, EXPLAIN:
7?-. IS THE PROJECT LOCATE'- WITHIN A NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF COASTAL
MANAGEMENT AREA OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN (AEC)?YES [ ] NO[:'
7c. IF THE PROJECT IS LOCATED l-=HIN A COASTAL COUNT'_ (SEE FAG`E - FCr,
LIST OF•COASTAL COUNT=-") , WHAT IS THE LAND USE PLAN (LUP) DESIGNATION?
8a. HAVE ANY SECTION 404 PERMITS BEEN PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED FOR USE ON
THIS PROPERTY? YES [ ] NO [X] IF YES, PROVIDE ACTION I.C. NUMBER OF
PREVIOUS PERMIT AND ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (INCLUDE PHOTOCOPY OF 401
CERTIFICATION):
8b. ARE ADDITIONAL PERMIT REQUESTS EXPECTED FOR THIS PROPERTY IN THE
FUTURE? YES [ ] NO [X] IF YES, DESCRIBE ANTICIPATED WORK:
9a. ESTIMATED TOTAL NUMBER OF ACRES IN TRACT OF LAND
N/A
9b. ESTIMATED TOTAL NUMBER OF ACRES OF WETLANDS LOCATED ON PROJECT
SITE:
0.20
Linville River

10a. NUMBER. JF ACRES JF WETLANDS IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT 3Y:
FILLING: 0.20 EXCAVATION:
FLOODING: OTHER:
DRAINAGE: TOTAL ACRES TO BE IMPACTED: 0.20
10b. (1) STREAM CHANNEL TO BE IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT (IF
RELOCATED, PROVIDE DISTANCE BOTH BEFORE AND AFTER RELOCATION):
LENGTH BEFORE: N/A FT AFTER: N/A FT
WIDTH BEFORE (based on normal high water contours): N/A FT
WIDTH AFTER: N/A FT
AVERAGE DEPTH BEFORE: N/A FT AFTER: N/A FT
(2) STREAM CHANNEL IMPACTS WILL RESULT FROM: (CHECK ALL THAT
OPEN CHANNEL RELOCATION: PLACEMF,1:';' OF PIPE IN CHANNE-11:
CHANNEL EXCAVATION: CONSTRUCTION OF A DAM/FLOODING:
nTHFR:
11. IF CONSTRUCTION OF A POND IS PROPOSED, WHAT IS THE SIZE OF THE
WATERSHED DRAINING TO THE POND? N/A
WHAT IS THE EXPECTED POND SURFACE AREA? N/A
12. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED WORK INCLUDING DISCUSSION OF TYPE OF
MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT TO BE USED (ATTACH PLANS: 8 1/2" X 11" DRAWINGS
ONLY):
Construction of a new bridge over the Linville River
Road construction equipment
13. PURPOSE OF PROPOSED WORK: To improve safety of the traveling
public by replacing a sub-standard bridge
3
L4. STATE REASONS WH'C IT IS BELIEVED THAT THIS ACTI'!IT'i MUST 3E CAR.R17D
OUT IN WETLANDS. (INCLUDE ANY MEASURES TAKEN TO MINIM= WETLAND
IMPACTS): To prevent- a curved alignment of the new bridge
nr`v9RESSF; S SH-EE rNG THE nnoScnTGE_ G nnr•. Fr-nEnTr r v r rSZED GR
r-n nrm rr-mrn ?mmr?-v RESPGNSFIS mn Gnrt THFSE GENGrc J )
17. DOFF, THE PROJECT INVOLVE AN EXPENDITURE OF PUBLIC FUNDS OR THE US_:
OF PUBLIC (STATE) LAND:
YES [X] NO [] (IF NO, (?O TO 18)
a. IF YES, DOES THE PROJECT REQUIRE PREPARATION OF AN
ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT PURSUANT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NOR.TI-I
CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT?
YES [X] NO []
b. IF YES, HAS THE DOCUMENT BEEN REVIEWED THROUGH THE NORTH
CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION STATE CLEARINGHOUSE?
YES [X] NO []
IF ANSWER TO 17b IS YES, THEN SUBMIT APPROPRIATE DOCUMENTATION FROM THE
STATE CLEARINGHOUSE TO DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT REGARDING
COMPLIANCE WITH THE NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL POLE'`; ACT.
QUESTIONS REGARDING THE STATE CLEARINGHOUSE REVIEW PROCESS SHOULD BE
DIRECTED TO MS. CHRYS BAGGETT, DIRECTOR STATE CLEARINGHOUSE, NORTH
CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION, 116 WEST JONES STREET, RALEIGH,
NORTH CAROLINA 27603-8003, TELEPHONE [phone].
4
13. THE FOLLOWING ITEMS SHOULD BE INCLUDED WITH THIS APPL7LCATION IF
PROPOSED ACTIVITY INVOLVES THE DISCHARGE OF EXCAVATED OR FILL MATERIAL
INTO WETLANDS:
a. WETLAND DELINEATION MAP SHOWING ALL WETLANDS, STREAMS, LAKES
AND PONDS ON THE PROPERTY (FOR NATIONWIDE PERMIT NUMBERS 14, 18, 21,
26, 29, AND 38). ALL STREAMS (INTERMITTENT AND PERMANENT) ON THE
PROPERTY MUST BE SHOWN ON THE MAP. MAP SCALES SHOULD BE 1 INCH EQUALS
50 FEET OR 1 INCH EQUALS 100 FEET OR THEIR EQUIVALENT.
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. ATTACH A COPY OF THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN IF REQUIRED.
e. WHAT IS LAND USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTY? rural
L. IF APPILTC.ABLE, WHAT IS PROPOSED METHOD OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL?
N/A
g. SIGNED AND DATED AGENT AUTHORIZATION LETTER, IF APPLICABLE.
NOTE: WETLAND§ OR WATERS OF THE U.S. MAY NOT BE IMPACTED PRIOR TO:
1) ISSUANCE OF A SECTION 404 CORPS OF ENGINEERS PERMIT,
2) EITHER THE ISSUANCE OR WAIVER OF A 401 DIVISION OF
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT (WATER QUALITY) CERTIFICATION, AND
3) (IN THE TWENTY COASTAL COUNTIES ONLY), A LETTER FROM THE
NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT STATING THE PROPOSED
ACTIVITY IS CONSISTENT WITH THE NORTH CAROLINA COASTAL MANAGEMENT
PROGRAM.

OWNER'S/AGENT'S SIGNATURE

DATE
(AGENT'S SIGNATURE VALID ONLY
IF AUTHORIZATION LETTER FROM
THE OWNER IS PROVIDED (18g.))
5
Avery County
Bridge No. 12 on SR 1525
Over Linville River
Federal Project BRZ-1525(1)
State Project 8.2720801
TIP # B-2917
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
APPROVED:
4-3o-,n C '-?V. O
Date Lubin V. Prevatt, P. E., Assistant Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
y-30-q8 C=N
Date holas Graf, P.
,vision Administrator, FHWA
Avery County
Bridge No. 12 on SR 1525
Over Linville River
Federal Project BRZ-1525(1)
State Project 8.2720801
TIP # B-2917
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
April 1998
Documentation Prepared in
Planning and Environmental Branch By:
.?` %A CARO4
?oFESSid%Y
SEAL -
,2 s 022552 i
?•
Date o
7 ?j L. Williams, P.E.
Project Planning Engineer '?yN (, vy?1.? ?•`
rf-29-qs, (d ca ,-, ? c! /•? 0 ?T
Date Wayne lliott
Bridge Project Planning Engineer, Unit Head

Date Lubin V. Prevatt, P. E., Assistant Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Avery County
Bridge No. 12 on SR 1525
Over Linville River
Federal Project BRZ-1525(1)
State Project 8.2720801
TIP # B-2917
Bridge No. 12 is located in Avery County over Linville River. It is programmed
in the 1998-2004 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) as a bridge replacement
project. This project is part of the Federal Highway Bridge Replacement and
Rehabilitation Program (HBRRP) and has been classified as a "Categorical Exclusion".
No substantial environmental impacts are expected.
1. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Bridge No. 12 will be replaced as recommended in Alternate 1 with a new bridge
on new alignment 18.3 meters (60 feet) east of the existing structure (see Figure 2). The
new structure will be approximately 55 meters (180 feet) long and 7.2 meters (26 feet)
wide. The bridge will include two 3.3-meter (11-foot) lanes and 0.6-meter (2-foot)
offsets. Traffic will be maintained on the existing bridge during construction.
The total project length is 396 meters (1300 feet) long including 183 meters (600
feet) of new approach work to the south and 159 meters (520 feet) of new approach work
to the north. The pavement width will be 6.6 meters (22 feet) and will extend 110 meters
(350 feet) south of the bridge and 60 meters (200 feet) north of the bridge. Additionally
there will be 1.2-meter (4-foot) grass shoulders widening to 2.2 meters (7 feet) where
guardrail is required. Based on preliminary design, the design speed should be
approximately 90 km/h (50 mph).
The estimated cost of the project is $752,000 including $725,000 in construction
costs and $27,000 in right of way costs. The estimated cost shown in the 1998-2004 TIP
is $355,000; including $325,000 in construction costs, and $30,000 in right of way costs.
II. SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS
All standard procedures and measures will be implemented to avoid or minimize
environmental impacts. All practical Best Management Practices (BMP's) will be
included and properly maintained during project construction.
In accordance with the provisions of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33
U.S.C. 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."
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (DWQ) Section 401 Water Quality
General Certification will be obtained prior to issue of the Army Corps of Engineers
Nationwide Permit # 23.
NCDOT will implement DWQ "Guidelines for Construction of Highway
Improvements Adjacent to or Crossing Trout Waters in North Carolina" (Joint Agency
Committee 1997) and "Design Standards in Sensitive Watersheds" (15A NCAC 04B
.0024)
To minimize impacts to the alluvial thicket wetland, the alignment will stay as
close as possible to the existing structure as shown in Figure 2. Fill will be minimized on
the southeastern shore of the project.
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.
This project must be reviewed under Section 26a of the Tennessee Valley
Authority (TVA) Act. The final bridge plans, hydraulic analysis of the effects of the
replacement structure on the 100-year flood elevation, and notice of compliance with the
Historic Preservation Act of 1966 will be forwarded to TVA for approval.
NCWRC has commented that Linville River is a Hatchery Supported Designated
Public Mountain Trout Waters which also supports wild rainbow and brown trout. With
a spanning structure (bridge), a moratorium is not required. The following will be
implemented to minimize impacts to aquatic resources:
• Where concrete is used, work will be accomplished so that wet concrete does not
contact stream water.
• Where possible, heavy equipment should be operated from the bank rather than in the
stream channel to minimize sedimentation and reduce the likelihood of introducing
other pollutants into the stream.
• Temporary or permanent herbaceous vegetation should be planted on all bare soil
within 15 days of completion of ground disturbing activities to provide long-term
erosion control.
III. ANTICIPATED DESIGN EXCEPTIONS
NCDOT expects a design exception will be likely due to horizontal alignment.
IV. EXISTING CONDITIONS
SR 1525 is classified as a Rural Local Route in the Statewide Functional
Classification System. Bridge No. 12 is located two miles south of Crossnore and five
miles east of Ingalls, N.C. Traffic volume is 200 vehicles per day (VPD) and projected at
300 VPD for the year 2020. There is no posted speed limit in the vicinity of the bridge.
Traffic is generated primarily by agriculture and residences in the area.
The existing bridge was completed in 1963. It is 37.2 meters (122 feet) long. The
deck is 5.5 meters (18 feet) wide. The height of the bridge crown (deck) over the
riverbed is approximately 5.8 meters (19 feet). There is one lane of traffic on the bridge.
According to Bridge Maintenance Unit records, the sufficiency rating of the
bridge is 35.6 out of a possible 100. Presently the bridge has posted weight restrictions of
11 tons for single vehicles and 15 tons for truck-tractor semi-trailers.
Vertical alignment is fair in the project vicinity. The alignment to the north of
Bridge No. 63 is curved. To the south the alignment is tangent. The pavement width on
the approaches to the existing bridge is 4.9 meters (16 feet). Shoulders on both
approaches of the bridge are approximately 1.2 meters (4 feet) wide.
The Traffic Engineering Branch indicates that six accidents have been reported
within the last three years in the vicinity of the project. Four of the accidents were
associated with the curvature of the approaches to the bridge.
There are 6 daily school bus crossings over the studied bridge.
Bell South has an underground telephone cable along the west side of SR 1525 and
the south side of SR 1546. The cable is aerial across the Linville River.
V. PROPOSED ALTERNATIVES
There are two "build" options considered in this document as follows:
Alternate 1) (Recommended) Replace Bridge No. 12 with a new bridge on new
location 18.3 meters (60 feet) east of the existing structure (see figure 2).
Traffic would be maintained on the existing bridge during construction.
The design speed would be approximately 90 km/h (50 mph).
Alternate 2) Replace Bridge No. 12 with a new bridge on new location 21.3 meters (70
feet) east of the existing structure (see Figure 2). Traffic would be
maintained on the existing bridge during construction. The design speed
would be approximately 90 km/h (50 mph)
An alternative of replacing the bridge at the existing location with an on-site
detour is not feasible. This would result in an unsatisfactory alignment with no apparent
advantages.
"Do-nothing" is not practical, requiring the eventual closing of the road as the
existing bridge completely deteriorates. Rehabilitation of the existing deteriorating
bridge is neither practical nor economical.
VI. ESTIMATED COST (Table 1)

COMPONENT Recommended
ALTERNATE 1
ALTERNATE 2
New Bridge Structure
Bridge Removal
Roadway & Approaches $ 282,000*
23,000
177,000 $353,000*
23,000
192,000
Mobilization & Miscellaneous 143,000 172,000
Engineering & Contingencies 100,000 110,000
Total Construction $ 725,000 $ 850,000
Right of Way $ 27,000 $ 27,000
Total Cost $ 752,000 $ 877,000
*The proposed bridge in Alternate 1 is 7.2 x 55.0 meters (24 x 181 feet) on tangent
alignment. The proposed bridge in Alternate 2 is 9.1 x 55.0 meters (30 x 181 feet) on
curved alignment.
VII. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS
Bridge No. 12 will be replaced as recommended in Alternate 1 with a new bridge
on new alignment 18.3 meters (60 feet) east of the existing structure (see Figure 2). The
new structure will be approximately 55 meters (180 feet) long and 7.2 meters (26 feet)
wide. The bridge will include two 3.3-meter (11-foot) lanes and 0.6-meter (2-foot)
offsets. Traffic will be maintained on the existing bridge during construction.
The total project length is 396 meters (1300 feet) long including 183 meters (600
feet) of new approach work to the south and 159 meters (520 feet) of new approach work
to the north. The pavement width will be 6.6 meters (22 feet) and will extend 110 meters
(350 feet) south of the bridge and 60 meters (200 feet) north of the bridge. Additionally
there will be 1.2-meter (4-foot) grass shoulders widening to 2.2 meters (7 feet) where
guardrail is required. Based on preliminary design, the design speed should be
approximately 90 km/h (50 mph).
Although Alternate 1 does impacts 0.08 hectares (0.20 acres) of shore wetland, it
costs $125,000 less than Alternate 2 and will not require the structure to be built on a
curve. A spanning structure built close to the existing structure as proposed will
minimize impacts to the wetland.
For these reasons, NCDOT recommends Alternate 1. The Division concurs with
this recommendation.
VIII. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
A. GENERAL
This project is expected to have an overall positive impact. Replacement of an
inadequate bridge will result in safer traffic operations.
This project is considered to be a "Categorical Exclusion" due to its limited scope
and insignificant environmental consequences.
This bridge replacement will not have a substantial adverse effect on the quality
of the human or natural environment by implementing the environmental commitments
listed in Section II of this document in addition to 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 this project.
There are no hazardous waste impacts.
No adverse effect on families or communities is anticipated. Right-of-way
acquisition will be limited.
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.
There are no publicly owned parks, recreational facilities, or wildlife and
waterfowl refuges of national, state, or local significance in the vicinity of the project.
The proposed bridge replacement project will not raise the existing flood levels or
have any significant adverse effect on the existing floodplain.
Utility impacts are considered to be low for the proposed project.
B. AIR AND NOISE
This project is an air quality "neutral" project, so it is not required to be included
in the regional emissions analysis and a project level CO analysis is not required.
The project is located in Avery County, which has been determined to be in
compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. 40 CFR part 51 is not
applicable, because the proposed project is located in an attainment area. This project is
not anticipated to create any adverse effects on the air quality of this attainment area.
The project will not substantially increase traffic volumes. Therefore, it will not
have substantial impact on noise levels. Temporary noise increases may occur during
construction.
C. LAND USE & FARMLAND EFFECTS
In compliance with the Farmland Protection Policy Act (FPPA) of 1981, the
Natural Resources Conservation Service (MRCS) was asked to determine whether the
project being considered will impact prime or important farmland soils. The NRCS
responded that both Alternates 1 and 2 would not impact prime or important farmland
soils. Both would result in the conversion of a small amount of land but the area is
primarily wooded and void of agricultural uses.
D. HISTORICAL EFFECTS & ARCHAEOLOGICAL EFFECTS
Upon review of area photographs, aerial photographs, and cultural resources
databases, the Department of Cultural Resources (DCR) has recommended that an
historic architectural survey is not required.
In the same letter, the DCR has recommended that an archaeological survey is
required. NCDOT has conducted the survey and determined that no sites of
archaeological significance were found and recommended that no further surveys were
necessary. DCR concurs in these findings and agrees with the recommendation.
E. NATURAL RESOURCES
PHYSICAL RESOURCES
Soil and water resources which occur in the project area are discussed below with
respect to possible environmental concerns. Soil properties and site topography
significantly influence the potential for soil erosion and compaction, along with other
possible construction limitations or management concerns. Water resources within the
project area present important management limitations due to the need to regulate water
movement and the increased potential for water quality degradation. Excessive soil
disturbance resulting from construction activities can potentially alter both the flow and
quality of water resources, limiting downstream uses. In addition, soil characteristics and
the availability of water directly influence the composition and distribution of flora and
fauna in biotic communities, thus affecting the characteristics of these resources.
Regional Characteristics
Avery County lies in the Blue Ridge Physiographic Province of the Appalachian
Mountains. Topography in the vicinity of the study area is composed of steep slopes and
wide floodplains along streams. Project elevation averages 991 meters (3260 feet) above
mean sea level. Soils of uplands in the project region have developed in place from
material weathered from biotite and granitic gneiss. Soils of stream bottoms and
floodplains are formed from unconsolidated clay, silt, sand, and rock fragments.
Soils
There are three soil types located in the project area. An inventory of these soils
can be found in Table 2. A brief description of each soil type is also provided.
Table 2. Soils occurring in the project study area.
Map Unit Symbol Specific Mapping Unit % Slope
Cd Chewacla silt loam 0-2
Cp Congaree fine sandy loam 0-2
Rg Riverwash 0-2
• Chewacla silt loam soils are found on first bottoms. They have very slow surface
runoff and slow internal drainage. They are well suited to pasture, crops, and forest
and have medium fertility.
• Congaree fine sandy loam soils are found on first bottoms. They have slow surface
runoff and medium internal drainage. These soils are moderately to strongly acidic.
They are well suited to crops and pasture and have medium fertility.
• Riverwash soils are found in first bottoms. They have poor workability and are not
suited to crops or pasture. Most only have sparse vegetation.
Chewacla soils are listed on the national list of hydric soils (USDA 1991).
WATER RESOURCES
This section contains information concerning surface water resources likely to be
impacted by the proposed project. Water resource assessments include the physical
characteristics, best usage standards and water quality aspects of the water resources,
6
along with their relationship to major regional drainage systems. Probable impacts to
surface water resources are also discussed, as are means to minimize impacts.
Best Usage Classification
Water resources within the study area are located in the Catawba River Drainage
Basin. SR 1525 crosses one perennial stream, the Linville River. Construction of either
alternate will necessitate the construction of a crossing of the Linville River on new
location.
Streams have been assigned a best usage classification by the Division of Water
Quality (DWQ), formerly Division of Environmental Management (DEM), which reflects
water quality conditions and potential resource usage. The Linville River [DWQ Index
No. 11-29-4.5, 04/01/941 is classified as "B Tr". The classification "B" refers to those
waters designated for primary recreation and any other usage specified by the "C"
classification. Class C refers to waters suitable for aquatic life propagation and survival,
fishing, wildlife, secondary recreation and agriculture. Tr (Trout water) is a supplemental
water classification including waters suitable for natural trout propagation and
maintenance of stocked trout. No waters classified as High Quality Waters (HQW),
Water Supplies (WS-I or WS-I1) or Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW) occur within
1.6 kilometers (1.0 miles) of the project study area.
Physical Characteristics of Surface Waters
The Linville River at SR 1225 is approximately 45 meters (150 feet) wide with an
average depth of 0.9 meters (3.0 feet). The substrate in the study area is composed of rocks
with some sand and small gravel. The river banks are shaded with deciduous trees. These
trees do not, however, shade the entire body of water.
Water Quality
This section describes the quality of the water resources within the project area.
Potential sediment loads and toxin concentrations of these waters from both point sources
and nonpoint sources are evaluated. Water quality assessments are made based on
published resource information and existing general watershed characteristics. These
data provide insight into the value of water resources within the project area to meet
human needs and to provide habitat for aquatic organisms.
General Watershed Characteristics
There are no point source dischargers located in the project area. Potential
sources of nonpoint source pollution include agriculture, Christmas tree farms and plant
nurseries. Discharge from septic tanks may also be a factor.
Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network
The Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network (BMAN), managed by the
DWQ, is part of an ongoing ambient water quality monitoring program which addresses
long term trends in water quality. The program monitors ambient water quality by
sampling at fixed sites for selected benthic macroinvertebrate organisms, which are
sensitive to water quality conditions. Samples are evaluated on the number of taxa
present of intolerant groups [Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, Trichoptera (EPT)] and a taxa
richness value (EPTs) is calculated. A biotic index value is also calculated for the sample
that summarizes tolerance data for all species in each collection. The two rankings are
given equal weight in final site classification. The biotic index and taxa richness values
primarily reflect the effects of chemical pollution and are a poor measure of the effects of
such physical pollutants as sediment.
The only BMAN test site along the Linville River is at the town of Nebo in
eastern Burke County, several miles downstream of the project site. The Linville River
received a rating of Excellent at that site. There is no BMAN information for the river
further upstream in Avery County.
Point Source Dischargers
Point source dischargers located throughout North Carolina are permitted through
the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program administered by
the DWQ. All dischargers are required to register for a permit. The NPDES report lists
no permitted dischargers into the Linville River in the project study area.
Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Impacts to water resources in the project area are likely to result from activities
associated with project construction. Activities likely to result in water resource impacts
include stream bank clearing and grubbing, riparian canopy removal, in-stream
construction, application of fertilizers and pesticides (used in revegetation), and pavement
installation. The following impacts to surface water resources are likely to result from
the above mentioned construction activities.
• Increased erosion in the project area and increased sedimentation and siltation
downstream of the crossing.
• Changes in light incidence and water clarity resulting from increased sedimentation
and vegetation removal.
• Changes in and destabilization of water temperature due to vegetation removal.
• Alteration of water levels and flows due to interruptions and/or additions to surface
and ground water flow from construction.
• Increased nutrient loading during construction via runoff from exposed areas.
Increased concentrations of toxic compounds in highway runoff.
Increased potential for release of toxic compounds such as fuel and oil from
construction equipment and other vehicles.
Alteration of stream discharge due to silt loading and changes in surface and
groundwater drainage patterns.
In order to minimize potential impacts to water resources in the project area,
NCDOT's Best Management Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters must be
strictly enforced during the construction phase of the project. Due to the additional
classification of Trout Waters by the DWQ, recommendations set forth in "Guidelines for
Construction of Highway Improvements Adjacent to or Crossing Trout Waters in North
Carolina" (Joint Agency Committee 1997) and "Design Standards in Sensitive
Watersheds" (15A NCAC 04B .0024) also apply to this project. Impacts can be further
reduced by limiting instream activities and revegetating stream banks immediately
following the completion of grading.
BIOTIC RESOURCES
Biotic resources include terrestrial and aquatic communities. This section
describes the biotic communities encountered in the project area, as well as the
relationships between fauna and flora within these communities. The composition and
distribution of biotic communities throughout the project area are reflective of
topography, soils, hydrology and past and present land uses. Descriptions of the
terrestrial systems are presented in the context of plant community classifications. These
classifications correspond to Schafale and Weakley (1990), where possible.
Representative animal species which are likely to occur in these habitats are also cited.
Scientific nomenclature and common names, when applicable, are provided for each
animal and plant species described. Subsequent references to the same organism refer to
the common name only. Fauna observed during the site visit are denoted in the text with
an asterisk (*).
Biotic Communities
Biotic communities include terrestrial and aquatic elements. Much of the flora
and fauna described from biotic communities utilize resources from different
communities, making boundaries between contiguous communities difficult to define.
Three terrestrial communities and one aquatic community are described. The project
study area contains terrestrial communities such as Disturbed Roadside / Agricultural
Fields, Montane Alluvial Forests and Rocky Bar and Shore as well as the aquatic
community, a mountain perennial stream (Linville River) (Figure 2).
Disturbed Roadside / Agricultural Fields
Disturbed Roadsides in the project study area contain a variety of shrubs and
herbaceous species. Multiflora rose is a common shrub of roadsides and other heavily
disturbed areas in the mountains. Some common weedy species found in disturbed areas
near the existing bridge include field garlic, curly dock, Queen Anne's lace, winter cress,
goldenrod and common dandelion.
Montane Alluvial Forest
Much of the project vicinity is currently maintained in cultivated agricultural
fields. The remaining forested areas occur as narrow strips of woods in the riparian zone
of the Linville River. These Montane Alluvial Forests are dominated by sycamore,
shagbark hickory, buckeye and black cherry. Subcanopy and shrub species found in this
community include ironwood, serviceberry, elderberry, great rhododendron and dog
hobble. Herbaceous species such as yellowroot and Miami mist dominate large patches
along the river bank. Green coneflower and bottlebrush grass are scattered throughout
the river banks of the project study area.
Rocky Bar and Shore - Alder Thicket Wetland
This wetland located in the channel of the Linville River is periodically flooded
during high water events. Dominant vegetation includes tag alder, elderberry and
common rush.
Wildlife
A variety of animal species inhabit the areas adjacent to the proposed bridge.
Mammals commonly found in these communities include white-tailed deer, Virginia
opossum, raccoon and muskrat*. Avian species found in the project area include eastern
phoebe*, belted kingfisher*, mourning dove*, common grackle*, red-winged blackbird*,
song sparrow, northern cardinal, rufous-sided towhee, blue jay, Carolina wren, American
crow and Carolina chickadee*.
Reptilian species that likely inhabit the communities in the project study area
include the eastern box turtle and rat snake. Amphibians such as the eastern newt, slimy
salamander, shovel nosed salamander, mountain dusky and the Blue Ridge two-lined
salamander are likely to be found in the project study area.
Mountain Perennial Stream - Linville River
One aquatic community type, a Mountain Perennial Stream, is also present in the
study area. The Linville River is composed of riparian and aquatic habitats. These
waters contain habitat for various species of freshwater fish and aquatic insects. Water
boatman (family Corixidae) and water striders (family Gerridae) are common in pools
and along stream edges. Fish species expected to inhabit these waters include brown
trout tessellated darter, bluehead chub, margined madtom, creek chub, and bluegill.
10
Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Construction of the proposed project will have various impacts on the biotic
resources described. Any construction related activities in or near these resources have
the potential to impact biological functions. This section quantifies and qualifies
potential impacts to the natural communities within the project area in terms of the area
impacted and the organisms affected. Temporary and permanent impacts are considered
here as well, along with recommendations to minimize or eliminate impacts.
Terrestrial Impacts
Impacts to terrestrial communities will result from project construction due to the
clearing and paving of portions of the project area, and thus the loss of community area.
Table 3 summarizes potential losses to these communities, resulting from project
construction. Calculated impacts to terrestrial communities reflect the relative abundance
of each community present in the study area. Estimated impacts are derived based on the
project lengths described in section 1. 1, and the entire proposed right-of-way width of
24.4 meters (80.0 feet). Project construction often does not require the entire right-of-way;
therefore, actual impacts may be considerably less.
Table 3. Estimated area impacts to terrestrial communities.
Community Impacted Area [ha (ac)]
Alternate 1 Alternate 2
Disturbed Roadside / Agricultural Land 0.25 (0.63) 0.51 (1.26)
Montane Alluvial Forest 0.11 (0.27) 0.11 (0.27)
Rocky Bar and Shore (Alder Thicket) 0.08 (0.20) 0(0)
Total Impacts 0.44(l.10) 0.62 (1.54)
Alternative 1 will impact approximately 0.25 hectares (0.63 acres) of Disturbed
Roadside and Agricultural land. Alternate 2 will cause considerably more damage to this
disturbed community [0.51 hectares (1.26 acres)] than Alternate 1. Both alternates will
impact the Montane Alluvial Forest community equally [0.11 hectares (0.27 acres)].
Alternate 1 has the potential to impact the Rocky Bar and Shore wetland if precautions
are not taken to avoid in-stream construction activities. Alternate 2 would be constructed
on the opposite side of the existing bridge from the wetland, and therefore, should not
impact this wetland. Alternate 2 has a slight advantage from an environmental standpoint
since it avoids impacts to the Rocky Bar and Shore wetland.
Aquatic Impacts
Impacts to the aquatic community of the Linville River will result from the
replacement of Bridge No. 12. Impacts are likely to result from the physical disturbance
of aquatic habitats (i.e. substrate, water quality, stream banks). Disturbance of aquatic
habitats has a detrimental effect on aquatic community composition by reducing species
11
diversity and the overall quality of aquatic habitats. Physical alterations to aquatic
habitats can result in the following impacts to aquatic communities:
• Inhibition of plant growth due to damage to the river substrate.
• Clogging of feeding structures of filter-feeding organisms and fish gills, and the burial
of benthic organisms resulting from increased sedimentation.
• Algal blooms resulting from increased nutrient concentrations.
• Mortality among sensitive organisms resulting from the introduction of toxic
substances and decreases in dissolved oxygen.
• Destabilization of water temperature resulting from riparian canopy removal.
• Loss of bent.hic macroinvertebrates through scouring resulting from an increased
sediment load.
Impacts to aquatic communities can be minimized by minimizing riparian canopy
removal, limiting in-stream construction, revegetation immediately following the
completion of grading activities, and strict adherence to Best Management Practices. In
addition, since the project lies in designed Trout Waters, recommendations set forth in
"Guidelines for Construction of Highway Improvements Adjacent to or Crossing Trout
Waters in North Carolina" (Joint Agency Committee 1997) and "Design Standards in
Sensitive Watersheds" (15A NCAC 04B .0024) also apply to this project.
JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS
This section provides inventories and impact analyses pertinent to two significant
regulatory issues: Waters of the United States and rare and protected species. These
issues retain particular significance because of federal and state mandates which regulate
their protection. This section deals specifically with the impact analyses required to
satisfy regulatory authority prior to project construction.
Waters of the United States
Surface waters and wetlands fall under the broad category of "Waters of the
United States," as defined in Section 33 of the Code of Federal Register (CFR) Part
328.3. Any action that proposes to dredge or place fill material into surface waters or
wetlands falls under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) under
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344). Surface waters include all
standing or flowing waters which have commercial or recreational value to the public.
Wetlands are identified based on the presence of hydric soils, hydrophytic vegetation, and
saturated or flooded conditions during all or part of the growing season.
Characteristics of Wetlands and Surface Waters
Criteria to delineate jurisdictional wetlands include evidence of hydric soils,
hydrophytic vegetation and hydrology. One jurisdictional wetland was identified in the
study area. This wetland was classified as a Rocky Bar and Shore wetland, located in the
channel of the Linville River. The wetland is dominated by tag alder (Alnus serrulata),
12
elderberry (Sambucus canadensis) and common rush (Juncos effusus) and contains low
chroma silty soils.
Impacts to jurisdictional surface waters are calculated based on the linear feet of
the stream that is located within the proposed right-of-way. Physical aspects of surface
waters are described earlier. The Linville River is the only jurisdictional surface water
located in the study area. Approximately 45 linear meters (150 linear feet) of the Linville
River will be directly impacted by the proposed project. Both alternatives will have equal
impacts on surface waters. Alternate 1 will likely bridge the Rocky Bar and Shore
wetlands described earlier, however, impacts to these wetlands may result from project
construction and shading. Alternate 2 would not impact the Rocky Bar and Shore wetland
but will likely cause an additional 0.2 hectares (0.5 acres) of impacts to biotic communities.
Permits
Impacts to jurisdictional surface waters are anticipated from the proposed project.
As a result, construction activities will require permits and certifications from various
regulatory agencies in charge of protecting the water quality of public water resources
A Nationwide Permit 33 CFR 330.5(a) (23) is likely to be applicable for all
impacts to Waters of the United States resulting from the proposed project. This permit
authorizes activities undertaken, assisted, authorized, regulated, funded or financed in
whole, or part, by another Federal agency or department where that agency or department
has determined the pursuant to the council on environmental quality regulation for
implementing the procedural provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act:
• (1) that the activity, work, or discharge is categorically excluded from environmental
documentation because it is included within a category of actions which neither
individually nor cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment,
and;
• (2) that the office of the Chief of Engineers has been furnished notice of the agency's
or department's application for the categorical exclusion and concurs with that
determination.
This project will also require a 401 Water Quality Certification from the DWQ
prior to the issuance of the Nationwide Permit. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act
requires that the state issue or deny water certification for any federally permitted or
licensed activity that may result in a discharge to Waters of the United States. Section
401 Certification allows surface waters to be temporarily impacted for the duration of the
construction or other land manipulation. The issuance of a 401 permit from the DWQ is
a prerequisite to issuance of a Section 404 permit. Since, the proposed project crosses
waters designated as Hatchery Supported Trout Waters, the authorization of a Section
404 Nationwide permit by the COE is conditioned upon concurrence of the Wildlife
Resource Commission (WRC). It is likely that the WRC will request that there be no
disturbance to the riparian zone or stream between 15 October and 01 April, which is the
designated Buffer Zone for trout spawning.
13
Avoidance, Minimization, Mitigation
The COE has adopted through the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) a
wetland mitigation policy which embraces the concept of "no net loss of wetlands" and
sequencing. The purpose of this policy is to restore and maintain the chemical, biological
and physical integrity of Waters of the United States, specifically wetlands. Mitigation of
wetland impacts has been defined by the CEQ to include: avoiding impacts (to
wetlands), minimizing impacts, rectifying impacts, reducing impacts over time and
compensating for impacts (40 CFR 1508.20). Each of these three aspects (avoidance,
minimization and compensatory mitigation) must be considered sequentially.
Avoidance mitigation examines all appropriate and practicable possibilities of
averting impacts to Waters of the United States. According to a 1990 Memorandum of
Agreement (MOA) between the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the COE,
in determining "appropriate and practicable" measures to offset unavoidable impacts,
such measures should be appropriate to the scope and degree of those impacts and
practicable in terms of cost, existing technology and logistics in light of overall project
purposes. Alternate 2 would cause little or no impact to the Rocky Bar and Shore Alder
Thicket wetland located northeast of the existing bridge.
Minimization includes the examination of appropriate and practicable steps to
reduce the adverse impacts to Waters of the United States. Implementation of these steps
will be required through project modifications and permit conditions. Minimization
typically focuses on decreasing the footprint of the proposed project through the
reduction of right-of-way widths, fill slopes and/or road shoulder widths. In this case,
minimization should include locating the new bridge and approaches as close to the
existing bridge as possible.
Compensatory mitigation is not normally considered until anticipated impacts to
Waters of the United States have been avoided and minimized to the maximum extent
possible. It is recognized that "no net loss of wetlands" functions and values may not be
achieved in each and every permit action. Appropriate and practicable compensatory
mitigation is required for unavoidable adverse impacts which remain after all appropriate
and practicable minimization has been required. Compensatory actions often include
restoration, creation and enhancement of Waters of the United States, specifically
wetlands. Such actions should be undertaken in areas adjacent to or contiguous to the
discharge site.
Compensatory mitigation is required for those projects authorized under
Nationwide Permits that result in the fill or alteration of more than 0.45 hectares (1.0 acres)
of wetlands will require compensatory mitigation; and/or more than 45.7 meters (150.0
feet) of streams will require compensatory mitigation.
Written approval of the final mitigation plan is required from the DWQ prior to
the issuance of a 401 Certification. Final permit/mitigation decisions rest with the COE.
14
Rare and Protected Species
Some populations of fauna and flora have been in, or are in, the process of decline
either due to natural forces or their inability to coexist with human development. Federal
law (under the provisions of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended) requires
that any action, likely to adversely affect a species classified as federally-protected, be
subject to review by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). Other species
may receive additional protection under separate state laws.
Federally-Protected Species
Plants and animals with federal classifications of Endangered (E), Threatened (T),
Proposed Endangered (PE), and Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under the
provisions of Section 7 and Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended. As of 04 November 1997, the FWS lists ten federally protected species for
Avery County.
Clemmys muhlenburgii (bog turtle) Threatened (S/A)
The bog turtle is North Carolina's smallest turtle, measuring 7 to 10 cm (3 to 4 in)
in length. It has a dark brown carapace and black plastron. The orange or yellow blotch
on each side of the head and neck is a readily identifiable characteristic. It inhabits damp
grassy fields, bogs and marshes in the mountains and western piedmont.
The bog turtle is shy and secretive, and will burrow rapidly in mud or debris when
disturbed. The bog turtle forages on insects, worms, snails, amphibians and seeds. In
June or July three to five eggs are laid in a shallow nest in moss or loose soil. The eggs
hatch in about fifty five days (Martof, et al., 1980).
The bog turtle is listed as Threatened due to similarity of Appearance with other
rare species that are listed for protection. Species listed as T (S/A) are not biologically
endangered or threatened and are not subject to Section 7 consultation. Habitat for the
bog turtle is not present in the project study area and the NCNHP has no records of this
species there.
Corynorhinus (=Plecotus) townsendii virginianus (Virginia big-eared bat)
Endangered
Corynorhinus townsendii is widespread throughout the western United States and
the eastern subspecies only exists in a few fragmented populations. These populations
are found in caves near the Potomac River in eastern West Virginia, Tazewell County,
Virginia, and Lee County, Kentucky. It was not observed in North Carolina until the
early '80's, when small populations were discovered in Avery and Watauga counties.
15
The Virginia big-eared bat is most easily identified by large ears (more than 2.5
cm) and large glandular masses on its muzzle. The ears are held erect when the bat is
awake and are curled around the head when it is hibernating or at its summer roost. This
bat has an overall length of 92- 112 mm and weighs from 9-12 grams. The Virginia big-
eared bat has long, soft fur that is brown in color and darker on the dorsal side. The hair
on the feet does not extend beyond the toes.
Virginia big-eared bats are permanent residents of caves in oak-hickory forests
and mines. Hibernating colonies are typically located in deep cave passage ways that
have stable temperatures and air movement. Temperature in these hibemacula average (6-
12 C), lower than that tolerated by most other bats. Maternity colonies are formed in
warm caves in the spring.
This species is nocturnal and feeds on moths, beetles, and other insects. Bats mate
in the fall and winter and a single young is born in June. The young grow rapidly and
reach adult within a single month, with females becoming reproductively active by the
following fall.
Suitable habitat in the form of caves or abandoned mine shafts is not present in
the project study area. The potential exists for this species to utilize riparian habitats in
the study area for foraging, however, construction of the proposed project will not limit
foraging opportunities for this species. The NCNHP database of rare species was
checked and no records for this species were found in the project study area. Construction
of the proposed project will not affect the Virginia big-eared bat.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Falco peregrinus (Peregrine falcon) Endangered
The peregrine falcon has a dark plumage along its back and its underside is
lighter, barred and spotted. It is most easily recognized by a dark crown and a dark
wedge that extends below the eye forming a distinct helmet. Immature peregrine falcons
have dark-brownish backs and heavily streaked underparts. The peregrine falcon has
pointed wings in flight, a common characteristic among falcons. The peregrine falcon is
roughly the size of a crow, between 41-51 cm long and 91-112 cm wide. In this species
the female is roughly 25% larger than the male.
The American peregrine falcon is found throughout the United States in areas
with high cliffs and open land for foraging. Nesting for the falcons is generally on high
cliff ledges, but they may also nest in broken off tree tops in the eastern deciduous forest
and on skyscrapers and bridges in urban areas. Nesting occurs from mid-March to May.
Prey for the peregrine falcon consists of small mammals and birds, including
mammals as large as a woodchuck, birds as large as a duck, and insects. The preferred
16
prey is medium sized birds such as pigeons. Peregrine falcons are at the top of their food
chain and are therefore extremely sensitive to chemical toxins such as DDT.
Nesting habitat for the peregrine falcon in the form of high cliff ledges or
skyscrapers does not exist within the project study area. Potential foraging areas will not
be impacted by replacing the subject bridge. The NC Natural Heritage Program database
of rare species does not list any populations of peregrine falcons anywhere within the
project vicinity. This project will not affect the peregrine falcon.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Glaucomys sabrinus coloratus (Carolina northern flying squirrel) Endangered
Populations of the northern flying squirrel are stable throughout most of its range.
After the Pleistocene Epoch glaciations this species underwent speciation in the southern
part of its range resulting in the coloratus and fuscus subspecies. Populations of
coloratus are considered to be isolated relicts and have a patchy distribution in the
southern Appalachian Mountains. Known populations occur at Grandfather Mountain,
Mt. Mitchell, the Great Balsam Mountains, the Plott Balsam Mountains, the Great Smoky
Mountains (Jackson and Swain Counties), the Unicoi Mountains, and the Long Hope
Valley area.
The northern flying squirrel is a small rodent, measuring from 26-31 cm in total
length and weighing from 95-140 gm. This squirrel has a large well furred flap of skin
along either side of its body, this flap of skin is connected at the wrist in the front and at
the ankle in the rear. The skin flaps and broad flattened tail allow the northern flying
squirrel to glide from tree to tree. It is a solely nocturnal animal with large dark eyes.
Juvenile squirrels have a uniform dark gray back and an off-white underside. Adult
squirrels are characteristically gray with a brownish, tan, or reddish wash on the back, and
a grayish-white to buffy white underside.
This squirrel is found in the vegetation transition zone between hardwood and
coniferous forests, above 1517 meters (5000 feet). Foraging occurs in both communities
with nesting only occurring in the Hardwood Community type. Northern flying squirrels
feed on lichens, fungi, seeds, buds, fruit, staminate cones, insects, and animal flesh.
Winter shelters are found in tree cavities, woodpecker holes. Leaf nests are most
commonly occupied in the summer. The inside of their nests is lined with lichens, moss,
or finely chewed bark. A West Virginia study has preliminary results that show the use
of burrows by northern flying squirrels.
The project is located at an elevation of 991 meters (3260 feet) above mean sea
level. This is well below the required elevational limits of this species. The NCNHP
database of rare species was checked and no records for this species were found in the
17
project study area. The construction of the proposed project will not affect the northern
flying squirrel.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Microhexura montivaga (spruce-fir moss spider) Endangered
The spruce-fir moss spider is the northern most representative of the family
Dipluridae (Tarantulas). It is also one of the smallest spiders in this primitive group, 3.0-
5.6 mm (0.25-0.45 in). Coloration ranges from light brown to dark reddish brown, with
no abdominal markings. Field identification characteristics include a pair of very long
posterior spinnerets and the presence of a second pair of book lungs, which appear as
light patches posterior to the genital furrow. Males of the species mature during
September and October, and females are known to lay eggs in June. The egg sac usually
contains between seven to nine eggs. The life span of these spiders is unknown although
it has been estimated that maturity may take four years.
The spruce-fir moss spider occurs in well-drained moss and liverwort mats
growing on rocks or boulders. These mats are found in well-shaded areas of mature, high
elevation (> 1524 m/5000 feet) spruce-fir forests. This species is currently known from
only four populations one in Tennessee, one in Avery/Caldwell County, and two in Swain
County. Individuals are very sensitive to desiccation and require constant high humidity.
Constant high humidity helps to maintain the necessary level of moisture in the moss
mats, neither parched nor saturated. The spider constructs its tube-shaped webs in the
interface between the moss mat and the rock surface. Some webs have been found to
extend into the interior of the moss mat. No prey has been found in the webs, but the
probable prey for the spruce-fir moss spider is the abundant springtails found in moss
mats.
The continued existence of the spruce-fir moss spider is related directly to habitat
loss/alteration of the spruce-fir forest from air pollution and exotic insect pests,
particularly the balsam wooly adelgid. The loss and reduction of the forest canopy results
in localized changes in microclimate, including increased temperatures, increased light
and decreased moisture on the forest floor. These alterations of the microclimate lead to
desiccation of the moss mats on which the spider and, possibly its prey base, depend for
survival.
The project is located at an elevation of 991 meters (3260 feet) above mean sea
level. This is well below the required elevational limits of the spruce-fir moss spider.
The NCNHP database of rare species was checked and no records for this species were
found in the project study area. The construction of the proposed project will not affect
the spruce-fir moss spider.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
18
Geum radiatum (spreading evens) Endangered
This species is found only in the North Carolina and Tennessee sections of the
Southern Appalachian Mountains. Known populations in Burke County have been
extirpated and populations in any other counties have shown a serious decline.
Stems of this perennial herb grow from horizontal rhizomes and obtain a height of
2-5 decimeters. The stems are topped with an indefinite cyme of bright yellow radially
symmetrical flowers. Basal leaves are odd-pinnately compound, terminal leaflets are
kidney shaped and much larger than the lateral leaflets, which are reduced or absent.
Leaflets have lobed or uneven margins and are serrate, with long petioles. Stem leaves
are smaller than the basal, rounded to obviate, with irregularly cut margins. Fruits are
hemispheric aggregates of hairy achenes that are 7-9 mm in diameter.
Spreading avens occurs on scarps, bluffs, cliffs and escarpments on mountains,
hills, and ridges. Known populations of this plant have been found to occur at elevations
of 1535-1541 meters (5060-5080 feet), 1723-1747 meters (5680-5760 feet) and 1759
meters (5800 feet). Other habitat requirements for this species include full sunlight and
shallow acidic soils. The spreading avens is found in soils composed of sand, pebbles,
humus, sandy loam, clay loam, and humus. Most populations are pioneers on rocky
outcrops.
The elevation of the project site is 991 meters (3260 feet) above mean sea level,
well below the required elevational range for this species [1535-1759 meters (5060-5800
feet)]. No scarps, bluffs, cliffs or escarpments are present in the project vicinity. The NC
Natural Heritage Program database of rare species does not list any populations of
spreading avens anywhere within the project vicinity and no plants were observed during
the site visit. This project will not affect spreading avens.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Houstonia montana (Roan Mountain bluet) Endangered
Houstonia montana is known historically from seven populations in the southern
Appalachian mountains of North Carolina and Tennessee. These populations of
Houstonia montana are threatened by land use as well as natural succession.
This perennial species is shallow rooted and grows in low tufts 1 to 2 dm tall.
The median cauline leaves are 1 to 3 centimeters long. It has several bright purple
flowers arranged in a terminal cyme. The seed capsule quickly follows the flowers which
form in July and early August.
This plant can be found on high elevation cliffs, outcrops, steep slopes, and in the
gravely talus associated with cliffs. It grows best in areas where it is exposed to full
19
sunlight and in shallow acidic soils composed of various igneous, metamorphic, and
metasedimentary rocks.
There are no high elevation cliffs, outcrops or steep slopes in the project study
area. The NCNHP database of rare species was checked and no records for this species
were found in the project study area. The construction of the proposed project will not
affect Roan Mountain bluet.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Liatris helleri (Heller's blazing star) Threatened
Heller's blazing star is a short, stocky plant that has one or more erect stems that
arise from a tuft of narrow, pale green basal leaves. Leaves are accuminate and diminish
in size and breadth upward on the stem. Heller's blazing star has small lavender flowers
and its fruits appear from September to November.
Heller's blazing star is endemic to high elevation ledges of rock outcrops of the
northern Blue Ridge Mountains in North Carolina. Known populations of this plant
occur at elevations of 1067-1829 meters (3500-6000 feet). Heller's blazing star is an early
pioneer species growing on grassy rock outcrops where it is exposed to full sunlight.
Heller's blazing star prefers shallow acid soils associated with granite rocks.
There are no high elevation ledges located in the project study area. The elevation
of the project site is 991 meters (3260 feet) above mean sea level, below the known
elevational range for this species [1067-1829 meters (3500 - 6000 feet)]. In addition, the
NC Natural Heritage Program database of rare species does not indicate any populations
of Heller's blazing star anywhere within the project vicinity. This project will not affect
Heller's blazing star.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Solidago spithamaea (Blue-Ridge goldenrod) Threatened
The Blue-Ridge goldenrod is found only on high mountain peaks in North
Carolina and Tennessee. This perennial herb has an erect 10 cm to 20 cm stem that
grows from a short stout rhizome. The stem is terete and longitudinally striate, and
greenish-brown proximally. It becomes more strongly ribbed and reddish distally, and is
usually covered with whitish hairs. The stem is generally unbranched below the flower.
The oblanceolate and spatulate leaves are acute with the offshoot and basal stem leaves
being the largest and longest. The broad portions of the leaves are ascending-serrate and
the bases are long-attenuate. Stem leaves are reduced and more sessile as they approach
the top of the stem. The yellow flowers are borne in heads arranged in a corymbiform
inflorescence.
20
The Blue Ridge goldenrod inhabits rock outcrops, ledges, cliffs, and balds at
elevations above 1400 meters. It grows in humus or clay loams on igneous and
metasedimentary rock. Sites are usually exposed to full sun and have shallow acidic (pH
4) soils. Ideal sites are intermittently saturated but excessively to moderately poorly
drained.
The project is located at an elevation of 991 meters (3260 feet) above mean sea
level. This is well below the required elevational limits of Blue Ridge goldenrod. The
NCNHP database of rare species was checked and no records for this species were found
in the project study area. The construction of the proposed project will not affect Blue
Ridge goldenrod.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Gymnoderma lineare (Rock gnome lichen) Endangered
The rock gnome lichen is a squamulose lichen in the reindeer moss family. This
lichen is a narrow endemic, restricted to areas of high humidity. These high humidity
environments occur on high elevation (> 1220 m/ 4000 feet) mountain tops and cliff faces
which are frequently bathed in fog or lower elevation (< 762 m/ 2500 feet) deep gorges in
the Southern Appalachians. The rock gnome lichen primarily occurs on vertical rock
faces where seepage water from forest soils above flows at (and only at) very wet times.
The rock gnome lichen is almost always found growing with the moss Adreaea in these
vertical intermittent seeps. The high elevation habitat occurs in the counties of Ashe,
Avery, Buncombe, Graham, Haywood, Jackson, Mitchell, Rutherford, Swain,
Transylvania, and Yancey. The lower elevation habitat of the rock gnome lichen can be
found in the counties of Jackson, Rutherford and Transylvania.
The terminal portions of the rock gnome lichen resemble strap-like lobes, having
a blue-gray color on the upper surface and generally a shiny-white color on the lower
surface. The color of the fungi near the base is black. The squamules are nearly parallel
to the rock surface and are generally 1 to 2 centimeters in length. The fruiting bodies are
born singly or in clusters, black in color, and are found at the tips of the squamules. The
fruiting season of the rock gnome lichen occurs from July through September. The
primary means of propagation appears to be asexual, with colonies spreading clonally.
The major threat of extinction to the rock gnome lichen relates directly to habitat
alteration/loss of high elevation coniferous forests. The thinning and death of these forest
occurs from exotic insect pests, trampling of hikers and associated soil erosion and
compaction from hikers. These coniferous forests usually lie adjacent to the habitat
occupied by the rock gnome lichen. Drastic changes in microclimate (including
increased temperatures and decreased moisture) result from the impacts to these forests.
These alterations of the microclimate lead to the desiccation of the rock gnome lichen.
21
The project is located at an elevation of 991 meters (3260 feet) above mean sea
level. This is well below the required elevational limits of rock gnome lichen. The
NCNHP database of rare species was checked and no records for this species were found
in the project study area. The construction of the proposed project will not affect rock
gnome lichen.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
22
19E ?
,R TOPS Z
4,852 G;
W
O

1121
/
?-' t•NOtsont 'v u'•• M IN.
4 194 :+1
0 1151 --
J
? 1197 1117
•'? ?
^
' S 1501
n
114 /1202
4 11206 6 \-
L
p 1114
A 1174 1150

2. 1
N
1147
N
1122 1119 Q _ l
11¢5 2
r S
4
PIuRMrs+•
1176 1117 ?
•a _
Q
_•
\
O
/
\
1
G 1118 1144
1541
-
' 1204
?- 1114
6 Qi _ CROSSNORE
h
°ft r- '
1114
POP. 268
i 1.0 221
1115 G
1117 to
BUCK HILL 1116
r Yi #1 194 1
'XW' 536
n •
BRIDGE NO. 12 1 1 14 C
1 109 7 Alltamont
13
1110 N /•
' 1187
1178 - THREE KNOBS
me
1546
' S µ
? ?''ti 0
F pp .
1
/,
1109
5 _ S F ?ppr
3
6 1525

In
alls 194
d? 6
\
1531
g

p 1 1 12 , . 1526 0 /
•
?Q 1106 `? ?/

4#1 *#
B U R
C 0
North Carolina
Department Of Transportation
Planning & Environmental Branch
AVERY COUNTY
REPLACE BRIDGE NO. 12 ON SR 1525
OVER LINVILLE RIVER
B-2917
kilometers 1.6 kilometers 3.2
I Figure 1
0 miles 1.0 miles 2.0
1527 ,
? /Linvilla
N.
1100, / Falb
221
?1

F
d
FY+
?Y•

u
4. ?
O r?

?i
W r?
?
bq
w

E
0.4 0
G
o °

.' .? W
cq
n ° oA
?
??yy a
U P4 °i
1
f?G
u
t C4 O $
° ?.
zHw
a?x
v

View from Bridge Facing North
FIGURE 3
View From Bridge Facing South
FIGURE 4
View of SR 1546 from South End of Bridge

COPY
J
•
® North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
312 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-1188, 919-733-3391
Charles R. Ful1wood, Executive Director E V FQ
MEMORANDUM
TO: H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager C, APR 2 4 1998
Planning and Environmental Branch, NCDOT ?. 0
DIVISION OF Q
FROM: Stephanie E. Goudreau, Mt. Region Coordinator HIGHWAYS Habitat Conservation Program Q?
JRONM?
DATE: August 6, 1996
SUBJECT: Review of scoping sheets for Bridge # 12 on SR 1525 over the Linville River, Avery County, B-
2917.
This correspondence responds to a request by you for our review and comments on the scoping sheets for
the subject project.
The Linville River is Hatchery Supported Designated Public Mountain Trout Water and also supports wild
rainbow and brown trout. We have the following recommendations regarding this project:
I) We prefer that the existing bridge be replaced with another spanning structure. We do not believe that a
timing restriction would be necessary while installing a new spanning structure.
2) If a multi-cell reinforced concrete box culvert is the proposed replacement structure, then the structure
should be designed so that all water flows through one cell (or two if necessary) during low flows. This
will ensure that water depth through the structure is deep enough to allow fish passage. In addition, no
instream work should take place between November 1 - April 15 to protect the spawning stages of trout.
3) Construction must be accomplished so that wet concrete does not contact river water. This will lessen the
chance of altering the river's water chemistry and causing a fish kill.
4) If possible, heavy equipment should be operated from the bank rather than in the river channel in order to
minimize sedimentation and reduce the likelihood of introducing other pollutants into the river.
5) Temporary or permanent herbaceous vegetation should be planted on all bare soil within 15 days of ground
disturbing activities to provide long-term erosion control.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment during the early stages of this project. If you have
any questions regarding these comments, please contact me at 704/652-4257.

e .. STAYr
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
December 5, 1997
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Bridge 12 on SR 1525 over Linville River, Avery
County, Federal Aid Project BRZ-1525(1), TIP 8-
2917, ER 97-7095, ER 98-7953
Dear Mr. Graf:
Division of Archives and History
Jeffrey J. Crow, Director
?,•?c E + d
r
DEC 0 9 1991
Y
DI,/IS10'.1110 r A-
el
0
Thank you for your letter of October 16, 1997, transmitting the archaeological
survey report by Megan O'Connell concerning the above project.
During the course of the survey no sites were located within the project area. Ms.
O'Connell has recommended that no further archaeological investigation be
conducted in connection with this project. We concur with this recommendation
since this project will not involve significant archaeological resources.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act 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.
Sincerely,
David Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw
cc: H. F. Vick
T. Padgett
109 Fast Jones Street - Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807 133
\ e w. STAI[
4
? Orr ??•
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt Jr., Governor Division of Archives and History
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary Jeffrey J. Crow, Director
August 6, 1996
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Replace Bridge #12 on SR 1525 over Linville
River, Avery County, B-2917, Federal Aid
Project BRZ-1525(1), State Project 8.2720801,
ER 97-7095
Dear Mr. Graf:
On July 17, 1996, Debbie Bevin of our staff met with North Carolina Department
of Transportation (NCDOT) staff for a meeting of the minds concerning the above
project. We reported our available information on historic architectural and
archaeological surveys and resources along with our recommendations. NCDOT
provided project area photographs and aerial photographs at the meeting.
Based upon our review of the photographs and the information discussed at the
meeting, we offer our preliminary comments regarding this project.
In terms of historic architectural resources, we are aware of no historic structures
located within the area of potential effect. We recommend that no historic
architectural survey be conducted for this project.
This project is located in an area of high probability. We recommend an
archaeological survey be conducted.
Having provided this information, we look forward to receipt of either a Categorical
Exclusion or Environmental Assessment which indicates how NCDOT addressed our
comments.
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.
l09 East Jones Street - Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807 g??
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.
Sincerely,
David Brook
Deputy State Historic
DB:sI-w/
Preservation Officer
cc: . F. Vick
C. Bruton
T. Padgett
- I'
s,•. SU1E.,
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HuNT JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS GARLAND B. GARRETT JR.
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGI1, N.C. 27611-5201 SECRETARY
June 10, 1996
MEMORANDUM TO:
FROM: H. Franklin Vick. Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
SUBJECT: Review of Scoping Sheet for Bridge No. 12 on SR 1525 in
Avery County over Linville River, B-2917
Attached for your review and comments is the scoping sheet for the subject project (See
attached map for project location). The purpose of this sheet and the related review
procedure is to have an early "meeting of the minds" as to the scope of work that should be
performed and thereby enable us to better implement the project. A scoping meeting
for this project is scheduled for July 17, 1996 at 10:00 A. M. in the Planning and
Environmental Branch Conference Room (Room 434). You may provide us with your
comments at the meeting or mail them to us prior to that date.
Thank you for your assistance in this part of our planning process. If there are any
questions about the meeting or the scoping sheets, please call John Williams, Project
Planning Engineer, at 733-7844 ext 235.
JW ? J C
Z- , ( I 21- { )
attachments L" A

o ve.
1?1o w S
/?? -; ?J-
-Ay / s V) ?r
vi- NZ U

r ?
TIP PROJECT
STATE PROJECT
F. A. PROJECT
BRIDGE PROJECT
SCOPING SHEET
B-2917
8.2720801
BRZ-1525(1)
DATE: June 7, 1996
DIVISION 11
COUNTY Avery
ROUTE SR 1525
PURPOSE OF PROJECT: REPLACE OBSOLETE BRIDGE
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Replace Bridge No. 12 on SR 1525 over Linville River
in Avery County.
WILL THERE BE SPECIAL FUNDING PARTICIPATION BY MUNICIPALITY,
DEVELOPERS, OR OTHERS? YES NO X
EXISTING LENGTH 37.2 METERS; WIDTH 5.5 METERS
STRUCTURE: 122 FEET 18 FEET
TIP CONSTRUCTION COST ...................................... $ 325,000
TIP RIGHT OF WAY COST ...................................... + $ 30,000
TIP TOTAL COST .................................... $ 355,000
CLASSIFICATION: Rural Local Route
0
19E
,R TOPS Z
4,852 ?
W
•O

Ingalls
* LL
221
0
North Carolina
Department Of Transportation
Planning & Environmental Branch
AVERY COUNTY
REPLACE BRIDGE NO. 12 ON SR 1525
OVER LINVILLE RIVER
B-2917
kilometers 1.6 kilometers 3.2
r Figure 1
0 miles 1.0 miles 2.0
o.....,,. 1. '.rvi rv. O 1 151 194 +
(1121
11 17-
?;'
1197
5
x/1202 X1501
P 1 142
41206 5
1114 1174%? \ 150
b All
/ ?''Jyy\ 1 147 N
1 122 2• t 'W 1119 0 v N l
11,15
? 4r • S
Plund, 1176 1117 Q / '.\\ O/
1118
114A S..
1 .? 1541
r
1204 t t t a 6 c. `? _ CROSSNORE
C 1118 POP. 268
1117 1. 8 1115 221
BUCK HILL 1116
194^
1114 4
Q
1109 11 13 7 Amon
Ln C, ^
1 187 1178 Three t 10 ®THREE KNOBS • , v 1546 /,/.
Miles ;tl 0
Z
1 109 S ? r. F A' 3 1 /.
.6 > 1525
0
I94 / 1011e y Cr l l 11 .6 A Camp
1531
9 / ( 1112.1 ? 1526 O
1106 3? o
O ,= 1527 B U R K
/1;rniIIe
•?: I 100, / Falls
1
/ ?, C O
ltamont
d - ? ?1.',?`\)\ l? ??r?^^` \ ??''po?'.?'1,?,? • / 'j?_ .?x??\?? \ -ice /i ? =-_'_- O//q/ ?
?? ? ?/yam ? \ J; I ? w?????\? ? ?,?? ?. • ,?. ?\? ? ?'3?\ ; ?. %// .' -,? ? '/" ! I ?? ? ???
x475
R T
Wise Cem
to
f
zu-
-BM
; 3371.
Plsgali /- G
510,
- -
111 M - _ - 36b0 -Q7 ?? - - ?? -
Z•
`? • - "?/i 04 3435
3625.'. /. •?/?
-- -?? ??? • - _? n _ i : " " a 3495
•
•?BM3325 _-
o,' 'Linville Falls n?,i ?? 600
0 - '307
Falls
4 V',
-o o
4260
UMpDaCK
10
o
"v
\ 6
RECEIVED
AU16 3 0 MIS
4 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
STATF OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. Him JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS GARLAND B. GARRETT JR.
60WRN)R P.O. BOX 25201. RA1.11611. N.(:. 270 5201 SIVRHARY
August 27, 1996
MEMORANDUM TO: Mr. Eric Galamb
DEM - DF,HNR - Water Quality
FROM: John Williams
Project Planning Engineer
SUBJECT: SR 1525, Avery County, Replacement of Bridge No. 12 over
Linville River, State Project 8.2720801, F. A. Project BRZ-1525(1),
B-2917
A scoping meeting for the subject bridge was held in the "Transportation Building
on July 17, 1996.
The following people were in attendance:
Roger Thomas
Ray Moore
Lanette Cook
Ray McIntyre
Jerry Snead
Sid Autry
Mike Tyndall
Lawrence Gettier
John Williams
Roadway Design
Structure Design
Program Development
Program Development
Hydraulics
Location & Surveys
Traffic Control
Traffic Control
Planning & Environmental
The following comments were either called in or delivered during the meeting:
Eric Galamb of DEM stated that the waters of Linville River are Class B Trout.
He requests High Quality Water Soil & Erosion Control Measures. If the bridge is
relocated, the approach fills to the old bridge should be removed and revegetated with
native tree species. He also requests no weep holes in the bridge if possible and
especially over the water. To the maximum extent possible, bridge bents should be kept
out of the stream.
Stephanie Goudreau of the Wildlife Resource Commission (WRC) commented
that the Linville River is Hatchery Supported Designated Public Mountain Trout Water
and also supports wild and rainbow trout. The following are the resulting comments:
• A spanning structure is preferred.
• If a multi-cell culvert is the proposed replacement structure, then the structure should
be designed so that fish passage is possible during normal flow. No instream work
NO
• should take place from November 1 through April 15 to protect the spawning stages
of trout.
• Construction must be accomplished so that wet concrete does not contact stream
water thereby reducing the chance of a fish kill.
• If possible, heavy equipment should be operated from the bank rather than in the
stream channel in order to minimize sedimentation and reduce the likelihood of
introducing other pollutants into the stream.
• Temporary or permanent herbaceous vegetation should be planted on all bare soil
within 15 days of completion of ground-disturbing activities to provide long-term
erosion control.
Jerry Snead of Hydraulics recommended that the existing bridge be replaced with
a bridge approximately 55 meters (180 feet) in length on new location to the east,
maintaining approximately the same roadway elevation as that of the existing bridge.
This will require approximately 30 meters (100 feet) of channel change.
The Division Engineer recommended replacing the existing bridge with a bridge
on new location to the northeast of the existing structure. Traffic would be maintained on
the existing bridge during construction.
The existing structure is 37.2 meters (122 feet) long and 5.5 meters (18 feet) wide.
The proposed structure will be approximately 55 meters (180 feet) long and 7.2 meters
(24 feet) wide. There are presently 200 vehicles per day (vpd) using the bridge and
300 vpd projected for the year 2020. SR 1525 is classified as a Rural Local Route.
Debbie Bevin of the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) commented no
surveys are required for this project.
DISCUSSION OF ALTERNATES
The Planning and Environmental Branch requested that Roadway Design evaluate
the cost and feasibility of the following alternates:
Alternate 1:
Replace the existing bridge with a bridge approximately 55 meters (180 feet) in
length on new location to the northeast, maintaining approximately the same roadway
elevation as that of the existing bridge. Maintain traffic on the existing alignment during
construction. }
Alternate 2:
Replace the existing bridge with a bridge approximately 55 meters (180 feet) in
length on new location to the southwest, maintaining approximately the same roadway
elevation as that of the existing bridge. Maintain traffic on the existing alignment during
construction.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Steve Lund, NCDOT Permit Coordinator
Asheville Office, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
FROM: Joe H. Mickey, Jr., Western Piedmont Region Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program
DATE: June 29, 1998
SUBJECT: Review of an application by NCDOT for replacement of Bridge No. 12 over the Linville
River on SR 1525 in Avery County. B-2917, State Project No. 8.2720801, Federal Aid
Project No. BRZ-1525(1).
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) is requesting a letter of concurrence
from the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) to obtain a 404 permit from the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers for the above referenced project. The NCWRC has reviewed information
provided by the applicant, and field biologists on our staff are familiar with habitat values of the project
area. These comments are provided in accordance with provisions of the Clean Water Act of 1977 (33
U.S.C. 466 et. seq.) and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C.
661-667d).
We have reviewed the Categorical Exclusion prepared for this bridge replacement project and
concur that this project should have minimal impact on aquatic resources and trout habitat in the Linville
River. Therefore, we have no objection to the project as proposed provided that disturbance to the trout
stream buffer zone and instream activities causing off-site sedimentation (test borings and initial digging
for construction of bridge support footers) are prohibited during the trout spawning period of October 15
through April 1.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this project. If you have any questions
regarding these comments, please contact me at 336/366-2982.
cc: Eric Galamb, DWQ
Mike Parker, DWQ
Lindsey Riddick, DOT
Chris Goudreau, WRC