19990034 Ver 1_Complete File_19990115

.h
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
February 3, 1999
Harnett County
WQC 401 Project # 990035

APPROVAL of 401 Water Quality Certification
Bill Gilmore
NC DOT
PO Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Gilmore:
You have our approval, in accordance with the attached conditions for replacing bridge 105 over the Black River on
SR 1735, as you described in your application dated January 15, 1999. After reviewing your application, we have decided
that this fill is covered by General Water Quality Certification Number 3107. This Certification allows you to use
Nationwide Permit Number 23 when the Corps of Engineers issues it. 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. Also 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. If you change your
project, you must notify us and send us a new application. 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). 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 which conforms to
Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes to the Office of Administrative Hearings, P.O. Box 27447, Raleigh,
N.C. 27611-7447. This certification and its conditions are final and binding unless you ask for a hearing.
This letter completes the review of the Division of Water Quality under Section 401 of the Clean Water-Act. If you
have any questions, please telephone John Domey at 919-733-1786.
Attachment
cc: Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Corps of Engineers Wilmington Field Office
Fayetteville DWQ Regional Office
Mr. John Domey
Central Files
A 0 WA
•
411'r
NC ENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Since
rest Howard, Jr. E.
990035.Itr
Division of Water Quality • Environmental Sciences Branch
Environmental Sciences Branch, 4401 Reedy Creek Rd, Raleigh, NC 27607 Telephone [phone] FAX # [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer • 50% recycled/10% post consumer paper
'49le-11
?.w SUIZ.. Y'
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TPANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. P.O. 60X25201. RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201
GOVERNOR
January 08, 1999
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Field Office
P.0 Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890
Attention: Mr. Dave Timpy
NCDOT Coordinator
E. NORRIS TOLSON
SECRETARY
L ? u ?f l f?fl ^?ti
l•
JAN 6 5 1999
f?pQS? i
WATER ON iIYGSECTION
Subject: Harnett County. Replacement of Bridge No. 105 over Black River on
SR 1735; Federal Aid Project No. BRSTP-1735(3), State Project
No. 8.2451001, TIP No. B-3183.
Dear Sir:
Attached for your information are copies of the programmatic categorical
exclusion (CE) action classification form and the natural resources technical report for the
subject project. The Department of Transportation (DOT) plans to replace Bridge No.
105 over Black River in Harnett County on existing location. Bridge approaches will
also be improved. During bridge replacement, traffic will be maintained off-site detour
along existing secondary roads, as depicted in the programmatic CE.
Based on the natural resources technical report prepared for the DOT, the
proposed bridge replacement will impact jurisdictional wetlands. The wetland acreage
total, based on the entire right-of-way, is 0.10 acre and this area is part of the mixed pine
hardwood community. The wetland type is described as Palustrine, forested, needle
leaved evergreen, temporarily flooded.
Mr. David Cox of the NC WRC indicated in a telephone conversation with Bill
Goodwin the NCDOT Project Planning Engineer, that a moratorium on in-water
construction would likely be required between April 1 and June 15 to protect fish
spawning in the Black River during this time. This request has been implemented into the
environmental commitments section of the referenced CE document which is attached for
your reference.
9

The project is being processed by the Federal Highway Administration as a
programmatic "Categorical Exclusion" in accordance with 23 CFR 771.115(b).
Therefore, the DOT does not anticipate requesting a Section 404 Individual Permit, but
proposes to proceed under a Section 404 Nationwide Permit in accordance with 33 CFR
330 Appendix A (B-23) issued on December 13, 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.
It is anticipated that a 401 Water Quality Certification for a Categorical Exclusion
will apply to this project. A copy of the CE and natural resources technical report are
being provided to the CE document to the North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality (DWQ), for their review.
The DOT requests a Section 404 Nationwide Permit 23 for impacts to waters of
the United States from the proposed bridge replacement. Application for 401 Water
Quality Certification from the DWQ is also made.
If you have any questions or need any additional information, please contact Mr.
Jared Gray at [phone], extension 32".
Sincerely,

W. D. Gilmore, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Wdg/jg
cc: Mr. David Franklin, COE, Wilmington Field Office
Mr. John Dorney, DWQ
Mr. William Rogers, P.E., Structure Design
Mr. Whit Webb, P.E., Program Development Branch
Mr. Len Hill, P.E., Highway Design
Mr. A. L. Hankins, Hydraulics Unit
Mr. Tom Shearin, P.E., Roadway Design Engineer
Mr. J. G. Nance, P.E., Division 6 Engineer
Mr. Bill Goodwin, P.E., Project Planning Engineer

CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION ACTION CLASSIFICATION FORM
TIP Project No.: B-3183
State Project No. 8,2451001
Federal-Aid Project No.: BRSTP-1735(3)
A. Project Description
NCDOT will replace Bridge No. 105 on SR 1735 over the Black River in Harnett
County. The bridge will be replaced with a new bridge measuring 31 meters (102 feet) in
length and 9.0 meters (30 feet) in width. This will provide a 7.2 meter (24 foot) travelway
and 1.0 meter (3 foot) offset on each side. The new approach roadway will be a 7.2 meter
(24 foot) travelway with shoulder widths of at least 2.4 meters (8 feet). Traffic will be
detoured on existing secondary roads during construction.
B. Purpose and Need:
Bridge No. 105 has a sufficiency rating of 27.6 out of 100. The deck of Bridge
No. 49 is only 7.2 meters (24 feet) wide. The bridge is posted at 22 tons for single
vehicles and at 30 tons for truck-tractor semi-trailers. For these reasons Bridge No. 105
needs to be replaced.
C: Proposed Improvements:
Circle one or more of the following improvements which apply to the project:
Type It Improvements
Modernization of a highway by resurfacing, restoration, rehabilitation,
reconstruction, adding shoulders, or adding auxiliary lanes (e.g., parking weaving,
turning, climbing).
a. Restoring, Resurfacing, Rehabilitating, and Reconstructing pavement
(3R and 4R improvements)
b. Widening roadway and shoulders without adding through lanes
c. Modernizing gore treatments
d. Constructing lane improvements (merge, auxiliary, and turn lanes)
e. Adding shoulder drains
f. Replacing and rehabilitating culverts, inlets, and drainage pipes, including
safety treatments
g. Providing driveways pipes
h. Performing minor bridge widening ( less than one through lane)

2. Highway safety or traffic operations improvement projects including the
installation of ramp metering control devices and lighting.
a. Installing ramp metering devices
b. Installing lights
c. Adding or upgrading guardrail
d. Installing safety barriers including Jersey type barriers and pier protection
e. Installing or replacing impact attenuators
f. Upgrading medians including adding or upgrading median barriers
g. Improving intersections including relocation and/ or realignment
h. Making minor roadway realignment
i. Channelizing traffic
j. Performing clear zone safety improvements including removing hazards
and flattening slopes
k. Implementing traffic aid systems, signals, and motorist aid
1. Installing bridge safety hardware including bridge rail retrofit
Bridge rehabilitation, reconstruction, or replacement or the construction of grade
separation replace existing at-grade railroad crossings.
a. Rehabilitating, reconstructing, or replacing bridge approach slabs
b. Rehabilitating or replacing bridge decks
c. Rehabilitating bridges including painting ( no red lead paint), scour repair,
fender systems, and minor structural improvements
0 Replacing a bridge (structure and/ or fill)
4. Transportation corridor fringe parking facilities.
Construction of new truck weigh stations or rest areas.
Approvals for disposal of excess right-of-way or for joint or limited use of right-
of-way, where the proposed use does not have significant adverse impacts.
Approvals for changes in access control.
8. Construction of new bus storage and maintenance facilities in areas used
predominantly for industrial or transportation purposes where such construction is
not inconsistent with existing zoning and located on or near a street with adequate
capacity to handle anticipated bus and support vehicle traffic.
9. Rehabilitation or reconstruction of existing rail and bus buildings and ancillary
facilities where only minor amounts of additional land are required and there is
not a substantial increase in the number of users.
2
10. Construction of bus transfer facilities (an open area consisting of passenger
shelters, boarding areas, kiosks and related street improvements ) when located in
a commercial area or other high activity center in which there is adequate street
capacity for projected bus traffic.
11. Construction of rail storage and maintenance facilities in areas used
predominantly for industrial or transportation purposes where such construction is
not inconsistent with existing zoning and where there is no significant noise
impact on the surrounding community.
12. Acquisition of land for hardship or protective purposes, advance land acquisition
loans under section 3 (b) of the UMT Act. Hardship and protective buying will be
permitted only for a particular parcel or a limited number of parcels. These types
of land acquisition will not limit the evaluation of alternatives, including shifts in
alignment for planned construction projects, which may be required in the NEPA
process. No project development on such land may proceed until the NEPA
process has been completed.
D. Special Project Information
Environmental Commitments:
All standard measures will be implemented to avoid or minimize environmental
impacts.
2. 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." A Corps
of Engineers Nationwide Permit # 23 will be applicable for this project.
A North Carolina Division of Environmental Management (DEM) Section 401
Water Quality General Certification will be obtained prior to issue of the Corps of
Engineers Nationwide Permit # 23.
4. An in-water construction moratorium will be observed between April 1 and June
15 to protect fish spawning in the river.
Estimated Costs:
Construction $ 400,000
Right of Way $ 25.000
Total $ 425,000
Estimated Traffic:
Current - 3700 VPD
Year 2018 - 6800 VPD
Proposed Typical Roadway Section:
The approach roadway will be 7.2 meters (24 feet) wide with at least 2.4 meter
(8 foot) shoulders. Shoulder width will be increased by at least 1.0 meter (3 feet) where
guardrail is warranted.
Design Speed:
100 km/h (60 mph)
Functional Classification:
SR 1735 is classified as a Rural Major Collector Route in the Statewide
Functional Classification system.
Division Office Comments:
The Division Engineer supports the chosen alternate and proposed detour route.
E. Threshold Criteria
If any Type II actions are involved in the project, the following evaluation must be
completed. If the project consists gil1X of Type I improvements, the following checklist does not
need to be Completed.
ECOLOGICAL YES NO
(1) Will the project have a substantial impact on any unique or ?
important natural resource? x
(2) Does the project involve any habitat where federally listed
endangered or threatened species may occur? 7 X
(3) Will the project affect anadromous fish? X
(4) If the project involves wetlands, is the amount of permanent
and/or temporary wetland taking less than one-third (1/3) acre
and have all practicable measures to avoid and minimize X
takings been evaluated?
4

i
1
1
(5) Will the project require use of U. S. Forest Service lands ? X
(6) Will the quality of adjacent water resources be adversely impacted
by proposed construction activities? X
(7) Does the project involve waters classified as Outstanding Water
Resources (OWR) and/or High Quality Waters (HQW)? X
(8) Will the project require fill in waters of the United States in any
of the designated mountain trout counties? X
(9) Does the project involve any known underground storage tanks
'

(UST
s) or hazardous materials sites? ? -
X
PERMITS AND COORDINATION YES NO
(10) If the project is located within a CAMA county, will the project
significantly affect the coastal zone and/or any "Area of
Environmental Concern" (AEC)? F-1 X
(11) Does the project involve Coastal Barrier Resources Act resources? F-1 X
(12) Will a U. S. Coast Guard permit be required? X
(13) Will the project result in the modification of any existing
regulatory floodway? X
(14) Will the project require any stream relocations or channel ?
changes? X
SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC YES NO
(15) Will the project induce substantial impacts to planned growth or -
land use for the area? F-1 X
(16) Will the project require the relocation of any family or business? 7 X
5
r ?
(17) If the project involves the acquisition of right of way, is the FI
amount of right of way acquisition considered minor? X (18) Will the project involve any changes in access control? 1-1 X
(19) Will the project substantially alter the usefulness and/or land
use of any adjacent property? F1 X
(20) Will the project have an adverse effect on permanent local ? X
traffic patterns or community cohesiveness?
(21) Is the project included in an approved thoroughfare plan and/or
Transportation Improvement Program (and is, therefore, in X ?
conformance with the Clean Air Act of 1990)?
(22) Is the project anticipated to cause an increase in traffic volumes? F-1 X
(23) Will traffic be maintained during construction using existing a
roads, staged construction, or on-site detours? X
(24) Is there substantial controversy on social, economic, or
environmental grounds concerning the project? 0 X
(25) Is the project consistent with all Federal, State, and local laws ?
relating to the environmental aspects of the action? X
CULTURAL. RESOURCES YES NO
(26) Will the project have an "effect" on properties eligible for or ?
listed on the National Register of Historic Places? X
(27) Will the project require the use of Section 4(f) resources
(public parks, recreation lands, wildlife and waterfowl refuges ,
historic sites or historic bridges, as defined in Section 4(f) of the F-1 X
U. S. Department of Transportation Act of 1966)?
(28) Will the project involve construction in, across, or adjacent to a
river designated as a component of or proposed for inclusion in a
the natural Wild and Scenic Rivers? X
F.
(Discussion regarding all unfavorable responses in Part E should be provided
below. Additional supporting documentation may be attached as necessary.)
None.
6
G. CE Approval
TIP Project No.: _ B-3183
State Project No. 8.2451001
Federal-Aid Project No.: BRSTP-1735(3)
NCDOT will replace Bridge No. 105 on SR 1735 over the Black River in Hamett
County. The bridge will be replaced with a new bridge measuring 31 meters (102 feet) in
length and 9.0 meters (30 feet) in width. This will provide a 7.2 meter (24 foot) travelway
and 1.0 meter (3 foot) offset on each side. The new approach roadway will be a 7.2 meter
(24 foot) travelway with shoulder widths of at least 2.4 meters (8 feet). Traffic will be
detoured on existing secondary roads during construction.
Categorical Exclusion Action Classification: (Check one)
X TYPE II (A)
TYPE II (B)
Approved
3-?-9? ' 9/
Date Assistant Manager
Planning & Environmental Branch
3-7-17 W G y h e Zr-74' o iT
Date Project lanning Unit Head k, 0
/
. / A

Date Project Planning Engineer
olo, ,?. .

For Type II (B) projects only:
Date. Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
7

11 d, eo.1??0..
roidwer s? •?
Ma.ers
Swann H A R
01-8
r 7
Pmeview
? .o
v Johnsonville 1 ooul Sprints 1
' -- - -
oncan
So-Is
K?olm a new
1 \?
? W1 e
oe\
Bwes
fees i Coats
intlon ?O• 11 °
\ \T ss aeon
nrr O •
AI e/ ? ?
11
1
1 1
1 1

55
•J 1 1 /i: ? ?''

?4
171

1815
::r'i::?;•
''l ?1: ;:
.. .ti

'? ?''
' ' ?•. '''''' .36

O
19:
^ N
17
1740 1815
173
14
b
o

17 ,•;.:
. .42 f:':?::::• 1
1735
1740 ::. Ir.,; ,•; ::.:;,,;
:;:.
,
.

1
IStudied Detour Route 0 0 --r
N
• ' North Carolina Department of
4t, Transportation
Division of Highways
Planning & Environmental Branch
Harnett County
Replace Bridge No. 105 on SR 1735
Over the Black River
B-3183
re One
Y

'?, ; ?SfAT(?h
?. , z 3
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
August 9, 1996
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Replace Bridge 105 on SR 1735 over Black
River, Harnett County, B-3183, Federal Aid
Project BRSTP-1735(3), State Project
8.2451001, ER 96-9200
Division of Archives and History
Jeffrey J. Crow, Director
Dear Mr. Graf:
We regret staff was unable to attend the scoping meeting for the above project on
July 25, 1996. However, Debbie Bevin met with Bill Goodwin of the North
Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) on August 7, 1996, to discuss the
project and view the project photographs and aerial.
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.
There are no known archaeological sites within the proposed project area. Based
on our present knowledge of the area, it is unlikely that any archaeological
resources which may be eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic
Places will be affected by the project construction. We, therefore, recommend that
no archaeological investigation be conducted in connection with this project.
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.
109 East Jones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2507
g0,
Y
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
C. Bruton
T. Padgett

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TPANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR.
GOVERNOR
P.O. BOX 25201. RALEIGH. N.C. 27611-5201
GARLAND B. GARRETT JR.
SECRETARY
07 March 1997
MEMORANDUM TO
FROM:
Wayne Elliot, Unit Head
Project Planning Unit
Lindsey Riddick, Environmental Biologist
Environmental Unit
SUBJECT: Natural Resources Technical Report for the proposed
replacement of bridge No. 109 on SR 1735 over Black
River, Harnett County. TIP No. B-3183, State project No.
8.2451001, Federal aid project No. BRSTP-1735 (3).
REFERENCE: Protected species survey prepared by NCDOT biologist
Bruce 0. Ellis 28 June 1996.
ATTENTION: Bill Goodwin, P.E., Project Manager
Project Planning Unit
The following report is submitted to assist in the preparation of a Programmatic
Categorical Exclusion for the proposed project. This report contains information
concerning water resources, biotic resources, Waters of the United States, permit
requirements and federally protected species within the project area. The information
contained in this report is relevant only in the context of existing preliminary design
concepts. If design parameters and criteria change, additional field investigations may
need to be conducted.
The proposed project involves replacing the existing bridge on existing location
with minimum approach work. Existing right-of-way (ROW) is 18 m (60 ft). Proposed
ROW is 24 m (80 ft). Project length is approximately 46 m (350 ft). Traffic will be
detoured off site.
Not

METHODOLOGY
General field studies were conducted along the proposed project area by
NCDOT biologists Dale Suiter and Lindsey Riddick on 20 February 1997. Plant
communities and their associated wildlife were identified and recorded. Wildlife
identification involved using one or more of the following observation techniques: active
searching and capture, visual observations (binoculars), identifying characteristic signs
of wildlife (sounds, scat, tracks and burrows). Faunal species observed during the site
visit are denoted with an asterisk (''). Terrestrial community classifications generally
follow Schafale and Weakley (1990) where possible, and plant taxonomy follows
Radford, et al. (1968). Animal taxonomy follows Martof, et al. (1980), Menhenick
(1991), Potter, et al. (1980), and Webster, et al. (1985). Wetland classifications follow
Cowardin et. al. (1979). Predictions regarding wildlife community composition involved
general qualitative habitat assessment based on existing vegetative communities.
Jurisdictional wetland determinations were performed using delineation criteria
prescribed in the "Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual" (Environmental
Laboratory, 1987). Information concerning federal and state protected species in the
study area was gathered from the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP)
database of rare species and unique habitats along with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (FWS) list of protected species and species of concern.
WATER' RESOURCES
Water resources occur in the project area. These resources are in the form of
the Black River, a coastal plain perennial stream. The Black River at bridge No. 105 is
approximately 17 ft (5.2 m) wide and approximately 3-4 ft (1 m) deep. Substrate
consists of sand and gravel and water is stained by tannins. Streams have been
assigned a best usage classification by the Division of Water Quality (DWQ), formerly
the Division of Environmental Management. The best usage classification for the Black
River (DWQ Index No. 18-68-12-1) is C Sw. Class C refers to waters suitable for
aquatic life propagation and survival, fishing, wildlife, secondary recreation and
agriculture. Sw (Swamp water) is a supplemental water classification including waters
which have low velocities and other natural characteristics which are different from
adjacent streams. NCDOT's Best Management Practices for the Protection of Surface
Waters should be strictly enforced during the construction phase of the project. This
would include:
1) installation of temporary silt fences to control runoff during construction
2) placement of temporary ground cover or re-seeding of disturbed sites to
reduce runoff and decrease sediment loading
3) reduction of clearing along streams

Terrestrial Communities
There are two types of terrestrial communities currently existing in the project
area, mixed pine hardwood and maintained/ roadside shoulder.
Mixed Pine Hardwood
Dominant canopy tree species noted were red maple (Acer rubrum), tulip poplar
(Liriodendron tulipifera), sweet gum (Liquidambar styraciflua), river birch (Betula nigra),
and loblolly pine (Pinus teada). Saplings of red maple and tulip poplar were also
present. Herbaceous species spresent in the area include giant cane (Arundinaria
gigantea) and Japanese honeysucle (Lonicera japonica).
Wildlife species that may be found in such areas may use this habitat for shelter
and foraging and may also utilize the maintained/distubed areas to forage and as a
travel corridor. Therfore, many of the species found in this habitat also have the
potential to utilize the maintained/distuded community. Mammalian species likely to
occur include, raccoon (Procyon lotor), gray squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis),whitetail
deer (Odecoileous virginiana) , hispid cotton rat (Sigmodon hispidus), and Virginia
oppossum (Didelphis virginiana). Avian species likely to be found in this community
include Carolina chickadee (Parus carolinensis), mourning dove (Zenaida macrroura),
common grackle (Quiscalas quicula), European starling (Sturnus vulgaris), and
Common crow* (Corvus brachyrhynchos). Reptiles likely to be found in these areas
include black racer (Coluber constrictor), five-lined skink (Eumeces fasciatus), and
eastern fence lizard (Sceloporus undulatus).
Maintained/Disturbed Community
Maintained/disturbed community is also present in the project area. This
community includes areas that are highly maintained in an early successional state.
They are subject to frequent mowing and/or herbicide use. Having been subjected to
some type and degree of disturbance in the past, many species found in this type of
habitat are highly adaptive and have the ability to repopulate an area quickly after
disturbance.
Soil disturbance and compaction, along with frequent mowing and/or herbicide
application, keep this community in an early successional stage. As a result, the
vegetation in this community is predominantly grasses and herbs. These areas include
roadside shoulder and small areas of maintained residential yards. These areas cover
the majority of the area where construction will take place.
Plant species that are common to maintained communities are fescue (Festuca
sp.), wild onion (Allium canadense), broomsedge (Andropogon virginica), blackberry
(Rubus argutus), Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), goldenrod (Salidago sp.),
privet (Ligustrum sinense), Carolina geranium (Geranium carolinianum), wild carrot
(Daucus carota), wood sorrel (Oxalis sp.), and giant cane.
Wildlife resources in this community are limited by the high degree of
maintenance that occurs on residential developments and roadside shoulder. Species
found in these areas generally use the area for foraging and are highly adaptive
species that adjust well to human development. Wildlife species that are common to
such areas include raccoon, eastern harvest mouse (Reithrodontomys humulis), hispid
cotton rat, eastern fence lizard, Carolina chickadee, mourning dove, common grackle,
European starling, black racer.
JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS
This section provides descriptions, inventories and impact analysis pertinent to
two important issues--rare and protected species, and Waters of the United States.
Waters of the United States
Impacts to jurisdictional surface waters are anticipated. Jurisdictional surface
waters are present in the form of the Black River, a coastal plain perennial stream..
Impacts can be minimized with NCDOT Best Management Practices.
A small wetland, less than .1 ac (.04 ha), will be impacted north of SR 1375 on
the western terminus of the project. This area is part of the mixed pine hardwood
community. The Cowardin classification for this wetland is PF04A. This wetland type
is described as Palustrine, forested, needle leaved evergreen, temporarily flooded.
In accordance with provisions of section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C.
1344), a permit will be required from the COE for the discharge of dredged or fill
material into "Waters of the United States."
Water Permits
Nationwide 23 Permit
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' or
department's application for the categorical exclusion and concurs with that
determination.
North Carolina Division of water Quality (DWQ) Section 401 Water Quality
General Certification is also required. 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 into waters of the United States. The issuance of a 401
permit from DWQ is a prerequisite to issuance of a Section 404 Permit.
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 activities.
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 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
provisions of Section 7 and Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended. As of 23 August 1996, the FWS lists four federally-protected species for
Harnett County (Table 1). A complete description along with a biological conclusion for
each species follows Table 1.
Table 1 Federally Protected Species for Harnett County.
Scientific name Common name Status
Noptropis mekistocholas Cape Fear Shiner Endangered
Picoides borealis red-cockaded woodpecker Endangered
Isotria medeoloides small-whorled pogonia Threatened*
_Lysamachia asperulaefolia rough-leaved loosestrife Endangered
" species was last observed in the county over twenty years ago.
Notropis mekistocholas (Cape Fear shiner) Endangered
Animal Family: Cyprinidae
Date Listed: 26 September 1987
a
The Cape Fear shiner is a small, moderately stocky minnow. Its body is
flushed with a pale silvery yellow, and a black band runs along its sides
(Snelson 1971). The fins are yellowish and somewhat pointed. The upperlip is
black and the lower lip has a black bar along its margin.
Cape Fear shiner habitat occurs in streams with gravel, cobble, or
boulder substrates. It is most often observed inhabiting slow pools, riffles, and
slow runs associated with water willow beds. Juveniles can be found inhabiting
slackwater, among large rock outcrops and in flooded side channels and pools.
The Cape Fear shiner is thought to feed on bottom detritus, diatoms, and other
periphytes. Captive specimens feed readily on plant and animal material.
The Cape Fear shiner is limited to three populations in North Carolina.
The strongest population of the Cape Fear shiner is in Chatham and Lee
counties from the Locksville dam upstream to Rocky River and Bear Creek.
Another population is located above the Rocky River Hydroelectric Dam in
Chatham County, and the third population is found in the Deep River system in
Randolph and Moore counties.
Biological Conclusion:
No Effect
No habitat occurs for the Cape Fear shiner in the project area. The
substrate of the Black River is mostly sandy with a few areas of gravel. The
rocky and boulder type substrate and associated beds of aquatic vegetation that
the Cape Fear shiner prefers does not occur in the project area. In addition, a
search of NCNHP database of rare species and unique habitats revealed no
records of the Cape Fear shiner in the project area. Therefore, this project will
not affect the Cape Fear shiner.
Picoides borealis (red-cockaded woodpecker) Endangered
Animal Family: Picidae
Date Listed: 13 October 1970
The adult red-cockaded woodpecker (RCW) has a plumage that is
entirely black and white except for small red streaks on the sides of the nape in
the male. The back of the RCW is black and white with horizontal stripes. The
breast and underside of this woodpecker are white with streaked flanks. The
RCW has a large white cheek patch surrounded by the black cap, nape, and
throat.
The RCW uses open old growth stands of southern pines, particularly
longleaf pine (Pinus palustris), for foraging and nesting habitat. A forested stand
must contain at least 50% pine, lack a thick understory, and be contiguous with
other stands to be appropriate habitat for the RCW. These birds nest
4
exclusively in trees that are ?60 years old and are contiguous with pine stands
at least 30 years of age. The foraging range of the RCW is up to 200 hectares
(500 acres). This acreage must be contiguous with suitable nesting sites.
These woodpeckers nest exclusively in living pine trees and usually in
trees that are infected with the fungus that causes red-heart disease. Cavities
are located in colonies from 3.6-30.3 m (12-100 ft) above the ground and
average 9.1- 15.7 m (30-50 ft) high. They can be identified by a large
incrustation of running sap that surrounds the tree. The RCW lays its eggs in
April, May, and June; the eggs hatch approximately 38 days later.
Biological Conclusion:
No Effect
No habitat as described above exists for the RCW in the project area.
The mixed pine hardwood stands contain significantly less than 50% pine trees
and are not contiguous to pine stands 30 years of age. In addition, a search of
the NCNHP database of rare species and unique habitats revealed no records of
RCW in the project area. Therefore, it can be concluded that this project will not
affect RCW.
Isofria medeoloides (small-whorled pogonia) Endangered
Plant Family: Orchidaceae
Federally Listed: September 10, 1982
Flowers Present: mid May-mid June
Small-whorled pogonia is a perennial orchid having long pubescent roots and a
hollow stem. Stems terminate in a whorl of five or six light green, elliptical leaves that
are somewhat pointed. One or two light green flowers are produced at the end of the
stem. Flowers of small-whorled pogonia have short sepals.
The small-whorled pogonia grows in "second growth deciduous" or '
deciduous-coniferous forests, with an open canopy, open shrub layer, and sparse herb
layer. It prefers acidic soils. Flowering is inhibited in areas where there is relatively
high shrub coverage or high sapling density.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
As stated in the referenced document, a plant by plant survey was conducted for
small-whorled pogonia by NCDOT biologists Bruce 0. Ellis and Mark A. Hartman on 13
June 1996. No specimens were observed and a biological Conclusion of No Effect was
given for this species. In addition, the NCNHP database of rare species and unique
habitats was reviewed on 17 February 1996. This search revealed no records of small-
whorled pogonia within the project area. Therefore, the Biological Conclusion of No
Effect rendered in the referenced document remains valid.

Lysimachia asperulaefolia (rough-leaved loosestrife) Endangered
Plant Family: Primulaceae
Federally Listed: June 12, 1987
Flowers Present: June
Rough-leaved loosestrife is a perennial herb having slender stems and whorled
leaves. This herb has showy yellow flowers which usually occur in threes or fours.
Fruits are present from July through October.
Rough-leaved loosestrife is endemic to the coastal plain and sandhills of North
and South Carolina. This species occurs in the ecotones or edges between longleaf
pine uplands and pond pine pocosins (areas of dense shrub and vine growth usually on
a wet, peat, poorly drained soil), on moist to seasonally saturated sands and on shallow
organic soils overlaying sand. It has also been found to occur on deep peat in the low
shrub community of large Carolina bays (shallow, elliptical, poorly drained depressions
of unknown origins). The areas it occurs in are fire maintained. Rough-leaved
loosestrife rarely occurs in association with hardwood stands and prefers acidic soils.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
As stated in the referenced document, a plant by plant survey was conducted for
rough-leaved" loosestrife by NCDOT biologists Bruce O. Ellis and Mark A. Hartman on
13 June 1996. No specimens were observed and a biological Conclusion of No Effect
was given for this species. In addition, the NCNHP database of rare species and
unique habitats was reviewed on 17 February 1996. This search revealed no records
of rough-leaved loosestrife within the project area. Therefore, the Biological
Conclusion of No Effect rendered in the referenced document remains valid.
Please contact me at extension 282 if you have any questions regarding this
report.
cc: V. Charles Bruton, Ph.D., Environmental Unit Head
Hal C. Bain, Environmental Supervisor
File: B-3183