20001381 Ver 1_Complete File_20001025

? y4
r
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201
GOVERNOR
October 9, 2000
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Field Office Post Office Box 1890 Ol1?SUFO,
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402
QQj381
DAVID MCCOY
ACTING SECRETARY
ATTENTION: Mr. Dave Timpy
NCDOT Coordinator
SUBJECT: Robeson County, Bridge No. 430 on SR 1539 over the Lumber
River; Federal Aid No. MABRZ-1539(1); State Project No.
8.2462001; TIP No. B-3228.
Dear Sir:
Attached for your information is a copy of the project-planning document
prepared by the North Carolina Department of Transportation (DOT) and signed by the
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) in February 2000. The project involves
replacing bridge No. 430 on SR 1539 over the Lumber River, Robeson County. The new
180 foot bridge structure will be a placed along the same alignment and location as the
existing bridge. The approach work will consist of resurfacing and widening the roadway
to two 11-foot lanes with 4-foot shoulders. Guardrail will be installed where warranted.
Total project length will be 880 feet. During construction, traffic will be detoured along
SR 1589, US 74,1-95 and NC 72.
The project is being processed by the FHWA as a "Categorical Exclusion" (CE)
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
(COE). 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 General Water Quality Certification for an approved
CE will apply to this project. The NCDOT will follow general conditions on permit,
Section 404 Nationwide 23. A copy of the CE document has been provided to the North
iA
Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources, Division of Water
Quality (DWQ), for their review. A copy of this document is also being provided to the
NC Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC) for their review. The DOT is requesting that
the WRC provide comments to the COE concerning permit requests.
Bridge No. 430 is located on SR 1539 over the Lumber River in Robeson County.
The superstructure is composed of two approach spans and a truss. Under a worst case
scenario, demolition of the reinforced concrete deck may result in as much as 62 cubic
yards of temporary fill. The truss itself should result in less than 20 cubic yards of
temporary fill. The two reinforced concrete abutments should result in 22 cubic yards of
temporary fill. The total temporary fill would be 104 cubic yards in a worst case
scenario. Careful applications of Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition may
result in a lesser impact. This bridge demolition has been classified as a Case 3 Bridge
Demolition (see BMP-BD&R attachment). There are no special restrictions beyond those
outlined in Best Management Practices for Protection of Surface Waters.
As stated in the CE document for this bridge replacement, the DOT commits to
the implementation of Design Standards for Sensitive Watershed Sedimentation Control
Guidelines in addition to standard Best Management Practices.
If you have any questions or need any additional information, please contact Mr.
Jeffrey Burleson at [phone], Extension 315.
Sincerely,
William D. Gilmore, PE, Manager
Project Development and Environmental
Analysis Branch
Attachments
cc: Mr. David Franklin, USACE, Wilmington
Mr. John Dorney, NCDENR, DWQ
Mr. Calvin Leggett, P.E., Program Development Branch
Mr. John Alford, P.E. Roadway Design Unit
Mrs. Debbie Barbour, P.E., Design Services
Mr. Dave Henderson, P.E., Hydraulics Unit
Mr. Tim Roundtree, P.E., Structure Design Unit
Mr. T. R. Gibson, P.E., Division 6 Engineer
Mr. Dave Cox, NCWRC
Mr. Tom McCartney, USFWS
. • ?
FINAL
9-20-99
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Best Management Practices
For Bridge Demolition and Removal
The following Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition and Removal
(BMP-BDR) was developed in coordination with the Army Corps of Engineers (COE),
the Wildlife Resource Commission, the National Marine Fisheries Service, and others
with the goal of establishing a consistent, environmentally sound approach to the
demolition and removal of bridges on North Carolina's public road systems. These
Practices shall be an addendum to (not a replacement for) NCDOT's Best Management
Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters.
The primary objective of these guidelines shall be to protect the water quality and
aquatic life of the affected environment in the vicinity of a project. The Department shall
use these BMP-BDR consistently on all projects involving bridge removal over a water
body.
All projects shall fall into one of the following three categories.
Case 1 - "In water" work is restricted to an absolute minimum, due to the presence of
Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW) or Threatened and/or Endangered Species (T&E
Species). All work potentially effecting the resource will be carefully coordinated with
the agency having jurisdiction.
Case 2 - allows no work at all in the water during moratorium periods associated with
fish migration, spawning, and larval recruitment into nursery areas.
Case 3 - there are no special restrictions beyond those outlined in Best Management
Practices for Protection of Surface Waters and the supplements added by this document
on Bridge Demolition. All three Cases are subject to BMP-BDR's.
It is not the intention of these guidelines to prevent the creativity of the contractor
in the removal of the bridge. If the contractor or Resident Engineer devises a means of
removal that retains the spirit of these guidelines but does not adhere to the letter, such a
means will be considered by the NCDOT Resident Engineer, the NCDOT Natural
Systems Specialist, and the federal and/or state agency representative(s). With that
caveat in mind, the following guidelines will be applied as appropriate during the
construction and demolition stages of a project:
• The contractor shall be required to submit a plan for bridge demolition and debris
removal to the Resident Engineer, and must receive written approval from the
Resident Engineer prior to any demolition work beginning.
• If there is a special resource, Case 1 (for example a Threatened or Endangered
Species), pointed out in the document, special provisions will apply to both the
construction of the new structure and demolition and removal of the old structure.
Such special provisions may supersede the guidelines herein.
Page 1 of 3
FINAL
9-20-99
Bridge Shall Be Removed Without Dropping Components Into The Water
If a bridge is to be removed in a fashion such that there is a practical alternative
to dropping bridge components into the water, that alternative shall be followed.
In the case of a concrete deck, the bridge deck shall be removed by sawing
completely through the concrete thickness. Removal may be in sections out between
the beams or a cut full length of span between the beams. No part of the structure
will be allowed to fall into the water. The concrete shall be removed from the site
intact and placed/retained in an upland disposal area.
If it is determined that components of the bridge must be dropped into the water, all
efforts will be made to minimize the overall impact to the surface waters. If the
bridge is composed of several spans, the demolition shall occur one span at a time.
Components from a given span which have been dropped into the water must be
removed from the water before demolition can proceed to the next span.
• If it is determined that components of the bridge must be dropped into the water, any
and all asphalt wearing surface shall be removed and not dropped into the water.
• If a CAMA permit is required, dropping any component of a bridge into the water
will not be acceptable unless it is proven that there is no feasible alternative. Such an
activity would require coordination with and approval of CAMA.
Every bridge to be removed which is constructed completely of timber shall be
removed without dropping components of the bridge into the water. If an unusual
circumstance arises where the contractor believes that a bridge component must be
dropped into the water, the contractor must alert the Resident Engineer. The Resident
Engineer shall coordinate with the Army Corps of Engineers and the Natural Systems
Specialist who obtained the permit to discuss the necessary course of action. This is
anticipated to be a rare occurrence.
• If the substructure of a bridge includes timber or steel piles, they shall be removed by
cutting them off level with surface of the streambed. In no circumstance are the piles
to remain above the surface of the streambed. This shall be accomplished in a fashion
which minimizes the increase of sediment into the surface waters. As an exception,
piles that are in conflict with the proposed piers may be completely removed by
pulling. Timber or steel piles will be removed in a fashion that does not allow the
pile to fall into the water. In tidal areas it may be necessary to remove the piers
completely or to some depth below the substrate because of sand/current movement
over time. Such a need will be established in the Greensheet(s) Project
Commitments.
Non Shattering Methods
• Every bridge demolition shall be accomplished by non-shattering methods.
Shattering means any method which would scatter debris. A wrecking ball is no
longer an acceptable tool for bridge removal. Explosives, a "hoe-ram", or other
comparable tools may be used in such a fashion that fractures but does not shatter and
Page 2 of 3
FINAL
9-20-99
scatter bridge components into the water. A possible exception to this rule might be a
concrete arch bridge in which case a method shall be found which minimizes impact
to the extent practical and feasible. In the case of an exception, the method of
demolition will be developed in consultation with the appropriate federal and state
agencies.
Use of Explosives
• In the event that there is not a practical alternative to non-shattering, alternate
methods of bridge demolition shall be discussed with and approved by the Army
Corps of Engineers and other federal and state resource agencies having jurisdiction
over the resource.
• All parties involved recognize that explosives are sometimes required to remove
components of a bridge. However, at the present, the proper means of applying those
explosives is not agreed upon. The various agencies involved agree that over time,
we will come to agreement on the use of explosives in a form that will be included in
these BMP's for Bridge Demolition and will not require special consultation. For
the present, if it is determined that explosives are required to remove any
component of a bridge, that activity shall be coordinated with the Army Corps of
Engineers in addition to the state or federal agency with jurisdiction over that
particular water. This issue shall be revisited at the earliest time possible to
determine appropriate measures to include in these BMP's which shall minimize or
eliminate the consultations required in the future.
General
• Where there are sedimentation concerns the Greensheet Project Commitments may
identify the need for turbidity curtains (or similar devices) in the demolition and
construction phases of a project in the area of concern to limit the impacts.
• If damage is done to the bank as a result of debris removal, the COE shall be
consulted and the bank shall be re-stabilized to natural contours using indigenous
vegetation prior to completion of activities in that period of construction.
• If the new bridge does not go back on the original alignment, the banks shall be
restored to original contours revegetated with indigenous species as appropriate.
• Any machine operating in an area which could leak engine fluids into the water shall
be inspected visually on a daily basis for leakage. If leakage is found, the fluid(s)
shall be contained and removed immediately in accordance with applicable state
regulations and guidelines, as well as the equipment repaired prior to further use.
• When pumping to de-water a drilled shaft pier, the discharge shall be into an
acceptable sediment containment bin to minimize siltation in the water.
Page 3 of 3
Robeson County
Bridge No. 430 on SR 1539
Over Lumber River
Federal Project MABRZ-1 539 (1)
State Project 8.2462001 001381
TIP No. B-3228
PROGRAMMATIC CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
PROGRAMMATIC SECTION 4(f)'s
February 2000
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS BRANCH

"reensneet
PROJECT COMMITMENTS:
B-3228, Robeson County
Bridge No. 430 on SR 1539
Over Lumber River
Federal Project MABRZ-1539(1)
State Project 8.2462001
The following headings indicate the individual or organization responsible for carrying
out the project commitment(s) listed beneath the headings.
Resident Engineer
• Bridge Demolition: Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition & Removal will be
implemented in this project.
• Before construction begins, the Resident Engineer will insure that "Bridge Construction
Ahead" signs are placed on the upstream and downstream sides of the bridge.
• The Lumber River channel will be kept open to boating traffic during construction.
• During construction, efforts will be made to maintain as wide a channel opening as possible.
• Resident Engineer will coordinate with the Lumber River State Park Superintendent, James
Sessoms. He can be reached at [phone].
• Resident Engineer will coordinate with NCDOT's Public Information Office ([phone])
in providing notification to the news media of closure of river to navigational traffic during
structure removal.
• Access to the Wildlife Resource Commission Boat Launch will be maintained during
construction.
Roadside Environmental Unit
• High Quality Waters Erosion Control Measures are required on this project.
• Bridge Demolition: Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition & Removal will be
implemented in this project.
Hydraulics Design Unit
• Designers will make efforts to maximize channel opening while minimizing number of piers in
the water.

Programmatic Categorical Exclusion Page 1 of 2
Green Sheet
February, 2000
lireensneet
Structure Design Unit
• If pier footing(s) which are placed in the channel come to within one meter (three feet) of the
water's normal water surface level, NCDOT will install fins to indicate the presence of the
?.? footings in order to protect boats and the footings.
Roadway Design Unit
• Before construction begins, "Bridge Construction Ahead" signs are to be placed on the
upstream and downstream sides of the bridge.
Project Development & Environmental Analysis
(Architectural Historian)
• Prior to the project being let to construction, the structure will be recorded according to the
Memorandum of Agreement signed by SHPO (see Attachment 3).
(Project Development Engineer)
• As required in the Memorandum of Agreement (see Attachment 3), NCDOT has advertised
Bridge No. 430 on the internet as being available to anyone wishing to assume ownership and
liability of the bridge. The web site is found at the following address:
http://www.doh.dot.state.nc.us/preconstruct/pe/
• As required by the Memorandum of Agreement (see Attachment 3), NCDOT has made the
bridge available to any party wishing to assume ownership and liability of the bridge on the
existing location. To this point in time there are no willing recipients. As such, NCDOT
will continue to plan the replacement of the bridge on the existing location.
g
Programmatic Categorical Exclusion Page 2 of 2
Green Sheet
February, 2000
Programmatic Categorical Exclusion
Page I of 7
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION ACTION CLASSIFICATION FORM
TIP Project No. B-3228
State Project No. 8.2462001
Federal Project No. MABRZ-1539(1)
A. Project Description:
The project consists of replacing Bridge No. 430 on SR 1539 over Lumber River
in Robeson County. The existing bridge will be replaced with a new bridge
approximately 180 feet in length at approximately the same location and roadway
elevation as the existing bridge. The roadway cross section on the bridge will
consist of two 11-foot lanes with 3-foot offsets.
Approach work will consist of resurfacing and widening the roadway to two
11-foot lanes with 4-foot shoulders. Guardrail will be installed where warranted.
The project length will be approximately 880 feet. Traffic will be detoured along
SR 1589, US 74,1-95 and NC 72 during construction.
B. Purpose and Need:
Bridge No. 430 has a sufficiency rating of 16.6 out of 100. Both the super and
sub-structure of this 77-year old bridge are in poor condition. For these reasons,
Bridge No. 430 needs to be replaced.
C. Proposed Improvements:
The following Type II improvements which apply to the project are circled:
1. 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 driveway 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
Programmatic Categorical Exclusion
Page 2 of 7
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
3O Bridge rehabilitation, reconstruction, or replacement or the construction of
grade separation to 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
O Replacing a bridge (structure and/or fill)
4. Transportation corridor fringe parking facilities.
5. Construction of new truck weigh stations or rest areas.
6. 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.
7. 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.
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 qualify for a CE only
where the acquisition will not limit the evaluation of alternatives,
Programmatic Categorical Exclusion
Page 3 of 7
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:
Estimated Costs:
Total Construction $ 825,000
Right of Way $ 30,000
Total $ 855,000
Estimated Traffic:
Current - 2100
Year 2025 - 4300
TTST - 2%
Dual - 4%
School Busses: 8 school bus crossings/ day
Road closure poses no problems according to the school bus
transportation director
Design Speed: 40 mph due to curvature of proposed design. To improve the
design speed any more would require a design that would go well beyond the
scope of a bridge project with significant wetland impacts and at a location where
accidents have not been a problem.
Functional Classification: Urban Local Route
Division Office Comments: The Division supports this recommendation
Bridge Demolition: The superstructure is composed of two approach spans and a
truss. Under a worst case scenario, demolition of the reinforced concrete
deck may result in as much as 62 cubic yards of temporary fill. The truss
itself should result in less than 20 cubic yards of temporary fill. The two
reinforced concrete abutments should result in 22 cubic yards of
temporary fill. The total temporary fill would be 104 cubic yards in a
worst case scenario. Careful application of Best Management Practices
for Bridge Demolition may result in a lesser impact.
Programmatic Categorical Exclusion
Page 4 of 7
E. Threshold Criteria
The following evaluation of threshold criteria must be completed for Type II
actions
ECOLOGICAL YES NO
(1) Will the project have a substantial impact on any unique or ?
important natural resource? X
(2) Does the project involve habitat where federally listed
endangered or threatened species may occur? 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) of an acre and have all practicable
measures to avoid and minimize wetland takings been ?
evaluated? X
(5) Will the project require the 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)? X
(11) Does the project involve Coastal Barrier Resources Act a
resources? X
(12) Will a U. S. Coast Guard permit be required? ?
X

Programmatic Categorical Exclusion
Page 5 of 7
(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, ECONOMIC, AND CULTURAL RESOURCES YES NO
(15) Will the project induce substantial impacts to planned
growth or land use for the area? X
(16) Will the project require the relocation of any family or
business? X
(17) Will the project have a disproportionately high and
adverse human health and environmental effect on any minority
or low-income population? X
(18) If the project involves the acquisition of right of way, is the
amount of right of way acquisition considered minor? X
(19) Will the project involve any changes in access control? ?
X
(20) Will the project substantially alter the usefulness and/or land
use of adjacent property? X
(21) Will the project have an adverse effect on permanent local
traffic patterns or community cohesiveness? X
(22) Is the project included in an approved thoroughfare plan
and/or Transportation Improvement Program (and is,
therefore, in conformance with the Clean Air Act of 1990)?
X
(23) Is the project anticipated to cause an increase in traffic
volumes? X
(24) Will traffic be maintained during construction using existing
roads, staged construction, or on-site detours? X
(25) If the project is a bridge replacement project, will the bridge be
replaced at its existing location (along the
existing facility) and will all construction proposed in
association with the bridge replacement project be contained on ?
the existing facility? X
(26) Is there substantial controversy on social, economic, or
environmental grounds concerning the project? X
Programmatic Categorical Exclusion
Page 6 of 7
(27) Is the project consistent with all Federal, State, and local laws
relating to the environmental aspects of the project? X
(28) Will the project have an "effect" on structures/properties
eligible for or listed on the National Register of Historic Places.
X*
(29) Will the project affect any archaeological remains, which are
important to history or pre-history? X
(30) 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 U. S. Department of Transportation Act of
1966)? X*
(31) Will the project result in any conversion of assisted public
recreation sites or facilities to non-recreation uses, as
defined by Section 6(f) of the Land and Water Conservation
Act of 1965, as amended? X
(32) Will the project involve construction in, across, or
adjacent to a river designated as a component of or
proposed for inclusion in the Natural System of Wild and
Scenic Rivers? X*
F. Additional Documentation Required for Unfavorable Responses in Part E
(Discussion regarding all unfavorable responses in art should e provided
below. Additional supporting documentation may be attached, as necessary.)
Question 7: HQW Soil Erosion Control measures will be
implemented.
Question 28: Bridge No.430 in a thru-truss eligible for the
National Register of Historic Places. Its condition is such
that it is not reasonable to maintain and is too large to be
moved. The structure was offered on the internet as requested
by the State Historic Preservation Office. There were no
parties interested in assuming responsibility for the bridge.
In addition, to maintain the structure would have required a
new parallel alignment through an area which contains both a
park and wetlands. Replacement on the existing location
minimized overall impacts to these other resources.
Question 30 a 31: The project has three 4(f) resources, Bridge
No. 430 (a National Register Eligible structure); the boat
ramp, owned and managed by the Wildlife Resource Commission as
a public recreation access to the Lumber River; and the Lumber
River which is a designated state park. The impact to the
bridge can not be reasonably avoided. The impact to the boat
access and the Lumber River are minimal and will not
significantly disturb the function of the resources provided
precautions are taken as outlined in the Project Commitments.
Programmatic Categorical Exclusion
Page 7 of 7
G. CE Approval
TIP Project No.
State Project No.
Federal-Aid Project No.
Project Description:
B-3228
8.2462001
MABRZ-1539(1)
The project consists of replacing Bridge No. 430 on SR 1539 over Lumber River
in Robeson County. The existing bridge will be replaced with a new bridge
approximately 180 feet in length at approximately the same location and roadway
elevation as the existing bridge.
Categorical Exclusion Action Classification:
TYPE II(A)
X TYPE II(B)
Approved:
2-28-2000
Date
2-2y-oo
Date
IN - 00
Date

Assistant Manager
Project Development & Environmental Analysis Branch
W q M Q- 4E?/i-o
roject Planning Unit Head
roject Development & Environmental Analysis Branch
,11:
Development &
For Type II(B) projects only:
)T-Feb-20CO
Date
C
Analysis Branch
Federal Highway Administration
Programmatic 4(f)
Historic Bridge
Page 1 of 5
NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION
FINAL NATIONWIDE SECTION 4(f) EVALUATION AND APPROVAL
FOR FEDERALLY-AIDED HIGHWAY PROJECTS
THAT NECESSITATE THE USE OF HISTORIC BRIDGES
T. I. P. No. B-3228
F. A. Project MABRZ-1539(1)
State Project 8.2462001
Description: Replace Bridge No. 430 (determined eligible for the National Register of
Historic Places) on SR 1539 over the Lumber River with a new bridge on the existing
location. Traffic will be detoured offsite during construction.
Yes No
1. Is the bridge to be replaced or
rehabilitated with Federal funds? X
2. Does the project require the use of
a historic bridge structure which is

on or eligible for listing on the ?
X
National Register of Historic Places?
3. Is the bridge a National Historic
Landmark? F1 X
4. Has agreement been reached among the
FHWA, the State Historic Preservation

Officer (SHPO), and the Advisory Council ?
x
on Historic Preservation (ACHP) through
procedures pursuant to Section 106 of the
National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA)?
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED AND FOUND NOT TO BE FEASIBLE AND PRUDENT
The following alternatives were evaluated and found
not to be feasible and prudent:
1. Do nothing
Yes No
X F-]
Does the "do nothing" alternative:
(a) correct the problem situation that
caused the bridge to be considered
deficient?
1-1 X
(b) pose serious and unacceptable safety
hazards?
X F]
Programmatic 4(f)
Historic Bridge
Page 2 of 5
Yes No
2. Build a new structure at a different ?
location without affecting the historic X
integrity o the structure.
(a) The following reasons were reviewed:
(circle, as appropriate)
(i) The present bridge has already
been located at the only feasible
and prudent site
and/or (ii) Adverse social, environmental,
or economic impacts were noted
and/or (iii) Cost and engineering difficulties
reach extraordinary magnitude
and/or iv) a existing bridge cannot be
preserved due to the extent of
rehabilitation, because no
responsible party will maintain
and preserve the historic bridge,
or the permitting authority
requires removal or demolition.
3. Rehabilitate the historic bridge without ?
affecting the historic integrity o the x
structure.
(a) The following reasons were reviewed:
(circle, as appropriate)
(i) The bridge is so structurally
deficient that it cannot be
rehabilitated to meet the
acceptable load requirements
and meet National Register
criteria
and/or (ii The bridge is seriously
deficient geometrically and
cannot be widened to meet the
required capacity and meet
National Register criteria
Programmatic 4(f)
Historic Bridge
Page 3 of 5
MINIMIZATION OF HARM
Yes No
1. The project includes all possible planning X F-1
to minimize harm.
2. Measures to minimize harm include the
following: (circle, as appropriate)
a. For bridges that are to be
rehabilitated, the historic
integrity of the bridge is preserved
to the greatest extent possible,
consistent with unavoidable transpor-
tation needs, safety, and load
requirements.
b. For bridges that are to be
rehabilitated to the point that the
historic integrity is affected or that
are to be removed or demolished, the
FHWA ensures that, in accordance with
the Historic American Engineering
Record (HAER) standards, or other
suitable means developed through
consultation, fully adequate records
are made of the bridge.
c. For bridges that are to be replaced,
the existing bridge is made available
for an alternative use, provided a
responsible party agrees to maintain
and preserve the bridge.
dd.. For bridges that are adversely affected,
agreement among the SHPO, ACHP, and
FHWA is reached through the Section
106 process of the NHPA on measures
to minimize harm and those measures
are incorporated into the project.
Programmatic 4(f)
Historic Bridge
Page 4 of 5
Specific measures to minimize harm are
discussed below:
The SHPO, FHWA, NCDOT and Advisory Council on Historic Preservation have signed
a Memorandum Agreement with the following stipulations:
1. FHWA and NCDOT will offer Bridge No. 430 for preservation in place in
accordance with NCDOT's Historic Bridge Preservation Program. If no
responsible party accepts the bridge prior to the completion of the new structure,
Bridge No. 430 will be removed.
II. Within ninety (90) days of the acceptance of this MOA by the Advisory Council
on Historic Preservation, NCDOT shall advertise the bridge on the World Wide
Web through its home page. The advertisement will remain on NCDOT's
homepage until the new structure is complete.
III. Prior to demolition of Robeson County Bridge No. 430, NCDOT shall record the
bridge in accordance with standard practices.
Note: Any response in a box requires additional information prior to approval. Consult
Nationwide 4(f) evaluation.
Programmatic 4(f)
Historic Bridge
Page 5 of 5
COORDINATION
The proposed project has been coordinated with the following (attach correspondence):
a. State Historic Preservation Officer (see attached)
b. Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (see attached)
c. Local/State/Federal Agencies (see attached)
d. U.S. Coast Guard (N/A)
(for bridges requiring bridge permits)
SUMMARY AND APPROVAL
The project meets all criteria included in the programmatic 4(f) evaluation approved on
July 5, 1983.
All required alternatives have been evaluated and the findings made are clearly applicable
to this project.
There are no feasible and prudent alternatives to the use of the historic bridge. The
project includes all possible planning to minimize harm, and there are assurances that the
measures to minimize harm will be incorporated in the project.
All appropriate coordination has been successfully completed.
Approved:
2-260-2000
Date Manager, Planning & Environmental Branch
NCDOT
z/L1?
Date ivi ' Administrator, FHWA
Programmatic 4(f)
Recreation
Pagel of 7
NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION
NATIONWIDE SECTION 4(f) EVALUATION AND APPROVAL
FOR FEDERALLY-AIDED HIGHWAY PROJECTS WITH MINOR INVOLVEMENT WITH
PUBLIC PARKS, RECREATION LANDS, AND WILDLIFE AND
WATERFOWL REFUGES
T. I. P. No. B-3228
F. A. Project MABRZ-1539(1)
State Project 8.2462001
Description: Replace Bridge No. 430 on SR 1539 over the Lumber River (a designated
state park) with a new bridge on the existing location. The project will also
have minor impact to a Wildlife Resource Commission boat launch access.
Traffic will be detoured offsite during construction.
Yes No
Is the proposed project designed to
improve the operational characteristics,
safety, and/or physical condition of ?
existing highway facilities on X
essentially the same location?
2. Is the project on new location? F-1 X
3. Is the Section 4(f) land a publicly
owned public park, recreation land, or ?
wildlife and waterfowl refuge located X
adjacent to the existing highway?
4. Does the amount and location of the land
to be used impair the use of the
remaining Section 4(f) land, in whole or
in part, for its intended purpose? F-1 X
(See chart below)
Total size of section 4(f) site Maximum to be acquired
less than 10 acres ............ 10 percent of site
10 acres-100 acres ............ 1 acre
greater than 100 acres ............ 1 percent of site
Programmatic 4(r)
Recreation
Page 2 of 7
Yes No
Do the proximity impacts of the project
(e.g., noise, air and water pollution,
wildlife and habitat effects, aesthetic
values) on the remaining Section 4(f)
land impair the use of such land for its ? X
intended purpose?
6. Do the officials having jurisdiction
over the Section 4(f) land agree, in
writing, with the assessment of the
impacts of the proposed project on, and ?
the proposed mitigation for, the Section X
4(f) lands?
7. Does the project use land from a site
purchased or improved with funds under
the Land and Water Conservation Act
(Section 6(f)), the Federal Aid in Fish
Restoration Act (Dingell-Johnson Act),
the Federal Aid in Wildlife Act
(Pittman-Robertson Act), or similar
laws, or are the lands otherwise
encumbered with a Federal interest F-1 X
(e.g., former Federal surplus property)?
8. If the project involves lands described
in Item 7 above, does the appropriate
Federal Agency object to the land ? X
conversion or transfer?
9. Does the project require preparation of
an EIS? ? X
Programmatic 4(f)
Recreation
Page 3 of 7
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED AND FOUND NOT TO BE
FEASIBLE AND PRUDENT
Yes No
The following alternatives were evaluated and ?
found not to be feasible and prudent: X
1. Do-nothing.
Does the "do nothing" alternative:

(a) correct capacity deficiencies? N/A
or (b) correct existing safety hazards? ? X
or (c) correct deteriorated conditions? ? X
and (d) create costs, unusual problems, or X 7
impacts of extraordinary measure?
2. Im rovement of the highway without using
the adjacent u is park recreational N/A*
land or wildlife waterfowl refuge.
* The river is the park and therefore it is not possible to replace the bridge without
having a 4(f) effect.
(a) Have minor alignment shifts,
changes in standards, use of
retaining walls, etc., or traffic
management measures been evaluated?
N/A ?
(b) The items in 2(a) would result in
(circle, as appropriate)
(i) substantial adverse community impact
or (ii) substantial increased costs
or (iii) unique engineering, transportation,
maintenance, or safety problems
or (iv) substantial social, environmental,
or economic impacts
or (v) a project which does not meet the need
and (vi) impacts, costs, or problems which are
Programmatic 4(f)
Recreation
Page 4 of 7
extraordinary magnitude
Yes No
3. Build an improved facilit on new
ocation without using the u is ark,
recreational an, or wi i e and
waterfowl refuge. (This would be a N/A*
localized run around."
* It is not possible to go around the park since the park extends many miles both
north and south of the bridge site.
(a) An alternate on new location would
result in: (circle, as appropriate)
(i) a project which does not solve
the existing problems
or (ii) substantial social,
environmental, or economic
impacts
or (iii) a substantial increase in
project cost or engineering
difficulties
and (iv) such impacts, costs, or
difficulties of truly unusual
or unique or extraordinary
magnitude
Programmatic 4(f)
Recreation
Page 5 of 7
MINIMIZATION OF HARM
Yes No
1. The project includes all possible ?
planning to minimize harm. X
2. Measures to minimize harm include the
following:
(circle those which are appropriate)
a. Replacement of lands used with lands
of reasonably equivalent usefulness
and location and of at least
comparable value.
b. Replacement of facilities impacted
by the project including sidewalks,
paths, benches, lights, trees, and
other facilities.
c. Restoration and landscaping of
disturbed areas.
Incorporation of design features and
habitat features, where necessary,
to reduce or minimize impacts to the
Section 4(f) property.
O Payment of the fair market value of
the land and improvements taken or
improvements to the remaining
Section 4(f) site equal to the fair
market value of the land and
improvements taken.
Q Additional or alternative mitigation
measures as determined necessary
based on consultation with the
officials having jurisdiction over
the parkland, recreation area, or
wildlife or waterfowl refuge.
Programmatic 4(f)
Recreation
Page 6 of 7
3. A discussion of specific mitigation measures is provided as follows:
• Before construction begins, the Resident Engineer will insure that "Bridge Construction
Ahead" signs are placed on the upstream and downstream sides of the bridge.
• The Lumber River channel will be kept open to boating traffic during construction.
• During construction, efforts will be made to maintain as wide a channel opening as
possible.
• Resident Engineer will coordinate with the Lumber River State Park Superintendent,
James Sessoms. He can be reached at [phone].
• Resident Engineer will coordinate with NCDOT's Public Information Office ((919)
733-2522) in providing notification to the news media of closure of river to
navigational traffic during structure removal.
• Designers will make efforts to maximize channel opening while minimizing number of
piers in the water.
• If pier footing(s) which are placed in the channel come to within one meter (three feet)
of the water's normal water surface level, NCDOT will install fins to indicate the
presence of the footings in order to protect boats and the footings.
• Access to the Wildlife Resource Commission Boat Launch will be maintained during
construction.
Programmatic 4(f)
Recreation
Page 7 of 7
COORDINATION
The proposed project has been coordinated with the following (attach correspondence):
a. Officials having jurisdiction over the Section 4(f) Land
NCDOT on behalf of FHWA has coordinated with the State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources Division of Parks
and Recreation and prepared the list of mitigation measures listed in Section 3
of this 4(f) statement in response to their concerns.
b. Local/State/Federal Agencies
c. US Coast Guard N/A
(for bridges requiring bridge permits)
d. DOI, if Section 6(f) lands are N/A
involved
SUMMARY AND APPROVAL
The project meets all criteria included in the programmatic 4(f) evaluation
approved on December 23, 1986.
All required alternatives have been evaluated and the findings made are clearly
applicable to this project. There are no feasible or prudent alternatives which avoid use of
the Section 4(f) land.
The project includes all possible planning to minimize harm, and there are
assurances that the measures to minimize harm will be incorporated in the project.
All appropriate coordination has been successfully completed.
Approved:
2_28-2000 c?4, !1`
Date Manager, Planning & Environmental Branch
NCDOT
Date Divisio dmmistrator, FHWA
Attachment I
DCR Letter
,.STw
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
March 20, 1997
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Bridge 30 on SR 1539 over Lumber River,
Robeson County, B-3228, Federal Aid Project
MABRZ-1539(1), State Project 8.2462001, ER
97-8344
Dear Mr. Graf:
Division of Archives and History
Jeffrey J. Crow, Director
On March 18, 1997, 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, Bridge 430 is the only structure over .
fifty years of age within the project's area of potential effect. The Pratt through
truss bridge was determined eligible for listing in the National Register in 1979. We
look forward to meeting to determine the project's effects on the bridge.
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. -041
109 Fast Jones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807
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,
i
Imo,,
David Brook

Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw
cc: &';!' F. Vick
B. Church
T. Padgett
Attachment 2
Concurrence Form
Federal Aid T M A 60-1- • I =?3y t) TIP R 6 3 LLB- County
CONCURRENCE FOPUM
FOR
ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS
Ro 6erS-V I
Brief Project Description
REP?tic? b&iot a we 4'?o vP4 U. 1=,? Pvsar Wwtt fA R+VGR.
On O ALW 1-1 1 119y00 , representatives of the

reviewed the subject project and agreed
North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
Federal Highway Administration (F 'WA)
North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SiTO)
Other
there are no effects on the National Register-listed property within the project's
area of potential e:;ect and listed on the reverse.
there are no a ec:s on the National Register-eligiole properties located within the
project's area of potential e:tect and listed on the reverse.
there is an a ec: on the National Ret ser-listed prone ry/properties within the
project's area of potential. effect. The property-properties and the a sect(s) are
listed on the reverse.
? there is an erect on the National Register-eligiole property/properties within the
project's area of potential erect. T're property/properties and eject(s) are listed
on the reverse.
Signed:
4? . Olt
N
Represen t' N I C DOT, Historic Architectural Resources Section Date
FHNV for the Divi on Administrator, or other Federal Agency Date
4IJk kV-,(Z;f IMv la ??A
Representative, SHPO 'Late
ace
State Historic Preservation Officer
(over)
ederal Aid -1"r MA 6R:z- ) TIP R 6.32 County Izz pis;-0N
rope des within area of potential elect for which there is no effect. Indicate if prope.^,y is
iational Register-listed (QTR) or determined eligible (DE).
Properies within area.of potential e5ec: fcr which there is an a erect. Indicate -rope-,y status (NR
or DE) and describe effect. 43 0 C D E? &V V Z*-,C ZFFE ar

Reason(s) why efr"ect is not adverse (if applicable).
Initialed: NCDOT FHVVA ??' SHPO ?,
Attachment 3
Memorandum of Agreement
MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT
SUBMITTED TO THE ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION
PURSUANT TO' 6 CFR PART 800.6(a)
REGARDING THE REPLACEMENT OF BRIDGE NO. 430
ON SR 1539 OVER THE LUMBER RIVER
ROBESON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
TIP NO. B-3228. STATE PROJECT NO. 8.2462001
FEDERAL AID NO. MABRZ-1 539(1)
WHEREAS. the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has determined that
replacement of Bridge No. 430 on SR 1 539 over the Lumber River in Robeson County,
North Carolina. a property eligible for inclusion in the National Resister of Historic
Places. will have an effect upon the structure. and has consulted with the North Carolina
State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) pursuant to 36 CFR Part 800, regulations
implementing Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470f);
and
WHEREAS, the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) participated in
the consultation and has been invited to concur in this Memorandum of Agreement;
NOW, THEREFORE, FHWA and the North Carolina SHPO agree that the undertaking
shall be implemented in accordance with the following stipulations in order to take into
account the effect of the undertaking on Bridge No. 430.
STIPULATIONS
FHWA will ensure that the following measures are carried out:
FHWA and NCDOT will offer Bridge No. 430 for preservation in place in
accordance with NCDOT's Historic Bridge Preservation Program. If no
responsible party accepts the bridge prior to the completion of the new
structure, Bridge No. 430 will be removed.
II. Within ninety(90) days of the acceptance of this MOA by the Advisory
Council on Historic Preservation (Council). NCDOT shall advertise the
bridge on the World Wide Web through its home page. The advertisement
will remain on NCDOT's home page until the new structure is completed.
III. Prior to the demolition of Robeson County Bridge No. 430. NCDOT shall
record the bridge in accordance with the attached Historic Structures
Recordation Plan (Appendix A).
Execution of this Memorandum of Agreement by FHWA and the North Carolina SHPO
and implementation of its terms evidence that FHWA has afforded the Council an
opportunity to comment on the replacement of Bridge No. 430 on SR 1539 over the
Lumber River and its effect on the historic property, and that FHWA has taken into
account the effects of the undertaking on the historic property.
rv
?71L (Pl ?I1`f? _
NORTH'eAR(?LfNA STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER DA'
C
L
NOR
TATI
CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
tg Party
'?- 22 i P--
ATE
S
D for
Y COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION
Attachment 3
Memorandum of Agreement
APPENDIX A
Historic Structures Recordation Plan
for the Replacement of Bridge No. 430
Robeson County. North Carolina
Description
A brief physical description and narrative statement of significance
Photographic Requirements
Photographic views of Bridge No. 430 includinsz:
Overall views (elevations and oblique views)
Overall views of the bridge in its setting
Details of construction or desisn
Format:
Representative color transparencies
35 mm or larger black and white negatives (all views)
8 x 10 inch black and white contact prints of all negatives
All processing to be done to archival standards
All photographs and negatives to be labeled according to Division of
Archives and History standards
Copies and Curation
One (1) set of all photographic documentation will be deposited with the North
Carolina Division of Archives and History/State Historic Preservation Office to
be made a permanent part of the statewide survey and icono.-raphic collection.
DENR Parks & Recreation Letter
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
MC®ENIt DIVISION OF PARKS AND RECREATION
January 28, 2000
JAMES O. HUNT JR. *,?7?,? Y? ? 7?mT?
GOVERNOR 1.1 G1Y10[?A t1l M
TO: John Williams, Bridge Replacement Unit
131LL HOLMAN Project Development & Environmental Analysis Branch
SECRETARY NC Department of Transportation
FROM: Sue Regier, Head
DR. PHILIP K. MCKNELLY Resource Management Program
DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: Bridge No. 430 - Robeson County: TIP No. B-3228
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the replacement of Bridge 430 in Robeson
County over the Lumber River. Two concerns were raised in the Division of Parks and
Recreation's review of the programmatic 4(f) document for this project. First, is the
finished elevation of the bridge above the river. The review material was not clear on what
the clearance would be under the bridge. The Division has no concern with the
replacement of the bridge if the clearance between the bridge and the river will be the same
- as the existing bridge.
The second concern is with the construction process. The programmatic 4(f) document
for the bridge replacement (NC 72/711) just upstream of this project included the
condition of maintaining an open boat channel during construction and the channel was
block on multiple occasions during that project. The mitigation measure to keep a channel
open to boat traffic is included in this document also. Our concern with this mitigation
measure is its actual implementation. If this mitigation measure is implemented the
Division has no concern with this project.
:_ -_ - Access to the Lumber River at this site is provided by a Wildlife Resources Commission
boat ramp. It was not clear if access to the river be maintained at this site during
construction or will the access to the boat ramp be improved as part of this project.
_ I look forward to your clarifications of our concerns. Let me know if you need additional
information or clarification. I can be reached at 715-8694.
:. /SMR
- cc: James Sessoms, Lumber River State Park
Kim Huband, Comprehensive Planning Program
1615 MAIL SERVICE CENTER, RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27609-1615
PHONE 919-7]D-4161 FAX [phone]
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY / AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER • 50% RECYCLED/109( POST-CONSUMER PAPER

Bridge No. 430
V)
a
l3n
_.._.._ _
r
c
i
t
,? t Q
4DQ
aW
Z O
i
.._ wvcind 23
1 .?oa.r
............................
_• •.
c /• L t i
:J: ..._.._.._
im t 2*11
i i
Studied Detour Route
North Carolina Dept. of Trawportation
Division of Highways
p Project Deueloprtent &
Environmental Analysis Branch
b
Robeson County
Replaee Bridge No. 430 on SR 1539
Over Lumber River
B-3228
SCALE: 2 in = 1 mi Figure 1
b c 5w/
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILNUNGTON DISTRICT, CORPS Or ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
REPLY TO
ATTENTION OF. November 16, 2001
Regulatory Division
Subject: Action ID No. 200100364, TIP No. B-3228, Bridge Number 430, SR-1539, Robeson
County, North Carolina.
Mr. William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manager
Project Development & Environmental Analysis
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, N.C. 27699-1548
Dear Mr. Gilmore:
I am responding to a request from Carolina Bridge Company dated November 12, 2001,
forwarded by the NCDOT Division 6 Environmental Officer on November 15, 2001, requesting
permission to remove Bridge Bent Number 1 by explosive fracturing. The use of explosives are
not subject to Department of the Army authorization, however, the fragments and debris
generated from the explosion that would be discharged into waters of the United States would
require Department of the Army authorization pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(33 U.S.C. 1344) and Section 10 of the River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 403).
As stated in the request, the bridge bent footing is 28-foot long by 6-foot wide and 8-foot
deep containing 50 cubic yards of un-reinforced concrete on 23 timber piles with a concrete pier
above. The bridge bent is located within the Lumber River and adjacent to the riverbank. The
pier above the footing will be removed by sawing prior to demolition of the footing. A Blasting
Plan, dated November 9, 2001, was submitted with the request indicating the shot hole
dimensions, spacing and explosive charge type and size. The use of explosives to remove the
footing will result in the elimination of the previously authorized temporary rock causeway.
I have determined that the proposed discharge will meet the terms and conditions of
Nationwide Permit #33 (Temporary Construction, Access and Dewatering) with the following
special conditions:
1. That the Blasting Plan (Enclosed) dated November 9, 2001 and submitted on November
15, 2001 be utilized for the demolition of Bridge Bent Number 1. The explosive charge
shall be sized to fracture the footer into manageable large fragments and not shatter the
structure into small shot-rock fragments.
2. Turbidity curtains will be placed around the perimeter of the bent before blasting to
control any disturbed bottom sediment during demolition and fragment removal. The
turbidity curtains will remain in place until completion of the removal of the bent
fragments.
-2-
3. The upper portion of the pier above the footer will be removed by sawing before the
footer is shot. The pier will not be toppled into the Lumber River, but will be removed
to the bank side of the bent.
4. Heavy blasting mats will be placed around the footer before being shot to contain
fragments and reduce the resulting percussion wave.
5. The developer of the blasting plan, Mr. R. Scott Nickel, Blaster's License No. LLR-
0320-2001, shall inspect the drilling and placement of the shot holes to determine that
they conform to the submitted blasting plan and personally supervise the setting and
detonation of the explosive charges.
6. This office will be notified two weeks in advance of the scheduled blasting date so that
I may be present when the bent footer is shot. The footer is not to be shot without my
presence at the site.
7. No in-stream work shall be performed in the Lumber River between the dates of April 1
through June 15 of any year.
This confirmation will supersede the Nationwide Permit #33 confirmation for the
temporary rock causeway issued by this office on February 14, 2001 and will expire on February
11, 2002. A General Permit Verification Letter is enclosed for your file. Should you have any
questions, please contact me at the Wilmington Field Office, Regulatory Division, at telephone
[phone].
Sincerely,
Richard K. Spencer
NCDOT Project Manager
Enclosures
Copies Furnished (with enclosures):
Mr. David Cox
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
512 N. Salisbury Street
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-1188
Mr. John HennessV
NCDENR-DWQ Wetlands Section 1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1621
-3-
Mr. James J. Rerko, PWS
Division Enviromnental Officer
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Division 6
P.O. Box 1150
Fayetteville, North Carolina 28302-1150
LPVV4 s--VN? r
as Ra?.r.o J !
..PV SAWNC
of - ,
"sAD 20%r% +'k Pya Gub.l `/AOo °?-
z.I& a Pea N..e T. Fzw.TwQ• G.,.nk
/-T- M•..w.W&LC S.s-E 1-r Eaa S
pa. 2 N•.c I,o? ly1.O3^ ¢spI_ovv¢. P-W'CL_
F.n• 3• NOLI$ ??- L- 020 ?l?L°a?oai {7• C13L_
LJlb M 17 r-.u_3ac Pecnys ARI-av- PAL-)4•-9
-?-- r IS 1'Zr4u.wEq
gL AS7i•+q MMa T. t3? L/L.p T. e-rA. DRao.s
_ t
i. 2flLC
j-7• l:7-_ I'V 7•.7? _ ?. P:77_.yc J_1' .tea Jr ..
1
?V

pLQ N
T.»,tre P?aea
T•..eac 7?L?:
LZ•/-? 3- 72??L N•LCa. (I?Ia ..G t'-olwl?
oN.... °. L- ? • I
CAROLINA BRIDGE CO. INC. RIcHn Scorr 'v I c r 3L M ST/NG FC A /V i/?/
nNAWA SUNG. SC °•^ - 9 • o rRJI%TQZ uCTAfg vo LLP-o3E°-b.
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
• Action ID: 200100364 TIP No: B-3228 State Project No: 8.2462001 County: Robeson
GENERAL PERMIT (REGIONAL AND NATIONWIDE) VERIFICATION
Applicant: North Carolina Department of Transportation
Address: William D. Gilmore, P.E., Branch Manager
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Project Development and Environmental Analysis
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
Telephone Number: [phone]
Size and Location of project (waterway, road name/number, town, etc.): Bridge No. 430 on SR-1539 over the
Lumber River in Robeson County, North Carolina.
Description of Activity: To discharge and remove fractured concrete fragments resulting from the explosive
demolition of the Bridge Bent Number 1 footer. All temporary fill is to be removed from the waterway in its
entirety upon completion of the demolition.
Applicable Law: X Section 404 (Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1344)
Section 10 (River and Harbor Act of 1899)
Authorization: 23 Nationwide Permit Number
Regional General Permit Number
Your work is authorized by this Regional General (RGP) or Nationwide (NWP) Permit provided it is accomplished
in strict accordance with the attached conditions and your submitted plans. If your activity is subject to Section 404
(if Section 404 block above is checked), before beginning work you must also receive a Section 401 water quality
certification from the N.C. Division of Environmental Management, telephone [phone]
Please read and carefully comply with the attached conditions of the RGP or NWP. Any violation of the conditions
of the RGP or NWP referenced above may subject the permittee to a stop work order, a restoration order, and/or
appropriate legal action.
This Department of the Army RGP or NWP verification does not relieve the permittee of the responsibility to obtain
any other required Federal, State, or local approvals/permits. The permittee may need to contact appropriate State
and local agencies before beginning work.
If there are any questions regarding this authorization or any of the conditions of the RGP or NWP, please contact
the Corps Regulatory Official specified below.
Date 16 November 2001
Corps Regulatory Official Richard K. Spencer Telephone No. [phone]
Expiration Date of Verification 11 February 2002
. i,
NATIONWIDE PERMIT 23
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
CORPS OF ENGINEERS
FINAL NOTICE OF ISSUANCE AND MODIFICATION OF NATIONWIDE PERMITS
FEDERAL REGISTER
MARCH 9, 2000
Approved Categorical Exclusions: Activities undertaken, assisted, authorized, regulated,
funded, or financed, in whole or in part, by another Federal agency or department where that
agency or department has determined, pursuant to the Council on Environmental Quality
Regulation for Implementing the Procedural Provisions of the National Environmental Policy
Act (40 CFR part 1500 et seq.), 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
the Office of the Chief of Engineers (ATTN: CECW-OR) has been furnished notice of the
agency's or department's application for the categorical exclusion and concurs with that
determination. Prior to approval for purposes of this NWP of any agency's categorical
exclusions, the Chief of Engineers will solicit public comment. In addressing these comments,
the Chief of Engineers may require certain conditions for authorization of an agency's categorical
exclusions under this NWP. (Sections 10 and 404)
I i.
NATIONWIDE PERMIT #23 APPROVED CATEGORICAL EXCLUSIONS
Section 10 and 404
NATIONWIDE PERMIT CONDITIONS
1. Navigation. No activity may cause more than a minimal adverse effect on navigation.
2. Proper Maintenance. Any structure or fill authorized shall be properly maintained, including
maintenance to ensure public safety.
3. Soil Erosion and Sediment Controls. Appropriate soil erosion and sediment controls must be
used and maintained in effective operating condition during construction, and all exposed soil
and other fills, as well as any work below the ordinary high water mark or high tide line, must be
permanently stabilized at the earliest practicable date.
4. Aquatic Life Movements. No activity may substantially disrupt the movement of those
species of aquatic life indigenous to the waterbody, including those species which normally
migrate through the area, unless the activity's primary purpose is to impound water. Culverts
placed in streams must be installed to maintain low flow conditions.
5. Equipment. Heavy equipment working in wetlands must be placed on mats, or other
measures must be taken to minimize soil disturbance.
6. Regional and Case-By-Case Conditions. The activity must comply with any regional
conditions which may have been added by the Division Engineer (see 33 CFR 330.4(e)) and with
any case specific conditions added by the Corps or by the State or tribe in its Section 401 water
quality certification and Coastal Zone Management Act consistency determination.
7. Wild and Scenic Rivers. No activity may occur in a component of the National Wild and
Scenic River System; or in a river officially designated by Congress as a "study river" for
possible inclusion in the system, while the river is in an official study status; unless the
appropriate Federal agency, with direct management responsibility for such river, has determined
in writing that the proposed activity will not adversely effect the Wild and Scenic River
designation, or study status. Information on Wild and Scenic Rivers may be obtained from the
appropriate Federal land management agency in the area (e.g., National Park Service, U.S. Forest
Service, Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.)
8. Tribal rights. No activity or its operation may impair reserved tribal rights, including, but not
limited to, reserved water rights and treaty fishing and hunting rights.
9. Water Quality Certification. The permittee must comply with all conditions of General Water
Quality Certification No. 3107, issued by the North Carolina Division of Water Quality
(NCDWQ) on February 11, 1997.
10. Coastal Zone Management. The North Carolina Division of Coastal Management
(NCDCM), has determined that this nationwide permit (NWP) is conditionally consistent with
the North Carolina Coastal Management Program. Notification to and written concurrence from
the NCDCM is required prior to work in the twenty (20) coastal counties of North Carolina.
11. Endangered Species.
a. No activity is authorized under any NWP which is likely to jeopardize the continued
existence of a threatened or endangered species or a species proposed for such designation, as
identified under the Federal Endangered Species Act, or which is likely to destroy or adversely
modify the critical habitat of such species. Non-Federal permittees shall notify the District
Engineer if any listed species or designated critical habitat might be affected or is in the vicinity
of the project, or is located in the designated critical habitat and shall not begin work on the
activity until notified by the District Engineer that the requirements of the Endangered Species
Act have been satisfied and that the activity is authorized. For activities that may affect
Federally-listed endangered or threatened species or designated critical habitat, the notification
must include the name(s) of the endangered or threatened species that may be affected by the
proposed work or that utilize the designated critical habitat that may be affected by the proposed
work. As a result of formal or informal consultation with the FWS or NMFS, the District
Engineer may add species-specific regional endangered species conditions to the NWP's.
b. Authorization of an activity by a NWP does not authorize the "take" of a
threatened or endangered species as defined under the Federal Endangered Species Act.
In the absence of separate authorization (e.g., an ESA Section 10 Permit, a Biological
Opinion with "incidental take" provisions, etc.) from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
or the National Marine Fisheries Service, both lethal and non-lethal "takes" of protected
species are in violation of the Endangered Species Act. Information on the location of
threatened and endangered species and their critical habitat can be obtained directly
from the offices of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries
Service or their world wide web pages at http://www.fws.gov/r9endspp/endspp.litml and
http://nfms.gov/prot_res/esaliome.html, respectively.
12. Historic Properties. No activity which may affect historic properties listed, or eligible for
listing, in the National Register of Historic Places is authorized, until the District Engineer has
complied with the provisions of 33 CFR part 325, Appendix C. The prospective permittee must
notify the District Engineer if the authorized activity may affect any historic properties listed,
determined to be eligible, or which the prospective permittee has reason to believe may be
eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, and shall not begin the activity
until notified by the District Engineer that the requirements of the National Historic Preservation
Act have been satisfied and that the activity is authorized. Information on the location and
existence of historic resources can be obtained from the State Historic Preservation Office and
the National Register of Historic Places (see 33 CFR 330.4(8)). For activities that may affect
historic properties listed in, or eligible for listing in, the National Register of Historic Places, the
notification must state which historic property may be affected by the proposed work or include a
vicinity map indicating the location of the historic property.
13. Notification:
a. Timing. Where required by the terms of the NWP, the prospective permittee must notify
the District Engineer with a PreConstruction Notification (PCN) as early as possible. The
District Engineer must determine if the PCN is complete within 30 days of the date of receipt and
can request the additional information necessary to make the PCN complete only once.
However, if the prospective permittee does not provide all of the requested information, then the
District Engineer will notify the prospective permittee that the PCN is still incomplete and the
PCN review process will not commence until all of the requested information has been received
by the District Engineer. The prospective permittee shall not begin the activity:
(1) Until notified in writing by the District Engineer that the activity may proceed
under the NWP with any special conditions imposed by the District or Division Engineer; or
(2) If notified by the District or Division Engineer that an individual permit is required;
or
(3) Unless 45 days have passed from the District Engineer's receipt of the complete
notification and the prospective permittee has not received written notice from the District or
Division Engineer. Subsequently, the permittee's right to proceed under the NWP may be
modified, suspended, or revoked only in accordance with the procedure set forth in 33 CFR
330.5(d)(2); and
b. Contents of notification. The notification must be in writing and include the following
information:
(1) Name, address and telephone numbers of the prospective permittee;
(2) Location of the proposed project; and
(3) Brief description of the proposed project; the project's purpose; direct and indirect
adverse environmental effects the project would cause; and other NWP(s), regional general
permit(s) or individual permit(s) used or intended to be used to authorize any part of the
proposed project or any related activity.
c. Form of Notification: The standard individual permit application form (Form ENG
4345) may be used as the notification but must clearly indicate that it is a PCN and must include
all the information required in b.(1)-(3) of General Condition 13. A letter containing the
requisite information may also be used.
d. District Engineer's Decision: In reviewing the PCN for the proposed activity, the District
Engineer will determine whether the activity authorized by the NWP will result in more than
minimal individual or cumulative adverse environmental effects or may be contrary to the public
interest. The prospective permittee may, optionally, submit a proposed mitigation plan with the
PCN to expedite the process and the District Engineer will consider any proposed compensatory
mitigation the applicant has included in the proposal in determining whether the net adverse
environmental effects to the aquatic environment of the proposed work are minimal. If the
District Engineer determines that the activity complies with the terms and conditions of the NWP
and that the effects on the aquatic environment are minimal, the District Engineer will notify the
permittee and include any conditions the District Engineer deems necessary.
Any compensatory mitigation proposal must be approved by the District Engineer prior to
commencing work. If the prospective permittee is required to submit a compensatory mitigation
proposal with the PCN, the proposal may be either conceptual or detailed. If the prospective
permittee elects to submit a compensatory mitigation plan with the PCN, the District Engineer
will expeditiously review the proposed compensatory mitigation plan. The District Engineer
must review the plan within 45 days of receiving a complete PCN and determine whether the
conceptual or specific proposed mitigation would ensure no more than minimal adverse effects
on the aquatic environment. If the net adverse effects of the project on the aquatic environment
(after consideration of the compensatory mitigation proposal) are determined by the District
Engineer to be minimal, the District Engineer will provide a timely written response to the
applicant stating that the project can proceed under the terms and conditions of the nationwide
permit.
If the District Engineer determines that the adverse effects of the proposed work are more
than minimal, then he will notify the applicant either:
(1) that the project does not qualify for authorization under the NWP and instruct the
applicant on the procedures to seek authorization under an individual permit;
(2) that the project is authorized under the NWP subject to the applicant's submission of
a mitigation proposal that would reduce the adverse effects on the aquatic environment to the
minimal level; or
(3) that the project is authorized under the NWP with specific modifications or
conditions. Where the District Engineer determines that mitigation is required in order to ensure
no more than minimal adverse effects on the aquatic environment, the activity will be authorized
within the 45-day PCN period, including the necessary conceptual or specific mitigation or a
requirement that the applicant submit a mitigation proposal that would reduce the adverse effects
on the aquatic environment to the minimal level. When conceptual mitigation is included, or a
mitigation plan is required under item (2) above, no work in waters of the United States will
occur until the District Engineer has approved a specific mitigation plan.
e. Agency Coordination. The District Engineer will consider any comments from Federal
and State agencies concerning the proposed activity's compliance with the terms and conditions
of the NWPs and the need for mitigation to reduce the project's adverse effects on the aquatic
environment to a minimal level.
For activities requiring notification to the District Engineer that result in the loss of greater
than''/2 acre of waters of the United States, the District Engineer will, upon receipt of a
notification, provide immediately (e.g., via facsimile transmission, overnight mail, or other
expeditious manner), a copy to the appropriate offices of the Fish and Wildlife Service, State
natural resource or water quality agency, EPA, State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO), and,
if appropriate, the National Marine Fisheries Service. (JVith the exception of NTVP 37) These
agencies will then have 10 calendar days from the date the material is transmitted to telephone or
fax the District Engineer notice that they intend to provide substantive, site-specific comments.
If so contacted by an agency, the District Engineer will wait an additional 15 calendar days
before making a decision on the notification. The District Engineer will fully consider agency
comments received within the specified time frame, but will provide no response to the resource
agency, except as provided below. The District Engineer will indicate in the administrative
record associated with each notification that the resource agencies' concerns were considered.
As required by Section 305(b)(4)(B) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act, the District Engineer will provide a response to National Marine Fisheries
Service within 30 days of receipt of any Essential Fish Habitat conservation recommendations.
Applicants are encouraged to provide the Corps multiple copies of notifications to expedite
agency notification.
f. Wetlands Delineations. Wetland delineations must be prepared in accordance with the
current method required by the Corps. {For NIVP 29 see paragraph (b)(9)(iii) for parcels less
than '/4 acre in size.) The permittee may ask the Corps to delineate the special aquatic site.
There may be some delay if the Corps does the delineation. Furthermore, the 45-day period will
not start until the wetland delineation has been completed and submitted to the Corps, where
appropriate.
g. For activities that may adversely affect Federally-listed endangered or threatened species,
the PCN must include the name(s) of those endangered or threatened species that may be affected
by the proposed work or utilize the designated critical habitat that may be affected by the
proposed work.
h. For activities that may affect historic properties listed in, or eligible for listing in, the
National Register of Historic Places, the PCN must state which historic property may be affected
by the proposed work or include a vicinity map indicating the location of the historic property.
14. Compliance Certification. Every permittee who has received a Nationwide permit
verification from the Corps will submit a signed certification regarding the completed work and
any required mitigation. The certification will be forwarded by the Corps with the authorization
letter. The certification will include:
a. A statement that the authorized work was done in accordance with the Corps
authorization, including any general or specific conditions;
b. A statement that any required mitigation was completed in accordance with the pen-nit
conditions; and
c. The signature of the permittee certifying the completion of the work and mitigation.
15. Use of Multiple Nationwide Permits. The use of more than one NWP for a single and
complete project is prohibited, except when the acreage loss of waters of the United States
authorized by the NWPs does not exceed the acreage limit of the NWP with the highest specified
acreage limit. For example, if a road crossing over tidal waters is constructed under NWP 14,
with associated bank stabilization authorized by NWP 13, the maximum acreage loss of waters
of the United States for the total project cannot exceed 1/3 acre.
16. Water Supply Intakes. No activity, including structures and work in navigable waters of the
United States or discharges of dredged or fill material, may occur in the proximity of a public
water supply intake except where the activity is for repair of the public water supply intake
structures or adjacent bank stabilization.
17. Shellfish Beds. No activity, including structures and work in navigable waters of the United
States or discharges of dredged or fill material, may occur in areas of concentrated shellfish
populations, unless the activity is directly related to a shellfish harvesting activity authorized by
NWP 4.
18. Suitable Material. No activity, including structures and work in navigable waters of the
United States or discharges of dredged or fill material, may consist of unsuitable material (e.g.,
trash, debris, car bodies, asphalt, etc.) and material used for construction or discharged must be
free from toxic pollutants in toxic amounts (see Section 307 of the Clean Water Act).
19. Mitigation. The project must be designed and constructed to avoid and minimize adverse
effects to waters of the United States to the maximum extent practicable at the project site (i.e.,
on site). Mitigation will be required when necessary to ensure that the adverse effects to the
aquatic environment are minimal. The District Engineer will consider the factors discussed
below when determining the acceptability of appropriate and practicable mitigation necessary to
offset adverse effects on the aquatic environment that are more than minimal
a. Compensatory mitigation at a minimum 1:1 ratio will be required for all wetland impacts
requiring a PCN. Consistent with National Policy, the District Engineer will establish a
preference for restoration of wetlands to meet the minimum compensatory mitigation ratio, with
preservation used only in exceptional circumstances.
b. To be practicable, the mitigation must be available and capable of being done
considering costs, existing technology, and logistics in light of the overall project purposes.
Examples of mitigation that may be appropriate and practicable include, but are not limited to:
reducing the size of the project; establishing and maintaining wetland or upland vegetated buffers
to protect open waters such as streams; and replacing losses of aquatic resource functions and
values by creating, restoring, enhancing, or preserving similar functions and values, preferably in
the same watershed;
c. The District Engineer will require restoration, creation, enhancement, or preservation of
other aquatic resources in order to offset the authorized impacts to the extent necessary to ensure
that the adverse effects on the aquatic environment are minimal. An important element of any
compensatory mitigation plan for projects in or near streams or other open waters is the
establishment and maintenance, to the maximum extent practicable, of vegetated buffers next to
open waters on the project site. The vegetated buffer should consist of native species. The
District Engineer will determine the appropriate width of the vegetated buffer and in which cases
it will be required. Normally, the vegetated buffer will be 25 to 50 feet wide on each side of the
stream, but the District Engineer may require wider vegetated buffers to address documented
water quality concerns. If there are open waters on the project site and the District Engineer
requires compensatory mitigation for wetland impacts to ensure that the net adverse effects on
the aquatic environment are minimal, any vegetated buffer will comprise no more than 1/3 of the
remaining compensatory mitigation acreage after the permanently filled wetlands have been
replaced on a one-to-one acreage basis. In addition, compensatory mitigation must address
adverse effects on wetland functions and values and cannot be used to offset the acreage of
wetland losses that would occur in order to meet the acreage limits of some of the NWPs (e.g.,
for NWP 39, '/4 acre of wetlands cannot be created to change a % acre loss of wetlands to a '/4
acre loss; however, '/z acre of created wetlands can be used to reduce the impacts of a 1/3 acre
loss of wetlands). If the prospective permittee is required to submit a compensatory mitigation
proposal with the PCN, the proposal may be either conceptual or detailed.
d. To the extent appropriate, permittees should consider mitigation banking and other
appropriate forms of compensatory mitigation. If the District Engineer determines that
compensatory mitigation is necessary to offset losses of waters of the United States and ensure
that the net adverse effects of the authorized work on the aquatic environment are minimal,
consolidated mitigation approaches, such as mitigation banks, will be the preferred method of
providing compensatory mitigation, unless the District Engineer determines that activity-specific
compensatory mitigation is more appropriate, based on which is best for the aquatic
environment. These types of mitigation are preferred because they involve larger blocks of
protected aquatic environment, are more likely to meet the mitigation goals, and are more easily
checked for compliance. If a mitigation bank or other consolidated mitigation approach is not
available in the water shed, the District Engineer will consider other appropriate forms of
compensatory mitigation to offset the losses of waters of the United States to ensure that the net
adverse effects of the authorized work on the aquatic environment are minimal.
20. Spawning Areas. Activities, including structures and work in navigable waters of the United
States or discharges of dredged or fill material, in spawning areas during spawning seasons must
be avoided to the maximum extent practicable. Activities that result in the physical destruction
(e.g., excavate, fill, or smother downstream by substantial turbidity) of an important spawning
area are not authorized.
21. Management of Water Flows. To the maximum extent practicable, the activity must be
designed to maintain preconstruction downstream flow conditions (e.g., location, capacity, and
flow rates). Furthermore, the activity must not permanently restrict or impede the passage of
normal or expected high flows (unless the primary purpose of the fill is to impound waters) and
the structure or discharge of dredged or fill material must withstand expected high flows. The
activity must, to the maximum extent practicable, provide for retaining excess flows from the
site, provide for maintaining surface flow rates from the site similar to preconstruction
conditions, and must not increase water flows from the project site, relocate water, or redirect
water flow beyond preconstruction conditions. In addition, the activity must, to the maximum
extent practicable, reduce adverse effects such as flooding or erosion downstream and upstream
of the project site, unless the activity is part of a larger system designed to manage water flows.
22. Adverse Effects From Impoundments. If the activity, including structures and work in
navigable waters of the United States or discharge of dredged or fill material, creates an
impoundment of water, adverse effects on the aquatic system caused by the accelerated passage
of water and/or the restriction of its flow shall be minimized to the maximum extent practicable
23. Waterfowl Breeding Areas. Activities, including structures and work in navigable waters of
the United States or discharges of dredged or fill material, into breeding areas for migratory
waterfowl must be avoided to the maximum extent practicable.
24. Removal of Temporary Fills. Any temporary fills must be removed in their entirety and the
affected areas returned to their preexisting elevation.
25. Designated Critical Resource Waters. Critical resource waters include, NOAA-designated
marine sanctuaries, National Estuarine Research Reserves, National Wild and Scenic Rivers,
critical habitat for Federally listed threatened and endangered species, coral reefs, State natural
heritage sites, and outstanding national resource waters or other waters officially designated by a
State as having particular environmental or ecological significance and identified by the District
Engineer after notice and opportunity for public comment.
a. For NWP 23, notification is required in accordance with General Condition 13, for any
activity proposed in the designated critical resource waters including wetlands adjacent to those
waters. The District Engineer may authorize activities under these NWPs only after he
determines that the impacts to the critical resource waters will be no more than minimal.
26. Fills Within 100-Year Floodplains. For purposes of this general condition 100-year
floodplains will be identified through the Federal Emergency Management Agency" (FEMA)
Flood Insurance Rate Maps or FEMA-approved local floodplain maps.
27. The permitee understands and agrees that, if future operations by the United States require
the removal, relocation, or other alteration, of the structure or work herein authorized, or if, in the
opinion of the Secretary of the Army or his authorized representative, said structure or work shall
cause unreasonable obstruction to the free navigation of the navigable waters, the permittee will
be required, upon due notice from the Corps of Engineers, to remove, relocate, or alter the
structural work or obstructions caused thereby, without expense to the United States. No claim
shall be made against the United States on account of any such removal or alteration.
REGIONAL CONDITIONS
1. Prior to the use of any NWP in a designated "Outstanding Resource Water" (ORW), a
designated "High Quality Water" (HQW) or a designated "Primary Nursery Area" (PNA), of
North Carolina or in contiguous wetlands (as defined by the North Carolina Division of Water
Quality) to any of the above waters, proponents must notify the Wilmington District Engineer
and furnish a written statement of compliance with all of the conditions of the applicable NWP.
Notification will include the location of work; a description of work; a delineation of wetlands; a
discussion of alternatives to working in the waters and/or contiguous wetlands and why
alternatives were not selected; and a plan to provide compensatory mitigation for all unavoidable
adverse impacts to the waters and/or adjacent wetlands as may be required by the applicable
NWP. Work may proceed only after the permittee has received written, telephonic, or faxed
approval from the authorized representative of the District Engineer to proceed. Normally such
notice to proceed will be furnished within 30 calendar days of receipt of the above information.
2. Prior to use of any NWP in a designated "Area of Environmental Concern" (AEC) in the
twenty (20) counties of Eastern North Carolina covered by the North Carolina Coastal Area
Management Act (CAMA), a proponent must first obtain the required CAMA pen-nit and furnish
a copy of the CAMA permit to the Wilmington District.
3. Prior to the use of any NWP on a barrier island of North Carolina, proponents must
notify the Wilmington District Engineer and furnish a written statement of compliance with all of
the conditions of the applicable NWP. Notification will include the location of work; a
description of work; a delineation of wetlands; a discussion of alternatives to the work and why
alternatives were not selected; and a plan to provide compensatory mitigation for all unavoidable
adverse impacts to wetlands or waters as may be required by the conditions of the applicable
NWP. Work may proceed only after the permittee has received written, telephonic, or faxed
approval from the authorized representative of the District Engineer to proceed. Normally such
notice to proceed will be furnished within 30 calendar days of receipt of the above information.
4. Prior to the use of any NWP in a "Mountain or Piedmont Bog" of North Carolina,
proponents must notify the Wilmington District Engineer and furnish a written statement of
compliance with all of the conditions of the applicable NWP. Notification will include the
location of work; a description of work; a delineation of wetlands; a discussion of alternatives to
the work and why alternatives were not selected; and a plan to provide compensatory mitigation
for all unavoidable adverse impacts to wetlands or waters as may be required by the conditions of
the applicable NWP. Work may proceed only after the permittee has received written,
telephonic, or faxed approval from the authorized representative of the District Engineer to
proceed. Normally such notice to proceed will be furnished within 30 calendar days of receipt of
the above information.
5. Prior to use of any NWP for construction of animal waste facilities in waters and/or
wetlands of North Carolina, proponents must notify the Wilmington District Engineer and
furnish a written statement of compliance with all of the conditions of the applicable NWP.
Notification will include the location of work; a description of work; a delineation of wetlands; a
discussion of alternatives to the work and why alternatives were not selected; and, a plan to
provide compensatory mitigation for all unavoidable adverse impacts to wetlands or waters as
may be required by the applicable NWP. Work may proceed only after the permittee has
received written, telephonic, or faxed approval from the authorized representative of the District
Engineer to proceed. Normally such notice to proceed will be furnished within 30 calendar days
of receipt of the above information.
NOTE: The total area of wetlands impacted, including wetlands drained by upland perimeter
ditches or by other means, will be considered as cumulative impacts in making a decision to
assert discretionary authority under any NWP.
6. Prior to the use of any NWP in mountain trout waters within twenty-five (25) designated
counties of North Carolina, proponents must notify the Wilmington District Engineer and furnish
a written statement of compliance with all of the conditions of the applicable NWP. Notification
will include a letter of comments and recommendations from North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission (NCWRC); the location of work; a delineation of wetlands; a discussion of
alternatives to working in the mountain trout waters and why alternatives were not selected; and
a plan to provide compensatory mitigation for all unavoidable adverse impacts to the mountain
trout waters. Work may proceed only after the permittee has received written, telephonic, or
faxed approval from the authorized representative of the District to proceed. Normally such
notice to proceed will be furnished within 30 calendar days of receipt of the above information.
a. The twenty-five (25) designated counties are:
Alleghany Ashe Avery
Buncombe Burke Caldwell
Cherokee Clay Graham
Haywood Henderson Jackson
Macon Madison McDowell
Mitchell Polk Rutherford
Stokes Surry Swain
Transylvania Watauga Wilkes
Yancy
b. To obtain the required letter of approval from the North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission (NCWRC), a proponent should contact:
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Habitat Conservation Program Manager
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, NC 27611
Telephone [phone]
11
STATE CONSISTENCY CONDITION
If the proposed activity is within or has potential to significantly affect any land or water use
or natural resource of the North Carolina coastal area, a consistency determination pursuant to 15
CFR 930, Subpart C, may be required.
WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION CONDITIONS
1. Proposed fill or substantial modification of waters or wetlands for this General Certification
requires written notification to the Division of Water Quality regarding the extent of impact to
waters and wetlands;
2. Two copies shall be submitted to DWQ at the time of notification in accordance with 15A
NCAC 2H.0501(a);
3. Fill or alteration of more than one acre (0.45 ha) of wetlands will require compensatory
mitigation in accordance with 15A NCAC .0506 (h). Written DWQ approval is required for this
mitigation plan which may utilize the state's Wetland Restoration Program;
4. Fill or alteration of more than 150 linear feet (45.7 meters) or streams may require
compensatory mitigation in accordance with 15A NCAC 2H.0506(h). Written DWQ approval is
required for this mitigation plan which may utilize the state's Wetland Restoration Program;
5. That appropriate sediment and erosion control practices which equal or exceed those outlined
in the most recent edition of the "North Carolina Erosion and Sediment Control Planning and
Design Manual" or "North Carolina Surface Mining Manual" (available from the Division of
Land Resources in the DEHNR Regional or Central Offices) are utilized to prevent exceedances
of the appropriate turbidity water quality standard (50 NTUs in streams and rivers not designated
as trout by DWQ; 25 NTUs in all saltwater classes, and all lakes and reservoirs; and 10 NTUs in
trout waters);
6. All sediment and erosion control measures placed in wetlands or waters shall be removed and
the natural grade restored after the Division of Land Resources has released the project;
7. If an environmental document is required, this Certification is not valid until a FONSI or ROD
is issued by the State Clearinghouse;
S. That additional site-specific conditions may be added to projects proposed under this
Certification in order to ensure compliance with all applicable water quality and effluent
standards;
9. If the project is not completed within three years from the date of the first notification to
12
DWQ, then the applicant will again need to notify DWQ.
13