20011624 Ver 1_Complete File_20011107

w?ryy ^` SEAT( o
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT- JR.
GOVERNOR
October 19, 2001
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Raleigh Field Office
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road
Suite 120 j '
Raleigh, NC 27609
ATTENTION: Ms. Jean Manuele
NCDOT Coordinator
DAVID MCCOY
SECRETARY
SUBJECT: Caswell County, Proposed Replacement of Bridge No. 10 on SR 1597
over Country Line Creek. Federal Aid Project No. MABRZ-1597(1),
State Project No. 8.248110 1, TIP No. B-3130.
Dear Sir:
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to replace Bridge
No. 10 on SR 1597, over Country Line Creek, in Caswell County. NCDOT will replace
Bridge No. 10 at a new location, south of the existing bridge. The new bridge will be
approximately 246 feet (75 m) in length and 30 feet (9 m) wide. A paved travelway of 22
feet (6.7 m) will be accommodated. SR 1597 is a designated North Carolina Bicycling
Highway; thus the bridge will be constructed with offsets of 4 feet (1.2 m) on each side to
accommodate bicycles. AASHTO standard bicycle rails, 54 inches (1.4 m) high, will be
used for the bridge. The approach roadway will also be designed to accommodate
bicycles, and will consist of a 22-foot (6.7 m) travelway, with 4-foot (1.2 m) grass
shoulders on each side. Where guardrail is required, shoulders will be increased by a
minimum of 3 feet (1.0 m). The new structure will be approximately 2-foot (0.6 m)
higher in elevation than the existing bridge. The project will require approximately 1600
feet of new work on approach ways. Traffic will be maintained on the existing structure
during construction. Replacement will be at approximately the same location with a
double barrel 13'x 10" reinforced concrete box culvert. Project length is approximately
400 feet. Traffic will be detoured along existing secondary roads.
Impacts to Waters of the United States
The project will temporarily impact 0.02 ha (.05 acres) of jurisdictional surface waters in
the construction of the temporary work pads. NCDOT will be using Class II Rip Rap.
The length of existing channel impacted will be 44 m (144 linear ft.) with the
construction of the proposed bridge. Surface water impacts associated with the placement
MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: [phone] LOCATION:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FAX: [phone] TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER WEBSITE: WWWDOH.DOTSTATE.NC.US RALEIGH NC
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548
of the temporary causeway are depicted on sheets 4, 5 and 7 of the attached permit
drawings.
The existing bridge will be demolished. The existing bridge is composed of timber and
steel components, with an overlaid asphalt-wearing surface. The asphalt-wearing surface
will be removed prior to demolition, without dropping it into the water. The timber and
steel components will also be removed in their sequence without dropping these
components into the water. No temporary fill in the waters is expected. During
construction, Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition and Removal will be
followed.
Federally-Protected Species
Plants and animals with federal classifications of Endangered, Threatened, Proposed
Endangered, and Proposed Threatened are protected under provisions of Section 7 and
Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. As of 22 March 2001, the
Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) lists one federally protected species for Caswell County
(Table 1). Since, the CE (dated June 2000) was completed the FWS has added the James
spinymussel. A survey was conducted on 16 August 2001 by NCDOT biologist Jeff
Burleson. NCDOT has a number of bridge replacement projects occurring in the Country
Line Creek subbasin including B-3130. Because of the large number of projects
impacting the same waterbody, a comprehensive survey effort was made in the drainage
from SR 1146 crossing above Farmer Lake downstream to the NC 57 crossing of Country
Line Creek. Survey sites were accessed by canoe. Survey methodology included wading
using visual batiscope and tactile methods. There were no James spinymussels located
during these surveys. Based on these surveys NCDOT is rendering a Biological
Conclusions of "No Effect" for the James spinymussel. Additionally, a review of the NC
Natural Heritage Program database of Rare and Unique Habitats on 17 August 2001
revealed that no known occurrences of James spinymussel occur within one mile of the
project area. Therefore, the Biological Conclusions of "No Effect" remain valid for each
of-these species.
Table 1. Federally-Protected Species for Caswell County
Common Name Scientific Name Federal
Status Biological
Conclusion
James spinymussel Pleurobema collina E No Effect
"E" denotes Endangered (a species that is in danger of extinction throughout all or
a significant portion of its range).
Avoidance / Minimization
The following is a list of the project's jurisdictional, stream avoidance/minimization
activities proposed or completed by NCDOT.
¦ Minimization: Best Management Practices will be strictly enforced for sedimentation
and erosion control for the protection of surface waters.
¦ Minimization: Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition and Removal for
the removal of the existing bridge.
Project Commitments
During construction, Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition and Removal
will be followed.
The existing bridge and approaches will be removed after the new bridge is completed
and the area will be revegetated with appropriate plant species.
The Class II Rip Rap that will be used as temporary work pads will be removed once the
new bridge is completed.
Summary
Proposed project activities are being processed by the Federal Highway Administration
as a programmatic "Categorical Exclusion" in accordance with 23 CFR § 771.115(b).
The NCDOT requests that these activities be authorized by a Nationwide Permit 23 (61
FR 65874, 65916; December 13, 1996). NCDOT is also applying for a Nationwide
Permit 33 for the temporary causeway (0.02 acres of temporary stream impacts, 44 linear
feet of stream impact), and any impacts associated with bridge demolition, which none
are expected.
Written notification is provided to the N. C. Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) for
this project per 401 Water Quality Certification (WQC) General Certification under
Section 404 Nationwide Permit 23 and 33. However, notification is not required from
DWQ for 401 WQC General Certification for Section 404 Nationwide Permit 23 and 33.
Thank you for your assistance with this project. If you have any questions or need
additional information, please contact Mr. Jared Gray at [phone] ext.331.
Sincerely,
-
0, E
William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
VCB/jg
cc: w/attachment
Mr. David Franklin, USACE, Wilmington Field Office
Mr. John Hennessy, DWQ
Mr. David Cox, NCWRC
Mr. John Alford, P.E., Roadway Design
Mr. Calvin Leggett, P.E., Program Development
Mrs. Debbie Barbour, P.E., Design Services
Mr. D.R. Henderson, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr. Tim Rountree, P.E., Structure Design
Mr. Mike Mills, P.E., 7 Division Engineer
Office Use Only' 0% 2 AA Form Version April 2001
USACE Action ID No. DWQ No.
If any particular item is not applicable to this project, please enter "Not Applicable" or "N/A" rather than
leaving the space blank.
1. Processing
Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project:
® Section 404 Permit
Section 10 Permit
® 401 Water Quality Certification
F] Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested: NW 23 & NW 33
3. If this notification is solely a courtesy copy because written approval for the 401 Certification is
not required, check here:
4. If payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program (NCWRP) is proposed for
mitigation of impacts (see section VIII - Mitigation), check here:
II. Applicant Information
Owner/Applicant Information
Name: North Carolina Department of Transportation
Mailing Address: Project Development & Environmental Analysis Branch
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh NC 27699-1548
Telephone Number: 919-733-3141 Fax Number: 919-733-9794
E-mail Address: b ilmore dot state nc us
2. Agent Information (A signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization letter must be attached
if the Agent has signatory authority for the owner/applicant.)
Name:
Company Affiliation:
Mailing Address:
Telephone Number:
E-mail Address:
Fax Number:
Page 1 of 10
III. Project Information
Attach a vicinity map clearly showing the location of the property with respect to local
landmarks such as towns, rivers, and roads. Also, provide a detailed site plan showing property
boundaries and development plans in relation to surrounding properties. Both the vicinity map
and site plan must include a scale and north arrow. The specific footprints of all buildings,
impervious surfaces, or other facilities must be included. If possible, the maps and plans should
include the appropriate USGS Topographic Quad Map and NRCS Soil Survey with the property
boundaries outlined. Plan drawings, or other maps may be included at the applicant's discretion,
so long as the property is clearly defined. For administrative and distribution purposes, the
USACE requires information to be submitted on sheets no larger than 11 by 17-inch format;
however, DWQ may accept paperwork of any size. DWQ prefers full-size construction
drawings rather than a sequential sheet version of the full-size plans. If full-size plans are
reduced to a small scale such that the final version is illegible, the applicant will be informed that
the project has been placed on hold until decipherable maps are provided.
1. Name of project: Bridge Replacement of Bridge No. 10 over Country Line Creek
2. T.I.P. Project Number (NCDOT Only): B-3130
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN):
4. Location
County: Caswell Nearest Town: Hamer
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number):
Directions to site (include road numbers, landmarks, etc.): Bridge No 10 over Country Line
Creek on SR 1597 approximately 1.5 miles southeast of NC 62 and Hamer.
5. Site coordinates, if available (UTM or Lat/Long): see attached application
(Note - If project is linear, such as a road or utility line, attach a sheet that separately lists the
coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody.)
6. Describe the existing land use or condition of the site at the time of this application:
Rural
7. Property size (acres):
8. Nearest body of water (stream/river/sound/ocean/lake): Country Line Creek
9. River Basin: Roanoke
(Note - this must be one of North Carolina's seventeen designated major river basins. The
River Basin map is available at http•//h2o.enr.state.nc.us/admin/maps/.)
Page 2 of 10
10. Describe the purpose of the proposed work: Replacement of the existing_bridge, at a new
location with a new bridge south of the existing bridge.
11. List the type of equipment to be used to construct the project: Construction equipment,
such as cranes backhoe and grading equipment.
12. Describe the land use in the vicinity of this project: rural
IV. Prior Project History
If jurisdictional determinations and/or permits have been requested and/or obtained for this
project (including all prior phases of the same subdivision) in the past, please explain. Include
the USACE Action ID Number, DWQ Project Number, application date, and date permits and
certifications were issued or withdrawn. Provide photocopies of previously issued permits,
certifications or other useful information. Describe previously approved wetland, stream and
buffer impacts, along with associated mitigation (where applicable). If this is a NCDOT project,
list and describe permits issued for prior segments of the same T.I.P. project, along with
construction schedules.
V. Future Project Plans
Are any additional permit requests anticipated for this project in the future? If so, describe the
anticipated work, and provide justification for the exclusion of this work from the current
application: No
VI. Proposed Impacts to Waters of the United States/Waters of the State
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
wetlands, open water, and stream channels associated with the project. The applicant must also
provide justification for these impacts in Section VII below. All proposed impacts, permanent
and temporary, must be listed herein, and must be clearly identifiable on an accompanying site
plan. All wetlands and waters, and all streams (intermittent and perennial) must be shown on a
delineation map, whether or not impacts are proposed to these systems. Wetland and stream
evaluation and delineation forms should be included as appropriate. Photographs may be
included at the applicant's discretion. If this proposed impact is strictly for wetland or stream
mitigation, list and describe the impact in Section VIII below. If additional space is needed for
listing or description, please attach a separate sheet.
Page 3 of 10
1. Wetland Impacts
Wetland Impact
Site Number
(indicate on map)
Type of Impact* Area
Impact
(acres) Located within
100-year Floodplain**
(yes/no) Distance to
Nearest Stream
(linear feet)
Type of Wetland***
None

r. n
* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: mechanized clearing, grauuig, uu,
excavation, flooding, ditching/drainage, etc. For dams, separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding.
** 100-Year floodplains are identified through the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps
(FIRM), or FEMA-approved local floodplain maps. Maps are available through the FEMA Map Service Center at 1-800-358-9616, or
online at http://www.fema.gov.
*** List a wetland type that best describes wetland to be impacted (e.g., freshwater/saltwater marsh, forested wetland, beaver pond,
Carolina Bay, bog, etc.)
List the total acreage (estimated) of existing wetlands on the property: 0.00
Total area of wetland impact proposed: 0.00
2. Stream Impacts, including all intermittent and perennial streams
Stream Impact
Site Number
(indicate on map)
Type of Impact* Length of
Impact
(linear feet)
Stream Name** Average Width
of Stream
Before Impact Perennial or
Intermittent?
(please specify)
12+84.5 to 13+01
L- temporary work
pads 44 Country Line Creek 60 ft. Perennial

* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: culverts and associated rip-rap,
dams (separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding), relocation (include linear feet before and after, and net loss/gain),
stabilization activities (cement wall, rip-rap, crib wall, gabions, etc.), excavation, ditching/straightening, etc. If stream relocation is
proposed, plans and profiles showing the linear footprint for both the original and relocated streams must be included.
** Stream names can be found on USGS topographic maps. If a stream has no name, list as UT (unnamed tributary) to the nearest
downstream named stream into which it flows. USGS maps are available through the USGS at 1-800-358-9616, or online at
wvvw.usp,s.gov. Several internet sites also allow direct download and printing of USGS maps (e.g., www.topozone.com,
www.mapqucst.com, etc.).
Cumulative impacts (linear distance in feet) to all streams on site: 44 linear feet
Page 4 of 10
Open Water Impacts, including Lakes, Ponds, Estuaries, Sounds, Atlantic Ocean and any
other Water of the U.S.
Open Water Impact
Site Number
(indicate on map)
Type of Impact* Area of
Impact
(acres)
(if Name applicable) Wat) Type of Waterbody
(lake, pond, estuary, sound,
bay, ocean, etc.)

List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: till, excavation, dredging,
flooding, drainage, bulkheads, etc.
4. Pond Creation
If construction of a pond is proposed, associated wetland and stream impacts should be
included above in the wetland and stream impact sections. Also, the proposed pond should
be described here and illustrated on any maps included with this application.
Pond to be created in (check all that apply): [:] uplands [_1 stream wetlands
Describe the method of construction (e.g., dam/embankment, excavation, installation of
draw-down valve or spillway, etc.):
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stormwater requirement, etc.):
Size of watershed draining to pond: Expected pond surface area:
VII. Impact Justification (Avoidance and Minimization)
Specifically describe measures taken to avoid the proposed impacts. It may be useful to provide
information related to site constraints such as topography, building ordinances, accessibility, and
financial viability of the project. The applicant may attach drawings of alternative, lower-impact
site layouts, and explain why these design options were not feasible. Also, discuss how impacts
were minimized once the desired site plan was developed. If applicable, discuss construction
techniques to be followed during construction to reduce impacts.
The existing _structure has efficiency rating of 21.3 out of 100 Replaces the bridge in place
would improve the bridge but would not fix the alignment of the road. The chosen alternative
would improve the road alignment and replace the existing structure They are spanning Country
Line Creek so NCDOT does not have any permanent impacts to surface waters. All impacts will
be temporary due to the construction of the temporary work pads Bicyclists and Amish Family
currently use this area NCDOT chose this alternative based on that the Amish use horse and
buggy to get around and constructing in place with a detour using existing roads would not be
feasible These trips by the Amish across the bridge are essential and made in the pursuit of their
economic livelihood.
Page 5 of 10
VIII. Mitigation
DWQ - In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0500, mitigation may be required by the NC
Division of Water Quality for projects involving greater than or equal to one acre of impacts to
freshwater wetlands or greater than or equal to 150 linear feet of total impacts to perennial
streams.
USACE - In accordance with the Final Notice of Issuance and Modification of Nationwide
Permits, published in the Federal Register on March 9, 2000, mitigation will be required when
necessary to ensure that adverse effects to the aquatic environment are minimal. Factors
including size and type of proposed impact and function and relative value of the impacted
aquatic resource will be considered in determining acceptability of appropriate and practicable
mitigation as proposed. 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
and/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, preferable in the same watershed.
If mitigation is required for this project, a copy of the mitigation plan must be attached in order
for USACE or DWQ to consider the application complete for processing. Any applications
lacking a required mitigation plan or NCWRP concurrence shall be placed on hold as
incomplete. An applicant may also choose to review the current guidelines for stream restoration
in DWQ's Draft "Technical Guide for Stream Work in North Carolina, available at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/newettands/strmgide.htm1.
1. Provide a brief description of the proposed mitigation plan. The description should provide
as much information as possible, including, but not limited to: site location (attach directions
and/or map, if offsite), affected stream and river basin, type and amount (acreage/linear feet)
of mitigation proposed (restoration, enhancement, creation, or preservation), a plan view,
preservation mechanism (e.g., deed restrictions, conservation easement, etc.), and a
description of the current site conditions and proposed method of construction. Please attach
a separate sheet if more space is needed.
No proposed mitigation --
2. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration
Program (NCWRP) with the NCWRP's written agreement. Check the box indicating that
you would like to pay into the NCWRP. Please note that payment into the NCWRP must be
reviewed and approved before it can be used to satisfy mitigation requirements. Applicants
will be notified early in the review process by the 401/Wetlands Unit if payment into the
Page 6 of 10
NCWRP is available as an option. For additional information regarding the application
process for the NCWRP, check the NCWRP website at http://h2o eiir.state.ilc.tis/wrp/iildcx.htm. If
use of the NCWRP is proposed, please check the appropriate box on page three and provide
the following information:
Amount of stream mitigation requested (linear feet): zero
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet): zero
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): zero
Amount of Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): zero
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres): zero
IX. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Only)
Does the project involve an expenditure of public funds or the use of public (federal/state/local)
land`?
Yes ® No ?
If yes, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the
requirements of the National or North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
Note: If you are not sure whether a NEPA/SEPA document is required, call the SEPA
coordinator at [phone] to review current thresholds for environmental documentation.
Yes ® No ?
If yes, has the document review been finalized by the State Clearinghouse? If so, please attach a
copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval letter.
Yes ® No F]
X. Proposed Impacts on Riparian and Watershed Buffers (DWQ Only)
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
required state and local buffers associated with the project. The applicant must also provide
justification for these impacts in Section VII above. All proposed impacts must be listed herein,
and must be clearly identifiable on the accompanying site plan. All buffers must be shown on a
map, whether or not impacts are proposed to the buffers. Correspondence from the DWQ
Regional Office may be included as appropriate. Photographs may also be included at the
applicant's discretion.
Will the project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233
(Meuse), 15A NCAC 2B .0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 2B .0250 (Randleman Rules and
Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please identify )?
Yes ? No ® If you answered "yes", provide the following information:
Page 7 of 10
Identify the square feet and acreage of impact to each zone of the riparian buffers. If buffer
mitigation is required, calculate the required amount of mitigation by applying the buffer
multipliers.
Zone* Impact
(square feet) Multiplier Required
Mitigation
N/A

Total
* Zone t extends out 30 feet perpendicular from near oanK of cnannei; Gone z exwuuS an
additional 20 feet from the edge of Zone 1.
If buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e., Donation
of Property, Conservation Easement, Riparian Buffer Restoration / Enhancement, Preservation or
Payment into the Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as
identified within 15A NCAC 213 .0242 or.0260.
Not required
XI. Stormwater (DWQ Only)
Describe impervious acreage (both existing and proposed) versus total acreage on the site.
Discuss stormwater controls proposed in order to protect surface waters and wetlands
downstream from the property.
XII. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Only)
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of
wastewater generated from the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
XIII. Violations (DWQ Only)
Is this site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500) or any Buffer Rules?
Yes F-1 No
Is this an after-the-fact permit application?
Yes ? No
Page 8 of 10
I
XIV. Other Circumstances (Optional):
It is the applicant's responsibility to submit the application sufficiently in advance of desired
construction dates to allow processing time for these permits. However, an applicant may
choose to list constraints associated with construction or sequencing that may impose limits on
work schedules (e.g., draw-down schedules for lakes, dates associated with Endangered and
Threatened Species, accessibility problems, or other issues outside of the applicant's control).
Applicant/Agent's Signature Ddte
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Field Offices and County Coverage
Asheville Regulatory Field Office Alexander Cherokee Iredell Mitchell
US Army Corps of Engineers Avery Clay Jackson Polk
151 Patton Avenue Buncombe Cleveland Lincoln Rowan
Room 208 Burke Gaston Macon Rutherford
Asheville, NC 28801-5006 Cabarrus Graham Madison Stanley
Telephone: [phone] Caldwell Haywood McDowell Swain
Fax: [phone] Catawba Henderson Mecklenburg Transylvania
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office Alamance Durham Johnston Rockingham
US Army Corps Of Engineers Alleghany Edgecombe Lee Stokes
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road Ashe Franklin Nash Surry
Suite 120 Caswell Forsyth Northampton Vance
Raleigh, NC 27615 Chatham Granville Orange Wake
Telephone: [phone] Davidson Guilford Person Warren
Fax: [phone] Davie Halifax Randolph Wilkes
Washington Regulatory Field Office Beaufort Currituck Jones
US Army Corps of Engineers Bertie Dare Lenoir
Post Office Box 1000 Camden Gates Martin
Washington, NC 27889-1000 Carteret* Green Pamlico
Telephone: [phone] Chowan Hertford Pasquotank
Fax: [phone] Craven Hyde Perquimans
Wilmington Regulatory Field Office
US Army Corps of Engineers
Post Office Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890
Anson Duplin Onslow
Bladen Harnett Pender
Brunswick Hoke Richmond
Carteret Montgomery Robeson
Pitt
Tyrrell
Washington
Wayne
Union
Watauga
Yancey
Wilson
Yadkin
*Croatan National Forest Only
Page 9 of 10
Telephone: [phone] Columbus Moore Sampson
Fax: [phone] Cumberland New Hanover Scotland
US Fh
US Fish and Wildlife Service
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
Telephone: [phone]
h and Wildlife Service / National N
US Fish and Wildlife Service
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, NC 28801
Telephone: [phone]
[arine Fisheries Service
National Marine Fisheries Service
Habitat Conservation Division
Pivers Island
Beaufort, NC 28516
Telephone: [phone]
North Carolina State Agencies
Division of Water Quality
401 Wetlands Unit
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1650
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Division of Water Quality
Wetlands Restoration Program
1619 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1619
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
CAMA and NC Coastal Counties
State Historic Preservation Office
Department Of Cultural Resources
4617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-4617
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Division of Coastal Management Beaufort Chowan Hertford Pasquotank
1638 Mail Service Center Bertie Craven Hyde Pender
Raleigh, NC 27699-1638 Brunswick Currituck New Hanover Perquimans
Telephone: [phone] Camden Dare Onslow Tyrrell
Fax: [phone] Carteret Gates Pamlico Washington
NCWRC and NC Trout Counties
Western Piedmont Region Coordinator Alleghany Caldwell Watauga
3855 Idlewild Road Ashe Mitchell Wilkes
Kernersville, NC 27284-9180 Avery Stokes
Telephone: [phone] Burke Surry
Mountain Region Coordinator Buncombe Henderson Polk
20830 Great Smoky Mtn. Expressway Cherokee Jackson Rutherford
Waynesville, NC 28786 Clay Macon Swain
Telephone: [phone] Graham Madison Transylvania
Fax: [phone] Haywood McDowell Yancey
Page 10 of 10
I
NORTH CAROLINA

VICINITY
MAPS

N.C.D.O.T.
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
CASWELL COUNTY
PROJECT: 8.2481101 B-3130
REPLACEMENT OF BRIDGE NO.10
OVER COUNTRY LINE CREEK
SHEET I OF 1 4/26/01
1568
i 1558 r
/ 1586 / ?
PROJECT
-y-
COSWELL
'- COUNTY
0
oN
s
BEGIN PROJECT
TEMPORARY WORK PADS

, _?- TO SR 1564--

END PROJECT
O -- DENOTES SITE
Z
D
v
w
N.C.D.O.T.
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
SITE CASWELL COUNTY
MAP PROJECT: 83481101 B-3130
REPLACEMENT OF BRIDGE NO.10
OVER COUNTRY LINE CREEK
SHEET 2 OF r7 4/26/01

LEGEND

-WLB WETLAND BOUNDARY PROPOSED BRIDGE
L* WETLAND PROPOSED BOX CULVERT
DENOTES FILL IN
1 ?
WETLAND PROPOSED PIPE CULVERT
DENOTES FILL IN (DASHED LINES DENOTE
SURFACE WATER
® EXIST NG STRUCTURES)
® DENOTES FILL IN
SURFACE WATER
R
(POND) SINGLE TREE
® DENOTES TEMPORARY
FILL IN WETLAND rrr!?t_?'Lr!?L WOODS LINE
DENOTES EXCAVATION
IN WETLAND
® ¦ DRAINAGE INLET

DENOTES TEMPORARY
FILL IN SURFACE WATERS
® ROOTWAD
• DENOTES MECHANIZED
•
?
• • • CLEARING
'
• y
OODDO VORTEX ROCK WEIR
E- k FLOW DIRECTION
TB RIP RAP
, TOP OF BANK
WE EDGE OF WATER
RIP RAP ENERGY
C PROP. LIMIT OF CUT DISSIPATOR BASIN
F PROP. LIMIT OF FILL
- A PROP.RIGHT OF WAY VANE
NG NATURAL GROUND
PL PROPERTY LINE
- TOE - TEMP. DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
-POE- PERMANENT DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
-EAB- EXIST. ENDANGERED
ANIMAL BOUNDARY
-EPB- EXIST. ENDANGERED
PLANT BOUNDARY
WATER SURFACE
X
X LIVE STAKES
X N
C
D
O
T
X
X .
.
.
.
.
O BOULDER DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
CASWELL COUNTY
--- CORE FIBER ROLLS
PROTECT: 83481101 B-5130
O
5 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER
OR PARCEL NUMBER REPLACEMENT OF BRIDGE NO.10
OVER COUNTRY LINE CREEK
SHEET 3 OF 1 4/26/01
\1 E. ?

8,0
?o U a .a d'
? W I I?
_ N
-
I a a ? ?
.
.. ? ?
s II I?

O =W <M u '

N w' ?w ? i/ nJ
K?
z
v • Y•??Y ?3+-I •69 aN
p
p
W W Ciro n
<
u? ra

ei I I r
w
x3321 All A8 i I I
,NI1 z
0J
I _ \ a,
L- J,

o I LI J

I II I I

r N
O
W
H
H

?
COW
ww
WW
I
?•
I W
I ?

U
I ?I o N
Ki
m?
J I
I
I ?? ?'
cc
W I
I
I
I
r
N N gJ
J i sN I I I' ' /r
r
V p NN ' I I' I
u< /

mN I I
r ?

o
r.
` CV)I NI CN N
%
_m
x
y ? awi
cri
i \ . ¢ U pN
WI`W\ \\ 2
V -i
\ J wE
?n 0

28 ? I I s
0
W
I r----
N I ? _ - ?Sd
0
I F--'

II '
I r--?

W
LL
3
N
1
m
W
CV)
M
r-
0,I n
04 C%4

N
r-
0
a O uj o
W
+ d ?,
" z w
U

® x 0 a
+ o a F
u z w W o
O
NO 0
0
d O
a U
c a
+ >
A U a .a
O
l
w
l
y
o
Ir.
1N o a a
N m
W
' + a e
J ae
W y?
/4 W
W U
H
p ? w
p ?, a
a + z h
z
j O
CD
+
NO
o F J
N
+ O U
F
O W
x ?
o ?
0
+ N N
N
r-
CO
+ O O
r-
O

-g z

Cr U
g

o
12 E
CL O
0 oZ w
O

L Cl)
uul
o U
co
}
Z

w

U.
3
:

-

C\j Q Q
W
CO
CL U
) 0
= Z CC
L W

CC

? L
j
Oo 3 Fro

c m
Ln c/) w
w W
LL
00 ¢cc0?
U
a
Z LL
O
-
t
U
w
cn

0 0

Ir a:

c, a:
cn a Q
a: a:

a.

a. 0
a

N
W
0 cc

O
«O T Q

- -

E o
N L

3
:
? ?
p, U
)
L o o p
3 N C O O O
~
W
V
Q
LL
N =
O L O

?t o
Q ? Z

N oD
? V > ? L
C p
G
l1J
-

a °
z
Q

Q
J LL
?
Z w E dr o

F- -
W

? L
_
ll. N v O
3
°
a
a a
? a
?H
? O
3 O
3
,
2 W ? r
N

0 0

w w

^O J J
O? tA O O
~
(n + M
LL
W J

O
D LL
W
H
Caswcll Counh
Bridge No. 10, on SK 1597
Over Country Line Creek
Federal Aid Project MABRZ-1 597(1)
State Project 8.2481101
TIP Project B-3130
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
01162
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
APPROVED:
8-$-°°
Date
Q/10/11V
at
N.C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS

William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
c
Nicholas L. GrXf, P.E.
Division Administrator, FHWA
Caswell Count-
Bridge No. 10, on SR 1597
Over Country Line Creek
Federal Aid Project MABRZ-1 597(1)
State Project 8.2481 101
TIP Project B-3130
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
Documentation Prepared in Project Development and Environmental Analysis
Branch By:
Date Dennis Pipkin
Project Planning Engineer
Date
$ - 8 - 00
Date
Wayne Llliott
Bridge Project Planning Engineer, Unit Head
C?--.w ::- V V - -
Lubin V. Prevatt, P.E., Assistant Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch'., Ilk
?\IIC111fff///AI
8 0/
SEAL
6976
?? I rI E,EQ, •;\ ,, ?
V. P o ",
ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS:
B-3130. Caswell County
Caswell County
Bridge No. 10, on SR 1597
Over Country Line Creek
Federal Aid Project MABRZ-1597(1)
State Project 82481101
1. Roadway Design Unit, Roadside Environmental Unit, Resident Engineer:
Reveaetation: The existing bridge and approaches will be removed after the new bridge is
completed, and the area will be revegetated with appropriate plant species.
2. Roadway Design Unit, Structure Design Unit, Project Development & Environmental
Analysis Branch (Permits), Resident Engineer.
Bridge Demolition: The existing bridge is composed of timber and steel components,
The timber and steel components will be removed without dropping into the water. The asphalt
wearing surface will be removed prior to demolition without dropping into the water. No
temporary fill in waters is expected. During construction, Best Management Practices for Bridge
Demolition and Removal will be followed.
Categorical Exclusion Document Pape 1 of 1
Green Shoot
June, 2000
Caswell County
Bridge No. 10, on SR 1597
Over Country Line Creek
Federal Aid Project MABRZ-1597(1)
State Project 8.2481101
TIP Project B-3130
1. SUMMARY OF PROJECT:
NCDOT proposes to replace Bridge Number 10, in Caswell County. Bridge Number 10
carries Highway SR 1597 over Country Line Creek, in the central part of Caswell County. NCDOT
and FHWA classify this action as a Categorical Exclusion, due to the fact that no notable
environmental impacts are likely to occur as a result of project construction. NCDOT will replace
Bridge No. 10 at a new location, as shown in Figure 2. The new bridge will be approximately 246 feet
(75 m) in length, and 30 feet (9 m) in overall clear width. A paved travelway of 22 feet (6.7 m) will
be accommodated. SR 1597 is a designated North Carolina Bicycling Highway, thus the bridge will
be constructed with offsets of 4 feet (1.2 m) on each side to accommodate bicycles. AASHTO
standard bicycle rails, 54 inches (1.4 m) high, will be used for the bridge. The approach roadway will
also be designed to accommodate bicycles, and will consist of a 22 foot (6.7 m) travelway, with 4 foot
(1.2 m) turf shoulders on each side. Where guardrail is required, shoulders will be increased by a
minimum of 3 feet (1 m). The new structure will be approximately two feet (0.6 m) higher in
elevation than the existing bridge. Initial design indicates that the completed project will provide a
design speed of 45 mph (70 kph). The project will require approximately 1600 feet (488 m) of new
work on approach roadways. Traffic will be maintained on the existing structure during construction.
The estimated cost is $1,225,000 including $25,000 for Right-of-Way acquisition and
$1,200,000 for construction. The estimated cost projected by the 2000-2006 Transportation
Improvement Program is $870,000; including $90,000 in prior year cost, $60,000 for Right-of-Way
Acquisition, and $720,000 for construction.
II. ANTICIPATED DESIGN EXCEPTIONS:
No design exceptions are anticipated for this project.
III. EXISTING CONDITIONS
NCDOT classifies SR 1597 as a Rural Local Route in the Statewide Functional
Classification System. The land use of the surrounding area is farming and rural residential, with
small businesses interspersed.
Near Bridge No. 10, SR 1597 is a two lane, paved facility, 18 feet (5.5 m) in width, with
grassed shoulders approximately 6 feet (2 m) wide on each side. The existing bridge carries two lanes.
Vertical and horizontal alignment in both directions is fair. The new bridge and approaches
will provide an improvement in design speed.
NCDOT built Bridge No. 10 in 1959. The bridge has an asphalt overlay surface on a timber
floor. This entire substructure is a combination of steel and timber. The deck of Bridge 10 is 21 feet
(6.4 m) above the stream bed. Water depth in Country Line Creek is approximately 5 feet (1.5 m) at
the bridge vicinity. Bridge 10 is 201 feet (61.2 m) long, with a 17.1 foot (5.2 m) roadway width.
Two lanes of traffic are carried and the load limit is posted at 17 tons for single vehicles (SV) and 24
tons for Truck-Tractor Semi-Trailers (TTST).
According to NCDOT Bridge Maintenance records, the bridge's sufficiency rating is 21.3 out
of a possible 100.0. The current traffic volume is 500 vehicles per day (VPD), projected to increase to
1,000 VPD by the design year (2025). No regulatory speed limit is posted in the area, therefore it is
assumed to be 55 mph by statute. Advisory speed limits of 40 mph are posted for each approach to
the bridge.
Traffic Engineering accident records indicate there was one vehicle crash reported in the
vicinity of Bridge No. 10 during a recent three year period. This crash occurred in dark, snowy
conditions.
The Transportation Director of Caswell County schools indicates that there are three school
busses crossing the bridge twice per day, for a total of six trips per day. He stated that road closure
can be accommodated by the school busses.
IV. ALTERNATES:
Two methods of replacing Bridge No. 10 were studied as follows:
Alternate One: - Replace bridge on existing location, with a new bridge approximately 240 feet
(73 m) in length. Traffic would be detoured along existing roads.
Alternate Two: (Recommended) - Replace bridge on an improved alignment to the south (upstream)
of the existing bridge. The new bridge would be approximately 246 feet (75 m) in
length. Traffic would be maintained on the existing structure during construction.
The "do-nothing" alternate is not practical, requiring eventual closing of the road as the
existing bridge completely deteriorates. The sufficiency rating of the existing bridge is only 21.3 out
of 100.0. Rehabilitation of the existing deteriorating bridge is neither practical nor economical.
V. COST ESTIMATE
Estimated project costs of the alternates studied are as follows:
Alternate 1 Alternate 2
(Recommended)
Structure
Roadway Approaches
Structure Removal
Subtotal
Engineering and Contingencies
Total Construction Cost
Right-of-Way and Utilities
Total Project Cost
439,000 451,000
358,000 572,000
26,000 26,000
823,000 1,049,000
127,000 151,000
950,000 1,200,000
20,000 25,000
970,000 1,225,000
Note: Structure cost for Alternate 2 reflects the increased length of replacement bridge.
VI. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS
NCDOT will replace Bridge Number 10 at a new location, as shown in Figure 2. Traffic will
be maintained on the existing bridge during construction.
NCDOT recommends that Alternate 2 be constructed, in order to improve the design speed at
the bridge vicinity, to reduce road user costs, and to accommodate bicycles and horse-drawn vehicles
during construction of the new bridge. Both approaches to the bridge are now posted at 40 mph. The
new alignment is expected to raise the design speed to 45 mph (70 kph). Also, Alternate 1 cannot
reasonably accommodate bicycles and horse-drawn vehicles. These reasons are discussed further in
the following paragraphs.
The additional cost of maintaining traffic on-site is $255,000 in estimated project costs.
However, the road user cost for the off-site detour is estimated at $369,000. Thus the road user cost
factor provides economic justification for the selected alternate.
Another important reason supporting the recommended alternate is the presence of Amish
families in the project area. This has already been acknowledged by the placement ofNCDOT
highway caution signs noting the presence of horse-drawn vehicles. These signs are placed on
SR 1597 and on the intersecting highway, NC 62. After extensive consultation with members of the
local Amish community, it was determined that Amish horse buggies and bicycles make an average
of approximately 8-12 essential trips per day across the bridge. These essential trips by the Amish are
made in the pursuit of their economic livelihoods, and the Amish are bound by their religious
principles not to use alternate forms of transportation. Also, the additional mileage on any available
detour is inconceivable for use by horse-drawn buggies because of the limited endurance of horses to
make such a journey, and because of the additional trip times involved. Off-site detours with horses
are not at all feasible.
An additional reason supporting the selected alternate is that SR 1597 is part of NCDOT
Bicycle Route No. 4, "North Line Trace." This route extends from Ashe County in the mountains to
Currituck County on the coast. According to citizen request records at the NCDOT Division of
Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation, it is estimated that approximately 1,000 bicyclists per year
currently use the North Line Trace. Bicycle usage is expected to increase in the future, since the
North Line Trace is relatively new. This is in addition to local and long distance use by bicyclists
from the Amish community near Bridge No. 10. Severance of this route for bridge construction would
be highly -undesirable.
Thus, because of high road user costs and the existence of the bicycle route, and since local
Amish livelihoods depend on access across the bridge, Alternate 2 (maintain traffic on-site) is the
recommended alternate.
The Division 7 Engineer concurs with the selection of the recommended alternate.
VII. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
A. General Environmental Effects
The project is considered to be a "Categorical Exclusion" (CE) due to its limited scope and
insubstantial environmental consequences.
The bridge project will not have a substantial adverse effect on the quality of the human or
natural environment with the use of current NCDOT standards and specifications.
The project is not in conflict with any plan, existing land use, or zoning regulation. No change
in land use is expected to result from construction of the project. No adverse effect on families or
communities is anticipated. Right-of-way acquisition will be limited.
No adverse effect on public facilities or services is expected. The project is not expected to
adversely affect social, economic or religious opportunities in the area.
No publicly owned parks, recreational facilities or wildlife or waterfowl refuges of national,
state, or local significance are in the vicinity of the project.
Construction of the project will not have a significant adverse impact on the floodplain or
associated flood hazard. The elevation of the 100-year flood will not be increased by more than 12
inches.
NCDOT expects utility conflicts to be low for a project of this size and magnitude.
There are no known hazardous waste sites in the project area.
B. Architectural & Archaeological Resources
This project is subject to compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act of 1966, as amended, & implemented by Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's regulations
for compliance with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800. Section 106 requires that if a federally
funded, licensed, or permitted project has an effect on property listed on or eligible for the National
4

Register of Historic Places, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation will be given an
opportunity to comment.
Architectural Resources
A meeting was held with The State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) to evaluate potential
effects of the project. The SHPO stated that there are no historic structures located within the area of
potential effect (APE) for this project, and recommended that no historic architectural surveys be
conducted. Thus, it is concluded that the project will have no effect on historic architectural
resources.
Archaeological Resources
The State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) indicated that there are no known recorded
archaeological sites within the area of potential effect, and it is unlikely that any archaeological
resources could be affected by the project. Therefore, the SHPO recommended that no archaeological
investigation be conducted in connection with this project. Thus, it is concluded that the project will
have no effect on archaeological resources.
C. Natural Systems
PHYSICAL RESOURCES
Soil and water resources, which occur in the study area, are discussed below. Soils and
availability of water directly influence composition and distribution of flora and fauna in any biotic
community. The project study area lies within the Piedmont Physiographic Province. Broad, smooth
ridgetops, long side slopes, and long narrow drainageways characterize the topography in this section
of Caswell County. Topography in the project area is long side slopes that flatten out into a narrow
floodplain area associated with Country Line Creek. Project elevation is approximately 122 in (400 ft)
above mean sea level (msl).
Soils
At the present time Caswell County does not have a soil survey. Personnel from the NRCS
indicated that the only information they had on a soil phase occurring in the project area was Cecil
sandy loam. The soil phase that occurs within project boundaries is Cecil sandy loam 2-6 percent
slopes.
Cecil sandy loam consists of well-drained soils that occur on smooth, long ridges in broad,
irregularly shaped areas. Permeability is moderate, runoff is medium, and the seasonal high water
table is located at a depth 1.8 in (6.0 ft) below the surface. Slope and moderate permeability are the
most important limitations. Cecil sandy loam has a non-hydric listing for Caswell County.
Soil core samples taken throughout the project area revealed soils with a loam to sandy loam
to clay loam texture. The soils did not exhibit hydric conditions, such as low chroma colors, in low
areas near the stream. Therefore, hydric soil indicators, as defined in the "Corps of Engineers Wetland
Delineation Manual", 1987, were not observed within the project study area.
Water Resources
This section contains information concerning those water resources likely to be impacted by
the project.
Waters Impacted and Characteristics
Country Line Creek will be the only surface water resource directly impacted by the proposed
project (Figure 2). Country Line Creek is located in sub-basin ROA4, 03-02-04 of the Roanoke River
Basin.
Country Line Creek, at Bridge No. 10, is a perennial stream approximately 18.3 m (60.0 ft)
wide and has a 3.0 m (10 ft) bank at this location. The substrate is composed of boulder, stone,
cobble, gravel and sand. The waters of Country Line Creek were very turbid at the time of the survey,
yielding a visibility of a depth of about 15 cm (6 in).
Best Usage Classification
Streams have been assigned a best usage classification by the DWQ (DEHNR 1999). The
classification of Country Line Creek [Index No. 22-56-(3.7)] is Class C. Class C waters are suitable
for aquatic life propagation and survival, fishing, wildlife, secondary recreation and agriculture.
Neither High Quality Waters (HQW), Water Supplies (WS-I: undeveloped watersheds or
WS-II: predominately undeveloped watersheds) nor Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW) occur
within 1.6 km (1.0 mi.) of project study area.
Water Quality
There were no benthic invertebrate monitoring sites on Country Line Creek located within
1.0 mile of the project area.
The North Carolina Index of Biotic Integrity (NCIBI) is a method for assessing a stream's
biological integrity by examining the structure and health of its fish community. The fisheries study
done on Country Line Creek was sampled on September 7, 1994, at a point 5 miles downstream at
NC 57. This site received a NCIBI score of 50, which placed it in the good range.
Point source dischargers located throughout North Carolina are permitted through the
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program administered by the DWQ. The
DWQ NPDES report lists two permitted dischargers into Country Line Creek within 8 km (5 mi.) of
SR 1597.The Town of Yanceyville WWTP (Permit No. N00040011) is located upstream of the
proposed project. This plant is permitted to discharge up to 0.45 million gallon per day (MGD). The
second facility NCDOCBlanch Youth is located northeast and downstream, of project vicinity. This
permit (No. N00030180) was issued on October 09, 1992, and allows the release of approximately
0.018 MGD into Country Line Creek (NCDEHNR 1996).
6
Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Biotic Resources
Biotic resources include aquatic and terrestrial communities. This section describes those
communities encountered in the study area, as well as, the relationships between fauna and flora
within these communities.
Scientific nomenclature and common names (when applicable) are provided for each animal
and plant species described. Plant taxonomy generally follows Radford, et al. (1968). Animal
taxonomy follows Martof, et al. (1980), Menhinick (1991), Potter, et al. (1980), and Webster, et al.
(1985). Subsequent references to the same organism will include the common name only. Fauna that
was observed during the site visit are denoted with an asterisk (*). Published range distributions and
habitat analysis are used in estimating fauna expected to be present within the project area.
Terrestrial Communities
Four distinct terrestrial communities are identified in the project study area: bottomland
hardwood community, hardwood community, maintained/disturbed community and pine forest
community. Community boundaries within the study area are well defined without a significant
transition zone between them. Faunal species likely to occur within the study area will exploit all of
these communities for shelter and foraging opportunities or as movement corridors.
Bottomland Hardwood Community
The bottomland hardwood community exists from the bridge at the toe of slope to the extent
of the ROW down along the southwest side of the project. Intermittent flooding during high flow
periods drives the hydrology of the marsh community. Periodic flooding provides nutrient input
through sediment deposition, making this system very productive. However, periodic flooding can
also be a destructive factor during large storm events by eroding soils.
The herbs and vines in the bottomland hardwood flora include sedge (Carex sp.), river oats
(Chasmanthium latifolia), cross vine (Anisostichus capreolata), Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera
japonica), poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans), and blackberry (Rubus argutus). The canopy was
comprised of river birch (Betula nigra), sycamore (Plantus occidentalis), sugar maple (Acer
saccharum), ironwood (Carpinus caroliniana), tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), swamp chestnut
oak (Quercus michauxii), American elm (Ulmus americana). The shrub layers consisted of green ash
(Fraxinus laevigata), elderberry (Sambucus canadensis), spicebush (Lindera benzion), pawpaw
(Asimina triloba), sweet gum (Liquidambar styraciflua), and black gum (Nyssa sylvatica).
The Maintained / Disturbed Community
The maintained/ disturbed community is made of several sub-communities, which include
roadside shoulder, maintained yard, and irregularly maintained powerline corridor. The flora which
can be found in the maintained areas include fescue (Festuca sp.), English plantain (Plantago
lanceolata), bush clover (Lespedeza intermedia), white clover (Trifolium repens), seed-box (Ludwigia
alternifolia), silverling (Baccharis halimifolia) and dandelion (Taraxacum officinale).
The flora for the infrequently maintained areas, including roadside shoulder and irregularly
maintained powerline corridor includes wild geranium (Geranium maculatum), wild onion (Allium
canadense), river oats (Chasmanthium latifolia), sedge, blackberry, giant cane (Arundinaria gigantea),
foxtail grass (Alopecurus carolinianus), Japanese honeysuckle, greenbrier (Smilax rotundifolia),
crossvine, shagbark hickory (Carya ovata), red maple, river birch, box elder (Acer negundo), fescue,
and English plantain.
The Hardwood Communi
The hardwood community is a small area located on the southeastern portion of the project,
from the bridge at the toe of slope to the extent of the right-of-way. The flora of the hardwood
community is comprised of American beech (Fagus grandifolia), crossvine, Christmas fern
(Polystichum acrostichoides), winged elm (Ulmus alata), ironwood, Japanese honeysuckle, river
birch, sweet gum, shagbark hickory, sugar maple, red cedar (Juniperus virginiana), short leaf pine
(Pinus echinata), poison ivy, cranefly orchid (Tipularia discolor), and wild strawberry (Fragaria
virginiana).
Pine Forest Communi
The pine forest community is also located on the southeastern section of the project. It starts
about 30.4 in (100 ft.) east of the hardwood community and extends the rest of the project. The flora
in the pine forest community includes short leaf pine, red cedar, sweetgum, ironwood, red maple,
American beech, poison ivy, sugar maple, blackberry, tulip poplar, black cherry (Primus serotina),
Christmas fern and white oak (Quercus alba).
Faunal Component
Wildlife that may frequently use the bottomland hardwood community, the pine forest
community, the hardwood community or maintained/disturbed communities include: two-lined
salamander (Eurycea bislineata), spring peeper (Hyla crucifer), Eastern ribbon snake (Thamnophis
sauritus), woodchuck (Marmota monax), beaver (Castor canadesis), white-tailed deer (Odocoileus
virginianus), pine vole (Microtus pinetorum), mink (Mustela vison), striped skunk (Mephitis
mephitis), raccoon (Procyon lotor), gray squirrel* (Sciurus carolinensis), river otter* (Lutra
canadensis), and white footed mouse (Peromyscus leucopus).
Avian species utilizing these communities include the northern mockingbird (Mimus
polyglottas), Carolina wren* (Thryothorus ludovicianus), Carolina chickadee* (Pares carolinensis),
blue jay* (Cyanocitta cristata) American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos), belted kingfisher*
(Megaceryle alcyon), field sparrow* (Spizella pusilla), and the downy woodpecker (Picoides
pubescens). The mourning dove (Zenaida macroura) is a permanent resident in this community type.
Aquatic Communities
One aquatic community, Country Line Creek, a piedmont perennial stream, will be impacted
by the proposed project. Perennial streams support an assemblage of fauna that require a constant
source of flowing water, as compared to intermittent or standing water. Physical characteristics of the
water body and condition of the water resource influence flora and faunal composition of aquatic
communities. Terrestrial communities adjacent to a water resource also greatly influence aquatic
communities.
8
Amphibians and reptiles commonly observed in and adjacent to moderately sized perennial
streams in rural areas may include northern dusky salamander (Desmognathus fuscus), three lined
salamander (Eurycea guttolineata), green frog (Rana clamitans), pickerel frog (Rana palustris), and
northern water snake (Nerodia sipedon). According to Fish (1968), Country Line Creek is of no
fishing significance due to stream size. Fish species that maybe located here include mountain
redbelly dace (Phoxinus oreas), fantail darter (Etheostoma flabellare), piedmont darter (Percina
crassa), redbreast sunfish (Lepomis auritus), margined madtom (Noturus insignis), yellow bullhead
(Amerius natalis) and creek chub (Semotilus astromaculatus).
Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Construction of the subject project will have various impacts on the biotic resources
described. Any construction related activities in or near these resources have the potential to impact
biological functions. This section quantifies and qualifies impacts to the natural resources in terms of
area impacted and ecosystems affected. Permanent impacts to biotic communities are represented in
Table 1.
Calculated impacts to terrestrial resources reflect the relative abundance of each community
present within the study area. Project construction will result in clearing and degradation of portions
of these communities. Table I summarizes potential quantitative losses to these biotic communities,
resulting from project construction. Estimated impacts are derived using the entire proposed right of
way width of 18.3-m (60.0-ft). Usually, project construction does not require the entire right of way;
therefore, actual impacts may be considerably less. The proposed ROW for alternates 1 and 2 are
listed below:
Alternate 1: 9.1m (30 ft) on each side of the existing bridge.
Alternate 2: 9.1m (30 ft) on each side of proposed bridge.
TABLE 1. Anticipated Impacts to Biotic Communities
Community Alternate 1 Alternate 2
Bottomland Hardwood 0.02 (0.06) 0.12 (0.29)
Maintained/Disturbed 0.04 (0.09) 0.08 (0.19)
Hardwood Forest 0.01 (0.03) 0.02 (0.05)
Pine Forest 0.00 (0.00) 0.06 (0.14)
Totals 0.07 (0.18) 0.28 (0.67)
Values cited are in hectares (acres)
Selection of Alternate I would result in the lowest impact on the biotic communities in the
project area.
Plant communities found within the proposed project area serve as nesting and sheltering
habitat for a variety of wildlife. Replacing Bridge No. 10 and its associated improvements will reduce
9
habitat for faunal species, thereby diminishing faunal numbers. However, due to the size and scope of
this project, it is anticipated that impacts to fauna will be minimal. Areas modified by construction
(but not paved) will become road shoulders and early successional habitat. Reduced habitat will
displace some wildlife further from the roadway while attracting other wildlife by the creation of
earlier successional habitat. Animals temporarily displaced by construction activities will repopulate
areas suitable for the species.
Aquatic communities are sensitive to even the smallest changes in their environment. Stream
channelization, scouring, siltation, sedimentation and erosion from construction- related work would
effect water quality and biological constituents. Although direct impacts may be temporary,
environmental impacts from these construction processes may result in long term or irreversible
effects.
Impacts often associated with in-stream construction include increased channelization and
.scouring of the streambed. In-stream construction alters the stream substrate and may remove
streamside vegetation at the site. Disturbances to the substrate will produce siltation, which clogs the
gills and/or feeding mechanisms of benthic organisms (sessile filter-feeders and deposit-feeders), fish
and amphibian species. Benthic organisms can also be covered by excessive amounts of sediment.
These organisms are slow to recover or repopulate a stream.
The removal of streamside vegetation and placement of fill material at the construction site
alters the terrain. Alteration of the stream bank enhances the likelihood of erosion and sedimentation.
Revegetation stabilizes and holds the soil, thus mitigating these processes. Erosion and sedimentation
carry soils, toxic compounds and other materials into aquatic communities at the construction site.
These processes magnify turbidity and can cause the formation of sandbars at the site and
downstream, thereby altering water flow and the growth of vegetation. Streamside alterations also
lead to more direct sunlight penetration and to elevations of water temperatures, which may impact
many species.
Jurisdictional Topics
This section provides descriptions of two important issues: Waters of the United States and
rare and protected species.
Waters of the United States
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) promulgated the definition of "Waters of the
United States" under. 33 CFR §328.3(a). Waters of the United States include most interstate and
intrastate surface waters, tributaries, and wetlands. Areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or
groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances
do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions are
considered "wetlands" under 33 CFR §328.3(b). Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs,
and similar areas. Any action that proposes to place dredge or fill materials into Waters of the United
States falls under the jurisdiction of the USACE, and must follow the statutory provisions under
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 U.S.C. 1344).
10
Characteristics of Wetlands and Surface Waters
Potential wetland communities were investigated pursuant to the 1987 "Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual". The three-parameter approach is used where hydric soils, hydrophytic
vegetation and prescribed hydrologic characteristics must all be present for an area to be considered a
wetland. There are no wetland areas located within the project study area.
Country Line Creek is jurisdictional surface water under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(33 U.S.C. 1344). Discussion of the biological, physical and water quality aspects of Country Line
Creek are presented in previous sections of this report.
B. 4.1.2 Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Anticipated impacts to surface waters are determined by using the entire project ROW width
of 18.3 m (60.0 ft). Surface water impacts pertaining to Alternate 1 have been determined to be 60
linear feet (18.3 m). Impacts to surface waters that would occur by using Alternate 2 have been
determined to be 60 linear feet (18.3 m). Usually, project construction does not require the entire
ROW, therefore, and actual surface water impacts may be considerably less.
Permits
Clean Water Act §404 establishes a permit program to regulate the discharge of dredge or fill
material into Waters of the United States. The USACE, which administers the permit program under
CWA §404, established nationwide permits for minor activities, specialized activities, and activities
regulated by other authorities. A nationwide permit (NWP) is a permit by rule. In other words,
compliance with the NWP rules satisfies the statutory provisions under section 404 of the Clean
Water Act. Forty NWP's referenced by a number currently exist (Strand, 1997). Nationwide 23,
entitled Approved Categorical Exclusions, covers certain activities undertaken, assisted, authorized,
regulated, funded, or financed, in whole or in part, by another Federal agency or department.
Nationwide 23 applies when another Federal agency or department determines that their activity,
work, or discharge is categorically excluded from an environmental impact statement (EIS) under the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The activity, work, or discharge becomes categorically
excluded when its actions neither individually nor cumulatively have significant effect on the human
environment. Also, the Office of the Chief of Engineers must receive notice of the agency or
department's application for the categorical exclusion and concur with the categorical exclusion
determination (61 FR 65874, 65916; December 13, 1996). The project's impacts on the Waters of the
United States will likely require a NWP 23.
Clean Water Act §401 authorizes states to determine whether activities permitted by the
federal government comply with state water quality standards. The DWQ may require a Section 401
Water Quality Certification if a project fills or substantially modifies waters or wetlands. North
Carolina developed General Certifications (GCs) that satisfy CWA §401 and correspond to the Corps
of Engineers' NWP's (NCDENR-DWQ, 1999). Water Quality No. 3107, which corresponds to NWP
23, will likely be required for the project's impacts to surface waters.
Mitigation
The COE has adopted, through the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), a wetland
mitigation policy which embraces the concept of "no net loss of wetlands and surface waters" and
sequencing. The purpose of this policy is to restore and maintain the chemical, biological and
physical integrity of Waters of the United States, specifically wetlands. Mitigation of Waters of the
U.S. has been defined by the CEQ to include: avoiding impacts (to surface waters), minimizing
impacts, rectifying impacts, reducing impacts over time and compensating for impacts (40 CFR
1508.20). Each of these three aspects (avoidance, minimization and compensatory mitigation) must
be considered sequentially.
Avoidance
Avoidance mitigation examines all appropriate and practicable possibilities of averting
impacts to Waters of the United States. According to a 1990 Memorandum of Agreement (MOA)
between the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the USACE, in determining "appropriate
and practicable" measures to offset unavoidable impacts, such measures should be appropriate to the
scope and degree of those impacts and practicable in terms of cost, existing technology and logistics
in light of overall project purposes. Avoidance cannot be reached because of the replacement of the
existing bridge, which will affect Waters of the United States.
Minimization
Minimization includes the examination of appropriate and practicable steps to reduce the
adverse impacts to Waters of the United States. Implementation of these steps will be required
through project modifications and permit conditions. Minimization typically focuses on decreasing
the footprint of the proposed project through the reduction of median widths, ROW widths, fill slopes
and/or road shoulder widths. Other practical mechanisms to minimize impacts to Waters of the United
States crossed by the proposed project include: strict enforcement of sedimentation control BMP's for
the protection of surface waters during the entire life of the project, reduction of clearing and
grubbing activity; reduction/elimination of direct discharge into streams, reduction of runoff velocity;
re-establishment of vegetation on exposed areas, minimization of "in-stream" activity, covering of
exposed fill material and litter/debris control.
Compensatory Mitigation
Compensatory mitigation is not normally considered until anticipated impacts to Waters of
the United States have been avoided and minimized to the maximum extent possible. It is recognized
that "no net loss of wetlands" functions and values may not be achieved in each and every permit
action. Appropriate and practicable compensatory mitigation is required for unavoidable adverse
impacts, which remain after all; appropriate and practicable minimization has been required.
Compensatory actions often include restoration, creation and enhancement of Waters of the United
States. Such actions should be undertaken in areas adjacent to or contiguous to the discharge site.
Compensatory mitigation will not be required according to DENR (15A NCAC 211.0506(h)), because
one must fill or alter more than 150 linear feet (45.7 meters) of streams, and the project area affects
much less than that.
12
Rare and Protected Species
Some populations of fauna and flora have been in, or are in, the process of decline either due
to natural forces or their inability to coexist with human activities. Federal law (under the provisions
of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended) requires that any action, likely to adversely
affect a species classified as federally protected, be subject to review by the Fish and Wildlife (FWS).
Other species may receive additional protection under separate state laws.
Federally-Protected Species
Plants and animals with federal classifications of Endangered (E), Threatened (T), Proposed
Endangered (PE) and Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under provisions of Section 7 and
Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. As of February 28, 2000, the FWS
lists no federally protected species for Caswell County. This county listing was verified on August 1,
2000.
Federal Species of Concern and State Listed Species
There are three Federal Species of Concern (FSC) listed for Caswell County. Federal Species
of Concern are not afforded federal protection under the ESA and are not subject to any of its
provisions, including Section 7, until they are formally proposed or listed as Threatened or
Endangered. Federal Species of Concern are defined as those species, which may or may not be listed
in the future. These species were formally candidate species, or species under consideration for listing
for which there was insufficient information to support a listing of Endangered, Threatened, Proposed
Endangered and Proposed Threatened. Organisms which are listed as Endangered (E), Threatened
(T), Significantly Rare (SR) or Special Concern (SC) by the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program
(NCNHP) list of rare plant and animal species are afforded state protection under the State
Endangered Species Act and the North Carolina Plant Protection and Conservation Act of 1979.
Table 2 lists Federal Species of Concern, the species state status (if afforded state protection)
and the existence of suitable habitat for each species in the study area. This species list is provided for
information purposes as the status of these species may be upgraded in the future.
Table 2. Federal Species of Concern for Caswell County
Scientific Name Common Name State Status
Isoetes virginica Virginia quillwort C
Lotus helleri Heller's trefoil C
Fusconaia masoni Atlantic pigtoe C
• Candidate species are species which are rare in North Carolina, generally with 1-20 populations
in the state, generally substantially reduced in numbers by habitat destruction (and sometimes
also by direct exploitation or disease).
Surveys for the above-mentioned species were not conducted during the site visit, nor were
these species observed during the site visit. A search of the NC Natural Heritage database of rare and
unique habitats revealed no records of FSC or State listed species in the project area.
13
D. Air Quality and Traffic Noise
This project is an air quality "neutral" project, thus it is not required to be included in the
regional emissions analysis (if applicable) and a project level CO analysis is not required.
If the project disposes of vegetation by burning, all burning shall be done in accordance with
applicable local laws and regulations of the North Carolina SIP for air quality in compliance with 15
NCAC 2D.0520.
The project will not substantially increase traffic volumes. Therefore, it will have no
substantial impact on noise levels. Temporary noise increases may occur during construction.
E. Farmland
The Farmland Protection Policy Act of 1981 requires that all federal agencies or their
representatives, to consider the impact of land acquisition and construction projects on prime and
important farmland soils. These soils are determined by the US Natural Resources Conservation
Service (MRCS) based on criteria such as potential crop yield and possible level of input of economic
resources. The project will result in the conversion of a small amount of land but the area to be
converted is void of agricultural uses. Therefore, no further consideration of impacts to farmland is
required.
14

North Carolina Department of
Transportation
Division of Hi;hways
Plannin; S Environmental Branch
Caswell County
Replace Bridge No. 10 on SR 1597
over Country Line Creek
B-3130
Fi^_ure One
Looking east across
Bridge No. 10
Looking west across
Bridge No. 10
East Carolina Department of
Transportation
Division of Highways
Project Development & Environmental
Analysis Branch
Caswell County
Replace Bridge No. 10 on SR 1597
Over Country Line Creek
B-3130
Three

Caution Sign on
SR 1597
East Carolina Department of
Transportation
Division of [-Highways
Project Development & Environmental
Analysis Branch
Caswell County
Replace Bridge No. 10 on SR 1597
Over Country Line Creek
B-3130
Supplement to Figure Three

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. VO. BOX 25201. RALEIGH. N.C. 27611-5201
GOVERNOR
July 9, 1998
MEMORANDUM TO: William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manager
PUin d Environmental Branch
FROM: C ates, Di rector
E. NORRIS TOLSON
SECRETARY
SUBJECT: Review of Scoping Sheets for Bridge Replacement Project:
Bridge No. 10 on SR 1597 over Country Line Creek in
Caswell County, TIP No. B-3130.
In your memorandum of February 27, 1998, you requested our comments
regarding the proposed improvements to the subject project.
This section of roadway corresponds to a NC Bicycling Highway, North Line Trace, as
shown on the attached map. Therefore, AASHTO standard bicycle accommodations should be
considered as part of the improvements for the proposed bridge replacement.
The replacement of Bridge No. 10 on SR 1597 should include 1.2 m (4-foot) shoulders
on both the new bridge and the approach roadway on either side of the new bridge. AASHTO
standard 1372 mm (54-inch) high rails should also be specified for the new bridge.
We appreciate the opportunity to comment on this project. If there is a need for further
information, please contact Tom Norman, Facilities Program Manager, at 715-2342.
CBY/rwd
Attachment
Curtis B. E arcs
Dwision of Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation
Phone [phone]- Fav [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
0

North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
April 22, 1998
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Bridge 10 on SR 1597 over Country Line Creek,
Caswell County, B-3130, Federal Aid Project
MABRZ-1597(1), State Project 8.248110 1, ER
98-8585
Dear Mr. Graf:
Division of Archives and History
Jeffrey J. Crow, Director
We regret staff was unable to attend the scoping meeting for the above project on
March 26, 1998. However, Debbie Bevin met with Dennis Pipkin of the North
Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) on April 15, 1998, to discuss the
project and view the project photographs and aerial.
Based upon our review of the photographs and the information discussed at the
meeting, we offer our preliminary comments regarding this project.
In terms of historic architectural resources, we are aware of no historic structures
located within the area of potential effect. We recommend that no historic
architectural survey be conducted for this project.
There are no known archaeological sites within the proposed project area. Based
on our present knowledge of the area, it is unlikely that any archaeological
resources which may be eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic
Places will be affected by the project construction. We, therefore, recommend that
no archaeological investigation be conducted in connection with this project.
Having provided this information, we look forward to receipt of either a Categorical
Exclusion or Environmental Assessment which indicates how NCDOT addressed our
comments.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966 and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
109 East Jones Street • Raleigh. North G -1;01-7807 7407 U?n
Nicholas L. Graf
4/22/98, Page 2
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental
review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
Sincerely,
David Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw
cc: 4 F. Vick
B. Church
T. Padgett

e'..?+Nt
V.n
STATE of NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201 DAVID MCCOY
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
March 26, 1998
MEMO TO: Project File
FROM: Dennis Pipkin, P.E.?^^?""'?'
Project Planning Engineer
SUBJECT: Record of verbal comments from NC Wildlife Resources Commission
(WRC) for TIP Project B-3130, Caswell County, Bridge No. 10, on'
SR 1597, Over Country Line Creek, Federal Aid Project
MABRZ-1597(1), State Project 8.2481101
On March 26, 1998, 1 discussed the above project with Mr. David Cox,
transportation projects coordinator for the NC Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC). He
stated that the WRC anticipates no problems with project B-3130. He requested that
standard NCDOT erosion and sedimentation control measures be in effect for the project.
Mr. Cox noted that the deeper reaches of Country Line Creek do yield catches of
bluegill, catfish, and largemouth bass. He reiterated that standard NC WRC comments
would be applicable for this project.