20011625 Ver 1_Complete File_20011107

Ilk
A°?'STAlf°
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR.
GOVERNOR
P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201
October 15, 1997
MEMORANDUM TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Ms. Cyndi Bell
DWQ - DENR
H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
C I (L? zS
J?feGy
L
GARLAND B. GARRETT JR.
SECRETARY
Review of Scoping Sheets for the following projects:
Project T.I.P. County Bridge No. State Route Planning Engineer
B-3170 Edgecombe No. 53 SR 1500 Jeff Ingham t/
B-3329 Edgecombe No. 79 NC 43 Jeff Ingham,,--'
B-3330 Forsyth No. 75 SR 2630 Dennis Pipkinv-'-

B-3333 Forsyth No. 168 SR 2776 Dennis Pipkin
Attached for your review and comments are the scoping sheets and location maps for the
subject projects. The purpose of this information and the related review procedure is to have an
early "meeting of the minds" as to the scope of work that should be performed and thereby
enable us to better implement the projects. Scoping meetings for these projects are scheduled for
November 18, 1997 in the Planning and Environmental Branch Conference Room (Room 470).
These scoping meetings will be held back to back beginning at 9:00 A. M. in the order shown
above. These meetings typically last 10 to 15 minutes per project, so all attendees should plan to
arrive at the beginning of the 9:00 A. M. session as applicable. You may provide us with your
comments at the meeting, mail them to us prior to the meeting, or e-mail them to
[e-mail] prior to the meeting.
Thank you for your assistance in this part of our planning process. If there are any
questions about the meetings or the scoping sheets, please call the indicated Project Planning
Engineer, at 733-3141.
HFV/bg
Attachments

?' J
a'`An7Fa
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
State Project: 8.2290901 (B-3170)
Contract No. C200436
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
November 18, 2002
F. A. Number: BRZ-1500(5)
County: Edgecombe
Description: Bridge over Fishing Creek and Approaches on SR 1500

t?
MEMORANDUM TO: Steven D. DeWitt, PE
State Construction Engineer
FROM: Wendi O. Johnson, PE Division Construction Engineer
Approved Preconstruction Conference Minutes
LYNDO TIPPETT
SECRETARY
We are transmitting an approved copy of the minutes covering the preconstruction conference for
the above project, which was held on October 28, 2002. The minutes were approved by the
Contractor, Dellinger, Inc., as noted.
Attachment
c: Ron Lucas (FHWA)
John Hennessy (NCDEHNR)
David Cox (NCWRC)
Ron Sechler (National Marine Fisheries)
Dr. Garland Pardue (US Fish & Wildlife)
Ross Langley (Edgecombe-Martin EMC)
Don Farmer (Sprint)
Floyd Williams (DEHNR, Land Quality Section)

Post Office Box 3165, Wilson, North Carolina 27895-3165
Telephone [phone] Fax [phone]
Steven D. DeWitt, PE
November 18, 2002
Page 2
ec: Don G. Lee
Eddie Bunn, PE
Warren Walker, PE
Haywood Daughtry, PE
Richard Chrisawn
Don Smith
Andy Pridgen
Lloyd Johnston, Jr.
Jimmy Marler
David R. Henderson, PE
Randy Turner
Jamie Shern
John Williamson
Amy Stephenson
Andy Brown, PE
Mike Robinson, PE
Mike Bell (US Army Corps of Engineers)
Geotechnical Unit (Don Moore)
Judith J. Ratcliffe (NCWRC)
Cecil L. Jones, PE (Attention: Randy Pace)
Shannon Sweitzer, PE
Gerald McCauley
PRECONSTRUCTION CONFERENCE MINUTES
State Project: 8.2290901 (B-3170)
Federal Aid No.: BRZ-1500(5)
Contract No.: C200436
County: Edgecombe
Description: Bridge over Fishing Creek and Approaches on SR 1500
The preconstruction conference for the above project was held in the Wilson Division Office Conference Room
on October 28, 2002 with the following persons in attendance:
NAME
Andy Pridgen
Steve Joyner
Jimmy Long
Brian A. Strickland
Bobby Francis
Lee Bradley
M. S. Robinson
C. D. McLamb
Eddie J. Bunn
REPRESENTING
NCDOT - QA Lab
NCDOT - Nashville Resident Engineer's Office
NCDOT - Nashville Resident Engineer's Office
NCDOT - Right of Way
Dellinger, Inc.
Dellinger, Inc.
NCDOT - Construction Unit
NCDOT - Nashville Resident Engineer's Office
NCDOT - Nashville Resident Engineer's Office
Wendi Oglesby Johnson, PE, Division Construction Engineer, presided over the conference. She asked
everyone present to introduce themselves and their company affiliation.
Mr. Bobby Francis will act as Project Manager and Traffic Control Coordinator for the Contractor, and the
Project Superintendent will be Harvey Richardson.
Mr. Steve Joyner will act as Project Inspector and Traffic Control Coordinator for the Division of Highways.
The Contractor advised they plan to begin work November 4, 2002 putting up signs.
The Contractor presented his progress schedule which will be checked, and he will be advised if
satisfactory. By copy of these minutes, we are advising the Contractor that his progress schedule has been
checked and is approved as submitted. .
RIGHT OF WAY
Brian Strickland advised that all of the right of way necessary for this project has been acquired and right of
way agreements have been secured. These agreements cover all the right of way and easements necessary for
this project that were acquired by negotiation. Condemnation was not filed on any parcels.
On June 19, 2002 Mr. Strickland sent plan revisions to Roadway Design and the State Location & Surveys
Engineer. These revisions are corrections to names of property owners and changes to property lines and not
actual design or right of way corrections, and will not affect the construction of this project. Also note that
Parcel 002 has been deleted and the area in that parcel was added to Parcel 001.
Preconstruction Conference Minutes
B-3170
` Page 2
There are no underground storage tanks located in the right of way or easement areas for this project. There is
no known contamination within the right of way of the project, and there are no 200 series items on this
project.
The Contractor is advised not to exceed the right of way or easement areas shown on the project plans
unless permission is granted from the property owner.
ASPHALT PAVEMENTS
Mr. Andy Pridgen, Division QA Supervisor, asked the Contractor if he had any questions of the Special
Provisions outlined on pages 23 thru the top of page 29.
Old pavement removed needs to be tested before incorporating into plant stockpile.
Mr. Pridgen advised that the Special Provisions in this contract are dated 01/15/02.
The Contractor advised that Barnhill Contracting Company would perform paving on this project. Use
theoretical price of $35.00 per ton for price reduction per Eddie Bunn.
PROJECT SPECIAL PROVISIONS
GENERAL
Any of the special provisions not covered will be as stipulated.
Contract Time and Liquidated Damages:
The date of availability for this contract is October 28, 2002.
The contract completion date is November 15, 2003.
The liquidated damages for this contract are $400.00 per calendar day.
Intermediate Contract Time Number I and Liquidated Damages - The Contractor shall complete the work
required of Phase II, Steps 2 thru 6 as shown on Sheet TCP-2 and shall place and maintain traffic on same.
Date of availability for this intermediate contract time will be the date the Contractor elects to begin the work
and the completion date will be the date which is 75 consecutive calendar days after and including the date the
Contractor begins the work.
Liquidated damages are $500.00 per calendar day.
Preconstruction Conference Minutes
B-3170
Page 3
Construction Moratorium - Since anadromous fish utilize Fishing Creek, NCDOT will follow the "Stream
Crossing Guidelines for Anadromous Fish Passage" throughout construction. This commitment includes a
moratorium on in-water construction activities from March 15`h to June 15`h of any year.
Disadvantaged Business Enterprise - The Contractor's EEO Officer and Minority Liaison Officer is Lee
Bradley.
The Resident Engineer furnished the Contractor with required posters for his bulletin board. The Contractor's
EEO Policy Statement is to be posted on the project's Bulletin Board, which should be weatherproof, along
with the following posters:
1. Davis-Bacon Minimum Prevailing Wage Rate Schedule
2. "Wage-Rate Information -F/A/ Project", Form PR-1495
3. "Notice Relating to False. Statements," Form PR-1022
4. EEO Poster - "Discrimination is Prohibited"
The Contractor is urged to document, in writing, all actions taken in complying with Equal Opportunity of
Employment Provisions, Training Provision, and Minority Business Enterprise Provision. This includes
applicant referrals, meeting with employees, on site inspections, wage evaluation, etc.
All subcontractors and suppliers are responsible for meeting the same requirements as the prime contractor,
and it is the prime contractor's responsibility to oversee that both are in compliance.
All alleged discriminatory violations should be brought to the attention of the Resident Engineer.
The State and/or FHWA will conduct a Contract Compliance Review sometime during the life of this contract.
Therefore, fair employment practice should be maintained at all times.
Reporting Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Participation - When payments are made to Disadvantaged
Business Enterprise firms, including material suppliers, contractors at all levels shall provide the Engineer with
an accounting of said payments.
Retainage and Prompt Payment - Contractor at all levels, prime, subcontractor, or second tier contractor,
shall within 7 calendar days of receipt of monies resulting from work performed on the project or services
rendered, pay subcontractors, second tier subcontractors, or material suppliers, as appropriate.
The Contractor's requested estimate period for this project will be the last day of the month.
Domestic Steel and Iron Products - All steel and iron products which are permanently incorporated into this
project shall be produced in the United States except minimal amounts of foreign steel and iron products may
be used, provided the combined project cost of the bid items involved does not exceed one-tenth of one
percent (0.1 percent) of the total amount bid for the entire project or $2,500.00, whichever is greater. This
minimal amount of foreign produced steel and iron products permitted for use by this Special Provision is not
applicable to fasteners. Domestically produced fasteners are required for this project.
Preconstruction Conference Minutes
B-3170
Page 4
Submission of Records - Federal Aid Projects - The Contractor's attention is directed to the Standard Special
Provision entitled "Required Contract Provisions - Federal Aid Construction Contracts" contained elsewhere
in this proposal form.
This project is located on a roadway classified as a local road or rural minor collector so the requirements of
Paragraph IV - Payment of Predetermined Minimum Wage, Paragraph V - Statements and Payrolls, and
Paragraph VI - Records of Materials, Supplies, and Labor are exempt from this contract.
This project is NOT located on the National Highway System; therefore, federal form FHWA-47 is not
required.
Safety Vests - All Contractors' personnel, all subcontractors and their personnel, and any material suppliers
and their personnel must wear an OSHA approved, reflective vest or outer garment at all times while on the
project. Ms. Oglesby advised that non-reflective orange shirts are acceptable for all project personnel except
flaggers.
PROJECT SPECIAL PROVISIONS
ROADWAY
Roadway Construction - The work shall consist of furnishing and installing all materials, labor and equipment
for construction of the roadway in accordance with the typical sections and pavement schedule.
This item of work shall include clearing and grubbing; excavation and embankment; construction surveying;
pipes; drainage structures; pavement removal; pavement structure; furnish and place borrow material; undercut;
steel beam guardrail; erosion control and all incidentals necessary to complete the work required of the plans.
Payment for work required of this provision will be made at the contract lump sum price for "Roadway
Construction".
Clearing and Grubbing - Clearing and grubbing shall be by Method III shown on Standard No. 200.03 of the
Roadway Standards.
Shoulder and Fill Slope Provision - Required shoulder and slope construction for this project shall be
performed in accordance with requirements of Section 226 of the Specifications except as noted in the
contract:
Construct the top 6" (150mm) of shoulder and fill slopes with soils capable of supporting vegetation.
Provide soil with P.I. greater than 6 and less than 25 and with a pH ranging from 5.5 to 6.8. Remove stones
and other foreign material 2" (50mm) or larger in diameter. All soil is subject to test and acceptance or
rejection by the Engineer.
Material shall be obtained from within the project limits or an approved borrow source.
Reinforced Bridge Approach Fills - The Contractor is to be guided by the Special Provisions and all work
shall be done in the presence of the Engineer or Inspector.
Preconstruction Conference Minutes
B-3170
Page 5
UTILITY CONFLICTS
1. Edgecombe-Martin EMC (power) - all cables have been relocated per Eddie Bunn.
2. Sprint (telephone) - aerial and underground cables need to be relocated prior to tie-in and bridge
demolition.
EROSION CONTROL
The Project Inspector for DOT will give the Contractor a weekly erosion control list.
Environmentally Sensitive Areas - This project is located in an Environmentally Sensitive Area. This
designation requires special procedures to be used for clearing and grubbing, temporary stream crossing,
and grading operations within the area identified on the plans. This also requires special procedures to be
used for seeding and mulching and staged seeding within the project.
The "Environmentally Sensitive Area" shall be defined as a 50' (16 meter) buffer zone on both sides of the
stream (or depression) measured from top of stream bank (or center of depression). Contractor may
perform clearing but grubbing cannot be performed until Contractor begins grading operations. Erosion
control devices shall be installed immediately following the clearing operation.
Once grading operations begin, work will progress in a continuous manner until complete.
Contractor shall establish an early stage of vegetation sufficient to restrain erosion immediately following
grade establishment.
Seeding and mulching shall be performed in accordance with Section 1660 of the Standard Specifications
and vegetative cover sufficient to restrain erosion shall be installed immediately following grade
establishment.
Seeding and mulching shall be performed on the areas disturbed by construction immediately following final
grade establishment. No appreciable time shall lapse into the contract time without stabilization of slopes,
ditches and other areas within the "Environmentally Sensitive Areas" as indicated on the erosion control
plans.
Gravel Construction Entrance - Contractor shall install a Gravel Construction Entrance in accordance with the
details in the plans and at locations directed by the Engineer.
STRUCTURES
Mike Robinson covered this portion of the contract. All work will be completed in accordance with the
contract plans and Standard Specifications except payment for all items required to complete this work would
be a lump sum payment.
Mr. Robinson asked Contractor how he would construct the bridge. Contractor advised he will install matting
off the bank to get barge in water. Will be working off the mats and barge to construct the bridge.
Preconstruction Conference Minutes
B-3170
Page 6
The Contractor questioned whether special qualifications were required for installing 18" pipe. Mr. Robinson
advised Contractor that he should submit certifications and qualifications of welders who will work on 18" pipe
piles. They will be reviewed by M&T.
PERMITS
Mrs. Johnson advised the US Army Corps of Engineers and DEHNR have issued a permit for this project and
the Contractor shall comply with all applicable permit conditions during construction of this project.
Agents of the permitting authority will periodically inspect the project for adherence to the permits.
Should the Contractor propose to utilize construction methods (such as temporary structures or fill in waters
and/or wetlands for haul roads, work platforms, cofferdams, etc.) not specifically identified in the permit
(individual, general or nationwide) authorizing the project, it shall be the Contractor's responsibility to
coordinate with the appropriate permit agency to determine what, if any, additional permit action is required.
The Contractor shall also be responsible for initiating the request for the authorization of such construction
method by the permitting agency. The request shall be submitted through the Engineer. The Contractor shall
not utilize the construction method until it is approved by the permitting agency. The request normally takes
approximately 60 days to process; however, no extensions of time or additional compensation will be granted
for delays resulting from the Contractor's request for approval or construction methods not specifically
identified in the permit.
The Contractor should contain his work within the footprint shown on the plans. Any deviation would be in
violation of the permits. The permit does not cover waste or borrow within wetlands.
The permit is valid until February 2003. Eddie Bunn will write a letter to Jean Manuele requesting an
extension until November 2003.
The barge method described by Dellinger is acceptable if kept within the footprint provided in the 401/404
permit.
Dewatering of the 18" pipe piles (if necessary) is permissible if pumped into erosion control measure.
The archeological study is complete. However, final report has not been received, but letter is being sent that
allows us to proceed with work the week of November 4-8. We cannot proceed with construction until the
summary report is reviewed and approved. If any artifacts are found during construction, work will cease on
project. (NOTE: CONTRACTOR SAID THIS WAS NOT STATED AT THE PRECONSTRUCTION
CONFERENCE.)
All standard procedures will be implemented to avoid or minimize environmental impacts.
Description of Activity - Mechanized land clearing, excavation and the discharge of fill material into Fishing
Creek associated with the replacement of the existing bridge with a new bridge south of the existing bridge.
This permit authorizes the discharge of fill material into surface waters of the United States associated with
bridge bent construction. Traffic will be detoured along the existing bridge and other secondary roads during
construction. The discharge of fill material associated with demolition of the current structure into surface
waters is not permissible. Separate Department of the Army (DA) permit will be required should demolition of
the present structure involve the discharge of fill material into surface waters of the United States.
Preconstruction Conference Minutes
B-3170
Page 7
The Contractor and his personnel should make themselves familiar with the conditions stipulated in the permits.
The Contractor presented a letter advising names of persons authorized to sign supplemental agreements in
conjunction with this project.
There were no further questions and/or comments and the meeting was adjourned.
l/ ?? 4", . I
DATE AP ROVED NAME AND btLE'
•? s
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
e??
A 00% Michael F. Easley, Governor NCDENR
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Acting Director ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
December 3, 2001
Edgecombe County
DWQ Project No. 011625
APPROVAL OF 4OlWater Qaalits Certification and ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS and Tar-
Pamlico River Buffer Rules
Mr. William D. Gilmore, Pte, Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
North Carolina Dent of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina, 27699-1548
Dear Mr. Gilmore:
You have our approval, as c escnbed in your application dated October 19, 2001, and in accordance with
the attached cows and those listed below, to place fill material in 133 square feet of protected riparian
buffers for the purpose of replacing BridL-- Number 53 on SR 1500 over Fishing Creek in Edgecombe
County. The pr*zt shall be constructed in accordance with your application dated October 19, 2001.
After reviewing yuw application, we baNr- decided that this fill is covered by General Water Quality
Certification Numb= 3197- Cestification 3197 corresponds to Nationwide Permit Number 23 issued by the
Corps of Engineem This approval is also valid for the Tar-Pamlico River buffer rules (15A NCAC 2B
.0259). In addition you should acquire any other federal, state or local permits before you proceed with
your project ineludmg (but not limited to) Sediment and Erosion Control, Non-Discharge and Water Supply
Watershed regnlafiwis. This approval will expire when the accompanying 404 permit expires unless
otherwise specified in the Ge2eratlDmtification.
This approval is surd solely for the purpose and design described in your application (unless modified
below). Should yaw project change, you must notify the DWQ and submit a new application. If the
property is sold, di-- mew own= most be given a copy of this Certification and approval letter, and is thereby
responsible for caup y"rng wig all the conditions. If total wetland fills for this project (now or in the future)
exceed one acre, ea of total imepacts to streams (now or in the future) exceed 150 linear feet, compensatory
mitigation may be wed as described in 15A NCAC 2H.0506 (h) (6) and (7).). This approval shall =
expire with the liationweide Permit expires or as otherwise provided in the General
Certification. For A& approval to be vapid, you mast follow the conditions listed in the attached
certification and any additiond conditions listed below.
1. Stormwater sbA be &cc*d to shectflow at nonerosive velocities through the protected stream buffers.
2. Upon complete of the project, dice NCDOT shall complete and return the enclosed "Certification of
Completion Fes" to notify DWQ when all work included in the 401 Certification has been completed.
The respontii & party sal complete the attached form and return it to the 401/Wetlands Unit of the
Division of W.Wer QuaTrtyr upon completion of the project.
Wedands/401 Unit 1621 Marl Service Center Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1621
Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
A Equal Oppammrty wave Acaou Employer 50% recycled/10% post consumer paper
L
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Acting Director
/ •
NCDENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
If you do not accept any of the conditions of the certification, you may ask for an adjudicatory hearing.
You must act within 60 days of the date that you receive this letter. To ask for a hearing, send a written
petition, which conforms to Chapter li0B of dw Forth Carolina General Statutes to the Office of
Administrative Hearings, P.O. Box 21-447, Raki2b, N.C. 27611-7447. This certification and its conditions
are final and binding unless you ask for a heariw-
This letter completes the review of the Divisic m of Water Quality under Section 401 of the Clean Water
Act. If you have any questions, pkase telephon-- John Dorney at 919-733-9646.
J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
Erector
Attachment
cc: Wilmington District Corps afEziw-ineers
Corps of Engineers Raleigh Fie-M Office
DWQ Raleigh Regional Offi=
File Copy
Central Files
c:\ncdot\TIP B-3170Wg0DI1625wge.doc
dd $W[p
01162:-
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTWNT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY LYNDO TIPPETT
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
October 19, 2001
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Field Office
6508 Falls of Neuse Road
Suite 120
Raleigh, NC 27615-6814
ATTENTION: Ms. Jean Manuele
NCDOT Coordinator
SUBJECT: Replacement of Bridge No. 53
County; Federal Aid Project No
Project B-3170.
Nov - -?
on SR 1500 over Fishing Creek in Edgecombe
BRZ-1550(5), State Project No. 8.229090 1, TIP
Dear Ma'am:
Please find attached the Categorical Exclusion for the above-referenced project, which is
scheduled to be let in April 2002. The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
proposes to replace Bridge No. 53 over Fishing Creek in Edgecombe County. Replacement will
be on a new location to the south with a bridge approximately 210 feet (64 meters) in length and
28 feet (8.6 meters) in width. The new bridge will provide two 11-foot (3.3-meter) lanes with 3-
foot (1-meter) offsets on each side. The new approach roadway will have two 11-foot lanes and
6-foot (1.8-meter) shoulders. Shoulder width will be increased by at least 3 feet (lmeter) where
guardrail is warranted. Traffic will be maintained on the existing bridge during construction.
After the new bridge and roadway approaches are constructed, traffic will be detoured on
surrounding roads for a short period of time in order to tie in the vertical alignment on the
eastern end of the project.
The existing structure, constructed by NCDOT in 1952, carries SR 1500 over Fishing
Creek in Edgecombe County. The bridge is 201 feet (61 meters) long and 19 feet (6 meters)
wide. There are approximately 23 feet (7 meters) of vertical clearance between the bridge deck
and streambed. The bridge is composed completely of timber and steel with an asphalt wearing
surface. Therefore, the bridge will be removed without dropping any component into Waters of
the U.S. during construction.
Fishing Creek is the only jurisdictional surface water resource in the project area. It is
located in the Tar-Pamlico River Basin and carries the DEM classification of WS-IV NSW
(Index No. 28-79-(30.5), 8/3/92). There are no waters classified as HQW, WS-I, WS-II, or ORW
within 1 mile of the project study area. There are no jurisdictional wetlands in the project area.
The proposed project will not impact any Waters of the U.S.
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. WWW. DOH. DOT. STATE. NC. US RALEIGH NC
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548
L
This project is subject to the Tar-Pamlico River Basin Buffer Rules. According to the
Rules, this bridge replacement project is allowable without mitigation because there are no
practical alternatives and buffer impacts are fewer than 150 linear feet and 0.3 acre. No portion
of Zone 1 and 0.14 acres (133 feet) in Zone 2 will be permanently impacted. Portions of both
zones will be temporarily impacted, but will be revegetated as soon as possible following
construction (see attached drawings).
The federally protected Tar spiney mussel is endemic to this drainage basin. A survey
will be conducted in and near the project area prior to construction by NCDOT endangered
species specialist Tim Savidge. In accordance with a December 5, 1997 request from the WRC,
Stream Crossing Guidelines for Anadromous Fish Passage will be applied.
The project is being processed by the Federal Highway Administration 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 23 in
accordance with 61 Federal Register 65874, 65916 (December 13, 1996) and as amended in the
Federal Register: March 9, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 47, Pages 12817-12899).
We anticipate that 401 General Water Quality Certification No. 2734 (Categorical
Exclusion) will apply to this project because of the Tar-Pamlico Buffer Rules requirement of
written authorization. One copy of the CE document is being provided to the North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality, for their review.
If you have any questions or need additional information please call Elizabeth Lusk at
733-7844, ext. 335.
Sincerely,
4/.C S7
William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
Cc. w/attachment:
Mr. David Franklin, USACE, Wilmington
Mr. John Dorney, NCDENR, DWQ
Mr. David Cox, NCWRC
Mr. Tim Rountree, P.E., Structure Design Unit
w/o attachment:
Mr. John Alford, P.E., Roadway Design
Mr. Burt Tasaico, P.E., Program Development
Ms. Debbie Barbour, P.E., Highway Design Engineer
Mr. D.R. Henderson, P.E., Hydraulics Unit
Mr. D.R. Dupree, P.E., Division 4 Engineer
Mr. Jeff Ingham, Project Planning Engineer
Mr. Hal Bain, Unit Head, Project Development and Environmental Analysis
i
,.. l::.,EII 1
SCALE
0 7 3 -US
• to , -.._ .. .. . ti+r-Z.--' '-+ • .
wtF -??
SCALE FOR ENLARGEMENTS
?! 0
7 t3. C
? V)1 t.? 1
,733
1]}3 \
CSi
Ingwood
d
4
t : Glenview
Gold Rack
TAR RIVER BUFFER
MAP
0
Aso
L]
O
Ls0)'
Roxottet 1?
L e,

42 aMi
H?
?,. . .
_ ... --.. ........ _ _..i
N. C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
EDGECOMBE COUNT'
PROJECT: 8.2290901 (B-3170)
BRIDGE NO.53 OVER
FISHING CREED
ON SR 100
SHEET
BUFFER LEGEND
- WLB WETLAND BOUNDARY
PROPOSED BRIDGE
WETLAND
L PROPOSED BOX CULVERT
I PROPOSED PIPE CULVERT
PERMANENT IMPACTS ZONE 1

(DASHED LINES DENOTE PIPES
EXISTNG STRUCTURES) 54' PIPES
® PERMANENT IMPACTS ZONE 2 & ABOVE
'
TEMPORARY IMPACTS
SINGLE TREE

-BZ -- RIPARIAN BUFFER ZONE WOODS LINE
- BZ1 - RIPARIAN BUFFER ZONE 1
30 f t (9.2m)
- BZ2 - RIPARIAN BUFFER ZONE 2
20 f t (6.1m)
-- -' FLOW DIRECTION
TO ----- TOP OF BANK
WE - EDGE OF WATER
- -C - PROP. LIMIT OF CUT
- -F - PROP. LIMIT OF FILL
--?- PROP. RIGHT OF WAY
- - NG- - NATURAL GROUND
- -Pa- - PROPERTY LINE
- TOE - TEMP. DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
-POE- PERMANENT DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
EAB- EXIST. ENDANGERED
ANIMAL BOUNDARY
- EPB- EXIST. ENDANGERED
PLANT BOUNDARY
- ?- - - - WATER SURFACE
X X X x
X XX LIVE STAKES
E2D BOULDER
--- CORE FIBER ROLLS
DRAINAGE INLET
ROOTWAD
Mt?N RIP RAP
O ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER
OR PARCEL NUMBER
IF AVAILABLE
? PREFORMED SCOUR HOLE
N. C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
EDGECOMBE COUNTY
PROJECT: 8.22290901 (B-3170)
DITCH / SWALE BRIDGE NO.53 OVER
FISHING CREEK
ON SR 1500
SHEET Z OF 4 10-11-01

f
b
J
t
i

?U
, jJ-7*f'
? U
O
11
s
W
.a
N
W'
Z
O
N
N N
I-- ?
U U
Q Q
d d
Z Cr
O W
w ? ?-1-
z ?
0
N rr
w W
LL \
m
tl O
Q
U ?
O Q- Q
F-
z0
? U
z
a -
o

C
?
?
Z
CA
0
:
0w
co H rT. 02
z?
a
04
4

I
o z u UA
? -
J; o°/ o Ey ? tW7 ?
ti a " z L
= N W a4 1.4 5 W O? CO Gc. 0
t? l
I
I
e f o N z LL w
a LL- z ?

8`
119 co
ZZ9

z
W N
2 Z U
U O a

CL
w

W Z?
g
LL o

D
00

W

W
L
L N
W

U
D O
CO
N
Z

z

g ZU
Z
W N

Q qq
?
W
L LL
C J

A N ?
U) CO 6 O
p O
0"
a a a
p
a

Z N ?

LU
Q
N
LL Z
LL O
W
m a
0 0 0
Z U

0-
N
z0
O
o
O J Q J
~ p N
t
+ M
+
t
N N co N
W W
?a

N C7 U`

c
m
m
z
Z
- ...1
F
0

:kL

I `
Edgecombe County
Bridge No. 53 on SR 1500
Over Fishing Creek
Federal Project BRZ-1550(5)
State Project 8.2290901
TIP # B-3170
011625
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DMSION OF HIGHWAYS
APPROVED:
Date William Gilmore, P. E., Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis
t I - 2-4
Date Nicholas Graf, P. E.
'?''. Division Administrator, FHWA
Edgepombe County
Bridge No. 53 on SR 1500
Over Fishing Creek
Federal Project BRZ-1550(5)
State Project 8.2290901
TIP # B-3170
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
December 2000
Documentation Prepared in
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch By:
=7
oel A. Johnsoiff
Project Development Engineer
C Z-71
-,
,.
,
VV Ct i°1 ..
C A f?0
Wayne
Bridge Project Development Engineer, Unit Head
°`
`SEA L
6976
00
Lubin V. Prevatt, P. E., Assistant Manager
°
Project Development and Environmental Analysis ;,?,; r`°°
Edgecombe County
Bridge No. 53 on SR 1500
Over Fishing Creek
Federal Project BRZ-1550(5)
State Project 8.2290901
TIP # B-3170
Project Commitments
In addition to all standard procedures and measures to avoid or minimize
environmental impacts, the following measures will be taken.
Division 4
High Quality Waters (HQW) erosion control (Design. Standards in Sensitive
Watersheds) will be implemented to minimize adverse impacts to mussel fauna present at
the site.
The NCDOT official policy "Stream Crossing Guidelines for Anadromous Fish
Passage" will be followed throughout construction.
Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition will be followed during the
removal of the existing structure.
Categorical Exclusion - December 2000 1
Edgecombe County
Bridge No. 53 on SR 1500
Over Fishing Creek
Federal Project BRZ-1550(5)
State Project 8.2290901
TIP # B-3170
Bridge No. 53 is located in Edgecombe County on SR 1550 crossing over Fishing
Creek. It is programmed in the Draft 2002-2008 Transportation Improvement Program
(TIP) as a bridge replacement project. This project is part of the Federal Aid Bridge
Replacement Program and has been classified as a "Categorical Exclusion." No
substantial environmental impacts are expected.
I SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Bridge No. 53 will be replaced as recommended in Alternate 1 with a bridge
approximately 64 meters (210 feet) in length and 8.6 meters (28 feet) in width on new
location to the south of the existing bridge. Traffic will be maintained during
construction on the existing bridge. After the new bridge and roadway approaches are
constructed, traffic will be detoured on surrounding roads for a short period of time so the
vertical alignment on the east end of the project can be tied in.
The new bridge will provide two 3.3 meter (11 foot) lanes plus 1 meter (3 foot)
offsets. The approaches will include two 3.3 meter (11 foot) lanes and 1.8 meter (6 foot)
shoulders. The shoulders will widen to 2.7 meters (9 feet) where guardrail is required.
Based on preliminary design work, the design speed for the permanent alignment will be
100 km/h (60 mph).
The estimated cost of the project is $ 1,030,000 including $ 1,000,000 in
construction costs and $ 30,000 in right of way costs. The estimated cost shown in the
Draft 2002-2008 TIP is $ 615,000.
II ANTICIPATED DESIGN EXCEPTIONS
NCDOT does not anticipate any design exceptions will be necessary.
III EXISTING CONDITIONS
SR 1550 is classified as a Rural Minor Collector in the Statewide Functional
Classification System. Traffic volume is currently 1200 vehicles per day (VPD) and is
projected to be 1900 VPD in the year 2020. There is no posted speed limit on this section
of SR 1550, although there are caution signs of 25 mph and 35 mph in the vicinity. The
road serves mostly local traffic. Two school busses cross the bridge twice daily.

The existing bridge was completed in 1952. It is 61.3 meters (201 feet) long.
There are approximately 7 meters (23 feet) of vertical clearance between the bridge deck
and streambed. The two travel lanes provide 5.8 meters (19 feet) of bridge roadway
width.
According to Bridge Maintenance Unit records, the sufficiency rating of the
bridge is 12.5 out of a possible 100. Presently the bridge is posted 12 tons for single
vehicles and 15 tons for TTST's.
Bridge No. 53 lies in a reverse "S" curve, the bridge being the only tangent part
between the curves. The vertical alignment of the roadway near the bridge is good. The
pavement on the approaches to the bridge is approximately 6.1 meters (20 feet) wide.
Shoulders are approximately 2.4 meters (8 feet) wide.
The Traffic Engineering Branch indicates that two accidents were reported from
1994 to 1997 in the vicinity of the project.
IV. PROPOSED ALTERNATIVES
There are two "build" options considered in this document. They are as. follows:
Alternate 1 would replace the existing Bridge No. 53 with a bridge approximately
64 meters (210 feet) in length on new location to the south of the existing bridge. Traffic
would be maintained on the existing bridge during construction.
Alternate 2 would replace the existing Bridge No. 53 with a bridge approximately
64 meters (210 feet) in length in the same general location and roadway elevation as the
existing bridge, with minor improvements to the design speed west of the bridge. Traffic
would be detoured along surrounding roads during construction.
"Do-nothing" is not practical, requiring the eventual closing of the road as the
existing bridge completely deteriorates. Rehabilitation of the existing deteriorating
bridge is neither practical nor economical.
k
COMPONENT ALTERNATE 1 ALTERNATE 2
New Bridge Structure
$ 411,600
$ 441,000
Bridge Removal
28,100
28,100
Roadway & Approaches
220,300
110,900
Mobilization & Miscellaneous
200,000
175,000
Engineering& Contingencies
140,000
120,000

$ 1,0001000 $ 875,000
Total Construction
$ 30,000 $ 26,500
Right of Way
$ 1,030,000 $ 901,500
Total Cost
VI RECOMMENDED IM PROVEIIM
Bridge No. 53 will be replaced as recommended in Alternate 1 with a bridge
approximately 64 meters (210 feet) in length and 8.6 meters (28 feet) in width on new
location to the south of the existing bridge. Traffic will be maintained during
construction on the existing bridge. After the new bridge and roadway approaches are
constructed, traffic will be detoured on surrounding roads for a short period of time so the
vertical alignment on the east end of the project can be tied in.
The new bridge will provide two 3.3 meter (11 foot) lanes plus 1 meter (3 foot)
offsets. The approaches will include two 3.3 meter (11 foot) lanes and 1.8 meter (6 foot)
shoulders. The shoulders will widen to 2.7 meters (9 feet) where guardrail is required.
Based on preliminary design work, the design speed for the new alignment will be 100
km/h (60 mph).
Road user cost analysis indicates that the vehicles routinely using SR 1500 would
incur an expense totaling approximately $ 1,500 per day while the road is closed. This
cost is based on 1250 vehicles per day traveling an average additional distance of
approximately 6.4 kilometers (4 miles) to bypass the closed bridge. Alternate 1 would
maintain traffic on the existing 2 would c ose the?oadf anthe construction of the d detour traffic alongnew
bridge and approaches. Alternate
I
4
surrounding roads for the entire construction period, resulting in road user costs of
approximately $360,000 for the estimated 8-month closure period.
Alternate 1 will improve the existing alignment to provide a 100 kph (60 mph)
design speed. Alternate 2 would slightly improve the existing alignment but would
include a horizontal curve that only meets a 50 kph (30 mph) design speed. Alternate 2
would require a design exception for design speed. Neither alternate would affect
wetland areas.
NCDOT recommends Alternate 1 because it substantially improves the alignment
and allows traffic to be maintained on site during the majority of construction.
VII. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
A. GENERAL
This project is expected to have an overall positive impact. Replacement of the
existing inadequate bridge will result in safer traffic operations.
This project is considered to be a "Categorical Exclusion" due to its limited scope
and insignificant environmental consequences.
This bridge replacement will not have a substantial adverse effect on the quality
of the human or natural environment by implementing the environmental commitments
listed in Section II of this document in addition to use of current NCDOT standards and
specifications.
The project is not in conflict with any plan, existing land use, or zoning
regulation. No change in land use is expected to result from construction of this project.
There are no hazardous waste impacts.
No adverse effect on families or communities is anticipated. There will be no
relocatees. Right-of-way acquisition will be limited.
No adverse effect on public facilities or services is expected. The project is not
expected to adversely affect social, economic, or religious opportunities in the area.
There are no publicly owned parks, recreational facilities, or wildlife and
waterfowl refuges of national, state, or local significance that will be adversely affected
by the project.
The proposed bridge replacement project will not raise the existing flood levels or
have any substantial adverse effect on the existing floodplain.
A telephone line on poles spans the creek on the north side approximately
9 meters (30 feet) from the centerline. Utility impacts are expected to be low.
B. AIR AND NOISE
This project is an air quality "neutral" project, so it is not required to be included
in the regional emissions analysis and a project level CO analysis is not required.
The project is located in Edgecombe County, which has been determined to be in
compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. 40 CFR part 51 is not
applicable, because the proposed project is located in an attainment area. This project is
not anticipated to create any adverse effects on the air quality of this attainment area.
The project will not substantially increase traffic volumes. Therefore, it will not
have substantial impact on noise levels. Temporary noise increases may occur during
construction.
C. LAND USE & FARMLAND EFFECTS
The project is located in a rural area with no urbanized land uses. The land is
zoned for agricultural/residential use. The area is characterized by a mixture of farms,
farmhouses, and other residences.
The Farmland Protection Policy Act requires all federal agencies or their
representatives to consider the impacts of land acquisition and construction projects on
prime and important farmland soils. The soil is of a type that could be considered prime
farmland, however, since the project will affect such a small area the impacts will not be
substantial.
D. HISTORICAL EFFECTS & ARCHAEOLOGICAL EFFECTS
Upon review of area photographs, aerial photographs, and cultural resources
databases, the State Historical Preservation Office (SHPO) has indicated that they "are
aware of no historic structures located within the area of potential effect." They therefore
recommend no historic architectural surveys be conducted.
The proposed project will impact one archaeological site which is eligible for
inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places. Site 31Ed333 is eligible for
inclusion in the National Register under criteria `d': "sites that have yielded, or may be
likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. More extensive subsurface
testing has been conducted in order to determine the integrity of cultural deposits. If
disturbance of the site by construction of the new bridge is unavoidable and the site is
determined significant, then an archaeological data recovery investigation will be
necessary, depending upon the effect of the construction upon the site. There are no
visible remains or features that would be appropriate for public display and interpretation,
so the archaeological site would not warrant preservation in place as a public exhibit.
Therefore, Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act (Federal-Aid Highway
Act as amended) will not apply to these sites.
E. NATURAL RESOURCES
Regional Characteristics.
Edgecombe County lies in the Coastal Plain Physiographic Province of North
Carolina. The soils are underlain by unconsolidated sand, silt, and clay. Approximately
82 percent of the county is nearly level, 17 percent is gently sloping near the
drainageways and 1 percent consists of sloping to strongly sloping side slopes adjacent to
the drainageways. The highest elevation in the county is 140 feet, along the western
boundary between Nash and Edgecombe counties; and the lowest is about 10 feet, on the
southeastern border where the Tar River leaves the county.
Soils
Chewacla silt loam (Cc) is nearly level, somewhat poorly drained soil found in
smooth areas on floodplains. It has a surface layer of silt loam. It has moderate
permeability, high available water capacity and low shrink-swell potential. The seasonal
high water table is about 0.2 meters (0.5 feet) to 0.5 meters (1.5 feet) below the surface
during the late winter and early spring. The soil is commonly flooded for brief periods.
The main limitations of this soil are wetness and flooding. The Capability Unit is IIw.
Wickham sandy loam 04% slopes (WkB) is well-drained soil found on smooth
low ridges, on stream terraces. It has a surface layer of sandy loam. It has moderate
permeability, medium available water capacity and low shrink-swell potential. The
seasonal high water table is below a depth of 6 feet. The main limitations are runoff and
erosion. The Capability Unit is Ile.
Best Usage Classification
Water resources within the study area are located in the Tar-Pamlico River
Drainage Basin. There is one water resource in the project study area. SR 1500 crosses
one perennial stream, Fishing Creek.
Streams have been assigned a best usage classification by the Division of Water
Quality (DWQ), formerly Division of Environmental Management (DEM), which reflects
water quality conditions and potential resource usage. The classification for Fishing
Creek [DEM Index No. 28-79-(30.5), 8/3/92] is WS-IV NSW. WS-IV (Water Supplies
IV) refers to those waters protected as water supplies which are generally in moderately
to highly developed watersheds; suitable for all Class C uses. Class C refers to waters
suitable for aquatic life propagation and survival, fishing, wildlife, secondary recreation
and agriculture. NSW (Nutrient Sensitive Waters) refers to waters which require
limitations on nutrient inputs. No registered point source dischargers are located in or
directly upstream from the project study area.
No waters classified as High Quality Waters (HQW), Water Supplies (WS-1
or WS-II) or Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW) occur within 1.6 kilometer
(1.0 mile) of the project study area.
Physical Characteristics of Surface Waters
Fishing Creek at SR 1500 is approximately 11.9 meters (39.0 feet) wide and
ranges in depth from 0.9-1.5 meters (3.0-5.0 feet). The substrate in the study area is
composed of sandy silt. The riparian community is composed of river oats, river birch,
water oak, and aster.
Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network
The Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network (BMAN), managed by the
DWQ, is part of an ongoing ambient water quality monitoring program which addresses
long term trends in water quality. The program monitors ambient water quality by
sampling at fixed sites for selected benthic macroinvertebrates organisms, which are
sensitive to water quality conditions. Samples are evaluated on the number of taxa
present of intolerant groups [Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, Trichoptera (EPT)] and a taxa
richness value (EPT S) is calculated. A biotic index value is also calculated for the
sample that summarizes tolerance data for all species in each collection. The two
rankings are given equal weight in final site classification. The biotic index and taxa
richness values primarily reflect the effects of chemical pollution and are a poor measure
of the effects of such physical pollutants as sediment. There -is one BMAN monitoring
station on Fishing Creek at SR 1500. This station is located in Tar-Pamlico subbasin 04.
This station received a rating of good and a S/SEPT rating of -/23 on 07/92.
Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Impacts to water resources in the project area are likely to result from activities
associated with project construction. Activities likely to result in impacts are clearing
and grubbing on streambanks, riparian canopy removal, instream construction, fertilizers
and pesticides used in revegetation, and pavement installation. The following impacts to
surface water resources are likely to result from the above mentioned construction
activities.
? Increased sedimentation and siltation downstream of the crossing and increased
erosion in the project area.
? Changes in light incidence and water clarity due to increased sedimentation and
vegetation removal.
? Alteration of water levels and flows due to interruptions and/or additions to surface
and ground water flow from construction.
? Changes in and destabilization of water temperature due to vegetation removal.
? Increased nutrient loading during construction via runoff from exposed areas.
? Increased concentrations of toxic compounds in roadway runoff.
? Increased potential for release of toxic compounds such as fuel and oil from
construction equipment and other vehicles.
? Alteration of stream discharge due to silt loading and changes in surface and
groundwater drainage patterns.
In order to minimize potential impacts to water resources in the project area,
NCDOT's Best Management Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters will be
strictly enforced during the construction phase of the project.
Biotic resources include terrestrial and aquatic communities. This section
describes the biotic communities encountered in the project area, as well as the
relationships between fauna and flora within these communities. The composition and
distribution of biotic communities throughout the project area are reflective of
topography, soils, hydrology, and past and present land uses. Descriptions of the
terrestrial systems are presented in the context of plant community classifications.
Representative animal species that are likely to occur in these habitats (based on
published range distributions) are also cited.
Biotic Communities
Biotic communities include terrestrial and aquatic elements. Much of the flora
and fauna described from biotic communities utilize resources from different
communities, making boundaries between contiguous communities difficult to define.
There are four communities located in the project area. These communities are discussed
below.
Loblolly Pine Plantation
This community is located on the southwest side of the existing bridge and would
be impacted by both Alternates. It is bordered by roadside and riparian communities.
Dominant plant species include loblolly pine, red maple, wild grape, American holly,
northern red oak, wintergreen and Japanese honeysuckle. The pines age from 15 to 30
years of age, decreasing in age away from the road.
Riparian Fringe Community
This community borders Fishing creek and is contiguous to the pine plantation
and roadside community. It would also be impacted by both Alternates. This community
is composed of water oak, loblolly pine, sycamore, river birch, greenbrier, river oats,
sparkleberry, ebony spleenwort, and aster.
Fishing Creek Levee Forest
This community is located across Fishing Creek on the southeast side of SR 1500.
It is bordered by the road and the creek. It would also be impacted by both Alternates.
This community is composed of beech, sycamore, privet, swamp holly, pokeberry,
Japanese honeysuckle, greenbrier, river oats, poison ivy, and blackberry.
Disturbed Roadside
This community is located on both sides of SR 1500 and would be impacted by
both Alternates. Because of mowing and the use of herbicides this community is kept in
a constant state of early succession. The dominant species in this community are fescue,
mugwort and wild onion.
Aquatic Community
This community consists of Fishing Creek. Aquatic species likely to be located in
this community include fish such as pirate perch, redbreast sunfish, redfin pickerel,
margined madtom, mosquitofish, and American eel. Insect species found in this habitat
include the water strider, riffle beetle, crane fly, stream mayfly, and black-winged
damselfly.
Wildlife
Maintained\disturbed communities adjacent to forested tracts provide rich
ecotones for foraging, while the forests provide forage and cover. Common mammals
associated with ecotones are woodchuck, least shrew, southern short-tailed shrew, hispid
cottonrat, and eastern cottontail rabbits.
The riparian edge provides habitat for an assortment of birds and mammals. Birds
often associated with streamside communities include red-winged blackbird, white-
throated sparrow, song sparrow, and northern cardinal. Yellow-rumped warblers and
common yellow throat may also be found in this community. Yellow warbler, red-eyed
vireo, Carolina wren, and mourning dove may also frequent this area.
Mammals which may frequent the riparian edge include white-footed mouse and
raccoon. In addition, white-tailed deer and gray squirrel may also forage in or near this
community. Amphibians and reptiles are likely to be locally abundant in the riparian
10
edge. Spring peeper and upland chorus frog breed in semipermanent pools during the
spring. Rat snake, worm snake, ring-necked snake, and queen snake may be found here
as well. The box turtle may also be found in the riparian fringe.
Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Construction of the proposed project will have various impacts on the biotic
resources described. Any construction related activities in or near these resources have
the potential to impact biological functions. This section quantifies and qualifies
potential impacts to the natural communities within the project area in terms of the area
impacted and the organisms affected. Temporary and permanent impacts are considered
here as well, along with recommendations to minimize or eliminate impacts.
Terrestrial Impacts
Impacts to terrestrial communities will result from project construction due to the
clearing and paving of portions of the project area, and thus the loss of community area.
The following table summarizes potential losses to these communities, resulting from
project construction. Calculated impacts to terrestrial communities reflect the relative
abundance of each community present in the study area. Estimated impacts are derived
based on the entire proposed right-of-way width of 24.4 meters (80.0 feet). However,
project construction often does not require the entire right-of-way; therefore, actual
impacts may be considerably less.
Estimated area impacts to terrestrial communities.
Community 1inpaoted Areahectare (acre) _
-1 Alternate 2
.Alternate
Pine Plantation 0.2 hectare (0.6 acre) 0.2 hectare (0.4 acre)
Riparian Fringe 0.1 hectare (0.2 acre) 0.1 hectare (0.1 acre)
Levee Forest 0.2 hectare (0.4 acre) 0.03 hectare (0.1 acre)
Disturbed Roadside 0.04 hectare (0.1 acre) 0.1 hectare (0.2 acre)
Total Impacts 0.54 hectare (1.3 acre) 0.43 hectare (0.9 acre)
Aquatic Impacts
Impacts to the aquatic community of Fishing Creek will result from the
replacement of Bridge No. 53. Impacts are likely to result from the physical disturbance
of aquatic habitats (i.e. substrate, water quality, and stream banks). Disturbance of
aquatic habitats has a detrimental effect on aquatic community composition by reducing
species diversity and the overall quality of aquatic habitats. Physical alterations to
aquatic habitats can result in the following impacts to aquatic communities.
? Inhibition of plant growth.
? Clogging of feeding structures of filter-feeding organisms, gills of fish, and the burial
of benthic organisms.
11
? Algal blooms resulting from increased nutrient concentrations.
? Mortality among sensitive organisms resulting from introduction of toxic substances
and decreases in dissolved oxygen.
? Destabilization of water temperature resulting from riparian canopy removal.
? Loss of benthic macroinvertebrates through scouring resulting from an increased
sediment load.
Impacts to aquatic communities can be minimized by minimizing riparian canopy
removal, limiting instream construction, revegetation immediately following the
completion of grading activities, and strict adherence to BMP's.
Anadromous fish are present in Fishing Creek. The NCDOT official policy
"Stream Crossing Guidelines for Anadromous Fish Passage" will be followed throughout
construction.
Waters of the United States
Surface waters and wetlands fall under the broad category of "Waters of the
United States," as defined in Section 33 of the Code of Federal Register (CRF)
Part 328.3. Any action that proposes to dredge or place fill material into surface waters
or wetlands falls under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) under
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344). Surface waters include all
standing or flowing waters which have commercial or recreational value to the public.
Wetlands are identified based on the presence of hydric soils, hydrophytic vegetation, and
saturated or flooded conditions during all or part of the growing season.
Characteristics of Wetlands and Surface Waters
Criteria to delineate jurisdictional wetlands include evidence of hydric soils,
hydrophytic vegetation, and hydrology. There are no wetlands in the project area.
Impacts to jurisdictional surface waters are calculated based on the linear feet of the
stream that is located within the proposed right-of-way. An area of approximately
0.1 hectare (0.2 acre) and a length of 24.4 meters (80.0 feet) of Fishing Creek will be
impacted by the proposed project. Both Alternates require this amount of impact.
Permits
impacts to jurisdictional surface waters are anticipated from the proposed project.
As a result, construction activities will require permits and certifications from various
regulatory agencies in charge of protecting the water quality of public water resources.
12
A Nationwide Permit 33 CFR 330.5(a) (23) is likely to be applicable for all
impacts to Waters of the United States resulting from the proposed project. This permit
authorizes activities undertaken, assisted, authorized, regulated, funded or financed in
whole, or part, by another Federal agency or department where that agency or department
has determined that pursuant to the council on environmental quality regulation for
implementing the procedural provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act:
(1) that the activity, work, or discharge is categorically excluded from environmental
documentation because it is included within a category of actions which neither
individually nor cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment,
and;
(2) that the office of the Chief of Engineers has been furnished notice of the agency'
or department's application for the categorical exclusion and concurs with that
determination.
This project will also require a 401 Water Quality Certification from the DWQ
prior to the issuance of the Nationwide Permit. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act
requires that the state issue or deny water certification for any federally permitted or
licensed activity that may result in a discharge to Waters of the United States.
Section 401 Certification allows surface waters to be temporarily impacted for the
duration of the construction or other land manipulation. The issuance of a 401 permit
from the DWQ is a prerequisite to issuance of a Section 404 permit.
Avoidance, Minimization, Mitigation
The COE has adopted through the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) a
wetland mitigation policy which embraces the concept of "no net loss of wetlands" and
sequencing. The purpose of this policy is to restore and maintain the chemical, biological
and physical integrity of Waters of the United States, specifically wetlands. Mitigation of
wetland impacts has been defined by the CEQ to include: avoiding impacts (to wetlands),
minimizing impacts, rectifying impacts, reducing impacts over time and compensating
for impacts (40 CFR 1508.20). Each of these three aspects (avoidance, minimization and
compensatory mitigation) must be considered sequentially.
Avoidance mitigation examines all appropriate and practicable possibilities of
averting impacts to Waters of the United States. According to a 1990 Memorandum of
Agreement (MOA) between the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the COE,
in determining "appropriate and practicable" measures to offset unavoidable impacts,
such measures should be appropriate to the scope and degree of those impacts and
practicable in terms of cost, existing technology and logistics in light of overall project
purposes.
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
13
typically focuses on decreasing the footprint of the proposed project through the
reduction to median widths, right-of-way widths, fill slopes and/or road shoulder widths.
Compensatory mitigation in 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 that remain after all appropriate
and practicable minimization has been required. Compensatory actions often include
restoration, creation and enhancement of Waters of the United States, specifically
wetlands. Such actions should be undertaken in areas adjacent to or contiguous to the
discharge site.
Compensatory mitigation is required for those projects authorized under
Nationwide Permits that result in the fill or alteration of
More than 0.45 hectares (1.0 acre) of wetlands will require compensatory mitigation;
And/or more than 45.7 meters (150.0 linear feet) of streams will require compensatory
mitigation.
Written approval of the final mitigation plan is required from the DWQ prior to
the issuance of a 401 Certification. Final permit/mitigation decisions rest with the COE.
Rare and Protected Species
Some populations of fauna and flora have been in, or are in, the process of decline
either due to natural forces or their inability to coexist with human development. Federal
law (under the provisions of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended) requires
that any action, likely to adversely affect a species classified as federally-protected, be
subject to review by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). Other species
may receive additional protection under separate state laws.
Federally-Protected Species
Plants and animals with federal classifications of Endangered (E), Threatened (T),
Proposed Endangered (PE), and Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under the
provisions of Section 7 and Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended. As of April, 2000, the FWS lists two federally protected species for
Edgecombe County.
Protected Species for Edgecombe County.
Common Name scientfc.Name Status ,
Red-Cockaded Woodpecker Picoides borealis Endangered
Tar spinymussel Elliptio lanceolata Endangered
14
Picoides borealis (red-cockaded woodpecker) Endangered
Animal Family: Picidae
Date Listed: 13 October 1970
The adult red-cockaded woodpecker (RCW) has a plumage that is entirely black
and white except for small red streaks on the sides of the nape in the male. The back of
the RCW is black and white with horizontal stripes. The breast and underside of this
woodpecker are white with streaked flanks. The RCW has a large white cheek patch
surrounded by the black cap, nape, and throat.
The RCW uses open old growth stands of southern pines, particularly longleaf
pine (Pinus palustris), for foraging and nesting habitat. A forested stand must contain at
least 50% pine, lack a thick understory, and be contiguous with other stands to be
appropriate habitat for the RCW. These birds nest exclusively in trees that are >60 years
old and are contiguous with pine stands at least 30 years of age. The foraging range of the
RCW is up to 200 hectares (500 acres). This acreage must be contiguous with suitable
nesting sites.
These woodpeckers nest exclusively in living pine trees and usually in trees that
are infected with the fungus that causes red-heart disease. Cavities are located in colonies
from 3.6-30.3 meters (12-100 feet) above the ground and average 9.1- 15.7 meters (30-50
feet) high. They can be identified by a large incrustation of running sap that surrounds
the tree. The RCW lays its eggs in April, May, and June; the eggs hatch
approximately 38 days later.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
The mature, open pine stands that the RCW needs are not present in the project
area. The pines that exist in the project area are between the ages of 15 and 30 years and
are too young to be nesting habitat. In addition, the pine plantation is not contiguous to
other stands of older pines that would enable it to be foraging habitat. The North
Carolina Natural Heritage Program database was checked and there were no records of
existing populations of RCW in the project area. No habitat for RCW exists in the project
area. Thus, no impacts to RCW will occur from project construction.
Elliptio steinstansana (Tar river spiny mussel) Endangered
Animal Family: Unionidae
Date Listed: 7/29/85
The Tar River spinymussel is endemic to the Tar River drainage basin, from
Falkland in Pitt County to Spring Hope in Nash County. Populations of the Tar River
spinymussel can be found in streams of the Tar River Drainage Basin and of the Swift
Creek Drainage Sub-Basin.
15
R
This mussel requires a stream with fast flowing, well-oxygenated, circumneutral
pH water. The bottom is composed of uncompacted gravel and coarse sand. The water
needs to be relatively silt-free. It is known to rely on a species of freshwater fish to act as
an intermediate host for its larvae.
The Tar River spinymussel is a very small mussel. This mussel is named for its
spines that project perpendicularly from the surface and curve slightly ventrally. As
many as 12 spines can be found on the shell which is generally smooth in texture. The
nacre is pinkish (anterior) and bluish-white (posterior).
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
Habitat for the Tar spinymussel is found in Fishing Creek. In water surveys were
conducted by NCDOT biologists Tim Savidge and Logan Williams on Friday,
December 4, 1998. Mussels were found in and around the project area. However, no Tar
spiny mussles were found during the survey. The North Carolina Natural Heritage
Program database was checked and there were no records of existing populations of Tar
spinymussel in the project area. As a result the Tar spinymussel will not be affected by
the proposed project.
16
N
>' -` •?
1430
IN I Lawrenw weft
1429
7.5
97
.?
0 c 1503
?. f
• \ 1500 S 15x14
LEGGETT ?
Pop. 09 a
1502 i
1500 - 150
`, `` '?i ?' c•. 1500 -
2.0
.N 1501 9 1500
., \
54 . \ \ . N 1500
,L `• , ? '? ( 1 ?
1253 •? ? ? •" l 1533 1513
•
1 4
to ? ? / -\ \ ,1255 ell' -
'L- 1ci5
• 7 .? n ti ? . -• ?" lima
• 0
?Alourer 13 pa• oro-Edgecom
eattleumo ?•/ Airport
n?
Cocky Mount ••-?
A

BaE
nnceaue 1
114 et y
- ?i
r?
North Carolina
a Department Of Transportation
:?' :•'P
4 Planning & Environmental Branch
EDGECOMBE COUNTY
REPLACE BRIDGE NO. 53 ON SR 1500
OVER FISHING CREEK
B-3170
0 kilometers 1.6 kilometers 3.2
Figure 1
0 miles 1.0 miles 2.0
CENTER OF BRIDGE LOOKING EAST
CENTER OF BRIDGE LOOKING WEST
FIGURE 3
SOUTH FACE OF BRIDGE
FIGURE 4
r ,
® North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
?, 919-733-3391
512 N. Salisbury Chaz?l Re Full'woNorth Carolina od, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Jeff Ingham, Project Planning Engineer
Planning & Environmental Branch, NCDOT
FROM: David Cox, Highway Project Coor ' or
Habitat Conservation Program
DATE: December 5, 1997
SUBJECT: NCDOT Bridge Replacements, Robeson, Columbus, Bladen, Edgecombe,
and Iredell counties, North Carolina, TIP Nos. B-3305, B-3194, B-3170,
B-3329, B-3112, B-3142, B-3148, B-3226, B-3229.
Biologists with the N. C. Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) have
conducted site visits as need and have the following preliminary comments on the subject
projects. Our comments are provided in accordance with provisions of the National
Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(c)) and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination
Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667d).
On bridge replacement projects of this scope our standard recommendations are as
follows:
1. We generally prefer spanning structures. Spanning structures usually do not
require work within the stream and do not require stream channel realignment.
The horizontal and vertical tprovided o block fish passage, and
structure, does not
and wildlife passage beneath
does not block navigation by canoeists and boaters.
2. Bridge deck drains should not discharge directly into the stream.
3. Live concrete should not be allowed to contact the water in or entering into the
stream.
4. If possible, bridge supports. (bents) should not be placed in the stream.
Bridge Replacement Memo 2 December 5, 1997
5. If temporary access roads or detours are constructed, they should be removed
back to original ground elevations immediately upon the completion of the
project. Disturbed areas should be seeded or mulched to stabilize the soil and
native tree species should be planted with a spacing of not more than 10'x10'.
If possible, when using temporary structures the area should be cleared but not
grubbed. Clearing the area with chain saws, mowers, bush-hogs, or other
mechanized equipment and leaving the stumps and root mat intact, allows the
area to revegetate naturally and minimizes disturbed soil.
6. A clear bank (riprap free) area of at least 10 feet should remain on each side of
the steam underneath the bridge.
7. In trout waters, the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission reviews all U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers nationwide and general `404' permits. We have the
option of requesting additional measures to protect trout and trout habitat and
we can recommend that the project require an individual `404' permit.
8. In streams that contain threatened or endangered species, NCDOT biologist
Mr. Tim Savidge should be notified. Special measures to protect these
sensitive species may be required. NCDOT should also contact the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service for information on requirements of the Endangered
Species Act as it relates to the project.
9. In streams that are used by anadromous fish, the NCDOT official policy
entitled "Stream Crossing Guidelines for Aadromous Fish Passage (May 12,
1997)" should be followed.
10. In areas with significant fisheries for sunfish, seasonal exclusions may also be
recommended.
If corrugated metal pipe arches or concrete box culverts are used:
1. The culvert must be designed to allow for fish passage. Generally, this means
that the culvert or pipe invert is buried at least 1 foot below the natural stream
bed. If multiple cells are required the second and/or third cells should be
placed so that their bottoms are at stream bankful stage (similar to Lyonsfield
design). This will allow sufficient water depth in the culvert or pipe during
normal flows to accommodate fish movements. If culverts are long, baffle
systems are required to trap gravel and provide resting areas for fish and other
aquatic organisms.
2. If multiple pipes or cells are used, at least one pipe or box should be designed
to remain dry during normal flows to allow for wildlife passage:
3. Culverts or pipes should be situated so that no channel realignment or
widening is required. Widening of the stream channel at the inlet or outlet of
structures usually causes a decrease -in water velocity causing sediment
deposition that will require future maintenance.
4. Riprap should not be placed on the stream bed.
In most cases, we prefer the replacement of the existing structure at the same
location with road closure. If road closure is not feasible, a temporary detour should be
designed and located to avoid wetland impacts, minimize the need for clearing and to
.
Bridge Replacement Memo 3 December 5, 1997
avoid destabilizing stream banks. If the structure will be on a new alignment, the old
structure should be removed and the approach fills removed from the 100-year
floodplain. Approach fills should be removed down to the natural ground elevation. The
area should be stabilized with grass and planted with native tree species. If the area that
is reclaimed was previously wetlands, NCDOT should restore the area to wetlands. If
successful, the site may be used as wetland mitigation for the subject project or other
projects in the watershed. - -
Project specific comments:
1. B-3305 -No specific concerns.
2. B-3194 - No specific concerns.
3. B-3170 - The Tar spiney mussel (Federally listed as endangered) may be
present at this site. We recommend that Tim Savidge be notified of this
project and a field meeting may be necessary. Anadromous fish use fishing
Creek so the guidelines apply (See Item 9 above).
4. B-3329 - Anadromous fish use Town Creek so the guidelines apply (See Item
9 above).
5. B-3112 - No specific concerns.
6. B-3142 - No specific concerns.
7. B-3148 - Many endemic fish and mollusks (status unknown). We recommend
that Tim Savidge be notified. High Quality sedimentation and Erosion
Controls should be used. In-stream work should be avoided from March 15 to
June 1.
8. B-3226 -No comment.
9. B-3229 - No specific concerns.
We request that NCDOT routinely minimize adverse impacts to fish and wildlife
resources in the vicinity of bridge replacements. The NCDOT should install and
maintain sedimentation control measures throughout the life of the project and prevent
wet concrete from contacting water in or entering into these streams. Replacement of
bridges with spanning structures of some type, as opposed to pipe or box culverts, is
recommended in most cases. Spanning structures allow wildlife passage along
streambanks, reducing habitat fragmentation and vehicle related mortality at highway
crossings.
If you need further assistance or information on NCWRC concerns regarding
bridge replacements, please contact me at [phone]. Thank you for the opportunity
to review and comment on these projects.
. 1.
„ S7ATt „
North Carolina Department of Cultural
State Historic Preservation Office
David L. S. Brook, Administrator
James B. Hunt Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
November 8, 2000
MEMORANDUM
To: William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
From: David Brook t CT ZD.VLA C?
Deputy State lc Preservation Officer
I
Resourggt 1 < 2?Oq
Divisionof.Archives and History
Jeffrey J. Crow, Director
Re: Archaeological Testing Report for 31 ED333. Bridge Replacement #53
on SR 1500. B-3170. Edgecombe County, ER 98-7765
We have reviewed the subject archaeological testing report by coastal Carolina research and
offer our comments.
In general, the report meets our report guidelines and those of The Secretary of the Interior. We
agree with the conclusions of the report, that 31ED333 is eligible for inclusion in the National
Register of Historic Places and that some form of data recovery will be necessary, if any portion
of the site is affected by the bridge replacement project.
We look forward to working with NCDOT and your consultant in the preparation of a scope of
work for the date recovery.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act
and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section
106 codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above
comment, contact Renee Gledhill-Earley. Environmental Review Coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
DB:kgc
cc: Roy Shelton, FHwA
Tom Padgett, NCDOT

Locati on h NC
i
l
ADMINISTRATION 507 N. Blount St.. g
Ra
e
h NC
i
ARCHAEOLOGIC 421 N. Blount St., Rale
g
h NC
i
l

ESTORATION

15 N.

N

lount St..

t St
Bl Mailing Address Telephone/Fax
4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 [phone] 733-3653
4619 Mail Service Center. Raleigh NC 27699-4619 [phone] 715-2671
4613 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4613 [phone] 715-4301
e
g
Ra
.. Raleigh NC 4613 Mail Service Center. Ralei!_h NC 27699-4618 (919) . 6545 •'715-4301
oun
515
.
SURVEl' S PL:%VN1\G

rid
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
August 21, 1998
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Archaeological survey report, Bridge 53 on SR
1500, Edgecombe County, B-3170, Federal Aid
BRZ-1500(5), ER 98-7765, ER 99-7249
Dear Mr. Graf:
Division of Archives and History
Jeffrey J. Crow, Director
Thank you for your letter of August 11, 1998, transmitting the archaeological
survey report by Nick Bon-Harper concerning the above project.
For purposes of compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act we agree that site 31 ED333 might be considered eligible for listing in the
National Register of Historic Places. The site should be tested to determine its
eligibility for listing if project planning intersects the site boundaries. In general, the
report meets our office's guidelines and those of the Secretary of the Interior.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations
for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental
review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
Sincerely,
David Brook
j ` 4
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw
cc: "W. D. Gilmore
T. Padgett
109 East'Jones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807 g3?

North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources tsion of Archives and History
Div
Jeffrey J. Crow, Director
James B. Hunt Jr., Governor
Betty Ray December 5, 1997
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
ti
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
3 on SR 1500 over Fishing Creek,
Re: B County, B-3170, ER 98-7765
Eridge ridge 5 5 o
Edgecombe Dear Mr. Graf:
November 18, 1997, Debbie Bevin of our staff met with North Carolina
Department of Transportation
reported oo r available information historic
ons.
the above project. ur with our reco
ra hs and aerial photographs at the meet
NCDOT provided ingand archaeoa psojectyarea and photogrcPs along
the photographs and the information discussed at the
Based upon our review of nts regarding this project.
meeting, we offer our the p preliminary comme ware s of historic architectural resources, We are
In term commendithno historic at no historic structures
conductedotentiatfor effect.
e
located within the area
this project.
architectural survey be the project boundaries.
There are no known recorded archaeological sites
erratically surveyed to determ ne the
r
However, the project area has never been sys We to identify
expenencedarchaeologist that a
on or significance of archaeological resources.
locate be conducted by be damaged or
comprehensive survey the
presence and significance of archaeological remains that may
ntial effects o tiles known resources should
project. Pote
destroyed by the proposed
be assessed prior to the initiation of construction act Categorical
our
Exclusion Having provided this information, we look which forward to indicates receipt how of NCDOT either a aaddressed
smen
or Environmental Asses
comments.
ic Preervat oints ric
above comments are made pursuant to Counic l onOHistorl s
The Preservat
Regulations for CompHanand the Advisory
Compliance with. Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 80 109 East Jones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2307

Ik

Nicholas L. Graf
December 5, 1997, 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.
ly,
Sincerely,
David Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw
cc: ?H. F. Vick
B. Church
T. Padgett