20010427 Ver 1_Complete File_20010321

a 1 (-)q z-7

JAN 8 200,
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201 DAVID McCOY
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
January 16, 2001
MEMORANDUM TO: Judith Johnson* NC Wildlife Resources Commission
John Alderman NC Wildlife Resources Commission
David Co'* NC Wildlife Resources Commission
John Hennessy* US Division of Water Quality
John Hammond* US Fish & Wildlife
Tom McCartney.* US Fish & Wildlife
Dale Suiter* US Fish & Wildlife
Dan Hinton* Federal Highway Administration
Jake Riggsbee Federal Highway Administration
Jean Manuele* US Army Corps of Engineers
Linda Pearsall NC Natural Heritage Program
Ken Pace* NCDOT - Roadside Environmental Unit
Jeff Renn* NCDOT - Roadside Environmental Unit
Hearbert Locklear* NCDOT - Structure Design Unit
Walker Armistead* NCDOT - Structure Design Unit
Thomas Payne* NCDOT - Structure Design Unit
Jerome Nix* NCDOT - Hydraulics Unit
Marshall Clawson* NCDOT - Hydraulics Unit
Chris Kreider* NCDOT - Soils & Foundations
Ron Allen* NCDOT - Roadway Design Unit
David Bass* NCDOT - Roadway Design Unit
Tracy Parrott* NCDOT - Division 5 Construction
Chris Murray* NCDOT - Division 5 Environmental Officer
Ron Hancock* NCDOT - Area Bridge Construction
Ellis Powell NCDOT - Bridge Construction
Tim Savidge* Project Development & Environmental Analysis
Logan Williams* Project Development & Environmental Analysis
Michael Wood* Project Development & Environmental Analysis
* These people attended at least one of the meetings.
FROM: Robin C. Young
PDEA, Project Planning Engineer
SUBJECT: Section 7 Meetings for the dwarf wedge mussel
Project B-2972
Section 7 Meeting Commitments Page i of 3
B-2972 Franklin County
s
Section 7 consultation meeting for the dwarf wedge mussel was held in Franklin
County at the subject bridge site on September 22, 2000.
A follow-up meeting was held in the Board of Transportation Conference Room at
the Transportation Building on December 14, 2000.
The attendees agreed upon the following.
B-2972 Bridge No. 22 on NC 58 over Red Bud Creek (Let Date April 17, 2001)
No Clearing or Grubbing from November 15 to April 1.
No in-stream construction from April 1 to June 15.
Weep holes will be configured so that the run-off does not fall into the stream and no wet
concrete will come in contact with the water.
The new structure will be a 3-span cored slab bridge.
Piles driven shall be encased. For all in-stream work, horseshoe turbidity curtains will be
used for driving piles and removing the existing abutments. Removal of the abutments may
require cofferdams instead of turbidity curtains. Turbidity curtains shall not be draped across the
entire stream, only around the area of activity.
Under no circumstances will temporary fill material, construction causeways, or
construction equipment be allowed into the river, defined as the normal flow channel to bank full
height. If a temporary work platform is needed for removal of existing structure, temporary piles
or similar devices may be driven into the river bottom to support the work platform. No separate
payment will be made for the temporary work platform as it is considered incidental to the
removal of the existing structure. Details of work platform shall be submitted to the resident
engineer for approval.
A survey of the area will be completed prior to let. A copy of the survey results shall be
sent to the US Fish & Wildlife Service, Wildlife Resource Commission, and the US Army Corps
of Engineers.
If there are fallen trees in the streambed, and if the trees are in the Right of Way of the
project, the trunks and limbs of the trees are to be sawed off and removed (not to be dragged out,
but lifted). The root system is to be left in place, as is.
High Quality Waters - Soil and Erosion Control Measures will be installed concurrently
with clearing and grubbing operations, and properly maintained throughout project construction.
This is an Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA).
The erosion control plans will be designated to High Quality Water (HQW) standards.
Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESA) will be defined on the plans, which consist of a
50-foot (15-meter) buffer zone on both sides of the stream.
The contractor may perform clearing operations, but not grubbing operations in the
Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESA), until immediately prior 4o beginning grading operations.
Once grading operations begin in Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESA), as specified on
the plans, work will progress in a continuous manner until complete.
Section 7 Meeting Commitments Page 2 of 3
B-2972 Franklin County
Seeding and mulching will be performed immediately following final grade establishment.
Stage seeding will be performed on cut and fill slopes as grading progresses.
The project will be designed using a "Special Hardware Cloth" erosion control device,
which will be used where needed along the stream banks..
Rock workpads will be established on both banks if heavy equipment will be located
and/or used, to minimize risk of sediment entering the stream. Appropriate care shall be taken by
the contractor when placing the pad.
. Abutments will be removed. The footings of the abutments are on top of timber piles. The
timber piles will be cut off at the streambed.
The interior bent will be removed such that the minimal amount of debris will fall into the
stream. Most likely, this will require breaking it into sections and lifting it out one section at a
time. The interior bent should not be dragged off in one piece because this will damage the
streambed:
Removal of the abutments should be done "in the dry". Most likely, the best time for this
is mid to late summer when the stream should be at a low flow condition. If there is any water at
the existing footing of the abutments, De-Watering must be used. If this is necessary, cofferdams
will be placed around the footings to hold water out of the excavation. Cofferdams may include
timber cribs, sheet piling, steel shells, or similar structures, as well as necessary bracing. Pumping
wells or well points will be used in conjunction with the cofferdams.
After removal of the abutments and footings, before the cofferdams are removed, the soil
will be stabilized. If needed, temporary seeding will be placed before putting down the Rip Rap
and Fabric.
Since there is a chance de-watering and cofferdams may be used, a Nationwide Permit # 33
must be obtained from the Army Corps of Engineers.
Written concurrence is required from John Hennessy of the North Carolina Division of
Water Quality (NCDWQ). The permit specialist, Mike Wood will send the request for this
concurrence.
Equipment will be maintained such that hydraulic fluids, oil, gasoline, or other chemicals
will not enter the stream. If chemicals are spilled on the site, they will be cleaned up immediately
and not allowed to filter down into the soil.
Stormwater runoff will not be channeled directly into the stream.
North Carolina Wildlife Resource Commission (NCWRC) and US Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS) will be notified in writing to attend the pre-construction meeting.
Section 7 Meeting Commitments Page 3 of 3
B-2972 Franklin County
B-2972 Bridge No. 22 on NC 58 over Red Bud Creek
No Grubbing from November 15 to April 1.
No in-stream construction from April 1 to June 15.
No weep holes directly discharged over the water.

Piles driven shall be encased. For all in-stream work, horseshoe turbidity curtains will be used for
driving piles and removing the existing pile in the middle of the stream.
Under no circumstances will temporary fill material, construction causeways, or construction
equipment be allowed into the river, defined as the normal flow channel to bank full height. If a temporary
work platform is needed for removal of existing structure, temporary piles or similar devices may be driven
into the river bottom to support the work platform. No separate payment will be made for the temporary
work platform as it is considered incidental to the removal of the existing structure. Details of work
platform shall be submitted to the resident engineer for approval.
A survey of the area will be completed prior to let. A copy of the survey results shall be sent to the
US Fish & Wildlife Service, Wildlife Resource Commission, and the US Army Corps of Engineers.
If there are fallen trees in the stream bed, and if the trees are in the Right of Way of the
project, the trunks and limbs of the trees are to be sawed off and removed. The root system is to
be left in place, as is.
High Quality Waters - Soil and Erosion Control Measures will be installed concurrently with
clearing and grubbing operations, and properly maintained throughout project construction. This is an
Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA).
The erosion control plans will be designated to High Quality Water (HQW) standards.
Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESA) will be defined on the plans which consist of a 50 foot (15
meter) buffer zone on both sides of the stream.
The contractor may perform clearing operations, but not grubbing operations in the
Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESA), until immediately prior to beginning grading operations.
Once grading operations begin in Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESA), as specified on the
plans, work will progress in a continuous manner until complete.
Seeding and mulching will be performed immediately following final grade establishment.
Stage seeding will be performed on cut and fill slopes as grading progresses.
The project will be designed using a "Special Hardware Cloth" erosion control device, which will
be used where needed along the stream banks.
The new structure will be a 3-span cored slab bridge.
DRAFT
COMMITTMENTS
01 C) F-7
Section 7 Meeting Commitments Page 2 of 2
Franklin County
b
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY LYNDo TIPPETT
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
March 19, 2001
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers A n G
Regulatory Field Office 1 ®
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road
Suite 120
Raleigh, NC 27609
ATTN: Ms. Jean Manuele
NCDOT- Coordinator
Dear Madam:
SUBJECT: NATIONWIDE PERMIT 23 APPLICATION FOR REPLACEMENT OF
BRIDGE NO. 22 OVER RED BUD CREEK ON NC 58, FRANKLIN
COUNTY, TIP NO. B-2972.
Attached for your information is a copy of the Categorical Exclusion Action
Classification Form (CE), the Natural Resources Technical Report (NRTR) and the
Section 7 information for the subject project. NCDOT proposes to replace the existing
structure with 3-span cored slab bridge. The new approach roadway will be a 6.6 meter
(22-foot) travelway with shoulder widths of at least 1.8 meters (6-feet). Traffic will be
detoured onto existing roads during construction. .
The CE originally called for replacing the existing bridge with a three barrel box culvert.
The reason for this change was the discovery of the federally protected dwarf wedge
mussel (Alasmidonta heterodon) directly downstream of the bridge. As a result of this
discovery, an informal Section 7 Consultation was initiated. After many meetings both in
the field and office, a list of Environmental Commitments were established that, if
adhered to during construction, will likely not adversely affect the dwarf wedge mussel.
The USFWS concurred with this Biological Conclusion in a letter dated February 23,
2001. A copy of this letter, the Environmental Commitments, and all related Section 7
correspondences are included in Appendix B. A permit drawing that shows the limits of
the new bridge, placement and details of the sediment and erosion control devices, and
the environmentally sensitive area is also included in Appendix B.
There are no wetlands within the project area. It will likely be necessary to install
cofferdams to remove the existing abutments and footings. While the details of the
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
i
cofferdam will be determined by the Contractor, the requirements by which the cofferdam
must adhere to are detailed in the Environmental Commitments. Therefore, any
temporary surface water impacts will conform to these conditions.
The existing structure has two spans totaling 54 feet (16 meters) in length. The
superstructure is composed of reinforced concrete abutments and in interior pier. Steel
has been added around the interior pier for extra support. The spans, abutments, and pier
total 475 cubic yards. The potential exists, however unlikely, for some of this material to
fall in the creek during removal. NCDOT will immediately notify agency personnel if
this were to occur.
The project is being processed by the Federal Highway Administration as a "Categorical
Exclusion" in accordance with 23 CFR 771.115(b). NCDOT proposes to proceed under a
Nationwide Permit in accordance with 33 CFR 330 Appendix A (B-23) issued March 9,
2000, by the Corps of Engineers. A Nationwide Permit 33 is also requested for the
activities aforementioned. The provisions of Section 330.4 and appendix A (C) of these
regulations will be followed during project construction as well as the Environmental
Commitments in Appendix B.
We anticipate that 401 General Water Quality Certification No. 3107 (Categorical
Exclusion) will apply to this project, and are providing seven copies of the application to
the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources, Division
of Water Quality, for their review. If you have any questions or need any additional
information, please contact Mr. Michael Wood at [phone].
Sincerely,
William D. Gilmore, PE, Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
cc: w/ attachment
Mr. David Franklin, USACE, NCDOT Coordinator
Mr. John Dorney, Division of Water Quality
Mr. Timothy V. Rountree, P.E., Structure Design
w/o attachments
Mr. John Alford, P.E., Roadway Design
Mr. Calvin Leggett, P.E., Program Development
Ms. Debbie Barbour, P.E., Highway Design
Mr. Dave Henderson, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr. J. G. Nance, P.E., Division 5 Engineer
Ms. Robin Young, Project Development & Project Analysis
Appendix A
Categorical Exclusion and Natural Resources Technical Report
N
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION ACTION CLASSIFICATION FORM
TIP Project No.: B-2972 010427
State Project No.: 8.1360901
Federal-Aid Project No.: BRSTP-58(5)
A.
B.
C:
Project Description :
NCDOT will replace Bridge No. 22 on US 58 over Red Bud Creek in Franklin
County. The bridge will be replaced with a three barreled culvert, with each barrel
measuring 4.3 meters (14 feet) by 3.4 meters (11 feet). The new approach roadway will
be a 6.6 meter (22 foot) travelway with shoulder widths of at least 1.8 meters (6 feet).
Traffic will be detoured on existing secondary roads during construction.
Bridge No. 22 has a sufficiency rating of 62.5 out of 100; but this is due to recent
reinforcement of the center bent of the bridge. The deck of Bridge No. 22' is only 5.2
meters (17 feet) wide. For these reasons Bridge No. 22 needs to be replaced.
Proposed Improvements:
Circle one or more of the following Type II improvements which apply to the project:
1. Modernization of a highway by resurfacing, restoration, rehabilitation,
reconstruction, adding shoulders, or adding auxiliary lanes (e.g., parking weaving,
turning, climbing).
a. Restoring, Resurfacing, Rehabilitating, and Reconstructing pavement
(3R and 4R improvements)
b. Widening roadway and shoulders without adding through lanes
c. Modernizing gore treatments
d. Constructing lane improvements (merge, auxiliary, and turn lanes)
e. Adding shoulder drains
f. Replacing and rehabilitating culverts, inlets, and drainage pipes, including
safety treatments
g. Providing driveways pipes
h. Performing minor bridge widening ( less than one through lane)
2. Highway safety or traffic operations improvement projects including the
installation of ramp metering control devices and lighting.
a. Installing ramp metering devices
b. Installing lights
c. Adding or upgrading guardrail
not inconsistent with existing zoning and where there is no significant noise
impact on the surrounding community.
12. Acquisition of land for hardship or protective purposes, advance land acquisition
loans under section 3 (b) of the UMT Act. Hardship and protective buying will be
permitted only for a particular parcel or a limited number of parcels. These types
of land acquisition will not limit the evaluation of alternatives, including shifts in
alignment for planned construction projects, which may be required in the NEPA
process. No project development on such land may proceed until the NEPA
process has been completed.
D. Special Project Information
Environmental Commitments:
1. High Quality Water (HQW) sedimentation and erosion control measures will be
implemented and strictly maintained throughout project construction.
2. In accordance with the provisions of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(33 U.S.C. 1344), a permit will be required from the Corps of Engineers for the
discharge of dredged or fill material into "Waters of the United States." A Corps
of Engineers Nationwide Permit # 23 will be applicable for this project.
3. A North Carolina Division of Environmental Management (DEM) Section 401
Water Quality General Certification will be obtained prior to issue of the Corps of
Engineers Nationwide Permit # 23.
Estimated Costs:
Construction
Right of Way
Total
Estimated Traffic:
Current
Year 2020
$ 450,000
$ 24.000
$ 474,000
800 VPD
1500 VPD
Proposed Typical Roadway Section:
The approach roadway will be 6.6 meters (22 feet) wide with at least 1.8 meter
(6 foot) shoulders. Shoulder width will be increased to at least 2.7 meters (9 feet) where
guardrail is warranted.
(9) Does the project involve any known underground storage tanks

(UST's) or hazardous materials sites? ?
X
PERM ITS AND COORDINATION YES NO
(10) If the project is located within a CAMA county, will the project
-
significantly affect the coastal zone and/or any "Area of 1 X
F
Environmental Concern" (AEC)?
(11) Does the project involve Coastal Barrier Resources Act resources? F-1 X
(12) Will a U. S. Coast Guard permit be required? X
(13) Will the project result in the modification of any existing
regulatory floodway? X
(14) Will the project require any stream relocations or channel
-
changes?' 1 X
F
SOCI AL., ECONOMIC, AND CULTURAL RESOURCES YES NO
(15) Will the project induce substantial impacts to planned growth or ? X
land use for the area?
(16) Will the project require the relocation of any family or business? F-1 X
(17) Will the project have a disproportionately high and adverse
human health and environmental effect on any minority or
low-income population? X
(18) If the project involves the acquisition of right of way, is the

amount of right of way acquisition considered minor? ?
X
-
(19) Will the project involve any changes in access control? 1 X
F
(20) Will the project substantially alter the usefulness and/or land
use of any adjacent property? X
(21) Will the project have an adverse effect on permanent local

traffic patterns or community cohesiveness? ?
X
(22) Is the project included in an approved thoroughfare plan and/or ?
Transportation Improvement Program (and is, therefore, in X
conformance with the Clean Air Act of 1990)?
5
G. CE Approval
TIP Project No.: B-2972
State Project No. 8.1360901
Federal-Aid Project No.: BRSTP-58(5)
Project Description :
NCDOT will replace Bridge No. 22 on US 58 over Red Bud Creek in Franklin
County. The bridge will be replaced with a three barreled culvert, with each barrel
measuring 4.3 meters (14 feet) by 3.4 meters (11 feet). The new approach roadway will
be a 6.6 meter (22 foot) travelway with shoulder widths of at least 1.8 meters (6 feet).
Traffic will be detoured on existing secondary roads during construction.
Categorical Exclusion Action Classification: (Check one)
X_ TYPE II (A)
TYPE II (B)
Approved:
Date Assistant Manager
Planning & Environmental Branch
i-/Y-% wo y'?J*--
Date Project Planning Unit Head
I -!fig
JYL? ':_1
Date Project Planning Engineer
For Type II (B) projects only:
Not Required
Date Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
7
'1451 (mot ?' .row / , . ti ; ?•
1448
/ =v
S
1450
s 1461
' 17
1460 N .5
r•. lam- 1449
Dftr 1449
462 co 1449 J
1456 !Tit. Le"I 9 1406
.3 .2 T3 . 5 3 1425 Q ?s
5 1425 'T `;1 'X'' / \ yl \\o C 15 y \1467 0 1463
'407
? C
l 1464
a6s to 0 1465 -
Red 1 01
1468'
1466
'.-P- d" . Creek *-
BJr
, / i 132,
9 ,1469
?
1468 N 1467 ? 7.0
aroods 140=
.6 .5 i
1 0 a 0 . 4 5 TumDllnq
--' 1617 ,i /" D -----1
1622 i
' ' 62 1330 CASTALIA
t?
7 1 1 POP. 257
-? 9 7 t 1
'Epsom t M 1 t
/ Alert
Ingleside i Centervi -Wood 2 \
,tklinton +t.ouisbur* 9
9
pleville Justice
.119
1 7%
to
4
1
`?
/, Youn[sville
<Ol
?t 3910 „A
6
A `5 New Hope
i 4
_ Bunn Sr
on
il 6
ey
,
Pe rtes
ilot./

3
4
`

Studied Detour Route
North Carolina Department of
?Transportation
Division of Highways
Planning & Environmental Branch
.,oFmri!s,
Franklin County
Replace Bridge No. 22 on NC 58
Over Red Bud Creek
B-2972
1 Figure One

?' STATp u
A
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt Jr., Governor Division of Archives and History
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary Jeffrey J. Crow, Director
March 10, 1997
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Bridge #22 on NC 58 over Red Bud Creek,
Franklin County, B-2972, Federal Aid Project
BRSTP-58(5), State Project 8.136090 1, ER 97-
8350
Dear Mr. Graf:
On March 5, 1997, Debbie Bevin of our staff met with North Carolina Department
of Transportation (NCDOT) staff for a meeting of the minds concerning the above
project. We reported our available information on historic architectural and
archaeological surveys and resources along with our recommendations. NCDOT
provided project area photographs and aerial photographs at the meeting.
Based upon our review of the photographs and the information discussed at the
meeting, we offer our preliminary comments regarding this project.
In terms of historic architectural resources, Bridge #22 is the only structure in the
project's area of potential effect that is over fifty years old. We recommend that
an architectural historian with NCDOT evaluate the bridge for National Register
eligibility and report the findings to us.
The subject project is in an area of high probability for the presence of
archaeological sites. We, therefore, recommend that any new areas of
construction, including temporary detours, lateral ditches, and temporary access
roads be surveyed.
Having provided this information, we look forward to receipt of either a Categorical
Exclusion or Environmental Assessment which indicates how NCDOT addressed our
comments.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966 and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
109 East Jones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807 ???
Federal Aid # BRSTP-58(5) TIP # B-2972 County: Franklin
CONCURRENCE FORM FOR PROPERTIES NOT ELIGIBLE FOR
THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES
Project Description: Replace Bridge No. 22 on NC 58 over Red Bud Creek
On August 21, 1997, representatives of the
[D North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
C] Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
® North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO)
Other
reviewed the subject project at
Scoping meeting
® Historic architectural resources photograph review session/consultation
n Other
All parties present agreed
E] there are no properties over fifty years old within the project's area of potential effects.
® there are no properties less than fifty years old which are considered to meet Criteria
Consideration G within the project's area of potential effects.
® there are properties over fifty years old within the project's area of potential effects, but based
on the historical information available and the photographs of each property, the property
identified as Bridge No. 22 is considered not eligible for the National Register and no
further evaluation of them is necessary.
® there are no National Register-listed properties within the project's area of potential effects.
Signed:
?1
DOT
the Divisi Administrator, or other Federal Agency
Representative;
..,? (. 21 t q 9 'I
Date
Date

Historic Preservation Officef /
If a survey report is prepared. a final copy of this form and the attached list will be included.
9111a-1
Date

s „a SfAlpo
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR.
GOVERNOR
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH. N.C. 27611-5201
03 November 1997
MEMORANDUM TO
FROM:
Wayne Elliot, Unit Head
Bridge Unit
GARLAND B. GARRETT JR.
S ECRETARY
Marc Recktenwald, Environmental Biologist
Environmental Unit
SUBJECT: Natural Resources Technical Report for the proposed
replacement of bridge No. 22 on NC 58 over Red Bud
Creek, Franklin County. TIP No. B-2972, State project No.
8.2404901, Federal aid project No. BRSTP-58(5).
ATTENTION: Bill Goodwin, P.E., Project Manager
Project Planning Unit
REFERENCE: Protected species survey memo prepared by Tim Savidge,
November 1997.
The following report is submitted to assist in the preparation of a Programmatic
Categorical Exclusion (PCE) for the proposed project. This report contains information
concerning water resources, biotic resources, Waters of the United States, permit
requirements and federally protected species within the project area. The information
contained in this report is relevant only in the context of existing preliminary design
concepts. If design parameters and criteria change, additional field investigations may
need to be conducted.
The proposed project involves replacing the existing bridge on existing location
with minimal approach work. The existing structure is on concrete deck girders with
concrete bents and end bents. The proposed structure is a three barrel RBC, each
barrel being 4.3 m (14 ft) by 3.4 m (11 ft). The project length is approximately 152 m
(500 ft). The proposed right of way for this project is to remain the same as the existing
right of way which is 18 m (60 ft). Traffic will be detoured off-site during the
construction of the proposed project.
e
METHODOLOGY
Field investigations were conducted on 06 August 1997 by NCDOT biologists
Marc Recktenwald, Chris Rivenbark, and Teryn Smith, with NCDOT Protected Species
Coordinator Tim Savidge and NCDOT Transportation Technician II Deborah Terrell to
assess natural resources at the project site. Plant communities and their associated
wildlife were identified and recorded. Wildlife identification involved using one or more
of the following observation techniques: active searching and capture, visual
observations (binoculars), and identifying characteristic signs of wildlife (sounds, scat,
tracks and burrows). Faunal species observed during the site visit are denoted with an
asterisk ("). Terrestrial community classifications generally follow Schafale and
Weakley (1990) where possible, and plant taxonomy follows Radford, et al. (1968).
Animal taxonomy follows Martof, et al. (1980), Menhenick (1991), Potter, et al. (1980),
and Webster, et al. (1985). Wetland classifications follow Cowardin et a/. (1979).
Predictions regarding wildlife community composition involved general qualitative
habitat assessment based on existing vegetative communities. Jurisdictional wetland
determinations were performed using delineation criteria prescribed in the "Corps of
Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual" (Environmental Laboratory, 1987).
Information concerning federal and state protected species in the study area was
gathered from the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) database of rare
species and unique habitats along with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) list of
protected species and species of concern.
WATER RESOURCES
The water resource crossed by the proposed project is Red Bud Creek
[Department of Environmental Management (DEM) Index No. 28-78-1-17]. The
Division of Water Quality (DWQ) best usage classification assigned to this water
resource is C NSW. Class C waters are defined as waters suitable for aquatic life
propagation and survival, fishing, wildlife, secondary recreation and agriculture. The
NSW (Nutrient Sensitive Waters) subclassification refers to waters which require
limitations on nutrient imputs. Red Bud Creek has its confluence with Sandy Creek
[DEM Index No. 28-78-1-(14)] approximately 6.8 km (4.2 mi.) downstream of the project
area. Sandy Creek becomes Swift Creek [DEM Index No. 28-78-(0.5)] approximately
7.7 km (4.8 mi) downstream from the Sandy Creek/Red Bud Creek confluence. Both
Sandy Creek and Swift Creek have a DWQ Best Usage Classification of C NSW.
These water resources lie in the Tar-Pamlico River Basin. No High Quality Waters or
Outstanding Resource Waters exist in the project area. However, Red Bud Creek
lies within proposed critical habitat for the tar spinymussel. Therefore, the
highest NCDOT's Best Management Practices for the Protection of Surface
Waters, high quality water construction standards, must be applied and strictly
enforced for this project. These guidelines must be strictly enforced during the
construction phase of the project.
Terrestrial Communities
There is one type of terrestrial community currently existing in the project area,
maintained roadside shoulder.
Maintained Roadside Shoulder
This community includes areas that are highly maintained in an early
successional state. They are subject to frequent mowing and/or herbicide use. Having
been subjected to some type and degree of disturbance in the past, many species
found in this type of community are highly adaptive and have the ability to repopulate
an area quickly after disturbance.
Soil disturbance and compaction, along with frequent mowing and/or herbicide
application, keep this community in an early successional stage. As a result, the
vegetation in this community is predominantly grasses and herbs. These areas cover
the majority of the area where construction will take place.
Plant species that are common to maintained communities are fescue (Festuca
sp.), wild onion (Allium canadense), broomsedge (Andropogon virginica), blackberry
(Rubus argutus), Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), goldenrod (Solidago sp.),
privet, Carolina geranium (Geranium carolinianum), wild carrot (Daucus carota),
Virginia creeper (Parthenocissus quinquefolia), grape (Vitus spp.) and dog fennel
(Anthemis cotula).
Wildlife resources in this community are limited by the high degree of
maintenance that occurs on residential developments and roadside shoulder. Species
found in these areas generally use the area for foraging and are highly adaptive
species that adjust well to human development. Wildlife species that are common to
such areas include raccoon (Procyon lotor), eastern harvest mouse (Reithrodontomys
humulis), hispid cotton rat (Sigmodon hispidus), eastern fence lizard (Sceloporus
undulatus), Carolina chickadee (Parus carolinensis), mourning dove (Zenaida
macroura), common grackle (Quisca/us major), European starling (Sturnus vulgaris),
and black racer (Coluber constrictor).
Aquatic Communities
One aquatic community type, piedmont perennial stream, will be impacted by
the proposed project.
Piedmont Perennial Stream
The piedmont perennial stream, Red Bud Creek, contains habitat for various
species of freshwater fish, benthic macro invertebrates and aquatic insects. Water
boatman* (family Corixidae) and water striders* (family Gerridae) are common in pools
and along stream edges. Fish species expected in these waters include tesselated
darter (Etheostoma olmstedi), bluehead chub (Nocomis leptocephalus), creek chub
(Nocomis leptocephalus), redfin pickerel (Esox americanus) margined madtom (Noturus
insignis) and bluegill (Lepomis macrochirus). Benthic macro invertebrates include
elliptio (Elliptio spp.), eastern floater (Pyganadon cataracta), notched rainbow (Villosa
constricta), paper pondshell (Utterbackia imbecilis), triangle floater (Alasmidonta
undulata), and eastern creekshell ( Villosa delumbis).
JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS
This section provides descriptions, inventories and impact analysis pertinent to
two important issues--Waters of the United States, and rare and protected species.
Waters of the United States
Impacts to jurisdictional surface waters are anticipated. Jurisdictional surface
waters are present in the form of a piedmont perennial stream. Impacts can be
minimized with NCDOT Best Management Practices. In accordance with provisions of
section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344), a permit will be required from the
COE for the discharge of dredged or fill material into "Waters of the United States."
The proposed project will directly impact 18 m (60) linear feet of surface waters.
No wetland impacts will occur due to the construction of this project. There are also
indirect impacts to surface waters associated with bridge construction projects. These
impacts include changes in flooding, discharge, erosion and sedimentation regimes.
The implementation of NCDOT's Best Management Practices for the Protection of
Surface Waters, high quality water construction standards, will reduce any water
resource impact caused by project construction.
No wetland impacts will occur due to the construction of this project.
Water Permits
Nationwide 23 Permit
A Nationwide Permit 33 CFR 330.5(a) (23) is likely to be applicable for all
impacts to Waters of the United States resulting from the proposed project. This permit
authorizes activities undertaken, assisted, authorized, regulated, funded or financed in
whole, or part, by another Federal agency or department where that agency or
department has determined the pursuant to the council on environmental quality
regulation for implementing the procedural provisions of the National Environmental
Policy Act:
(1) that the activity, work, or discharge is categorically excluded from environmental
documentation because it is included within a category of actions which neither
individually nor cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment,
and;
(2) that the office of the Chief of Engineers has been furnished notice of the agency' or
department's application for the categorical exclusion and concurs with that
determination.
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (DWQ) Section 401 Water Quality
General Certification is also required. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act requires that
the state issue or deny water certification for any federally permitted or licensed activity
that may result in a discharge into waters of the United States. The issuance of a 401
permit from DWQ is a prerequisite to issuance of a Section 404 Permit.
Rare and Protected Species
Some populations of fauna and flora have been in, or are in, the process of
decline either due to natural forces or their inability to coexist with human activities.
Federal law (under the provisions of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended) requires that any action, likely to adversely affect a species classified as
federally-protected, be subject to review by the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). Other
species may receive additional protection under separate state laws.
Federally-Protected Species
Plants and animals with federal classifications of Endangered (E), Threatened
(T), Proposed Endangered (PE) and Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under
provisions of Section 7 and Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended. As of 05 May 1997, the FWS lists three federally-protected species for
Franklin County (Table 1). A complete description along with a biological conclusion
for each species follows Table 1.
Table 1. Federally Protected Species for Franklin County.
Scientific Name Common Name Status
Rhus michauxii Michaux's sumac E
Alasmidonta heterodon Dwarf wedge mussel E
Elliptio steinstansana Tar spiny mussel E
Note: "E" denotes Endangered (a species that is threatened with extinction throughout
all or a significant portion of its range).
Rhus michauxii (Michaux's sumac) Endangered
Plant Family: Anacardiaceae
Federally Listed: 28 September 1989
Flowers Present: June
Michaux's sumac is a densely pubescent rhizomatous shrub. The bases of the
leaves are rounded and their edges are simply or doubly serrate. The flowers of
Michaux's sumac are greenish to white in color. Fruits, which develop from August to
September on female plants, are a red densely short-pubescent drupe.
This plant occurs in rocky or sandy open woods. Michaux's sumac is dependent
on some sort of disturbance to maintain the openness of its habitat. It usually grows in
association with basic soils and occurs on sand or sandy loams. Michaux's sumac
grows only in open habitat where it can get full sunlight. Michaux's sumac does not
compete well with other species, such as Japanese honeysuckle, with which it is often
associated.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
During the site visit the areas of open roadside shoulder habitat were searched
for the presence of this plant. No specimens were found. In addition, a search of the
NCNHP database of rare species and unique habitats revealed no records of Michaux's
sumac being present in the project area. Therefore, this project will not affect this
species.
Alasmidonta heterodon (dwarf wedge mussel) Endangered
Animal Family: Unionidae
Date Listed: 14 March 1990
The dwarf wedge mussel is a small mussel having a distinguishable shell
noted by two lateral teeth on the right half and one on the left half. The
periostracum (outer shell) is olive green to dark brown in color and the nacre
(inner shell) is bluish to silvery white.
Known populations of the dwarf wedge mussel in North Carolina are
found in portions of the Tar and Neuse drainages This mussel is sensitive to
agricultural, domestic, and industrial pollutants and requires a stable silt free
streambed with well oxygenated water to survive.
Biological Conclusion:
No Effect
See Reference 1.
Elliptio steinstansana (Tar river spiny mussel) Endangered
Animal Family: Unionidae
Date Listed: 29 July 1997
Distribution in N.C.: Edgecombe, Franklin, Halifax, Nash, Pitt, Vance,
Warren.
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.
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 which 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
See Reference 1.
No Effect
cc: V. Charles Bruton, Ph.D., Environmental Unit Head
Hal C. Bain, Environmental Supervisor
File: B-2972

?
?
1451 t.v
sow /,;? -- N :?., •?" /
f
? "?.

1461 14? 1
/
%
1460 •N 5 _ f
`1 i /,
. 1-- 1449
,
RJ /
1449
I
.? ?
/
462 ? •
14x9
q) Br0 . -?
146 3 2 White Level 9
5
3
•4
( 1406

1425
•
?t425.T T

???
"j ;, ?\
?

\??'?r •S
g
?•

\ta67
? •?
1463 }

1464 ^ ti 1407
3 1468 Cn O 1465
Red
14.66 'J \ ?.
Creek 1-
/ 1321 Boy
9 1469 A ,
?
? ' ?- / / v s

?
1467
1468 ® 1. o
srootis 6 /
.X o 14C=
5
.O 4 /
5
.0 Tumbling J
1
I
1617 ?? 1622
/ ?
t
co 1621
1330
CASTALIA
1 1 c? 1 POP. 257

?? . M
?I Alert
- / " 9 f 1 t
1 F t

/
)-39'
'l Cent Woe
n 2le7
561
1
5f U
1 ,? 1
A+.LG-ue.bu-rS;t'
q
56
O 561
?

, \ • i
Bunn Sr
5 98,
irces
Pilot I 10
North Carolina Department of
?•, Transportation
m =, Division of Highways
Planning & Environmental Branch
tames.
Franklin County
Replace Bridge No. 22 on NC 58
Over Red Bud Creek
25
B-2972
Figure One
Figure 1
s5wc
° r r
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201. RALEIGH. N.C 27611-5201
November 04, 1997
Memorandum To: Wayne Elliot, Unit Head
Bridge Unit
GARLAND B. GARRE17 JR.
SECRETARY
Attention: Bill Goodwin, P.E., Project Manager
From: Tim Savidge, Environmental Biologist
Environmental Unit
Subject: Protected species surveys for proposed replacement of bridge no.
58 over Red Bud Creek on NC 58; Franklin County;
TIP No. B-2972.
Reference: Alderman, J. M., R. C. Wilson and C. McGrath. 1993.
Conservation of aquatic critical habitats in North Carolina. Proc.
Annu. Conf. Southeast. Assoc. Fish and Wildl. Agencies 47:348-
352.
The proposed action calls for the replacement of bridge No. 58 over Red Bud
Creek in the existing location, with minimal approach work. Two federally Endangered
freshwater mussel species, the dwarf-wedge mussel (Alasmidonta heterodon) and the Tar
spiny mussel (Elliptio steinstansana) are listed for Franklin County. In-stream surveys
for mussel fauna were conducted at the subject project on August 06, 1997 by NCDOT
biologists Tim Savidge, Teryn Smith, Mark Rectenwald and Chris Rivenbark. NCDOT
Transportation Technician Deborah Terrell also participated in the surveys.
Mussel survey methodology included visual (view bucket) and tactile methods by
wading in the stream at the bridge site and to a distance of 300 feet downstream. Water
depth was low and mussels were easily found. In 30 minutes of survey time, 591 elliptio
mussels (Elliptio spp.), 10 eastern floater (Pyganadon cataracta), 2 notched rainbow
(Villosa constricta), which is considered Significantly Rare (SR)* in North Carolina, and
1 paper pondshell (Utterbackia imbecilis) were found by the group. Mussel abundance
and diversity increased further downstream of the crossing. Areas further downstream
were surveyed by doing "spot checks" in areas of prime substrate. In addition to the
above mentioned species, the 2 triangle floater (Alasmidonta undulata) and 2 eastern
0 -
creekshell (Villosa delumbis) were also found. These species have North Carolina
status's of Threatened (T)* and SR respectively.
Biological Conclusion:
No Effect
Given the survey results, it is apparent that neither the dwarf-wedge mussel, nor
the Tar spinymussel occur in the project area. It should be noted that Red Bud Creek
flows into Sandy/Swift Creek approximately 6.8 km (4.2 mi) downstream of project
crossing. The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC) has identified
Swift Creek and its tributaries as one of 25 areas in North Carolina that have formally
been proposed as aquatic Critical Habitats (PCH). These habitats are considered essential
for the continued survival of endangered or threatened aquatic wildlife species. Certain
conservation procedures, such as high quality waters designation and protection, are then
established by the state regulatory agencies (Alderman et al. 1993). Presently the WRC is
not allowed to designate areas as Critical Habitat; however NCDOT uses the PCHs for
guidance in determining if a project will impact a federally listed aquatic species.
NCDOT implements HQW standards in the former PCHs that contain federally listed
species. Because this projects eventually drains into PCH for the Tar spinymussel
and the presence of a diverse mussel fauna in the project area, including the state
protected triangle floater, it is recommended that this project by design to HQW
standards.
North Carolina Status
* T (Threatened): Any native or once-native species of wild animal which is likely to
become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a
significant portion of its range, or one that is designated as a threatened species pursuant
to the Endangered Species Act." (Article 25 of Chapter 113 of the General Statutes;
1987).
* SR (Significantly Rare): "Any species which has not been listed by the NCWRC as an
Endangered, Threatened, or Special Concern species, but which exists in the state in
small numbers and has been determined by the NC Natural Heritage Program to need
monitoring.
Endangered, Threatened and Special Concern species have legal protection status in
North Carolina under the State Endangered Species Act administered and enforced by the
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission. However the level of protection given to
state listed species does not apply to NCDOT activities.
cc: V. Charles Bruton, Ph.D., Environmental Unit Head
Hal Bain, Environmental Supervisor
e: Protected species issues
ile: B-2972
w
?!.

O 1 0427
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION ACTION CLASSIFICATION FORM
TIP Project No.: B-2972
State Project No.: 8.1360901 *01?ssUFO,
Federal-Aid Project No.: BRSTP-58(5)
A. Project Description :
NCDOT will replace Bridge No. 22 on US 58 over Red Bud Creek in Franklin
County. The bridge will be replaced with a three barreled culvert, with each barrel
measuring 4.3 meters (14 feet) by 3.4 meters (11 feet). The new approach roadway will
be a 6.6 meter (22 foot) travelway with shoulder widths of at least 1.8 meters (6 feet).
Traffic will be detoured on existing secondary roads during construction.
B. P=ose and Need:
Bridge No. 22 has a sufficiency rating of 62.5 out of 100; but this is due to recent
reinforcement of the center bent of the bridge. The deck of Bridge No. 22 is only 5.2
meters (17 feet) wide. For these reasons Bridge No. 22 needs to be replaced.
C: Proposed Improvements:
Circle one or more of the following Type II improvements which apply to the project:
1. Modernization of a highway by resurfacing, restoration, rehabilitation,
reconstruction, adding shoulders, or adding auxiliary lanes (e.g., parking weaving,
turning, climbing).
a. Restoring, Resurfacing, Rehabilitating, and Reconstructing pavement
(3R and 4R improvements)
b. Widening roadway and shoulders without adding through lanes
c. Modernizing gore treatments
d. Constructing lane improvements (merge, auxiliary, and turn lanes)
e. Adding shoulder drains
f. Replacing and rehabilitating culverts, inlets, and drainage pipes, including
safety treatments
g. Providing driveways pipes
h. Performing minor bridge widening ( less than one through lane)
2. Highway safety or traffic operations improvement projects including the
installation of ramp metering control devices and lighting.
a. Installing ramp metering devices
b. Installing lights
c. Adding or upgrading guardrail
not inconsistent with existing zoning and where there is no significant noise
impact on the surrounding community.
D
12. Acquisition of land for hardship or protective purposes, advance land acquisition
loans under section 3 (b) of the UMT Act. Hardship and protective buying will be
permitted only for a particular parcel or a limited number of parcels. These types
of land acquisition will not limit the evaluation of alternatives, including shifts in
alignment for planned construction projects, which may be required in the NEPA
process. No project development on such land may proceed until the NEPA
process has been completed.
Special Project Information
Environmental Commitments:
1. High Quality Water (HQW) sedimentation and erosion control measures will be
implemented and strictly maintained throughout project construction.
2. In accordance with the provisions of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(33 U.S.C. 1344), a permit will be required from the Corps of Engineers for the
discharge of dredged or fill material into "Waters of the United States." A Corps
of Engineers Nationwide Permit # 23 will be applicable for this project.
3. A North Carolina Division of Environmental Management (DEM) Section 401
Water Quality General Certification will be obtained prior to issue of the Corps of
Engineers Nationwide Permit # 23.
Estimated Costs:
Construction
Right of Way
Total
Estimated Traffic:
Current
Year 2020
$ 450,000
$ 24.000
$ 474,000
800 VPD
1500 VPD
Proposed Typical Roadway Section:
The approach roadway will be 6.6 meters (22 feet) wide with at least 1.8 meter
(6 foot) shoulders. Shoulder width will be increased to at least 2.7 meters (9 feet) where
guardrail is warranted.
3
(9) Does the project involve any known underground storage tanks

(UST's) or hazardous materials sites? ?
X
PER MITS AND COORDINATION YES NO
(10) If the project is located within a CAMA county, will the project
-
significantly affect the coastal zone and/or any "Area of 1 X
F
Environmental Concern" (AEC)?
(11) Does the project involve Coastal Barrier Resources Act resources? X
(12) Will a U. S. Coast Guard permit be required? F-1 X
(13) Will the project result in the modification of any existing

regulatory floodway? ?
X
(14) Will the project require any stream relocations or channel
changes? 7 X
SOCI AL, ECONOMIC. AND CULTURAL RESOURCES YES NO
(15) Will the project induce substantial impacts to planned growth or ? X
land use for the area?
(16) Will the project require the relocation of any family or business? X
(17) Will the project have a disproportionately high and adverse
human health and environmental effect on any minority or
low-income population? X
(18) If the project involves the acquisition of right of way, is the

amount of right of way acquisition considered minor? ?
X
-
(19) Will the project involve any changes in access control? 1 X
F
(20) Will the project substantially alter the usefulness and/or land
use of any adjacent property? X
(21) Will the project have an adverse effect on permanent local

traffic patterns or community cohesiveness? ?
X
(22) Is the project included in an approved thoroughfare plan and/or ?
Transportation Improvement Program (and is, therefore, in X
conformance with the Clean Air Act of 1990)?
5
G. CE Approval
TIP Project No.: B-2972
State Project No. 8.1360901
Federal-Aid Project No.: BRSTP-58(5)
Project Description :
NCDOT will replace Bridge No. 22 on US 58 over Red Bud Creek in Franklin
County. The bridge will be replaced with a three barreled culvert, with each barrel
measuring 4.3 meters (14 feet) by 3.4 meters (11 feet). The new approach roadway will
be a 6.6 meter (22 foot) travelway with shoulder widths of at least 1.8 meters (6 feet).
Traffic will be detoured on existing secondary roads during construction.
Categorical Exclusion Action Classification: (Check one)
X_ TYPE II (A)
TYPE II (B)
Approved
I +4-98 ?? ? !? `
Date Assistant Manager
Planning & Environmental Branch
lq-98 - Z?6 X.4le- Z-71,?-O -?'
Date Project Planning Unit Head
1-tq_ I W j4-46":"4. IL
Date Project Planning Engineer
For Type II (B) projects only:
Not ReQ.uired
Date Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
7
N 1451
1448
10< cell 10i
1461 145° /
1460 N 5 ?"
2 )
.449 3' }
_ 1449 /
Leer
co 1449 ? Brp ?
/kA
Whits Low1
1456 .3 .2 .3 .5 3 1425 i t i Q - ` • `` `.T , 1406
5 1425
1467 0 1463
1407 • ? ? _ r
l - 1464
5 1468 U1 O 1465 Red 1 0 "
N
1466 ? I J ?-? Creek ?' '?,? ' . ? / • ?
B?
S 132,
9 ' 1469 ;
_ s
1468 1467 ? ?. o
?r+oads ® 6? X` O 1 Goo
.6 .5 + 4
I 1 0 a0 5
Tumbling J
1 1617 ? ',1 ? I/, ?, .? I
4
co 162 1622 / , -
CASTALIA
1 1 POP. 257
9 ? 1
1 1
Wood
Centervi
1
W
\ k
Studied Detour Route
4?o€N°"'%?;q? North Carolina Department of
Transportation
Division of Highways
Planning & Environmental Branch
`Of tp1??.''-?
Franklin County
Replace Bridge No. 22 on NC 58
Over Red Bud Creek
B-2972
1 Figure One

.w SrATF o
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt Jr., Governor Division of Archives and History
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary Jeffrey J. Crow, Director
March 10, 1997
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Bridge #22 on NC 58 over Red Bud Creek,
Franklin County, B-2972, Federal Aid Project
BRSTP-58(5), State Project 8.1360901, ER 97-
8350
Dear Mr. Graf:
On March 5, 1997, Debbie Bevin of our staff met with North Carolina Department
of Transportation (NCDOT) staff for a meeting of the minds concerning the above
project. We reported our available information on historic architectural and
archaeological surveys and resources along with our recommendations. NCDOT
provided project area photographs and aerial photographs st the meeting.
Based upon our review of the photographs and the information discussed at the
meeting, we offer our preliminary comments regarding this project.
In terms of historic architectural resources, Bridge #22 is the only structure in the
project's area of potential effect that is over fifty years old. We recommend that
an architectural historian with NCDOT evaluate the bridge for National Register
eligibility and report the findings to us.
The subject project is in an area of high probability for the presence of
archaeological sites. We, therefore, recommend that any new areas of
construction, including temporary detours, lateral ditches, and temporary access
roads be surveyed.
Having provided this information, we look forward to receipt of either a Categorical
Exclusion or Environmental Assessment which indicates how NCDOT addressed our
comments.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966 and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
109 East Jones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807 ?-'1
Federal Aid # BRSTP-58(5) TIP # B-2972 County: Franklin
CONCURRENCE FORM FOR PROPERTIES NOT ELIGIBLE FOR
THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES
Project Description: Replace Bridge No. 22 on NC 58 over Red Bud Creek
On August 21, 1997, representatives of the
® North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
? Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
® North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO)
? Other
reviewed the subject project at
? Scoping meeting
® Historic architectural resources photograph review session/consultation
? Other
All parties present agreed
? there are no properties over fifty years old within the project's area of potential effects.
® there are no properties less than fifty years old which are considered to meet Criteria
Consideration G within the project's area of potential effects.
® there are properties over fifty years old within the project's area of potential effects, but based
on the historical information available and the photographs of each property, the property
identified as Bridge No. 22 is considered not eligible for the National Register and no
further evaluation of them is necessary.
® there are no National Register-listed properties within the project's area of potential effects.
Signed:
H,
DOT
WA /Ibr*the Divisi
Representative; SHPO
Administrator, or other Federal Agency
Historic Preservation Of icer/ < C
If a survey report is prepared. a final copy of this form and the attached list will be included.
?-s{- 21 Iq9?
r
Date
/z
Date
0?1

?5EATE
?? ' .mod
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR.
GOVERNOR
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH. N.C. 27611-5201
03 November 1997
MEMORANDUM TO:
FROM:
Wayne Elliot, Unit Head
Bridge Unit
GARLAND B. GARRETr JR.
SECRETARY
Marc Recktenwald, Environmental Biologist
Environmental Unit
SUBJECT: Natural Resources Technical Report for the proposed
replacement of bridge No. 22 on NC 58 over Red Bud
Creek, Franklin County. TIP No. B-2972, State project No.
8.2404901, Federal aid project No. BRSTP-58(5).
ATTENTION: Bill Goodwin, P.E., Project Manager
Project Planning Unit
REFERENCE: Protected species survey memo prepared by Tim Savidge,
November 1997.
The following report is submitted to assist in the preparation of a Programmatic
Categorical Exclusion (PCE) for the proposed project. This report contains information
concerning water resources, biotic resources, Waters of the United States, permit
requirements and federally protected species within the project area. The information
contained in this report is relevant only in the context of existing preliminary design
concepts. If design parameters and criteria change, additional field investigations may
need to be conducted.
The proposed project involves replacing the existing bridge on existing location
with minimal approach work. The existing structure is on concrete deck girders with
concrete bents and end bents. The proposed structure is a three barrel RBC, each
barrel being 4.3 m (14 ft) by 3.4 m (11 ft). The project length is approximately 152 m
(500 ft). The proposed right of way for this project is to remain the same as the existing
right of way which is 18 m (60 ft). Traffic will be detoured off-site during the
construction of the proposed project.
0-
METHODOLOGY
Field investigations were conducted on 06 August 1997 by NCDOT biologists
Marc Recktenwald, Chris Rivenbark, and Teryn Smith, with NCDOT Protected Species
Coordinator Tim Savidge and NCDOT Transportation Technician II Deborah Terrell to
assess natural resources at the project site. Plant communities and their associated
wildlife were identified and recorded. Wildlife identification involved using one or more
of the following observation techniques: active searching and capture, visual
observations (binoculars), and identifying characteristic signs of wildlife (sounds, scat,
tracks and burrows). Faunal species observed during the site visit are denoted with an
asterisk (" ). Terrestrial community classifications generally follow Schafale and
Weakley (1990) where possible, and plant taxonomy follows Radford, et a/. (1968).
Animal taxonomy follows Martof, et al. (1980), Menhenick (1991), Potter, et al. (1980),
and Webster, et al. (1985). Wetland classifications follow Cowardin et a/. (1979).
Predictions regarding wildlife community composition involved general qualitative
habitat assessment based on existing vegetative communities. Jurisdictional wetland
determinations were performed using delineation criteria prescribed in the "Corps of
Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual" (Environmental Laboratory, 1987).
Information concerning federal and state protected species in the study area was
gathered from the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) database of rare
species and unique habitats along with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) list of
protected species and species of concern.
WATER RESOURCES
The water resource crossed by the proposed project is Red Bud Creek
[Department of Environmental Management (DEM) Index No. 28-78-1-17]. The
Division of Water Quality (DWQ) best usage classification assigned to this water
resource is C NSW. Class C waters are defined as waters suitable for aquatic life
propagation and survival, fishing, wildlife, secondary recreation and agriculture. The
NSW (Nutrient Sensitive Waters) subclassification refers to waters which require
limitations on nutrient imputs. Red Bud Creek has its confluence with Sandy Creek
[DEM Index No. 28-78-1-(14)] approximately 6.8 km (4.2 mi.) downstream of the project
area. Sandy Creek becomes Swift Creek [DEM Index No. 28-78-(0.5)] approximately
7.7 km (4.8 mi) downstream from the Sandy Creek/Red Bud Creek confluence. Both
Sandy Creek and Swift Creek have a DWQ Best Usage Classification of C NSW.
These water resources lie in the Tar-Pamlico River Basin. No High Quality Waters or
Outstanding Resource Waters exist in the project area. However, Red Bud Creek
lies within proposed critical habitat for the tar spinymussel. Therefore, the
highest NCDOT's Best Management Practices for the Protection of Surface
Waters, high quality water construction standards, must be applied and strictly
enforced for this project. These guidelines must be strictly enforced during the
construction phase of the project.
Terrestrial Communities
There is one type of terrestrial community currently existing in the project area,
maintained roadside shoulder.
Maintained Roadside Shoulder
This community includes areas that are highly maintained in an early
successional state. They are subject to frequent mowing and/or herbicide use. Having
been subjected to some type and degree of disturbance in the past, many species
found in this type of community are highly adaptive and have the ability to repopulate
an area quickly after disturbance.
Soil disturbance and compaction, along with frequent mowing and/or herbicide
application, keep this community in an early successional stage. As a result, the
vegetation in this community is predominantly grasses and herbs. These areas cover
the majority of the area where construction will take place.
Plant species that are common to maintained communities are fescue (Festuca
sp.), wild onion (Allium canadense), broomsedge (Andropogon virginica), blackberry
(Rubus argutus), Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), goldenrod (Solidago sp.),
privet, Carolina geranium (Geranium carolinianum), wild carrot (Daucus carota),
Virginia creeper (Parthenocissus quinquefolia), grape (Vitus spp.) and dog fennel
(Anthemis cotula).
Wildlife resources in this community are limited by the high degree of
maintenance that occurs on residential developments and roadside shoulder. Species
found in these areas generally use the area for foraging and are highly adaptive
species that adjust well to human development. Wildlife species that are common to
such areas include raccoon (Procyon lotor), eastern harvest mouse (Reithrodontomys
humulis), hispid cotton rat (Sigmodon hispidus), eastern fence lizard (Sceloporus
undulatus), Carolina chickadee (Parus carolinensis), mourning dove (Zenaida
macroura), common grackle (Quisca/us major), European starling (Sturnus vulgaris),
and black racer (Coluber constrictor).
Aquatic Communities
One aquatic community type, piedmont perennial stream, will be impacted by
the proposed project.
Piedmont Perennial Stream
The piedmont perennial stream, Red Bud Creek, contains habitat for various
species of freshwater fish, benthic macroinvertebrates and aquatic insects. Water
boatman* (family Corixidae) and water striders* (family Gerridae) are common in pools
and along stream edges. Fish species expected in these waters include tesselated
darter (Etheostoma olmstedi), bluehead chub (Nocomis leptocephalus), creek chub
(Nocomis leptocephalus), redfin pickerel (Esox americanus) margined madtom (Noturus
insignis) and bluegill (Lepomis macrochirus). Benthic macroinvertebrates include
elliptio (Elliptio spp.), eastern floater (Pyganadon cataracta), notched rainbow (Villosa
constricta), paper pondshell (Utterbackia imbecilis), triangle floater (Alasmidonta
undulata), and eastern creekshell (Villosa delumbis).
JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS
This section provides descriptions, inventories and impact analysis pertinent to
two important issues-Waters of the United States, and rare and protected species.
Waters of the United States
Impacts to jurisdictional surface waters are anticipated. Jurisdictional surface
waters are present in the form of a piedmont perennial stream. Impacts can be
minimized with NCDOT Best Management Practices. In accordance with provisions of
section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344), a permit will be required from the
COE for the discharge of dredged or fill material into "Waters of the United States."
The proposed project will directly impact 18 m (60) linear feet of surface waters.
No wetland impacts will occur due to the construction of this project. There are also
indirect impacts to surface waters associated with bridge construction projects. These
impacts include changes in flooding, discharge, erosion and sedimentation regimes.
The implementation of NCDOT's Best Management Practices for the Protection of
Surface Waters, high quality water construction standards, will reduce any water
resource impact caused by project construction.
No wetland impacts will occur due to the construction of this project.
Water Permits
Nationwide 23 Permit
A Nationwide Permit 33 CFR 330.5(a) (23) is likely to be applicable for all
impacts to Waters of the United States resulting from the proposed project. This permit
authorizes activities undertaken, assisted, authorized, regulated, funded or financed in
whole, or part, by another Federal agency or department where that agency or
department has determined the pursuant to the council on environmental quality
regulation for implementing the procedural provisions of the National Environmental
Policy Act:
(1) that the activity, work, or discharge is categorically excluded from environmental
documentation because it is included within a category of actions which neither
individually nor cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment,
and;
(2) that the office of the Chief of Engineers has been furnished notice of the agency' or
department's application for the categorical exclusion and concurs with that
determination.
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (DWQ) Section 401 Water Quality
General Certification is also required. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act requires that
the state issue or deny water certification for any federally permitted or licensed activity
that may result in a discharge into waters of the United States. The issuance of a 401
permit from DWQ is a prerequisite to issuance of a Section 404 Permit.
Rare and Protected Species
Some populations of fauna and flora have been in, or are in, the process of
decline either due to natural forces or their inability to coexist with human activities.
Federal law (under the provisions of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended) requires that any action, likely to adversely affect a species classified as
federally-protected, be subject to review by the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). Other
species may receive additional protection under separate state laws.
Federally-Protected Species
Plants and animals with federal classifications of Endangered (E), Threatened
(T), Proposed Endangered (PE) and Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under
provisions of Section 7 and Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended. As of 05 May 1997, the FWS lists three federally-protected species for
Franklin County (Table 1). A complete description along with a biological conclusion
for each species follows Table 1.
Table 1 Federally Protected Species for Franklin County.
Scientific Name Common Name Status
Rhus michauxii Michaux's sumac E
Alasmidonta heterodon Dwarf wedge mussel E
Elliptio steinstansana Tar spiny mussel E
Note: "E" denotes Endangered (a species that is threatened with extinction throughout
all or a significant portion of its range).
Rhus michauxii (Michaux's sumac) Endangered
Plant Family: Anacardiaceae
Federally Listed: 28 September 1989
Flowers Present: June
Michaux's sumac is a densely pubescent rhizomatous shrub. The bases of the
leaves are rounded and their edges are simply or doubly serrate. The flowers of
Michaux's sumac are greenish to white in color. Fruits, which develop from August to
September on female plants, are a red densely short-pubescent drupe.
This plant occurs in rocky or sandy open woods. Michaux's sumac is dependent
on some sort of disturbance to maintain the openness of its habitat. It usually grows in
association with basic soils and occurs on sand or sandy loams. Michaux's sumac
grows only in open habitat where it can get full sunlight. Michaux's sumac does not
compete well with other species, such as Japanese honeysuckle, with which it is often
associated.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
During the site visit the areas of open roadside shoulder habitat were searched
for the presence of this plant. No specimens were found. In addition, a search of the
NCNHP database of rare species and unique habitats revealed no records of Michaux's
sumac being present in the project area. Therefore, this project will not affect this
species.
Alasmidonta heterodon (dwarf wedge mussel) Endangered
Animal Family: Unionidae
Date Listed: 14 March 1990
The dwarf wedge mussel is a small mussel having a distinguishable shell
noted by two lateral teeth on the right half and one on the left half. The
periostracum (outer shell) is olive green to dark brown in color and the nacre
(inner shell) is bluish to silvery white.
Known populations of the dwarf wedge mussel in North Carolina are
found in portions of the Tar and Neuse drainages This mussel is sensitive to
agricultural, domestic, and industrial pollutants and requires a stable silt free
streambed with well oxygenated water to survive.
Biological Conclusion:
No Effect
See Reference 1.
Elliptio steinstansana (Tar river spiny mussel) Endangered
Animal Family: Unionidae
Date Listed: 29 July 1997
Distribution in N.C.: Edgecombe, Franklin, Halifax, Nash, Pitt, Vance,
Warren.
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.
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 which 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
See Reference 1.
cc: V. Charles Bruton, Ph.D., Environmental Unit Head
Hal C. Bain, Environmental Supervisor
File: B-2972
' N 1451(?j S'? f _. N / .?; •?
"Las
1461 1450
1460
'
.t . lam' 1449 `' '3
a r ? 1 1, r 1449
462 - D r /
14x9 Boo -?
14 ?5 • Z White lr4l g 1406
.3 .3
5 ? 1425 T ; t 5 .3 1425 ? ? ? ? • 4 ?"• ? ? (? `\o?. ' ,$
?
46 7 1463
\1 ? ?
1407
N u' 0 1465 1464 Red ?-
1468 1466 -J _ / 1 n
;'J' ? ? "? _ Creek ?? / ? • '
t; , 5 l 40P 132 ? . ed
9 1469 1 All, s ? 1468 ? 1457 ? ? / •6? - c 1G' O
•5
1' 1 0 s0 4 i. s TumOlinq J
1617
1621 ? 622 /
1330
I . ? 1
CASTALIA
f 1 r 1 POP. 257
'Epsom ? __? • ? ~ f ' '`. 1
- / / Alert
/ 639 .6 J It' \
Centervi 1 -wood ?f\ • 7
_ ` ? Ingleside 1 3 (i i
?? ?? 1 )
13
-- F R `? N, ;IyL I N
S.. +LoussburH •; 9
,ildinton
DO , 581 S6
56
It'SVb.1'"`y? d% spledlle ' Justice
niounlsWlle / to 3910
New Hooe
Bunn Sr
°ondS1 ??
deY3 5 6 98 ,
Peerces
Pilot
-6p do ZFN\ North Carolina Department of
Transportation
i y tel.
T =, Division of Highways
O;
Planning & Environmental Branch
\OR TRANS i
Franklin County
Replace Bridge No. 22 on NC 58
Over Red Bud Creek
B-2972
Figure One
Figure 1
.sw_ r
° r y+A
Y
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMEs B. HUNT JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201. RALEIGH. N.G 27611-5201
November 04, 1997
Memorandum To: Wayne Elliot, Unit Head
Bridge Unit
GARLAND B. GARRETT J R.
SECRETARY
Attention: Bill Goodwin, P.E., Project Manager
From: Tim Savidge, Environmental Biologist
Environmental Unit
Subject: Protected species surveys for proposed replacement of bridge no.
58 over Red Bud Creek on NC 58; Franklin County;
TIP No. B-2972.
Reference: Alderman, J..M., R. C. Wilson and C. McGrath. 1993.
Conservation of aquatic critical habitats in North Carolina. Proc.
Annu. Conf. Southeast. Assoc. Fish and Wildl. Agencies 47:348-
352.
The proposed action calls for the replacement of bridge No. 58 over Red Bud
Creek in the existing location, with minimal approach work. Two federally Endangered
freshwater mussel species, the dwarf-wedge mussel (Alasmidonta heterodon) and the Tar
spiny mussel (Elliptio steinstansana) are listed for Franklin County. In-stream surveys
for mussel fauna were conducted at the subject project on August 06, 1997 by NCDOT
biologists Tim Savidge, Teryn Smith, Mark Rectenwald and Chris Rivenbark. NCDOT
Transportation Technician Deborah Terrell also participated in the surveys.
Mussel survey methodology included visual (view bucket) and tactile methods by
wading in the stream at the bridge site and to a distance of 300 feet downstream. Water
depth was low and mussels were easily found. In 30 minutes of survey time, 591 elliptio
mussels (Elliptio spp.), 10 eastern floater (Pyganadon cataracta), 2 notched rainbow
(Villosa constricta), which is considered Significantly Rare (SR)* in North Carolina, and
1 paper pondshell (Utterbackia imbecilis) were found by the group. Mussel abundance
and diversity increased further downstream of the crossing. Areas further downstream
were surveyed by doing "spot checks" in areas of prime substrate. In addition to the
above mentioned species, the 2 triangle floater (Alasmidonta undulata) and 2 eastern
0 -
creekshell (Villosa delumbis) were also found. These species have North Carolina
status's of Threatened (T)* and SR respectively.
Biological Conclusion:
No Effect
Given the survey results, it is apparent that neither the dwarf-wedge mussel, nor
the Tar spinymussel occur in the project area. It should be noted that Red Bud Creek
flows into Sandy/Swift Creek approximately 6.8 km (4.2 mi) downstream of project
crossing. The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC) has identified
Swift Creek and its tributaries as one of 25 areas in North Carolina that have formally
been proposed as aquatic Critical Habitats (PCH). These habitats are considered essential
for the continued survival of endangered or threatened aquatic wildlife species. Certain
conservation procedures, such as high quality waters designation and protection, are then
established by the state regulatory agencies (Alderman et al. 1993). Presently the WRC is
not allowed to designate areas as Critical Habitat; however NCDOT uses the PCHs for
guidance in determining if a project will impact a federally listed aquatic species.
NCDOT implements HQW standards in the former PCHs that contain federally listed
species. Because this projects eventually drains into PCH for the Tar spinymussel
and the presence of a diverse mussel fauna in the project area, including the state
protected triangle floater, it is recommended that this project by design to HQW
standards.
North Carolina Status
* T (Threatened): Any native or once-native species of wild animal which is likely to
become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a
significant portion of its range, or one that is designated as a threatened species pursuant
to the Endangered Species Act." (Article 25 of Chapter 113 of the General Statutes;
1987).
* SR (Significantly Rare): "Any species which has not been listed by the NCWRC as an
Endangered, Threatened, or Special Concern species, but which exists in the state in
small numbers and has been determined by the NC Natural Heritage Program to need
monitoring.
Endangered, Threatened and Special Concern species have legal protection status in
North Carolina under the State Endangered Species Act administered and enforced by the
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission. However the level of protection given to
state listed species does not apply to NCDOT activities.
cc: V. Charles Bruton, Ph.D., Environmental Unit Head
Hal Bain, Environmental Supervisor
e: Protected species issues
ile: B-2972
c10427.
Appendix B
10, Isslit
Section 7 Consultation Information
United States Department of the Interior
V_ TD WILT
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
February 23, 2001
Mr. William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manager
NCDOT
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
Dear Mr. Gilmore:
Thank you for your letter of February 1, 2001, requesting comments or concurrence from the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service (Service) on the biological assessment for the dwarf wedge mussel (Alasmidonta
heterodon) in the vicinity of Bridge No. 22 on NC 58 over Red Bud Creek, Franklin County, North
Carolina (TIP No. B-2972). This report is provided in accordance with provisions of the Fish and
Wildlife Coordination Act (16 U.S.C. 661-667d) and Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973,
as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543).
The Service considers this report to be an accurate representation of the survey and results for the Cape
Fear shiner, and its habitat. Based on the information provided, the Service concurs that this project,
implemented as described, is "Not Likely to Adversely Affect (Conditional)" the dwarf wedge mussel,
provided you strictly adhere to all construction commitments outlined in your January 16, 2001
memorandum.
Note, however, that this concurrence applies only to the referenced species up to the date of the report.
Should additional information become available relative to the referenced species, additional surveys
may be required.
The Service appreciates the opportunity to comment on this document. Please advise us of any changes
in project plans. If you have any questions regarding these comments, contact Tom McCartney at (919)
856-4520, ext. 32.
Sincerely,
a-r
Dr. Garland B Pardue
Ecological Services Supervisor
cc: COE, Raleigh, NC (Eric Aismeyer)
FWS/R4:TMcCartney:TM:02/23/01:919/856-4520 extension 32AB-2972.esp
e ?. srnrE
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
Mr. Tom McCartney
USFWS - Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
January 31, 2001
Vk?1w
DAVID MCCOY
SECRETARY
SUBJECT: Section 7 Biological Conclusion for the Federally Endangered Dwarf wedge
mussel, relating to Proposed Replacement of Bridge # 22 Over Red Bud Creek,
Franklin County, TIP # B-2972.
In a memorandum dated January 16, 2001, you received the a list of the construction
protocol that resulted from a field meeting held on September 22, 2000 and a follow-up in house
meeting on December 14, 2000 as part of the Section 7 Consultation process. The purpose of
these meetings and resulting protocol is to minimize to the extent practicable any adverse effect
to the dwarf wedge mussel (Alasmidonta heterodon). If the protocol outlined in the January 16,
2001 memorandum is strictly adhered to, it can be concluded that construction of this project is
not likely to adversely impact the dwarf wedge mussel.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: Not Likely to Adversely Affect (Conditional)
If any of these commitments are not strictly adhered to, the project may adversely affect
the Dwarf wedge mussel, requiring that the project be shut down and Section 7 Consultation
reinitiated. If this occurs, construction. of the project cannot resume until the Section 7
requirements have been resolved.
We are seeking your concurrence with this Biological Conclusion. Please note, the
Biological Conclusion of Not Likely to Adversely Affect the Tar Spinymussel rendered on
November 4, 1997, remains valid. If you have any questions or need additional information,
please contact Mr. Michael Wood at 919-733-1194.
cc: Judy Johnson, WRC
Jean Manueie. USACE
Robin. `I x ' is
Charles Bruton, PDEA
MAILING ADDRESS:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548
Sincerely,
William D. Gilmore, P.E., Branch Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis
TELEPHONE: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
WEBSITE: WWWDOH.DOT.sTATE.NC.US
LOCATION:
TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
RALEIGH NC
e..? SWE a
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 22611-5201 DAVID McCOY
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
January 16, 2001
MEMORANDUM TO: Judith Johnson* NC Wildlife Resources Commission
John Alderman NC Wildlife Resources Commission
David Cox* NC Wildlife Resources Commission
John Hennessy* US Division of Water Quality
John Hammond* US Fish & Wildlife
Tom McCartney.* US Fish & Wildlife
Dale Suiter* US Fish & Wildlife
Dan Hinton* Federal Highway Administration
Jake Riggsbee Federal Highway Administration
Jean Manuele* US Army Corps of Engineers
Linda Pearsall NC Natural Heritage Program
Ken Pace* NCDOT - Roadside Environmental Unit
Jeff Renn* NCDOT - Roadside Environmental Unit
Hearbert Locklear* NCDOT - Structure. Design Unit
Walker Armistead* NCDOT - Structure Design Unit
Thomas Payne* NCDOT - Structure Design Unit
Jerome Nix* NCDOT - Hydraulics Unit
Marshall Clawson* NCDOT - Hydraulics Unit
Chris Kreider* NCDOT - Soils & Foundations
Ron Allen* NCDOT - Roadway Design Unit
David Bass* NCDOT - Roadway Design Unit
Tracy Parrott* NCDOT - Division 5 Construction
Chris Murray* NCDOT - Division 5 Environmental Officer
Ron Hancock* NCDOT - Area Bridge Construction
Ellis Powell NCDOT - Bridge Construction
Tim Savidge* Project Development & Environmental Analysis
Logan Williams* Project Development & Environmental Analysis
Michael Wood* Project Development & Environmental Analysis
* These people attended at least one of the meetings.
FROM: Robin C. Young
PDEA, Project Planning Engineer
SUBJECT: Section 7 Meetings for the dwarf wedge mussel
Project B-2972
Section 7 Meeting Commitments Pagel of 3
B-2972 Franklin County
Section 7 consultation meeting for the dwarf wedge mussel was held in Franklin
County at the subject bridge site on September 22, 2000.
A follow-up meeting was held in the Board of Transportation Conference Room at
ssoortation Buiidinp can
The attendees agreed upon the following.
B-2972 Bridge No. 22 on NC 58 over Red Bud Creek (Let Date = April 17, 2001)
No Clearing or Grubbing from November 15 to April 1.
No in-stream construction from April 1 to June 15.
Weep holes will be configured so that the run-off does not fall into the stream and no wet
concrete will come in contact with the water.
The new structure will be a 3-span cored slab bridge.
Piles driven shall be encased. For all in-stream work, horseshoe turbidity. curtains will be
used for driving piles and removing the existing abutments. Removal of the abutments may
require cofferdams instead of turbidity curtains. Turbidity curtains shall not be draped across the
entire stream, only around the area of activity.
Under no circumstances will temporary fill material,, construction causeways, or
construction equipment be allowed into the river, defined as the normal flow channel to bank full
height. If a temporary work platform is needed for removal of existing structure, temporary piles
or similar devices may be driven into the river bottom to support the work platform. No separate
payment will be made for the temporary work platform as it is considered incidental to the
removal of the existing structure. Details of work platform shall be submitted to the resident
engineer for approval.
A survey of the area will be completed prior to let. A copy of the survey results shall be
sent to the US Fish & Wildlife Service, Wildlife Resource Commission, and the US Army Corps
of Engineers.
If there are fallen trees in the streambed, and if the trees are in the Right of Way of the
project, the trunks and limbs of the trees are to be sawed off and removed (not to be dragged out,
but lifted). The root system is to be left in place, as is.
High Quality Waters - Soil and Erosion Control Measures will be installed concurrently
with clearing and grubbing operations, and properly maintained throughout project construction.
This is an Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA).
The erosion control plans will be designated to High Quality Water (HQW) standards.
Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESA) will be defined on the plans, which consist of a
50-foot (15-meter) buffer zone on both sides of the stream.
The contractor may perform clearing operations, but not grubbing operations in the
Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESA), until immediately prior to beginning grading operations.
Once grading operations begin in Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESA), as specified on
the ;Mans, work will progress in a continuous manner until complete.
Section 7 Meeting Commitments Page 2 of 3
B-2972 Franklin County
Seeding and mulching will be performed immediately following final grade establishment.
Stage seeding will be performed on cut and fill slopes as grading progresses.
iplojec. '%•_'_.'` ?v des'? ed using a ` ?Cia1 Hardware Cloth" erosion control device;
which will be used w s ;re needed along the stream banks.
Rock workpads will be established on both banks if heavy equipment will be located
and/or used, to minimize risk of sediment entering the stream. Appropriate care shall be taken by
the contractor when placing the pad.
Abutments will be removed. The footings of the abutments are on top of timber piles. The
timber piles will be cut off at the streambed.
The interior bent will be removed such that the minimal amount of debris will fall into the
stream. Most likely, this will require breaking it into sections and lifting it out one section. at a
time. The interior bent should not be dragged off in one piece because this will damage the
streambed.
Removal of the abutments should be done "in the dry". Most likely, the best time for this
is mid to late summer when the stream should be at a low flow condition. If there is any water at
the existing footing of the abutments, De-Watering must be used. If this is necessary, cofferdams
will be placed around the footings to hold water out of the excavation. Cofferdams may include
timber cribs, sheet piling, steel shells, or similar structures, as well as necessary bracing. Pumping
wells or well points will be used in conjunction with the cofferdams.
After removal of the abutments and footings, before the cofferdams are removed, the soil
will be stabilized. If needed, temporary seeding will be placed before putting down the Rip Rap
and Fabric.
Since there is a chance de-watering and cofferdams may be used, a Nationwide Permit # 33
must be obtained from the Army Corps of Engineers.
Written concurrence is required from John Hennessy of the North Carolina Division of
Water Quality (NCDWQ). The permit specialist, Mike Wood will send the request for this
concurrence.
Equipment will be maintained such that hydraulic fluids, oil, gasoline, or other chemicals
will not enter the stream. If chemicals are spilled on the site, they will be cleaned up immediately
and not allowed to filter down into the soil.
Stormwater runoff will not be channeled directly into the stream.
North Carolina Wildlife Resource Commission (NCWRC) and US Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS) will be notified in writing to attend the pre-construction meeting.
Section 7 Meeting Commitments Page 3 of 3
B-2972 Franklin County
,?swc
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF Tk NSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR.
GOVERNOR
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201
November 04, 1997
Memorandum To:
Attention:
From:
Subject:
Reference:
Wayne Elliot, Unit Head
Bridge Unit
Bill Goodwin, P.E., Project Manager
Tim Savidge, Environmental Biologist
Environmental Unit
GARLAND B. GARRETT J R.
SECRETARY
Protected species surveys for proposed replacement of bridge no.
58 over Red Bud Creek on NC 58; Franklin County;
TIP No. B-2972.
Alderman, J. M., R. C. Wilson and C. McGrath. 1993.
Conservation of aquatic critical habitats in North Carolina. Proc.
Annu. Conf. Southeast. Assoc. Fish and Wildl. Agencies 47:348-
352.
The proposed action calls for the replacement of bridge No. 58 over Red Bud
Creek in the existing location, with minimal approach work. Two federally Endangered
freshwater mussel species, the dwarf-wedge mussel (Alasmidonta heterodon) and the Tar
spiny mussel (Elliptio steinstansana) are listed for Franklin County. In-stream surveys
for mussel fauna were conducted at the subject project on August 06, 1997 by NCDOT
biologists Tim Savidge, Teryn Smith, Mark Rectenwald and Chris Rivenbark. NCDOT
Transportation Technician Deborah Terrell also participated in the surveys.
Mussel survey methodology included visual (view bucket) and tactile methods by
wading in the stream at the bridge site and to a distance of 300 feet downstream. Water
depth was low and mussels were easily found. In 30 minutes of survey time, 591 elliptio
mussels (Elliptio spp.), 10 eastern floater (Pyganadon cataracta), 2 notched rainbow
(Villosa constricta), which is considered Significantly Rare (SR)* in North Carolina, and
1 paper pondshell (Utterbackia imbecilis) were found by the group. Mussel abundance
and diversity increased further downstream of the crossing. Areas further downstream
were surveyed by doing "'spot checks" in areas of prime substrate. In addition to the
above mentioned species, the 2 triangle floater (Alasmidonta undulata) and 2 eastern
0
creekshell (Villosa delumbis) were also found. These species have North Carolina
status's of Threatened (T)* and SR respectively.
Biological Conclusion:
No Effect
Given the survey results, it is apparent that neither the dwarf-wedge mussel, nor
the Tar spinymussel occur in the project area. It should be noted that Red Bud Creek
flows into Sandy/Swift Creek approximately 6.8 km (4.2 mi) downstream of project
crossing. The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC) has identified
Swift Creek and its tributaries as one of 25 areas in North Carolina that have formally
been proposed as aquatic Critical Habitats (PCH). These habitats are considered essential
for the continued survival of endangered or threatened aquatic wildlife species. Certain
conservation procedures, such as high quality waters designation and protection, are then
established by the state regulatory agencies (Alderman et al. 1993). Presently the WRC is
not allowed to designate areas as Critical Habitat; however NCDOT uses the PCHs for
guidance in determining if a project will impact a federally listed aquatic species.
NCDOT implements HQW standards in the former PCHs that contain federally listed
species. Because this projects eventually drains into PCH for the Tar spinymussel
and the presence of a diverse mussel fauna in the project area, including the state
protected triangle floater, it is recommended that this project by design to HQW
standards.
North Carolina Status
* T (Threatened): Any native or once-native species of wild animal which is likely to
become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a
significant portion of its range, or one that is designated as a threatened species pursuant
to the Endangered Species Act." (Article 25 of Chapter 113 of the General Statutes;
1987).
* SR (Significantly Rare): "Any species which has not been listed by the NCWRC as an
Endangered, Threatened, or Special Concern species, but which exists in the state in
small numbers and has been determined by the NC Natural Heritage Program to need
monitoring.
Endangered, Threatened and Special Concern species have legal protection status in
North Carolina under the State Endangered Species Act administered and enforced by the
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission. However the level of protection given to
state listed species does not apply to NCDOT activities.
cc: V. Charles Bruton, Ph.D., Environmental Unit Head
Hal Bain, Environmental Supervisor
File: Protected species issues
File: B-2972
}nLS !,Af iilu ll rti?!; ulu.? LS ?.t ; ?i {'L ?.

N
A
U1

01
fl{

OD
Q-

O
01

N
01

A
01

01
O?

OD

y

y Z

c

111
1
o
F
I - _
,
I ._ mg mn
I f

1
I
411
1 ti,
1
11
111
111
_ C O
z
?y 20

m
: - g

N
IJA

- -

-

n y

m

i fli
v Z

411
o f .1
1
: .. .... _. - -
-

..
..
-
..
'.. RI P
-
7 r m

I
M _
R
- I I I l D

N
O o
- I

.IYJ7d 11 I m

I I _

O

: _
?- ?
I
+ O
M
o
cn

Q HI
I I
I ?I
o
a2
c
+ .
- _ 1
I .I O
c W
N
10
N
1 ?

44
I

I

I

I
a ?

p 4 0 4
.
. -

?J I

I
I ?
-
-- -
- ?I I o
rl II

DO '
-t
rt {
t
H
I
M W i n

I

I
:
?I
h
' _ ? - _ _ _ I I
F N I I I II °
.. -
?
x I I I
. i. -.. ' m
u m l
1
1
? i (
a ki i 1 i# } -
? # f 1 o
' .
_.

+
+ 44 .4r4t.m -44 4i H it TT
I
I
I
xm
"?
m3
p
}1?
+
i k? . .. I
x
1
I I
I _
mZ
6
I II

HI R# m i lt
M
t.

?? FILM
?
I I I I
F
r O ff -- - S E -141 1flIt ?

+
, ..
o : I
I
-o
_ -
r I I I J
1

i

1

. 4 11 111 1- 1

I
i
:
1
Lh I I I

R
i
m
11
1
1

rx I

'
I
, I I JI

--- 4.17
..
--
- X

I I
1 J
?
I 12
1
1,1 1 I I . m
9
1 i l N v

- 11 11, A
I i
I
-?

_ ? D
A
- I I '? I N o

I I x
I
i ? Ia I I i lls 0 L
: 14 o V
_ 1 0 FI
+
A Its -

+ i
!6
7 i}/W
F n

'D T
<
O
M
M ml 11
:.
a
R
- H
I
I
:
-
1
m
m
?
r
?
f
t D
r ??
42 111- cn ` n
=a

-p- Mil- 444
m

?? Cr
-_
._
_
m - og
o
Z D

f 1 1 ,

O

?

00%

po
AN GGG

A

_

...
O

Z
?
m

'"

_ n

.- -

Z

x
m

m
? ...
. . ... 4
_
_ FYY -
.. - ...
_ ..
. . ..
. .
.. . - - .:
- :. .
.. _ _ _ _ -
-_ -

S
mop
iQp
__
n
`.?
.
_ .. - :.L.. .- _ -: . ..__ ...::
.
-
...
::
.
O
?
o
0
3
_N
nZ
m ? -,O p t
?
?`
?0 Z
l T

Z ^o a
G
?
m a
z0 -
y7 FN p z
Lim Ui Ul o, O O o, 01 D y O
? 01 OD O N A P OD
1a
010427
Appendix B
Section 7 Consultation Information
United States Department of the Interior
_ ..: 'ND WILL.' Q7
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
February 23, 2001
Mr. William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manager
NCDOT
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
Dear Mr. Gilmore:
Thank you for your letter of February 1, 2001, requesting comments or concurrence from the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service (Service) on the biological assessment for the dwarf wedge mussel (Alasmidonta
heterodon) in the vicinity of Bridge No. 22 on NC 58 over Red Bud Creek, Franklin County, North
Carolina (TIP No. B-2972). This report is provided in accordance with provisions of the Fish and
Wildlife Coordination Act (16 U.S.C. 661-667d) and Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973,
as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543).
The Service considers this report to be an accurate representation of the survey and results for the. Cape
Fear shiner, and its habitat. Based on the information provided, the Service concurs that this project,
implemented as described, is "Not Likely to Adversely Affect (Conditional)" the dwarf wedge mussel,
provided you strictly adhere to all construction commitments outlined in your January 16, 2001
memorandum.
Note, however, that this concurrence applies only to the referenced species up to the date of the report.
Should additional information become available relative to the referenced species, additional surveys
may be required.
The Service appreciates the opportunity to comment on this document. Please advise us of any changes
in project plans. If you have any questions regarding these comments, contact Tom McCartney at (919)
856-4520, ext. 32.
Sincerely,
Dr. Garland B Pardue
Ecological Services Supervisor.
cc: COE, Raleigh, NC (Eric Aismeyer)
FWS/R4:TMcCartney:TM:02/23/01:919/856-4520 extension 32:\B-2972.esp

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
January 31, 2001
Mr. Tom McCartney
USFWS - Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
V??
DAVID MCCOY
SECRETARY
SUBJECT: Section 7 Biological Conclusion for the Federally Endangered Dwarf wedge
mussel, relating to Proposed Replacement of Bridge 9 22 Over Red Bud Creek,
Franklin County, TIP 4 B-2972.
In a memorandum dated January 16, 2001, you received the a list of the construction
protocol that resulted from a field meeting held on September 22, 2000 and a follow-up in house
meeting on December 14, 2000 as part of the Section 7 Consultation process. The purpose of
these meetings and resulting protocol is to minimize to the extent practicable any adverse effect
to the dwarf wedge mussel (Alasmidonta heterodon). If the protocol outlined in the January 16,
2001 memorandum is strictly adhered to, it can be concluded that construction of this project is
not likely to adversely impact the dwarf wedge mussel.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: Not Likely to Adversely Affect (Conditional)
If any of these commitments are not strictly adhered to, the project may adversely affect
the Dwarf wedge mussel, requiring that the project be shut down and Section 7 Consultation
reinitiated. If this occurs, construction of the project cannot resume until the Section 7
requirements have been resolved.
We are seeking your concurrence with this Biological Conclusion. Please note, the
Biological Conclusion of Not Likely to Adversely Affect the Tar Spinymussel rendered on
November 4, 1997, remains valid. If you have any questions or need additional information,
please contact Mr. Michael Wood at 919-733-1194.
Sincerely,
William D. Gilmore, P.E., Branch Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis
cc: Judy Johnson, WRC
Jean Manuele, USACE
Robin
Charles Bruton, PDEA
MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: [phone] LOCATION:
NC DEPARTMENT GP 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
"s
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201 DAVID MCCOY
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
January 16 , 2001
MEMORANDUM TO: Judith Johnson* NC Wildlife Resources Commission
John Alderman NC Wildlife Resources Commission
David Cox* NC Wildlife Resources Commission
John Hennessy* US Division of Water Quality
John Hammond* US Fish & Wildlife
Tom McCartney* US Fish & Wildlife
Dale Suiter* US Fish & Wildlife
Dan Hinton* Federal Highway Administration
Jake Riggsbee Federal Highway Administration
Jean Manuele* US Army Corps of Engineers
Linda Pearsall NC Natural Heritage Program
Ken Pace* NCDOT - Roadside Environmental Unit
Jeff Renn* NCDOT - Roadside Environmental Unit
Hearbert Locklear* NCDOT - Structure Design Unit
Walker Armistead* NCDOT - Structure. Design Unit
Thomas Payne* NCDOT - Structure Design Unit
Jerome Nix* NCDOT - Hydraulics Unit
Marshall Clawson* NCDOT - Hydraulics Unit
Chris. Kreider* NCDOT - Soils & Foundations
Ron Allen* NCDOT - Roadway Design Unit
David Bass* NCDOT - Roadway Design Unit
Tracy Parrott* NCDOT - Division 5 Construction
Chris Murray* NCDOT - Division 5 Environmental Officer
Ron Hancock* NCDOT - Area Bridge Construction
Ellis Powell NCDOT - Bridge Construction
Tim Savidge* Project Development & Environmental Analysis
Logan Williams* Project Development & Environmental Analysis
Michael Wood* Project Development & Environmental Analysis
* These people attended at least one of the meetings.
FROM: Robin C. Young
PDEA, Project Planning Engineer
SUBJECT: Section 7 Meetings for the dwarf wedge mussel
Project B-2972
Section 7 Meeting Commitments Page I of 3
B-2972 Franklin County
Section 7 consultation meeting for the dwarf wedge mussel was held in Franklin
County at the subject bridge site on September 22, 2000.
A follow-up meeting was held in the Board of Transportation Conference Room at
soortation Building on D .., D.._ .
The attendees agreed upon the following.
B-2972 Bridge No. 22 on NC 53 over Red Bud Creek (Let Date = April 17, 2001)
No Clearing or Grubbing from November 15 to April 1.
No in-stream construction from April 1 to June 15.
Weep holes will be configured so that the run-off does not fall into the stream and no wet
concrete will come in contact with the water.
The new structure will be a 3-span cored slab bridge.
Piles driven shall be encased. For all in-stream work, horseshoe turbidity. curtains will be
used for driving piles and removing the existing abutments. Removal of the abutments may
require cofferdams instead of turbidity curtains. Turbidity curtains shall not be draped across the
entire stream, only around the area of activity.
Under no circumstances will temporary fill material,. construction causeways, or
construction equipment be allowed into the river, defined as the normal flow channel to bank full
height. If a temporary work platform is needed for removal of existing structure, temporary piles
or similar devices may be driven into the river bottom to support the work platform. No separate
payment will be made for the temporary work platform as it is considered incidental to the
removal of the existing structure. Details of work platform shall be submitted to the resident
engineer for approval
. A survey of the area will be completed prior to let. A copy of the survey results shall be
sent to the US Fish & Wildlife Service, Wildlife Resource Commission, and the US Army Corps
of Engineers.
If there are fallen trees in the streambed, and if the trees are in the Right of Way of the
project, the trunks and limbs of the trees are to be sawed off and removed (not to be dragged out,
but lifted). The root system is to be left in place, as is.
High Quality Waters - Soil and Erosion Control Measures will be installed concurrently
with clearing and grubbing operations, and properly maintained throughout project construction.
This is an Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA).
The erosion control plans will be designated to High Quality Water (HQW) standards.
Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESA) will be defined on the plans, which consist of a
50-foot (15-meter) buffer zone on both sides of the stream.
The contractor may perform clearing operations, but not grubbing operations in the
Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESA), until immediately prior to beginning grading operations.
Once grading operations begin in Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESA), as specified on
the plans, work will progress in a continuous manner until complete.
Section 7 Meeting Commitments Page 2 of 3
B-2972 Franklin County
Seeding and mulching will be performed immediately following final grade establishment.
Stage seeding will be performed on cut and fill slopes as grading progresses.
T e prajec ??-z b- des?gned using a ' pecial Hardware Cloth" erosion control device,
which will be used were needed along the stream banks..
Rock workpads will be established on both banks if heavy equipment will be located
and/or used, to minimize risk of sediment entering the stream. Appropriate care shall be taken by
the contractor, when placing the pad.
Abutments will be removed. The footings of the abutments are on top of timber piles. The
timber piles will be cut off at the streambed.
The interior bent will be removed such that the minimal amount of debris will fall into the
stream. Most likely, this will require breaking it into sections and lifting it out one section.at a
time. The interior bent should not be dragged off in one piece because this will damage the
streambed.
Removal of the abutments should be done "in the dry". Most likely, the best time for this
is mid to late summer when the stream should be at a low flow condition. If there is any water at
the existing footing of the abutments, De-Watering must be used. If this is necessary, cofferdams
will be placed around the footings to hold water out of the excavation. Cofferdams may include
timber cribs, sheet piling, steel shells, or similar structures, as well as necessary bracing. Pumping
wells or well points will be used in conjunction with the cofferdams.
After removal of the abutments and footings, before the cofferdams are removed, the soil
will be stabilized. If needed, temporary seeding will be placed before putting down the Rip Rap
and Fabric.
Since there is a chance de-watering and cofferdams may be used, a Nationwide Permit # 33
must be obtained from the Army Corps of Engineers.
Written concurrence is required from John Hennessy of the North Carolina Division of
Water Quality (NCDWQ). The permit specialist, Mike Wood will send the request for this
concurrence.
Equipment will be maintained such that hydraulic fluids, oil, gasoline, or other chemicals
will not enter the stream. If chemicals are spilled on the site, they will be cleaned up immediately
and not allowed to filter down into the soil.
Stormwater runoff will not be channeled directly into the stream.
North Carolina Wildlife Resource Commission (NCWRC) and US Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS) will be notified in writing to attend the pre-construction meeting.
Section 7 Meeting Commitments Page 3 of 3
B-2972 Franklin County
?e rrA6?
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
JAMES B. HUNT JR.
GOVERNOR
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201
November 04, 1997
Memorandum To:
Attention:
From:
Subject:
Wayne Elliot, Unit Head
Bridge Unit
Bill Goodwin, P.E., Project Manager
Tim Savidge, Environmental Biologist
Environmental Unit
GARLAND B. GARRETT J R.
SECRETARY
Protected species surveys for proposed replacement of bridge no.
58 over Red Bud Creek on NC 58; Franklin County;
TIP No. B-2972.
Reference: Alderman, J. M., R. C. Wilson and C. McGrath. 1993.
Conservation of aquatic critical habitats in North Carolina. Proc.
Annu. Conf. Southeast. Assoc. Fish and Wildl. Agencies 47:348-
352.
The proposed action calls for the replacement of bridge No. 58 over Red Bud
Creek in the existing location, with minimal approach work. Two federally Endangered
freshwater mussel species, the dwarf-wedge mussel (Alasmidonta heterodon) and the Tar
spiny mussel (Elliptio steinstansana) are listed for Franklin County. In-stream surveys
for mussel fauna were conducted at the subject project on August 06, 1997 by NCDOT
biologists Tim Savidge, Teryn Smith, Mark Rectenwald and Chris Rivenbark. NCDOT
Transportation Technician Deborah Terrell also participated in the surveys.
Mussel survey methodology included visual (view bucket) and tactile methods by
wading in the stream at the bridge site and to a distance of 300 feet downstream. Water
depth was low and mussels were easily found. In 30 minutes of survey time, 591 elliptio
mussels (Elliptio spp.), 10 eastern floater (Pyganadon cataracta), 2 notched rainbow
(Villosa constricta), which is considered Significantly Rare (SR)* in North Carolina, and
1 paper pondshell (Utterbackia imbecilis) were found by the group. Mussel abundance
and diversity increased further downstream of the crossing. Areas further downstream
were surveyed by doing "spot checks" in areas of prime substrate. In addition to the
above mentioned species, the 2 triangle floater (Alasmidonta undulata) and 2 eastern
0
creekshell (Villosa delumbis) were also found. These species have North Carolina
status's of Threatened (T)* and SR respectively.
Biological Conclusion:
No Effect
Given the survey results, it is apparent that neither the dwarf-wedge mussel, nor
the Tar spinymussel occur in the project area. It should be noted that Red Bud Creek
flows into Sandy/Swift Creek approximately 6.8 km (4.2 mi) downstream of project
crossing. The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC) has identified
Swift Creek and its tributaries as one of 25 areas in North Carolina that have formally
been proposed as aquatic Critical Habitats (PCH). These habitats are considered essential
for the continued survival of endangered or threatened aquatic wildlife species. Certain
conservation procedures, such as high quality waters designation and protection, are then
established by the state regulatory agencies (Alderman et al. 1993). Presently the WRC is
not allowed to designate areas as Critical Habitat; however NCDOT uses the PCHs for
guidance in determining if a project will impact a federally listed aquatic species.
NCDOT implements HQW standards in the former PCHs that contain federally listed
species. Because this projects eventually drains into PCH for the Tar spinymussel
and the presence of a diverse mussel fauna in the project. area, including the state
protected triangle, floater, it is recommended that this project by design to HQW
standards.
North Carolina Status
* T (Threatened): Any native or once-native species of wild animal which is likely to
become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a
significant portion of its range, or one that is designated as a threatened species pursuant
to the Endangered Species Act." (Article 25 of Chapter 113 of the General Statutes;
1987).
* SR (Significantly Rare): "Any species which has not been listed by the NCWRC as an
Endangered, Threatened, or Special Concern species, but which exists in the state in
small numbers and has been determined by the NC Natural Heritage Program to need
monitoring.
Endangered, Threatened and Special Concern species have legal protection status in
North Carolina under the State Endangered Species Act administered and enforced by the
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission. However the level of protection given to
state listed species does not apply to NCDOT activities.
cc: V. Charles Bruton, Ph.D., Environmental Unit Head
Hal Bain, Environmental Supervisor
Filer Protected species issues
File: B-2972
I L t 3 L L', ?
t!1!!:'1!
,1! ' ' I :
III ?F I L 1
L'!li '1'1
iCi•:I;III!IL
II!1
1ItI91-

N
A
N
P
N
O
P
O
P P
N A
P
P
P
OD

! Z
O
.
D C
{{
il

'1
+{
1i-1: 111 M l
mo

1= ?..
9
p:E 01
x
o
0; ?o
Y
m

o q
r j
Trt - 7- - - - - - - - - - Z y
Nj m
L ?.
rez* r ar?rnv

I I
I ?
r
rn

:
- N
Z
1 I I ? D
N q 1
#D7-4II
I m
I ? p
? o

A C) M
rill
?I
p
?2

o I i `1 ° w°'
,

fi
i
I t: O w l
I
I I
N

?? 1' a
-' 1

U
IM
9 I
+

O .- . I
I
I
OW N

1

-.
T
T
: $

f I I

P
?I
I

+

? JIM-

A
I I
I I

I
O } f? ?I h

.rte i'
N X
F N I

I I I

I I•

A
4 t !
F T RV !D O
, O

5
y.
s1 ..
?-!?? -
Mi
MS
m
i X I I I
N X
.
J_ T_ 1
Itit
l
H
M
1 ?i? -fl f i 1 k= lk ? I

_ -,- 4 ._. . Ar
Ow
.
"H
o
t
+ Mi m3:
a
I I
I mZ
I I ?I

AIM
1 ] M

FLOW
til l 11 11
t
- I
M
0 1 = I I 1 , o
I I
]H UT : .:
_ m N
* 1 I
41 I I ?'

-
.. , I N ,O

M

M

I H11
11
ME

N

IN

o x I
,
I
._ _
I
I ? l2
E 1 r m
I I I I

- I i I I ?I D ?

I '
i m
N t t 1 I I +
O !? - HIM
.. :_ .?.:..
-
.:- -
-
-
I I
?I
I
o

JIM
S
HIMI
N
IM
t
!. StIt

T Sw

ill
-
_

1 a I
I

I

P
O

O
W

N

R

V

11111]"I

M

R

11-111

0

11IM-
:1111 t-M
1

41 u- -Iflow

W- 4 till -

111 lo w :
_
EI
+ - -
- -
A .. .-.
t . .. -. ...
t.. - - - -
16
011w
i'rl + -

:

:
li
t p

?
n
.
..
z

11111
1 It]- till
d
italfitIttItIM-111
HII
, 41141441 11 111
.
1111-ti
t _ K
cn
m

m
<

o
- -1

-
all -
H
a o m

? o
I
` o
Y
o I R$
1.1 a
m o A
:.t. 4.r .. - -
s
t

-
:

-

-

-

-

- -

-

m

o

-

?
o

ZD
y
y m
I B M 0 1 S
m?
T
i H l ?
a
m 6) z
l . Z r _ Z S

lat' 1:11 1 11 it - - -11

-..

.'

.

-1
e
°o
m

Op

?
Qn

Z z
I 1 - - - - O g o ?N yZr
z o O
o a
p
- Z ? ?,O m
io G1? n

> Z
N N N P P P P P -Di "' N
~ O
.
A P OD O N A P co
a