19970616 All Versions_Complete File_20021021

a w ?
q 7D?l6 Pico
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR r
October 11, 2002
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Field Office
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road, Suite 120
Raleigh, North Carolina 27615
ATTN: Ms. Jean Manuele
NCDOT Coordinator
FILE COPY
LYNDO TIPPETT
SECRETARY
Subject: Watauga County, US 421 new location from South Fork New River in Boone to
the Blue Ridge Parkway in Deep Gap. USACE Action ID No. 199707161, DWQ
project No. 970616, Federal Aid Project No. FR-86-1(6), State Project No.
8.1750601, TIP No. R-529BA, BB & BD.
The North Carolina Department of Transportation is requesting a modification to
Department of the Army Permit No. 199707161. Department of the Army (DOA) Permit No.
199707161 was issued on May 4, 1998 and authorized impact by fill or excavation to 1.32 acres
of wetland and 13,461 linear feet of stream channel. DOA Individual Permit No. 199707161
required channel relocations to be done utilizing natural channel design instead of placing the
stream in what is essentially a straight rip-rap lined ditch.
Since the original permit was issued and the project let to construction, the design of a
channel relocation for an unnamed tributary to Gap Creek has an ed. The stream channel in
is lust west
In the original design, the channel relocation was designed as a straight, rip-rap lined
channel. The NCDOT, in coordination with the USACE, the NCWRC, the NCDWQ, and other
agencies, revised the design in January of 1999 to comply with the permit requirement to
171
_a
incorporate natural channel design into all channel relocations. A design was agreed upon and
approved by the agencies. It was subsequently incorporated into the construction plans. Since Fri
construction began on the stream relocation, there have been numerous problems. To date, the C;
NCDOT and its contractors have not been able to build the channel relocation as designed and
permitted. The soil in the project area is extremely unstable and the slope too severe to allow for
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.NCDOT.ORG RALEIGH NC
RALEIGH NG 27699-1548
I
I

i I t Ali .`• .? _? `7 _?
.21
•?•?
W f L1.
? ? ? ;i

.I 11
,I
81 0'
?I ?I
V ?I G
0 0l o
41 j I
? I
gl
ti

CO)

CO) C
ca

`
" ? O i ? TUB ° O?
Q N ? ? o
/ ?
` GJ

C ? C
? O N
Q
O p ? -ac
Z'
? ?' p p

vi
C
O

.
?
l C _ I v Q ?? i

'•; - '?? I
'ZI
1 ,.
, .
Z: ct

a_ ? O ? V I
`1 \ 1 A
:
l
L1
_
.
L ti
C
Q
I
Q
Q)
41
C C

e

O g
G O r??l'
h
N
O
O
U
O
a ?-

.f SWt o
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
9t7Lqkl6 lz-rdo
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION . 11%
LYNDO TIPPETT
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
October 11, 2002
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Field Office
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road, Suite 120
Raleigh, North Carolina 27615 '
ATTN: Ms. Jean Manuele
NCDOT Coordinator
[it a ?Olvv M[?
4 y i
OCT2120?
Subject: Watauga County, US 421 new location from South Fork New River in Boone to
the Blue Ridge Parkway in Deep Gap. USACE Action ID No. 199707161, DWQ
project No. 970616, Federal Aid Project No. FR-86-1(6), State Project No.
8.1750601, TIP No. R-529BA, BB & BD.
The North Carolina Department of Transportation is requesting a modification to
Department of the Army Permit No. 199707161. Department of the Army (DOA) Permit No.
199707161 was issued on May 4, 1998 and authorized impact by fill or excavation to 1.32 acres
of wetland and 13,461 linear feet of stream channel. DOA Individual Permit No. 199707161
required channel relocations to be done utilizing natural channel design instead of placing the
stream in what is essentially a straight rip-rap lined ditch.
Since the original permit was issued and the project let to construction, the design of a
channel relocation for an unnamed tributary to Gap Creek has changed. The stream channel in
.73
question is just west of the US 421 and US 221 intersection. i
a
In the original design, the channel relocation was designed as a straight, rip-rap lined =_??
channel. The NCDOT, in coordination with the USACE, the NCWRC, the NCDWQ, and other
agencies, revised the design in January of 1999 to comply with the permit requirement to
incorporate natural channel design into all channel relocations. A design was agreed upon and
approved by the agencies. It was subsequently incorporated into the construction plans. Since
construction began on the stream relocation, there have been numerous problems. To date, the
NCDOT and its contractors have not been able to build the channel relocation as designed and
permitted. The soil in the project area is extremely unstable and the slope too severe to allow for
MAILING ADDRESS:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NG 27699-1548
TELEPHONE: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
WEBSITE: WWW.N000T.ORG
LOCATION:
TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
RALEIGH NC
,

Cz:

I i`I

°
o fl
C.j

V (Z
. ,
0 0, o,
QI j
n

r;
S
W ,
r

/
C i? pq

o
ai Lu
r Z
Q
J
Q-
CC)
O
G
0
N42:'
O O.
Co?
G
? O
G ?
O
V
\ 1 /

-
d O I
?/'
l'

O
?'
O O ?
Y O
? 4
Q

i U O
a,
O
C
is
7

la.

^
cq
- :.
L ?

`
C
Q
I
Q
Z
O
v
E D ?
. c
v o Q D??

• 1 \ J U .I ? ? ? •Os

, co .
Io °

c ? <
q.b
.
a•
o D

:. `
` N v,

h
\
a\?
0
0
Q
O

sssssssssssssss
..?rnr?rm.a
Q)
n
rn
I
4?
_ ' ,xneax?we%""' ,
-i
?m9
DO
NC® \
n
NpP? \\
o \ I
!A A \
mom
l
Ch
t
d ?
ryi
o ((D
yo
- f
N
o _ " CCv»Try
1?y.. 7C
1 N G
°m=
MATC

l4 *900
my
o -'
? A
m
N H
15+000
i
?
? I l
ryI ?
1
rn

i
l
\ c
o m
r
PL AS i C' 'O "m

ti o n
"' z m
O, AN
'4
. Y

H LINE A-A r
i?'i?

Q,
O
tr\3
C
m
IV
P
I 1
I m=
I 4?
n D
I am
I D
? O
I ti
C04S
I
I _
I m II
I m oll
0 o gl l `
I ?' II
I ? u
I I
d-?

?PL S T f7
?
1
11
1
?
I I
'1
1
I
?? I

I I I I

o y
o ?
1N i
mmD ?
u?
m
I ?
/
r\
II /?/I1 / II I` n 11
MATCH LINE B-B
15+100
N
D
C-)
2

s o
m m o
n ? ??
v

n
ny
C?
"
\
CAD

m
/

/
/

15+200
mo
00
I -b
?m
D
0
2
N /
?o
m ;m
N ?D
m
o DZ?
v z
n ;o
D
Nz
15+300

ffffUSE?NNMEffft?GNf Stff ff isf SSSffi
?s
IX?
7
Q) s
9
5
O
r
i
S-S 314111 H3.LvK
15+300
N ? 1
? I T m
r
f
I I II ?m ?,
K 'r
II 1
I 1 ? y m
N ~m m ° >? a r
zz ® ¢
?T..1 I I .?F ? mn
I ?•
n n .N r
m?
I, m
? I
fa FM 6a.
I G $ / „N w
I
r
II \ m 15+400
II ` I /
I
II ?? I r ?
I
k
II 1 i
II ?m ?
o , r
a
o m (lYu
o
II ? J
I,
.r.r, ?.......M....M.
t; i ? € m M E
p tl
151 ?f
E 4'•" .?
z T ?
Cr
42 P v
ja
i i;,
N

T

Z?m z
o
m
? °so
mo
o
r (n
c
o °
^
?
x sno w
o?^o
°
o jrr
D
D
O
n =
N
ti
ti ET
Oy0 A
x Z
y mKr
O
N
? N
OOs
m z Z
N y r
? p o m
m
m ?
? r mn
O _
n
D m
D m C C
p?m

o
r
o
? °
m
D
O m
z

m
.? N
o
O
TI

m

?t a
O

F) 3
N r
D
?
---I m
D N v

mo °
z
m ?:D
mCi'l
D
r + -
D Q m
ZO
o ?
1

M r -
m
m m O

Ut

-i m ?
R :
N I

W N co

Ul D

3 ?

?a 'm
-1 Z

r
D
Z
Z In
O -1
-1 n
N O
m z
mcn-
+
ro
D O
Z O
? t
_ r
m?
mm
1 <
I
N N
W U1
3
2 4
a
' o
0
1
n
D
r
Ln
O
D
--I
m
0
n
m
co C-
n
Z
m
z
3
.-0
O
r
m
r ?^
HEAD OF RIFFLE
A o
0
Im ?
w r
r m
I o
v
0
0
7AII OF RIFFLE

N j n

D il
r
Q

.A --I

X,

? O C)
D

I
r v
r
N
m ?
<
o O
?
"

) ? o
o? D
1 N m m
D ? 's
=
Ul
? + O
O
Q N \
O m n
o
r Q 3 i
m z
. I i

(/
m
m
?
r
D
8 5" B e8 5 ? i b 6 5 e l
a
e e. a

F `> e 9 R
z

> y
ZS ?

P G S n I"
M l
b c' : r G

i
-
>r
a
5
•
a_
a x v
n?0

A. r b b
i
X
S 5

1
"O
a

$ r

g F'

o

_

_ >• •

a

w P
p
f
r P

a !
'%
2
l

p
oyp
_
'w"
i a n
N O

g
p -
P
z r . .
n O
G N
b _
4
4 .
w
t
Y
.
.
z'
0
-1
O
N
m
or
nz
~ T
x]
O r
? N
e
v
o y
< m
aor
-moo
m (,
n°c mo
O C
N
N aA
r z ;
n z w z
-i
-? m y N
Z -Zino
r
O = N =
a > m
r
r
t^ tp v ?
i m o z
z ;
D t„
z m
zorz
n ?
pm
? Q
o m m
z
q? z
om r
c
c
z xt n
z 2
-{ z m
D
r
D
Z
L
m
e »
ti
3
s
- 3 a \ r
yA O
F?
n
Om
?o
3
3 ?
'm
=a \
?r f
0
0
A
m ? s
m
.O D C7 O
V ?4 A
r

• z
o r 3 p

-I pC o =F 3
' 40 m m o A
?O
D 3 ° 2

N

n
r
A

a
z
m
(n ?O m 2
O r
n
F- m O N
tai

til

O O O
f
mim
°nD
O
•
>?
e
r
N
o°Nm

'
.

a 3 • °v m >?H
z
t
?
t
l ? • y es
y
ma Q
o•\ T
ry F K N
r
' i O
GI n
N `
? 1 O
3 1. O
\ O

'. 3 -' D
z
r
o

Z
n
7
?m
I ' ?
D
O
D
?m
I '
0
/V 11
VT1
V
D
?Tt
N
W
/Dn
V )
z
D
r
-
m
Z
N
0
z
N
n
O
x
z
D
m
FFT?
3
3
°
_ C) m m o c--) m D
N U) N O O O - O
-J cn O to 1n o) -4
-
LD 00 to 6) Q) - 0 L"
it
N c
,n N O p p - O
•
to O U) cn
0 N
?p oo LD 0)
-
,-j U) N o o 0 - O
* 4 CJ1 O U) Is m 0 :-4
cD m c0 m Q) - 0

m
D
n
2

S

CD

W

I

S

l

?

W

N

- Z7
m
n
C7
r
O

U)
Ul
lJl 7
(A ±
Ln
O

O
N 6) Z
cn a)

r r
?
rL

< < <

r
r o
c
• r
m

n ?
C A
r ?
m Z
?I -Q / O
0, °
I
N o
IG °v o
z 1
yk z m
- O U
ID 1 ? ?
0, ?
`? I 1
N o O
03 '
D A
C) o ?
? -- --0t -- --- ? I-? V1 00
/
T
/NKJ Fr? 1
I
?I O \ 0 ^
l J
O W 0 O
O
O
\ O o -n = CD
0 - O O I
0 n
0
D \ n O
0 \ m
1 -n
O N I 0
01 W

m
"'
o c
O

::a OD

O W

O
/
-n / r
n c i
co ; wm O
O wm
mn
v n Dx
" 0Q Dx

o
?n \ A

Z7?
?m
m<
1=n
N? <

rn
?Q rm rm
-13 ?10
m m

G

o

m
°
v = oW =
-I o
m
A N ::a
m D m D
m o
z
0 z
0 0 o
m x 70
-Im 70
x
?m
n u ii
m O
?c O
?c
nL/) -n CD mo v? v;o
rn ?? m? no Da
<z
m
m
o v
?o ?
c
m
'n x
F -;u
<
°
?m
c
?
m ?x -+A
n m
?o "D
C) I

Q .;V
D /?,0(2)0 I
r

D
m O O
o o
o o n

/?
v ,

? ITI
n
J o
O D K
O
D
o
CMD
F-
O z
O ZO D
m

=
CD o
Dz
z
?l z
m D
r ---I
C
I>
I>
r
11?
n
?
111 o
lll? -O
n
ll? S O
D TI
co D
0 Din
U) -8 CK:ZO D o -t
FT] 0 x C)
C) -1 O m ITt m T
F- ? o ?? r v)
0 C) o?,n ??v)
-I mmm
MOT
DoD
z A m
17- m
V) Z
z Z
0 0
m m

-p=rD mC

OZO -p x
ZZ?
W
m-
pry
z M
-1 r
o
o
mc
n Dzr<*,
W
_
o?z
z ? r
-

--
---
---
-
---------
--
--
----- m1
)o
I

-I ^ r A S? V1NG
a n c p
xtnr n n W

D ?
z?°? -?D
D, ov)
?pm nD?
?
D I
1

-W

•
orD
?
n
m
r -Im
9
p
N rV7 N

I m? mm
O onm
0°? ?o
00 O m
r D
N O ? O7
n D D
_ Z
z
V) r V)
?
cn z
m
o c
o rn _ N
zAO ?A
D
O y G ? G
?Zm 0?7
-O O
C
Z D
? -
(D
?D
o?0? o
mn_ ?o

p D_

A
N
N
M 10
S ?
9
JPEG image 1000011 pixels
Subject: FW: Trib of Gap creek
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2002 16:01:07 -0400
From: "James R. Linville" <[e-mail]>
Organization: NCWRC
To: "'David Cox"' <[e-mail]>,
"'Steve Lund"' <[e-mail]>,
"'Jean.B.Manuele"' <[e-mail]>,
"'Matt Gantt"' <[e-mail]>, "'Steve Mauney"' <[e-mail]>
CC: "'Becky Fox"' <[e-mail]>,
"'Franklin T. McBride"' <[e-mail]>,
"'Joe Mickey"' <joemickey @ surry.net>, "'John Dorney"' <john.dorney @ ncmail.net>,
"'Mark Cantrell"' <[e-mail]>,
"'Jennifer Frye"' <[e-mail]>,
"'Marella Buncick, USFWS"' <[e-mail]>,
"'Kathy Matthews EPA"' <[e-mail]>,
"'Deaton, Shannon L."' <[e-mail]>,
"'Kevin Hining"' <[e-mail]>, "'Kin Hodges"' <[e-mail]>
I have noticed that this situation has been going on for a long time as
well. It appears that innumerable tons of sediment continually surge into
this "channel", then get picked up and moved again during the next rain
event.
Although not the best quality, these pictures are appalling. If we can't
get a handle on stabilizing this stream channel or controlling the sediment
load, we should look into providing-stormwater management ponds or wetlands
up the hillside. We may need to do that anyway as this material appears to
be very unstable and not likely to settle down of its own accord without a
major effort. Trout present downstream in Gap Creek.
Please take a look at photos and read Kevin's observations about this and
another site near the Blue Ridge Parkway. [Maybe we should get Kevin a
handful of 500 ml sampling bottles to carry with him on his weekend trips.]
Have a nice weekend all..
James Ronald Linville
NCWRC Regional Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]
We shall never achieve harmony with
achieve absolute justice or liberty
aspirations, the important thing is
Leopold
the land, any more than we shall
for people. In these higher
not to achieve, but to strive. Aldo
-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin Hining [SMTP:[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 2:33 PM
To: 'Ron Linville'
Cc: 'Staci L Scott'; 'Hodges Kin'
Subject: Trib of Gap creek
Ron,
1 of 4 6/10/2002 10:18 AM
JPEG image 1000011 pixels
The Wal-Mart in Elkin couldn't put the pictures we took of the stream in
Deep Gap on a disc, so we scanned them. All we had was a disposable camera
we bought from a gas station there at the site, so the pictures aren't
great and really do not give it justice. It was pretty nasty.
At the DOT meeting that I attended with you the other week I think a lot of
folks felt that the sediment traps at the mouth of the stream would hold
back sediment from entering Gap Creek. These pictures should prove that
notion false and show the impact a rain event has on the sediment traps.
All the more reason for them to work on the site until they get it fixed.
I can't even begin to guess how much sand and silt the storm we witnessed
washed into Gap Creek.
We haven't sent these out to anyone. I figured you would know who to send
these out to, so we were hoping you could take it from here. Please CC me
or Staci any comments that you send to others on it. Maybe this will help
speed up efforts to get the site fixed.
On another note, we drove up Stony Fork (Mt. Zion Rd) the night of the
storm and the entire length of the stream was pink to red mud. We couldn't
see where or how the sediment was entering the stream along Stony Fork
Road. When we got on 421 near the BRP bridge that's under construction we
could see a river of mud running off of the area around the bridge that
they are working on. I'm guessing that this was the cause for the muddy
water in Stony Fork, as the quad maps (Maple Springs) show that the upper
watershed of Stony Fork begins right beneath the BRP bridge. It rained
pretty hard, but it's hard for me to believe that they are properly
handling the run-off from the construction area. On both sides of the BRP
bridge (towards Deep Gap and towards Wilkesboro) there was a river of mud
running down 421. Perhaps we can get someone to look into it also.
Thanks and have a great weekend.
Kevin Hining
District 7 Assistant Fisheries Biologist
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
PO Box 322
Boomer, NC 28606
[phone]
2 of 4 6/10/2002 10:18 AM
0
r m
Nmn ???
>o
IV
i
1
o \
_A A
9?<
-?z
N
1
I
1
1 ?.
x
s ?
2-4
\ p
?aLO
1 0 ??
mN
N \'
MATCH LINE A-A

14+900
°m o
O
O ~
n ?
o m

15+000
CXR
N
I
m \
?m
? ns
m ? vm+

sssssssessss
w?
C)
0
N
3
r
m

I I
I n
I mi
4 wZ
I I ?n©
I ? C4S _
i
I _
I m it
m olI
I m" gll
I ??? II
I N? II
I I u
I
I I
I
II
V-V aisl'I HD.LVW
v'm'n
I o..
i
I \?
I ?
I /
I / '0/
--kV.
m
1 I
_ T
5eP- Si I I?
11 I I ?
_ 11 I Im •'?
II II (?
II II ??
11 I
11
II I
II_ I
° m
I I / )'
11 s'
1 ?
JJ
NN`N
m
I )
r r\

15+100
D
?m
? 9 A
?u
m /
/
15+200
mj
UO"
o?
,n m
?m
a
c')
N
/
/
/
?o
W ;m
z
o m?®
n ?
,„ o 0
m?
N Z
15+300
MATCH LINE B-B
tss TliEisss Gr+ssssssasststssis
I 7
n
t
3
d 3 € r
y v
5
I
r
F
S-S 2XII H3.Lvw 15+300.
IN
? o r
I a
I I ?? vm ? s
f
r?4 I I f?l
O ?
?1 m f
? /V m ? m w m=
II D
I / C') f
ell \ II B / ? w
m 15+400 s
? I
II ? I /
I
I ?
II ? I ,k
o
Wm
I
Selo
0 v
II / v
--- - ---- - --- - - ------ - -
c=
? L:r in
`? rn
S ? <
7b rh :4
u
N
D
--I
U)
mO
z
m
?Ul
+
D p
zo
V) o
= I
M r-
mx
-+ m
# •I
N
W N
Ln
3
x
71
N) IV
W Ul
3
?rl
OF

A
mN-a
m Z
O
? °Sp
?" o
Opr N Q'
r O
m
O
sZo W HEAD OF RIFFLE

0
C7 oTr ?

~?Y y
p n A

? mrz n
m c' ?
o
i
mss - A
- o
N
C O w
OOD r m y

y
P

D m

p mCN
c
ov?iM

TAIL OF

RIFFLE

o
r
°
? °
A
a
N

Cl

? Z

N
?
-
J•
A
C
m ? o z
O N
TI
r BEGINNING OF P OOL
m

C

v

0 z
0
-1
MIDPOINT OF BEND
0

Q >7
p N
O
D
m
1

? a
N
3 END OF POOL
7
D ? m
cr) 6
C/1 ? rv r m

HEAD OF RIFFL E

? m

m
or
m

m
? O
Z -;
l oA n
?r
xD
W
D .A ? N
L
M
Z L
N O
D

?
m I
M
r ti
r
N T
r- m
D
D C o O
?7
Z Z I ? ?

p 3

<
=D
-? 1
?
n m
fTl N `"
?
D -1
'

Z Lnl r

In D
#
b s
O -f
M n
o
W u, O

O
Fn
? +
r
6
0
r Z
O
N
m O fTl (Cl

r- n
v
3 0 ?,
D O
Z O ;0 3 n o
7 - ?\ o
V) I
r O
° C / _
%
2 7: \ , n
nr
--j <

I
CO
D
0
- -
c 4 ?
Y ti
y
= a
N e
' o
Z
z
ill
O 3
M
O
M
8 5 6 "e8 5 5 l

e 3

? 6 5 `0 o"e 6v e;s en e
H 0 ua
im c <

? i g ? es ?? A ?
;
yy
yy ?

?
E
p 'M 1!

5^ P ? ? tAtl A
y r t
? ? 0
c p A P. ff
++ FAQ

. c g ti

b - fl
4 P
Y
G Y . ?? ?Y
° N :"
? a. . C
Y n
A P°
S' U.
.. p
o N
-1 < fn
n p
m
nc°mo
O -? D C
r z ?
A
n z °a z
~ m y N
a Z z o
r
imocl
z ? m
m C y
?m
o ? a
? m <
A m
Anz
m
pmoc
z A z
m
o=?
z m
L
n
A

m
A ?
•O a ? G
V
z
0
y

?

?y
ri
• . )?C
O"
n
7-1
-T S
W
M1?ay
r n ?
P • 44 ?^ m

`?
D
r
3 C
N

~ - - - M
C)

z
? N ?O m Oz
L m o
m

O
•
o 0
Imo
m2p
z
?-
1.x.1 ? r ONm
3 • o m
o ?yN
•
N
n n?N
Z?m
m?
N
?-y
I N ? K O
;7 2
a
T
3 -'

v
i a
z
z
? In
T ?
m
IT
I ?
n
n
ow
3
m? V
I
D
C
JI
/V
D
FT?
Q
I ' ?
(Tl
G?
r /11
VTR
V
D
O
W
/Dn
V )
0
2 c m T- -
co
?
0 - 0
? cn O to In 0 a
-
LO LO m a) 0 -
N ?n N O p p - O
v Ln O Ln (.n O) 00 1 N
,O m tD m cn -
N N O O O - O
-4 Zn O Ln M n 0

LO
CO
t0
m
a
- L,
m
M
D
n
2
to
s

i
0
z
N
n
A
A
G
D
m
3

)

l

A

W

N

- A
m
n
n
2
F-
0

Ln
U1 -
U1 n
D
+
w ±
m +
O
N
?
1 T)
? z
r S rL

< < <

r r
?
r o
c
r
M
A
n A
n
r ?
?I W4 F / O
O
TT / Z o• o
D N / o.°03 N
I G M ° ?I
Z ? m•
- O U
In ?
r - ? m O
2 •? I 0
?- , A
v
i??K ? ? 2:1 I A
-f - n
'+'
O
n
n ,

Ur) -- -----

0
ff ------
--
,
m O
C? 0 0
W
o
0 0

D O
O n
-T,
c
I \ 0 I
?
0 \ n
\ M
O N?
\ n

1 f
? n
om

D N ?
C c !
mn ; oo m
nx
o n
O nn
? D
A A T <
- m r D
o rm
zc
mA m
?
f

Am
nc7 ?
=0
0W
-
v ? n
or
0 0 0 0
m
no -nw -Do
C 0 O? -py
rn AA m?
<z
?o oCC) m cm
-i-n x r A
<
A C-4 AO
m r2 -+A
D M
A A
x
A2
T= K:
o
V) C
> ?N
z o
m A A
?o
A C
A A
Am
no
0
O7 m
nx
n n
\ D
m <
r D
- r -a
m r
= cn ?
N C
A ?
>r AVM
• z o
m AA
?o
A C
-v ?
Am
D
0
0
Vm '
I'I
C7
D
D
z
0 z
0
M
M m
W n
nnT?? C?n
O
?=rD
ADOZ7 M e
n-nm
ozo o ?mx
z A p n

?moW _
zm
O?"Iz Azr
-4
--I
D O
--1 V1
Cpz0 D O
nn
?n
r D 2 ?
-i CD V1 VI
m m
n cp nnW
SNrA
zi7m?
?
ovni
• m ,
n n
?
M
r-D O " rN
ODD ?? V7
-1 mm
m
n
n
?
So? -n
n
D ?l
D
?mr m im
O
Nr VI N
m-i
o< xmm
x
n m =i 4
om
2 0 '' m z 0
z P
i
=
A O
A n , W

n D D
Z
Z
?rz --i cn
-< Vz
0M c
>
C>m a: V
Z AO -I A
-r ?A M
X 2
O> ID ? O

?C
K z o
m
zn? o °
o
n a
c

D
70 c
n o
n . O
r z n W
A -+
on
Nz
n m0 II
0° I
-n

r
?
-n
v

0

m
\
1
O O
om o
-n ?u
D
c A 103 D ITI
co Co-->
A
_ m
A O
O
C-)
n 0 v K:
C

V
? O O

--
D

z
--A

O
r-

z
>
r
O
z
~
-1
0 D
° m A
=
w o
w
0 1 DZ
n
- ------? U-) O O
ffI 0 \
C7 0 -
0
Q r C0 - 00

m O
? uj i 00

D 0 rn
O O

1 0
O
n
2 O
D
zz
m D
r -i
C
A
D
F-
m
4

Ys?_ 1I l
IISI

From: Self <NROAR04/N1EW331>
To: DAVID ROBINSON <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: US 421 Projects
Send reply to: [e-mail]
Date sent: Mon, 14 Sep 1998 16:01:47 +0500
Don't remember this exact project location. Can you tell me
which county and describe section? Difficult for me to say without
understanding issues and being properly oriented. Classification of
waters involved will dictate comments to a big degree. It would be
best to sit down and look at plans or go to field for a visit to see
what options we can come up with that satisfy everyone and still
protect water quality. May be able to plug in some due dates in the
401 conditions that might help. Sort of like we did with stormwater
in Watauga. To be honest, I do so many different things with the DWQ
that it is hard to know what you guys are referring to with your
project numbers so please forgive my being at some loss. Anyway, it
may help to meet and discuss the issues. I will be out of office
from 18 Sept - 27 Sept. If it is that pressing, is it possible to meet
between now and Thursday (preferably up here?) Tuesday is filled up
already and I don't have any evening hours I can spare. Or if I have
documents here already, I'll try to find them and we can discuss over
phone. Regional offices do not always receive all materials that
Central office receives. We don't have enough storage as it is now.
Also, I'm told that COE will only allow WRP for NWPs but willing to
try to do what makes sense as long as we do some things in the
watershed (filtration, habitat, stormwater) where the impacts occur to
offset local losses.
Best bet is to call me around 0815 Tuesday morning to discuss
opportunities. Thanks for the e-mail. Sometimes, I don't think I
make Alice's life easier but I do think we are all trying to do things
better for the long term.
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1998 14:42:12 -0400
From: DAVID ROBINSON <[e-mail]> To:
RON [e-mail] Cc:
[e-mail] Subject: US 421 Projects
Ron:
Just wanted to thank you for working so well with Alice
Gordon on her projects.
As you know, Lindsey Riddick has an imminent US 421 project
(R-2239) and has been holding off calling you about the 401
until he got resolution on the mitigation proposal
(Shepherd's Tree site.) Resolution is near at hand, but not
near enough for us to make a November letting.
So, since we'll probably miss a November 1998 let date for
R-2239B and move it to December, I was wondering if you
would be inclined to recommend issuance of the 401 based
upon us paying into WRP. I realise that this won't satisfy
the Corps' need for mitigation, but at least the 401 would
be issued, and it would only be the Corps that still needs
to issue a permit. I don't want you individually or DWQ
collectively to be singled out as delaying this project
(when you clearly aren't doing so).
James Ronald (Ron) Linville -- 1 -- Tue, 15 Sep 1998 08:43:21
I wanted to write this to you in the new DENR/DOT spirit of
cooperation. Lindsey had to go to class this afternoon, and
was wanting to ask you the very same question, but ran out
of time. When he returns, he'll read his copy of this, and
probably want to follow up on the idea.
Thanks. David
James Ronald (Ron) Linville -- 2 -- Tue, 15 Sep 1998 08:43:21
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
10•
10 0-44
NCDENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
October 13, 1998
Mr. Bill Gilmore, P.E.
Manager, Planning and Environmental Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
PO Box 25201
Raleigh NC 27611-2501
Dear Mr. Gilmore:
0 CT 19 1998
M ?
a Office
Re: Certification Pursuant to Section 401 of the Federal Clean Water Act,
US 421 from South Fork New River to the Blue Ridge Parkway
WQC Project # 970875; COE Action ID. No. 199707161; T.I.P. Nos. R-0529BABBBD
Watauga County
Reference is made to your correspondence of June 19, 1998, in which you submitted a
stormwater enhancement plan in compliance with Condition No. 7 of the 401 Water Quality
Certification issued April 20, 1998. Thank you for providing these details, and for implementing
them throughout construction. For your records, please note that NCDOT is now in compliance
with this Condition No. 7.
If we can be of further assistance, do not hesitate to contact us.
980875.1tr
cc: Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Mr. John Dorney, DWQ
Corps of Engineers Asheville Field Office
Central Files
Winston-Salem DWQ Regional Office
Mr. John Parker, DCM
Division of Water Quality • Environmental Sciences Branch
Enviro. Sciences Branch, 4401 Reedy Creek Rd., Raleigh, NC 27607 Telephone [phone] FAX # [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer • 50% recycled/10% post consumer paper
Sincerely.
N01iVHVd3S,kSd3 d03 N01iVH0JH3d ONOId HiHOd (INV NOV9 4103
Date sent: Mon, 14 Sep 1998 14:42:12 -0400
From: DAVID ROBINSON <[e-mail]>
To: RON_LINVILLEQwsro.enr.state.nc.us
Copies to: [e-mail]
Subject: US 421 Projects
Ron:
Just wanted to thank you for working so well with Alice
Gordon on her projects.
As you know, Lindsey Riddick has an imminent US 421 project
(R-2239) and has been holding off calling you about the 401
until he got resolution on the mitigation proposal
(Shepherd's Tree site.) Resolution is near at hand, but not
near enough for us to make a November letting.
So, since we'll probably miss a November 1998 let date for
R-2239B and move it to December, I was wondering if you
would be inclined to recommend issuance of the 401 based
upon us paying into WRP. I realise that this won't satisfy
the Corps' need for mitigation, but at least the 401 would
be issued, and it would only be the Corps that still needs
to issue a permit. I don't want you individually or DWQ
collectively to be singled out as delaying this project
(when you clearly aren't doing so).
I wanted to write this to you in the new DENR/DOT spirit of
cooperation. Lindsey had to go to class this afternoon, and
was wanting to ask you the very same question, but ran out
of time. When he returns, he'll read his copy of this, and
probably want to follow up on the idea.
Thanks. David

James Ronald (Ron) Linville -- 1 Tue, 15 Sep 1998 08:25:56
pied ssoulsn8 Aese? AJOAy
To: John Dorney, Cynddi Bell
From: r Ron Linville
Subject: Watauga Section 421 Stormwater
Considerations for Approval
Date: 980909
After meeting with Marshall Clawson with NCDOT today, the
following comments are provided for your consideration in approving
401 Certification Condition Number 7, stormwater and on-site
enhancement for WQC project #970616. The WSRO generally concurs
with the proposals; however, specific site details were not
available.
The NCDOT should provide to the Region and the Central Office
sets of half-size drawings which show construction details for the
measures prescribed for sites where stormwater measures will be
utilized. These should include stream relocations and
modifications for Laxon and Pine Run streams. All revegetation and
reforestation should be indicated. This will provide a basis for
DWQ follow up inspections.
Where ditches are converted to grassed swells, the bottom
areas should include natural vegetation as well as stone where
feasible. In areas where riprap is used for ditching, plantings
within the stone coverage or allowing for revegetati.on to occur
naturally should also be considered in mowing and maintenance,
guidelines and schedules.
The conversion of A-basins to wet detention ponds or,
preferably, constructed wetlands should be maximized where suitable
surface hydrology occurs. Assurances of adequate volume storage
and recharge water is necessary for pollutant removal success.
Where conversion to wetlands is not practicable, tree plantings may
be an option for water detention, thermal considerations and
habitat as well as trash and pollutant removal.
Facilities need to be installed at the top of stormwater
measures which will collect trash and litter. These areas will
need to be periodically maintained so NCDOT should provide a
generic schedule for the cleaning and removal of debris.
At all points where water is released from stormwater
measures, sheet flow and natural vegetation should be encouraged
whenever practicable for both water quality and habitat
restoration.
For your consideration, DWQ and DOT should generate a generic
guidance document similar to the Colorado DOT's_ for future DOT
stormwater management practices. These practices should be
included and referenced in future 401 Certifications for highway
projects.
cc: Central files
WSRO a:\strmwtr.DOT
Z/7 1

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TP ANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. P.O. BOX 25201. RALEIGH. N.C. 27611-5201 E. NORRIS TOLSON
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
June 19, 1998
Mr. John Dorney
Division of Water Quality
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
Dear Mr. Dorney:
Re: US 421, Watauga County, TIP No. R-529 BA/BB/BD; New Location from South
Fork New River to Blue Ridge Parkway; DWQ Project No. 97-0616, US Army
Corps of Engineers Action ID No. 199707161.
Reference is made to.Condition 07 of the 401 certification issued for this project. This
condition resulted from a March 25, 1998 meeting between representatives of the
NCDOT and DWQ. The NCDOT has reviewed the roadway plans for the subject project
and incorporated additional measures to reduce impacts to jurisdictional surface waters
associated with roadway drainage and storm water runoff. Additionally, the relocation of
a tributary to Pine Run Creek has been revised to incorporate riffles and pools. A
summary of these modifications is included as Appendix 1. Please note that the revisions
are referenced to the location on the roadway plans and do not necessarily correlate with
areas shown in the permit drawings. Therefore, the NCDOT will be happy to review the
roadway plans with your staff at your request.
If you have any questions or need any additional information, please contact Mr. Lindsey
Riddick at [phone] extension 315.
Sincerel ,
r
t?rt?
David C. Robinson, Ph.D., P. E.
Assistant Manager-Environmental Services
Planning and Environmental Branch
DCR/plr
cc: Mr. Archie Hankins, P. E., State Hydraulics Engineer

Appendix 1.
PROJECT R-529 BAs BB
Additional management measures that will be incorporated into plans at designated locations.
• Side ditches connecting to major streams have been enlarged adjacent to channel to
provide a detention/storage area at nine sites.
The sites are located as follows:
Sta. 4+025 RT to Sta. 4+080 RT
Sta. 6+980 RT to Sta. 6+997 RT
Sta. 8+880 RT to Sta. 8+910 RT
Sta. 9+615 RT to Sta. 9+650 RT
Sta. 10+020 LT to Sta. 10+043 LT
Sta. 12+550 LT to Sta. 10+585 LT
Sta. 12+890 LT to Sta. 12+930 LT
Sta. 14+100 RT to Sta. 14+137 RT
Sta. 15+480 LT to Sta. 15+500 LT
• Shoulders drain outlets have been relocated maximum distance from outlet crossing
streams to allow maximum filtration and detention of flow inside ditches at nine sites.
The sites are located at: Sta. 7+000 LT, Sta. 7+020 RT, Sta. 8+870 RT,
Sta. 8+920 LT, Sta. 11+130 RT, Sta. 11+220 RT, Sta. 11+290 LT,
Sta. 12+600 LT and Sta. 14+110 RT
• Roadside Environmental will include woody vegetation in stream side revegetation
plans.
• A - basin that are contained in right of way or permanent easement will be retained as
long term detention and possible wetland areas.
The sites are located at : Sta. 4+880 LT, Sta. 5+060 LT, Sta. 5+140 LT,
Sta. 5+240 LT, Sta. 8+280 RT. and Sta. 8+910 RT
• Laxon Creek channel modification conforms to.geomorphic stability and maximum
in-channel habitat enhancement.
• Pine Run tributary relocation has been revised to incorporate riffles and pools.
This location is from Station 6+980 LT to Station 7+360 LT
Zt
Jv-

w ? fi 4,j 7
7?
-S` <

IV,

State of North Carolina {
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality ??r?
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor •ttii?j'
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Proston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director V
Division of Water Quality
Environmental Sciences Branch
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, N.C. 27907
FAX:[phone]
Date
I FAX TO: led v^ l FAX NUMBER:
FROM: C ((
PHONE:
NQ_ OF PAGES INCLUDING THIS SHEET: f-?- I
Per our I v54
Environmental Sciences Branch 4401 Reedy Greek Road • ? Raleigh, North Carollna 27607
'Telephone [phone] FAX # [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Ankmadve Acton Employer so% MN'We010% post donsurr er paper
V0/10'd 62:2T 86, bT I nr 6S66-SU-6T6: XP3 IOSAM3 Ill Ma A
NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND
NATURAL RESOURCES
1:3 ENR
FAX TRANSMITTAL
Water Quality Section
Winston-Salem Regional Office
585 Waughtown Street
Winston-Salem, I.C. 27107
Phone: [phone]
-7--.
TO: U
FAX NUTNIBER- 3,3
FROM: ?::7* =
DATE: p
Fax: [phone]

Number of pages (including cover page):
COMMENTS:

M • ? ,s
_.ee
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P-E., Director
hU David Robinson
NC DOT
PQ Box 25201
Raleigh NC 27611-5201
D= Robinson,:
April 20.1998
Re: Certification Pursuant to Section 401 of the Federal Clean Water Act,
Ftoposed US 421 relocation from west of South Fork of the New River to east of the Blue
Midge Parkway-
WQC Project # 970616 COE #199707161, TIP R-529 BA, 11B, BD
Watauga County
Attached hereto is a copy of Certification No. 3185 issued to the N. C, Department of
TraQSportati.on dated April 20, 1998.
If we can be of further assistance, do not hesitate to contact us.
Atrac mcnts
970616-wqc
A&4
NC left E
NR
NORTH CARoumA DEPARTMENT OF
Ewwor4mzw AND NAnjRAL. Rf,sauRc;&s
{
J.F.
Flon
cc: Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Corps of Engineers Asheville Field Office
Winston-Salem DWQ Regional orace
W John Domey
Mr. John Parker. Division of Coastal Managcmcnt
Central Files
Frank McBride
Goleen Sullins
M. Judy Moretz
RM Ferrell; WRP
DiAWon of Water Duality - Environmental Sciences Branch
Ehvira Sciences Branch, 4401 Reedy Creek Ind., Raleigh, NC 27607 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportun4 Affirmative Action Employer • 50% raWdedfI0% post consumer paper
VO/ZO'd K:51 86, bT iof 6S66-iU-6T6:x'2J IOSON3 O1 ORI ON
NORTH CAROLINA 401 WATER QtIALITY CERTIFICATION
_J
THIS CERTIFICATION is issued in conformity with the requirements of Section 441
Public Laws 92-500 and 95-217 of the United States and subject to the North Carolina Division
of Water Quality (DWQ) Regulations in 15 NCAC 2H, Section .4500 to the NC DOT resulting
in 1.32 a Of wetland and 13,461 linear feet or. s impact in Watauga County pursuant to a
revi d application dated the 9?day of QCto?ber 1997 to relocate US 421 from east of the South
fork of the New River to west of the Blue Ridgo Parkway.
N?
The application provides adequate assurance that the discharge of fill material into the
waters of Rocky Branch, line Run Creek, Thaxon Creek, Laxon Creek, ('rap Creek and the South
iFOtk of the New River in conjunction with the proposed development will not result in a
violation of applicable Water Quality Standards and discharge guidelines. 'Iherefore, the State of
North Carolina codifies that this activity will not violate the applicable portions of Sections 301,
302, 303, 306, 307 of PL 92-500 and PL 95-217 if conducted in accordance with the application
and conditions hereinafter set forth.
This approval is only valid for the propose and design that you submitted in your
application, as described in the Public Notice. If you change your project, you must notify us
and send us a new application for a new cert;ncation. if the property is sold, the new owner must
be given a copy of the Certification and approval letter and is thereby responsible for complying
with all conditions. If addition.9 wetland fills for this project (now or in the future) are
proposed, additional compensatory mitigation will be required as described in 15A NCAC 211
.0506 (h) (6) and (7). For this approval to be valid, you must follow the conditions listed below-
In audition, you should get any other federal, state or local permits before you go ahead with
your project including (but not limited to) Sediment and Erosion control, Coastal Stormwater,
Mon-discharge and Water Supply watershed regulations.
Condition(s) of Certification:
1. Appropriate sediment and erosion control practices which equal or exceed those outlined
in the most recent version of the "North Carotins Sediment and Erosion Control Planning
and Design Manual" or the "North Carolina Surface Mining Manual" (available from the
Division of Land Resources in the DEIINR Regional or Central Offices) shall be utilized
to prevent exceedances of the appropriate turbidity water quality standard (50 NTUs in
all fresh water streams and rivers not designated as trout waters; 2,5 NTUs in all lakes
and ieservoirs, and all saltwater classes: and 10 NTUs in trout waters).
2. All sediment and erosion control measures placed in wetlands or waters shall be removed
and the natural grade restored after the Division of Land Resources has released the
project; - -
3, Should waste or borrow sites be located in wetlands, compensatory mitigation is
mired since it is a direct impact from road construction activities;
4. All of the wetland mitigation and a portion (to be determined in mitigation
plan) of the stream mitigation shall be done at the Sparta Bog mitigation site as
discussed in the March 27, 1998 memo (feasibility study) from DOT entitled "Wetland
and Stream Mitigation Strategy for US 421". The NC Wetland Restoration Program
b0/170 'd OV:2T 86. bI Ind: 6S66-i22--6t6: xPd IOSAN3 OM OM ON
, t
shall be involved in the design of this mitigation site. DWQ ,shall be copied on the final
mitigation plan and annual reports for five years.
6. Stream mitigation shall be done in accordance with the contract with the NC
Wildlife Resources Commission. Total direct perennial stream impacts will include
13,461 linear feet for this projecL Of this 13,461 feet. 6,054 feet shall be relocates
within the project right-of-way, while the remaining 7,407 feet will be permanently lost
due to piping, culverting or fill. the 7,407 feet of permanentunpact shell be mitigated
at a 1:1 ratio. Additional written approval required fix= DWQ for these nc& on
plans. DWO shall be involved in the selection of stream mitigation sites. Interim
reports shall be sent to DWQ by October 621998 and April 6,1999 to describe progress
main locat[ng_suitable and available stream mitigation sttes. Conservation easements
or fee simple land ?utchase shall be dome by October 6,1999 to ensure a 1:1
replacement for impacted streams (74071incar fiat). DWQ shall be sent a
depicting the stream mitigation sites by April 6, 1999. DOT and WRC shall develop a
stream mitigation monitoring protocol and su mit tt to DWQ for written approval. This z
protocol shall include monitoring of macrobenthos and streambank stability for five
Years.
7. DOT shall submit a stormwater and on=site stream enhancement plan to DWQ
by June 6, 1998 for DWQ's written approval. This plan shall maximize stvrmwater
treatment and on-site stream enhancement to the maximum cal extent.
Violations of any condition herein set fortis shall result in revocation of this Certification
and may result in criminal and/or civil penalties. This Certification shall become null and void
unless the above conditions are made conditions of the Federal 404 and/or coastal Area
Management Act Permit. This Certification shall expire upon expiration of the 404 or LAMA
permit-
If this Certification is unacceptable to you have the right to an adjudicatory hearing upon
written request within sixty (60) days following receipt of this Certification. This request must
be in the form of a written petition conforming to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General
Statutes and filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings, F.O. Box 27447, Raleigh, N.C.
27611-7447. If modifications are made to an original Certification, you have the right to an
adjudicatory hearing on the modifications upon wnsen request within sixty (60) days following
receipt of the Certification. Vniess such demands are made, this-Certification shall be final and
binding.
This the 20? day of April 1998
DMSION OF WATER QUALM
Wton
How Jr. P.
WQC # 3185
P,
b0/£0'd 6£:£T 86, VT Inf 6S66-££2--6T6:xpd IOSrM Om MU ON

kJ

100
From: "Jenny Rankin" <[e-mail]>
Organization: NC DENR Winston Salem
To: [e-mail]
Date sent: Tue, 4 Aug 1998 09:17:45 +0500
Subject: (Fwd) 421 mitigation team meeting
Send reply to: [e-mail]
Priority: normal
Ron, This is what I was sent on the 421 meeting.
------- Forwarded Message Follows -------
From: "Clemmons, Micky M."
<[e-mail]> To: "Alsmeyer, Eric"
<[e-mail]>, "Black, Eric"
<[e-mail]>, "Rankin, Jenny"
<[e-mail]>
Subject: 421 mitigation team meeting
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 1998 17:45:00 -0400
Thanks for being willing to serve on this team. The first meeting is
August 10th at 2:00. The directions as I got them from DOT are:
I have arranged for us to have a room, I believe that it
will be the same one used for the preconstruction conference
meeting earlier that day.
Directions:
US 421, take Exit 282 (Statesville Road), going north about
3 miles. The building is on your right, new complex (L
shaped), just before a long bridge crossing. The room is in
my name, or if not, under Planning and Environmental.
If lost, call 336-903-9186 and ask for a Ms. Jordan.
Please reply back to me and let me know if you received this message.
That way I know that I have the email address correct.
By the way Jenny I did not tell you that there will actually be 2
teams. One team for Watauga and one for Wilkes. You and Eric may want
to take a different team or you both may want to be on both teams.
Either way is OK with me. We can talk about this at the meeting.
---------------------------------------------
Jenny Rankin [e-mail]
NC DENR Water Quality
585 Waughtown Street
Winston-Salem, NC 27107
voice [phone] ext 271
FAX [phone]
air
Vz)
James Ronald (Ron) Linville -- 1 -- Wed, 5 Aug 1998 07:52:52
?fll
lI M d'Svn.vd.cx
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR.
GOVERNOR
July 14, 1998
E. NORRIS TOLSON
?R13
}: w
ai _ !
7 ?^s ?' ;'^? M
PROJECT: 6.759002T, 6.759003T (R-529BA & R-529BB)
COUNTY: Watauga
DESCRIPTION: US 421 From Just West of the South Fork New River to West of
the Blue Ridge Parkway East of Boone.
SUBJECT: Conference - US Army Corp of Engineers Permit and NC
Wildlife Resources Commission Mitigation Plans
Mr. Larry Gavin
Wright Brothers Construction Company, Inc.
Box 437
Charleston, TN 37310
Dear Mr. Gavin:
The US Army Corp of Engineers' permit for the above referenced project requires that a
meeting be held to ensure that all interested parties are fully aware of the terms and
conditions of the permit. As per your discussion with Mr. Wally Bowman, Division
Construction Engineer, the meeting will be held in the large conference room (Room
Number 2) of the new Equipment/Resident Engineer's office building located in the
southeast quadrant of NC 115 crossing of the Yadkin River in North Wilkesboro at
10:00a.m.on Monday, August 10, 1998.
During the meeting we will also take time to discuss any concerns and comments from
DEHNR, Water Quality and the NC Wildlife Resources Commission including their
mitigation plans.
If additional information is needed, please advise.
P. 0. Box 250, N. WILKESBORO, NC 28659
PHONE: [phone] FAx [phone]

Mr. Larry Gavin
Page 2
July 14, 1998
Sincerely,
0. 4L
W. E. Hoke, PE
Division Engineer - Division 11
WEH/JWB/wb
cc: S. D. DeWitt, PE
Bill Rogers, PE
Bill Gilmore, PE
David Robinson, PE
A. L. Hankins, PE
Jamie Wilson, PE
D. H. Patton
Joe Thompson
F. J. Gioscio
Neil Trivette
Steve Lund - US Army Corp of Engineers, Asheville
Joe Mickey - NC WRC
Micky Clemmons - NC WRC
Ron Linville - NC DEHNR, Division of Water Quality
Matthew Gant, P.E. - NC DEHNR, Division of Land Quality
Mot n?-Vd?
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA , ,.
DEPARTMENT OF TMNSPORTATIO?d r.°
JAMES B. HUNT JP- " E. NoRRis Tbts6'N
GOVERNOR July 15, 1998 SECRETARY
PROJECT: 6.759002T, 6.759003T (R-529BA & R-529BB)
COUNTY: Watauga
DESCRIPTION: US 421 From Just West of the South Fork New River to West of
the Blue Ridge Parkway East of Boone.
SUBJECT: Salvage of Stream Restoration Materials
Mr. Joe Mickey, Jr.
NC Wildlife Resources Commission
155 Timberbrook Drive
State Road, NC 28676
Dear Mr. Mickey:
This is in reference to your letter dated July 10, 1998, requesting the NC DOT to have the
Contractor salvage and stockpile materials along the construction corridor for later use by
the NC WRC in stream relocation and stream bank restoration sites. As you are aware the
NC DOT entered into an agreement with WRC to reimburse $50.00 per linear foot of
stream restoration. We will discuss your requests to salvage and stockpile materials with
the Contractor, Wright Brothers Construction Company, Inc., at the Preconstruction
Conference on July 23, 1998.
We have also scheduled a meeting with the Contractor, US Army Corp of Engineers, NC
DEHNR, Division of Water Quality, and NC Wildlife Resources Commission on August
10, 1998 and we will discuss your proposal in more detail at this meeting.
If additional information is needed, please advise.
Sincerely,

W. E. Hoke, PE
Division Engineer - Division 11
P. O. Box 250, N. WILKESBORO, NC 28659
PHONE [phone] FAX [phone]
Mr. Joe Mickey, Jr.
July 15, 1998
Page 2
WEH/JWB/wb
cc: S. D. DeWitt, PE w/ attachment
Bill Gilmore, PE
David Robinson, PE
Jamie Wilson, PE w/ attachment
F. J. Gioscio w/ attachment
Neil Trivette w/ attachment
Micky Clemmons - NC WRC
Ron Linville - NC DEHNR, Division of Water Quality
1 ;61 rIJ
?,?-sJs t SL, ?P s?

„,.

00
1-\ Vi
zjr
Zf
00
J V U NN
Z

cv- -a
?J ? a ?; • .. ? h cam.

Y 7-
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. P.O. BOX 25201. RALEIGH. N.C. 27611-5201 E. NORRIS TOLSON
GOVERNOR August 06, 1998 SECRETARY
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Field Office
608 Falls of the Neuse Road,
Suite 120
Raleigh, North Carolina 27615
ATTN: Mr. Eric Alsmeyer
NCDOT Coordinator
Dear Sir:
Subject: Wilkes County, Widening of U.S. 421 from east of SR 2433 to east of
SR 2309; TIP No. R-223913; State Project No. 6.769001T.
In a letter dated July 13, 1998, the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
requested the Individual Permit application for the aforementioned project be reinstated. The
letter detailed various mitigation efforts to compensate for impacts to jurisdictional waters of the
United States. As stated in the July 13, 1998 letter, NCDOT has funded the purchase of
Shepherd's Tree mitigation site in Iredell County. A conceptual mitigation plan has been
prepared which outlines expected activities and anticipated opportunities for the site. A copy of
the conceptual mitigation plan is attached.
Thank you for your continued review of this project. If you have any questions or need any
additional information, please contact Mr. Lindsey Riddick at [phone] extension 315.
Sincerely,
William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
cc: Mr. David Franklin, USACE, Wilmington
Mr. John Dorney. Division of Water Quality
Mr. W. H. Hoke. P. E.. Division 10 Engineer
Mr. Mark Cantrell, USFWS, Asheville
Mr. Joe Mickey. NCWRC Eastern Mountain Coordinator

Conceptual Wetland Mitigation Plan for Shepherd's Tree Site,
Iredell County
Prepared by
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Planning and Environmental Branch
August 4, 1998
1.0 Introduction
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) has estimated
wetland impacts resulting from highway projects in the Yadkin River Basin to be
approximately 73 acres over the next five years. To address these wetland impacts and
provide compensatory wetland mitigation, NCDOT has identified the proposed
Shepherd's Tree Mitigation Site in Iredell County as a suitable site for the development
of a regional mitigation project (Figure 1). The Shepherd's Tree site presents the
opportunity to restore a functioning bottomland hardwood wetland system to provide
wetland mitigation throughout the Yadkin Basin.
This report provides a general description of the proposed mitigation site and a
conceptual mitigation plan based on preliminary site investigations. A detailed final
mitigation plan will be developed in the future and sent to state and federal regulatory
agencies for approval once hydrologic studies and soil sampling are complete. The
objective of this report is to introduce the Shepherd's Tree Mitigation Site, to describe
existing hydrologic and vegetative conditions, and to provide a framework for site
development.
2.0 Site Description
2.1 General Characteristics
The proposed Shepherd's Tree Mitigation Site is located in Iredell County, in the
Piedmont physiographic region of the Yadkin River Basin (USGS Hydrologic Unit
03040102). The site is located on SR 2362 (Triplett Road), approximately one mile south
of US 70 at Elmwood (Figure 2), in the west central portion of the Yadkin Basin.
The area under investigation is comprised of a large complex of heavily ditched
agricultural fields on the floodplain of Third Creek, a channelized Piedmont stream. The
floodplain is relatively flat, with slopes of 0-3% and a total relief of <10 feet. Along the
edges of the floodplain, upland hills rise up with steeper slopes covered in agricultural
crops to the north and primarily forests to the south.
The portion of the floodplain currently proposed for the Shepherd's Tree site is
comprised of two parcels which occupy each side of Third Creek between SR 2362 and
SR 2363 (Knox Farm Road). The north parcel is comprised of approximately 150 acres
and the south parcel is comprised of approximately 50 acres. Other adjacent agricultural
areas in the Third Creek floodplain may be added to the proposed site in the future if
practical.
ct-
?F _ , uFt _ a g __?_ •9 w ., < w+ur °o? ? ' I a 4 b G F
r ? 175 '° a4 • dp ' ?o? p ? `.r+tr ?.' ? r"A. t -
_ OMn b '" F p R' ? ? Y . 4a1? .?-?? b - $IrBaW
IN,
1 , ? n
aao.c o w Y ? ?? £ E
06, 64
21 ? - ? P v va.c 9 i
2 ,
srs a sw cas o r ?
crrrT a .a? % ` 'd a .
901
I'0 1 n yy `• A ?•.
Creek F dfOa "^ a a wwr
g '\ i
it th
77
.,a ? ;-- ?. 9 P ? a? ^'•1,, can ., $. ,, ! p,,, "° C ? 'w •?
01 04"'C CO
S . Ceel .
•e?• F ?" '2 11© , qa l?, -? °,t.'n- Y ? F C,« . 40 swr.s.. o \ q?` r"r ' ? ,
B a '4a Ala' i "P44}?? Wµ .`.. '4 ??. ti/ ?e I fLP9 f
o for o B J/ %~. ?? ?- °arwr ?aa+t-, a 1 4 li4 4 '$+•, c b ig`• ? r $ ?
u '• i __ a ?
°" f9rt a ' 21 3. RI P +d? ` a p , i wurMi 'ttra?? ' aw w
`fie i •?, .; ?'°` wot* V/ ? '''? r
M m ? F++4 5 Q '$ PTA ?F' ? ' `? ? !, ?s Krcrpr .. (b.
? g' ?V F r` ..nur - w ?/ ,t"y?/mot d?',S / rq'r" %'? ' -:? ii s?
epa/
, .+`" ?`rwr •o « u, "" ,,?f. pp"-;???_•., ,?? r/g' .u.m Wr $`? \ _ ?- _ 1?` !?
rT
? `caavr,a / 70
r 70 ' ./3 ?S
'r stauanl "a e a "'r~T1. P J r ! j1 i _ '?aea e""e/ g? - C?ze? /'
wraw?awr ~ b` O g gh_ 'a -art - f
f ?` ?i\ fir. 77 ., d/?'\\? - \ et?+oae 3? 1 y-
70 ??+r
G"M S. , ?.. =
7hnd o L----
3 21
IF
g 115 '-' d) " y 4 elm d' j ?? g .rp, Ay'nR 1b 1 '/ y, C1 _ "° rr P Crcck wr }`
F - rem ?! a?,"' d / / , wr.un .? b oya ?? c •\ ? I / ° ? / ? ?. ',' '0}'20 ~ 4+.r ae _ n?rP
. . e 3
)? a ag J F f F 9 3 3 H,^ $,_. - 53
.r .w W ; ?? 801
))!( \ 3 ?o...tr a `<a a /? I
\16 4
`? ? lnn * } nartt rtl A ? ?\I ? I CI ? 7 _ ' ,L t'f6t1 p ??

"1 C
Figure 1. Location map of proposed Shepherd's Tree Mitigation Site
j ? -"'? '• ? ro 15
N 1Y iA z1 ?.. c? s t 21
?;•?P'ti/ .., c,\. 1 715 i s./
?l\`\`?///^ttom (I +?, \ \\?\I ((( ll l??" %? 9?• J ; ??I ?? 1\ \ '\-_ / nv ` I ;'_° ?7 -
?!????\\?soo ?r/ (? \? \ ?x 83 / p 1 ?\` ? J , ? y? ? T. +_ __ ? 77.\l.;) ? ? l ! ?y O / j J•^ - '\ n m ?n
4j
1)\? \'_??\ I / 1/l I 84
as
55
1 \\
k9? \ III I('/?\''I ? ? I ? ? / f/ ??'•
\ 1
146 `?-,?J ?o ? \36 - - ,\?'? ?--?? ?75"_"?1\
X54
r
/ B m ilk 1.
9%?? o ?.? \.1 ^(?`;?f'\vi• Mitigation Site `?1;?+i. .?•.Cl? ?.:.•r ??'??? i%;??' I, \k I
_zj
r
-Iff
?-/?1 1 i'? ?1 ? ?~ jn >, ` •? I?-•l y ? I (,?/ / w^ ( li \? n /\-?/? \??? ,a I/ ; .?,r l ? "'_'?J ? I
x'11 7720
f\?\?(?? ?(? /?'?/ . ^'•l \?? ;g `\?`?• I\ nom., i . /--_•I-I f C:-
3952
?
??1/ ?I,?II[?? r 11?\? ?`1?/ \' I• L ?. /f? i / /? 11" •! ?'`I II iy ?l \\i -/ ?I ?`?? 1(r"\? `.
1+`1/''^ 'lm?\\7i 3Z 65? ; 1J ?''??" / ?\?, "ijll (,,?= / „I?? \\1.\\ 1 f( t/t\ \ 42r;
fig
3951
///.. ? ?rV?
1 n/
?
• / J l ?? A•.jtTh?
2392 IoB ;`7 apI\ i? i ?•,'.-?`?i w P`\1\
107
?(? i/ llJJ??,? - J \\? /1 `? .\Ii \ 2883 -? . t• / ?•\\i\/ ?\/ 0h?? \;\^\\c•J1?\
3950
1 r • ? v i.. /1 U r ? v??.
' Figure 2. Proposed Shepherdes Tree Mitigation Site \
`'? .???'1. ?O- mot!- 1 ' ,-`?.? _ _ __Ii878 _ __. _- /?J • ? I. ?1?. ?.`--7''. ?i I ??°,1 ?. ? l? ? j ?' - ,\1?? o....
2.2 Hydrology
The hydrology of the Shepherd's Tree Mitigation Site is affected by both surface
and groundwater sources which naturally combine to create wetland conditions because
of the site's topographic position. Surface water hydrology is derived from Third Creek,
a fourth order Piedmont stream with an upstream watershed of approximately 100 square
miles. Historically, flooding by Third Creek overtopped the natural levee along the
channel banks and flooded lower lying areas further back from the channel. Once
flooded, lower lying areas probably retained water for significant periods, slowly draining
eastward across the site and downward through the soil profile.
The Shepherd's Tree site is also significantly influenced by shallow subsurface
drainage from the upslope watershed. Groundwater moving downslope enters the site
along the floodplain margins and is particularly significant in the northwest corner of the
north parcel. This shallow groundwater flow maintains a high water table along the outer
floodplain, likely creating saturated wetland conditions in the early part of the growing
season.
The natural hydrology of the Shepherd's Tree site has been greatly altered by
human activities which have served to prevent surface water inputs and decrease the
residence time of groundwater. A tall berm, 8-12 feet high, has been constructed along
both sides of Third Creek to inhibit overbank flooding of the stream. In addition, the
stream has been straightened and possibly excavated throughout the length of the site to
accelerate water flow downstream. The constriction of floodwaters through the
straightened -and restricted channel has likely resulted in accelerated undercutting of the
stream bed and sedimentation of downstream waters.
A network of broad, shallow ditches has also been excavated throughout the site
to drain groundwater inputs directly into Third Creek. This network of ditches is
especially pronounced in the northwest corner of the north parcel where groundwater
inputs are apparently greatest. Lateral ditches in the north parcel connect to a deeper
central ditch which flows across the site to the southeast. Drainage ditches have also
been excavated along the base of the upland slope in the south parcel, intercepting
groundwater discharge. .
2.3 Soils
Soils occurring on site are comprised of typical Piedmont bottomland soils of the
Chewacla, Congaree, and Wehadkee series (Figure 3). Tables 1 and 2 indicate the
relative proportion of each soil type on each parcel, along with estimated water table
depth and hydric status as listed in the Iredell County soil survey (1964).
4
Moms s?_e? _ .
7'.k t
_? 7
'
X
r

i \ ?

?@' r ?f 7 E
62 r
a
S
lcol
1

1 j --
1 I 1
_ '.
?
'
W ? ...?. -

1
%
'
.
r?y -
?
ct; i ry fit W S2 '! ry 4, ? (,
`
l

Af8
'
HfB2 .
? 1 1

'Ah

/
i .tom ' :?13? ^J. S -. .' Y.
" - ^?
i A

1rsC1 Cw Cy
S
_itiC;.T
ion site

}
I
o -0

r
I1
r t LfC_ ?? La
I

P

V -

_ _ 19N8??? ?1
1 '\
i
CMD2
.e'
f
-
/ s

?? _ y 1 Lf6 _-
'L
m i
;; .
h ,

q s ???m Cc
a"Y c M2 rc1 >
?.
n .
'Cf62
?
Cm82 ^CfD2-

r -? g 1 s CcC3 ?`

\
•
1 rc
l _ Cw ..

}i. P As62
iAS B?'- -
'fit
?. .'

y
x t / ?.__T
CMC-
4 ?_ ;3

>BZ I' Y 5 GN?
`
? = 1...
r
r__1
Y L~

C' i
'..°rau'_ Tree -Mitigation Site soils map
F1_ure Sneph i

.
IL

g? '
Table 1. Mapped soils occurring on the North Parcel, Shepherd's Tree Mitigation Site.
Soil Series Code % of Site Depth to Groundwater (ft.) . Hydric
Chewacla Cw 50 1-3 Yes
Congaree Cy 35
Wehadkee We 15
3-8 Alluvial
0-2 Yes
Table 2. Mapped soils occurring on the South Parcel, Shepherd's Tree Mitigation Site.
Soil Series Code % of Site Depth to Groundwater (it.) ilyanc
Chewacla Cw 50 1-3 Yes
Congaree Cy 50
3-8 Alluvial
As indicated, approximatley 65% of the north parcel is mapped as hydric soil,
along with 50% of the south parcel. Congaree soils tend to occur along the natural river
levee which is present on both sides of Third Creek. Wehadkee soils are most prevalent
in the northwest corner of the north parcel where groundwater discharge is prominent.
Preliminary soil investigations at the Shepherd's Tree site indicated a loam
surface soil, tilled and mixed, underlain by a clay subsoil at a depth of 12-14 inches with
a highly reduced matrix (10 YR 6/0).
2.4 Vegetation
The majority of the site (>95%) is currently planted in corn or other agricultural
crops, with a narrow fringe of early successional grasses, herbs, and shrubs along the
margins. A 10-20 foot buffer of trees occurs along the berm bordering each side of Third
Creek, comprised of typical disturbed site species. Wetland herbs, grasses, and shrubs
occur in the shallow ditches which cross the corn fields.
Overall, the vegetative communities of the Shepherd's Tree Mitigation Site are
highly disturbed such that none realistically represents a naturally occurring assemblage.
The natural community types which likely occurred on this site prior to disturbance are
Piedmont/Mountain Levee Forest and Piedmont/Mountain Bottomland Forest, though
virtually none remains in a characteristic state.
6

3.0 Proposed Mitigation Activities
3.1 Hydrology
Restoration of hydrology at the Shepherd's Tree Mitigation Site will involve the
removal or disruption of all artificial water control structures. Ditches will be plugged or
backfilled, and the berm along both sides of Third Creek will be dismantled or breached
at various locations. These activities should serve to significantly increase the frequency
of surface water flooding across the site and to raise the seasonal high water table by
slowing goundwater drainage.
The Shepherd's Tree-site also offers the opportunity for stream restoration and
enhancement activities in areas where both sides of the stream are under ownership. The
existing straightened and constricted channel could be restored to more natural meanders
and cross-sectional topography. Removal of the constructed berm would serve to
alleviate high water flows and down cutting of the channel. However, Third Creek, being
a fourth order stream subject to significant upstream inputs, will require detailed
hydrologic study prior to the initiation of any stream modifications.
3.2 Soils
Soil analyses will be performed to determine if an artificial hardpan exists on the
site due to continued use of heavy agricultural machinery. If such a hardpan is
encountered, deep ripping of the soil will be evaluated as a means of improving
subsurface hydrology.
Grading of higher portions of the floodplain to lower elevations will also be
studied for feasibility and cost effectiveness to determine whether such activities are
practical. Grading, if pursued, would likely involve minor alterations in elevation (<1
meter) or resurfacing of the soil for microtopographic enhancement. Grading of marginal
upland areas could create new wetland area in the floodplain subject to surface water
flooding and groundwater discharge.
Lastly, the soil surface will be stabilized by the establishment of permanent forest
cover as opposed to the existing agricultural conditions.
3.3 Vegetation
Once soil and hydrologic restoration activities are completed, the site will be
planted with a mixture of hardwood species. Natural community zones will be mapped
based on soil and hydrology data, and hardwood species will be distributed across the site
7

based on their tolerance to flooding and saturation. Vegetation plantings will attempt to
recreate Piedmont/Mountain Levee Forest and Piedmont/Mountain Bottomland Forest
communities which are likely characteristic of natural floodplain conditions prior to
alteration.
4.0 Projected Mitigation Area
Based on soils mapping and preliminary _field reviews, NCDOT estimates that the
Shepherd's Tree Mitigation Site can provide approximately 70-80 acres of wetland
restoration, 40-50 acres of wetland creation, and 7000 linear feet of stream restoration.
These estimates are based on successful acquisition of both the north and south parcel.
Additional mitigation acreage may be available in adjacent properties, which will be
investigated and pursued in the future if practical.
5.0 Project Schedule and Implementation
Acquisition and development of the Shepherd's Tree Mitigation Site is currently
in progress. An appraisal has been completed and funding for purchase has beep
approved by the N.C. Board of Transportation. The NCDOT Right of Way Branch has
contacted the property landowners and begun negotiations for purchase.
Development of a mitigation plan for the site has been initiated through a private
consulting firm. Water table wells are scheduled to be installed in September of this year.
Soil sampling, hydrologic modeling, and community mapping are scheduled for autumn
and winter of 1998. A completed mitigation plan with a final design package is expected
in spring of 1999, with implementation of the site anticipated in summer 1999.
Regulatory agencies will be invited to review the site and provide
recommendations once purchase is finalized through the ROW Branch. All mitigation
and design plan development will be coordinated with state and federal regulatory
agencies prior to implementation.
8

F
J-20-ti
To: John Dorney
r Cyndi Bell
From: Ron Linville
Subject: DOT On-Site Stormwater/Habitat Credits
Date: 980629
After several site visits and discussions with individuals who
are involved with DOT projects, it appears that in many cases.on-
site and in-kind mitigation may not always be practical or very
successful. Regulations generally require in-kind mitigation.
These efforts are often done in another area away from the
destroyed area and often in another subbasin. This is not
conducive to maintaining water quality and quantity to
predisturbance conditions in the new roadway area.
I would propose that, especially in the piedmont, and
foothills, that we review the possibility of giving some mitigation
credit to DOT for activities which would provide stormwater
retention, litter and pollutant removal as well as habitat
replacement adjacent to the affected area of the new roadway. This
should be in addition to as much regularly required in-kind
mitigation. It would seem that such efforts would tend to
compliment existing protection and restoration activities by
providing more diversity and protecting water quality in the
immediately disturbed areas.
Please consider t4iA --a-s this option as it could also assist
DOT in their efforts of minimizing flood stage elevational changes.
Such practices could also be utilized for spill containment. This
might also be utilized to reduce long-term forestry fragmentation
and disruption in some instances.
Thank you for your time and consideration of this idea.
cc: Central files
WSRO
/? fl
tM1_-
f?or tie-
f
AANFo
?e vim
S
'taus
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT, JR.
GOVERNOR
August 14, 1998
E. NoRR1s TOLSON
SECRETARY
N.C. Drzl,W.. o, f it-! x I I;
AU G Z 6 1998
n ;, r
PROJECT NUMBER: 6.759002T, Etc. (R-529BA & R-529BB) ({-q"
COUNTY: Watauga
DESCRIPTION: US 421 From Just West of the South Fork New River to
West of Blue Ridge Parkway East of Boone
MEMORANDUM TO: W. E. Hoke, P. E.
Division Engi eer - Div. 11
FROM: F. J. Giosco
Resident Engineer
SUBJECT: Project Permit Review Conference
Please be advised that on August 10, 1998 a permit review conference was conducted at the
North Wilkesboro Division conference room. Attached is an attendance record that documents
names, phone numbers, titles, and firms for each attendee.
Mr.Bowman began the meeting by discussing in brief what the purpose of this meeting was. He
also described what would be covered.
The first item discussed, page 210 of the project contract, concerned the time limits the
Contractor should expect if they propose to utilize construction methods not specifically
identified in the existing permits. They were reminded that the 60 day time limit is in the contract
but the request usually does not take this long.
Starting on page 211 of the project contract, the Corps of Engineers permit was reviewed.
General condition number 1 gives the time limit for completing the authorized work. It was
explained that should the date listed not be met, the DOT will address the situation at the
appropriate time.
On page 212 of the contract, general condition number 4 was discussed. The Contractor was
advised that this condition was for NCDOT only. Under general condition number 5, it was
1359 EAST KING STREET, BOONE, NC 28607
PHONE [phone] FAx [phone]
W. E. Hoke, P. E.
August 14, 1998
Page 2
pointed out that a water quality certification has been issued for this project. All remaining
information on this page was reviewed along with page 213.
The "Special Conditions" on page 214 was then reviewed. It was reiterated to the group, in
reference to special condition number 2, that this is one of the most critical projects ever let to
contract in Division 11. It was also noted that in reference to special condition number 6 on the
same page, anything outside of the permit authorization must be addressed before performing the
operation, including all waste areas. All other special conditions on this page were reviewed.
On page 215 of the project contract, it was explained that special conditions numbers 8, 9, 10,
and 11 are for NCDOT only. It was pointed out that special condition number 12 is addressed in
the project plans, therefore this condition has been met. It was discussed, though, that if for some
reason this cannot be met in the field DOT needs to know as soon as possible so the situation can
be addressed. It was agreed that special condition number 13 would be handled by Mr. Lindsey
Riddick, NCDOT Planning and Environmental. Staff biologists, Logan Williams and Bruce
Wallace will also be involved with this activity.
Special conditions 14 through 18, on page 216 of the contract, was reviewed.
The next item discussed was the reimbursement agreement between the NCDOT and the North
Carolina Wildlife Resources Commision. Item number 1 on page 218 was discussed. WRC
representatives stated that they will advertise through the media for landowners who may be
interested in applying for the available trout stream mitigation work. Mr. Micky Clemmons,
WRC, explained how this process was handled on other projects in the past.
On page 219 of the project contract, it was discussed the NCDOT Right of Way Department will
be responsible for obtaining all easements needed to implement the approved mitigation plans.
NCDOT Location Department will also be involved with the required surveys. This discussion
was held in reference to item number 2 on this page. Items 3 through 5 were reviewed. It was
agreed that under item number 5, the final invoice will be submitted to NCDOT in care of
Lindsey Riddick and Beth Harmon.
Items 6 and 7 on page number 220 was reviewed.
The North Carolina 401 Water Quality Certification, starting on page 223 of the contract, was the
next document that was reviewed. Conditions of Certification number 1,2, 3, and 4 were
reviewed. It was clarified concerning condition number 6 on page 224 of the contract that WRC
required a 2:1 ratio instead of the 1:1 stated here. And, WRC would be performing this item. It
was discussed that condition number 7 on the same page has already been accomplished.
The vicinity maps and the plan views were reviewed. Mr. Bowman suggested that NCDOT
Construction office personnel and Contractor field personnel highlight these areas on their plans
so everybody is aware of the exact locations. The Contractor agreed to delineate the specific
areas on the project with orange snow fence.
W. E. Hoke, P. E.
August 14, 1998
Page 3
A discussion was conducted with Mr. Steve Lund, COE, concerning items that may not be
covered by the existing COE permit for this project. Mr. Lund stated the temporary stream
crossings for clearing and grubbing were not covered by the permit. It was agreed upon that a
generic plan could be submitted to the COE for their approval that would cover all temporary
crossings. The Contractor shall prepare this plan that will include a detailed explanation of how
the crossing will be built, what materials will be used to construct the crossing, it will state that a
minimum number of crossings will be used in each work area, and will make provisions for the
crossings to be removed if constructed out of the roadway footprint and restored to natural
condition. A plan that the Contractor had drawn up for a temporary crossing at Sta. 10+360 +-
was given to Mr. Lund at this meeting. The above mentioned plan shall be sent to Mr. Lindsey
Riddick, NCDOT, so the existing permit can be modified with this information. Mr. Lund also
suggested that we make sure the project construction plans are in agreement with the project
permits. Mr. Lund stated that sometime between the time the permits are issued and the plans are
sent to the field, changes occur that are not covered by the permits.
Being no further business, the meeting was adjourned.
FJG\fg
cc: All Attendants Listed on the Attendance Record
File
1359 EAST KING STREET, BOONE, NC 28607
PHONE [phone] FAx [phone]
op bfi--i & 6

?ap -373

Y,_coomeAAA4

// !1 1! GI
? ? - °' 'r 336 G67-ylll
- -- ---- - Lb!^?__ lv???-cr -- - - Wa-lcWT 62os- !?OfICTY 1001ca)N& 423 - 3-3 aQe,
L4
---------------

T2?.? t?.?W4 ?D 1
?e- -- .. _ 8Z $- Z( S- S3 73
-
---- _
----
--
- - - --- - - --D 3_ GA L I G,6, tQ - - .. --- - N C _ D oi- ----- - --- _----- --- BZ ? = z e S- 53- -_3-
-- -- lam- -6?--- - - - -?'i1 p' r`?°-?0? ----- - - -- --- - -?'73 -` i4/__..
All

lf?-
_ in /. _- ewe rl? .
-- s? -
A e,?/?.,?
c 6 R nS of E,4&rtIrJrR 5 PP MAr1 A &ER -- `fs2. 2- ? 71-YSrs 7
1 /? n r, ` n ,/ I I
Or r5,
5-3.7
t ??o.GSZ _5384.
L( 86
`117-4/34
?'z$
_
iDDVC4<_ Nc-Dcri Pd'E_ . ?,e??r?'_S?Ec _??S?--- -----_9 ?9 _x_733. --3! %?
H
vLOhy--Lra.?---
Board

award, s
road.,
deals-
N Construction on both
U.S. 421 and N.C. 16 to
start by early September
By Duane Marsteller
JOURNAL NORTHWEST BUREAU
RALEIGH
Orange road-construction signs will soon
appear on two of Northwest North Caroli-
na's major roads.
The N.C. Board of Transportation award-
ed contracts yesterday to widen an 8.3-mile
section of U.S. 421 in Watauga County and
improve a 2.8-mile stretch of N.C. 16 in
Ashe County.
Wright Brothers Construction Co. of
Charleston, Tenn.; was awarded a $34 mil-
lion contract to widen U.S. 421 between
Deep Gap and Boone. J.R. Vannoy and Sons
Construction Co. of West Jefferson won a
$3.6 million contract to widen and make
other improvements to N.C. 16 between
Jefferson and the New River.
Officials of both companies said they
plan to start construction by early Septem-
ber.
The U.S. 421 project is scheduled to be
finished by the end of 2001, and the N.C.16
project should be done in late 1999.
The board's decision to award a contract
was good news to supporters of widening
U.S. 421 from two to four lanes who have
been frustrated by years of delays.
"It's great," said'Thurman Johnson, the
president of the Boone Area Chamber of
Commerce. "I'm just glad to see it's finally
happening."
Work to widen the section between Deep
Gap and Boone was to start last year, but
problems in getting a permit from the N.C.
Division of Water Quality delayed the proj-
ect.
Public outcry over the delay prompted a
letter-writing campaign to Gov. Jim Hunt

to ? • `? ? i S i? ? ` c ? ?.. ?G. I ?"-2?
ROADS
Continued From Page Bi
asking him to end the stalemate. It
also prompted the directors of the
N.C. Department of Transportation
and the water-quality division to
apologize for the delay during a
visit to Boone in March. The permit
was issued in April.
Most of the new U.S. 421 will be
built north of the existing two-lane
road, but drivers can expect delays
at some spots on the existing road
once construction starts, an official
with Wright Brothers said.
One bottleneck will be a bridge
just east of the Boone city limits
that will have to be replaced, said
Larry Gavin, the company's sub-
contracting manager for the proj-
ect.
Another bottleneck will be about
three miles east of Boone, where
the new road will cross the existing
highway, he said.
The N.C. 16 project calls for ex-
panding each of the road's lanes tc
12 feet Wille and adding 2-foot-
wide paved shoulders between the
South Fork of the New River and
U.S. 221.
The DOT's plans for the road
have spawned a citizens' opposi-
tion group. An official of the group,
the Friends of Highway 16, said
that the group has no problem with
the project.
"What they approved today is
something that we haven't brought
into the fight," said Bebe A. Hen-
nessy, the group's chairwoman.
"That's not the area we're fight-
ing."
The group opposes plans to buy
up to 80 feet of right-of-way to
widen N.C. 16 by four feet in the
Glendale Springs community, sev-
eral miles down the road from the
construction site.
W-sue 9rd 7 1 /
See ROADS, Page 67
yid

a)
t w
r
O
`mb
O
M
V L
0 1 41,4 :s 0 4w -Z,:3
t 5 V) p,,
a ?
° C Yb g '.
cd O GR. °'O m° pi;b
b my too C ^? 'd ? cd aoi
O 0 0 O 2. 42 -2 0 Ei
y y y y E?
????.n aoi??gxo.a
a ao o'° dw o o?w"?:
yd?NO 1]oooyy:a
a?toooc?,do? 41
r..
CdoU . d °oP,
t? bq 3 O 3
s >,o cad
i.,1„O O9 ti d iC cd w
cd V 'a {? O ZS
ca?vi
to r. 6 y d ? ? ? V 40. y vii
t34)+ 4 o ++Pa
.2 5
Om0
s
34
J
m
A
by
33oo°n z
o

4. Q

,
c
'

7
a
o
w

Q
o
Q
C) r w °
?'
^O
0 0 3 ° O 2
a o

V W
N
? y 2
Q) C
?
¢
as
to
?•U .4
,
[/
Qi .O,? ',? y., o
'o ff, Cd 41
3

0.
? Pr
3 ?
c
7 O
4y
l p cud o
d '? Q
r
c
D,
p O Cd d
N a?
? a° Q° (?

c v"i ao a U Fa N oO
O
0, o
0
o
oo
a.z
W
c

os
c ° wo b

4- Ei
B)
r. to 14

Gl
s A
C's Q
M U o A E
d • c
n
^
oP4 d
t

W c? r ??
e W o
w 4
oo ??
b
A o cc > o
i-A m o o CA
y0 CS pp+'Gcd?O C7U ?O
O MO w T cd '? O C Y ?„ OA
0
boa o §
c3 c6 gwa?Cl2 CL ?+? Uq
C by0y O
c R.? G'. yZ7 O. 4
d? ??,.,• O 3 m O• F f+ CA
107. 0-
° -o
O ?
00i c•Oa ? 40, -0 M ?•? d ° a?x C
j O t 4,
to,
W
A I>,
0- ao? y coca Ro
:• `? o o 0 3
V O YO ?a ti 000-
(L)
cd cG6? G?i? Da ° O
c
yz y ai•;o tip d
o
+'?'., Sr W ? Pa ? w Gi ? U
1
a
!sse1o
ub s
w
' -lanap aq suoo5bI jo Inoasegd a .ro;
q
p
p
g3n
?a,ww gonw
ep;xau wd 00=9 • W dS auil-u0 SuotIvpuaunuooaj Imp aambaa OI
[
•Cep agl;nog6noaq; Smau
euoiteu pue a;e;s'Ie301 6uiNeaaa
a$ueua a asoddo Iou pip uo e
L ,
anti
-oaitp a se aaour il?q agI noes Sagl

•
WO3¦ Ieill paureiduiOO Sa0leis1591 Jalte
pafelap see+ alon aIU
Sepsan 1
,
•lg8tuaanO aaptsuoaaa
of aouega 'e peg ueld aqj of pasod
-do saoleist8al Iegl padog ags pies
`ugdnQ Q `uoslem SpuiO dag
'ittg SPnls
e Isnf uegl aaour gonur uotleisi2al
• • • • agI apetu li Iegj 5ut<fes `SiopsanZ
uo ueld agI 3o slaadse asogl Pam
-iluo `q$nogl `saa)ieuzA uj leaanaS
•uoileaapisuoa ao; aleuas N
agl of sao5 mou iesodoad ags „•Ino pauma st Inoasegd
aqI Iegl alnsua„ pue uialSSS u002'ei
'It ao3 las saalaurered_ aiour aneg agI ;O Ino Suisegd agI do3 ,suoij
Iou pue Irodai pai.map UdAo m qI -epuaunuooai doianap„ Aoua$e agl
Yiaeq $wuq of pamolle aq pings Iegl paimbaa SIputffuo weld agy
anssi alp $utApMS SletoIJJo Bauafie •.MaA IXau AlqurassV ieaa
aqI Imp pies `g8nogl `uosle)A -ua f) aqj of suotlepuaunuoaaa aqeui
suoo$ei agI jiulDeldaa pinom tia?gm `aaquiaaa(I ui uois
Io; papuaunuoaaa aq „sat8oiougaai
laajja-Isoa Isour„ agI Sluo Ieill
an . -SnuuroC) AAatnag leluaunroitnu'3
aill of s$utpui? nagl I rodaa plnom
t
paambaa pue aapio 1o s.n:aA Ig2ia s1emi3;o Iuauilaeda(I •suialsSs
suoo8ei Aluo Ino $utsegd Ie )iooi uotlef?tnt-Seads pue suoo$?q $og
of Apnls aqI pa rmbaa aneg pinom ao-eidaa of tuagl Sutsn 3o f4il[gtSea;
legl `IIaunHll `stA'eQ uo(I •dag Aq alp pue alsem $og $utleaal ;o spo
lesodoid a palea;ap saaZfeureme'I
aau
s
`
• -glaur Mau Spnls saoanosag lemleN
pue luauurorlnug 3o IuaurlaedaQ
p
auop aq of
ptes xaAaa(I „
.q aqj of
Spnls aril 4rrtgl I Pn Ili
•C•N aql imp a.imbar pinom `alon
usaop Alleaa SMJ,,,
urreg Aue op I V9118 tie ut Panoidde `weld agy
,
paont agl
?feur 'Ino pasegd an suoo$el Iegl „arras
„
glt a uralsBs uoo2ei agI;o Inoaseqd -ua„ Pinogs saolelaaa 110111 $utlea
agl ro; suotlepuaunuooaa dolanap -iPu! wO?IeiS12ai agI ur0i3 panoutaz
seer a$en$uet a.rojaq Iou Inq'suoo8
,,Hegs„ fbuaiie agl Iegl Iuaiuaiinb
-al alp paasidaa `glSszO3-g `aa)loa(l -ei alsem-?og Ino asegd of aolou
11 •dag Aq pasodoid `uotl
laega -W61 Mau $utsn ?fpnls of ?fepaalsa?f
•
•
.
-eis12ai alp 01 a8uega aaglouV 0
weld le panoadde asnOH
N aU

-Isea; AHlR3jurouo3a„ 31 Aluo pado SS38d CIUVIOOSSV 3Hl
jig5nos 01sum 5uTjuazl jo sPOITIO I 'A
PC-)10 SU0021Lt?o.u jo
inoasvqd Sp'n'js off: uvId
•
a)
W
F
F
N
70
Q?
i
C/J
U)
L
CA
a-+
Q -
U)
co
C
CIO
4-
C/)
Cd
C)
0-

O
CO
(U
v`
r?
r L
O
bA

424
O
4m?
cz
O
0 P=4
IM4
b
"o C N Da O V •O ' cu ? ..,
.N O R}
41bVOCa4?
t ?
0
COQ 0?CZ) Z
a; p Ow
O D ° o to
p ^° aV O O F. ai v? cd x C.
U vy1 4 V O C ° O o 0 y O
.a cd .,., O Y 40 O V .? d cd c+
bOw °o,?z vo C,J ?. 0 Dyy
vi-O b0? m o ?'a W u
04 V -0 -0
cad w° Lid W W= 0 m v v -o
?C6 5 -0 cd ?.' o "?"R. 4
?? a.d w z.F V V
.w
p V V V w a> ,d c3
dr: d....y O G 0a O t'. GL O d
bo-a w ° G bA GL ^C y c3
V cd +? w
vi y N?' V 0 a"..' Ca
0,0 0 V
cd ?] fs' •O 5 V 0 ??DbDOb... V..
O ? E' rr PL oo G v
?? ° oo`? v cd? 3w z cd
w
v?
bA V W y Ow"cd m O
G 4? c. c? t. V? CY v y `?
1 g
ciG a o LO, b6 $1oco .1
C '! O O :O cd V to
q p y q A'ai ai° ai
-Cod
0Cd V O a) O O 0 Cd
cd A 0 G) 5 t-
y 'Q cd O cd
U .d O bA cd .fl ? ? ' 'C m
mC>? vOiv?O p°ya?VO
? a?ioy?3
9) 0 t. cd
?r d •? p y ., O D?a c y' M cad ? cd
vi03r: ai o4? ?421 or.f.
? d 0 o"o o o^ O u cd o
GrO, cd c,G
D t°+ O co
C/3 42) .Q
cad to+ "o R. q w .
' O - " on d
C'S p cad m cd G w u0i
W u? 0 d^ y Lti,O^C 'd ai m'.
?I d too ?.J V dam'
•sV. a?..+ 7, cif '? d G7 1§ y
3 U ?° •° N tLo p°.4 `" ° O
?v`,a°oo`'nc?
m y p? r•.; O V ??, ? a 1, d
°vCdaVi^OO?
°v a? o a -x a?
ry. (D 0 420
1-4 PQ IZ <OD
wood, ?o
°Y
10 Q
d vi m V O q 9 0
0my0.?p??5 N
G m b m O O? ?
w ?oa?° o'ao f
o ?m CD
o ?, vN ? o c ?•e
y3
?3 0. m a.w m c N•
?yy Qrfy. O y O UQ
lp, fD 5 ?A x+
m 0 °Q' a 2 a?'o Q?d ?•
IV $?.
S ?N.- o Ham' Vq
'D o Um
c1 51x?'a
a.? o p 5 ?'o a5:? ??
? e
a c tw. /?
o p l Y
o ?.pb.d
0 0 R o o5a ?n. V^M,
o awp. w ?'?
.0 1, y? ??M 5500 ?++
O
co w o E'.
n
y p M O O 0 p 0 V1
?C,
?r0v?anMO?O?'
m m ?n Hro o"
r'? aav??omNmm fir.
H? ?:t?d5'0 aw °'?
CD 0 of 0 O p O N
C 054 . ID
o N-o d rya ° ?? m
O
m? G• ^p N O.? G Ord
g????0 O
(ED, CD,
DbON Owil?m
Gp N y ry ° tz
mOo° 9(°;?9wgA CD
m 7 0 " CD '.. w
c? ' o o °
b
:. ° m a i m c 0
:? N m 5' m
m SE
5v ? o M l ,
v & 'OUy' O G tD w -.`X' ap
? ^ 7 ec O O ? O ?• <
?aa y 7 E ao a:=
b C]
ti 0 W 0Q 0C-' '] Op O t7O H
?:? m:4 5 p xRvH. ondw
`° w D O
3 '
OpOdN°5'3mO PV- 5
N
? D ID E
-b yFm..ab'a17- y 5 ,
< N ?C2 `"O w 5
5 O
O p ,?". c. ? O? •r`C m ?n E m
O O, ti r?i? l ?.
O n? S7 .
A m k 5g
ID m
0 0 m
m 5 a r`J• -
H'
a
m
3

z
0
0
z
a
3
O
c
z
to
U)
co
D
G7
Rl
W
W

GROWTH density to four five units per
acre," Yarbrough said. "We'll learn
to design office parks and more
f Continued From Page Al neighborhood shopping centers.
"I think we can increase the qual-
`ror his department's population es ity of life and decrease the number
•.'timates. of daily car trips people have to
"What we have is a very manage- make."
table and healthy growth rate," he
"said.
"We manage to provide water ANY S I Z E
' ..and sewer service, and in spite of WI N D O W
what people say, we don't have real -Dwb?•-hw,p Mamared W-ow
;(traffic) congestion."
r Although Forsyth may not have jw??
",to contend with the population
booms that Mecklenburg and Wake
'counties are expected to face, Yar- • Tilt In Sashes For Easy
brough said that planning officials cleaning
Hassle
still need to adjust tlteir sights on • NO ...NO Hot Air
-future development. • COMPPLETELETELY INSTALLED
• Minimum 8 Windows
Not everyone will be able to live Call For A Phone Quote
,in a spacious house on a large, 993-8820
:secluded lot, he said.
"We may have to push up the
?? 0 0
KFTCHEN
VISION '.Quality At A Price You Can Afford!";
1414 Plaza South Dr.
Kernersville, NC
68 '
HOMECRF_5T?' corner Hwy. s
VISIT OUR SHOWROOM
n BpmMon: Thur, 9am-5pm Fri.
- 'U ' p1 7 c o Z5, (=- ?;-
0a Cy7rp C n ',a i? C/]
° ° m CD 7J
N? p? O R
O
ID rA* S o
e-' rD C N
•.,• a
??Ap boa R. ° CD !?T
07?w$ ° O O
CP 9.
5. 5 CD C
rx c ?y C7 1--
o a r0 r0 G] m Cn ?y
E Bo° a'°+ 0 c W O•
" Fo rx A? ,.?
CD
° m P9 re"N P.
0o r0 ? d ? f7 m CJ 5' (??° ? N
y C, m r,d `N., a!,cO `c ur ro OcD r0 m
V* A
Z 10 (b
5.ere0a8aorem
5 r°-• 0° G rD S'iF A iD ID rAo O
<cpno.r? em mov
w A C ,iy 'O M N a° I to >; O Cry fOy
w ?o° rf mb 7
o0, y aCsa
Cn O m O O a• 21- ?s N w
uy, off, ,p a+rn °a ?'°,' 11040 0¢100
cp N O O N
a _ fD 5 o?7? m ID I
ou °r xm? CL °yo
_0 O .°•1 N N 10' p •S O re p ro
'?' c <.1y o'+y o'er-F?•°,
ED ?n r° `?' n O n m 1100 I's• ;; o " ?n.
Gpmore?ivv 50IDtir`:mfm
porldR °oa?nmoaroe
ap- ? 0 re t7?3 "1Ei 5 r A p;o m m S
CD (D
NfF•..'V. ' O E A O r?D N V00 N vi
?r7ai'r°C„r (D; ?C7roi 'S• N04m
gog Mho °o gym °? ro_a o b°"
Zro QQ 0 CA I.
?a
R y t?: aan of 5' p ? o
0 0 0 .,
t? oaq 0, 0 ° NO S o ° o rc fD
$.?
mR''C Fo n6 RrO' C.VL 710
M CD 0 RD Er-
0- 9? G- on 20 CD 2, OQ , M M_
1010+0 0 .MFj5,°,05.garD0
CD 0
'O ,°y .10i N -? O rDN? O O
ID,
^ o t?i'•rN1D0a? m
`110,•0 €x C
rc r' 10 ?? n ,10.E
U1 a ?. m a
?'• m 7c' r0 ?-
r0 k m 10 ,?
n 10 it xo re 'O Gfs'?
o °
p10 m. s
y ..G '`C Ft O'b L7• b" 1Rp , °G 1rep-
C
2
O
m
2
x
CD
0
Ina
N

Old •
O
O '
CD

N
Ho t?
?git

?
d f
m
H
$ N
Z
.
dm??
omC)?
°
Er o
a

SN
Ar

m
od_;
gym; 0
?
O m
=
?/
y e=V
d O
m
Or
o
?

47
t0
A
6
G]
t0
W
O
N
N
W
t0
d O

?
z
t)
?
a
?
.
?
d
°

'
rn
a

n
a

a
<
?+
o
v
m
v
m

<
a
m
n

m
n

?
m 0 1"
7 N
N C A 7c N
- ? y <
N <
i]. a
•G ?
? 7
y m 1
7 1 4 C
7 3 ` C

0 m
3
m
?
V
C-

? ;2
A W
W O
W P. O)
V A
[J W
V7 ?
T M
W W
O ? A
N N
W
r0 C
.C
? W W T + ? N b V ? + _ ? V 10
O
i
O P. W O
O = V O A t0 r
O
0 -• N fn O 1
a
W ?
W '° C

? A O
-
+
N
V A
D7
1
G O
OJ
O A
eD
GA V
O
0 to
m
A tD
W
O A
t0 O
p, A
0
t71 W
Oo
co V
W
W N
N
? m N
n p
m
r?
r W 0
N A j 0
W 0 N
W A W
N v rD
A O 71
r W 171 (
p 0 t
D

N
Of N
Co
/n
V
W
t0
W
W
N
?
N
N
!?
W
S
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o e o 0 0 0 0 0 ?
o
3F /*
rp y
a
N
M
CL

?I
M
M
?Z
N
,a
`•G
C\
W
i
m
wi
tJf
AQ
rt
N
From: Self <NROAR04/NlEW331>
To: "John Dorney" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: US 421 update and related DOT matters
Send reply to: [e-mail]
Date sent: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 08:07:20 +0000
John, Hope that we can start working with DOT better. Still
have some unanswered questions. On Feb 4, 1998 I sent you e-mail
message that Phillip Todd and I had found a stream trib that had not
been included in impacts for McConnel Rd interchange and requested
review by DOT to determine if this was an oversight that needed to be
included. Phillip was a bit put out by our finding an undocumented
impact. Trib was discharging from an old pond site. Also, Eric Black
has been pursuing as best he can (since I was out) a large wetland
impact from this same project. I do not recollect that this project
was to impact a large wetland as described by Eric. So bottom line is
that we need to come to some resolution on this specific project site
ASAP as DOT is working has been working there for some time and we
still have questions. In my previous e-mail I called this rib a dual
braided trib with about 300' of impact. We need to see a COMPLETE
document on this whole Greensboro bypass.
From: "John Dorney" <[e-mail]> Cc:
'coleen' <[e-mail]> ,
'dennis' <[e-mail]> Cyndi_B
<Windows/PostMaster/[e-mail]> , John _D
<Windows/PostMaster/[e-mail]> Subject: US 421
update and related DOT matters Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1998 16:56:34
-0700
Update on 421: Prepared draft 401 and faxed to DOT. They reviewed
and agreed with conditions as written. Once COE straightens out the
Public Notice issue, we will issue 401.
Second (and related issue): My understanding of the agreement between
DOT and DENR with respect to future 401s was that DOT would not send
applications to us for review unless they had a mitigation plan. We
just received the Public Notice for a project (widening I-40 in
Greensboro) which will impact 5.37 acres of wetlands and 4,297 linear
feet of streams with no mitigation plan. DOT is developing the plan
for a wetland mitigation site on South Buffalo Creek (no final plan or
even a final draft yet), they are talking to the Starmount Forest
Country Club about stream mitigation on their property (they are
"currently investigating the development of a mitigation plan" ) and
(even with these mitigation ideas) they still need additional stream
and wetland mitigation areas which they have yet to locate. We propose
to put the project on hold (in writing) since "Information necessary
to the Director's decision is unavailable" (15A NCAC 2H .0507 (a)(5)).
Please advise. It would be helpful if someone in the Archdale
Building told them generically not to send these applications until
they have mitigation plan (assuming this is the policy understanding
between our Departments). Be aware that this general policy would
have some serious implications for their TIP schedule but we believe
that it is better to have DOT be honest about this problem rather than
put in an incomplete application. Please advise.
James Ronald (Ron) Linville -- 1 -- Wed, 12 Aug 1998 12:18:09

From: Self <NROAR04/NlEW331>
To: John Dorney <[e-mail]>,NROAR04/TS19W40, "C
Subject: 421 and DOT suggestions
Copies to: steve mauney,NROAR04/N1ED706
Send reply to: [e-mail]
Date sent: Tue, 24 Mar 1998 09:18:50 +0000
Article in paper this AM indicating that State will make priority of
421 and that there is a realization of doing business a better way. I
concur and agree we do need a safer road. I have relatives in Wilkes
and drive the road a lot for other purposes. DOT created the existing
fiasco by calling the new road a "widening" which is misleading. So
if it is a new day, let's move forward and make some elementary and
basic changes to the way we ALL do business.
Firstly, DOT should not hide (misname) what they are doing in the
environmental documents by calling a project what it is not. That is
how these things get up the ladder w/o a full review. ("It's just a
road widening.")
Secondly, DOT should not buy property until after they have
all their permits. To do otherwise is questionable as USFWS and EPA
can overide. This also makes permit review seem pointless unless we
are willing to let DOT waste tax dollars if changes are made. Court
cases do not consider owership as a priority for permitting.
Thirdly, DOT and environmental reviewers should come to
an agreement early on, which means that DOT must produce a close to
finished project plan with good maps showing the actual impacts at the
time of preapplication reviews, not permit reviews. To do this DOT
must incorporate env. field comments into the plan when they finally
do submit plans or show very good reasons for not doing so.
Previously, they have ignored us (or their env. people) when things
were brought up. Things were likely ignored by central DOT staff so
we had too many decisions made by non-field personnel for
non-environmental reasons. We only have one environment. We can have
many roads but they can be built sensitively. It is the State's job
to insure that happens.
Forthly (and repeat of above), we and DOT environmental spend half of
our field time trying to decipher the maps provided by DOT
engineering. We need to spend time to see the impacts and understand
the project. Simply put, we need to see the project on USGS topo type
maps and less busy site specific maps. We need to see wetlands,
streams, hydrology and buildings. Even the DOT staff gets very
confused and frustrated looking at the current maps.
Fifthly, DOT should never build a 2 lane road in the middle of a right
of way that has been purchased large enough for a future 4 lane
highway. Utilization becomes more difficult and costly. Access
control for the future 4 lane was not preserved through parts of this
roadway which does not provide for ease of future utilization.
Controlled acess should be a must with major connectors and potential
4 lane highways.
Still think we could all sit down and work out an appropriate 421
route if DOT is willing. A shame this had to happen this way before
James Ronald (Ron) Linville -- 1 -- Wed, 12 Aug 1998 12:19:13
r
they would listen. I think that most of DOT environmental want to do
the right thing but somehow it just doesn't get to the final project.
In my opinion, there are onsite stormwater opportunities that we and
they should look at that may help us protect water quality that may
not fit our "in kind" mitigation requirements especially in the
mountains and piedmont.
Hope this is helpful. Will FAX article to Cyndi this AM.
James Ronald (Ron) Linville -- 2 -- Wed, 12 Aug 1998 12:19:13
From: Self <NR0AR04/N1EW331>
To: "Cyndi Bell" <cyndi_ [e-mail]>, "John Dorney
Subject: (Fwd) RE: (Fwd) 421
Send reply to: [e-mail]
Date sent: Wed, 11 Mar 1998 08:16:50 +0000
Thought this might give some more insights into this 421 mess.
Forwarded Message Follows -------From: "Mickey, Joseph H.
Jr." <[e-mail]> To: "James Ronald
(Ron) Linville" <[e-mail]> Subject:
RE: (Fwd) 421 Date: Tue, 10 Mar 1998 07:07:00 -0500
The ones in the Wilkesboro paper are just as bad, putting address to
governor and legislators so folks can write them to push this economic
boom road through. It's a damn shame we can't defend ourselves on
this in the press. So much for the right of free speech, doesn't
apply to state employees I guess. Wonder why Wade Hoke hasn't
mentioned that when this road was first mentioned the resource
agencies said then to follow the existing route. Also, no mention of
the fact that when DOT widened the existing 421 in the 60's, with the
intention of adding another lane in the future, they put the existing
road in the wrong place and failed to control access. Wonder why they
go and buy right-of-way before they get any permits? Seems backwards
doesn't it. This road is not about road safety, but getting folks to
the mountains to spend their money. This really pisses us off
doesn't it. Just goes to show that this state doesn't really care
about the environment, only the greenback dollar. We're gong to
eventually drown in our own waste.
"Woe to those who join house to house, who add field to field, until
there is no more room, and you are made to dwell alone in the mist of
the land" Isaiah 5:8
Excepting atomic holocaust, the most dangerous threats to our way of
life are pollution, politicians and developers - not necessarily in
that order. (Guess we better add DOT).
From: James Ronald
To: Mickey, Joseph
Subject: (Fwd) 421
Date: Monday, March
Confidential:
(Ron) Linville
H. Jr.
09, 1998 6:03AM
I assume you read the editorials in the W-S Journal this
morning. DOT is obviously putting on the pressure and they have got
their side of the story out via the Wilkesboro reports in the paper...
None of the reasons for not doing this road as proposed have come
out.
------- Forwarded
Message Follows -------From: Self <NROAR04/N1EW331>
To: "Cyndi Bell" <[e-mail]>, "John
Dorney" <[e-mail]>, "John Dorney"
<[e-mail]> Subject: 421 Cc:
James Ronald (Ron) Linville -- 1 -- Wed, 12 Aug 1998 12:20:03
[e-mail] Reply-to:
[e-mail] Date: Mon, 9 Mar 1998
10:48:29 +0000
Think some things that need to come out from PR on this are:
1. DWQ and a lot of others did not know (WSRO did not) that DOT
owned enough right of way to build the road on the existing roadway
until recently. So the EAs and economic issues were flawed?
2. Impacts can and should be minimized by using existing roadways.
Innovative planning with environmental concerns upfront should be
utilized instead of straight line engineering.
3. Wetland area near Boone has significant uses. There are
associated areas that appear to have potential for mitigation sites
(PC pastures). These should not be unnecessarily destroyed. If we
build the road and destroy these we may get the tourist to the
mountains quicker but we will have destroyed a part of the ecosystem
that they are trying to enjoy.
4. As indicated in the W-S Journal editorial of 980309 on
sustainable development, "Good environmental stewardship is good
business. It deserves a wide hearing." How can the Journal turn
around in the next editorial and say the 421 "delays don't seem to be
about the environment. They are about bureaucracy." ??? Obviously,
they only have a small piece of the story.
5. Following the thought in number 4 above, once DOT destroys these
environments, they will be lost forever and that is not
sustainability. Sustainability can only occur if DOT uses the roadway
that they have already messed up. All they need to do is talk to
USFWS, USEPA, NCWRC. NC Nat. Hist Museum (Dennis) and a few others to
understand this thing.
6. Who but an idiot would want to keep on destroying the good
things in our state when we ought to be working together to do it
better with less destruction? Just because an EA was done does not
insure that permits can or should be issued.
*************************************************** To a person
uninstructed in natural history, a country stroll is a walk through a
gallery filled with wonderful works of art, nine-tenths of which have
their faces turned to the wall. -Thomas Huxley
James Ronald (Ron) Linville -- 2 -- Wed, 12 Aug 1998 12:20:03
t?
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. P.O. BOX 25201. RALEIGH. N.C. 27611-5201
GOVERNOR
July 2, 1998
Mr. G. Wayne Wright
Chief
Regulatory Branch
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Post Office Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402
Dear Wayne:
Re: Permit Review Agency Meeting - Southern Section
4 t ! ! R
J U L ® 7 1938
?'ie'glt nail Office
E. Noms TOLSON
SECRETARY
Attached are the minutes from the meeting of May 21, 1998 and an agenda for our July
16, 1998 meeting. By cony of this letter I am inviting all Federal and State review agencies to our
next meeting Everyone in attendance at the last meeting and those being sent a cony of this letter
are being provided a cony of the minutes of the May meeting and an agenda for the July 16. 1998
meeting.
Our next Southern Section meeting is Thursday, July 16, 1998 at 9:30 a.m. in the
Photogrammetry conference room located in the NCDOT Century Center Complex just west of I-
440/Poole Road interchange in Raleigh.
Please advise if you have any questions regarding the meeting, minutes, or agenda.
Sincerely,
ell
l
,?tA ,
David C. Robinson, Ph.D., P.E.
Assistant Manager
Planning & Environmental Branch
3% ?A
Attachments
cc: Lt. Col. Terry R. Youngbluth, COE
Mr. Ernie Jahnke, COE, Wilmington
Mr. Ken Jolly, COE, Raleigh
Mr. Robert Johnson, COE, Asheville
Mr. David Lekson, COE, Washington
Ms. M. Brooke Lamson, COE, Wilmington
Mr. Ted Bisterfield, EPA, Atlanta
Mr. Tom Welborn, EPA, Atlanta
Mr. John Hefner, USFWS, Raleigh
Mr. Mark Cantrell, USFWS, Asheville
Mr. Larry Hardy, NMFS, Beaufort
Mr. Ron Sechler, NMFS, Beaufort
Mr. N. L. Graf, FHWA, Attn: Mr. Roy Shelton
Mr. Craig Deal, DEHNR, Raleigh
Ms. Linda Pearsall, DEHNR, Natural Heritage
Ms. Melba McGee, DEHNR/DEM
Mr. John Parker, DCM, Raleigh
Mr. Michael D. Marshall, NCDMF, Morehead City
Mr. P. A. Wojciechowski, NCDMF, Morehead City
Mr. David Cox, NCWRC, Northside
Mr. Len Sanderson, P.E.
Mr. Don Morton, P.E.
Mr. C. W. Leggett, P.E.
Mr. L. V. Prevatt, P.E.
Mr. R. B. Davis, P.E.
Dr. David Robinson, P.E.
Mr. R. L. Hill, P.E.
Mr. A. L. Hankins, P.E.
Mr. G. T. Shearin, P.E.
Dr. V. C. Bruton
Mr. David Foster, P.E.
Mr. M. R. Turner
Mr. Don Lee

PERMIT REVIEW MEETING
July 16, 1998
Agenda
9:30 AM
9:45 AM
OPENING COMMENTS
David C. Robinson - NCDOT, P&E
David Franklin - COE, Regulatory
STATUS OF PERMIT APPLICATIONS IN COE SOUTHERN SECTION
PROJECTS REQUIRING CAMA PERMITS
Gordon Cashin R-2633, Wilmington Bypass, New Hanover County
Phillip Todd R-2105AB, Widening of NC 24 from 0.38 Mile West of NC 58
to Broad Creek, Carteret County
STATUS OF OTHER PROJECTS
Phillip Todd U-2009A, Kannapolis - Westside Bypass from 0.118 km South
of SR 1555 East of I-85 to NC 73, Cabarrus County
R-2562A, NC 87 from Multi-Lane Section E of I-95 in
Cumberland County to NC 20 in Bladen County, Cumberland
and Bladen Counties
A-11BA, Improvements to US 64 from NC 69 in Hayesville
to East of the Hiwassee River, Clay County
U-401, SR 1684 (Elk Mountain Road) Improvements from
NC 251 to Cottage Street, Buncombe County
X-21), New Connector from US 401 to I-95, Cumberland
County
Lindsey Riddick U-3616, Western Boulevard Widening (Jacksonville),
Onslow County
R-529BA & BB, US 421 from West of South Fork New
River to West of the Blue Ridge Parkway, Watauga County
R-2596A, US 221 Widening from NC 226 to North of
SR 1569 near North Cove, McDowell County
Michael Wood R-210, US 1 from South of SR 1853 North of Lakeview to
SR 1180 South of Sanford, Moore and Lee Counties
U-2506, Rea Road Extension, Mecklenburg County
U-2510, NC 16 Widening, Mecklenburg County
R-2248BA, AC, and AD, Charlotte Outer Loop, Mecklenburg
County
PERMIT REVIEW MEETING
July 16, 1998
Agenda - Page Two
Alice Gordon U-2912, Fayetteville - Owen Drive Extension from I-95
Business to NC 87 at SR 2283 (East Mountain Drive),
Cumberland County
R-2204A, NC 11/903 from NC 24 to 1.0 Mile North of
Kenansville, Duplin County
R-2238A, NC 87 from South of SR 1451 (Manchester Road)
in Spring Lake to SR 1113 South of NC 27, Cumberland
and Harnett Counties
U-2211A, Lenoir - SR 1001 from South of SR 1933
(Southwest Boulevard) to North of US 321A (Northwood
Street), Caldwell County
e TATS
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH. N.C. 27611-5201 E. NORRIS TOLSON
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
July 2, 1998
MEMORANDUM TO: File
FROM: David C. Robinson, Ph.D., P.E.
Assistant Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
SUBJECT: Joint NCDOT/Corps of Engineers/
Review Agencies Permit Meeting
The Permit Review Agencies Meeting was held on May 21, 1998, at 9:30 a.m. in the
Photogrammetry Conference Room at the Department of Transportation's Century Center
Complex on Poole Road, Raleigh, North Carolina. Attached is a list of those in attendance.
Mr. Robinson opened the meeting by welcoming everyone. Mr. Robinson announced
Mr. William (Bill) Gilmore, P.E. was announced as the Planning and Environmental Branch
Manager and will start on June 8. Mr. Ted Devens introduced Ms. Kendra Williamson who will
be working for Planning and Environmental during the summer.
The September 17th meeting will be changed to September 24th because.of the CTE
conference scheduled for September 16-18, 1998, in New Bern, North Carolina.
Mr. Franklin announced the COE is developing several new nationwide permits which
will replace the Nationwide Permit No. 26. The draft permits are not on Public Notice yet and a
schedule has not been established.
STATUS OF PERMITS
U-2107, Jacksonville Bypass, Onslow County; Gordon Cashin, NCDOT Environmental
Specialist/Permit Supervisor
The COE advised NCDOT of a borrow pit problem associated with the project. A meeting
will be scheduled to discuss this situation.
2. R-2633CC, Wilmington Bypass from I-40 to NC 132, New Hanover County; Gordon
Cashin, NCDOT Environmental Specialist/Permit Supervisor
The NCDOT is finalizing the revised permit drawings for Section CC. The new permit
application will be distributed to the resource agencies as soon as possible. Section CC will
impact 13.89 acres of bottomland hardwood and 34.95 acres of wet pine flats. The new permit
application will contain a discussion of the differences between the old and revised applications.
0
Mr. David Schiller distributed handouts on two potential mitigation sites, the Angola Bay
Site and Corbett Site which are both located in the Cape Fear River Basin. Development of either
site would be provided as turnkey, project-specific mitigation by a private organization for the
NCDOT.
Part of the Angola Bay site consists of prior converted farmland, which can be restored to
pocosin, swamp forest and/or wet pine flat. The remainder of the site contains ditched flatwood
and preservation areas. At the present time, the site does not have any potential creek or stream
restoration opportunities. The site developer has applied for permits from the resource agencies
based on the restoration of 100 acres of farmland on the site for mitigation. The NCDWQ 401
Certification has been issued and the COE 404 permit is pending. The preliminary design for the
entire site is complete. The site contains approximately 4,400 acres which includes about 628
acres of restoration; 1,060 acres of enhancement; and 2,576 acres of preservation.
The advantages of the Angola Bay site are: (1) suitable mitigation for Wilmington
Bypass; (2) ample acreage for Section C and the remaining sections of the project; (3) primarily
muck soils to meet 12.5% hydrology criteria; (4) reasonable proximity to impact areas (28 miles);
(5) large management tracts; (6) adjacent to and contiguous with public lands; and (7) adjacent
landowner (NCWRC) wants property after mitigation construction is complete.
The Corbett Property contains approximately 1,900 acres of interstream flats, headwater
slopes, and stream on both sides of the proposed Wilmington Bypass for approximately three
miles. Prince Georges Creek and Island Creek, both tributaries associated with emergency
watershed programs in the Wilmington area, are located on this property. The site is vegetated
primarily by pocosin, pine flatwood, longleaf pine savannah, and red maple forest along former
streams corridors. One red-cockaded woodpecker colony has been documented in southwestern
portions of the mitigation site. Also, documented populations of rough-leaved loosestrife occur
immediately south of the site and may be incorporated into the ecosystem approach to on-site
mitigation.
The site contains approximately 480 acres of on-site wetland restoration in nonriverine
flatwood systems. The remaining, approximately 1,420 acres within nonriverine flats provide
upland buffer, wetland enhancement, and/or wetland preservation potential with opportunities for
protected species enhancements. Additionally, the site could provide approximately 30 acres of
on-site wetland restoration in riverine, bottomland hardwood swamps and up to 5,000 linear feet
of stream restoration credit. -
The NCDOT wants to include a mitigation proposal in the revised permit application
package and would like to utilize one of these sites. The resource agencies requested any
additional information the NCDOT or the consultant may have on both sites. A site visit to both
properties was scheduled for June 9. If the Corbett property is selected, construction could begin
this year; however, the NCDOT would need to know as soon as possible. There is tremendous
pressure for urban development of the Corbett property.
3. R-2105AB, Widening of NC 24 from Existing 5-1ane Section in Swansboro to US 70 in
Morehead City: Phillip Todd, NCDOT Environmental Specialist
Construction of the Weeks property began in April. The NCDOT, COE, and NCDWQ
visited the site after the grading was completed. The planting will be completed by May 29.
Through right-of-way contacts, the NCDOT has learned that the property in Cedar Point,
which includes the peninsula into the White Oak River, is 14 acres in size (12 acres of mash and 2
acres of upland). The NCDOT requested the resource agencies' input as to whether the entire 14
acre property should be purchased. The 12 acre portion of the property would be preservation
only; however, it does have a development risk and does pose questions about land rights.
4. A-9DB and DC, Improvements to NC 28 from West of SR 1231 to SR 1121 at
Almonds, Graham and Swain Counties; Phillip Todd, NCDOT Environmental
Specialist
As per the 404 permit special conditions, the water sampling data and plan sheet showing
the water sampling sites will be submitted to the resource agencies soon.
The NCDOT has purchased the front portion of the Mason tract. Information on this site
will be distributed to the resource agencies when available.
5. A-10, Improvements to US 19/23, Buncombe and Madison Counties: Phillip Todd,
NCDOT Environmental Specialist
Construction of Section D has begun. The NCDOT, COE, NCDWQ, and NCWRC met
with the contractor to discuss the project.
6. A-11, Improvements to US 64 from NC 68 in Hayesville to East of the Hiwassee
River, Clay County; Phillip Todd, NCDOT Environmental Specialist
An endangered mussel may occur in the project area. The NCDOT must resolve the
potential presence of this species before the permits can be issued for this project. The survey will
be conducted in July.
The NCDOT will apply for a NWP 14 for the pipe extension and a NWP 33 and a General
Permit No. 31 for the bridge construction over the Hiwassee River.
7. U-401, SR 1684 (Elk Mountain Road) Improvements from NC 251 to Cottage Street,
Buncombe County; Phillip Todd, NCDOT Environmental Specialist
This project involves widening and realigning the roadway to increase the design speed,
reduce the potential for accidents, and provide traffic flow improvements. The preferred
alternative involves piping approximately 1,025 feet of stream (an unnamed tributary to
Beaverdam Creek). The NCDOT submitted an Individual permit application on April 3, 1998, to
the resource agencies for review and comment. The COE issued the Public Notice on May 14 and
it will expire in June. The NCDOT proposed to utilize the WRP for the stream mitigation
requirements.
The COE requested NCDOT investigate all other possibilities for stream restoration
mitigation before proposing to utilize the WRP. The consultant conducted a search of the area for
potential stream restoration mitigation sites and found Reed Creek. The Reed Creek site was
utilized for R-2306 (US 74 Improvements, Buncombe County). The COE requested information
on the potential sites located in the search.
X-21), New Connector from US 401 to East of I-95, Cumberland County; Phillip Todd,
NCDOT Environmental Specialist
The NCDOT submitted an Individual permit application in April for Sections D and E.
The COE requested additional information for the Public Notice.
The NCDOT and resource agencies met in the field to visit the McPherson Creek (Cedar
Falls) and verify the stream delineation. The construction of the project will impact approximately
2,165 feet of stream. Approximately 1,591 feet of McPherson Creek (Cedar Falls) will be
relocated utilizing the Natural Stream Channel Design Principles. The NCDOT will submit
information on the McPherson Creek (Cedar Falls) relocation including the new channel designs,
comparison between existing and proposed channel and stream bank vegetation.
The Cravers Creek bridge will be extended which eliminates wetland impact site number
6. Wetland impact sites 1, 2, and 3 will be deleted because the project termini location was
changed. The project construction will end at US 401 with an at grade, signalized intersection
which the NCDOT plans to convert to an interchange in the future.
The construction of the project will result in a net loss of 574 feet of stream. The NCDOT
will propose to utilize the Barra Farms mitigation site for the wetland and remaining stream
impacts. The COE cannot authorize the use of Barra Farms until a final banking agreement is
signed. EcoBank developed the mitigation banking instrument.
9. U-3616, Jacksonville - Western Boulevard from 0.2 Mile East of US 17 to SR 1308
(Gum Branch Road), Onslow County; Lindsey Riddick, NCDOT Environmental
Specialist
The NCDOT submitted an Individual permit application to the resource agencies for
review and comment in August 1997. The resource agencies approved the proposal to utilize the
Haws Run mitigation site for this project. The permits will be issued after NCDOT supplies a
boundary survey indicating the portions to be used for this project.
10. R-529BA & BB, US 421 from West of South Fork New River to West of the Blue
Ridge Parkway, Watauga County; Lindsey Riddick, NCDOT Environmental Specialist
The NCDOT has received the permits for the construction of this project and wishes to
thank the resource agencies for their assistance in obtaining the permits.
11. R-2596A, US 221 Widening from NC 226 to North of SR 1569 near North Cove,
McDowell County; Lindsey Riddick, NCDOT Environmental Specialist
This project involves the widening of US 221 for approximately four miles. The NCDWQ
submitted a letter requesting the stream restoration mitigation proposal. The NCDOT is
investigating a potential on-site stream restoration mitigation area. More information on this site
will be forwarded to the resource agencies when available.
12. R-210, US 1 from South of SR 1853 North of Lakeview to SR 1180 South of Sanford,
Moore and Lee Counties; Michael Wood, NCDOT Environmental Specialist
A pre-application field review meeting was scheduled for April 22 and 23 with the
resource agencies; however, it was canceled due to design changes which will probably increase
the wetland impacts. The NCDOT will re-schedule the field review meeting after receipt of the
revised information on the wetland impacts. The NCDOT is planning to utilize the Taylor site and
Barra Farms for the mitigation on this project.
13. U-2506, Rea Road Extension, Mecklenburg County; Michael Wood, NCDOT
Environmental Specialist
The Public Notice will be issued the week of May 26. The agreement with the City of
Charlotte to transplant the Schweinitz's sunflower will be signed soon. The 404 permit cannot be
issued until NCDOT obtains concurrence from the USFWS. The NCDOT intends to utilize the
Long Creek site for mitigation.
14. U-2510, NC 16 Widening, Mecklenburg County; Michael Wood, NCDOT
Environmental Specialist
The NCDOT has received the permits required for the construction of the project except
for the proposed dredging activities at Four Mile Creek. A NWP 27 permit application is being
prepared and will be distributed to the resource agencies for review and comment soon. The
dredging activities are associated with Section BB which will be let in September 1998.
15. R-2248BA, AC, and AD; Charlotte Outer Loop, Mecklenburg County; Michael
Wood, NCDOT Environmental Specialist
The project will impact approximately 2 1/2 acres of wetlands. The NCDOT is calculating
the stream impacts and developing the stream drawings which will be in the permit application.
The NCDOT is investigating mitigation options for these sections. The permit application
will be distributed after the mitigation proposal is finalized.
16. U-2912, Fayetteville - Owen Drive Extension from I-95 Business to NC 87 at SR 2283
(East Mountain Drive), Cumberland County; Alice Gordon, NCDOT Environmental
Specialist
The NCDOT submitted a letter to the resource agencies with detailed information on the
Wilkes Road alternative and requested the permit files be re-opened. The COE has issued the 30-
day Public Notice.
The preferred alternative, will be full control of access. The NCDOT will have to purchase
the rights for full control of access from the property owners. The total cost to purchase the full
control of access is estimated to be $1 - 1 1/2 million. This process will not begin until the
NCDOT knows the 404 and 401.permits will be issued for the preferred alternative.
The Wilkes Road alternative will cost approximately $3 million more than the preferred
alternative. The additional cost, involves the construction of an interchange and bridge over NC
87.
The NCDOT will propose to utilize the Dowd Dairy mitigation site. The mitigation plan
was approved by the resource agencies. The site planting will begin this fall and continue into the
winter of 1999. The NCDOT will sign a wetland mitigation banking instrument for this site.
The NCDWQ has several avoidance and minimization issues to resolve on the Wilkes
Road alternative before a permit will be issued for either alternative.
17. R-2204A, NC 11/903 from NC 24 to 1.0 Mile North of Kenansville, Duplin County;
Alice Gordon, NCDOT Environmental Specialist
This project will be a 1 1/2 mile four-lane divided facility on new location with partial
control of access and a 46 foot median width. The design was changed to a partial control of
access to eliminate the proposed service roads. The project has independent utility and does not
pre-determine future project's alignments.
The project is located in the Cape Fear river basin and will permanently impact
approximately 7.16 acres of wetlands, approximately 0.95 acre of temporary wetland impacts, and
348 feet of stream impact (116 feet of stream will be relocated). The permanent impacts consist of
swamp forest. The NCDOT originally proposed to utilize the Dowd Dairy mitigation site;
however, the Barra Farms mitigation site would offer a better replacement for the impacted
wetlands and streams.
The resource agencies expressed concern about the proposed Grove Creek bridge. The
anticipated wetland impacts around Grove Creek is a unusual type of wetland and very high
quality. The COE stated this type of wetland system probably cannot be mitigated. The resource
agencies stated the Grove Creek bridge needs to be extended to reduce the impacts to the area.
18. R-2238A, NC 87 from South of SR 1451 (Manchester Road) in Spring Lake to SR 1113 South
of NC 27, Cumberland and Harnett Counties; Alice Gordon, NCDOT Environmental Specialist
This project involves widening NC 87 to a four-lane curb and gutter facility. Approximately 2.8
acres of wetlands will be impacted and 74 feet of stream on Section AB. A stream determination is
scheduled for June 1998 for Section AA. The Barra Farms mitigation site will be proposed to offset the
wetland and stream impacts associated with this project.
The Department of the Army has requested the "Overhill" area of the project be re-designed to
allow passage of Army vehicles. Additional structures may be constructed. An Individual permit
application will be submitted to the resource agencies for review and comment when the information on
the stream impacts and the revised drawings for the "Overhill" re-designed is received.
A red-cockaded woodpecker consultation was conducted and NCDOT received a "no effect" from
USFWS in 1995.
PROJECT PLANNING
R-2559, US 74 - Monroe Bypass, from East of SR 1515 to Existing US 74, Union County,
Leigh Lane, NCDOT P&E Project Planning Engineer
The project involves the construction of a bypass around the northern side of the City of
Monroe. The proposed facility will be a four-lane divided freeway on new location. The
Environmental Assessment (EA) and Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) were approved in
March 1996 and June 1997, respectively.
The NCDOT is in the final design phase of the project and needs concurrence from the
resource agencies on the final medial width and several small design modifications. The median
width for this project was originally 70 feet which resulted in 7.9 acres of wetland impacts (EA).
The NCDOT conducted an internal meeting and decided to reduce the median.width to 46 feet for
cost containment reasons (FONSI). The 46 foot median width will impact approximately 5.46
acres of wetlands. The reduction of the median width did not significantly change the wetland
impacts associated with this project.
The NCDOT is requesting the median width be changed from 46 feet to the original 70
feet for the following reasons: (1) close proximity.to a metropolitan planning area (Charlotte); (2)
the facility will be a part of the primary southern intrastate route running the west to east through
North Carolina; (3) high traffic volumes are expected; (4) allows for future widening within the
median; and (5) the wetland impacts sites are very small and fragmented.
The NCDWQ requested the stream impact information before concurring with the 70 foot
median width. Also, the NCDWQ suggested the mitigation plan development phase needs to
begin. There are 20 stream crossings associated with the construction of this project. The
NCDOT agreed to provide wetland and stream restoration mitigation for this project in order to
utilize the 70 foot median width. The NCDWQ concurred with the 70 foot median width provided
that adequate mitigation is offered. A stream determination will be required before issuance of the
permits. The resource agencies will expected the mitigation plan to offset the wetland and stream
impacts associated with the project in the permit application package.
Minimization will be further reviewed during preparation of the final design plans. The
NCDOT will meet with the resource agencies once the final design plans are complete enough for
review.
R-2911, US 70 from SR 2318 (Fanjoy Road) East of Statesville to US 601 in Salisbury, Iredell
and Rowan Counties; Beverly Robinson, NCDOT P&E Project Planning Engineer
The project involves the widening and partial relocation of US 70 which is divided into
five sections. Section A will be constructed on new location and has multiple alternatives.
Sections B, C, D, and E involve widening US 70 on existing location. The NCDOT is finalizing
the Environmental Assessment (EA) and needs concurrence on the preferred alternative for
Section A.
Several alternatives for Section A were investigated. Alternative No. 1 involves widening
US 70 to a five-lane curb and gutter facility on existing location. This alternative would require an
at-grade crossing of rail spur tracks servicing four businesses in the vicinity of the project. This
alternative was eliminated because of the substantial train delays presently occurring and would
cause major conflicts and delays on US 70 after construction of the proposed improvements.
Deliveries to Furst McNess delay traffic six to seven times per week for about 5 minutes each
time. The Purina Chow Company averages five trains per week and blocks existing US 70
approximately 20 minutes per trip. Two other companies, M. A. Resin Distribution Company and
Liberty Homes, Inc., are located further south of existing US 70. M. A. Resin Distribution
Company averages three trains per week and Liberty Homes, Inc. averages one train per month.
Alternative No. 2 involves relocating US 70 south of the existing US 70 from Fanjoy Road
tying into the existing US 70 east of Hezekiah Lane ending at the county line. Dual structures will
be constructed over the rail spur tracks eliminating the current conflicts with the trains.
Alternative No. 3 was developed as a result of the citizens informational workshop held in
July 1997 and involves relocating US 70 south of existing US 70 from Fanjoy Road tying into the
existing US 70 at the county line. This alternative would be a four-lane 30 foot raised median
facility with dual structures over the rail spur tracks. Alternative No. 3 also allows for better
continuity than the other alignments. Section B will be a four-lane divided facility with a 30 foot
raised median.
Alternative No. 1 would impact approximately 0.1 acres of wetlands and 183.7 feet of
stream. Alternative No. 2 would impact approximately 2.6 acres of wetlands and 2,755.5 feet of
stream. Alternative No. 3 would impact approximately 3.3 acres of wetlands and 3,156.3 feet of
stream. The NCDOT and the citizens have selected Alternative No. 3 as the preferred. The
NCDOT is aware of the difference in the wetland and stream impacts associated with Alternative
Numbers 2 and 3; however, Alternative No. 3 would provide better continuity and avoids multiple
train delays.
The COE asked if the alignment could be shifted to avoid the wetlands impacts. The
wetland impact sites probably extend throughout the project and not isolated pockets. The
NCDOT conducted a wetland and stream determination, not a delineation.
The COE suggested NCDOT investigate possible train management techniques with the
Rail Division. The NCDOT will get more information on the issue and schedule a meeting with
the resource agencies to further discuss.
U-620, Hope Mill Bypass from SR 1141 (Bingham Drive) to SR 1363 (Elk Road),
Cumberland County; Beverly Robinson, NCDOT P&E Project Planning Engineer
The project will widen George Owen Road to a five-lane curb and gutter section
beginning at SR 1141 (Bingham Drive) and extend on new location to intersect SR 1132 (Legion
Road) directly across from Elk Road. The new location section will be a four-lane 16-foot raised
median. Also, a substantial revision to SR 1107 (Fisher Road) and SR 1141 (Bingham Drive)
intersection is being considered. Widening the existing NC 59 from south of Camden Road to US
401 Business was not feasible because of impacts to the historic district of the town of Hope Mills.
The Hope Mills Bypass is one element of a system-wide thoroughfare plan that provides
circumferential travel between suburban growth area, and is consistent with local land use plans.
The purpose of the project is to provide a circumferential route to facilitate travel around the
southwest side of Fayetteville. The Environmental Assessment (EA) will be completed soon for
distribution to the resource agencies for review and comment. The Public Hearing is scheduled
for Fall 1998.
The NCDOT began with the Cumberland County Thoroughfare Plan Alignment which
impacted high quality of wetlands. A preliminary survey for wetlands was conducted early in the
project development. Based on the information from the survey, Alternative Nos. 1 and 2 were
developed. Alternative No. 1 was developed to minimize the wetland impacts associated with the
thoroughfare plan alignment and Alternative No. 2 was developed to avoid wetlands associated
with the Thoroughfare Plan alignment and Alternative No. 1. A wetland and stream
determination has been conducted. A wetland and stream delineation will be conducted on the
preferred alternative at a later time. The NCDOT has selected Alternative No. 1 as the preferred
alternative.
Alternative No. 1 will impact approximately 6.82 acres of wetlands and 1,250 feet of
stream and Alternative No. 2 will impact approximately 5.12 acres of wetlands and 1,036 feet of
stream. The preliminary wetland and stream impacts are based on a 100 foot right-of-way on
existing location and 230 foot corridor width on new location.
The NCDOT is studying realigning Fisher Road to create a four-leg intersection with
George Owen Road and Bingham Drive. This realignment will not be built as part of this project
but is considered for a future project. Decisions regarding this intersection will be made as a part
of the Hope Mill Bypass project. The proposed realignment would impact approximately 2.2
acres of wetlands and cross Beaver Creek twice. The COE requested a discussion of the proposed
Fisher Road realignment be included in the EA.
The next Southern Section Permit Review Agency Meeting will be Thursday. July 16 1998 at
9:30 a.m. at the Photogrammetry Conference Room, NCDOT Century Center Comulex Poole
Road. Raleigh. North Carolina.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 3:25 p.m.
ATTACHMENT TO MINUTES OF PERMIT MEETING
NAMES AGENCY
Ron Allen NCDOT Roadway Design
Cyndi Bell NCDWQ-Raleigh
Greg Brew NCDOT Roadway Design
Charles Bruton NCDOT P&E
Gordon Cashin NCDOT P&E
Maurizia Chapman Fayetteville MPA
Craig Deal NCDENR/Hwy. Env. Eval. Prog.
Ted Devens NCDOT P&E
Bruce Ellis NCDOT P&E
Sue Flowers NCDOT Roadway Design
Gary Foster NCDOT Roadway Design
David Franklin COE-Wilmington
Alice Gordon NCDOT P&E
Randy Griffin NCDOT Roadside Environmental
Howard Hall USFWS-Raleigh
Rob Hanson NCDOT P&E
Beth Harmon NCDOT P&E
Phil Harris NCDOT P&E
Jim Hauser NCDOT P&E
Tanner Holland NCDOT P&E
Emad Khatib NCDOT Design Services
Leigh Lane NCDOT P&E
Steve Lund COE-Asheville
Tom McCartney USFWS-Raleigh
Scott McLendon COE-Wilmington
Chris Murrary NCDOT P&E
Karen Orthner NCDOT P&E
Lubin Prevatt NCDOT P&E
Abdul Rahmani NCDOT Hydraulics
Lindsey Riddick NCDOT P&E
Beverly Robinson NCDOT P&E
David Robinson NCDOT P&E
Enrico A. Roque NCDOT Roadway Design
David Schiller NCDOT P&E
John Schrohenloher FHWA-Raleigh
Zigrida Smith NCDOT Design Services
David Snyder FHWA-Raleigh
Dewyne Sykes NCDOT Roadway Design
Alan Temple NCDOT Roadway Design
David Timpy COE-Wilmington
Phillip Todd NCDOT P&E
Steve Vamedoe NCDOT Division 6 Engineer
Kendra Williamson NCDOT P&E
Michael Wood NCDOT P&E
May 1998
0 00100
p Ptdd
>(D
CL
? . ?
CD 9
o p

?t
?
?.o
U 00 °?J
m
- ?0
?
n
C
CD rr O ,
", O
0 d
h p
CL

CAD
CD ty U' CD
.• `??
CD t3
¢. +t
CD
,..r.
'•
T
'
O ?3 CD n CD
,ms
O ?
?' O O O
? ?
?
?
,
,,,
.S
S'
G CD s
,
CD
P CD ,
.
Or CD
CIA
= .
.
CD 0
CD
C
.s Gp CD cn O'
CD O •C?p
CD cr CD 0 CD 0

CD `C3 CD
CD cn CD
-F? P O 8 ? uQ p o CD
n
C
U?Q
p'

o
w
CD
`p ID Q" cn p p N O
? CD p -`CS
O
C ?p0
O ¢ i ? CD
A N 0
CD i CD `? CD

00
P
x
O CE CD 0
0
N O c cn S

CD o ~?
CD
C C7
¢ CD ?h
CD O O
P. CD
? PV

0
CD
0

CD P, n
CD
A
- 0- CD O O O C
D D
CD C) rn .?
p

D CD

?
CD
CD
N
O p.
T N
¢

CD 1
p CD
.-o

'
CD CAD >C p O
W ?' p
CL CD q err O
CD CD cn ?3
?t
0
O ( n

H '

- n O Q'
c CD
- z
CD
CD ?O 0
cr
CD ??
z o. o CD CD
Opp
0
cr
CD Pl+
CD
N

d
O
CD

C
QQ
O
O
CD
CD
O
CD
z?zd
won
d ?.
?woo.?
?0 H?
N
0 0 ' ?:S CD
O ITJ
N
C
N
`C
x?o
CD CD
? 'D
oood??
?. ?:3 CD x
¢
t-' o CD ¢' CD
CD a' CD o ?
CD
ddocD ?dcra
uQ
y?n o
O
A

( C
D
ID
?
D
CD ?.
? a J?

? CD

o p
CD

CD ° (D
CD On

(D
L='?
(D

C
o a C)
'
0 6
? cn
CD CD

rA ?* C O
Ln
En CD
CD CS'
O D
1+
CD rUQ
Q
(D
CD cn
? ' CD

Z1 O
(
CD C O v O
CD
cn CS O C
" A CD
A
A
p =
CD FD+ D
D C
C
CDD
B
1
?h " P)
CD
CD

COs CD CD 0

00
N
n ry CD
O
'

En D
0 C
cn
c?D pi ?-.
C-Dt ?
r+ -,
O `C

?• O

cn
A? ? •
C CD O
CD UQ
CD `C
n cn O .s O
O
n CD c
CD CD O
(D O

a
CD
CD
0
cD
(y
.P W
o
CD
CD
' ¢ o
UQ ?-
o
CD
vac
(:r CD
cn
tO+, C
'-r O O
cr
O CD
CY •?"?
CD
cn ?•
CD cn
CD
P. O
P.
C,
n 1+
CD
d
O
F W A TF Michael F. Easley, Governor
O?0 9QG William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
\ Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
4 ?
November (''2002
Mr. Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Manager
NCDOT Planning and Environmental Branch
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC, 27699-1548
Dear Dr. Thorpe:
Re: MODIFICATION to Water Quality Certification Pursuant to §401 of the Federal Clean Water
Act, Proposed US 421 Relocation from west of South Fork of the New River to east of the Blue
Ridge Parkway. Watauga County.
TIP Project Nos. R-529 BA, BB and BD.
DWQ Project No. 970616. COE #199707161.
The Division of Water Quality has reviewed your submittal for a Modification to §401 Water Quality
Certification Number 3185 for the aforementioned project. Review of your application revealed it
lacking necessary information required for making an informed permit decision. The permit application
was deficient in the following areas:
1. Existing Stream Design
The existing stream does not appear to have been designed and/or constructed properly, as such,
DWQ agrees that a new design is in order.
2. In Stream Bed Material and Bank Stabilization
The proposed channel cross sections indicate a specification for "bed material" that is 0.6 meters
thick for the entire channel and over-bank area. However, no specification was provided indicating
the size or gradation of the material. The purpose and nature of the material is not discussed.
Additionally, no sediment transport analysis, shear stress analysis or other modeling was provided
to support the need for such an approach. Finally, it is not clear as to how this approach relates to
natural channel design techniques. The Division of Water Quality does not allow g 6ulm
,§er-channelyreleeation fez-rr>iti s.
-f-a ?uav a12 co
3. Riparian Buffers and Planting Plan KA 1 `Oh.
A planting plan must be provided for the proposed stream buffers. The planting plan should include
tree planting densities of the appropriate native species that will result in a survival rate of 320 trees t j
per acre after five years. Please revise the site plans to include the extent and nature of the plantings
and buffers.
4. Stormwater hilet Location/Protection
Please locate any stormwater outlets to the proposed restored stream on the site plans. Please
provide the means of stabilizing the stormwater outlets on the site plans.
&VIM
'J?f?E>vl
North Carolina Division of Water Quality, 401 Wetlands Certification Unit,
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 (Mailing Address)
2321 Crabtree Blvd., Raleigh, NC 27604-2260 (Location)
919-733-1786 (phone), 919-733-6893 (fax), http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetiands/
5. Morphological Measurements Table
Please complete the Morphological Measurements Table provided in Appendix B of The Internal
Technical Guide for Stream Work in North Carolina, April 2001, for the reference stream reaches.
6. Morphological Measurements
The morphological measurements provided do not appear to? with the proposed stream
plans:
The typical cross section for Reach 1 indicates that the bankfull cross sectional area of 12 sq. ft.
The table indicates a bankfull cross section of 4 sq. ft. The table also indicates a bankfull mean
depth of 1 ft. whereas the typical cross section implies a bankfull mean depth of 1.2 ft.
The typical cross section for Reaches 2 and 3 imply a bankfull cross section of 13 sq. ft. and a mean
bankfull depth of 1.2 ft. The table indicates a bankfull cross section of 4.5 sq. ft. and a mean
bankfull depth of 1 foot.
The existing stream supports the smaller bankfull cross section. The proposed channel widths,
depths, and cross sectional areas appear to be too large. This will likely affect the dimensionless
ratios for the entire design, including the pool to pool spacing and meander lengths. Also, the
proposed sinuosities in Reaches 1 and 2 do not correspond to the valley and average channel slopes.
The pool slopes appear to be overly steep. They should be less than the average slopes. Finally, the
proposed Reaches 1 and 2 appear to be Bc type streams as opposed to C streams based on the
entrenchment ratios ?.,?j h I
??f1vv2 0.Q?Q?esy l?' _ C?jtsvr-e- / CAV-5-
7. Sediment Transport Analysis
A sediment transport analysis can confirm that a stream has been properly designed. A naturally
stable stream transports its bedload in equilibrium so that there is not net aggradation or degradation
over the stream reach. As such, it is necessary that the predicted sediment transport in the design
stream be demonstrated to be in equilibrium to ensure overall stability will be achieved. No bed
load data was provided.
8. Reference Reach
Please provide the precise location(s) of the reference reach(es) used on a site map. A reference
reach must be at least 20 bankfull widths or two full meander lengths at a minimum.
9. Physical Monitoring
Please provide a physical monitoring plan. It is recommended that the plan be based on the Wetland
Restoration Program's Draft Physical and Vegetation Monitoring Outline (Success Criteria)
available at http://h2o.ehnr.state.nc:us/ncwetlands/restore.html.
10. Biological Monitoring
Biological monitoring is required for this stream restoration/relocation project. A written biological
monitoring plan based on the Benthic Macroinvertebrate Monitoring Protocols for Stream
Mitigation Projects that is available online at http://h2o.ehnr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/restore.html.
11. NC WRC Compensatory Stream Mitigation
I?? ele the application w er NCDOT plans to contract with NC Wildlife Resources
Commission for the additional mitigatio es ora '
Pry--
Please note that the Internal Technical Guide for Stream Work in North Carolina (April 2001), and other
documents and information can be downloaded from the Wetlands Unit web site at
hftp://h2o.ehnr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/restore.htm1.
Pursuant to 15A NCAC 2H.0507(a)(3), the permit application will remain on hold until we are supplied
the necessary information. Furthermore, until the information is received by the NC Division of Water
Quality, we request (by copy of this letter) that the US Army Corps of Engineers continue to place the
permit application on hold.
We look forward to working with you to expedite the processing of your permit application. If you have
any questions or require additional information, please contact Cynthia F. Van Der Wiele at
919.733.5715.
Sincerely,
John R. Dorney
Water Quality Certification Program
cc: Wilmington District COE
John Thomas, USACE Raleigh Field Office
Todd St. John, DWQ
Jennifer Frye, NCDWQ Winston-Salem Regional Office
File Copy
US 421 Improvements
from west of South Fork of the New River
to east to the Blue Ridge Parkway
Watauga County
TIP No. R-529 BA and BB
Federal Aid Project No. FR-86-1(16)
State Project No. 8.1750601
STREAM ASSESSMENT REPORT
R-529 BA and BB
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL BRANCH
NATURAL RESOURCES, PERMITS AND MITIGATION UNIT
BRUCE O. ELLIS, CLM, ENVIRONMENTAL BIOLOGIST
LOGAN WILLIAMS, ENVIRONMENTAL BIOLOGIST
15 AUGUST 1997
SUMMARY
Site Number Surface Water USGS HYDROLOGIC BIOCLASSIFICATION
(Section) DESIGNATION'
1 (BA) South Fork of the New
River perennial Good
2 (BA) UT to South Fork of the
New River perennial ND3
4 (BA) Rocky Branch 4A perennial Excellent
UT to Rocky Branch 4B no designation ND
Rocky Branch 4C perennial Good
7 (BA) Pine Run perennial Excellent
8 (BA Pine Run perennial Excellent
9 (BA) Thaxon Creek perennial Excellent
10 (BA) Thaxon Creek perennial Excellent
11 (BA) UT to Thaxon Creek2 intermittent Excellent
1 (BB) Laxon Creek perennial Fair
2 (BB) UT to Laxon Creek no designation ND
3 (BB) UT to Laxon Creek intermittent Good
5 (BB) UT to Gap Creek perennial Excellent
6 (BB) UT to Gap Creek no designation ND
7 (BB) UT to Gap Creek perennial Excellent
10 (BB) UT to Gap Creek no designation ND
12 (BB) UT to Gap Creek intermittent Excellent
13 (BB) Gap Creek perennial Good
14 (BB) UT to Gap Creek no designation ND
16 (BB) UT to Gap Creek no designation Excellent
' USGS Hydrologic Designation as illustrated on the USGS Quadrangle map as a blue line.
2 Data for this stream was collected below the proposed impact area.
3 ND denotes that the bioclassification was not determined, since no macroinvertebrate
collections were performed at this location. Sampling rationale is presented in Section 1.4.
Overall, streams within the project area contained taxa of macroinvertebrates that are
sensitive to pollution, indicating good water quality within the streams. However, the generally
low numbers of taxa and individuals indicate that there is some form of physical stress in most of
the streams. The types of physical stress that are occurring are in the form of substrate
embeddedness, siltation, and scouring.
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The following Stream Assessment Report is submitted to assist in the submission of a
Section 404 permit application for the proposed project. The project lies in Watauga County
(Figures 1 and 2).
1.2 Project Description
The proposed project consists of improving US 421 to a four lane divided facility,
primarily on new location, from just west of the South Fork of the New River to the Blue Ridge
Parkway. Section BA begins just west of the South Fork of the New River and runs essentially
parallel and to the south of US 421 for approximately 7.7 km (4.8 mi) to SR 1357 (Old US 60).
Section BB begins at SR 1357 and runs nearly parallel and to the north of US 421 for 6.4 km (4.0
mi) to just east of the Blue Ridge Parkway.
1.3 Purpose
The purpose of this report is to provide an inventory of the morphological and biological
characteristics of surface waters likely to be impacted by the proposed project. Assessments are
made with regard to the quality of the surface waters, which will allow a comparison to potential
stream restoration sites and an assessment of post construction impacts.
1.4 Methodology
Field surveys and assessments of project area streams were conducted by NCDOT
biologists Bruce O. Ellis, and Logan Williams and Lindsey Riddick on 09, 10, 11, and 12 June
1997, and by Bruce Ellis and Logan Williams on 16, 17, 18, and 19 June 1997. Fisheries
investigations were conducted by Bruce Ellis, Logan Williams and Lindsey Riddick on 14, 15,
16, and 17 July 1997.
Information sources include; U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) quadrangle maps (Boone
and Deep Gap), and NCDOT plan sheets for the proposed project. Water resource information
was obtained from publications of the Department of Environment, Health and Natural
Resources (DEHNR, 1993) and the N.C. Center for Geographic Information and Analysis
(Environmental Sensitivity Base Map of Watauga, Avery, and Caldwell Counties, 1995).
All potentially impacted project area surface waters were investigated as part of this
survey. The rationale for the level of sampling detail for each site was based on the type of
impact proposed, and the relative condition of the stream. For example, intermittent streams
were surveyed for morphological features, however, biological investigations were very limited.
Additionally, after a cursory investigation, some streams were observed to have very little, or no
aquatic fauna, either through the affects of siltation or scouring. For these streams, it was
determined that the expenditure of time and effort to collect a full range of biological and water
quality data was not justified at this time.
2
1.4.1 Stream Morphology
Investigations of stream morphology were conducted in accordance with Rapid
Bioassessment Protocols For Use In Streams and Rivers (RBP), (Plafkin 1986), and Applied
River Morphology (ARM), (Rosgen 1996). The hydrologic status of project area streams was
determined by the stream's representation on a USGS quadrangle map and by guidelines
established by the N.C. Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
(NCDEHNR, 1997). Photographs were taken of each stream in an effort to depict the general
condition and environmental surroundings of each stream system.
1.4.2 Water Chemistry
Very general water chemistry analysis was performed in the field during the
macroinvertebrate collections. The following water quality parameters were examined:
dissolved oxygen, total alkalinity, and pH. Water temperature was also measured during the
macroinvertebrate collections.
All chemical analysis was performed in accordance with field test kit instructions.
Dissolved oxygen content was analyzed using a modified Winkler titration. Total alkalinity was
measured using an acid titration, and pH was determined by color comparison. Dissolved
oxygen and total alkalinity concentrations are reported in parts per million (ppm). Temperature
was recorded as degrees Celsius (°C).
1.4.3 Benthic Macroinvertebrates
Benthic macroinvertebrates were collected from selected streams using methods
described in Standard Operating Procedures, Biological Monitoring [(SOPBM), NCDEHNR,
1995)]. All available habitats (riffles, pools, leaf packs, undercut banks, etc.) within the
proposed construction impact area of the streams were sampled. Macroinvertebrates were
preserved in 70 per cent isopropyl alcohol, and returned to the laboratory for identification.
The NCDHNR has developed criteria to assign bioclassifications ranging from Poor to
Excellent to each benthic sample based on the number of taxa present in the intolerant groups of
Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera and Trichoptera (EPT), (DEM, 1994). A biotic index was calculated
for the macroinvertebrate samples by summarizing tolerance data for all species in a given
sample. A bioclassification was then derived from the data generated from the biotic index
metrics. The bioclassifications generated in this document reflect water quality conditions within
the construction impact area.
1.4.4 Fisheries
A fisheries survey was performed in selected project area streams. The fisheries survey
was performed by a three man team using a Coffelt Model Mark 10, Variable Voltage Pulsator
electroschocker. Selection of a particular stream for the fisheries inventory was largely based on
accessibility and stream size. For example, many of the smaller streams contained overhanging
obstructions that severely encumbered safe and effective passage with the electroshocking
equipment. Additionally, the small widths and depths of some streams prohibited effective use
of the equipment.
Study area lengths were 100 in (328 ft) with the exception of Site 4A in Section BA. The
study area length for Site 4A was 40 m (131 ft) due to overhanging obstructions. Collection time
was recorded during each sampling event to determine catch per unit effort (CPUE). All fish
collected during the fisheries surveys were placed in temporary holding tanks and were then
identified to species, counted, measured (standard fork length), and weighed. Larger specimens
were weighed individually, while an aggregate weight per size class for smaller species was
performed. Upon completion of data collection, all fish were returned to their respective stream.
A Scientific Fish Collection License (No. 0635), was obtained from the Wildlife
Resources Commission (WRC), to collect fish from project area streams. All fisheries data
collected during the study will be forwarded to the WRC as per license conditions.
1.5 Definitions
The following are definitions of terminology and methodology utilized within this report:
Abundance: Rare, 1-2 specimens; Common, 3-9 specimens; Abundant, >10 specimens
Canopy Cover: Visual estimation of the density of terrestrial vegetative cover over the stream.
Channel Depth: The vertical distance measured between the top of the bank and the stream
bottom.
Channel Slope: Slope of the stream channel, determined in the field with a Suunto
combination compass/inclinometer.
Channel Width: The horizontal distance between the channel banks, measured at the top of
the channel.
Embeddedness: The visual observation of the degree to which larger substrate particles are
surrounded by fine sediments. The following categories are assigned to the
per cent coverage by fine sediment (RBP): excellent 0-25, good 25-50, fair
50-75, and poor >75.
EPT: Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, Trichoptera
Stream: The actively flowing portion of the stream observed at the time of the
survey.
Nick Point: An abrupt change in gradient of the channel.
Pool/Riffle Ratio: The pool/ riffle (run/bend) ratio is calculated by dividing the average
distance between riffles (or bends) by the average stream width.
Habitat assessments based on the ratio are as follows (RBP): 5-7 excellent, 7-
15 good, 15-25 fair, and >25 poor.
Substrate: Material composition of the stream bottom. Substrate composition is
evaluated by observation and presented in descending order of abundance.
Substrate
Particle Size: Boulder, > 256 mm (10 in); Rubble, 64.0 to 256.0 mm (2.5 to 10.0 in);
Gravel, 2.0 to 64.0 mm (0.1 to 2.5 in); Sand 0.06 to 2.00 mm (gritty
texture), Silt, 0.004 to 0.06 mm (powdery texture), Clay, < 0.004 mm (slick
texture). Bedrock, exposed solid rock, which is free of other overlying
substrate particles.
4
Tolerance Value: Value assigned to an organism indicating it's tolerance to pollution. The
value is based on a scale where 0 is the most sensitive while 10 is the most
tolerant. (* indicates that a tolerance value has not been established for the
organism).
1.6 Qualifications of Principal Investigators
Bruce O. Ellis, Environmental Biologist II, NCDOT, March 1995-present.
Education: BS Agriculture/Environmental Science, Rutgers University
College of Agriculture and Environmental Science.
Certification: Certified Lake Manager (North American Lake Management Society).
Pertinent
Coursework: Aquatic Biology, Entomology, Invertebrate Zoology, Ichthyology,
Limnology, Hydrology.
Experience: Biologist, Allied Biological, Inc., March 1976-April 1994. Lake and
watershed management; water quality; stream bioassessments for
NPDES permit requirements, and environmental impact statements,
fisheries inventories, wetland delineation.
Biologist, Upper Raritan Watershed Association, 1974-1976, two year
bioassessment study of first and second order streams within a
subwatershed of the Raritan River basin.
Expertise: Aquatic resource management; wetland delineation; Section 7 field
investigations; NEPA investigations and documentation.
Organizations: North American Lake Management Society
North Carolina Lake Management Society, Director Region III
Logan Williams, Environmental Biologist II, NCDOT, January 1995-present.
Education: MS, Entomology, North Carolina State University
BA, Philosophy, North Carolina State University
AA, Agricultural Pest Control, North Carolina State University
Pertinent
Coursework: Ecology of Stream Invertebrates, Aquatic Natural History, Systematics
of Immature Insects, Insect Systematics Seminar, Insect Diversity,
General Entomology, Ichthyology.
Experience: Apiary Inspection Supervisor, NCDA, 1984-1995.
Naturalist, Raleigh Parks and Recreation, 1994.
Biologist, Williams Biological, 1992-1994.
Expertise: Insect identification, field botany, natural history, wetland delineation;
Section 7 field investigations; NEPA investigations and
documentation.
Organizations: American Entomological Association
North Carolina Entomological Association
Dragonfly Society of the Americas
2.0 WATER RESOURCES
Project area water resources are located in the South Fork of the New River drainage
basin (sub basin no. 050701). Most of the South Fork of the New River watershed is forested,
with areas of pasture, crop production and development. Boone is the largest urban area within
this watershed. (Division of Environmental Management, 1994). Within the project area, the
landscape is dominated by forested and pasture areas, with development comprising a lesser
component.
2.1 Best Usage Classification
Streams have been assigned a best usage classification by the Division of Water Quality
(DWQ). The classification of project area waters is presented in the following table.
Best Usage Classifications of Project Area Surface Waters
Site Number Surface Water Index Number Best Usage
(Section) Classification
1 (BA) South Fork of the New River 10-1-(3.5) C+
2 (BA) UT to South Fork of the New River 10-1-(3.5) C+
4 (BA) Rocky Branch 10-1-7 C Tr +
7 (BA) Pine Run 10-1-11 C Tr+
8 (BA Pine Run 10-1-11 C Tr +
9 (BA) Thaxon Creek 10-1-12 C Tr +
10 (BA) Thaxon Creek 10-1-12 C Tr +
11 (BA) UT to Thaxon Creek 10-1-12 C Tr +
1 (BB) Laxon Creek 10-1-14 C +
2 (BB) UT to Laxon Creek 10-1-14 C +
3 (BB) UT to Laxon Creek 10-1-14 C +
5 (BB) UT to Gap Creek 10-1-23-(0.5) C Tr +
6 (BB) UT to Gap Creek 10-1-23-(0.5) C Tr +
7 (BB) UT to Gap Creek 10-1-23-(0.5) C Tr +
10 (BB) UT to Gap Creek 10-1-23-(0.5) C Tr +
12 (BB) UT to Gap Creek 10-1-23-(0.5) C Tr +
13 (BB) Gap Creek 10-1-23-(0.5) C Tr+
14 (BB) UT to Gap Creek 10-1-23-(0.5) C Tr +
16 (BB) UT to Gap Creek 10-1-23-(0.5) C Tr +
Class C uses include aquatic life propagation and survival, fishing, wildlife, secondary
recreation and agriculture. The supplemental classification Tr denotes freshwaters protected for
natural trout propagation and survival of stocked trout. The + symbol identifies waters that are
subject to a special management strategy in order to protect downstream waters designated as
Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW), which are: unique and special waters of exceptional state
or national recreational or ecological significance which require special protection to maintain
existing uses. The New River and lower portions of the South Fork of the New River have ORW
designations.
000-000offWoor +•••of•
: LE?
-Ax _P01-
J -act dU,4 ?
-- -- -- -=- -a- --- M- - - 'dW - - -
-- ----- - - - --- --
?_ }knhess
YV1d,J?
_,_??_:rte d?tc?_- ??uo_
W" 4/YL , I __q ?m 14-Ad -
a .
6
2.2 Water Quality
The Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network (BMAN) is managed by the Division
of Water Quality ([DWQ] formerly the Division of Environmental Management) and is part of an
ongoing ambient water quality monitoring program which addresses long term trends in water
quality. The program assesses water quality by sampling for benthic macroinvertebrate
organisms at fixed monitoring sites.
One BMAN sample site is located in the project study area on the South Fork of the New
River at US 421. This station received a bioclassification of Fair on 12 July 1993. DWQ reports
that this site is located below the Boone Wastewater Treatment Plant and receives runoff from
development within the area (DEM, 1994).
3.0 RESULTS
The following section contains all field information and data analysis for each stream site.
The data is presented in a site format, where all the information collected for a particular site is
presented under the site heading. This format is selected to enable the reader to view all aspects
of a site at one location. Site numbers correspond to the site numbers listed on NCDOT plan
sheets.
Scientific nomenclature and common names (when applicable) are provided for each
animal and plant species described. Plant taxonomy generally follows Radford, et al. (1968).
Insect taxonomy follows Brigham et. al., (1982), and fish taxonomy follows Rhode et. al.,
(1994). Subsequent references to the same organism will include the common name only.
3.1 Section BA
Site 1, Section BA: South Fork of the New River upstream of US 421 bridge.
The proposed construction impacts at this location include widening the existing bridge
to five lanes (upstream side of the bridge), and the placement of a temporary rock causeway to
provide equipment access during bridge construction. The study area extended from the US 421
bridge to approximately 150 in (490 ft.) upstream of the bridge. This reach of the creek was
dominated by a run/pool habitat that consisted of a fairly soft sand/gravel substrate.
The east bank of the South Fork of the New River at this location is heavily vegetated
with multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora), ninebark (Physocarpus opulifolius), black walnut
(Juglands nigra), black cherry (Prunus serotina), and tag alder (Alnus serrulata). The west bank
of the South Fork of the New River at this location is vegetated primarily with herbs, grasses and
small shrubs and includes: vetch (Vicia spp.), forget-me-not (Myosotis scorpioides), fescue
(Festuca spp.), and multiflora rose. The east bank displays more evidence of erosion than the
west bank.
7
Site 1, Section BA. 11 June 1997
MORPHOLOGY WATER QUALITY
Canopy Cover: 2-5% Temperature (°C): 14
Channel Depth: 3 m (10 ft) pH: 7.0
Channel Width: 24 m (80 ft) Dissolved Oxygen (ppm): 9.0
Channel Slope: 1-2% Total Alkalinity (ppm): 32
Stream Depth: 0.4 m (1.2 ft) EPT taxa richness: 4
Stream Width: 18 m (60 ft) Biotic Index: 4.53
Substrate: Gr, Sa, R Bioclassification: Good
Embeddedness: Fair
Site 1, Section BA: Macroinvertebrates. Collected 11 June 1997
TAXA ABUNDANCE TOLERANCE
VALUE
ARTHROPODA
Decapoda
Astacidae
Orconectes spp. abundant 7.62
INSECTA
Ephemeroptera
Ephemerellidae
Ephemerella spp. common 2.04
Eurylophella spp. common 4.34
Odonata
Aeshnidae
Boyeria vinosa common 5.89
Plecoptera
Perlodidae
Isoperla holochlora common 0.00
Trichoptera
Hydropsychidae
Syymphitopsyce bron ta rare 2.47
Diptera
Chironomidae
Brilla spp. common 5.18
Polypedilum spp. common
Cricotopus spp. common
Diamesinae common
Tipulidae
Tipula spp. common 7.33
Total Taxa 11
Site l: South Fork of New River
Looking Upstream (South)
Site l: South Fork of New River
Looking Downstream (North) Towards US 44 Bridge
Site 2, Section BA: Unnamed tributary to South Fork of New River
This stream is an unnamed tributary to the South Fork of the New River which is situated
to the north of US 421. The stream runs parallel to US 421 and flows in an easterly direction.
The USGS quadrangle map illustrates this stream as perennial. Proposed impacts to this stream
from project construction include filling the existing stream channel and containing the stream
flow within a pipe for a distance of 83 in (272 ft).
The sample site is located approximately 46-61 in (150-200 ft) east of the entrance to the
Produce Company. The stream at this location can be considered entrenched. It is obvious,
through channel bank erosion, that the stream receives high volumes of flow during storm events
from impervious surfaces associated with upstream commercial properties. Vegetation on top of
the channel banks consisted of mountain laurel (Kalmia latifolia), flowering dogwood (Cornus
Florida), blackberry (Rubus spp.), and jewelweed (Impatiens capensis).
The stream substrate consisted of fairly soft accumulations of sand and gravel. There was
a coating of silt on the substrate particles, especially in pool areas. Cursory investigations for
macroinvertebrate fauna yielded no individuals. A this point a decision was made to dispense
with further biological or water quality investigations at this site. Morphological data was
collected.
Site 2, Section BA
MORPHOLOGY
Canopy Cover:
Channel Depth:
Channel Width:
Channel Slope:
Stream Depth:
Stream Width:
Substrate:
Embeddedness:
90%
1.5-2.2 in (5-8 ft)
8 in (26 ft)
4-5%
10 cm (4 in)
1.4 in (4.5 ft)
Gr, Sa, R, B, Be
Poor
Site 2: View of Stream Channel
and Entrenchment
Site 2: Silt Covered Substrate
9
Site 4, Section BA, Rocky Branch
Site 4 consists of three sampling locations associated with the Rocky Branch. Three
sampling locations were established because of the confluence (from the west) of an unnamed
tributary with Rocky Branch, and its potential impact to the water quality of Rocky Branch below
their confluence. Proposed surface water impacts include the relocation of 405 m (1329 ft) of the
Rocky Branch stream channel, and enclosing 60 m (197 ft) of the unnamed tributary to Rocky
Branch in pipe.
Site 4A was established on Rocky Branch above the confluence with the unnamed
tributary. The Rocky Branch is identified as a perennial stream on the USGS quadrangle map.
Vegetation in vicinity of this section of stream is dominated by mountain laurel, interspersed
with cherry birch (Betula lenta), and ironwood (Carpinus caroliniana). The area surrounding the
stream is used to pasture cattle. The main portion of the pasture lies to the north and east of the
stream channel, however, the cattle have unrestricted access to a major portion of the stream
channel. Subsequently, there is some evidence of streambank deterioration and erosion due to
cattle crossings.
Site 4A, Section BA
MORPHOLOGY WATER QUALITY
Canopy Cover: 90% Temperature (°C): 13
Channel Depth: 1.7 m (5.5 ft) pH: 7.0
Channel Width: 7.6 m (25.0 ft) Dissolved Oxygen (ppm): 8.5
Channel Slope: 6-8% Total Alkalinity (ppm): 22
Stream Depth (Average): 11.4 cm (4.5 in) EPT taxa richness: 7
Stream Width (Average): 1.1 m (3.5 ft) Biotic Index: 2.91
Substrate: G, R, Sa, Be Bioclassification: Excellent
Embeddedness: Fair
Pool/Riffle Ratio 4 (excellent)
Site 4A, Section BA, Sample time 10 min. Sample length 40 m. 15 July 1997
FISH SPECIES NUMBER LENGTH (mm) WEIGHT (g) C.P.U.E.
Rhinichthys atratulus
(blacknose dace) 3 65 10 0.3
1 80 4 0.1
Etheostoma flabellare
(fantail darter) 1 68 10 0.1
Cottus bairdi
(mottled sculpin) 7 60-70 21 0.8
2 75 10 0.2
Total 15 55 1.5
10
Site 4A, Section BA: Macroinvertebrates. Collected 11 June 1997
TAXA ABUNDANCE TOLERANCE
VALUE
ARTHROPODA
Decapoda
' Cambaridae
Cambarus spp. rare 7.62
INSECTA
Ephemeroptera
Ephemerellidae
Drunella longicornis abundant
Ephemerella spp. abundant 2.04
Odonata
Zygoptera
Gomphidae
Stylogomphus albistylus common 4.72
Plecoptera
Perlidae
Acroneuria abnormis abundant 2.06
Pteronarcyidae
Pteronarcys spp. rare 1.67
Trichoptera
Hydropsychidae
Diplectrona modesta abundant 2.21
Lepidostomatidae
Lepidostoma spp. rare 0.90
Rhyacophilidae
Rhyacophila fuscula common 1.88
Diptera
Tipulidae
Hexatoma spp. common 4.31
Tipula spp. common 7.33
Total Taxa 11
Site 4A: Looking Upstream
In Stream Channel
Site 4A: Debris from Small Logging Operation
II
Site 4B is located on the unnamed tributary to Rocky Branch. This stream flows in a
Northeasterly direction until it joins with Rocky Branch opposite the southern limit of the trailer
park which borders Rocky Branch. The USGS map does not indicate that a stream is present at
this location.
The stream is located within a cattle pasture. Vegetation associated with the channel
banks includes fescue, buttercup (Ranunculus spp.), and golden ragwort (Senecio aureus).
Channel banks display impacts from cattle.
The substrate of this stream was heavily covered by fine silt. A cursory biological
investigation yielded one blackfly larvae (Simuliidae), therefore, more extensive biological
investigations for macroinvertebrates and fish were determined to be unjustified.
Site 4B, Section BA
MORPHOLOGY WATER QUALITY
Canopy Cover: 0 Temperature (°C): 17
Channel Depth: 1.5 m (5.0 ft) pH: 8.0
Channel Width: 4 m (913 ft) Dissolved Oxygen (ppm): 8.0
Channel Slope: 4% Total Alkalinity (ppm): 120
Stream Depth (Average): 3.8 cm (1.5 in)
Stream Width (Average): 1.1 m(3.5 ft)
Substrate: G, Sa, R, Si, B
Embeddedness: Poor
Pool/Riffle Ratio 2 (excellent)
Site 42: Overall View of Stream
Channel and Effects of Siltation

! -A,

Site 43: Silt Covered Substrate
12
Site 4C is located on Rocky Branch below the confluence with the unnamed tributary.
The stream flows to the north towards US 421. The section of the Rocky Branch displays effects
from siltation originating in the unnamed tributary. The substrate is covered by a fine layer of
silt, but the covering is significantly less than what is present in the unnamed tributary.
The eastern bank of Rocky Branch is vegetated with multiflora rose, black cherry, and
ironwood. The vegetation on the eastern bank provides a buffer area separating the stream from
the trailer park. The western bank is within a cattle pasture and is vegetated primarily with
fescue and forbs. The western bank displays evidence of deterioration from cattle crossing.
The results of the macroinvertebrate analysis show that the tributary stream 4B is
adversely impacting the lower section of Rocky Branch. Slightly lower numbers of
macroinvertebrate taxa and a lower bioclassification result from siltation entering from 4B.
Site 4C, Section BA
MORPHOLOGY WATER QUALITY
Canopy Cover: 50% Temperature (°C): 14
Channel Depth: 1.8 m (6.0 ft) pH: 7.0
Channel Width: 6.1 m (20.0 ft) Dissolved Oxygen (ppm): 8.5
Channel Slope: 2-3% Total Alkalinity (ppm): 40
Stream Depth (Average): 6.3 cm (2.5 in) EPT taxa richness: 7
Stream Width (Average): 2.0 m (6.5 ft) Biotic Index: 4.61
Substrate: G, R, Sa, Si, B Bioclassification: Good
Embeddedness: Poor
Pool/Riffle Ratio 3.5 (excellent)
Site 4C, Section BA. Sample Time 15 min. Sample length 100 m. 15 July 1997
FISH SPECIES NUMBER LENGTH (mm) WEIGHT (g) C.P.U.E.
Salmo trutta
(brown trout) 1 90 10 0.07
Rhinichthys atratulus
(blacknose dace) 4 60-70 12 0.25
8 70-80 45 0.53
Rhinichthys cataractae
(longnose dace)
8 60-70 35 0.53
7 70-80 40 0.47
Semotilus atromaculatus
(creek chub) 1 65 5 0.07
Cottus bairdi
(mottled sculpin) 4 60-70 14 0.27
Total 33 161 2.19
13
Site 4C, Section BA: Macroinvertebrates. Collected 11 June 1997
TAXA ABUNDANCE TOLERANCE
VALUE
INSECTA
Ephemeroptera
' Ephemerellidae
Ephemerella dorothea common 2.04
Heptageniidae
Epeorus spp. common 1.27
Stenonema exiguum common
Plecoptera
Leuctridae
Leuctra spp. common 0.67
Perlodidae
Isoperla spp. common
Trichoptera
Hydropsychidae
Hydropsyche betteni abundant 7.78
Rhyacophilidae
Rhyacophila fuscula common 1.88
Diptera
Tipulidae
Tipula spp. common 7.37
Total Taxa 8
Site 4C: View of Stream Channel
Looking Downstream (North) Towards US 421
Site 4C: Silt Covered Substrate
14
Site 7, Section BA, Pine Run
The stream at site 7 is Pine Run Creek. Pine Run Creek flows in a northerly direction at
this location, and runs parallel to and is east of SR 1355 (Pine Run Road). Two sections of Pine
Run Creek will be impacted by the proposed project. The section at site 7 is the southern most
section and closer to existing US 421. Pine Run Creek is a perennial stream. Proposed
construction impacts include enclosing 132 m (433 ft) of the creek in pipe.
This portion of Pine Run Creek travels through a pasture, where canopy cover for the
stream is provided by fescue, orchard grass (Dactylis glomerata), and scattered individuals of tag
alder and multiflora rose. The pasture appears to have been unused for cattle for quite some
time, since the channel banks were very well vegetated and with very little evidence of erosion.
Fisheries data was not collected at this location, however, a fisheries survey was conducted at site
8 on Pine Run Creek.
Site 7, Section BA
MORPHOLOGY WATER QUALITY
Canopy Cover: 50-60% Temperature (°C): 15
Channel Depth: 1.2 m (4.0 ft) pH: 6.5
Channel Width: 4 m (13 ft) Dissolved Oxygen (ppm): 8.2
Channel Slope: 2% Total Alkalinity (ppm): 22
Stream Depth (Average): 15.4 cm (6.0 in) EPT taxa richness: 9
Stream Width (Average): 2 m (6.4 ft) Biotic Index: 3.88
Substrate: G, Sa, R, Be Bioclassification: Excellent
Embeddedness: Good
Pool/Riffle Ratio 6.6 (excellent)
15
Site 7, Section BA: Macroinvertebrates. Collected 12 June 1997
TAXA ABUNDANCE TOLERANCE
VALUE
MOLLUSCA
INSECTA
Ephemeroptera
Baetiscidae
Baetisca carolina rare 3.47
Ephemerellidae
Ephemerella dorothea. common. 2.04
Heptageniidae
Stenonema Ithaca rare 3.58
Stenonema spp. common
Odonata
Anisoptera
Aeshnidae
Boyeria vinosa common 5.89
Boyeria grafiana rare 6.05
Gomphidae
Lanthus vernalis rare 1.80
Dromogomphus spinosus common
Plecoptera
Perlodidae
Remenus bilobatus rare 0.28
Trichoptera
Hydropsychidae
Diplectrona modesta common 2.21
Hydropsyche betteni abundant 7.78
Limnephilidae
Pycnopsyche guttifer common 2.58
Philopotamidae
Dolophilodes spp. rare 0.81
Diptera
Chironomidae
Polypedilum spp. common
Diamesinae rare
Simuliidae
Simulium spp. common 4.00
Tiulidae
Tipula spp. common 7.33
Total Taxa 17
Site 7: Pine Run
Looking Upstream (South)
Towards US 421
Looking Downstream (North)
Site 7: Pine Run
16

Site 8, Section BA, Pine Run
This section of Pine Run Creek is located north (downstream) of site 7. At this location
Pine Run Creek runs parallel and to the east of SR 1355. The creek channel travels very close to
SR 1355 near the northern limits of the study area, where a 3m (12 ft) embankment separates the
creek from the roadway. Proposed construction impacts include enclosing 31 m (101 ft) of creek
in pipe.
The channel banks and surrounding landscape consists of mountain laurel, tag alder,
eastern hemlock (Tsuga canadensis), and umbrella tree (Magnolia fraseri). A small, apparently
unused pasture area is situated on a portion of the eastern bank where the vegetation is dominated
by fescue, orchard grass and small shrubs. The channel banks display slight erosion and the
stream channel does contain some shoaling.
Site 8, Section BA
MORPHOLOGY WATER QUALITY
Canopy Cover: 70% Temperature (°C): 15
Channel Depth: 1.2 m (4.0 ft) pH: 6.5
Channel Width: 8 m (26 ft) Dissolved Oxygen (ppm): 8.8
Channel Slope: 2% Total Alkalinity (ppm): 22
Stream Depth (Average): 20 cm (8 in) EPT taxa richness: 10
Stream Width (Average): 3.7 m (12.0 ft) Biotic Index: 3.40
Substrate: G, Sa, R, B, Be Bioclassification: Excellent
Embeddedness: Good
Pool/Riffle Ratio 3.5 (excellent)
Site 8, Section BA, Sample Time: 20 min. Sample Length 100 m. 15 Jul 1997
FISH SPECIES NUMBER LENGTH (mm) WEIGHT (g) C.P.U.E.
Clinostomus funduloides
(rosyside dace) 21 70-80 40 1.05
Rhinichthys atratulus
(blacknose dace) 2 50-55 2 0.10
Rhinichthys cataractae
(longnose dace) 1 65 3 0.05
Semotilus atromaculatus
(creek chub) 3 50-60 5 0.15
3 70-80 14 0.15
5 80-90 28 0.25
1 110 14 0.05
3 120-130 88 0.15
Etheostoma flabellare
(fantail darter) 2 40-50 2 0.10
7 50-60 10 0.35
4 60-70 5 0.20
Total 52 211 2.60
17
Site 8, Section BA: Macroinvertebrates. Collected 12 June 1997
TAXA ABUNDANCE TOLERANCE
VALUE
INSECTA
Ephemeroptera
Baetiscidae
Baetisca carolina common 3.47
Ephemerellidae
Drunella longicornis rare
Ephemerella dorothea common 2.04
' Ephemeridae
Ephemera spp. rare
Heptageniidae
Stenonema sinclairi abundant
Odonata
Anisoptera
Aeshnidae
Boyeria vinosa abundant 5.89
Gomphidae
Lanthus spp. rare 1.77
Plecoptera
Nemouridae
Amphinemura delosa rare 3.33
Perlodidae
Remenus bilobatus rare 0.28
Megaloptera
Corydalidae
Nigronia serricosnis rare 4.95
Trichoptera
Glossosomatidae
Glossosoma spp. rare 1.55
Hydropsychidae
Hydropsyche betteni rare 7.78
Philopotamidae
Dolophilodes spp. abundant 0.81
Coleoptera
Ptilodactylidae
Anchytarsuss spp. rare 3.64
Diptera
Chironomidae
Eukiefferiella spp. rare
• Dixidae
Dixa spp. common 2.55
Simuliidae
Simulium common 4.00
Tipulidae
Dicranota spp. common 0.00
Tipula spp. common 7.33
Total Taxa 19
Site 8: Pine Run
Looking upstream (South) Towards Site 7
Looking Downstream (North)
Site 8: Pine Run
18
Site 9, Section BA, Thaxon Creek
Site 9 is located in the headwater area of Thaxon Creek. Thaxon Creek at this location
runs to the east towards SR 1357 (Old US 60). The creek is characterized by areas of moderately
steep runs over bedrock, and a canopy dominated by mountain laurel, cherry birch and eastern
hemlock. An active cattle pasture area borders portions of the northern channel bank. Cattle
crossings have contributed to some channel bank deterioration and erosion. Proposed
construction impacts include enclosing 130 in (427 ft) of the creek in pipe.
Fisheries data was not collected for this site, due to turbid water conditions from a recent
thunderstorm. However, fisheries data was collected from site 10, which is situated on Thaxon
Creek downstream of this site.
Site 9, Section BA
MORPHOLOGY
Canopy Cover: 90%
Channel Depth: 1.2 in (4.0 ft)
Channel Width: 8.2 in (27 ft)
Channel Slope: 4-5%
Stream Depth (Average): 10 cm (4 in)
Stream Width (Average): 1.8 in (6.0 ft)
Substrate: G, Sa, R, B, Be, Si
Embeddedness: Good
Pool/Riffle Ratio 2.4 (excellent)
WATER QUALITY
Temperature (°C): 15
pH: 6.5
Dissolved Oxygen (ppm): 8.0
Total Alkalinity (ppm): 22
EPT taxa richness: 11
Biotic Index: 3.48
Bioclassification: Excellent
19
Site 9, Section BA: Macroinvertebrates. Collected 18 June 1997
TAXA ABUNDANCE TOLERANCE
VALUE
INSECTA
Ephemeroptera
Ephemerellidae
Drunella longicornis abundant
Ephemerella dorothea common 2.04
Heptageniidae
Stenonema exiguum abundant 3.83
Oligoneuriidae
Isonychia spp. rare 3.45
Odonata
Anisoptera
Gomphidae
Lanthus spp. rare 1.77
Plecoptera
Leuctridae
Leuctra spp. abundant 0.67
Perlidae
Acroneuria abnormis rare 2.06
Eccoptura xanthenes common 3.74
Trichoptera
Hydropsychidae
Diplectrona modesta rare 2.21
Limnephilidae
Pycnopsyche luculenta common 2.50
Philopotamidae
Dolophilodes spp. abundant 0.81
Rhyacophilidae
Rhyacophila carolina rare 0.00
Rhyacophila fuscula common 1.88
Tipula spp.
Total Taxa 13
Site 9: Thaxton Creek Headwater Area
Note Bedrock
Boulder/Rubble Substrate
Looking Downstream (North)
Site 9: Thaxton Creek Headwater Area
20
Site 10, Section BA, Thaxon Creek
Site 10 is located on Thaxon Creek, in an area where the creek runs parallel and to west
of SR 1357. Proposed construction impacts include enclosing 235 in (770 ft) of the creek in
pipe. An active cattle pasture is located along the western channel bank, and steep vegetated
slopes leading up to SR 1357 occupy the eastern side of the channel. Vegetation along the
western bank includes fescue, buttercup, and jewelweed. The eastern slopes are dominated by
multiflora rose and mountain laurel. Significant channel bank deterioration and erosion are
present on the western bank due to cattle crossing.
Site 10, Section BA
MORPHOLOGY WATER QUALITY
Canopy Cover: 0-20% Temperature (°C): 19
Channel Depth: 1.5 in (5.0 ft) pH: 7.0
Channel Width: 8.2 in (27 ft) Dissolved Oxygen (ppm): 8.2
Channel Slope: 3% Total Alkalinity (ppm): 22
Stream Depth (Average): 13 cm (5 in) EPT taxa richness: 5
Stream Width (Average): 3 in (10 ft) Biotic Index: 3.29
Substrate: G, Sa, R, B, Be Bioclassification: Excellent
Embeddedness: Fair
Pool/Riffle Ratio 3.2 (excellent)
Site 10, Section BA. Sample Time 13 min. Sample Length 100 in. 15 July 1997
FISH SPECIES NUMBER LENGTH (mm) WEIGHT (g) C.P.U.E.
Salmo trutta
(brown trout) 1 185 70 0.08
Campostoma anomalum
(central stoneroller) 5 70-80 42 0.38
8 110-120 120 0.62
Rhinichthys atratulus
(blacknose dace) 26 70-80 128 2.00
Rhinichthys cataractae
(longnose dace) 4 60-70 12 0.31
Etheostoma flabellare
(fantail darter) 15 40-50 18 1.15
4 60-70 10 0.31
Total 63 337 4.85
21
Site 10, Section BA: Macroinvertebrates. Collected 17 June 1997
TAXA ABUNDANCE TOLERANCE
VALUE
MOLLUSCA
Gastropoda
' Pleuroceridae
Elimia spp. common 2.46
ARTHROPODA
Decapoda
Cambaridae
Cambarus spp. common 7.62
INSECTA
Ephemeroptera
Ephemerellidae
Ephemerella dorothea abundant 2.04
Ephemeridae
Ephemera spp.
Odonata
Anisoptera
Gomphidae
Lanthus parvulus common 1.80
Plecoptera
Capniidae
Allocapnia spp. rare 2.52
Perlodidae
Isoperla spp. rare
Trichoptera
Rhyacophilidae
Rhyacophila fuscula common 1.88
Diptera
Chironomidae
Ablabesmyia spp. rare 7.20
Dixidae
Dixa spp. abundant 2.55
Tipulidae
Hexatoma spp. common 4.31
Total Taxa 10
Site 10: Thaxton Creek
Looking Upstream (South)
Site 10: Thaxton Creek
Looking Downstream (North)
22
Site 11, Section BA, Unnamed tributary to Thaxon Creek
Site 11 is associated with an unnamed tributary to Thaxon Creek. In the area of the
proposed construction impact, the creek becomes braided as is flows through an alluvial flat.
Proposed construction impacts in this area include enclosing the channels in 147 m (482 ft) of
pipe.
A transect was established perpendicular to the flow of the channels. The transect was 30
m (100 ft) long and extended from the western toe of slope to the eastern toe of slope. In the
following diagram, distance is presented in feet, and the arrows indicate the position of channels
along the transect.
Channel Channel Channel Channel
100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20
10 0
The creek divides into four channels, each approximately 0.5 m (1.5 ft) wide and each
approximately 3.8 cm (1.2 in) deep. The four channels flow slowly through an area that varies
between 30 and 46 m (100 and 150 ft) wide. Vegetation in the alluvial flat was dominated by
goldenrod (Solidago spp.).
North (downstream) of the proposed impact area, the unnamed tributary reforms into a
single channel. Water quality data was collected in this portion of the unnamed tributary to
Thaxon Creek to establish baseline water quality conditions prior to construction. Fisheries data
was not collected in this stream section. However, young of the year (yoy) brook trout were
captured during the macroinvertebrate collections. Water quality data was not collected within
the braided channels.
Site 11, Section BA (Downstream of Site 11)
MORPHOLOGY WATER QUALITY
Canopy Cover: 50% Temperature (°C): 15
Channel Depth: 1.4 m (4.5 ft) pH: 6.5
Channel Width: 3 m (10 ft) Dissolved Oxygen (ppm): 8.2
Channel Slope: 2% Total Alkalinity (ppm): 20
Stream Depth (Average): 10 cm (4 in) EPT taxa richness: 6
Stream Width (Average): 1.3 m (4.2 ft) Biotic Index: 3.64
Substrate: G, Sa, R (soft) Bioclassification: Excellent
Embeddedness: Fair
Pool/Riffle Ratio 3.1 (excellent)
23
Site 11, Section BA: Macroinvertebrates. Collected 18 June 1997
TAXA ABUNDANCE TOLERANCE
VALUE
1NSECTA
Ephemeroptera
Ephemerellidae
Drunella longicornis common
Ephemerella dorothea abundant 2.04
Ephemeridae
Ephemera varians common.
Odonata
Anisoptera
Gomphidae
Lanthus spp. rare 1.77
Plecoptera
Nemouridae
Amphinemura delosa rare 3.33
Perlodidae
Isoperla holochlora rare 0.00
Remenus bilobatus common 0.28
Diptera
Dixidae
Dixa spp. common 2.55
Tipulidae
Dicranota spp. rare 0.00
Hexatoma spp. common 4.31
Tipula spp. abundant 7.33
Total Taxa 11
Site 11: Area to be impacted
By the Proposed Project
Site 11: Stream Channel Below Area
To be Impacted By the Proposed Project
24
3.2 Section BB
Site 1, Section BB, Laxon Creek
Site 1 is located on Laxon Creek, in the vicinity of the intersection of SR 1357 and SR
1353 (Hardin Road). Proposed construction impacts include enclosing 147 m (482 ft) of the
channel in pipe. Laxon Creek, at this location, flows through a pasture area where stream bank
vegetation includes fescue, elderberry (Sambucus canadensis), tag alder, buttercup, and forget-
me-not. Some shading of the creek is offered from these low growing species, however, most of
the stream channel is exposed to full sunlight.
Site 1, Section BB
MORPHOLOGY WATER QUALITY
Canopy Cover: 10% Temperature (°C): 21
Channel Depth: 1.5 m (5.0 ft) pH: 7.0
Channel Width: 3.7 m (12.0 ft) Dissolved Oxygen (ppm): 7.8
Channel Slope: 2% Total Alkalinity (ppm): 40
Stream Depth (Average): 20 cm (8 in) EPT taxa richness: 0
Stream Width (Average): 2 m (6.7 ft) Biotic Index: 6.09
Substrate: G, Sa, R, B Bioclassification: Fair
Embeddedness: good-fair
Pool/Riffle Ratio 4.3 (excellent)
Site 1, Section BB: Macroinvertebrates. Collected 17 June 1997
TAXA ABUNDANCE TOLERANCE
VALUE
ARTHROPODA
Decapoda
Cambaridae
Cambarus spp. common 7.62
Odonata
Zygoptera
Calopterygidae
Calopteryx maculata abundant 7.78
Anisoptera
Aeshnidae
Boyeria vinosa common 5.89
Diptera
Simuliidae
Prosimulium spp. abundant 4.01
Total Taxa 4
25

Site 1, Section BB, Sample Length 100m. Sample time 13 min.
FISH SPECIES NUMBER LENGTH (mm) WEIGHT (g) C.P.U.E.
Campostoma anomalum
(central stoneroller) 4 60-70 12 0.31
7 90-100 90 0.54
9 100-110 130 0.69
1 135 32 0.08
Clinostomus funduloides
(rosyside dace) 2 50-60 4 0.15
6 80-90 63 0.46
Rhinichthys atratulus
(blacknose dace) 16 50-60 25 1.23
15 60-70 50 1.15
26 70-80 120 2.00
Semotilus atromaculatus
(creek chub) 2 60 3 0.15
1 100 12 0.08
3 120-130 90 0.23
1 195 95 0.08
Total 93 726 7.15

Site 1: Laxon Creek
Looking Downstream (West)

Site 1: Laxon Creek
Looking Upstream (Southeast)
26
Site 2, Section BB, Unnamed tributary to Laxon Creek
Site 2 is located on a small stream draining a cattle pasture. Proposed construction
impacts consist of enclosing the stream channel in 93 m 305 ft) of pipe. The stream is an
unnamed tributary to Laxon Creek, and flows in a southerly direction. Vegetation along the
streambank includes fescue, wing stem (Verbesina spp.), and buttercup. The stream is not
illustrated on the USGS map. A cursory inspection of the stream revealed areas that contained
heavy growths of filamentous algae. A small dam is present within the stream channel that
provides a water supply for a small pond. Macroinvertebrates collected during this cursory
investigation consisted of black fly larvae (Simuliidae).
A decision was made in the field that only a very limited amount of information would be
collected from this site. According to the best professional judgment of the investigators, it was
determined that this stream is intermittent, and therefore, detailed macroinvertebrate and fisheries
studies were not conducted.
Site 2, Section BB
MORPHOLOGY
Canopy Cover: 0%
Channel Depth: 1.1 in (3.5 ft)
Channel Width: 3.7 in (12.0 ft)
Channel Slope: 2%
Stream Depth (Average): 2.5 cm (1.0 in)
Stream Width (Average): 0.3 in (1.0 ft)
Substrate: Sa, Gr
Embeddedness: Fair

r {

Site 2: Looking Downstream
(South)

Site 2: Looking Upstream
(North)
27
Site 3, Section BB, Unnamed tributary to Laxon Creek
Site 3 is located on an unnamed tributary to Laxon Creek. The stream flows in a
southerly direction and is illustrated as intermittent on the USGS map. Proposed construction
impacts include enclosing the stream channel in 152 m (498 ft) of pipe. The stream flows
through a cattle pasture and receives drainage from a nearby Christmas tree farm. Streambank
vegetation consists of fescue, various asters (Aster spp.), buttercup, multiflora rose and scattered
individuals of silky willow (Salix sericea).
The streambanks are steep and show evidence of erosion and deterioration from cattle
crossing. There is also a thin coating of silt over the substrate. The stream morphology closely
resembles the gully stream type as presented by Rosgen, 1996. The stream channel is relatively
straight as it travels through the valley. This is reflected in a higher pool/riffle ratio.
Site 3, Section BB
MORPHOLOGY WATER QUALITY
Canopy Cover: 0% Temperature (°C): 21
Channel Depth: 3 m (10 ft) pH: 6.5
Channel Width: 8 m (26 ft) Dissolved Oxygen (ppm): 7.0
Channel Slope: 2% Total Alkalinity (ppm): 30
Stream Depth (Average): 6.4 cm (2.5 in) EPT taxa richness: 3
Stream Width (Average): 0.9 m (3.0 ft) Biotic Index: 4.38
Substrate: Sa, G, Si, R Bioclassification: Good
Embeddedness: Fair
Pool/Riffle Ratio 10.2 (good)
28
Site 3, Section BB: Macroinvertebrates. Collected 17 June 1997
TAXA ABUNDANCE TOLERANCE
VALUE
1NSECTA
Ephemeroptera
Ephemerellidae
Eurylophella spp. common 4.34
Leptophlebiidae
Paraleptophlebia spp. common 0.94
Odonata
Zygoptera
Calopterygidae
Calopteryx spp. common 7.78
Anisoptera
Aeshnidae
Aeshna spp. rare
Trichoptera
Hydropsychidae
Hydropsyche betteni abundant 7.78
Diptera
Chironomidae
Polypedilum spp. common
Procladius spp. common 9.0
Simuliidae
Prosimulium spp. abundant 4.01
Tipulidae
Dicranota spp. abundant 0.00
Total Taxa 9
Site 3: Looking Downstream (South)
Looking Downstream (South)
Site 3: View of Bank
29
Site 5, Section BB, Unnamed tributary to Gap Creek
The stream at site 5 is an unnamed tributary to Gap Creek and flows southward through a
pasture/hay field area. The stream is situated north of US 421 and runs parallel to SR 1359
Brownwood Road. This stream is illustrated as perennial on the USGS quadrangle map. The
proposed construction impacts include enclosing the stream channel in 107 m (351 ft) of pipe.
The sample site was established immediately below the confluence of two small branches of this
stream.
Even though there are no canopy trees, the well vegetated banks do supply a significant
amount of shading to the stream. Streambank vegetation includes fescue, silky willow,
jewelweed, and goldenrod (Solidago rugosa). Very little bank erosion is present. A fisheries
survey was not conducted on this stream, however, it should be noted that young of the year
(yoy) brook trout were collected during the macroinvertebrate collections.
Site 5, Section BB
MORPHOLOGY WATER QUALITY
Canopy Cover: 15% Temperature (°C): 18
Channel Depth: 1.8 m(6.0 ft) pH: 7.0
Channel Width: 3.9 m (13.0 ft) Dissolved Oxygen (ppm): 7.6
Channel Slope: 4% Total Alkalinity (ppm): 22
Stream Depth (Average): 10 cm (4 in) EPT taxa richness: 12
Stream Width (Average): 0.9 m (3.0 ft) Biotic Index: 2.14
Substrate: G, Sa, R, B Bioclassification: Excellent
Embeddedness: Good
Pool/Riffle Ratio 3.1 (excellent)
30
Site 5, Section BB: Macroinvertebrates. Collected 17 June 1997
TAXA ABUNDANCE TOLERANCE
VALUE
INSECTA
Ephemeroptera
Baetidae
Baetis spp. common
Baetiscidae
Baetisca carolina abundant 3.40
Ephemerellidae
Drunella spp. common
Ephemerella spp. common 2.04
Heptageniidae
Stenonema spp. abundant
Leptophlebiidae
Paraleptophlebia spp. abundant 0.94
Plecoptera
Leuctridae
Leuctra spp. rare 0.67
Perlodidae
Isoperla holochlora rare 0.00
Remenus bilobatus rare 0.28
Trichoptera
Hydropsychidae
Hydropsyche betteni common 7.78
Philopotamidae
Dolophilodes spp. abundant 0.81
Polycentropodidae
Polycentropus spp. rare 3.53
Diptera
Dixidae
Dixa spp. rare 2.55
Total Taxa 13
Site 5: Looking Downstream
(South)
Towards US 421
Site 5: Looking Upstream
(North)
31
Site 6, Section BB, Unnamed tributary to Gap Creek
Site 6 is a small drainage associated with, and originating in a wetland area. The site is
just to the south and east of the Deep Gap Volunteer Fire Department (DGVFD). Proposed
construction impacts include enclosing the stream in 85 m (279 ft) of pipe. The stream channel
is undeveloped and poorly defined as it flows through the wetland. However, it does develop a
well defined channel as it approaches existing US 421.
During the field survey interval, it was observed that the lower portion of the stream (near
the DGVFD parking lot) was undergoing enclosure, presumably for an unrelated project. It was
observed that once the current construction project is complete, the existing stream channel will
be enclosed. Therefore, only the wetland will remain. No morphological, macroinvertebrate,
fisheries or water quality data was collected from this site.
32
Site 7, Section BB, Unnamed tributary to Gap Creek
Site 7 is located on a small unnamed tributary to Gap Creek. Flow is to the south, and the
stream is illustrated as perennial on the USGS map. The stream lies on the north side of existing
US 421, and runs parallel to Hot Rod Road (private). Proposed construction impacts include
enclosing the channel in 90 m (295 ft) of pipe.
The stream runs through an active pasture area and also receives drainage from a small
Christmas tree farm. Streambank vegetation consists of fescue, softstem rush (Juncus effusus),
sedges (Carex spp.), and forget-me-not. Channel banks display the effects of deterioration and
erosion in some areas from cattle crossing.
Site 7, Section BB
MORPHOLOGY
Canopy Cover:
Channel Depth:
Channel Width:
Channel Slope:
Stream Depth (Average)
Stream Width (Average)
Substrate:
Embeddedness:
Pool/Riffle Ratio
WATER QUALITY
0% Temperature (°C): 16
2.3 m (7.5 ft) pH: 7.0
7.3 m (24 ft) Dissolved Oxygen (ppm): 8.2
3% Total Alkalinity (ppm): 22
8.9 cm (3.5 in) EPT taxa richness: 11
1 m (3.3 ft) Biotic Index: 3.48
G, Sa, R, B, Si, Be Bioclassification: Excellent
Good
2.4 (excellent)
33
Site 7, Section BB: Macroinvertebrates. Collected
T'AXA ABUNDANCE TOLERANCE
VALUE
1NSECTA
Ephemeroptera
Baetidae
Baetis spp. common
Ephemerellidae
Drunella longicornis rare
Drunella spp. rare
Ephemerella spp. common 2.04
Heptageniidae
Stenonema spp. abundant
Leptophlebiidae
Paraleptophlebia spp. abundant 0.94
Oligoneuriidae
Isonychia spp. abundant 3.45
Odonata
Zygoptera
Calopterygidae
Calopteryx spp. common 7.78
Anisoptera
Cordulegastridae
Cordulegaster erronea common 5.73
Gomphidae
Lanthus spp. common 1.77
Stylogomphus albistylus rare 4.72
Plecoptera
Perlidae
Eccoptura xanthenes common 3.74
Trichoptera
Lepidostomatidae
Lepidostoma spp. rare 0.90
Limnephilidae
Neophylax spp. common 2.20
Philopotamidae
Dolophilodes spp. abundant 0.81
Diptera
Chironomidae
Cricotopus spp. common
Dixidae
Dixa spp. common 2.55
Tipulidae
Antocha spp. rare 4.25
Dicranota spp. rare 0.00
Hexatoma spp. common 4.31
Tipula spp. common 7.33
Total Taxa 21
?t
?Mx oy
T
Site 7: Looking Upstream
(North)
Site 7: Loo.King Downstream
(South)
Towards US 421
34
Site 10, Section BB Unnamed tributary to Gap Creek
Site 10 consists of two swales that form an intermittent stream below their confluence.
This surface water system is part of the Gap Creek drainage. The site is located on the north side
of existing US 421 and the USGS map does not illustrate this surface water feature. Proposed
construction impacts include enclosing the stream channel in 88 m (289 ft) of pipe.
The swales and stream channel run through an old pasture area. The stream channel can
be best described a gully stream type according to the Rosgen system of stream classification.
The channel banks are vegetated by grasses and forbs. The channel bank soils consist of fairly
loose gravel, and sand with some rubble. The banks also show evidence of erosion.
Data on stream morphology was gathered for this site. However, no supplemental water
quality, macroinvertebrate or fisheries data was collected.
Site 10, Section BB
MORPHOLOGY
Canopy Cover: 0%
Channel Depth: 3.7 m (12.0 ft)
Channel Width: 7.6 m (25.0 ft)
Channel Slope: 3%
Stream Depth (Average): 2.5 cm (1.0 in)
Stream Width (Average): 0.5 m (1.5 ft)
Substrate: G, Sa, Si
Embeddedness: Fair
Site 10: Looking North

Site 10: Looking South Towards US 421
35
Site 12, Section BB, Unnamed tributary to Gap Creek
Site 12 is located on an unnamed tributary to Gap Creek. The tributary flows to the east,
and parallels existing US 421, until it joins Gap Creek. This stream is illustrated as intermittent
on the USGS map. Proposed construction impacts include enclosing the channel in 29 m (95 ft)
of pipe.
The stream is bordered to the north by a cattle pasture and bordered to the south by
commercial properties. The northern channel bank is fenced, therefore, no disturbance from
cattle crossing is occurring. The channel banks are vegetated by red maple (Acer rubrum), black
cherry, manna grass (Glyceria spp.), jewelweed, and asters. Channel banks are observed to be
relatively stable.
Site 12, Section BB
MORPHOLOGY
Canopy Cover:
Channel Depth:
Channel Width:
Channel Slope:
Stream Depth (Average):
Stream Width (Average):
Substrate:
Embeddedness:
Pool/Riffle Ratio
WATER QUALITY
60% Temperature (°C): 22
2.0 m (6.5 ft) pH: 7.0
5.2 m (16 ft) Dissolved Oxygen (ppm): 7.2
3% Total Alkalinity (ppm): 20
8.9 cm (3.5 in) EPT taxa richness: 2
0.8 m (2.5 ft) Biotic Index: 3.66
G, Sa, Si, R Bioclassification: Excellent
Good
7.0 (good-excellent)
36
Site 12, Section BB: Macroinvertebrates. Collected 19 June 1997
TAXA ABUNDANCE TOLERANCE
VALUE
INSECTA
MOLLUSCA
Gastropoda
Mesogastropoda
Pleuroceridae
Elimia spp. common 2.46
Ephemeroptera
Baetidae
Baetis spp. rare
Odonata
Zygoptera
Calopterygidae
Calopteryx maculata abundant 7.78
Trichoptera
Hydropsychidae
Philopotamidae
Dolophilodes spp. common 0.81
Diptera
Simuliidae
Simulium spp. rare 4.00
Tipulidae
Dicranota spp. abundant 0.00
Limnophila spp.
Tipula spp. common 7.33
Total Taxa 8
Site 12: Looking Downstream
(East)
Site 12: Looking Upstream
(West)
37
Site 13, Section BB, Gap Creek
Site 13 is located on Gap Creek just north of US 421. Gap Creek flows in a northerly
direction through a cattle pasture at this location. Proposed construction impacts include
enclosing the channel in 80 in (262 ft) of pipe.
Channel banks are primarily vegetated with fescue, with scattered individuals of wool
grass (Scirpus cyperinus), and forget-me-not. Channel banks display significant deterioration
and erosion from cattle crossing. In vicinity of the sample site, the active floodplain of Gap
Creek was measured to be 17.6 in (58 ft).
The stream substrate is fairly soft and larger substrate particles were over 50 per cent
embedded by fine substrate particles. Some shoaling of the substrate was also observed. Visual
observations of the existing streambed suggest that scouring of the substrate occurs during storm
events.
Site 13, Section BB
MORPHOLOGY WATER QUALITY
Canopy Cover: 0% Temperature (°C): 22
Channel Depth: 0.9 in (3.0 ft) pH: 7.0
Channel Width: 4.6 m(15 ft) Dissolved Oxygen (ppm): 8.0
Channel Slope: 2% Total Alkalinity (ppm): 22
Stream Depth (Average): 21 cm (8.3 in) EPT taxa richness: 6
Stream Width (Average): 4.0 in (13 ft) Biotic Index: 4.20
Substrate: G, Sa, R Bioclassification: Good
Embeddedness: Fair
Pool/Riffle Ratio 7.7 (good)
38
Site 13, Section BB: Macroinvertebrates. Collected 19 June 1997
TAXA ABUNDANCE TOLERANCE
VALUE
1NSECTA
Ephemeroptera
Baetidae
Baetis spp. abundant
Ephemerellidae
Ephemerella spp. abundant 2.04
Heptageniidae
Heptagenia spp. rare 2.57
Oligoneuriidae
Isonychia spp. common 3.45
Odonata
Zygoptera
Calopterygidae
Calopteryx maculata abundant 7.78
Trichoptera
Hydropsychidae
Hydropsyche betteni common 7.78
Limnephilidae
Neophylax spp. abundant 2.20
Diptera
Chironomidae
Cricotopus spp. rare
Simuliidae
Simulium spp. rare 4.00
Total Taxa 9
39
Site 13, Section BB. Sample length 100 m. Sample time 14.7 min. 16 July 1997
FISH SPECIES NUMBER LENGTH (mm) WEIGHT (g) C.P.U.E.
Salvelinus fontinalis
(brook trout) 3 60-70 8 0.20
8 160-170 378 0.54
Salmo trutta
(brown trout) 1 180 60 0.07
Campostoma anomalum
(central stoneroller) 17 40-50 30 1.16
6 50-60 18 0.41
9 70-80 56 0.61
12 90-100 154 0.82
1 110 18 0.07
Clinostomus funduloides
(rosyside dace) 3 40-50 2 0.20
4 80-90 26 0.27
Rhinichthys atratulus
(blacknose dace) 33 40-50 34 2.24
18 70-80 74 1.22
Semotilus atromaculatus
(creek chub) 2 60 4 0.14
1 75 5 0.07
2 100 30 0.14
1 120 20 0.07
Catostomus commersoni
(white sucker) 1 185 70 0.07
1 285 282 0.07
Etheostoma flabellare
(fantail darter) 7 40-50 4 0.48
14 50-60 20 0.95
4 60-70 12 0.27
Cottus bairdi
(mottled sculpin) 3 70-80 20 0.20
Total 151 1325 10.27

Site 13: Gap Creek
Looking Downstream (North)
Site 13: Gap Creek
Embedded Substrate
40
Site 14, Section BB, Unnamed tributary to Gap Creek
Site 14 consists of a swale area that originates east of US 221 and drains to the west,
eventually entering into Gap Creek. The area is not illustrated as a surface water feature on the
USGS map. Proposed construction impacts include enclosing 1 lm (36 ft) of the channel in pipe.
No definitive stream channel is present east of US 221. However, a channel develops west of US
221. No flow was observed in this channel during the site visit.
The channel west of US 221 is located in an active cattle pasture. Channel banks display
evidence of deterioration and erosion resulting from cattle crossing. Vegetation associated with
the channel banks includes fescue, wool grass, and forget-me-not. No water quality,
macroinvertebrate, or fisheries data was collected at this site.
Site 14 Section BB
MORPHOLOGY
Canopy Cover: 0%
Channel Depth: 1.2 m (4.0 ft)
Channel Width: 3.7 m (12.0 ft)
Channel Slope: 2%
Stream Depth (Average): No flow
Stream Width (Average): .03 m (1.0 ft)
Substrate: Sa, Si, G

?N
Site 14: Swale to Gap Creek
West of US 221
u?.

k

Site 14: Swale to Gap Creek
East of US 221
41
Site 16, Section BB, Unnamed tributary to Gap Creek
The stream at site 16 is a unnamed tributary to Gap Creek. The stream is located east of
US 211 and north of US 421. The stream flows perpendicular to US 421 and crosses US 421 via
a culvert opposite Moretz Road (private). The stream is not illustrated as a surface water on the
USGS map. Proposed construction impacts include enclosing the channel in 85 m (279 ft) of
pipe.
Channel bank vegetation includes silky willow, tag alder, blackberry and jewelweed.
Vegetation overhanging the stream channel is very dense in some areas. The channel banks are
steep and do display some signs of erosion.
Site 16, Section BB
MORPHOLOGY WATER QUALITY
Canopy Cover: 80% Temperature (°C): 14
Channel Depth: 1.8 m (6.0 ft) pH: 6.5
Channel Width: 4.0 m (13 ft) Dissolved Oxygen (ppm): 8.6
Channel Slope: 4-5% Total Alkalinity (ppm): 18
Stream Depth (Average): 6.4 cm (2.5 in) EPT taxa richness: 15
Stream Width (Average): 0.8 m (2.5 ft) Biotic Index: 2.10
Substrate: Sa, G, R, B Bioclassification: Excellent
Embeddedness: Good
Pool/Riffle Ratio 3.2 (excellent)
42
Site 16, Section BB: Macroinvertebrates. Collected 19 June 1997
TAXA ABUNDANCE TOLERANCE
VALUE
MOLLUSCA
• Gastropoda
Mesogastropoda
Pleuroceridae
• Elimia spp. common 2.46
INSECTA
Ephemeroptera
Baetidae
Baetis spp. rare
Ephemerellidae
Drunella longicornis rare
Ephemerella spp. common 2.04
Serratella spp. rare
Heptageniidae
Epeorus spp. abundant 1.27
Heptagenia spp. common 2.57
Stenonema spp. abundant
Odonata
Anisoptera
Gomphidae rare 1.77
Lanthus spp.
Plecoptera
Nemouridae
Amphinemura spp. rare 3.33
Perlodidae
Remenus bilobatus rare 0.28
Trichoptera
Hydropsychidae
Diplectrona spp. common 2.21
Parapsyche spp. rare
Limnephilidae
Hydatophylax argus common 2.17
Neophylax spp. abundant 2.20
Pycnopsyche spp. abundant 2.52
Rhyacophilidae
• Rhyacophila fuscula rare 1.88
Total Taxa 17
Site 16: Looking Downstream
(South)
Towards US 421
Site 16: Looking Upstream
(North)
43
REFERENCES
Allan, J. D. 1995. Stream Ecology: Structure and function of running waters. Chapman &
Hall, New York.
Brigham, A. R., W. U. Brigham, and A. Gnilka, eds. 1982. Aquatic Insects and Oligochaetes of
North and South Carolina. Midwest Aquatic Enterprises, Mahomet, Illinois.
• Daigle, J. J. 1992. Florida Dragonflies (Anisoptera): A Species Key to the Aquatic Larval
Stages. Technical Series Vol. 12 Number 1, Department of Environmental Regulation, Florida.
Edmunds, G. F., S. L. Jensen and L. Berner. 1976. The Mayflies of North and Central America.
University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis.
Epler, J.H. 1995. Identification Manual for the Larval Chironomidaie (Diptera) of Florida.
Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Tallahassee, Florida.
Epler, J.H. 1996. Identification Manual for the Water Beetles of Florida. Florida Department of
Environmental Protection, Tallahassee, Florida.
Hitchcock, S. W. 1974. Guide to the Insects of Connecticut. Connecticut Geological and
Natural History Survey. Bulletin 107.
Hobbs, H. H. 1976. Crayfishes (Astacidae) of North and Middle America. Smithsonian
Institution, Washington, D.C.
Lewis, P. A. 1974. Taxonomy and Ecology of Stenonema Mayflies (Heptageniidae:
Ephemeroptera). National Environmental Research Center, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Mason, W. T., Jr. 1973. An Introduction to the Identification of Chironomid Larvae. National
Environmental Research Center, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Menhenick, E.F. 1991. The Freshwater Fishes of North Carolina. N.C. WRC., Raleigh.
Merrit, R. W., K. W. Cummins. 1996. An Introduction to the Aquatic Insects of North America.
Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company, Dubuque, Iowa.
NCDEHNR-DEM, 1994, Basinwide Assessment Report, New River Basin, Raleigh.
NCDEHNR-DEM, 1995, Standard Operating Procedures, Biological Monitoring, Raleigh.
it
44
Pescador, M. L., A. K. Rasmussen, & S. C. Harris. 1995. Identification Manual for the
Caddisfly (Trichoptera) Larvae of Florida. Florida Department of Environmental Protection,
Tallahassee, Florida.
Plafkin, J. L., M. T. Barbour, K. D. Porter, S. K. Gross, & R. M. Hughes. 1989. Rapid
Bioassessment Protocols For Use In Streams and Rivers. Report No. EPA/444/4-89-001, United
` States Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.
Radford, A.E., H.E. Ahles and G.R. Bell. 1968. Manual of the Vascular Flora of the Carolinas.
Chapel Hill, The University of North Carolina Press.
Rohde, Fred C., R.G. Arndt, D.G. Lindquist, J.F. Parnell, 1994, Freshwater Fishes of the
Carolinas, Virginia, Maryland, & Delaware, University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill.
Rosgen, Dave. 1996. Applied River Morphology. Wildland Hydrology. Pagosa Springs,
Colorado.
Schuster, G. A. & D. A. Etnier. 1978. A Manual for the Identification of the Larvae of the
Caddisfly Genera Hydropsyche Pictet and Symphitopsyche Ulmer in Eastern and Central North
America (Trichoptera: Hydropsychidae). Report No. EPA-600/4-78-060, United States
Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Stehr, Frederick W., 1987. Immature Insects. Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company, Dubuque,
Iowa.
Williams, W. D. Freshwater Isopods (Asellidae) of North America. 1976. Water Pollution
Control Research Series 18050 ELD05/72, U.S. EPA, Cincinnati Ohio.

4ow rMI.

f?
a
A?K
44
4 ++
tjt
?l
it ....4111
Y

o?0? WA
a ®'i
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
November 7, 2002
Mr. Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Manager
NCDOT Planning and Environmental Branch
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC, 27699-1548
Dear Dr. Thorpe:
Re: MODIFICATION to Water Quality Certification Pursuant to §401 of the Federal Clean Water
Act, Proposed US 421 Relocation from west of South Fork of the New River to east of the Blue
Ridge Parkway. Watauga County.
TIP Project Nos. R-529 BA, BB and BD:
DWQ Project No. 970616. COE #199707161.
The Division of Water Quality has reviewed your submittal for a Modification to §401 Water Quality
Certification Number 3185 for the aforementioned project. Review of your application revealed it
lacking necessary information required for making an informed permit decision. The permit application
was deficient in the following areas:
1. Existing Stream Design
The existing stream does not appear to have been designed and/or constructed properly, as such,
DWQ agrees that a new design is in order. .
2. In Stream Bed Material and Bank Stabilization
The proposed channel cross sections indicate a specification for "bed material" that is 0.6 meters
thick for the entire channel and over-bank area. However, no specification was provided indicating
the size or gradation of the material. The purpose and nature of the material is not discussed.
Additionally, no sediment transport analysis, shear stress analysis or other modeling was provided
to support the need for such an approach. Finally, it is not clear as to how this approach relates to
natural channel design techniques. Although channel armoring may be needed at time, the Division
of Water Quality does not allow armored channels to count as compensatory mitigation.
Riparian Buffers and Planting Plan
A planting plan must be provided for the proposed stream buffers. The planting plan should
include tree planting densities of the appropriate native species that will result in a survival rate of
320 trees per acre after five years. Please revise the site plans to include the extent and nature of
the plantings and buffers.
4. Stormwater Inlet Location/Protection
Please locate any stormwater outlets to the proposed restored stream on the site plans. Please
provide the means of stabilizing the stormwater outlets on the site plans.

North Carolina Division of Water Quality, 401 Wetlands Certification Unit,
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 (Mailing Address)
2321 Crabtree Blvd., Raleigh, NC 27604-2260 (Location)
919-733-1786 (phone), 919-733-6893 (fax), hftp://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/hcwetlands/
Please note that the Internal Technical Guide for Stream Work in North Carolina (April 2001), and other
documents and information can be downloaded from the Wetlands Unit web site at
http:Hh2o. eh n r. state. nc. us/ncwet lan ds/restore. htm 1.
Pursuant to 15A NCAC 2H .0507(a)(3), the permit application will remain on hold until we are supplied
the necessary information. Furthermore, until the information is received by the NC Division of Water
Quality, we request (by copy of this letter) that the US Army Corps of Engineers continue to place the
permit application on hold.
We look forward to working with you to expedite the processing of your permit application. If you have
any questions or require additional information, please contact Cynthia F. Van Der Wiele at
919.733.5715.
Sincerely,
o . ter ertific ion Program
cc: Wilmington District COE
John Thomas, USACE Raleigh Field Office:
Todd St. John, DWQ
Jennifer Frye, NCDWQ Winston-Salem Regional Office
File Copy

WAIF Michael F. Easley, Governor
F
0 qQG William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Cq Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
o ?
November 7, 2002
Mr. Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Manager
NCDOT Planning and Environmental Branch
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC, 27699-1548
Dear Dr. Thorpe:
RECEIVED
N.C. Dept. of EHNR
NOV 15 2002
Winston-Salem
Regional Office
Re: MODIFICATION to Water Quality. Certification Pursuant to §401 of the Federal Clean Water
Act, Proposed US 421 Relocation from west of South Fork of the New River to east of the Blue
Ridge Parkway. Watauga County.
TIP Project Nos. R-529 BA, BB and BD.
DWQ Project No. 970616. COE #199707161.
The Division of Water Quality has reviewed your submittal for a Modification to §401 Water Quality
Certification Number 3.185 for the aforementioned project. Review of your application revealed it
lacking necessary information required for making an informed permit decision. The permit application
was deficient in the following areas:
1. Existing Stream Design
The existing stream does not appear to have been designed and/or constructed properly, as such,
DWQ agrees that a new design is in order. .
2. In Stream Bed Material and Bank Stabilization
The proposed channel cross sections indicate a specification for "bed material" that is 0.6 meters
thick for the entire channel and over-bank area. However, no specification was provided indicating
the size or gradation of the material. The purpose and nature of the material is not discussed.
Additionally, no sediment transport analysis, shear stress analysis or other modeling was provided
to support the need for such an approach. Finally, it is not clear as to how this approach relates to
natural channel design techniques. Although channel armoring may be needed at time, the Division
of Water Quality does not allow armored channels to count as compensatory mitigation.
3. Riparian Buffers and Planting Plan
A planting plan must be provided for the proposed stream buffers. The planting plan should
include tree planting densities of the appropriate native species that will result in a survival rate of
320 trees per acre after five years. Please revise the site plans to include the extent and nature of
the plantings and buffers.
4. Stormwater Inlet Location/Protection
Please locate any stormwater outlets to the proposed restored stream on the site plans. Please
provide the means of stabilizing the stormwater outlets on the site plans.
North Carolina Division of Water Quality, 401 Wetlands Certification Unit,
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 (Mailing Address)
2321 Crabtree Blvd., Raleigh, NC 27604-2260 (Location)
919-733-1786 (phone), 919-733-6893 (fax), http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/
t
Please note that the Internal Technical Guide for Stream Work in North Carolina (April 2001), and other
documents and information can be downloaded from the Wetlands Unit web site at
hftp://h2o.ehnr.state.nc.us/ncwetiands/restore.htm1.
Pursuant to 15A NCAC 2H.0507(a)(3), the perniit application will remain on hold until we are supplied
the necessary information. Furthermore, until the information is received by the NC Division of Water
Quality, we request (by copy of this letter) that the US Army Corps of Engineers continue to place the
permit application on hold.
We look forward to working with you to expedite the processing of your permit application. If you have
any questions or require additional information, please contact Cynthia F. Van Der Wiele at
919.733.5715.
Program
cc: Wilmington District COE
John Thomas, USACE Raleigh Field Office
Todd St. John, DWQ
Jennifer Frye, NCDWQ Winston-Salem Regional Office
File Copy

Sincerely,
TO: Jean Manuele, USACOE
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office FILE COPY
FROM: Ron Linville, Regional Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program
DATE: October 28, 2002
SUBJECT: North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT), TIP R-529BA, BB & BD, US
421, Unnamed Tributary Gap Creek Restoration Modification Requests, Watauga County
NCDOT proposes to modify the natural channel design for the referenced stream relocation. Biologists
with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission are familiar with habitat values in the area. These
comments are provided in accordance with the provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48
Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667d) and the North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (G.S. 113A-
1 through 113A-10; NCAC 25).
NCDOT indicates that site conditions are very unstable and that slope conditions are too severe for
previously approved channel design restoration activities to be stabile. Instead of abandoning the
restoration site, NCDOT proposes to amend the previous design by using less sinuosity and more in-
channel structure.
Biologists with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission have previously expressed our
concerns about these conditions at the site. Considering that the alternative would be to riprap the channel
and provide off site mitigation, we will not object to the proposed modification. However, we recommend
that mitigation credits be based on a successfully stabilized stream restoration complex. Conditions
previously required by the Corps for this project should continue to the fullest extent possible; however, the
project should be completed without further delays providing stringent erosion control efforts are used
during the moratorium period. If any wetlands are created, NCDOT should receive credit if they provide
sufficient habitat values. We recommend that any future restoration projects of this type be built and
stabilized prior to road construction beginning.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this project during the early planning stages. If
you have any questions regarding these comments, please contact me at 336/769-9453.
Cc: Cynthia Van Der Wiele, DDWQ
Heath Slaughter, DOT
Marella Buncick, USFWS
Becky Fox, EPA
Marla Chambers, WRC
® North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
1721 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1721
919-733-3633
MEMORANDUM
.
TO. Heath Slaughter, Environmental Officer FILE COPY
Division 11, NCDOT
FROM: Marla Chambers, Highway Projects Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program, NCWRC
DATE: October 15, 2002
SUBJECT: North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) request for a variance to
the trout moratorium for a stream channel relocation project on US 421, Watauga
County. USACE Action ID No. 199707161, DWQ Project No. 970616, Federal
Aid Project No. FR-86-1(6), State Project No. 8.1750601, TIP No. R-529BA, BB
& BD.
NCDOT requests to extend the start date of the trout moratorium from October 15 to
November 15, 2002 to construct and stabilize the new stream channel using a new design for the
relocation of an unnamed tributary to Gap Creek. There have been numerous problems with this
project since construction began on the stream relocation, and reasons for the delay into the
moratorium period remain unclear.
While we are disappointed the work on this project was not completed prior to the trout
moratorium, we believe it is important to stabilize this area to reduce further impacts to
downstream habitats. We will not object to extending the start date of the trout moratorium to
November 15, 2002, however all practical precautions must be taken to prevent or minimize off
site sedimentation.
If you have any questions or need further assistance, please call me at [phone].
/ Z
L
0
0
m
z
c
3
W
m
X
o z
0 0
_0

N m
?
o
o D

N ?
M
0
M
0
0
z
?m
0
a o

1 n
m
?
? D
rte--
Lrl 0
Z
^\ O _{

v
v,
0
0
c
z

T
M
m
G)
x

z
m
-a
D

UI O
c
z
--I

)iI
Z
O
r
w
u,
U.)
w
rn
z
0
v
m
-1 T
m 3z
m0
Z m
C7 0
V (n ?m
C
to -nZZ
1, W-1
?0 00
Lna
0
Lo z
0
Fl
i
N
O
O
N
?Tye,,.SWE°
N ?-A
70 ??
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY LYNDO TIPPETT
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Field Office
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road, Suite 120
Raleigh, North Carolina 27615
ATTN: Ms. Jean Manuele
NCDOT Coordinator
Subject: Watauga County, US 421 new location from South Fork New River in Boone to
the Blue Ridge Parkway in Deep Gap. USACE Action ID No. 199707161, DWQ
project No. 970616, Federal Aid Project No. FR-86-1(6), State Project No.
8.1750601, TIP No. R-529BA, BB & BD.
The North Carolina Department of Transportation is requesting a modification to
Department of the Army Permit No. 199707161. Department of the Army (DOA) Permit No.
199707161 was issued on May 4, 1998 and authorized impact by fill or excavation to 1.32 acres
of wetland and 13,461 linear feet of stream channel. DOA Individual Permit No. 199707161
required channel relocations to be done utilizing natural channel design instead of placing the
stream in what is essentially a straight rip-rap lined ditch.
Since the original permit was issued and the project let to construction, the design of a
channel relocation for an unnamed tributary to Gap Creek has changed. The stream channel in
question is just west of the US 421 and US 221 intersection.
October 11, 2002
` OCT ?2 *M
In the original design, the channel relocation was designed as a straight, rip-rap lined
channel. The NCDOT, in coordination with the USACE, the NCWRC, the NCDWQ, and other
agencies, revised the design in January of 1999 to comply with the permit requirement to
incorporate natural channel design into all channel relocations. A design was agreed upon and
approved by t e agencies. It was subsequently incorporated into the construction plans. Since
construction began on the stream relocation, there have been numerous problems. To date, the
NCDOT and its contractors have not been able to build the channel relocation as designed and --
permitted. The soil in the project area is extremely unstable and the slope too severe to allow for
MAILING ADDRESS:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NG 27699-1548
TELEPHONE: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
WEBSITE. WWW.NCDOT.ORG
LOCATION:
TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
RALEIGH NC
the current design to be constructed and stabilized. The NCDOT has consulted with the USACE
and the NCWRC to determine what can be done to correct the problem. After reviewing all the
available options, including abandoning natural channel design in favor of a rip-rap "ditch", the
NCDOT decided to go with an amended natural channel design. The new design incorporates a
more conservative channel design with ess sinuosity anmore in-channel structure. The new
design will reduce the chance of catastrophic bank failure and provide a more stable stream.
However, due to the reduction in sinuosity, the new design is approximately 918.4 feet shorter
than the original design. Therefore, the NCDOT will now need to go off site to replace t e ost
channel.
The NCDOT proposes to contract with the NCWRC to rovide the additional MAI
at a 2 to 1 ratio. The NCDOT will purc ase .837.0 linear eet of stream mitigation from
Please find attached a copy of the proposed design. The NCDOT requests that DOA
Individual Permit No. 199707161 be modified to reflect the new design and mitigation proposal.
Additionally, in order to allow time to construct the new channel design and get it stabilized
immediately, the NCDOT requests that the in-water work moratorium begin on Nov. 15 instead
of October 15, as is currently required.
By copy of this letter, the Department also requests that the Division of Water Quality
modify the §401 Water Quality Certification (DWQ Project No. 970616). If you have any
further questions or would like additional information, please don't hesitate to call. Thank you
for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
Environmental Management Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
cc: w/attachment
Mr. David Franklin, USACE, Wilmington
Mr. John Dorney, Division of Water Quality
Mr. Ron Linville, NCWRC
w/o attachment
Mr. John Alford, P.E., Roadway Design
Mr. David Rhodes, P.E., Programming and TIP
Ms. Debbie Barbour, P.E., Highway Design
Mr. David Chang, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr. Mark Staley, Roadside Environmental
Mr. Carl McCann, Division 1 I Engineer
Mr. Greg Perfetti, P.E., Structure Design
Mr. Heath Slaughter, DEO-Division 11
7
cu
G
n
O
c1D
P?
\a
0
)..tr2, °0.
O O ?
J? n 9
O?
d
03 •/l. o
l .'l o oV?o

o ?

• .,

C
0
a
o?

?l

.O I I• n O

-1A
?o
.0 CL
l
? 7
r? ?
' O °Qa I O
?
? ? ,a

?(-/,j
? J
O
z
I
I p
?.
j
t; ? t7
•
L :
.r? l,7

`
^ i ?"
` v

O
O
J ? ru+ G1 > 1;
O
C rrD
? ? ? ti
1Q
_ cn O
cep p
cu O
`

J ,) 1 ]
r
W

O
r' N) Zl-

? o
!

! ? I

f ` Il
1
\ ]

1 lT ? O

[j?
COD

w
, ]
!

7

ct. r?
l' J
] t•'. I J
r!"v^ y

ti 1
If
O
I
O
fj ! ?,

1
1p
fV 0
6
1C I
n
t
I?
?

ZL !:z

i C
s
T ?
N
\\?? 141900
? N \ I
mA
>o m
I ?N
\ r
a ?, I
0111 ? ?m? \ I `-\
I \Ak?
9 I T \ I
15+000
I
r1i
0 l -- rq
\ s n ° nm
? - ? ? _ Pl AS1 C? 'O
mZn .1. ? m m ?N
MATCH LINE A-A

3
0
O
n
r
m
It
m=
_z
?W
?4S
V ?y S
C4 ?(
I
I m II
I °I I
I °m gll N
I I ??? II
°n II
I n
I I ?

J / -0'
aNI'I HO.LVW

1 m

SPL S1 C7
II x
11 I I K

1
?
1 ? (
11 I?

Jll
11 I
11 I '
ll_ I
l? I m
n I ` \ .
1 I /?
Nib 1 1
y ?.
v
I )
i
r\
MATCH LINE B-B
15+100
N
D
?m
a A<
n ?a
/
/
/
15+200
G
0.
L
m
D
0
2
N
/
/
/
m ;m
o mz®
z ?
00
N mF
?a
Nz
15+300

fffiUSIJES"IRsftoGN S S S S S S $ $ if l$ si ss
3 !
I.1
t
L
6 3
f
g r i
v
S
r
c
..;
..................................... J
o
5
8-8 3N I I H3.Lvw
I5+300
Q)
1 C1 I T ? m 3
I _ -
r*
r
! a
It II
? r
m
76
N m
y I aF \ , ? °a 'v
G I ? m> y
_ r
II a / 'N L4
I I R\ m 15+400
II ? I /
ii
1
k
v -
? J
r
I I ?
.J ........
v wf v
CE w
b ti
n Y N iM1
M
t; ? x
Iz s: .
G5 ri v
7S Cnt C}
F
S n
D
or
?-0
m .?
O
Ti
r-
m
D
m 0
mz
m
v Ln
r +
D p
Z Q
cn O
_ I
M ,-
m?
-? m
R •1
N
W N
Ln
3
o -
3
? N
C'7 \ 3

n
D
r
N
0
D
m
0
n
7z
(n ? N
O
? cn
D
-1
IM
O
K W?7
m
D
Z
Z
m
z
m
r
D
Z
z vl
O
-I n
m?
N O
mz
mGi
r- 0
D O
z O
? I
m
mm
-j <
a
N N
W Ln
3
--I
Y
a
$ e
rO? ? (a
a
' o
3
m
00
D
Z
?m
z
0
'Tl
r -
m

mNi IO
z° y m
m0 N
m?-'8
O
P
??v mm
0
omo °
zp? n
y?? y
pyn D.
mz >
n
x
m ?
° O x
Z -+ r
y
? S O m
? ?mm
m C C
ovlim
0
- n

n
r
n
-u
a
O
zl
o'
y
O
N
n
m
RIFFLE
F?
O
o n a m f o m a i i
p z o m m
a x m' c c= m N
m rt'on n m:
,n .z
nc°mo ,n z
01 A c> np p
vzia n?ni Pn Frn
Ac z s y ym cz,oo
C Z O Z N A
y
y? N N r N ZO x N
oz u ? n??^•-?u
2 -.nO m -.D nOr
I S ?m ? ,rID
O N m p -00,-
m r? a o? x A F o i
mvr 3`or c
nm Ag nC Z -'
xpoz o:nm
z
z ?m `z.a oc°m
m?oz nz°yyn
O y D O n m z
z
X M, 11
p m m c Z
p m n n Z z a
Z m N m z 0
O N
z x? m m° T m
z
oo mr?--mat
Z a n
a zo m =
z x ° v
m
D
r
ca
r
D
z
<
D o
O
mx
O
N
A I`

or
? i

Z o n
r
i?

1
J
D C

t I ?
l.D -0 A

z
F4
\
O
Q
D

??
W
•
m M
M o
D . o
• .x u z RiFF<E
I
Z g

N
D 9 A
m
-r C,
m (A m
y
-
O W
#
N
Ul r
O
_ 3
3y I
57

+ O y x o
O

O

cn
Fr

>
O m
C) n
N
O \. z

r

O
O

3 m
3
3
m z sy;? o

•I /`' r'r f? ?

e •
! S 0 "e
> B 5 ? i 3 5 5s ? 5S 6 e e 's =e oe
C g 0 7
?g i 0 L 1 9 9 >
a g >

j i
O <
? >N
E

-
'

?
a
S p
C
a
Q
o A
S 0
H b .. ?
,? M
? o
?
-
?
?
N P
3
i
3
? h
P o
C C j
C r
y P
? e
A > A
S

?
w s P
a O
P P
4 ? t s N r :" a
a " a
b
? w d.
I
V
c?
r ?^
HEAD OF RIFFLE
v
A O
- _ o
W T
r rn
y
O
0
TAIL OF RIFFLE
mzz
RFGINNING OF POOL
OF
n
0
-yG A

O
• T m
•?, ;
y C71d o
D P e? a
?a n
O

? • •,?OC ? ? ? Y o 3

»
/,.
?9 ^
l I ?

D 3
.
• ?4 T1

N
m Y
m
?. O A

?
N ?, ?y ? •

N r ` S
m N ?p m - o m
m
n 2r
z
mys
y
v
mmm x
O
z o _ d ?o°

v
ymn
x
?
r ?
•
M ? o r ? o°Nm .
•
4 N x mDy ° „
°
z YZ
\A 3 y
Z

° b

Z \?
c ?r

N
0
v
t T/
v ? o
F--)
I?' f?
1
D
0T-1

m
I ' ?
0
r-n
V/
D
U
z
P
r
r
O
m
Z
0
z
D
G
x
D
m
3
3
0
= c -n M n

4 c.n O Ln 0
Lo m (o m J 0 l

(n O Ln L?n qn, 0 -
Co tD m
N (n N 0 0 0 - O
-j (n O Ln (n m ? W
Lo m (o m m -
rn
m
n

In
S

W

co

--,

S

(n

t,

L,

N

- m
n
(")
r
G

(J1
(n
Ln 7
D
(A ±
Ln O -1
O
N m Z
U CD

r r
m
rL
m m a

r ? r c
r
m

C/)
71
o
I
m
r
-i
O m
70
n Nr
c
mn
n -D U)
O
- m
0
?c
m Z7
zm
n C7
v
0 0 0 0
rn
Cl V1 -n CO -10
Cm OD =D
rn m?
<z
?O or- c
-In x? r m
M
<
m C? 700
m <_ -+z1
n m
x
co m
Dx
n o
T D
?I <
D
r -?
m
, r
?
-'o -,Go
0m
_ (n
n c
-O D
? r -o v1
. z o
m ?z
-i O
TJ C
xm
no
v
Q7 m
nx
n n
\ ??
?1 G
rn
m
F
2
? -i O mzl
= V)
?V) ??
z o
m
? O
?C
mm
Da
0
O
U)
Fr-,
C7
D
i
D
4
O
o
n
2 O
D m
z
z z
mn
F- -1
C
A
n
f
z z
0 0

m m
co
D
D C7m? Ul
2 = r ?
?noA m C
?mm
OZO-o ?-n x
Z Z -- p _n
Zm
?r0D
O

WO 2
z W r

m?-?o
°
C: C) -i
D

r•-?_OZ ,N0
C-) -AOCO
-Tj (nr mm
s
zM °?
novn

Z • ?
? _
D Z
?
mnm
r , o -
„ rN
D i Z
O O I
> l/1 D
m M In
,
?xv -'
=O mm-
?n
VA
OD mf?-
n m
orn? m 1m
m
.
V) r- VI C/)
K<' xMX
Onm i-i.-A
oo>
<oz
m °
F-
D
? I
>
On W
o L?nn
z z
?rZ -a In
<CA
om
r I
0m
-1 SN

m?? Sm
02
O D O n0
? C
? Z m 0:0
m
?A
°
Z> a
CD
---I
C
>
O ;10 m ((0 o
mn_ ?o
rZ

O D
N Z
N
I
4
C D
r- m
I m Z
W-Q F j
o . o m
o °
N
O v; 1 ?O
vt `mm
- O o
N o O
Imo- A
? I ? I n
D ? n
--?-k? ?-
C7
?I
r
> \\ m C7
- D
n i
° v°v I
n m0
F
_

°
o
-A
0
D m
4e 30

o
-*
m o
0
?
co
D
c ?7 QJ D
cc) Co
?7 '4lE7-
O m -4
A SJ O
S
C-)
O ? N
° I o -
D z o
r O
> z
o

H z
O zn
m 0

W O

O AX
co m0 2
1 nz
C-)

ITI O \
C-) O -
o o
o co
-
00
m
m
o
uj
O O
D ° QJ
A OO

O
??i r?
DENR Winston-Salem Fax:[phone]
iy fr>
StAte of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Rewurcea
Division of Water Quality
Jam" B. Hunt, Jr., cdvemor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A Preston Howard, Jr., P.E. Director
Nk David Roblason
NC DoT
7.'0 Hvx 23201
Raleigh NC 27611-5201

Oct 29 '02 16:48 P.02
1•
NCDENR
MM" C-WOUNA MMWME09 OF
EIV OUMMMr wNV NMUF"L Rasp c as
Aydl z0. ]IRS
FILE COPY
Re. Ce ""fiCn Flrlm= to Saxton a Of ft mew CIM Water Act,
Pc+q?osed US 421 aeloCtltion hom west of South Fork of the New River to east of the Blue
RAW Parkway. -
WQC Roject # 970616 COE 0199707161, TIP R-529 DA, BE, ZD
wa=ga Cwnty
Attached hereto h 6 copy of CWiilcdion No. 3185 issued to the N. C. Aeparpmmt of
Transportation daW Apc1120, INS.
If we ew be of SuWCr asstatanc e, do to hesitate to uonua us,
970616.wgc
jkr.
1-9
pap
caw Wilmington Dig do t Cotes ofEagi
coops of EnOm Asneme Fied office
o11-S3lcm DWQRegianal 0Mw
lyI[. John Doucy
w Jaha Pates, Division of Costal Management
ceutw Plies
FMI McBride
hk Judy mw=
R6a Ferrell; WRP
Div"d WaterQLARy • EnwWwinemd Odom= 6rarich
a" hwcL Sciences 9rAMk 4101 PAG&I Q*& Rd_. R24t , NC 37607 Ukphem a -.733-1708 FAX1173)-C?OBo
M E*W OMxwttk* Afkma*$ Artbn l:mpfoyer • M% te0Yd6M6% post cmwma paper
VO/LO 'd 5f: FI 86, yi I of 6966--M-6T6: xuj IBS va "q am ON
DENR Winston-Salem
Y f
1
Fax:[phone] Oct 29 '02 16:48 P.03
NOATIif CARQXJNA 40x WATER OUALITY CMRTMCATlioa`r
TMS CMRTYFICATiON is issued in mdorwity with the MNkGxn,,ft of Section 40 1
Public L4Wa 92-SM and 95-217 of the United States and aubJea to tt Noa Catalina ni vw on
Qf water Quality (D'WQ) RC$BlationS to 15 NCAC 21L SeOMM.0300 to the NC DOT =W11. 92
In a 11.3 acres of rt?e gad 1 45I face Qom impact in WMV Calnty pursuant to a
ICTI&d application caged 1flG 9 day of OcttM 1997 to reoew us 4Z1 am e at at the 5oum
flb& of the New Mverdo wwt of the Blue Ridge FukwL .
lbo Mplicadon xovldefl Md quattr w=aace clot t1c etlachwp of im ma bedd into we
aims of Rbcjry Br=* litre Run Ctr Ck TAMOR CM-14 LOW Comic, Gap Creek and the South
Fat of the New Riven in cogfwxdan with thew propou d development will not ICsult in a
vloladm of applkole. Water Quality Smdm* AW diBC Sr, gtddeliwL Tlru+cfott, the State of
Nd dh Carolina c 0flea that this arflvity will noc violate d>e epplic" poltoW of S=MS N1,
302, 303, 306, 307 of PL 92-500 and PL 95-217 it condut ad In W rdaaca with tbo vpiication
aad conditions her+ein&w set forth
This approval is only valid for the p apoat and design that you subenittrd is your
application, as desaibod In to Public Nod= If you dlmge yow itojM you must notify us
and scud us a new appllMata fbr a new cmrt cal uL Kme propaiy iii add, die new ow= must
be givrat a copy of the QrMation and approval It= ad is ftnty tegmdbla ft complying
whh ati coaditiona. It a"dlonal wetland MU for this pmjaot (now or in the t4turq) =
peapased, aMdenlal cnmpt:asftW midgadoa will be regtiiredas described in iSA NCAC 21i
,0305 (h) (6) and (7). For" appOV91 to be valid, you nowt follow cite conditions listed below.
In addition, you should get any 0111a federal, state of 20011 permits bCf= you go ahead wlttt
your pmjeat including (bat not limited to) SMinau and Eragon control, Coastal Starmww,
Nun-dlsc?c trod Wam Supply womftd mow.
Covation(s) of C cWan-
i_ Appropriate saftesrt sad erosion cmanl p whccs whtm 6ROd or exceed thole oudmed
in we mast remit version of the "Nat+dt Camuna. samsnt aad Erosion Cgnttkol Platming
and Deus Mutual" or the "North Car ylfni Swface M d" Mattttal" (avaitable from the
blvlsion of Land lgeavateee iu tae DEHNR Re gonal Or C=9 OffiCee) shall be mil=d
to Vnwatt etxoeedwow of the appropriate tuLtIdity wattt quality (SO NTus in
an !h'iesti watery str and dven not dedgnated w tro oA waters; 25 NTUa in an lalcos
and i +ob . and aIl sattwates: da =610 WTUS in tract wafters):
2. All sediment and melon cowol cue == Flaoed in wetlands or wabCts shall be removed
and t M 22DOM 940 neBtlO W Ca tha D1v sfm of Land Resom= has t+ale:ased the
FMjeC4
3. Should waft or boagw di feu be localedia wedtw&. compensa my mitigation is
=pAred since it is a etima impact ftm road comtractieon activities:
4. Ali oftitt v4daad rnitigattou and a pordw (to be determined In lmaagatlon
plan) of the atr MM mitigation shall be done at the Sparta Hog tnlttgatlon Sh& a$
discussed in the Mstuh 27.1998 meow *ammity awry) fgm DoT enddeyd "wed ad
and Strum lu809%don StMW for [1S 421". 'X710 NC wetland Rcstorafta Pray
> O/VO 'd 017:51 86. VT Inf 6966-2U-M, xPA 10SAN3 CM 5M ON
DENR Winston-Salem Fax:[phone] Oct 29 '02 16:49 P.04
• , j .
dull W involved is We dadga of this mldgatloa situ. DWQ sbaR bt> copied on the and
midgadozt plan and atmusl =parts foe five yam.
6. 5auam mitigIdOn s1W1 be dono In wxmda= with ft cone id with the NC
*Mdiite Raw= Commission. Tow direct perennial stun impacts will include
13,461 linear first for this ptoje a Of lids 13,461 fa;t 034 feet shall tae ref
whhin the ptq= itght ot=-way, white the wmalaing 7.407 fee will be ptataaently lost
due w pipitig, cWvadng ar fill. DO 7,407 feet of pamenent impact shall be init( Bawd
at a 1*1 antis. Additional wdttea approv?uimd $ora DWQfOC thme reiacttitln
plans. D1aVD shall be inrOlved in the sdc cdotl of stream mitigation sites, Intedm
tqxft shall be m tto_DW y X998 and Agd16,1999 to describe pt+c gnu
m`sAe Fluft amiable W available stn iWtIg ion aiW Consayida n easements
or tee simple land pmdc =_ shall be dohs by [?cco ??19 W env= a 1:1
replace== for Impacmd streams (740T1mcsr #=*. DWQ shall be sent xzwd -
ftiming ahe strertm mitigation altos by Apri16.19W. DUr and WRC dnd dt vutop a
mmm mitigation mod? protoodl AW submit it to DWQ for vvritods approval. TNs
proWW shall include mnnittdng of maatbendw tend swanbuk ' ty for five
Yam
7. DOT 0911 fit: a stormwttter ate on-site strew enhancement pion to J)WQ
by Tum 6,1998 tore DWQ's written eppcoveL 'lain pl an stun maatimiu m=wsur
tremment 2nd on- stream a the maximum cat extent.
Violations of any coadidon herein set lbrtir'shall resWt in isvoca don of this CaUcation
and may result in cdndral sndk r civil penalties. Ibis CudBoatlon shall beeome on and void
unwss me above eondidons we made conditions of the Federal 404 mWor coastal Area
Mmagamm Act PamnkL This CertMmdou shalt expire upon cxpiradon of t6tr 404 of CAMA
permit
If this CeIMcafm is unwoppW u to yce have the right to am sdiadicawy htadag upoh
written request violin duy (6) days following itoalpt of this CUfitcation. 'Phis t+agttest mast
be its the A= of a wdaten petition conning to ChapW 15011 of the Noah CarWw Gueral
Stafauee Lad men with ft Office of AdmUdmlive Eleating% P.O Box 27447, Ralelgk N.C.
276117447. if nK udcadoai are made to au origami Ca Ucadoa. you bavo ft ldght to an
4udicauxy hea ft oa ft mo&ftstum uptm wdtmn request wlthln try (60) days following
awaipt of t3te Cwffic adon. U doss such dementia are made, dit.Ca ift ion sha be Enid and
bindinj. _ . .
Ma the V day of Ap 2 IW8
DIM ION OF WATER QUALM
if. P.
WQC d 3185

VO/£0'd 6£:2S 06, VT tot 6966-2PZ-6T6:xRd IjSrw to OKI 3N
DENR Winston-Salem Fax:[phone]
NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND
NATURAL RESOURCES
Oct 29 '02 1648 P.01
ID FE P1
FAX TRANSMITTAL
Water Quality Section
Winston-Salem Regional Office
585 Waughtown Street
Winston-Salem, N.C. 27107
Phone: [phone]{) Fay:: [phone]
E -
TO:
FAX NUMBER: 93
FROM: ? --
? .
I) ATh:: 0
jNwiter of pages (111ciudin cover pagej: