20050724 Ver 1_Complete File_20060201

~'
~q~ µ57'hl~n
N ~ ~~
'' s
~~~~~~
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
C~S~~Z~
~~ ~ vl
~~~
FFd ~~ ~ s5~2~
~'Fr~v;~os Nk. w ©1 ~0~~ ~ ZGVCO
~N~STT~kQb
~'~W '4c%r
DEPARTT~NT OF TRANSPORTATION gT,~Re~'Ch
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
January 30, 2006
Mr. William D. Gilmore, P.E.
EEP Transition Manager
Ecosystem Enhancement Program
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1652
Dear Sir:
LYNDO TIPPETT
SECRETARY
Subject: Proposed replacement of Bridge No. 16 over Rockyhock Creek on SR 1222 in
Chowan County. Federal Project No. BRZ-1222(5), State Project No.
8.2030401, WBS Element: 33184.1.1, T.I.P. No. B-3636.
Please reference the EEP Mitigation Acceptance Letter dated October 3, 2005. The purpose of
this letter is to request that the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) revise
the compensatory mitigation for the project due to changes in the design of this project.
The North Carolina Department of Transportation proposes to remove and replace Bridge
Number 16 carrying SR 1222 (Rockyhock Road} over Rockyhock Creek in Chowan County.
Bridge No. 16 is 66 feet long and 25 feet wide and will be replaced with a 100-foot x 33-foot
bridge. The 75-foot 2.5 x 8-foot reinforced concrete box culvert will be replaced at the same
location with a 75-foot 8'2" x 5'9" aluminum pipe arch. This project is scheduled to let April
18, 2006.
RESOURCES UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF SECTION 404 AND 401
OF TIIE CLEAN WATER ACT
We have avoided and minimized the impacts to jurisdictional resources to the greatest extent
possible. We propose to provide compensatory mitigation for the jurisdictional stream impacts
by using the EEP. We estimate that there will be 0.198 acre of impact to jurisdictional riverine
wetlands. The project is located in the Chowan River basin in Hydrological Cataloguing Unit
03010203, DWQ Index # 25-22, and is classified as warm water.
Please send the letter of confirmation to Mr. Bill Biddlecome (USAGE Coordinator) at U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers Regulatory Field Office, P.O. Box 1000, Washington, NC 27889-1000.
MAILING ADDRESS:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
1598 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699-1598
TELEPHONE: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
WEBSITE: WWW. DOH. DOT. STATE. NC. US
LOCATION:
TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
RALEIGH NC

r'
If you have any questions or need additional information please contact Chris Underwood at
(919) 715 - 1451.
Sincerely,
.;`~ L,,,Grego J. Thorpe, Ph.D.,
Environmental Management Director
%" Project Development & Environmental Analysis Branch
cc: w/attachment
Mr. John Hennessy, NCDWQ
~Is. Nicole Thomson, NCDWQ
Mr. Bill Biddlecome, USACE
Ms. Cathy Brittingham, NCDCM
Ms. Wanda Gooden, NCDCM
Ms. Linda Fitzpatrick, NCDOT Natural Environment Unit
Mr. Majed Alghandour, P. E., NCDOT Project Management/Scheduling Unit
Mr. Todd Jones, NCDOT External Audit Branch
File-B-3636

i
1
Mr. William D. Gilmore, P.E.
EEP Transition Manager
Ecosystem Enhancement Program
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1652
Dear Sir:
January 30, 2006
Subject: Proposed replacement of Bridge No. 16 over Rockyhock Creek on SR 1222 in
Chowan County. Federal Project No. BRZ-1222(5), State Project No.
8.2030401, WBS Element: 33184.1.1, T.I.P. No. B-3636.
Please reference the EEP Mitigation Acceptance Letter dated October 3, 2005. The purpose of
this letter is to request that the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) revise
the compensatory mitigation for the project due to changes in the design of this project.
The North Carolina Department of Transportation proposes to remove and replace Bridge
Number 16 carrying SR 1222 (Rockyhock Road) over Rockyhock Creek in Chowan County.
Bridge No. 16 is 66 feet long and 25 feet wide and will be replaced with a 100-foot x 33-foot
bridge. The 75-foot 2.5 x 8-foot reinforced concrete box culvert will be replaced at the same
location with a 75-foot 8'2" x 5'9" aluminum pipe arch. This project is scheduled to let April
18, 2006.
RESOURCES UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF SECTION 404 AND 401
OF THE CLEAN WATER ACT
We have avoided and minimized the impacts to jurisdictional resources to the greatest extent
possible. We propose to provide compensatory mitigation for the jurisdictional stream impacts
by using the EEP. We estimate that there will be 0.198 acre of impact to jurisdictional riverine
wetlands. The project is located in the Chowan River basin in Hydrological Cataloguing Unit
03010203, DWQ Index # 25-22, and is classified as warm water.
Please send the letter of confirmation to Mr. Bill Biddlecome (USAGE Coordinator) at U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers Regulatory Field Office, P.O. Box 1000, Washington, NC 27889-1000.
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
µ SPATE
a4~d w,.a~
J
Vj ^u~ ~~
!-~a,,,,,,,,m•
4 ~~
SFr FF~ ~ ~~
C4i~, sFil,~, ,r, ~f
~ !~
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ~"~s p'~RpG ~~6' ~
'~'~~y glil3,
MICHAEL F. EASLEY LYNDO ~TT
GOVERNOR SECRETARY Ch,
MAILING ADDRESS:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
1598 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699-1598
TELEPHONE: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
WEBSITE: WWW. DOH. DOT. STATE. NC. US
LOCATION:
TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
RALEIGH NC

r
t
If you have any questions or need additional information please contact Chris Underwood at
(919) 715 - 1451.
Sincerely,
;'~ f~--.
;- }
,`~ ~ Grego , J. Thorpe, Ph.D.,
Environmental Management Director
Project Development & Environmental Analysis Branch
cc: w/attachment
~Ir. John Hennessy, NCDWQ
Ms. Nicole Thomson, NCDWQ
Mr. Bill Biddlecome, USAGE
Ms. Cathy Brittingham, NCDCM
Ms. Wanda Gooden, NCDCM
Ms. Linda Fitzpatrick, NCDOT Natural Environment Unit
Mr. Majed Alghandour, P. E., NCDOT Project Management/Scheduling Unit
Mr. Todd Jones, NCDOT External Audit Branch
File-B-3636

Permit Class G~G~ ~ -1 Permit Number
NEW 63-06
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
Department of Environment and Natural Resources ~~
and
Coastal Resources Commission C~.V
r r
Mps Y,p ~ e9 ~7
fOT 9N~STTF~Q. ~~~6'
X pursouanDt to NCGSn113An1Agea of Environmental Concern°'~~iyq~R~,
~cy
Excavation and/or filling pursuant to NCGS 113-229
Issued to N.C. Department of Transportation, 1548 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1548
Authorizing development in Chowan County at Rockyhock Creek, Bride No. 16 on SR
1222, near Edenton , as requested in the permittee's application dated 1/3/06. including the
attached workplan drawings (15), 5 dated 12/22/05 and 10 dated 12/20/05
This permit, issued on April 11, 2006 , is subject to compliance with the application (where consistent
with the permit), all applicable regulations, special conditions and notes set forth below. Any violation of these terms may
be subject to fines, imprisonment or civil action; or may cause the permit to be null and void.
TIP No. B-3636, Bride and Culvert Replacement
1) In order to protect anadromous fisheries resources in Rockyhock Creek, no in-water work shall be
conducted between February 15th to June 30th of any year without prior approval of the N.C.
Division of Coastal Management (DCM), in consultation with the N.C. Wildlife Resources
Commission. For the purposes of this moratorium, in-water is defined as those areas that are
inundated at normal water level, including the waters or contiguous inundated wetlands of
Rockyhock Creek.
2) The permittee shall implement the N.C. Department of Transportation's (NCDOT's) Stream
Crossing Guidelines for Anadromous Fish Passage.
(See attached sheets for Additional Conditions)
This permit action may be appealed by the permittee or
other qualified persons within twenty (20) days of the issuing
date. An appeal requires resolution prior to work initiation or
continuance as the case may be.
This permit must be accessible on-site to Department
personnel when the project is inspected for compliance.
Any maintenance work or project modification not covered
hereunder requires further Division approval.
All work must cease when the permit expires on
Signed by the authority of the Secretary of DENR and the
Chairman of the Coastal Resources Commission.
Charles S. J nes, Director
Division of Coastal Management
This permit and its conditions are hereby accepted.
No expiration date, pursuant to GS 136-44.7B
In issuing this permit, the State of North Carolina agrees
that your project is consistent with the North Carolina Coastal
Management Program.
Signature of Permittee

N.C. Department of Transportation Permit # 63-06~ +'"
Page 2 :,f 5
ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS
3) Excavation of ditches as depicted on the attached workplan drawing(s) shall not exceed a depth of 18
inches and a length of 25 feet, without permit modification. The width of ditches north of SR 1222 shall
not exceed 15.5 feet. The width of ditches south of SR 1222 shall not exceed 10.5 feet, without permit
modification:
4) In accordance with the e-mail received from the permittee on 4/7/06, the dimensions of the culvert shall
be 7 feet and 11 inches wide and 5 feet 7 inches high.
5) The culvert invert shall be buried at least one foot below normal bed elevation to allow for passage of
water and aquatic life.
6) The permittee did not propose the use of deck drains. Any future proposal to utilize deck drains shall
require additional coordination with the Division of Coastal Management.
7) No temporary impacts to wetlands or waters of the State are authorized by this per~~~it witliout prior
approval from DCM.
8) Material excavated maybe used in fill areas associated with the project or shall be removed from the site
and taken to an approved high ground location.
9) The temporary placement and double handling of any excavated or fill material within waters or
vegetated wetlands is not authorized. This condition also applies to the removal of the existing bridge,
culvert, roadway asphalt and associated materials.
10) No excavation shall take place at any time in any vegetated wetlands or surrounding waters outside of
the alignment of the areas indicated on the attached workplan drawing(s), without permit modification.
11) No excavated or fill material shall be placed at any time in any vegetated wetlands or surrounding
waters outside of the alignment of the fill area(s) as indicated on the attached workplan drawing(s),
without permit modification.
12) All fill material shall be clean and free of any pollutants except in trace quantities.
13) Live concrete shall not be allowed to contact the water in or entering into Rockyhock Creek or the
adjacent wetlands.
14) The bridge shall be constructed using top down construction methodologies. Any other construction
methodologies may require additional authorization.
15) Unless specifically altered herein, NCDOT's document "Best Management Practices for Bridge
Demolition and Removal" (final 9/20/99) shall be followed during both demolition and construction
activities.
16) Pilings from the existing bridge, as well. as any remnant pilings from previous bridges, shall be removed
in their entirety. In the event that a piling breaks during removal and cannot be removed in its entirety,
the piling may be cut off flush with the bed of the water body only if prior approval is received from
DCM.

N.C. Department of Transportation Permit # 63-06
Page 5 of 5
ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS
35) If it is determined that additional permanent and/or temporary impacts (such as but not limited to
temporary access roads, detours, or matting to transport equipment across wetlands) are necessary that
are not shown on the attached workplan drawings, a permit modification and/or additional authorization
from DCM shall be required. In addition, any changes in the approved plan may also require a permit
modification a~ld/or additional authorization from DCM. The permittee shall contact a representative of
DCM prior to ,ommencement of any such activity for this determination and any permit modification.
36) DWQ authorized the proposed project on 2/8/06 (DWQ Project No. OS-0724) under General Water
Quality Certification Nos. 3403 and 3366. Any violation of the Certifications approved by DWQ shall
be considered a violation of this CAMA permit.
NOTE: The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers authorized the proposed project under Nationwide Permit
Number 23 (COE Action ID No. 200510073), which was issued on 3/14/06.
NOTE: This permit does not eliminate the need to obtain any additional permits, approvals or
authorizations that may be required.

,y, . - - _ rah.
~.
d~~E4
~,, "'m~,
~ ".,L - ~~
'~a.;~'
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
~~
~. ~o~
/qN ~
~~~~r~pa~ `WqT 2p~6
Alypspp~~~~~ B
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION mac"
MICHAEL F. EASLEY LYNDO TIPPETT
_.
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
January 3, 2006
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers / '
Regulatory Field Office Q ~ ~ 7 ~ `~J j''
Post Office Box 1000 (((~~~ (( 1/
t~ _ .
Washin on NC 27889-1000.. _ - _ ._.
ATTENTION: Mr. Bill Biddlecome
NCDOT Coordinator
Dear Sir:
Subject: Nationwide 23 & 33 Permit Application for the Replacement of Bridge No. 16
over Rockyhock Creek on SR 1222, Chowan County. Federal Aid Project No.
BRZ-1222(5), State Project No. 8.2030401, TIP Project No. B-3636.
Please find enclosed the Preconstruction Notification (PCN), permit drawings, half-size plans,
Categorical Exclusion Action Classification (CE), Natural Resources Technical Report (NRTR), and the
Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) acceptance letter for the above-mentioned project. The North
Carolina Department of Transportation proposes to replace existing Bridge No. 16 over Rockyhock
Creek on SR 1222 in Chowan County. The project involves replacement of the existing structure with an
80-foot long bridge in the same location using top-down construction. The approach roadway will consist
of 12-foot travel lanes with five-foot shoulders (eight-foot where guardrails are needed). The proposed
structure for Bridge No. 16 will provide a 24-foot travel-way with 3-foot offsets on each side. An offsite
detour will be utilized. NCDOT also proposes to replace the 2.5-foot x 8-foot reinforced concrete box
culvert with an 8-foot, 2-inch x 5-foot, 9-inch aluminum pipe arch to the southwest of Bridge No. 16. The
project schedule calls for an April 18, 2006 let with a review date of February 28, 2006. Proposed
permanent impacts include 0.198 acre of wetland. Proposed permanent impacts to surface water will be
0.004 acre.
Impacts to Water of the United States
General Description: Rockyhock Creek is located in the 03010203 CU of the Chowan River Basin. The
Division of Water Quality (DWQ) has assigned Rockyhock Creek a Stream Index Number of 25-22.
DWQ has assigned a best usage classification of B NSW.
Permanent Impacts: Rockyhock Creek and adjacent riverine wetlands will be impacted by the proposed
project. Construction of the proposed project will result in permanent impacts of 0.072 acre of fill, 0.016
acre of excavation, and 0.110 acre of mechanized clearing in wetlands (see permit drawings). In
addition, 0.004 acre of surface water will be impacted by this project,
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 NC 27699-1548

a
Utility Impacts: There will be no impacts to jurisdictional waters. The existing utilities will be replaced
using directional bore and staying within the slope stakes (see permit drawings).
Bridge Demolition
The superstructure for Bridge No. 16 should allow removal without dropping components into the water.
Likewise, it should be possible to remove the timber piles without dropping them into the water. The
concrete piers may result in as much as 55 cubic yards of fill depending on the method of removal to be
determined after a contractor is selected. Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition and
Removal will be implemented. Any component of the bridge dropped into the water shall be immediately
removed.
NCDOT will observe an in-stream construction moratorium from February IS to June 34-and-utilize • •- - -~
Stream Crossing Guidelines for Anadromous Fish Passage.
Avoidance and Minimization
Due to the location of this project and the juxtaposition of adjacent wetlands and surface waters, total
avoidance of the surrounding marsh and wetland is impossible during the construction of this project.
NCDOT has taken steps to minimize the impacts to this resource.
To minimize impacts to the wetland adjacent to Bridge No. 16, NCDOT is replacing the bridge in place
and utilizing anoff--site detour.
Minimum width for the approaches and structure has been utilized. Fill slopes in wetlands on this
project will be 3:1 due to the loose alluvial sandy soils lacking clay or cohesion in order to avoid major
erosion and slope failure.
Mitigation
NCDOT proposes to use the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) to mitigate for
permanent impacts associated with this project. The EEP acceptance letter was received on October 3,
2005. A copy of this letter is included with this application.
Federally Protected Species
As of January 29, 2003, the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) lists the bald eagle (Haliaeetus
leucocephalus) as threatened for Chowan County. The biological conclusion of "May Affect, Not Likely
to Adversely Affect" remains valid.
Regulatory Approvals
Section 404 Permit: This project is being processed by the Federal Highway Administration as a
"Categorical Exclusion" in accordance with 23 CFR 771.115(b). Therefore, we do not anticipate
requesting an individual permit but propose to proceed under a Nationwide 23 & 33 as authorized by a
Nationwide Permit 23 & 33 (67 FR 2020; January 15, 2002).
Section 401 Permit: We anticipate 401 General Certification number 3403 and 3366 will apply to this
project. In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H, Section .0500(a) we are providing two copies of this

-~
application to the North Carolina Department of Environmental and Natural Resources, Division of
Water Quality, for their review.
CAMA Permit: A CAMA Major Development Permit application is being submitted under separate
cover to the Division of Coastal Management.
A copy of this permit application will be posted on the NCDOT website at:
http //www.ncdot.org_/planning_/pe/naturalunit/Perrriit.html.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Chris Underwood at (919) 715-
1451.
....Sincerely, - . _ :_ ... ..._ _ _ , _ . ~ _ ....... , ._. ..
~. Grego J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Environmental Management Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis
W/attachment:
Mr. John Hennessy, NCDWQ
Mr. Travis Wilson, NCWRC
Mr. Gary Jordan, USFWS
Mr. Ron Sechler, NMFS
Mr. Michael Street, NCDMF
Ms. Cathy Brittingham, NCDCM
Dr. David Chang, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr. Greg Perfetti, P.E., Structure Design
Mr. Mark Staley, Roadside Environmental - -~
Mr. Anthony Roper, P.E., Division 1 Engineer
Mr. Clay Willis, Division 1 Environmental Officer
W/o attachment
Mr. Scott McLendon, USACE, Wilmington
Ms. Wanda Gooden, DCM, Elizabeth City
Mr. Jay Bennett, P.E., Roadway Design
Mr. Majed Alghandour, P. E., Programming and TIP
Mr. Art McMillan, P.E., Highway Design
Ms. Beth Harmon, EEP
Mr. Todd Jones, NCDOT External Audit Branch
Mr. John Williams, P.E., Planning Engineer

s
Office Use Only: Form Ve(,rs~ion March OS
USACE Action ID No. DWQ No. ~~© ~~ t !J• ~-
(lf any particular item is not applicable to ttus project, please enter "Not Applicable" or "N/A".)
Processing
1. Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project:
® Section 404 Permit ^ Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules
^ Section 10 Permit ^ Isolated Wetland Permit from DWQ
® 401 Water Quality Certification ^ Express 401 Water Quality Certification
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested: NW 23, NW 33
3. If this notification is solely a courtesy copy because written approval for the 401 Certification
is not required, check here:
4. If payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) is proposed
for mitigation of impacts, attach the acceptance. letter from NCEEP, complete section VIII,
and check here:
If your project is located in any of North Carolina's twenty coastal counties (listed on page
4), and the project is within a North Carolina Division of Coastal Management Area of
Environmental Concern (see the top of page 2 for further details), check here:
II. Applicant Information
Owner/Applicant Information
Name: North Carolina Department of Transportation
Mailing Address: Proiect Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1548
Telephone Number: [phone] Fax Number: [phone]
E-mail Address: ~thorpe(a~dot.state.nc.us (Gregory Thorpe, PhD.)
2. Agent/Consultant Information (A signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization letter
must be attached if the Agent has signatory authority for the owner/applicant.)
Name:
Company Affiliation:
Mailing Address:
Telephone Number: Fax Number:
E-mail Address:
Page 1 of 8

III. Project Information
Attach a vicinity map clearly showing the location of the property with respect to local
landmarks such as towns, rivers, and roads. Also provide a detailed site plan showing property
boundaries and development plans in relation to surrounding properties. Both the vicinity map
and site plan must include a scale and north arrow. The specific footprints of all buildings,
impervious surfaces, or other facilities must be included. If possible, the maps and plans should
include the appropriate USGS Topographic Quad Map and NRCS Soil Survey with the property
boundaries outlined. Plan drawings, or other maps may be included at the applicant's discretion,
so long as the property is clearly defined. For administrative and distribution purposes, the
USACE requires information to be submitted on sheets no larger than 11 by 17-inch format;
how.ever.,. DWQ .may .accept-. paperwork of any size. DW,Q prefers ...full-size,,. construction.
drawings rather than a sequential sheet version of the full-size plans. If full-size plans are
reduced to a small scale such that the final version is illegible, the applicant will be informed that
the project has been placed on hold until decipherable maps are provided.
1. Name of project: Replacement of Bride No. 16 over Rockvhock Creek on SR 1222
2. T.I.P. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only): B-3636
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN): N/A
4. Location
County: Chowan Nearest Town: Edenton
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number):
Directions to site (include road numbers/names, landmarks, etc.): Bridge No. 16 over
Rockvhock Creek on SR 1222 (Rockvhock Creek Rd.) ~ -
5: Site coordinates (For linear projects, such as a road or utility line, attach a sheet that
separately lists the coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody.)
Decimal Degrees (6 digits minimum}: 36° 08' 19.9 °N 76° 39 58.4 °W
6. Property size (acres): N/A
7. Name of nearest receiving body of water:- .Rockvhock Creek
8. River Basin: Chowan
(Note -this must be one of North Carolina's seventeen designated major river basins. The
River Basin map is available at h_ptt ://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/admin/maps/.)
9. Describe the existing conditions on the site and general land use in the vicinity of the project
at the time of this application: Forested riparian wetlands with little development
10. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used: The
existing bride and culvert will be replaced in place Work to be conducted with dozers
track-hoes, and other equipment typically used for highway construction projects
Page 2 of 8

11. Explain the purpose of the proposed work: To replace a structurally deficient bridge.
IV. Prior Project History
If jurisdictional determinations and/or permits have been requested and/or obtained for this
project (including all prior phases of the same subdivision) in the past, please explain. Include
the USACE Action ID Number, DWQ Project Number, application date, and date permits and
certifications were issued or withdrawn. Provide photocopies of previously issued permits,
certifications or other useful information. Describe previously approved wetland, stream and
buffer impacts, along with associated mitigation (where applicable). If this is a NCDOT project,
list, and describe :permits issued. for prior_segments of .the. same .T.LP_ pro}eet,_ along with .... ,.,_
construction schedules. Jurisdictional determination fro_m_ the USACE AID 200510008 NW 6
AID 200510884
V. Future Project Plans
Are any future permit requests anticipated for this project? If so, describe the anticipated work,
and provide justification for the exclusion of this work from the current application.
N/A
VI. Proposed Impacts to Waters of the United States/Waters of the State
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
wetlands, open water, and stream channels associated with the- project. Eaeh -impact must be~
listed separately in the tables below (e.g., culvert installation should be listed separately from
riprap dissipater pads). Be sure to indicate if an impact is temporary. All proposed impacts,
permanent and temporary, must be listed, and must be labeled and clearly identifiable on an
accompanying site plan. All wetlands and waters, and all streams (intermittent and perennial)
should be shown on a delineation map, whether or not impacts are proposed to these systems.
Wetland and stream evaluation and delineation forms should be included as appropriate.
Photographs maybe included at the applicant's discretion. If this proposed impact is strictly for
wetland or stream mitigation, list and describe the impact in Section VIII below. If additional
space is needed for listing or description, please attach a separate sheet.
1. Provide a written description of the proposed impacts:Permanent and temporary impacts to
wetlands
2. Individually list wetland impacts. Types of impacts include, but are not limited to
mechanized clearing, grading, fill, excavation, flooding, ditching/drainage, etc. For dams,
separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding.
~' -
Wetland Impact -
Type of Wetland Located within Distance to Area of

Site Number
Type of Impact
(e.g., forested, marsh, 100-year Nearest Impact
(indicate on map) herbaceous, bog, etc.) Floodplain Stream (acres)
(yes/no) (linear feet)
1 Fill Cypress/gum swamp Yes 0 0.072
Page 3 of 8

1 Excavation Cypress/gum swamp Yes 0 0.016
1 Mech. Clearing Cypress/gum swamp Yes o 0.110

Total Wetland Impact (acres) 0.198
3. List the total acreage (estimated) of all existing wetlands on the property: 10
Y P p y p arY..._....... _.
'~-~ ~ `- ~ ~ ~ 4. Individuall list ali intermittent-and erennial stream im acts. Be sure~to--identif •tem or
impacts. Stream impacts include, but are not limited to placement of fill or culverts, dam
construction, flooding, relocation, stabilization activities (e.g., cement walls, rip-rap, crib
walls, gabions, etc.), excavation, ditching/straightening, etc. If stream relocation is proposed,
plans and profiles showing the linear footprint for both the original and relocated streams
must be included. To calculate acreage, multiply length X width, then divide by 43,560.
Stream Impact
Perennial or Average Impact Area of
Number
~ Stream Name Type of Impact
Intermittent? Stream Width Length Impact
indicate on ma
(
) Before Im act
(linear feet)
(acres)

1 Rockyhock Creek permanent fill perennial 20 ft 0.004

Total Stream Impact (by length and acreage) 0.004
5. Individually list all open water impacts (including lakes, ponds, estuaries, sounds, Atlantic
--~ • =~_~-~ ~ -Ocean and any other water of the-U.S.). Open water impacts-include, but -are not limited to- ~~~
fill, excavation, dredging, flooding, drainage, bulkheads, etc.
Open Water Impact
Name of Waterbody Type of Waterbody Area of
Site Number (if applicable) Type of Impact (lake, pond, estuary, sound, bay, Impact
(indicate on map) ocean, etc.) (acres)

Total Open Water Impact (acres)
6. List the cumulative impact to all Waters of the U.S. resulting from the project:
Stream Impact (acres): 0.004
Wetland Impact (acres): 0.198
Open Water Impact (acres): N/A
Total Impact to Waters of the U.S. (acres) 0.202
Total Stream Impact (linear feet): N/A
7. Isolated Waters
Do any isolated waters exist on the property? ^ Yes ®No
Describe all impacts to isolated waters, and include the type of water (wetland or stream) and
the size of the proposed impact (acres or linear feet). Please note that this section only
applies to waters that have specifically been determined to be isolated by the USACE.
Page 4 of 8

8. Pond Creation .
If construction of a pond is proposed, associated wetland and stream impacts should be
included above in the wetland and stream impact sections. Also, the proposed pond should
be described here and illustrated on any maps included with this application.
Pond to be created in (check all that apply): ^ uplands ^ stream ^ wetlands
Describe the method of construction (e.g., dam/embankment, excavation, installation of
draw-down valve or spillway, etc.):
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
....... _. .. _. _. __ __._ ,......local stormkvaterrequirement, etc.): _. _.__.. ...... .: _ ..... _.. .... .... .. ....._ .... .....~ .__ ..
Current land use in the vicinity of the pond:
Size of watershed draining to pond: Expected pond surface area:
VII. Impact Justification (Avoidance and Minimization)
Specifically describe measures taken to avoid the proposed impacts. It may be useful to provide
information related to site constraints such as topography, building ordinances, accessibility, and
financial viability of the project. The applicant may attach drawings of alternative, lower-impact
site layouts, and explain why these design options were not feasible. Also discuss how impacts
were minimized once the desired site plan was developed. If applicable, discuss construction
techniques to be followed during construction to reduce impacts.
Proposed impacts include measures such as replacement in place and an offsite detour.
Additional avoidance and minization measures are included in the attached cover letter.
VIII. -Mitigation ~ . ~....._ _ ,.... ,.:,..~._
DWQ - In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0500, .mitigation may be required by the NC
Division of Water Quality for projects involving greater than or equal to one acre of impacts to
freshwater wetlands or greater than or equal to 150 linear feet of total impacts to perennial
streams.
USACE - In accordance with the Final Notice of Issuance and Modification of Nationwide
Permits, published in the Federal Register on January 15, 2002, mitigation will be required when
necessary to ensure that adverse effects to the aquatic environment are minimal. Factors
including size and type of proposed impact and function and relative value of the impacted
aquatic resource will be considered in determining acceptability of appropriate and practicable
mitigation as proposed. Examples of mitigation that may be appropriate and practicable include,.
but are not limited to: reducing the size of the project; establishing and maintaining wetland
and/or upland vegetated buffers to protect open waters such as streams; and replacing losses of
aquatic resource functions and values by creating, restoring, enhancing, or preserving similar
functions and values, preferable in the same watershed.
If mitigation is required for this project, a copy of the mitigation plan must be attached in order
for USACE or DWQ to consider the application complete for processing. Any application
Page 5 of 8

lacking a required mitigation plan or NCEEP concurrence shall be placed on hold as incomplete.
An applicant may also choose to review the current guidelines for stream restoration in DWQ's
Draft Technical Guide for Stream Work in North Carolina, available at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/strmgide.html.
1. Provide a brief description of the proposed mitigation plan. The description should provide
as much information as possible, including, but not limited to: site location (attach directions
and/or map, if offsite), affected stream and river basin, type and amount (acreage/linear feet)
of mitigation proposed (restoration, enhancement, creation, or preservation), a plan view,
preservation mechanism (e.g., deed restrictions, conservation easement, etc.), and a
description of the current site conditions and proposed method of construction. Please attach
_-_ .., _ ._ ....... _. ... a separatesheet if.more space..is needed. .. ,... ... _. .._ _ .... ~ , .__ ..._.. .. ~ .._ ....... _
The NCEEP has agreed to provide compensatory mitigation for impacts from this project
2. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (NCEEP). Please note it is the applicant's responsibility to contact the NCEEP at
[phone] to determine availability, and written approval from the NCEEP indicating
that they are will to accept payment for the mitigation must be attached to this form. For
additional information regarding the application process for the NCEEP, check the NCEEP
website at http:/lh2o.enr.state.nc.us/wrp/index.htm. If use of the NCEEP is proposed, please
check the appropriate box on page five and provide the following information:
Amount of stream mitigation requested (linear feet): N/A
• - °° ~- Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet): N/A -- 3-•
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): 0.198
Amount ofNon-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
IX. Environmental Documentation (required by DWQ)
Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the use of
public (federal/state) land? Yes ® No ^
2. If yes, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the
requirements of the National or North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
Note: If you are not sure whether a NEPA/SEPA document is required, call the SEPA
coordinator at [phone] to review current thresholds for environmental documentation.
Yes ® No ^
3. If yes, has the document review been finalized by the State Clearinghouse? If so, please
attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval letter. Yes ® No ^
Page 6 of 8

X. Proposed Impacts on Riparian and Watershed Buffers (required by DWQ)
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
required state and local buffers associated with the project. The applicant must also provide
justification for these impacts in Section VII above. All proposed impacts must be listed herein,
and must be clearly identifiable on the accompanying site plan. All buffers must be shown on a
map, whether or not impacts are proposed to the buffers. Correspondence from the DWQ
Regional Office may be included as appropriate. Photographs may also be included at the
applicant's discretion.
1. Will the project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233
_ . _.__ ... _ ~... .. _ (Meuse), 15A NCAC ZB .0259 (Tar-Pamlico)., .15A NCAC 02B .02.43 .(Catawba}.1SA.NCAC
2B .0250 (Randleman Rules and Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please
identify )? Yes ^ No
2. If "yes", identify the square feet and acreage of impact to each zone of the riparian buffers.
If buffer mitigation is required calculate the required amount of mitigation by applying the
buffer multipliers.
* Impact Required
Zone r~,,,,~,-o a e«~ Multiplier ,~,~,«:~_~,__
3 (2 for Catawba)
1.5
Total
* Zone 1 extends out 30 feet perpendicular from the top of the near bank of channel; Zone 2 extends an
additiona120 feet from the edge of Zone 1.
3. .lf buffer mitigatio>~,,zs_ required, please discuss what type of .mitigation is .proposed (i.e.,
Donation of Property, Riparian Buffer Restoration /Enhancement, or Payment into the
Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as identified
within 15A NCAC 2B .0242 or .0244, or .0260.
N/A
XI. Stormwater (required by DWQ)
Describe impervious acreage (existing and proposed) versus total acreage on the site. Discuss
Stormwater controls proposed in order to protect surface waters and wetlands downstream from
the property. If percent impervious surface exceeds 20%, please provide calculations
demonstrating total proposed impervious level.
Onsite Stormwater will be approximately e__qual to that of the existing site condtions. Standard
sedimentation and erosion control measures will be adhered to throu out project construction.
XII. Sewage Disposal (required by DWQ)
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of
wastewater generated from the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
Page 7 of 8

XIII. Violations (required by DWQ)
Is this site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500) or any Buffer Rules?
Yes ^ No
Is this an after-the-fact permit application? Yes ^ No
XIV. Cumulative Impacts (required by DWQ}
......__.._...___.._ _r__... _-. _.. _..-._.. _ ... _....__..._ _ _-._-.-_-. ..._ _ _.
Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in additional
development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality? Yes ^ No
If yes, please submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with
the most recent North Carolina Division of Water Quality policy posted on our website at
http:/lh2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands. If no, please provide a short narrative description:
XV. Other Circumstances (Optional):
It is the applicant's responsibility to submit the application sufficiently in advance of desired
construction dates to allow processing time for these permits. However, an applicant may
choose to list constraints associated with construction or sequencing that may impose limits on
work schedules (e.g., draw-down schedules for lakes, dates associated with Endangered and
--•-->.---~~--.Threatened Species, accessibility problems,:ar-otherissues.autside-ofthe applicant's control).
N/A
ll3/a G
~pplicant/Agent's Signature ate
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)
Page 8 of 8

dam SfATg
~mv.~ gp
~~
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTIVIENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
January 3, 2006
Division of Coastal Management
1367 U.S. 17 South
Elizabeth City, NC 27909
ATTENTION: Ms. Wanda Gooden
NCDOT Coordinator
Dear Madam:
LYNDO TIPPETT
SECRETARY
Subject: CAMA Major Development Permit Application for the Replacement of
Bridge No. 16 over Rockyhock Creek on SR 1222, Chowan County. Federal Aid
Project No. BRZ-1222(5), State Project No. 8.2030401, TIP Project No. B-3636.
Please find enclosed the CAMA Major Development Permit Application, permit drawings, half-size
plans, Categorical Exclusion Action Classification (CE), Natural Resources Technical Report (NRTR),
Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) acceptance letter, and the landowner receipts for the above-
mentioned project. WBS Element 33184.1.1 will be debited for $400.00 for the application of the
sul~j.ect project,.,_.~'~~.North Carolina Department of Transportation proposes to replace.~e~cisting Bridge.
No. 16 over Rockyhock Creek on SR 1222 in Chowan County. The project involves replacement of the
existing structure with an 80-foot long bridge in the same location using top-down construction. The
approach roadway will consist of 12-foot travel lanes with five-foot shoulders (eight-foot where
guardrails are needed). The proposed structure for Bridge No. 16 will provide a 24-foot travel-way with
3-foot offsets on each side. An offsite detour will be utilized. NCDOT also proposes to replace the 2.5-
foot x 8-foot reinforced concrete box culvert with an 8-foot, 2-inch x 5-foot, 9-inch aluminum pipe arch
to the southwest of Bridge No. 16. The project schedule calls for an April 18, 20061et with a review date
of February 28, 2006. Proposed permanent impacts include 0.198 acre of wetland. Proposed permanent
impacts to surface water will be 0.004 acre.
Impacts to Water of the United States
General Description: Rockyhock Creek is located in the 03010203 CU of the Chowan River Basin. The
Division of Water Quality (DWQ) has assigned Rockyhock Creek a Stream Index Number of 25-22.
DWQ has assigned a best usage classification of B NSW.
Permanent Impacts: Rockyhock Creek and adjacent riverine wetlands will be impacted by the proposed
project. Construction of the proposed project will result in permanent impacts of 0.072 acre of fill, 0.016
acre of excavation, and 0.110 acre of mechanized clearing in wetlands (see permit drawings). In
addition, 0.004 acre of surface water will be impacted by this project.
MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: [phone] LOCATION:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FAX: [phone] TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 SOUTH W ILMINGTON STREET
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER WEBSITE: WWW.NCDOT.ORG RALEIGH NC
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548

Utility Impacts: There will be no impacts to jurisdictional waters. The existing utilities will be replaced
using directional bore and staying within the slope stakes (see permit drawings).
Bridge Demolition
The superstructure for Bridge No. 16 should allow removal without dropping components into the water.
Likewise, it should be possible to remove the timber piles without dropping them into the water. The
concrete piers may result in as much as 55 cubic yards of fill depending on the method of removal to be
determined after a contractor is selected. Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition and
Removal will be implemented. Any component of the bridge dropped into the water shall be immediately
removed.
NCDOT will observe an in-stream construction moratorium from February 1-5 to •June 30 -and utilize ~• "
Stream Crossing Guidelines for Anadromous Fish Passage.
Avoidance and Minimization
Due to the location of this project and the juxtaposition of adjacent wetlands and surface waters, total
avoidance of the surrounding marsh and wetland is impossible during the construction of this project.
NCDOT has taken steps to minimize the impacts to this resource.
To minimize impacts to the wetland adjacent to Bridge No. 16, NCDOT is replacing the bridge in place
and utilizing anoff--site detour.
Minimum width for the approaches and structure has been utilized. Fill slopes in wetlands on this
project will be 3:1 due to the loose alluvial sandy soils lacking clay or cohesion in order to avoid major
erosion and slope failure.
Mitigation '-
NCDOT proposes to use the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) to mitigate for
permanent impacts associated with this project. The EEP acceptance letter was received on October 3,
2005. A copy of this letter is included with this application.
Federally Protected Species
As of January 29, 2003, the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) lists the bald eagle (Haliaeetus
leucocephalus) as threatened for Chowan County. The biological. conclusion of "May Affect, Not Likely
to Adversely Affect" remains valid.
Regulatory Approvals
NCDOT requests that the proposed work be authorized under a Coastal Area Management Act Major
Development Permit. The landowner receipts are attached. NCDOT has also applied for the issuance of
a United States Army Corps of Engineers NWP 23 & 33, and a 401 Water Quality Certification under
separate cover. NCDOT has received a stormwater permit for this project.
A copy of this permit application will be posted on the NCDOT website at:
http://www.ncdot.org/planning~e/naturalunitlPermit.html.

If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Chris Underwood at (919) 715-
1451.
Sincerely,
~~~
~ Gregory Thorpe, Ph.D., Environmental Management Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis
W/attachment:
Mr. John Hennessy, NCDWQ
__ _........, _ ._, .. ,, .Mr: Travis Wilson; NCWRC .. ._... _ .. ...... .... ,.., .._.:.. .
Mr. Gary Jordan, USFWS
Mr. Ron Sechler, NMFS
Mr. Michael Street, NCDMF
Ms. Cathy Brittingham, NCDCM
Dr. David Chang, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr. Greg Perfetti, P.E., Structure Design
Mr. Mark Staley, Roadside Environmental
Mr. Anthony Roper, P.E., Division 1 Engineer
Mr. Clay Willis, Division 1 Environmental Officer
W/o attachment
Mr. Scott McLendon, USACE, Wilmington
Mr. Bill Biddlecome, USACE, Washington
Mr. Jay Bennett, P.E., Roadway Design
Mr. Majed Alghandour, P. E., Programming and TIP
Mr. Art McMillan, P.E., Highway Design
Ms. Beth Harmon; EEP
Mr. Todd Jones, NCDOT External Audit Branch
Mr. John Williams, P.E., Planning Engineer

Form DCM-MP-1
APPLICATI
ON
(To be completed by all applicants)
b. City, town, community or landmark
Edenton, NC
1. APPLICANT
a. Landowner:
c. Street address or secondary road number
SR 1222
_,__.... _ _.....__ _. _. _.. _.. .... _. _d...-Is .-proposed ..work .w.ithin_.city ..limits.. or planning
Name N. C. Department of Transportation jurisdiction? Yes X No
Address P.O. Box 850
City Edenton State N.C.
Zip 27932 Day Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]
b. Authorized Agent:
Name
Address
City
Zip _ Day Phone
Fax
State
c. Project name (if any)
NOTE: Permit will be issued in name of landowner(s), and/or
project name.
2. LOCATION OF PROPOSED
PROJECT
a. County Chowan
e. Name of body of water nearest project (e.g. river,
creek, sound, bay) Rockyhock Creek
3. DESCRIPTION AND PLANNED USE
OF PROPOSED PROJECT
a. List all development activities you propose (e.g.
building a home, motel, marina, bulkhead, pier, and
excavation and/or filling activities.
Replacement of bridge #16
,. and pipe arch, on SR 1222 _.
b. Is the proposed activity maintenance of an existing
project, new work, or both? Both
c. Will the project be for public, private or commercial
use? Public
d. Give a brief description of purpose, use, methods of
construction and daily operations of proposed project.
If more space is needed, please attach additional
pages.
Roadway transportation over bridge and pipe
arch. Top down construction for bridge and
replacement in the same location for the pipe
arch.
Revised 03/95

Form DCM-MP-1
4. LAND AND WATER
CHARACTERISTICS
a. Size of entire tract N/A, NCDOT Right of Way
b. Size of individual lot(s) N/A
c. Approximate elevation of tract above MHW or NWL
Appr. 6.0'
d. Soil type(s) and texture(s) of tract
_ ...... _ _.... Stream crossing; wetland_-.. ._ ..._....... ~ _ ........, _ .,.._.
e. Vegetation on tract Bottomland Hardwoods
n. Describe location and type of discharges to waters of
the state. (For example, surface runoff, sanitary
wastewater, industriaUcommercial effluent, "wash
down" and residential discharges.)
Surface runoff, point discharge
o.. Describe existing drinking water supply source.
N/A
5. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
f. Man-made features now on tract
Bridge, RCBC, roadway, utilities
g. What is the CAMA Land Use Plan land classification
Of the Site? (Consult the local land use plan.)
Conservation Transitional
Developed x Community
x Rural Other
h. How is the tract zoned by local government?
Residential - - ,•.,~- ,_ .
i. Is the proposed project consistent with the applicable
zoning? x Yes No
(Attach zoning compliance certificate, if applicable)
j. Has a professional archaeological assessment been
done for the tract? X Yes No
If yes, by whom? NCDOT
k. Is the project located in a National Registered
Historic District or does it involve a National
Register listed or eligible property?
Yes X No
1. Are there wetlands on the site? X Yes _ No
Coastal (marsh) X Other
If yes, has a delineation been conducted? Yes
(Attach documentation, if available)
m. Describe existing wastewater treatment facilities.
N/A
In addition to the completed application form, the
following items must be submitted:
• A copy of the deed (with state application only) or
other instrument under which the applicant claims title
to the affected properties. If the applicant is not
claiming to be the owner of said property, then forward
a copy of the deed or other instnuent under which the
owner claims title, plus written permission from the
owner to carry out the project.
• An accurate, dated work plat (including plan view
and cross-sectional drawings) drawn to scale in black
ink on an 8 1/2" by 11" white paper. (Refer to Coastal
Resources Comrnission Rule 7J.0203 for a detailed
description.)
Please note that original drawings are preferred and
only high quality copies will be accepted. Blue-line
prints or other larger plats are acceptable only if an
adequate number of quality copies are provided by
applicant. (Contact the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
regarding that agency's use of larger drawings.) A site
or location map is a part of plat requirements and it
must be sufficiently detailed to guide agency personnel
unfamiliar with the area to the site. Include highway or
secondary road (SR) numbers, landmarks, and the like.
•A Stormwater Certification, if one is necessary.
•A list of the names and complete addresses of the
adjacent waterfront (riparian) landowners and
signed return receipts as proof that such owners
have received a copy of the application and plats by
certified mail. Such landowners must be advised that
they have 30 days in which to submit comments on the
proposed project to the Division of Coastal

s
Form DCM-MP-1
Management. Upon signing this form, the applicant
further certifies that such notice has been provided.
Name See attached list
Address
Phone
Name
Address
Phone
Name
... ....
.Address .. _. _........
Phone
• A list of previous state or federal permits issued for
work on the project tract. Include permit numbers,
permittee, and issuing dates.
NC Stormwater Permit
• A check for $250 made payable to the Department of
Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
(DEHNR) to cover the costs of processing the
application.
• A signed °AhC hazard notice for projects in
oceanfront and inlet areas.
• A statement of compliance with the N.C.
Environmental Policy Act (N.C,G.S. 113A - 1 to 10)
If the project involves the expenditure of public funds
or use of public lands, attach a statement documenting
compliance with the North Carolina Environmental
Policy Act.
6. CERTIFICATION AND PERMISSION
TO ENTER ON LAND
I understand that any permit issued in response to this
application will allow only the development described in
the application. The project will be subject to conditions
and restrictions contained in the permit.
I certify that to the best of my knowledge, the proposed
activity complies with the State of North Carolina's
approved Coastal Management Program and will be
conducted in a manner consistent with such program.
I certify that I am authorized to grant, and do in fact, grant
permission to representatives of state and federal review
agencies to enter on the aforementioned lands in
connection with evaluating information related to this
permit application and follow-up monitoring of the
project.
I further certify that the information provided in this
application is truthful to the best of my lmowledge.
This is the ~ day of ~--. , 20a L.
Print Name ~ ~-.3
Signature .~-~~-
Landowner r Azzthorized Agent
Please indicate attachments pertaining to your proposed
project.
X DCM MP-2 Excavation and Fill Information
DCM MP-3 Upland Development
TDCM MP-4' ~Structure§ hifoiniatibn
X DCM MP-5 Bridges and Culverts
DCM MP-6 Marina Development
NOTE: Please sign and date each attachment in the
space provided at the bottom of each form.
Revised 03/95

Form DCM-MP-2
E~~CAVATI4N
AND FILL
(Except bridges and culverts)
Attach this form to Joint Application for CAMA Major 1. EXCAVATION
,_ ... Permit, Form, DCM MP-1. Be sure to complete all. other _
_...
sections of the Joint Application that relate to this a. Amount of material to ~ be excavated from below
proposed project. MHW or NWL in cubic yards 295 (Pipe arch)
Describe below the purpose of proposed excavation or fill
activities. All values to be given in feet.
Average Final
Existing Project
Length Width Depth Depth
Access
channel
(MLV~ or (NWL)
Canal
Boat
basin
Boat
ramp
Rock
groin
Rock
breakwater
Other
(Excluding
shoreline
stabilization)
86.0' 8.0'
(Pipe (Pipe
arch) arch)
b. Type of material to be excavated Swamp
c. Does the area to be excavated include coastal
wetlands (marsh), submerged aquatic vegetation
(SAVs) or other wetlands? X Yes _ No
d. High ground excavation in cubic yards 1320 Bridge)
2. DISPOSAL OF EXCAVATED
MATERIAL
a. Location of disposal area to be determined by the
contractor
b. Dimensions of disposal area to be determined by the
contractor
c. Do you claim title to disposal area?
Yes X No
If no, attach a letter granting permission from the
owner.
d. Will a disposal area be available for future
maintenance? X Yes No
If yes, where? to be determined by the contractor
Revised 03!95

Form DCM-MP-2
e. Does the disposal area include any coastal wetlands
(marsh), SAVs or other wetlands?
Yes X No
f. Does the disposal include any area in the water?
Yes X No
b. Will fill material be placed in coastal wetlands
(marsh), SAVs or other wetlands?
X Yes No
If yes,
(1) Dimensions of fill area See above
3. SHORELINE STABILIZATION N/A
a. Type of shoreline stabilization
Bulkhead Riprap
(2) Purpose of fill See above
-b. Len>?th ......... .. - : _ ...... 5. GENERAL
c. Average distance waterward of MHW or NWL
d. Maximum distance waterward of MHW or NWL
e. Shoreline erosion during preceding 12 months
(Source of information)
f. Type of bulkhead or riprap material
g. Amount of fill in cubic yards to be placed below
.water level - - ~°"
(1) Riprap
(2) Bulkhead backfill
a. How will excavated or fill material be kept on site
and erosion controlled?
Standard erosion control (AEC)
Fill to be stored on causeway
b. What type of construction equipment will be used (for
example, dragline, backhoe, or hydraulic dredge)?
Standard road construction equipment
c. Will wetlands be crossed in transporting equipment to
project site? _ Yes X No
If yes, explain steps that will be• taken to lessen
environmental impacts.
h. Type of fill material
i. Source of fill material
4. OTHER FILL ACTIVITIES
~ L~ ~
p licant or Project Name
~d^
Signatu e
i3DV
D to
(Excluding Shoreline Stabilization)
a. Will fill material be brought to site?
X Yes No
If yes,
(1) Amount of material to be placed in the water
None
(2) Dimensions of fill area
0.104 ac
(3) Purpose of fill Roadway slope
Revised 03/95

Y
Form DCM-MP-S
BRIDGES AND
CULVERTS
Attach this form to Joint Application for CAMA Major
Permit, Form DCM-MP-1. Be sure to complete all other
sections of the Joint Application that relate to this
proposed project.
1. BRIDGES .
a. Public X Private
b. Type of bridge (construction material)
Cored Slab
c. Water body to be crossed by bridge
Rockyhock Creek
d. Water depth at the proposed crossing at MLW or
NWL Water depth appr. 6.0'
i. Height of proposed bridge above wetlands
the bride will be over the stream, not wetlands
j. Will the proposed bridge affect existing water flow?
Yes X No
If yes,_ explain
k. Navigation clearance underneath proposed bridge
Appr. 6.0'
1. Will the proposed bridge affect navigation by
reducing or increasing the existing navigable
opening? Yes X No
If yes, explain
e. Will proposed bridge replace an existing bridge?
X Yes No
If yes,
(1) Length of existing bridge 66.0'
(2) Width of existing bridge 24.0'
(3) Navigation clearance underneath existing
bridge Appr.6.0'
(4) Will all, or a part of, the existing bridge be
removed? (Explain} All
f. 'Will proposed bridge replace an existing culvert(s)?
Yes X No
If yes,
(1) Length of existing culvert
(2) Width of existing culvert
(3) Height of the top of the existing culvert above
the MHW or NWL
(4) Will all, or a part of, the existing culvert be
removed? (Explain)
g. Length of proposed bridge 98.0'
h. Width of proposed bridge 36.0'
m. Will the proposed bridge cross wetlands containing
no navigable waters? Yes X No
If yes; explain
n. Have you contacted the U.S. Coast Guard concerning
their approval?
Yes X No
If yes, please provide record of their action.
2. CULVERTS
a. Water body in which culvert is to be placed
Overflow culvert
b. Number of culverts proposed 1
c. Type of culvert (construction material, style)
8'Z" X 5'9" aluminum nine arch
d. Will proposed culvert replace an existing bridge?
Yes X No
If yes,
(1) Length of existing bridge
(2) Width of existing bridge
Revised 03/95

d
Form DCM-MP-S
(3) Navigation clearance underneath existing
bridge
(4) Will all, or a part of, the existing bridge be
removed? (Explain)
e. Will proposed culvert replace an existing culvert?
X Yes No
If yes,
(1) Length of existing culvert 40.0'
(2) Width of existing culvert 10.0'
(3) Height of the top of the existing culvert above
the MHW or NWL
(4) Will all, or a part of, the existing culvert be
_ .. -.
__ ... ... removed? Exp am Yes _ ........ _. _. .
f. Length of proposed culvert 86.0'
g. Width of proposed culvert 5'9".
h. Height of the top of the proposed culvert above the
MHW or NWL Appr. 4.0'
i. Will the proposed culvert affect existing water flow?
Yes X No
If yes, explain
j. Will the proposed culvert affect existing navigation
potential? Yes X No
If yes, explain
3. EXCAVATION AND FILL
a. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
require any excavation below the MHW or NWL?
X Yes No
If yes,
(1) Length of area to be excavated 86.0'
(2) Width of area to be excavated 6.0'
(3) Depth of area to be excavated 1.0'
(4) Amount of material to be excavated in cubic
yards Appr. 325
b. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
require any excavation within:
_ Coastal Wetlands _ SAVs X Other Wetlands
If yes,
(1) Length of area to be excavated 86.0'
(2) Width of area to be excavated 6.0'
Revised 03/95
(3) Amount of material to be excavated in cubic
yards Appr. 325
c. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
require any highground excavation?
Yes X No
If yes,
(1) Length of area to be excavated
(2) Width of area to be excavated
(3) Amount of material to be excavated in cubic
yards
d. If the placement of the bridge or culvert involves any
.. _. : .
excavation, p ease complete the following:
(1) Location of the spoil disposal area
to be determined by the contractor
(2) Dimensions of spoil disposal area
to be determined by the contractor
(3) Do you claim title to the disposal area?
Yes X No
If no, attach a letter granting permission from
the owner.
(4) Will the disposal area be available for future
maintenance? N/A Yes No
(5) Does the disposal area include any coastal
wetlands (marsh), SAVs, or other wetlands?
Yes X No
If yes, give dimensions if different from (2)
above.
(6) Does the disposal area include any area below
the MHW or NWL? Yes X No
If yes, give dimensiori if different from No. 2
above.
e. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
result in any fill (other than excavated material
described in Item d. above) to be placed below MHW
or NWL? X Yes No
If yes,
(1) Length of area to be filled 20 feet
(2) Width of area to be filled 8 feet
(3) Purpose of fill Road
f. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
result in any fill (other than excavated material
described in Item d. above) to be placed within:
_ Coastal Wetlands _ SAVs X Other Wetlands
If yes,
(1) Length of area to be filled Appr. 360'
(Z) Width of area to be filled Appr. 3.0'
(3) Purpose of fill Roadway fill

Form DCM-MP-S
g. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
result in any fill (other than excavated material
described in Item d. above) to be placed on
highground? X Yes No
If yes,
(1) Length of area to be filled 1425 feet
(2) Width of area to be filled 40 feet
(3) Purpose of fill Improving the existing
causeway
Yes X No
If yes, explain in detail
~ (,tee T
Applicant or Project Name
Signa u
~ ~x o to
Date
4. GENERAL _ _ .._ __ .. .. . . ... ....:. ....
a. Will the proposed project involve any mitigation?
X Yes No
If yes, explain in detail Compensatory mitigation
will be provided by the NC Ecosystem Enchancement
Program
b. Will the proposed project require the relocation of
any existing utility lines? X Yes No
If yes, explain in detail the existing utilities will be
relocated via directional boring and beneath the fill slope
c. Will the proposed project require the construction of
any temporary detour structures?
Yes X No
If yes, explain in detail
d. Will the proposed project require any work channels?
Yes X No
If yes, complete Form DCM-MP-2
e. How will excavated or fill material be kept on site
and erosion controlled?
Standard erosion control (AEC)
f. What type of construction equipment ...will be used
(for example, dragline, backhoe or hydraulic dredge)?
Road construction equipment (backhoe,crane etc.L
g. Will wetlands be crossed in transporting equipment
to project site? Yes X No
If yes, explain steps that will be taken to lessen
environmental impacts.
h. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
require any shoreline stabilization?
Revised 03195

cO~OF W ATF9QG
r
. =i
t7 ~
~~~~~~~~
JUL 6 2005
OF #ii~~~VAYS
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
~~~,61VEIj
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
June 27, 2005
~ij~- 1 2~Q~
Dr. Gregory J. Thorpe
NC Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1548
~~s1~N
Htc
Subject: Permit No. SW7050512
TiP No. B-3636, # 16 Bridge Replacement
Other Storrnwater Permit
Linear Public Road/Bridge Project
Chowan County
Dear Dr. Thorpe:
The Washington Regional Office received a completed Stormwater Application for the subject project
on May 13, 2005. Staff review of the plans and specifications has determined that the project, as proposed,
will comply with the Stormwater Regulations set forth in Title 15A NCAC 2H.1000. We are forwarding Permit
No. SW7050512 dated June 27, 2005 to the NC Department of Transportation for the proposed replacement
of bridge # 16 over Rocky Creek and widening of a section of SR 1222 in Chowan County.
This permit shall be effective from the date of issuance until rescinded and shall be subject to the
conditions and limitations as specified therein.
If any parts, requirements, or limitations contained in this permit are unacceptable, you have the right
to request an adjudicatory hearing upon written request within thirty (30) days fiollowing receipt of this permit.
This request must be in.the form of a written petition, conforming to Chapter 1506 of the North Carolina
General Statutes, and filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings, 6714 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC
27699-6714. Unless such demands are made this permit shall be final and binding.
If you have any questions, or need additional information conceming this matter, please contact me
at (252) 948- 3923.
Sincerely,
vQ u _ ~c ~?~~..~
Roge K. Thorpe
Environmental Engineer
Washington Regional Office
cc: Washington Regional Office
Central Files
Noe Carc
~Qtlll'R
North Carolina Division of Water Quality Washington Regional Office Phone [phone] PAX (252) 94b-9215 Customer Service
Internet. h2o.enr.state.nc.us 943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, NC 27889 1-877-623-6748
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources

i
.State Stormwater Management Systems
Permit No. SW7050512
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF Vli'ATER QUALITY
STATE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PERMIT
OTHER PERMIT
In accordance with the provisions of Article 21 of Chapter 143, General Statutes of North Carolina as
amended, and other applicable Laws, Rules, and Regulations
PERMISSION IS HEREBY GRANTED TO
NC Department of Transportation
Chowan County
FOR THE
Construction of a public road/bridge in compliance with the provisions of 15A NCAC 2H.1000 (hereafter
referred to as the "stormwater rules' and the approved sto-mwater management-plans and specifications
and other supporting data as attached and on file with and approved by the Division of Water Quality and
considered a part of this permit for the replacement of bridge # 16 and the widening of a section of SR 1222
in Chowan County.
This permit shall be effective from. the date of issuance until rescinded and shall be subject to the following
specified conditions and limitations:
I. DESIGN STANDARDS
1. .The runoff from the impervious surfaces has been directed away from surface waters as much as
possible.
2. The Amount of built-upon area has been minimized as much as possible.
3. Best management Practices are employed which minimizes water quality impacts.
4. Approved plans and specifications for this project are incorporated by reference and are enforceable
.parts of the permit.
5. Vegetated roadside ditches are 3:1 slopes or flatter.

II. SCHEpULE OF COMPLIANCE
The permittee shall at all times. provide adequate erosion control measures in conformance with the
approved Erosion Control Plan.
2. The Director may notify the permittee when the permitted site does not meet one or more of the
minimum requirements of the permit. Within the time frame specified in the notice, the permittee
shall submit a written time schedule to the Director for modifying the site to meet minimum
requirements. The permittee shall provide copies of revised plans and certification in writing to the
Director #hat the changes have been made.
3. The permittee shall submit all information requested by the Director or his representative within the
time frame specified in the written informs#ion request.
4. The permittee shall submit to the Director .and shall have received approval for revised plans,
specifications, and calculations prior to construction for the following items:
a. Major revisions to the approved plans, such as road realignment, deletion of any proposed
BMP, changes to the drainage area or scope of the project, etc.
b. Project name change.
c. Redesign of, addition to, or deletion of the approved amount of built-upon area, regardless of
size.
d. Alteration of the proposed drainage.
5. The Director may determine that other revisions to the project should require a modification to the
permit.
Ill. GENERAL CONDITIONS
1. This permit is no# transferable to any person except after notice to and approval by the Director. The
Director may require modification or revocation and reissuance of the permit to change name and
incorporate such other requirements as may be necessary. A formal permit request must be
submitted to the Division of Water Quality accompanied by the appropriate fee, documentation from
the parties involved, and other supporting materials as may be appropriate. The approval of this
request will be considered on its merits and may or may not be approved. The permittee is
responsible for compliance with the terms and conditions of this permit until such time as the Director
approves the transfer.
2. Failure to abide by the conditions and limitations contained in this permit may subject the Permittee
to enforcement action by the Division of Water Quality, in accordance with North Carolina General
Statute 143-215.6(A) to 143-215.6(C).
3. The issuance of this permit does not preclude the Permittee from complying with any and all statutes,
rules, regulations, or ordinances which may be imposed by other government agencies (local, state,
and federal) which have jurisdiction.
4. The issuance of this permit does not prohibit the Director from reopening and modifying the permit,
revoking and reissuing the permit, or terminating the permit as allowed by laws, rules, and
regulations contained in Title 15A of the North Carolina Administra#ive Code, Subchapter 2H .1000;
and North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1 et. al.

5. The permit may be modified, revoked and reissued or terminated for cause. The filing of a request
for a permit mod cation, revocation and reissuance or termination does not stay any permit
condition.
6. The permit issued shall continue in force and effect until revoked or terminated..
7. The permittee shall notify the Division of any name, ownership or mailing address changes within 30
days.
Permit issued this the 27 th day of June, 2005.
NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
~C
for Al n W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission
Permit Number SW7050512

OCT '~ 2005
PDEA•OFF1uE CF ~Yr~i it i;;i ~i~~irtON~i~I'
Mr. Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
Environmental Management Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
Dear Dr. Thorpe:
Subject: EEP Mitigation Acceptance Letter:
B-3636, Bridge Number 16 over Rockyhock Creek on SR 1222, Chowan
County
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the Ecosystem Enhancement Program
(EEP) will provide the compensatory riverine wetland and stream mitigation for the subject
project. Based on the information supplied by you in a letter dated September 30, 2005, the
impacts are located in CU 03010203 of the Chowan River Basin in the Northern Outer Coastal
Plain (NOCP) Eco-Region, and are as follows:
Riverine Wetland: 0.223 acre
Stream: 72 feet
The subject project is listed in Exhibit 2 of the Memorandum of Agreement among the
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, the North Carolina
Department of Transportation, and the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District dated
July 22, 2003. However, according to the 2005 Impact Projection Database, there were no
anticipated impacts listed for this project. Fortunately, sufficient assets are available in the
cataloging unit to meet the mitigation needs for this project. The compensatory riverine wetland
and stream mitigation for the subject project will be provided in accordance with this agreement.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Ms. Beth
Harmon at 919-715-1929.
Sincerely,
i iam D. Gilmore, P.E.
EEP Director
cc: Mr. Bill Biddlecome, USACE-Washington
Mr. John Hennessy, Division of Water Quality, Wetlands/401 Unit
File: B-3636
~.estorr~... ~ e.. Pv~otectu~ty 0~ State Nc~N
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program,1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 21699-1652 / 919-115-4476 / www.nceep.net

`~--
--, ~5~~
PROGRAM
October 3, 2005
Mr. Bill Biddlecome
US Army Corps of Engineers
Washington Regulatory Field Office
Post Office Box 1000
Washington, North Carolina 27889=1000
Dear Mr. Biddlecome:
Subject: EEP Mitigation Acceptance Letter:
B-3636, Bridge 16 over Rockyhock Creek on SR 1222, Chowan
County; Chowan River Basin (Cataloging Unit 03010203);
Northern Outer Coastal Plain (NOCP) Eco-Region
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (EEP) will provide the compensatory mitigation for the 0.223 acre of
unavoidable riverine wetland impact and 72 feet of unavoidable stream impact associated
with the above referenced project.
EEP will commit to implementing sufficient compensatory riverine wetland and
stream mitigation up to a 2:1 ratio to offset the impacts associated with this project by the
end of the MOA year in which this project is permitted, in accordance with Section X of
the Memorandum of Agreement between the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, N. C.
Department of Environment and Natural Resources, and N. C. Department of
Transportation (Tri-Party MOA), signed on July 22, 2003. EEP understands the USACE
will allow remaining high quality preservation assets to be utilized as a component in the
mitigation strategy at a 5:1 ratio. Therefore, EEP intends to utilize high quality riverine
wetland and stream preservation assets in the following manner:
High Quality Stream Preservation (5.11 in Same Eco-Region
Roanoke River (Cashie), Bertie County 360 feet stream
NOCP Eco-Region 1.115 acre riverine
Roanoke River Basin, CU 03010107
_r _
North Carolina ecosystem Enhancement Program,1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1652 / 919-715-0476 / www.nceep.net

The reminder of the required 1:1 riverine wetland and stream mitigation will be in
the form of riverine wetland and stream restoration. Riverine wetland and stream
restoration mitigation assets available include, but are not limited to, Nichols Farm
mitigation site. The subject TIP project is listed in Exhibit 2 of the Tri-Party MOA.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Ms. Beth
Harmon at [phone].
Sincerely,
~,
William D. Gilmore, P.E.
EEP Director
cc: Mr. Greg Thorpe, Ph.D., NCDOT-PDEA
Mr. John Hennessy, Division of Water Quality, Wetlands/401 Unit
File: B-3636

~_
O a
71 I I
~%
~ I`I
Z @I Fri ppZ
~>~ '! ~F~
~~ ~~ g
`; A
n
n o
Z"3 m^iq Z~ ~' O
~ ~ e
$Lu
n u~~
. 32
_~~
~° $a=
III
WZ
Z~
HO
JU
WQ
•"SSF-
C~U
(f H
Z}~
N [~ ~--~
~ ~
(nOH
HGy.1(w~~
W JLL
Ow
~"'~"~~
i
J
~
Z
2 •' !

$ ~
M
O ~~ + 8
~~ W ~ I,
V T
v) ti ~~ ~~
v
O ~ ~~ *

~

~
~
~ ~
J o i.~
WW q

m O

O

~

~
t
J a
~
}
~
Q /y
~
W ~ ~p
WN
2
~
-
/~~
W 0
~ ~
I
~ ~ ~
~t ,
m ~ O
o

al
- .„ ~ ~
•~ 2
~/ ~,~ 3 ..
i
/
~
H
I ~ • ~
I - " Q
I i Sf O
~ O
N

~ WFj
fit'
~'
I ~ =
~ ~ O
WmW i
`~
s
'N m
Z
- ~ ~ ~
w I . ~
7 s W Q

~u

n
s _„aO ~lY'~YH~\
b..o~ucp ~ vu ~28
rg ~~~_ ~~~ ~~3om~q~q
•-~ ; an ~ g ~~~z'G~b
g o ~ I .~ r~~Q~ ~
I,
~ ~ I I ~ ;
•N ~~ I I p ~
~ I I I
it ~
8 •g I I I~ J
~g I I ~ ~ g8 ~
a ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~.
~ ~ i ~
~:
~ ~-_~ - : 8
Z ~ I
i ~~~ I ~z
8 ( •~' ~ i
~ z - ~~
~W ~ ~ I, -
~W~ ~ ~~ ~
r
~ Wm ~ ~ ~ Is\ , ~ 2 O
I ~ W!
•N
~~
J
~B Ig~l o.
9 8 8 ,H

~ ~
~
8 F
a o 2
g
~ F
_
? W
f
~ ~~
{
V
~~~ H
~i 3 $
-
''~~' ~ mOb s ,Y - p~
z pap
Q ~F W p ~ ,M:
Q -

-
~
O ~ aW ~ - I
~~
p
a 22
i ~~
~m ~ ~ I.
a. I
.~• I
~~
W
I ~~ `
~ ~,
a 8
O ~

W + m
O
'm ~I

al 1 ~yM
~
SZ/
•/
,,. p/
p ~ ~~

~
$ o~o Z
M
gr, w
+ 8 F
A
~

8 ^
^
~ '"'

H
Q
~ $~ OS~~~~
+ ` ~ Q LL
~
~

w
~3C
m
p'~kz~U
~ _ owzw
~O[awz

~
~ :

Z N m
~
~ .NMZ
:~ x r~L]N
l
il Nr m
D Q ~ ~
~
Q 3 lpa~Ne~
`i ~GNstF-
O ~ W U
2 _ a W
Q , awmmz
pa z
.~ Q l~W
p 2N ~ ~O
dO.NNC)

~ ~
c~
W
~
Z
~
. ~
~ 2~
m
i W
3
m
~O
Q
Z
a
0
h
N
N
K
W
a
w
c~
0
m
0
r
W
0
W
U
Q
LL
N
W
r
a
w
W J
J
ZLL
~ W ~ W ~ O N
a°¢N .JJ.a Mp >°z acs
far a z as =z
w u ~ Na wW fa
r W Q W J
ua Wu Wr 2 w
rw'~~ r0~ r03 WZ WU
Z Z r.... r
Z~ oN o Z Z
w
o 0
~~
a~
66/Z/L
u6p•~.wd-pfiy-g£g£q\s6utno~p ¢[WJB \sogno~ y\:a
esai sooz-~3a-zz
~ ~

N
Z ~ 1 ~ 1 1 I ' ' S I ,..I ~ ~ ~ .~
a 3 wmY = g~ j`: ~ ~ ~ 2
~- ~ Y = N u~ ar c'oo' •.. °~ ~, : / -' wr W
.I`j W -'.~ c~ I`~ 0 3
OY
~ '~Z v zmv ~ ~ ~ 1~,4-~+ _ ~y i.I i'I ;' I+~. O ~' ~ tV
I ~ ~~ mZ wam w ui O ~ ~ H cn4 ~ :~ i ' ~,~ ~ {' ~ ~ W~ p ~ f ~
„~ ~W mu m¢o v ~ ~ ~ ZJ ,~20''._.._ ...............ry ~ I 4 ~ ~ .; ~ ~ ~~ I = ~ ~ o
~ m ~ W ~ ~ Ww ~ i ° ': ' ~ ZW QU
~ OU Q ~ J ~,' I '' I ~ .' ~ WmW O ~ ~
~ O ~ 0 ° ! •• SE I I ~ ~ ~ ~ W 1
+ ~ ..
• ~ ~~ ~ N J ~ I~g _ ! li ~ ill ~ J ~ W
O W ~~~ ~~_ ~.- i l r i j ~~r ~ w , W ~
W ~ I , , i W
_ ~ I ~ a
- •~ ~'I I I fir,
- _
~.. -.
r>
.... -
_ - ....
.........:................... ,,: - v
.... ...
,..... 8
..~
..... ~
..............
:::::::?kj-: • ~:: ~ .. acs ~.G.___.._:-~:P.'~:~-._
..
:. '•.
pQC~rQs;i;l~;iEk€ X03 ~ ~ ~~ ~ -~. ~ o,
~~o~~~o _
............ ...................
`~~~Z~>~S g~~j • ill ~~ y~
b"~~uq~_ IW~ ~ :1 ~ ~~3~~`8 m
f p ZZ m ~ ~ ~
~~ ~ pN i ~il al 8 <ZV a ~
~ W •M ,'~ r ~Q~=Te~ W
8 I I ~~,. S ~~ ~ w
r a ~ a
~ III ~ W ~ i I I~ ~ ; ~ LL
Z ``I ~G~ ~ ~ \ Z ,r.i W ~
~ ~ to
::~I it ¢
_ ~
~~' ~I ~ 1 3
~ A ~ g ~- I~I 11 ~~ 1 .Z-r
^• +
+t '^ W J
-~~777~-' n Z u .al T ppy O
=Z ~m^ O~ ~effiTOaV 4p, 'H I•I I ~ ~ Zli
° < N l: $~
~~~ Z >hj `~ ~ ~ I % ~ 88 ~
o
_ 4 I ~-
¢~ ~ F
u ~ I+ ~3t•-• 3 Z w¢ ~2
w
w $~~ `, ~I, 8 l~J ~ w~~ F~ rw-3 w3 fa
m C9 ~ ~I• i; I R ~~ Fm Zm Z WZ wcJ.i
r.. ~
~ ~ i~:l ~ Z °zv~i om o °z °z
8 :$ ~ ; ~ ~ i ~ '.~ '~ 1 ~ wo w w
0 0
~~ + 8 I~ i S I m ~~
•~ ~
c~
I ~ _ ~
~~$ I (I ~:II x
~~
~ ~2 Ir • ~ I ~I~r' ~ °~ N
o~ r : ~ O
.I I W = ~
~ ~ ~I .. ~~
wz ~ :I I ;.
z~ S~ a ' +: I II I ~$ x
MO ~ i I W
+ e,--.
e m
~_~ ; I !' ~
W ~ ~f I W + . O
~~ ~ ~ ~I
z~oc ~ ....._.~,~ .
(nOF-1 '
ek
Z 1x ~ q C~
_~~ - _ . n
~„ C n +n F
~ LL
• .. , ~+ f"
3...
~ J
~.
I:. ~ mmN a
Z I ~ O V
~ ~~ ' I I ~ >3o~W
.w ; ~~ ~ ~_ OWZW
Ii r' -'• !!{F-1Y ~ 41~ _~. ... j i I I I s O .NMZ
i ~ ~ r i r~QN
$.. i +:-~
. ~
` -- ! Nr fA
y ~ Q .~... ...~......-._r.... li ;~WI. ~ Q o ~
a•
'S. xx ~ ; w
~+ ~'~ • ~ I ~ + Z awmmz
' Ti maWO...... _':,. I ' I I ~ ~t as z
i ,: •~ ~.W tLri. .p
` ~',11i I ~ ~,~ aaNNo
I
:,k:.. ~ ~ +I. W~
.....',' ~ • ~ ~ ~ ~x
-~ Irr i ~. ~I I' I 'aat~- a I.,- ..
662/L r~cy:ccnH ~c Ni~~e~~~t'N
ufip••}wd-pfiy-g£g~q\s6u:rno~p 1[w.~e socjnv.rp y\:~
" BS°II SOOZ-J30-ZZ
a

~ NORTH CAROLINA
~nvvv~-i~
SITE
N.C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
V I C K I TY CH°W~ c°~~
PROJECT N0. -
33154.1.1 (B~3636)
M e P .BRIDGE N0. 16, PIPE ARCH,
~ 1~1 AND APPROACHES ON SR 1222
OVER ROCKYHOCK CREEK
3/23/05
otrm~ -F d ra.Ml ~ ^~ 1 -~

C
_.
f _ _ ~.~ ~..__ f ~ ~i - ... ~o ~ x /23 a ~I! "
~, R
1
_ 1 i~ _ r ~ -.f .J ~_
t I _ ~ I i~ _• f~ \
f~ -4- .. x ~0 ~-- i r J l I3C3 ;
~ --- ~ ~ kk ~ ->~'
i • Chowan ~ ~:~~ v ., r --- - _ ~ ~ B~ ~ ~t20 •i !' .•"I ~ , ~
-. I
- r jAwdemy Hackghock -~-.di .. ._ i t= .. ~\. `\ +~. 0
i ~ ~` ~~;, ~ lam' .. '- _ f ~ " f i'r' ~ ,~
! iCsm` 12111 -~ - ~ \ ~-~y.~~i \ y. ~ 1 -. i y ~ `~~x 43 p~ ~ ~ ~\
tl~ r ~• ~ J
~1~1 - _ --. I \` ~f d er 11 I ~j.
~ I - _ ~~ ~. I ~.
h t 1 A,
^x ~ < •rf'
~ ~ as ~. ~ -, ~ ~~ - ~ ~ , ,. .
;~ ~ ,:..
,,
ti ( ,f
~` J1111I~ ~~. p r:~o ~ e~ c -t .__ , s- ;f _~~_ ___ ;~ ,,,
- 1
-~~ `... .. '\~ S ~ 'i3R 251 ~~~/ /I~ ~'J` ~//
' ~~ r,. _ f 1.
.~ ,y,- ~``. ,t ~ ! ~~~~ 1 ~ ._ ~ ` . fly ~~4, i~~ ::~
- ~ _ _ 1 .,.. Lr y ~.. //-T~ ' 17.5 1 ~ ~
r _ ~. r' xS5
Cam.. ~ .~--~ ~ ~ 3-_~'=_. ~i/aa °1
i l I. ~\.. ~\ r ~'~ r i
~o~ -
~ - ~ ~ _~t-~. ~~ ~ .~c 1 i_e;---~ . j Cam:..
0 _, -2;OO~U~ •4 000 s , -
- -' , . ' , - - - ~ ' ',_~ ;~ - ^- N . C . DEPT . OF TRANSPORTATION
_ i.. _ _ -~, Feet` - ,1;' :~~•`:~=_ :'c DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
1,inch equals 2,000 feet ~ CHOWAN COUNTY
PROJECT' N0. 33184.1.1 (B-3636)
L 0 CAT I 0 N BRIDGE NO . 16 , PIPE ARCH ,
AND APPROACHES ON SR 1222
OVER ROCKYHOCK CREEK
3/23/05
source: u5u5 i.5 nnlnute cauadrang~es, Vai-Halla, NC ~2rrv+i-1- dro~..Jin+ ;Z, o~ `7

~'~ __~
---
------~1
~ ~~
1 j~
1 ~~
1 1;>
`o
!-
SZ i ~~
1~
I~
1
~ I
---
I ---- .`-
I
~`~~ • ~ I I
4,4i I 1 _
I _ .
.` I I ~ -
II '
• ~ I I ~
I
• II~•
.•• 1I~-
OZ •' Ilo.
~ .
ti.
~. '~
~ ~~~~
. `~ ~,
.~ ~ Joy~~JO~
.~
_~
5/ •. I I '
.I I
.. ~
. II
' I I O
• ~ ~ N
. I
•~I I
' I I ' `'
' I I '
' II
.. :~ ~
O
i o O
~/ V
II ~
II
~ N.C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
~ DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
CHOWAN COUNTY
PROJECT 3318.1.1 (B-3636)
BRIDGE N0.16, PIPE ARCH, AND APPROACHES
ON SR 1222 OVER ROCKYHOCK CREEK
~Q,fYWi~ c1COarJ ~ru~ 3 0~ ~ 03/16/05

~A~
~ My~~3~~~5
V~~ ZOO
~'~7ZZ° 1F'S '$
''99 ~ G ~ ~`g, .a,
a v;i
3
~ ~ ~
0 0
g ;
s
~> m
_ `II ~Fr7 ~ ` _' ~
vz
~>~ ~~& ~I
~~ ~~s ,„
A A ~ g •s
V +
in u ~ =p O ~
p~ LL
~ ~ ~ m ~g
4
~~V ~
A w' o S
a~a
b i ~
oZ yyy~
III FC~
gam`
m 2 LL-~
41£
~~`26~ i
_~
if
Y~Jp
j~x $
~~
LLp ~
~~
S
(~
Wm

i~,
~ ~ ~,
~ ..

~ o
3
99 013 ~
~p
m
s g
N 3t
W ~
o
~2J
1
~b O
2
2
•
~~
8 8
/ 52,5, `7M
/~
.. ~ rf ~
f S
j. w $ ~ n
0~~
~~
4
H mN
m
_z
WaWp
~"''
O
fl
.Q
-~
;~"
d
o.
w
N
i
W
a
w
c~
0
00
O
F
W
O
W
U
a
LL
to
w
a
3
Z
W J
O J
Z LL
d' W ? W ... O N
OF- JN J j Q
QQ SZ
f 31N- "J" 3 .J. Z Z f,
IW"WQ LLW LLJ XF WK
Ua (nU (l1 F... WW ~W
rn¢E WQ WW cn3 UIJ
F~~ ~O~ ~03 WZ WU
O~ Z~ Z F... F-
Z(A wN W O O
O
W O O O O
'#`
iR
!t
bb/Z/L k:CyICGAH JHV F'l"`!fif"NN
u6p•1wd-pfiy-g£g£9\s6uino.ap lwae•~sogno ~p y~:a
II•b SOOZ-X30-ZZ
f
ti
O
3
m
0
Q
~1 x
W
a.
0
v

~ AIM ~:~ ~ ~ lye; ,o
v 1 ' ~ W
' ~ j ~ ~
~~ ~I ~$

_t`
~...
t:.
r4:i,;~:~~..:..:::.4::::
::i :::: ~::::.::::::4::. w..:~':

I ~ III
~ \
,Z ~~ GFr7
~ =Z
~~~
~3~
~~ ~~8
a
'^ o
=p
z ~nb
~ag ~f ZZt~
~jw p
W'n
~
F
8
'F,r
d
CZ
{JJ~~~
F
J

~ ~~U
A

III Zy3~~
~GL

III ga
..
~' .
W I
~'I
W J i
((~~ ~ b
o ~1 WN ~:
i
~ ~~
~ ..:
i I_
~\`e .. ~ ~
}~ ' .''...
J
w ,_ -
'-'~ O
1 '
:i
i
~
$
p
R
J~ 6 ~i ~~
: I I ~
I,
~
~
~

._.
~ mom.. -- .... I'!

_~ i
z::
~ -

I I j
~
~
$
,
...
.
;
~ ij ~ N
I
I ~ ::
{
:
_-~~_"' ~ -N
; I
:._......_. ~
~
1
2
{
;`
r; i.
,1
~ J Wm ~
~ ~
~ ~
I 1
~ r
~

1
~ N
Q
rI~I ~ ~
! I I1. !~ p
i g ~
:i 3 1'
W

ot91 U ,~ ~ i~~ ... •284x9\
N~ $ + I ~<3 a~O
~~~ ~~$ ° ~
'~_~ N it ~ IEII, ~ 8 ~~~~~~
o ~ •~ I ills ~ ^.,oo=~~
is
' I I ~~;! ~ a .~
.~ i I I I! a1 a
W!? I,I'~' o ~L
~ , i I 'i g s
~ .g ~_ ' { I iI '
8 • _ j I
a
~ •'1' {i l jl :~I
i
Q I~ o
~ QO
~:f. I ~I ~~ ~ ~
.. N•{i.I ~ R Q~
~{ji, ~~
~' {
-~ ~~~
~a c I j s i
i ~ , iI -.~
W .„ ~ I I
'~
~ s ~ ~'
W ~ ' ~i .>,
•!'I I~- 3
~~~~ "~ I I! I~ ~ o
' Wes., ~ • I I~ ;'~ ~
W
.I ,I : ~:.
II ~I II ~ W
;~~ S ~
~~ ; 1 I ' I I' ~ ~ 2
W
S '~ ~ I {I !~~ vxm i
~, +
g' I l{, I I I it ~~
8 •' 'i 4
~/ ~ I ~ p
,~ '~I I,: ~ C ~
- ~ o-
.P I i '. g
W :
~ ~: ~ I ~~ I
'.
~t
.~! '. .yi j ~i I 1,
~I :'kl .+ llt 52~ \9.11
1
HfR ., ~~ :'r. ~.~ .a ~.Jw
~ : II ~ V
71~ I
F ~ ~~ n ~' w w N
Il ~ p ~ V
~j. S
• '- . J
i I! I ~ ~~ N
`~o ~~ I I I,~ ~s
WJ
o~
ZLL
} Z 0
H w ~ N
ao z
f3H 'J"3 ~Z az =c~
Q Z
W U LL LLa XF W~
~U1 NU ~F WW EQ
UI¢E W¢ Ww 3 w
~~^ O~ O~ M-.Z-.-, FU
ZZ
2N wN W O O
o ~ ~ W W
00
~~
~~
~'-
0
,~
4
"O
,£

~I-
N
n
to
a'
W
a
w
c~
0
m
0
w
0
W
U
W
N
w
a
3
z
/L
v
3
W
~ m
0 0
Z
nW
m~
W Z
' W
Q.
O
v
u6p•Zwd-Pfi4 9£9£9\s6utMO~pl 21w ed\soctno~pfiy\
Il~bl SOOZ-030-ZZ
a

rn
~
~ ~ N
~ M
~ ~
W ~~N O ~

ZZ ~ ~Q ~-~
[D
~..
a ~~~ °~ Zv
~ ~~W Z~ ~~- ~°

W ~:
W ~~
_..
~~ _
Z ~
N~
Z
~
-a~~
Z
L~LO QM
M O

~
~~ "
r= OO
`~ Off. ~-
a
4 o
~' Y ~
> ~w
' L
2
~, _ " W
p o ~
O T/
0 oN~ U ~ a t
LL ~ ~ M z

a M N
~ ~„

N d
Q.
W

Q
U ,-.
J
J Z ~
~ ~ ~
W QQ~
~ 0 W

O QOM
dL.LJ
Z
~ ~
Q
~
~
Q
J
~/ m~
W W LLW.~
Q. ~ !-

a
O
Z
i.~ r- N M
O
I.L
a
X
d
O
O.
N
0
-o
a
2
U
N
.~
N

°
z
o °
M
_
`~
F
~. ~ M
a ¢ `~'
~
~
~
h
F

~ o z :°. ~
z z 3 M oc
W ~ ~ (-~
W ~
F ~
V
Q ~ Q

W a
[]
U a
z

H
.a
`m
3 E
m N
m
.t E
~
°
a
N g
C_
w ~, 3
? `o
~
~ t~ _
N
N ~ E
O y
Z Z¢
a
~
~~~
~~ ~=
zoo

~ w
•~ ~ U ~
H m m a w
.
U X '~ E F-
Q WU-
a
~
~ ~ c
C~ C V C

~ c
,w m Q ~~
W ~ ~ d

W
U
LL m
_~ ~ ~ U
ca
_
_ ~
v
~ ~
~
Q ~
~

~ c
w
(6 ?) (6 U

0

O
~ E fn fl- (9
v 0
O O
O
F- N ~
U a
a
~ ~, ~
~
_
~ ~ ~ __ m m
~~ ~,~
~ U ~

W -a m
a~ ~
0 C ~ ~ ~j ~ ~

Q ~ ~
U _N j~
U
O O
O
1J- V ~
.c
~
o a
~
Q c
~ ~ f0 U m co
(U
v O O
Z X ~ O o
~ W
H
W
~ rn
a
~
.-.
~
E- ~° ~
~~~v

c m
c
m-~ ~

o

0

0

0
jy ~ ~ O O O ~
N ?)

~ Q
~~
3 L
~
a~
~
~~
~ ~
~ a
in ~ ~° a m
0
C
~ 0

o 0
a0 0
O
~
~~ ~
~ O ~
~ LL
~ J J J
i

~
•+ Q ~
(~ Z O
H

J~
e
W z
Q
_
~'
~ ~
~~ ~ _
~
W
o. V
E
v ~ ~ ~

M
r
~
r
~
~
N
.p ,~
~
~
~
M
l:
~ ~
~ ~
N ~
l'7
m ~
^
t " ~
K U
~%J
~1
t~-~I
~~
!~1
C~
~ N
m
g~
~~
a
.: Op
~~
a
0
U
x
U
N
~~
a4 V
W~
Uy
~~
O~
^~
~w
o ~
~w
H
•~
A~
..
0
0
~~~
N~
~ m~ ~---
$ ml m~ ml >~ \ / ~I
` ~` e
m~ ~~~ J ~~
~. 1~~ NI N
~~ ~~ ~l
/~l, ~ U
' /' ~` ~ NI NI N~ ~ o >
~~ m (V
N, W
1 ~""
nt iol N NI t/~
N ~I N
N V
~~ OI
N N
N` ~
oc
O
d
W
~-
N
O
N
U
Z
Q
J
_~
-~ 1 I
>I 1
~ I II
Q I (~
~~~~~
0
v ..
~ ~
J
J
Q
ti
o~ ~
y~ H~ ~
"' vJ
'"~~
!Va~ 4
~~ °~
,,,0 p C7
~~
a~ ~ ~
y ~~
~i A
a ~ a
h ~
a
W
d
d

w

W
W
N OC
o
W
y
~O
"' H
W V
U
~ ~ _ ~
~
8~~
s o

-.
~ ~ ~s
©
p
6 y

a
~
O
~
y ~

~~
3 ~ rD
q
°

A
~ v
~
cti
o ~~
~
~ ~ ~~
y
W
W
~_y
0
0
N
O
z
O
W
U
W
Z
4
W
W ~ W
<J< J_ J<
< ~ G
Q~~
N 0 N
~ O Q
II II II
C3 ,o w ,o
~~~
U ~~~
O ~~~
~- ~-
Q. ~~~
3~,z
~ J
~ H
~~O
W W
-~ -~ ~_

~
OC d I

A ~
H ~
M
~ ~ ~ ~O
~'
~ n n u n n n a
Ch v ~n ~ p ~ ) rs
II
w N ~ 0 *,
A ~"' ~
~ a
v
'~'
9£9£ ~ ~,L~~lO?Id dll 69tiioz~ ~s~vusxo~

t%J
Z
O
V
J
~-
Z p O O
3 p p O
~~'!
0 N O ~
-+ + -E -f-
Q O '~ N
= O ,~O •o-
F-gpOo
0
~ + + +
0 ^ ~ ~
ZdFd~a
Z N N N
~ S S
H
V
N
7
O ~ ~
N
W
V
`~ v
F- W
~ r- o• ~? ~ ~ ~ Z
J N~ ~ h Z
~ ~ = O
I~ ~ ~
W
:0 33 i ~ ~ ~ V
o a V ~
CJ
.q
- W
Q"O
~ ^ ~ C~
v.
~\
7

a a a ~
~ 'f; a w ~ w

~ m
4 u; m m m }
'
N O~ O ° ~ J
N N r ~ ~ O
w a w~ m m~

~ r
~
a
~o ao
W W
N ~ ~ _
W ~ U
W o o ~x N Nw
~ ~ oa ~ ~z
O w O V O ~ O

w Ci
j N
~~
~ d x
a p
m
a
m
N
~ ~ 7tnr
N ~ 0
N
w W a
r S W W W
'-
~a
w wwo
F..d r w
W ~
ww
Z v
V l p m O J Z m ZO m ~ N
U~ Vu7 OJt17 V J Um
J J
~.. J

w
Nw a
'~'o~ a W
aou a
No a°
~M
o a a a
Nr a a r w ~N r ~N ~ r
W yr
a -
U J ~ = a z
_ N N~

Q w

oa X t7 r
oa O (~ O
az X C7
oa X OC
o >
a
x

¢x
awo
~wcn
aw
a~
a w
r
aa >aw as a~ z ~
as x
a a w a a ~ z '> r =
~'
z
a a a a a
° cn a
O
~a ~rz
aa-- ~rz
aa-- °xr
a s ~
z
a s x
w w

U
U
U
W N
W ~ F-
86/9Z/0i
w
~_
3
W
x
0
Z
3
O
N
N
Z
a
N
W
a
0
a
w
O
z
O
o.
J
~~
~~
H~ ~
W
w H
Fx~
W
W
N
0
•I

G~
W W N
N Z ~

~
~ ~ N Z Z
^ J
-I ~, Z
~
O
_
O W

W N
n
p
J
~
p ~
~I W
~
N
V

u
~~
7
N Q
N_
OG Q
N
J ~
J
V
_O
N
M
`~

N
O V °o
W ~
~ W ~ ~
+
? ~ N
nC
0 m ~ 0
m Z O

Z -}-
N
N .f.. 0 O

V
~
W O
+
O ~ r
V Q F
N
~ ~' 1

V!
Z
QO
U
O
J
_Z
0 $ pp 00
0 ~ ~ ~
+ +
W ~' r^- p.
F ~
o00
p o 0
N p O p
O ,°~ °o ~
Z + ~{- +
c ~ m
Z
o add
~ ~~~
N J ~ J
~ I
W
V!
3
W
0
J
0
N
W
0
W
~_
W
GC
Z
_~
I--
W
V
Z
t9
y
W
0
!,.

~~
x 8 ~g
+~ W~
3 ~p ,~
~ o ~~
C9i~N ~
m ~I .~~
~/~
V
Q
~ I
~ J
~ ~
~ ~
~T
N
r ^ Iv, 1'
;1~/ W
_ `~
W
~ III
S
Z ~~I ~FV Z
R ~~~
~'3 "~
~ ~~s
A
n o
~i '" in
a m"n ~~ pj
o
~~v
A ~_
u~
i
111 $~
w
`I.
~ 1
i ~ O N
W W ~'
1
^ ''^^
V
W J ~
o
~ ~ W
N
i 8
~~
/
`~ u
u
~6 ~

J

~ ~`
v~$
~ O ~

I
: ~.
\
,
.
\ ~ `;
\~ .~:
,.
628 _~ '`~ .. 91
~
b ~ ~ ~ '
~ O
/ '„
6 ~~ ~~
~
~ O
' O

I ~• ~
I , ~ a
~
i . ~_

~
~

o

N~
Wn
_~
~
~ I
I ~ N ~~ ~ N ~~
I ~ ~ 2W
W _
~
1
r S W N ~ ~
k~ ~ ~ ~ o ~
' e ~ I
~ ~
w
o
~ Q
~
. ~
~, ~8
"-itlD
s
~~~`H~
is ~ •~ m ~~ 9/ ~~ ~~ cs tgy\
v I ~..
~~3~~~g ~ ~ u ~~~
~"'° a`~
~~~z°~5 ~'9 }}a
b..n~~c>p -~ vp i~~8
s ~
~~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ s ~~~~_~~
I I 8 'N~VF O1~
It I I I ~71 ~ 7
W' ®i I i ~ H ~
~ g ~
~~ ii i~~
~ s 'g I ~
+~ II I~~,~,~1
~~O ~~ i i I I I ~~
I I ~ s ~,
I ~-
I ~i ~' ~ ~
~: ~ a.
e~. p
a ~ I I ~z
$3 +~~.~i I ~g .m
°~ s .,,
~i
~~W ~ ~ I I ~
~, W$ j j .
~ zW ~ I I.; ; :.~ ~ Q
~' Wm ~ i i , ~ 2
I I r~: ~
~~~
.>,
.Q~
I ~_
$8~ ~ . I I ~ W . ~ JzW _ ~
8 +e~ ~I I I I 1 ~ _ S
n s p ~ .„ ~ ~
+ _II alW $; ~
. I S
~~
I :o
~ ~
~ ll- : °~8 p5, ~~
w ~r-N W / 52
rii ~~
/ '. ~ $ ~ W Q~~w
~ ~~ m d I~ ~ E d$$ 8 ~ P
~ ~ a, I$
8 ~ o w;~4 S ~
o ~^~°. N u
8 ~8 ~ I ! ~ g~+ S'~~~
~ z W. I i J l ~ ~ ~ -~~ N
~ z ~I ~ ~ ~s
V
J,.,
~~ I
~ aw ,~ I I I I ~ ~'
O $~
~~ I
~ x ~ ~ c~
1 ~~ ~ Q
~~
~: I ~ o ~ ~~
x

3
m
~O
Q
R,
O
v

~~~ nc ~ccnn lv rie.~ ••rr
4s 'b~9£9E9~5OSi^Q-'P 4\~•'
ZO~b SOOZ-X30-ZZ
t

O
Z
~ ~
= m
w eZ
Z
~ M

::::: c ::::::::............

:~:
:: ~:::
~ ~

.:' ::::::

::::::::

:::::::::

:
::

::::::
::
.

::~::
....
Vii
::~: ii~ii

....
:: d:: iiiii ii

..~.
::~:
:.::::::
:
:
:..::::: ~i'i~iii:iiii
:~: ~. ~:~~:: ~~::::::::: .. ..
::~:'
~ :`
~:y~:.:.:::
:i
`
`ti~i
:::~::::::
iiil'~iii ::.
:
~ii
::la.~p::
iiiii:ii :
iii..:
:: ~::;
iiiiiii... '.
':~~'
... ~
~'~: ~:.
::::::.:: "d`:
:: ~:.~
i ~::~iii~iicyt~iiiiiiii
i ~:i~ii~i ii ii i'~ .
ii r:ii: i
iiC~ii :
.
:::~ii
i F'
": t!i~~ii
ii~ii it iic i~~ :::
:~il!iii ::::II::::
iiiiiiiii iii~~ci
i itl~iii iii3~iii
iiiiiiii 'iiil~iii
iii'iiiii i:::ii
iii„ii
~. N: ::~:: .
::~I:: :::. : ~ .
~ ::~. w,
.~. c.........
.~
C?
1
:::
::~ ::::::
::::::::
::::::::
:
::::
::
:: ~:::
:Q::
::~
~::
::
::
,
::: : .
.:iFiiiiiiSCiiiOi
~
~ ii ~iii
V ii ~ii iii:~ii
~' !i~~:ii:
~ ::i':''iii
~ ii'::'ii
~ ii.: ~: ~:
~ iii:i:'ii
~ ii~:"i
.::
:::::::
~::
~: Q~::: ::
::
~...
::p:: :: ~::
.
::ti:: ::
::
:::lc;E:: ::
::
::~: :::
:::
:::©: ::
::
:: ~:: ::
:
::~::
C~ ::
:
:: ~::
L ::

::~:
C'

:::::::::.: ~ ::::::::
:: .:::
::: .::
::: .:::
::~::
:: ~ ::
:::~-:: ,.
::
::~: : t
,::
:: G~ : ~.:
::
::C3.

::~ ::::::::::::::::::::. ::rJ:: ;:~:: :::~:: ::~3:: ::~:: ::C~3: ::g4 a:: ::e
:::::::::::...:::...
::::........ ...
~ .::::::::::::::
..............
::::::::::Q::...::::::::
....~.... ..
::::::::::.
.....::di:~:~:~.~::
.~~:::~
~
I~ :::::::::: ~: Q: ~::
:::::::~: -::::..
::::::Q. . .
`~
:~-.v~::
........
...
v..~,,,.... ~.:
:•:::~:::: .•: ~::::: ~: ~:::::
~
~
~ ::::::~: : ~::

......~::
~
~
::::::
:::I: ~::
icii:iiiii ~i
i
ii
i iiiiiiiiii
i
i:.~:.ii
:::::::~::~:~:~::
:::I::::
::::::(fl:~:::':k~~~'. ~::
N.~.I.....~..,., ::::::~:::::::~":::
.....w
o :~:i

~::......
::::::::4~: rte: ~!
~::p'
~ :
::
I*~:::::::::' :Op
~]
Ix}C7::1~:

~'
?::
a:::
:::D::`~:r~<::~:::
EG Q::~:b:
s
....... ~,-Z..
; U;l
.,.
i:::.: ~~':iiii'i"?il~ii
...~:::.:::~i(j';)ii~ii ue
i~iE~iliiji~..'•i'i~i'ii'~~ii
iii ~iii~ii, ~~i~r~ii
~ii`i'.Jii~i~i( Z!!
.~.~. ~.

iii
::
~.y-~
' ~1
i iiiwJ ii~ii~i':(ii iiiliii~ iii~ ii~ii~ii:€iiii :
~. ~. ~. ~:' ::::::::
~! '',
~. ",ir.i
~i
~j: ~;:~j:d;.
~f1E::::
:::IL::::::::: ;II
................. .
...........................
li 'a!C?
~:~::~:
...............................
..............................
~`;
=~- ~-' d-
~ N ~:
~i ~:!~~:
'~~`::
s' I 1 j ; t?
~;::W:::~::::::::
~:::':
...............................
...............................
L~
66/41/5

i

u6p•~-

. - _:--
A.
B.
C.
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION ACTION CLASSIFICATION FO
TIP Project No.
State Project No.
W.B.S. No.
Federal Project No
Project Description:
B-3636
8.2030401
33184.1.1
BRZ-12220
i-1~~~~
OCT 25 2005
- 0!'fl~i0~ Cif u wti~,~YS
PDEA-Offl~f Of ~fATi~{AtfBUi~i, t~I
This project proposes to replace Bridge No. 16 on SR 1222 over Rocky Hock
Creek in Chowan County. The replacement structure will be a 80-foot long
bridge. The bridge will be of sufficient width to provide for two 12-foot lanes
with three-foot offsets on each side. Traffic will be detoured offsite during
construction.
The roadway grade of the new structure will be approximately the same as the
existing grade at this location.
The approach roadway extending approximately 110 feet from the east end of the
bridge and 280 feet from the west end of the bridge will be widened to a 24-foot
pavement width to provide two 12-foot lanes. Five-foot shoulders will be
provided on each side (eight-foot shoulders where guardrail is included). This
roadway will be designed as a rural local route with a 60 mile per hour design
speed.
Purpose and Need:
Bridge No. 118 includes atwo-span superstructure composed of a five-inch
reinforced concrete deck on I-beams. The original substructure includes solid
reinforced concrete piers and abutments. The structure was later widened with
concrete caps on timber piles.
Bridge Maintenance Unit records indicate the bridge has a sufficiency rating of
34.7 out of a possible 100 for a new structure. The bridge is considered
functionally obsolete due to a deck geometry appraisal of 2 out of 9 according to
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) standards and therefore eligible for
FHWA's Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Program.
Wear and tear resulting from increasing traffic, aging (59 year old) bridge
components, increasing maintenance costs, and a cross section narrower than
generally desired for this type of facility are the reasons for replacing this bridge.
Proposed Improvements:
Circle one or more of the following Type II improvements which apply to the
project:
1. Modernization of a highway by resurfacing, restoration, rehabilitation,
reconstruction, adding shoulders, or adding auxiliary lanes (e.g., parking,
weaving, turning, climbing).

a. Restoring, Resurfacing, Rehabilitating, and Reconstructing
pavement (3R and 4R improvements)
b. Widening roadway and shoulders without adding through lanes
c. Modernizing gore treatments
d. Constructing lane improvements (merge, auxiliary, and turn lanes)
e. Adding shoulder drains
f. Replacing and rehabilitating culverts, inlets, and drainage pipes,
including safety treatments
g. Providing driveway pipes
h. Performing minor bridge widening (less than one through lane)
i. Slide Stabilization
j. Structural BMP's for water quality improvement
2. Highway safety or traffic operations improvement projects including the
installation of ramp metering control devices and lighting.
a. Installing ramp metering devices
b. Installing lights
c. Adding or upgrading guardrail
d. Installing safety barriers including Jersey type barriers and pier
protection
e. Installing or replacing impact attenuators
f. Upgrading medians including adding or upgrading median barriers
g. Improving intersections including relocation and/or realignment
h. Making minor roadway realignment
i. Channelizing traffic
j. Performing cleaz zone safety improvements including removing
hazards and flattening slopes
k. Implementing traffic aid systems, signals, and motorist aid
1. Installing bridge safety hazdwaze including bridge rail retrofit
O3. Bridge rehabilitation, reconstruction, or replacement or the construction of
grade separation to replace existing at-grade railroad crossings.
a. Rehabilitating, reconstructing, or replacing bridge approach slabs
b. Rehabilitating or replacing bridge decks
c. Rehabilitating bridges including painting (no red lead paint), scour
repair, fender systems, and minor structural improvements
O Replacing a bridge (structure and/or fill)
4. Transportation corridor fringe pazking facilities.
5. Construction of new truck weigh stations or rest areas.
6. Approvals for disposal of excess right-of--way or for joint or limited use of
right-of--way, where the proposed use does not have significant adverse
impacts.
7. Approvals for changes in access control.
8. Construction of new bus storage and maintenance facilities in areas used
predominantly for industrial or transportation purposes where such
construction is not inconsistent with existing zoning and located on or neaz
2

a street with adequate capacity to handle anticipated bus and support
vehicle traffic.
9. Rehabilitation or reconstruction of existing rail and bus buildings and
ancillary facilities where only minor amounts of additional land are
required and there is not a substantial increase in the number of users.
10. Construction of bus transfer facilities (an open area consisting of
passenger shelters, _boarding azeas, kiosks and related street
improvements) when located in a commercial azea or other high activity
center in which there is adequate street capacity for projected bus traffic.
11. Construction of rail storage and maintenance facilities in azeas used
predominantly for industrial or transportation purposes where such
construction is not inconsistent with existing zoning and where there is no
significant noise impact on the surrounding community.
12. Acquisition of land for hardship or protective purposes, advance land
acquisition loans under section 3(b) of the UMT Act. Hardship and
protective buying will be permitted only for a pazticulaz pazcel or a limited
number of pazcels. These types of land acquisition qualify for a CE only
where the acquisition will not limit the evaluation of alternatives,
including shifts in alignment for planned construction projects, which may
be required in the NEPA process. No project development on such land
may proceed until the NEPA process has been completed.
13. Acquisition and construction of wetland, stream and endangered species
mitigation sites.
14. Remedial activities involving the removal, treatment or monitoring of soil
or groundwater contamination pursuant to state or federal remediation
guidelines.
D. Special Project Information:
Estimated Costs:
Total Construction
Right of Way
Total
Estimated Traffic:
Current - 2300
TTST - 1
$ 475,000
$ 34,000
$ 509,000
Yeaz 2025 - 3800
Dual - 3%
Accidents: In a check of a recent three-year period, one accident occurred just northeast
of the bridge. The accident was not associated with the geometry of the road.
Functional Classification: Rural Minor Collector
School Busses: During the current school year there are 12 school bus crossings per day
at this location. The School Bus Transportation Director for Chowan County indicated

that they can re-route the busses without too much trouble although aturn-around
location will need to be identified or created between the bridge and NC 32.
Bridge Demolition: The superstructure for Bridge No. 16 should be possible to remove
without dropping components into the water. Likewise, the timber piles should be
possible to remove without dropping them into the water. The concrete piers may result
in as much as 55 cubic yazds of fill depending on the method of removal to be determined
after a contractor is selected. According to NCDOT's Best Management Practices for
Bridge Demolition and Removal, the contractor shall make every practical effort to
minimize the fill.
Studied Offsite Detour: NCDOT Guidelines for Evaluation of Offsite Detours for
Brid a Re lacement Pro e~cts consi ers m tip a project vana es eginnuig vv~ e
a tion tune trave e by the average road user resulting from the offsite detour. The
offsite detour for this project would include SR 1223, NC 32 and back to SR 1222. The
detour for the average road user would result in 2.5 minutes additional travel time (1.6
miles additional travel) which falls within the range of acceptable delay for the three-
month duration of construction expected on this project. Chowan County Emergency
Services has indicated a particular concern for this project in that there aze two retirement
homes just north of the bridge. The road closure would resulf in a 3.5-minute response
delay for an average of four or five trips per week. NCDOT's original query to EMS
indicated a road closure time up to one yeaz. The Area Bridge Construction Engineer has
estimated that the fastest construction would be approximately three months less and
communicated this with EMS who agreed that they could work around this timeframe.
Chowan County EMS did request that we minimize road closure as much as possible.
Chowan County Schools have indicated that they could also work azound an offsite
detour provided that aturn-azound location is provided south of the bridge.
Design Exception: NCDOT believes that a 30-foot clear deck width is appropriate for
this project.
The NCDOT Bridge Policy calls fora 40 foot clear deck width for a Rural Minor
Collector whose project design year ADT is greater than 2000 vehicles per day. For
bridges greater than 100 feet a 30-foot clear deck width is acceptable.
Given the existing alignment characteristics of SR 1222, a 30-foot cross section should
provide acceptable service to traffic without compromising safety. It will help minimize
unpacts to the surrounding high quality wetlands and the anadramous fish stream.
Division Office Comments: The Division concurs with the proposed alternate

,~ ~ _,-, r
E. Threshold Criteria
The following evaluation of threshold criteria must be completed for Type II
actions
ECOLOGICAL YES NO
(1) Will the project have a substantial impact on any
unique or important natural resource? ^ X
(2) Does the project involve habitat where federally
listed endangered or threatened species may occur?
(3) Will the project affect anadromous fish? ^
X
(4) If the project involves wetlands, is the amount of
permanent and/or temporary wetland taking less than
one-tenth (1/10) of an acre and have all practicable measures

to avoid and minimize wetland takings been evaluated? ^
X
(5) Will the project require the use of U. S. Forest Service lands? ^
X
(6) Will the quality of adjacent water resources be adversely
impacted by proposed construction activities? ^ X
(7) Does the project involve waters classified as Outstanding Water
Resources (OWR) and/or High Quality Waters (HQW)? ~ X
(8) Will the project require fill in waters of the United States
in any of the designated mountain trout counties? ~ X
(9) Does the project involve any known underground storage
tanks (UST's) or hazardous materials sites? ^ X
PERMITS AND COORDINATION YES NO
(10) If the project is located within a CAMA county, will the
project significantly affect the coastal zone and/or any ^
"Area of Environmental Concern" (AEC)? X
(11) Does the project involve Coastal Barrier Resources Act ^
resources? X
(12) Will a U. S. Coast Guard permit be required? ^
X
(13) Will the project result in the modification of any existing
regulatory floodway? ^ X
5

(14) Will the project require any stream relocations or channel ^
changes? X
SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND CULTURAL RESOURCES YES NO
(15) Will the project induce substantial impacts to planned
growth or land use for the area? X
(16) Will the project require the relocation of any family or

business? ^
X
(17) Will the project have a disproportionately high and adverse
human health and environmental effect on any minority or

low-income population? ^
X
(18) If the project involves the acquisition of right of way, is the
amount of right of way acquisition considered minor? X
(19) Will the project involve any changes in access control?
X

(20) Will the project substantially alter the usefulness

and/or land use of adjacent property? ^
X
(21) Will the project have an adverse effect on permanent
local traffic patterns or community cohesiveness? ^ X
(22) Is the project included in an approved thoroughfare plan
and/or Transportation Improvement Program (and is,
therefore, in conformance with the Clean Air Act of 1990)? X
(23) Is the project anticipated to cause an increase in traffic

volumes? ^
X
(24) Will traffic be maintained during construction using existing
roads, staged construction, or on-site detours? X
(25) If the project is a bridge replacement project, will the bridge
be replaced at its existing location (along the existing facility)
and will all construction proposed in association with the ^
bridge replacement project be contained on the existing facility? X
(26) Is there substantial controversy on social, economic, or
environmental grounds concerning the project? ~ X
(27) Is the project consistent with all Federal, State, and local laws ^
relating to the environmental aspects of the project? X
(28) Will the project have an "effect" on structures/properties
eligible for or listed on the National Register of Historic Places? ~ X
6

(29) Will the project affect any archaeological remains which are
important to history or pre-history? X
(30) Will the project require the use of Section 4(f) resources
(public parks, recreation lands, wildlife and waterfowl refuges,
historic sites, or historic bridges, as defined in Section 4(f)
of the U. S. Department of Transportation Act of 1966)? ^ X
(31) Will the project result in any conversion of assisted public
recreation sites or facilities to non-recreation uses, as defined
by Section 6(f) of the Land and Water Conservation Act ^
of 1965, as amended? X
(32) Will the project involve construction in, across, or adjacent
to a river designated as a component of or proposed for
inclusion in the National System of Wild and Scenic Rivers? ~ X
F. Additional Documentation Required for Unfavorable Responses in Part E
Response to Question 2: Marginal habitat for the Bald Eagle. Surveys have
been conducted and a Biological Assessment of "May Affect, Not Likely to
Adversely Affect" has been submitted to U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service for
concurrence. The opinion will be updated if the project is not let to construction
by Apri12006.
Response to Question 3: National Marine Fisheries Service has requested a risk
averse approach regarding anadramous fish. They recommend applying a
moratorium from February 1 to September 30 of any given year.
7

,- _:_
G. CE Approval
TIP Project No.
State Project No.
W.B.S. No.
Federal Project No.
Project Description:
B-3636
8.2030401
33184.1.1
BRZ-1222(5
This project proposes to replace Bridge No. 16 on SR 1222 over Rocky Hock
Creek in Chowan County. The replacement structure will be a 80-foot long
bridge. The bridge will be of sufficient width to provide for two 12-foot lanes
with three-foot offsets on each side. Traffic will be detoured offsite during
construction.
The roadway grade of the new structure will be approximately the same as the
existing grade at this location.
The approach roadway extending approximately 110 feet from the east end of the
bridge and 280 feet from the west end of the bridge will be widened to a 24-foot
pavement width to provide two 12-foot lanes. Five-foot shoulders will be
provided on each side (eight-foot shoulders where guardrail is included). This
roadway will be designed as a rural local route with a 60 mile per hour design
speed.
Categorical Exclusion Action Classification:
TYPE II(A)
X TYPE II(B)
Approved:
~o- .~- ~~
Date
ate
~ - t7
Date

,istant Manager
ject Development &
l
Analysis Branch
Project Development & Environmental Analvsis Branch
For Type II(B) projects only:
Date John F. Sullivan, III, P.E., Divisi~
Federal Highway Administration
Administrator
rro~ect Development & Environmental Analysis Branch

PROJECT COMMITMENTS:
Chowan County
Bridge No. 16 on SR 1222
Over Rocky Hock Creek
Federal Aid Project No. BRZ-1222 (5)
State Project No. 8.2030401
W.B.S. No. 33184.1.1
T.I.P. No. B-3636
All Design Groups/Division Resident Engineer - Anadramous Fish
The North Carolina Division of marine Fisheries has indicated that a moratorium on in-water
construction will be in place from February 1 to September 30 of any given year.
To the extent practical, construction should be accomplished without the use of construction pads
in the water.
To the extent practical, bridge demolition should occur without getting into the water.
To the extent practical, the footprint of the proposed project should be minimized.
NCDOT will implement Stream Crossing Guidelines for Anadramous Fish Crossings.
Office of Natural Environment -Bald Eagle
A Biological Opinion of "May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect" has been reached for this
project. If the project does not let to construction prior to Apri12006, the assessment will have to
be re-confirmed.
Project Services/ All Design Groups/ Utilities -Need for accelerated construction schedule
Chowan County Emergency Services has indicated that there are two rest homes just north of the
bridge and response time will be delayed as a result of road closure. There is a high frequency of
visits each week to the two homes. They have strongly requested that if we can not maintain
traffic onsite that construction should be accomplished in the fastest manner practical. The
contract and all aspects of design and construction should be fashioned to facilitate this outcome.
Coordinate with PDEA Project Engineer if there are questions.
Division Resident Construction Engineer -School Bus Turn-Around
Chowan County Schools have six busses a day which cross the bridge and all pick up and drop
off children south of the bridge. The school system has requested a location for aturn-azound be
coordinated with the school transportation director. The resident engineer will coordinate with
the school transportation director prior to construction to accommodate this need.
Programmatic Categorical Exclusion Page 1 of 1
Green Sheet
August 2004

NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ~I7tANSPORTATION
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT &
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS BRANCH
CHOWAN COUNTY
REPLACE BRIDGE 16 ON SR 1222
OVER ROCKY HOCK CREEK
B-3636
Figure 1

i r
CHOWAN COUNTY
EMERGENCY SERVICE BUILDING
208 W. HICKS ST.
EDENTON, N.C. 27932
oFFtcE oF: [phone] o~cE oF:
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT EMS/RESCUE
May 2, 2000
Mr. John L. Williams, P.E.
NC Department of Transportation
Bridge Replacement Planning Unit
P.O, Box 25201
Raleigh;.NC 27611-5201
SUBJECT: Replacement of Bridge No. 16 on SR 1222, over Rocky Hock
_ Creek in Chowan County (T.LP. No. B-3636)
Dear Mr. Williams,
At a recent, Chowan County 911 Advisory Board meeting we
discussed the proposed replacement of Bridge No. 16 on SR 1222.
Attending the meeting were Sheriff Fred Spruill, Edentoa Police Chief
Gregory Bonner, Edenton Fire Chief Chuck Westbrook, 911 Director Jim
Carr. and myself. We all have great concerns of public safety with the
closing of this bridge and rerouting of traffic.
There are many contributing factors in the Rocky Hock area that aze
of concern to us. They are as follows:
(1) Two (2) densely populated retirement communities are located
in this response area.
(2) Two (2) large industries are located in this response area.
(3) A day care is located in this response area.
(4) One (1) of the State's largest. rural church congregations is
located in this response area.

4
(5) Rocky Hock Road is the primary route of emergency response
vehicles to the Rocky Hock community.
(6) Many elderly citizens live off the primary routes of Rocky
Hock Road.
Closing this bridge and rerouting traffic will cause a major delay of
emergency response personnel to the Rocky Hock community. By taking
alternate routes this will cause an additional 3.5 miles of travel and delay
response time by 4 minutes. These are critical numbers for emergency
responders in a rural community. These delays could mean the difference
between life and death.
If possible, please consider putting a temporary bridge at Rocky Hock
Creek site during construction of the new bridge. Your consideration will be
greatly appreciated.
e c ,Coordinator
Chowan County Emergency Services
CC: Cliff Copeland, Chowan County Manager
Fred Spruill, Chowan County Sheriff
Gregory Bonner, Edenton Police Chief
Chuck Westbrook, Edenton Fire Department Chief
Jim Carr, Chowan County 911 Director

,,, STArE -• -
d`
~ i^ ~'rs
~r~s .
.~~~y,,.
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
David L. S. Brook, Administrator
James B. Hunt Jr., Governor Division of Archives and History
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary Jeffrey J. Crow, Director
September 12, 2000
MEMORANDUM
To: William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
.r' ` ~ !~
From: David Brook ~. ',~..= ~t~V~l ~r ~~~p~ ~/ ;
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer ~ v
Re: Replacement of Bridge No.. l 6 on SR 1222 over Rocky Hock Creek,
T1P No. B-3636,, Chowan County, ER 00-8452
On March 7, 2000, April Montgomery of our staff met with North Carolina Department of Transportation
(NCDOT) staff for a meeting of the minds concerning the above project. We reported our available
information on historic architectural and archaeological surveys and resources along with our
recommendations. NCDOT provided project area photographs and aerial photographs at the meeting:
Based upon our review of the photographs and the information discuss at the meeting, we offer our
preliminary comments regarding this project.
In terms of historic architectural resources, we are aware of no historic structures located within the area
of potential effect. We recommend that no historic architectural survey be conducted for this project.
There are no known archaeological sites within the proposed project area. Based on our present
knowledge of the area, it is unlikely that any archaeological resources, which may be eligible for
inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, will be affected by the project construction. We,
therefore, recommend that no archaeological investigation be conducted in connection with this project.
Having provided this information, we look forward to receipt of either a Categorical Exclusion or
Environmental Assessment, which indicates how NCDOT addressed our comments.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36
CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, Environmental Review Coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
DB:kgc
Location Mailing Address Telephone/Faa
ADMINISTRATION 507 N. Blount St., Raleigh NC • 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 [phone] • 733-8653
ARCHAEOLOGY 421 N. Blount St., Raleigh NC 4619 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4619 [phone] • 715-2671
RESTORATION 515 N. Blount St., Raleigh NC 4613 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4613 [phone] • 715-4801
CiruvFV R PT.ANNTNr 515 N. Blount St.. Raleigh NC 4618 Mail Service Center. Raleigh NC 27699-4618 [phone] 715-4801

Natural Resources Technical Report for the proposed replacement of
Bridge No. 16 on SR 1222 over Rockyhock Creek, Chowan County
TIP No. B-3636
Federal Aid Project No. BRZ-1222(5)
State Project No. 8.2030401
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIlZONMENTAL ANALYSIS BRANCH
NATURAL SYSTEMS iJNIT
Chris Underwood, Environmental Specialist
October 2005

Natural Resources Technical Report for the proposed replacement of
Bridge No. 16 on SR 1222 over Rockyhock Creek, Chowan County
Executive Summary
TIP No. B-3636
Federal Aid Project No. BRZ-1222(5)
State Project No. 8.2030401
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIItONMENTAL ANALYSIS BRANCH
NATURAL SYSTEMS UNIT
Chris Underwood, Environmental Specialist
October 2005

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
B-3636
CHOWAN COUNTY
Bridge No. 16 over Rockyhock Creek on SR 1222 (Rockyhock Road) in Chowan County.
INTRODUCTION
The proposed project, Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) No. B-3636, will replace
._. Bridge No. 16 on SR 1222 over. Rockyhock Creek in Chowan County, North. Carolina. The
bridge, constructed in 1949, is currently structurally deficient and in need of replacement. The
replacement is intended to provide a safer bridge consistent with federal and state bridge
standards.
The proposed project is situated in the northeastern portion of the Coastal Plain physiographic
province. The geography consists predominantly of gently sloping uplands and broad, level
floodplains along most streams. The elevation of the project study area is approximately 50 feet
above Mean -Sea Level (MSL). The land uses surrounding and within the project study area are
mainly forests, agricultural fields, and some residential development. Also, Bennett's Millpond is
to the north of Bridge No. 16. Chowan silt loam and Dorovan muck are classified as hydric soils.
PHYSICAL CI3ARACTERISTICS
Water Resources
The proposed project is situated in the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) Sub-
basin 03-01-04 and Hydrologic Unit (HUC) 03010203 of the Chowan River Basin. The project
study area contains approximately 400 linear feet of Rockyhock Creek. Rockyhock Creek flows
north to south underneath the bridge proposed for replacement:
The best usage classification of this section of Rockyhock Creek is class B-NSW (DWQ Index
No. 25-22, 9/6/79). No High Quality Waters (HQW), Water Supplies (WS-I or WS-II); or
Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW) occur within the project vicinity.
Biotic Resources
Three plant communities were observed in the project study area: mesic mixed hardwood forest,
cypress-gum forest, and maintained-disturbed areas. Design alternatives have yet to be identified
for this project, therefore no estimated area of impact to these natural communities has been
calculated at this time. The following table describes the acreage of plant communities within the
project study area; however, actual impact acreage within the construction limits will likely be_
less.
Table 1. Natural Communities within the Project Study Area.
Communi T e Percenta a of Project Stud Area
Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest 5%
C ress-Gum Forest 70%
Maintained-Disturbed Area 25%
-i-.

JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS
Surface Waters and Wetlands
Rockyhock Creek is a jurisdictional surface water under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(CWA). One jurisdictional. wetland was identified within the project study area. Since no
alternatives have been selected, specific impacts to waters of the United States cannot by
determined. However, some impacts to Rockyhock Creek and the. wetland could be anticipated
for the proposed project. The following table describes the acreage of the wetland and linear
footage of the stream located within the project study area; however, actual impacts within the
construction limits will likely be less.
Table 2. Jurisdictional Wetlands and Streams within the Project Study Area.
-- Jurisdictional Wetland/Stream Area within Project Stud Area._
Wetland 1 9 acres
Rockyhock Creek 4001ineaz feet
The bridge superstructure is reinforced concrete deck on timber joists. The substructure is timber
caps on timber piles. Removal of the superstructure and substructure is not likely to cause fill in
surface waters.
The following issues apply to the proposed project:
• Anadromous fish moratorium
• CAMA AEC (Public Trust Waters)
Permits
In accordance with the Federal Register (January 15, 2002), Part II, Volume 67, Number 10, the
project will likely require authorization under a Section 404 Nationwide Permit #23 (Approved
Categorical Exclusions). A Nationwide Permit # 33 (Temporary Construction, Access, and
Dewatering) may be needed for temporary construction access if that is not addressed in the
NEPA document. A final permitting strategy cannot be developed until a design alternative is
selected.
Section 401 General Water Quality Certifications for NWP #23 and #33 are No. 3361 and 3366,
respectively. Written concurrence from the N.C. Division of Water Quality (DWQ) is not
required provided all standard conditions of these Certifications are met. Final determination of
permit applicability lies with USACE. NCDOT will coordinate with the USACE after the
completion of fmal design to obtain the necessary permits.
Mitigation
In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H.0506(h) and 40 CFR 1508.20, mitigation will be required for
permanent impacts to jurisdictional streams. In addition, mitigation will be required for
permanent wetland impacts. At this time, no design alternatives have been selected; however,
once an alternative and right-of--way widths aze established, specific impact calculations to
wetlands and streams can be determined and mitigation requirements can be further evaluated.
Federally-Protected Species
Plants. and animals with federal .classifications of Endangered (E), Threatened (T), Proposed
Endangered (PE), and Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under provisions of Section 7 and
-ii-

Section 9 of the ESA. According to the January 29, 2003 USFWS listing, the bald eagle is the
only federally threatened species listed for Chowan County.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect
The project area is approximately 4 miles upstream of the confluence of Rockyhock
Creek and the Chowan River and suitable nesting and foraging habitat is available. This habitat
consisted of cypress-gum swamp adjacent to Bennett's Mill Pond. A walking visual search for the
species was conducted to ensure no individuals existed within the immediate vicinity of the
proposed bridge replacement. Also a canoe survey of Bennet's Mill Pond was conducted to
determine if there were nests nearby. In addition, each road that parallels Rockyhock Creek was
driven to survey the trees along the creek for nests. During the survey, no bald eagles or their
Y__. _._.._ ........ .......nests were_observed. In addition,. the North Carolina Natural.Heritage Program database of rare ..... . .
and protected species was reviewed and revealed no records of bald eagles in the project area.
Therefore, construction of the proposed project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect
this species.
-iii-

Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... i
1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. ..1
1.1 Project Description ............................................:..................................................................... ..1
1.2 Methodology ..............................................................................:............................................ ..1
1.3 Definition of Area Terminology ............................................................................................. ..2
1.4 Qualifications of Principal Investigator .................................................................................. ..2
2.0 PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF PROJECT AREA .................................................... ..2
2.1 Regional Characteristics ......................................................................................................... ..3
2.2 Soils ...................................................:.................................................................................... ..3
2.3 Water Resources ..................................................................................................................... ..4
2.3.1 Physical Characteristics of Impacted Surface Waters ...................................................:..... ..4
2.3.2 Best Usage Classification ......................................... ........................................................... ..4
2.3.3 Water Quality...........-• .......................................................................................................... ..5
2.3.3.1 General Watershed Characteristics .................................................................................:. ..5
2.3.3.2 Ambient Water Quality MonitoringBiologic Water Quality Monitoring ........................ ..5
2.3.3.3 Point Source Dischargers .................................................................................................. ..5
2.3.4 Summary of Anticipated Impacts ...............:...........................................:............................ ..5
3.0 BIOTIC RESOURCES .....:..:...........:.................................................::................................... ..6
3.1 Terrestrial Communities ................................:........................................................................ ..6
3.1.1 Maintained/Disturbed .................................:........................................................................ ..7
3.1.2 .Cypress-gum Swamp Forest ................................................................................................ ..8
3.1.3 Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest ..................................................................... ..8
3.2 Aquatic Communities ...................................................................:......................................... ..8
3.3 Summary of Anticipated Impacts .......: ................................................................................... ..9
3.3.1 Impacts to Terrestrial Communities ..................................................................................... ..9
3.3.2 Impacts to Aquatic Communities ......................................................................................... 10
4.0 JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS ......................................:.................:.:::.:.................................. 11
4.1 Waters of the United States ..................................................................................................... 11
4.1.1 Characteristics of Wetlands and Surface Waters ................................................................. 11
4.1.2 Permits and Consultations ................................................................................................... 12
4.1.2.1 Section 404 Permits .......................................................................................................... 12
4.1.2.2 Water Quality Certification ..............................:................................................................ 12
4.1.2.3 Coastal Area Management Act Permitting ........................................................................ 13
4.1.3 Mitigation of Wetland Impacts .....................:...................................................................... 13
4.1.3.1 Avoidance ..............................................................................................:.......................... 13
4.1.3.2 Minimization ..................................................................................................................... 13
4.1.3.3 Compensatory Mitigation ...........................:..................................................................... 14
4.2 Rare and Protected Species ......................................................:.............................................. 14
4.2.1 Federally-Protected Species ...................................................:.....................:....................... 14
4.2.2 Federal Species of Concern .....................................................................:........................... 15
5.0 REFERENCES ......................:................................................................................................. 17
6:0 APPENDIX ...................................................................:.......................................................... 19
Figures, Wetland Forms, Jurisdictional Determination, and FWS Concurrence
iv

1.0 INTRODUCTION
The following Natural Resources Technical Report is submitted to assist in the preparation of a
Categorical Exclusion (CE) for the proposed project. The purpose of this document is to inventory and
describe the natural resources which occur within the proposed right-of--way boundaries and which are
likely to be impacted by the proposed action. Assessments of the nature and severity of probable impacts
to these natural resources are provided, along with recommendations for measures that will minimize
resource impacts.
This report identifies areas of particular environmental concern, which may affect the selection of a
preferred alignment or may necessitate changes in design criteria. Such environmental concerns should
- be addressed during the preliminary planning ~ stages of the proposed -project in order to• maintain- -~ - - - ~ ~•
environmental quality in the most efficient and effective manner. The analyses contained in this
document are relevant only in the context of the existing preliminary project boundaries and design. If
design parameters and criteria change, additional field investigations maybe necessary.
1.1 Project Description
The proposed project calls for the replacement of an obsolete bridge, bridge No. 16, on SR 1222 over
Rockyhock Creek in Chowan County, North Carolina. Figure 1 depicts the project vicinity. Bridge No.
16 will be replaced in place with a new bridge with traffic detoured off-site on local roads during
construction. The existing right-of--way is approximately 60 feet from ditch line to ditch line. The
proposed right-of--way is an 80-foot corridor. Approximately 1250 feet of the approaches to the bridge
will be upgraded.
1.2 Methodology
_ . _.._
Prior to a site visit, published resource information pertaining to the project area was gathered and
reviewed. Resources utilized in this preliminary investigation of the project area include:
- U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) quadrangle map (Edenhouse, N.C.)
- U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (LJSFWS) National Wetland Inventory (NWI) Map (Edenhouse,
N.C.)
- NCDOT aerial photomosaics of the project area
- Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) Soil Survey of Chowan/Perquimans County,
North Carolina (1986).
- NC Center for Geographic Information and Analysis Environmental Sensitivity Base Map of
Chowan County (1995)
Water resource information was obtained from publications of the Department of Environment and
Natural Resources. Quantitative sampling was not undertaken to support existing water quality data.
Information concerning the occurrence of federal and state protected species in the study area was
obtained from the USFWS list of protected and candidate species (January 29, 2003) and from the N.C.
Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) database of rare species and unique habitats. NCNHP files were
reviewed for documented sightings of state or federally listed species and locations of significant natural '
areas.
1

NCDOT Environmental Biologist Chris Underwood conducted general field surveys along the proposed
alignment on April 14, 2004. Water resources were identified and their physical characteristics were
recorded. Plant communities and their associated wildlife were also identified and described. Terrestrial
community classifications generally follow Schafale and Weakley (1990) where possible, and plant
taxonomy follows Radford, et al. (1968). Animal taxonomy follows Martof, et al. (1980), Menhenick
(1991), Potter, et al. (1980), and Webster, et al. (1985). Vegetative communities were mapped utilizing
aerial photography of the project site. Predictions regarding wildlife community composition involved
general qualitative habitat assessment based on existing vegetative communities. Field surveys for
federally-protected species were performed following initial habitat assessments where suitable habitat
for each species was identified.
Jurisdictional wetlands were identified and evaluated based on criteria established in the "Corps of
Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual" (Environment Laboratory, 1987) and "Guidance for Rating the
Values of Wetlands in North Carolina" (Division of Environmental Management, 1995). Wetlands were
classified based on the classification scheme of Cowardin, et al. (1979).
1.3 Definition of Area Terminology
For the purposes of this document, the following terms are used concerning the limits of natural
resources investigations. "Project area" denotes the area bounded by the proposed right-of--way limits
along the full length of the project alignment. "Project vicinity" is defined as an area extending 0.6 mile
on all sides of the project area, and "project region" denotes an area equivalent in size to the area
represented by a 7.5 minute USGS quadrangle map, i.e. 61.8 square miles.
1.4 Qualifications of Principal Investigator
Investigator: Chris Underwood
Education: BS Wildlife and Fisheries Science, Universityof Tennessee at Knoxville, 1989
Experience: Environmental Biologist, NCDOT,-May 2003- Present
Senior Biologist, Tennessee Valley Authority, 1991- 2003
Expertise: Fish taxonomy, stream biology, fisheries biology, natural resource surveys, &
wetland delineations
2.0 PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF PROJECT AREA
Soil and water resources, which occur in the project area, are discussed below with respect to possible
environmental concerns. Soil properties and site topography significantly influence the potential for soil.
erosion and compaction, along with other possible construction limitations or management concerns.
Water resources within the project area present important management limitations due to the need to
regulate water movement and the increased potential for water quality degradation. Excessive soil
disturbance resulting from construction activities can potentially alter both the flow and quality of water
resources, limiting downstream uses. In addition, soil characteristics and the availability of water
directly influence the composition and distribution of flora and fauna in biotic communities, thus
affecting the characteristics of these resources.
2

2.1 Regional Characteristics
The project area of Chowan County lies in the Coastal Plain physiographic province of northeastern
North Carolina. The topography of Chowan County is nearly level with the lowest points being along
major drainageways. Elevations in the project region range from near sea level to approximately 50.0 feet
above sea level near the Snow Hill area of Chowan County.
The project area occurs approximately 4 miles upstream of the mouth of Rockyhock Creek as it enters the
Chowan River. The majority of the project vicinity consists of natural forested communities. Limited
areas of agriculture also occur within the project vicinity. Land use patterns in the project region are not
expected to change in the foreseeable future.
2.2 Soils
The dominant soils occurring within the project area are Chowan silt loam (NRCS 1999). This soil
occurs on flood plains of small streams that flow into Albemarle Sound, Chowan River, and Perquimans
River. It is a very poorly drained soil that is underlain by muck. Included with this soil are small areas
of Dorovan muck.
Table 1 provides an inventory of the specific soil types which occur in the project area. A brief
description of each soil type is also provided. Proportional area of each soil type was determined from
NRCS soil maps of the project area.
Table 1. Soils occurring in the project area.
_ Map Unit Soil Series % Slope % of Project Area Hydric Class.
CO Chowan Silt Loam Nearly Nearly 100 H
level
DO Dorovan Muck Nearly Unmapped; H
level inclusions
Note: H Hydric soils or soils having hydric soils as a major component.
As stated above, Chowan silt loam is a nearly level, very poorly drained soil that occurs on the flood
plains of small streams that flow into the Albemarle Sound. Typically, the surface layer is dark grayish
brown silt loam 6.0 inches thick. Below that, to a depth of 27 inches, is gray silty clay loam in the upper
part and dark grayish brown silt loam in the lower part. The underlying material, to a depth of 80.0
inches, is black muck. This soil ranges from extremely acidic to moderately acidic in the mineral horizon
and is extremely acidic to strongly acidic in the organic horizon. Chowan silt loam is subject to frequent
flooding for long periods.
Dorovan muck soils are nearly level, poorly drained soils on the Albemarle Sound, Chowan River,
Perquimans River, and major streams. Typically, the surface layer is very dark brown muck 3.0 inches
thick. Below that to a depth of 96.0 inches is black muck. The soil is made up of highly decomposed
organic matter and is extremely acidic. The seasonal high water table is at or near the surface and the
soil is subject to frequent flooding for extended periods of time. .
Erosion hazards are generally slight, primarily due to the nearly level topography of the project area.
Surface runoff velocity under such conditions is low, limiting its erosive potential.
3

As indicated in Table 2, forest productivity for soils occurring in the project area is poor as compared to
other soils in the Coastal Plain region. Due to the severe wetness, active forest management for timber
production is not present in the project corridor. However, it is likely that the swamp forests in the
project corridor have been harvested in the past and may possibly be harvested again in the future. This
is most likely to occur when drought and high timber prices combine to allow easier access and fmancial
incentive for timber harvest.
Table 2. Potential forest productivity of soils in the project. area.
Soil Series Site Index-Water tupelo Green ash
Chowan silt loam 80 98
Note: -Site Index is defined as the expected average height in feet of dominant trees in an even aged stand at 50
yeazs of age. Water tupelo and Green ash are the only species for which a site index was provided in the
soil survey
2.3 Water Resources
This section contains information concerning surface water resources likely to be impacted by the
proposed project. Water resource assessments include the physical characteristics, best usage standards,
and water quality aspects of the water resources, along with their relationship to major regional drainage
systems. Probable impacts to surface water resources aze also discussed, as are means to m;n;m;~e
impacts.
2.3.1 Physical Characteristics of Impacted Surface Waters
Water resources within the project vicinity are part of sub-basin 030104 of the Chowan River basin
(HUC 03010203). The project area occurs approximately four miles upstream of the confluence of
Rockyhock Creek and the main stem of the Chowan River.
2.3.2 Best Usage Classification
Streams have been assigned a best usage classification by the Division of Water Quality (DWQ) which
reflects water quality conditions and potential resource usage. Unnamed streams or tributaries carry the
same best usage classification as that assigned to the stream segment to which they are a tributary.
Rockyhock Creek carries the best usage classification of B-NSW (DWQ Index No. 25-22, 9/6/79}. Class
B refers to those waters designated for primary recreation and any other usage specified by the "C"
classification; NSW (Nutrient Sensitive Waters) refers to waters which require limitations on nutrient
inputs. Class C waters are defined as suitable for aquatic life propagation and survival, fishing, wildlife,
secondary recreation, and agriculture. Additionally, Rockyhock Creek is a designated anadromous fish
spawning area for American shad, blueback herring, and alewife.
No waters classified as FIigh Quality Waters (IiQW), Water Supplies (WS-I or WS-In or
Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW) occur within 1.0 miles of project study area.
4

2.3.3 Water Quality
This section describes the water quality of the water resources within the project area. Potential
sediment loads and toxin concentrations of these waters from both point sources and nonpoint sources
are evaluated. Water quality assessments are made based on published resource information and existing
general watershed characteristics. These data provide insight into the value of water resources within the
project area to meet human needs and to provide habitat for aquatic organisms.
2.3.3.1 General Watershed Characteristics
The watershed of Rockyhock Creek is dominated by nearly equal proportions of forestland and
agricultural lands with the immediate -shoreline of the creek being -dominated by a forested -swamp ~ ---~
community. Residential and commercial development is also present in the project vicinity, but only to a
minor extent. Non-point source runoff from developed residentiaUcommercial areas and agricultural
practices is likely to be a source of water quality degradation to the water resources located in the project
vicinity. However, the low intensity of such development and the limited surface area of impervious
surfaces suggest that non-point source inputs from developed lands are not likely to be severe.. Inputs of
non-point source pollution from agricultural areas within the project area are likely to be more of a
contributing factor. The high proportion of surface area occupied by forestland, along with the gently
sloping topography and low erodibility of the soils, suggest that sedimentation of surface waters is
probably moderate to low for Rockyhock Creek.
2.3.3.2 Ambient Water Quality MonitoringBiologic Water Quality Monitoring
The DWQ has initiated a basinwide approach to water quality management for the 17 river basins of
North Carolina, which includes biologic, chemical, and physical data that are collected at fixed sampling
points. Based on these data, basinwide water quality is reassessed every five years for each river basin.
Rockyhock Creek is located in the Chowan River basin (HUC 03010203), sub-basin 030104. A water
quality monitoring site (020253632) is located downstream of the project area at the US 17 crossing of
the Chowan River. According to the Chowan River Basin Basinwide Assessment Report (DWQ, January
2000), the Chowan River received aGood-Fair bioclassification for site 020253632 in 2000.
2.3.3.3 Point Source Dischargers
Point source dischargers located throughout North Carolina are permitted through the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program administered by the DWQ. All dischargers are
required to register for a permit. No permitted dischargers are listed for water resources within the
project area.
2.3.4 Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Potential impacts to water resources, which often result from highway construction, occur primarily
because of increased sedimentation as a result of accelerated soil erosion from exposed areas.
Sedimentation and substrate disturbance occurring during construction can significantly reduce water
clarity and dissolved oxygen content, in addition to the direct clogging of stream channels. Effects are
usually most severe locally but may extend downstream for a considerable distance, with decreasing
intensity. However, impacts can be minimized through adequate planning which emphasizes the
5

reduction of disturbed surface area and by protecting exposed areas from the energy of falling and
flowing waters. Use of BMPs will also help to ensure that impacts to water quality are temporary and
localized rather than long-term and extensive.
Long term impacts to water resources resulting from the proposed project are expected to be minor, given
the site characteristics. Soil erosion from exposed areas should be slight due to the nearly level
topography of the site and the relatively slow flow rates of Rockyhock Creek.
Due to the cumulative effect of water quality degradation and varied usage of water resources
downstream, consideration should be taken to minimize sediment and toxic discharge into surface waters.
In order to minimize potential impacts to water resources in the project area; NCDOT's Best Management
- ~ -~•-~- ~ ---- Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters should be enforced during-the- construction phase-of the - ~- - - - --- -
proj ect. This would include:
1) elimination or reduction of direct and non-point discharge into the water bodies and
minimization of activities conducted in streams.
2) installation of temporary silt fences, dikes, and earth berms to control runoff during
construction.
3) placement of temporary ground cover or re-seeding of disturbed sites to reduce runoff
and decrease sediment loadings.
4) elimination of construction staging areas in floodplains or adjacent to streams to
minimize disturbed surface area in close proximity to surface waters and to reduce
the potential for accidental discharge of toxins into water bodies.
5) protection of existing streambank vegetation to the greatest extent. possible.
6) prevention of any uncured concrete coming into contact with the waters of Rockyhock Creek
3.0 BIOTIC RESOURCES
This section describes the biotic communities encountered in the project area, as well as the relationships
between fauna and flora within these ecosystems. The composition and distribution of biotic
communities throughout the project area are reflective of topography, soils, hydrology, and past and
present land uses. Descriptions of the terrestrial systems are presented in the context of plant community
classifications, defined by the dominant plant species observed. Representative animal species which are
likely to occur in these habitats (based on published range distributions) are also cited.
Scientific nomenclature and common names (when applicable) are provided for each animal and plant
species described. Subsequent references to the same organism refer to the common name only.
3.1 Terrestrial Communities
Three distinct terrestrial communities were identified within the project area: maintained/disturbed,
cypress-gum swamp, and mesic mixed hardwood forest. Figure 2 depicts these communities. Community
composition in the project vicinity is primarily reflective of the current and prior land uses of the area.
Each community type exhibits some degree of past or continued human disturbance, which has affected
their structure or species composition. It is likely that much of the original bald cypress (Taxodium
distichum) that would have dominated the cypress-gum community has been removed through logging.
Bald cypress has been replaced by swamp tupelo (Nyssa aquatica) as the dominant species. Community
boundaries within the project area tend to be well defined since forested communities usually border
6

open, disturbed areas.
The landscape immediately surrounding the project area is occupied to a large extent by agriculture and
forestland, interspersed with minor development along roadways. Remaining forests are frequently
found along slopes or bottomlands, or as buffers between fields or around residential areas.
Many faunal species are highly adaptive and may populate the entire range of terrestrial communities
discussed. Raccoon (Procyon lotor), Virginia opossum (Didelphis virginiana) and northern cardinal
(Cardinalis cardinalis) are examples of species, which are likely to occur in all of the habitats in the
project area. These species are adapted to forest/clearing boundary conditions and likely utilize
numerous .habitats to some extent for shelter, foraging, or movement corridors. Such species may not be
-- _ --_ .. listed-for-each community described. __.~__.. - .., ..--.. - :.....
Wildlife observed during the site visit includes: the Virginia opossum, ruby-throated hummingbird
(Archilocus colubris), tufted titmouse (Pares bicolor), Carolina chickadee (Pares carolinensis), northern
parula (Parula americana), black-and-white warbler (Mniotilta varia), yellow-throated warbler
(Dendroica dominica), Carolina wren (Thryothorus ludovicianus), song sparrow (Melospiza melodia),
summer tanager (Piranga rubra), northern cardinal (Cardinalis cardinalis), turkey vulture (Cathartes
aura), black vulture (Coragyps atratus), and red-shouldered hawk (Buteo lineatus).
3.1.1 Maintained/Disturbed
The Maintained/Disturbed community occupies ~25% of the project area and consists of areas heavily
impacted and maintained by human development activities. The project area to a large extent consists of
roadside areas including: the road shoulders and maintained right-of--way of existing SR 1222, utility
rights-of--way, and roadways. Significant soil disturbance and compaction, along with frequent mowing
and/or herbicide application, inhibit natural succession and keep this community in an early successional
state. As a result, the vegetation of this community is dominated by grasses and herbs with scattered
trees and shrubs.
Common plants of this community are fescue (Festuca sp.), crabgrass (Digitaria sp.), wild onion (Allium
canadense), and foxtail grass (Setaria sp.). Important associate species include goldenrod (Solidago
sp.), dandelion (Taraxacum officinale), clover (Trifolium spp.), plantain (Plantago sp.), blackberry
(Rebus sp.), henbit (Lamium spp.), Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), Queen Ann's lace
(Daucus carota), broomsedge (Andropogon virginicus), and aster (Aster sp.). Seedlings of various tree
species occur along road slopes, utility rights-of--way, and areas where mowing is less frequent. These
species include yellow poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), sweetgum (Liquidambar styrac~ua), and
winged sumac (Rhus copallina).
Wildlife found in this community is limited and consists primarily of wide-ranging, adaptable species
such as hispid cotton rat (Sigmodon hispidus}, white-footed mouse (Peromyscus leucopus), eastern
harvest mouse (Reithrodontomys humulis), and eastern cottontail rabbit (Sylvilagus jloridanus), which
are well suited to coexistence with human development. Nocturnal mammals common to suburban areas,
such as the raccoon and Virginia opossum, may travel periodically through the project area, and gray
squirrels (Sciurus carolinensis) may inhabit forested fringes. Common reptiles include the eastern fence
lizard (Sceloporus undulates) and eastern box turtle (Terrapene Caroline), and bird populations likely
include species such as northern cardinal, Carolina chickadee, American robin (Turdus migratorius),
mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), common grackle (Quiscalus quiscula), and European starling

(Sturnus vulgaris). Predators found in this community are the black racer (Coluber constrictor) and the
rat snake (Elaphe obsoleta).
3.1.2 Cypress-gum Swamp Forest
This community type comprises -~70% of the project area. This community occurs adjacent to SR 1222
and the banks of Rockyhock Creek, except where human development or disturbance has displaced it.
Dominant vegetation found in this community includes bald cypress, sweetgum, willow (Salix sp.), red
maple (Ater rubrum), swamp tupelo, black cherry. (Prunus serotina), and sweetbay (Magnolia
virginiana) in the overstory. The understory is comprised of Carolina ash (Fraxinus caroliniana), giant
- - - •- --cane (Arundinaria-•gigantea), false nettle- (Boehmeria cylindriea),- greenbrier (Smilax sp.); netted-•• ---- -~--- --
chainfern (Woodwardia areolata), and .poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans). Wax myrtle (Myrica
cerifera) is also prevalent along the edge between this community and the roadside shoulder.
Wildlife expected in this community includes gray squirrel, gray fox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus),
raccoon, muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus), Virginia opossum, barred owl (Strix varia), great blue heron
(Ardea herodias), pileated woodpecker (Dryocopus pileatus), yellow-bellied sapsucker (Sphyrapicus
varius), wood duck (Aix sponsa), and downy woodpecker (Picoides pubescens).
Amphibians common to this community include the southern two-toed amphiuma (Amphiuma means),
spring peeper (Hyla crucifer), southern leopard frog (Rana sphenocephala), and the green tree frog (Hyla
cinerea). Reptiles such as the northern water snake (Nerodia sipedon), eastern cottonmouth
(Agkistrodon piscivorous), and the common snapping turtle (Chelydra serpentina) may also be found.
An osprey (Pandion haliaetus), green-backed heron (Butorides striatus), great blue heron, anhinga
(Anhinga anhinga), fish crow (Corvus ossifragus), wood duck, mallard (Anas platyrhynchos), and
Canada goose (Branta canadensis) were observed near the project.
3.1.3 Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest
The mesic mixed hardwoods are located on the upland area to the southeast of Bridge 16 and comprises
^-5% of the plant communities the project study area. Canopy species found include yellow poplar
(Liriodendron tulipfera), white oak (Quercus alba), laurel oak (Quercus laurifolia), sweetgum
(Liquidambar styraciflua), and loblolly pine (Pinus taeda). Understory species include water oak
(Quercus nigra), laurel oak, sweetgum, loblolly pine, American holly (Ilex opaca), grapevine (Vitis sp.),
multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora), and privet (Ligustrum vulgare). Plants in the herbaceous layer include
fescue (Festuca sp.), ironweed (Vernonia altissima), poison ivy, netted chain fern (Woodwardia
areolata), columbine (Aquilegia canadensis), jack-in-the-pulpit (Arisaema triphyllum), and honeysuckle
(Lonicera sp.).
Considering the small size of this community and the close proximity of the cypress-gum swamp forest,
the wildlife found here would be similaz to the cypress-gum swamp.
3.2 Aquatic Communities
One aquatic community type, defined as a Coastal Plain Perennial Stream, will be impacted by the
8

proposed project. Rockyhock Creek is characterized by slow moving, tannin stained water. The creek is
accompanied in the project area by an extensive cypress-gum swamp community.
Coastal plain perennial streams are utilized by a variety of aquatic/semiaquatic insects such as dragonfly
(Odonata) and stonefly (Plecoptera) and by.certain species. of crayfish (Cambaridae), and freshwater
mussels. This stream system also supports a diverse f shery including bluegill (Lepomis marcrochirus),
yellow bullhead catfish (Ictalalurus natalis), alewife (Alosa aestivalis), blueback herring (Alosa
aestivalis), bowfin, (Amia Galva), redfm pickerel (Esox americana), pirate perch (Aphredoderus sayanus)
mosquito fish (Gambusia holbrooki), and eastern mud minnow (Umbra pygmaea).
A yellow belly slider (Trachemys scripta scripta) was observed during the site visit.
As stated earlier, Rockyhock Creek is known to be a spawning and nursery area for American shad,
alewife, and blueback herring...
3.3 Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Construction of the proposed project will have various impacts on the biotic resources described. This
section quantifies and qualifies potential impacts to the natural communities within the project area in
terms of the area impacted and the organisms affected. Temporary versus permanent impacts are
considered as well, along with recommendations to minimize or eliminate impacts.
3.3.1 Impacts to Terrestrial Communities
Impacts to terrestrial communities will result from project construction due to the clearing and paving of
portions of the project area, and thus the loss of community area. Table 3 summaries potential
quantitative losses to these biotic communities, resulting from project construction. Calculated
quantitative impacts to terrestrial communities reflect the relative abundance of each community present
in the study area. Estimated impacts are derived based on the project length of approximately 1,200 feet
and the right-of--way width through the project. However, project construction often does not require
the entire right-of--way and certain portions of the project area are already paved; therefore, actual
impacts maybe somewhat less.
Table 3. Estimated area impacts to biotic communities.
Alternative 1 replace bridge in place
Community with traffic detoured on existing
roads.
Maintained roadside 0_=i~
Cypress-gum swamp forest 1.0-1
Total 1.~
Note: Values cited are in acres
Total impacts indicated in Table 3 are estimates based on the estimated widths of the existing roadway
cross section and the existing right-of--way. Actual impacts should be less once a final design for the
stabilization of SR 1222 north of bridge No. 16 is complete.
The projected loss of terrestrial habitat resulting from project construction will have minimal impact on
9

populations of native flora and fauna.. The relatively small scale of the project as a bridge replacement
with minor roadway stabilization will result in a minimum of total habitat loss when the final design is
complete. The impacted forest communities have considerable value as wildlife habitat. However, the
displacement of native flora and fauna away from the project area should be minor.
Animals temporarily displaced by construction activities should repopulate areas suitable for the species
following project completion. As a result, it is unlikely that existing species will be displaced
significantly from the project area following construction. However, to minimize the temporary effects
of project construction, all cleared areas along the roadways should be revegetated soon after project
completion to minimize the loss of wildlife habitat.
Because the project consists of replacing-a bridge-and stabilizing-the-roadway on-existing location, ~• ~ - -
fragmentation of natural habitats and disruption of normal wildlife movement should not be a serious
concern. The existing roadway already partially disrupts the natural movements of wildlife in habitat
corridors, such that the proposed prof ect is not expected to create unusual environmental conditions.
Direct effects on biotic communities should be minimal. Additionally, secondary development impacts
resulting from prof ect construction are not expected. The project will not open new areas to development
and there will be no upgrade to the level of service currently provided by SR 1222.
3.3.2 Impacts to Aquatic Communities
Potential impacts to aquatic communities downstream of the project area primarily consist of increased
sedimentation of the stream channel and toxic inputs from stormwater runoff. Increased sedimentation
during construction activities and road surface runoff, after construction, are widely recognized as factors
that can contribute to the cumulative degradation of water quality. Aquatic organisms are generally
highly sensitive to changes in water quality. Effects are generally most severe at the point of stream
crossings, but can extend downstream for a considerable distance, if not controlled.
If precautionary measures are not taken, excessive soil erosion from construction sites may result in the
following impacts to surface water resources:
1)- Increased turbidity and sedimentation.
2) Reduced light penetration due to reduced water clarity.
3) Reduced concentrations of dissolved oxygen.
4) Increased nutrient loading.
Sedimentation in rivers and streams reduces water clarity and light penetration, affecting the
photosynthetic ability and growth of aquatic vegetation. Suspended particles may also impact benthic
filter feeders inhabiting downstream areas by clogging their filtration apparatus or by covering them with
excessive sediment. Sedimentation affects the concentration of dissolved oxygen in the water column by
raising water temperature. Warmer water contains less oxygen and results in a reduction in aquatic life
dependent on high oxygen concentrations. Moreover, increased nutrient loading can result in. the
accelerated growth of certain types of algae at the expense of other aquatic organisms. The loss of
aquatic plants and animals resulting from these processes may ultimately affect terrestrial fauna, which
feed upon these resources.
In addition, the removal of streamside vegetation increases the exposure of the water's surface to direct
sunlight, which results in locally elevated water temperatures and reduced concentrations of dissolved
10

oxygen. The removal or burial of these streambank plants also decreases the food and shelter resources
available to aquatic organisms, and disturbance of streambank vegetation enhances the likelihood of
erosion and sedimentation. Revegetation of streamside zones following construction stabilizes the soil
and shades the water surface, thus mitigating these processes.
Toxic substances from roadways (e.g. oil, gas, etc.) may enter surface waters through stormwater runoff
from impervious surfaces. Such chemical substances may result in the direct mortality of aquatic species
inhabiting the water resources located in the project area.
Construction of the proposed project will require work to be conducted within Rockyhock Creek.
However, the proposed project should have only minor impacts on downstream aquatic communities,
- - ----• --assumin recaution measures are-taken: Local erosion from construction-•activities- rna be hi - ----- -
g p ary y gh---
during construction, but appropriate use of BMPs should prevent most sediment from reaching surface
waters. Erosion rates should diminish rapidly following project completion if exposed soils are
revegetated and streambanks are stabilized. 1Vlinimizing the area of streambank disturbance will greatly
aid in limiting erosion from the project area and protecting aquatic communities. Following project
completion, road shoulders should aid in absorbing toxic runoff from roadways. Other considerations to
protect stream communities include:
1) consideration of bioengineering. techniques for streambank protection/stabilization.
2) using native vegetation to stabilize streambanks.
3) ;nim;~;ng/eliminating the use of fertilizers adjacent to streams.
4) properly installing and maintaining all erosion control measures
4.0 JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS
This section provides inventories and impact analyses pertinent to two significant regulatory issues:
Waters of the United States and rare and protected species. These issues retain particular significance
because of federal and state mandates, which regulate their protection. This section deals specifically
with the impact. analyses required to satisfy regulatory authority prior to project construction.
4.1 Waters of the United States
Surface waters and wetlands fall under the broad category of "Waters of the United States," as defined in
Section 33 of the Code of Federal Register (CFR) Part 328.3. Any action that proposes to dredge or place
fill material into surface waters or wetlands falls under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (LTSACE) under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344). Surface waters include
all standing or flowing waters which have commercial or recreational value to the public. Wetlands are
identified based on the .presence of hydric soils, hydrophytic vegetation, and saturated or flooded
conditions during all or part of the growing season.
4.1.1 Characteristics of Wetlands and Surface Waters
Potential wetland communities were 'delineated using the criteria specified in the 1987 "Corps of
Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual". Criteria to delineate jurisdictional wetlands include:
11

1) presence of hydric soils,
2) presence of hydrophytic vegetation, and
3) evidence of prescribed hydrologic characteristics during the growing season
All of these features must be present for an area to be considered a wetland.
One jurisdictional riverine wetland occurs in the project area. This wetland is part of the cypress-gum
swamp community described in section 3.1.2. The area is frequently flooded and is dominated by
hydrophitic vegetation. Soil profiles in the Dorovan muck soil consists of 0-3.0 inches of lOYR 2/2
brown muck underlain by >20.0 inches of l OYR 2/1 black muck. These soils are very poorly drained and
very acidic.
The classification scheme developed by Cowardin et al. (1979) provides a uniform approach in
classifying wetland and open water systems. Based on this system, the wetlands in the project area
would be classified as PFO6F. This classification is interpreted as palustrine (P), forested (FO),
deciduous vegetation (6}, with asemi-permanently flooded water regime (F).
4.1.2 Permits and Consultations
Impacts to jurisdictional surface waters and wetlands are anticipated from the proposed project. As a
result, construction activities will require permits and certifications from various regulatory agencies in
charge of protecting the water quality of public water resources. Surface water systems and wetlands
receive similar treatment and consideration with respect to most regulatory permits. These permits are
authorized under the Clean Water Act and under separate state laws regarding significant water
resources.
4.1.2.1 Section 404 Permits
Impacts to jurisdictional wetlands and/or surface waters may occur from project construction. In
accordance with provisions of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344), a permit will be
required from the USACE for the discharge of dredged or fill material into "Waters of the United States."
The proposed project will require impacts to Rockyhock Creek, and the adjacent wetlands.
Given the magnitude of potential impacts, a Nationwide Permit 33 CFR 330.5 (a) 23 is likely to be
applicable at the stream/wetland crossings found in the project study area. However, fmal decisions
concerning applicable permits for the proposed project rest with the USACE.
On October 15, 2004, the USACE issued a Jurisdictional Determination (Action ID 200510008) for this
protect confirming the location of regulated wetlands and surface waters.
Rockyhock Creek is a designated anadromous fish spawning area. An in-water work moratorium exists
for this stream from February 15 to June, 30 of any given year.
4.1.2.2 Water Quality Certification
This project will also require a 401 Water Quality General Certification from the DWQ prior to the
issuance of a Section 404 Nationwide Permit. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act requires that the state
12

issue or deny water quality certification for any federally permitted or licensed activity that may result in
a discharge into Waters of the United States. Section 401 Certification allows surface waters to be
temporarily impacted for the duration of the construction or other land manipulation. Issuance of a 401
Certification from the DWQ is a prerequisite to the issuance of a Section 404 Permit.
4.1.2.3 Coastal Area Management Act Permitting
This project will also require a Major Development Permit from the North Carolina Division of Coastal
Management (DCM). The North Carolina Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) requires that
development activities impacting Areas of Environmental Concern (AEC) in one of the twenty
designated coastal counties be reviewed and authorized by the DCM.
Rockyhock Creek within the project area is a designated AEC. Therefore, the project will require
authorization in the form of a CAMA Major Development Permit. Issuance of the CAMA Major
Development Permit is also a prerequisite to the issuance of a Section 404 Permit.
4.1.3 Mitigation of Wetland Impacts
The USACE has adopted through the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) a wetland mitigation
policy which embraces the concept of "no net loss of wetlands" and sequencing. The purpose of this
policy is to restore and maintain the chemical, biological and physical integrity of Waters of the United
States, specifically wetlands. Mitigation of wetland impacts has been defined by the CEQ to include:
avoiding impacts, minimizing impacts, rectifying impacts, reducing impacts over time and compensating
for impacts (40 CFR 1508.20). Each of these three aspects (avoidance, minimization and compensatory
mitigation) must be considered sequentially.
4.1.3.1 Avoidance
Avoidance mitigation examines all appropriate and practicable possibilities of averting impacts to Waters
of the United States. According to a 1990 Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the USACE, in determining "appropriate and practicable"
measures to offset unavoidable impacts, such measures should be appropriate to the scope and degree of
those impacts and practicable in terms of cost, existing technology and logistics in light of overall project
purposes.
Due to the proximity of the project to a large continuum of cypress-gum swamp, it is unlikely that
wetlands can be totally avoided. Additionally, the replacement of bridge No. 16 will require work in
Rockyhock Creek.
4.1.3.2 Minimization
Minimization includes the examination of appropriate and practicable steps to reduce the adverse impacts
to Waters of the United States. Implementation of these steps will be required through project
modifications and permit conditions. Minimization typically focuses on decreasing the footprint of the
proposed project through the reduction to median widths, ROW widths, fill slopes and/or road shoulder
widths.
13

Unavoidable impacts to Waters of the United States should be minimized by modifications in design such
as:
1) perpendiculaz stream crossings.
2) reduction of fill slopes
3) elimination of staging areas in lowland sites.
4) reduced clearing and grubbing activity in or near floodplain systems.
4.1.3.3 Compensatory Mitigation
-Compensatory mitigation is not: normally considered -until anticipated impacts to Waters of -the United
States have been avoided and minimized to the maximum extent possible. It is recognized that "no net
loss of wetlands" functions and values may not be achieved in each and every permit action. Appropriate
and practicable compensatory mitigation is required for unavoidable adverse impacts which remain after
all appropriate and practicable minimization has been required. Compensatory actions often include
restoration, creation and enhancement of Waters of the United States. Such actions should be undertaken
in areas adjacent to or contiguous to the discharge site.
In accordance with the "Memorandum of Agreement Among the North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources, the North Carolina Department of Transportation, and the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District" (MOA}, July 22, 2003, the North Carolina Department
of Environment and Natural Resources Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP), will be requested to
provide off-site mitigation, if necessary, to satisfy the federal CWA compensatory mitigation
requirements for this project. Compensatory mitigation may be required for this project, although final
determination rests with the USACE.
4.2 Rare and Protected Species
Threatened or endangered species are species whose populations-are in decline and which face probable
extinction in the neaz future without strict conservation management. Federal law under the Endangered
Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended, protects. plant and animal species which have been classified as
Endangered (E), Threatened (T), Proposed Endangered (PE), or Proposed Threatened (PT). Provisions
of Section 7 and Section 9 of the ESA require that any action, which is likely to adversely affect such
federally classified species, be subject to review by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Other
potentially endangered species may receive additional protection under separate state laws. In North
Carolina, protection of endangered species falls under the N.C. State Endangered Species Act and the
N.C. Plant Protection and Conservation Act of 1979, administered and enforced by the N.C. Wildlife
Resources Commission (WRC) and the N.C. Department of Agriculture, respectively.
4.2.1 Federally-Protected Species
As of January 29, 2003, the USFWS lists the following federally-protected species for Chowan County
(Table 5). A brief description of the characteristics and habitat requirements of each species follows
Table 5, along with a conclusion regarding potential project impacts.
14

Table 5. Federally Protected Species for Chowan County
Scientific Name Common Name Status
Haliaeetus leucocephalus bald eagle Threatened
Haliaeetus leucocephalus (bald eagle) Threatened
Animal Family: Accipitridae
Date Listed: 3/11/67
Adult bald eagles can be identified by their large white head and short white tail. The body
plumage is dark-brown to chocolate-brown in color. In flight bald eagles can be identified by
their flat wing soar.
Eagle nests are found in close proximity to water (within a half mile) with a clear flight path to
the water, in the largest living tree in an area, and having an open view of the surrounding land.
Human disturbance can cause. an eagle to abandon otherwise suitable habitat. The breeding
season for the bald eagle begins in December or January. Fish are the major food source for bald
eagles. Other sources include coots, herons, and wounded ducks. Food maybe live or carrion.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect
The project area is approximately 4 miles upstream of the confluence of Rockyhock Creek and
the Chowan River and suitable nesting and foraging habitat is available. This habitat consisted
of cypress-gum swamp adjacent to Bennett's Millpond. A walking visual search for the species
was conducted to ensure no individuals existed within the immediate vicinity of the proposed
bridge replacement. Also a canoe survey of Bennet's Millpond was conducted to determine if
there were nests nearby. In addition, each road that parallels Rockyhock Creek was driven to
survey the trees along the creek for nests. During the survey, no bald eagles or their nests were
observed. In addition, -the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program database of rare and
protected species was reviewed and revealed no records of bald eagles in the project area.
Therefore, construction of the proposed project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect
this species.
It should also be noted that the bald eagle is currently proposed to be delisted from the list of Endangered
and Threatened Species.
On July 27, 2004, the USFWS concurred with the biological conclusion for bald eagle for this project.
4.2.2 Federal Species of Concern
One Federal Species of Concern (FSC) is listed by the USFWS for Chowan County as of January 29,
2003 (Table 6). FSC species are not afforded federal protection under the Endangered Species Act and
are not subject to any of its provisions, including Section 7, until they are formally proposed or listed as
Threatened or Endangered. However, the status of these species is subject to change, and so should be
included for consideration.
In addition, organisms which are listed as Endangered (E), Threatened (T), or Special Concern (SC) by
the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program list of Rare Plant and Animal Species are afforded limited
15

state protection under the NC State Endangered Species Act and the NC Plant Protection and
Conservation Act of 1979. Species listed under state laws may or may not be federally protected.
Species with state designations of Candidate (C), Signif candy Rare (SR), and Watch List (W) are not
protected under state laws; however, evidence suggests that populations of these species are also in
decline.
Table 6 lists Federal Species of Concern, the state status of these species (if afforded state protection),
and the potential for suitable habitat in the project area for each species. This species list is provided for
informational purposes as the protection status of these species maybe upgraded in the future.
Table 6. Federal Species of Concern for Chowan County.
Scientific Name ~ ~ Common Name - ~ NC Status Habitat ~~
Corynorhinus (=Plecotus) rafinesquii Rafinesque's big-eared bat SC/PT Yes
"T"----A Threatened species is one which is likely to become endangered species within the foreseeable future
throughout all or a significant portion of its range.
"SC"--A Special Concern species is one which requires monitoring but may be taken or collected and sold under regulations
adopted under the provisions of Article 25 of Chapter 113 of the General Statutes (animals) and the Plant Protection and
Conservation Act (plants). Only propagated material may be sold of Special Concern plants that are also listed as
Threatened or Endangered.
" /P='--denotes a species which has been formally proposed for listing as Endangered, Threatened, or Special Concern, but has not
yet completed the listing process.
Surveys for this species were not conducted during the site visit, nor was this species observed. A review
of the NCNHP database of rare species and unique habitats revealed no record of any federal Species of
Concern within the project area. Based on available information, no impacts to state listed species are
anticipated.
16

5.0 REFERENCES
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual,"
' Technical report Y-87-1, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station,
Vicksburg, Miss.
Fish, Frederick F. 1968. A Catalog of the Inland Fishing Waters in North Carolina. NCWRC,
Raleigh.
LeGrand, Jr., H.E. 1993. "Natural Heritage Program List of the Rare Animal Species of North
......._. _ _ Carolina";. North_Carolina Natural Heritage Program: -- . - __. ...._. ... .. . . . .. ... ..._ _.. _. ._.. _.._
Martof, B.S., W.M. Palmer, J.R. Bailey and J.R. Harrison III. 1980. Amphibians and Reptiles of
the Carolinas and Vir 'nia. Chapel Hill, The University of North Carolina Press.
Menhenick, E.F. 1991. The Freshwater Fishes of North Carolina. NCWRC, Raleigh.
NCDEHNR-DEM. 1988. Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network (BMAN) Water Quality
Review 1983-1986.
NCDEHNR-DEM. 1991. Biological Assessment of Water Quality in North Carolina Streams:
Benthic Macroinvertebrate Data Base and Long Term Changes in Water Quality, 1983-
1990.
NCDEHNR-DEM. 1993. "Classifications and Water Quality Standards for North Carolina
River Basins." Raleigh, Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources.
NCWRC. 1990. - "Endangered Wildlife of North Carolina". Raleigh, North Carolina Wildlife
Resources Commission.
Plant Conservation Program. 1991. "List of North Carolina's Endangered, Threatened and
Candidate Plant Species". Raleigh, North Carolina Department of Agriculture.
Potter, E.F., J.F. Parnell and R.P. Teulings. 1980. Birds of the Carolinas. Chapel Hill, The
University of North Carolina Press.
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.
Schafale, M.P. and A.S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of The Natural Communities of North
Carolina. Third Approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of
Parks and Recreation, NCDEHNR.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. North Carolina Agriculture
Experiment Station.
17

~ f
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1979. Classifications of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of
the United States., U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington D.C.
Weakley, A.S. 1993. "Natural Heritage Program List of the Rare Plant Species of North
Carolina". North Carolina Natural Heritage Program.
Webster, W.D., J.F. Parnell and W.C. Biggs. 1985. Mammals of the Carolinas, Virginia and
Maryland. Chapel Hill, The University of North Carolina Press.
18

~ 1224 •-~•~
`
~
1. 1217 ~'•~
Evans ~

123 ' 4 '
~
, ~ ~ 1217
Q
1 6 1223 ~'' ~
` 1315 _
.
1214 ~ 1216 .- ~'` Mavat~
_ Mavaton .
.
1215 9 `•
, S ~
~:
1
• 6 ; .~ ~ 1215 1213 1222 ~ 1

!
2 • Rockyhoc4{YCh.
3 ~ y
N
<~
1216 N ~ X ; '
''

J \
~~ '~ _
,
.~~
1213 ~
1214 O . 1 Bridge NO. 16 15
.•
BURNETT
1211 ~ 1212
MILL
POND
. 5 1 • 5
6 .
2 ~
,5 1210 l ~
~ '6
12 O 1207
^
1
4 ~_• .• _
i
1 .
11 -
1222 ~ •~'•, 1316
,,,~'~ ~` Valhalla ,
4
~' •.`
., `S
..
1271
~
. ,.~~~~.
~ 1200 -~
~ 1207 1206 '
'~
.` ~•
.` ,•
.` .'
.`
•` _
.,
~2 '~ ~ ~
'~ ~ Macedonia
•~. 1207 ~.
~ 1209
~ ~
i ~ ' ~ ,~. a
~ `'1206 ~j ' 6
i
12 5 ~ w 42 120
i
i •~
i
~ o
i •'`., ~ Q
i
5
1316
~~
pP

~t ~~._.._..,••,.
1317 Barber 4
~ ~•~`~.~ 1319
~ ~ 9 ~ ~
1318 i ~
'~ i ~
~~O~Q.'' __ -
-..,y . . 6 1316 ~'' ----•• ; •--..
' Hancock
'•~
o ,' E ENTON
' ;' POP. 5,354
.= 32 ~:
r
f - ?f
. 1 ~ -~ ,~
.~ ;:
~;
~F ~ North Carolina
~. Department of Transportation ~~,
~ ~ Division of Highways
' ~ Planning ~' Environmental Branch
Chowan County
Replace Bridge No. 16 on SR 1222
Over Rocky Hock Creek
B-3636
SCALE: 1 in = 1 mi Figure 1

If you have any questions or need additional information please contact Chris Underwood at
(919) 715 - 1451.
Sincerely,
.~~
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.,
Environmental Management Director
Project Development & Environmental Analysis Branch
cc: w/attachment
John Hennessy, NCDWQ
Ms. Nicole Thomson, NCDWQ
Mr. Bill Biddlecome, USACE
Ms. Cathy Brittingham, NCDCM
Ms. Lynn Mathis, NCDCM
Ms. Linda Fitzpatrick, NCDOT Natural Environment Unit
Mr. Majed Alghandour, P. E., NCDOT Project Management/Scheduling Unit
Mr. Todd Jones, NCDOT External Audit Branch
File-B-3636

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
June23, 2004
Phillip Harris, III
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Project Development and Environmental Analysis
1598 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1598
Dear Mr. Harris:
This letter is in response to your letter of June 15, 2004 which provided the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service) with the biological determination of the North Carolina Department of
Transportation (NCDOT) that the replacement of Bridge No. 16 on SR 1222 over Rocky Hock
Creek in Chowan County .(TIP No. B-3636) may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the
federally threatened bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus). These comments are provided in
accordance with section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C.
1531-1543).
According to the information you submitted, a walking survey was conducted at the project site
on April 14, 2004. -The information does not provide the extent of the survey. At a minimum,
surveys for bald eagles should extend out in a one-half mile radius within suitable habitat. From
a June 23, 2004 phone conversation between Gary Jordan (Service biologist) and Chris
Underwood (NCDOT biologist), it was determined that the survey may not have extended out far
enough. The Service cannot concur with your biological determination for the bald eagle at this
time. We recommend that the NCDOT determine what the survey boundary was, and if needed,
conduct an additional survey. The .Service will reconsider our response at that time.
The Service appreciates the opportunity to review this project.. If you have any questions
regarding our response, please contact Mr. Gary Jordan at [phone] (Ext. 32).
Sincerely,
Garland B. Pardue, Ph.D.
Ecological Services Supervisor
cc: Bill Biddlecome, USACE, Washington, NC
Nicole Thomson, NCDWQ, Raleigh, NC
Travis Wilson, NCWRC, Creedmoor, NC
Chris Militscher, USEPA, Raleigh, NC

United .States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
July 27, 2004
Phil Harris, III
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Project Development and Environmental Analysis
1598 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1598
Dear Mr. Harris:
This letter is in response to Greg Thorpe's letter of July 23, 2004 which provided the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service) with the biological determination of the North Carolina Department of
Transportation that the replacement of Bridge No. 16 on SR 1222 over Rocky Hock Creek in
Chowan County (TIP No. B-3636) may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the federally
threatened bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus). These comments are provided in accordance with
section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 153.1-1543).
According to the information you submitted, a survey was conducted at the project site on July 14,
2004. The survey extended to approximately a 3/4 mile radius. No eagles or eagle nests were
observed. Based on the information provided and other information available, the Service concurs
with your determination that the project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the bald
eagle. We believe that the requirements of section 7(a)(2) of the ESA have been satisfied. We
remind you that obligations under section 7 consultation must be reconsidered if: (1) new
information reveals impacts of this identified action that may affect listed species or critical habitat in
a manner not previously considered in this review; (2) this action is subsequently modified in a
manner that was not considered in this review; or (3) a new species is listed or critical habitat
determined that maybe affected by this identified action.
The Service appreciates the opportunity to review this project. If you have any questions regarding
our response, please contact Mr. Gary Jordan at [phone] (Ext. 32).
Sincerely,
/V
John Ellis
Acting Ecological Services Supervisor
cc: Bill Biddlecome, USACE, Washington, NC
Nicole Thomson, NCDWQ, Raleigh, NC
Travis Wilson, NCWRC, Creedmoor, NC
Chris Militscher, USEPA; Raleigh, NC

J
,:
d ~~~
~ a.~
~ .~ -.
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-201 DAVID MCCOY
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
May 4, 2000
MEMORANDUM TO: File
FROM: John L. Williams
Project Planning Engineer
SUBJECT: SR 1222, Chowan County, Replacement of Bridge No. 16 over
Rocky Hock Creek, State Project 8.2030401, F. A. Project BRZ-
1222(5), B-3636
A scoping meeting for the subject bridge was held in the Transportation Building
on March 7, 2000.
The following people were in attendance:
Jim Speer Roadway Design Lanette Ingham Programming & TIP
April Alperin SHPO Bill Zerman Hydraulics
Lei Lani Paugh PD&EA Ramesh Fofaria Structure Design
Barbara Benifield
GENERAL PROJECT INFORMATION
Current Schedule:
Plan-Design, Document Due: Oct 2001
Right of Way: February 2002
Construction: February 2003
Bridge No. 16
[Built in 1945] [66 feet long] [25-foot wide deck] [24 feet clear deck width]
[Crown of Bridge to bed of river/stream: [10 feet] [Posted 17 tons for SV and 22 tons for
TTST's] [Sufficiency Rating 35.2] [6 years estimated remaining useful life]
Traffic Information
SR 1222 is a Rural Local Route with no posted speed limit in the vicinity.
Land use is primarily agricultural, with scattered residential and undeveloped.
Current ADT: 2300 VPD, Projected 2025 ADT: 3800 VPD, 3% Duals, 1% TTST
Bus Information:
There are 4 bus crossings per day. Detouring offsite is not feasible for the county school
system.

f~
Cross Section of New Bridge According to Bridge Policy: Pending Ne~v Policy
Accidents: One accident has occurred in the past three years. It was unrelated to either
the bridge or the approach alignment.
SLOPING COMMENTS
April Alperin of SHPO indicated that no architectural or archaeological surveys are
required.
Location Surveys indicated that the only utility in the area is an aerial power line.
Marshall Clawson of Hydraulics wrote in recommendations for the bridge to be
replaced with an 80 foot long bridge at the same location and roadway grade as the
existing bridge. Deck drainage will not be discharged directly into Rockyhock Creek
which is a designated anadramous fish spawning creek. If an onsite detour is considered,
it would require a 70 foot bridge located to the south. It is recommended that the grade of
the detour be the same as that of the existing bridge.
David Cox of the Wildlife Resource Commission indicated no special concerns for this
project.
Emergency Services for Chowan County is opposed to a road closure option as it
would lengthen their response time. They commented that there are several rest homes
on the lake accessed by the bridge.
ALTERNATE FOR EVALUATION
Alternate 1: Replace bridge on existing location. Traffic would be detoured offsite
during construction.
Alternate 2: Replace bridge on existing location. Traffic would be maintained on a
temporary onsite detour during construction.
Roadway Engineer: Jim Speer
Date of Estimate & Sketch: Feb 2001

h w d"
~.e V' .,r its' ~ ?~'i ~ C ~ ~ ?, a ~ r ~}~
.. yS
~it ~_ 'x,. r r ~, _~: t". ;K f Ja ~ l.{ ~y ~P~~ ~'k`.$ ~4t-~'~ ~.~~Zs7 "; r; r ~'. MY~ + ate ( r ?~°Y~J _
=t. ~~ F'k t f:f'!a 1 y+r 7 . .pf F +PkyJ: a..'~ ..~. ~ i~.r .a > 'Z^ -
r+' ^ rMa `: f .+~~ ~ pA•` f ~'~s r obi; ~Ytir f ~ ~1 a{s .,;,fib ~> t r; ~~r a~
i t, .,
2 Y
~ ~' !. Air- ~„ ,,. .. .. _......- , .... ._ ... _._..,y.. 7? t;.
} :. } ~ ~ 7 Y y~
~r•~ ^'~ aS T.
y.`.
i 4 p ~~Y
~''`''.~ "(- i, _ ~ j ~ • a ~z f "F~'[y~ly h~ .V~ ~ ~ 1 S,. .~ 1 t ~~.: ~Y I
1. ~y~ r g Y 1 t
y ~3 S rs~ n r .:~y f i ,y i rY i~ :~
~ ~.: it ~i -..47~?j?'Ez (i`~. K ~~'t;. .~ij! ~i ~ 3) ; ~ 'c~§!~ ~•
r~n+a= ~ 5r r T ~ L~ ~ 1 ..
a ~ d. i
i ~- - ~..i ~ ..
.. ~R:.
f
~<~ ,~ g~7~~-t,~i ~-a~~rf '~~ ~ ~,a f~,'~ ~yfi, ,~ ~ f ~ ' , n; ~k _ o~d~' ~' '.I _
F ~ .~+'ri~ x~~, ' ~r ~ +~3 -~#
a
r 1 ,n~~: d ~. 3 .~~~ ~ - ~ ~ r~:_ , ~~~. ch~
.vk~ 4 $
rk~:' y3 ~ 'it ~~ , { Pj'ap7K~' f ^~. iy, ,. !. '' ~,
~~s ~~~~d ~ ~+i ..,~' M ~ s:.,y ~a ~,,c ~" t ~ ~~ ~ r:." ,y~.de~' k v~ ~ i
~~V r f Yr~ 5 Y. .g .~C'k .~ ~ ' g},~ % iV y h r
,~~~j:Cn ~ ~ ~'74+i f .kz 4 7 ._ -s 7- ~, ?' flflfl t
ar_ d 4 4 fi ti ,~ ~~ °` ~ _ S
r "~ z~ LL i
~+s ~ f
t Y'f : i5,y S 3 41f { ~, ~ t, i
L'xrz ~ '[~' a ~. "'~~h~S,2 by.~.r s 4~r'~py",~", t ik ~ y, l
fit' ~ ~ 4'af"{~'P.~{y~( ~ t~L~G;'~'Sk ~.. sz•Gf, dF •` ' I t ;'M' 'fit r, SaY~'.i WY}4'nr ~~.,
~~a j~t.+my~rnny.~, ~'~~r ~ ' f f a ai ,ft
,`m~~~ ..
~ ~i ~ ;Fy~q, !.'. d . 'ill.
+,v ter ~ ,~~$i:" r~,."~':~. "~ ~ "<t Y n ~t._' xy t ~ L ~ t 7,.' !. ~e
* i~iJ ` s ~~ ~`.~,
~ ft ~
',~L t ~G Xt :sAd hr, ,~ ~ .,~ of j~~~'iat~ ~~
' ;
., ^
t gam- ~~ ~ }~ ~ ~~ - ~ c ~ :.~~~_~
,
f~ p. y 'ry~4 a i j + -
s
.ln. M !"W ,P
} ,~ 'ten ,. _ ~' d kt tid'Y - ~ r
' .. K~ ~ kv {~t ~ t ~ ~ ~f. : y~ > x : w ~ 6q
l~+:-`i ~'~ 7 y kr: '~~t'' t III
"' y` r ~rT: i 1; ;'~ ~ r y
-`~ ~ ~
y. "ty ` ~ rA` ~ ~ p x~ x ~~'
E ~`'~ ~ ~~r ~ ~
# A ~ ~ d ~`.
a~ - ~s5'S'' ~ '. t i. o - :.
~A , ; ~ ~ 'ftss i
~+
.
ti
333... -f.i ~
1 ~ ~ ~J 7 ` y l
t
:
~ fit':. t
r
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ i ,~ weir` . _ A -
i >ti
.,
i# ++
V +
I' Y~ „~, f .. a,v e1
~ y ~ ~ a;~ 3 ~ ~•,' -
i ,~ ~ j fr ~yt, .~.,
u i~. .. ..
>•
~~i 9 ' .
, 4
J ~ :.
'i ,
~..
Y
f F Q ~ ~ r ~. I h .S - CSC ISt «.
~~ ~ t
k
i't~ , ~' rR ~ a t ~ 'I ~ ¢ C$ P
L ~ ' ~ Gi T 5 '• ~ r ~ W.~
i
i
' 1
L F }
' ~ a
4.
.E ~ ~Y Sin" 'S~b '~ e ~i~`i, s ..
J
9 ~
Fc -~ '.-TAM S.3p .-- s -
k ~ a u ~ j
e ~f 3 i i~ B~'#~`
~`l ~ i'.~
.r aj~y ~' ~6~ .d ~S ~ ~;;a ~ +''~~y ~ ~ ¢. ~ ~ ~r i~ ~ r~ f' ~ it=r) ~..
t: i es ~R f~J"r Ar,: a ~1 .,'_ + ~:~. + a n ~.,~ b~tf
t,° '#. ~ ~ ~ f' ~ ~ ~~ x~ .
1.~s<7ry. ~ , t y ~. ~ r„ a R. ~ ~ zFa ~ ~y n! ,~ ~ >{ r sir r. ~ ~,, r
aids ,_ ° '~' ~ r.k, r ~..3.~` ~` !i
f x ~ .
X3`4 ~.r 'sR'L{ - ,,~~4'4 ,~' ~AJpPro, '~{.~ j~ '~ 4'~ ~* ~~j r , ~` ~ y~~:"^
~f ~ 'y -
tw ~r:.
~~ y~~d~` -fF :fi,~d' f ~ ~#,i4~i' "7 3~,}JT^- t:~ ~r '..
Y i a F .. '
:.. 1
f
1~ ~ -
aux. '~ ~ -.. .- _.._ - .. ;4 a~{kd. -c`ir : :,y+ r y f_
~a. r . `ry i' ~ 9~xwa ' x r"'
~:, 7jt ` _
~.:,' ,~~~ ''~ ~ ~;~. ,~9i ~ ~ , i~ t .~~:~ ~':

~ ~
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Determination Manual)
Project /Site: B-3636 Date: 4/15/04
Applicant /Owner: NCDOT County: Chowan
Investigator: Chris Underwood. Lindsey Riddick, Chris Manley State: NC

Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes X No Community ID:
Is the-site significantly disturbed (Atypical situation)? Yes No X Transect ID:
Is the area a potential problem area? Yes No X Plot ID:
(explain on reverse if needed)
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Acer rubrum. C,S FAC 9. Ulmus americana C FACW
2. Liquidambar styraciflua C.S FAC+ 10. Ilex opaca S FAC-
3. Taxodium ascenders C,S OBL 11. Onoclea sensibilis H FACW
4. Decumaria Barbara V FACW 12. Osmunda re~alis H OBL
5. Berchemia scandens V FACW 13. Fraxinus americana C FACU
6. Smilax laurifolia V FACW+ 14. Virburnum dentatum S FAC
7. Arundinaria gi~antea G FACW 15. Impatiens capensis H FACW
8. Rosa palustris V OBL 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC excluding FAC-). ~ 87%
Remarks: Wetland Vegetation Present Based Upon Greater than 50% of the Plant Species are not
Classified as FAC-OBL in the National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands. Sample plot was taken...in
Wetland area: Cypress-gum
HYDROLOGY
_ Recorded Data (Describe In Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs Primary Indicators:
Other x Inundated
x Saturated in Upper 12"
_ No Recorded Data Available X Water Marks
x Drift Lines
Field Observations: x Sediment Deposits
x Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth of Surface Water: n/a (u-•) Secondary Indicators:

Depth to Free Water in Pit: 12 (in.) Oxidized Roots Channels in Upper 12"
X Water-Stained Leaves

x Local Soil Survey Data
Depth to Saturated Soil: n/a (in.) FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
GPS A041519A Hvdric-1

M
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Drainage Class:
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No
Profile Descriation:
Depth Matrix Colors Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,-
(inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
1-12 10 R 2.5/1 none organic muck
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol _ Concretions
x Histic Epipedon x High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moisture Regime x Listed On Local Hydric Soils List
Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
x Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampling Point
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No Within a Wetland? Yes X No_
Hydric Soils Present? Yes X No
Remarks: Location (describe) is/is not classified as a wetland based upon the criteria set forth in the 1987
Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual

~;
DATA .FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Determination Manual)
Project /Site: B-3636 Date: 4/15/04
Applicant /Owner: NCDOT County: Chowan
Investigator: Chris Underwood. Lindse~itiddick Chris Manley State: NC
Do normal circumstances exist on-the site? Yes No X Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical situation)? vas X No Transact ID:
Is the area a potential problem area? vas No X Plot ID:
(explain on reverse if needed)
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Vicia sp. H FACU 9. Lamium purpureum H
2. Valerianella locusta H FAC- 10.
3. Viola papilionacea H FAC 11.
4. Trifolium repens H FACU 12.
5. LoniceraLyonica H FAC- 13. '
6. Festuca sp. H FACU 14.
7. %ri~ia H FACU 15.
8. Cerastium vu~earis H FACU- 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC excluding FAC-). ~ 12.5%
Remarks: Wetland Vegetation Present Based Upon Greater than 50% of the Plant Species are/ e n
Classified asFAC-OBL in the National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands. Sample plot was taken...in
upland area: causeway of road.
HYDROLOGY
- Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
_ Aerial Photographs
Other
No Recorded Data Available
Field Observations:
~~•)
Depth of Surface Water:
Depth to Free Water in Pit:
Depth tv Saturated Soil:
Remarks: No hydrology indicators.
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Primary Indicators:
Inundated
_Saturated in Upper 12"
Water Marks
_ Drift Lines
~, Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
n/a (in.) Secondary Indicators:
Oxidized Roots Channels in Upper 12"
~a Water-Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
_ FAC-Neutral Test
n!a (in.) „_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Dry-1

~.
SOfLS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Drainage Class:
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Confirm Mapped Type? Yes
No
Profile Descri~tlon:
Depth Matrix Colors Mottle Colors Mattle Texture, Concretions,
finches) Horizon (Mansell Moist) (Mansell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure. etc.
0+ 10 YR 2/2 sandy loam fill material
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_ Histosol _ Concretions
Histic Eplpedon ~ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy
Soils
5ulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Solis
Aquic Moisture Regime Listed On Local Hydric Soils Llst
Reducing Condetions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
_Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _Othw (Explain in.Remarks)
Remarks: Data point taken in roadside fill. Maintained and mowed roadside.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No X is the Sampling Point
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X Within a Wetland? Yes_ No X
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No X
Remarks: Location (describe) is/is not classified as a wetland based upon the criteria set forth in the 1987
Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual.

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Field Office
Post Off ce Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 2763Cr3726
July 27, 2004
Phil Harris, III
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Project Development and Environmental Analysis
1598 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1598
Dear Mr. Harris:
This letter is in response to Greg Thorpe's letter of July 23, 2004 which provided the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service) with the biological determination of the North Carolina Department of
Transportation that the replacement of Bridge No. 16 on SR 1222 over Rocky Hock Creek in
Chowan County (TIP No. B-3636) may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the federally
threatened bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus). These comments are provided in accordance with
section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543).
According to the information you submitted, a survey was conducted at the project site on July 14,
2004. The survey extended to approximately a 3/4 mile radius. No eagles or eagle nests were
observed. Based on the information provided and other information available, the Service concurs
with your determination that the project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the bald
eagle. We believe that the requirements of section 7(a)(2) of the ESA have been satisfied. We
remind you that obligations under section 7 consultation must be reconsidered if: (1) new
information reveals impacts of this identified action that may affect listed species or critical habitat in
a manner not previously considered in this review; (2) this action is subsequently modified in a
manner that was not considered in this review; or (3) a new species is listed or critical habitat
determined that maybe affected by this identified action.
The Service appreciates the opportunity to review this project. If you have any questions regarding
our response, please contact Mr. Gary Jordan at [phone] (Ext. 32).
Sincerely,
John Ellis
Acting Ecological Services Supervisor
cc: Bill Biddlecome, USACE, Washington, NC
Nicole Thomson, NCDWQ, Raleigh, NC
Travis Wilson, NCWRC, Creedmoor, NC
Chris Militscher, USEPA, Raleigh, NC

~r
.,
Action Id. 200510008

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WII.,MINGTON DISTRICT
County: Chowan U.S.G.S. Quad:
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINA'
~~~ ~~
Property Owner/Agent: NCDOT, Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D. Vii'
Address: Environmental Management Director, PDEA ~'
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
Telephone No.: [phone]
Property description:
~ ~ ~ ~00~
,...
n~~
Size (acres) 1 acre Nearest Town Valhalla
Nearest Waterway Rockyhock Creek River Basin Chowan River
USGS HUC 03010203 Coordinates N 36.1387202 W 76.6667212
Location description The proiect is located on NCSR 1222 at bridge number 16 approximately .5 miles west of NC
highway 32 crossing and adiacent to Rocky Hock Creek Bennett Millpond). TIP # B-3636.
Indicate Which of the Following Apniv:
_ Based on preliminary information, there maybe wetlands on the above described property. We strongly suggest you have
this property inspected to determine the extent of Department of the Army (DA) jurisdiction. To be considered final, a
jurisdictional determination must be verified by the Corps. This preliminary determination is not an appealable action
under the Regulatory Program Administrative Appeal Process (Reference 33 CFR Part 331).
_ There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described property subject to the permit requirements of
Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Unless there is a change in the law or
our published regulations, this detemunation maybe relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this
notification.
X There are waters of the U.S. including wetlands on the above described project area subject to the permit requirements of
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published
regulations, this determination maybe relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
_ We strongly suggest you have the wetlands on your property delineated. Due to the size of your property and/or our
present workload, the Corps may not be able to accomplish this wetland delineation in a timely manner. For a more timely
delineation, you may wish to obtain a consultant. To be considered final, any delineation must be verified by the Corps.
_ The wetland on your property have been delineated and the delineation has been verified by the Corps. We strongly
suggest you have this delineation surveyed. Upon completion, this survey should be reviewed and verified by the Corps.
Once verified, this survey will provide an accurate depiction of all areas subject to CWA jurisdiction on your property
which, provided there is no change in the law or our published regulations, maybe relied upon for a period not to exceed
five years.
_ The wetlands have been delineated and surveyed and are accurately depicted on the plat signed by the Corps
Regulatory Official identified below on .Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this
determination maybe relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
_ There are no waters of the U.S., to include wetlands, present on the above described property which are subject to the
permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our
published regulations, this determination maybe relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this
notification.
X The property is located in one of the 20 Coastal Counties subject to regulation under the Coastal Area Management Act
(CAMA). You should contact the Division of Coastal Management in Elizabeth City, NC, at [phone] to determine
their requirements.
~ECEIVED
Q~1 ~2 2004
Page 1 of 2
~D,'VIStDN OF HIGNYVA'IS
PDEA-0FF~E OF NANRAL f.~MROf~trg~i

Action Id. 200510008
Placement of dredged or fill material within waters of the US and/or wetlands without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC § 1311). If you have any questions regarding this
determination and/or the Corps regulatory program, please contact Bill Biddlecome at [phone] egt. 31.
Basis For Determination: This site ezhibits wetland criteria as described in the 1987 Corns Wetland Delineation Manual
and is Hart of a broad continuum of wetlands connected to Rockyhock Creek which is a tributary to the Chowan River.
Remarks:
Corps Regulatory Official: ,
Date 10/15/2004 a Expiration Date 10/15/2009
Corps Regulatory Official (Initial):
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY:
• A plat or sketch of the property and the wetland data form must be attached to the file copy of this form
• A copy of.the "Notification Of Administrative Appeal Options And Process And Request For Appeal" form must be
transmitted with the property owner/agent copy of this form.
• If the property contains isolated wetlands/waters, please indicate in "Remarks" section and attach the
"Isolated Determination Information Sheet" to the file copy of this form.
Page 2 of 2

~r
~' ~ ~OS S 1.~~
~. ~ ~ .~
PROGRAM
October 3, 2005
Mr. Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
Environmental Management Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
Dear Dr. Thorpe:
Subject: EEP Mitigation Acceptance Letter:
B-3636, Bridge Number 16 over Rockyhock Creek on SR 1222, Chowan
County
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the Ecosystem Enhancement Program
(EEP) will provide the compensatory riverine wetland and stream mitigation for the subject
project. Based on the information supplied by you in a letter dated September 30, 2005, the
impacts are located in CU 03010203 of the Chowan River Basin in the Northern Outer Coastal
Plain (NOCP) Eco-Region, and are as follows:
Riverine Wetland: 0.223 acre
Stream: 72 feet
The subject project is listed in Exhibit 2 of the Memorandum of Agreement among the
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, the North Carolina
Department of Transportation, and the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District dated
July 22, 2003. However, according to the 2005 Impact Projection Database, there were no
anticipated impacts listed for this project. Fortunately, sufficient assets are available in the
cataloging unit to meet the mitigation needs for this project. The compensatory riverine wetland
and stream mitigation for the subject project will be provided in accordance with this agreement.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Ms. Beth
Harmon at 919-715-1929.
Sincerely,
i lam D. Gilmore, P.E. U~
EEP Director
cc: Mr. Bill Biddlecome, USACE-Washington
Mr. John Hennessy, Division of Water Quality, Wetlands/401 Unit
File: B-3636
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program,1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 21699-1652 / 919-715-041b / www.nceep.net

• ~ ' N~Eo
9 p ~'' ~.
~'~',,,",.s'
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
D~ARTIVIENT OF TRANSPORTATION
1VIICHARi"F. E.~SLEY
GOVERNOR
Apri121, 2005
United States Army Corps of Engineers
~ t Regulatory Field Office 0 ~ O 7 ~ ,~
Post Office Box 1000
Washington, NC 27899-1000
ATTN: Mr. Bill Biddlecome
NCDOT Coordinator-Division One
O~
~~
.q/O/1 ~/ ///j/~/~\\V\
~~( /l~f ~d Vt\V
~ D
~~~'~,~.~ cs'~~o0s O
LYNDO TrnP~
SECRETARY
SUBJECT: Nationwide 6 Permit Application:
Bridge No. 16 over Rockyhock Creek on SR 1222; Chowan County; TIP
Project B-3636; Federal Aid Project No. BRZ-1222(5); State Project
No.33184.1.1.
Deaz Mr. Biddlecome,
The North Cazolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) is in the process of planning
a foundation investigation for the above referenced project. A consultant will be
conducting the investigation with a minimum of 6 borings. Two of the borings will be
performed within Rockyhock Creek and will be drilled through the bridge deck of the
existing bridge. Four others will be drilled through the existing roadway embankment.
All six borings are shown on the attached permit drawings.
Due to the fact that Rockyhock Creek supports anadromous fish, notification to the
appropriate agencies through a Nationwide 6 Pernut is required.
In order to build the new bridge over Rockyhock Creek, geotechnical test borings will
need to be done so that structure and foundation recommendations can be made. All
borings will be drilled utilizing a drill mounted on an ATV (All Terrain Vehicle) or a
Drill Truck. The size of the borings aze approximately 0.5 feet in diameter. The area that
maybe disturbed per boring is estimated to be 4 square feet, for a total disturbance area of
24 squaze feet in the creek. The consultant will use casing to advance the borings and
rotary-wash techniques while recirculating the drilling fluids between the mud tub and the
inside of the casing. This will isolate the drilling mud and cuttings and contain them in
the boring and the mud tub. The borings will be backfilled with the cuttings and then
IAAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: [phone] LOCATION:
NC DEPARTM~Ni OF TRANSPORTATION FAX: [phone] TRANSPORTATION BuILD~NG
PROJECT DEVELOPAENT AND ENVIRONI~NTAL ANALYSIS 1 SOUTH WLLMINGTON STREET-
1548"""LSERVICECENTER wessrrE: wWW.ncdot.or~ ~"Nc
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548

. ~,
sealed with a bentonite hold plug. The excess drilling mud will be disposed of in the
upland areas.
Because this area is located in sensitive waters, an in-water moratorium exists between
February 15 through June 30. All in-stream work will take place outside the moratorium
dates.
The NCDOT anticipates that these activities will be authorized by Nationwide Permit No.
6. NCDOT will follow the conditions set by a Nationwide Permit No. 6 and by NCDWQ
Water Quality Certification # 3494. In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H.0501(a), we are
providing two copies of this application to the NCDWQ for their records.
If you have any questions or would like additional information, please call Mr. Chris
Underwood at [phone]. Thank you in advance for your help in this matter.
Sincerely,
~~
w Grego J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
Environmental Management Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
CC: W/attachment
Mr. John Hennessy, NCDWQ (7 copies)
Mr. Travis Wilson, NCWRC
Mr. Gary Jordan, USFR7S
Mr. Ron Sechler, NMFS
Mr. Michael Street, NCDMF
Mr. Cathy Brittingham, NCDCM
Mr. Bill Arrington, NCDCM
Mr. David Chang, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr. Greg Perfetti, P.E., Structure Design
Mr. Mazk Staley, Roadside Environmental
Mr. Njoroge W. Wainaina, State Engineering Geologist, P.E., Geotechnical Unit
Mr. C. E. Lassiter, P.E., Division Engineer
Mr. Jay Johnson, DEO
W/o attachment
Mr. David Franklin, USACE, Wilmington (Cover Letter Only)
Mr. Jay Bennett, P.E., Roadway Design
Mr. Omaz Sultan, Programming and TIP
Mr. Art McMillan, P.E., Highway Design
Mr. John Williams, P.E., PDEA

Off1Ce USe Only' 0 ~ O ~ ~ ~ Form Version May 2002
USACE Action ID No. DWQ No.
(If any particulaz item is not applicable to ttus project, please enter "Not appticadie" or ._N~A~~.I
I. Processing
1. Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project:
® Section 404 Permit ^ Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules
^ Section 10 Permit ^ Isolated Wetland Permit from DWQ
^ 401 Water Quality Certification
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested: NW 6
3. If this notification is solely a courtesy copy because written approval for the 401 Certification
is not required, check here:
4. If payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program (NCWRP) is proposed for
mitigation of impacts (verify availability with NCWRP prior to submittal of PCN), complete
section VIII and check here: ^
5. If your project is located in any of North Carolina's twenty coastal counties (listed on page
4), and the project is within a North Carolina Division of Coastal Management Area of
Environmental Concern (see the top of page 2 for further details), check here:
II. Applicant Information
1. Owner/Applicant Information
Name: NCDOT / PDEA Branch / Grey Thorpe
Mailing Address: 1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh NC 27699-1548
Telephone Number: [phone] Fax Number: [phone]
E-mail Address:
2. Agent/Consultant Information (A signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization letter
must be attached if the Agent has signatory authority for the owner/applicant.)
Name:
Company Affiliation:
Mailing Address:
Telephone Number: Fax Number:
E-mail Address:
Page 5 of 12

III. Project Information
Attach a vicinity map clearly showing the location of the property with respect to local
landmarks such as towns, rivers, and roads. Also provide a detailed site plan showing property
boundaries and development plans in relation to surrounding properties. Both the vicinity map
and site plan must include a scale and north arrow. The specific footprints of all buildings,
impervious surfaces, or other facilities must be included. If possible, the maps and plans should
include the appropriate USGS Topographic Quad Map and NRCS Soil Survey with the property
boundaries outlined. Plan drawings, or other maps may be included at the applicant's discretion,
so long as the property is cleazly defined. For administrative and distribution purposes, the
USACE requires information to be subnutted on sheets no lazger than 11 by 17-inch format;
however, DWQ may accept paperwork of any size. DWQ prefers full-size construction
drawings rather than a sequential sheet version of the full-size plans. If full-size plans aze
reduced to a small scale such that the final version is illegible, the applicant will be informed that
the project has been placed on hold until decipherable maps are provided.
1. Name of project: Replacement of Bridge No. 16 Over Rockyhock Creek on SR 1222
2. T.LP. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only): B-3636
3. Property Identification Number (Tax P]I~:
4. Location
County: Chowan Neazest Town: Valhalla
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number):
Directions to site (include road numbers, landmarks, etc.): Bridge No. 16 over Roc ,hock
Creek On SR 1222
5. Site coordinates, if available (UTM or Lat/Long): 36 08 19.9/76 39 58.4
(Note - If project is linear, such as a road or utility line, attach a sheet that sepazately lists the
coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody.)
6. Property size (acres):
7. Nearest body of water (stream/river/sound/ocean/lake): Rockyhock Creek
8. River Basin: Chowan
(Note -this must be one of North Cazolina's seventeen designated major river basins. The
River Basin map is available at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/admin/maps/.)
9. Describe the existing conditions on the site and general land use in the vicinity of the project
at the time of this application: Wetlands and riparian forest with little develo,~ment.
Page 6 of 12

10. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
Geotechnical test borings will be made in the roadway and creek bottom. Drilling rigs will
be used to perform this work.
11. Explain the purpose of the proposed work: To provide structure and foundation
recommendations for the proposed bridge.
IV. Prior Project History
If jurisdictional determinations and/or permits have been requested and/or obtained for this
project (including all prior phases of the same subdivision) in the past, please explain. Include
the USACE Action ID Number, DWQ Project Number, application date, and date permits and
certifications were issued or withdrawn. Provide photocopies of previously issued permits,
certifications or other useful information. Describe previously approved wetland, stream and
buffer impacts, along with associated mitigation (where applicable). If this is a NCDOT project,
list and describe permits issued for prior segments of the same T.I.P. project, along with
construction schedules.
Jurisdictional Determination from the USACE. AID # 200510008
V. Future Project Plans
Are any future permit requests anticipated for this project? If so, describe the anticipated work,
and provide justification for the exclusion of this work from the current application.
Yes. NW 23 permit will be applied for. Typical bridge construction on existing location and
improving approaches.
VI. Proposed Impacts to Waters of the United StatesJWaters of the State
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
wetlands, open water, and stream channels associated with the project. The applicant must also
provide justification for these impacts in Section VII below. All proposed impacts, permanent
and temporary, must be listed herein, and must be clearly identifiable on an accompanying site
plan. All wetlands and waters, and all streams (intermittent and perennial) must be shown on a
delineation map, whether or not impacts are proposed to these systems. Wetland and stream
evaluation and delineation forms should be included as appropriate. Photographs may be
included at the applicant's discretion. If this proposed impact is strictly for wetland or stream
mitigation, list and describe the impact in Section VIII below. ff additional space is needed for
listing or description, please attach a separate sheet.
1. Provide a written description of the proposed impacts: Soil borings in the wetland,
high ground, and river bottom.
Page 7 of 12

2. Individually list wetland impacts below:
Wetland Impact
Site Number
(indicate on ma)
Type of Impact* Area of
Impact
(acres) Located within
100-year Floodplain**
es/no) Distance to
Neazest Stream
(lineaz feet)
Type of Wetland***

* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but aze not limited to: mechanized clearing, grading, fill,
excavation, flooding, ditching/drainage, etc. For dams, separately list impacts due to both stmchue and flooding.
** 100-Year floodplains aze identified through the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps
(FIItM), or FEMA-approved local floodplain maps. Maps are available through the FEMA Map Service Center at i-800-358-9616, or
online at http://www.fema. ov.
*** List a wetland type that best describes wetland to be impacted (e.g., freshwater/saltwater marsh, forested wetland, beaver pond,
Cazolina Bay, bog, etc.) Indicate if wetland is isolated (determination of isolation to be made by USACE only).
List the total acreage (estimated) of all existing wetlands on the property:
Total area of wetland impact proposed:
3. Individually list all intermittent and perennial stream impacts below:
Stream Impact
Site Number
indicate on
Type of Impact* Length of
Impact
linear feet
Stream Name** Average Width
of Stream
Before lm act Perennial or
Intermittent?
lease i

* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: culverts and associated rip-rap,
dams (separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding), relocation (include lineaz feet before and after, and net loss/gain),
stabilization activities (cent wall, rip-rap, crib wall, gabions, etc.), excavation, ditching/straightening, etc. If stream relocation is
proposed, plans and profiles showing the lineaz footprint for both the original and relocated streams must be included.
** Stream names can be found on USGS topographic maps. If a stream has no name, list as UT (unnamed tributary) to the nearest
downstream named stream into which it flows. USGS maps aze available through the USGS at 1-800-358-9616, or online at
www.uses.gov. Several Internet sites also allow direct download and printing of USGS maps (e.g., www.topozone.com.
www.mapquest.com, etc.).
Cumulative impacts (linear distance in feet) to all streams on site:
4. Individually list all open water impacts (including lakes, ponds, estuaries, sounds, Atlantic
Ocean and any other water of the U.S.) below:
Page 8 of 12

Open Water Impact

Site Number
(indicate on ma)

Type of Impact* Area of

~-pact
(acres)
Name of Waterbod
(~ applicable) y Type of Waterbody

(lake, pond, estuary, sound,
ba ,ocean, etc.)

* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: fill, excavation, dredging,
flooding, drainage, bulkheads, etc.
5. Pond Creation
If construction of a pond is proposed, associated wetland and stream impacts should be
included above in the wetland and stream impact sections. Also, the proposed pond should
be described here and illustrated on any maps included with this application.
Pond to be created in (check all that apply): ^ uplands ^ stream ^ wetlands
Describe the method of construction (e.g., dam/embankment, excavation, installation of
draw-down valve or spillway, etc.):
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stormwater requirement, etc.):
Size of watershed draining to pond: Expected pond surface area:
VII. Impact Justification (Avoidance and Minimization)
Specifically describe measures taken to avoid the proposed impacts. It may be useful to provide
information related to site constraints such as topography, building ordinances, accessibility, and
financial viability of the project. The applicant may attach drawings of alternative, lower-impact
site layouts, and explain why these design options were not feasible. Also discuss how impacts
were minimized once the desired site plan was developed. If applicable, discuss construction
techniques to be followed during construction to reduce impacts.
VIII. Mitigation
DWQ - In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0500, mitigation may be required by the NC
Division of Water Quality for projects involving greater than or equal to one acre of impacts to
freshwater wetlands or greater than or equal to 150 linear feet of total impacts to perennial
streams.
USACE - In accordance with the Final Notice of Issuance and Modification of Nationwide
Permits, published in the Federal Register on March 9, 2000, mitigation will be required when
necessary to ensure that adverse effects to the aquatic environment are minimal. Factors
Page 9 of 12

including size and type of proposed impact and function and relative value of the impacted
aquatic resource will be considered in determining acceptability of appropriate and practicable
mitigation as proposed. Examples of mitigation that may be appropriate and practicable include,
but aze not limited to: reducing the size of the project; establishing and maintaining wetland
and/or upland vegetated buffers to protect open waters such as streams; and replacing losses of
aquatic resource functions and values by creating, restoring, enhancing, or preserving similaz
functions and values, preferable in the same watershed.
If mitigation is required for this project, a copy of the mitigation plan must be attached in order
for USACE or DWQ to consider the application complete for processing. Any application
lacking a required mitigation plan or NCWRP concurrence shall be placed on hold as
incomplete. An applicant may also choose to review the current guidelines for stream restoration
in DWQ's Draft Technical Guide for Stream Work in North Cazolina, available at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/strmgide.html.
Provide a brief description of the proposed mitigation plan. The description should provide
as much information as possible, including, but not limited to: site location (attach directions
and/or map, if offsite), affected stream and river basin, type and amount (acreage/lineaz feet)
of mitigation proposed (restoration, enhancement, creation, or preservation), a plan view,
preservation mechanism (e.g., deed restrictions, conservation easement, etc.), and a
description of the current site conditions and proposed method of construction. Please attach
a separate sheet if more space is needed.
N/A
2. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Cazolina Wetlands Restoration
Program (NCWRP). Please note it is the applicant's responsibility to contact the NCWRP at
[phone] to determine availability and to request written approval of mitigation prior
to submittal of a PCN. For additional information regazding the application process for the
NCWRP, check the NCWRP website at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/wrp/index.htm. If use of
the NCWRP is proposed, please check the appropriate box on page three and provide the
following information:
Amount of stream mitigation requested (linear feet): N/A
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (squaze feet): N/A
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
Amount of Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
IX. Environmental Documentation (requured by DWQ)
Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federaUstate) funds or the use of public
(federaUstate) land?
Yes ® No ^
Page 10 of 12

If yes, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the
requirements of the National or North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
Note: If you aze not sure whether a NEPA/SEPA document is required, call the SEPA
coordinator at [phone] to review current thresholds for environmental documentation.
Yes ® No ^
If yes, has the document review been finalized by the State Clearinghouse? If so, please attach a
copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval letter.
Yes ® No ^
X. Proposed Impacts on Riparian and Watershed Buffers (required by DWQ)
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
required state and local buffers associated with the project. The applicant must also provide
justification for these impacts in Section VII above. All proposed impacts must be listed herein,
and must be clearly identifiable. on the accompanying site plan. All buffers must be shown on a
map, whether or not impacts aze proposed to the buffers. Correspondence from the DWQ
Regional Office may be included as appropriate. Photographs may also be included at the
applicant's discretion.
Will the project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233
(Meuse), 15A NCAC ZB .0259 (Taz-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 2B .0250 (Randleman Rules and
Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please identify )?
Yes ^ No ®If you answered "yes", provide the following information:
Identify the square feet and acreage of impact to each zone of the riparian buffers. If buffer
mitigation is required calculate the required amount of mitigation by applying the buffer
multipliers.
Zone* (s uare feet Multiplier Miti aU'on
1 3
2 1.5
Total
* Zone 1 extends out 30 feet perpendiculaz from near bank of channel; Zone 2 extends an
additional 20 feet from the edge of zone 1.
If buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e., Donation
of Property, Conservation Easement, Riparian Buffer Restoration /Enhancement, Preservation or
Payment into the Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as
identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0242 or .0260.
Page 11 of 12

XI. Stormwater (required by DWQ)
Describe impervious acreage (both existing and proposed) versus total acreage on the site.
Discuss stormwater controls proposed in order to protect surface waters and wetlands
downstream from the property.
N/A
XII. Sewage Disposal (required by DWQ)
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-dischazge or discharge) of
wastewater generated from the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
N/A
XIII. Violations (required by DWQ)
Is this site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500) or any Buffer Rules?
Yes ^ No
Is this anafter-the-fact permit application?
Yes ^ No
XIV. Other Circumstances (Optional):
It is the applicant's responsibility to submit the application sufficiently in advance of desired
construction dates to allow processing time for these permits. However, an applicant may
choose to list constraints associated with construction or sequencing that may impose limits on
work schedules (e.g., draw-down schedules for lakes, dates associated with Endangered and
Threatened Species, accessibility problems, or other issues outside of the applicant's control).
ApplicandAgent's Signature Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)
Page 12 of 12

~ ~ s

t~

.~
c

~ ~ ~ i

ti

N
Pro~eets\8-3636\pro,J\b3636s4_permit.dgn
i v
a
O R° ~
w ~8
s ~~
~~
N
ay
2
IF
s CO
~~
O$~ ~~
x A~
L:N ~sa
~~
~ V k
1F
y ~
x ~,
~ LL~ ;
~F O
V
~.~.- o
fll
~~
r
i
Mb~~L~~ZS'~
M1
14
~~
~ ~~
IE O ~ ~
14 r~
{ ~1
~• O
~_ Bl
16.4Y (LT)

7/2/99

m m
m ~
~ N
nl ~_
y
~ C
1
~ ~
O ~
~ ~
y
C

SS
~rn
to ?~.
. ~,
o -~-
~ ~~~TT ~S° 8S
~~T~ s C~
/~ ,~ E~~
~~~,8
0~9,
wrn
Cn ~.
. to
o~
o'
~v
a
c
c
c
~~.
30d 3~, N48 0
+15025

• _
NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality-Stormwater Management
943 Washington Square Mall
Washington, NC 27889
Attention: Mr. Bill Moore
Subject: Stormwater Permit Request for the Replacement of Bridge No. 16 over Rockyhock Creek on SR
1222; Chowan County; TIP Project B-3636; Federal Aid Project No. BRZ-1222(5); $420.00 Debit WBS
33184.1.1.
The North Cazolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to replace Bridge No. 16 in Chowan County, North
Carolina. Chowan County falls under the jurisdiction of the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA). The NCDOT is
applying for a CAMA Major Development Permit, a Clean Water Act (CWA) §404 Department of the Army Permit, and a
North Carolina CWA §401 Water Quality Certification.
A stormwater application form and one copy of the project permit drawings aze provided with this request. Please review
this project for authorization by your division.
Thank you for your assistance with this important matter. Any assistance you can provide in expediting the review of this
project is greatly appreciated. If you have any questions concerning this project, please feel free to contact Mr. Chris
Underwood at [phone].
Sincerely,
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA ~"'~~;
DEPARTIVIENT OF TRANSPORTATION ~~~,~.
MICHAEL F. EASLEY LYNDO TIPPETT
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
May 6, Zoos
©So72`-~
.~A'~o
~e r=w
~~
C~
SFr o ~9y ~~
~P,ly~Uu9 ~' ,~~
~~~ ~~ //~
~~~-~`~-
. ~ Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Environmental Management Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
CC:
Mr. John Hennessy, DWQ Raleigh
Mr. Travis Wilson, NCWRC
Mr. Gary Jordan, USFWS
Mr. Jay Bennett, P.E., Roadway Design
Mr. Omar Sultan, Programming and TIP
Mr. Art McMillan, P.E., Highway Design
Mr. David Chang, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr. Greg Perfetti, P.E., Structure Design
Ms. Lynn Mathis, DCM
Mr. Mazk Staley, Roadside Environmental
Mr. John Sullivan, FHWA
Mr. Don Conner, P.E., Division Engineer
Mr. Clay Willis, DEO
Mr. David Franklin, USACE, Wilmington
Mr. Brian Yamamoto, P.E., Planning Engineer
Ms. Cathy Brittingham, DCM
JNG ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: [phone] LOCATION:
)EPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FAX [phone] TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
ECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
MAIL SERVICE CENTER WEBSITE: WWW.NCDOT.ORG RALEIGH NC
IGH NC 27699-1548

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PERMIT APPLICATION FORM
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
LINEAR ROADWAY PROJECT
This form may be photocopied for use as an original.
DWG Stormwater Management Plan Review:
A complete starmwater management plan submittal includes this application form, a supplement form for each BMP
proposed (see Section V), design calculations, and plans and specificarions showing all road and BMP details.
L PROJECT INFORMATION
NCDOT Project Number: BRZ-1222(5) / 33184.1.1 County:
Project Name:
Project Location: 0.5 miles west of Valhalla on NC 32
Contact Person: Mr. Marshall Clawson, PE Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
Receiving Stream Name: Rockyhock Creek River Basin: Chowan Class: B NSW
Proposed linear feet of project: 0.269mi (1420 LF)
Proposed Structural BMP and Road Station (attach a list of station and BMP type :f more room is needed):
Type of proposed project: (check all that apply):

~ New OWidening ~21ane* 041ane* [7Curb and Gutter I~Bridge Replacement
^Other (Describe) _.--
*21aneand 41ane imply that roadside ditches are used unless Curb and Gutter is also checked.
II. REQUIRED TTEMS CHECKLIST
Initial in the space provided below to indicate the following design requirements have been met and supporting
documentation is attached. Supporting documentation shall, at a minimum, consist of a brief narrative description
including (1) the scope of the project, (2) how the items below are met, (3) how the proposed best management practices
minimi~E water quality impacts, and (4) any significant constraints and/or justification for not meeting a, b, c and d .to ~ ~
maximum extent practicable. ~ ... ^. ~ . i
~.
Desi er',s IniZigls ~ .. `;(` -
~~t ~ ~s
a. The amount of impervious surface has been minimized as much as possible.
-~--
~b~~~ The runoff from the impervious areas has been diverted away from surface waters as much as possible.
~c ~',~~est Management Practices are employed which minimize water quality impacts.
Vegetated roadside ditches aze 3:1 slope or flatter.
Form SWU-112 Rev 04.00 Page 1 of 2

-'
III. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT
I acknowledge and agree by my initials below that the North Carolina Department of Transportation is responsible for the
implementation of the four maintenance items listed. I agree to notify DWQ of any operational problems with the BMP's
that would impact water quality or prior to making any changes to the system or responsible party.
Maintenance Engineer's Initials
~~~~. BMP's shall be inspected and maintained in good working order.
~~ ~/~/''~i. Eroded areas shall be repaired and reseeded as needed.
.f0l3 ~~~ c. Stormwater collection systems, including piping, inlets, and outlets, shall be maintained to insure proper
functioning.
Maintenance Engineer's Name:_._._S'~e. L»~ _,_.._U. 4 ~Kca__
Title: it ~,.~~w_ /~l~yr~lw~.~r fvtst+ArJ~__._ __ _.-
IV. APPLICATION CERTIFICATION
I, (print or type name) Branch,
certify that the infon:nation included on this permit application form is, to the best of my knowledge, correct and that the
project will be constructed in conformance with the approved plans and that the proposed project complies with the
requirements of 15A NCAC 2H .1000.
Address:
V. SUPPLEMENT FORMS
I~.t
The applicable state stormwater management permit supplement form(s) listed below must be submitted for each BMP
specified for this project. Contact the Stormwater and General Permits Unit at [phone] for the status and
availability of these foams.
Form SWU-102
Form SWU-103
Form SWU-104
Form SWU-105
Form SWU-106
Form SWU-107
Form SWU-108
Form SWU-109
Form SWU-110
Wet Detention Basin Supplement
Infiltration Basin Supplement
Low Density Supplement
Chub Outlet System Supplement
Off-Site System Supplement
Underground Infiltration Trench Supplement
Neuse River Basin Supplement
Innovative Best Management Practice Supplement
Extended Dry Detention Basin Supplement
t .,,•
Form SWU-112 Rev 04.00 Page 2 of 2

coxTxacz• C201469 TIP PROJECT: 8-3636
O
~g

~. v N N
0 o
y
n ~ n n ~ u x
* ~
j
3~~~ oo a
°, i SY S
fi.

~ GZi
r
m
Z ~O
~~g
~
~
~
o
~
~
-~
~ 0
o o
Q
~~ y
p
a
w~°~
II ~~
a y
x
~ n II
IJ
O~
'° 3 3
r;r ~ N
m N
y

N~
~~ O
~
~
b
~~
N
O
~~
~

~ ~~
$
~~,
s
0 ~ $

z ~
~
~ ~
n~
~
n
Z ~ ~
°~
~
O m
~
Q
m m
.Z1
6
K y

ro

~~
Mx
,1~
'C
~ 00
~'=f
~
~
~y

xx
v
^O
l )
~_
Z

z
0
O
rn
N
Z
<o
G
2
Z
~ --.
~_
rn
r
N
'o
Z
z
D
r

r
n
O
O
T
T
N_
-i
rn

O
f N_
~ I
N t
N 10~ ~'
J J
~
J
..IW •
`' I

~ ,
• P
/5/~ IN N W /` ..
Z
I2fi I x
J ~~ ~° / '
~ cam
~
`
-
`
~ `J ~ IW
F
\ /
f
.:~; '
`
`
~~

1v / ~
_
~ N
~ l~
`
~~
v
S
~p
~k
N
a
`J
~~ ~
~~ O dy
~x ~ c~
o~
~~ ~ z~
~o ~ ~~
~a ~~
"o C~ x x
~~
~ O x~
~,~ C ~~
b ~
~ ~~
~~ ~
A
~x
-~
~"~

03-MAY -2A05~ 008:5?`63636. typ
RR 77
10/26/96

(~ ~ o
N I m

s
r
~ r
O-
` '^
~ m
N
n °; w
z
N O J
N m
v n n

O
==11 0 A
w ~
~
~
z
OC O 3
N 70 r
+ Z C ~p ~ H
s
~ O z D r °
O Z ~ .~
~ ° ~
v O
~ .•-.
~ o
°° ~ v z , ; a
a (~ -~ ~ ~
O ~ ~

~ 70
C
m ~ m ~
~
N ~
N

o
~
N N
V '^
C O-
+
~ s
m n .a
N 1

t
~~
O

-i c$p o ~
b
t a,
a
m
N
~~

v
O I

q
~ ~

a
n
~ N
4~ A ~ b
~ ~ ~ I
1 `" H-
•- ~ ~ Oa•
m ~
~./ ~
I
~J ~ o ~

s s ~ ~ I
a Z ~
~ 'n C
O ~
~ 7v
m ~~ ~ ~
0 i s N
~ ~ b
n z I
N ~ ~
N
~ b
c,

r
N ar
O
~ ~
~ ~
b
O ~ ~ s
Z y

H r
Z
V
~
~
I
m
m

O m _

~~ .a
N

~
~
rn b a
y N
N ~ s ~ b
Z ~ ~ m n
N m
~ ~ ~
Z
pi o Z ~~~i
tt?Z ~
O++

O
_I ~ ~ ~ ~ C
~ .}, + Q ~
o~
o >
o
~00 ->i s ~g$~
~ r ~ p ~ ~ m

.oZo p +++F

p ~ o o Z < W

O ~- ~
O ~' rzi- '' ~" ~
H !
~
~
'~%G1c1~ ~$j N ~Z

-i C m
N m
-+ w N
m m a v a v a ~o a ~0 1 z
a 2 i Z~ '.1

~
1 ..
~ 0
<v ~
Z;9 ~
;9
sP ~
sp
Zv
x z z•
z ~s ss ma< iss s
ca'> v m ~ vpimz omv ~~ '0

n
;~ m mm za_ 101 Coro D =
` m
Zi o ro`a m N~a m ~ m N`= m ~
a
m
a
W.i~ ~~ m~i y~i~ '~~
~_ ~= v~rs- =
~ Z
(T r r
W ~ Wr y
~
ri '~ ~o
~ ~i ~
C7 ~
N n lA n p
p
V0 QI Z ~ n
N$ N ~
A (n
-o~ ao m
z VI" t
n
z

~
m

m ~ m ~
~
m A "i
m rnA ~~
m mm =

QW
~~
=
~
pN ~
~
m
N N o
~ NA ~,
~
~
om C
~ ~ ~ om r

=
;m A y
m
1 1 m
~ m 1^ "~ ~
m -~ c
,E N N = m m m
O tr '~
~ ~ y ~
~
m~ ~ ma '~

i
a N
s
i ~
v

eevaons nR,sF
JD~irah~am363AT ~~D223174 7/2/99
BL-2
PW ~tfi4 gg
+ ~ ~+45J~9 -l-
8 ¢ X5.80' Rf.
$ o I
i~ I
°i I
~ I x
1 I A ~~ 1
~ a .. I I + v~ O
~° a I I
~I I , ~~ .
~ ~•
2
I I °
~~ ~~ I ~~
I ~ + ~:
I ~ ~.
0 ~+ I 8+
~~ ~$ I s~ ~
V
~~$ ~oP ~w
~ m ~• Y9Z~ 4
Q $ ~ n
~~~LS'
~' / ~ , µ
I'
~ I m
+ ~ ~
IF ~ I
I( I
~~ -~~ II I ~ ~+
~ ,~. 11
~~ ~ II
~s ~ ~ ~
O R•~~ ~ I\ ~ °~i
~; ~°
~~ ~ x
-g ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~
,~ I ~ ~ ~ • s
"' ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~
~z i ~ ~
I
~ „/ I ~
o I I $
~ W I I ~ O ~„ N
= o~ I I I ~ ~ _~ m
I I I s- s ~ ~ i
~. I Iw ( ~ rn y
-4 + 9 •
I
µ -- a +. N
,~ I i5.ni• aT~ m c
€ "'
gTi~ P~~ ~ ~ , . + ~xZ gN'4
~Q
R . ~ - ~
8i~ a~~ ' i o
+ ~ ~
Samba?~ $ µ µ ~ ~ ~ O y
s $ ~ ~l ~
'~ ~ ~ C
~" ~~~5 p4fF~1' N0879Y9 f ~ y
-dy ,~
1f ~'O•
`~ ~
~ 0
• ~
O ~ ~ o
~ ~ ~
~ + ~ ~
'~ x N z
~ ~~ ~ I ~ O
~ ~. Q ~ ................................
m I ~ ~ ~

~ ~ i

e
l
~ x

~ ~

~ ~

bb/EZ/B

65'80 5002-AtlW-£0

. .i ~ .,

,.i ~
,.

:~ ~.:
~:
N `
M
V '.:
~b3 z
~~>
N ~
N M
~ a0 O
MO
L'e'
~~ o~ - ~Q
~~ ti
Wm
V ~~ p ~
~ ~ W
V Vj
w ~~.
~ v~ ~
z~ o
~ ~
~ ~`" -=, ~
~ ~ V A M _~
~i ~ p ~., co W ~ ;; r
mm ~
~ M
~ ~ .~
p ~ ~ ~,~~
I--~ ~ ~ _
~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~_~ -
r~ ,_,_ IlJ
~w ~ ~ ~ N ~
® ~ ~ z
[may] ~ ~ _
C:7 ~ ~ J u.: F=
~ w t~ m ~ ~
//~~ Z c~ ., z
MGM ® ~ •l~lb'1!!8/'Jl ~~3~J~ H~OH,IH~O?~ N
I~1 ~ ~~a~~~~
® ~ ~
p0 0 i~E. W
H ~ O
w ..
~ o w ,,~ N
o
~ ~~ - w
t~ ~ ~ z
N
N
~ ~
~ ~
~ ~
~ m` @• J
I~ ~ rl ~
`~ ~ m
m 2
~,~
~_ ~ ~ O
b b m, ~Jb ~ ` • tGl ~
c'
•a J ~ ~ O
` wv ~ Y ~ ~I ~ F-
~ f ~ Z ~, z
~~ ~ / ~I y ~m a I! 5 O
to r J
~~ Q ~~ ~ f N V
~~ m~
N~tlq ~ NI NI N, V O
{~ ~ O

~~ ~
~
~
~
~ ~
~
~
~ n
~
~

~ U
x~o
~
y~
! ~
h~
~
xx ~~
~p
~~
H
~
ti R
~a
ac

d
~ O
~~ a ~
~x ~ Z
g~ o
w ~`
-o
~o~
~~
~~ ~ ~o
~~
A ~ ~"
c v
~~~
~~a
~o
II it o
~o
~ ~~ u
~ ~~~°
N ~~~
~~~~
o ~d~
a F ~ °-
~2~
`~~
~~i-Z
~~~
W W
~~ ~
d II

N lq
~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~
II II II II N II ~
v a ?so~>
r
~ o ~
~
~
~
~ 0

N NN~ ~
~ ~
~ n ~ ~ ~
~ ~ o

9£9£~ ~Z~SL~O?Id dIZ 69bI0Z~ ~s~[+usxo~

~ °ai>
N >r:~

N
Z lA 0
0
e O
O
~
~0
- :,..:..
~; ~
Z
o p
1 Z
3
p g
~ ~
00~ o
~3
gg^ ~
~ ,~
'° ~ $~°n
p
.t
~ ~ oZo
.
~
A
S O^ a W ~
~
+ ~ 1

W ~ i F ~ '~ m
OOg
O ! ` OOF~,

t W
Uf M+
+ ~1 0 I'~ M O O O
~ P
^ ~ O O 8~
iA

~ ~
O Z W
ii
Z~
/it
i Z o'C
s
s
s F
N ~ V N ~ •~ W

Q
1 ~ ! 4
' 10 - 1
N W

~ ~ N

O
r W W

tIl Z
a I ~ _0
1 ~
~ o ~ ~ W
W H
~ c
V e
1 W ~
N
'- N
g, ' e V
T ~j ~
.ap
~1
~ ~
Z 0
Z
~ ~ oC 0 ~ ~
•
y 0- ~
~
~ H ~
. .
~
-
i `.rJ 0 c ~ 'per
~ S ~
~ v ~
~
F YJ t
g
C ~1
~
W
V

r- 1T_
~
u
~
V 7 !1!

G
_ '~
o
R
~
~
~3
i
0
~
lA
}1

~ V
~'

~~ Z
~
"~' "1'
O ~
w N
N 1
~
~ IJJ
~ o
~
°
~ ~ z ~ H
3 ~
O
c ~ ~ m~ O OO
1
i ~
~
VI
J ~
~ ~;
7
(~ . y L °
~ ~C ~ O o

~
Q~
lh
~ ,
~
V ~ ~
~
N NJ
h

i+~
~ Q
V ....
~, M ~
1
0
~
~ p
J r
a `
~
p
°' 1 N
$ ~
U

86/8Z/0f dfi LL ~ y ld w y a~
1'9£9£91~5~80 \500 Z- A VW-£ 0

a ~ a ~
y am Y
y ~
LL Il ~ ~

y
N O1 O C ~ J
W r
N
N
O
d W
y WI=- m N
mH
i... r a a
~ o
r o
r

y w ! ~- ~ _
~ W~ ~ V
W O O ~ ~ W vwi W
J ~ Wo ~a i
u
~ oz
~ ~
V V
a W D
~ V p V
a
W
~N V
a N O
N~
w Cd
O
~N ~
y l
i
OC d S y
d
m
N~ W N N d m N N
Z W W W a K W W~ W
U Wa ~ ~a° wa Wm
(/~ ~N Vm ~ z ~ ~a
"' Gm OJ m! Om O

VW
Vu'i Z
VJN
V J y
V m
J °^ " J
Z ~ti
M M
a r J
a
y IL1

W
a~ O
=.
NOOyC Q W
dOU O
=.
Np d O
yM

a a

a
W
a
a
W
! !N r a r !N r !N o r
w v~ J O
NU ~
F RK V~ ~
> ~ oc ~ a a
yti; X t9r 0(90 X V X Or > ~
~ a
a°C a>° a>
`~ aw a a
s o
c a s a ~ ~
a aav >a~ W
aaw aa~ a as H
z
a ° o:
c ¢rz ¢rz ° °
w a
as aa-- aa~- as as w
W
U U U W ~ I-

I ~!

t
~~ .,

e Q

e
R~ N ~
, F

~ ~ i"~
~ ~
~ ~ .
~ '~R~ ~
~r g
+ W ~
A +
~ ~ ~W J
~ ~
Q
i
~,~ I
* ~~ ' *
~¢
~
O
W ~
+ I~ I~ ~ ~
~
~ i
o Ri
W d ` s
~ W RI
W

I i
if
k`

~

~
.~ Y
~
+w + ~ ~
m
N
D ~ N
~ s + r I
~~

y
e,~
~
~, W

~
. ~
V ``

~~
ti
~
~
1
2 u~
7 I
`
~~
~~ ~
N
i y`~^
V7
(~ 1
~!
`~ V
~ N
W
~U
N
66/Z/L
~i

~~~ ~
~
~~g +$
o

~ ~ d
~ k~
Gp~

~

~~$
'" ~
~
«8 ~~~ ~
^~ N
~ ~LLI ~3
.~~
~
V~
~
~
Q
9 `
`~(
~~
ii
~ W I ~
(ll) ,IV'91
i '~ I * ~
:1 +81 d b-
~
I
~ ~ I
r
•~ ~ I I
~ +
~
dg ~ ~
~ I
~ * ~
.~ ~
1 ~
J ~ I W
fi
x Q p1~
`b' ~. ~'
$
I
~ ~'
a N 'I
3 +
~ I '~
I ~ ~ 8
C7 ~ ti
m ° ~ ~ ~ ~ N

W ~~ ~ ~
, x
.~
~ W
~
it ' ~
~ I ~, ~ ~

' I I W QO
+ I w

+ ' I ~ I
I '~gg5~ ~
* s - ~
~
19 +, ~
W
~ /
`I k
~
W t ' I ~~
~ c'7p W S20g1 ~Y~
Z6~f. ??
J 6 W ~ d ~ ~
»

J~ W
+ ZQ
+ F
~g I g ~ ~~8
W
I
+
, ~

. I
+ 1
~
~~ I IW J Z
~
m
~~ ~ I I Q eb

~ ~a
m~
I
* I W
I
I
~
~
~
~
i
~ d
~ I ~ ~ ~
~
~~:~
~ ~ I IW
W
I
I ~
c~
o
m W

a .OB'SI 1
~ ~
ti
+
-l- 61'56 +
* Nld
Z-18

66/EZ/B
ub'p~j b x~'sf'i ~.i -9E9E8 \ osx~:~i
65'80 SOOZ-AtlW-f0

~.T.~~~Q~..I.tl ,.,.,, woyo ar~p~
~65~80 5002-.1VN!-£0

• • ~ I I ~ ~

r
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
FIELD INVESTIGATION REPORT
APPLICANT'S NAME: North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
LOCATION OF PROJECT SITE: Bridge #16 over Rockyhock Creek is located on SR 1222 near the town
of Valhalla (Chowan County), North Carolina approximately 0.5 mile west of the NC 32 crossing.
Photo Index - 1989: 18-7 (R-9)
State Plane Coordinates - X: 2690250 Y: 876925 Valhalla Quad
INVESTIGATION TYPE: CAMA
INVESTIGATIVE PROCEDURE: Date of Site Visit - November 2, 2005; Applicant Present -Yes
PROCESSING PROCEDURE: Application Received Complete - 3 Feb 2006
Office -Elizabeth City
6. SITE DESCRIPTION:
(A) Local Land Use Plan: Chowan County
Land Classification From LUP: Rural, Community
(B) AEC(s) Involved: Public Trust Area/Public Trust Shoreline
(C) Water Dependent: Yes
(D) Intended Use: Public
(E) Wastewater Treatment: Existing - None Planned - None
(F) Type of Structures: Existing - Roadway/Bridge/Reinforced Concrete Boxed Culvert
Planned - New Roadway/Bridge/Aluminum Pipe Arch
(G) Estimated Annual Rate of Erosion: N/A Source - N/A
7. HABITAT DESCRIPTION:
fAREAI
DREDGED EILLEI2 QTHEg
(A) VEGETATED WETLANDS:
(404) 0.016 acre 0.08 acre 0.110 acre
(B) NON-VEGETATED WETLANDS
(C) OTHER: 1.31 acres (high
ground) 0.004 acre (bridge)
(D) Total Area Disturbed: 1.52 acres (66,211 sf)
(E) Primary Nursery Area: No
(F) Water Classification: B-NSW Open: No
8. PROJECT SUMMARY: NCDOT proposes to demolish Bridge #16 that carries SR 1222 over Rockyhock
Creek. The existing bridge will be demolished and replaced with a new, longer and wider bridge. Roadway
approaches will be upgraded. An off-site detour along local roads will be utilized for traffic during
construction.

Bridge #16 Replacement -Chowan Co.
Page 2 of 3
.~
PROJECT SETTING
The project setting is Bridge #16 that crosses Rockyhock Creek, approximately 4 miles upstream of the confluence
of Rockyhock Creek and the Chowan River. Bridge #16 is located on State Route 1222 (Rockyhock Road) near the
community of Valhalla, North Carolina, approximately 0.5 mile west of the NC 32 crossing in Chowan County.
SR 1222 is a two-lane road and is classified as a rural minor collector in the Statewide Functional Classification
System. Originally constructed in 1949, Bridge #16 is a two-span structure (66-ft long x 24-ft wide) that includes
two travel lanes. Its superstructure consists of a reinforced concrete deck on I-beams. The original substructure
included solid reinforced concrete piers and abutments but was later widened with concrete caps on timber piles.
Navigation clearance underneath existing Bridge #16 is approximately 6-feet. Bridge #16 has a sufficiency rating of
34.7 out of 100 and is considered functionally obsolete. Public access to Public Trust Waters may occur alongside
existing bridge.
The majority of land use in or near the vicinity of the project area includes natural forested communities. There is
limited use for agriculture and residential development. Bennett's Mill Pond is to the north of Bridge #16. A
cypress-gum swamp community (e.g. bald cypress - Taxodium distichum; sweet gum - Liquidambar styraciflua)
dominates the project area, occurring adjacent to SR 1222 and along the banks of Rockyhock Creek. Other
vegetation common in the area includes various grasses (e.g. fescue - Festuca sp., crabgrass - Digitaria sp.),
herbs (e.g. wild onion - Allium canadense), shrubs and trees (e.g. winged sumac - Rhus copallina; yellow-poplar
- Liriodendron tulipifera). Coastal wetland plant species were not observed in the surrounding area of the project
site.
Rockyhock Creek flows north to south underneath Bridge #16 to its confluence with the Chowan River, which in
turn flows into the Albemarle Sound. Water depth of the creek is approximately 6 feet at normal water level
(NWL). Rockyhock Creek carries the Best Usage Classification of "B-NSW", assigned by the .Division of Water
Quality (DQW). No water resources classified as "High Quality Waters" (HQW), Water Supplies (WS-I or WS-II),
or Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW) occur within 1.0 mile of the project area. Rockyhock Creek is also
designated an anadromous fish spawning area. The Division of Coastal Management (DCM) classifies Rockyhock
Creek as "Public Trust Area/Public Trust Shoreline" AECs.
A memorandum dated 12 Sep 2000 from the NC Department of Cultural Resources State Historic Preservation
Office (SHPO) mentions that there are no known historic or archaeological sites within the project area. Regarding
rare and protected species impacts, the bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) is the only federally protected species
listed for Chowan County. With regard to impacts this project may have on bald eagle ecology, NCDOT submitted
a biological conclusion of "May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect" to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for
concurrence.
DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL
NCDOT is proposing to demolish Bridge #16 over Rockyhock Creek on SR 1222 (Chowan County), and replace it
with a new, cored slab bridge that is approximately 32-feet longer and 12-feet wider. Traffic will be re-routed on
an off-.site detour during construction. NCDOT also plans to replace a reinforced concrete box culvert on SR 1222,
approximately 0.13 mile southwest of the proposed bridge replacement site proper. This culvert site was not
determined to be a CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) per G.S. 113A-113.
Existing Bridge #16 will be removed using NCDOT Best Management Practices for bridge demolition and removal
without dropping bridge components into the water. All components of the bridge will be removed. The proposed
replacement structure is approximately 98-ft long x 36-ft wide and will be placed. in the same location as the
existing bridge using top-down construction. The proposed roadway approaches extending approximately 110 feet
from the east end of the bridge and 280 feet from the west end will be widened to a 24-foot pavement width to
provide two 12-foot travel lanes with 5-foot shoulders (8-foot where guardrails are needed).
The proposed development involves filling, excavating and/or mechanized clearing in either riverine 404 wetlands

Bridge #16 Replacement - Chowan Co.
Page 3 of 3
or upland areas for pipe replacement and roadway improvements. Class "B" riprap is shown on the drawing being
t
placed on the west ends of the bridge. Relocation of a water line at the culvert site will be required; the applicant
states it will be replaced using directional bore techniques.
As noted in the Categorical Exclusion document, NCDOT will observe a moratorium on in-water work between 15
February and 30 June to protect fish spawning and will follow "Stream Crossing Guidelines for Anadromous Fish
Passage". The Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) initially agreed to provide compensatory mitigation for
0.223 acre of riverine wetland .impact and 72 feet of stream impact (reference EEP Mitigation Acceptance Letter
dated 3 Oct OS). However, due to changes in project design, NCDOT has requested that EEP do compensatory
mitigation for riverine wetland impacts for 0.198 acre vs. 0.223 acre (reference NCDOT letter dated 30 Jan 06). A
response letter from EEP is anticipated. DWQ has issued Stormwater Permit No. SW7050512 for this project.
ANTICIPATED IMPACTS
^ Shading of 0.004 acre of Public Trust Area (PTA) surface waters due to bridge placement.
^ Permanent impact to 0.08 acre of 404 wetlands (versus 0.072 as indicated in application) due to permanent fill.
^ Permanent impact to 0:016 acre of 404 wetlands due to excavation.
^ Permanent impact to 0.110 acre of 404 wetlands due to mechanized clearing.
^ Navigation clearance underneath proposed bridge will not change.
^ Temporary turbidity may occur during demolition of the existing bridge and construction of the new bridge;
however, applicant will use BMP for the protection of surface water to minimize these impacts.
^ Proposed new design does not appear to impede potential access to Public Trust Waters.
^ In-water moratorium between 15 February and 30 June of each year may delay or interrupt construction but
will minimize impacts to anadromous fish resources.
Submitted by: Wanda S. Gooden
Date Submitted: 9 Feb 06

MAJOR PERMIT FEE MATRIX
Auplicant: NCDOT, Bridge #16, SR 1222
Selection Development Type Fee DCM % DWQ
(14300 1601 435100093 1625 6253) (24300 1602 435100095 2341)
I. Private, non-commercial
development that does not $250 100% ($250) 0% ($0)
involve the filling or
excavation of any wetlands
or o en water areas:
II. Public or commercial
development that does not $400 100% ($400) 0% ($0)
involve the filling or
excavation of any wetlands
or o en water areas:
III. For development that
involves the filling and/or
excavation of up to 1 acre
of wetlands and/or open
water areas, determine if A,
B, C, or D below a lies:
III(A). For Private non-
commercial development, if $250 100% ($250) 0% ($0)
General Water Quality ~ .
Certification No. 3301 (see _,
attached can be a lied: -
III(B). For public or
commercial development, if $400 100% ($400) 0% ($0)
General Water Quality
Certification No. 3301 (see
attached can be a lied:
III(C). If General Water
~ Quality Certification No. $400 60% ($240) 40% ($160}
3301 (see attached) could
be applied, but DCM staff
determined that additional
review and written DWQ
concurrence is needed
because of concerns
related to water quality or
a uatic life:
III(D). If General Water
Quality Certification No. $400 60% ($240) 40% ($160}
3301 (see attached) cannot
~~~,;,. be..a lied:
IV. For development that
involves the filling and/or $475 60% ($285) 40% ($190)
excavation of more than
one acre of wetlands and/or
o en water areas:

.,
,~
Natural Resources Technical Report for the P reeks Chowan County f
Bridge No. 16 on SR 1222 over Rockyhock C ,

TIP No. B-3636 ~~,~:~ ~ ,s ~,,z ~,:;~ A. ~,:ra~ fFa ~ • _
<<
Federal Aid Froject No. BRZ-1222(5) ~-
State Project No. 8.2030401
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS BRANCH
NATURAL SYSTEMS iJNIT
Chris Underwood, Environmental Specialist
October 2005

r~
~~
Natural Resources Technical Report for the proposed replacement of
Bridge No. 16 on SR 1222 over Rockyhock Creek, Chowan County
Executive Summary
TIP No. 5-3636
Federal Aid Project No. BRZ-1222(5)
State Project No. 8.2030401
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS BRANCH
NATURAL SYSTEMS UNIT
Chris Underwood, Environmental Specialist
October 2005

,_
B-3636
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ))~ ~,~ ~-~;~~
CHOWAN COUNTY
. --, ,;-~,.--,. m, ~,F-~„M.,

Bridge No. 16 over Rockyhock Creek on SR 1222 (Rockyhock Road) in Chowan County.
INTRODUCTION
The proposed project, Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) No. B-3636, will replace
Bridge No. 16 on SR 1222 over. Rockyhock Creek in Chowan County, North. Carolina. The
bridge, constructed in 1949, is currently structurally deficient and in need of replacement. The
replacement is intended to provide a safer bridge consistent with federal and state bridge
standards.
The proposed project is situated in the northeastern portion of the Coastal Plain physiographic
province. The geography consists predominantly of gently sloping uplands and broad, level
floodplains along most streams. The elevation of the project study area is approximately 50 feet
above Mean Sea Level (MSL). The Land uses surrounding and within the project study area are
mainly forests, agricultural f elds, and some residential development. Also, Bennett's Millpond is
to the north of Bridge No. 16. Chowan silt loam and Dorovan muck aze classified as hydric soils.
PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
Water Resources
The proposed project is situated in the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) Sub-
basin 03-01-04 and Hydrologic Unit (HUC) 03010203 of the Chowan River Basin. The project
study area contains approximately 400 linear feet of Rockyhock Creek. Rockyhock Creek flows
north to south underneath the bridge proposed for replacement.
The best usage classification of this section of Rockyhock Creek is class B-NSW (DWQ Index
No. 25-22, 9/6/79). No High Quality Waters (HQW), Water Supplies (WS-I or WS-II), or
Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW) occur within the project vicinity.
Biotic Resources
Three plant communities were observed in the project study area: mesic mixed hardwood forest,
cypress-gum forest, and maintained-disturbed azeas. Design alternatives have yet to be identified
for this project, therefore no estimated area of impact to these natural communities has been
calculated at this time. The following table describes the acreage of plant. communities within the
project study area; however, actual impact acreage within the construction limits will likely be,
less.
Table 1. Natural Communities within the Project Study Area.
Communi~ T e Percenta a of Project Stud Area
Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest 5%
C ress-Gum Forest 70%
Maintained-Disturbed Area 25%
-i-

w
~1
JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS
Surface Waters and Wetlands
Rockyhock Creek is a jurisdictional surface water under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(CWA). One jurisdictional wetland was identified within the project study area. Since no
alternatives have been selected, specific impacts to waters of the United States cannot by
determined. However, some impacts to Rockyhock Creek and the. wetland could be anticipated
for the proposed project. The following table describes the acreage of the wetland and linear
footage of the stream located within the project study area; however, actual impacts within the
construction limits will likely be less.
Tahle 2. Jurisdictional Wetlands and Streams within the Pro.iect Study Area.
Jurisdictional Wetland/Stream Area within Pro'ect Stud Area...
Wetland 1 9 acres
Rockyhock Creek 400 linear feet
The bridge superstructure is reinforced concrete deck on timber joists. The substructure is timber
caps on timber piles. Removal of the superstructure and substructure is not likely to cause fill in
surface waters.
The following issues apply to the proposed project:
• Anadromous fish moratorium
• CAMA AEC (Public Trust Waters)
Permits
In accordance with the Federal Register (January 15, 2002), Part II, Volume 67, Number 10, the
project will likely require authorization under a Section 404 Nationwide Permit #23 (Approved
Categorical Exclusions). A Nationwide Permit # 33 (Temporary ~ Construction, Access, and
Dewatering) may be needed for temporary construction access if that is not addressed in the
NEPA document. A final permitting strategy cannot be developed until a design alternative is
selected.
Section 401 General Water Quality Certifications for NWP #23 and #33 are No. 3361 and 3366,
respectively. Written concurrence from the N.C. Division of Water Quality (DWQ) is not
required provided all standazd conditions of these Certifications are met. Final determination of
permit applicability lies with USACE. NCDOT will coordinate with the USACE after the
completion of final design to obtain the necessary permits.
Mitigation
In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H.0506(h) and 40 CFR 1508.20, mitigation will be required for
permanent impacts to jurisdictional streams. In addition, mitigation will be required for
permanent wetland impacts. At this time, no design alternatives have been selected; however,
once an alternative and right-of--way widths are established, specific impact calculations to
wetlands and streams can be determined and mitigation requirements can be further evaluated.
Federally-Protected Species
Plants and animals with federal classifications of Endangered (E), Threatened (T), Proposed
Endangered (PE), and Proposed Threatened (PT) aze protected under provisions of Section 7 and
-ii-

n
Section 9 of the ESA. According to the January 29, 2003 USFWS listing, the bald eagle is the
only federally threatened species listed for Chowan County.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect
The project area is approximately 4 miles upstream of the confluence of Rockyhock
Creek and~the Chowan River and suitable nesting and foraging habitat is available. This habitat
consisted of cypress-gum swamp adjacent to Bennett's Mill Pond. A walking visual search for the
species was conducted to ensure no individuals existed within the immediate vicinity of the
proposed bridge replacement. Also a canoe survey of Bennet's Mill Pond was conducted to
determine if there were nests nearby. In addition, each road that parallels Rockyhock Creek was
driven to survey the trees along the creek for nests. During the survey, no bald- eagles or their
_ __ _. nests were_observed. In addition, the North Carolina Natural.Heritage Program database of rare ....... .
and protected species was reviewed and revealed no records of bald eagles in the project area.
Therefore, construction of the proposed project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect
this species.
-ui-

Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... i
1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. ..1
1.1 Project Description ..............................................................................................................:... ..1
1.2 Methodology ........................................................................................................................... ..1
1.3 Definition of Area Terminology ............................................................................................. ..2
1.4 Qualifications of Principal Investigator .....................................:.......:.................................... ..2
2.0 PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF PROJECT AREA .................................................... ..2
2.1 Regional Characteristics ......................................................................................................... ..3
2.2 Soils ........................................................................................................................................ ..3
2.3 Water Resources ...........................:..:...................................................................................... ..4
2.3.1 Physical Characteristics of Impacted Surface Waters ......................................................... ..4
2.3.2 Best Usage Classification ....................................................................................................
,.. ... ..4
2.3.3 Water Quality ..................................:.................................................................................... ..5
2.3.3.1 General Watershed Characteristics ................................................................................... ..5
2.3.3.2 Ambient Water Quality Monitoring/Biologic Water Quality Monitoring ........................ ..5
2.3.3.3 Point Source Dischargers .................................................................................................. ..5

.................................................................
2.3.4 Summary of Anticipated Impacts ...............:.. ..... ..5
3.0 BIOTIC RESOURCES ........................................................................................................... ..6
3.1 Terrestrial Communities ......................................................................................................... ..6
3.1.1 Maintained/Disturbed .......................................................................................................... ..7
3.1.2 Cypress-gum Swamp Forest ................................................................................................ ..8
3.1.3 Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest .........................................:........................... ..8
3.2 Aquatic Communities ....................:........................................................................................ ..8
3.3 Summary of Anticipated Impacts ........................................................................................... ..9
3.3.1 Impacts to Terrestrial Communities ..................................................................................... ..9
3.3.2 Impacts to Aquatic Communities ...................................................:..................................... 10
4.0 JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS .................................::.:.:.:..................................
...................... 11
4.1 Waters of the United States ..................................................................................................... 11
4.1.1 Characteristics of Wetlands and Surface Waters ................................................................. 11
4:1.2 Permits and Consultations ................................................................................................... 12
4.1.2.1 Section 404 Permits .. ................................................................................................... 12
4.1.2.2 Water Quality Certification ................:.............................................................................. 12
4.1.2.3 Coastal Area Management Act Permitting ........................................................................ 13
4.1.3 Mitigation of Wetland Impacts ............................................................................................ 13
4.1.3.1 Avoidance .........................................:..................................................:............................ 13
4.1.3.2 Minimization ..................................................................................................................... 13
4.1.3.3 Compensatory Mitigation ................................................................................................. 14
4.2 Rare and Protected Species ......................................................:.............................................. 14
4.2.1 Federally-Protected Species ................................................................................................. 14
4.2.2 Federal Species of Concern ................................................................................................. 15
5.0 REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................ 17
6.0 APPENDIX ......................................................:....................................................................... 19
Figures, Wetland Forms, Jurisdictional Determination, and FWS Concurrence
iv

1.0 INTRODUCTION
The following Natural Resources Technical Report is submitted to assist in the preparation of a
Categorical Exclusion (CE) for the proposed project. The purpose of this document is to inventory and
describe the natural resources which occur within the proposed right-of--way boundaries and which are
likely to be impacted by the proposed action. Assessments of the nature and severity of probable impacts
to these natural resources are provided, along with recommendations for measures that will muumize
resource impacts.
This report identifies azeas of particular environmental concern, which may affect the selection of a
preferred alignment or may necessitate changes in design criteria..Such environmental concerns should
be addressed during the ~ preliminary•-planning -stages of the proposed • project• in order ~to~ ~ maintain-- •° ~ - ~- •- ~ ~•
environmental quality in the most efficient and effective manner. The analyses contained in this
document aze relevant only in the context of the existing preliminary project boundaries and design. If
design parameters and criteria change, additional field investigations may be necessary.
1.1 Project Description
The proposed project calls for the replacement of an obsolete bridge, bridge No. 16, on SR 1222 over
Rockyhock Creek in Chowan County, North Carolina. Figure 1 depicts the project vicinity. Bridge No.
16 will be replaced in place with a new bridge with traffic detoured off-site on local roads during
construction. The existing right-of--way is approximately 60 feet from ditch line to ditch line. The
proposed right-of--way is an 80-foot corridor. Approximately 1250 feet of the approaches to the bridge
will be upgraded.
1.2 Methodology
Prior to a site visit, published resource information pertaining to the project area was gathered and
reviewed. Resources utilized in this preliminary investigation of the project area include:
- U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) quadrangle map (Edenhouse, N.C.)
- U.S. Fish and Wildlife. Service (USFWS) National Wetland Inventory (NWI) Map (Edenhouse,
N.C.)
- NCDOT aerial photomosaics of the project area
- Natural Resource Conservation Service (MRCS) Soil Survey of Chowan/Perquimans County,
North Carolina (1986).
- NC Center for Geographic Information and Analysis Environmental Sensitivity Base Map of
Chowan County (1995)
Water resource information was obtained .from publications of the Department of Environment and
Natural Resources. Quantitative sampling was not undertaken to support existing water quality data.
Information concerning the occurrence of federal and state protected species in the study area was
obtained from the USFWS list of protected and candidate species (January 29, 2003) and from the N.C.
Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) database of rare species and unique habitats. NCNHP files were
reviewed for documented sightings of state or federally listed species and locations of significant natural
areas.
1

NCDOT Environmental Biologist Chris Underwood conducted general field surveys along the proposed
alignment on April 14, 2004. Water resources were identified and their physical characteristics were
recorded. Plant communities and their associated wildlife were also identified and described. Terrestrial
community classifications generally follow Schafale and Weakley (1990) where possible, and plant
taxonomy follows Radford, et al. (1968). Animal taxonomy follows Martof, et al. (1980), Menhenick
(1991), Potter, et al. (1980), and Webster, et al. (1985). Vegetative communities were mapped utilizing
aerial photography of the project site. Predictions regarding wildlife community composition involved
general qualitative habitat assessment based on existing vegetative communities. Field surveys for
federally-protected species were performed following initial habitat assessments where suitable habitat
for each species was identified.
Jurisdictional wetlands were identified and evaluated based on criteria established in the "Corps of
Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual" (Environment Laboratory, 1987) and "Guidance for Rating the
Values of Wetlands in North Carolina" (Division of Environmental Management, 1995). Wetlands were
classified based on the classification scheme of Cowardin, et al. (1979).
1.3 Definition of Area Terminology
For the purposes of this document, the following terms are used concerning the limits of natural
resources investigations. "Project area" denotes the area bounded by the proposed right-of--way limits
along the full length of the project alignment. "Project vicinity" is defined as an area extending 0:6 mile
on all sides of the project area, and "project region" denotes an area equivalent in size to the area
represented by a 7.5 minute USGS quadrangle map, i.e. 61.8 square miles.
1.4 Qualifications of Principal Investigator
Investigator: Chris Underwood
Education: BS Wildlife and Fisheries Science, University of Tennessee at Knoxville, 1989
Experience: Environmental Biologist, NCDOT, May 2003- Present
Senior Biologist, Tennessee Valley Authority, 1991- 2003
Expertise: Fish taxonomy, stream biology, fisheries biology, natural resource surveys, &
wetland delineations
2.0 PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF PROJECT AREA
Soil and water resources, which occur in the project area, are discussed below with respect to possible
environmental concerns. Soil properties and site topography significantly influence the potential for soil
erosion and compaction, along with other possible construction limitations or management concerns.
Water resources within the project area present important management limitations due to the need to
regulate water movement and the increased potential for water quality degradation. Excessive soil
disturbance resulting from construction activities can potentially alter both the flow and quality of water
resources, limiting downstream uses. In addition, soil characteristics and the availability of water
directly influence the composition and distribution of flora and fauna in biotic communities, thus
affecting the characteristics of these resources.
2

2.1 Regional Characteristics
The project area of Chowan County lies in the Coastal Plain physiographic province of northeastern
North Carolina. The topography of Chowan County is nearly level with the lowest points being along
major drainageways. Elevations in the project region range from near sea level to approximately 50.0 feet
above sea level near the Snow Hill area of Chowan County.
The project area occurs approximately 4 miles upstream of the mouth of Rockyhock Creek as it enters the
Chowan River. The majority of the project vicinity consists of natural forested communities. Limited
areas of agriculture also occur within the project vicinity. Land use patterns in the project region aze not
expected to change in the foreseeable fiiture.
2.2 Soils
The dominant soils occurring within the project azea are Chowan silt loam (MRCS 1999). This soil
occurs on flood plains of small streams that flow into Albemarle Sound, Chowan River, and Perquimans
River. It is a very poorly drained soil that is underlain by muck. Included with this soil are small areas
of Dorovan muck.
_ _ __.._ Tahle_l._provides an inventory of the sQecific soil types which occur in th_e project area. A brief _
description of each soil type is also provided. Proportional area of each soil type was determined from
MRCS soil maps of the project area.
Table 1. Soils occurring in the project area.
Map Unit Soil Series % Slope % of Project Area Hydric Class.
CO Chowan Silt Loam Nearly Nearly 100 H
level
DO Dorovan Muck Neazly Unmapped; H
level inclusions
Note: H Hydric soils or soils having hydric soils as a major component.
As stated above, Chowan silt loam is a nearly level, very poorly drained soil that occurs on the flood
plains of small streams that flow into the Albemarle Sound. Typically, the surface layer is dark grayish
brown silt loam 6.0 inches thick. Below that, to a depth of 27 inches, is gray silty clay loam in the upper
part and dark grayish brown silt loam in the lower part. The underlying material, to a depth of 80.0
inches, is black muck. This soil ranges from extremely acidic to moderately acidic in the mineral horizon
and is extremely acidic to strongly acidic in the organic horizon. Chowan silt loam is subject to frequent
flooding for long periods.
Dorovan muck soils are nearly level, poorly drained soils on the Albemarle Sound, Chowan River,
Perquimans River, and major streams. Typically, the surface layer is very dark brown muck 3.0 inches
thick. Below that to a depth of 96.0 inches is black muck. The soil is made up of highly decomposed
organic matter and is extremely acidic. The seasonal high water table is at or neaz the surface and the
soil is subject to frequent flooding for extended periods of time.
Erosion hazards are generally slight, primarily due to the nearly level topography of the project area.
Surface runoff velocity under such conditions is low, limiting its erosive potential.
3

As indicated in Table 2, forest productivity for soils occurring in the project area is poor as compared to
other soils in the Coastal Plain region. Due to the severe wetness, active forest management for timber
production is not present in the project corridor. However, it is likely that the swamp forests in the
project corridor have been harvested in the past and may possibly be harvested again in the future. 'This
is most likely to occur when drought and high timber prices combine to allow easier access and financial
incentive for timber harvest.
_Table 2 Potential forest productivity of soils in the project area.
Soil Series Site Index-Water tupelo Green ash
~hnwan silt loam 80 98
Note: Site Index is defined as the expected average height in feet of dominant trees in an even aged stand at 50
years of age. Water tupelo and Green ash are the only species for which a site index was provided in the
soil survey
2.3 Water Resources
This section contains information concerning surface water resources likely to be impacted by the
- proposed-.pr-oject-Water--resoarce-assessments include .the, physis~l c~harac..teristics, best usage standards, _
and water quality aspects of the water resources, along with their relationship to major regional drainage
systems. Probable impacts to surface water resources are also discussed, as are means to min;Tnize
impacts.
2.3.1 Physical Characteristics of Impacted Surface Waters
Water resources within the project vicinity are part of sub-basin 030104 of the Chowan River basin
(HUC 03010203). The project area occurs approximately four miles upstream of the confluence of
Rockyhock Creek and the main stem of the Chowan River.
2.3.2 Best Usage Classification
Streams have been assigned a best usage classification by the Division of Water Quality (DWQ) which
reflects water quality conditions and potential resource usage. Unnamed streams or tributaries carry the
same best usage classification as that assigned to the stream segment.to which they aze a tributary.
Rockyhock Creek carries the best usage classification of B-NSW (DWQ Index No. 25-22, 9/6/79). Class
B refers to those waters designated for primary recreation and any other usage specified by the "C"
classification; NSW (Nutrient Sensitive Waters) refers to waters which require limitations on nutrient
inputs. Class C waters are defined as suitable for aquatic life propagation and survival, fishing, wildlife,
secondary recreation, and agriculture. Additionally, Rockyhock Creek is a designated anadromous fish
spawning area for American shad, blueback herring, and alewife.
No waters classified as High Quality Waters (HQW), Water Supplies (WS-I or WS-I>) or
Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW) occur within 1.0 miles of project study area.
4

2.3.3 Water Quality
This section describes the water quality of the water resources within the project area. Potential
sediment loads and toxin concentrations of these waters from both point sources and nonpoint sources
are evaluated. Water quality assessments are made based on published resource information and existing
general watershed characteristics. These data provide.insight into the value of water resources within the
project area to meet human needs and. to provide habitat for aquatic organisms.
2.3.3.1 General Watershed Characteristics
The watershed of Rockyhock Creek is dominated by nearly equal proportions of forestland and
- agricultural lands with the immediate -shoreline of the creek being -dominated by a forested-swamp ~ °• ~--~-•
community. Residential and commercial development is also present in the project vicinity, but only to a
minor extent. Non-point source runoff from developed residentiaUcommercial areas and agricultural
practices is likely to be a source of water quality degradation to the water resources located in the project
vicinity. However, the low intensity of such .development and the limited surface azea of impervious
surfaces suggest that non-point source inputs from developed lands aze not likely to be severe. Inputs of
non-point source pollution from agricultural areas within the project area are likely to be more of a
contributing factor. The high proportion of surface azea occupied by forestland, along with the gently
-s}ciping--topo~phy- and-le~v-€r-odibl-it-y-o-f~he-sail,s,-suggest.that~.edimentation_.o~surf~se waters is_ --.-- - -
probably moderate to low for Rockyhock Creek.
2.3.3.2 Ambient Water Quality Monitoring/Biologic Water Quality Monitoring
The DWQ has initiated a basinwide approach to water quality management for the 17 river basins of
North Carolina, which includes biologic, chemical, and physical data that aze collected at fixed sampling
points. Based on these data, basinwide water quality is reassessed every five years for each river basin.
Rockyhock Creek is located in the Chowan River basin (HUC 03010203), sub-basin 030104. A water
quality monitoring site (020253632) is located downstream of the project area at the US 17 crossing of
the Chowan River. According to the Chowan River Basin Basinwide Assessment Report (DWQ, 3anuary
2000), the Chowan River received aGood-Fair bioclassification for site 020253632 in 2000.
2.3.3.3 Point Source Dischargers
Point source dischargers located throughout North Cazolina aze permitted through the National Pollutant
Dischazge Elimination System (NPDES) program administered by the DWQ. All dischargers are
required to register for a permit. No permitted dischargers are listed for water resources within the
project area.
2.3.4 Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Potential impacts to water resources, which often result from highway construction, occur primarily
because of increased sedimentation as a result of accelerated soil erosion from exposed areas.
Sedimentation and substrate disturbance occurring during construction can significantly reduce water
clarity and dissolved oxygen content, in addition to the direct clogging of stream channels. Effects are
usually most severe locally but may. extend downstream for a considerable distance, with decreasing
intensity. However, impacts can be minimized through adequate planning which emphasizes the
5

reduction of disturbed surface area and by protecting exposed areas from the energy of falling and
flowing waters. Use of BMPs will also help to ensure that impacts to water quality are temporary and
localized rather than long-term and extensive.
Long term impacts to water resources resulting from the proposed project are expected to be minor, given
the site characteristics. Soil erosion from exposed areas should be slight due to the nearly level
topography of the site and the relatively slow flow rates of Rockyhock Creek.
Due to the cumulative effect of water quality degradation and varied usage of water .resources
downstream, consideration should be taken to minimize sediment and toxic dischazge.into surface waters.
In order to rn;n;m;~e potential impacts to water resources in the project area, NCDOT's Best Management
• -~- Practices for the Protection of Surfaee~ Waters should be enforced during• the construction phase of the ~ -- ~ ~ • • ••
project. This would include:
1) elimination or reduction of direct and non-point discharge into the water bodies and
minimization of activities conducted in streams.
2) installation of temporary silt fences, dikes, and earth berms to control runoff during
construction.
3) placement of temporary ground cover or re-seeding of disturbed sites to reduce runoff
__ _ _ and decrease sediment loadings. _ _ _
4) elimination of construction staging areas in floodplains or adjacent to streams to
m;t1;m;ze disturbed surface area in close proximity to surface waters and to reduce
the potential for accidental discharge of toxins into water bodies.
5) protection of existing streambank vegetation to the greatest extent possible.
6) prevention of any uncured concrete coming into contact with the waters of Rockyhock Creek
3.0 BIOTIC RESOURCES
This section describes the biotic communities encountered in the project area, as well as the relationships
between fauna and flora within these ecosystems. The composition and distribution of biotic
communities throughout the project azea are reflective of topography, soils, hydrology, and past and
present land uses. Descriptions of the terrestrial systems are presented in the context of plant community
classifications, defined by the dominant plant species observed. Representative animal species which aze
likely to occur in these habitats (based on published range distributions) aze also cited.
Scientific nomenclature and common names (when applicable)' are provided for each animal and plant
species described. Subsequent references to the same organism refer to the common name only.
3.1 Terresixial Communities
Three distinct terrestrial communities were identified within the project area: maintained/disturbed,
cypress-gum swamp, and mesic mixed hardwood forest. Figure 2 depicts these communities. Community
composition in the project vicinity is primarily reflective of the current and prior land uses of the area.
Each community type exhibits some degree of past or continued human disturbance, which has affected
their structure or species composition. It is likely that much of the original bald cypress (Taxodium
distichum) that would have dominated the cypress-gum community has been removed through logging.
Bald cypress has been replaced by swamp tupelo (Nyssa aquatics) as the dominant species. Community
boundaries within the project area tend to be well defined since forested communities usually border
6

open; disturbed areas.
The landscape immediately surrounding the project area is occupied to a lazge extent by agriculture and
forestland, interspersed with minor development along roadways. Remaining forests are frequently
found along slopes or bottomlands, or as buffers between fields or around residential areas.
Many faunal species are highly adaptive and may populate the entire range of terrestrial communities
discussed. Raccoon (Procyon lotor), Virginia opossum (Didelphis virginiana) and northern cardinal
(Cardinalis cardinalis) are examples of species, which are likely to occur in all of the habitats in the
project area. These species are adapted to forest/clearing boundary conditions and likely utilize
numerous habitats to some extent for shelter, foraging, or movement corridors. Such species may not be
.: v,...... listed for-each community described. . _ .._... ............... ......... -,.:....- -... _ ........... _ . _ ........- _ ...._........ _.. ... _ .. _
Wildlife observed during the site visit. includes: the Virginia opossum, ruby-throated hi7mm;ngbird
(Archilocus colubris), tufted titmouse (Parus bicolor), Carolina chickadee (Parus carolinensis), northern
parula (Parula americana), black-and-white warbler (Mniotilta varia), yellow-throated warbler
(Dendroica dominica), Carolina wren (Thryothorus ludovicianus), song sparrow (Melospiza melodia),
summer tanager (Piranga rubra), northern cardinal (Cardinalis cardinalis}, turkey vulture (Cathartes
aura), black vulture (Coragyps atratus), and red-shouldered hawk (Buteo lineatus).
3.1.1 MaintainedJDistnrbed
The Maintained/Disturbed community occupies ~-25% of the project area and consists of azeas heavily
impacted and maintained by human development activities. The project area to a large extent consists of
roadside areas including: the road shoulders and maintained right-of--way of existing SR 1222, utility
rights-of--way, and roadways. Significant soil disturbance and compaction, along with frequent mowing
and/or herbicide application, inhibit natural succession and keep this community in an eazly successional
state. As a result, the vegetation of this community is dominated by grasses and herbs with scattered
trees and shrubs.
Common plants of this community are fescue (Festuca sp.), crabgrass (Digitaria sp.), wild onion (Allium
canadense), and foxtail grass (Setaria sp.). Important associate species include goldenrod (Solidago
sp.), dandelion (Taraxacum officinale), clover (Trifolium spp.}, plantain (Plantago sp.), blackberry
(Rubus sp.), henbit (Lamium spp.), Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), Queen Ann's lace
(Daucus carota), broomsedge (Andropogon virginicus), and aster (Aster sp.). Seedlings of various tree
species occur along road slopes, utility rights-of--way, and areas where mowing is less frequent. These
species include yellow poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), and
winged sumac (Rhos copallina).
Wildlife found in this community is limited and consists primarily of wide-ranging, adaptable species
such as hispid cotton rat (Sigmodon hispidus), white-footed mouse (Peromyscus leucopus), eastern
harvest mouse (Reithrodontomys humulis), and eastern cottontail rabbit (Sylvilagus floridanus), which
aze well suited to coexistence with human development. Nocturnal mammals common to suburban areas,
such as the raccoon and Virginia opossum, may travel periodically through the project area, and gray
squirrels (Sciunis carolinensis) may inhabit forested fringes. Common reptiles include the eastern fence
lizard (Sceloporus undulatus) and eastern box turtle (Terrapene Caroline), and bird populations likely
include species such as northern cardinal, Cazolina chickadee, American robin (Turdus migratorius),
mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), common grackle (Ouiscalus quiscula), and European starling
7

(Sturnus vulgaris). Predators found in this community are the black racer (Coluber constrictor) and the
rat snake (Elaphe obsoleta).
3.1.2 Cypress-gum Swamp Forest
This community type comprises ~70% of the project area. This community occurs adjacent to SR 1222
and the banks of Rockyhock Creek, except where human development or disturbance has displaced it.
Dominant vegetation. found in this community includes bald cypress, sweetgum, willow (Salix sp.), red
maple (Ater rubrum), swamp tupelo, black cherry. (Prunus serotina), and sweetbay (Magnolia
virginiana) in the overstory. The understory is comprised of Carolina ash (Fraxinus caroliniana), giant
• • ° ---cane (Arundinaria °gigantea}, false nettle• {Boehmeria cylindriea), ~greenbrier (Smilax sp.}; netted~~ ~ - - ~- ~ ••- ~•-
chainfern (Woodwardia areolata), and poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans). Wax myrtle (Myrica
cerifera) is also prevalent along the edge between this community and the roadside shoulder.
Wildlife expected in this community includes gray squirrel, gray fox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus),
raccoon, muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus), Virginia opossum, barred owl (Strix varia), great blue heron
(Ardea herodias), pileated woodpecker (Dryocopus pileatus), yellow-bellied sapsucker (.Sphyrapicus
varius), wood duck (Aix sponsa), and downy woodpecker (Picoides pubescens).
Amphibians common to this community include the southern two-toed amphiuma (Amphiuma means),
spring peeper (Hyla crucifer), southern leopard frog (Rana sphenocephala), and the green tree frog (Hyla
cinerea). Reptiles such as the northern water snake (Nerodia sipedon), eastern cottonmouth
(Agkistrodon piscivorous), and the common snapping turtle (Chelydra serpentina) may also be found.
An osprey (Pandion haliaetus), green-backed heron (Butorides striatus), great blue heron, anhinga
(Anhinga anhinga), fish crow (Corvus ossifragus), wood duck, mallard (Anas platyrhynchos), and
Canada goose (Branta canadensis) were observed near the project.
3.1.3 Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest
The mesic mixed hardwoods are located on the upland area to the southeast of Bridge 16 and comprises
^~5% of the plant communities the project study area. Canopy species found include yellow poplar
(Liriodendron tulipfera), white oak (Quercus alba), laurel oak (Quercus laurifolia), sweetgum
(Liquidambar styraciflua), and loblolly pine (Pinus taeda). Understory species include water oak
(Quercus nigra), laurel oak, sweetgum, loblolly pine, American holly (Ilex opaca), grapevine (Vitis sp.),
multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora), and privet (Ligustrum vulgare}. Plants in the herbaceous layer include
fescue (Festuca sp.), ironweed (Vernonia altissima), poison ivy, netted chain fern (Woodwardia
areolata), columbine (Aquilegia canadensis), jack-in-the-pulpit (Arisaema triphyllum), and honeysuckle
(Lonicera sp.).
Considering the small size of this community and the close proximity of the cypress-gum swamp forest,
the wildlife found here would be similar to the cypress-gum swamp.
3.2 Aquatic Communities
One aquatic community type, defined as a Coastal Plain Perennial Stream, will be impacted by the
8

proposed project. Rockyhock Creek is characterized by slow moving, tannin stained water. The creek is
accompanied in the project area by an extensive cypress-gum swamp community.
Coastal plain perennial streams are utilized by a variety of aquatic/semiaquatic insects such as dragonfly
(Odonata) and stonefly (Plecoptera) and by.certain species of .crayfish (Cambaridae), and freshwater
mussels. This stream system also supports a diverse fishery including bluegill (Lepomis marcrochirus),
yellow bullhead catfish (Ictalalurus natalis), alewife (Alosa aestivalis), blueback herring (Alosa
aestivalis), bowfin, (Amia Galva), redfm pickerel (Esox americana), pirate perch (Aphredoderus sayanus)
mosquito fish (Gambusia holbrooki), and eastern mud minnow (Umbra pygmaea).
A yellow belly slider (Trachemys scripta scripta) was observed during the site visit.
........._ ... .........w~ ........ ..._.
As stated earlier, Rockyhock Creek is known to be a spawning and nursery area for American shad,
alewife, and blueback herring.
3.3 Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Construction of the proposed project will have various impacts on the biotic resources described. This
section quantifies and qualifies potential impacts to the natural communities within the project area in
terms of the area impacted and the organisms affected. Temporary versus permanent impacts are
considered as well, along with recommendations to m;n;m;~e or eliminate impacts.
3.3.1 Impacts to Terrestrial Communities
Impacts to terrestrial communities will result from project construction due to the clearing and paving of
portions of the project area,. and thus the loss of community area. Table 3 surnmarizes potential
quantitative losses to these biotic communities, resulting from project construction. Calculated
quantitative impacts to terrestrial communities reflect the relative abundance of each community present
in the study area. Estimated impacts are, derived based on the project length of approximately 1,200 feet
and the right-of--way width through the project. However, project construction often does not require
the entire right-of--way and .certain portions of the project area are already paved; therefore, actual
impacts maybe somewhat less.
Table 3. Estimated area impacts to biotic communities.
Alternative 1 replace bridge in place
Community with traffic detoured on existing
roads.
Maintained roadside x:45,
Cypress-gum swamp forest ~ 04
Total `T`i49~
Note: Values cited are in acres
Total impacts indicated in Table 3 are estimates based on the estimated widths of the existing roadway
cross section and the existing right-of--way. Actual impacts should be less once a final design for the
stabilization of SR 1222 north of bridge No. 16 is complete.
The projected loss of terrestrial habitat resulting from project construction will have m;n;mal impact on
9

populations of native flora and fauna. The relatively small scale of the project as a bridge replacement
with minor roadway stabilization will result in a minimum of total habitat loss when the final design is
complete. The impacted forest communities have considerable value as wildlife habitat. However, the
displacement of native flora and fauna away from the project area should be minor.
Animals temporarily displaced by construction activities should repopulate areas suitable for the species
following project completion. As a result, it is unlikely that existing species will be displaced
significantly from the project area following construction. However, to min;m;ze the temporary effects
of project construction, all cleared areas along the roadways should be revegetated soon after project
completion to n~m;ze the loss of wildlife habitat.
• ~ Because the project consists of replacing-a bridge-and stabilizing-the roadway on~-existing location, •- •-~•, -
fragmentation of natural habitats and disruption of normal wildlife movement should not be a serious
concern. The existing roadway already partially disrupts the natural movements of wildlife in habitat
comdors, such that the proposed prof ect is not expected to create unusual environmental conditions.
Direct effects on biotic communities should be minimal. Additionally, secondary development impacts
resulting from prof ect construction are not expected. The prof ect will not open new areas to development
and there will be no upgrade to the level of service currently provided by SR 1222.
3.3.2 Impacts to Aquatic Communities
Potential impacts to aquatic communities downstream of the project area primarily consist of increased
sedimentation of the stream channel and toxic inputs from stormwater runoff. Increased sedimentation
during construction activities and road surface runoff, after construction, are widely recognized as factors
that can contribute to the cumulative degradation of water quality. Aquatic organisms are generally
highly sensitive to changes in water quality. Effects are generally most severe at the point of stream
crossings, but can extend downstream for a considerable distance, if not controlled.
If precautionary measures are not taken, excessive soil erosion from construction sites may result in the
following impacts to surface water resources:
1) Increased turbidity and sedimentation.
2) Reduced light penetration due to reduced water clarity.
3) Reduced concentrations of dissolved oxygen.
4) Increased nutrient loading.
Sedimentation in rivers and streams reduces water clarity and light penetration, affecting the
photosynthetic ability and growth of aquatic vegetation. Suspended particles may also impact benthic
filter feeders inhabiting downstream areas by clogging their filtration apparatus or by covering them with
excessive sediment. Sedimentation affects the concentration of dissolved oxygen in the water column by
raising water temperature. Warmer water contains less oxygen and results in a reduction in aquatic life
dependent on high oxygen concentrations. Moreover, increased nutrient loading can result in the
accelerated growth of certain types of algae at the expense of other aquatic organisms. The loss of
aquatic plants and animals resulting from these processes may ultimately affect terrestrial fauna, which
feed upon these resources.
In addition, the removal of streamside vegetation increases the exposure of the water's surface to direct
sunlight, which results in locally elevated water temperatures and reduced concentrations of dissolved
10

oxygen. The removal or burial of these streambank plants also decreases the food and shelter resources
available to aquatic organisms, and disturbance of streambank vegetation enhances the likelihood of
erosion and sedimentation. Revegetation of streamside zones following construction stabilizes the soil
and shades the water surface, thus mitigating these processes.
Toxic substances from roadways (e.g, oil, gas, etc.) may enter surface waters through stormwater runoff
from impervious surfaces. Such chemical substances may result in the direct mortality of aquatic species
inhabiting the water resources located in the project azea.
Construction of the proposed project will require work to be conducted within Rockyhock Creek.
However, the proposed project should have only minor impacts on downstream aquatic communities,
g.,p az.y y.. gh._. _.._...
• - -••-~~-~~ •-assumin recaution ~ measures azetaken: L-ocal erosion from construction-•activities- ma be hi •~- -
during construction, but appropriate use of BMPs should prevent most sediment from reaching surface
waters. Erosion rates should diminish rapidly following project completion if exposed soils are
revegetated and streambanks are stabilized. Minimizing the azea of streambank disturbance will greatly
aid in limiting erosion from the project area and protecting aquatic communities.. Following project
completion, road shoulders should aid in absorbing toxic runoff from roadways. Other considerations to
protect stream communities include:
1) consideration of bioengineering techniques for streambank protection/stabilization.
2) using native vegetation to stabilize streambanks.
3) mirurnizing/eliminating the use of fertilizers adjacent to streams.
4) properly installing and maintaining all erosion control measures
4.0 JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS
This section provides inventories and impact analyses pertinent to two significant regulatory issues:
Waters of the United States and rare and protected species. These issues retain particular significance
because of federal and state mandates, which regulate their protection. This section deals specifically
with the impact analyses required to satisfy regulatory authority prior to project construction.
4.1 Waters of the United States
Surface waters and wetlands fall under the broad category of "Waters of the United States," as defined in
Section 33 of the Code of Federal Register (CFR) Part 328.3. Any action that proposes to dredge or place
fill material into surface waters or wetlands falls under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (tJSACE) under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344). Surface waters include
all standing or flowing waters which have commercial or recreational value to the public. Wetlands are
identified based on the presence of hydric soils, hydrophytic vegetation, and saturated or flooded
conditions during all or part of the growing season.
4.1.1 Characteristics of Wetlands and Surface Waters
Potential wetland communities were •delineated using the criteria specified in the 1987 "Corps of
Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual". Criteria to delineate jurisdictional wetlands include:
11

1) presence of hydric soils,
2) presence of hydrophytic vegetation, and
3) evidence of prescribed hydrologic characteristics during the growing season
All of these features must be present for an area to be considered a wetland.
One jurisdictional riverine wetland occurs in the project area. This wetland is part of the cypress-gum
swamp. community described in section 3.1.2. The area is frequently flooded and is dominated by
hydrophitic vegetation. Soil profiles in the Dorovan muck soil consists of 0-3.0 inches of lOYR 2/2
brown muck underlain by >20.0 inches of l OYR 2/1 black muck. These soils are very poorly drained and
very acidic.
The classification scheme developed by Cowardin et al. (1979) provides a unifo
classifying wetland and open water systems. Based on this system, the wetlands in
would be classified as PF06F. This classification is~ interpreted as palustrine (P)
deciduous vegetation (6), with asemi-permanently flooded water regime (F).
4.1.2 Permits and Consultations
rrri approach in
the project area
forested (FO),
Impacts to jurisdictional surface waters and wetlands are anticipated from the proposed project. As a
result, construction activities will require permits and certifications from various regulatory agencies in
charge of protecting the water quality of public water resources. Surface water systems and wetlands
receive similar treatment and consideration with respect to most regulatory permits. These permits are
authorized under the Clean Water Act and under separate state. laws regarding significant water
resources.
4.1.2.1: Section 404 Permits
Impacts to jurisdictional wetlands and/or surface .waters may occur from- project construction. In
accardance~ with provisions of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344), a permit will be
required from the USACE for the discharge of dredged or fill material into "Waters of the United States."
The proposed project will require impacts to Rockyhock Creek, and the adjacent wetlands.
Given the magnitude of potential impacts, a Nationwide Permit 33 CFR 330.5 (a) 23 is likely to be
applicable at the stream/wetland crossings found in the project study area. However, final decisions
concerning applicable permits for the proposed project rest with the USACE.
On October 15, 2004, the USACE issued a Jurisdictional Determination (Action ID 200510008) for this
project confirming the location of regulated wetlands and surface waters.
Rockyhock Creek is a designated anadromous fish spawning area. An in-water work moratorium exists
for this stream from February 15 to June 30 of any given year.
4.1.2.2 Water Quality Certification
This project will also require a 401 Water Quality General Certification from the DWQ prior to the
issuance of a Section 404 Nationwide Permit. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act requires that the state
12

issue or deny water quality certification for any federally permitted or licensed activity that may result in
a discharge into Waters of the United States. Section 401 Certification allows surface waters to be
temporarily impacted for the duration of the construction or other land manipulation. Issuance of a 401
Certification from the DWQ is a prerequisite to the issuance of a Section 404 Permit.
4.1.2.3 Coastal Area Management Act Permitting
This project will also require a Major Development Permit from the North Carolina Division of Coastal
Management (DCM). The North Carolina Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) requires that
development activities impacting Areas of Environmental Concern (AEC) in .one of the twenty
designated coastal counties be reviewed and authorized by the DCM.
Rockyhock Creek within the project area is a designated AEC. Therefore, the project will require
authorization in the form of a CAMA Major Development Permit. Issuance of the CAMA Major
Development Permit is also a prerequisite to the issuance of a Section 404 Permit.
4.1.3 Mitigation of Wetland Impacts
The USACE has adopted through the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) a wetland mitigation
policy which embraces the concept of "no net loss of wetlands" and sequencing. The purpose of this
policy is to restore and maintain the chemical, biological and physical integrity of Waters of the United
States, specifically wetlands. Mitigation of wetland impacts has been defined by the CEQ to include:
avoiding impacts, m;n;m;~ing impacts, rectifying impacts, reducing impacts over time and compensating
for impacts (40 CFR 1508.20). Each of these three aspects (avoidance, minimization and compensatory
mitigation) must be considered sequentially.
4.1.3.1 Avoidance
Avoidance mitigation examines all appropriate and practicable possibilities of averting impacts to Waters
of the United States. According to a 1990 Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the USACE, in determ;n?ng "appropriate and practicable"
measures to offset unavoidable impacts, such measures should be appropriate to the scope and degree of
those impacts and practicable in terms of cost, existing technology and logistics in light of overall project
purposes.
Due to the proximity of the project to a large continuum of cypress-gum swamp, it is unlikely that
wetlands can be totally avoided. Additionally, the replacement of bridge No. 16 will require work in
Rockyhock Creek.
4.1.3.2 Minimization
Minimization includes the examination of appropriate and practicable steps to reduce the adverse impacts
to Waters of the United States. Implementation of these steps will be required through project
modifications and permit conditions. Minimization typically focuses on decreasing the footprint of the
proposed project through the reduction to median widths, ROW widths, fill slopes and/or road shoulder
widths.
13

Unavoidable impacts to Waters of the United States should be minimized by modifications in design such
as:
1) perpendicular stream crossings.
2) reduction of fill slopes
3) elimination of staging areas in lowland sites.
4) reduced clearing and grubbing activity in or near floodplain systems.
4.1.3.3 Compensatory Mitigation
Compensatory mitigation is not normally considered until anticipated impacts to Waters of the United• - •~~~
States have been avoided and minimized to the maximum extent possible. It is recognized that "no net
loss of wetlands" functions and values may not be achieved in each and every permit action. Appropriate
and practicable compensatory mitigation is required for unavoidable adverse impacts which remain after
all appropriate and practicable m;n;m;ration has been required. Compensatory actions often include
restoration, creation and enhancement of Waters of the United States. Such actions should be undertaken
in areas adjacent to or contiguous to the discharge site.
In accordance with the "Memorandum of Agreement Among the North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources, the North Carolina Department of Transportation, and the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District" (MOA), July 22, 2003, the North Carolina Department
of Environment and Natural Resources Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP), will be requested to
provide off-site mitigation, if necessary, to satisfy the federal CWA compensatory mitigation
requirements for this project. Compensatory mitigation may be required for this project, although final
determination rests with the USACE.
4.2 Rare and Protected Species
Threatened or endangered species aze species whose populations are in decline and which face probable
extinction in the near future without strict conservation management. Federal law under the Endangered
Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended, protects plant and animal species which have been classified as
Endangered (E), Threatened (T), Proposed Endangered (PE), or Proposed Threatened (PT). Provisions
of Section 7 and Section 9 of the ESA require that any action, which is likely to adversely affect such
federally classified species, be subject to review by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Other
potentially endangered species may receive additional protection under separate state laws. In North
Carolina, protection of endangered species falls under the N.C. State Endangered Species Act and the
N.C. Plant Protection and Conservation Act of 1979, administered and enforced by the N.C. Wildlife
Resources Commission (WRC) and the N.C. Department of Agriculture, respectively.
4.2.1 Federally-Protected Species
As of January 29, 2003, the USFWS lists the following federally-protected species for Chowan County
(Table 5). A brief description of the characteristics and habitat requirements of each species follows
Table 5, along with a conclusion regarding potential project impacts.
14

Table 5 Federally Protected Species for Chowan County
CriPntific Name Common Name Status
Haliaeetus leucocephalus bald eagle Threatened
Hatiaeetus leucocephalus (bald eagle) Threatened
Animal Family: Accipitridae
Date Listed: 3/11/67
Adult bald eagles can be identified by their large white head and short white tail. The body
plumage is dark-brown to .chocolate-brown in color. In flight bald eagles can be identified by
their flat wing soar.
Eagle nests are found in close proximity to water (within a half mile) with a clear flight path to
the water, in the largest living tree in an area, and having an open view of the surrounding land.
Human disturbance can cause an eagle to abandon otherwise suitable habitat. The breeding
season for the bald eagle begins in December or January. Fish are the major food source for bald
eagles. Other sources include coots, herons, and wounded ducks. Food may be live or carrion.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect
The project area is approximately 4 miles upstream of the confluence of Rockyhock Creek and
the Chowan River and suitable nesting and foraging habitat is available. This habitat consisted
of cypress-gum swamp adjacent to Bennett's Millpond. A walking visual search for the species
was conducted to ensure no .individuals existed within the immediate vicinity of the proposed
bridge replacement. Also a canoe survey of Bennet's Millpond was conducted to determine if
there were nests nearby. In addition, each road that parallels Rockyhock Creek was driven to
survey the trees along the creek for nests. During the survey, no bald eagles or their nests were
observed. In addition, the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program database of rare and
protected species was reviewed and revealed no records of bald eagles in the project area.
Therefore, construction of the proposed project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect
this species.
It should also be noted that the bald eagle is currently proposed to be delisted from the list of Endangered
and Threatened Species.
On July 27, 2004, the USFWS concurred with the biological conclusion for bald eagle for this prof ect.
4.2.2 Federal Species of Concern
One Federal Species of Concern (FSC) is listed by the USFWS for Chowan County as of January 29,
2003 (Table 6). FSC species are not afforded federal protection under the Endangered Species Act and
are not subject to any of its provisions, including Section 7, until they are formally proposed or listed as
Threatened or Endangered. However, the status of these species is subject to change, and so should be
included for consideration.
In addition, organisms which are listed as Endangered (E), Threatened (T), or Special Concern (SC) by
the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program list of Rare Plant and Animal Species are afforded limited
15

state protection under the NC State Endangered Species Act and the NC Plant Protection and
Conservation Act of 1979. Species listed under state laws may or may not be federally protected.
Species with state designations of Candidate (C), Significantly Rare (SR), and Watch List (W) are not
protected under state laws; however, evidence suggests that populations of these species are also in
decline.
Table 6 lists Federal Species of Concern, the state status of these species (if afforded state protection),
and the potential for suitable habitat in the project area for each species. This species list is provided for
informational purposes as the protection status of these species maybe upgraded in the future.
Table 6. Federal Species of Concern for Chowan County.
Scientific Name ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Common Name ~ ~ ~~-~ NC States Habitat
Corynorhinus (=Plecotus) rafinesquii Rafinesque's big-eared bat SC/PT Yes
"T"---A Threatened species is one which is likely to become endangered species within the foreseeable future
throughout all or a significant portion of its range.
"SC"-A Special Concern species is one which requires monitoring but may be taken or collected and sold under regulations
adopted under the provisions of Article 25 of Chapter 113 of the General Statutes (animals) and the Plant Protection and
Conservation Act (plants). Only propagated material may be sold of Special Concern plants that are also listed as
Threatened or Endangered.
" /P='-denotes a species which has been formally proposed for listing as Endangered, Threatened, or Special Concern, but has not
yet completed the listing process.
Surveys for this species were not conducted during the site visit, nor was this species observed. A review
of the NCNHP database of rare species and unique habitats revealed no record of any federal Species of
Concern within the project area. Based on available information, no impacts to state listed species are
anticipated.
16

5.0 REFERENCES
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual,"
Technical report Y-87-1, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station,
Vicksburg, Miss.
Fish, Frederick F. 1968. A Catalog of the Inland Fishing Waters in North Carolina. NCWRC,
Raleigh.
LeGrand, Jr., H.E. 1993. "Natural Heritage Program List of the Rare Animal Species of North
- • ••-• _ Carolina".• North Cazolina Natural Heritage Program: - -~ . ~- .....__ .. ... , .._
Martof, B.S., W.M. Palmer, J.R. Bailey and J.R. Harrison III. 1980. Amphibians and Reptiles of
the Carolinas and Vir 'zia. Chapel Hill, The University of North Cazolina Press.
Menhenick, E.F. 1991. The Freshwater Fishes of North Carolina. NCWRC, Raleigh.
NCDEHNR-DEM. 1988. Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network (BMAN) Water Quality
Review 1983-1986.
NCDEHNR-DEM. 1991. Biological Assessment of Water Quality in North Carolina Streams:
Benthic Macroinvertebrate Data Base and Long Term Changes in Water Quality, 1983-
1990.
NCDEHNR-DEM. 1993. "Classifications and Water Quality Standards for North Carolina
River Basins." Raleigh, Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources.
NCWRC. 1990. "Endangered Wildlife of North Cazolina". Raleigh, North Carolina Wildlife
Resources Commission.
Plant Conservation Program. 1991. "List of North Carolina's Endangered, Threatened and
Candidate Plant Species". Raleigh, North Carolina Department of Agriculture.
Potter, E.F., J.F. Parnell and R.P. Teulings. 1980. Birds of the Carolinas. Chapel Hill, The
University of North Carolina Press.
Radford, A.E., H.E. Ahles and G.R. Bell. 1968. Manual of the Vasculaz Flora of the Carolinas.
Chapel Hill, The University of North Carolina Press.
Schafale, M.P. and A.S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of The Natural Communities of North
Carolina. Third Approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of
Parks and Recreation, NCDEHNR.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. North Carolina Agriculture
Experiment Station.
Z7

k
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1979. Classifications of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of
the United States., U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington D.C.
Weakley, A.S. 1993. "Natural Heritage Program List of the Rare Plant Species of North
Cazolina". North Carolina Natural Heritage Program.
Webster, W.D., J.F. Parnell and W.C. Biggs. 1985. Mammals of the Carolinas, Vir 'nia and
Maryland. Chapel Hill, The University of North Carolina Press.
18

~.

4~'d°aSWFo
y m~
r..n
.~~,~.
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTIVIENT OF TR.ANSPORTATIO
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
January 3, 2006
Division of Coastal Management
1367 U.S. 17 South
Elizabeth City, NC 27909
ATTENTION: Ms. Wanda Gooden
NCDOT Coordinator
~F~~~~
~A~ ° :9 Zoos
~'~~5~~~ ~~~
N ~c,~~;~~ ~ ~r~,~~a°
LYNDO TIPPE"I"f
SECRETARY
Dear Madam:
Subject: CAMA Major Development Permit Application for the Replacement of
Bridge No. 16 over Rockyhock Creek on SR 1222, Chowan County. Federal Aid
Project No. BRZ-1222(5), State Project No. 8.2030401, TIP Project No. B-3636.
Please find enclosed the CAMA Major Development Permit Application, permit drawings, half-size
plans, Categorical Exclusion Action Classification (CE), Natural Resources Technical Report (NRTR),
Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) acceptance letter, and the landowner receipts for the above-
mentioned project. WBS Element 33184.1.1 will be debited for $400.00 for the application of the
subject project, . ~'~,e_North Carolina Department of Transportation proposes to replace.,existing Bridge
No. 16 over Rockyhock Creek on SR 1222 in Chowan County. The project involves replacement of the
existing structure with an 80-foot long bridge in the same location using top-down construction. The
approach roadway will consist of 12-foot travel lanes with five-foot shoulders (eight-foot where
guardrails are needed). The proposed structure for Bridge No. 16 will provide a 24-foot travel-way with
3-foot offsets on each side. An offsite detour will be utilized. NCDOT also proposes to replace the 2.5-
foot x 8-foot reinforced concrete box culvert with an 8-foot, 2-inch x 5-foot, 9-inch aluminum pipe arch
to the southwest of Bridge No. 16. The project schedule calls for an April 18, 20061et with a review date
of February 28, 2006. Proposed permanent impacts include 0.198 acre of wetland. Proposed permanent
impacts to surface water will be 0.004 acre.
Impacts to Water of the United States
General Description: Rockyhock Creek is located in the 03010203 CU of the Chowan River Basin. The
Division of Water Quality (DWQ) has assigned Rockyhock Creek a Stream Index Number of 25-22.
DWQ has assigned a best usage classification of B NSW.
Permanent Impacts: Rockyhock Creek and adjacent riverine wetlands will be impacted by the proposed
project. Construction of the proposed project will result in permanent impacts of 0.072 acre of fill, 0.016
acre of excavation, and 0.110 acre of mechanized clearing in wetlands (see permit drawings). In
addition, 0.004 acre of surface water will be impacted by this project.
MAILING ADQRESS: TELEPHONE: [phone] LOCATION:
NC DEPARTMENT OFTRANSPORTATION FAX: [phone] TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONPJIENTAL ANALYSIS 1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER WEBSITE. WWW.NCDOT.ORG RALEIGH NC
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548

r
Utility Impacts: There will be no impacts to jurisdictional waters. The existing utilities will be replaced
using directional bore and staying within the slope stakes (see permit drawings}.
Bridge Demolition
The superstructure for Bridge No. 16 should allow removal without dropping components into the water.
Likewise, it should be possible to remove the timber piles without dropping them into the water. The
concrete piers may result in as much as 55 cubic yards of fill depending on the method of removal to be
determined after a contractor is selected. Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition and
Removal will be implemented. Any component of the bridge dropped into the water shall be immediately
removed.
NCDOT will observe an in-stream construction moratorium from February 15 to June -30 and utilize ~~
Stream Crossing Guidelines for Anadromous Fish Passage.
Avoidance and Minimization
Due to the location of this project and the juxtaposition of adjacent wetlands and surface waters, total
avoidance of the surrounding marsh and wetland is impossible during the construction of this project.
NCDOT has taken .steps to minimize the impacts to this resource.
To minimize impacts to the wetland adjacent to Bridge No. 16, NCDOT is replacing the bridge in place
and utilizing an off-site detour.
Minimum width for the approaches and structure has been utilized. Fill slopes in wetlands on this
project will be 3:1 due to the loose alluvial sandy soils lacking clay or cohesion in order to avoid major
erosion and slope failure.
Mitigation ~~
NCDOT proposes to use the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) to mitigate for
permanent impacts associated with this project. The EEP acceptance letter was received on October 3,
2005. A copy of this letter is included with this application.
Federally Protected Species
As of January 29, 2003, the US Fish and Wildlife Service (IJSFWS) lists the bald eagle (Haliaeetus
leucocephalus) as threatened for Chowan County. The biological conclusion of "May Affect, Not Likely
to Adversely Affect" remains valid.
Regulatory Approvals
NCDOT requests that the proposed work be authorized under a Coastal Area Management Act Major
Development Permit. The landowner receipts are attached. NCDOT has also applied for the issuance of
a United States Army Corps of Engineers NWP 23 & 33, and a 401 Water Quality Certification under
separate cover. NCDOT has received a stormwater permit for this project.
A copy of this permit application will be posted on the NCDOT website at:
http://www.ncdot.or /planning/pe/naturalunit/Permit.html.

c
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Chris Underwood at (919) 715-
1451.
Sincerely,
(J---~~
~ Gregory Thorpe, Ph.D., Environmental Management Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis
W/attachment:
Mr. John Hennessy, NCDWQ
. ......... ...... . Mr. Travis Wilson; NGWRC .. ... ... ...... ......_... ... ...... .
Mr. Gary Jordan, USFWS
Mr. Ron Sechler, NMFS
Mr. Michael Street, NCDMF
Ms. Cathy Brittingham, NCDCM
Dr. David Chang, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr. Greg Perfetti, P.E., Structure Design
Mr. Mark Staley, Roadside Environmental
Mr. Anthony Roper, P.E., Division 1 Engineer
Mr. Clay Willis, Division 1 Environmental Officer
W/o attachment
Mr. Scott McLendon, USACE, Wilmington
Mr. Bill Biddlecome, USACE, Washington
Mr. Jay Bennett, P.E., Roadway Design
Mr. Majed Alghandour, P. E., Programming and TIP
Mr. Art McMillan, P.E., Highway Design
Ms. Beth Harmon, EEP
Mr. Todd Jones, NCDOT External Audit Branch
Mr. John Williams, P.E., Planning Engineer

f~
e„~ ~.IA7)n~
.,~ ~tl V
V
•ti •w•~•
S'l"ATE OF NOrt fH CAROL•INA
D~PARTIv~N'T OF T1~ANS1'O1ZTA'T'ION
MICI•IAIL• 1.~. I:ASt,tsY
GC~v+~ItNak
January 3 f, 20t)E-
Division of Ccltt~t~l Management
1367 IJ.S. i 7 South
l;G~al,+~th city, Nc 279ay
!\'J'"C~Nf IGN: M.s. Wanda Goodcn
NCDOT Coordint,tor
l7c:tr Maclam:
LYNt70 •f11't'E`I''I'
SsC1tL' IA+tY
Subjeca: Revision to the CAMA, Major Deve(t~prttent Permit ApplicAtiatt, 1'i)r
li1C Repla.ezrn~nt of l3ridf;e No, 16 over Rockyhock Creek on Slt 1222,
Chowan County. Nederll Aid 1?r~jcct Nu. Hlt%-1222(5), StaCe Project
No. t~,2(13g4(1.1,'I'I:P hrojc~Cl No. 13=3C3C,
l>lease reference tho C•AMI~1 Matjor l~c;vc;loprncn[ 1'vrmit Application dated January 3, 2006. 7hc
origintll t-pplication stated that tho proposed bridge will bc: 80 I~cct lung. '1'l,e proposes hria~4
will be 98 feet long.
:fl you have any questions or riC~ct t,dditionUl in1'orcnation, please contact C1u•is Underwood 1t
[phone].
Sir~et;rely, _
~~ ~~~
Gregory J. "hclt•pc. l'It.f.)., >~,nvironn~ental Management Director
l'rcljeet Development and Enviroru~icntttl Analysis
Mr. John 1-1c;nncssy, ~NCDWQ
Mr.'1'rtlvis Wilson, NCWItC
Mr. Gary Jordan, USI?WS
Mr. Ron Scchler, NMI^S
Mr. Mioha~l Street. NCI~MW
Mg. Cathy 13riuingham, NGDCM
Dr. David Chang, r'.r--.,, [-lyd+-aulics
Mr. Gre~;1'c;rl'etti, P.E., Struelurv Desig+l
Mr. Mark Staley, Itorad;ride iwnvirot~mental
Mr. Anthony 1'toper, P.1~:., Division k
i:ngi Weer
Mr, Clay Willis, Division Lnvironl,'-ent~~l
UFi.ic~r
MAILINQ ADDRC88•
NC ~GvAafMISNf QP TRANSPORTATION
PRO!@CT ~VFIOhMCNI'ANU ENVIItONMENTAI, ANAl,v51~
1548 MNL $CRVIrC• C~Nflk
RAI.1=1614 NC 276HH-15dN
Mr. Scott Mcl.,endon, USA.C1~, Wilrn.ington
Mr, t3ill 13iddleconle, USACE, Washinb*ton
Mr. Jc+y Hennc;tl, 1'.13., k~~aclwt-y Design
Mr. Majed Alghandour, P.. E., Progranm~ing and
TLP
Mr, Art McMillan, P.I?., I lighway Design
Ms. F3eth i•I~ry'non, L?EP
Mr. l'odd lanes, NCDU-l' ~xtcrn~rl t~iuiit.
Branch
Mt•. ,It~hn Williams, P.E., Platu,ing 1rn~;ineEr
'I'~Lr,•r»wNr; 619.733-31d1
FAX [phone]
WE8S~7E' WWW NCppT CIRG
IoCAT10N:
TIVIN;,PORTATION ©UROiNQ
1 $GUl'14 WIIAMNG'IUN STR&CI'
RAlLION NC
SOS'd EZZ£ t~9Z 2S2~~1 ZZSZ SZZ 6t6 100 ~NcwO-+~ ~~~~i 9002-£0-83~

iD~~~~ ~1 ~ ~U~
' ~ FEB l ? 2006 ii~~..
Form DCM-MP-1
C~ENR -WATER QUALITY
D H
PLICA
AP
(To be completed by all applicants)
1. APPLICANT
a. Landowner:
Name N. C. Department of Transportation
Address P.O. Box 850
City Edenton State N.C.
Zip 27932 Day Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]
b. Authorized Agent:
Name
Address
City State
Zip - Day Phone
Fax
c. Project name (if any)
NOTE: Permit will be issued in name oJlandowner(s), and/or
project name.
2. LOCATION OF PROPOSED
PROJECT
a. County Chowan
~.~ ~° .
~a~ ®~ ?oc6
~C)ASTA L ~~,lt~t\!~C ~AR~~IU~'
E:~.IZ,~B~T~ ~!T`~
b. City, town, community or landmark
Edenton. NC
c. Street address or secondary road number
SR 1222
d. Is .proposed ..work ..within.. city .limits or planning
jurisdiction? Yes X No
e. Name of body of water nearest project (e.g. river,
creek, sound, bay) Rockyhock Creek
3. DESCRIPTION AND PLANNED U5E
OF PROPOSED PROJECT
a. List all development activities you propose (e.g.
building a home, motel, marina, bulkhead, pier, and
excavation and/or filling activities.
Reulacement of bridge #16
and pipe arch. on SR 1222 ..
b. Is the proposed activity maintenance of an existing
project, new work, or both? Both
c. Will the project be for public, private or commercial
use? Public
d. Give a brief description of purpose, use, methods of
construction and daily operations of proposed prof ect.
If more space is needed, please attach additional
pages.
Roadway transportation over bride and pipe
arch. Top down construction for brid;?e and
replacement in the same location for the pipe
arch.
Revised 03/95

e,
t.
Norm qCM-ME'-I
4. LAN~U AND WA'fLR
CIIAI2,AC"I'b~R[STICS
~t, Sizo of cnti.re tract N/A. NCt)O'I' Ftisht of Wav
b. Sian of individual lot(s) N/A
c. Approxintat~ elevation ofCrttct about MI-IW or NWI.
Audr~6 0•_ _
d. Svil type(s) rand texture(s) of.`tract
Streutr>_crossine, wotinnd
e. Vcgctation on tract 13ottomland LlarciwuociY
l: Mt~n~mado fcttturea now on trtct _„
pridgc..l~tCBC,,roadwnv. ntiiities,~,,,.,,_„r„
g. What is the CAMA Land Use I?lrm.land classification
t~l'the site`l (Consrrlr rlra Incrtllu-rcl ncc (~lnr-.)
Concorvatioty l'ransitional
1'~eveloped x Catt~munity,
__ x.,, Rurttl __,__ Other
h. I-foW l9 the lract %aned by local govenullCtlt'?
i. Is rho proposed project consistent with rho applicable
zartint;'j ....~5._ Yos ~No
(Atrnr,.li svnln,~f cunrpficrncc t'crfi/ic~irtc. fJ 11It11lFi~ctlt/c~)
,I, IIas a professional ttrchacologicrrl assessment been
done far the tract'? X Yew No
It yes, by whom? NCUO'I'
k_ Is the prc~jeet located in a ~Natirfn:al Itegisterecl
llistoric Dtsh'ict or flocs it involve a National
Ctcgister listed or eiil;ible properly?
Yes X Nt-
I. Are there wetlands on the site'? X Yes No
Caastttl (marsh) OU~er X C.S(.(
If yes, has a delineation been Conducted? Yes______
(rt!lc+cir duc~+unerrrnrirn+. i/ni~nNuble)
n, • Deseribo locttlion ttn<L type of discharges to waters of
the stake. (I~or example, surl:ttc:e runoff, Sanitary
wastewater, inciustrisil/eomrttercia) et~luent, "wash
down" foul rt~idential discharges.)
SurfACC runoff, point dischhargc
o. laeserihe existing drinking water supply source,
N/A ,_, '~
5. ADUI'1'TONAL INFORMATION
its ttdditivn tv the completed application form, the
fi~ltowing iterttis must be submitted:
• A copy of the decd (with state application only) or
other instrument autder which the applicant clttinl5 title
to the affected propuriiew. IF the e-pplicanl: iv not
cltrin~tint; to he the owner of Said property, then forward
a copy of tho flood or other instrument u.ndcr which the
awrtc:r ctairns title, plus writtan pzrtnission from tha
owner to carry out the pr~jeca.
• An accurate, dntccl work pint (including plan view
and cross-SOCtional drawings) drawn to settle i.n black
ink on an 8 l/2" ny I I" white paper. (infer to Cirastal
Reaourees Commission Rule 71.0203 for a detailed
daecripticm„)
t'tense note tl•rtU. original clrtwinb~ are proferrtxi <tnci
only high yualily copies will be accepted. 131ue~line
prints or other larger plats taro acceptable only if an
adequate number al' duality copies are provided by
applicant. (Contact tllo U.S. Army Corps of F,ngincccs
regitrdinl; tl•tC,t r,gcncy's use ol` larger drawings.) A silo
or location map is a part of plat requirements and it
n1U5t be sufL•lclentiy dctallCCi to bU1dC agency nersunncl
unl:7mili~tr with the aria to
the silt:. l,nclu<le highway or secondary road (S12)
numbers, landmarks, and the like.
n•t. Doscribc exisl.ing wastewater t.rot,t.rnunt: I'aailities. •n 5tormwater Certiticntiun, ifi one is necessary.
N/A
•A list of the names and complete atldressey of tlto
_ r _ udjuccul waterfrnnt (riparian) landowners and
S~£'d ~2Z~ b92 252:1 22ST STL 6T6 100 ~N:wo~.~ ~£~~T 9002-~0-8~d

Form DCM-MP-1
Management. Upon signing this form, the applicant
further certifies that such notice has been provided.
Name See attached list
Address
Phone
Name
Address
Phone
Name
Address
Phone
~ A list of previous state or federal permits issued for
work on the project tract. Include permit numbers,
permittee, and issuing dates.
NC Stormwater Permit
• A check for $250 made payable to the Department of
Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
(DEHNR) to cover the costs of processing the
application.
®A signed AEC hazard• notice for projects in
oceanfront and inlet areas.
• A statement of compliance with the N.C.
Environmental Policy Act (N.C.G.S. 113A - 1 to 10)
If the project involves the expenditure of public funds
or use of public lands, attach a statement documenting
compliance with the North Carolina Environmental
Policy Act.
6. CERTIFICATION AND PERMISSION
TO ENTER ON LAND
I understand that any permit issued in response to this
application will allow only the development described in
the application. The project will be subject to conditions
and restrictions contained in the permit.
I certify that to the best of my knowledge, the proposed
activity complies with the State of North Carolina's
approved Coastal Management Program and will be
conducted in a manner consistent with such program.
I certify that I am authorized to grant, and do in fact, grant
permission to representatives of state and federal review
agencies to enter on the aforementioned lands in
connection with evaluating information related to this
permit application and follow-up monitoring of the
project.
I further certify that the information provided in this
application is truthful to the best of my knowledge.
This is the 3 day opf ~--~.. , ~20a L.
Print Name ' ~`~~ 1T~`^-~3
.___.--
Signature
L.attdowner rAuthorized Agent
Please indicate attachments pertaining to your proposed
project.
X DCM MP-2 Excavation and Fill Information
DCM MP-3 Upland Development
'"DCM MP-4~ Strixctures Information
X DCM MP-5 Bridges and Culverts
DCM MP-6 Marina Development
NOTE: Please sign and date each attachment in the
space provided at the bottom of each form.
Revised 03/95

Form DCM-MP-2
EXCAVATION
AND FILL
(Except bridges and culverts)
Attach this form to Joint Application for CAMA Major
.... Permit, Form. DCM-MP-1. Be sure. to complete. all. other.
sections of the Joint Application that relate to this
proposed project.
Describe below the purpose of proposed excavation or fill
activities. All values to be given in feet.
Average Final
Existing Project
Length Width . Depth Depth
Access
channel
(MLW) or (NWL)
Canal
Boat
basin
Boat
ramp
Rock
groin
Rock
breakwater
Other
(Excluding
shoreline
stabilization)
86.0' 8.0'
(Pipe (Pipe
arch) arch)
,~
t;t i~aSB~7`i-~ Gfl'Y
1. EXCAVATION
n. Amount of material to~ be excavated from below
MHW or NWL in cubic yards 295 (Pipe arch)
b. Type of material to be excavated Swamp
c. Does the area to be excavated include coastal
wetlands (marsh), submerged aquatic vegetation
(SAVs) or other wetlands? X Yes _ No
d. High ground excavation in cubic yards 1320 (Bride)
2. DISPOSAL OF EXCAVATED
MATERIAL
a. Location of disposal area to be determined by the
contractor
b. Dimensions of disposal area to be determined by the
contractor
c. Do you claim title to disposal area?
Yes X No
If no, attach a letter granting permission from the
owner.
d. Will a disposal area be available for future
maintenance? X Yes _ No
If yes, where? to be determined by the contractor
~.
4'
Revised 03/95

Form DCM-MP-2
e. Does the disposal area include any coastal wetlands
(marsh), SAVs or other wetlands?
Yes X No
f. Does the disposal include any area in the water?
Yes X No
b. Will fill material be placed in coastal wetlands
(marsh), SAVs or other wetlands?
X Yes No
If yes,
(1) Dimensions of fill area See above
3. SHORELINE STABILIZATION N/A
a. Type of shoreline stabilization
Bullchead Riprap
(2) Purpose of fill See above
b. Length ...... .. .. 5. GENERAL ... .
c. Average distance waterward of MHW or NWL
d. Maximum distance waterward of MHW or NWL
a. How will excavated or fill material be kept on site
and erosion controlled?
Standard erosion control (AEC)
Fill to be stored on causeway
e. Shoreline erosion during preceding 12 months
(Source of information)
b. What type of construction equipment will be used (for
example, dragline, backhoe, or hydraulic dredge)?
Standard road construction equipment
f. Type of bulkhead or riprap material
g. Amount of fill in cubic yards to be placed below
water level
(1) Riprap
(2) Bulkhead backfill
c. Will wetlands be crossed in transporting equipment to
project site? _ Yes X No
If yes, explain steps that will be~ taken to lessen
environmental impacts.
h. Type of fill material
~ L~
i. Source of fill material
4. OTHER FILL ACTIVITIES
(Excluding Shoreline Stabilization)
p licant or Prolject Name
Signat e
1~3 D ~
Date
a. Will fill material be brought to site?
X Yes No
If yes,
(1) Amount of material to be placed in the water
None
(2) Dimensions of fill area
0.104 ac
(3) Purpose of fill Roadway slope
Revised 03/95

Form DCM-MP-S
BRIDGES AND
CULVERTS
Attach this form to Joint Application for CAMA Major
Permit, Form DCM-MP-1. Be sure to complete all other
sections of the Joint Application that relate to this
proposed project.
1. BRIDGES
a. Public X Private
b. Type of bridge (construction material)
Cored Slab
c. Water body to be crossed by bridge
Rockyhock Creek
d. Water depth at the proposed crossing at MLW or
NWL Water depth appr. 6.0'
k. Navigation clearance underneath proposed bridge
Appr. 6.0'
1. Will the proposed bridge affect navigation by
reducing or increasing the existing navigable
opening? Yes X No
If yes, explain
e. Will proposed bridge replace an existing bridge?
X Yes No
If yes,
(1) Length of existing bridge 66.0'
(2) Width of existing bridge .24.0'
(3) Navigation clearance underneath existing
bridge Appr. b.0'
(4) Will all, or a part of, the existing bridge be
removed? (Explain) All
f. Will proposed bridge replace an existing culvert(s)?
Yes X No
If yes,
(1) Length of existing culvert
(2) Width of existing culvert
{3) Height of the top of the existing culvert above
the MHW or NWL
(4) Will .all, or a part of, the existing culvert be
removed? (Explain)
g. Length of proposed bridge 98.0'
h. Width of proposed bridge 36.0'

~~~ ~ ~ zoos
~l.l~~?~it1'i-i ~~T'Y
i. Height of proposed bridge above wetlands
the bride will be over the stream, not wetlands
j. Will the proposed bridge affect existing water flow?
Yes X No
If yes,. e~cplain
m. Will the proposed bridge cross wetlands containing
no navigable waters? Yes X No
If yes,. explain
n. Have you contacted the U.S. Coast Guard concerning
their approval?
Yes X No
If yes, please provide record of their action.
2. CULVERTS
a. Water body in which culvert is to be placed
Overflow culvert
b. Number of culverts proposed 1
c. Type of culvert (construction material, style)
8'2" X 5'9" aluminum Wipe arch
d. Will proposed culvert replace an existing bridge?
Yes X No
If yes,
(1) Length of existing bridge
(2) Width of existing bridge
Revised 03/95

Form DGM-MP-S
(3) Navigation clbarancc underneath cxisting
bridge _ ___ _
(4) Will all, ur a part of, the existing bridge be
ren~ov~i? (iWxplain) '
e. Will proposed culvert replace a.n existing culvert?
,,,,~_ Yea No
if yes,
(1) Length of existing Culvert 40.Q' ~ ~ . ,
(2) Width of existing culvert :10.U.' , ~,,,,~ ....... ......
(3) Height of the top of the existing culvert about
the MNIW orNWL 0.8'
(4) Wiil all,. or a pert of, the existing culvert be
rcnwvcd'? (1sxplwin) Yes
!', T,,ength of proposed culvert 116.0'
g, Width of proposed culvert 5'9"
h, I'•lcight of the top of Chc proposed culvert above the
MI-LW or NWI. A~ur, 2.S'
Will the proposed culvert affect existing water flow?
Yes ,,,~_ No
l.f yes, explztin
j. 1Ni11 the proposed culvert affect existing navigation
potertti,~17 Yea ~_ No
If yes, eXplflln
3, ~'XCAVA'C[ON AND .F.i.~t~t,
a. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
require any excavation below the M1~Vi/ or NWI,?
X ~.. Yes _ No
Ii' yes,
(1) Length of axes to be excavated 6.0~~
(2) Width t-1'area to be excavated 6.U„•,,,,,~,.,,,,,,.,.,.
(3) .Depth ofarea to be excirva(etl .0~,-,~,,,.,~,,,,,,
(4) Antoutlt of materia! to be excavated in cubic
yards Appr.325 _
b. Will the placement of the proposed bridga or culvcxt
require any excavation within;
_ Coastal Wetlands _ SAVs.~ Other Wetlands
if yes,
(1 } Length of area to be excavated 8 ~g,(~--
(2) Width of at•ea to be excavated 6,0~
Itrvlsed U3/9S
(3) Amount of material to be excavated in cubic
yards ~~r.325
c, Will the placement ot'the proposed bridge or culverk
regcrire any higl~•ound excavat:ion7
Yes X No
:I:f yc.~,
(1) Length of area to be excavated
(2) Width ocarea to be excavated
(3) Amount of material to be excavated in cubic
yards
d, if the placement of the bridga or culvert involves arty
exeHVaticfn, please complecy thz following:
(1) Location of rho spoil disposal area
N/~_ ~,.. ~~,.
(2) T)i.mensions of spoil disposal area
NJA
(3) Do you Claim title to the disposal ¢trea?
Yes ~_ No
if no, attach a letter granting permission front
the owner.
(4) Will the disposal area be availably for future
maintenanoe7 Yea No
(5) llocs the disposal area include any ooe9ta1
wetlands (marsh), SAVs, or ether wetlands?
Ycs No
[f yes, give dimensions. if dit~eretl<t from (2)
above.
(F) Does the disposal area include any area below
rho M~i1N or NWL? Yes _ No
If yes. give dimension if different 6•om No. 2
above. - -------
e. Will the placement of thu proposed bridge or cuivrrrt
result in any fill (other than excavated material
described in ltern d. above) to be placed below M1:T.W
or NWL? Yes No
Tf yeS,
(l} Length of erect to be iil.lcd 2U feet
(2) Width of areit to be fillctl 8 feet.- . _-_...
(3) I~urpose of tilt l7oad
Wilt the placement of the proposc^,d bridge or culvert
result in any Etll (other than excavated material
described in Item d, above) to be placed within;
Coastal Wetlwds ~ SAVs ,~ Other Wetlands9
Lt ye.~.
(1) t,etigth oi'at•ea to be tilled AuDt;. 360'
{2) Width of area to be tilled Aonr,_3._0'
(3)Purpose of till Ro_, dway.~~,
-, .-, • ~ ~~ i ~ a.o> >ca ~ o i aacr c7 t ~.T~ inn '1N : wo ~ -I ~s : i L 9AGI~-Gtr -8~~

Form DCM-MP-S
g. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
result in any fill (other than excavated material
described in Item d. above) to be placed on
highground? X Yes No
If yes,
(1) Length of area to be filled 1425 feet
(2) Width of area to be filled 40 feet
(3) Purpose of fill Improving the existing
causeway
4. GENERAL
a. Will the proposed project involve any mitigation?
X Yes No
If yes, explain in detail Compensatory mitisation
will be provided by the NC Ecosystem Enchancement
Program
b. Will the proposed project require the relocation of
any existing utility lines? X Yes No
If yes, explain in detail the existing utilities will be
relocated via directional boring and beneath the fill slope
c. Will the proposed project require the construction of
any temporary detour structures?
Yes X No
If yes, explain in detail
d. Will the proposed project require any work channels?
Yes X No
If yes, complete Form DCM-MP-2
e. How will excavated or fill material be kept on site
and erosion controlled?
Standard erosion control (AEC)
f. What type of construction equipment will be used
(for example, dragline, backhoe or hydraulic dredge)?
Road construction equipment (backhoe,crane, etc.l
g. Will wetlands be crossed in transporting equipment
to project site? Yes X No
If yes, explain steps that will be taken to lessen
environmental impacts.
h. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
require any shoreline stabilization?
Revised 03/95
Yes X No
If yes, explain in detail
~1C~~T
Applicant or Project Name
Signa~
~ -x O~v
Date

.

`l'F' ~ Z
` .+ ~.
' ~ ~ ,
{['g
<
~
_ /
X

North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
David L.S. Brook, Administrator
James B. Hunt Jr., Governor Division of Archives and History
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary Jeffrey J. Crow, Director
September 12, 2000
MEMORANDUM
To: William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manager '
. Project Development and Environmental An~lysis Branch
t ~. ~.
From: David Brook ~. '•,/ -~ ~k.V~t ~~ ~~~~_,
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer ~ - ~
Re: Replacement of Bridge No..16 on SR 1222 over Rocky Hock Creek,
TIP No. B-3636, Chowan County, ER 00-8452
On March 7, 2000, April Montgomery of our staff met with North Carolina Department of Transportation
(NCDOT) staff for a meeting of the minds concerning the above project. We reported our available
information on historic architectural and archaeological surveys and resources along with our
recommendations. NCDOT provided project area photographs and aerial photographs at the meeting.
Based upon our review of the photographs and the information discuss at the meeting, we offer our
preliminary comments regarding this project.
In terms of historic architectural resources, we are aware of no historic structures located within the area
of potential effect. We recommend that no historic architectural survey be conducted for this project.
There are no known archaeological sites within the proposed project area. Based on our present
knowledge of the area, it is unlikely that any archaeological resources, which may be eligible for
inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, will be affected by the project construction. We,
therefore, recommend that no archaeological investigation be conducted in connection with this project.
Having provided this information, we look forward to receipt of either a Categorical Exclusion or
Environmental Assessment, which indicates how NCDOT addressed our comments.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36
CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. if you have questions concerning the above comment,
contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, Environmental Review Coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
DB:kgc
Location Mailing Address Telephone/Fax
ADMINISTRATION 507 N. Blount St., Raleigh NC ~ 46t7 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC ?7699-4617 [phone] • 733-8653
ARCHAEOLOGY 4Z1 N. Blount St., Raleigh NC 4619 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-46(9 [phone] • 715-2671
RESTORATION 515 N. Blount St., Raleigh NC 4613 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4613 [phone] • 715-4801
_.._ ........ .......,..... ~, r ., .,~_..... c. v.,i-;mss. Ur dF1 A Mail Crrvirr Center. Raleigh NC 27699.4618 [phone] • 715-4801

~~~~~~~
OCT '~ 2005
Uf'r f•~IJI~i 11F1~.:1~%~1F1I~
PDEA•GFFfCf Or it,t,i J"i~L GR~'~?IPsONhlErf 1'
Mr. Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
Environmental Management Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
Dear Dr. Thorpe:
Subject: EEP Mitigation Acceptance Letter:
i;
~~~~~ 1ji,ly~alr~~ _
r,.
B-3636, Bridge Number 16 over Rockyhock Creek on SR 1222, Chowan
County
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the Ecosystem Enhancement Program
(EEP) will provide the compensatory riverine wetland and stream mitigation for the subject
project. Based on the information supplied by you in a letter dated September 30, 2005, the
impacts are located in CU 03010203 of the Chowan River Basin in the Northern Outer Coastal
Plain (NOCP) Eco-Region, and are as follows:
Riverine Wetland: 0.223 acre
Stream: 72 feet
The subject project is listed in Exhibit 2 of the Memorandum of Agreement among the
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, the North Carolina
Department of Transportation, and the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District dated
July 22, 2003. However, according to the 2005 Impact Projection Database, there were no
anticipated impacts listed for this project. Fortunately, sufficient assets are available in the
cataloging unit to meet the mitigation needs for this project. The compensatory. riverine wetland
and stream mitigation for the subject project will be provided in accordance with this agreement.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Ms. Beth
Harmon at 919-715-1929.
Sincerely,
i iam D. Gilmore, P.E.
EEP Director
cc: Mr. Bill Biddlecome, USACE-Washington
Mr. John Hennessy, Division of Water Quality, Wetlands/401 Unit
File: B-3636
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program, 1652 Mail Service tenter, Raleigh, NC 21699-1652 / 919-115-0476 / www.nceep.net

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS ~~
W]L,MIl~GTON DISTRICT
Action Id. 200510008 County: Chowan U.S.G.S. Quad:
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERNIINATI
Properly Owner/Agent: NCDOT, Gregory J. Thorne, Ph.D.
Address: Environmental Management Director, PDEA
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
Telephone No.: [phone]
~"~9C'~ ~ ~ 206
D~~µ ~AYS
'.. ,.
Property description: '~C<~. ~; ;- ..
Size (acres) 1 acre Neazest Town Valhalla ~a ? 1,r.,
Nearest Waterway Rockvhock Creek River Basin Chowan River ~ >ri't~,f '
USGS HUC 03010203 Coordinates N 36.1387202 W 76.6667212
Location description The proiect is located on NCSR 1222 at bridge number 16 auuro~mately .5 miles west of NC
highway 32 crossing and adiacent to Rocky Hock Creek Bennett Millpondl. TIP # B-3636.
Indicate Which of the Foilo~ing Apply:
_ Based on preliminary information, there maybe wetlands on the above described property. We strongly suggest you have
this property inspected to determine the extent of Deparhnent of the Army (DA) jurisdiction. To be considered final, a
jurisdictional determination must be verified by the Corps. This preliminary determination is not an appealable action
under the Regulatory Program Administrative Appeal Process (Reference 33 CFR Part 331).
_ .There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described property subject to the permit requirements of
Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Unless there is a change in the law or
our published regulations, this determination maybe relied upon for a period not to exceed five yeass from the date of this
notification.
X_ There aze waters of the U.S. including wetlands on the above described project area subject to the permit requirements of
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published
regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
_ We strongly suggest you have the wetlands on your property delineated. Due to the size of your property and/or our
present workload, the Corps may not be able to accomplish this wetland delineation in a timely manner. For a more timely
delineation, you may wish to obtain a consultant. To be considered final, any delineation must be verified by the Corps.
_ The wetland on your property have been delineated and the delineation has been verified by the Corps. We strongly
suggest you have this delineation surveyed. Upon completion, this survey should be reviewed and verified by the Corps.
Once verified, this survey will provide an accurate depiction of all azeas subject to CWA jurisdiction on your property
which, provided there is no change in the law or our published regulations, maybe relied upon for a period not to exceed
five years.
_ The wetlands have been delineated and surveyed and are accurately depicted on the plat signed by the Corps
Regulatory Official identified below on .Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this
determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
_ There are no waters of the U.S., to include wetlands, present on the above described property which are subject to the
permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our
published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this
notification.
X The property is located in one of the 20 Coastal Counties subject to regulation under the Coastal Area Management Act
(CAMA). You should contact the Division of Coastal Management in Elizabeth City, NC, at [phone] to determine
their requirements. -"~"~~~
. ~ECEIVEt~
Q,~T ~2 21104
Page 1 of 2
} ~{VISION OF HIGMNAYS
( PDEA-0Ff ICE OF NANRIIE. ENVIRONl~1~i

Action Id. 200510008
Placement of dredged or fill material within waters of the US and/or wetlands without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Section 301 of the Clean W ater Act (33 USC ~ 1311). If you have any questions regardin~~ this
determination and/or the Corps regulatory pro~*ram, please contact Bill Biddlecome at [phone] ext. 31.
Basis For Determination: This site exhibits wetland criteria as described in the 1987 Coras Wetland Delineation Manual
and is Hart of a broad continuum of wetlands connected to Rockyhock Creek which is a tributary to the Chowan River
Remarks:
Corps Regulatory Official:
Date 10!15/2004
Expiration Date 10/15/2009
Corps Regulatory Official (Initial):
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY:
• A plat or sketch of the property and the wetland data form must be attached to the file copy of this form.
• A copy of the "Notification Of Administrative Appeal Options And Process And Request For Appeal" form must be
transmitted with the property owner/agent copy of this form.
• If the property contains isolated wetlands/waters; please indicate in "Remarks" section and attach the
"Lsolated Determination Information Sheet" to the file copy of this form.
1'ai'_C ? ul 2

NORTH CAROLINA
~nvvv~-~v
F::~. i
~~ ~f~~5
~.~ ~~ m
D ~~~LI ~~
SITE FFe m: }-.
z ~ ~ar;~~
+~w°uo"sue sr~R Q~:~, , ;.
~ r~R `~~~~~,
N.C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
CHOWAN COUNTY
V I C I~ I TY PROJECT N0.33154 B-
.1.1 ( 3636)
M /, ~ BRIDGE N0. 16, PIPE ARCH,
1.1.1 AND APPROACHES ON SR 1222
OVER ROCKYHOCK CREEK
3/23!05
eLrr+n~ -~- d ra.hl~n~ 1 aF -7

. •.- ''. -. ~ ~ .,_ \ ` r 'o x 12.5
-X5.5 ,y. ~,'h._ _.\ '~: - ,~\ •~\J ..t• ~ - ~~
-~` "`-- '-`~:.1; _ ~~ . ~ • : •~;::.•_ - - _ - - - X 120- .r ~ . •~ ~y`~ ~~i2 ~.
~ ~ Chowaal~ `~~ -..¢~ - _ i.. .,,y` ((~tt11••WWc h~'~ff_-_`Y'.s~l~~~ . ~` ~i20 ~! :i~ql 4°v
..f / Ny " I S. - "' l `// .... _. _ ?~ ~'ti~s`~F-'at . c.J~t ~ t \. 1~ fi1$/) ! ~ a
~cade Rockyhock ~~_. y : ' `` _ ,• j C!f ~ l `~' ~ ~6; ~ . , t ~ a
~ ?~ Ch r~ 'x6.0 ~ ~ •. ~.m~'~.r~;~ ~ i _ 1. 7~ - !
~, "i ~. o 'i ~ iii 1 ~ F. x _ •.~~_• ! J •a ~ X1111 , ~~ 4 •'~
~.. , , ~ _ • ~ :..: l - ... - ~ ` } _ ' ' ^ti';..,. ~ ,f :ill '
'~i • 1:" _i ,i Cein ~ •'~'`..' ~ .s ..~ ~~"~~ `_ `'""= %'•~"' ~?,: f,•r, ark. .
_ ~,,_,. __. -- e _ •` ~ r . yr- „ 6 1,,.:
-~'I_` :~ iii y~~x ~ r-.J' ~o :' •rlr ,l/ --
~ h B ~~ '~~...~~ '~ -w•~Y- , y,Y .+r. 1!. ~ ~ .,;i- ' ~ X~6 I '. Y'!~• - . ~ T~..1.. , t ••+ ~i ~ ~, iR
~ ( it ~~`= ~~ ~- ~. ° . ~ S -.~;.\ ~ ~ • 4 ~..' ~_ ._'n ' ~ , ! ! ~ li i °~f ,
,.l i`~ '" • `~--~ \ ""`" ~ -~~"' ~'a'~, i ; aQ '~, •' •\:~..,~ j 'i - `' 1. • •~r~ • . •y •~i •~ ' • ~t`' ~•~
' h • I ~ .u~ ~s~' ~ , f r W1 !!ia {.7L0~l~ ~ ~ `yam,
r~-~~-- Cam.: ~ _'V
.i. ,. o,
9.!a 1•'•
-- ~- ~• i I ~ .-•r ~ it o~ .
-~~0^_ . -,~~ 2;000~~ 4;000 =`" *~' -,' : ~• ~ ~.~_. N. C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
-~- Feet` ,.. ;;.~.=: ~,:-
i.- _ ~. -~- ! ~~~ ~`," ~_'• °'c DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
1 inch equals 2,000 feet CHOWAN COUNTY
PROJECT' N0. 33184.1.1 (B-3536)
LOCAT I ~N BRIDGE N0. 16, PIPE ARCH,
AND APPROACHES ON SR 1222
OVER ROCKYHOCK CREEK
3/23/05
t
Source: u5U5 ~.5 minute cluaarangies, val-Halla, NC Qi¢rw.,+ droo.a~'.~ 2 0~' `"j

,-1 \
~~----'--1~ 1Q
`i~ 11~
~ ;>
~o
~Z. ~~~
4d~ ' , ' 1
tt
v~ •
•
• • ~ i
. I

~~~~ ~~~
OG •.
~ . .
• :.~ ..
5/ • : •
• I
• .I
. I
',
I
0/
~ 5F' ', nom. r'?t-. r ;n ~r'+:.n P-;R
Ah ~' . .
•.
L'
ti
~ •
~~
J
~~

. ~,
~'y-GY~
Od~
•
~.. D ~~ ~°/
D
• • ~~B z ~ 2oos
•
• DENR -WATER QUALITY
WEIIANDS AND STORMWATER BRANCH O
N
. ~•
•• . ~ O
'Q O
~ N.C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
~ DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
CHOWAN COUNTY
PROJECT 3318(.1.1 (B-3636)
BRIDGE N0.16, PIPE ARCH, AND APPROACHES;
ON SR 1222 OVER ROCKYHOCK CREEK
~ erah~ ~- a ~ ~ ~ 3 of '7 03 / 16 / OS ~

N ~ Tv
/-
O

Z
O

O
"'~ U /
z~,m ~
'
Om 17
1
m
DW
r ~
t1
f
cnc
y
Z ~
~O~
~
Z~
^om Z
~~~ m
~Z~ ~
.., v. ~ Z
n

m

}
7 N W
O
W
Z p .p ~J O

O
= CA
-~-1 ..
2 ~ ~ 0

.•~
~O .
Op ~
° °'~ C

~ ~
wD
O~
~~ a C
Z

~
N ~ Z
man 'n.
=~ . _ °- ~ m
a m
o . m--~`
° ~
~° -'z =~ ~o~ D

v
~~
e
r ~
Z .; p... ...SV :.7,~.
,`r3 "~'g'! R ~'{:~~;l
.. ~
N V~

:~ ~ c:
:
..::SJ :.~'~:: '.
N
(/1
~.
m
a
0
v
X
y

G
3. m O
g W
N
n ~
'
's a
~ H
V N

3 C
m
3

m F
N
~
r O
•O
(D
t~

z
n
~
o o
t7 <
~ ~ x ~ ~
p p m
w E Z
z
ca
-3
~
Z ~ O
n 2 .~~
v
•- CO Q ;p
>~
CG ~ ~
O
w ~
.~ w
-°' a
w ...3
N p
O Z
O
Q~
1 ~ ` i !'°i

D ~ ~ ~ o m
r

e ~
r ~
r-
o to
w v
0 0
O
0 ~ ~

~ ~ N ~
W
D v c ~
m ~
~ m

m
o
0

o

o

o -n

~ „~
N ~ w ~ `-'a~ ~

m ~ ~
~~_~
a~ ~
~ m
m
~ n ~
O
0 o
o
~ Z
~
v~~
rn rn ~ °:
a
j ~
~
1
4 a

~ nm
~
~
N m
~
r
D
o
° o
_, rn~
~ :° o~ w Z
o o vm =•~ p
'co o m
°
.

~ ~ ~
~. ~
~v~v~
~
.r
y
D
m A
0 0
-1
° ° v ~ ~ ~ C
.
t~ .
p ~
~ ~
D
-~
3 ~ C ~
~
~~ ~
D
y n
m
~_ g
~ ~ ~ x
~vm~~ D
rn
.
~ n > > ~
y CD t0 _
.

~ ~ ~ X D
n
.^ ~ m 3 ~ ~
~
~ ~ > >
y m ca
p ~ Z
_ ... ~
.~'+ N CD C
v
d ~

-o
. ~
3~,
a.
p
~j~
l? I
1
O
'h

~~
G ;a
'"~ -~ d
G I ,..
~ ~'
~ ~
~k.'D f^J
Cfl ~ O
.'Dr 07 (ea n~

~ LjUL{
U
_
~ ~ °
s
v
0
m
m
mm Zm o Ao ~°1
mN g~ mm am 3atmil
D3 mm yV7 (7N '9A
~m ~x r m ~mm
Z= DD Or Dr ND'9
o~ zoD r -~r -+o
~ m m~
z ~Z ~D
m o ~
o z ~
mz
~~
r~
m
z
s
D
-a
m
a
N
C
D
n
m
0
c '
m
0
0
c~
m
.v
m
A
N
i
N
Z
y~
C
m z
~ o
x
a ~
O
m y2~
H '~
~~
b~rr~ O
M 1"
n
W y ~ C V
~,~ s ~
~_
yS~LS'0~/i
g
b
}
~ ~ ~'
S CC
i
~I
Z
OQQ
~1
2
V / V
~~
~ 8
N
C >
~, ~ V
"'N OIR

., IE
~
m ~
k
.. M. h k,
i~
Ik
!F ~(~ ~
., ~ OI i
1
y
g~
h ~ ~~
h iO ~
3 R ~~~+
~rrii
r
A
y~~~ /
~ ppp
o~T
~~.
8. 8
It
K'
~'
7
~$~ ~ ~~~ I
D -

`I-
V ~
D

rte-' 1"'
~~
~y ~
M V'E~ (~: :"H
(3 ~
..dam N `~`.:ld

°CZ C7
~~

ui
3~g
y_ III
.~
~~ Q}Q}
n ~II
~ N
i~~ z
w
$~Z r
a~~
_ >
i = ` ~ ~Z~ Iii c=i
III ~
I ~ I

0
~ a ~
Q
_"
O

+'
~~
N
0
-.l
K.
IE'
i
>t:
If f
~ ~ ~ ~1
N ~
~~
!t ~
p p p
z z ° Nm usz
Z m
o ~o ~
cam m ~
m -
ce nN -vc,N
a3 m i
r m am-,
~m
m ~x
rm am m n m
Z=
c' Da
z Or Dr ND'O
M pn r -,r -+o

m "'
z ~--
z ~a

p o
Z A
„Z
~~
r~
zm
f
D
1
m
N
C
T
D
fl
m
C
m
1
0
W
0
c,
m
m
N
N
u
-ti
y8 ~ \
ytl
Q ~ O
~ ~` Geri
~ ~8'
~$^8
t
~ ¢ ~
/~
~a
k s
~~ -
~:
~ ~ ~LL
O ~
It$
`~ W
_ ~ + ~
~ v
Z ~
~a
~~

ZZ~~
<~7
~ ^
~~'
ga~
n
~~~
-~
?~~y
-''•• '~

a ~-
i
~ ~
N g•
~ o ygg . F
SOY ~ ~
~Q~~ „
...^ ,~ ~.
1
r 1
i, /~
~~
~~ ~ ~ ~ d
~ ; ~' l
~~ k 2~. ~ ~+~ d
., ~l
. y
~~ * ,
~m -+ ,
II^^~~~ •~, ~ ~8i QSO~j ~ l ~ ~~s:
14 ~~ .. ~O i iiiiTTTT~M, .~~i
~1
~ /
4N
~ ~:~'°'
1•

~g
I ~ ~ ! f,
~ ~ `~
~' :~~rn ,
2
~ i ~~ r
~ fry ~~ ~
r?
~` g
2
IF
I ~ K-`.
~ '~ ~- ~~
I ~i ~ : ~ ~~
,I ~ .14
® ~
I
i
' m IF
r Fi
I
~ ~ ~ ~ "'
~ $~a a~
S~~ ~ ~o~
1~
_ ~
A $. Ir : Ir
Z ~ ~ _
~. __-_
1 _ O
Z r m ~ ~ ~~ ~ li I ~ ~~ ~ j
my o ~~
~ '~ ~ ~ ~
~ rn S ~ ~' mom' ~~ ~ •(~ ! ~ A $m , c
~C C
,. ~ ~ ~ V ~ rn
0 ~--. ti4 ~ u
' ~ ~ ( ~~ ~~
~~'1~~ ~ ~ ~~~
AI
~~ ai
T s M
~a
n~~ ~ a
~_
~ ~ ~
~~~~ ~z ~~~~ a~
Y~ °
SZ
8~~
~~ y ~~~
t ~ `~on~ Iii n
III ~ ~ x

~
r
~~ ~ ~..
~
1-`
~ ~
~
,~ ~,
.~ ~ ~}
~ c ~ ~~

~ :

d,.a AAA ~
~ m~
~~~~~,
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
°~~
F ~~
F~
STOR~~~~/rY 6'
DEPART~NT OF TRANSPORTATION Re~~ti
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
January 31, 2006
Division of Coastal Management
1367 U.S. 17 South
Elizabeth Ciry, NC 27909
ATTENTION:. Ms. Wanda Gooden
NCDOT Coordinator
Dear Madam:
LYNDO TIPPETT
SECRETARY
Subject: Revision to the CAMA Major Development Permit Application for
the Replacement of Bridge No. 16 over Rockyhock Creek on SR 1222,
Chowan County. Federal Aid Project No. BRZ-1222(5), State Project
No. 8.2030401., TIP Project No. B-3636.
Please reference the CAMA Major Development Permit Application dated January 3, 2006. The
original application stated that the proposed bridge will be 80 feet long. The proposed bridge
will be 98 feet long.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Chris Underwood at
[phone].
Sincerely,
'l ~ ~ (.1-----~ -
Gregory J. orpe, Ph.D., Environmental Management Director
` Project Development and Environmental Analysis
Mr. John Hennessy, NCDWQ
Mr. Travis Wilson, NCWRC
Mr. Gary Jordan, USFWS
Mr. Ron Sechler, NMFS
Mr. Michael Street, NCDMF
Ms. Cathy Brittingham, NCDCM
Dr. David Chang, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr. Greg Perfetti, P.E., Structure Design
Mr. Mark Staley, Roadside Environmental
Mr. Scott McLendon, USACE, Wilmington
Mr. Bill Biddlecome, USACE, Washington
Mr. Jay Bennett, P.E., Roadway Design.
Mr. Majed Alghandour, P. E., Programming and
TIP
Mr. Art McMillan, P.E., Highway Design
Ms. Beth Harmon, EEP
Mr. Todd Jones, NCDOT External Audit
Branch
Mr. Anthony Roper, P.E., Division 1 Mr. John Williams, P.E., Planning Engineer
Engineer
Mr. Clay Willis, Division Environmental
Officer
MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: [phone] LOCATION:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FAX: [phone] TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMEt~fTAL ANALYSIS 1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER WEBSITE: WWW.NCDOT.ORG RALEIGH NC
RALEIGH NC 27699-154$

M srA~ o
~d wnmoa nn
~ >
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
~. ~~
FF ~~
~m
~fiT~/1iyUr~'/h.
~ 6
DEPART~NT OF TRANSPORTATION ~s"Q~D$T~rk~ ~O
MICHAEL F. EASLEY LYNDO T~~
GOVERNOR SECRETARY C/y
January 31, 2006
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Field Office
Post Office Box 1000
Washington, NC 27889-1000
ATTENTION: Mr. Bill Biddlecome
NCDOT Coordinator
Dear Sir:
Subject: Revision to the Nationwide 23 & 33 Permit Application for the
Replacement of Bridge No. 16 over Rockyhock Creek on SR 1222,
Chowan County. Federal Aid Project No. BRZ-1222(5), State Project
No. 8.2030401, TIP Project No. B-3636.
Please reference the Nationwide 23 & 33 Permit Application dated January 3, 2006. The original
application stated.that the proposed bridge will be 80 feet long. The proposed bridge will be 98
feet long.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Chris Underwood at
[phone].
Sincerely,
' ~ ~ t ~---
,'~, ~ Gregory ~ .Thorpe, Ph.D., Environmental Management Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis
Mr. John Hennessy, NCDWQ
Mr. Travis Wilson, NCWRC
Mr. Gary Jordan, USFWS
Mr. Ron Sechler, NMFS
Mr. Michael Street, NCDMF
Ms. Cathy Brittingham, NCDCM
Dr. David Chang, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr. Greg Perfetti, P.E., Structure Design
Mr. Mark Staley, Roadside Environmental
Mr. Anthony Roper, P.E., Division 1
Engineer
Mr. Clay Willis, Division Environmental
Officer
MAILING ADDRESS:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
154$ MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548
Mr. Scott McLendon, USACE, Wilmington
Ms. Wanda Gooden, DCM, Elizabeth City
Mr. Jay Bennett, P.E., Roadway Design
Mr. Majed Alghandour, P. E., Programming
and TII'
Mr. Art McMillan, P.E., Highway Design
Ms. Beth Harmon, EEP
Mr. Todd Jones, NCDOT External Audit
Branch
Mr. John Williams, P.E., Planning Engineer
TELEPHONE: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
WEBSITE: WWW.NCDOT.ORG
LOCATION:
TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
RALEIGH NC

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY `~ ®`~~°
~ WILD'IINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
~, Washington Regulatory Field Office ~fi,>,
'~ o~\\\~~%~ Post Office Box 1000 ~;~ a~ 9~ ~~>`O
~ Washington, North Carolina 27889-1000 `•,c' ~ ~+
IN REPLY REFER TO: ~~
'~`j°9ifi
March 14, 2006 ©~ ti<< ~ ~,~
6
Regulatory Division ~~;,
Subject: Action ID No. 200510073 and Nationwide Permit No. 23 (Approved
Categorical Exclusions)
Dr. Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
Environmental Management Director, PDEA
N.C. Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
Dear Dr. Thorpe:
Reference your Categorical Exclusion Document, approved on October 7, 2004,
and your subsequent correspondence dated January 3, 2006, for the replacement of
Bridge No. 16 on NCSR 1222 over Rockyhock Creek, Federal Aid Project No. BRZ-
1222 (5), State Project No. 8.2030401, T.I.P. No. B-3636, Chowan County, North
Carolina. The preferred alternative involves an off site detour and will replace the
existing structure in the same location with a 98-foot bridge using top-down construction
and also involves replacing an existing concrete box culvert with an aluminum pipe arch
to the southwest of Bridge No. 16 adversely impacting 0.198 acres, of wetlands adjacent
to the Rockyhock Creek.
For the purposes of the Corps of Engineers Regulatory Program, Title 33, Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 330.6, published in the Federal Register on November
22, 1991, lists nationwide permits. Authorization pursuant to Section 10 of the Rivers
and Harbors Act of 1899 and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, was provided for
activities undertaken, assisted, authorized, regulated, funded or financed, in whole or
part, by another Federal agency or department where that agency or department has
determined, pursuant to the CEQ Regulation for the Implementing the Procedural
Provisions of the National. Environmental Policy Act, that the activity, work or discharge
is categorically excluded from environmental documentation because it is included
within a category of actions which neither individually nor cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment, and the Office of the Chief of Engineers has
been furnished notice of the agency's or department's application for the categorical
exclusion and concurs with that determination.

Review of this project indicates that the construction of the new bridge will
adversely impact 0.198 acres of riverine wetlands consisting of 0.072 acres of permanent
fill, 0.016 acres of excavation, and 0.110 acres of mechanized land clearing in wetlands.
The permanent wetland impacts are for the widening of the roadway shoulders at the
approach fills for the replacement bridge.
Your work is authorized under Nationwide Permit 23, Categorical Exclusion, and
provided it is accomplished in strict accordance with the enclosed Nationwide Permit
Conditions and the following special conditions:
a. Compensatory mitigation for the unavoidable impacts to 0.198 acres of
riverine wetlands associated with the proposed project shall be provided by the
Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP), as outlined in the letter dated February 28,
2006, from William D. Gilmore, EEP Director. Pursuant to the EEP Memorandum of
Agreement (MOA) between the State of North Carolina and the US Army Corps of
Engineers signed on July 22, 2003, the EEP will provide 0.40 acres of restoration
equivalent riverine wetlands in the Chowan River basin (Hydrologic Cataloging Unit
03010203) by one year of the date of this permit. For wetlands, a minimum of 1:1
(impact to mitigation) must be in the form of wetland restoration. The NCDOT shall,
within 30 days of the issue date of this permit, certify that sufficient funds have been
provided to EEP to complete the required mitigation, pursuant to Paragraph V. of the
MOA.
b. To avoid adverse impacts to spawning populations offish, anadromous and
resident species at the project site, NCDOT will follow the "Stream Crossing Guidelines
for Anadromous Fish Passage."
c. To avoid adverse impacts to spawning populations offish, anadromous and
resident species at this project site, no in-water work will be conducted between February
15 and June 30. For the purpose of this moratorium, in water is defined as those areas
that are inundated at mean high water.
d. All measures will be taken to avoid any temporary fill from entering into the
Rockyhock Creek from bridge demolition. Bridge demolition shall follow NCDOT best
management practices for construction and maintenance activities dated August 2003 and
incorporate NCDOT policy entitled "Bridge Demolition and Removal in Waters of the
United States" dated September 20, 1999.
e. No bridge demolition debris or excavated or fill material will be placed at any
time, in any wetlands or surrounding waters, outside of the alignment of the fill area
indicated on the work plans.
f. All excavated materials will be confined above normal high water and
landward of regularly or irregularly flooded wetlands behind adequate dikes or retaining
structures to prevent spillover of solids into any wetlands or surrounding waters.
2

g. Except as authorized. by this permit or any USACE approved modification to
this permit, no excavation, fill, or mechanized land-clearing activities shall take place at
any time in the construction or maintenance of this project, within waters or wetlands, or
any activities that cause the degradation of waters or wetlands, except as authorized by
this permit, or any modification to this permit. This permit does not authorize temporary
placement or double handling of excavated or fill material within waters or wetlands
outside the permitted area. There shall be no excavation from, waste disposal into, or
degradation of, jurisdictional waters or wetlands associated with this permit without
appropriate modification of this permit, including appropriate compensatory mitigation.
This prohibition applies to all borrow and fill activities connected with this project.
h. To ensure that all borrow and waste activities occur on high ground and do not
result in the degradation of adjacent wetlands and streams, except as authorized by this
permit, the permittee shall require its contractors and/or agents to identify all areas to be
used to borrow material, or to dispose of dredged, fill, or waste material. The permittee
shall provide the USACE with appropriate maps indicating the locations of proposed
borrow or waste sites as soon as the permittee has that information. The permittee will
coordinate with the USACE before approving any borrow or waste sites that are within
400 feet of any streams or wetlands. The permittee shall ensure that all such areas
comply with condition (k) of this permit, and shall require and maintain documentation
of the location and characteristics of all borrow and disposal sites associated with this
project. This information will include data regarding soils, vegetation and hydrology
sufficient to clearly demonstrate compliance with the preceding condition (k). All
information will be available to the USACE upon request. NCDOT shall require its
contractors to complete and execute reclamation plans for each waste and borrow site and
provide written documentation that the reclamation plans have been implemented and all
work is completed. This documentation will be provided to the Corps of Engineers
within 30 days of the completion of the reclamation work.
i. The permittee shall require its contractors and/or agents to comply with the
terms and conditions of this permit in the construction and maintenance of this project,
and shall provide each of its contractors and/or agents associated with the construction or
maintenance of this project with a copy ofthis-permit. A copy of this permit, including
all conditions and any Corps approved modifications shall be available at the project site
during construction and maintenance of this project.
j. Any violation of these conditions or violations of Section 404 of the Clean
Water Act or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act must be reported in writing to the
Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, within 24 hours of the violation.
k. Failure to institute and carry out the details of special conditions a. - j., above,
may result in a directive to cease all ongoing and permitted work within waters and/or
wetlands associated with TIP No. B-3636, or such other remedy as the District Engineer
or his authorized representatives may seek.

This nationwide permit does not relieve you of the responsibility to obtain any
required State or local approval. This permit is valid until the NWP is modified,
reissued, or revoked. All of the existing NWPs are scheduled to be modified, reissued, or
revoked prior to March 18, 2007. It is incumbent upon you to remain informed of
changes to the NWPs. We will issue a public notice when the NWPs are reissued.
Furthermore, if you commence or are under contract to commence this activity before the
date that the relevant nationwide permit is modified or revoked, you will have twelve
(12) months from the date of the modification or revocation of the NWP to complete the
activity under the present terms and conditions of this nationwide permit. If, prior to the
expiration date of March 18, 2007, .the nationwide permit authorization is reissued and/or
modified, this verification will remain valid until March 18, 2007, provided it complies
with all new and/or modified terms and conditions. The District Engineer may, at any
time, exercise his discretionary authority to modify, suspend, or revoke a case specific
activity's authorization under any NWP.
Thank you for your time and cooperation. If you have any questions, you may
contact me at the Washington Regulatory Field Office, Post Office Box 1000,
Washington, North Carolina, 27889, or telephone [phone], extension 26.
Sincerely,

William Biddlecome
Project Manager
Copies Furnished:
Ms. Nicole Thomson
Water Quality Section
North Carolina Division of Environment
and Natural Resources
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
Mr. Travis Wilson
Eastern Region Highway Project Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program
1142 I-85 Service Road
Creedmoor, North Carolina 27522
4

Mr. Gary Jordan
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Fish and Wildlife Enhancement
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
Mr. Ron Sechler
National Marine Fisheries Service
101 Pivers Island
Beaufort, North Carolina 28516
Mr. Chris Militscher
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
C/O FHWA, Raleigh Office
310 New Bern Avenue, Room 206
Raleigh, North Carolina 27601
Mr. William D. Gilmore, P.E.
EEP Director
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1652
BCF:

1--
~~~~ '~
PROGRAM
February 28, 2006
Mr. Bill Biddlecome
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Washington Regulatory Field Office
Post Office Box 1000
Washington, North Carolina 27889-1000
Dear Mr. Biddlecome:
Subject: EEP Mitigation Acceptance Letter
~~ n
,. 'Ir ,
~~ . w~ vb
~~9~~8
~~
B-3636, Replace Bridge 16 over Rockyhock Creek on SR 1222, Chowan County;
Chowan River Basin (Cataloging Unit 03010203); Northern Outer Coastal Plain
(NOCP) Eco-Region
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) will
provide the compensatory riverine wetland mitigation for the unavoidable impact associated with the
above referenced project. Previously, the NCDOT had requested stream mitigation for 72 feet of stream
impact; however, stream mitigation is now no longer needed by the NCDOT for this project. As
indicated in the NCDOT's revised mitigation request letter dated January 30, 2006, the project will
impact 0.198 acre of riverine wetlands.
This mitigation acceptance letter replaces the mitigation acceptance letter dated October 3,
2005. Mitigation for this project will be provided in accordance with Section X of the Memorandum of
Agreement between the N. C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources, the N. C. Department
of Transportation, and the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers. EEP commits to implement sufficient
compensatory riverine wetland mitigation up to a 2:1 ratio to offset the impacts associated with this
project by the end of the MOA year in which this project is permitted. If the impacts change from the
above listed amount, then this mitigation strategy letter will no longer be valid and a new mitigation
strategy letter will be required from EEP.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Ms. Beth Harmon at
919-715-1929.
Sincerely,
pp~
i~~~!G~iLL ,kS~~' .~;tll~J r~
William D. Gilmore, P.E.
EEP Director
cc: Mr. Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., NCDOT-PDEA
Mr. John Hennessey, Division of Water Quality, Wetlands/401 Unit
File: B-3636 Revised
~~' l.rf rtf . A' ~.4 l.n ~ 1 !e ~ c ~ '„f ~ F'l ~ ~~~, ~ [l~lilGilR
Enhancement Program, 16521'~ail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27649-(652 / 419-115-0416 / www.nceep.net

x' ~ ~
~ro S L~1 ii a
PROGRAM
February 28, 2006
Mr. Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
Environmental Management Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
Dear Dr. Thorpe:
Subject: EEP Mitigation Acceptance Letter:
B-3636, Bridge Number 16 over Rockyhock Creek on SR 1222,
Chowan County
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (EEP) will provide the compensatory riverine wetland mitigation for the subject
project. Based on the information supplied by you in a letter dated January 30, 2006, the
impacts are located in CU 03010203 of the Chowan River Basin in the Northern Outer
Coastal Plain (NOCP) Eco-Region, and are as follows:
Riverine Wetland: 0.198 acre
Previously, you indicated a need for stream mitigation to offset approximately 72 feet of
stream impacts associated with this project. EEP issued a mitigation acceptance letter on
October 3, 2005 committing to provide the riverine wetland and stream mitigation. Since
this project was accepted by EEP, the project has been re-designed and stream mitigation
is now no longer required from EEP.
This mitigation acceptance letter replaces the mitigation acceptance letter
issued on October 3, 2005. EEP will provide the compensatory riverine wetland
mitigation in accordance with Section X of the Memorandum of Agreement between the
N. C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources, the N. C. Department of
Transportation, and the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, signed on July 22, 2003.
According to the 2005 Impact Projection Database, there were no anticipated impacts
listed for this project. Fortunately, sufficient assets are available in the cataloging unit to
meet the mitigation needs for this project. If the above referenced impacts amounts are
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program, Ib52 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 21699-I b52 / 919-115-047b / www.nceep.net

revised, then this mitigation acceptance letter will no longer be valid and a new
mitigation acceptance letter will be required from EEP.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Ms. Beth
Harmon at 919-715-1929.
Sincerely,

William D. Gilmore, P.E.
EEP Director
cc: Mr. Bill Biddlecome, USACE-Washington
Mr. John Hennessy, Division of Water Quality, Wetlands/401 Unit
File: B-3636 Revised
i

~~

~~
~V
4R ~ a ~5
Z
Wqp °°s
ST oR~W~~ B
icy
® North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
MEMORANDUM Richard B. Hamilton, Executive Director
TO: Doug Huggett
Major Permits Processing Coordinator
Division of Coastal Management
FROM: Travis Wilson, Highway Project Coordinator~~ ~~/ ~~
Habitat Conservation Program ,.~. /-
DATE: March 6, 2006
SUBJECT: NCDOT request for a CAMA/ Dredge and Fill permit for bridge No. 16 over
Rockyhock Creek on SR 1222; in Chowan County
We have reviewed the information included in the package received from the Division of
Coastal Management. Our comments are provided in accordance with provisions of the Fish and
Wildlife Coordination, Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661 et. seq.) and the Coastal
Area Management Act (G.S. 113A-100 through 113A-128).
NCWRC prior comments have been incorporated in the permit application, therefore do
not object to the issuance of the CAMA permit for this project provided that the following
conditions are also included in the CAMA Permit:
1. All riprap placed in-water should be free of pollutants and soil.
2. Live concrete should not be allowed to contact the water in or entering into the
stream.
3. Turbidity curtains should be used to contain all bottom disturbing activities, including
pile or casement driving/vibrating/jetting, placement of riprap, excavation or filling.
Excessive silt and sediment loads can have numerous detrimental effects on aquatic
resources including destruction of spawning habitat, suffocation of eggs, and
clogging of gills of aquatic species.
NCDOT is expected use Best Management Practices for the protection of Surface
Waters and Sedimentation and Erosion Control measures sufficient to protect the aquatic
resources.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this permit application. If you have any
concerns about our comments, please contact me at [phone].

Memo.
cc: John Hennessy, DWQ, Raleigh
Bill Biddlecome, USACE, Washington
Cathy Brittingham, Morehead City
March 6, 2006