20060314 Ver 1_Complete File_20060424

a
:a
0
VVATFR
Q6
T?
r
1 WN-OM
1-11
April 24, 2006
Johnston County
DWQ Project No. 20060314
Bridge 52 on NC 96
TIP No. B-4164
UALITY CERTIFICATION, NEUSE BUFFER RULES' with ADDITIONAL
APPROVAL of 401 WATER Q
CONDITIONS
Mr R. E. Greene, P.E., Division Engineer
NCDOT, Division 4
PO Box 3165
Wilson, NC 27895-3165
Dear Ivlr. Greene: acts for the purpose of
in accordance with the conditions listed below, for the following impacts for the purpose of
you have our approval,
replacing Bridge 52 in Johnston County:
Site --TP-e-r impact in
nnen Waters.. ac .
13+90 V.Vu7V .?
-
Total 0.0096
Total Open water Impact for Project: 0.0096. acres
= Zone. 2 Zone. 2. Buffer.
Buffers (not Mitigation
wetlands) Required
r.. tminv- 3:1. ratio;
0.0096
Neuse. Ri ariau ,?..... Zone
2. minus

Site zone 1
minus
d = Zone 1

Buffers. (not Zone.l.Buffer.
hybgation .
Impact
(sq ft) Wetlands.

in Zone 2.
Impact
ft)
(sq s .
Wetlan
in Zone 1 .
wetlands) Required

.
(Using 3:1. ratio) . ft .
s
0
.
. s ft .
0 s . ft
1300
N/A 665
665.
0.
1300
N/A
1 .
. 0 act, no mitigation required
1300 1300
eet of imp
Totals
and 1
.
* n/a = Tot al for Site is les s than 1/3 acre
t: 1965 care feet*
square
.
Total Buffer. Impact for Projec
665
27, 2006 and
our application datereceived that these
The project shall be constructed in 19a 006After reviewing your application,
information received April . Number 3494. This certification c
additional Certification orresptguffer
impacts are covered by General Water Quality approval is also valid for the Neuse Rip
should acquire any other federal, state or local permits as W titer
by s of Engineers' This
Nationwide Permit 3 issued b the Corps
limited to) Sediment and Erosion Control, permit, Non-Discharge
(15A NCAC 2B.0233). In addition,
not You
proceed with your project including (but will expire with the accompanymg 404 permit,
Supply watershed regulations- This app
specified in the Water Quality Certification.
Transportation Permitting Unit
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh,
L -,n R e qh N ? Carolina 527604----+,f .,e- usmcwetlands
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
:m acts. in the. Neuse. Rivoer. Basin
Temporary. Fill in Total in Open
(acl.
0
0.
r c?
„O y
fO ?
?` f4
application (unless modified below).
ose and design described in your lication. If the property is sold, the
This approval is valid solely for the pure the DWQ and submit a new app
our project change, You must notify rough letter, and is thereby responsiblef°of tot?all?g
Should y P of this Certification and aPP the future) exceed one acre, o as
ro ect (now or mensatory mitigation may be requinew owner must be given
If a total copy wetland f exceed for this PJ
with all the conditions. exceed 150 linear feet, co p remain valid, you must adhere to the.
impacts to streams (now or in 0t506 h) (6) and (7). For this approval to
described in 15A NCAC 2H • cation as well as those listed below.
conditions listed in the attached certifi work area should be maintained to prevent direct contact betwee to
construction, a dry 1. If, concrete is used during Water that inadvertently contacts unc?ed?a concrete lolls not be discharged
curing concrete and stream v!ater. H and possible aquatic
surface waters due to the potential for elevated p
no staging of equipment of any kind is permitted in waters of the U.S" or
constriction of the protect,
2 During the
protested riparian buffers. should not be modified*
erasion, pattern and profile of the stream above and beeO orpbic conditions.
stored tonatural g
3. The dim should be re ny
Disturbed floodplains and streams laced for stream stabilization
aquatic placed
h water mark shall be minimized, A ede r ip-rap
life passage-
4. The use of rip-rap above the is
shall be placed in stream channels in such a manner that it does not imp BMP measures from
work area. Approved
acent to stream waters shall be conducted in a dry ual such as sandbags, rock berms,
and Maintenance Activities man e
5. All work in or adj water.
in flowing
most current version of NCDOT s shall Construction d to prevent excavation
be use
them and other diversion structuT el in order to minim
cofferdams rather than in the stream channel
equipment operated from the banks
shall be
6. Heavy pollutants into the stream' to prevent
sedimentation and reduce introduction of other inspected and maintained
ed equipment operated near surface waters must regularly l other toxic materials.
lubricants, hydraulic fluids,
meclianiz .
7. All fuels
contamination of stream waters from , el except where authorized by this
No rock, sand or other materials shall be dredged from the str eam channel
N to surface
certification ui ment in or adjacent
hydroseed mixtures and washing out hydTOSeeders and other equipment
9. Discharging
waters is prohibited. er consistent with State water quality
ents shall conduct its activities with §303(d) of the Clean Wateri la?S are not
10. NCDOT and its authorized
resulting from comp determines that such standards o violate
Stand d,
ards (including ally or that Stother appropri ate or federal law is being
ate requirements of State and Federald or achievQed use) this certification.
reevaluate and modify
(including the failure to sustain a designated DWQ may
being met to assure comp otherwise
or that further conditions are necessary 3.1, unless
slight be placed at slopes no flatter than
located in juris dictional wetlands
11. All fill slopes
authorized by this certification.. construction site at all ties. In addition, the
pity Certification shall be posted on the hall b m
12. A copy subsequent modifications, if any, shall be maintained with the Division Engineer
Water Quality Certification and all
and the on-site project manager. oe
Transportation Permitting Unit
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 276991650
-:. orn Raleigh, North Carolina 27604_ ?t?ro nc.uslncwetlans
0
W ATFR
?G
r
n3
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
13. The outside buffer, wetland or water boundary located within the construction corridor approved by this
authorization shall be clearly marked by highly visible fencing prior to any land disturbing activities. Impacts to
areas within the fencing are prohibited unless otherwise authorized by this certification.
14. Upon completion of the project, the NCDOT Division Engineer shall complete and return the enclosed
"Certification of Completion Form" to notify DWQ when all work included in the 401 Certification has been
completed.
15. Native riparian vegetation must be reestablished within the construction limits of the project by the end of the
growing season following completion of construction.
16. There shall be no excavation from, or waste disposal into, jurisdictional wetlands or waters associated with this
permit without appropriate modification. Should waste or borrow sites be located in wetlands or streams,
compensatory mitigation will be required since that is a direct impact from road construction activities.
17. Erosion and sediment control practices must be in full compliance with all specifications governing
the proper design, installation and operation and maintenance of such Best Management Practices in
order to protect surface waters standards:
a. The erosion and sediment control measures for the project must be designed, installed, operated, and
maintained in accordance with the most recent version of the North Carolina Sediment and Erosion
Control Planning and Design Manual.
b. The design, installation, operation, and maintenance of the sediment and erosion control measures
must be such that they equal, or exceed, the requirements specified in the most recent version of the
North Carolina Sediment and Erosion Control Manual. The devices shall be maintained on all
construction sites, borrow sites, and waste pile (spoil) projects, including contractor-owned or leased
borrow pits associated with the project.
C. For borrow pit sites, the erosion and sediment control measures must be designed, installed, operated,
and maintained in accordance with the most recent version of the North Carolina Surface Mining
Manual.
d. The reclamation measures and implee ollution must Control with the reclamation in accordance with
the requirements of the Sedimentation
18. Sediment and erosion control measures shall not be placed in wetlands or waters to the maximum extent
wetlands and waters is unavoidable, they shall be
practical. If placement of sediment and upon devices
the project.
removed and the natural grade restored completion
19. Strict adherence the DOT's BMPs for bridge demolition as approved by the Corps of Engineers is a condition of
the 401 Water Quality Certification.
20. Bridge deck drains should not discharge directly into the stream. Stormwat should be directed across
buffers,
bridge and pre-treated through site-appropriate means (grassed swales, p re-formed holes, scour vegetated
etc.) before entering the stream. Please refer to the most current version of Stormwater Best Management Practices.
21. The NCDOT will need to adhere to all appropriate in-water work moratoriums (including the use of pile driving
or vibration techniques) prescribed by the NC Wildlife Resources Commission, the US Fish 5 and Wu n of Service, and Je any
and National Marine Fisheries Service. No in-water work is permitted between b t the NC Wildlife Resources Commission.
year, without prior approval from the NC Division of Water Quality
In addition, NCDOT shall conform with the NCDOT policy entitled "Stream Crossing Guidelines for Anadromous
Fish Passage (May 12, 1997) at all times.
®rri Caro ' a
Nal . ,
Transportation Permitting Unit
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone: [phone] FAX [phone] Internet: http•//h2o enr state.nc.uslncvvetiands
N NA T Michael F. Easley, Governor
??
? William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Lj ry Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
} Division of Water Quality

22. All stormwater runoff shall be directed as sheetflow through stream buffers at nonerosive velocities, unless
otherwise approved by this certification.
23. All riparian buffers impacted by the placement of temporary fill or clearing activities shall be restored to the
preconstruetion contours and revegetated. Maintained buffers shall be permanently revegetated with non-woody
species by the end of the growing season following completion of construction. For the purpose of this condition,
maintained buffer areas are defined as areas within the transportation corridor that will be subject to regular DOT
maintenance activities including mowing. The area with non-maintained buffers shall be permanently revegetated,
with native woody species before the next growing season following completion of construction.
24. Pursuant to NCAC15A 2B.0233(6), sediment and erosion control devices shall not be placed in Zone 1 of any
Neuse Buffer without prior approval by the NCDWQ. At this time, the NCDWQ has approved no sediment and
erosion control devices in Zone 1, outside of the approved project impacts, anywhere on this project. Moreover,
sediment and erosion control devices shall be allowed in Zone 2 of the buffers provided that Zone 1 is not
compromised.and that discharge is released as diffuse flow.
If you do not accept any of the conditions of this certification, you may ask for an adjudicatory hearing. You must
act within 60 days of the date that you receive this letter. To ask for a hearing, send a written petition that conforms
to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes to the Office of Administrative Hearings, 6714 Mail Service
Center, Raleigh, N.C. 27699. This certification and its conditions are final and binding unless you ask for a
hearing. This letter completes the review of the Division of Water Quality under Section 401 of the Clean Water.
Act. If you have any questions, please contact Rob Ridings at [phone].
mcerel ,
/-
n W. Klimek, P.E.
Attachments (General Certification and Certificate of Completion form)
cc: William Wescott, US Army Corps of Engineers, Washington Field Office
Jamie Guerrero, Division 4 Environmental Officer
Travis Wilson, NC Wildlife Resources Commission
DWQ Raleigh Regional Office copy
File Copy
Noe Carro?a
Transportation Permitting Unit " ' ""tkC"
1650. Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone: [phone] / FAX [phone] / Internet htti)://h2o.enr.state.nc.usfncwetiands

?Qia SfATFP -?
Yyn
STATE of NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY LYNDO TIPPETT
GOVERNOR
SECRETARY
April 17, 2006
Mr. Robert Ridings 0 R @ 12
Wetlands/401 Unit
NC DENR Division of Water Quality APR 1 9 2006
2321 Crabtree Blvd. Suite 250
Raleigh, NC 27604-2260 DENR - WATER QUALITY
WETLANDS AND STORMWATER BRANCH
Subj ect: Replacement of Bridge 52 on NC 96 in Johnston County, TIP B-4164
Dear Mr. Ridings:
In response to your letter dated on March 31, 2006, in which the aforementioned project application was
determined to be deficient, the following clarification is offered:
All widening of the bridge and approaches will occur on the east side of the road and is outside the
buffered area of Parker Pond located west of the roadway.
The 1300 square feet of Zone 1 impacts and 665 square feet of Zone 2 impacts are for the bridge,
not the approaches. Bridges are allowable pursuant to 15A NCAC 2B .0233.
The only additional impact is 418 square feet (0.0096 acre) of open water impact from the riprap
located on the south side end bent of the bridge.
No buffer mitigation plan was included in the permit application because there are no buffer impacts for
the approaches. Furthermore, all widening of the roadway is confined within the existing right-of-way
of NC 96.
If any further information is needed, please contact Jamie Guerrero at [phone].
Respectfully Yours,
R.E. Lee Jr., PE
Division Engineer - Division 4
Cc: Nu. ddmir, Guerrero, Division Environmentai Utticer
Mr. Jimmy Marler, Bridge Superintendent
Mr. William Wescott, US Army Corps of Engineers, Washington Field Office
[phone] x 3532 [e-mail]
Post Office Box 3165, Wilson, North Carolina 27895-3165
r It STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA

MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
February 23, 2006
Mr. William Wescott
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Washington Regulatory Field Office
Post Office Box 1000
Washington, North Carolina 27889-1000
(One Copy)
Ms. Nicole Thomson
Wetlands/401 Unit
NC DENR Division of Water Quality
2321 Crabtree Blvd. Suite 250
Raleigh, NC 27604-2260
(Seven Copies)
LYNDO TIPPETT ???`??iy
SECRETARY
060314
Subject: Nationwide 3 Notification and Buffer Authorization Request, for the demolition and
reconstruction of Bridge No. 52, NC 96 over John K. Swamp (a.k.a. Little Swamp),
Johnston County. TIP Project Number : B-4164
Dear Sir or Madam:
Please find enclosed the Pre-Construction Notification for the above referenced project. The existing
bridge (75-foot long) will be replaced with a new 160-foot long bridge on the existing aligmnent. Traffic
will use an offsite detour during construction. There are impacts to buffers and Waters of the U.S./State
associated with this project. The new bridge will completely span the creek and a much larger portion of
floodplain. The bridge replacement will result in a better hydraulic opening and provide for increased
wildlife passage beneath the future bridge. John K. Swamp is located in the Neuse River Basin and is
classified by the Division of Water Quality at this bridge as C NSW 27-52-(2.5).
The bridge will be removed by sawing the deck and lifting it out in sections. We will excavate behind
the end bents and fold them back, then remove them without dropping any components into the creek.
Concrete and steel piles from the existing bridge will be cut off at the mud line of the stream using a
hydraulic shear or other means that does not require construction equipment to get into the water. Best
Management Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters and for Bridge Demolition and Removal
will be strictly adhered to during the removal of the existing bridge.
Y
06
S10 -
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
[phone] x 3532j guerrero@dot. state. nc.us
Post Office Box 3165, Wilson, North Carolina 27895-3165
PAI
FEDERALLY-PROTECTED SPECIES AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
The Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) currently list four federally protected species for Johnston County
(Table 1).
Table 1- Federally Protected Species of Johnston County
Federal
Common Name
Scientific Name
Status
Habitat Biological Conclusion
Present
Kea-cocxaaea Picoides borealis E N No Effect
woodpecker
Dwarf wedge mussel Alasmidonta heterodon E N May Affect - Not Likely
to Adverse] Affect
Tar spiny mussel Elliptio steinstansana E N May Affect - Not Likely
to Adversely Affect
Michaux's sumac Rhus inichauxii E N No Effect
A mussel survey was conducted at the project site on October 6, 2003. None of the federally listed
species were found, and it was concluded that the project construction "May Affect-Not Likely to
Adversely Affect" the dwarf wedge mussel and the tar spiny mussel. No element occurrences are listed
on the NHP database within one mile of the bridge. No pine trees suitable for RCW foraging or nesting
are in, or adjacent to, the bridge. This project is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any
of the federally protected species listed in Johnston County.
The State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) concurs that Parker's Mill, located on the west side of
NC 96, is eligible for the National Register of Historic Places under Criteria A and C. The proposed
design avoids impacts to the existing dam and buildings by replacing the bridge in the existing location
and at approximately the same roadway elevation. SHPO has concurred with the "No Adverse Affect"
call on the condition that a two-bar metal bridge rail be installed on the proposed structure instead of the
standard New Jersey Barrier.
NCDOT's GeoEnvironmental Unit stated that an old gas station is located in the project vicinity.
Records state that the underground storage tanks (USTs) have been removed. However, metallic
readings were registered during the field visit, which suggests the possible presence of a UST. Since an
offsite detour will be utilized during project construction, no impacts to UST's are anticipated.
Regulatory Approvals
USAGE Section 404 Permit: The project qualifies for Nationwide Permit 3 (Maintenance of previously
approved structures). All permit conditions will be followed. Impacts to the Waters of the U.S. are not
anticipated. For our files, please provide general permit verification that the activity is authorized.
NCDWO Section 401 Certification: The project qualifies for 401 General Certification number 3376.
All conditions of the general certification will be followed.
NCDWO Buffer Rules: As bridges are an allowable use they require written authorization from the
Division of Water Quality. Only Buffer Rule approval is sought in writing.
Please contact Jamie Guerrero at [phone] if you have any questions or need additional
infonnation. Your time and effort are appreciated.
Respectfully Yours,
R.E. Greene. Jr.. PE
Division Engineer - Division 4
Cc: Mr. Jamie Guerrero, Division Environmental Specialist
Mr. Jimmy Marler, Bridge Superintendent
Ms. Katie Simmons, Roadside Environmental Field Operations Technician
Office Use Only: Fonn Version May 2002
USACE Action ID No. DWQ No. 2 0 0 6 0 3 1 4
itf- .,r.: i ,
__ ....? 1,... .... w..., ......• .o aav, app wav,c W Llllb pl UJecl, please enter Not Applicable" or "N/A°.)
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: NWP 3
3. If this notification is solely a courtesy copy because written approval for the 401 Certification
is not required, check here:'no discharge - qualifies for GC 3376
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: ?NA
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: ?NA
if. Applicant Information
Owner/Applicant Information
Name: - R. E. Greene - Division Engineer
Mailing Address: PO Box 3165
Wilson NC 27895-3165
Telephone Number: 252 237-6164x3501 Fax Number: 252 234-6174
E-mail Address:_ rareene(a,dot.state. nc us
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: Jamie Guerrero Division 4 Environmental Specialist
Company Affiliation: Division 4 - NCDOT
Mailing Address: 509 Ward Blvd.
Wilson NC 27895-3165
Telephone Number: 252 237-6164 x3532 Fax Number: 252 234-6174
E-mail Address: iguerrero(a_)dot.state nc us
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 clearly defined. For administrative and distribution purposes, the
USACE requires information to be submitted on sheets no larger than 11 by 17-inch format;
however, DWQ may accept paperwork of any size. DWQ prefers full-size construction
drawings rather than a sequential sheet version of the full-size plans. If full-size plans are
reduced to a small scale such that the final version is illegible, the applicant will be informed that
the project has been placed on hold until decipherable maps are provided.
1. Name of project: Bridge 52, NC 96 over John K. Swamp (aka Little Swamp)
Johnston County
2. T.I.P. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only): B-4164
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN): NA
4. Location
County: Peacocks Crossroads Quad Map Nearest Town: Meadow
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number): NA
Directions to site (include road numbers, landmarks, etc.):
0.81 miles S of NC 50 on NC 96 in Johnston County
5. Site coordinates, if available (UTM or Lat/Long): 35.3091°N, 78.4576°W
(Note - If project is linear, such as a road or utility line, attach a sheet that separately lists the
coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody.)
6. Property size (acres): N/A
7. Nearest body of water (stream/river/sound/ocean/lake):John K. Swamp (Parker Pond) -C
NSW 27-52-2.5
8. River Basin: Neuse
(Note - this must be one of North Carolina's seventeen designated major river basins. The
River Basin map is available at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/admin/maDs/.)
9. Describe the existing conditions on the site and general land use in the vicinity of the project
at the time of this application:_ rural agriculture pasture woodland
Page 6 of 12
r
10. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
Using mechanical highway equipment replace an existing bridge with a longer bridge in
place with offsite detour.
11. Explain the purpose of the proposed work:
Bridge Maintenance Unit records indicate the bridge has a sufficiency rating of 14.6 out
of a possible 100 for a new structure. The bridge is currently posted at 21 tons for a
single vehicle and 28 tons for TTST's The bridge is considered Functionally Obsolete
due to a deck geometry appraisal of 3 out of 9 according the the Federal Highwav
Administration (FHWA) standards and the bridge is therefore eligible for FHWA's
Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Program The replacement of the
structure will result in safer traffic operations
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.
Bridge previously approved by 33 CFR 330.3
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.
NA
VI. Proposed Impacts to Waters of the United States/Waters of the State
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
wetlands, open water, and stream channels associated with the project. The applicant must also
provide justification for these impacts in Section VII below. All proposed impacts, permanent
and temporary, must be listed herein, and must be clearly identifiable on an accompanying site
plan. All wetlands and waters, and all streams (intermittent and perennial) must be shown on a
delineation map, whether or not impacts are proposed to these systems. Wetland and stream
evaluation and delineation forms should be included as appropriate. Photographs may be
included at the applicant's discretion. If this proposed impact is strictly for wetland or stream
Page 7 of 12
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:
The bridge replacement will result in an appropriate hydraulic opening and provide for
increased wildlife passage The new bridge will be 13.8 feet wider based on current
design standards. Therefore the new bridge will have 450 additional square feet of
decking over lurlsdlctlonal waters of the US/State There will be no impacts to wetlands
Individually list wetland impacts below:
Wetland Impact Area of Located within Distance to
Site Number Type of Impact* Impact I00-year Floodplain** Nearest Stream Type of Wetland***
(indicate on map) (acres) (yes/no) (linear feet)
N/A
* List each im act tie a t 1 d 'd 'f
F IF ra e y an i enti y temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: mechanized clearing, grading, till,
excavation, flooding, ditching/drainage, etc. For dams, separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding.
** 100-Year floodplains are identified through the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps
(FIRM), or FEMA-approved local floodplain maps. Maps are available through the FEMA Map Service Center at 1-800-358-9616, or
online at http:/Iwww.fema.eov.
*** List a wetland type that best describes wetland to be impacted (e.g., freshwater/saltwater marsh, forested wetland, beaver pond,
Carolina Bay, bog, etc.) Indicate if wetland is isolated (detennination of isolation to be made by USACE only).
List the total acreage (estimated) of all existing wetlands on the property: N/A
Total area of wetland impact proposed: N/A
2. Individually list all intermittent and perennial stream impacts below
Stream Impact Length of Average Width Perennial or
Site Number Type of Impact* Impact Stream Name** of Stream Intermittent?
(indicate on map) (linear feet) Before Impact (please specify)
,
'^-r-11 -V.1Q«JY uiw iucmny [emporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: culverts and associated rip-rap,
dams (separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding), relocation (include linear feet before. and after, and net loss/gain),
stabilization activities (cement wall, rip-rap, crib wall, gabions, etc.), excavation, ditching/straightening, etc. If stream relocation is
proposed, plans and profiles showing the linear footprint for both the original and relocated streams must be included.
** Stream names can be found on USGS topographic maps. If a stream has no name, list as UT (unnamed tributary) to the nearest
downstream named stream into which it flows. USGS maps are available through the USGS at 1-800-358-9616, or online at
www.uses.gov. Several internet sites also allow direct download and printing of USGS maps (e.g., www.topozone.com,
www.mapquest.conl, etc.).
Cumulative impacts (linear distance in feet) to all streams on site: 0
Page 8 of 12
3. Individually list all open water impacts (including lakes, ponds, estuaries, sounds, Atlantic
Ocean and anv other water of the U.S.) below:
Open Water Impact
Site Number *
Type of Impact* Area of
Impact Name of Waterbody Type of Waterbody
(lake
pond
estuary
sound

(indicate on map)
(acres)
(if applicable) ,
,
,
,
bay, ocean, etc.)
13 +90 -L- Rip Rap 0.0096 N/A Pond (man-made)
* L'• h '
ist eac nnpact separately and identity temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: fill, excavation, dredging,
flooding, drainage, bulkheads, etc.
4. Pond Creation NA
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.): NA
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stormwater requirement, etc.): NA
Size of watershed draining to pond: NA Expected pond surface area: NA
VII. Impact Justification (Avoidance and Minimization)
Specifically describe measures taken to avoid the proposed impacts. It may be useful to provide
information related to site constraints such as topography, building ordinances, accessibility, and
financial viability of the project. The applicant may attach drawings of alternative, lower-impact
site layouts, and explain why these design options were not feasible. Also discuss how impacts
were minimized once the desired site plan was developed. If applicable, discuss construction
techniques to be followed during construction to reduce impacts.
The bridge length will be extended from 75' to 160' to span a larger portion of the
floodplaln. Two bents will be removed from the stream and will be replaced with only
one. Offslte detour avoids temporary fill from onsite detour. Equipment staging and
work will be performed within the existing road footprint Strict enforcement of Best
Management Practices for sedimentation and erosion control the protection of wetlands
and surface waters, and bridge demolition will be enforced during project construction
Both wooden and steel piles from the existing bridge will be cut off at the mud line of the
stream using a hydraulic shear or other means that does not require construction
equipment to get into the water. No temporary causeways or temporary work pads will
be allowed in the stream during construction No weep holes will be allowed in the
bridge deck which allow water to drain directly into the stream Special sediment control
fence (hardware cloth and stone) will be used where appropriate throughout all phases
of construction.
Page 9 of 12
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.
USAGE - In accordance with the Final Notice of Issuance and Modification of Nationwide
Permits, published in the Federal Register on March 9, 2000, mitigation will be required when
necessary to ensure that adverse effects to the aquatic environment are minimal. Factors
including size and type of proposed impact and function and relative value of the impacted
aquatic resource will be considered in determining acceptability of appropriate and practicable
mitigation as proposed. Examples of mitigation that may be appropriate and practicable include,
but are not limited to: reducing the size of the project; establishing and maintaining wetland
and/or upland vegetated buffers to protect open waters such as streams; and replacing losses of
aquatic resource functions and values by creating, restoring, enhancing, or preserving similar
functions and values, preferable in the same watershed.
If mitigation is required for this project, a copy of the mitigation plan must be attached in order
for USACE or DWQ to consider the application complete for processing. Any 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 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 separate sheet if more space-is needed.
No further mitigation is proposed for this project. Bridges are an allowable use per
Buffer Rules.
2. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina 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 regarding 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:
Page 10 of 12
Amount of stream mitigation requested (linear feet): NA
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet): NA
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): NA
Amount of Non-ripari an wetland mitigation requested (acres): NA
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres): NA
IX. Environmental Documentation (required by DWQ)
Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state) funds or the use of public
(federal/state) land?
Yes ® No ?
If yes, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the
requirements of the National or North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
Note: If you are not sure whether a NEPA/SEPA document is required, call the SEPA
coordinator at [phone] to review current thresholds for environmental documentation.
Yes ? No ® Meets Federal Categorical Exclusion criteria
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. NA
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 are proposed to the buffers. Correspondence from the DWQ
Regional Office may be included as appropriate. Photographs may also be included at the
applicant's discretion.
Will the project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233
(Neuse), 15A NCAC 2B .0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 2B .0250 (Randleman Rules and
Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please identify-p
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.
Page 11 of 12
Zone* Impact
(square feet) Multiplier Required
Mitigation
1 1300 3 0
2 665 1.5 0
Total 1965
- cone i extenas out su teet perpenaicular trom 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.
Not required. Replacing existing bridge with a longer bridge
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.
All appropriate best management practices for sediment and erosion control will be
implemented during streambank stabilization and scour protection
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.
NA
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. 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).
Page 12 of 12
John K. Swamp (also known as Little Swamp has a potential as a travel corridor for anadromous
fish. Therefore, an in-stream moratorium will be in effect from February 15 to June 15 The
Stream Crossing Guidelines for Anadromous Fish Passage will be implemented as applicable
The mussel survey was valid until October 6 2005. A new survey will have to be conducted
prior to construction. NCDOT will use a two-bar metal bridge rail on the proposed structure
instead of the standard New Jersey Barrier rail. This is to comply with The State Historic
Preservation Office (SHPO) concurrence that the proposed bridge will have "No Adverses
Affect" to Parker's Mill.
Page 13 of 12

u«Y.ff www.LVFVLVIIG.UUIWPiIILL-USP!Z=1 /CSGII=S`J1VL2SL.yyyblyNl?G..
Aw?? ?(f• ??? - y ?. Lit

1136

c ?~ 4,ti1 YY

Ills

yy { P { V
-n k

? \ 4 111 ??? /^

r,_.-w f f r/
0.3 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.5 km
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 mi
Map center is 35.30910N, 78.4576°W (WGS84/NAD83)
Peacocks Crossroads quadrangle
Projection is UTM Zone 17 NAD83 Datum
M*
G
M=-8.868
G=1.47
1 of 1 2/20/2006 3:48 PM

i III r ,R ny
m
m
N
r
<so ? C ao
? ?
A
+ D N v

tT pajy?
? ? Y.Ln n ? '
T

II
I
11
1
1,
1.
,
H
il
l 0 y = r
, 2 ? ?
11 11 11 1 1 111 H il l . 111 11 I'll n
? m
a
2
I m
Z
+
a c

a ®o ao®?

y

11
I
ll
III
II
II
H
il
l
H
il
l
,
1
1
11
11
1
1
111
111
1 Ill I

Hil
l 1
1111
11
11
1
11
1
M1
11 a2 ? ? ? ? a i
x
O
I 11 ? i

I
11 Hil l Hi ll I N il :11 1f oll i II II:
/ I ll 11 11
o
i

Hil l
mO ' I
1
? c I
?
o ?Z I I
i ll I H il l I il l 11 10 11 11 '1 5 1 i ll 1 11,11 1 /
F z '? ' / -
/ Q I Zm

I ' '
I
W
y ? ? I
p m o I
O o ? I I I
ill 1 1111 11 11 11 11 1 1 11 1 111 11 1 H-T 11 111 1 = n
m 1 1 !1 1 I- 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 11 1 111 1 1 1111 1 1
.-. m
wo
Hi l l 1 11 1 111
an 1 I I ?Oa
arn

?mO ?a I / s R
n
l Hz?
'?< 3
7
C
an t

2 a G -1 o D

I
a O
cscac> ? ? rrl S ' ?-
wam ? Q r17 '? (!
N _
` '-1
i
, D o-I< ? az
a°
rm - O
I
V

I i
yA
?vo n
ri 't1" I A ^ p /? E O
9
o
} _ d?
m
N
I 5'SiZ 3Z5.15.H85 zYpT 2 '
? ?A m Z' N
A ? w ?
/^1
P N r
?
N
•G r
O ?o a +
m I F W
D mlm ?a
_ n
n A
N
^
7C m Oy
ZmA•'m

G ? V1 ? m
'
' c-' m I -
- ?
-tV 3 ?? wl I Z 3
?OZ
? F
v °oD
m f,?
? _zZe I Fpm

ro + b
I <
' °o p 0220 ?H;off

-
1 o A
. N A mtim
y
bm2gb 5 1 \m
g
$rn?m$ l I 'ti N
o
x I.
H$??
/ I
V
ay
I 5 N om 56/E8 OVN
'+' I"pon$ 'rO f I I - zz Ola`JON
N
$ ?m II I /
$
p ??o? a= i I
ri n no'
I
2 1O r=.,
Cp
? N I I
? _
0
c
'O
I
b?? ?
n I 2
A -N+?

1
? t
if
T??tn 5 I I A ?m
1 a, n
I 'r ?i _ \ ,I I I i

Il'n I
r n N
b
,,
N
? .- ?, n l I I N
- ;
I `I -
A 3 1 I 1 ;
I n
or°`yS
I m
'
'
I 1
i
r '? ?
''LZtl
I I I ` I
ti
I
ti
1
y,' - I
O
?
? i
i I
9 I

I
I i 11 20
o 61. ;;;
r I
?
I
O
1 , I
mZ
' i I

a
/, ?\
T I I
ca N

? III II I H i ll 1 1 111 11 1 11
I

I
1 °?
? I YI 1 J 2
I' I I

N
1 \ I +
p __-_ _ ?: I I I I
\ D
m x
?
Q -----
n
aiH
,
' v
x
\ I
1
I x
o m
Hi l l I M 1 11 1 11 A Ii li d 4 d
1
'
I
1
'
?
T
m
z m

1
9
9
0
1 '
I
...1 7? v
? , A n
? m
? ? ' 1 I
' I I ?9 o
Y r ml
3
0 z !. I
N I D
.
? Iv ? i 1 p
Q I ? o N
z! I
1 m
0 Z
z n I
1 .?? ..
1
I Z
v O 1 I
1
z 0
I
I
o
n z
T
111
11
IT
11
1
1
1
1
1

1

; I

I ?
a
I
a ? it N I
I W N o

+
? ti
D
r
Q
O ?
o-1

z
x
m
m
-i
N

CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION ACTION CLASSIFICATION FORM
TIP Project No.
State Project No.
WBS No.
Federal Project No
Proiect Description:
A.
B-4164
8.1313301
33512.1.1
BRSTP-96(6)
This project proposes to replace Bridge No. 52 on NC 96 over Little Swamp in
Johnston County. The bridge will be replaced with a 100-foot long bridge at the
existing location and approximate the same low chord elevation. The cross
section of the new bridge will include two 12-foot lanes with 3.0-foot minimum
offsets. The approach roadway will be widened to accommodate a 24-foot
pavement width consisting of two 12-foot lanes with eight-foot shoulders. The
approach work will consist of earthwork, paving, some resurfacing and tapering
back to the existing roadway for approximately 370 feet to the south and 700 feet
to the north. Guardrail will be installed where warranted. Traffic will be
detoured offsite during construction (See Section D, Studied Offsite Detour).
Purpose and Need:
B.
Bridge No. 52 is a three-span bridge with a reinforced concrete deck on steel I-
beams. The substructure is composed of reinforced concrete caps on timber piles.
The existing bridge was built in 1951.
Bridge Maintenance Unit records indicate that the bridge has a sufficiency rating
of 14.6 out of a possible 100 for a new structure. The bridge is currently posted at
21 tons for single vehicle and 28 tons for TTST's. The bridge is considered
Functionally Obsolete due to a deck geometry appraisal of 3 out of 9 according to
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) standards and the bridge is therefore
eligible for the FHWA's Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation
Program. The replacement of this structure will result in safer traffic operations.
Proposed Improvements:
The following Type II improvements which apply to the project are circled:
1. Modernization of a highway by resurfacing, restoration, rehabilitation,
reconstruction, adding shoulders, or adding auxiliary lanes (e.g., parking,
weaving, turning, climbing).
C.
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 clear zone safety improvements including removing hazards
and flattening slopes
k. Implementing traffic aid systems, signals, and motorist aid
1. Installing bridge safety hardware including bridge rail retrofit
O 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 parking 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 near 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 areas, kiosks and related street improvements) when located in
a commercial area 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 areas used
predominantly for industrial or transportation purposes where such construction is
2

not inconsistent with existing zoning and where there is no significant noise
impact on the surrounding community.
12. Acquisition of land for hardship or protective purposes, advance land acquisition
loans under section 3(b) of the UMT Act. Hardship and protective buying will be
permitted only for a particular parcel or a limited number of parcels. These types
of land acquisition 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 Proiect Information:
Estimated Costs:
Total Construction
Right of Way
Total
Estimated Traffic:
Current - 2,000 vpd
Year 2025 - 4,000 vpd
Dual -3%
TTST -2%
Design Speed:
60 mph
Functional Classification:
Rural Major Collector
Studied Offsite Detour
$ 725,000
$ 53,250
$ 778,250
NCDOT Guidelines for Evaluation of Offsite Detours for Bridge Replacement Projects considers
multiple project variables beginning with the additional time traveled by the average road user
resulting from the offsite detour. The studied offsite detour for this project would include
SR 1116 and NC 50. The detour for the average road user would result in less than five minutes
additional travel time (2.4 miles additional travel) which falls within the range of acceptable
delay for a construction duration of one year on this project.
According to the Transportation Director for Johnston County Schools, there are 18 school bus
crossings per day over Bridge No. 52. However, closing the road will not be a problem. The
school buses can be rerouted.

Johnston County Emergency Management stated that the use of an offsite detour would not pose
any negative impacts. There is a designated water point for the Meadow Fire Department
located southwest of the existing bridge. If necessary, temporary arrangements can be made to
access water from Parker Pond from the northwest side of the bridge.
Division Office Comments:
The Division Four Construction Office concurs with replacing Bridge No. 52 at the existing
location and elevation while detouring traffic offsite during construction.
Bridge Demolition:
Bridge No. 52 has a superstructure composed of reinforced concrete deck on steel I-beams with
reinforced concrete rails. The substructure is composed of reinforced concrete caps on timber
piles and reinforced concrete end bents. Based on current construction practices, the existing
bridge can be removed without dropping any concrete into Little Swamp. Therefore, there is no
anticipated temporary fill associated with the removal of Bridge No. 52.
Alternates Eliminated from Further Study
The no-build alternate for this project is not practical or feasible. The existing bridge will
continue to deteriorate necessitating eventual closure of the bridge. This is unacceptable due to
the traffic that NC 96 serves.
Rehabilitation of the existing structure is not feasible due to the timber pile substructure.
Replacing the structure on new location is not practical- due to the existing horizontal tangent
alignment, impacts to the historic property to the west of the existing bridge, and availability of a
reasonable offsite detour.
Maintaining traffic onsite with a temporary detour is not practical due to the wetlands on the east
side of the bridge and the historic property on the west side of the bridge. Additionally, there is a
feasible offsite detour as discussed under Studied Offsite Detour.
4

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? X
(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 minimise 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
5

(13) Will the project result in the modification of any existing
regulatory floodway? X
(14) Will the project require any stream relocations or channel
changes? 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 th? :roject 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
6
(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
(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 Natural System of Wild and
Scenic Rivers? X
F. Additional Documentation Required for Unfavorable Responses in Part E
ITEM NO.
2. A mussel survey was conducted on October 6, 2003 in the project vicinity. No
evidence of Dwarf wedgemussel or Tar River spinymussel was found. The site
exhibited very low mussel diversity and abundance. The Biological Conclusion
for both threatened and endangered mussel species is "May Affect-Not Likely
to Adversely Affect."
3. North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries stated that anadromous fish are
found in this section of Little Swamp. Therefore, an in-stream work
moratorium from February 15 to June 15 will be in effect. NCDOT will adhere
to the "Stream Guidelines for Anadromous Fish Crossings."
9.* NCDOT's GeoEnvironmental Unit stated that an old gas station is located in the
project vicinity. Records state that the underground tanks have been removed.
However, metallic readings were registered during the field visit, which suggest
the possible presence of a UST. The site should not be impacted unless a
temporary detour is located on the west side of the existing bridge. The
recommended alternate is to replace the bridge in the existing location.
7
Therefore, no impacts to UST's are anticipated at this time. If the scope of the
project changes, the GeoEnvironmental Unit should be notified for further
coordination.
28. & The State Historic Preservation Society (SHPO) concurs that Parker's Mill,
30. located on the west side of NC 96, is eligible for the National Register of
Historic Places under Criteria A and C. The proposed design avoids impacts to
the existing dam and buildings by replacing the bridge in the existing location
and at approximately the same roadway elevation. SHPO has concurred with
the "No Adverse Affect" call on the condition that a two-bar metal bridge rail
be used on the proposed structure instead of the standard New Jersey Barrier.
8
G. CE Approval
TIP Project No. B-4164
State Project No. 8.1313301
WBS No. 33512.1.1
Federal Project No. BRSTP-96(6)
Project Description:
This project proposes to replace Bridge No. 52 on NC 96 over Little Swamp in
Johnston County. The bridge will be replaced with a 100-foot long bridge at the
existing location and approximate the same low chord elevation. The cross
section of the new bridge will include two 12-foot lanes with 3.0-foot minimum
offsets. The approach roadway will be widened to accommodate a 24-foot
pavement width consisting of two 12-foot lanes with eight-foot shoulders. The
approach work will consist of earthwork, paving, some resurfacing and tapering
back to the existing roadway for approximately 370 feet to the south and 700 feet
to the north. Guardrail will be installed where warranted. Traffic will be
detoured offsite during construction (See Section D, Studied Offsite Detour).
Cateeorical Exclusion Action Classification:
TYPE II(A)
X TYPE II(B)
Approved:
2 /ts/off
Date
Z 123105
Date

ect Planning Unit Head
ect Development & Environmental Analysis Branch
ect
Development, & Environmental Analysis Branch
For Type II(B) projects only:
Date
9
Federal Highway Administration
PROJECT COMMITMENTS
Johnston County
Bridge No. 52 on NC 96 Over Little Swamp
Federal Aid Project No. BRSTP-96(6)
State Project No. 8.1313301
WBS No. 33512.1.1
T.I.P. No. B-4164
Commitments Agreed to During the Proiect Planning Process
Division 4 Construction Engineer, Structure Design Unit
The proposed structure should be designed to eliminate the need for construction
equipment to be placed in the wetlands. Additionally, if practical, the use of work-pads
and causeways should be avoided. If it is determined that these conditions cannot be
met, then additional coordination with the United States Army Corps of Engineers will be
required.
No deck drains will be allowed to discharge directly into Little Swamp.
Division 4 Construction Engineer, Structure Design Unit, Roadway Design Unit-
40 Swamp has potential as a travel corridor for anadromous fish. Therefore, an in-
stream moratorium will be in effect from February 15 to June 15. The Stream Crossing
Guidelines for Anadromous Fish Passage will be implemented, as applicable.
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
The mussel survey for this project is valid until October 6, 2005. If the project is let after
this date, a new survey will have to be conducted before construction can begin.
Roadway Design Unit, Division 4 Construction Engineer
An old gas station is located in the project vicinity. NCDENR records state that the
underground storage tanks (UST's) have been removed. However, metallic readings
were registered during the field visit, which suggest the possible presence of a UST.
Based on the recommended alternate, there will be no impacts to UST's. If the scope of
the project changes, the GeoEnvironmental Unit should be notified for further
coordination.
Greensheet Sheet 1/2
Programmatic Categorical Exclusion,
PDEA
March 2005

Division 4 Construction Engineer, Structure Design Unit, Roadway Design Unit
NCDOT will use a two-bar metal bridge rail on the proposed structure instead of the
standard New Jersey Barrier rail. This is to comply with The State Historic Preservation
Office (SHPO) concurrence that the proposed bridge project will have "No Adverse
Affect" to Parker's Mill. If there is a change from the current project scope (replacement
in the existing location at approximately the same low steel elevation), additional
coordination with SHPO will be required.
At this point in time, there are no additional archaeology surveys required for this project.
However, if the alignment shifts toward the historic Parker's Mill, NCDOT will be
required to contact SHPO in order to re-evaluate the need for further surveys.
,;. --
Greensheet
Programmatic Categorical Exclusion,
PDEA
March 2005
Sheet 2/2
IJ a

r 1106 !? ??
48
1 to& , slog 11147. WOO&
1
r- 'IT 407
I I a15
-A73
191
Ift tts 4
1114 ,fig
Us •>
52 111E`i
1 t• 12 •
1 ,
1-c3 `v 111 ? f}.. I
1154 J r f
1143 f
t t? tt?
! +rl
!4S /
` f } ~ 1 7• 4
M
cnmm&
floe
L !. -•??y4I? tI • 11
?
73 7Z
• i
1143 ., .? h !' 11311 4-
s
t29p
1149 r ! 121 1 1 491 i42 ? 1136 11 11 t6
,? 191
4?
rte •-
48 :
.2
? 8 h
)INT 5 ti
r?
l 1f?9?
.fl
s ?
r
11 t ] 164•
r •
? • r
j ? 11 $
AdIkk r
Studied Offsite Detour
Nonce NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TR

\ ANSPORTATION
DM
I
H
.:
I S
ON OF
IGHWAYS
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT &

OFrn.^" EwiRoNMENTAL ANALYSIS BRANCH
JOHNSTON COUNTY
REPLACE BRIDGE NO. 52 ON NC 96
OVER LITTLE SWAMP
B-4164

Figure 1

Michael F. Easley, Governor
Lisbeth C. Evans, Secretary
Jeffrey J. Crow, Deputy Secretary
August 24, 2004
MEMORANDUM
TO: Gregory Thorpe, Ph.D., Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
NCDOT Division of Highways
FROM: Peter B. Sandbeck? Pd-
Office of Archives and History
Division of Historical Resources
David Brook, Director
SUBJECT: Architectural Survey Report for Replacement of Bridge No. 52 on NC 96
over Little Swamp, B-4164, Johnston County, ER03-0948
Thank you for your letter of July 15, 2004, transmitting the survey report by Marvin A. Brown of URS
Corporation.
For purposes of compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, we concur that the
following property is on the State Study List and remains eligible for listing in the National Register of
Historic Places under the criterion cited:
Parker's Mill, west side of NC 96, 0.1 mile north of junction with SR 1116, Meadow Vicinity, is eligible for the
National Register under.. Criteria A and C. The building is representative of the small non-textile mill industry
in the early twentieth-century. In addition, the mill is an example of the small non-textile grist mill
complexes-which included mills, spillways, and ponds. These complexes once dotted the county. We
concur with the proposed National Register boundary for this property as described and delineated in the
survey report.
For purposes of compliance, with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, we concur that the
following property is not eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places:
NC 96 Bridge over Little Swamp, west side of NC 96, 0.1 mile north of junction with SR 1116, Meadow
vicinity, is not eligible for the National Register because it is a replacement bridge and does not have a historic
association with the Parker Mill Complex. The bridge was constructed in 1950 and is a common steel stringer
bridge.
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Peter B. Sandbeck, Administrator
Location Mailing Address Telephone/Fax
ADMINISTRATION 507 N. Mount Street, Raleigh NC 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 276994617 (919)73347631733-8653
RESTORATION 515 N. Blount Street, Raleigh NC 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 [phone]/715-1801
SURVEY & PLANNING 515 N. Mount Street, Raleigh, NC 4617 Mad Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 (919)733-65451715-4801
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. In all future
communication concerning this project, please cite the above referenced tracking number.
PBS:w
cc: Mary Pope Furr
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
David L. S. Brook, Administrator
Michael F. Easley, Governor
Lisbeth C. Evans, Secretary
Jeffrey J. Crow, Deputy Secretary
June 25, 2003
MEMORANDUM
Division of Historical Resources
David J. Olson, Director
TO: Greg Thorpe, Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
NCDOT Division of Highways
FROM: David Brook
SUBJECT: Bridge 52 on NC 9 over Little Swamp, B-4164, Johnston County, ER03-0948
Thank you for your letter of April 7, 2003, concerning the above project.
We have reviewed the subject project and note that there are the remains of a mill just upstream of
The current bridge location. Mapping and photographic recording will be recommended should
these remains be disturbed by the bridge replacement. The quality of the maps and other
information provided eliminated a request for survey of the entire project area and significantly
reduced our review time.
We have conducted a search of our maps and files and located the following structure of historical
or architectural importance within the general area of this project:
Parker Mill QT898), Highway 96, Peacocks Crossroads
Bridge 52 on NC 96
We recommend that a Department of Transportation architectural historian identify and evaluate
any structures over fifty years of age within the project area, and report the findings to us.
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. In all
future communication concerning this project, please cite the above referenced tracking number.
www.hvo.dcr.state.nc.us
Location Mailing Address . Telephone/Fax
ADMINISTRATION 507 N. Blount St., Raleigh NC 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 276994617 (919) 7334763 •733-8653
RESTORATION 515 N. Blount St., Raleigh NC 4613 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4613 [phone] •715-4801
SURVEY & PLANNING 515 N. Blount St., Raleigh NC 4618 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4618 [phone] •715-4801
Federal Aid #: BRSTP-96(6) TIP # : B-?t164 County: JOHNSTON
CONCURRENCE FORM FOR ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS
Project Description: Replace Bridge No. 52 on NC 96 over Little Swamp
On October 11, 2004 representatives of the.
® North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
? Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
® North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (11PO)
? Other
Reviewed the subject project and agreed
? There are no effects on the National Resister-listed property/properties located within
the project's area of potential effect and listed on the reverse.
? There are no effects on the National Register-eligible property/properties located within
the project's area of potential effect and listed on the reverse.
? There is an effect on the National Register-listed property/properties located within the
project's area of potential effect. The property/properties and the effect(s).are listed on
the reverse.
There is an effect on the National Register-eligible property/properties located within the
project's area of potential effect. The property/properties and effect(s) are listed on the
reverse.
Signed:
Representative,
FHWA, for e Division Admini
, or other Federal Agency
1 v ! t v 4-
Date
1(3
?`Clll lC?
tate Historic Preservation Officer Date
Federal Aid #: BRSTP-96(6) TIP #: B-4164 County: JOHNSTON
Properties within the area of potential effect for which there is no effect. Indicate if property is
National Register-listed (NR) or determined eligible (DE).
Properties within the area of potential effect for which there is an effect. Indicate property status
(NR or DE) and describe the effect.
M.'(( C DF-)
Reason(s) why the effect is not adverse (if applicable).
N D Q„aL jg*-s 4, eipe c-,t t?/ 0-he, a.- ?wv -L
i S, pr.ri? eM?c? /
s 1?c1?` JI ?JU t t/e? 1
L o? f-"rK
Initialed: NCDOT J AC FHWA
HPO t-, ••.l
NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION
FINAL NATIONWIDE SECTION 4(f) EVALUATION AND APPROVAL
FOR FEDERALLY-AIDED HIGHWAY PROJECTS WITH MINOR INVOLVEMENTS
WITH HISTORIC SITES
F. A. PROJECT: BRSTP-96(6)
STATE PROJECT: 8.1313301
T. I. P. NO.: B-4164
Description:
Replacement of Bridge No. 52 on NC 96 over Little Swamp in Johnston County.
1. Is the proposed project designed to YES NO
improve the operational characteristics,
safety, and/or physical condition of the X ?
existing highway facility on essentially
the same alignment?
2. Is the project on new location?
_ F-1 X
3. Is the historic site adjacent to the
existing highway? X ?
4. Does the project require the removal or
alteration of historic buildings, ? X
structures, or objects? -
5. Does the project disturb or remove
archaeological resources which are F1 X
important to preserve in place rather -
than to recover for archaeological
research?
6. a. Is the impact on the Section 4(f)
site considered minor (i.e. no effect, X ?
no adverse effect)?
b. If the project is determined to have
"no adverse effect" on the historic F-1 X
site, does the Advisory Council on
Historic Preservation object to the
determination of "no adverse effect"?
7. Has the SHPO agreed, in writing, with the
assessment of impacts and the proposed X ?
mitigation?
8. Does the project require the preparation
of an EIS? F-I X
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED AND FOUND NOT TO BE FEASIBLE AND
PRUDENT
The following alternative(s) were evaluated
and found not to be feasible and prudent:
Yes No
1. Do nothing X ?
Does the "do nothing" alternative:
(a) correct capacity deficiencies? ? X
or (b) co.Lrcct existing safety hazards? ? X
or (c) correct deteriorated conditions? ? X
and (d) create a cost or impact of
extraordinary measure?
2. Improve the highway without using the
adjacent historic site
(a) Have minor alignment shifts, changes
in standards, use of retaining walls, X ?
etc., or traffic management measures
been evaluated?
(b) The items in 2(a) would result in:
(circle, as appropriate)
(i) substantial adverse environmental
impacts
o Siiunique substantial increased costs
o engineering,
transportation, maintenance, or
safety problems
or (iv) substantial social, environmental,
or economic impacts
or (v) a project which does not meet
the need
or (vi) impacts, costs, or problems which
are of extraordinary magnitude
Yes No
3. Build an improved facility on new
location without using the historic site X
(a) An alternate on new location would
result in: (circle, as appropriate)
(i) a project which does not solve
the existing problems
or (ii) substantial social,
environmental, or economic
impacts
or (iii a substantial increase in
project cost or engineering
difficulties
and (iv) such impacts, costs, or
difficulties of truly unusual
or unique or extraordinary
magnitude
NIINMZATION OF HARM
Yes No
1. The project includes all possible planning
to minimize harm necessary to preserve the X ?
historic integrity of the site.
2. Measures to minimize harm have been
agreed to, in accordance with 36 CFR X ?
Part 800, by the FHWA, the SHPO,
and as appropriate, the ACHP.
3. Specific measures to minimize harm are
described as follows:
a. The proposed vertical alignment is essentially the same as the existing vertical
alignment, thereby minimizing the extent of the cut/fill slopes.
b. Traffic will be detoured offsite on surrounding roads during construction, eliminating
impacts from a temporary, onsite detour.
1 J
n ?
c. The proposed structure was lengthened so that the required offsets on the bridge were
reduced. This allowed for the proposed typical section for the approach roadway work
to be reduced. The smaller typical section reduced the impacts on the historic site from
the cut/fill slopes.
d. A two-bar metal bridge rail will be used on the proposed bridge as requested by SHPO
for mitigation of impacts to the historic site.
COORDINATION
The proposed project has been coordinated with the following (attach correspondence):
a. State Historic Preservation Officer see attachment
b. Advisory Council on Historic Preservation Sent concurrence form
c. Property owner NA
d. Local/State/Federal Agencies see attachment
e. US Coast Guard not applicable
(for bridges requiring bridge permits)
SUMMARY AND APPROVAL
The project meets all criteria included in the programmatic 4(f) evaluation approved on
October 11, 2004.
All required alternatives have been evaluated and the findings made are clearly applicable
to this project. There are no feasible and prudent alternatives to the use of the historic site.
The project includes all possible planning to minimize harm, and the measures to minimize
harm will be incorporated in the project.
All appropriate coordination has been successfully completed with local and state agencies.
Approved:
Date Manager, Planning & Environmental Branch, NCDOT
Date, Division Administrator, FHWA

? r
U 'C
March 31, 2006
DWQ Project No. 20060314
CERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. R. E. Greene, PE, Division Engineer
NCDOT, Division 4
PO Box 3165
Wilson, NC 27895-3165
Subject: Replacement of Bridge 52 on NC 96 in Johnston County, TIP B-4164.
Dear Mr. Greene:
The Division of Water Quality has reviewed your submittal for a 401 Water Quality Certification and Neuse Buffer
Authorization for the aforementioned project. Review of your application revealed it lacking necessary information
required for making an informed permit decision. The permit application was deficient in the following areas:
• Buffer impacts for the widened roadway approaches to the bridge are classified as allowable with mitigation.
Please supply a mitigation plan for these impacts.
Therefore, pursuant to 15A NCAC 21-1.0507(a)(5), we will have to place the permit application on hold until we are
supplied the necessary information. You have 21 days to respond in writing with the requested information or
notification to this office that the information is forthcoming. If, at the end of the 21 days, this office has not
received this information in writing, we will assume you are withdrawing your application and it will be returned.
Furthermore, until the information is received by the NC Division of Water Quality, we request (by copy of this
letter) that the US Army Corps of Engineers place the permit application on hold.
If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact Robert Ridings at [phone].
in W. Klimek, P.E.
Director
cc: William Wescott, US Army Corps of Engineers, Washington Field ffice
Jamie. Guerrero, Division 4 Environmental Officer
NC Wildlife Resources Commission
DWQ Raleigh Regional Office copy
File Copy
-One Carolina
Transportation Permitting Unit NQtIfCII??I,J
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone: [phone] / FAX [phone] / Internet: httg://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetiands
wnuam u. Hoss jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled/100% Post Consumer Paper
`T +
File
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
October 1, 2003
MEMORANDUM TO:
FROM:
Subject:
Karen B. Capps, PE
Project Development Engineer
LYNDO TIPP=
SECRETARY
Replacement of Bridge No. 52 on NC 96 over Little
Swamp, Johnston County, State Project No. 8.1313301
F. A. Project No. BRSTP-96(6), TIP No. B-4164
d ?m?4
puw
A scoping meeting was held for the subject bridge replacement on August 7, 2003
in the Roadway Design Conference room. The following people were in attendance.
Ray McIntrye Program Development Jeanie Tyson Roadway Design
Tinnettte Hayes Right of Way Ron Allen Roadway Design
Karen Capps PDEA Sarah McBride SHPO
Eugene Tarascio Geotechnical Derek Bradner Location & Surveys
Tim Gardner PDEA/PICS Bruce Klappenbach Structure Design
Ann Steedly PDEA/PICS Bill Goodwin PDEA
Joe Futrell Traffic Control
Karen Reynolds Congestion Mgmt.
Mack Bailey Structure Design
Steve Gurganus PDEA/PICS
Wendi Johnson Division 4
Wayne Cody Bridge Maintenance
GENERAL PROJECT INFORMATION
Current Schedule Document:
Right of Way:
Construction:
MAILING ADDRESS:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548
August 2004
February 2005
February 2006
TELEPHONE: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
WEBSITE. WWW.DOH.DOT.STATE.NC.US
LOCATION:
TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
RALEIGH NC
Bridge No. 52 was originally built in 1951. It is 75 feet long and 23.4 feet wide. The
bridge is posted at 21 tons for single vehicle and 28 tons for TTST's. The sufficiency
rating for the bridge is 45.6 out of a possible 100. The approach roadway width is
approximately 18 feet with 6-foot to 8-foot grass shoulders.
Traffic Information NC 96 is a Rural Major Collector with a posted speed limit of 55
mph. The current ADT is 1000 vpd and the projected 2025 ADT is 2000 vpd. There are
currently 3% Duals and 2% TTST's. Seven school buses cross Bridge No. 52 eighteen
times in one day; however, closing the road in order to replace the bridge does not create
a problem. The buses can be rerouted.
Accidents
There were two accidents reported in a recent, three-year study period. Both accidents
occurred at the intersection of NC 96 and SR 1116 and did not involve the existing bridge
alignment and approaches.
Cross Section of New Bridge According to March 2000 Bridge Policy
Based on the NCDOT Bridge Policy, the minimum typical section for the proposed
bridge should be able to carry two 12-foot (3.6-m) lanes with 8.0-foot (2.4-m) offsets.
However, if the bridge exceeds 100 feet, the offsets may be able to be reduced. The final
typical section will be coordinated between the Roadway Design Unit and the Hydraulic
Design Unit.
Possible Offsite Detour
There are two offsite detours available. The first detour utilizes NC 50 and SR 1116.
The detour length is approximately 2.4 miles and is the one recommended by Division 4.
The second detour utilizes SR 1116, SR 1115 and NC 50. The pavement conditions are
poor on this route and one intersection is heavily skewed. Therefore, detour route # 1
will be used for detouring traffic during construction.
SCOPING COMMENTS
Division 4 recommended that an offsite detour be used in this location. The detour
length and associated costs are discussed above. There are aboveground utility lines on
both sides of the existing bridge and an existing dam to the southwest of the existing
bridge.
Johnston County Emergency Services stated that, to date, no concerns have been
voiced by the Meadow Fire Department or Benson EMS. They foresee no major
complications with rerouting emergency responders. However, it was noted on the field
trip that Parker Pond, located in the southwest quadrant, is designated as Water Point # 1
for the Meadow Fire Department. Further coordination with this particular unit may be
required. Wendi Johnson, Division 4, indicated that temporary arrangements could be
made to access the water from Parker Pond if required.
The Geotechnical Unit stated that there is an old gas station in the project vicinity. The
gas station was in operation from 1920-1990. Records state that the underground tanks
2
have been removed. However, metallic readings were registered during a field visit of the
site that might suggest the presence of an UST. The structure was gutted by fire recently
and may be slated for demolition. It is located approximately 250 feet south of the
existing bridge. The site should not be impacted unless a temporary detour located on the
west side of the existing bridge is used. This is highly unlikely due to the historic mill
site located on this side.
The US Army Corps of Engineers stated that this project is likely to impact wetlands
and the document prepared must adequately show that the project will have minimal
impact to the surrounding natural environment.
The Wildlife Resources Commission stated that anadromous fish species are found in
this area and all appropriate guidelines should be used during construction. An in-stream
moratorium is required from February 15 to June 15.
The Division of Water Ouality has not commented to date.
The Division of Marine Fisheries has not commented to date.
The National Marine Fisheries Service stated that there are no NMFS trust fishery
resources in the project area.
The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service gave the standard comments concerning avoidance
and minimization, resolving all Section 7 issues, and preferring bridges over culverts and
offsite detours.
The North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources The Historic Preservation Office
conducted a search of their records and have determined that Parker Mill, adjacent to the existing
bridge as well as the bridge itself are of historical or architectural importance. Therefore, further
surveys will be required to reach a final determination of impacts. SHPO recommends recording
any archaeological sites that are discovered in the vicinity of the old mill.
The Natural Resources Technical Report The project falls within the Neuse River
Basin. The Neuse River Buffer Rules must be adhered to on this project. This section
of Little Swamp is classified as C NSW. There are no Watershed Critical Areas or water
resources classified as High Quality Waters, Water Supplies, or Outstanding Resource
Waters within 1.0 mile (1.5 km) of the project area. The existing project site has a pocket
of riverine wetlands in the northeast quadrant of the project site. The proposed project is
not anticipated to involve Essential Fish Habitat; however, this reach of Little Swamp has
potential support multiple species of fish that require moratoriums on in stream work.
NC DOT will be responsible for conducting additional surveys to determine which
species are present and the appropriate moratoriums. The biological conclusion for the
Red-cockaded Woodpecker is "no effect." The biological conclusion for the Dwarf
wedge mussel and Michaux's sumac are unresolved. These Section 7 issues will be
resolved with additional surveys by qualified biologists. The biological conclusion for
the Tar River spinymussel is reported as "no effect." However, based on recent findings
by NCDOT biologist, the biological conclusion has been changed to "unresolved."
Removal of the existing causeway to lengthen the bridge will not be beneficial relative to
3
the wetlands located in the northeast quadrant. The moratoriums outlined in the NRTR
are for all fish species that could occur in North Carolina. NCDOT will clarify the
moratorium dates for the species in the project vicinity.
The Location Surveys Unit stated that overhead power lines are located on the eastern
side of the existing bridge. Underground telephone lines are located on both sides of NC
96. The telephone lines cross Little Swamp on poles. No other utilities were observed.
The Hydraulics Unit recommends replacing the existing bridge with a bridge 90 feet in
length in the existing location and at the existing low steel elevation. No deck drains will
be allowed to discharge into Little Swamp. If a temporary onsite detour is required, the
required detour structure should be located downstream of the existing bridge with a
length of 60 feet. No hazardous material spill basins will be required on this project.
The Community Impact Assessment stated that there should be no adverse effect to the
local community if an offsite detour is used during the construction of the bridge.
The NC DOT Rail Division confirmed that there are no rail interaction anticipated on
this project.
ALTERNATES FOR EVALUATION
The Roadway Design Unit stated that preliminary plans will be ready for this project in
November of 2003.
The following alternate will be carried forward for further study.
1. Replace the existing bridge with a new bridge in the same location and at the same
elevation. Detour traffic offsite during construction.
ALTERNATES ELIMINATED FROM FURTHER STUDY
The following alternatives were eliminated from further study.
1. Replacing the existing bridge with a new bridge in the existing location and elevation
using an onsite detour to maintain traffic. This was eliminated due to the historical
mill site and the availability of a feasible, offsite detour.
NEXT STEPS
4
1. PDEA will request additional surveys of the old mill site to determine its boundaries
and present these findings to SHPO to obtain an effect call. Additional steps will be
dependent on the outcome of the effect call.
2. PDEA will request mussel surveys for the Tar spinymussel.
3. PDEA will send the Roadway Design Unit and the Hydraulics Unit the wetland
delineation files for use in the preliminary design phase.
5
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
November 30, 2004
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Project Development and Environmental Analysis
1598 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1598
Dear Dr. Thorpe:
This letter is in response to your letter of November 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. 52 on NC 96 over Little Swamp in Johnston County (TIP
No. B-4164) may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the federally endangered dwarf wedgemussel
(Alasmidonta heterodon) and Tar spinymussel (Elliptio steinstansana). 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 provided, a mussel survey was conducted at the project site on October 6,
2003. The survey extended approximately 400 meters downstream of NC 96. An old mill dam exists
immediately upstream of the crossing. Neither of the federally listed species was found, and habitat
quality for the two species was not optimal. Based on the information provided and other information
available, the Service concurs with your determination that the proposed bridge replacement may affect,
but is not likely to adversely affect the dwarf wedgemussel and Tar spinymussel. We believe that the
requirements of section 7(a)(2) of the ESA have been satisfied for these species. 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 may be 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).
*Petenjamin
Ecological Services Supervisor
cc: Mike Bell, USACE, Washington, NC
Nicole Thomson, NCDWQ, Raleigh, NC
Travis Wilson, NCWRC, Creedmoor, NC
Chris Militscher, USEPA, Raleigh, NC
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality

?_Orn_- ?
k)x'?4 cJyj- . W ?
APPROVAL of 401 WATER
CONDITIONS

Mar 22, 6
John ounty
DWQ Project No. 20060314
aylJ_ Ao-r>R21 ZA-n6N ----
CERTIFICATIOANEUSE BUFFER "Elffir ith ADDITIONAL
Mr R. E. Greene, P.E., Division Engineer
NCDOT, Division 4
PO Box 3165
Wilson, NC 27895-3165
Dear Mr. Greene: I
You have our approval, in accordance with the conditions listed below, for the following impacts for the purpose of
replacing Bridge 52 in Johnston County:
N t?lCa 10
Open Water (Ponds) Impacts in the Neuse River Basin

Neuse Riparian Buffer Im acts
Site Zone 1 minus = Zone 1 Zone 1 Buffer Zone 2 minus = Zone 2 Zone 2 Buffer
Impact Wetlands Buffers (not Mitigation Impact Wetlands Buffers (not Mitigation
(sq ft) in Zone 1 wetlands) Required (sq ft) in Zone 2 wetlands) Required
(s ft) (s ft) (using 3:1 ratio) (s ft) (s ft) (using 3:1 ratio)
B-416 00 0 00 N/A 665 0 665 N/A
o als 00 0 00 N/A 665 0 665 N/A
* n/a = Total for Site is less than 1/3 acre and 150 linear feet of impact, no mitigation required
Total Buffer Impact for Project: 1965 square feet.
The project shall be constructed in accordance with your application dated received February 27, 2006. After
reviewing your application, we have decided that these impacts are covered by General Water Quality Certification
Number 3494. This certification corresponds to the Nationwide Permit 3 issued by the Corps of Engineers. This
approval is also valid for the Neuse Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B.0233). In addition, you should acquire
any other federal, state or local permits before you proceed with your project including (but not limited to) Sediment
and Erosion Control, Non-Discharge and Water Supply Watershed regulations. This approval will expire with the
accompanying 404 permitsimless
One
thCarolina
No
Transportation Permitting Unit atU41911Y
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone: [phone]/ FAX [phone]/ Internet: http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands
V 5
Site Permanent Impact in
Open Waters (ac) Temporary Fill in
Open Waters (ac) Total Fill in Open
Waters (ac)
13+90 0.0096 (rip rap) 0.0096
Total 0.0096 0.0096
Total Open Water Impact for Project: 0.0096 acres.
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer-50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper

Q

V
`yam
V
u?? J
CA .? 3
F W A TF Michael F. Easley, Governor
\O?? RQG William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
r Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
> ` _ UK, Division of Water Quality
bU

This approval is valid solely for the purpose and design described in your application (unless modified below).
Should your project change, you must notify the DWQ and submit a new application. If the property is sold, the
new owner must be given a copy of this Certification and approval letter, and is thereby responsible for complying
with all the conditions. If total wetland fills for this project (now or in the future) exceed one acre, or of total
impacts to streams (now or in the future) exceed 150 linear feet, compensatory mitigation may be required as
described in 15A NCAC 2H.0506 (h) (6) and (7). For this approval to remain valid, you must adhere to the
conditions listed in the attached certification as well as those listed below.
1. If concrete is used during construction, a dry work area should be maintained to prevent direct contact between
curing concrete and stream water. Water that inadvertently contacts uncured concrete should not be discharged to
surface waters due to the potential for elevated pH and possible aquatic life and fish kills.
2. During the construction of the project, no staging of equipment of any kind is permitted in waters of the U.S., or
protected riparian buffers.
3. The dimension, pattern and profile of the stream above and below the crossing should not be modified.
Disturbed floodplains and streams should be restored to natural geomorphic conditions.
4. The use of rip-rap above the high water mark shall be minimized. Any rip-rap placed for stream stabilization
shall be placed in stream channels in such a manner that it does not impede aquatic life passage.
5. All work in or adjacent to stream waters shall be conducted in a dry work area. Approved BMP measures from
the most current version of NCDOT Construction and Maintenance Activities manual such as sandbags, rock berms,
cofferdams and other diversion structures shall be used to prevent excavation in flowing water.
6. Heavy equipment shall be operated from the banks rather than in the stream channel in order to minimize
sedimentation and reduceentroduction of other pollutants into the stream.
-m-
7. All mechanized equipment operated near surface waters must be regularly inspected and maintained to prevent
contamination of stream waters from fuels, lubricants, hydraulic fluids, or other toxic materials.
8. No rock, sand or other materials shall be dredged from the stream channel except where authorized by this
certification.
9. Discharging hydroseed mixtures and washing out hydroseeders and other equipment in or adjacent to surface
waters is prohibited.
10. NCDOT and its authorized agents shall conduct its activities in a manner consistent with State water quality
standards (including any requirements resulting from compliance with §303(d) of the Clean Water Act) and any
other appropriate requirements of State and Federal law. If DWQ determines that such standards or laws are not
being met (including the failure to sustain a designated or achieved use) or that State or federal law is being violated,
or that further conditions are necessary to assure compliance, DWQ may reevaluate and modify this certification.
s op s o e m?urisdictional wetlands shall be placed at slopes no flatter than 3:1, unless o se
authorized by this ertWcatwxa,.
12. A copy of this Water Quality Certification shall be posted on the construction site at all times. In addition, the
Water Quality Certification and all subsequent modifications, if any, shall be maintained with the Division Engineer
and the on-site project manager.
- One
NofthCarolina
Transportation Permitting Unit Naturally
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone: [phone] / FAX [phone] / Internet: http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetiands
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper
wAr
F Michael F. Easley, Governor
l
o?o RPG William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
\
? Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
O `C
13. The outside buffer, wetland or water boundary located within the construction corridor approved by this
authorization shall be clearly marked by highly visible fencing prior to any land disturbing activities. Impacts to
areas within the fencing are prohibited unless otherwise authorized by this certification.
14. Upon completion of the project, the NCDOT Division Engineer shall complete and return the enclosed
"Certification of Completion Form" to notify DWQ when all work included in the 401 Certification has been
completed.
15. Native riparian vegetation must be reestablished within the construction limits of the project by the end of the
growing season following completion of construction.
16. There shall be no excavation from, or waste disposal into, jurisdictional wetlands or waters associated with this
permit without appropriate modification. Should waste or borrow sites be located in wetlands or streams,
compensatory mitigation will be required since that is a direct impact from road construction activities.
17. Erosion and sediment control practices must be in full compliance with all specifications governing
the proper design, installation and operation and maintenance of such Best Management Practices in
order to protect surface waters standards:
a. The erosion and sediment control measures for the project must be designed, installed, operated, and
maintained in accordance with the most recent version of the North Carolina Sediment and Erosion
Control Planning and Design Manual.
b. The design, installation, operation, and maintenance of the sediment and erosion control measures
must be such that they equal, or exceed, the requirements specified in the most recent version of the
North Carolina Sediment and Erosion Control Manual. The devices shall be maintained on all
construction sites, borrow sites, and waste pile (spoil) projects, including contractor-owned or leased
borrow pits associated with the project.
c. For borrow pit sites, the erosion and sediment control measures must be designed, installed, operated,
and maintained in accordance with the most recent version of the North Carolina Surface Mining
Manual.
d. The reclamation measures and implementation must comply with the reclamation in accordance with
the requirements of the Sedimentation Pollution Control Act.
18. Sediment and erosion control measures shall not be placed in wetlands or waters to the maximum extent
practical. If placement of sediment and erosion control devices in wetlands and waters is unavoidable, they shall be
removed and the natural grade restored upon completion of the project.
19. Strict adherence the DOT's BMPs for bridge demolition as approved by the Corps of Engineers is a condition of
the 401 Water Quality Certification.
20. Bridge deck drains should not discharge directly into the stream. Stormwater should be directed across the
bridge and pre-treated through site-appropriate means (grassed swales, pre-formed scour holes, vegetated buffers,
etc.) before entering the stream. Please refer to the most current version of Stormwater Best Management Practices.
21. The NCDOT will need to adhere to all appropriate in-water work moratoriums (including the use of pile driving
or vibration techniques) prescribed by the NC Wildlife Resources Commission, the US Fish and Wildlife Service,
and National Marine Fisheries Service. No in-water work is permitted between February 15 and June 15 of any
year, without prior approval from the NC Division of Water Quality and the NC Wildlife Resources Commission.
In addition, NCDOT shall conform with the NCDOT policy entitled "Stream Crossing Guidelines for Anadromous
Fish Passage (May 12, 1997) at all times.
One
rhCarolina
Nao
Transportation Permitting Unit dV turaily
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone: [phone] / FAX [phone] / Internet: http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetiands
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper
Val A TF Michael F. Easley, Governor
`O?0 9QG William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
moo
ram„ Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
22. All stormwater runoff shall be directed as sheetflow through stream buffers at nonerosive velocities, unless
otherwise approved by this certification.
23. All riparian buffers impacted by the placement of temporary fill or clearing activities shall be restored to the
preconstruction contours and revegetated. Maintained buffers shall be permanently revegetated with non-woody
species by the end of the growing season following completion of construction. For the purpose of this condition,
maintained buffer areas are defined as areas within the transportation corridor that will be subject to regular DOT
maintenance activities including mowing. The area with non-maintained buffers shall be permanently revegetated,
with native woody species before the next growing season following completion of construction.
24. Pursuant to NCACI5A 2B.0233(6), sediment and erosion control devices shall not be placed in Zone 1 of any
Neuse Buffer without prior approval by the NCDWQ. At this time, the NCDWQ has approved no sediment and
erosion control devices in Zone 1, outside of the approved project impacts, anywhere on this. project. Moreover,
sediment and erosion control devices shall be allowed in Zone 2 of the buffers provided that Zone 1 is not
compromised and that discharge is released as diffuse flow.
If you do not accept any of the conditions of this certification, you may ask for an adjudicatory hearing. You must
act within 60 days of the date that you receive this letter. To ask for a hearing, send a written petition that conforms
to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes to the Office of Administrative Hearings, 6714 Mail Service
Center, Raleigh, N.C. 27699. This certification and its conditions are final and binding unless you ask for a
hearing. This letter completes the review of the Division of Water Quality under Section 401 of the Clean Water
Act. If you have any questions, please contact Rob Ridings at [phone].
Sincerely,
Alan W. Klimek, P.E.
Attachments (General Certification and Certificate of Completion form)
cc: William Wescott, US Army Corps of Engineers, Washington Field Office
Travis Wilson, NC Wildlife Resources Commission ; __'jl V • ??
DWQ Raleigh Regional Office cppk..,k„ W A,0 In V'F,C-r-1 C>OA
File Copy
NonrthCarolina
Transportation Permitting Unit Natura!!lf
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone: [phone] /FAX [phone] /Internet htto://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetiands
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer- 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper
0?0? wAr RQG
DWQ Project No.:
Applicant:
Project Name:
Date of Issuance of 401 Water Quality Certification:
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
County:
Certificate of Completion
Upon completion of all work approved within the 401 Water Quality Certification or applicable Buffer Rules, and
any subsequent modifications, the applicant is required to return this certificate to the 401 Transportation Permitting
Unit, North Carolina Division of Water Quality, 1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC, 27699-1650. This form
may be returned to DWQ by the applicant, the applicant's authorized agent, or the project engineer. It is not
necessary to send certificates from all of these.
Applicant's Certification
I, , hereby state that, to the best of my abilities, due care and diligence
was used in the observation of the construction such that the construction was observed to be built within substantial
compliance and intent of the 401 Water Quality Certification and Buffer Rules, the approved plans and
specifications, and other supporting materials.
Signature:
Date:
Agent's Certification
I, , hereby state that, to the best of my abilities, due care and diligence
was used in the observation of the construction such that the construction was observed to be built within substantial
compliance and intent of the 401 Water Quality Certification and Buffer Rules, the approved plans and
specifications, and other supporting materials.
Signature:
Date:
Engineer's Certification
Partial Final
I, , as a duly registered Professional Engineer in the State of North
Carolina, having been authorized to observe (periodically, weekly, full time) the construction of the project,for the
Permittee hereby state that, to the best of my abilities, due care and diligence was used in the observation of the
construction such that the construction was observed to be built within substantial compliance and intent of the 401
Water Quality Certification and Buffer Rules, the approved plans and specifications, and other supporting materials.
Signature
Date
Registration No.
NorthCarolina
Transportation Permitting Unit Natumillff
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone: [phone] / FAX [phone] Internet: http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper