58384_NC DOT_20120703

1 14
❑CAMA / ❑DREDGE &FILL �J`61'
GENERAL PERMIT Previous permit#
❑New ❑Modification ❑Complete Reissue ❑Partial Reissue Date previous permit issued
As authorized by the State of North Carolina, Department of Environment and Natural Resources
and the Coastal Resources Commission in an area of environmental concern pursuant to 15A NCAC
❑ Rules attached.
Applicant Name Project Location: County
Address Street Address/ State Road/ Lot #(s)
City
State ZIP
Phone # O
Fax # ( )
Authorized Agents
❑ CW
❑ EW ❑ PTA ❑ ES ❑ PTS
Affected
❑ OEA
❑ HHF ❑ IH ❑ UBA ❑ N/A
AEC(s):
❑ PWS:
❑ FC:
ORW: yes/ no PNA yes / no Crit.Hab. yes / no
Type of Project/ Activity
Pier (dock) length
Platform(s)
Finger pier(s)
Groin length
number
Bulkhead/ Riprap length
avg distance offshore
max distance offshore -
Basin, channel
cubic yards
Boat ramp
Boathouse/ Boatlift
Beach Bulldozing
Other
Shoreline Length I
SAV: not sure yes no
Sandbags: not sure yes no
Moratorium: n/a yes no
Photos: yes no
Waiver Attached: yes no
A building permit may be required by:
Notes/ Special Conditions
Subdivision
City ZIP
Phone # () River Basin
Adj. Wtr. Body (nat /man /unkn)
Closest Maj. Wtr. Body
(Scale:
Agent or Applicant Printed Name
E:1 See note on back regarding River Basin rules.
Permit Officer's Signature
r >
Signature ** Please read compliance statement on back of permit ** Issuing Date
Application Fee(s)
Check# Local Planning Jurisdiction
Expiration Date
Rover File Name

Statement of Compliance and Consistency
This permit is subject to compliance with this application, site drawing and attached general and specific conditions. Any
violation of these terms may subject the permittee to a fine or criminal or civil action; and may cause the permit to become
null and void.
This permit must be on the project site and accessible to the permit officer when the project is inspected for compliance. The
applicant certifies by signing this permit that 1) prior to undertaking any activities authorized by this permit, the applicant will
confer with appropriate local authorities to confirm that this project is consistent with the local land use plan and all local
ordinances, and 2) a written statement or certified mail return receipt has been obtained from the adjacent riparian
landowner(s) .
The State of North Carolina and the Division of Coastal Management, in issuing this permit under the best available
information and belief, certifythat this project is consistentwith the North Carolina Coastal Management Program.
River Basin Rules Applicable To Your Project:
❑ Tar - Pamlico River Basin Buffer Rules ❑ Other:
❑ Neuse River Basin Buffer Rules
If indicated on front of permit, your project is subject to the Environmental Management Commission's Buffer Rules for the
River Basin checked above due to its location within that River Basin. These buffer rules are enforced by the NC Division of
Water Quality. Contact the Division of Water Quality at the Washington Regional Office (252-946-6481) or the Wilmington
Regional Office (910-796-7215) for more information on how to comply with these buffer rules.
Division of Coastal Management Offices
Raleigh Office Morehead City Headquarters
Mailing Address: 400 Commerce Ave
1638 Mail Service Center Morehead City, NC 28557
Raleigh, NC 27699-1638 252-808-2808/ 1-888ARCOAST
Location: Fax: [phone]
2728 Capital Blvd.
Raleigh, NC 27604
919-733-2293
Fax:[phone]
(Serves: Carteret, Craven, Onslow -above
New River Inlet- and Pamlico Counties)
Elizabeth City District
1367 U.S. 17 South
Elizabeth City, NC 27909
252-264-3901
Fax: [phone]
(Serves: Camden, Chowan, Currituck,
Dare, Gates, Pasquotank and Perquimans
Counties)
Washington District
943 Washington Square Mall
Washington, NC 27889
252-946-6481
Fax: [phone]
(Serves: Beaufort, Bertie, Hertford, Hyde,
Tyrrell and Washington Counties)
Wilmington District
127 Cardinal Drive Ext.
Wilmington, NC 28405-3845
910-796-7215
Fax: [phone]
(Serves: Brunswick, New Hanover,
Onslow -below New River Inlet- and
Pender Counties)
Revised 08/09/06

..q, .
CAMA / ❑ .r DREDGE & FILL ``"— ' 3; f' 5
GENERAL PERMIT Previous permit#
❑New ❑Modification ❑Complete Reissue El Partial Reissue Date previous permit issued
As authorized by the State of North Carolina, Department of Environment and Natural Resources } a
and the Coastal Resources Commission in an area of environmental concern pursuant to I SA NCAC'
I❑ RUles attached.
Project Location: County
Street Address/ State Road/ Lot #(s)
Subdivision
City f < ZIP
❑`CW ❑ EW O PTA ❑ ES ❑ PTS Phone # ( ) River Basin
Affected ❑ OEA ❑ HHF ❑ IH ❑ UBA ❑ N/A
AEC(s): Adj. Wtr. Body (bat tman /unkn)
❑ PWS:
❑ FC:
ORW: yes / no' PNA„ :yes. /, no Crit.Hab., . yes / no Closest Ma Wtr. Bod
I Y
Type of Project/ Activity
Pier (dock) length
Platform(s)
Finger pier(s)
Groin length
number
Bulkhead/ Riprap length
avg distance offshore.,
max distance offshore
Basin, channel
cubic yards_
Boat ramp
Boathouse/ Boatlift
Beach Bulldozing
Other Aa -' 0', ; i t; ,
(Scale:
■■W
l�■�■[�ill�iil,■L'�,®i1��i
` ��i®C�■■i!©■■■■�ll�rllL�Z
� � �. _.
■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■fi■r
-�
�
.
■■■�J�■fA�■■■�r�!!�■��■DJ�■■�J■�■■1!'JI.■©al■ilia■■■
■■a�`■ILIE.II.!!■01�►fL�ilLo���{IE.Js©�■�u0■■■■■■■■■■
Agent or Applicant Printed Name
PermitOfiicer's Signature
� `
L.
Signature Please read compliance statement on back of permit*
Issuing Date
ExQiration Datg
ApplicationFee(s)
Check#
Local PlanningJurisdiction
Rover File Name
•:;
� � �. _.
l � � 9, 3-
.moi tee. '.
-�
�
Agent or Applicant Printed Name
PermitOfiicer's Signature
� `
L.
Signature Please read compliance statement on back of permit*
Issuing Date
ExQiration Datg
ApplicationFee(s)
Check#
Local PlanningJurisdiction
Rover File Name

Gentlemen,
RECEIVED
FEB 14 2013
;ZrVF -VHD CIT`:
A field adjustment at the Onslow 226 bridge replacement project is needed. In the northeast corner of
Onslow 226, a wooden bulkhead from private property ties back into the NCDOT road fill. The existing
permitted scenario would apparently have the proposed cut line for the floodplain going through or at
the edge of the subject wooden bulkhead tie in area leaving a steep drop between the proposed cut
area and what would then be a higher elevation area to the immediate north of the floodplain and east
of the bulkhead tie in wall. This currently permitted proposal would likely result in compromising the
bulkhead and/or the earth presently being supported by the bulkhead. It seems that erosion would be
apt to occur in this area over time considering the steep slope that would remain even if vegetation and
matting were attempted. This likely would result in sediment accumulation in the nearby marsh and
creek area.
Therefore, NCDOT proposes a better scenario. While a portion of the original proposed floodplain area
will still be cut out, the proposed rip rap bridge abutment protection would be extended to tie into
existing rip rap currently protecting the bulkhead tie in wall section. This should result in preserving the
integrity of this bulkhead tie in wall and help create a stable situation as opposed to the perhaps likely
erosive scenario described in the preceding paragraph. I had previously thought that this proposed
solution may result in more floodplain area as I thought that we may actually be removing some of the
existing rip rap. However, further data gathering, drawing up the scenario, and better thinking this
through shows that we need to preserve the existing rip rap and tie in our proposed rip rap abutment
protection to the existing rip rap to create a more stable situation than is currently permitted.
Please keep in mind that there will be no additional jurisdictional impacts as a result of this proposal.
Please keep in mind that we are attempting to create a more stable situation. Please also keep in mind
that the total "loss" of what would otherwise be created floodplain area is approximately 30 square
feet; this 30 square feet may very well have been lost to sedimentation over time any way if we do not
create the more stable situation proposed. Also, NCDOT did not formally propose coastal wetland
restoration on this east side of Wheeler Creek, however, we are planning to take steps as we have
discussed in the field to match adjacent marsh elevations with our floodplain cut and also to plant some
marsh grass sprigs on this east side of the creek as well.
Please approve this proposed field adjustment as described in the second paragraph above and justified
throughout. Please let me know if you have any questions or need additional information. I am
supplying a drawing and photo(s) to support this request. This project is permitted as follows: USACE
Action ID 2009 1811, NCDCM General Permit # 58384C (.2300), and NCDWQ Water Quality Cert. 3883.
This project number is 8-5103P with WBS # 45349.1.16 or 45349.3.16.
Thank you,
Stonewall Mathis

E�= S�f2N G
W o o9rs N
�d
P'R,EV -7 o vs
�I
.......
6
a
h
PTA
C
S
ALE
_ T \.

w'
� �•� ,� ��.`• int, i ; � `` ; -.1 ' ,' '� , ', . I .} _ .
AOr'

C41
, �m

' :;• . mss= � v
' f M' L EIMi
A_ tk -o wool*
f
.A' r �, '�'` 1 i}�'T� • •r�11s �t+� / \ \ q.', p, �•� /i��', l,i � � J s t 7t
° �,./ � -� $. - �y\`�`� f . � it �/{�1��{`�i �♦ a t s¢a i ,T�' � ✓.� . j�Y,�Y` 6:_.dl��'
!j/;,./'may - �j�, ,1il�+r s ¢ SRP �.Yrr.�r/.� �'•' .t r r 1`i7 ;'fy
ti ; _p r.

+•R� � + ate; �'' y .� � ';� "
F '' •fir � _ v - �rDt"
t _
r \
• X11 .. _�._._-.7p.. �� 'r"'.' "� -Jow
L
„' ..�- �_'._
°
1013
012 O
1r
�• y =_ r5b ��. �
-�'�' '.�
L_
,
F

s _
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natura
Division of Coastal Management
Beverly Eaves Perdue Braxton C. Davis
Governor Director
July 10, 2012
NCDOT
c/o Jon Giles
5501 Barbados Blvd.
Castle Hayne, N.C. 28429
Dear Mr. Giles:
Resources
Dee Freeman
Secretary
Attached is General Permit #58384 C to replace the existing bridge with a 30'wide X 100' long bridge and
associated infrastructure, at Bridge #226, on SR 1557, Sneads Ferry, North Carolina.
In order to validate this permit, please sign the permit as indicated. Retain the white copy for your files and
return the signed yellow and pink copies to us in the enclosed, self-addressed envelope. If the signed permit
copies are not returned to this office before the initiation of development, you will be working without
authorization and will be subject to a Notice of Violation and subsequent civil penalties.
We appreciate your early attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Stephen Lane
Coastal Management Representative
rcb
Enclosures
400 Commerce Ave., Morehead City, NC 28557
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: www.nccoastalmanagement.net
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer
NorthCarolina
;Vaturallry

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
BEVERLY EAVES PERDUE
GOVERNOR
May 31, 2012
Stephen Lane
Division of Coastal Management
400 Commerce Ave.
Morehead City, NC 28557
SUBJECT: Application for CAMA General Permit .2300 for
Replacement of Onslow County Bridge #226 & associated work on
SR 1557 Wheeler Creek Road approximately 0.6 mile East of NC 172
Onslow County, BD -5103P, WBS # 45349.1.16
Dear Mr. Lane:
EUGENE A. CONTI, JR.
SECRETARY
r' PXCEIVEI:D
JUN 0 4 2012
DCAI.Nl" CITY'
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) is requesting issuance of CAMA General Permit
.2300 to replace Onslow County Bridge #226 on SR 1557 Wheeler Creek Road. The proposal is to replace the
existing 53 feet long by 25 feet wide bridge with a 100 feet long by 30 feet wide bridge. The existing navigable
vertical clearance would be maintained and slightly improved while the horizontal navigable clearance would be
significantly improved. The proposed bridge replacement project would require the installation of guardrails,
stormwater controls, raising the elevation of the roadbed and the relocation of an existing underground telephone
line in highground inside the ROW.
Please find enclosed the following:
1) CAMA Permit application forms MP -1 and MP -5
2) Adjacent riparian property owner listed on MP -1 form, copy of letter(s) that were sent
3) Certified mail receipts from the mailings to the adjacent riparian property owners
4) Three maps including a lidar map, an aerial photo map, and a USGS map
5) Attachment G detailing many aspects and environmental considerations for this project
6) Wetland Impact Summary Table
7) Plan set with 10 sheets prepared by HNTB North Carolina containing vicinity map, legend, plan sheets,
and cross-sections of creek at specified stations
8) Bridge Survey Report
9) Memorandum dated July 8, 2011 from Mr. Travis Wilson of the North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission to Ms. Amanda Glynn, P.E. NCDOT Bridge Manager in regard to recommendations for,
amongst others, Onslow County Bridge #226 project BD -5103P. Please see page 3 near the bottom of the
page for Mr. Wilson's specific comments regarding Onslow County Bridge #226 project BD -5103P
10) Email correspondence with Ms. Jessi Baker with North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries dated
05-27-2012 concerning moratorium requirements for this project.
5501 BARBADOS BLVD. CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]

Onslow County Bridge #226
CAMA Permit Application Cover Letter
May 31, 2012
Page 12
11) Wetland and Stream Package from Mr. Robert Turnbull of Environmental Services, Inc. including the
following:
A) Memo
B) Aerial Map
C) Flagging Info
D) Jurisdictional Determination Form
E) Wetland Data Form
F) Upland Data Form
G) NC Division of Water Quality Stream Identification Form
H) US Army Corps of Engineers Stream Quality Assessment Worksheet
12) Wetland Data Form for the NW quadrant 404 wetlands delineation performed by Mr. Stonewall Mathis,
P.E. NCDOT Environmental Engineer.
13) NCDOT Cultural Resources Staff Architectural and Archaeological clearance documents for this project.
Email correspondence between Shane Petersen (NCDOT) and myself concerning additional review by
Cultural Resources for work areas located outside existing NCDOT ROW. Mr. Petersen stated that the
original "no survey required" will still stand.
14) Concurrence from the US Department of Transportation that no Coast Guard permit is required for this
project.
The water body at the location of Onslow County Bridge #226 is Wheeler Creek and is classified as SA HQW.
Wheeler Creek is classified as Primary Nursery Area. Wheeler Creek is not classified as Anadromous Fish
Spawning Area at this location. Attachment G states that this location is classified for Sturgeons and references
the moratorium for sturgeon; this is on the Attachment G because during our initial scoping efforts it was
suspected and therefore noted that a sturgeon moratorium may be required. After speaking with Mr. Fritz Rohde
with NMFS on 05-17-2012 it has been determined that this project is not located in an area that supports Sturgeon
and as such does not require any moratorium related to sturgeon.
In regard to the note on the Attachment G about the Threatened and Endangered Species being present, this note
was originally made in regard to Sturgeon. Referencing the phone conversation with Mr. Rohde, a biological
conclusion of No Effect is determined in regard to Sturgeon. Also, all other listed species for Onslow County have
now been considered and a biological conclusion of No Effect has been determined for all.
There are some minor wetland delineation discrepancies between the ESI package provided by Mr. Robert Turnbull
and the plan set provided by HNTB. These discrepancies are located in the SW quadrant and the NW quadrant on
the project area. ESI had performed a delineation prior to the onsite scoping meeting with the resource agencies.
During that meeting it was determined that the coastal wetland (CW) line in the SW quadrant should be a joint
line from the waterline to a point approximately 80' west where the 404 line and the CW line would split as noted
on plan sheets. Additionally, there were no 404 wetlands delineated by ESI in the NW quadrant of the project site.
After further review by Mr. Stonewall Mathis (NCDOT), it was determined that there were 404 wetlands located
between the waterline and the permanent drainage easement (PDE) as shown on plan sheets. Please note that the
plan sheets would stand as the actual wetland delineation.
The excavation described in Item 3.a. of the MP -5 form is landward of the existing eastern abutment. This
excavation is proposed in order to make a smooth tie in of the existing channel with the proposed excavation due to
the increased bridge length.
The proposed bridge replacement will have no stream impacts. The proposed work will require the filling of
approximately 180 sq.ft. of coastal wetlands. In order to gain access to the work area, NCDOT will need to hand
clear the vegetation (not disturbing the root mat) of approximately 530 sq.ft. of coastal wetland vegetation and
approximately 19 sq. ft. of 404 wetland vegetation. Additionally, NCDOT is proposing to restore approximately 537
sq.ft. of coastal wetlands once the project is completed. The restoration area will be located on the north and south

Onslow County Bridge #226
CAMA Permit Application Cover Letter
May 31, 2012
Page 13
side of the western abutment. Planned grade for the restoration area will match the adjacent coastal wetlands areas
and will be planted with similar plant species. The grading work for the restoration will be completed during the
construction schedule. Depending on the completion date of the project the planting may be delayed due to
seasonal planting requirements of the plant species to be planted. NCDOT requests that this restoration be
considered as complete mitigation for the impacts associated with this project.
Additionally, NCDOT by copy of this package is making application to the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)
for a Nationwide Permit #3 and North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) for corresponding Water
Quality Certification #3883; please also find enclosed a copy of the cover letter to the USACE and NCDWQ in this
regard.
NCDOT acknowledges that $400.00 will be debited against the WBS element provided above for processing this
CAMA General Permit .2300 application.
Thank you for all your help working through this process. If you have any questions or need additional
information in this regard please contact me at [phone].
Sincerely, -�
Jon W Giles Jr.
Division 3 Environmental Unit
Engineering Technician
Enclosures
Ms. Amanda Glynn, NCDOT Bridge Manager
Mr. Brad Shaver, USACE, Wilmington District
Mr. Mason Herndon, NCDWQ, Fayetteville

APPLICATION for
Maier Development Permit
(last revised 12/27/06)
North Carolina DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
1. Primary Applicant/ Landowner Information
Business Name
Project Name (if applicable)
North Carolina Department Of Transportation
Onslow County - Bridge #226 Replacement
Applicant 1: First Name
MI
Last Name
Jon
W
Giles
Applicant 2: First Name
MI
Last Name
If additional applicants, please attach an additional page(s) with names listed.
Mailing Address
PO Box
City
State
5501 Barbados Blvd.
Agent/ Contractor 2: First Name
Castle Hayne
NC
ZIP
Country
Phone No.
FAX No.
28429
USA
910-341 -2048 ext.
910 - 675 - 0143
Street Address (if different from above)
City
State
ZIP
n/a
N/A
n/a
n/a-
Email
[e-mail]
2. Agent/Contractor Information
Business Name
N/A
Agent/ Contractor 1: First Name
MI
Last Name
n/a
n/a
n/a
Agent/ Contractor 2: First Name
MI
Last Name
n/a
n/a
n/a
Mailing Address
PO Box
City
State
n/a
n/a
N/A
n/a
ZIP
Phone No. 1
Phone No. 2
n/a
n/a -
ext.
n/a - ext.
FAX No.
Contractor #
n/a
n/a
Street Address (if different from above)
City
State
ZIP
n/a
N/A
n/a
n/a -
Email
n/a
<Form continues on back>
252-808-2808 .. 1-888-4RCOAST .. www.nccoastaimanagement.net

Form DCM MP -1 (Page 2 of 4)
APPLICATION for
Major Development Permit
3. Project Location
County (can be multiple)
Street Address
State Rd. #
Onslow
SR 1557 approximately 0.6 miles east of NC172
SR 1557
Subdivision Name
City
State
Zip
n/a
Sneads Ferry
NC
28460-
8460-Phone
PhoneNo.
Lot No.(s) (if many, attach additional page with list)
910 - 341 - 2000 ext.
NCDOT ROW, , , ,
a. In which NC river basin is the project located?
b. Name of body of water nearest to proposed project
White Oak
Wheeler Creek
c. Is the water body identified in (b) above, natural or manmade?
d. Name the closest major water body to the proposed project site.
NNatural ❑Manmade ❑Unknown
New River
e. Is proposed work within city limits or planning jurisdiction?
f. If applicable, list the planning jurisdiction or city limit the proposed
®Yes ❑No
work falls within.
Onslow County
4. Site Description
a. Total length of shoreline on the tract (ft.)
b. Size of entire tract (sq.ft.)
--131 LF
project area = 24,000 sq.ft.
c. Size of individual lot(s)
d. Approximate elevation of tract above NHW (normal high water) or
n/a, I I
NW L (normal water level)
(If many lot sizes, please attach additional page with a list)
8' ❑NHW or NNWL
e. Vegetation on tract
Mainly roadside grasses and some trees, edge of ROW, in upland portions of ROW.
f. Man-made features and uses now on tract
Existing 53'x 25'3 span bridge within the NCDOT right of way. Current land use is transporation.
g. Identify and describe the existing land uses adjacent to the proposed project site.
Adjacent land uses include residential, commercial and vacant.
h. How does local government zone the tract?
i. Is the proposed project consistent with the applicable zoning?
n/a
(Attach zoning compliance certificate, if applicable)
❑Yes ❑No NNA
j. Is the proposed activity part of an urban waterfront redevelopment proposal? ❑Yes NNo
k. Hasa professional archaeological assessment been done for the tract? If yes, attach a copy. NYes ❑No ❑NA
If yes, by whom? NCDOT Cultural Resources Staff
I. Is the proposed project located in a National Registered Historic District or does it involve a ❑Yes NNo ❑NA
National Register listed or eligible property?
<Form continues on next page>
252-808.2808 .. 1-888-4RCOAST .. www.nccoastaimanagement.net

Form DCM MP -1 (Page 3 of 4)
APPLICATION for
Major Development Permit
m. (i) Are there wetlands on the site? ®Yes ❑No
(ii) Are there coastal wetlands on the site? ®Yes ❑No
(iii) If yes to either (i) or (ii) above, has a delineation been conducted? ®Yes ❑No
(Attach documentation, if available)
n. Describe existing wastewater treatment facilities.
n/a
o. Describe existing drinking water supply source.
n/a
p. Describe existing storm water management or treatment systems.
currently stormwater flows through deck drains in the bridge directly to Wheeler Creek
5. Activities and Impacts
a.
Will the project be for commercial, public, or private use? ❑Commercial ®Public/Government
❑ Private/Community
b.
Give a brief description of purpose, use, and daily operations of the project when complete.
New bridge to provide safe passage of the traveling public across Wheeler Creek.
c.
Describe the proposed construction methodology, types of construction equipment to be used during construction, the number of each type
of equipment and where it is to be stored.
Standard road and bridge methodologies will be implemented buring construction. Standard equipment to include but not
limited to dump truck, excavator, pile driver, roller, dozer and cranes will be used during construction.
d.
List all development activities you propose.
NCDOT is proposing to remove existing 53'x 25'3 span bridge and replace with 100'x 30'2 span bridge. Also associated
roadway approach construction, stormwater drainage controls and rip rap outlet protection, guard rails, relocation of
underground telephone lines in upland areas, class "II" rip rap will be placed at the base of the abutments, roadway and
roadside stabilization measures. Minimal filling of 404 and coastal wetlands for adaquate approach on the SW side of
project. Restoration of approximately 537 sq.ft. of coastal wetlands.
e.
Are the proposed activities maintenance of an existing project, new work, or both? new work
f.
What is the approximate total disturbed land area resulting from the proposed project? 24,000 NSq.Ft or ❑Acres
g.
Will the proposed project encroach on any public easement, public accessway or other area ❑Yes [:]No ENA
that the public has established use of?
h.
Describe location and type of existing and proposed discharges to waters of the state.
Currently stormwater flows through deck drains in the bridge directly to Wheeler Creek. Proposed sheet flow from bridge to
berm gutters. Water outlets from class 111 rcp into class 'B' riprap on the northside of ROW at sta.12+80.
no direct discharge to open water, however there will be some sheet flow from the embankments.
i.
Will wastewater or stormwater be discharged into a wetland? ®Yes ❑No ❑NA
If yes, will this discharged water be of the same salinity as the receiving water? ❑Yes NNo ❑NA
j.
Is there any mitigation proposed? NYes ❑No ❑NA
If yes, attach a mitigation proposal.
<Form continues on back>
252.808-2808 .. 1-888-4RCOAST .. www.nccoastalmanagement.net

Form DCM MP -1 (Page 4 of 4)
APPLICATION for
Major Development Permit
6. Additional Information
In addition to this completed application form, (MP -1) the following items below, if applicable, must be submitted in order for the application
package to be complete. Items (a) — (1) are always applicable to any major development application. Please consult the application
instruction booklet on how to properly prepare the required items below.
a. A project narrative.
b. An accurate, dated work plat (including plan view and cross-sectional drawings) drawn to scale. Please give the present status of the
proposed project. Is any portion already complete? If previously authorized work, clearly indicate on maps, plats, drawings to distinguish
between work completed and proposed.
c. A site or location map that is sufficiently detailed to guide agency personnel unfamiliar with the area to the site.
d. A copy of the deed (with state application only) or other instrument under which the applicant claims title to the affected properties.
e. The appropriate application fee. Check or money order made payable to DENR.
f. A list of the names and complete addresses of the adjacent waterfront (riparian) landowners and signed return receipts as proof that such
owners have received a copy of the application and plats by certified mail. Such landowners must be advised that they have 30 days in
which to submit comments on the proposed project to the Division of Coastal Management.
Name Estelle Revell Phone No.
Address 230 Wheeler Creek Rd., Sneads Ferry, NC 28460
Name Richard & Kathleen Millis Phone No.
Address 220 Wheeler Creek Rd, Sneads Ferry, NC 28460
Name Margret Nicholson Phone No.
Address 1055 Gold Camp Rd., Colorado Springs, CO 80960
g. A list of previous state or federal permits issued for work on the project tract. Include permit numbers, permittee, and issuing dates.
n/a
h. Signed consultant or agent authorization form, if applicable.
L Wetland delineation, if necessary.
j. A signed AEC hazard notice for projects in oceanfront and inlet areas. (Must be signed by property owner)
k. A statement of compliance with the N.C. Environmental Policy Act (N.C.G.S. 113A 1-10), if necessary. If the project involves expenditure
of public funds or use of public lands, attach a statement documenting compliance with the North Carolina Environmental Policy Act.
7. Certification and Permission to Enter on Land
I understand that any permit issued in response to this application will allow only the development described in the application.
The project will be subject to the conditions and restrictions contained in the permit.
I certify that I am authorized to grant, and do in fact grant permission to representatives of state and federal review agencies to
enter on the aforementioned lands in connection with evaluating information related to this permit application and follow-up
monitoring of the project.
I further certify that the information provided in this application is truthful to the best of my knowledge.
Date May 22, 2012 Print Name Jon W�Giles, NCDOT_
Signature =� _tom �1
Please indicate application attachments pertaining to your proposed project.
❑DCM MP -2 Excavation and Fill Information NDCM MP -5 Bridges and Culverts
❑DCM MP -3 Upland Development
❑DCM MP -4 Structures Information
252.808-2808 .. 1-888.4RCOAST .. www.nccoastalmanagement.net

Form OCM MP -5
BRIDGES and CULVERTS
Attach this form to Joint Application for CAMA Major Permit, Form DCM MP -1. Be sure to complete all other sections of the Joint
Application that relate to this proposed project. Please include all supplemental information.
1. BRIDGES ❑ This section not applicable
a. Is the proposed bridge:
❑Commercial ®Public/Government ❑Private/Community
c. Type of bridge (construction material):
cored slab horizontal members with open graded friciton
course (type of asphalt), with concrete bridge rail,one
bent installed on 16" Pre -stressed concrete piles with
concrete cap and concrete bridge abutments with rip
rap abutment protection.
e. (i) Will proposed bridge replace an existing bridge? ®Yes ❑No
If yes,
(ii) Length of existing bridge: 53'
(iii) Width of existing bridge: 25'
(iv) Navigation clearance underneath existing bridge: —7'
(v) Will all, or a part of, the existing bridge be removed?
(Explain) all
g. Length of proposed bridge: 100'
i. Will the proposed bridge affect existing water flow? ®Yes ❑No
If yes, explain: the new bridge has one support bent, where
the existing has two support bents and therefore will
reduce the amount of structures in the stream and
allow for water to flow more freely.
k. Navigation clearance underneath proposed bridge: —7'
b. Water body to be crossed by bridge:
Wheeler Creek
d. Water depth at the proposed crossing at NLW or NWL
approximately -2.5'@ NWL
f. (i)Will proposed bridge replace an existing culvert? ❑Yes ®No
If yes,
(ii) Length of existing culvert:
(iii) Width of existing culvert:
(iv) Height of the top of the existing culvert above the NHW or
NWL:
(v) Will all, or a part of, the existing culvert be removed?
(Explain)
h. Width of proposed bridge: 30'
j. Will the proposed bridge affect navigation by reducin or
increasing the existing navigable opening? MYes ❑No
If yes, explain: Project will maintain existing vertical opening
at a minimum. With the removal of existing 2 support
bridge and installation of proposed bridge with one support
bent, the horizontal clearance will be increased.
I. Have you contacted the U.S. Coast Guard concerning their
approval? ❑Yes ®No
If yes, explain: Federal Highway said no Coast Guard
permit required 11/2011.
m. Will the proposed bridge cross wetlands containing no navigable n. Height of proposed bridge above wetlands: —7'
waters? ❑ Yes ®No
If yes, explain:
r

Farm DCM MP -5 (Bridges and Culverts, Page 2 of 4)
2. CULVERTS ®This section not applicable
a. Number of culverts proposed:
c. Type of culvert (construction material):
b. Water body in which the culvert is to be placed:
< Form continues on back>
d. (i) Will proposed culvert replace an existing bridge? e. (i) Will proposed culvert replace an existing culvert?
❑Yes ❑No El Yes ❑No
If yes,
(ii) Length of existing bridge:
(iii) Width of existing bridge:
(iv) Navigation clearance underneath existing bridge: _
(v) Will all, or a part of, the existing bridge be removed?
(Explain)
f. Length of proposed culvert:
h. Height of the top of the proposed culvert above the NHW or NW L
j. Will the proposed culvert affect navigation by reducing or
increasing the existing navigable opening? Yes ❑No
If yes, explain:
If yes,
(ii) Length of existing culvert(s):
(iii) Width of existing culvert(s):
(iv) Height of the top of the existing culvert above the NHW or
NW L:
(v) Will all, or a part of, the existing culvert be removed?
(Explain)
g. Width of proposed culvert:
i. Depth of culvert to be buried below existing bottom contour.
k. Will the proposed culvert affect existing water flow?
❑Yes ❑No
If yes, explain:
3. EXCAVATION and FILL ❑This section not applicable
a. (i) Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert require any
excavation below the NHW or NW L? ®Yes ❑No
If yes,
(ii) Avg. length of area to be excavated: —5'
(iii) Avg. width of area to be excavated: —60'
(iv) Avg. depth of area to be excavated: —1'
(v) Amount of material to be excavated in cubic yards: 11 Cy
b. (i) Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert require any
excavation within coastal wetlands/marsh (CW), submerged
aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB), or other wetlands
(WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the number of square
feet affected.
❑CW ❑SAV ❑SB
OWL ®None
(ii) Describe the purpose of the excavation in these areas:
252-808.2808 :: 1-88&-4RCOAST :, www.nccoastalmanagement.net revif,ed: 10 26 06

Form DCM MP -5 (Bridges and Culverts. Page 3 of 4)
C. (i) W ill the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert require any
high -ground excavation? ®Yes ❑No
If yes,
(ii) Avg. length of area to be excavated: 30 : 15
(iii) Avg. width of area to be excavated: 60
(iv) Avg. depth of area to be excavated: 6
(v) Amount of material to be excavated in cubic yards: 600
d. If the placement of the bridge or culvert involves any excavation, please complete the following:
(i) Location of the spoil disposal area: onsite, suitable material will be used to elevate roadbed, any unsuitable material or excess
material will be removed to an authorized offsite diposal area.
e.
9•
(ii) Dimensions of the spoil disposal area: 300' length and 30'-60' width
(iii) Do you claim title to the disposal area? ®Yes ❑No (If no, attach a letter granting permission from the owner.)
(iv) Will the disposal area be available for future maintenance? ®Yes ❑ No
(v) Does the disposal area include any coastal wetlands/marsh (CW), submerged aquatic vegetation (SAVs), other wetlands (WL), or shell
bottom (SB)?
®cW ❑SAV OWL ❑SB ❑None
If any boxes are checked, give dimensions if different from (ii) above. 60' length x 3' average width
(vi) Does the disposal area include any area below the NHW or NW L? ? ❑Yes ®No
If yes, give dimensions if different from (ii) above.
(i) Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert result in any
fill (other than excavated material described in Item d above) to
be placed below NHW or NWL? ❑Yes NNo
If yes,
(ii) Avg. length of area to be filled:
(iii) Avg. width of area to be filled:
(iv) Purpose of fill:
(i) Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert result in any
fill (other than excavated material described in Item d above) to
be placed on high -ground? ®Yes ❑No
If yes,
(ii) Avg. length of area to be filled: —300'
(iii) Avg. width of area to be filled: ~22'
(iv) Purpose of fill: road base course material to open
grade friction course.
4. GENERAL
a. Will the proposed project require the relocation of any existing
utility lines? ®Yes ❑No
If yes, explain: telephone lines currently located in r -o -w
will be relocated in the highground area.
(i) Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert result in any
fill (other than excavated material described in Item d above) to
be placed within coastal wetlands/marsh (CW), submerged
aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB), or other wetlands
(WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the number of square
feet affected.
❑CW ❑SAV ❑SB
❑WL ®None
(ii) Describe the purpose of the excavation in these areas:
b. Will the proposed project require the construction of aHnn temporary
detour structures? LJ Yes ®No
If yes, explain:

Form DCM MP -5 (Bridges and Culverts, Page 4 of 4)
If this portion of the proposed project has already received
approval from local authorities, please attach a copy of the
approval or certification.
< Form continues on back>
c. Will the proposed project require any work channels? d. How will excavated or fill material be kept on site and erosion
❑Yes ®No controlled?
If yes, complete Form DCM-MP-2. Excavated material and fill material would be kept on site
and erosion controlled by proper erosion and
sedimentation control devices including but not limited
to silt fence, waddles, rock checks, special sediment
control fence and the like until such time as the material
is placed and permanently stabilized whether by rip rap
stabilization or vegetation as described in this
application and in the included drawings.
e. What type of construction equipment will be used (for example, f. Will wetlands be crossed in transporting equipment to project site?
dragline, backhoe, or hydraulic dredge)?
❑Yes ®No
Standard road and bridge methodologies will be If yes, explain steps that will betaken to avoid or minimize
implemented buring construction. Standard equipment to environmental impacts.
include but not limited to dump truck, excavator, pile driver,
roller, dozer and cranes will be used during construction.
g. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert re n uire a
shoreline stabilization? BYeS i�No
If yes, complete form MP -2, Section 3 for Shoreline
Stabilization only.
05-31-2012
Date
Onslow County Bridge 226 Replacement
Project Name
NCDOT - Jon Giles
A cant Name
UVB LI) dA ��4
-
Appli ant Signature
252-808.2808 :: 1-888-4RCCAST :: wvrw.nccoaEtaimanagement.net

M
(DomesticLn .
.- Provided)
17�-
,
u1
delivery�
LnFor
r-1
V)
For delivery Information
r-
-
I �
E3
G
E3
Postage
$
LkO
l ,
pPostage
Q"
(�
Certified Fee
Certified Fee
Certified Fee
M
Return Receipt Receipt Fee
Return Receipt Fee
p0
ru
35
J Here
Postmark
Her
Postmark
M
Return Receipt Fee
>
Here
p
(Endorsement Required)
Restricted Delivery Fee
C3
Restricted Delivery Fee
(Endorsement Required)
(Endorsement Required)
17-1
Total Postage &Fees
p
co
Total Postage & Fees
s
+ 5
1:31A*
rl
(� f
Cej 6 1 I4+ X/
------
--------------------
City ZIP; .4jr
:00 AugqEd2096
p
Sent r �� E
Reverse 'for instructions"
\+
-[(-c- b.l.
Street, Apt. No.; f f D�/ �/ p
or PO Box No. t �y�- `�Y �1 Gk 4L_-_-.S.1.L -.l � �-
City, State, ZlP+
'
:00 August 2006
See Reverise for Instructions
M
., •
r Insurance Coverage
Provided)
,
LnFor
delivery information
V)
For delivery Information
visit our websiti at www.usps.come
I �
7
G
M
Postage
$ru
LkO
l ,
pPostage
$
(�
Certified Fee
Certified Fee
�3
M
Return Receipt Receipt Fee
Return Receipt Fee
p0
35
J Here
Postmark
Her
a
(Endorsement Required)
(End
(Endorsement Required)
M Restricted Delivery Fee
(Endorsement Required)
EJ
Restricted Delivery Fee
p
� Total Postage & Fees
(Endorsement Required)
17-1
Total Postage &Fees
$
an
Sent
,
+ 5
1:31A*
po.;
Street, At. N
or PO Box No.
(� f
Cej 6 1 I4+ X/
------
--------------------
City ZIP; .4jr
:00 AugqEd2096
�lJ
See
Reverse 'for instructions"
Dr
(Domestic Mail Only,
r Insurance Coverage
Provided)
E'
LnFor
delivery information
visit our website at
r
:>I
I �
7
G
M
Postage
$ru
LkO
l ,
Certified Fee
M
Return Receipt Receipt Fee
�
J Here
a
E=1
(Endorsement Required)
EJ
Restricted Delivery Fee
(Endorsement Required)
17-1
Total Postage &Fees
$
,
a
Sent To
\+
Street, Apt No.;
'
E3
N---------------------
or PO Box No.
4 rn
-- --------T------'--^ ..-- -----
Cit}; State, ZIP \
"--'— -----------" -

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
BEVERLY EAVES PERDUE
GOVERNOR
May 22, 2012
Margret Nicholson
1055 Gold Camp Rd.
Colorado Springs, CO 80960
Dear Riparian Neighbor,
EUGENE A. CONTI, JR.
SECRETARY
The NC Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to replace Onslow County Bridge #226 located
on SR 1557 Wheeler Creek Road approximately 0.6 miles east of NC 172. NCDOT is applying for
permits to perform the proposed work. You are being notified of this proposal because the Coastal Area
Management Act requirement applicants to notify adjacent riparian property owners of proposed
development.
Please see the enclosed plan sheet for your review in regard to this proposal.
If you wish to comment on the proposed project to the regulatory agency of the NC Division of Coastal
Management, please contact Mr. Stephen Lane by emailing to stephen.laneAncdering_ov or write to him
at:
NC Division of Coastal Management
Attn: Mr. Stephen Lane
400 Commerce Avenue
Morehead City, NC 28557
You have ten days from receipt of this letter in which to submit written comments to the NC Division of
Coastal Management. No response shall be interpreted as no objection.
Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions regarding this work proposal. Thank you
for your consideration.
Enclosure
Sincerely,
qo' V3 -'
Jon W Giles Jr.
Division Environmental Unit
Engineering Technician
5501 BARBADOS BLVD. CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
BEVERLY EAVES PERDUE
GOVERNOR
May 22, 2012
Richard & Kathleen Millis
220 Wheeler Creek Road
Sneads Ferry, NC 28460
Dear Riparian Neighbor,
EUGENE A. CONTI, JR.
SECRETARY
The NC Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to replace Onslow County Bridge #226 located
on SR 1557 Wheeler Creek Road approximately 0.6 miles east of NC 172. NCDOT is applying for
permits to perform the proposed work. You are being notified of this proposal because the Coastal Area
Management Act requirement applicants to notify adjacent riparian property owners of proposed
development.
Please see the enclosed plan sheet for your review in regard to this proposal.
If you wish to comment on the proposed project to the regulatory agency of the NC Division of Coastal
Management, please contact Mr. Stephen Lane by emailing to stephen.lane(a)ncdenr.gov or write to him
at:
NC Division of Coastal Management
Attn: Mr. Stephen Lane
400 Commerce Avenue
Morehead City, NC 28557
You have ten days from receipt of this letter in which to submit written comments to the NC Division of
Coastal Management. No response shall be interpreted as no objection.
Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions regarding this work proposal. Thank you
for your consideration.
Enclosure
Sincerely,
Jon W Giles Jr.
Division Environmental Unit
Engineering Technician
5501 BARBADOS BLVD. CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
BEVERLY EAVES PERDUE
GovERNoR
May 22, 2012
Estelle Revell
230 Wheeler Creek Road
Sneads Ferry, NC 28460
Dear Riparian Neighbor,
EUGENE A. CONTI, JR.
SECRETARY
The NC Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to replace Onslow County Bridge #226 located
on SR 1557 Wheeler Creek Road approximately 0.6 miles east of NC 172. NCDOT is applying for
permits to perform the proposed work. You are being notified of this proposal because the Coastal Area
Management Act requirement applicants to notify adjacent riparian property owners of proposed
development.
Please see the enclosed plan sheet for your review in regard to this proposal.
If you wish to comment on the proposed project to the regulatory agency of the NC Division of Coastal
Management, please contact Mr. Stephen Lane by emailing to stgphen.lanena ncdenr..gov or write to him
at:
NC Division of Coastal Management
Attn: Mr. Stephen Lane
400 Commerce Avenue
Morehead City, NC 28557
You have ten days from receipt of this letter in which to submit written comments to the NC Division of
Coastal Management. No response shall be interpreted as no objection.
Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions regarding this work proposal. Thank you
for your consideration.
Enclosure
Sincerely, �p
Jon W Giles Jr.
Division Environmental Unit
Engineering Technician
5501 BARBADOS BLVD. CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429
Phone:[phone] Fax: [phone]

Lidar Imagery
Replacement of Bridge 226
Onslow County
Z
N ;DCO
to
Davis n 1558
s�
N
a eJ`e�
New River
67
1681
c r
a
N +�
n
oa
NC 172 o tti
a Mullet L
31
k
U f: i -
Z i Wheeler Creek Rd
Middleton PI x b
SR 1557
SR#15 57
Wheeler Creek 42d i
nn p,+rt j 4 - 1 }
Onslow 226
}
�^ o
S
Heads Ferry R Y
�. ,,
d
0 250 500 1,000 1,500 2.000
Feet

Aerial Imagery
Replacement of Bridge 226
Onslow County
250 500 1,000 1,500 2,000
Feet

USGS Map - Sneads Ferry
Replacement of Bridge 226
Onslow County
i =r tir f
Davis
7=A
41
Me
New River
i 1
r ` ? 1681 ,
Y
ry` j) NC 172
'oto •J .�,rte` Wheeler Creek Rd
a� �n SR 1557
* �"}.�
��• } r •tea -.,t x.��-,.r^'f 8 -•-" - - +."-,Y, _..', ,;
'c_�� Onslow 226 f!
�`° � � �?.ti�---r.�.. ;-•i�'?_ _�..�—.-....�----- to ���-'
cfj
ds Fer
iii <} _j
ryJA
V Li
o/
t 0,�
0 250 500 1,000 1,500 2,000
Feet

Low/Minimal Impact Bridge Project Data Sheet
TIP NO
White Oak
BD -5103P
SA HQW
WBS Element No.
1
19-35
45349.1.16
perennial
County
50 X 2
Onslow
3 span bridge
Bridae Number
53x25
226
14
Description I Replace Bridge 226 over Wheeler Creek
Basin
White Oak
Classification
SA HQW
Stream SIN
19-35
Type
perennial
Size width & depth)
50 X 2
Type
3 span bridge
Existing Structure Size
53x25
Suff. Rating
14
Type
2 Span Cored Slab Bridge
Proposed Structure
Size len thmidth out -out
100, X 30,
USACE Impacts (LF)
0
Stream
NCDWQ Impacts LF
0
USACE Impacts (AC)
0.01
Wetlands Non 404 Impacts (AC)
0
CAMA Impacts SF
710 180 fill, 530 hand clearing)
DWQ Buffers Impacts (SF)
No
ffer Application Required (Y/N)
No
to Stormwater Permit Required (Y/N)
No
Habitat
Yes
T&E Species Present
Yes
Bio Conclusion
May affect, not likely to adversely affect
Type
PNA and Sturgeon
Moratorium
Dates
Feb 1 - Sept 30
Native/Hatchery
No
Trout Waters Trout Species Present
Trout Conditions Y/N
WRC Reviewer
CAMA AECs
Yes
Essential Fish Habitat /n
Yes
Nay. Opening
Maintain
USCG Permit
Not Required -Cleared 11 /2011
Historic Properties
No
Archaeological Resources
No
Tribal Lands
No
4 Resources
No
6 LWCF] Resources
No
Wild and Scenic River
No
Federal Lands
No
TVA Area
No
FEMA Buyout
No
FEMA Flood Study
No
USTs Haz Mats
No
Relocatees
No
LAT
34.566056
Location
LONG
77.388639
No flood study. MOA not required. Project
Project Comments proposes to restore 537 sf of coastal
wetlands.
2—
En§ilnepr,
Division Environmental Officer,' Date
4/17/2012

WETLAND PERMIT IMPACT SUMMARY (1 OF 2)
COASTAL WETLAND IMPACTS SURFACE WATER IMPACTS
)
1
-L- 12+38 TO 14+38
Site
No.
Station
(From/To)
Structure
Size /Type
Permanent
Fill In
Wetlands
(sf)
Temp.
Fill In
Wetlands
(sf)
Excavation Mechanized
in Clearing
Wetlands in Wetlands
(sf) (sf)
Hand
Clearing
in
Wetlands
(sf)
Permanent
SW
impacts
(ac)
Temp.
SW
impacts
(ac)
Existing Existing
Channel Channel
Impacts Impacts
Permanent Temp.
(ft) (ft)
Natural
Stream
Design
(ft
TOTALS:
180
-
- -
530
-
-
-
-
-
Notes:
1. 404 Welland Impacts are summarized separately on Wetland Impact Summary Table 2.
2. There is 537 sq.ft. of coastal wetland restoration associated with this project.
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
ONSLOW COUNTY BRIDGE 226
BD-5103P
SHEET OF 5/17/2012
)
1
-L- 12+38 TO 14+38
21" Cored Slab Bridge
180
-
- -
530
-
-
-
-
-
TOTALS:
180
-
- -
530
-
-
-
-
-

�I
See Sheet 1-A For Index of Sleets
Rin
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA N(
R
DIVISION OFF HIGHWAYS 4
ONSLOW COUNTY
LOCATION: BRIDGE NO. 226 OVER WHEELER CREEK
ON SR 1557 (WHEELER CREEK RD.)
TYPE OF WORK: LOW IMPACT BRIDGE REPLACEMENT
0
BEGIN PROJECT BD -5103P
BEGIN CONSTRUCTION
-L- STA//+85
TO NC HWY 172 L
m
z
END PROJECT BD -5103P
END CONSTRUCTION
-L- STA/5+80
TO SR 1541
(FULCHERS LANDING LOOP)
GIN BRIDGE END BRIDGE
- STA13+38 +/- -L- STA14+38 +/-
1681 TRAPS
HIDRAULICS
— • ` ` - BAY
GRAPHIC SCALES
;.\.
�,�-: � .•.'-` -'�,� � i! 1, -F'-1543`.\ '. \ � �
PROJECT LENGTH
ENGINEER
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
andin
' �
o �� o ,frihditlg
1541
50 25 0 50 100
k Rd. a @ 2;ra <, •_.,
Wheeler Cree ��'� ✓o D. hqs ,I __
l s 16�Ph�
•- J 1542
t o c° 1556
N.Snerads —
ca
Ferry Rd. END�a 2229
PROD T
v
Q
2242 2228 2223
%r I. w2246
1515 1517
— P -E.
SIGNATURE
� ��
L
to 5 2227
dp
i• I
167
ENRICO A. ROQUE, P.E.
f 1601 �, 2243
SReads Fer Rd2226. 1� 2225
Ferry ,' —
2224
Rd 1519 id Peru Rd.
Count
2206 5. I ?
50 25 0 50 100
1561 -
1697 a \
2205 Y 1521
T - 6% *
VICINITY MAP Ak -*Aj�- DETOUR ROUTE
Rin
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA N(
R
DIVISION OFF HIGHWAYS 4
ONSLOW COUNTY
LOCATION: BRIDGE NO. 226 OVER WHEELER CREEK
ON SR 1557 (WHEELER CREEK RD.)
TYPE OF WORK: LOW IMPACT BRIDGE REPLACEMENT
0
BEGIN PROJECT BD -5103P
BEGIN CONSTRUCTION
-L- STA//+85
TO NC HWY 172 L
m
z
END PROJECT BD -5103P
END CONSTRUCTION
-L- STA/5+80
TO SR 1541
(FULCHERS LANDING LOOP)
GIN BRIDGE END BRIDGE
- STA13+38 +/- -L- STA14+38 +/-
Prepored In the Office of:
HIDRAULICS
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
GRAPHIC SCALES
DESIGN DATA
PROJECT LENGTH
ENGINEER
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
HNTB NORTH CAROLINA, P.C.
043 E. Six Forks Road, Suite 200
50 25 0 50 100
ADT 2009 = 2000
Raleigh, North Carolina 27609
���� NC License No: C-1554
eF0104rh
ADT 2035 = 4000
DHV = 10%
LENGTH OF ROADWAY TIP PROJECT BD -5103P = 0.05 MI.
— P -E.
SIGNATURE
'•
zo,2 STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS
ENRICO A. ROQUE, P.E.
PLANS
LENGTH OF STRUCTURE TIP PROJECT BD -5103P = 0.02 MI.
c
PROJECT ENGINEER
50 25 0 50 100
D = 60%
RIGHT OF WAY DATE:
T - 6% *
APRIL 27, 2012
ANTHONY THOMPSON, P.E.
ROADWAY
G
ENGINEER
PROFILE
�Pfr °F i4�NjQ'e�e
(HORIZONTAL)
PROJECT DESIGNER
V = 55 MPH
10 5 0 10 20
* TTST 1% DUAL 2%
TOTAL LENGTH OF TIP PROJECT BD -5103P = 0.07 MI.
_
LETTING DATE:
AMANDA GLYNN, P.E.
_ PE
SIGNATURE:
PE
AUGUST 16, 2012
NCDOT CONTACT
PROFILE (VERTICAL)
STATE HIGITWAY DESIGN ENGINEER

Note: Not to Scale
*S. U.E. = Subsurface Utility Engineering
S°Jf°A'JC1E OF NOlfB°g°H CAIBOLINA
DdVISION OF HIGHWAYS
CONVENTIONAL PLAN SHEET SYMBOLS
BOUNDARIES AND PROPERTY.•
- - - C - - -
State Line
County Line
— -
Township Line
-0-
Proposed Wheel Chair Ramp Curb Cut
Proposed Right of Way Line
City Line
Proposed Right of Way Line with
Reservation Line
Iron Pin and Cap Marker
Property Line
Proposed Right of Way Line with
Existing Iron Pin
Concrete or Granite Marker
Property Corner
Existing Control of Access
Property Monument
O
Parcel/Sequence Number
izs
Existing Fence Line
-x x x -
Proposed Woven Wire Fence
e
Proposed Chain Link Fence
e
Proposed Barbed Wire Fence
Proposed Permanent Utility Easement
Existing Wetland Boundary
m
Proposed Wetland Boundary
•"
Existing Endangered Animal Boundary
EIB—
Existing Endangered Plant Boundary
-
BUILDINGS AND OTHER CULTURE.-
Gas Pump Vent or U/G Tank Cap
O
Sign
Well
°
Small Mine
5Z
Foundation
0
Area Outline
0
Cemetery
0
Building
School
Church
Dam
HYDROLOGY.-
Stream or Body of Water
Hydro, Pool or Reservoir
Jurisdictional Stream —Is -
Buffer Zone 1 Bz i
Buffer Zone 2 Bz 2 -
Flow Arrow
Disappearing Stream —
Spring 0-- .�
Wetland
Proposed Lateral, Tail, Head Ditch T`
False Sump
RAILROADS. -
Standard Gauge -
RR Signal Milepost
Switch
RR Abandoned -
RR Dismantled -
RIGHT OF WAY.-
Baseline Control Point
- - - C - - -
Existing Right of Way Marker
- - - F - - -
Existing Right of Way Line
-0-
Proposed Wheel Chair Ramp Curb Cut
Proposed Right of Way Line
—
Proposed Right of Way Line with
A
Iron Pin and Cap Marker
Telephone Cell Tower
Proposed Right of Way Line with
T T T T
Concrete or Granite Marker
Existing Cable Guiderail
Existing Control of Access
—
Proposed Control of Access
—�
Existing Easement Line
E
Proposed Temporary Construction Easement
—E—
Proposed Temporary Drainage Easement
TDE
Proposed Permanent Drainage Easement
PDE
Proposed Permanent Utility Easement
PUE
ROADS AND RELATED FEATURES.
Existing Edge of Pavement
Existing Curb —
Proposed Slope Stakes Cut
- - - C - - -
Proposed Slope Stakes Fill
- - - F - - -
Proposed Wheel Chair Ramp
-0-
Proposed Wheel Chair Ramp Curb Cut
CC
Curb Cut for Future Wheel Chair Ramp
ccF
Existing Metal Guardrail
❑T
Telephone Cell Tower
Proposed Guardrail
T T T T
"H
Existing Cable Guiderail
n n
—
Proposed Cable Guiderail
n n n
Recorded U/G Telephone Conduit
Equality Symbol
Designated U/G Telephone Conduit (S.U.E.*)- -
Pavement Removal
VEGETATION. -
Single Tree
Single Shrub
Hedge
Woods Line
Orchard
Vineyard
4 Q 4 0
vi�ayara
EXISTING STRUCTURES.•
MAJ O R:
Bridge, Tunnel or Box Culvert
Bridge Wing Wall, Head Wall and End Wall
—
MINOR:
Head and End Wall
Pipe Culvert
Footbridge
Drainage Box: Catch Basin, DI or JB
Paved Ditch Gutter
Storm Sewer Manhole
Storm Sewer
UTILITIES.-
POWER:
Existing Power Pole
Proposed Power Pole
Existing Joint Use Pole
Proposed Joint Use Pole
Power Manhole
Power Line Tower
Power Transformer
LVG Power Cable Hand Hole
H -Frame Pole
Recorded U/G Power Line
Designated U,/G Power Line (S.U.E.*)
CONC
� CONC WW I
CONC HW l
❑ CB
Os
i
NH
0-9
TELEPHONE:
Existing Telephone Pole
f
Proposed Telephone Pole
-0-
Telephone Manhole
OT
Telephone Booth
❑O
Telephone Pedestal
❑T
Telephone Cell Tower
- - - -"- - - -
U/G Telephone Cable Hand Hole
"H
Recorded LVG Telephone Cable
0
—
Designated U/G Telephone Cable (S.U.E.*)- -
- - -'- - - -
Recorded U/G Telephone Conduit
TV Tower
Designated U/G Telephone Conduit (S.U.E.*)- -
- - -T°- - -
Recorded U/G Fiber Optics Cable
°
Designated � Fiber Optics Cable (S.U.E.�
U
A/G Tank; Water, Gas, Oil
WATER:
Water Manhole
OO
Water Meter
o
Water Valve
Water Hydrant
.0
Recorded U/G Water Line
"
Designated U/G Water Line (S.U.E.*)
- - - -"- - - -
Above Ground Water Line
A/0 Water
TV:
0
TV Satellite Dish
C�
TV Pedestal
KI
TV Tower
UG TV Cable Hand Hole
a*
Recorded U/G TV Cable
Designated U/G TV Cable (S.U.E.*)
Recorded U/G Fiber Optic Cable
Designated WG Fiber Optic Cable (S.U.E.*)-
GAS:
Gas Valve 0
Gas Meter
Recorded U/G Gas Line
Designated U/G Gas Line (S.U.E.*) - - - - - -
Above Ground Gas Line A/C C—
SANITARY SEWER:
Sanitary Sewer Manhole
OO
Sanitary Sewer Cleanout
+�
WG Sanitary Sewer Line
Above Ground Sanitary Sewer
A/C sanitary Se -
Recorded SS Forced Main Line
«-
Designated SS Forced Main Line (S.U.E.*) -
- - - -F_S- - - -
MISCELLANEOUS:
Utility Pole
0
Utility Pole with Base
O
Utility Located Object
O
Utility Traffic Signal Box
Utility Unknown U/G Line
a*
WG Tank; Water, Gas, Oil
A/G Tank; Water, Gas, Oil
U/G Test Hole (S.U.E.*)
m
Abandoned According to Utility Records
AATUR
End of Information
E.O.I.

O
�llj�.7 i I IiI Ill
MATERIAL TO BE REMOVED
HNTB NORTH CAROLINA, P.C. PROJECT REFERENCE NO. SHEET NO.
PLAN '�INTB -N'C'-Lice
43 E.
Six Forks Road, Suite 200 BD -5/03P 4
Raleigh, North Carolina 27609
NC License No: C-1554 RM' SHEET NO.
ROADWAY DESIGN HYDRAULICS
ENGINEER I ENGINEER
-L- Sta.13+38.00 +/-
END SHLD.
BERM GUTTER
STAI3+309 LT 1
BEGIN APP. SLAB END BRIDGE
-L- Sta.13+27.00 +/- LEND
l4+3,8.00 +/- cElxiEr,,
US 1277 F'(
F'hEE EF C4 Eh LIE '.ti P '
OWWER i., ,.... P:C. - --- 12+90m=LL------ --- - PS B `•,1�
DS21,57 E sT° O 2973 a o. IA+ .00
118 45m' LT 1 `
Lt l,F.E r RE CLASS 'B' RIP -RAP j
` , EST. I TONS SHLD.
I I�_H�ISOr?, ET at EST. 5 SYFF %GUTTfR
u ,. (I r: r. +sea LT END CONSTRUCTION
j Is s 12+79m -L- srlLD. -L- Sta.15+80.00
45m' LT Gfl7TER E Clt'BEG/N SHLD. /4+652 LT f ELL
BERM GUTTERoa0 oSTA12+809 LT PE 350 I- _ 8:1 TYP - - - - -- --
F
N 74'1. n IT NT
TRIN —I U
TYPE 350 Ol ttP :III�C T- IIF
TAPER--
_ ri EXISTING..- •I .:.I ` -�. c'tTR EXISTING
BEGIN CONSTRUCTION 2+44.65 -L- - -
-L- Sto.11+85.00 3523' RT 4om Rr
BEGIN SHLD. 13+0000 ,L
BERM GUTTER 40Da RT END SKID. ESiELLE.f'i.I'LLL
STA12+809 RT ENO, SHLD. BERM GUTTER OS Q� ;, g67
. BERM. GUTTER STA14+577 RT
STA 13+233 RT BEGIN SHLO.
JEANIE K. CLEMENT + -L- BERM GUTTER
(LIFE ESIB.TE CLASS 'II' RIP-RAPSTA14+45JRT
OB 3.E6 PC 130 _ 30.40 RT
13+47m -L-I - 2 35D0'RT
3033 RT
PROFILE
PI = 12+35.00 PI = 15+30.00
EL = 7.63' EL = 896'
VC = l00' VC = l00'
20 K=114 K=172 END CONSTRUCTION
BEGIN CONSTRUCTION DS = 55 DS = 60 -L- STA.15+80.00
-L- STA.11+85.00 EL 9.47
EL 7.84
WS EL: -0.38
10 SURVEY II -17-2011 —_
(+)0.4500% +!1.0300% —— —
--
0
GIN BRIDGE ND BRIDGE
—10 EL TAA13+38.00 -L- STA14+38.00
EL 854'
—20
oam
0
\M
10+00 11+00 12+00 13+00 14+00 15+00 16+00
PRELIMINARY PLANS
OO NOT USE PORICONSTRUCTION
DATUM DESCRIPTION
THE LOCALIZED COORDINATE SYSTEM DEVELOPED FOR THIS PROJECT
IS BASED ON THE STATE PLANE COORDINATES ESTABLISHED BY
NCOOT FOR MONUMENT 'B4781-2"
WITH HAD 83/NSRS 2007 STATE PLANE GRID COORDINATES OF
NORTHING: 2483397.623(ft) EASTING: 299916.632(ft)
ELEVATION: 20.45(ft)
THE AVERAGE COMBINED GRID FACTOR USED ON THIS PROJECT
(GROUND TO GRID) IS: 0.99994879
THE N.C. LAMBERT GRID BEARING AND
LOCALIZED HORIZONTAL GROUND DISTANCE FROM
'B4781-2" TO -L- STATION 10+00 IS
N 85 11' 53' E 571.20'
ALL LINEAR OIMENSIDNS ARE LOCALIZED HORIZONTAL DISTANCES
VERTICAL DATUM USED IS NAVD 88
BRIDGE HYDRAULIC DATA
DESIGN DISCHARGE = 250
CFS
DESIGN FREQUENCY = 25
YRS
DESIGN HW ELEVATION = 05
FT
BASE DISCHARGE = 380
CFS
BASE FREQUENCY = l00
YRS
BASE HW ELEVATION = 1.0
FT
OVERTOPPING DISCHARGE= -
CFS
OVERTOPPING FREQUENCY= X500
YRS
OVERTOPPING ELEVATION = 774
FT
DATE OF SURVEY = 11-17-11
WS.ELEVATION
AT DATE OF SURVEY --038
FT
20
10
0
—10
—20

75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 2OJ 15 10
15
5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
N
10 rn
PR,
0.025
5 S.S.5.2/ v . -- 7.43
XI
W
-----------------------------------------
15 -_------__ ---------------------
15
1Ln
0
S.S.3.42 PR, - 0.025
5
xi 7.51
LU
15
0
5------------------------
iO]
12+50.00
15 1
10
W
S.S.0.32
-------------------------------------- 0
15
10
�qR 5
IX
IW S.S.1.49
`---------------------------------------- 0
15 1
10
S.S.6.79 3.I I x.09.5 0.02.5 I
S_S.6.57 iW
5
------------L-------
0
rll
75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75

75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 2:5 20 15 10 5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
16
I
i
5 S.S.3.82
- - - - - - -
10
5
i
�i
0
x;
----------------------------------------- — — — — — — — — —
W i
— — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — '
10
5
n 0
�w
>f
:Z
W
75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75
O
0.025 °0
7.68
14+50.00
e
10
'
w -----
5
---------------------
0
In
00
i�
i
i
IW
I
------------------
----------------- -'-"` ----------------------- d-
10
5
Ln
10
0-025
- -----
---------------
------------ __
5
7,40
�� I
LLI
-------------�-� L----------------- ___ 0
S.S. 0.3/ S.S. 0.23------------
13+50.00

SL 0L 99 09 99 09 9b 017 SE 0E 5Z 0Z 51 0T 9 0 s 0T 51 0Z 9Z 0E 9E 0-� 5t7 09 99 09 99 0L 9L
NO-IsTolm
0 _ 0
----------------------
--------------------
----------------------'--------------- I-
06 -9 -S'S
— -- ---r---
06.9-S°S -------,------------------
0T 0T
Oo
00°O9+ST
0 0
f0'8'S'S
0 T <o SL°L°S°S 0 T
MMMNMp► •
9
5
--————————————————
----------- ----- --------
0Tx�---- ------ T---------------- -------- -- 01
�I !m
i IX
i
q 91
0z
09 sb 0b 9E 0E 5Z 0Z 9T 0T 9 0 9 0T 51 0z 9Z 0E 9E 0t7 9b 09 99 09 99 0L 9L

Z
O
w
z
1
PLAN
PROJECT REFERENCE NO, SHEET NO.
C� N T S INT NORTH CAROLINA, f BD—SIOJ P 4
343 'c. Six Forks Roatl, Suite 200
Raleigh, NOrth CeroLina 27609
NC LiDeR se No. C-1554 RW SHEET NO.
ROADWAY DESIGN HYDRAULICS
ENGINEER ENGINEER
i
°RELIMINA Y PLANS
DO NOT USE FOR 100NMrRUCTION
,•`CY�7i1�ING•' I • �
•
EXISTING LOW CHORD ELEV. = 5.83 f
-- - ----- EXISTING BRIDGE OPENING = 346 sf
PROPOSED LOW CHORD ELEV. = 5.83 ft
PROPOSED BRIDGE OPENING = 640 sf
no MATERIAL TO BE REMOVED
20
10
0
-10
-20
E
c
0
T
L
Ned
oao
N M —
\ N p
N V
PI = 12+351X) P/ _ /5+30.00
EL = 7.63' EL = 8.96'
VC = 100' VC = l00'
K=114 K =172 N CONSTRUCTION
BEGINCONSTRUCTION OS = 55 DS = 60 -L- STA.l5t801J0
-L- STA.11+85.00 EL 947
EL 7.84
WS EL: -0.38
SURVEY 11-17-2011
_ f+K1.4500%---------
f- .4250% --- --� — -- ----- +IIA300%
I
I
`y►
GIN RI N RI
-L- S A14 -h-38.00
-L- STA.04-38.00
EL 8109' EL 854'
10+00 11+00 12+00 13+00 14+00 15+00 16+00
BRIDGE HYDRAULIC DATA
DESIGN DISCHARGE = 250
CFS
DESIGN FREQUENCY = 25
YRS
DESIGN IAN ELEVATION = 0.5
FT
BASE DISCHARGE = 380
CFS
BASE FREQUENCY = l00
YRS
BASE l -M' ELEVATION = l.0
FT
OVERTOPPING DISCHARGE = -
CFS
OVERTOPPING FREQUENCY= >500
YRS
OVERTOPPING ELEVATION = 7.74
FT
DATE OF SURVEY = II -17-1I
W.S. ELEVATION
AT DATE OF SURVEY = -038
FT
'I Z
20
10
0
-10
-20

�� +C0 -WL!-�-i
- % _ ---
I' -I _
ONCURRENT WLB & CWL LIN
• SCALE
1"=40'
LEGEND EEgg gg
® DENOWETLANDSORED
F /-,-I
DENOWpTEESLS�N�LAL IN
® DEN LEETARIND"ND
EXISTING LOW CHORD ELEV. - 5.83 ft
EXISTING BRIDGE OPENING = 346 Sf
PROPOSED LOW CHORD ELEV.= 5.83 ft
PROPOSED BRIDGE OPENING = 640 Sf
MATERIAL TO BE REMOVED
20
10
0
-10
-20
HIGH WATER
ELEV=1.49'
PER PHILLIP REVELL
_ ( l � Ee9 •
l
' COASTAL WET AS -
COASTAL WETLAND S\ FOO 537 SF OFR TION
C
TE I
--- ___
F F
Iy NATER EL .30'
COASTAL WETLAND LINES I. ENT WL & CWL LIN 1:50:57 PM /
7/13/2D31 - -
___-. COA AL WETL NO LIN--
COAS AL WETLANDS' SCALE 1 Z!,—
404 WETLANDS 180 SF F PE NENT FIL COASTAL WETLANDS
19 SF OF HAND CLEARING - - - -
_ 42 SF OF HAND CLEARING 1 n = 40'
COASTAL WETLA .. - - - -
488 SF OF HAND CLEARINGFLOOD
•.
.30'
—L— JI A./IT'OD.W
EL 7.84
PI = I2+35.00
EL = 7.63'
VC = l00'
K=114
DS = 55
WS EL: -0.3B
SURVEY II -17-2011
Pl = 15+30.00
EL = 896'
VC = l00'
K=172
OS = 60
—L— JI A.
EL 854'
-L - J l A. /.J rtXJl-V
EL 9.47
PRELIMINARY PLANS
DO NOT USE POA CONff RUCTION
0
BRIDGE HYDRAULIC DATA
DESIGN DISCHARGE = 250
CFS
PLAN
YRS
HNTB NORTH CAROLINA, P.C.
C�INTB 343 E. Six Forks ROatl, Suite 200
Rale ice; North Carolina 27609
PROJECT REFERENCENO.
SHEET NO.
BD -5/03P
4
YRS
BASE HW ELEVATION = l.0
FT
OVERTOPPING DISCHARGE = -
NC LioenSe No: C-1554
RW SHEET NO.
YRS
OVERTOPPING ELEVATION = 7.74
FT
DATE OF SURVEY = 11-17-1/
ROADWAY DESIGN
W.S. ELEVATION
HYDRAULICS
AT DATE OF SURVEY = -038
FT
ENGINEER
ENGINEER
O
HISTORIC
JI
HIGH WATER
ELEV=1.49'
PER PHILLIP REVELL
_ ( l � Ee9 •
l
' COASTAL WET AS -
COASTAL WETLAND S\ FOO 537 SF OFR TION
C
TE I
--- ___
F F
Iy NATER EL .30'
COASTAL WETLAND LINES I. ENT WL & CWL LIN 1:50:57 PM /
7/13/2D31 - -
___-. COA AL WETL NO LIN--
COAS AL WETLANDS' SCALE 1 Z!,—
404 WETLANDS 180 SF F PE NENT FIL COASTAL WETLANDS
19 SF OF HAND CLEARING - - - -
_ 42 SF OF HAND CLEARING 1 n = 40'
COASTAL WETLA .. - - - -
488 SF OF HAND CLEARINGFLOOD
•.
.30'
—L— JI A./IT'OD.W
EL 7.84
PI = I2+35.00
EL = 7.63'
VC = l00'
K=114
DS = 55
WS EL: -0.3B
SURVEY II -17-2011
Pl = 15+30.00
EL = 896'
VC = l00'
K=172
OS = 60
—L— JI A.
EL 854'
-L - J l A. /.J rtXJl-V
EL 9.47
PRELIMINARY PLANS
DO NOT USE POA CONff RUCTION
0
BRIDGE HYDRAULIC DATA
DESIGN DISCHARGE = 250
CFS
DESIGN FREQUENCY = 25
YRS
DESIGN HW ELEVATION = 05
FT
BASE DISCHARGE = 380
CFS
BASE FREQUENCY = l00
YRS
BASE HW ELEVATION = l.0
FT
OVERTOPPING DISCHARGE = -
CFS
OVERTOPPING FREQUENCY= )500
YRS
OVERTOPPING ELEVATION = 7.74
FT
DATE OF SURVEY = 11-17-1/
W.S. ELEVATION
AT DATE OF SURVEY = -038
FT
20
10
0
-10
-20
L 10+00 11+00 12+00 13+00 14+00 15+00 16+00 I

- ----- - ----------­-------- -
SITE DATA ?LL✓
INFORMATION TO BE SHOWN ON PLANS
v ;1.0 Sq. Mi. USGS QUAD-SNEADS FERRY REPORT
Drainage Area
U. BRIDGE SURVEY & HYDRAULIC DESIGNEPOR
Design: Discharge ...... _ . _ 250 c.f.s. Frequency . _ . _ _ _ . _ 25 0.5 WHITE OAK. RURAL COASTAL PLAIN
_-__._. Elev_ __________________ River Basin ..._... Character......................................................
-----1,.
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Base Flood: Discharge ----------------_--- 380 100 IA spy NQW :' . DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
c.f.s. Frequency-------------------- Elev. _____.___--__-_.__._.--- Stream Ciassifioation (Such as Trout, High Quality Water, etca .__-__-.----__---------------- HYDRAULICS UNIT
Overtopping: Discharge ........... > 500 7.74 BRIDGE N0.226 OVER WHEELER CREEK, Q 7T - 10", 1 Q 1 T - 1",1 @ 17' - 8", W RALEIGH, N. C.
--- c.f.s. Frequency ------- ------------ Elev- ------------------------ Data on Existing Structure------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- a:
CL @ SAG --t- STA. 12+33.57 ;
10.0', L = 52 7", BUILT 1955.'
RC DECK O-- TiMBER 10l- - - - - - - CROWN TQ BED - ' -
8134
U-1- I.D. No........... 03P Project No............ 45349.1.16 13 + 88.00 -1-
................... Proj. Station .................._....._....._..
----_--•--•
'.�_-_-•---------------•-•------•-----_-•-_-------_••-•-.•••---:-_•-•-•--•---_--•------•••-_•--,-------•-••--•-----•-•-•-_------ i.•,
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND COMPUTATIONS '
County .-•-_-._.ONSLOW..---... Bridge Over -•----•-•--_---WHEELER CREEK Bridge Inv. No._ -••0226
Debris Potential: Low.__X_.. Moderate -------- High ...... Waterway Opening ----3.46-.SF
SR 1557 SR 1541 SR 1515
FERRY
HISTORICAL INFORMATION: OnHighway ........--•..... Between -......---••--_•-.-•---- and -------------------•-------------
(WHEELER CREEK RD.) (JOHN EVEREiT DR.) (SNEADS FERRY RD-)
------------------------------•----.....•._._......._........_....•...-•--•-------------...---_-----_-•-•----•--•••----•_..--••--•-- Data on Structures Up and Down Stream ...--------............_.....------ •-------
1 @45'-0",1 Q 55'-0", 21" CORED SLAB. TOTAL BRIDGE LENGTH = 100'
MATT MITCHELL HAS LIVED IN THE AREA FOR 52 YEARS ANL? STATED THAT WATER REACHED THE DOOR UPSTREAM- MQ SR 1517. 1 g 30- RCP, HT. CROWN TO BED = 11AY;t Recommended Structure ------------- ------------- -------. .---_-_._--.------ ---.-_--_••.--____--_-.__-_-_•-__--.--_.-_-_-
---------------------•-------------------------•-------------•••--••--•.._......---...--••--.._..._._.........
n: TOTAL BRIDGE WIDTH = 30'-0" OUT -OUT, 4'-0" END BENT CAPS, NO DECK DRAINS
KNOB TO THE OFFICE OF MITCHELL'S FISH HOUSE DURING HURRICANE FRAN (SEPTEMBER 1996). DOWNSTREAM: (0.4 Mi)CONFLUENCE WITH NEW RIVER .-------------------------------.---------.-------------.•----------.------_--.-----------------.----------.-------------------------.
-------------•---------------•-----------------•------------------------•-------•----------------------•--•---------------•---------- ----- .--------------------•--------------------------------------------------------------------------
CN 0
' NY 10
HISTORIC HIGH WATER ELEVATION AND ROADWAY OVERTOPPING OCCURED DUE TO STORM SURGE. Recommended Width of Roadway-•_•___________________•_._-___---_--._._..._-__--_._-_-•- Skew _-___-..__ _--___.---
l Ll` EXISTING Q WSEL @ RS 3316 : -O' Recommended Location Is t , At, Existing Crossing. _ _ .. _ _ .. _ EXISTING •...CATION• • _ . _ _ _ .
RAY KNOWLES, TS III FOR PENDER COUNTY HAS WORKED IN THE AREA FOR 35 YEARS AND STATED THAT Design Control Elev.
1.1'(EXISTING )
----_---•---------•--•-------------------------•-----------------------.------------------- •-----•------------------••-- - - - - - -
HE HAS NEVER SEEN THE ROAD OVERTOP. Gage Station No. _N /A Period of RecordsN /A Nearest Shipping Point _____________________. On ..... NORFOLK R. ..__. Miles From Bridge
CAMP LEJEUNE NORFOLK SOUTHERN R. 17 d e
--•-----------------------------------•---------------------•-----..---------•----------•-- •-----•---------.----------------------------------------
- M k i
Max. Discharge N /A c.f.s. Date ........_N /A. Frequency -- N-�A- LA -
4 BenchMork s .......................................................... BENCHMARK "BM -i', ON -L- STA. 11-i- 55.29
--------------------•----------•--•------------•-•--------------•-------•--•-------------...___•_------------------------ .,, Elev. 11.99 - Datum: - NAVD 88._..
------------------------------------•-----_---------•---•--•--•_---------------.------...-.-.---------------------__--.-.- „. Historical Flood Information: SEE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND COMPUTATIONS ;
+ Period of C ; Temporary Crossing NOT REQUIRED OFF SITE DETOUR PROVIDED
DISCHARGE CALCS. BY NCDOT GUIDELINES FOR DRAINAGE STUDIES AND HYDRAULIC DESIGN AND SIR 2009--5158. Date _ _ 09,96 8 2 500 YR MATT MITCHELL 52 YRS ' _ ...... _ .... • . .... . ..........'. _ ...... .............................. _ , ..... _ ........
--------------------------------------------- -----------------------------•--•--•-----....-_.---------- ----- Elev._.._.. -_.Est. Fr q .. Sours -----------------•------------------------ edge--_•-•-- :
Freq.. e Knowi '
174 0.617 _ - - Period f
RURAL Q: Qto 0.00) 174 ds SAY 170 ds Date _ _ _ _ _ Elev.. _ _-_. _ _ .. Est. Freq _ - - - _ _. _ Source RAY KNOWLES Knowledge 35 YRS
0.606
Q25 245 (1.00) 245 cSAY 250 ds .-_-_.. is Historical Scour Info. General_______ ________ Contraction ------------ ------------- Local _________-
_ __.. ...........................................................
Z
Qioo = 380 1.00 0 s94 - 380 ds SAY 380 ds 0.0005 FT / FT FIELD SURVEY - 0.4 ± m
( ) Channel Slope Source ____________ _ _ Normal Water Surface Eiev--_.-__.-.__.......
- - .....................••--•-•---•••------........._.........---••-•-•--...-• r - a _L
0.583
Q 500 = 550 (1.00) = 550 ds SAY 550 ds Manning's n - Left O.B. 0.08 Channel 0.045 Right O.B. 0.08 Source-_---H� .OBSERVATION
------------•---------------------------------------•---...................................._....---------••---..............-•_..... - - - ._ARq. -
n
OVERTOPPING: SAG @ -L- STA. 12 + 33.57 ± , ELEV. - 7.74 i Flood Study / Status NONE Floodway Established? NO-
- o;
........................•-...............---••-------•-••-•-- _... -------------•--••-----•-- -----
_ : Flood Study 100 yr. Discharge /A c.f.s.; W.S. Elev.: With Floodway __N /A Without Floodway___
---------------------------- ................... --•-----------••-----_--..---------•--•------•--------------•------- ;
SCOUR COMPUTATIONS: DESIGN ---•-----•--------------------------- ..---- DESIGN DATA z°
Q & W *, RS 3460 PROPOSED ROAD OT ELEV = 7.7' MEAN HIGH WATER ELEV =0.9' USGS SIR 2009-5158
- '-- ------------•--------------------•-------•-••--.........••--•-•--•--......--••-------••-------•--•-•-••_------•--•-•... : Hydrological Method .- ----.-.•--------------------------------•------------------------------------•-----.------
,o:
Q,& W2 *� RS 3281.82 BR U APPROX. VOLUME FROM OT ELEV TO MHT ELEV = 10,634,000 cu fl Hydraulic Design Method _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ HEC -RAS v. 4.1 _0 - - ,
--...•-•---• .. ............•-•---•-------•-•--------._..._...--•---•-•--._......._.... o.
FOR ASSUMED STORM SURGE EXIT TIME OF 3hrs: Floods Evaluated: Freq. Q Etev. Backwater Bridge Opening Velocity o
----------•••---•----•------•-------••-----•..............................................................................
10,634,000 cu fi/(3hrs * lhr/3600 sec) = 985 ds Ccs RS 3316 170 - 0.1 2.4
-••-•-------------•-_----•---••----••.._...•--••-•---......_.....•--•.....__....--•--........_......-•---•---..._.. 10 ------- -------- ....... a -- c
-•--- 5---- 2 50 -------0--. - ---- 0.1---- ----------2.4 -•------- j
L
CONTRACTION SCOUR: Y2/Y1 = (02/Q} )b'x (W1 /W2 )K'; Ys = Y2 - YO 100 380 1.0 0.1 - 2.5 . - to
----------------•-------•------•-----------------.--------------------•--------------•----•-------•----------------•---•------------- --------•-------------------------------------------- --- ;
OT• Q2-770 cis, Q1 =440 cis, W1 =53.27 ft, W2 =63.53 ft, Y1 =4.32 ft, Ya =3.50 ft, K1=0.69 500 550 1.5 0.1 2.8 HCAROLINA P o��`GA$pj'�i�i
......-----.Y.... . -- _--------------•- •--------------- -- - ---
• 1y1 ���� HNTe NOR -r . .C. '�
�. 343 E. Six Forks Roed Site 200Q.-
6.13 ft - 3.50 ft Y 2.63 ft 104.2 SF 152.0 SF U: Raleigh, North Carolina zTeOs
5 s ----- -__ Waterwa 0 enin Provided Below. Desi n W.S.Elev_________________________ t00 r WS.EIev.__.__._______._.___-__-_ -- No LlceNse NO: C_1554 w Z��•'-•�SS/ ',9 r
--- - - - y P 9 9 Y Designed by: • --- -- -
LOCAL SCOUR: a = 1.2 ft, Ki = 1.1, K2= 1.0, K 3= 1.1, K 4= 1.0, g = 32.2 ft/s Average Channel Velocity (Design) _.. _ _ _..? 9 f A s_ _ _ _ Average Overbank Velocity (Design) _ _ _ _ _ - _ 4 f•P_•s_ _ -_- _ W' JOHN WATSON, EI; PHILLIP ROGERS, PE Date ' _ _"""""-""' R
. - _ _ SI w_• Assisted b
_._._.... - a -- - - - y - - - ----•---------------•-------------------
@ RS 3316
Ys= Y 1 12.0 x K, x K2 x K3 xK4 x (Y1 )o.ez Fr °'43 J Fr V / (9) (Y,) Computed Scour General _ Contraction ._-.._.....?:b_.__.__. Local --_--___._29.••_-••-•.__ - JAMES A.BYRD PE
-•---------•---•---....--•--•---•------------------•-•---------------------------•--------------------•--•----.--•-- p -•-----.. . Pr j ct E e • ----------_--.-------------------•----------
3: 562
BENT 1: OT: V = 3.89 ft/s, YJ - 4.66 ft, Fr- 0.3176, Ys = 2.85 ft NO v ��i/f'/PG iNR0 0�.4*
--•----•-----------------------•-•-----.------ -------•---•--------•----------•----------...--•-------•---------•-------• : Is a Floodway Revision Required?..---•-----------•--------•----•-----•-•--•--------------•----......--- - m Reviewed y � !�` -�J. a.� s •---•-...__..._..... �* ! p`
b ylis E vis
4t

1II VV - 1.)1l/l1 fmti'1ni �1-+-1111

-A
v
® North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Gordon Myers, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Amanda T. Glynn, P.E.
Division Bridge Program Manager, NCDOT
FROM: Travis Wilson, Highway Project Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program
DATE: July 8, 2011
SUBJECT: Division 3 Bridge Replacements
Biologists with the N. C. Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) have reviewed the
information provided and have the following preliminary comments on the subject project. Our
comments are provided in accordance with provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act
(42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(c)) and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16
U.S.C. 661-667d).
Our standard recommendations for bridge replacement projects of this scope are as
follows:
1. We generally prefer spanning structures. Spanning structures usually do not require
work within the stream and do not require stream channel realignment. The horizontal
and vertical clearances provided by bridges allows for human and wildlife passage
beneath the structure, does not block fish passage, and does not block navigation by
canoeists and boaters.
2. Bridge deck drains should not discharge directly into the stream.
3. Live concrete should not be allowed to contact the water in or entering into the stream.
4. If possible, bridge supports (bents) should not be placed in the stream.
5. If temporary access roads or detours are constructed, they should be removed back to
original ground elevations immediately upon the completion of the project. Disturbed
areas should be seeded or mulched to stabilize the soil and native tree species should
be planted with a spacing of not more than 10'x10'. If possible, when using temporary
Mailing Address: Division of Inland Fisheries • 1721 Mail Service Center • Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
Telephone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]

Bridge Memo Page 2 July 8, 2011
structures the area should be cleared but not grubbed. Clearing the area with chain
saws, mowers, bush -hogs, or other mechanized equipment and leaving the stumps and
root mat intact, allows the area to revegetate naturally and minimizes disturbed soil.
6. A clear bank (riprap free) area of at least 10 feet should remain on each side of the
steam underneath the bridge.
7. In trout waters, the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission reviews all U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers nationwide and general `404' permits. We have the option of
requesting additional measures to protect trout and trout habitat and we can
recommend that the project require an individual `404' permit.
8. In streams that contain threatened or endangered species, NCDOT biologist Mr.
Logan Williams should be notified. Special measures to protect these sensitive species
may be required. NCDOT should also contact the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for
information on requirements of the Endangered Species Act as it relates to the project.
9. In streams that are used by anadromous fish, the NCDOT official policy entitled
"Stream Crossing Guidelines for Anadromous Fish Passage (May 12, 1997)" should
be followed.
10. Sedimentation and erosion control measures sufficient to protect aquatic resources
must be implemented prior to any ground disturbing activities. Structures should be
maintained regularly, especially following rainfall events.
11. Temporary or permanent herbaceous vegetation should be planted on all bare soil
within 15 days of ground disturbing activities to provide long-term erosion control.
12. All work in or adjacent to stream waters should be conducted in a dry work area.
Sandbags, rock berms, cofferdams, or other diversion structures should be used where
possible to prevent excavation in flowing water.
13. Heavy equipment should be operated from the bank rather than in stream channels in
order to minimize sedimentation and reduce the likelihood of introducing other
pollutants into streams.
14. Only clean, sediment -free rock should be used as temporary fill (causeways), and
should be removed without excessive disturbance of the natural stream bottom when
construction is completed.
15. During subsurface investigations, equipment should be inspected daily and
maintained to prevent contamination of surface waters from leaking fuels, lubricants,
hydraulic fluids, or other toxic materials.
If corrugated metal pipe arches, reinforced concrete pipes, or concrete box culverts are
used:
The culvert must be designed to allow for aquatic life and fish passage. Generally, the
culvert or pipe invert should be buried at least 1 foot below the natural streambed
(measured from the natural thalweg depth). If multiple barrels are required, barrels
other than the base flow barrel(s) should be placed on or near stream bankfull or
floodplain bench elevation (similar to Lyonsfield design). These should be

Bridge Memo Page 3 July 8, 2011
reconnected to floodplain benches as appropriate. This may be accomplished by
utilizing sills on the upstream and downstream ends to restrict or divert flow to the
base flow barrel(s). Silled barrels should be filled with sediment so as not to cause
noxious or mosquito breeding conditions. Sufficient water depth should be provided
in the base flow barrel(s) during low flows to accommodate fish movement. If
culverts are longer than 40-50 linear feet, alternating or notched baffles should be
installed in a manner that mimics existing stream pattern. This should enhance
aquatic life passage: 1) by depositing sediments in the barrel, 2) by maintaining
channel depth and flow regimes, and 3) by providing resting places for fish and other
aquatic organisms. In essence, base flow barrel(s) should provide a continuum of
water depth and channel width without substantial modifications of velocity.
2. If multiple pipes or cells are used, at least one pipe or box should be designed to
remain dry during normal flows to allow for wildlife passage.
3. Culverts or pipes should be situated along the existing channel alignment whenever
possible to avoid channel realignment. Widening the stream channel must be avoided.
Stream channel widening at the inlet or outlet end of structures typically decreases
water velocity causing sediment deposition that requires increased maintenance and
disrupts aquatic life passage.
4. Riprap should not be placed in the active thalweg channel or placed in the streambed
in a manner that precludes aquatic life passage. Bioengineering boulders or structures
should be professionally designed, sized, and installed.
In most cases, we prefer the replacement of the existing structure at the same location
with road closure. If road closure is not feasible, a temporary detour should be designed and
located to avoid wetland impacts, minimize the need for clearing and to avoid destabilizing
stream banks. If the structure will be on a new alignment, the old structure should be removed
and the approach fills removed from the 100 -year floodplain. Approach fills should be removed
down to the natural ground elevation. The area should be stabilized with grass and planted with
native tree species. If the area reclaimed was previously wetlands, NCDOT should restore the
area to wetlands. If successful, the site may be utilized as mitigation for the subject project or
other projects in the watershed.
Project specific comments:
BD- 51030 Pender County, bridge number 117: We recommend replacing this bridge with a
bridge. Standard recommendations apply.
BD- 5103P Onslow County, bridge number 226: This area is characterized by higher salinity
water primarily supporting species under the jurisdiction of the NC Division of Marine Fisheries;
therefore NCDOT should coordinate with NCDMF to address impacts to aquatic species. We
recommend replacing this bridge with a bridge. Standard recommendations apply.
BD- 5103Q Duplin County, bridge number 154: We recommend replacing this bridge with a
bridge. Standard recommendations apply.

Bridge Memo Page 4 July 8, 2011
BD- 5103R Brunswick County, bridge number 64: We recommend replacing this bridge with a
bridge. Standard recommendations apply.
BD- 5103S Sampson County, bridge number 77: We recommend replacing this bridge with a
bridge. Standard recommendations apply.
BD- 5103T Sampson County, bridge number 78: We recommend replacing this bridge with a
bridge. Standard recommendations apply.
If you need further assistance or information on NCWRC concerns regarding bridge
replacements, please contact me at [phone]. Thank you for the opportunity to review and
comment on this project.

Giles, Jon W
From: Baker, Jessi E
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2012 2:09 PM
To: Giles, Jon W
Subject: RE: Onslow 226 Bridge Replacement
Jon,
Wheeler Creek has silty substrate and is designated as Primary Nursery Area (PNA). We would require an in -water work
moratorium of April 1 to September 30 at this location.
Thanks,
Jessi
From: Giles, Jon W
Sent: Monday, May 21, 2012 10:42 AM
To: Baker, Jessi E
Cc: Mathis, Stonewall D
Subject: Onslow 226 Bridge Replacement
Ms. Baker,
I am currently working on the Onslow 226 Bridge replacement over Wheeler Creek, this project is in Sneads Ferry,
Onslow County. In a memo dated 07-08-2011 from Travis Wilson, Highway Project Coordinator there is direct reference
to this project, see page 3 second paragraph from the bottom, requiring coordination with NCDMF to address any
impacts to aquatic species. I have attached a copy of the proposed bridge replacement and memo from Travis for your
review. Please review and provide any comments and any moratoriums that may affect this project. Thank you in
advance for your timely response on this project.
Sincerely,
Jon W Giles Jr.
NCDOT
Engineering Technician
910-341-2048
Li

ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC.
524 South New Hope Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27610
919-212-1760 (0) / 919-212-1707 (F)
www.en��ironmentalservices.com
,T1E110R.A,VD Ulf
TO: James Byrd
FROM: Robert Turnbull
DATE: July 11, 2011
RE: T.I.P. BD -5103P - Onsloxv 226
Environmental Services, Inc., (ESI) has completed the jurisdictional wetland and surface water
delineation for Onslow County Bridge #226. The project study area is located on Wheeler Creek
Road (SR 1557) over Wheeler Creek.
One (1) Section 404 jurisdictional wetland, three (3) coastal wetlands, and one (1) jurisdictional
stream channel (Wheeler Creek) were flagged per U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE), N.0
Division of Coastal Management (DCM), and N.C. Division of Water Quality (DWQ) criteria.
All of the jurisdictional wetlands are abutting Wheeler Creek. One (1) potentially jurisdictional
tributary, a man-made ditch with an ordinary high water mark, was also flagged and flows into
Wheeler Creek. Normal high water elevation was marked with an orange flag near flag SA2.
The attached jurisdictional layout depicts the approximate location of the jurisdictional features.
It is our understanding that these features will be located via traditional survey. The attached
layout is intended to be used by your surveyor to aid in locating the wetland and stream flagging.
Please note that the delineation results are considered preliminary pending USAGE concurrence.

A
'4
Ditch
A
T'
h
011
. tr,
Project Study Area Boundary*
, IN
Jurisdictional Wetland*
L_ZJ CAMA Wetland'
Jurisdictional Stream' i Irk P
Ditch*
0 35 70
Feet
Source: 2006 True Color imagery NC OneMap
Onslow County, Protect Boundary and features
approximated by ESI
Disclaimer The Information depicted on this figure Is for Delineation considered preliminary
informational purposes only and was not prepared for and is
not suitable for "or or engineering purposes. pending USACE concurrence.
Project: ERI 1009.09
Jurisdictional Areas
Division Bridges - Onslow 226 Date: Jul 2011
Onslow County, North Carolina Drwn/Chkd-. KT/RT
TIP- BD -5103P
11 Figure:
Pahl I r` %G-G-r`!.je,,A, a 0 1 IG091G I Svtadwti)=, 12Tip_ orris 022e IT OC [)zle, 7:' 1,2C' 1 17 Ai I

T.I.P. BD -510--,P (Onslow 226)
Onslow County, NC
Environmental Services, Inc.
July 11, 2011
Section 404 Jurisdictional Wetlands (blue/pink & black striped flagging)
Flag
Flagging
Location
Comments
Designation
Sequence
Location
Comments
WA
1-5
Southwest of
WA 1=CWA 1=SA2
CWA
1-7
existing bridge
CWAI=WAI=SA2A
Coastal Wetlands (orange/pink & black striped flaQp_in2)
Flag
Flagging
Location
Comments
Designation
Se uence
Location
Comments
Southwest of
SA6=WC l
CWA
1-7
Both sides of
CWAI=WAI=SA2A
existing bridge
SA2=CWC]
Northwest of
SA5A=CWB I
C'AiB
1-4
existing bridge
CWBI=SA5A
Southeast of
C\�'C
1-3
Existing bridge
CWCI=SA2
Jurisdictional Streams (blue/orange flagging)
Flag
Flagging
Designation
Sequence
Location
Comments
SA6=WC l
SA
1-6, ]A -6A
Both sides of
SA2A=WA 1=CWA 1
existing bridge
SA2=CWC]
SA5A=CWB I

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section 1V of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION 1: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND iNFOR-MATION:
State:NC County/parish/borough: Onslow City:
Center coordinates of site (]at/long in degree decimal format): Lai. 34.56344'N, Long. 77.391111
Universal Transverse Mercator: 18S 280631 3827231
Name of nearest waterbody: Wheeler Creek
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: New River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 030300001
Check if map, diagram ofreview area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is'are available upon request.
17 Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites. disposal sites, etc... ) are associated with this -action and are recorded on a
different JD forth.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Office (Desk) Detennination. Date:
❑ Field determination. Date(s):
SECTION H- SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Pick List -navigable waters of the US." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR pan 329) in the
review area. [Required]
❑ Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
�] waters are presently used, or have been used in die past or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Are" Craters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR pan 328) in the review area. [Requirct�
1. NVaters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in reviear area (check all that appl)): '
❑ TNWs, including territorial seas
❑ Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
Relatia ely permanent waters`' (RPW,,) that flow'directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑ Non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑ Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RI)Ws that flow directly or indirectly into TN\N's
❑
Wetlands adjacent to non•RPWs that flora directly or indirectly into TNWs
Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
D Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non -wetland waters: 100 linear feet: 40 width (fl) and/or acres.
Weilands: < 0.5 acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: 1987 Delineation Nfanua)
Elevation of established OHWM Of known):
2. Non-regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable):'
❑ Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review arca and determined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain:
BOWS chcckcd 1100\k .hall be supported b• completing the appropriate sections to Section 111 below
For purposes of'tlits torn. an RPW is defined as a u ibutan that is not a T\W and that typically floc, year-round or has e ontinuous 1)mv at least 'seasonally'
(c.g. typicalh 3 months).
` Suppta-ting docunientution is presented in Section III.F.

SECTION ill: CV4A ANALYSIS
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNV1's
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNIN's. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete
Section III.A.1 and Section iIi.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a w•efland adjacent to a TNVd, complete Sections iII.A.1 and 2
and Section III.D.I.: other -wise, see Section IiI.B below.
1. TN NN'
identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent
CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND iTS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Ropanes have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non -navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPVI's), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year-round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section IiI.D.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section III.D.4.
A ii etland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPV4* requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents lite existence of a significant nexus bet" cell a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water; even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
if the waterbody° is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RP`'i', a JD will require additional data'to determine if the
wat.erbody has a significant nexus with a TN1i'. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines; for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section III.B.1 for
the tributary, Section III.B.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section IIl.B.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section III.0 below.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(f) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: Pick List
Drainage area: Pick List
Average annual rainfall: inches
Average annual snowfall: inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TN -W:
❑ 'Tributary flows directly into TNW.
❑ Tributary flows through Pick List tributaries before entering TNW,
Prt?icci waters are Pick List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are (Pick List river miles from RPW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from T'; W.
Project waters are Ick List aerial (s(raight) miles fi-ort RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
identifv flow route to TN. W5:
Tributary stream order, if known:
' Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding sw ales. ditches;. washcw. and erosional natures generally and in the and
West.
` Flow route can be described by identiliing. e.g.- t ibutary a, which flows through the rev;ew area, in flow into tributary h. which then Ilow•s Into TNW.

(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all thztapu)vZ
Tributary is: ❑ Natural
❑ Artificial (man-made). Explain:
❑ Manipulated (man -altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: feet
Average depth: feet
A\erage side slopes: Pick List.
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
❑ sill-, ❑ Sands ❑ Concrete
❑ Cobbles ❑ Gravel ❑ Muck
❑ Bedrock ❑ Vegetation. Type/% cover:
❑ Other. Explain:
Tributary condition stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain:
Presence of run/rifil e 'pool complexes. Explain:
Tributary geometry: Pick List
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): `%u
(c) Flow:
Tributary proN ides for: Fick List
Estimate average number of flow events in review area year: Fick Ust
Describe flow regime:
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: Pick List. Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Pick List. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed: _
Tributary has (check all that apply):
❑ Bed and banks
❑ OHWM6 (check all indicators that apply):
❑ clear, natural line impressed on the bank
❑
❑ changes in the character of soil
❑
❑ shelving
❑
❑ vegetation matted down, bent, or absent
❑
❑ leaf litter disturbed or washed away
❑
❑ sediment deposition
❑
❑ water staining
❑
❑ other (list):
❑ Discontinuous OHWM.7 Explain: .
the presence of litter and debris
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
the presence of wrack line
sediment sorting
scour
multiple observed or predicted flow events
abrupt change in plant community
if factors other than the OH WM vere used to determine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
❑ High Tide Line indicated by: D Mean High Water Marh indicated by:
❑ oil or scum line along shore objects ❑ survey to available datum:
❑ fine she]] or debris deposits (foreshore) ❑ physical markings;
❑ physical markings%characteristics ❑ vegetation lines'changes in vegetation types.
❑ tidal gauges
❑ other (list):
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g... hater color is clear. discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, eta).
Explain:
ldcntify specific pollutants, if known:
"A natural or man-made dtsconlinuin in the OHWM does nrn necessarih ,evei ,jurisdiction ie.g . where the swum temporanly flows underground. or v here
the OPIWIM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OH" M that is unrelated to the waterbndt'ti flow
regime I r g , 11ow occr ;,.rock outcrop or through a culvert ), Ifie agencies xv;ll loo): Inr indicators of flow alx,ve and below the break.
Ihid.

(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that appy):
❑ Riparian corridor. Characleri.sl' (type. average tiidth):
❑ Wetland fringe, Characteristics:
❑ Habitat fot:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fishispawn areas. Explain findings:
❑Otherensironmentally-sensitisesiecies. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatic -'wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
2. Characteristics of %,etlands adjacent to non-TMN' that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size: acres
Wetland type. Explain:
Wetland quality. Explain:
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non-TNW-
Flow is: Pick List. Explain:
Surface flow is: Pick List
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Pick List.. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non-TNW:
❑ Directly abutting
❑ Not directly abutting
❑ Discrete wetland hydrologic connection, Explain:
❑ Ecological connection. Explain:
❑ Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximitv (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are Pick List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: Pick List.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the Pick List floodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g.. water color is clear. brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general watershed
characteristics. etc.). Explain:
ldentity specific pollutants, if known:
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that appy):
❑ Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
❑ Vegetation type%percent cover. Explain:
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish'spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally -sensitive species. Explain findings.
❑ Aquatic./wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
All u•etland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis: Fick List
Approximately ( 1 acres in lotal are being cmisidered in the cumulative analysis.

For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (YM Size (it) acres) DITCCtIY abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being perfonned:
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATiON
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TN\V. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and/or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
"etlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent Aetland or between a tributary and the TNAV). Similar])-, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNV4', as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary; in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), ha%e the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TN Ws, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Docs the tributary, in combination with its adjacent �retlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW?
'Vote: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
I. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs_ Explain
findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section 111.1):
2, Significant nexus findings for non-RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non-RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNNN's. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section 111.13:
3. Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPNA'. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to
Section i11.D:
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/yVETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
TIIAT .APPLY):
1. TNNVs and Adjacent \Vetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
❑ TN\4's: linear feet width (.ft), Or, acres.
❑ Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
2. RP\Vs that flow directly or indirectly into TN\t's.
Tributaries ofTNWs where tributaries typically flow )ear -round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial: Wheeler Creek- is a large. 3r1 order perennial stream within an extensive coastal marsh system.
❑ I ributarics of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "scasonall\• (e.g.. typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data suppnnina this conclusion is provided at Section 111.13. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally:

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the reN ices, area (check all that apply):
® Tributary waters: 100 linear legit 40 w idth (ft).
❑ Other non -wetland waters: acres,
identify type(s) of waters:
3. Non-RP\\'sA that floes• directly or indirectly into TNV!'s.
❑ Waterbody that is not a TNN or an RPW. but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW. and it has a significant nexus with a
TNW isjurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the revicm area (check all that apply):
❑Tributary rvawrs: linear feet width (ft).
Other non -wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
4. Wetlands directly abutting an RP\V that flow directl) or indirectly into TN S.
Q Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
® Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically floe year-round. Proxtide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section iiI.D.2, abore. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW: No non jurisdictional areas observed between wetlands and RP\V.
❑ Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow '-seasonal]):." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section 111.13 and rationale in Section 111.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW:
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: <0.5 acres.
5. \Vctlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow, directly or indirectly into TNVPs.
❑ Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW. but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section IIi.C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
(. \Vetlands adjacent to non-R.PNN's that flow directly or indirectly into TN\r1's.
❑ Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in comhination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates forjurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
7. linpotindments of jurisdictional Aater•s.9
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
C] Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "% atcrs of the U.S.,— or
❑ Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1-6), or
❑ Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
ISOLATED jINTERSTATE OR INTRA -STATE] \'PATERS. INCLUDING 1SOLAi ED WETLANDS. TILE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF \VHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):t°
❑ which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
❑ from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
❑ A hich are or could be used for industrial purposes by indu .trics in interstate commerce.
❑ interstate isolated waters. Explain:
❑ Other factors. Explain:
Identify ,tiaier body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
'See Footnote « 3.
To compleic tht imalysis nler to the kej in SeC tion 111.D.6 of the Instructional Guidehook
10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts % iil elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
re%iew consistent "ith the process described in the Corpa'LPA Memorandum Regarding C'144 At7.lurisdirrion Follonvng Rapano.�.

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
❑ Iributary waters: linear feet width (11).
❑ Other non -wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
NON -JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CIIECK ALL THAT APPLY):
[] If potential wetlands were assessed within die review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
ReN iew area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
❑ Prior to the .Ian 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SM'ANCC:' the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
❑ Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
❑ Other: (explain, if not covered above):
Provide acreage estimates for non -jurisdictional tN atcrs in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i.e.. presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
judgment (check all that apply):
❑ Non -wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
❑ Lakesiponds: acres.
j] Other non -1A etland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the reviei+ area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, \, here such
a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
❑ yon -wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
❑ Lakes/ponds: acres.
❑ Other non -wetland vt atcrs: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
Maps. plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:
Data sheets prepared submitted by or on behalf of the applieant!consultant.
❑ Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable haters' study:
❑ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NH data.
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
U.S. Geological Survey map(sm
). Cite scale & quad nae:Sneads Ferri, NC 1:24000.
USDA Natural Resources Conservation SeT\ ice Soil Survey. Citation:Soil Surrey of Onslow County, NC.
National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name: Sneads Ferry, NC.
❑ Statc-Local wetland inventory map(s):
❑ FEMA f'IRM maps:
❑ 100 -year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
❑ Photographs: ❑ Aerial (Name & Date):
or ❑ Other (Name & Date):
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
Applicable/supporting case lath:
❑ Applicable%supporting !zcienlific literature:
❑ Other irtfortnation (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL CONIMENTS TO SL.PPORT JD:

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: T.I.P. BD -5103P (Onslow 226) City/County Onslow Sampling Date. 7/5/2011
Applicant/Owner, NCDOT State. NC Sampling Point. WA2
Investigator(s): Environmental Services, Inc. (RT) Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.). floodplain Local relief (concave, convex. none) flat Slope (%); 0-2%
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR T Lat. 34.56344 Long: -77.39111 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name Muckalee loam NWI classification: PSS/E2EM
Are climatic J hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ✓ No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ✓ No
Are Vegetation . Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ✓ No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ✓ No within a Wetland? Yes ✓ No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ✓ No
Wetland WA includes coastal wetland CWA.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimu n of two reouired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
_ Surface Water (Al)
_ Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
High Water Table (A2)
_ Aquatic Fauna (1313)
_ Drainage Patterns (B10)
✓ Saturation (A3)
_ Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR V)
_ Moss Trim Lines (616)
_ Water Marks (B1)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
_ Dry -Season Vater Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (62)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (133)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (64)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Iron Deposits (65)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks)
FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes
No -./ Depth (inches). n/a
Water Table Present? Yes v(No
Depth (inches): 4
Saturation Present? Yes ✓
No Depth (inches). 0
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ✓ No
includes capillary fringe)_
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic. and Gulf Coastal Plan Region - Interim Version

VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stralum {Piot sizes: 30' )
1
2
3
4 _
5
6.
7.
Sampling Point: WA2
Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
% Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL. FACW, or FAC: 4 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 4 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
- — That Are OBL, FACW. or FAC: 100 (A/B)
0 = Total Cover
Sapling Stratum ( 30' )
1. Salix nigra 15 yes OBL
2
3.-
4.
5.
6
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x 4 =
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals:
(A) (B)
Remarks: (If observed. list morphological adaptations below)
US .Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Pian Region - Interim Version
Prevalence Index = B/A =
7.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
15 =Total Cover
Shrub Stratum ( 30' )
t� Dominance Test is >50%
1. Juncus roemaerianus
50
ves OBL
_ Prevalence Index is X3.0'
2. Tvoha latifolia
30
Yes OBL
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
3 Rubus betulifolius 10 no FAC
4
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present.
5.
6.
7
Definitions of Vegetation Strata:
90
= Total Cover
Herb Stratum ( 30' )
Tree - Woody plants. excluding woody vines,
1 Juncus effusus
20
ves FACW
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and
2. Arundinaria aigantea
5
Ves FACW
3 in. (7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast
height (L)BH).
3.
4.
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
5.
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
6,
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
7.
Shrub - Woody plants. excluding woody vines.
8.
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
9
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
10,
11
herbaceous vines, regardless of size. Includes
12.
woody plants, except woody vines, less than
25
= Total Cover
approximately 3 ft (1 m) in height.
Woody Vine Stratum { 30' )
1
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
2.
3
4.
Hydrophytic
5
Vegetation
0
= 1olal Cover
Present? Yes No
Remarks: (If observed. list morphological adaptations below)
US .Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Pian Region - Interim Version

SOIL
to the depth needed to document the indicator or
Sampling Point: WA2
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type Loc Texture Remarks
0-20+ 10YR 2/1 100 SL
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. `Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matr
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric SoiIs':
_ Histosol(Al)
Hist c Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
_ Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T. U)
5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
Muck Presence (AS) (LRR U)
_ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Laver (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U) _ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U) _
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
_ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O) _
Reduced Verlic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) _
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, 5, T)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3) _
Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
(MLRA 1538)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) _
Red Parent Material (TF2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8) _
Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) (LRR T, U)
_ Marl (F10) (LRR U) _
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T)
2Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
wetland hydrology must be present.
_ Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151)
_ Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 1508)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
_ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 1530)
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ✓ No
US Arrny Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Interim Version

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/site: T.I.P. BD -5103P (Onslow 226) CityrCounty: Onslow Sampling Date: 7/5/2011
Applicant/Owner: NCDOT State: NC Sampling Point: WA2
Investigator(s): Environmental Services, Inc. (RT) Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope. terrace, etc.): floodplain Local relief (concave, convex. none). flat Slope (%): 0-2%
Subregion (LRR or MLRA). LRR T Lat: 34.56344 Long: -77.39111 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Muckalee loam NWI classification.
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ✓ No (If no, explain in Remarks )
Are Vegetation ✓ , Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ✓ No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ✓ No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No ✓ V/within a Wetland. Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No ✓
mowed roadside
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
_ Surface Water (Al)
_ Water -Stained Leaves (69)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (68)
_ High Water Table (A2)
_ Aquatic Fauna (1313)
_ Drainage Patterns (1310)
_ Saturation (A3)
_ Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
_ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
_ Water Marks (B1)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (132)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (03)
,_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (133)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Iron Deposits (B5)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
Depth (inches): n/a
Water Table Present? Yes No
Depth (inches): >20
Saturation Present? Yes No
Depth (inches): >20
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks -
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantis and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Interim Version

VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: WA2
6.
7
0 = Total Cover
Shrub Stratum ( 30' )
1.
2-
3
4.
5.
6.
7.
0 = Total Cover
Herb Stratum ( 30' )
1 Festuca spo. 90 yes FAC
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
r.
8.
9
10.
11.
12.
Vu = i otai Cover
Woody Vine Stratum ( 30' }
1 Smilax bonanox 20 yes FAC
2 Wisteria frutescens 20 yes FACW
3
4.
5
40 - Total Cover
Remarks: (If observed list morphological adaptations below)
Mowed roadside
US Army Corps of Enameers
Prevalence Index = B1A =
(A)
(B)
i'A/B)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Dominance Test is >50%
_ Prevalence Index is 53.0'
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
(B)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present.
Definitions of Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and
3 in. (7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast
height (DBH).
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7 6 cm) DBH
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size. Includes
woody plants, except woody vines, less than
approximately 3 ft (1 m) in height.
Woody Vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Reg on - Interim Version
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot sizes: 30'
) % Cover Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1
That Are OBL. FACW, or FAC-. 3
2.
Total Number of Dominant
3.
Species Across All Strata: 3
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
5.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100
6.
7.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
0 = Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
Sapling Stratum ( 30' )
OBL species x 1 =
1.
FACW species x 2 =
2.
FAC species x 3 =
3.
FACU species x 4 =
4
UPL species x 5 =
5.
Column Totals: (A)
6.
7
0 = Total Cover
Shrub Stratum ( 30' )
1.
2-
3
4.
5.
6.
7.
0 = Total Cover
Herb Stratum ( 30' )
1 Festuca spo. 90 yes FAC
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
r.
8.
9
10.
11.
12.
Vu = i otai Cover
Woody Vine Stratum ( 30' }
1 Smilax bonanox 20 yes FAC
2 Wisteria frutescens 20 yes FACW
3
4.
5
40 - Total Cover
Remarks: (If observed list morphological adaptations below)
Mowed roadside
US Army Corps of Enameers
Prevalence Index = B1A =
(A)
(B)
i'A/B)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Dominance Test is >50%
_ Prevalence Index is 53.0'
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
(B)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present.
Definitions of Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and
3 in. (7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast
height (DBH).
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7 6 cm) DBH
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size. Includes
woody plants, except woody vines, less than
approximately 3 ft (1 m) in height.
Woody Vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Reg on - Interim Version

SOIL Sampling Point. WA2
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc Texture Remarks
0-4 10YR 311 100 S
4-18 10YR 5/3 100 S
18-20+ 10YR 3/1 100 S
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lininq, M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
_ Idistosol (Al)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
_ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR 0)
_ Reduced Verfic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20)
_ Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
(MLRA 1536)
_ 5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Red Parent Material (TF2)
_ Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) (LRR T, U)
_ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
_ Marl (F10) (LRR U)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 15 1)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T)
'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
wetland hydrology must be present.
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O; S)
_ Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 1506)
Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1719) (MLRA 149A)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A,
153C, 153D)
_ Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydric
Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks
US Army Corps of Engineef s Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Interim Version

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: T.I.P. BD -5103P (Onslow 226) City/County: Onslow Sampling Date: 7/5/2011
ApplicanVOwner NCDOT State: NC Sampling Point CWB2
Investigator(s): Environmental Services, Inc. (RT) Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace. etc.): marsh Local relief (concave. convex, none): concave Slope (%): 0-2%
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR T Lat. 34.56344 Long: -77.39111 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name. Muckalee loam NWI classification: E2EM
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ✓ No (If no. explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ✓ No
Are Vegetation . Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ✓ No
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ✓ No within a Wetland? Yes ✓ No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ✓ No
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
_ Surface Water (Al) _
Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
High Water Table (A2) _
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
_ Drainage Patterns (810)
✓ Saturation (A3) _
Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
_ Moss Trim Lines (816)
_ Water Marks (61) _
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (62) _
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (133) _
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (64) _
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Iron Deposits (135) _
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137) _
Other (Explain in Remarks)
✓ FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No ✓
Depth (inches). n/a
Water Table Present? Yes ✓ No
Depth (inches): 2
Saturation Present? Yes ✓ No
Depth (inches): 0
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes `� No
(includes capillary fringe
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available.
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Interim Version

VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point: WB2
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below)
US Army Cops of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Interim Version
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot sizes: 30'
) % Cover
Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1.
That Are OBL. FACW, or FAC. 4 (A)
2.
Total Number of Dominant
3
Species Across All Strata: 4 (B)
4
Percent of Dominant Species
5.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (AM)
6.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7.
0
= Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
Sapling Stratum ( 30' )
OBL species x 1 =
1.
FACW species x2=
2.
FAC species x3=
3.
FACU species x 4 =
4.
UPL species x 5 =
5.
Column Totals: (A) (B)
6.
Prevalence Index = BIA =
7.
0
Total
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
= Cover
-/ Dominance Test is >50%
Shrub Stratum ( 30' )
1. Mvrica cerifera
15
Ves FAC
_ Prevalence Index is s3.0'
2
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
3.
4
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present.
5
6.
7
Definitions of Vegetation Strata:
15
= Total Cover
Herb Stratum ( 30' )
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
1. Juncus roemerianus
40
V OBL
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and
2. Tvoha latifolia
40
ves OBL
3 in. (7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast
height (DBH).
3.
4
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines.
5.
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
6,
than 3 in. (7 6 cm) DBH.
7.
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines.
8.
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
9.
10
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
11
herbaceous vines, regardless of size. Includes
12.
woody plants, except woody vines, less than
80
= Total Cover
approximately 3 ft (1 m) in height
Woody Vine Stratum ( 30' )
1
Woody Vine - All woodv vines. regardless of height.
2.
3
4.
Hydrophytic
5•
Vegetation
'�
0
= Total Cover
Present? Yes No
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below)
US Army Cops of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Interim Version

SOIL Sampling Point WB2
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix
Redox Features
(inches)_ Color (moist) %
Color (moist) % Type Loc Texture Remarks
0-20+ 10YR 2/1 100
SL
'Type-. C=Concentration, D=De letion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.
ZLocation: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U) _
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U) _
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
Black Histic (A3)
_ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O) _
Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) _
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F 19) (LRR P, S, T)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3) _
Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (1720)
_ Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
(MLRA 1536)
5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) _
Red Parent Material (TF2)
_ Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
_ Redox Depressions (F8) _
Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) (LRR T. U)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
_ Marl (F10) (LRR U) _
Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T)
;Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
_ Umbric Surface (1713) (LRR P, T, U)
wetland hydrology must be present.
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (Si) (LRR O, S)
_ Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 150B)
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
_ Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches).
Hydric
Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic ano Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Interim Version

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site T.I.P. BD -5103P (Onslow 226) CityrCounty: Onslow Sampling Date. 7/5/2011
Applicant/Owner: NCDOT State: NC Sampling Point. CWB2
Investiaator(s): Environmental Services, Inc. (RT) Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.). floodplain Local relief (concave. convex, none): flat Slope (%). 0-2%
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR T Lat. 34.56344 Long. -77.39111 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Muckalee loam NWI classification-
Are
lassificationAre climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ✓ No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation . Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ✓ No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks )
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ✓ No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No ✓ within a Wetland? Yes No V/
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No ✓
Remarks:
mowed roadside
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
_ Surface Water (Al)
_ Water -Stained Leaves (69)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
_ High Water Table (A2)
_ Aquatic Fauna (B13)
_ Drainage Patterns (1310)
_ Saturation (A3)
_ Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
_ Moss Trim Lines (1316)
_ Water Marks (B1)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (B2)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (63)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (134)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Iron Deposits (B5)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (87)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
Depth (inches): n/a
Water Table Present? Yes No
Depth (inches): >20
Saturation Present? Yes No
Depth (inches): >20
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No ✓
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well. aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps or Engineers Atlantic and Gull Coastal Plain Region - Interim Version

VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: CwB2
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below)
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic ano Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Interim Version
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot sizes: 30'
) % Cover
Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1. Pinus taeda
20
Yes FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 5 (A)
2. Liquidambar styraciflua
30
yes FAC
Total Number of Dominant
3
Species Across All Strata: 7 (B)
4
Percent of Dominant Species
5.
That Are OBL. FACW, or FAC: 71 (AIB)
6.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7.
50
= Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
Sapling Stratum ( 30' )
OBL species x 1 =
1.
FACW species x2=
2.
FAC species x 3 =
3.
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
4.
5.
Column Totals: (A) (B)
6.
Prevalence Index = B/A =
7.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Shrub Stratum ( 30' )
= Total Cover
✓ Dominance Test is >50%
1. JuniDerus Virciinlana
30
yes FACU
_ Prevalence Index is 53.0'
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
2. Rubus betulifolius 10 yes FAC
3.
4
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present.
5.
6.
7.
Definitions of Vegetation Strata:
40
= Total Cover
Herb Stratum ( 30' )
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
1. Pteridium aauilinum
20
yes FAC
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and
2.
3 in (7 6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast
height (DBH).
3.
4.
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines.
5•
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
6.
than 3 in (7.6 cm) DBH.
7.
8
Shrub - Woody plants. excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
9.
10.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants. including
11.
herbaceous vines, regardless of size. Includes
12
woody plants, except woody vines, less than
20
= Total Cover
approximately 3 ft (1 m) in height
Woody Vine Stratum ( 30' )
1 Smilax bonanox
5
yes FAC
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height
2 Vitis rotundifolia
10
yes FAC
3
4.
Hydrophytic
5.
Vegetation
15
= Total Cover
Present? Yes No
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below)
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic ano Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Interim Version

SOIL Sampling Point. CWB2
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Tol erture Remarks
0-4 10YR 3/1 100 S
4-18 10YR 5/3 100 S
18-20+ 10YR 3/1 100 S
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. ZLocation: PL=Pore Lininq, M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
_ Histosol (A1)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
_ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O)
_ Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20)
_ Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
(MLRA 1538)
_ 5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Red Parent Material (TF2)
_ Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) (LRR T, U)
_ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
_ Marl (F10) (LRR U)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA IS 1)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR 0, P, T)
3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
wetland hydrology must be present.
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)
_ Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Reduced Verlic (F 18) (MLRA 150A, i50B)
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F 19) (MLRA 149A)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
_ Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydric
Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks
US Army Coips o1 Engmeeis Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Interim Version

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Projecvsite: T.I.P. BD -5103P (Onslow 226) City/County: Onslow
Applicant/Owner: NCDOT State: NC
Investigator(s)- Environmental Services, Inc. (RT) Section, Township, Range.
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): marsh Local relief (concave. convex, none). flat Slope (%): 0-2%
Subregion (LRR or MLRA)- LRR T Lat 34.56344 Long, -77.39111 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Muckalee loam NWI classification: E2EM
Are climatic ! hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ✓ No (if no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation . Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ✓ No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
Sampling Date: 7/5/2011
Sampling Point CWC1
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ✓ No
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ✓ No
within a Wetland? Yes ✓ No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ✓ No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (66)
_ Surface Water (Al)-
✓ Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
High Water Table (A2)
_ Aquatic Fauna (B13)
_ Drainage Patterns (B10)
✓ Saturation (A3)
_ Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
_ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
y Water Marks (61)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (132)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
✓ Drift Deposits (63)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (64)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Iron Deposits (135)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes
No Depth (inches). n/a
Water Table Present? Yes ✓
No Depth (inches): 5
Saturation Present? Yes ✓
. No Depth (inches) surface
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes `�
No
(includes capillary frinoe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well aerial photos. previous inspections), if available:
Remarks-
I
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Interim Version

VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point CWC1
0 = Total Cover
Herb Stratum ( 30' )
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot sizes, 30'
) % Cover Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1.
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and
3 in. (7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast
height (DSH).
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A)
2.
3.
Total Number of Dominant
3
Species Across All Strata: 2 (B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
--
5
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B)
6.
6,
Prevalence Index worksheet;
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
7.
0 = Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply bv:
Sapling Stratum ( 30' )
Shrub - Woody plants. excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height
OBL species x 1 =
1.
FACW species x 2 =
2.
10.
FAC species x 3 =
3,
FACU species x 4 =
4.
UPL species x 5 =
5
Column Totals: (A) (B)
6.
approximately 3 ft (1 m) in height.
Woody Vine Stratum ( 30' )
Prevalence Index = B/A =
7.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
0
=Total Cover
✓ Dominance Test is >50%
Shrub Stratum ( 30' )
1
4,
_ Prevalence Index is <3 0'
2
Hydrophytic
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
3.
I
4
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
=Total Cover
Present? Yes No
be present.
5.
6.
7.
Definitions of Vegetation Strata:
0 = Total Cover
Herb Stratum ( 30' )
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
1. Juncus roemerianus
30
Ves OBL
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and
3 in. (7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast
height (DSH).
2 Cladium iamaicense 60 yes OBL
3.
4.
Sapling - Woody plants. excluding woody vines,
--
5.
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
6,
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
7.
8.
Shrub - Woody plants. excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height
_
9.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
10.
11.
herbaceous vines, regardless of size. Includes
12.
woody plants, except woody vines. less than
90
= Total Cover
approximately 3 ft (1 m) in height.
Woody Vine Stratum ( 30' )
1
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
2
3
4,
Hydrophytic
6
I
Vegetation
✓
0
=Total Cover
Present? Yes No
Remarks: (If observed list morphological adaptations below)
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Interim Version

SOIL Sampling Point CWC1
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Calor (moist) % Type Loc _ Texture Remarks
0-6 10YR 3/2 100 Muck
6-9 10YR 3/1 100 S
9-20+ 10YR 3/2 100 Muck
`Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (88) (LRR S, T, U)
_ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
Hrstic Epipedon (A2)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Loamy Mucky Mineral (FI) (LRR 0)
_ Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (172)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20)
_ Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
(MLRA 153B)
5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Red Parent Material (TF2)
_ Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) (LRR T, U)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
_ Marl (F10) (LRR U)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T)
31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
wetland hydrology must be present.
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)
_ Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 150B)
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (1720) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
_ Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type.
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Interim Version

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM —Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: T.I.P. BD -5103P (Onslow 226) City/County OnSIOw
Applicant/Owner: NCDOT State: NC
Investigator(s), Environmental Services, Inc. (RT) Section, Township. Range.
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): floodplain Local relief (concave. convex, none): flat
Subregion (LRR or MLRA) LRR T Lat 34.56344 Long -77.39111
Sampling Date. 7/5/2011
Sampling Point: CWC1
Slope (%): 0-2%
Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Muckalee loam NWI classification:
Are climatic 1 hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ✓ No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ✓ , Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes _
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
✓ No
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ✓ No
✓ Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
V/within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks:
mowed roadside
HYDROLOGY
vvetiano nyorotogy moicators:
>econgary moicators immimum of two regturec
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (86)
_ Surface Water (Al)
_ Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
High Water Table (A2)
_ Aquatic Fauna (613)
_ Drainage Patterns (1310)
_ Saturation (A3)
_ Marl Deposits (815) (LRR U)
_ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Water Marks (131)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (132)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (83)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
Iron Deposits (B5)
_ Thin Muck. Surface (C7)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations: -7,
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): nla
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): >20
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): >20 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No ✓
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge. monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
US Aimy Corps of Engineers Allantic and Gurl Coastal Plain Region - Interim Version

VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point: CWC1
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Culf Coastal Plain Region - Interim Vernon
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot sizes. 30'
) % Cover Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1.
That Are OBL, FACW. or FAC 2 (A)
2
Total Number of Dominant
3.
Species Across All Strata 3 (B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
5.
100
That Are OBL, FACW. or FAC: (A/B)
6
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7
0 = Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
Sapling Stratum ( 30' )
OBL species x 1 =
1,
FACW species x2=
2.
FAC species x 3 =
3
FACU species x 4 =
4.
UPL species x 5 =
5.
Column Totals. (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
7.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
= Total Cover
✓
Shrub Stratum ( 30' )
Dominance Test is >50%
1. Rosa multiflora
30 yes UPL
_ Prevalence Index is 53.0'
2.
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
3.
4.
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present.
5.
6.
7.
Definitions of Vegetation Strata:
30 = Total Cover
Herb Stratum ( 30' )
Tree - Woody plants. excluding woody vines,
1.
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and
2.
3 in (7 6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast
height (DBH)
3.
4
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines.
5
approximately 20 It (6 m) or more in height and less
6.
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
7.
$
Shrub - Woody plants. excluding woody vines,
9.
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
10
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
11
herbaceous vines. regardless of size Includes
12.
woody plants, except woody vines, less than
approximately 3 ft (1 m) in height
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum ( 30' )
1. Smilax bonanox
20 yes FAC
Woody Vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
2. Wisteria frutescens
20 Ves FACW
3
4
Hydrophytic
5
Vegetation
✓
40 - Total Cover
Present? Yes No
Remarks: (If observed. list morphological adaptations below).
Moved roadside
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Culf Coastal Plain Region - Interim Vernon

SOIL
Sampling Point: CWC1
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % TyDe Loc Texture Remarks
0-4 10YR 3/1 100 S
4-14 10YR 4/3 100
14-20+ 10YR 3/1 100
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_ Histosol (Al)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
_ Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
_ 5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
_ Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
_ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (1,ALRA 150A)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T. U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
S
S
educed Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. ZLocation: PL=Pore Linina, M=Matrix
Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151)
_ Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 1508)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
_ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
Hydric Soil Present? Yes
No ✓
US Arany Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Interim Version
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
_ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
_ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O)
_ Reduced Vedic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
(MLRA 1536)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Red Parent Material (TF2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) (LRR T, U)
_ Mari (F10) (LRR U)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Depleted Ochric (F 11) (M LRA 151)
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR 0, P, T)
'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
wetland hydrology must be present.
Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151)
_ Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 1508)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
_ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
Hydric Soil Present? Yes
No ✓
US Arany Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Interim Version

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: 7/s�;l
Project/Site: 3 J'
Latitude: �L SE ;`f`f
Evaluator: rr' `,,_„ , , . ,.
County: .',
Longitude: 7 ?. 3
Total Points:
least intermittent
Stream Determination (circle one)
Other
Stream is at _'> I
Ephemeral Intermittent+.:Perenniab
e.g. Quad hfame: )r e_J.l
if;? 19 orperennial if z 30`
=
i
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal =_-L Z
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
18- Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
.3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
: _P
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
16. Organic debris lines or piles
1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
17
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
i..Q
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
01)
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
,.0
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes
s artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = q )
12. Presence of Baseflow
0 1
2
(3�
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
7.1.5 > 1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0 0.5
3
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
2
1.5
17, Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
1
C. Biology (Subtotal = I. L--)
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2`
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
"D
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
(D)
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
_1.5%
23. Crayfish
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
25. Algae
01)
0.5
1 1 1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75;
OBL = 1. Other = 0
"perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
ry
Notes:
Sketch:

t'JS.ACF .AID# D \ Q _ Site # (indicate on attached map) i
M1 STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: NC-DO
7 2. Evaluator's name: s 1'f ��...•=6 /!
3. Date ofevaluation: 7���1 4. Time of evaluation: I /"'-1
5. ;lame of stream: 6. River basin: glut 11"k --
7.
1"L7. Approximate drainage area: 8. Stream order:
9. Length of reach evaluated: /L` b Ef 10. County: C<. /mow
11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees. 12. Subdivision name (if any):
Latitude (ex 34 872312): 3 e4 - S 3V{ Longitude (ex. -77.556611): -% 7. 3 1
Method location determined (circle): GPS Topo Sheet (11rtho (Aerial) Photo/G Other GIS Other
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and lar marks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
14. Proposed channel work (if any): 773 P
15. Recent weather conditions:
16. Site conditions at time of visit: /mcwa rr-'1f' d' f
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known:
_Section 10 _Tidal Waters _Essential Fisheries Habitat
_Trout Waters _Outstanding Resource Waters _
Nutrient Sensitive Waters _Water Supply Watershed (I-IV)
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES (N.f yes; estimate the water surface area:
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? (9D NO
20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey?LYE NO
21. Estimated watershed land use: .30 % Residential
u % Commercial _% Industrial _% Agricultural
5C% Forested
_% Cleared / Logged % Other (
22. Bankfull width:
23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): t 7
24. Channel slope down center of stream: Flat (0 to 2%)
_Gentle (2 to 4%) _!Moderate (4 to 10%) _Steep (> 10%)
25. Channel sinuosity: Straight X -Occasional bends
_Frequent meander _Very sinuous _Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain. vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points
to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of tite stream reach under evaluation. If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions. enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section. \Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest), the stream may be divided into srnaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must ranee between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): � J Comments: bJkoz('- ;s c_ ('k.r,, r k r� , 'e lei(,'% lJ
Evaluator's Signature ��"�L"~ J 4'f Date A 0
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
galhering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to male a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change- %ersion 06.-03. To Comment please call 919-876-8441 x 20.

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
1, lhesc characteristics are nol assessed in c����stal streams.
CHARACTERISTICS
R
vco JE
Coastalj
lu
Presence of flow /persistent pools in stream
1
no flo% or saturation = 0, stmng flow = max points)
0-5
0-4
0-5
Evidence of past human alteration
(extensive alteration = 0; noOteration = max points)
0-6
0 - 5
0-5
3
Riparian zone
(no bufi
er 7 0, contiguous, wide buffer max points)
0-6
0-4
0-5
4
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
(extensive discharges = 0, no dischar es = riiaxpoint,
0-5
0-4
0- 4
Groundwater discharge
0-3
'3
06 discharge = 0; springs. seeps, wetlands, etc, max points)
o
4
4
0-4
rA,
0
Presence of adjacent floodplain
0-4
EO - 4
0-2
(-no floodplain = 0; extensive floodplain = max points)
7
Entrenchment / floodplain access
(deepiy entrenched. = fO; frequent flooding = max points)
0-5
0-4
8
Presence of adjacent wetlands
0-6
0-4
0- 1
0-2
J (no wetlands =.O; lar geadjacent wetlands = max points)
9
Channel sinuosity
(extensive channelization natural meander = max points)
0-5
0--4
0
#4
10
Sediment input
0-5
0-4
0 -
(extensive deposition= 0: little or no sediment = max points)
11
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
WA*.
0-4
{fine,e, homogenous = 0, Wnge, diverse sizes = max points)
.1 ;'.- ,
0-5
Evidence of channel incision or widening
0-5
0-4
0-5
(deeply incised = 0. stable bed & banks = max points)
33
Presence of major bank failures
0-5
0-i
0-5
(severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = max points)
14
Root depth and density on banks
0-3
0-4
0-5
(no visible roots = 0. dense roots throughout = max points)
15
Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
(substantial impact =0-, no evidence = max points)
0-5
0-4
0-5 1
16
Presence of riffle-pool/ripple-pool complexes
I
(no riffles/ripples or pools = 0; well-developed = max points)
0-3
0-5
0-6
17
Habitat complexity
0-6
0-6
0-6
(little or no habitat = 0; frequent varied habitats = max poitits)
23
18
Canopy coverage over streambed
0-5
0-5
0-5
r.
(no shading vegetation = 0; continuous Canopy = max points)
19
Substrate embeddedness
(deeply embedded = 0; loose structure = max)
0--4
0-4
20
Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
0-4
0-5
0-5
2
(no evidence 0; common. numerous !Ypes = max points)
-
21
Presence of amphibians
0-4
0-4
(no evidence 0, common, numerous types = max
22
r3l
Presence ence of fish
(jig evidence 0, common, tlumc�rcius types = max points)
0-4
0-4
Q-4
2
Evidence of wildlife use
0-6
0-5
0-5
{nnmax points} e = 0 abundant evidence
Y -49"M 4,
rlo,tjl 40010", 90 Ksqblc
!fill
14U
)00
rOT A 1, SCO R E f a I sx, enter o P I i i t [vj-,•L
1, lhesc characteristics are nol assessed in c����stal streams.

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: Onlsow 226 -Wheeler Creek Rd - SR1557 City/County:­ oos�-J-✓ Sampling Date: 01/25/2012
Applicant/Owner: NCDOT State: NC Sampling Point:
Investigator(s): S. Mathis Section, Township, Range: SneadS Ferry
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%); 0-1 %
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR T Lat: 34.334879N Long; -77.232903W Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: MUcklee Loam NWI classification: PSS1 Rd
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ✓ No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ✓ No
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ✓ No 1( No
within a Wetland? Yes
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ✓ No
Remarks
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reouired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that aooly)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (66)
_ Surface Water (Al)
_ Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
v High Water Table (A2)
_ Aquatic Fauna (1313)
_ Drainage Patterns (1310)
Saturation (A3)
_ Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
_ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
_ Water Marks (61)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (B2)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (133)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Iron Deposits (135)
✓ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (67)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes
No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes ✓
No Depth (inches): 9"
Saturation Present? Yes ✓
No Depth (inches): 3"
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ✓ No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks: .
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Interim Version

VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: i"L0 ?
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below)
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Interim Version
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot sizes: 30' radius )
% Cover
Species?
Status
Number of Dominant Species
1. Pinus taeda (Loblolly Pinel
20
yes
FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 6 (A)
2. Liquidambar styraciflua (Sweet Gum)
10
yes
FAC
Total Number of Dominant
3. Acer rubrum (Red Maple)
5
no
FAC
Species Across All Strata: 8 (B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
5.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 75% (A/B)
6.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7
35
= Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
Sapling Stratum ( )
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
1.
FACW species 15 x 2 = 30
2,
FAC species 60 x 3 = 180
3,
FACU species 0 x 4 =
4.
UPL species 2 x 5 = 10
5.
Column Totals: 77 (A) 220 (B)
6.
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.86
7.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
= Total Cover
✓
Shrub Stratum ( 30' radius )
Dominance Test is >50%
1. Quercus palustris (Pin Oak)
10
yes
FACW
✓ Prevalence Index is 153.01
2. Ilbex vomitoria (Yauoon)
8
yes
FAC
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
3. Lobelia feavana (Loblolly Bav)
5
no
FACW
4. Myrica cerifera (Wax Myrtle)
5
no
FAC
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present.
5
6.
7.
Definitions of Vegetation Strata:
28 = Total Cover
Herb Stratum ( 15' radius )
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
1. Ilex vomitoria (Yaupon)
2
v
FAC
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and
2. Quercus marilandica (Blackjack Oak)
2
yes
UPL
3 in. (7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast
height (DISH).
3.
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
4•
5.
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
6,
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
7.
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
$
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
9.
10.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
11.
herbaceous vines, regardless of size. Includes
12.
woody plants, except woody vines, less than
4
= Total Cover
approximately 3 ft (1 m) in height.
Woody Vine Stratum ( 15' radius )
1. Smilax clauca (Cat Greenbrier)
10
yes
FAC
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
2. lonicera x bella
3
yes
3.
4.
Hydrophytic
5.
Vegetation
13
= Total Cover
Present? Yes No
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below)
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Interim Version

SOIL
Sampling Point: �' � > )
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
Matrix
Histosol (Al)
Redox Features
(inches)
Color (moist)
%
Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-1
10YR2/1
100
muck Muck
1-9
10YR2/1
100
loam Mucky modified
9-15+
10YR2/1
100
loam loam
Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. `Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
Histosol (Al)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
_ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
Black Histic (A3)
_ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O)
_ Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
— Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20)
_ Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
(MLRA 153B)
5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Red Parent Material (TF2)
_ Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) (LRR T, U)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
_ Marl (F10) (LRR U)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A) Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
wetland hydrology must be present.
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)
_ Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 1506)
Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA
149A, 153C, 153D)
_ Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region – Interim Version

NO SURVEY REQUIRED FORM
PROJECT INFORMATION
Pi-oject No: Onslow 226
JK13S No: 45349.1.16
F.A. No. BR7_-1557(1)
Federal (LISA CE) Permit Reguirrd?
Project Tracking No tlnteraal Use/
10-01-0007
Counh: Onslow
Dowment: ?
Funding: ® State ❑ f=ederal
® Yes ❑ No Permit Tjpe Nationwide 3, Water Quality
Certification 3687, CAMA
General Permit 2300
Pryo jest Description:
NCDOT Division 3 intends to replace Bridge No. 226 on SR 1557, Wheeler Creek Road, over Wheeler
Creek. The bridge replacement is currently proposed within existing ROW. The total project length is
estimated at 350 feet (106.68 meters) including 150 -foot approaches at each end of a new 100 -foot long
structure. The APE is eery roughly estimated at .964 acres (39 hectares) based on an assumed 60 -foot ROW.
Traffic flow will be maintained with an off-site detour during construction.
SUMMARY OF CULTURAL RESOURCES REVIEW
Brief de-raiption of rerienv actit ities, results of review, and conadusionr.
A review of the maps and files archived at the North Carolina Office of State Archaeology was conducted on
January 7, 2010. While no previously identified archaeological sites are recorded in the immediate vicinity of
the proposed bridge replacement. No further archaeological investigations are recommended for the project
as currently proposed. '11iis project should be considered to be compliant with Section 106 and NCGS 121-
12(a).
Brief Explanation of why the availableirfornration pmtrides a reliable bcuisfor naronabfy predicting that their are no
unidentfied historic properties in the APE:
Despite a paucity of known archaeological resources in the immediate vicinity of the bridge replacement
project, numerous archaeological resources abound along the coast in both terrestrial and marine settings
along the New River and Stump Sound. An examination of the soil survey for Onslow County suggests that
the majority of the proposed APF mill fall within disturbed Muckalee loam soils in the existing ROW; areas
very unlikely to contain NRI IP -eligible archaeological sites. However, because of the potential in
surrounding areas, further archaeological review will be required should the proposed project change or
earth -disturbing activities (including temporary easements) extend outside existing ROW.
SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION
See attached: Project location map; aerial photograph of the B-4781 study area (Bridge No. 226); detail of the
Sneads Ferry, NC (1952) 7.5 -minute topographic map; NRCS web soil survey information
O)tti)://websoflsur-,,ey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/).
FINDING BY NCDOT CULTURAL RESOURCES PROFESSIONAL NO SURVEY REQUIRED
iicC HAEC)LC1GY HISTORIC AIiCHi7"FC7'URE (GRCLF ON
c
NCDOT Cultural Resources Specialist 1).:te
',NoSurve} Rryurrrd' jormJor Arno+ tro-ror oor. Pro ec!+ a� 0 aif,rJrr. the .U!!• Nrogrammmtr rffrremon!
N(IM Ar,hordogi' A- Hi sons- Arc fire: wrr Groups
14

Project Tracking .Wo. (Internal Use)
10-01-0007
NO PREHISTORIC OR HISTORIC PROPERTIES PRESENT FORM
PROJECT INFORMATION
Project No: B-4781
WBS No: 38552.1.1
FA. No: BRZ-1557(1)
Federal (t18.4CE) Permit Required?
County.- Onslow
Document: CE
Funding: ❑ State
❑ Yes ❑ No Permit Type:
Project Description:
Replace Bridge No. 226 over a branch of the New River on SR 1557 (Wheeler Creek Road)
SUN1MA RY OF FINDINGS
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) revic"d the subject project and determined:
Historic Architecturei'Undscapes
® There are no National Register -listed or Study Listed properties within the project's area of potential
effects.
There are no properties less than fifty years old which are considered to meet Criteria Consideration G
within the project's area of potential effects.
❑ There are no properties within the project's area of potential effects.
® There are properties over fifty years old within the area of potential effects, but they do not meet the
criteria for listing on the National Register.
® All properties greater than 50 years of age located in the APE have been considered and all compliance for
historic architecture with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and GS 121-12(a) has been
completed for this project.
Archaeology
❑ There are no National Register -listed or Study Listed properties within the project's area of potential
effects.
❑ No subsurface archaeological investigations are required for this project.
❑ Subsurface investigations did not reveal the presence of any archaeological resources.
❑ Subsurface investigations did not reveal the presence of any archaeological resources considered eligible
for the National Register.
❑ All identified Archaeological sites located within the APE have been considered and all compliance for
archaeological resources with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and GS 121-12(a) has
been completed for this project.
"No Historic Propertin Pmrnt "jour fw Mmr Trarrportaiior. Projrw a: Qualified ir, the 2007 Progwmmafk Agrrernrnt.
NCD07 Archaeology & Historic Archiuertun Groups

10-01-0007
SUMMARY OF CULTURAL RESOURCES REVIEW
Brief description of review activities, results of review, and conclusions:
Review of HPO quad maps, historic designations roster, and indexes was undertaken on 8 January 2010.
Based on this review, there were no existing NR, SL, LD, DE, or SS properties in the Area of Potential
Effects. The CRS also accessed Onslow County GLS and tax records online that same day. Based on this
information, there appeared to be properties within the APE that were built prior to 1960. A historic
architecture site visit was recommended.
During the site visit the CRS observed two properties over fifty years of age within the APE. Both
properties are altered examples of small cottages that arc typical of those found throughout rural areas of
the state and do not meet any of the criteria for National Register listing.
Signed:
Representative, HPO
HPO/OSA Comments:
"No Historic Properties Fmjew `for* for Moor Tramportwim Proje= to Qw4f4d in tmr 200; Prorrmn otic Ar verrew
NCWT AnAotokV d Howie Ardsiircmt Groups
Date

Giles, Jon W
From: Petersen, Shane C
Sent: Monday, May 21, 2012 10:20 AM
To: Giles, Jon W
Cc: Mathis, Stonewall D; Overton, Brian P; Wilkerson, Matt T
Subject: RE: Onslow 226 Bridge Replacement
Thanks, Jon. I really appreciate the follow-up and the detailed map is excellent!
Based on the mapping and the information obtained from the original review, I think the original "no survey required"
call can stand. The proposed actions outside existing ROW appear to still be within areas mapped as Muckalee
loam. This soil type reflects conditions that are generally ill-suited to pre-Columbian and historic period
occupations. Additionally, no previously identified archaeological resources have been recorded in these areas. The
potential for NRHP-eligible archaeological resources is considered extremely low for those areas.
I'm not going to submit a new "No Survey" form since the last recommendation will stand, but you might want to put a
copy of this email in the file.
Thanks again, and please let me know if I can be of any further assistance.
Shane C. Petersen
Archaeologist 1I
North Carolvia Department of Trwisportation
Human En\lronment tliut
Telephone: [phone]
FAY: [phone]
"Cogitationis poenma neino patitur"
Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N.C. Public Records La« and may be disclosed to third parties.
From: Giles, Jon W
Sent: Monday, May 21, 2012 9:38 AM
To: Petersen, Shane C
Cc: Mathis, Stonewall D
Subject: Onslow 226 Bridge Replacement
Shane,
Good morning. Let me introduce myself, my name is Jon Giles I will be working with Stoney and Annaliese. I look
forward to working with you.
This email is in reference to bridge replacement Onlsow 226, project tracking number (10-01-0007). The "No Survey
Required Form" dated 08-10-11 states that further review would be required if work was to extend beyond existing
ROW. After reviewing the submitted plans dated 04-27-12
1 noticed two areas located outside the existing ROW where work is proposed. One, on the NW side of the work area
there is a Permanent Drainage Easement(PDE) planned that measures 15' x 15' with rip rap outlet protection. The PDE is
located on the north side of the western approach near station 12+80. Second, there is approximately 180 sq.ft. of fill
material to be placed on the south side of the western approach between stations 12+50 and 13+23.

I have attached a pdf titled BDO4 034 see sheet no. 4 for your review. This shows the details and locations of the work
areas outside the existing ROW.
Please review the additional work and reply with your determination. Thank you in advance for timely response.
Sincerely,
Jon W Giles Jr.
Engineering Technician
910-341-2048
Ph n Bence to and from this sender is subject to the N a Publ c Records Laws and mar A d sckseo is !had pankF

Nov 09 it 04:13p
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
FHWR North Carolina Divis 919-747-7030
Route .Slip Distribution:
To: Name
Amanda Glynn
Bridge Program Manager
NCDOT Division 3 - Wilmington
X Per Your Request
For Your Information
Per Our Conversation
Note and Return
Discuss With Me
For Your Approval
For Your Signature
Comment
Take Appropriate Action
Please Answer
Prepare Reply For Signature Of
Date November 9, 2011
p.1
From: Name Telephone Org/Rtg Symbol
Ron Lucas P.E. 919-747-7019 HO -NC
Form DOT F1320.9 (Rev 5-81) Supersedes Alt Previous Editions *U.S, Government Printing office: 1991 -525-056140223
FHWA concurrence that no USCG permit is required for STIP Project B -5103P

UNITED STATES.POS.Tly�,RV1C�...Is.IWBif
ems°`' "
• Sender: Please print your name, address, and ZIPP+4 inthisbox R
N. C. Department of Transportation
Division Three Office
5501 Barbados Blvd.
Castle Hayne, NC 28429
UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE
��r'.S''�rt' ,3,.'�d�; "a :�.: "4'
.,.�w. =
• Sender: Please print your name, address and Ztinlis box
N. C. Department of Transportation
Division Three Office
5501 Barbados Blvd.
Castle Hayne, NC 28429
uta
UNITED --------.._.�irSi Clash Mai �.. ,
1.
• Sender: Please print your name, address, and ZIP+4 in this box •'
N. C. Department of Transportation
Division Three O u L i
V El D
5501 BarbadosER,
Castle Hayne, NC
!UN 01 2012
O
CE

■ CoMpiete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired.
■ Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
■ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
or on the front if space permits.
1. Article Addressed to:
E s-fe l le. Revell
a3a Wkw�e ler C, -eek �
Srn elxds Ve-rr-y, NC
A. Signature n . /� �p
X (V Agent
B. Received by ( Printed Name) I C. Data of Delivery
z -a -e// 1? - ln./ I --J/v
D. Is delivery address different from item 1 ❑ e:
If YES, enter delivery address below: ❑ No
RECEIVED
3.S ice Type
Certified Mail. �,�� E*"��
❑ Registered gRetum Receipt for Merchandise
❑ Insured Mail ❑ C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delive[y2'(1;xtra!Fe , 13 Yes
2. Article Number 7010 1870 0002 9001 1575
(Transfer from service label)
PS Form 3811, February 2004 Domestic Return Receipt 102595-02-M-1540

■ Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired.
■ Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
■ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
or on the front if space permits.
1. Article Addressed to:
+(NL . R,clila.vc�
0 DY- (c73
Sofadg T�W-fy6 M C
��"��11����L"y
A'V nature . r
❑ Agent
❑ Addressee
Reived bS y ( Printe Name) C. D e o Delivery
i�
�Z
D. Is delivery address different from item Yes
If YES, enter delivery address below: ❑ No
3. Service Type
FW(Certified,Mail ❑Express Mail
❑ Registe"red ,
'L�Fieturn Receipt for Merchandise
❑ Insured Mail ❑ C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) ❑ Yes
2. Article Number
(Transfer from service label) 7 010 1870 0002 9000 8926
PS Form 3811, February 2004 Domestic Return Receipt 102595 -o2 -M-1540

■ Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired.
■ Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
■ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
or on the front if space permits.
1. Article Addressed to:
ry
� re i- l v i C kOkDn
I 5 Gold CarnjO
l�
C-0 tom clo Spr' in
c6o9(o�
A.- 65iakure
XIJ 0 Agent
0 Addressee
B. Receive ( Printed Name) C. Date of Delivery
D. Is delivery address different from item 1? 0 Yes
If YES, enter delivW(gddresp below: 0 No
JUN 2 6 2012
3.ice Type
Certified Mi�fl�"%!-I� tiipi'4sS Mail
0 Registered Return Receipt for Merchandise
0 Insured Mail 0 C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) ❑ Yes
2. Article Number 7010 1870 0002 9001 1599
(Transfer from service label)
PS Form 3811, February 2004 Domestic Return Receipt 102595-02-M-1540

BEVERLY EAVES PERDUE
GOVERNOR
e.w STATFo-
n�
• RECEIVED
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA 9, 6 2012
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
June 22, 2012
Stephen Lane
Division of Coastal Management
400 Commerce Ave.
Morehead City, NC 28557
Dr�4-�,irrrJrTT
EUGENE A. KKTI, JR.
SECRETARY
SUBJECT: Return Receipts for Adjacent Riparian Property Owner Notifications for
Application for CAMA General Permit .2300 and .1600 for
Replacement of Onslow County Bridge #226 on
SR 1557 Wheeler Creek Road approximately 0.6 mile East of NC 172
Onslow County, BD -5103P, WBS # 45349.1.16
Dear Mr. Lane:
Please find enclosed the return receipt green cards that I have received to date from the adjacent
riparian property owner notifications for the Onslow County Bridge #226 replacement project.
Please let me know if you need additional information in this regard. Thank you for your help
with this project.
Enclosures
Sincerely,
Jon W Giles Jr.
Division 3 Environmental Unit
Engineering Technician
5501 BARBADOS BLVD. CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429
Phone:[phone] Fax: [phone]