NCDOT 64-04 White Oak River

APR. -27' 04 (TUE) 14:28
DEHNR COSTAL MGMT
TEL:[phone]
P. 002
Permit Class
NEW
Issued to
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
and
Coastal Resources Commission
J)Or46-46 1
for
X Mtgor Development in an Area of Environmental Concern
pursuant to NCGS 113A-118
X Excavation and/or filling pursuant to NCGS 113-229
Permit Number
64— �
Authorizing development in Carteret / Onslow County at White Oak River, Bridge No 49 on SR_
1101 / 2 1" M No. B-29381 , as requested in the permittee's application dated
attached wQ194 n drawings as referenced in Condition No 1 of this permit.
This permit, issued on 4/27m4 , is subject to compliance with the application (where cqusistent
with the permit), all applicable regulations, special conditions and notes set forth below. Any violation of these terms may
be subject to fines, imprisonment or civil action; or may cause the permit to be null and void.
B-2938. Bridge Replacement
1) All work authorized by this permit must be carried out in accordance with the following workplan
drawings, except as modified herein:
Permnit drawings: 14 sheets dated 5/31/01; 1 sheet dated 5/31101 revised 1/9/02; 2 sheets
dated 5/31/01 revised 2/20/03; and 2 sheets dated 2/17%03
Vh size drawingi: 5 sheets dated 2/17103: and 2 sheets dated 2/3/03
V ll ens: 3 sheets r% size dated 2J20/03
(See attached sheets for Additional Conditions) ��
This permit actperiod may betaenty (2 by the of
tee of Signed by the authority of the Secretary of DIM and the
other qualified parsons widtin twenty (20) days of the issuing Chairman of the w1esources Commission.
date. An appeal requires resolution prior to work initiation ordo '--�-•.. .
enmtiAUanCe as the case maybe.
IAAa_t
This permit must be accessible on -site to Department •✓
persotmel when the pmJect is inspected for compliance.
Any maintenance work or project modification not covered ree
Charles S..Jorm, l)itor
hereunder requires farther Division approval Divisiotl'of Coastal Management
All work must cease when the permit expires on
No Expiration Date, pursuant to CS 136.44.7E
In issuing this permit, the State of North Carolina agrees
that your project ls.eondstem with the North Carolina Coastal
Management program.
This permit and Its conditions are fiereby accepted.
Signature of permutes

APR• -27' 04 (TUE) 14:28 DEHNR COSTAL MGMT
TEL:[phone] P.003
N.C. Department of Transportation
ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS
Permit #64.04
Page 2 of 6
2) Duo to the presence of anadromous fish and the classification of the White Oak Riveras a primary
Nursery Area, no in -water work shall be conducted from February 15th to September 30"' of any year
without prior approval of the NC Division of Coastal Management (DCM), in consultation with the NC
Division of Marine Fisheries (DMI9.
3) The permittee shall implement NC DOT's Stream Crossing Guidelines for Anadromous Fish Passage.
4) Turbidity curtains shall be used to isolate all work areas from the White Oak lover, including pile or
casement installation, placement of riprap, excavation or filling. j1w turbidity cu.*M' s shall be installed
parallel to the stream banks on each side of the stream. The turbidity curtains shall extend past the
construction limits and attach to the silt fences containing the work site. The turbidity curtains shall not
encircle a work area or extend across the streams, The turbidity curtains are to be properly maintained
and retained in the water until construction is complete and all of the work area contained by the
turbidity curtains has been stabilized by vegetation or other means. The turbidity curtains shall be
removed when turbidity within the curtains reaches ambient levels.
5) The permittee plans on removing the existing boat ramp and dock in the southeast quadrant of the
project area. The existing boat ramp will be replaced with a new boat ramp south of the current
location.
6) live concrete shall not be allowed to contact the water in or entering into the stream. To facilitate this
requirement, the boat ramp shall be either poured at an upland location and pushed into place once
hardened or constructed in place within a watertight form or similar structure.
7) No excavated or.fill material will be placed at any time in any vegetated wetlands or surrounding waters
outside of the alignment of the fill area indicated on the work plan drawing(®).
8) The work bean fill requested in the permittee's application is not authodzed.
9) The temporary placement or double handling of excavated or fill materials within waters or vegetated
wetlands are not authorized
10) There shall be no clearing or grubbing in wetlands.
11) No excavation will occur within waters or wetlands of the State.
12) All excavated materials will be confined above normal high water and landward of regularly or
irregularly flooded wetlands behind adequate dikes or other retaining structures to prevent spillover of
solids into any wetlands or surrounding waters.
13) The fill material will be clean and free of any pollutants except in trace quantities.

APR. -27' 04(TUE) 14:29 DENNR COSTAL MGMT TEL:[phone] P, 004
N.C. Department of Transportation
ADDITIONAL
Permit #64-04
Page 3 of 6
14) Placement of riprap shall be. limited to the areas as depicted on the attached work plan drawings, The "I
riprap material must be free from loose dirt or any pollutant. It must be of a size sufficient to prevent ite
movement from the site by wave or current action, The riprap material must consist of clean rock or
masonry materials, such as but not limited to, granite or broken concrete.
15) All excavated materials and debris associated with the removal of the existing bridge, existing boat
ramp, existing dock, and existing causeway will be disposed of on an approved upland alto,
Bridee Replacement _.
16) Drilled shaft pilings with turbidity curtains will be used in the open water areas and driven piles will be
used in wetland auras. Should jetting of any bridge piles become necessary, a modification to this
permit will be required.
17) No drill slurry or water that has been in contact with uncured concrete shall be allowed to enter surface
water. Drilling fluids shall be disposed of in an upland disposal site. Water returning to the river shall
be of sufficient quality so as to not pose a threat to aquatic organisms or otherwise violate State water '
quality standards.
18) Excavated material from the drilled -shaft construction will be removed from the encasements directly
into containment vessels,
19) A temporary work bridge will be used for construction access, Tn accordance with the permittee's e-
mail dated 2/3/04, it is expected that the contractor will not need to use barges. Therefore, additional
CAMA authorization will be required if it is determined that barges are needed. Use of timber mats for
construction access is not authorized without permit modification.
20) Dredging in any manner, including "kicking" with boat propellers is not authorized,
21) The temporary work bridge and the temporary shoring shall be removed within 90 days of project
completion or within 30 days of the moratorium end date if the project is completed while the
moratorium referenced in condition #2 of this permit is in effect.
22) Debris resulting from demolition of the existing bridge, including deck components, shall not enter
wetlands or waters of the United States, even temporarily.
23) Existing bridge pilings shall be extracted entirely or removed flush with the streambed,
24) In accordance with project commitments made within the Categorical Exclusion document dated
October 2001, bridge deck drains will not discharge directly into the White Oak River,
Sedimentation and Erosion Control
25) This project is in a Mgh Quality Water Zone and must comply with the Design Standards in Sensitive
Watersheds, 1SA NCAC 4B .0124.

APU-27 041TUE) 14:29 DEHNR COSTAL MGMT
TEL:[phone] P. 005
N.C. Department of Transportation Permit #64-04
Page 4 of 6
ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS
26) The permittee shall follow Best Management Practices for the protection -of Surface. Waters and
sedimentation and erosion control measures sufficient to protect aquatic resources.
27) Appropriate sedimentation and erosion control devices, measures or structures must be implemented to
ensure that eroded materials do not enter adjacent wetlands, watercourses and property (e.g: silt fence,
diversion swales or berms, sand fence, etc,),
28) This project must conform to all requirements of the NC Sedimentation Pollution Control -Act and NC
DOT's Memorandum of Agreement with the Division of Land Resources.
29) In order to protect water quality, runoff from the construction must not visibly increase the amount of
suspended sediments in adjacent waters.
30) The area below normal high water where the existing boat ramp is removed shall be immediately
stabilized to prevent erosion and sedimentation during normal tidal cycles.
Mitigation
31) On -site riverine restoration will be carried out as described in the document titled "Stella Bridge
Mitigation Plan, Bridge No. 49 over the White Oak River on SR 1101 in Carteret County and SR 1442
in Onslow County" dated May 2003.
NOTE; It is anticipated that the proposed removal of 1,911 feet of existing causeway will lead to the
restoration of approximately 1.7 acres of fill causeway to its natural hydrology.
NOTE: DCM supports the permittee's request for wetland enhancement credits. However, the exact
amount of wetland enhancement credits will not be approved until the permittee submits a
revised map depicting the proposed wetland enhancement areas along with a revised mitigation
plan in accordance with the letter from NCDOT dated 2/13/04 and that revised mitigation plan
receives approval from DCM, DWQ, and USACE.
32) The wetland restoration areas will be fully contained by silt fence until an of the unsuitable fill material
has been removed and the restoration areas have been restored to the approximate natural elevation of
the adjacent wetlands and stabilized with vegetation. Turbidity curtains shall also be used to contain the
wetland restoration areas where the existing causeway comes within close proximityto the river.
33) The permittee will ensure the removal of all unsuitable fill material within the wetland restoration areas,
and will fill any void left by the removal of this unsuitable material with clean, unconsolidated material
to the same approximate elevation as the adjacent natural wetlands or to an appropriate reference
wetland elevation. The permittee will provide verification to DCM that the wetland restoration areas
have been restored to the approximate natural elevation of the adjacent coastal wetlands.
NOTE: The parmittee is strongly encouraged toi obtain written approval from DWQ and USACB onthe
request for wetland enhancement credits In order to increase the likelihood that the wetland
enhancement credits maybe used as compensatory mitigation for future projects.

.APR. -27' 04 (TUE) 14:30 OEHNR COSTAL MGMT
fN.'C. Department of Transportation
TEL:[phone] P• 006
Permit #64.04
Page 5 of 6
ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS
34) Due to the possibility that compaction, mechanized clearing and/or other site alterations might prevent
the temporary wetland impact area from re -attaining jurisdictional wetland status, the penmittee shall
provide an annual update on the wetland areas temporarily impacted by this project. This annual update
will consist of photographs provided during the agency monitoring report meeting and a brief report on
the progress of these temporarily impacted areas in re -attaining wetland jurisdictional status. Three
years after project completion, the permittee shall schedule an agency field meeting with DCM, the NC
Division of Water Quality and the NC Wildlife Resources Commission to determine if the wetland areas
temporarily impacted by this project have re -attained jurisdictional wetland status. If at the end of 3
years the wetland areas temporarily impacted by this project have not re -attained jurisdictional wetland.
status, NC DCM and the above listed agencies shall determine whether a compensatory wetland
mitigation plan will be required,
NOTE. This permit does not convey or imply approval of the suitability of the excess mitigation
generated by this project as compensatory wetland mitigation for any particular future projects.
The use of any portion of the excess mitigation generated by this project as compensatory
mitigation for future projects will be approved on a case-by-easo basis during -the CAMA permit
review and/or consistency process,
c
NOTE: If the excess mitigation generated by this project is to be used as'mitigation for impaefa of future
projects, written concurrence must be obtained from DCM that poet -construction monitoring
demonstrates that vegetative and hydrologic success criteria have been met. Although annual
monitoring reports will not be required, vegetative and hydrologic monitoring data shall be made
available to DCM at such time as the site is proposed for use as mitigation for future projects.
NQ. I?r The permittee is strongly encouraged to restore the area where the existing boat ramp is removed
to a natural condition similar to adjacent wetland areas, and to request additional wetland
restoration credit for this area, if appropriate.
HI oric ro erties
35) The permittee shall adhere to stipulations contained within the Memorandum of Agreement among the
Federal Highway Administration and North Carolina historic Preservation Officer for the Replacement
Of Bridge No, 49 on -SR 1101 over White Oak River
4/2/01. , Carteret/Onslow Counties, North Carolina, dated
General
36) The authorized activity will not cauee an unacceptable interference with navigation.
37) Any relocation of utility lines that is not already depicted on the attached work plan drawings, or
described within the attached permit application, will require approval by DCM, either under the
authority of this permit, or by the utility company obtaining separate authorization.
38) If tho pemritteo determines that additional permanent and/or temporary impacts will occur that are
shown on the attached permit drawings, additional authorization from DCM will be required.

APR. -27' 04 (TUE) 14:30 OEHNR COSTAL MGMT TEL:[phone] P. 007
N.C. Department of Transportation Permit #64-04
Page 6 of 6
ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS
39) This permit does not eliminate the need to obtain any additional permits, approvals or authorizations that
may be required.
40) The N.C. Division of Water Quality (DWQ) has authorized the proposed project under a General Water
Quality Certification (DWQ Project No. 04-0017). which was issued on 1/6/04. Any violation of the
Certification approved by the DWQ will be considered a violation of this CAMA permit.
41) The Division of Water Quality 1bWQ) approval of this project under stormwater management rules of
the Environmental Management Commission is covered by way of Stormwater Permit No, SW8
020321, which was issued on 6/27102, Any violation of the permit approved by the DWQ will be .
considered a violation of this CAMA permit.
NOTE: The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers authorized the proposed project under Nationwide Permit
Number 23 (COE Action ID No.199801809), which was issued on 4/27/04,
NOTE: The Permittee is encouraged to contact the Public Health Pest Management Section at (919) 733-
640E to discuss mosquito control measures.

NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Michael F. Easley, Govemor Charles S. Jones, Director William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
September 3, 2004
Gregory J Thorpe, PhD, Environmental Management Director
Project Development & Environmental Analysis Branch
N.C. Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1548
RE: Request for refinement of CAMA Major Development Permit No. 64-04 (TIP No. B-
2938). Replacement of bridge No. 49 on SR 1101 in Carteret County and SR 1442 in Onslow
County over the White Oak River.
Dear Dr. Thorpe:
This letter is in response to the N.C. Department of Transportation's (NCDOT's) request dated
August 19, 2004 requesting a Letter of Refinement for CAMA Major Permit No. 64-04. The
NCDOT letter and accompanying request from the bridge contractor requests authorization to
use a wider work bridge, eliminate the finger bridges between bents and connect work bridge
bents 27 and 28 over the navigation channel in the White Oak River with a section of work
bridge, in lieu of the work bridge configuration referred to in the CAMA Permit and application
from NCDOT, as follows:
Increasing the work bridge width from the 10.7 meters approved in CAMA Major Permit
No. 64-04, to 11.43 meters, will allow the use of a larger crane and the elimination of 25
work bridge fingers between the bents of the new bridge. A work bridge section will be
installed between work bridge bents 27 and 28with a vertical navigation clearance equal to
the existing bridge 49, connecting the east and west portions of the work bridge. Due to the
length of piles for the temporary work bridge bents 31 through 38, at the crossing of the
water of the White Oak River, batter piles may be necessary to ensure stability.
Please be advised that through this Letter of Refinement, DCM conveys its determination that
this request as described in the August 19, 2004 NCDOT correspondence to the USACE, is
consistent with existing State rules and regulations and is in keeping with the original purpose
and intent of the CAMA permit, with the following conditions.
1638 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1638
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: www.nocoastalmanagement.net

This permit does not eliminate the need to obtain any additional state, federal or local
permits, approvals or authorizations that may be required.
This Letter of Refinement must be attached to the original of CAMA Permit No. 64-
04, which was issued on April 27, 2004 and both documents must be readily available
on site when a DCM representative inspects the project for compliance.
3. All conditions and stipulations of the active permit remain in force unless altered
herein.
4. The clearance from the water of the White Oak River to the lowest horizontal
member of the work bridge will be greater or equal to the clearance of the existing
bridge 49.
Please contact Bill Arrington at [phone] if you have any questions or concerns.
Sincerely,
Ted Tyndall, Assistant Director
NC Division of Coastal Management.
Cc: Doug Huggett, DCM
Bill Arrington, DCM
Jason Peterson, NC DOT, New Bern
Deanna Riffey, NCDOT
Dave Timpey, USACE
John Hennessy, DWQ

B-2938 Falsework Support
K,
Subject: B-2938 Falsework Support
From: Bill Arrington <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 15:07:04 -0400
To: Jason Peterson <[e-mail]>
CC: Doug Huggett <[e-mail]>, Jim Gregson [e-mail]>, Steve
Sollod <[e-mail]>, Cathy Brittingham <[e-mail]>, Dave
Timpy <[e-mail]>, Mike Thomas <[e-mail]>, Nicole
Thomson <[e-mail]>, Jay Johnson <[e-mail]>, "'Ed Eatmon,
PE"' <[e-mail]>, Elizabeth Lee Lusk <[e-mail]>, "Deanna R. Riffey"
<[e-mail]>, Tere Barrett <[e-mail]>, Lynn Mathis
<[e-mail]>
Hi Jason, V
I'm sorry I did not make the monthly ride through for B-2938. I hope to make it the first Wednesday
of November.
I received a copy of your 9/24/04 letter to Dave Timpy, USACE, requesting a modification of the
USACE permit to include the temporary impacts for the 24 inch hollow pipe piles that support the
template used when driving the piles for the bridge bents. I have observed this as a standard
construction practice for bridge projects using driven piles. The Division of Coastal Management is
aware that a template, supported by temporary hollow piles, is often required for the accurate
placement of driven piles. We did not specify impacts for this process. These short lived impacts
(days, rather than months) would be considered equivalent to temporary matting for worker foot
traffic, installation of BMP's, etc.. Therefore, the Division of Coastal Management will not require
you obtain a modification for the Falsework for the pile installation on this project. This temporary
work is subject to all the conditions in the CAMA Major Permit, in particular the condition requiring
all "Temporary Impacts" to be monitored for three years; Condition # 34 reads:
Due to the possibility that compaction, mechanized clearing and/or other site alterations might
prevent the temporary wetland impact area from re -attaining jurisdictional wetland status, the
permittee shall provide an annual update on the wetland areas temporarily impacted by this project.
This annual update will consist of photographs provided during the agency monitoring report meeting
and a brief report on the progress of these temporarily impacted areas in re -attaining wetland
jurisdictional status. Three years after project completion, the permittee shall schedule an agency
field meeting with DCM, the NC Division of Water Quality and the NC Wildlife Resources
Commission to determine if the wetland areas temporarily impacted by this project have re -attained
jurisdictional wetland status. If at the end of 3 years the wetland areas temporarily impacted by this
project have not re -attained jurisdictional wetland status, NC DCM and the above listed agencies shall
determine whether a compensatory wetland mitigation plan will be required.
I app your a and notifying me of temporary impacts that are not specifically noted in
the AMA Major Perms . lease continue to bring these items to my attention and I will make every
effo o provide you answ to these questions in a timely manner, preventing project delays.
Impacts or impacts generated by particular construction practices will vary by contractor.
If there are impacts or temporary impacts generated by a particular construction practice that will
0
V
1 of 2 10/19/04 10:33 AM

B-2938 Falsework Support
most likely be used on a project being applied for, please include those impacts in the application
package so we will be able to include them in the permit.
Thank you for monitoring B-2938 closely,
Bill
2 of 2 10/19/04 10:33 AM

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY LYNDD TIPPETT
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
July 8, 2004
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers'd
Regulatory Field Office D
Post Office Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890 JUL 1 5 7nn4
ATTENTION: Mr. Dave Timpy
Morehead City DCAf
Dear Sir -
Subject: Request for Enhancement Credit and Addendum: B-2938 Mitigation Plan for
the proposed replacement of Bridge No. 49 on SR 1101 and SR 1442 over White
Oak River in Carteret and Onslow County, NCDOT Division 2. Federal Project No.
BRZ-1101 (5); VMS Element 32767.1.1; T.I.P. No. B-2938.
Reference: CAMA B-2938 Permit, dated April 27, 2004, Condition No. 31 and 33.
NCDOT proposes to replace the existing 432-foot bridge over the White Oak River with a new
bridge approximately 2,310 feet in length. The additional bridge length will allow for the removal
of 1,911 linear feet of causeway in the previously filled wetlands. The existing causeway will be
removed and returned to an elevation resembling that of the adjacent wetlands then planted with
wetland vegetation. The onsite mitigation plan (May 2003) describes 1.7 acres of brackish marsh
restoration in the White Oak River Basin, Cataloging Unit 030300.01. NCDOT proposes the
addition of 46 acres of brackish marsh enhancement mitigation.
The removal of the old causeway will allow approximately 1.7 acres of fill to be removed from
wetlands associated with White Oak River, restoring the coastal marsh wetland underneath. It is
anticipated that after the causeway is removed, there will also be an enhancement to the natural
hydrologic cycle for the surrounding wetlands. Water will be able to flow unimpeded beneath the
new structure, allowing natural wetland hydrology to improve. Therefore, in addition to the 1.7
acres of brackish marsh restoration, the NCDOT proposes brackish marsh enhancement extending
outward from the removed causeway on the northwest and southwest of the White Oak River on the
Onslow County side (see attached drawing).
On April 7, 2003, NCDOT along with the Division of Coastal Management (DCM), the United
States Army Corps or Engineers (USACOE), and Division of Water Quality (DWQ) performed an
onsite delineation to determine the division line between the 404 jurisdictional area and the coastal
wetlands on the southwest side of White Oak River. Representatives onsite were Deanna Riffey,
Elizabeth Lusk and Cheryl Knepp for NCDO'r, Bill Arrington for DCM, Dave Timpy for USACOE,
MAILINGADDRESS:
TELEPW)NE: 919-71 -15W
LOCATION:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TPANSKJRTAT"AI
FAA : 919-715-l"A
2728 CAPITAL BLVD
PW)IF.t' Drvaopww AM Ewwtam: Nm Aru-,. PB9
PLB SNrE 1FA
159R fAAiL SENVr-F C%:NrrR
WEB -IRE: WWW.Nry r.0RG
RAI EK1N NC 27(;(A
RAITr.n NC 27699-15911

and Mike Thomas for DWQ. DCbI wetlands were delineated by Bill Arrington based on the
presence or absence of coastal wetland plant species. Plant species found that satisfies the coastal
wetland criteria were: Spartina cvnosaroides (Giant Cord Grass), Spartina alternr/lora (Smooth
Cord Grass), Scirpas Spp. (Bulrush), Cladium jamaicense (Saw Grass), and Typha spp. (Cattail).
The division line was marked and GPS'd. The line extended northwest (N 34° 46' 23.3") to south
(N 34' 46' 16.7") along the White Oak River. After review of the field information, placement of
the GPS data on the aerial of this project, and calculation of the proposed enhancement area using
the one -quarter circle method, the enhancement mitigation area is 46 acres (see attached drawing).
NCDOT is requesting enhancement mitigation credit for the 46 acres of brackish marsh.
During the site visit, NCDOT and the agencies also gave consideration of the need for a
conservation easement. It was agreed upon that no conservation easement was needed due to the
presence of such high quality coastal marsh wetlands bounded by 404 jurisdictional wetlands.
NCDOT proposes to evaluate the enhancement area through periodic photographs and installation of
two surface water gauges in the enhancement area as referenced in the Onsite Mitigation Plan for
the restoration area. No further hydrological monitoring is proposed due to the proposed presence
of these two gauges and consultation with DCM.
Thank you for your assistance with this project. Upon your approval of the enhancement credit,
please send approval response to Deanna Riffey. If you have any questions or need additional
information please call Ms. Riffey at [phone].
Sincerely, D
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
Environmental Management Director, PDEA
GJT/drr
Cc: Ms. Bill Arrington, NCDCM
Mr. Travis Wilson, NCWRC
Mr. Ron Sechler, NMFS
Mr. Jay Bennett, P.E., Roadway Design
Mr. Art McMillan, P.E., Highway Design
Mr. Greg Perfetti, P.E., Structure Design
Mr. H. Allen Pope, P.E., Div. 3 Engineer
Mr. Mike Thomas, DWQ, Washington
Mr. John Hennessy, DWQ, Raleigh
Mr. Gary Jordan, USFWS
Mr. Mike Street, NCDMF
Mr. Omar Sultan, Programming and TIP
Mr. David Chang, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr. Mark Staley, Roadside Environmental
Mr. Mason Herndon, Div 3 DEO

j j V d
` h fp`♦♦
- • i r PsS• +i
r ti t
rtl+ � ;1 ,,,•
' a
! ct 500
3 j i r 0 Meter 152.4
a Y
}
d
'
• �
' •
• may
�. --I':
L r
_
f
t
•.
q
1
e

AT&A.
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Division of Coastal Management
Michael F. Easley, Governor Charles S. Jones, Director
May 27, 2004
Gregory J Thorpe, Ph.D.
Environmental Management Director
Project Development & Environmental Analysis Branch
N.C. Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1548
Resources
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
JUN 0 1 2004
,++sorehead City DC'
RE: Request for Enhancement Credit for B-2938 Mitigation Plan for the Proposed
Replacement of Bridge No. 49 on SR 1101 and SR 1442 over the White Oak River in
Carteret and Onslow Counties. CAMA Major Permit No. 64-04.
Dear Dr. Thorpe:
This correspondence is in response to your letter dated May 7, 2004 requesting approval for 46
acres of wetlands enhancement mitigation credit for CAMA Major Permit No. 64-04.
The Division of Coastal Management (DCM) has concluded, based upon observations during our
field investigation and calculation of the proposed enhancement area using the one -quarter circle
method, that the revised map attached to your 5/7/04 letter accurately depicts the proposed
wetland enhancement areas and 46 acres is available for coastal marsh enhancement mitigation.
However, in accordance with the note on page 4 of CAMA Permit No. 64-04, wetland
enhancement credits will not be approved until the permittee submits a revised mitigation plan in
accordance with the letter from NCDOT, dated 2/13/04, and that revised mitigation plan receives
approval from DCM, DWQ, and USAGE.
Please contact Steve Sollod at [phone] if you have any questions or concerns.
Sincerely,
P-71
Doug Rugged
Major Permits and Consistency Coordinator
Cc: Ted Tyndall, DCM
Bill Arrington, DCM
Deanna Riffey, NCDOT
Dave Timpy, USACE
John Hennessy, DWQ
1638 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1638
Phone: [phone] \ FAX: [phone] \ Internet: www.necoastaimanagement.net
An Eaual O000rtunity \ Affirmative Action Emolovar — ql% Recvetad \ I(K Pont rma rmwr Parwr

i
NN rD. HR.
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Michael F. Easley, Governor Charles S. Jones, Director William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
May 14, 2004
MAY 2 1 2004
Gregory J Thorpe, PhD, Environmental Management Director Morehead City DCM
Project Development & Environmental'Analysis Branch
N.C. Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1548
RE: Request for refinement of CAMA Major Development Permit No. 64-04 (TIP No. B-
2938). Replacement of bridge No. 49 on SR 1101 in Carteret County and. SR 1442 in Onslow
County over the White Oak River.
Dear Dr. Thorpe:
This letter is in response to the N.C. Department of Transportation's (NCDOT's) electronic mail
request dated May 12, 2004 requesting a Letter of Refinement for CAMA Major Permit No. 64-
04. The NCDOT letter requests authorization to use pipe piles in the White Oak River, in lieu of
the drilled shaft pilings referred to in the CAMA Permit and application from NCDOT, as
follows:
Steel pipe piles will be used instead of drilled shafts in water. This should allow for less
impacts due to installation methods, no waste to dispose of and no rig pulling procedures.
There will be 4 pipe piles at each column location. Where the permit drawing indicated
drilled shafts in water, they will be substituted with pipe piles. The wetland areas will
continue to be the'same driven pile methodology.
Please be advised that through this Letter of Refinement, DCM conveys its determination that
this request as described in the May 12, 2004 NCDOT correspondence, is consistent with
existing State rules and regulations and is in keeping with the original purpose and intent of the
CAMA pemut, with the following conditions.
1638 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1638
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: www.nccoastalmanagement.net
An Equal OpportunitylAffirmative Action Employer-50% Recycled \ 10% Post Consumer Paper

1. This. permit does not eliminate the need to obtain any additional state, federal or local
permits, approvals or authorizations that may be required.
2. This Letter of Refinement must be attached to the original of CAMA Permit No. 64-
04, which was issued on April 27, 2004 and both documents must be readily available
on site when a DCM representative inspects the project for compliance.
3. All conditions and stipulations of the active permit remain in force unless altered
herein.
Please contact Bill Arrington at [phone] if you have any questions or concerns.
Sincerely,
Lruggett
Major Permits and Consistency Coordinator
Cc: Ted Tyndall, DCM
Bill Arrington, DCM
Deanna Riffey, NCDOT
Dave Timpey, USACE
John Hennessy, DWQ

DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
APPLICATION TRANSMITTAL AND PROCESSING RECORD
1)
APPLICANT: NC Department of Transportation
County: Carteret & Onslow
LOCATION OF PROJECT: Bride # 49 on SR 1101 in Carteret County and SR 1442 in Onslow County at the crossing
of the White Oak River in Stella
DATE APPLICATION RECEIVED COMPLETE
BY FIELD: 02/16/04
FIELD RECOMMENDATION: Attached: Yes
To Be Forwarded: No
CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION: Attached:
NO To Be Forwarded: YES
FIELD REPRESENTATIVE: Bill Arrington
DISTRICT OFFICE: Morehead\
DISTRICT MANAGER REVIEW:
B)
DATE APPLICATION RECEIVED IN RALEIGH: FEE RECD: $ u Zs O/,qo
PUBLIC NOTICE RECD:
END OF NOTICE DATE: /2 0
ADJ. RIP. PROP NOTICES RECD:
DEED RECD:
APPLICATION ASSIGNED TO:
ON:
C)
75 DAY DEADLINE:
150 DAY DEADLINE:
MAIL OUT DATE:
STATE DUE DATE:
FEDERAL DUE DATE:
FED COMMENTS RECD:
PERMIT FINAL ACTION: ISSUE
DENY DRAFT ON
AGENCY
DATE
COMMENTS
RETURNED
OBJECTION
S:
YES NO
NOTES
Coastal Management- Regional Representative
Coastal Management - LUP Consistency
Division of Community Assistance
Land Quality Section
Division of Water Quality
Storm Water Management (DWQ)
State Property Office
Division of Archives & History
Division of Environmental Health
Division of Highways
Wildlife Resources Commission
Division. of Water Resources
Division of Marine Fisheries
Submerged Lands (DMF)

r
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Michael F. Easley, Governor Charles S. Jones, Acting Director William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
MEMORANDUM:
TO: DOUG HUGGETT
FROM: BILL ARRINGTON
SUBJECT: COMMENTS & RECOMMENDATIONS - CAMA MAJOR PERMIT —
Replacement of Bridge No. 49 on SR 1101 in Carteret County and SR 1442 in Onslow
County, at the crossing of the White Oak River, in Stella. TIP No. B-2938
DATE: February 27, 2004
The following are my comments and recommendations regarding the above -mentioned proposal.
The proposal is to replace the existing 432-foot long by 19-foot wide timber bridge with an 2310-
foot long by 32-foot wide concrete bridge on an alignment just to the south of the existing bridge
while allowing traffic to use the existing bridge during construction. The proposed bridge will have
a vertical clearance greater than the existing bridge (approximately 11+ feet). Constructing this
project would include removing approximately 1,911 feet of the previously filled causeway (that:is
approximately 40 feet wide) and roadway surfaces and grading it to the elevation of the surrounding
coastal wetlands. NC DOT wishes to eventually be granted Brackish Marsh restoration mitigation
credit for this area as well as enhancement mitigation credit for an area extending outward from the
removed causeway, calculated as a quarter circle, the radius of which is the length of the removed
causeway. This Enhancement mitigation credit is requested only for the areas between the removed
causeway and. the waters of the White Oak River (40.1 acres in the southwest and northwest
quadrants). The western portion of the bridge will be approximately 6 feet higher than the existing
SR 1442 to prevent future flooding. The bridge is being widened from 19 feet to 32 feet to allow
12-foot travel lanes and 4-foot shoulders. NC DOT Best Management Practices will be used for
erosion control and bridge demolition
I would recommend the project be approved contingent upon the following conditions:
1) No bridge demolition debris or excavated or fill material will be placed at anytime, in any
wetlands or surrounding waters, outside of the alignment of the fill area indicated on the
work plats.
2) The temporary placement or double handling of excavated or fill materials within waters or
vegetated wetlands are not authorized.
151-B Hwy. 24, Hestron Plaza II, Morehead City, North Carolina 28557
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: www.nccoastalmanagement.net
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled 110% Post Consumer Paper

3) All excavated materials will be confined above normal high water and landward of regularly
or irregularly flooded wetlands behind adequate dikes or other retaining structures to prevent
spillover of solids into any wetlands or surrounding waters.
4) In order to protect anadromous fish populations, no excavation or filling will be permitted in
Rocky Hock Creek between February 15 and September 30 of any year without the prior
approval of the DCM, in consultation with the DMF.
5) In order to protect water quality, runoff from the construction must not visibly increase the
amount of suspended sediments in adjacent waters.
6) All fill material must be clean and free of any pollutants, except in trace quantities. Metal
products, organic materials, or unsightly debris will not be used.
7) The riprap material must be free from loose dirt or any pollutant. It must be of a size
sufficient to prevent its movement from the site by wave or current action.
8) Temporary detour impacted areas are monitored with photographs and a summary submitted
yearly for three years. At the end of three years an on -site meeting should be attended by
DCM, USACE and DWQ to determine if the temporary impacts have attained jurisdictional
status. Mitigation should be required if the temporary detour areas impacted do not receive
jurisdictional status.
9) All commitments in the application and CE made by NC DOT are observed.
10) Turbidity curtains shall be used to isolate all work areas from the stream at Bear Creek,
including pile or casement installation, placement of riprap, excavation or filling. The
turbidity curtains shall be installed parallel to the stream banks on each side of the stream.
The turbidity curtains shall extend past the construction limits and attach to the silt fences
containing the work site. The turbidity curtains shall not encircle a work area or extend
across the streams. The turbidity curtains are to be properly maintained and retained in the
water until construction is complete and all of the work area contained by the turbidity
curtains has been stabilized by vegetation or other means. The turbidity curtains shall be
removed•when turbidity within the curtains reaches ambient levels.
Cc: Cathy Brittingham
Ted Tyndall

DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
NCDENR
NORM C Ra .. D�ae
ENNRONM E. i I.N. NRIlR1l RES.R
151-B HWY. 24, HESTRON BUILDING
MOREHEAD CITY, NC 28557
TELEPHONE: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
TO: hAILy /liEi�lS
OFFICE: LEGAL Lid �E�TIs MF.vT SECT7a �/
TELEPHONE #:
FAX #: 0161 �S3- 0935
FROM: a L-L A am ie�'l
OFFICE: DlVTSIQN QE COASTAL ' i NA ENI T
RE: �l /'cF ��'c/{ E ATTAcNE� AfdT/r't ice/ 7HE �68�u/
2q LDO� ISSUE OF 7746- t -V �EcJS
DATE SENT: OZ IZ 7 Id
TOTAL NUMBER OF PAGES IN I UDINQ COVER_ HET:

North Carolina
Michael F. Easley, Governor
February 27, 2004
NCDENR
Department of Environment and Natural
Division of Coastal Management
Charles S. Jones, Acting Director
Daily News
Legal Advertisement Section
P.O. Drawer 196
Jacksonville, NC 28541-0196
Re: Public Notice - Onslow and Carteret Counties
Dear Sir:
Resources
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
Please publish the attached Notice in the Sunday, February 29, 2004, issue of the Daily
News.
The State Office of Budget and Management requires an original Affidavit of Publication
prior to payment for newspaper advertising. Please send the affidavit, an original
copy of the published notice, and an original invoice to Jaye Poole, N C Division of
Coastal Management, 1638 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-
1638, Telephone [phone].
Thank you for your assistance in this matter. If you should have any questions, please
contact me at our Morehead City office [phone].
Sincerely,
r^-t, -
Bill Arringt
D.O.T. Field Representative
wla
Enclosure
cc: Ted Tyndall, District Manager
Doug Huggett
151-B Hwy. 24, Hestron Plaza II, Morehead City, North Carolina 28557
Phone: [phone] \ FAX: [phone] \ Internet: www.nccoastalmanagement.net
An Equal Opportunity \ Affirmative Action Employer— 50% Recycled \ 10% Post Consumer Paper

NOTICE OF FILING
OF APPLICATION FOR
CAMA MAJOR DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
The Department of Environment and Natural Resources hereby gives public notice as
required by NCGS 113A-119(b) that application for a development permit in an Area of
Environmental Concern as designated under the CAMA was received as complete on February 16,
2004. According to said application, the North Carolina Department of Transportation is
requesting to replace Bridge No. 49, on SR 1101 in Carteret County and SR 1442 in Onslow
County, at the crossing of the White Oak River, in Stella. A copy of the entire application may
be examined or copied at the office of Bill Arrington, NC Division of Coastal Management,
located at 151-B Hwy. 24, Hestron Plaza 11, Morehead City, NC, [phone] during normal
business hours.
Comments mailed to Charles S. Jones, Director, Division of Coastal Management, 1638
Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC, 27699-1638, prior to March 20, 2004, will be considered in
making the permit decision. Later comments will be accepted and considered up to the time of
permit decision. Project modification may occur based on review and comment by the public and
state and federal agencies. Notice of the permit decision in this matter will be provided upon
written request.
PUBLISHED ON: Please publish on February 29, 2004

TRANSACTION REPORT P,O1
FEB-27-2004 FRI 08:34 AM
DATE START RECEIVER TX TIME PAGES TYPE NOTE M# DP
FEB-27 08:33 AM 89103530935 57" 3 SEND OK 236

`
Development Type
FEE
DCM %
(14300160143510009316256253)
DWQ %
f243CO 16024351000952341)
1. Private, non-commercial
development that does not involve
S250
100%(S250)
0%(SO)
the filling or excavation of any
wetlands or open water areas:
it. Pubiie er commercial development
that does not involve the filling or
S400
100 % (S400)
0 % (SO)
excavation of any wetlands or open
water areas:
III. For development that involves the
filling and/or excavalion of up to 1
acre of wetlands andlor open water
'
areas, determine if A. B. C. or D
below applies:
III(A). For Private, noncommercial
development, If General water Quality
S250
100% (S250)
C., (SO)
Certificaton No.3301 (see attached)
can be applied:
,
III(B): For public or commercial
development, if General water Quaiiy/
S400
100% (S400)
0% (SO)
Certification No.3301 (see attached)
can be applied:
III(C). If General Water Quality
Certification No. 3301 (see attached)
could be applied, but DCM staff
determined that additional review and
$400
60% (S240)
40% ($160)
wri"en DWQ concurrence is nee'_ed
because of concerns related to water
qualiy or aquatic life:
III(D). If General Water Quaiibf
Certifcation No. 3301 (see attache:)
S400
60%(S240)
40%(S160)
can not be applied:
IV. For development that involves
the filling andlor excavation of more
S+ra
6095 (5265)
4096 (5190)
than are acre of wetlands and/or
open water areas:

DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
FIELD INVESTIGATION REPORT
1. APPLICANT'S NAME: North Carolina Department of Transportation
2. LOCATION OF PROJECT SITE: Bridge No. 49, on SR 1101 in Carteret County and
SR 1442 in Onslow County, at the crossing of the White Oak River, in Stella
Photo Index - 2000: 36-463 grid A-7 to I77 1995: 36-444 grid A-17 to I-17
State Plane Coordinates: x 2554400 v: 377580 GPS: Rover File N X043017A
3. INVESTIGATION TYPE: CAMA/D&F
4. INVESTIGATIVE PROCEDURE: Dates of Site Visit - 4/30/2003 & 1/27/2004
Was Agent Present - YES (H. Montague 4/30/03)
5. PROCESSING PROCEDURE: Application Received as Complete- 2/16/2004
Office - Morehead City
6. SITE DESCRIPTION:
(A) Local Land Use Plan - Carteret & Onslow Counties
Land Classification from LUPs - Rural and Conservation
(B) AEC(s) Involved: EW, CW, PTA and CS
(C) Water Dependent: Yes
(D) Intended Use: Public
(E) Wastewater Treatment: Existing - N/A
Planned - N/A
(F) Type of Structures: Existing - Secondary paved road and bridge
Planned - Secondary paved road and bridge
(G) Estimated Annual Rate of Erosion: N/A Source: N/A
7. HABITAT DESCRIPTION: [AREA]
Excavated Filled Other
(A) Coastal Wetlands
Perm. 890 sq. ft.
Perm. Shading 51,840 sq. ft.
Temp. 1,937 sq. ft.
Temp. Shading 87,365 sq. ft.
(B) 404 Type Wetlands
Perm. 99 sq. ft.
Perm. Shading 8,000 sq. ft.
Temp. 215 sq. ft.
Temp. Shade 11,880 sq. ft.
(C) Public Trust Area -
Perm. 1623 sq. ft.
Ad` Itional Perm Shadin sq
Shallow Bottom
Temp. 623 sq. ft.
g
Temp. Shading 18,11115 sq. ft.
(D) Other -High Ground
1.7 acres
Approx 5.0 acres high ground
(causeway
disturbance
removal)
(D) Total CAMA AEC Disturbed: 4.03 acres
(E) Total area disturbed by project: 9.8 acres
(F) Primary Nursery Area: Yes
(G) Water Classification: SA-HQW
(H) Open for Shellfishing: No
8. PROJECT SUMMARY: The N.C. Department of Transportation is proposing to replace the
existing 432-foot long timber bridge No. 49 over the White Oak River with a 2,310-foot long
concrete bridge spanning the White Oak River and the adjacent Coastal Wetlands and Riverine
Pine Flat. The new bridge will be adjacent to and south of the existing causeway and bridge. The
existing boat ramp, in the southeast quadrant, will be relocated approximately 30 feet southward.
Approximately 1,911 feet of causeway will be excavated from the existing roadbed and restored to
its previous wetland hydrology.

FIELD INVESTIGATION REPORT
NC DOT - B-2938 Carteret and Onslow Counties, Bridge No. 49
PAGE 2
9. PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The site of this proposal is where State Road 1101 Carteret and SR 1442 Onslow meet at Bridge
No. 49, at Stella and the crossing of the White Oak River. The general purpose of the project is
to replace the deteriorated 432-foot long by 19-foot wide timber bridge with a 2310- foot long by
32-foot wide concrete bridge Spanning the White Oak River and the adjacent Coastal Wetlands
and Riverine Pine Flat, to alleviate flooding of the western bridge approach and allow safer
driving conditions for the traveling public.
The Causeway approaching Bridge No. 49 from the west bisects the second oxbow north of the
confluence of the White Oak River and Webb Creek. The approximately 40-foot wide causeway
west of the bridge traverses approximately 250 feet of Riverine Pine Flat and approximately 1,650
feet of coastal wetlands with two nine foot travel lanes and four foot grassed shoulders. The
bridge crosses the open water of the White Oak River and approximately 15 feet of coastal
wetland before it joins high ground in Stella. There is a concrete boat ramp and parking lot in the
southeast quadrant. The land east of the bridge is urbanized and currently supports commercial
buildings and homes. The land west of the causeway supports a church, a home, woods and
agricultural land. River width at the crossing is approximately 420 feet and widens significantly
downstream (south) of the bridge. Vertical clearance between the water and bridge bottom is -
approximately 11 feet. The causeway and Bridge No. 49 were constructed in 1950 and
reconstructed in 1975 on Lafitte Muck soils. The causeway settlement and flooding have led to
constant maintenance of the road. The Riverine Pine Flat area consists of Pond Pine, Sweet Gum,
Willow, Red Maple, Sweet Bay, Greenbrier and Myrtle. The Coastal Wetland area consists of
Spartina alterniflora, Spartina cynosuroides, Juncus roemerianus, Spartina patens, Cladium
jamaicense and Distichlis spicata. Soils on this site are mainly Lafitte Muck with a small portion
of Marvyn Loamy Fine Sand in the upper elevations as classified by the NC Soil Conservation
Service. Approximate elevations on the site range between 0 feet and 5 feet above normal water
level. No evidence of SAV beds was noted. The North Carolina Division of Water Quality
classifies waters of the White Oak River as SA-HQW at the project site. Primary Nursery Area,
as designated by the North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries, is located at this site. The
Carteret and Onslow county Land Use Plans designate the project area as Rural, with all CAMA
Areas of Environmental Concern designated as Conservation.
The proposal is to replace the existing 432-foot long by 19-foot wide timber bridge with an 2310-
foot long by 32-foot wide concrete bridge on an alignment just to the south of the existing bridge
while allowing traffic to use the existing bridge during construction. The proposed bridgewill
have a vertical clearance greater than the existing bridge (approximately 11+ feet). Constructing
this project would include removing approximately 1,911 feet of the previously filled causeway
(that is approximately 40 feet wide) and roadway surfaces and grading it to the elevation of the
surrounding coastal wetlands. The western portion of the bridge will be approximately 6 feet
higher than the existing SR 1442 to prevent future flooding. The bridge is being widened from 19
feet to 32 feet to allow 12-foot travel lane's and 4-foot shoulders. NC DOT Best Management
Practices will be used for erosion control and bridge demolition.

FIELD INVESTIGATION REPORT
NC DOT — B-2938 Carteret and Onslow Counties, Bridge No. 49
Page 3
10. ANTICIPATED IMPACTS:
As proposed, the construction of the bridge would impact approximately 99 square feet of 404
type wetlands due to piling installation, 890 square feet of coastal wetlands filled due to piling
installation, rip rap slope protection at the east end bent and relocation of the boat ramp, 1498
square feet of shallow bottom filled due to piling installation, 8000 square feet of shading of 404
type wetlands, 51,840 square feet of shading of coastal wetlands, 5,030 square feet of shading of
open water, and 5.0 acres disturbance of high ground. The installation of the temporary work
bridge would temporarily impact approximately 215 square feet of 404 type wetlands filled due to
piling installation, 1937 square feet of coastal wetlands filled due to piling installation, 623 square
feet of shallow bottom filled due to piling installation, 11,880 square feet of shading to 404 type
wetlands, 87,365 square feet shading to coastal wetlands, and 18,115 square feet shading to open
water. Removal of 1,911 feet of previously filled causeway will result in the disturbance of
approximately 74,052 square feet (1.7 acres) of high ground. A minimal disturbance of the river
bottom is expected during the installation of the drilled shaft piles in the open water areas.
NC DOT has reduced the wetland excavation and fill impacts associated with this proposal by
lengthening the bride from 432 to 2,310 feet. This will reduce fill in wetlands that would have
occurred in raising the causeway. Bridge deck drains will not discharge into the waters of the
White Oak River. Lengthening the bridge also creates a wetland buffer between the bridge
approaches and the waters of the White Oak River, allowing some treatment of the storm water
run off associated with the bridge and roadway. Relocated utilities will be inside the footprint of
the existing causeway. Drilled shaft pilings will be used in the open water areas and driven piles
will be used in wetland areas. A temporary work bridge will be used instead of a fill causeway.
Existing pilings will be removed to the streambed. NC DOT has committed to dropping no
materials from the bridge demolition in the water and to using top down construction to minimize
impacts. Due to the presence of anadromous fish in the White Oak River, NC DOT has committed
to an in -stream work moratorium from February 15 to September 30. No clearing or grubbing
will take place. The NC DOT has proposed to use BMP's for the protection of surface waters in
sensitive watersheds to minimize the impacts of erosion.
The proposed removal of 1,911 feet of existing -causeway should restore approximately 1.7 acres
of fill causeway to its natural hydrology. NC DOT wishes to eventually be granted Brackish
Marsh restoration mitigation credit for this area as well as enhancement mitigation credit for an
area extending outward from the removed causeway, calculated as a quarter circle, the radius of
which is the length of the removed causeway. This Enhancement mitigation credit is requested
only for the areas between the removed causeway and the waters of the White Oak River (40.1
acres in the south west and northwest quadrants). NC DOT has agreed to perform hydrologic
monitoring in this area (see included mitigation plan).
The collective disturbance area for the project is 9.8 acres.
Bill Arrington
February 27, 2004
Morehead City

IF Subject: Re: B-2938 questions
Date: Mon, 05 Apr 2004 17:28:33 -0400
From: "Deanna R. Riffey" <[e-mail]>
Organization: North Carolina Department of Transportation
To: Cathy Brittingham <[e-mail]>
CC: "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>, [e-mail],
Mason Hemdon <[e-mail]>,
"Timpy, David L SAW" <[e-mail]>
Hello,
I have the answers to your questions:
#1) The MP 2 form does mention the use of a work berm fill in Item 5C. However,
after checking with NCDOT hydraulics and the consultant that worked with the
project, the phrase " work berm fill' is to be disregarded. The phrase was
included by mistake. ..
#2) I spoke with the Bridge Construction Engineer, Ed Eatmon (Div 2), and the old
ramp and dock will be removed to allow the new bridge (ROW).
Cathy Brittingham wrote:
Hi Deanna, - w
We are making good progress on drafting the CAMA permit for B-2938. We have a couple of questions
for you: ii6;
1. On the MP-2 form that was submitted by DOT, 5c., it states thaft4l will be using
temporary work bridge, erosion control measures and work berm, fill to lesskerNronmental
impacts. What is meant by work berm fill? Is it sbo4p.,qn the workplan drawmpV uIs it within
wetlands and waters, and if so is it included in the estimated wetland and water t4�o�s?
2. The application states that the boat ramp will be relocated 3feet south of its existin location.
What will happen to the existing boat ramp and existing wooden dock? Will they be leklq place
and operational when the project is complete?
Also, FYI, all state agency comments needed to process the permit have been received except for 0
comments from the Division of Archives and History. Due to the Historic District affected by this
project, we will need their comments before we can proceed.
Thanks.
Cathy Brittingham
Transportation Project Coordinator
NC Division of Coastal Management
1638 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1638
[phone] X238 phone
[phone] FAX
I of 1 4/6/04 8:20 A

0 rEB 1 n 2004
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY LYNDO TIPPETT
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
February 13, 2004
N. C. Dept. of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Hestron Plaza II
151-B NC Highway 24
Morehead City, NC 28557
ATTENTION
Dear Sir:
Mr. Bill Arrington
District Manager
Subject: B-2938 Brackish Marsh Enhancement for the proposed replacement of
Bridge No. 49 on SR 1101 and SR 1442. over White Oak River in Carteret
and Onslow County, NCDOT Division 2. Federal Project No. BRZ-1101 (5);
WBS Element 32767.1.1; T.I.P. No. B-2938.
NCDOT proposes to replace the existing 432-foot bridge over the White Oak River with a
new bridge approximately 2,310 feet in length. The additional bridge length will allow for
the removal of 1,878 linear feet of causeway in the previously filled wetlands. The existing
causeway will be removed and returned to an elevation resembling that of the adjacent
wetlands then planted with wetland vegetation. The onsite mitigation plan (May 2003)
describes 1.7 acres of brackish marsh restoration in the White Oak River Basin, Cataloging
Unit 03030001. NCDOT proposes the addition of approximately 40.1 acres of brackish
marsh enhancement mitigation.
The removal of the old causeway will allow approximately 1.7 acres of fill to be removed
from wetlands associated with White Oak River, restoring the coastal wetland underneath. It
is anticipated that after the causeway is removed, there will also be a return to the natural
hydrologic cycle for the surrounding wetlands. Water will be able to flow unimpeded
beneath the new structure, allowing natural wetland hydrology to return. Therefore, in
addition to the 1.7 acres of brackish marsh restoration, the NCDOT proposes brackish marsh
enhancement extending outward from the removed causeway on the northwest and
southwest of the White Oak River on the Onslow County side (see attached drawing). The
MAILING ADDRESS:
TELEPHONE: [phone]
LOCATION:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FAX: [phone]
2728 CAPITAL BLVD
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLB SUITE 168
1598 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
WEBSITE: WWW.NCDOT.ORG
RALEIGH NC 27604

FEB 1 G 20,04
area of enhancement was calculated as a one -quarter circle, the radius of which is the length
of the causeway removed. The total enhancement area will be approximately 40.1 acres.
NCDOT is requesting enhancement mitigation credit for the brackish marsh.
If resource agencies agree to this proposal, NCDOT along with the Division of Coastal
Management and the United States Army Corps of Engineers will delineate and verify the
division between the 404 jurisdictional area and the coastal wetlands on the southwest side
of White Oak River prior to permit issuance. A revised mitigation plan will follow
verification of actual enhancement acreage. Two surface water gauges will be installed in
the enhancement area as referenced in the Onsite Mitigation Plan for the restoration area.
No further hydrological monitoring is proposed due to the presence of these two gauges and
consultation with DCM.
Thank you for your assistance with this project. If you have any questions or need additional
information please call Ms. Deanna Riffey at [phone].
Sincerely,
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
Environmental Management Director, PDEA
GJT/drr
Cc:
Ms. Cathy Brittingham, NCDCM Mr. David Timpy, USACE, Wilmington
Mr. John Dorney, DWQ, Raleigh Mr. Travis Wilson, NCWRC
Mr. Gary Jordan, USFWS Mr. Ron Sechler, NMFS
Mr. Mike Street, NCDMF Mr. Jay Bennett, P.E., Roadway Design
Mr. Omar Sultan, Programming and TIP Mr. Debbie Barbour, P.E., Highway Design
Mr. David Chang, P.E., Hydraulics Mr. Greg Perfetti, P.E., Structure Design
Mr. Mark Staley, Roadside Environmental Mr. H. Allen Pope, P.E., Div. 3 Engineer
Mr. Mason Herndon, Div 3 DEO

Ito." J• .o a, '�' y •G,� '� • 1X u'^+ Yl€`{�w;, * ' ••S ,x-• I y.•�` �
� s. �'.+ . "" �� ,'k ..''w °Xt'�.�s i•�''., ,��q , l ,v. kk 'S. , ' `>.."e%e°� l i,
art,., ' m ram•' r,KN,`p r +{,w '."v + ' < af' _%c
p�•f�l �, xy •$'R'�"a L.''{ i�rw 115 -x -., - t �`R' *a: �v •hv • .A� „iJt�yy i I !
u.yl.4b ` w•S'. , ��� k..^'rN'M.. �4 f� x � f..^ i,
{ x radius
`" ry i�� y '` a`1 "" k * "TSr•'t'� ~ b ✓ .iT' �Y �� Y 5"""[[•" i -
4`.enhancement
area
r ... _ tl� , r':. "'' �"'1' - M.-. a y « w..:„y<r "a 1ii • ��.}.J;�y
u,_ w
+lU•e�; +l>.... �a r "+Rw +" .y - s• fy I �q. x
v . L h4.' .- r. ; t+ 'tek' "•` r ��a'• ��' 'Y' ; ` vi 'k� u,F. - '.�"" ` tl { -a .
:�r(' n � ��, .p a �� = y a �a"•t' „y •,+�,i"C� �� �.- O CY , ��
�Y•V X 2wg S H'r 5....".,µSit�� »�«+m .,, ar vt Y v 1.}`•#yyt s'liti„ ' Y'�i ti*T4 t c. '... L+' ±, eZ.
f • ,,:iC" v/° ri•.'. •.r q'S ,, ." r #iY "�raJ'F/W"• �.. .x'. .0 �• i� ,
i .`u r ,e 1•� r r'� •`'� :.•,. F y� 5OV/yy - 4 £S? °54<..` •y h • b
a°.3 � s•�.a � � '� +, � w -. 1•• � .,`J t � y < vw � 1; i 4e^' l lei y ✓ J„„J K* t �„�,Y"'� �y � ..
^ Meters
.v •. . '`� .,y i•�yri+ qr —. «F -k .� • °' s 5G "'�'�`�� J,•w..v�.
+ ° 4 ary�� �� • s., v..�'"'"` rvr . w.� � �' ('v✓w 1" ..;, a . ..xar -yi,,. r<.. rW
-. 0 h ,�5. `l�:�t a2 ^ "" .�„ •. � ,wS"` Rs �2 +t �5•,�'!`... 'i+4.`«S�`.r, a" M1
ae - ' � t •�.,» M ° a...e {^ w y �.� ayy +, r.Y ✓ .xf w, 't° . � ,L � 4•r�cF 'rX «'K ' 'i
y ..'%.. �7i'y �}.. �.� 11 _•« _ �,'1L�..Jm•'•5+'i-�a •N •.. �. •" r N••o ifiY �.M r V 't H' �F
!.�y,!s iriM �. '+ • _r ,f k i w" �.»•^• � .M u:».i.. '' •,� i ;, r :� $ � *, rt
.i ..`I Y`xw .d k r w. '�d.+•'�' .�-``Ji�y.h W F_fx' ` y. a � �, � � r °t;. ��,�e
.•up�jr`y1 '£e:Y.ioP r">( ♦r'..'\.. s' �, 4 i; �' -
'' �$. f? • Sx+�gQ -'� t
.' i :T.r s k..y1 ay 1:,x5' �,r .."•'J4 �. .. ••' w - v• PoY• - tf `/'1 Y•l:
l�?��'..•..' I _v i •ifS�`}-,w'i,,,r'+t.`5 t , '`i. a _ k• .t, {. r 'ir ,, ,`y+yY
P✓.�<r t �4�'"•. .�u ^ �/ k, k � _ �.y.^ � '_ L ` 4 u, .' y * r a, •.r i
�•""4 r o �°r s 1 � ' ✓ _ •. v� e'er " . .,
9< Y ( ty� '� � •

RE: B-2938 Questions
Subject: RE: B-2938 Questions
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2004 15:22:09 -0500
From: "Deanna R. Riffey" <[e-mail]>
Organization: North Carolina Department of Transportation
To: [e-mail]
CC: Cathy. [e-mail], [e-mail],
[e-mail], [e-mail], mike. [e-mail]
Good Afternoon Bill,
I received the questions you had on B-2938 and the response to each is included below. If we need to
discuss further or if something seems unclear, give me a call at 715-1409 and we will work through it.
1. (BA):In your cover letter dated 1/2/04 under "Permanent Surface Water Impacts" The Stream
Classification you have listed for the White Oak River is C HQW. This is the classification I found for the
waters of the White Oak above Hunter's Creek according to the DWQ BIMS Stream Classifications I have.
The bridge is a little downstream of the confluence of the White Oak and Hunter's Creek. My listings
classify the waters of the White Oak as SA HQW from Hunter's Creek to it's confluence with the sound.
Response: You are correct the classification for the White Oak River for this
project area is SA HQW. The C HQW classification is for a nearby part of
White Oak.
2. (BA):Also in your cover letter under "Schedule", you state that barges will be used on the bridge span
over the channel. Could you verify that this will be
necessary. The Temporary work bridge and piers on the permit drawings are
adjacent to and allow access to each bent. If the barges will be required, will
they stay floating or will they be sunk?
Response: I spoke with the bridge project engineer regarding the use of
barges. It is expected that the contractor will not need to use barges.
However, the contractor is usually given the option once on site to use barges
to complete project if he/she deems necessary. A permit modification will
have to be done if barges are used. If barges are to be used the barges
should be the floating hpe with anchors unless there is significantly lower
water levels at the time of build.
3) (BA):This past summer I met Heather M. on site for a pre application
conference. We discussed enhancement credit similar to the
enhancement credit generated at other bridge lengthening projects. The
limits of the enhancement areas we discussed were adjusted from the
"usual" Cox Semi -circle to exclude surface water and the wetlands on the
opposite side of the open water from the restoration area. I have a rough
sketch of the enhancement area Heather and I discussed.
Response: 1 not sure iffurther information is needed on the enhancement area. Ifyou can give me a call so
that 1 can better understand the issues that would be great.
Deanna Riffey, Environmental Specialist
Office of Natural Environment
1n6Me 0-10

NC DENR - DIVISON OF WATER QUALITY
.0312 WHITE OAK RIVER BASIN
28 .0300
Classification
Name of Stream
Description
Class
Date
Index No.
Mundine Branch
From source to White Oak
C
06/01/56
20-6
River
Gibson Branch
From source to White Oak
C
06/01/56
20-6.5
River
1
Mirey Branch
From source to White Oak
C
O6/01/56
20-7
River
Brick Kiln Branch
From source to White Oak
C
06/01/56
20-8
River
Black Swamp Creek
From source to White Oak
C
06/01/56
20-9
River
Catfish Lake
From source to Black Swamp
C
06/01/56
20-9-1
Creek
Starkeys Creek
From source to White Oak
C
06/01/56
20-10
River
Gravelly Branch
From source to White Oak
C
06/01/56
20-11
River
Holston Creek
From source to White Oak
C
06/01/56
20-12
River
Mulberry Creek
From source to White Oak
C
06/01/56
20-13
River
Spring Branch
From source to White Oak
C
O6/01/56
20-14
River
Grants Creek
From source to Spring Branch
C
06/01/56
20-14-1
Halls Branch (Cummins
From source to Grants Creek
C
O6/01/56
20-14-1-1
Creek)
WHITE OAK RIVER
From Spring Branch to
C HOW
08/01/90
20-(14.5)
Hunters Creek
Calebs Creek
From source to White Oak
C
06/O1/56
20-15
River
Freemans Creek
From source to White Oak
C
06/01/56
20-16
River
Hunters Creek (Great
From source to White Oak
C
06/01/56
20-17
Lake)
River
Wolf Swamp
From source to Hunters Creek
C
06/01/56
20-17-1
WHITE OAK RIVER
From Hunters Creek to
SA HOW
06/01/56
20-(18)
Atlantic Ocean, including
the Intracoastal Waterway,
with exception of restricted
shellfish area adjacent to
Swansboro
Webb Creek
From source to White Oak
C
06/O1/56
20-19
River
Taylor Creek
From source to White Oak
C
06/01/56
20-20
River

Flo
0� JAN 0 5 20G1
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY LYN Do TIPPETT
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
January 2, 2004
N. C. Dept. of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Hestron Plaza 11
151-B NC Highway 24
Morehead City, NC 28557
ATTENTION: Mr. Bill Arrington
SUBJECT: Application for CAMA Major Development Permit for the proposed
replacement of Bridge No. 49 on SR 1101 and SR 1442 over White Oak
River in Carteret and Onslow County, NCDOT Division 2. Federal Project
No. BRZ-1101(5), $475 Debit Work Order 8.2160801 (WBS Element
32767.1.1), T.I.P. No. B-2938.
Dear Sir:
Please find enclosed copies of the Categorical Exclusion (CE), Onsite Mitigation Plan,
the Coastal Area Management Act (LAMA) permit application, permit drawings, half size
plan sheets, Utilities By Others sheets, copies of green cards from the Adjacent Riparian
Property Owners Notification process, and a copy of the North Carolina Division of Water
Quality (DWQ) Stormwater Permit.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to replace
Bridge No. 49 over the White Oak River on SR 1101 and 1442, at Stella. This project lies
on the Carteret/Onslow County line. Bridge No. 49 will be replaced downstream of the
existing bridge with a much longer bridge over the river and the marshland on the
Onslow County approach. During construction, traffic will be maintained on the existing
structure. Once the new bridge is completed, the old roadway will be removed and the
wetlands restored.
MAILING ADDRESS:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
154E MAIL SERVICE CENTER
TELEPHONE. [phone]
FAX: [phone]
WEBSITE: WWWNCDOTORG
LOCATION:
TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
1 SOUTH WIIMINGTON STREET
RALEIGH NC

PROPOSEDIMPACTS
Bridge Demolition:
Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition and Removal will be followed. Bridge
No. 49 will be removed without dropping any portion of the structure into waters of the
United States (as indicated on Pages 9-10, Section 3.b. of the CE document).
Utility Relocation:
No wetland or surface water impacts will result from the relocation of utility lines
(Carteret/Craven EMC, Sprint Telephone, and Time Warner). All areas associated with
utility relocation will be within the existing causeway. The excavation for the proposed
onsite restoration (see attached plan dated May 2003) will take place around the relocated
poles by grading the remaining area to the elevation of the adjacent wetland.
Permanent Wetland Impacts:
Construction of the propose, project will result in 0.0h7 acre of permanent fill in e '
wetlands. There ill be 0.01�acre of impact due to concrete piles for the proposed bridge
at Site 3� 0.000 acre due to rip rap slope protection for the proposed bridge at Site 4, and
0.0078 act''e due to rip rap fill for the proposed boat ramp at Site 5.
Temporary Wetland Impacts:
A temporary work bridge (depicted on the attached drawings) will also be necessary for
construction. The resulting temporary impacts to wetlands will be 0.0494 acre. There will
be 0.0238 acre of impact due to H-piles for the temporary work bridge at Site 1 and 0.0256
acre due to H=piles for fingers on the work bridge at Site 2.
Permanent Surface Water Impacts: ifl Ip_"
White Oak River [DWQ Index No. 0-(l;) Class C HQW will be impq by the
proposed project. Construction of thropo ed proJec will result in 0.0344 acre of
permanent surface water fill. There will be 0.0017 acre of fill due to the installation of the
drilled shafts for the proposed bridge at Site 4 and 0.0327 acre of fill due to the rip rap fill
for the proposed boat ramp at Site 5.
Temporary Surface Water Impacts:
The temporary surface water fill due to the construction of the temporary work bridge will
be 0.0143 acre. There will be 0.0057 acre of surface water fill for the temporary bridge H-
piles at Site 1 and 0.00858 acre of surface water fill for the H-piles on the fingers on the
work bridge at Site 2.
Restoration Plan: The temporary fill will consist of H-piles in the river. Following
construction of the temporary work bridge, the construction of permanent bridge will be
completed. Once the temporary work bridge is no longer needed, all material used in the
construction of the temporary work bridge will be removed. The temporary impact area
associated with the work bridge is expected to recover naturally.
Schedule: The project schedule calls for a let date of June 15, 2004 with an estimated date
of availability of approximately 41 days later. It is expected that the contractor will choose
to start construction of the portion of the temporary work bridge in the river shortly after
the end of the moratorium of February 15 — September 30. The only bents in the water are
bents 21 through 30. It will take approximately 2 % to 3 months to drive the piles for the
footings, and form and pour the footings for these bents. After that, all work can be done

- J;A N
V 5 201
from bargees in the water and the temporary work bridge for the approach spans. Removal
of the existing bridge at the end of construction is expected to take approximately 1 month.
The temporary surface water fill resulting from the construction will probably be in place
for approximately twelve (12) months.
Removal and Disposal Plan: After the temporary work bridge is no longer needed, all
temporary work bridge material will become the property of the contractor. The contractor
will be required to submit a reclamation plan for the removal of and disposal of all
materials off -site at an upland location.
AVOIDANCE and MINIMIZATION
For avoidance and minimization, the following measures will be implemented:
1) replace 432- foot bridge with approximately 2,310-foot bridge.
2) use a work bridge instead of a temporary causeway.
3) reduced spans and girder depth to maintain clearance over the White Oak River.
4) old causeway removal for onsite wetland restoration of approximately 1.7 acre.
5) an instream construction moratorium will be in effect from Feb 15 to Sept 30.
6) all existing piers will be removed down to streambed.
7) bridge deck drains will not discharge directly into the White Oak River.
MITIGATION
Proposed impacts to jurisdictional wetlands due to the replacement of Bridge No. 49 are
below the threshold for compensatory mitigation. Therefore, the entire 1.7 acre of brackish �,
WBasin,
marsh restoration will be available for future projects in the )White Oak River Basin,'
03030001 Cataloging Unit. See attached for the B-2938 Mitigation Plan, dated May 2003
for details.
PROTECTED SPECIES
As of January 29, 2003, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service lists a combined total
of seventeen federally protected species for Carteret and Onslow Counties. This list
includes sixteen originally listed species for which biological conclusions of "No Effect'
were rendered. Since the completion of the referenced CE, the bald eagle has been added
to this list. A habitat determination and survey for the bald eagle was conducted by a
consultant firm on January 28, 2003 and rendered a biological conclusion of May Affect -
Not Likely to Adversely Affect. Concurrence from the United States Fish and Wildlife
Service, dated December 2, 2003, has been requested. A copy of letter is attached. See
attached Protected Species Update Report, dated February 2003 for bald eagle survey
information and biological conclusion. The Natural Heritage Program database (last
updated on October 16, 2003) revealed no occurrences of federally listed species within
1.0 mile (1.6 km) of the project study area. Therefore, the biological conclusions for each
of these species remain valid. An in -stream construction moratorium will be in effect from
February 15 to September 30. This moratorium is required due to the standard anadromous
fish moratorium and the site being designated as a primary nursery area. This moratorium
applies to the White Oak River only not to the marsh areas.

REGULATORY APPROVALS
NCDOT requests that the proposed work be authorized under a Coastal Area Management
Act Major Development Permit. We have provided a method of debiting $475 to be
submitted to the DCM for processing the CAMA permit, as noted in the subject line of this
application. With a separate application, we are also requesting issuance of a United States
Army Corps of Engineers Nationwide Permit 23 (ER number 10, pages 2020-2095;
January 15, 2002). We anticipate a 401 General Certification number 3371 will apply to
this project. In compliance with Condition 1 of GC 3371 we hereby request written
concurrence from the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources,
Division of Water Quality.
Thank you for your assistance with this project. If you have any questions or need
additional information please call Ms. Deanna Riffey at [phone].
Sincerely,
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
^ Environmental Management Director, PDEA
GJT/hwm
cc:
Ms. Cathy Brittingham, NCDCM
Mr. Dave Timpy, USACE, Wilmington
Mr. John Domey, DWQ, Raleigh
Mr. Travis Wilson, NCWRC
Mr. Gary Jordan, USFWS
Mr. Ron Sechler, NMFS
Mr. Mike Street, NCDMF
Mr. Jay Bennett, P.E., Roadway Design
Mr. Omar Sultan, Programming and TIP
Ms. Debbie Barbour, P.E., Highway Design
Mr. David Chang, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr. Greg Perfetti, P.E., Structure Design
Mr. Mark Staley, Roadside Environmental
Mr. Neil Lassiter, P.E., Division 2 Engineer
Mr. Jay Johnson, DIV 2 DEO

Carteret and Onslow Counties JAN u ii -0
SR 1101 and SR 1442 11'
Bridge No. 49 over the White Oak River
Federal -Aid Project No. BRZ-1101(5)
State Project No. 8.2160801
T.I.P. No. B-2938
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
AND
PROGRAMMATIC SECTION 4(F) EVALUATION AND APPROVAL
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
EIT1002-067ma
DATE William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manager
Project Development and Environmental
Analysis Branch, NCDOT
DATE ✓,L Nicholas L. Graf, P.E.
i� Division Administrator, FHWA

Carteret and Onslow Counties
SR 1101 and SR 1442
Bridge No. 49 over the White Oak River
Federal -Aid Project No. BRZ-1101(5)
State Project No. 8.2160801
T.I.P. No. B-2938
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
r_wbl
PROGRAMMATIC SECTION 4(F) EVALUATION AND APPROVAL
Pamela R. Williams
Prniort Manonor
October 2001
Document Prepared by:
Wang Engineering Company, Inc.
For the North Carolina Department of Transportation
S . 1412 ug,
Stacy B. Harris, P.E.
Project Manager
Consultant Engineering Unit.

'Jti;d 0 5 2GG
PROJECT COMMITMENTS
Carteret and Onslow Counties
SR 1101 and SR 1442
Bridge No. 49 Over the White Oak River
Federal -Aid Project No. BRZ-1101(5)
State Project No. 82160801
T.LP. No. B-2938
In addition to the standard Nationwide Permit No. 23 Conditions, the General Nationwide Permit
Conditions, Section 404 Only Conditions, Regional Conditions, State Consistency Conditions,
North Carolina Department of Transportation's (NCDOT) Guidelines for Best Management
Practices for Bridge Demolition and Removal, Guidelines for Best Management Practices for
Protection of Water Surfaces, General Certification Conditions, and Section 401 Conditions of
Certification, the following special commitments have been agreed by NCDOT:
Project Development & Environmental Analysis Branch, Structure Design, Design Branch
The following measures will be carried out for the replacement of Bridge No. 49 per the
approved Memorandum of Agreement:
1. Recordation: Prior to the demolition of Bridge No. 49, NCDOT shall record the
existing conditions of the Bridge and its surroundings as well as the General
Store/Post Office and 2-story, brick warehouse within the historic district in
accordance with the Historic Structures and Landscape Recordation Plan (Appendix
A). The written andphotographic documentation Anll be deposited with the North
Carolina Division of Archives and History/ State Historic Preservation Office (HPO) to
be made part of the permanent statewide survey and iconographic collection.
2. Replacement Bridge Design: NCDOT will use a two -bar metal rail on the
replacement bridge. Prior to right of way acquisition, NCDOT will provide the North
Carolina SHPO final design plans for the replacement bridge for their comments.
3. Future Widening of Shoulders and Approaches: NCDOT will notify the division and
district engineers that no widening of the shoulders on the approaches can be
undertaken in the future without first consulting with the North Carolina State Historic
Preservation Officer (SHPO). To ensure this, maps of the Stella Historic District will
be integrated into the highways maps regularly reviewed by the division and district
engineers.
4. Dispute Resolution: Should the North Carolina SHPO object within thirty (30) days to
any plans or documentation provided for review pursuant to this agreement, Federal
Highway Administration (FHWA) shall consult with the North Carolina SHPO to
resolve the objection. If FHWA or the North Carolina SHPO determines that the
objection cannot be resolved, FHWA shall forward all documentation relevant to the
dispute to the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (Council). Within thirty (30)
days after receipt of all pertinent documentation, the Council will either.
a. Provide FHWA with recommendations which FHWA will take into account
in reaching a final decision regarding the dispute, or
Green Sheet
Preconstruction

b. Notify FHWA that it will comment pursuant to 36 CFR Section 800.7(c))
and proceed to comment. Any Council comment provided in response to
such a request will be taken into account by FHWA in accordance with 36
CFR Section 800.7(c)(4) with reference to the subject of the dispute.
Any recommendation or comment provided by the Council will be understood to pertain only
to the subject of the dispute; FHWA's responsibility to carry out all the actions under this that
are not the subject of the dispute will remain unchanged.
Division Engineer
An in -stream construction moratorium will be in effect from February 15 to September 30. This
moratorium is required due to the standard anadromous fish moratorium and the site being
designated as a primary nursery area. This moratorium applies to the White Oak River only not
to the marsh areas.
The Stream Crossing Guidelines for Anadromous Fish Passage will be implemented, as
applicable.
Access for emergency services will be maintained to the existing boat dock during construction.
All existing piers will be removed down to the streambed.
Hydraulic Design
Bridge deck drains will not discharge directly into the White Oak River.
Green Sheet
P.reconstruction
October 2001
2

Carteret and Onslow Counties 2064
SR 1101 and SR 1442
Bridge No. 49 Over the White Oak River
Federal -Aid Project No. BRZ-1101(5)
State Project No. 8.2160801
T.I.P. No. B-2938
INTRODUCTION: The replacement of Bridge No. 49 is included in the 2002-2008 North
Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) Transportation Improvement Program and the
Federal -Aid Bridge Replacement Program. The location is shown in Figure 1 (Appendix B). No
substantial environmental impacts are anticipated. The project is classified as a Federal
"Categorical Exclusion."
PURPOSE AND NEED
Bridge Maintenance Unit records indicated the bridge has a sufficiency rating of 31.5 out of a
possible 100 for a new structure. The bridge is considered functionally obsolete and structurally
deficient. The replacement of an inadequate structure will result in safer and more efficient
traffic operations.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
SR 1101 and SR 1442 are classified as rural minor collectors and are, together, designated as a
bike route, Jacksonville: City to the Sea. Land use in the project area is predominantly
residential and High Quality Marsh (Brackish Marsh). The small riverside community of Stella is
on the east approach and is eligible for the National Register of Historic Places as an historic
district (see Figure 6). Bridge No. 49 is a contributing element to the district. There is a privately
owned boat ramp on the southeast quadrant that is the only deep -water ramp in the area usable
for water rescue vehicles.
Bridge No. 49 (Figure 3) was constructed in 1950 and reconstructed in 1975 with an overall
length of 131.7 meters (432 feet). The clear roadway width is 5.7 meters (19 feet). The
superstructure consists of twenty-three timber spans and one steel girder main span. The
posted weight limit is 12.7 metric tons (14 tons) for single vehicles and 18.1 metric tons (20
tons) for truck -tractors, semi -trailers.
The approach at the west end of the bridge is on a 13.5-degree (136.5 meter radius) curve. The
approach at the east end of the bridge is on a 25-degree (70 meter radius) curve. The
approach roadway provides two 2.7-meter (nine foot) travel lanes with 1.8-meter (six foot) grass
shoulders. The bed to crown height is nine meters (30 feet), and the normal water depth is
approximately 4.2 meters (14 feet). The speed limit is not posted and the statutory speed limit
is 90 kilometers per hour (km/h) (55 miles per hour (mph)). Advisory posted speed limit is 30
km/h (20 mph) on the approaches to the bridge.
The 2001 estimated average daily traffic volume is 1,600 vehicles per day (vpd). The projected
traffic volume is expected to increase to 2,500 vpd by the design year 2025. The volumes
include one percent truck -tractor semi -trailer (TTST) and two percent dual -tired vehicles (DT).

There is a private boat ramp in the southeast quadrant of the project site and a parking lot on
the northeast side. Telephone, cable television and power lines cross the stream parallel to the
roadway on the south side of the structure. Utility impacts are anticipated to be low.
Three accidents were reported near the bridge during the period from September 1, 1993 to
August31, 1996.
No school busses cross Bridge No. 49.
III. ALTERNATIVES
A. Project Description
The proposed structure will provide two 3.6-meter (12-foot) travel lanes with 1.2-meter (four
foot) shoulders for a total clear roadway width of 9.6 meters (32 feet). Bicycle safe rails will
be provided (two -bar metal bridge rails at 1372 mm (54-inches) in height) (Figure 4,
Appendix B). The proposed approach roadway will consist of two 3.6-meter (12-foot) travel
lanes with 2.4-meter (eight foot) shoulders. The design speed will be 70 kilometers per hour
(km/h) [45 miles per hour (mph)]. A design exception has been approved for the design
speed of 70 km/h (45 mph) and the horizontal sight distance, and is attached in Appendix D.
The new structure will be approximately 704 meters (2347 feet) in length and will span the
White Oak River and the high quality marshland. The existing navigational clearance will
be maintained.
B. Reasonable and Feasible Alternatives
One (1) "reasonable and feasible" constructible alternative studied for replacing the existing
bridge is described below.
Alternate D (Preferred) replaces the bridge downstream of the existing bridge and spans
the White Oak River and the marshland on the Onslow County approach. The new
structure is recommended to have a length of approximately 704 meters (2347 feet).
During construction, traffic will be maintained on the existing structure and roadway.
C. Alternatives Eliminated From Further Study
Alternates A, B', Bz, C and E were eliminated due to the poor soil conditions on the bridge
approach on the Onslow County side. it was determined that the soil could not be stabilized
and differential settlement would occur if the roadway was raised for the end bent approach
embankment.
Alternate A replaces the bridge at the existing location. During construction, traffic would
be maintained by a two lane temporary detour structure, approximately 170 meters (567
feet) in length, located downstream of the existing bridge. The proposed bridge would be
approximately 165 meters (550 feet) in length on a five degree (350 meter radius) curve.
The approach roadway in Onslow County would be raised approximately 0.76-meter (2.5
feet) and includes placement of rock fill at the ox bow and guardrail from west of the oxbow
to the bridge. The project length is 853 meters (2843 feet).

For avoidance and minimization of adverse impacts, the following measures will be
accomplished: -
1. Anticipated impacts to wetlands minimized. to approximately 0.008 hectare (0.021
acre).
2. Restoration of wetlands of approximately 0.69 hectare (1.70 acres).
3. Replacing 132-meter (440-foot) bridge with a 704-meter (2,347400t) bridge.
4. Design exception to reduce the design speed from 90 km/h (55 mph) to a design
speed of 70 km/h (45 mph) to minimize impacts in the historic district and eliminate
impacts to the cemetery.
5. Design exception for the horizontal clearance to maintain the existing canopy
attached to the post office to minimize impacts in the historic district.
6. Reduced spans and girder depth to maintain clearance over the White Oak River
and minimize impacts to the historic district.
IV. ESTIMATED COST
The estimated costs, based on current 2001 prices, are as follows:
Alternate D
(Preferred)
Structure Removal (existing)
$ 65,500
New Structure (with Temp. Work Bridge)
6,082,600
Roadway Approaches
339,800•
Miscellaneous and Mobilization
699,100
Engineering and Contingencies
1,113,000
ROW/Const. Easements/Utilities:
169,00011
TOTAL 1
$8,369,000
.x
The estimated cost of the project, as shown in the 2002-2008 Transportation Improvement
Program, is $7,174,000 including $74,000 for right-of-way and $7,100,000 for construction.
V. NATURAL RESOURCES
A. Methodology
Informational sources used to prepare this report include: USGS Stella, NC 7.5 minute
series topographic map (1988); Soil Conservation Service (SCS) Soil Survey of Onslow
County, NC (July, 1992) and Soil Survey of Carteret County, NC (September, 1987); United
States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetlands Inventory map (Stella, NC,
1995); USFWS Endangered, Threatened, and Candidate Species and Federal Species of
Concern in North Carolina (March 22, 2001); North Carolina Natural Heritage Program
(NCNHP) computer database of rare species and unique habitats (January 2001); and
NCDOT aerial photography of the study area.
A general field survey was conducted along the proposed project corridor on March 19,
1998 and October 7, 1998. Plant communities and their associated wildlife were identified

J;w 6 a 204
Alternate B' replaces the bridge downstream of the existing bridge. During construction,
traffic would be maintained on the existing bridge. The proposed bridge would be
approximately 214 meters (713 feet) in length on a two degree (875 meter radius) curve with
a five degree (350 meter radius) east approach curve. Onslow County approach work
includes a minimum resurfacing grade beginning west of the ox bow and placement of rock
fill at the ox bow and guardrail from west the ox bow to the bridge. The project length is 704
meters (2347 feet).
Alternate BZ alignment is identical to Alternate B', but the approach roadway in Onslow
County would be raised approximately 0.76-meter (2.5 feet). The project length is 845
meters (2817 feet).
Alternate C replaces the bridge at the existing location. During construction, one lane of
traffic would be maintained on the existing bridge. The proposed bridge would be
approximately 143 meters (477 feet) in length on a seven degree (250 meter radius) curve.
Traffic would be routed off -site during the construction of the temporary approaches for the
one lane detour structure. Alternate C was eliminated at the early phase of the study
because it provided a one -lane detour bridge to maintain traffic during the anticipated two-
year project duration and would require a road closure to construct the detour approaches.
Alternate E involves replacing the bridge with a new bridge approximately 165 meters (550
feet) in length on a five degree (350 meter radius) curve and minimum approach work.
During construction, traffic would be maintained with an on -site detour. Alternate E includes
additional rock fill in the ox bow to avoid further erosion. The project length is 378 meters
(1260 feet).
The "Do -Nothing" Alternative would eventually necessitate removal of the bridge,
effectively removing this section of SR 1101/SR 1442 from traffic service. This is not
desirable due to the traffic service provided by SR 1101/SR 1442 and the estimated 22-
kilometer (13.8 miles) detour route.
Investigation of the existing structure by the Bridge Maintenance Unit indicates that
rehabilitation of the old bridge is not feasible due to its age and deteriorated condition.
D. Preferred Alternate
Alternate D, replacing the bridge downstream of the existing bridge and raising the grade
on the Onslow County approach, was selected as the preferred alternate because it
minimizes wetland impacts, minimizes impacts to Stella's Historic District, and restores
high quality wetlands. In addition, Alternate D was the only alternate considered to be
constructible. The proposed bridge will be constructed utilizing a temporary work bridge
located south of the existing structure. The length of approach work will be approximately
342.4 meters (1141 feet).
The NEPA/404 Merger Team concurred with Alternate D as the preferred alternative and as
the least environmentally damaging, practical alternative (Appendix C).
s

200�
using a variety of observation techniques including active searching, and identifying
characteristic signs of wildlife such as sounds, tracks, scats, and burrows.
Impact calculations were based on the construction limits for each individual alternate, the
width of the replacement structure, the width of the river, and the length of the project
approaches.
B. Physiography And Soils
The proposed project lies within the Coastal Plain Physiographic Province, which includes
all parts of North Carolina east of the Fall Line. This province typically consists of
unconsolidated sands, silts, clays, and peats. The topography of the project vicinity can be
characterized as nearly level to gently rolling, with elevations ranging from approximately
<1.5 meters to 7.5 meters (< five feet to 25.0 feet) above mean sea level (msl). The
elevation in the project area ranges from approximately <1.5 meters to 4.5 meters (< five
feet to 15.0 feet) above msl. Current land use in the project vicinity includes agricultural and
rural residential, with much of the undeveloped areas being jurisdictional wetlands.
According to the soil surveys for Carteret and Onslow Counties, three different soil
associations are located within the project area. The Muckalee-Dorovan association is
located north and south of the approach west of the White Oak River and consists of nearly
level, poorly and very poorly drained soils. The Lafitte-Hobucken-Carteret and Baymeade-
Onslow-Lynchburg soil associations are located in the project area on the east side of the
Over. The Lafitte-Hobucken-Carteret association consists of very poorly drained, mucky and
sandy soils found in marshes flooded frequently with saltwater. The Baymeade-Onslow-
Lynchburg association is located in areas that parallel drainageways, and includes well
drained to somewhat poorly drained sandy and loamy soils. Field conditions generally,
conform to soil survey mapping.
Seabrook fine sand occurs directly adjacent to the bridge east of the river, and also south of
SR 1101 east of the river in the project area (USDA-SCS, 1987). This soil is moderately
well drained, with rapid permeability. The seasonal high water table is 0.6 to 1.2 meters
(two to four feet) below the surface and flooding occurs rarely in low-lying areas. A small
irregularly shaped wet area occurs directly adjacent to the bridge on the east side of the
river. This area is more sandy than mucky and is probably Leon sand, which occasionally
occurs as an inclusion in the Seabrook fine sand. Leon sand is poorly drained and is listed
as hydric (USDA-SCS, 1991).
Norfolk loamy fine sand, two to six percent slopes, is located on the north side of SR 1101
west of the river. The seasonal high water table is 1.2 to 1.8 meters (four to six feet) below
the surface. This soil is well drained, permeability is moderate, and erosion is a moderate
hazard in areas not protected by vegetation. This soil is not listed as hydric.
Lafitte muck is found on both sides of the roadway approach west of the White Oak River
(USDA-SCS, 1992). This soil is typically found <1.5 meters (< five feet) above msl and is
flooded daily with brackish water. Infiltration and permeability are moderate and the water
table is at or near the surface most of the time. Lafitte muck is listed as hydric (USDA-SCS,
1991).

C. Water Resources
1. Surface Waters
The proposed project falls within the White Oak River Basin, with a subbasin designation
of WOKII (03-05-01) and a federal hydrologic unit designation of White Oak-03020106.
2. Water Resource Characteristics
The White Oak River is a low flowing, coastal river which discharges into Bogue Sound
approximately 8.1 kilometers (five miles) southeast of the project study area. Within the
project study area of Bridge No. 49, the White Oak River flows south to southeast and is
approximately 119 meters (390 feet) wide with a drainage area of 373 square kilometers
(233 square miles). The White Oak River and SR 1101 cross at this location
perpendicular to each other but there is a sharp curve on the western end of the bridge.
On the day of the field investigation the river had a deep, tannin tea color and a low flow.
The depth of the river along the riverbanks ranged from approximately 0.6 to 1.2 meters
(two to four feet). The riverbank substrate consisted of fine silts and sands. The White
Oak River is tidal but also has some wind driven tidal influence as well and is considered
brackish. The river's salinity on the day of the site visit was three parts per thousand.
The White Oak River has a Class SA rating from the North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR). The Class SA indicates the White Oak
River is designated as tidal salt waters protected for shellfishing for market purposes,
primary recreation, aquatic life -propagation and survival, fishing, wildlife and secondary
recreation. The Classification Date and Index for this portion of the Over are 6/1/56, 20-
(18). Approximately 1.6 kilometers (one mile) upstream from the bridge crossing, the
White Oak River is classified as C HQW. The C indicates that the river is suitable for
aquatic life propagation and survival, fishing, wildlife, secondary recreation, and
agriculture. HQW indicates High Quality Waters, which are rated as excellent based on
biological and physicat/chemical characteristics through monitoring or special studies.
Point -source discharges located throughout North Carolina are permitted through the
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program. A search within .the
project vicinity [0.8 kilometers (0.5 miles)] was conducted for NPDES permitted
discharges and none were revealed.
Non -point source refers to runoff that enters surface waters through storm water flow or
no defined point of discharge. In the project study area, storm water runoff from SR
1101 may cause water quality degradation as well as surface runoff from the boat ramp
area in the. southeast quadrant of the project study area.
The North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) includes the North Carolina
Index of Biotic Integrity (NCIBI), as another method to determine general water quality in
the basinwide sampling. The NCIBI is a modification of the Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI)
initially proposed by Karr (1981) and Karr, et. al. (1986). The IBI method was developed
for assessing a stream's biological integrity by examining the structure and health of its
fish community. The Index incorporates information about species richness and
composition, trophic composition, fish abundance, and fish condition. The NCIBI
summarizes the effects of all classes of factors influencing aquatic faunal communities
(water quality, energy source, habitat quality, flow regime, and biotic interactions).

X. j 6 a 2001
According to NCDWQ, the Division has a sampling station located on SR 1101 at Bridge
No. 49 on the White Oak River. This station was last sampled in April of 1995, and
includes a fish community (IBI) sample. The NCDWQ sampling identification number is
95-22. The NCIBI rating of the White Oak River at this location was determined to be
Good.
3. Anticipated Impacts
a) General Impacts
Other than the one water resource mentioned in the previous section, neither High
Quality Waters (HQW), Water Supplies (WS-I: undeveloped watershed, or WS-II:
predominately undeveloped watersheds) nor Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW)
occur within 1.6 km (one mile) of project study area. Impacts to water resources will
result due to the placement of support structures (bents) in the river. In the, short
tens, construction of the bridge and approach work will increase sediment loads.
The NCDOT, in cooperation with the NCDENR, has developed a sedimentation
control program for highway projects that adopts formal Best Management Practices
for the Protection of Surface Waters. The following are methods to reduce
sedimentation and water quality impacts:
• strict adherence to BMPs for the protection of surface waters in sensitive,
water sheds during the life of the project
• reduction and elimination of direct and non -point discharge into the water
bodies and minimization of activities conducted in streams
• placement of temporary ground cover or re -seeding of disturbed sites to
reduce runoff and decrease sediment loadings
• reduction of clearing and grubbing along the river.
b) Impacts Related to Bridge Demolition and Removal
In order to protect the water quality and aquatic life in the area affected by this
project, the NCDOT and all potential contractors will follow appropriate guidelines for
bridge demolition and removal. These guidelines are presented in three NCDOT
documents entitled "Pre -Construction Guidelines for Bridge Demolition and
Removal", "Policy: Bridge Demolition and Removal in Waters of the United States",
and "Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition and Removal" (all
documents dated 9/20/99). Guidelines followed for bridge demolition and removal
are in addition to those implemented for Best Management Practices for the
Protection of Surface Waters.
Dropping any portion of the structure into waters of the United States will be avoided
unless there is no other practical method of removal. The superstructure of Bridge
No. 49 consists of timber flooring on steel I -Beams, with an asphalt -wearing surface.
The substructure consists of timber caps on timber piles. The end bents are timber
abutment design. Since Bridge No. 49 is composed of timber and steel, the bridge
can be removed without dropping any components into waters of the United States.
If removal of the substructure will create disturbance in the streambed, a turbidity
curtain can be used to address sediment concerns.

Under the guidelines presented in the documents noted in the first paragraph of this
section, work done in the water for this project would fall under Case 2, which states
that no work shall be performed in the water during moratorium periods (February 15
to September 30) associated with fish migration, spawning, and larval recruitment
into nursery areas. This conclusion is based upon the classification of the waters
within the project area and vicinity, the Stream Crossing Guidelines for Anadromous
Fish Passage, and comments received from the North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission (NCW RC).
D. Biotic Resources
1. Plant Communities
Living systems described in the following sections include communities of associated
plants and animals in the project area. These descriptions refer to the dominant flora
and fauna in each community and the relationship of these biotic components.
Classification of natural plant communities is based on the system used by the NCNHP
(Schafale and Weakley 1990). Scientific nomenclature and common names (when
applicable) are used for the plant and animal species described. Subsequent references
to the same species include the common name only. Vascular plant names follow
nomenclature found in Radford et al. (1968) unless more current information is available.
Terrestrial and aquatic wildlife were determined through field observations, evaluation of
habitat, and review of field guides and other documentation.
a) Man -Dominated Community
The Man -Dominated Community found at this site includes the road shoulders,
parking lots, and residential and commercial properties within the project area.
Dominant vegetation includes dandelion (Taraxacum officinale), plantain (Plantago
sp.), white clover (Ti folium repens), and planted grass. Parking lots and some parts
of the road shoulders consist of exposed soil. Most areas of the Man -Dominated
community appear to be regularly maintained.
b) Brackish Marsh
This wetland community is located west of the river, north and south of the roadway
approach, and in a small patch that extends under the bridge east of the river.
Dominant vegetation includes black needlerush (Juncus roemerianus), cord grass
(Spartina patens), Olney threesquare (Schpus olneyi), and common reed
(Phragmites australls). Wax myrtle (Myrica cerifera), yaupon holley (Ilex vomitoria),
and eastern redcedar (Juniperus virginiana) are widely scattered throughout. The
depth of surface water in this community on the day of the initial site investigation
ranged from approximately zero to 30 centimeters (zero to 12 inches) and salinity
was three parts per thousand.
2. Wildlife
Plant diversity is low in the Man -Dominated community and there are no areas of vines
or brush that might provide shelter for wildlife. Limited habitat may be available for such
species as American robin (Turdus migratodum), starling (Stumus vulgaris), and house
mouse (Mus musculus).
10

The Brackish Marsh community provides important habitat for a variety of wildlife and
serves as nursery grounds for many aquatic species. Wildlife seen or heard in this
community on the day of the visit included double -crested cormorant (Phalacrocorax
auritus), ring -billed gull .(Lanus delawarensis), Canada goose (Branca canadensis),
mallard (Anas platyrhynchos), red -winged blackbird (Agelaius phoeniceus), and common
crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos).
Other species of ducks and gulls may find food sources in the marsh. King rail (Rallus
elegans) and short -billed marsh wren (Cistothorus platensis) could find suitable winter
habitat in this community and other birds such as least bittern (Ixobrychus exilis) may
find good nesting habitat here. Mammals such as muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus) and
marsh rice rat (Oryzomys palustris) may be found nesting in this community as well.
Diamondback terrapin (Malaclemys terrapin) may be seen here feeding on crabs, small
mollusks, and dead fish, and marsh fiddler crab (Uca pugnax) could reside here, feeding
on organic matter and burying into the substrate. Many other species of wildlife not
listed here may be found in this very productive community.
3. Aquatic Communities
The aquatic community in the project study area exists within the White Oak River_,A
cursory search of the shoreline was conducted for evidence of mussel and clam species.
Hard clam shells (Mercenaria mercenaria) and eastern oyster shells (Crassostrea
virginica) were found along the riverbanks but no other signs of mollusks or bi-valves
were revealed. Signs were posted along both sides of the White Oak River by the North
Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries (NCDMF) closing the shellfish beds and warning
of serious illness if shellfish from this area were consumed. Dip -netting along the
riverbank yielded only juvenile brown shrimp (Penaeus aztecus).
According to the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC), the following
freshwater fish species are found within the White Oak River, redbreast.sunfish;
(Lepomis auritus), chain pickerel (Esox niger), bluegill (Lepomis macrochirus),
pumpkinseed (Lepomis gibbosus), and largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides).
NCWRC stated the following saltwater species were also found in the White Oak River
at this location: herring (Alosa spp.), hickory shad (Alosa mediocris); and striped bass
(Morone,saxatilis). NCWRC recommended no instream work from April 1 to June 15, as
these are critical spawning periods for most sunfish and bass (Centrarchidae family) and
additionally NCWRC recommended no instream activity from February 15 to May 30 due
to anadromous fish migrations. NCWRC also made other bridge replacement
recommendations such as placing the new structure as close as possible to the existing
structure, deck drains should not discharge directly into the Over, live concrete should
not be allowed to contact the water and a clear bank (riprap free) area of at least three
meters (ten feet) should remain on each side of the river underneath the bridge.
NCWRC stated in response to a scoping letter that the bridge should be replaced, in
place, with a spanning structure and with off -site detour. No in -water work should occur
from February 15 to September 30, and that the marsh adjacent to the bridge should be
avoided.
The North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries (NCDMF) stated that they have a
longstanding sampling station at Stella, below Bridge No. 49. From 1978 through 1996
11

for the .Months of May and June these are the most frequently sampled species found at
this location in descending order of abundance; brown shrimp (Penaeus aztecus), spot
(Leiostomus xanthurus), Atlantic croaker (Micropogonias undulatus), American eel
(Anguilla rostrata), bay anchovie (Anchoa mitchilb), Atlantic menhaden (Brevoortia
tyrannus), grass shrimp (Palaemonetes spp.), hog choker (Triunectes maculatus), blue
crab (Callinectes sapidus), weakfish (Cynoscion regalis), pinfish (Lagondon
rhomboides), and southern flounder (Paralichthys lethostigma). NCDMF stated that this
is a primary marine nursery area that has a variable salinity rate depending on rainfall
and wind tides. NCDMF stated the waters are navigable, primarily for recreation
purposes, but some commercial gill netting also occurs here: NCDMF recommended a
dredge moratorium from April 1 to September 30 and advised that the NCDOT needs to
practice strict best management practices (BMPs) when work does begin to replace the
bridge due to it being a primary nursery area.
4. Anticipated Impacts to Biotic Communities
Biotic community impacts expected to result from project construction are addressed
separately as terrestrial impacts and aquatic impacts. However; impacts to terrestrial
communities, particularly in wetland areas and in locations exhibiting slopes, can result
in the aquatic community receiving heavy sediment loads as a consequence of erosion.
It is important to note that construction impacts may not be restricted to the communities
in which the construction activity occurs. Efforts will be made to ensure that no sediment
leaves the construction site.
a) Plant Communities
Plant communities provide nesting, foraging, and shelter habitat for fauna. The loss
of these habitats will result in the displacement and mortality of faunal species in
residence. Individual mortalities may occur to terrestrial animals from construction
machinery used during clearing activities.
Calculated impacts to terrestrial resources reflect the relative abundance of each
community present in the study area. Project construction will result in clearing and
degradation of portions of these communities. Alternate D will result in the least
amount of permanent impacts and will restore a portion of the existing road back to
Brackish Marsh. Table 1 details the anticipated impacts to terrestrial and aquatic
communities by habitat type.
TABLE 1
ANTICIPATED IMPACTS TO
TERRESTRAIL AND AQUATIC COMMUNTIES
PROJECT
BRIDGE
SURFACE
BRACKISH
WETLAND
AQUATIC
ALTERNATE
LENGTH
LENGTH
WATER
MARSH
RESTORATION
COMMUNITY
METERS
METERS
IMPACTS
IMPACTS
HA
HA
(FEET)
(FEET)
LINEAR
HA (ACRE)
(ACRES)
(ACRES)
METERS
(FEET)
D
1077.525
I
704 (2 310)
I 9.6 (32) I
0.008
0.68
0.16
(Preferred)
(3,534)
(0.021)
(1.70)
(0.40
NOTES:
• Calculations for impacts are based on the construction limits.
• Aquatic community impacts are based upon the entire width and length of the bridge over water.
12

0 a 2001
b) Aquatic Communities
The aquatic community in the study area exists within the White Oak River. The
new replacement structure construction and approach work will likely increase
sediment loads in the river in the short term. Construction related sedimentation is
harmful to local populations of invertebrates that are an important part of the aquatic
food chain. Construction activities also increase the possibility of potentially toxic
substances, such as engine fluids and particulate rubber, entering the waterway and
harming aquatic organisms.
The BMPs for the protection of surface waters will be strictly enforced to minimize
potential adverse impacts due to this project. Since White Oak River is potentially
anadromous fish spawning habitat, the NCDOT's Stream Crossing Guidelines for
Anadromous Fish Passage will be adhered to for this project. The purpose of these
guidelines is to provide guidance to the NCDOT to ensure that replacement of
existing and new highway stream crossing structures will not impede the movement
of anadromous fish.
E. Special Topics
1. Waters of the United States
Wetlands and surface waters fall under the broad category of "Waters of the United
States" as defined in 33 CFR 328.3 and in accordance with provisions of Section 404 of
the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344). "Waters of the United States" are regulated by
the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE).
Investigation into wetland occurrence in the project study area was conducted during" the
initial site visit using methods of the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation:
Manual. Wetland areas consisting of Brackish Marsh were found within the western
quadrants of the project study area and in a small patch east of the river.
On October 7, 1998, the wetlands were delineated and surveyed. On December 1, 1998,
the USACE and the Division of Coastal Management met on -site and gave their
agreement of the delineation.
Project construction cannot be accomplished without infringing on jurisdictional surface
waters. Anticipated surface water impacts fall under the jurisdiction of the USACE.
2. Permits
In accordance with provisions of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 U.S.C.
1344), a permit would be required from the USACE for the discharge of dredged or fill
material into "Waters of the United States". Since no significant impacts are expected
from this project, a Categorical Exclusion level study will be initiated. Categorical
Exclusions are subject to the provisions of Nationwide Permit 23. This permit authorizes
any activities, work and discharges undertaken, assisted, authorized, regulated, funded
or financed, in whole or in part, by another federal agency. It states that the activity is
"categorically excluded" from environmental documentation because it is included within
a category of actions which neither individually nor cumulatively have a significant effect
on -the environment. The Categorical Exclusion report is submitted to the USACE to
13

document that the terms and conditions of the Nationwide Permit 23 are met. However,
final permit decisions are left to the discretionary authority of the USACE.
If filling from a proposed project will impact wetlands or waters, a Section 401 Water
Quality Certification may be required from the North Carolina Division of Water Quality.
North Carolina has developed General Certifications (GC) that will satisfy Section 401 of
the CWA and correspond to the USACE's Nationwide Permits. An application must be
made if there are any impacts to "Waters of the United States".
If no practical alternative exists to remove the current bridge other than to drop it into the
water, prior to removal of debris off -site, fill related to demolition procedures will need to
be considered during the permitting process. A worst -case scenario should be assumed
with the understanding that if there is any other practical method available, the bridge
will not be dropped into the water. Permitting should be coordinated such that any
permit needed for bridge construction should also address issues related to bridge
demolition. Since this bridge is of timber and steel construction, removal should be
possible without dropping portions of the bridge into the water.
The White Oak River is subject to tidal influence and thus considered legally navigable
for Bridge Administration Purposes by the U.S. Coast Guard. This waterway meets the
criteria for advance approval waterways outlined in Title 33, Code of Federal
Regulations, Section 115.70, stating that advance approval waterways are those that are
navigable in law, but not actually navigated by other than small boats. The .
Commandant of the Coast Guard has given advance approval of the construction of the
bridge over the White Oak River. Therefore, a Coast Guard permit will not be required
for this project.
3. Division of Coastal Management Consultation
The Division of Coastal Management must be consulted regarding application of the
Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) to this project. Section .2300 of the CAMA
discusses general permits for the replacement of existing bridges. The water at this site
is brackish and the marsh is considered estuarine and will not meet the CAMA general
permit condition of the bridge replacement spanning no more than 75 meters (250 feet)
of estuarine water. A CAMA major permit will be required.
General permit conditions include but are not limited to; single bridge and culvert
projects that do not require temporary fill causeways or temporary bridges associated
with replacements; bridge replacements spanning no more than 75 meters (250 feet) of
estuarine water, public trust area, and coastal wetland Areas of Environmental Concern;
bridge projects which do not increase the vertical clearance to more than 1.5 meters
(five feet) above normal water level or normal high water, or by vertical clearance to
more than 25 percent over the existing clearance, whichever is greater; projects in which
the total area of public trust area, estuarine waters, and wetlands to be excavated or
filled do not exceed 232 square meters (2500 square feet) except that the wetland
component shall not exceed 46.5 square meters (500 square feet); and projects which
DENR determines that the proposed activity would not adversely affect areas which
possess historic, cultural, scenic, conservation, fisheries, water quality, or recreational
values.
14

204
4. Mitigation
The USACE usually requires compensatory mitigation for activities authorized under
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act if unavoidable impacts to waters of the United States
total more than 0.04 hectares (0.1 acre) of wetlands or 45.0 linear meters (150 linear
feet) of perennial and intermittent streams.
The DWQ may require compensatory mitigation for activities authorized under -Section
401 of the Clean Water Act if unavoidable impacts to waters of the United States total
more than 0.40 hectares (one acre) of wetlands and/or 45.0 linear meters (150 linear
feet) of perennial streams. A final determination regarding mitigation requirements rests
with DCM, with input from the COE and DWQ.
F. Protected Species
Some populations of plants and animals are in the process of decline due either to natural
forces or their inability to coexist with humans. Rare and protected species listed for
Carteret and Onslow Counties, and any likely impacts to these species as a result of the
proposed project constriction, are discussed in the following sections.
1. Federally Protected Species
Plants and animals with federal classification of Endangered (E), Threatened (T),
Proposed Endangered (PE), and Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under
provisions of Section 7 and Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended. The USFWS lists fourteen federally protected species for Carteret County
(Table 2) and for Onslow County (Table 2A). Information pertinent to each species and
the possibility of impact due to the proposed project is listed on the following table.
TABLE 2
FEDERALLY PROTECTED SPECIES
FOR CARTERET COUNTY
(MARCH 22, 2001)
Common Name
Scientific Name
Status
Shortnose sturgeon
Acipnserbrevirostrum
E
American alligator
Alligator mississippiensis
T(S/A)
Seabeach amaranth
Amaranthus pumilus
T
Loggerhead sea turtle
Caretta caretta
T
Piping plover
Charadrius melodus
T
Green sea turtle
Chelonia mydas
T
Leatherback sea turtle
Dermochelys codacea
E
Hawksbill turtle
Eretmochelys imbricata
E
Eastern cougar
Felis conco/or couguar
E" #
15

TABLE 2
FEDERALLY PROTECTED SPECIES
FOR CARTERET COUNTY
(MARCH 22, 2001)
Common Name I
Scientific Name
Status
Kemp's (Atlantic) ridley sea
turtle
Lepidochelys kempit
E
Rough -leaved loosestrife
Lysimachia asperulaefolia
E
Red -cockaded woodpecker
Picoides borealis
E
Roseate tem
Sterna dougallii
E
Manatee
Trichechus manatus
E
NU Lb:
Denotes Federally Protected Species for both Carteret and Onslow Counties
Denotes obscure record, date this species was last observed in the county is unknown
E Denotes Endangered (a species that is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of
its range)
T Denotes Threatened (a species that is likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future
throughout all or a significant portion of its range)
T(S/A) Denotes Threatened due to similarity of appearance (species which are threatened due to similarity of
appearance with other rare species and are listed to protect these species)
Historic record at NCNHP. Last observed in the county more than 20 years ago.
# Historic record at USFW S. Last observed in the county more than 50 years ago.
TABLE 2A
FEDERALLY PROTECTED SPECIES
FOR ONSLOW COUNTY
MARCH 22,2001
Common Name
Scientific Name
Status
American alligator
Alligator mississippiensis
T(S/A)
Seabeach amaranth
Amaranthus pumilus
T
Loggerhead sea turtle
Caretta caretta
T
Golden Sedge
CarexLutea
PE
Piping plover
Charadrius melodus
T
Green sea turtle
Chelonia mydas
T
Leatherback sea turtle
Dermochelys codacea
E
Eastern cougar
Felis concolorcouguar
E
Rough -leaved loosestrife
Lysimachia asperulaefolia
E
Red -cockaded woodpecker
Picoides borealis
E
Cooley's meadowrue
Thalictrum coo/eyf
E
NOTE&
Denotes Federally Protected Species for both Carteret and Onslow Counties
Denotes obscure record, date this species was last Observed in the county is unknown
E Denotes Endangered (a species that is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of
its range)
T Denotes Threatened (a species that is likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future
throughout all or a significant portion of its range)
T(S!A) Denotes Threatened due to similarity of appearance (species that are threatened due
to similarity of appearancewithother rare species and are listed to protect these species)
PE Proposed Endangered
16

Species: Acipnser brevirostrum (shortnose sturgeon)
Family: Acipenseridae 4i,, ..
Date Listed: 3/11/67 "1 b e 200f
The shortnose sturgeon is a small (usually less than three ft [0.9 meters] in length) species of
fish that occurs in the lower sections of large rivers and in coastal marine habitats from the St.
John River, Canada to the Indian River, Florida. It can be differentiated from the Atlantic
sturgeon because of its shorter snout, wider mouth, and the pattern of its preanal shields (the
shortnose having one row and the Atlantic having two).
The shortnose sturgeon prefers deep channels with a salinity less than sea water. It feeds on
benthic invertebrates and plant material and is most active at night. It is an anadromous
species that spawns upstream in the spring and spends most of its.life within close proximity of
the rivers mouth. The sturgeon inhabits the lower sections of larger rivers and coastal waters
along the Atlantic coast. It may spend most of the year in brackish or salt water and move into
fresh water only to spawn. At least two entirely freshwater populations have been recorded, in
South Carolina and Massachusetts.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
The White Oak River may provide suitable habitat for the shortnose sturgeon. Through
written communication on August,16, 2001 with Fritz Rohde of the N.C. Division of -
Marine Fisheries, it was determined that there are no records of this species occurring in
the White Oak River and it is unlikely that the shortnose sturgeon would be present.
However, best management practices will insure this project will not affect this species.
In addition, a review of the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHPj database
on August 28, 2001 indicated that there is no known occurrence of the shortnose
sturgeon within one mile (1.6 kilometers) of the project area.
Species: Alligator mississfppiensis (American alligator)
Family: Crocodylidae
Date Listed: 6/4/87
The American alligator is a large (1.8 to 3.7 meters / six to 12 feet long) rough -backed reptile
with a broad, rounded snout. Its fourth tooth on the lower jaw fits into a notch in the upper jaw.
This distinguishes the American alligator from the American crocodile which has its fourth tooth
exposed when the jaw is closed.
American alligators are sexually mature at about six or seven years of age. Nesting occurs in
late spring or early summer when females produce approximately 35 to 40 eggs. American
alligators inhabit fresh to slightly brackish river systems, canals, lakes, ponds, swamps, bayous,
and coastal marshes. The American alligator is not biologically endangered or threatened and
is not subject to Section 7 consultation.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
This species is listed as threatened due to similarity of appearance to the American
crocodile (Crocodylus acutus). Habitat is present for the alligator in the project area, but
not for the crocodile. The range of the American crocodile currently includes southern
portions of the Everglades National Park as well as areas south of there. The American
alligator will not be affected by this project.
17

Species: Amaranthus pumilus (seabeach amaranth)
Family: Amaranthaceae
Date Listed: 4/7/93
Seabeach amaranth is an annual plant that grows on Atlantic Ocean beaches. The stems are
fleshy and pink -red or reddish, with small rounded leaves. The leaves are clustered toward the
tip of the stem and have a small notch at the rounded tip. Flowering occurs in July and
continues until the ieath of the plant in late fall.
Seabeach amaranth is found on the upper beach and lower foredune of coastal barrier islands.
The species is an effective sand binder, building dunes where it grows.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
Suitable beach habitat does not exist in the project area forthis species. The NCNHP
database shows no recorded occurrences of the seabeach amaranth in the vicinity of the
project. The seabeach amaranth will not be affected by this project.
Species: Caretta caretta (Loggerhead sea turtle)
Family: Cheloniidae
Date Listed: 7/28/78
The Loggerhead sea turtle is characterized by a large head with blunt jaws. The carapace
and flippers are a reddish -brown color and the plastron is yellow. Adults grow to an average
weight of about 91 kilograms (200 pounds), although some specimens may occasionally reach
1000 pounds. The species feeds on mollusks, crustaceans, fish and other marine animals. The
loggerhead is typically found at sea but may enter bays and lagoons. It nests on beaches in
late spring and early summer.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
Nesting habitat does not exist for this species however it could occasionally be found
feeding in the vicinity of the project. If the loggerhead is observed in the project area
during construction, activities will cease until the turtle leaves. The Loggerhead sea
turtle will not be affected by this project.
Species: Carex Lutea (Golden Sedge) Proposed Endangered
Family: Cyperaceae
Date Listed: 8/16/99
The golden sedge has yellowish green, grass -like leaves and produces stems that may reach
three feet (0.9 meter) or more with many flowers. This perennial plant is native to the coastal
plain of North Carolina, where it is associated with wet partially wooded ecotones between
longleaf pine savannas and non-riverine tree swamps on sites underlain with calcareous
(chalky) deposits. Historically, its open habitat was maintained by periodic wildfires.
The golden sedge currently is known only from eight populations in Pender and Onslow
counties. Most of the populations are small, and seven are on privately owned lands vulnerable
to draining, development, mining, fire suppression, and a variety of other changes in habitat
management.
18

BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO. EFFECT
Suitable habitat for golden sedge in the form of partially wooded ecotones between
longleaf pine savannas and non-riverine tree swamps does not exist within the project
area. In addition, a review of the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP)
database on August 28, 2001 indicated that there is no known occurrence of golden
sedge within one mile (1.6 kilometers) of the project area. Therefore, this project will not
affect this species.
Species: Charadrius melodus (piping. plover)
Family: Charaddidae
Date Listed: 12/11/85
The piping plover is a small, stocky shorebird resembling a sandpiper. The plover is pale
brownish above and white below. A black band across the forehead over -the eye, and a black
ring around the base of the neck are distinguishing marks in adults during the summer, but are
obscure during the winter.
The piping plover nests on sand beaches, preferring sparsely vegetated areas that are slightly
raised in elevation. The species is primarily coastal during the winter, choosing areas with
expansive sand or mudflats for feeding that lie in close proximity to a sandy beach for roosting.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
Habitat does not exist in the project area for this species.since no tidal flats or sandy
beaches are in the area. A search of the NCNHP database showed no recorded
occurrences of this species within the project vicinity. The piping plover will not be
affected by this project.
Species:
Chelonia mydas (Green sea turtle)
Family:
Cheloniidae
Date Listed:
7/28178
The green sea turtle grows to a maximum size of about four feet and a weight of 200 kilograms
(440 pounds). It has a heart -shaped shell, small head, and single -clawed flippers. The adult
carapace is smooth, keelless, and light to dark brown with dark mottling. The plastron is whitish
to light yellow and the head is light brown with yellow markings. Adult green turtles feed mainly
on marine algae and grasses in shallow water areas.
Green turtles are generally found in fairly shallow waters (except when migrating) inside reefs,
bays, and inlets. Open beaches with a sloping platform and minimal disturbance are required
for nesting.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
Habitat does not exist for this species since no beaches are within the project area. A
search of the NCNHP database showed no recorded occurrences of this species within
the project vicinity. The Green sea turtle will not be affected by this project.
Species: Dermochelys coriacea (leatherback sea turtle)
Family: Dermochelyidae
19

Date Listed: 6/2/70
The leatherback sea turtle is the largest of all sea turtles and is easily distinguished by its ,.
leathery skin. Adults generally weigh from 290 and 590 kilograms (640 to 1300 pounds). The
neck and limbs are thick and feebly retractable. The triangular shaped carapace is covered with
a layer of rubbery skin rather than homy shields. The head and neck are black or dark brown
with a few white or yellow blotches.
The leatherback sea turtle is typically found at sea. It requires sandy -nesting beaches backed
with vegetation and sloped sufficiently so that the crawl to dry sand is not too far. The preferred
beaches are in close proximity to deep water and generally rough seas.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
There are no sandy beaches in the project vicinity for nesting and this species is typically
found at sea. A search of the NCNHP database showed no recorded occurrences of
this species within the project vicinity. The leatherback sea turtle will not be affected by
this project.
Species: Eretmochelys imbricata (hawksbill turtle)
Family: Chelonddae
Date Listed: 6/2f70
The hawksbill turtle weighs between 43 and 75 kilograms (95 and 165 pounds) and measures
approximately 76 to 89 centimeters (30 to 35 inches) in length. The shell is oval and usually
brown with scattered areas of yellow, orange, or reddish -brown. The flippers have two claws
and barnacles are often attached to the carapace and plastron.
The hawksbill turtle inhabits shallow coastal waters and feeds on mollusks, sea urchins,
barnacles, fish, sponges, and algae. It usually nests on islands in tropical and subtropical seas.
Continental United States nesting is limited to Florida, however this species can be found along
the coastline from Massachusetts southward.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
The project vicinity does not provide nesting habitat for this species and it is unlikely that
it would be found feeding there. In the event that a sea turtle is spotted during
construction, activities will be halted until it is out of the project area. The hawksbill turtle
will not be affected by this project.
Species:
Felis concolor couguar (Eastern cougar)
Family:
Felidae
Date Listed:
6/4/73
Cougars are tawny colored with the exception of the muzzle, the backs of the ears, and the tip
of the tail, which are black. In North Carolina, the cougar is thought to occur in only a few
scattered areas, possibly including coastal swamps and the southern Appalachian Mountains.
The eastern cougar is found in large remote wilderness areas where there is an abundance of
their primary food source, whitetail deer. A cougar will usually occupy a range of 40 kilometers
(25 miles), and is usually most active at night.
20

BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
J .N 0 � 204a
The project is not adjacent to an undisturbed area that could provide food and shelter for
the cougar. The NCNHP database reports no recorded occurrences of this species
within the vicinity of the project. The Eastern cougar will not be affected by this project.
Species:
Lepidochelys kempii (Kemp's (Atlantic) ridley)
Family:
Cheloniidae
Date Listed:
12/2/70
The Kemp's ridley sea turtle has a triangular -shaped head and a hooked beak with crushing
surfaces. The shell is heart -shaped and gray to olive green. This species ranges in length from
about 56 to 71 centimeters (22 to 28 inches) and weighs between 35 and 42 kilograms (77 and
93 pounds).
Adult turtles are restricted to the Gulf of Mexico, however immatures have been seen along the
Atlantic coast as far north as Massachusetts. The Kemp's ridley feeds primarily on crabs, but
also eats shrimp, snails, sea urchins and fish.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
Nesting habitat for this species does not exist in the vicinity of the project. In the event
that immatures wander into the project area, construction activities will be halted until
they have left. The NCNHP reports no sitings of this species within the project vicinity.
The Kemp's ridley will not be affected by this project.
Species:
Lysimachia asperulaefolia (rough -leaved loosestrife)
Family:
Primulaceae
Date Listed:
6/12/87
The rough -leaved loosestrife is a rhizomatous perennial herb with whorls of three to four
leaves encircling a slender stem. This plant reaches 0.3 to 0.6 meters (one to two feet) in
height. Showy yellow flowers are produced from mid -May through June and fruits are present
from July through October.
The rough -leaved loosestrife is endemic to the coastal plain and sandhills of North Carolina and
South Carolina. It occurs in open ecotones between longleaf pine uplands and pond pine
pocosin, on moist to seasonally saturated sands and on shallow organic soils overlaying sand.
It has also been found on deep peat in the low shrub community of large Carolina bays.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
This habitat type does not exist in the project area. There are no areas of longleaf pines
or adjacent pond pine pocosins. A search of the NCNHP database showed no recorded
occurrences of this species within the project vicinity. The rough -leaved loosestrife will
not be affected by this project.
Species: Picoides borealis (red -cockaded woodpecker)
Family: Picidae
Date Listed: 10/13/70
21

The red -cockaded woodpecker is a small 18 to 20 centimeters (seven to eight inches) long
bird with black and white horizontal stripes on its back, a black cap and a large white cheek
patch. The male has a small red spot or "cockade" behind the eye.
The preferred nesting habitat of the red -cockaded woodpecker is open stands of pine with a
minimum age of 60 to 120 years. Longleaf pine (Pinus palustris) is preferred for nesting;
however other mature pines such as loblolly (Pinus taeda) may be utilized. Typical nesting
areas, or territories, are pine stands of approximately 81 hectares (200 acres), however nesting
has been reported in stands as small as 24 hectares (60 acres). Preferred foraging habitat is
pine and pine -hardwood stands of 80 to 125 acres with a minimum age of 30 years and a
minimum diameter of 25 centimeters (ten inches). The red -cockaded woodpecker utilizes these
areas to forage for food sources such as ants, beetles, wood -boring insects, caterpillars, and
seasonal wild fruit.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
There are no pine stands in the project area to support nesting or foraging activities for
this species. The NCNHP database reports no recorded occurrences of the woodpecker
in the vicinity of the project. The red -cockaded woodpecker will not be affected by this
project.
Species: Sterna dougallii (roseate tern)
Family: Laridae
Date Listed: 11/2/87
The roseate tern is approximately 40 centimeters (16 inches) in length, with light gray wings
and a black cap. The back is gray and the rest of the body is white, with a rosy blush on the
chest and belly during the breeding season. The tail is deeply forked and the bill is black.
This species breeds from Florida through the West Indies and islands off Central America and
northern South America. Habitat includes small offshore islands, rocks, and cays. These birds
are often seen nesting on open beaches or near the shoreline on rocks.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
Although a breeding pair was noted in Carteret County in the 1970's, this species is
mainly a rare coastal transient. Breeding habitat is not located within the project area
and the NCNHP reports no recorded occurrences of the tern within the project vicinity.
The roseate tern will not be affected by this project.
Species: Thalictrum cooleyi (Cooley's meadowrue)
Family: Ranunculaceae
Date Listed: 2/7/89
Cooley's meadowrue is a,perennial herb that grows from an underground rhizome. Under
ideal conditions, in full sun, the stems are erect, however in the shade they are lax and may trail
along the ground. The leaflets are green and the leaves are usually in groups of three.
Cooley's meadowrue flowers in mid- to late June.
22

Cooley's meadowrue is found in moist to wet bogs and savannahs. It grows along fireplow
lines, roadside ditches, woodland clearings, and power line right-of-ways, requiring some type of
disturbance to maintain its open habitat.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
This habitat type does not exist in the project area. There are no wet bogs or wet pine
savannahs and a search of the NCNHP database showed no recorded occurrences of
this species within the project vicinity. The Cooley's meadowrue will not be affected by
this project.
Species: Trichechus manatus (manatee)
Family: Trichechidae
Date Listed: 612170
The West Indian manatee is a large aquatic mammal that reaches a length of approximately
three meters (ten feet) and a weight of about 454 kilograms (1,000 pounds). The forelimbs are
paddlelike and the tail is oval and horizontally flattened. The body is gray to brown and hair is
mostly absent except for stiff whiskers on the upper lip.
This species inhabits coastal waters, estuaries, and freshwater streams bordering tropical and
subtropical seas, but may enter waters near North Carolina in. summer months. The manatee is
herbivorous and feeds on aquatic vegetation, preferring grasses.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
Although it is possible that this species could migrate into the project area during
summer months, occurrences would be rare. The NCNHP database reports no
recorded occurrence of the manatee in the vicinity of the project, however if one is
sighted, construction activities will be halted until it has left the area. The manatee will
not be affected by this project.
2. Federal Species of Concern
Federal Species of Concern (FSC) are not legally protected under the Endangered
Species Act and are not subject to any of its provisions, including Section 7, until they
are formally proposed or listed as Threatened of Endangered. Species designated as
FSC are defined as taxa that may or may not be listed in the future. These species were
formerly Candidate 2 (C2) species or species under consideration for listing for which
there is insufficient information to support listing. Some of these species are listed as
Endangered, Threatened, or Special Concern by the NCNHP database of rare plant and
animal species and are afforded state protection under the State Endangered Species
Act and the North Carolina Plant Protection and Conservation Act of 1979. Table 3
provides the Federal Species of Concern in Carteret County and their state
classifications, and Table 3A provides the same information for Onslow County.
23

TABLE 3
NORTH CAROLINA STATUS OF FEDERAL SPECIES
OF CONCERN IN CARTERET COUNTY
March 22, 2001
Common Name
Scientific Name
North
Carolina
Status
Habitat
Present
Bachman's sparrow
Aimophila aestivalis
SC
No
Henslow's sparrow
Ammodramus henslowii
SR
No
Argos skipper
Atrytone argos argos
SR
No
Bogue Banks endemic skipper
Atrytonopsis spl
SR
No
Chapman's sedge
Carex chapmanii ♦
NL
No
Savanna campylopus
Campylopus carolinae
C
No
Venus flytrap
Dionea muscipula
C-SC
No
Southern hognose snake
Heterodon simus'
SR
No
Venus flytrap cutworm moth
Hemipachnobia subporphyrea subporphyrea
SR
No
Black rail
Laterallus jamaicensis
SR
Yes
Pondspice
Litsea aestivalis
C
No
Northern diamondback terrapin
Malaclemys terrapin terrapin ♦
Sc
Yes
Loose watermilfoil
Mynophyllum laxum
T
No
Mimic glass lizard
Ophisaurus mimicus
Sc
No
Savanna cowbane
Oxypolis temata •
NL
No
Eastern painted bunting
Passerina cin's ciris
SR
No
Croatan crayfish
Procambarus plumimanus♦
SR
Yes
Carolina gopher frog
Rana capito capito
SC
No
Carolina goldenrod
Solidago pulchra
E
No
Spring -flowering goldenrod
Solidago vema ■
T
No
Carter's noctuid moth
Spartiniphaga carterae
SR
No
Carolina asphodel
Tofieldia glabra
C
No
Dune bluecurls
Trichostema sp. 1
C
No
NOTES: Denotes FSCs for both Carteret and Onslow Countles
Indicates species was last observed in the county more than 20 years ago.
• Listed by USFWS but not by NCNHP.
Listed by NCNHP but not by USFWS.
E Denotes Endangered (species which are afforded protection by state laws).
T Denotes Threatened (species which are afforded protection by state laws).
sc Denotes Special Concern (species which are afforded protection by state laws).
PT Denotes Proposed Threatened (species which are proposed for official listing as threatened).
C Denotes Candidate (species for which population monitoring and conservation action is recommended).
SR Denotes Significantly Rare (species for which population monitoring and conservation action is recommended).
NL Not listed.
24

J'6 �! fi 5 200RH
TABLE 3A
NORTH CAROLINA STATUS OF FEDERAL SPECIES
OF CONCERN IN ONSLOW COUNTY
ommon Name
Scientific Name
North Carolina
Status
Habitat
Present
Bachman's sparrow
Aimophila aestivalis
SC
No
Henslow's sparrow
Ammodramus henslowii
SR
No
Carolina spleenwort
Asplenium heteroresifiens
E
No
Chapman's sedge
Carex chapmanii ♦
NL
No
Hirst's panic grass
Dichanthelium sp. f (= hirstfl)
E
No
Venus flytrap
Dionea muscipula
C-SC
No
Southern hognose snake
Heterodon sinus
SR
No
black rail
Laterallus jamaicensis
SR
Yes
pondspice
Litsea aestivalis
C
No
Boykin's lobelia
Lobelia boykinif
C
Na
loose watermilfoil
Mynophyllum laxum
T
No
mimic glass lizard
Ophisaurus mfmicus
SC
No
savanna cowbane
Oxypolis temata ♦
NL
No
Carolina grass-of-pamassus
Pamassia caroliniana
E
No
Eastern painted bunting
Passerina ciris ciris
SR
Nof
Croatan crayfish
Procambarus plumimanus
NL
Yes
Carolina gopher frog
Rana capito capito
SC
No
awned meadow beauty
Rhexia anstosa
T
No
Thorne's beaksedge
Rhynchospora thomei
E
No
Carolina goldenrod
Solidago pulchra
E
No
Spring -flowering goldenrod
Solidago vema
T
No
Carolina asphodel
Tofieldia glabra
C
No
NOTES:
♦ Listed by USFW S but not by NCNHP.
E Denotes Endangered (species which are afforded protection by state laws).
T Denotes Threatened (species which are afforded protection by state laws).
sc Denotes Special Concern (species which are afforded protection by state laws).
C Denotes Candidate (species for which population monitoring and conservation action is recommended).
SR Denotes Significantly Rare (species for which population monitoring and conservation action is recommended).
NL Not listed.
A search of the NCNHP database showed no recorded occurrences of any FSC within the
project vicinity.
25

VI.
'3. Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Habitat is present in the project area for the American alligator; however, this•species is
listed as threatened by similarity of appearance to a rare species. It is not biologically
threatened and it is not subject to a Section 7 consultation. No individuals were
observed at the time of the site visit. No habitat is present for any other federally
protected species.
CULTURAL RESOURCES
A. Compliance Guidelines
This project is subject to compliance with Section 106 of the National Historical Preservation
Act of 1966, as amended, implemented by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800. Section 106
requires that for federally funded, licensed, or permitted projects having an effect on
properties listed in or eligible for the National Register of Historic Places, the Advisory
Council on Historic Preservation be given the opportunity to comment.
B. Historic Architecture
A preliminary field survey of the Area of Potential Effects (APE) was conducted on February
18, 1998. All structures within the APE were photographed, and later reviewed by the North
Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (HPO). In a memorandum dated June 18, 1998,_
the Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) recommended a survey of the
project's APE. A copy of the memorandum is included in the Appendix A.
In a letter dated April 23, 1999, the SHPO concurred with the findings of the Historic
Architecture Survey Report that concluded that the Stella Historic District is eligible for the
National Register of Historic Places under Criterion A for community development, and
Criterion C for architecture. Further, they concurred with the district's boundaries, except for
the western edge that should encompass Bridge No. 49 as a contributing element to the
district. A copy of the HPO letter is included in the Appendix A.
In a concurrence form dated August 5, 1999, the SHPO concurred with the Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) that the replacement of Bridge No. 49 over the White Oak River will
have an adverse effect on the Stella Historic District since the existing bridge will be
demolished. The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation filed a Memorandum of
Agreement (MOA) between the Federal Highway Administration and the SHPO for
mitigating the adverse effects of the bridge replacement project on the historic district. A
copy of the MOA is included in the Appendix A.
C. Archaeology
The SHPO, in a memorandum dated June
investigation be conducted in connection
memorandum is included in the Appendix A.
18, 1998, recommended, "no archeological
with this project". A copy of the SHPO
�z

.l.c ! 0 5 200�
VII. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
The project is expected to have an overall positive impact. Replacement of an inadequate
bridge will result in safer traffic operations.
The project is a Federal "Categorical Exclusion" due to its limited scope and lack of significant
environmental consequences.
The bridge replacement will not have an adverse effect on the quality of the human or natural
environment with the use of current NCDOT standards and specifications.
The project is not in conflict with any plan, existing land use, or zoning regulation. No significant
change in land use is expected to result from construction of the project.
No adverse impact on communities is anticipated. Right-of-way acquisition will be limited. No
relocatees are expected with implementation of the proposed alternative.
No adverse effect on public facilities or services is anticipated. The project is not expected to
adversely affect social, economic, or religious opportunities in the area.
There are no publicly owned parks, recreational facilities, or wildlife and waterfowl refuges of
national, state, or local significance in the vicinity of the project.
No geodetic survey markers will be impacted.
The Farmland Protection Policy Act requires all federal agencies or their representatives to
consider the potential impacts to prime and important farmland soils by all land acquisition and
construction projects. Prime and important farmland soils are defined by the Natural Resources
Conservation Service (NRCS). Since there are no prime or important farmlands in-, the
immediate vicinity of the proposed bridge the Farmland Protection Policy does not apply.
This project is an air quality "neutral" project, so it is not required to be included the regional
emission analysis (if applicable) and a project level CO analysis is not required.
This project is located in Carteret and Onslow Counties, which have been determined to be in
compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. 40 CFR Part 51 is not applicable,
because the proposed project is located in an attainment area. This project is not anticipated to
create any adverse effects on the air quality of this attainment area.
The traffic volumes will not increase or decrease because of this project. There are no
receptors located in the immediate project area. The project's impact on noise and air quality
will not be significant.
Noise levels could increase during construction but will be temporary. If vegetation is disposed
of by burning, all burning shall be done in accordance with applicable local laws and regulations
of the North Carolina SIP for air quality in compliance with 15 NCAC 2D.0520. This evaluation
completes the assessment requirements for highway traffic noise (23 CFR Part 772) and for air
quality (1990 CAAA and NEPA) and no additional reports are required.
An examination of records at the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural
Resources, Division of Environmental Management, Groundwater Section and the North
27

Carolina Department of Human Resources, Solid Waste Management Section revealed no
hazardous waste sites in the project area. There are no underground storage tanks located in
the project area.
Onslow County and Carteret County are participants in the National Flood Insurance Program.
This site on White Oak River is included in an approximate Federal Emergency Management
study. Attached is a copy of the Flood Insurance Rate Map, on which are shown the
approximate limits of the 100-year flood plain in the vicinity of the project (Figure 5, Appendix B).
Adverse impacts to the historic district are anticipated, but will be compensated through
mitigation (see Appendix A).
On the basis of the above discussion, it is concluded that no significant adverse environmental
effects will result from implementation of the project.
Vill. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
Efforts were undertaken early in the planning process to contact local officials and residents to
involve them in the project development. Two Local Officials Meetings and two Citizens
Informational Workshops were held at the Midway United Methodist Church in Stella on
December 14, 1998, and September 14, 1999, where preliminary alternatives were reviewed
and discussed with local officials and concerned citizens.
Alternate D was not presented at the first_ local officials meeting and citizens workshop but was
discussed. The local official preferred Alternate D. Alternate, D was presented (required
removing the warehouse) at the second local officials meeting and workshop. Approximately 30
people attended the second Citizen's Informational Workshop and 11 comment sheets were
received. at the workshop, most of which are in favor of replacing the bridge. (Alternate A-3,
Alternate B-0, Alternate D-5, Undecided-3)
Citizens and local officials concerns included the necessity to maintain traffic onsite, maintaining
the existing boat ramp, improving safety for bridge approaches and minimizing affects to the
post office.
Alternate D was revised so the proposed design would not Femove the warehouse or post office
in response to the comments received at the workshop. The proposed new bridge will be
constructed as close to the existing bridge as practicable to avoid and minimize impacts to the
proposed historic district. The proposed design speed of 70 km/h (45 mph) will minimize
impacts to the post office and warehouse, and also allows for the existing clearance over the
White Oak River to be maintained. For approach roadway tie-ins, traffic will be temporarily
detoured off site.
IX. AGENCY COORDINATION
March 18, 1999 a meeting was held with USACE and NCWRC to review Alternatives A; B, C
and D. As a result it was determined a detailed Bridge Survey Report should be prepared to
eliminate concerns that Alternate A, B and C provided adequate flood protection and to present
alternates at an interagency review meeting.
On October 28, 1999, an interagency review meeting was held at NCDOTs Transportation
Building Room 467. Agencies in attendance were DCM, USFWS, NCDWQ, FHWA, NCWRC,
28

USACE, and NCDMF. Results of the Bridge Survey Report recommended raising the grade 2.5
feet to reduce flooding of the roadway for Alternate A and B. It was also decided that the ox
bow area along the approach would require stabilization for Alternates A and B. FHWA
suggested realigning Alternate D to avoid impacting the warehouse.
On February 20, 2000, a Merger Team Meeting was held on site. Representatives from
USFWS, FHWA, NCWRC, USACE, NMF, DCM and NCDOT were present. As a result of the
field meeting the following was concluded:
• Based on the roadway history and visual observation of the site it is not anticipated
that the river will migrate at the ox bow within the life of the proposed new bridge.
• NCDOT-Geotechnical Unit does not recommend Alternate A or Alternate B due to
differential settling where the grade will be raised on the Onslow County approach.
• It was recommended that an alternate with minimum approach work be designed
(Alternate E).
• Alternates needed updated cost with barge construction over the river and top -down
construction over the marshland.
On June 9, 2000 a Merger Team Meeting was held at NCDOT's Century Center. As a result of
this meeting, forms for Concurrence Point No. 1, 2, and 3 were signed. It was the consensus of
all the agencies present that Alternate Deis the preferred alternate with top down construction
(Appendix C).
On May 17, 2001 a Merger Team Meeting was held at NCDOTs Transportation Building Board
of Transportation Conference Room to revise Concurrence Point 3 to show Alternate D as
preferred and to present Concurrence Point 4-Avoidance and Minimization.
Alternate D revision included a temporary work bridge for the construction of the proposed
bridge. This was recommended by NCDOT since'the bridge will be built with prestressed
girders due to the vertical and horizontal alignment. Building with temporary bridges will
minimize wetland impacts and lessen construction duration.
Concurrence Point 4 — Avoidance and Minimization was discussed. For avoidance and
minimization, the following measures will be accomplished:
1. Anticipated impacts to wetlands 0.008 hectare (0.021 acre).
2. Restoration of wetlands of approximately 0.69 hectare (1.70 acres).
3. Replacing 131.7-meter (432400t) bridge with a 704-meter (2,347-foot) bridge.
4. Design exception to reduce the design speed from 90 km/h (55 mph) to a design
speed of 70 km/h (45 mph) to minimize impacts in the historic district and eliminate
impacts to the cemetery.
5. Design exception for the horizontal clearance to maintain the existing canopy
attached to the post office and to minimize impacts in the historic district.
6. Reduced spans and girder depth to maintain clearance over the White Oak River
and minimize impacts to the historic district.
29

All team members present except DCM signed Concurrence Points 3 and 4 at the meeting.
SHPO, DCM and NMF concurred and signed after the meeting (Appendix C).
X. SECTION 4(F) EVALUATION
Part 23 CFR 771.135 Section 4(f) (49 U.S.C. 303) states that "The Administrator may not
approve the use of land from a significant publicly owned public park, recreation area, or wildlife
and waterfowl refuge, or any significant historic site unless a determination is made that:
(i) There is no feasible and prudent alternative to the use of land from the property;
and
(ii) The action includes all possible planning to minimize harm to the property
resulting from such use."
In accordance with the criteria set forth in the Federal Register December 23, 1986, the
following Programmatic Section 4(f) for Minor Involvements with Historic Sites evaluation was
prepared:
Stella retains a significant collection of buildings dating from the late nineteenth and
early twentieth centuries, including a general store/post office, warehouse, and several "
dwellings and outbuildings. Bridge No. 49 on SR 1101 and SR 1442 overthe White Oak
River was built in 1950. The approximate 131.7-meter (432-foot) long, multiple -span
structure contains twenty-three timber spans and one steel -deck girder main span.
In a letter dated April 23, 1999, the State Historic Preservation Officer concurred with
FHWA the findings of the Historic Architecture Survey Report that concluded that the
Stella Historic District (see Figure 2A and Figure 6) is eligible for the National Register of
Historic Places under Criterion A for community development, and Criterion C for
architecture. Further, they concurred with the district's boundaries, except for the
western edge that should encompass Bridge No. 49 as a contributing element to the
district. A copy of the SHPO letter is included in the Appendix A.
Since this project necessitates the use of a minor amount of land from a historic site,
which is adjacent to the existing roadway, and since the project meets the criteria set
forth in the Federal Register (December 23, 1986), a programmatic Section 4(f)
evaluation satisfies the requirements of Section 4(f).
The following alternatives, which avoid use of the historic site, have been fully evaluated: (1) do
nothing; (2) improve the highway without using the adjacent historic site; (3) build the
replacement structure on new location without using the historic site.
No Build Alternative: The No Build or "Do -Nothing" alternative is not. considered feasible
and prudent because the bridge will eventually deteriorate beyond repair and
necessitate closure of the bridge. This is not prudent due to the traffic service provided
by SR 1101 and SR 1442.
Rehabilitation of the Existing Bridge: This alternative is not considered to be feasible and
prudent due to the age and deteriorated condition of the existing bridge. In addition, the
existing bridge deck is only 7.2 meters (24 feet) wide and is functionally obsolete. The
NCDOT Bridge Policy requires a minimum clear roadway width of 8.6 meters (28 feet)
based on the traffic volumes and design speed.
30

200:��
Replacement of Bridge No. 49 on New Location (Figure 2A): Moving the bridge location
to a point either upstream or downstream of the current location to avoid impacts to the
proposed historic district would negatively impact the district by disrupting a major
element of the setting for the district and will result in substantial disruption to the
environment and local businesses. An alternative on new location will not provide the
same transportation access and service as the current location. Therefore, this
alternative is not considered feasible or prudent.
These alternatives were not found to be feasible and prudent.
All possible planning to minimize harm to the historic site has been performed as an
integral part of this project. The following mitigation measures will be carried out for the
replacement of Bridge No. 49:
1. A design exception to reduce the design speed to 70 km/h (45 mph) from 90
km/h (55 mph) to minimize impacts to the 4(f) property will be processed.
2. The proposed bridge will be within 3 meters (10 feet) of the existing bridge and a
temporary shoring will be required during construction to maintain traffic and to
minimize impacts to the 4(f) property.
3. The approved Memorandum of Agreement (MOA):
a. Recordation: Prior to the demolition of Bridge No. 49, NCDOT shall
record the existing conditions of the bridge and its surroundings as well
as the general store/post office and 2-story, brick warehouse within the
historic district in accordance with the Historic Structures and Landscape
Recordation Plan. The written and photographic documentation will be
deposited with the North Carolina Division of Archives and History/SHPO
to be made part of the permanent statewide survey and iconographic
collection.
b. Replacement Bridge Design: NCDOT will use a two -bar metal rail on the
replacement bridge. Prior to Right of Way acquisition, NCDOT will
provide the North Carolina SHPO final design plans for the -replacement
bridge for their comments.
c. Future Widening of Shoulders and Approaches: NCDOT will notify the
division and district engineers that no widening of the shoulders on the
approaches can be undertaken in the future without first consulting with
the North Carolina SHPO. To ensure this, maps of the Stella Historic
District will be integrated into the highways maps regularly reviewed by
the division and district engineers.
Dispute Resolution: Should the North Carolina SHPO object within thirty
(30) days to any plans or documentation provided for review pursuant to
this agreement, FHWA shall consult with the North Carolina SHPO to
resolve the objection. If FHWA or the North Carolina SHPO determines
that the objection cannot be resolved, FHWA shall forward all
documentation relevant to the dispute to the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation (Council). Within thirty (30) days after receipt of all pertinent
documentation, the Council will either.
31

i. Provide FHWA with recommendations which FHWA will take into
account in reaching a final decision regarding the dispute, or
ii. Notify FHWA that it will comment pursuant to 36 CFR Section
800.7(c)) and proceed to comment. Any Council comment
provided in response to such a request will be taken into account
by FHWA in accordance with 36 CFR Section 800.7(c)(4) with
reference to the subject of the dispute.
Any recommendation or comment provided by the Council will be understood
to pertain only to the subject of the dispute; FHWA's responsibility to carry out
all the actions under this that are not the subject .of the dispute will remain
unchanged.
This project has been coordinated with the North Carolina State Historic Preservation
Officer (SHPO), whose correspondence is included in Appendix A. The SHPO has
concurred that this project, as proposed, has an adverse effect, because the bridge will
be replaced with regard to the historic district. Approval of the Programmatic Section
4(f) evaluation by the FHWA Division of Administrator, is included in this document.
The owners of the general store/post office and warehouse have concurred with
Alternate D as the preferred alternative and all possible planning and coordination to
minimize impact to the Historic District were incorporated into this project. The approved
is included in Appendix A.
32

f) i 200;
Stella Bridge Mitigation Plan
Bridge No.49 over the White Oak River on SR 1101 in Carteret County
and SR 1442 in Onslow County.
TIP B-2938
Federal Aid Project No.BRZ-1 101 (5)
State Project No. 8.2160801
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
Office of Natural Environment
May 2003

1.0 Introduction
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to replace Bridge No.49
over the White Oak River on SR 1101 in Carteret County and SR 1442 in Onslow County (see
Figure 1). As a component of the project, the existing causeway will be removed and the area
will be graded to the elevation of the adjacent wetland.
1.1 Wetland Resources
Within the project area, a brackish marsh lies along the southern and western banks of the White
Oak River. Existing marsh vegetation primarily consists of big cordrass (Spartina
cynosuroides), black needle rush (Juncos roemerianus), saltmeadow cordgrass (Spartina patens),
and common reed (Phragmites australis) along the edges of the causeway. An occasional
Eastern red cedar (Juniperus virginiana), wax myrtle (Myrica cerifera), and yaupon holly (Ilex
vomitoria) exists throughout the marsh.
1.2 Summary of Mitigation
Wetland restoration associated with TIP B-2938 will be accomplished by removal of 1.7 ac of
the existing causeway and vegetating with species matching the target wetland community (see
Figure 2). Proposed impacts to jurisdictional wetlands due to the replacement of Bridge No. 49
are below the threshold for compensatory mitigation. Therefore, the entire 1.7 ac of restoration
will be available for future projects in the White Oak River Basin (03030001 CU).
2.0 B-2938 Onsite Mitigation
The purpose of this report is to document the existing site conditions at the location of the
proposed replacement of Bridge No. 49, to describe the wetland restoration, and to establish the
monitoring for the onsite restoration site. This plan includes on -site wetland restoration
associated with the planned removal of the bridge causeway.
2.1 Site Descriptions
The total project area for the bridge replacement is approximately 9.8 ac in size. The change in
elevation across the site is from 0.5 feet above mean sea level (msl) to 5.0 feet above msl.
The soils in this area are mapped by the Soil Survey of Onslow County (SCS, 1992) as the
Muckalee-Dorovan association. However, Lafitte muck is the dominant soil type in the study
area and is found on both sides of the roadway approach west of the White Oak River. This soil
is typically found less than 5f3 above msl and is flooded daily with brackish water. Infiltration
and permeability are moderate and the water table is at or near the surface most of the time.

2.2 Methodology
The goal of the mitigation plan is to establish a wetland community classified as Brackish Marsh.
The proposed replacement of Bridge No. 49 will provide 1.7 ac of on -site wetland restoration by
the removal of the existing bridge causeway to the elevation of the adjacent marsh.
Fill material will be graded down approximately 2.5 ft. to the elevation of the adjacent
jurisdictional wetlands. Exact elevations will be determined during construction by matching
grades at cross sections of the marsh. If the depth of excavation of the existing roadway surface
layers falls below the adjacent wetland elevation and excess waste soil is not available onsite,
clean sand will be added to bring the restored area to the correct elevation. The area will be
disked as necessary to reduce compaction. Soil amendments may be added if needed. Marsh
vegetation (See Figure 3) consisting of the species mix in the table below will be planted on 3 x 3
feet centers (4,840 plants per acre).
TABLE 1. Species mix for B-2938 marsh restoration
SF• �$ .,.e .P. vaLS#IM1.. ....'A.. W4s .. .t• ....8•N':'Ne.e.
• • cordgrass (Spartina / / /�
#`S"L"-�.v- p•�+
Black.needle/ /
111 -.11 1 1•rass (Spartina patens)
2.3 Monitoring
Hydrologic monitoring will occur throughout the growing season in the restoration area by using
surface water gauges. Two surface water gauges will be placed in the restored Brackish Marsh
area. Two surface water gauges will be placed in the reference adjacent Brackish Marsh area
located within the project area. Hydrologic success criteria will be based on the establishment
of hydrologic conditions comparable in hydrologic frequency and duration to those of the
existing reference wetlands adjacent to the areas being restored. Hydrographs from gauges in the
reference marsh will be compared to those in the restored marsh as a component of the annual
monitoring report.
Vegetation monitoring will consist of thirty lm X lm random plots in the Brackish Marsh
community. The vegetative marsh success of the wetland site will be determined in accordance
with National Marine Fisheries Service Guidelines. The vegetation component of the wetland
site will be deemed successful if the following criteria are met.
1. At year five, the average of all plots should have a scale value of 5 (75% vegetative cover)
consisting of wetland herbaceous species, not including any invasive species.
2. A minimum of 70% of the. plots shall contain the target (planted) species. Visual observation
of plant establishment will be recorded using photo reference points.

1.=1ia 01 7 2004
2.4 Mitigation Credit Ratios
The following table outlines the onsite mitigation from the proposed replacement of Bridge No.
49. NCDOT proposes to use this surplus mitigation for impacts from projects in the White Oak
River Basin (03030001 CU).
TABLE 2. B-2938 Onsite Mitigation Debit
ac
2.5 Final Dispensation of Property
NCDOT will retain ownership of the mitigation site until all monitoring requirements are
fullfilled and an appropriate recipient is identified. If and when the deed is transferred,
restrictions will be placed on the property to ensure protection in perpetuity.

I
I
V.

j
.
q
f
TIP B-2938 Onsite Mitigation
Bridge No.49 :over the White Oak River
SR II01/SR 1442
Carteret grid .Onslow Counties.

Figure 3. Planting plan detail
'i f
S (if _t
'r
w1fix left
�tt� �i[f�E F4� Ili -IF �
;� lr
�o
Y

Form DCM-MP-1
APPLICATION
(To he completed by all applicants)
1. APPLICANT
a. Landowner:
Name N. C. Department of Transportation
Address 1548 Mail Service Center
City Raleigh State NC
Zip 27699 Day Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]
b. Authorized Agent:
Name
Address
City
State
Zip Day Phone
c. Project name (if any) B-2938
NOTE: Permit will be issued in name of landowner(s), and/or
project name.
2. LOCATION OF PROPOSED
PROJECT
a. County Carteret/ Onslow
b. City, town, community or landmark
Stella, NC
c. Street address or secondary road number
SR 1101/SR 1442
r 004
d. Is proposed work within city limits or planning
jurisdiction? Yes X No
e. Name of body of water nearest project (e.g. river,
creek, sound, bay) White Oak River
3. DESCRIPTION AND PLANNED USE
OF PROPOSED PROJECT
a. List all development activities you propose (e.g.
building a home; motel, marina, bulkhead, pier, and
excavation and/or filling activities.
Bridge Construction- New location over White
Oak River
b. Is the proposed activity maintenance of an existing
project, new work, or both? New
c. Will the project be for public, private or commercial
use? Public
d. Give a brief description of purpose, use, methods of
construction and daily operations of proposed project.
If more space is needed, please attach additional
pages. New bridge over White Oak River is
proposed to be built off of temporary work bridge
within construction easement.

Form DCM-MP-1
4. LAND AND WATER
CHARACTERISTICS
a. Size of entire tract
b. Size of individual lot(s) N/A
c. Approximate elevation of tract above MHW or NWL
5'-15' (1.5m-4.5m above WSE)
d. Soil type(s) and texture(s) of tract
-Muckalee-Dorovan, Lafitte-Hobucken-Carteret,
and Baymeade-Onslow-Lynchburg association
-fine sand, loamy fine sand, and muck texture
e. Vegetation on tract Man dominated and brackish
marsh communities
f. Man-made features now on tract Privately owned
boat ramp parking lot I— � ` ;
g. What is the CAMA Land Use Plan land classification
of the site? (Consult the local land we plan)
X Conservation _ Transitional
Developed Community
Rural _ Other
h. How is the tract zoned by local government?
i. Is the proposed project consistent with the applicable
zoning? X Yes _ No
(Attach zoning compliance certificate, if applicable)
j. Has a professional archaeological assessment been
done for the tract? X Yes _ No
If yes, by whom? SHPO
k. Is the project located in a National Registered
Historic District or does it involve a National
Register listed or eligible property?
X Yes _ No
I. Are there wetlands on the site? X Yes _ No
Coastal (marsh) X Other_
If yes, has a delineation been conducted? X
(Attach documentation, ifavailable)
n. Describe location and type of discharges to waters of
the state. (For example, surface runoff, sanitary
wastewater, industrial/commercial effluent, "wash
down" and residential discharges.) Surface runoff
o. Describe existing drinking water supply source.
Wells
5. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
In addition to the completed application form, the
following items must be submitted:
• A copy of the deed (with state application only) or
other instrument under which the applicant claims title
to the affected properties. If the applicant is not
claiming to be the owner of said property;then forward
a copy of the deed or other instrument under which the
owner claims title, plus written permission from the
owner to carry out the project.
• An accurate, dated work plat (including plan view
and cross -sectional drawings) drawn to scale in black
ink on an 8 1/2" by I1" white paper. (Refer to Coastal
Resources Commission Rule 710203 for a detailed
description.)
Please note that original drawings are preferred and
only high quality copies will be accepted. Blue -line
prints or other larger plats are acceptable only if an
adequate number of quality copies are provided by
applicant. (Contact the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
regarding that agency's use of larger drawings.) A site
or location map is a part of plat requirements and it
must be sufficiently detailed to guide agency personnel
unfamiliar with the area to the

Form DCM-MP-1
site. Include highway or secondary road (SR) numbers,
landmarks, and the like.
*A Stormwater Certification, if one is necessary.
•A list of the names and complete addresses of the
adjacent waterfront (riparian) landowners and
signed return receipts as proof that such owners
have received a copy of the application and plats by
certified mail. Such landowners must be advised that
they have 30 days in which to submit comments on the
proposed project to the Division of Coastal
Management. Upon signing this form, the applicant
further certifies that such notice has been provided.
Name see permit drawings, page 21 of 22 for a list
Address
Phone
Name
Address
Phone
Name
Address
Phone
• A list of previous state or federal permits issued for
work on the project tract. Include permit numbers,
permittee, and. issuing dates.
• A check for $250 made payable to the Department of
Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
(DEHNR) to cover the costs of processing the
application.
• A signed AEC hazard notice for projects in
oceanfront and inlet areas.
• A statement of compliance with the N.C.
Environmental Policy Act (N.C.G.S. 113A - 1 to 10)
If the project involves the expenditure of public funds
or use of public lands, attach a statement documenting
compliance with the North Carolina Environmental
Policy Act.
'`'''I li `)U4;
6. CERTIFICATION AND PERMISSION
TO ENTER ON LAND
I understand that any permit issued in response to this
application will allow only the development described in
the application. The project will be'subject to conditions
and restrictions contained in the permit.
I certify that to the best of my knowledge, the proposed
activity complies with the State of North Carolina's
approved Coastal Management Program and will be
conducted in a manner consistent with such program.
I certify that I am authorized to grant, and do in fact, grant
permission to representatives of state and federal review
agencies to enter on the aforementioned lands in
connection with evaluating information related to this
.permit application and follow-up monitoring of the
project.
I further certify that the information provided in this
application is truthful to the best of my knowledge.
This is the 27 day of lkr 2063 .
Print Name
�������iD S��.�� j4arr;s
((t�
Signature 1`�� (2'- -2�
Landowner &AuthorLedAgent
Please indicate attachments pertaining to your proposed
proj ect.
X DCM MP-2
Excavation and Fill Information
_ DCM MP-3
Upland Development
DCM MP-4
Structures Information
X DCM MP-5
Bridges and Culverts
DCM MP-6
Marina Development
NOTE. Please sign and date each attachment in the
space provided at the bottom of each form.

Form DCM-MP-2
EXCAVATION
AND FILL
(Except bridges and culverts)
Attach this form to Joint Application for CAMA Major
Permit, Form DCM-MP-1. Be sure to complete all other
sections of the Joint Application that relate to this
proposed project.
Describe below the purpose of proposed excavation or fill
activities. All values to be given in feet.
Access
channel
(MLW) or (NWL)
Canal
Boat
basin
Boat
ramp
Rock
groin
Rock
breakwater
Other
(Excluding
shoreline
stabilization)
Average Final
Existing Project
Length Width Depth Depth
*2850 16 1 1
**63 23
*Fill in existing ditch
**Excavation in existing ditch
(. S '004
1. EXCAVATION
a. Amount of material to be excavated from below
MEW or NWL in cubic yards None
b. Type of material to be excavated Local Material
c. Does the area to be excavated include coastal
wetlands (marsh), submerged aquatic vegetation
(SAVs) or other wetlands? _ Yes X No
d. High ground excavation in cubic yds 4435 vd3
const., 74,052 ft2 for onsite restoration
2. DISPOSAL OF EXCAVATED _
1UT1:Y1191Ak 0
a. Location of disposal area Upland area
b. Dimensions of disposal area Not known until
construction
c. Do you claim title to disposal area?
_ Yes X No
If no, attach a letter granting permission from the
owner.
d. Will a disposal area be available for future
maintenance? X Yes —,No
If yes, where? Not known until construction

Form DCM-MP-2
e. Does the disposal area include any coastal wetlands
(marsh), SAVs or other wetlands?
Yes X No
f. Does the disposal include any area in the water?
Yes X No
3. SHORELINE STABILIZATION N/A
a. Type of shoreline stabilization
Bulkhead Riprap
b. Length
c. Average distance waterward ofMHW orNWL
d. Maximum distance waterward ofMHW orNWL
e. Shoreline erosion during preceding 12 months
(Source of information)
f. Type of bulkhead or riprap material
g. Amount of fill in cubic yards to be placed below
water level
(1) Riprup
(2) Bulkhead backfill
h. Type of fill material
i. Source of fill material
4. OTHER FILL ACTIVITIES
(Excluding Shoreline Stabilization)
a. Will fill material be brought to site?
Yes X No
(1) Amount of material to be placed in the water
(2) Dimensions of fill area
(3) Purpose of fill
b. Will fill material be placed in coastal wetlands
(marsh), SAVs or other wetlands?
Yes X No
If yes,
(1) Dimensions of fill area
(2) Purpose of fill
5. GENERAL
a. How will excavated or fill material be kept on site
and erosion controlled? Silt fence, NCDOT Type B Silt
Basins, diversion ditches, inlet protection
b. What type of construction equipment will be used (for
example, dragline, backhoe, or hydraulic dredge)?
Barge, bulldozer, backhoe, crane, and temporary
work bridge
c. Will wetlands be crossed in transporting equipment to
project site? X Yes _ No
If yes, explain steps that will be taken to lessen
environmental impacts. Temporary work bridge,
erosion control measures, work berm fill
,Aeplicant or ojectName
Signat e
tz)z-11a3
Date
If yes,

Form DCM-MP-S
BRIDGES AND
CULVERTS
Attach this form to Joint Application for CAMA Major
Permit, Form DCM-MP-1. Be sure to complete all other
sections of the Joint Application that relate to this
proposed project.
1. BRIDGES
a. Public X Private
b. Type of bridge (construction material)
Concrete girders and deck with steel 4-pile and
drilled pier bents
c. Water body to be crossed by bridge
White Oak River
d. Water depth at the proposed crossing at MLW or
NWL 1.83 ft or 0.549 m WSE
e. Will proposed bridge replace an existing bridge?
X Yes No
If yes,
(1) Length of existing bridge 432'
(2) Width of existing bridge 19'
(3) Navigation clearance underneath existing
bridge 11' (measured onsite with DCMO
(4) Will all, or a part of, the existing bridge be
removed? (Explain) all of the existing bridge
will be removed
f. Will proposed bridge replace an existing culvert(s)?
Yes X No
If yes,
(1) Length of existing culvert
(2) Width of existing culvert
(3) Height of the top of the existing culvert above
the MHW orNWL
`; +) 15 NOA
(4) Will all, or a part of, the existing culvert be removed?
(Explain) N/A
g. Length of proposed bridge 2,310'
h. Width of proposed bridge 32'
i. Height of proposed bridge above wetlands
3.5-12'
j. Will the proposed bridge affect existing water flow?
X Yes _ No
If yes, explain
This proiect enhances water movement by
removal of existing causeway.
k. Navigation clearance underneath proposed bridge
11' (maintain existing) measured witli-DCM
1. Will the proposed bridge affect navigation by
reducing or increasing the existing navigable
opening? _ Yes X No
If yes, explain
m. Will the proposed bridge cross wetlands containing
no navigable waters? X Yes — No
If yes, explain New Structures will span the
marsh lands to the south of the river
n. Have you contacted the U.S. Coast Guard concerning
their approval?
X Yes No
If yes, please provide record of their action.
uo.,:." nllac

Form DCM-MP-5
�r;"; is n L004
j. Will the proposed culvert affect existing navigation
2.
CULVERTS N/A
potential? _ Yes _ No
If yes, explain
a.
Water body in which culvert is to be placed
3. EXCAVATION AND FILL
b.
Number of culverts proposed
a. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
c.
Type of culvert (construction material, style)
require any excavation below the MHW or NWL?
_ Yes X No
d.
Will proposed culvert replace an existing bridge?
If yes,
Yes _ No
(1) Length of area to be excavated
_
If yes,
(2) Width of area to be excavated
(1) Length of existing bridge
(3) Depth of area to be excavated
(2) Width of existing bridge
(4) Amount of material to be excavated in cubic
(3) Navigation clearance underneath existing
yards
bridge
(4) Will all, or a part of, the existing bridge be
b. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
removed? (Explain)
require any excavation within: NO
_ Coastal Wetlands _ SAVs _ Other Wetlands
e.
Will proposed culvert replace an existing culvert?
If yes,
Yes No
(1) Length of area to be excavated
_
If es -
- - (2) Width of area to be excavated
(1) Length of existing culvert
(3) Amount of material to be excavated in cubic
(2) Width of existing culvert
yards
(3) Height of the top of the existing culvert above
the MHW orNWL
c. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
(4) Will all, or a part of, the existing culvert be
require any highground excavation?
removed? (Explain)
X Yes _No
If yes,
(1) Length of area to be excavated
(2) Width of area to be excavated
f.
Length of proposed culvert
(3) Amount of material to be excavated in cubic
yards 3390 m3 =4435 vd3 for construction
g.
Width of proposed culvert
74,052 ft2 for onsite restoration
h. Height of the top of the proposed culvert above the
MHW orNWL
Will the proposed culvert affect existing water flow?
_ Yes _ No
If yes, explain
d. If the placement of the bridge or culvert involves any
excavation, please complete the following:
(1) Location of the spoil disposal area
Unknown until construction
(2) Dimensions of spoil disposal area
(3) Do you claim title to the disposal area?
Yes —No
If no, attach a letter granting permission from
the owner.

Form DCM-MP-5
(4) Will the disposal area be available for future
maintenance? _Yes _No
(5) Does the disposal area include any coastal
wetlands (marsh), SAVs, or other wetlands?
_Yes No
If yes, give dimensions if different from (2)
above.
(6) Does the disposal area include any area below
the MHW orNWL? Yes _No
If yes, give dimension if different from No. 2
above.
e. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
result in any fill (other than excavated material
described in Item d. above) to be placed below MHW
or NWT? X Yes No
If yes, See Permit drawings
(1) Length of area to be filled
(2) Width of area to be filled
(3) Purpose of fill Piles driven for temporary
work bridge
f. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
result in any fill (other than excavated material
described in Item d. above) to be placed within:
X Coastal Wetlands _ SAVs _ Other Wetlands
If yes,
(1) Length of area to be filled
(2) Width of area to be filled
(3) Purpose of fill
piles rip rap and boat ramp (see drawings)
g. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
result in any fill (other than excavated material
described in Item d. above) to be placed on
highground? X Yes _No
If yes,
(1) Length of area to be filled 327'
(2) Width of area to be filled 55'
(3) Purpose of fill Roadway embankment
4. GENERAL
a. Will the proposed project involve any mitigation?
X Yes _ No
If yes, explain in detail See onsite mitigation plan
b. Will the proposed project require the relocation of
any existing utility lines? X Yes _ No
If yes, explain in detail Telephone cable, power
lines cross on south side of structure
c. Will the proposed project require the construction of
any temporary detour structures?
_ Yes X No
If yes, explain in detail
d. Will the proposed project require any work channels?
_ Yes X No
If yes, complete Form DCM-MP-2
e. How will excavated or fill material 'be kept on site
and erosion controlled? Silt fence, diversion ditches,
NCDOT Type B Basin
f. What type of construction equipment will be used
(for example, dragline, backhoe or hydraulic dredge)?
Backhoe, bulldozer, crane, temporary work
bridge
g. Will wetlands be crossed in transporting_ equipment
to project site? X Yes No
If yes, explain. steps that will be taken to lessen
environmental impacts. Work within construction
easments and temporary work bridge
h. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
require any shoreline stabilization?
_ Yes X No
If yes, explain in detail —
Applicant or Pro ect Name
Signature
t2 ) Z.-110 3
Date

Postage $
Co ""a' Fee
Postmark
�Ej H"at.ud R.R.11" Fee H... -A)
s, a gunn squired) 62q
.,. 'a"'. Fee
Endorsement Required)
0 �do r rn 59 ;!Ib a It
E nub[id
)NITED STATES POSTAL
Postage I $
Certified Fee
Return Recelpl Fee
(Endors
Restricted Delivery Fee
(Endorsement Requiredt
Total Postage & Fees Lq�_
Postmark
6Aat
A)
U.-011s =I*
First -Class Mail'
Postage & Fees Paid
Permit No; 2 -0
P+4Jn.thIst0x-*-
First -Class Mail
Postage& Fees Paid
USPS
Permit No. G-10
In this box 0
I=".
--" Postage 'g Fee ! s Pal(
USPS
Permit No. G-10
J ZIP+4 in this box 0
F-9
Postage
= co
IXI
ru C.IIf—
Postmark
M Fluor, Receipt Fee
C3 (Endorsement Required)
0Restricted Delivery Fee jw
C3 (Endorsement Required)
E:3
Total Postage & Fees $
-q sent T,
LO
r3 Sfreeq
M
C3
r- 6iY--Sr-IbP
First -Class Mail
Postage & FeesPaid
USPS
Permit No. G-10
ZIP+4 in this box
�
CIO Postage $
U1
ru Cedif,e.d Fee Post ... e,k
M Return Receipt Fee Her.
[= (Endorsement Required)
C3 Restricted Delivery Fee 62q,5 E3
1-3, (Endorsement Required)
ram- Total Postage & Fee. $
-a
r-q Sent f1soti I
- ---------------
EJ ....... — .... ........... . ... ....... . ..........
C3 Stmef,g6i;r PO Pox No. -
'SkIla 19-1. ........... .................... ............
C3 4-
C

I
It Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
item 4 if Restricted Delivery Is desired.
r Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
r Attach this card to the back of the mallplece,
or on the front if space permits.
. Article Addressed to:
t,V
Nido L. Hamilton
110 Wetheringlon Landing Road.
Stella, NC 28582
Article Number (Copy from service
S Form 3811, July 1999
1 Complete Items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
Item 4 if Restricted Delivery is destred.
a Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
r Attach this card to the back of the met piece,
or on the front If space permits.
Article Addressed to:
Mr. Charles W. Hermanson, Jr.
355 Stella Road
Stella, NC 28582
Article Number (Copy from service label)
Received by (Please Print Clearly) B. Date of
C. Signature ,,(
X t7�U Lct�C/M7 ddressee
D. Is delivery address different from item 17 Wes
If YES, enter delivery address below:
Certified Mail ❑ Express Mail
❑ Registered ❑ Return Receipt for Merchandise
❑ Insured Mail ❑ C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) ❑ Yes
Receipt 102595.00-M-0952
A. Received by (Please Print Clearly) I B. Date of Delivery
C. Signature �
V4— li ❑ Agent
°yCJLV ,x(. ❑Addressee
D. Is delivery addrdss different from Item 1? ❑ Yes
If YES, enter delivery address below: ❑ No
3. Ice Type
Zertiged Mall ❑ Express Mall
❑ Registered ❑ Return Receipt for Merchandise
❑ Insured Mail ❑ C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) ❑ Yes
S Form 3811, July 1999 Domestic Return Receipt
■ Complete Items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
item 4 it Restricted Delivery Is desired.
■ .Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the c9rd to you.
r ■ Attach this card to the back of the mallplece,
t or on the front if space permits.
1.. Article Addressed to
!l, Mr. Harry Barker
A. Received by (Please Print Cleady) I B.
C. Signature
❑ Al
X l o
D. Is delivery ad different from item 1? ❑ Y1
If YES, ante livery address below: 0 N'
4604 Pine Needle Lane
3. Service Type
r Wilson, NC 27896
❑ Certified Mail ❑ Express Mall
r
❑ Registered ❑ Return Receipt for Mer
i
❑ Insured Mail ❑ C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra fee) 1i Y
4 2. Article Number (Copy from service label)
'1ax7 I�e"lo nao�
PS Form 3811, July 1999 .
Domestic Return Receipt 102595-0
■ 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 mallplece,
or on the front if space permits.
1. Article Addressed to:
Midway United Methodist Church
j 139 Wetherington Landing Road
I Stella, NC 28582
2. Article Number (Copy from service label)
102595-00-M-0952 I PS Form 3811, July 1999
A. Rgce)ved by (Please Prinj Clearly) I B. Date c
C. Signa !\
D. Is delivery address differen mp, Is delivery address m Item 14 ❑ 1❑--'`1
If YES, enter delivery
address below: ❑ f
Yv
S�l/L i '�
3. Ice Type
ergried Mail ❑ Express Mail
S
Registered ❑ Return Receipt for Me
❑ Insured Mall ❑ C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) ❑ '
Receipt
102595

UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE
Frst-Class
Mail
Postage a Fees Paid
USPS
Permit No. G-10
�
ZIP+4 in this box
rn
M1
rl
-07
Postage $
uT
ru
Caddied Fee
Postmark
M
Return Receipt Fee He
(Endorsement Required)
C3
�
Restricted Fee
I`Jl•(/�
(Endorsement Featured)
m Regmredl
b
M1
Total Postage 8 Fees
-_D
.. - ., .. �..
A
Sent T
"BoxNo.------------------------
r.C�rett.f: ----------------
CItY. Sr e. P+a n�
:•r L
I I I11: I I I11
First -Class Mail
Postage & Fees Paid
LISPS
Permit No. G-10
0
ZIP+4 in this box
A
-
ra
Postage
$
lt-1
nl
Certrfietl Fee
Postmark
M
Return Receipt Fee
Here
p
(Endorsement Required)
7A
0
n /) Q
Restricted Delivery Fee
/a0N
)
(Endorsement Required)
--)
O
M1
Total Postage 8 Feas
$
.D
A
Sent To
-
O---.-----
O
,I/1A'.M.l.'_p-�-yid'l-yl�t--L-f✓-------------------------------------
Street.-- (.INI or---B
M1
1 --h_fcy?,------------------------------------------
�,�Sat Pq- 5lj1 -
�W12Form
JJtttl�tti
3800. Me r•r See Reverse for Instructions
First -Class Mail
Postage S Fees Paid
LISPS
Permit No. G-10
ZIP+4 in this box
.a
m Postage $
t-rl
ru Cemfiad Fee
f>•1 turn Receipt Fee Postmark
O (Entl cement Required) Here
Endorsement
Delivery Fee �lj�� .rj)
(Flltlorsem¢nt Required) ((//�!
0
r. Total Postage & Fees $
A Sent To
5 Wit. -yea ----��n'�nfh► yr - - _
s

;omplete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
tem 4 If Restricted Delivery is desired.
print your hams and address on the reverse
10 that we can return the card to you.
%teach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
1r on the front if space permits.
krUcle Addressed to
Ms. Ethlyn Sanders Hurst
145 Doctor Corbett Road
3warsboro, NC 28584
4rticle Number (Copy from service
Form 3811, July 1999
Complete Items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
hem 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. -
Article Addressed to
Ir. Kenneth W. Metts
117 River Drive
Aella, NC 28582
Article Number (Copy from service label)
S Form 3811, July 1999
Complete Items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
hem 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 9 space permits.
Article Addressed to
Ms. Jeanette Smith Morton
1405 Holly Lane
Valdosta, GA 30602
A. Received by (Please P ' t Clearly)
>SB: Date of Delive
fifh/4N s u� s'/y-ol
C. Signa ure
% ❑L/� El Addressee
w�LlAtltlressee
D. Is deIN4 address different from item 1? ❑ Yes
If YES, enter delivery address below. ❑ No
1
3. S rvice Type
rt�ed Mail ❑ Express Mail
[[[[[[����3jjjjjj Registered ❑ Return Receipt for Merchandise
❑ Insured Mail ❑ C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) ❑ Yes
10259&-0 -0952
A Received by (Pleasq gdnt Clepr ,) I By Date of Delivery
C.
n
D. Is delivery address different from Item 1?r, o Yes
If YES, enter delivery address below. rT-d
3. Service Type
Rifled Mail ❑ Express Mail
Registered ❑ Return Receipt for Merchandise
❑ Insured Mail ❑ C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) ❑ Yes
Return Receipt
102595-00-M-0952
A R�.eivad by (PI se Print CI¢arly) I S. Date of f)e)ivery
1. � XCc {1 r_lJh-� /!rf✓r /✓Ys-� ,ri/ 1/ ! �--/>
C. Si na re _ �1
I11.\ f
❑ Agent
X ��� � 11 VI WV
❑Addressee
D. Is delivery address ddferent from hem l?
❑ Yes
If YESj,lenter delivery address below.
V
❑ No
e
3. rvice Type
Certified Mall ❑ Express Mail
Registered ❑ Return Receipt for Merchandise
❑ Insured Mall ❑ C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee)
❑ Yes
Article Number (Copy from service label)
7000 [VR 0023 2551 75

D
Er
f`-
rM1
MI
c13
Postage $
u1
rut
Certified Fee
M
Retum Receipt Fee
p
(Endorsement Required)
Restricted Delivery Fee
EM
lFsdorsement Required)
r-
Total Postage a Fees 9
■ 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, 4le Addressed to:
G
Mr. Grover C. Caddell, III
International Patient Services, Inc.
3201 River Road
Stella, NC 28582
2. Article Number
(transfer from service label)
PS Form 3811, August 2001
Postmark
Here
5 q3
V_Ud
lalea
HEIN
f3Gd
•C 'N
seeld :-1apuaS
ltl1SOd S31V1S O311Nf1
A. Signat
3. "ice Type
fled Mail ❑ Express Mail
13 Registered ❑ Flat Receipt for Merchandise
❑ Insured Mail ❑ C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) ❑ yes
ry
X ❑Agent
❑ Atltlressee
eceived y (Printed Name) C. Date of Delive
f
• G
D. Is delivery address different from hem 1 ❑ s
It YES, enter delivery address below: ❑ No
Domestic Return Receipt
102595-02-M-1540

NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Michael F. Easley, Governor Charles S. Jones, Acting Director William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
February 27, 2004
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Manager
NC Department of Transportation
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC, 27699-1548
Dear Mr. Thorpe,
The INC Division of Coastal Management hereby acknowledges receipt of your application
for State approval for the replacement of bridge No. 49 on SR 1442 in Onslow County and SR 1101
in Carteret County, T.I.P. project B-2938. The requested information submitted February 16, 2004,
completed your application and it appears to be adequate for processing at this time. The
projected deadline for making a decision is May 1, 2004. An additional 75day review period is
provided by law when such time is necessary to complete the review. If you have not been notified
of a final action by the initial deadline stated above, you should consider the review period
extended. Under those circumstances, this letter will serve as your notice of an extended review.
However, an additional letter will be provided on or about the 75th day.
If this agency does not render a permit decision within 70 days from theDATE RECEIVED,
you may request a meeting with the Director of the Division of Coastal Management and permit
staff to discuss the status of your project. Such a meeting will be held within five working days from
the receipt of your written request and shall include the property owner, developer, and project
designer/consultant.
NCGS 113A-119(b) requires that Notice of an application be posted at the location of the
proposed development. Enclosed you will find a "Notice of Permit Filing" postcard which must be
posted at the proposed development. You should post this notice at a conspicuous point along the
roadway where it can be observed from the road. An example would be: nailing the notice card to
a telephone pole or tree along the road right-of-way near the project. Failure to post this notice
could result in an incomplete application.
An onsite inspection will be made, and if additional information is required, you will be
contacted by the appropriate State or Federal agency. Please contact me if you have any
questions and notify me in writing if you wish to receive a copy of my field report and/or comments
from reviewing agencies.
Sincerely, n
v
Bill Arrington,
D.O.T. Field Representative,
NC Division of Coastal Management
Enclosure
cc: Doug Huggett;
Ted Tyndall, District Manager
151-B Hwy. 24, Hestron Plaza II, Morehead City, North Carolina 28557
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: www.nccoastaimanagement.net
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer- 50% Recycled 110% Post Consumer Paper

tCrl
tu a
eu ta�
LAMA PERMIT
APPLIED FOR
COMMENTS ACCEPTED THROUGH _3/���
APPLICANT:
FOR MORE DETAILS CONTACT
THE LOCAL PERMIT OFFICER BELOW:

• -"'E —
r
1
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
June 27, 2002
Mr. William D. Gilmore; P.E., Manager
NCDOT PD&E Analysis Branch
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1548
Subject:
Dear Mr. Gilmore:
Alan W. Klimek P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
Wilmington Regional Office
tn
LL N W
US
W ��
Permito. 1
Bridge #49A River)
Statc Preiee • . 8.2160801
Genera ormwater Permit
Linear Public Road / Bridge Project
Onslow County
The Wilmington Regional Office received a complete Stormwater Management Permit
Application for Bridge#49 (White Oak River), TIP Project B-2938, State Project No. 8.2160801,
on June 4, 2002. Staff review of the plans and specifications has determined that the project, as
proposed, will comply with the Stormwater Regulations set forth in Title 15A NCAC 2H .1000.
We are forwarding Permit No. SW8 020321 dated June 27, 2002, for the construction of Bridge
#49 (White Oak River).
This permit shall be effective from the date of issuance until rescinded and shall be subject to the
conditions and limitations as specified therein.
If any parts, requirements, or limitations contained in this permit are unacceptable, you have the
right to request an adjudicatory hearing upon written request within thirty (30) days following
receipt of this permit. This request must be in the form of a written petition, conforming to
Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes, and filed with the Office of Administrative
Hearings, P.O. Drawer 27447, Raleigh, NC 27611-7447. Unless such demands are made this
permit shall be final and binding. . . -
If you have any questions, or need additional information concerning -this matter, please contact
either me or Linda Lewis at [phone].
Sincerely,
Rick Shiver
Water Quality Regional Supervisor
RSS/arl: S:\WQS\STORMWAT\PERNHTNO20321.JUN
cc: Jay Twisdale, P.E.
Division of Coastal Management
Linda Lewis
Wilmingt6r. Regional Office
Central Files
N.C. Division of Water Quality 127 Cardinal Drive Extension Wilmington, N.C. 28405 [phone] Fax [phone] Customer Service

State. Stormwater Management Systems
Permit No. SW8 020321
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
STATE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PERMIT
GENERAL PERMIT
In accordance with the provisions of Article 21 of Chapter 143, General Statutes of North
Carolina as amended, and other applicable Laws, Rules and Regulations
PERMISSION IS HEREBY GRANTED TO
NCDOT PD&E Analysis Branch
Bridge #49 (White Oak River), TIP Project B-2938, State Project No. 8.2160801 "
Onslow County
FOR THE
replacement of an existing bridge over the White Oak River'icompliance with the provisions of
15A NCAC 2H .1000 (hereafter referred to as the "stormwater rules ") and the approved
stormwater management plans and specifications, and other supporting data as attached and on
file with and approved by the Division of Water Quality and considered a part of this permit for
Bridge 949 (White Oak River), TIP Project B-2938, State Project No. 8.2160801.
The Permit shall be effective from the date of issuance until rescinded and shall be subject to the
following specific conditions and limitations:
I. DESIGN STANDARDS
The runoff from the impervious surfaces has been directed away from surface waters as
much as possible. Two closed systems will pollect runoff over the main channel and
direct it into the surrounding marsh.
2. The amount of built -upon area has been minimized as much as possible.
3. Best Management Practices are employed which minimize water quality impacts.
4. Approved plans and specifications for projects covered -by this permit are incorporated by
reference and are enforceable parts of the permit.
5. Vegetated roadside ditches are 3:1 slopes or flatter.
6. The existing causeway will be removed and 1.7 acres of wetlands will be restored.

State Stormwater Management Systems
Permit No. SWS 020321
II. SCHEDULE OF COMPLIANCE
1. The permittee shall at all times provide adequate erosion control measures in
conformance with the approved Erosion Control Plan.
2. The permittee shall submit all information requested by the Director or his representative
within the time frame specified in the written information request.
3. The permittee shall submit to the Director and shall have received approval for revised
plans, specifications, and calculations prior to construction for the following items:
a. Major revisions to the approved plans, such as road realignment, deletion of any
proposed BMP, etc.
b. Project name change.
C. Redesign of, addition to or deletion of the approved amount of built -upon area,
regardless of size.
d. Alteration of the proposed drainage.
4. The Director may determine that other revisions to the project should require a
modification to the permit.
5. The Director may notify the permittee when the permitted site does not meet one or more
of the minimum requirements of the permit. Within the time frame specified in the notice,
the permittee shaft submit a written time schedule to the Director for modifying the site to
meet minimum requirements. The pemuttee shall provide copies of revised plans and
certification in wilting to the Director that the changes have been made.
HI. GENERAL CONDITIONS
1. Failure to abide by the conditions and limitations contained in this permit may subject the
Permittee to an enforcement action by the Division of Water Quality, in accordance with
North Carolina General Statutes 143-215.6A to 143 213.6C.
2. The permit issued shall continue in force and effect until revoked or terminated.
3. The permit may be modified, revoked and reissued or terminated for cause. The filing of
a request for a permit modification, revocation and reissuance, or termination does not
stay any permit condition.
4. The issuance of this permit does not prohibit the Director from reopening and modifying
the permit, revoking and reissuing the permit; or terminating the permit as allowed by the
laws, rules, and regulations contained in Title 15A of the North Carolina Administrative
Code, Subchapter 2H.1000; and North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1 et. al.
5. The permit is not transferable to any person except after notice to and approval by the
Director. The Director may require modification or revocation and reissuance of the
permit to change the name and incorporate such other requirements as may be necessary.
A formal permit request must be submitted to the Division of Water Quality accompanied
by the appropriate fee, documentation from both parties involved, and other supporting
materials as may be appropriate. The approval of this request will be considered on its
merits, and may or may not be approved.
6. The issuance of this permit does not preclude the Permittee from complying with any and
all statutes, rules, regulations, or ordinances which maybe imposed by other government
Anencies (lncal_ state and federal) which have iurisdiction.

State Stormwater Management Systems
Permit No. SW8 020321
7. The permittee shall notify the Divisions of any name, ownership or mailing address
changes within 30 days.
Permit issued this the 27th day of June, 2002 1r v %C04
NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
---C�1�-- - - ----------------
���1 Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission
Permit Number SW8 020321

:.. '*... � : ,. � .. , :w="•^rOFFICE�USEONLY ;... ... _., ;—... .- ..
Date Received
Fee Paid
Permit Number
yzo.
o D� p3 I
!-- ......... _----------
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources ,,:.,; (i Qi 22-01
Division of Water Quality
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PERMIT APPLICATION FORM .
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
LINEAR ROADWAY PROJECT
This form maybe photocopied for use as an original.
DWO Stormwater Management Plan Review:
A complete stormwater management plan submittal includes this application form, a supplement form for each BMP
proposed (see Section V), design calculations, and plans and specifications showing all road and BMP details.
I.
NCDO'.
Project
PROJECT INFORMATION
Project Location: 5/1' //G
Contact Person: /
Receiving Stream Name-M..
Proposed linear feet of project
Proposed Structural M/P and
25R- �c A
me: 9/9- CEO — 4/00 Fax: 9/9-?D "-'A709
River Basin: A,05,4 a�- Class: SA
on (attach a list ofstation and BMP type if more room is needed):
.16�'*9/47 .
Type of proposed project: (check all that apply):
❑ New ❑Widening 02 lane* 04 lane* ❑Curb and Gutter 09ridge Replacement
❑Other (Describe)
*3 lane and 4 lane imphy that roadside ditches are used unless Curb and Gutter is also checked.
H. REQUIRED ITEMS CHECKLIST
Initial in the space provided below to indicate the following design requirements have been met and supporting
documentation is attached. Supporting documentation shall, at a minimum, consist of a brief narrative description
including (1) the scope of the project, (2) how the items below are met, (3) how the proposed best management practices
minimize water quality impacts, and (4) any significant constraints and/or justification for not meeting a, b, c and d to the
maximum extent practicable.
Designer's Initials
-� 7�✓� a. The amount of impervious surface has been minimized as much as possible.
J L✓ b. The runoff from the impervious areas has been diverted away from surface waters as much as possible.
St'✓ mac. Best Management Practices are employed which minimize water quality impacts.
J t'✓ d. Vegetated roadside ditches are 3:1 slope or flatter.
Form SWU-112 Rev 04.00 Page 1 of 2

M. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT
I acknowledge and agree by my initials below that the North Carolina Department of Transportation is responsible for the
implementation of the four maintenance items listed. I agree to notify DWQ of any operational problems with the BMP's
that would impact water quality or prior to making any changes to the system or responsible party.
Maintenance Engineer's Initials
;�-3�6__a. BMP's shall be inspected and maintained in good working order.
r b. Eroded areas shall be repaired and reseeded as needed.
C. Stormwater collection systems, including piping, inlets, and outlets, shall be maintained to insure proper
functioning.
Maintenance Engineer's
IV. APPLICATION CERTIFICATION
I, (print or type name)" of Branch
certify that the information included on this permit application form is, to the best of my knowledge, correct and that the
project will be constructed in conformance with the approved plans and that the proposed project complies with the
requirements of 15A NCAC 2H .1000. -
Address:
V. SUPPLEMENT FORMS
The applicable state stormwater management permit supplement form(s) listed below must be submitted for each BMP
specified for this project. Contact the Stormwater and General Permits Unit at [phone] for the status and
availability of these forms.
Form SWU-102
Form SWU-103
Form SWU-104
Form SWU-105
Form SWU-106
Form SWU-107
Form SWU-108
Form SWU-109
Form SWU-110
Wet Detention Basin Supplement
Jnfiltration Basin Supplement
Low Density Supplement
'Curb Outlet System Supplement
Aff--Site System Supplement
'Underground htfrltration Trench Supplement
Neuse River Basin Supplement
Innovative Best Management Practice Supplement
Extended Dry Detention Basin Supplement
Form SWU-112 Rev 04.00 Page 2 of

NCDOT Project No. 8.2160801 (B-2938)
Carteret / Onslow Counties
Proiect Scone
This project -involves the remov 1a -and replacemerit of Bridge # 49 over the White Oak
River on SR 110l/ SR 1442 (Wetherington Landing Road). This reach of the White Oak
River is designated as SA/HQW waters. The proposed bridge will be located
immediately down stream (South) of the existing bridge. The proposed bridge will be
2310.feet in length compared to the 432 feet of existing bridge. Increasing the length of
the bridge and restoring wetlands in the area of the existing embankments will serve as
mitigation for this project_ All of the resource agencies agreed that this is the most
preferred alternate. The existing causeways will be removed to an elevation to allow
wetlands to be restored within the footprint of the existing embankment. This will result
in 1.70 acres of wetland restoration, which will be planted with native non-invasive
wetland species. The existing bridge has a clear roadway width of nineteen feet. The
proposed bridge will have a clear roadway width of 32 feet that will provide 24 feet of
travel way with 4 foot shoulders. The existing approaches consist of two nine foot travel
lanes with six foot grassed shoulders. The proposed approaches will consist of two
twelve foot travel lanes with eight grassed shoulders. A temporary work bridge located
just South of the proposed bridge will be utilized to construct the proposed bridge to
allow traffic to maintained on the existing crossing and to minimize impacts to the
existing marsh, wetlands and river.

NCDOT Project No. 8.2160801 (B-2938)
Carteret/Onslow Counties
Best Management Practices
The proposed deck drains overthe water surface of the White Oak River will be contained in
two separate closed systems since the proposed crest of the roadway grade will be at
14+99.615 —L-. The closed system on the West side of the river will outlet at station
14+37.235 —L- which will be approximately 85 feet from the water surface of the river. Flow
from this outlet will be dispersed by a proposed 6.5 x 6.5 foot rip rap pad located directly
under this outlet in the marsh. The closed system on the East side of the river will outlet at
station 15+95.965 —L- onto the proposed rip rap end bent slope protection. This outlet will be
approximately 55 feet from the water surface of the river. All. other deck drains will
discharge directly into the existing marsh/wetlands.
2. The proposed roadway section will consist of grassed shoulders, fill slopes, and ditches with
side slopes of 3:1 or flatter.
3. Replacement of 432 feet of existing bridge with 2310 feet of proposed bridge. Increasing the
length of the bridge and restoring wetlands in the area of the existing embankments will serve
as mitigation for this project. All of the resource agencies agreed that this is the most
preferred alternate.
4. The existing causeways will be removed to an elevation to allow wetlands to be restored
within the footprint of the existing embankment. This will result in 1.70 acres of wetland
restoration, which will be planted with native non-invasive wetland species.
5. The proposed drainage design will require a short run of shoulder berm gutter and a single
inlet just off each end of the proposed bridge. Class B rip rap will be placed at the outlet of
each of these inlets to attenuate flow. The water from the inlet on the West End of the bridge
will outlet and travel in a 0.9 meter (3 foot base) grassed swale with permanent rock check
dams every 10 meters (32 feet) for 19.5 meters (64 feet) before entering a large area of
wetlands. The permanent rock check dams and a grassed swale wider than minimum
requirements are additional efforts to attenuate flow and provide treatment before entering
wetlands adjacent to the river. On the East End of the bridge, a 0.6 meter (2.0 foot) base
outlet basin will be constructed for filtration purposes. This outlet basin will be one foot in
depth and have a length of 11 meters (36 feet).
6. The proposed bridge will be built from a temporary work bridge, which will reduce impacts
to the wetlands/marsh and surface waters of the White Oak River.
7. An in stream construction moratorium will be in effect from February 15 to September 30.
This moratorium is due to the standard anadromous fish moratorium and the site being
designated as a primary nursery area. This moratorium applies to the White Oak River only
not to the marsh areas.

i.
t I
BRIDGE NO. 49
VICINITY
M.C.D.O.T.
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
CARTERET AND ONSLOW
COUNTY
BRIDGE NO. 49 ON SR 1101
AND SR 1442 OVER WHITE
OAK RIVER
STATE PROJECT #8.2160801 B-2938
SILEET I OF 22 05/31/01

4"
STA. 6+70.000 -L- BEGIN STATE PROJECT B-2938
STA. 6+70.000 -L- BEGIN F.A. PROJECT BRZ-110M
VICINITY
n
70 ,OV \\\
\�d i
\ ;Oww ux[
ZO\
N. C.D. O. T.
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
CARTERET AND ONSLOW
COUNTY
BRIDGE NO. 49 ON SR 1101
AND SR 1442 OVER WHITE
OAK RIVER
STATE PROJECT #8.2160801 B-2938
SHEET 2 OF 22 05 / 31 / 01

-WLB WETLAND BOUNDARY
WETLAND
CL
® DENOTES FILL IN
WETLAND
®DENOTES FILL
SURFACE WATER
DENOTES FILL
SURFACE WATER
(POND)
®DENOTES TEMPORARY
FILL IN WETLAND
® DENOTES EXCAVATION
IN WETLAND
® DENOTES TEMPORARY
FILL IN SURFACE
WATER
DENOTES MECHANIZED
CLEARING
_ - FLOW DIRECTION
Tom_ TOP OF BANK
....... wE....... EDGE OF WATER
-- C--- PROP. LIMIT OF CUT
---F-- PROP. LIMIT OF FILL
- A PROP. RIGHT OF WAY
---NG --- -NATURAL GROUND
---P�-- PROPERTY LINE
-TOE-
TEMP. DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
- PDE -
PERMANENT DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
--EAB--
EXIST. ENDANGERED
ANIMAL BOUNDARY
--EPB--
EXIST. ENDANGERED
PLANT BOUNDARY
WATER SURFACE
x x x x x LIVE STAKES
x x x
BOULDER
- - - CORE FIBER ROLLS
LEGEND
PROPOSED BRIDGE
PROPOSED BOX CULVERT
PROPOSED PIPE CULVERT
12'-48`
(DASHED LINES DENOTE PIPES
EXISTNG STRUCTURES) 54' PIPES
& ABOVE
W SINGLE TREE
.. ........... .. WOODS LINE
DRAINAGE INLET
ROOTWAD
RIP RAP
O ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER
OR PARCEL NUMBER
IF AVAILABLE
BZI BUFFER ZONE I
BZ2 BUFFER ZONE 2
N. C. DEPT.OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
CARTERET AND ONSLOW COUNT
PROJECT:8.2160801 (B-2938)
BRIDGE NO.49 ON SR 1101
AND SR 1442 OVER WHITE
OAK RIVER

STA. 17+30.000 -L- END STATE PROJECT B-2938
ilz
`STA. 6+70.000 -L- BEGIN STATE PROJECT B-2938
STA. 6+70.000 -L- BEGIN F.A. PROJECT BRZ-1101(5)
VICINITY
N. C.D. O. T.
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
CARTERET AND ONSLOW
COUNTY
BRIDGE NO. 49 ON SR 1101
AND SR 1442 OVER WHITE
OAK RIVER
STATE PROJECT #8.2160801 1-2938
SHEET 2 OF 22 05 / 31 / 01

LEGEND
--iJLB
WETLAND BOUNDARY
�
PROPOSED BRIDGE
WETLANO
PROPOSED BOX CULVERT
DENOTES FILL IN
®
WETLAND
PROPOSED PIPE CULVERT
12'-48'
DENOTES FILL IN
(DASHED LINES DENOTE PIPES
SURFACE WATER
EXISTNG STRUCTURES) 54' PIPES
& ABOVE
FILL IN
®DENOTES
SURFACE WATER
(POND)
SINGLE TREE
®DENOTES TEMPORARY
FILL IN WETLAND.
... WOODS LINE
DENOTES EXCAVATION
®
IN WETLAND
DRAINAGE INLET
®
DENOTES TEMPORARY
FILL IN SURFACE
WATER
ROOTWAD
DENOTES MECHANIZED
CLEARING
- - FLOW DIRECTION
- RIP RAP
T��
TOP OF BANK
------WE..--.-
EDGE OF WATER
ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER
OR PARCEL NUMBER
O
C- __
PROP. LIMIT OF CUT
IF AVAILABLE
-- F -- PROP. LIMIT OF FILL
-A� PROP. RIGHT OF WAY
---NG--- NATURAL GROUND
---P�-- PROPERTY LINE
- TDE - TEMP. DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
-POE- PERMANENT DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
--EAB - - EXIST. ENDANGERED
ANIMAL BOUNDARY
--EPB-- EXIST. ENDANGERED
PLANT BOUNDARY
WATER SURFACE
x x x x x LIVE STAKES
x x x
BOULDER
- - - CORE FIBER ROLLS
BZl BUFFER ZONE 1
BZ2 BUFFER ZONE 2
N. C. DEPT.OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
CARTERET AND ONSLOW COUNT
PROJECT:8.2160801 (B-2938)
BRIDGE NO.49 ON SR 1101
AND SR 1442 OVER WHITE
OAK RIVER
SHEET 3 OF 22 05/31/01

r
D
1
r
o
'
0
d
JEANETTE S. MORTON ETAL
!
OB 727, PG. 397
i
'
08 1295. PG. 783
n
n
DETOUR #1
DETOUR
PI Sto 8+19J67
0 = 23' 19' 427' (RT)
L = 114005
T = 57BO3
R = 28ODOO
Se = MATCH EXISTING
BEGIN TEUP.
SHORING
FSNEO 5342m LT. .
O DETOUR SLOPE STAKE—
E
EACH SNOT TAFEN AT ONAVE NEAOSTONE
W NO NEAOS GRAVE DDEPRESSION. T1FEN PT
MIDWAY UNITED MECHURCH
08 150
OB I50 PG 298
OB M. PG 216
16
DB 1, PG
DB I627274fi27, PG 102 1026
_ Q O
atw E"b .
i
2
29"F-':"T i
tii Hit
ONST.pEV.
DETOUR
PISta 9+03J00
0= 2' iY 32D' (LT)
L = 45253
T = 22.629
bIn R = IJ65DW
x m0' Se = MATCH EXISTIA
0 cb ♦BT.SOO
h �p 7540
l58.4'1
Q 4 BEGIN CIA e�w
I O END TEUP. .�,
l� SHORING A
W l +0I —C— vENO TEMP
IO 6f80m CT. CQN(ZBARRIER
woods
O ETRLYN S. HURST .y.
DB 760. PG 179
08 808,PG 692
DB 1077. PG 8T3
NOTE%USE 3m DRIVEWAY RADIUS
Ni C.D. O. i i
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
CARTERET AND ONSLOW
COUNTY
BRIDGE NO. 49 ON SR 1101
AND SR 1442 OVER WHITE
OAK RIVER
STATE PROJECT #8.216080I B-2938
SHEET 3A OF 22

MA
-1.���i.�-1.vi�i
qLWVA
�.1AN=W,
.�•-•.•.�1-•.•-•.•-
111111111111111111111111111111111411111�
�1i!�11v111�111�
1111�1=1i1�11�1=1i1�11M1:1��i►�_1'_�1:1=1��1vw:t
111:1=Q�'A 1=1i111'AF,#,
i�1�►1�1iv1���1�v��1V•1w�1�1�1V•1i���1���1v��1�►uuV�1�1�'!����1��i��'r1�
BEGIN TEMP
WORK BRIDGE
0.9m BASE
PLAN VIEW
IN WETLANDS ONLY.NO
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
CLASS 'B\
REINF MAT SN'
MECHANIZED CLEARING
CARTERET AND ONSLOW
.,
PIP
. . .,
OUT LET
CHECK DAM
PROTECTION
lOm SPACING TEMP WORK BRIDGEAND
BRIDGE NO.49 ON SR 1101
����
SR 1442 OVER WHITE

q
WILLIAM MA JOCKS \�
SANDERS
d
E
5m
SCALE
HURST
SANDERS
CTHLYN
NOTE:HAND CLEARING
VIEW%����%
IN WETLANDS ONLY.NO
v
MECHANIZED CLEARING
TEMP WORK BRIDGE
WETLAND RESTORATION
N.C.D.®.T.
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
A.CARTERET AND ONSLOW
COUNTY
BRIDGE NO.49 ON SR 1101
AND SR 1442 OVER WHITE
OAK RIVER
STATE PROJECT#8.2160801 B-2938
SHEET 5 OF 22 05/31/01

N
:ARTERET COUNTY _. _ oR
._._.._.._.._.._.._.._.._.._.._.._.._.._.._.._..
ONSLOW COUNTY
�im ME - 1 _ .•=•'e�eeeee0eeeeeeee!e�e��
i�i�:!':. ._.=-eieeeieeeeeeeeeeee=e�e!•!e�.'::-e-ei.��.�.e.
T `� �� eeee �eee��ee �.e.�-� _ �.. ee-._•-•
eieeieieieiei!e%!e�..•!e=e-e'i��!•!•��e.•-♦.
�••e�e�e�e�i��e�eieie�i��•�e�e♦e�e.•.�♦

WILLIAM MATTOCKS SANDER
i - -
C
S.
SCALE
10.7m
L
F.
EXIST R/W
--�FXIST
G
e
E
v1
e
------------------------------------------ ----- N.C,D.®.T.
ETHLYN WARD SANDERS ��- ---
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
CARTERET AND ONSLOW
PLAN VIEW � COUNTY r
Jf BRIDGE NO.49 ON SR 1101
TEMP WORK BRIDGE AND SR 1442 OVER WHITE
NOTE. HAND CLEARING OAK RIVER
IN WETLANDS ONLY,NO E?/!/!//7/_.
MECHANIZED CLEARING LLL_L_GLI� WETLAND RESTORATION STATE PROJECTA8.2160801 B-2938 c
SHEET 7 OF 22 05/31/01

1
1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------
. IVA
wom kw
♦
...�I
'.....�/I
LVA
�i���i����1�i�=��1�i�=��1�i�=��1�i�=����i�:
,ITT,
��A�i�'���►�w�����i�i�=����iw�
-
MA ma
. II O
-�
1IVISION OF
ETHLYN
WA
.
COUNTY
I" I .--A ` IBRIDGE
NO.49 ON SR 1101
��..

0
O
h
is• T
�O,q!
LAN VIEW N.C.D.®.T.
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
CARTERET AND ONSLOW
TEMP WORK BRIDGE COUNTY
BRIDGE NO.49 ON SR 1101
AND SR 1442 OVER WHITE
Sq0 10. OAK RIVER
SCALE STATE PROJECT"8.2160501 B-2938
SHEET 9 OF 22 OS/

F
m
I
CL 'II' RIP -RAP y
SLOPE PROTECTION I I/
1 A.1
GRAF A.
I�TOtV
DRILLED
r� ,
�� _ .f�%!lam � • _ •
END -TEMP
TEMP
o
�;�
N/oO ° 400mfi
� C yA'��< TON 0.6m BASE
METAL PIPE
OUTLET BASIN
CLASS II RIP -RAP W/ CL 'B' RIP -RAP
OUTLET PROTECTION
PLAN VIEW
liffiffil
Sm�.
SCALE
4 ri
N.C.D.®.T.
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
CARTERET AND ONSLOW
COUNTY
BRIDGE NO.49 ON SR I101
AND SR 1442 OVER WHITE
OAK RIVER
STATE PROJECTa92160801 B-29u

d
_.-.�....
8-2938
`R'
R/ SHEET NO.
\
ROADWAY DESIGN
MYDRAWCS
5 10
ENGp4EER
,lN UfOI'np.
=�`iP`o(ESS/q��'Ei 2-
ENGINEER
.. pit% ulop,�,�0'
n?`oEESSI Trc`. IR.
f
IRM M. 1
DETOUR #2
ti
DETOUR
Pl Stu 16+14957
Ern
o
A= 15'33'53e(RT)
o I
N
L = 2/J66 co of
�.
T = 1JE67
R = IOODOO
Se = MATCH EXISTING "w•
o
Y ryn�7
A'
O
y a
l I
o
O
Q o�
Q
BEGIN TEMP. ;
��
4j
/ Q b�
CONC BARRIER70
O
p
v S
Ll
DETOUR SLOPELESL/f
SEq�lN TEMP.
`�
^�cp Q O
`� Alive
f� P(gST�C.
» Og 82S• BRIGHT
9 - PG
b
+9 60 CTL_
q 'i
M14� �i v A �pOST
_ �� B4' ACF
r
OF'33' sm�
t
:Y
E
ZSFp
Mp Pp1F
`
.2
Q
y
RpM RAMP
_—
\�
TEUP08AIW
CRASH
ENO TEMP. CUSHRON
Sf10RING _ wis Of
C BARRIER ri
R
J•�LT
yq ©
+380/J
fb9m !T
LO 08 PUGN PG 238ON
- Pc zJe
s
—L— Poo Stu +/-
JOEL C.000M
OB 412
' OB 412 - PC 462
Ga 400 - PC z9C N/y
BEGIN PA MB 12 - PG 26
08 859 - PG 559q�
L Qi C.D.O.i i
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
CARTERET AND ONSLOW
COUNTY
BRIDGE NO. 49 ON SR 1101
AND SR 1442 OVER WHITE
OAK RIVER
STATE PROJECT #8.2160801 B-2938
SHEET 9A OP 22

E
iF
0
5�.
HORIZONTAL SCALE
Im
VERTICAL SCALE
5
3
M Z
01
� 1
N
W
s
-3
+20 +40 +60 +80
N.C.D.®.T.
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
CARTERET AND ONSLOW
COUNTIES
PROFILE
®1L�1f 1( lI? BRIDGE NO.49 ON SR 1101
JC'�R 1I' I LeE AND SR 1442 OVER WHITE
OAK RIVER
STATE PROJECT $18.2160801 B-2938
SHEET 11 OF 22 05/3
Is

5
0
0
r
a
N
W
Z
J
S
H
IU +1U +4U +6U +bu 11
sm
HORIZONTAL SCALE
lm
VERTICAL SCALE
PROFILE
N.C.D.®.T.
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
CARTERET AND ONSLOW
COUNTIES
BRIDGE NO.49 ON SR 1101
AND SR 1442 OVER WHITE
OAK RIVER
STATE PROJECT U8.2160801 B-2938
SHEET 12 OF 22 05/2
5
3
1
-1
-3

5
o
a
T
3
Fa-
N
W
Z
N
J
S
CJ
r
—3
1-4
1
IN
N.C.D.®.T.
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
Sm CARTERET AND ONSLOW
HORIZONTAL SCALE COUNTIES
PROFILE FILE BRIDGE NO.49 ON SR 1101
lm 0 2m AND SR 1442 OVER WHITE
III III I oRIVER
VERTICAL SCALE
STATE PROJECT A8.2160801 6-2938
SHEET 13 OF 22 05/31/01
lA

5
+20
+40
sm
HORIZONTAL SCALE
lm
VERTICAL SCALE
+60
:f
13
+20
N.C.D.®.T.
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
CARTERET AND ONSLOW
COUNTIES
-3
PROFILE BRIDGE NO.49 ON SR 1101
AND SR 1442 OVER WHITE
OAK RIVER
STATE PROJECT a8.2160801 B-2958
SHEET 14 OF 22 06/31/01

5
0
N
3 +
r
t�
i-3
1-4
+1U +4U
i
S. 0 10m
Y� HORIZONTAL SCALE
1mW J
VERTICAL SCALE
+6U +tsu
o
0
r
14 +ZU
�5
-3
N.C.D.®.T.
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
CARTERET AND ONSLOW
COUNTIES
BRIDGE NO.49 ON SR 1101
AND SR 1442 OVER WHITE
OAK RIVER
STATE PROJECT N8:2160801 B-2938
SHEET 15 OF 22 OS/31/01

BRIDGE
DRAINAGE
COLLECTION
SYSTEM
1.8m x 1.8m
CLASS B
RIP RAP PAD
+40
NORM
EL
Pl•�
N.C.D.®.T.
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
I CARTERET AND ONSLOW
COUNTIES
BRIDGE NO.I9 ON SR 1101
AND SR 1442 OVER WHITE
OAK RIVER
' STATE PROJECT P9.2160801 D-2938
SHEET 16 OF 22 05/ 31/ 01
PROPOSED GRADE
EXISTING
BRIDGE
.S.E
5491 9 i
I I
I I
I �
I I
I
I I I I I I
I
I j j I I I
I
I
I I I I
1 I I
I I
EXISTING
GROUND
15
+20
S� 0 10e. `
Y�O�O�O HORIZONTAL SCALE
PROFILE �1'y' ICI
ly'
VERTICAL SCALE
5
-3

5
3
lf) I I I
r I I I I I I I
1 `n i NORMAI iW.S.
z i EL. = 6.541Fa m i i I
._. 7. ._._ . _._._.i._...�._._._
0
EXISTING
GROUND
I �
+60
sm
HORIZONTAL SCALE
Im
VERTICAL SCALE
PROPOSED GRADE EXISTING 5
BRIDGE
'-�_�_ -A
I , STA 16+00.00
Ti, L I I T I END BRIDGE 3
yBRft�GEl 1 0
SYST
CLASS II RIPRAP
—1
—3
+20 +40
N.C.D.®.°][°.
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
CARTERET AND ONSLOW
COUNTIES
BRIDGE NO.49 ON SR 1101
AND SR 1442 OVER WHITE
OAK RIVER
STATE PROJECT R8.2160901 B-2938
SHEET 17 OF 22 05/31/01

I
-9
Ln
C)
I
QW
1, J
Iw
vi
Lo
Usz?
p
N
j
�Ln
ZE
W J
I J
J
Ln
Q Q I
V) I G010
_
J Lo !'
� � J
+ 60 + 80
CLASS 'A' RIP -RAP
W/ FILTER FABRIC
*57 STONE
+60
:l
E
(�> � I" I I I I., (n ail
S. 0 10. RAMP PROFILE
Y� HORIZONTAL SCALE
Im4C�
VL'RTICAL SCALE
16
3
1
-1
-3
N.C.D.®.T.
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
CARTERET AND ONSLOW r..
COUNTIES
:n
BRIDGE NO.49 ON SR 1101
AND SR 1442 OVER WHITE
OAK RIVER
STATE PROJECT a8.2160801 B-2938
SHEET 18 OF 22 OS/31/01
EV.2/20/03

i
NOTE:
i
BOTTOM OF TEMP WORK BRIDGE
i
SHALL
BE A MINIMUM OF 0.6. ABOVE +
MEAN
HIGH WATER ELEVATION OF I.O..
15
PRE -STRESSED
:4
CONCRETE PILES
ALTERNATELY
3
BATTERED
(TYPICAL )
-- --------
'
1
EXIST GROUND
i
I
I-3
i
I
50
40 30 20 10
I
S. 0 10.
iHORIZONTAL SCALE
lm
VERTICAL SCALE
LIMITS OF
CONSTRUCTION
EASEMENT
BOTTOM Or
TEMP. WORK
BRIDGE
ELEV. 2m
TEMPORARY
STEEL "H" PIL
0 10 20
-L- STA.14 + 35
+ WETLANDS
MHW ELEV.I.000.
EXIST GROUND
5
3
1
-1
-3
30 40 50
N.C.D.®.T.
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS -
CARTERET AND ONSLOW -
COUNTIES
BRIDGE NO.19 ON SR 1101 =
AND SR 1142 OVER WHITE
OAK RIVER
STATE PROJECT 09.2160801 B-2938
SHEET 19 OF 22 05/31/01

NOTE:
BOTTOM OF TEMP WORK BRIDGE
SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 0.6. ABOVE
MEAN HIGH WATER ELEVATION OF 1.0..
15
I
-4— DRILLED PIG
(TYPICAL)
3
. ``---------'
j EXIST GROUND—
i
u
i
I-1
i
I�
-3
BOTTOM OF
TEMP. WORK
BRIDGE
ELEV. 2m
TEMPORARY --
STEEL "H" PILES
EXIST GROUND
MHW ELEV.
5
K,
1
------------------------- 1
-3
50 40 30 20
10 0 10 20
30
40 50
N.C.D.®.T.
-L- STA. 14+65
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
�.
SA 0 10.
CARTERET AND ONSLOW
=�
Y� HORIZONTAL SCALE
WETLANDS
COUNTIES
BRIDGE NO.49 ON SR 1101
co
=;
AND SR 1442 OVER WHITE
lm
owx RIVER
VERTICAL SCALE
STATE PROJECT 8.2160801 B-2938
SHEET 20 OF 22 05/31/01

PROPERTY OWNERS
NAMES AND ADDRESSES
PARCEL NO. NAMES ADDRESSES
CHARLES W.HERMANSON.JR.
2
ETHLYN SANDERS HURST
3
KENNETH W.METTS
4 --
- --MIDWAY-UNITED-- - - —
METHODIST CHURCH
5
Cj
ETHLYN SANDERS HURST
7
NIDO L. HAMILTON
8 HARRY BARKER
355 STELLA RD.
STELLA.NC 28582
145 DOCTOR CORBETT RD.
SWANSBORO, NC 28584
2117 RIVER DR.
STELLA.NC 28582
-69- WETHERINGTON-L-ANDING-RD-
STELLA,NC 28582
-44
145 DOCTOR CORBETT RD.
SWANSBORO, NC 28584
110 WETHERINGTON LANDING RD.
STELLA.NC 28582
4604 PINE NEEDLE LN.
WILSON, NC 27896
rj GROVER C. CADDELL. III. 3201 RIVER ROAD
STELLA, NC 28582
N,C.D.O.T.
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
CARTERET AND ONSLOW
COUNTY
BRIDGE NO.49 ON SR 1101
AND SR 1442 OVER WHITE
OAR RIVER
STATE PROJECT a8.2160801 B-2938
SHEET 21 OF 22 05/31/01

WETLAND PERMIT IMPACT SUMMARY
Site
No.
Station
(Fromrro)
TYPE OF
STRUCTURE
4 dl
Rows
k of
Structures
Der Row
4 of
Fingers
or Bents
tot. k of
Structures
tot. Area he
WETLAND IMPACTS
SURFACE WATER IMPACTS
Fill In
We
ha
Temp. Fill
In Wetlands
ha
Excavation
In Wetlands
(he)
Mechanized
Clearing
(Method III)
ha
Fill In SW
(Natural)
ha
Fill In SW
(Pond)
ha)
Existing
Temp. Fill Channel
In SW Impacted
ha m)
Relocated
Channel
m
1
MAIN
TEMP.
WORK BRIDGE
8+96 to 14+50
1 H-piles
1
171
37
1 259
0.00963
0.00963
14+50 to 15+4
H-piles
1
1 7
6
1 42
0.00156
1 0.00156
1 10.7
15+55 to 15+
H-piles
1 1
1 7
1 3
1 21
1 0.00078
1 0.00078
2
FINGERS
ON TEMP. WORK
BRIDGE
8+961014+50
H- iles
2
7
19
266
0.00990
0.00990
H- iles
2
10
1
20
0.00045
0.00045
14+50 to 15+
H- iles
2
1 10
1 4
80
1 0.00298
1 0.00298
13.2
H- Iles
1 2
1 7
1 1
14
1 0.00052
1
1 0.00052
.
15+90 to 16+0
none
3
PROPOSED BRIDGE
8+96 to 14+50
1 Conc. Piles
1 1 1 7 1 21
1 147
1 0.00547
0.00547
14+50 to 15+24
Drilled Shafts
1 1 1 3 1 10
1 30
1 0.00068
0.00068
1
1
1 9.6
15+90 16+00
1 Conc. Piles
1 1 1 7 1 1
1 7
1 0.00026
0.00026
4
RIPRAP
14+37 8 15+961 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.00032
0.00032
5
PROPOSED BOAT RAMP
15+70 to 15,901
0.00314 1
0.01324
TOTALS:
1
0.0091928 1 0.01998 1 0 1 0
0.013915 1 0 1 0.0058 1 33.5,. 1 0
Wetland restoration = 0.69 hectares (see drawings)
Assumed Dimensions (m): Assumptions:
H-piles are (2' x 2') =0.372 Surface Waters span from 14+50 to 15+90
Drilled shafts are (3.5' diam.) = 0.225
Prestressed Concrete Piles (2'x2) = 0.372
Riprap Pads are (1.8mxt.8m) = 3.24
Proposed Boat Ramp is (4.2mx23m)= 96.6

rN
I
`cz
00
V
N
�V
0'
TAT E OF NORTH[ (CAROLINA TRI
See Shet 1-A Fqr_ ln0et ofSheets
See Sleet 1-B For Comentioml SymDNs
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS ALL MatS1ONS IN
THESE PLANS ARE IN METER:
AND/Olt AUu1METERS
UNLESS OTHMME SHOWN
CAR TERETIONSLO W COUNTIES
VrclxrTY
MAP
i
DETOUR ROUTS tH-
STA. 6+70.000 4, BEGIN STATE PROJECT B-2438
GRAPIJTC SCALE
5(n Q 70m
PLANS
Sm q tOm
PROFILE (HORIZONTAL)
1m 2m
PROFILE (VERTICAL)
DESIGN DATA
ADT 2002 = 1600
ADT 2025 = 2500
DHV = 10 %
D = 60 %
T = 3 % •
• TTST 1% DUAL 2%
. V = 70 krwh••
-DESIGN SPEED AND
HORIZONTAL CLEARANCE
DESIGN EXCEPTION
LOCATION: REPLACE BRIDGE NO.' 49 OVER WHITE OAK RIVER
AND APPROACHES ON SR 1101 AVID SR 1442
TYPE OF WORK: GRADING, DRAINAGE, PAVING, RESURFACING AND STRUCTURE.
I
�I $
4
SLO
µ - �i
BEGIN BRIDGE
STA 6+94.3 8
i
PROJECT LENGTH
LENGTH ROADWAY F.A. PROJECT BRZ-1101(5) = 0.361 km
LENGTH STRUCTURE F.A. PROJECT BRZ-1101(5) = 0.706 km I
TOTAL LENGTH STATE PROJECT 8.2160901 1.067 km
I
YI
�!.C.j B-2938 I L L
PRELI �1 v E D
DO NOT USE FOR CONSTRUCTION
200. MAR 2 5 2002
DW@
PROD # Si u$GZo3Z I
STA. 17 + 37.500 4, END STATE PROJECT B-2938
X!
O /Ar
6
r
0/L
_ C
`
/
E
END BRIDGE
STA 16+00.340
Tp
� r'O2 dhc p0
APP VED
.�
IH
OMMMMMAL
cc ON
ATEiR OW WTY
Z-t- SM) ZCx37-
N= 0UNTX sCoWff KUSMPE.PRWECr ENNEER - AYSEN SERVCES
Prepared in Ne Office Cf:
WANG ENGINEERING COMPANY, INC.
CARY, N.C.
POl1 NOR2H CAROM" DS_ ARTALII T OF Sx&Nxro iA
teal STANOSND smcDmI rmNS
GREG S. PURVIS. P.E.
JUM OF WAY DATE.
mojz= T�r�
JANUARY 18.2002
LgrnNG DATE:
WILUAM TILUTT
JANUARY 21.2003
HIDRAUMCS ENGMM I DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
STATE OF NORTH CAROI.WA
ROADWAY
DEPARTMENT OP TRANSPORTATION
mDERAL HIGHWAY ADMIA4STEATION