20191466 Ver 1_BR-0044 Section 7 Concurrence Request_20191029

$51ATEa
P wa'srn 'I'�
YG
'X.-
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Roy COOPER
GOVERNOR
October 29, 2019
Mr. Pete Benjamin
Field Supervisor
US Fish and Wildlife Service
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
TAMES H. TROGDON, III
SECRETARY
Subject: Section 7 Concurrence Request for the Proposed Bridge Replacement of Bridge No. 168
on NC 14/87 over the Smith River in Rockingham County, Division 7; TIP: BR-0044; WBS
No. 67044.1.1.
REFERENCE: Biological Assessment for BR-0044, dated September 27, 2019 (attached).
Mr. Benjamin,
The purpose of this letter is to request concurrence from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) (ESA).
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to replace Bridge 168 on NC 14/87
over the Smith River in Rockingham County with a five span, 520 feet long bridge to the north of the
current alignment with the existing bridge being utilized as an onsite detour during construction. This
action will result in the following impacts: 80 linear feet of permanent stream impact, 10 linear feet of
permanent impacts from bank stabilization, 0.47 acre of temporary impacts to surface waters for
causeways for bridge construction/removal, and 10 linear feet temporary impacts for bank stabilization.
The project is slated to Let in April 2020.
As of June 27, 2019, the USFWS lists three (3) federally protected species for Rockingham County
Common Name
Scientific Name
Status
Habitat
Presence
Biological Conclusion
Roanoke logperch
Percina rex
E
Yes
MANLTAA
Smooth coneflower
Echinacea laevigata
E
Yes
No Effect
James spinymussel
Parvaspina collina
E
Yes
MANLTAA**
**MAY AFFECT, NOT LIKELY TO ADVERSELY AFFECT
E-Endangered
Roanoke logperch -The Roanoke logperch has been documented in in the past from the Smith River above
the Martinsville Dam in Virginia (Roberts et al 2013), upstream from the project location, and from the
Smith River in North Carolina slightly over one stream mile downstream of the project location. However,
Mailing Address: Telephone: [phone] Location:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Fax: [phone] BIRCH RIDGE DRIVE
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS UNIT Customer Service: 1-877-368-4968 RALEIGH NC 27610
1598 MAIL SERVICE CENTER Website: www.ncdot.gov
RALEIGH NC 27699-1598

due to the highly regulated flow conditions within the Smith River in the Action Area as outlined in Section
3.0 of the attached assessment, and the isolation of the Action Area from downstream populations by a
dam, it is not reasonably certain that the species occurs within the Action Area. Given that the species is
not reasonably certain to occur within the Action Area combined with the implementation of the
conservation measures outlined in Section 4.2, potential project related effects to the Roanoke logperch
will be discountable.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: MAY AFFECT, NOT LIKELY TO ADVERSELY AFFECT
Smooth coneflower A visual survey conducted for smooth oneflower on June 6, 2018 did not observe the
species in the project study area. A review of the NCNHP records on April 16, 2018 indicated no known
occurrences within 1.0 miles of the Action Area. Completion of this project will not affect Smooth
Coneflower.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
James spinymussel — A mussel survey on November 14, 2001 indicated that instream habitat for the
species was present in the project Action Area. However, no evidence of any species of freshwater
mussels was observed. In addition, the highly variable and controlled flow pattern of the Smith River
through the project creates an inhospitable (as detailed in Section 3.0) setting for native mussel species.
Although the presence of the species in the Action Area cannot be completely ruled out, the distances to
current, known records for the species and the highly variable flow conditions in the Smith River within
the Action Area, suggest the likelihood of the species presence in the Action Area is very low, and
therefore the potential effects to the species are discountable.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: MAY AFFECT, NOT LIKELY TO ADVERSELY AFFECT
No Proposed Project Commitments
Based on the information presented and, in the attachments, NCDOT believes that the requirements of
Section 7(a)(2) of the ESA have been satisfied and hereby request your concurrence. If you have any
questions, please contact Jeff Hemphill at [e-mail].
Sincerely,
Philip S. Harris III, P.E., C.P.M.
Environmental Analysis Unit Head
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Enclosures: Biological Assessment for BR-0044, dated September 27, 2019
Cc: Gary Jordan, USFWS
Marissa Cox, NCDOT BSG-EAU
David Bailey, USACOE
Kevin Fischer, NCDOT Structures
File: BR-0044

Biological Assessment
For
Replacement of Bridge No. 168 on NC 14/87
Over the Smith River
Rockingham County, North Carolina
TIP number BR-0044
WBS Element # 67044.1.1
Prepared For:
NC Department of Transportation
Raleigh, North Carolina
Contact Person:
Matt Haney
Biological Surveys Group
North Carolina Department of Transportation
mmhaney(rc ncdot.gov
1598 Mail Service Center
Raleigh NC 27699-1598
September 27, 2019

Prepared by:
RiC%fC
900 Ridgefield Drive, Suite 350
Raleigh, NC 27609
Contact Person:
Neil Medlin
Manager, Natural Resources
[e-mail]
919-878-9560

Table of Contents
1.0
Project Overview....................................................................................................I
1.1 Federal Nexus...................................................................................................1
1.2 Project Description............................................................................................1
1.3 Project Area and Setting...................................................................................1
1.4 Project Action Area...........................................................................................1
1.5 Consultation History.........................................................................................2
2.0
Federally Proposed and Listed Species and Designated Critical Habitat ........2
3.0
Environmental Baseline.........................................................................................2
4.0
Project Details........................................................................................................3
4.1 Construction......................................................................................................3
4.2 Conservation Measures.....................................................................................4
5.0
Effects Analysis......................................................................................................5
5.1 Direct Effects....................................................................................................6
5.2 Indirect Effects..................................................................................................6
5.3 Cumulative Effects............................................................................................7
6.0
Effect Determinations............................................................................................7
6.1 Effect Determinations for Listed Species.........................................................7
6.1.1 No Effect Determinations...........................................................................7
6.1.2 May Affect; Not Likely to Adversely Affect Determinations ....................7
7.0
References...............................................................................................................9
Appendix A. Figures:
Figure 1: Project Vicinity & Survey Locations
Figure 2: Smith River CFS
Figure 3: Smith River 2-Month CFS
Figure 4: NPDES Dischargers and 303(d) Listed Streams
Figure 5: NCNHP Element Occurrences
Appendix B. Design Plans
Appendix C. Detailed Species Information

1.0 Project Overview
1.1 Federal Nexus
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to replace Bridge No. 168
on NC 14/87 over the Smith River in Rockingham County (Appendix A, Figure 1). This project
is funded by the state of North Carolina and will require a United States Army Corps of
Engineers (USACE) permit. USACE will serve as the lead federal agency. NCDOT derives
their statutory authority via North Carolina General Statutes (NCGS) 143B — 345 and 346.
USACE derives their statutory authority via Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899
(33 USC 403) and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344).
1.2 Project Description
The action proposed by NCDOT is to replace Bridge No. 168 on NC 14/87 over the Smith River.
The bridge has a general northwest to southeast orientation. The action includes all activities
required for the bridge replacement project. Demolition of the existing bridge, construction of
the new bridge, approach work, etc. are described later in Section 4.1.
1.3 Project Area and Setting
This project is located in the EPA Piedmont Ecoregion in central North Carolina. The project
area is generally rural and is located adjacent to the north side of the town of Eden. The Smith
River flows approximately 44 miles through Virginia and North Carolina. It begins in Henry
County, Virginia at Philpott Lake and crosses into Rockingham County in North Carolina. It
eventually ends at its confluence with the Dan River near the town of Eden. The proposed
bridge replacement project on the Smith River is located in the Roanoke River Basin (HUC#
03010103). From the project area, the Smith River flows approximately 4 river miles to the Dan
River.
1.4 Project Action Area
The project Action Area is defined as all areas to be affected directly or indirectly by the federal
action and not merely the immediate area involved in the action [50 CFR §402.02]. The Action
Area for this project includes not only the footprint of the fill in waters of the U.S., but also those
areas of the waters downstream of the proposed fill that might reasonably be affected by the
placement of that fill, as well as those segments of the proposed road whose alignment is dictated
by the proposed fill, and those segments of the road that would have no independent utility apart
from the proposed fill. As such, the ESA Action Area for this project is within the footprint of
the regulated activities in the delineated waters, in uplands immediately adjacent to those waters
that would be affected due to the authorized work in waters of the U.S., in waters downstream
that would be expected to be affected by the proposed activities in waters of the U.S. and the
uplands noted above.
For this bridge replacement, the limits of the effects are considered to include the limits of
construction of the approaches (approximately 862 feet from the northwest end of the bridge and
Biological Assessment; Bridge No. 168, Rockingham County September 2019
Page 1

approximately 848 feet from the southeast end of the bridge), and any areas receiving the runoff
from the construction activity including the Smith River extending 400 m (1,314 ft.) downstream
and 100 m (328 ft.) upstream of the structure. The stream bank stabilization activities would be
included within this stream segment.
1.5 Consultation History
The preparation of this Biological Assessment is the beginning the of the consultation for this
project.
2.0 Federally Proposed and Listed Species and Designated Critical Habitat
As of August 30, 2019, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) indicated three federally
listed species for Rockingham County (Table 1). No proposed species were noted for
Rockingham County.
Table 1. Federally Listed Species for Rockingham County, North Carolina
Common Name
Scientific Name
Status
Roanoke Logperch
Percina rex
Endangered
James Spinymussel
Parvas ina collina
Endangered
Smooth Coneflower
Echinacea laevi ata
Endangered
The primary focus of this Biological Assessment is on the Roanoke Logperch and James
Spinymussel. The Smooth Coneflower is not discussed further until Section 6.0.
No Critical Habitat has been designated for any of these species.
3.0 Environmental Baseline
The Smith River at the project site is a highly regulated stream with extreme ranges in flows
(Figures 2 and 3). Philpott dam was constructed on the Smith River in 1953 and is used to
control flooding and provide peak power generation. Fluctuating releases generated by Philpott
dam have substantially altered the downstream ecosystem, impacts include highly modified
flows, coldwater thermal regime, modified or altered aquatic community, and reduced
productivity (Orth 2004). In addition to the Martinsville and Philpott dams above the reach of
the river where the project is located, the project reach itself is above another dam separating it
from the lower portions of the Smith River as well as the Dan River.
There are no NPDES permitted dischargers in North Carolina at locations that could affect water
quality at the project site (Figure 4). Dischargers downstream on the Dan River could potentially
affect the Dan River downstream of the confluence with the Smith River, potentially affecting
aquatic species recruitment to the lower Smith River. There are no permitted dischargers in
Virginia within 7 stream miles of the project location.
Biological Assessment; Bridge No. 168, Rockingham County September 2019
Page 2

The Smith River in the project area is on the North Carolina Department of Environmental
Quality (NCDEQ) - Division of Water Resources 2018 303(d) list of impaired streams (Figure
4). The stream is on the list for exceeding the criteria for a Fair benthic macroinvertebrate rating.
A review of NC Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) records, last accessed August 30, 2019,
indicated there is an element occurrence (EO) for one of the target species within a 5-mile buffer
of the project bridge (Figure 5). This occurrence is for the Roanoke Logperch (EO ID 25404)
and begins approximately 1.3 stream miles downstream from Bridge No. 168. This occurrence
was first observed on July 24, 2007 and last observed on July 28, 2016. The closest occurrence
for the James Spinymussel (EO ID 37056) approximately 9 stream miles downstream from the
project bridge, is on the Dan River. The only observation date for this EO was November 18,
2016. There is no recent survey information for either of these species within the project reach
of the Smith River. This is largely due to the flow ranges referenced above being unpredictable
and presenting significant challenges to safely accessing the river to conduct effective aquatic
surveys.
Although the Roanoke Logperch has not been documented from the project reach, the species
has been documented above and below the project location. The species was first detected in the
Smith River in North Carolina in September 2007. A genetics study of the species indicated that
the Smith River population, including those individuals from above and below the project reach,
was genetically similar (Roberts et. al 2013). This suggests the source of the first Roanoke
Logperch individuals collected in North Carolina was likely to have been the Smith River. For
this to be the case, the species would have to had passed through the project reach as larvae or
adults sometime in the past. However, in the Smith River in Virginia, the Roanoke Logperch
population downstream of Philpot dam has been considered limited due to cold summer
temperatures, fluctuating flows during spawning, and excessive silt and sand in pool habitats
(Orth 2004). In addition, Roanoke Logperch populations have been estimated to be more robust
when flows are moderate and constant, not highly variable discharges which are presumed to
displace or kill individuals (Anderson et al 2013). Although the presence of Roanoke Logperch
at the project location at any given time cannot be ruled out, it is not reasonably certain that the
species occurs within the Action Area given the highly regulated conditions.
No mussels have been collected within the project reach. A survey on November 14, 2001 at the
project location reported no mussels detected.
4.0 Project Details
4.1 Construction
Bridge No. 168 is currently a 525-foot long structure, with a reinforced concrete deck on steel
beams, and a reinforced concrete substructure. The bridge has 7, 75-foot spans, with 4 bents in
the Smith River channel. NCDOT Bridge Management Unit records indicate Bridge No. 168 has
a sufficiency rating of 69.08 out of a possible 100 for a new structure. The bridge was
constructed in 1966 and is considered structurally deficient according to the latest NCDOT
bridge inspection report. Existing interior bents catch large amounts of debris, including logs,
during significant rain events.
Biological Assessment; Bridge No. 168, Rockingham County September 2019
Page 3

The current bridge will remain in place to carry traffic until the new bridge is constructed. When
the new bridge is complete, traffic will be shifted onto it and the old bridge will be taken down.
The superstructure of the current bridge will be removed by cutting it up and lifting out the
pieces by crane. The substructure will be cut and removed by crane. The current bridge has 4
bents in the Smith River channel. Bridge removal work will progress from a causeway.
Demolition will occur after construction of the new bridge is complete. Rock causeways will be
used during demolition. It is anticipated these causeways will be in place for two months since
there are three bents that will need to be removed using the causeways to position the equipment.
The fourth bent in the Smith River channel should be able to be removed from land. Partial
removal of rip rap associated with the current bridge may be needed.
The new bridge will have 5 spans, with 1 at 105 feet, 3 at 115 feet, and 1 at 85 feet. This
arrangement calls for 2 bents to be placed in the waters of the Smith River. Causeways are
anticipated to be installed for 6 weeks for each bent that is in the water during construction. This
timeframe includes construction of the causeways. Causeways will be installed to block no more
than 50 % of the channel. Rip rap will be used along both banks for stabilization. Earthwork
will be required at each end of the bridge to achieve the desired road grade. This work will
generally consist of excavation at the northwest end of the bridge and fill at the southeast end.
The 100-year Water Surface Elevation will be approximately 18 feet above the causeway.
The staging area for equipment and materials used during project construction will likely be in
the northeast quadrant of the Action Area.
4.2 Conservation Measures
The conservation measures outlined below will be incorporated into the design and construction
of this structure. These measures will help to avoid and minimize effects to the Smith River and
the Roanoke Logperch and James Spinymussel.
NCDOT will adhere to Design Standards in Sensitive Watersheds described in 15A NCAC
0413.0124.
Special procedures will also be used for clearing and grubbing, grading operations, seeding and
mulching, and staged seeding within the project.
• Clearing and Grubbing
In areas identified as Environmentally Sensitive Areas, the Contractor may perform
clearing operations, but not grubbing operations until immediately prior to beginning
grading operations as described in Article 200-1 of the Standard Specifications. Only
clearing operations (not grubbing) shall be allowed in this buffer zone until
immediately prior to beginning grading operations. Erosion control devices shall be
installed immediately following the clearing operation.
Biological Assessment; Bridge No. 168, Rockingham County September 2019
Page 4

• Grading
Once grading operations begin in identified Environmentally Sensitive Areas, work
shall progress in a continuous manner until complete. All construction within these
areas shall progress in a continuous manner such that each phase is complete and
areas are permanently stabilized prior to beginning of next phase. Failure on the part
of the contractor to complete any phase of construction in a continuous manner in
Environmentally Sensitive Areas will be just cause for the Engineer to direct the
suspension of work in accordance with Article 108-7 of the Standard Specifications.
• Seeding and Mulching
Seeding and mulching shall be performed in accordance with Section 1660 of the
Standard Specifications and vegetative cover sufficient to restrain erosion shall be
installed immediately following grade establishment. Seeding and mulching shall be
performed on the areas disturbed by construction immediately following final grade
establishment. No appreciable time shall lapse into the contract time without
stabilization of slopes, ditches and other areas within the Environmentally Sensitive
Areas.
• Stage Seeding
The work covered by this section shall consist of the establishment of a vegetative
cover on cut and fill slopes as grading progresses. Seeding and mulching shall be
done in stages on cut and fill slopes that are greater than 20 feet in height measured
along the slope, or greater than 2 acres in area. Each stage shall not exceed the limits
stated above.
All applicable practices from the following documents will be used during project design and
construction: Erosion and Sediment Control Design and Construction Manual (NCDOT 2015);
Stormwater Best Management Practices Toolbox (NCDOT 2014); and Best Management
Practices for Construction and Maintenance Activities (NCDOT 2003).
No direct discharge of deck drains over water will be allowed. Discharge from the deck drains
will be directed to dissipator pads located between the toe of the rip rap stabilization and the
water's edge.
Project design calls for a reduction in the number of bents within the Smith River channel to be
reduced from 4 to 2 bents.
5.0 Effects Analysis
Project -related threats to the Roanoke Logperch and James Spinymussel can be separated into
direct, indirect, and cumulative effects. Direct effects refer to consequences that are directly
attributed to the construction of the project, such as land clearing, stream channelization, and
erosion. Indirect effects are those effects that are caused by, or will result from, the proposed
action and are later in time, but are still reasonably certain to occur. Cumulative effects are those
effects of future State or private activities, not involving federal activities, that are reasonably
certain to occur within the action area of the federal action subject to consultation [50 CFR
Biological Assessment; Bridge No. 168, Rockingham County September 2019
Page 5

§402.02]. Potential direct, indirect, and cumulative effects to the Roanoke Logperch and James
Spinymussel which may result from the project are discussed here.
Project construction such as bridge replacement can also result in beneficial species effects.
Removal of existing instream bents and concrete slope protection can stabilize and improve
habitats that were previously unsuitable.
5.1 Direct Effects
While instream surveys have not documented the presence of Roanoke Logperch or James
Spinymussels at the project location, their presence at the project site cannot be ruled out. Direct
effects on the Roanoke Logperch may be caused by increased sedimentation due to erosion
during and immediately after construction. Increased sedimentation can affect the species by
clogging gills, interfering with feeding, and burying eggs. However, implementation of the
conservation measures outlined in Section 4.2 will significantly decrease the potential for
sedimentation and its potential effects on the Roanoke Logperch. Proper installation and
maintenance of the erosion control measures will reduce the potential sedimentation effects to an
insignificant level.
The placement of rock causeways in the Smith River and the placement of rip rap along the
stream banks for bank stabilization has the potential to crush Roanoke Logperch individuals,
crush eggs of the species, and bury prey items such as aquatic insects. Due to the high mobility
of individuals, the potential for an individual Roanoke Logperch to be crushed by construction
related activities is very low and therefore discountable.
The sources of potential direct effects on the James Spinymussel are the same as those discussed
above for the Roanoke Logperch. Increased sedimentation can clog mussel siphons and
completely bury individuals if enough sediment accumulation occurs. Individual mussels lack
the mobility of fish and are at greater risk of being crushed by the installation of rock causeways
or rip rap if they are present at the time of these activities. In addition to the potential direct
effects on the mussels themselves, the increased sedimentation and rock placement may have an
effect on the host fish of James Spinymussel in the same manner as described for the Roanoke
Logperch. Based on stream flow conditions, a 2001 mussel survey, and distances to known
James Spinymussel records, the potential for this species to be present in the project construction
area is very low. Therefore, the likelihood of any direct effect on the James Spinymussel is
discountable.
5.2 Indirect Effects
Indirect effects of the bridge replacement are likely to be minor and temporary. Flow patterns
may be altered during construction and could cause a change in erosion and sedimentation levels
in the Smith River. However, given the already highly regulated flow conditions in the Action
Area, any minor alterations in flow patterns would be insignificant.
The reduction of the number of bridge bents currently in the Smith River will have a long-term
beneficial effect on the Roanoke Logperch and James Spinymussel. By reducing the number of
Biological Assessment; Bridge No. 168, Rockingham County September 2019
Page 6

bents in the stream, the potential for the bridge to collect debris is reduced. Debris accumulation
can cause disruptions in flow patterns which have the potential to redirect flow onto stream
banks resulting in bank erosion and increased sedimentation. The size and amount of debris
accumulation may necessitate the use of heavy equipment to remove it and depending on where
the equipment is operated from, there is potential for erosion and runoff from the equipment
location. Decreasing debris accumulation reduces the need for and the frequency of such
removal activities.
5.3 Cumulative Effects
NCDOT is not aware of any other projects planned in the action area. There should be no
cumulative effects of this project.
6.0 Effect Determinations
6.1 Effect Determination for Listed Species
6.1.1 No Effect Determinations for Listed Species
A visual survey conducted for Smooth Coneflower on June 6, 2018 did not detect the species in
the project Action Area. A review of the NCNHP records on April 16, 2018 indicated no known
occurrences within 1.0 miles of the Action Area. Completion of this project will not affect
Smooth Coneflower.
6.1.2 May Affect; Not Likely to Adversely Affect Determinations for Listed Species
Records for the James Spinymussel in North Carolina exist from the Smith River approximately
9 stream miles downstream of the Action Area in the Dan River. A mussel survey on November
14, 2001 indicated that instream habitat for the species was present in the project Action Area.
However, no evidence of any species of freshwater mussels was observed. In addition, the
highly variable and controlled flow pattern of the Smith River through the Action Area creates
an inhospitable (as detailed in Section 3.0) setting for native mussel species. Although the
presence of the species in the Action Area cannot be completely ruled out, the distances to
current, known records for the species and the highly variable flow conditions in the Smith River
within the Action Area, suggest the likelihood of the species presence in the Action Area is very
low, and therefore the potential effects to the species are discountable.
The Roanoke Logperch has been documented in in the past from the Smith River above the
Martinsville Dam in Virginia (Roberts et al 2013), upstream from the project location, and from
the Smith River in North Carolina slightly over one stream mile downstream of the project
location. However, due to the highly regulated flow conditions within the Smith River in the
Action Area as outlined in Section 3.0 of this assessment, and the isolation of the Action Area
from downstream populations by a dam, it is not reasonably certain that the species occurs within
the Action Area. Given that the species is not reasonably certain to occur within the Action Area
combined with the implementation of the conservation measures outlined in Section 4.2,
potential project related effects to the Roanoke Logperch will be discountable.
Biological Assessment; Bridge No. 168, Rockingham County September 2019
Page 7

6.2 Effect Determination for Critical Habitat
The project location is not within Critical Habitat for the Roanoke Logperch, James
Spinymussel, or Smooth Coneflower. Therefore, Critical Habitat will not be affected by
completion of the proposed project.
Biological Assessment; Bridge No. 168, Rockingham County September 2019
Page 8

7.0 References
Anderson, G.B., J.H. Roberts, P.L. Angermeier. 2013. Monitoring of Endangered Roanoke
Logperch in Smith River Upstream of Philpott Reservoir. Project report to U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, Wilmington, NC.
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality. NPDES Wastewater Treatment Facility
Permits. http://data-
ncdenr.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/a86af4f7549343419b4c8177cedb3e4b_0 (March
2019).
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality - Division of Water Resources. 2019.
2018 North Carolina 303(d) List.
https:Hfiles.nc. gov/ncdeg/Water%Quality/Planning/TMDL/3 03 d/2016/2016_NC_Categor
X 5 303d_list.pdf (August 2019)
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP). 2019. nheo-2019-07. Natural Heritage
Element Occurrence polygon shapefile. July 2019.
North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) 2003. BMPs for Construction and
Maintenance Activities.
https://connect.ncdot. gov/projects/Roadway/RoadwayDesi gnAdministrativeDocuments/B
est%20Management%2OPractices%20for%2OConstruction%20and%2OMaintenance%20
Activities.pdf
NCDOT 2014. Stormwater Best Management Practices ToolBox. Version 2.
https:Hconnect.ncdot.gov/resources/hydro/Stormwater%20Resources/NCDOT BMP_T
oolbox_2014 April.pdf
NCDOT 2015. Erosion and Sediment Control Design and Construction Manual.
https:Hconnect.ncdot.gov/resources/hydro/HSPDocuments/NCDOT ESC_ Manual 2015
pddf
Orth, Donald. 2004. Influences of Fluctuating Releases on Stream Fishes and Habitat in the
Smith River, below Philpott Dam. Final Report. Virginia Department of Game and
Inland Fisheries, Richmond, VA.
Roberts, J.H., P.L. Angermeier, E.M. Hallerman. 2013. Distance, dams, and drift: what
structures populations of an endangered, benthic stream fish? Freshwater Biology
58:2050-2064.
Biological Assessment; Bridge No. 168, Rockingham County September 2019
Page 9

Appendix A
Figures

E14
USGS 7.5 Minute Quadrangle, NORTHWEST EDEN, NC
No�-
87
A
Prepared By: Prepared For: BRIDGE # 168 ON NC14, NC 87 Dace: September 2019
"°p'"° OVER SMITH RIVER Scale 0 200 Feet Figure
z • BR-0044 Job No.
BR-0044
OF11MPNS��Po ROCKINGHAM COUNTY Drawn by: GSM KNM
Checked bv:

USGUSGS 02074000 SMITH RIVER AT
EDEN, N
2999
a
L
U
1000
4}
41
C]
7
C]
41
bJp
L
L
C]
N
G
300
May
May
May
May
May
Jun Jun
Jun
27
28
29
30
31
01 92
03
2619
2919
2019
2619
2619
2919 2019
2619
---- Provisional
Data Subject to
Revision ----
Median
daily statistic (68
years)
— Discharge
Figure 2

USGUSGS 02074000 SMITH RIVER AT EVEN, N
4999
0 3000
L 2000 -
U
a=
4}
+ 1000
C]
•�
t
41
b!p
L
L
C]
N
G 200
Mar Apr Apr Apr Apr May May May May Jun
39 96 13 20 27 94 11 18 25 01
2019 2919 2019 2919 2019 2919 2919 2019 2919 2019
Median daily statistic (68 years) Period of provisional data
Discharge Measured discharge
Period of approved data
Figure 3

O
VA0021989
0
-f -
\1cr /001010
80 is
311 NCO 0016430�
�1 i...l L.
I
� NG0029980
NC0003468
311
NCO060623
NC008518 ' J NC 25071
Legend 311
n
C NPDES Sites
Survey Location
n87
5-Mile Buffer
111a" ,r
Analysis NC911 Board
NPDES Dischargers and Date September2019
Prepared By: Prepared For: N°eip 303(d) Listed Streams
Scale Figure
BRIDGE # 168 ON NC14, NC 87 0 1 Mikes
�. OVER SMITH RIVER Job No. BR-0044
Fo BR-0044 4
9e OF TFlPNROCKINGHAM COUNTY Drawn by: GSM KNM
Checked bv:

Checked bv:

Appendix B
Design Plans

0-
Ln
to
Z
O
LU
w
TOE
PROTECTION
SEE DETAIL 3
Q�
N W ,
1
W
J N
W W
Z W
J N
V
L
P1 Sto 16 +00.61
P1 Sto 28 +02.44
=
9° 53' 29.9" (RT)
L =
9° 58' 27.2" (RT)
D =
40 05' 33.2"
D =
40 05' 33.2"
L =
241.70"
L =
245.72"
T =
121.15"
T =
122.17"
R =
1,400.00"
R =
1,400.00'
e =
0.06 FT/FT
e =
0.06 FT/FT
R.O.
= 162.00"
R.O.
= 162.00'
Q
CARLTON F. JOYCE
DB 1222 PG 1836
DB 673 PG 27A (PLAT)
4
�y �P PETE & DONNA ATKINS
DB 1312 PG 668
\Q1)
O
(0503 ,----- - - - --
-
I cn _— _———— — — — — ——
0
NORMAN L. NANCE
BRADLEY B. & SHEILA B. NANCE
DB 1189 PG 814
PB 74 PG 3
DETAIL 3
TOE PROTECTION
( Not to Scale)
1 0 FILL
NATURAL �pC� SLOPE
GROUND d
GEOTEXTILE
d = 2 Ft.
Type of Liner= 105 TONS, Class II Rip -Rap
GEOTEXTILE = 195 SY
FROM -L- STA. 13 + 75 LT TO -L- STA. 15 + 50 LT
DETAIL 6
STANDARD BASE DITCH
( Not to Scale)
Natural Natural
Ground .7 ry1 Ground
d D
Geotextile g Min. D= 2 Ft.
Max. d = 2 Ft.
*When B is < 6.0' B= 4 Ft.
Type of Liner= 29 TONS, CL B Rip -Rap
FROM -L- STA. 23 + 80 LT TO STA. 25 + 00 LT
IN
REMOVE EXIST BRIDGE
(STRUCTURE PAY ITEM)
Appendix B:
Plan Sheet 2
v
JONATHAN D. HALL
DB 1068 PG 116(PER GIS)
THIS DEED DOES NOT
DESCRIBE THIS PARCEL
DETAIL 7
LATERAL BASE DITCH
( Not to Scale)
ISNatural IS Fill
Ground ?'7 ID 1 III/Ft. Slope
d
GEOTEXTILE g
Min. D= 2 Ft.
Max. d = 2 Ft.
*When B is < 6.0B= 4 Ft.
T___ _f I (..ems- OA Tnmz ('I R Di.,_D__ b= 5 Ft.
0
NORMAN L. NANCE
BRADLEY B. & SHEILA B. NANCE
DB 1189 PG 814
PB 74 PG 3
O�
\ GREATLAND RETRIEVERS, LLC Z
\ \ DB 1523 PG 2994
\ /Vq 0
00 9 2Ln 3'- �
\ 8
N \ 30 s\
r
ogRFFr
\OS9
I T
� 96 v90�
93 ,F' tiF F
�OF
01-
TyF
S 32 � ti Rr�F
R
qS 0-
—L— 6RIDG&PAVEMENT
END APPROACH SLAB
-L- STA.24+82 +/-
RELATIONSHIP SKETCH
BEGIN BRIDGE
-L- STA.19+37 +/-
(NOT TO SCALE)
SBG
SBG
LB-77....
B-77 IT
T
N
o o
—L —
Lw W N
N
o
o o
S 62° 36' 40.4" E
u- � �'
�1 �'
a
B-77
B-77
7
SBG
END BRIDGE
BEGIN APPROACH SLAB
-L- STA.24+57+/-
-L- STA.19+12 +/-
OF r Op
tiF O
S41/T Or14
R 4,-39„
Fn,S
DETAIL 5
DECK DRAIN DISSIPATOR PAD
( Not to Scale)
FT
DISSIPATOR PI AN VIEW
PAD
*NOTE: CENTER PAD DIRECTLY BELOW DECK DRAINS
GROUND
J�
GEOTEXTILE 1.0'
PROFILE VIEW
L= 31FT (@ EBI, LT), 41FT (@EBI, RT)
L= 58FT (@ E62, LT), 24FT (@EB2, RT)
Type of Liner— 31 TONS CL B Rip —Rap
Geotextile= 110 sy
FROM
STA. 20+07 TO
STA. 20+38
-L-
LT
FROM
STA. 20+38 TO
STA. 20+79
-L-
RT
FROM
STA. 23 + 35 TO
STA. 23 + 93
-L-
LT
FROM
STA. 24 + 01 TO
STA. 24 + 25
-L-
RT
QUANTITIES SHOWN
FOR EACH
PAD
PROJECT REFERENCE NO.
BR —0044
R/W SHEET NO.
ROADWAY DESIGN
ENGINEER
SHEET NO.
5
HYDRAULICS
ENGINEER
INC®MPLEF� PLANS
USE ]F DO NOT USE // W ACQUISITION
rreparea in the
Office of: _C0M NC FIRM LICENSE No: Drive,
12
Su
701CorpoFIRM Center Drive, Suite 475
Raleigh, NC 27607
[phone] - [phone](FAX)
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED
START TRANSITION FROM SPECIAL
LATERAL BASE DITCH TO LATERAL
BASE DITCH STA:29+00
E I P
0
N
C Q sO
o �
W
W W
Z W
Z
V
JONATHAN D.HALL
DB 1068 PG 116(PER GIS)
THIS DEED DOES NOT
DESCRIBE THIS PARCEL
DETAIL 4
PIPE OUTLET CHANNEL
( Not to Scale)
Natural_ "A, �\E atural
Ground Fkia. _0/ round
sT�Nc / ro ti.�
d
k
CHANNEL BED
Length = 12 Ft. (Variable)
d = 3 Ft.
Est. = 15 Tons of Class I Rip -Rap
FROM -L- STA. 15 + 71 LT TO -L- STA. 15 + 76 LT
FOR -L- PROFILE SEE SHEET 7
PAVEMENT REMOVAL
END BENT EXCAVATION
SEE STRUCTURE PLANS
(STRUCTURE PAY ITEM)

Appendix C
Detailed Species Information

Detailed Listed Species Information for BR-0044; The Replacement of Bridge 168 over the
Smith River in Rockingham County, North Carolina
1.0 Roanoke Logperch (Perrcina rrex)
1.1 Characteristics
The Roanoke Logperch is a large darter, growing to a maximum length of 165 mm. The lateral
portions of the fish are covered with vertically elongate blotches (8-11) and dark vermiculations
are interspersed between dorsal saddles. Its' snout is elongate and conical. The fins are strongly
speckled, and the first dorsal fin contains an orange band, particularly vivid in males. Spawning
occurs during April -May in deep runs underlain by gravel. As with other Percina species, larval
drift probably represents an essential dispersal and recolonization mechanism. This species
matures at 2-3 years old and has a lifespan of approximately 6.5 years.
1.2 Distribution and Habitat Requirements
The Roanoke Logperch is found in the Roanoke River Basin: Rockingham County (Dan River,
Mayo River, Smith River, and Big Beaver Island Creek) and potentially portions of the Dan
River and tributaries within Stokes, Caswell, and Forsyth Counties. Adult Roanoke Logperch
typically inhabit medium to large sized, warm, clear streams and occupy riffles, runs, and pools
containing sand, gravel, or boulder. Young -of -year congregate in mixed -species schools in
shallow, margin habitat underlain by sand and gravel. Roanoke Logperch utilize their snout to
overturn gravel to forage on benthic aquatic macroinvertebrates.
1.3 Threats to Roanoke Logperch
Roanoke Logperch populations are threatened by dams and reservoirs, stream channelization,
woody debris loss, non -point source pollution caused by urbanization, agricultural, and
silvicultural activities, toxic spills and toxic point source discharges, and water withdrawals.
These threats are present throughout the historic range of the species.
Construction of large impoundments in the Roanoke River Basin in the 1950's and 1960's
(Roanoke Rapids, Gaston, Kerr, Leesville, Smith Mountain, and Philpott Reservoirs) may have
been the cause of significant declines of Roanoke Logperch due to the massive habitat loss for
the species associated with the construction of these reservoirs. These impoundments disrupted
the fish's ability to move within its historic range resulting in smaller, isolated (physically and
genetically) populations. Small, isolated populations are more at risk of being eliminated by
single events. These events could be natural, such as flooding or drought, or anthropogenically
influenced such as toxic spills. One such toxic spill occurred in Virginia in 2009 in Cascade
Creek less than one mile from the North Carolina state line. Approximately 10,000 fish were
killed including 2 Roanoke Logperch.
Non -point sources of pollution and siltation can impact aquatic species, including the Roanoke
Logperch. Stormwater runoff from lawns, parking lots, streets and other impervious surfaces

carry nutrients, oil, metals, and other pollutants into the upper Roanoke River Basin (USFWS
1992a). Siltation is a threat to the species throughout its historic range. Heavy silt deposition
reduces habitat heterogeneity and primary productivity and increases egg and larval mortality. It
may also impact the macrobenthic communities upon which the Roanoke Logperch rely.
Excessive siltation triggered by poor agricultural and logging practices has been problematic in
the Nottoway River watershed in the past (USFWS 1992).
2.0 James Spinymussel (Parvaspina collina)
2.1 Characteristics
The James Spinymussel was first described in 1837. This species is a small freshwater mussel
that is slightly less than three inches in length. Young mussels can have three spines found on
their shells and are shinny and yellow in color. The shells of young mussels are subrhomboid
with an obliquely subtruncated posterior. Older mussels are dark brown, and exhibit pronounced
growth rings and the spines are typically absent or reduced to small bumps. As the shell grows,
it also becomes more elliptical in shape, and develops a rounded posterior. The left valve has
two thick pseudocardinal and two thin lateral teeth where the right valve contains one of each.
Shells have a thicker anterior end and thin toward the posterior. The foot and mantle of adults
are noticeably orange, and nacre is peach to salmon colored towards the anterior end.
2.2 Distribution and Habitat Requirements
It was once found throughout the main stem of the James River and all of its major tributaries
upstream of Richmond, Virginia. The species has experienced a precipitous decline over the past
two decades and now exists only in small, headwater tributaries of the upper James River Basin
in Virginia and West Virginia and the upper Roanoke River drainage of Virginia and North
Carolina. These sites include the Craig Creek drainage - Craig Creek, Johns Creek, Dicks Creek
and Patterson Creek in Craig and Botetourt Counties, VA. The other sites are Potts Creek -
Monroe County, WV and Craig and Alleghany Counties, VA, Pedlar River - Amherst County,
VA, Mechums River - Albemarle County, VA, Moormans River - Albemarle County, VA,
Rocky Run (Moormans River) - Albemarle County, VA, and Catawba Creek - Botetourt County,
VA.
The James Spinymussel is found in waters with slow to moderate current and relatively hard
water on sand and mixed sand -gravel substrates that are free from silt. Current stream width at
these sites varies from 10 to 75 feet with a water depth of 0.5 to three feet. Historic sites on the
James River were much wider, up to 165 feet across.
2.3 Threats to James Spinymussel
The primary reason for its decline is habitat loss and modification. Threats to this species
include siltation, invasion of the non-native Asian Clam (Corbicula fluminea), impoundment of
waterways, water pollution, stream channelization, sewage discharge, agricultural runoff

including pesticides and fertilizers, poor logging and road/bridge construction practices, and
discharge of chlorine.
Siltation from agricultural and forestry operations and road construction is significant in
contributing to water quality problems. Since mussels are sedentary, they are unable to move
long distances to more suitable areas in response to heavy siltation. Human activities often
create excessively heavy silt loads that can have severe effects on mussels. Suspended sediment
can also clog the gills of filter feeding mussels and suffocate them —therefore mussels respond
by closing their valves. Overall, siltation can severely stress mussels and lead to chronic effects.
The invasion of the Asian Clam also poses a serious threat to James Spinymussels. The Asian
Clam, which can achieve high densities and expand rapidly, can increase competition with James
Spinymussels and decrease food supply for native bivalves. Disturbance of watersheds also
plays a role in the expansion of the Asian Clam. Since the Asian Clam is hermaphroditic,
requires no fish host, and spawns twice a year, it may be competitively superior to native mussels
in disturbed habitats.
Impoundments on rivers in the Southeast have also been responsible for the decline of many
mussel populations. Closure of dams changes habitat —depth increases, flow decreases, and silt
accumulates on the bottom. Fish communities exchange and host fish species may be
eliminated. Mussel communities also change as species requiring clean gravel and sand
substrate are replaced by silt -tolerant species.
Pollution of inland waters also affects the James Spinymussel. Municipal, industrial, and
agricultural pollution have all contributed to reducing various mussel populations in several
locations in the Southeast. Some populations have even been extirpated by pollutants including
effluent from chlor-alkali plants, fly ash and sulfuric acid spills, acid mine drainage, and organic
wastes. It was found that insecticides also have significant effects on mussels and chlorinated
effluent from sewage treatment plants can affect the diversity and abundance of mollusks. Acid
rain may also pose a threat to Atlantic drainage mussel populations, especially those inhabiting
poorly buffered systems.
3.0 Smooth Coneflower
3.1 Characteristics
Smooth Coneflower is a perennial herb that grows up to 1.5 meters tall from a vertical root stock.
The stems are typically smooth, with few leaves. The basal leaves are the largest, reaching 20
cm long and are elliptical to broadly lanceolate shaped. The flower heads are typically solitary,
roughly 5 to 8 cm long, drooping, with light pink to purplish ray flowers. Disk flowers are
approximately 5 mm long and have tubular purple corollas with generally erect short, triangular
teeth. Flowering occurs from May through July.

3.2 Distribution and Habitat Requirements
Smooth Coneflower is endemic to the Piedmont or Mountain physiographic provinces. It is
typically found in meadows, open woodlands, the ecotonal regions between meadows and
woodlands, cedar barrens, dry limestone bluffs, clear cuts, and roadside and utility rights -of -way
(ROW). In North Carolina, the species normally grows in magnesium- and calcium- rich soils
associated with gabbro and diabase parent material, and typically occurs in Iredell, Misenheimer,
and Picture soil series. It grows best where there is abundant sunlight, little competition in the
herbaceous layer, and periodic disturbances (e.g., regular fire regime, well-timed mowing,
careful clearing) that prevents encroachment of shade -producing woody shrubs and trees.
3.3 Threats to Species
Smooth Coneflower is threatened throughout its range by the suppression of fire and by the
ecological succession that occurs in areas not burned on a regular basis. Additional threats
include timber operations, intensive utility ROW maintenance, and residential, commercial, and
industrial development.

References
North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT). Connect NCDOT - Guidance and
Procedures_T&E Animal Habitat Descriptions Mar _6_2015.
https://connect.ncdot. gov/resources/Environmental/Compliance%20Guides%20and%20P
rocedures/TE%20Animal%20Habitat%20Descril2tions%20Mar_6 2015.pdf
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission. 2019.
https://www.ncwildlife.org/Leaming/Species/Fish/Roanoke-Logperch (May 2019)
Roberts, J. H., P. L. Angermeier, E. M. Hallerman. 2014. Extensive dispersal of Roanoke
Logperch (Percina rex) inferred from genetic marker data. Ecology of Freshwater Fish
25:1-16.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1990. James Spinymussel (Pleurobema collina) Recovery Plan.
Newton Corner, MA.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1992. Roanoke Logperch (Percina rex) Recovery Plan. Newton
Corner, MA.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1995. Smooth Coneflower Recovery Plan. Atlanta, GA. 31 pp.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2003. James Spinymussel fact sheet. Gloucester, VA.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2010(a). Roanoke Logperch (Percina rex) Species Profile.
Available: https://www.fws.gov/northeast/pdf/RoanokeLogperch.pdf (March 2019)
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2010(b). Smooth Coneflower (Echinacea laevigata). 5-year
Review: Summary and Evaluation. Raleigh, NC.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2019. James Spinymussel (Pleurobema collina) Species Profile,
Environmental Online System (ECOS). Available:
https:Hecos.fws. og v/ecp0/profile/speciesProfile?sId=2212. (March 2019).