19940185 Ver 1_Complete File_19940301

N -%
N
! I MAR I
1011-1, STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT, JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS R. SAMUEL HUNT III
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201 SECRETARY
February 23, 1994 qL1 /K5
District Engineer
Army Corps of Engineers
P. O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402
ATTENTION: Regulatory Branch
Dear Sir:
Subject: Brunswick County, Proposed replacement of Bridge
No. 97 on SR 1340 over Juniper Creek, State Project
Number 8.2230901, Federal Aid Number BRZ-1340(1),
T.I.P. Number B-2111.
Attached for your information is a copy of the project
planning report for the subject project. The project is
being processed by the Federal Highway Administration as a
"Categorical Exclusion" in accordance wi 3 CFR 771.115(b).
Therefore, we do not anticipate reques ing an ndividual
permit but propose to proceed under a.:iVationwi e Permit in
accordance with 33 CFR 330 Appendix A'(B-23) i sued November
22, 1991, by the Corps of Engineers.,, The pro isions of
Section 330.4 and Appendix A (C) of these re ulations will be
followed in the construction of the lroject.
We anticipate that 401 General Certification No. 2734
(Categorical Exclusion) will apply to this project, and are
providing one copy of the CE document to the North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources,
Division of Environmental Management, for their review.
We anticipate that a CAMA permit will be required from
the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and
Natural Resources, Division of Coastal Management, for this
project. DOT will apply directly to DEHNR for that permit
when plans have been developed.

y , 'a
r
If you have any questions or need additional
information, please call Mr. Gordon Cashin at [phone].
Sincerely,
B. J . O Q u;.?rf
Ass ant Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
BJO/gec
Attachment
cc: Mr. Rudolf Schiener, COE, Wilmington
Mr. John Dorney, NCEHNR, DEM
Mr. John Parker, NCEHNR, DCM/Permit Coordinator
Mr. Kelly Barger, PE, Program Development Branch
Mr. Don Morton, PE, State Highway Engineer-Design
Mr. A.L. Hankins, PE, Hydraulics Unit
Mr. John L. Smith, Jr., Structure Design Unit
Mr. Tom Shearin, PE, State Roadway Design Engineer
Mr. D.J. Bowers, PE, Division 3 Engineer
Mr. Davis Moore, Planning and Environmental Branch

Brunswick County, SR 1340
Bridge No. 97
over Juniper Creek
State Project No. 8.2230901
Federal-Aid Project BRZ-1340(1)
T. I. P. No. B-2111
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
M C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
APPROVED:
Da
I
ate
H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch, NCDOT
J..'// lvf
__ C4 r W
FOQ Nichol . Graf, P. E.
Division Administrator, FHWA
Brunswick County, SR 1340
Bridge No. 97
over Juniper Creek
State Project No. 8.2230901
Federal-Aid Project BRZ-1340(1)
T. I. P. No. B-2111
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
November 1993
Documentation Prepared by Carter & Burgess, Inc.:
GIIC7? Me (41k,,Z
'?
Thomas McCloskey ,bga°I °?
C : p ?fl°?}/`. ',
Project Engineer %®?'. •??EES? ??? e9 u`,
SEAL i
•
10359
r
1

Thomas R. Heple , P.E. 6
?.,? ?ys•p, t?••.• ?? ;°
Project Manager 041,
4 S• P•

For The North Carolina Department of Transportation:
tl/>
L. 1 Grimy, P.E., Unit Head
Consulting Engineering Unit
Michelle Wagoner Fishburne
Project Planning Engineer
Brunswick County, SR 1340
Bridge No. 97
over Juniper Creek
State Project No. 8.2230901
Federal-Aid Project BRZ-1340(1)
T. 1. P. No. B-2111
Bridge No. 97 is included in the 1994-2000 NCDOT Transportation Improvement Program.
The location is shown in Figure 1. No substantial environmental impacts are anticipated as a
result of this action. The project is classified as a Federal "Categorical Exclusion."
I. SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENT
All standard procedures and measures, including NCDOT "Best Management Practices for the
Protection of Surface Waters", will be implemented to avoid or minimize environmental
impacts. No special or unique environmental commitments are necessary.
II. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Bridge No. 97 will be replaced in its existing location with a new structure 180 feet long and
26 feet wide as shown by Alternate 1 in Figure 2. The structure will provide a 22 foot
travelway and two foot shoulders on each side.
Traffic will be detoured along existing secondary roads during the six month construction
period.
The estimated cost of the project, based on current prices, is $476,000. The estimated cost of
the project, as shown in the 1994 - 2000 NCDOT Transportation Improvement Program, is
$567,000.
III. EXISTING CONDITIONS
SR 1340 is classified as a rural local route in the Statewide Functional Classification System.
In the vicinity of the bridge, SR 1340 is a 24-foot soil stabilized roadway. The vertical
alignment is generally flat and the horizontal alignment is tangent. The structure is situated 15
feet above the creek bed. The approaches are on embankments ranging from one to four feet
above natural ground. Land use in the immediate vicinity of the bridge is primarily woodland
and farmland. Development in the surrounding area is scattered residential. The speed limit is
not posted and therefore is assumed to be 55 mph.
The current traffic volume of 200 vehicles per day (vpd) is expected to increase to
approximately 500 vpd by the year 2015. The projected volume includes 1 % truck-tractor
semi-trailer (TTST) and 2% dual-tired vehicles (DTT).
The existing bridge (Figure 3) was constructed in 1961. The superstructure consists of a
timber deck on timber joist. The substructure is composed of timber caps on timber piles.
The overall length is 188 feet and six inches. The clear roadway width is 19 feet. The posted
weight limit is 12 tons for single vehicles and 22 tons for trucks with trailers.
An underground telephone cable and an overhead telephone line are located to the north of the
existing roadway.
Bridge No. 97 has a sufficiency rating of 32.8 compared to a rating of 100 for a new structure.
No accidents were reported near Bridge No. 97 during the period from January 1, 1989 to
April 30, 1992.
Coordination with local school officials indicated no school bus trips over this bridge.
An overflow structure consisting of three 67" x 95" corrugated metal pipes with stacked
concrete bag headwalls is located northeast of the structure. This structure was constructed in
1991 and appears in good condition. This structure will remain in place.
IV. ALTERNATIVES
Several replacement alternatives were considered for Bridge No. 97. The "do-nothing"
alternative would eventually necessitate closure of the bridge. This is not prudent due to the
traffic service provided by SR 1340. "Rehabilitation" of the old bridge is not feasible due to
its age and deteriorated condition. The recommended alternative for Bridge No. 97 is
replacement of the existing bridge at its present location with a new structure 180 feet long and
26 feet wide. The roadway approaches will be 22 feet of pavement with four foot fill
shoulders and seven foot cut shoulders. Since the existing alignment is tangent, the only
prudent alternative is replacement of the existing structure on the present alignment. This also
presents the least negative environmental impacts.
Two detour alternates were considered for implementation while Bridge No. 97 is being
replaced. Following is a discussion of these alternatives.
2
Alternate 1 (Recommended) would detour traffic off-site along existing roadways during the
anticipated six month construction period. The logical detour route, identified in Figure 5,
follows SR 1342, SR 1343 and NC 211 south of the proposed project.
Alternate 2 consists of detouring traffic on-site using a temporary bridge structure
approximately 160 feet in length with 500-foot approaches on each side
V. ESTIMATED COST
Estimated costs of the detour alternatives are as follows:
Structure
Permanent Roadway Approaches
Temporary Detour Structure
Temporary Detour
Structure Removal
Engineering & Contingencies
Right-of-Way, Utilities
Total
Recommended
Alternate 1 Alternate 2
$342,000 $342,000
45,000 45,000
--- 144,000
4,000 96,000
24,000 44,000
61,000 100,000
--- 5,000
$476,000 $776,000
VI. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS
Bridge No. 97 will be replaced at its existing location with a new structure approximately 180
feet long. The recommended structure is 26 feet wide with 22 feet of travelway and two-foot
shoulders. The recommended structure is in compliance with the 1991 NCDOT Bridge
Policy. The approaches will provide 22 feet of pavement with seven-foot fill shoulders and
four-foot cut shoulders, and extend approximately 100 feet on each end of the bridge.
The design speed for the recommended alternative is 60 mph.
Traffic will be detoured along existing secondary roads during the six month construction
period, as shown in Figure 5. The average vehicle will be required to travel an additional
13.5 miles during an anticipated six month road closure period.
Alternate 1 is recommended because of cost and environmental consequences. The road user
costs associated with this detour are estimated at a maximum of $130,000 based upon a six
month construction time, 200 vehicles per day and 13.5 miles of additional travel. Only one
resident is located along this section of SR 1340, therefore inconvenience is expected to be
3
resident is located along this section of SR 1340, therefore inconvenience is expected to be
minimal. The cost difference for Alternate 2 of $295,000 far exceeds the user cost for
Alternate 1 of $130,000. Alternate 1 avoids impact to wetlands found adjacent to the bridge.
The Division Construction Engineer concurs with the recommendation outlined in Alternate 1.
According to a preliminary hydrographic study, the new structure is recommended to have a
length of approximately 180 feet and will accommodate the flow of Juniper Creek at this
point. The elevation of the new crossing is recommended to be approximately the same as the
elevation of the existing bridge. The structure size will be assessed and modified, as
necessary, during final design.
Maintenance of traffic on-site is not justified because of the availability of a suitable detour
route. Detour roadway and bridges are adequate to accommodate affected traffic during the
construction period.
VII. NATURAL RESOURCES
Ecologists visited the project site on January 8, 1993 to verify documented information and to
gather field data for a thorough assessment of the potential impacts incurred by the alternatives
being considered.
The project proposes to replace the bridge on SR 1340 spanning the Muddy Branch portion of
Juniper Creek in north central Brunswick County, NC. The examination was conducted (1) to
search for protected plant and animal species (2) to identify unique or prime-quality
communities, (3) to describe the current vegetation and wildlife habitat, (4) to determine
wetland impacts, and (5) to provide information to minimize adverse environmental impacts.
Methods
The project study area is 6.5 acres, a circular plot with a radius of 300 feet. The plot center
was located in the middle of the existing bridge. Plant communities within this plot were
identified from aerial photographs and ground-checked on site. Forest community types
follow Schafale and Weakley (1990). Within each community, a list of member plant species
and general site description was developed on-site. Dominance (ft2/ac) of woody vegetation
layers was determined by the variable plot method (Husch et al. 1972). Dominance (percent
foliar cover) of herbaceous layers or communities was determined by ocular estimation, using
foliar cover guides developed by Belanger and Anderson (1989). For communities dominated
by trees, tree age, stem diameter at breast height (dbh), and total height were measured for the
largest trees. Age was determined from two millimeter increment borings; dbh and height
were measured using d-tape dendrometers and Abney-level hypsometers, respectively (Wilson
1976). Ground distance was determined either by estimation on the ground or by
4
measurement on aerial photographs, but all other measurements and all species lists were
developed from on-site reconnaissance.
Evidence of terrestrial and aquatic wildlife was sought on-site through close observation of
available habitats. Habitats were characterized based on plant communities, and typical
wildlife communities associated with these habitats were determined. Special attention was
given to features indicative of habitats preferred by federal and state protected species.
Aquatic system features were noted at the bridge and available documentation of water quality
was reviewed (NCDEM 1989, 1991, 1993). Wetland determinations were conducted
following procedures described by the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual
(Environmental Lab. 1987), and wetland classification follows Cowardin et al. (1979).
Plant Communities
The project area is dominated by naturally forested lands, except for (1) the mowed roadsides
which are about ten feet wide and (2) Juniper Creek, which is about 70 feet wide. The road
and roadsides occupy 0.4 acres or 6% of the study area and Juniper Creek occupies 1.1 acres
or 17% of the study area.
The Cypress--Gum Swamp community is the predominate forest type and occupies about five
acres or 77% of the study area. This community is called the Baldcypress--Tupelo type by
Eyre (1980). The Cypress--Gum Swamp community is common in Brunswick County,
occupying 25 percent of the county's forested land. It ranks second only to the Loblolly Pine
community (Johnson 1990).
The upper canopy of the Cypress--Gum Swamp community is even-aged, containing
pondcypress (Taxodium ascendens), swamp blackgum (Nyssa sylvatica var. biflora), and red
maple (Acer rubrum). Most of the pondcypress and swamp blackgum have expanded bases (or
butt-swell.) The drier edges of this community on the causeway for the road and along the
southeastern edge of the study area contain loblolly pine (Pinus taeda), measuring 18-inches
dbh and 47 years old, and American holly (Ilex opaca). Three mature loblolly pines occur
within the study area on the southeastern side of the bridge, and nine occur on the
northwestern side.
Carolina ash (Fraxinus caroliniana), titi (Cyrilla racemiflora), redbay (Persea borbonia),
Atlantic white-cedar (Chamaecyparis thyoides), and sweetbay (Magnolia vir iniana) form a
second canopy, well below the upper canopy. Containing only eight tree species, this
community ranks among the most species-poor in the Southeastern United States. Spanish
moss (Tillandsia usneoides) and resurrection fern (Polypodium polypodioides) grows on
several canopy trees, and mistletoe (Phoradendron serotinum) grows on several red maple.
Canopy dominance averages 105 ft2/acre, a figure much lower than many other stands of this
same type. The largest trees are pondcypress, measuring 18-inches dbh, 70 feet tall, and 45
years old. The largest red maples measure 14-inches dbh.
5
The shrub layer contains Virginia-willow (Itea vir ig nica), swamp pepperbush (Clethra
alnifolia), fetterbush (Leonia lucid a), and myrtle-leaved holly (Ilex myrtifolia). Interestingly,
this latter shrub occurs at unusually high densities. These shrubs generally grow in drier
microsites, especially on small hummocks, crevices in tree bases, and fallen logs. Foliar
cover of the shrub layer averages ten percent. In addition, wax myrtle (Myrica cerifera) and
blueberry (Vaccinium sp., possibly V. corymbosum) occur under the pines on the causeway.
The ground layer is sparse, due to the long hydroperiod. Foliar cover is only five percent and
composed of netted chainfern (Woodwardia areolaia), greenbriers (Smilax laurifolia, S.
rotundifolia, and S. walteri), giant cane (Arundinaria gieantea), and partridgeberry (Mitchella
ripens). Other herbaceous species possibly occur also but were not evident at time of the field
survey.
Wildlife (General)
The B-2111 site sits amid a vast tract of contiguous swampland dominated by cypress-gum
forest and ditched pine plantations. Other than periodic breaks for seldom-traveled forest
access roads, this area maintains many characteristics of coastal wilderness. Therefore, the
area provides superior habitat for species intolerant of frequent human intrusion, such as black
bears (Ursus americanus). Signs along SR 1340 indicate that the northeast quadrant is part of
a wildlife sanctuary; the Bear Pen Islands are located about 0.6 mile southeast of the project
site.
The NC Natural Heritage Program in a letter dated November 11, 1993 noted that "two
priority natural areas have been identified in the near vicinity of project B-2111": Juniper
Creek floodplain and Waccamaw River Aquatic Habitat. "Juniper Creek Floodplain is
characterized by a high-quality Cypress-Gum Swamp (Blackwater subtype)." The Nature
Heritage Program also noted that a state Threatened and federal Candidate species, the
Carolina pygmy sunfish (Elassoma boehlkei), occurs in the vicinity of the bridge crossing
(discussed below under jurisdictional topics).
Studies by Dickson et al. (1980) indicate that mature oak-gum-cypress stands (greater than 44
years of age) in the Southeast may harbor abundant populations of six bird species: Yellow-
billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus), Acadian flycatcher (Empidonax virescens), Tufted
titmouse (Parus bicolor), Carolina wren (Thryothorus ludovicianus), Red-eyed vireo (Vireo
olivaceus), Cardinal (Cardinalis cardinalis). Downy woodpeckers (Picoides pubescens) are
common in such stands, another 13 species are regular visitors, and another 22 species may be
present at various times (Dickson et al. 1980). Winter visitation to the project site severely
limited the potential for encountering many of these species. Other than titmice, wrens, and
cardinals, only turkey vultures (Cathartes aura) were actually observed at the site.
Habitat for herptile species is excellent, and about a dozen Carolina anoles (Aoles
carolinensis) were observed sunning on tin caps of the wooden bridge pilings. Freshwater
turtles, frogs and snakes should be abundant here. Small mammal populations would be
affected by the flooded conditions prevalent through significant portions of the year, but
6
several squirrel nests were noted in the forest canopy. A deer (Odocoileus vir inianus) carcass
floating in the creek gave the only obvious evidence of other mammal activity.
Fish occurring here may include the Pirate perch (Anhredoderus saynus), Taillight shiner
(Notro is maculatus), Tadpole madtom (Noturus gydnus), Creek chubsucker (Erimvz?o-n
oblongus), and Yellow bullhead (Ictalurus natalis). These species dwell permanently in
Atlantic Coastal Plain backwaters of low gradient streams, ponds, swamps, and bayous in clear
to murky water with aquatic vegetation. Spotted suckers (Minytrema melanovs), also occur in
such waters but "make spawning runs up rivers and small streams in early spring" (Boschung
et al . 1983). Anadromous fishes, such as the American shad (Alosa sapidissima) and
Blueback herring (Alosa aestivalis), may enter these waters to spawn but dwell primarily in
saltwater.
Physical Resources
Geologically, the project area lies on the Pee Dee Formation, Cretaceous-aged sediments
composed largely of sand, clayey sand, and clay of the Coastal Plain physiographic region
(Brown 1985). Brunswick County, situated in the lower Coastal Plain, ranges in elevation
from sea level to 75 feet. Except for short slopes along the major drainages, most of the
county is nearly level. In the project's vicinity, the elevation ranges from just under 45 feet to
a high of 50 feet.
Muckalee loam soils underlie the project area. Typically Muckalee soils exhibit a Munsell
color of 10 YR 3/2, a very dark grayish brown and occur where slopes are zero to two
percent. They are invariably hydric (USDA 1989). The color observed in a sample taken on-
site was 7.5 YR 2/0. The causeway is composed of fill brought in and deposited to raise and
stabilize the unpaved road surface.
Aquatic Resources
Juniper Creek begins in the Green Swamp of central Brunswick County and flows westerly and
northwesterly before it joins the Waccamaw River near the town of Old Dock. For much of
its length Juniper Creek forms the boundary between Brunswick and Columbus Counties.
Headwaters of Juniper Creek drain from land overlain by several feet of organic muck and
peat deposited over the last several thousand years. For this reason Juniper Creek is known as
a black (water) river. Water in Juniper Creek carries little sediment, is acidic, and has high
concentrations of organic acids but low concentrations of inorganic compounds. These waters
are designated "C Sw" according to the state's classification system (NCDEM 1993) and are
suitable for agricultural uses or wildlife propagation but not human consumption or contact
recreation.
Flooded conditions observed in January and presented in Table 1 precluded determination of
several channel characteristics but suggested that long hydroperiods are frequent, that almost
no stream gradient exists, and that the proposed project poses little danger to water quality.
7
Table 1. Stream Characteristics Observed At Juniper Creek Crossing.
Observation Point Existing
Substrate Not discernible due to flooding
Current Flow Moderate
Channel width (ft) ' 70.0
Bank Height (ft) Not discernible due to flooding
Water Depth (ft) Flood stage conditions prevailing.
Water Color Black
Water Odor None
Aquatic Vegetation Very little observed, characteristic of blackwater rivers.
Adjacent Vegetation Cypress, black gum, red maple.
Wetlands Associated Broad flood lain adjacent.
According to the BMAN reports (NCDEM 1989, 1991) a site in the Waccamaw River at
Freeland was rated Good in both 1984 and 1987. However, that site is more than 10 miles
downstream, and no closer monitoring point exists.
Jurisdictional Topics
Wetlands
The entire area surrounding the project is palustrine, cypress-gum forested wetland (Cowardin
et al. 1979) situated on Muckalee loam soils. The site may be flooded for four to eight months
per year in years with average precipitation and may be flooded as much as 12 months per
year in years with above average precipitation. At the time of the field investigation, water
depth was about two feet over most of the project site and considerably deeper in places. Only
the current causeway qualifies as upland at this site, and it was artificially created. The
Muckalee soils found on the site are invariably hydric (USDA 1989). The proposed action
could require about 100 square feet of additional fill at either end bent location, but
replacement of the bridge in place, with an off site detour, will avoid further wetland
intrusion.
Protected Species
Under federal law, any federal action which is likely to result in a negative impact to federally
protected plants and animals is subject to review by the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) under
one or more provisions of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973. The FWS and other
wildlife resource agencies also exercise jurisdiction in this resource area in accordance with the
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 USC 661 et seq). North
Carolina laws are also designed to protect certain plants and animals where statewide
populations are in decline.
8
Federal Listed Species
The Fish and Wildlife Service Raleigh Field Office identified the species listed in Table 2 as
known to occur in Brunswick County (FWS letter 12/11/92). Specific treatment of each
species follows Table 2.
Table 2. Federally Listed Endangered Species for Brunswick County.
Species
Status*
Eastern cougar (Felis concolor cou par) E
Florida manatee (Trichechus manatus) E
Red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis) E
Arctic Peregrin falcon (Falco Wregrinus tundrius) T
Bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) E
Wood stork (Mycteri a Americana) E
Piping plover (Charadrius melodus) T
Leatherback sea turtle (Dermochelys coriacea) E
Kemp's ridley sea turtle (Lepidochelys kepi) T
Green Sea turtle (Chelonia mydas) T
Loggerhead turtle (Caretta caretta) T
American alligator (Alligator mississippiensis) T S/A+
Shortnose sturgeon (Acipenser brevirostrum) E
Rough-leaved Loosestrife (?simachia asperulaefolia) E
Cooley's meadowrue (Thalictrum colevi) E
Seabeach amaranth (Amaranthus pumilus) PT
*E= endangered; T= threatened; P= proposed; SA=status due to similarity of appearance to
another species.
The Eastern cougar (Felis concolor coin. arar) "needs a large wild area with an adequate food
supply for survival. It feeds mainly on deer, but its diet may also include small mammals,
wild turkeys, and occasionally domestic livestock" (Parker and Dixon 1980). Persistent
hunting of the cougar and reduction of deer herds during the early 1900's effectively
eliminated the animal, but growth of white-tail deer populations in the past 40 years has
perhaps allowed cougars to survive (Parker and Dixon 1980). Parker and Dixon indicate
biologists are unsure where in the historical range, from eastern Canada south into Tennessee
and the Carolinas, the eastern cougar occurs in the United States; however, "significant
reports of sightings persist in North and South Carolina and Tennessee."
Potential cougar habitat surrounds this site. Since the road already exists, the construction of a
new bridge should not pose any additional danger to the cougar. Therefore, no impacts to the
Eastern cougar will occur as a result of this project.
9
• Florida manatees (Trichechus manatus), according to Parker and Dixon (1980), "inhabit
sluggish rivers, sheltered marine bays and shallow estuaries" and require access to fresh water
and channels at least seven feet deep. While the manatee was once subject to commercial
hunting for its meat, oil, and leather, the greatest current threat derives from collisions with
boats and barges. Because the waters occupied by the manatee are heavily used by humans,
regulating commercial and recreational boating traffic is crucial to manatee survival.
The manatee's critical habitat identified by the FWS occurs mainly in Florida. Only in
summer does the manatee move as far north as North Carolina's southern coast. However,
this project occurs more than 50 miles inland and far upriver from even the Intracoastal
Waterway. Moreover, the normal depth of the water in Juniper Creek in summer is reported
to be less than five feet. Therefore, no impacts to the Florida Manatees will occur as a result
of this project.
The Arctic Peregrin Falcon (Falco neregrinus tundrius) summers in the treeless tundra of
Arctic North America and migrates to Argentina in winter (Parker and Dixon 1980). The
journey takes the bird through the eastern, central and Gulf Coast regions of the United States.
Like the American peregrin (Falco Wregrinus anatum), the bird was historically affected by
chlorinated pesticides in its food and environment. Falcon reintroduction efforts have been
moderately successful and the ban on harmful pesticides has decreased the threat to the
population's reproductive system.
No habitat features associated with the project site are specifically related to the Arctic
Peregrin Falcon; therefore no impacts to the Arctic Peregrin Falcon will occur as a result of
the proposed action.
The Wood Stork (Mycteria americana), a large white and black-feathered bird 40-44 inches
tall with a 66 inch wingspan, is found on or near the coast, breeding chiefly in cypress swamps
and in mangroves (Bull and Fan-and 1977). Often seen perching motionless on bare branches
or stalking slowly through marshes in search of food, individuals are sometimes seen circling
high in the air on rising thermal currents. They typically nest in enormous colonies, laying
two to three eggs on huge stick platforms in trees. Numbers have declined drastically as a
result of land development, lumbering, and draining of feeding grounds.
While the cypress-gum forest surrounding this project could serve as habitat for the wood
stork, examination of the bare canopy in all directions revealed no nests fitting the description,
suggesting that the birds are not using this habitat. Therefore, no impacts to the Wood Stork
will occur as a result of the proposed project.
Red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis) nesting colonies usually occur in mature pine
(preferably Longleaf) stands with open understories, contiguous with areas where pines
dominate the surrounding forest to provide suitable foraging habitat. "Suitable habitat consists
of pine or pine-hardwood (50 percent or more pine) stands 30 years of age or older" (Henry
1989). Although some colonies may be found in pine stands where midstory hardwood
encroachment has occurred, this situation is relatively rare.
10
W
RCW habitat occurs in the vicinity, though not contiguous with this project; since no pines
greater than 30 years of age will be removed from the project site, no impacts to the RCW will
occur as a result of the proposed project.
Bald eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) typically require large bodies of water with abundant
fish populations and roosting habitat in proximity to the food supply (Luukkonen et al. 1989).
According to Luukkonen et al. (1989), "good perch trees are the most important characteristics
of forest stands for eagles. " Eagles appear to prefer large, open-crowned perch trees, and
eagle roost habitat requires large trees with open structures at low densities. Studies have
shown that the critical flush distances for eagles are 137.2 meters for motorized boats, 220
meters for walking approaches. Reportedly, "eagles are not significantly disturbed by
normally occurring auditory activities such as vehicular traffic, human vocalization, or logging
practices. "
The project area is considerable distance from any large, open body of water, and no suitable
roost trees were observed in proximity to the project; therefore, no impact to the Bald eagle
will occur as a result of the proposed project.
The Piping plover (Charadrius melodus) is mainly a northern shore species that winters as far
north as the Carolinas and south to the West Indies and Mexico (Bull and Farrand 1977) and is
found in "bare, dry, sandy areas, both inland and on the coast."
Habitat for the piping plover does not exist in the project area; therefore no impact to the
species will occur as a result of the proposed project.
The Shortnose sturgeon (Acipenser brevirostrum) inhabits lower sections of larger rivers and
coastal waters along the Atlantic seaboard from Canada to central Georgia. According to
Parker and Dixon (1980) "it may spend most of the year in brackish or salt water and move
into fresh water only to spawn." Feeding on invertebrates and some plant material, the
shortnose sturgeon is endangered because of pollution, over-fishing, and construction of dams
on rivers it uses for spawning.
The proposed project is approximately 60 miles up river. If the shortnose sturgeon does travel
here to spawn, its spawning migration would not be hampered by the proposed project because
flow will not be impeded. Therefore no impacts to the Shortnose sturgeon will occur as a
result of the proposed project.
Four marine turtle species have been noted in Brunswick County: Leatherback sea turtle
(Dermochelvs coriacea), Kemp's ridley sea turtle (Lepidochelys kempi), Green Sea Turtle
(Chelonia mvdas), Loggerhead turtle (Caretta caretta). Parker and Dixon's (1980)
discussions of the characteristic habitats suggest that none of these four species occur in the
project area. The Leatherback, not considered common along the NC coast, is an open ocean
species sometimes moving into "shallow bays, estuaries and even river mouths." Kemp's
11
• ridley prefers shallow coastal waters and was "formerly common in summer around Carteret
County and known in Dare County." The Green sea turtle, which "prefers fairly shallow
waters inside reefs, bays and inlets, was once a common visitor along parts of the North and
South Carolina coasts" but is now common only in the Caribbean. The Loggerhead "frequents
open ocean waters as well as bays, lagoons, salt marshes, creeks, ship channels and the mouths
of large rivers."
This project occurs more than 60 miles from the Waccamaw River's confluence with the Pee
Dee River and more than 75 miles from the Pee Dee estuary. Therefore, no impact to the four
marine turtle species will occur as a result of the proposed project.
The American alligator's (Alligator mississippiensis) status in North Carolina has improved,
having been changed from endangered (Parker and Dixon 1980) to threatened. It is found in
coastal marshes, swamps, river systems, canals, and lakes from Dare County, NC to Corpus
Christie, Texas. Its varied diet includes mammals, herptiles, fish, and birds. Although
marked increases in numbers have followed the alligator's protection from hunting and
protection of its wetland habitat, its similarity in appearance to the crocodile keeps it listed as
T/SA.
A local resident reported that very occasionally an alligator is sighted in the vicinity, the last
sighting being reported several years ago near Cruso. The names Alligator Swamp and
Alligator Bay, affixed to nearby areas suggest that the animals were past denizens of these
swamps and backwaters. There was no evidence to suggest that they now inhabit the project
area; therefore, no impacts to the American alligator will occur as a result of the proposed
project.
The following three federally-listed threatened or endangered plants are known to occur in
Brunswick County: rough-leaf loosestrife (Lysimachia asperulifolia), sea-beach amaranth
(Amaranthus pumilus), and Cooley's meadow rue (Thalictrum coolevi).
Rough-leaf loosestrife (Lvsimacia asperulifolia) typically occurs in black, sandy peat soils
with long hydroperiods like that found at the edge of seep bog pocosins or boggy flatwood
savannas that burn frequently. Although it has been observed at the edge of woods along
roadsides, it more typically occurs in the understory of open stands'dominated by an overstory
of longleaf pine (Pinus palustris), pond pine (Pinus serotina), or pondcypress (Taxodium
ascendens). It rarely persists in dense stands lacking fire. Associate hardwoods include
swamp blackgum (Nyssa biflora), red maple (Acer rubrum), and sweetbay (Mg
a n olia
vir ing iana). Common understory associates include inkberry (Ilex labra, dwarf huckleberry
(Gaylussacia dumosa), pepperbush (Clethra alnifolia), honeycup (Zenobia pulvurulenta),
ground-cedar (Lycopodium sp.), chain fern (Woodwardia virginica), pinelands three-awn
(Aristida stricta), and white-top sedge (Dichromena latifolia).
Rough-leaf loosestrife was not observed during the field investigation. Even though the
investigation was not conducted at the optimum time (early June) for observing this species,
rough-leaf loosestrife is nevertheless a distinctive plant that can be identified from dead leaves
12
and stems, even in January. The typical habitat for the species is completely lacking from the
project area. Therefore, no impact to the Rough-leaf loosestrifes will occur as a result of the
proposed project.
Sea-beach amaranth (Amaranthus pumilus) occurs on the fore dunes of barrier islands, where
salt-spray winds and blowing sands predominate. The soil is invariably composed of
excessively well-drained sands, shells, and shell fragments. Associate species include sea-
oats (Uniola paniculata), beach grass (Ammophila brevili ulata), bear-grass (Yucca
filamentosa), marsh elder (Iva imbricata), sand spur (Cenchrus tribuloides), broomsedge
(Andropo o ing icus}, seaside groundcherry (Physalis maritima), pennywort (Hydrocotyle
bonariensis), and beach morning glory (Ivomoea stolonifera).
Foredunes are completely absent from the project area, and sea-beach amaranth was not
observed during the field investigation. Owing to the lack of suitable habitat for this site-
specific species, it is concluded that no impact to the Sea-beach amaranth will occur as a result
of the proposed project.
Cooley's meadow rue (Thalictrum coolevi) occurs largely in pine savannas, characterized by a
sparse canopy of longleaf pine (Pinus palustris) or occasionally pond pine (Pinus serotina)
growing on wet mineral soil. Survival of the species is greatly enhanced, when these sites
burn frequently with low-intensity fire. The understory is typically dominated by grasses,
especially pinelands three-awn (Aristida stricta), savannah muhly (Muehlenber ig a expan
sa),
and little bluestem (Andropo og n scopanus). Other herbs occur scattered among the above
dominants, including deer tongue (Trilisa paniculata), slough-grass (Scleria sp), candyweed
(Polygala lutea), meadow-beauty (Rhexia alifanus), blazing star (Liatris spicata), bracken fern
(Pteridium aquilinum), and yellow-eyed grass (Xyris caroliniana). Scattered shrubs occur
also, especially creeping blueberry (Vaccinium crassifolium), gallberry (Ilex lg abra),
waxmyrtle (Myrica cerifera), and dangleberry (Gaylussacia frondosa).
Typical habitat for Cooley's meadow rue does not occur in the project area, nor was evidence
of the species found during the field investigations. It is therefore concluded no impact to the
Cooley's meadow rue will occur as a result of the proposed project.
State Listed Species
The NC Natural Heritage Program indicates that the Carolina pygmy sunfish (Elassoma
boehlkei), is listed as a state threatened and a federal candidate species, occurs in Juniper
Creek near SR 1340. In addition, the following six state-listed plants also occur in Brunswick
County: golden crest (LMhiola aurea), Harper's fimbry (Fimbristylis perpusila), Plymouth
gentian (Sabatia kennedyana), dissected sneezeweed (Helenium pinnatifidum), sarvis holly
(Ilex amelanchier), and water dawnflower (Stylisma aquatica.).
The Carolina pygmy sunfish (Elassoma boehlkei), like the banded pygmy (E. zonatum) and
everglades pygmy (E. evergladei), inhabits "quiet and clear or dark, stained and sluggish
streams, sloughs, and swamps with abundant vegetation" along the Atlantic coast (Boschung et
13
al. 1983). Apparently this species has a rather confined range, especially compared to the
banded pygmy, which is found from the Carolinas to East Texas and up the Mississippi River
Valley to Indiana and Illinois. All three species are small, feed on crustaceans and aquatic
insects, and rarely live more than three years.
Habitat for the Carolina pygmy sunfish does exist at this location, but the presence or absence
of the sunfish was not determined. If present, it is unlikely that populations would be
impacted by the proposed action. The stream gradient and normal flow rate in Juniper Creek
in combination with the implementation of NCDOT " Best Management Practices for the
Protection of Surface Waters" would limit the extent of any adverse impacts.
Golden crest (Lophiola aurea) occurs largely in pine savannas, characterized by a sparse
canopy of longleaf pine (Pinus palustris) or occasionally pond pine (Pinus serotina) growing on
wet mineral soil. Survival of the species is greatly enhanced, when these sites burn frequently
with low-intensity fire. The understory is typically dominated by grasses, especially pinelands
three-awn (Aristida stricta), savannah muhly (Muehlenber is expansa), and little bluestem
(Andropo og n scoparius). Other herbs occur scattered among the above dominants, including
deer tongue (Trilisa paniculata), slough-grass (Scleria sp), candyweed (Polygala lute a),
meadow-beauty (Rhexia alifanus), blazing star (Liatris spicata), bracken fern (Pteridium
aquilinum), and yellow-eyed grass (Xyris caroliniana). Scattered shrubs occur also, especially
creeping blueberry (Vaccinium crassifolium), gallberry (Ilex lg abra), waxmyrtle (Myrica
cerifera), and dangleberry (Gaylussacia frondosa).
Habitat for the Golden crest is not available within the project area; nor was evidence of the
species found during field investigations. Therefore, it is concluded no impact to the Golden
crest will occur as a result of the proposed project.
Harper's fimbry (Fimbristylis perpusilla) and Plymouth gentian (Sabatia kennedyana)
occupy sand and/or mud bars in and adjacent to streams and rivers or the shore of ponds.
These areas are typically flooded and reshaped during times of high water. Associate species
include cat-tail (Tvnha latifolia), elderberry (Sambucus canadensis), swamp rose (Rosa
alp ustri s), buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis), bulrush (Scirpus cyWrinus), various rushes
(Juncus spp.), and pickerelweed (Pontederia cordata). Trees are typically lacking, although
baldcypress (Taxodium distichum), swamp blackgum biflora), red maple (Ater
rubrum), black willow (Salix nigra), and sycamore (Platanus occidentalis) may occur.
During the field investigation, high water levels covered the shoreline and obscured any
possible existing sand or mud bars from sight. Thus, it could not be determined whether
Harper's fimbry or Plymouth was present.
Dissected sneezeweed (Helenium pinnatifidum) occurs either in pine savannas, characterized
by a sparse canopy of longleaf pine or occasionally pond pine, or in small, seasonally flooded
depressions, dominated by herbaceous cover. These depressions often occur scattered within a
much larger wet pine savanna or flatwood community. Associate species in these depressions
include Virginia chain fern (Woodwardia v ig nica), coinwort (Centella asiatica), sundews
14
(Drosera spp. ), pitcher plants (Sarracenia spp. ), panic grasses (Panicum spp. ), and cutgrass
(Leersia hexandra). Small, scattered trees may occur, especially pondcypress (Taxodium
ascendens) and swamp blackgum (Nyssa biflora).
As mentioned previously, pine savanna habitat is lacking, and small depressions are also
lacking from the project area, except possibly for the periodically-mowed roadside, which was
largely flooded at the time of the field investigation. Whether dissected sneezeweed tolerates
mowing is not known. Sneezeweed was not observed during the field investigation.
Sarvis holly (Ilex amelanchier) occurs in several plant communities, generally either black-
water bottomlands or cypress savannas. In bottomlands, associate trees include sweetgum
(Liquidambar styraciflua), red maple (Acer rubrum), swamp blackgum (Nyssa biflora),
American elm (Ulmus americans), laurel oak (Quercus laurifolia), American holly (Ilex
Maca), musclewood (Carpinus caroliniana), and pop ash (Fraxinus caroliniana). Associate
shrubs include swamp pepperbush (Clethra alnifolia), titi (Cyrilla racemiflora), Virginia-
willow (Itea vir inica), fetterbush (Leonia lucida), and blueberry (Vaccinium elliottii).
Associate herbs include false-nettle (Boehmeria cylindricasedge (Carer sp., especially C.
i antea), giant cane (Arundinaria gigaantea), and netted chain fern (Woodwardia areolata).
In cypress savannas, associate trees, including pondcypress (Taxodium ascendens), swamp
blackgum (Nyssa biflora), pond pine (Pinus serotina), and red maple (Acer rubrum}, form a
sparse canopy. Associate shrubs are essentially the same as those listed above, but the herb
layer is dominated by grasses, especially maidencane (Panicum hemitomon), panic grasses
(Panicum spp.), broomsedge (AndLMgon virginicus), and cutgrass (Leersia hexandra).
Black-water bottomland dominates the project area, and most species that commonly associate
with sarvis holly also occur. Nevertheless, sarvis holly was not observed during the field
investigation.
Water dawnflower (Styli, sma agnatica) occurs in wet pine savannas or small, wet depressions
within larger pine savanna or flatwood communities. Typical associate species are the same as
those listed for Cooley's meadow rue and Dissected sneezeweed. Neither habitat was observed
in the project area.
No habitat within the project area occurs for rough-leaf loosestrife, sea-beach amaranth,
Cooley's meadow rue, and golden crest, and the absence of habitat suggests that they probably
do not occur. However, suitable or marginally-suitable habitat occurs for Harper's fimbry,
Plymouth gentian, dissected sneezeweed, sarvis holly, and water dawnflower. None of these
species were observed during the field investigation.
Unique and/or Prime-Quality Habitat. No unique or prime quality habitat occurs within the
project area. The Cypress--Gum Swamp community is common in Brunswick County,
occupying 25 percent of all forested land.
15
Based upon a comparison with other Cypress-Gum Swamps, overall stand quality within the
project area ranks moderate because (1) stand basal cover of 105 square feet is unusually low,
(2) individual trees are not especially well-formed or developed, and (3) stand age of 45 years
is moderately young for pondcypress.
Impacts
NCDOT proposes to replace Bridge No. 97 with a new structure in the same location. The
preferred alternative includes the use of an off-site detour, an action that would not have an
impact on area resources.
The existing causeway approaches will be wide enough to accommodate the new bridge with
approximately 100 square feet of additional fill at either end of the bridge. Such filling will
narrow the borrow-ditches created when the causeway was originally built.
Any other alternatives except the "no-build" would have potentially more serious impacts.
Bottomland vegetation such as exists surrounding this site is extremely sensitive to changes in
the depth and duration of flooding. Ruts and soil compaction caused by operating machinery
in the forested bottomland could create small water impoundments by restricting water
movement. Impoundments could, in turn, cause existing trees to die or fail to regenerate
adequately. Extreme care will be taken to restrict vehicles and other machinery from
operating within the bottomland during construction so the natural drainage regime, to which
the current vegetation is adapted, is preserved. The NCDOT " Best Management Practices for
the Protection of Surface Waters" will be implemented, where practicable, to avoid and to
minimize impacts to the stream and bottomland vegetation.
During any road construction project some accelerated soil erosion could occur and therefore
deposit erosion sediments downstream. In sufficient quantities, such deposits could clog and
restrict drainage and smother aquatic organisms, especially bottom-dwelling and bottom-
reproducing species.
Permit Coordination
An individual Section 404 permit will not be required from the Corps of Engineers because the
conditions of Section 404 Nationwide Permit #23, Categorical Exclusion, under 33 CFR 330
Appendix A (B-23) are applicable. This permit authorizes any activities, work and discharges
undertaken, assisted, authorized, regulated, funded or financed, in whole or in part, by another
federal agency and that the activity is "categorically excluded" from environmental
documentation because it is included within a category of actions which neither individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on the environment. However, final permit decisions
are left to the discretionary authority of the United States Army Corps of Engineers.
A 401 General Water Quality Certification #2734, administered through the North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources (NCDEHNR), will be required.
16
This certificate is issued for any activity which may result in a discharge into waters for which
a federal permit is required.
Compensatory wetland mitigation is not required under a Nationwide Permit.
Erosion and sedimentation control measures will be strictly enforced during construction to
minimize unnecessary impacts to stream and wetland ecosystems. Best management practices
will also be implemented.
Since the project area falls within the definition of public trust areas as described in subchapter
7H.0207 of the North Carolina Administrative Code, a CAMA Permit for development is
required for activity in this area. The permit is administered through NCDEHNR Division of
Coastal Management. Application for the CAMA permit will take place after completion of
project design. All environmental permits, including the CAMA permit, must be in hand
before construction can begin.
IX. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
The project is expected to have an overall positive impact. Replacement of an inadequate
bridge will result in safer traffic operations.
The project is considered to be a Federal "Categorical Exclusion" due to its limited scope and
insignificant 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 families or communities is anticipated. Right-of-way acquisition will be
limited. No relocations are expected with implementation of the proposed alternative.
No adverse effect on public facilities or services is expected. The project is not expected to
adversely affect social, economic, or religious opportunities in the area.
Since the bridge is to be replaced in its present location, the project is exempt from the
Farmland Protection Policy Act.
This project is subject to compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic 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 if a federally funded, licensed, or permitted project has an effect on a property
17
listed on or eligible for the National Register of Historic Places, the Advisory Council on
Historic Preservation be given an opportunity to comment.
The State Historic Preservation Officer also reviewed the archaeological aspects of the project
and determined that no archaeological resources will be impacted by the recommended
alternative (see appendix).
The existing bridge, built in 1961, is the only structure in the project area. The structure was
reviewed by the State Historic Preservation Officer and determined not to be eligible for the
National Register; therefore, no further compliance with Section 106 is required.
The project involves no Section 4(f) properties. There are no publicly-owned parks, historic
sites, recreational facilities or wildlife and waterfowl refuges of national, state or local
significance in the vicinity of the project.
The project is located within the Southern Coastal Plain Air Quality Control Region. The
ambient air quality for Brunswick County has been determined to be in compliance with the
National Ambient Air Quality Standards. Since this project is located in an area where the
State Implementation Plan (SIP) does not contain any transportation control measures, the
conformity procedures of 23 CFR 770 do not apply to this project.
The project will not substantially increase traffic volumes. Therefore, its impact on noise
levels and air quality will be insignificant. Noise levels could increase during construction but
this increase 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 of Title 23, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 770 and 772 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 Carolina Department of Human Resources, Solid Waste Management Section revealed
no underground storage tanks or hazardous waste sites in the project area.
Brunswick County is a participant in the National Flood Insurance Regular Program. The
approximate 100-year floodplain in the project area are shown in Figure 4. The amount of
floodplain area to be affected is not considered to be significant. There are no practical
alternatives to crossing the floodplain area. Any shift in the alignment would result in a
crossing of about the same or greater magnitude. The alignment of the project is
perpendicular to the floodplain area. All reasonable measures will be taken to minimize harm.
On the basis of the above discussion, it is concluded that no adverse environmental effects will
result from implementation of the project.
18
Literature Cited
Barnhill, W. L. 1986. Soil survey of Brunswick County, North Carolina. USDA Soil Cons.
Serv. 120 p. and maps.
Belanger, R.P., and R.L. Anderson. 1989. A guide for visually assessing crown densities of
loblolly and shortleaf pines. USDA For. Ser., SE For. Exp. Sta. Res Note 5E-352.
Boschung, H.T., Jr., J.D. Williams, D.W. Gotshall, D.K. Caldwell, and M.C. Caldwell.
1983. The Audobon Society field guide to North American fishes, whales, and
dolphins. Alfred A. Knopf. NY. 848 p.
Brown, P. M. 1985. Geologic map of North Carolina. Div. of Land Res., Dept. of Natl.
Res. and Community Dev., Raleigh, NC.
Bull, J., and J. Farrand, Jr. 1977. The Audobon Society field guide to North American
birds. Alfred A. Knopf. New York. 775 p.
Conant, R. 1975. A field guide to reptiles and amphibians of eastern/central North America.
Houghton mifflin Company: Boston. 429 p.
Cowardin, L. M., V. Carter, F. C. Golet, and E. T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands
and deepwater habitats of the United States. FWS/OBS-79/31. Fish and Wildlife
Service, U. S. Dept of Interior: Washington, D. C. 103 p.
Dickson, J. G., R. N. Conner, and J. H. Williamson. 1980. Relative abundance of breeding
birds in forest stands in the southeast.
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual.
Technical Report Y-87-1, U. S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station,
Vicksburg MS.
Eyre, F.H. (Ed.) 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and Canada. Soc. of Amer.
For., Washington, DC. Pp. 148 p., map.
Henry, V. G. 1989. Guidelines for preparation of biological assessments and evaluations for
the Red-Cockaded Woodpecker. Fish and Wildlife Service, Southeast Region, Atlanta,
GA. 13 p. appendices.
Husch, B., C. I. Miller, and T. W. Beers. 1972. Forest mensuration. The Ronald Press Co.,
NY. 410 p.
19
• Johnson, T. G. 1990. Forest statistics for the southern coastal plain of North Carolina, 1990.
USDA For. Ser., Southeast For. Exp. Sta. Bull SE-11.1 52 p.
Luukkonen, D. R.; T. J. Smith; D. N. Chester; J. D. Fraser; and D. F. Stauffer. 1989.
Ecology, habitat and management of bald eagles at B. Everett Jordan Lake, North
Carolina. Project Final Report. Dept. Fisheries and Wildlife Sciences, Virginia
Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA.
NCDEM. 1989. Benthic macroinvertebrate ambient network (BMAN) water quality review
1983-1988. Water Quality Tech. Rept. No. 89-08. NC Dept. of Env., Health, and
Nat. Res., Div. Env. Mgt., Water Qual. Sect., Raleigh, NC.
NCDEM. 1991a. Biological assessment of water quality in North Carolina streams: Benthic
macroinvertebrate data base and long term changes in water quality, 1983-1990. NC
Dept. of Env., Health, and Nat. Res., Div. Env. Mgt., Water Qual. Sect., Raleigh,
NC.
NCDEM. 1991b. Classifications and water quality standards assigned to the waters of the
Lumber River Basin. NC Dept. Envir. Health, and Nat. Res.: Raleigh, North
Carolina.
Parker, W. and L. Dixon. 1980. Endangered and threatened wildlife of Kentucky, North
Carolina, South Carolina and Tennessee. Fish and Wildlife Serv. and NC Ag. Ext.
Serv., Raleigh. NC. 116 p.
Schafale, M. P. and A. S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the natural communities of North
Carolina, Third Approximation. N. C. Natl. Heritage Prog., Div. of Parks and
Recreation, N. C. Dept. of Environ., Health, and Natl. Res., Raleigh. Pp. 325.
Webster, W. D.; J. D. Parnell; and W. C. Biggs, Jr. 1985. Mammals of the Carolinas,
Virginia, and Maryland. Univ. of North Carolina Press: Chapel Hill, NC. 255 p.
Wilson, R. L. 1976. Elementary forest surveying and mapping. Oregon State Univ. Book
Stores, Inc., Corvallis. Pp. 1
20
•tlea_n -vy,
wh
t
D-illl
0 mile 1 FIG.1
B-21 1 1
BRIDGE NO. 97
BRUNSWICK COUNTY
NORTH APPROACH
SOUTH APPROACH
SIDE VIEW
FIGURE 3

O ?

:..•.

1

.77

\ - }J:

Sub ta, -- BRIDGE NO 97

BM
4 3 . • Y:

1310

{ ? ,n rya 1310
I J/
0
Tram
r
vx`
48
: ::: •:•::• g e
60
JY:'
100-YEAR FLOOD PLAIN----lo"--, 7`
Makat k-a
1 1311
x 47
B-2111 -
BRIDGE NO. 97
48
BRUNSWICK COUNTY
` - -' - _ - FIGURE 4

G O m
1I
Mss/ ,??? ? 1l?II
o g
u
A1.YalaY
„! u7a UaL „u PROPOSED PROJECT
0 17,39 11
l7u
?? es r}rk
s 11'2
\
91.3
1342 171. ?, t7s7 \`
Prospoo
s
j
1711 ?1 AA °?? ' a 1L43.
y 3u
1171
4 ? ? Rad L
3. 1.0 t
im 1,
la 1x7
! 1m v ? e
'K li4! \u ll93 ' J ??
? \• 1.
7 It 1717
'?--f--f-iSTUDIED DETOUR ROUTE
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISIONS OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
BRANCH
BRUNSWICK COUNTY
BRIDGE NO. 97
ON SR 1340 OVER
JUNIPER CREEK
B-2111
0 mile 2 FIG.5
?erVM W »a
L
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
July 1, 1993
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh,. N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Bridge replacement, Bridge No. 97 over-Juniper
Creek, Brunswick County, Federal-aid Project BRZ-
13400 ), State Project No. 8.2230901, B-2111,
ER 93-9037
Dear Mr. Graf:
rl?zl
History

JUL 0.6 1993
V ?JRONti'? \
Thank you for your letter of June 11, 1993, concerning the above project.
There are no recorded archaeological sites within the proposed project area. If the
replacement is to be located along the existing alignment, it is unlikely that
significant archaeological resources would be affected and no investigations would
be recommended. If, however, the replacement is to be in a new location, please
forward a map to this office indicating the location of the new alignment so we
may evaluate the potential effects of the replacement upon archaeological
resources.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966 and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley,
environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
Sincerely,
ava Brook
Deputy State Historic
DB:slw
cc: A J. Ward
T. Padgett
XjA"
Preservation Officer
109 East Jones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807

North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
January 27, 1993
Tom McCloskey
William G. Daniel and Associates, PA
1150 Southeast Maynard Road, Suite 100
Cary, NC 27511
Re: Replacement of Bridge No. 97 on SR 1340 over
Juniper Creek, Brunswick County, B-2111, ER 93-
8014
Dear Mr. McCloskey:
Division of Archives and History
William S. Price, Jr., Director
Thank you for your letter of January 5, 1993, concerning the above project. We
note that bridge B-2111 is less than fifty years of age.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966 and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley,
environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
Sincerely,
r?
L David Brook
Deputy State Historic
DB:slw
cc: L. J. Ward
B. Church
I /I
f
Preservation Officer
109 East Jones Street - Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807
w

? ?,.c STATE Q,
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
James R Hunt, Jr., Governor
January 12, 1993
Mr. Gary B. Blank
813 Lake Boone Trail
Raleigh, NC 27607
SUBJECT: Special Status Species and Priority Natural Areas
Bridge Replacement Sites
Northampton, Brunswick, and Columbus Counties
Dear Mr.'Blank:
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program has records of concern
from two of the bridge replacement sites, project numbers B-2111
and B-2120. It is my understanding that the three other projects,
B-1299, B-1300, and B-1307, are all within the Roanoke River
floodplain along US 258. We have no records from this area,
although we do have records from the nearby Bull Neck Swamp.
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A number of rare plant species are known to occur in the vicinity
of project B-2120, two of them on the riverbanks at the NC 130
crossing over the Waccamaw River. All of these species are
vulnerable to sedimentation and changes in flow regime. If the
bridge must be replaced, the area targeted for construction should
be surveyed thoroughly during the growing season for these species
so that damage to the populations can be minimized. The plant
species known from this area are listed below.
Common Name
Scientific Name
N.C. Federal
Status Status
Harper's Fimbry
Dissected Sneezeweed
Sarvis Holly
Golden Crest
Plymouth Gentian
Water Dawnflower
Fimbristylis
perpusila
Helenium
pinnatifidum
Ilex amelanchier
Lophiola aurea
Sabatia kennedyana
Stylisma aquatica
T C2
SR --
SR 3C
E --
T-SC --
SR --
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone] Fax # [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
Mr. Gary B. Blank
Page 2
January 11, 1993
The two plant species of most concern are Harper 's fimbry and
Plymouth gentian. These species grow in drawdown zones of
blackwater rivers, and so the populations can be destroyed by
sediment deposition or by changes in flow regime. Harper's fimbry
is quite rare in the state; only four populations are known.
Plymouth gentian occurs in North Carolina only along the Waccamaw
River, so the population through this area is quite important.
A rare animal species is known from Juniper Creek near the SR 1340
bridge crossing. This is the Carolina pygmy sunfish (Elassoma
bcehlkei;, a state Threatened and federal Candidate species. As
with other aquatic species, it is highly vulnerable to river
sedimentation.
Two priority natural areas have been identified in the near
vicinity of project B-2111. These are Juniper Creek Floodplain and
Waccamaw River Aquatic Habitat. Juniper Creek Floodplain is
characterized by a high-quality Cypress--Gum Swamp (Blackwater
Subtype). The Waccamaw River Aquatic Habitat also extends through
the area traversed by project B-2120. Downstream from the NC 130
crossing is yet another natural area, known as Ward's Lake. These
natural areas are all highly significant, and we recommend that any
impacts to these areas from constructing bridge replacements be
minimized.
Please contact Natural Heritage Program staff at 733-7701 if you
have any questions or require further information.
Sincerely,
Ann W. Kelly
Natural Heritage Program
Division of Parks and Recreation
/awk
h
w)' d??A?onn
D
QwM
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James G. Martin, Governor
Patric Dorsey, Secretary
December 18, 1992
Mr. Tom McCloskey
William G. Daniel & Associates, PA
1150 Southeast Maynard Road
Suite 100
Cary, NC 27511
Re: Replacement of Bridge No. 97 on SR 1340 over Juniper
Creek, Brunswick County, B-2111, ER 93-7844
Dear Mr. McCloskey:
Division of Archives and History
William S. Price, Jr., Director
Thank you for your letter of December 1, 1992, concerning the above project.
We have conducted a search of our files and are aware of no structures of historical or architectural
importance located within the planning area. However, since a comprehensive historical
architectural inventory of Brunswick County has never been conducted, there may be structures of
which we are unaware located within the planning area.
We recommend that an architectural historian survey the area of potential effect and report the
findings to us. Please submit photographs of all structures over fifty years of age, keyed to a map,
along with a location description. Also include a brief statement about the structure's history and
explain which National Register criteria it does or does not meet. If there are no structures over
fifty years of age in the area of potential effect, please notify us in writing.
Because of the location and topographic situation of the proposed project area, it is unlikely that any
archaeological sites which may be eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places
will be affected by the proposed construction. We, therefore, recommend that no archaeological
investigation be conducted in connection with this project.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of
1966 and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section
106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above
comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-
4763.
Sincerely,
David Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
11 DB:slw
cc: L. J. Ward
B. Church
109 EastJones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
December 11, 1992
Gary B. Blank
813 Lake Boone Trail
Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
Dear Mr. Blank:
¦
TAKE
PRIDE IN

This is in response to your letter of November 23, 1992,
requesting verification of Federally-listed endangered and
threatened species known to occur in Brunswick, Columbus,
Cumberland and Northhampton Counties.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service concurs with the species
you have listed for Columbus, Cumberland and Northhampton
Counties. However, enclosed you will find the most recent
list of Federally-listed species known to occur in Brunswick
County.
We appreciate your interest in endangered species and if you
have any questions, please contact Ms. Kate Looney of this
office.
Sincerely,
Debbie Mignogi
Acting Supervisor