19960755 Ver 1_Complete File_19960812

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources • •
Division of Water Quality r??.r
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary p E H N R
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
December 15, 1997
Jackson County
DWQProject #960755
TIP No. B-3393
APPROVAL of 401 Water Quality Certification and ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS
Mr. Frank Vick
NC DOT
PO Box 25201
Raleigh NC 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Vick:
You have our approval, in accordance with the attached conditions and those listed below, to
fill in 0.1 acres of wetlands or waters for the purpose of replace bridge 29 at Scott's Creek as you
described in your application dated August 7, 1996. After reviewing your application, we have
decided that this fill is covered by General Water Quality Certification Numbers 3127 and 3107.
This certification allows you to use Nationwide Permit Numbers 6 and 23 when it is issued by the
Corps of Engineers. In addition, you should get any other federal, state or local permits before
you go ahead with your project including (but not limited to) Sediment and Erosion Control,
Coastal Stormwater, Non-Discharge and Water Supply Watershed regulations. This approval will
expire when the accompanying 404 or CAMA permit expires unless otherwise specified in the
General Certification.
This approval is only valid for the purpose and design that you described in your application
except as modified below. If you change your project, you must notify us and you may be
required to send us a new application. If total wetland fills for this project (now or in the future)
exceed one acre, compensatory mitigation may be required as described in 15A NCAC 2H .0506
(h) (6) and (7). For this approval to be valid, you must follow the conditions listed in the attached
certification and any additional conditions listed below.
1. Sediment and erosion control measures shall adhere to the design standards for sensitive
watersheds (T 15A:04B .0024).
2. DOT shall follow guidance provided by DWQ in our 27 May 1997 letter for minimizing
damage to aquatic resources until a final policy is developed in conjunction with DOT.
If you do not accept any of the conditions of this certification, you may ask for an
adjudicatory hearing. You must act within 60 days of the date that you receive this letter. To ask
for a hearing, send a written petition which conforms to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina
General Statutes to the Office of Administrative Hearings, P.O. Box 27447, Raleigh, N.C. 27611-
7447. This certification and its conditions are final and binding unless you ask for a hearing.
This letter completes the review of the Division of Water Quality under Section 401 of the
Clean Water Act. If you have any questions, please telephone John Dorney at 919-733-1786.
Sin erely,
Pr ston Howard, Jr. P
Attachment
cc: Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Corps of Engineers Asheville Field Office
Asheville DWQ Regional Office
Mr. John Dorney
Central Files
960755/ltr
Division of Water Quality • Non-Discharge Branch
4401 Reedy Creek Rd., Raleigh, NC 27607 Telephone [phone] FAX # [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer • 50% recycled/10% post consumer paper

JAMES B. HUNT JR.
GOVERNOR
June 11, 1996
960634
GARLAND B. GARRETT JR.
SECRETARY
r
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Field Office
P. O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
ATTENTION: Mr. Cliff Winefordner
Dear Sir:
M STAr( o
1 ? 'T
?r~
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TPANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
P.O. BOX 25201. RALEIGH. N.C. 27611-5201
Chief, Southern Section
SUBJECT: Jackson County - Replacement of Bridge No. 29 on SR 1456 over Scotts
Creek; T.I.P. No. B-3393; State Project No. 8.2960501
The Categorical Exclusion document for this project is currently in preparation by
NCDOT. At this time, foundation test borings are necessary in the channel and along the
banks of Scotts Creek. This work will be necessary to obtain foundation information for
design of the structure. We have determined that this activity may be authorized under
Nationwide Permit No. 6 for Survey Activities. As this project occurs in a designated
mountain trout county, review by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and North Carolina
Wildlife Resources Commission is required. We hereby request approval of Nationwide
Permit No. 6 for the proposed work.
Attached herein are a project location map and pre-discharge notification form. If
you have any questions, please contact Ms. Cyndi Bell at [phone], Ext. 306.
Sincerely,
H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager,
Planning & Environmental Branch
HF V/mlt
.J

4W
cc: Mr. F. D. Martin, P. E., Division 14 Engineer
Mr. Bob Johnson, DOA, Asheville
Mr. David Cox, NCWRC
Mr. David Yow, NCWRC
Mr. W. L. Moore, III, Geotechnical
Mr. John Dorney, DEM, Water Quality Section
Mr. Tom Shearin, P. E., Roadway Design
Mr. Kelly Barger, P. E., Program Development
Mr. Don Morton, P. E., Design Services
Mr. A. L. Hankins, P. E., Hydraulics
Mr. John Smith, P. E., Structure Design
IrF,vi iD: ACTION ID:
Nationwide Permit Requested (Provide Nationwide Permit #): 6
JOINT FORM FOR
Nationwide permits that require notification to the Corps of Engineers
Nationwide permits that require application for Section 401 certification
WILMINGTON DISTRICT ENGINEER WATER QUALITY PLANNING
CORPS OF ENGINEERS DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY NC DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH,
P.O. Box 1890 AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890 P.O. Bor. 29535
ATTN: CESAW-CO-E Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
Telephone [phone] ATTN: MR. JOHN DORNEY
Telephone [phone]
ONE (1) COPY OF THIS COMPLETED APPLICATION SHOULD BE SENT TO THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS.
SEVEN (7) COPIES SHOULD BE SENT TO THE N.C. DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT.
PLEASE PRINT.
1. Owners Name:
2. Owners Address: P . n _ Rnx 29201 1 P;; pi gh , NC, 27611
Work): 919-733-3141
3. Owners Phone Number (Home): (
4. If Applicable: Agent's name or responsible corporate official, address, phone number:
H Franklin 1/irk,P F Mananar Planninn R Fnvirnnmen:L^i P-rape'
5. Location of work (MUST ATTACH MAP). County: Jackson
Nearest Town or City: Addi
Specific Location (Include road numbers, landmarks, etc.): Bridge No 29 on SR 1456
6. Name of Closest Stream/River: Scotts Creek
7. River Basin: little Tennesspp
8. Is this project located in a watershed classified as Trout, SA, HQW, ORW, WS I, or WS II? YES (] NO
9. Have any Section 404 permits been previously requested for use on this property? YES [ ] NO k?
If yes, explain.
10. Estimated total number of acres of waters of the U.S., including wetlands, located on project site:
NI/ A
11. Number of acres of waters of the U.S., including wetlands, impacted by the proposed project:
Filled: N/A
Drained: N/A
Flooded: N/A
Excavated:
Total Impacted: N/A

12. Description of proposed work (Attach PLANS-8 1/2" X 11" drawings only):
13. Purpose of proposed work: Structural information for bridge design
14. State reasons why the applicant believes that this activity must be carried out in wetlands. Also, note measures
taken to minimize wetland impacts. N/A
15. You are required to contact the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and/or National Marine Fisheries Service
(NMFS) regarding the presence or any Federally listed or proposed for listing endangered or threatened species or critical
]
habitat in the permit area that may be affected by the proposed project. Have you done so? YES [J NO[
RESPONSES FROM THE USFWS AND/OR NMFS SHOULD BE FORWARDED TO CORPS.
16. You are required to contact the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) regarding the presence of historic
properties in the permit area which may be affected by the proposed project? Have you done.so? YES VX] NO [ ]
RESPONSE FROM THE SHPO SHOULD BE FORWARDED TO CORPS.
17. Additional information required by DEM:
A. Wetland delineation map showing all wetlands, streams, and lakes on the property.
B. If available, representative photograph of wetlands to be impacted by project.
C. If delineation was performed by a consultant, include all data sheets relevant to the placement of the
delineation line.
D. If a stormwater management plan is required for this project, attach copy.
E. What is land use of surrounding property? rural - N/A
F. If applicable, what is proposed method of sewage disposal?
57wner's Signature Date

I
bh
:i 4
z to
?t
477
x r
? u < Zw
> ?ow C
N v
a z _ ~ ?
V
E... Z z
O<s.<
azc zw0
N?
?
uozZ^ N
L
CA Z z W
m
C Z
<'><< 0
cwi
OeG-_7C
Z'rQaC Q
J ;?

1 W

cvI
11
?I
XO? b"l
?I .2 a
r
H
,n
t^f

Y r
h
h?
h
r -
s
r
r,
CA Z,10

Q o . ?I
i o
Nti o
?I 3 ,
0
o c

o'
?
o'

M
PI
Pi

Og rl
?- 77?
r
rf
^I '
dom. i
or•
N
N
R
•
a ?
•
P
I
• M
Ilk
e .?wL
c ? s
u ?
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Govemor
Jonathan 8. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Ho ward, Jr., P.E., Direc to r
APPROVAL of 401 Water Quality Certification
Mr. Franklin Vick
N.C. Dept. of Transportation
Planning and Environmental Branch
P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh, Nc 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Vick:
A[4Own% 000%
?EHNF1
August 21, 1996
Jackson County
DWQ Project # 960755
TIP#'B-3393
You have our approval to place fill material in 0.1 acres of wetlands or waters for the purpose of
improving Bridge #29 on SR 1456 at Bridge 29 over SR 1456, as you described in your application dated 7
August 1996. After reviewing your application, we have decided that this fill is covered by General Water
Quality Certification Number 3027. This certification allows you to use Nationwide Permit Number 6
when it is issued by the Corps of Engineers.
This approval is only valid for the purpose and design that you described in your application. If you
change your project, you must notify us and you may be required to send us a new application. For this
approval to be valid, you must follow the conditions listed in the attached certification. In addition, you
should get any other federal, state or local permits before you go ahead with your project.
If you do not accept any of the conditions of this certification, you may ask for.'an adjudicatory
hearing. You must act within 60 days of the date that you receive this letter. To ask for a hearing, send a
written petition which conforms to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes to the Office of
Administrative Hearings, P.O. Box 27447, Raleigh, N.C. 27611-7447. This certification-and its
conditions are final and binding unless you ask for a hearing.
This letter completes the review of the Division of Water Quality under Section 401 of the Clean
Water Act. If you have any questions, please telephone John Dorsey at 919-733-1786. _
Attachment
cc: Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Corps of Engineers Asheville Field Office
Asheville DWQ Regional Office
Mr. John Domey
Central Files
Sincerely,
Pre n How
960755.1tr
Division of Water Quality • Environmental Sciences Branch
Environmental Sciences Branch, 4401 Reedy Creek Rd., Raleigh, NC 27607 Telephone [phone] FAX # [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer • 50% recycled/10% post consumer paper

5FATE
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TP ANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS GARLAND B. GARRETT JR.
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201 SECRETARY
November 21, 1997 CJ?`+
? ? gad a
US Army Corps of Engineers Q
Wilmington Field Office
2 1 ??
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 228402-1890 ECii?N '!
WATE U
ATTENTION: Mr. Michael D. Smith, P.W.S.
Assistant Chief
Dear Sir:
Subject: Jackson County, Replacement of Bridge No. 29 over Scotts Creek on
SR 1456, Federal Project No. BRZ-1456(4), State Project No. 8.2960501,
T.I.P. No. B-3393.
The Corps of Engineers (COE) issued Section 404 Nationwide Permits 6 and 23
for the subject project on August 30, 1996. These permits expired on January 21, 1997.
The replacement of Bridge No. 29 over Scotts Creek on SR 1456 is scheduled to be let in
November 1998. Consequently, the N.C. Department of Transportation (NCDOT) needs
to renew authorization for this work.
Information regarding the project description has not changed since the
distribution of the Categorical Exclusion document in a letter dated August 7, 1996.
However, NCDOT completed an updated review of the project for potential impacts to
protected species by memorandum dated August 1, 1997 which concluded that the project
would have no effect on currently listed species. A copy of this memorandum is
enclosed. The NCDOT requests that the COE reauthorize this bridge replacement project
in Jackson County under Section 404 Nationwide Permits 6 and 23. A copy of this
request is being provided to the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission for their
concurrence. Reissuance of 401 Water Quality Certification by the Division of Water
Quality is also requested.
N
2
If you have any questions or need additional information please call Mr. Gordon
Cashin at 733-7844 Ext. 278.
Sincerely,
H. Franklin Vick, PE, Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
HFV/plr
cc: Mr. Bob Johnson, Corps of Engineers, Asheville Field Office
Mr. John Dorney, NCDEHNR, Division of Water Quality
Mr. David Cox, NCWRC
Mr. Mark Davis, NCWRC
Mr. Whit Webb, P.E., Program Development Branch
Mr. R.I. Hill, P.E., Highway Design Branch
Mr. A. L. Hankins, P.E., Hydraulics Unit
Mr. William J. Rogers, P.E., Structure Design Unit
Mr. Tom Shearin, P.E., Roadway Design Unit
Mr. F. D. Martin, P.E., Division 14 Engineer
Mr. William Goodwin, PE, P & E Project Planning
O,,?SFA.
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR.
GOVERNOR
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
P.O. BOX 25201. RALEIGH. N.C. 27611-5201
August 1, 1997
MEMORANDUM TO:
FROM:
Wayne Elliott, Unit Head
Project Planning Unit
GARIAND B. GARRETT JR.
SECRETARY
Chris Rivenbark, Environmental Biologist C?-
Permits, Mitigation, and Natural Resources Unit
SUBJECT: Protected Species Review for proposed replacement of
Bridge No. 29 on SR 1456 over Scott's Creek in Jackson
County. T.I.P. No. B-3393, State Project No. 8.2960501,
Federal-Aid Project No. BRZ-1456(4).
ATTENTION: Bill Goodwin, P.E., Project Planning Engineer
Project Planning Unit
REFERENCE: Categorical Exclusion dated May 1996
The following memorandum provides a Protected Species Review for the
proposed project. It addresses federally protected species potentially impacted by the
project and serves to update the previously submitted Categorical Exclusion (CE) with
respect to this issue.
FEDERALLY PROTECTED SPECIES
Plants and animals with federal classifications of Endangered (E), Threatened
(T), Proposed Endangered (PE), and Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under
provisions of Section 7 and Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended.
As of May 2 1997, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) lists seven federally
protected species for Jackson County (Table 1). Since the completion of the
referenced CE, Appalachian elktoe (Alasmidonta raveneliana) has been added to the
list of federally protected species for Jackson County. Descriptions and biological
conclusions of "No Effect" were given for the remaining six species in the referenced

CE. These biological conclusions of "No Effect" remain valid. A description and
biological conclusion for Appalachian elktoe is given below.
Table 1. Federallv Protected S
G/aucomys sabrinus coloratus
Myotis sodalis
Falco peregrinus
A/asmidonta raveneliana
for Jackson Cou
Carolina northern flying squirrel E
Indiana bat E
peregrine falcon E
Appalachian elktoe E
Helonias bullata swamp pink T
Isotria medeoloides small-whorled pogonia T
Gymnoderma /ineare rock gnome lichen E
Note: "E" denotes Endangered (a species that is threatened with extinction
throughout all or a significant portion of its range).
"T" denotes Threatened (a species that is likely to become endangered within
the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range).
Alasmidonta raveneliana (Appalachian elktoe) Endangered
Animal Family: Unionidae
Date Listed: 5/2/97
The Appalachian elktoe is a small mussel with a maximum length reaching up to
8.0 cm. Its shell is thin but not fragile and subovate (kidney-shaped). Juveniles of the
species generally have a yellowish-brown periostracum (outer shell) while the
periostracum of the adults is a dark brown in color. Rays are prominent on some
shells, particularly in the posterior portion of the shell, although occasionally some
individuals have only obscure greenish rays. The nacre (inside shell) is shiny, with a
white to bluish-white color which changes to a salmon, pinkish, or brownish color in the
central and beak cavity portions of the shell. Some specimens may be marked with
irregular brownish blotches.
Since the Appalachian elktoe is a rare specimen, little is known about the
specifics of its biology. The mussel has been reported to propagate in the waters of
relatively shallow, medium-sized creeks and in rivers with cool, moderate-to
fast-flowing currents. The Appalachian elktoe has been observed in gravelly
substrates often mixed with cobble and boulders, in cracks of bedrock and in relatively
silt-free, coarse sandy substrates. The reproduction of the mussel is thought to be
normal although the fish species which the mussel glochidia parasitizes is unknown.
The populations of the Appalachian elktoe are threatened by a
variety of man-made factors such as road construction and residential and commercial
development.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Though suitable habitat in the form of medium-sized creeks with cool, moderate-
to fast-flowing currents is present in the project area, pollution from a lumber yard that
lies adjacent to the stream is likely to prohibit a successful mussel population. No
mussels were found during a field survey conducted on 30 July 1997 by NCDOT
biologists Chris Rivenbark, Marc Recktenwald, and Lindsey Riddick. This survey,
which was conducted for one hour, included tactile in-stream searches for mussels and
searches for mussel middens along streambanks. In addition, a review of North
Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) database on 7 July 1997 indicated that
there is no known occurrence of Appalachian elktoe within 1.6 km (1.0 mi) of the project
area. Therefore, this project will not affect this species.
Federal Species of Concern and State Listed Species
There are thirty Federal Species of Concern (FSC) listed for Jackson County.
Federal Species of Concern are not afforded federal protection under the ESA and are
not subject to any of its provisions, including Section 7, until they are formally proposed
or listed as Threatened or Endangered. Federal Species of Concern are defined as
those species which may or may not be listed in the future. These species were
formally candidate species, or species under consideration for listing for which there
was insufficient information to support a listing of Endangered, Threatened, Proposed
Endangered and Proposed Threatened. Organisms which are listed as Endangered
(E), Threatened (T), Significantly Rare (SR) or Special Concern (SC) by the North
Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) list of rare plant and animal species are
afforded state protection under the State Endangered Species Act and the North
Carolina Plant Protection and Conservation Act of 1979.
Table 2 lists Federal Species of Concern and State listed species, the species
state status and the existence of suitable habitat for each species in the study area.
This species list is provided for information purposes as the status of these species
may be upgraded in the future.
Federal Candidate S
Aneides aeneus green salamander E No
Cryptobranchus alleganiensis hellbender SC Yes
Percina squamata olive darter SC Yes
Pituophis melanoleucus Northern pine snake SC No
melanoleucus
Cambarus reburrus French Broad crayfish SR Yes
Dactyloctythere prinsi Whitewater crayfish SR Yes
ostracod
Speyeria diana Diana fritillary butterfly SR Yes
_
Abies fraseri Fraser fir C No
Cardamine clematitis mountain bittercress C Yes
Carex manhartii Manhart's sedge C No
Delphinium exaltatum tall larkspur E-SC No
Euphorbia purpurea glade spurge C No
Junglans cinerea butternut W5 Yes
Lysimachia fraseri Fraser's loosestrife E Yes
Monotropsis odorata sweet pinesap C No
Saxifraga caroliniana Carolina saxifrage C Yes
Senecio millefolium divided-leaf ragwort T No
Silene ovata mountain catchfly C No
Bryocrumia vivicolor gorge moss E No
Cheilolejeunea evansii a liverwort C No
Chiloscyphus appalachianus a liverwort C No
Plagiochila caduciloba a liverwort E No
Plagiochila echinata a liverwort C No
Plagiochila su/livantii
var. spinigera a liverwort C No
Plagiochila sul/ivantii
var. sullivandi a liverwort C No
Plagiochila virginica var. a liverwort SR No
caroliniana
Plagiomnium carolinianum Carolina star-moss C No
=(Mnium carolinianum)
_
Schlotheimia lancifolia highlands moss T No
Spenolobopsis pearsonii a liverwort C No
Tortula ammonsiana Ammon's trtula E No
Note:
"SR" denotes Significantly Rare (a species which is very rare in North Carolina,
generally with 1-20 populations in the state, generally substantially reduced in
numbers by habitat destruction.
"SC" denotes Special Concern (a species in North Carolina which requires
monitoring).
"E" denotes Endangered (a species whose continued existence as a viable
component of the State's flora or fauna is determined to be in jeopardy, or one
that is designated as a threatened species pursuant to the Endangered Species
Act).
,,r denotes Threatened (a species that is likely to become endangered within the
foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range, or one that
is designated as a threatened species pursuant to the Endangered Species Act).
°C" denotes Candidate (a species which is very rare in North Carolina, generally
with 1-20 populations in the state, generally substantially reduced in
numbers by habitat destruction. If these species are relocated in the state, or if
present land use trends continue, they are likely to be listed as Endangered or
Threatened).
°W5" denotes Watch Category (rare because of severe decline but not requiring
active monitoring at this time)
Surveys for these species were not conducted during the site visit. A review of
the N.C. Natural Heritage Program data base of the rare species and unique habitats
on July 7,1997 revealed no records of North Carolina rare and/or protected species in
or near the project study area.
cc: V. Charles Bruton, Ph.D., Unit Head, Permits, Mitigation, and Natural Resources
Hal Bain, Environmental Supervisor
File: B-3393
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources 1 • •
Division of Water Quality Oft
James B. Hunt,Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary C) FE F1
A. Preston Floward, Jr., P.E., Director
July 11, 1996
Jackson County
DWQ Project # 960618
TIP #B-3393
State Project No. 8.2960501
APPROVAL of 401 Water Quality Certification
Mr. Franklin Vick
N.C. Dept. of Transportation
Planning and Environmental Branch
P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Vick:
You have our approval to place fill material in wetlands or waters for the purpose of constructing
foundation test borings at SR 1456 over Scotts Creek, as you described in your application dated 11 June
1996. After reviewing your application, we have decided that this fill is covered by General Water Quality
Certification Number 3027. This certification allows you to use Nationwide Permit Number 6 when it is
issued by the Corps of Engineers.
This approval is only valid for the purpose and design that you described in your application. If you
change your project, you must notify us and you may be required to send us a new application. For this
approval to be valid, you must follow the conditions listed in the attached certification. In addition, you
should get any other federal, state or local permits before you go ahead with your project.
If you do not accept any of the conditions of this certification, you may ask for an adjudicatory
hearing. You must act within 60 days of the date that you receive this letter. To ask for a hearing, send a
written petition which conforms to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes to the Office of
Administrative Hearings, P.O. Box 27447, Raleigh, N.C. 27611-7447. This certification and its
conditions are final and binding unless you ask for a hearing.
This letter completes the review of the Division of Water Quality under Section 401 of the Clean
Water Act. If you have any questions, please telephone John Domey at 919-733-1786.
Sincerely,
Pe on Howar , Jr. P.E.
Attachment
cc: Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Corps of Engineers Asheville Field Office
Asheville DWQ Regional Office
Mr. John Dorney
Central Files
960618.1tr
Division of Water Quality - Environmental Sciences Branch
Environmental Sciences Branch, 4401 Reedy Creek Rd., Raleigh, NC 27607 Telephone [phone] FAX # [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer • 50% recycled/10% post consumer paper
J
a..
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPAUMENT OF TP ANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH. N.C. 27611-5201
August 7, 1996
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Field Office
P. O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
ATTENTION: Mr. Cliff Winefordner
Chief, Southern Section
Dear Sir:
GARLAND B. GARRETT J R.
SECRETARY

ft*Vw
„'i
dNMRI:
SUBJECT: Jackson County - Replacement of Bridge No. 29 on SR 1456 over Scotts
Creek, T.I.P. No. B-3393; State Project No. 8.2960501
The North Carolina Department of Transportation proposes to replace the existing
structure on new alignment, along with associated approach improvements. Traffic will be
maintained on the existing bridge throughout construction. This project is being
processed as a Categorical Exclusion in accordance with 23 CFR 771.115(b). We expect
to proceed with this project under a Nationwide Permit in accordance with 33 CFR 330
Appendix A (B-23) issued November 22, 1991, by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers.
The provisions of Section 330.4 and Appendix A (C) of these regulations will be followed
in the construction of this project.
The proposed work may involve up to 0.1 acre of till in jurisdictional wetlands.
Scotts Creek is designated as a Wild Public Mountain Trout Water by the N. C. Wildlife
Resources Commission. All work in or adjacent to the stream will be completed in a dry
work area. Sandbags, rock berms, coffer dams, or other diversion structures will be used
where possible to prevent excavation in flowing water. All in-stream work will be limited
to the immmediate vicinity of the proposed bridge to reduce the possibility of disturbance
to the natural form of the stream channel. Construction shall be accomplished so that wet
concrete does not contact stream water. In order to protect trout eggs and fry, in-stream
work will not be undertaken between January 1 and April 15.
E)

?, -A4V t
,0- .. 14 -
f r
2
Foundation investigations will be required
include test borings in soil and/or rock for in-site
laboratory testing. This may require test borings
work may be authorized under Nationwide Perpl
'n,,tfiis,proje t. The investigation will
xstyng as well as obtaining samples for
f the streaVey is anticipated that this
No. 6 for Activities.
In accordance with current procedure or pro' s located in the designated trout
counties, the concurrence of WRC must be obtame prior to construction. By copy of
this letter, we hereby request that WRC review the proposed project and provide any
comments they find necessary. A copy of the CE document is included for the WRC
review. Please note the special construction conditions included in the Summary of
Environmental Commitments.
Thank you for your assistance. If you have any questions, please call Cyndi Bell at
[phone], Extension 306.
Sincerely
Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager,
Planning and Environmental Branch
HFV/mlt
Attachment
cc: Mr. Steve Lund, COE, NCDOT Coordinator
Mr. David Yow, WRC, Asheville
Mr. John Dorney, DWQ
Mr. Kelly Barger, P. E., Program Development
Mr. Don Morton, P. E., Highway Design
Mr. A. L. Hankins, P. E., Hydraulics
Mr. William Rogers, P. E., Structure Design
Mr. Tom Shearin, P. E., Roadway Design
Mr. F. D. Martin, P. E., Division 14 Engineer
Mr. Bill Goodwin, P. E., Planning & Environmental

Jackson County,
Bridge No. 29 on SR 1456
Over Scotts Creek
Federal Aid Project BRZ - 1456(4)
State Project 8.2960501
TIP Project B-3393
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
APPROVED:
5- 9 -96
Date

Date Nicholas L. Graf, P. E.
ivision Administrator, FHWA

H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Lt'
•,
Jackson County,
Bridge No. 29 on SR 1456
Over Scotts Creek
Federal Aid Project BRZ - 1456(4)
State Project 8.2960501
TIP Project B-3393
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
May 1996
Documentation Prepared in Planning and Environmental Branch By:
William T. Goodwin, Jr., P. E.
Project Planning Engineer
tiCn
y /
Wayne Elliott
Bridge Project Planning Engineer, Unit Head
3--g-14

Lubin V. Prevatt, P. E., Assistant Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
tt%11n111J11i,.
.%``? ? CARO(
•o•oooop••••%
•? ? .•• F ASS /p ?? 9
SEA! 2106
GN?•?
G 0 ``?s.
w
Jackson County,
Bridge No. 29 on SR 1456
Over Scotts Creek
Federal Aid Project BRZ - 1456(4)
State Project 8.2960501
TIP Project B-3393
L SUMMARY OF PROJECT
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to replace Bridge
No. 29 in Jackson County. This bridge carries SR 1456 (Addie Mine Road) over Scotts Creek
(see Figure 1). NCDOT includes this bridge in the 1996-2002 Transportation Improvement
Program (TIP) as a bridge replacement project. NCDOT and the Federal Flighway Administration
MMA) classify this project as a federal Categorical Exclusion. These agencies expect no notable
environmental impacts.
NCDOT will replace Bridge No. 29 on new alignment just east of the existing bridge, as
shown in Figure 2. NCDOT recommends replacing the existing bridge with a new bridge. The
new bridge will have a 6.6 meter (22 foot) wide travelway with a 1.0 meter (3 foot) offset on each
side and a 1.5 meter (5 foot) sidewalk on the east side, for a total structure width of 10.1(33 feet)
meters. The new bridge will be approximately 37 meters (121 feet) in length. The new roadway
approaches will have a 6.6 meter (22 foot) wide travelway plus a minimum of 1.8 meter (6 foot)
shoulders. Shoulders will be 1.0 meters (3 feet) wider where guardrail is warranted. The proposed
structure and roadway will be at approximately the same grade as the existing roadway. The
completed project will provide a design speed of approximately 60 km/h (40 mph).
The estimated cost is $890,000 including $ 90,000 for right of way acquisition and
$ 800,000 for construction. The estimated cost included in the 1996-2002 TIP is $ 240,000.
IL ANTICIPATED DESIGN EXCEPTIONS
NCDOT may need a design exception due to the low design speed for this project caused
by the horizontal alignment.
III. SUMMARY OF PROJECT COMMITMENTS
All standard procedures and measures will be implemented to avoid or minimize
environmental impacts. All applicable Best Management Practices will be installed and properly
maintained during project construction.
Foundation investigations will be required on this project. The investigation will include
test borings in soil and/or rock for in-site testing as well as obtaining samples for laboratory
testing. This may require test borings in the stream.
Scotts Creek in the project vicinity is a designated public mountain trout stream. The
proposed replacement structure will be a two span structure if site hydrology and structure
requirements allow. If not the structure will be a typical three-span bridge. This will reduce in
stream work and possible disturbance of the streambed to a minimum.
All work in or adjacent to stream water will be completed in a dry work area. Sandbags,
rock berms, coffer dams, or other diversion structures will be used where possible to prevent
excavation in flowing water. All in stream work will be limited to the immediate vicinity of the
proposed bridge to reduce the possibility of disturbance to the natural form of the stream channel.
Any concrete used in construction of the proposed structure will be contained in a dry
work area to prevent direct contact with stream water during concrete curing. Uncured concrete
affects water quality and is toxic to fish and other organisms.
In stream work for the proposed project will not be undertaken between January I and
April 15. During this period trout eggs and fry would be vulnerable to mortality from
sedimentation.
This project must be reviewed under section 26(a) of the Tennessee Valley Authority
(TVA) Act. The final bridge plans, hydraulic analysis of the effects of the replacement structure
on the 100-year flood elevation, and notice of compliance with the Historic Preservation Act of
1966 will be forwarded to TVA for approval under Section 26(a).
In accordance with the provisions of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C.
1344), a permit will be required from the Corps of Engineers for the discharge of dredged or fill
material into "Waters of the United States." A Corps of Engineers Nationwide Permit # 23 will
likely be applicable for this project.
A North Carolina Division of Environmental Management (DEM) Section 401 Water
Quality General Certification will be obtained prior to issue of the Corps of Engineers Nationwide
Permit # 23.
IV, EXISTING CONDITIONS
NCDOT classifies SR 1456 as a local route in the Statewide Functional Classification
System. The surrounding area is a mixture of forested mountainous terrain and relatively level
residential sites. Also in the area are a school, a proposed school site, and a lumber yard. Southern
Railway also has tracks crossing SR 1456 just north of Bridge No. 29.
South of Bridge No. 29, SR 1456 is a two lane road, 5.5 meters (18 feet) wide with
grassed shoulders. North of Bridge No. 29, SR 1456 is a 2 lane paved road, 5.5 meters (18 feet)
wide with grassed shoulders. Vertical alignment in the immediate area is acceptable, while
horizontal alignment is poor along both approaches.
2
NCDOT reconstructed Bridge No. 29 at it's present location in 1961. The bridge has an
asphalt overlay surface over a timber deck on a high steel truss system (see Figure 3). It is 31.7
meters (104 feet) long with a 5.2 meter (17 foot) roadway width. The deck of Bridge No. 29 is
6.1 meters (20 feet) above the streambed. Water depth is approximately 1.0 meter (3 feet) in the
project area. Bridge No. 29 has posted load limits of 26 tons for single vehicles and 32 tons for
Truck-tractor Semi-trailer (TTST). The bridge has a height restriction of 4.2 meters (13.67 feet).
According to Bridge Maintenance Unit records, the sufficiency rating of Bridge No. 29 is
54.5 of a possible 100.0. However, the bridge is functionally obsolete. The Jackson County
School Board proposes to construct a new elementary school just south of Bridge No. 29. While
the existing bridge could continue to serve the existing traffic needs for several years, it will not
be capable of supporting the traffic needs of the proposed school. The small size of the structure
opening, both vertical and horizontal, will restrict or possibly prohibit school busses from using
the existing bridge. Also, the increase in traffic will hasten the deterioration of this aging structure.
Since a truss structure of this type can not be widened, replacement is the only option for
eliminating this restriction of traffic movement.
The current traffic volume is 50 vehicles per day (VPD); however, this number should
increase to 600 VPD once the proposed school is opened. The traffic volume will increase to 800
VPD by the design year (2020).
Traffic Engineering Accident Records indicate one accident occurred in the vicinity of
Bridge No. 29 between October 1, 1991 and September 30, 1994.
The Transportation Director for Jackson County Schools has indicated that there will be
between 8 and 12 school bus crossings daily (4 to 6 buses crossing once in the morning and
afternoon.), once the proposed school is in operation.
V. RECOMMENDED Il"ROVEMENTS
NCDOT will replace Bridge No. 29 on new alignment, as shown in Figure 2. Traffic will
be maintained on the existing bridge during construction.
NCDOT will replace Bridge No. 29 with a new bridge. The new bridge will have a 6.6
meter (22 foot) wide travelway with a 1.0 meter (3 foot) offset on each side and a 1.5 meter (5
foot) sidewalk on the east side, for a total structure width of 10.1 (33 feet) meters. The new
bridge will be approximately 37 meters (121 feet) in length.
The completed project will provide a design speed of approximately 60 km/h (40 mph).
The new approaches will have a 6.6 meter (22 foot) wide travelway plus 1.8 meter (6 foot)
shoulders. If the design requires guardrail, additional shoulder width will be provided. The new
roadway approaches will be at approximately the same grade as the existing roadway.
Placement of a sidewalk on the bridge is justifiable, since the structure provides a direct
connection [and the only connection] between the planned school and a high-density residential
area.
NCDOT recommends the studied alternate because it replaces a functionally obsolete
bridge in the most economical and environmentally responsible manner. It allows traffic to be
maintained on-site while the new bridge is constructed. It also eliminates the height restriction
associated with the existing bridge. A culvert alternate was originally considered but found to be
inadequate from a hydraulic standpoint.
No acceptable off-site detour route is available, so road closure alternates were not
feasible. South of Scotts Creek, SR 1456 becomes a narrow winding road as it traverses some
rather mountainous terrain enroute to US 23/US 74 approximately 1.8 kilometers (1.1 miles)
south of the creek.
Replacement in place would not have addressed the poor horizontal alignment issue.
Replacement to the west would not have addressed the poor horizontal alignment issue and would
have involved considerably more construction in the creek. A westward alternate would also
involve right-of-way impacts to a lumber yard located just west of the bridge on the north bank of
the creek.
The "do-nothing" alternate is not practical. The existing bridge would continue
deteriorating until it was unusable. This would require closing the road, or continued intensive
maintenance. Also, the existing bridge can not meet the traffic demands of the proposed school.
The division engineer concurs with the recommendation of the studied alternate, and the
decision to maintain traffic on-site.
NCDOT expects utility conflicts to be low for this project. The only utilities in the project
area are overhead power and telephone lines which cross Scotts Creek above the existing bridge.
The cost of moving these utilities however, accounts for approximately half of the right-of-way
cost for this project. Right-of-way needed within the proposed school site is to be donated.
VI, COST ESTIMATE
Estimated cost of the alternate studied is as follows:
Recommended
Alternate
Structure $ 380,000
Roadway Approaches $ 280,000
Structure Removal $ 40,000
En 'neerin & Contingencies $ 100,000
Total Construction $ 800,000
Right of Way & Utilities $ 90,000
TOTAL PROJECT COST $ 890,000
4
VII. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
A. General Environmental Effects
The project is expected to have an overall positive impact. Replacement of a functionally
obsolete bridge will result in safer traffic operations.
The project is considered to be a "categorical exclusion" due to its limited scope and
insignificant environmental consequences.
The bridge replacement will not have a substantial 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.
Jackson County is a participant in the National Flood Insurance Regular Program. The
proposed structure is not expected to adversely affect existing floodplain conditions. The studied
crossing of Scotts Creek is within a designated flood hazard zone, but not included in the detailed
flood study. The proposed bridge replacement project will not have any significant adverse effect
on the existing floodplain. Construction of the studied alternate will not increase the 100-year
flood elevation by more than 30 centimeters ( 12 inches). Construction of the recommended
alternate will not place significant amounts of fill in the floodpWn area.
No adverse effect on families or communities is anticipated. Right-of-way acquisition will
be limited.
No adverse effect on public facilities or service is expected. The project is not expected to
adversely affect social, economic, or religious opportunities in the area.
There are no publicly owned parks, recreational facilities, or wildlife and waterfowl
refuges of national, state, or local significance in the vicinity of the project.
B. Historic Architectural and Archaeological Resources
Architectural Resources
The SHPO has indicated that "in terms of historic architectural resources, Bridge No. 29
is the only structure over fifty years of age in the area of potential effect for the project. We
recommend that an architectural historian with the NCDOT evaluate the bridge for National
Register eligibility." [See SHPO memo dated January 19, 1995.]
The bridge was evaluated and determined to be a standard Pratt Through truss design and
not considered to be eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. The SHPO
concurs with the determination that existing Bridge No. 29 is not eligible for the National
Register. [See SHPO memo dated March 14, 1996.]
Archaeological Resources
The SBPO has indicated that there are no known archaeological sites in the project area,
and that no previously unknown sites are likely to be found. Therefore, SBPO has recommended
no archaeological investigations in connection with this project. The FHWA has determined that
an archaeological survey is not required based on this input.
C. Natural Systems
Physical Resources
Jackson County lies in the mountain physiographic region. The topography of Jackson
County is characterized by mountains with steep slopes and sharp crests. The average elevation
throughout the project area is 609.7 meters (2000.0 feet) above mean sea level.
Soils
There is one soil type in the immediate project area. Udorthents-Urban land complex
(UtB publication symbol) soils are found in the project vicinity. These soils have 0-5 percent
slopes and are rarely flooded.
Water Resources
Waters Impacted and Characteristics
The proposed project is located at the confluence of Scotts Creek and its tributary Ochre
Hill Creek. Both creeks are located in the Little Tennessee River Basin. The headwaters of
Scott Creek are located near the Blue Ridge Parkway. The creek flows approximately 13.0
kilometers (8.0 miles) to its confluence with Fisher Creek and ultimately into the Tuckasegee river
near Webster. Ochre Hill Creek originates south of US 23/US 74 and meanders northwesterly for
approximately 2.4 kilometers (1.5 miles) to its confluence with Scotts Creek.
Characteristics of Scotts Creek at the project crossing are as follows. The creek is
approximately 0.6-0.9 meters (2.0-3.0 feet) deep and 3.0-4.0 meters (9.0-12.0 feet) wide. The
substrate consists of gravel, cobble and boulder. The flow of the creek is fast and there is no
aquatic vegetation in the project vicinity.
Ochre Hill Creek is approximately 0.3 meters (1.0 feet) deep and 1.2 meters (4.0 feet)
wide in the vicinity of the project. The substrate consists of gravel, cobble and boulders. The
flow is moderate to fast and no aquatic vegetation was observed during the site visit.
6
Best Usage Classification
Streams have been assigned a best usage classification by the Division of Environmental
Management (DEM). Scotts Creek is designated as class C, TR in the vicinity of the project area.
Class C uses are defined as secondary uses such as aquatic life propagation and survival, fishing,
wildlife, secondary recreation and agriculture. The TR rating denotes Trout Waters which are
suitable for natural trout propagation and maintenance of stocked trout. Ochre Dill Creek has a
classification of C, from its source to its confluence with Scotts Creek. Neither High Quality
Waters (HQW), Water Supplies (WS-1 or WS-II), nor Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW)
occur within 1.6 kilometers (1.0 miles.) of project study area.
Water Quality
The Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network (BMAN) is managed by the DEM and
is part of an ongoing ambient water quality monitoring program which addresses long term trends
in water quality. The program assesses water quality by sampling for selected benthic
macroinvertebrate organisms at fixed monitoring sites. Macroinvertebrates are sensitive to very
subtle changes in water quality; thus, the species richness and overall biomass are reflections of
water quality. There is no BMAN information available for Scotts Creek or Ochre Hill Creek.
Point Source dischargers located throughout North Carolina are permitted through the
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Service (NPDES) program. Any discharger is required
to register for a permit. There are four registered dischargers for Scotts Creek: Lewis Oil Co.,
Jackson Paper Manufacturing Co., Sylva Waste Water Treatment Plant and Jackson County
Schools.
Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Replacing an existing structure in the same location with a road closure during
construction is almost always preferred because it poses the least risk to aquatic organisms and
other natural resources. Bridge replacement on new alignment usuzlly results in more severe
impacts due to clearing and grubbing in the construction area. Impacts associated with this
project will be associated with new alignment.
Project construction may result in a number of impacts to water resources such as:
• Increased sedimentation and siltation from construction and/or erosion.
• Changes in light incidence and water clarity due to increased sedimentation and
vegetation removal. Alteration of water levels and flows due to interruptions
and/additions to surface and ground water flow from construction.
• Changes in water temperature due to vegetation removal.
• Increased concentration of toxic compounds from highway runo$ construction and
toxic spills.
7
Recommendations:
• Sedimentation Control guidelines and Best Management Practices will be implemented
prior to construction and maintained throughout the life of the project.
• Non-point sediment sources will be identified and efforts made to control sediment
runoff.
Biotic Resources
Terrestrial Communities
Three distinct terrestrial communities were identified in the project study area:
Piedmont/Low Mountain Alluvial Forest, Pasture and Maintained. Many faunal species are highly
adaptive and may populate the entire range of terrestrial communities discussed and may not be
mentioned for each community located.
Piedmont/Low Mountain Alluvial Forest Community - The canopy of the
piedmont/Low Mountain Alluvial Forest is composed of sycamore, black walnut, box elder and
black locust. The subcanopy consists primarily of black cherry, red maple and buckeye.
Spicebush, black alder, multifloral rose, poison ivy, jewelweed, golden ragwort and bitter cress
are also common. Japanese grass is abundant throughout the project vicinity.
The Piedmont/Low Mountain community provides habitat for an assortment of birds and
mammals. Birds often associated with riverside communities include red-winged blackbird,
white-throated sparrow, song sparrow and northern cardinal. Yellow-rumped warblers, hooded
warbler and common yellowthroat may also be found in this community. Yellow warbler, red-
eyed vireo, Carolina wren and mourning dove were observed during the site visit. A major
predator commonly found in bottomlands and alluvial forests is the Barred owl.
Mammals which may frequent the rivers edge include white-footed mouse, raccoon and
woodchuck. In addition, white-tailed deer and gray squirrel may also forage in the Piedmont/Low
Mountain Alluvial Community.
Amphibians and reptiles are likely to be locally abundant in the community adjacent to the
river. Spring peeper and upland chorus frog breed in semi-permanent pools during the spring.
Two-lined salamander and mountain dusky salamander are found in or near woodland streams.
Rat snake, worm snake, ring-necked snake and queen snake may be found here as well. Snapping
turtle and box turtle may also occur along alluvial flood plains. Copperheads and timber
rattlesnakes are important predators of small mammals inhabiting the alluvial forest.
Pasture - The pasture is located on the south of bridge no. 29 and east of SR 1456. This
community is dominated by fescue and Kentucky bluegrass mixed with an assortment of forbs,
shrubs and scattered trees. The few trees found in this community during the site visit include:
black walnut, black cherry, box elder, black locust and buckeye. Spring vetch, red clover,
8
bulbous buttercup, chickweed and curly dock are also found in the pasture community. Japanese
honeysuckle and multifloral rose are scattered but kept low growing due to grazing and/or
mowing.
Most of the birds and mammals mentioned previously may also wander into the
maintained community occasionally. Red-winged blackbird, song sparrow and white-throated
sparrow may all be observed in this area. Woodchuck, cottontail rabbits, meadow vole and
raccoon will also find refuge and/or forage in this community. Rat snakes will forage in this
community on occasion. In addition, meadowlark and eastern bluebird may be observed perching
on telephone wires or fences overlooking the pasture. The red-tailed hawk is an important
predator known to forage in the pasture community.
Maintained Community - The maintained community exists along the roadside both
north and south of bridge no. 29. This community is periodically mowed or otherwise maintained
by NCDOT road maintenance crews. Japanese honeysuckle, multifloral rose, fescue, black cherry,
curly dock, spring vetch and bulbous buttercup are common in this community.
The faunal composition of the maintained roadside community is very similar to the
adjacent pasture. Eastern bluebird, eastern meadowlark, song sparrow and white throated
sparrow are all common in the maintained community. Cottontail rabbits and black snake may
also find suitable habitat in this community. There is a direct relationship between animal use of
the roadside habitat and those animals which become "road kills" as a result of highway use.
Aquatic Community
Both Scott Creek and Ochre Dill Creek will be impacted by the proposed project.
Physical characteristics of the water bodies and conditions of the water resource reflect faunal
composition of the aquatic communities. Terrestrial communities adjacent to a water resource
also greatly influence aquatic communities.
The bank on the south side of Scott Creek is wooded and shallow. The north side of
Scott Creek is steeper, and eroded somewhat. There is a large saw mill operation adjacent to the
north creek bank.
A variety of biological organisms utilize the mountain stream community. Brook trout,
rainbow trout and brown trout are stocked in Scotts Creek by the Wildlife Resources
Commission. The central stoneroller, whitetail shiner, watpaint shiner and blacknose dace may be
present. These fish feed on detritus and algae and serve as prey for small mouth bass and
redbreast sunfish. Northern water snake, northern dusky salamander and green frog may also be
present.
The banks of the smaller Ochre Creek are approximately 0.9 meters (3 feet) tall in the
vicinity of the proposed project. The banks are vegetated and show little sign of serious erosion.
Some fish typically inhabiting small mountain streams include: warpaint shiner, central stoneroller
9
and blacknose dace. In addition, invertebrates such as crayfish, scuds and a diversity of aquatic
insects may inhabit these waters serving as prey for larger organisms.
Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Construction of the subject project will have various impacts on the biotic resources
described. Any construction related activities in or near these resources have the potential to
impact biological functions. This section qualifies and quantifies impacts to the natural resources
in terms of area impacted and ecosystems affected. Temporary and permanent impacts are
considered here as well.
Calculated impacts to terrestrial resources reflect the relative abundance of each
community present in the study area. Project construction will result in clearing and degradation
of portions of these communities. Table 1 summarizes potential quantitative losses to these biotic
communities, resulting from project construction. Estimated impacts are derived using the entire
proposed right of way of 20.0 meters (65.6 feet). Usually, project construction does not require
the entire right of way; therefore, actual impacts may be considerably less.
Table 1 Estimated Impacts to Biotic Communities
rnXrnainvrrv IMPACTS
Alluvial Forest 0.10 (0.20)
Pasture 0.12 (0.31)
Maintained 0.15 (0.38
Totals 0.37 (0.95)
Note: Values cited are in hectares (acres).
Permanent impacts to terrestrial communities will occur in the form of habitat reduction in
the process of clearing, grading and surfacing during road construction. Some animals such as
rabbits and birds build their nests in roadside cover. Road construction will destroy foraging and
nesting habitat for some species, while actually improving habitat for others, especially grass
eating rodents like voles and cotton rats. Ground dwellers and slow moving organisms will
decrease in numbers in the wake of highway construction. Many mobile species may be
permanently displaced as a result of project construction.
It is anticipated that permanent and temporary impacts to aquatic communities will occur
from increased sedimentation, increased light penetration and loss of habitat. Sedimentation
covers benthic organisms inhibiting their abilities to feed and obtain oxygen. Filter feeders may be
covered by the sedimentation, thus preventing their ability to feed. Increased sediment loads and
suspended particulates can lead to the smothering of fish eggs, reduced depth of light penetration
in the water column, reduction of dissolved oxygen and alterations in water temperature.
Increased light penetration from removal of stream side vegetation may also increase water
temperatures. Warmer water contains less oxygen and results in a reduction of aquatic life
dependent on high oxygen concentrations.
10
Jurisdictional Topics
Waters of the United States
Surface waters and wetlands fall under the broad category of "Waters of the United
States", as defined in Section 33 of the Code of Federal Register (CFR) Part 328.3. Wetlands,
defined in 33 CFR 328.3, are those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground
water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and under normal circumstances do
support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted to life in saturated conditions. Any action
that proposes to place fill into these areas falls under the jurisdiction of the US Army Corps of
Engineers (COE) under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344).
Characteristics of Wetlands and Surface Waters
Potential wetland communities were evaluated using the criteria specified in the 1987
"Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual". For an area to be considered a "wetland",
the following three specifications must be met; 1) presence of hydric soils (low soil chroma
values), 2) presence of hydrophytic vegetation, and 3) evidence of hydrology, including; saturated
soils, stained leaf litter, oxidized rhizospheres, matted vegetation, high water marks on trees,
buttressed tree bases and surface roots.
Less than 0.1 acres of jurisdictional wetlands are located within the project area. The
wetland is associated with a seepage area and is located south of the existing bridge and east of
SR 1456 adjacent to the pasture. The soil color in the wetland is 10 YR 4\2. Evidence of
hydrology at the time of the site visit included signs of flow and standing water. Plant species
with wetland indicator status include: elderberry (FACW-), soft rush (FACW+) and jewelweed
(FACW).
The Division of Environmental Management (DEM) has instituted a numerical rating
system from 0-100 to gauge wetland quality. The fourth version of the rating system assesses
wetlands on the basis of water storage, bank/shoreline stabilization, pollutant removal, aquatic
life, recreational and educational values of a wetland community. The DEM rating for this
wetland is 21.
This wetland is described by the National Wetlands Inventory Classification system as
PEMIH (Palustrine Emergent Persistent Permanently flooded).
Summary of Anticipated Impacts
The construction of the proposed project will impact jurisdictional wetlands in the study
area. Anticipated wetland and surface water impacts are derived using the entire right of way.
The amount of impacts will likely be less due to conditions outlined by the COE, DEHNR, and
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) during issuance of permits necessary
for project construction. The amount of wetland and surface water impacts may be modified by
any changes in roadway parameters and or criteria.
11
These impacts can affect the functions that wetlands perform in an ecosystem. Wetlands
influence regional water flow regimes by intercepting and storing storm runoff which ultimately
reduces the danger of flooding in surrounding and downstream areas. It is documented that
wetlands function to remove organic and inorganic nutrients and toxic materials from water that
flows across them. Wetlands adjacent to roadways can act as filters which remove pollutants and
toxins from stormwater runoff. Less than 0.10 acre of jurisdictional wetland impacts are
anticipated.
Permits
Since the project is classified as a Categorical Exclusion (CE) a Nationwide Permit 33
CFR 330.5 (a)(23) is likely to be applicable for proposed construction. This permit authorizes
any activities undertaken, assisted, authorized, regulated, funded or financed, in whole or in part,
by another federal agency or department has determined pursuant to the Council on
Environmental Quality regulation for implementing the procedural provisions of the National
Environmental Policy Act, that the activity, work, or discharge is Categorically Excluded from
environmental documentation because it is included within a category of actions which neither
individually nor cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment and the office of
the Chief of Engineers has been furnished notice of the agency's or department's application for
the CE and concurs with that determination.
In addition, the project is located in a designated "trout" county where NCDOT is
required to coordinate with the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission. Final permit decision rests
with the Corps of Engineers.
A Section 401 General Water Quality Certification is required for any activity which may
result in a discharge and for which a federal permit is required. State permits are administered
through the Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources (DEHNR).
Mitigation
The COE has adopted through the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) a wetland
mitigation policy which embraces the concept of "no net loss of wetlands" and sequencing. The
purpose of this policy is to restore and maintain the chemical, biological, and physical integrity of
Waters of the United States, specifically wetlands. Mitigation of wetland impacts has been
defined by the CEQ to include: Avoiding impacts (to wetlands), minimizing impacts, rectifying
impacts (40 CFR 1508.20). Each of these three aspects (avoidance, minimization and
compensatory mitigation) must be considered sequentially.
Avoidance - Avoidance mitigation examines all appropriate and practical possibilities of
averting impacts to Waters of the United States. According to a 1990 Memorandum of
Agreement (MOA) between the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the COE, in
determining "appropriate and practical" measures to offset unavoidable impacts, such measures
12
should be appropriate to the scope and degree of those impacts and practical in terms of cost,
existing technology and logistics in light of overall project purposes. Some impacts to Waters of
the United States will occur as a result of the proposed project.
Minimization - Minimization includes the examination of appropriate and practical steps
to reduce the adverse impacts to Waters of the United States. Implementation of these steps will
be required through project modifications and permit conditions. Minimization efforts should be
implemented when practical. These efforts may involve any or all of the following: decreasing the
footprint of the proposed project through the reduction of median width, ROW widths, fill slopes
and/or road shoulder widths.
Compensatory Mitigation - Compensatory mitigation is not normally considered until
anticipated impacts to Waters of the United States have been avoided and minimized to the
maximum extent possible. It is recognized that "no net loss of wetlands" functions and values
may not be achieved in each and every permit action. Appropriate and practicable compensatory
mitigation is required for unavoidable adverse impacts which remain after all appropriate and
practicable minimization has been required. Compensatory actions often include restoration,
creation, and enhancement of Waters of the United States. Such actions should be undertaken in
areas adjacent to or contiguous to the discharge site.
Authorizations under Nationwide Permits usually do not require compensatory mitigation
according to the 1989 MOA between the EPA and the COE. Final decisions concerning
compensatory mitigation rests with the COE.
Rare and Protected Species
Some populations of fauna and flora have been in the process of decline either due to
natural forces or their inability to coexist with man. Federal law (under the provisions of the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended) requires that any action, likely to adversely affect a
species classified as federally-protected, be subject to review by the Fish and Wildlife Service
(FWS). Other species may receive additional protection under separate state laws.
Federally-Protected Species
Plants and animals with federal classifications of Endangered (E), i hreatened (T),
Proposed Endangered (PE) and Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under provisions of
section 7 and section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. As of March 28,
1995, the FWS lists the following federally-protected species for Jackson County (Table 2). A
brief description of each species characteristics and habitat follows table 2.
13
Table 2. Federally-Protected Species
For Jackson County
Scientific Name
rnmmon Name
Status
Falco pergg,u_s
Glaucomvs sabrinus 1 r s
Myotis sodalis
Isotria medeoloides
Helonias hullata
Chmoderma linear
peregrine falcon E
Carolina northern flying E
squirrel
Indiana Bat E
small whorled pogoma T
Swamp Pink T
rock gnome lichen E
"E" denotes Endangered (a species that is threatened with extinction throughout all or a
significant portion of its range).
"T" denotes Threatened (a species that is likely to become an endangered species within the
foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range).
Falco Qerarinus (Peregrine falcon)
E
Animal Family: Falconidae
Date Listed: 3/20/84
Distribution in N.C.: Avery, Brunswick, Burke, Carteret, Dare, Hyde, Jackson, Madison,
New Hanover, Rutherford, Surry, Transylvania, Wilkes, Yancey
The peregrine falcon has a dark plumage along its back and its underside is lighter, barred
and spotted. It is most easily recognized by a dark crown and a dark wedge that extends below
the eye forming a distinct helmet.
The American peregrine falcon is found throughout the United States in areas with high
cliffs and open land for foraging.
Biological Conclusion:
No Effect
Based on extensive in-house and field investigation of the study area it has been
determined that suitable nesting habitat does not exist within the immediate project area. This
does not preclude the possibility that the falcon may forage in the vicinity of the proposed project.
However, project construction will not affect foraging opportunities in the study area.
14
Glaucomvs sabrinus coloratus (northern flying squirrel) E
Animal Family: Sciurdiae
Date Listed: 7/1/85
Distribution in N.C.: Avery, Buncombe, Graham, Haywood, Jackson, McDowell,
Mitchell, Swain, Transylvania, Watauga, Yancey
The Carolina northern flying squirrel has a large well furred flap of skin along either side
of its body. This furred flap of skin is connected at the wrist in the front and at the ankle at the
rear. The skin flaps and its flattened tail allow the northern flying squirrel to glide from tree to
tree.
There are several isolated populations of the northern flying squirrel in the western part of
North Carolina, along the Tennessee border. This squirrel is found above 1517 meters (5000
feet) in vegetation transition zone between hardwood and coniferous forests.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Based on extensive in-house and field investigations of the project study area it has been
determined that suitable habitat does not exist for the Carolina northern flying squirrel. In
addition, the proposed project is located at an elevation of 609.0 meters (2000 feet) above mean
sea level and does not meet the 1517 meters (5000 feet) requirement of this animal.
Mvotis sodalis (Indiana bat) E
Animal Family: Vespertilionidae
Date Listed: 3/11/67
Distribution in N.C. Jackson, Mitchell, Rutherford, Swain
Adult Indiana bats are the smallest bats found in western North Carolina. Several
characteristics can be used to distinguish them from other bats; the hair on the feet is short and
does not extend past the tips of the claws, and the calcar (cartilaginous spur from the bats heel
which helps support tail or interfemoral membrane) is keeled. The Indiana bats dorsal fur is
brown in color and the ventral fur is lighter with a cinnamon hue.
The range of the Indiana bat centers around cavernous limestone regions in the eastern
United States. The Indiana bat has different summer and winter habitat requirements. Winter
habitat is in caves and abandoned mines that usually has standing water on the floor. The bats
migrate to the winter habitat between September and November; they stay there with occasional
periods of activity until they emerge in mid-March to early May. Hibernation only occurs in
regions where winter temperatures are stable and are around four degrees Celcius. Little is
known of the summer habitat of the Indiana bat, it is thought that they disperse throughout there
range and spend the summer foraging alone over streams or along forest margins. They have
been found under loose bark on dead and living trees along small to medium-sized streams.
15
Biological Conclusion:
No Effect
Based on extensive in-house and field investigations of the project study area it has been
determined that suitable roosting habitat does not exist within the immediate project area. This
does not preclude the possibility that the Indiana bat may forage in the area. However, project
construction will not affect foraging opportunities in the project area.
Isotria med+ eoloides
(Small whorled pogonia)
E
Plant Family:
Federally Listed:
Distribution in N.C.
Orchidaceae
September 10, 1982
Burke, Haywood, Henderson, Jackson, Macon, Surry
Small whorled pogonia is a perennial orchid having long pubescent roots and a hollow
stem. Stems terminate in a whorl of five or six light green, elliptical leaves that are somewhat
pointed. One or two light green flowers are produced at the end of the stem. Flowers of small
whorled pogonia have short sepals.
The small whorled pogonia grows in "second growth deciduous" or deciduous-coniferous
forests, with an open canopy, open scrub layer, and sparse herb layer. It prefers acidic soils.
Flowering is inhibited in areas where there is relatively high scrub coverage or high sapling
density.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Suitable habitat does not exist within the proposed project area. Therefore, no impacts to
small whorled pogonia will result from project construction.
H 1 ni bullata (Swamp pink) T
Plant Family: Liliaceae
Federally Listed: September 9, 1988
Flowers Present: May (first half)
Distribution in N.C.: Henderson, Jackson, Transylvania.
Swamp pink is a perennial plant that grows from tuberous rhizomes. It has lance-shaped,
smooth, evergreen leaves that grow in basal rosette. Swamp pink has a hollow stem that is
topped with a short, dense, spike-like raceme of pink or purplish flowers.
The North Carolina populations of swamp pink are limited to bogs in the southern
Appalachian in Transylvania, Jackson, and Henderson counties. Swamp pink is found freshwater
wetland areas including spring seepages, swamps, bogs, meadows, and along the margins of
meandering streams. Soils where this plant occurs are described as being slightly acidic (pH: 4.2-
4.9), having a thin layer of decomposed organic matter, underlain by a black to dark gray silt loam
16
that is slightly sticky, with many small roots and fine mica chips. Populations are found in areas
with varying amounts of shade but populations in open areas are less vigorous due to increased
competition from other species.
Biological Conclusion
No Effect
This project was visited on May 4, 1995 during the plant's flowering season. All suitable
habitat in the project vicinity was carefully studied on a plant by plant basis. Swamp pink was not
found during the site visit. Therefore, no impacts to swamp pink will result from project
construction.
Gvmnoderma lin re (Rock gnome lichen) E
Plant Family: Cladoniaceae
Federally Listed: December 28, 1994
Distribution in N.C.: Ashe, Avery, Buncombe, Graham, Haywood, Jackson, Mitchell,
Rutherford, Swain, Transylvania, Yancey.
The rock gnome lichen is a squamulose lichen in the reindeer moss family. The lichen can
be identified by its fruiting bodies which are born singly or in clusters, black in color, and are
found at the tips of the squamules. The fruiting season of the rock gnome lichen occurs from July
through September.
The rock gnome lichen is a narrow endemic, restricted to areas of high humidity. These
high humidity environments occur on high elevation (>1220 meters/4000 feet) mountaintops and
cliff faces which are frequently bathed in fog or lower elevation (<762 meters/2500 feet) deep
gorges in the Southern Appalachians. The rock gnome lichen primarily occurs on vertical rock
faces where seepage water from forest soils above flows at (and only at) very wet times. The
rock gnome lichen is almost always found growing with the moss Adr in these vertical
intermittent seeps. The major threat of extinction to the rock gnome lichen relates directly to
habitat alteration/loss of high elevation coniferous forests. These coniferous forest usually he
adjacent to the habitat occupied by the rock gnome lichen. The high elevation habitat occurs in
the counties of Ashe, Avery, Buncombe, Graham, Haywood, Jackson, Mitchell, Rutherford,
Swain, Transylvania, and Yancey.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Based on extensive in-house and field investigations it has been determined that suitable
habitat does not exist in the immediate project area for the rock gnome lichen. In addition, the
proposed project is located at an elevation of 609.0 meters (2000 feet) and does not meet the
elevation requirements this plant.
17
r
D. Air Quality and Traffic Noise
The project is located in Jackson County, which has been determined to be in compliance
with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. 40 CFR part 51 is not applicable, because the
proposed project is located in an attainment area. This project is not anticipated to create any
adverse effects on the air quality of this attainment area.
The project is an air quality "neutral" project, so a project level CO analysis is not
required.
The impact on air quality will be insignificant. If the contractor disposes of vegetation 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 the 1990 Clean Air Act amendments and the National
Environmental Policy Act. The project requires no additional reports.
The project will not significantly increase traffic volumes. Therefore, it will have no
significant impact on noise levels. Temporary noise increases may occur during construction.
E. Farmland
The Farmland Protection Policy Act requires all federal agencies or their representatives, to
consider the impact of land acquisition and construction projects on prime and important farmland
soils. These soils are determined by the U.S. Soil Conservation Service (SCS) based on criteria
such as crop yield and level of input of economic resources. The SCS was asked to determine
whether the alternative under consideration will impact prime or important farmland soils.
According to the SCS, the proposed sn alleamount of land but the impact
area to be converted is
The project will result in the conversion of a
wooded and void of agricultural uses.
VIII. CONCLUSIONS
Based on the above discussion, NCDOT and FHWA conclude that the project will cause
no significant environmental impacts. Therefore, the project may be processed as a Categorical
Exclusion.
WTG/plr
18
a
`? L ] a
N LL
z

a y a
CL. Q

N Y
? Q az
3 OW
w
a z
Q z2C7p ?Nv
00yen
0.
°
I ?FLa

ou,0"
O
S' U_
O U
zz U' Um

N
U c
M
p-
U
S'r ?zrnzz Q
< m>

Z??a? g
21
ni 'Is
bh
N
[h N
r.
?I hl
h
h
n ?
s
a,
1 i 1.10
IV.
O
b cn
ro- 'n C4 K
vl v >
?I 3
cif ? • • .
Y
_ ?? / 1
a I 1
• ; a
• / •
1
<I ?, 1
Zs' al - i
^I ?i ^ ? -33?u° \? ? •y `=fig/
6 ° a.
to
49.
vl? ?-r C ? \.a ? ? " u
O ?? u
Ol oe'
ALVIII
7.1
H
r f
r ,„1 ,.?
M
I
i 1 `•I
ap?,9 yp?M,c, F I ?? I i `? I r
w +?
Cb I i 1rI {f. ?• ; { ..aye r`,
( r1 8'.
1
.° ?? I .CI O
G a
i har ! d a ? .?' p y
d '+i`' «1 O C3 N V M
Q ca Z uML
? p OA ? ? V] Ra
r 7r' ,? Z H A fs+ ? O
,, .. N
o ?
N?pt? ? jtt i`S I I ! t, 1 115 ? 1'4; `?, iI'?` t,.• I '?'
?°7}•1?P4{M)!i S I ?,t ?i:f( 'tl I? :.? ,; 4? ? ?, ?I.6 3 ,, ? :?'???t ,
, ?Ci I .,". rP77t"++rCyy 1??? • ;? +" ? r .
r i +? 1 f i I Ob\ f i *? , 1 ','?? F^?)?? - ?' ? ,?' 1, •
I
rl l ? y"t'
t ?`
' I ?V ?19
All
t A, ? IV l V r +, 1 t, ? • ti k • ? _ r+ r ? ?'y?
? r •• ,?3 t a (? CA v 1
4 141q.
y?y? I ?r { t 11 I?? •?: j
??t l I I
*Ilktl .; "it Vitt (e,
J. Jr ;t.
?.av. n ?It?? 4 r ,, } ? it¢?,t,? ,tpt, i. ?y`
• 1?,, , _ I yr t 5'l?e rl? pl C ?4 -r?r+?"y?Hl ! ??? ? .Jr.t d!'1 I... I '?r ° .'A`
,pIF3a I , 'I: r.f*C"' . t( ,r1 tc t
IT,
t''1 / '? , 1I 5 1 ;(ap Y? la i ? t ?,? v 1 . }
Y\ , '} Z? 1 L iy? \ 7 a
Ilt

Appendix A
/ s
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
January 19, 1995
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Replace Bridge 29 on SR 1456 over Scott's Creek,
Jackson County, B-3393, ER 95-7975
Dear Mr. Graf:
P cE,?
JAN 2 3 1995
Division o chivf1\At91 ii§tJAY
WilliarniNp. ctor, ??`
?ROnti
On January 10, 1995, Debbie Bevin of our staff met with North Carolina
Department of Transportation (NCDOT) staff for a meeting of the minds
concerning the above project. We reported our available information on historic
architectural and archaeological surveys and resources along with our
recommendations. NCDOT provided project area photographs and aerial
photographs at the meeting and for our use afterwards.
Based upon our review of the photographs and the information discussed at the
meeting, we offer our preliminary comments regarding this project.
In terms of historic architectural resources, Bridge #29 is the only structure over
fifty years of age in the area of potential effect for the project. We recommend
that an architectural historian with the NCDOT evaluate the bridge for National
Register eligibility.
There are no known archaeological sites within the proposed project area. Based
on our present knowledge of the area, it is unlikely that any archaeological
resources which may be eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic
Places will be affected by the project construction. We, therefore, recommend'
that no archaeological investigation be conducted in connection with this project.
Having provided this information, we look forward to receipt of either a
Categorical Exclusion or Environmental Assessment which indicates how NCDOT
addressed our comments.
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.
109 East Jones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807 0
Nicholas L. Graf
January 19, 1995, Page 2
i
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.
Sin ly,
David Brook
Deputy State Historic
DB:slw/
cc: PH. F. Vick
B. Church
T. Padgett
44-6-k
Preservation Officer
METAL TRUSS BRIDGE EVALUATION
TIP NO. R ?393 COUNTY Jackson BRIDGE NO. 29
LOCATION On SR 1546 over, ,S'cott.s C'r•eck SPAN(S) Pratt Through
1. CRITERION A
To be eligible under Criterion A. a bridge must fall into one or morc of the following categories:
• A bridge that prc-dntcs the State HiglmaN Commission (established in 1915) and ?sas built on
one of the states major transportation corridors. No.
The first bridge at a crossing to sene traffic on one of the routes designated as state highways in
1921. \'o.
• A briduc built at a critical crossing on one of the states maJor transportation corridors. \'o.
A bridge that is spcci(icalls associated %Nith significant residential. conrrnercial. or industrial
dc\ clopmcni or expansirnL \
Integrity. Does the bridge possess sufficient integriu to support its significance under Criterion A?
11 CRITERION C
To be eli gible under Criterion C. a bricigc must score four (4) or morc points.
Catc4on Max. Points Score
A. Builder and/or Desianer
1. Known. important in cNolution of truss technology 3
2. Kno\\ it. prolific builder or NC compam 2
3 Knossn 1
4. Unknossn 0 0
B. Geometn/Configuration (Statewide significance)
1. Range: 1-6 remaining 2
2. Range: 7-15 remaining I
3. Rangc: 16 or more t) 0
C. Gcontetn/Configuration (Local significance)
1. Range: 1-2 remaining 2
2. Range: 3-5 remaining I /
3. Range: 6 or more I)
D. Technological features 2
E. Decoratis c features 1 0
TOTAL POINTS 10 3 pts.
Inte-rit . Does the bridge possess sufficient intcgrity to support its significance under Criterion C?
B-2640 Memo Page 2 March 1, 1996
1. Under no circumstances should rock, sand, or other materials be dredged from
the stream channel under authorization of this permit, except in the immediate
vicinity of the culvert. Channel relocations have catastrophic effects on
aquatic life, and disturbance of the natural form of the stream channel will
likely cause downstream erosion problems, possibly affecting adjacent land
owners.
All work in or adjacent to stream waters should be completed in a dry work
area. Sandbag or rock berms, coffer dams, or other diversion structures
should be used where possible to prevent excavation in flowing water.
Grading and backfilling should be minimized, and tree and shrub growth
should be retained if possible to ensure long term availability of shoreline
cover for gamefish and wildlife.
4. Adequate sedimentation and erosion control measures must be implemented
and maintained on the project site to avoid impacts to downstream aquatic
resources. All disturbed soils should be stabilized with ground cover within
15 working days of grading.
5. If concrete is used during construction of piers and abutments, a dry work area
should be maintained to prevent direct contact between curing concrete and
stream water. Uncured concrete affects water quality and is toxic to fish and
other organisms.
6. Instream work should not be scheduled for the period between January 1 and
April 15, when trout eggs and fry would be vulnerable to mortality from
sedimentation.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide input in the early planning stages for
this project. If I can further assist your office, please contact me at [phone].
DC/dy
cc: Micky Clemmons, District 9 Fisheries Biologist
Bill Goodwin, Project Planning Engineer, NCDOT
.n
y ? I 1 '
,w SfAi(
? w
C
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt Jr., Governor Division of Archives and History
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary Jeffrey J. Crow, Director
March 14, 1996
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Replace Bridge No. 29 on SR 1456 over Scott's
Creek, Jackson County, B-3393, Federal Aid
Project BRZ-1456(4), State Project 8.2960501,
ER 96-8499
Dear Mr. Graf:
Thank you for your letter of March 7, 1996, transmitting the metal truss bridge
evaluation for the above project. We concur that Bridge No. 29 is not eligible for
the National Register of Historic Places.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations
for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental
review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
Sincerely,
baVid Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw/
cc: P14. F. Vick
B. Church
109 East Jones Street - Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807
VED
SING & Ev`??O
4
g??
" f , %
9 North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission 0
512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-1188, 919-733-3391
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
N. C. Department of Transportation
FROM: David Cox, Highway Project C di for
Habitat Conservation Program
DATE: March 1, 1996
SUBJECT: Request for scoping comments, Bridge No. 29 on SR 1456 over Scotts
Creek, Jackson County, North Carolina, TIP No. B-3393.
This memorandum responds to your request for our concerns regarding impacts
on fish and wildlife resources resulting from the subject project. The N. C. Wildlife
Resources Commission (NCWRC) has reviewed the proposed project, and our comments
are provided in accordance with provisions of the North Carolina Environmental Policy
Act (G.S. 113A-1 et seq., as amended; 1 NCAC 25).
The proposed work involves replacement of an obsolete roadway bridge. We
anticipate that a spanning structure will be required for the site, given the size of the
existing bridge. Scotts Creek is managed for trout by the NCWRC. Construction
impacts on fisheries and wildlife resources will depend on the extent of disturbance in the
stream bed and surrounding floodplain areas. Environmental documentation for this
project should include description of any wetlands and waters on the project site and
surveys for any threatened or endangered species that may be affected by construction.
Because Jackson County is a "trout water county", the NCWRC anticipates
review of the environmental document for this project when a 404 permit application is
submitted to the Corps of Engineers. The following conditions to the 404 permit are
likely to be recommended:
B-2640 Memo Page 2 March'l, 199'
1. Under no circumstances should rock, sand, or other materials be dredged from
the stream channel under authorization of this permit, except in the immediate
vicinity of the culvert. Channel relocations have catastrophic effects on
aquatic life, and disturbance of the natural form of the stream channel will
likely cause downstream erosion problems, possibly affecting adjacent land
owners.
2. All work in or adjacent to stream waters should be completed in a dry work
area. Sandbag or rock berms, coffer dams, or other diversion structures
should be used where possible to prevent excavation in flowing water.
Grading and backfilling should be minimized, and tree and shrub growth
should be retained if possible to ensure long term availability of shoreline
cover for gamefish and wildlife.
4. Adequate sedimentation and erosion control measures must be implemented
and maintained on the project site to avoid impacts to downstream aquatic
resources. All disturbed soils should be stabilized with ground cover within
15 working days of grading.
If concrete is used during construction of piers and abutments, a dry work area
should be maintained to prevent direct contact between curing concrete and
stream water. Uncured concrete affects water quality and is toxic to fish and
other organisms.
Instream work should not be scheduled for the period between January 1 and
April 15, when trout eggs and fry would be vulnerable to mortality from
sedimentation.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide input in the early planning stages for
this project. If I can further assist your office, please contact me at [phone].
DC/dy
cc: Micky Clemmons, District 9 Fisheries Biologist
Bill Goodwin, Project Planning Engineer, NCDOT
N ? ? V
APPENDIX B
SUMMARY OF PROJECT COMMITMENTS
All standard procedures and measures will be implemented to avoid or minimize
environmental impacts. All applicable Best Management Practices will be installed and properly
maintained during project construction.
Foundation investigations will be required on this project. The investigation will include
test borings in soil and/or rock for in-site testing as well as obtaining samples for laboratory
testing. This may require test borings in the stream.
Scotts Creek in the project vicinity is a designated public mountain trout stream. The
proposed replacement structure will be a two span structure if site hydrology and structure
requirements allow. If not the structure will be a typical three-span bridge. This will reduce in
stream work and possible disturbance of the streambed to a minimum.
All work in or adjacent to stream water will be completed in a dry work area. Sandbags,
rock berms, coffer dams, or other diversion structures will be used where possible to prevent
excavation in flowing water. All in stream work will be limited to the immediate vicinity of the
proposed bridge to reduce the possibility of disturbance to the natural form of the stream channel.
Any concrete used in construction of the proposed structure will be contained in a dry
work area to prevent direct contact with stream water during concrete curing. Uncured concrete
affects water quality and is toxic to fish and other organisms.
In stream work for the proposed project will not be undertaken between January I and
April 15. During this period trout eggs and fry would be vulnerable to mortality from
sedimentation.
This project must be reviewed under section 26(a) of the Tennessee Valley Authority
(TVA) Act. The final bridge plans, hydraulic analysis of the effects of the replacement structure
on the 100-year flood elevation, and notice of compliance with the Historic Preservation Act of
1966 will be forwarded to TVA for approval under Section 26(a).
In accordance with the provisions of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C.
1344), a permit will be required from the Corps of Engineers for the discharge of dredged or fill
material into "Waters of the United States." A Corps of Engineers Nationwide Permit # 23 will
likely be applicable for this project.
A North Carolina Division of Environmental Management (DEM) Section 401 Water
Quality General Certification will be obtained prior to issue of the Corps of Engineers Nationwide
Permit # 23.