20042000 Ver 1_Complete File_20041216

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636.3726
January 4, 2005
Eric Alsmeyer
Army Corps of Engineers
6508 Falls of Neuse Road
Raleigh, NC 27615-6814
Dear Mr. Alsmeyer:
0 qZooc?
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has reviewed the following permit application.
This is the report of the Service submitted pursuant to, and in accordance with, provisions of the
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661 et seq.) and the
Endangered Species Act of 1973 (87 Stat. 884, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Based on the available information, we do not believe that the proposed activities will have
significant adverse and/or irreversible effects on fish and wildlife resources. Therefore, the
Service has no objection, from the standpoint of fish and wildlife, to the issuance of a permit
related to the proposed activities.
Action ID No. Issue date County Applicant
200020945 December 27, 2004 Durham NCDOT
Should you have any questions regarding these comments, please contact Gary Jordan at (919)
856-4520 extension 32.
Pete 13eril-amin
Ecological Services Supervisor
cc: Chris Militscher, USEPA, Raleigh, NC
Travis Wilson, NCWRC, Creedmoor, NC
Nicole Thomson, NCDWQ, Raleigh, NC
O?O?WAT?RpG

February 9, 2005
Dr. Gregory J. Thorpe, PhD., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina, 27699-1548
Dear Dr. Thorpe:
Re: 401 Water Quality Certification Pursuant to Section 401 of the Federal Clean Water Act for the Proposed
Widening of US 15-501 from north of SR 2294 (Mt. Moriah Road) to south of SR 1116 (Garrett Road)
Durham County, TIP No. U-4012, State Project No. 8.1352301, Federal Aid Project No. NHF-15(8).
WQC Project No. 042000
Attached hereto is a copy of Certification No. 3500 issued to The North Carolina Department of Transportation
dated February 9, 2005.
If we can be of further assistance, do not hesitate to contact us.
Attachments
Sincerely,
Alan W. Klimek,
Director
cc: Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Mr. Eric Alsmeyer, Corps of Engineers Raleigh Field Office
Mr. Christopher Militscher, US EPA, Region IV
Mr. Jon Nance, PE, Division 5 Engineer, 2612 N. Duke St., Durham, NC 27704
Mr. Chris Murray, Division 5 Environmental Officer, 2612 N. Duke St., Durham, NC 27704
Mr. Matt Haney, ONE, 2728-168 Capital Blvd., Parker Lincoln Bldg., Raleigh, NC 27604
Mr. William Gilmore, Ecosystem Enhancement Program
NCDWQ Raleigh Regional Office
Central Files
File Copy
One
NhCarolina
Transportation Permitting Unit Naturally
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone: [phone] / FAX [phone] / Internet: htta://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
APPROVAL OF 401 Water Quality Certification and ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS
THIS CERTIFICATION is issued in conformity with the requirements of Section 401 Public Laws 92-500 and
95-217 of the United States and subject to the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (DWQ) Regulations in 15
NCAC 2H, Section .0500 The project shall be constructed pursuant to the application dated received December 16,
2004, to widen US 15-501 from north of SR 2294 (Mt. Moriah Road) to south of SR 1116 (Garrett Road), Durham
County. The approved design is that submitted in your application dated received December 16, 2004, This
certification authorizes the NCDOT to impact 0.71 acres of jurisdictional wetlands, permanently impact 164 linear
feet of stream, temporarily impact 0.02 acres of stream and temporarily impact 0.19 acres of jurisdictional wetlands
in Durham County. The authorized impacts are as described below:
Wetland Im acts in the Ca a Fear River Basin
Site Fill
(ac) Fill (temporary)
(ac) Excavation
(ac) Mechanized Clearing
(ac) Hand Clearing
(ac)
1 LSTA 70+58 0.376 0.194 0.331
Total 0.376 0.194 0.331
Surface Water Impacts in the 'ape Fear River Basin
Site Temporary Fill in Surface
Water (ac) Permanent Stream
Impacts (ft) Temporary Stream
Impacts (ft)
1 L STA 70+58 0.02
1 L STA 77+89 164
Total 0.02 164
The application provides adequate assurance that the discharge of fill material into the waters of the Cape Fear River
Basin in conjunction with the proposed development will not result in a violation of applicable Water Quality
Standards and discharge guidelines. Therefore, the State of North Carolina certifies that this activity will not violate
the applicable portions of Sections 301, 302, 303, 306, 307 of PL 92-500 and PL 95-217 if conducted in accordance
with the application and conditions hereinafter set forth.
This approval is only valid for the purpose and design that you submitted in your application dated received
December 16, 2004, as described in the Public Notice. Should your project change, you are required to notify the
DWQ and submit a new application. If the property is sold, the new owner must be given a copy of this
Certification and approval letter, and is thereby responsible for complying with all the conditions. If any additional
wetland impacts, or stream impacts, for this project (now or in the future) exceed one acre or 150 linear feet,
respectively, additional compensatory mitigation may be required as described in 15A NCAC 2H.0506 (h) (6) and
(7). For this approval to remain valid, you are required to comply with all the conditions listed below. In addition,
you should obtain all other federal, state or local permits before proceeding with your project including (but not
limited to) Sediment and Erosion control, Coastal Stormwater, Non-discharge and Water Supply watershed
regulations. This Certification shall expire three years from the date of the cover letter from DWQ or on the same
day as the expiration date of the corresponding Corps of Engineers Permit, whichever is sooner.
Condition(s) of Certification:
1. Construction will be conducted in such a manner as to prevent a significant increase in turbidity outside
the area of construction or construction-related discharge. Erosion and sediment control practices must be
in full compliance with all specifications governing the proper design, installation and operation and
maintenance of such Best Management Practices in order to assure compliance with the appropriate
turbidity water quality standard.
a. The erosion and sediment control measures for the project must equal or exceed the proper design,
installation, operation and maintenance outlined in the most recent version of the North Carolina Sediment
and Erosion Control Planning and Design Manual. These devices shall be maintained on all construction
sites, borrow sites, and waste pile (spoil) projects, including contractor-owned or leased borrow pits
associated with the project.
b. For borrow pit sites, the erosion and sediment control measures must equal or exceed the proper
design, installation, operation and maintenance outlined in the most recent version of the North Carolina
Surface Mining Manual. The reclamation measures and implementation must comply with the
reclamation in accordance with the requirements of the Sedimentation Pollution Control Act.
2. All sediment and erosion control measures shall not be placed in wetlands or waters to the maximum
extent practicable. If placement of sediment and erosion control devices in wetlands and waters is
unavoidable, they shall be removed and the natural grade restored after the Division of Land Resources
has released the project;
3. If an environmental document is required, this Certification is not valid until a FONSI
or ROD is issued by the State Clearinghouse. All water quality-related conditions of the FONSI or ROD
shall become conditions of this Certification;
4. No live or fresh concrete shall come into contact with waters of the state until the concrete has hardened.
5. There shall be no excavation from or waste disposal into jurisdictional wetlands or waters associated with
this permit without appropriate modification of this permit. Should waste or borrow sites be located in
wetlands or stream, compensatory mitigation will be required since it is a direct impact from road
construction activities.
6. Upon completion of the project, the NCDOT shall complete and return the enclosed "Certification of
Completion Form" to notify DWQ when all work included in the 401 Certification has been completed.
The responsible party shall complete the attached form and return it to the 401/Wetlands Unit of the
Division of Water Quality upon completion of the project.
7. Placement of culverts and other structures in waters, streams, and wetlands must be placed below the
elevation of the streambed, unless otherwise authorized by this certification, to allow low flow passage of
water and aquatic life unless it can be shown to DWQ that providing passage would be impractical.
Design and placement of culverts and other structures including temporary erosion control measures shall
not be conducted in a manner that may result in dis-equilibrium of wetlands or streambeds or banks,
adjacent to or upstream and down stream of the above structures. The applicant is required to provide
evidence that the equilibrium shall be maintained if requested in writing by DWQ.
8. Compensatory mitigation for impacts to 0.71 acres of jurisdictional wetlands shall be done. Total
mitigation shall be provided as described below:
Offsite Compensatory Mitigation
Compensatory mitigation for the unavoidable impacts to 0.71 acres of riverine wetlands in the
Hydrologic Cataloging Unit 030030002 of the Cape Fear River Basin, associated with the
proposed project shall be provided by the Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP), as
outlined in the letter dated 9 December 2004, and in accordance with the Memorandum of
Agreement (MOA) between the State of North Carolina and the US Army Corps of Engineers
signed on July 22, 2003
9. Compensatory mitigation for impacts to 164 linear feet of streams shall be done at a replacement ratio of
1:1. Applying a replacement ratio of 1:1, total mitigation for 164 linear feet of streams shall be provided
as described below:
Offsite Compensatory Mitigation
Compensatory mitigation for the unavoidable impacts to 164 linear feet of streams in the
Hydrologic Cataloging Unit 03030002 associated with the proposed project shall be provided
by the Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP), as outlined in the letter dated 9 December
2004, and in accordance with the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the State of
North Carolina and the US Army Corps of Engineers signed on July 22, 2003.
10. During the construction of the project, no staging of equipment of any kind is permitted in waters of the
U.S.
11. All temporary fills in wetlands and surface waters shall be removed upon completion of the project. In
addition, the post-construction removal of any temporary bridge structures or fill will need to return the
project site to its preconstruction contours and elevations. The revegetation of the impacted areas with
appropriate native species will be required.
12. The dimension, pattern and profile of the stream above and below the crossing should not be modified by
widening the stream channel or reducing the depth of the stream. Disturbed floodplains and streams
should be restored to natural geomorphic conditions.
13. Any riprap used must not interfere with thalweg performance and aquatic life passage during low flow
conditions.
14. All mechanized equipment operated near surface waters must be regularly inspected and maintained to
prevent contamination of stream waters from fuels, lubricants, hydraulic fluids, or other toxic materials.
15. Discharging hydroseed mixtures and washing out hydroseeders and other equipment in or adjacent to
surface waters is prohibited.
16. Two copies of the final construction drawings shall be furnished to NCDWQ prior to the pre-construction
meeting. Written verification shall be provided to the NC Division of Water Quality that the final
construction drawings comply with the attached permit drawings contained in your application dated July
22, 2004.
17. The outside buffer, wetland or water boundary located within the construction corridor approved by this
authorization shall be clearly marked by highly visible fencing prior to any land disturbing activities.
Impacts to areas within the fencing are prohibited unless otherwise authorized by this certification.
18. NCDOT, and its authorized agents, shall conduct its activities in a manner consistent with State water
quality standards (including any requirements resulting from compliance with §303(d) of the Clean Water
Act) and any other appropriate requirements of State law and Federal law. If DWQ determines that such
standards or laws are not being met (including the failure to sustain a designated or achieved use) or that
State or federal law is being violated, or that further conditions are necessary to assure compliance, DWQ
may reevaluate and modify this certification to include conditions appropriate to assure compliance with
such standards and requirements in accordance with 15A NCAC 2H.0507(d). Before modifying the
certification, DWQ shall notify NCDOT and the US Army Corps of Engineers, provide public notice in
accordance with 15A NCAC 2H.0503 and provide opportunity for public hearing in accordance with 15A
NCAC 2H.0504. Any new or revised conditions shall be provided to NCDOT in writing, shall be
provided to the United States Army Corps of Engineers for reference in any permit issued pursuant to
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, and shall also become conditions of the 404 Permit for the project.
19. A copy of this Water Quality Certification shall be posted on the construction site at all times. In addition,
the Water Quality Certification and all subsequent modifications, if any, shall be maintained with the
Division Engineer and the on-site project manager.
20. DOT shall schedule a preconstruction meeting for this project prior to incurring any impacts in
jurisdictional waters including wetlands. The Division of Water Quality shall be notified a minimum of
30 days prior to the preconstruction conference.
21. Culverts that are less than 48-inch in diameter should be buried to a depth equal to or greater than 20% of
their size to allow for aquatic life passage, unless otherwise authorized by this certification. Culverts that
are 48-inch in diameter or larger should be buried at least 12 inches below the stream bottom to allow
natural stream bottom material to become established in the culvert following installation and to provide
aquatic life passage during periods of low flow. These measurements must be based on natural thalweg
depths.
22. There shall be no excavation from or waste disposal into jurisdictional wetlands or waters associated with
this permit without appropriate modification of this permit. Should waste or borrow sites be located in
wetlands or stream, compensatory mitigation will be required since it is a direct impact from road
construction activities.
23. Any violations, during the construction of the approved project, of this 401 Water Quality Certification or
the North Carolina State Water Quality Standards as defined in 15A NCAC 213 .0200 Rules, shall be
reported immediately to the North Carolina Division of Water Quality.
24. Pursuant to NCAC15A 2B.0233(6), sediment and erosion control devices shall not be placed in Zone 1 of
any Neuse Buffer without prior approval by the NCDWQ. At this time, the NCDWQ has approved no
sediment and erosion control devices in Zone 1, outside of the approved project impacts, anywhere on this
project. Moreover, sediment and erosion control devices shall be allowed in Zone 2 of the buffers
provided that Zone 1 is not compromised and that discharge is released as diffuse flow.
Violations of any condition herein set forth may result in revocation of this Certification and may result
in criminal and/or civil penalties. This Certification shall become null and void unless the above
conditions are made conditions of the Federal 404 and/or Coastal Area Management Act Permit. This
Certification shall expire upon the expiration of the 404 or CAMA permit.
If this Certification is unacceptable to you have the right to an adjudicatory hearing upon written request within sixty
(60) days following receipt of this Certification. This request must be in the form of a written petition conforming to
Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes and filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings, P.O. Box
27447, Raleigh, N.C. 27611-7447. If modifications are made to an original Certification, you have the right to an
adjudicatory hearing on the modifications upon written request within sixty (60) days following receipt of the
Certification. Unless such demands are made, this Certification shall be final and binding.
This the 9`h day of February 2005
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
Alan W. Klimek, P.E.
Director
WQC No. 3500

`o
kzooa
?Y yr?
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
December 13, 2004
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Field Office
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road
Suite 120
Raleigh, NC 27615
ATTN: Mr. Eric Alsmeyer
NCDOT Coordinator
o c?c??od? p
DEC 1 6 2004
DENR - WATEP QUALITY
VOLANDS AND STORMINATER BRANCH
LYNDO TIPPETT
SECRETARY
SUBJECT: Individual Permit Application for the widening of US 15-501 from north of SR
2294 (Mt. Moriah Road) to south of SR 1116 (Garrett Road), Durham County,
TIP No. U-4012; State Project No. 8.1352301; Federal Aid Project No. NHF-
15(8). Division 5. $475 to Work Order 8.1352301 (WBS Element 35012.1.1).
L
Dear Sir:
The NCDOT proposes to widen the existing four-lane US 15-501 to a six-lane facility with
divided median from north of SR 2294 (Mt. Moriah Road) to south of SR 1116 (Garrett Road) in
Durham County. US 15-501, both south of SR 2294 and north of SR 1116, is currently a six-
lane facility. The project is approximately 0.9 mile long. The existing bridges over New Hope
Creek will be replaced with 2 bridges approximately 300 feet in length and a minimum 10-foot
vertical clearance. The proposed width of each of the dual bridges is 56 feet, including three 12-
foot travel lanes and 10-foot offsets to both bridge rails. An on-site detour with temporary bridge
will be utilized while the new bridges are constructed in phases.
An additional improvement included as part of this project will be the addition of a second right-
turn lane on the I-40 westbound off-ramp at exit 270 to connect to US 15-501. A portion of SR
1126 (Service Road) to the southeast of US 15-501 and southwest of SR 1116 will also be
removed due to the widening. The remainder of SR 1126 will be removed as part of TIP Project
U-4009. Where space allows, the new outside paved shoulders on both sides of US 15-501 will
be 10 feet thus accommodating bicycle passage. The travel lanes on US 15-501 will be 12 feet
wide. Enclosed please find the ENG 4345 Form, 8 '/2 x 11 drawings, half-sized plan sheets, US
Fish and Wildlife Service concurrence letter, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers wetland data forms,
and EEP confirmation letter. The Environmental Assessment (EA) and Finding of No
Significant Impact (FONSI) are available upon request.
MAILING ADDRESS: LOCATION:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TELEPHONE: [phone] CAPITAL BLVD.
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS FAX: [phone] PARKER LINCOLN BUILDING, SUITE 168
1598 MAIL SERVICE CENTER WEBSITE: WWW.NCDOT.ORG RALEIGH NC 27604
RALEIGH NC 27699-1598

Summary of Impacts: Impacts on jurisdictional areas consist of a total of 0.71 acre of permanent
riverine wetland impacts. There will also be approximately 164 linear feet of jurisdictional
stream impacts. There will also be approximately 0.19 acre of temporary fill in wetlands and
0.02 acre of temporary stream impacts.
Summary of Mitigation: The project has been designed to avoid and minimize impacts to
jurisdictional areas throughout the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and design
processes. Detailed descriptions of these actions are presented elsewhere in this application. We
propose to use the Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) to mitigate for 0.71 acre of
wetland impacts and 164 linear feet of jurisdictional stream impacts.
Purpose and Need
The purpose of the project is to improve traffic flow, level of service, and safety on this section
of US 15-501.
Alternatives: NCDOT investigated several alternatives for this project which were discussed in
detail in Section IV of the EA. Alternative 4 was chosen (see page 10 of the FONSI).
Project Schedule
U-4012 is scheduled to be let to construction on April 19, 2005, with a date of availability of
May 24, 2005.
NEPA Document Status
An EA for U-4012 was approved by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) on July 31,
2002. A FONSI for U-4012 was approved by FHWA on November 25, 2003. The EA explains
the purpose and need for the project, provides a description of the project and characterizes the
social, economic, and environmental effects of the project. Copies of the EA and FONSI have
been provided to the regulatory agencies involved in the approval process. Additional copies
will be provided upon request.
Independent Utility
According to 23 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 771.111(f), "...in order to ensure
meaningful evaluation of alternatives and to avoid commitments to transportation improvements
before they are fully evaluated, the action evaluated... shall:
(1) Connect logical termini and be of sufficient length to address
environmental matters on a broad scope;
(2) Have an independent utility or independent significance, i.e., be usable and
be a reasonable expenditure even if no additional transportation
improvements in the area are made; and,
(3) Not restrict consideration of alternatives for other reasonably foreseeable
transportation improvements."
2/8
1
The proposed project will connect a six-lane section of US 15-510 to a six-lane section of US 15-
501. The locations of the proposed project's termini have been coordinated with other
programmed TIP projects in the area. The locations of this project's termini do not preclude the
development and assessment of multiple alternates for other programmed TIP projects in the
area. In this regard, the proposed project demonstrates logical termini and independent utility.
This project can stand alone as a functioning project and is designed to be compatible with other
TIP projects in the area. The environmental impacts of the other projects will be fully evaluated
in separate environmental documents. NCDOT has determined this project meets the criteria set
forth in 23 CFR 771.111(f).
Resource Status
Delineations: Field work for the wetland delineation was conducted during August 2000 by
NCDOT biologists using the criteria specified in the 1987 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE) Wetland Delineation Manual. A jurisdictional wetland verification was conducted by
USACE on October 4, 2000. In addition to the delineations, the streams were characterized and
data recorded on both the NCDWQ Stream Classification Form and the USACE Intermittent
Channel Evaluation Form. The following characterization of the jurisdictional sites summarizes
the August 2000 wetland delineation including the data form, aforementioned forms, and field
notes. The jurisdictional impacts including fill and mechanized clearing are summarized below.
Permanent Jurisdictional Impacts (Section 404)
Site Station Wetland Impacts (ac) Stream Impacts (ft)
1 L Sta. 70+58 0.71 0
1 L Sta. 77+89 0 164
Total 0.71 164
Wetlands: Approximately 0.71 acre of wetlands will be permanently impacted due to roadway
fill to accommodate the widening and 0.19 acre of wetlands will be temporarily impacted due to
the construction of the temporary detour.
The vegetated wetlands identified in the study corridor are of the following Cowardin
classifications:
PEM1 SS 1 B-palustrine, emergent, persistent, scrub-shrub, broad-leaved deciduous, saturated
PEM213-palustrine, emergent, nonpersistent, saturated
PEM2FO1 B-palustrine, emergent, nonpersistent, forested, broad-leaved deciduous, saturated
PFO1B-palustrine, forested, broad-leaved deciduous, saturated
These wetlands are in a piedmont alluvial forest plant community. The DWQ scores for these
wetlands range from 20-78.
3/8
E7j
The FONSI denoted 0.41 ac of permanent wetland impacts. This estimate did not account for
mechanized clearing impacts in wetlands. The final estimate of 0.71 ac of permanent wetland
impacts accounts for impacts from fill and mechanized clearing.
Streams: Approximately 164 feet of Mud Creek, a tributary to New Hope Creek, will be
permanently impacted due to the culvert extension and 0.02 acre of New Hope Creek will be
temporarily impacted due to the installation of coffer dams to remove the existing bridge piers.
Both of these streams are perennial. The project corridor is contained within USGS Hydrologic
Unit 03030002, which encompasses the New Hope Creek drainage.
Protected Species
Plants and animals with federal classifications of Endangered, Threatened, Proposed Endangered,
and Proposed Threatened are protected under provisions of Section 7 and Section 9 of the
Endangered Species Act. As of January 29, 2003, a total of three federally-protected species are
listed for Durham County (Table 1).
Table 1. Federally-protected species for Durham County
Scientific Name Common Name Status Biological Conclusion
Haliaeetus leucocephalus Bald eagle Threatened (proposed No effect
for delisting)
Echinacea laevigata Smooth Endangered May affect, not likely
coneflower to adversely affect
Rhus michauxii Michaux's Endangered May affect, not likely
sumac to adversely affect
A Biological Conclusion of "No Effect" for the bald eagle was issued in several documents,
including the EA. This conclusion was based on the fact that there is no suitable habitat present
for bald eagle in the project area. The last survey for smooth coneflower and Michaux's sumac
was done in July 2003. Habitat is present for both of these species, but neither species were
observed during the surveys. The Natural Heritage Program (NHP) database does not denote any
occurrence of smooth coneflower or Michaux's sumac within 1 mile of the project. The U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) concurred with a biological conclusion of "May Affect, Not
Likely to Adversely Affect" for smooth coneflower and Michaux's sumac in a letter dated
November 18, 2003.
Cultural Resources
Compliance Guidelines: This project is subject to compliance with Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, and implemented by the Advisory Council on
Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified as 36 CFR Part
800. Section 106 requires Federal agencies to take into account the effect of their undertakings
(federally-funded, licensed, or permitted) on properties included in or eligible for inclusion in the
4/8

National Register of Historic Places and to afford the Advisory Council a reasonable opportunity
to comment on such undertakings.
Historic Architecture: In their memo dated June 16, 2000, the State Historic Preservation Office
(HPO) did not recommend historic architecture surveys for the project and stated that they were
not aware of any historic properties that would be affected by the project. A copy of the memo is
included in the appendix of the EA.
Archaeology: The HPO, in the same memo mentioned above, recommended that no
archaeological investigation be conducted in connection with this project. The HPO stated that it
is unlikely that any archaeological resources that may be eligible for inclusion in the National
Register of Historic Places will be affected by the project construction.
FEMA Compliance
New Hope Creek and Mud Creek are involved with a FEMA Detailed Flood Insurance Study.
The water surface elevation has been reduced substantially at the New Hope Creek crossing since
the proposed bridges have been lengthened.
Wild and Scenic River System
The project will not impact any Designated Wild and Scenic Rivers or any rivers included in the
list of study rivers (Public Law 90-542, as amended).
Indirect and Cumulative Impacts
No Indirect and Cumulative Impact study was done for this project. Indirect and cumulative
impacts from the project will be minimal as the transportation improvements will not provide
access to previously undeveloped land or provide any new interchanges.
Utilities
There are underground telephone cable relocations that will need to occur near Bridge No. 21.
These relocations will be done using directional bore methods to minimize impacts.
There will be impacts to wetland areas as a result of relocating Duke Power transmission towers.
A path approximately 68 feet wide and 1,500 feet long will need to be cleared to relocate the
towers and aerial transmission lines. Only 1,000 feet of the proposed cleared path will be inside
wetland areas. Therefore, approximately 1.6 acres of hand clearing (no grubbing) will occur in
wetland areas. Also, four new transmission towers are proposed. Each tower's base is 30 feet by
30 feet. Each tower will be inside a wetland area. Therefore, approximately 0.08 acre of
wetlands will be impacted as a result of these towers.
Mitigation Options
The Corps of Engineers has adopted, through the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), a
wetland mitigation policy that 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 the Waters of the United States. Mitigation of wetland and surface water impacts has
been defined by the CEQ to include: avoiding impacts, minimizing impacts, rectifying impacts,
5/8

reducing impacts over time, and compensating for impacts (40 CFR 1508.20). Executive Order
11990 (Protection of Wetlands) and Department of Transportation Order 5660.1A (Preservation
of the Nations Wetlands), emphasize protection of the functions and values provided by
wetlands. These directives require that new construction in wetlands be avoided as much as
possible and that all practicable measures are taken to minimize or mitigate impacts to wetlands.
AVOIDANCE AND MINIMIZATION: The NCDOT is committed to incorporating all
reasonable and practicable design features to avoid and minimize jurisdictional impacts, and to
provide full compensatory mitigation of all remaining, unavoidable jurisdictional impacts.
Avoidance measures were taken during the planning and NEPA compliance stages; minimization
measures were incorporated as part of the project design.
By the very nature of this project (widening), the ability to avoid and minimize impacts is
limited. However, avoidance and minimization have been incorporated into the preliminary
design as far as practicable. The decision was made to pursue a symmetrical widening
alignment, due to the existing horizontal alignment. One lane is being added in each direction on
the outside of the existing lanes because not enough room exists in the median for the new lanes.
Impacts to the wetlands and surface waters will be minimized to the extent practicable by:
temporary silt fences, earth berms, and temporary ground cover during construction
enforcement of sedimentation and erosion control Best Management Practices for the
protection of surface waters and wetlands
reduction of clearing and grubbing activity in and adjacent to water bodies and wetlands
use of timber mats
2:1 fill slopes
the temporary fill in wetlands will be removed and the area graded to current existing depth
- preformed scour holes are proposed near the bridge crossing to minimize impacts to the water
quality and aquatic life in New Hope Creek
Wildlife Crossing
After coordinating with the public and the environmental regulatory agencies, NCDOT has
committed to constructing bridges 300 feet in length and a minimum of 10 feet in vertical
clearance over New Hope Creek to provide safe passage of wildlife under the bridges. The
original design proposed to construct bridges 205 feet in length over New Hope Creek. NCDOT
has also committed to installing high fencing (10 feet) along all four quadrants of New Hope
Creek parallel to US 15-501 to provide safe passage of wildlife in this area.
The permanent and temporary bridges over New Hope Creek will span the stream. This serves to
avoid impacts to this surface water. However, the roadway widening cannot avoid adjacent
wetlands along the roadway since wetlands are located on both sides. The proposed alternative
will greatly expand the area underneath the bridges available for wildlife passage, thus
6/8
1
minimizing impacts to wildlife. The proposed high fencing and deer ramps will also serve to
channel wildlife to cross underneath the bridges.
COMPENSATION: The primary emphasis of the compensatory mitigation is to reestablish a
condition that would have existed if the project were not built. As previously stated, mitigation
is limited to reasonable expenditures and practicable considerations related to highway operation.
Mitigation is generally accomplished through a combination of methods designed to replace
wetland functions and values lost as a result of construction of the project. These methods
consist of creation of new wetlands from uplands, borrow pits, and other non-wetland areas;
restoration of wetlands; and enhancement of existing wetlands. Where such options may not be
available, or when existing wetlands and wetland-surface water complexes are considered to be
important resources worthy of preservation, consideration is given to preservation as at least one
component of a compensatory mitigation proposal.
FHWA STEP DOWN COMPLIANCE: All compensatory mitigation must be in
compliance with 23 CFR Part 777.9, "Mitigation of Impacts" that describes the actions
that should be followed to qualify for Federal-aid highway funding. This process is
known as the FHWA "Step Down" procedures:
1. Consideration must be given to mitigation within the right-of-way and should
include the enhancement of existing wetlands and the creation of new wetlands in
the highway median, borrow pit areas, interchange areas and along the roadside.
2. Where mitigation within the right-of-way does not fully offset wetland losses,
compensatory mitigation may be conducted outside the right-of-way including
enhancement, creation, and preservation.
Based upon the agreements stipulated in the "Memorandum of Agreement Among the North
Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, the North Carolina Department of
Transportation, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District" (MOA), it is
understood that the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) will assume responsibility for satisfying the federal
Clean Water Act compensatory mitigation requirements for NCDOT projects that are listed in
Exhibit 1 of the subject MOA during the EEP transition period which ends on June 30, 2005.
Since U-4012 is listed in Exhibit 1, the necessary compensatory mitigation to offset unavoidable
impacts to waters that are jurisdictional under the federal Clean Water Act will be provided by
the EEP. The offsetting mitigation will derive from an inventory of assets already in existence
within the same 8-digit cataloguing unit. The Department has avoided and minimized impacts to
jurisdictional resources to the greatest extent possible as described above. The remaining,
unavoidable impacts to 0.71 acre of jurisdictional wetlands and 164 feet of jurisdictional streams
will be offset by compensatory mitigation provided by the EEP program.
7/8
I
Regulatory Approvals
Application is hereby made for a Section 404 Individual Permit as required for the above-
mentioned activities. By copy of this letter, we are also requesting a 401 Water Quality
Certification. In compliance with Section 143-215.3D(e) of the NCAC we will provide $475 to
act as payment for processing the Section 401 permit application as previously noted in this
application (see Subject line). Seven copies of the application are being provided to the North
Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality, for their
review.
Thank you for your assistance with this project. If you have any questions or need any
additional information about this project, please contact Mr. Matt Haney at [phone].
Sincerely,
I ?
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Environmental Management Director,
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
GJT/mmh
Enclosure
w/attachment
Ms. Beth Harmon, EEP
Mr. John Hennessy, NCDWQ (7 copies)
Mr. Travis Wilson, NCWRC
Ms. Becky Fox, USEPA - Whittier, NC
Mr. Ronald Mikulak, USEPA - Atlanta, GA
Mr. Gary Jordan, USFWS
Dr. David Chang, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr. Greg Perfetti, P.E., Structure Design
Mr. Jon Nance, P.E., Division 5 Engineer
Mr. Chris Murray, Division 5 DEO
w/o attachment
Mr. Jay Bennett, P.E., Roadway Design
Mr. Omar Sultan, Programming and TIP
Mr. Art McMillan, P.E., Highway Design
Mr. Mark Staley, Roadside Environmental
Mr. David Franklin, USACE, Wilmington
Ms. Beth Smyre, PDEA
8/8

0 0
r

r r
c T N
d
+ N o p:
7
co +
V1
OD

W W
ry

X a
4 po R' ST

C7
W a
m ? ?_
m O

o r
o
0 o m
D T

rn
rn _
" m a
» N m
--I
C
Y
0 0 j
3 m p
?° co T
m = m
m
z

n
m

O

o

}
{ i
o > >
>
S
a
N f?
?
N (n
n
0 0 m c m
m D
w
w w
w ? ? 7 ' X
R
_ fD
CL -<
T
0

o o z =
d
d c
CA cn m d Cl)
m T
3 m _
it r? v c
@ In
n
D
n
_
?'
3 a a m
a
5 A
8 _
0
v m
(D

-
m
0 m
D
3
?'g N N N ?

O N y

v 3 @
0
APPLICATION FOR DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PERMIT I OMB APPROVAL NO. 0710-003
(33 CFR 325) Expires December 31, 2004
Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 10 hours per response, although the majority of applications should
require 5 hours or less. This includes the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed,
and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of
information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Service Directorate of Information
Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302; and to the Office of Management and Budget,
Paperwork Reduction Project (0710-0003), Washington, DC 20503. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no
person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number.
Please DO NOT RETURN your form to either of those addresses. Completed applications must be submitted to the District Engineer having jurisdiction
over the location of the proposed activity.
PRIVACY ACT STATEMENT
Authority: Rivers and Harbors Act, Section 10, 33 USC 403: Clean Water Act, Section 404, 33 USC 1344; Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries
Act, 33 USC 1413, Section 103. Principal Purpose: Information provided on this form will be used in evaluating the application for a permit. Routine
Uses: This information may be shared with the Department of Justice and other federal, state, and local government agencies. Submission of
requested information is voluntary, however, if information is not provided the permit application cannot be evaluated nor can a permit be issued.
One set of original drawings or good reproducible copies which show the location and character of the proposed activity must be attached to this
application (see sample drawings and instructions) and be submitted to the District Engineer having jurisdiction over the location of the proposed
activity. An aaolication that is not completed In full will be returned.
ITEMS 1 THRU 4 TO BE ILLED BY THE CORPS
1. APPLICATION NO. 2. FIELD OFFICE CODE 3. DATE RECEIVED 4. DATE APPLICATION COMPLETED
ITEMS BELOW TO BE F LLED BYAPPLICAN
5. APPLICANT'S NAME 8. AUTHORIZED AGENT'S NAME AND TITLE (an agent is not required)
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Project Development & Environmental Analysis
6. APPLICANT'S ADDRESS 9. AGENT'S ADDRESS
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1548
7. APPLICANT'S PHONE NOS. W/AREA CODE 10. AGENT'S PHONE NOS. W/AREA CODE
a. Residence a. Residence
b. Business 919-733-3141 b. Business
11. STATEMENT OF AUTHORIZATION
I hereby authorize, to act in my behalf as my agent in the processing of this application and to fumish, upon
request, supplemental information In support of this permit application.
APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE DATE
NAME, LOCATION, AND DESCRIPTION OR PROJECT OR ACTIVITY
12. PROJECT NAME OR TITLE (see Instructions
Widening of US 15-501 from north of SR 2294 (Mt. Moriah Road) to south of SR 1116 (Garrett Road) in Durham County
13. NAME OF WATERBODY, IF KNOWN (if applicable) 14. PROJECT STREET ADDRESS (if applicable)
New Hope Creek, Mud Creek
15. LOCATION OF PROJECT
Durham NC
COUNTY STATE
16. OTHER LOCATION DESCRIPTIONS, IF KNOWN (see Instructions) Section, Township, Range, Lat/Lon, and/or Accessors's Parcel Number, for example.
See cover letter
17. DIRECTIONS TO THE SITE
See vicinity map associated with permit drawings
ENG FORM 4345, Jul 97 EDITION OF FEB 94 IS OBSOLETE (Proponent: CECW-OR)
8. Nature of Activity (Description of project, include all features)
14 Widening of US 15-501 from north of SR 2294 (Mt. Moriah Road) to south of SR 1116 (Garrett Road) in Durham County. The project is 0.9 mi in length.
A six-lane divided facility with a 30 ft median is proposed. The proposed right of way width for the project is 200 ft.
19. Project Purpose (Describe the reason or purpose of the project, see instructions)
To improve traffic flow, level of service, and safety on this section of US 15-501.
USE BLOCKS 20-22 IF DREDGED AND/OR FILL MATERIAL IS TO BE DISCHARGED
20. Reason(s) for Discharge
Roadway fill, pipe/culvert/bridge construction
21. Type(s) of Material Being Discharged and the Amount of Each Type in Cubic Yards
Roadway fill
22. Surface Area in Acres of Wetlands or Other Waters Filled (see instructions)
Wetland impact: 0.71 ac riverine
Stream impact: 164 ft
23. Is Any Portion of the Work Already Complete? Yes _ No x IF YES, DESCRIBE THE COMPLETED WORK
24. Addresses of Adjoining Property Owners, Lessees, Etc., Whose Property Adjoins the Waterbody (If more than can be entered here, please attach a supplemental list).
See listing of property owners associated with permit drawings
25. List of Other Certifications or Approvals/Denials Received from other Federal, State, or Local Agencies for Work Descri bed in This Application.
AGENCY TYPE APPROVAL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER DATE APPLIED DATE APPROVED DATE DENIED
Would include but is not restricted to zoning, building, and flood plain permits
26. Application is hereby made for a permit or permits to authorize the work described in this application. I certify that the information in this application is
complete and accurate. I further certify that I possess the authority to undertake the work described herein or am acting as the duly authorized agent
of the applicant.
SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT DATE SIGNATURE OF AGENT DATE
The application must be signed by the person who desires to undertake the proposed activity (applicant) or it may be signed by a duly authorized
agent if the statement in block 11 has been filled out and signed.
18 U.S.C. Section 1001 provides that: Whoever, in any manner within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States knowingly
and willfully falsifies, conceals, or covers up any trick, scheme, or disguises a material fact or makes any false, fictitious or fraudulent statements or
representations or makes or uses any false writing or document knowing same to contain any false, fictitious or fraudulent statements or entry, shall
be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than five years or both.
ENG FORM 4345, Jul 97 EDITION OF FEB 94 IS OBSOLETE (Proponent: CECW-OR)
1
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
U-4012, State Project Date:7/1/04
Durham County Revised 8/24/04
Hydraulics Project Manager: Andrew Nottingham, PE
ROADWAY DESCRIPTION
The project involves the widening of US 15-501 to a six lane facility with divided median
from north of SR 2294 (Mt. Moriah Road) to south of SR 1116 (Garrett Road) in
Durham. The project also includes the addition of a second right turn lane on I-40
westbound off ramp at exit 270. The overall length of the project is 0.97 miles. The
proposed typical section is a 6 lane divided highway shoulder section with a 30-ft.
grassed median. The project will involve replacing the existing 136-ft. long dual bridges
over New Hope Creek with longer bridge structures to accommodate a greenway and
wildlife passage. A temporary detour bridge will be required in order to facilitate
replacement of the bridges over New Hope Creek. The project will also involve
extending an existing 3 @ 9 ft. wide by 10 ft. high reinforced concrete box culvert
(RCBC) on Mud Creek.
ENVIRONMENTAL DESCRIPTION
The project is located in the Cape Fear River Basin. There are two existing stream
crossings on this project. The first crossing is an existing dual bridge over New Hope
Creek. New Hope Creek is classified as Class C NSW waters. The second crossing is a
RCBC on Mud Creek. Mud Creek is also classified as Class C NSW waters. Both
crossings are perennial streams. In the vicinity of the project both creeks share the same
floodplain as Mud Creek connects with New Hope Creek just downstream of the project.
Approximately 240 ft. of existing stream will be impacted due to the project.
Approximately 0.90 acres of wetlands will be impacted due to this project. All of the
wetlands are located in various places of the floodplain of New Hope Creek and Muddy
Creek both up and downstream of the project.
BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES AND MAJOR STRUCTURES
Best Management Practices (BMPs) and measures used on the project are an attempt to
reduce the stormwater impacts to the receiving streams due to erosion and runoff. The
primary BMP is the use of grassed roadway ditches and shoulders, as opposed to a curb
and gutter roadway system. Rip rapped ditches were used where warranted to control
erosion. Ditches were ended in flat floodplain areas where possible to allow dispersal
and infiltration. Preformed scour holes were used in floodplain areas to attenuate and
disperse flow. No bridge deck drains will be used directly over the surface water.
Shoulder berm gutter was used in high fill slope areas with 2:1 slopes in order to prevent
erosion of the steep slopes from the roadway drainage runoff.
f
Stream Relocations
None
Brid es
Station 70+22 -L-
The existing 136-ft. long dual bridges on US 15-501 over New Hope Creek will be
removed and replaced with new dual bridges 300 ft. in length. The new bridges will be
4-span steel I-beam bridges, which will span the water. Temporary cofferdams will be
required around the existing piers in order to dewater the site for pier removal.
Temporary deck drains will be required on the eastbound lane bridge during construction
due to minimum shoulder widths being used in the traffic phasing. The deck drains will
be connected into a temporary 16" PVC pipe that will discharge onto the riprap spill
through slope away from the creek. The deck drains and 16" PVC pipe will be removed
in the final phase.
Station 23+25 -Detl-
The proposed 166 ft. long temporary detour bridge over New Hope Creek will span the
creek with no interior bents in the creek.
Culvert
Station 77+89 -L-
The existing 3 @ 9 ft. wide by 10 ft. high RCBC will be extended on the inlet and outlet
ends to accommodate the roadway widening. 2-ft. high sills will be installed in the two
outer barrels on the inlet end in order to maintain normal channel flow through the
middle barrel. Flood plain benches will be constructed at the inlet and outlet ends of the
culvert in order to maintain normal channel width at the inlet and outlet of the culvert.
The stream will be temporarily diverted near the culvert entrance and outlet to allow for
all dry construction.

12/1/2003
FINAL MINUTES OF INTERAGENCY HYDRAULIC DESIGN
REVIEW MEETING FOR PROJECT U-4012, DURHAM COUNTY
Held on 10/24/03
Team Members: Andrew Nottingham-NCDOT Hydraulics (Present)
Eric Alsmeyer-USACE (Present)
John Hennessy-NCDWQ (Present)
Gary Jordan-USFWS (Absent)
Travis Wilson-NCWRC (Absent/provided written comments)
Chris Militscher-EPA (Absent)
Matt Haney-NCDOT PDEA (Absent)
Ron Allen-NCDOT Roadway Design (Present)
Participants: Marc Shown-NCDOT Hydraulics
Elizabeth Lusk-NCDOT PDEA-ONE
Jason Davis-NCDOT Hydraulics
Marc Cheek-NCDOT Structures Design
Bryan Key-NCDOT Roadway Design
Beth Smyre-NCDOT PDEA
Jerry Beard-NCDOT Hydraulics
Rick Nelson-NCDOT Bridge Construction
Mark Staley-NCDOT Roadside Environmental
U-4012
DOT began the meeting with a brief overview of the project. The project involves
widening US-15-501 north of Mt. Moriah Rd. to south of Garrett Rd. The existing 135
feet dual lane bridges over New Hope Creek will be replace with 300 feet long dual
bridges and the existing 3 @ 9 feet by 10 feet reinforced concrete box culvert (RCBC) on
Mud Creek will be extended approximately 26 feet upstream and 28 feet downstream.
i
The majority of the discussion centered on the construction of the bridges over New
Hope Creek.
DOT noted that the temporary detour bridge over New Hope Creek could be specified in
the plans to span the creek but that it would most likely require a wider bridge. Based on
the present traffic phasing this may require that the temporary detour be shifted further
from the proposed bridge which would increase wetland impacts. If the traffic phasing
could be change so that all of the traffic could be placed on the North bound bridge once
it is complete then the detour would not have to be shifted since it would be removed
while they are constructing the South bound bridge. DOT will investigate the possibility
to change the traffic phasing.
1
DOT noted that a minimum distance of 30 feet from the edge of the bridge deck would be
required on the south side of the bridge to set the girders. DOT also noted that access
would be needed on the south side of the roadway for a distance approximately 75 feet
back from the proposed end bents of the bridge. It was noted that the width of the access
should not extend beyond the existing waterline easement on the south side (downstream
side) of the bridge. This would allow the approach fill to be placed on each end of the
bridge.
DOT noted that timber mats could be used to access the site through wetland areas to get
to the interior bents and that causeways would likely not be needed. USACOE and DWQ
noted that the use of timber mats and method of clearing should be specified in the
permit.
DOT noted that the existing high-powered utility lines on the west side of the creek might
cause a construction problem since the bridge is being lengthened directly underneath
them. DOT noted that it may be possible to build the bridge with the lines in place but it
would likely require a temporary work bridge in the creek to access the interior bents
during construction. DOT will investigate if the bridge can be built with the lines in place
or if the lines can be moved. DWQ noted that if the utility lines need to be relocated and
there are wetland impacts associated with it they should be included in the permit.
DOT noted that no deck drains were needed on the bridge. Since the meeting DOT has
noted that there may be a need for temporary deck drains during construction if four lanes
of traffic are put on the eastbound bridge.
USACOE noted that the wetland impacts due to the detour could be considered
temporary and that once the detour fill is removed the ground should be ripped and
replanted.
DWQ noted that preformed scour holes should be placed outside of wetland areas.
NCWRC asked if sills were recommended in the culvert at Mud Creek. DOT noted that
sills would be used on the culvert at Mud Creek.
DOT will investigate all items noted above and present them during the permit drawing
review meeting.
1
8/24/2004
FINAL MINUTES OF INTERAGENCY PERMIT DRAWING
REVIEW MEETING FOR PROJECT U-4012, DURHAM COUNTY
Held on 7/21/04
Team Members: Andrew Nottingham-NCDOT Hydraulics (Present)
Eric Alsmeyer-USACE (Present)
Nicole Thomson-NCDWQ (Present)
Gary Jordan-USFWS (Absent)
Travis Wilson-NCWRC (Present)
Chris Militscher-EPA (Absent)
Matt Haney-NCDOT PDEA (Present)
Ron Allen-NCDOT Roadway Design (Absent)
Tracey Parrot-NCDOT Division 5 (Present)
Participants: Marc Shown-NCDOT Hydraulics
David Smith -NCDOT Preconstruction
Jason Davis-NCDOT Hydraulics
John Duggins-NCDOT Structures Design
Bryan Key-NCDOT Roadway Design
Beth Smyre-NCDOT PDEA
Rick Nelson-NCDOT Bridge Construction
Mark Staley-NCDOT Roadside Environmental
Chris Murray-NCDOT Division 5
John Henessy-NCDWQ
David Chang-NCDOT Hydraulics
U-4012
NCDOT Hydraulics noted that the description of the bridge in the Stormwater
Management Plan should list the bridge as a 4 span structure instead of a 3 span structure.
i
USACOE asked about the temporary stream impact shown for the culvert at site 1. They
noted that the stream impact should be shown as a permanent impact since there will be
rip rap below ordinary high water. The drawings will be changed to reflect this.
NCDOT Construction questioned if building the culvert wings would be considered a
permanent channel impact. USACOE noted that the culvert wings would not be
considered a permanent channel impact unless they effect the stream below the ordinary
highwater mark.
NCDOT Construction also noted that the area around (above and behind) the culvert
wings and headwall is sometimes hard to stabilize and may need to be rip rapped. They
asked if this needed to be shown on the drawings. USACOE noted that it is not a permit

issue as long as it is minimized and stays out of the stream and would not need to be
shown on the drawings. NCDWQ noted the same.
NCDWQ asked why a Preformed Scour Hole was not used at the outlet of the pipe right
of station 66+50 -L-. NCDOT Hydraulics noted that it would conflict with a waterline
located at the outlet of the pipe. NCDOT noted that rip rap would be used at the pipe
outlet to dissipate energy.
USACOE asked about the timber mats in the wetland areas. NCDOT noted that it was
shown where it was anticipated that construction equipment would have to cross wetland
areas to access the bridge site.
NCWRC noted that the project commitment concerning the wildlife fencing should be
included in the permit but that the fencing does not need to be shown on the plans since it
will be done at a later date.
Removal of the existing piers was discussed. It was decided that rip rap would be shown
where the existing piers are to be removed in order to help stabilize the stream bank.
NCWRC noted that flattening the stream bank slopes to 2:1 and lining with rip rap would
be acceptable. This will be shown on the plan and profile views.
USACOE requested that the mechanized clearing impact be reduced right of station
74+00 -L- and that the note about using timber mats in wetlands areas be shown at this
location also. The drawings will be changed to reflect this.
NCDOT questioned if erosion control devices were allowed in wetlands in the
mechanized clearing area. USACOE and NCDWQ noted that if sediment control basins
or silt ditches were needed then they would have to be shown as excavation in wetlands.
NCDOT will coordinate and determine what needs to be used.
USACOE asked if the temporary detour bridge would have any bents in the creek.
NCDOT noted that no bents would be placed in the creek for the detour bridge.

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
0 987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site:
Date:
Applicant?Owner: NC Dom County: bT ;
! ?
S
Investigator: 6 < v L, 'p _ tate:
.
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? es No Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes (Nol
N
Y Transect ID:
t ID:
Pl
Is the area a potential Problem Area? o
es ( o
(If needed, explain on reverse.)
? icnGT A TtlVU
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. 9.
2. - bw Gi EeNvsi< ?? h` cv 10.
3. t '
4. 12.
C cl C -Ad
5. L3 S ci'c U M ,pt f:1t A C 1 13.
tt
6. c/ J -Aac Dc) ?F , i , J / UQt_ 14.
7. ?Clp?Crr C?nadY/?S _ Uf 15.
8 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL. FACW or FAC C?
U
(excluding FAC-).

Remarks: I
uvnnnl nI±V
fl1 V1IV VVV
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
-' Primary Indicators:
_
Aerial Photographs _ Inundated
_
Other _ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
-
No Recorded Data Available
- Water Marks
Drift Lines
_
osits
t De
di
S
p
men
_
e
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Field Observations: _
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water: (in.) _ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _
- Local Soil Survey Date
FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.) _
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:

SOILS
Map Unit Name A I ( c
(Series and Phase): Drainage Class:
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast structure, etc.

Hydric Soil Indicators:
_ Histosol _ Concretions
_ Histic Epipedon _ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor _ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
_ Aquic Moisture Regime /Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
_ Reducing Conditions /Listed on National Hydric Soils List
_ Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:

WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes (Circle) (Circle)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes
Hydric Soils Present? Yes Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes dl 'o
Remarks:
t LJ ek ? a, -- C ?p
171
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
0 987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: U ' ti 0) Date: AUK,. c S, Z 000
Applicant/Owner: C. oT County: ]>,/ .11c• ,t-
Investigator: r Uri State: NC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes No Community ID: A
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? es (,&6) Transect ID: ,?? }(?•?
Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes Plot ID:
(If needed, explain on reverse.)
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
n C .,S O ?
1 . 5 v J5 JI --
? }- f{C,.J'f 9. ( rinSre. (c. rY r / ^' /' °i f C.
r
2. O?Id?•?„ `?(?
a 1
?! 10.
3. ZY 11.
4. 1/Q1r?D?r,U /1ni7ry borGirnil5 --rr'I? 12.
5. F- 16X, a /1 s.T/00n•c. 13.

6. rj ^^JJl
14.

J11 r k 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC
(excluding FAC-). (00
Remarks: ii
????hlrhtn a ?n? ? ?i^"?9rC
r3Ati? C? ?? et f
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
_
_ Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators:
_ Aerial Photographs _ Inundated
Other Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
_
No Recorded Data Available _ Water Marks
Drift Lines
_
Sediment Deposits
_
?Dreinage Patterns in Wetlands
Field Observations: _
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water: f (in.) _ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper.12 Inches
_ Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: --J-(in.) Local Soil Survey Data
_
FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.) _ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:

.l
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase):
Drainage Class:
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell MoistL_ Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
Al /0 2, S /2 10# S-A fe,
-
?1L, /.Sly P? fit.^%ye is

Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol _ Concretions
_ Histic Epipedon _ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
_.. Sulfidio Odor _ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
- Aquic Moisture Regime _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Reducing Conditions
:ZGle
ed or Low-Chroma Colors _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Oth
l
i
i
R
k
(E
y _
er
a
n
emar
xp
n
s)
Remarks:
?tr9f?C 50 i`, (re#e,,e-A4

WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? (f;3) No (Circle) (Circle)
Wetland Hydrology Presentl a No
Hydric Soils Presentl r e No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? ea No
Remarks:
? i
? d
Approved by HQUSACE /

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
0 987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)

Project/Site: (?(- 2 Date:%
Applicant?Owner. ,i jiO1- County: -?
Investigator: ?/w ?{?u? State: ! 1
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Ye?s No Community ID: S 'k-L
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes ( N Transect ID: a 0A, c
Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes %No) Plot ID:
(If needed, explain on reverse.)
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. ?' d? bey * Iackc),-,. T F.4c -o -t r -r,
s.? . S/5 P l C, t-
'F 6C-
2. 44W' r U._ b Y? 9A 7- /?
1 CP . r r L?
lo. /
??
3. GC (?fi'1 ?Clrv??,n G(i?j J T--A(,..)... pp
11. D?.i?c. J .L f t.. Cl4 ) T ?C "`1
- 4. ?l Cc? h?. t t ut 1nA .?? - ?a • t?1w M ?± 12.
I FA(, ?r` 13.
6. 'tr•??S,ne - plc,Dlf.?h F/QCJ 14.
7. b), 15.
e. ??Iti.'1(Clninuvv. ???n{.?Lf 0? 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC
(excluding FAC-).
Remarks:
P c Qu. (p?? e ®? ?J,a? k.I,frcc
5P ec(Pg 'L J
5 ( .
WvnRni nr;v
Recorded Date (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
_
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators:
Aerial Photographs _ Inundated
_
Other _ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
_
No Recorded Data Available
, _ Water Marks
_ Drift Lines
_
_ Sediment Deposits
Field Observations: _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water: (in.) _ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper.12 Inches
_ Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _ Local Soil Survey Data
_ FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.) _ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:

1
SOILS
Map Unit Name
S
i
,
(
er
es and Phase): e
,., r.. 01 Drainage Class: )
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
10 YP 4/"-
?
a A a to YK S73 T rS l t\ ?/? '?'e,-1 O(?? `ice W GI
?, ??R. sip C.la?l
J
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_ Histosol _ Concretions
_ Histlc Epipedon _ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
_ Sulfidic Odor _ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
_ Aquic Moisture Regime _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
_ Reducing Conditions _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List
_ Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:

WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? es No (Circle) (Circle)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 1
Hydric Soils Present? Yes Is this Sampling Point Within a Watland? Yes No
Remarks:
w e-4 (a-?? GI fcC/:1`et c?,r rt0,,
t
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
0 987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: r_i ?l a Date: 8'' S ' a'D
Applicant%Owner: 4,1 41; or County: c„ i
Investigator: State: Al
c
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site?e 49 Community ID: ?r+e 6
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes Transect ID: u r
Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes Plot ID:
(If needed, explain on reverse.)
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1 .? (f ?, I C ?'I VVt^. U ( UV'.c?i(1.^CE'. J?"
(AL-
9.
C-
?? i??-.?.ro?u???tu\?a r`
2. 10.

4. ?Ac,-j1- 12.
5. 13.
6. 14.
7. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC
(excluding FAC-). o 0
Remarks:
ec?„glr? c? of h????r??! I rt ?Q-P c. ae, ut ?' y 1'jP,
Nvnwni nr;v
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
_
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators:
Aerial Photographs _ Inundated
_
Other %/Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
_
No Recorded Data Available _ Water Marks
? Drift Lines
_
/Sediment Deposits
Field Observations: !/Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water: i (in.) Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
',"Water-Stained Leaves
-
Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) Local Soil Survey Data
FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.) _
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
( n
W (-? \r +1,/ ??? ?.?a', OCR y
1 '. ?,• r ? ?r ? '
rr ' ? r T'P .
SOILS
Map Unit Name rr
(Series and Phase):
Drainage Class:
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
D - 2- IV/P1 --q. I ca m'ODY? d, ?-C.- C 1,!L,4
2-12 E I0 cz /fib
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_ Histosol _ Concretions
_ Histic Epipedon _ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor _ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
_ Aquic Moisture Regime _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Reducing Conditions
7' Gle
ed or Low-Chrome Colors _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Oth
(E
l
i
i
R
k
)
y _
er
xp
a
n
n
emar
s
Remarks:

WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? ( Ye.>No (Circle) (Circle)
Wetland Hydrology Present? "YSs No
Hydric Soils Present? es 7Vo Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? l`Y.o
Remarks:
L.,)et (e,,?; CE
?&,r t., M o n t r'. ( r