20070771 Ver 1_Application_20070507

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
G ~~ ~
`-. ^ti ~ V
M,~Y ~
~, ~ ,:,
`~~,My,,~~:: .
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ~ "'~'t'~y
eµ SVVFo
~ ~
.~~.~,.
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
May 1, 2007
N.C. Division of Water Quality
2321 Crabtree Boulevard
Suite 250
Raleigh, NC 27604
ATTENTION: Mr. Rob Ridings
NCDOT Coordinator
Dear Sir:
LYNDO TIPPETT
SECRETARY
o~oa~i
Subject: Neuse Riparian Buffer Authorization Request for the Replacement of Bridge No. 79
over Bloomery Swamp on SR 1001; Wilson County; TIP Project B-4326; Federal Aid
Project No. BRZ-1001 (27); State Project No.8.2342101; WBS 33663.1.1.
Please find enclosed the Preconstruction Notification (PCN), permit drawings, half-size plans, and the
Categorical Exclusion (CE) for the above-mentioned project. The North Carolina Department of
Transportation proposes to replace existing Bridge No. 79 over Bloomery Swamp on SR 1001 in Wilson
County. The project involves replacement of the existing bridge and related approaches with a new
bridge and new approaches. The new bridge will feature two 12-foot lanes with 4-foot nine-inch offsets
for a total bridge width of 36 feet. The project schedule calls for November 20, 2007 let. There are no
proposed permanent or temporary impacts to wetlands or surface waters associated with this project. The
proposed impact due to hand clearing is 0.02 acre.
Impacts to Waters of the United States
General Description: Bloomery Swamp is located in the 03020201 USGS Cataloging Unit of the Neuse
River Basin (Subbasin 030407). The Division of Water Quality (DWQ) has assigned Bloomery Swamp a
Stream Index Number of 27-86-6-(3). DWQ has assigned a best usage classification of WS-IV NSW.
The Bloomery Swamp is not designated as a North Carolina Natural or Scenic River, or as a National
Wild and Scenic River, nor is it listed as a 303(d) stream. No designated Outstanding Resource Waters
(ORW), High Quality Waters (HQW), Water Supply I (WS-I), or Water Supply II (WS-II) waters occur
within 1.0 miles of the project study area.
Permanent Impacts: As stated above, there are no proposed permanent impacts associated with this
project.
Temporary Impacts: As stated above, there are no proposed temporary impacts associated with this
project.
MAILING ADDRESS:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548
TELEPHONE: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
WEBSITE: WWW.NCDOT.ORG
LOCATION:
TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
RALEIGH NC

Hand Clearing: Although considered non jurisdictional impacts under the Clean Water Act, we are
advising the regulatory agencies of the 0.02 acres of hand clearing proposed for project construction.
Utility Impacts: There will be no jurisdictional. impacts due to utilities associated with this project.
Neuse Riparian Buffer Rules
This project lies within the Neuse River Basin; therefore, the regulations pertaining to the Neuse River
Buffer Rules will apply. There are 2,593 square feet of impacts to Zone 1 and 1,981 square feet of
impacts to Zone 2. Of these impacts, 2,353 square feet are considered allowable due to bridge
construction and 2,221 square feet are allowable with mitigation due to roadway construction.
Bridge Demolition
Bridge No. 79 consists of a reinforced concrete deck and railings on timber joists. The structure includes
three spans totaling 53 feet in length. The bents are constructed of timber caps on timber piles. It is
anticipated that all components can be removed without any appreciable debris falling into the water. All
measures will be taken to avoid any temporary fill from entering Waters of the United States. Best
Management Practices for Bridge Demolition and Removal will be implemented.
Avoidance and Minimization
To avoid impacts, NCDOT is replacing Bridge No. 79 in place and utilizing an off-site detour. NCDOT
is also minimizing impacts to surface waters by utilizing longer spans with no bents in the water.
Mitigation
Compensatory mitigation is not proposed for this project. There will be no permanent or temporary
impacts to wetlands or surface waters. Compensatory mitigation is not proposed for riparian buffer
impacts because impacts due to bridges do not require mitigation and the mitigation threshold has not
been exceeded for impacts that are allowable with mitigation.
Federally Protected Species
As of January 29, 2007, the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) lists four federally protected species
for Wilson County. The following table lists these species.
Table 1. Federally Protected Species for Wilson County.
Common Name Scientific Name Status Habitat Conclusion
Bald Ea le Haliaeetus leucoce halus T Y No Effect
Red-cockaded Wood ecker Picoides borealis E N No Effect
Dwarf wed a mussel Alasmidonta heterodon E N No Effect
Michaux's sumac Rhus michauxii E N No Effect
Note: T - Threatened; E -Endangered.
The Biological Conclusion for the Bald eagle has changed from "May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely
Affect" as listed in the CE to "No Effect" after further surveying, conducted on January 26, 2007, and
discussion with Gary Jordan of the USFWS.
2

Project Schedule
The project has a scheduled let of November 20, 2007 with a review date of October 2, 2007.
Regulatory Approvals
Section 404 Permit: This project is being processed by the Federal Highway Administration as a
"Categorical Exclusion" in accordance with 23 CFR 771.115(b). Approval to proceed under Nationwide
Permit 23 was given on February 28, 2006 based on impacts detailed in the CE (Action ID# 200610543).
Section 401 Permit: A written 401 General Certification is not being requested.
Neuse River Basin Buffer Authorization: NCDOT requests that the NC Division of Water Quality review
this application and issue a written approval for a Neuse River Riparian Buffer Authorization.
A copy of this permit application will be posted on the NCDOT website at:
http://www.ncdot.orpJdoh/preconstruct/Qe/neu/permit.html.
If you have .any questions or need additional information, please contact Veronica Barnes at (919) 715-
7232.
Sincerely
~.
(~ Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Environmental Management Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis
W/attachment
Mr. John Hennessy, NCDWQ (5 Copies)
Mr. Travis Wilson, NCWRC
Mr. Gary Jordan, USFWS
Mr. Ron Sechler, NMFS
Mr. Michael Street, NCDMF
Dr. David Chang, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr. Greg Perfetti, P.E., Structure Design
Mr. Victor Barbour, P.E., Project Services Unit
Mr. Mark Staley, Roadside Environmental
Mr. Richard E. Greene , P.E., Division 4 Engineer
Mr. Jamie Shern, Division 4 Environmental Officer
W/o attachment
Mr. Scott McLendon, USACE, Wilmington
Mr. Jay Bennett, P.E., Roadway Design
Mr. Majed Alghandour, P.E., Programming and TIP
Mr. Art McMillan, P.E., Highway Design
Mr. S. Wade Kirby, PDEA
3

Office Use Only: Form Version March OS
USACE Action ID No. DWQ No. 2 ~ O~ Q 7 7 1
(lf any particular item is not applicable to this project, please enter "Not Applicable" or "N/A".)
I. Processing
1. Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project:
^ Section 404 Permit ® Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules
^ Section 10 Permit ^ Isolated Wetland Permit from DWQ
^ 401 Water Quality Certification ^ Express 401 Water Quality Certification
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested:
3. If this notification is solely a courtesy copy because written approval for the 401 Certification
is not required, check here: ^
4. If payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) is proposed
for mitigation of impacts, attach the acceptance letter from NCEEP, complete section VIII,
and check here: ^
5. If your project is located in any of North Carolina's twenty coastal counties (listed on page
4), and the project is within a North Carolina Division of Coastal Management Area of
Environmental Concern (see the top of page 2 for further details), check here: ^
II. Applicant Information
1. Owner/Applicant Information ,
Name: Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D. Environmental Management Director
Mailing Address: 1598 Mail Service Center
Telephone Number: [phone] Fax Number: [phone]
E-mail Address:
2. Agent/Consultant Information (A signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization letter
must be attached if the Agent has signatory authority for the owner/applicant.)
Name:
Company Affiliation:
Mailing Address:
Telephone Number:
E-mail Address:
Fax Number:
Page i of 8

III. Project Information
Attach a vicinity map clearly showing the location of the property with respect to local
landmarks such as towns, rivers, and roads. Also provide a detailed site plan showing property
boundaries and development plans in relation to surrounding properties. Both the vicinity map
and site plan must include a scale and north arrow. The specific footprints of all buildings,
impervious surfaces, or other facilities must be included. If possible, the maps and plans should
include the appropriate USGS Topographic Quad Map and NRCS Soil Survey with the property
boundaries outlined. Plan drawings, or other maps may be included at the applicant's discretion,
so long as the property is clearly defined. For administrative and distribution purposes, the
USACE requires information to be submitted on sheets no larger than 11 by 17-inch format;
however, DWQ may accept paperwork of any size. DWQ prefers full-size construction
drawings rather than a sequential sheet version of the full-size plans. If full-size plans are
reduced to a small scale such that the final version is illegible, the applicant will be informed that
the project has been placed on hold until decipherable maps are provided.
1. Name of project: Replacement of Bridge 79 on SR 1001 over Bloomerv Swamp
2. T.I.P. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only): B-4326
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN): N/A
4. Location
County: Wilson Nearest Town: Wilson
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number): N/A
Directions to site (include road numbers/names, landmarks, etc.): Project is on SR 1001 in
Wilson county, lust north of the NC 210/NC264 Alternate intersection.
Site coordinates (For linear projects, such as a road or utility line, attach a sheet that
separately lists the coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody.)
Decimal Degrees (6 digits minimum): 35.7693 °N 78.0089 °W
6. Property size (acres): N/A
7. Name of nearest receiving body of water: Contentnea Creek
8. River Basin: Neuse River Basin
(Note -this must be one of North Carolina's seventeen designated major river basins. The
River Basin map is available at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/admin/maps/.)
9. Describe the existing conditions on the site and general land use in the vicinity of the project
at the time of this application: The project is located just inside the Wilson City limits and
land use is mostly residential, though there is some forested area.
Page 2 of 8

10. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
The bride will be replaced in place with an off site detour.
11. Explain the purpose of the proposed work: To replace the current bridge, which is
functionally obsolete and structurally deficient because is does not meet the NCDOT Bride
Policy Standards for clear deck width and has a sufficiency rating of 44.5 out of 100.
IV. Prior Project History
If jurisdictional determinations and/or permits have been requested and/or obtained for this
project (including all prior phases of the same subdivision) in the past, please explain. Include
the USACE Action ID Number, DWQ Project Number, application date, and date permits and
certifications were issued or withdrawn. Provide photocopies of previously issued permits,
certifications or other useful information. Describe previously approved wetland, stream and
buffer impacts, along with associated mitigation (where applicable). If this is a NCDOT project,
list and describe permits issued for prior segments of the same T.I.P. project, along with
construction schedules. A Section 404 Nationwide 23 Permit Authorization was issued for
this project bYthe USACE, based on the Categorical Exclusion, on February 28, 2006. The
Action ID # is 200610543.
V. .Future Project Plans
Are any future permit requests anticipated for this project? If so, describe the anticipated work,
and provide justification for the exclusion of this work from the current application.
No
VI. Proposed Impacts to Waters of the United States/Waters of the State
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
wetlands, open water, and stream channels associated with the project. Each impact must be
listed separately in the tables below (e.g., culvert installation should be listed separately from
riprap dissipater pads). Be sure to indicate if an impact is temporary. All proposed impacts,
permanent and temporary, must be listed, and must be labeled and clearly identifiable on an
accompanying site plan. All wetlands and waters, and all streams (intermittent and perennial)
should be shown on a delineation map, whether or not impacts are proposed to these systems.
Wetland and stream evaluation and delineation forms should be included as appropriate.
Photographs maybe included at the applicant's discretion. If this proposed impact is strictly for
wetland or stream mitigation, list and describe the impact in Section VIII below. If additional
space is needed for listing or description, please attach a separate sheet.
1. Provide a written description of the proposed impacts: There will be no permanent or
temporary impacts to wetlands or surface waters. Impacts resulting from hand clearing will
tota10.02 acre.
Page 3 of 8

2. Individually list wetland impacts. Types of impacts include, but are not limited to
mechanized clearing, grading, fill, excavation, flooding, ditching/drainage, etc. For dams,
separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding.

Wetland Impact
Site Number
(indicate on map)

Type of Impact
Type of Wetland
(e.g., forested, marsh,
herbaceous, bog, etc.) Located within
100-year

Floodplain
( es/no) Distance to
Nearest

Stream
(linear feet) Area of
Impact

(acres)
N/A

Total Wetland Impact (acres) 0
3. List the total acreage (estimated) of all existing wetlands on the property:2.4 acres
4. Individually list all intermittent and perennial stream impacts. Be sure to identify temporary
impacts. Stream impacts include, but are not limited to placement of fill or culverts, dam
construction, flooding, relocation, stabilization activities (e.g., cement walls, rip-rap, crib
walls, gabions, etc.), excavation, ditching/straightening, etc. If stream relocation is proposed,
plans and profiles showing the linear footprint for both the original and relocated streams
must be included. To calculate acreage. multiply length X width_ then divide by 43 SfiB
Stream Impact
Number
(indicate on ma)
Stream Name
Type of Impact Perennial or
Intermittent? Average
Stream Width
Before Im act Impact
Length
(linear feet) Area of
Impact
(acres)
N/A

Total Stream Impact (by length and acreage) 0 0
5. Individually list all open water impacts (including lakes, ponds, estuaries, sounds, Atlantic
Ocean and any other water of the U.S.). Open water impacts include, but are not limited to
fill_ excavation_ dred~in~_ flondin~_ draina~e_ hulkheads_ etc_
Open Water Impact

Site Number
(indicate on ma)
Name of Waterbody
(if applicable)

Type of Impact Type of Waterbody

(lake, pond, estuary, sound, bay,
ocean, etc.) Area of

Impact
(acres)
N/A

Total Open Water Impact (acres) 0
Page 4 of 8

6. List the cumulative impact to all Waters of the U.S. resulting from the project:
Stream Impact (acres): 0
Wetland Impact (acres): 0
Open Water Im act (acres): 0
Total Impact to Waters of the U.S. (acres) 0
Total Stream Impact (linear feet): 0
7. Isolated Waters
Do any isolated waters exist on the property? ^ Yes ®No
Describe all impacts to isolated waters, and include the type. of water (wetland or stream) and
the size of the proposed impact (acres or linear feet). Please note that this section only
applies to waters that have specifically been determined to be isolated by the USAGE.
8. Pond Creation
If construction of a pond is proposed, associated wetland and stream impacts should be
included above in the wetland and stream impact sections. Also, the proposed pond should
be described here and illustrated on any maps included with this application.
Pond to be created in (check all that apply): ^ uplands ^ stream ^ wetlands
Describe the method of construction (e.g., dam/embankment, excavation, installation of
draw-down valve or spillway, etc.): N/A
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stormwater requirement, etc.): N/A
Current land use in the vicinity of the pond: N/A
Size of watershed draining to pond: N/A Expected pond surface area: N/A
VII. Impact Justification (Avoidance and Minimization)
Specifically describe measures taken to avoid the proposed impacts. It may be useful to provide
information related to site constraints such as topography, building ordinances, accessibility, and
financial viability of the project. The applicant may attach drawings of alternative, lower-impact
site layouts, and explain why these design options were not feasible. Also discuss how impacts
were minimized once the desired site plan was developed. If applicable, discuss construction
techniques to be followed during construction to reduce impacts. To avoid impacts, NCDOT is
renlacina Bridle No. 79 in place and utilizine an off site detour. NCDOT is also minimizinu
impacts to surface waters by utilizing longer spans with no bents in the water.
VIII. Mitigation
DWQ - In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0500, mitigation may be required by the NC
Division of Water Quality for projects involving greater than or equal to one acre of impacts to
freshwater wetlands or greater than or equal to 150 linear feet of total impacts to perennial
streams.
Page 5 of 8

USACE - In accordance with the Final Notice of Issuance and Modification of Nationwide
Permits, published in the Federal Register on January 15, 2002, mitigation will be required when
necessary to ensure that adverse effects to the aquatic environment are minimal. Factors
including size and type of proposed impact and function and relative value of the impacted
aquatic resource will be considered in determining acceptability of appropriate and practicable
mitigation as proposed. Examples of mitigation that may be appropriate and practicable include,
but are not limited to: reducing the size of the project; establishing and maintaining wetland
and/or upland vegetated buffers to protect open waters such as streams; and replacing losses of
aquatic resource functions and values by creating, restoring, enhancing, or preserving similar
functions and values, preferable in the same watershed.
If mitigation is required for this project, a copy of the mitigation plan must be attached in order
for USACE or DWQ to consider the application complete for processing. Any application
lacking a required mitigation plan or NCEEP concurrence shall be placed on hold as incomplete.
An applicant may also choose to review the current guidelines for stream restoration in DWQ's
Draft Technical Guide for Stream Work in North Carolina, available at
http://h2o. enr.state.nc.us/ncwetl ands/strmgide.html.
1. Provide a brief description of the proposed mitigation plan. The description should provide
as much information as possible, including, but not limited to: site location (attach directions
and/or map, if offsite), affected stream and river basin, type and amount (acreage/linear feet)
of mitigation proposed (restoration, enhancement, creation, or preservation), a plan view,
preservation mechanism (e.g., deed restrictions, conservation easement, etc.), and a
description of the current site conditions and proposed method of construction. Please attach
a separate sheet if more space is needed.
N/A
2. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (NCEEP). Please note it is the applicant's responsibility to contact the NCEEP at
[phone] to determine availability, and written approval from the NCEEP indicating
that they are will to accept payment for the mitigation must be attached to this form. For
additional information regarding the application process for the NCEEP, check the NCEEP
website at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/wrp/index.htm. If use of the NCEEP is proposed, please
check the appropriate box on page five and provide the following information:
Amount of stream mitigation requested (linear feet): N/A
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet): N/A
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
Amount ofNon-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
Page 6 of 8

IX. Environmental Documentation (required by DWQ)
1. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the use of
public (federal/state) land? Yes ® No ^
2. If yes, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the
requirements of the National or North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
Note: If you are not sure whether a NEPA/SEPA document is required, call the SEPA
coordinator at [phone] to review current thresholds for environmental documentation.
Yes ® No ^
3. If yes, has the document review been finalized by the State Clearinghouse? If so, please
attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval letter. Yes ® No ^
X. Proposed Impacts on Riparian and Watershed Buffers (required by DWQ)
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
required state and local buffers associated with the project. The applicant must also provide
justification for these impacts in Section VII above. All proposed impacts must be listed herein,
and must be clearly identifiable on the accompanying site plan. All buffers must be shown on a
map, whether or not impacts are proposed to the buffers. Correspondence from the DWQ
Regional Office may be included as appropriate. Photographs may also be included at the
applicant's discretion.
1. Will the project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC. 2B .0233
(Meuse), 15A NCAC 2B .0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 02B .0243 (Catawba) 15A NCAC
2B .0250 (Randleman Rules and Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please
identify ~ )? Yes ® No ^
2. If "yes", identify the square feet and acreage of impact to each zone of the riparian buffers.
If buffer mitigation is required calculate the required amount of mitigation by applying the
buffer multipliers.
Im act
Zone* r~,,,,.,p f e}~ Multiplier Required
1 2593 3 (2 for Catawba) 0
2 1981 1.5 0
Total I 4574 I I 0
* Zone 1 extends out 30 feet perpendicular from the top of the near bank of channel; Zone 2 extends an
additiona120 feet from the edge of Zone 1.
3. If buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e.,
Donation of Property, Riparian Buffer Restoration /Enhancement, or Payment into the
Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as identified
within 15A NCAC 2B .0242 or .0244, or .0260. N/A
Page 7 of 8

XI. Stormwater (required by DWQ)
Describe impervious acreage (existing and proposed) versus total acreage on the site. Discuss
stormwater controls proposed in order to protect surface waters and wetlands downstream from
the property. If percent impervious surface exceeds 20%, please provide calculations
demonstrating total proposed impervious level.N/A
XII. Sewage Disposal (required by DWQ)
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of
wastewater generated from the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
N/A
XIII. Violations (required by DWQ)
Is this site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (ISA NCAC 2H .0500) or any Buffer Rules?
Yes ^ No
Is this anafter-the-fact permit application? Yes ^ No
XIV. Cumulative Impacts (required by DWQ)
Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in additional
development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality? Yes ^ No
If yes, please submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with
the most recent North Carolina Division of Water Quality policy posted on our website at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands. If no, please provide a short narrative description:
The project is a relatively small bridge in a residential area. There will be no new road created
and no additional lanes added, therefore it is unlikely to attract development.
XV. Other Circumstances (Optional):
It is the applicant's responsibility to submit the application sufficiently in advance of desired
construction dates to allow processing time for these permits. However, an applicant may
choose to list constraints associated with construction or sequencing that may impose limits on
work schedules (e.g., draw-down schedules for lakes, dates associated with Endangered and
Threatened Species, accessibility problems, or other issues outside of the applicant's control).
N/A
f,
~' ~.0
Applicanf/Age>Kt's Signature Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)
Page 8 of 8

SITE
~~ "~
~'~
~.
u .__.,
~~
~ ~
,, ,
.' .~
~~,_~ .r
L~
.+
_ `~
WILSON COUNTY - --
N.C. IDEFT. ®F TI3~NS1[D®IgTt~TI®N
DIVISI®N ®F IalIGHW.~~S
WI1,S®N C®UNT~
3~~~,3.1.1 (]f$-4326)
I$IaIDGE 79 ®VEIB BI,®®1bIERY
SW~1--IF ®N SIt lOml
SHEET , ®F ~
VICINITY MAP

z o
O ~-
F
F
~
~
~-
S
~ 3 ~ m
x z
C7 ~
~
F z O
~, ~ U
0 o z
z ~
w O ~ ~
~ ~ 3 "
F ~ ~
a
`~
q
m
m 3

U
z

m
m

N
m
.Q
m
N
O
a
O
Q
_O
m
3

.D
m
l6
a
~U
c
m
Y
U
f0
a
E
O
Z e
e
n

z
z
a
~oE~
~
~
i
N~
~ a
d
Z ~ ~
~ ~
a
~ ~
m ~
F- .N m a
W U ~ ~
Q
a
~
~ c
C C U C
~ N ~ Q ~ $
~ WV ~a

W
Q N
~ a m
~ ~
~ ~ E- ,E
Q
~ c ~
d
~ ~° ~ ~° m
~ ~~ E
U a
a
N
U C~ C
U
N
O
N
O
F" ~ N 'C N ~
= O O
~ U

W
a y

N
0
Z ~ ~
~~~+. v
a
U ~ ~ ~
U
H ~ °~
c
~
U
Q
a
D
o
.
~ m -~ ~ m
Z X >>m
7
g W
H
W N
c
a ~
~ _ ~ m
~u_~
C fA
C = C
(0 _ f0 U
Y
2
J
a

m
~ ~
m
U ~ ~
N
lA m
t
O
CO p
+
~
Y r
~ ti :a
~.. (A
J

m O J
~-
(~ Z Q
H
,:~,.,.,:...:~..__ ~ S
--..~

0

o > Q
°- a } m
_ ~

~
O n
=
U ~ o

~ LL

O _
co
~
O
~ n
i Q
w g
~ j ~ w

~ ~ O
a
w
0
U
Z
~
N
1~1.
a

(/?

H
U

a
C
C

N
W

m

N
W W N
Z~
~ o O
o

[O
Z_

D
Z

o ~
~ ~
N

C ~
O ~ Q
('-Y6
0 F

O
~ ~
N

Phi ~i:3'. if'uV1~:'+~ _

SITE
sa
~.i
~+ ' O `• 7
~'\ .l .'
~~ ~
..~~;. ;
..;1~
'' ,~.._
v
,, ~ ,
'_, '/
WILSON COUNTY
N.C. DEFT. ®F TIIANSF®ItTr1TI®N
. DIVISI®N ®F HIGHW.~YS
WII,S®N C®UNT~
3363.1.1 (I$-4326)
I$ItIDGE X79 ®~EIB ICI,®®1~IEI~Y
SW.~bIF ®N SIB 1001
(I,r~I~IM I~®r~D)
SI-IEET ~ ®F L~
•
I
v^~~
-T . ~
_ `-~ _ ~'i
i` ' 1I +~ _
_ ~ i -
i _
-- ~ ~".
~ I ~,
;. ~ ~~
i
-~, ;' -
~ i
,,
':i,3'`
VICINITY MAP

N i
Z w ,^ I
Q ~
w ~
LL LL

~ Q
CII d ^
W ~
W ~ x
N
J
~- ~ N
N N
N
N

w

m N
~ W ^
Z x
n
~
H O ...
N
W
Z ~ o
~
O
N

N
(7
~ ~
Q
v N N
Q w F'
J
Q N
Z ~ N
Q N N
-
J
//~
A
Q _
W^
M
~
M
r
Z ~
O N N
U

Q W F-
a J~
J Q

-
~ a
w
W w o
~ n- x
LL ~ m
~ ~
m °~
0o x
~
~
U
N ~
~ r 0~0
r
0 ~
~ CO N

J J J
W
N
f0
LL

~ } ; v
U ~ m m
~ ~
H

O
Z J
a

o

t3uf!er Dr~wi~~
Sheet ,~.,,_ of ~,„ ;,,,

Z
O
~
r
a ~ ~
a ~ m
a = z
~ O O o
~ U ~ -

~ ~ ~
Z ~ m Q
W ~ ~
~ j 3 w

o O
a
w ~
a
0
U
Z

Q

N

U

a
CC
G
N
I.I.
W
LL
LL

m

N
W W N
0
~ Z <
O o

CD
Z_

0

g W
~
w o~
~l N
F-
C J J
O _i
~ O

N
+•

B~e~ G~...... r~
Shut ...~.~-R ~f^"'~"'_'..

NAMES AND ADDRESSES
PARCEL NO.
NAMES
ADDRESSES
3
BERNICE M. THOMPSON
P.O. BOX 1~8
SIMMS, NC 27880
5
ROBERT F. WHITEHEAD
5751 LAMM ROAD
WILSON, NC 27896
~~~®~
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
WILSON COUNTY
PROJECT: 33663.L1 (B-1326)
REPLACE BRIDGE A79
OVER BLOOMERY SWAMP
ON SR 1001
RHRFT U nR ~t%

23-APR-2007 14• 6
r;\dro;nggq\b-4,' hyd_prm_r.at_psh_.dgn

_
_
_

J /9
I ,
~ I~

N _' N
o W
a Ja tr
o 0 .
p
0 ~ I
m
- ~p~ I ~' ~
a
"
~
~~Q
~
~} X
I~`o I+I
;
~
~x~_x_._---x- ~ I III ~11 q O ~ ~ ~ZZ
~ (~~ A ~€ ~ 11 ~ I

© ~~ ~ ~ .~,NO~g~ Flo r, ~ ,,
` ~ ~`b

~ ~,
~~
~ I
~ oro ~
_ ~
~J S -~~A I = i
~N~ ~NI~ ~ o I
'^
I „ ~ ~ ~,,
I ~ I
~ 4 ,-~

w
STA.1
+00.00 L I
T A. 13+00
ICT.
/~~/C~-~S/' 1 ~
I
I
Q N ~I ~ ~ I ; .
a
I i~' )I ~ pp r
~ '~ PL
~ n ~

t ~
' EL. 13 8 50 p+ ; 139.40

BEGI

N GRADE ~ m 0 ~

~ >
$ ~ ~ p I
I I ~ . ~} ~-J...! . ', 1
I I
'
~ r~ "` I Q ,
i

~ ~ ~
A.13+5
00 LT. ST/-.1
EL ~ +50.00
U0.31' ~
~
8 / g I
~
II ~ _ _
1

~
0
L 137.00
~
8
~
~ I I i ~ r

S ~I:I E 137
60 ~
~
+ f
~
~ I
~ C~'--~~
`~

;' ~
ST
U+00.
LT. .
r ,
~NI
~~
~
~ ~ ~ j ~ A ~} ~
~ I
I 5
,
~ ~
~
E 136.20 r w~
~ of I ,' ;;

T

+45.

T. '~
~~ I

~~~oP
~ ) I -'

~ ' `~ ~

,, ~> ,,
~...
~ c V1

4
~ ~ 1 i ~
~ na
~' ~ I ~ n r
I\ .WWII ° °~Ilq~
~ Q O ~ I I
I I I

I ~'~ ~8?~ ~, ~ r
~ J
I
`

-+

U

~

a ~

A. 15+00.

R.T.
to
~ ~

I

4 I\ ~
§

O 1
o• I~
oz p
J
$

I I p
~. m

,/ 8-'~~
+ 2 E .135.00 + ~ ~
~ ~ I
~ i ~ ~
/Sf00
I
p
g
ST
15+50.00
RT.
I
~ ~ ~ $~~
~ 2S ~ I ~ I
b ~ ~ I ~ I II
~ 11 ~ o° ,.~ .
.l
'~
~ }, ~
~ EL 34.50 I
~ ~ g ~ v1 ~ r ~N$ I~ ~
1
`v'c `°~ a' ~ ~} ~} ~~

.~
i I P
~ ~ N
~~ °FgQ~~~
~~m~~~~~ ~
O~ ~
V ~~~~ I
•~~ °~ II o f i ~ >T
a ~-1~ ~ ~i.

r I
I -
~ p xx ~~jj~y~~I ~ ~
J~ ~D

~

~ A =
4.
~ 5T 16 1 85.00 j
,
- ~ ~P ~ ~ m ~
r~ ~ ~ ~ fqr y~4MP
ul ~„ /~
~~ ~ T~
t•- n
1 ~tii ~

~
EL
34.00
I
a~
~ ~ ~ A ~` '
^~ _ ~.
~ ~
r
,
~ ~ /' ~ m1 $8 f~
9
~ ig

V

--

-~ -I I
I

. ~~
+
C
n n n r n n n u n n n n

,' x I
~
~
r ~} D // ~~ ~ ~~
.. i 4 i ~
y~
a ~ ~ ~ " y ~' o N + i ~
t4i ~
n ~ D y~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
l J
v STA
17+ 5
00 LT ~ ~ ~ ~ \~ ~
~ "
~
~ n ~
t ~ A .
EL 137 .
. I
$~
~ + m N ~
m a
° P
' ~ ~ m
\ f
'~ A ~
~
~3~ d ~ °
. ~ .,
o
<• ~ (n ; d m
r ~ o .ll +, p ti _

~
~
1 I + ~~~
N ~ ~ V
i
~ `v
% ~ ' ~ ~ ~
I _
- ~_
~ R ~~ .N o
i n
Q
V ~ I 0
~
~
~ ~
. 137.85
t
' , ~I < m
I
°
~
• g
~~ ~3~
~
_ , 1
om
~ ,gyp ~ ~ ~!
p II
N O`]1 ~
M ~
~- a Oro I
I ~I li ,~
~ ~\
'~A _~ r II
~ II M~-1
~`tf~,l ~}
~(~ r~ ~i'
p'I~
~ II
m l ~
n ice/ I
i
I
~
I
+, ti~
V
,O

fA.19+

.00 LT. ~ ~ -

~`
V~

~ ~ o, .~, I
r
` I
r I I~ I
`.1 11
_r I
r
I ~ ~ -
l O'7N0011'`il' `~/

~ ~

N
140.2

. 20+00.

T.

~~
8 ~ I
~

~
'
~I ~ m~
1 ~
~~ ,~~
I
-
IA O
' ' ~ s
~~ ~
Cl
~ ~ ~ W .

a

w
C E .141.80 m i
I ~} ~}
~
O ~ 'x II
m ~ I
; `` ~-- --~~
~~'~w n
-- ---
O it I
'
I
' I
N RA~} a_
o !
~ I
°
~

N

. NOG
- 145
6' - - ~ ~,a~roa?.e '_ - -_ -' -_ -
f
D I
r I
I o ~I ~ `~

' ---- Q ~g~
1

'
II ti
' ~ • 1 O I
~ ~ ~

8~
+111 ~I~'*I'0 ~,,pD ~

1 ' © ~ r03s"ne.~slear II ~ _-- -_' ~' ~ ~~N~C r
~ I I
~+ .. ..
I i -~ ~ ~ ~Q~} W ~~~
W I
`Q
N ~ ~
A
I I ~m
p~' I~. a ~}~~ ~ §~V
.~ ~
~
.II
I
p I J'1I~ ~!I ~~
N I~ ~ I
!~
S
~ I ~ _
~r-,r ` ~

~ q
~
~
N ~ ~
'I I
~
~3
~
`
~ `
Illo ~' ~,'q -~ \~ ~
- _-~ ~. III III ©_~ ~ \ ~ ~ ~

' I ~ I I - 1" ~ ~-~ == -g © © ~ ~ ~

I .00 9
I
~ ~
\
r
%
.
~
I©
N~ II N W
J
b r1 la i P
~ ~ u f } I ~~
8
A e 4~
I ~- I
'
-1 ~
,
-
~~~ ~ m ~ ~ ~
A < ~ m
~
UI :~ rOir
b 1
~

~ g
d to
X
aN I;
~
~
~
~ ~J
° L
~
1
'
T
;~
S
S n
- -
~ -I
n L,'t
~
~ 8 s
-i
r
~» ~ ^ w
~
~ ~

m o c
8
D
c~- o
< ~
>
K
~
J.
v =1
~ ~m 8 ~~ ~ ~ 0.
Sil ~ a ~
ms ~ = ~
t 'a' i y I = ~ m
c
? ~°
+ "' + .ar ~ ~ O

3

J

J

A ««
S
~
~
0
~
0
~ Q
0 o

.i
23-APR-2007 14•
r:\drmn e\b-4 _hyd_prm_wet_psh _.dgn
9
_ _ _ ~
,
_
O N
O W
O ~
O _
W
O C*
O m- m
~ ~ ~I~
~ I
~ ,

'

~ ~
~ I

I "C

~ ~
' `
y /\ p~,61 a
' ~
i
r ~n _
~ 1
/
1

~

TA.1

00.00 LT I

. 13+00

IT. A I
>
~- ~ c
m ~ N
J 1
1 ..

~
~
~ I

0p ~ I
~"~ EL
13B 50 F+ 139
40 _ I
~ '' ~~
~ n m

~ . ,
Q
~
~~~ .

BEGIN

GRADE `

S > I ; ~
.
Q
~
~
T
~ ' „ ~~

' ~ STA.1 +50.00 --
`_
~
' ~ ~ A. 13+ 00 LT. EL s 140.31' + ~} ~ I
$ L 137.00 ~~ 1 1 I
. i ~~:~ E 137.60 ~ +`
$
5 I ~ ~

ST
U+00.
LL ~
` ~
~~ ~`

~ ,
'~ EL 136
20 ~ ;! ~'' r
. _
., ~_...

5f U+45. LT. V ti O

4 I
~ ~ ~ S
~ a~ A15+00. Ri. ~ I ~ ~ ~w a
> ' l$ ~
l5i'00
N N 2 E .135.00 + ~ ~ ~ I oQ ~ t ~. ..
O _
~ a 1
~ ~ +
~ ~ I I, ~~ DO ,..~. ~ .~
..
,
$ ~ ~ Q
~ N ~ II ~ i
..
ST 15+50.00 I
RT. ~ ~
~ ,
~
~ EL. 34.50 I I ~ J of r ~ $- ~~ S m. y
m

~

~
I
I
I

t
Z
~ o

~
~~~
~ '~
rn
~
C
~
~
'aa ,
o o -., ~
~'
I ~ ~
i -' n
y'o

~ aa
~n
'I
~~
~y~
°
'
a
.~
~s
~ "
~ 4 , ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~
~
~ Qr O
~ ~~'.
' 4., x
?
R
~ ST 16 185.00 ITS I I ~ ~P i
~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~i ~ ~f
~
^'i ~ ~"~P - ~ Q
• EL 34.00 I ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ; ~y'g
V -- l _~ i ,1tv q g q q n u q u 4 M u C ~~ ~ ~
~i y~~y
O
~
~'~ ~„~,
~

yy`~
I~ a~I
•<b"
"
Q I~~
~
~ m
?~'
~ N
yy
VI VV
~ ~ yly
~
• a F ~

u
a
5TA
17+
5
00 LT N
~ y
~ ~
~ ~ ~
~
T ~ n .
EL 137 .
.
'
g
~
~ `> ~
~ e
.r '~ . , ,~, a 'ii * 1 ~
Q Q
+ ~ ~ ~ 4 ~ -E
pU v
p ~ 1

' P
O N
• ~' = A. 18+50. LT. o r i ~}
r ~} 1 i
E 137.85
.`
0 , .
"11

•
II
~
q ~
q m !- ~
I
1
-+ U
~ ~ 5
m r i Q
~ ~~ ~ y.
~ ~ II ~W~ 1 I

SiA.19+ 0.00 LT. °' ~ ~ + ~ ~~ I E~
EL 1 0.2 w A w
a 11

N A 20+00. LT. ~ ~~ ~
~ ~ `" a n~
O E .141.80
~~ `""„"„'
~ ~,
~ m _
_

mN I
m ~ I
z
e
O
D
- ~~ia aae _ - - --~ -~~

NY~

145. 6' ~- ~ I o i ti +

O ~ I
~

' ti
N 1~ a N
-
+ ~
~otiroD~
~ P ~ g uuU°
uq~+
~ ss"n°Nfi v~ ~ _ _
j
~ ~_ ~~N~o
I
~~ r
,
1 i~

1 I
' ~
~_..-

~~
a
,1 s ~
~"''
O
j ~
w ti__ `. ~~}
I ~

1 !^.1'
" I i~ ~
a ="
©

'
~ \
1
~ ~ ~ ~
ynul
;~ : P ~7
ors I
~ y uJ~

~ **~~~*ttt Ni O I I
(~
p~ ~ I
T N
u +
~ ~
~ y

~ a N ~
~
T
~
~ '
~
I ~
T
V i~i k,
nn
i+ y

~ ~ * aa
O
8 ' D rD K
m o g ~f ~ Z fd

T

c g

;" 5 x ~
t gib : 1 t

~?
"' m

z
=i m
~
+
g
g N~
~ ° +
~ +r ~
~n ".
~ ~ql

y' O
,~ ~ ~ r
y y y ~~

J N w A i o ~ A ~
O O O O t
i
O a
O ~
T~
`~~
1 aO,1

23-APR-2007 I4. 4
r:\dre:n~ce\h~4~~; hyd_prm_buf_psh_,dgn
i aia
I !
~ I~

~'
o
0
0 0
0 w g
~ I
~ ~h~
I \
'
~
.r I,N
Z o
~
~
N _ Il
a+~ Q O ~ ~^
I IIIA
X~'' X~ X
X ~ I
N r Z
'~
I y]
I~ 1 ~I ~
~~ '
I
X m 'i7 n "~" "~J = t11 I
© ~ n ^ ~$ .ya ~NOa al
l o ~I o ~,
~
` I `~
~ ~
~

iA. l

00.00 LT i

r

A. 13+00

i. I
N tl
irJ~ ~ _ --~A I. 1 I
~
I
~ ~mm m ~zr, "1111 ~ o l l ~ ~ ~
( ,
~.J OA ~~ ~ II v' 11
,---~ , ~ ~ I I a
///q~Q~'1
MIS ~ 1 i ~ ~,__
J ~ ~~~

I
'
* I
ono 'I ~'
~"~ EL 138 50 139
~
40 /
t~ ~ _ ~}
'fi
~ n
t/l
A S "~' ~
.
'~ BEGIN

GRADE

~ ~ > ~ . ,
II I ,
r ..
I I ~ ~ f~} ~ ,'
n

~'' G ~

A 13+

00 LT.
~ 5iA.1
EL m
+50.00
140.31' Y
~
8
g I I` I

~~ ~ I I I ~ ~ , `"
°o= L137.00 . ~
~
I
E 137
60
~ ~ `~ I
~
~ ~
I
} ~
.
~v ~< ~~
~ } ~ I
1
~
~0~
I
'
``' I'!
~' EL 136.20 ~
~
I ,,! ''
ol
C I
1 ~
>
I I ~~ ~>8J ~~ 3
Si 14+45. LT. I
~~~`OD~ ~
I
~
~ ~
~
~
0 a
s m
C7 I C; v1 n r
, \ y 4 II II
~

~ II II n e° ti
$~~qQ~
~
~ I j I ~}
8
4
~ ~ N _ , i I .. ~ SI '~~: ~ r
n z~ ~ ~
I
/
+

t
a~
als+oo.
RT.
`~°
j
~~~ ~
~aQ
15+00
~1~
~~w p 1~ ~ ~'e
/
~ cn

~ x E .135.00 ~• R ~ Q~

~ II

W II ~ ~~ I I I

DS II , GI7 I~ ' g '`~"
y.
~,m o° ~.
N1 ' A
..

ST
15+50.00
RT. i
~
~
~O ~
Q
N ~ Ci ~ I II
j
0
~~ ~ o
~ ..
_..

~
EL
34.50
I
I
~ P
~ ,
. V1n
(~M~
~ ~
I ~N~ I
r
~ II
I
~
- r "
l
`~~ ~"~ ,~,
e ~ ~ ~ ~

~

i
I

~
Z .~}

~ ~ p

yy p p p pop ~j
~I~ ° gFQ~~mmRl nl
i
~^
rnm
mm _
\

~ °
~
~
y
~
~ r
~ L12 II
~~~G
~aa ~ro ~ C~1
`,~ a i c9, I 4~ Tr

~ ~ ~
`I V~.. ~} L'i i
~ J `;'} ~}
N

D`
~°
l NH
Oh1
~
r
*I n
m 1
88
~o
~
N
'
~
~ ~~~~~'~~'~
~
&
~` ~ ,
~~'"
~ Y =
S
~
ST
16 188.00 5i
h I
~
p ~
~
~ tj g ~ ~
~ Mfg
,
m'a'P ~~ F' UI ~.
+
`
~~' c~' / / \ I ~~
~ Q*
,~ EL 34.00 I ~~S n
~ ~
~ ~--~{~, \ _\
~' ./ T1 ~ / ~ \ m \ 88
r \ q
,
~
°
` 4
~4+
V - - - ~
l ~ ~~
+ 11 4 M M
N q II N M II C ~.
'~_ I -- r .
/ ~ \
`.f ~
~ ,
~} /

n /
~ ~ m
~
~
,~ ~ h
~ xr ~
`` i
m
~
~
to n ~
t ~ STA. 17+
EL 137 5.00 LT. ~
I ~ ~ + m In ~
>
$ Q
'` ~ ~ nd~~ A ~ }
~3' $
~
~ n
.~. . ~
~
, ~
io .
n..;1 ~ N
~
p .
-~
i ,9 V
w ~'}
m I v
1
+ m ~
N m
~ ~, ~

'
, ~ ~
c
p
O ~
n O
'
` - ~ f
'
'
E 137.85 ~ I ,~ ~ ~ < rn }
~

N ~ II Y m ~ {/A~) ~ 1 ~
~ 3
.p N
a~~
~ I n
4
~ a p
Gl I
a l 1
`, ~ ~ ~; g I I
~ .1 ~i ~ ~y _
',~n ~~-N
- N _
STA. 19+ 0.00 LT. t
°' +
~ ~ c• /
"~ 1~ i I ~ , , f~
1 0.2 m
i~~ s ~
°' f
xi V
~ ml I~ ~e~ ¢ ~ ~}
1
Q
~ 07 0l
O E 141.80 D W I I _
~}
~ r { x I ~ _ ~~ ~ a_ - 2n+~g
-__
m O _
D ; ~I I tv a ~~ s~~} ~

D G - m-.ao,5~os - --- I S
------ ~~„ 1 1
145. 6' _
a f:1+~

1
n r I o _ ` _
- i
m
I o II
~ ~ ~~
U'r ~ ~}
N f I
~ 8
* III a" I '~ A ~~ ~m~~rop~
'+
~' ~I Q
_~~
II II II 11 Y VI
~ ©

z ~
_ _ ~
Y y
}',C'1 103NOONtlBtl1 I~~((I ~ - ~-"'-~-- y~
RQlil 5nN~51 \ N
II II i - o ~ ~
-~------ P r

1
N 1
~ m
... S 7`i7~ I.H~ ` ~*
* .. .. II
g ~ III a Z~ ~} `v' Q~Op`Q~
W
~ 'Y

N Q
i
P I I~ I
~ ~
~
1 )
,
.II~ I
~I _-!
o
~
~
I ~---
~"'
~ m p ~
1 ~~- ~
~ ~ ~
~
N {:}
~ ~ ~ Ir
O
I
I I ~ ~
4i
1 '
II~o ~~ o -~ - ~~
-- --~~ ,~ • I I Ill ©~~ a '~~ \
' ~ 4f a
~•00 9
~ r I X I
\
.
©
Of'~ © I
N ~I u
~n~,m r I ~ I
-1

T
~ ~ G N I
^.I I; ~
r p
o Z ^
w I
~
+
~

S

--I
n

u

$ s
~
m

D
~ > '-1 ~

~ $

~1 ~
o
m 8 c~- o 'L
K
o
k
iim ~ K
~p 44
~P
a ~ ON.
T o. Q ~ a6 y~ = t
i ~ m
Z
}~ y. Y ~
s
y r
H
Z

O N
O W
O A X11
O O O~
O ~~ A z
~
0
~~

23-APR-2007 14• q
r:\dro:noTq~\b-4~~6_hyd_prm_buf _psh_.dgn
u ~ ~i
¢_ ~ ~..,
V
/99
...,
O N
O W
O ~ ~
O O r
p ~ ~
~
r
~
N I
~ IIA I ; °
~ Y
'
r ~ ZZ
~
: _
I~ i
jai I„
~°
, y
1 ~
~ ~
~
~
r
\ ~
/nz
c z- ~ o~
n 1
1
1 ~ ,'
-+ SiA.I 00.00 L T A. 13+00 RT. /i /~ © I
~ ~ 1
~ n a
t S ~j EL 13 8 50 ~ ~ 139.40
' ~' BEGI

A.1
'~
N GRADE

+0
00 ~~~
~

~
g >

M ~'} I ~ ~~,
1
./ ~} ~~
1
~
~'' ~ A. 13+ 00 LT. E 3. * I 1 1
- --
$ L 137.00 :I
E 137
60
~ ,
*
° '
~
~
_

A
1
ST

14-1 00.

LT.
.
~v
~
S'
_
~}
,.

~`~
/
r~
'
'' E 136.20 r
1 ''
-,~ .
` ~
~ C

ST
14+45.
LT. U
~
.
' 1~1: \~
V
\
~ ~
; YI'7Q
1 ~
~1f 1``
F Vf
--
y F w

~

w -1
O

~ rn

$~

+ a ~

5+00.

T. ~
I
~ Ya"u
' ~
~ib

r

1 n\M'~n
u ~
~ q
l.: IN
~ ~~ ~
~
~
~ ~ I~ I
~ Q ~ Q,

5 , '
r
~} ~g
~ ,~ : ~ /
~~ ~s:
a +~ ~i /
S~~ ~ ~~ ~ `
'/ ~
'
+
w
S E

5T
,135,00

15+50.00

T.
+

I

' X45 it

/ wia ~ ,~ I ~ ~

~ ~ II

b ~ I II ` ~5too
-
t
m~p ~ ~. ~'
' :%
..
y '
~ EL 34.50 1
~ ' P
~ o ~ .rnn
~v' r` ~ ~ jI
I ~
-
I ~ ~ ;
~ !7. ,m ~ *~
'Y'
~ 1 I a
I ~ a ~ o ~CO~ °'
~ ~ ~ ~
=
I
7t aoi ~
o o- i o
_ ~

~ Lei
~ o ~m m ~$$~~Q~~~ IA
~
~ ~
~ ~~ ~ ~ 1 4
r ~ ~ ~)
y R
a
~~ -
+ ~ ask' ~ rn
4
~ ~~~~~~~~g~ rn
~ ~~~ ~
Q~ b~ ~°-
~
I {
~
K ~
; ~I
~
~ ' _ 6

~
ST
16 185.00 P5
~
~P <
~ ~i
^I O
~ ct g ~.. f
Hr
'~`a"p
~
EL 34.00 I ~~ ~
~ ~ ~ '
,. ga
V
- - -
~ -I ~
~
M Y M M II 4 M 11 Y 4 11 C i
,~`' ~ ~'a ~ - ~ 3
~ i
N ~
ryr~a ~c~ ~
~ ~/ m
N

C~ to
~
STA. 17+
5.00 LT.
I ~ rS~ ~n
~ D
~ ~ ~^ ~ ~~~m
~ ~ '~ ~
p
m~
J~
9
`~• '
" EL 137
0 ~: ~ n ~ ~ ~^ dd
. 1
?
'
OD
~
I I
~ ~ ~
~
~ /'''
e
g
n S
~ N
r 2 A. 18+50. LT. ~ °0 1
r j ~
~
~
137.85 ' ~`}Q
~
: _
t~}'"
X11

~
~ N
~
' •Y
P - p
I Q
,
-
~

STA. 19+
0.00 LT. V
a
~ ~ a 1
~
~ .1
I
~ N
L1 0.2 W
8\ A ~
P ~~
~1~ ~

~
I -
I I'l~

N
A. 20+00.
LT. C~jC ~1~ =
% . i1W
~

~

~
O E , 141.80
0
m rn ~
D
~ e
O I
W
~.

D G

--~ .
_ _ r
m 'aa i ,ass _ -- - - -- - -~ 0
-`- -
1
~
j

N A. 11 +0
U5. 00
6' --
-- ~ ~
~ S
- ~~
' ~ o I z ~ ~~
~

(n - ~ I
~ o
II a ~ ~ + ~ r
~ ~
~'
II
Y

~ N
\ 4
Z t3~
rn ~
$ _ II II
V
II
S"naNr rl I ~_ t~'Hyo
~~~
~~ 1
I
r
_-~
~~ I
~
I
~~
N ~ ... ~
-~ ~il~a
Q
/ -~ Q
N
1 t
I ~~rn
I
' ~
"
I ~ -~
~
_-
., ~ -S B
1 wf
~
~
~
w O
~ I - ~

I ~ ~}
9 ~
1
r
/
J it N I ~
N : A
o~~ Y+ F ~ b_
N ~I W
-iP~r
I
pN~
ti i
-

~<a m ~

A . Ql ~ u,
m ~Mj
ry
N
~~ o I
~
~ ~
Yt
T ~ ~ ~ li T ~
~ ° 0 c., I
pp•
v
8 u -~
te
o
y

~m g

~ a
vF- ;
~~ ~
.g >
K
}

~ ~

~
s
~ ?, a
m5 ~
T Na 6 ~ =
.1 mTC
Z Zz
=
o S' O
* NO pP i ~
~ /_ ^
y , Q
4~ t11 '
~ 4
A ~
O O O O O O ~ ~

\Aoa wa~\ r~o~\64326_~dy_tsh.dgn
$ 09/08/99
C0111 TRA CT: TIP PRO ECT: 8-4326
000
O T
~ O ~j O O , ,y •
s `
_ ~ ~
N
t7 ° Z o o -~ ~ . ~
` cn
~ ,~ 4;•
ti ~ ~ \ ' `'
/ ;.;
N ~ ~•
0 8 c ~ +.• n
~• ~
~~
~~~ voo to Z ., .`
~ I ~z `~ k
t • ~
~ ny II II II II II II ~ I ~ ` I y ` ,~ ~ •~ 6 ••• ~
C O o ~ o o A ~ +b 3 ~ ~ ~ ' 1ji • c~G
r ° W I I ~ ~y ~ ~ ••
N~ ~aea~a~°° a g y i j ~ ~ `•
~ ° _ '' y ~ ~
~ I j ~ ~~,~ © `.
w I `,~ ~~ •
~' I ~ `•
-I ~ w ~ ~
I `
C ~ ~ r ~a ~ l
~ ~ ~ I
b ~ Z ~ ~
h
m y ~ } ) `~
m ~ 2 n ~ y ~ ~
N ~ Qj ~ -~ ~ ` Q ti ~
~, , ~ ~
r ~ ~
~ I ~ ~ O~-~
II II II ~ I„
° O m ~ o
~ ` O
° ~ ~ O ® 0
N N N 2 1...~^ .-r'~~~
V
v~ ~~ ~~~ ~ o -~
x
~ Q V
~ ~ ~
o '•
w~ $ '
~ D
~ ~
~ fA C
C `i ~ ~
70
x
~ o ~ x
°x
n ~ ~ ~
~ ~
~_- Q ~! o
N
~~ ~ A~ ~
~ ~ ~ oN•
a a i ~--
~ ~~ ~ ~ , .
w ~
N~
~ i Z b ~~
a
~ y 8r ~
~b ~~
y ~~
~ .. m o,
~ ~c ~x ~~~ g~~a`~
~'~ Qon ~ r 8
ti ~~ ~ zy
h~ ~~ ~ ~~
'•1 ~°
q c x ~~

08:38
ro,~\b4326_rdy_typ.dgn
7U25
r
N
i
Q ~( N
+~
O r x
O
o ni ~
{ ~ N
'~ -1 0~
r
O
OI
o~
~v
m4
A -i
~a
~_
m~
pO~
CS
ti H
mx
6
2
u
1
U
R
N
N
O
ti
m
N
m°
0
-i i D

y ~y
O
p
111 9 yy
e
~~ ~~
~

La
~~ x
~
>w

~ D
<
y
~ O~
~ i
?
O Z
m
• O
yQQQ
gp ~
~ -~
~

~
9~ Il
9C
8~
~
~ ^^
\I
m
°
~m m
ag "~ ~
~
~
a ~~
T m
~ ~
~
a rm

s
°
°
~
m<
!
m
° ~
~~
~ N
I I
rr
I I Z
j
N Vf pD ~
0o m~ ~ i °'~
~ N
+ + ~ V fN
O O n ~
D ~
r ~ rJ
m ° N f >
v + -i f*7
W o o n ° - rF+
~ ~ Z -i
=
-I
vm
VI o
Z
IT1 ~ ~ ~
r N
N
.. O - Z m ~
~ O D
O N
Z
+ W O ~ ~N a m<
O n r y
N Z O - ~ ~ ~ ym
o W N ~ Im
O ~ Hin e
~
O m "'
~a olnt
W~
~a
s<
~~
m y,
p
Cf O
m r°~
z ~
~q
pac
,~a~

nm
7D m
cox
o
,j
~ vl
2~
c~ v~
f

N
w

a
' V

~~ -r._-~x~ "~
~ ~ Jc~ 4 `a .dJ JNOJ ,81
n~ P
v ~ ~ /moo
L~ n ( °a ~ I r
1J
///ra' °S ~ ~r
~i/ ~ x 4
~~
+ n g YP
s~ +
g 1 C.i n
~£ ~ r~ ~ -
wad +_a= -~ ~ --
uu"u~~
i
~Q~~ r
~
~~
~~ Q o ;A
$
b
§5
Q ~
I
~
y
b ~{
~N~~
7$c ?~ ~~
7 '

a ~~jj w
~ ~
aa bb ~/f ~Q V ~ _+
O~ RI ~y yRl hl~~2S~ m° ~ ~6 $ r~~a.~. 'MO7
2 2 Cp ~ ~ o
~~ ~~~~~~=~~Q ~ ~ ~~
S ROaf
'["ACC ~ ` NT
/NE
1~ ,0 .~ O y v -V"
Q \\`~
1 N ~ ~ > ~
V1 ~r'~ ~•
lama ~ ~ ~~
a~; 1 `F p
~ g~ 3~~
A ~ ~ \``1 K
`~ G
Im o
7 I~\
~n3, \\// ~ `1 1
~ p I I I
( I
` ~N `\1 l ~ I o
/ ~_ I O
I I I
f ~ `J
~ ,
~ / F
_, ~ ~3 ~,
I ,~
~~ -~,',
_ I ',+ I f x
~~ i~ 4
i
8oi3nbaJe _ _-_ ~-~ ~-
' N
r
' N
N
~ , ~, I o I
a
~. ~ /I
© loasne sieve I 1
~ ~ I ~~ ~~
~I~
~ Oc I ~~I
~_.,'_.
p~w ' C
~g~ ~ ~
~,~ ~ ~ r
,~ ~~
i J~; 15+00
///YY
1
~ ~ o. 9~..
C ~ o° ~ ~ .~
' ~~ ~m
O O .
JAI `jJ ~ _ ~ / ~ ~ A ~ t r N
T ~ ~ ~ I I ~ 3 ~ o ~ ~ ~+ 9
4 V ~ ~ ~ \i ~ M Sa o 1-- ~ D
~ ~~ ~o-
~~ ~~ ^~ ~~a~ ~ 4~
T rr ~
6 - ua
-r`
I ~ / 1"1
/ ~ ~JJ
N77 / /
17'IV /
.. ~ / Z] a j ~~ `V
~ O <'
l1k b p _
^ 1 ntl~911 m o ~~
'H~" o+ t~ ia,
m
-~ t
w, ~
~ N°0
_ ~ ~ ~F
~ £
m~
~~
m
n C'l~~
• ~~ `lJ
~/ /
~LS /
~p.B4•
~ O'~f147 A 4Z'64Z ~ o
_ ~
_, rgmO
4~ ~ P
°m~
~~ ~' ~} ~ ~~m ? ~
~~ w~ ~~,
Y 'NO'JNOJ A/
_, ~ --w~-- _--
_ _ ~Z
~' P.S, nO
50.00 C p ~ c IA>
~~ ~ o..
H~ ~ ~
m
2' P.. ~ ° * ~'S
4' P.S. 4' P.S.
! i Z
~~

yy 0

=O
_
~ C

'
'
'
' 1Z
~~
1
~ 33 1
~
Om
~
~
~
>
{
[l7 OI

! i
4' P.S. ''
4' P.S.
~
~
!
~
- - g- o~~~~OD~
~ u ° u ~i~
_
`~ ~~ ~} a ~, rv $ ~3 ~
`Q ~
~~

I
IW
~
~~V
~ ~ s I I ..~
_~ N I ~ r I a + +' - __-- -----_
o ba° ~ ~ ' ~ ~ U ~o M.IO.co.IJ
J II ~ a ~' • ~ ,99 Ltb
w
~~

r-i
lr~
I o X

t 71

I
_

~ ~o
C a

Z~
~~

Q

,
^
~
I =
x
r ,.aog
J
_
I©
N ii Nm 4
J I N ;
O r ~
N
W
ti ti A
~
~ r
~

~

~

r
I
N
~ ~ ~
N N
cn m >
O O
m n.
~ b

.c`7 ' I I-

d ~ ~

O~
m m

m o
411 I
(,E~"
~"
N N p
111
N J n
~ j
n
` I

~
T ~ m ~ N , y O
J ~ N ~ ~
' J
+
S
~ ~ (~ u
KS
, -i
~D -1 o
p ~
S n D g o F.- ° D ,~
o
~m
U
~3
r a
: s
a: ~ ~~. ~

~
+ .
me =
a T
P Npc
~1 ~~

8 bo ~ .T ~~

8
yqn
i~
• N S+~

s y

,i
9 N
~~..,I
V Xq
_"
z =
I
N
I
I I~
I ~ /
Z
/

IIID ~

I
$

Q

O G
/o
i N

r

~i[
~I y i 1 il~i
/
I I+
I ' I I V m o

~n ~~ l~

Q /~~

~'
I ~ r
~ ° I
~ 4, ~
II~~ ~ I
I ~ ~
~
/~
+
~~ ~ ~
~ I
I~
II
I
I ~
~
~ ~
I
I : ~} /
~~

~ I. __
\ ~

I
I
12 2' P.S. ; ~
I
I
I I
~
~ ~' ~ r

I
I

4
I
~ . ~;~
)~ ° ~
~ ' (~-~s ~
r
I ~
I ' ~' o
I 4

,~
Wilson County
Bridge No. 79 on SR 1001 Over Bloomery Swamp
Federal-Aid Project No. BRZ-1001(27)
State Project No. 33663.1.1
T.I.P. Project No. B-4326
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
APPROVED:
DATE ~~Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph. D., Environmental Management Director
Project Development and Environmental
Analysis Branch, NCDOT
~-a~
DATE John F. Sullivan, III, P. E.
Division Administrator, FHWA

Wilson County
Bridge No. 79 on SR 1001 Over Bloomery Swamp
Federal-Aid Project No. BRZ-1001(27)
State Project No. 33663.1.1
T.I.P. Project No. B-4326
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
December 2005
Document Prepared by:
Wang Engineering Company, Inc.
~,~
Greg urvis, P. E.
Project Manager
`~~~~~~~uniu~~,~
'~.
``~~~.o~~~ CARpIi •,~~~
~r OFESS/0~;~'y
i Q~ '
• ~~
' 9 9
~ ~~
J '
~~~~'cG ~s~~~p~~ `~~ 12~ ~ S =° 5
For the North Carolina llepartment of "1"ransportation
~ .~lM
Wade Kirby, P ., . G
Project Development Engineer
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch

PROJECT COMMITMENTS
Wilson County
Bridge No. 79 on SR 1001 Over Bloomery Swamp
Federal-Aid Project No. BR~1001(27)
State Project No. 33663.1.1
T.I.P. Project No. B-4326
In addition to the standard Nationwide Permit No. 23 Conditions, the General Nationwide Permit
Conditions, Section 404 Only Conditions, Regional Conditions, State Consistency Conditions, NCDOT's
Guidelines for Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition and Removal, NCDOT's Guidelines for
Best Management Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters, General Certification Conditions, and
Section 401 Conditions of Certification, the following special commitments have been agreed to by
NCDOT:
Division Four
Road closure will be coordinated with the Wilson County Schools and Wilson County Emergency
Medical Services prior to construction.
Roadway Design
The State Historic Preservation Office agreed to Alternative A with the following provision: The project
limits will be reduced to avoid encroaching on the old store building located approximately 406 feet
northeast of the existing bridge. A note will be added to the roadway design plans to this effect. There is
also a possible UST involvement with the old store.
Categorical Exclusion Page I of I
December 2005

Wilson County
Bridge No. 79 on SR 1001 Over Bloomery Swamp
Federal-Aid Project No. BR~1001(27)
State Project No. 33663.1.1
T.I.P. Project No. B-4326
INTRODUCTION: The replacement of Bridge No. 79 is included in the 2006-2012 North Carolina
Department of Transportation (NCDOT) Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and the Federal-Aid
Bridge Replacement Program. The location is shown in Figure 1. No substantial environmental impacts
are anticipated. The project is classified as a Federal "Categorical Exclusion."
I. PURPOSE AND NEED
Bridge Maintenance Unit records indicated the bridge has a sufficiency rating of 44.5 out of a
possible 100 for a new structure. The bridge is considered functionally obsolete and structurally
deficient. The existing bridge does not meet the NCDOT Bridge Policy Standards for clear deck
width. The replacement of an inadequate structure will result in safer and more efficient traffic
operations.
II. EXISTING CONDITIONS
SR 1001 is classified as a rural minor collector. Land use in the project area is predominantly
woodlands, light residential and farmland. Undeveloped woodlands are adjacent on the north and
south sides of the study area. There is farmland to the north of the existing bridge.
Bridge No. 79 was constructed in 1951. The existing structure is 53 feet in length, consisting of
three spans with the maximum span at approximately 18 feet. The clear roadway width is 24.0
feet, providing two ten-foot travel lanes with two-foot gutters. The superstructure consists of a
reinforced concrete floor on timber joists. The substructure consists of timber caps on timber
piles. The bed to crown height is 11.6 feet and the normal depth of flow is 3.6 feet. The posted
weight limit is 19 tons for single vehicles (SV) and 28 tons for truck-tractors semi-trailers
(TTST).
The existing bridge on SR 1001 is on a tangent. There is an approximate 1,767-foot radius curve
located approximately nine feet north of the existing structure and an approximate 12,146-foot
radius curve located approximately 227 feet south of the existing structure. SR 1001 consists of
two ten-foot lanes with six-foot grass shoulders.
The estimated 2004 average daily traffic volume is 2,800 vehicles per day (vpd). The projected
traffic volume is expected to increase to 5,400 vpd by the design year 2030. The volumes include
three percent TTST and two percent dual tired vehicles.
The speed limit in the vicinity of the bridge is posted at 45 miles per hour (mph).
This section of SR 1001 is part of a designated NC Bicycling Highway, NC-7 Ocracoke Option.
There are aerial power and telephone lines on the east and west sides of the existing bridge.
There is fiber optic cable on the west side of the existing bridge. There is a natural gas line on the
west side of the existing bridge. Utility impacts are anticipated to be medium.
There was one accident reported for the three-year period of May 1, 2001 to April 30, 2004.

Five school buses cross this bridge daily.
III. ALTERNATIVES
A. Project Description
The proposed structure will provide a 33-foot six-inch clear deck width providing two 12-foot
travel lanes with four-feet nine-inches between the edge of travelway and the face of the bridge
rail. The design speed will be 50 mph.
The proposed approach roadway will consist of a 24-foot travel way providing for two 12-foot
travel lanes with eight-foot shoulders including four-foot paved shoulders. The proposed right-
of-way width is 80 feet.
Based on a preliminary hydraulic analysis, Bridge No. 79 will be a bridge approximately 110 feet
in length. The grade of the roadway will match the elevation of the existing roadway since
lowering the grade would cause the road to be flooded by Bloomery Swamp. The minimum deck
grade will be 0.3%. The length of the proposed bridge and the recommended roadway elevation
may be adjusted (increased or decreased) to accommodate design floods as deternlined in the
final hydrologic study and hydraulic design.
B. Build Alternatives
Two (2) build alternatives studied for replacing the existing bridge are described below.
Alternate A (Preferred) replaces the bridge at the existing location. During construction, traffic
will be maintained by an off-site detour route along SR 1309 and US 264 Alternate
approximately 4.7 miles in length. The length of approach work will be approximately 300 feet
on the south side of the bridge and approximately 340 feet on the north side of the bridge. The
right-of--way width is 80 feet.
Alternate B replaces the bridge on existing alignment. During construction, traffic will be
maintained by an on-site temporary detour structure located east of the existing bridge. The
length of approach work will be approximately 360 feet on the south side of the bridge and
approximately 327 feet on the north side of the bridge. The right-of--way width is 80 feet.
Alternate B was not chosen because it has comparatively higher natural environmental impacts
and construction cost.
C. Alternatives Eliminated From Further Study
The "Do-Nothing" Alternative will eventually necessitate removal of the bridge and closing of
the road. This is not desirable due to the traffic service provided by SR 1001.
Investigation of the existing structure by the Bridge Maintenance Unit indicates the rehabilitation
of the old bridge is not feasible due to its age and deteriorated condition.

D. Preferred Alternative
Alternate A, replacing the existing bridge at the existing location, while maintaining traffic by an
off-site detour route is the preferred alternate. Alternate A was selected because of the
comparatively lower construction cost, lower environmental impacts, and lesser construction time
associated with it.
The Division Engineer concurs with Alternate A as the preferred alternative.
Alternate A is estimated to cost $868,000. A breakdown of the estimated cost is shown in Item V
(Table 1).
IV. DESIGN EXCEPTIONS ANTICIPATED
No design exceptions will be required.
V. ESTIMATED COSTS
The estimated costs, based on current 2005 prices, are as follows:
Table 1. -Estimated Costs
Alternate A
..(Preferred) Alternate B
Structure Removal (existing) $ 13,500 $ 13,500
Structure (proposed) 376,200 376,200
Detour Structure and Approaches 0 103,400
Roadway Approaches 161,300 161,300
Miscellaneous and Mobilization 132,000 158,600
Engineering and Contingencies 117,000 137,000
ROW/Contt. Easements/[Jtilities: 68,000 160,000

TOTAL S 868,000 S .1,110,000.::
The estimated cost of the project, as shown in the 2006-2012 Transportation Improvement
Program, is $1,045,000 including $70,000 for right-of--way, $825,000 for construction, and
$150,000 for prior year costs.
VI. NATURAL RESOURCES
A. Methodology
Materials and research data in support of this investigation have been derived from a number of
sources including applicable U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) topographic mapping (Bailey, NC
[1988] 7.5-minute quadrangle), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetlands
Inventory (NWI) mapping (USFWS 1994), and recent aerial photography (1998). Water quality
information for area streams and tributaries was derived from the North Carolina Division of Water
Quality (DWQ) sources (DWQ 2004a-c, 2003, 2002a, 2002b, 2001). Quantitative sampling was not
undertaken to support existing data.

Natural community descriptions are based on a classification system utilized by the N.C. Natural
Heritage Program (NHP) (Schafale and Weakley 1990). When appropriate, community
classifications were modified to better reflect field observations. Vascular plant names generally
follow nomenclature found in Radford et al. (1968), with adjustments made to reflect more current
nomenclature (Kartesz 1998). Habitat used by terrestrial wildlife and aquatic organisms, as well as
expected population distributions, were determined through field observations, evaluation of available
habitat, and supportive documentation (Webster et al. 1985, Potter et al. 1980, Martof et al. 1980,
Rohde et al. 1994, Menhinick 1991, Hamel 1992, Palmer and Braswell 1995, Conant and Collins
1998).
Jurisdictional areas were evaluated using the three-parameter approach following U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (USAGE) delineation guidelines (Environmental Laboratory 1987). Wetland jurisdictional
areas were characterized according to a classification scheme established by Cowardin et al. (1979)
and A Field Guide To North Carolina Wetlands (DEM 1996).
Information regarding federally protected species within the project study area was obtained from the
USFWS list of federally protected species (February 25, 2003) and federal species of concern (FSC).
Supporting documents and databases documenting the presence of rare species and rare natural
communities were consulted before commencing field investigations (Amoroso 2002, LeGrand and
Hall 2001).
Bridge No. 79 was visited on Apri122 and 26, 2004. The project study area was walked and visually
surveyed for significant physical and biological features. For purposes of field surveys, the project
study area has been delineated by Wang Engineering (Figure 6). Special concerns evaluated in the
field include 1) potential habitat for protected species and 2) wetlands and water quality protection in
Bloomery Swamp.
B. Physiography and Soils
The project study area occurs within the Rolling Coastal Plain ecoregion of the Southeastern Plains
physiographic province of North Carolina (Griffith et al. 2002). The project study area is situated
within the terrace deposits and upland sediment and is underlain by gravel, clayey sand, and sand
(NCGS 1985). Elevations in the project study area range from approximately 130 to 170 feet
National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD) (USGS Bailey, NC [1988] 7.5-minute quadrangle).
Soils within the project study area consist of three series: Altavista, Bibb, and Wagram. Altavista
fine sandy loamy are nearly level, moderately well drained soils found along terraces of major
streams. Permeability is moderate and water capacity is medium. Altavista soils are rarely flooded
and the seasonal high water table is approximately 1.5 to 2.5 feet below the soil suface. Altavista
soils are located in the northeast quadrant of the project study area and are the least abundant soil
series within the project study area. Altavista soils are not listed as hydric in Wilson County (NRCS
1997).
Bibb loamy are nearly level, poorly drained soils on floodplains in Bloomery Swamp. Permeability is
moderate. Bibb soils are subject to frequent flooding and the seasonal high water table is
approximately 6 to 18 inches. Bibb loam is the most abundant soils series in the project study area
and is considered hydric in Wilson County (NRCS 1997).
Wagram loamy sands are well-drained soils on slightly convex upland ridges in the coastal plain.
Permeability is moderate and the available water capacity is low. Wagram soils are very susceptible
to wind erosion. The majority of upland soils within the project study area are Wagram soils.
Wagram soils are not considered hydric in Wilson County (NRCS 1997).
4

C. Water Resources
1. Waters Impacted
The project study area is located in sub-basin 03-04-07 of the Neuse River Basin (DWQ 2002a).
The project study area is part of USGS hydrologic unit 03020203 of the South Atlantic-Gulf
Coast Region (Seaber et al. 1987). The North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP),
formerly known as the North Carolina Wetland Restoration Program (WRP), does not list this
hydrological unit as a Targeted Local Watershed for restoration, enhancement, and preservation
of water and riparian resources (DWQ 2002b). This section of Bloomery Swamp, from 0.8 mile
upstream of SR 1001 (Bridge No. 79) to 0.3 mile upstream of Contentnea Creek has been
assigned Stream Index Number 27-86-6-(3) by the DWQ (DWQ 2001, DWQ 2004a).
Within the project study area, Bloomery Swamp is a third-order perennial stream exhibiting
strong sinuosity, slow to moderate velocity, with a moderately developed riffle-pool sequence.
The average width of the stream is approximately 25 feet. During the field survey, water clarity
was good. The substrate is primarily composed of sand and silt with some gravel.
2. Stream Characteristics
Classifications are assigned to waters of the State of North Carolina based on the existing or
contemplated best usage of various streams, or segments of streams, in the basin. A Best Usage
Classification of WS-IV NSW has been assigned to Bloomery Swamp in the project study area.
These waters are protected for Class WS-IV uses which include waters used as sources of potable
water where a WS-I, II or III classification is not feasible. WS-IV waters are generally in
moderately to highly developed watersheds or Protected Areas, and involve no categorical
restrictions on discharges. These waters are also protected for Class C uses. Class C uses
include aquatic life propagation and survival, fishing, wildlife, secondary recreation, and
agriculture. Secondary recreation refers to human body contact with waters on an infrequent or
incidental basis. The supplemental classification NSW, Nutrient Sensitive Waters, is intended for
waters needing additional nutrient management due to vulnerability to excessive growth of
microscopic or macroscopic vegetation. In general, management strategies for point and non-
point source pollution control require no increase in nutrients over background levels. Bloomery
Swamp is "not rated" based on its classification and appears to be poorly monitored (DWQ
2002a).
No watershed Critical Area (CA) occurs within 1 mile of the project study area. No designated
High Quality Waters (HQW), Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW), Water Supply I (WS-I), or
Water Supply II (WS-II) waters occur within 1 mile of the project study area (DWQ 2002a).
The DWQ conducts awhole-basin approach to water quality management for the 17 river basins
within the state. To accomplish this goal, the DWQ collects biological, chemical, and physical
data that can be used in basinwide assessment and planning. All basins are reassessed every five
years. No ambient water quality monitoring station (AMS) exists on Bloomery Swamp (DWQ
2002a). The nearest AMS (A-7) is located approximately 7 miles downstream of the project
study area on Contentnea Creek. Water quality parameters do not exceed North Carolina
standards at this station. A benthic macroinvertebrate sampling station (SB-2) is located
approximately 4.2 miles downstream from the project study area at the NC 42 crossing (DWQ
2002a). Bloomery Swamp received a "poor" bioclassification rating in 1996 and 2000 (DWQ
2002a). Further monitoring has apparently not been conducted.

The Neuse River subbasin 03-04-07 supports 21 permitted dischargers with a total permitted flow
of 21.2 million gallons per day. The largest dischargers are the Wilson Waste Water Treatment
Plant (WWTP), Contentnea Sewage District WWTP, Farmville WWTP, and Little Creek WWTP
with permitted discharges of 12, 2.8, 3.5, and 1.8 million gallons per day, respectively (DWQ
2004c).
Nonpoint source (NPS) pollution refers to runoff that enters surface waters through stormwater or
snow melt. Sediments and nutrients are the major pollution sources associated with NPS
pollution. Other pollutants include any substance that may be washed off the ground or removed
from the atmosphere and carried into surface waters. Unlike point source pollution, NPS
pollution is diffuse in nature and occurs at random intervals depending on rainfall events. Major
non-point sources of pollution within the project study area subbasin (03-04-07) include
agriculture, forageland, and animal operations (DWQ 2001).
The DWQ has assembled a list of impaired waterbodies according to the Clean Water Act Section
303(d) and 40 CFR 130.7. The list is a comprehensive public accounting of all impaired
waterbodies. An impaired waterbody is one that does not meet water quality standards including
designated uses, numeric and narrative criteria, and anti-degradation requirements defined in 40
CFR 131. The standards violation may be due to an individual pollutant, multiple pollutants, or
an unknown cause of impairment. The source of impairment could be from point sources,
nonpoint sources, and/or atmospheric deposition. Some sources of impairment exist across state
lines. North Carolina's methodology is strongly based on the aquatic life use support guidelines
available in the Section 305(b) guidelines (EPA-841-B-97-002A and -002B). Bloomery Swamp
is not listed on the NC 2002 or 2004 Section 303(d) list of impaired streams in the Neuse River
Basin (DWQ 2003 and 2004b).
The WRC has developed a Significant Aquatic Endangered Species Habitat database to enhance
planning and impact analysis in areas proposed by WRC as being critical due to the presence of
Endangered or Threatened aquatic species. No Significant Aquatic Endangered Species Habitat
occurs within the project study area watershed (USGS Hydrologic Unit 03020203020010). The
nearest Significant Aquatic Endangered Species Habitat within the Neuse River Basin occurs
approximately 7 miles northwest of the project study area in Nash County (WRC 1998).
To minimize fishing and non-fishing activities that adversely affect marine fisheries, areas of
Essential Fish Habitat afford limited protection under the Magnuson-Stevens Act of 1996 (16
U.S.C. 1801 et seq.). Essential Fish Habitat has been broadly defined by congress as "those
waters and substrate necessary to fish for spawning, breeding, feeding, or growth to maturity."
Fishing and non-fishing related activities that can adversely affect fisheries include fishing gear,
dredging, filling, agricultural and urban runoff, and point-source pollution discharge.
Anadromous fish spawning habitat does not occur within Bloomery Swamp. Therefore, Essential
Fish Habitat does not exist within the project study area, and consultation with the National
Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) is not required. _
3. Anticipated Impacts
a) Impacts Related to Water Resources
Temporary construction impacts due to erosion and sedimentation will be minimized through
implementation of a stringent erosion control schedule and the use of Best Management
Practices (BMPs). The contractor will follow contract specifications pertaining to erosion
control measures as outlined in 23 CFR 6S0 Subpart B and Article 107-13 entitled Control of
Erosion, Siltation, and Pollution (NCDOT, Specifications for Roads and Structures). These
6

measures include the use of dikes, berms, silt basins, and other containment measures to
control runoff; elimination of construction staging areas in floodplains and adjacent to
waterways; re-seeding of herbaceous cover on disturbed sites; management of chemicals
(herbicides, pesticides, de-icing compounds) with potential negative impacts on water
quality; and avoidance of direct discharges into streams by catch basins and roadside
vegetation. In addition, tall fescue is not suitable for erosion control along stream banks.
The proposed bridge replacement will allow for continuation of pre-project stream flows in
Bloomery Swamp, thereby protecting the integrity of this waterway. Long-term impacts
resulting from construction are expected to be negligible. In order to minimize impacts to
water resources, NCDOT BMPs for the Protection of Surface Waters will be strictly enforced
during the entire life of the project.
b) Impacts Related to Bridge Demolition and Removal
In order to protect the water quality and aquatic life in the area affected by this project, the
NCDOT and all potential contractors will follow appropriate guidelines for bridge demolition
and removal. These guidelines are presented in three NCDOT documents entitled "Pre-
Construction Guidelines for Bridge Demolition and Removal", "Policy: Bridge Demolition
and Removal in Waters of the United States", and "Best Management Practices for Bridge
Demolition and Removal" (all documents dated 9/20/99). Guidelines followed for bridge
demolition and removal are in addition to those implemented for Best Management Practices
for the Protection of Surface Waters.
Dropping any portion of the structure into waters of the United States will be avoided unless
there is no other practical method of removal. In the event that no other practical method is
feasible, aworst-case scenario is assumed for calculations of fill entering waters of the United
States. There is potential for components of the bridge to be dropped into waters of the
United States. The resulting temporary fill associated with the concrete deck is expected to
be approximately 14 cubic yards. NCDOT's Best Management Practices for Bridge
Demolition and Removal (BMP-BDR) will be applied for the removal of this bridge.
No Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW) or anadromous species are anticipated to be
impacted by this project. Under the guidelines presented in the documents noted in the first
paragraph of this section, work done in the water for this project will fall under Case 3, where
there are no special restrictions beyond those outlined in NCDOT's Best Management
Practices for Protection of Surface Waters.
D. Biotic Resour-ces
1. Plant Communities
Five distinct plant communities were identified within the project study area:
disturbed/maintained land, Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest (Coastal Plain Subtype), Coastal Plain
Bottomland Hardwoods (Blackwater Subtype), Coastal Plain Levee Forest (Blackwater Subtype),
and Coastal Plain Semipermanent Impoundment (Figure 6). These plant communities are
described below.
a) Disturbed/Maintained Land
Disturbed/maintained land is the dominant land use type in the project study area and
encompasses diverse vegetation types. Approximately 11.9 acres occur as maintained

residential areas and road right-of--ways. The maintained roadside area is approximately 20
feet wide and consists of mowed herbaceous vegetation. Plant species on the roadside
margins include clover (Trifolium spp.), chickweed (Stellaria media), Japanese honeysuckle
(Lonicera japonica), and fescue (Festuca spp.). Plant species in residential areas range from
mowed fescue (southeast quadrant of the project study area) to mixed pine-hardwood trees,
such as loblolly pine (Pinus taeda), white oak (Quercus alba), willow oak (Q. phellos), water
.oak (Q. nigra), and red maple (Ater rubrum) with a landscaped understory of herbs, shrubs,
and/or small trees (northern half of the project study area). Disturbed/maintained land is
variable in plant and wildlife diversity depending upon the individual landowner. Lawns
have the least diversity of wildlife relative to forested yards. Wildlife species that utilize
lawns include American robins (Turdus migratorius), white-tailed deer (Odocoileus
virginianus), northern mockingbirds (Mimus polyglottos), and eastern cottontail (Sylvilagus
floridanus). American robins and northern mockingbirds forage for soil and fescue
associated invertebrates. White-tailed deer and rabbits consume many of the herbaceous
species. Mixed pine-hardwood yards provide habitat for pine warblers (Dendroica pinus),
summer tanagers (Piranga rubra), red-eyed vireos (Vireo olivaceous), yellow-throated vireos
(Vireo flavifrons), northern cardinals (Cardinalis cardinalis), great crested flycatchers
(Myiarchus crinitus), blue gray gnatcatchers (Polioptila caerulea), Carolina wrens
(Thryothorus ludovicianus), Carolina chickadees (Poecile carolinensis), tufted titmice
(Baeolophus bicolor), eastern gray squirrels (Sciurus carolinensis), black rat snakes (Elaphe
obsoleta), and white-tailed deer.
b) Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest (Coastal Plain Subtype)
This forest type occupies a total of 2.1 acres within the project study area and is the adjacent
upland plant community to the Coastal Plain Bottomland Hardwood Forest. Canopy species
include white oak, water oak, sweetgum (Liquidambar sryraciJlua), red maple, black cherry
(Prunus serotina), tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), and sourwood (Oxydendron
arboreum). The shrub layer consists of blueberry (Vaccinium arboreum), Chinese privet
(Ligustrum sinense), and various canopy species saplings. Vines present include greenbrier
(Smilax rotundifolia) and muscadine grape (Vitis rotundifolia). The herbaceous layer is
sparse and mainly consists of Christmas fern (Polystichum acrosticoides). Wood thrush
(Hylocichla mustelina), blue-gray gnatcatchers, great crested flycatchers, and northern
cardinals were observed during the field visit. Wildlife species that utilize the resources of
this plant community include wood thrush, red-eyed vireos, yellow-throated vireos, Carolina
chickadees, tufted titmice, northern black racer (Coluber constrictor), and southeastern shrew
(Sorex longirostris). Wood thrushes nest in shrubs and saplings and forage for invertebrates
on the forest floor. These same invertebrates are also eaten by southeastern shrews, which in
turn are eaten by the northern black racer. Northern black racers also eat bird eggs and
nestlings.
c) Coastal Plain Bottomland Hardwoods (Blackwater Subtype)
Coastal Plain Bottomland Hardwood Forests cover approximately 2.3 acres. The mature
canopy is mainly composed of black gum (Nyssa bijlora), red maple, river birch (Betula
nigra), green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), water oak, and willow oak. Tulip poplar also
occupies the canopy. Shrubs present include fetter-bush (Leucothoe racemosa), sweet
pepperbush (Clethra alnifolia), tag alder (Alnus serrulata), giant cane (Arundinaria
gigantea), and saplings of canopy species (mainly red maple). Vines present include
greenbrier (Smilax laurifolia), muscadine grape, poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans) and
Virginia creeper (Parthenocissus quinquefolia). The herb layer consists of sedges (Carex
spp.), rushes (Juncus spp.), arrow arum (Peltandra virginica), Asian spiderwort (Murdania

keisak), lizard's tail (Saururus cernuus), and touch-me-not (Impatiens capensis). Wildlife
species observed during the field visit include downy woodpecker (Picoides pubescens),
southern leopard frog (Rana utricularia), Kentucky warbler (Oporornis formosus), Louisiana
waterthrush (Seiurus motacilla), and broadhead skink (Eumeces laticeps). Wildlife species
that utilize Coastal Plain Bottomland Hardwood Forests include prothonotary warblers
(Protonotaria citrea), Kentucky warblers, hooded warblers (Wilsonia citrina), Louisiana
waterthrush, broadhead skinks, red-bellied watersnakes (Nerodia erythrogaster), and barred
owls (Strix varia). Prothonotary warblers nest in small cavities in small trees or standing
dead wood over water. Hooded warblers and wood thrushes nest in patches of small shrubs
and saplings. Kentucky warblers nest on or near the ground in areas with fallen woody
debris. These Neotropical migrant songbirds are exclusively insectivorous during the
breeding season and thrive on the abundant insects within the Bottomland Hardwood Forest.
Barred owls nest in large cavities and utilize the abundant reptiles (e.g. broadhead skink),
amphibians (e.g. southern leopard frogs), and small mammals (shrews and mice) that live in
Bottomland Hardwood Forests. All areas of this plant community within the project study
area are subject to consideration under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act as "waters of the
United States" (33 CFR Section 328.3).
d) Coastal Plain Levee Forest (Blackwater Subtype)
Coastal Plain Levee Forest makes up approximately 1.6 acres of the project study area. This
plant community is described by Schafale and Weakley (1990) as natural levee deposits along
channels of blackwater rivers that are seasonally to intermittently flooded, with variable flow
regimes. The water tends to be very acidic, low in mineral sediments and nutrients, and
colored by tannins. Coastal Plain Levee Forest occurs in upland areas adjacent to the non-
maintained banks on the floodplain sides of Bloomery-Swamp throughout the project study
area (Figure 6). The mature canopy is dominated by river birch, red maple, sweetgum, black
cherry, and tulip poplar. The mid-story and shrub layers are well developed and contain
sweet pepperbush, giant cane, and Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense). These shrubs are
intertwined and made almost impenetrable by vine species such as muscadine grape,
greenbrier, Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), poison ivy, and Virginia creeper. The
herb layer is sparse due to the well developed shrub and vine layers but includes the exotic
and invasive microstegium (Microstegium vimineum). Wildlife species that utilize Mesic
Mixed Hardwood Forests also exploit Coastal Plain Levee Forests, especially when these
forests are narrow as they are on small streams such as Bloomery Swamp.
e) Coastal Plain Semipermanent Impoundment
Coastal Plain Semipermanent Impoundment is the least abundant plant community in the
project study area (approximately 0.06 acre). This community is located near an abondoned
hog pen that has a concrete drain that once emptied into the wetland. This impoundment was
probably excavated in the floodplain of Bloomery Swamp decades ago. Spoil around the
impoundment is evident. Natural Semipermanent Impoundments are typically beaver ponds
throughout the state, but man-made examples are numerous (e.g. millponds; Schafale and
Weakley 1990). The hydrology of Semipermanent impoundments consists of permanent
inundation, and the plant composition consists of few submerged species. This particular
Semipermanent Impoundment contains coontails (Ceratophyllum spp.) and duckweed
(Lemna spp.). Eastern mud turtles (Kinosternon subrubrum) and bullfrogs (Rana
catesbeiana) readily utilize this habitat for feeding and reproducing. All areas of this plant
community within the project study area are subject to consideration under Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act as "waters of the United States" (33 CFR Section 328.3).

2. Aquatic Communities
Southern leopard frogs, bullfrogs, an eastern mud turtle and a cottonmouth (Agkistrodon
piscivorous) were the only aquatic amphibians and reptiles observed during the site visit. Typical
amphibian species for these habitat types include spring peepers (Pseudacris crucifer), southern
cricket frogs (Acris gryllus), and green frogs (Rana clamitans). Bloomery Swamp and the
associated wetlands provide suitable habitat for aquatic and semi-aquatic reptiles including
eastern mud turtle, common musk turtle (Sternotherus odoratus), snapping turtle (Chelydra
serpentina), red-bellied watersnake (Nerodia erythrogaster), and cottonmouth. No benthic
invertebrates were observed during the field visit.
No sampling was undertaken in Bloomery Swamp to determine fishery potential. No identifiable
fish were noted during the field visit. Species which may be present within Bloomery Swamp
include dusky shiner (Notropis cummingsae), creek chubsucker (Erimyson oblongus), yellow
bullhead (Ictalurus natalis), margined madtom (Noturus insignis), tadpole madtom (Noturus
gyrinus), pirate perch (Aphredoderus sayanus), eastern mosquitofish (Gambusia holbrooki),
bluespotted sunfish (Enneacanthus gloriosus), redbreast sunfish (Lepomis auritis), warmouth
(Lepomis gulosus), sawcheek darter (Etheostoma serriferum), and swamp darter (E. fusiforme).
No anadromous fish utilize Bloomery Swamp.
3. Anticipated Impacts to Biotic Communities
Alternate B permanent Plant Community impacts are only slightly larger than Alternate A
permanent impacts. Permanent plant community impacts are negligible for both alternatives
(approximately 1 acre, Table 2). The majority of impacts will occur in the most disturbed areas
(disturbed/maintained). Temporary impacts (Alternate B detour bridge) are also small. A total of
only 0.2 acres will be temporarily affected by the on-site detour associated with Alternate B.
No significant habitat fragmentation will be expected as a result of project activities if potential
improvements are restricted to adjoining roadside margins. Construction noise and associated
disturbances will have short-term impacts on avifauna and migratory wildlife movement patterns.
Potential downstream impacts to aquatic habitat are to be avoided by bridging the stream system
to maintain regular flow and stream integrity. Short-term impacts associated with turbidity and
suspended sediments and pollutants may affect benthic populations. Benthic invertebrates form
the basis of the food chain in stream and estuarine systems. Impacts to downstream habitats
associated with turbidity and suspended sediments will be minimized through the use of silt
curtains and the implementation of stringent erosion control measures.
10

Table 2. Project Studv Area Plant Community Imaacts
Alternate A

Plant
(Preferred) Alternate B Alternate B Alternate B

Community Total Area
Permanent permanent Temporary (Total

Im acts Impacts Impacts Impacts)
Bottomland

Hardwood Forest 2 3 - -
-
-
Disturbed/Maint

ained 11.9 0.7 0.9 0.13 1.1
Mesic Mixed

Hardwood Forest 2 1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2
Coastal Plain
Semipermanent 0.1 _ _ _ _
Im .
Total 16.4 0.8 1.0 0.2 13
Areas are given in acres (hectares).
No Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW) or anadromous species are anticipated to be impacted
by this project. Under the guidelines presented in the documents noted in the first paragraph of
this section, work done in the water for this project will fall under Case 3, where there are no
special restrictions beyond those outlined in NCDOT's Best Management Practices for
Protection o, f .Surface Waters.
E. Special Topics
1. Waters of the United States
Surface waters within and adjacent to the embankments of Bloomery Swamp are subject to
jurisdictional consideration under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act as "waters of the United
States" (33 CFR Section 328.3). The Bloomery Swamp channel and immediate floodplain,
upstream of bridge No. 79 have been characterized on NWI mapping (NWI Bailey, NC [ 1988]
7.5-minute quadrangle) as palustrine, forested with broad-leaved deciduous trees, and temporarily
flooded (PFO1 A). Downstream from Bridge No. 79, NWI mapping classifies Bloomery Swamp
channel and floodplain as palustrine, forested with broad-leaved deciduous trees and are
semipermanently flooded and impounded (PFO1Fh). During the field visit, the channel of
Bloomery Swamp was determined to be riverine, lower perennial with an unconsolidated bottom
that is permanently flooded (R2UBH). The project study area contains a total of approximately
808 linear feet of perennial streams (Table 3).
Vegetated wetlands are subject to jurisdictional consideration under Section 404 of the Clean
Water Act as "waters of the United States" (33 CFR Section 328.3). These areas are defined by
the presence of three primary criteria: hydric soils, hydrophytic vegetation, and evidence of
hydrology at or near the surface for a minimum of 12.5 percent of the growing season
(Environmental Laboratory 1987). During the field visit, two wetland types found within the
floodplains of Bloomery Swamp generally agreed with the NWI classifications on floodplains
upstream and downstream of Bridge No. 79 (see above paragraph). However, the NWI
impoundment status of the downstream floodplain seems to have reverted, or is in the process of
reverting, to temporary flooding (PFO1 A) except for a small area near an old hog pen. Reasons
for impoundment and subsequent reversion are unidentified, and due to factors (beaver activity,
man-made dams, etc.) downstream of the project study area. A total of 2.4 acres of wetlands
occurs within the project study area.

Replacement of Bridge No. 79 will be constructed with one of two alternatives: A) replacement
in place with an off-site detour of approximately 4 miles or B) replacement in place with an on-
site detour via a temporary bridge on the east side of the existing structure. Both alternatives
employ similar designs for the replacement structure. Alternative A will result in no permanent
or temporary impacts to waters of the United States beyond bridge demolition. The temporary
detour bridge proposed in Alternate B will result in no permanent impacts to waters of the United
States and less than 0.1 acre, if any, temporary impacts to Bottomland Hardwood Forest wetland
(Table 3). A request fora "no practical alternatives" determination will have to be made to the
DWQ if Alternate B is chosen. Final determination rests with the DWQ.
Table 3. Jurisdictional Areas and Impacts within the Prniect 4turly Area

Cowardin Linear
Total Permanent
Temporary

Classification Distance
f
t
Area (acres) Impacts
Impacts
(acres) DWQ hating'
ee A and B .
1t2UBH
(Bloomery 808.0 N/A - - N/A
Swamp)
PFOIA
(Bottomland N/A 2.3 - <0.1 78
Hardwood
Forest)
PFO1Fh
(Semipermanent N/A 0.05 - - 78
Impoundment)
Total 808.0 2.4 - x(1.1 N/A ;,
2. Permits
a). Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
This project may be processed as a Categorical Exclusion (CE) under Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) guidelines. The USACE has made available Nationwide Permit
(NWP) No. 23 (67 FR 2082; January 15, 2002) for CEs due to expected minimal impact.
Activities under this permit are categorically excluded from environmental documentation
because they are included within a category of activities that neither individually nor
cumulatively have a significant effect on the human and natural environment. Activities
authorized under nationwide permits must satisfy all terms and conditions of the particular
permit.
b). Section 401 Water Quality Certification
DWQ has made available a General 401 Water Quality Certification for NWP No. 23 (GC
3403). If temporary structures are necessary for construction activities, access fills, or
dewatering of the site, then a NWP 33 (67 FR 2020, 2087; January 15, 2002) permit and
associated General 401 Water Quality Certification (GC 3366) will be required. Impacts to
vegetated wetlands may be authorized under NWP 3 (67 FR 2020, 2078) and the associated
General 401 Water Quality Certification (GC 3376). In the event that NWPs 23, 33, and 3
will not suffice, impacts attributed to bridge replacement and associated approach
improvements may qualify under General Bridge Permit (GP) 031 issued by the Wilmington
12

USACE District. DWQ has made available a Genera1401 Water Quality Certification for GP
031 (GC 3404). Notification to the Wilmington USACE District office is required if this
general permit is utilized. Alternative B proposes to undertake uses designated as Allowable
under the Neuse River Basin Rule. A request fora "no practical alternatives" determination
will have to be made to DWQ if Alternative B is chosen.
c). Bridge Demolition and Removal
If no practical alternative exists to remove the current bridge other than to drop it into the
water, prior to removal of debris off-site, fill related to demolition procedures will need to be
considered during the permitting process. A worst-case scenario will be assumed with the
understanding that if there is any other practical method available, the bridge will not be
dropped into the water. The worst-case scenario associated with the bridge removal is
expected to be 14 cubic yards of temporary fill. Permitting will be coordinated such that any
permit needed for bridge construction will also address issues related to bridge demolition.
3. Riparian Buffer Protection Rules for the Neuse River Basin
The Nutrient Sensitive Waters Management Strategy for the Protection and Maintenance of
Riparian Buffers for the Neuse River Basin (15A NCAC 02B .0233) provides a designation for
uses that cause impacts to riparian buffers within the Neuse River Basin. The Neuse River Basin
Buffer Rule applies to 50-foot wide riparian buffers (measured perpendicular to the stream)
directly adjacent to surface waters in the Neuse River Basin. Designated surface waters are
indicated on USGS 7.5-minute topographic maps and county soil surveys. Within the project
study area, Bloomery Swamp is the only feature subject to the riparian buffer rule.
Changes in land use within the buffer area are considered to be buffer impacts. Land use changes
within the riparian buffer are defined as being Exempt, Allowable, Allowable with Mitigation, or
Prohibited (15A NCAC 2B .0233 (7)). The Exempt designation refers to uses allowed within the
buffer. The Allowable designation refers to uses that may proceed within the riparian buffer
provided there are no practical alternatives, and that written authorization from the DWQ is
obtained prior to project development. The Allowable with Mitigation designation refers to uses
that are allowed, given there are no practical alternatives, and appropriate mitigation plans have
been approved. The Prohibited designation refers to uses that are prohibited without a variance.
Exemptions to the riparian buffer rule include the footprint of existing uses that are present and
ongoing (15A NCAC 2B .0233 (3)(b)).
Both alternatives for the replacement of Bridge No. 79 permanently impact less than 40 linear
feet of riparian buffer, and are therefore Exempt under the Neuse River Basin Buffer Rule.
Temporary impacts from the on-site detour of Alternate B are approximately 3,485 square feet.
Impacts from temporary roads used for bridge construction or replacement are Allowable,
providing that restoration activities, such as soil stabilization and revegetation, are conducted
immediately after construction (15A NCAC 2B .0233 (6)). In addition, any changes to
stortnwater discharges due to the project should be converted to diffuse flow prior to entering the
buffers.
4. Mitigation
The USACE 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
waters of the United States, and specifically wetlands. Mitigation of wetland impacts has been
13

defined by the CEQ to include: avoiding impacts (to wetlands), minimizing impacts, rectifying
impacts, reducing impacts over time and compensating for impacts (40 CFR 1508.20). Each of
these three aspects (avoidance, minimization, and compensatory mitigation) must be considered
sequentially.
Avoidance mitigation examines all appropriate and practicable 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 USACE, in determining "appropriate and
practicable" measures to offset unavoidable impacts, such measures should be appropriate to the
scope and degree of those impacts and practicable in terms of cost, existing technology and
logistics in light of overall project purposes. Impacts to streams are expected due to the nature of
the project. Not all sediment can be prevented from entering waters of the United States.
Minimization includes the examination of appropriate and practicable 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 typically focuses on decreasing the
footprint of the proposed project through the reduction to median widths, right-of--way widths, fill
slopes, and/or road shoulder widths. All efforts will be made to decrease impacts to surface
waters. The existing bridge is being replaced in the existing location with an offsite detour to
minimize natural environment impacts and 3:1 fill slopes will be utilized in wetland areas to
minimize impacts.
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. In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0506(h), the DWQ may require compensatory
mitigation for projects with greater than or equal to 0.1 acre of impacts to jurisdictional wetlands
or greater than or equal to 150 linear feet of total perennial stream impacts. Furthermore, in
accordance with 67 FR 2020, 2092; January 15, 2002, the USACE requires compensatory
mitigation when necessary to ensure that adverse effects to the aquatic environment are minimal.
The size and type of the proposed project impact and the function and value of the impacted
aquatic resource are factors considered in determining acceptability of appropriate and practicable
compensatory mitigation. 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, preservation and
enhancement, and creation of waters of the United States. Such actions should be undertaken
first in areas adjacent to or contiguous to the discharge site.
Compensatory mitigation for Section 404 jurisdictional area impacts may not need to be proposed
for this project due to the potentially limited nature of the project impacts. However, utilization
of BMPs is recommended in an effort to minimize impacts. Temporary impacts to floodplains
associated with construction activities could be mitigated by replanting disturbed areas with
native riparian species and removal of temporary fill material upon project completion. Fill or
alteration of more than 150 linear feet of stream may require compensatory mitigation in
accordance with 15 NCAC 2H .0506(h). A final determination regarding mitigation rests with
the USACE and the DWQ.
Opportunities for compensatory mitigation are available within the project study area. The
proposed replacement structure includes extending the distance between abutments and will allow
for less concentrated flow under Bridge No. 79. This will reduce flooding immediately upstream
and improve aquatic habitat under the bridge and downstream.
14

F. Protected Species
1. Federally Protected Species
Species with the federal classification of Endangered (E), Threatened (T), Threatened due to
Similarity of Appearance (T [S/A]), or officially Proposed (P) for such listing are protected under
the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). The term
"Endangered Species" is defined as "any species which is in danger of extinction throughout all
or a significant portion of its range," and the term "Threatened Species" is defined as "any
species which is likely to become an Endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout
all or a significant portion of its range" (16 U.S.C. 1532). The term "Threatened due to Similarity
of Appearance" is defined as a species which is not "Endangered" or "Threatened," but "closely
resembles an Endangered or Threatened species" (16 U.S.C. 1532).
Three federally protected species are listed as occurring in Wilson County (February 25, 2003
USFWS list). Another endangered species, bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), was last seen
in this county in 2001 approximately 10 miles southwest of the project study area. Although not
included in the USFWS County List, this species is included in the following biological
conclusions. A summary of Biological Conclusions for the replacement of Bridge No. 79 is
represented in Table 4.
Table 4. Federally Protected Species
Commou Name Scientific Name Biological Conclusion ~
.. Federal
Status
Dwarf wedge mussel Alasmidonta heterodon No Effect E
Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus May Affect, Not Likely to T
Adversely Affect
Red-cockaded
Picoides borealis
No Effect
E
woodpecker
Michaux's sumac Rhus michauxii No Effect E
T- Threatened, E- Endangered, Exp- Experimental
Alasmidonta heterodon (Dwarf wedge mussel)
Endangered
Family: Unionidae
Date Listed: March 14, 1990
The dwarf wedge mussel is relatively small, averaging 1.0 to 1.5 inches long. The shells are
olive-green to dark brown in color and are subrhomboidally shaped. The shells of females are
swollen posteriorly, while males are generally flattened (TSCFTM 1990). This mussel species
typically inhabits streams with moderate flow velocities and substrates varying in texture from
gravel and coarse sand to mud with little silt deposition (USFWS 1992). The preferred habitats
are streams with moderate flow velocities and bottoms varying in texture from gravel and coarse
sand to mud, especially just downstream of debris and on banks of accreting sediment. Several
intensive mussel surveys were conducted in Contentnea Creek and its tributaries from 1991-1993
in association with environmental documentation for the proposed Buckhorn Reservoir
expansion. This species has been well documented in Turkey and Moccasin Creeks upstream
from Buckhorn Reservoir, but has not been documented within Contentnea Creek or tributaries
downstream from Buckhorn Reservoir. This .species was previously known only from a few,
disjunct populations in the Neuse River basin (Johnston Co.) and Tar River basin (Granville Co.).
15

State-wide surveys conducted since 1992 have expanded this species' range in North Carolina
(WRC 2004).
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
Previous surveys of this swamp have only resulted in finding the mussel Elliptio sp. Also, the
relatively low pH (around 6.5 su) in the watershed suggests that it would not support the Dwarf
wedge mussel. Due to these factors we have determined that another survey for Alasmidonta
heterodon is not necessary. Staff from the WRC concur with this opinion. Furthermore, a review
of the NHP database of rare species and unique habitats revealed no records of Dwarf wedge
mussel within Bloomery Swamp.
Haliaeetus leucocephalus (Bald eagle)
Threatened (proposed for delisting)
Family: Accipitridae
Date Listed: March 11, 1967
The bald eagle is a large raptor with a wingspan greater than 6 feet. Adult bald eagles are dark
brown with a white head and tail. Immature bald eagles are brown with white mottling on the
tail, belly, and wing linings. Bald eagles typically feed on fish; however, they may also take birds
and small mammals. In the Carolinas, the nesting season extends from December through May
(Potter et al. 1980). Bald eagles typically nest in tall, living trees in conspicuous locations near
open water. Eagles forage over large bodies of water and utilize adjacent trees for perching
(Hamel 1992). Disturbance activities within a primary zone extending 750 to 1,500 feet from a
nest tree are considered to result in unacceptable conditions for eagles (USFWS 1987). USFWS
recommends avoiding disturbances, including construction and tree-cutting, within this primary
zone. A secondary zone extends from the primary zone boundary out to a distance of 1 mile from
a nest tree. Construction and land-clearing activities should be restricted within the secondary
zone to the non-nesting period. The USFWS also recommends avoiding the alteration of natural
shorelines where bald eagles forage and avoiding significant land-clearing activities within 1,500
feet of known roosting sites.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: MAY AFFECT, NOT LIKELY TO ADVERSELY AFFECT
NHP records document the nearest occurrence of the bald eagle in Wilson County as
approximately 1.5 miles west of the project study area. The project study area has breeding and
foraging habitat for bald eagles. In April 2004, a survey was conducted along the Bloomery
Swamp shoreline for a distance of 1,500 feet upstream and downstream of Bridge No. 79. No
bald eagles or eagle nests were observed during this survey.
Picoides borealis (Red-cockaded woodpecker)
Endangered
Family: Picidae
Date Listed: October 13, 1970
This small woodpecker (7 to 8.5 inches long) has a black head, prominent white cheek patches,
and ablack-and-white barred back. Males often have red markings (cockades) behind the eye;
however, the cockades may be absent or difficult to see (Potter et al. 1980). Primary habitat
consists of mature to over-mature southern pine forests dominated by loblolly (Pinus taeda),
long-leaf (P. palustris), slash (P. elliottii), and pond pines (P. serotina) (Thompson and Baker
1971). Nest cavities are constructed in the heartwood of living pines, generally older than 70
years that have been infected with red-heart disease. Nest cavity trees tend to occur in clusters,
16

which are referred to as colonies (USFWS 1985). The woodpecker drills holes in the bark around
the cavity entrance, resulting in a shiny, resinous buildup around the entrance that allows for easy
detection of active nest trees. Foraging habitat is comprised of open pine or pine/mixed
hardwood stands 30 years of age or older (Henry 1989). Pine flatwoods or pine-dominated
savannas, which have been maintained by frequent natural fires serve as ideal nesting and
foraging sites for this woodpecker. Development of a thick understory may result in
abandonment of cavity trees.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
NHP has no records of red-cockaded woodpeckers (RCWs) within 5 miles of the project study
area, and no evidence of RCWs was observed during the site visit. Although the disturbed
maintained community contains individuals of loblolly pine in the northeast quadrant of the
project study area, the understory beneath the loblolly pines is thicker than that preferred by the
RCW. In addition, the pines in this portion of the project study area will not be impacted by
either construction alternative. This project is not expected to adversely affect RCWs.
Rhus michauxii (Michaux's sumac)
Endangered
Family: Anacardiaceae
Date Listed: September 28, 1989
Michaux's sumac is a dioecious, densely pubescent rhizomatous shrub, generally 2 to 3 feet in
height, which produces fruits (drupes) and seeds in late summer. The alternate, compound leaves
consist of 9 to 13 hairy, round-based, toothed leaflets borne on a hairy rachis that may be slightly
winged (Radford et al. 1968). Most populations appear to be monoclonal, consisting exclusively
of male or female plants that propagate vegetatively by way of rhizomes. Michaux's sumac tends
to grow in disturbed areas where competition is reduced by periodic fire or other disturbances,
and may grow along roadside margins or utility right-of--ways. In the Piedmont, Michaux's
sumac appears to prefer clay soil derived from mafic rocks or sandy soil derived from granite; in
the Sandhills, it prefers loamy swales (Weakley 1993).
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
A review of the NHP database of rare species and unique habitats revealed no records of existing
populations of Michaux's sumac within 5 miles of the project study area. There is little suitable
habitat within the project study area because most maintained areas are frequently mowed.
However, some of the disturbed areas within the project study area could harbor this species,
particularly along roadside edges and around abandoned buildings. A systematic survey of
suitable habitat areas within the project study area was conducted on June 24, 2004, and no
individuals were found. Therefore, the presence of this species in the project study area is
discounted, and this project will not adversely affect Michaux's sumac.
2. Federal Species of Concern
The January 30, 2003 USFWS list also includes a category of species designated as "Federal
species of concern" (FSC) in Wilson County (Table 5). A species with this designation is one
that may or may not be listed in the future (formerly C2 candidate species or species under
consideration for listing for which there is insufficient information to support listing).
17

Table 5. Federal S ecies of Concern
Common Name Scientific Name Potential
Habitat State Status**
Eastern Henslow's
s arrow Ammodramus henslowii susurrans No SR
"Neuse" madtom Noturus furiosus No SC
Pinewoods Shiner Lythrurus matutinus No SR
Atlantic pigtoe Fusconaia masoni No T
Carolina asphodel * Tofieldia glabra * No W-1
nis[onc recora - [ms species was last observed in Wilson County more than 50 years ago
**State Status Codes - SC: Special Concern; T: Threatened; SR-L: Significantly rare and the range of the species is
limited to North Carolina and adjacent states; W-l :rare, but relatively secure (Amoroso 2002, LeGrand and Hall 2001)
The FSC designation provides no federal protection under the ESA for species listed. NHP
records indicate no occurrences of FSC species are located within 5 miles of the project study
area.
VII. CULTURAL RESOURCES
A. 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
projects) on properties listed in or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places
and to afford the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation a reasonable opportunity to comment on
such undertakings.
B. Historic Architecture
A field survey of the Area of Potential Effects (APE) was conducted on July 30, 2003. All structures
within the APE were photographed, and later an NCDOT staff architectural historian reviewed these
photographs. Bridge No. 79 was determined not eligible for the National Register of Historic Places
and was shown to the State Historic Preservation Office (HPO) in a meeting on June 14, 2004. At
that meeting HPO staff concurred that Bridge No. 79 was not eligible and a form was signed to this
effect. However, both NCDOT architectural historians and HPO staff concurred that a small country
store in the APE may be eligible for the National Register. Nevertheless, since the project limits do
not encroach upon the country store and the plans, dated June 9, 2004, clearly state that the store is to
be avoided both HPO and NCDOT concurred that there are "no historical properties affected" by the
proposed project. This is documented in the form dated June 14, 2004. Copies of all correspondence
and the concurrence form are included in Appendix A.
C. Archaeology
The State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) reviewed the subject project. There are no known
archaeological sites within the proposed project area, and no archaeological investigation needed to
be conducted (see letter dated May 6, 2005 in Appendix A).
18

VIII. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
The project is expected to have an overall positive impact. Replacement of an inadequate bridge will
result in safer traffic operations.
The project is a Federal "Categorical Exclusion" due to its limited scope and lack of significant
environmental consequences.
The bridge replacement will not have an adverse effect on the quality of the human or natural
environment with the use of current NCDOT standards and specifications.
The project is not in conflict with any plan, existing land use, or zoning regulation. No substantial change
in land use is expected to result from construction of the project.
No adverse impact on families or communities is anticipated. Right of way acquisition will be limited.
No relocatees are expected with implementation of the proposed alternative.
No adverse effect on public facilities or services is anticipated. The project is not expected to adversely
affect social, economic, or religious opportunities in the area.
There are no publicly owned recreational facilities, or wildlife and waterfowl refuges of national, state, or
local significance in the vicinity of the project.
The proposed project will not require right-of--way acquisition or easement from any land protected under
section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act of 1966 (49 U.S.C. 303).
No North Carolina Geodetic Survey control monuments will be impacted during construction of this
project.
The Farmland Protection Policy Act requires all federal agencies or their representatives to consider the
potential impacts to prime and important farmland soils by all land acquisition and construction projects.
Prime and important farmland soils are defined by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS).
Since there are no prime or important farmlands in the immediate vicinity of the proposed bridge the
Farmland Protection Policy does not apply.
This project is an air quality "neutral" project, so it is not required to be included the regional emission
analysis (if applicable) and a project level CO analysis is not required.
This project is located in Wilson 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 traffic volumes will not increase or decrease because of this project. Therefore, the project's impact
on noise and air quality will not be substantial.
Noise levels could increase during construction but will be temporary. If vegetation is disposed of by
burning, all burning shall be done in accordance with applicable local laws and regulations of the North
Carolina SIP for air quality in compliance with 15 NCAC 2D.0520. This evaluation completes the
assessment requirements for highway traffic noise (23 CFR Part 77.2) and for air quality (1990 CAAA
and NEPA) and no additional reports are required.
19

An examination of records at the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources,
Division of Water Quality, Groundwater Section and the North Carolina Department of Human
Resources, Solid Waste Management Section revealed no hazardous waste sites in the project area. There
is one Underground Storage Tanks (UST) site located in the project vicinity. The site is a former country
store/gas station located on the east side of SR 1001 approximately 420 feet north of Bridge No. 79. The
tanks appear to be near the southwest corner of the building, approximately 35 feet from the centerline of
SR 1001. The project will terminate before the old store and it does not appear it will affect the tanks.
Wilson County is a participant in the Federal Flood Insurance Program. The bridge is located within a
Detailed Study area. The new structure should be designed to match or lower the existing 100-year storm
elevation upstream of the roadway. Since the proposed replacement for Bridge No.79 would be a
structure similar in waterway opening size, it is not anticipated that it will have any significant adverse
impact on the existing floodplain and floodway. The proposed alternatives will not modify flow
characteristics and will have a minimal impact on floodplains due to roadway encroachment. The
existing drainage patterns and groundwater will not be affected.
On the basis of the above discussion, it is concluded that no significant adverse environmental effects will
result from implementation of the project.
IX. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
A mailing list was developed based upon property owners located near the bridge. Approximately thirty
eight names are included on the list. Newsletters were mailed early in the planning process to the nearby
property owners and local officials. A copy of the newsletter is attached in Appendix D. A workshop
was held on January 24, 2005 at the James Hunt High School Media Center. Attendance at the Workshop
included two local citizens. No written comment sheets were received.
X. UNRESOLVED ISSUES AND AREAS OF CONTROVERSY
No unresolved issues or areas of controversy have been identified during the planning process and none
are anticipated.
XI. AGENCY COMMENTS
Scoping letters were sent to the following agencies listed below. Agencies that responded are marked
with an asterisk (*). Comment letters are included in Appendix A.
Federal A encies
US Fish and Wildlife Service - Raleigh*
US Army Corps of Engineers -Washington
US Army Corps of Engineers -Wilmington
Environmental Protection Agency -Raleigh
National Marine Fisheries -Beaufort
US Geological Survey -Raleigh
20

State A eg ncies
NC Wildlife Resources Commission*
NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources
NC Division of Water Quality
NC Department of Cultural Resources*
NC Division of Marine Fisheries
Regional and Local A encies
Wilson County Schools*
Wilson County Schools -Transportation Department*
Wilson County
Wilson County EMS*
Upper Coastal Plain Council of Governments
The following are comments received during the scoping process:
1. United States Department of the Interior -Fish and Wildlife Service
Comment: "Wetland, forest and designated riparian buffer impacts should be avoided and
minimized to the maximum extent practical."
Response: The preferred alternate, Alternative A, replaces the existing bridge in the existing
location and minimizes natural environment impacts.
Comment: "Off-site detours should be used rather than construction of temporary, on-site
bridges."
Response: An off-site detour will be utilized for this project.
Comment: "Wherever appropriate, construction in sensitive areas should occur outside fish
spawning and migratory bird nesting seasons.....The general moratorium period for anadromous
fish is February 15-June 30."
Response: No Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW) or anadromous species are anticipated to be
impacted by this project.
Comment: "The bridge design should not alter the natural stream and stream-bank morphology
or impede fish passage."
Response: The bridge will be replaced in the existing location and the final bridge length will be
determined during final design.
Comment: "Bridges and approaches should be designed to avoid any fill that will result in
damming or constriction of the channel or flood plain."
Response: The bridge will be replaced in the existing location and the final bridge length will be
determined during final design.
21

2. North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Comment: "We recommend replacing this bridge with a bridge."
Response: The preferred alternate, Alternative A, replaces the existing bridge in the existing
location and minimizes natural environment impacts.
3. Wilson County Schools
Comment: "...No problem finding an alternate detour route."
Response: An off-site detour will be utilized for this project.
4. Wilson County Emergency Medical Services
Comment: "We respectfully request that just prior to closing this road your office notify the
Emergency Communications Center here in Wilson."
Response: The project commitments include notifying Wilson County Emergency Medical
Services prior to construction.

22

FIGURES
Figure 1- Vicinity Map
Figure 2A - Alternate A (Preferred)
Figure 2B- Alternate B
Figure 3 - Photographs of Bridge No. 79
Figure 4 - Typical Roadway Section
Figure 5 - FEMA Floodplain Map
Figure 6 - Natural Communities Map

_ ••
••••• i,
••
•• i
N ••
.•
•
• ~ :~ - .
• • • ,roe j
• • • ; ~ _ _ ~oo~
• ~.. j
• • , ___e
S ~ "~-
.~f •-.
.. ~ 1 ~~~
+~ ~3.a ~:
s
.~~ ~ Q~.
s
.•
i ~ ~ ~
ae. ~r..I ~ ~r~~ `v~
~~~~ .• ,~
_ ,I

, h \,
' 97 s~i
~ 4''~
*
~; l
~ - 1
M a F
.C
I . i 4
'
3 / ~
Rcr.:
~
sr -- T' NS
~~`~'r~
YIII~SOtt`
_
zu, a~ -~ 4 "" '.-,'a~
,

96 ~~ a_
. ~. -,.cs+ J ~ ,
' ~
'~ - ~
elm - ~ ~ tzz ' .", ' -
a ~ ~ 1 ~J
..
,i

~<' ~
u
Lamm
~ 0 1 2 MILES
1 0 1 2 KILOMETERS
SCALE
LEGEND
~~~~ Studied Detour
Route
NORTX CAROLINA
! DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT
i, ..• fy ENV/RONMENTAL ANALYSIS
WILSON COUNTY
BRIDGE NO. 79 ON SR 1001
OVER BLOOMERY SWAMP
TIP NO. B~326
VICINITY MAP
FIGURE 1

~n
0
-[-
f L / • x.76
6~~~1 ~~ llr~9'~Z~utT!
POC a t3+5000 ~ /Jry~
. AGw/NAM/
pi. 1 ~~
-~~ r4 II
11
... I 1
w v+v 5497-w ~ ~ ~
/ ..,.. o,. ~°,~ ~
~ _ ~
LEGEND
POT Sto. 2i~-OOr00 -L-

I \
~ `, ; ,
I I.
BUILDING I I
DO NOT DISTURB I
I~
~~ I .. I i ~
i o C) ~ I I ,
~j ~ ~, `~
I ~~
x
x_-x._
~r-®------ ~
.I~ ^
® BUlLDMGS
® EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY
Q PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY
ALL EASEMENTS
Q EXISTING ROADWAY
EXISTMG ROADWAY TO BE RESURFACED
PROPOSED ROADWAY
_ PROPOSED STRUCTURES, ISLAND,
CURB AND GUTTER
EXISTING STRUCTURES, ISLAND, CURB
AND GUTTER 70 BE REMOVED
® LAXES, RIVER, STREAMS, AND PONDS
® TEMPORARY DETOUR
® TEMPORARY DETOUR STRUCTURE
!00
~' PRESEM ADT (200/)
FUTURE ADr (zo2s~
PRELIMINARY PLANS
pp NOT VN[ COR CONSTRVCTION
INCOMPLETE PLANS
DO NOT US! POR R/• ACOULSITION
NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT Cy
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS BRANCH
WILSON COUNTY
BRIDGE NO. 79 ON SR 1001
OVER BLOOMERY SWAtMP
TIP NO. B-4326
SO' ALTERNATE A
6 m (PREFERRED)
FIGURE 2A

~,~
::,
~
~ _,
.~ ~; .~
a ~ .
:
. i - ;

,~.: $
~~

~~ r ~~
-
~-
:
.
' , L
;~,
w , >
1 ~
~ , ~. ' a:~',
~.
`
~. ,.

ii
.
.
.

~
'
a ~
-
F7
le
i
~S u
6-

a`
~" r ° y
,~ ,~,a :., ~~~''
~~
r` d f-~~stz ,~*~ ,fqt[
Y
~ uk .x,~ '.~ r 1 a„ 3lG~-
s~~ .~F.
y i~.~`iF -j Kii~f~~..~~1 ~. ~ ;»1~1~ ~~1 r y'.:. ~ "~W~'h c .~,iK. ~ '.~~.
~.iea~ S.*' ~ e .aahhf ~Y ~nR ~ ;'~i0.. ~4 ~ 3~ ~' ~`!~ '7 r
t1, ? +~ (y
E ~r ~~ r I~
it }
~~~
-....
-~
~~ 7~ es ~ ~ €~~
~1~''~~5~; ~ '~; «_
~~
x ~
~ ,t
1.
3

E
~3 ~
~
~..
~`+.1,': i"V age ".`3Y Pm +~ ~S t ~i
g

e' a=..
~~ ~~
.:
~ }
_
Y gym; L
C~ `~ar1°

r
- ~., tom.? pL^~ r~ c-...
~
"
°
~~ ~a ,~ g
`
~
R¢~~.
}~
r~
V
{~1~
LeJ
~Y

~ti~ p

~~~~~
~~ ~ ~

e

C»' CA. ~9
Pte, . _"
I ~ ~

:.
~+w ~

Y__. ti
& _

ra

...~

p ~
~ ~
L

P
G
-_
w

:~ ~ a~
.1.:N
PENA4 CVOPER4TIYYs T~MWCA.t EARTHEN.
r~~.
t~.C. POoodplain tstapping IrlfvPrrea#iosa 8ysten
Om-Line Mapping FipplicaHon Provided by #3ae
tr mrEh ~avtaiina F9sodplaen Mapping Pragrane
D!->Ciairner; This is na a tegafly binding (F1 P,Mi i;~?nd
irs~~ znce Fata leap and shoo€d nat be ased as such.
=.z. ~ Pdt3RTFI OY~Iti.9
~~_. i3Ll'flft~'h3Elv~' CAF TRt~~IISk'O~*7rY1"$S?~'
P~cf3,jECT dDEd'F*LCDI'ti~l~e~rT
r w::.... ~, .EIti$'IRC3NIi3Et1/Tt3L .tlYr$L:'SIS
,i x~ .. _._ __.
~~ r~~~>~d~~~
.~'ILsLl. .~

'a ^
~z
,~'
_~ `
„'
it' r
~,,:w, /~ ~,~~ ~
. ... .sue
I._ ~~~ ..
~.

. ..
rr
.
.
. -
.~.,
w

h'
~~ ~~ , ...
1
f „~:~

3
~_~s ~ y
~
.w' k;+ I
~'
. r H
F
L yr ~ ~
n re~7 '
x
a _
.~ a ~ de a~ ~e '~~ .~
~A s~~t
d
xr»~~..^~i ;._... ~ ~ a ae c cwt` ~ :a V ~,. '.
~~~ ;~' ~ ,yam T ~ S~ ~ ~~
~~
~. r
~.1kJ~ Pfrt ti t .~ F' fi
r r1 n ~ ~ {
r r~ ~. ~.4 *w,.i.
.r
'"~" t,r
c tr s ~ "~ +~
' "rte
(,, yY,. ~1y ~:.
Projgr_t Study krea ~ + ~ts r~+
r.aturalCammunities i ~ c.-r`_~" ~:
g 9loomerySwamp (~ ~~ ~ s :#
j ~` ~Eoastal Fain Eottomfar~ ~iardw~od' ~~ , ~ ~~:+v ~ ~- ,~.
~'~ uca=tal Plarn ~FV_e Fore ~ '~ -.
Coastal Plain SemEP rr~anen# (rnp. ~ ,,,t g
1 ~ r+leiriE ~men,`Jist4r ea i~ ~,' _~ ~'~+~ ~~ a"+,"w~6>i"~ ~r~~
P~lesicP^i,.erjrarac,oods ~- ~,, x ,~: ~'r"~-~_„
Pai~ernert `~:~~.~w'"a°~~`" '..~ .~sn~14
r,. ["
&-~,` ~y~t,~~ ~tb~~~'x~ t~tN~,s ~e er ~...zi..m~yo~...R'C7RTH $.,,9ROEINtE •~.>.~.vey
. ~ .~,~'._. .Fz. ._"". ~ '~' ~ ~' ~ ' u~` ss ~ ': F3i?'~7'ASEPu~' f3F" k"L2~tYSt't)R2'.te~C«<d~
~w.
a :~~ _: ~ :~ !+ ~~- PRC?JEC~ t?~[/ELfI]~A3E2~T
.. ~ s ~ _. >,~. Via' f7 ERit'ZRL3Nd4ENTr9L i#h:4:.I'SdS
+~ xrr-~. ; e-ca; ass 1d1?~~
u _ _ ~_ ~~ r
~i~'~3tTL ~_'il~~~~rPv~~'I'~ ~~Ir3~
~I~~;r ~a

APPENDIX A
Comments received from Federal, State, and Local Agencies

United S tates Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Feld OQice
Post OESce Box 35726
Raleigh, North Caro4tu 27636.3726
January 13, 2004
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Project Development and Environmental Analysis
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1548
Dear Dr. Thorpe:
-- ~.~ ~~
r~r~-
L,
J-
i _ Z~j,, ~U
:~ 2 .-ji
," N~~ ~~/
-.~~„ ~-c_ nEV~A~P~'
`'~~~~n, ~;vTAL
This letter is in response to your request for comments from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(Service) on the potential environmental impacts of the proposed replacement of the following
nine bridges:
• B-4018, Beaufort County, Bridge No. 104 on NC 32 over Broad Creek
• B-4019, Beaufort County, Bridge No. 103 on NC 32 over Runyon Creek
• B-4020, Beaufort/Pitt County, Bridge No. 8 on SR 1403 over Tranters Creek
• B-4055, Carteret County, Bridge No. 22 on SR 1124 over Branch of Newport River
• B-4132, Halifax County, Bridge No. 97 on NC 561 over Looking Glass Swamp
• B-4172, Lenoir County, Bridge No. 9 on NC 55 over Jericho Run
• B-4212, Northampton County, Bridge No. 77 on NC 35 over Kirby's Creek
• B-4321, Wayne County, Bridge No.. 17 on SR 1918 over Carraway Creek
• B-4326, Wilson bounty, Bridge No. 79 on SR 1001 over Bloomery Swamp
These comments provide scoping information in accordance with provisions of the Fish and
Wildlife Coordination Act (16 U.S.C. 661-667d) and section 7 of the Endangered Species Act
(ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543).
For bridge replacement projects, the Service recommends the following general conservation
measures to avoid or minimize environmental impacts to fish and wildlife resources:
1. Wetland, forest and designated riparian buffer impacts should be avoided and minimized
to the maximum extent practical;
2. If unavoidable wetland impacts are proposed, every effort should be made to identify
compensatory mitigation sites in advance. Project planning should include a detailed
compensatory mitigation plan for offsetting unavoidable wetland impacts. Opportunities
to protect mitigation areas in perpetuity via conservation easements, land trusts or by

B-4020, Beaufort/Pitt County -There is a past occurrence of the West Indian manatee
(Trichechus manatus) less than one mile south of the.project azea. The Service's
Guidelines For Avoiding Impacts To The West Indian Manatee: Precautionary
Measures for Construction Activities in North Carolina Waters should be
implemented to minimize impacts to this species. These guidelines can be found at
httn://nc-es.fws. ov/es/publications html .
B-4055, Carteret County -There aze known occurrences ofred-cockaded woodpeckers
(Picoides borealis) and rough-leaved loosestrife (Lysimachia asperulaefolia) within two
and three miles, respectively, of the project azea. If habitat for these or any other listed
species occurs at the site, appropriate surveys should be conducted. In addition, this site
occurs within the Croatan Game Lands azea. Impacts to this protected area should be
minimized to the maximum extent practical.
We reserve the right to review any federal permits that maybe required for this project, at the
public notice stage. Therefore, it is important that resource agency coordination occur early in
the planning process in order to resolve any conflicts that may arise and minimize delays in
project implementation. In addition to the above guidance, we recommend that the
environmental documentation for this project include the following in sufficient detail to
facilitate a thorough review of the action:
A cleazly defined and detailed purpose and need for the proposed project;
2. A description of the proposed action with an analysis of all alternatives being considered,
including the "no action" alternative;
3. A description of the fish and wildlife resources, and their habitats, within the project
impact azea that maybe directly or indirectly affected;
4. The.extent and acreage of waters of the U.S., including wetlands, that are to be impacted
by filling, dredging, clearing, ditching, or draining. Acres of wetland impact should be
differentiated by habitat type based on the wetland classification scheme of the National
Wetlands Inventory (NWI). Wetland boundaries should be determined by using the 1987
Coros of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual and verified by the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers;
5. The anticipated environmental impacts, both temporary and permanent, that would be
likely to occur as a direct result of the proposed project: The assessment should also
include the extent to which the proposed project would result in secondary impacts to
natural resources, and how this and similaz projects contribute to cumulative adverse
effects;
6. Design features and construction techniques which would be employed to avoid or
minimize the fragmentation or direct loss of wildlife habitat and waters of the US;

other means should be explored at the outset;
3. Off-site detours should be used rather than construction of temporary, on-site bridges.
For projects requiring an on-site detour in wetlands or open water, such detours should be
aligned along the side of the existing structure which has the least and/or least quality of
fish and wildlife habitat. At the completion of construction, the detour area should be
entirely removed and the impacted areas be planted with appropriate vegetation, including
trees if necessary;
4. Wherever appropriate, construction in sensitive areas should occur outside fish spawning
and migratory bird nesting seasons. In waterways that may serve as travel corridors for
fish, in-water work should be avoided during moratorium periods associated with
migration, spawning and sensitive pre-adult life stages. The general moratorium period
for anadromous fish is February 15 -June 30;
5. New bridges should be long enough to allow for sufficient wildlife passage along stream
corridors;
6. Best Management Practices (BMP) for Protection of Surface Waters should be
implemented;
7. Bridge designs should include provisions for roadbed and deck drainage to flow through a
vegetated buffer prior to reaching the affected stream. This buffer should be large enough
to alleviate any potential effects from run-off of storm water and pollutants;
8. The bridge designs should not alter the natural stream and stream-bank morphology or
impede fish passage. To the extent possible, piers and bents should be placed outside the
bank-full width of the stream;
9. Bridges and approaches should be designed to avoid any fill that will result in damming
or constriction of the channel or flood plain. If spanning the flood plain is not feasible,
culverts should be installed in the flood plain portion of the approach to restore some of
the hydrological functions of the flood plain and reduce high velocities of flood waters
within the affected area.
A list of federally protected species for each county in North Carolina can be found at http://nc-
es.fws.gov/es/countvfr.html . Additional information about the habitats in which each species is
often found can also be found at http://endan~?ered.fws.gov . Please note, the use of the North
Carolina Natural Heritage Program data should not be substituted for actual field surveys if
suitable habitat occurs near the project site. If suitable habitat exists in the project area, we
recommend that biological surveys for the listed species be conducted and submitted to us for
review. All survey documentation must include survey methodologies and results.
We do not have any specific comments for the individual projects, with the exception of the
following two:

7. If unavoidable wetland impacts are proposed, project planning should include a detailed
compensatory mitigation plan for offsetting the unavoidable impacts.
The Service appreciates the opportunity to comment on this project. Please continue to advise us
during the progression of the planning process, including your official determination of the
impacts of this project. If you have any questions regarding our response, please contact Mr.
Gary Jordan at [phone], ext. 32.
cc:
Mike Bell, USACE, Washington, NC
Bill Biddlecome, USACE, Washington, NC
John Hennessy, NCDWQ, Raleigh, NC
Travis Wilson, NCWRC, Creedmoor, NC
Chris Militscher, USEPA, Raleigh, NC
Sincerely,
u~~k~~~~G~~
Garland B. Pardue, Ph.D.
Ecological Services Supervisor
r
f

06ii4i2004 13:00 NC DOT PDEA ~ %?79?44 tJ0.744
• JlAv~1J-LtJb4 %J%bt Nt,~DOT 0~°O1'~E
919 72S iS01 P. B2
Federal Aitl fr 81tZ-100I1?7) Y7~! B-4326 Counry: Wilson
YrujNCt Ucscriyfion: Rrplace Bridge ~ o. 79 un SR IItUl ever IIlootnery ~wsrnp
On .lone 14, 2A04 represtntati~'es of ilte
® Nunh Cprofinn Uepararttrtt of Tronsprtrtation (NCD07j
® Fcdcntl Highway Atlntittistrati0n (F~tWA)
® North Can+lins Stan Historic Preservation OtTce (1'1P0)
^ Other
Re~iewcd the sublcy.t project at
[] Scoping mettiny
® Historic archir~1ttrra) resuurtt; phot0~raph re~'iew secsiorl/cons:ultation
^ Other
All parties present agreed
O Thor urn as properrizs o~tr GRy yeas old within the project'. area of potential ct)'cctx.
® There arc rsu prupcrnc~ less I)tfln fifty years Old ~t•Ltich are considered to meet Criscria Con:iacrntipa G within tht
prujcrrt's rarer ofputential effects.
$) There rrre properties ovrr Fatty yearn old within the project's Arca of Petcntisl EFfccrv (APE), bul boxed C+n thz
hiswric~l infurmatiau a~:tilJble and the photograph: of each property, the properties identittcd ns 8~C'~ ttrt
toa;idcrcd not elibiblt fc~r the T~ahonal Tfci;istur 1nU nu furthrr CvtQuttliutt of.lhetn i3 t1dCt;iary. (!~~~ t 1 ~1 ~
® There arc nn I~'etionetl RcXister-listed or $rudy Listed progenies ~t~ithin the project'e area ,~~-petcntial effect;,
== -- -- - ~=-- ~rcarCr shrtn SU ycuta Of.1g~~ Dared in the APE have been considered at this consultation. and ba:cd
upon the above c~ncurn:ncC, all compliance f^• ^;~.,..-_= ____:____=_-= -_-__ - -----._ _.- -- -- - -- _ - - - -
-.-. • -~;r.:.+n tiGiand liS ~ ~ 1-I2(a) has been completed for this projee[.
® There ue no historic properties affectzd by this pmjcct. (aNac6 any nutrc nr t/pC'amCnts [+s nt~.•dNd}
JiCred:
l~ H W A, fur the
Reprerentstivc, HPO
D+tte
WAIF
~ ' ~~
~liste llisn~ri~ Preservatia» C1fTicer ll~tr.
It p fI1~YN (C)1Mt i~ r{-4~1.1IC(t. A Gn;,l Cnrltl nF lh ~,l' t1:f11t nnJ chu nuuchcJ G4: win be ~~clutiW.
. or ott~r Federal agency
102
---. -- ---------.. _..~ _ l)atC

06i14i2004 13:00
~u~r-~ra~nv ~~~ el
Jt Jurc : (XJd
NC DOT PDEA ~ %779?44 N0.744 D03
-~l.Ckl7 01iE-urn ?19 ^35 15E91 F.O~
hrujcct: Replace Bride No, 79 on SR 1001
Attachmc~~t
TIP: B--1325; County: Wilson
I=ietdwork has been conductc~l for the project. Thr bridge itselfi. recommended not
etibiblc based on the NCDOT Historic Bridge Inventory.
A country store was id~nti Eied in the Area of Potential ~ffeGts. Country stows lc~cated
close to the road hive become a buildinb type of histaric;il intCre~t:
A finding of "No Hist~>ric Properties Aftcctcd" has bcen determined, based on thr
fitllawing chartgc to i1~c project:
~ The project limits have bcen teducc;d to avoid encroaching upon the country
store buildinb.
• See attached original project limits dated O~120i()4 and revis8d project limits
elated Q6/A9/2004 showing the Hate "avoid encroaching on store buildinb."

M~i'i 1 2 ~OG~
~~~:.~•
~;,
-:(t!:k
North Carolina Department of Cultural Reso ~ ~~ysK,.. ~ ~ .._~~:.,zr~~"~~"~' ~'
State Historic Preservation Office
Peter a sandbecl:, Adtninistntor
h&chael F. Easley, Governor
Lisbeth C. Evans, Secretary
Jeffrey J. Crow, Deputy Secretary
May 6, 2005
MEMORANDUM
Office of Archives and History
Division of Historical Resources
David BroolS Director
TO: Greg Thorpe, Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
NCDOT Division of Higphways
FROM: Peter Sandbeck ~~q' 1-~1.~~'~
V
SUBJECT: Federal Categorical Exclusion, Bridge 79 on SR 1001 over Bloomery Swamp, TIP B-4326,
Wilson County, ER 04-0109
Thank you for pour letter of March 22, 2005, transmitting the Categorical Exclusion (CE) for the above
project We believe the CE adequately addresses our concerns for historic resources.
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,
contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763. In all future
communication concerning this project, please cite the above referenced tracking number.
cc: John F. Sullivan
NCDOT, Federal Highway Administration
Location Maifiag Addrns Telephone/Fa:
ADMINISTRATION 507 N. Blount Street, Raleigh NC 4617 Mai Service Croat, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 [phone]/733-8653
RESTORATION 515 N. Blount Staet, Raleigh NC 4617 Matt Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 [phone]/715-4801
SURVEY & PLANNING 575 N. Blount Sheet, Raleigh, NC 4617 Mall Service Center, Raleigh NC27699-4617 [phone]/715-4801

C/.J W GfJV1 LG. ~1 ...... /1../ 1 1 /LI'l i
JO I I J I MY ~~r. L7.~
~+ •
'..,s
~~ North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
- State Historic Preservation Ot6ce
Miehasl F. Ea~lry, Governor Division of Hiatorit,sl tiksourves
Lisbeth C. t:vana, Serrrtary David L. S. Brook Director
Jef52y J. Crow, Deputy Secretary
Office of Archives and History
I=ebruary 18, 2004
MEMORANDUM
TO: Stacey Baldwin
Project Development and Environmental Analysis.
NCDOT Division of T-li hwaye
FROM: David Brook ~ 6~ 1
SUBJECT: Request for Comments for Group SO Bridge Replacements:
Bridge No. 104 on NC 32 over Broad Creek, B-4018,~c:aufort Count}, ER04-0102
Bridge No. 103 on'_~IC 32 over. Runyon Creek, B-4019r Beaufort Coupry, ER04-0103
Badge No. 8 on SR ]403 over Tzanters Creek, B-4020, Beaufort/Pjtc Counties, LR04-0104
Bridge No. 22 on SR 1 ] 24 over Branch of Newport River, B-4955, Carteret County, F.R04-0105
Badge Vo. 97 on NC 5G1 over Lnokutg Glass Sw~tnp, B-4132, Halifax County, F 804-OIOG
Bridge I`'o. 9 on NC SS over Jericho Run, D-4172, Lenoir Counn~, L-8040107
Badge No. 77 on NC 35 over I{irby's Creek, Iiy4212,~Northampton County, L-804-0078
Bridge I~'o. 17 on SR 1918 ovex Creek, B-4321, Wayne Coynty~, ER04-0108
Bridge No. 79 on SR 100] over Bloomecy Swamp, B-432G, Wilson County, ~R04-0109
Thank you for your letters of January 8, 2004, concestung the above pzojects.
We aze unable to comment on the potential effect of these projects on ctiln~zal hisrotic resouzces total we receive
further information.
Please forward a labeled 7.5 tnulute LSGS quadrangle map for each of the above projects clearly indicating the
project ~~ciniry, location, and ternuni. In addition, please include the name of the quadrangle map.
'T'here ate no known archaeological sites within tht proposed project area. Based on our knowledge of the area, it
u unlikely that any archaeological xesotuces that may be eligible for conclusion in die National Register of
Historic Places will be affected by the ptojeer.. We, therefore, recommend that no archaeological investigation be
conducted in connection with this project.
Two copies of the resulting archaeological surrey report, as well. as one copy of the appropriate site forms,
should be forwarded to tts for zevtew and comment as soon a9 they aze available and well m advance of any
construction activities.
w~ww~.hpo.der.ctate.ne.a~
Wb~
Location MrrfUng wddreae TslspbonsJF~a
ABMItVISCRATiON 107 N. Blount St, Raleigh, NC 4617 Mul Service Crnter, Raleigh, NC 276994617 [phone].733-8653
RS4TOiR~ITTaN SIS N. alovm 5L Raleigh, NC 0611 Mail Service Center, RaleiBR NC 27699-4617 (919) 733~347.715~801
SURVEY B Pt.MIN1NG 515 N. Btwmt SC RaleigtL NC 4b17 Mal Service Center. Raleigh, laC 27699.0617 1919) 733.4763 .115.4101

cl.~~ w~ cw•+ ac • ~ i i R LJL1 i r lJf=n ~ 7p f f 7 f 4H

. Febntary ~ 8, 2004
Page 2
The above comments nre made pursuant to Section 106 of the National t-iiscoric Presen•aoon Act and the
advisory Council on Historic Preservaaon's Regulations for Cotapliance with Section lOG codified at 36 CFR
Pan 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
contact. Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763. In all future communicnti
concernuig this project, please cite the above referenced tracking number.
cc: AfArn Pope Fury, NCDOT
Matt Wilkerson, NCDOT

North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission ~
Charles R. Fullwood, E~ecuti~-e Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Elmo Vance
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch, NCDOT
FROM: Travis Wilson, Highway Project Coordinator ~ ~~
Habitat Conservation Program
DATE: February ~, 2004
SUBJECT: NCDOT Bridge Replacements in Beaufort, Carteret, Halifax, Lenoir, ,
Northampton, Wayne, and Wilson, counties. TIP Nos. B-4018, B-4019, B-4020,
B-4055', B-4132, B-4172, B-4212, B-4321, and B-4326.
Biologists with the N. C. Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) have reviewed the
information provided and have the following preliminary comments on the subject project. Our
comments are provided in accordance with provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act
(42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(c)) and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16
I1.S.C. 661-667d).
Our standard recommendations for bridge replacement projects of this scope are as
follows:
1. We generally prefer spanning structures. Spanning structures usually do not require
work within the stream and do not require stream channel realignment. The horizontal
and vertical clearances provided by bridges allows for human and wildlife passage
beneath the structure, does not block fish passage, and does not block navigation by
canoeists and boaters.
2. Bridge deck drains should not discharge directly into the stream.
3. Live concrete should not be allowed to contact the water in or entering into the stream.
4. If possible, bridge supports (bents) should not be placed in the stream.
~Iailin;; Address: Dil ::.Inn (>t ji1~: Iiil ~'I' Il.'fi:1 • ~ i_' ~ ~1,1!~ ~i~ ~ ICC ~ ,~ Cic`.- • i:.i~: ~~~,. ~.f_ ~.'~i~)9- ~ 7~'.
Telephone: ,=+1`-~; ';;-;r,.,~~;~-?,~I • Fax: "~i`~ .=-'r:.;

Bridge Memo
2 February 5, 2004
5. If temporary access roads or detours are constructed, they should be removed back to
original ground elevations immediately upon the completion of the project. Disturbed
areas should be seeded or mulched to stabilize the soil and native tree species should
be planted with a spacing of not more than 10'x 10'. If possible, when using temporary
structures the area should be cleared but not grubbed. Clearing the area with chain
saws, mowers, bush-hogs, or other mechanized equipment and leaving the stumps and
root mat intact, allows the area to revegetate naturally and minimizes disturbed soil.
6. A clear bank (riprap free) area of at least 10 feet should remain on each side of the
steam underneath the bridge.
7. In trout waters, the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission reviews all U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers nationwide and general `404' penmits. We have the option of
requesting additional measures to protect trout and trout habitat and we can
recommend that the project require an individual .`404' permit.
8. In streams that contain threatened or endangered species, NCDOT biologist Pvlr.-~YfiI' r o ~,,,,.,~..
should be notified. Special measures to protect these sensitive species may be `K"~° °pt
required. NCDOT should also contact the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for
information on requirements of the Endangered Species Act as it relates to the project.
9. In streams that are used by anadromous fish, the NCDOT official policy entitled
"Stream Crossing Guidelines for Anadromous Fish Passage (May 12, 1997)" should
be followed.
10. In areas with significant fisheries for sunfish, seasonal exclusions may also be
recommended.
11. Sedimentation and erosion control measures sufficient to protect aquatic resources
must be implemented prior to any ground disturbing activities. Structures should be
maintained regularly, especially following rainfall events.
12. Temporary or permanent herbaceous vegetation should be planted on all bare soil
within 15 days of ground disturbing activities to provide long-term erosion control.
13. All work in or adjacent to stream waters should be conducted in a dry work area.
Sandbags, rock berms, cofferdams, or other diversion structures should be used
where possible to prevent excavation in flowing water.
14. Heavy equipment should be operated from the bank rather than in stream channels in
order to minimize sedimentation and reduce the likelihood of introducing other
pollutants into streams.
15. Only clean, sediment-free rock should be used as temporary fill (causeways), and
should be removed without excessive disturbance of the natural stream bottom when
construction is completed.
16. During subsurface investigations, equipment should be inspected daily and
maintained to prevent contamination of surface waters from leaking fuels, lubricants,
hydraulic fluids, or other toxic materials.
If corrugated metal pipe arches, reinforced concrete pipes, or concrete box culverts are
used:

Bridge Memo
3 February 5, 2004
1. The culvert must be designed to allow for aquatic life and fish passage. Generally, the
culvert or pipe invert should be buried at least 1 foot below the natural streambed
(measured from the natural thalweg depth). If multiple barrels are required, barrels
other than the base flow barrel(s) should be placed on or near stream bankfull or
floodplain bench elevation (similar to Lyonsfield design). These should be
reconnected to floodplain benches as appropriate. This may be accomplished by
utilizing sills on the upstream and downstream ends to restrict or divert flow to the
base flow barrel(s). Silled barrels should be filled with sediment so as not to cause
noxious or mosquito breeding conditions. Sufficient water depth should be provided
in the base flow barrel(s) during low flows to accommodate fish movement. If
culverts are longer than 40-50 linear feet, alternating or notched baffles should be
installed in a manner that mimics existing stream pattern. This should enhance
aquatic life passage: 1) by depositing sediments in the barrel, 2) by maintaining
chanhel depth and flow regimes, and 3) by providing resting places for fish and other
aquatic organisms. In essence, base flow barrel(s) should provide a continuum of
water depth and channel width without substantial modifications of velocity.
2. If multiple pipes or cells are used, at least one pipe or box should be designed to
remain dry during normal flows to allow for wildlife passage.
3. Culverts or pipes should be situated along the existing channel alignment whenever
possible to avoid channel realignment. Widening the stream channel must be avoided.
Stream channel widening at the inlet or outlet end of structures typically decreases
water velocity causing sediment deposition that requires increased maintenance and
disrupts aquatic life passage.
4. Riprap should not be placed in the active thalweg channel or placed in the streambed
in a manner that precludes aquatic life passage. Bioengineering boulders or structures
should be professionally designed, sized, and installed.
In most cases, we prefer the replacement of the existing structure at the same location
with road closure. If road closure is not feasible, a temporary detour should be designed and
located to avoid wetland impacts, minimize the need for clearing and to avoid destabilizing
stream banks. If the structure will be on a new alignment, the old structure should be removed
and the approach fills removed fram the 100-yeas floodplain. Approach fills should be removed
down to the natural ground elevation. The area should be stabilized with grass and planted with
native tree species. If the area reclaimed was previously wetlands, NCDOT should restore the
area to wetlands. If successful, the site may be utilized as mitigation for the subject project or
other projects in the watershed.
Project specific comments:
B-4018, Beaufort County, Bridge No. 104 over Broad Creek on NC 32. We recommend
replacing this bridge with a bridge. Adult and juvenile anadromous species are found in
this portion of Broad Creek, including striped bass, American shad, river herring, and
hickory shad. NCDOT should follow all stream crossing guidelines for anadromous fish
passage, including an in-water work moratorium from February 15 to September 30.
Standard recommendations apply.

Bridge Memo
4 February 5, 2004
2. B-4019, Beaufort County, Bridge No. 103 over Runyon Creek on NC 32. We
recommend replacing this bridge with a bridge. Adult and juvenile anadromous species
are found in this portion of Runyon Creek, including striped bass, American shad, river
herring, and hickory shad. NCDOT should follow all stream crossing guidelines for
anadromous fish passage, including an in-water work moratorium from February 15 to
September 30. Standard recommendations apply.
3. B-4020, Beaufort County, Bridge No. 8 over Tranter's Creek on SR 1403. We
recommend replacing this bridge with a bridge. Adult and juvenile anadromous species
are found in this portion of Tranter's Creek, including striped bass, American shad,. river
herring, and hickory shad. NCDOT should follow all stream crossing guidelines for
anadromous fish passage, including an in-water work moratorium from February 15 to
September 30. Standard recommendations apply.
4. B-405, Carteret County, Bridge No. 22 over Branch of Newport River on SR 1124. We
recommend replacing this bridge with a bridge. Adult and juvenile anadromous species
are found in this area, including striped bass, American shad, blueback herring, and
hickory shad. NCDOT should follow all stream crossing guidelines for anadromous fish
passage, including an in-water work moratorium from February 15 to September 30.
Standard recommendations apply.
5. B-4132, Halifax County, Bridge No. 97 over Looking Glass Swamp on NC 561. We
recommend replacing this bridge with a bridge. Anadromous species are found in this
portion of Looking Glass Swamp, including alewife and blueback herring. NCDOT
should follow all stream crossing guidelines for anadromous fish passage, including an
in-water work moratorium from February 15 to June 15. Standard recommendations
apply.
6. B-4172, Lenoir County, Bridge No. 9 over Jericho Run on NC 55. We recommend
replacing this bridge with a bridge. Standard recommendations apply.
7. B-4212, Northampton County, Bridge No. 77 over Kirby's Creek on NC 35. We
recommend replacing this bridge with a bridge. Anadromous species are found in this
portion of Kirby's Creek, including alewife and blueback herring. NCDOT should
follow all stream crossing guidelines for anadromous fish passage, including an in-water
work moratorium from February 15 to June 15. Standard recommendations apply.
8. B-4321, Wayne County, Bridge No. 17 over Caraway Creek on SR 1918. We
recommend replacing this bridge with a bridge. Anadromous species are found in this
portion of Caraway Creek, including alewife and blueback herring. NCDOT should
follow all stream crossing guidelines for anadromous fish passage, including an in-water
work moratorium from February 15 to June 15. Standard recommendations apply.
9. B-4326, Wilson County, Bridge No. 79 over Bloomery Swamp on SR 1001. We
recommend replacing this bridge with a bridge. Standard recommendations apply.
NCDOT should routinely minimize adverse impacts to fish and wildlife resources in the
vicinity of bridge replacements. Restoring previously disturbed floodplain benches should
narrow and deepen streams previously widened and shallowed during initial bridge installation.
NCDOT should install and maintain sedimentation control measures throughout the life of the
project and prevent wet concrete from contacting water in or entering into these streams.
Replacement of bridges with spanning structures of some type, as opposed to pipe or box

Bridge Memo
5 February 5, 2004
culverts, is recommended in most cases. Spanning structures allow wildlife passage along
streambanks and reduce habitat fragmentation.
If you need further assistance or information on NCWRC concerns regarding bridge
replacements, please contact me at [phone]. Thank you for the opportunity to review and
comment on these projects.
Cc: Gary Jordan, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Raleigh

YJJ~ GJ~ LCJI'JY ~ r/C! • KJf..r 1`Il.. LU 1 rLCM "- 7b f ! 7 (NN IMJ. J f O 1/171
~~,C El ~F~
. - ,- .
`~~' MAR ?z 2ca
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA s~~° oMS~
DEPAR'I~.NT OF TRANSPORTATION ~°y ~r "'~"~'"''~
MICFIAL-L F. EASLEY LYN~~rF~~~p, ~
covawoa
SECRLTTAiIY
March .18.2004
MEMORANDUM TO: Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.,
Environmental Management Director,
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
FROM: David P. Bender
Program Manager ~
SUBJECT: Scoping Review Bridge Replacement Projects B-4018, B-
4019, B•4020, B-4055, 8.4132, B-412,13.4212, B-4321
and B-4326.
In response to your January 8, 2004 memorandum, you requested our input regarding the
proposed improvements to the subject projects.
These sections of roadway SR 1918 (B-4321), NC 35 (8.4212), NC 55 (B-4172), NC 861
(B-4132) and SR 1124 (B-4055) do not correspond to a current bicycle TIP request, nor
aze they a designated bicycle route. At the present we have no indication that there is an
unusual number of bicyclists using these roads.
The section of SR 1001 (B-4326) is part of a designated NC Bicycling Highway, NC-7
Ocracoke Option. We recommend ASSHTO standard bicycle-safe bridge railing height of
34 in. and 4 foot paved shoulders in both directions for shoulder sections or 14 foot wide
lanes in curb and gutter sections continued for at least 100 ft. on either side of the
improvements depending on the preferred cross section.
The section of SR 1403 (D-4020), NC 32 (B-4019) and NC 32 (13-4018) are part of a
designated NC Bicycling )`Iighway, NC-2 Mountains-to-Sea. We recommend ASSHTO
standard bicycle-safe bridge railing height of 54 in. and 4 foot paved shoulders in both
directions for shoulder sections or 14 foot wide lanes in curb and gutter sections
continued for at least l00 ft. on either side of the improvements depcncling on the
preferred cross sec[ion.
We appreciate the opportunity to comment on this project. If there is a need for further
information, please do not hesitate to contact me at ? 15-2340.
ce: Tom Norman, Director
MAILING AOORESS:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRAN670RTA7i0N
DNASIOA' Of BrCYCLE ~ PEDE6TRIAN TRAN$DDRTATION
1552 M,ia SERwGE (.ENTEn
RA~E~Gti NC 2766~T552
T f i.i~NO~IE: 9 ~ 6.715-2310
Fix: oTOaTb.lazz
WEHB~TE: WMA1lDpf.AtA7YAQ/8lTpAN9~T/!)IG1'CiE/_
LNR: OElAOERODO7.BfATE AC. /8
LOCATION:
TAANtP011rAnOM 9VM1Dn+O
T SOUTN WKMINOTON STIIEET
ROOM 901
RA~c1OM NC

Fax Wizard

Greg Purvis
Page 1 of 1
From: Tammy Williford [[e-mail]~
Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2005 4:12 PM
To: Greg Purvis
Subject: Wilson County
1817 Glendale Dr.
Wilson, NC 27893
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Fax
Please Comment
Please Reply
Please Recycle
Wilson County
Emergency Medical
Services
To: Greg Purvis, P.E. From: Tammy Williford
Fax: [phone] Date: March 31, 2005
Phone: [phone] Pages: 1
Re: Bridge No. 79 in Wilson County CC:
Urgent x For Review
•Comments: Mr. Purvis,
I have reviewed your information regarding the replacement of Bridge No. 79 on SR 1001 over Bloomery
Swamp in Wilson County. We respectfully request that just prior to closing this road your office notify
the Emergency Communications Center here in Wilson. Their number is 252-237-8300, ext. 2. This will
allow them to re-route our ambulances as needed to have a quicker response time to those who require
emergency care. Thank you for sharing this information with us and allowing us to comment. If you
have questions, please call me.
Thank you,
Tammy Williford
3/31 /2005

02i06i2004 09:15 NC DOT PDEA ~ 96779744

N0.166 D01
usrr~
W~ LS~N CQ lJ NTY SCHQQLS
z ~
'~o,~~`~ Administrative Services, Transportation
i~~i~m
TO: Elmo Vance
Project D~velopm~ent 3 Environmental Analysis Branch
FROM: Phillip Williamso~b!'Di~ector of TFansportation
RE: Buses on SR 1001 Wilson County
DATE: 29-Jan-04
1 received the information on the plan to replace bridge No. 79 on SR 1001 over Bloomery
Swamp. According to our records we have five (5) buses'croesing that bridge daily.
Three of the buses are transporting elementary, mitldie and high school students. Two o/
1 the buses are Iransporting special neetls students. If you have further questions, please
contact me at my office at [phone]
Post-it' Fax Note 7671 0"1e - pa°ges~
To~Q~ FfO1AEl Y
CoJDOfr4 ~
V
~
lA Co. Nc-4ot - ~O~tA
Phon
e
o Phono - .7.3~- '~
fi4 ~ tc.7
FBU R ~~ ~ Feu 1
519 Ward Blvd., Bldg. 5, Unir A • P.O. Box 3915 • Wilson, NC 27895-3915 • [phone] • fAX [phone]

Q-~-3a6
~~
4pUNly
3~
W
V
WI LSO~N COUNTY SCHOOLS
Administrative Services, Transportation
MEMORANDUM
TO: lMlliam T. Goodwin, Jr. PE
Projecf Development & Environmental Analysis Branch
FROM: Phillip D. l~liams~~tor of Transportation
SUBJECT: Replacement of Bridge 79 on SR 1001 over Bloomery
Swamp, Wilson County
DATE: October 23, 2002
Mr. Goodwin, We have 6 buses using SR 1001 daily but would have no
problem finding an alternate route. I believe we should be able to re-route
the buses down Countryside Road or Bloomery Road to get them where
they need to go.
If you have questions or concerns, please contact me at [phone].
519 l-yard Blvd., Bldg. 5, Unit A ^ P.O. Box 3915 ^ '.Nilson, NC 27895-3915 ^ [phone] ^ FAX [phone]

NZJ -'I ~1 ~~~
Wilson Cuwity
For Replacement of Bridge No. 79
Over Bioomery Swamp Un SR 1001
TIP Project No. B-4326
Citizens Informational Workshop `------
MondayJanuary 24, 2005 from 4.30 PM to 7.30 PM at James Hunt Hrgh School in Wilson
This newsletter is published by the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) to inform concerned citizens
of an ~'er,~i~r•Er~c~te~jefrrl lt'o~•ks1FO~ concerning the proposed replacement and road closure of Bridge No. 79 on SR 1001
over Bloomery Swamp (TIP Project No. B-4326). This newsletter gives an overview of the steps in the project
development process and presents the bridge replacement alternatives evaluated.
. ~ Step 6 Environmental Document
`~~ ~ Step ~ I'ulrlic Involvement
Step 4 Selection of Preferred Alternative
" Step 3 Environrtrental Studies
Step 2 Alternatives Development
~ - _ _ .-_~ .r.~. Step 1 Project hutiation/Scoping
maintained by an on-site temporary detour structure
located east of the existing bridge. Alternate B was not
chosen because it has comparatively higher natural
environment impacts and construction cost.
During Step 1 of the project development process,
information was collected on the existing human and
natural environments. This information was used to
identify preliminary alternatives for replacing Bridge
No. 79. In Step 2, the preliminary alternatives were
evaluated and two "build" alternatives were selected
for detailed environmental studies. Steps 3 and 4
involved conducting the detailed environmental
studies for the "build" alternatives and selecting a
preferred alternative. The build altematives were:
Alternate A, replacing the existing bridge at the
existing location, while maintaining traffic by an ofl=
site detour route is the preferred alternate. The off-
site detour is along SR 1309 and US 264 Alternate
approximately 4.7 miles in length. Alternate A was
selected because of the comparatively lower
construction cost, lower environmental impacts, and
lesser construction time associated with it.
Alternate B replaces the bridge on existing
alignment. During construction, traffic will be
The NCDOT is aware that citizens living in the
proposed project area want to know the potential effects
of the project on their homes and businesses. However,
exact information is not available at this stage in the
planning process. Additional design work will be
performed before the actual right-of--way limits can be
established. This newsletter is to inform the public of
the replacement of Bridge No. 79 and solicit your input
on the project.
Planning and environmental studies for this project are
in progress. The Federal Categorical Exclusion (CE) is
scheduled for approval in February 2005. The CE will
address the potential impacts of the proposed bridge
replacement on the human and natural environments
and will include recommended design criteria for the
project. Input received from the public will be included
in the decision making process.
A Citizens Informational Workshop wi1P be held
Monday, January 24, 2005 at James Aunt High
SchooE, 4SS9 Lamm Road in Wilson. The preferred
alternate will be displayed at the Citizens
Informational Workshop for your review and
comments. Following the informational workshop and
evaluation of the comments, an environmental
document will be published.
{ O~ ~~RFf€ ~~ !I
tf ~~ ~!`
~` ~
~~ ~
o a R
01€
k
ggvf ''dl ..... ' ~~
4 ~~~~~ ae".~ ~t
THE PROJECT DEVELOPMENT PROCESS

1v~~sLErrER
c~ ~~J J~ Ms. Karen B. Taylor, P.E. or Mr. Greg Purvis, P.E.
\~ NCDOT - PD&EA Branch Wang Engineering
CJ 1548 Mail Service Center 15200 Weston Parkway, Suite 101 ~
`~~` Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548 Cary, North Carolina 27513
,,-•
(~ _ [phone], ext. 223 [phone]
/ C'fEPA~[t~'~~€~Fdf3~FC'0~;,~.C~Pd,~c~'"n°C'.(f C.B€f ~P€f~f3:~:hg~'2'g€T'6`l~Cd~k&'CibF$~"'L`lf~gfF€EG~'d'dS€h'.E.'~/1t7& -V
I~ ~~o~ l~aF~e trattspuatEn ~~esti~tt~ nn otltet° prc~,~eets~
call tTae NCO®T Ct~slomer ~ee°o~ice ~t~ce hall-fc°€~ a~ 1-~~7-I~6'T-4~'f11i.~.
You are invited to a
Cil"iaens iraforrrtationaB 14/c~rksitop
On Monday January 24, 2005
From 4:30 pm to 7:30 pm
At
James Hunt High School
4559 Lamm Road
in
~Ison
WILSON COUNTY
Replacement of Bridge No. 79
Over Bloomery Swamp
On SR 1001
TIP PROJECT NO. 8-4326
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Project Development and Environmental Analysis ',
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh NC 27699-1548
Public involvement is an important part of the project planning process. The North
Carolina Department of Transportation is committed to ensuring all issues of concern
to the public are addressed and considered. We encourage you to attend the Citizens
Informational Workshop and discuss your views with the Project study team. If you
are unable to attend, you may send your comments to one of the addresses listed
below. Your comments are important to us!

NOTICE OF A CITIZENS INFORMATIONAL WORKSHOP
FOR THE PROPOSED REPLACEMENT OF BRIDGE NO. 79 ON
SR 1001 OVER BLOOMERY SWAMP IN WILSON, NC
WBS No. 33663.1.1 TIP Project No. B-4326 Wilson County
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) will hold the
above Citizens Informational Workshop on Monday, January 24, 2005 between
the hours of 4:30 p.m. and 7:30 p.m. at James Hunt High School's Media Center
located on 4559 Lamm Rd. in Wilson, NC.
The purpose of this workshop is for NCDOT representatives to provide
information, answer questions, and accept written comments regarding this
project. NCDOT proposes to replace Bridge No. 79 on SR 1001 over Bloomery
Swamp. During construction, traffic will be maintained by an off-site detour route
along SR 1309 and US 264 Alternate approximately 4.7 miles in length.
.Anyone desiring additional information may contact Karen B. Taylor, P.E.,
NCDOT Project Development Engineer, at 1548 Mail Service Center, Raleigh,
NC 27699-1548, by phone at [phone] ext. 223, fax at [phone], or
E-mail at kbtaylor a(~.dot.state.nc.us .
NCDOT will provide auxiliary aids and services for disabled persons who
wish to participate in this workshop, to comply with the Americans with
Disabilities Act. To request special assistance, please contact Ms. Taylor as
early as possible so that arrangements can be made.

"8Ig
~b ~ ~ nb A ~ W
C~
~~ ~ o`' ~~ o ~ y o y S
~ ~ ~ ~ ~y ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 3
~ ~ SS °~
~8 ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ a a ~ p
0 ~~ ~ ~ ~
a ~o
y
a
8
e o
ti
U
o
o g
ti .,
1~ ~~
~~
~ ~ rib x b
h~ ~ Zo~
a ~O ~ a~~~
C1 hy"J N ~ h0~0
o ~xoa
~' ~~y
~ ~ x
'~-
II
~x~'-x
0
~x_-x- x
x '-
..~
~~~~ ~,i
I
x 1 r
I -~
r=.~ =i
,~ ~.r ~ ' ~
V ~.'.
o ~~ ~
' II°
~~~~oD
~,.,~
~_
~~
,_
PS.

)Q
a
~...1
1~v~.
I~
ti ~ r
~k~
~ o ~, ~
~ ~~ +/5
~; ~ ~
.~
y
s ~ :
~ +
j
" '; ~ s '
E 1
~~ ~ i
~ i
~-' ~ ~~ i i
'~~ ~ / , ~~--,I--
,--~.:
~ ~.,~M
~~41/P ~ // / i' ,1 \1
`4~ /
o ~-,r-oD~ ~;1 ~
~ ~ 4 r~ ~
~ ~
~ ry ~ 8 2b
..
~ ~ ~ r ~ r~ ~~ S B
~~ ~ ~. _~~y ~~ s
~~ r
' ~~ ~ ~
1 +~ '
1
~ ~~'
~, - -- ---
s i +75
O ci 4 PS. ~ a
r
y~
m +~
• ~`
i
?oo
yob ~ :
rn
m~ y
•
6
® _- ~
~~ =r ~ \
s~
~~ y ,_____ _ ___
-~ - - - --- ~ I-
Z y = z I ~-
~' ~~~
~~ ~ l

r
y ts1 'J'tl N Z ~ ~ ~ ."'y O v o ~ ~ ~: o ~ ~ 'd ~ ry ~ C~
y gi A ~ o w ~ y ~liAl~ ._.,.. .. i~.w. ~ r"7 P~ ~ t! . u. t9 ~ '~ ~; (9 y
t„ i -~I ~. ~yy ~, n ~ ti n. _ ' (,~"`~ '"3 pp~7~ "~ `~1 ~ ~ tai ~ x tzi ~ t~r{i z ° ~~j N ~ p, 'w .C n acs ~ c, ~~p c~
p~y ~ r1 n w m y a' ., ..,,~r ,.1 ~ N ~ ~ ~ v' O ~ ~ p ti Qi M p ~ tD 'b n O, ~ ~ ~ ~ Vi
G' N '1 O .y :;t O• ~ v t9 O ~ :T' ~ O CT7 ° ~ L~ l~ Al V
DD ~ n hJ m ti p -'.' f9 ~ °- f Gl' y `~y ""h ® i7 O ~ `d J. Q' b'e! G" ~ r°'~ wZ
rr ~ A d B ~ ~ o ~ .~ p1 ~ _ K `d ~ fb `~ ~ C].. G~ ~' ~ .nes o a.. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ YA/
,-.o Ln°ooc ~ ~ a.~.~ ~ n x•3.0 ; ~' a. "~,~' .~G! C ~ ~~
_~ Ef0 A it ~ b (% ~ i .5~~" dp ~ ® Gig w py~ ,wy Q `f~~"1 ~ ~ VC ps ~o~y pr°si' O ~ C,it ~ ~
W ~ '+ r G C9 r WW O `~ ~• Eat 9. ~ y f~QQ ~ °e~ ~ ~y+9 ~,
eR!
W ~ ~ O A rn' ' tm ~ C y CT' ^' ~ ~C ~ y~ O ~ w.. `O Q N~ O
~ to y d O ~ t't ~ W ~ r C' ~• cD "'`' p' y f1, ep '~t
A p d a ~ a ~ ~ °~ vim, pay ~ °p7 ~~s ~ ~ O ~ a ~" ° ~t
M Vi y I~
y G ~ y .7 fH ~ ~+ W O 'Jt O
~ ~ ~ to ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ° co
W d a .
K ~ ~ t~+ ~ y ~ "~. r`3' ~ G • ply ~•'' y'
~. m a
7c'
~~~ ~
i o
cn [/1 ""' b tat Eat `G -qy "+ "'~ w v. `ty b
C to ~ '"~' C .:. t1. N ~-' ~ p~j c~ ~ °a 0g", Otr' O n t' '• i; , ~t/tc'.
yy r~q ~. Y O ~' !(yD G: N C~Fyt ~' '~EjC' ~fD. ~ W `y fD ~' ~ tF ~r l ~ ~4 1 1
m U ~ -i `^t' fOD ~ G ~ ~ O ~ G~ ~ ~ UQ a (D c9 y ~ ~ ~. ;t 11 ~ ~~;
~ ~ o o ~ ~ d ~ Chi e' ~ .< ~ 5' h '~ ~ ~rJ, , a, . Vo CCC~~~777 ~ ~f ;~~~ « ~ ~ ~ .
2 ~ 4 ~
~" ~ ~ o tre ~ ® C ~ "' y .d < ~ o kh n ".s' ~ Z III ~`i ~ ~?~. ~
~ ~ ~ ~° C:f ~ ~ ~ ~"' ~ ft 'd p n ~ (~D ~ ® p O `~ N Q. V1 i ~ ~ ~2' ' ' ~ N Y ~ ~d',
W N b ~ u. y "~t' ~ ~' CD ~ ~.S'I "r3' y~ r ,.' ~~ -. ~.
® ~ S e C ~ co ,~ ~ ~' ° Q. to N r • ~ ~ Cam.' ~ 'o ~ S. Y I ~• ~ ~.
~ p ee ~ ~ ~ ti 00 ~ ~ ty ~ "d CS. N .-. ~~y ~~~ ° ~ ~ ~~~~.?
w b ,.. C r t~.r #
~ rr m b ~ tv O n Ci a N+ d (~D in' ~ ~' a' ~ ~ „~,,, ^~' .~ C/j ~,d~.: ' w~`t 4 f} + r?,~ r ~• `
.~r C O •.~~ ,~ ,.~ .
pa /~~ (D C o O N O G~.. ~ ® n, 'n-. "~ dq ~ ~ ~ , ; ~ ; ~ d~~` r `t
O~+ f 1" V~ `j 'y Q' '+ <p• ~ '~ ~ rn Fir' c° ~. ~, I» ?<„~ .~ ~ ~- ~ ,~': - F ~)
`7 ~~~ ~,/, ~ N O ~ ~ ~ •O ~ `r3' '~ C1' ~ C• {~~t ~ ~ "r `. a.." i ~'- y ` ~k~ ~ ~c i~V,~~' ~_
C/ O t7. .y-' ~~, O O 'C"' ~. r fiN fi ~ ry,~.1*h n1. ~~~ 7p' ~ ~,.
~ O ~ ro ''C 5~ G q~q caD O ~ ~ ~ ~ C. G y' 'O''~ O ~ ~ ~ p t7' ~N~y ~ ~ ~~~~s~~~. ~ Sr~~'
O qC. A fD O `G Q' C. .y. r. O. N O m~ A rn N C~ N w N a,'~ Q~
~ ~ ~ o ~,
~' ~~o.co '~~~~`°~~o '`~~at•typ~~o ~cu~o~~ ®o xAor r~~ w
o ~ o ~. o• ~ .~~.. m a. a- ~' a r-. p eu ~ ~' ~ ~; r0, S. p Gi ~ ~. ~ ~ ~.,~e7na ~
tv rv ~i o
~» ~ CJ ~ n
~.•~ `r' °,cao ~ ° c5o.~ ~ar~o ~' ~co ~n5•~ ~.~ ~.~° p p °,z~.„~ 5 ~°'
~ ~ y o w ,~ 5• c .» p~ tD ~ ~ rn
fIQ O G ~ ~ `A ~~..~ ~ ~, y ~ ~ ,~ ~ 0 O fD O „Oy 't! ~ O ~O CS ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ e
~ co ~ ° Cb lam' a' eo ~ • O rv ctt C r» `CS r9 ~ Q. ~ ~
® ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ to Amt ~ O. y ~ `d Ox Q N ~ ..y ~' a..i ° ~ N '* v'. <• `~ 'J' O ~ ~h O ~~i ;~
(/~ ~-1 cra ° .y cr, ~ ~ O .y ~ .y '~ ry' ".S ~ "r=') r ~ ,;
~'~' 7' ~ ~ocyu~.~~• z~.°S~cCow'_' ~ ;c~~o~:<, p.< ~~ Oa`i pts~tf ~~'
~ ~. ~ ~ ~ o ~ 5"bo ~ $' p C ti ~... N cu w O ~ ~ ~~ f,~. ~ ~c.~,.
~ N N ~ ('~ ° b ° CD '~ to co :S• S'i ~° ~, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ cr• 1 C/) , '; ti~E '"~ ~ =x'p"
~' ~ g ~, '-~ ~ w ~ w `~° is ~ ° w ~ ~ e' ~ < ~ ~ ~ ~' ~ p' W ~ ~ W ~ O ,~. ~ ~~ 6a
n ~ r9
io ~~ ~ ~ o~a~ o.,~~~~05 o~ct.o~o„~ `~~oyo. ®~ ~~~ ~ti '• .
~ ~ ~ ~ co 5, co ~, co ~ ~' .» a. ~' 5' ~ a ~ ~ a ~' ~ b co ... ~~
,~e;.
A }A
~~o,~
wcnoo~ r'~_ ~
~.. '
~ ~ o ~-~ ~~~--z
y C1] n >v n w e.+u ~ ~° ~. `P . ~ ~ ~. a+ Z ~ ~tyo ~ „~ /C~y9 ~ _ ,~?-~ i_~
p ~ p• ~• `C ~Oy W (1~ (p ~ p~ C9 A ~ Q~ ~ ~G p fn ~ i ~;.. 'rhF;~~,b ~. l~.t
N r /~ !~.7~~ ~., ~ _ t ~ ,
t7 W ~ `d W M- ~ ~ y ~ n ~Q7 ~ ~. M ° ~ ~ ~+ ~ OQ ~ ~ ~ CA r ~ ~ r dy .i ~r :~
~' ~7 ~ ~ ~ trio o". ~ ~ ~ ~• ~ ~ ,~;a t ~' ~ 8 r ., ~ ,
a ~ ~ ~ ~~. ~._ _ . : `'mow a ''f ».
~ "~._
_.. _.
.. Fnr ~ • ad O .... ~ w wer ~ O v v+ ~ Ca+ ~ ew ~ ~ i
~.
d. ~n 0~t) ~ ~ CD Ow O+ ~ ~C dQ vOi o Q+ ti - -- -- ®,~~.m...=.,...,.

cJ
r ~
~ ~
~ ~_.~- ~ ~
~~_~ ~ \
----_
--~-
r -..

r
' ' -w V
. ;.
;- aI
;-
„:
~. ~,.,f
`.`; .
i~
.=T`' i ~-
~~" ~r
. l;" H .
`~
..:~
a
~...~
-~~:;.
,-%'
,- ,
.~
J
r
s q~~~
4ru`@~
~~. ~,;. ..e,
j ~
~ ~ _ _ t_~
'~` 1d
~-
,~ r
~~ ~ _ -
u, ~_~
~~ ~
~`1 I
_~ ~
J ~ ~~
t
~~
l,~
44
dl~
~ j 1 Tay _ -..~
;~1 ' r~ ~
~ h
• •
LJ
~ o
,.~:, ..
~~
.r _.
~ ~
.i ..,
i
I S
?~
i~ l
1
I
I
I~
I i `
~~
.r,
1.
~~.
~.

z
~ z
0. 4
~ F.
x~ ~~
~~ ~~
a8 ~8

~~ ~ ~tJ~

~ r
~ --° '_
•
°

~ • ~ o

~~
~
, _,
~ ..
,
~ ~

~t ~~

~ i J
~~'

i r~ '

~

.~
~ _
_ ~'

o
~.J
_x _.
1
1 y
~ . = --"_
' x-~x~~X~
j
' ~ i;
..
~
-~ I
f
~~~ ~
~~ °
... ~
,~
1

i
!

. ~.,

_. '
,.
II

~
~

~

(.,,~
, . ~
I
p ~
I
__..ll.~~ ,

~:
_.
~~ ~
N
®~
~ ~ a
u
ui'
~~
a~
4 ~'
-- ---t,
~~'°'~.i_ae. J
~,...'..
J ~~'
~~ ~~ ~-
~.. -.
:~ ~~ ~ 1
t

APPENDIX C
Routine Wetland Determination Data Forms

.t
~~
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1957 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: I I~ ~ ~ 13 ~ ~p Date: ~,a~ f ~ ~(~y
Applicant/Owner: ~ County r~[501f1
Investigator: G d$C~£ nG 2. State: N C
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes No Community ID: _ .
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situationl? Yes No Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes No Plot ID:
(If needed, explain on reverse
VEGETATION
ra
tum
Dominant Plant S ecies St r
n
d
i
e
a
ta Dominant Plant Soeeies Stratum ndicator
~
C
~ `~
1 [~
/n
/~
'
~
' 9
. ~ -
2. ~ 7~~ 10.
3. S_ ~~G 11.
4. ,~ ~,e~,,, 12
5. ~ 13.
6. 14.
7. - _ -- _..- ----- ....~...~..... 15.
9. ~ 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are 08L, FACW or

FAC lexeluding FAC-) ~~~
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
_Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Gauge
Stream, Lake or Tide Primary Indicators:
_
_
Aerial Photographs _Inundated
_
Other iSaturated in Upper 12 Inches
_
~No Recorded Data Available Water Marks
_Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
_Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Field Observations: Secondary Indicators (2 or mare requiredl:
Oxidized Aoot Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Depth of Surface Water:
l~n•) Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: -+ 12 (in.) Local Soil Survey Data
~AC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: ~ (in.l
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:

1 . ,~
can e
Map Unit.Name I ^~
~'G~{~~~ Drainage Class• l.r-~~'
(Series and Phase): v

~
~f °~t
~ J Field Observations
M
d T
~V'~S C
fi
N
`
t
L
Taxonomy (Subgroup): appe
on
rm
a
eV ype: Yes
o
Profile Deseriarian:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Motde Texture, Concretions.
s orizon Munseil Moi
in
ch
e (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast _ Structure. etc.
~
'
~J
~! ` ~ ~ ~ ~ l1' ~ A UCi ~ ~~
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol _ Concretions'
Histia Epipedon _ High Organic Content in Surface layer in Sandy Soils
_
Sulfidie Odor _ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
_
Aquic Moisture Regime _ Usted on Local Hydric -Soils List
Reducing Conditions _ Usted on National Hydric Soils List
_
Gleyed or Low-Chrome Colors _ Other (Euplain in Remarks)
Remarks:
wF-rl nN^ ^1=TERMINATION
Hydrophytie Vegetation Present? Ye Circle) (Circle)
Wetland Hydrology Present? ~ Yes N _
Hydric Soils Present? Yes o Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes ~No
Remarks:
Approved dy Nc1U5A[:E Z/yl
HJL
S/93

`~ ,
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETEAM1NATlON
(198.7 COE Wetlands Delineation Manuatl
Project/Site ~~ R ~' ~ J~~ Date: _ A','~c-i~ ~ ~ 2~~"'~
Applicant/Owner: C ~' County: l~~;lsl~,n
Investigator: Go SG State: N C,
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes No Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes No Transact ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes No Plot ID: _
(if needed, explain on reverse
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Soeeies/ Stratum
~Gti C.
1 Indicator
~~ Dominant Plant Soeeies Stratum ndicator
9
. .

3. Md-ra(Ci~+, c'. ~t i 54i~ ~._Lld~ 11.
a. ~aucv~,s Ger~vs l J~~ 12
s. ~r~ac ~ ~ ~ 18.
6: TN..r~e•,~ c:~~ f~~ 14.
7. _--:_ ...-----. _
~~~ 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL. FACW or
~
FAC (excluding FAC-) ~
~ ~
~{~
-7°'
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
_Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indcators:
_Stream. Lake or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators:
_Aerial Photographs Inundated
Other Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
_
~(Vo Recorded Data Available Water Marks
_Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Field Observations: Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
O
id
Depth of Surface Water• ~lin
) x
ized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
. Water-Stained Leaves
Local Soil Surve
Data
Depth to Free Water in Pit: lin•I y
AC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Sail: lin,) _Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
-- ' ~

' i
JUtLJ
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phasel: 1 ~~ ~
~ ~ F`^ Drainage Class: i `~~

~
~ Field Observations
e: Yes Na
Ma
ed T
fi
V~
~s C
' ~-
Taxonomy (Subgroupl' pp
yp
on
rm
U
U eh
Profile Deseriation:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions.
inches liarizort (Munseil Moistl (Munsell Moist) AbundancelContrast Strocture. etc.

1
I~~ I
~ o ~ San
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol Concretions=
_ .:
Histie Ep(pedan
_ High Organic Content in Surface layer in Sandy Sails
~Suifidic Odor _ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
~i4quic Moisture Regime _, Listed on Local Hydrie Soils List
,Reducing Conditions _ Usted an National Hydric Soils List
~Gleyed or Low-Chrama Colors _ _ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
~.r-r~ w wm nrrt:flrlMlUAT1f1lU
iv a~a -
Hydrophytie Vegetation Present? Yes No (Circle)
Wetland Hydrology Present? es No
Hydric Soils Present? No
Remarks:
.~cn re mina
,~Nr.,,.......~ ...~..._...-- -
(Circle)
Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland Yes No
HJL ,,
8/93