20140501 Ver 1_Application_20140521

Corps Submittal Cover Sheet
Please provide the following info:
1. Project Name Bridge 321 on SR 1424 (Clark Road)
2. Name of Property Owner /Applicant: NC Department of Transportation
3. Name of Consultant /Agent: N/A
*Agent authorization needs to be attached.
4. Related /Previous Action 1D number(s): N/A
5. Site Address: N /A.
6. Subdivision. Name: N /A.
7. City. Franklin
8. County: Macon
9. Lat: 35.298320 N Long: 83.440570 W (Approx Project Center)
10. (quadrangle Name: Alarka (35083 - C4-TF -024)
1 l . Waterway: Lakey Creek (C Tr)
12. Watershed: Little Tennessee River (0601 O�202040030)
13, Requested Action:
X Nationwide Permit # 3
General. Permit ##
Jurisdictional Detern- iination Request
Pre - Application Request
The following information will be completer) by Corps office:
AID:
Prepare File Folder Assign number in ORM Begin Date
Authorization: Section 10 Section 404
Project Description/ Nature of Activity/ Project Purpose:
Site /Waters Name.
1 eywvot ds:

PAT MCCRORY
SEAJT'
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTAMN
May 20, 2014
Ms. Lori Beckwith, NCDOT Regulatory Project Manager
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208,
Asheville, NC 28801-2714
ANTHONY J. TATA
SITRUAR),
Subject: Nationwide 14 Permit Application
Replace Bridge No. 321 on SR 1424 (Clark Road) over Lakey Creek
Macon County
WBS Element No. 17BP.14.R.73
Dear Ms. Beckwith:
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) is proposing to replace the subject
bridge. The functionally obsolete 1831, x 20.0'W single: span timber structure will be replaced
with a single span 50,0'L x 30,0'W x 21" D concrete cored slab bridge. The new bridge will be
stage constructed slightly upstrearn of the existing structure. There will also be some minor
approach work our the existing roadway.
I am enclosing a PCN application, Rapanos Jurisdictional form, Biological Assessment and
Biological Opinion for Virginia spiraea, plan sheets showing the proposed work, a marked
county map, a USES quad map and photographs.
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Database was checked for records of threatened and
endangered species. The database lists 58 species for Macon County that have federal status.
Additionally, the bald eagle (Halkieetus lencocephalus), which is protected under. the Bald and
Golden Eagle Protection Act, is known from Macon County.
The species in the database include the sicklefin redhorse (Hoxoslom(t sl).2), a candidate species
for listing, and the bog turtle (Gljptemys mithlenbei-gii), which is listed as threatened due to
similarity of appearance to tile listed northern bog turtle. Seven species, spotfin chub (Erhnonax
moncichus), Appalachian elktoe (Alminiclonita ravenelian(t), littlewing pearlyniussel (Peghts
ftibida), small whorled pogonia (Isotria mecleoloi(les), Virginia spiraca (,�I)iraea virginiana),
noonday globe snail (Panera clarki nanlahalct), and rock gnome lichen (Gymnocterma lineare)
are listed as either threatened or endangered. Additionally, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
considers Macon County to have potential for the Indiana bat (Ifyotis socicilis).
Fourteenth Divisioo Of
Telephone: [phone] Webster Road, Sylva, North Carolina 28779 Fax: (8281,580 -4043

Bridge No. 321 — Macon County Page 2 May 20, 2014
There are records for the spotfin chub, the Appalachian elktoe, the littlewing peadyniussel,
sicklefin redhorse, bog turtle, and the Virginia spiraea within five miles of the bridge, but, with
the exception of Virginia spirea, none of the records are in the Lake), Creek watershed. Virginia
spiraea plants were found at the bridge site. The Little Tennessee River is about L5 miles
downstream of the site. This section of river is a Significant Natural Heritage Area and
designated as critical habitat for the Appalachian elktoe and spotfin chub by the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service.
Lakey Creek at the bridge is too small, steep, and/or cold for Appalachian elktoe, littlewing
pearlymussel, or the sicklcfin redhorse. No spotfin chub have been observed in the Lakey Creek
watershed (survey work conducted by the Little Tennessee Watershed Association), The project
is limited in scope to replacing the bridge with another spanning structure, therefore, the potential
adverse effects on aquatic habitat in Lakey Creek and downstream in the Little Tennessee River
should be minimal.
Riparian habitat at the project site is part[), wooded, but disturbed by agricultural activities,
several derelict fish ponds, a single family residence, and the road and bridge. The habitat is not
characteristic of the listed species or the bald eagle. Wetland habitat required by the bog turtle is
also lacking.
Habitat for small whorled pogonia is variable in North Carolina, though this plant is typically
found in open, dry deciduous woods with acid soil, sometimes oil slopes along streams. It is also
known to, occur in rich, mesic forest in association with white pine and rhododendron. The area
near the bridge does not meet these conditions.
The rock gnome lichen is typically found at high elevations oil vertical rock surfaces that are
bathed in fog, though it can occur at lower elevations in deep river gorges where there is high
humidity. The elevation at the project site is less than 2200 feet and lacks vertical rock bluffs.
The stream also lies in a wide valley with a general southern orientation, so consistently high
humidity conditions are not present.
The noonday globe is found in oak-hickory, forest with rich, moist soils. Habitat is typically thick
undergrowth in steep rocky areas with northern exposures. The noonday is only kiiown from the
Nantahala Gorge, Habitat is lacking for this species at the project site.
Due to the proximity of Indiana bat records, the USFWS considers Macon County to be ail
"Indiana bat county". In early April 2014, all trees affected by the project were removed to avoid
the period when bats could potentially be using trees in the area for summer roosting. There
could be indirect effects on Indiana bats due to removal of potential roost trees, but the loss, of a
small number of trees in a primarily forested landscape should be insignificant.
Virginia spiraea is typically found along portions of larger, relatively high gradient rivers where
periodic flooding and scour removes competing vegetation. Virginia spiraea is also known to
occur along roads where maintenance activities maintain the open canopy condition favored by
Virginia spiraea. The habitat at the bridge site appears marginally suited for Virginia spiraea,

Bridge No. 321 — Macon County Page 3 May 20, 2014
However, biologists with NCDOT found Virginia spiraea plants at two locations at the bridge
site. The first location is near the inlet of a 24-inch corrugated metal pipe that conveys a small
(1 -foot wide) unnamed tributary under an old driveway entrance. The second location is along
the left bank of Lakey Creek approximately 30 feet upstream of the existing bridge. The habitat
at the bridge was somewhat shaded by tree canopy, though it is more open now due to the tree
removal.
NCDOT consulted with the USFWS about the impacts of the project on Virginia, spiraea. A
Biological Assessment (BA) for the bridge replacement was completed by Mr. Dennis, Hernian of
NCDOTon March 11, 2014. On April 28,,2014, Mr. Jason Mays with the USFWS transmitted a
Biological Opinion (BO) for the bridge project to your office. Based on implementation of the
conservation measures identified in the BA and BO (see attached documents), we recommend a
"inal, affect, likely to adversely affect" determination for effects of the project on Virginia
spiraea.
This project was reviewed by NCDOT's Human Environment Unit in 2012/13 for potential
affects to historic architecture and archaeology. Surveys were conducted for both archaeology
and historic architecture with determinations of no effect (see attached forms).
NCDOT best management practices including "Design Standards in Sensitive Waters" will be
used to minimize and control sedimentation an(] erosion on this project, The construction
foreman will review all erosion control measures daily to ensure erosion and sedimentation are
being controlled effectively. If the devices are not functioning as intended, they will be replaced
immediately with better devices.
Impacts to Waters of the United States
Lakey Creek (►WR Class: C Tr) is shown on the USGS topographic map as a perennial stream.
The channel is well defined with a substrate of cobble, sand and gravel and is approximately I I
feet in width. The stream supports fish and other aquatic life. Lakey Creek flows approximately
1.5 miles to the Little Tennessee River. The Little Tennessee River meets the definition of a
Traditional Navigable Water, For these reasons, we believe Lakey Creek is a Relatively
Permanent Water and is under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. In order to
construct the project, it will be necessary to impact waters of the United States in the Little
Tennessee River Basin (HUC 06010202), Specifically, NCDOT is requesting to replace Bridge
No. 321 with a concrete cored slab bridge. Listed below is a summary of the proposed impacts.
Site No.
Station
Existing Condition
Proposed Condition
Net
Impacts
Site I
21'L x 20'W
40'L x 2TW x 21" D
W
Single Span Timber Bridge
Single Span Concrete Cored Slab Bridge
Impervious Dikes and Flow Diversion to
Site I A
Free: Flowing Stream
100,
Remove Old Abutments

Bridge No. 321 — Macon County Page 4
May 20, 2014
Total Per•manent Sti•cam Impact for Bridge 09
Total Permanent Impact for- Streambank Stabilization 53'
Total Permanent Impact for Stream Channel Relocation 1009
Tempoi-at-y Impact for Impervious Dikes and Flow Diversion 1001
Permits Requested
NCDOT is hereby requesting authorization under, Section 404 ol'the Clean Water Act to proceed
with the construction project outlined above. By copy of this letter, I am asking Ms. Marla
Chambers, Western NCDOT Review Coordinator, of the North Carolina Wildlife Resources,
Commission (NCWRC) to comment directly to you concerning the 404 Nationwide Permit
request.
I am also requesting authorization under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act rrom the North
Carolina Department of Environn-tent and Natural Resources (DENR), Division of Water
Resources (DWR). In addition, I am asking Ms. Chambers and Mr. Ben DeWit, Roadside
Environmental Field Operations Engineer (NCDOT), to comment directly to me concerning this
permit request.
Sincerely,
Mark S. Davis
Division 14 Environmental Program Supervisor.
Enclosures
cc: Ms. Amy Chapman, Division of Water Resources — DENR, Raleigh
Mr. Kevin Barnett, Division of Water Resources — DENR, Asheville
Mr. Jason Mays, Biologist, US Fish and Wildlife Service, Asheville
Ms. Marla Chambers, Western NCDOT Review Coordinator, NCWRC, Albemarle
Mr. Josli Deyton, P,E, Division 14 Bridge Management Engineer, NCDOT, Bryson City
Mr. Ben DeWit, EI, Roadside Environmental Field Operations Engineer, NCDOT
Remove Old AbUtInClItS and Slope
Site I B
Timber Abutments
Streambanks and Riprap Banks
53'
Adjacent to New End Bents
Free Flowing Roadside
Relocate Stream Channel
Site 2
Strearn Channel
North of Road
100,
(No Flow Diversion Required)
Total Per•manent Sti•cam Impact for Bridge 09
Total Permanent Impact for- Streambank Stabilization 53'
Total Permanent Impact for Stream Channel Relocation 1009
Tempoi-at-y Impact for Impervious Dikes and Flow Diversion 1001
Permits Requested
NCDOT is hereby requesting authorization under, Section 404 ol'the Clean Water Act to proceed
with the construction project outlined above. By copy of this letter, I am asking Ms. Marla
Chambers, Western NCDOT Review Coordinator, of the North Carolina Wildlife Resources,
Commission (NCWRC) to comment directly to you concerning the 404 Nationwide Permit
request.
I am also requesting authorization under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act rrom the North
Carolina Department of Environn-tent and Natural Resources (DENR), Division of Water
Resources (DWR). In addition, I am asking Ms. Chambers and Mr. Ben DeWit, Roadside
Environmental Field Operations Engineer (NCDOT), to comment directly to me concerning this
permit request.
Sincerely,
Mark S. Davis
Division 14 Environmental Program Supervisor.
Enclosures
cc: Ms. Amy Chapman, Division of Water Resources — DENR, Raleigh
Mr. Kevin Barnett, Division of Water Resources — DENR, Asheville
Mr. Jason Mays, Biologist, US Fish and Wildlife Service, Asheville
Ms. Marla Chambers, Western NCDOT Review Coordinator, NCWRC, Albemarle
Mr. Josli Deyton, P,E, Division 14 Bridge Management Engineer, NCDOT, Bryson City
Mr. Ben DeWit, EI, Roadside Environmental Field Operations Engineer, NCDOT

0�
:71
WIN&
ov
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWO project no,
Form Version 1,3 Dec 10 2008
Page I of 11
PCN Form —Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
Pre-Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A.
Applicant hifoi-itiatioii
1.
Processing
1a.
Type(s) of approval sought from the
Corps:
Section 404 Permit E] Section: 10 Permit
1 b,
Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 14 or General Permit (GP) number:
1c.
Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
F-1 Yes
No
ld.
Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
0 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular El Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
E] 401 Water Quality Certification — Express El Riparian Buffer Authorization
1e.
1f.
Is this notification solely for the record For the record only for DWQ 401
because written approval is not required? Certification:
El Yes 0 No
Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation
of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank or in -lieu
fee program.
For the record only for Corps Permit:
F] Yes 0 No
El yes 0 No
lg.
Is the project located in any of NC"s twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1h
below.
El Yes
Z No
1 h,
Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
i ❑ Yes
No
2.
Project Information
2a.
Name of project:
Replace Bridge No, 321 on SIR 1424 (Clark Road) over Lakey Creek
2b.
County:
Macon
2c.
Nearest municipality / town:
Franklin
2d.
Subdivision name:
N/A
2e.
NCDOT only, T.I.P. or State
Project No:
17BP.14.R.73
3.
Owner information
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
North Carolina Department of Transportation
3b.
Deed Book and Page No,
N/A
3c.
Responsible Party (for LILC if
applicable):
Mark S. Davis, Division Environmental Supervisor
3d.
Street address:
253 Webster Road
3e.
City, state, zip:
Sylva, NC 28779
3f.
Telephone no.:
828-586-2141
3g.
Fax no.:
828-586-4030
3h.
Email address:
[e-mail]
Page I of 11
PCN Form —Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is: El Agent ❑ Other, specify:
4b. Name:
N/A
4c. Business name
(if applicable):
N/A
4d. Street address:
NIA
4e. City, state, zip:
N/A
4f. Telephone no.:
N/A
4g. Fax no.:
N' /A
4h. Email address:
N/A
5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name:
NI/A
5b. Business name
(if applicable):
N/A
5c. Street address:
N/A
5d. City, state, zip:
N/A
5e. Telephone no.:
N/A
5f, Fax no.:
N/A
5g. Email address:
N/A
Page 2 of 11
PCNI Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
Not Applicable
1 b, Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
Latitude: 35.29832 Longitude: - 8144057
(DD.DDDDDD) (-DD.DDDDDD)
1 c. Property si'ze:
acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water (strearn, river, etc.) to
Lakey Creek
proposed project:
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
C Tr
2c. River basin:
Little Tennessee (HUC 06010202)
3. Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
The overall landscape is primarily closed canopy deciduous forest with scattered single family residences and
subdivisions. The immediate vicinity of the project is closed canopy forest along the upstream side of the bridge and a
narrower forested riparian area with an adjacent field downstream of the project. Single family residences and derilict fish
ponds also have altered the landscape surrounding the bridge.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
None
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing strearns (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
N/A
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
To replace an obsolete 18.5' L x 20'W single span timber bridge with a new single span 50' L x 30'W x 21°' D concrete
cored slab, bridge on existing location.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
Virginia spiraea plants, a federally threatened species will be removed prior to construction (see attached BA and BO).
Erosion and sedimentation control measures will be installed. A section of an UT to Lakey Creek will be relocated. Water
will be diverted away from work areas as needed. Part of the old bridge will be removed and part of the new bridge will
be constructed slightly upstream to maintain traffic. Then the traffic will be shifted and the remainder of the old bridge will
be removed and the new bridge completed. Track hoes, dump trucks, bulldozers, graders, paving equipment, water
pumps, sandbags, diversion pipe and various hand tools will be used to accomplish the work.
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a, Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property I
F] Yes 0 No El Unknown
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
Comments:,
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
❑ Preliminary El Final
of determination was made?
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Agency/Consultant Company: N/A
Name (if known): NI/A
Other: NI/A
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
N/A
Page 3 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications, been requested or obtained for
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
El Yes 0 No El unknown
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
N/A
6. FUtUre Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?
❑ Yes No
6b. If yes, explain.
N/A
Page 4 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1 a., Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
❑ Wetlands Streams - tributaries ❑ Buffers
[:1 Open Waters El Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then, complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a.
2b.
2c.
2d.
2e.
2f.
Wetland impact
Type of jurisdiction
number -
Type of impact
Type of wetland
Forested
(Corps - 404, 10
Area of impact
Permanent (P) or
(if known)
DWQ - non-404, other)
(acres)
Temporary (T)
W1 [:1 P Ell T
N/A
NI /A.
❑ Yes
El No
[:1 Corps
[] DWQ
N/A
W2 ❑ P F-1 T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
W3 [--I PDT
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
[:1 DWQ
W4 ❑ P [:] T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps,
❑ No
[-] DWQ
W5 E]PnT
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
W6 [:1 P El T
❑ Yes
[:1 Corps
[:1 No
❑ DWQ
2g. Total wetland impacts
N/A
2h. Comments: N/A
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a.
3b,
3c.
3d.
3e.
3f.
3g,,
Stream impact
Type of impact
Stream name
Perennial
Type of jurisdiction
Average
Impact
number -
(PER) or
(Corps - 404, 10
stream
length
Permanent (P) or
intermittent
DWQ - non-404,
width
(linear
Temporary (T)
(INT)?
other)
(feet)
feet)
S1 EP[IT
Cored Slab Bridge
Lakey Creek
0 PER
[:1 INT
Z Corps
0 DWQ
11
0
SIA El P M T
Impervious Dikes
& Flow Diversion,
Lakey Creek
Z PER
❑ INT
Z Corps
Z DWQ
11
100
S1B Z P E] T
Riprap Bank
Stabilization
Lakey Creek
Z PER
[] INT
Z, Corps
Z, DWQ
11
53
S2 Z P [:IT
Channel
Relocation
UT Lakey Creek
0 PER
❑ INT
E Corps
Z DWQ
1
100
S3 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ PER
❑ Corps
EJ INT
F-1 DWQ
S4 E:1 P ❑ T
PER
Corps
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
A. Total Permanent Stream and Tributary Impacts -- Bridge
0
Total Permanent Stream Impact for Streambank Stabilization
531
Total Permanent Stream Impact for Channel Relocation - (No Flow Diversion Required)
100,
Total Temporary Stream Impact for huper0ous Dike and Flow Diversion
100,
K Comments:
Page 5 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2006 Version

Page 6 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 1 0, 2008 Version
4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, Sounds. the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then individually list alll open water impacts below.
4a,
Open water
impact number —
Permanent (P,) or
Temporary (T)
4b.
Name of waterbody
(if applicable)
4c.
Type of impact
4d.
Waterbody type
4e,
Area of impact (acres)
01 OPEIT
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
02 [:1 P El T
03 E]P❑T
04 [:1 P El T
4f. Total open water inipicts
NIA
4g. Comments: N/A
6, Pond or Lake Construction
If and or lake construction proposed, then complete the chart below.
5a.
Pond ID
number
5b.
Proposed use or purpose
of pond
5c.
Wetland'Impacts (acres)
5d.
Stream Impacts (feet)
5e.
Upland:
(acres)
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Pi
N/A
NIA
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
P2
5f. Total
5g. Comments:
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
El Yes El No If yes, permit ID no: N/A
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
N/A
5j:. Size of pond watershed (acres):
N/A
5k. Method of construction:
NIA
Page 6 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 1 0, 2008 Version

6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buff er, then complete the chart below, If yes, then, individually list all buffer impacts
below. If any impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill Out Section D of this form.
6a.
El NeLliSe El Tar-Parn lico El Other:
Project is in which protected basin?
0 Catawba El Randleman
Buffer impact
nurnber —
Reason
Buffer
Zone 1 impact
Zone 2 impact
Permanent (P) or
for
Stream name
mitigation
(square feet)
(square feet)
Temporary (T)
impact
required
El No
El No
El No
6h. Total buffer impacts
NIA
N/A
6i. Comments: N/A
D. Impact Justificationand Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization,
la Specifically describe measures taken, to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
The bridge is being replaced with another spanning structure that is longer, which increases, the hydraul'ic capacity through the
bridge opening. The channel change will include cross-vanes, reforestation with Virginia spiraea, coir fibermatting and
seeding for long-term bank stabilization.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
Erosion and sedimentation control measures will be installed prior to work beginning, The stream will be diverted away from
work areas as needed.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the, State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
El Yes 0 No
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apl)ly):
El DWQ El Corps
El Mitigation bank
2c, If yes, which mitigation option willbe used for this
Payment to in-lieu fee program
El Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank: NIA
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type N/A
Quantity N/A
Page ?of11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

3c, Comments: N:/A
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In-lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in -Herr fee program is attached.
❑ Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested:
N/A linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
El warm El cool ❑col:d
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
N/A square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
N/A acres
4 Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested:
N/A acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
NIA acres
4h. Comments: N/A
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If using: a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
N/A
6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) — required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
buffer mitigation?
E] Yes 0 No
6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required.
Zone
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Total impact
(square feet)
Multiplier
6e.
Required mitigation
(square feet)
Zone 1
N/A
N/A
3 (2 for Catawba)
N/A
Zone 2
1 1,5
6f. Total buffer mitigation required:
N/A
6g, If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in-lieu fee fUnd).
NIA
6h. Comments: N/A
Page 8 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
11a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
❑ Yes N No
within, one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection, Rules?
1 b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
❑ Yes F1 No
Comments: N/A
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
N/A %
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
0 Yes, ❑ No
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why:
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide, a brief, narrative description of the plan:
The project is covered by individual NPDES Permit No. NCS000250.
El Certified Local Government
2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
❑ DWQ Storrnwater Program
DWQ 401 Unit
3, Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a, In which local government's jurisdiction is this project?
N/A
El Phase 11
3b. Which of the following locally-implemented stormwater management programs
❑ NSW
❑ USMP
apply (check all that apply):
❑ Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other:
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ❑ No
attached?
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
n Coastal Counties
El HQW
4a. Which of the following state - implemented stormwaterinanagementprograms apply
El ORW
(check all that apply):
El Session Law 2006-246
❑ other:
4b. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
attached?
❑ Yes ❑ No
5. DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a. Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
❑ Yes ❑ No
5b. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
❑ Yes ❑ No
Page 9 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

F. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1 a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (fed eral/sta te/local) funds or the
Yes No
use of public (federal/state) land?
1 b. If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State
❑ Yes No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1C. If You answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
letter.)
❑ Yes No
Comments: N/A
2. Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWQ Welland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
El Yes N No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b, Is this an after-the-fact permit application?
Yes 0 No
2c. If you answered "`yes "" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s): N/A
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in
El Yes MNo
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b. If You answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
The project involves the replacement of an existing bridge, on a secondary rural road. The road infrastructure is not being
upgraded. The limited scope of this project would not be expected to result in any significant secondary or cumulative
effects.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a. 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
Page 10 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
Yes No
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
Yes No,
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
Raleigh
Asheville
5d. What data sources did YOU Use to determine whether your site WOUld impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Database, a site visit on August 2, 2013, and a subsequent site visit on 8/28/2013
with UISFWS biologists to confirm presence of Virginia spiraea and a follow up visit on 10/1512013 when, a second group
of spiraea plants were discovered upstream of the bridge, along Lakey Creek. A Biologicai Assessment and Biological
Opinion was prepared on March 11, 2014 and April 28, 2014, respectively (see attached dOCUments),
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish ha itat?
Yes No
6b. What data sources did YOU use to determine whether your site Would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
N/A—There are no marine or estuarine communities within the Blue Ridge Physiographic Province
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a, Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
El Yes No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b, What data sources did YOU Use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
The project was reviewed by the NCDOT's Human Environment Unit for potential effects on historic architecture and
archaeology in 2012,/13. SUveys were performed for both historic architecture and archaeology; however, it was
determined that there would be "no effect" to the respective resources (see attached forms).
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a Will this project Occur in a FEMA-clesignated 1 00-year floodplain?
No
8L If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements: N/A
8c. What source(s) did YOU use to make the floodplain determination? NC Floodplain Mapping, Program
Mark S. Davis
Division 14 Eiivironiiiental SUpervisor
Date
Applicanit/Agent's Signature
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
(Agent's s�gnature is valid only if an authorization letter from tile
appficant is provided.)
Page l>of11
PCN Form – Version 1,3 December 10, 2008 Version

ti
-11� .. . ... ..
J, ........ .
co i
PJA yy
Q) M
to 0 1 Zl'
It
In
ol
0 10
CN
fl,
t wl- w
4A
0,..j
_j
1: ZL
N M
L-f
UJI
w
v L'i
bm
qJ
(/g/mg)
00

I
I
LLY
t
SJ
m Nt
I
U)
0
2�1
ca
E
00
4)
E
C:
D
0
0
w
C"
�
Q.
U)
C)
t
SJ
m Nt
I

-!2
U)
N
E3
ar
(N
uy
C)
w C)
i
cu LL
co IT
z co C)
C;
00
C)
-!2
U)
N
E3
ar
(N
uy
C)

ay
LL (n
C)
C)
Cl)
C)
CD
M
(D
(1)
1-4
U)
a)
C"o
ay
LL (n
C)
C)
Cl)
C)
CD
M
(D

Bridge 321 on SR 142,4 (Clark Road) over Lakey Creek
Macon County, North Carolina
Looking East across Bridge

Bridge 321 — Macon County

Bridge 321 — Macon COUnty

Bridge 321 — Macon County
Unnamed Tributary (Inlet End)

DEPARTMENT OF THE, ARMY REGEivE.-iD
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
151 PATTON AVE, NU
ROOM 208
ASHEVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA 28801-5006 MA 2, 8 2014
March 28, 2014
Regulatory Division
Action ID: SAW 2014-00522
Ms. Janet A. Mizzi
Field Supervisor
U.& Fish and Wildlife Set-vice
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
Dear Ms. Mizzi:
DIViSION14
This letter serves as our request to initiate formal consultation under Section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, for effects to the federally threatened Virginia
Spiraea (Spiraea virginiana), and informal consultation for effects to the federally endangered
-Indiana bat (My9fi.s sodahs), that would result from the replacement of Bridge No. 321 on
SR 1424 over Lakey Creek in Macon County, North Carolina.
Attached to this request is a document titled, "Biological Assessment for Virginia Spiraea for
the Replacement of Bridge 321 on SR 1424 (Clark Road) over Lakey Creek, Macon Co., North
Carolina, NCDOT Division 14, Project No. 17BP. 14.R.73," dated March 11, 2014. The U.S.
Anny Corps of Engineers (USACE) has reviewed the Biological Assessment (BA) and agrees
with the conclusions contained therein.
If the information contained in this BA is complete, we will expect to receive a draft
Biological Opinion for our review within 90 days of the receipt date of this letter, unless a time
extension is mutually agreed upon between our agencies. If the information contained in this BA
is incomplete, please inform us of any inadequacies within 30 days.
In addition to the effects to Virginia Spiraea, as noted abovc; there may be trees in the permit
area that provide habitat for the Indiana bat., We propose conditioning any Nationwide Permit
verification -letter that we may issue for this project as follows:
1. Tree removal associated with this project must occur outside of the April 15th to
October 15th (of any year) time frame.
2. Immediately prior to demolition, the existing bridge must be inspected fo ' r signs of bat
roosting, to include signs/presence of guano or smudges of body oil. , If bats, or signs of

-2-
bats are found to be present, the perTnittee shall stop all bridge demolition work and
contact the USACE and the Asheville USFWS for ftirther instructions. If bats are present,
the demolition may not conunence until consultation is completed.
With inclusion of these conditions, we have determined that the project "may affect, but is
not likely to adversely affect" the Indiana Bat and request your concurrence with this
determination.
If you have any questions or coordination requirements, please contact Lori Beckwith,
Regulatory Project Manager in the Asheville Field Office at [phone], ekt. 223,
Sincerely,
Scott Jones W
Chief, Ash Field Office
Enclosure
Copies Furnished (via e-mail) w/enclosures:
USFWS -Jason Mays
NCDOT - Mark Davis
NCDOT - Dennis Herman

BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR VIRGINIA SPIRAEA
FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF BRIDGE 321
ON SR 1424 (CLARK ROAD) OVER LAKEY CREEK
MACON CO., NORTH CAROLINA
NCDOT DIVISION 14
PROJECT NO. 17BP.14.R.73
March 11, 2014
Contact Person:
Dennis Her
Environmental Program Consultant
No•tb Carolina Department of Transportation
Natural Environment Section
Biological Surveys Group
1598 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699
919.707.6127

Table of Contents
1.
INTRODUCTION ......- .......... .................. .........................Error!
Bookinark not defined,
II.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND HISTORY .......................Error!
Bookmark not defined.
111.
STATED PURPOSE AND NEED OF THE PROJECT .......Error!
Bookinark not defined.
IV.
THREATS TO SPECIES ........................................................................
............................... 2
V.
DIRECT EFFECTS .................................................................................
............................... 3
VI.
MITIGATION AND CONSERVATION MEASURES ............................
.......... .................. 4
VII.
REFERENCES ...................».........................................
.... ».,.................,...... S
VIII. APPENDICES
A, Appendix A.1. Figure I .............................................. ..............................6
B. Appendix A.2: Figure 2 ...............................................
..............................7
C. Appendix A.3: Figure 3 ............. . ................ . ...............................
. .............8

Biological. Assessment for Virginia Spiraea (Sph -aea virginiana)
Bridge No. 321 on SR 1424 (Clark Road) over Lakey Creep
State Project No. 1713P.M.R.73
Macon County, North Carolina
Introduction
The federally threatened Virginia Spiraea (Spiraea Ojgirtiana), protected under the
Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973 . as amended (USFWS 1990, 1992), has been documented
to occur within the 17BP,14.R.73 project area for the proposed replacement of Bridge No. 321
on SR 1124 (Clark Road) over Lakey Creek in Macon County (Figure 1). The proposed let elate
is scheduled for March or April 2015, with a completion date of October 2015. This Biological
Assessment (BA) is provided to satisfy the North Carolina Department of Transportation
(NCDOT) and US Army Corps of Engineers obligations under Section 7 of the ESA. It
addresses project- related concerns such as probable direct, secondary and cumulative effects to
this species.
Project Description and History
NCDQT Division 14 proposes to replace Bridge No. 321 where SR 1424 crosses Lakey
Creek in Macon. County (Figure 2). The existing structure is a single spare one lane timber bridge
with a timber joist substructure, and it has been scheduled for replacement dune to deterioration
and insufficient width„ The new bridge will be phased constructed and shifted slightly upstream
in carder to maintain traffic on this dead end road during construction. The total project length is
439.5 ft. and the new bridge length is 52.6 feet..
An u nnanaed tributary Bows east southeastward through a channeled ditch on the west
side of Lakey Creek and north of the bridge project area, enters. a 15 inch pipe culvert, and flows
into Lake), Creek near the bridge.
A new population of Virginia Spiraea was identified within the project study area during .
a field investigation on August 2013 by biologists with NCDOT and U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (USF WS). The population is small, totaling 5 plants: three plants were located along the
ditch at the 15 inch pipe culvert north of the bridge on tlue west side of Lakey Creek and two
additional plants were located near the northeast corner of the bridge on the east side of Lakey
Creek.
The spiraca population will be impacted because the new bridge must be shifted slightly
upstream of the existing bridge. On the downstream side of the bridge is a curve and steep
incline which preclude the road from being tied back into tlue existing road grade. One hunched
feet of the "wet ditch where the spir<aea grows must be relocated as a result of the new bridge
location and impacts to the spiraea population are unavoidable. The new ditch will have a
natural, meandering channel and 2:1 sloped banks.

Stated Pm-pose an(] Need of the Project
Bridge No. 321 has been programmed for replacement as part of the Division Bridge
Replacement Program passed by the NC Legislature in 2012. The purpose of the program is to
replace timber bridges throughout the Division (State) due to deterioration and insufficient
width. The prioritization of the bridges to be replaced is based upon the sufficiency rating of
each structure. These ratings are obtained from the bridge inspection reports, which are
conducted every two years on every structure in the state.
Bridge No. 321 has a sufficiency rating of Funclionall), Obsolele. A bridge that is
functionally obsolete is narrow, has inadequate under-clearances, has insufficient load-carrying
capacity, is poorly aligned with the roadway, and can no longer adequately service today's traffic
(NCDOT 2014). For these reasons, NCDOT has scheduled Bridge No. 321 over Lakey Creek
for replacement.
Threats to Thr -eatened and Endangered Species
Virginia Spiraea faces a variety of threats. Populations have been eliminated by reservoir
construction (USFWS 1990, 1992, 2014a, 2014b). Although the species needs some flooding to
maintain its habitat, severe flooding or inundation caused by dams eliminates the species.
Suitable habitat has disappeared throughout the species' range, either because of severe flooding
or the stabilization ofwater flow, which reduces scouring (USFWS 1990, 2011), Roadside
populations have been affected by highway maintenance and construction (USFWS 1992, 2011,
20] Ala, 2014b).
In addition to the population along SR 1424 near the bridge:, there are at least five other
populations of Virginia Spiraea that Occur within or near NCDOT rights-of-way, one of which is
in Graham County, the remainders are in Ashe County. NCDOT staff has been working to keep
roadside populations marked with signs in order to eliminate future impacts from routine
maintenance activities such as roadside mowing.
Extensive clearing or water-siphoning within river watersheds has also destroyed spiraea
habitat (Ogle 1'991). In Tennessee, the species is threatened by upland timbering and dumping,
(Rawinski 1988). The stabilization of riverbanks to prevent erosion could also alter areas suited
for colonization by Virginia Spifaca.
Natural factors are also impacting the species. In several populations, insect damage,
such as leaf removal by caterpillars, has been observed (USFWS 1990, 1992). The reproductive
capacity of spiraea also may seriously hamper the gro%vth and expansion of the species. No
seedlings had been observed at any locations, and mature seeds had been found at only a few
(USFWS 1990, 1992, 2014b). Most of the plants in the existing populations are old, with Nvell-
established root systems (USFWS 1990). Very few of the seeds collected rrorn plant sites have
ever germinated. In addition, findings suggest that the species has limited genetic variability,
which suggests that colonization and new site establishment may be difficult (USFWS 1990,
1992, 2014b). It is possible that new populations could be established during floods by clumps
breaking off and becoming established downstream. However, the plants would have to be
W

deposited our ideal habitat, and if severe flooding was occurring, it could destroy the original
populations. Because the establishment of new sites may be difficult, the USFWS recominends
that work focus on maintaining existing populations (USFWS 1990, 19192).
Project Related Impacts to Virginia Spiraea
Project related threats to Virginia Spiraea can be separated into direct, secondary and
cumulative effects. Direct effects refer to consequences that are directly attributed to the
construction Of the project, such as land clearing and paving. Secondary effects are defined as
those impacts that are "caused by an action and are later in time or farther removed in distance
but are still reasonably foreseeable" (40 CFR 1508.8, USFWS 1990). These effects are not
direct consequences of road construction, but result from modifications to adjacent parcels of
land (Mulligan and Horowitz, 1980. Secondary land use impacts include residential,
commercial and industrial developments and urban sprawl. Cumulative effects are those impacts
that result from "the incremental impacts of an action when added to other past and reasonable
foreseeable future actions" (40 CFI 1058.7, USFWS 1990), Direct, secondary and cumulative
effects to Virginia Spiraea are discussed below.
Direct Effects
The definition of a plant population is Vague; however, for the purpose of this BA,
population" refers to the Virginia Spiraea plants occurring within the vicinity of Bridge No.
321. This I)OPUIatiOJ1 Occurs along tile "wet" ditch in the vicinity of a IS inch pipe culvert on the
west side of Lakey Creek north of Bridge No. 321 and at the northeast corner of Bridge No,. 321
oil the east side of Lakey Creek. The Population is made tip or 5 plants; 3 plants near the pipe
culvert and 2 plants near the northeast corner of the bridge (Figure 3). The North Carolina
Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) has designated this population as Element Occurrence (EO)
61.
The Structure of the existing bridge is a timber deck with a timber joist substructure and
the end bents are timber caps with timber posts, and sills. The bridge is to be removed without
dropping components into the stream. The new bridge will be shifted slightly upstream and span
Lakey Creek. Oil the downstream side of the bridge is a curve and incline which preclude the
road from being tied back into the existing roadway. One hundred feet of the "wet" ditch,
including where the spiraea is located at the culvert ii-nist be relocated as a result of the new
bridge location. In addition, the secondary spiraea area near the northeast corner of the bridge
will be affected by the new bridge location and relocation of (lie existing drainage ditch. The
entire spiraea population will be directly impacted and the loss of the plants is unavoidable.
There are no secondary and cumulative impacts to tile spiraca population.
Biological Conclusion: May Affect, Likely to Adversely Affect

Mitigation and Consei•vation Measui•es
To minimize effects to the spiraea, the following will be conducted:
March 2014: Take 50-100 cuttings from dormant Virginia Spiraea plants at Lakey
Creek that will be affected by the bridge replacement project. Inconspicuously mark
donor plants after the cuttings are removed. The cuttings will be propagated and held at
the USFWS office in Asheville. Two trips may be taken (early spring and late spring) to
maximize the number of cuttings removed
October 20�14: Dig up affected spiraea plants and relocate them to a holding facility at
the USFWS office in Asheville.
The plants and cuttings will be held in Asheville until the bridge project is complete
(anticipated in October 2015), at which point NCDOT and USFWS staff will transport
and plant the spiraea in appropriate areas adjacent to the new bridge.
Exact locations for planting the spiraea CLIttings and plants will be coordinated with US
Fish and Wildlife Service biologists.
Monitor spiraea at the bridge site following the transplant, counting # plants /clumps, 9
sterns and # flowering stems. Assuming the spiraca is replanted at the bridge in the fall
of 2015, monitoring will take place on the following schedule: Sumner 2016; Summer
2018; and Summer 2020.,
A permit will be obtained from the North Carolina Plant Conservation Program
(NCPCP).
0 Monitoring results will be provided to USFWS and NCPCP.
It is anticipated that when the spiraca is replanted post-construction, it can be placed
along the top of the bank along the "%Nvet" ditch relocation. Planting spiraca back in the ditch is
not preferred as the spiraea COUld again be impacted if the ditch needed to be cleaned out to
maintain flow. The new ditch on the downstream side of the bridge will probably be riprapped
and may not be suitable for spiraea planting. The erosion control plantings/seed inix will be
coordinated with USFWS.
Privet currently growing along the "wet" ditch within NCDOT right of way call be
treated when relocation work begins. It will not be possible to treat all of the privet or nniltiflora
rose in the area as some of it occurs outside right of way. Long-term treatment of the privet and
multiflora rose will occur as NCDOT budget and staff allow. If Funds are not available in the
maintenance budget, treatment work could be billed to R-9999, WBS H 34634.2.14.
Post - construction maintenance: Mowing woody competition around Virginia Spiraea is
important as it prefers open, sunny areas. Shoulder mowing during the growing season will be
allowed on a normal basis for safety reasons (no spiraea will be planted on the road
4

shoulder). Winter moxving should be conducted ever), other year with a long-arm rnower to
prevent/control tall, woody grow-th that would shade the spiraea.
References
Mulligan, P.M. and A.J. Horowitz. 1986. Expert Panel Method ol"Forecasting Land Use
Impacts of I-lighway Projects. Transportation Research Record 1079 Land
Development Simulation and Traffic Mitigation. TRB National Research Board,
Washington, DC,
North Carolina Department of Transportation. 2014. North Carolina Bridge Improvement
Program: Bridge Statistics, Accessed 3/5/2014.
trap ://%VNVw,,ncdot, kCt -� I ql)t"jdjkq5 1jr1plo 'CIIIcrttjltml
Ogle, D. 1991. Virginia spiraea. Pages 117-119 in K. Terwilliger, ed. Virginia's Endangered
Species, Proceedings o f a Symposium. McDonald and Woodward Publishing Company,
Blacksburg, Virginia,
Rawinski, Thomas J. 1988. Final Status Survey Report: The Distribution and Abundance of
Virginia Spiraea (.5piraea virginiana). Report to the US Fish and Wildlife Service,
New-tom Corner, MA. 5pp. (Cited in USFWS 1990b.)
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (U.S.F.W.S.). 1990. Endangered and Threatened
Wildlife and Plants: Threatened Status Determined for Sifiraea vh-,giniema (Virginia
Spiraca). Federal Register, 55:116:24241 - 24246.
U.S.F.W.S. 1992. Virginia spiraca (SWraea vii-giniona Britton) recovery plan, Newton Corner,
Massachusetts.
U.S.F.W.S. 2011. Virginia spiraea (�51)iraea virginiana). Asheville Ecological Services Field
Office. Last Updated: January 11, 2012. Accessed: 3/4/2014.
es/vi jitnil
.. ......... —1--i r
U,S.F,W.S. 2014a. Virginia Spiraea,,51-)h•,aea virginiana, fact sheet. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Asheville, NC, Accessed: 3/4/2014.
jIqp://NVmV. kys.gqyL l a?wille /Jadls /Virs iLi i a,31 arc to ll'
U.S.F.W.S. 2014b. Species Profile: Virginia spiraea (Spiram virginian(t). Environmental
Conservation Online System. Accessed: 3/4/2014,
�m'zmqqi
L
P�

Appendix A.1
Iq
P
J
xv
����� „r, ,f �w " ,� ;� � s. �,, �� he"""y �(� �"+,�`f� � dC� R,y4 �" '��d /G� kw "+, `� �� d" ,I'�u Fkx��",�� �,�'ei� � "��Y�9�%dwf�7'�y ���rv"'�,�i��C
Of
�U Of 1028 N
QQ
4
U(I I
A
oil
A /1-11
E
0,25 0.15 1 M
M)J
NCDO�T, Division 14, Project #17BP.14.R.73
ZI, 21 Figure 1
Bridge 321 over SR, 1424 (Clark Road)
Macon Co., North CarolIna
m

Appendix 14.2;

Appendix A.3

Mr. Scott Jones
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Asheville Regulatory Field Office
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801-5006
Dear Mr. Jones:
This document transi�ii`ts the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (Service) Biological Opinion (BO)
based on our review of the North Carolina Departinent of Transportation's (NCDOT) proposed
replacement of Bridge Number 321 in Macon County, North Carolina, and its effects on the
federally threatened Virginia spiraca (Sphwea vh-giniaim) and the federally endangered Indiana
bat (A4) fls sodcdis) in accordance with section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543) (ESA). Your March 28, 2014, request for formal consultation
on the Virginia spiraca was received on March 30, 2014, That request included a biological
conclusion of "may affect, not likely to adversely affect," for the Indiana bat and included
conservation measures to address potential effects to this species. Your proposal to condition the
Clean Water Act Section 404 permit to prohibit tree clearing during the April 15-07ctober 15 bat
roosting season and to require an inspection of the bridge structure prior to demolition will
minimize the potential for direct take of bats. We believe these conservation measures fulfill
your obligations under section 7 for the Indiana bat.
This 130 is based on information provided in the March H, 2014, Biological Assessment (BA)
provided by the NCDOT, survey reports, telephone conversations, emails, field investigations,
and other sources of information. A complcte administrative record of this consultation is on file
at this office.
1
CONSULTATION HISTORY
August 28, 2..013 — Site visit with Mr, Owen Anderson (NCDOT Division 14 Environmental
Specialist) and Mr, Jason Mays and Dr. Mara Alexander (with the Service's Asheville Field
Office staff) to examine plants at the projject site identified by Mr. Anderson as Virginia spiraca.

These plants were compared to a known population of this species at the nearby Town of
Franklin greenway and confirmed to be Virginia spiraea,
December 3, 2013 — Onsite meeting with Mr. Anderson, Mr. Josh Deyton, Mr. Mark Hill, and
Mr. Mark Davis, (NCDOT) and Mr. Mays and Dr. Alexander to discuss avoidance of the plants
by engineering the bridge to avoid the area where the plants are located. Due to linc-of-sight
issues and the necessity to fill part of a larger creek if the bridge location is altered in order to
avoid the plants, all were in agreement that the plants could not be avoided entirely and that a
plan should be discussed to hold the plants in captivity until the final grade is established and
construction is complete, The NCDOT agreed that: (1) the project could be graded in such a
way that there would be ample room to return the plants to the relocated strealilbank and
(2) appropriate steps would be taken to maintain the population,
February 10, 2014 — Phone conversation with Ms. Mary Frazer (NCDOT) concerning the
establishment of a work plan to bring the plants into captivity and propagate cuttings in order to
maximize the opportunity for the establishnient of a viable population. We decided that Service
and NCDOT staff would share the effort of propagating and housing the plants.
March 19, 2014 — Site visit with Ms. Frazer, Mr. Davis, Mr, Dennis Herman, Mr. Dave McHenry
(NCDOT) and Mr. Mays and Mr. Gary Peeples (the Service's Asheville Field Office staff) to
collect Virginia spiraea cuttings within the project footprint for propagation, There were
38 plants at the project site within the area of expected disturbance, and 90 cuttings were
collected for propagation, About 7'4 were retained at the Service's Asheville Field Office, and
about 16 were transported to the NCDOT office in Raleigh. The plants were separated so as to
reduce the chance of a total loss from a single event.
March 30, 2014 — Letter received from Mr. Scott Jones (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
[USAGE]) transmitting a request to begin formal consultation. Included with this request was
a BA prepared by Mr. Herman.
April 11, 2014 , — Phone conversation with Mr. McHenry concerning ail NCDOT
miscommunication resulting in the trees within the action area being cut ahead of schedule. The
maintenance crew damaged about five Virginia spiraea sterns while cutting the trees around
them.
BIOLOGICAL OPINION
I. DESCRIPTION OF THE, PROPOSED ACTION
The NCDOT proposes to replace Bridge 321 on Clark Road (SR 1424) over Lakey Creek in
Macon County, North Carolina. The new bridge will be constructed along similar alignment to
the existing structure; however, due to changes in standard specifications between the
construction of the existing and new structures, the new structure must be slightly wider and
longer than the existing structure in order to meet safety requirements. Options of expanding the
2

bridge in a direction that would avoid the Virginia spiraca were discussed, but this was not
possible due to line -of -sight issues and the requirement of substantial fill in a medium-sized
creek. Expanding the bridge ill the manner proposed also requires the relocation of a small
jurisdictional stream that runs along the existing road. This stream is only a half meter wide on
average but appears to be perennial and is the feature that seems to provide the blest habitat for
the Virginia spiraca. The project requires the relocation of a portion of this small stream, which
will affect most of the Virginia spiraea plants on the site. The project plans indicate that the
relocated section of stream will be stabilized with constructed riffles and root wads. The
relocation process will increase the length of stream that is open for the Virginia spirae:a and will
remove the invasive multiflofa rose (Rosa inulliflora) that is currently outcompeting the Virginia
spiraea in most of the available habitat. Approach work is limited to the area immediately
adjacent to the bridge and will involve ditch improvement, staging, and construction areas.
Action Area
The action area should be determined based on the consideration of all direct and indirect effects
of the proposed action (50 CFR 402.2 and 402.14(h)(2)). Construction activities, associated with
the replacement of Bridge 321 will take place primarily within the existing road right-of-way
except where the right-of-way has been expanded slightly to accommodate the relocation of the
small stream. The adverse effects to the Virginia spiraea will be clue to the direct effects of
CODSIRICtion activities that cause ground disturbance. Construction activities, including materials
staging and equipment movement, will be contained within areas of the existing right-of-way or
casement shown on the plan sheets. As such, we do not anticipate indirect effects to those
Virginia spiraca plants located outside the right-of-way or boundaries of the casement. We
consider the action area to be the entire area within the limits of the right-of-way or casement
shown on the plan sheets.
Consci-ration Measures
Conservation measures represent actions, pledged in the project description, that tile action
agency will implement to minimize the effects of the proposed action and further the recovery of
the species under review. Such measures should be closely related to the action and should be
achievable within the authority of the action agency. Because conservation measures are part of
the proposed action, their implementation is required under the terms of the consultation. The
following conservation measures have been developed by the NCDOT (project proponent)
through the informal consultation process and have been submitted to the USACE (federal action
agency) as part of the project description in preparation of a preconstruction notification package
that will be submitted as a request for a Clean Water Act 404 permit,
Engineering considerations of the proposed project did not allow for avoidance of the Virginia
spiraca plants adjacent to the existing bridge. During informal consultation, the NCDOT and tile
Service developed a plan to propagate the plants that will be disturbed by collecting and growing
cuttings. Additionally, the parent plants at the site will be dug by hand prior to the beginning of

ground-disturbing activities and moved to a safe location during construction. After the project
is complete, the parent plants and any propagules will be rnovcd back to the original site and will
be planted in areas where they are most likely to thrive. The intended location is along the top of
the batik along the relocated stream near where they rank from originally and directly across
from Lakey Creek where a newly constructed ditch is intended to outflow. The NCDOT has
agreed to ensure that the final grade is appropriate for this species and will participate in
long- terra maintenance through the control of invasive species and by prohibiting the spraying of
broadcast herbicides. The intention of this conservation measure is to maintain a viable
population of the Virginia spiraca at this site. It is hoped that this effort will lead to an increased
stem count and less competition from invasive species,
11. STATUS OF THE SPECIES
The historical distribution of the Virginia spiraea is well known. Specimens have been deposited
in herbaria collections and the species' occurrence has been vouchered since the initial
description in 1890. The Virginia spiraea is widely scattered within seven states (Ohio, West
Virginia, Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee, North Carolina, and Georgia) and is recorded from
historical localities in Pennsylvania and Alabama. Since the recovery plan was published in
1992 (Service 1992), few additional populations have been discovered (Gardner and Moser
2007, Ogle 2008, Shaw and Wofford 2003, Stine 1993). Historical records from Pennsylvania
and Alabama have been examined and verified, but the species is not currently known from
either state. Fairly extensive areas of appropriate habitat exist in both Pennsylvania and
Alabama, and the species may still be rediscovered there. With the possible exception of some
Blue Ridge areas of South Carolina, it is unlikely the species' range will be expanded to more
states.
Populations of the Virginia spiraea are currently estimated as stable in Georgia, North Carolina,
West Virginia, Virginia, and Ohio and are considered increasing in Tennessee and decreasing in
Kentucky (Ogle 2008), Most experts caution that estimates were based on anecdotal or casual
observation; little, if any, quantitative data are available for these determinations. Kentucky
officials are considering raising the species' status from threatened to endangered, and officials
in Tennessee are considering lowering their state's designation from endangered to threatened
(Ogle 2008).
It is difficult to determine population trends for the Virginia spiraea due to limited surveys and
monitoring and varying terminology through time. Terms such as "clone ,'° °` population," and
"element occurrence" (130) have been used to refer to an occurrence of one or more Virginia
sp,iraea steins found in a given location. There is no standard conversion factor between
population/clone counts and EO counts, and there is a lack of clarity about the relative
abundance and abundance trends of this species since the recovery plan was published in 1992.
Uncertainty about genetic variation among plants within and between sites further complicates
efforts to assess population trends. The following table is provided to demonstrate a
conservative estimate of the number of known sites in 1992 and 2007.
9

STATE
NUMBER OF CLONES IN 1.992
NUMBER OF EOs IN 2007
Alabama
0 (historical record prior to 1992)
0
Georgia
entu ky
7
20
8
17
Louisiana
Misidentification
0
North Carolina
12
36
Ohio
3
5
Pennsylvania
0 (historical record prior to 1992)
0
Tennessee
20
32+
Virginia
18
29
West Virginia
27
109
[Tota, - All States
107
236
111. ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE
Under section 7(a)(2) of the ESA, when considering the "effects of the action" on federally listed
species, the Service is required to take into consideration the environmental baseline. The
environmental baseline includes past and ongoing natural factors and the past and present
impacts of all federal, state, or private actions and other activities in the action area (50 Clip.
402,02), including federal actions in the area that have already undergone section 7 consultation,
and the impacts of state or private actions which are contemporaneous with the consultation in
process.
Status of the Species Within the Action Area
To our knowledge, this population of the Virginia spiraea was unknown until it was discovered
by Mr. Owen Anderson in August 2013. The first site visit by Service staff on August 28, 2013,
was during the growing season. The area was overgrown by multiflora rose, and a steirt count
was not possible, During the March 19, 2014, effort to collect cuttings for propagation, 38 stems
of the Virginia spiraca were counted within the road right-of-way, and two more were found
adjacent to the right-of-way. It is unknown if there are more plants outside the right-of-way
because this area is on private land and access was not obtained for surveying, but the area is
heavily forested and does not appear to provide good far habitat beyond what can be seen easily
from the road. We suspect that the total stein count for this population is likely close to the
number found on March 19, 2014, There is not enough data to estimate a population trend, but
the location did not appear to have suffered recent alteration that would have affected the
population; however, on April 8, 2014, an NCDOT maintenance crew cut several trees in the
right-of-way in preparation for the bridge replacement. The tree removal was scheduled to take
place after the plants were removed in October 2014, but miscommunication with the
maintenance crew resulted in early removal. Several Virginia spiraca plants were damaged. The
estimate we received from Mr, Dave McHenry was that five stems were damaged but not

completely destroyed; it is unknown if they will survive, The NCDOT is ensuring that all other
units of their organization are aware of the location of the Virginia spiraca, thus we do not expect
any further disturbance before removal. The population does appear to be limited by
competition with multiflora rose and Chinese privet (Ligustruni sinense) as we did not observe
any Virginia spiraca plants where these two invasive species were dominant. The Service and
NCDoT are presently working on a strategy to remove the invasive species.
IV, EFFECTS OF THE ACTION
Under section 7(a)(2) of the ESA, "effects of the action" refers to the direct and indirect effects
of an action on the species or critical habitat, together with the effects of other activities that are
interrelated or interdependent with that action. The federal agency is responsible for analyzing
these effects. The effects of the proposed action are added to the environmental baseline to
determine the future baseline, which serves as the basis for the determination in this BO. Should
the effects of the federal action result in a situation that would jeopardize the continued existence
of the species, we may propose reasonable and prudent alternatives that the federal agency can
take to avoid a violation of section 7(a)(2). The discussion that follows is our evaluation of the
anticipated direct and indirect effects of the proposed project. Indirect effects are those caused
by the proposed action that occur later in time but are still reasonably certain to occur (50 CFR
402.02),
Factors to be Considered
Of the 40 Virginia spiraea sterns that were observed, 38 are proposed to be disturbed by this
action. Conservation measures are intended to reduce this effect from mortality to temporary
disturbance from relocation activities and the taking of cuttings for propagation. This species is
known to readily reproduce vegetatively, so we expect that we will have successful propagation
and that the number of stems will be greater than 38 when the plants are returned to the action
area.
Analysis of the Effects of the Action
Potential Beneficial Effects - It is the Service's opinion that there is the potential for a positive
influence on this population. Presently, there is no management of the population other than
irregular disturbance by roadside rnowing. The plants are confined to small patches of suitable
habitat as a result of their competition with invasive species. If the conservation measures
achieve their intended goal of propagating and holding the plants during construction without
significant mortality, it is possible that the number of stems after construction will be greater in
number and spread out over a larger area. The disturbance will also temporarily reduce the
competition from invasive species. The NCDOT has committed to monitor the plants every
other year until the summer of 2020, and competition from invasive species will be evaluated
during this monitoring and addressed appropriately. One of the greatest threats to the species at
this site is the potential for inadvertent herbicide application. The placement of the plants after
construction will be somewhat further from the roadside than they are now, and the NCDOT has
offered to install signs that prohibit herbicide application, The placement of the plants along a
R

jurisdictional stream will also deter herbicide use as most herbicide applications are
contraindicated for use around streams.
Direct Effects — As discussed above, we expect most of this population will be affected by
temporary removal from the project site. There is a risk that the plants will die in captivity and
result in substantial loss to the population. We are minimizing this risk by creating as many
propagated sterns as possible and by housing them in two locations for added safety.
Indirect Effects, - Indirect effects are defined as those that are caused by the proposed action and
are later in time but are still reasonably certain to occur (50 CFI 402.02). Tile construction of
the proposed project will require the removal of several trees that are presently providing shade
to the site. This, by itself, may benefit the Virginia spiraea because it is tolerant of full sun, but
additional sunlight may exacerbate the competition from invasive species, This possibility will
be observed during monitoring and may require additional management in the future.
Interrelated and Interdependent Actions - There are no known interrelated and interdependent
actions associated with this activity.
V. CUMMULATIVE EFFECTS
Cumulative effects include the effects of future state, tribal, local, or private actions that are
reasonably certain to occur in the action area considered in this BO. Future federal actions that
are unrelated to the proposed action are not considered in this section because they require
separate consultation pursuant to section 7 of the ESA.
Substantial changes in land use within the action area resulting from this project are not
anticipated because of the limited scope of the action. There is no indication that this project will
induce any change of land use by adjacent landowners. The addition of guardrails may prohibit
some uses of the right-of-way.
VI. CONCLUSION
After reviewing the Current status of the Virginia spiraca, the environmental baseline for the
action area, all effects of the proposed project, and the conservation measures identified in the
BA, it is the Service's biological opinion that the construction of the bridge, as proposed, is not
likely to jeopardize the continued existence of this species. No critical habitat has been
designated for this species; therefore, none will be affected.
This nonjeopardy BO is based, in part, oil the following facts:
1. The current number of known populations of the species is greater than when the
species was listed in 1992.
2. Conservation measures included in this opinion are intended to improve the habitat
for the Virginia spiraca and to provide for the control of competing species.
7

3. The 38 stems that will be affected by this action are likely to be successfully
reestablished at the site along with the potential for greater than 100 additional
propagated steins.
4. Increased awareness of the species' location, and its position behind guardrails and
along a perennial stream, will allow for better long-term management of the
population and will reduce the potential for the population to be lost to inadvertent
mowing or spraying,
INCIDENTAL TAKE STATEMENT
Section 9 of the ESA and federal regulations pursuant to section 4(d) of the ESA prohibit the
taking of endangered and threatened species, respectively, without special exemption. Take is
defined as to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or attempt to
engage in any such conduct, Harm is further defined by the Service to include significant habitat
modification or degradation that results in death or injury to listed species by significantly
impairing essential behavioral patterns such as breeding, feeding, or sheltering. Harass is
defined by the Service as intentional or negligent actions that create the likelihood of injury to
listed species to such an extent as to significantly disrupt normal behavior patterns, which
include, but are not limited to, breeding, feeding, or sheltering, Incidental take is defined as take
that is incidental to, and not for the purpose of, the carrying out of an otherwise lawful activity.
Under the terms of section 7(b)(4) and section 7(0)(2), taking that is incidental to and not
intended as part of the agency action is not considered to be prohibited taking under the ESA
provided that such taking is in compliance with the terms and conditions of this incidental take
statement.
Sections 7(b)(4) and 7(0)(2) of the ESA generally do not apply to listed plant species, However,
limited protection of listed plants from take is provided to the extent that the ESA prohibits the
removal and reduction to possession of federally listed endangered plants or the malicious
damage of such plants on areas under federal jurisdiction or the destruction of endangered plants
on nonfederal areas in violation of state law or regulation or in the course of any violation of a
state criminal trespass law. Applicable provisions of the North Carolina Plant Protection and
Conservation Act (GS 106-202.12 to 202.22) should be followed.
CONSERVATION RE' COMMENDATIONS
Section 7(a)(1) of the ESA directs federal agencies to use their authorities to further the purposes
of the ESA by carrying out conservation programs for the benefit of endangered and threatened
species. The following conservation reconuriendations are discretionary agency activities to
minimize or avoid adverse effects of a proposed action on listed species or critical habitat, to
help implement recovery plans, or to develop information.
The NCDOT should endeavor to keep roadside populations of the Virginia
spiraea free of invasive plant species.

2. Roadside maintenance of the Virginia spiraca at the project site should be
sufficient to reduce competition through the occasional hand clearing of other
woody vegetation,
In order for the Service to be kept informed of actions ininitnizing or avoiding adverse effects or
benefiting listed species or their habitats, we request notification of the implementation of any
conservation recommendations and close coordination during the preconstruction salvage effort
and during construction.
REINITIATIONICLOSING STATEMENT
This concludes formal consultation on the action outlined in your September 4, 2013, request for
formal consultation. As provided in 50 CFI section 402.16, the reinitiation of formal
consultation is required where discretionary federal agency involvement or control over the
action has been retained (or is authorized by law) and if: (1) new information reveals effects of
the agency action that may affect listed species or critical habitat in a manner or to ail extent not
considered in this BO, (2) the agency action is subsequently modified in a manner that causes an
effect to the listed species or critical habitat not considered in this BO, or (3) a new species is
listed or critical habitat is designated that may be affected by the action.
If you have any questions concerning this BO, please contact Mr. Jason Mays of our staff at
828/258-3939, Ext. 226. In any future correspondence regarding this project, please reference
our log number 4-2-13-424.
Sincerely, I .
anct Ae. izz
Field
Supervisor
Electronic copy to:
Mr. Dennis Berman, North Carolina Department of Transportation
Ms. Mary Frazer, North Carolina Department of Transportation
Ms. Lesley Stark, North Carolina Plant Conservation Program
Ms. Lori Beckwith, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
9

Literature Cited
Gardner, R. L., and M. Moser. 2007, Surveys for Virginia Sneezeweed (Helenhun,
virginicum) and New Populations of Virginia Spiraea (SI)irma vii-ginlano) in
Ohio, Ohio Department of Natural Resources Ohio Division of Natural Areas and
Preserves, Columbus, OH.
Ogle, D. W. 2008. Scientific assessment for the federally listed plant Spiraea virginiana
Britton. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Gloucester, VA. 27 pp.
Shaw, J., and B. W. Wofford. 2003, Woody plants of Big South Fork National River and
Recreation Area, Tennessee and Kentucky and floristic comparison of selected
Southern Appalachian woody floras. Castanea. 68:119-134.
Stine, S. J., Jr. 1993. Inventory for Virginia Spiraea (Iii -am virginiana Britton) in Ohio,
Project No. E-2-1, Study No. 204. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
U,S,, Fish and Wildlife Service. 1992. Virginia spiraca (Spiraea virginiana Britton)
recovery plan. Newton Corner, MA. 47 pl).
ff

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U,S. Army Corps of Engineers
This fomi should be completed by following (lie instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION 1: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUINIBER:
C. PROJECT` LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION Bridge 321 on SR 1424 (Clark Road)
State: NC County /parish /borough: klacon City, Franklin
Center Coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format). Lat. 35,29832 N, Long. 83.44057* W
Universal Transverse %Mercalor:
Name of nearest waterbody: Lakey Crecy (Class C Tr)
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: Little Tennessee River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (I I UQ: 06010202040030
Check if map/diagrani of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available Upon request.
Check if other sites (e,g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc...) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD forni.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CIIECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Office (Desk) Determination, Date: November 20, 2012
Field Determination. Date(s): October 18, 2011
SECTION 11: SUNIMARY OF FINDINGS
A. IMA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
ThereAre'lio "navigable waters of the (AS." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RI IA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
revic", area. [Require(fl
HWaters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or maybe suseq)fible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:
B. CNVA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
"I'liere fro "craters ofthe U.S." within Clean Water Act (C` A) (as defined by 33 CFR pail 328) in the review area, [Requirefl
1. Waters of the U.S.
a, Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply):
TNWs, including territorial seas
'Wetlands adjacent to TWIs
Relatively Permanent waterS2 (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TINWs
Non-RI)Ws that flow directly or indirectly into TNNVs
Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that now, directly or indirectly into'I'W's
Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into I NiWs
Wetlands adjacent to non-RI'Ws that flow directly or indirectly into'rNWS
11111)01111dolellk OrjUrisdictional waters
Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non- wetland waters: 150 linear feet: width (tl) 8 and/or acres.
Wetlands: acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction base(] on: tstablished,by OHNVNI�
Elevation of established OHWNI (if known): .
2. Noii-regulated waters /wetland's (check if applicable) :'
El Potentiallyjurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain: .
'Boxes checked below shall be supporled by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
'For purposes of this fonii, an RPW is definedasa tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year-round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally"
(e:g., typically 3 nimiths).
'Supporting documentation is presented in Section III.F.

SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS
The x&mu,h* will assert jurisdiction over TNM's and nnVoudomjxn mmo1lWo. U the aquatic resource bxTNW,complete
Section lO.&.0 and Section DII`.I. only; if the aquatic resource bm°zV:oU xUjumn/t^oTNIV\ complete Sections OIA`I and
and Section III.D.I.; otherivise, see Section HIM belmv.
|. l7YNV
Svmmwizm rationale supporting determination:
2. Welland adjacent wTN\Y
Sturimarize rationMe supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent":
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRlB0TA01' (T"AT/S NOT 4TNNV) AND ITS ADJACENTWETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics, mfthe trihumry and immdjumrutvzrhudo,iiun)` and |\helps
dnm,mixr whether or not the sum0nrda for ]orbd1, ion mmWiv lied uo der /apxow/bure been n`m.
The agencies n|N:seo,, jurisdiction over, nvn-oav|gnN, tributaries "f TNWsn,ho,e (lie oribumriemn,c "relatively »emmuww\
wom,m"(NPWs).i.r. tributaries Umt typically Ovv year-round ", have continuous flow ut least seasonally (r.g., typically 3
m^mth*)� A %vetland that directly abitts an RPNV is also jnrisdictional, If the aquatic resource is not .1 TNNNI, but has year-round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section III.D.2. If the aquatic resource is :I 8vetland directly abutting I tributary with peren nill flow,
skip mSection 11I.0`4.
A Nvetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexits evaltiation. Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents (lie existeilee ofa significant nextis between n
relatively permanent tributtiry that is not perennial (and its adjacent Ivetlands if.111y) and 9 traditional navigable water, even
though o significant ucswm finding im not required non matter "K|m,
If the w^t,rbvdy^io not art DPIV,v,uwetland directly abutting on11MV,mJU will require oddiUono| data m determine iCthe
%vaterbody has a significant nexiis with I TNNNI. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexiis evaluation must
consider the tributary in combinatioo with all of its adjacent wetlquids. This significant nextis evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all vJ its mUmcmft wetlands is"*ed whether the review area identified in the JU request im
the tributary, or its adjacent vmo(ondn,o,both. xf the JD covers m tributary with adjacent w"Uoodw.complete Suc8omUI.8.| for
the tributary, Section III.B.2 for- any onsite wetlands, and Section III.B.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, bmhowaim
and offske.The determination whether o significant nexus exists is determined ix Section JILCbrhv.
L Characteristics of non-TNM's th9t flom, directly or indirectly into TNAV
N General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: Pick List
Dmixageure«: 0Pick Lisv
A°mmgummnuo|mioffiU: juoho,
(ii) Mysical Characteristics:
(m
El Tributary flows directly bxwTNW.
n Tributary flONVS thm1.1gh Pick List tributaries before entering TNW.
Project xateware river miles fromT0W.
Project waters are river miles From KPVL
Project waters are u*riw|(utmighV miles xom?wnI,
Project waters are Pick List, ocriu|(mmight) miles from KpVL
Project waters cross nr,*rv^oSmx\Ch*undo,ieo.Explain: .
Ncrihfy flow route *TNW\ .
Tributary stream order, ifk**mm:
" Note dint the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and crosiona|features gcn=afl�,,od in the arid
West,
3 Flow route can be described bv identifying, e.g., tributarya, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TN%V.

(b) general Tributary Ch,aracleristics (check all that atlt)lr,):
Tributary is: ❑ Natural
❑ Artificial (man- made'). Explal
[l Manipulated (man-altered). Explain:
Tributary properties wilh respect to top ofbauk (estimate):
Average wvidth: feet
Average depth: feet
Average side slopes: Pick List,
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all than apply):
❑ Silts ❑l Sands ❑ Concrete
❑ Cobbles ❑ Gravel ❑ Muck
❑ Bedrock ❑I Vegetation. Typc /% cover:
❑ Other. Explain: ,
Tributary condition /stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. FINplain:
Presence ofrunhlriffle /pool complexes. Fxphhin:
Tributary geometry: Pick List
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: Pick List
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year: lick Us(
Describe flown regime;
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow" is: Fick List. Characteristics:
Subsurface flown: Fick Lis(, Explain Findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
Tribunary has (check all that apply):
Bed and banks
® OH %%,N,16 (cheek all indicators that apply):
❑ clear, natural line impresscd on the bank
❑
the presence of litter and debris
❑ changes in the character of soil
❑
destruCtion of terrestrial vegetation
❑ shelving
❑
the presence o,f wrack line
❑ vegetation matted down, bent, or absent
❑
sccllment sorting
❑ leaf litter disturbed or washed away
❑
scour
F1 sediment deposition
❑
multiple observed or predicted flow events
❑ water staining
❑
abrupt change in plant community
❑I other (list):
❑ 1)nSCta11tmuo1 S 01 lWNIw 7 Explain:
If factors althea than the C)HtiWiM were used to determ
High Title Line indicated by: Ell
❑ oil or scum line along shore objects
❑ line shell or debris deposits (foreshore,)
❑ physical markings/characteristics
❑ tidal gauges
ages
❑ other (list):
ine lateral extent of CrWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
NIcann High Water Mark indicated by:
❑ survey to available datum,
❑ physical markings,
❑ vegetation limes /changes in vegetation types.
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; Water duality; gealerat watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain:
Identity specific pollutants, if known:
6,A, natural or man -made discontinuity in the fat WNI does not necessarily sewer jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the C)HwWidl has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHi,WM that is unrelated to the ww ^aterbordy "s flew
regime (e.g., hewn over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
'lbid.

(iv) Biological Charncteristies. Channel supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width):
❑ Welland fringe. Characteristics:
❑ Habitat far:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish /spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ father cnw,iroariaaeiataally sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ .Aquatie /wildlife diversity. Explain findings: .
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to nom -°TNIV that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Welland Characteristics:
Properties ::
Welland size: :acres
Wetland type. Explain:
Welland quality. ENplaiaa:
Proiect wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries, Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non -TNW :.
Flow is: Pick List. Explain: .
Surrace flow is: Pick List,
Characteristics:
SUbsurf'ace flow: Pick List. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed: .
(c) Welland .Ad'acency Determination with Non -TNW:
❑ Directly abutting
❑ Not dircctly abutting,
❑ Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
❑ Ecological connection. Fxphaiw
❑ Separated by berm /barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity ( Relationship) to °I'NW
Prqiect wetlands are Pick List, river miles from `l'NW.
Proieet waters are Pick List aerial (straight) Wailes firom TN1if.
Flow is from: Pick List.
Estiraaaate approxinaaake location of wetland as within the Pick List Poodp>laain.
(H) Chemical Characteristics-
Characterize wvctland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general watershed
characteristics: etc.). Explain:
Identify specific polltatants, if k=nown:
(iii) Biological Characteristics. wetland supports (check aII that apply):
❑ Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average Nvidth'):
❑ Vegetation type /perccnt cover. Explain:
❑ I labitaat fear:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish /spawn areas. Explain findings: .
❑ atlaereaaviroaamcntall y ^- seaasitiw ^e species. Explain findings:
❑I Aquatic /wvildlife clivea-sity. Explain findings: .
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (ifany)
Ail wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis: Fick List
Approximately ( ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.

For each"etkmd, specify tile Following:
Size fin acres Sizelio—lic—re-A
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant uexmnoohsio will assess the flow characteristics and functions vKWmtributary itselfmndWile functions performed
hyuwy wetlands adjacent m the tributary tv determine |fthey significantly affect the chemical, Physical, and biological integrity
vro?NW. For each n[ the following situations, o significant nexus exists if the tributary' ill mwh|mmiwx wHk all ^f its adjacent
wetlands, hoy more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the cliemical, lAysieni nodlor biological integrity ofa TNW.
Considerations When evaluating significlint nextis include, but are not limited to the volume, (Itil-atioll, and frequency ofthe flow
oy water b/ tile Nh"mry "Ind its proximity mmTN*, mid (lie functions performed »y tile /,|bomry:nd all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not npproprinte to determine significant nextis base(] solely on any specific threshold of distance (e,g. between a
orib"mryxnd its adjacent wetland ",hemmcma tributary and the TNNV). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside o/uflwodp|nim iu not solely dcoc,minnh,rvf significant m°xxn.
Draw ,nmu,rUvnm huumru the features documented xoU the effects vm the TNIV, a^ |/\mVQcd in Um8olonum Guidance and
discussed ill the I nstructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
° 0oca the tributary, ill combination with it,mUoumx vu|lvuJ: (if vny) have tile capacity *o carry pollutants ur flood waters to
TN\vs'*,/o reduce "heom^wm"l,p*0v,mm^sv, flood waters reaching uTNN%1?
°
Does 1he Iributary, in combination with ilsad.iaceot wellandg (ifany), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, mrearing young, for species that are present ill theTNW?
�
Does file tribUtary, ill combination with its adJacent wetlands (if ally), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
xuppnrtdovmoozum &`*dvehx?
�
Does the tributary, in mmmbioadna nkb i»sadJuuvx wetlands (if xuy) have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity nKthe TNIW7
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to Occur should be documented
bdmn
U. Significant vrxn* findings for x*n'RP\Y that |m*wv adjacent weo|xodwand flows directly vr indirectly b`toTNYYm. Bsp|uim
findings of presence or absence of significant acxmabelow, based oo the oibmmn' itself, then Xn:o Scchvu lN.D:
2. Significant o,xom§nd|xgs for mvn-RPYy and its adjacent wdUmndm. where the non-RPlf flows directly "r indirectly into
T'NWs. Explain fi,dingsofpncscomcvr absence uf significant ucxum below, based oil Nbc tributary ia combination with all n/iw
a(ljJonou/ wetlands, then gvmo Section Ul.D: .
3, SiAoiOruvooeou*finNugs for wmUmnds, adjacent m ,ill DrNVbill that (to not directly abut the AP81. Eqlum§udngsef
presence mr absence oCuigniUcmuuemim below, based oil 1he tributary iv combination wkh all *[ its okj*cem me/kwmds then X^us
Section 111,D: .
D. DETERIMINATIONS OFJUR0DICTI0NAL FINDING&TIIE SUBJECT ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
|. TNA'sxnd Adjacent Wm|xuVs. Check all that apply umd provide size estimates im review arm
Q TNWs: linear feet width (A),Or, acres.
El Wetlands a(ljjacent to'T'NWs: acres,
1 RP%V*What flow directly minW1rewly iwwTNWm
Thhvmriex"[I'NN'svhomoohbotmieutypimUydmryenr-mmmduwejnrirdk*iov*.PmvNudommmdmm[ouu\eindicuUu8/h*
tributary is perenniaLl-akey Creek has a well-defined channel and is shown as a perennial stream on the USGS topographic
map.
E] Tribataries ol"I'N\\' wbere tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each ynm) are
jurisdictional, Data anMportiug this coxo|nu[ouiu provided at Section IU.13. Provide muiuuw|*indicating that tributary flows,
seasonally: ,

Provide estimates for juurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: 150 linear feet %width (ft). S
Other atom - wetland waters: acres.
Identify tylte(s) of %voters: .
3. Non- RPAN'ss that flow directly or indirectly into TN4"Js.
fWaterbody that is not a TNNV or all R:PIW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TPA W, and it has a significant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section 1II,C.
Provide estimates forjurisdictional wvaters within the review area (cfacck all that apply):
Tributary waters: linear feet wvidth (ft).
Other non- wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters: .
d. ""Wetlands directly abutting ail RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNNVs.
Wetlands directly abut RPW and this are jurisdictional as acijaccnt wetlands.
E] Wetlands directly abutting all RIM' where tributaries typically flow year-round. Provide datau and l-aatioraale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section 111.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wvefland is
directly abutting in RP \V: .
Wetlands directly abutting an RPNV where tributaries typically ilowwP -seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary' is
seasonal in Section IILB and rationale in Section 111.11.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wvetland is directly
abutting an ltl'W: .
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres..
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWS.
El Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in contlainalion with the tributary to which they are atliaccnt
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a `I INW are, jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided it Section III.C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands io the review area: acres.
6. Wetlands adjacent to non- RM's that Blow directly or indirectly into TN\Vs.
El Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
wvith similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a Ti NV are jurisdictional. Data sarpporting this
conclusion is provided at Section 1ILC.
Provide estimates fi%rjurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
7. Impoundments of jurisdictional wwnters.9
Asa general rule, the impoundment ofa,jurisdictional tribittury remains ju dsdictional.
Demonstrate that impoundment was created front " ww ^titers of the U.S.," or
Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1 -6), or
El Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below),
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE Olt INTRA- STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED \vETLriNDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COAIi'rIERCE, INCLUDING AN)'
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):t°
E which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
fi-om which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
D
which are or could lie used for industrial purposes by^ industries in interstate commerce.
Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
El Mier factors. Explain:
'See footnote # 3.
To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section 11i.€y.6 of the lostroctional Guidebook.
1tl Prim` to asserting or dccliniing CNVA jurisdiction based stalely Oar this category, Corps Districts swill clewnte the action to Corps and EPA IIQ for
revim, cousisteot %with 111c process described in the COrpVEPA Memorandum Regarding C V -1 Act Jurisdiction Follrooring Rujumos.

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (clieck all that apply):
El Tributary waters: linear feet Nvidth (11).
El Other non- wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
El Wetlands: acres.
F, NONJURISDICTIONA L WATERS, INC LU DING WETLANDS (C I I ECK ALL THAT APPLY):
E] If potential wetlands Nvere assessed within the review area, these areas did not mect the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Welland Delineation IManual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements,
El Review area included isolated Nvaters with no substantial iiemis to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
F1 Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SIVANCC," the revicw area would have been regulated based solely , oil the
" 9
i' vfi ratory Bird Rnle" (NIBIZ),
HNN'aters do not nicel the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
Other: (explain, if not covered above):
Provide acreage estimates for non -jurisdictional wvrtters al basis ot'jurisdiclion is the NIBR
in the review area, where the sole potential
factors (i.e., presence ofinigratory birds, presence ofendangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
judgment (check all that apply):
Non-XVCtl0nd wNrale
'rS
(i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
H Lakes/ponds: acres.
Other non-wetland waters: acres, List type of aquatic resource:
Wetlands: acres.
Provide acreage estimates for non-jurisdictiomal waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for-jurisdiction (check all that apply):
Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (11),
Lakes/ponds: acres.
Other non - wetland Nvaters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
Q Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file an(], where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consuhaliv
E] Data slicets prepared/submitted by or on bclialf of the applicant/constdtant,
[:1 Office C011CLITS Nvith data sheets/delineation report
F1 Office does not concur with data sheets /delineation report.
Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
Corps navigable Nvaters' study:
U.S, Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
F1 USES NHD data.
El USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: Alarka; 1:24,000.
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey, Citation:
National wetlands inventory niap(s). Cite nanic;
State/Local wetland inventor), map(s):
FEMAMIMI maps:
100 -year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
Photographs: ❑ Aerial (Nance & Date):
or Z Other (Name & Date): Project Site August 2013.
Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
Applicable/supporting case law:
Applicable / supporting scientific literature:
Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:

Project No:
County:
Macon DEC
WBS No.:
17BP, 14.R.73
Document
Type:,
MCC
Fed. Aid No:
Funding:
M State El Federal JJ1
VIS
Federal
Permit(s)
Yes ❑ No
Permit
Type(s):
TVA
Project DesCtjeti2g:
Replace Bridge No. 321 on SR 1424 over Lackey Creek
SUMMARY OF HISTORIC ARCHICTECTURE AND LANDSCAPES REVIEW
There are no National Register-listed or Study Listed properties within the project's area of
potential effects.
There are no properties less than fifty years old which are considered to meet Criteria
Consideration G within the project's area of potential effects.
There are no properties within the project's area of potential effects.
There are properties over fifty years old within the area of potential effects, but they do not
meet the criteria for listing on the National Register,
There are no historic properties present or affected by this project. (Attach ally notes or
documents as needed.)
Date of field visit: November 26, 2012
DeNC1'#)ti01J,qf review activities, results and conclusions:
Review of HPO GIS website was undertaken on August 27, 2012. There are no Based on this review, there are no
existing NR, SL, LD, DE, or SS, properties in the Area of Potential Effects. Macon County Tax Data revealed
structures in the APE, that appeared to be older than 50 years. On November 26, 2012 an architectural historian
surveyed lite project area. A c, 19010 house located at 117 Clark Rd lies within the APE of this project. The house
along with several outbuildings were photographed. The property contains an assorfinent of severely altered and
deteriorated resources over fifty years of age, along with one modern house. As a result the property suffers from a
substantial loss of historic integrity and does not appear to possess any specific historic or architectural significance.
Historic .4r-ciiieecitireoaidl.airdscapes NO HISTORIC PROPRRUESPRESEAT OR AFFECTED funaforAhnor Transportation Prof eels as Qualiftedin the 2007
Prograinwafic Agreement
Page I of 3
0 6 201?

SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION
[AMap(s) []Previous Survey Info, MPhotos OCorrespondence DDesign Plans
FINDING BY NCDOT ARCHITECTURAL HISTORIAN
Historic Architecture and Landscapes - NO 111STOWC PROPFRT JES PRESENT OF AFFECTED
NCDOT Architdctural Historian Date
WE
HkiorIcArchileenfre and Landscapes NO HISTORIC PROPERTIES PRESENT ORAFFECTEDformforAlftror Transportation Projectraj Qualifled in the 2007
Progranwrafic Agicenient.
Page 2 of 3

House (PIN 6579526926], 117 Clark Road, oblique view to southwest
House and outbuilding, 117 Clark Road, overall view to south
IfistarIc Ards fteclureand Landscaper NO HISTORIC11ROPERTI&Y PRESENT OR AFFECTED forma for Ahnor Trajupoffation Projecir aj Qualyledhi Me 2007
Programmatic Agreement
Page 3 of 3

a'

12-08-0063
NO NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES
PROJECT INFORMATION
Pi•oject Aro: County Macon
WBS Afo: 17BP.14.R.,73 Document: Minimum Criteria Checklist
FA odor: Funcling: N State ❑ Federal
fi'eclei-al Pa iwdl Required? M Yes ❑ No Pc i-mit Tyl)e: TVA
Pmject Description: Replace Bridge 321 on SR 1424 over Lakey Creek. Area of Potential Effects
(A.P.E.) includes approximately 60 meters (200 ft.) in each direction from the bridge and 15 meters (50
fl.) from centerline on each side of the road. Design plans provided. Project is State-funded; Federal
(TVA) permits required; permanent easements required.
SUMMARY OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL FINDINGS
The Noi-t% Camlitia Depai1meiit of Tiwitsportation (NCD07) Alt-chaeology G)wup i-eviewed
the subject pi-oject and deteiwihied:
There are no National Register. listed ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES within the project's
area of potential effects.
No subsurface archaeological investigations are required for this project, ject,
❑ Subsurface investigations did not reveal the presence of any archaeological resources.
Subsurface investigations did not reveal the presence of any archaeological resources
considered eligible for the National Register.
All identified archaeological sites located within the APE have beets considered and all
compliance for arcliaeological resources with Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act and GS 121-12(a) lias been completed for this project.
There are no National Register Eligible or Listed ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES present
or affected by this project. (Attach (my notes oi• clocumews as nee(leel)
"NONATIONAt OR 141-11,111,CTED
Prinfi,rAfinew Tranyfwarfim Projeav m Qualifiedin she 2007 Programmatk, Agreemem
I of 13
ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES
PRESENT OR AFFECTED FORM
This form only pertains to ARCI JAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES for this project. It is not
valid for I -listoric Architecture and Landscapes. You must constik separately with (lie
Historic Architecture and Landscapes Group.
PROJECT INFORMATION
Pi•oject Aro: County Macon
WBS Afo: 17BP.14.R.,73 Document: Minimum Criteria Checklist
FA odor: Funcling: N State ❑ Federal
fi'eclei-al Pa iwdl Required? M Yes ❑ No Pc i-mit Tyl)e: TVA
Pmject Description: Replace Bridge 321 on SR 1424 over Lakey Creek. Area of Potential Effects
(A.P.E.) includes approximately 60 meters (200 ft.) in each direction from the bridge and 15 meters (50
fl.) from centerline on each side of the road. Design plans provided. Project is State-funded; Federal
(TVA) permits required; permanent easements required.
SUMMARY OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL FINDINGS
The Noi-t% Camlitia Depai1meiit of Tiwitsportation (NCD07) Alt-chaeology G)wup i-eviewed
the subject pi-oject and deteiwihied:
There are no National Register. listed ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES within the project's
area of potential effects.
No subsurface archaeological investigations are required for this project, ject,
❑ Subsurface investigations did not reveal the presence of any archaeological resources.
Subsurface investigations did not reveal the presence of any archaeological resources
considered eligible for the National Register.
All identified archaeological sites located within the APE have beets considered and all
compliance for arcliaeological resources with Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act and GS 121-12(a) lias been completed for this project.
There are no National Register Eligible or Listed ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES present
or affected by this project. (Attach (my notes oi• clocumews as nee(leel)
"NONATIONAt OR 141-11,111,CTED
Prinfi,rAfinew Tranyfwarfim Projeav m Qualifiedin she 2007 Programmatk, Agreemem
I of 13

12-08-0063
Brief tlescription of review activities, results of review, and conclusions:
The original review (10/2/2012) included an examination of a topographic trial), an aerial photograph, and
listings of previously recorded sites, previous archaeological surveys, and previous environmental
reviews at the Office of State Archaeology (OSA).
The topographic map (Alarka) shows the bridge is located in a wide creek valley with level landforms
nearby. The landforms in the northwest, northeast, and southwest quadrants appear to be elevated, well-
drained landforms, overlooking Lakey Creek with a moderate to high potential for prehistoric
archaeological sites. The road curves to the south in the southeast quadrant so there is only a narrow strip
of flat land.
The Macon County soil survey describes the soil in the A.P.E. as Reddics fine sandy loam (0-3% slopes),
frequently- flooded, next to the bridge, Saunook loam (2-8% slopes) and Saunook gravelly loani (8-15%
slopes) on the west side of the bridge, and SaUrtook gravelly loam (15-30% slopes) on the cast side.
These are all Nvell-drained soils.
The aerial photograph shows a structure near the bridge in the southeast quadrant. A driveway joins SR
1424 in the northeast quadrant.
There are no previously recorded archaeological within the A.P.E. The A,P,E, has not been previously
surveyed for archaeological sites, and the: A.P.E. has not been included in any environmental reviews.
Based on the review a survey of the northwest, southwest, and northeast quadrailts, of the A.P.E. was
recommended oil 10/2/2012.
The survey was conducted on 11/29/2012 and 1/3/2013. The bridge is oriented approximately 180'
(cast/west). Site 31MA767 is a prehistoric archaeological site identified in the southwest quadrant
(described below).
The A.P.E. in the northwest quadrant consists of a disturbed access road from the bridge west for 10
meters (33 ft.), then it is a narrow strip of roadside between the road and a wide drainage ditch (or
seasonal creek?) that extends west to the intersection with Lakey Creek Road. The landform on the north
side of the ditch /creek appears to have a moderate to high potential for archaeological sites but it is
outside (north of) the A.P.E. A house trailer is located on that landforin approximately 120 meters (394
ft.) northwest of the bridge. No shovel tests, were excavated in this quadrant.
The A.P.E. in the northeast quadrant is disturbed creckside from the bridge cast for approximately 25
meters (82 ft.), then an access road, then a steep slope up to the east. The landform next to the creek
looks like it may have been excavated by licavy machinery. No shovel tests were excavated in this
quadrant.
The AY.E. in the southeast quadrant is a narrow strip of roadside and a steep slope down to the creek cast
for appoximately 30 meters (100 ft.), then a moderately sloped ridgetoe, There is an interesting "barn" on
the ridgetoe, an old house trailer with a barn built around it. No shovel tests were excavated in this
quadrant.
The A.P.E. in the southwest quadrant is a level floodplairi/terrace. Site 3l MA767 was identified in this
quadrant and is described below,
ORAFFUTFI)
filopfforMynor Iranyorfamw Proieo� im 01nififiedin Me 2007
2 of 13

SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION
See attached: M Map(s) ❑ Previous Survey Info M Photos ❑correspondence
Other: aerial photograph; 31MA767 site description
Signed:
Caleb Smith
NCDOT ARCHAEOLOGIST
'NOMA I 10NAL RF(;JVTI.J? h.11GIBLEM 1.1S)ED
kim-fi,rAlwor Tronvomaimp Proles Is m (Malificdin 1he 2007
3 of 13
8/1/2013
Date

Z
1p4 "Pl,
"50,
V" Y
it;
ff
O's
Owe",
A/
own mug K vo
wn
e V"
�,n
r A I
q N RA
N:j
I$
V,
")
'n 4 &
AM-
4 f
t
A�,
asr
n �S
r v
ll(, 3j),
A*
IF4 og v
'
2�10, MIl, 1, 1, IUA, -,1 , �, a !,:a, " L, ',' �,-, � , � W",. � �)." a �,,, 2, -4 J I JIA I
Figure 1: Locatim of the project area.
AVN�4 1 WNW, Ate" 'ISI fle FlICIRIFOR 11,1TTD.(R( HAEoLOGICALMTES PREkEVT0R.4FfTCTFD
f"-fivAt"", Ra"""'mam", P,, '097 P-4,—ne
W13

5DV
/'�a � � y � Yrt / l Jlri� � ; ��,�; i rr ��"'+r�` ? /f � a� r r�ow�F / 1, rR;t��l„�,� ,� �.
o'�
7
Ir
Bridge 32 1
o/I
ROM
-IA767
"17
f1i
Lake} Creek Rd.
Nwf
Frigure 2: Topographic niap or (lie pro�lcct area (USGS 1940 Ala•ka, ALC' 1:2.1,000-scale to map),.
NO ,VA IIUNAI. Rj- GLYUR FIBURIF OR Al IFCTTD
1h, 2F,07
5 of 13

'AONAHONAL R.1 GIVILR HIGMIE OR VVII hARCHAFOR)GICAL.VITS FRESEVI ORAf I I CIf D
,, (4,01', I , ;,l. , 7 00 7 Pq;-,,,- mtn A q,d
6 of 13

trtr r.pa- H,WIH strati
—f — STe, i3$ 17AF,
13H, ld t3 ,Ub:
W GIOIJ —L— ST! 8�fc,$Fifi
N 0.1I Ib.�h,a15 26:"G1L
HI G p"Y'P'itaA!!f! 517!7 � 0510 43f:4?,,'?4
s3' 1 `, I A W f ,6,B5 3!' 31.71(RT )
4 ] 7 fl i Z"
ell
IN
3 3 S
i
PFGftd TfF f1;�jr T f7P3'P),,R73 E&D fW fi' FOfECT ffETTiefi7.3
-L- sra 14420.43
31 r I ��67
> fi
Figure 4: Preliminary design playas of'the bridge replacco cni.
,vo s. ulos'.A L W.W.W18 f) IGI qIT Ole I147TfP AR(HAEoIo6It —I L MILS P RE..'NESI OR AAFL4 71f1)
! =ir�afx,tfrar Taim,Pr.rrrvrr,r�r Fr,:".Pr ary ��t � {Jixrdan �Pr zrd /PIr y spat{ 1a +' <'r,rent
7 af'13

Site 3 1 NIA767
Site 3 1 MA767 is a prehistoric artifact scatter located oil the south side or SR 1424 and the west side
of Lakey Creek, Tile site is located oil a level floodplain and terrace. The site is bounded oil the
north by SR 1424, on the east by Lakey Creek, oil the south by the limits of the Area of Potential
Effects (A.P.E.) of the bridge replacement project, and on the west by Lakey Creek Road. The area
is currently a Fallow field 01- pasture. Tile landform extends south along the west side of Lakey
Creek, and it is likely the site does, too.
It should be noted that the 1940 topographic map ShOWS an Unnamed tributary of Lakey Creek
1111111irIg north/south along the western edge of this site, along the cast side of Lakey Creek Road.
We saw no sign of a creek at this location, although there is a creek /ditch running east/west along
the north side of SR 1424. Tile 1940 topographic map depicts SR 1424 as a single dotted line, a
"track", while currently it is a paved road., What has probably happened is that the stream was re-
I'011ted to Ral along the north side of SR 1424 when the road was improved. Tile re-location of the
stream channel could have disturbed the soil in the western part of the site.
A total of seven shovel tests were excavated at a 15-meter (50 -ft.) interval at 31 MA767. Four (STs
1-4), were excavated in a parallel line along the south side of SR 1424. Each shovel test was placed
as close to the road as possible \vithOL1t being within tile: disturbed roadside, usually within 10
meters (33 ft,) of tile pavement edge. Three (STs 5-7) were excavated in a parallel line
approximately 15 meters (50 ft.) south of that line. The soil was fairly uniform throughout the
shovel tests, consisting of between 30-40 centimeters (12-16 inches) of brown silt), loam and silty
clay. The shovel test closest to the creek (ST 1) Nvas excavated to a depth of 95 centimeters (37 in.).
Several shovel tests contained a moderate to heavy aniount of rocks. The soil survey describes the
soil in this quadrant as Reddies Fine sandy loam, frequently flooded, near the creek, and Saunook
loam and Saunook gravelly loam in the western part of the site.
Five of the seven shovel tests contained prehistoric artifacts (11-23). One historic artifact, a piece of
stoneware, was also recovered. The site has a moderate artifact density of 5 artifacts per positive
shovel test. The artifact assemblage consists of lithic reduction flakes, shatter, a chest proJectile
point✓knife base, and a quartzite billace fragment. The lithic raw materials represented are chert and
qUartzite. None of the artifacts are diagnostic or any prehistoric cultural phase.
The A.P.E. is limited to the existing right of way along each side of the road, and not enough shovel
tests were excavated to make any statements about horizontal patterning, The shovel tests did not
identify any evidence of deeply buried cultural deposits.
Based on this information site 31MA767 is recommended ineligible for the National Register of
Historic Places (NRI-IP). Tile site is a scatter of prehistoric artifacts and does not have the features
that Nvould be needed to provide any additional information about prehistoric life in this area.
Therefore no farther work is recommended at the site.
Ne)NAPONAL RLGL'Uhl 1:1.101BLE OR I SWU'S PRI"1N1 OR A FL (71.-1)
fiorinfiv Minor m (Malified in the 207 flrogrummuriv Agremoul
8 of 13

Table 1: Description of Shovel Tesiszit 31MA767
-Shovel
Description
Ai-tifacts,
Test
0-95 cm 10 YR 4/4 (dark yellowish brown) silty loan
15 111 west of creek and 10 111 SOLIIII of road;
Fallow field; level floodplainiterracc
2
0-20 cm IDYR 4/4 (dark yellowish brown) silt), loam; 20-30 cm 10YR 4/6 (dark yellowish
a I quartzite flake
brown) silly loam with lots of racks; stopped at heavy gravel layer
0 1 light gray chorl pp/k base
30 In west ol'creek and 10 In south of road
(heavily re-sharpened)
Fallow field; level floodplairt/terrace
3
a 0-25 cm 10YR 3/6 (dark yellowish brown) silt), loam; 25.40 cm 10YR 518 (yellowish brown)
a 3 qUartAlC flakes
silt), loam; very rocky soil; stopped at gravel layer
45 111 west of creek; 10 In south of road
Fallow field; level floodplairi/terracc
0-22 car lOYR 4/4 (dark yellowish brom)) sill), loam; 22-34 cat 10YR 6/6 (brownish yellow)
a 3 quartzite flak-es
Clay loan
0 1 slonc%vare
60 111 west of creek; 10 111 south ofroad
Grass/fallow field; ridge-toe/terface
0-17 car 10YR 4/4 (dark yellowish brown) silly loani, 17-30 can IOYR 616 (brownish yellow)
9 1 (lark gray chert fhike
silty Clay
a 5 quartzite flakes/shatter
60 111 west of creek; 25 111 south of road
llasturc; ridge-toc/ter-race
6
0 0-18 cin lOYR 4/4 (dark yellowish brom) silty loan; 19-30 car 10 YR 5/8 (yellowish brown)
2 quartzite flakes/shatter
silty clay loam
0 30111 west of creek-, 30 111 soirth of road
Pasture; ridge-toe/terrace
7
« 0.25 can 10 YR 4/4 (dark, yctlowish brown) silt), loam; 2540 car 10 YR 6/6 (brolvilish
e 1 light gray chert flake
yellow) silly clay
2 quartzite fire-cracked rock
45 111 west of creek; 30 111 south of road
• 1 quarlAc bifirce firagmerit
Pasture'. ridge-toe/turace
a 2 quarvite flakes/shatter
Y"INATIONALRMISTER HJGIBI L ORIPW I I)ARCHAVOWGIC.41 It 1F.D
9 Vf 13

ozovFt"
151 001" Ad
' N"a
J` ""por
'JIJ,
2—.
Lakey Creek
A. P. E
T,
.......... .
"OF
mi
j
Ni
01001/1"
/'l
*A / ,
I'M
FigUrc 5: 19,10 topographic neap orthe prqject area showing the former location ofthe Lake), Creek tributary.
NON,4"aV.4[.RrCJV7LR EL161BI I, OR I)SIMARCHAL Of OUICALWESPRLN04 ORAI I LCIL 0
. (A ohf—h,, th, 3rwrJ7F irur azk Aq,. ...... t
10 of •3

"NONAMONAL REWSTER I, SlJl.'SJIIUVJ.,'NfOR AFFE( 'IED
fiwinfiAr A Imor Iramporlation Prq)ecic ov Qualifiechn the 2007 Progranimairc iqreemenf
11' of 13

'AT) A'AlIONAL REGISTER LLIGIBLVOR I ISI-AD Jl?('H,4Lf)1,0(;I('AL SHES
fimp; for,llwor lianspWalion Projects a� QualyJ cdin the 2007 Programmauc Agreement
12 of 13

'NONAHONAL REGLUER ELIGIBLVOR VED
fivrij,forAlmor Yramporlalion PryevfKaw Qnal�fiedin the 2007
1 -3 or 11

- ------------
'
FF�w
Bridge No. 321
I
135,
"M 3
Ft�,
v 355
VICINITY MAP
1.
See Sheet I-A For Index of Sheets
See Sheet 1-13 For Corplenflonal Symbols
tl
tl
I.
c
l pp
Vl
i.
cc
ee
CMD
as
0
GRAPHIC SCALES
r N
DESIGN DATA
r-
50 25 0 50 100
ADT (1995) 10
0
PLAN'S
5 10
c,
V 20 MPH
PROFILE (HORIZONTAL)
V)
0
10 5 0 101 20
FUNC CLASS
LnLn
LOCAL
1,2
PROFILE (VERTICAL)
SUB-REGIONAL TIER
coc'
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LOCATION. BRIDGE, 321 OVER LAKEY CREEK
ON SR 1424 (CLARK ROAD)
TYPE OF WORK GRADING, PAVING, DRAINAGE & STRUCTURE
PROJECT LENGTH Prepored In Me office of,
Mattern & Cr
LENGTH ROADWAY TIP PROJECT 17BP.14.R,73 = 0.0732 A
A$Aw1.MWAN COWL,
c92W 2S4.22iX • FAX E9283
LENGTH STRUCTURE TIP PROJECT 17BP.14.R.73 = 0.0100 All
TOTAL LENGTH 77P PROJECT 1711P.H.R.73 = 00832 All
NCDOT CONTACT. JOSHUA DEYTON, P.E.
PRojEcr EsGmEER
RIGHT OF WAY DATh JAMES B. VOSO, P. E.
PROJECT E,',G[,\EER
LETTING DATE., RANDY DODSON, P.E.
FY 2013 PROJECT DESIGN ENCESWER
I.n I FF.To rzIN'RVF k"IM-9 — �1 w. I
.c.1 17BP.14.R.73
17BP.14.R.73 PE, W, U
17HP 14 R CONST
HYDRAULICS ENGINEER
ROADWAY DESIGN ENGINEER
SfC,VArXfRF,
0
co 04
Ln
i < v)
zz
INCOMPLETE PLANS
CO NaW USE FOR RIV ACQVURT N
PRELIMINARY PLANS
00 NOT tng JVR C 1 57jkt'C N
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
A.E.
STATE IfIGHWAI'DESIGM F-VGIVfFR

| �
. "
`
^
^
�
^
^
"
�
,
"
|
|
,
|
'
^
"
^
`
,
"
"
"
�
"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
,
,
,
,
,
' --
`
|
| �
ai
cc
________-��
DETAIL 2
xm PAP AT EMBANKMENT
' Not °*.b)
�
Mich_~
PROJECT PEFERENCE NO. 1 SHEET NO.
WO SKEET HO.
| INCOMPLEIrE PLANS |
Dow", Um mwwsm°cm1"
50 100
so 35 0
SCALE

I
I
I
I
i
1
I
I
I
_ —, „I „I
y 1
L r PLpd I r I:.L.
{. tc' ... _.
r d I I IW I 8 1r
1 1 i { i. _. r.1 . , e ....._ p .....t.. , L.._ ,
11 q ^..�. ,,
X= ,, I, I�, Y III i,, ,b.l, 1 Y r „pl , it 1, l , (,91 ;r ,, ,4�,w,lo , ,,I
� E 11 ,. ,_, 1 I , , r!„ , _ �
__ .�
.,1 I 6 ii p t r: I I I Irl l
l ,.,(.. r II "1r 1.r c
C , t i
s
nc:. 2,,,200"
s —. L� r1(t II 1{ I I
��� A ,,:' ,, C, I 1 1 t...:, I t r
1 1 1
kl 11 ! e, f � f vllf II # 7t 11 1,f G
Y I V , f .... I V.....: I ...._ d I_ ..a: 1 .I ➢ � .., { ,.. I � r d.._. ( f_:.. , 1..((. r ;_I.
I 1, E k I r 91 Ir f 1 tll ,III 1 11,11 , I
I G r I_ I f_ .. �, f I I,_
: I
1d„ ka I,I
, I {{ r , { .L,
I I ,
s I
I {` 4
� I.
s
.... ...., ,..
rL�:_ i1 7.L'.. ,....
_.., . _ ......_. , � ........ , , .� .i1.Y ,....i 1. „.. ..._
I, 1Il rlrll 1,slvrl.I� „ olr I. 1. n 1 „� ,Ilr 1 i�lll,iillpp,Irl 9r 1 IIII i {t
,� 1111 c r IC rlllr r, rk 'sltr ,Irlti rllr I !, , Li , I e ,,., , t_ Is i I
, .. , r....... �....._ ...
!_ W i I , � r, r r I, 1 Y,; ,,
1 d I 1 a I 1111 1111 ,i I VI>r1 1 I }t t II I I.4 t_� 1 4If_.
jld II i halt l I1 NY f III
, .� .� 1,
1i l =I 1, —I _ _ ll1 r1 II 1 , 1� I, , I , ,
r 11_ . 111 Ilak I _t r I II I . I I 1 .�.
1
)
1
. ,. (. �„ ... ,._ 1 1..._7. , r.,..
r. r ,r l 1, 1 Ir I, x11, r. 1r I -re I rr I. I 11 Ilr rr
, I I,, I r , , h.;'I 1 I I= 1 r r I I 1 r I ...., � �, 1
i I _.. r...il , ,rr, r ,:” r ,.... I. o I I u. n I
1 ..) I_.. I ( I V I_. I V :1, I I.I_,. r 9.... _a.. I �.. l.. 7 ........
,� x,11,1 rre I udl hill .. o „ u 1
1 1 i III .... . ........ 1 ,`:... I ... [ ,..._ I , r_.. _f f: G l I
1 }i I '. i.:I I. r ¢ Irlr ,wr6 Ili rl_
I I. I , r u , { 'r Y r r I, 1 4 I V
,,. .1.. 7 � 1, _I I 1..... 1 I ,. , _ U,t �
y.r..,. ... ii it d ..r..,tt Irl f.lY It
� ._, i i, I
,. r r 1, i , 1 r , G” r o 1 f( r , , ri. , u J I
r. r ,: :_ I I 1 o r t I I k # , 1 I M = r4 _ . 1,. _.. ...,. ,. _..... _,., ,. ..._. . it .. .......I 1, .,.. .. ..
t# 'rii11,, �Illdl
i t i t }, t {
r rll ! f,911E �� r, h�l 7 - f fi41 " -k 4d -If 1 ,I rl. i_l_. I t i_.. fi [.....I f i _ i 1 1.,..0_, r ..n... I,.. _..... a.i. 1.
EI1 l r It i,i I 3 t.�. __ ' ti rI,1,
yp r , r � r l I l
I r i r i i. r l r. , v. v. 11 1 1 1� :, a I I 1 x 1 1 { i YY.., � t: k r. 1 l l, l l � p r d( r: 1, �# Y I v, (V 4 r I ( v I
r 1..1.11 I , i �I.. I 11 rl.. Y 9. �.. I.I. q ,.... ......,. 1 .'�A _....... f ....,.w i ,:.,, r ..,.. I,. ... I. j .� ...,... I (
I ,1 1L1, Ir,l4llr I,Il�rlll kl rF11 1 144 ,I � i r 1 r a I^ �fx,_;11,41 1.1 -1 Ilr
rlyd , , 1 Y� rl rl , I 1 , Y, ,f r , IB I 1 , 1 I ; 11 1_. I � 111 i r I 1 �
r. r 1 ,.. _ i , I Y I..,., ,, ...1 1 I I .i....._ " .... .I. a ,.... i Y,'� t _... � 1 I
{j ,r, 1.;_wiq In r 1�7C rl.,,ftl..l, .....1,, I;r1 ,ukp" ,.I ,
r� p ,. , o. l: l 1 t' r i l l 1 d '...i i r l 9, 1 i, r l' , r V > l r, r b r t s' r 1. f , I i, L... I ,4'A c.:._,. .....:I
L
rlrk
r r r .. , l i r L 1, r l l , r , 1 1 1 it r l r r l l r v, r r,, 1 t r 1 1 , (1 I tiV ( L. tiC1f l e w �,, r 1 9 4 7
_.L.1 w .., a. , , _i x e l y f .. , _ I . "r !..d_l.. 1 f tl L.f_ ... ,, i„ = C I._., ,.I r r r
rj� �] �7 � ....� r I i I 1 u L.. y r .L "u r...
,. ..... ({{ 1 1, , -P L. . 1_., i t k.,. , r 1 1 r 1 L_:. ( ;....... 1 L 1 ....1 P q , 1 1 1 1 d X 11 �y 1 I. L...
I:I Y , s , I r p....1_ I _. I. L.. , L_. , V � , , _. _.,.. L.. I......... A I _........I ..
I .,, { ,— , 2 rl yak ,_ lui � j II rol1r, lx, Ic f .
I" 11 r i r I1 r: I I I 1 Ir ; 11 I I _ ,r„ r {, II kL�TINGGR ___ 1 r, Ix 1 Inl, r 11 111 t
I_: r #.. _, ,_... , I 1. r.. .,:, ....... s 1..._ ( I L... ...v . 1
c I , E2 2d ! v a I,
g r. .li did }I „Ir
I rrl I , I ,b I r I r ,BI ,= f 1 , r I I _ , ,
..I C....i tl..L,. _... _L... t _....L.. ,1.,. WWI
,,...
.� {{ 1,L,lI rv, r, Fx llf I 1rl I II
r 14- Ir ,: I r �y c 1d rl„ , , , ! =11,I_ ,I_, ,'i: I,rl Ir ,, l «If v 1_ u I
1 1 Isla IG f,. ;G: y la 1 I_I Il ry 1 1 +�}p+ _t I_ _,
l Y 4.. , �J r 1 {..'v.
r..�,. �'pp _ .. , rl.., 1 fn �f ... ..
( r
f 1'k-rrf }l�cY , Iic i fr 9111 rl 1 call' r f+ I -I x 11 el „ rl ,
u� v�._ f
...
xll� ,11 sl1rl 14x1, Ir u,
I�4! u= ✓ c,1 r 1I , _.o, t ,!.
].n""r "r. 1 , ;......
, +15 �, r. _ , J,.1, 1 ,In rill+ l
...f r" I ... .,...... ,...
1 1 C ,.1P.�.�.
_
, >1 ,..I, �r „ ,
.,. _, _ u Y_; a , i r. ,� , 1 , I 6 r i,
1 , I, 1 I,
,rl r IC , , rll, r1 ,{ 4 r, # I � I__„ ,_ll , 11 II I val 1r , I lr_I 1
i. -,..: 1 r,� k t , I ;., x 1 1 I,= Y k.1 I.,h r r {: 1 1 r A I f ,: V: r I iV , : fV 1
[ I: t r: i , ," 1 l( i , ,. I u 1 4 c, I, k v. , I r, I -4 1, l Y ,.., i r f l l 4... , ! p l t..'.i k -r , r i w _!.( i ... 1 _.L. ,.. l_(... l 1- ., f 1..
..I I _, � .._ 1. 1 n I V_ I I _.
- -e -r I 1I:.Irlh'i, ' r4 it L # „IV v t' , r �, ,11 I n "4,
ll,r ,I, , u I I,1 rr,I lirlr„ r r ,'; YY' x11 1., rf .1, ,4 I I , 1, IB.: ,r B .1_., =,r I
, I #1I, i _ ,_ , I 1 f YI
I
I w
r x 1r � ,o-- ,r , I,I II ,I I I 1 , I � 1L �. f_. ,
9
J r ,
I , 6,
I , , d , r I r, 1,. ! :: i i L.I„ r ,;'.I
f r 9sr iulc I,Ir,I
, 1c 9 lia 'tl rlrcrrr f i�r r1 :,,I 6 rl 4er -4 19.1 r r1,S �I 4, rlr'll Y, r , I , L Y I , Itl I ,., 1 ( , T'I_ I i 1.
9b�YII r 3 iil L4k11 r
Y (I I -IIYI II
l,rl it FF� yn ry r c y �i
r r 1 I ! I I 11: I V 1,.1.. C. A.l�f r�fY V.:. � tN I r ,_. i
,� I, ,I � I I1 I ,11 rr I1,I,11
Y{jj �I % r I j{L� � 11, 1 ir, II +I 6 #f ru �I= lulu II14V L_I1 ,{ I1 I 1 I ,
I l I� f .I`(,.., ,...f 1
r pp yy jI 1 1
44. r.'Y 1, i.56
,
x18111 11, ,111 1..I ,rxl , r Ir , IY vr, x111' it "i.l I Il n r 1 av , f 14 r.f I .
,
&i
r I (
4. I' j, l l
� �!4
X�a!�a � E+
r, rf-
1 .I v rttir I „arr?' „ , , -� -Ir , i1Xlliv i1;a irr ui'iG ul,i, rr,arrl: II iu XI, o vl rl al,rl�:. uGllr„lrl tY(r,l urr,lkul ora uo ! [ dr. aai.. �. +.m.- ..c =...,wi.4..{�j"�i „,..,. 61!IIN 11411.1...
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
I
I
I
I
r
I'
I'
r
r
f
f
I
Y
Y
I
1
l ____.___________._._._.__._____

PLAN 01 11II DETAILS
LIA'E STAKES PLANTING DETAIL BAREROOT PLANTING DI,TAIL
DIBBLE PLANTING METHOD
USING THE KBC. PLANTING BAR.
LIVE STAKE
2 inch
d�
d�
S011ARE cur
BUDS IFAC'.GG UFM'ARDI d
UN
1. Insert planting bar 2. Remaxe planting bar 3. Insert planting Isar
as shuun and pull handle and place seedling al 2 inches toward planter
tu7curd planter. correct depth. from scedling.
IIwE cerrtrlG
(112' -2' DtAVETER)
2 3 feet
ANNE CUT 30` -45'.
a' Pull handle ofbar 5. Push handle foniurd 6. Ixare compaction
to)rard plsnter,firming farming, soil at lop, hole open. Nvaler
veil at bottom. thoroughly.
COR F B€.R MAT
UFA STAKES
PLANTING NOTES:
PLANTING BAG
During planting, seedling;
shall be kept in a moist �}
canvas bag or molar l
container to pri�s -ent the
root systems from drying.
fxtsrR� /PRCar'OSfD
CROOttO
A,
F, (l1J5 A
KBC. PLANTING: 13AR
Planting bar shall bare a
blade ssith a triangular
ExtSTtx /PROPOSED erOss section, and shall
STREWBEO be 12 inchei .. tent,
g inches aide And
1 ;rich thiick at censer,
DA14K STABILIZAIION! flITH LIVE STAKES
tA3tEs
LIVE STAKES SRALL BE SPACED APP'ROx1NATRY 4 FEET
On CENTER
LIVE STAKES SFALL BE O�RWEN UNIt APPRO)WATELY 3A4 ROOT I:'RU,NINGn
OF UYE STAKE 6 11401 GR'O''GO
e'HI seedlings sh:dl he root
pruned, if necessary, so that
no roots extend more than
I0 inches beloss° the
out collar.
`1 YPE I STREAM ANIC IU., F 1RESTATION SHALL BE PLANT 3 FT. TO 5 TT
ON CENTER, RANDOM SPACING, AVERAGING 4 Vf. ON C.LN I'ER,
APPROXENIA'I "ELY 2724 PLANTS PER ACRE.
[] -11TE 2 STRFA'BANK REFORES'I'MION SHALL, BE PLANTED 6 F I ". TO IG ii'r,
ON CENTER, IW\DONI SPACING, AVERAGING S' IT. ON CENTER,
i,
APPROXIMATELY 680 PUNTS PER ACRE.
El NOTE: ME I AND TYPE 2 STII b"IBANX RE, FORE,STATION SHALL BE
PAID FOR AS "STREAtlIBANK REFORESTATION"
FROaECT REFERENCE NO. I SHEET'
'RW SHEET NO..
UNAY Vt$IGEt
HY , ?.., �
OPAUtlCS
ENGINEEk
1111.111 €Ek
PRELIMN
RY
PLANS
W Nor USE ro
COXSTa4!!Cr9oN
STMtMBANK REFORESTATION
,11IXTIJRF, -n TE, SIZE,,%. \U FURINISTI SILALL CONFORM TO THE FOI.I.ONUNG:
mane* r
50✓ SAM VIGIL -1
50% CORNUS WOMUM
TYPE 2
25% LIRIODENDRON TULIPIFERA
25% PL FANUS OCCIDE1NTr'yLIS
25✓ PRUNUS SEROTIINA
25% BETULI NIGRA
BLACK WILLOW 2 Et - 3 ft LIFE STAKES
SILKY DOGWOOD 2 ft - 3 ft 1,111 STAKES
TULIP POPLAR
SYCAMORE
BI.<ACK CHERRY
RIVER BIB;CH
H SEE PLAN SHEETS FOR AREAS TO BE PLANTED
S N i Offift I I MA
12 In - 18 In BR.
12 in - 18 in BR
12 in -18 in BR
12 In 18 to BR
DETAIL SHEET I OF
N.C:U.O.T'•• ROADSIDE ENVIRONMENTAL UNIT
J

ANCLIurneu Will
i' CENTERS
MATTING ANCHOR TRENCH
I'N TRENCHI ON 1' CENTERS
n urunn nracnl An
COIR FI'BE'R
MATTING
ANCHORS ON-
3' CENTERS
FLOOOPLAIN/
EXISTING
GROUND

WORUATION TO BE SHOWN ON PLANS
Cottons USChW09 .... c.f.16
co•a flow- mcharga Qf�
mA6
-OVERTOPPM FLOOD IS GREATER THAN
Fr
SOOYR EVENT
AMTKNIAL OWMATION AND COUPLITATIONS
EMv. ...... M-A -
EM, . ..... ........
Dm .. ' 2rEi3J.......,
VFRTOPPM OCCURS APPROXNATELY W FT 4( OF THE PROPOSED BRtDQE
......................... ............... .......
AT ELEWATI@1f 23.P@..
......... ................. .......... . .. . .....
... DESIGN FOLLQR$ WEIREGIONAL TIER GLAD LINES
..... I ........ ................. ............ ........
- ..-- ........................
-- ...................................... ........... ....................... -
....................... I .... --- ......... 11- ..... —.1 ...... 11-11-1.1 ... -
.
................ . ....... .......... ....... - ...... 1.1- ..........
Itswicalrbod hformttcht
............. .................SAY...,.....,
.. . ............... ........ ....... ...............
0. - 609
..................................
600
.......... ........
0. 730 ..........
750
-- ................ .......... .......... . ........... .......... .....................
Q. IlIs
Soo ............. ......
0.- - 1200
I ..............
1200
...................... ............. ... ............ ........ .............. ...... ..........
... ...........
..........
BED A)(D BAT(i(.5 STABLE
................................... -- ....... ................
CGMfTRACTI@(( SCOUR FCF( 140 YEAR ........ ...... —'— .......... ......
Y, a Y, ED, /0. PAN, /w, 11
..-1---'.----' ............................. -- .........................................
... ys.f..Y.l ...... y ...... ........... ..... . .............. ........................
­9OS: ..................
Y, - AR""TOP WIDTH (SECT. 12601 = 02.7 120k = 4Y
............ ............
K, 2 0.64
............... ......... .......... .................... .................. -
O 760 (SECT 1:2601
-11 ........ I ....... ..................I.......... «..........,. ........
W, 20.0 (SECT 1 60)
............. ............ - ......... .......
0) = 900 ICONSTRJCTEO, BROGE SECTION)
............... ................... ....... ­- ............. d ..............
........... ....... ......
Y, - 4X900-761.31" (20.0?37.01- z3.2'
............. --- ....... .......... -­ ............. .................. ......
--yo
- �. A'2 .. . ................ ............. .......... ...............................
SITE DATA
o'~ Area AJPI� . ........................... ... ......
sh r Badta AMXAPME.*SEI MIAMAM� .......
Stroom Ck"floolkm I$voh as Trout, WAM Ductfly 114toe. alaj.PAr.11111111-1.- ......... ........
Dole on E"" .................
EMIS,IAZER CAPS W/ TRIBER POSTS & SILLS
.......................... -.1 ....... ....... ........................... votw"y
DWIG Polmikk Lora A ... Wdsrota ..... - fth--
We on structures th and pommt W. "TKIM J" I -- ...
... ... --- ..... -
.1)011�4.5TREAV;BROGE 55,tSPA-? Y-6 IN mFLOOR I 0 2C R FLOOR ON TAMER JOISTS
.. -- .... .. . 1 1. 0134 � - ........ .......... ....................
Ctslgn C�trcf W., NAIMMUNPAW
0wo stanch Na. ............................ Partod of Daum Fiih.........................
...............
(Aiw. wschc A% NA.--.- ..... ...... Q'.e. Date ..........
Feowsmy.)YA ..........
Itswicalrbod hformttcht
PWria W of
.......... .. K�, .......
Ported of
Outit ........... . f3p.-. .Efif.fraq ........ Sour . .......................
Period of
Dote., .......... Eksv ........... Est. frao..... -.. source .... __ .......................
F'1'10� _ ......
walor" sooW Infe. F Gorwal."ON ................
L00a .......
1100T PROV"O
0-7-s' wo" "I'M source ........ AARM ....... C'dhp y #6g" gater Etsy. 1126.4.8 .........
Vo,*V's n Left O.L Owe ina "t M Scur"
F&.4 Study r $totu$ Ap.4 ...................... ...............................
r,004.07 Est ta~
Flood study Cc W.S.Div.1 faith Fxo*way!MA—. sithout rloo4 oy.Wh—,
DESM DATA
USGS STREAM FLOR - APFLICATW: OF LMTNWS TOOL M.0
.......... -�.mw
Hy&da~Uathod .... ..... RIM M0.9'", .......
................
F" MT
flmM Evatualvd, rrM VS Beek QtWV$ Alldea Opan&g V0601y
Val
. .........
so Yk
*0 YR. 900 240. 2 1.7 317 8.
.... ................. -- -- ...... 1-M I
Q 2r.Q 2,0 3.8 9.4
............ .... ... ...
grolieway am*v ............ q.s.mv'AQ!p.:v- .........
L,vorow owhovoccily A,rcrooa Overbork Velocity RSam1gN 4B FPS
Co-p.leg Soour , C~ci VA.,,.,...... Coofrocilon A'A .... LOW ... . ....
Ama FlS ftd, R4,4atw Rog,&od? _J&_ _ .......... -- ....................... ....... ...... - ............. --
k.
BRIDGE SURVEY & HYDRAULIC DESIGN REPORT
oa KILCEPAM14EXT 0 MMSPWAIC"
OV4M OF MRAVS
groak"s toil
FAEOI WC.
W. w, SF' .550.324 ...... pro}aot he RQUI&P .... . ..... ..... pra
ro' IYYAC9� ...... 0,,4;MKY JRjR kw.
Lwy CREEL Fa EL"F IM LJLW
an or-dy -M!.. .................. sat'ramn ...... (M I.." "hM .................
4050'2rPREST
.............
....................................... ............ ............... -- .......
wr
Roca-*v.%,e Owth of tt***,a, U0. -5 ..................
q Raco-W404 1,94411on 10 ILA0,00owra Stream flams Extsfk* C1.1gro
.., sripo-q oi .................. RAL. 9• §. vast, r,ain¢ Drk"
CdrCh Vark 13
...................................................
To-p-ary Crag dma . rs NOT REOLIk ED !STAGED CONSTRI ............ ....... ................
N
1;
; Pro
pwa,rld A,
-i
...........
Data IM
v
SE
2 13 AS