20051035 Ver 3_Information Letter_20071023

~~ p7
,,
/.,~~ l/4 / /~~~:
1
~~~~
yn n FK ~/
~ ~~~
~ ~ 4J /
~;~~ ,~ ~.~ ,R~~,
North Carolina Department cif C~n~~ironmc;nt anc~ Natural F~esol lrt:e~ .,f,~h.
~f~f(~if7f~t ~~[ ~ keati~~~ ~1iE~i`Ei.~~:~iiif~`C
Michael F. Easley, Governor James H. Gregson, Director William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
October 22, 2007
MEMORANDUM:
TO: John Hennessy
Garcy Ward
Division of Water Quality
FROM: Doug Huggett
Major Permits Processing Coordinator
SUBJECT: CAMA/DREDGE & FILL Permit Application Review
Applicant: North Carolina Department of Transportation
Project Location: S/R 1005 over Bachelor Creek at Bridge No. 212, Craven County
Proposed Project: The applicant is proposing to replace the existing 83' long bridge on S/R 1005
over Bachelor Creek with a new 115' long cored slab concrete bridge and
associated infrastructure within the existing right-of--way.
Please indicate below your agency's position or viewpoint on the proposed project and return this form by
11/12/2007. If you have any questions regarding the proposed project, please contact
Stephen Lane at [phone]. When appropriate, in-depth comments with supporting data are
requested.
REPLY: This agency has no objection to the project as proposed.
This agency has no comment on the proposed project.
This agency approves of the project only if the recommended changes are
incorporated. See attached.
This agency objects to the project for reasons described in the attached comments.
400 Commerce Avenue, Morehead City, North Carolina 28557
SIGNED Phone: [phone] \ FAX• 5 - 47-~~~tternet: www.nccoastalmanagQment.net
An Equal Opportunity \ Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled \ 10% Post Consumer Paper

MAJOR PERMIT FEE MATRIX
3gL:rt'F.E~.~~r'.;L'~°",:_:'..".LY~x.......:~.'.'.~' ~#'i33".'~:~.+ .u~'a'.~4:`£$' r~::3~i'~$.'~3R i&Y~.E ~~.`Ta+4'~~ln;:'~:75d~P'3Sa':~YGC:-.m.~rav.+g
se'actir,n t7~v2io~,;;;;~n 1°YP~ F'eF, t)Ctvl % a C)~~~~(~ °io
(1430G 161)1 435100090 1625 6153) (24300 1601.43510009:1 2341)
I. Private, non-commercial
development that does not $250 100% ($250) 0% ($0)
involve the filling or
excavation of any wetlands
or o en water areas:
II. Public or commercial
development that does not $400 100% ($400) 0% ($0)
involve the filling or
excavation of any wetlands
or o en water areas:
III. For development that
involves the filling and/or
excavation of up to 1 acre
of wetlands and/or open
water areas, determine if A,
B, C, or D below a lies:
III(A). For Private non-
commercial development, if $250 100% ($250) 0% ($0)
General Water Quality
Certification No. 3301 (see
attached can be a lied:
III(B). For public or
commercial development, if $400 100% ($400) 0% ($0)
General Water Quality
Certification No. 3301 (see
attached can be a lied:
III(C). If General Water
Quality Certification No.. $400 60% ($240) 40% ($160)
3301 (see attached) could
be applied, but DCM staff
determined that additional
review and written DWQ

concurrence is needed _
because of concerns
related to water quality or
aquatic life:
III(D). If General Water
Quality Certification No. $400 60% ($240) 40% ($160)
3301 (see attached) cannot
be a lied:
IV. For development that
involves the filling and/or $475 60% ($285) 40% ($190)
excavation of more than
one acre of wetlands and/or
o en water areas:

DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
FIELD INVESTIGATION REPORT
APPLICANT'S NA?~,IE: North Carolina Departrilent of Transportation
2
LOCA PION OF PROJEC"I' Sl"I'I/: "I'l~ie project is located on SR1005 ovcr Bachelor Creclc at L'ridge No.
212 in Craven County.
Photo Index - N/A
State Plane Coordinates - X: 2,544,161 Y: 513,481
Latitude: 35°08'S9" Longitude: 77°10'26"
3
INVESTIGATION TYPE: CAMA/Dredge and Fill
4
INVESTIGATIVE PROCEDURE: Date of Site Visits -June S, 2007
Was Applicant Present -Yes
S
PROCESSING PROCEDURE: Application Received Complete: October 9, 2007
Office -Morehead City
6. SITE DESCRIPTION:
(A) Local Land Use Plans -Craven County
Land Classification From LUP -Rural with Services/Conservation
(B) AEC(s) Involved: PTW, PTA, PTS
(C) Water Dependent: Yes
(D) Intended Use: Public
(E) Wastewater Treatment: Existing - N/A
Planned - N/A
(F) Type of Structures: Existing -Bridge for public use
• Planned -Bridge for public use
(G) Estimated Annual Rate of Erosion: N/A
Source - N/A
7. HABITAT DESCRIPTION: [AREA]
RXC'AVATF.T) FTT,T,F.T~
(1TNFR
(A) Open Water Existing Shading 2,560 sf
Additional Shading 320 sf
(B) Section 404 Wetlands 3,920 sf Hand clearing 3,920 sf
(C) High Ground Disturbed by project 84,220 sf
(D) Total Area Disturbed: 94,940 sq. ft.
(E) Primary Nursery Area: No
(F) Water Classification: C; Sw, NSW Open: No

8. PROJECT SUMMARY: The applicant proposes to replace the existing 83' long bridge on SRl00S over
Bachelor Creek with a new 11 S' long cored slab concrete bridge and associated infrastructure within
the existing right-of--way.

FIELD INVESTIGATION REPORT:
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
P12II)CE NO. 212 OVER BACHELOR Cl?.EI?I~
p ~-,. C 1J i~2
9. NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION:
Project Setting
Bridge No. 212 is located on SR1005 over Bachelor Creek, approximately four miles west of
New Bern, Craven County. Elevations in the project area range from 9 to 15 feet NGVD. The
predominant land use in the project area is forestry with a few residential dwellings located within
the project vicinity. The sides of the causeway to the bridge are maintained and vegetated with sod
grasses. The floodplain and embankments of Bachelor Creek inunediately adjacent to the bridge are
characterized by cypress-gum swamp type vegetation.
The existing bridge is a two lane bridge that was constructed in 1937. The bridge is 83' long and
32' wide. The bridge is a fixed bridge consisting of four spans, with a maximum of 21' horizontal
distance between spans. The bridge has a vertical clearance of 5.5' underneath the bridge. The
bridge consists of a concrete deck on continuous I-beams. The bridge is supported with timber caps
on timber piles. The bridge received 35.2 out of a possible 100 points during its last sufficiency
rating. The bridge is classified as a rural major collector and allows for the flow of traffic between
the City of New Bern and the City of Kinston.
There are no stormwater runoff controls on the bridge. A fiber optic telephone cable parallels the
north side of the bridge and also crosses under Bachelor Creek. Aerial electric lines parallel the
north side of the bridge and cross over Broad Creek. The NCRR/Norfolk Southern Railroad
parallels SR1005 in the vicinity of the project and crosses over Bachelor Creek approximately 55'
upstream of Bridge No. 212.
Bachelor Creek is classified C; Sw, NS W by the EMC in the area of the proposed construction.
Bachelor Creek is classified by the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission as Inland
Waters, however, the area is not considered a Primary Nursery Area. The waters are closed to
shellfishing by the Shellfish Sanitation Section of the Division of Environmental Health. At the
project site Bachelor Creek is approximately 80' wide and has a maximum water depth of-9' below
NWL in the area of the bridge. There were no SAV's observed in the project area during the site
visits. The creek bottom is composed of mucky fine sandy loams to sandy loam substrates.
Project Proposal
NCDOT proposes to replace the existing Bridge No. 212 over Bachelor Creek. The project
involves replacement of the existing bridge and related approaches with a cored slab concrete bridge
and new approaches. To initiate the proj ect, the existing bridge would be closed and traffic re-routed
to an off-site detour route along SR1243 (Sanders Lane), NC Hwy 55 West, and SR1244(Hyman's
Road). The existing bridge would be completely demolished and removed from the project site
utilizing Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition and Removal, such that any component
of the bridge dropped into the water will be immediately removed.
The new bridge as proposed would be 115' in length and 36' in width, which would be
approximately 4' wider than the existing bridge. The new bridge would consist of three spans
ranging in length from 30' to 50'. The bridge would include one bent within Bachelor Creek, which
would be offset to the east side of the creek. This would provide approximately 45' of horizontal
clearance underneath the bridge. The new bridge is also designed to allow 6.5' of vertical clearance

FIELD INVESTIGATION REPORT:
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
I3E.IDGI~ N0.2I2 OVER. I;ACI-ILI,C~fL CI~.~:~;I;";
underneath the bridge, which is an increase of 1' above the existing 5.5' clearance height. The new
bridge as proposed would have two 12' travel lanes, with a 4.5' offset on each side. The bridge
would also have a 1.5' wide concrete rail along each side for safety purposes. NCDOT has
committed to construct the bridge, utilizing top down construction methods and to build the bridge
with no deck drains over surface waters. The commitments reduce potential impacts to the
surrounding environment and eliminate the need for a temporary work bridge.
The applicant has proposed to excavate a 15' long x 70' wide section of existing roadway fill
from beneath the base of the bridge on each side of Bachelor Creek. This would partially restore
hydraulic capacity and floodplain area to the Neuse River system, which was displaced with the
construction of the existing bridge. The bases of the bridge are to be stabilized with Class UII riprap.
The rip rap as proposed would be up to 130' in total length and 22' in width under each side of the
bridge, and would be placed entirely above the NWL elevation.
The applicant has also proposed to replace the approach structures to the bridge. The asphalt on
the east and west ends of the bridge would be removed for 400' and 3 85', respectively, from the foot
of the bridge. The grade would be raised by 1 foot in the two areas that are each approximately 100'
wide. The road would then be replaced with two 12' wide travel lanes with eight-foot shoulders,
two foot of which would be paved. New guardrails would also be constructed along SR1005 for up
to 350' at the east end of the bridge and 320' at the west end of the bridge. The existing fiber optic
telephone line on the north side of the bridge, will all be relocated by boring under Bachelor Creek
with a directional drill from high ground to high ground.
Anticipated Impacts
The proposed bridge would permanently shade 2,880 sq. ft. of Public Trust Waters and the Public
Trust Area of Bachelor Creek, which would be an increase of 320 sq. ft. more than that which exists
with the current bridge. The project would result in 84,220 sq. ft. of high ground disturbance for the
grading and paving of the new approaches to the bridge and riprap. It is anticipated that the proposed
removal of the high ground causeway under the northern base of the bridge would restore 2,100 sq.
ft. of floodplain within Bachelor Creek.
Approximately 4,646 sq. ft. of area within the Neuse River Basin Ripariari Buffer Area adjacent
to Bachelor Creek would be impacted by the construction of the bridge and roadway. The project
also includes 3,920 sq. ft. of fill in Section 404 Wetlands and 3,920 sq. ft. of hand clearing in Section
404 Wetlands for roadway construction. No permanent impacts to any Coastal Wetlands are
anticipated with the project.
The navigable clearance under the bridge would increase by 1' from 5.5' to 6.5'. The bridge
would also allow an increase in the maximum navigational width from approximately 21' to
approximately 45'. A localized increase in turbidity can be expected during the in-water
construction portion of the supporting structures for the bridge. No additional closures of
shellfishing waters are expected in association with the proposed project. Impacts to anadromous
fish in Bachelor Creek are expected to be minimal with the applicant's commitment to avoid any
in-water work between the dates of February 15 to June 30 of any year.

FIELD INVESTIGATION REPORT:
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
F3RIL?G?~; i~i0. ?..12 (~VEI~'.1:~.CI~~,I,OIZ. CREI•/l~r
l'AC E #~'<t
Traffic along SRl 005 would be re-routed during the construction period of the project which will
result in increased travel distances for some uses of the transportation system, however, the public is
expected to benefit upon completion of the project by the increase in the safety and efficiency of the
new structure.
Submitted by: Stephen Lane -Morehead City District -October 19, 2007

N . ~1 f
~~` -, ~~ ~
~~ Wu+va~• P w, 3
L '..
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARI~NT OF TR.ANSPORTATI~~~ `" `~ ~' f ~ ' ~~{ ~,
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
October 9, 2007
Mr. William Wescott
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Field Office
Post Office Box 1000
Washington, NC 27889-1000
Dear Sirs:
Subject: Modification Request to the Nationwide 23 Permit and Neuse Riparian
Buffer Authorization, and Revision to the CAMA Major Development
Permit Application, for the Replacement of Bridge No. 212 over Bachelor Creek
on SR 1005; Craven County; TIP Project B-4085; Federal Aid Project No.
BRSTP-1005(7); State Project No.8.2171201.
Reference: USACE Action ID-200702586 issued 08/09/07
NCDWQ Project No.-20051035 v.2 issued 09/14/07
Original Application dated July 16, 2007
NCDOT is revising the application for proposed impacts for the subject project due to temporary
hand clearing for erosion control, riparian landowner receipts, revised impact summary sheet,
and revised MP Forms (with revised landowner list).
Summary of Revised Impacts to Jurisdictional Wetlands: Proposed temporary impacts due to
0.04 acre of temporary fill in wetlands in the hand clearing areas are needed for the installation of
erosion control measures, including some or all of the following: temporary silt fence, special
sediment control fence, and temporary rock silt checks.
After NCDOT had applied for the permit, it was brought to our attention that a landowner had
changed. Please replace any reference to International Paper Realty Company of 865 John L.
Regel Road, Riegelwood, NC 28456 with Hiram J. Mayo, Jr. of P. O. Box 1734, New Bern NC
28563. The appropriate units within NCDOT have been notified in order to make this change.
Mr. Stephen Lane
Division of Coastal Management
N. C. Dept. of Env. & Natural Resources
400 Commerce Avenue
Morehead City, NC 28557
LYNDO TIPPETT
SECRETARY
A copy of this revised permit application and permit modification request will be posted on the
NCDOT website at: http://www.ncdot.or~/doh/preconstruct/pe/neu/permit.html.
MAILING ADDRESS:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548
TELEPHONE: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
WEBSITE: WWW.NCDOT.ORG
LOCATION:
TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
RALEIGH NC

If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Chris Underwood at
[phone]. ~`~ _.}'~
~~
Sincerely
;,
~`
°'~;~ls.°~t i a}"fit ~~'w `,)
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Enviromnental Management Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis
W/attachment:
Mr. John Hennessy, NCDWQ (2 copies)
Mr. Travis Wilson, NCWRC
Mr. Gary Jordan, USFWS
Mr. Ron Sechler, NMFS
Mr. Michael Street, NCDMF
Mr. Steve Sollod, NCDCM
Dr. David Chang, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr. Greg Perfetti, P.E., Structure Design
Mr. Victor Barbour, P.E., Project Services Unit
Mr. Mark Staley, Roadside Environmental
Mr. C. E. Lassiter, P.E., Division 2 Engineer
Mr. Jay Johnson, Division 2 Environmental Officer
W/o attachment
Mr. Scott McLendon, USACE, Wilmington
. Mr. Jay Bennett, P.E., Roadway Design
Mr. Majed Alghandour, P. E., Programming and TIP
Mr. Art McMillan, P.E., Highway Design
Mr. John Williams, P.E., Planning Engineer

~~ __ z
-e
>~ 4,;
' Note: Steel piles for interior bents result in 28 sq. ft. of surface water impacts. ~~- ~ _ NC DEPARrNIENTOFTT2ANSPORTATTON
t~ ~ _ DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
~;~ .. _ CRAVEN COUNTY
~. `"" ` WBS - 33444.1.2 (B-4085]
x• Replace Bridge # 212 on SR 1005 Over Bachelor Creek
= ~_ =~ ti 'L Perms Drawing R4+f ~ 5~
ATN Revised 3/31/05 4%~ l~ SKEET 10~8~2007
- , _ +.~~
WETLAND PERMIT IMPACT SUMMARY
WETLAND IMPACTS SURFACE WATER IMPACTS

Site
No.

Station
(From/To)

Structure
Size /Type
Permanent
Fillln
Wetlands
(ac)
Temp.
Fillln
Wetlands
(ac)
Excavation
in
Wetlands
(ac)
Mechanized
Clearing
in Wetlands
(ac) Hand
Clearing
in
Wetlands
(ac)
Permanent
SW
impacts
(ac)
Temp.
SW
impacts
(ac) Existing
Channel
Impacts
Permanent
(ft) Existing
Channel
Impacts
Temp.
(ft)
Natural
Stream
Design
(ft)
1 8+39 -L- TO Bride 0.090 0.090
13+64 -L- LT

TOTALS: 0.090 0.090

DCM MP-1
APPLICATION for
Major Deu~lopment Permit
~iagt re~isea ~ti2~los)
North Carolina DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
1. Primary Applicant/ Landowner Information -
Business Name Project Name (if applicable) '~ ~
North Carolina Department Of Transportation B-4085
Applicant 1: First Name MI Last Name ~ .;
Gregory J. Thorpe
Applicant 2: First Name MI Last Name
~ac~' i ~J F N ~ iv bir.° ~ +~;
fff
If additional applicants, please attach an additional page(s) with names listed.
Mailing Address PO Box City State
1598 Mail Service Center Raleigh NC
ZIP Country Phone No. FAX No.
27699 919 - 715 - 1334 ext. 919 - 715 - 5501
Street Address (if different from above) City State ZIP
Email
2. Agent/Confractor Information
Business Name
AgenU Contractor 1: First Name MI Last Name
AgenU Contractor 2: First Name MI Last Name
Mailing Address PO Box City State
ZIP Phone No. 1
-
- ext. Phone No. 2
- - ext.
FAX No. Contractor #
Street Address (ildifferent from above) City State ZIP
Email
<Form continues on back>
~`4
.~ Vii, Z
252-808-2808 .. 1-888-4RCOQST .: www,nccoas#almanagement.net

Form DCM MP-1 (Page 2 of 5)
APPLICATION for
Major Development Permit
3. Project Location
County (can be multiple) Street Address State Rd. #
Craven 1005
Subdivision Name City State Zip
New Bern NC 28562 -

Phone No. ~ Lot No.(s) (if many, attach additlOhaf page ivithJistf ~.,. s''
~ . -
~
- - ext.
a. In which NC river basin is the project located? b. Name of body of water nearest to proposed project
Neuse Bachelor Creek
c. Is the water body identified in (b) above, natural or manmade? d. Name the closest major water body to the proposed project site.
®Natural ^Manmade ^Unknown Neuse River
e. Is proposed work within city limits or planning jurisdiction? f. If applicable, list the planning jurisdiction or city limit the proposed
^Yes jBNo work falls within.
4. Site Description
a. Total length of shoreline on the tract (ft.) b. Size of entire tract (sq.ft.)
200' NA
c. Size of individual lot(s) d. Approximate elevation of tract above NHW (normal high water) or
N/A, NWL (normal water level)
(lf many lot sizes, please attach additional page with a list) 9' - 15' ^NHW or ®NWL
e. Vegetation on tract
Wetland vegetation, roadside grasses
f. Man-made features and uses now on tract
Bridge, railroad and bridge, & guardrail
g. Identify and describe the existing land uses adiacent to the proposed project site.
Forested wetland
h. How does local government zone the tract? i. Is the proposed project consistent with the applicable zoning?
Rural services (Attach zoning compliance certificate, if applicable)
®Yes ^No ^NA
j. Is the proposed activity part of an urban waterfront redevelopment proposal? ^Yes ®No
k. Has a professional archaeological assessment been done for the tract? If yes, attach a copy. ®Yes ^No ^NA
If yes, by whom? SHPO
I. Is the proposed project located in a National Registered Historic District or does it involve a Yes jSINo NA
National Register listed or eligible property?
<Form continues on next page>
m. (i) Are there wetlands on the site? ®Yes ^No
(ii) Are there coastal wetlands on the site? ^Yes ®No
(iii) If yes to either (i) or (ii) above, has a delineation been conducted? ®Yes ^No
(Attach documentation, if available)
252-808-2808 .. 1-888-4RCOAST .. www.nccoastalmanagement.net

Form DCM MP-1 (Page 3 of 5)
APPLICATION for
Major Development Permit
n. Describe existing wastewater treatment facilities.
None
~'
o. Describe existing drinking water supply source.
None
p. Describe existing storm water management or treatment systems. ~ ~ ~ : t ~
.: d N~ ~ ~.. ,.
None
5. Activities and Impacts
a. Will the project be for commercial, public, or private use? Commercial ®Public/Government
^ Private/Community
b. Give a brief description of purpose, use, and daily operations of the project when complete.
New bridge over Bachelor Creek. Used for conveying traffic.
c. Describe the proposed construction methodology, types of construction equipment to be used during construction, the number of each type
of equipment and where it is to be stored.
Replace existing bridge using road construction equipment.
d. List all development activities you propose.
Bridge replacement
e. Are the proposed activities maintenance of an existing project, new work, or both? New
f. What is the approximate total disturbed land area resulting from the proposed project? 1.9 ^Sq.Ft or ®Acres
g. Will the proposed project encroach on any public easement, public accessway or other area ®Yes No ^NA
that the public has established use of?
h. Describe location and type of existing and proposed discharges to waters of the state.
Existing bridge has deck drains; new bridge does not. Stormwater will discharge through wetlands.
i. Will wastewater or stormwater be discharged into a wetland? ®Yes ^No ^NA
If yes, will this discharged water be of the same salinity as the receiving water? ®Yes ^No ^NA
j. Is there any mitigation proposed? ^Yes ®No ^NA
If yes, attach a mitigation proposal.
<Form continues on back>
6. Additionallnformation
In addition to this completed application form, (MP-1) the following items below, if applicable, must be submitted in order for the application
package to be complete. Items (a) - (f) are always applicable to any major development application. Please consult the application
instruction booklet on how to properly prepare the required items below.
a. A project narrative.
b. An accurate, dated work plat (including plan view and cross-sectional drawings) drawn to scale. Please give the present status of the
proposed project. Is any portion already complete? If previously authorized work, clearly indicate on maps, plats, drawings to distinguish
between work completed and proposed.
c. A site or location map that is sufficiently detailed to guide agency personnel unfamiliar with the area to the site.
252-80$-2808 .. 1-888-4RCOAST :. www.nccoastalmanagernent.net

Form DCM MP-1 (Page 4 of 5)
APPLICATION for
Major Development Permit
d. A copy of the deed (with state application only) or other instrument under which the applicant claims title to the affected properties.
e. The appropriate application fee. Check or money order made payable to DENR.
f. A list of the names and complete addresses of the adjacent waterfront (riparian) landowners and signed return receipts as proof that such
owners have received a copy of the application and plats by certified mail. Such landowners must be advised that they have 30 days in
which to submit comments on the proposed project to the Division of Coastal Management.
Name Hiram J. Mayo, Jr. - ; .....
Phone No.
Address PO Box 1734, New Bern, NC 28563 ±~ '
r
Name Monta Humphrey Betts
~ ;,
Phone No. a ~ ~ ~ a ' ~, ~:~ ~ ';
Address 8421 Two Courts Drive, Raleigh, NC 27613
Name James C. Humphrey
Phone No.
Address 607 West Wilson Creek Drive, New Bern, NC 28562
g. A list of previous state or federal permits issued for work on the project tract. Include permit numbers, permittee, and issuing dates.
N/A
h. Signed consultant or agent authorization form, if applicable.
i. Wetland delineation, if necessary.
j. A signed AEC hazard notice for projects in oceanfront and inlet areas. (Must be signed by property owner)
k. A statement of compliance with the N.C. Environmental Policy Act (N.C.G.S. 113A 1-10), if necessary. If the project involves expenditure
of public funds or use of public lands, attach a statement documenting compliance with the North Carolina Environmental Policy Act.
7. Certification and Permission to Enter on Land
I understand that any permit issued in response to this application will allow only the development described in the application.
The project will be subject to the conditions and restrictions contained in the permit.
I certify that I am authorized to grant, and do in fact grant permission to representatives of state and federal review agencies to
enter on the aforementioned lands in connection with evaluating information related to this permit application and follow-up
monitoring of the project.
I further certieefy that the information provided in this application is trut ful to the best of my knowledge.
Date ~G'O ~U7 Print Name (~ ~'~~
Signature ~ '
Please indicate application attachments pertaining to your proposed project.
(DCM MP-2 Excavation and Fill Information ®DCM MP-5 Bridges and Culverts
^DCM MP-3 Upland Development
^DCM MP-4 Structures Information
252-808-2808 .. '1-888-4RCOAST :. www.nccoastalmanagement.net

Form DCM MP-2
EXCAVATI®N end FILL.
(Except for bridges and culverts)
-.~
;~
~-

Attach this form to Joint Application for CAMA Major Permit, Form DCM MP-1. Be sure to complete all o~hersections of the Joint ;~ `' -'
Application that relate to this proposed project. Please include all supplemental information.
Describe below the purpose of proposed excavation and/or fill activities. All values should be given in feet.
Access Other
Channel
(NLW or Canal Boat Basin Boat Ramp Rock Groin Rock
Breakwater (excluding
shoreline
NWL stabilization
Length
Width
Avg. Existing
Depth NA NA
Final Project
Depth NA NA
1, EXCAVATION ®This section not applicable
a. Amount of material to be excavated from below NHW or NWL in b. Type of material to be excavated.
cubic yards.
c. (i) Does the area to be excavated include coastal wetlands/marsh d.
(CW), submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB),
or other wetlands (WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the
number of square feet affected.
^CW ^SAV ^SB
^WL ^None
(ii) Describe the purpose of the excavation in these areas:
High-ground excavation in cubic yards.
12. DISPOSAL OF EXCAVATED MATERIAL ®This section not applicable
a. Location of disposal area. b. Dimensions of disposal area.
c. (i) Do you claim title to disposal area?
^Yes ^No ^NA
(ii) If no, attach a letter granting permission from the owner.
e. (i) Does the disposal area include any coastal wetlands/marsh
(CW), submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB),
or other wetlands (WL)? tf any boxes are checked, provide the
number of square feet affected.
^CW ^SAV ^SB
^WL ^None
(ii) Describe the purpose of disposal in these areas:
d. (i) Will a disposal area be available for future maintenance?
^Yes ^No ^NA
(ii) If yes, where?
f. (i) Does the disposal include any area in the water?
^Yes ^No ^NA
(ii) If yes, how much water area is affected?
3. SHORELINE STABILIZATION ^This section not applicable
(If development is a wood groin, use MP-4 -Structures)
252-$t)8-2808 :: 1-88$-4RCOAST :: www.nccoastalmanagement.net revised: 12/26106

P®Plfit DCtVI MP-~ (Excava#ion and Pill, Page 2 of Zj
a. Type of shoreline stabilization: b. Length: 22'
^Bulkhead ®Riprap ^Breakwater/Sill ^Other: Width: 130'
c. Average distance waterward of NHW or NWL: 0' d. Maximum distance waterward of NHW or NWL: 0'
e. Type of stabilization material:
class I riprap
(i) Has there been shoreline erosion during preceding 12
months? ~ t
^Yes ®No ^NA
(ii) If yes, state amount of erosion~and source of erosioni~InoLnt
information.
g. Number of square feet of fill to be placed below water level.
Bulkhead backfill N/A Riprap N/A
Breakwater/Sill N/A Other
i. Source of fill material.
N/A
>.~.y
h. Type of fill material. ~ .r ~ •~ a ~ ~- ~~ ~~ ` .
N/A
4. OTHER FILL ACTIVITIES ^This section not applicable
(Excluding Shoreline Stabilization)
a. (i) Will fill material be brought to the site? ®Yes ^No ^NA b. (i) Will fill material be placed in coastal wetlands/marsh (CW),
If yes,
(ii) Amount of material to be placed in the water None
(iii) Dimensions of fill area 600'x20' (aoo)
(iv) Purpose of fill
Stabilize slopes
submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB), or
other wetlands (WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the
number of square feet affected.
^CW ^SAV ^SB
^WL ®None
(ii) Describe the purpose of the fill in these areas:
I5. GENERAL
a. How wilt excavated or fill material be kept on site and erosion b. What type of construction equipment will be used (e.g., dragline,
controlled? backhoe, or hydraulic dredge)?
Silt fence, NCDOT Type B silt basin, diversion ditches, and inlet Bulldozer, backhoe, & crane.
protection.
c. (i) Will navigational aids be required as a result of the project? d. (i) Will wetlands be crossed in transporting equipment to project
^Yes ^No jgJNA site? ®Yes ^No ^NA
(ii) If yes, explain what type and how they will be implemented. (ii) If yes, explain steps that will be taken to avoid or minimize
environmental impacts.
Best Management Practices.
lU~~, ~~
Date
g-yogS
Project Name
~ ~
L ~l ~ (~-~Sk. Ap
plicant Name
P
plicant Signature
i
252-808-2808 :: 1-888-4RCOAST :: www.nccoastalmanagement.net revised: 12/26/06

BRI06ES antl CULVERTS
Attach this form to Joint Application for CAMA Major Permit, Form DCM MP-1. Be sure to complete all other sections of the Joint
Application that relate to this proposed project. Please include all supplemental information.
. ... ,
1. BRIDGES ^This section not applicable
a. Is the proposed bridge: b. Water body to be crossed by bridge:
^Commercial ®Public/Government ^Private/Community Bachelor Creek
c. Type of bridge (construction material):
21 "cored slab
d. Water depth at the proposed crossing at NLW or NWL:
_g~
e. (i) Will proposed bridge replace an existing bridge? ®Yes ^No f.
If yes,
(ii) Length of existing bridge: 83'
(iii) Width of existing bridge: 32'
(iv) Navigation clearance underneath existing bridge: -5.5'
(v) Will all, or a part of, the existing bridge be removed?
(Explain) All (new bridge will be longer)
(i) Will proposed bridge replace an existing culvert? ^Yes ®No
If yes,
(ii) Length of existing culvert:
(iii) Width of existing culvert:
(iv) Height of the top of the existing culvert above the NHW or
NWL:
(v) Will all, or a part of, the existing culvert be removed?
(Explain)
g• Length of proposed bridge: 120'
i. Will the proposed bridge affect existing water flow? ^Yes ®No
If yes, explain:
k• Navigation clearance underneath proposed bridge: -6.5'
h• Width of proposed bridge: 36'
j. Will the proposed bridge affect navigation by reducing or
increasing the existing navigable opening? ^Yes ®No
If yes, explain:
I. Have you contacted the U.S. Coast Guard concerning their
approval? ^Yes ®No
If yes, explain:
m. Will the proposed bridge cross wetlands containing no navigable n. Height of proposed bridge above wetlands: -6'
waters? ^Yes ®No
If yes, explain:
2. CULVERTS ®This section not applicable
a. Number of culverts proposed: b. Water body in which the culvert is to be placed:
c. Type of culvert (construction material):
< Form continues on back>
252-808-2808 :: 1-888-4RCOAST :: www.nccoastalmananement.net revised: 10!26/06

FOrtt1 DC~ M~'-5 {Sriidges and Culverts, Page 2 of 4)
d. (i) Will proposed culvert replace an existing bridge?
^Yes ^No
If yes,
(ii) Length of existing bridge:
(iii) Width of existing bridge:
(iv) Navigation clearance underneath existing bridge:
(v) Will all, or a part of, the existing bridge be removed?
(Explain)
e. (i) Will proposed culvert replace an existing culvert?
^Yes ^No
If yes,
(ii) Length of existing culvert(s):
(iii) Width of existing culvert(s):
(iv) Height of the top of the existing culvert above the NHW or
NWL: !
(v) Will all, or a part of, the existing culvert be remSived?
(Explain) _- a
f. Length of proposed culvert:
h. Height of the top of the proposed culvert above the NNW or NWL.
j. Will the proposed culvert affect navigation by reducing or
increasing the existing navigable opening? ^Yes ^No
If yes, explain:
g. Width of proposed culvert:
i. Depth of culvert to be buried below existing bottom contour.
k. Will the proposed culvert affect existing water flow?
If yes, explain:
^Yes ^No
3. EXCAVATION and FILL ^This section not applicable
a. (i) Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert require any b. (i) Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert require any
excavation below the NHW or NWL? ^Yes ®No excavation within coastal wetlands/marsh (CW), submerged
If yes, aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB), or other wetlands
(WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the number of square
(ii) Avg. length of area to be excavated: feet affected.
(iii) Avg. width of area to be excavated: ^CW ^SAV ^SB
(iv) Avg. depth of area to be excavated: ^WL ®None
(v) Amount of material to be excavated in cubic yards:
(ii) Describe the purpose of the excavation in these areas:
c. (i) Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert require any
high-ground excavation? ®Yes ^No
If yes,
(ii) Avg. length of area to be excavated: 70'
(iii) Avg. width of area to be excavated: 30'
(iv) Avg. depth of area to be excavated:
(v) Amount of material to be excavated in cubic yards: 314
d. If the placement of the bridge or culvert involves any excavation, please complete the following:
(i) Location of the spoil disposal area: To be determined by the contractor
(ii) Dimensions of the spoil disposal area: To be determined by the contractor
(iii) Do you claim title to the disposal area? ^Yes ®No (If no, attach a letter granting permission from the owner.)
(iv) Will the disposal area be available for future maintenance? ^Yes ®No
(v) Does the disposal area include any coastal wetlands/marsh (CW), submerged aquatic vegetation (SAVs), other wetlands (WL), or shell
bottom (SB)?
^CW ^SAV ^WL ^SB ®None
If any boxes are checked, give dimensions if different from (ii) above.
(vi) Does the disposal area include any area below the NHW or NWL? ? ^Yes ®No
If yes, give dimensions if different from (ii) above.
252-808-2808 :: 1-888-4RCOAST :: www.nccoastalmanagement.net revised: 10126!06
x

Form ©CIIA MP-5 (Bridges and Culverts, Page 3 of 4)
e. (i) Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert result in any f. (i) Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert result in any
fill (other than excavated material described in Item d above) to
be placed below NHW or NWL? ^Yes ®No
If yes,
(ii) Avg. length of area to be filled:
(iii) Avg. width of area to be filled:
(iv) Purpose of fill:
g. (i) Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert result in any
fill (other than excavated material described in Item d above) to
be placed on high-ground? ®Yes ^No
If yes,
(ii) Avg. length of area to be filled: 385' W & 400'E
(iii) Avg. width of area to be filled: 100' X 1' depth
(iv) Purpose of fill: Roadway widening
4. GENERAL
a. Will the proposed project require the relocation of any existing
utility lines? ®Yes ^No
If yes, explain: Telephone line will be directionally bored.
See attached Utility Plan sheet No. 4.
If this portion of the proposed project has already received
approval from local authorities, please attach a copy of the
approval or certification.
< Form continues on back>
c. Will the proposed project require any work channels? d. How will excavated or fill material be kept on site and erosion
^Yes ®No controlled?
If yes, complete Form DCM-MP-2. Silt fence, NCDOT Type B silt basin, diversion ditches, and
inlet protection.
e. What type of construction equipment will be used (for example,
dragline, backhoe, or hydraulic dredge)?
Bulldozer, backhoe, & crane.
f. Will wetlands be crossed in transporting equipment to project site?
^Yes ®No
If yes, explain steps that will be taken to avoid or minimize
environmental impacts.
g. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert require any
shoreline stabilization? ®Yes ^No
If yes, complete form MP-2, Section 3 for Shoreline
Stabilization only.
fill (other than excavated material described in Item d above) to
be placed within coastal wetlands/marsh (CW), submerged
aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB), or other wetlands
(WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the number of square
feet affected.
^CW ^SAV ^SB `
®WL 3920 ^None
(ii) Describe the purpose of the excavation in these areas:
Fill for bridge approaches. t
b. Will the proposed project require the construction of any temporary
detour structures? ^Yes ®No
If yes, explain:
252-808-2808 :: 1-888-4RCOAST :: www.nccoastaimanagement.net revised: 10/26/06

Fl~rnt DCM MP-5 (Bridges and Culverts, Page 4 of 4}
V ~ C"1 ~
Date
g- y cgs
Project Name
~"li ~ , c.usk p
plicant Name
~~ P
plicant Signature
,f .a f
b
252-808-280$ :: 1-888-4RCOAST :: www.nccoastalmanagement.net revised: 10!26106

^ Complete items 1, 2, and 3, Also complete
item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired.
^ Print your name and address on tho reverse
so that we can return the card to yota.
^ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
or on the front if space permits.
1. Article Addressed to:
Monta Humphrey Betts
8421 Two Courts Drive
Raleigh, NC 27613
A. Signature
t ^ Agent
X`'%~/~ [` ~ Ff~~- "'" [Addressee
B. Receive by (Printeld Name) C. Date of Delivery ,
D. Is delivery address different from Item-17 ^ Yes -
If YES, enter delivery address below:. ~ No
._
~UNZ 31007 ~-~~-
3. Service Type -
^ Certified Mail ^ Express Mail
^ Registered ^ Return Receipt for Merchandise
^ Insured Maii ^ C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) ^ Yes
2. Article Number 700f., 0810 0005 9028 5544
(Transfer from service label)
PS Form 3811, February 2004 Domestic Return Receipt 102595-02-M-1540
^ Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired.
^ Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
^ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
or on the front if space permits.
1. Article Addressed to:
James C. Humphrey
607 West Wilson Creek Drive
New Bern, NC 28562
A. Signature
~r~/` gent
X Gv w~?•'LI ^ Addressee
B. Received by Printed Name) C. Date of Delivery
~~'~1 P.fi 7. ~A r~ 4''11 ~ " y- v
D. Is delivery address different from item 11 ^ Yes
If YES, enter delivery address below: ^ No
3. Service Type
^ Certified Mail ^ Express Mail
^ Registered ^ Return Receipt for Merchandise
^ Insured Mail ^ C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) ^ Yes '
2. Article Number 7006 0810 0005 9028 5537
(transfer from service label)
PS Form 3811, February 2004 Domestic Return Receipt 1o25ss-o2-M-15ao
^ Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired.
^ Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
^ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
or on the front if space permits.
A.
^ Agent
1. Article Addressed to:
International Paper Realty Corporation
865 John L. Regel Road
Reiglewood, NC 28456
B. Received by (Printed Name) I C. DafAot DeJjroery
i( .° ~
D. Is delivery address different from item 1? u„Ye:
If YES, enter delivery address below: ^ No
3.. Service Type
^ Certified Mail ^ Express Maii
O Registered ^ Return Receipt for Merchandise
^ Insured Mail ^ C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) ^ Yes

4 ._..._
}
' r ~ ~~
~~ ~ ....
3
11 -
~ '~
]n1 rJ`3 a `9
d'
D ,,ETA
EP T~A~F I~TpRT
MICHAEL F. EgSLEY ARZiti~NT OF H CAROLIlVA
~~~oR T~NSPpRTATI
OIv
Mr. William W Ju1Y 16, 2007 1.1'IVDO TIPPET`r
LJ. S ~ escort sECaETARY
Regulatory p eld Offi Enb'~neers Mr.
Post Office Bo Ce Stephen Lsne
Washington x 1000 Division of
N. C De Coastal M
NC 27889-1000 Pt. of Env. & Nsgement
400 COmrnerce stural Resources
Dear Sirs: Morehead Avenue
City, NC 2855
Subject: 7
Nationwide 23
Application, and Neese Application, C
Replacement of Brid R1Parian g ~A Major D
County; TIP ge No. 212 offer Author' evelopment Per
Pro• Project B-4085• over Bachelor ~zation mit
Ject NO.8.21712p1 • ~ Federal Creek o Request for the
Please find ~ Debit $400.00 m1~sject n SR 1005•
enclose fro ~ Craven
Ad'ac d the p 3344 0 1BRSTp-1005 7
Cate ent 1~parian Lando reconstruction Noti 4.1. (), State
gorical Exclusion (CE ner return recei fication
P
Transp°rtatio )for the ab pts, permit drCN)' C`q~'IA Ma or
Craven C n Proposes to r °Ve-mentioned swings, half-size Peit (MP) fo
structural] ounty The Pro eCeplace existing grid Project. The No Plans, NRTR rms,
brid Y deficient brid ~ involves ge NO. 212 rth Carotins D 'and the
ge will fea ge snd a replacement of °Ver Bachelor Creek onePar~ent of
aPProx' PPr°sches with the existin SR 1005 in
lmately 330 e two 12-foot lanes anew 115- g functional]
°ffsite detour will feet ton with 4•S_ foot brid Y obsolete and
im be utilized. p o the east pprOach °pt offsets. ~e ~d sPproaches. 'lie new
Pacts for fill. a will be Vest
Additions]] Posed pew spproxi sPProach will be
Y, there will snent impacts i ~ mately 300
Impacts to Water of the Uni be 0.09 acre ofhsnd clearin 0.09 acre of ri~f rine ong An
red States g in rive ' wetland
nne wetlands.
eneral Descri tion: Bachelor Cre
The Division of
27-9g Water Quali ek is located i
~ (DWQ) has n the 03020202
WQ has assigned a best usa CU of the
Bachelor ge class fic geed Bachelor Cree Neese ~ Ver
Creek is ation of C Sw k s Stream Index Basin.
Wild and Sce not designated as NS~'• Number of
mile oI the nic River It is not listed asoarth Carotin
Waters (HQ~ ~ Brea. No desi 303(d s a Natural or Scenic
of the ~ ater Suppl gnated Outst ) trees n°r are there p3 ~' °r as s national
Project study Brea. Y I (WS'I), or Waterding Resourc Wat (d ~'
Supp1 II e ~ aters within 1
~ ADDRESS: Y (WS_II) atersOocc )' High
~R-~+ENr QUa11
~ TRANS ut
C ~~ECE~R~T~NMENTq~AN,t~rslS rELEFFp"E. 919-7 ~'Ithln 1 mile
~i54g FAX. [phone]~9a 141

Permanent Impacts: A_s stated above, pemYanent impacts consist of fill in riverine wetlands. The
total amount of proposed impacts is 0.09 acre.
Temporary Impacts: There are no temporary impacts proposed for this project
Utility Impacts: There will be no impacts to jurisdictional resources due to utilities. The electrical
lines to the north of the project will remain in place. The buried, fiber optic phone line will be
relocated using directional bore.
Hand Clearing: There are 0.09 acre of hand clearing proposed for this project.
Neuse Buffer Rules: This project lies within the Neuse River Basin; therefore, the regulations
pertaining to the Neuse River Buffer Rules will apply. There are 2,386 square feet of impacts to
Zone 1 and 2,260 square feet of impacts to Zone 2. Of these impacts, 2,129 square feet are
considered allowable due to bridge construction and 2,517 square feet are allowable with
mitigation due to roadway construction.
Bridge Demolition
The superstructure for Bridge No. 212 is a concrete deck on I-beams and will allow removal
without dropping components into the water. Likewise, it should be possible to remove the
timber piles and timber caps without dropping them into the water. Best Management Practices
for Bridge Demolition and Removal will be implemented. Any component of the bridge dropped
into the water shall be immediately removed.
Avoidance and Minimization
Avoidance examines all appropriate and practicable possibilities of averting impacts to "Waters
of the United States". Due to the presence of surface waters and wetlands within the project study
area, avoidance of all impacts is not possible. The NCDOT is committed to incorporating all
reasonable and practicable design features to avoid and minimize jurisdictional impacts.
Minimization measures were incorporated as part of the project design. These included:
• To avoid impacts, NCDOT is replacing Bridge No. 212 in place and utilizing anoff--site
detour.
• The bridge will be lengthened by 22 feet.
• Top down construction will be utilized.
• NCDOT is also minimizing impacts to surface waters by utilizing longer spans with fewer
bents than the existing bridge.
• NCDOT will observe an in-stream construction moratorium from February 15 to June 30 and
utilize Stream Crossing Guidelines for Anadromous Fish Passage.
• 3:1 slopes were used in jurisdictional areas.

Mitigation
The proposed project will have permanent impacts to wetlands totaling 0.09 acre due to fill. Due
to the minimal amount of permanent impacts to jurisdictional wetlands, and impacts to riparian
not exceeding the threshold requiring compensatory mitigation, NCDOT is not proposing
mitigation.
Access
Due to safety concerns, increased costs, and not meeting the threshold of "undue interference", as
it relates to NCDOT's "Guidelines for Recreational Access at Creeks and Rivers" (attached),
NCDOT does not propose access for recreation for this project.
Federally Protected Species
As of June 28, 2007, the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) lists five federally protected
species for Craven County. The following table lists these species.
Common Name Scientific Name Status Habitat Conclusion
Leatherback Sea Turtle Dermochel s coriacea E N No Effect
American Alli ator Alli ator mississi iensis ~ T S/A Y N/A
Red-cockaded Wood ecker Picoides borealis E N No Effect
West Indian Manatee Trichechus manatus E N No Effect
Sensitive Joint-vetch Aesch nomene vir 'pica T N No Effect
E - endangered; T -threatened; T(S/A) -threatened due to similarity of appearance
The bald eagle was delisted as of June 28, 2007 and is no longer protected by the Endangered
Species Act. The most recent survey found no individuals or nests. It is, however, protected
under the Bald and Golden Eagle Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.
Project Schedule
The project has a scheduled let of January 15, 2008 with a review date of December 4, 2007.
Regulatory Approvals
Section 404 Permit: This project is being processed by the Federal Highway Administration as a
"Categorical Exclusion" in accordance with 23 CFR 771.115(b). Therefore, we do not anticipate
requesting an individual permit but propose to proceed under a Nationwide 23 as authorized by a
Nationwide Permit 23 (67 FR 2020; March 19, 2007).
Section 401 Permit: We anticipate 401 General Certification number 3632 will apply to this
project. In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H, Section .0500(a) we are providing two copies of this

application to the North Carolina Department of Environmental and Natural Resources, Division
of Water Quality, for their review.
Neuse River Riparian Buffer Authorization: NCDOT requests that the NC Division of Water
Quality review this application and issue a written approval for a Neuse River Riparian Buffer
Authorization.
CAMA Permit: NCDOT requests that the proposed work be authorized under a Coastal Area
Management Act Major Development Permit. The landowner receipts are attached. NCDOT has
received a stormwater permit for this project.
A copy of this permit application will be posted on the NCDOT website at:
http://www.ncdot.orb/doh/yreconstruct/pe/neu/permit html.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Chris Underwood at
[phone].
Sincerely,
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Environmental Management Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis
W/attachment:
Mr. John Hennessy, NCDWQ (2 copies)
Mr. Travis Wilson, NCWRC
Mr. Gary Jordan, USFWS
Mr. Ron Sechler, NMFS
Mr. Michael Street, NCDMF
Mr. Steve Sollod, NCDCM
Dr. David Chang, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr. Greg Perfetti, P.E., Structure Design
Mr. Victor Barbour, P.E., Project Services Unit
Mr. Mark Staley, Roadside Environmental
Mr. C. E. Lassiter, P.E., Division 2 Engineer
Mr. Jay Johnson, Division 2 Environmental Officer
W/o attachment
Mr. Scott McLendon, USACE, Wilmington
Mr. Jay Bennett, P.E., Roadway Design
Mr. Majed Alghandour, P. E., Programming and TIP
Mr. Art McMillan, P.E., Highway Design
Mr. John Williams, P.E., Planning Engineer

BCM M~-1
a~ruennor nr
Alalor oere~oa.rem rermn
(last revised 12127/06)
North Carolina DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
1. Primary Applicant Landowner Information
Business Name
Nc Department Of Transportation Project Name (if applicable) '
B-4085
Applicant 1: First Name
Gregory MI
J. Last Name
Thorpe
Applicant 2: First Name MI Last Name
If additional applicants, please attach an additional page(s) with names listed.
Mailing Address
1598 Mail Service Center PO Box City
Raleigh State
NC
ZIP
27699 Country Phone No.
919 - 715 -1334 ext. FAX No.
919.715 - 5501
Street Address (if different from above) City State ZIP
Email
2. AgentContractor Information
Business Name
AgenU Contractor 1: First Name MI Last Name
AgenU Contractor 2: First Name MI Last Name
Mailing Address PO Box Ciry State
ZIP Phone No. 1
r
- ext. Phone No. 2
- - ext.
FAX No. Contractor #
Street Address (rf different from above) City State ZIP
Email
<Form continues on baclc~
252-808-2808 .. 1-888-4RCCYAST .. www.nccoastalmanagement.net

'=orm DCM MP-1 (Page 3 of 5)
APPLICATION for
Major Development Permit
n. Describe existing wastewater treatment facilities.
None
o. Describe existing drinking water supply source.
None
p. Describe existing storm water management or treatment systems.
None
5. Activities and Impacts
a. Will the project be for commercial, public, or private use? Commercial Public/Government
^ Private/Community
b. Give a brief description of purpose, use, and daily operations of the project when complete.
New bridge over Bachelor Creek. Used for conveying traffic.
c. Describe the proposed construction methodology, types of construction equipment to be used during construction, the number of each type
of equipment and where it is to be stored.
Replace existing bridge using road construction equipment.
d. List all development activities you propose.
Bridge replacement
e. Are the proposed activities maintenance of an existing project, new work, or both? New
f. What is the approximate total disturbed land area resulting from the proposed project? ^Sq.Ft or ^Acres
g. Will the proposed project encroach on any public easement, public accessway or other area Yes No NA
that the public has established use of?
h. Describe location and type of existing and proposed discharges to waters of the state.
Surface runoff
i. Will wastewater or stormwater be discharged into a wetland? Yes ®No NA
If yes, will this discharged water be of the same salinity as the receiving water? ^Yes ^No ^NA
j. Is there any mitigation proposed? Yes No NA
If yes, attach a mitigation proposal.
<Form continues on back>
6. Additionallnformation
In addition to this completed application form, (MP-1) the following items below, if applicable, must be submitted in order for the application
package to be complete. Items (a) - (1) are ahvays applicable to any major development application. Please consult the application
instruction booklet on how to properly prepare the required items below.
a. A project narrative.
b. An accurate, dated work plat (including plan view and cross-sectional drawings) drawn to scale. Please give the present status of the
proposed project. Is any portion already complete? If previously authorized work, clearly indicate on maps, plats, drawings to distinguish
between work completed and proposed.
c. A site or location map that is sufficiently detailed to guide agency personnel unfamiliar with the area to the site.
252-808-2808 .. 1-888-4RCOAST :. www.nccoastalmanagement.net

corm DCM MP-1 (Page 2 of 5)
APPLICATION for
Major Development Permit
3. Project Location
County (can be multiple) Street Address State Rd. #
Craven
Subdivision Name City State Zip
Phone No. Lot No.(s) (if many, attach additional page with list)
- - ext. ,
a. In which NC river basin is the project located? b. Name of body of water nearest to proposed project
Neuse Bachelor Creek
c. Is the water body identified in (b) above, natural or manmade? d. Name the closest major water body to the proposed project site.
®Natural ^Manmade ^Unknown Neuse River
e. Is proposed work within city limits or planning jurisdiction? f. If applicable, list the planning jurisdiction or city limit the proposed
^Yes ®No work falls within.
4. Site Description
a. Total length of shoreline on the tract (ft.) b. Size of entire tract (sq.ft.)
N/A
c. Size of individual lot(s) d. Approximate elevation of tract above NHW (normal high water) or
N/A, NWL (nom-a/ water level)
(1/many lot sizes, please attach additional page with a list) `. - ^NHW or ^NWL
e. Vegetation on tract
Wetland vegetation, roadside grasses
f. Man-made features and uses now on tract
Bridge, railroad and bridge, & guardrail
g. Identify and describe the existing land uses ' c n to the proposed project site.
Forested wetland
h. How does local government zone the tract? i. Is the proposed project consistent with the applicable zoning?
Rural services (Attach zoning compliance certificate, if applicable)
®Yes ^No ^NA
j. Is the proposed activity part of an urban waterfront redevelopment proposal? Yes No
k. Has a professional archaeological assessment been done for the tract? If yes, attach a copy. Yes No NA
If yes, by whom? SHPO
I. Is the proposed project located in a National Registered Historic District or does it involve a Yes No NA
National Register listed or eligible property?
<Form continues on next page>
m. (i) Are there wetlands on the site? ®Yes No
(ii) Are there coastal wetlands on the site? ^Yes ®No
(iii) If yes to either (i) or (ii) above, has a delineation been conducted? ®Yes ^No
(Attach documentation, if available)
252-80$-28Q8 .. 1-888-4RCOAST ., www.nccoastafmanagement.net

corm DCM MP-1 (Page 4 of 5)
APPLICATION for
Major Development Permit
d. A copy of the deed (with state application only) or other instrument under which the applicant claims title to the affected properties.
e. The appropriate application fee. Check or money order made payable to C~ENR.
f. A list of the names and complete addresses of the adjacent waterfront (riparian) landowners and signed return receipts as proof that such
owners have received a copy of the application and plats by certified mail. Such landowners must be advised that they have 30 days in
which to submit comments on the proposed project to the Division of Coastal Management.
Name International Paper Company
Phone No.
Address 865 John L. Regel Road, Reigelwood, NC 28456 r
Name Monta Humphrey Betts
Phone No.
Address 8421 Two Courts Drive, Raleigh, NC 27613
Name James C. Humphrey
Phone No.
Address 607 West Wilson Creek Drive, New Bern, NC 28562
g. A list of previous state or federal permits issued for work on the project tract. Include perrnit numbers, permittee, and issuing dates.
N/A
h. Signed consultant or agent authorization form, ff applicable.
i. Wetland delineation, if necessary.
j. A signed AEC hazard notice for projects in oceanfront and inlet areas. (Must be signed by property owner)
k. A statement of compliance with the N.C. Environmental Policy Act (N.C.G.S. 113A 1-10), if necessary. If the project involves expenditure
of public funds or use of public lands, attach a statement documenting compliance with the North Carolina Environmental Policy Act.
~ 7. Certification and Permission to Enter on Land
I understand that any permit issued in response to this application will allow only the development described in the application.
The project will be subject to the conditions and restrictions contained in the permit.
I certify that I am authorized to grant, and do in fact grant permission to representatives of state and federal review agencies to
enter on the aforementioned lands in connection with evaluating information related to this permit application and follow-up
monitoring of the project.
I further certify that the information provided in this application is truthful to the best of my knowledge
Date
Print Name
Signature
.- _ Please indicate application attachments pertaining to your proposed project.
®DCM MP-2 Excavation and Fill Information ®DCM MP-5 Bridges and Culverts
^DCM MP-3 Upland Development
^DCM MP-4 Structures Information
252-SQ8-2808 .. 1-888-4RCOA5T ., www.nccoastalmanagement.net

N~~CY~FS
BRIDGES and CULVERTS
Attach this form to Joint Application for CAMA Major Permit, Form DCM MP-1. Be sure to complete all other sections of the Joint
Application that relate to this proposed project. Please include all supplemental information.
Y. BRIDGES ^ This section not applicable
a. Is the proposed bridge: b. Water body to be crossed by bridge:
^Commercial ®Public/Government ^Private/Community Bachelor Creek
c. Type of bridge (construction material):
21 "cored slab
e.
(i) Will proposed bridge replace an existing culvert? ^Yes ®No
If yes,
(ii) Length of existing culvert:
(iii) Width of existing culvert:
(iv) Height of the top of the existing culvert above the NHW or
NWL:
(v) Will all, or a part of, the existing culvert be removed?
(Explain)
9• Length of proposed bridge: 120' h. Width of proposed bridge:.33' ,
i. Will the proposed bridge affect existing water flow? ^Yes ®No j. Will the proposed bridge affect navigation by reducing or
If yes, explain: increasing the existing navigable opening? Yes ®No
If yes, explain:
k• Navigation clearance underneath proposed bridge: -6.~' I. Have you contacted the U.S. Coast Guard concerning their
approval? ^Yes ®No
If yes, explain:
m. Will the proposed bridge cross wetlands containing no navigable n. Height of proposed bridge above wetlands: -6'
waters? ^Yes ®No
If yes, explain:
2. CULVERTS ®This section not applicable
a. Number of culverts proposed: b. Water body in which the culvert is to be placed:
c. Type of culvert (construction material):
< Form continues on back>
d. Water depth at the proposed crossing at NLW or NWL:
--9'
(i) Will proposed bridge replace an existing bridge? ®Yes ^No f
If yes,
(ii) Length of existing bridge: 83'
(iii) Width of existing bridge: 32'
(iv) Navigation clearance underneath existing bridge: -5.5'
(v) Will all, or a part of, the existing bridge be removed?
(Explain) All (new bridge will be longer)
2~-~'t3$-~$7£t :: '1-Fs't.8-~~t;LlA~T
uvnrvv.rtcL~astalrn~r~agemertf.net reviseci:1f3:26;06

~o1m ®CM M6~-S 6Bridges and Culverts, Page z at a)
d. (i) Will proposed culvert replace an existing bridge?
^Yes ^No
If yes,
(ii) Length of existing bridge:
(iii) Width of existing bridge:
(iv) Navigation clearance underneath existing bridge:
(v) Will all, or a part of, the existing bridge be removed?
(Explain)
f. Length of proposed culvert:
h. Height of the top of the proposed culvert above the NHW or NWL.
j. Will the proposed culvert affect navigation by reducin or
increasing the existing navigable opening? [jYes ^No
If yes, explain:
3. EXCAVATION and FILL
a. (i) Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert require any
excavation below the NHW or NWL? ^Yes ®No
If yes,
(ii) Avg. length of area to be excavated:
(iii) Avg. width of area to be excavated:
(iv) Avg. depth of area to be excavated:
(v) Amount of material to be excavated in cubic yards:
e. (i) Will proposed culvert replace an existing culvert?
^Yes ^No
If yes,
(ii) Length of existing culvert(s):
(iii) Width of existing culvert(s):
(iv) Height of the top of the existing culvert above the NHW or
NWL:
(v) Will all, or a part of, the existing culvert be removed?
(Explain)
g. Width of proposed culvert:
i. Depth of culvert to be buried below existing bottom contour.
k. Will the proposed culvert affect existing water flow?
^Yes ^No
If yes, explain:
^ This section not applicable
b. (i) Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert require any
excavation within coastal wetlands/marsh (CW); submerged
aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB), or other wetlands
(WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the number of square
feet affected.
^CW~ ^SAV ^SB
^WL ®None
(ii) Describe the purpose of the excavation in these areas:
c. (i) Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert require any
high-ground excavation? ®Yes ^No
If yes,
(ii) Avg. length of area to be excavated: 70'
(iii) Avg. width of area to be excavated: 30'
(iv) Avg. depth of area to be excavated:
(v) Amount of material to be excavated in cubic yards: ,~14
d. If the placement of the bridge or culvert involves any excavation, please complete the following:
(i) Location of the spoil disposal area: To be determined by the contractor
(ii) Dimensions of the spoil disposal area:
(iii) Do you claim tftle to the disposal area? ^Yes ~No (If no, attach a letter granting permission from the owner.)
(iv) Will the disposal area be available for future maintenance? ^Yes ^No
(v) Does the disposal area include any coastal wetlands/marsh (CW), submerged aquatic vegetation (SAVs), other wetlands (WL), or shell
bottom (SB)?
^CW ^SAV ^WL ^SB ®None
If any boxes are checked, give dimensions 'rf different from (ii) above.
(vi) Does the disposal area include any area below the NHW or NWL? ? ^Yes ®No
If yes, give dimensionsrf different from (ii) above.
_._
252-808-2808 1-888-.3fttrt?AST :: v_vvvv_v.ncccsastaEm_asYa_c~ernenk.»et rerrised:1t52~i;gis

Form DCM MP-5 (Bridges and Culverts, Page 3 0# 4)
e. (i) Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert result in any
fill (other than excavated material described in Item d above) to
be placed below NHW or NWL? ®Yes ^No
If yes,
(ii) Avg. length of area to be filled: see permit drawings
(iii} Avg. width of area to be filled:
(iv} Purpose of fill: Piles driven.
f. (i) Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert result in any
fill (other than excavated material described in Item d above) to
be placed within coastal wetlands/marsh (CW), submerged
aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB), or other wetlands
(WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the number of square
feet affected.
^CW ^SAV ^SB
^WL ~ ^None
,, ,
(ii) Describe the purpose of the e~CCavation in these areas:
r, -/, c.,;a;
g. (i) Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert result in any
fill (other than excavated material described in Item d above) to
be placed on high-ground? ®Yes ^No
If yes,
(ii) Avg. length of area to be filled: -400'
(iii) Avg. width of area to be filled: -12'
(iv) Purpose of fill: Widen shoulders that approach bridges.
4. GENERAL
a. Will the proposed project require the relocation of any existing
utility lines? ®Yes ^No
If yes, explain: Telephone line will be directionally bored.
See attached Utility Plan sheet No. 4.
b. Will the proposed project require the construction of any temporary
detour structures? ^Yes ®No
If yes, explain:
If this portion of the proposed project has already received
approval from local authorities, please attach a copy of the
approval or cert~cation.
< Form continues on back>
c. Will the proposed project require any work channels? d.
^Yes ®No
If yes, complete Form DCM-MP-2.
How will excavated or fill material be kept on site and erosion
controlled?
Silt fence, NCDOT Type B silt basin, diversion ditches, and
inlet protection.
e. What type of construction equipment will be used (for example, f
dragline, backhoe, or hydraulic dredge)?
Bulldozer, backhce, 8~ crane.
Will wetlands be crossed in transporting equipment to project site?
^Yes ®No
If yes, explain steps that will be taken to avoid or minimize
environmental impacts.
g. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert require any
shoreline stabilization? ' ®Yes ®No
If yes, complete form MP-2, Section 3 for Shoreline
Stabilization only.
252-808-2808 :: 1-888-4RCOAST :: www.nccoastalmana4ement.net revised: 10126/06

FG/ti'94 LICIVI MP-5 (Bridges and Culverts, Page 4 of 4}
Date
Project Name
plicant Name
np
plicant Signature
252-808-2848 :: 1-888-4RCOAST :: www_nccoastalmana~ement.net revised: 10!26!06

Office Use Only: Fornl Version March OS
USAC:E Action ID No. DWQ No.
(If any particular item is not applicable to this project, please enter "Not Applicable" or "N/A".)
Processing
1. Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project:
® Section 404 Permit ® Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules
^ Section 10 Permit ^ Isolated Wetland Permit from DWQ
® 401 Water Quality Certification ^ Express 401 Water Quality Certification
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested: NW 23
3. If this notification is solely a courtesy copy because written approval for the 401 Certification
is not required, check here: ^
4. If payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) is proposed
for mitigation of impacts, attach the acceptance letter from NCEEP, complete section VIII,
and check here: ^
5. If your project is located in any of North Carolina's twenty coastal counties (listed on page
4), and the project is within a North Carolina Division of Coastal Management Area of
Environmental Concern (see the top of page 2 for further details), check here:
II. Applicant Information
1. Owner/Applicant Information
Name: Gregory J Thorpe PhD Environmental Management Director
Mailing Address: 1598 Mail Service Center
Telephone Number: (9191733-3141 Fax Number: (,9191733-9794
E-mail Address:
2. Agent/Consultant Information (A signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization letter
must be attached if the Agent has signatory authority for the owner/applicant.)
Name:
Company Affiliation:
Mailing Address:
Telephone Number:,
E-mail Address:
Fax Number:
Page 1 of 8

III. Project Information
Attach a vicinity map clearly showing the location of the property with respect to local
landmarks such as towns, rivers, and roads. Also provide a detailed site plan showing property
boundaries and development plans in relation to surrounding properties. Both the vicinity map
and site plan must include a scale and north arrow. The specific footprints of all buildings,
impervious surfaces, or other facilities must be included. If possible, the maps and plans should
include the appropriate USGS Topographic Quad Map and NRCS Soil Survey with the property
boundaries outlined. Plan drawings, or other maps may be included at the applicant's discretion,
so long as the property is clearly defined. For administrative and distribution purposes, the
USACE requires information to be submitted on sheets no larger than 11 by 17-inch format;
however, DWQ may accept paperwork of any size. DWQ prefers full-size construction
drawings rather than a sequential sheet version of the full-size plans. If full-size plans are
reduced to a small scale such that the final version is illegible, the applicant will be informed that
the project has been placed on hold until decipherable maps are provided.
1. Name of project: Replacement of Bridge No. 212 on SR 1005 over Bachelor Creek
2. T.I.P. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only): B-4085
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN): N/A
4. Location
County: Craven Nearest Town: New Bern
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number): N/A
Directions to site (include road numbers/names, landmarks, etc.): Bridge 212 over Bachelor
Creek on SR 1005
5. Site coordinates (For linear projects, such as a road or utility line, attach a sheet that
separately lists the coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody.)
Decimal Degrees (6 digits minimum): 35.1494 °N 77.1739 °W
6. Property size (acres): N/A
7. Name of nearest receiving body of water: Neuse River
8. River Basin: Neuse
(Note -this must be one of North Carolina's seventeen designated major river basins. The
River Basin map is available at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/admin/maps/.)
9. Describe the existing conditions on the site and general land use in the vicinity of the project
at the time of this application: Rural
10. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used: Replacing
a structurally deficient bride using toy-down construction. Standard road building
equipment will be used.
Page 2 of 8

11. Explain the purpose of the proposed work:_ To replace a structurally def cient bride.
IV. Prior Project History
If jurisdictional determinations and/or permits have been requested andlor obtained for this
project (including all prior phases of the same subdivision) in the past, please explain. Include
the USACE Action ID Number, DWQ Project Number, application date, and date permits and
certifications were issued or withdrawn. Provide photocopies of previously issued permits,
certifications or other useful information. Describe previously approved wetland, stream and
buffer impacts, along with associated mitigation (where applicable). If this is a NCDOT project,
list and describe permits issued for prior segments of the same T.I.P. project, along with
construction schedules. N/A
V. Future Project Plans
Are any future permit requests anticipated for this project? If so, describe the anticipated work,
and provide justification for the exclusion of this work from the current application.
No.
VI. Proposed Impacts to Waters of the United States/Waters of the State
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
wetlands, open water, and stream channels associated with the project. Each impact must be
listed separately in the tables below (e.g., culvert installation should be listed separately from
riprap dissipater pads). Be sure to indicate if an impact is temporary. All proposed impacts,
permanent and temporary, must be listed, and must be labeled and clearly identifiable on an
accompanying site plan. All wetlands and waters, and all streams (intermittent and perennial)
should be shown on a delineation map, whether or not impacts are proposed to these systems.
Wetland and stream evaluation and delineation forms should be included as appropriate.
Photographs may be included at the applicant's discretion. If this proposed impact is strictly for
wetland or stream mitigation, list and describe the impact in Section VIII below. If additional
space is needed for listing or description, please attach a separate sheet.
1. Provide a written description of the proposed impacts: 0. 09 acre of wetland impacts.
2. Individually list wetland impacts. Types of impacts include, but are not limited to
mechanized clearing, grading, fill, excavation, flooding, ditching/drainage, etc. For dams,
separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding.
Page 3 of 8

Wetland Impact Type of vJetland Located within Distance to Area of
Site Number Type of Impact (e.g., forested, marsh, 100-year
Floodplain Nearest
Stream Impact
(acres)
(indicate on map) herbaceous, bog, etc.) es/no linear feet
Bridge Fill Riverine Yes 0 0.09

Total Wetland Impact (acres) 0.09
3. List the total acreage (estimated) of all existing wetlands on the property: ~1
4. Individually list all intermittent and perennial stream impacts. Be sure to identify temporary
impacts. Stream impacts include, but are not limited to placement of fill or culverts, dam
construction, flooding, relocation, stabilization activities (e.g., cement walls, rip-rap, crib
walls, gabions, etc.), excavation, ditching/straightening, etc. If stream relocation is proposed,
plans and profiles showing the linear footprint for both the original and relocated streams
must be included. To calculate acreage, multiply length X width, then divide by 43,560.
Stream Impact Perennial or Average Impact Area of
Number Stream Name Type of Impact Stream Width Length Impact
indicate on ma Intermittent? Before Im act linear feet acres
N/A

Total Stream Impact (by length and acreage)
Individually list all open water impacts (including lakes, ponds, estuaries, sounds, Atlantic
Ocean and any other water of the U.S.). Open water impacts include, but are not limited to
fill, excavation, dredging, flooding, drainage, bulkheads, etc.
Open Water Impact

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

Type of Impact Type of Waterbody

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

Impact
acres
N/A

Total Open Water Impact (acres)
6. List the cumulative impact to all Waters of the U.S. resulting from the proiect:
Stream Im act acres
Wetland Im act (acres): 0.09
O en Water Im act acres
Total Im act to Waters of the U.S. acres 0.09
Total Stream Im act linear feet):
7. Isolated Waters
Do any isolated waters exist on the property? ^ Yes ®No
Page 4 of 8

Describe all impacts to isolated waters, and include the type of water (wetland or stream) and
the size of the proposed impact (acres or linear feet). Please note that this section only
applies to waters that have specifically been determined to be isolated by the USACE.
N/A
8. Pond Creation -
If construction of a pond is proposed, associated wetland and stream impacts should be
included above in the wetland and stream impact sections. Also, the proposed pond should
be described here and illustrated on any maps included with this application.
Pond to be created in (check all that apply): ^ uplands ^ stream ^ wetlands
Describe the method of construction (e.g., dam/embankment, excavation, installation of
draw-down valve or spillway, etc.): N/A
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stormwater requirement, etc.): N/A
Current land use in the vicinity of the pond: N/A
Size of watershed draining to pond: Expected pond surface area:
VII. Impact Justification (Avoidance and Minimization)
Specifically describe measures taken to avoid the proposed impacts. It may be useful to provide
information related to site constraints such as topography, building ordinances,.accessibility, and
financial viability of the project. The applicant may~attach drawings of alternative, lower-impact
site layouts, and explain why these design options were not feasible. Also discuss how impacts
were minimized once the desired site plan was developed. If applicable, discuss construction
techniques to be followed during construction to reduce impacts. Top-down construction,
bridge was lengthened, and minimum widths were used for structures and approaches
VIII. Mitigation
DWQ - In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0500, mitigation may be required by the NC
Division of Water Quality for projects involving greater than or equal to one acre of impacts to
freshwater wetlands or greater than or equal to 150 linear feet of total impacts to perennial
streams.
USACE - In accordance with the Final Notice of Issuance and Modification of Nationwide
Permits, published in the Federal Register on January 15, 2002, mitigation will be required when
necessary to ensure that adverse effects to the aquatic environment are minimal. Factors
including size and type of proposed impact and function and relative value of the impacted
aquatic resource will be considered in determining acceptability of appropriate and practicable
mitigation as proposed. Examples of mitigation that may be appropriate and practicable include,
but are not limited to: reducing the size of the project; establishing and maintaining wetland
and/or upland vegetated buffers to protect open waters such as streams; and replacing losses of
aquatic resource functions and values by creating, restoring, enhancing, or preserving similar
functions and values, preferable in the same watershed.
Page 5 of 8

If mitigation is required for this project, a copy of the mitigation plan must be attached in order
for USACE or DWQ to consider the application complete for processing. Any application
lacking a required mitigation plan or NCEEP concurrence shall be placed on hold as incomplete.
An applicant may also choose to review the current guidelines for stream restoration in DWQ's
Draft Technical Guide for Stream Work in North Carolina, available at
httb://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/strmgide.html.
1. Provide a brief description of the proposed mitigation plan. The description should provide
as much information as possible, including, but not limited to: site location (attach directions
and/or map, if offsite), affected stream and river basin, type and amount (acreage/linear feet)
of mitigation proposed (restoration, enhancement, creation, or preservation), a plan view,
preservation mechanism (e.g., deed restrictions, conservation easement, etc.), and a
description of the current site conditions and proposed method of construction. Please attach
a separate sheet if more space is needed.
Due to the limited amount of area impacted no mitigation is,proposed
2. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (NCEEP). Please note it is the applicant's responsibility to contact the NCEEP at
[phone] to determine availability, and written approval from the NCEEP indicating
that they are will to accept payment for the mitigation must be attached to this form. For
additional information regarding the application process for the NCEEP, check the NCEEP
website at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/wrp/index.htm. If use of the NCEEP is proposed, please
check the appropriate box on page five and provide the following information:
Amount of stream mitigation requested (linear feet): N/A
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet}: N/A
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
Amount ofNon-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
IX. Environmental Documentation (required by DWQ)
1. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the use of
public (federal/state) land? Yes ® No ^
2. If yes, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the
requirements of the National or North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
Note: If you are not sure whether a NEPAISEPA document is required, call the SEPA
coordinator at [phone] to review current thresholds for environmental documentation.
Yes ® No ^
3. If yes, has the document review been finalized by the State Clearinghouse? If so, please
attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval letter. Yes ® No ^
Page 6 of 8

X. Proposed Impacts on Riparian and Watershed Buffers (required by DWQ)
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
required state and local buffers associated with the project. The applicant must also provide
justification for these impacts in Section VII above. All proposed impacts must be listed herein,
and must be clearly identifiable on the accompanying site plan. All buffers must be shown on a
map, whether or not impacts are proposed to the buffers. Correspondence from the DWQ
Regional Office may be included as appropriate. Photographs may also be included at the
applicant's discretion.
1. Will the project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233
(Neuse), 15A NCAC 2B .0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 02B .0243 (Catawba) 15A NCAC
2B .0250 (Randleman Rules and Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please
identify )? Yes ® No ^
2. If "yes", identify the square feet and acreage of impact to each zone of the riparian buffers.
If buffer mitigation is required calculate the required amount of mitigation by applying the
buffer multipliers.
Zone* Impact
s uare feet Multiplier Required
Miti ation
1 2,386 3 (2 for Catawba) None
2 2,260 1.5 None
Total 4,646 None
XI.
XII.
* Zone 1 extends out 30 feet perpendicular from the top of the near bank of channel; Zone 2 extends an
additional 20 feet from the edge of Zone 1.
3. If buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e.,
Donation of Property, Riparian Buffer Restoration /Enhancement, or Payment into the
Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as identified
within 15A NCAC 2B .0242 or .0244, or .0260.
Stormwater (required by DWQ)
Describe impervious acreage (existing and proposed) versus total acreage on the site. Discuss
stormwater controls proposed in order to protect surface waters and wetlands downstream from
the property. If percent impervious surface exceeds 20%, please provide calculations
demonstrating total proposed impervious level.Impervious acreage will not appreciably increase
as a result of the bridge construction.
Sewage Disposal (required by DWQ)
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of
wastewater generated from the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
No wastewater will be generated from the implementation of the proposed project.
Page 7 of 8

XIII. Violations (required by DWQ)
Is this site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (1 SA NCAC 2II .0500) or any Buffer Rules?
Yes ^ No
Is this an after-the-fact permit application? Yes ^ No
XIV. Cumulative Impacts (required by DWQ)
Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in additional
development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality? Yes ^ No
If yes, please submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with
the most recent North Carolina Division of Water Quality policy posted on our website at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands. If no, please provide a short narrative description:
N/A
XV. Other Circumstances (Optional):
It is the applicant's responsibility to submit the application sufficiently in advance of desired
construction dates to allow processing time for these permits. However, an applicant may
choose to list constraints associated with construction or sequencing that may impose limits on
work schedules (e.g., draw-down schedules for lakes, dates associated with Endangered and
Threatened Species, accessibility problems, or other issues outside of the applicant's control).
f.
Z~v~
Applicant/Agent's Signature Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)
Page 8 of 8

GUIDELINES FOR RECREATIONAL ACCESS AT CREEKS AND RIVERS
Public interest in recreational access along various creeks and rivers in North Carolina has been
increasing in recent years. The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) fully
acknowledges the value of recreational access but has not been given the mission to fund, provide, or
manage such facilities. The Department will lend support (as legal, design, and funding constraints
allow) by coordinating with other agencies that have been charged with such a mission.
In order to delineate more clearly how NCDOT will participate in providing recreational access,
NCDOT has developed the guidelines to direct the decision making process. These guidelines should
be used during the planning process. The decision regarding whether an access will be provided should
be made before the final planning document is completed so the access can be addressed within the
document.
if there is an existing publicly owned formal facility managed for recreational access (fishing,
canoeing, or otherwise), the Department will replace the facility as part of the project
construction. This is in accordance with the Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA)
Section 4(f) procedures.
1f there is an existingprivately owned formal facility managed for recreational access (fishing,
canoeing, or otherwise) NCDOT will address any project impacts to the facility through the
right of way acquisition process. NCDOT will not, however, replace impacted parts of the
facility as part of the project construction.
Tf formal access is desired where there is an informal recreational access (no formal facilities
but site is used to access fishing, canoeing, and otherwise) or no existing access at all, NCDOT
will include new access as part of the project construction under either of the following two
conditions:
1) If, in the judgement ofNCDOT, there is a strong transportation safety related need to
include an access then NCDOT will improve the location as appropriate to resolve the
safety concern. NCDOT will coordinate with local agencies on the long term management
of the site. A separate government agency must agree to provide the long term
maintenance and management of the site.
2) if all of the following five criteria is met, then NCDOT will as part of planning, design
and construction, include a recreational access facility:
- If there is a separate funding source outside of the North Carolina Department of
Transportation
- if there is a partnering government agency willing to maintain, fund, and manage the
site
- if there is a willing seller or provider of land needed for the facility
- if there are not unacceptable impacts associated with developing the new recreational
access facility (wetland impacts for example)
- if the adjacent property owners and the majority of the public comments favor the
addition of the recreational access facility
Any project constructed by NCDOT will be consistent with the Americans with Disabilities Act
(ADA). Any exceptions to the guidelines will require the approval of the NCDOT State Highway
Administrator and the FHWA Division Administrator.

55
i_

70
1243\
]I!3
SD~e~Tj R~~~ ~~ Hymans 1243
t005
/ \
~'~,
NOT TO SCALE
DETOUR ROUTE
~~CIl~TI~~
r~~~~
;~;
DIVISION ~ OF` HIGHWAYS---~-• ",~.,; ;
CRAVEN COUNTY ~~ i s
~,
PROJECT:33~1.~_ (~-~ .~ L
REPL.A~EM~NT OF , BR~II~S~iL~--~lx
ON SR 1005.4VFR BA,GH$$C~~~
SHEET 1 OF 5
1/31/05
Permit Drawing . _
NORTH SAROLII~!,"-,

~~~~~~~ ~~~~LV
-WLB°-~ WETLAND BOUNDARY ~ PROPOSED BRIDGE
WETLAND PROPOSED BOX CULVERT
L
® DENOTES FILL [N
WETLAND PROPOSED PIPE CULVERT
® DENOTES FILL IN
SURFACE WATER
® DENOTES FILL IN
SURFACE WATER
(POND)
®DENOTES TEMPORARY
FILL IN WETLAND
®DENOTES EXCAVATION
IN WETLAND
® DENOTES TEMPORARY
FILL IN SURFACE
WATER
• DENOTES MECHANIZED
•~ ~~ • ~ ^ CLEARING
~ FLOW DIRECTION
~~ TOP OF BANK
---• WE EDGE OF WATER
_ . ~- -PROP. LIMIT OF CUT
- - -F -PROP. LIMIT OF FILL
~- PROP. RIGHT OF WAY
- - NG- - NATURAL GROUND
- -Pl - PROPERTY LINE
-TDE- TEMP. DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
-PDE- PERMANENT DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
- EAB- • EXIST. ENDANGERED
ANIMAL BOUNDARY
- EPB-' E PILANT BOUNDAR ~
- -~ - - -WATER SURFACE
Xx XXX x z LIVE STAKES
BOULDER
--- COIR FIBER ROLLS
LEVEL SPREADER (LS)
DITCH /
GRASS SWALE
1V ~lU~~~
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
CRAVEN COUNTY
PROJECT:334~~1.1.2 (B-085)
REPLACEMENT OF BRIDGE ~Y1R
ON SR 1005 OVER BACHELOR CREEg
SHEET 2 OF 5
1/31/QS
12'-48'
(DASHED LINES DENOTE PIPES
EXISTNG STRUCTURES) 54' PIPES
& ABOVE
S[NGLE TREE
.. .. .. .. WOODS LINE

DRA[NAGE INLET
ROOTWAD
RIP RAP
5 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER
OR PARCEL NUMBER
IF AVAILABLE
PREFORMED SCOUR HOLE

f+ernntt Drawing ~

to+oo
EXISTING
~ GRADE
11 + 00
PROPOSED
~ GRADE -
12 +oo
NG LT. f-~'-~ -
NG RT.~------------ - I I I
-- __-_- -___---` -------------- - I I... I
I ~I
I / I
I I I / I
TYP>S II RIP-RAP I I \\ I ~ I
I I J' I
-5 I I I I
~ ~ I I
~~®~~~~'
scµ.E~ r_ so• r+oeiz.
r= b• vERT.
13+00
14+oa
2
PROPOSE
~ GRAD`
EXISTING
CL GRADE
------------ -T~
_ -~
NG RT.
'~G LT. 5
~- WS EL.= 7.4'
01/06/04
~~~®~
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
CRAVEN COUNTY
PROJECT:3344~.1.1.2 (B-4085)
REPLACEMENT OF BRIDGE X212
ON SR 1005 OVER BACHELOR CREEg
SHEET
,~„~~ 10 / 16 / Oll
.,....

PIS®PERTY ®WI~TERS
NAME5 AND ADDRESSES
PARCEL NO.
NAMES
ADDRESSES
O
O
O
INT~REAL T1~NA~~P :PER
MONTA HUMPHREY BETTS
JAMES C. HUMPHREY. et ux
g65 John L Req I R
Riegelwood. SIC ~84~~
aF~deigh. N~ur 2~613r~
607 MI. Nilson Creep Qr.
New Bern. NC 28562
O
INTItEAL T~fN C~RP.PER
R1 gewood~ Ceg2845~
~~

WETLAND PERMIT IMPACT SUMMARY
WETLAND IMPACTS SURFACE WATER IMPACTS

Site
No.

Station
(FromfTo)

Structure
Size /Type
Permanent
Fillln
Wetlands
ac
Temp.
Fillln
Wetlands
ac
Excavation
in
Wetlands
ac
Mechanized
Clearing
in Wetlands
(ac) Hand
Clearing
in
Wetlands
(ac
Permanent
SW
impacts
(ac
Temp.
SW
impacts
ac Existing
Channel
Impacts
Permanent
ft Existing
Channel
Impacts
Temp.
ft)
Natural
Stream
Design
ft
1 8+39 -L- TO Bride 0.090 0.090
13+64 -L- LT

TOTALS: 0.090 0.090
Ravisetl &31/05
P+srmlt Drawing
Sliest ~ of '7

.Y • SU7t s
.Y s y~1
•!`" s ~a
a.w
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Michael F. Easley, Governor Division of Histo '
Lisbeth C. Evans, Secretary David L. S. -gctor~
Jeffrey J. Crow, Deputy Secretary ~ `'~~ _
Office of Archives and History ~C/ '
c
~ e o
March 5, 2004 ~ `L~~' d
i., f-
MEMORANDUM ~~. ~~ ,~. ~q<
TO: Greg Thorpe, Ph.D., Director ~, ; . , ~ _ . ~ ~~
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch ~``E:;;'~' ~: ~;z~~.~~
NCDOT Division of Highw\s ~" T
)) '~, ~I`
FROM: Da~~id Brook tom. ~~ %~Y ~~~ =- `~'~-~`t-
J
SUBJECT: Replace Bridge No. 212 on SR 1005 over Bachelor Creek, B-4085,
Craven County, ER03-0928 '
Thank you for your letter of December 30, 2003, concerning the above project.
We have reviewed the additional research you provided in your letter concerning the eligibility
of Bridge No. 212 over Bachelor Creek.
For purposes of compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, we
concur that the following structure is not eligible for the National Register of Historic Places:
Bridge No. 212 on SR 1005 over Bachelor Creek is not eligible for the
National Register because it is not one among the state's technologically
significant examples of the continuous stringer bridge types.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with
Section 106 codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the
above comment, contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review coordinator, at
9]9/733-4763. In all future communication concerning this project, please cite the above
referenced tracking number.
cc: Mary Pope Furr, NCDOT
Matt Wilkerson, NCDOT
w~wrv.hpo.dcrstate.aaos
L,ocatioo Mailing Address Telephooe/Fa:
ADMIIYLSTRATION S07 N. Blount St, Raleigh, NC 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-4617 (919) 7334763.733-8653
RESTORATION 515 N. Blount St, Raleigh, NC 4617 Mail Service Ceruu, Raleigh, NC 27699-4617 [phone].715-4801
SURVEY Qc PI,ANNIlVG 515 N. Blount St, Raleigh, NC 4617 Mail Servics Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-4617 [phone].715-4801

J ~
. ~~~
~~
.~~~~.~
~N~DElV~
North Caroiin~. Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Marine Fisheries
Pllichael F. Easley: Governor
William G. Ross. Jr., Secretary
MEMORANDUM
TO: William T. Goodwin, Jr., PE
NCDOT
Bridge Replacement Planning Unit
FROM: Mike Street . = "

DATE: July 8, 2003
SUBJECT: Bridge Replacement for: # B-4168, # B-4088, # B-4085
Preston P. Pate, Jr., Director
Attached is the Divisions' reply for the above referenced project. If you have any
questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. .
MS/sw
~4~ ~ .:: ~..•:.e!, ~:. -. _. ~_; -;,•?. "crehead City: North Carolina 28557
Fncre: %~~-~ co--~?; : =;'~. ?',?-'~7-5?2i 1 Internet:.ti~s.~J . ncdmf .net
An i=dual Qppor ;;r:iiy ~ ;frinnativa ~,~a~cr ~mc;oyer- 50% Recycled i 1C°'o Post Consumer Paper

~ Z
NATURAL SYSTEMS REPORT
Replacement of Bridge No. 212
SR 1005 (Old US Highway 70 West) over Bachelor Creek
Craven County, North Carolina
(B-4085)
(State Project No. 8.2171201)
(Federal Aid No. BRSTP-1005[7])
Prepared for:
The North Carolina Department of Transportation
Raleigh, North Carolina
March 2003

ti
NATURAL SYSTIrMS REPf?RT
Replacement of E3ridge No. 212
SR 1005 (Old US Highway 70 West) over Bachelor Creek
Craven County, North Carolina
(B-4085)
(State Project No. 8.2171201)
(Federal Aid No. BRSTP-1005[7])
Prepared for:
The North Carolina Department of Transportation
Raleigh, North Carolina
Prepared by:

EcoScience
EcoScience Corporation
1101 Haynes Street, Suite 101
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Tel [phone] Fax [phone]
January 2003

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Proposed replacement of Bridge No. 212 at SFt 1005 (Old US Highway 70 West) over
Bachelor Creek, Craven County, North Carolina, TIP No. B-4085.
INTRODUCTION
The project proposes replacement of Bridge No. 212 on SR 1005 (Old US Highway 70
West) over Bachelor Creek and associated floodplain. The project area is approximately 30.2
acres (12.2 hectares) in size, and includes the channel, banks, and associated floodplain
swamps of Bachelor Creek. Land use consists of undeveloped forested land, disturbed land,
and sparse rural residential and commercial development. The project area is within the Lower
Coastal Plain physiographic province, approximately 5.0 to 25.0 feet (1.5 to 7.6 meters) above
mean sea level. Approximately 14.4 acres (5.8 hectares) (38 percent) of the project area is
underlain by hydric soils, consisting of Masontown mucky fine sandy loam and Muckalee sandy
loam, frequently flooded, and Tomotley fine sandy loam.
PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
Water Resources
The project area is located within sub-basin 03-04-08 of the Neuse River Basin (DWQ
2002a). This area is part of USGS Hydrologic Unit 03020202 of the South Atlantic/Gulf Region.
The structure targeted for replacement spans Bachelor Creek and the Bachelor Creek
floodplain. This section of Bachelor Creek has been assigned Stream Index Number 27-98 by
the N.C. Division of Water Quality (DWQ 2002b).
The Best Usage Classification for Bachelor Creek is C Sw NSW (DWQ 2002b). No
Watershed Critical Areas or water resources classified as High Quality Waters, Water Supplies
(WS-I or WS-II), or Outstanding Resource Waters are located within 1.0 mile (1.6 kilometers) of
the project area. No §303(d) listed streams exist in or within 5 miles (8 kilometers) of the project
area.
Biotic Resources
Five distinct plant communities were identified within the project area: Mesic Mixed
Hardwood Forest (Coastal Plain Subtype), shrub/scrub assemblage, Coastal Plain Bottomland
Hardwoods (Blackwater Subtype), disturbed/maintained land, and Cypress-Gum Swamp
(Blackwater Subtype). A summary of plant community areas is presented in the following table.
1

r
Plant community coverage within the project area. Coverage is given in acres, with hectares in
arenthc~ses~ v~
Plant Community Ared
Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest (Coastal Plain Subtype) 8.2 (3.3)
Shrub/scrub assemblage 5.8 (2.3)
Coastal Plain Bottomland Hardwoods (Blackwater Subtype) 5.5 (2.2)
Disturbed/maintained land 5.7 (2.3)
Cypress-Gum Swamp (Blackwater Subtype) ~ 2.5 (1.0)
JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS
Surface Waters and Wetlands
Bachelor Creek is considered jurisdictional surface waters under Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act. The replacement bridge will span Bachelor Creek. No impacts to surface
waters are anticipated. Based on field investigations, the project area also contains
jurisdictional wetlands., Areas of these systems within the project area are summarized in the
following table. Coverage is given in acres, with hectares in parentheses.
Cowardin Classification Area DWQ Rating
PFO1 A (Coastal Plain Bottomland Hardwoods, Blackwater Subtype) 1.8 (0.7) 60
PFO1 C (Coastal Plain Bottomland Hardwoods, Blackwater Subtype) 3.0 (1.2) 60
PFO6C (Coastal Plain Bottomland Hardwoods, Blackwater Subtype) 1.3 (0.5) 60
PFO6F (Cypress-Gum Swamp, Blackwater Subtype) 0.9 (0.4) 71
PSS1/3C (Scrub-shrub assemblage) 0.3 (0.1) 27
Total 8.3 (3.3)
In addition to vegetated wetlands, there are 860 feet (262 meters) and 1.0 acre (0.4
hectare) of Neuse River riparian buffer within the project area. Of this acreage, 0.6 acre (0.2
hectare) is in Zone 1 and 0.4 acre (0.2 hectare) is in Zone 2.
During project construction, Bridge No. 212 will be dismantled without dropping portions
of the structure into Bachelor Creek. Therefore, no temporary fill from bridge demolition is
expected to be placed in waters of the United States. As this reach of Bachelor Creek is in the
Coastal Plain, and has potential as a travel corridor and breeding area for migratory fish, this
project can be classified as Case 2, where in-water work will be avoided during moratorium
periods (February 15 through June 15) associated with fish migration, spawning, and nursery
areas.
To minimize fishing and non-fishing activities that adversely affect marine fisheries,
areas of Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) afford limited protection under the Magnuson-Stevens Act
2

of 1996 (16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.). EFH has been broadly defined by congress as "those waters
and substrate necessary to fish for spawning, breeding, feeding, or growth to maturity." Fishing
and non-fishing related activities that can adversely affect fisheries include fishing gear,
dredging, filling, agricultural and urban runoff, and point-source pollution discharge. No marine,
estuarine, or tidally influenced waters are located within the project region. Based on the latest
directive from the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS 2000), the nearest designated EFH
is associated with tidal waters of the Neuse River, approximately 12.7 river miles (20.4 river
kilometers) downstream of the project area.
Permits
The project area may contain Public Trust Waters AECs. If replacement of the bridge
avoids impacts to AECs, the DCM will review the permit application for CAMA consistency. If
an AEC is proposed to be impacted, a CAMA Major Permit or General Permit for bridge
replacement (15A NCAC 07H.2300) may be applicable.
This project may be processed as a Categorical Exclusion (CE) under Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) guidelines. The USACE has made available Nationwide Permit (NWP)
No. 23 (67 FR 2020, 2082; January 15, 2002) for CEs due to minimal impacts to waters of the
U.S. expected with bridge construction. DWQ has made available a General 401 Water Quality
Certification for NWP No. 23 (GC 3361). However, authorization for jurisdictional area impacts
through use of this permit will require written notice to DWQ. If temporary construction is
required that is not described in the CE, a NWP No. 33, for temporary construction, access, and
dewatering (67 FR 2020, 2084; January 15, 2002) and associated DWQ General Water duality
Certification (GC 3366) may required. In the event that NWP No. 23 will not suffice, impacts
attributed to bridge replacement and associated approach improvements may qualify under
General Bridge Permit (GP) 031 issued by the Wilmington USACE District. DWQ has made
available a General 401 Water Quality Certification for GP 031 (GP 3375). Notification to the
USACE Wilmington district office is required if this general permit is utilized. The USACE may
exert discretionary authority and require an Individual Permit if avoidance and minimization have
not been adequately addressed, or if mitigation is inadequate (assuming .mitigation may be
required).
The Neuse River Basin Rule applies to 50-foot (15-meter) wide riparian buffers directly
adjacent to surface waters of the Neuse River Basin. Neuse Buffer Certification will be needed
in addition to a USACE permit and DWQ Water Quality Certification. .
Federally Protected Species
Species with the federal classification of Endangered, Threatened, or officially Proposed
for such listing are protected under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended
(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). One federally protected species is listed for Craven County (May 31,
2002 FWS list), and is presented in the following table.
3

~ ~
Common Name Scientific Name ~ Status
American alligator Alligator missisippiensis T(S/A)`
Bald eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus T
Leatherback sea turtle Dermochelys coriacea E
West Indian manatee Trichechus manatus E
Red-cockaded woodpecker Picoides borealis E
Sensitive iointvetch** Aeschynomene virginica _ T
* Threatened due to Similarity of Appearance: resembles in appearance a threatened species that enforcement
personnel would have substantial difficulty in differentiating between the listed and unlisted species. The American
alligator has this designation due to similarity of appearance to other rare crocodilians.
'`` Historic record -last seen within Craven County more than 20 years ago.
Alligator missisippiensis (American alligator)
T S/A species are not subject to Section 7 consultation and a biological conclusion is not
required. However, this project is not expected to affect the American alligator.
Haliaeetus leucocephalus (Bald eagle)
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: MAY AFFECT, NOT LIKELY TO ADVERSELY AFFECT
Potential habitat for bald exists within the project area. The open water swamp of this section of
Bachelor Creek contains numerous emergent bald cypress, gum and green ash suitable for
perching. Areas of open water for foraging are also present. No bald eagles were observed
during the site visit. The nearest NHP record of a bald eagle is approximately 9.0 miles (14.5
kilometers) southeast, at Brice Creek near the Trent River. No tong-term impact to bald eagle is
anticipated as a result of this project.
Dermochelys coriacea (Leatherback sea turtle)
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION:
NO EFFECT
Bachelor Creek, in the project area, is anon-tidal, freshwater stream. Therefore, no habitat for
Leatherback sea turtle exists in or near the project area. No Leatherback sea turtles were
observed during the site visit, and NHP documents no Leatherback sea turtle occurrences within
5.0 miles (8.0 kilometers) of the project area.
Trichechus manatus (West Indian manatee)
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION:
NO EFFECT
Potential habitat for West Indian manatee does not exist within or near the project area. The
dimensions of the Bachelor Creek channel preclude access for an animal as large as a
4

t
manatee. In these upstream reaches of the stream, obstacles such as beaver dams, logjams
and point bars obstruct the movement of larger aquatic mammals. No West Indian manatees
were observed during the site visit. The nearest NHP record of the West Indian manatee is
approximately 8.0 miles (12.9 kilometers) southeast, at the mouth of the Trent River.
Picoides borealis (Red-cockaded woodpecker)
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: MAY AFFECT, NOT LIKELY TO ADVERSELY AFFECT
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION:A few mature loblolly pine trees exist within the project area and
adjacent areas. However, the trees are widely spaced and occur in scattered locations. The
clustered arrangement of pine trees preferred by the birds for nesting colonies is not provided in
the project vicinity. In addition, dense shrub and understory layers occur under large areas of
bottomland and mesic mixed forest. The use of scattered pines for foraging sites would depend
on the birds' crossing large tracts (greater than 300 feet [91 meters] wide) of roadways,
agricultural fields, and brushy woods. Therefore, the project area contains no suitable habitat
for red-cockaded woodpecker nesting, roosting, or foraging. No occurrence of red-cockaded
woodpecker is documented by the NHP within 5.0 miles (8.0 kilometers) of the project area. No
red-cockaded woodpeckers were observed during the site visit.
Aeschynomene virginica (Sensitive jointvetch)
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION:
NO EFFECT
The project area is well upstream of any tidal influence. In addition, disturbed open areas with
little herbaceous competition are not found within the project area. Most shoreline and open
areas are colonized by tearthumb, marsh pennywort, and soft rush, as well as other grasses
and rushes. Therefore, suitable habitat for sensitive jointvetch does not exist within the project
area. The nearest NHP records for sensitive jointvetch are approximately 8.5 miles (13.7
kilometers) southeast, near James City. However, this species has not been recorded in
Craven County in over 20 years. No individuals of sensitive jointvetch were observed during the
site visit.
CONCLUSIONS
The project area contains 8.3 acres (3.3 hectares) of jurisdictional areas that could potentially
be impacted by the proposed project. Permits potentially be required for this project are a
CAMA Major Permit or General Permit for bridge replacement (15A NCAC 07H.2300), NWP No.
23 and No. 33 along with their corresponding Section 401 Water Quality Certifications. Neuse
Buffer Certification will also be needed in addition to a USACE permit and DWQ Water Quality
Certification.
5

Cypress-Gum Swamp, a High Quality Resource, occurs within the project area. The
National Marine Fisheries will be consulted as to the timing of construction activities to minimize
impacts to fisheries resources.
Construction of a replacement bridge within the footprint of the existing Bridge No. 212 is
recommended to minimize impacts to wetlands, plant communities, and fisheries resources.
6

r
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Pape
1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Project Description ....................................................... ............... 1
.............................
1.2 Purpose :................................................................................................................... 1
1.4 Qualifications ............................................................................. .......................:...4
1.5 Definitions of Area Terminology ................................................................................ 5
2.0 PHYSICAL RESOURCES ................................................................................................... 5
2.1 Physiography and Soils ............................................................................................ 5
2.2 Water Resources ...................................................................................................... 6
3.0 BIOTIC RESOURCES ......................................................................................................... 9
3.1 Terrestrial Communities ............................................................................................ 9
3.1.1 Vegetation Communities ..................................................................................... 9
3.1.2 Faunal Communities ............................................................................:............ 11
3.2 Aquatic Communities .............................................................................................. 12
3.3 Summary of Anticipated Impacts ............................................................................ 13
4.0 JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS .....................................'............:............................................. 14
4.1 Waters of the United States .................................................................................... 14
4.2 CAMA Areas of Environmental Concern ................................................................. 16
4.3 Permit Issues .......................................................................................................... 16
4.3.1 Permits ..............................................................................................................16
4.3.2 Mitigation .........................:................................................................................. 16
4.4 Protected Species .................................................................................................. 18
5.0 REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................24
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Plant community coverage within the project area ...................................................... 13
Table 2: Wetland areas within the project area ......................................................................... 15
Table 3. Federally Protected Species listed for Craven County ...............................................18
Table 4. Federal Species of Concern listed for Craven County ............................................... 23
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Location ...................................................................................................................... 2
Figure 2: Plant Communities ...................................................................................................... 3

Replacement of Bridge No. 212
SR 1005 (Old EJS Highway 70 West) over Bachelor Creek
Craven County, Nortl~~ Carolina
(8-4085)
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Project Description
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes replacement of Bridge
No. 212 on SR 1005 (Old US Highway 70 West) over Bachelor Creek and the associated
floodplain (Figure 1). Bridge No. 212 spans Bachelor Creek and adjacent banks for a distance
of approximately 82.0 feet (25.0 meters). The existing roadway is approximately 28.0 feet (8.5
meters) wide with a total, maintained right-of-way width of approximately 52.0 feet (15.8 meters)
(Figure 2).
The project area is located at the crossing of SR 1005 (Old US Highway 70 West) over Bachelor
Creek approximately 7 miles (11 kilometers) northwest of downtown New Bern, NC (Figure 1).
Included within the project area are Bachelor Creek,, the associated floodplain, and adjacent
terraces. Also included is a railroad track that parallels SR 1005 approximately 55 feet (16.8
meters) to the south.
Bridge No. 212 was built in 1937 of timber piles and caps, with a superstructure of continuous I-
beams. The NCDOT project engineer will complete bridge materials and fill data at a later time.
During project construction, Bridge No. 212 will be dismantled without dropping portions of the
structure into Bachelor Creek. Therefore, no temporary fill from bridge demolition is expected to
be placed in waters of the United States. NCDOT will coordinate with various resource
agencies during project planning to ensure that all concerns regarding bridge demolition are
resolved.
1.2 Purpose
The purpose of this study is to provide an evaluation of biological resources in the project area.
Specific tasks performed for this study include 1) an assessment of biological features within the
project area including descriptions of vegetation, wildlife, protected species, jurisdictional
wetlands, and water quality, 2) a delineation of Section 404 jurisdictional areas and subsequent
survey of jurisdictional boundaries (utilizing Trimble XRS Differential Global Positioning System
technology), 3) an evaluation of plant communities and their areas within the project area, and
4) a preliminary determination of permit needs.
1

7

w :~ w r"L• - ~a •~ •
L
.
~r ~~ A i' ~'~ -'~
~ uaa
~
~ ~
,
r
~~~jj
("J9 K7 ~~(~ ~`` ~~ f
v
r
' • j
~
,.~ :-
.~
_

,
'
~
4~ jam- ~
=~
~ ~•
\
11lt
\_ _~_ '~

,
w ,
,.o
- ~,eo ~ ~_

• 20 ~
~
1
~ 2
••__
~'~26 '• 19
Y X

'~. 1 ~
,Op'f -~ 16if

r
~-
44 :
- p
y..
~ _:
;
~
i
'.t.
(• .•
~
A
1 ~
--~,
`, I
,s,s
•.. s
124' ''
~'~ ~ ~ ~~
• _ _ r ~ _ 34

a` ~
~ ..YS ~ ~
.
f'
••` '~
r i ~U ` ~ ~
~.
.m _- J
__ ., . ~ i
11
%'~- ~ r~r ~e
ro- a
P70 =~
• , .
~
,
~ ~

-_` ~ 3
~ ~ 2 r-_ ~
~
0
~ i
-

CNpV M i
•~• ~ ~ _ ~ `__
~~ ~~ •\
~`

69 i '-~

° ~ ~ i .ri
~ °' ~ ~ vw~,
P45

40 P193 ~ a •. .rw .eo

-
, `
L -
TREtR ,.
i `
` -
•
C O U N T Y ~~
~d ~OR~
C~ NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION

.~
~ DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT 8t
~
\
a Tp-.~~" ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS BRANCH
CRAVEN COUNTY
REPLACE BRIDGE N0.212 ON SR 1005
OVER BACIlELOR CREEK
B-4085

Figure 1

Materials-and literature supporting -this investigation have been derived from a number of
sourcesincluding U.S. Geological Survey (USG.S) topographic-mapping (Jasper, NC 7.5 minute
quadrangle)., U.S: Fish and Wildlife Service (FINS) National.lNetlands Inventory(NWI) mapping
(Jasper; NC 7.5 minute quadrangle), NC Division of Coastal Management (DCM) wetlands
mapping, Naturaf Resources Conservation Service ~(NRCS;::formerly the. Soils Conservation
Service) soils mapping (SCS 1989), and- recent aerial photography (scale 1:200) furnished by
NCDOT.
The most current FWS listing of federally protected species with ranges extending into Craven
County. (February 11, 2003 FV11S list) was addressed in this report: In addition, NHP records
documenting the .Presence of federally or . state listed species were consulted before
commencing field investigations. significant Aquatic Endangered Species Habitats proposed by
the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC; June 13, 1995 listing) were consulted
to determine the presence of Proposed Critical Habitats for aquatic species.
Plant community descriptions -are based on a classification system.. utilized by N.C. Naturaf
Heritage Program (NHP) (Schafale and Weakley 19:90), When appropriate, community
classifications were modified. to better Feflect field abservation5; Vascular ,plant names follow
nomenclature found. in Radford `et al.:(~~968)` wi#h .ad}'ustmerits for updated norraanclature
(Kartesz .'1998). .Jurisdictional areas were. evaluated using the .three-parame#er approach
following iJ.S. Army. ,Corps of Engineers (USAGE) delineation guidelines (DOA; 1987).
Jurisdictional areas wEre characterized according to a classification scheme established by
Cowardin et al. (1979). Aquatic' and terrestrial wildlife habitat requirements and distributions
ware determined by supportive' literature (Martof et al. 1980, Potter et al. 1980, Webster et al.
1985,, Menhinick 1991, Hamel 1992,. Palmer and Braswell 1995, and Rohde et a/...1994).. Water
quality iriforrnation for area strearns .and tributaries was- derived from avai{able sources (DWQ
2002x, 2002b). Quantitative sampling was not undertaken to support existing data.:: -
__ .The'projeet area...was-walked and vis~alty su-veyed #or-significant #eatures: For purposes of this _-
evaluation, the. project area has been delineated by the NCDOT (Figure 2), Special concerns
. evaluated in the field include 1) potential. protected species habitat and 2) wetlands and water
quality protec#ion in Bachelor Creek.
1.4 Qualifications
The field: work for this .investigation.. was. conducted. on December 1.8,.2002 by feoScience
Corporation biologists Elizabeth.;Schemer and. Sandy Smith. Ms. Scheirer is a Project Scientist
with 5 years, ofi experience in the environmentat field. She -holds an M.S. in forestry from North
Carolina State University, :with .minors in botany and ecology. Her. research involved the
restoration of :farmed wetlands on the North Carolina Coastal :Plain, with emphasis on 'the
influence of microtopography on hydrology and plant communities. At Tall Timbers Research
4

i
i `~
Station- in Tallahassee, FL; she designed. Arid implemented a :study. of rsd-cockaded
woodpecker habitats in the Apalachicola National Forest. ~ F~rofessional expertise includes
wetland .and jurisdictional -area delineations, .plant and wild{ife identification anc community
mapping, plant community-parameter analysis, protected species surveys; .and environmental
documentpreparation. ~ :
Mr. Smith is a Senior .Scientist with 14 years of .experience: in the environmental field. Mr. Smith
has a bachelor's degree in bio%gy firom Davidson :College: and 'a :aster`s :degree in
marine/cpastal biology from the University of Norttr Carolina at Wilmington, He has conducted
field- research and species inventories involving seabirds, shorebirds, colonial waterbirds,
songbirds, small. mammals; reptiles, amphibians,. freshwater and estuarine fish, and benthic
invertebrates. Professional expertise includes jurisdictional: area delineations, stream and
riparian buffer determinations, -plant and wildlife identification and rornmunity:.mapping,
protected species surveys, environmental permitting, and~environrnental document. preparation.
1.5 Definitions of Area Terminology
The pro1ect area boundary (Figure 2) has been delineated by the NCDOT; and encompasses
approximately 30,2. acres (12;2 hectares).. The protect tarea is gene. rally Linear, and ::follows SR
1 X05 : along; ~a ~~tst-soutl?~st ;,~~i~antatidri fpr ~ d+'st~rt~e Qf felt (gam rne~~: 'sta. -
wi(ith ~o# die :+~j~ao~ a~ is aprpro`xi+~ately ~9© fae~ (~.r~ete~) fi project i~ty~ts ~e airea
within 0 5 mite (0,8 kilometer) of he project area, and the prefect region is the area included In a
7.5 minute .ll~GS quadrangle map with the project area as the center;:.
2.0 PHYSICAL RESOURCES
2.1 Physiography and Soils
~'he project area is located within: a:Jeve1', wide ffoodplan galley with a gently Moping western
valleywall- and s slightly steeper eastern valley wall .~levatiEanair~_;ttis project ergo range from a _ .. _._.
high-of approxima#ely 25 feet (? 8 meters) National Qaodetic Ver#ic~l I~a#um (NOD), or}'-the
ends of the project area .and along t#~e roadway, to a low of approxirtaa#ely 5.feet (1:5 mQter~s)
NGVD wlthirt the -stream channel. Land use within :and Heal the prt~ject `area -+c~nsrsts of
woodlands, swamps, -agricultural fiields, and rural:residential and cotnmetcial lots.
- The projeG# area is underlain by the Lower Coastal, Plain Wic:ornic~o and Talbot System soil.
..region: rn than Coastal Plain: physio~rapl~ic province of ~tortkt ~aro~e, _ the ~up}at-d surf~c~ -ln ,
:, .
the. t=ower Coastal,Plain have tress local relief, are wider, artcf ~ha~e Tntg_~r'are~s Hof potxly d
;very poorly;drained soils than the A`Atdele ;and Upper Coastal W#ai~ tegions. ~ At tl*re: I.awer
Coastal Plan ,t~oundary (thy Surry scarp), -clay rnineratogy changes ffaorn i~ae}Init~c to a- mixed
mineralogy; rf~th mare than 1'0 peFCent expanding :day minerals. Marine . sed,'me~ts are
5

dominant, resulting in fine- and ec~arse-loamy, siliceous soils on the Wicom'ico and Talbot plains
(Daniels. et al. 1999).
Based on soil mapping for Graven County (ACS .1989), the project aGea is underlain by three
soil series: -Masontown mucky -fine sandy loam and Muckalee sandy loam, frequently flooded
(Cumulic Humaquepts and. Typic Fluvaquents), Tomotley fine sandy loam (Tj~picOclira~uults),
and Craven silt foam (Aquic Hap/udults): Within the project area, the Masontown-and Muckalee
series occurs .along- the river channel, Tomotley fine sandy loam is found on slopes and river
terraces, and Craven silt .loam is -found on uplands. ,The Masontown .and Muckalee and
Tomotley series are considered hydric soils in Craven County by the NRCS (NRCS 1997). In
total, approximately 38 percent (14.4 acres. [5:8 hectaresj) of the project area is underlain by
hydric sons.
The Masontown and. Muckalee series consists of poorly and-very poorly drained, moderately to
rapidly permeable :'soils on floodplains. The soils formed in moderately coarse textured
alluvium, and slopes are nearly level (0 to 2 percent). The seasonal high water table is
approximately 1.5 feet (0.5 meter) below the soil surface or higher.. These soils are subject to
frequent flooding of long duration. Acidity ranges from alkaline to strongly acid.
. The Torr~o~ley series consists of .poorly drained; mode~alely permeable soils on broad oafs ~d
in depressions in stream terraces along the. Neuse River:and its larger tributaries. This series
formed in moderately fine textured sediments. Slopes are pearly Jevel, from 0 to 2 percent, and
the seasonal high water table is at or near the -soil surface. Water ponds in the depressions for
brief periods. The soils are strongly to extremely acid.
The Graven series consists of moderately well drained; nearly level soils on low ridgesand side
slopes on ,uplands near drainageways: .The. soils are slowly -permeable, and formed in fine
textured sediments. Soil reactivity is strongly to extremely acid. The seasonal high water table
is 2 to 3 feet (0:6 to 0:9 meter) beneath the soil surface..
2.2 .Water. Resources .
The project area is located within sub-basin 03-04-08 of the 'Nauss River .Basin ,(DWQ 2002a)..
TFtis area is part of U:SGS Hydrologic lJnit 03020202 of the South AtlantclGulf Region. The
structure targeted for replacement spans Bachelor Creek and `Bachelor Creek floodplain. Tfiis
section of Bachelor Creek has been assigned Stream. Index Number 27-98 by the N.C. Division
of Water Quality (DWQ 2002b).
a At llie project-area, BacheJOr Creek is a poorly-defined, fourth-prder, perennJai str~earn with low
flow Doer a silt substrate. During field investigations, water.-level was.high, from approximatefy~8
inches (20 centimeters) .to 5 feel (1.5 meters) deep, and extensive areas~of the'ftoodplain were
inundated.. The river had apparently overtopped its. banks, and no clearly defined chi~nel was
visible.. At Bridge No. 21.2, Bachelor Creek is approximately 80 feel {24 meters): wide. The
6

floodplain of .Bachelor Creek slopes gently upwards from the water surface.. Water clarity was
. poor due to tannin staining, with visibility to 8 inches. (20 centimeters), and flow velocity was -low.
Classifications :are assigned to waters. of the State of North Carolina based on the existing or
con~temp(ated, best usage- of._ ~anous streams or :segments' of streams in the' basin: A Best.
4
lJsage Classification of C Syv `NSW `has been assigned to this reach. o#' Bachelor Creek. The
designation :C denotes waters `.are suitable.. for aquatic .life. propagation `and protection,
agriculture,: and secondary recreation: Secondary recreation includes wading, boating, and.
other uses. not involving human body .contact with waters on an organized or frequent basis.
The supplemental classification Sw denotes waters. which have low velocities and other natural
characteristics which are different from adjacent streams. The designation recognizes waters
that will naturally be mare acidic (have lower.. pH values) and -have lower~levels of dissolved
oxygen. NSW. denotes Nutrient.Sensitive Waters which require limitations on nutrient inputs.
All waters in the Neuse River Basin have this supplementary. classification. In general,
management strategies for point and non-point source pollution control require. no increase in
nutrients over: background levels. No designated High Quality Waters (HOW),. Outstanding
Resource Waters (ORW), Water Supply l (WS-I), or Water Supply ll'(WS-11) waters occur within
1.0 mile (1.6 kilometers) of the project area (DWQ 2002a). No .watershed Critical Area (CA)
occurs within `1.O mile (0.6 kilometer) of the project area.
The. Di~risron of Water. Quality (DWQ?)' (previot~s~r. ~knoviin as the Qivision of Environmental
Managerr~erit, Water Quality Section [DEWI]) has ini~a#ed a' whole-basin appcoa~. to water.
.. .
gdality management #or .the 1'7 : riper `basins within the state. tlllater q ftality for tl~e proposed
project area is .summarized in the Neuse Basinwide tyVater Quality `plan tl>tl1/Q 2002a):..Based.
on DWQ data,'Bachelor Creek is currently not given a UseSupport Rating of its Best Usage
Classrfcatican. Although DWQ maintains a Fish Tssue~Anal~isis, station approximately 4.0 `miles
(6.4 lcilometefs) downstream: an Bachelor creek, sand an Ambient 11Aonrtorinig Station near the
mouth of Bachelor Creek near Vllashngton Forks,; the river has not. been -assigned a
bioclassificafion based on this data: Biocriteria are currently being deve#oped to assess
. swampy streams. such as Bachelor Creek.. however, afl waters In the subbasin are;considered
-- ---_-- --- -impaired-on-an evaluatecttrasis because of fish consumption-aisories (bWQ 20th}: - : _ - - - ---- - .
:.Sub-basin 03-p4-08 of -the Neuse River Basin ,supports .three i~lationat` Pollutant Disc~large
~ltmination System permitted point source dischar9ers. Total' discharge is 3~:-4 million g#Ilons
::per day (4.22:6 million liters' per day). One major discharger (1Neyerhauser Never Bern Plant)
accounts-#or a total of 32.0 million gaflons-per day (121.1 million liters per ;day). This discharger
is 1oc~ted .on the Neuse River approxim~oly 4.8„ stream ;rmre"s (7:7 kilorxteters) ~upstrear~ of the
n'~outh of Bachelor .Creek. Three rrfin~r drscriarge~s aor~t foir 0.4 ri~l~n -gallc~s per day-(i :5
n~ilhdr liters per day) Tha rnrnof ttssc~argers ~ lie ~ sub~sin ~e ,boated Qn fhe Neese Giver
upstream of the i~©uth of Bachelor Creek, exoe~t #~n aye discharger approximately 0.3 stream
_mdes ,(0.5 kdorrneter) upstream of the project area on Bachel©r Creek.
7

r: + ~
Major non-point sources of pollution for Bachelor Creek and the lower Neuse River, Basin
include nutrient inputs from agricultural areas; confined animal operations, and urbanised areas.
~yuatic .habitat. degradation is al;~o exacerbatdd lay remaval of native riparian vegetation.
. Sedimentation and nutrient inputs .are- major .,problems .associated with ngn•point.;source
discfiarges and often resul# in algal. bloo(ns and elevated levels of fecal aoliform ~ bacteria. In
addition; oxygen-consainin~ wastes discharged into low- or' zero-flow streams, .`.such as
Bachelor Creek, result in `lowered levels of dissolved oxygen and poor habitat for aquatic
species. ~No part of Bachelor Creek is listed on the state's §303(d) lisf.
Temporary construction impacts due to erosion and sedimentation will be minimized through
implementation of a stringent erosion ,control schedule and the use of Best Management
Practices (BINIPs). The contractor will follow contract specifications pertaining to erosion control
measures as outlined in 23 CFR 650 Subpart B and Article-107-13 entitled "Confrol of Erosion,
'Siltation, and Pollution" (NCDOT, Specifications for Roads 'and Structures). .These measures
include the use of dikes, berms, silt basins, and other containment measures to control: runoff;
elimination of construction staging areas in floodplains. and .adjacent to waterways; re-seeding of
herbaceous cover on disturbed sites; management of chemicals (herbicides, pesticides, de-icing
compounds) with potential negative impacts on water quality; and avoidance of direct
discharges into steams by catch basins and roadside vegetation: Tall fescue is not'sttitable for
erosion controls along stream banks: .
The proposed bridge replacement will allow for continuation of :pre-project stream flows in
Bachelor Creek, thereby protecting the integrity of this waterway. Long-term impacts .resulting.
from :construction are :expected to be negligible.. In order to minimize impacts to .water
resources, NCDOT. Best Managecnen# :Practices (BMPs) for the Protection of Surfac+a~ Waters
will be strictly enforced during the entre.life of the project. Due to the composition of Bachelor
Creek streambed, sediment curtains should.`be utilized- to minimize potential wa#er .quality
degradation as a result of bridge replacement.
During project construction, Bridge No. 212 will be dismantled without dropping. portions of the
_.__- ____ _ _s#ructure into-Bachelor Creek --Therefore- no-tem ore #lll-from-bra e-dem€~httonts-e
p ry dg xPected to_ _ . _ .._. ...
be placed in waters of the, United States, NCDOT will coordinate. with various resource
. agencies during. project planning to ensure that all concerns regarding bridge demolition ~ are
resolved.
8

s . , ~. .~ -
3.n BIOTtC RESOURCfbS
3.1. Terrestrial Communities
3.1.1 Vegetation Communities. -
Five distinct plant communities were identified within he project areas Mesic Mixed Hardwood ~ .
Forest (Coastal Plain Subtypej, shrub/scrub. assemblage, Coastal Plain Bottomland Hardwoods
(Blackwater Subtype), disturbed/maintained land, and Cypress-Gum Swamp (Blackwater~
Subtype): Plant community descriptions are based on a classification. system utilized by N.C.
.Natural Heritage Program (NHP) (Schafale and, Weakley 1.990), ,where applicable.. These
communities are described -below in order of their dominance within the project area.
Mesc. Mixed Hardwood Forest (Coastal Plain Subtype) - Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest is
found at the ends of the project area, in the upper edges of the Bachelor Creek floodplain, and
also in divides between swampy. areas. According. to Schafale and Weskley (1990), this
community occurs on mesic upland .areas protected from- first Most of the large stands of
woodlands in the western half of the, project area have bean .logged within the previous 10
..years. In these areas, the canopy layer is fragmented,and the subcanopy and shrub #~yers are
well-devekxped `In the mature, woodlands of the easl$rn ;prtc~ec# area, tlie~'cancpy tatrar is will-
developed and fhe o#her layers are less dominant. This pfautt cdrnmunity is dominated by beech
(Fagus grandifora), and water oak (Quercus nigr'a) on the tower lopes, and grades into a larger
proportion of loblolly ,pine (Pious: ;feeds) and. hickory; ~Carya sp.) on ridges. Tulip poplar .
(Liriodendron ,tulipifera) and sweetgum (L.iquicilacrtGar styraCifltra) are also common. The
subcanopy and shrub layers contain flowering dogwood (Comus ~florida), American holly (.Ilex
opera), red maple (Acerrubrum); :sweetleaf (S'ynr-plocas flndoria), and glen#. cane- (Anundinaria
g~gantea). Vines include supplejack (Berchemia scarrarens), greenbrier (Sn7ilax rotundifalia),
and cross -vine (B. ignonia capreo/a#a). _ Herbs are scarce. under the closed canopy, but partridge
berry (Mifcheiia repens) and cranefly orchid (Tipularia di~seol©~j occur.
__
__ .__ . -5hryb~scrub assemblage =This plant community-occurs-m a strip between-SR ~'t)05 and the -
railroad track approximately 55 feet. (17 meters) to its south;. and also on the southern .edge of
the railroad right-of=way.. On the south edge of ~R ,1005, #his. community fors a #~our~dary
between distu~bed/mairitained land on the' roadway shoulder and the rrroce mature forested
plan# .commurtit~es: Shrub-scrub :assemblage may, tie descrilaed .as . n extension of. the.
surrounding plant comrnurii~es, which .are in are early stage of successwn. A Iatge component,
of weedy species is also introduced into the $hn~ ~amrriun,~ty. At the project area; n© canopy
layer Qceurs~ `in the shrub/scrub assemblage,, but., scattered srnatl irt~adualS of. en€~ efm
(Urines ame~ieana) lciblclly pate; red maple, ~d occur. ~s ars fairy diverse ire.
tfe :absence of a Canopy..cover, and include ~groundsel (f~cclt~is halimifoiia),. w,ax :myrtle
(R~lorella: cerii~era), ,gtac~t cane, black ~I~w (,fir .nom); buttonbus#~ . f~epn+al~rtt#us
oacrdentalts), and red ctroke=berry (Phor~nia ~~~). The yJrre-:~ompon~t~uu~ades Japanese
honeysueicle (Lonieera japonica), Csrolma j.ess~-rtune (6e~Iucr-: sernparvrrens), gr@enbrier,
9.

a ri ~4
and cross vine. Herbs are also diverse, especially at the sunny .edges bordering disturbed land,
and include t1c>g ferincl (Ecf,~yator~!rm capillifolium), frQ~i~ aster (Aster pilosus), Christmas fdrn
(Polystichurn acrosticMoides), busf~y bluestem (Andropogon glomeratus}, verbena (Verbena
bonariensis), goldenrod (Solidago sp.), and Indian-hemp (Apacynum cannabinum).
Coastal Plain Bottomland Hardwoods (Blackwater Subtype] -.'This plant .community is
temporarily flooded, and forms a .border between i/ypress-:Gum Swamp .and the adjacent
uplands. Schafale ;and Weakley (-1990) describe .this community. as flooded, at least
occasionally, but seldom disturbed by flowing water. It occurs of the center, of the. project area,
and in small pockets. separated from the main stream channel and adjoining wetlands.. As with
the Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest community,. the western sections of Coastal Plain
Battomland Hardwoods have been logged within the last 10 years. In these sections, the shrub
and subcanopy layers predominate, with. few canopy level trees present. .Herbs .are present in
gaps and at edges. The mature forest to -the east has a mature, well-developed canopy with
fewer shrubs and herbs.. The canopy of this plant community includes swamp chestnut oak
(Quercus michauxir), water oak, laurel oak (Q. lauritglia), sweetgum, :American elm, sugar maple
(Acesbarbatum), red maple, green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), loblolly.pine, and tulip poplar.
The subcanopy and shrub layers contain American :holly; ironwood {Carpinus caroliniana), titi
(Cyrilla racemiflora), sweetleaf, highbush blueberry (Vaccinium corymbosum), nannybeny
(Viburnum ~udum), sweet bar (Mag»bla ,virginiana), giant raris;x blacl<becry (Babas -a~guttrs),
groundsel, and wax myrtle. Herbs include royal fern (Osmunda regalia} and .bamboo grass
{©ichanthelium scoparium).
Disturbed/maintained land. - Disturbed/maintained land oocurs'along the 14-foot (4:3-meter)
wide shoulders of SR 1005; and includes small areas of railroad maintenance yards, residential.
lots,,and agricultural fields. These areas contain planted acid aotunteer grass species, such as
foxtail grass: (Setaria geniculata) along .with other weedy. species such.as plantain. (Plantago
lancaolata), chickweed {Stellaria media), pussytoes {Antennaria sp.), and wild onion (Album
canadensd):
_ ,_ _ ,
~- -
Cypress Gum ~wamp~(Blackwater Subtype} = Tfiis plant `communityis described btr-Schatale- _ _._ .._ ......
and Weakley (1990) as occurring [n b-ackswamps, bughs, swales, and fest~reless #lootlplains
of blackarvater rivers. They are: seasonally. to sernipermanently flooded,.. with variabte flow
regimes. The water tends to be Very acidic, low in tn~-eraf sedrnen3s and nutrients, anti polored
by tannins. Cypress;Gum Swamp extends through ahe center of the, project area; in the channel . .
and lower. flooc}plain of Bachelor Creek. South of SA 1r)05 arid; east of the main channel, 8n.
additional pocket of the. swat~P area borders 3R: 1005: This. plant community has: ah .open
Viand structure, with mature trees interspersed:: with areas cif wa#er Sl~~,ubs are few,
and herbs occupy small is~ands,.and edges ofi e
xpdsed so<l `The canopy is dorxtir~ted;by b~fc!
cypress. (~axgclium distich~rn) and guru (1ltysse; aqu~tica}, -bc~t ~~gaen ~ asl .. also ~~:oCCUrs. Ttae
shrub layer. oontains Virginia ;wiflt?w (Ifea virginiEa}, red cheti®~y, nkberry (ilex g/abra)
staggerbush .(:yonia lucida),'and swarpp rase (Rosa pa/~st~s).~ ~%ir~es mcle~de:~rape,j`~f#s':~.),
and catbrier (~~milax bona-nox). The herb layer, is fairly diverse in open `areas, including
10

woolgrass bulrush (Scirpus cyperinus), plume ,grass. (Erianthus giganfeus), cattail (Typha
latifolia), soft rush (Juncus effusus), royal- fem, .cinnamon fern (Dsmunda cinnamomea),
tearthurrib (Polygonum arifofium), and marsh penrtywort (Wyd~ocatylQ umbellata). ~"he Gypress~ -.
Gum Swamp plant community grades into Coastal -Plain Bottomland Hardwoods (Bfackwater
Subtype) at fts -upper edges, except at the western end of the project area. In this area, -
Cypress-Gum Swamp`directly abuts upland Mesic Mixed hardwood communities.
$.12 Faunal Communities
No terrestrial mammals were observed during the site visit but physical signs of three mammal
species, white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus), .marsh rabbit (Sylvifagus palustris), and
beaver (Castor canadensis) were observed in t3ottomland Hardwoods within the project area. .
. Other mammal species expected to utilize swamps and lowland forested habitats in the- project
area are southeastern shrew (Sorex /ongirosiris), star-nosed mote (Condy/ure cristata), sliver-
. haired bat, (Lasionycteris noctivagans), Rafinesque's big-eared bat (Rlecotus rafinesqui~), cotton
mouse (Peromyscus gossypinus), raccoon (Procyon Jotor); and mink (Mustela vision),. Fields
and other disturbed areas might host eastern cottorrtail (Sy/vilagus floridanus), gray. squirrel.
(Sciurus carolinensis), eastern harvest -mouse (Reithrodontomys humulis),. red fox (Vulpas
vulpes), and Virginia, opossum (Dide/phis virginiana). `
t3irds obseruect toiaging in swamp or hardwood areas wittm or.ad~$certt:to the corridor ere red-;
shouldered hawk (Buteo lineatus), red-bellied .woodpecker: (Me/er-er~s caroiinus), downy
woodpecker (.Picoides pubescens), pileated woodpeckers ('Dryocopus pileatus); tufted titmouse
(Baealgphus'bicolor)., Carolina chickadee (Poecile nensis), v~ih#e-breasted. nuthatch (Sirta
carolinensis), drown-headed nuthatch` (Slits puslla), gokera-crowned kinglet (lgegu-us satraps),
and ruby-crooned kinglet. (Regulus calendula) ...Birds .seen yr heard: in span fields,. disturbed
areas, shrub/scrub .areas, or over open waist are great blue Freron (r~rdes hems), pct=tailed
:hawk (Buteo jsmaicensis), turkey vulture (Cathartes 8u~), .Carotins: wren: , (fhr~rothorr~s:
lradovicianus);, florthem mockingbird (iGfiimus polyg/ottos), cedar waxwing (1~ombyci/la~:cedr+otum),
,:.:
northern caxdmal (Cardinafis cardinalis), dark-eyed junco (,Junco ~iyemalrs), white-throated
..
_ _ . -sparrow:. (ZvrrQtricha ~.albicapis), - song -sparrcn~ = (Metospize melodra),-- ~lmeticar~- - ~oid#inph - - --~ _ _:.:.
(Garduelis trisf1s), and common crow (Corvus.6~^achyfiynchos) Other bird species.expected to
be #ound m rurgl swamp and bottornland hardwood areat; are:wood dwck {A~x sporis~},.barred ~ -
:owl (5`trix yetis), winter wren (Troglodytes"trogfQdytes), gi~aY cati~ird`(~trneteile oara~linepsia)~
wood .thrush. (Hy/oeich/a -mustelma); whiteeyed ;vireo.:: {~n~o gr~sus), prothonotary: auarl~ler
(Protortotarla citrea), northern parula ~ (PanrJa: amencana), and : swamp ~sparrfl~- (Arlelos~iza
georg~grta) ..
.
No terrestri~! rattle car ~phitiian species: v~re ob~:;ctucing t~ ~,te visit ,Some t~gi
- reptiles' sand athibians yvhich `may occur ~rithirt sv~a $n~d b~t#om#pnd~. ft~b~tai, m the.proteict ,
aces irioltxde:: eastern :box turfle. (7~e ca~nroJlr spoftad ~ls~and~r (~~stc~na
rriia~t~~, r~Ebled sta~actder (~fiton~s opac~rtri~, ~ ~'ercr; . ;~ttslEy` strrar'ec
..
. , ,.
...
(Desmagn~~ acfncula#~s), two-trued salamander (Lt~ita; bis~ Fcawler'stoad (fit:
1 "1

~ 9 A {
~ioodhousei), green treefrog (Hyla cinerea}, Brimley's chorus frog (Pseudacris brimleyi),
ringneck snake (Diadophis puncfatus), rat- snake (Elaphe obsolete), .rainbow srzal;e (Farancia
erytr°ogramma), rough green snake (Opheodrys aestivus), and timber rattlesnake (Crotalus
horridus).
3.2 Aquatic Communities.
Observations of aquatic plant communities observed within the project area were limited to
duckweed (Lemna sp.) and mosquito fern (Azolla caroliniana). Emergent hardwood species
.included baldcypress, green ash, and gum.
Crawfish chimneys were .observed along waterways within the project area. .Limited
investigations resulted in no observations of aquatic reptiles or amphibians. Aquatic or semi-
aquatic reptiles and amphibians expected to occur. within vegetated wetlands and open waters
in the project area include greater siren (Siren lacertina), eastern newt (Notophthalmus
virideseens), two-toed amphiuma (Amphiuma means), southern leopard frog (Rana utricularia),
eastern musk turtle (Stemotherus odoratus), painted turtle (Chrysemys pieta), spotted turtle
(C/ernmys guttata), mud snake (Farancia abacura), redbelly water snake, (Nerodia
erythrogaste~; black .swamp .snake (Seminafrix pygaea), and cottonmouth (Agkistrodon
piscivorus). ~ .
No sampling was undertaken in Bachelor. Creek to determine fishery potential: Small,
unidentified minnows-were observed during the field survey: f=ish species- adapted to slow,
swampy,.acid waters in the project. region include bowfin (Amin calve), eestem silvery minnow.-
(Hybognathus regius), golden shiner (Notemigonus crysoleucas); yellow bullhead (Ameiurus
nataiis), _redfin pickerel (Esox americanus), chain pickerel. (Esoxniger), eas#ern mudminnow
(Umbra pygmaea), pirate perch (Aphredoderus sayarrus}, swampfish (Gho/ogaster cornuta),
eastern mosquitofish (Gainbusia holbrook~j, striped> bass (Morons saxatilis), mud sunfish
(Acantharchus pomotis}; blackbanded sunfish (Enneacani`hus chaetodon), bluegill {Lepomis
macrochicus), black .crappie (Rornoxis nigromacufatus), banded pygmy sunfish (E/assoma
zonatam), and swamp -darter: (Etheostama; fusiforme) : -:
WRC has: developed a Significant Aquatic Endangered Species Habitat database to enfiance.
planning, siting,. and impact analysis in areas proposed by V1LRC as being critical due ~to the .
presence of endangered:or threatened aquatic species. - AIo Significant-Aquatic:~ndangered
Species Habita# `occurs within the project area, or within Sub=basin 03-04-08, However, this
reach . of t3achtlor Creek .has potential as a spawning arcs for anadrorrious, f'+sh (such as .
Arnerlcan shad [Atosa sapid~ssirrraj and alewife [~losa pseudvhare~g~rs}) and a Cravat corridor
for rrfigcatory ~tsh Therefore, m-water work during`project c~lxstructian rnay, need-,t~ be $voided
during moratorium periods (F.eb;niary 15 through; June t5) associated' wdh fish rrtigt&~ion,
spawning, and nursery areas. Future covrdinatioh with resource ~agertaes `may..: resutt in
a~ustFn'ents to these requirements. -

12 -

To minimize fishing and. non-fishing .activities that adversely affect marine fisheries, areas of .
Essential Fish Habitat. (EFH) afford limited. protection under the Magnuson-Stevens Act of 1996
(16 IJ.S:C. 1681 et seq.). CFf~ has beon broadly defined fay congress as "ttyose winters ar~d "
.substrate necessary to fish for spawning, breeding, feed'mg, or growth to maturity." Fishing and
non-fishing related activities that can adversely affect fisheries include fishing gear, dredging,
filling, agricultural and urban runoff, and point-source pollution discharge, No marine, estuarine,
or tidally in#luenced waters are located within the project region. Based on the latest directive
from the National. Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS 2000), the neares# designated EFH is
,associated with tidal waters of the Neuse River, approximately 12.7 -river miles (20.4 river
kilometers) downstream of the project area.
3.3 Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Plant communities within the project area were- delineated to determine approximate area and
location of each within the project area. A summary of plant community areas is presented in
"Table 1.
No .significant habitat fragmentation is expected as a result. of project activities since potential
improvements will be restricted to adjoining roadside margins. Construction noise and
associated cis#uttzances will have short Term: ~rnp$c~s= on a~rifat~rta Snd n~igr-ator~r wildlife
mover~ne~t ~ratterns. _
Table 3; Plant community coverage within. the project area. Areas are expressed in serest. with
hectares in parentheses. .
Pian# ~ommc~nity Area
Mesic.Mlxed-Hardwood Forest (Coastal Plain Subtype) 8:2 (3.3)
shrub/scrs~ assemblage 5.8 f 2:3)
Coastal Plain Bottomland Wardwoods-(Blackwater Subtype).- ~ 5;S (2.2)
Disttlfbedlma~ntaned land 5.7 (2.3)
- - -- -
.-
resS C.~t~m ~w~rn lackv~ater Suli e _ 2:5 1 A
No Sigrr~fcarjt Aquatic ;Endangered Species ittitat or :exists' within or near..the project
region. 'phis -reach ofi, Bachelor Cheek is -fn the Coastal: Pla•r~ and hag patientiel as a travel
cx~rridor for r~gratory f+sh Irt ~ddi#io~, the.:project ages is ~ ~4r~adr~mr~s Fsh S,pav~t~ Area,
.,
. as def~nec#uy tfie~~~taUona~fil~Aarine ~tsherxes~ Ttt+t~sfor~ ~is.~r±c~rE~can tie o~~.aa base 2,
"
~e~e u~ ~r w.orfc ~ritl #~e` ~ra+ded ~~ ~t31~ p~l~~>;15 #~r~au.t~ ~uhe. i
$~iate~ rrSiguori, spa~arni; and l't~ _er: emirs inatiioxt with ~so~ccd
8~e~1CIQS, l~a~( r@b'ltlt ItT 8lJSb~~t~~ to ~te~ 1'~tfK'., it~~i$~S ~ M1E~1 tt~rbldityF:- :
a~ :euspd_f sa~iiHns reatfitt~~tg~tt+arrt b~~~at ;aa~ #~ ~tze~l:IG?u~ugla 'use .
_ .
of SiI~-C~fB a~ tf~~ t~plen~erT~4atii7fl~ ~ s~i~it el'o } ~ ~H'1'~Sq~-es.
..
. .. - ..
~3

~ ~ '~ ~ '4
Potential down-stream impacts to aquatic habitat will be avoided by bridging the swamp system
to maintain regular flow and str~:~~m integrity. New bridge dosic~n parameters should seek to
avoid placing bents in the streai r~ chaiir~~~:i, ii possil.zi;~. Shari-term ir~rpacts associated witi~
turbidity and suspended sediments will affect benthic populations. Temporary impacts to
downstream habitat from increased sediment during construction will be minimized by. the
implementation of stringent erosion .control measures.
4.0 JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS
4.1 Waters of the United States
Surface waters within the embankments of .Bachelor Creek. are subject to jurisdictional
consideration under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act as waters of the United States (33 CFR
Section 328.3). The Bachelor. Creek channel and lower floodplain has been characterized by
Cowardin et al. (1979) as palustrine, forested, broad-leaved deciduous, seasonally flooded
system (PFO1 C). During -the filed visit, an open channel ,approximately 75 feet (23 meters)
could be distinguished in Bachelor Creek..
Vegetated wetlands are .defined by the ,,presence. ;a# #hree `prier-nary criteria: hydric soils,
hydrophytic vegetation,- and evrclenc~e of hydrology.. at or near the surface 'for a potlion (12.5
percent) of the-growing. season (DOA 1,987): In. addition to the channel grid lower floodplain
swamps of ,Bachelor Creek, NWI mapping; describes `palustrine, forested, broad-leaved
deciduous, temporarily .flooded (PF01A), and palustrine, .forested, deciduous, .seasonally
flooded (PF06C) areas throughout-.the: project area. During the field visit, evidence was 'noted
that the floodplain, area may. be more persistently flooded, including a beaver dam upstream of
the railroad bed, cypress knees, and water marks on trees. Bachelor Creels was found to be a
poorly de#ined, open :water swamp system with numerous. bald cypress trees along with
emergent hardwoods: Therefore, the Cowardin classification maybe more accurately fated. as.
a palustrine; forested, deciduous, semipermaneritly flooded.: system (PF06F). This vegetated
wetland system is generally. _.associa ad with the .Cypress-hum _.Swamp . ptant `.community _. _.. _
describedrn section 3:1 ". The PFOa A` and. PF01 C wetlands correspond: roughly. to ~ the
boundaries of Coastal Plain f3ottomland Hardwoods. The: P"F~06.C wetlands occupy ;an-area of
.Coastal Plain Botfomland Hardwoods in the northeastern quadrant of-the pcgject xre~: The" field
visit verified the nature `and general placement "of these: vegetated wetlands. Ih addition,
palustrine scrub/shrub, - broad/leaved deciduousJboad-leaved evergrieen, easonakly . flooded"
`wetlands (PSS1%3C) exist .within the scrublshrub a$semblage-p.l$~rt co~trout~ities atangsde. the
railroad tracks. !n ail, approximately. 27:~ercent (6;~ adces [3:4 hec~are>~J;) of "the project area
,.
consists of vegetater'1 wetlands (Figure; ,~) 1`et#;te ~` "tests tt~esa w~lartd types and. #teir exteirfts
wifliin :the project :area On the whole, wetlands 'avitl'tm the prgjeCt area would be arnsidered
rivetit~e by the DWO based on::tf3eir location" witfxri the Bachelor"Creek:~loodpt&i~t:
1a

a ~ w .. ..
Tabte 2: Wetlands within the project area. P.reas are expressed in acres, with hectares in
parentheses.
Cowardin Classification Area DWQ Rating
PFO1A (Coastal ;Plain Bottornland' Hardwoods, BlackwaterSubtype) 1.8 (0.7) ~ 60
PFO1 C (Coastal Plain Bottomfand Hardwoods, t3lackwaater Subtype) 3:0 (1.2) 60
PF06C (Coastal Plain Bottomland Hardwoods, Blackwater Subtype) 1.3 (0.5) 60 .
Pf061= (Cypress-Gum Swamp, BlackwaterSubtype) 0.9(0.4) 71
PSS113C {scrub-shrub assemblage) ~ 0.3 (0.1) 27
Total ~ 8.3'(3.3)
The Nutrient Sensitive Waters Management Strategy for the .Protection- and Maintenance of
Riparian Buffers for the Neuse River Basin (15A NCAC 02B .0233) .provides a designation for
uses that cause impacts to riparian buffers within. the Neuse Basin. The Neuse :Basin .Rule
applies to 50-foot wide riparian buffers (measured perpendicular to the stream) directly adjacent
to surface waters in the .Neuse River Basin. Changes in land use within th® buffer area are
considered #o be buffer impacts. Land use changes within the riparian buffer are defined as
being Exempt, Allowable, Allowable with Mitigation,. or Prohibited; `The Exempt
designation .refers to uses allowed within. the- buffer.: The Allowable designation refers to uses
that rr~y proceed within the ripgr~an buffer .provided tl3ere are ~o pcactic~( alternatives, ar~cl that
wnttsn -authortivn from the DiN~ ie obta~ed °Or 'to praebE dQ~et~f.. The vwabie
with litigation designation refers to uses that are a8ow~cl, given there: "are `no practical
alternatives and appropriate,mitigation plans have been approved. The Prohibited designation
refers to uses that are prohibited without a valiance. F..xemptions to the riparian. buffer rule
. include the fvotQrint of existing uses that are present and ongoing:
The ch~nel' of Bachelor creek; as defined on he Jasper, NC USES topographic snapping is
the basis for b~rffer length and area .calculations. Acxx7rding to .this: source, the chanr~ei of
Bachelor Creek within -.the project area is 430~`feet (131 meters) long.. Therefore,. where is
approximately 1,Q acre (D.4 hectare) of riparian buffer within the project area Of this area, 0.6
__ _ ._ ._ __-acre _(0.2 hectare): is within done 1, _and 04 acre_ (0 2 _ hectare) is wrthm-Zone 2 of the buffer
____ __._
area. The final- deterfinination of the existence of Meuse Aver. buffer and the issue of associated .
impacts rests v+~th~:DWQ, _

~ - ., ~~ ; ~
4.2 CAMA Areas of Environmental Concern
7-I~~: proposed project will occur in or~L (~;ravr~i) 6f tl~i~. 20-North GaE~nlina coastal c:~~t~nties
covered by the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) (N.C.G.S. 113A-118)..CAMA authorizes
the N.C. Division of Coastal Management. (DCM) o manage development yin Areas of
Environmental .Concern in the 20 counties: Estuarine waters, estuarine shorelines, coastal
wetlands, and public trust areas are designated as AECs. Any activity involving construction,
excavation, filling, or other land disturbance within an AEC is considered development and
requires. authorization under CAMA. Because the project area contains an .open water within a
CAMA county, a DI/M .representative will need- #o verify the presence or absence of a Public
Trust Water Area of Environmental Concern (AEC).
4.3 Permit Issues
4.3.1 Permits
The project area may contain Public Trutt Waters AECs. If replacement of the bridge avoids
impacts to AECs, the DCM will review the, permit application for CAMA consistency. If an AEC
- is ,proposed: to be impacted, a CAMA Major Permit or General Permit for-bridge replacement
{15A I'';ICAC 0?H:230) may. be a{aplica4le:
This ::project may be processed _ as a Categorical Exclusion (CE) ander Federal .Highway
Administration (FH1NA) guidelines. The USACE has made available Nationwide Permit (NWP)
No.~23 (67 FR 202x,.2082; January 15, 2002) for GEs due ta~minimal impacts to waters of the
U.S. expected: with bridge; construction. DWQ has made available a>General401.Water .Quality
Certification for NWP No. 23 (GC 3361). If ;temporary construction is required that is not
described in the CE, a N11VP IVo. 33, for temporary instruction, access, .and dewatering (67 FR
2020; 2084; January 15, 2002) and assoc(ated: DWQ Generi~l`; Water Quality C~ertifict~tion (GC
3366)' may required, In the event that NWP ~Io: 23 wily not suffice, impacts..attributed to bridge
replacement and associated approach improvements may quafr`Fy under~General Bridge Permit
(GP)_'031 issued._by_the 1Nilrrjingtgn. USACE_Distnct _DWQ _has. made available__a ~erteral_4Q1 -____..
Water Quality :Certification for GP 031 (GP 3375):: Notfication,to the USAGE Wilrrirngton district
office is required if this general permit is utilized. -
The Ne.use Rtver Basin .:Mule applies to `50-#c~ot (15.3-meter] wide:'riparian buffers directly
adjacent to surface waters: of _the. Neese River f3asin f~teuse ~3u#fer Certification witl be needed

~ ~ ~ b
waters of the United ,States, and specifically wetlands. Rllitigation of wetland impacts has been
defined by the CEQ to include: avoiding. impacts. (to wetlandsj, minimizing impacts,. rectifying
impacts, reduc:i~~y impacts .over time;, and compensating for impacts (~~0 CPF3 Suction 150a.2C~}.
Each. of the three. major aspects- (avoidance, minimization, and compensatory mitigation) .must
be considered sequentially.
Avoidance entails an .examination of all appropriate and practicable possibilities of averting
impacts to waters of the United States. According to a 1.990 Memorandum of Agreement
between the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the USACE, in determining
"appropriate and practicable° measures to offset unavoidable impacts, such measures should
be appropriate to the scope and. degree of those impacts. and practicable in -terms of-cost,
existing technology;. and logistics in light of overall. project purposes. Impacts to wetlands in the
project area are expected to be temporary in nature, depending `on the footprint of the final
bridge. design.. Temporary impacts due to bridge construction-may be unavoidable during a
replacement project.
Minimization includes .the examination of appropriate and practicable steps to reduce adverse
impacts to waters of the United. States. Implementation of these..steps will be required through
project modifications and perrrait conditions. Mir~intization typically focuses on :decreasing the
footp~rit of the proposed p~ject throagh t~xe .redi~dion of rigf~t-of why was, ~~ll slopes and~s~r
roadside shoulder widths. Len~gthrening of the bridge to lessen the lend ` of the -appn7ach
causeway is another method to minimifie impacts in bridge projects. Ail efforts will be made to
decrease impacts to surfacewaters.
Compensatory mitigation is -not normaNy considered until anticipated impacts to waters of the
United States have been avoided.-and minimized to the rnaxirhurn extent possible..: It is
recognized 'that "no net, loss of wetlands" functions and values rfaay not be ~ achieved in every
permit- action. In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0506(h), ~WQ may require compensatory
mitigation. for projects. with greater than or squat to 1.0 secs (O:S hectacej _~ impacts to
jurisd-ctioral wetlands or greater than nor equal- to 150. ~tinear feet (46 linear meters) ;of total'
--
._. _ _ __ _ _ p8cenntal-stream-rmpacts; ~-Frrrtl~@rmore; .in aextirdancs= witf~'-~ FA- 20~-fl, 2092; -~far~uary f5, _.___._ ....__._
2002, the USACf ,requires cornperfsatory maiigation when ~.ecessary to ensure that- atlverse
effects to the~aqua~ic envir©nment are rninirrr~al. The size and type ~ proposed profeet:impact,.
and function and value of the impacted `.aquatic resource, - are motor considered ;in detemunng
- $cceptab~l-ty of compensatory: mitigation Appropriate artd p~actrEable c:~ompensatory tnitigatfon .
is required-frx ubavoida~ile adverse impacts which rernaln after~all..appn~riate and predicable
. ..
rninirrriz~tfion has been performed. 5u0h actions sho~#Id be wa~e~tal~h firstin areas $dtacerit to
or ~rrtguoue=i~o tMe discharge she.
[~A~ugation far ~ect'ron 404 jurisdictional .area i~pacts cney gc~f need t© tie promised ,for phis
,,pE01e~3t dt~e tvzthe potentiaily litrtt'~ri3tttre of tfte-p~FajeEt t~pa Ham, 9A of f
r r
is re~e~u~wfeetle€t irt'an ef#prt.te~r~i~ mopeds. Tr=it t©~lajia~ aetal~d
with construction `acttviYes could be rut+gate~i by repfanting;di~rbied areas w~h.,~ltlve npaclara
17

species and removal of temporary fill material upon project completion. FII or alteration of-more
than 150 linear feet (~C meters) nf` stream- may require compensatory mitigation' in accordance
with 15 NCAC 2H .U506(h). A final determinatian regarding mitigation restswith -the USACE
and DWQ.
The..requirement for riparian buffer mitigation: will depend on the amount of potential impacts
resulting from proposed bridge replacement and the availability of practical_alternatives. A final
determination regarding practical alternatives rests with DWG.
If an on-site detour becomes .necessary, a bridge may be required for crossing project area
wetlands, depending. on results of a geotechnical investigation of -the wetland substrate's
consolidation. potential. This would be necessary if impacts to high-quality arid. medium-quality
wetlands in the project area, due to the construction of a temporary causeway, are determined
to be intolerable and must be minimized... The use of an on-site detour would be .further
restricted by the presence of the railroad approximately 55 feet (17 meters) to the south.
.Limited opportunities for mitigation exist within the project area: A culvert passes .under SR
1005 approximately 1200 feet (366 meters) east of.Bridge No. 212. Additional culverts to allow
free flow of Bachelor Creek. swamps under SR' 1005 and the upstream railroad bed may be
beneficial.. :
4.4 Protected Species
Species with ,the federal classification of, Endangered (E), Threatened ('17, or officially Proposed
(P) for such listing are protected under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1873, as
amended {16 U.S.C. 151 et seq:). The term "Endangered Species" is defined as °any species
which-is to danger of extinction 'throughout a!I or a significant,portion of its range," and the term
" `Threatened Species" is defined as "any,-species which is ikely to become art Endangered
species within the foreseeable. future throtaghcaut all or a signfficant portion- of .its range" (16
U.S.C: 1532): `A fQderally protected~species listed #or Craven County (f'ebruary) t:, 2003 FINS
_.... #st)_ispresen#ed~tn-Table.3 _ ,... _.. _.
7~ble 3: Federally Protected Specieslisied for Craven County (f=$bruary 11, 2Q03 F11VS Est),
:.
. .
r
Cc~nmon Name sci~4irtif~c 1NA~a ~~~+~YQ>
,.
American al igator Alhgafor rrusss+ppiensis
-Bald eagle ~ Watiaeetus leu~cephglus
Leatherback sea turtle ~ Qermach coriacea
11~est.#ndian n7anatee ' i'richeEtifis haanatus:
~3ed-egckad~d woodpecker Piccndes eatis
~ens~~ive iorrltvetch" ~+eschynom~rne v~rg~nca
,,
~aatoned dUe to Similarity'at ~Pp~rance; resarl~ in appean~ce,~ th. re
peravnr~el v~ottl~t~eve substantfial dNt`icr~ty i~ d~FereF~tieirit~betk~ee[t the li~~ti and
aNigBtoi• has this designation. dc~e to stft~ility ,of a~ ~-.et#ier isle Et~diltai
" Historic record..=last seen wit~iri. Craven C©unty more than 20 years ago.
ig

j .i l R ~ .
Alligator misslsipplensfs (Am~Fican alligator)
Threateneddue to Similarity of Appearance .
Family; Rlligatoridae
Date Listed: March 11, 1967
Date Delisted: June 04, 1987
American alligator is listed as threatened based on the .similarity in appearance- to other
federally-listed crocodilians; however, there are no other crocodilians within North Carolina.
American alligators can be found in a variety of freshwater to estuarine aquatic habitats
including swamp forests, marshes. ,large streams and canals, and ponds and lakes.
T S/A species are not subject to Section 7 consultation and a biological conclusion is not
.required. However, this project .is not expected to affect the American alligator.
Hallaeet~s leucocepha/us (Bald eagle)
Threatened
Family.: Accipitridae
Date. Listed: March 11, 1.967
The: bald ea~te is _a large:.raptor with $ ~rin~appn g€eate~ ~ar~ 6, feet .(2:0 aietenr). ~~0.1t 1~alt~
eagles are dark titown with a white `head and. -tail, Immature , eagl+as are brrswn -with whitish
mottling on tf~,e tail, belly; and wing linings. Bald .eagles typically feed on fish but rr~ay ~Iso take
birds and mall mammals.: In the Carolinas,, nesting season extends frorm.December through.
~.
May (Potter%et al. 1980j. 13a1d eagles typically nest in tall, t~ving, tr+~es m a conspicuous.#acation
_ near open v~ater. Eagles forage over.. large bodies of water and utilize :adjacent tees for.
perching :(Hafriel 1'992:). ~3isturt~ance ctryitles within a primary zone extending 750 to .1500 feet
(229 to 458 rr~eters) from a nest tree are considered. to result in unacceptable..,coraditipns for
: eagles (FV1f~~ 1987}. The FWS recommends avoiding disturbance activities, ..:including'.
construction ar*d tree-cu#ing within this primal zone. Wtthin~a s~ondary zone, esder~ding from
the primary zone boundary out to a distance of 1 0 mile (~.6 kilometers) from `a nest tree;
constrtion `arid-`land-clearing `aCtivltiee` should be restricted to the rfvn-nestirtg. ,period:. The. _.

..
d?'ermochelys coriacea (Leatherback sea turtles)
Endangered
Family: Dermochelyidae
Date Listed: June 02, 1970
The leatherback turtle is distinguished by its large size (46- to 70-inch [120- to 180-centimeter]
carapace, 650 to 1,500 pounds, [295 to 682 kilograms]) and a shell of soft, leathery skin. This
species. is primarily tropical in nature, :but the range. may :extend to Nova Scotia and
Newfoundland.:(Palmer-and Braswell 1.9.95, Martof et a/. 1980). The leatherback is a powerful
swimmer, often seen far from land; however, it sometimes moves into shallow bays, estuaries,
and even river mouths. Its preferred food is jeNyfish, althqugh the diet .includes other 'sea
animals and seaweed. The leatherback generally nests on sandy, tropical beaches.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
Bachelor. Creek, in the project area, is anon-tidal, freshwater stream. Therefore, no habitat for
leatherback sea turtle exists in or near the project area. No leatherback sea turtles were
observed during the site visit, and NHP documents no leatherback sea turtle occurrences within
5.0 miles (80 kilometers) of the project.area.
Trfc'hecltus ~anat~rs (1Nes# Indian manatee)
Endangered:
Family: Triehechidae
Date Listed: March 11, 1967 "
.The West fndian manatee is a large, gray or brown aquatic mammah That averages #0 to 13 feet.
(3 to 4 meters) in length and weighs up to 1000 .pounds (455 kilograms). During: summer
month manatees migrate. from their Florida wintering areas as far north as cc~astai Virginia
(FWS 1993).. These mammals inhabif'war~ waters, .both fresh and salt, where. heir die#
consists mostly of.aquatic vegetation (Webster et x/.,19$5).
$IOLOGICAL GONELUSION: ~ NEJ'fFFECT.:
Potential hatiifat fbr Vli!est Indian manatee does not. exist within"ar near jhe Rroject ~acea.: Thee.,
dimensions of the. Bachelor Creek< channel ..preclude atx~ess. for an atti~nal as. ~la~ge `as a
manatee. In. these upstream readies of tfie stream, obstacljes:such as faeaver dams, log}ams
and ~pdint bats obstruci tFie mov..ernerrt of larger agr~atic~mammals. No Vlfaist Indian. rnaRatees
were,~observ~d during tie :site visit . Ttie nea~e_s# t~H#~ records t>~ tll~ V~~t ih~fian c~a~nafiae is
.:
appiroximaPely :B.O miles (°1~-9 krlcmete~ra) southeast, at tMe mr~ytFi of fhe. T-~nt 1~rer.. '"

E. i ~~ t
Picoldes trorealis (fled-cockaded woodpecker)
Endangered
~a~ri~ily: d"°iciaac
Date Listed: October 13, 1970
This small woodpecker (7 to 8.5 inches [18 to 22 centimeters]-long) has a. black head, prominent
white cheek patches,- and ablack-and-white barred-back. Males often. have red markings
(cockades) behind the eye, but the cockades may be absent or difficult to see (Potter et al.
1980). Primary habitat consists of mature to over-mature southern pine forests dominated by
loblolly,. long-leaf (Pinus pa/usbis), slash (P. elliottii), and' pond (P. serotina) pines (Thompson
and Baker 1971). Nest cavities are constructed. in the heartwood of living pines, .generally. older
than 70 years, that have been infected with red-heart disease. Nest cavity trees tend to occur in
clusters,..which are referred to as colgnies (FV11$ ~ 1985). The woodpecker drills holes. into., the
bark around the cavity entrance, resulting in a shiny, resinous buildup around the entrance`that
allows for easy detection of active nest trees. Pine flatwoods or pine-dominated savannas
which have been maintained by frequent. natural fires serve as ideal nesting and for~gtng sites
for this woodpecker. Development of a thick understory may result in abandonment of cavity
trees.
Ht4L4G1.C~L eQ'NCLl1S1O1~1: ~ af+fFECT
A few mature loblolly pine trees exist within the project area and adjapent areas. 1.lowever, the
trees are widely spaced and occur in scattered bcations.~ The clustered arrangement of pine
trees preferred by the :birds for nesting: colonies is snot provided in the project vicinity. In
addition, der~s~e shrub.. and undarstory laysrs occur under large. areas of bottomland acid mesic
mixed forest The use of scattered pintas ;for foraging sites would:: dep®nd on the birds crossing
.large tracts (greater than 300 [91 meters] f®et wide)of roadways, agricaltur~l fields, and bnlshy .
woods. Therefore, the project `area contains no suitable :habitat for red-cockaded wood{~ecker
nesting, roasting, or foraging. No occurrence of red~ockaded woodpecker is documented by
the .NHP within 5.O miles (8.0 kilometers).of the`project area, No red-cockaded. woodpeckers
_ _were-observedduriflg tale srte yisi#. __ _- -- . _ . _
Aeschynotner~e vlrgJni~a (~ensl#ive )ofntvetoh)
Threatened . .
_ .
'Family:.Fabaceae
Date .Li ted: May 20, 1992

E • :- ~,
flowered racemes from July to October. The jointed .legume (loment) is about 2 inches (5
centirnefieai•s) loncl, has 6 to 10 segments, a€~d a 0.5 to 1.0 inch (1.3- to 2.5-cerytirneter) long
stalk.. ~cso~sitive: j®irrtvE>~ch occu~~:~ i~~ tl ie. intertidal z~r~e near the upper limit of .tidal fluctuation: It
seems to prefer sparsely-vegetated areas where annuals predominate (FWS 1995): Habitat for
this species in: North Carolina consists of moist to wet coastal roadside ditches and moist #i~elds
that are nearly tidal (FWS 1994:), especially in full sun (Leonard 1985). Associated plaMS listed
-for this jointvetch in North. Carolina are all fresh water species: Sensitive jointvetch is not
expected to be found in association with salt-tolerant species such as saltmarsh cordgrass or
giant cordgrass (Rouse 1994). This species seems to favor microhabitats where there is a
reduction in competition from other plant species, -and usually some form of soil disturbance
(FWS 1995).
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION; NO EFFECT
The project area is well upstream of any tidal influence. In addition, disturbed open areas with
little herbaceous competition .are not found within. the project :.area. Most shoreline and -open
areas are colonized by tearthumb, marsh pennywort, and soft rush, as weN as other grasses
and rushes. Therefore, suitable habitat for sensitive jointvetch does not exist within the project
area..-The nearest NHP records far sensitive jointvetch are approximately s-~ miles (13.7
IFitQtneteFS) ~so~atfieast, near James Ctty: Hewer, ~tl~is sepies has .got recoded in
``raven C©untjr in over 20-y+sars: No individuals ©f ssitiwe jaintvetch wets c~iise~rved ~i~iring the
site isit
Federal Species. of Concern -The February 11; 2003 FWS list also includes a category of
species designated as ".Federal species of concern' (FSC). A species .with: this designation is
one that rrray or may not be listed ire the future (formierly C2 c~ndida#e species oc peEies under
.consideration for listing for which. there is insufficient- information to support listin.g~.. The -FCC
designation provides no_federal protection under the ESA for ttte species listed. f$C species
listed foreraven County are Presented`in Table 4.
- - MMIr~-#iaes list ~o documentation-fior•f~G species-wifih~n-5:©~ miles _(8:8 -kitorrretersj~t~fi the project
,.
ama

t w .:~ ..
Table 4: Federal Species of Cdncern `Ilsted #or Graven County (F1MS It~tt, February 1 ~,
2003}.
.~
_~-_ - ._
.~_..._.~. C~`atenfic~l ta~e~
Comtnan Name. , Scientific Name Habitat Status**
~
Bacht~~r~'s; `spa[fow Ar~aphUa aestivalis ino SC
Black rail. l~terallus jamaicensis no SR
Southern hognose'snake Heterodon simus no SC
Anointed sallow moth* Pyreferra ceromatica ~ no SR
Croatan crayfish Procambarus plumimanus yes W3
Caroi'rna asphodel* Tofeldia g/abra no W1
Carolina spleenwort AsplenitJm-heteroresiliens no E
Ghaprnan'S sedge* Carex ehapmanii yes W 1
Godfrey's" andwort Minuartia godfreyi- no E
Loose watermilfoil Myrioph llum laxum no T
Pondspice' Litsea gesfivalis no SR-T
Savannah cowbane Oxypolis temata - no W1
Spring-flowering- goldenrod Solidago vema no SR-L
Venus flytrap Dionaea muscipula no SR-L
White wicky' Kalmia cuneata no SR-L
' Historic record;-the species was last obs~.r~ed it~:the county mareth~n 5fl Yeats ago
"State status: SC . s~ecutl Concerti; S€~ = Sti9ttific~c~USR' >e; sQ=T = SIg -Kars tk~rout:s~e~aeRa' range;
SR=L Slgn~cartly+-Rare and :of limited=range (enden~or near-eradert~ic~#!o Notfh.Gardiris) .
1IiF1 =Watch List= rare, but. relatively secure: W3 = Watch List -fare, .but uncertain documentat~n
E = Endangered; T =threatened; (Amoroso 2002; Lef3rand and HaU 21)01).
,~3

~ + - :.
5.D REFERENCES
Ernoroso, J.L. 2002. Natural. Heritage F~rogram list of tl°~e Rare; Plant Species of North
Carolina. North Carolina. Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and Recreation,
N.C. Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources, Raleigh.
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C: Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and
Deepwater Habitats of the United States. FWS/OBS -79/31..Fish and Wildlife Service,
U.$. Department of the Interior; Washington, DC. 1.03: pp.
Daniels, R.B., S.W. Buol; H.J. Kleiss, and C.A. Ditzler. 1999.. Soil Systems in North Carolina.
North Carolina State University Soil. Science Department. Raleigh, North: Carolina. 118
PP~
Department of the Army (DOA). 1987. Corps ofi Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual.
Technical Report Y-87-1. US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg,
MS. 10U PP•
Division of Water Quality (DWQ): 2Q02a.:.Neuse River Basinwide Water Quality Plan. North
'Carolina Departrrr+ertt ofi Environment and ~l~atur`al ~fieso~a~ces, RaleigFl.
Division of Water Quality (D1NQ). 2002b. Classi#ications and Water Qualitji Standards
Assigned to the Wa~ecs of .the Neuse River. Basin. North Carolina . Department of
Environment and Na#ural Resources, Raleigh.
Fsh and Wildiife Service (FW$). '1985. Red-cockaded Woodpec~Cer Recovery Plan, U.S.
Department:of the Interior;,Sou#heast Region, Atlanta, Georgia. $S pp.
Fish and Wldlife.Service (FWS). 1987. Habitat Management Guidelines for the Bald Eagle in

1~:

Southern R~~1 Hymans
7D
IN T
NOT TO SCALE '~
DETOUR ROUTE
NEUSE RIVER BUFFER
i~ICIN~°IC ~'

55
a ,243
c
N R
1243
'1005
1242
T.
/ 1006
.-.~.i
~~~®~
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
CRAVEN COUNTY
PROJECT:33~~~.L1.2 (B-~O85)
REPLACEMENT OF BRIDGE X212
ON SR 1005 OVER BACHELOR CREEg
SHEET 1 OF S
1/31/05
Buffer Drawing
Rheet I of _'~ _r
NORTH CAf?OLINA

~~~~~~ ~.~~~~ID
'-WLB WETLAND BOUNDARY
/~`~`~.

~---MI L BBB "'
WETLAND
YXYY~/ ALLOWABLE IMPACTS ZONE I
~~~
~~~~~ ALLOWABLE IMPACTS ZONE 2
MITIGABLE IMPACTS ZONE I
® MITIGABLE IMPACTS ZONE 2
- BZ - RIPARIAN BUFFER ZONE
- BZ1 - RIPARIAN BUFFER ZONE 1
30 f t (9.2m)
- BZ2 - RIPARIAN BUFFER ZONE 2
20 f t (6.1m)
-~-- --~ FLOW DIRECTION
TB
~~ TOP OF BANK
---- WE EDGE OF WATER
- -~ PROP. LIMIT OF CUT
- -F -PROP. LIMIT OF FILL
---~- PROP. RIGHT OF WAY
- - NG- - NATURAL GROUND
- -P~ - PROPERTY LINE
-TDE- TEMP. DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
- PDE - .PERMANENT DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
- EAB- ~ EXIST, ENDANGERED
ANIMAL BOUNDARY
- EPB- ~ EXIST. ENDANGERED
PLANT BOUNDARY
- - -~ - - - WATER SURFACE
Xx Xx X X LIVE STAKES
BOULDER
- - - COIR FIBER ROLLS
-- - I PROPOSED BRIDGE
PROPOSED BOX CULVERT
PROPOSED PIPE CULVERT
12'-48'
(DASHED LINES DENOTE PIPES
EXISTNG STRUCTURES) 54' PIPES
& ABOVE
SINGLE TREE
.. .. .. .. WOODS LINE
~ DRAINAGE INLET
ROOTWAD
RIP RAP
5 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER
OR PARCEL NUMBER
IF AVAILABLE
PREFORMED SCOUR HOLE (PSH)
LEVEL SPREADER (LS)
GRASS SWALE
N~~®°]C
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
CRAVEN COUNTY
PROJECT:3w1~~1.1.1.2 (B-085)
REPLACEMENT OF BRIDGE X212
ON SR 1005 OVER BACHELOR CREEg
SHEET Z OF 5
1/31/05
Buffer Oroiwin9_ , i

BUFFER IMPACTS SUMMARY
IMPACT BUFFER
TYPE ALLOWABLE MITIGABLE REPLACEMENT

SITE NO. STRUCTURE SIZE
TYPE STATION
FROM/TO ROAD
CROSSING
BRIDGE PARALLEL
IMPACT ZONE 1
(ft2) ZONE 2
(ft2) TOTAL
(ftz) ZONE 1
(ft2) ZONE 2
(ft2) TOTAL
(ft2) ZONE 1
(ft2) ZONE 2
(fie)
1 Bride 11+50 to 13+06 X 473.0 2044.0 2517.0
X 1913.0 216.0 2129.0

TOTAL: 1913.0 216.0 2129.0 473.0 2044.0 2517.0
w_ .1~~
~~~ LI~anR~
Sheet ~ °~ _...~,.,

PROJECT COI~IlNIITIY~Eri1TS:
f:ravere ~::ounty
Bridge No. 212 on SR 1005
Over Bachelor
Federal Aid Project No. BRZ-1179(1)
State Project No. 8.2171201
W.B.S. No. 33444.1.1
T.I.P. No. B-4085
Hydraulics -Anadramous Fish
NCDOT will implement Stream Crossing Guidelines for Anadramous Fish
All Design Groups/ Division Resident Engineer -Anadramous Fish
The North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries has indicated that a moratorium on in-water
construction will be in place from February 15 to June 30 of any given year.
To the extent practical, construction should be accomplished without the use of construction pads.
To the extent practical, bridge demolition should occur without getting into the water.
Office of Natural Environment -Bridge Demolition
The entire bridge is constructed of timber and steel. Therefore, it is unlikely that there will be any
temporary fill resulting from bridge demolition.
Contract Specifications -Length of Construction
In order to address specific requests from the Craven County Emergency Services Coordinator,
NCDOT will set the minimum reasonable contract time to reduce the period of road closure.
Resident Engineer -School Bus Turnaround
Prior to the Construction Letting, the Division will coordinate with school bus officials to
establish a turnaround for busses during the period of construction.
Categorical Exclusion
Green Sheet
March 2004
Page 1 of 1

Q 1 '
~ ~ ~
~ •? ~ ~7 ; 20 ~
•`
~5 -v ~~ ~ 21
-~ ~' ~ ~_
~
~ 26
~• ~ ~' -
'- •.
.~
- .
~ r

.
;

~••
~ ~ -
F64 '~ ,
~

_
• ' ~ .,

• ~•
•`••/• _ • e
l._.
=' 209 ~ ~
~ tom. ~'~
. ~ ~. 1 ~.
i • ~ • 1!1!
~~~" ~ ~ ~ ~, '
•. ~ ,;.Q 207 :~ -

o

,.
-•~ ~ .
124 ~.
• ~ ''
_ ~.~ ,~

` ~ ; ~ , ~e ~
C51 ~ _ ~
, '
~ ~ f ~ L /
l
~I

..~
~~

P70 _
~ 0 ~
'~
~ • m

~
~
~
~ ~ ~_
•- I ~

^ _ ,•--•-- - 46 ~ ` ~•
~~

_.... ~
~''
cam'"'" t.... t ~
.. ~ ``~~
\ • ~ v
~ ~
~•' •~'
' 69 i ••~

•~.. •`•
sae
" ~•
'~p;T=~ 47; •
_. •.o.. Asa
~~
° r' ,~
~ ~
) 4•i
6. ~ ~~
•aa~ M. P45 vim ~

o ~

2
~. _ ,
`
~
'•
' ~ '~_.3
40 P193 ~
• ,j
~ .r.i wo

, ~• ~ 7R NT
i `

C O U N T Y ~~ •
/~~'~TM ~~ NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
`~ ~ TRANSPORTATION
.1
I% ` y- DMSION OF HIGHWAYS
!~ ~' PROJECT DEVELOPMENT 8t
' ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS BRANCH
~"~~,~
CRAVEN COUNTY
REPLACE BRIDGE N0.212 ON SR 1005
OVER BACHELOR CREEK
B-4085
Figure 1

c,/. l,J:ll~~ams
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
David L. S. Brook, Administrator
Michael F. Easley, Governor
Lisbeth C. Evans, Secretary
Jeffrey J. Crow, Deputy Secretary
June 27, 2003
Division of Historical Resources
David J. Olson. Director
MEMORANDUM R ~ C~~ f~
~O
TO: Greg Thorpe, Manager iv ~G
Project Development and Environmental Analysis B ~i~1 ~ ~n
NCDOT Division of Highways y ~ 0~~,~ ~%p~
~~ ~ y/G~~O,~~
FROM: David Brook ~~~ ~ ~ y>'FL qys
9~q ~OPMENS Pa ~~
N'tLYS1S ~
SUBJECT: Replacement of Bridge No. 212 on SR 1005 over Bachelor Cree ,
Craven County, ER03-0928
Thank you for your memorandum of April 7, 2003, concerning the above project.
There aze no known archaeological sites within the proposed project azea. Based on our knowledge
of the azea, it is unlikely that any archaeological resources that may be eligible for conclusion in the
National Register of Historic Places will be affected by the project. We, therefore, recommend that
no archaeological investigation be conducted in connection with this project.
We have conducted a seazch of our maps and files and located the following structure of historical
or architectural importance within the general area of this project:
Bridge No. 212 on SR 1005 over Bachelor Creek
We recommend that a Department of Transportation architectural historian identify and evaluate
any structures over fifty yeazs of age within the project azea and report the findings to us.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act
and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regtilations for Compliance with Section 106
codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above
comment, contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763. In all
future communication concerning this project, please cite the above referenced trackiag number.
cc: Mary Pope Fury, NCDOT
Matt Wilkerson, NCDOT www.h
LueaNoo
AUM1IINISTRATIUN 507 N. Dlount St., Raleigh NC
RESTORATION S I5 N. Blount St, Raleigh NC
SURVEY & PLANNING 515 N. (fount St.. Raleigh NC
o.dcrstate.nc.us
MaHlog Address Tekphoae/Fa:
4617 Mail Service Center. Raleigh NC 27699-4617 [phone] •733-8653
4613 Mail Scrvicc Centcr. Raleigh NC 27699-4613 [phone] •715801
4618 Mail Service Center. Rnlcigh NC 27699-461R [phone] •715-4801

CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION ACTION CLASSIFICATION FORM
A.
B
C.
TIP Project No.
State Project No.
W.B.S. No.
Federal Project No
Project Description:
B-4085
8.2171201
33444.1.1
BRSTP-1005
The purpose of this project is to replace Craven County Bridge No. 212 on SR 1005
over Bachelor Creek. The replacement structure will be a bridge 115 feet long and
30 feet wide. The cross section will include two 12-foot lanes and 3-foot offsets. The
west approach will be approximately 330 feet and east approach will be
appro~cimately 300 feet long. The approach cross section will include two 12-foot
lanes and S-foot shoulders: Traffic will be detoured offsite during construction (see
Figure 1). The roadway will be designed as a Major Collector with a 60 mile per
hour design speed.
Purpose and Need:
Bridge Maintenance Records indicate the bridge has a sufficiency rating of 35.2 out
of 100. The bridge's four- span superstructure is composed of a concrete deck on
continuous I-beams. The substructure is composed of timber caps on timber piles.
The bridge's deck width (32 feet wide) and low structural appraisal (2 out of 10)
qualify the bridge as both functionally obsolete and structurally deficient and
therefore eligible for FHWA's Highway Bridge Replacement Program.
Proposed Improvements:
Circle one or more of the following Type II improvements that apply to the
project:
1. Modernization of a highway by resurfacing, restoration, rehabilitation,
reconstruction, adding shoulders, or adding auxiliary lanes (e.g., parking,
weaving, turning, climbing).
a. Restoring, Resurfacing, Rehabilitating, and Reconstructing
pavement (3R and 4R improvements)
b. Widening roadway and shoulders without adding through lanes
c. Modernizing gore treatments
d. Constructing lane improvements (merge, auxiliary, and turn lanes)
e. Adding shoulder drains
f. Replacing and rehabilitating culverts, inlets, and drainage pipes,
including safety treatments
g. Providing driveway pipes
h. Performing minor bridge widening (less than one through lane)
i. Slide Stabilization
j. Structural BMP's for water quality improvement
2. Highway safety or traffic operations improvement projects including the
installation of ramp metering control devices and lighting.

a. Installing ramp metering devices
b. Installing lights
c. Adding or upgrading guardrail
d. Installing safety barriers including Jersey type barriers and pier
protection
e. Installing or replacing impact attenuators
f. Upgrading medians including adding or upgrading median barriers
g. Improving intersections including relocation and/or realignment
h. Making minor roadway realignment
i. Channelizing traffic
j. Perfonming clear zone safety improvements including removing
hazards and flattening slopes
k. Implementing traffic aid systems, signals, and motorist aid
1. Installing bridge safety hazdware including bridge rail retrofit
3. Bridge rehabilitation, reconstruction, or replacement or the construction of
grade separation to replace existing at-grade railroad crossings.
a. Rehabilitating, reconstructing, or replacing bridge approach slabs
b. Rehabilitating or replacing bridge decks
c. Rehabilitating bridges including painting (no red lead paint), scour
repair, fender systems, and minor structural improvements
O Replacing a bridge (structure and/or fill)
4. Transportation corridor fringe parking facilities.
5. Construction of new truck weigh stations or rest areas.
6. Approvals for disposal of excess right-of--way or for joint or limited use of
right-of--way, where the proposed use does not have significant adverse
impacts.
7. Approvals for changes in access.control.
8. Construction of new bus storage and maintenance facilities in azeas used
predominantly for industrial or transportation purposes where such
construction is not inconsistent with existing zoning and located on or neaz
a street with adequate capacity to handle anticipated bus and support
vehicle traffic.
9. Rehabilitation or reconstruction of existing rail and bus buildings and
ancillary facilities where only minor amounts of additional land are
required and there is not a substantial increase in the number of users.
10. Construction of bus transfer facilities (an open, area consisting of
passenger shelters, boarding azeas, kiosks and related street
improvements) when located in a commercial azea or other high activity
center in which there is adequate street capacity for projected bus traffic.
11. Construction of rail storage and maintenance facilities in azeas used
predominantly for industrial or transportation purposes where such
construction is not inconsistent with existing zoning and where there is no
significant noise impact on the surrounding community.

12. Acquisition of land for hardship or protective purposes, advance land
acquisition loans under section 3(b) of the UMT Act. Hazdship and
protective buying will be permitted only for a particulaz parcel or a limited
number of pazcels. These types of land acquisition qualify for a CE only
where the acquisition will not limit the evaluation of alternatives,
including shifts in alignment for planned construction projects, which may
be required in the NEPA process. No project development on such land
may proceed until the NEPA process has been completed.
13. Acquisition and construction of wetland, stream and endangered species
mitigation sites.
14. Remedial activities involving the removal, treatment or monitoring of soil
or groundwater contamination pursuant to state or federal remediation
guidelines.
D. S ecial Pro'ect Information: (Include Environmental Commitments and Permits
equire .)
Estimated Costs:
Total Construction $ 700,000
Right of Way $ 50,000
Total $ 740,000
Estimated Traffic:
Current - 3100 vpd
Yeaz 2025 - 5500 vpd
TTST - 3%
Dual - 3%
Design Exceptions: There aze no design exceptions anticipated for this project
Functional Classification: Rural Major Collector
Bridge Demolition: There will be no appreciable fill associated with debris from
demolition of the bridge.
Alternatives Discussion: An offsite detour will be utilized during construction
including SR 1244, NC 55, SR 1243 and back to SR 1005. The delay for the
average road user would be approximately 4 minutes over 2.2 miles additional
travel. The Division, the School Bus Transportation Director for Craven County,
and the Emergency Services Coordinator for Craven County have no objection to
an offsite detour at this location. The School Bus Director did indicate that a
turn-around would need to be provided and asked that NCDOT provide one prior
to road closure.

E.. Threshold Criteria
The following evaluation of threshold criteria must be completed for Type II
actions
ECOLOGICAL YES NO
(1) Will the project have a substantial impact on any
unique or important natural resource? a X
(2) Does the project involve habitat where federally
listed endangered or threatened species may occur? X
(3) Will the project affect anadromous fish? ^
X
(4) If the project involves wetlands, is the amount of
permanent and/or temporary wetland taking less than
one-tenth (1 /10) of an acre and have all practicable measures

to avoid and minimize wetland takings been evaluated?
X ^
(5) Will the project require the use of U. S. Forest Service lands?
^~ X
(6) Will the quality of adjacent water resources be adversely

impacted by proposed construction activities? ^
X
(7) Does the project involve waters classified as Outstanding Water

Resources (OWR) and/or High Quality Waters (HQW)? ^
X
(8) Will the project require fill in waters of the United States
in any of the designated mountain trout counties? ~ X
(9) Does the project involve any known underground storage
tanks (UST's) or hazardous materials sites? ~ X
PERMITS AND COORDINATION YES NO
(10) If the project is located within a CAMA county, will the
project significantly affect the coastal zone and/or any
"Area of Environmental Concern" (AEC)? a X
(11) Does the project involve Coastal Barrier Resources Act ^
resources? X
(12) Will a U. S. Coast Guard permit be required? ^
X
(13) Will the project result in the modification of any existing
regulatory floodway? X
4

(14) Will the project require any stream relocations or channel ^
changes? X
SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND CULTURAL RESOURCES YES NO
(15) Will the project induce substantial impacts to planned
growth or land use for the area? X
(16) Will the project require the relocation of any family or

business? ^
X
(17) Will the project have a disproportionately high and adverse
human health and environmental effect on any minority or

low-income population? ^
X
(18) If the project involves the acquisition of right of way, is the

amount of right of way acquisition considered minor? ^
X
(19) Will the project involve any changes in access control? ^
X
(20) Will the project substantially alter the usefulness

and/or land use of adjacent property? ^
X
(21) Will the project have an adverse effect on permanent
local traffic patterns or community cohesiveness? X
(22) Is the project included in an approved thoroughfare plan
and/or Transportation Improvement Program (and is,

therefore, in conformance with the Clean Air Act of 1990)? ^
X
(23) Is the project anticipated to cause an increase in traffic

volumes? ^
X
(24) Will traffic be maintained during construction using existing

roads, staged construction, or on-site detours? ^
X
(25) If the project is a bridge replacement project, will the bridge
be replaced at its existing location (along the existing facility)
and will all construction proposed in association with the

bridge replacement project be contained on the existing facility? ^
X
(26) Is there substantial controversy on social, economic, or
environmental grounds concerning the project? X
(27) Is the project consistent with all Federal, State, and local laws

relating to the environmental aspects of the project? ^
X
(28) Will the project have an "effect" on structures/properties
eligible for or listed on the National Register of Historic Places? X

(29) Will the project affect any archaeological remainswhich are'
important to history or pre-history? ~ R
(30) Will the project require the use of Section 4(f) resources
(public pazks, recreation lands, wildlife and waterfowl refuges,
historic sites, or historic bridges, as defined in Section 4(f) ^
of the U. S. Department of Transportation Act of 1966)? X
(31) Will the project result in any conversion of assisted public
recreation sites or facilities to non-recreation uses, as defined
by Section 6(f) of the Land and Water Conservation Act D
of 1965, as amended? X
(32) Will the project involve construction in, across, or adjacent
to a river designated as a component of or proposed for
inclusion in the National System of Wild and Scenic Rivers? ~ X
F. Additional Documentation Required for Unfavorable Responses in Part E
Question 3. Will the project affect anadromous fish?
The stream is habitat for anadramous fish. Impact from the project will be
minimized by the use of the measures included below which are repeated in the
Project Commitments Green Sheet of this document.
• NCDOT will implement Stream Crossing Guidelines for Anadramous Fish
• The North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries has indicated that a moratorium on
in-water construction will be in place from February 1 to September 30 of any given
year.
• To the extent practical, construction should be accomplished without the use of
construction pads.
• To the extent practical, bridge demolition should occur without getting into the
water.
6

G. CE Approval
TIP Project No.
State Project No.
W.B.S. No.
Federal Project No
~.L.P.~.tve-- JAI ~V
Project Description: (Include project scope and location. Attach location map.)
The purpose of this project is to replace Craven County Bridge No. 212 on SR 1005
over Bachelor Creek. The replacement structure will be a bridge 115 feet long and
30 feet wide. The cross section will include two 12-foot lanes and 3-foot offsets. The
west approach will be approximately 330 feet and east approach will be
approximately 300 feet long. The approach cross section will include two 12-foot
lanes and 8-foot shoulders. Traffic will be detoured offsite during construction (see
Figure 1). The roadway will be designed as a Major Collector with a 60 mile per
hour design speed.
Categorical Exclusion Action Classification: (Check one)
TYPE II(A)
X TYPE II(B)
Approved:
.3 -3~1- ~~
Date
3 3 -Q
Date
3- 3l-0
Date
B-4085
8.2171201
33444.1.1
BRSTP-1005
Project Development & Environmental Analysis Branch
For Type II(B) projects only:
Date John F. Sullivan, III, Division Administrator
deral Highway Administration
rro~ect Development ac tJnvironmentai Analysis tsrancn
Yrolect Development ~c trnvironmentai Analysis tsrancn

® °E~4~A~~~'"°
~OENO~ES PILL IN
ETL NO 11 ~BSS~~ `.
1.
,.` "\
~ `,
tt t
t~ `t
,~
i
i
i
i
1
Nmef M/Y SOAC'fYM n Mac (1Si Rn
O ~
MEAwTgN/l PAPER FE61.Tr CORP.
DI NTO • PO 671 r
~!G•PCN
tp~pp ^ ° g
AA 11 60A4 -I urn ro P z
WI tEAp t AAP 4 y
-~ ~" „y~i. .. 1
OIU6! !!0
~ 'L T exAkE xo, az
t ~u
-"-~"--'~ iNV no -. F F:
.. .. ..
3 ~avNUa~aN xEar10.0'
r*
ROJE B-4085 ~~ n+'~bo'ab ~ p~i ro pMr~
xoTEl9kDCE xMS 8000 RA9N;$ eTx
STEFL GAOEAS ~N1 •C00 rWGRAlLS
NOTEr F1EV~ipxS ALWG R/R IEADR~LLS ANNE NpT
MCQRAIE 0.E TO IAtETJ1RAITT ~Np AGE Oi STRUCiIFE.
--~ _
L ~
~~sr "tPw .., ~
y`~ I ~.e _.. ~ ~ ..
i
.rf~~.%~ ,..,., .-
~ _ _
I DETAIL 3t~U'r'~aN~ PAVEE~ENT AND
BRIDGE RELATIONSHIP
r
1
r
i
O
~ YONT! HU6p1AlEY BETiS
~ OB pi! - PO !/T
~ 16 A1•PG 7T
I
I
r N
r wla ~r TAW
/ ET~~ Z TON! OUIDQ RAM GUTilI!
f.q r~tEA fuac 7~ pp n
r d l01. YD! A 10+16.00 -*b ~n TO
"~ii+~'4i+~i/tir~-ir'~tiiir"~
_I~3~P ~: -~_.--ter -
~I,~ _"
~~~ ..~

~0 a° is
~~ rt
ao a.. ~ ro
su u+76AS a..
END

LESA~r Nr ELkV!v41 ~~ A
BISE:C~iRM1CE' .:~:ddTOCFS.
!$tSLfRfYArtMTiii!liiiiiiiii:+, ac:::rns
aASCrAr~raloi!::::::::::-~ rr
aaara°Pbbc:asa+~E::::• satcFs
avFato~rc:rcr:: -~oa;:rRS.
aa~o^PUa:E~tvara =,lxaPr:

'
'.1W
E OP:SUlrEr ~. .:~liQ-0S I?.

~- OdE 0" AA~d' TA !'~' ::
..........................................................
..........................................................
........................................................

..!Z !i~i~i:i::i~.i:ii:i
..E9lTiilii`iiiiii
i.: i 3rA II0~S6lZ:. iV

na~lcr 16EAaQ No. :HRr No.
61085 4
I
YW RRT N0.
~q,~
y
9g+~QI [~A~~ 8~61NE~Bl
( .~_
ll_~ ~ Y ~.....n.~
3~} T ~ ~ ,~ 6 i ~ 11~Y~
i. 1 L l 1
i

nPF nr r Pa/EO
SM7ULOE~

'{-

nPE rIl
2_~TOFACE
4P,VE
SNIX!(DER cixvu
7t NN 4U~IEH
BEirEGr PIVEO SMAAAE/i ARO SAOIR1lR
~Rd GiItTO? OdOT rO lC11Ei
S~E~
~T E TO
uL

F
i ~~0pTT sgty~
®DENO~ETLAfAL IN _l 0l \
._01 :~ ~9~•w
`~
..~~
~_.._-~--~ p
J
8(_ _ %O.
aq /
` ~ 1 O
8 1
IBrzt_+_ ~ NTERIU P~PEA tt CORP. m
_ OB MTO ' PG N ~Rr
~8 pwpou ~ ~ ~ r
ITA D .0~ k CUY I Ml Z
.. ~ fN ~a / stet r " ..
/ eta
111
-:~.._ rw.saar xaw
F F ~'.
v
NOTE~BA~GE NAS FOOD
S1IFELL GPOEAS AIa NO
NOTE~EIENAl7Gi5 ALONG P/T
ACQFA7[ OI.C i0 WPEfAUPoT1
.......................
.........................
• ~.. •.
V
>~ :Dt--
y1
f
t
_. r
~. > .~.
j r,'Y ~ _~
~.~ 5 _.~
.~ _ - ,,
_ ;._
D T L O E~PA4N r
-- . ,_~
r r
_..~~..

Pi:fti911f
air58t:
..................
x:~e~s ::r
..................
~::',
nano raR~e+a rw. weEr ra•
B-~0l3 4
kw war rro•
°~'
Di1° MYD
er, e~u

PR1 LIhfIN RI P~.ANS
m Nor me ro . cotmxvu~~wt7

.:~- Wti
YP~111 =-~ ~ PNED
SRpIlDE
ttPE w
2~IrOFACE SHQ!lAER tuna
tlCrtAr 4UI/~
~7MEf~1 PA~EO SipROE'R
BEnv Ov-TfA uOT TO SCwEr
0`

.C 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

~ f~ dJ.d. ~.. C`eaTS sr.:.~
® LLLONIdI,E APACfS 2tlE t
Mog56W.
JgZa.N
\~
i
i
i
I
ti 0 8~ B~
NTEAxATgNL6 PdPEp FEALTY CORP.
OB NTC • Po 678
N!q•PO6B
6HOU F191p9p1A1 G~LUnIfEI
AA 11 60.8/ -I ~lT(ro CIABf '1' F IUl
FST.2 T a
N~ FILT66 fMl
wrWr vR 50.00'TINY 0. A0.W Ei15t RiN -
'~~~, F .r -may' - _ -.. '
~4~-------------•A--- -- i --- Ib~CA4 H
~ OFAU Jd0
sn uo5 2~esr -~ ~ 1! CAF
1 7G
o
~s
A
a
~~ .. .. ~qyA
uAU 16r 6M 4
` /
A n+ .a ~,.~ 6IItyQ,UE ~AY~
B 4085 ~~" + ~7~` ~roL j
wrESwucE Nls Hood REMas RRrN
srEaL cRm~+s .w woad NAN;NAUs
NOTES FIEVAIgNS ILONG R/R HF,AaNllLS aRE wi
ACCIAATE plE 70 IiiEGIAASRir Aw AGE dF STAOCiUAE.
~',~ ~
~ r ._ r ., I
~ _... f ,,k .- i
~ ~ ~ i
~ ~ _
I
I DETAIL &HOWING P.RVEMENT Ah'D
BRIDGE REI.ATION9HIP
r
I
I
I
~ YONi~ 3dMPL(iEY BETT$
I 06 q73 • PO 362
I 6Nq•PG33
I
I
/ ~
~ CtA6 'M IA 6AF ~
i E6L7 TOW ~H~u~ ~~,
~ FlLigl FAIAIC ddTT 6600
~ d 6O. YDf A 16 * -4
.. .. ., .. ., .. .. .. .. .. .. w
a10 - .
~1!'W
-~------r __.. -.._.
T~~ ~r~mm ~ro
9PoOGl: HrDQN/tfC.DATA
oESxA as~5,rxx . ~ r~s
pESp:FI~'q,rtAYy . 50 YpS.
GESY"l'i . . MF E!E•'lr~.w. .: ~,T,t Fr:.
8+3E:L-F]!AaCE -, J6P7CS
86SE F(6`RIE6[T • ~Git YIFS
ANSC:F6T::El6AT10Y-'. 41rZ.FT_.
DYDSOpPNC.L6SKNAgGE :::• SA]7LF5
1kD'8''O°F!MY. FidEGUfAtI' :: : : ~ SCO. YRS
Oi'fl9O°PI~O ECEYA~Or • K.J Fl
OAt'E Q° 9Ai'EY ~ lid-0S
•S,f121'AtiOv
ArGATEO":SUYfr •T.t::FT..
6n, 7
.$6r
-: STA 116.672
U cRiA SF+'KE
SETS JQ'P~! ;;
~ C''„'FnE ~~tRrET~y*
t P , ~' (~~
E ~ ,p
Y PACED
1YPf U! 5~~" ~ J
" -c-
2~4' TD FACE) 4 PAV£Q I
OF GUARp4NL SPIX!(DER SHW
RCfATKN'SM~P BEir££r AroEO E E~ $XE6d1CR
~rdF anrEK u~or ro ASE!
aBRlC FoR Say SraBlUZarlOx
USED FROM -L- STATION 15+30+/-
O+/- ALONG THE RK;Hr SLOE TO
IN STABlUZING POTENTIAGY WEAK
'E OEPoSIrS. THE FABRK; SHOU(D
"ED FROM fXISTlNG TOE ~ flLL TO
FD TOE OF FILL ALONG -L-. THE
oR FA9RIC FOR sat STABluzarrox
DETERMINED BY THE ENGINEER.

i

///
1
t

Ny~',ac.
e•,
~,

~ ~ G ¢ ( r.~
e ~ ~ Elv ilibb V~~Vtt. ~~f4 F 1' ~. iH~1i-'. _..-..
~~ql.
~ ,,s 9RIDDE V~EL i Z01l~H%P

O unrR nPVt Pxr,sf Yfmu ftffrR~Yl. LPas Yxc
ururr Pa,>:s Mu Rfuui Po Pua >w RfCUIa_ O
NO RELOC.YTpN. A LL 1ELEPXONE C.tAIE IPES ill~i
CONFUOT MTH 71E BRIKE CONSTROC~1011 SWLL
Q B eE ABYNOOIEp a Pf.cf.
.xaRZORra oa+ffcnawL oraLEo

PAR OP710 raFrrwRE uuf.

NTERNATIONU ~+fPFR REUTT COMP.
YONTA ,UI~PIaEr BEttS
(b 1277 • PO 7I2
~
uPPRax-u>E srw RKm
' pA RTO • PO 6Tt
b b • IG 6t w ~
"^
° .RaR u rMwL
artlm sPRq~r PRIER aPrlc rELfrROr~ t1NE
BEGw PRaP rRERa,ED SPRNT PBFR OPtf:
t N. q - PG

PROP. TRERCIED SPRNi FRET
iNl P6EA aPrk
E 7a fxnrxc NIOU A IaA) QIRIEI
Ay~ ~9,pp
A t k ro ~ ~ g aP7k 7aEPw~ Lrac Ye>,RO~+
fxnr. PAIFA aPnc rftf>haxE i+rE.
'
'
Pnc >F1EPRa+E Lo,E. SfA 11 60.D/ k ~
QAft '1' t W
q 1
Ir AA1
em
oPi~ TELEPHONE wwrw uw.5
~ctFARiR
.. ..
EUNE
BOirOM
. rfE M~idAt LAIR
OIdYDI n
;
° ~ r
~' ;,;
u
~" ~ / ' ~ ~~ f~T t7+U.90~ ~~i0
d ~ / ITAI/
d

T
,
.. .. .,
~ ~
+
16. -4
0

UNDER
Y ! Y. ~1 IOp Y/P ( 1YL yKIgPY

OAAU 7I0 I
1BANDON SR R1E 1f 637 '~.' I
fRROE N0.71t
~ _ _ - _ _ _ _ AElWOH-
7G
Y
'kRl
@
~~~~__~F~ ~~r~ ~-- ~1~F
--F ........
~ - - - Y
r
F;
6 7. ...~... ,': 'ieRiOou.. ~~~
e
.
................. .
a o' ~ y ......
........
~~~
~r u AAr
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
8t00A0 ~' aAn AIP NJ
~ R .. t~ .. .r!h.r!hs!h .. ..
e~"A ,°wDE+,e"
T~
ro R ,a yr„
- ' i
~
.
PROJE B 4085 ITA „+~ ~.
~
~
~ 3~~ u
eo ~
P~ ~A

NO,f, BNROE HY$ RQ~ PARS RnH .

~.
~ ~ ~' ~ ~ END T1P

STEFL LdDFAS UO R000 RNORallS ..

.. ,
..
NOTFt f1EYl7gN$ uONO R/R iFAOMUL$ ANRE NOi
YOQRYif OlE i0 RMEpLAPoT7 W AGE OF STRUCIIAF.
~_

................ ..... ................................
......... .........................................
"! BRfOCiE:' M'URAfIUC:DATAG:::; i

Df;KAr sR6WEACr~: !.--.?]:i:JJSt:
PE'SRl' ~-:~1EYArp::::::::!!:LS~:Er:::

ISEi/IL{~ICT~iiitii'iiii~il!!i~:.j'SS'.
dISL' R I I' E(fYA5Y111 i' r t' t E i i+ l ~:');T"
G'2~]'PMC: p517fAA~::::::s :SAS : .
.. fNfJHOPMAN~.fAE07EM7' .~~ffi:
...
..
~: OVfJBp?PRti~fEQYAT,f71 *~~
:
.
. .........................................................
' 1S~~'fA~.7.•2yy1~~rATMA1~w~:.-~~::II:-:::::i::;:::::*r'::: r.....:

:: ... ~ ~ ...'.: F
:::
:
:
::::::::::::::
y
~
Y
.
i.TY ::::::::::::::
x- 7fA:lff76f1:::: .
tr ni~ :sewE
t ~Er
....... W:
.... ]o
.... rPe
.... pl::
...... :::
...

Q
~ iA>t
W :ti
p :::
R _
~: . .
M!
i~
j7
Pl. tti~ 6! fl!J . A! ::. : Jir
4: o
b~/6
iii::!i: .
:!': ~:l~:::iii .
: 'AC~~~2fl1!:ii:i
!6Fi.
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Mmpr Y/1 rUM RYY 0. Y01D EMi RA
--
M
PAOm ABBIMQ no. 71~T Pq.
6.40l~ 4
AM' DleT Ia.
AOAOWA~ Y plilCq+ MYDFAUlIC1
Gt~A [NCINEfit
r ~~ Iett ~ ~I
~.
tNY
~ ~rrtf t t /~~ t~~ ~ x,5`1
ucr.... ~
f _~ ~~
l_.,~.._ .a~~. •- _ ._.__
r PrvED
iYPf 111 SlrvfllDE
j~
=' -E-
TYPE IN
7-470 FACE SMUlf1ER S~ f
OF CUMDRAJL ERN 6Y1T7'ER
,ors+r~atniEElr rAVEp sAEtoA,f AA'Q 9AU0Ee
sTaeruzarxw
STATI~Y l5fJ0+/-
RICFIT 5lDE TO
?OTEHTINIY WEN(
E fABRlC SHOULD
7N0 TOE OF flCL TO
. ACpVG -C-. THE
4N.

0
0
T
0
P
Dd
/~
`~~oe
~ L~
o ~,
a
f
See Sheet i-A Foy InOex of Sheets
~'
4
~I
V
W
0
ti
h
~~ ~<~
G' ~~
t~~',?,
-_ ~~
,~ ~-
i~ ~~~ ,`~
~~~ ~
DETOUR ROUTE -~__~__~_~-e-f+ I ~~~~1 /
VICINITY MAP
1~~~,I~~®N ®]F l~I~~I[~~fl~Y~

LOCATIONr BRIDGE N0.212 OVER BACHELOR CREEK ON SR 1005
TYPE OF WORK, SIGNALS, STRUCTURE, GRADING, DRAINAGE, PAVING
To ----- NCRR/Norfolk Sout ern
Cove City
~i BEGIN TIP PROJECT B-4085
o STA 8+00.00 -L-
U
R.111 R~1, AOOI.T OpO,t R ~I
Fp MIL
®BRf
•C• ~-
8-4085_
.te 1
Y ti OJ.)T
~~~~~ i v
5~46f ,a 1

...- _ - F,L'W'th
~ "~P q~i J }
~R~1h 1G(~~5(,a.
._
e_ _~~ . e_ ~
~~ - - r. ,:Nr '-\
j,~t~ ~_
t~4iust

~
--_ a_..--
-=_-

W \
BE6tri 3RtOGE `~ •~ NO 8RlOGE
STA e+85A0 -C- ~ a r3~00.~ -L-
u
m •"
~t
-C- -
_____ ~______________ To
•I c NC 5
,:~<~ I `'
END TIP PROJECT B-40$5
THERE IS NO CONTROL OF ACCESS ON THIS PROJECT
V GRAPHIC SCALES DBSIGN DATA PROf&CT LENGTl!
o_ 15 0 50 1 ADT 1007 = 3621_____
ADT 1015 = 550_0 length of Roadway TIP Project 8-4085 = 0.148 mile
PLANS DHV = iQ 96 length of Structure T1P Projed i3-4085 = 0.011 miles
1~, 45 ~_ Q D 60 96 Total Length of T1P Project 8-4085 = 0.170 mile
O PROFILE (HORIZONTALS y = 60 MPH
4 0 ~ 1 FUNC CUSS - COLLECTOR
V PROFILE (VERTICALS ~ TTST 3% DUAL 3%
STA
P~epore? In !ht OII1Ce d:
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
lA00 JiraA RIJr~ Dr., RoJif/A NC, 27610
moa rrumuc ,uscamc+nnxt
RIGHT OF WAY DATB~ TONY ROUSER. PE _ ___
MAY 14,1005 » ~t°°'~"
L817WG DAT& _ _ _ _ BRUCE_ B,_PAYNE, PE_ __ ___
1ANUARY 16.1007 "0~'' Di1~" A1i01~"
17+00 ~ Q:0 .. L.a .
~1 -~t` rS ~l~ ~.1y~ ~....
~1 ~t olt i 5'
, ", t
amR:tvires ~rGDrse~ DIVISI0IV;
STATB 08• N
e
1 C
s
ROMWAY DBSIGN
RNG1N88R o ~

N

c
m
m
m
a
v
24~ USE TYPICAL SECTION NO< i
12' B' 12' 12' B' -lr STA 8+50.00 TO -{r STA 11+35.00
11'wGR -L- STA 13+50.00 TO -lr STA 16+50,00
~ 2' FDPS C W l P RARE ~ C 2' FDPS
'4P
TO 3 OA8 ~ 0,_02 _0,02 ~ 0_L~
0 ?)
T p E 9.5^ u ~ U W D E T ~' ORIGINAL
GROUND
GRADE TO THIS UNE BADE T THIS UNE
TYPICAL SECTION N0. 1
CR -Ir (SR 1005(
I ,
u'
USE TYPICAL SECTION NO" _2
1 ' B' 12' 12' B' -lt STA 11+35,00 TO -L- STA 11+98.00 (BEGIN BRIDGE)
11'wGR ~ -lr STA 12+81.00 TEND BRIDGE) TO -L- STA 13+50,00
~ 2'FDPS ~ C ~ ~ GRADE ~ p 2'fDPS
~ ~ 3,)1L. psi 0.0 ~ 0.0~ 0.02 ~~.. ~ ~~I,P ,
` 9.5~
Jl 1 ^ E
1v 0
IE TYPICAL SECTION NO" ~ E T
• ~ -L- (SR 1005)
.n
32'-10" ~ ROADWAY

~ ~ C1
~ 02_ i E ~ Ci
0. 2 i1
00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
TYPICAL SECTION N0.3
~ ~ (SR 1005)
1'_7"
USE TYPICAL SECTION N0. 3
,~0-1 ~ 5TA 11+85.00 (BEGIN BRIDGE(TO
~ STA 13+00.00 (END BRIDGE)
' `ADDTOONAI WIDTH REQUIRED FOR
HYDRAULIC SPREAD •
' EXISrIN wIDTH USE TYPICAL SECTION N0. 4
C~ V I CRO CZ -L- STA 8+00,00 TO ~- STA 8+50,00
RIGI~ POINT -~ STA 16+50.00 TO ~- STA 17+00,00
GROUND ~
~ _
~ ice'' ~~
\ ~ i I ~
~ " ~ TYPICAL SECTION N0. 4 ~ ~ ORIGINAL
~~~ROU
' TIE TO EXISTING; INCIDENTAL MILLING AS NEEDED
PAVEMENT SCHEDULE

~ PROP. APPROX. 9 " ABPXALT CONCRETE BUAFACE COURSE TYPE B6.6B
T
_ A
AN AYEAADE RATE OF 18S LBS. PER Eq. YD., IN EA~H OF 2 LAYE~B
Ci FA
B
U
A
ATOAN AVERAOEPAATB OFA
17C
9lREpE
C
BE'1
89
e
g
R
7
e
L
VD,
PER
DEPTN
T0
BE PULED iN UYEAS NOT TD EXCEED 1)7" IN DEPTH.

CZ PROP. APPROX. 1 1~7" ASPHALT CONCRETE BUAFACE COURSE, TY/E 88.68
AT AN AVEA
AOE RATE OP 181 LBB. PER Bq. YD.
D PAOI, APPADX. 217" ABPNALT CDNCRETE INTERMEDIATE CWRBl,
_ TYPE 116.08, AT AN AVFRABE RATE Of 786 LBB. PER 8q. 1Ti.
PROP, YAA, DEPTN ASPNALT CONCRETE INTERMEDIATE COURSE
D1 TYPE I1D.OB, AT AN AVEAABE MTE Of 114 181, PM Bq. Yb. P!R 1"
DEPTN, TO BE PLACED IN LAYERS NOT LE88 TNAN 7 1~4 " IN DEPTH DA
OAEAIEA THAN 4" IN DEPTH.
E PROP. APPROX. 4.0" ABRHALT CONCRETE BA6E COURSE, TYPE B18.OB,
AT AN AYEAADE RATE OF 466 LBB. PEA Sq. YD.
PROP. VAR, DEPTH ABPNALT CONCRETE BABE COURSE, TYPE B78.OB
E1 AT AN AVERASE RATE OF 174 L88~ PER 80. YD. PER 1" DEPTH. T6
BE FUCED [H UYERB HOT LE88 TXAN 8" IN DEPTH OR OAEATER
THAN 614 iN DEPTH.
T_ EARTH MATERIAL.
LI_ EXIBTINB PAVEMENT.
V INCIDENTAL YELLING
11f VARIABLE DEPTN ASPHALT PAYEYENT (BEE STANDARD WEDgiNO DETAILI
NOTE: PAVEMENT EDGE SLOPSU~1:1 UNLESS SHOWN OTHERWISE,
~ ~]
II''
~~„~ !2_V4n Y Z_v4~`~~~
3_
~N• Detail Showing Method of Wedging ~ MIN.

~O
O
O
N
\~
M
a

i
i
i
1
1 O
O
O
a
--- nmo, wvw som~rRO: tt xa+o Exn, xix
'~ m
'_~4--------------w--- -~.
xcxa piw
1+`i.:'
-Alw- ~ .... - _ . _ .. _
$o ..^.`
fNOTORE~ RRR~ ENTRY II
REOUiREBENTS,SEE L
NCR FORM IQ3 E
roxa x~.
~s
NPg Epp.
3y2sy
-BL- 5 PINC ]0+28.09
-L- 12+90.E8 !15.49' LTl
- fl- IOI PINC 6+27.34
PL Ir~p'.
fl • 36C
[ •. p5
vC.~
o _ e
h 4i~
_.
r'
~ V
wr ~~' ICI
.~.~. ~ .. ~s....
o, ~ ~ ,
--- _ _
n0iE: Er.I;,CE Ne5 wOGU PIUNL$ wITH

~
'
STEEL LiRGERS e,~ w0G0 wNGweLLS -JI- I~Z
'~
FU'f v~~i$4/~~n~;.y~.
norE:ELEVerwns eEOxc Rie wEeaweLLS eRE nGT
eLCURnTE OUE TO IRREGULaxITY eN0 tGF OF STRUCNRE. ELEV .19.81' IP SET ~`
~._ -L- 12+97.40 172.69' RTI _

a'
BMQiE NYC~QN!!JC DATA
CESBN DTST~IAROE •-. YXll OF5
IL~56MFRfp/E1CY -. I:-SO. YRS-
lC56N. NM. E(EYAT:(W ~ LS.4 FT
'BASE C4CRM#"' -I'S600Cf5:
'BASC fM0UE1Lt` .I,p0' YRS..
BASE nY: f1EYATQY . w2 /T
dFRTD'PuC Ot9CNMCE • 5170 CiS
,. . g9ERT0°~. fREOIiFAp • SOD rAg..

.'~ . QYCRT(PPn4 E[EYup • Ai.T ft
OpE Cr Sca~fF • ~O-0S
~+YSfEfvAFUV
b OATf OF $EpMC! •. lA FT

i
.

u 2
pqP,
-r STA 6,SGT2
L7 !RlR $PnfE
SE7 WY 3(7FnE1

CBS:AOSLP N6 :: Pr• INPd50
ElEY,7T31' ~(• 020'
Y- 51'A n+9t51

BURT R w ~
K ~ Xn
_. __

• ~
s i~ ~¢+a w -~-
R
, t0'J ~ 7 6'd R 35'.fi LpREp
~

~~
ux7 RE~eeue ~, metr No.
B-4085 4
aw ~+tEr No.
ow,~r oewN ~"- "'Nrouuucs
81Q41EER t 6NGN!!R
r-5 PaED
SHOUICfR
-t70 FACE
r-5'PafO Q` C~MDRaL
SHC'JIDER Zpa
SRq/
RELPA?KAF BETKC~ P.vCO SNOUtRER rp gp
RERY 6URER GqT TO SCA1f!
b
~'.
8 9 10 11 1~ 13 14 15 16 17 a

s

;.

Iry} y, s .
dr~js S'. 4 7 +& r• _ 'k ~ ~ h• n!b ~ ~„C.r L W`y f ~ `/µ3 ~ niZ "n•
,~, i3`T' 1~ en. ~ j. 4 a ~Y1~ ~• 4`Si,9 ~,yl }7"~• ~i~f y-~~. ' ~ ,~N,1
.My~ ~ WIt '~. T. M1I
y
~ ~ a
r` ~ ~ o ~s ~° r- K~u t
T ~
4 ~~~tW. CY !e Ti, 7M~M 1
~' VI ~Y.' C 1 ~~ D y ~. ~y'
. F ~` (3"a 1t M~
~ ~~ ~'~ n ..~ ~ ,;< .g
~' ~t ~ •
~~ ' ~ ~~ '`
y ~ 4
w Y• 6 F ~ k .t. ~ 1J
~ ~ G ~
i~ ~ f r, ~
~ pit'` .rar~ ~l r,~ ~' .. ~,y;,, ~ ~.~ ~~
N ^•••~ Nom.;. y x' ~
...~ , ~ ~~ , A r
~ ~
. ~,;
~~; ,. ~ r,~~ ~~ _ ,.~r ,~,~,~ ,.,
• ,r~.,,,~~. '~
L `' .~ . ~,; ,x '~
.~, ~~ ~~
~ ~,~ ~ ~~~ `"~ r ,e , ti
>,
~ ~` ~
,~~, ,~
i
~~ ,~
~ .. ~;,
u:.
I~
. ~'. i .f~

F' .> ~
k ~. °~
~_
s P
~~~~~~
PA'~R ~ r•' r •~
~ ..~'
~! 4 ' tF" ' '+F
d ~ ,~ ,~
s, ~~" ''TF'~. ~~,
,~;~
.>~. ~~ A
.~ ~~ ~.
k' y~? ~ l' Jk~:
I~•yat ~ r ~•~ ti~ ~,
~.~ ~,. .
~~~ > :,.
~ it k ~~r;` «~ ! •'~~~
' _ '~ rw
e ~ 1
~.~SR~```' ~ • ~ ` ~ ' a~
lpp `- ~•
a
st r~,
- ,

~ ~,~,'~'~
,~ ~,,~, tl ,,~,~,
N '~ r '
b;r ~ !~. ~ ~~

~..,
~
, ~ '
~A ~~ ~M
~...t___~.t~.1. ~•
•~ ~
~

~ ~ ~ ® Wetland boundaries
'`"""' Ri
i
p
ff
~'
, er
par
an
u ~
i~rojec4~eea
~
Plant commur~iGes -
Goa~'f'el Wl..in L3c~t~',nc+ cr.: ~:vr, .,.!.~
~~„ ~ L"ypress-~St~rt ~~r~ni~. I
disturbedlmarntained land ~ " I
~~ Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest " ~`,
~
~ '~ shrublscrub assemblage _

w+~
b tt" ~~
~
W.:
d~^L
~ r
~t F
~ #
~
~~ M .
.x
_.
"~' , , ~v ~ ~ W ,.,
2. ;~ ' ~
,~ ~,
Iur'
~. y
~` 3
~~:
r
~t
4 ~ '
rb ~' ~ .
>.
4
~ M
~ ~ ~ r ~ ~~
~ ~ ary
~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ r
.af
„ t ~ ,. 1
t
~ }
~- i ~ '~c ~~
w~ '.W -
i~~~~c -
3
t
~~~
,~
~ ~~ #
~` ~ t~
~~ ~,

~~ F
~.~`
~ x ~,
;, ,
4,
{,Q
7,=wax
~~ a4~
~'~ti
~I~S11AV ~J fj1~~n 'Ryy.;.
1144
~1 • TIT '.:
y lh ~14•. yPef'S'3
..., ~ a ~ yc -aa~M..

9
~.. ~
>~~ _~
~'

~~ ~` .
A'j ~, ~C !; ~;
1909hayn~~~ t:u~t.tli~.
~eiaroh, non>, Caroline z~so4
Ph:919 8283433
Frx 9t9 828 3516
Figure 2
B-4085
Cra~ren
Countal
Replacement of
Bridge No. 212
SR 1005 over
Bachelor Creek
State Project No.
8.2171201
Federal Aid No.
BRSTP-1005[7]
Prepared for:
The North Carolina
Department of
Transportation
Zaleigh, North Carolii
Client; NCDOT
Project: 02-113.08
Date; March 2003
Drawn By: ES
Scale: 1" = 250'