20090298 Ver 1_Information Letter_20050531

e
??Hps HR, h, ??Q
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA AHps?NWIY S
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ??Rec
H
MICHAEL F. EASLEY LYNDO TIPPETT
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
May 20, 2005
Nicole Thomson
Division of Water Quality
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1650
SUBJECT: SR 1434 (Sam Powell Road) Bridge Replacement over Quankey Creek
Halifax County, North Carolina
State Project No. 8.2302101 (B-4541); WBS Element 33756. 1.1
F.A. No. BRZ-1434(3)
Dear Ms. Thomson:
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT), Project Development and
Environmental Analysis Branch is conducting planning, environmental and engineering
services and preparing a Planning Report/Categorical Exclusion (CE) for the proposed
improvements on the subject project. As an integral part of this study, we are soliciting
input from agencies and individuals concerning the potential impacts of the proposed
improvements on any structure or feature within the project area and the impacts this
project may have on the social, economic, cultural, physical or biological conditions in
the area. Attached is a location map for your information and reference.
The proposed project is included in the Draft 2006-2012 Transportation Improvement
Program (TIP) as TIP No. B-4541. Right-of-way acquisition is scheduled to begin in
Fiscal Year 2007 and construction in Fiscal Year 2008. The scope of the project consists
of replacement of the bridge. This replacement will result in safer traffic operations.
Rehabilitation of the existing structure does not appear to be a feasible option due to its
age and deteriorating condition.
Alternatives that will be studied for the project include:
1. Do Nothing/No-Build
2. Replace the existing structure on existing location with off-site detour
3. Replace the existing structure on new location to the north, utilizing the existing
structure to maintain two-lane, two-way traffic pattern
We are currently in the process of evaluating the environmental impacts associated with
the bridge replacement project. Please note that there will be no formal interagency
scoping meeting for this project. This letter, therefore, constitutes solicitation for scoping
MAILING ADDRESS: LOCATION:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TELEPHONE: [phone] TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS FAX: [phone] SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER RALEIGH NC
RALEIGH NC 27899-1548 WEBSITE: WWW.NCDOTORG
comments related to the subject project. In order that we may fully evaluate the impacts
of the proposed project, it is requested that you respond in writing concerning any
beneficial or adverse impacts of the proposed project relating to the interest of your
agency. For the study effort to stay on schedule and for your input to be included, please
respond by June 15, 2005.
Please direct your comments to:
Ms. Colista S. Freeman, P.E.
NCDOT, Project Development & Environmental Analysis
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
[e-mail]
If you have any questions or need additional information concerning this project, please
contact Ms. Freeman at [phone], ext. 227.
Gregory J. 1horpe, Pti.D., Environmental Management Director
North Carolina Department of Transportation
GJTJs1
Attachment
SR 1434 (Sam Powell Road) Bridge Replacement over
Quankey Creek Site Location
Halifax County, North Carolina
State Project No. 8.2302101 (B -4541) FIGURE 1
F.A. No. BRZ-1434(3)
North Carolina Vicinity Map
RALPH WHREHEAD
ASSOCIATES, INC.
BRIDGE DEMOLITION FORM
DATE: May 20, 2005
PROJECT TIP NUMBER: B-4541
STRUCTURE: 410024
COUNTY: Halifax
FACILITY NAME: SR 1434
BODY OF WATER: Quankey Creek
DIVISION NO.: 4
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
This project involves the removal and replacement of a bridge over Waters of the
United States. Bridge No. 24 over Quankey Creek on SR 1434 was constructed in
1954 and is 52 feet long and 25.4 feet wide. Bridge No. 24 has a sufficiency
rating of 26.0.
STRUCTURE DESCRIPTION:
The superstructure of Bridge No. 24 is a reinforced concrete floor on timber
joists. The substructure consists of timber caps and timber piles for both the
interior and exterior bents.
MAXIMUM POTENTIAL FILL
The existing bridge can be removed without
dropping components into Waters of the
United States. However, maximum
potential fill is 10 cubic yards.
CLASSIFICATION OF WATERS:
MORATORIUM:
SECTION 7:
C
None anticipated for this project
USFWS list of Endangered and Threatened
Species in Halifax County:
Bald Eagle (Threatened -PD)
Red-cockaded Woodpecker (Endangered)
Dwarf Wedgemussel (Endangered)
Tar River Spinymussel (Endangered)

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh. North Carolina 27636-3726
June 10, 2005
Ms. Colista S. Freeman, P.E.
NCDOT, Project Development & Environmental Analysis
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
Dear Ms. Freeman:
This letter is in response to Dr. Gregory Thorpe's request for comments from the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service) on the potential environmental effects of the proposed replacement of
the bridge on SR 1434 crossing Quankey Creek (TIP No. B-4541) in Halifax County, North
Carolina. These comments provide scoping information in accordance with provisions of the
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (16 U.S.C. 661-667d) and section 7 of the Endangered
Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543).
For bridge replacement projects, the Service recommends the following general conservation
measures to avoid or minimize environmental impacts to fish and wildlife resources:
Wetland, forest and designated riparian buffer impacts should be avoided and minimized
to the maximum extent practical;
2. If unavoidable wetland or stream impacts are proposed, a plan for compensatory
mitigation to offset unavoidable impacts should be provided early in the planning
process. Opportunities to protect mitigation areas in perpetuity via conservation
easements, land trusts or by other means should be explored at the outset;
Off-site detours should be used rather than construction of temporary, on-site bridges.
For projects requiring an on-site detour in wetlands or open water, such detours should be
aligned along the side of the existing structure which has the least and/or least quality of
fish and wildlife habitat. At the completion of construction, the detour area should be
entirely removed and the impacted areas be planted with appropriate vegetation,
including trees if necessary;
4. Wherever appropriate, construction in sensitive areas should occur outside fish spawning
and migratory bird nesting seasons. In waterways that may serve as travel corridors for
fish, in-water work should be avoided during moratorium periods associated with
migration, spawning and sensitive pre-adult life stages. The general moratorium period
for anadromous fish is February 15 - June 30;

New bridges should be long enough to allow for sufficient wildlife passage along stream
corridors;
Best Management Practices (BMP) for Protection of Surface Waters should be
implemented;
7. Bridge designs should include provisions for roadbed and deck drainage to flow through
a vegetated buffer prior to reaching the affected stream. This buffer should be large
enough to alleviate any potential effects from run-off of storm water and pollutants;
8. The bridge designs should not alter the natural stream and stream-bank morphology or
impede fish passage. To the extent possible, piers and bents should be placed outside the
bank-full width of the stream;
9. Bridges and approaches should be designed to avoid any fill that will result in damming
or constriction of the channel or flood plain. If spanning the flood plain is not feasible,
culverts should be installed in the flood plain portion of the approach to restore some of
the hydrological functions of the flood plain and reduce high velocities of flood waters
within the affected area.
Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act requires that all federal action agencies (or their
designated non-federal representatives), in consultation with the Service, insure that any action
federally authorized, funded, or carried out by such agencies is not likely to jeopardize the
continued existence of any federally-listed threatened or endangered species. A biological
assessment/evaluation may be prepared to fulfill the section 7(a)(2) requirement and will
expedite the consultation process. To assist you, a county-by-county list of federally protected
species known to occur in North Carolina and information on their life histories and habitats can
be found on our web page at http://nc-es.ffivs.Lov/es/countyfr.html .
Although the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) database does not indicate any
known occurrences of listed species near the project vicinity, use of the NCNHP data should not
be substituted for actual field surveys if suitable habitat occurs near the project site. The
NCNHP database only indicates the presence of known occurrences of listed species and does
not necessarily mean that such species are not present. It may simply mean that the area has not
been surveyed. If suitable habitat occurs within the project vicinity for any listed species,
surveys should be conducted to determine presence or absence of the species.
If you determine that the proposed action may affect (i.e., likely to adversely affect or not likely
to adversely affect) a listed species, you should notify this office with your determination, the
results of your surveys, survey methodologies, and an analysis of the effects of the action on
listed species, including consideration of direct, indirect, and cumulative effects, before
conducting any activities that might affect the species. If you determine that the proposed action
will have no effect (i.e., no beneficial or adverse, direct or indirect effect) on listed species, then
you are not required to contact our office for concurrence.
We reserve the right to review any federal permits that may be required for this project, at the
public notice stage. Therefore, it is important that resource agency coordination occur early in
the planning process in order to resolve any conflicts that may arise and minimize delays in
project implementation. In.addition to the above guidance, we recommend that the

environmental documentation for this project include the following in sufficient detail to
facilitate a thorough review of the action:
1. A clearly defined and detailed purpose and need for the proposed project;
2. A description of the proposed action with an analysis of all alternatives being considered,
including the "no action" alternative;
3. A description of the fish and wildlife resources, and their habitats, within the project
impact area that may be directly or indirectly affected;
The extent and acreage of waters of the U.S., including wetlands, that are to be impacted
by filling, dredging, clearing, ditching, or draining. Acres of wetland impact should be
differentiated by habitat type based on the wetland classification scheme of the National
Wetlands Inventory (NWI). Wetland boundaries should be determined by using the 1987
Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual and verified by the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers;
The anticipated environmental impacts, both temporary and permanent, that would be
likely to occur as a direct result of the proposed project. The assessment should also
include the extent to which the proposed project would result in secondary impacts to
natural resources, and how this and similar projects contribute to cumulative adverse
effects;
6. Design features and construction techniques which would be employed to avoid or
minimize impacts to fish and wildlife resources, both direct and indirect, and including
fragmentation and direct loss of habitat;
7. If unavoidable wetland or stream impacts are proposed, project planning should include a
compensatory mitigation plan for offsetting the unavoidable impacts.
The Service appreciates the opportunity to comment on this project. Please continue to advise us
during the progression of the planning process, including your official determination of the
impacts of this project. If you have any questions regarding our response, please contact Mr.
Gary Jordan at [phone], ext. 32.
Si=ere ye
Pete Bdnj.
Ecological Services Supervisor
cc: Bill Biddlecome, USACE, Washington, NC
Nicole Thomson/Christina Breen, NCDWQ, Raleigh, NC
Travis Wilson, NCWRC, Creedmoor, NC
Chris Militscher, USEPA, Raleigh, NC

O
A TF9
Or
ZQQ; --I
r Y
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
June 17, 2005
MEMORANDUM
TO: Colista Freeman, P.E., NCDOT Project Development & Environmental Analysis
FROM: Christina Breen, NC Division of Water Quality
SUBJECT: Scoping Review of NCDOT's proposed bridge replacement projects: B-4541
In reply to your correspondence dated May 20, 2005 (received May 31, 2005) in which you requested
comments for the referenced projects, the NC Division of Water Quality has the following comments:
1. Proiect-Specific Comments
B-4541 Bridle over Ouankey Creek, Halifax Co.
1. Quankey Creek are class C waters of the State. Quankey Creek is on the 303(d) list for impaired use
for aquatic life due to impaired biological integrity. DWQ is very concerned with sedimentation and
erosion impacts that could result from this project. DWQ recommends that the most protective
sedimentation and erosion control BMPs be implemented to reduce the risk of nutrient runoff to
Quankey Creek. DWQ requests that road design plans provide treatment of the storm water runoff
through best management practices as detailed in Best Management Practices for the Protection of
Surface Waters. Refer to 15A NCAC 213 .0224(2) and 15A NCAC 2H. 1006.
2. This project.is within the Neuse River Basin. Riparian buffer impacts should be avoided and
minimized to the greatest extent possible. Refer to 15A NCAC 2B .0233 for a table of allowable
uses.
11. General Comments Regarding Bridge Replacement Proiects
1. If corrugated metal pipe arches, reinforced concrete pipes, or concrete box culverts are used to replace
the bridge, then DWQ recommends the use of Nationwide Permit No. 14 rather than Nationwide
Permit 23.
2. If the old bridge is removed, no discharge of bridge material into surface waters is preferred. Strict
adherence the Corps of Engineers guidelines for bridge demolition will be a condition of the 401
Water Quality Certification.
3. DWQ prefers spanning structures. Spanning structures usually do not require work within the stream
and do not require stream channel realignment. The horizontal and vertical clearances provided by
bridges allows for human and wildlife passage beneath the structure, does not block fish passage, and
does not block navigation by canoeists and boaters.
4. Bridge deck drains should not discharge directly into the stream; stormwater should be directed
across the bridge and pre-treated through site-appropriate means (grassed swales, pre-formed scour
holes, vegetated buffers, etc.) before entering the stream. Please refer to NCDOT Best Management
Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters
Ny?o,tt`'?hCarolina
Transportation Permitting Unit ,NWuraffy
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699.1650
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone: [phone] / FAX [phone] Internet: hftp /Hh2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer-50% Recycled/10 % Post Consumer Paper
2. If multiple pipes or cells are used, at least one pipe or box should be designed to remain dry during
normal flows to allow for wildlife passage.
3. Culverts or pipes should be situated along the existing channel alignment whenever possible to avoid
channel realignment. Widening the stream channel should be avoided. Stream channel widening at
the inlet or outlet end of structures typically decreases water velocity causing sediment deposition that
requires increased maintenance and disrupts aquatic life passage.
4. Riprap should not be placed in the active thalweg channel or placed in the streambed in a manner that
precludes aquatic life passage. Bioengineering boulders or structures should be professionally
designed, sized, and installed.
In most cases, we prefer the replacement of the existing structure at the same location with road closure.
If road closure is not feasible, a temporary detour should be designed and located to avoid wetland
impacts, minimize the need for clearing and to avoid destabilizing stream banks. If the structure will be
on a new alignment, the old structure should be removed and the approach fills removed from the 100-
year floodplain. Approach fills should be removed down to the natural ground elevation. The area
should be stabilized with grass and planted with native tree species. Tall fescue should not be used in
riparian areas. If the area that is reclaimed was previously wetlands, NCDOT should restore the area to
wetlands. If successful, the site may be used as wetland mitigation for the subject project or other
projects in the watershed. I
Thank you for requesting our input at this time. The DOT is reminded that issuance of a 401 Water
Quality Certification requires that appropriate measures be instituted to ensure that water quality
standards are met and designated uses are not degraded or lost. If you have any questions or require
additional information, please contact Christina Breen at [phone].
cc: Eric Alsmeyer, USACE Raleigh Field Office
Chris Militscher, USEPA
Travis Wilson, NCWRC
Gary Jordan, USFWS
File Copy