20180561 Ver 1_401 Application_20180424

Action History (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada)
�brrrit by Anonymous User 4/24/2018 8:08:39 AM (Start Event)
Accept by Carpenter,Kristi 4/24/2018 11:50:02 AM (DOT Initial Review)
. The task was assigned to Carpenter,Kristi. The due date is: April 27, 2018 5:00 PM
4/24/2018 8:09 AM

i i �� �
�����
�ivislan af Water Resour�es
Pre-Construction Notification (PCN) Form
For Nationwide Permits and Regional General Permits
(along with corresponding Water Quality Certifications)
January 31, 2018 Ver 2.3
*
Please note: fields marked with a red asterisk beloware required. You will not be able to submit the form until all mandatory questions are ans�red.
Also, if at any point you wish to print a copy of the E-PCN, all you need to do is right-click on the document and you can print a copy of the form.
Below is a link to the online help file.
https://edocs.deq. nc.gov/WaterResources/0/edoc/624704/PCN%20Help%20File%202018-1-30.pdf
A. Processing Information
County (or Counties) where the project is located:*
Jones
Is this project a public transportation project?*
C Yes l' No
lhis is any publicly funded by rrunicipal,state or federal funds road, rail, airport transportation project.
Is this a NCDOT Project?*
f• Yes r No
(NCDOT only) T.I.P. or state project number:
B-4563
WBS #
38411.1.2
(for �ICDOT use only)
1a. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:*
fJ Section 404 Permit (wetlands, streams and waters, Clean Water Act)
r Section 10 Permit (navigable waters, tidal waters, Rivers and Harbors Act)
1b. What type(s) of permit(s) do you wish to seek authorization?*
fJ Nationwide Permit (NWP)
r Regional General Permit (RGP)
r Standard (IP)
This form may be Corps to initiate the standard/individual permit process. Please contact your Corps representative for submittal of standard permits.
All required items that are not provided in the E-PCN and be added to the miscellaneous upload located at the bottom of this form.
Nationwide Permit (NWP) Number: 03 - Maintenance
NWP Number Other:
List all MNnurrbers you are applying for not on the drop down list.
1c. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWR:*

check all that apply
r% 401 Water Quality Certification - Regular r 401 Water Quality Certification - Express
r Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit �rJ Riparian Buffer Authorization
r Individual Permit
*
1d. Is this notification solelyfor the record because written approval is not required?
For the record onlyfor DWR 401 Certification:
For the record onlyfor Corps Permit:
f Yes C' No
C' Yes f' No
1e. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in-lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
IF so, attach the acceptance letter from rritigation bank a- in-lieu fee program
l" Yes f' No
1f. Is the project located in anyof NC's twentycoastal counties?*
f Yes C•' No
1h. Is the project located in a designated trout watershed?*
C' Yes C No
Link to trout information: http://�wvw.saw.usace.army.mil/Missions/Regulatory-Permit-Program/Agency-Coordination/Trout.aspx
B. Applicant Information
1a. Who is the Primary Contact?*
Jay B Johnson
1b. PrimaryContact Email:*
[e-mail]
1c. PrimaryContact Phone:*
(xxx)xxx-xxxx
[phone]
1d. Who is applying for the permit?
fJ Owner r7 Applicant (other than owner) r Agent/Consultant
(Checkall that apply)
2. Owner Information
2a. Name(s) on recorded deed:
North Carolina Department of Transportation
2b. Deed book and page no.:
f�UA
2c. Responsible party:
(for Corporations)
wa
2d. Address
Street Address
1037 W.H. Smith Blvd
Address Line 2
aty
Greenville
Fbstal / Zip Code
27835
2e. Telephone Number:
(xxx)xxx-xxxx
[phone]
State / Rovince / Region
NC
Cauntry
USA

2f. Fax Number:
(xxx)xxx-xxxx
2g. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
3. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
3a. Applicant is:
C' Agent
f•' Other
IF other please specrfy.
3b. Name:
JayJohnson
3c. Business Name:
(if applicable)
3d. Address
Street Address
P.O. Box 1587
Address Line 2
a�y
Greenville
Fbstal / Zip Code
27835
3e. Telephone Number:
[phone]
(xxx)xxx-xxxx
3f. Fax Number:
(xxx)xxx-xxxx
3g. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
State / F ovince / Rsgion
NC
Country
USA
C. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Project Information
1a. Name of project:*
Jones 6
1b. Subdivision name:
(if appropriate)
wa
1c. Nearest municipality/ town:'�
Trenton
1d. Driving directions*
IF it is a new project and can not easily be found in a GPS rrapping system Rease provide directions.
From intersection of NC 58 and NC 41 in Trenton, proceed in a westwardly direction for about 7.5 miles to SR 1301 Pine Street. Turn right
and proceed in a northerly direction for about .7 miles to the project.
2. Project Identification
2a. Propertyldentification Number:

(tax RN or parcel ID)
Jones 6 Bridge to Bridge Replacement
2b. Propertysize:
(in acres)
wa
2c. Project Address
Street Address
Address Line 2
a�y
Fbstal / Zip Code
2d. Site coordinates in decimal degrees
State / Rovince / FZegion
Cour�try
Please collect site coordinates in decimal degrees. Use between 4-6 digits (unless you are using a survey-grade GPS device) after the decimal place as
appropriate, based on how the location was determined. (For example, most mobile phones with GPS provide locational precision in decimal degrees to
map coordinates to 5 or 6 digits after the decimal place.)
Latitude:* Longitude:*
35.105467 -77.788800
ex:34.208504 -77.796371
3. Surface Waters
3a. Name of the nearest body of water to proposed project:*
Big Chinquapin Creek
3b. Water Resources Classification of nearest receiving water:*
C;Sw, NSW
Surface Water Lookup
3c. What river basin(s) is your project located in?*
Neuse
RiverBasin Lookup
4. Project Description
4a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this application:*
SR 1301 Pine Street is a paved secondary road. Agriculture and forests dominate the landscape.
4b. Attach an 8 1/2 X 11 excerpt from the most recent version of the USGS topographic map indicating the location of the project site. (for
DWR)
Gick the upload button or drag and drop files here to attach docurcent
Jones 6 Vicinity.pdf 148.52KB
Fle type rrust be pdF
4c. Attach an 8 1/2 X 11 excerpt from the most recent version of the published County NRCS Soil Survey map depicting the project site.
(for DWR)
Click the upload button or drag and drop files here to attach document
Jones 6 Soil Map.pdf 577.88KB
Fle type rrust be pdF
4d. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
0
4e. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams on the property:
(interrrittent and perennial)
60

4f. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:*
Bridge to bridge replacement, the ebsting bridge has deteriorated and needs replacement.
4g. Describe the overall project in detail, including indirect imapacts and the type of equipment to be used:*
The existing 90' bridge will be replaced with a 110' cored slab bridge.
4h. Please upload project drawings for the proposed project.
C7ick the upload button or drag and drop files here to attach docurrent
B4563_Permit Plan.pdf 232.62KB
Fle type rrust be pdF
5. Jurisdictional Determinations
5a. Have the wetlands or streams been delineated on the property or proposed impact areas?*
f• Yes l" No �' Unknown
Comme nts:
No wetlands on site
5b. If the Corps made a jurisdictional determination, what type of determination was made?*
f Preliminary f Approved �' Unknown f•' f�llA
Corps AID Number:
6carrple: SAV�2017-99999
5c. If 5a is yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known):
Agency/Consultant Company:
Othe r:
Jay B Johnson
NC DOT
5d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
5d1. Jurisdictional determination upload
aick the upload button or drag and drop files here to attach docurrent
Fle type rrust be FDF
6. Project History
6a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for this project (including all prior phases) in the past?'�
f Yes C No f" lJnknown
7. Future Project Plans
7a. Is this a phased project?*
C' Yes C•' No
Are any other NWP(s), regional general permit(s), or individual permits(s) used, or intended to be used, to authorize any part of the
proposed project or related activit�/? This includes other separate and distant crossing for linear projects that require Department of the
Army authorization but don't require pre-construction notification.
D. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1a. Where are the impacts associated with your project? (check all that apply):
r Wetlands r% Streams-tributaries r7 Buffers
r Open Waters r Pond Construction

3. Stream Impacts
ff there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this question for all stream sites
impacted.
3a. Reason for impact*3b.lmpact 3c. Type of impact*3d. Stream name * 3e. Stream 3f. Type of 3g. Stream 3h. Impact sqfe�
type * Type * Jurisdiction * width * length *
g� 1 T Bank Big Chinquapin Perennial Both 40 30 1
N�plabel(e.g.I�adQossing F2rrranent(Fjor StabilizatiOn Creek F2rennial(�or Average (linearfeet) ,
1) Terrporary (lj intermittent (If� (feet) 2
0
0
"* All Perennial or Intermittent streams must be verified by DWR or delegated local government.
3i. Total jurisdictional ditch impact in square feet:
0
3i. Total permanent stream impacts:
0
3i. Total temporary stream impacts:
30
3i. Total stream and tributary impacts:
30
3j. Comments:
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWR)
ff project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. Individually list all buffer impacts below.
6a. Project is in which protect basin(s)?*
Check all that apply.
rJ Neuse r Tar-Pamlico
r Catawba r Randleman
r Goose Creek r Jordan Lake
r Other
6b. Impact Type * 6c. Per or
Te mp *
1 P
Location and 6cerrpt, Allowable, allowable w/ F2rrranem (Fj or
rritigation Terrporary (�
2 P
Location and Exerrpt, Allowable, allowable w/ F�rrrenent (Fj or
rritigation Terrporary (�
3 P
Location and 6cerrpt, Allowable, allowable w/ F2rrranent (Fj or
rritigation Terrporary (lj
4 P
Location and Exerrpt, Allowable, allowable w/ F�rrranent (� or
rritigation Terrporary (lj
6h. Total buffer impacts:
6d. Stream name * 6e. Buffer mitigation
required?*
Big Chinquapin Creek No
Big Chinquapin Creek No
Big Chinquapin Creek No
Big Chinquapin Creek No
Zone 1 Zone 2
Te mporary impacts: 0.00 0.00
6f. Zone 1
impact*
7,335
(squarefeet)
950
(squarefeet)
905
(squarefeet)
850
(square feet)
6g. Zone 2
impact *
780
(squarefeet)
7,180
(squarefeet)
595
(squarefeet)
785
(square feet)

Zone 1 Zone 2
Permanent impacts: 4,040.00 3,340.00
Zone 1 Zone 2
Total buffer impacts: 4,040.00 3,340.00
6i. Comments:
Supporting Documentation - i.e. Impact Maps, Plan Sheet, etc.
Gick the upload button or drag and drop files here to attach docurrent
Fle rrust be FDF
E. Impact Justification and Mitigation
`�dR.7C .. �FTt:t�Tir�►� � �fP1PilF�iiC�7'i1
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing the project:*
The ewsting bridge will had twro bents in Big Chinquapin Creek, the proposed bridge will only have one.
1b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques:*
Use of existing roadway to operate construction equipment.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
C' Yes r No
2b. If this project DOES NOT require Compensatory Mitigation, explain why:
F. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWR)
*** Recent changes to the stormwater rules have required updates to this section .`**
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection
Rules?
C•' Yes �' No
1b. All buffer impacts and high ground impacts require diffuse flow or other form of stormwater treatment. If the project is subject to a
state implemented riparian buffer protection program, include a plan that fully documents how diffuse flow will be maintained.
All Stormwater Control Measures (SCM)s must be designed in accordance with the NC Stormwater Design Manual. Associated
supplement forms and other documentation shall be provided.
What type of SCM are you providing?
r Level Spreader
r Vegetated Conveyance (lower SHWT)
r Wetland Swale (higher SMNT)
r% Other SCM that removes minimum 30% nitrogen
(check all that apply)
For a list of options to meet the diffuse flow requirements, click here.
Diffus Flow Documentation

aick the upload button or drag and drop files here to attach docurrent
Fle type rrust be FDF
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. Is this a NCDOT project subject to compliance with NCDOT's Individual NPDES permit NCS000250? *
l•' Yes f" No
G. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation
1a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the use of public (federal/state) land? *
G' Yes C' No
1b. If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the
requirements of the National or State (North Carolina) Environmental PolicyAct (NEPAISEPA)?*
f Yes r No
Comme nts: *
f�UA
2. Violations (DWR Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWR Water Quality Certification Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), or
DWR Surface Water or Wetland Standards or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?*
C' Yes C•' No
2b. Is this an after-the-fact permit application?*
f Yes r No
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWR Requirement)
3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonablyanticipated future impacts) result in additional development, which could impact
nearby downstream water quality?*
f Yes C No
3b. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWR Requirement)
4a. Is sewage disposal required by DWR for this project?*
l" Yes C' No C' WA
5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or habitat? *
f Yes r No
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act impacts?*
C' Yes C•' No
5d. Is another Federal agency involved?*
C' Yes C No
5e. Is this a DOT project located within Division's 1-8?*
G Yes r No
C' Unknown

5j. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical Habitat?
Onsite field investigation by Jay Johnson "No EffecY'
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as an Essential Fish Habitat?*
C' Yes C•' No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact an Essential Fish Habitat?'�
Mr. Travis Wilson, NCWRC
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
Link to the State Historic Preservation Office Historic Properties Map (does not include archaeological data: http://gis.ncdcr.gov/hpoweb/
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal governments have designated as having historic or cultural
preservation status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in North Carolina history and archaeology)? *
f Yes r No
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources? *
NCDOT HEU Historic Architecture and Archaeology
7c. Historic or Prehistoric Information Upload
Qick the upload button or drag and drop files here to attach docurrent
Archaeology 16-07-0021 No Survey.pdf 824.14KB
HistoricArchitecture 16-07-0021NoSurvey.pdf 1.55MB
Fle rrust be FDF
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
Link to the FEMA Floodplain Maps: https://msc.fema.gov/portal/search
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain?*
f• Yes l" No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMArequirements:
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?*
FEMA FIRM Maps
Miscellaneous
Miscellaneous attachments not previously requested.
C]ick the upload button or drag and drop files here to attach docurrent
Fle rrust be FDF or IWQ
Signature
fJ By checking the box and signing below, I certify that:
• I have given true, accurate, and complete information on this form;
■ I agree that submission of this PCN form is a"transaction" subject to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic
Transactions AcY');
■ I agree to conduct this transaction by electronic means pursuant to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic
Transactions AcY');
■ I understand that an electronic signature has the same legal effect and can be enforced in the same way as a written signature; AND
■ I intend to electronically sign and submit the PCN form.

Full Name:*
Jay B Johnson
Signature
C'�i/ �5'�d/ri��Ioa.r
Initial Review
Is this project a public transportation project?* (?)
C' Yes r No
Change only rf needed.
Has this project met the requirements for acceptance in to the review process?'�
f• Yes
f No
BIMS # Assigned *
20180561
Version#*
Reviewing Office *
Washington Regional Office - [phone]
Select Project Reviewer*
Garcy Ward:eads\gpward
Is a payment required for this project?*
l' No payment required
l•' Fee received
C' Fee needed - send electronic notification

Project Tracking No. (Ivter�zal Use�
16-07-0021
HISTORIC ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPES
NO SURVEY REQUIRED FORM
This form only pertains to Historic Architecture and Landscapes for this project. It
is not valid for Archaeological Resources. You must consult separately with the
Archaeology Group.
PRn.TF,CT iNFORMATION
Project No: B-4563 County: JOnes
WBS No.: 38411.1.2 Document
Type:
Fed. Aid No: Funding: X State Federal
Federal X Yes No Permit NWP 3 Or NWP 14
Permit s : Type(s):
ProiectDescrintion: Replace Bridge No. 6 on SR 1301 (Pine Street) over Big Chinquapin
Branch off-site detour, no im rovements planned .
SUMMARY OF HISTORIC ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPES REVIEW
DESCRIPTIONOFREVIEWACTIVITIES. RESULTS, AND CONCLUSIONS: HPOWeb reviewed on 3 August
2016 and yielded no NR, SL, DE, LD or SS properties in the Area of Potential Effects (APE). Jones County
current GIS mapping, aerial photography, and tax information indicated an APE of woodland and
cultivated fields with no resources present (viewed 3 August 2016). Constructed in 1963, Bridge No. 6 is
not eligible for the National Register as it is not representative of any distinctive engineering or aesthetic
type. Google Maps ��Street View" confirmed the absence of critical historic architectural and landscape
resources in the APE (viewed 3 August 2016).
No architectural survey is required for the project as currently defined.
WHY THE AVAILABLE INFORMATION PROVIDES A RELIABLE BASIS FOR REASONABLY PREDICTING THAT
THERE ARE NO UNIDENTIFIED SIGNIFICANT HISTORIC ARCHITECTURAL OR LANDSCAPE RESOURCES IN
THE PROJECTAREA: APE extends 500 feet from the either end of the existing bridge (N-S) and 100 feet
to either side of the SR 1301 (Pine Street) centerline (W-E) to encompass proposed construction
activities. Comprehensive county architectural survey (1974; 1997-7) and later studies record no
properties in the APE. County GIS/tax materials and other visuals support the absence of significant
architectural and landscape resources. No National Register-listed properties are located within the APE.
Should any aspect of the project design change, please notify NCDOT
Historic Architecture as additional review may be necessary.
SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION
X Map(s) ❑Previous Survey Info. ❑Photos ❑Correspondence
�' FINDING BY NCDOT ARCHITECTURAL HISTORIAN
Architecture and Landscapes -- NO SURVEY REQUIRED
NCDOT Architectural Historian
❑Design Plans
'�b
Date
Hisroric Archriechu•e anrt I.andscapes NO SUIZVEY RF.O(IIRED jorm jor Minor 77•nnspormrion Projecls as punlified i�� die 2007 Prograinnia�ic Agreeinein.

B-4563 Bridge No. 6 Replacement Jones County
WBS No. 38411.1.2 Base map: HPOWeb, nts
NCDOT — Historic Architecture
August 2016
Tracking No. 16-07-0021

3 Soil Map—Jones County, North Carolina 3
(V
a
m �
F �
272900 273100 273300 273500 273700 273900 274100 274300 274500 274700 274900 275100 275300
35° 6' 38" N �. � � _ � � � �.— —.�— _— _ � � _. _ � _ �. 35° 6' 38" N
o \ '
IS � ,
� k �` '
I /
i .�
�— �, i � i � . . y ..
\ 0
� �~� . ,1t'����� � �j'7�.1 __ . 1 \� ;. �,' y� Vi. , ' �' � M
_ �
�
�_� �J�/ �b ��i�,�`,.. . � . }�h,,,, ��_._.. n,,,,
� .. � � � � T-Tr � '-V
� -_ �4 p �
o � "" ... ... � <� - �� - ,x � �1 �
O . ..� _ • ' I M
� `. Yy�... 1��. ��. � .
�—
� ` � ♦ �.� �.:'r 1 .°� � � o II .. � . �
o ������' � '� .' � �II
- �,/ , � - ��_� -�i� L y � �'*`-� � �����_ o
*� .. _ `�� � ��„ .•�� �
� � � �k� � �
; � T�,, -,� ,_
o— r. . ` �'��-.: i. : A, y ` \ t � � � � 3�� {f� 'a�F . � (jM � �
� ..��_ a. ���'�". ��� . �t ti4�, �i
� � ' - "'� , - � � ����� ., � �
�
,F; � � ���� � � � � � " .�.r.��r�Cx �
i`-. ,� r-� ``"�,
0
J I :� M
*m�
O ��- i �'� � .I, d I— �
�_ ��_�� ��� .,. p ,� ��
, ,L� �
� - �' � , � �� � �,,�g
�SV �.
� - �� I ,� - I � � 4 "*r'v� o
r"T-`�, �►���� ' '
g � �'� o – - �� �I; "� u��'�'.c� • �
�- � � ' � y �
�� �; ,,.n�
m .�_.. 1 / `� �
� .� �' � /
� . I` . �=n% , /•
II
� p
�t g
r' 1 � � � . � . — �
� � � � �� � �
� � � ��. � � � � _ �
�- � ���t,,,� ���� L �
�., � / � � �I
� �:„y� , 3; .
,
� ��� � � � �� � � ���y� � � � � ��'`� �
� f , J't:�. �� �pRJ � L. 'i} ✓�..�-- W
� + \_Jl] I . � �
O I ��/�����. ���u','I 1 i I , 1 r,� �/ �� M
�^ �. f
I� ' � / `J.:/ : iT. � � . A � � //��� / 1
� �'pI /
�'��`�� ��?� ' "— III � �� . O
— i`' � I � � �� � — �
O — �_� � � � — I � M
�— — �� �i
_ - - . � ar�f .
!
�
� — — � � . _ .�ii _ 4 _ I ' <.�� ,�•� q/.
35° 5' 43" N � � - - �" / ` � 35° S' 43" N
��� � � � � � � I � �
272900 273100 273300 273500 273700 273900 274100 274300 274500 274700 274900 275100 275300
3 3
N Map Scale: 1:12,000 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet. �
Meters �
F N 0 150 300 600 900 F
� �
0 500 1000 2000 3000
Map projection: Web Merotor Comer coordinates: WGS84 Edge ti6: UTM Zone 18N WGS84
USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 7/12/2016
�' Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 1 of 3

MAP LEGEND
Area of Interest (AOI)
Area of Interest (AOI)
Soils
Soil Map Unit Polygons
�-�f Soil Map Unit Lines
0 Soil Map Unit Points
Special Point Features
� Blowout
� Borrow Pit
� Clay Spot
Closed Depression
� Gravel Pit
, Gravelly Spot
Y� Landfill
� Lava Flow
�, Marsh or swamp
� Mine or Quarry
��.s�1� Miscellaneous Water
�-;y Perennial Water
_ Rock Outcrop
-»�- Saline Spot
, Sandy Spot
r Severely Eroded Spot
- Sinkhale
Slide or Slip
oa Sodic Spot
Soil Map—Jones County, North Carolina
� Spoil Area
�` Stony Spot
- Very Stony Spot
Wet Spot
Other
r� Special Line Features
Water Features
Streams and Canals
Transportation
�-++ Rails
.�+,� Interstate Highways
US Routes
Major Roads
Local Roads
Background
� Aerial Photography
MAP INFORMATION
The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 124,000.
Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.
Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause
misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line
placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting
soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale.
Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map
measurements.
Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey URL: http://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov
Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857)
Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator
projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts
distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the
Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate
calculations of distance or area are required.
This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of
the version date(s) listed below.
Soil Survey Area: Jones County, North Carolina
Survey Area Data: Version 20, Sep 30, 2015
Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000
or larger.
Date(s) aerial images were photographed: May 9, 2010—Sep 10,
2010
The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were
compiled and digitized probabiy differs from the background
imagery disp�ayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting
of map unit boundaries may be evident.
USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 7/12/2016
�' Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 2 of 3

Soil Map—Jones County, North Carolina
Map Unit Legend
Jones County, North Carolina (NC103)
Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI
Go Goldsboro loamy sand, 0 to 2 385.5 54.7%
percent slopes, Atlantic
Flatwoods
Gt Grifton fine sandy loam 69.3 9.8%
Ly Lynchburg fine sandy loam, 0 to 13.4 1.9%
2 percent slopes, Atlantic
Coast Flatwoods
Me Meggett loam 135.2 19.2%
Mk Muckalee loam 30.5 4.3%
NoB Norfolk loamy sand, 1 to 4 67.3 9.6%
percent slopes
St Stallings loamy fine sand 3.0 0.4%
Totals for Area of Interest 704.2 100.0%
41� Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 7/12/2016
� Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 3 of 3

Z
O
w
z
DETAIL A
SPECIAL CUT DITCH
( No} fo Scale)
Fronf
Ditch
Noturol � Slope
Graund 3�j D
Min. D= Variable.
DETAIL B
STANDARD 'V' DITCH
( Nof }o Scale)
Natural Natural
Ground 3.� Ground
FOffe� p �a;,�e<
r
Min. D= Variable.
FROM STA.16+31 TO STA.16+80 LT
\ `
—
`
_
O ANNETTE L.DAUGHETY
DB 09E P 54
8/
BUFFER ZONE l
IMPACTS = 1335 Sq.Ff.
BUFFER ZONE 2
IMPACTS = 780 SqFt. /
5/
PERMANENT N
� STREAM /MPACTS = 30 LINEAR FEET �
m
Impacts in
Surface W
SPECIAL CUT DITCH STANDARD
SEE DETAIL A \ SEE DETAIL
— ,
F F F /
F_ � �' — — _ _.
F ` _
—�
� F �
�.e __. I
\F F\ �_
\`
a4 F \ � �� E�
BUFFER ZONE l
IMPACTS = 850 Sq.Ft. /
BUFFER ZONE 2
IMPACTS = 785 Sq.Ff.
O ANNETTE L.DAUGHETY
DB 09E P 54
� DENOTES IMPACTS IN
BUFFER ZONE 1
\�������� DENOTES IMPACTS IN
�L���������� BU F F ER ZO N E 2
�DENOTES IMPACTS IN
SURFACE WATER
�
�
/
m
O
WANDA & BUTCH HOWARD FAMILY
DB 361 P 988
B2
BUFFER ZONE l
IMPACTS = 950 SqFt.
BUFFER ZONE 2
IMPACTS = 1180 Sqft.
. /
F
N
PROJECT REFERENCE NO.
SHEET NO.
Z
` ��
��<�� �
—F— — � � �
—
SR l30/ (l8' BSTI � —
F — — — F F
� —/�— �� �
� _ �
F
— / �� R/W
F �
� �` N E
� ,
.
� m.
� ,
��
i �
��
„ �l
/ ,� 83
BUFFER ZONE l
m `� IMPACTS = 905 Sq.Ft.
� /Qi� BUFFER ZONE 2
/ IMPACTS = 595 SqFt.
O
WANDA & BUTCH HOWARD FAMILY
DB 361 P 988
30' 0' 30' 60' 90'
GRAPHIC SCALE
DETAIL C
RIP RAP AT EMBANKMENT
( Nor+o sco�e)
10'min.
Di}ch 7.0'min.� z
Grade �
GEOTEXTILE �
Type of Liner= 7 TONS,CL II Rip—Ra
Geotextile= 2
FROM STA.16+90 LT.
DETAIL D =
FALSE SUMP �
( Nof to Scale� �
� Outside Ditch _ ly p-�
Traffic Flow ,�0•� 20;7 '1
GI
t— � � efc.
S=Ditch Slope � Proposed Ditch
FROM STA.16+25 RT

Project Tracking No.:
16-07-0021
o��`�� NO ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY REQUIRED FORM .�
,,Q,." ?'' 4�: , �. :.��.�:.., �. �
� a This form only pertains to ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES for this project. It is not ��. ; p
'�:�:�� ;�:: : F=.: �:
,� v:�► valid for Historic Architecture and Landscapes. You must consult separately with the
�:_.�� � Historic Architecture and Landscapes Group. �����'Q f.
PROJECT INFORMATION
Project No:
WBS No:
B-4563
38411.1.2
F.A. No: NOT AVAILABLE
Federal Permit Required? � Yes
County:
Document
Jones
Pce
Funding: ❑ State � Federal
❑ No Permit Type: nw3 or nw 14
Project Description: NCDOT proposes to replace Bridge No. 0006 over Big Chinquapin Creek on SR
1301 (Pine Street) in Jones County, TIP # B-4563. This is a federally funded project and a federal permit
(Nationwide 3 or 14) is required from the USACE. Therefore, this is a federal undertaking and Section 106
of the National Historic Preservation Act applies. This is a Low Impact Bridge Replacement project
(LIBR), and, as such, has a minimal footprint, little new impacts, and, importantly, an offsite detour. While
the actual impacts of the proj ect are likely to be much smaller (approximately 600 feet by 75 feet), the Area
of Potential Effects (APE) for purposes of this review is 75 feet wide to either side of the roadway, and
1000 feet long. Design was not available at the time of review, however the NCDOT project manager
provided a project description that Br. No. 0006 would be replaced in the existing location with an offsite
detour, as noted above. A Permanent Utility Easement was noted on the request for review and should fall
within the considered APE. Much of the APE has already been modified by the construction of the existing
SR 1301 and bridge, or is else surrounded by swamp.
SUMMARY OF CULTURAL RESOURCES REVIEW
Brief description of review activities, results of review, and conclusions:
Specific design mapping is not available, though assumptions can be made for this low impact bridge
replacement project (LIBR) to be replaced on the same location and with an offsite detour. USGS mapping
(Phillips Crossroads) and aerial photography was studied. The project area along SR 3101 passes across
agricultural fields from the southern approach to the bridge before continuing through more low, wooded
terrain. It is possible that the area was drained for reclaiming agricultural use.
The primary soil type present at Bridge No. 0006 is mainly Meggett Loam (Me - poorly drained stream
terraces) near the bridge and to the north, with Norfolk loamy sand (NoB, 1 to 4 percent slope), a well-
drained soil, to the south. Based on current usage and a virtual drive by, both soils could potentially support
human occupation or sustained activities that could leave an archaeological record, especially a little further
outside of the APE, past the unfarmed (possibly too low and wet) woods and bridge launch.
Virtual drive-by was available Google Maps. There was no flooding ar pooled water visible in the Me soils
that are wooded. No cemeteries were noted during the aerial viewing or on the USGS mapping at the
project location, though there are some mapped in the local area. According to the NCDOT cemetery
dataset prepared by Archaeologist P.J. Mohler, there are no mapped cemeteries close by.
The 1934 Jones County Soil Survey historic map was examined, overlaid in GIS over the project area (1934
MC.057.1934d). A detailed and accurate map of great use, it did not indicate any structures or obvious
industry within the APE, though a house was present a little further south of the APE, on higher ground
west of SR 1301. The current alignment of SR 1301 may have changed over the past hundred years ar so,
"No ARCHAEOLOCY SURVEYREQCIIRED "form for the Amended Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2015 Programmatic Agreement.
1 of 5

Project Tracking No.:
16-07-0021
as there is a notable deviation away from the modern roadbed, more perpendicular to the creek, before
bending or turning back west in the northeast quadrant. It is notable, too, that the creek is mapped towards
the south of its current course. This suggests, and is noted in the inspection of the aerials, that the streambed
was channelized or drained in the past 75 years or so since that 1930s mapping. This also corresponds to
soils mapping which ends Me a bit south of the bridge. If this is the case, the reconfiguration and alteration
of the drainage properties in the immediate vicinity might indicate a lowered probability for the presence
of archaeological sites on the original, undisturbed landform prior to the installation of one or more bridges.
The Office of State Archaeology was visited in July, 2016, to review archaeological mapping and to
reference any known archaeological surveys and sites. While there are few documented and recorded sites
in the immediate vicinity, a nearby archaeological compliance review provides good and reliable insight
about archaeological expectations. ER OS-2736 was the review for the Brock wetland and stream
restoration site three quarters of a mile east on a similar topographic setting. Originally, noting the nearby
military history that includes the 1862 Battle of Kinston and the 1865 Battle of Wyse Fork, an
archaeological survey was recommended to record and evaluate any sites that would be impacted by that
project. In particular, there was a nearby cemetery to be examined and if there were recognizable sites
related to the Battle of Wyse Fork. However, the footprint of the project was actually much smaller (though
still larger than the current APE) and wouldn't impact the cemetery ar have the acreage of coverage that
would have increased the probability of encountering otherwise undocumented archaeological sites. The
recommendation was then changed to concur that no archaeological survey would be required. Using this
well thought out archaeological review as a direct comparison, the current undertaking is smaller and
already has a transportation facility that disturbs much of the APE. Probability is lessened for this
undertaking as compared to the larger ER OS-2736 which had no recommended survey.
For this undertaking, the proposed bridge replacements of the existing transportation facility, Bridge No.
0006, little but some new soil disturbance will occur. As much of the existing APE has been modiiied for
the current roadway, bridge and perhaps the relocation of the creek, expectations are low for encountering
new archaeological sites, especially any that may be intact and significant, and is generally less likely to
have intact, supported habitation sites.
As a result of this review, we conclude that the likelihood of encountering intact, NRHP-eligible resources
are low based on the limited new footprint of the undertaking at the same preexisting location, previous
bridge and road construction disturbances, and the location within a modified, likely drained setting. The
project should be considered compliant with Section 106. No archaeological survey is recommended for
this undertaking as currently proposed.
Brief Explanation of why the available information provides a reliable basis for reasonably predicting
that there are no unidentified historic properties in the APE:
The scale and nature of the project is limited to replacement of an existing bridge with a new structure at
the same location. An offsite detour will be used, though some easements may be required outside of the
existing ROW. The APE of the project overlays the current transportation facility roadway and bridge
construction. New impacts will be limited to work adjacent to the bridge and bridge approaches. Review
of background archaeological information, examination of mapping and aerials suggests a moderate
probability for the presence of significant, intact archaeological resources on the surrounding area, though
it is lowered within the modiiied APE. Previous reviews for archaeology on somewhat larger projects
nearby resulted in no survey, though historic, military events occurred in the general area. Historic mapping
from 80 years ago suggests a different route was in use northeast of Bridge No. 0006, and that the drainage
itself may have been relocated, claiming additional acreage for farming. Based on the low changes to the
footprint of construction and the degree of existing disturbances, it is unlikely that intact, significant,
NRHP-eligible archaeological resources would be encountered or impacted by the project. No
archaeological survey is recommended. Therefore, this federally permitted undertaking should be
considered compliant with Section 106.
"No ARCHAEOLOCY SURVEYREQUIRED "form for the Amended Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2015 Programmatic Agreement.
2 of 5

SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION
See attached: � Map(s) ❑ Previous Survey Info
❑ Photocopy of County Survey Notes
FINDING BY NCDOT ARCHAEOLOGIST
NO ARCHAEOLOGY SUR VEY REQ UIRED
LOGIST
❑ Photos
Other:
Project Tracking No.:
16-07-0021
❑Correspondence
8/12/2016
Date
"No ARCHAEOLOGYSURVEYREQUIRED"form for the Amended Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2015 Programmatic Agreement.
3 of 5

Project T��acking No.:
16�0 / �0�21
Figure 1. Vicinity of PA # 16-07-0021, on USGS topographic mapping (Phillips Crossroads),
showing the Bridge No. 0006 location (black circle) along SR 1301 (Pine Street) over Big
Chinquapin Branch in Jones County. The ER OS-2736 location is pointed out with a white arrow.
"No �9RCHAEOLOGY SURVEYREQUIRED "f'orm %or tFte Antended A�7inoi� Ti�anspor�tation Project,r «s Quadi/iecl in !he �Ol.i Programrnatie Ag�eenAent.
4of5

Project Tr•«cki�zg No.:
16�0 / �0�21
T�= i T r4i` � p /
� �,�
- -,'��; � `�- �'' �
� � _ -
,� �. 'i,�
` �4 � . _ `l: � '.;� � ,j�,.. � �r �
— ' . � .� . . ,'/"r . r
i.
� �� �
q} �` �, �
..� � h't
� �y�, � l" ��'�"�Alyi� J � � y Y
"�„` ���'�� �z �' �c,,r ' t �°�' ;.r ''� ., � _
'�- ,L, µ �� ,, ; x� , �� R � � � �'�.�i �� 1� �i�yu� .2'?4,-K ?l.�h.o ' r i i .
'�I y-��r � ' , e � .ij2 _ _ ' � �. `j(�. � F�n° 4 � ��.
� ,�"3�,���. ut . �. .r u Fd� .i.qa +� --x .� "`��{ ; � y� t H� ,
'° . � . �' . ; ~ � . , . . y.`.�
. . ��`' .. .. '- �. ' R,"�.: .. - _ `�:;., �f-_ �r.
. . �� �^.��, � �- , ' . � �
\'� x 5+,. 6+j` T 5�� L � �
: ,. ��'`�..�-r"�_ _ .�.,..,��� � ,
:£
, � ��� �
a , z. .;s+ � �, -
� , � � - 9���.��, � .
�4e1 � ' � �// � `� - ���` ���.. .z"'.7�d'�.-
%. " "t���► �... �
� � � {.'3 . .. j: � S -
h I � '
'. f ��� . _ _ _ ��
� ' � - _ __��` ' - _ _ = _ _
��' � � � _ _ ___— --- ___ -
�,-;1 _ �, — --
�' JONES
,\� r I�. _ . . - ^r :s� � .
- '�5� I
. � r + __ ,* ,� � . � �
�'�}F .. , ^ �
�Mi � F �I
_T ' C�� , �."_—�-.—� q � . — .
- I �` �
I� i 1 �
� 1
1 �_ � � �� —
1 I
\
` i4. — - =_ - _
�. ,,:� �� � r�' — _ — - - - _� �_
��' >. �.. �
��o-: .- �.: : �: ti � , �r� ', �,, r �'
./ "#qt�' ` �� �
r t j
ii �
{y � � I y�"�iii�'iti�i�i�i, i�, ,
6r��Ji..-. Pn ._� I��� ���il��i�l.jl����j I - . '.{�'.
` ' b� iu„�,�ti I _ _ '� �
; f � I ___ �
. � � '� _ _ � ��1'��
��� _ �� � � ��,� �;�„ �, ��,, �
'!r [�� � Ilri��i�iil�rii���ll�',�� 1�-'.. a'
� I�� I � � lc �
} -, ' � � �� ��Ili Ili�ii,l� I . � y �, �� .
.�.�� � , �,,,�:.. �
t 'c � t �a �'��
4 �����' �;;� i i'�i!'.�-
�� � �'�. - ���.nl ��I���� i i i�'�i�i�+i�idii'I ..
FJ��" � � � �II I ��ii � �
l � 11�
I �f�
�' �'� .A, '�� i: � � i ^ �.( I
_�. .� ' �� .�:--� -' _ ��" f , /i;
_, / E�� "� - _ , . . �- '� �..»f-ti�, � {- ' rr I
/ 171 �
' ��(�� �� �
N 0 250 500 1,000 i�� _� 2 I N I��^ -�I a i� a i�� �� C.
� ��� Feet Pyd � � �,,,� r �. r, � G��Qr�
- oq ul c i oim� lui � d�i ��-i N �i�.y ai i yi. I �L � Loin�e' I��
.`� . . hhapL�i � i�� p�r�E�9d, .,�� �n rs..an 7 a�lS�i�.un,. iunty- ��'
Figure 2. Aerial map of PA 16-07-0021, Br. No. 0006 replacement along SR 1301 over Big
Chinquapin Branch in Jones County. The APE is shown in yellow. Note the darker agricultural
field south of the bridge – this break may represent the original creek, with the road crossing
perpendicular over the stream originally, as depicted in 1934 mapping, instead of the bend present
now. That southern portion of the field may, therefore, be reclaimed for agricultural use.
"No �9RCHAEOLOGY SURVEYREQUIRED "f'orm %or tFte Antended A�7inoi� Ti�anspor�tation Project,r «s Quadi/iecl in !he �Ol.i Programrnatie Ag�eenAent.
5 of 5

� ����'�`� ` JONES 006 B-4563
� �- REPLACE EXISTING 91' L x 31' W BRIDGE TO JULY12, 2016
.- , � PROPOSED I10' L x 33' W BRIDGE
; p�• SR 1301,PINE STREET OVER CHINQUAPIN BRANCH -
- {�
� t_. _=.�-�` � - PHILLIPS CROSSROADS USGS QUAD MAP
_ _ �� ,_, --
- �- , SHEET NUMBER 4 OF THE SOILS SURVEY NEUSE RIVER BASIN
N OFJONES COUNTY LOWER NEUSE 03020204
��, �; ..� E CHINQUPINBRANCH C;Sw,NSW MAPNUMBER 3720444800 J"
�
• WBS ELEMENT NUMBER 38411.1.2 FIRM PANEL 4448J
S - - , - , .� ` _ �.�.
� � , �� �� � � �' ' , � � � ���'��� �i _ �� �
� �� � , .. ,
, - � ��'`� ; ��, � � . � � � � � �x � . �� �:�,
% ' • ' �,``°� .�
� 3d, � �� �a��o f,rP 1,7• �._
y `� _ W __ .� _ � � _ _. .. _ - - — _ y , . �O� �:�.�� ��� � ff ,�
- -- � ry 7 . �ral \�r ` � �a
- - } l i ,� � � t a
; • "�° � . ,'���.
'� � �-\ , f�. ___ _ _--_ '--- - -- ---- - -- _ _ """ � _�._ "b��_
_�..�y ° _' � JONES 6 ��'�� „r �r�a�:�
��i �" '�� � " i Y= 496797.2250 '��s � �'� _ �'.
,.,. .
� " ' . X= 2454941.6780 _ - � - ' `�':= �; � ,
" --,. ' „ , --
- J-- � ; �����,_ _ � � � - �- -'+ - - - -- - N 35^-06'-19. 68" ' ,,_ � '' _.�,
� � � � W 77^-28'-43. G6" ; '`o � �
v] � '� �.�, ben�, - = - - r✓.:y -- :.'
rr, � ' � d "� _ " *�-I_
ly ; � • � ,e _ . - � "_ :.
� � � - - -- � . ' ;� _, ��„
— - - _ _ 9 - -- � �= F
-``----_ "' -- � �i
�' ; 5 ' M; '.=_:
� '� - �
f,
���^i � . u ��,yttlt �`'l� ' �. •�'4 - - -� . �'"W�a�irn �I . i I .� � . � I�
Ih i '�'�' � r . I . :'+
-- _
, �. � .. /� � ' _ �� , _ , a�.r� -.% - +A-' . "�._ . ti
a�
, �.. _ . ; - - - � .ro, � ,� l � ._�� q� 4 �,
_ � � � �t.� r��a„a n
-- — � � , . , - - 7 ' � �� , . ,�-c�� __ . � y,�` c�
�
� � � � `�,; � {I• .._
� � ,,� � � � � Y� I� ! �r �. �" � I �
- u = . ��-''; I , �
� �� . � �a��� -._-
� . � � . ' Cem � �i ?� �/ '�'' �� . �, � �
um. � r _
� .. � I . �_ � ��/� �t \` .� �'�.
� ia1 � • • ' - t. _ - - -�' .�' $ ; \' -�
1 �.j
_' ' �.. I � ' � F . ' _ _' . . - . - I - ^ - - �P . �. . , . `• 7 i�,�, _ i
�� � i , . �' `;.
•i �
� i.
Ph lips Rtl � � �. �'
r,� �,o • ,I 1 � I i , ", i�eiuip'[�,a�rorAr I �,
� ! . 7 � � � — _ - -' - - + _ _ _ � - -- ' ' - `- ;�� �� I ,.c,�M Mc� - "I-
;: .._._� '� , � -_ _ -�- - �- p � _ � , a �,, ;.�; e
. �, � 9 I � 4 ; �m�e` `? _
� � � � ` G��4 - . � _ �
q ^ I� ` IE _ ,{ti,�`���4 _ 'I� _ _ _ ,:L,w'. :� , - . -* `- 7C� � - I
�, _ _, _.. �
_ 1 � -�,� ���_..
F� ` 1 inch = 3,333 feet '
. �, � .�.�..' -' 1� _�
� �" 0 1,2502,500 5,000 7,500 10,000 .+,. _ ,_ _
p� i F�e# _ ��;c�.�
¢ N � -f E`. , "_ ' :�-i°.. •,r;..-. -�,'' � -