20090961 Ver 1_Application_20090903

A,
4
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
&@4W ?
SFp0 `,
? Z
X09
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
BEVERLY EAVES PERDUE EUGENE A. CONTI, JR.
GOVERNOR SECRITARY
August 27, 2009
USAGE Wilmington Regulatory Field Office
69 Darlington Avenue
Wilmington, NC-'18402-1890
ATTN: Ms. Kim Garvey
NCDOT Coordinator
Dear Madam:
Subject: Application for Section 404 Nationwide Permit 23 and Section 401 Water Quality
Certification for the replacement of Bridge No. 1 1 on SR 1864 (Long Point Rd.) over
the Little River, Randolph County, Federal Aid Project Number BRZ-1864(1),
Division 8, T.I.P No. B-4584.
Debit $270.00 from WBS No. 33785.1.1.
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to replace Bridge No. 1 1
on SR 1864 (Long Point Rd) over the Little River. There will be less than 0.01 acre of
permanent surface water impact resulting from the construction of two bents which will be
located partially in the Little River. There will also be 0.11 acre of riparian wetland impact
resulting from construction of the approaches.
Please see the enclosed copies of the Pre-Construction Notification (PCN), Little River Bridge
Mitigation Site debit ledger information, stormwater management plan, stormwater management
permit, request for Jurisdictional Determination (dated July 26, 2006), permit drawings, and
design plans for the above-referenced project. The Categorical Exclusion (CE) was completed
for this project in September 2007 and distributed shortly thereafter. The Right of Way
Consultation was completed in March 2009. Additional copies are available upon request.
This project calls for a letting date of June 15, 2010 and a review date of April 27, 2010.
However, the let date may advance as additional funds become available.
MAILING ADDRESS:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PRCJEC- DEVEI OPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
NATURAL ENVIRONMENT UNIT
1598 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699-1598
TELEPHONE: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
WE:35!`C KAWNCDOT.ORC
LOCATION:
4701 Atlantic Ave.,
Suite 116
Raleigh, NC 27604

A copy of this permit application will be posted on the NCDOT Website at:
http://www.ncdot.org/doh/preconstruct/pe/. If you have any questions or need additional
information, please call Erica McLamb at [phone].
Sincere
a Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
Environmental Management Director, PDEA
w/attachment
Mr. Brian Wrenn, NCDWQ (5 Copies)
w/o attachment (see website for attachments)
Dr. David Chang, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr. Mark Staley, Roadside Environmental
Mr. Greg Perfetti, P.E., Structure Design
Mr. Victor Barbour, P.E., Project Services Unit
Mr. Tim Johnson, P.E., Division 8 Engineer
Mr. Art King, Division 8 Environmental Officer
Mr. Jay Bennett, P.E., Roadway Design
Mr. Majed Alghandour, P. E., Programming and TIP
Mr. Art McMillan, P.E., Highway Design
Mr. Scott McLendon, USACE, Wilmington
Mr. Travis Wilson, NCWRC
Mr. Gary Jordan, USFWS
Mr. Tracy Walter, PDEA
Ms. LeiLani Paugh, NEU
LEI
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.3 Dec 10 2008
Pre-Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A. Applicant Information
1. Processing
1a. Type(s) of approval sought from the
Corps:
®Section 404 Permit ? Section 10 Permit
1 b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 23 or General Permit (GP) number:
1c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps? ? Yes ® No
1 d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
® 401 Water Quality Certification - Regular ? Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
? 401 Water Quality Certification - Express ? Riparian Buffer Authorization
1 e. Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required? For the record only for DWQ 401
Certification:
? Yes ® No For the record only for Corps Permit:

? Yes ® No
1f. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in-lieu fee program proposed for mitigation
of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank or in-lieu
fee program. ? Yes ® No
1g. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1h
below. ? Yes ® No
1h. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)? ? Yes ® No
2. Project Information
2a. Name of project: Replacment of Bridge 11 over the Little River on SR 1864 (Long Point Rd.)
2b. County: Moore
2c. Nearest municipality / town: Vass
2d. Subdivision name: not applicable
2e. NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state
project no: B-4584
3. Owner Information
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed: North Carolina Department of Transportation
3b. Deed Book and Page No. not applicable
3c. Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable): not applicable
3d. Street address: 1598 Mail Service Center
3e. City, state, zip: Raleigh, NC 27699-1598
3f. Telephone no.: [phone]
3g. Fax no.: [phone]
3h. Email address: [e-mail]
4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is: ? Agent ? Other, specify:
4b. Name: not applicable
4c. Business name
(if applicable):
4d. Street address:
4e. City, state, zip:
4f. Telephone no.:
4g. Fax no.:
4h. Email address:
5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name: not applicable
5b. Business name
(if applicable):
5c. Street address:
5d. City, state, zip:
5e. Telephone no.:
5f. Fax no.:
5g. Email address:
B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1 a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID): not applicable
1b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees): Latitude: 35.2349 Longitude: - 79.2787
(DD.DDDDDD) (-DD.DDDDDD)
1c. Property size: 1.4 acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc.) to
proposed project: Little River
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water: WSIII, HQW
2c. River basin:
Cape Fear
3. Project Description
_ 3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
Existing land use in the project area consists of forested land (Coastal Plain Bottomland Hardwood Forest) and some
maintained roadsides. Land use in the project vicinity is comprised of forested land, disturbed areas, and residential
development.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
0.11
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
100 linear feet.
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
To replace a structurally deficient and functionally obsolete bridge.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
The project involves replacing a 108-foot bridge with a 135-foot, 3-span bridge on the existing alignment with an off-
site detour. The existing bridge has two bents located in the water. Standard road building equipment, such as
trucks, dozers, and cranes will be used. The proposed bridge consists of a three span, cored slab bridge with
spans at 50 feet, 50 feet, and 35 feet. The bridge has a 28-foot clear roadway width. The proposed bridge will have
portions of 2 bents located in the water (resulting in <0.01 acre of surface water impacts).
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property
/ project (including all prior phases) in the past?
Comments: Wetland and stream delineations were completed in
May 2006 by Ecoscience Corp. biologists. 1 wetland system
and 1 stream was identified in the project study area.
Delineations were verified by USACE representative Richard
Spencer on February 15, 2007. No written JD was provided.
However during the meeting Richard Spencer stated that the ® Yes ? No ? Unknown
jurisdictional area boundaries "looked reasonable". The N.C.
Department of Transportation does not request the Corps to
evaluate our site for TIP No. B-4584, Wake County, using the
Rapanos guidance. Instead, we are satisfied with the
delineation as reviewed and approved in the field prior to June
5, 2007, and ask that you evaluate this permit verification based
on that field review.
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
[I Preliminary [] Final
of determination was made?
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas? Agency/Consultant Company: Ecoscience Corp.
Name (if known): Craig Terwilliger, Justin Wright Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
While a Jurisdictional Determination was requested, no formal documentation was issued by USACE representative,
Richard Spencer.
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained ? Yes ® No ? Unknown
for this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project? ? Yes ® No
6b. If yes, explain.
C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1 a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
® Wetlands ® Streams - tributaries ? Buffers
? Open Waters ? Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a. 2b. 2c. 2d. 2e. 2f.
Wetland impact Type of jurisdiction
number - Type of impact Type of wetland Forested (Corps - 404, 10 Area of impact
Permanent (P) or (if known) DWQ - non-404, other) (acres)
Temporary T
Site l ®P ? T Fill Riparian ® Yes
? No ® Corps
? DWQ 0.038

Site 2 ®P ? T Mechanized
clearing
Riparian ® Yes
? No ® Corps
? DWQ
0.073
Site 3 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
Site 4 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
?No ?DWQ
Site 5 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
Site 6 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
2g. Total wetland impacts 0.11 acres
2h. Comments: The proposed permanent fill is required for construction of the approaches. Mitigation for the wetland impacts
associated with this project will provided using the NCDOT mitigation debit ledger.
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a. 3b. 3c. 3d. 3e. 3f. 3g.
Stream impact Type of impact Stream name Perennial Type of Average Impact
number - (PER) or jurisdiction stream length (linear
Permanent (P) or intermittent (Corps - 404, 10 width feet)
Temporary (T) (INT)? DWQ - non-404, (feet)
other)
Site 1 ® P ? T Surface Water Little River ® PER
? INT ® Corps
? DWQ 65 NA
Site 2 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
Site 3 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
Site 4 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
Site 5 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts NA Perm
0 Temp
3i. Comments: The proposed stream impacts are due to the construction of 2 bents, portions of these bents will be in the
stream channel (<0.01 acre of impact). Mitigation is not proposed for impacts to the stream as the impacts are minimal and
will not result loss of stream quality or function.
4
4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then individual) list all open water impacts below.
4a. 4b. 4c. 4d. 4e.
Open water Name of
impact number - waterbody Type of impact Waterbody type Area of impact (acres)
Permanent (P) (if applicable)
or Tem ora T
01 ?P?T
02 ?P?T
03 ?P?T
04 ?P?T
4f. Total open water impacts 0 Permanent
0 Temporary
4g. Comments:
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If and or lake construction proposed, then complete the chart below.
5a. 5b. 5c. 5d. 5e.
Wetland Impacts (acres) Stream Impacts (feet) Upland
Pond ID Proposed use or (acres)
number purpose of pond
Flooded Filled Excavated Flooded Filled Excavated Flooded
P1
P2
5f. Total
5g. Comments:
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
? Yes ? No if yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer
impacts below. If an impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a.
? Neuse ? Tar-Pamlico ? Other:
Project is in which protected basin? ? Catawba ? Randleman
6b. 6c. 6d. 6e. 6f. 6g.
Buffer impact
number - Reason for impact Buffer mitigation Zone 1 impact Zone 2 impact
Permanent (P) Stream name required? (square feet) (square feet)
or Temporary T
61 ?P?T ?Yes
? No
B2 ?P?T ?Yes
? No
B3 ?P?T ?Yes
? No
6h. Total buffer impacts
6i. Comments:
D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance
1 a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
During construction of the proposed bridge a portion of the existing roadway will be removed and the new bridge will be
54 feet longer, thereby increasing floodplain access.
An offsite detour will be utilized during construction.
Bridge end drains are located outside of wetland areas.
The proposed bridges bents, which will be located partially in the stream, are located toward the banks of the stream and
way from the thalwag.
The proposed bridge will use the existing alignment and will be approximately the same grade as the existing bridge.
1b . Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
NCDOT will implement Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition and Removal. NCDOT BMP's for the
Protection of Surface Waters will be strictly enforced during construction of this project.
At all the sites, stormwater will be treated and non-erosive velocities will be achieved where practicable.
The proposed bridge will be 54 feet longer, therefore increasing floodplain access.
Design Standards in Sensitive Watersheds will be implemented
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for ® Yes ? No
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply): ? DWQ ® Corps
? Mitigation bank
2c, If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
? Payment to in-lieu fee program
project?
® Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank: not applicable
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter) Type Quantity
3c. Comments:
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In-lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in-lieu fee program is attached. ? Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested: linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature: ? warm ? cool ?cold
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only): square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested: acres
4f. Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested: acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested: acres
4h. Comments:
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
6
5a If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan

See attached Compensatory Mitigation description. 1:1 mitigation (for a total of 0.11 acres) is proposed for this project
because the mitigation site is located within the same HUC (03030004) as the impacted wetlands. The mitigation site is
also located along the Little River, therefore, the proposed project will not result in wetland loss along the Little River. The
proposed mitigation site has undergone four years of successful vegetative and hydrological monitoring.
6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) - required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires ? Yes ® No
buffer mitigation?
6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required.
6c. 6d. 6e.
Zone Reason for impact Total impact Multiplier Required mitigation
(square feet) (square feet)
Zone 1 3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2 1.5
6f. Total buffer mitigation required:
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in-lieu fee fund).
6h. Comments:

E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1 a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified ? Yes ® No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1 b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
? Yes ? No
I
Comments:
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project? N/A %
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan? ® Yes ? No
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why:
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
See the attached permit drawings and stormwater management plan.
? Certified Local Government
2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan? ? DWQ Stormwater Program
? DWQ 401 Unit
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which local government's jurisdiction is this project? not applicable
? Phase II
3b. Which of the following locally-implemented stormwater management programs ? NSW
? USMP
apply (check all that apply): ? Water Supply Watershed
? Other:
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been ? Yes ? No
attached?
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
? Coastal counties
® HOW
4a. Which of the following state-implemented stormwater management programs apply ? ORW
(check all that apply):
? Session Law 2006-246
? Other:
4b. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
attached? ® Yes ? No
5. DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a. Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements? ® Yes ? No
5b. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met? ® Yes ? No
F. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1 a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the ® Yes ? No
use of public (federal/state) land?
1 b. If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State ® Yes ? No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1 c. If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (if so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
letter.) ® Yes
Comments:
? No
8
2. Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a . Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards, ? Yes ® No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b. Is this an after-the-fact permit application? ? Yes ® No
2c. If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s):
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in ? Yes ® No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b. If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
Due to the minimal transportation impact resulting from this bridge replacement, this project will neither influence
nearby land uses nor stimulate growth. Therefore, a detailed indirect or cumulative effects study will not be
necessary.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a. Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
not applicable
5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or ® Yes ? No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act ® Yes ® No
impacts?

5c.
If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted. ®
Raleigh
? Asheville
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
Based on NCDOT field surveys, NHP database, and USFWS Website for Moore County, it has been determined that the
proposed project will have no effect on Endangered Species or Designated Critical Habitat.
No habitat for the red cockaded woodpecker or the Cape Fear Shiner is within the project area. No surveys are
required. A biological conclusion of "No Effect" has been issued for the red cockaded woodpecker and Cape Fear
shiner.
Potential habitat is present in the project area for American chaffseed and Michaux's sumac. Surveys were conducted on
May 25, 2006 and May 13, 2009. No specimens were observed in the project study area. Therefore, a biological
conclusion of "No Effect" has been issued for American chaffseed and Michaux's sumac.
9
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat? ? Yes ® No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
NMFS County Index
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation ? Yes ® No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
NEPA Documentation
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain? ® Yes ? No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements: NCDOT Hydraulics Unit coordination with FEMA
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? FEMA Maps

Dr. Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph D 8 Z ?•
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name Appl anU ent's Signature Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if n authorization letter from the applicant
is provided.)
10
Compensatory Mitigation
The Little River Bridge Mitigation Site was originally constructed as mitigation for the
US 1 Bypass in Moore County (T.I.P. R-02 10). The 14.8-acre mitigation site is located in
Moore County approximately 0.75 mile southeast of the town of Vass. The site is situated
on both sides of the Little River and can be accessed via US I Business South on the
northeastern boundary. The site includes 6.4 acres of bottomland hardwood restoration
and 8.4 acres of bottomland hardwood preservation. This mitigation site has undergone
tour years of successful vegetative and hydrological monitoring as of 2009.
As shown below, NCDOT has debited 0.11 acres of riverine wetland restoration from the
Little River Bridge Mitigation Site to offset the 0.11 acres of unavoidable impacts
associated with the replacement of Bridge 11 over the Little River on SR 1864 (T.I.P. B-
4584).
NCDOT
Onsite
Mitigation
Debit
i Ledger
River Mitigation
Site name HUC Basin Division Count Type Available Debit
Little
River Cape
Bride 03030004 Fear 8 Moore B-4584
Riverine
Wetland
Restoration 1.07 0.11
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
Project: 33785.1.1
TIP: B-4584
County: Moore
Hydraulics Project Engineers: Henry Wells, P.E. (Sungate Design Group):
Galen Call, P.E. (NCDOT Hydraulics Unit)
ROADWAY DESCRIPTION
The project involves the replacement of Bridge No. 11 on SR 1864 over Little River.
The overall length of the project with approach work is approximately 782 feet. The
proposed bridge will consist of 2 @ 65' and 1 @ 45' box beam. The project drainage
systems consist of the bridge and associated bridge end drains. There are no proposed
side or lateral ditches proposed.
ENVIRONMENTAL DESCRIPTION
The project is located in the Cape Fear River Basin. Currently, there are no buffer rules
for this river basin. The project will have one (1) crossing of a jurisdictional stream that
will impact Little River. Little River is classified as Class WS-III and High Quality
Waters (HQW). The HQW designation applied to Little River necessitates the use of
NCDOT's Design Standards in Sensitive Watersheds throughout the design and
construction of the project. The Little River in the project area is on NCDWQ's 303d list.
There are several wetland areas impacted by the proposed project.
BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES AND MAJOR STRUCTURES
The primary goal of Best Management Practices (BMPs) is to prevent degradation of the
states surface waters as a result of the location, construction and operation of the highway
system. BMPs are activities, practices and procedures taken to prevent or reduce
stormwater pollution. There are no BMPs used on this project.
At all the sites, stormwater will be treated and non-erosive velocities will be achieved
where practicable.
MINIMIZATION OF IMPACTS
Several design elements provided for minimization of wetland impacts. Bridge end drains
are located outside wetland areas.
`A
DE
North Carolina Department o+ Environment anc
Division o VVater Quality
, -ayes Perdue Coleen P. Sullins
."ernc,r Director
March 6, 2009
North Carolina Department of Transportation-Hydraulics Unit
.Attn: D. R. Henderson, PE, State Hydraulics Engineer
1590 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1590

Natura; Resourc_s
7 E.
Subject: Stormwater Management Permit SW6090202
Replacement of Bridge No. 11 on SR 1864 over Little River
NCDOT Project Number B-4584
Other Stormwater Permit
Linear Public Road / Bridge Project
Moore County
Dear Mr. Henderson:
t -7
n.,
..z
MAR 1 0 ZOL19

The Fayetteville Regional Office of the Division of Water Quality received a complete Stormwater
Management Permit Application for the Replacement of Bridge No. 11 on SR 1864 over Little River
(NCDOT Project Number B-4584) project on February 26, 2009. Staff review, of the plans and specifications
has determined that the project, as proposed, will comply with the Stormwater Regulations set forth in Title
15A NCAC 2H .1000. Therefore, we are forwarding herewith Stormwater Management Pen-nit S W6090202,
dated March 6, 2009, for the construction of the subject project.
This permit shall be effective from the date of issuance until rescinded and shall be subject to the
conditions and limitations as specified therein.
If any parts, requirements, or limitations contained in this permit are unacceptable, you have the right to
request an adjudicatory hearing upon written request within thirty (30) calendar days following receipt of this
permit. This request must be in the form of a written petition, conforming to Chapter 150B of the North
Carolina General Statutes, and filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings, P.O. Drawer 27447, Raleigh
NC 27611-7447. Unless such demands are made this permit shall be final ancbinding.
If you have any questions, or need additional information concerning this matter. please contact Mike
Lawyer or myself at [phone].
Sincerely,
AL40 I
Belinda S. Henson
Regional Supervisor
Surface Water Protection Section
13SH: ML/ml
cc: FRO-Surface Water Protection
Sonia Gregory-401 Wetlands Unit/DOT Group
DWQ Central Files
L?:a;icrn 225C-rt:tinSlreel -we 714. Fayetteville, Nora Carolina 28301
31r Op F4 91(4486.0707 ', Customer Service: 1-3i7.623•b748

N 011C
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
STATE STORM WATER MANAGEMEN'T' PERMIT
OTHER PERMIT
In accordance with the provisions of Article 21 of Chapter 143, General Statutes of North Carolina as amended,
and other applicable Laws, Rules and Regulations
PERMISSION IS HEREBY GRANTED TO
NC Department of Transportation-Hydraulics Unit
Replacement of Bridge No. II on SR 1864 over Little River
Moore County
FOR THE
construction of a public road / bridge in compliance with the provisions of 15A NCAC 2H .1000 (hereafter
referred to as the "stormwater rules") and the approved stormwater management plans and specifications, and
other supporting data as attached and on file with and approved by the Division of Water Quality and
considered a part of this permit.
The Permit shall be effective from the date of issuance until rescinded and shall be subject to the following
specitic conditions and limitations:
1. DESIGN STANDARDS
I . The runoff from the impervious surfaces has been directed away from surface waters as much as
possible.
2. The amount of built-upon area has been minimized as much as possible.
3. Best Management Practices are employed, which minimize water quality impacts.
4. Approved plans and specifications for projects covered by this permit are incorporated by reference and
are enforceable parts of the permit.
5. Vegetated roadside ditches are 3:1 slopes or flatter.
II. SCHEDULE OF COMPLIANCE
1. The permittee shall at all times provide adequate erosion control measures in conformance with the
approved Erosion Control Plan.
2. The Director may notify the permittee when the permitted site does not meet one or more of the
minimum requirements of the permit. Within the time frame specified in the notice, the permitiee shall
submit a written time schedule to the Director for modifying the site to meet minimum requirements.
The permittee shall provide copies of revised plans and certification in writing to the Director that the
changes have been made.
Suit'',- rayetiaville. North Carolina 25301 I Jflt
?hr-;nc 9t.i-?3?-33R+ r .X i!,•dc"d-0'f- Customer Service 1-877-62-6'218 T T'
n!crnr' :^mr..?:rra.erqualiiv crq ?I _ r
'4 t i. i
3. The permit-tee shall submit all information requested by the Director or his representative within the time
frame specified in the written information request.
4. The permittee shall submit to the Director and shall have received approval for revised plans,
specifications, and calculations prior to construction for the following items:
a. Major revisions to the approved plans, such as road realignment, deletion of any proposed 13MP,
changes to the drainage area or scope of the project, etc.
b. Project name change.
C. Redesign, addition, or deletion of the approved amount of built-upon area, regardless of size.
d. Alteration of the proposed drainage,
5. The Director may determine that other revisions to the project should require a modification to the
permit.
III. GENERAL CONDITIONS
1. Failure to abide by the conditions and limitations contained in this permit may subject the Permittee to
an enforcement action by the Division of Water Quality, in accordance with North Carolina General
Statutes 143-215.6A to 143-215.6C.
2. The permit issued shall continue in force and effect until revoked or terminated.
3. The permit may be modified, revoked and reissued or terminated for cause. The filing of a request for a
permit modification, revocation and reissuance, or termination does not stay any permit condition.
4. The issuance of this permit does not prohibit the Director from reopening and modifying the permit,
revoking and reissuing the permit, or terminating the permit as allowed by the laws, rules, and
regulations contained in Title 15A of the North Carolina Administrative Code, Subchapter 2H .1000,
and North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1 et. al.
5. The permit is not transferable to any person except after notice to and approval by the Director. The
Director may require modification or revocation and reissuance of the permit to change the name and
incorporate such other requirements as may be necessary. A formal permit request must be submitted to
the Division of Water Quality accompanied by the appropriate fee, documentation from both parties
involved, and other supporting materials as may be appropriate. The approval of this request will be
considered on its merits, and may or may not be approved. The permittee is responsible for compliance
with the terms and conditions of this permit until such time as the Director approves the transfer.
6. The issuance of this permit does not preclude the Permittee from complying with any and all statutes,
rules, regulations, or ordinances, which may be imposed by other government agencies (local, state and
federal), which have jurisdiction.
7. The permittee shall notify the Division of any name, ownership, or mailing address changes within thirty
(30) calendar days.
Permit issued this the sixth day of March 2009.
NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
Division of Water Quality
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission
Stormwater Management Permit SW6090202
-.:,aeon "5 Greer jt!ee! Suite , =ayetteville Norm t-2mhna 2830
Pc'•_r r t ). 3`s a:GOB =-.., 510-8c G7,D ..,us om8r Sercice. '-ET-623-0"7,48

N?)3 i-1 Caro IL
-- "r ll(il H "wile"; Strcct Suitc 1(11 Raleigh, NTC 27604 Telephone: [phone] Fax: 919,828.3518
July 26, 2006 RECEIVED
Mr. Richard Spencer AUG 3 2005
Wilmington Regulatory Field Office
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers •DIVISION OF WMYS
Post Office Box 1890 PDEAgME Of I>cATM ENVIAOW
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890
RE: Jurisdictional Delineations for NCDOT Bridge Group 58 Replacements 05-238
Dear Richard:
EcoScience Corporation has been contracted to conduct field surveys at selected highway bridges the
N.C. Department of Transportation (NCDOT) is proposing to replace. Tasks completed during our field
investigation include Section 404 jurisdictional area delineations and location of delineation flags with
Global Positioning System (GPS) technology. As part of our contract, we have been asked to obtain
regulatory agency verification of our delineations. To this end, I am providing you information
concerning three bridges proposed for replacement in NCDOT Division 8.
Bridge replacement B-4583 crosses Aberdeen Creek in Moore County. Bridge replacement B-4584
crosses Little River in Moore County. Bridge replacement B-4642 crosses Juniper Creek in Scotland
County. Vegetated wetlands were identified within the project study area for all three bridge
replacements. Attached to this letter is a packet of information for each bridge and a table of coordinates
for all bridges. Included in each packet is a location map, a depiction of the GPS survey of the
jurisdictional area delineation, and completed U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) routine onsite
delineation data forms, if applicable. Locations where data forms were completed are depicted on the
GPS survey maps by red circles.
Again, I am interested in obtaining USACE verification of the delineations. Please let me know if you
would like for us to join you in a visit to these bridges, and if you need further documentation concerning
the delineations. Thank you for your attention to these important projects.
Sincerely,
ECOSCIENCE CORPORATION
Layna Thrush
Senior Scientist
Attachments
Locations of NCDOT Group 58 bridges which occur in NCDOT Division S.
Positions are located at the approximate center of each bridge and reported in feet.
NCDOT TIP# Latitude* Lonritude*
B-4583 35.0816°N 79.4624°W
B-4584 35.2345°N 79.2791°W
B-4642 34.7976°N 79.3973°W
'Located within US State Plane 1983 Coordinate System, North Carolina 3200 Zone
B-4584
Bridge No. II over Little River
Moore County
f NONr, c'
PROJECT VICINITY MAP
=_ .. Replacement of Bridge No. 11 (B-4584)
p over Little River
Moore County, North Carolina
MAF LET FIGURE

JUL 2006
:AS SHOWN
Pr n?eCl No,
05-238
BRIDGE
NO.
lee
?N rya "y `?aM ]Y • , o w.h .
••L ?b ?Y •Pa ' w]
- tiL = ? _a ?• ?a N
o zoo
s r? Y Y? r SCALE IN FEET
h LEGEND
. fSk -•jk -•[ .r •1 .?? re]
h _ CPS POINT
COMPLETED USACE
I ^4 -? DATA FORM
L 4Y = _? = " °-? FLOW DIRECTION
f "?? - - -
PROJECT STUDY
AREA BOUNDARY
JURISDICTIONAL
STREAM BOUNDARY
:,-L JURISDICTIONAL
WETLAND BOUNDARY
-?- BRIDGE
Clients Project: U- Lly Ckd eye
° N0A1H 99o JURISDICTIONAL AREAS gate. MAF ceT FIGURE
- ?_ Replacement of Bridge No. 11 (B-4584) JUL Zoos
Scale
over Little River 1"-200-
ESC Project No,: 3
?F T ^u Moore County, North Carolina
Percent of Dominant Species
?Stratum? Indicator
rA C_
t -?s?-
?l
UN
re OBL, FACW or
0
n,ani rrd,n J02G1eS Stratum
9 --? Indic:
10.
--
12.
13.
15.
16.
? Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
? Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
? Aerial Photographs
? Other
? No Recorded Data Available
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water: I (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: _ (in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil:
Remarks:
(in.)

etland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
[{ Inundated
Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
Water Marks
Drift Lines
? Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
5 condary Indicators (2 or more required):
? Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Water-Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
? FAC-Neutral Test
? Other (Explain in Remarks)
i_JATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
DATA FORM ?• Y "?? Q t{???
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Si te:
Applicant/Owner.
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site?
Is the area a potential Problem Area?
Dominant Plant Soecies Stratum Indicator
2. L'JI' NI r [14,
3. M7.
R
that are OBL.
or
?No
?Yes `f''No (Plot ID:
1
ID.
Straturn Indic.
51D
? Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
? Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
? Aerial Photographs
? Other
? No Recorded Data Available
Field Observations:
d?
Depth of Surface Water: (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: / I L (in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil: -7I ?, (in.)
Remarks: I_ 1
No r1 top I a r C
retland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
? Inundated
? Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
? Water Marks
? Drift Lines
? Sediment Deposits
? Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
? Oxidlzed Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
? Water-Stained Leaves
? Local Soil Survey Data
? FAC-Neutral Test
? Other (Explain in Remarks)
I'NVI ? G? 1 0'5
N
MOORE COUNTY
BEGIN
is ??. -? ?. ?• h.

` 9
rj I
f
Lit
WETLAND/STREAM
IMPACTS
PROPERTY OWNERS
NAMES AND ADDRESSES
PARCEL NO. NAMES ADDRESSES
1 BETTYRENE RICHARDSON 136 UNION CHURCH RD
CARTHAGE NC. 28327
1045 LOBELIA LANE
2 BONITA BLUE VASS, NC 28394
525 MAIN STREET
5 MACK BLUE VASS, NC 28591
NCD®T
DIVISION OR HIGHWAYS
MOORE COUNTY
PROJECT:33T85.1.1 (B-4584)
BRIDGE NO.11
OVER LITTLE RIVER
ON SR 1864 (LONG POINT ROAD)
HEFT 2 OF -? 7/2/

z Q

7
h
f
?
Q K

u r
O p
z
?` O O n `h

U
z
0 ? E

cn

U) CL ca

cz,

IL a)

0 10
co = N U
0
p
O

a] Q 11 LL LL

65 O

P

0

a
?cE?
?
N N
z
VJ c: c V O.
U xL EF-
W U
¢
-
d
_
N C
Q
? C U C
F -•?' m aE=
3wv Ea

w
Q N
? E?
cvo
CL

a
C N N
? 3 tU0

U
Q ?
a rn N

W
? c_c co "T o ? o
Q L N mM
U
- ? 0 O V O O
WU
3 ¢
a c N
o '0
0 ro C tCV U
N [d
ZQ
J U
W
H
W
N
U
E -_
- Cc
y
C N
C C C
_ co
LL O
V
O
OV
O
?
N
a

U ?
? N O O cc ca
O

Q J ?
J J J
O _O LO
N
p ? t
r } }
O
?
O
O
O
N

O <

(? Z ]F
-

Moore County
Bridge No. 1 l on SR 1864 (Long Point Road)
Over Little River
Federal-Aid Project No. BRZ-1864(1)
W.B.S. No. 33785.1.1
T.I.P. Project No. B-4584
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
DA ECiregory .Thorpe, Ph. D., Environmental Management Director
Project Development and Environmental
Analysis Branch, NCDOT
DA ?E
John F. Sullivan, III, P. E.
Division Administrator, FHWA
Moore County
Bridge No. 11 on SR 1864 (Long Point Road)
Over Little River
Federal-Aid Project No. BRZ-1864(1)
W.B.S. No. 33785.1.1
T.I.P. Project No. B4584
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
September 2007
Document Prepared by:
Wang Engineering Company, Inc.
4 .=n
Greg Purvis, P. E.
Project Manager
91z5/0-1
DATE
b
DATE
ror the North Carolina Department of Transportation
Tracy Iter
Project Manager
Bridge Project Development Unit
Bryan D. Kluchar, P.E.
gk&o
DATE
9 ZG a 7
DATE
Z.6/0-)
Project Engineer
Bridge Project Development
PROJECT COMMITMENTS
Moore County
Bridge No. 11 on SR 1864 (Long Point Road)
Over Little River
Federal-Aid Project No. BRZ-1864(l)
W.B.S. No. 33785.1.1
T.I.P. Project No. BA584
Division Eight Construction, Resident Engineer's Office - Offsite Detour
In order to have time to adequately reroute school busses, Moore County Schools should be contacted at
[phone] at least one month prior to road closure.
Moore County Emergency Services needs to be contacted at [phone] at least one month prior to
road closure to make the necessary temporary reassignments to primary response units.
Roadside Environmental Unit, Division Eight Resident Engineer - Sensitive Watersheds
The portion of the Little River in the project study area is designated as WS-III;HQW waters.
Sedimentation and erosion control measures shall adhere to the Design Standards in Sensitive
Watersheds.
Hydraulics Unit
Little River is a FEMA regulated stream within a Limited Detailed Study area. Coordination with FEMA
will be required.
A State Stormwater permit will be required.
Categorical Exclusion Page I of 1
September 2007
Moore County
Bridge No. 11 on SR 1864 (Long Point Road)
Over Little River
Federal-Aid Project No. BR2r1864(l)
W.B.S. No. 33785.1.1
T.I.P. Project No. B4584
INTRODUCTION: The replacement of Bridge No. 11 is included in the latest approved North Carolina
Department of Transportation (NCDOT) Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and is eligible for
the Federal-Aid Bridge Replacement Program. The location is shown in Figure 1. No substantial
environmental impacts are anticipated. The project is classified as a Federal "Categorical Exclusion."
1. PURPOSE AND NEED
Bridge Maintenance Unit records indicated the bridge has a sufficiency rating of 38.9 out of a
possible 100 and a structural appraisal of 2 out of a possible 9. Therefore, based on Federal
Highway Administration (FHWA) standards, the bridge is considered structurally deficient. In
addition, the existing structure is considered functionally obsolete due to a deck geometry
appraisal of 4 out of a possible 9.
Bridge No. 11 is composed of timber, concrete and steel. Timber typically does not last beyond
40 to 50 years due to the natural deterioration rates of wood. Rehabilitation of a timber structure
is generally practical only when a few members are damaged or prematurely deteriorated. The
condition of Bridge No. 11, built in 1961, has deteriorated to the point that makes rehabilitation
impractical. Replacement of the bridge will result in safer traffic operations.
H. EXISTING CONDITIONS
The project is located northeast of the intersection with SR 2175 (see Figure 1). Land use in the
project area is predominantly woodlands and light residential. Undeveloped woodlands are
adjacent on the north and south sides of the study area.
SR 1864 (Long Point Road) is classified as a rural local in the Statewide Functional Classification
System and it is not a National Highway System Route. This route is not a designated bicycle
route and there is no indication that an unusual number of bicyclists and/or pedestrians use the
roadway. Therefore, bicycle and pedestrian accommodations are not accounted for.
In the vicinity of the bridge, SR 1864 has an 18-foot pavement width with four-foot grass
shoulders (see Figure 3). The roadway grade has a slight crest at the existing bridge. The existing
bridge on SR 1105 is located in a tangent with horizontal curves located on both approaches. The
roadway is situated approximately 19 feet above the creek bed.
Bridge No. 11 is a three-span structure that consists of a timber deck with asphalt wearing surface
on I-beams. The substructure consists of end bents with timber caps on timber piles and interior
bents with reinforced concrete caps on timber piles. The existing bridge (see Figure 3) was
constructed in 1961. The overall length of the structure is 121 feet. The clear roadway width is
24.3 feet. The posted weight limit on this bridge is 14 tons for single vehicles and 19 tons for
TTST's.
On the downstream side of the bridge overhead telephone and power cross the stream. There are
no utilities attached to the bridge. Utility impacts are anticipated to be low.
The current traffic volume of 775 vehicles per day (VPD) is expected to increase to 1,600 VPD
by the year 2030. The projected volume includes one percent truck-tractor semi-trailer (TTST)
and two percent dual-tired vehicles (DT). The speed limit in the vicinity of the bridge is not
posted and therefore a statutory 55 miles per hour (mph) is assumed. There is a 35 mph advisory
sign for horizontal curve on north approach. Three school busses cross this bridge daily.
There were no accidents reported during a recent three-year period.
M. ALTERNATIVES
A. Project Description
The replacement structure will consist of a bridge approximately 175-foot long. The bridge length
is based on preliminary design information and is set by hydraulic requirements. The opening
size of the proposed structure may increase or decrease as necessary to accommodate peak flows
as determined from a more detailed hydraulic analysis to be performed during the final design
phase of the project. The bridge will be of sufficient width to provide for two 12-foot lanes with
three-foot offsets on each side. The roadway grade of the new structure will be approximately the
same as the existing grade.
The existing roadway will be widened to a 24-foot pavement width to provide two 12-foot lanes.
Six-foot shoulders will be provided on each side in accordance with the current NCDOT Design
Policy. This roadway will be designed as a rural local. The proposed design speed is 60 mph.
B. Reasonable and Feasible Alternatives
Two (2) alternatives studied for replacing the existing bridge are described below
Alternate A (Preferred) replaces the bridge at the existing location. Traffic will be detoured
offsite (see Figure 1) during the construction period. The length of approach work will be
approximately 330 feet on the south side of the bridge and approximately 330 feet on the north
side of the bridge.
NCDOT Guidelines for Evaluation of Offsite Detours for Bridge Replacement Proiects considers
multiple project variables beginning with the additional time traveled by the average road user
resulting from the offsite detour. The offsite detour for this project would include SR 2175
(Aiken Road) and US 1 approximately 3.08 miles in length. The detour for the average road user
would result in 2 minutes additional travel time (1.31 miles additional travel). Up to a twelve-
month duration of construction is expected on this project. No additional funds will be required
for upgrading or improving the offsite detour.
Based on the Guidelines, the criteria above indicate that on the basis of delay alone the detour is
acceptable. Moore County Emergency Services along with Moore County Schools
Transportation have also indicated that the detour is acceptable. NCDOT Division 8 has indicated
the condition of all roads, bridges and intersections on the offsite detour are acceptable without
improvement and concurs with the use of the detour.
Alternate B replaces the bridge on new location east of the existing bridge. During construction,
traffic will be maintained on the existing bridge. The length of approach work will be
approximately 460 feet on the south side of the bridge and approximately 468 feet on the north
side of the bridge. The proposed structure would be 325 feet long.
C. Alternatives Eliminated From Further Study
The "Do-Nothing" Alternative will eventually necessitate removal of the bridge and closing of
the road. This is not desirable due to the traffic service provided by SR 1864.
"Rehabilitation" of the existing bridge is not practical due to being composed mainly of timber
and the natural deterioration of timber.
Staged construction is not practical due to the availability of an offsite detour.
D. Preferred Alternative
Alternate A, replacing the existing bridge in the existing location while maintaining traffic on an
offsite detour during the construction period is the preferred alternate. Alternate A was selected
because of the comparatively lower human and natural environmental impacts associated with it.
NCDOT Division Eight Engineer concurs with Alternate A as the preferred alternative.
IV. DESIGN EXCEPTIONS ANTICIPATED
A design exception will be required for the horizontal curve on the north approach for Alternate
A. A design exception will be required for the horizontal curves on both approaches for Alternate
B and also for the sag vertical curve k value.
V. ESTIMATED COSTS
The estimated costs, based on current 2007 prices, are as follows:
V1. NATURAL RESOURCES
A. Physical Characteristics
1. Water Resources
The project study area is located within sub-basin 03-06-14 of the Cape Fear River Basin. This
area is part of USGS Hydrologic Unit 03030004 (Seaber et al. 1987) of the South Atlantic - Gulf
Region. Little River, the only stream within the project study area, is spanned by Bridge No. 11.
The portion of Little River that lies within the project study area has been assigned Stream Index
Number 18-23{10.7) by North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) (NCDWQ 2004).
Little River is designated as a warm water stream.
Classifications are assigned to waters of the State of North Carolina based on the existing or
contemplated best usage of various streams or segments of streams in the basin. A Best Usage
Classification of WS-III has been assigned to Little River along with the supplemental
classification of High Quality Waters (HQW). No Water Supply I (WS-1), Water Supply II (WS-
In, Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW), or watershed Critical Areas (CA) occur within LO mile
of the project study area. This portion of Little River is listed on the N.C. 2006 Section 303(d)
Final list. The impaired use is aquatic life support and the reason for listing is low pH.
2. Biotic Resources
Plant communities within the project study area were delineated to determine the approximate
area and location of each (Figure 2). A summary of the plant community areas within the project
study boundary is presented in Table 2.
2. Plant Communities within Proiect Studv Area
Coastal Plain Bottomland
11.5 1 75
Disturbed/maintained Land 1.9 13
Impervious Surfaces 1.6 12
Total 15.0 100
B. Jurisdictional Topics
1. Surface Waters and Wetlands
Within the project study area there is one jurisdictional stream: Little River. Most of the
remainder of the project study area is comprised of Coastal Plain Bottomland Hardwoods.
Surface waters within the project study area are subject to jurisdictional consideration under
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Potential impacts to waters of the United States resulting
from replacement of this bridge consist of fill associated with bridge demolition and minor
impacts to wetlands within the Coastal Plain Bottomland Hardwoods. A summary of
jurisdictional areas within the project study area is presented in Table 3. The maximum potential
fill that may be deposited into Little River during bridge demolition is approximately 9 cubic
yards-
4
2. Permits
The United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) has made available Nationwide Permit
(NWP) 23 for CEs due to minimal impacts to waters of the United States expected with bridge
construction. A NWP No. 33 may be required if temporary construction including cofferdams,
access and dewatering are required for this project. NCDWQ has made available a General 401
Water Quality Certification for NWP 23 and/or NWP 33. Potential impacts to waters of the
United States resulting from replacement of this bridge consist of fill associated with bridge
demolition and minor impacts to wetlands within the Coastal Plain Bottomland Hardwoods.
3. Federally Protected Species
Species with the federal classification of Endangered (E), Threatened (T), Threatened due to
Similarity of Appearance (T [S/A]), or officially Proposed (P) for such listing are protected under
the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). The term
"Endangered Species" is defined as "any species which is in danger of extinction throughout all
or a significant portion of its range," and the term "Threatened Species" is defined as "any
species which is likely to become an Endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout
all or a significant portion of its range" (16 U.S.C. 1532). The term "Threatened due to Similarity
of Appearance" is defined as a species which is not "Endangered" or "Threatened," but "closely
resembles an Endangered or Threatened species" (16 U.S.C. 1532).
The project study area was walked and visually surveyed for significant features including
potential protected species habitat. The field work for this investigation was conducted on May
25, 2006, and May 26, 2006 by EcoScience Corporation biologists Craig Terwilliger and Justin
Wright.
The USFWS lists four federally protected species for Moore County (USFWS 2006, see Table 4).
"JYIfS'?:t? C31YrX.''K acyyF;l? h .r o
`
?able+t F¢eydeis Proteted S es Ltsted< f°r core Cottii &

Common Name Scientific Name Status* Habitat Biological
Present Conclusion
American chaffseed Schwalbea americana E Y No Effect
Cape Fear shiner Notropis mekistocholas E N No Effect
Michaux's sumac Rhus michauxii E Y No Effect
Red-cockaded
woodpecker Picoides borealis E N No Effect
AMERICAN CHAFFSEED
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
Within the project study area there is suitable habitat for American chaffseed within some of the
forested areas that are open and dominated by oak species. During the May 25, 2006 field visit, a
systematic plant-by-plant survey was conducted within suitable habitat by EcoScience
Corporation biologists. No specimens were observed. NCNHP records (reviewed May 2006)
document no occurrence of American chaffseed within 2.0 miles of the project study area. Based
on the plant survey identifying that the species was not present and NCNHP records, the proposed
project will have No Effect on American chaffseed.
CAPE FEAR SHINER
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
Within the project study area there is no suitable habitat for the Cape Fear shiner in the form of
streams with gravel, cobble, and boulder substrates with pools, riffles, and shallow runs. The
habitat at the project site is sand and silt and the water is tannin in color with little flow. The
stream has more of a coastal plain appearance. There are no slackwater areas with large rock
outcrops and pools with water of good quality with relatively low silt loads (USFWS 2006).
NCNHP records (reviewed May 2006) document no occurrence of Cape Fear shiner within 2.0
miles of the project study area. The effect of this project on Cape Fear shiner is No Effect.
MICHAUX'S SUMAC
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
The project study area contains suitable habitat for Michaux's sumac along the roadway within
the disturbed/maintained land. During the May 25, 2006 field visit, a systematic plant-by-plant
survey was conducted within suitable habitat by EcoScience Corporation biologists. No
specimens were observed. NCNHP records (reviewed May 2006) document no occurrence of
Michaux's sumac within 2.0 miles of the project study area. Based on the plant survey
identifying that the species was not present and NCNHP records, the proposed project will have
No Effect on Michaux's sumac.
RED-COCKADED WOODPECKER
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
The majority of the project study area is Coastal Plain Bottomland Hardwoods. This plant
community lacks the open shrub layer of pine savanna or pine woods habitat required by this
species for foraging and nesting. NCNHP records (reviewed May 2006) document no occurrence
of red cockaded woodpecker within 2.0 miles of the project study area. Based on NCNHP
records and lack of suitable habitat, this project will have No Effect on red cockaded woodpecker.
VII. HUMAN ENVIRONMENT
Section 106 Compliance Guidelines
This project is subject to compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of
1966, as amended, and implemented by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations
for Compliance with Section 106, codified as 36 CFR Part 800. Section 106 requires Federal
agencies to take into account the effect of their undertakings (federally funded, licensed, or permitted
projects) on properties listed in or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places
and to afford the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation a reasonable opportunity to comment on
such undertakings.
Historic Architecture
The Historic Preservation Office (HPO) reviewed the subject project and determined that no
surveys are required (see letter dated May 1, 2006).
Archaeology
The Historic Preservation Office (HPO) reviewed the subject project. There are no known
archaeological sites within the proposed project area, and no archaeological investigation
needed to be conducted (see letter dated May 1, 2006).
Community Impacts
No adverse impact on families or communities is anticipated. Right of way acquisition will be
limited. No relocatees are expected with implementation of the proposed alternative.
No adverse effect on public facilities or services is anticipated. The project is not expected to
adversely affect social, economic, or religious opportunities in the area.
The project is not in conflict with any plan, existing land use, or zoning regulation. No substantial
change in land use is expected to result from construction of the project.
The Farmland Protection Policy Act requires all federal agencies or their representatives to consider
the potential impacts to prime and important farmland soils by all land acquisition and construction
projects. Prime and important familand soils are defined by the Natural Resources Conservation
Service (NRCS). Since there are no prime or important farmlands in the immediate vicinity of the
proposed bridge the Farmland Protection Policy does not apply.
The project will not have a disproportionately high and adverse human health and environmental
effect on any minority or low-income population.
Noise & Air Quality
This project is an air quality neutral project in accordance with 40 CFR 93.126. It is not required to
be included in the regional emissions analysis (if applicable) and project level CO or PM2.5 analyses
are not required. This project will not result in any meaningful changes in traffic volumes, vehicle
mix, location of the existing facility"; or any other factor that would cause an increase in emissions
impacts relative to the no-build alternative. Therefore, FHWA has determined that this project will
generate minimal au quality impacts for Clean Air Act criteria pollutants and has not been linked
with any special MSAT concerns. Consequently, this effort is exempt from analysis for MSATs.
Any burning of vegetation shall be performed in accordance with applicable local laws and
regulations of the North Carolina State Implementation Plan (SIP) for air quality compliance with 15
NCAC 213.0520.
Noise levels may increase during project construction; however, these impacts are not expected to be
substantial considering the relatively short-term nature of construction noise and the limitation of
construction to daytime hours. The transmission loss characteristics of nearby natural elements and
man-made structures are believed to be sufficient to moderate the effects of intrusive construction
noise.
VEIL GENERAL ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
The project is expected to have an overall positive impact. Replacement of an inadequate bridge will
result in safer traffic operations.
The bridge replacement will not have an adverse effect on the quality of the human or natural
environment with the use of current NCDOT standards and specifications.
The proposed project will not require right-of-way acquisition or easement from any land protected under
section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act of 1966 (49 U.S.C. 303).
An examination of records at the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources,
Division of Water Quality, Groundwater Section and the North Carolina Department of Human
Resources, Solid Waste Management Section revealed no hazardous waste sites, no regulated or
unregulated landfills or dumpsites with in the project area. No facility with underground storage tanks
(UST) was identified in the project vicinity.
Moore County is a participant in the Federal Flood Insurance Program The bridge is located within a
Limited Detail Study Area. The new structure should be designed to match or lower the existing 100-
year storm elevation upstream of the roadway. Since the proposed replacement for Bridge No. 1 l would
be a structure similar in waterway opening size, it is not anticipated that it will have any significant
adverse impact on the existing floodplain and floodway. The proposed alternatives will not modify flow
characteristics and will have a minimal impact on floodplains due to roadway encroachment. The
existing drainage patterns and groundwater will not be affected.
On the basis of the above discussion, it is concluded that no significant adverse environmental effects will
result from implementation of the project.
UK. OTHER AGENCY COMMENTS
NCDOT has sought input from the following agencies as a part of the project development: U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, N. C. Department of Cultural Resources, U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service, N. C.
Division of Water Quality, N. C. Wildlife Resources Commission, National Marine Fisheries, U. S.
Forest Service, Moore County Emergency Services and the Moore County Public Schools.
The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service in a standardized letter provided a request that they prefer any
replacement structure to be a spanning structure.
Response: The existing bridge will be replaced with a bridge and bents in the stream will be minimized to
the extent possible. Equal or greater conveyance will be provided with the bridge and wetland impacts
will be minimized/avoided to extent practical.
The N.C. Wildlife Resource Commission had no special concerns for this project.
The North Carolina Division of Water Quality stated that NCDOT will be required to design,
construct, and maintain hazardous spill catch basins in the project area and that they prefer an offsite
detour to avoid temporary impacts.
Response: The NCDOT Hydraulics unit has stated that these items should not apply to this project.
The Moore County Public Schools and Moore County Emergency Services indicated that an offsite
detour is acceptable.
X. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
A newsletter has been sent to all those living along SR 1864 between the intersection with SR 2175 and
the intersection with US 1. There have been three comments received to date including one in support of
Alternate A.
There is not substantial controversy on social, economic, or environmental grounds concerning the
project.
XL CONCLUSION
On the basis of the above discussion, it is concluded that no substantial adverse environmental impacts
will result from implementation of the project. The project is therefore considered to be a federal
"Categorical Exclusion" due to its limited scope and lack of substantial environmental consequences.
FIGURES
Figure 1 - Vicinity Map
Figure 2 - Alternate A (Preferred)
Figure 2A - Alternate B
Figure 3 - Photographs of Bridge No. 11
Figure 4 - Typical Roadway Section
.. ?. I '0! !® 1 1 feel eso •1
40 a eus •'?
•

lees Q,• ? leer F`I'Z
•?
? J
?.
• • •.?: ?. ..`
•• •
'?
O Vass
? •? 1691
1 r
"° `
'• '
. Of 1903
;
e
.;
+
?
1650 1904
•,
® '
1994
1843 e1 1893 i ®
® 1
X19
'853 1862 les] ..`• 1 ?: CITy LIMIT® / 3013
1843
•.I ^???0,,0
,
BRIDGE NO. 11
Lakeview
2175 41#
R 1
I ,.R.
!
2025
1 69 ?.
r• I 1994 '`1!?!
`
2115 ,

2025 •'o
•
?
I4 024 I •? o.
I
21T5 r'•r
'
I o
, /
® I
•
/ rI • I
, I• I

r.ECExn
Studied Debur
NO M G1R0L
DEPARTAIPNI OF TRANSPORlA_
' PROJECT OEVELOPAIEN)
6 £NV2RoN" AL ANALYSIS
MOORE COUNTY
BRIDGE NO. 11 ON SR 1861
OVER 11771E RlI
77P NO. B-1584
VIM= Aup
FIGURE I

CONTRACT : _ TIP PROJECT: B-4584
0
T
m
O
A
N
O
H
D
L
R1y
rl
n
CO)
rA
II c I D D
N
~ AZ
C P I O O

<
tio N
<o N
° (Sf
C

0
it
it IP II II
it 1
: o "o?o o a
C 3 = e-. ° a
N =
A

z Z
m

Z

_
?_ v
n

a
s
O
v
f
j
?
p
m m
O
Im ?
? ? H
N y
A W ? x
A A
it
O O p
O
A
3 31 3

m

p yay
O I?l

'p+f
S
Y
o "? ?

y?
,°O Y
m ?
@

6

m
w

y
? b
x

?
i
n
b
a

n

z

'z

?8

?$
r) b

o
n _
O
Mx
o
y b ?l?J

i m
z
Z
Z

m
m z

o
m
a
?b
m
z
?
Y (7

d
n ke
b y
t C
?ti

ti
ab
?
t vaza.a p
` z
y

,.rgon . vuv"
ti
?c
?f
o?
lid C
ai
s'
a?

9/17/99
e
F 1 \ F
F F "
x
0
10+0

- - - - - -

I - - - - - - - -
F
V I ?

F
?
I ?s
x
F F
1 1g I

-
yyym
m
xz
n \
=
?
y
b?b?]IIOIAP1 In Y ?F
?
22220 1 I
F
1
?
yy
im2 D]1
?
? ? ?
1
F
mo?,m
im?mn
? I ?
N ? n m?? .Zl L m n
< ?? ? x F
?nmti
2
y
y O -<
I
EGIN
-G
8
. '\I
m
o m 2 o O ? L- ST .12 54.0 P \
* ?\
e
\ *
I
1
F
u n II II II n II u u C ? ' f 1 I
Nin In NM1.+N ?N?
?? i0 r a 1 r I
,
ILn I-0 n
*
W
"

g
1 m

I
?n<?nTn< n
ln
] 0 1
1

\
* I
. I
?
]
y?byT?IT
t? ? an H I/1 o
? w F
I
I I
I 1
G e
\ I F
I II
\
F
\ I
1
1n
A x x \ ?
'
I
X \ T ,
F
1
z
z
p i x P

£
H
E
I
o
D

f \
a IN
0 I o? o +' /5+00
I

D
" 0
Z
EGIN
BRI
GE

S
N N ® \ \ J\
? ?
\
A \
a -R .. - \

N
ar ? W
(
-- _ _ _ \
I y m .. vr

\ I ' ? ?2 \ ?
I \ x a
?iy
14 - _ / ND RID E
I T 1Z. 0-a I a l ?
T
" P"
"
I a z A> ? x x ? ' I ??p

f
o
o
e m m

x /
a /
Z
"
Z
_ v ? ?m F
x x g *
O
x
fCD
10
E:
oAM

og

(gym Mm
Z ?
-
N m m
F
D -rl
1> -K
" `r m y *
F r / Mn Or
G
+ ? "
r
I z
? Np =
I
?
°' N7/ D
" I I
m II I
O C
3 :1 N r"A
* F FT1
w 0
(A
EN
G
DE
F / N 20+00 10
m -L STA. 20+1 6.00
N EL = 2 44.67 1 a /
F
?
I z
? ! ?o ? l
N C: a

?
m ?.

F *
N ' IS

N /
I 1
J

1 0
4

p
</1 1 ?? € co
A z
* r
Cy 0

2
z z
x
z R
0
o

* ^ o>
I u/ ? i
m
I a
0 p

S/17/99
m ,
I
5
\ 5
s
x
I
\
s I s
5 x
0
I0+0

\ 1? s
?
_ x \
1 ?
?_i
x
O ?
Z
I \ s 5
15

-

- ly 1 5
F x F. 5
I
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- s 5 I s
'? $

oogg8°ooo
m
IT IT 1
-t 1
II ca
T v
i In In
a?A«c
c?c?2
I 1 _
x I

>
titi-Imm2z2n ?
?
iii@?m II
?
?n? ?mxo O I 1
^ m°?mxl?2n m I 5
5 !
'
m
m
m
? w 5
•1.
?
n
m
Y
?m ymo EGIN E
z
o
2 L- S7 12 54
0 5
z
m . . \ v §I
n _

IAA

I
5
II II II II 11 II II II II C I
NIn In NIwN NNIp t`
M
Id
M
Id MIA IdMM ? I
? .f m
p
In I
I?n
iin
lO iO iO
? fm 1 °z
p
la
O 5
?
s
W y ? p m
5 I I!
?n<?n?ln-c to D
? F I
? 1 ? I
?
?In In In?vl vl °
? '
,I ?
?1 I
I
?
A 1
x
x j
\ F =' p I I
I
\ 1
`
C:j
z
\
N
no
I
I
V
?
I A p I I

Y 'v r N
I_ y I O 1 F
l
y y

°

)
0? *

J
O m '
15+00

N - - * l
+ Z i EGIN BRI GE 236
of
R
o
a a
" II w8

N ? m
m 4 r G ?

x_ '..
p ' \
+ I 4 ? 91
? ice
I 11
?F"1 F
o t„uNi ? ?\ x I
Ar?

?( ND 0.1D E \
I 9'

T4-
X12.
0? x
I
I
p
I 5
. ?
1v2 P"- ?
s l
N
R

co , Y x Y
??ee
v
? x
? ? n 4

,
I
F
I i
I ? Y
5
? ' I
x x I I I /
O 5 O
I

51 r?° tmv?1 _ i ?; ` m m
/
g
Z Z
V T y A x 5
/
O
?
g
E
o ° cam mm
= 5 F
5
mn r-
I m
I
DT
]>
I
?
N P'" ? Z..
s I
m
1 '
5 F

+0
O o
1 ro .,n r
m
I ? z
NZ II =
?D
F I o
I
N w f
5
o N 2 x z Z
pp
m
ry? T m
5
N EN GR ADE ?y ? F ? ? ZO
m 5
-L STA. 20+ 6.00 ti .I S /
x
N EL = 24 4.67
y / ww

N C I y / 5
?
"
5
/}w
o
I d i
c _ _ _ 5
C

m I 5 / : np $
s '` I N
4
/ 4

5
' x
U
I?
x
s s
?
Vf 1
, P

/
z
s
1
A
I
1 v Eb
s
a
J
y? %? i m
a

r
n
' F
5
? 3
?
I ? 1 z
i
i 2
a z
z
"Z
a a w
Q
21 zz 0
? 4 K
w

/
G1
7
r
?? qo
f

I
I 5

r a
?
?z c?

a

I
SEYSSSSYST'ME8f88E
558888888 EEESSE4?GNEf8EY888EEE88EEE
EESEUSE RNAMEEf88
to
° O
O °
O °
O
O
O G
I _
°

I
i O

0 I
I
I I
I I °
?
I j
I I
I I
I
f
pr
m
°
I
? I j I I Z
I
I c m
I I I I c
o ?
I I
I I
I ? I
I I °
I I I i I I
I

I
I I I I I °
I
I
II I
I
I
I
II i I` ` \ .y F o
\ \ Z

-
? I t o

CA)
T ? N O ? N° T ° ° ? v
A A N T N N
-+ A A A
O o° A u
o O > O a O °
I _ o o ° u
. o
O O °
° ° ° c c

?
C)
it
O
O
O
p
a
p
1
I
1 I 1
? I
? I ? I

V
? I
I I
I I I
I I
°
I I I I I I
I I
I
I I

° I

I
I
I I
I
I I
I
I I
I
I

?;
m
I i I
I
I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I
I I
I z?
G? q
m
° I I o
I I I

o I I i I I

I I
I
i
I ? I i I I
I o

o I I

c
I
? I
I
I o

I
I
I o

I 0
?^y
o L.i o ?

I
W
.m. o
0
I o
A
I
J °
°
° t
I
' m
n
m
Z
O O
O
y
O
u Z
O
SSSSSSSYSTIMESSSS4
SSSSSSSSSSDCNSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
SSSSUSFRNAMFERNAMFSSSB
CONTRACT. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ TIP PROJECT: B-4584

O U O !

rT O
T

9
O .
CCU
T =
0 n
O O G y C

F

o
O
I p
S
II c z
g
g
??? p
< ? v ?

rL o o n
O II II II II II II x
(
?
y
° F-
' OP W OP w a 0 a
c
aR o y
a

o i i
Gf (,1
Z
? p
O

L
to p

? i Q

a

H

II II II
0
3 3 I3:

?
m
<? x
m ?
C) J
a
w
k
y
Sa a

b ? B
M
0 lyG?a
Z 'nnR
?
? ta
9 i y
?V
y
k
Z
m o
v
T ¦
ti
2 (?

9
atti
2?
n
y ?
I,mn y
2
2
y
Rf

a°pa a

? r
H
K
fit
o?
A•
i
N
III ?
? I
I m
I o a?
c' a m
i a m
+ m
\ i b 8 15+00
I
8
0
N
Z
O
9
0
20+0p
N

D
I
C
O
b
V?
SSa
h
x
x
co)
h O
?. O
C1
0
\-A
IG ,. .. IS .. ? to

?n

pp t

i
IN,

C)
0
z

z®
z
® F M
W m
m
rj)
z

a
W
a
7
m u

' ; O
5 C
,E b ?
a

?+ b?

r
?F

°i. O 0 t+ O `3i1 m O S S° O C 3 O 10 l L'. t S S L` C 9 O n g~ n W
m ?' vG £ m a m 11????7777 3 2° a 3 °°_' N C 3$$ $$$ Y$ m 3 c S
v 3
8 S' g ° y? ro q 7 c
v o E m m o h o v m M ` qF m ` T 8 n r. ° 9 c m
O 1O N ... O C O < O O ` Y C S` 0 j ° O , j °
-°. 3 3 7 F $ n o m c 3 C.f
a o 3 3 0 .°? m^ m m
9 ? O S m? $ ° o
b
S v O ` N
b
Q\ YI i
? I I I R ? I i i -. .o NO O ? I I I I I I I I I
e ilWl ? i ? Lf LJ I I ??? k 9 f t G . Q @O ao
x
?lWll? ) I I Li I ILyJ I t I I t
5 0 F 'j N 41 S 9 S 9 '° V 9 ,l '° (II V 9 i?. L? O A 33N J° N [V O
m n g _ t? 4 a a ?a a s a a a a a a a L a _ a a ^p
o° v, } v v y x 0 N y N
° N m m m 3 ° $ u°i u°i o ] s S $ $ $ $ $kk $ ; $ j --S O Y m. n !n a
a a r s ll9 7 '° m a i m m o 3 ^ fO ° 03 1
s 1°
'm m y a ? o Z c Q o o a- m Q m' m m m m as o 0 m m' m m° s on 0= 3 ?n 0
0° °- o° a O m °m $ °., 0. 0 3 a o a 3 0 3 2 g c° a s, I I?$ a m IO ? M
CI °`-°•. a° s a o o' CJ n m 3 m' 'm a a 3 T g, Gl °.. n 3. 9. F F 9 ° y
3 'M a, n
a =
o a a' 3 T S 0 3? >>°° ?c.C. c O q 'C
v m m °° Smm m m ??
7 0 m N O ...TTT O
' y 3
lii ills I i? r
F p I I
i D ° ® IT In I O 2 i I D }?O
°o ? IIII i ?
Iii ? I I I >I f
O A A I A H H y '-1 9
mm D A $ v M 9 9 v U N N 9 >
°°$ R v m m m m$ $. ?n a =
o ° i L
O m O
Im 0a0 a 3m -' i s T T NS _ 3 a v,,, 1$q? ?' yqo? a' 8L m $a Z M
S; A ?j
a 6 a 9 b m O O m T a y g O ; S O °. a°?9 A yN N C 0 a R.
V? m o m o m T m c 6' o m ?' C m l : ,xg', ° 1 m to 0 7Sy1
T c -? m y° n 4 0 o o m o m c m o° 3 F °-
a 03 m O T m S m , G ° y O O b_T mT = 2 x
0 2.
O O O ° C a a ° ° ° u0 a C
Q Q m m m n 2 I
° o F m
D 3 C O' m O ° O
O' m 3 d
m fi in
m
y 3 I a
T C
I 1 I I I `-/
? I
I ' l l I I ? ^ O
?t r
a m? ? vsf » c c c T. 0 ° €j 7 7 7 ? g? F F F F j
a `m rn a ~ 'c' 0 ° N < '° 0 ° ° c m ° m n V
5 *3
a a m o a P
o N°° c v ° a° q
°° T N° O N a d9 CS a 0y n, G O a M CS a
q m q H C N T d N A,3 G. S "' Vl U O a V? Y' a O
U G 70 44Y???1 O T T Y4 ?1 o F O
C m O 0 Q O C
LL
i
lO ?' :" r k 1 $Z 2° C O O_ C C < p a o A
° O Q m S rn ° `; m m u o o c m o C
C j' C f N n 0 m m o °
o C n c C H
u ° m _c S m C
8 i m m
? C . to •
I I ? I I
I I I I I
A I I I i I i t
I i I I i I
i

?J
V
z®
z
®x
0--l r4
cn 0-4
O
O

!??L
YE';H M
a u n
£ e

IS 3 r IS
'

B
Y
?
?
o
o
? }
a
9
2
3
LWwiax M1i. Ri, DR al' m 7
e } ;
FROM
???j
5
-
%'
m
s E EE
? €
m C
TD
0
F T. ELevNTOx : i ? r
? ? F 8 8 ? ; ?
39 a
wNERt ELEYNUOx 8 ? a' ? ? ? ''? c E Y E 2

WYERL FLEVI.iNIM _ i 5 1 q i
? s

SLOPE MI'm 2 ' Z

4
z

; tly
?
- P

av y

oW 'y

I
I ? q
ON
Y

2
_
6$

on A

W

n y
n
m ;
It

v
b 5m
N m
Or z H O
N Z T
2
_
? c

= n .1

?
?m
$ n
?
n = C7

`
e
r f

4 - n
IS' 6NE CRNM W£ (° 3
i

'

L 3
a
yr WE DUN EBN[
A
1
G ( o

]e SIDE DRUN WPE
acv.
?
yy yy
C6 P. C
q
d ??mm ? Cl
J

DUMPED 1f
a
PEREUm1 ?aiHRUSD) n
PUN DRUxME Z 4
6mucNPES [
sa.10.
' i
TOM LPfC11 1C

'1i PAY
OU.WIIIY SHUT
-UANU OYE BF COL.
N' (U4
CDL.el A
CB.Si0.410.OICASTEI E10.N Q

s 1 fl i s

D.D.LF..1 1MOOR TES 6iD. W
n:F[ool
P - oy O
- t - I F
F .

- .
°
an
uQ
>jm [`4
9
Gm
?i
] MSEARNOM.WD.WU f

Cwi0. SYEELELBOWONO
SSUM ?imtn
° p
. n
y ??NN
:cmo

g
CONC. LCIlUiS 4.'B'CY. sl0. W01] j
c
LCNCSBLCKMKW.CY. STO. MIT a S
y
L
RPEM &LIN. R.

X mm??
0Y['
DC a
w
m
c
o
mFF boo:
_ p'-_om e
20g ?
€

oe
222
£ n

a
ll
fa Y

h h h h ?
Q m
V _
? V i O

n c
'a
E F
S
y j
?' o
c
?
G ,
Y -
? m
u°
O
4 A

k" " o $ $ o n
mc' o

i8

s s °?
?

a

3
gF

? $ $ v y
Oy 1^]

e?

y

F
C
A

o e
i
n
y

- Y O
w
yy yLy
S ?y

i
s?
C

n °

C? 9
am y ?

I'
AUG 4 2009
MION OF NIOMNAYI!
MEA-0FFICE OF NATURAL ENW
to

@Q@gg°m°m °m °a
m m m v\\n vl ?
???mm=xe?
a?i$$ Qom w
N m 0 m Z 2 D M
QA 2 D
u II II u u o, n r n C
ryny?n?ifV lw IV IV fV OO e
in ?t5bo$?N? ?
n
W ti
to to H H ? >
IA
IL
la
I-4
Im
I o
?o
I IN
N
O
wi
?Z
Op
bq
K
? \ x
\
x , x
? x
x
? \ * x
x , \ _ x
\
x \ \ `I
x \
\ x x .
x * \I \` ` s * x
4
* ? A x
x p
x
i
x x C\ 16 1 x x?
R\ 15
Z? S x
x U'Ia 1 ?x x
SNNN? , b S x
x \: 1 I x
x Z'. I
x x
t \
x \ \
o,
,x.
,x
/ x \
\ x
\ x x ?
x nor` ?
x + a
x
x x x
x x
x x
x ,
4 I
x I
x .? I
x / .S
x x /
x * /
/
x * /
/
x /
/
/ CP.
?I2
to
10+00
? I
? x

4 *
x
8„
«
¢fO
x x

?y

x g?
ti
r CD
x
20vo
? a

8 8$ 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8
x
m
c
O
0
O
w
2 m
c
°m
n
I I
a
p
O
C
I ?
f
VI
?H
t?
?O
0 ?
O
zz
0
?y
xx
y ?O
y ?z
0
Z
i y
i 3
a
i? 8s
m
g$
Sa ?
cn C/)
g•
g g • 3
s2 q
nb9a
0 3
3
d'A
y 9o i4?f
om
z K P
y'?-`"i (v' 9$a Sa
p? C y a 4 b
C ? Z e
by Ov' i
Z ?qt o
+A ? m
n
0
i
x ?
r
? Z
m

?J
O

d
N
8
D (n

s m
Z n

o ?

O

z
o s _
Z
z
s
o

N
m

?
o

=
x
u m

n MX7 >
I
1
I o
I

I ,
I
'
'1111
:'I 1 II I-I ' I I ,
. IIII 'II :I I I I
' I 11 I
I
1 ' !.
II II ' ' II
I
I
Illll 1
' ' I
I I 1
I
I
1 I I
? - I
1 0
1
I
' i 111 ? I III , , I I 1 I I
Al

i
1
11' "' ? ? ' I I
-I I ,
i? ' ' 'II_'

I ' IIII'!
'o

1
III
1
1
" III I'I11 ll I 1{
I
:
I ' ;?I
I I
'
I
II
! I
ltl
l I I 1
{
i
,
I
I??
III I I. I I J
_? I

', F ? I i- '-

I ?

i g
I
1, I 1 , 1 l
I
?' I tI' I y
? {
I I
11 I1 I ? ' IIL '
?
I I
' ,I
1

r I
I
I f I

i1 it 1 ??'' I
' I
1 1
I II11
?
I ( III , I

1 II'
Ia'' f
I
tt I ,
l
-
ll
'
(
I
?
I
{? i
f
Il
:'
I
_'
tl
1
I I ?
I
'
I ?
,
I ? I 1' ? I
I
I, I
I
I
I
.?
?I
I 1 ? I , t ? '
I
I
1 11,1 :C
I !1,,"1I I
I I
'
III ', ' , ; '
10

I ,: I I
{'? ?: II I I i?? 1 I
L,

,

I
,
?
1
1
1
1
1 I
1 1??
'1? I
. 1 '
' IJI!
I
/
1
1
1
'
', 1,
I
I
1'
111
1
1 1 ' i I It'1 ?1 11 C ?.
? -"
I ?
1
1 1{
, ll 1
1
1
1 t 1.
1
L
1 ?
,
1
..
C

I l'. 1
ll
9?,
?
'
I'
?f
I 1 , , ,
. 1
I
t I I
1
1
I 1 1- , 1 1 :.i .,:,
1 1
1
I 1', ,?' .1
11 l fl

1 {, 11 1 1` 1, 1'11,!
I F ?I
1? rl 1 11
?
' '
'
,
l
1
I
1
1 I,?II? I,
1'
, Ln, 1
1
l
1 1
1
,
r
1

{ ? 111,{ 1 1 1_1 {1 , 1 1 1l
1'
1
?
1 11 i 1
' N
,
1 ?'.
.1 11
1 I ,'11

i

1 I1 ,, `4 ''i.l
?,1
ti.

0
F
% Fc
4

North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources R?41 P
State Historic Preservation Office
Pray B. S.Mbl? Ad.,4.i.m.
,Mhchad F. r•-I,.y, Goremnr Office of Archives and Histmv
I.odxTh l_ V, x , `cccccw Division of Historical Ita.res
Jeffrey J. Cnnv, Ih7.uty S .cns David Brook, Dire r
May 1, 2006
MEMORANDUM
TO: Greg Thorpe, Ph.D., Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
NCDOT Division of Highways
FROM: Peter Sandbeck Os?,? PAke C. " kck_
SUBJECT: Replace Bridge 11 on SR 1864 over Little River, B-4584, Moore County, ER 06-0830
Thank you for your letter of March 21, 2006, concerning the above project
We have conducted a review of the project and are aware of no historic resources that would be affected by
the project. Therefore, we have no comment on the project as proposed.
The above comments are trade pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisorv 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
please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763. In all future
communication concerning this project, please cite the above-referenced tracking number.
(lc. PL4.7 O?v4_pt-

tom' :5:'7
L.m. Maili..g Add.e.. Te"p .m/Fu
ADMINISTRATION Yr7 N. UMun, Slr,, Rak:i,. ?t Y.17 Mal.Sc,. lis.tcr, 8.160 NI:'-?(MW.17 ()19)7314763173W.5)
RESTORATION 515 N. Ilkn.t S,. L!dclvi. M' Xd7 XIQS: ec /'corer. Rakich NC'-76MWI7 MI9)73}65a7/'l5-g4
SURVEY & PLANNING 3 15 N. Il4mm Stncc Rak.p. V 4617 Mail Service tls.w. Ralugh NC MW .G' T)17)7716545i715- 4

?r
ac'
r:a R
ti? X? N ly[
a
B-4584
Replacement of Bridge
No. I1 on SR 1854
Over Little River
Moore Count,,
FIGURE 3 1