20111075 Ver 1_Complete File_20111209

d?,.. S7A7F4
fi k1a
-
20
,
yps/7to S`?Elt
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA Icy
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY LYNDO TIPPETT
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
June 12, 2007
Mr. Bill Biddlecome, Transportation Project Manager
Department of the Army; Corps of Engineers
Washington Regulatory Field Office
Post Office Box 1000
Washington, North Carolina 27889-1000
Dear Mr. Biddlecome:
SUBJECT: SECTION 404 - N.E.P.A MERGER PROCESS Application for a
Department of the Army (DOA) Permit pursuant to Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act TO DISCHARGE DREDGED OR FILL MATERIAL
INTO WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES TO CONSTRUCT the
proposed US 158 widening from Murfreesboro Bypass to US 13 West of
Winton, Hertford County. WBS No. 35489.1.1, T.I.P. No. R-2583
The following application, including separate attachments for (1) ENG Form 4345 and
(2) mailing list (labels) is submitted for your consideration. As you are aware, this
project was selected for treatment under the new "merger" process. At this juncture, the
Regulatory Division has provided concurrence with Purpose and Need, with the selection
of Detailed Study Alternatives and with the bridge locations and lengths. An
Environmental Assessment (EA) was prepared and signed on April 27, 2006. The
document was circulated on May 26, 2006. A copy is attached.
Please issue your public notice at the earliest opportunity so that we can jointly proceed
toward selecting the LEDPA (least environmentally damaging, practicable alternative
which meets the purpose and need of the project) following analysis of public input.
Once the LEDPA is selected and approved, efforts will be undertaken to further minimize
impacts to wetlands and riparian buffers in the LEDPA corridor and to propose suitable
compensatory mitigation to offset unavoidable impacts:
The following information is a summary of relevant project details and is being provided
to assist in the Section 404 regulatory-rev-of the project. Please note that more -
detailed information is available in the EA.
MAILING ADDRESS:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548
TELEPHONE: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
WEBSITE. WWW.DOH.DOT.STATE.NC.US
LOCATION:
TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
RALEIGH NC
INTRODUCTION
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to widen US 158
from Murfreesboro Bypass to US 13 west of Winton in Hertford County. Figure 1 (refer
to the EA) is a vicinity map, and Figure 3 (refer to the EA) shows water resources and a
map of the detailed study alternatives.
The proposed US 158 widening is approximately 8.3 miles in length (depending upon
alternative). There will be a four-lane divided facility, consisting of four 12-foot travel
lanes, paved shoulders, and a 46-foot wide grassy median. The existing facility will have
partial control access and full control access on new location. The proposed right-of-way
is approximately 250 feet for all build alternatives. The proposed facility has a design
speed of 60 miles per hour (mph).
NEPA/404 MERGER PROCESS DOCUMENTATION
Although this is a state-funded action that is subject to North Carolina (or State)
Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) requirements, the proposed project is being developed
through the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)/404 Merger Process to ensure
systematic evaluation of the project plus avoidance and minimization of all potential
impacts. Concurrence Point 1 (Purpose & Need) was signed by Merger Team members
on January 15, 2003. Concurrent Point 2 (Alternatives for Detailed Study) was signed on
May 19, 2005. It was agreed upon by the Merger Team that Concurrence Point 2a
(Bridging and Alignment Review) would be combined with Concurrence Point 3
(LEDPA) because there are only two potential bridge sites to discuss. Copies of the
above forms are attached.
PURPOSE AND NEED
Project Need
Within northeastern North Carolina, only two counties- Northampton and Halifax- are
directly served by I-95. Improved regional mobility by widening US 158 is anticipated to
help Hertford County, as well as the northeastern region of NC, attract industry. The
Hertford County Economic Development Commission has stated that most companies are
looking for access to I-95 and I-85. Several major employers, including the WCC Rivers
Correctional Institution and Nucor Steel, have -already locate-d-to the area, and truck traffic
associated with both facilities utilizes US 158. Expansion of US 158 to a multi-lane
facility is needed to enhance connectivity to I-95 as well as to other regional intrastate
highways, thereby increasing regional mobility and improving strategic highway system
linkages.
The total crash rate on US 158 within the project study area is 137 accidents per 100
million vehicular miles traveled (mvm). Although this crash rate is less than the statewide
average for similar two-lane rural US routes (Table 1), the statewide average crash rates
for four-lane rural routes with access control show a trend of decreasing accidents over
those of two-lane rural US routes. The fatal crash rate for the project study area is 2.08
accidents per 100 mvm, higher than the statewide average;, however, this accident total
represents only 1 fatality during the study period.
US 158 has been designated by the North Carolina Board of Transportation as a Strategic
Highway Corridor (Corridor #37). This corridor connects the Winston-Salem, Henderson,
Roanoke Rapids, Elizabeth City, and Kitty Hawk/ Kill Devil Hills/ Nags Head areas, a
length of approximately 200 miles. The US 158 corridor is ultimately envisioned as a
combination of a Freeway, Expressway, and Boulevard facility. The corridor was
included in the Strategic Highway Corridor program for several reasons, including its
connection between multiple activity centers and its function as a major hurricane
evacuation route.
Table 1: Accident Rates for Proiect Studv Area, August 1997- Julv 2002
Total Crash ]Late FaLd Crash Rate
(A CC/1[IUM?'N1) (_a('('/l0-0-NI N1)
US 158 Within Stud Area 137.08 2.08*
Statewide Average Two-lane Rural US
Routes (1998-2001) 167.73 2.01
Statewide Average Four-lane Rural US- No
Control of Access (1998-2001) 137.85 1.29
Statewide Average Four-lane Rural US-
Partial Control of Access (1998-2001) 75.68 1.09
Statewide Average Four lane Rural US-
Full Control of Access (1998-2001) 63.50 0.72
* Note- This rate represents 1 fatality during the 5-year study period.
Project Purpose
The purpose of the project is to:
• Provide system linkage, specifically between northeastern North Carolina and
Interstate 95
• Support economic development in Hertford and surrounding counties
• Ensure future safety along the project limits on US 158 in Hertford County
3
ALTERNATIVES
No-Build, Mass Transit Alternatives
1. No-Build Alternative
The No-Build Alternative would forego any improvements to US 158 with the exception
of routine maintenance. No new segment would be constructed, and no roadway or
intersection improvements would be performed.. The No-Build Alternative would avoid
any adverse environmental impacts, in that no wetlands, streams, historic properties, or
other cultural and natural resources would be directly impacted. However, this alternative
would not meet the stated purpose of the project, as it would not support economic
development or ensure future safety along this section of US 158.
The No-Build Alternative was eliminated from consideration because it does not meet the
transportation needs of the region or the objectives of the project. However, the No-Build
Alternative does provide a basis for comparing the adverse impacts and benefits of the
design options.
2. Transportation System Management Alternatives
Transportation Systems Management (TSM) improvements involve increasing the
available capacity of the facility within the existing right-of-way with minimum capital
expenditures and without reconstructing the facility. Items such as the addition of turn
lanes, striping, signing, signalization, and minor realignments are examples of TSM
physical improvements. Traffic law enforcement, speed restrictions, access control, and
signal timing changes are examples of TSM operational improvements. These types of
improvements were considered, and some elements, such as access control measures, will
be incorporated into the recommendations, but TSM improvements alone would not meet
the stated purpose of the project. Therefore, the TSM Alternative was not considered a
reasonable and feasible alternative and was eliminated from further consideration.
3. Mass Transit Alternatives
There is no existing no-cost mass transit in Hertford County due to lack of demand, low-
density development, and low population density. The only form of mass transit in the
area is the Choanoke Public Transportation Authority (CPTA), which provides
subscription and demand-responsive transportation in Northampton, Halifax, Bertie, and
Hertford Counties; the CPTA is based in Northampton County. The study area is
primarily rural, with the town of Murfreesboro located west of the project limits.
Additionally, US 158 carries a large proportion of through traffic with relatively high
truck-p__ercentages-which is not conducive to local mass transit.- Based=(Tn- factors,
the Mass Transit Alternative was eliminated from consideration, as it would not
effectively address the purpose and need for the proposed project.
4
Detailed Study Alternatives
Three main construction alternatives are currently proposed (refer to Figures 5 and 7 in
the EA). One alternative (Alternative A) proposes to widen the roadway entirely on
existing location, while two alternatives (Alternatives B and C) propose to widen the
majority of US 158 on existing location with a short new location bypass in the vicinity
of Mt. Tabor Baptist Church. For each of the three construction alternatives, an
additional service road option is under consideration. The Mapleton Option, (referred to
as A2, B2, and C2 in the table) proposes to shift US 158 farther south in Mapleton than
what is proposed in Alternatives A, B, and C and providing access to residences on the
north side by utilizing existing roadway as a service road. This Mapleton option is
designed to reduce the number of residential relocations in the vicinity of Mapleton Road
(SR 1304).
Partial access control will be maintained for any of the six construction alternatives.
Existing driveways exiting onto US 158 will be maintained; however, no new driveways
will be allowed on any new location section (Alternatives 13, B2, C and C2). Existing
stop-sign controlled intersections will be modified to include directional crossovers and
offset left-turns (refer to Figure 6 in the EA). The 4-foot outside paved shoulder will
accommodate any bicycle traffic. The typical section design is consistent with the
Strategic Highway Corridor vision for an Expressway design within the project limits.
While the Strategic Highway Corridor vision includes an interchange at the US 158/ US
13 intersection, an interchange is not included within the scope of this project. Any
interchange at this location will be studied as part of TIP Project R-2507A.
a) Alternative A: Widen on Existing
This alternative would widen the roadway entirely along its existing location. New
lanes would be added south of the existing roadway between the Murfreesboro
Bypass to Cool Spring Road; east of Cool Spring Road, the new lanes would be north
of the existing roadway. The alternative includes the construction of a new, two-lane
bridge over Potecasi Creek north of the existing structure. In addition, the existing
bridge would also be replaced.
b) Alternative A2: Widen on Existing including Mapleton Service Road.
This alternative is the same as Alternative A except for the addition of the service
road option that would shift US 158 further south in Mapleton and utilize the existing
roadway as a service road.
c) Alternative B: Widen on Existing with Northern Bypass
This alternative would widen US 158 on existing location as described in Alternative
A, with the exception of a new location section north of the Mt. Tabor Church Road
(SR 1176) intersection. The new location section would serve to straighten the
existing curve as well as to avoid impacts to the nearby Mt. Tabor Baptist Church
property. This alternative would also include a new crossing of Potecasi Creek in the
5
form of a two-lane bridge to be located north of the existing crossing. The existing
Potecasi Creek bridge would also be replaced.
d) Alternative B2: Widen on Existing with Northern Bypass and Mapleton Service
Road.
This alternative is the same as Alternative B except for the addition of the service
road option that would shift US 158 further south in Mapleton and utilize the existing
roadway as a service road.
e) Alternative C: Widen on Existing with Southern Bypass
This alternative would widen US 158 mostly on existing location as described in
Alternative A, with the exception of a new location section south of Mt. Tabor
Church Road (SR 1176). The new location section would both straighten the existing
curve as well as avoid impacts to the historic church property. This alternative would
include the construction of two new two-lane bridges over Potecasi Creek, both to be
located south of the existing crossing. If this alternative is chosen, the existing
Potecasi Creek bridge would be removed as potential wetland mitigation.
f) Alternative C2: Widen on Existing with Southern Bypass and Mapleton Service
Road.
This alternative is the same as Alternative C except for the addition of the service
road option that would shift US 158 further south in Mapleton and utilize the existing
roadway as a service road.
COST ESTIMATES AND SCHEDULE
Preliminary cost estimates for the Detailed Study Alternatives are presented in Table 2
below. Alternatives A2, B2 and C2 include the Mapleton Service Road option. The
costs include right-of-way and construction costs, but do not account for any wetland or
stream mitigation costs.
The project is included in the approved 2007-2013 State Transportation Improvement
Program (STIP) (TIP Project No. R-2583) with right-of-way acquisition scheduled to
begin in state fiscal year (SFY) 2010 and construction scheduled to begin in -SFY 20-12.
The total estimated cost included in the STIP is $35,700,000.
6
Table 2: Preliminary Cost Estimates
Alternative Right-of-Way° Construction To' tal Cost
A $8,710,500 $27,900,000 $36,610,500.
A2* $6,948,000 $31,700,000 $38,648,000
B $8,548,000 $28,900,000 $37,448,000.
B2* $6,785,500 $32,700,000 $39,485,500
C $8,397,500 $30,100,000 $38,497,500
C2* $6,63500 $33,900,000 $40,535,000
*Mapleton Service Road Option
WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES
Streams
This section contains information concerning surface water resources likely to be affected
by the proposed project. Water resource assessments include the physical characteristics,
best usage standards, and water quality aspects of the water resources, along with their
relationship to major regional drainage systems. Probable impacts to surface water
resources are also discussed, as are means to minimize potential impacts.
a) Best Usage Classification
Water resources within the study area are located in the Chowan River Basin
(USGS Hydrologic Unit 03010204, NCDWQ Subbasin 03-01-02). Several water
resources are present in the study area. Two of these streams, Potecasi Creek and Mill
Branch, are named. These water resources also include unnamed perennial and
intermittent tributaries of Potecasi Creek and an intermittent tributary to Mill Branch.
Two ponds are also present within the study area.
Potecasi Creek, a fourth order stream, flows north into the Meherrin River. Its
drainage area is approximately 238 square miles and includes perennial and
intermittent streams within the study area.
Mill Branch, a first order stream, flows into Potecasi Creek north of the study area. Its
drainage area is approximately 5.7 square miles and includes on intermittent stream
within the study area.
Streams have been assigned a best usage classification by the NCDWQ that reflects
water quality conditions and potential resource usage. Unclassified tributaries carry
the same best usage classification as the classified stream to which they are tributary.
The classification for Potecasi-Creek (NCDWQ Index No. 25-4-8, 09/06/79) is-? --
C, Nutrient Sensitive Waters (NSW) from its source to Meherrin River. Mill Branch
(NCDWQ Index No. 25-4-8-11, 09-05-79) is also assigned Class C, NSW from its
source to Potecasi Creek (NCDENR 2003a). Class C waters are protected for
secondary recreation, fishing, wildlife, fish, and aquatic life propagation and survival,
agriculture, and other uses suitable for Class C. Secondary recreation includes those
7
activities performed in an infrequent, unorganized, or incidental manner. NSW is a
supplemental classification intended for waters needing additional nutrient
management due to excessive growth of microscopic or macroscopic vegetation. In
general, management strategies for point and non-point source pollution control
require control of nutrients such that excessive growths of vegetation are reduced or
prevented and there is no increase in nutrients over target levels. Management
strategies are site-specific. The entire subbasin is classified as NSW (NCDENR
2002a). Within the Project Vicinity, no High Quality Waters (HQW) are present.
HQW include Outstanding Resource Waters and waters protected for public drinking
water supply (NCDENR 2003a).
The county is under the jurisdiction of the North Carolina Division of Coastal
Management (NCDCM); however, no Areas of Environmental Concern, as defined by
the Coastal Area Management Act (LAMA), are present within the study area. In
addition, the study area is within the Chowan River basin, which currently does not
have riparian buffer protection rules.
b) Physical Characteristics of Surface Waters
Potecasi Creek at US 158 has a channel width of approximately 75 feet and a water
depth greater than 4 feet. At the bridge, the stream is constricted to approximately 50
feet wide. Bank heights are approximately 6 feet from the edge of water.
Potecasi Creek has a substrate composed of 15 percent sand, 45 percent silt, and 45
percent clay. Potecasi Creek exhibits high sinuosity. The stream runs on either side of
US 158 and makes an oxbow bend as it passes under the bridge. Where the stream
parallels US 158, the banks adjacent to the road are very steep; however, there is a
riparian buffer. On the north side of US 158, a power line ROW interrupts the buffer.
Mill Branch is an extremely braided system at US 158. Currently, there are four
culverts connecting the system under US 158. At the westernmost culvert, on the
south side of US 158, Mill Branch has an average channel width of 4 feet (1.22 m)
and a water depth ranging from 2 to 4 feet (0.6 to 1.2 m). The stream channel is more
defined on the south side of the westernmost culvert and on the north side of the
easternmost culvert. The substrate in Mill Branch is composed of 10 percent sand, 50
percent clay, and 40 percent silt.
Several intermittent and perennial tributaries are included within the study area.
Table 3 presents all streams within the study area and their perennial or intermittent
stream determinations ("SA" through "SS"). These tributaries begin as intermittent,
often braided, streams within forested headwater wetlands. In these headwater areas,
substrate composition is mostly silt and sand. Exposed roots are abundant. Headcuts
and undercut banks are also present in these reaches. Adjacent to agricultural fields,
these streams often exhibit signs of increased instability, as evidenced by scouring
and some incising. Overall, the streams have a very low-grade slope, which is
characteristic of the Coastal Plain. Scores were assigned to each stream within the
study area using the USACE Stream Quality Assessment Worksheet (see Table 3).
These are based on a scale of 0 to 100, with 100 being a very high quality stream.
Table 3: Stream Characteristics
tiSA F _
('hannel Width 'B.inla'ull Depth ! Stream
Stream J
- - -- __ - Type ll?cet) (I?'cet? Quality Score
Mill Branch* (SA) Perennial 4.0 2.0 to 4.0 73
Potecasi Creek (SB) Perennial 75.0 6.0+ 66
Unnamed Tributary to Perennial

Potecasi Creek (SC) 4.0 1.0 64
Unnamed Tributary to Perennial

Potecasi Creek (SD) 40.0 8.0 59
Unnamed Tributary to Perennial 1.0 0.5 35
Potecasi Creek (SF)
Unnamed Tributary to Perennial 8.0 3.0 54
Potecasi Creek (SJ)
Unnamed Tributary to Intermittent
2.0
0.5
-
Potecasi Creek (SK)
Unnamed Tributary to Intermittent
Potecasi Creek & Perennial 3.0 0.5 64
(SUSM)
Unnamed Tributary to Intermittent 3.0 0.5 -
Potecasi Creek (SN)
Unnamed Tributary to Intermittent 3.0 1.0 41
Potecasi Creek (SP)
Unnamed Tributary to Perennial 3.0 1.0 83
Potecasi Creek (SQ)
Unnamed Tributary to Intermittent 3.0 2.0 27
McHerrin River (SR)
Unnamed Tributary to Perennial 2.0 0.5 46
McHerrin River (SS)
Unnamed Tributary to Intermittent NA NA 32
Potecasi Creek (SCC) & Perennial
*Measurements for Mill Branch were taken near the westernmost culvert
The intermittent streams transition into perennial streams downslope through the
larger palustrine forested wetland areas, frequently after the confluence with other
intermittent streams. These channels often exhibit only minor sinuosity and have
active floodplains, as is common- in the Coastal Plain. They exhibit characteristics of
- ground water flow, such as thepresents of iron -oxidizing bacteria. In some areas,
streams widen to become swampy areas of standing or very slow moving water with
some braiding of the channels.
9
Two ponds are present within the western half of the study area. One pond is narrow
with steep, wooded side slopes. The other pond occurs within the scrub-shrub
wetland.
c) Water Quality
This section describes the quality of water resources within and downstream of the
study area. Water quality assessments are made based on published resource
information and existing general watershed characteristics. Both point and non-point
sources of pollution are evaluated, such as potential sediment loads and toxin
concentrations of these waters. These data provide insight into the potential for water
resources within the study area to meet human needs and provide habitat for aquatic
organisms.
Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network
The Basinwide Monitoring Program (Program), managed by the NCDWQ, is part of
an ongoing ambient water quality monitoring program that addresses long-term trends
in water quality. The Program monitors ambient water quality by sampling at fixed
sites for selected benthic macroinvertebrate organisms, which are sensitive to water
quality conditions, as part of the Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network
(BMAN). Samples are evaluated on the number of taxa present of intolerant groups
[Ephemoptera, Plecoptera, Trichoptera (EPT)], and a taxa richness value (EPT S) is
calculated. A biotic index value is also calculated for the sample that summarizes
tolerance data for. all species in each collection. The two rankings are given equal
weight in final site classification. The biotic index and taxa richness values primarily
reflect the effects of chemical pollution and are a poor measure of the effects of
physical pollutants, such as sediment. Although there is a benthic monitoring station
on Potecasi Creek, this site was sampled but not rated in 2000. During the sampling
visit, habitat degradation and "severe stress" were noted at Potecasi Creek. Only the
Meherrin River was rated based on benthic data, and it received a rating of Good
(NCDENR 2002a).
Water Quality Monitoring Data
The Chowan River Basinwide Water Quality Plan does not designate support ratings
for-Potecasi Creek or Mill Branch (NCDENR 2002a). In 19975 Potecasi Creek was
deemed to be impaired, as it had Fair water quality, which was thought to be a result
of agricultural runoff and channelization. However, it was noted that the low pH and
low dissolved oxygen values could have been due to natural swamp conditions. While
Potecasi Creek is currently not rated, it is one of two streams that DWQ has
_recoimnended undergo a Swamp Waters Study_Plan.--T_he_dls=of a-Swamp Waters
Study Plan are currently in development by NCDWQ and not readily available at this
time. In addition, Potecasi Creek is listed on the most recent Clean Water Act Section
303(d) list as impaired waters (NCDENR 2002b). It is listed under Category 5, which
requires Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL).
10
Point and Non-point Source Dischargers
There are no NPDES dischargers within the subbasin (NCDENR 2003b). Land use
within the subbasin which can contribute to non-point source pollution, is
approximately 65 percent forested, 1 percent pasture, 32 percent agriculture, and less
than 1 percent urban (NCDENR 2002a). Agriculture is the primary land use;
therefore, it is the primary threat for non-point source pollution within the study area.
Large agricultural areas throughout the study area may introduce nutrients, herbicides,
or pesticides if used for crop management. In several areas, agricultural drainage
ditches drain directly into the headwater wetlands and intermittent streams, Erosion
from these fields also contributes sediment to the water resources. Current timber
activity within the study area has the potential to introduce additional sediment load to
the streams. In addition, there are several poultry farms within the project vicinity. To
a smaller extent, residential runoff through the roadside drainage ditches or lawn
management may also introduce previously mentioned pollutants.
d) Impacts
Impacts to water resources in the study area are likely to result from activities
associated with project construction. Table 4 shows the estimated impacts to streams
for each alternative.
Individual stream crossing impacts may include clearing and grubbing on stream
banks and in wetlands, riparian canopy removal, in-stream construction, fertilizers
and pesticides used in revegetation, and pavement installation. The following impacts
to surface water resources are likely to result from the aforementioned construction
activities:
• Increased sedimentation and siltation downstream of the construction zone
and increased erosion in the project construction area.
• Changes in light incidence and water clarity due to increased sedimentation
and vegetation removal.
• Alternation of water levels and flows due to interruptions and/or additions to
surface and ground water flow from construction.
Changes in and destabilization of water temperature due to vegetation
removal.
• Increased nutrient loading during construction via runoff from exposed areas.
• Increased concentrations of toxic compounds in roadway runoff.
• Potential increase of toxic compound releases, such as fuel and oil, from
_-construction equipment and other vehicles. -- --- -
Alteration of stream discharge due to silt loading and changes in surface and
ground water drainage patterns.
11
Table 4: Stream Impacts (linear feet)

Str
?ltcrnati?e I- --- ?
,llternalke Alternative - - -- - - - -
k1ternatiNe hernatke ltcrnative
eam A 12 li
- ----
B2
UT to Meherrin
River (SS) 64 64 64 64 64 64
UT to Potecasi 119.97 181.69 119.97 181
69 119
97 181.69
Creek (SD) . .
UT to Potecasi
Creek (SQ) 129.20 129.20 134.75 134.75 108.81 108.81
UT to Potecasi
Pote
Creek 166.43 166.43 NA NA 124.36 124.36
UT to Potecasi

Creek (SJ) 76.92 76.92 256.71 256.71 46.17 46.17
UT to Potecasi

Creek (SL) NA NA 255.18 255.18 NA. NA
UT to Potecasi

Creek (SN) NA NA 15.29 15.29 NA NA
UT to Potecasi
Creek (SF) 33.94 33.94 NA NA NA NA
Potecasi Creek
Pote
247.12 247.12 247.12 247.12 329.50 329.50
Mill Branch

(SA) 79.56 79.56 79.56 79.56 79.56 79.56
UT to Potecasi

Creek (SCO NA NA NA NA 719.16 719.16
Total Stream

Impacts
')17.1-1
978.86
1172.58
1234.30 ?
1 _591.53 ?
13._25
In order to minimize potential impacts to water resources in the project vicinity,
NCDOT's Best Management Practices (BMPs) for Construction and Maintenance
Activities should be strictly enforced during the construction phase of the project.
Limiting in-stream activities and revegetating stream banks immediately following
completion of the grading can further reduce impacts. Seed mixes used in
revegetating stream banks should not include tall fescue. Use of turbidity curtains for
this project was reviewed and investigated. Given the dimensions for the streams in
the study area and general design considerations for turbidity curtains, in many
instances, the specified floatation components for turbidity curtains are larger than the
depth of the stream and would most likely result in additional expense with minimal
added benefit. However, Potecasi Creek is a large enough system, featuring a width of
75 feet and maintaining a sufficient water depth to support the use of a turbidity
curtain. The use of a turbidity curtain in Potecasi Creek should be considered during
project design, as it is designated as having nutrient sensitive waters, and increased
sediment -?o-wnstr-earn-could-impact aquatic systems. Turbidity curtains-are-not -
recommended for the remaining streams within the study area, as water conditions do
not meet the requirements for the installation of turbidity curtains. The majority of
other streams in the study area are less than 4 feet in width and 3 feet in depth, where
floatation requirements would not be met.
12
Wetlands
There are seven wetland community types found within the delineated portion of the
project study area: Riparian Forest, Bottomland Hardwood Forest, Scrub-Shrub,
Swamp Forest, Headwater Forest, Headwater Ditch and Pine Savanna.
Approximately 40 jurisdictional wetland sites were delineated within the project study
area. Of these 40 sites, between 21 and 24 are impacted by the proposed alternatives.
Table S details the wetland sites that are impacted by Alternatives A, A2, B, B2, C
and C2.
Floodplains
Hertford County is currently participating in the National FloodInsurance Regular
Program. The, tributaries to Potecasi Creek and Potecasi Creek itself are in designated
flood hazard zones where detailed flood studies have not been performed. The Mill
Creek crossing is not located within a flood hazard zone. The floodplain area in the
vicinity of he stream crossings is primarily rural and undeveloped. The terrain
throughout most of the project is rolling, with streams and natural draws located such
that the project can be drained without difficulty. Existing drainage patterns will be
maintained to the extent practicable. It is not anticipated that the proposed project
should have any adverse impacts on the existing floodplain.
13
Table 5: Wetland Impacts
Alternatives
Site Wetland 11) lvetland Type
1 WTT Riparian Forest 0.097 0.097 0.093 0.093 0.096 0.096
3 WRR Headwater Ditch 0.004 0.004 0.005 0.005 0.004 0.004
6 WPP Swam Forest 0.411 1.325 0.391 1.325 0.414 1.325
7 WNN Headwater Ditch 0.010 0.016 0.013 0.016 0.008 0.016
8 WMM Headwater Ditch 0.015 0.023 0.019 0.023 0.014 0.023
9 WLL Riparian Forest 0.370 0.481 0.388 0.481 0.970 0.481
10 WLL Riparian Forest 0.082 0.131 0.018 0.131 0.006 0.131
12 WHH/WGG Headwater Forest 0.094 0.094 0.780 0.780 0.069 0.069
13 WFF Headwater Forest 0.004 0.004
14 WEE Riparian Forest 0.150 0.150
15 WY Headwater Forest 0.021 0.021 0.022 0.022
16 WY Headwater Forest 0.004 0.004
17 WT Bottomland
Hardwood 0.048 0.048 0.048 0.048
18 WT Bottomland
Hardwood 0.016 0.016 0.019 0.019
20 WT Bottomland
Hardwood 0.173 0.173 0. L84 0.184
21 WS Bottomland
Hardwood 0.052 0.052 0.057 0.057
23 WX Headwater Forest 0.051 0.051
27 WK Bottomland
Hardwood 0.029 0.029 0.027 0.027 0.029 0.029
30 WG Scrub-Shrub 0.030 0.030 0.028 0.028 0.030 0.030
31 WE Head Water Ditch 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007
33 WD Swam Forest 1.177 1.177 1.219 1.219 1.181 1.181
34 WD Swam Forest 0.059 0.059 0.048 0.048 0.086 0.086
35 WC Headwater Forest 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.027 0.027
36 WB Headwater Forest 0.010 0.010 0.012 0.012 0.010 0.010
37 WA Pine Savanna 0.089 0.089 0.083 0.083 0.098 0.098
38 WA Pine Savanna -0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 -0.-023
39 WE Swam Forest 0.054 0.054 0.009 0.009
40 WCC Swam Forest 0.625 0.625
41 WV300 Swam Forest 1.821 1.821
- - - j Tot.11 (.1c.) 2.901) j 3.988 3.663 4.810 1' 5.578 ).142
14
MITIGATION EVALUATION
The USACE, through the CEQ, has adopted a wetland mitigation policy that embraces
the concept of "no net loss of wetlands" and sequencing. The purpose of this policy is to
restore and maintain the chemical, biological, and physical integrity of Waters of the
United States, specifically wetlands. Mitigation of wetland impacts has been defined by
the CEQ to include the following: avoiding, minimizing, rectifying, reducing (over time),
and compensating for impacts (40 CFR 1508.20). These three aspects are avoidance,
minimization, and compensation and must be considered sequentially.
Avoidance mitigation examines all appropriate and practicable possibilities of averting
impacts to Waters of the United States. According to a 1990 Memorandum of Agreement
(MOA) between the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and the USACE,
when determining "appropriate and practicable" measures to offset unavoidable impacts,
such measures should be appropriate to the scope and degree of those impacts and
practicable in terms of cost, existing technology, and logistics in light of overall project
purposes. Complete avoidance of wetlands is not possible due to the extent of wetlands in
the study area.
Minimization includes the examination of appropriate and practicable steps to reduce the
adverse impacts to Waters of the United States. Implementation of these steps will be
required through project modifications and permit conditions. Minimization typically
focuses on decreasing the footprint of the proposed project through the reduction of
median widths, ROW widths, fill slopes, and/or road shoulder widths. Widening to the
South at the west-end of the project and to the North at the east-end of the project was
used to avoid excessive wetland impacts.
Compensatory mitigation is not normally considered until anticipated impacts to Waters
of the United States have been avoided and minimized to the maximum extent possible. It
is recognized that "no net loss of wetlands" functions and values may not be achieved in
each and every permit action. Appropriate and practicable compensatory mitigation is
required for unavoidable impacts that remain after all appropriate and practicable
minimization has been achieved. Compensatory actions often include restoration,
creation, and enhancement of Waters of the United States, specifically wetlands. Such
actions should be undertaken in areas adjacent or contiguous to the discharge site, if
practical.
Compensatory mitigation will likely be required for the potential impacts associated with
this project. Wetland restoration or enhancement potential should be evaluated for the
wetlands WG and WQQ, if these areas are not impacted by the final project. Recent
disturbance in both of these areas has altered the vegetation and possibly the hydrology.
The hydrology and vegetation-withi"ortions of this area could be adjusted to imp-rove
habitat and water storage functions that were lost during previous timbering activities. If
Alternative C is selected, the existing bridge over Potecasi Creek would be removed as
part of potential wetland mitigation.
15
PROTECTED SPECIES
Some populations of fauna and flora are, or have been, in the process of decline either
due to natural forces or their inability to co-exist with human development. Federal law
[under the provisions of the Endangered Species Act (ESA), as amended] requires that
any action likely to adversely affect a species classified as Federally protected be subject
to review by the USFWS. Other species may receive limited additional protection under
Separate State laws.
a) Federally-Protected Species
Plants and animals with Federal classifications of Endangered (E), Threatened (T),
Proposed Endangered (PE), and Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under the
provisions of Sections 7 and 9 of the ESA, as amended. The USFWS (last update:
December 11, 2006) and NCNHP (last update: May 2003) list on Federally-protected
species for Hertford County. The Red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis) is
listed as endangered at the Federal and State levels. The Biological Conclusion for the
species is May Affect- Not Likely to Adversely Affect due to the limited suitable
habitat within the study area. The pine savanna within the eastern edge of the study
area contains pines of intermediate age with an open understory; however, this area is
relatively small and not contiguous with other suitable habitats. No individuals or nest
cavities of this species were observed during the site visit. This survey and resulting
Biological Conclusion are considered valid for two years form the date of the survey.
A letter requesting USFWS concurrence on this Biological Conclusion will be
submitted by NCDOT.
A review of the NCNHP database of rare species and unique habitats shows no
occurrence of Federally-protected species within 1 mile of the study area (NCDENR
2003c).
b) Federal Species of Concern and State Listed Species
There is one species listed as a Federal Species of Concern (FSC) by the USFWS and
NCNHP for the county (USFWS 2003, NCDENR 2003c). Species classified as FSC
are not afforded Federal protection under the ESA and are not subject to any of its
provisions, including Section 7, until they are formally proposed or listed as
_ ---
-Threatened or Endangered. However, the status of these species is subject to change
and should be included for consideration. FSC are defined as species that are under
consideration for listing for which there is insufficient information to support listing.
In addition, organisms that are listed as Endangered (E), Threatened (T), or Special
Concern (SC) under the North Carolina State Endangered Species Act of 1987 and
__-___=he North Carolina Plant Protection and-Cons erAct of 1979 are afforded
limited State protection.
16
In the county, the Chowanoke Crayfish (Orconectes virginiensis) is listed as FSC by
the USFWS. The state status of this species is SC. Within the study area, there is
potential habitat for this species. The known habitat for this species includes sluggish
streams or swamps on sand or gravel substrates and sluggish streams flowing through
woodlands on sandy or gravelly substrates. A review of the NCNHP database of rare
species and unique habitats shows no occurrence or FSC within 1 mile of the study
area (NCDENR 2003c).
WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS
The project will not impact any Designated Wild and Scenic Rivers or any rivers included
in the list of study rivers (Public Law, 90-542, as amended).
CULTURAL RESOURCES
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) on properties included in or
eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and to afford the
Advisory Council a reasonable opportunity to comment on such undertakings.
Historic Architecture
A detailed survey was conducted for Alternatives A and B. Thirty-seven properties that
are at least fifty years old were identified during a field survey. Of these, only three were
determined to be eligible for the NRHP: Britt Store, Mt. Tabor Baptist Church and
cemeteries, and the William H. Kiff House. The North Carolina State Historic
Preservation Office (HPO) confirmed the eligibility of these properties in correspondence
dated April 25, 2003 and July 10, 2003.
The addition of Alternative C resulted in a larger Area of Potential Effects (APE).
NCDOT conducted additional surveys to identify historic architectural resources located
within the expanded APE. No properties eligible-for or listed on the NRHP were
identified within the new location portion of Alternative C, except for the previously
identified Mt. Tabor Baptist Church and cemeteries; the HPO concurred with this
determination in a concurrence form dated August 31, 2005. Figure 2 (refer to the EA)
shows the locations of all three eligible sites.
17
Table 6: Architectural Resources Eligible for the National Register
P -roperty Name Criteria lkscriptio?n Location
}+li?ibilit?,
Britt Store A, C I Commercial I Adjacent to US 158 and
building SR 1304 intersection,
Mt. Tabor Baptist Church A, C Church and US 158 east of SR 1176
and Cemeteries cemeteries
William H. Kiff House C Agricultural Adjacent to the US 158/
_ complex SR 1174 intersection
a) Eligible Properties
Britt Store
The Britt Store is located at the northwest corner of the intersection of US 158 and
SR 1303 within the Mapleton community. The circa 1880 single-story store is a front-
gabled frame building with a false front; a shed-roofed addition on the east side has a
lower false front. Both false fronts are weatherboarded and have cornices supported
by carved brackets and decorative frieze boards.
The Britt Store has been determined eligible for the National Register of Historic
Places under Criterion A in the areas of commerce and transportation for its
association with the commerce related to Hill's Ferry and the surrounding rural area.
The store is also eligible under Criterion C in the area of architecture as a relatively
intact example of a late-nineteenth-century store building in a rural, crossroads
community. The building retains its original form and the architectural detailing in the
parapets. The eligible boundary of the Britt Store encompasses the entire 0.29-acre lot
historically associated with the store and conforms to the present tax boundary,
following the existing right-of-way along US 158 and Mapleton Road (SR 1304).
Mt. Tabor Baptist Church and Cemeteries
Mt. Tabor Baptist Church stands on the south side of US 158 near Mapleton, just east
- of-the intersection with SR 1176 (Mt. Tabor Church Road). Two cemeteries share the
site; one is directly behind the church, spreading to the west, and the other is south of
the church, closer to the highway and bordered on its south side by Potecasi Creek.
18
The Mt. Tabor Baptist Church has been determined eligible for the National Register
of Historic Places under Criterion A in the area of social history for its association
with the development of communities in rural Hertford County. The church is eligible
under Criterion C in the area of architecture as a relatively intact example of
antebellum churches built by Baptist congregations in rural Hertford County.
Additions have been made to the building, but its original form and materials are still
easily discernable. The additions, all made to the rear, are small in scale and do not
overwhelm the original building. The church building meets Criteria Consideration A
for a property owned by a religious institution or used for religious purposes, but
which derives its primary significance from architectural distinction or historical
importance. The eligible boundary of the Mt. Tabor Baptist Church encompasses the
entire six acres historically associated with the church and cemeteries and conforms to
the present tax boundary, following existing right-of-way along US 158.
William H. Kiff House
The house and its outbuildings stand at the southwest corner of the junction of US
158 and SR 1174. The buildings crowd the corner, while agricultural fields spread
south on both sides of SR 1174. The complex consists of a house, a kitchen, and a
smokehouse. The house (ca. 1860) is a single-story, gable-end, weatherboarded frame
house with rear ell.
The front section is dressed in vernacular Greek Revival style and has a center-hall
plan. The kitchen (ca. 1860) stands just southeast of the house and also faces north.
This gable-end building has two interior brick stacks, a full-width, shed-roofed front
porch, and six-over- line, reflecting the historic appearance of the tract. This area is
smaller than the current tax boundary, which includes 145 acres on both sides of Mt.
Moriah Road (SR 1174).
b) Project Effects
The potential effect of the proposed US 158 widening project on eligible architectural
resources in the project area was evaluated pursuant to the Assessment of Adverse
Effects (36 CFR 800.5).
For Alternatives A, B, and C, the new lanes will be placed south of existing US 158
in the Mapleton vicinity in order to avoid impacts to both the Britt Store as well as
homes on the north side of the roadway. In January 2006, HPO, FHWA, and NCDOT
concurred that each of the three alternatives would have No Effect on the Britt Store
property.
In January 2006, HPO, FHWA, and NCDOT agreed that Alternatives B and C would
have-No-Effect on Mt. Tabor Church. It was also agreed that-A4ternative A would
have an Adverse Effect on Mt. Tabor Church. Further coordination with the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers and HPO may be required to determine if the Mt. Tabor
Baptist Church is considered to be within the project's federal permit area, thereby
making Section 106 requirements applicable. six double-hung sash windows. A
front-gable frame smokehouse (ca. 1860) stands to the west, facing the kitchen and
19
the rear wing of the house.
The William H. Kiff House and its outbuildings have been determined eligible for the
National Register of Historic Places under Criterion C in the area of architecture as an
intact domestic agricultural complex from the mid-nineteenth century. The Kiff
House is a rare, well-preserved example of a one-story, vernacular Greek Revival
dwelling in Hertford County. The complex, including the kitchen and smokehouse,
represents the types of buildings commonly employed on small, self-sufficient farms
of the period.
The eligible boundary for the William H. Kiff House encompasses the three buildings
and sufficient surrounding land to create a sense of the historic setting. As drawn, the
boundary includes the buildings and 5.5 acres of cleared agricultural fields reaching to
forested areas at. the south boundary
For Alternatives A, B, and C, widening in the vicinity of the Kiff House was shifted
to the north side of US 158 to avoid impacts to the property. The adjacent intersecting
street was shifted slightly east in order to straighten the intersection angle. In January
2006, HPO, FHWA, and NCDOT concurred that each of the three alternatives would
have No Effect on the Kiff House. A copy of the January 2006 effects form can be
found attached.
Archaeology
An intensive archaeological survey was conducted within the study corridor for
Alternatives A and B. A total of 21 historic resources was identified and evaluated (15
archaeological sites, 5 family cemeteries, and 1 historic resource). Of the 15
archaeological sites identified within the study corridor, 13 sites (31HF260, 31HF261,
31 HF262, 31 HF263, 31 HF264, 31 HF265, 31 HF266, 31 HF267, 31 HF269, 31 HF270,
31HF271, 31HF274, and 31HF275) were recommended as not eligible for inclusion in
the NRHP. In a memo dates July 9, 2004, the HPO concurred that these sites were not
eligible for such listing, since "these properties do not retain the level of integrity nor do
they posses the potential to yield significant new information pertaining to the prehistory
of North Carolina."
Both of the two remaining archaeological sites (3IHF268 and 31HF278) are
recommended as-eligible-forrtlre?-NR-HP. Representing the remains of a"farm complex that _
appears to have been occupied from the mid-nineteenth to the mid-twentieth centuries,
Site 31HF268 consists of at least one intact feature with the potential for other intact
features below the plowzone; therefore, Site 31HF268 is recommended as eligible for the
NRHP per Criterion D. Site 31HF278 is a Civil War-period earthwork and archaeological
site probably constructed in +862 and-occupied by Confederate forces. This-resources
locally significant for its role as part of the Union campaign against the Weldon Railroad,
one of only two campaigns conducted within the confines of what is now Hertford
County. Site 31HF278, therefore, is recommended as eligible for inclusion in the NRHP
for the following reasons: (1) the site is associated with the broad patterns of local, state,
and national history (Criterion A), (2) the earthwork is one of the very few intact Civil
20
War fortifications found in Hertford County that has retained its integrity (Criterion C),
and (3) the archaeological information will contribute important information about
history or prehistory (Criterion D). In a memo dated July 9, 2004, the HPO concurred that
these two archaeological sites are eligible for the NRHP since they have th"otential-to
yield new information about the historic archaeology of the Coastal Plain. Should either
of these sites be impacted by the proposed project, mitigation efforts are recommended.
Five family cemeteries, three active (31HF273, 31HF276, and 31HF277) and two inactive
(31HF272 and 31HF279), have been identified in or adjacent to the study corridor. Four
of the cemeteries-(31HF272, 3-1-HF276, 31HF277, and 31HF279) are recommended as not
eligible for inclusion in the NRHP since (1) the cemeteries do not appear to meet
National Register Criteria Consideration D governing cemeteries, (2) they are not
associated with an important historic event and do no, contain graves of individuals of
transcendent importance, and (3) the marked graves do not demonstrate any particularly
distinctive characteristics with regard to design. The Lee family cemetery (31HF273),
containing one interment and last used in 1995 as indicated by the grave marker, is
currently maintained and located in the yard of a residence. This cemetery postdates 1954
and does not appear to meet the age criteria established for inclusion in the NRHP.
Avoidance of all cemeteries is recommended; however, if any of these sites are to be
impacted by the proposed alternatives, removal per applicable State statutes (i.e. NC GS
65 or NC GS 70, Article 3) is recommended.
The remaining historic resource identified as part of the intensive archaeological survey
consists of the Mt. Tabor Baptist Church and its two associated cemeteries (Section
E.2.a).
Since Alternative C was added to the list of proposed alternatives after the intensive
archaeological survey was completed, the NCDOT conducted an additional preliminary
review of the new location portion of Alternative C. This review revealed a low potential
for containing intact remains on either side of Potecasi Creek, portions of which have
already been surveyed. In addition, the west side of Potecasi creek shows signs of
previous timbering and bulldozing activities, while the east side of the creek can be
categorized as hydric with a very high water table. NCDOT has recommended that a
detailed survey within the Alternative C corridor be conducted only if this alternative is
selected as the preferred for the proposed project, due to the fact that the design and
orientation of Alternative C may impact Site 31HF278, which is eligible for the NRHP.
In a memo dated July 19, 2005, the HPO then concurred with the steps proposed by the
NCDOT to evaluate any adverse effects to the extant cultural resources located either
within or adjacent to the project.
21
A field reconnaissance survey was conducted along the project. The purpose of this
investigation was to identify the existence of any unknown hazardous-materials within the _-
proposed_project alignment. In addition to the field survey, a file search of appropriate
environmental agencies was conducted to identify any known problem sites along the
proposed project alignment. Based on the field reconnaissance survey, there are no
anticipated UST impacts. Based on the GIS search and the field reconnaissance, no
apparent Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) or the Comprehensive
Environmental-Response, Compensation,- and Liability ?t (CERCIJA) sites were
identified within the project limits. Based on the GIS, no regulated or unregulated
landfills or dumpsites occur within the project limits.
LOGICAL TERMINI / INDEPENDENT UTILITY
Federal Highway Authority (FHWA) regulations [23 CFR 771.111(f)] outline three
general principals to determine project limits. The regulations state:
In order to ensure meaningful evaluation of alternatives and to avoid
commitments to transportation improvements before they are fully evaluated, the
action evaluated in each EIS or FONSI shall:
• Connect logical termini and be of sufficient length to address environmental
matters on a broad scope;
• Have independent utility or interdependent significance, i. e.; be usable and be
a reasonable expenditure even if no additional transportation improvements
in the area are made; and,
• Not restrict consideration of alternatives for other reasonably foreseeable
transportation improvements.
The project's termini and other elements meet the FHWA's criteria for logical termini.
The project would provide system linkage between northeastern North Carolina and
Interstate 95, support economic development in Hertford and surrounding counties, and
ensure future safety along project limits.
The project is of sufficient length (8.3 miles) to address environmental matters on a broad
scope. The potential for segmentation was avoided during the planning for this project by
evaluating environmental impacts for the entire length of the proposed project.
The project would have independent utility, even if no additional transportation
improvements were made in the area. The proposed project would not restrict
consideration of alternatives for other reasonably foreseeable transportation
improvements in the area.
22
Enclosed you will find a completed ENG Form 4345 and mailing labels. This submittal
is in accordance with Step 4 of the guidelines for integrating project review under the
National Environmental Policy Act and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. This letter,
along with the previously distributed EA, should provide sufficient information for the
issuance-of-a Public Notice for the project. The pub it c-he-ar4ng-is scheduled for July 19,
2007.
If you have any questions, or need additional information, please contact Charles R. Cox,
P.E. at [phone] extension 301.
Sincerely,
?QffGregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis
CC: Mr. Scott McLendon, USAGE, Wilmington
Mr. David Wainwright, NCDWQ (7 copies)
Mr. Travis Wilson, NCWRC
Mr. Chris Militscher, USEPA
Mr. Gary Jordan, USFWS
Mr. Clarence W. Coleman, P.E., FHWA
Mr. Jay Bennett, P.E., Roadway Design
Mr. Phil Harris, P.E., Natural Environment Unit
Mr. Carl Goode, Human Environment Unit
Mr. Majed Al-Ghandour, P.E., Programming and TIP
Mr. Art McMillian, P.E., Highway Design
Mr. David Chang, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr. Greg Perfetti, P.E., Structure Design
Mr. Mark Staley, Roadside Environmental
Mr. Anthony W. Roper, P.E., Division 1 Engineer
Mr. Clay Willis, DEO Division 1
23
APPLICATION FOR DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PERMIT I OMB APPROVAL NO. 0710-003
(33 CFR 325) Expires December 31, 2004
Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 10 hours per response, although the majority of applications should
require 5 hours or less. This includes the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed,
and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of
information, Including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Service Directorate of Information
Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302; and to the Office of Management and Budget,
Paperwork Reduction Project (0710-0003), Washington, DC 20503. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no
person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number.
Please-DO-NOT RETURN your form to either of those addresses. Completed-applications _must be submitted to the District Engineer having unsdiction
-- over the-location of the proposed activity.
PRIVACY ACT STATEMENT
Authority: Rivers and Harbors Act, Section 10, 33 USC 403: Clean Water Act, Section 404, 33 USC 1344; Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries
Act, 33 USC 1413, Section 103. Principal Purpose: Information provided on this form will be used in evaluating the application for a permit. Routine
Uses: This information may be shared with the Department of Justice and other federal, state, and local government agencies. Submission of
requested information is voluntary, however, if information is not provided the permit application cannot be evaluated nor can a permit be issued.
One set of original drawings or good reproducible copies which show the location and character of the proposed activity must be attached to this
application (see sample drawings and instructions) and be submitted to the District Engineer having jurisdiction over the location of the proposed
activity. An application that is not completed in full will be returned.
ITEMS 1 THRU 4 TO BE ILLED BY THE CORPS
1. APPLICATION NO. 2. FIELD OFFICE CODE 3. DATE RECEIVED 4. DATE APPLICATION COMPLETED
ITEMS BELOW TO BE F LLED BYAPPLICANT
5. APPLICANT'S NAME 8. AUTHORIZED AGENT'S NAME AND TITLE (an agent is not required)
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Project Development & Environmental Analysis
6. APPLICANT'S ADDRESS 9. AGENT'S ADDRESS
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1548
7. APPLICANT'S PHONE NOS. W/AREA CODE 10. AGENT'S PHONE NOS. W/AREA CODE
a. Residence a. Residence
b. Business 919-733-3141 b. Business
11. STATEMENT OF AUTHORIZATION
I hereby authorize, to act in my behalf as my agent in the processing of this application and to furnish, upon
request, supplemental information in support of this permit application.
APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE DATE
NAME, LOCATION, AND DESCRIPTION OR PROJECT OR ACTIVITY
12. PROJECT NAME OR TITLE (see instructions
US 158 Widening from Murfreesboro Bypass to US 13 West of Winton
13. NAME OF WATERBODY, IF KNOWN (if applicable) 14. PROJECT STREET ADDRESS (if applicable)
Meherrin River Basin
15. LOCATION OF PROJECT
Hertford County NC
COUNTY STATE
16. OTHER LOCATION DESCRIPTIONS, IF KNOWN (see instructions) Section, Township, Range, Lat/Lon, and/or Accessory's Parcel Number, for example.
17. DIRECTIONS TO THE SITE
Please see attached vicinity map and cover letter.
18. Nature of Activity (Description of project, include all features)
Widen the existing US 158 to four 12-foot travel lanes, paved shoulders, and a 46-foot wide grassy median. The existing facility will
have partial control access and full control access on new location.
ENG FORM 4345, Jul 97 EDITION OF FEB 94 IS OBSOLETE (Proponent: CECW-OR)

19. Project Purpose (Describe the reason or purpose of the project, see instructions) The purpose of this project is to provide system linkage, specifically
between northeastern North Carolina and Interstate 95 ; Support economic development in Hertford and surrounding counties; and
ensure future safety along the project limits on US 158 in Hertford County.
USE BLOCKS 20-22 IF DREDGED AND/OR FILL MATERIAL IS TO BE DISCHARGED
20. Reason(s) for Discharge
The Widening of US 158 will result in roadway fill in wetlands.
21. Type(s) of Material Being Discharged and the Amount of Each Type in Cubic Yards
Fill from roadway.
-- 22. Surface Area in Acres of Wetlands or Other-Waters-Filled-(see-instructions) --
See Merger Permit Application Letter
23. Is Any Portion of the Work Already Complete? Yes _ No X IF YES, DESCRIBE THE COMPLETED WORK
24. Addresses of Adjoining Property Owners, Lessees, Etc., Whose Property Adjoins the Waterbody (If more than can be entered here, please attach a supplemental list).
25. List of Other Certifications or Approvals/Denials Received from other Federal, State, or Local Agencies for Work Described in This Application.
AGENCY TYPE APPROVAL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER DATE APPLIED DATE APPROVED DATE DENIED
Would include but is not restricted to zoning, building, and flood plain permits
26. Application is hereby made for a permit or permits to authorize the work described in this application. I certify that the information in this application is
complete and accurate. I further certify that I possess the authority to undertake the work described herein or am acting as the duly authorized agent
of the aDelicant.
SI T APPLICAN DATE SIGNATURE OF AGENT DATE
The a do must be signed by the person who desires to undertake the proposed activity (applicant) or it may be signed by a 'duly authorized
agent i e tement in block 11 has been filled out and signed.
18 U.S.C. Section 1001 provides that: Whoever, in any manner within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States knowingly
and willfully falsifies, conceals, or covers up any trick, scheme, or disguises a material fact or makes any false, fictitious or fraudulent statements or
representations or makes or uses any false writing or document knowing same to contain any false, fictitious or fraudulent statements or entry, shall
be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than five years or both.
ENG FORM 4345, Jul 97 EDITION OF FEB 94 IS OBSOLETE (Proponent: CECW-OR)
,,. SINE
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
UN ??
?FTjpN Uri... .1(9
i? . 1oa1;1
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION wNC,y
MICHAEL F. EASLEY LYNDO TIPPETT
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
June 12, 2007
Mr. Bill Biddlecome, Transportation Project Manager
Department of the Army; Corps of Engineers
Washington Regulatory Field Office
Post Office Box 1000
Washington, North Carolina 27889-1000
Dear Mr. Biddlecome:
SUBJECT: SECTION 404 - N.E.P.A MERGER PROCESS Application for a
Department of the Army (DOA) Permit pursuant to Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act TO DISCHARGE DREDGED OR FILL MATERIAL
INTO WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES TO CONSTRUCT the
proposed US 158 widening from Murfreesboro Bypass to US 13 West of
Winton, Hertford County. WBS No. 35489.1.1, T.I.P. No. R-2583
The following application, including separate attachments for (1) ENG Form 4345 and
(2) mailing list (labels) is submitted for your consideration. As you are aware, this
project was selected for treatment under the new "merger" process. At this juncture, the
Regulatory Division has provided concurrence with Purpose and Need, with the selection
of Detailed Study Alternatives and with the bridge locations and lengths. An
Environmental Assessment (EA) was prepared and signed on April 27, 2006. The
document was circulated on May 26, 2006. A copy is attached.
Please issue your public notice at the earliest opportunity so that we can jointly proceed
toward selecting the LEDPA (least environmentally damaging, practicable alternative
which meets the purpose and need of the project) following analysis of public input.
Once the LEDPA is selected and approved, efforts will be undertaken to further minimize
impacts to wetlands and riparian buffers in the LEDPA corridor and to propose suitable
compensatory mitigation to offset unavoidable impacts.
The following information is a summary of relevant project details and is being provided
to assist in the Section 404 regulatory review of the project. Please note that more
detailed information is available in the EA.
MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: [phone] LOCATION:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FAX: [phone] TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER WEBSITE. WWW.DOH.DOT.STATE.NC.US RALEIGH NC
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548
INTRODUCTION
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to widen US 158
from Murfreesboro Bypass to US 13 west of Winton in Hertford County. Figure 1 (refer
to the EA) is a vicinity map, and Figure 3 (refer to the EA) shows water resources and a
map of the detailed study alternatives.
The proposed US 158 widening is approximately 8.3 miles in length (depending upon
alternative). There will be a four-lane divided facility, consisting of four 12-foot travel
lanes, paved shoulders, and a 46-foot wide grassy median. The existing facility will have
partial control access and full control access on new location. The proposed right-of-way
is approximately 250 feet for all build alternatives. The proposed facility has a design
speed of 60 miles per hour (mph).
NEPA/404 MERGER PROCESS DOCUMENTATION
Although this is a state-funded action that is subject to North Carolina (or State)
Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) requirements, the proposed project is being developed
through the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)/404 Merger Process to ensure
systematic evaluation of the project plus avoidance and minimization of all potential
impacts. Concurrence Point 1 (Purpose & Need) was signed by Merger Team members
on January 15, 2003. Concurrent Point 2 (Alternatives for Detailed Study) was signed on
May 19, 2005. It was agreed upon by the Merger Team that Concurrence Point 2a
(Bridging and Alignment Review) would be combined with Concurrence Point 3
(LEDPA) because there are only two potential bridge sites to discuss. Copies of the
above forms are attached.
PURPOSE AND NEED
Project Need
Within northeastern North Carolina, only two counties- Northampton and Halifax- are
directly served by I-95. Improved regional mobility by widening US 158 is anticipated to
help Hertford County, as well as the northeastern region of NC, attract industry. The
Hertford County Economic Development Commission has stated that most companies are
looking for access to I-95 and I-85. Several major employers, including the WCC Rivers
Correctional Institution and Nucor Steel, have already located to the area, and truck traffic
associated with both facilities utilizes US 158. Expansion of US 158 to a multi-lane
facility is needed to enhance connectivity to I-95 as well as to other regional intrastate
highways, thereby increasing regional mobility and improving strategic highway system
linkages.
The total crash rate on US 158 within the project study area is 137 accidents per 100
million vehicular miles traveled (mvm). Although this crash rate is less than the statewide
average for similar two-lane rural US routes (Table 1), the statewide average crash rates
for four-lane rural routes with access control show a trend of decreasing accidents over
those of two-lane rural US routes. The fatal crash rate for the project study area is 2.08
accidents per 100 mvm, higher than the statewide average; however, this accident total
represents only 1 fatality during the study period.
US 158 has been designated by the North Carolina Board-of Transportation as a Strategic
Highway Corridor (Corridor #37). This corridor connects the Winston-Salem, Henderson,
Roanoke Rapids, Elizabeth City, and Kitty Hawk/ Kill Devil Hills/ Nags Head areas, a
length of approximately 200 miles. The US 158 corridor is ultimately envisioned as a
combination of a Freeway, Expressway, and Boulevard facility. The corridor was
included in the Strategic Highway Corridor program for several reasons, including its
connection between multiple activity centers and its function as a major hurricane
evacuation route.
Table 1: Accident Rates for Pro,'ect Study Area, August 1997- July 2002
Total Crash Rate Fatal Crash Rate
_ (ACC/IOOMVM) (ACC/100MVM)
US 158 Within Stud Area 137.08 2.08*
Statewide Average Two-lane Rural US
Routes (1998-2001) 167.73 2.01
Statewide Average Four-lane Rural US- No
Control of Access (1998-2001) 137.85 1.29
Statewide Average Four-lane Rural US-
Partial Control of Access (1998-2001) 75.68 1.09
Statewide Average Four-lane Rural US-
Full Control of Access (1998-2001) 63.50 0.72
* Note- This rate represents 1 fatality during the 5-year study period.
Project Purpose
The purpose of the project is to:
• Provide system linkage, specifically between northeastern North Carolina and
Interstate 95
• Support economic development in Hertford and surrounding counties
• Ensure future safety along the project limits on US 158 in Hertford County
3
ALTERNATIVES
No-Build, Mass Transit Alternatives
1. No-Build Alternative
The No-Build Alternative would forego any improvements to US 158 with the exception
of routine maintenance. No new segment would be constructed, and no roadway or
intersection improvements would be performed. The No-Build Alternative would avoid
any adverse environmental impacts, in that no wetlands, streams, historic properties, or
other cultural and natural resources would be directly impacted. However, this alternative
would not meet the stated purpose of the project, as it would not support economic
development or ensure future safety along this section of US 158.
The No-Build Alternative was eliminated from consideration because it does not meet the
transportation needs of the region or the objectives of the project. However, the No-Build
Alternative does provide a basis for comparing the adverse impacts and benefits of the
design options.
2. Transportation System Management Alternatives
Transportation Systems Management (TSM) improvements involve increasing the
available capacity of the facility within the existing right-of-way with minimum capital
expenditures and without reconstructing the facility. Items such as the addition of turn
lanes, striping, signing, signalization, and minor realignments are examples of TSM
physical improvements. Traffic law enforcement, speed restrictions, access control, and
signal timing changes are examples of TSM operational improvements. These types of
improvements were considered, and some elements, such as access control measures, will
be incorporated into the recommendations, but TSM improvements alone would not meet
the.stated purpose of the project. Therefore, the TSM Alternative was not considered a
reasonable and feasible alternative and was eliminated from further consideration.
3. Mass Transit Alternatives
There is no existing no-cost mass transit in Hertford County due to lack of demand, low-
density development, and low population density. The only form of mass transit in the
area is the Choanoke Public Transportation Authority (CPTA), which provides
subscription and demand-responsive transportation in Northampton, Halifax, Bertie, and
Hertford Counties; the CPTA is based in Northampton County. The study area is
primarily rural, with the town of Murfreesboro located west of the project limits.
Additionally, US 158 carries a large proportion of through traffic with relatively high
truck percentages, which is not conducive to local mass transit. Based on these factors,
the Mass Transit Alternative was eliminated from consideration, as it would not
effectively address the purpose and need for the proposed project.
4
Detailed Study Alternatives
Three main construction alternatives are currently proposed (refer to Figures 5 and 7 in
the EA). One alternative (Alternative A) proposes to widen the roadway entirely on
existing location, while two alternatives (Alternatives B and C) propose to widen the
majority of US 158 on existing location with a short new location bypass in the vicinity
of Mt. Tabor Baptist Church. For each of the three construction alternatives, an
additional service road option is under consideration. The Mapleton Option, (referred to
as A2, B2, and C2 in the table) proposes to shift US 158 farther south in Mapleton than
what is proposed in Alternatives A, B, and C and providing access to residences on the
north side by utilizing existing roadway as a service road. This Mapleton option is
designed to reduce the number of residential relocations in the vicinity of Mapleton Road
(SR 1304).
Partial access control will be maintained for any of the six construction alternatives.
Existing driveways exiting onto US 158 will be maintained; however, no new driveways
will be allowed on any new location section (Alternatives 8, B2, C and C2). Existing
stop-sign controlled intersections will be modified to include directional crossovers and
offset left-turns (refer to Figure 6 in the EA). The 4-foot outside paved shoulder will
accommodate any bicycle traffic. The typical section design is consistent with the
Strategic Highway Corridor vision for an Expressway design within the project limits.
While the Strategic Highway Corridor vision includes an interchange at the US 158/ US
13 intersection, an interchange is not included within the scope of this project. Any
interchange at this location will be studied as part of TIP Project R-2507A.
a) Alternative A: Widen on Existing
This alternative would widen the roadway entirely along its existing location. New
lanes would be added south of the existing roadway between the Murfreesboro
.Bypass to Cool Spring Road; east of Cool Spring Road, the new lanes would be north
of the existing roadway. The alternative includes the construction of a new, two-lane
bridge over Potecasi Creek north of the existing structure. In addition, the existing
bridge would also be replaced.
b) Alternative A2: Widen on Existing including Mapleton Service Road.
This alternative is the same as Alternative A except for the addition of the service
road option that would shift US 158 further south in Mapleton and utilize the existing
roadway as a service road.
c) Alternative B: Widen on Existing with Northern Bypass
This alternative would widen US 158 on existing location as described in Alternative
A, with the exception of a new location section north of the Mt. Tabor Church Road
(SR 1176) intersection. The new location section would serve to straighten the
existing curve as well as to avoid impacts to the nearby Mt. Tabor Baptist Church
property. This alternative would also include a new crossing of Potecasi Creek in the
5
form of a two-lane bridge to be located north of the existing crossing. The existing
Potecasi Creek bridge would also be replaced.
d) Alternative B2: Widen on Existing with Northern Bypass and Mapleton Service
Road.
This alternative is the same as Alternative B except for the addition of the service
road option that would shift US 158 further south in Mapleton and utilize the existing
roadway as a service road.
e) Alternative C: Widen on Existing with Southern Bypass
This alternative would widen US 158 mostly on existing location as described in
Alternative A, with the exception of a new location section south of Mt. Tabor
Church Road (SR 1176). The new location section would both straighten the existing
curve as well as avoid impacts to the historic church property. This alternative would
include the construction of two new two-lane bridges over Potecasi Creek, both to be
located south of the existing crossing. If this alternative is chosen, the existing
Potecasi Creek bridge would be removed as potential wetland mitigation.
f) Alternative C2: Widen on Existing with Southern Bypass and Mapleton Service
Road.
This alternative is the same as Alternative C except for the addition of the service
road option that would shift US 158 further south in Mapleton and utilize the existing
roadway as a service road.
COST ESTIMATES AND SCHEDULE
Preliminary cost estimates for the Detailed Study Alternatives are presented in Table 2
below. Alternatives A2, B2 and C2 include the Mapleton Service Road option. The
costs include right-of-way and construction costs, but do not account for any wetland or
stream mitigation costs.
The project is included in the approved 2007-2013 State Transportation Improvement
Program (STIP) (TIP Project No. R-2583) with right-of-way acquisition scheduled to
begin in state fiscal year (SFY) 2010 and construction scheduled to begin in SFY 2012.
The total estimated cost included in the STIP is $35,700,000.
6
Tnhh- 2! Preliminarv Cost Estimates
Alternative Right-of-Way Construction Total Cost
A $8,710,500 $27,900,000 $36,610,500
A2* $6,948,000 $31,700,000 $38,648,000
B $8,548,000 $28,900,000 $37,448,000
B2* $6,785,500 $32,700,000 $39,485,500
C $8,397,500 $30,100,000 $38,497,500
C2* $6,635,000 $33,900,000 $40,535,000
*Mapleton Service Road Option
WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES
Streams
This section contains information concerning surface water resources likely to be affected
by the proposed project. Water resource assessments include the physical characteristics,
best usage standards, and water quality aspects of the water resources, along with their
relationship to major regional drainage systems. Probable impacts to surface water
resources are also discussed, as are means to minimize potential impacts.
a) Best Usage Classification
Water resources within the study area are located in the Chowan River Basin
(USGS Hydrologic Unit 03010204, NCDWQ Subbasin 03-01-02). Several water
resources are present in the study area. Two of these streams, Potecasi Creek and Mill
Branch, are named. These water resources also include unnamed perennial and
intermittent tributaries of Potecasi Creek and an intermittent tributary to Mill Branch.
Two ponds are also present within the study area.
Potecasi Creek, a fourth order stream, flows north into the Meherrin River. Its
drainage area is approximately 238 square miles and includes perennial and
intermittent streams within the study area.
Mill Branch, a first order stream, flows into Potecasi Creek north of the study area. Its
drainage area is approximately 5.7 square miles and includes on intermittent stream
within the study area.
Streams have been assigned a best usage classification by the NCDWQ that reflects
water quality conditions and potential resource usage. Unclassified tributaries carry
the same best usage classification as the classified stream to which they are tributary.
The classification for Potecasi Creek (NCDWQ Index No. 25-4-8, 09106/79) is Class
C, Nutrient Sensitive Waters (NSW) from its source to Meherrin River. Mill Branch
(NCDWQ Index No. 25-4-8-11, 09-05-79) is also assigned Class C, NSW from its
source to Potecasi Creek (NCDENR 2003a). Class C waters are protected for
secondary recreation, fishing, wildlife, fish, and aquatic life propagation and survival,
agriculture, and other uses suitable for Class C. Secondary recreation includes those
7
activities performed in an infrequent, unorganized, or incidental manner. NSW is a
supplemental classification intended for waters needing additional nutrient
management due to excessive growth of microscopic or macroscopic vegetation. In
general, management strategies for point and non-point source pollution control
require control of nutrients such that excessive growths of vegetation are reduced or
prevented and there is no increase in nutrients over target levels. Management
strategies are site-specific. The entire subbasin is classified as NSW (NCDENR
2002a). Within the Project Vicinity, no High Quality Waters (HQW) are present.
HQW include Outstanding Resource Waters and waters protected for public drinking
water supply (NCDENR 2003a).
The county is under the jurisdiction of the North Carolina Division of Coastal
Management (NCDCM); however, no Areas of Environmental Concern, as defined by
the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA), are present within the study area. In
addition, the study area is within the Chowan River basin, which currently does not
have riparian buffer protection rules.
b) Physical Characteristics of Surface Waters
Potecasi Creek at US 158 has a channel width of approximately 75 feet and a water
depth greater than 4 feet. At the bridge, the stream is constricted to approximately 50
feet wide. Bank heights are approximately 6 feet from the edge of water.
Potecasi Creek has a substrate composed of 15 percent sand, 45 percent silt, and 45
percent clay. Potecasi Creek exhibits high sinuosity. The stream runs on either side of
US 158 and makes an oxbow bend as it passes under the bridge. Where the stream
parallels US 158, the banks adjacent to the road are very steep; however, there is a
riparian buffer. On the north side of US 158, a power line ROW interrupts the buffer.
Mill Branch is an extremely braided system at US 158. Currently, there are four
culverts connecting the system under US 158. At the westernmost culvert, on the
south side of US 158, Mill Branch has an average channel width of 4 feet (1.22 m)
and a water depth ranging from 2 to 4 feet (0.6 to 1.2 m). The stream channel is more
defined on the south side of the westernmost culvert and on the north side of the
easternmost culvert. The substrate in Mill Branch is composed of 10 percent sand, 50
percent clay, and 40 percent silt.
Several intermittent and perennial tributaries are included within the study area.
Table 3 presents all streams within the study area and their perennial or intermittent
stream determinations ("SA" through "SS"). These tributaries begin as intermittent,
often braided, streams within forested headwater wetlands. In these headwater areas,
substrate composition is mostly silt and sand. Exposed roots are abundant. Headcuts
and undercut banks are also present in these reaches. Adjacent to agricultural fields,
these streams often exhibit signs of increased instability, as evidenced by scouring
and some incising. Overail, the streams have a very low-grade slope, which is
characteristic of the Coastal Plain. Scores were assigned to each stream within the
study area using the USACE Stream Quality Assessment Worksheet (see Table 3).
8
These are based on a scale of 0 to 100, with 100 being a very high quality stream.
Table 3: Stream Characteristics
USAGE
Channel Width Bankfull Depth Stream
Stream Type (Feet) (Feet); unlit Score
Mill Branch* (SA) Perennial 4.0 2.0 to 4.0 73
Potecasi Creek (SB) Perennial 75.0 6.0+ 66
Unnamed Tributary to Perennial 4.0 1.0 64
Potecasi Creek (SC)
Unnamed Tributary to Perennial 40.0 8.0 59
Potecasi Creek (SD)
Unnamed Tributary to Perennial 1.0 0.5 35
Potecasi Creek (SF)
Unnamed Tributary to Perennial 8.0 3.0 54
Potecasi Creek (SJ)
Unnamed Tributary to Intermittent 2.0 0.5 -
Potecasi Creek (SK)
Unnamed Tributary to Intermittent
Potecasi Creek & Perennial 3.0 0.5 64
(SUSM)
Unnamed Tributary to Intermittent
3.0
0.5 -
Potecasi Creek (SN)
Unnamed Tributary to Intermittent 3.0 1.0 41
Potecasi Creek (SP)
Unnamed Tributary to Perennial 3.0 1.0 83
Potecasi Creek (SQ)
Unnamed Tributary to Intermittent 3.0 2.0 27
McHerrin River (SR)
Unnamed Tributary to Perennial 2.0 0.5 46
McHerrin River (SS)
Unnamed Tributary to Intermittent NA NA 32
Potecasi Creek (SCC) & Perennial
*Measurements for Mill Branch were taken near the westernmost culvert.
The intermittent streams transition into perennial streams downslope through the
larger palustrine forested wetland areas, frequently after the confluence with other
intermittent streams. These channels often exhibit only minor sinuosity and have
active floodplains, as is common in the Coastal Plain. They exhibit characteristics of
ground water flow, such as the presents of iron-oxidizing bacteria. In some areas,
streams widen to become swampy areas of standing or very slow moving water with
some braiding of the charnels.
9
Two ponds are present within the western half of the study area. One pond is narrow
with steep, wooded side slopes. The other pond occurs within the scrub-shrub
wetland.
c) Water Quality
This section describes the quality of water resources within and downstream of the
study area. Water quality assessments are made based on published resource
information and existing general watershed characteristics. Both point and non-point
sources of pollution are evaluated, such as potential sediment loads and toxin
concentrations of these waters. These data provide insight into the potential for water
resources within the study area to meet human needs and provide habitat for aquatic
organisms.
Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network
The Basinwide Monitoring Program (Program), managed by the NCDWQ, is part of
an ongoing ambient water quality monitoring program that addresses long-term trends
in water quality. The Program monitors ambient water quality by sampling at fixed
sites for selected Benthic macroinvertebrate organisms; which are sensitive to water
quality conditions, as part of the Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network
(BMAN). Samples are evaluated on the number of taxa present of intolerant groups
[Ephemoptera, Plecoptera, Trichoptera (EPT)], and a taxa richness value (EPT S) is
calculated. A biotic index value is also calculated for the sample that summarizes
tolerance data for all species in each collection. The two rankings are given equal
weight in final site classification. The biotic index and taxa richness values primarily
reflect the effects of chemical pollution and are a poor measure of the effects of
physical pollutants, such as sediment. Although there is a benthic monitoring station
on Potecasi Creek, this site was sampled but not rated in 2000. During the sampling
visit, habitat degradation and "severe stress" were noted at Potecasi Creek. Only the
Meherrin River was rated based on benthic data, and it received a rating of Good
(NCDENR 2002a).
Water Quality Monitoring Data
The Chowan River Basinwide Water Quality Plan does not designate support ratings
for Potecasi Creek or Mill Branch (NCDENR 2002a). In 1997, Potecasi Creek was
deemed to be impaired, as it had Fair water quality, which was thought to be a result
of agricultural runoff and channelization. However, it was noted that the low pH and
low dissolved oxygen values could have been due to natural swamp conditions. While
Potecasi Creek is currently not rated, it is one of two streams that DWQ has
recommended undergo a Swamp Waters Study Plan. The details of a Swamp Waters
Study Plan are currently in development by NCDWQ and not readily available at this
time. In addition, Potecasi Creek is listed on the most recent Clean Water Act Section
303(d) list as impaired waters (NCDENR 2002b). It is listed under Category 5, which
requires Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL).
10
Point and Non-point Source Dischargers
There are no NPDES dischargers within the subbasin (NCDENR 2003b). Land use
within the subbasin which can contribute to non-point source pollution, is
approximately 65 percent forested, 1 percent pasture, 32 percent agriculture, and less
than 1 percent urban (NCDENR 2002a). Agriculture is the primary land use;
therefore, it is the primary threat for non-point source pollution within the study area.
Large agricultural areas throughout the study area may introduce nutrients, herbicides,
or pesticides if used for crop management. In several areas, agricultural drainage
ditches drain directly into the headwater wetlands and intermittent streams, Erosion
from these fields also contributes sediment to the water resources. Current timber
activity within the study area has the potential to introduce additional sediment load to
the streams. In addition, there are several poultry farms within the project vicinity. To
a smaller extent, residential runoff through the roadside drainage ditches or lawn
management may also introduce previously mentioned pollutants.
d) Impacts
Impacts to water resources in the study area are likely to result from activities
associated with project construction. Table 4 shows the estimated impacts to streams
for each alternative.
Individual stream crossing impacts may include clearing and grubbing on stream
banks and in wetlands, riparian canopy removal, in-stream construction, fertilizers
and pesticides used in revegetation, and pavement installation. The following impacts
to surface water resources are likely to result from the aforementioned construction
activities:
• Increased sedimentation and siltation downstream of the construction zone
and increased erosion in the project construction area.
• Changes in light incidence and water clarity due to increased sedimentation
and vegetation removal.
• Alternation of water levels and flows due to interruptions and/or additions to
surface and ground water flow from construction.
• Changes in and destabilization of water temperature due to vegetation
removal.
• Increased nutrient loading during construction via runoff from exposed areas.
• Increased concentrations of toxic compounds in roadway runoff.
• Potential increase of toxic compound releases, such as fuel and oil, from
construction equipment and other vehicles.
• Alteration of stream discharge due to silt loading and changes in surface and
ground water drainage patterns.
11
Table 4: Stream Impacts (linear feet)
Alternative Alternative Alternative Alternative's Alternative' Alternative
Stream
A N2 B B2 C C2
UT to Meherrin

River (SS) 64 64 64 64 64 64
UT to Potecasi 181
69
Creek (SD) 119.97 181.69 119.97 181.69 119.97 .
UT to Potecasi

Creek (S Q) 129.20 129.20 134.75 134.75 108.81 108.81
to Potecasi
166.43 166.43 NA NA 124
36 124.36
Creek (SC)
Creek .
UT to Potecasi

Creek (SJ) 76.92 76.92 256.71 256.71 46.17 46.17
UT to Potecasi

Creek (SL) NA NA 255.18 255.18 NA. NA
UT to Potecasi

Creek (SN) NA NA 15.29 15.29 NA NA
UT to Potecasi
33.94 33.94 NA NA NA NA
Creek (SF)
Potecasi Creek

(SB) 247.12 247.12 247.12 247.12 329.50 329.50
Mill Branch
79.56 79.56 79.56 79
56 79
56 79.56
(SA) . .
UT to Potecasi

Creek (SCC) NA NA NA NA 719.16 719.16

Total Stream
917.14
978.36
1172.58
1234
30 _
1
591.53
16-53.25
Impacts . -
In order to minimize potential impacts to water resources in the project vicinity,
NCDOT's Best Management Practices (BMPs) for Construction and Maintenance
Activities should be strictly enforced during the construction phase of the project.
Limiting in-stream activities and revegetating stream banks immediately following
completion of the grading can further reduce impacts. Seed mixes used in
revegetating stream banks should not include tall fescue. Use of turbidity curtains for
this project was reviewed and investigated. Given the dimensions for the streams in
the study area and general design considerations for turbidity curtains, in many
instances, the specified floatation components for turbidity curtains are larger than the
depth of the stream and would most likely result in additional expense with minimal
added benefit. However, Potecasi Creek is a large enough system, featuring a width of
75 feet and maintaining a sufficient water depth to support the use of a turbidity
curtain. The use of a turbidity curtain in Potecasi Creek should be considered during
project design, as it is designated as having nutrient sensitive waters, and increased
sediment downstream could impact aquatic systems. Turbidity curtains are not
recommended for the remaining streams within the study area, as water conditions do
not meet the requirements for the installation of turbidity curtains. The majority of
other streams in the study-area are less than 4 feet in width and 3 feet in depth, where
floatation requirements would not be met.
12
Wetlands
There are seven wetland community types found within the delineated portion of the
project study area: Riparian Forest, Bottomland Hardwood Forest, Scrub-Shrub,
Swamp Forest, Headwater Forest, Headwater Ditch and Pine Savanna.
Approximately 40 jurisdictional wetland sites were delineated within the project study
area. Of these 40 sites, between 21 and 24 are impacted by the proposed alternatives.
Table 5 details the wetland sites that are impacted by Alternatives A, A2, B, B2, C
and C2.
Floodplains
Hertford County is currently participating in the National Flood Insurance Regular
Program. The tributaries to Potecasi Creek and Potecasi Creek itself are in designated
flood hazard zones where detailed flood studies have not been performed. The Mill
Creek crossing is not located within a flood hazard zone. The floodplain area in the
vicinity of he stream crossings is primarily rural and undeveloped. The terrain
throughout most of the project is rolling, with streams and natural draws located such
that the project can be drained without difficulty. Existing drainage patterns will be
maintained to the extent practicable. It is not anticipated that the proposed project
should have any adverse impacts on the existing floodplain.
13
Table 5: Wetland Impacts
Alternatives
Site Wetland II) Wetland Type A A2 B B? C C2
1 WTT Riparian Forest 0.097 0.097 0.093 0.093 0.096 0.096
3 WRR Headwater Ditch 0.004 0.004 0.005 0.005 0.004 0.004
6 WPP Swam Forest 0.411 1.325 0.391 1.325 0.414 1.325
7 WNN Headwater Ditch 0.010 0.016 0.013 0.016 0.008 0.016
8 WMM Headwater Ditch 0.015 0.023 0.019 0.023 0.014 0.023
9 WLL Riparian Forest 0.370 0.481 0.388 0.481 0.970 0.481
10 WLL Riparian Forest 0.082 0.131 0.018 0.131 0.006 0.131
12 WHH/WGG Headwater Forest 0.094 0.094 0.780 0.780 0.069 0.069
13 WFF Headwater Forest 0.004 0.004
14 WEE Riparian Forest 0.150 0.150
15 WY Headwater Forest 0.021 0.021 0.022 0.022
16 WY Headwater Forest 0.004 0.004
17 WT Bottomland
Hardwood 0.048 0.048 0.048 0.048
18 WT Bottomland
Hardwood 0.016 0.016 0.019 0.019
20 WT Bottomland
Hardwood 0.173 0.173 0.184 0.184
21 WS Bottomland
Hardwood 0.052 0.052 0.057 0.057
23 WX Headwater Forest 0.051 0.051
27 WK Bottomland
Hardwood 0.029 0.029 0.027 0.027 0.029 0.029
30 WG Scrub-Shrub 0.030 0.030 0.028 0.028 0.030 0.030
31 WE Head Water Ditch 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007
33 WD Swam Forest 1.177 1.177 1.219 1.219 1.181 1.181
34 WD Swam Forest 0.059 0.059 0.048 0.048 0.086 0.086
35 WC Headwater Forest 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.027 0.027
36 WB Headwater Forest 0.010 0.010 0.012 0.012 0.010 0.010
37 WA Pine Savanna 0.089 0.089 0.083 0.083 0.098 0.098
38 WA Pine Savanna 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023
39 WJJ Swam Forest 0.054 0.054 0.009 0.009
40 WCC. Swam Forest 0.625 0.625
41 WV300 Swam Forest 1.821 1.821
Total (Ac.) 2.900 3.988 3.663 4.810 5.578 6.142
14
MITIGATION EVALUATION
The USACE, through the CEQ, has adopted a wetland mitigation policy that embraces
the concept of "no net loss of wetlands" and sequencing. The purpose of this policy is to
restore and maintain the chemical, biological, and physical integrity of Waters of the
United States, specifically wetlands. Mitigation of wetland impacts has been defined by
the CEQ to include the following: avoiding, minimizing, rectifying, reducing (over time),
and compensating for impacts (40 CFR 1508.20). These three aspects are avoidance,
minimization, and compensation and must be considered sequentially.
Avoidance mitigation examines all appropriate and practicable possibilities of averting
impacts to Waters of the United States. According to a 1990 Memorandum of Agreement
(MOA) between the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and the USACE,
when determining "appropriate and practicable" measures to offset unavoidable impacts,
such measures should be appropriate to the scope and degree of those impacts and
practicable in terms of cost, existing technology, and logistics in light of overall project
purposes. Complete avoidance of wetlands is not possible due to the extent of wetlands in
the study area.
Minimization includes the examination of appropriate and practicable steps to reduce the
adverse impacts to Waters of the United States. Implementation of these steps will be
required through project modifications and permit conditions. Minimization typically
focuses on decreasing the footprint of the proposed project through the reduction of
median widths, ROW widths, fill slopes, and/or road shoulder widths. Widening to the
South at the west-end of the project and to the North at the east-end of the project was
used to avoid excessive wetland impacts.
Compensatory mitigation is not normally considered until anticipated impacts to Waters
of the United States have been avoided and minimized to the maximum extent possible. It
is recognized that "no net loss of wetlands" functions and values may not be achieved in
each and every permit action. Appropriate and practicable compensatory mitigation is
required for unavoidable impacts that remain after all appropriate and practicable
minimization has been achieved. Compensatory actions often include restoration,
creation, and enhancement of Waters of the United States, specifically wetlands. Such
actions should be undertaken in areas adjacent or contiguous to the discharge site, if
practical.
Compensatory mitigation will likely be required for the potential impacts associated with
this project. Wetland restoration or enhancement potential should be evaluated for the
wetlands WG and WQQ, if these areas are not impacted by the final project. Recent
disturbance in both of these areas has altered the vegetation and possibly the hydrology.
The hydrology and vegetation within portions of this area could be adjusted to improve
habitat and water storage functions that were lost during previous timbering activities. If
Alternative C is selected, the existing bridge over Potecasi Creek would be removed as
part of potential wetland mitigation.
15
PROTECTED SPECIES
Some populations of fauna and flora are, or have been, in the process of decline either
due to natural forces or their inability to co-exist with human development. Federal law
[under the provisions of the Endangered Species Act (ESA), as amended] requires that
any action likely to adversely affect a species classified as Federally protected be subject
to review by the USFWS. Other species may receive limited additional protection under
Separate State laws.
a) Federally-Protected Species
Plants and animals with Federal classifications of Endangered (E), Threatened (T),
Proposed Endangered (PE), and Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under the
provisions of Sections 7 and 9 of the ESA, as amended. The USFWS (last update:
December 11, 2006) and NCNHP (last update: May 2003) list on Federally-protected
species for Hertford County. The Red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis) is
listed as endangered at the Federal and State levels. The Biological Conclusion for the
species is May Affect- Not Likely to Adversely Affect due to the limited suitable
habitat within the study area. The pine savanna within the eastern edge of the study
area contains pines of intermediate age with an open understory; however, this area is
relatively small and not contiguous with other suitable habitats. No individuals or nest
cavities of this species were observed during the site visit. This survey and resulting
Biological Conclusion are considered valid for two years form the date of the survey.
A letter requesting USFWS concurrence on this Biological Conclusion will be
submitted by NCDOT.
A review of the NCNHP database of rare species and unique habitats shows no
occurrence of Federally-protected species within 1 mile of the study area (NCDENR
2003c).
b) Federal Species of Concern and State Listed Species
There is one species listed as a Federal Species of Concern (FSC) by the USFWS and
NCNHP for the county (USFWS 2003, NCDENR 2003c). Species classified as FSC
are not afforded Federal protection under the ESA and are not subject to any of its
provisions, including Section 7, until they are formally proposed or listed as
Threatened or Endangered. However, the status of these species is subject to change
and should be included for consideration. FSC are defined as species that are under
consideration for listing for which there is insufficient information to support listing.
In addition, organisms that are listed as Endangered (E), Threatened (T), or Special
Concern (SC) under the North Carolina State Endangered Species Act of 1987 and
The North Carolina Plant Protection and Conservation Act of 1979 are afforded
limited State protection.
16
In the county; the Chowanoke Crayfish (Orconectes virginiensis) is listed as FSC by
the USFWS. The state status of this species is SC. Within the study area, there is
potential habitat for this species. The known habitat for this species includes sluggish
streams or swamps on sand or gravel substrates and sluggish streams flowing through
woodlands on sandy or gravelly substrates. A review of the NCNHP database of rare
species and unique habitats shows no occurrence or FSC within 1 mile of the study
area (NCDENR 2003c).
WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS
The project will not impact any Designated Wild and Scenic Rivers or any rivers included
in the list of study rivers (Public Law 90-542, as amended). -
CULTURAL RESOURCES
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) on properties included in or
eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and to afford the
Advisory Council a reasonable opportunity to comment on such undertakings.
Historic Architecture
A detailed survey was conducted for Alternatives A and B. Thirty-seven properties that
are at least fifty years old were identified during a field survey. Of these, only three were
determined to be eligible for the NRHP: Britt Store, Mt. Tabor Baptist Church and
cemeteries, and the William H. Kiff House. The North Carolina State Historic
Preservation Office (HPO) confirmed the eligibility of these properties in correspondence
dated April 25, 2003 and July 10, 2003.
The addition of Alternative C resulted in a larger Area of Potential Effects (APE).
NCDOT conducted additional surveys to identify historic architectural resources located
within the expanded APE. No properties eligible for or listed on the NRHP were
identified within the new location portion of Alternative C, except for the previously
identified Mt. Tabor Baptist Church and cemeteries; the HPO concurred with this
determination in a concurrence form dated August 31, 2005. Figure 2 (refer to the EA)
shows the locations of all three eligible sites.
17
Table 6: Architectural Resources Eligible for the National Register

Property Name Criteria
' -
Eligibility
Description
Location
Britt Store A, C Commercial Adjacent to US 158 and
building SR 1304 intersection,
Mapleton
Mt. Tabor Baptist Church A, C Church and US 158 east of SR 1176
and Cemeteries cemeteries
William H. Kiff House C Agricultural Adjacent to the US 158/
complex SR 1174 intersection
a) Eligible Properties
Britt Store
The Britt Store is located at the northwest corner of the intersection of US 158 and
SR 1303 within the Mapleton community. The circa 1880 single-story store is a front-
gabled frame building with a false front; a shed-roofed addition on the east side has a
lower false front. Both false fronts are weatherboarded and have cornices supported
by carved brackets and decorative frieze boards.
The Britt Store has been determined eligible for the National Register of Historic
Places under Criterion A in the areas of commerce and transportation for its
association with the commerce related to Hill's Ferry and the surrounding rural area.
The store is also eligible under Criterion C in the area of architecture as a relatively
intact example of a late-nineteenth-century store building in a rural, crossroads
community. The building retains its original form and the architectural detailing in the
parapets. The eligible boundary of the Britt Store encompasses the entire 0.29-acre lot
historically associated with the store and conforms to the present tax boundary,
following the existing right-of-way along US 158 and Mapleton Road (SR 1304).
Mt. Tabor Baptist Church and Cemeteries
Mt. Tabor. Baptist Church stands on the south side of US 158 near Mapleton, just east
of the intersection with SR 1176 (Mt. Tabor Church Road). Two cemeteries share the
site; one is directly behind the church, spreading to the west, and the other is south of
the church, closer to the highway and bordered on its south side by Potecasi Creek.
18
The Mt. Tabor Baptist Church has been determined eligible for the National Register
of Historic Places under Criterion A in the area of social history for its association
with the development of communities in rural Hertford County. The church is eligible
under Criterion C in the area of architecture as a relatively intact example of
antebellum churches built by Baptist congregations in rural Hertford County.
Additions have been made to the building, but its original form and materials are still
easily discernable. The additions, all made to the rear, are small in scale and do not
overwhelm the original building. The church building meets Criteria Consideration A
for a property owned by a religious institution or used for religious purposes, but
which derives its primary significance from architectural distinction or historical
importance. The eligible boundary of the Mt. Tabor Baptist Church encompasses the
entire six acres historically associated with the church and cemeteries and conforms to
the present tax boundary, following existing right-of-way along US 158.
William H. Kiff House
The house and its outbuildings stand at the southwest corner of the junction of US
158 and SR 1174. The buildings crowd the corner, while agricultural fields spread
south on both sides of SR 1174. The complex consists of a house, a kitchen, and a
smokehouse. The house (ca. 1860) is a single-story, gable-end, weatherboarded frame
house with rear ell.
The front section is dressed in vernacular Greek Revival style and has a center-hall
plan. The kitchen (ca. 1860) stands just southeast of the house and also faces north.
This gable-end building has two interior brick stacks, a full-width, shed-roofed front
porch, and six-over- line, reflecting the historic appearance of the tract. This area is
smaller than the current tax boundary, which includes 145 acres on both sides of Mt.
Moriah Road (SR 1174).
b) Project Effects
The potential effect of the proposed US 158 widening project on eligible architectural
resources in the project area was evaluated pursuant to the Assessment of Adverse
Effects (36 CFR 800.5).
For Alternatives A, B, and C, the new lanes will be placed south of existing US 158
in the Mapleton vicinity in order to avoid impacts to both the Britt Store as well as
homes on the north side of the roadway. In January 2006, HPO, FHWA, and NCDOT
concurred that each of the three alternatives would have No Effect on the Britt Store
property.
In January 2006, HPO, FHWA, and NCDOT agreed that Alternatives B and C would
have No Effect on Mt. Tabor Church. It was also agreed that Alternative A would
have an Adverse Effect on Mt. Tabor Church. Further coordination with the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers and HPO may be required to determine if the Mt. Tabor
Baptist Church is considered to be within the project's federal permit area, thereby
making Section 106 requirements applicable. six double-hung sash windows. A
front-gable frame smokehouse (ca. 1860) stands to the west, facing the kitchen and
19
the rear wing of the house.
The William H. Kiff House and its outbuildings have been determined eligible for the
National Register of Historic Places under Criterion C in the area of architecture as an
intact domestic agricultural complex from the mid-nineteenth century. The Kiff
House is a rare, well-preserved example of a one-story, vernacular Greek Revival
dwelling in Hertford County. The complex, including the kitchen and smokehouse,
represents the types of buildings commonly employed on small, self-sufficient farms
of the period.
The eligible boundary for the William H. Kiff House encompasses the three buildings
and sufficient surrounding land to create a sense of the historic setting. As drawn, the
boundary includes the buildings and 5.5 acres of cleared agricultural fields reaching to
forested areas at the south boundary
For Alternatives A, B, and C, widening in the vicinity of the Kiff House was shifted
to the north side of US 158 to avoid impacts to the property. The adjacent intersecting
street was shifted slightly east in order to straighten the intersection angle. In January
2006" HPO, FHWA, and NCDOT concurred that each of the three alternatives would
have No Effect on the Kiff House. A copy of the January 2006 effects form can be
found attached.
Archaeology
An intensive archaeological survey was conducted within the study corridor for
Alternatives A and B. A total of 21 historic resources was identified and evaluated (15
archaeological sites, 5 family cemeteries, and 1 historic resource). Of the 15
archaeological sites identified within the study corridor, 13 sites (31HF260, 31HF261,
31 HF262, 31 HF263, 31 HF264, 31 HF265, 31 HF266, 31 HF267, 31 HF269, 31 HF270,
31HF271, 31HF274, and 31HF275) were recommended as not eligible for inclusion in
the NRHP. In a memo dates July 9, 2004, the HPO concurred that these sites were not
eligible for such listing, since "these properties do not retain the level of integrity nor do
they posses the potential to yield significant new information pertaining to the prehistory
of North Carolina."
Both of the two remaining archaeological sites (31HF268 and 31HF278) are
recommended as eligible for the NRHP. Representing the remains of a farm complex that
appears to have been occupied from the mid-nineteenth to the mid-twentieth centuries,
Site 31HF268 consists of at least one intact feature with the potential for other intact
features below the plowzone; therefore, Site 31HF268 is recommended as eligible for the
NRHP per Criterion D. Site 31HF278 is a Civil War-period earthwork and archaeological
site probably constructed in 1862 and occupied by Confederate forces. This resource is
locally significant for its role as part of the Union campaign against the Weldon Railroad,
one of only two campaigns conducted within the confines of what is now Hertford
County. Site 31HF278, therefore, is recommended as eligible for inclusion in the NRHP
for the following reasons: (1) the site is associated with the broad patterns of local, state,
and national history (Criterion A), (2) the earthwork is one of the very few intact Civil
20
War fortifications found in Hertford County that has retained its integrity (Criterion C),
and (3) the archaeological information will contribute important information about
history or prehistory (Criterion D). In a memo dated July 9, 2004, the HPO concurred that
these two archaeological sites are eligible for the NRHP since they have the potential to
yield new information about the historic archaeology of the Coastal Plain. Should either
of these sites be impacted by the proposed project, mitigation efforts are recommended.
Five family cemeteries, three active (31HF273, 31HF276, and 31HF277) and two inactive
(31HF272 and 31HF279), have been identified in or adjacent to the study corridor. Four
of the cemeteries (31HF272, 31HF276, 31HF277, and 31HF279) are recommended as not
eligible for inclusion in the NRHP since (1) the cemeteries do not appear to meet
National Register Criteria Consideration D governing cemeteries, (2) they are not
associated with an important historic event and do no contain graves of individuals of
transcendent importance, and (3) the marked graves do not demonstrate any particularly
distinctive characteristics with regard to design. The Lee family cemetery (31HF273),
containing one interment and last used in 1995 as indicated by the grave marker, is
currently maintained and located in the yard of a residence. This cemetery postdates 1954
and does not appear to meet the age criteria established for inclusion in the NRHP.
Avoidance of all cemeteries is recommended; however, if any of these sites are to be
impacted by the proposed alternatives, removal per applicable State statutes (i.e. NC GS
65 or NC GS 70, Article 3) is recommended.
The remaining historic resource identified as part of the intensive archaeological survey
consists of the Mt. Tabor Baptist Church and its two associated cemeteries (Section
E.2.a).
Since Alternative C was added to the list of proposed alternatives after the intensive
archaeological survey was completed, the NCDOT conducted an additional preliminary
review of the new location portion of Alternative C. This review revealed a low potential
for containing intact remains on either side of Potecasi Creek, portions of which have
already been surveyed. In addition, the west side of Potecasi creek shows signs of
previous timbering and bulldozing activities, while the east side of the creek can be
categorized as hydric with a very high water table. NCDOT has recommended that a
detailed survey within the Alternative C corridor be conducted only if this alternative is
selected as the preferred for the proposed project, due to the fact that the design and
orientation of Alternative C may impact Site 31HF278, which is eligible for the NRHP.
In a memo dated July 19, 2005, the HPO then concurred with the steps proposed by the
NCDOT to evaluate any adverse effects to the extant cultural resources located either
within or adjacent to the project.
21
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
A field reconnaissance survey was conducted along the project. The purpose of this
investigation was to identify the existence of any unknown hazardous materials within the
proposed project alignment. In addition to the field survey, a file search of appropriate
environmental agencies was conducted to identify any known problem sites along the
proposed project alignment. Based on the field reconnaissance survey, there are no
anticipated UST impacts. Based on the GIS search and the field reconnaissance, no
apparent Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) or the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) sites were
identified within the project limits. Based on the GIS, no regulated or unregulated
landfills or dumpsites occur within the project limits.
LOGICAL TERMINI / INDEPENDENT UTILITY
Federal Highway Authority (FHWA) regulations [23 CFR 771.111(f)] outline three
general principals to determine project limits. The regulations state:
In order to ensure meaningful evaluation of alternatives and to avoid
commitments to transportation improvements before they are fully evaluated, the
action evaluated in each EIS or FONSI shall:
• Connect logical termini and be of sufficient length to address environmental
matters on a broad scope;
• Have independent utility or interdependent significance, i.e.; be usable and be
a reasonable expenditure even if no additional transportation improvements
in the area are made; and,
• Not restrict consideration of alternatives for other reasonably foreseeable
transportation improvements.
The project's termini and other elements meet the FHWA's criteria for logical termini.
The project would provide system linkage between northeastern North Carolina and
Interstate 95, support economic development in Hertford and surrounding counties, and
ensure future safety along project limits.
The project is of sufficient length (8.3 miles) to address environmental matters on a broad
scope. The potential for segmentation was avoided during the planning for this project by
evaluating environmental impacts for the entire length of the proposed project.
The project would have independent utility, even if no additional transportation
improvements were made in the area. The proposed project would not restrict
consideration of alternatives for other reasonably foreseeable transportation
improvements in the area.
22
Enclosed you will find a completed ENG Form 4345 and mailing labels. This submittal
is in accordance with Step 4 of the guidelines for integrating project review under the
National Environmental Policy Act and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. This letter,
along with the previously distributed EA, should provide sufficient information for the
issuance of a Public Notice for the project. The public hearing is scheduled for July 19,
2007.
If you have any questions, or need additional information, please contact Charles R. Cox,
P.E. at [phone] extension 301.
Sincerely,
?d?Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis
CC: Mr. Scott McLendon, USACE, Wilmington
Mr. David Wainwright, NCDWQ (7 copies)
Mr. Travis Wilson, NCWRC
Mr. Chris Militscher, USEPA
Mr. Gary Jordan, USFWS
Mr. Clarence W. Coleman, P.E., FHWA
Mr. Jay Bennett, P.E., Roadway Design
Mr. Phil Harris, P.E., Natural Environment Unit
Mr. Carl Goode, Human Environment Unit
Mr. Majed Al-Ghandour, P.E., Programming and TIP
Mr. Art McMillian, P.E., Highway Design
Mr. David Chang, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr. Greg Perfetti, P.E., Structure Design
Mr. Mark Staley, Roadside Environmental
Mr. Anthony W. Roper, P.E., Division 1 Engineer
Mr. Clay Willis, DEO Division 1
23
APPLICATION FOR DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PERMIT I OMB APPROVAL NO. 0710-003
(33 CFR 325) Expires December 31, 2004
Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 10 hours per response, although the majority of applications should
require 5 hours or less. This includes the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed,
and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of
information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Service Directorate of Information
Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302; and to the Office of Management and Budget,
Paperwork Reduction Project (0710-0003), Washington, DC 20503. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no
person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number.
Please DO NOT RETURN your form to either of those addresses. Completed applications must be submitted to the District Engineer having jurisdiction
over the location of the proposed activity.
PRIVACY ACT STATEMENT
Authority: Rivers and Harbors Act, Section 10, 33 USC 403: Clean Water Act, Section 404, 33 USC 1344; Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries
Act, 33 USC 1413, Section 103. Principal Purpose: Information provided on this form will be used in evaluating the application for a permit. Routine
Uses: This information may be shared with the Department of Justice and other federal, state, and local government agencies. Submission of
requested information is voluntary, however, if information is not provided the permit application cannot be evaluated nor can a permit be issued.
One set of original drawings or good reproducible copies which show the location and character of the proposed activity must be attached to this
application (see sample drawings and instructions) and be submitted to the District Engineer having jurisdiction over the location of the proposed
activitv. An application that is not completed in full will be returned.
ITEMS 1 THRU 4 TO BE /LLED BY THE CORPS
1. APPLICATION NO. 2. FIELD OFFICE CODE 3. DATE RECEIVED 4. DATE APPLICATION COMPLETED
ITEMS BELOW TO BE F LLED BYAPPLICANT
5. APPLICANT'S NAME 8. AUTHORIZED AGENT'S NAME AND TITLE (an agent is not required)
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Project Development & Environmental Analysis
6. APPLICANT'S ADDRESS 9. AGENT'S ADDRESS
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1548
7. APPLICANT'S PHONE NOS. W/AREA CODE 10. AGENT'S PHONE NOS. W/AREA CODE
a. Residence a. Residence
b. Business 919-733-3141 b. Business
it. STATEMENT OF AUTHORIZATION
I hereby authorize, to act in my behalf as my agent in the processing of this application and to furnish, upon
request, supplemental information in support of this permit application.
APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE DATE
NAME, LOCATION, AND DESCRIPTION OR PROJECT OR ACTIVITY
12. PROJECT NAME OR TITLE (see instructions
US 158 Widening from Murfreesboro Bypass to US 13 West of Winton
13. NAME OF WATERBODY, IF KNOWN (if applicable) I 14. PROJECT STREET ADDRESS (if applicable)
Meherrin River Basin
15. LOCATION OF PROJECT I
Hertford County NC
COUNTY STATE
16. OTHER LOCATION DESCRIPTIONS, IF KNOWN (see instructions) Section, Township, Range, Lat/Lon, and/or Accessors•s Parcel Number, for example.
17. DIRECTIONS TO THE SITE
Please see attached vicinity map and cover letter.
18. Nature of Activity (Description of project, include ail features)
Widen the existing US 158 to four 12-foot travel lanes, paved shoulders, and a 46-foot wide grassy median. The existing facility will
have partial control access and full control access on new location.
ENG FORM 4345, Jul 97 EDITION OF FEB 94 IS OBSOLETE (Proponent: CECW-OR)
19. Project Purpose (Describe the reason or purpose of the project, see instructions) The purpose of this project is to provide system linkage, specifically
between northeastern North Carolina and Interstate 95 ; Support economic development in Hertford and surrounding counties; and
ensure future safety along the project limits on US 158 in Hertford County.
USE BLOCKS 20-221F DREDGED AND/OR FILL MATERIAL IS TO BE DISCHARGED
20. Reason(s) for Discharge
The Widening of US 158 will result in roadway fill in wetlands.
21. Type(s) of Material Being Discharged and the Amount of Each Type in Cubic Yards
Fill from roadway.
22. Surface Area in Acres of Wetlands or Other Waters Filled (see instructions)
See Merger Permit Application Letter
23. Is Any Portion of the Work Already Complete? Yes - No X IF YES, DESCRIBE THE COMPLETED WORK
24. Addresses of Adjoining Property Owners, Lessees, Etc., Whose Property Adjoins the Waterbody (If more than can be entered here, please attach a supplemental list).
25. . List of Other Certifications or Approvals/Denials Received from other Federal, State, or Local Agencies for Work Described in This Application.
AGENCY TYPE APPROVAL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER DATE APPLIED DATE APPROVED DATE DENIED
Would include but is not restricted to zoning, building, and flood plain permits
26. Application is hereby made for a permit or permits to authorize the work described in this application. I certify that the information in this application is
complete and accurate. I further certify that I possess the authority to undertake the work described herein or am acting as the duly authorized agent
of the applicant.
/q OF,
DATE SIGNATURE OF AGENT DATE
The a do must be signed by the person who desires to undertake the proposed activity (applicant) or it may be signed by a duly authorized
agent i e tement in block 11 has been filled out and signed.
18 U.S.C. Section 1001 provides that: Whoever, in any manner within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States knowingly
and willfully falsifies, conceals, or covers up any trick, scheme, or disguises a material fact or makes any false, fictitious or fraudulent statements or
representations or makes or uses any false writing or document knowing same to contain any false, fictitious or fraudulent statements or entry, shall
be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than five years or both.
ENG FORM 4345, Jul 97 EDITION OF FEB 94 IS OBSOLETE (Proponent: CECW-OR)

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ,9", 19
MICHAEL F. EASLEY LYNDO TIPPETT
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
June 12, 2007
Mr. Bill Biddlecome, Transportation Project Manager
Department of the Army; Corps of Engineers
Washington Regulatory Field Office
Post Office Box 1000
Washington, North Carolina 27889-1000
Dear Mr. Biddlecome:
SUBJECT: SECTION 404 - N.E.P.A MERGER PROCESS Application for a
Department of the Army (DOA) Permit pursuant to Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act TO DISCHARGE DREDGED OR FILL MATERIAL
INTO WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES TO CONSTRUCT the
proposed US 158 widening from Murfreesboro Bypass to US 13 West of
Winton, Hertford County. WBS No. 35489.1.1, T.I.P. No. R-2583
The following application, including separate attachments for (1) ENG Form 4345 and
(2) mailing list (labels) is submitted for your consideration. As you are aware, this
project was selected for treatment under the new "merger" process. At this juncture, the
Regulatory Division has provided concurrence with Purpose and Need, with the selection
of Detailed Study Alternatives and with the bridge locations and lengths. An
Environmental Assessment (EA) was prepared and signed on April 27, 2006. The
document was circulated on May 26, 2006. A copy is attached.
Please issue your public notice at the earliest opportunity so that we can jointly proceed
toward selecting the LEDPA (least environmentally damaging, practicable alternative
which meets the purpose and need of the project) following analysis of public input.
Once the LEDPA is selected and approved, efforts will be undertaken to further minimize
impacts to wetlands and riparian buffers in the LEDPA corridor and to propose suitable
compensatory mitigation to offset unavoidable impacts.
The following information is a summary of relevant project details and is being provided
to assist in the Section 404 regulatory review of the project. Please note that more
detailed information is available in the EA.
MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: [phone] LOCATION:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FAX: [phone] TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER WEBSITE. WWW.DOH.DOT.STATE.NC.US RALEIGH NC
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548
INTRODUCTION
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to widen US 158
from Murfreesboro Bypass to US 13 west of Winton in Hertford County. Figure 1 (refer
to the EA) is a vicinity map, and Figure 3 (refer to the EA) shows water resources and a
map of the detailed study alternatives.
The proposed US 158 widening is approximately 8.3 miles in length (depending upon
alternative). There will be a four-lane divided facility, consisting of four 12-foot travel
lanes, paved shoulders, and a 46-foot wide grassy median. The existing facility will have
partial control access and full control access on new location. The proposed right-of-way
is approximately 250 feet for all build alternatives. The proposed facility has a design
speed of 60 miles per hour (mph).
NEPA/404 MERGER PROCESS DOCUMENTATION
Although this is a state-funded action that is subject to North Carolina (or State)
Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) requirements, the proposed project is being developed
through the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)/404 Merger Process to ensure
systematic evaluation of the project plus avoidance and minimization of all potential
impacts. Concurrence Point 1 (Purpose & Need) was signed by Merger Team members
on January 15, 2003. Concurrent Point 2 (Alternatives for Detailed Study) was signed on
May 19, 2005. It was agreed upon by the Merger Team that Concurrence Point 2a
(Bridging and Alignment Review) would be combined with Concurrence Point 3
(LEDPA) because there are only two potential bridge sites to discuss. Copies of the
above forms are attached.
PURPOSE AND NEED
Project Need
Within northeastern North Carolina, only two counties- Northampton and Halifax- are
directly served by I-95. Improved regional mobility by widening US 158 is anticipated to
help Hertford County, as well as the northeastern region of NC, attract industry. The
Hertford County Economic Development Commission has stated that most companies are
looking for access to I-95 and I-85. Several major employers, including the WCC Rivers
Correctional Institution and Nucor Steel, have already located to the area, and truck traffic
associated with both facilities utilizes US 158. Expansion of US 158 to a multi-lane
facility is needed to enhance connectivity to I-95 as well as to other regional intrastate
highways, thereby increasing regional mobility and improving strategic highway system
linkages.
The total crash rate on US 158 within the project study area is 137 accidents per 100
million vehicular miles traveled (mvm). Although this crash rate is less than the statewide
average for similar two-lane rural US routes (Table 1), the statewide average crash rates
for four-lane rural routes with access control show a trend of decreasing accidents over
those of two-lane rural US routes. The fatal crash rate for the project study area is 2.08
accidents per 100 mvm, higher than the statewide average; however, this accident total
represents only 1 fatality during the study period.
US 158 has been designated by the North Carolina Board of Transportation as a Strategic
Highway Corridor (Corridor #37). This corridor connects the Winston-Salem, Henderson,
Roanoke Rapids, Elizabeth City, and Kitty Hawk/ Kill Devil Hills/ Nags Head areas, a
length of approximately 200 miles. The US 158 corridor is ultimately envisioned as a
combination of a Freeway, Expressway, and Boulevard facility. The corridor was
included in the Strategic Highway Corridor program for several reasons, including its
connection between multiple activity centers and its function as a major hurricane
evacuation route.
Table 1: Accident Rates for Project Study Area, August 1997- July 2002
Total Crash Rate Fatal Crash Rate
(ACC/100MV11i) (ACC/100MVM)
US 158 Within Stud Area 137.08 2.08*
Statewide Average Two-lane Rural US
Routes (1998-2001) 167.73 2.01
Statewide Average Four-lane Rural US- No
Control of Access (1998-2001) 137.85 1.29
Statewide Average Four-lane Rural US-
Partial Control of Access (1998-2001) 75.68 1.09
Statewide Average Four-lane Rural US-
Full Control of Access (1998-2001) 63.50 0.72
* Note- This rate represents 1 fatality during the 5-year study period.
Project Purpose
The purpose of the project is to:
• Provide system linkage, specifically between northeastern North Carolina and
Interstate 95
• Support economic development in Hertford and surrounding counties
• Ensure future safety along the project limits on US 158 in Hertford County
3
ALTERNATIVES
No-Build, Mass Transit Alternatives
1. No-Build Alternative
The No-Build Alternative would forego any improvements to US 158 with the exception
of routine maintenance. No new segment would be constructed, and no roadway or
intersection improvements would be performed. The No-Build Alternative would avoid
any adverse environmental impacts, in that no wetlands, streams, historic properties, or
other cultural and natural resources would be directly impacted. However, this alternative
would not meet the stated purpose of the project, as it would not support economic
development or ensure future safety along this section of US 158.
The No-Build Alternative was eliminated from consideration because it does not meet the
transportation needs of the region or the objectives of the project. However, the No-Build
Alternative does provide a basis for comparing the adverse impacts and benefits of the
design options.
2. Transportation System Management Alternatives
Transportation Systems Management (TSM) improvements involve increasing the
available capacity of the facility within the existing right-of-way with minimum capital
expenditures and without reconstructing the facility. Items such as the addition of turn
lanes, striping, signing, signalization, and minor realignments are examples of TSM
physical improvements. Traffic law enforcement, speed restrictions, access control, and
signal timing changes are examples of TSM operational improvements. These types of
improvements were considered, and some elements, such as access control measures, will
be incorporated into the recommendations, but TSM improvements alone would not meet
the-stated purpose of the project. Therefore, the TSM Alternative was not considered a
reasonable and feasible alternative and was eliminated from further consideration.
3. Mass Transit Alternatives
There is no existing no-cost mass transit in Hertford County due to lack of demand, low-
density development, and low population density. The only form of mass transit in the
area is the Choanoke Public Transportation Authority (CPTA), which provides
subscription and demand-responsive transportation in Northampton, Halifax, Bertie, and
Hertford Counties; the CPTA is based in Northampton County. The study area is
primarily rural, with the town of Murfreesboro located west of the project limits.
Additionally, US 158 carries a large proportion of through traffic with relatively high
truck percentages, which is not conducive to local mass transit. Based on these factors,
the Mass Transit Alternative was eliminated from consideration, as it would not
effectively address the purpose and need for the proposed project.
4
Detailed Study Alternatives
Three main construction alternatives are currently proposed (refer to Figures 5 and 7 in
the EA). One alternative (Alternative A) proposes to widen the roadway entirely on
existing location, while two alternatives (Alternatives B and C) propose to widen the
majority of US 158 on existing location with a short new location bypass in the vicinity
of Mt. Tabor Baptist Church. For each of the three construction alternatives, an
additional service road option is under consideration. The Mapleton Option, (referred to
as A2, B2, and C2 in the table) proposes to shift US 158 farther south in Mapleton than
what is proposed in Alternatives A, B, and C and providing access to residences on the
north side by utilizing existing roadway as a service road. This Mapleton option is
designed to reduce the number of residential relocations in the vicinity of Mapleton Road
(SR 1304).
Partial access control will be maintained for any of the six construction alternatives.
Existing driveways exiting onto US 158 will be maintained; however, no new driveways
will be allowed on any new location section (Alternatives 13, B2, C and C2). Existing
stop-sign controlled intersections will be modified to include directional crossovers and
offset left-turns (refer to Figure 6 in the EA). The 4-foot outside paved shoulder will
accommodate any bicycle traffic. The typical section design is consistent with the
Strategic Highway Corridor vision for an Expressway design within the project limits.
While the Strategic Highway Corridor vision includes an interchange at the US 158/ US
13 intersection, an interchange is not included within the scope of this project. Any
interchange at this location will be studied as part of TIP Project R-2507A.
a) Alternative A: Widen on Existing
This alternative would widen the roadway entirely along its existing location. New
lanes would be added south of the existing roadway between the Murfreesboro
.Bypass to Cool Spring Road; east of Cool Spring Road, the new lanes would be north
of the existing roadway. The alternative includes the construction of a new, two-lane
bridge over Potecasi Creek north of the existing structure. In addition, the existing
bridge would also be replaced.
b) Alternative A2: Widen on Existing including Mapleton Service Road.
This alternative is the same as Alternative A except for the addition of the service
road option that would shift US 158 further south in Mapleton and utilize the existing
roadway as a service road.
c) Alternative B: Widen on Existing with Northern Bypass
This alternative would widen US 158 on existing location as described in Alternative
A, with the exception of a new location section north of the Mt. Tabor Church Road
(SR 1176) intersection. The new location section would serve to straighten the
existing curve as well as to avoid impacts to the nearby Mt. Tabor Baptist Church
property. This alternative would also include a new crossing of Potecasi Creek in the
5
form of a two-lane bridge to be located north of the existing crossing. The existing
Potecasi Creek bridge would also be replaced.
d) . Alternative B2: Widen on Existing with Northern Bypass and Mapleton Service
Road.
This alternative is the same as Alternative B except for the addition of the service
road option that would shift US 158 further south in Mapleton and utilize the existing
roadway as a service road.
e) Alternative C: Widen on Existing with Southern Bypass
This alternative would widen US 158 mostly on existing location as described in
Alternative A, with the exception of a new location section south of Mt. Tabor
Church Road (SR 1176). The new location section would both straighten the existing
curve as well as avoid impacts to the historic church property. This alternative would
include the construction of two new two-lane bridges over Potecasi Creek, both to be
located south of the existing crossing. If this alternative is chosen, the existing
Potecasi Creek bridge would be removed as potential wetland mitigation.
f) Alternative C2: Widen on Existing with Southern Bypass and Mapleton Service
Road.
This alternative is the same as Alternative C except for the addition of the service
road option that would shift US 158 further south in Mapleton and utilize the existing
roadway as a service road.
COST ESTIMATES AND SCHEDULE
Preliminary cost estimates for the Detailed Study Alternatives are presented in Table 2
below. Alternatives A2, B2 and C2 include the Mapleton Service Road option. The
costs include right-of-way and construction costs, but do not account for any wetland or
stream mitigation costs.
The project is included in the approved 2007-2013 State Transportation Improvement
Program (STIP) (TIP Project No. R-2583) with right-of-way acquisition scheduled to
begin in state fiscal year (SFY) 2010 and construction scheduled to begin in SFY 2012.
The total estimated cost included in the STEP is $35,700,000.
6
Table 2: Preliminary Cost Estimates
Alternative Right-of-Way Construction Total Cost
A $8,710,500 $27,900,000 $36,610,500
A2* $6,948,000 $31,700,000 $38,648,000
B $8,548,000 $28,900,000 $37,448,000
B2* $6,785,500 $32,700,000 $39,485,500
C $8,397,500 $30,100,000 $38,497,500
C2* $6,635,000 $33,900,000 $40,535,000
*Mapleton Service Road Option
WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES
Streams
This section contains information concerning surface water resources likely to be affected
by the proposed project. Water resource assessments include the physical characteristics,
best usage standards, and water quality aspects of the water resources, along with their
relationship to major regional drainage systems. Probable impacts to surface water
resources are also discussed, as are means to minimize potential impacts.
a) Best Usage Classification
Water resources within the study area are located in the Chowan River Basin
(USGS Hydrologic Unit 03010204, NCDWQ Subbasin 03-01-02). Several water
resources are present in the study area. Two of these streams, Potecasi Creek and Mill
Branch, are named. These water resources also include unnamed perennial and
intermittent tributaries of Potecasi Creek and an intermittent tributary to Mill Branch.
Two ponds are also present within the study area.
Potecasi Creek, a fourth order stream, flows north into the Meherrin River. Its
drainage area is approximately 238 square miles and includes perennial and
intermittent streams within the study area.
Mill Branch, a first order stream, flows into Potecasi Creek north of the study area. Its
drainage area is approximately 5.7 square miles and includes on intermittent stream
within the study area.
Streams have been assigned a best usage classification by the NCDWQ that reflects
water quality conditions and potential resource usage. Unclassified tributaries carry
the same best usage classification as the classified stream to which they are tributary.
The classification for Potecasi Creek (NCDWQ Index No. 25-4-8, 09/06/79) is Class
C, Nutrient Sensitive Waters (NSW) from its source to Meherrin River. Mill Branch
(NCDWQ Index No. 25-4-8-11, 09-05-79) is also assigned Class C, NSW from its
source to Potecasi Creek (NCDENR 2003a). Class C waters are protected for
secondary recreation, fishing, wildlife, fish, and aquatic life propagation and survival,
agriculture, and other uses suitable for Class C. Secondary recreation includes those
7
activities performed in an infrequent, unorganized, or incidental manner. NSW is a
supplemental classification intended for waters needing additional nutrient
management due to excessive growth of microscopic or macroscopic vegetation.. In
general, management strategies for point and non-point source pollution control
require control of nutrients such that excessive growths of vegetation are reduced or
prevented and there is no increase in nutrients over target levels. Management
strategies are site-specific. The entire subbasin is classified as NSW (NCDENR
2002a). Within the Project Vicinity, no High Quality Waters (HQW) are present.
HQW include Outstanding Resource Waters and waters protected for public drinking
water supply (NCDENR 2003a).
The county is under the jurisdiction of the North Carolina Division of Coastal
Management (NCDCM); however, no Areas of Environmental Concern, as defined by
the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA), are present within the study area. In
addition, the study area is within the Chowan River basin, which currently does not
have riparian buffer protection rules.
b) Physical Characteristics of Surface Waters
Potecasi Creek at US 158 has a channel width of approximately 75 feet and a water
depth greater than 4 feet. At the bridge, the stream is constricted to approximately 50
feet wide. Bank heights are approximately 6 feet from the edge of water.
Potecasi Creek has a substrate composed of 15 percent sand, 45 percent silt, and 45
percent clay. Potecasi Creek exhibits high sinuosity. The stream runs on either side of
US 158 and makes an oxbow bend as it passes under the bridge. Where the stream
parallels US 158, the banks adjacent to the road are very steep; however, there is a
riparian buffer. On the north side of US 1-58, a power line ROW interrupts the buffer.
Mill Branch is an extremely braided system at US 158. Currently, there are four
culverts connecting the system under US 158. At the westernmost culvert, on the
south side of US 158, Mill Branch has an average channel width of 4 feet (1.22 m)
and a water depth ranging from 2 to 4 feet (0.6 to 1.2 m). The stream channel is more
defined on the south side of the westernmost culvert and on the north side of the
easternmost culvert. The substrate in Mill Branch is composed of 10 percent sand, 50
percent clay, and 40 percent silt.
Several intermittent and perennial tributaries are included within the study area.
Table 3 presents all streams within the study area and their perennial or intermittent
Two ponds are present within the western half of the study area. One pond is narrow
with steep, wooded side slopes. The other pond occurs within the scrub-shrub
wetland.
c) Water Quality
This section describes the quality of water resources within and downstream of the
study area. Water quality assessments are made based on published resource
information and existing general watershed characteristics. Both point and non-point
sources of pollution are evaluated, such as potential sediment loads and toxin
concentrations of these waters. These data provide insight into the potential for water
resources within the study area to meet human needs and provide habitat for aquatic
organisms.
Benthic Macro invertebrate Ambient Network
The Basinwide Monitoring Program (Program), managed by the NCDWQ, is part of
an ongoing ambient water quality monitoring program that addresses long-term trends
in water quality. The Program monitors ambient water quality by sampling at fixed
sites for selected benthic macroinvertebrate organisms, which are sensitive to water.
quality conditions, as part of the Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network
(BMAN). Samples are evaluated on the number of taxa present of intolerant groups
[Ephemoptera, Plecoptera, Trichoptera (EPT)], and a taxa richness value (EPT S) is
calculated. A biotic index value is also calculated for the sample that summarizes
tolerance data for all species in each collection. The two rankings are given equal
weight in final site classification. The biotic index and taxa richness values primarily
reflect the effects of chemical pollution and are a poor measure of the effects of
physical pollutants, such as sediment. Although there is a benthic monitoring station
on Potecasi Creek, this site was sampled but not rated in 2000. During the sampling
.visit, habitat degradation and "severe stress" were noted at Potecasi Creek. Only the
Meherrin River was rated based on benthic data, and it received a rating of Good
(NCDENR 2002a).
Water Quality Monitoring Data
The Chowan River Basinwide Water Quality Plan does not designate support ratings
for Potecasi Creek or Mill Branch (NCDENR 2002a). In 1997, Potecasi Creek was
deemed to be impaired, as it had Fair water quality, which was thought to be a result
of agricultural runoff and channelization. However, it was noted that the low pH and
low dissolved oxygen values could have been due to natural swamp conditions. While
Potecasi Creek is currently not rated, it is one of two streams that DWQ has
recommended undergo a Swamp Waters Study Plan. The details of a Swamp Waters
Study Plan are currently in development by NCDWQ and not readily available at this
time. In addition, Potecasi Creek is listed on the most recent Clean Water Act Section
303(d) list as impaired waters (NCDENR 2002b). It is listed under Category 5, which
requires Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL).
10
Point and Non-point Source Dischargers
There are no NPDES dischargers within the subbasin (NCDENR 2003b). Land use
within the subbasin which can contribute to non-point source pollution, is
approximately 65 percent forested, 1 percent pasture, 32 percent agriculture, and less
than 1 percent urban (NCDENR 2002a). Agriculture is the primary land use;
therefore, it is the primary threat for non-point source pollution within the study area.
Large agricultural areas throughout the study area may introduce nutrients, herbicides,
or pesticides if used for crop management. In several areas, agricultural drainage
ditches drain directly into the headwater wetlands and intermittent streams, Erosion
from these fields also contributes sediment to the water resources. Current timber
activity within the study area has the potential to introduce additional sediment load to
the streams. In addition, there are several poultry farms within the project vicinity. To
a smaller extent, residential runoff through the roadside drainage ditches or lawn
management may also introduce previously mentioned pollutants.
d) Impacts
Impacts to water resources in the study area are likely to result from activities
associated with project construction. Table 4 shows the estimated impacts to streams
for each alternative.
Individual stream crossing impacts may include clearing and grubbing on stream
banks and in wetlands, riparian canopy removal, in-stream construction, fertilizers
and pesticides used in revegetation, and pavement installation. The following impacts
to surface water resources are likely to result from the aforementioned construction
activities:
• Increased sedimentation and siltation downstream of the construction zone
and increased erosion in the project construction area.
• Changes in light incidence and water clarity due to increased sedimentation
and vegetation removal.
• Alternation of water levels and flows due to interruptions and/or additions to
surface and ground water flow from construction.
• Changes in and destabilization of water temperature due to vegetation
removal.
• Increased nutrient loading during construction via runoff from exposed areas.
• Increased concentrations of toxic compounds in roadway runoff.
• Potential increase of toxic compound releases, such as fuel and oil, from
construction equipment and other vehicles.
• Alteration of stream discharge due to silt loading and changes in surface and
ground water drainage patterns.
11
Table 4: Stream Impacts (linear feet)
Alternative Alternative Alternative' Alternative Alternative Alterative
tream A _ A2 B B2 C C2<
UT to Meherrin
64 64 64 64 64 64
River (SS)
UT to Potecasi 181.69
Creek (SD) 119.97 181.69 119.97 181.69 119.97
UT to Potecasi

Creek (SQ) 129.20 129.20 134.75 134.75 108.81 108.81
UT to Potecasi
166.43 166.43 NA NA 124.36 124.36
Creek (SC)
UT to Potecasi

Creek (SJ) 76.92 76.92 256.71 256.71 46.17 46.17
UT to Potecasi

Creek (SL) NA NA 255.18 255.18 NA. NA
UT to Potecasi

Creek (SN) NA NA 15.29 15.29 NA NA
UT to Potecasi

Creek (SF) 33.94 33.94 NA NA NA NA
Potecasi Creek

(SB) 247.12 247.12 247.12 247.12 329.50 329.50
Mill Branch
79.56 79.56 79.56 79.56 79.56 79.56
(SA)
UT to Potecasi

Creek (SCC) NA NA NA NA 719.16 719.16
Total Stream 917.14 978.86 1172.58 1234.30 1591.53 1653.25
Impacts
In order to minimize potential impacts to water resources in the project vicinity,
NCDOT's Best Management Practices (BMPs) for Construction and Maintenance
Activities should be strictly enforced during the construction phase of the project.
Limiting in-stream activities and revegetating stream banks immediately following
completion of the grading can further reduce impacts. Seed mixes used in
revegetating stream banks should not include tall fescue. Use of turbidity curtains for
this project was reviewed and investigated. Given the dimensions for the streams in
the study area and general design considerations for turbidity curtains, in many
instances, the specified floatation components for turbidity curtains are larger than the
depth of the stream and would most likely result in additional expense with minimal
added benefit. However, Potecasi Creek is a large enough system, featuring a width of
75 feet and maintaining a sufficient water depth to support the use of a turbidity
curtain. The use of a turbidity curtain in Potecasi Creek should be considered during
project design, as it is designated as having nutrient sensitive waters, and increased
sediment downstream could impact aquatic systems. Turbidity curtains are not
recommended for the remaining streams within the study area, as water conditions do
not meet the requirements for the installation of turbidity curtains. The majority of
other streams in the study`area are less than 4 feet in width and 3 feet in depth, where
floatation requirements would not be met.
12
Wetlands
There are seven wetland community types found within the delineated portion of the
project study area: Riparian Forest, Bottomland Hardwood Forest, Scrub-Shrub,
Swamp Forest, Headwater Forest, Headwater Ditch and Pine Savanna.
Approximately 40 jurisdictional wetland sites were delineated within the project study
area. Of these 40 sites, between 21 and 24 are impacted by the proposed alternatives.
Table 5 details the wetland sites that are impacted by Alternatives A, A2, B, B2, C
and C2.
Floodplains
Hertford County is currently participating in the National Flood Insurance Regular
Program. The tributaries to Potecasi Creek and Potecasi Creek itself are in designated
flood hazard zones where detailed flood studies have not been performed. The Mill
Creek crossing is not located within a flood hazard zone. The floodplain area in the
vicinity of he stream crossings is primarily rural and undeveloped. The terrain
throughout most of the project is rolling, with streams and natural draws located such
that the project can be drained without difficulty. Existing drainage patterns will be
maintained to the extent practicable. It is not anticipated that the proposed project
should have any adverse impacts on the existing floodplain.
13
Table 5: Wetland Impacts
Alternatives
Site Wetland ID Wetland Type A A2 B B2 C C2
1 WTT Riparian Forest 0.097 0.097 0.093 0.093 0.096 0.096
3 WRR Headwater Ditch 0.004 0.004 0.005 0.005 0.004 0.004
6 WPP Swam Forest 0.411 1.325 0.391 1.325 0.414 1.325
7 WNN Headwater Ditch 0.010 0.016 0.013 0.016 0.008 0.016
8 WMM Headwater Ditch 0.015 0.023 0.019 0.023 0.014 0.023
9 WLL Riparian Forest 0.370 0.481 0.388 0.481 0.970 0.481
10 WLL Riparian Forest 0.082 0.131 0.018 0.131. 0.006 0.131
12 WHH/WGG Headwater Forest 0.094 0.094 0.780 0.780 0.069 0.069
13 WFF Headwater Forest 0.004 0.004
14 WEE Riparian Forest 0.150 0.150
15 WY Headwater Forest 0.021 0.021 0.022 0.022
16 WY Headwater Forest 0.004 0.004
17 WT Bottomland
Hardwood 0.048 0.048 0.048 0.048
18 WT Bottomland
Hardwood 0.016 0.016 0.019 0.019
20 WT Bottomland
Hardwood 0.173 0.173 0.184 0.184
21 WS Bottomland
Hardwood 0.052 0.052 0.057 0.057
23 WX Headwater Forest 0.051 0.051
27 WK Bottomland
Hardwood 0.029 0.029 0.027 0.027 0.029 0.029
30 WG Scrub-Shrub 0.030 0.030 0.028 0.028 0.030 0.030
31 WE Head Water Ditch 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007
33 WD Swam Forest 1.177 1.177 1.219 1.219 1.181 1.181
34 WD Swam Forest 0.059 0.059 0.048 0.048 0.086 0.086
35 WC Headwater Forest 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.027 0.027
36 WB Headwater Forest 0.010 0.010 0.012 0.012 0.010 0.010
37 WA Pine Savanna 0.089 0.089 0.083 0.083 0.098 0.098
38 WA Pine Savanna 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023
39 WJJ Swam Forest 0.054 0.054 0.009 0.009
40 WCC Swam Forest 0.625 0.625
41 WV300 Swam Forest 1.821 1.821
Total (Ac.) 2.900 3.988 3.663 4.810 5.578 6.142
14
MITIGATION EVALUATION
The USACE, through the CEQ, has adopted a wetland mitigation policy that embraces
the concept of "no net loss of wetlands" and sequencing. The purpose of this policy is to
restore and maintain the chemical, biological, and physical integrity of Waters of the
United States, specifically wetlands. Mitigation of wetland impacts has been defined by
the CEQ to include the following: avoiding, minimizing, rectifying, reducing (over time),
and compensating for impacts (40 CFR 1508.20). These three aspects are avoidance,
minimization, and compensation and must be considered sequentially.
Avoidance mitigation examines all appropriate and practicable possibilities of averting
impacts to Waters of the United States. According to a 1990 Memorandum of Agreement
(MOA) between the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and the USACE,
when determining "appropriate and practicable" measures to offset unavoidable impacts,
such measures should be appropriate to the scope and degree of those impacts and
practicable in terms of cost, existing technology, and logistics in light of overall project
pumoses. Complete avoidance of wetlands is not possible due to the extent of wetlands in
MITIGATION EVALUATION
The USACE, through the CEQ, has adopted a wetland mitigation policy that embraces
the concept of "no net loss of wetlands" and sequencing. The purpose of this policy is to
restore and maintain the chemical, biological, and physical integrity of Waters of the
United States, specifically wetlands. Mitigation of wetland impacts has been defined by
the CEQ to include the following: avoiding, minimizing, rectifying, reducing (over time),
and compensating for impacts (40 CFR 1508.20). These three aspects are avoidance,
minimization, and compensation and must be considered sequentially.
Avoidance mitigation examines all appropriate and practicable possibilities of averting
impacts to Waters of the United States. According to a 1990 Memorandum of Agreement
(MOA) between the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and the USACE,
when determining "appropriate and practicable" measures to offset unavoidable impacts,
such measures should be appropriate to the scope and degree of those impacts and
practicable in terms of cost, existing technology, and logistics in light of overall project
19. Project Purpose (Describe the reason or purpose of the project, see instructions) The purpose of this project is to provide system linkage, specifically
between northeastern North Carolina and Interstate 95 ; Support economic development in Hertford and surrounding counties; and
ensure future safety along the project limits on US 158, in Hertford County. ,
USE BLOCKS 20-22 IF DREDGED AND/OR FILL MATERIAL IS TO BE DISCHARGED
20. Reason(s) for Discharge
The Widening of US 158 will result in roadway fill in wetlands.
21. Type(s) of Material Being Discharged and the Amount of Each Type in Cubic Yards
Fill from roadway.
22. Surface Area in Acres of Wetlands or Other Waters Filled (see instructions)
See Merger Permit Application Letter
23. Is Any Portion of the Work Already Complete? Yes - No X IF YES, DESCRIBE THE COMPLETED WORK
24. Addresses of Adjoining Property Owners, Lessees, Etc., Whose Property Adjoins the Waterbody (If more than can be entered here, please attach a supplemental list).
25. List of Other Certifications or Approvals/Denials Received from other Federal, State, or Local Agencies for Work Described in This Application.
AGENCY TYPE APPROVAL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER DATE APPLIED DATE APPROVED DATE DENIED
Would include but is not restricted to zoning, building, and flood plain permits
26. Application is hereby made for a permit or permits to authorize the work described in this application. I certify that the information in this application is
complete and accurate. I further certify that I possess the authority to undertake the work described herein or am acting as the duly authorized agent
of the aoeiicant.
1q1-Jo ?-
DATE SIGNATURE OF AGENT DATE
The a do must be signed by the person who desires to undertake the proposed activity (applicant) or it may be signed by a duly authorized
agent i e tement in block 11 has been filled out and signed.
18 U.S.C. Section 1001 provides that: Whoever, in any manner within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States knowingly
and willfully falsifies, conceals, or covers up any trick, scheme, or disguises a material fact or makes any false, fictitious or fraudulent statements or
representations or makes or uses any false writing or document knowing same to contain any false, fictitious or fraudulent statements or entry, shall
be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than five years or both.
ENG FORM 4345, Jul 97 EDITION OF FEB 94 IS OBSOLETE (Proponent: CECW-OR)