20070529 Ver 1_Application_20070327

.~
~Jy µ~~o
d. ~-~
~ .,.,.
'~~,.,~'
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
~FTL9 ~~!~ `~ ~ r1 "
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION rRa~"~~cy
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
US Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Field Office
6508 Falls of Neuse Road, Suite 120
Raleigh, NC 27615
ATTENTION: Mr. Andy Williams
NCDOT Coordinator
Dear Sir:
LYNDO TIPPETT
SECRETARY
X70529
Subject: Application for Regional General Permit 31 and Section 401 Water Quality
Certification 3404 for the replacement of Bridge No. 45 on SR 1002 over Jordan
Creek, Alamance County. Federal Project No. BRZ-1002(11), WBS No. 33368.1.1,
State Project No. 8.2473401, T.I.P. B-4000, Division 7.
Please see the enclosed Programmatic Categorical Exclusion, Natural Resource Technical
Report, Pre-Construction Notification, Ecosystem Enhancement Program acceptance letter,
permit drawings, and design plans for the subject project. The North Carolina Department of
Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to replace Bridge No. 45 over Jordan Creek. The project
involves replacing the current bridge on its existing location. The proposed structure will be a
235 foot, 27 inch box beam bridge. The bridge will consist of three spans at 83 feet, 82 feet, and
70 feet. The bridge will provide a clear roadway width of 39-feet 10-inches and an out to out
superstructure width of 42 feet. During construction, traffic will be detoured onto existing
secondary roads.
IMPACTS TO WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES
The project is located in the Cape Fear River Basin (sub-basin 03-06-02). This area is part of
Hydrologic Cataloging Unit 03030002 of the South Atlantic-Gulf Coast Region. The section of
Jordan Creek crossed by the subject bridge has been assigned Stream Index Number 16-14-6-
(0.5) (8/3/92) by the N.C Division of Water Quality. Jordan Creek has a best usage classification
of WS-II, HQW, NSW. Jordan Creek is the only jurisdictional stream within the project area.
No designated Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW) occur within one-mile of the project area.
Jordan Creek is not listed on the 2004 List of impaired waters [Section 303(d)] for the Cape Fear
River Basin nor does it drain into any 303(d) waters within 1-mile of the project area.
MAILING ADDRESS:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
NATURAL ENVIRONMENT UNIT
1598 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699-1598
March 21, 2007
TELEPHONE: [phone] or
919-715-1335
FAX: [phone]
WEBSITE: WWW.NCDOT.ORG
LOCATION:
2728 CAPITAL BLVD. SUITE 240
RALEIGH NC 27604

f
Temporary Impacts
There will be 0.03 acre (54 linear feet) of temporary impacts to Jordan Creek resulting from the
construction of a causeway (Site 2). The causeway will be used for removal of existing Bent
Number 3.
Permanent Impacts
There will be less than 241inear feet (0.01 acre) of permanent impacts to Jordan Creek resulting
from the placement of fill in the channel (Site 3). The fill is necessary to protect the stream bank
from eroding where two standard base ditches enter the stream. Due to the topography of the
project area, it is not possible to outlet the ditches prior to entering Jordan Creek.
There will be less than 0.01 acre of permanent riverine wetland impacts resulting from
mechanized clearing in the wetland located in the southwest of the existing bridge (Site 1).
Mechanized clearing is necessary to provide access for equipment and for construction of the
bridge and the new fill slopes.
Utility Impacts
Construction of the new bridge will require the relocation of power and phone utilities. Power
lines located on the south side of the project area will be relocated south of the existing location.
A wetland, composed of emergent and forested portions, is located within this area. The lines
will cross the emergent portion. The poles will be located outside the wetland boundary. Hand
clearing will be performed, if necessary, to maintain the 50-foot utility corridor. No jurisdictional
impacts will result from the relocation of the power lines.
Phone lines located south of the bridge will be abandoned and new phone cables will be
relocated to the north side of the bridge. The lines will be relocated underground and under
Jordan Creek using directional bore. No jurisdictional impacts will result from the relocation of
the phone lines.
Moratorium
In a letter dated February 19, 2003, the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
requested a moratorium on in-stream work from April 1 to June 15 due to a diverse sunfish
population within Jordan Creek. The project site was sampled by NCDWQ biologists in
November 1993 as part of the Stream Fish Community Assessment Program. The site does
support a diverse sunfish population, however, the species identified are common and found
throughout the state; no state or federally listed species were identified. Furthermore, several of
the sunfish species identified are tolerant of reduced water quality.
NCDOT Best Management Practices and Design Standards in Sensitive Watersheds will be
implemented for this project. These protocols mandate the use of stringent erosion and sediment
control measures.
Final B-4000 Permit Application
Page2of5

Therefore, due to the lack of statutory regulations requiring this moratorium, as well as the
stringent erosion and sediment control measures, NCDOT does not believe that this moratorium
is warranted.
Bridge Demolition
Existing Bridge No. 45 is approximately 201-feet long with a deck width of 21-feet. The
superstructure is composed of a timber floor with an asphalt wearing surface on steel I-beams,
channels, and timber joist. The substructure consists of mass concrete abutments, bents, and steel
pile crutch bents. One bent is located within the water.
All components of the bridge, except the mass concrete piers, will be removed without dropping
any of their components into Waters of the United States. However, there is potential for
components of the mass concrete piers to drop into the Waters of the United States during
construction. The resulting potential temporary fill associated with the mass concrete piers is
approximately 60 cubic yards. If field conditions permit, a turbidity curtain will be used during
the removal of the bent located within the stream.
Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition and Removal and Protection of Surface
Waters will be followed.
Restoration Plan
Following construction of the bridge, all material used in the construction of the structure will be
removed. The impact area associated with the bridge is expected to recover naturally, since the
natural streambed and plant material will not be removed. NCDOT does not propose any
additional planting in this area. Class II riprap and filter fabric will be used for bank
stabilization. Pre-project elevations will be restored. NCDOT will restore stream to its pre-
project contours.
Schedule: The project calls for a letting of July 17, 2007 with a date of availability of August 28,
2007. It is expected that contractor will choose to start construction in August 2007.
Removal and Disposal Plan: Removal and Disposal Plan: The contractor will be required to submit
a reclamation plan for the removal and disposal of all material off-site at an upland location. The
contractor will use excavation equipment for removal of any earthen material. Heavy-duty
trucks, dozers, cranes, and various other pieces of mechanical equipment necessary for
construction of roadways and bridges will be used on site. The contractor will have the option of
reusing any of the materials that the engineer deems suitable in the construction of the project.
After the erosion control devices are no longer needed, all temporary materials will become
property of the contractor.
Following construction of the bridge, all temporary fills will be completely removed from
wetlands and streams. Restoring natural hydrology and native vegetation will restore wetlands..
Stream contours and vegetation will be reestablished upon the removal of the temporary
causeway. Class II riprap and filter fabric will be used for bank stabilization.
Final B-4000 Permit Application
Page 3 of 5

MITIGATION OPTIONS
Avoidance and Minimization and Compensatory Mitigation: The NCDOT is committed to
incorporating all reasonable and practicable design features to avoid and minimize jurisdictional
impacts, and to provide full compensatory mitigation of all remaining, unavoidable jurisdictional
impacts. Avoidance measures were taken during the planning and NEPA compliance stages;
minimization measures were incorporated as part of the project design.
According to the Clean Water Act (CWA) §404(b)(1) guidelines, NCDOT must avoid, minimize,
and mitigate, in sequential order, impacts to waters of the US. The following is a list of the
project's jurisdictional stream avoidance/minimization activities proposed or completed by
NCDOT:
Avoidance/Minimization
• Design Standards in Sensitive Watersheds will be used
• The new bridge will be 34 feet longer than the existing bridge, increasing the floodplain
under the bridge.
• The proposed bridge will be replaced on its existing location.
• The proposed project will completely span Jordan Creek, allowing for pre-project stream
flows to maintain the current water quality, aquatic habitat, and flow regime.
• Fill slopes will not be located within the wetlands.
• An off-site detour will be utilized during construction.
• Temporary construction impacts due to erosion and sedimentation will be minimized through
implementation of stringent erosion control schedule and use of Best Management Practices
(BMPs).
• The contractor will follow contract specifications pertaining to erosion control measures as
outlined in 23 CFR 650 Subpart B and Article 107-13 entitled "Control of Erosion, Siltation,
and Pollution" (NCDOT, Specifications for Roads and Structures).
Compensatory Mitigation:
An acceptance letter dated November 27, 2006 from the EEP is attached. NCDOT has avoided
and minimized impacts to jurisdictional resources to the greatest extent possible as described
above. Unavoidable, permanent impacts to 24 feet of jurisdictional stream will be offset by
compensatory mitigation provided by the EEP program. NCDOT is not proposing mitigation for
the less than 0.01 acre of riverine wetland impacts because the impacts are minimal.
FEDERALLY PROTECTED SPECIES
Plants and animals with federal classifications of Endangered (E), Threatened (T), Proposed
Endangered (PE), and Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under provisions of Section 7 and
Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. As January 29, 2007 the United
States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) website does not list any federally protected species
Final B-4000 Permit Application
Page 4 of 5

for Alamance County. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) documents no
occurrences of federally protected species within 1.0 miles of the project area.
REGULATORY APPROVALS
Section 404 Permit: Application is hereby made for the Department of Army Section 404
Regional General Permit 31 authorizing for the above-described activities associated with the
replacement of Bridge No. 45.
Section 401 Permit: The NCDOT will adhere to all General Water Quality Certifications (WQC)
3404. Written concurrence from the NCDWQ is required. We are providing five copies of this
application to the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division
of Water Quality, for review.
A copy of this permit application will be posted on the NCDOT website at:
http://www.ncdot.org/doh/preconstruct/pe/. If you have any questions or need additional
information, please call Erica McLamb at 715-1521.
Sincerely
~_~
Gregory Thorpe, Ph.D.
Environmental Management Director, PDEA
w/attachment
Mr. John Hennessy, NCDWQ (5 Copies)
Mr. Travis Wilson, NCWRC
Mr. Gary Jordan, USFWS
Dr. David Chang, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr. Greg Perfetti, P.E., Structure Design
Mr. Mark Staley, Roadside Environmental
Mr. J. M. Mills, P.E., Division 7 Engineer
Mr. Jerry Parker, Division 7 Environmental Officer
w/o attachment
Mr. Jay Bennett, P.E., Roadway Design
Mr. Majed Alghandour, P. E., Programming and TIP
Mr. Art McMillan, P.E., Highway Design
Mr. William Goodwin, PDEA
Mr. Scott McLendon, USACE, Wilmington
Ms. Beth Harmon, EEP
Mr. Todd Jones, NCDOT External Audit Branch
Final B-4000 Permit Application
Page 5 of 5

Office Use Only: Form Version March O5
USACE Action ID No. DWQ No. 2 0 0 7 0 5 2 9
(If any particular item is not applicable to this project, please enter "Not Applicable" or "N/A".)
I. Processing
Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project:
® Section 404 Permit ^ Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules
^ Section 10 Permit ^ Isolated Wetland Permit from DWQ
® 401 Water Quality Certification ^ Express 401 Water Quality Certification
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested: GP 31
3. If this notification is solely a courtesy copy because written approval for the 401 Certification
is not required, check here: ^
4. If payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) is proposed
for mitigation of impacts, attach the acceptance letter from NCEEP, complete section VIII,
and check here:
5. If your project is located in any of North Carolina's twenty coastal counties (listed on page
4), and the project is within a North Carolina Division of Coastal Management Area of
Environmental Concern (see the top of page 2 for further details), check here: ^
II. Applicant Information
1. Owner/Applicant Information
Name: Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Environmental Management Director
Mailing Address: 1598 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1548
Telephone Number:~919) 733-3141 Fax Number: [phone]
E-mail Address:
2. Agent/Consultant Information (A signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization letter
must be attached if the Agent has signatory authority for the owner/applicant.)
Name: N/A
Company Affiliation:
Mailing Address:
Telephone Number: Fax Number:
E-mail Address:
Page 1 of 9

III. Project Information
Attach a vicinity map clearly showing the location of the property with respect to local
landmarks such as towns, rivers, and roads. Also provide a detailed site plan showing property
boundaries and development plans in relation to surrounding properties. Both the vicinity map
and site plan must include a scale and north arrow. The specific footprints of all buildings,
impervious surfaces, or other facilities must be included. If possible, the maps and plans should
include the appropriate USGS Topographic Quad Map and NRCS Soil Survey with the property
boundaries outlined. Plan drawings, or other maps maybe included at the applicant's discretion,
so long as the property is clearly defined. For administrative and distribution purposes, the
USACE requires information to be submitted on sheets no larger than 11 by 17-inch format;
however, DWQ may accept paperwork of any size. DWQ prefers full-size construction
drawings rather than a sequential sheet version of the full-size plans. If full-size plans are
reduced to a small scale such that the final version is illegible, the applicant will be informed that
the project has been placed on hold until decipherable maps are provided.
1. Name of project: Replacement of Bridge No 45 over Jordan Creek on SR 1002
2. T.I.P. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only): B-4000
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN)
N/A
4. Location
County: Alamance Nearest Town: Burlingtton
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number):
Directions to site (include road numbers/names, landmarks, etc.): see map in permit
drawings
5. Site coordinates (For linear projects, such as a road or utility line, attach a sheet that
separately lists the coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody.)
Decimal Degrees (6 digits minimum): 36.2054 °N 79.3830 °W
6. Property size (acres): N/A
7. Name of nearest receiving body of water: Jordan Creek
8. River Basin: Cape Fear
(Note -this must be one of North Carolina's seventeen designated major river basins. The
River Basin map is available at http:/m2o.enr.state.nc.us/admin/maps/.)
9. Describe the existing conditions on the site and general land use in the vicinity of the project
at the time of this application: Land use within the project area consists of forested land,
agricultural fields, and some residential development.
Page 2 of 9

10. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
Bridge No. 45 will be replaced on existing location with a offsite detour. Heavy duty
excavation equipment will be used such as trucks, dozers, cranes and other various
equipment necessary for roadway construction.
11. Explain the purpose of the proposed work: To replace a deteriorating bride
IV. Prior Project History
If jurisdictional determinations and/or permits have been requested and/or obtained for this
project (including all prior phases of the same subdivision) in the past, please explain. Include
the USACE Action ID Number, DWQ Project Number, application date, and date permits and
certifications were issued or withdrawn. Provide photocopies of previously issued permits,
certifications or other useful information. Describe previously approved wetland, stream and
buffer impacts, along with associated mitigation (where applicable). If this is a NCDOT project,
list and describe permits issued for prior segments of the same T.I.P. project, along with
construction schedules. N/A
V. Future Project Plans
Are any future permit requests anticipated for this project? If so, describe the anticipated work,
and provide justification for the exclusion of this work from the current application.
N/A
VI. Proposed Impacts to Waters of the United States/Waters of the State
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
wetlands, open water, and stream channels associated with the project. Each impact must be
listed separately in the tables below (e.g., culvert installation should be listed separately from
riprap dissipater pads). Be sure to indicate if an impact is temporary. All proposed impacts,
pernianent and temporary, must be listed, and must be labeled and clearly identifiable on an
accompanying site plan. All wetlands and waters, and all streams (intermittent and perennial)
should be shown on a delineation map, whether or not impacts are proposed to these systems.
Wetland and stream evaluation and delineation forms should be included as appropriate.
Photographs may be included at the applicant's discretion. If this proposed impact is strictly for
wetland or stream mitigation, list and describe the impact in Section VIII below. If additional
space is needed for listing or description, please attach a separate sheet.
Page 3 of 9

1. Provide a written description of the proposed impacts: Tem~orary stream impacts resulting
for construction of a causewayfor bride demolition• permanent fill in stream; mechanized
clearing in wetlands for construction access (Refer to cover letter for details)
2. Individually list wetland impacts. Types of impacts include, but are not limited to
mechanized clearing, grading, fill, excavation, flooding, ditching/drainage, etc. For dams,
separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding.
Wetland Impact

Site Number
(indicate on map)

Type of Impact Type of Wetland

(e.g., forested, mazsh,
herbaceous, bog, etc.) Located within
100-yeaz
Floodplain

( es/no) Distance to
Nearest
Stream

(lineaz feet) Area of
Impact
(acres)
1 Mechanized clearing Emergent Yes 50 <0.01

Total Wetland Impact (acres) <0.01
3. List the total acreage (estimated) of all existing wetlands on the property: 1.05 acres
4. Individually list all intermittent and perennial stream impacts. Be sure to identify temporary
impacts. Stream impacts include, but are not limited to placement of fill or culverts, dam
construction, flooding, relocation, stabilization activities (e.g., cement walls, rip-rap, crib
walls, gabions, etc.), excavation, ditching/straightening, etc. If stream relocation is proposed,
plans and profiles showing the linear footprint for both the original and relocated streams
must be included. To calculate acreage, multiuly length X width, then divide by 43,560.
Stream Impact
Number
(indicate on ma
Stream Name
Type of Impact Perennial or
~
Intermittent. Average
Stream Width
Before Im act Impact
Length
linear feet Area of
Impact
(acres
2 Jordan Creek Temporary fill Perennial 22 54 0.03
3 Jordan Creek Permanent Fill Perennial 22 24 <0.01

Total Stream Impact (by length and acreage) 78 0.03
Page 4 of 9

5. Individually list all open water impacts (including lakes, ponds, estuaries, sounds, Atlantic
Ocean and any other water of the U.S.). Open water impacts include, but are not limited to
fill, excavation, dyed 'n ,flooding, drama e, bulkheads, etc.
Open Water Impact

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

Type of Impact Type of Waterbody

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

Impact
(acres)
NA

Total Open Water Impact (acres)
6. List the cumulative impact to all Waters of the U.S. resulting from the project:
Stream Impact (acres): 0.03
Wetland Impact (acres): <0.01
Open Water Impact (acres): 0
Total Impact to Waters of the U.S. (acres) 0.04
Total Stream Ixn act (linear feet): 78
7. Isolated Waters
Do any isolated waters exist on the property? ^ Yes ®No
Describe all impacts to isolated waters, and include the type of water (wetland or stream) and
the size of the proposed impact (acres or linear feet). Please note that this section only
applies to waters that have specifically been determined to be isolated by the USACE.
8. Pond Creation
If construction of a pond is proposed, associated wetland and stream impacts should be
included above in the wetland and stream impact sections. Also, the proposed pond should
be described here and illustrated on any maps included with this application.
Pond to be created in (check all that apply): ^ uplands ^ stream ^ wetlands
Describe the method of construction (e.g., dam embankment, excavation, installation of
draw-down valve or spillway, etc.):
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic,
local stormwater requirement, etc.):
Current land use in the vicinity of the pond:
trout pond,
Size of watershed draining to pond: Expected pond surface area:
Page 5 of 9

VII. Impact Justification (Avoidance and Minimization)
Specifically describe measures taken to avoid the proposed impacts. It may be useful to provide
information related to site constraints such as topography, building ordinances, accessibility, and
financial viability of the project. The applicant may attach drawings of alternative, lower-impact
site layouts, and explain why these design options were not feasible. Also discuss how impacts
were minimized once the desired site plan was developed. If applicable, discuss construction
techniques to be followed during construction to reduce impacts. Please refer to the attached
cover letter
VIII. Mitigation
DWQ - In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0500, mitigation may be required by the NC
Division of Water Quality for projects involving greater than or equal to one acre of impacts to
freshwater wetlands or greater than or equal to 150 linear feet of total impacts to perennial
streams.
USAGE - In accordance with the Final Notice of Issuance and Modification of Nationwide
Permits, published in the Federal Register on January 15, 2002, mitigation will be required when
necessary to ensure that adverse effects to the aquatic environment are minimal. Factors
including size and type of proposed impact and function and relative value of the impacted
aquatic resource will be considered in determining acceptability of appropriate and practicable
mitigation as proposed. Examples of mitigation that may be appropriate and practicable include,
but are not limited to: reducing the size of the project; establishing and maintaining wetland
and/or upland vegetated buffers to protect open waters such as streams; and replacing losses of
aquatic resource functions and values by creating, restoring, enhancing, or preserving similar
functions and values, preferable in the same watershed.
If mitigation is required for this project, a copy of the mitigation plan must be attached in order
for USAGE or DWQ to consider the application complete for processing. Any application
lacking a required mitigation plan or NCEEP concurrence shall be placed on hold as incomplete.
An applicant may also choose to review the current guidelines for stream restoration in DWQ's
Draft Technical Guide for Stream Work in North Carolina, available at
ht~://h2o. enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/strmgide.html.
Page 6 of 9

1. Provide a brief description of the proposed mitigation plan. The description should provide
as much information as possible, including, but not limited to: site location (attach directions
and/or map, if offsite), affected stream and river basin, type and amount (acreage/linear feet)
of mitigation proposed (restoration, enhancement, creation, or preservation), a plan view,
preservation mechanism (e.g., deed restrictions, conservation easement, etc.), and a
description of the current site conditions and proposed method of construction. Please attach
a separate sheet if more space is needed.
Mitigation will be conducted through the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement
Program
2. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (NCEEP). Please note it is the applicant's responsibility to contact the NCEEP at
[phone] to determine availability, and written approval from the NCEEP indicating
that they are will to accept payment for the mitigation must be attached to this form. For
additional information regarding the application process for the NCEEP, check the NCEEP
website at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/wrp/index.htm. If use of the NCEEP is proposed, please
check the appropriate box on page five and provide the following information:
Amount of stream mitigation requested (linear feet): 24
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet: 0
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): .0
Amount ofNon-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): 0
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres): 0
IX. Environmental Documentation (required by DWQ)
1. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the use of
public (federal/state) land? Yes ® No ^
2. If yes, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the
requirements of the National or North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
Note: If you are not sure whether a NEPA/SEPA document is required, call the SEPA
coordinator at [phone] to review current thresholds for environmental documentation.
Yes ® No ^
3. If yes, has the document review been finalized by the State Clearinghouse? If so, please
attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval letter. Yes ® No ^
Page 7 of 9

X. Proposed Impacts on Riparian and Watershed Buffers (required by DWQ)
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
required state and local buffers associated with the project. The applicant must also provide
justification for these impacts in Section VII above. All proposed impacts must be listed herein,
and must be clearly identifiable on the accompanying site plan. All buffers must be shown on a
map, whether or not impacts are proposed to the buffers. Correspondence from the DWQ
Regional Office may be included as appropriate. Photographs may also be included at the
applicant's discretion.
1. Will the project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233
(Meuse), 15A NCAC 2B .0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 02B .0243 (Catawba) 15A NCAC
2B .0250 (Randleman Rules and Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please
identify )? Yes ^ No
2. If "yes", identify the square feet and acreage of impact to each zone of the riparian buffers.
If buffer mitigation is required calculate the required amount of mitigation by applying the
buffer multipliers.
* Impact Required
Zone ,~~„~Me r e~, Multiplier
L A:a: ,...a:.....
1 ~ 13 (2 for Catawba) I 0.0
2 1.5 0.0
Total I I I 0.0
* Zone 1 extends out 30 feet perpendicular from the top of the near bank of channel; Zone 2 extends an
additional 20 feet from the edge of Zone 1.
3. If buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e.,
Donation of Property, Riparian Buffer Restoration /Enhancement, or Payment into the
Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as identified
within 15A NCAC 2B .0242 or .0244, or .0260.
XI. Stormwater (required by DWQ)
Describe impervious acreage (existing and proposed) versus total acreage on the site. Discuss
stormwater controls proposed in order to protect surface waters and wetlands downstream from
the property. If percent impervious surface exceeds 20%, please provide calculations
demonstrating total proposed impervious level. N/A
XII. Sewage Disposal (required by DWQ)
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of
wastewater generated from the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
Page 8 of 9

XIII. Violations (required by DWQ)
Is this site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500) or any Buffer Rules?
Yes ^ No
Is this anafter-the-fact permit application? Yes ^ No
XIV. Cumulative Impacts (required by DWQ)
Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in additional
development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality? Yes ^ No
If yes, please submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with
the most recent North Carolina Division of Water Quality policy posted on our website at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands. If no, please provide a short narrative description:
XV. Other Circumstances (Optional):
It is the applicant's responsibility to submit the application sufficiently in advance of desired
construction dates to allow processing time for these permits. However, an applicant may
choose to list constraints associated with construction or sequencing that may impose limits on
work schedules (e.g., draw-down schedules for lakes, dates associated with Endangered and
Threatened Species, accessibility problems, or other issues outside of the applicant's control).
None
~. ~~+v~ 3~r4-o
A~lplic~t/Agent's Signature Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)
Page 9 of 9

..-
o stem
~n a ement
PROGRAM
November 27, 2006
Mr. Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
Environmental Management Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
Dear Dr. Thorpe:
Subject: EEP Mitigation Acceptance Letter:
OEC 8 206
;i
.r
i,o u~ S~~ aa4
r
B-4000, Replace Bridge Number 255 over Jordan Creek on SR
1002, Alamance County
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (EEP) will provide the compensatory stream mitigation for the subject project.
Based on the information supplied by you in a letter dated November 8, 2006 (received
November 14, 2006), the impacts are located in CU 03030002 of the Cape Fear River
Basin in the Central Piedmont (CP) Eco-Region, and are as follows:
Stream:
24 feet
During the review of this request, it was noted that the 2006 Impact Projection
Database listed no wetland or stream impacts for this project; however, EEP will provide
the requested stream mitigation. If additional stream mitigation in this cataloging unit is
required due to this previously unreported mitigation need, EEP will include it in the
2007-2008 biennial budget. Mitigation for this project will be provided in accordance
with the Memorandum of Agreement between the N. C. Department of Environment and
Natural Resources, the N. C. Department of Transportation, and the U. S. Army Corps of
Engineers signed on July 22, 2003. EEP will commit to implementing sufficient
compensatory stream mitigation to offset the impacts associated with this project by the
end of the MOA year in which this project is permitted. If the above referenced impacts
amounts are revised, then this mitigation acceptance letter will no longer be valid and a
new mitigation acceptance letter will be required from EEP.
R.P~StO~' ... ~ ... PV'OtP.Gt Olff~ -~tG{,~L ~~~
North [arolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program,1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, N[ 21699-1652 / 919-115-0416 / www.nceep.net

If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Ms. Beth
Harmon at 919-715-1929.
Sincerely,
~°
i iam D. Gilmore, P.E.
EEP Director
cc: Mr. Monty Matthews, USACE -Raleigh
Mr. John Hennessy, Division of Water Quality, Wetlands/401 Unit
File: B-4000

November 27, 2006
Mr. Monty Matthews
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers ,
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road, Suite 120
Raleigh, North Carolina 27815
Dear Mr. Matthews:
Subject: EEP Mitigation Acceptance Letter:
B-4000, Replace Bridge Number 255 over Jordan Creek on SR 1002,
Alamance County; Cape Fear River Basin (Cataloging Unit 03030002);
Central Piedmont (CP) Eco-Region
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the Ecosystem Enhancement Program
(EEP) will provide the compensatory stream mitigation for the unavoidable impact associated
with the above referenced project. As indicated in the NCDOT's mitigation request letter dated
November 8, 2006, compensatory stream mitigation from EEP is required for approximately 24
feet of stream impacts.
Mitigation for this project will be provided in accordance with Section X of the
Memorandum of Agreement between the N. C. Department of Environment and Natural
Resources, the N. C. Department of Transportation, and the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
signed on July 22, 2003. EEP commits to implement sufficient compensatory stream mitigation
up to 48 stream credits to offset the impacts associated with this project by the end of the MOA
year in which this project is permitted. If the impacts change from the above listed amount, then
this mitigation strategy letter will no longer be valid and a new mitigation strategy letter will be
required from EEP.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Ms. Beth
Harmon at 919-715-1929.
Sincerely,
. ti ~ar--
it am D. Gilmore, P.E.
EEP Director
cc: Mr. Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., NCDOT-PDEA
Mr. John Hennessy, Division of Water Quality, Wetlands/401 Unit
File: B-4000
R , ~~
f
NCDENR
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program,1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 21699-1652 / 919-715-0416 / wwwnceep.net

f~ORTH CARO~II~A
.~~~
ed
~ 1616 ~.~b'
r l / 1616 100 / ' ti68
1617 ~
'-' - P/ROfECT L7lCA~OX
7cr+ a
RES / 767
1692 / 186
L ~, -
,78 ,
IB1I (' 81
I61 ~ 0
/ 161 ~
/ 81 62 17
~' 07
1 9 •:' /
1 1
~ 18DB • R•~on 100 81 _ 1]66
iW
/ 'b
1 aaP~416o ~.~
~ 1 pt o2
~ 1 el 01 ~ j °~` \ Cl_
i e
1 67 6i 1 76
1002 ~ ~ wr ~
1 / q
\ / _ O
18D ~
BD6 ~ / ~
P r 176 / 17
1 1 / lYtrry ./ s
1 0 / / -1
(NOT TO SGLEJ ~ry
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
~ y ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ALAMANCE COUNTY
~y PROJECT: 33368.1.1 (B-4000)
BRIDGE N0.45 OVER
JORDAN CREEK
ON SR 1002
SHEET ! OF O1 .P 09 ®2006

0
0
N
O O+
O ~ O
O ~ 2I ~ p ~
3 z ~ ~
N 0 1` ~\/T ~~ raj ~ O W O
F.4 ~~ /jam/~ lJ ~ ® U ~ z z v
4 ti ~~// I ~ Z @ ~"
l p~ ~ U W tx O
W II ~ ~ ~ ~
q CL
* F
P W
* w
m N / V]
Q
W~
J
I
(~ I
O M
~C
m N
2
(.~ h
W ~n
m
J
I
1
~~
~~ ~ O
~ ~
~`` 0 ~ 1
+U
// ~
// ti O
h~
~ 0.,
9 ~_ ~ 4
~~~ ' W
// M
/~

NAMES AND ADDRESSES
NAMES ADDRESSES

1
TimoE}oy Neal BrisEow 3615 SEoney Creels Church Road
Elora, NC 27244
2 Bobby Ferry CorbeEE 4666 Hassell CorbeEE Road
BurlingEon, NC 27217

3
Hassell A. CorbeEE, Jr. 712 Jeffries Cross Roads
BurlingEon, NC 27217

4
William Boyce Davis 578 Jeffries Cross Ronds
BurlingEon, NC 27217

5
Henry F. Hilliard, Jr. SOH MyrEle Drive
Graham, NC 27253

6
MiEcbell Todd Kindler 500 Elva Drive
BurlingEon, NC 27217

7
Clyde J ®'Ferrell, Jr. 201 BrigbEon Drive
Elora, NC 27244

8
Dale E. TlUlEE 503 Wayne Trail
BurlingEon, NC 27217

9
Donald E. Wilson 516 Jeffries Cross Roads
BurlingEon, NC 27217

J k, f •!~
'..J ,\
~,
~~ + ~„
~t .
~- ~.,
i/ J" `q
~~
~~ PROJECT
ge B-4000
4
~~ ~
~= ~` .~
444
Y K'• ~-
`1 ti
. ~ ~~~ ~
it
' / ~ ~5,~ 650 ~,'^?\ , ~l~"~~- ~^ ~~ "~~
~~ ~
r - ~ ~, ,~ t.r~
~. . , !I ~~
~.
~~ • l ~ ~-\
/ _ t~ J
.~ ri y ~
J r~ *~~-
~_ w ~ ~
h,~
ter` •~!4 ~~
,^ ~ ~ ~t 4 ~ It
~~ ~ aj'~
~°. , ~ ~
~~~ ~
~' ~ ~~
j 4~ t .rte.
j ~ ~riF~fti4 t "`.4 }
Vim. !) , ,.~~~ f ~ /~s

\ r t l t t F) ('~'~i i~.r., 'e +~ k .~ 1 ~ ~.,i,~ t ~D°~~''4` ~'' ~~
F \ _ l 7 ~-~~~ _ ~
®~® ~~~
SCALE: 1" :1500'
~T~~®~
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
ALAMANCE COUNTY
PROJECT: 33368.1.1 (B-~4000>
BRIDGE N0.45 OVER
JORDAN CREEg
ON SR 1002
SHEET ~ OF ~ ~ 11®1,~ 05

C
~ N W ~
N ` y `~
Z ~ 0
O N N d
N d y ~ ~
~' N
.
U x s E F-
Q wU-
a
.~-. C

W
~
~
~
C
d N N
I
6
~
„
3 wU Via

w
~ E 3 m ~ o Mo

Q ~
C C

c N
N
~
~ >
~ > ~ (j O O
y E w a ;g
E o
v 0
v
H
U
Q y
a
a
~ ~, N
~° ~ _ :
,
~ (gyp C ~ U
H' ~ y m
~ U ~ v

W
a
~ ~, ~

Z N C C
Q U
m f~ ~
O
O
C
L N~ m
~ " 0
v O
v
~ ~ U
W U ~
d o ~
~ ~ N U
C

Z ~
.
.
..
U j
x >
g w

~ N
a ~ ~ ~
E__ ~
H ~ ~ v

c w
c
c~o_m~
E
~ ~
a>
d
N ~

a~

N
~ ~
M ~
lf)
O
~ ~ O
N ~
N ~
N
'~ E O O O
~ LL ~ O CN7
... +
O t
r +
r
~ N N

J
Z ~ N M O
H

J
to

IN
IW
~c
I
@@g88°m°mm°~
Rlmrn v, v,v,g
--~i~~mm2iix
A ~i~~~ o~,m ~ ~
rnornmi~~mnrn
~~g~~2m`~ c ~
ocJxo ~
xl„~x ~ C
m n
II II II II 11 N 11 11 II
'-' ~ a In w rv ~ ,xo ~
~ ~~~~e~~~~ , ~
n
~i~ ~~i~^1~~~J

n
m
y
O
v
~, , ,~ R ~
Z ~
n
E
v
m R r ~ g ; o
~ 3
~
.A I
_

`~ !n
O y
y 9 1 N r ~ a~
O 9 11
~ n
S
y ~no~
or D
1.1
m
s _ m
~ ~ =

`\ • W u ~
~~~
\
©
© ~
\
~ ~
~
~ ~
© 11LI7
~O ~O O
©
© ~] I'
LJ ~ C
jN
I
I
N ~
~N

C3 th
`
tnm
0 :~ a
my
n~ =
n
i
~ yD
Z~

IA? yo
a
A a
Np a
H

0
© = F rP
6 m
mm

xN
~' ~ I

I
©

~ ~
r
In
Z

_
r~
o ~
_
~ I I
I ~ ~o
I ~ o n=, ~
~ I I ~
~ ~ ~
_
2
O ~
~

I
I
I
I
Q %m
° g
~i
m~
~ I m
~~
I
I _
~9 11 ~

I
I I
~ ~
u
~o
S
A
S^ _
~y A
J
~ r' a
i'a ~

~
I ° a fTl
NN
~ yy~
'>

mN

m

N
~ '^

~
om
n_
oml-
31f
y y ~

F
_ eZW

T
y it
~ •
nP I \
`4' w ,
^ ~ o ~ \
I= ~\ ~
\ Q 5j957963
I ~ I Q ~ \4\ ~ ~ ~ ~ 9j~~3'w
$$ c ~
I g ~ I O ~ \ ~~~~ ~ _k•Y _ nfl'r Tn inn nn _
to ~ 1 5 .. t.9 '.. .. .. ..

n
=
~ ~ a---~

e - ~ _ .
r ~ .. .. ..
I ~
2F
OI

11~~
~ ~ Z~

{n ~

O
y
~ s
~' ~ ~ t
m 1
~
~ a0
~ I
8 _ m
A
IA
y
O ~
d~
N
I~ ! ~ ~ v I yr.y
m ~ m = o IL ° IF^ N~~ .
o k ~~$ $o p a b> s°N
~~YO ~a~m~w~ C no
17: ~ ~ Y ~ C O ~ w ~ ~1 2y s ~ .. ii ~~/yJ~j//~/y//~/~~
~~~~~EE~aov~~m`~i O v~ mlfi~
nSi~~~ ~°7T~m ~ n ~ o
~~~`~~o~°~~ ~ u u II u u l n u II u u l N~
O Y q. -a ~ ~ ~ l~ (y v ~ ~ ly ~ ~ ~ in
~~ v'ri$~ ~i Z Ul$O V? UI~O Z
O
~ ` ~m/1 V1 t~i~
~ ~ ~ ~lyou ~~~"i
8 ~-
f+~'~ ~ l
..\ N~

V ~

J ~ I Z
oD m I I o
~ F I

C Z
r ~~
I y k
~rn
~ my
n
22
~
e >
i

rn ~~ n ggm88v~miv~~liv~rni
i0 01., m .ya~~mmiii W
~I O 000
~
C ~ In
rn ~~a~~~~° p~
x g i°lo c ~~~~~rnmi k

rn m
cx ~ m~Qrn=~g~ ~
~ ~
~
~rn
g=~
~
°mo
a
I
z ~~
2~
a
a
x~nlx ~g
n
~
N II
ll
II II II 11 % II II ~
O
r tL
nI
~ N VIV ~~pO~jUN Rln
g
D
V
ti
1
~ a ~~
~~~~~
T
I t
n
N
N
I N
w
NI9'S5'J7'E
516.BT
t'J L'J W ~ W - -

"° ~? © ~ C3
~o ~ ~~° Q ° ~
~ Q C;3 ~7 /S
o a ~ ~, c~ ~ ~
- %
~ _-
---
~
'
( _
I _
~ ~
~
~n
u I
m
"~, m ~
~
~
(
/ ~

r r ~'
_ N
n
~ ~ oo ~ ~
I
~ I _
Z
I f ~ as °31~

~ mtn ~O~
I~ -~ yy
00 ~ O ~IPD
~ ~^Nf
~.NiN ~ gma
'

~
I~
I m oo

v i-
y y o
= n
~ ~ _

Ia

~ Jl
I~ •

9 ~ I ~
r
; ~_
~~
`

~ ;J

r

r r
a
,
f~ I ~ O y

~.~
I
(7
f7
m
N
+
N
+ A
~ ~~~
m ,~
\~ F O ~~ OO ~mD
f~l ~ n \'4~ X m I < / ~ „ 1k y y .~ Nla/11=
lwJ ~~O V \ \ ~.. I ~1k ~ 'k ~ 1E uNia _O
~ ~~ mg ~ ~~ \ + ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~
rt
o v~ D
~2m Z; w -- / ~ ~ µ ~ ~~ ~ ~y o m v
S~
y ~ ;v a M' 1t ~ I
1 ~ ^m ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ .
ti ~ ik~ ~ c ~ M ~ 1t
M 1k: ~ i I M ~ 1t ~ It .k M' ~ k
I~
k ~ M ~ ~ ~ SO ~ ~ ~ K' ~ k ~
N
K' ~ llt. y ~ 1t k ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
hl I I I ~ It 1 s ~k M
~~I_ ~~ ~~~~ ~~~ ~~ µ~~ n
2N~~ S m\ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Dv
II A Vl C ~ = r~-s \ 70
OA~Nrn ` ~ 70 r ` q I ~ ~7ONm Z
R,o~iNnJ N. $ ~ ~~y~y/~/ ~o~ZnO ~
Ln ~fN / u, C Z
l
gym ~.\~~' ~ ~ M33tl7 7 N11~ wTT °i cq3•~ ~' myhp ~Nn Z^
II pS. Altl d ~ EEK / V/
~~~_... '' aW ~REEA' ..
N ~ !yam
~.. b~ bb y~ ~ 1~ ~m \m.o O
~ m ~ ~ L ,~ c
(~' ~ ?+ ~ 4+ oO 8~ g(zj i~ ~j r
T ~ n
11~ m O ~~ S~ ~~ ~ go
z13'CSP wnE ~ ~ w• az 'h7 ~
~~ )S ~ AND ROD 6 U ~p ~ Ei ~ P 15' CSE rL] ELeOWS '~ • ~ C
` ~CONN~CTORS m AND ROD 6 LUG u ~ -. v ~ „~ • ~
y ~ ~ ,, o O N N ~ ~ ~ CONNEC10R5 .u ~ 144Y77I ~
y o m g
~~ _ p ~~ ~ ~r ~y 4~
MATCHL/NE TO SHEET 5 ~ ao zy =~ ~~ ~ a
ST AT lON 23 +00

0 1 1-i-
I
m
v
m
~= o
m
.n ~
or D
'^a r
goo
y ~
N
w {-F-V-
gg~88°m°m°m~
mmm v, v,ing
~A~mmiii2
A ~~~~~ o~,m ~ ~
2 2 2 O~~ A ~
~~~~~nmi"'~ ~ m
rno~,mi~~mn m
~nrn~~y^o'~ ~ O
y~gymo ~~
020 2 n
xrn~2 ~ C
m n
N II % II 11 II M II II
Cl% mtO~'wt~p~~'uNilO ~ ~
~n O+~ a~ ~
O~
I~~
O
~ ~
~ ~
y "
O
C2
1
r ~~
n
J ~~
~ my
g2
0
~ ~rn
~ ~rn
io
°i g
I r
IN~
IWI
~s f~_ ; -
a
~~~ I / '
-~.
9° I m
P
ti
~N
~ p\
~ ( ~~ ~~ ~ ~
A ~ ~~\
~ ~~ .
I © \ \~_~~
© ~ I1 ~~l
© ~~ zm
~ II _~
I - AN
m~
aZs
~ '~Z
p m
Ny
a z ~
© (a'
O
m
~ I O r
N
s © i _ 1
-- r ~ I~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~
-- I ~ ..
~ N
1= m N I ~° m
3j
N
1
+ /0
° °
m m
m
~
~~ ~
N

y0
~ Z
N
0

_ ~'° p
gi v
s 4
Y ~
a
i~~

~ I + a fTl
yy~
omD
~;r r
N_
r
O
an \
p y - _~
I. i 'n "' o ~~ a Rol
m
~ R a = m~ m ~ D
z5 °
o ; x m~~~~~ C y
c~wra,~~`'a'~o :~~~v1 p m'
v~+i ° '^
o a
v `= vmi v^~i FI
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~'~a t~~°
~ ~ ~ ~~~ ,~
~`*a. ti ~ {
~ ~
O ~ ~
I m
I O
I I
y~ D ~g~ggvrnivrnitrnn
o"' "' ~~~mmiii t~
~I O 000
rnn '' ~vi~~~rno ~~
~2 ~+ iii °rno~ ohm
~o c c~c>c~~~
~ m~,omiF~m~ ~
~ ~ ~~=~~~~rn o0
27~r~2 m~
~n
% II lII~11 M111 II II II II ~O
obi N lnN V4o~i UNiN rnn
P ~ i y~
\'I'
~ `~ \ v ~
I ~ nT B1 > ~
Q r~ P
~m a ~
2 ~~
m~
J
3 N '
~~
I"
,~ ~
D I . ~ ~
2 N n ~ $ m
a
II OAV1 aO' µ'
~~N~ ~ \~
cnb?'~ ~ "
~U'n,, \
~~A2
~~4 N
~q~ .Z S 0
a
yym .\~~
M33tl7
II ~
.5 ~ ~~
~ t L
~/
~ ~ ~;
: ,I
I I
I

S I t' ma7 ti
- ~ ~ N19'S5'3J'E
I
~ ~ 516.87'
0
~~- _`
=13roa s6 _ ~ -- -
a fi ' ~ ~ 4~ p / Q
~
O~ p
~
m
2 pl I
~? ~
~ ~ ~ ~? ~ /5
~ I ~ i
-
~_
~
~3 ~ ~
~ ~ ~;
© ,'- ~ - -7
~ ao ~ s
Z
I
I N _
p
o ~
l ~n za0
'v

m im

D y
O 'mD
~ ~ mr
I N N
N
u
~

N m r
oo

31 f' o
; ~
j =
y I y N
,
l ~5
¢ • ~
II
-- r
a
-1
m
K NN r ~~~1'I
±± L
~ /W ~ -ly ~Inr-
/ M k I o0 om
r
* /~k ~ k ~ 1t ~ 00 j v s
~k ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~y v
zm ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I - ii
I ~ ~°~ ~O~ N' ~ N_ M' ~ `kI 3~
n ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
I ~ ~ Ms N k
m A x~ ~ & ~ ~ M' ~
~ ~a 1t M ~ I
In ~" rt ~ ~ ~ M' ~ M' ~
~~ ~~ ~~ ~~
~ `~ ~ " .• " ~ I g3
V ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I NP° /
a .~
M ~ M t< k
m :~O ~ ~~ µ, ~ M It I
~ ~ ~
~~ ~ ~ ~ f °~
v
~~
m ~~.? m ~ ~ ~ DAn

MATCHLINE TO SHEET 5
STATION 23+00
•~.o b ~
°
aO. ~
(m~
p0 ~

~ ro
8~ ..
g~ ~<
v
~

~ ~ ~
~fi~I

m
„"
-yl

O ~I-~M

7 P~ }~ p
A i ~ ~
Z Z
O
IWS

e ~ ~
z -C
~ ~
~ [r1
'' O
~
o ~^ ~
~r n
~r
Y
i~
~
z~ z~ zo~
Sa ~
O

~, J

N
W
N
A
N
N
r ~~
NL~ I `
O n ~~
ZND~
u °'acn
+~
barn
a~N~
~~a2
~~ Q
~~rn
MATCHLINE TO SHEET 4
STATION 23+00
N
^~~~
j
~ ~ ~~
x
x a
~~
N
N
r O
r
0
m
m
-• x
,~ m
~ ~
.'~ K
s
n
0
z
S~
app
~~
L
P
N
~.
N
V
N
OD
N
.~
w
0
w
r
w
N
w
W
'1
-~
y ~
~°m
C2
~rn
c `~'
~~
rn~
g2
o~
~g
~rn
i~
g
rn
°a

m
m
m
~o
n
ox
m
y
a
i
rn
z
r r~r~r~r~rr ~ O
88$88882
n
~888~~N ~
i
R
~~~~~~ ~ o
A
~~~~~~ ~ ~
8888~~ ~
Q~~`.V m R
89 ;~l~o ~ ~
~~nma ~ rn
5w$k~l~ ~ ~
i

(.~~~
o `I,~ ~
j<
~.~~
~~
~~~~ ~$
a ~ '~
o,
2~ ',
~ir`~
,;
~ I~~
mZ~
mm
m=
I°
I
i 1~ 1
I1 ~
1 1
1 ~ 111
~1 1
~ 1
\1
a ~ ~ ° \1
~ \~
i -~ ° ~
~~ ~
r '"~
II I . mz I A
~1S' CONC_ z ~ ^
1
0
~~
~~ ELL ~~ ~ I I S~ CONC
L~ ~R•J~'CRAV `'~
`EL
SIB 7B ~al.q~~~,='~5~
29(1.00. _

r o
~
O
"' T
_

°

N
~
n

^~
in
~

~
o ~
.'~ n
z r 0

o
~ :nlTl

o
y

~

m ~
y
O °yD
O N Nm~
~n
ro
m ~
m mm~
T
~
o

p x ;
?
m n o
~~
m N o ,~ o
~ ~
x

NO
O~0
§.
n
y
^~~
~Dm
.r ~
~ ~m D
N ° ~nN
8 m ps
m 2~ °s
•~ y
0 0=
%~
omo°
.... mT
ti
v _ ~
m - N
~ ~
'

rr o
~,
n _ n
° n n

rr r

n

O1 Vl r
~ - ~ ^mO
NN ,. m
oD~
00 ~ om ° ~m
'
° '
y O -
mD
°'

00
~ o °oD
y -
a. ~,,,r
ONOm D ,~D m=OO NN uy

00 y
% 7 Ohm ~
v
° O O
00 ~~
; _
~F
y y m n o
n
ii i~ 1~ ~
N ~~
y y
Q m D
~ ~
oo
~ °ni~ -
a°
~_
\\`
1°
~~
~\
. \ ~.
\ C'~
~\
25
4
~• ~ T~f2MFRM
~fJ `~ ~
i.
~ ~~
~ ~
/ /~ ~
/ I 1~
/ /~ 1 \~
/ / ~ \ ~\
/,~ \~
i~ ~~~
i, i ~ ~
~~~/ ~~\
/ ~/
~~~ /
,~ ~1
~ \~ Q
/~
~ //
o ~ ~
~` ~ ~ ~~ Q
~~ \~ \ .
~ _~ ~
~~ ~ ~
\~
x~
~ `~
~~ \
0
~\ \` ~>>
~\
~\ ~~~/
\ \ ~~\ ` Q
\ au ~y4bo6
m ~ S
\ ' e
H

~v
~
sr 8
so

ZZ
jOm
v .,
c-~
+
~~
~ ~
;
A
a ~ ~~
ouzo
~
a ~
; ~'
n
mN ~ NnAZ ~ ~

r~ ~\~
~~~ \
n
T
Z
/Z^
V/
0 O
Z~ ~~
I
~p~~~
~~o~
o °
~G ~ ~

P~ 83

09/08/99
PRUJECT: 33368.2.1 TIP PRUJECT: B-40oo
0 0 0
~ b
~ N ~ ~ ~~! H
~O „ ~ q ~
O c m c O 'tt~! z ~~ ~.~ C,
z
_ N
~ ~ N y ~o~~ Q 4.% ~ ~
O Q O O ObOY T~ ~ ~ (n
nkn't Tn `A~7 ~ (~~
_ (n AlyNly Z ~ '+
N .r ~ byb~ ~ ~
O O O y'yAtiW ~ ~ ~ \~ ~ ~ l1
~Oxsu ~ C F.~ t
00 ,~ xCw ~
~~ ~_ ~ gg ~~~ o 0
~~ ~ NN b ~b~ 1 ~
~'~ O v o Qf z Q! ~ ~ ~° k
Z ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ cn
~ ~ v ~ ~ ~ ~~
n~Z py =uv~cav ~ b ~ ~~ S ~ / ~ g (n
~_~ ~T ~
m~^c p~ aR=2R yeaR a K x b y ~ ~ ~
b r~ ~
~~ AZ y O ~J
Gf x ~ ~ ~~ :-r 4 n r ~
O Z Z x x ~,~ ~/~
~_ ~ ~~ caw
'`1 ~ /
o x ~ c ~ ~/ h
=a g ~b ~° ~-~, o
x ~
O m ~ ~ a ~ ~~
o ~ o ~ o ~~ ~ x ~ ~
000 ~ ~ ~
o
~ ~ ®~
~o~ ~ ~
N ~
~ o
3 3 3. ~ ~ ® Od
~~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ a lJ~ `~ \~r rl~ v ~ ~ ~ 1
r ~ ~ ~~y ~ ~ ~ rT1 ~'
~ ~ ~ ~ On ~ n ~ ~ O
N ~ '~cf MM I b ~ ~ ~ r ~ p
~ ~~~ ~ ~~~rn b ~ ~~
~~ ~ o ~ ~ ~
~N ~ ~ n ~
~ ~ ti ~~ ~ ~ V) VJ
`° ~ ti ° ~ -V
e ~~ ~ ~
~m ~ > m O
~+ ~ w ~ I ~ N
m w O
e ~ ~I ~ ~ y
~ ~ ~ w
m ~
C
y~~~~ \ J~ I % y C ~ y
Q~ ~ ~~ ~y
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~Oy ~ ~~„
~'~ ~ y ~ [=7 N y
00
~ z ~ II y+ ~
A
° w O
~ ~ O ?
x '' ~ ~ ~ p ~ aw a (~ ~
QO o.p
~ ~ iv ~ ~
O ~ m
~~ = ~ ~
~ ~~ `' NC GRID NAD ~3 0
gg~ ~ ~ o ~j
~~ S~ S~ ~ O p
x ~ x C" 3
~ ~~ s"
~ ~ ~z
~~ ~ ~
a ~~ ~ _~
~~ tb m I--' v~
~p~ ~y ~~ ~
w Z r ~~
~ ~ 'LG+ CZI~ ~~

o 'n ~~ v T 2 N v f1 ~ ~ A ~ N~ N Q! ~ ~ ~~ p ~ ~ N ~!
I n o A
7 O ~ 3 ~ ~ ~
a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g ~ s °oo ~ ~ p- a > > C s ~ ~ ~ ° ~ ~ I I
' ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ I
° ~ ~ 0 1 ~ 1 I 1
n i I i i 1 i I i i i i 1 i C 4 03 g G C ? A ; I ~ I I i i I 1 i i I
I I I 1 1 7 O ~ - p ~ ~ Q ° I I i I I ~ ~ i 1 ~
~ ' i i ; ~ i i i ~ C n - ° I i i i I ~ I ' I
r I I i I i I i A 7 ~ I I I i I I
A 1 1 1 1 I I 1 p n C ~ ; i I ~ ~ I I 1 1 ;
S ; ' I I 1 'O O 7 O i I 1 I I ~ i i ~ ; I O
~ I I ~ G ~ I ' 1 i i 1 i I i i
! I I i I I I I i I I I ~ ~ ~ I I I I 1 I 1 I I I
; I ~ I i I ~ ~ ~ i 1 I I ; ~ ~ t ~ I
I 1 i ~ ~ I I I I ~ ~ I I I ~ I 1 ~ ~ 1 I
~ I I I
~ Y~ ~~ I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ~ I
II ~ x I ~
-• =o No o I
e i I I I ,, I ~* ~- ~ k s s~ e 2 x~ @~ ao
1 1 I i~ I I I I I ~ I ~ I I i
O ~ = N N ~ m ~ ~ A ~ b ~ ~ 7 ~ 'O 7 -p -p -p N N
~ °o- c m~ ~ co a c a a a a a a a a a a a ~~ ~'
o ~ ~ o ~ s ~ 3 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ a•~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a
gg gg gg Ao ~ - °~~ H o
a ~ c N ~ Q7 ~ ~ $ ~ ~ c A S S S n ~ ~ ~ $ $ o c ~g ~~ ° a a ~ &' o ~ o
w 1 2 s~ "' y n c g n n n A~~ n n n~ ~ A ^n .ten ~~~°~ o a ~ o a.
Q. y 's° n Q. N N C O ~ -o -~ -7 ~ A o ~ 3 n o A _ o
'V 3~ °o- e~_ °7 ~ o o a• s °° 3 y 3 0 3° n p n o S~ ~_ 0 3 0 ~ c
I 1 Q ~ $ o O a_ CO C O ~ ~ ~ ~+ ~y ~ ~ ~ o ° a ~ ~ ~ n ~ ~ ~. 3. 3 ~ ~ n ; ~ ao
I i i I ~ - ~ G a Q ~ (~ N N I ~ V p O a s .~• ~, G1 ~. ~. ~. .o ~ I I o°
I ~ ~:=~a Tamar I ~~ ~ ;
~ ~ 0 ~ I• a ~ ~. L L i S ~ v v ~ S ~ O ~\ ~Y ~\ ~\ ~ S ~ ~ 1 I I
1 I 1 ~ fwll 1w11 I 3 ~^• I I I
; I I i a - 1 ~• O ~ T A ~ y ~~ O a 7 ~ r ~C ~ 7 p ~ i i i ~ 1
' 7 I I ; ~ V ~ O 1 S ~ 1 I
I I ppm ~ ~~ I ~ ~~ I I
v I ' I ~ ~ 0 ~ y I I ' I I i ~
g
I ~II .I ;; I I
I
fllp II Illili ~ii~ ~I~ 1 IIII }II
~a ~ ~~~~I~I Iil~, ~ ~R
~ ~ ~ 1
InI ~y~ ~ p ~ ~ ~ Ir k, ~ I m m ' D• ~ ~~
L J p I I 1 I '" m m I ~ I ~_ Ik Q
~ III ~~~II I I ~
0 o s s ° ~"
o~oa'aooooo~oo
°o. ~ a. ~ o°gc. ~ v° s ~ o o g' -~ Z
S ~ S ~ S ~ 7 ~ C ~ 7 ~ S T
44447777 41 4' o
'71 -1 -i gw-~ ~ S S S O
O ~ O ~ O ~ Q' `~ i ° O ~
S S ~
p 'g ~ ° ~ ° ° I o 0
~ o c 0 =
Q > > o °
R ° A ° A a
c o I '
e ° c ~ ° I ~
:: I
y
v7 ~ in ~ C ;
C C m ;
rn -^~ rR
'-~ I s l l l l I I
I 1 i
I I I
I I I
~ I I
I
' l ~ l i l
v n fi ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q' O
~ s „ ~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ ° ~ ~
° ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~-
n O O ~ ° S O 7~ ~
~€ "~-~°
o~~ o~~~;
~gQ° ~ o o ~ ~ M ~ ~ o
° ' i 7 I O_ O ° i
~ I ~ I
c o_ I ° I
° ~ 2 I I
0 0 ~ I
y
m ~ ~ ;
1 ' '
.3 ~ ;
I i 1
i
I I I I I I I I I
I
I
I
i
I
I
0 o g a o~= z~ 3
N N~° m ~~ S C y
S °~+
v~^ x~~ m n o
O ;
C ~ pA ~ ~ O
~ S S Q =
I ~
~ ~ ~^
I I Y I I ~ oa c ~
I I w I ;
I
~ I a ~
' o c
I I I
I n ~
' W ;
; m
I I I
I 1 I a
I I I
~ i ~ <
p
I - ,
~ II
II v
o ~ ~ I I ~ ~ ~
II ^
a~~~c~~~x~~~~ ~ £~c~3~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~~7~
O D_ -1 --1 y~~ `G ~~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ m O M p O p O -~ 'O N
-•' ~~>> C~ s v~ o_ o a .z ~~ 3 0~ o o a~ a n o
~ ° ~ ~ ~ n o o ~ n O ~ -c ~ °.~ n ~ g s g s ~ ~ ~ o
~' n = 'r ~ ~ o o m ~ N a ~ N N N a ~ ~ ~ °~ ~ a ~ -
O -{
a H ~ ~ C ~ N O ~ p ~ A ~ ~ ~ 7f ` = I S
S s =
~ I i ~ ~ ~ I i i H I ; I n ('~ _
C O s i l l C A° y ~ ~ I
R • I I m 1
O N I Y I ° • I I
a ^+ I C
I 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
I I I -~ i i i m I
I 1 I I I ~ 1 I I I v ;
I i i I I ; ~ i
I 1 I I I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 I I I I 1 I 1 1 1
I I I I I
1
I I
m$ I ~ I I I I I I I I
p~ 9~~~® 0 0• a a$~ o® ~ ®0 7 7 7 ®®® Q
-~ I I a i I
I r I ~ I
' I I ~ ~ I
~~~~~~~;
w <
a~ ~g~~
~ S
d ~ ~ ~ ; O
444777 ~ I O
g ~ ~ i
~, I I
r. ~ c I
'° ~ u
° I I I
I I ;
I I
~ N I i i I
I C i i I
I
m
~ I ~
i i ;
1
I 1 I I I 1 1
I I .
I
I
I ~ ® 0
v I
I
I
n
0
z
m
Z
O
z
D
r
s
Z
rn
rn
N
r
N
~~
h
o• O
n
•
®®
y~
'®
®~
~~

R \Roadwa~6Pr4o5984000_RDY_PSH02.dgn 6/2/99
l l
W
~ ~~
~~ ~ ~~
m
m
~. ~ y
~ ~ ~
~ ~~D
~ ;~
s ~ ~ N ~ f~ ~ ~ a I
~ ~' i rn ~ i ~ I~ ~ I
~ 0 0 4-~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
'~ w Z y m y m
~ ~ a Z ~ ~ o ~'~ ~ ~~ I ~'~
~ ~O O ~ Z
r
~+, ~ w Z Z ~, T I ~I
V Z m
$ Z I
o N -~
z O ~ 0 ~
r I
O
O ~
!9
y m
m
1 ~
~E I~
~ f,
L l j, l
55 C 5~ ~S ~ N
rn
m
~~
NO ~ +T p++ + i' ~" S
Vg ~ 07~ OV ~~ rI 175•
QQ -t ~ y
pQ lN~1 QZ p~ ~~
o} z ~
z Z
Qi•o O vp +g ~~ ~ ~ ~
a
~~ a ~ o O
~ w
P
w
~~ ~ ( ~ ~
a
w
m
~ n
~ ~ ~ s ~
N m
= rn o
o ~
~ Z
T _ ~
Z `" -~
m
v e= ••
Z
Z m
Q m
s
L1 ~
s m
~ ; o ~
8 v w
H ~ 1 O
~• 1 ~ t~ii
H ° m
y ~ ~S' m Z
"~ ~ ~ o ' ~
O z
p ~ z
m
w
c
~' o
~~~,~ v Z ~
~~ y o ~N ~ ? '~ ~K OD
~~~ ~ zs I y ~~j ~ I
~~~ M ;~' ~
I °1
y m
~ ~ ~ ' ' ~
/ ° '~;
i«q
rr~~ >'
~'~
I~ ~~_ ~
~ ~ ~~ N
o O
Z
~ c ~ ~ m v N j
< m m ~ >v oo~v ~>v
M r>v
M
a w > a 1o m9~o O
H <
o
p w -~1 .a i~ iim~ mz~ ~9
m
~ ° o
7
~
r z s o » a
< >< »

m my -ao• a zms m~
° ~ > ~o im°m• r>s S„-o

s ~ m m• v mmm m• ~
m ~ aw ~v>
~--~-~ as aro y
m = ~ 1 = ..o>= O1~m 1~

v .
.I
m
ms
zmz>
zmv
m = <
m

i NM xr>oM wwoi ~~ m
n
9 ~
Z m mn > z°i mz
j c'~
-i 1 om1 z a'n

m v
mm Mom
' ~~
~mo m
- CD
a n as v
~
m om m~1 m
w a
o
p w =
~ m w+a _
s w na
m

o °° Duo m~~ o O
•
c
a >
> .<
G m
a ..O
i > 1's C
f
- C
° zm m 9s
~ ~ zc r
o ~~ o c° m m
w
M
° ~
c m
m z zmm =
z o ro
° "N °mo- _
1-i o~
° ~a a• ~=v 'gym
m
-~ oo =a om ~

w
~
a M w

r r
~ O
a z m
m„ 0~1
m
.
. mmm a

~
a
-
~ ,
>
>
=

SEP
O
J
N
W
P
v
°~
~ ~
m
~"
k~
cc~~
C2
~~
c~
~ am~
2
~~
C ~
tJ ~
O a
N
N
1V
N
W
rdy_peh04.dgn
R/W REV/5/ON, ADDED PARCEL 5Ar AIOD/PIED PARCEL 5. 9/ll/06 RRE
REVISIONS

~$~

~~$
! ~~~ a
I
~
? ' N~
~~
e ~ ~ ~~
r ~ N ~~

j
'~ O '~
~ o
• ~
N C
r ~
^y~
i~ I,1

~ ~~
~
~
s ~
g?~
~
N
O, ~
~ p
i
Os~
Cy ,~.
S
C n ~
~ I '~~'
G
O
8/17/99
~ ~
~~ ~ ~~ \
~ I d
~ I~ ~ \~
~ O ~ ~ \
~ i ~ I ~~ \ ~
~ ~
o ~\`4t~ Q ~
~Q~Q~ 0~ ~
© ~~ I ~`
X10
ti
ti tif~ $ N ~Qp .
* l~
h I~~11
lC~~c~~~ee ~~i ~ o o ? s t~
o ~ +K~6 ~b ~ ~QN~
~ v
~ s+ sq .. C
g N
~~,a ~e~~~~ ~ ~
~ ~~ ~~ ~~
~ ~
f/~~ 'C „ 4
~j,
:,.
:.~ N~~
a
I M ~ ~µ ~' ~
y~ ~ I ~ ~. ~
R ~ w
..L• T ~ W V. µ V•.. M (c
µ `
t, p
I~ ~ ~ ~
t :..:...:(q
f~: ~:: :~~h~:
'~ ~y 2'. ~...f...i

ii`.ii~.~~.i N ` W
mN I ~ ~ W ,~
~
M
b.pb.a...:::::
!...~: :. ...:..:::~~~ :
....
~
N,ow
g y a .

~~;; , ~ ~ 5
iiil ~.:iiiliiilii?IiiMEil!i;~iiN'.i M.ii~ii
...... ............................

k ~+ i ..:::::

d.

2t

Z
~~~i~~y~c~r~
:.:
.
.
.
.....
.
.... ~~ b0E / M~~
.
.
_ .
. ... ... .
. . . ._ _ _ .. ~~r
~ ~
~~ yy
~
'
O
~i
~
~
N ~
I .
SiJ
Q ~\ ~ , - ~
o~ 1
01 I E~
o~ I Q a ~
.,
~ I ~ ~
I '----:-
~/ I ~~-_
m ~~
h A -~ ~~ ,
s ~ µ ,~
~ ~ ~ ~ I
~t ~ ~t ~ M ~ N
~ ~
V~ ~~~' ~ ~ I
m ~ ~A~ µ k
~ v~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~, r
~ ~
~ ,~
~s /~ ~ ` '~
~- i
'\ s ~/~~
~~ ~
3 a$s
~~~~
:~ a~~~
Rs ~~3
'~
20
/ m
Z
'Z
m
.~
Z
S ~i i W
o I
~~ ~~~~
z ~

~r
x~
to i~
R 0
'A ~
~
0

8/17/99
w
w
4
s
v
N
C~ Y
.~°`' ~
~`~ oa
~ ~
^~ y
x
r DO
O~
~$~~
S~~F ® 25
~T~~

3

~n~+~~3~~lVJ°
~,'~ip~"j~~
r
~': ~~~ ~
y
\P
$Sg~ ~ i
t~~r ~ i ~ ~
~ ~ ~ i
~
N
'~g~ ~
~ ~ ~
~ ~?
Q
~

Q
~ ~ d QQ
~
~/"
~
N
~\
\
N

0
~~ n

~~~ ~
\
~ / m
~
~ ~ clay ' m

~ ~~ ~ ~
~
"z
~ R
~
0
~~
b
~r
x
p
y ~~ ~ z
O

24-AUG-2006 07:28
8/
t:\roa~way\x,€c ~b4000_rdy_xpl.dgr•
bp s >u at nrv r+r it aa -o>

- I _~
r i
~
-
-

- ~
Ip -
3 Z

O_ O ~!

~.~$
"8
K - -
7
_
m°3
a

<° o°_.fl
3
~

0
' -
Wm
rt n ~
~
a
. $
~. O
~7 7
_
~ ~ ~
C - -
O 7 -
dn-n - _ -
~Q
~2 ~
o ~
_a
s5
-
m m ~, -
- -
S ~~ _

O 7r O _ w

~,
7
7
_
~
C O W
3 -~ a
~
a -
~ A
a
~ ~~ o
- oo
3 ~
m ~
~ ~

0 < o ~
7. p

n<Q
Op_.
-~
T
A
O
O p ? O
~ -~. V1
~p p
-
~ ~ C
~
n.
' n.
A _ N
_ 7
m _ x

r Z
0

24-AUh-2006 07:29
c:¢roo~ ~~ sr\64~0C~_r dy_>.pl.dgn
axis ~ ridG aara
E/23/99

24-AUK-2006 07:29
?:\rw ~{ ouu\ ,c\64000_rdy_o:p l.dgn
SGi tI~CF RRI~MCRRAi
8/23/99

24-AUG-2006 07:30
%8%USER~AI4E%~%sU00_rdy_•~.pLdg~ ~
8/23/99

24-AUG-2006 07:30
t;\roadN \x c\b4000_rdy_xpl.dgn
aaaai i~F~`~Ani~kaaaa 8/23/99

24-A1iG-2006 07:30
t:\roa~w~+~\„sue\64000_rdy-<pl.dgn
8/23/99

-2006 07:30
24-AUG
dd
E%%EUSE F~t~A MEi Ei$000_r dy_.~pl.dgn
8!23/99

-- - - - ~ ~ -i - -- -

O

_
U

- - ~
W
I ~s

--
a T
m
_ O Pn
O n
O ,,,
Z
O

_ N
S
X

~ Z
- O

24-AUG-2p0u06 07:31 ~
8/23i 99
t~? tGInSF pu 01~1~AE%g000_rdy_•.pl.dgn

24-AUG-2006 07:19
R?\~ oo~l~R~y\~sro eb a000_rdy_xpl.dgn
8/23/99

CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION ACTION CLASSIFICATION FORM
A.
B.
TIP Project No.
State Project No.
Federal Project No.
Project Description:
NCDOT will replace Bridge No. 45 on SR 1002 (Jeffries Cross Road) over Jordan
Creek in Alamance County. The bridge will be replaced with a new bridge
measuring 220 feet in length and 28 feet in width at approximately the same
location as the existing bridge. This bridge will provide fora 22 foot travelway
and 3 foot offsets on each side. The new approach roadway will be a 22 foot
travelway with 5 foot grassed shoulders. The approach work will consist of 800
feet to the west and 900 feet to the east of the existing bridge. The bridge will be
raised approximately 10 feet to meet the Statutory speed limit of 55-mph. Traffic
will be detoured on existing secondary roads during construction.
B-4000
8.2473401
BR~1002(11)
~~~`'~~
Ally ~~ 2005
Df4'iShllaCf ~1Gli~IAYS
~A•OffI~E 4f hAT'uF~? E~~4'i~hMEit~
C.
Purpose and Need:
Bridge Maintenance records indicate the bridge has a sufficiency rating of
18.5 out of 100. The bridge's eleven span superstructure is composed of a timber
deck on steel beams and channels and timber joist. The substructure is composed
of mass concrete abutments and piers with steel pile crutch bents. The bridge's
deck width (21 feet wide), low structural evaluation, and low superstructure and
substructure condition ratings qualify the bridge as both functionally obsolete and
structurally deficient according to Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
standards and therefore eligible for FHWA's Highway Bridge Replacement and
Rehabilitation Program. The replacement of this inadequate structure will result in
safer traffic operations.
Proposed Improvements:
The following Type II improvements which apply to the project are circled:
Modernization of a highway by resurfacing, restoration, rehabilitation,
reconstruction, adding shoulders, or adding auxiliary lanes (e.g., parking,
weaving, turning, climbing).
a. Restoring, Resurfacing, Rehabilitating, and Reconstructing
pavement (3R and 4R improvements)
b. Widening roadway and shoulders without adding through lanes
c. Modernizing gore treatments
d. Constructing lane improvements (merge, auxiliary, and turn lanes)

e. Adding shoulder drains
f. Replacing and rehabilitating culverts, inlets, and drainage pipes,
including safety treatments
g. Providing driveway pipes
h. Performing minor bridge widening (less than one through lanel
i. Slide Stabilization
j. Structural BMP's for water quality improvement
2. Highway safety or traffic operations improvement projects including the
installation of ramp metering control devices and lighting.
a. Installing ramp metering devices
b. Installing lights
c. Adding or upgrading guardrail
d. Installing safety barriers including Jersey type barriers and pier
protection
e. Installing or replacing impact attenuators
f. Upgrading medians including adding or upgrading median barriers
g. Improving intersections including relocation and/or realignment
h. Making minor roadway realignment
i. Channelizing traffic
j. Performing clear zone safety improvements including removing
hazards and flattening slopes
k. Implementing traffic aid systems, signals, and motorist aid
1. Installing bridge safety hardware including bridge rail retrofit
03. Bridge rehabilitation, reconstruction, or replacement or the construction of
grade separation to replace existing at-grade railroad crossings.
a. Rehabilitating, reconstructing, or replacing bridge approach slabs
b. Rehabilitating or replacing bridge decks
c. Rehabilitating bridges including painting (no red lead paint), scour
repair, fender systems, and minor structural improvements
Od. Replacing a bridge (structure and/or fill)
4. Transportation corridor fringe parking facilities.
5. Construction of new truck weigh stations or rest areas.
6. Approvals for disposal of excess right-of--way or for joint or limited use of
right-of--way, where the proposed use does not have significant adverse
impacts.
7. Approvals for changes in access control.

8. Construction of new bus storage and maintenance facilities in areas used
predominantly for industrial or transportation purposes where such
construction is not inconsistent with existing zoning and located on or near
a street with adequate capacity to handle anticipated bus and support
vehicle traffic.
9. Rehabilitation or reconstruction of existing rail and bus buildings and
ancillary facilities where only minor amounts of additional land are
required and there is not a substantial increase in the number of users.
10. Construction of bus transfer facilities (an open area consisting of
passenger shelters, boarding areas, kiosks and related street improvements)
when located in a commercial area or other high activity center in which
there is adequate street capacity for projected bus traffic.
11. Construction of rail storage and maintenance facilities in areas used
predominantly for industrial or transportation purposes where such
construction is not inconsistent with existing zoning and where there is no
significant noise impact on the surrounding community.
12. Acquisition of land for hardship or protective purposes, advance land
acquisition loans under section 3(b) of the LJMT Act. Hardship and
protective buying will be permitted only for a particular parcel or a limited
number of parcels. These types of land acquisition qualify for a CE only
where the acquisition will not limit the evaluation of alternatives,
including shifts in alignment for planned construction projects, which may
be required in the NEPA process. No project development on such land
may proceed until the NEPA process has been completed.
13. Acquisition and construction of wetland, stream and endangered species
mitigation sites.
14. Remedial activities involving the removal, treatment or monitoring of soil
or groundwater contamination pursuant to state or federal remediation
guidelines.

D. Special Proiect Information:
Estimated Cost:
Construction $ 1,400,000
Right of Way $ 57,000
Total $1,457,000
Estimated Traffic:
Current - 700 VPD
Year 2025 - 1400 VPD
TTST - 1%
Dual - 6%
Proposed Typical Roadway Section:
The approach roadway will be 22 feet wide with 5-foot shoulders. Shoulder width will be
increased by three feet where guardrail is warranted.
Design Speed: 55 mph
Design exceptions: It is anticipated that no design exceptions will be required.
Functional Classification: Rural Minor Collector Route
Division Office Comments:
The Division 7 Construction Engineer concurs with the recommendation of replacing the
bridge in place and detouring traffic on local roads during construction.
Bridge Demolition:
Bridge No. 45 has 11 spans totaling 201 feet in length. The bridge superstructure is
composed of a timber floor with an asphalt wearing surface on steel I-beams, channels
and timber joist. The substructure is composed of mass concrete abutments and piers and
steel pile crutch bents. All components of the bridge, except the mass concrete piers, will
be removed without dropping any of their components into Waters of the United States.
However, there is the potential for components of the mass concrete piers to drop into the
Waters of the United States during construction. The resulting temporary fill associated
with the mass concrete piers is approximately 60 cubic yards.

Alternatives Studied and Rejected:
The "do-nothing" alternative will eventually necessitate closure of the bridge. This is not
acceptable due to the traffic service provided by SR 1002.
Due to the short detour (5.2 miles) and the low traffic (700 vehicles per day), no other
alternatives were studied.
Environmental Commitments:
Please see attached Green Sheet for Project Commitments.
E. Threshold Criteria
The following evaluation of threshold criteria must be completed for Type II actions.
ECOLOGICAL YES NO
(1) Will the project have a substantial impact on any
unique or important natural resource? ^ X
(2) Does the project involve any habitat where federally
listed endangered or threatened species may occur? ^ X
(3) Will the project affect anadromous fish?
^ X
(4) If the project involves wetlands, is the amount of
permanent and/or temporary wetland taking less than
one-tenth (1/10) acre and have all practicable measures
to avoid and minimize wetland takings been evaluated? X
(5) Will the project require use of U. S. Forest Service lands? ^
X

(6) Will the quality of adjacent water resources be adversely
impacted by proposed construction activities? ~ X
(7) Does the project involve waters classified as Outstanding Water
Resources (OWR) and/or High Quality Waters (HQW)? ^ X
(8) Will the project require fill in waters of the United States
in any of the designated mountain trout counties? ~ X
5

(9) Does the project involve any known underground storage
tanks (UST's) or hazardous materials sites? ^ X
PERMITS AND COORDINATION YES NO
(10) If the project is located within a CAMA county, will the
project significantly affect the coastal zone and/or any
"Area of Environmental Concern" (AEC)? ^ X
(11) Does the project involve Coastal Barrier Resources Act
resources? ^ X
(12) Will a U. S. Coast Guard permit be required?
X
(13) Will the project result in the modification of any existing
regulatory floodway? ^ X
(14) Will the project require any stream relocations or channel
changes? ^ X
SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND CULTURAL RESOURCES YES NO
(15) Will the project induce substantial impacts to planned
growth or land use for the area? ~ X
(16) Will the project require the relocation of any family or
business? ^ X
(17) Will the project have a disproportionately high and adverse
human health and environmental effect on any minority or

low-income population? ^
X
(18) If the project involves the acquisition of right of way, is the
amount of right of way acquisition considered minor? X
(19) Will the project involve any changes in access control? ~ X
(20) Will the project substantially alter the usefulness
and/or land use of adjacent property? ~ X

6

(21) Will the project have an adverse effect on permanent
local traffic patterns or community cohesiveness? ^ X
(22) Is the project included in an approved thoroughfare plan
and/ or Transportation Improvement Program (and is,
therefore, in conformance with the Clean Air Act of 1990)? X
(23) Is the project anticipated to cause an increase in traffic
volumes? ^ X
(24) Will traffic be maintained during construction using existing
roads, staged construction, or on-site detours? X
(25) If the project is a bridge replacement project, will the bridge
be replaced at its existing location (along the existing facility) X
and will all construction proposed in association with the
bridge replacement project be contained on the existing facility?
(26) Is there substantial controversy on social, economic and
environmental grounds concerning aspects of the action? ~ X
(27) Is the project consistent with all Federal, State, and local laws
relating to the environmental aspects of the project? X
(28) Will the project have an "effect" on structures/properties
eligible for or listed on the National Register of Historic Places? ~ X
(29) Will the project affect any archaeological remains which are
important to history or pre-history? ~ X
(30) Will the project require the use of Section 4(f) resources
(public parks, recreation lands, wildlife and waterfowl refuges,
historic sites or historic bridges, as defined in Section 4(f)
of the U. S. Department of Transportation Act of 1966)? ~ X
(31) Will the project result in any conversion of assisted public
recreation sites or facilities to non-recreation uses, as defined
by Section 6(f) of the Land and Water Conservation Act
of 1965, as amended? ^ X
7

(32) Will the project involve construction in, across, or adjacent
to a river designated as a component of or proposed for
inclusion in the natural Wild and Scenic Rivers? ^ X
F. Additional Documentation Required for Unfavorable Responses in Part E
(Discussion regarding all unfavorable responses in Part E should be provided
below. Additional supporting documentation maybe attached, as necessary.)

G. CE Approval
TIP Project No. B-4000
State Project No. 8.2473401
Federal-Aid Project No. BI2~1002(111
Proiect Description:
NCDOT will replace Bridge No. 45 on SR 1002 (Jeffries Cross Road) over Jordan
Creek in Alamance County. The bridge will be replaced with a new bridge
measuring 220 feet in length and 28 feet in width at approximately the same
location as the existing bridge. This bridge will provide fora 22 foot travelway
and 3 foot offsets on each side. The new approach roadway will be a 22 foot
travelway with 5 foot grassed shoulders. The approach work will consist of 800
feet to the west and 900 feet to the east of the existing bridge. The bridge will be
raised approximately 10 feet to meet the Statutory speed limit of 55-mph. Traffic
will be detoured on existing secondary roads during construction.
Categorical Exclusion Action Classification:
X TYPE II(A)
TYPE II(B)
Approved:
Date Teresa Hart, PE, CPM, Assistant Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
r
~~~ ~ ~ .~
Date William T. G odwin Jr., P.E., it Head
Bridge Replacement Planning Unit
S,/7-r~Y'
Date oel A. Johnson, Project Development Engineer
Bridge Replacement Planning Unit
9

PROJECT COMMITMENTS
Replacement of Bridge No. 45
On SR 1002 over Jordan Creek
Alamance County
Federal-Aid No. BRZ-1002(11)
State Project No. 8.2473401
T.I.P. No. B-4000
Commitments Developed Through Proiect Development and Desi
Hydraulics Unit, Roadside Environmental Unit, Division Seven Construction Office,
Structure Design Unit
NCDOT will adhere to the Best Management Practices (BMPs) for "Bridge
Demolition and Removal" during the removal of Bridge No. 45.
A significant fishery for sunfish exists at this site; therefore an in-water moratorium
for sunfish will be in effect from April 1 to June 30.
Green Sheet
Programmatic Categorical Exclusion Page 1 of 1
May 2004

--- -----•- PI86

, - _
- ,o
-.--
•~••- -
\
\ \ 1066
' .7 -3 / 1611 J i AyE 5113
~ % BUR(JNGTQH 1613 ./ °
- '~ 1 -. .-.
.19a~
~ 104
' I
~ --- --'
281
' t _
° ~1 ~
, „
~ 19a

267
1561
` :,~ - .
39 s
tr~N1
~•
°
/
~ ~S
~•0 6 S ~ •e - 1902
i ,
,~ ~11 u•
1661
.6
• ~ `~ ' 1~~ U\ ~ l~ Z
- 313 170 ( ~ ~ .3
~
'?
~ f o f
1901 •
I ~ - «.
~ , \ f
~'

IS76 ,~. a
I ' \ 1617 I o
~ 42
X -
1 7
~ ~s o
.f 1906 ~:
C~ ~ ~~ . I

•l
.5 32 \
.9 y
'
O - ---
•
, •
P29 `

,
,~6 ~
~
~ - .•~ ~
--
/
9 1900
,~ ~I
190,
o
1575 .2 ~~
- \ ~ ~ 7-~
i ' i
176z
n... 70
J
, 1 ~
1 1~ ~ 1737 2
,
.9 N
~
/ I
~
' ' ~
' ~
1 1
~. ~ ~, n ~
•
J - n
1
~ ' 0 I I 19~
IOQ2 1 ,2 ~ (606 1
1em27 1\ ~~
1756
6
I O J°f,rl~6 I ~ I. 1 1909 / ' ~
• - 2001, ~
~
\ ~
1663 P34 24 ~' ~ 4
'• , ~ 1004
C123~
~ i
i

•~
, 15x3
.
, ~: 240
l-
IT29
~'
• zo ~+1
cro6aromal.l3?

"• 'p ~
,
-
/'
V• .] ~

• _

~'I O ~
r~
~
1
r29b /0
a '.
~ 23
t ~
n' ~7
~ G
1910
'
1 .a 1917~
a I
~ ~~
1
~ 1
eo
~
~ 261,

. ~~
11911
1756 1><x i
66
~ rn
19 r
C87 I
5 2 1 .
- -3 1995 ~

.
'. ~ 9
1796
\-z 1751
~ ,Q 2 ' ` I,~ 65 ~ 1912 °
175M1 ~. '
a' ~/
1913 ?I
270
153D IrA - p
~ 1910 df A
.
/ 191
/. ,p _ I i
_~ 1~ I

7967

~ ~ /

• '.~: .9 1 1994
T y . g L1md
~ L9rgr t•~ 1 1912 .I \.0 t
'

1916 ~'~,

•
-• '
~~
~ I7n 173! ' Q
19D°1. •.
~ 7' 1916/` ` 1912 1917
/ -- 19fQ1
~
•
' k1~°3
F •
~
CJ77
'
`
?`
.~' korawlowrl ^
~,~' L
f ~°R' har
3
. /ras .
f
u
1919
_•- /'
~ ~
-~
O•
J ~ lyryb ~
1
I 1919
~
' J
~~ ( 1~1 i
~ 1917 - i
u _
~
- \ ~ 7917 -
_
HZ 1 .1~ _ •I O J 1. ` ; ~ !
~" ~ ~ w. .'+.• ~'
~~ /- _ 1r.r ~ ` \ror.
I [IDrI couerf 1" d- , s.1.7 ' I
I / rar. , V e _ ~ I ~ .
I ~ ~ BUI~I.INGTON _ - - I I~"~ - ,~
;xiw ,1~ 71•er
`-I 1 f ii M~ ror ~~ I _ j` '~--`1---
I I ' 7 trr7u~1 . a~ . -~ 9 I '- I
~ ( ~"` ~- ~ ~ ~ ao ~ 7ar.n,a7 'm ' ' ..~r 126 \\ ` i
-2.1 z.z.
.:
DETOUR ROUTE
-_ ,
. _ .- .. - -- - --I~
- ...
-~.' L
~~.
' '; ~1
..
/..
,~. NORiNC'\ NORTH CAROLINA DEPART!v1ENT OF
4~ ~ 1 qo`.
MP %•, TRANSPORTATION
iT~ +~ DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
z.
`'~ ` 9; PROJECT DEVELOPMENT &
'9) ^-' 4P
~F oP' ENVIRONMENTAL:~Nr\LY'SIS BR:INCFI
'1'T OF TR-115~'
ALAMANCE COI:NTY
REPLACE BRIDGE NO. 45 ON SR ]002
OVERJORDAN CREEK
8-4000
Flgure 1

North Carolina Department of Cultural Resou
State Historic Preservation Office
David L. S. Brook, Administrator
Michael F. Easley, Governor
Lisbeth C. Evans, Secretary
Je>~ey J. Crow, Deputy Secretary
Office of:~rchivea and History
October 28, 2003
MEMORANDUM
F~
~ ~
?~ ti '~
,o oG ;n
~ ~
d, 4
~ F, 9Ld,~
0
~'9; YR~FtV T ,^,P1C~
S/S ° r I,N ~1~
Division of Historical Resources
TO: Greg Thorpe, Ph.D., Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
NCDOT Division of Highways
FROM: David Brook ~F~ ~~.
~~
SUBJECT: Replacement of Bridge No. 45 on SR 1002 over Jordon Creek, B-4000,
Alamance County, ER03-0913
On September 4, 2003, Sarah McBride, our preservation specialist for transportation projects
met with the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) staff for a meeting of
the minds concerning the above project. We reported on our available information on historic
architectural and archaeological surveys and resources along with our recommendations. DOT
provided project area photographs and aerial photographs at the meeting.
Based on our review of the photographs and the information discussed at the meeting, we
offer our preliminary comments regarding this project.
In terms of historic architectural resources, we are aware of no historic structures located
within the areas of potential effect. We recommend that no historic architectural survey be
conducted for this project.
There are no recorded archaeological sites within the proposed project area. Based on our
present knowledge of the area, it is unlikely that any archaeological resources which may be
eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places will be affected by the project
construction. We, therefore, recommend that no archaeological investigation be conducted in
connection with this project.
Having provided this information, we look forward to receipt of either a Categorical
Exclusion or Environmental Assessment which indicates how NCDOT addressed our
comments.
www.hno.dcr.state.nc.us
Location Mailing :address Telephone/Fax
.1D1111NISTR,ITION 507 N. [3ount St., Raleigh NC 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-1617 (9l9) 733-1763 •733-8653
RESTORATION 515 N. Blount St., Raleigh NC 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 276991617 [phone] •715--1801
SURVEY & PLANNING 515 N. (ilount St., Raleigh NC 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 [phone] •715-1801

October 28, 2003
Page 2
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with
Section 106 codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the
above comment, contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review coordinator, at
919/733-4763. In all future communication concerning this project, please cite the above
referenced tracking number.

Natural Resources Technical Report
Replacement of Bridge No. 45 on SR 1002
Over Jordan Creek
Alamance County, North Carolina
State Project No. 8.2473401
TIP Project No. B-4000
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
February 2003

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary ......................................................................................................................................................................i
1.0 Introduction .............................................................................................................................................................1
1.1 Project Description ............................................................................................................................................1
1.2 Purpose ..............................................................................................................................................................1
1.3 Methodology .....................................................................................................................................................2
1.4 Qualifications of Principal Investigators .........................................................................:.................................3
2.0 Physical Resources ..................................................................................................................................................3
2.1 Geology .............................................................................................................................................................4
2.2 Soils ..........................................................................................................................................................:........4
2.3 Water Resources .......................................................................................................................................:........5
2.3.1 Point and Non-point Source Discharges ..................................................,..........................................7
2.4 Physical Resources Impacts .........................................................................................................:....................7
3.0 Biotic Resources ......................................................................................................................................................8
3.1 Plant Communities ............................................................................................................................................8
3.1.1 Piedmont Alluvial Forest ...........................................................................................9
3.1.2 Mesic Mixed Hardwood/Pine Forest .............................................................................9
3.1.3 Fallow Field ..........................................................................................................9
3.1.4 Maintained -Disturbed Area ....................................................................................10
3.2 Terrestrial Wildlife ..........................................................................................................................................10
3.3 Aquatic Habitats and Wildlife .........................................................................................................................11
3.4 Biotic Resource Impacts ..................................................................................................................................1 l
4.0 Waters of the United States ...................................................................................................................................12
4.1 Surface Waters ................................................................................................................................................13
4.2 Jurisdictional Wetlands ...................................................................................................................................13
4.3 Wetland Functional Assessment ......................................................................................................................14
4.4 Impacts to Waters of the United Sta[es ............................................................................................................14
4.5 Permit Requirements .......................................................................................................................................14
4.6 Mitigation ........................................................................................................................................................15
4.7 Bridge Demolition into Waters of the United States .......................................................................................16
4.8 Buffer Rules ....................................................................................................................................................17
5.0 Rare and Protected Species ....................................................................................................................................1?
5.1 Federally-Protected Species .............................................................................................................................17
5.2 Federal Species of Concern .............................................................................................................................17
6.0 Conclusions ...........................................................................................................................................................20
7.0 References ........................................................................................................................22
FIGURES Following Paee
1. Vicinity Map ...................................................................................................................1
2. Vegetative Communities and Land Use ...................................................................................8
3. Jurisdictional Wetlands and Streams within the Project Study Area .................................................13
TABLES
1. Land Use within the Project Study Area ...................................................................................9
2. Jurisdictional Wetlands and Streams within the Project Study Area ..................................................14
3. Federal Species of Concern Listed for Alamance County, North Carolina ................:........................18
APPENDICES"
A. Site Photographs
B. North Carolina Division of Water Quality Stream Classification Forms
C U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Data Forms
D. Division of Water Quality Wetland Rating Worksheet
E. North Carolina Wildlife Resources Comrnission Correspondence
-vr

1.0 Introduction
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. (KHA) has been retained by the North Carolina Department of
Transportation (NCDOT) to complete natural resources investigations associated with the replacement
of Bridge No. 45 over Jordan Creek in Alamance County, North Carolina. The following Natural
Resources Technical Report is submitted to assist in the preparation of the Categorical Exclusion (CE)
for the proposed project.
1.1 Project Description
The proposed project, Transportation Improvement Project (TIP) No. B-4000, will replace Bridge No.
45 on Jeffries Cross Road (SR 1002) over Jordan Creek in Alamance County, North Carolina (Figure
1). The bridge, constructed in 1950, is currently in poor condition and in need of replacement. The
replacement is intended to provide a safer bridge structure consistent with federal and state bridge
standards. Photographs of the project study area are included in Appendix A.
For the purposes of this report, the following terminology is used define the limits of the natural
resource investigations.
Project study area -denotes the area bound by the proposed right-of-way limits along the full length
of the project alignment. No alternatives for the proposed project have been defined, therefore, the
project study area is comprised of an area approximately 3,500 feet (1,067 meters) long and 400 feet
(122 meters) wide consisting of nearly 32 acres (13 hectares). Approximately 4801inear feet of
Jordan Creek is located within the project study area.
Project vicinity- denotes an area extending 0.5 miles (0.8 kilometers) on all sides of the project study
area.
Project region - is equivalent to an area represented by a 7.5 minute USGS quadrangle map with the
project study area occupying the central portion.
1.2 Purpose
The purpose of this technical report is to inventory, catalog, describe, and quantify the natural systems
within the project study area. Specifically, the evaluations conducted for this study include: 1) an
assessment of physical resources, including geology, soils, and water resources; 2) an assessment of
biotic resources including plant communities, aquatic habitats, terrestrial wildlife and aquatic species;
3) an evaluation of waters of the U.S. including surface waters and wetlands, along with a preliminary

A

,
_-
~ !
i
c:~
.
~
I -_ -1 - ~ - i. -
1

F
.~I 4
~.
_ + ~ _ ~E 4
1,_
• ~ ~ gyp, J f ~` t ,! I ti
I v -
:7 i i1
•i
~
-
' ,
~ _
~ T _
~~
~~ ~
II
-_ - t
- _ + ,
r

f ~ ~ ~~
44 ~L'
t ~ r {~

_ - (
~
~ t
j _ _ ~ .` ti
~-
I ~ ~
~
I _ i ~
__
~
~ti
1

~_.
5. j
(
,
~
.. ~ , y
. I,
.f
_ _ _ _ _ _ 6' j r5.. i_ -

_ i ,s
a r

r i
•
- ~
ii
~
I
- t _ ' -

- .. __
leis. ~ _
Legend
Project Study Area
N
W E
S
2,000 4
Feet
Title Vicinity Map (USGS Quad Lake Burlington, North Cazolina 1969)
Prepared For: Project Study Area
^~^ ~ ,aerx ~ Project T.I.P. No. B-4000 Replacement of Bridge #45 on SR 1002
~ , :`~ ~`c Alamance Coun ,North Cazolina
Kimley-Hom ~ Date: Scale: Pro'ect No. Fi re.
and Associates, Inc. l s l ~
`~'+r „ ,p..•~ 2/25/03 1 in. = 2,000 ft. 011700019 1

discussion of Section 404/401 permit requirements and conceptual mitigation needs; 4) an assessment
of rare and protected species habitat; 5) mapping of natural resource features, including plant
communities, jurisdictional surface waters and wetlands, and potential habitat for federally protected
species; and 6) an evaluation of potential impacts resulting from construction, as well as
recommendations for measure which may minimize resource impacts.
These descriptions and estimates are based on the existing project study area. If the criteria change,
additional field investigations may be necessary.
1.3 Methodology
Qualified biologists from KHA and Edwards-Pitman Environmental, Inc. conducted field
investigations along-the project study area during the month of January 2003. Pedestrian surveys were
undertaken to determine natural resource conditions and to document natural communities, wildlife,
and the presence of protected species or their habitats.
Published information regarding the project study area and region was derived from a number of
sources including: USGS 7.5-minute topographical quadrangle map (Lake Burlington, North
Carolina), United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFW) database reviews, National Wetland
Inventory (NWI) Map, NCDOT aerial photography (1" = 200'), and Natural Resources Conservation
Service (NRCS) soil survey mapping of Alamance County.
Surface waters within the project study area were evaluated in the field to document their physical
characteristics and jurisdictional status. The top of bank and/or centerline of streams, depending on
channel widths, were surveyed and recorded in the field using Global Positioning Satellite (GPS)
survey methods. Water resources information was obtained from publications of the North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources Division of Water Quality (DENR-DWQ).
Approximate boundaries of plant communities were mapped in the field utilizing aerial photography
of the project study area. Dominant plant species were identified in each strata for each plant
community. Plant community descriptions are based on the classifications utilized by Schafale and
Weakly (1990). Plant names follow the nomenclature found in Radford et al. (1968).
Wildlife occurrences were determined through visual field observations, evaluation of habitat-types
within the project study area, secondary indicators of species (tracks, scat, and burrows), as well as a
review of supporting literature (Coe, 1994, Martof, et al 1980, and Webster, 1985). Field observations
and literature reviews (Bogan, 2002, Jenkins and Burkhead, 1993) were utilized to assess aquatic life.
-2-

Information concerning the potential occurrence of federal and state protected species within the
project study area and project vicinity was obtained from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
list of protected species (updated January 29, 2003) and the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program
(NCNHP) database of rare species and unique habitats (updated July, 2002). Field evaluations of the
project study area were conducted to identify suitable habitat for protected species. If suitable habitat
was identified, field surveys were conducted for Federally listed endangered or threatened species if
the field investigation corresponded to the appropriate survey season for the species.
Jurisdictional wetlands were identified and delineated based upon the methodology outlined in the
1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory, 1987). Wetland
systems were classified based upon the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Classification of Wetlands and
Deepwater Habitats of the United States (Cowardin, et al., 1979). Wetland boundaries were located in
the field using Global Positioning System (GPS) methods with sub-meter accuracy.
l.4 Qualifications of Principal Investigators
Investigator: Andrew Kiley, Environmental Scientist
Education: BS, Biology, University of Notre Dame du Lac
Experience: Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2000 to present
St. John's River Water Management District 1998 to 2000
Expertise: Wetland/Stream Delineation, Geographic Information Systems, Stream Restoration
Investigator: Rick Filer, Project Ecologist
Education: BS, Biology, Kennesaw State University
Experience: Edwards-Pitman Environmental, March 2001 to present
Environmental Scientist, Environmental Aspecs of Georgia
September 1999 to March 2001
Expertise: Wetland/Stream Delineation, Permitting, Threatened and Endangered Species
Surveys
2.0 Physical Resources
Alamance County is situated in the northwestern portion of the Piedmont physiographic province.
The geography of the county consists predominantly of gently sloping uplands and broad, nearly level
floodplains along most streams. The elevation of the project study area is approximately 550 feet (168
meters) above Mean Sea Level (MSL) as depicted on the Lake Burlington, North Carolina, USGS
topographic quadrangle map (Figure 1). The land uses surrounding and within the project study area
-3-

are mainly agriculture and forestry with some residential development. An old gas station is located
in the northwest quadrant of the SR 1002 and Lowder Road intersection.
2.1 Geology
The geologic features underlying the project study area are associated with the Carolina slate belt,
specifically, metamorphosed granitic rock (late Proterozoic to Late Cambrian). The granitic rock is
megacrystic, well foliated, and locally may contain hornblende, Vance county suite, and Buckhorn
granite (North Carolina Geological Society, 1985).
2.2 Soils
Soil associations are classified as a group of defined and named taxonomic soil units occurring
together in an individual and characteristic pattern over a general region. The soils within an
association generally vary in depth, slope, stoniness, drainage, and other characteristics. Based on
information contained in the soil survey data for Alamance County, the soils within the project study
area are composed of two soil series and two unclassified soil groups.
Helena clay loam (HaC3) 6-10 % slopes
In many areas, this soil has lost most of its original surface soil and part of its subsoil through erosion.
This association consists of moderately well-drained, strongly acidic soils found on the smooth
uplands of the Piedmont Plateau. Helena clay loam soils are typically a gray to grayish brown clay
loam. Surface runoff is rapid on bare and unprotected areas. The shrink-swell potential of the soil is
moderate to high. The depth to bedrock is greater than 5 feet and the high water table is below 4 feet.
The permeability of the subsoil is slow.
Helena coarse sandy loam (HbB and HbC) 2-10% slopes
This association consists of somewhat poorly and moderately well-drained, acidic soils found on
smooth uplands or on side slopes and near the top of slopes. Helena coarse sandy loam soils are
typically a dark grayish brown sandy loam at the surface. The subsoil is typically mottled brownish
yellow and gray sandy clay. This soil .has a friable, very permeable surface soil that has a low
capacity to hold available water. The shrink-swell potential of the soil is moderate to high. The depth
to bedrock is greater than 5 feet and the high water table is below 4 feet.
Wilkes soils, sloping phase (WbC and WbD2) 6-1 S % slopes
This association consists of excessively drained, strongly acidic soils found on the steeper side of
slopes. Wilkes soils are typically a gray or yellowish gray sandy loam with yellowish brown mottles
found in the subsoil. This soil has a thinner surface soil due to loss through erosion The shrink-swell
-4-

potential of the soil is low and has a variable permeability rate. The depth to bedrock is 1 to 10 feet
and the high water table is below 8 feet.
Mixed Alluvial land (Mc)
This land consists of material that has accumulated from the sediments washed down from the
surrounding upland areas. This land occurs on bottoms that border meandering streams that have
shallow banks. In many places, the whole area is comprised of a maze of old stream channels and
natural levees. The land is poorly drained with a high organic content. Most alluvial areas do not have
developed horizons but have various layers of sand, silt, and clay layers occurring at various depths.
This land is typically flood-prone.
Local Allcvial land (Ld)
This land consists of material that has accumulated from the sediments washed down from the
surrounding upland areas. The land is poorly drained with a high organic content. Most alluvial areas
do not have developed horizons but have various layers of sand, silt, and clay layers occurring at
various depths. This land is typically flood-prone. This well drained alluvial land consists of materials
that sloughed or was washed down from the surrounding soils.
The NRCS defines a hydric soil as one that is saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the
growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part of the soil. Such soils usually
support hydrophytic vegetation. Based on information obtained from the Alamance County soil
survey, Helena, Wilkes, and Local Alluvial land are not classified as hydric and do not contain hydric
inclusions. Local Alluvial land may contain hydric inclusions due to landscape position.
2.3 Water Resources
Streams, creeks, and tributaries within the project vicinity are part of the Haw River watershed within
the Cape Fear River Basin. The Cape Fear River basin is the largest river basin in the state covering
9,149 square miles in twenty-four counties. The Cape Fear River is formed by the confluence of the
Deep and Haw Rivers.
Jordan Creek and an unnamed tributary of Jordan Creek represent the surface waters in the project
study area. The project is located approximately one mile east of Lake Burlington. It is situated in
NCDWQ Sub-basin 03-00-40 and the Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) is 03030002. The project study
area contains approximately 4801inear feet of Jordan Creek and approximately 6001inear feet of an
unnamed tributary of Jordan Creek.
-5-

Jordan Creek is a perennial stream that flows north to south underneath the bridge proposed for
replacement. The top of bank width is approximately 22 feet wide with a wetted width of 18 to 20
feet. One to three feet of moderately flowing water was observed within the channel during the site
visit. Jordan Creek has a bankfull depth of 5.5 feet throughout the project study area. The 3 to 5 feet
tall stream banks appeared stable. The substrate consisted of silt and sand. The water was clear with
moderate sediment deposition. The stream received a DWQ stream classification of 54. DWQ stream
classification forms are contained in Appendix B.
Based on Rosgen classification, Jordan Creek is an "F" channel. It is entrenched with a meandering,
riffle/pool channel on a low gradient with a high width/depth ratio.
An unnamed tributary to Jordan Creek is located approximately 100 to 200 feet south of SR 1002
within the project study area. The moderately flowing tributary runs parallel to SR 1002 for
approximately 600 feet, flowing east to west, discharging into Jordan Creek approximately 100 feet
south of the existing bridge. The unnamed tributary to Jordan Creek appears to be a perennial stream.
The top of bank width is approximately 8 feet wide with a wetted width of 1-foot. During the field
review, 1 to 3 inches of water was observed in the channel. The stream has a bankfull depth of 2 feet
throughout the project study area. The stream banks were deeply incised and unstable. The substrate
consisted of silt and sand. The water was clear and had moderate sediment deposition. The tributary
received a DWQ classification of 26.5. Although the water levels observed in the channel during the
non-growing season (January) would indicate that the channel was likely intermittent, other primary
field indicators observed such as the channels geomorphology and biological indicators are
characteristic of a perennial stream. KHA will schedule a field verification with the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers (USAGE) and the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) to obtain a final
jurisdictional determination for the tributary.
NCDWQ classifies surface waters of the state based on their intended best uses. Jordan Creek and its
tributaries are classified as "WS-II NSW" waters. Class "WS-II" denotes waters protected as water
supplies which are generally in predominantly undeveloped watersheds. The supplemental
classification, Nutrient Sensitive Waters (NSW), denotes waters subject to growths of microscopic or
macroscopic vegetation requiring limitations on nutrient inputs.
No High Quality Waters (HQW) or Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW) occur within the project
vicinity. Jordan Creek and its tributaries are not listed on the DWQ 2000 Draft 303 (d) list of
impaired waters.
-6-

Jordan Creek and it unnamed tributary are not classified as C-Tr (Trout) and Alamance County is not
one of the 25 mountain counties designated by the North Carolina Wildlife Resource Commission
(NCWRC) as containing Mountain Trout Waters (MTWs). Jordon Creek does not support trout or
anadromous fish species and is not designated as essential fish habitat. Jordan Creek does support a
diverse sunfish population and a moratorium on in-stream work will be requested by the NCWRC
from April 1 to June 15 (2/19/03 memorandum from Shari Bryant ,NCWRC -Appendix E).
The Ambient Monitoring System (AMS) is a network of stream, lake, and estuarine water quality
monitoring stations strategically located for the collection of physical and chemical water data. The
type of water quality data or parameters collected is determined by the waterbodies' classification and
corresponding water quality standards. The AMS determines the "use support" status of waterbodies,
meaning how well a waterbody supports its designated uses. On July 6, 1998, macroinvertebrate data
was collected from Jordan Creek. The site was rated as "good-fair".
2.3.1 Point and Non point Soccrce Discharges
Point source dischargers are permitted through the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) program and are required to register for a permit. Based upon DWQ's database, there are
no NPDES permit locations within one mile of the project study area.
Non-point source discharge refers to runoff that enters surface waters through stormwater, snowmelt
or atmospheric deposition. Land use activities such as land development, construction, mining
operations, crop production, animal feeding lots, failing septic systems, landfills, roads and parking
lots are contributors of non-point source pollutants. The land uses surrounding and within the project
study area are mainly agriculture and forestry with some residential development. An old gas station is
located in the northwest quadrant of the SR 1002/Lowder Road intersection. Sediment is the most
widespread cause of non-point source pollution in North Carolina. In agriculture, sediment and
nutrients are major polluters. Land clearing and plowing disturbs soils to a degree where they are
susceptible to erosion, which can lead to sedimentation in streams. Pesticides, chemical fertilizers,
and land application of animal wastes can be transported via runoff to receiving streams and
potentially elevate concentrations of toxic compounds and nutrients. Animal wastes can also be a
source of bacterial contamination and elevate biochemical oxygen demand.
2.4 Physical Resoccrces Impacts
The proposed project is expected to impact both soils and topography. The topography is gently
sloping. The possible construction of a new bridge and/or road improvements is likely to require the
7-

removal of soils and the placement of fill. No adverse long-term impacts to soils and topography are
expected from the proposed bridge replacement.
The primary sources of water-quality degradation in rural areas are nonpoint-source discharges and
storm water runoff. Precautions should be taken to minimize impacts to water sources in the project
vicinity. Aquatic organisms are very sensitive to discharges and inputs from construction.
Appropriate measures must be taken to avoid petroleum spillage and control runoff. Potential impacts
associated with construction of the proposed project include the following: increased sedimentation
resulting from the clearing of streams and in-stream construction activities, soil compaction, loss of
shading due to vegetation removal, and fertilizers and pesticides used in revegetation. Measures to
minimize these potential impacts include formulation of an erosion and sedimentation control plan,
provision for waste material and storage, stormwater management measures, and appropriate road-
maintenance measures. NCDOT's Best Management Practices for Protection of Surface Waters
(BMPs-PSW) and Sedimentation Control guidelines should be strictly enforced during the
construction stages of the project. Limiting in-stream activities and revegetating stream banks
immediately following the completion of grading can further reduce impacts. No adverse long-term
impacts to water resources are expected to result from the proposed bridge replacement.
3.0 Biotic Resources
This section describes the existing vegetation and associated wildlife that occur within the project
study area. The project study area is composed three different vegetative communities based on
topography, soils, hydrology, and disturbance. These systems are interrelated and in many aspects
interdependent. Potential impacts affecting these communities are also discussed. Scientific
nomenclature and common name (when applicable) are provided for each plant and animal species
listed. Subsequent references to the same organism only include the common name.
3.1 Plant Communities
Three plant communities were observed in the project study area: piedmont alluvial forest, mesic
mixed hardwood/pine, and fallow field. Also, located within the project study area are maintained-
disturbed areas that include the grassed shoulders on both sides of SR 1002, and single-family
residential lawns. An overhead utility is located within the SR 1002 right-of-way. The plant
communities are mapped on Figure 2 and are described in Table 1.
-8-

Table 1. Land Use within the Project Study Area.
Community Type Acres (Hectares) Percentage of Project Study Area
Piedmont Alluvial Forest 3.5 (1.4) 10%
Mesic Mixed Hardwood/Pine Forest 13.5 (5.5) 42%
Fallow Field 2.7 (1.1) 8%
Maintained-Disturbed Area 13.0 (5.3) 40%
3.1.1 Piedmont Alluvial Forest
The piedmont alluvial forest community is situated along the floodplain of the Jordan Creek. This
alluvial forest can best be characterized as a variation of the Piedmont Alluvial Forest (Schafale and
Weakly, 1990). Approximately 3.5 acres (1.4 hectares) of this community are located within the
project study area comprising 10% of the plant communities within the project study area. The
canopy was dominated by river birch (Betula nigra), sycamore (Platanus occidentalis), sweetgum
(Liquidambar sryraciflua), tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), red maple (Acer rubra~m), and
American elm (Ulmus americana). Understory trees, shrubs, vines, and herbs included musclewood
(Carpinus caroliniana), box elder (A. negundo), black willow (Salix nigra), Chinese privet (Ligustrum
sinense), greenbrier (Smilax spp.), poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans), Japanese honeysuckle
(Lonicera japonica), crossvine (Anisostichus capreolata), blackberry (Rubus spp.), river oats
(Chasmanthium latifolium), wild onions (Album canadense), and chickweed (Stellaria media).
3.1.2 Mesic Mixed Hardwood/Pine Forest
The mesic mixed hardwood/pine community is located on the upland slopes and ridges.
Approximately 13.5 acres (5.5 hectares) of this community are located within the project study area
comprising 42% of the plant communities within the project study area. This fragmented community
was dominated by tulip poplar, white oak (Quercus alba), shortleaf pine (Pinus echinata), various
oaks (Q. spp.), and eastern red cedar (Juniperus virginiana). Vines include crossvine and greenbrier.
The forested floor contained scattered Christmas fern (Polystichum acrostichoides).
3.1.3 Fallow Field
The fallow field is located adjacent to the single-family residences. Approximately 2.7 acres (1.1
hectares) of this community are located within the project study area comprising 8% of the plant
communities within the project study area. The Feld is dominated by little bluestem (Schizachyrium
scoparium), broomsedge (Andropogon virginicus), fescue grass (Festuca spp.) and Bermuda grass
(Cynadon dacrylon).
-9-

3.1.4 Maintained-Disturbed Area
The maintained-disturbed areas are located on the grassed shoulders on both sides of SR 1002 and
within the maintained residential lawns. An overhead utility is located within the SR 1002 right-of-
way. Because of mowing and the use of herbicides, this community is kept in a constant state of early
succession. The dominant species in this community are fescue and Bermuda grass with scattered
oaks and ornamental shrubs. Approximately 13 acres (5.3 hectares) of this community are located
within the project study area comprising 40% of the plant communities within the project study area.
3.2 Terrestrial Wildlife
The maintained roadside, overhead utility right-of-way, and fallow field provide rich ecotones for
foraging, while the alluvial forest provides foraging and cover. White-tailed deer (Odocoilieus
virginianus) and raccoon (Procyon lotor) tracks were observed along Jordan Creek. Rabbit scat was
observed and evidence of past beaver foraging were observed within the alluvial forest community.
The field survey was conducted on January 14, 2003 as repair work by NCDOT was being performed
on the bridge over Jordan Creek. This repair work most likely frightened many wildlife species.
Although sightings of wildlife accustomed to human activity was observed such as the American crow
(Corvus brachyrhynchos), red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), cardinal (Cardinalis cardinalis), and
turkey vulture (Cathartes aura) was observed.
Common mammals, which could be expected to utilize the project study area habitat, includes the
opossum (Didelphis virginiana), gray squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis), striped skunk (Mephitis
mephitis), coyote (Canis latrans), red fox (Vulpes vulpes), gray fox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) and
various shrews, moles, bats, and mice.
Common birds, which could be expected to utilize the project study area habitat, includes the Carolina
chickadee (Parus carolinensis), mockingbird (Mimus polygottos), wild turkey (Meleagris gallopavo),
mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), field sparrow (Spizella pusilla), robin (Turdus migratorius),
Carolina wren (Thryothorus ludovicianus), cardinal, and blue jay (Cyanocitta cristata).
Common reptiles and amphibians, which could be expected to utilize the project area habitat, includes
eastern garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis sirtalis), water snakes (Nerodia spp.), eastem box turtle
(Terrapene Carolina), five-lined skink (Eumeces fasciathus), toads (Bccfo spp.), leopard frogs (Rana
spp.), tree frogs (Hyla spp.), and salamanders (Ambystomn spp.).
-io-

3.3 Aquatic Habitats and Wildlife
Jordan Creek and its associated tributary provide aquatic habitat within the project study area. The
physical characteristics (size and water quality) of the stream, as well as the adjacent terrestrial
community, directly influence faunal composition of this aquatic community. The quality of aquatic
habitat within the project study area is expected to be moderate due to agricultural run-off and the
amount of sediment deposition. Woody debris located throughout the stream provides habitat, shade,
and concealment pockets for several aquatic species. Aquatic invertebrates are a major component of
aquatic ecosystems, as primary and secondary consumers, as well as prey items for organisms higher
in the food chain.
Insects typically found in this type of community include Mayflies (Ephemeroptera), stoneflies
(Plecoptera), caddisflies (Tricoptera), dragonflies (Odonta sp.), aquatic beetles (Coleoptera), mosquito
larvae (Culicidae sp.) and midges (Chironomidae sp.). caddisflies were observed in Jordan Creek and
its associated tributary. Crayfish (Decapoda) chimneys were observed in Jordan Creek.
Fishery data was collected for Jordan Creek by NCDWQ in November 1993 and by the N.C. State
Museum of Natural Sciences in August 2001. Fish species collected within the project vicinity
include gizzard shad (Dorosoma cepedianum), highfin shiner (Notropis altipinnis), bluehead chub
(Nocomis leptocephalus), coastal shiner (N. petersoni), creek chub (Semotilus atromaculatus), creek
chubsucker (Erimyzon oblongus), yellow bullhead (Ameiurus natalis), speckled killifish (Fundulus
rathbuni), flier (Centrarchus macropterus), redbreast sunfish (Lepomis auritus), green sunfish (L.
cyanellus), pumpkinseed (L. gibbosus), warmouth (L. gulosus), bluegill (L. macrochirus), redear
sunfish (L. microlophus), largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides), tessellated darter (Etheostoma
olmstedt~, crescent shiner (Luxilus cerasinus), golden shiner (Notemigonus crysoleucas), shallowtail
shiner (N. procne), rosyside dace (Clinostomus funduloides), and notchlip redhorse (Moxostoma
collapsum).
Freshwater mussels that may occur include spike (Elliptio spp.), Carolina lance (E.angustata),
Carolina slabshell (E.congaraea) and pondhorn (Uniomerus sp.). Other species likely to be found
include snapping turtle (Chelydra serpentina), Eastern mud turtle (Kinosternon subrubrum), sliders
(Chrysemys scripta), and painted turtles (Chrysemys pitta).
3.4 Biotic Resource Impacts
Design alternatives have yet to be identified for this project, therefore, no estimated area of impact to
these natural communities has been calculated at this time. Table 1 describes the acreage of plant
communities within the project study area; however, actual impact acreage within the construction
-11-

limits will be less. Impacts to plant communities associated with construction activities include the
removal of vegetation, soil compaction, damaging and/or exposing root systems, as well as potential
impacts associated with petroleum spills.
Due to the minimal disturbance of plant communities anticipated as a result of the bridge replacement,
significant impacts to terrestrial wildlife populations are not expected.
Loss of wildlife is an unavoidable aspect of development. Temporary fluctuations in populations of
animal species that utilize these communities are anticipated during the course of construction. Slow-
moving, burrowing, and/or subterranean organisms will be directly impacted by construction
activities, while mobile organisms will be displaced to adjacent communities. Competitive forces in
the adapted communities will result in a redefinition of population equilibria.
Aquatic organisms are acutely sensitive to changes in their environment and environmental impacts
from construction activities may result in long term or irreversible effects. Impacts usually associated
with in-stream construction activities include alterations to the substrate and impacts adjacent
streamside vegetation. Such disturbance within the substrate lead to increased siltation, which can
clog the gills and/or feeding mechanisms of benthic organisms, fish, and amphibian species. Siltation
may also cover benthic macroinvertebrates with excessive amounts of sediment that inhibit their
ability to obtain oxygen.
The removal of streamside vegetation and placement of fill material during construction enhances
erosion and possible sedimentation. Quick revegetation of these areas helps to reduce the impacts by
supporting the underlying soils. Erosion and sedimentation may carry soils, toxic compounds, trash,
and other materials into the aquatic communities at the construction site. As a result, bars may form at
and downstream of the site. Increased light penetration from the removal of streamside vegetation
may increase water temperatures. Warmer water contains less oxygen, thus reducing aquatic life that
depends on high oxygen concentrations.
4.0 Waters of the United States
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act requires regulation of discharges into "Waters of the United
States." The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) is the principle administrative agency
of the Clean Water Act; however, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE) has the responsibility
for implementation, permitting, and enforcement of the provisions of the Act. The USAGE regulatory
program is defined in 33 CFR 320-330.
12

Wetlands, streams, and open waters are regulated by the USACE pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean
Water Act. The North Carolina DENR-DWQ also has regulatory input through Section 401 Water
Quality Certification. Wetlands, defined in 33 CFR 328.3, are those areas that are inundated or
saturated by surface water or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and under
normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil
conditions. Any action that proposes to place fill into these areas fall under the jurisdictional of the
USACE under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344).
4.l Surface- Waters
The DWQ defines a perennial stream as a clearly defined channel that contains water for the majority
of the year. These channels usually have some or all of the following characteristics: distinctive
streambed and bank, aquatic life, and groundwater flow or discharge. Jordan Creek and its associated
tributary were identified as perennial streams in the project study area. Detailed stream
characteristics, including specific water-quality designations, are present in Section 2.3 Water
Resources. DWQ stream classification forms are contained in Appendix B.
4.2 Jurisdictional Wetlands
The project study area was surveyed for jurisdictional wetlands in accordance with guidelines for
wetland definition as given in the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. This
approach incorporates three criteria in delineating wetlands: (1) the presence of hydrophytic
vegetation, (2) the presence of hydric soils, and (3) evidence of wetland hydrology. All three criteria
must be present in a given location for an area to be considered a jurisdictional wetland.
Two jurisdictional wetlands were associated with the project study area within the piedmont alluvial
forest community. Wetland 1 was located north of SR 1002 and west of Jordan Creek. Wetland 2
was located south of SR 1002 and east of Jordan Creek. The boundaries of each of these wetland
locations were identified in the field and located using GPS. The location of the wetlands is shown in
Figure 3.
Wetland 1 is a forested wetland dominated by sweetgum, American elm, tulip poplar, red maple, and
sycamore with an open understory of scattered Chinese privet, Japanese honeysuckle, and greenbrier.
Drainage patterns and manmade ditches were present. Based on the Cowardin classification, the
wetland is a Palustrine Forested Broad Leave Deciduous (PFO1). USACE data forms are contained in
Appendix C.
-13-

Wetland 2 is dominated by red maple, sweetgum, riverbirch, willow oak, and sycamore. Near the
roadside, this wetland system was part of the maintained right-of-way associated with overhead
utilities and was dominated by rush (Juncus sp.). Based on the Cowardin classification, the wetland
dominated by trees is classified as a PFO1 and the portion within the utility right-of-way is classified
as a Palustrine Emergent Marsh Persistent (PEM1). USACE data forms are contained in Appendix C.
4.3 Wetland Functional Assessment
Wetland values for each area within the project study area were evaluated using the Fourth Version of
the Guidance for Rating the Values of Wetlands in North Carolina. This procedure rates wetlands
according to six functional parameters: water storage, bank/shoreline stabilization, pollutant removal,
wildlife habitat, aquatic life value, and recreationaUeducational value. Each parameter is numerically
weighted to assess the water quality functions that the wetland system performs.
Wetland 1 received a numerical ranking of 16 and is considered a low quality wetland. Wetland 2
received a numerical ranking of 26 and is considered a low quality wetland. The Wetland Ranking
scores for each wetland is listed in Appendix D.
4.4 Impacts to Waters of the United States
Since no alternatives have been selected, specific impacts to "Waters of the United States" cannot by
determined. However, some impacts to Jordan Creek and its tributary, Wetland 1, and Wetland 2
could be anticipated for the proposed project. Table 2 describes the acreage of the wetlands and linear
footage of the streams located within the project study area; however, actual impacts within the
construction limits will be less.
Table 2. Jurisdictional Wetlands and Streams within the Project Study Area.
Jurisdictional Wetland/Stream Potential Impact Amount
Wetland 1 0.75 Acres (0.3 hectare)
Wetland 2 0.30 Acres (0.1 hectare)
Jordan Creek 480 Linear feet (146 meters)
UT Jordan Creek 600 Linear feet (183 meters)
4.5 Permit Requirements
Impacts to "Waters of the United States" come under the jurisdiction of the USACE. Permits will be
required for highway encroachment into jurisdictional wetlands and streams. The Nationwide Permit
-14-

#23 (Approved Categorical Exclusions) should cover the impacts to jurisdictional wetlands and
streams in the project study area. Nationwide Permit No. 33 (Temporary Construction, Access, and
Dewatering) may be needed for temporary construction access if that is not addressed in the NEPA
document. A final permitting strategy cannot be developed until a design alternative is selected.
A Section 401 General Water Quality Certification is also required for any activity which may result
in a discharge into "Waters of the United States" or for which an issuance of a federal permit is
required. The issuance of a required Section 401 certification is a prerequisite to the issuance of a
Section 404 permit. Section 401 General Water Quality Certifications for NWP #23 and #33 are No.
3361 and 3366, respectively. However, written concurrence from the N.C. Division of Water Quality
(DWQ) is not required provided all standard conditions of these Certifications are met.
Final determination of permit applicability lies with USACE. NCDOT will coordinate with the
USACE after the completion of final design to obtain the necessary permits.
4.6 Mitigation
The USACE has adopted, through the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), a mitigation policy
which embraces the concepts of "no net loss of wetlands" and project 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: avoidance of impacts (to wetlands), minimizing impacts, rectifying impacts, reducing impacts
over time, and compensating for impacts (40 CFR 1508.20). Each of these aspects (avoidance,
minimization, and compensatory mitigation) must be considered in sequential order.
Avoidance mitigation examines all appropriate and practicable possibilities of averting impacts to
"Waters of the United States". According to a 1990 Memorandum of Agreement (MOE) between the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and the USACE, in determining "appropriate and
practicable" measures to offset unavoidable impacts, such measures should be appropriate to the scope
and degree of those impacts and practicable in terms of cost, existing technology, and logistics in light
of overall project purposes. Some unavoidable impacts to wetlands and surface waters may result
from project construction.
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, right-of-way widths, fill
-IS-

slopes, and/or road shoulder widths. The following methods are suggested to minimize adverse
impacts to "Waters of the United States":
1. Strictly enforce Best Management Practices (BMP's) to control sedimentation during project
construction.
2. Clearing and grubbing activity should be minimized.
3. Reestablishment of vegetation on exposed areas with judicious pesticides and herbicide
management.
4. Minimization of "in-stream" activity.
5. Minimization of roadway footprint width.
6. Bridge lengthening in environmentally sensitive areas.
Compensatory mitigation is not normally considered until anticipated impacts to "Waters of 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 adverse impacts that
remain after all appropriate and practicable minimization has been required. Compensatory actions
often include restoration, creation, and enhancement of "Waters of the United States", specifically
wetlands. Such actions should be undertaken in areas adjacent to or contiguous to the discharge site.
In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H.0506 (h) and 40 CFR 1508.20, mitigation will be required for
impacts to jurisdictional streams requiring mitigation when these impacts are equal to or greater than
150 linear feet per stream. Although the bridge replacement over Jordan Creek will likely impact less
than 1501inear feet of stream, parallel encroachments to the unnamed tributary of Jordan Creek could
exceed the 1501inear foot threshold and require mitigation (pending the jurisdictional determination
by the USACE and DWQ). In addition, mitigation may be required for wetland impacts exceeding
0.10 acre. At this time, no design alternatives have been selected; however, once alternative and right-
of-way widths are established, specific impact calculations for wetlands and streams can be
determined and mitigation requirement can be further evaluated.
4.7 Bridge Demolition into Waters of the United States
The demolition and removal of bridge No. 45 may involve dropping components of the bridge into
Jordan Creek as the only practical means of removal. According to Section 402-2 of NCDOT's
Standard Specifications for Roads and Structures, the chapter titled "Removal of Existing Structures"
outlines restrictions and Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition and Removal.
-16-

All spans over Jordan Creek may be considered potential fill except for structures that are all steel and
timber. The superstructure is timber deck on I-beams with steel channels and timber joints. The
substructure is mass concrete with steel caps. It is not known at this time if the superstructure and
substructure of bridge No. 45 are to be removed. Removal of the superstructure and substructure may
cause a fill.
4.8 Bicffer Rules
Currently, the only buffer regulations in the Cape Fear River Basin apply to the Randleman Reservoir
(15A NCAC 2B .0250 -Randleman Rules and Water Supply Buffer Requirements). Jordan Creek is
not located within the Randleman Reservoir watershed, therefore, no buffer rules apply for the
proposed project.
5.0 Rare and Protected Species
Federal law under the provisions of Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as
amended, requires that any action likely to adversely affect afederally-protected species be subject to
review by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Other species may warrant protection under separate
state laws.
S.l Federally-Protected Species
Plants and animals with federal classifications of Endangered (E), Threatened (T), Proposed
Endangered (PE), and Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under provisions of Section 7 and
Section 9 of the ESA. According to the January 29, 2003 USFWS intemet listing, no federally
endangered or threatened species are listed for Alamance County.
"Critical habitat," as defined in the Endangered Species Act (ESA), is a term for habitat given special
protection for the benefit of a listed species. Critical habitat, as defined by the USFWS, is not
designated for any species listed in Alamance County, North Carolina. In addition, according to
North Carolina's Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP's) database, no federally threatened, endangered,
or species of concern listed by the USFWS have been documented within a 1-mile radius of the
proposed project corridor.
5.2 Federal Species of Concern
There are five federal species of concern listed by the USFWS for Alamance County. Federal species
of concern (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. Federal species of concern are defined as species under consideration for listing for
-17-

which there is insufficient information to support listing as threatened or endangered. The status of
these species may be upgraded at any time, thus they are included here for consideration.
In addition, species which are listed as Endangered (E), Threatened (T), or Special Concern (SC) by
the NCNHP list of Rare Plant and Animal Species are afforded state protection under the NC State
Endangered Species Act and the NC Plant Protection and Conservation Act of 1979. The NCNHP list
of July 2002 included these species and identified an additional 9 species receiving protection under
state law. Protections afforded to species listed under state law are not applicable to this project.
However, federal protection status for these species may be upgraded in the future. Therefore,
consideration should be given to potential occurrences within the project study area. Table 3 lists the
federal species of concern, their state status, and the existence of suitable habitat within the project
study area.
Table 3. Federal Species of Concern Listed for Alamance County, North Carolina.
Scientific Name Common Name Federal State Habitat Habitat
Status Status Requirements Available
Monotropsis odorata Sweet pinesap FSC* SR-T Mixed deciduous Yes
woods
Etheostoma Collis Carolina darter FSC N/L Rivulets and Yes
lepidinion creeks with
infrequent short
riffles
Moxostoma sp. Carolina redhorse FSC N/L Riverine habitat No
Lampsilis cariosa Yellow FSC E Medium to large No
lampmussel rivers with
substrates that
range from silt to
cobble
Villosa vaughaniana Carolina FSC E Silty sand or clay Yes
creekshell along the banks
of small streams
Phacelia covillei Buttercup phacelia FSC SR-T Bottomlands, Yes
rich lower slopes
Note: FSC -Federal Species of Concern; E-Endangered; T-Threatened; SR-Significantly Rare Throughout Range;
N/L - No Listing; * denotes Historic Record-species last observed in county more than 20 years ago
-18-

Field assessments were conducted for potential habitat by biologists with KHA and EPEI in January
2003. The assessment included an evaluation of constraints to the presence of listed species within the
proposed project study area. Descriptions of these species and their habitat are discussed below.
Sweet pinesap
Sweet pinesap is a yellow, tawny, pinkinsh or red colored plant. The stems are glabrous with leaves
that are sessile, bract-like, widely lanceolate with a tapered to acute or obtuse apex. The flowers are in
bracteate racemes with pedicels in a pair of bracteoles. The species is known to occur in dry forests
and bluffs in the Piedmont and Mountain physiographic regions of the state. The plant flowers in
April and is usually identified by its odor, a sweet spicy smell, since it flowers under rotten logs and
leaves. Mixed deciduous woods were observed within the project study area along the floodplain of
Jordan Creek.
Carolina Darter
There are three allopatric taxa that compose the collis group of the Carolinas and Virginia. E. collis
lepidinion is known to occur in the Roanoke, Neuse, and Cape Fear drainages. Little is known on the
biology of the Carolina darter in nature. Its habitat includes hilly regions on the lower and middle
Piedmont. It occupies rivulets and creeks with infrequent short riffles in wooded and pasture areas.
Juveniles and adults reside in pools and very slow runs, usually occurring on sand, gravel, or detritus
in open and stick-littered areas. Potential habitat exists within the project study area.
Carolina Redhorse
The Carolina redhorse is a large catostomid that is found in mainstream riverine habitats. Historically,
it occurred in the southeastern Atlantic slope river drainages, from the Altamaha in Georgia to the Pee
Dee River in North and South Carolina. The Carolina redhorse is vulnerable to catastrophic accidents
and general habitat degradation. Water pollution and transportation accidents that result in spills of
hazardous chemicals could result in major fish kills. In addition, increased siltation that results from
construction projects could eliminate clean gravel substrates, which are used by the Carolina redhorse
for spawning. The elimination of these spawning habitats will greatly reduce the recruitment of new
generations of this species. Jordan Creek is not a mainstream riverine habitat.
Yellow Lampshell
The yellow lampshell is a medium sized mussel that reaches 120 mm in length. Male shells are
elliptical and somewhat elongate, and female shells are subovate with a bluntly rounded posterior
margin. The shells of this species often have a tinge of green with a waxy yellow periostracum and a
bluish-white nacre tinged with cream or salmon. The yellow lampshell is found in medium to large
-19-

rivers with substrates that range from silt to cobble. The historic range of the yellow lampshell extends
from the Ogeechee River Basin, Georgia, north to Nova Scotia, and westward to the St. Lawrence
River Basin. In North Carolina, this species is known to occur in the Pee Dee, Waccamaw, Cape Fear,
Neuse, and Pamlico basins. Marginal habitat for this species exists within the project study area.
Carolina creekshell
The Cazolina creekshell is a small sized sexually dimorphic mussel that can reach approximately 60
mm in length. The somewhat inflated shells are elliptical in males and obovate to trapezoidal in
females. The shells are dark brownish yellow with numerous dark green rays, and a shiny, white or
bluish-white nacre. The Cazolina creekshell is usually found in silty sand or clay along the banks of
small streams and have also been found occupying substrates of mixed sand and gravel. In North
Carolina, this species is known to occur in the Catawba, Pee Dee, Cape Feaz river basins. Potential
habitat exists within the project study area.
Buttercup phacelia
Buttercup phacelia is an annual spreading or decumbent herb with bristly hairs with three-parted
leaves. The species is known to occur in rich soils on floodplains and contiguous terraces and slopes
in central North Carolina. The plant flowers in April with tubular bell shaped pale blue or lavender
flowers. Rich soils with contiguous terraces and slopes were observed within the project study area
along the floodplain of Jordan Creek.
6.0 Conclusions
The project study area contains approximately 4801inear feet of Jordan Creek and approximately 600
linear feet of an unnamed tributary of Jordan Creek. Jordan Creek and its tributaries are classified as
"WS-II NSW" waters. No High Quality Waters (HQW), or Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW)
occur within the project vicinity. Jordan Creek and its tributaries are not listed on the DWQ 2000
Draft 303 (d) list of impaired waters. No buffer rules exist at this time for Jordan Creek and its
associated tributaries.
Jordan Creek does not support trout or anadromous fish species and is not designated as essential fish
habitat. According to the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, Jordan Creek does support
a diverse sunfish population and a warm water fish moratorium will be requested on in-stream work
from April 1 to June 15.
Two jurisdictional wetlands are located in the project study area in two of the four quadrants around
the bridge. Wetland impacts could exceed 0.10 acre and may require mitigation. An unnamed
-20-

tributary to Jordan Creek is located approximately 100 to 200 feet south of SR 1002 within the project
study area. The tributary parallels SR 1002 for approximately 6001inear feet before discharging into
Jordan Creek approximately 100 feet south of the existing bridge. If stream impacts exceed 1501inear
feet, mitigation will be required. No federally endangered or threatened species are listed for
Alamance County.
-21-

7.0 References
Bogan, A.E. 2002. Workbook and key to the freshwater bivalves of North Carolina. North Carolina
Museum of Natural Sciences, Raleigh, NC 101 pp, 10 color plates.
Brown, Kirkman 1990, 1993, 1996. Trees of Georgia and Adjacent States. Timber Press, Portland
Oregon. 292 pp, 80 color plates.
Coe, James. 1994. A Guide to Field Identification of North American Species of Eastern Birds.
Golden Press, New York.
Cowardin, L.M., V.Carter, F.C. Golet and E.T. LaRoe, 1979. Classification of Wetlands and
Deepwater Habitat of the United States. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of the
Interior.
Department of Natural Resources and Community Development. 1985. Geologic Map of North
Carolina. 1:500,000 scale. Compiled by the North Carolina Geological Survey.
Godfrey, Wooten. 1981. Aquatic and Wetland Plants of Southeastern United States Dicotyledons.
University of Georgia Press, Athens Georgia. 933 pp.
Godfrey, Wooten. 1981. Aquatic and Wetland Plants of Southeastern United States Monocotyledons.
University of Georgia Press, Athens Georgia. 712 pp.
Jenkins, R.E., and N.M. Burkhead. 1993. Freshwater fishes of Virginia. American Fisheries Society,
Bethesda, Maryland. 1079 pp, 40 color plates
Martof, Bernard S., William M. Palmer, Joseph R. Bailey and Julian R. Harrison, III 1980.
Amphibians and Reptiles of the Carolinas and Vir ig nia. The University of North Carolina
Press, Chapel Hill.
North Carolina Department of Agriculture. 1990. Plant Conservation Program List of North
Carolina's Endangered, Threatened and Candidate Plant Species. Raleigh, North Carolina.
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources -Division of Water
Quality. 2000. Cape Fear Basinwide Water Quality Plan. Raleigh, North Carolina.
-22-

a +
North Carolina Department of the Environment and Natural Resources -Division of Water Quality.
(2000). Stream Classifications by Hydrologic Unit. http://h20.enr.state.nc.us/strmclass/
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program. (2000). List of Rare Plant and Animal Species in North
Carolina. http://www.ncparks.net/nhp/
Protected Animals of Georgia 1999. Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Wildlife Resource
Division, and Nongame Wildlife-Natural Heritage Section.
Radford, Ahles, Bell. 1968. Manual of the Vascular Flora of the Carolinas. The University of North
Carolina Press, Chapel Hill. 1155 pp.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical
Report Y-87-1. Environmental Laboratory, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
United States Department of Agriculture. 1970. Soil Survey of Alamance County. U.S. Department
of Agriculture Press.
United States Department of Agriculture. 1991. Hydric Soils of the United States. U.S. Department
of Agriculture Press.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 1995. National Wetlands Inventory Map -Lake Burlington
Quadrangle. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service. (2000). Species Accounts.
http://endan~~red.fws.~~ov/wildlife.html
United States Geologic Survey. (1991). Topographic Map -Lake Burlington Quadrangle. U.S.
Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.
Webster, W.D., J.F. Parnell and W.C. Biggs. 1985. Mammals of the Carolinas, Virginia and
Maryland. The University of Chapel Hill Press, Chapel Hill.
-23-

Appendix A
Site Photographs

^_^
Project: Alamance B-4000
Client: North Cazolina
Department of
Transportation
Prepared by: DNW
Kimley-Horn
and Associates, Inc.
Project Number:
011700019
Page 1 of 2
Photo 2: Looking upstream of UT of Jordan Creek.
Photo 1: Looking upstream of Jordan Creek towazd bridge no. 45.

^_^
Kimley-Horn
and Associates, Inc.
Project: Alamance B-4000
Client: North Carolina
Department of
Transportation
Prepared by: DNW
Project Number:
011700019
Page 2 of 2
Photo 4: Looking west at Jordan Creek downstream of bridge no. 45
Photo 3: Looking west from Jordan Creek upstream of bridge no. 45.

Appendix B
DWQ Stream Classification Forms

. l~CDtiVQ Stream Classification Form
Project Nume: B ••loao River Basin: C..pa trot County: /~1.......ae Evaluator:.t~,,N,'W' 1
DWQ Project Numbcr. Nearest Named Stream: Te.J~...+ Latitude: 1~ ti I~~N Signature: r+•~-
r....k.
Date: eti(ovlo; USGS QUAD: Ir.lre B..lvy}...,N~ Longitude: 7~~x1 •a"W Location/Directions: Tn{.cyae.};a .F
*PLEASE NOTE: ljcvnhratur and landowner ngree llmt Ure feature is a man-made ditch, r/ten use ojdris fonrt is not necessary. 7 .Ar.n e~.olr./
Also, if in the best professional judgement ojfhr evahra(or, the jeanrre is a rnan-made ditch and nnf n madt'/ied naarral ttrenm-this T {'{.Jai C.~++ ~`J'
rating system should not be used*
Prima ry Fieltl Indicators: /cJ,r4 one Nanra~. P~. un~J
I. Geontor bolo Absent Weak hoderate Stron
1)Is There ARiffle-PoolSeauence? 0 2 3
2) Is The USDA Texture In S Veambed
Different From Surroundioe Terrain? 0 I m 3
3) Are Natural Levees Present? ® l 2 3
4)Is The Channel Sinuous? 0 1 m 3
5) Is There An Active (Or Relic)
a
II. Hvdrobev Absent Weak Moderate Stroue
1) Is There A Groundwater
- Flow/Dischar¢e Present? 0 ~ 2 3
PRIMARY HYDROLOGY INDICATOR POINTS: I
Secondary Field Indicators: rcrcJe O,Ie Nmrdm, Per Lae)
I. Genmor bolo Absent Weak Moderate Str u
1) Is There A Head Cul Present In Channeh 0 5 1 1
21 Is There A Grade Conyol Point In Channeh 0' .5 1 ( i
3) Does Topography Indicate A
Natural Drainaec Wav? 0 5 nl 1 5
SECONDARY GEQMORPHOLOGY INDICATOR POINTS: ~_
II. Hy_droloev Absent Wenk Nlodernte Strou
1) Is This Year's (Or Last's) Leaflit[er
J) Is Water In Channel Arld >48 Hrs. Since . 0 .5 I.5
[ 11 IVIt ~ • it N
5) Is There Water In Channel During Dry .5 • I 1.5
ond~uo Or In r w' S n ?
G) Are Hvdric Soils Present In Sides Of Channel (Or In Head~tl? Yes. LS No=O '
SECONDARY HYDROLOGY INDICATOR POINTS: 4.5
T~TAL P~INT.S (Printary + $econdary)=~(IjGreater Than Or Equal To 19 Points The Stream Is At Leas! In[mniaen!)
9) Is A Continuous Bed Sc Bank Present? 0 I ~ 3
L`NOTE: !l Bed A Bank~Caused By DirclWle And WITHOUT Sinuosirv Dmn Score=0•I
10) Is A 2"" Order Or Greater Channel (As Indicated
_ _ On Topo Mao And/Or [n Fieldl Present? Yes=3 No~O
PRIA/ARY GEOIYIORPHOLOGY INDICATOR POINTS:~~
PRIMARY BIOLOGY INDICATOR POINTS: ~a_
a! nee weuana Hants Jn Streamtxd'1 SAV Mostly OBL Mostly FACW Mostly FAC Mostly FAC.U htoslly UPL
(• NOTE: /j Torat .gbsn¢e OJAII Plana !n Srreambed 2 1 .75 .$ 0 0
A+ Noted A_buve Skin fi's Sr UNLESS SAV P a rh
SECONDARY BIOLOGY INDICATOR POINTS: I

• ~ NCDWO Stream Classification Form
Project Name: 3•yooe River Basin: Cope. Fc~r County: AI<...,ranGt. Evaluamr: Drit.J
La[itude:lt•~li t9.t.t.°f!
DWQProjectNumber: Nearest Named Stream: Sw~ SigttaNre: ~~
~
~o rdo,.. Ct ee1L
Date: ez~atfo=- USGS QUAD: l.r..kt 4~I: ~~,N~ Longitude:'11~s7~ o,e.7~t~ Location/Directions: _ ;~s•.hr~ •F
*PLEASE NOTE: Ijevaluatar mui btutownrr agree tluu the feature is a nwn-made ditch, then use ojth/s form is no[ necessary. J.•+-.. C...ek ~.:+++
S.RrH.• t:.•e R•+~.
ALso, if in the first professiondjudganrnt afthe evaluator, du femur is a man-quote ditch and not a modifud natural rtream~his
rating system s/wu/d not be usrd*
Primary Field Indicators: rcirrle one Nw~dxr Per tu¢)
I. Geomor holo Absent Weak Moderate Stron
1) Is There ARiffle-Pool Sequence? 0 1 2
Z) Is The USDA Texture In Streambed
Different From Surtoundine Terrain? 0 I 2
3 Are Natmal Levee Present? 0 1 2
4) Is The Channel Sinuous? 0 1 2
5) is Thue An Active (Or Relic) - -
PRIMr1 RY BIOLOGY INDICATOR POINTS: ~_
9) Is A Continuous Bed & Bank Present? 0 I 2 (~
!'NOTE: If Bed .F Bank Caiued By Ditchine Aid {YR'HOUT Sfnuasin 7Nen Sco re=0.1
10) Ls A god Ordu Or Gretitu Channel (As Indicated
On Topo Mao AntUOr In Field) Present? Yes No=O
PRIMARY GEOMORPHOLOGY INDICATOR POINTS: 28
II. Hvdroloev Absent Weak Moderate Strone
1) Ls Thue A Grouodwatu
.. Flow/Discharee Present? 0 1 2 CD.
PRI~LIARY HYDROLOGY INDICATOR POINTS: 3
III. Biolo Absent Weak Moderate Stron
D Are Fibrous Roots Present [n Streambed? - 2 1 0
2) Are Rooted Plants Present In Streambed? ® 2 1 0
3 Is Peri h ton Present? 0 2
4) Are Bivalves Present? 0 1 2 3
Secondary Field Indicators: rcirrlr one Namber Prr Lru)
I. Geomor holo Absent Weak Moderate Stron
1) Is There A Head Cut Present In Channel? ~ ~ .5 1 1.5
2) Is There A Grade Control Point [n Channel? - .5 1 1.5
3) Dces Topography Indicate A
Natural Drainaee Wav? 0 5 L
SECONDARY GEOMORPHOLOGY INDICATOR POINTS: r.5
II. Hvdroloev Absent Weak Moderate Strone
1) Is This Year's (Or Last's) Leaflit[u
Present In Streambed? ~ 1 5 0
4) Is W atu In Channel And >48 Hrs. Since 0 .5 1 1.5
Kn wn ~ ~ i I Sr n x
5) Is There Water In Channel During Dry 0 .5 • 1 1.5
ndi[ion Or I rowin Season ?
6) Are Hvdric Soils Present In Sides Of Channel (Or In Headcut)? Yes' .5 No=O
SECONDARY HYDROLOGY INDICATOR POINTS: A.S
8) Are Wetland Plants In Streambed? SAV NIastly OBL Mostly FACW Mostly FAC Mostly FACU Mostly UPL
(• NOTE: fJTotd Absenn OJAII Plante In Strcambed 2 1 .75 .5 0 0
~Npted Above Skin This Stm UNLESS SAV Presoa•1.
SECONDARY BIOLOGYlNDICATOR POINTS:_1~
TOTf1L PINTS (Primary + Secondary= ~" _(IjGreater T/tan Or Egtsal To 19 PoitRS The Stream Is A! Lead Intemrirlent)

Appendix C
USACE Wetland Data Forms

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual
PmjecVSite: State Route 1002 over Jordan Creek Date:
ApplicandOwne~ NCDOT County:
Investigator(s): Rick Filer & Andy Kiley State:
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site Yes No Community ID
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation) Yes (N~ Transect ID:
Is this area a potential Problem Area' Yes o Plot ID:
(If needed, explain on reverse
1/15/03
Alamance
North Carolina
Wetland 1
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Specie: Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Liquidambar strycal(lua Tree FAC+ 9.
2. Ulmus americans Tree FACW 10.
3. Liriodendron tulip era Tree FACU 11.
4. Acer rubrum Tree FAC 12.
5. Platanus occidentalis Tree FACW- 13.
6. Li,qustrum sinense Shrub FAC 14.
7. Lonicera japonica Vine FAC- 15.
S. Smilax.spp. Vine FAC 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC- 88%
Remarks:
Nvnu ni .nrv
_ Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks.
Stream, Lake, or tide Gauge
Aerial Photograph:
Other
No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Primary Indicators
x Inundated
x 5atutated in Upper 12 Inche:
x Water Marks
x Drift Line.
x Sediment Deposit:
Field Observations x Drainage Patterns in Wetland:
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Depth of Surface Water 0.3 (in.) x Oxidized Root Chaiurels in Upper 12Inche
x Water-Stained Leave:
Depth to Free Water in Pit 0 (in.) .Local Soil Survey Data
FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil 0 (in.) _
_ Other (Explain in Remarks;
Remarks:
Past Ditching

UV1LU
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase) Mixed alluvial fond Drainage Class: n/a
Field Observation:
'
Taxonomy (Subgroup) n/a Yes No
Confirm Mapped Type
Profile Description
Depth Matrix Color
Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions.
inches Horizon (Mansell Moist; (Mansell Moist; Abundance/Contrasl Sttucture, etc.
0-9 A lOYR 52 ClayLoam
3+ Bw IOYR4/1 IOYRS/4 10% C1ayLoam
Hydric Soil Indicators
Histoso] _ Concretions
_
Histic Epipedor _ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soil
_
Sulfidic Odoi _ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soil;
_
Aquic Moisture Regime _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils Lis
_
x Reducing Conditions _Listed on National Hydric Soils Lis
x Gleyed or Low-Chroma Color _ Other (Explain in Remarks;
Remarks:
tx/L~TT A 1~TTl TTi TTr UMTNA TT(1N
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yens No
Remarks:
Approved by HQUSACE 3/9i

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual
Pmject/Si[e: State Route 1002 over Jordan Creek Date:
Applicant/Ownea NCDOT County:
Investigator(s): Rick Filer etc Andy Kileti State:
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site ® No Community ID
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situatiar) Yes ~ Transect ID:
Is this area a potential Problem Area' Yes No Plot ID:
(If needed, explain on reverse
1/15/03
Alamance
North Carolina
Wetland 2
VF(TFTA TinN
Dominant Plant Specie: Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Liquidambar strycal/lua Tree FAC+ 9.
2. Ulmus americans Tree FACW 10.
3. Cahasmanthium latifolium Herb FAC- 11.
4. Aces rubrum Tree FAC 12.
5. Platanus occidentalis Tree FACW 13.
6. Ligsrstrum sinense Shrub FAC 14.
7. Juncus spp. Herb FAC 15.
8, puercus phellos Tree FACW- 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC- 100%
Remarks:
uvnuni.nc:v
_ Recorded Data (Describe in Remazks:
Stream, Lake, or tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
p~az
No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Primary Indicators
Inundated
x Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
x Water Marks
x Drift Line:
x Sediment Deposit:
Field Observations x Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Depth of Surface Water 0.1 (in.) x Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12Inche
x Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit 0 (in.) Local Soil Survey Data
x FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil 0 (in) _ Other (Explain in Remarks;
Remazks:

enrr c
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase) Mixed alluvial land Drainage Class: n/a
Field Observation:
ed T
e' Yes No
Confirm Ma
Taxonomy (Subgroup) n/a pp
yp
Profile Description
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Color? Mottle Texture, Concretions.
inches Horizon (Mansell Moist; (Mansell Moist; Abundance/Contrnsi Structure, etc.
0-4 A lOYR 52 Clay/Sand/Loam
5+ Bw IOYR52 10YR5/4 10-20% Clay/Sand/Loam
Hydric Soil Indicators
Histoso] _ Concretion:
_
Histic Epipedor _ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in 5aiidy Soil
_
Suhidic Odor Orgatuc Streaking in Sandy Soil;
Aquic Moisture Regimt _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils Lis
x Reducing Condition: _ Listed on National Hydric Soils Lis
x Gleyed or Low-Chroma Color. _ Other (Explain in Remarks;
Remarks:
WFTT A Nil T1F.TFRMTNA TTnN
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
Approved by HQUSACE 3/92

Appendix D
DWQ Wetland Rating Worksheet

WETLAND R~T.ING «tOP~SHEE°P~ Fourth Vernon
Project Name: TI l~ No . 3 - y o o y Nearest road: 5 R t o02
County: Alwvh~hc~ Wetland area: acres Wetland width: feet
Name of evaluator: ~ F ~ A K - Dater ~ ~S o3
Wetland location
on pond or lake
~_ on perennial stream
on intermittent stream
within interstream divide
other:
Soil series Wa~,~k.cG
predominantly organic
(humus, muck, or peat)
_ C~ predominantly mineral
(non-sandy)
predominantly sandy
Hydraulic factors
_ steep topography
_ ditched or channelized
- total riparian wetland width > l00 ft
Adjacent land use (within 1/: mile upstream,
upslope, or radius)
forested/natural vegetation 0
agriculture, urban suburban 30
impervious surface
Dominant vegetation
1) tr~~;d«»,bw~ ~y~o°~
0
3) L,~~r~d~.. {-M.li~~o.g
Flooding and wetness
semipermanently to permanently flooded
or inundated
~_ seasonally flooded or inundated
intermittently flooded or temporary
surface water
no evidence of flooding or surface water
Wetland type (select one)
Bottomland hardwood forest
~ Pine savanna
_
Headwater forest Freshwater marsh
Swamp forest Bog/fen
Wet flat Ephemeral wetland
Pocosin Carolina Bay
Bog forest Other
*The rating systemcannot be applied to salt or brackish marshes or stream channels. ~_ _
~ weight
R Water storage ~_ x 4.00 = `I
A Banlc/Shoreline stabilization ___Q__ x 4.00 = o
' ' T Pollutant removal 2 ' x 5.00 = +0 2~
I Low flow augmentation 1 x 2.00 = z
N Wildlife habitat ~- x 4.00 = g
G Aquatic life ~ x 1.00 = 1
'Add 1 point'if in sensitive watershed and >1 0% nonpoint disturbance within `/a mile radius.

~~'ETLAND R:~.TI~G ~VO'RKSHEET Fourth Version
"~ Project Name:. 1 Z~ No• B-yooo Nearest road: SR loot
County:. A1av+,a.v.cc Wetland area: acres Wetland width: feet
Name of evaluator: {t F ~ AK Date: o~ s o
Wetland location
on pond or lake
~_ on perennial stream
on intermittent stream
within interstream divide
other:
Dominant vegetation
Soil series Wo~a.rJlk.e~
predominantly organic
(humus, muck, or peat)
C predominantly mineral
(non-sandy)
predominantly sandy
Hydraulic factors
_ steep topography
_ ditched or channelized
_ total riparian wetland width > 100 ft
Adjacent land use (within'/z mile upstream,
upslope, or radius)
forested/natural vegetation ~ o
agriculture, urban suburban 30
impervious surface
1) l..i~k~d4rhba. S~yri cGl^lua
2) 1,/nI~IN.Ks arri6•~ carve
3) -TLV fu.I,~LLM
Flooding and wetness
semipermanently to permanently flooded
or inundated
seasonally flooded or inundated
~C_ intermittently flooded or temporary
surface water
no evidence of flooding or surface water
Wetland type (select one)
~_ Bottomland hardwood forest Pine savanna
Headwater forest Freshwater marsh
Swamp forest 'Bog/fen
Wet flat Ephemeral wetland
Pocosin Carolina Bay
Bog forest Other
*The rating system_cannot be applied to salt or brackish marshes or stream channels
'I weight
~ R Water storage ~ x 4.00 = ~_
A Bank/Shoreline stabilization ~_ x 4.00 = c
T Pollutant removal ~_' x 5.00 = ~_ ~~
I Low flow augmentation ~_ x 2.00 = ~_
N Wildlife habitat I x 4.00 = ~_
G Aquatic life _j_ x 1.00 = ~_
'Add 1 point if in sensitive watershed and >10% nonpoint disturbance within'/z mile radius.
i

Appendix E
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission Correspondence

® North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
1721 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1721, 919-733-3633
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: "Norton Webster
Kimley-Horn
FROM: Shari Bryant, Fisheries Biologist
Division of Inland Fisheries
DATE: February 19, 2003
SUBJECT: Request for information regarding N.C. Department of Transportation bridge
replacement projects in Alamance, Guilford, and Orange Counties, North
Carolina.
Below is the aquatic and fisheries information you requested regarding the subject bridge
replacement projects.
1. Alamance Co. -Jordan Creek: Jordan Creek is in the Cape Fear River watershed and has a
water quality classification of WSII-NSW. No threatened or endangered aquatic species are
documented in Jordan Creek. Fishery data has been collected from two sites. Below is the
species list for each site. Given the diverse sunfish population in Jordan Creek, I request a
moratorium on instream work from April 1 to June 15.
Date: 4 November 1993
Site: SR-1002
Collectors: N.C. Division of Water Quality
Gizzard shad Dorosoma cepedianum
Highfin shiner Notropis altipinnis
Bluehead chub Nocomis leptocephalus
Coastal shiner Notropis petersoni
Creek chub Semotilus atromaculatus
Creek chubsucker Erimyzon oblongus