19990010 Ver 1_Complete File_19990107

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
11 1 ? •
NC ENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
January 19, 1999
Franklin County
WQC 401 Project # 990010
APPROVAL of 401 Water Quality Certification
Bill Gilmore
NC DOT
PO Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Gilmore:
You have our approval, in accordance with the attached conditions, for the purpose of replacing bridge 49 over
Sandy Creek on SR 1412, as you described in your application dated January 7, 1999. After reviewing your application,
we have decided that this fill is covered by General Water Quality Certification Number 3107. This Certification allows
you to use Nationwide Permit Number 23 when the Corps of Engineers issues it. In addition, you should get any other
federal, state or local permits before you go ahead with your project including (but not limited to) Sediment and Erosion
Control, Coastal Stormwater, Non-Discharge and Water Supply Watershed regulations. Also this approval will expire
when the accompanying 404 or CAMA permit expires unless otherwise specified in the General Certification.
This approval is only valid for the purpose and design that you described in your application. If you change your
project, you must notify us and send us a new application. If the property is sold, the new owner must be given a copy of
this Certification and approval letter and is thereby responsible for complying with all conditions. If total wetland fills for
this project (now or in the future) exceed one acre, compensatory mitigation may be required as described in 15A NCAC
2H .0506 N. For this approval to be valid, you must follow the conditions listed in the attached certification.
If you do not accept any of the conditions of this certification, you may ask for an adjudicatory hearing. You must
act within 60 days of the date that you receive this letter. To ask for a hearing, send a written petition which conforms to
Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes to the Office of Administrative Hearings, P.O. Box 27447, Raleigh,
N.C. 276 1 1-7447. This certification and its conditions are final and binding unless you ask for a hearing.
. This letter completes the review of the Division of Water Quality under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. If you
have any questions, please telephone John Domey at 919-733-1786.
Attachment
cc: Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Corps of Engineers Raleigh Field Office
Raleigh DWQ Regional Office
Mr. John Dorney
Central Files
in rely,
Howard, Jr. P
990010.Itr
Division of Water Quality • Environmental Sciences Branch
Environmental Sciences Branch, 4401 Reedy Creek Rd, Raleigh, NC 27607 Telephone [phone] FAX # [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer • 50% recycled/10% post consumer paper
S
a M STNj u?
,Y r
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
ll'y
JAN ? /999
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201 E. NORRIS TOLSON
GOVERNOR
SECRETARY
January 8, 1999
US Army Corps of Engineers
Raleigh Field Office
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road, Suite 120
Raleigh, North Carolina 27615

ATTENTION: Mr. Eric C. Alsmeyer.
NCDOT Coordinator
Dear Sir:
Subject: Franklin County, Replacement of Bridge No. 49 over Sandy Creek on
SR 1412, Federal Project No. MABRZ-1412(3), State Project No. 8.236050 i,
T.I.P. No. B-3173.
Please find enclosed three copies of the project planning report for the above referenced
project. Bridge No. 49 will be replaced at its existing location with a bridge 46 meters
(150 feet) long and 8.40 meters (28 feet) wide. During construction traffic will be
detoured on existing secondary roads. Approximately 0.05 hectares (0.13 acres) of
jurisdictional wetlands may be affected by the construction of the proposed project.
The project is being processed by the Federal Highway Administration as a "Categorical
Exclusion" in accordance with 23 CFR 771.115(b). Therefore, we do not anticipate
requesting an individual permit, but propose to proceed under Nationwide Permit 23 in
accordance with the Federal Register of December 13, 1996, Part VII, Volume 61,
Number 241.
We anticipate a 401 General Certification will apply to this project, and are providing one
copy of the CE document to the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and
Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality, for their review.
r ' I
i
If you have any questions or need additional information please call Ms. Alice N. Gordon
at 733-7844 Ext. 307.
Sincerely,
/ C- '?a ?
William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
cc: w/attachment
Mr. David Franklin, Corps of Engineers, Wilmington Field Officc
Mr. John Dorney, NCDENR, Division of Water Quality
Mr. Whit Webb, P.E., Program Development Branch
Mr. R. L. Hill, P.E., Highway Design Branch
Mr. A. L. Hankins, P.E., Hydraulics Unit
Mr. William J. Rogers, P.E., Structure Design Unit
Mr. Tom Shearin, P.E., Roadway Design Unit
Mr. W. S. Varnadoe, P.E., Division 5 Engineer
Mr. William T. Goodwin, P.E., P & E Project Planning Engineer

TIP Project No.: B-3173
State Project No. 8-2360501
Federal-Aid Project No.: MABRZ-1412(3)
A. Project Description : (include project scope and location)
NCDOT will replace Bridge No. 49 on SR 1412 over Sandy Creek in Franklin
County. The bridge will be replaced with a new bridge measuring 46 meters (150 feet) in
length and 8.4 meters (28 feet) in width. This will provide a 6.6 meter (22 foot) travelway
and 1.0 meter (3 foot) offset on each side. The new approach roadway will be a 6.6 meter
(22 foot) travelway with shoulder widths of at least 1.2 meters (4 feet). Traffic will be
detoured on existing secondary roads during construction.
B. P=ose and Need:
Bridge No. 49 has a sufficiency rating of 17.0 out of 100. The deck of Bridge No.
49 is only 5.8 meters (19 feet) wide. The bridge is posted at 7 tons for both single
vehicles and for truck-tractor semi-trailers. For these reasons Bridge No. 49 needs to be
replaced.
C: Proposed Improvements:
Circle one or more of the following improvements which apply to the project:
I= 11 Improvements
1. 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 driveways pipes
h. Performing minor bridge widening ( less than one through lane)
I It
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
3. Bridge rehabilitation, reconstruction, or replacement or the construction of grade
separation 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
O 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.
2
i
I
r
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 UMT Act. Hardship and protective buying will be
permitted only for a particular parcel or a limited number of parcels. These types
of land 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.
D. Special Project Information
Environmental Commitments:
All standard measures will be implemented to avoid or minimize environmental
impacts.
2. In accordance with the provisions of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(33 U.S.C. 1344), a permit will be required from the Corps of Engineers for the
discharge of dredged or fill material into "Waters of the United States." A Corps
of Engineers Nationwide Permit # 23 will be applicable for this project.
A North Carolina Division of Environmental Management (DEM) Section 401
Water Quality General Certification will be obtained prior to issue of the Corps of
Engineers Nationwide Permit # 23.
4. High Quality Water (HQW) sedimentation and erosion control measures will be
implemented and strictly maintained throughout project construction.
All clearing and other soil disturbing activities will be limited to the time between
April 1 and November 15.
6. Mr. Tim Savidge of NCDOT-Planning and Environmental Branch (919-733-
3141), Mr. David Cox of NCWRC (919-528-9886), Mr. John Alderman of
NCWRC (919-542-5331), and Ms. Candice Martino of USFWS (919-856-
4520x18) will be invited to the preconstruction meeting to be held before the
contractor is ready to begin project construction.
3
Estimated Costs:
Construction
Right of Way
Total
Estimated Traffic:
Current
Year 2018
$ 475,000
$ 22.000
$ 497,000
120 VPD
300 VPD
Proposed Typical Roadway Section:
The approach roadway will be 6.6 meters (22 feet) wide with at least 1.2 meter
(4 foot) shoulders. Shoulder width will be increased to at least 2.1 meters (7 feet) where
guardrail is warranted.
Design Speed: 100 km/h (60 mph)
Functional Classification:
SR 1412 is classified as a Rural Local Route in the Statewide Functional
Classification system.
Division Office Comments:
The Division Engineer supports the chosen alternate and proposed detour route.
E. Threshold Criteri
a
If any Type II actions are involved in the project, the following evaluation must be
completed. If the project consists Qnjy of Type I improvements, the following checklist does not
need to be Completed.
ECOLOGICAL YES NO
(1) Will the project have a substantial impact on any unique or F-1 important natural resource? X
(2) Does the project involve any habitat where federally listed
endangered or threatened species may occur? 7 X
(3) Will the project affect anadromous fish? 0 x
. It

4

(4) If the project involves wetlands, is the amount of permanent
and/or temporary wetland taking less than one-third (1/3) acre ?
and have all practicable measures to avoid and minimize X
takings been evaluated?
(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)? El X
(8) Will the project require fill in waters of the United States in any ?
of the designated mountain trout counties? X
(9) Does the project involve any known underground storage tanks

(UST's) or hazardous materials sites? ?
X
PERM ITS AND COORDINATION YES NO

(10) If the project is located within a CAMA county, will the project
"
Area of
significantly affect the coastal zone and/or any X
Environmental Concern" (AEC)?
? X
(11) Does the project involve Coastal Barrier Resources Act resources
(12) Will a U. S. Coast Guard permit be required? X
(13) Will the project result in the modification of any existing ? X
regulatory floodway?
(14) Will the project require any stream relocations or channel

changes? ?
X
SOCI AL AND ECONOMIC YES NO

(15) Will the project induce substantial impacts to planned growth or ? X
land use for the area?
(16) Will the project require the relocation of any family or business? ? X
(17) If the project involves the acquisition of right of way, is the ?
amount of right of way acquisition considered minor? X
5
? f

V
(18) Will the project involve any changes in access control? 1:1 X
(19) Will the project substantially alter the usefulness and/or land ?
use of any adjacent property? X
(20) Will the project have an adverse effect on permanent local ? X
traffic patterns or community cohesiveness? -
(21) Is the project included in an approved thoroughfare plan and/or
Transportation Improvement Program (and is, therefore, in X F1
conformance with the Clean Air Act of 1990)?
(22) Is the project anticipated to cause an increase in traffic volumes? X
(23) Will traffic be maintained during construction using existing X
roads, staged construction, or on-site detours?
(24) Is there substantial controversy on social, economic, or ?
environmental grounds concerning the project? X
(25) Is the project consistent with all Federal, State, and local laws ?
relating to the environmental aspects of the action? X
JLTURAL. JRCES YES NO
(26) Will the project have an "effect" on properties eligible for or
listed on the National Register of Historic Places? El X
(27) Will the project require the use of Section 4(f) resources
(public parks, recreation lands, wildlife and waterfowl refuges, X
historic sites or historic bridges, as defined in Section 4(f) of the -
U. S. Department of Transportation Act of 1966)?
(28) Will the project involve construction in, across, or adjacent to a
river designated as a component of or proposed for inclusion in ? X
the natural Wild and Scenic Rivers? -
F
(Discussion regarding all unfavorable responses in Part E should be provided
below. Additional supporting documentation may be attached as necessary.)
None.
6
G. CE Approval
TIP Project No.: B-3173
State Project No. 8,2360501
Federal-Aid Project No.: ABRZ-1412(3)1
Prof t Description : (include project scope and location)
NCDOT will replace Bridge No. 49 on SR 1412 over Sandy Creek in Franklin
County. The bridge will be replaced with a new bridge measuring 46 meters (150 feet) in
length and 8.4 meters (28 feet) in width. This will provide a 6.6 meter (22 foot) travelway
and 1.0 meter (3 foot) offset on each side. The new approach roadway will be a 6.6 meter
(22 foot) travelway with shoulder widths of at least 1.2 meters (4 feet). Traffic will be
detoured on existing secondary roads during construction.
Categorical Exclusion Action Classification: (Check one)
X_ TYPE II (A)
TYPE II (B)
2 - 13-98 G\? !i .
Date Assistant Manager
Planning & Environmental Branch
2-12-98 axe-
Date Project Planning Unit Head
ajj-"
Date Project Planning Engineer
For Type II (B) projects only:
Not Required
Date Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
7
InNp?ae
1

Studied Detour Route

?k
\ North Carolina Department of
Transportation
• •1
4
?,
Division of Highways
Planning & Environmental Branch
Franklin County
Replace Bridge No. 49 on SR 1412
Over Sandy Creek
B-3173
1 Figure One
P1M NT 0 ..T•yF
OAP 1T
9
N
r.. - eA
"CH 7
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE S .iZ%'ILL
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Boa 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
February 11, 1998
H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
PO Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27611-5201
ATTN: Bill Goodwin, Project Planning Engineer
O
J
z
• t 1998 z
RE: 1) Replacement of Bridge No.207 on SR 2352 over Little River, Wake
County NC, TIP No-B-3261; and, 2)Replacement of Bridge No. 49 on SR 1412
over Sandy Creek, Franklin County, TIP No. B-3173
Dear Mr. Vick:
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife (Service) has reviewed your February 5, 1998
letters regarding the above-referenced projects in Wake and Franklin
Counties in North Carolina. Our comments are provided in accordance with
Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C.
1531-1543) (Act).
Based on the North Carolina Department of Transportation's agreement to
implement the environmental commitments stated in your letters, the
Service concurs that these two projects are not likely to adversely
affect the federally-endangered Tar spiny mussel, the dwarf wedge mussel,
or any other federally-listed species in the project areas.
We believe that the requirements of Section 7 of the Act have been
satisfied. We remind you that obligations under Section 7 consultation
must be reconsidered if: (1) new information reveals impacts of this
identified action that may affect listed species or critical habitat in a
manner not previously considered; (2) this action is subsequently
modified in a manner that was not considered in this review; (3) a new
species is listed or critical habitat determined that may be affected by
the identified action.
Thank you for your cooperation with our agency.
Sincerely,
? ?/c•?• ? Uc• d?rk1
Field Supervisor
John M. Hefner
FWS/R4:CMartino:cm:2-11-98/919-856-4520:WP51:NCDOT:Br49-207.NE
[JCl ?JlCJcdLo1.
w?IIo
a ?
N, North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources

James B. Hunt Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
October 10, 1996
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Replace Bridge 49 on SR 1412 over Sandy
Creek, Franklin County, B-3173, ER 97-7251
Dear Mr. Graf:
Division of Archives and History
Jeffrey J. Crow, Director
J?
F?
T Obi
?4yRONr.
We regret staff was unable to attend the scoping meeting for the above project on
September 25, 1996. However, Debbie Bevin met with Bill Goodwin of the North
Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) on September 20, 1996, to
discuss the project and view the project photographs and aerial.
Based upon 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 area of potential effect. We recommend that no historic
architectural survey be conducted for this project.
There are no known archaeological sites within the proposed proje t area. Unless
an on-site detour structure is planned or the bridge is to be replace in anew
location, no archaeological investigation is recommended in conne tion with this
project as presently proposed.
Having provided this information, we look forward to receipt of either a Categorical
Exclusion or Environmental Assessment which indicates how NCDOT addressed our
comments.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966 and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
It
109 Fast Jones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807 g
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental
review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
Sincerely,
vDavid Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw
cc: H. F. Vick
B. Church
T. Padgett
Franklin County Historic Properties Commission
1V1\
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR.
GoVERNoK
P.O. BOX 25201. RALEIGH. N.C. 27611-5201
20 March 1997
MEMORANDUM TO
FROM:
Wayne Elliot, Unit Head
Bridge Unit
GARLAND B. GARRETT JR.
SECRETARY
Lindsey Riddick, Environmental Biologist I-K
Environmental Unit
SUBJECT: Natural Resources Technical Report for the proposed
replacement of bridge No. 49 on SR 1412
over Sandy Creek, Franklin County. TIP No. B-3173,
State project No. 8.2360501, Federal aid project No.
MABRZ-1412 (3).
ATTENTION: Bill Goodwin, P.E., Project Manager
Project Planning Unit
The following report is submitted to assist in the preparation of a Programmatic
Categorical Exclusion (PCE) for the proposed project. This report contains information
concerning water resources, biotic resources, Waters of the United States, permit
requirements and federally protected species within the project area. The information
contained in this report is relevant only in the context of existing preliminary design
concepts. If design parameters and criteria change, additional field investigations may
need to be conducted.
The proposed project involves replacing the existing bridge on existing location
with minimal approach work. Project length is approximately 136 m (450 ft) with a right-
of-way of 18.2 m (60 ft). Traffic will be detoured off site.
METHODOLOGY
General field studies were conducted along the proposed project area by
NCDOT biologists Dale Suiter and Lindsey Riddick on 11 February 1997. Plant
communities and their associated wildlife were identified and recorded. Wildlife
identification involved using one or more of the following observation techniques. active
e
` signs of wildlife (sounds, scat, tracks and burrows). Faunal species observed during
the site visit are denoted with an asterisk ('). Terrestrial community classifications
generally follow Schafale and Weakley (1990) where possible, and plant taxonomy
follows Radford, et al. (1968). Animal taxonomy follows Martof, et al. (1980),
Menhenick (1991), Potter, et al. (1980), and Webster, et al. (1985). Wetland
classifications follow Cowardin et. al. (1979). Predictions regarding wildlife community
composition involved general qualitative habitat assessment based on existing
vegetative communities. Jurisdictional wetland determinations were performed using
delineation criteria prescribed in the "Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual"
(Environmental Laboratory, 1987). Information concerning federal and state protected
species in the study area was gathered from the North Carolina Natural Heritage
Program (NCNHP) database of rare species and unique habitats along with the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) list of protected species and species of concern.
WATER RESOURCES
Water resources occur in the project area. These resources are in the form of
Rocky Swamp, a coastal plain perennial stream. Sandy Creek at bridge No. 49 is
approximately 18.2 m (60 ft) wide and approximately 1.6 m (5 ft) deep. Streams have
been assigned a best usage classification by the Division of Water Quality (DWQ),
formerly the Division of Environmental Management (DEM). The best usage
classification for Sandy Creek (DWQ Index No. 28-78-1-8) is B NSW. Class B refers to
those waters designated for primary recreation and any other usage specified by the
"C" classification. Class C refers to waters suitable for aquatic life propagation and
survival, fishing, wildlife, secondary recreation and agriculture. NSW (Nutrient
Sensitive Waters) refers to waters which require limitations on nutrient inputs. Sandy
Creek becomes Swift Creek over the Franklin-Nash County line.
The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC) has indentified Swift
Creek and its tributaries from its confluence with the Tar River in Edgecombe County to
the headwaters in Edgecombe, Nash, Franklin, Warren, and Vance Counties, as one of
25 areas in North Carolina that have been formally proposed as aquatic Critical
Habitats (PCH). These habitats are considered essential for the continued survival of
endangered or threatened aquatic wildlife species. Certain conservation proceedures,
such as high quality water (HOW) designation and protection, are recommended
(Alderman et al. 1993). Presently the WRC is not allowed to designate areas as
Critical Habitat, however NCDOT uses the PCHs for guideance in determining if a
project will have an impact on a federally listed aquatic species. NCDOT implements
HQW standards in the former PCHs that contain federally listed species. NCDOT's
Best Management Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters should be strictly
enforced during the construction phase of the project. This would include.-
1 ) installation of temporary silt fences to control runoff during construction
A
2) placement of temporary ground cover or re-seeding of disturbed sites to
reduce runoff and decrease sediment loading
3) reduction of clearing along streams
Terrestrial Communities
There are two types of terrestrial communities currently existing in the project
area, bottomland alluvial forest and maintained roadside shoulder.
Bottomland Alluvial Forest
Dominant canopy tree species noted were red maple (Acer rubrum), sweet gum
(Liquidambar styraciflua), and river birch (Betula nigra). Sub-canopy layer species
include American holly (Ilex opaca) and muscle wood (Carpinus caroliniana).
Herbaceous species present in the area include river oats (Chasmanthium latifolium)
Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica) and hybiscus (Hybiscus sp.). A large
portion of this community meets the requirements of a jurisdictional wetland.
Wildlife species that may be found in such areas may use this habitat for shelter
and foraging and may also utilize the maintained/distubed areas to forage and as a
travel corridor. Therfore, many of the species found in this habitat also have the
potential to utilize the maintained roadside shoulder community. Mammalian species
likely to occur include raccoon (Procyon lotor), gray squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis),
whitetail deer (Odecoileous virginiana) , hispid cotton rat (Sigmodon hispidus), and
Virginia oppossum (Didelphis virginiana). Avian species likely to be found in this
community include Carolina chickadee (Parus carolinensis), mourning dove (Zenaida
macrroura), common grackle (Quiscalas quicula) and common crow (Corvus
brachyrhynchos). Reptiles likely to be found in these areas include black racer
(Coluber constrictor), rat snake (Elaphe obsoleta) and painted turtle (Chrysemys picta).
Maintained Roadside Shoulder
Maintained roadside shoulder community is also present in the project area.
This community includes areas that are highly maintained in an early successional
state. They are subject to frequent mowing and/or herbicide use. Having been
subjected to some type and degree of disturbance in the past, many species found in
this type of community are highly adaptive and have the ability to repopulate an area
quickly after disturbance.
Soil disturbance and compaction, along with frequent mowing and/or herbicide
application, keep this community in an early successional stage. As a result, the
vegetation in this community is predominantly grasses and herbs. These areas cover
the majority of the area where construction will take place.
Plant species that are common to maintained communities are fescue (Festuca
sp.), wild onion (Allium canadense), broomsedge (Andropogon virginica), blackberry
(Rubus argutus), Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), goldenrod (Solidago sp.),
privet, Carolina geranium (Geranium carolinianum), wild carrot (Daucus carota), ground
cherry (Physalis virginiana), and giant cane (Arundinaria gigantea).
Wildlife resources in this community are limited by the high degree of
maintenance that occurs on residential developments and roadside shoulder. Species
found in these areas generally use the area for foraging and are highly adaptive
species that adjust well to human development. Wildlife species that are common to
such areas include raccoon, eastern harvest mouse (Reithrodontomys humulis), hispid
cotton rat, Carolina chickadee, mourning dove, common grackle, European starling
(Sturnus vulgans) and black racer.
JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS
This section provides descriptions, inventories and impact analysis pertinent to
two important issues--Waters of the United States, and rare and protected species.
Waters of the United States
Impacts to jurisdictional surface waters are anticipated. Jurisdictional surface
waters are present in the form of a piedmont perennial stream. Impacts can be
minimized with NCDOT Best Management Practices. In accordance with provisions of
section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344), a permit will be required from the
COE for the discharge of dredged or fill material into "Waters of the United States."
Wetlands occur within the proposed right-of-way for this project. Wetland areas
cover the entire 18 m (60 ft) ROW on both sides of the creek bank. The Cowardin
classification for this wetland is PF01 C. This wetland type is described as palustrine,
forested, broad leaved deciduous, seasonally flooded, well drained. This area
encompasses approximately .05 ha (.13 ac).
Permits
Nationwide 23 Permit
A Nationwide Permit 33 CFR 330.5(a) (23) is likely to be applicable for all
impacts to Waters of the United States resulting from the proposed project. This permit
authorizes activities undertaken, assisted, authorized, regulated, funded or financed in
whole, or part, by another Federal agency or department where that agency or
department has determined the pursuant to the council on environmental quality
regulation for implementing the procedural provisions of the National Environmental
Policy Act:
(1) that the activity, work, or discharge is categorically excluded from environmental
documentation because it is included within a category of actions which neither
individually nor cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment,
and;
(2) that the office of the Chief of Engineers has been furnished notice of the agency' or
department's application for the categorical exclusion and concurs with that
determination.
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (DWQ) Section 401 Water Quality
General Certification is also required. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act requires that
the state issue or deny water certification for any federally permitted or licensed activity
that may result in a discharge into waters of the United States. The issuance of a 401
permit from DWQ is a prerequisite to issuance of a Section 404 Permit.
Rare and Protected Species
Some populations of fauna and flora have been in, or are in, the process of
decline either due to natural forces or their inability to coexist with human activities.
Federal law (under the provisions of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended) requires that any action, likely to adversely affect a species classified as
federally-protected, be subject to review by the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). Other
species may receive additional protection under separate state laws.
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 of 23 August 1996, the FWS lists three federally-protected species for
Franklin County (Table 1). A complete description along with a biological conclusion
for each species follows Table 1.
Table 1. Federally Protected Species for Franklin County.
Scientific name Common name Status
Rhus michauxii Michaux's sumac Endangered
Elliptio steinstansana Tar River spinymussel Endangered
Alasmidonta heterodon dwarf wedge mussel Endangered
Rh,us michauxii (Michaux's sumac) Endangered
Plant Family. Anacardiaceae
Federally Listed: 28 September 1989
Flowers Present: June
Michaux's sumac is a densely pubescent rhizomatous shrub. The bases of the
leaves are rounded and their edges are simply or doubly serrate. The flowers of
Michaux's sumac are greenish to white in color. Fruits, which develop from August to
September on female plants, are a red densely short-pubescent drupe.
This plant occurs in rocky or sandy open woods. Michaux's sumac is dependent
on some sort of disturbance to maintain the openness of its habitat. It usually grows in
association with basic soils and occurs on sand or sandy loams. Michaux's sumac
grows only in open habitat where it can get full sunlight. Michaux's sumac does not
compete well with other species, such as Japanese honeysuckle, with which it is often
associated.
Biological Conclusion:
Unresolved
A search of the NCNHP database of rare species and unique habitats revealed
no records of Michaux's sumac being present in the project area. However, the areas
of open roadside shoulder provide habitat for this species. The survey window for this
species had passed at the time of the initial site visit. Therefore, the interim biological
conclusion is unresolved. A follow up survey between late May and June is
recommended.
Elliptio steinstansana (Tar River spinymussel) Endangered
Animal Family: Unionidae
Date Listed-29 July 1985
The Tar River spinymussel is endemic to the Tar River drainage basing
from Falkland in Pitt County to Spring Hope in Nash County. Populations of the
Tar River spinymussel can be found in streams of the Tar River Drainage Basin
and of the Swift Creek Drainage Sub-Basin.
This mussel requires a stream with fast flowing, well oxygenated,
circumneutral pH water. The bottom is composed of uncompacted gravel and
coarse sand. The water needs to be relatively silt-free.
The Tar River spinymussel is a very small mussel. This mussel is named
for its spines which project perpendicularly from the surface and curve slightly
ventrally. As many as 12 spines can be found on the shell which is generally
smooth in texture. The nacre is pinkish (anterior) and bluish-white (posterior).
Biological Conclusion: Unresolved
A search of the NCNHP database of rare species and unique habitats revealed
no records of the Tar River spinymussel in the project area. However, Sandy Creek is
Proposed Critical Habitat for the Tar River spinymussel and suitable habitat exists in
Sandy Creek for this species. Seasonal weather did not permit entrance into the water
at the time of the initial site visit. A survey for this species is recommended for mid-late
May when temperatures will be warm enough to survey the creek.
Alasmidonta heterodon (dwarf wedge mussel) Endangered
Animal Family: Unionidae
Date Listed: 14 March 1990
The dwarf wedge mussel is a small mussel having a distinguishable shell
noted by two lateral teeth on the right half and one on the left half. The
periostracum (outer shell) is olive green to dark,brown in color and the nacre
(inner shell) is bluish to silvery white.
Known populations of the dwarf wedge mussel in North Carolina are
found in Middle Creek and the Little River of the Neuse River Basin and in the
upper Tar River and Cedar, Crooked, and Stony Creeks of the Tar River system.
This mussel is sensitive to agricultural, domestic, and industrial pollutants and
requires a stable silt free streambed with well oxygenated water to survive.
Biological Conclusion:
Unresolved
A search of the NCNHP database of rare species and unique habitats revealed
no records of dwarf wedge mussel in the project area. However, habitat exists in
Sandy Creek for the dwarf wedge mussel. Seasonal weather did not permit entrance
into the water at the time of the initial site visit. A survey for this species is
recommended for mid-late May when temperatures will be warm enough to survey the
creek.
REFERENCES
Alderman, John M., Randal C. Wilson, and Christopher McGrath. 1993. Conservatoin
of Aquatic Habitats in North Carolina. N.C. WRC., Raleigh.
American Ornithologists' Union. 1983. Check-list of North American Birds (6th ed. ).
Lawrence, Kansas, Allen Press, Inc.
Lee, D.S., J.B. Funderburg, Jr. and M.K. Clark. 1982. A Distributional Survey of
North Carolina Mammals. Raleigh, North Carolina Museum of Natural History.
LeGrand, Jr., H.E. 1993. "Natural Heritage Program List of the Rare Animal Species
of North Carolina". North Carolina Natural Heritage Program.
Martof, B.S., W.M. Palmer, J.R. Bailey and J.R. Harrison III. 1980. Amphibians and
Reptiles of the Carolinas and Virginia. Chapel Hill, The University of North
Carolina Press.
Menhenick, E.F. 1991. The Freshwater Fishes of North Carolina. N.C. WRC.,
Raleigh.
NCDEHNR-DEM. 1988. Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network (BMAN) Water
Quality Review 1983-1986.
NCDEHNR-DEM. 1991. Biological Assessment of Water Quality in North Carolina
Streams: Benthic Macroinvertebrate Data Base and Long Tern Changes in
Water Quality, 1983- 1990.
NCDEHNR-DEM. 1993. "Classifications and Water Quality Standards for North
Carolina River Basins." Raleigh, Department of Environment, Health and
Natural Resources.
NCWRC. 1990. "Endangered Wildlife of North Carolina". Raleigh, North Carolina
Wildlife Resources Commission.
Plant Conservation Program. 1991. "List of North Carolina's Endangered, Threatened
and Candidate Plant Species". Raleigh, North Carolina Department of
Agriculture.
Potter, E.F., J.F. Fbrric;; and R.P. Teulings. 1980. Birds of the Carolinas. Chapel Hill,
The University of North Carolina Press.
Radford, A.E., H.E. Ahles and G.R. Bell. 1968. Manual of the Vascular Flora of the
Carolinas. Chapel Hill, The University of North Carolina Press.

Schafale. M.P. and A.S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of The Natural Communities of
North Carolina. Third Approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage
Program, Division of Parks and Recreation, NCDEHNR.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1979. Classifications of Wetlands and Deepwater
Habitats of the United States, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington D.C.
Weakley, A.S. 1993. "Natural Heritage Program List of the Rare Plant Species of
North Carolina". North Carolina Natural Heritage Program.
Webster, W.D., J.F. Parnell and W.C. Biggs. 1985. Mammals of the Carolinas,
Virginia and Maryland. Chapel Hill, The University of North Carolina Press.
cc: V. Charles Bruton, Ph.D., Environmental Unit Head
Hal C. Bain, Environmental Supervisor
Tim Savidge, Protected Species Coordinator
File: B-3173
•

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPAPUMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMEs B. HUNT JIL 11-0 FOX 25201. RALEIGH. N.C. 27611-5201
GOVERNOR
February 04. 1998
Memorandum To: Wayne Elliot, Unit Head
Bridu,e Unit
E. NORRIs TOLSON
SECRETARY
.Attention: Bill Goodwin. P.E.. Project Manager
From: Tim Savidue, Environmental Biologist
Environmental Unit
Subject: Protected species surveys for proposed replacement of bridge no.
49 over Sandv Creek on SRI 412: Franklin County:
TIP No. B-3173.
Reference: 1). March 20, 1997 Natural Resources Technical Report for
B-3173, prepared by Lindsey Riddick.
2). J.M. Alderman, A.L. Braswell. S.P. Hall, A.W. Kelly and
C.McGrath. 1993. Biological Inventory: Swift Creek Subbasin.
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, 133 p.
The proposed action calls for the replacement of bridge No. 49 over Sandy Creek
in the existing location, with minimal approach work. The referenced Natural Resources
Technical Report (NRTR) (Ref. 1) gave Biological Conclusions of "Unresolved" for the
federally Endangered dwarf-wedge mussel (Alasmidonta heterodon), 'Far spinymussel
(Elliptio steinstansana) and Michaux's sumac (Rhos michauxii) until appropriate surveys
could be conducted. The subject project was visited on August 07, 1997 by NCDOT
biologists Tim Savidge and Tervn Smith.
Sandy Creek, arises in Vance County and flows southeast through Warren and
Franklin Counties, becoming Swift Creek in Nash County, and flowing into the Tar river
in Edgecomb County. Total Creek length is approximately 86 miles. The Swift Creek
subbasin is considered possibly the most significant lotic creek ecosystem along the
Atlantic seaboard (Ref. 2).
A mussel survev was conducted at the bridge site to approximately 300 yards
downstream using snorkeling and tactile surveys. 'vVater depth averaged around 2 feet
and the visibility was fair. The substrate consisted mostly of gravel and coarse sand.
0
s
L
Survey time was 1 hour. Mussels were fairly abundant and easily located. Species and
number found Acre 324 elliptio (Elliptio spp.). 15 notched rainbow ( 1711ma constrictu). 5
eastern floater (Pvzunmlon cataructu). 2 squawfoot (Strophitus undulatirs) and 1 trianule
floater (.41asmiclonta unchdatu). The notched rainbow and triangle floater are considered
significantlN Rare (SR) and Threatened (T) under North Carolina statutes. No dwarf-
wedoe (DWM) or Tar spinvmussel (TSM) were found.
An additional mussel species. Atlantic pigtoe (Fusconaia masoni) was found in
this stretch of Sandv Creek during survevs conducted in 1987 by North Carolina Wildlife
Resources Commission (WRC) biologists (Ref. 2). The Atlantic pigtoe is a Federal
Species of Concern (FSC)
Biological Conclusion (Tar spinymussel): Not Likely to Adversely Affect
The survey indicates that the TSM is not present in the immediate vicinity of the
bridge. However, this species is known from Swift Creek, shortly downstream of the
Franklin/Nash County line. approximately 13 miles downstream of the project area. The
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC) has identified this portion of
Sandy/Swift Creek and its tributaries. as one of 25 areas in North Carolina that have
formally been proposed as aquatic Critical Habitats (PCH). These habitats are considered
essential for the continued survival of endangered or threatened aquatic wildlife species.
Certain conservation procedures, such as high quality waters designation and protection,
are then established by the state regulatory agencies (Alderman et al. 1993). Presently the
WRC is not allowed to designate areas as Critical Habitat: however NCDOT uses the
PCHs for guidance in determining if a project will impact a federally listed aquatic
Species. NCDOT implements HQW standards in the former PCHs that contain federally
listed species. _
A list of Environmental Commitments proposed by NCDOT for the construction
of this project to eliminate the potential for impacting the Swift Creek TSM population
downstream of the project area are listed below. These measures will also ensure that the
diverse aquatic habitat located at the project site is not significantly adversely impacted.
High Quality Water (HQW) sedimentation and erosion control measures
will be implemented and strictly maintained throughout project
construction.
2. All clearing and other soil disturbing activities will be limited to the time
between April 1 and November 15.
3. Mr. Tim Savidge of NCDOT-Planning and Environmental Branch (919-
73;-3141), Mr. David Cox of NC WRC (919-528-9886), Mr. John
Alderman of NCWRC (919-542-5331), and Ms. Candice Martino of
USFWS (919-856-4520x18) will be invited to the preconstruction meeting
to be held before the contractor is ready to begin project construction.
f•
If these prop ision?, i . :rictl? adhered to. it can he concluded that project
construction 'got t.ikely to .'?d?crsely :Affect the Tar spin\mussel.
Biological Conclusion (dwarf-wedge mussel): No Effect
Given the survey results it is apparent that the D\VM does not occur in the vicinity
of the project. This species has not been documented in the Swift Creek subbasin. It can
be concluded that construction of this project will not impact the dv,-arf-wedge mussel.
Biological Conclusion (Michaux's sumac): No Effect
The referenced NRTR stated that habitat suitable for Michaux's sumac occurs
alone the existing approaches to Bridge No. 49 and roadside habitats in the project area.
These areas were visually examined for the presence of this species. Michaux's sumac
was not found during these surveys.
Given the survey results, it is apparent that Michaux's sumac is not present in the
project area. It can be concluded that project construction will not impact this species.
cc: V. Charles Bruton, Ph.D.. Environmental Unit Head
Hal Bain, Environmental Supervisor
File: Protected species issues
File: B-3173
File: Aquatic Issues