19991303 Ver 1_Complete File_19991130

F"
of ?s?
31 991303
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT- JR. P.O. BOX 25201. RALEIGH, N.C. 2761 1-5201 DAVID MCCOY
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
November 19, 1999
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road, Suite 120
Raleigh. North Carolina 27615 i
Attention: Mr. Eric Alsmevc
NCDOT Project Coordinator
Subject: Caswell County, Replacement of Bridge No. 42 over Hogan's Creek on
SR 1330; Federal Aid Project No. BRL-1330(2): State Project No.
8.2480901; TIP No. B-3121.
Dear Sir:
Attached for your information is a copy of the Programmatic Categorical Exclusion
Action Classification Form (PCE) and the Natural Resources Technical keport (NRTR)
for the subject project. The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
proposes to replace Bridge No. 42 on existing location with a bridge 67.0 meters (220.0
feet) long and 8.4 meters (28.0 feet) wide. The proposed Structure will have two 3.3
meter (11.0 foot) travel lanes and 1.0 meter (3.0 foot) offsets. The new approach
roadway will be a 6.6 meter (22.0 foot) travelway with shoulder widths of at least 1.8
meters (6.0 feet). The shoulder width will be increased to at least 2.7 meters (9.0 feet)
where guardrail is warranted. The existing and proposed right of way are both estimated
to be 18.3 meters (60.0 feet). Traffic will be detoured along existing secondary roads
during construction.
Based on the NRTR prepared by Rust Environment & Infrastructure staff, the
proposed bridge replacement will not impact any jurisdictional wetlands. The surface
water impacts will be restricted to the removal of existing bents. Bents for the
replacement structure will be situated outside of the river channel.
The existing structure is composed of a timber deck on steel girders with timber
bents and end bents. The bridge will be removed without dropping any component into
Waters of the U.S. during construction.
I'IIONI'. [phone] 1--AX [phone]

Plants and animals,with federal classification 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
13 May 1999, there are no federally protected species listed by the Fish and Wildlife
Service (FWS) for Caswell County.
The project is being processed by the Federal Highway Administration as a
programmatic "Categorical Exclusion" in accordance with 23 CFR 771.115(b).
Therefore, NCDOT proposes to proceed under the Corps of Engineers Nationwide Permit
33 CFR 330.5 (a) (23).
By copy of this letter, the appropriate 401 Water Quality Certification is requested
from the North Carolina Division of Water Quality. If you have any questions or need
additional information, please contact Lynn Smith at [phone].
Sincerel).
William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manager
Project Development and Environmenta'
Analysis Brancl-WDG/al:

cc: w/ attachment
Mr. David Franklin; COE, Wilmington
Mr. John Dorney, DWQ, Raleigh
Mr. William Rogers, Y.E., Structure Design
Mr. Calvin Leggett, P.E., Program Development
Mr. Len Hill, P.E., Highway Design
Mr. A. L. Hankins, P.E., Hydraulics Unit
Mr. John Alford, P.E., Roadway Design Engineer
Mr. John Watkins, P.E., Division 7 Engineer
Mr. Wayne Elliott, P.E., PDEA
f

TIP Project No.: B-3129
State Project No. 8,2480901
Federal-Aid Project No.: BRZ-1330(2,)
A. Project Description :
NCDOT will replace Bridge No. 42 on SR 1330 over Hogan's Creek in Caswell
County. The bridge will be replaced with a new bridge measuring 67 meters (220 feet) by
8.4 meters (28 feet). The proposed structure will have two 3.3 meter (11 foot) travel lanes
and 1.0 meter (3 foot) offsets. The new approach roadway will be a 6.6 meter (22 foot)
travelway with shoulder widths of at least 1.8 meters (6 feet). Traffic will be detoured on
existing secondary roads during construction.
B. P=ose and Need:
Bridge No. 42 has a sufficiency rating of 17.1 out of 100. The deck of Bridge
No. 42 is only 5.8 meters (19 feet) wide. Bridge No. 42 is posted at 9 tons for single
vehicles and 16 tons for truck-tractor semi-trailers [TTST]. For these reasons Bridge
No. 42 needs to be replaced.
C: Proposed Improvements:
Circle one or more of the following Type II improvements which apply to the project:
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)
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
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
Od Replacing a bridge (structure and/ or fill)
4. Transportation corridor fringe parking facilities.
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 UNIT Act. Hardship and protective buying will be
permitted only for a particular parcel or a limited number of parcels. These types

i,
2
?.A
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
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.
3. 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.
Estimated Costs:
Construction
Right of Way
Total
Estimated Traffic:
Current
Year 2020
$ 750,000
$ 29.000
$ 779,000
760 VPD
1400 VPD
Proposed Typical Roadway Section:
The approach roadway will be 6.6 meters (22 feet) wide with at least 1.8 meter
(6 foot) shoulders. Shoulder width will be increased to at least 2.7 meters (9 feet) where
guardrail is warranted.
Design Speed:
40 km/h (25 mph)
The design speed is limited by a steep grade on the south approach to the bridge.
The southern end of the new bridge will be raised as much as is reasonable to reduce this
grade, but the design speed will not reach the desirable level of 100 km/h (60 mph). A
design exception will likely be required due to the design speed not meeting the
minimum acceptable design speed.
3

Functional Classification:
SR 1330 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 method for
detouring traffic during construction.
Other Alternates Considered
Two other alternates were considered and rejected. An on-site detour alternate had
a cost of maintaining traffic on-site of more than twice the cost to local road users for
detouring during construction, eliminating on-site traffic maintenance from consideration.
An alternate for realigning SR 1330 to the south improves the design speed, but cost
approximately $ 400,000 more than the recommended alternate. This alternate was also
rejected due to the higher cost for minimal improvement in alignment and design speed.
E
The following evaluation of threshold criteria must be completed for Type II actions.
YES NO
(1) Will the project have a substantial impact on any unique or ? X
important natural resource?
(2) Does the project involve any habitat where federally listed ?
endangered or threatened species may occur? X
(3) Will the project affect anadromous fish? 0 X
(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 ? X
Resources (OWR) and/or High Quality Waters (HQW) ? -
4
(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
'
?7

X
s) or hazardous materials sites?
(UST
PERM ITS 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
F
X
Environmental Concern" (AEC)?
11 l B
i
R
A
?
D
h
i
l
C F-1 X
(
) ct resources
nvo
ve
arr
er
esources
oes t
e project
oasta

(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
SOCI AL, ECONOMIC. AND CULTURAL RESOURCES 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? F1 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 any adjacent property? X
(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
X ?
conformance with the Clean Air Act of 1990)?
5
(23) Is the project anticipated to cause an increase in traffic volumes? 7, X
(24) Will traffic be maintained during construction using existing X hj
roads, staged construction, or on-site detours? L_j
F
(25) If the project is a bridge replacement project, will the bridge be
replaced at its existing location (along the existing facility) and
will all construction proposed in association with the bridge X ?
replacement project be contained on the existing facility?
(26) Is there substantial controversy on social, economic, or
environmental grounds concerning the project? F-1 X
(27) Is the project consistent with all Federal, State, and local laws ?
relating to the environmental aspects of the action? X
(28) Will the project have an "effect" on properties eligible for or X
listed on the National Register of Historic Places? _
(29) Will the project affect any archaeological remains which are ? X
important to history or pre-history ?
(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 X
U. S. Department of Transportation Act of 1966)?
(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 1966, X
as amended?
(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?
None.
X
6
G. CE Approval
TIP Project No.: B-3129
State Project No. 8.2480901
Federal-Aid Project No.: BRZ-1330(2)
A. Project Description :
NCDOT will replace Bridge No. 42 on SR 1330 over Hogan's Creek in Caswell
County. The bridge will be replaced with a new bridge measuring 67 meters (220 feet) by
8.4 meters (28 feet). The proposed structure will have two 3.3 meter (11 foot) travel lanes
and 1.0 meter (3 foot) offsets. The new approach roadway will be a 6.6 meter (22 foot)
travelway with shoulder widths of at least 1.8 meters (6 feet). Traffic will be detoured on
existing secondary roads during construction.
Categorical Exclusion Action Classification: (Check one)
X_ TYPE II (A)
TYPE II (B)
Date Assistant Manager
Planning & Environmental Branch
Date Project Tanning Unit Head
jz X-v, 2; r A 4 " 011A
Date Project Planning Engineer
For Type II (B) projects only:
Not Required
Date Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
7

1325 Park, C"
Spring ="15IC
1324 1518
o I
? Covirptol
1323 •
s
co
Studied Detour Route
North Carolina Department of
Transportation
M
Division of Highways
Planning & Environmental Branch
O.,".
Caswell County
Replace Bridge No. 42 on SR 1330
Over Hogan's Creek
B-3129
N
h
53 ? Or 3 3 ? 2
?
•
' ' `? - - ? _ / ?? ? 1328 1517 Purl
' 1341 ?
1331 61 1321 I v 1500
40?* .0,6 1327 .7
86
1 .2
CGatswood 5 t 630, -? " N
1503
o 1627
1358\ . 1360 @ 16201
163T 1505
1506 3
1330 ? ? - ? ....._ . ?
Pelham
1 I
V 1329
o, ' \ •? .5
19
'V`
1 !5oo Providei
? I 300
Creek ?? 1300
'? N ? 61 1
?, ?, 1330 '
C A
Gaa ye
i ?+v
`east Nil
I Figure One I
1,
._I

North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
April 22, 1997
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Bridge 42 on SR 1330 over Hogan's Creek,
Caswell County, B-3129, Federal Aid Project
MABRZ-1330(2), State Project 8.2480901, ER
97-8334
Dear Mr. Graf:
• ??W?UJ??.J
Division of Archives and History
Jeffrey J. Crow, Director
i
APR 2 51991!
Z
DiVISloh, OF
\
`f $A' - WAYS . 0Q
On April 8, 1997, Debbie Bevin of our staff met with North Carolina Department of
Transportation (NCDOT) staff for a meeting of the minds concerning the above
project. We reported our available information on historic architectural and
archaeological surveys and resources along with our recommendations. NCDOT
provided project area photographs and aerial photographs at the meeting.
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 project area. Based
on our present knowledge of the area, it is unlikely that any archaeological
resources which may be eligible for inclusion 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.
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.
109 East Jones Street • Raleigh, N-rrth C artdina''7601-?-m r?
Nicholas L. Graf
April 22, 1997, Page 2
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,
David Brook
?w
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw
cc: H. F. Vick
B. Church
T. Padgett
•
Natural Resources Technical Report
Proposed Bridge Replacement
State Road 1330 Bridge No. 42 over Hogan's Creek
Caswell County
LTIP,N-o.TBr3129.•
State Project No. 8.2480901
FAP # BRZ-1330(2)
Prepared for:
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
Planning and Environmental Branch
Environmental Unit
Issued by:
Rust Environment & Infrastructure
5510 Six Forks Road, Suite 200
Raleigh, North Carolina 27609
Rust Project No. 201012
August 1997
(Revised November 1997)
14
Natural Resources Technical Report
Hogan's Creek, Caswell County, North Carolina
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION
PAGE
1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................... 1
1.1 Project Description ...................................... 1
1.2 Methodology .......................................... 1
1.3 Terminology and Definitions ................................ 4
1.4 Qualifications of the Principal Investigators ...................... 4
2.0 PHYSICAL RESOURCES ...................................... 5
2.1 Regional Characteristics ................................... 5
2.2 Soils ...............................................5
2.3 Water Resources ........................................ 5
2.3.1 Physical Characteristics of Surface Waters .................. 6
2.3.2 Best Usage Classification ............................. 6
2.3.3 Water Quality ....... ...... 6
2.3.3.1 General Watershed Characteristics .............. 6
2.3.3.2 Benthic Macro invertebrate Ambient Network ....... 7
2.3.3.3 Point Source Dischargers .................... 7
2.3.4 Summary of Anticipated Impacts ........................ 7
3.0 BIOTIC RESOURCES .................... .................... 8
3.1 Terrestrial Communities ............... .................... 8
3.1.1 Disturbed Community ........... .................... 8
3.1.2 Upland Forest ................. .................... 9
3.2 Aquatic Communities ................ ................... 10
3.3 Summary of Anticipated Impacts ......... ................... 11
3.3.1 Terrestrial Communities .......... ................... 12
3.3.2 Aquatic Communities ............ ................... 12
4.0 JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS ................................... 13
4.1 Waters of the United States ................................ 13
4.1.1 Characteristics of Wetlands and Surface Waters .............. 13
4.1.2 Summary of Anticipated Impacts ....................... 13
4.1.3 Permits ........................................ 14
4.1.4 Avoidance, Minimization, Mitigation ..................... 14
4.2 Rare and Protected Species ................................ 14
4.2.1 Federally Protected Species ........................... 14
4.2.2 Federal Species of Concern and State Listed Species ........... 15
5.0 REFERENCES ............................................16
P:V0101IIF1NALRPT August 1997
n. -
Natural Resources Technical Report
HoQan's Creek, Caswell County, North Carolina
TABLES
Table 1 - Summary of Qualitative Benthic Macro invertebrate Survey .............. 10
Table 2 - Estimated Area Impacts to Terrestrial Communities ................... 12
Table 3 - Federal Species of Concern and State Protected Species for Wake County ..... 15
Figure 1 - Site Location Map ......................................... 2
Figure 2 - Project Area ............................................. 3
P:11010121FINALRt'T August 1997
11
Natural Resources Technical Report
Hogan's Creek, Casivell County, North Carolina
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This Natural Resources Technical Report is submitted to assist in the preparation of a Categorical
Exclusion (CE) for the proposed project. The purpose of this technical report is to inventory,
catalog and describe the various natural resources likely to be impacted by the proposed action.
The report also attempts to identify and estimate the likely consequences of the anticipated impacts
to these resources. These descriptions and estimates are relevant only in the context of the
preliminary design concepts. It may become necessary to conduct additional field investigations
should design parameters and criteria change.
1.1 Project Description
The proposed project involves the replacement of Bridge No. 42 on SR 1330 over Hogan's Creek.
The project is located in Caswell County, in the northern central region of North Carolina
(Figure 1). Two alternates are proposed for this project.
Alternate 1
Alternate 1 calls for replacing Bridge No. 42 on the existing location with a bridge approximately
67 m (220 ft) in length. Traffic would be maintained during construction on an off-site detour
(Figure 2).
Alternate 2
Alternate 2 calls for replacing Bridge No. 42 on the existing location with a bridge approximately
67 m (220 ft) in length. Traffic would be maintained on an on-site temporary detour just east of
the existing bridge during construction (Figure 2).
1.2 Methodology
Research of published information and resources was conducted prior to the field investigation.
Information sources used to prepare this report include:
• U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) quadrangle map (Park Spring, 1994).
• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) Map (Park
Spring, 1995).
• NCDOT aerial photograph of project area (1:1200).
• Soil Conservation Service [now known as the Natural Resource Conservation Service
(SCS)] General Soil map for Caswell County.
• N.C. Department of Environmental Health and Natural Resources benthic
macroinvertebrate information.
• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) list of protected and candidate species.
• N.C. Natural Heritage Program (NHP) database of uncommon species and unique habitats.
P:LIotot2TINALRPT August 1997
1

' ? s6
1 _ _ .2
~ 1356 • - Gatewood .5 .? 630,
• 1503
N / 1627
nrt 503 '? ? • 0 ?-
1358 1360 8 1626.
Z
163 f
/ . 2 \ N 1506 3
1330 \ - 1
?elham
1 I
V 1329
•5
19
1500 Provide)
300
1300
.440 N
f " 40 1400 1330 1611
53 1341` Wo 40 o' .3 i ^ 21328 1517 Puri
, 1331 (T 1321 I v 1
137
1325 Porn, G??? 1
Spring ` ,I 5C
°Od er,n?altt S " Cy 1 4? 1 1518
p Pel rProtideirce? 62
'
77iiff P CoVInQtOf
1 Parley 17 1323
C A W L
?..,Caswlte Ya+ircel^nlr ?,•/ r ?
.oausl Hil~?e I62 6
?p Frot
Mght v I
M?lesville Fite
R .di
86
7 Pros)ec
?,Ums ? - ? - Ndl I
411,
s
iO?NORiMC? North Carolina Department of
Transportation
Division of Highways
' Planning & Environmental Branch
.HT OR TNAIa,• ,
Caswell County
Replace Bridge No. 42 on SR 1330
Over Hogan's Creek
B-3129
Figure One
n> 'o .3, .
m m < °,° -mss
?'+ O A ry ? 7 p n
N ? ? n
? vi A ? Cr7 .'L'•, ?' _•
('? N O < S O ?+
f?D ? `t O• m
? ? O M ?L7
r fb
W S fP
C O
A
G
C S

Natural Resources Technical Report
Hogan's Creek, Castivell County, North Carolina
Water resource information was obtained from publications of the North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health, and Natural Resources (DEHNR, 1993), Division Environmental
Management [(DEM) now known as Division of Water Quality (DWQ)]. Information concerning
the occurrence of federal and state protected species in the study area was obtained from the FWS
list of protected and candidate species (May 1, 1997) and from the NHP database of rare species
and unique habitats. NHP files were reviewed for documented sightings of state or federally listed
species and locations of significant natural areas.
A general field survey was conducted along the proposed project route by Rust biologists on July
10, 1997. Water resources were identified and their physical characteristics were recorded. For
the purposes of this study, a qualitative aquatic survey and brief habitat assessment were
performed within the project area of Hogan's Creek. A composite sample of the
macroinvertebrate community within Hogan's Creek was collected and preserved immediately
after collection for later laboratory identification. Principal identification keys included Merritt
and Cummins (1996) and Peckarsky et al. (1990). Macroinvertebrate identification was generally
performed to family level.
Plant communities and their associated wildlife were identified using a variety of observation
techniques, including active searching, visual observations, and identifying characteristic signs
of wildlife (sounds, tracks, scats, and burrows). Terrestrial community classifications generally
follow Schafale and Weakley (1990) where appropriate, and plant taxonomy follows Radford et
al. (1968). Animal taxonomy follows Robbins et al. (1966), Thompson (1985), Rohde et al.
(1994), Martof et al. (1980), Palmer and Braswell (1995), and Webster et al. (1985). Vegetative
communities were mapped utilizing aerial photography of the project site. Predictions regarding
wildlife community composition involved general qualitative habitat assessment based on existing
vegetative communities.
Jurisdictional wetlands, if present, were delineated and evaluated based on criteria established in
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineer's (COE's) " 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation
Manual." Wetlands were classified based on Cowardin et al. (1979).
1.3 Terminology and Definitions
For the purposes of this report, the following terms are used for describing the limits of natural
resources investigations. "Project area" denotes the area bounded by the proposed right-of-way
limits along the full length of the project alignment. The "project vicinity" is an area extending
1.0 km (0.6 mile) on all sides of the project area, and "project region" is an area equivalent in
size to the area represented by a 7.5 minute USGS quadrangle map (about 163.3 sq km or 61.8
sq mi).
1.4 Qualifications of the Principal Investigators
Investigator Lynn Stemmy Woerner, Environmental Scientist
Education: MS, Marine Biology, University North Carolina at Wilmington, May 1995
P:U01011V7NALRPT August 1997
4
Natural Resources Technical Report
Hogan's Creek, Caswell County, North Carolina
Experience: Rust Environment & Infrastructure; Biologist, two years
Expertise: Wetland delineation and mitigation, wetland ecology
Investigator: Ron Johnson, Senior Biologist
Education: MS, Biological Sciences, Illinois State University, Normal, IL, 1982
Experience: Biologist, Rust Environment & Infrastructure, 10 years
Expertise: Natural resource surveys, wetland delineations
2.0 PHYSICAL RESOURCES
Soil and water resources which occur in the project area are discussed with respect to possible
environmental concerns.
2.1 Regional Characteristics
The proposed project lies in Caswell County, in a rural area located in the north central portion
of North Carolina. The project area lies within the Piedmont Physiographic Province. Elevations
in the project area range from approximately 125 to 128 in (410 to 420 ft) National Geodetic
Vertical Datum (NGVD). The topography of the project vicinity is described as rolling hills with
steep banks along the streams. Within the project area the creek banks are steep and slightly
eroded. On the south side of the creek, the adjacent floodplain slopes gently away from the creek.
On the north side of the creek, the bank is steep and the topography of the adjacent floodplain is
relatively flat.
Caswell County's major economic resources include agriculture and forestry. The project vicinity
is primarily wooded and agricultural.
2.2 Soils
Detailed soil mapping has not been conducted for Caswell County. The NRCS has identified and
mapped some soils on cultivated land within the county, but undeveloped wooded areas have not
been mapped. Soils encountered during the field visit consisted of a sandy loam in the flood plain
and a silt loam in the higher elevation areas away from the creek.
2.3 Water Resources
This section contains information concerning water resources likely to be impacted by the
proposed project. Water resources assessments include the physical characteristics likely to be
impacted by proposed project (determined by field survey), best usage classifications, and water
quality aspects of the water resources. Probable impacts to surface waters are also discussed as
well as means to minimize impacts.
PX010111F1NALRPT August 1997
5
Natural Resources Technical Report
Hogan's Creek, Caswell County. North Carolina
2.3.1 Physical Characteristics of Surface Waters
The project is located in the Roanoke River basin. One surface water resource, Hogan's Creek,
will be' impacted by the proposed project. Hogan's Creek originates about 34 km (21 mi) north
of the project area and flows to the south about 43 km (27 mi) to its confluence with the Dan
River. Hogan's Creek is approximately 10 to 15 in (33 to 50 ft) wide within the project area and
has a slow streamflow. The substrate of the creek was mainly sand and silt. The water contained
some dissolved and particulate organic matter. The creek has a closed canopy and riparian
vegetation consists mostly of deciduous trees.
At the time of the field survey, the creek averaged 1 in (3 ft) in depth. In the project area, the
creek flows east and consists mainly of a straight run. The floodplain appears to be seasonally
flooded along some areas of the bank. On the day of the site visit, the water color was tan and
water clarity was poor.
2.3.2 Best Usage Classification
Surface waters in North Carolina are assigned a classification by the Division of Environmental
Management (DEM) that is designed to maintain, protect, and enhance water quality within the
State. Hogan's Creek (Index # 22-50) is classified as a Class C waterbody. Class C water
resources are used for aquatic life propagation and survival, fishing, wildlife, secondary
recreation, and agriculture.
No waters classified as High Quality Waters (HWQ), Water Supplies (WS-I of WS-II) or
Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW) occur within 1.6 Ian (1 mi) if the project study area.
2.3.3 Water Quality
This section describes the water quality of the water resources within the project area. Potential
impacts to water quality from point and nonpoint sources are evaluated. Water quality
assessments are based upon published resource information and field study observations.
2.3.3.1 General Watershed Characteristics
Nonpoint source runoff from agricultural land is likely to be the primary source of water quality
degradation to the water resources located within the project vicinity. The surrounding vicinity
appears to be primarily forested land and agricultural as well as several private residences.
Nutrient loading and increased sedimentation from agricultural runoff and forestry affects water
quality. Inputs of nonpoint source pollution from private residences within the project area may
also contribute to water quality degradation.
P:II010121FINAL.RP7' August 1997
6
Natural Resources Technical Report
Hogan's Creek, Caswell Cotuuy, North Carolina
2.3.3.2 Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network
The Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network (BMAN), managed by the DEHNR, Division
of Water Quality (DWQ) and established in 1982, is part of an on-going ambient long-term water
quality monitoring program. The program has established fixed water quality monitoring stations
for selected benthic macroinvertebrates.
A BMAN station is located along Hogan's Creek downstream of the project area. This station
is located approximately 6.5 km (5 mi) downstream at SR 1503. This location received a
bioclassification rating of fair in November 1996.
2.3.3.3 Point Source Dischargers
Point source discharges in North Carolina are permitted through the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) program administered by the DWQ. All discharges are required
to obtain a permit to discharge. There are no known permitted point source dischargers to
Hogan's Creek within the project vicinity.
2.3.4 Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Any action which affects water quality can adversely affect aquatic organisms. Temporary
impacts during the construction phases may result in long-term impacts to the aquatic community.
Replacing an existing structure in the same location with an off-site detour is the preferred
environmental approach. Bridge replacement at the existing location with a temporary on-site
detour will result in more severe impacts. Therefore, based on environmental impacts, Alternate
1 is the preferred alignment. Physical impacts will be the most severe at the point of bridge
replacement.
Project construction may result in the following impacts to surface water resources:
• Increased sediment loading and siltation as a consequence of watershed vegetation
removal, erosion/and or construction.
• Decreased light penetration/water clarity from increased sedimentation.
• Changes in water temperature with vegetation removal.
• Changes in the amount of available organic matter with vegetation removal.
• Increased concentration of toxic compounds from highway runoff, construction activities
and construction equipment, and spills.
• Alteration of water levels and flows due to interruptions and/or additions to surface and
groundwater flow from construction.
• Increased scouring of the existing channel due to increased water flows from the
stormwater runoff associated with curb and gutter systems.
Construction impacts may not be restricted to the natural communities in which the construction
activity occurs. Downstream communities could potentially be affected by stormwater runoff or
P:120101TU7NALR/'T August 1997
7
Natural Resources Technical Report
Hogan's Creek, Caswell County, North Carolina
sediments from the project site. NCDOT's Best Management Practices for the Protection of
Surface Waters should be followed in order to minimize the amount of sediment being released
by construction activities.
3.0 BIOTIC RESOURCES
Terrestrial and aquatic communities are included in the description of biotic resources. Living
systems described in the following sections include communities of associated plants and animals.
These descriptions refer to the dominant flora and fauna in each community and the relationship
of these biotic components. Descriptions of the terrestrial systems are presented in the context
of plant community classifications. These classifications follow Schafale and Weakley (1990)
where possible. Representative animal species which are likely to occur in these habitats (based
on published range distributions) are also cited. Scientific nomenclature and common names
(when applicable) are used for the plant and animal species described. Subsequent references to
the same species are by the common name only.
3.1 Terrestrial Communities
Two distinct terrestrial communities were identified within the project area: a disturbed
community, and a mesic mixed hardwood forest or upland forest (Figure 2). Dominant faunal
components associated with these terrestrial areas will be discussed in each community
description. Many species are adapted to the entire range of habitats found along the project
alignment, but may not be mentioned separately in each community description.
3.1.1 Disturbed Community
The disturbed community includes the road shoulders and the edge between the road shoulders
and the adjacent forested communities. Many plant species are adapted to these disturbed and
maintained areas. Regularly maintained areas along the road shoulders are dominated by various
grasses including ryegrass (Lolium spp.) and fescue (Festuca spp.), as well as wild onion (Allium
cernuum), dandelion (Taraxacum gficinale), white clover (Trifolium repens), and plantain
(Plantago virginica).
In the irregularly maintained areas along the edge between the road shoulders and the adjacent
forested communities poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans), trumpet creeper (Campsis radicans),
common ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia), Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), kudzu
(Pueraria lobata), greenbrier (Smilax rotundifolia), and Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense)
predominate. Other species present include sassafras saplings (Sassafras albidum), ebony
spleenwort (Asplenium platyneuron), Japanese grass (Alicrostegium vitnineum), thistle (Cirsium
sp.), Joe-pye-weed (Eupatorium fistulosum), Queen Anne's lace (Dauca carota), butterfly weed
(Asclepias tuberosa), flowering spurge (Euphorbia corollata), and greater coreopsis (Coreopsis
major var. stellata). Within the northeast quadrant, the edge between the road shoulder and the
forested area is more dense and includes shrubs such as blackberry (Rubus spp.), smooth sumac
(Rhus glabra), winged sumac (Rhus copallina), and pokeweed (Phytolacca americana).
P:1201011kFINALRI T August 1997
8

Natural Resources Technical Report
Hogan's Creek, Caswell County, North Carolina
North of Hogan's Creek within the project areas is a scour area which contains standing water.
Adjacent to this area is a dense assemblage of weedy shrubs and vines including Chinese privet,
blackberry, poison ivy, grape (Vitis spp.), honeysuckle, trumpet creeper, and goldenrod (Solidago
spp.).
The animal species present in these disturbed habitats are opportunistic and capable of surviving
on a variety of resources, ranging from vegetation (flowers, leaves, fruits, and seeds) to both
living and dead faunal components. American robins (Turdus migratorius) and starlings (Sturnus
vulgaris) are two of the more common birds that use these habitats. Species such as brown
thrasher (Toxostoma rufum) and gray catbird (Dumetella carolinensis) may utilize the dense,
shrubby areas. Due to the location and linear nature of this community, it is unlikely that it is
regularly used by any reptiles or amphibians, except as they cross the road from one forested area
to another.
3.1.2 Upland Forest
The upland forest community at the project site is the dominant community along Hogan's Creek.
Within the southeast quadrant, the topography slopes up away from the creek. This community
has a very diverse vegetative cover. Southern red oak (Quercus falcata) and Virginia pine (Pinus
virginiana) are the dominant canopy species. Also present are tulip poplar (Liriodendron
tulipifera), river birch (Betula nigra), green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), and sycamore
(Platanus occidentalis), with white oak (Quercus alba) and black cherry (Prunus serotina) at
slightly higher elevations. The understory is dominated by ironwood (Carpinus caroliniana),
mulberry (Morus rubra), and red maple (Acer rubrum). Sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua),
flowering dogwood (Corpus , f lorida), sourwood (Oxydendrum arboreum), highbush blueberry
(Vaccinium corymbosum), spice bush (Lindera benzoin), and winged elm (Ulmus alata) are also
present. The herbaceous layer includes Christmas fem (Polystichum acrostichoides), bedstraw
(Galium sp.), yucca (Yucca filamentosa), ebony spleenwort, and poison ivy. Vines include
greenbrier (Smilax bona-nox and S. rotundifolia), cross-vine (Bigonia capreolata), Virginia
creeper (Parthenocissus quinquefolia), grape, and trumpet creeper.
In the northeast quadrant of the project area the topography is flatter than the southeast quadrant.
Portions of this area adjacent to the creek have been previously flooded and contain a large
amount of sand deposition with very little leaf litter. The species are similar, however, more
privet is present and the vegetation is younger and more dense.
No mammals were directly observed during the field activities. However, grey squirrels (Sciurus
carolinensis), white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus), raccoon (Procyon lotor), eastern
cottontail (Sylvilagus floridanus), opossum (Didelphis virginiana), and striped skunk (Mephitis
mephitus) likely utilize this habitat.
No reptiles or amphibians were observed during the site visit however, this habitat type is likely
utilized by the Eastern king snake (Lampropeltis getula getula), copperhead snake (Agkistrodon
1':11010111F1NALRPr August 1997
9
Natural Resources Technical Report
Hogan 's Creek, Casx'ell County, North Ca •olina
contortrix), Eastern box turtle (Terrepene carolina carolina), Fowler's toad (Bufo woodhousei),
and American toad (Bufo antericanus), three-lined salamander (Eurycea guttolineata), and slimy
salamander (Plethodon glutinosus).
A wide variety of birds use the forest for foraging and nesting. Species observed during the field
survey included American robin, morning dove (Zenaida macroura), cardinal (Cardinalis
cardinalis), and purple finch (Carpodacus purpureus). Other birds may include downy
woodpecker (Picoides pubescens), wood thrush (Hylocichla nui.stelina), summer tanager (Piranga
rubra), tufted titmouse (Parus bicolor), and white-breasted nuthatch (Sitta carolinensis).
This community corresponds most closely to the Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest community of
the NHP classification system.
3.2 Aquatic Communities
Within the project area Hogan's Creek is a low gradient, mid to high order creek containing sand
and silt substrates and having low water clarity. The riparian community, especially on the
eastern bank, contains mostly trees and is described in Section 3.1.2.
The aquatic community composition, including total species number, species richness, taxa
richness and density, and species tolerance data, is reflective of the physical, chemical, and
biological condition of the water resource.
Several minnows were observed during field activities, however, no species were captured and
identified. Hogan's Creek provides habitat for a variety of species of fish. According to Shari
Bryant, the District 5 Biologist for the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC),
game fish species known to exist in Hogan's Creek within the project area include largemouth
bass (Micropterus salmoides), bluegill (Lepomis macrochirus), green sunfish (Lepomis cyanellus),
warmouth (Lepomis gulosus), and redbreast sunfish, (Lepomis auritis). Nongame fish species
include channel catfish (Ictalurus punctatus), and suckers (Catostomus sp.). Hogan's Creek has
not been stocked for gamefish species.
The families of benthic macroinvertebrate species found in Hogan's Creek during the field survey,
are presented in Table 1.
P:1101011V7NAU?Pr
August 1997
10
Natural Resources Technical Report
Hogan's Creek, Castirell County, North Carolina
Table 1
Summary of Qualitative Bentbic Macroinvertebrate Survey
Hogan's Creek 7/10/97
Taxa Abundant Common Present
Phylum Arthropoda
Class Insecta
Order Ephemeroptera X
family Heptageniidae X
Order Odonata
Suborder Anisoptera X
Suborder Zygoptera
family Caloptcrygidae X
Order Megaloptera
family Corydalidae X
Class Crustacea
Order Decopoda
family Cambaridae X
Order Amphipoda
family Gammaridae X
Identified organisms are representative a wide variety of habitats within lotic erosional
environments. Lotic erosional environments generally have high velocity streams and generally
contain coarse sediments typical of stream riffles. The most abundant organisms identified in this
survey were of the Insect order, Ephemeroptera, which are generally pollution intolerant and
require oxygen rich water. Organisms of the Insect order, Megalopetera, which typically require
high velocity streams, were also identified.
3.3 Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Project construction will have various impacts to the previously described terrestrial and aquatic
communities. Any construction activities in or near these resources have the potential to impact
biological functions. This section quantifies and qualifies potential impacts to the natural
communities within the project area in terms of the area impacted and the plants and animals
affected. Temporary and permanent impacts are considered here along with recommendations to
minimize or eliminate impacts.
P:12010121171VALUT August 1997
11
Natural Resources Technical Report
Hogan's Creek, Castivell Counly, North Carolina
3.3.1 Terrestrial Communities
Terrestrial communities in the project area will be impacted by project construction from clearing
and paving and loss of the terrestrial community area along SR 1330. Estimated impacts derived
are based on the project lengths for Alternates 1 and 2 of 457 m (1500 ft), and the entire
proposed right-of-way width of 18 m (60 ft). Table 2 details the potential impacts to terrestrial
communities by habitat type. It should be noted that impacts are based on the entire right-of-way
width and actual loss of habitat will likely be less.
Table 2
Estimated Area Impacts to Terrestrial Communities
Impacted Area in ha (ac)
Community Alternate 1 Alternate 2
Permanent Permanent Temporary
Disturbed Community 0.22 (0.54) 0.22 (0.54) 0.11 (0.27)
Upland Forest 0.33 (0.80) 0.33 (0.80) 0.70(l.74)
Total Impacts 0.55(l.34) 0.55(l.34) 0.81(2.01)
Destruction of natural communities along the project alignment will result in the loss of foraging
and breeding habitats for the various animal species which utilize the area. Animal species will
be displaced into surrounding communities. Adult birds, mammals, and some reptiles are mobile
enough to avoid mortality during construction. Young animals and less mobile species, such as
many amphibians, may suffer direct loss during construction. Plants and animals found in these
communities are generally common throughout North Carolina.
Impacts to terrestrial communities, particularly in locations having steep to moderate slopes, can
result in the aquatic community receiving heavy sediment loads as a consequence of erosion. It
is important to understand that construction impacts may not be restricted to the communities in
which the construction activity occurs, but may affect downstream communities. Efforts should
be made to ensure that no sediment leaves the construction site.
3.3.2 Aquatic Communities
Impacts to aquatic communities include fluctuations in water temperatures due to the loss of
riparian vegetation. Shelter and food resources, both in the aquatic and terrestrial portions of
these organisms' life cycles, will be affected by losses in the terrestrial communities. The loss
of aquatic plants and animals will affect terrestrial fauna which rely on them as a food source.
r:Uo10111FINALRPT August 1997
12
Natural Resources Technical Report
Hogan's Creek, Caswell Counly, North Carolina
Temporary and permanent impacts may result to aquatic organisms from increased sedimentation.
Aquatic invertebrates may drift downstream during construction and recolonize the disturbed area
once it has been stabilized. Sediments have the potential to affect fish and other aquatic life in
several ways, including the clogging and abrading of gills and other respiratory surfaces; affecting
the habitat by scouring and filling of pools and riffles; altering water chemistry; and smothering
different life stages. Increased sedimentation may caused decreased light penetration through an
increase in turbidity. Although both alternatives will cause temporary increases in sedimentation
from construction, Alternate 2 will have greater impact as well as destruction of additional
riparian habitat.
Wet concrete should not come into contact with surface water during bridge construction in order
to minimize effects of runoff on the stream water quality. Potential adverse effects can be
minimized through the implementation of NCDOT Best Management Practices for Protection of
Surface Waters.
4.0 JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS
This section provides inventories and impact analyses for two federal and state regulatory issues:
Waters of the U.S. (including wetlands) and rare and protected species.
4.1 Waters of the United States
Wetlands and surface waters fall under the broad category of "Waters of the United States" as
defined in 33 CFR 328.3 and in accordance with provisions of Section 404 of the Clean Water
Act (33 U.S.C. 1344), and are regulated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE). Any
action that proposes to dredge or place fill material into surface waters or wetlands falls under
these provisions.
4.1.1 Characteristics of Wetlands and Surface Waters
Jurisdictional wetlands are not present within the project area.
Hogan's Creek is a perennial stream which meets the definition of surface waters. Hogan's Creek
is therefore classified as Waters of the United States. Within the project area, Hogan's Creek
ranges from 10 to 15 m (33 to 50 ft) wide.
4.1.2 Summary of Anticipated Impacts
No wetlands will be impacted by the proposed project. However, surface waters will be
impacted. Alternate 1 would impact 18 meters (60 feet) of stream encompassing 0.02 hectares
(0.05 ac). Alternate 2 would have the same impacts, plus additional temporary impacts of 18
meters (60 feet) encompassing 0.02 hectares (0.05 ac). These anticipated impacts are based upon
a right-of-way width of 18 m (60 ft). Project construction typically does not require the entire
P:12101012WINALRPT August 1997
13
Natural Resources Technical Report
Hogan's Creek, Casivell County, North Carolina
right-of-way, therefore, actual surface water impacts may be less. Anticipated* surface water
impacts fall under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE).
4.1.3 Permits
Impacts to surface waters are anticipated from the proposed project. Permits and certifications
from various state and federal agencies may be required prior to construction activities.
Construction is likely to be authorized by provisions of CFR 330.5 (a) Nationwide Permit (NWP)
No. 23, which authorizes activities undertaken, assisted, authorized, regulated, funded, or
financed in whole or in part, by another Federal agency or department where that agency or
department has determined, pursuant to the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for
Implementing the Procedural Provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act:
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
that the Office of the Chief Engineer has been furnished notice of the agency's or
department's application for the categorical exclusion and concurs with that determination.
This project will also require a 401 Water Quality Certification or waiver thereof, from DEHNR
prior to issuance of the NWP 23. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act requires that the state issue
or deny water certification for any federally permitted or licensed activity that results in a
discharge into Waters of the U.S.
4.1.4 Avoidance, Minimization, Mitigation
Since this project will likely be authorized under a Nationwide Permit, mitigation for impacts to
surface waters is generally not required by the COE. A final determination regarding mitigation
requirements rests with the COE.
4.2 Rare and Protected Species
Some populations of plants and animals are declining either due to natural forces or due to their
inability to coexist with man. Rare and protected species listed for Caswell County, and any
likely impacts to these species as a result of the proposed project construction, are discussed in
the following sections.
4.2.1 Federally Protected Species
Plants and animals with federal classification of Endangered (E), Threatened (T), Proposed
Endangered (PE) and Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under provisions of Section 7 and
P:11010111F1NALRPT August 1997
14
Natural Resources Technical Report
Hogan's Creek, Caswell County, North Carolina
Section 9.of-the Endangered Species.Acf of 1973; as amended. There are no federally protected
species listed by the Fish and Wildlife Service: (FWS) for Caswell County as of May. 1, 1997..
4.2.2 Federal Species of Concern and State.Listed Species
Federal Species of Concern (FSC) are not legally protected under the Endangered Species Act and
are not subject to any of its provisions, including Section 7, until they are formally proposed or
listed as Threatened or Endangered. Table 3 includes FSC species listed for Caswell County and
their state classifications. Organisms which are listed as Endangered (E), Threatened (T), or
Special Concern (SC) by the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program list of Rare Plant and
Animal Species are afforded state protection under the State Endangered Species Act and the
North Carolina Plant Protection and Conservation Act of 1979; however, the level of protection
given to state listed species does not apply to NCDOT activities.
Table 3
Federal Species of Concern and NC Protected Species for Caswell County
Scientific Name Common Name NC Status Habitat present
Isoetes virginica Virginia quillwort C No
Lotus helleri Heller's trefoil C No
Notes: Source, LeGrand, 1993 and Weakley, 1993
C-Candidate
Surveys for these species were not conducted during the site visit. However, none of these
species were observed during the site reconnaissance. A review of the Natural Heritage Program
data base of rare species and unique habitats revealed an occurrence of the Roanoke Hog Sucker
(Hypenteliwn roanokense) which is listed as SR by the NHP within a 5 to 10 second radius [129
to 257 m (423 to 845 ft )] of the project study area. This species is not federally listed as
Threatened, Endangered or FSC.
P:11010111F1NALRPT
August 1997
15
Natural Resources Technical Report
Hogan's Creek, Casivell County, North Carolina
5.0 REFERENCES
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and
Deepwater Habitats of the United States. Prepared for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, United
States Department of the Interior, Washington DC.
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual,
Technical Report Y-87-1. U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg,
Mississippi.
LeGrand, H.E., Jr. 1993 (5/16/94 update). Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Animal
Species of North Carolina. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Raleigh, North Carolina.
Martof, B.S., W.M. Palmer, J.R. Bailey, and J.R. Harrison 111. 1980. Amphibians and Reptiles
of the Carolinas and Virginia. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC.
Merritt, R.W. and K.W. Cummins. 1996. An Introduction to the Aquatic Insects of North
America, Third Edition. KendalUHunt Publishing Company, Dubuque, Iowa.
NC Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources. 1988. Benthic Macroinvertebrate
Ambient Network (BMAN) Water Quality Review 1983-1986.
NC Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources. 1993. Classifications and Water
Quality Standards Assigned to the Waters of the Roanoke River Basin.
Palmer, W. M., and A. L. Brasswell. 1995. Reptiles of North Carolina. The University of North
Carolina Press, Chapel Hill
Peckarsky, B.L., P.R. Fraissinet, M.A. Penton, and D.J. Conklin, Jr. 1990. Freshwater
Macro invertebrates of North America. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New York.
Radford, A.E., H.E. Ahles and G.R. Bell. 1968. Manual of the Vascular Flora of the Carolinas.
The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Robbins, C.S., B. Bruun and H.S. Zim. 1966. A Guide to Field Identification of Birds of North
America. Western Publishing, Racine, Wisconsin.
Rhode, F. C., R. G. Arndt, D. G. Lindquist, and J. F. Parnell. 1994. Freshwater Fishes of the
Carolinas, Virginia, Maryland, and Delaware. Univ. Of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill.
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, Dept. of Environment, Health and Natural Resources, Raleigh, NC.
P:U010111FINALRPT August 1997
16
Nalural Resources Technical Reporl
Hogan's Creek, Caswell County, North Carolina
Thompson, P. 1985. Thompson's Guide to Freshwater Fishes of North America. Houghton
Mifflin Publishing, Boston, Massachusetts.
United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. Selected portions from the
Soil Survey of Caswell County, North Carolina.
Webster, W. D., J. F. Parnell, and W. C. Biggs, Jr. 1985. Mammals of the Carolinas, Virginia,
and Maryland. The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill.
Weakley, A.S. 1993 (5/16/94 update). Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of
North Carolina. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Raleigh, North Carolina.
P:12010121F1NALRPT August 1997
17

C(c
cc:- APR 2000
WETLANDS GROLI
'ATER QUALITY SECTIQtJ_
STATE OF Noin'I 1 CAROLINA TR'
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNTJR. P.O. BOX 25201. RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201 DAVID MCCOY
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
April 3, 2000
MEMORANDUM TO: ALL CONCERNED PARTIES
FROM: V. Charles Bruton, Ph. D., Assistant Manager
Project Development & Environmental Analysis Branch
SUBJECT: Caswell County, Replace Bridge No. 42 over I-Iogan's
Creek on SR 1330, Federal Aid Project No. BRZ-1300 (2),
State Project No. 8.2480901, TIP No. B-3129.
Attaclicd is a list of project commitments that were developed during the prc-
construction phase of the subject project. If you have any questions or need additional
information, please contact Lynn Smith at [phone].
VCB/als
Attachment
cc: Mr. Bob Brown, P.E., Design Services
Mr. Jimmy Lynch, P.E., Traffic Engineering & Safety System
Mr. Johnie Marion, Area Roadside Environmental
Mr. Brad Wall, P.E., Area Roadway Construction
Mr. Tommy Grubbs, P.E., Area Bridge Construction
Mr. C.D. Kirkman, P.E., Resident Engineer, Division 7
Mr. Wayne Elliott, PD&EA
Mr. David Franklin, COE, Wilmington
Mr. Jean Manuele, COE, Raleigh
Mr. John Dorney, Division of Water Quality
a z
PROJECT COMMITMENTS
Replace Bridge No. 42 over
Hogan's Creek on SR 1330
Caswell County
Federal Aid No. BRZ-1300(2)
State Project No. 8.2480901
T.I.P. No. B-3129
In addition to the Nationwide Perniit 923 Conditions, General Nationwide Permit
Conditions, Section 404 Only Conditions, Regional Conditions, State Consistency
Conditions, General Certification Conditions, and Section 401 Conditions of
Certification, the following special commitments have been agreed to by NCDOT:
Commitments Developed Through Project Development and Design
All standard procedures and measures, including Best Management Practices will be
implemented to avoid or minimize environmental impacts. This is a standard NCDOT
Procedure.
Commitments Developed Through Permitting
Structure Desig&Division 7
Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition will be implemented. The existing
structure will be removed without dropping any component into Waters of the U.S.
during construction. The bridge is composed of a timber deck on steel girders with
timber bents and end bents.
Contacts:
Lynn Smith, Project Development & Environmental Analysis (NCDOT), [phone]
Jean Manuele, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, [phone] (ext. 24)
John Hennessy, Division of Water Quality, [phone]
Preconstruction
March 29, 2000
Page 1 of 1