20040938 Ver 1_Complete File_20040609

d aA STATFy
m..aoy
V •? paw ?•
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
4.? D
NOV 0 4 2004
CENR - `WATER QUALITY
4VE I LAND A JC STGRMWATER BRANCH
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GovERNOR
September 24, 2004
US Army Corp of Engineers
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road, Suite 120
Raleigh, NC 27615
ATTENTION: Mr. John Thomas
LYNDo TIPPETT
SECRETARY
Subject: Request for Modification to Permit Conditions for the replacement of
Bridge No. 13 over the Yadkin River and Yadkin Valley Railroad and NC 268
on I-77, Yadkin and Surry County. Federal Aid Project Number IMS-77-
1(141)83, State Project No. 8174101, Division 11, TIP Project No I-4025A,
WBS Element 34209.1.1
Dear Mr. Thomas:
This letter is a follow up to our phone conversation on the morning of September 24,
2004, regarding the conditions of the permit issued on August 5, 2004 (USACE Action
ID 200421358 and 200421359). NCDOT does not find conditions 1 and 2 relevant, as
recommended by the NC Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC).
Condition 1 states " A mussel survey should be conducted in the project vicinity and
downstream. If state or federally listed species are found, NCDOT should consult with
the appropriate resource agencies, including WRC." NCDOT will not survey for mussels
due to the lack of suitable habitat. Attached is an email from John Alderman stating that
there is too much sediment in the Yadkin River in the area of the project.
Condition 2 states "Hazardous spill catch basins should be incorporated into the project
design to protect the Yadkin River and listed species downstream." In conjunction with
DWQ, NCDOT adopted a set of guidelines for the use and location of Hazardous Spill
Catch Basins. The guidelines specify that catch basins will be used on crossings where
the stream is classified as an Outstanding Resource Water, a WS-1 watersupply or the
stream is within a % mile of the critical area of a water supply source classified as WS-II,
WS-III or WS-IV. The Yadkin River is classified as a Class C water in the project area
and is not within 'h mile of a critical area of a water supply water shed: A copy of the
memo from DWQ regarding Hazardous Spill basins is included with this letter.
MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: [phone] LOCATION:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FAX: [phone] CAPITOL BOULEVARD
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS PARKER LINCOLN BUILDING, SUITE 168
1598 MAIL SERVICE CENTER WEBSITE: WWW.DOH.DOT.STATE.NC.US RALEIGH NC 27699
RALEIGH NC 27699-1598
Please modify the permit issued on August 5, 2004 to exclude the conditions listed above.
If you have any questions please contact Brett Feulner at 715-1488.
Sincerely,
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
Environmental Management Director, PDEA
w/ attachment:
Mr. John Hennessy, NC Division of Water Quality (2 copies)
Ms. Marla Chambers, NCWRC
Ms. Marella Buncick, USFWS
Mr. Greg Perfetti, P.E., Structure Design
w/o attachment
Mr. David Franklin, USAGE, Wilmington Ms. Mark Staley, Roadside Env.
Mr. Jay Bennett, P.E., Roadway Design Mr. Heath Slaughter, DEO
Mr. Omar Sultan, Programming and TIP Mr. David Chang, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr. Art McMillan, PE, Highway Design Ms. Missy Dickens, PDEA
Mr. Michael Pettyjohn, P.E., Division 11 Engineer
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
- Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Ja mes B. Hunt, Jr., G ove mor
Jonathan a Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
July 8, 1996
Mr. Franklin Vick, Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
N.C. Department of Transportation
P.O. BOX 25201
Raleigh, N.C. 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Vick:
ILT X. MAI
"T 0 0
now ow
ID EHNFz>,
t I??1.?; r"? it r°
-JUL .1 6 1996
RE : Hazardous Spill Catch basin D1\/#S#Dt;')
HYDRAULICS UNIT
Attached for the final (minor) revisions is the.Hazardous
Spill Catch Basin understanding between DOT and DWQ (previously
DEM). The minor changes suggested are typographic in nature. I
have discussed with Archie Hankins the related issue of weep
holes in bridges. Instead of dealing with this issue in this
agreement, I suggest that we prepare a separate brief
understanding regarding when weep holes are acceptable with
regard to their impacts on water quality taking into account
maintenance and safety issues. If this is an acceptable
approach, we will prepare a draft understanding in the next
several weeks.
The process we have followed for the hazardous spill catch
basins has been very productive mainly due to the active
involvement of Eric Galamb of DWQ and Archie Hankins of DOT. I
believe that it is a good model of how our agencies can develop
workable solutions for difficult problems in a cooperative mode.
Please call me if you have any questions. I look forward to
receiving the final.version of the guidelines.
Please call me at 733-1786 if you have any questions.
hazbasin.mem
Water
SJncerely,
11
Johp R. Dorney
Quality (Certificatio f ram
cc: Linda Rimer, EHNR
Preston Howard, DWQ
Steve Tedder, DWQ
Larry Goode, DOT
Barney O'Quinn, DOT
Archia,,.Hanki ns, DOT.
Wavne Wri cfht, COB

ances o?
t`=nvlrcnmental Sc;.. ^r?ro,. Y-. ' 01 Reedy Creek Road Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
Telephone [phone] FAX # [phone]
An EquA C` pxiunity Attirmau?e ALlJon Erncloytx 1-01. rec cJ 101 pest corsumef pope(
APPENDIX O
SHEET 1 OF 2
GUIDELINES FOR THE LOCATION AND DESIGN
OF HAZARDOUS SPILL BASINS
Hazardous Spill Basins are provided in new highway construction and major
improvment projects at. strategic locations along arterial system highways to aid in
containment and clean up of accidental spills. The determination of these strategic
locations is based on concentrated truck usage areas such as; parking sites at rest
areas, weight stations, and runaway ramps, as well as for highway segments in close
proximity to particularly sensitive waters such as; outstanding resource waters and
water supply sources.
The strategy is to configure the highway segment of concern such that any
potential spill runoff would be directed through a facility (basin) where the flow could be
interrupted and temporarily stored to prevent hazardous material from reaching a
receiving stream.
The use of these basins and other management practices to protect receiving
waters is in accordance to the general policies and criteria presented in the departments
document "Best Management Practices for Protection of Surface Waters". The following
is additional specific guidance in the location and design of the basins:
APPLICABLE LOCATIONS
• Basins will be provided at stream crossings on highways
functionally classified as a rural or urban arterials and,
The stream(`) is identified as an Outstanding Resource
Water (ORW) or a WS-I watersupply, or
The stream(') crossing is within 1/2 mile of the critical
area (2) of a water supply source classified as WS-II, WS-III
and WS-IV.
Provision of basins at crossings of these streams on highways
functionally classified as collectors and local streets and roads
can be evaluated on a site by site basis with consideration for;
traffic volume, traffic type, accident potential related to the
the highway geometries, receiving water quality and the
feasibility of basin construction at the site.
7/96
[Fwd: Yadkin River]
Subject: [Fwd: Yadkin River]
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 09:03:02 -0400
From: "Karen M. Lynch <[e-mail]>
Organization: North Carolina Department of Transportation
To: "Brett M. Feulner" <[e-mail]>
Hi Brett,
You can forward this info. to Marla.
Thanks
Karen
Subject: Re: Yadkin River
Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 10:28:12 -0400
From: John Alderman <[e-mail]>
To: "Karen M. Lynch" <[e-mail]>
Given what I've seen of this area, there is too much sediment to be
quality Alasmidonta varicosa habitat. In the main channel of the
Yadkin, I've only seen A. varicosa in the "Big Bend of the Yadkin" area
associated with island habitats.
John
Karen M. Lynch wrote:
>Hi John,
>Several months ago, we were riding somewhere likely to do a
>mussel survey and Logan and I asked you about a project I-4025A,
>on I-77 over the Yadkin River on the Yadkin/ Surry County line.
>Marla Chambers (WRC) sometimes requests surveys for state listed
>species. In this case you said that there was no habitat (fast
>turbid deep waters). We just need something brief in writing
>(e-mail reply is fine) to forward to her regarding the lack of
>habitat for this mussel.
> Thanks
>Karen
>Hope all went well in SC! Angie will be in touch w/ us regarding
>next week. I think she will be e-mailing both of us and if no
>rain on the weekend they will do a drive by on Monday.
1 of 1 9/24/2004 10:16 AM

® North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
TO: Gregory J. Thorpe, Environmental Management Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis, NCDOT
FROM: Marla Chambers, Highway Projects Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program, NCWRC
DATE: October 20, 2003
SUBJECT: Scoping review of NCDOT's proposed replacement of Bridge No. 13 on I-77
over the Yadkin River, Yadkin Valley Railroad and NC 268, Surry and Yadkin
Counties, for TIP No. I-4025A.
North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) has requested comments from
the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) regarding impacts to fish and
wildlife resources resulting from the subject project. Staff biologists have reviewed the
information provided, including the Natural Systems Technical Report for the project. The
following preliminary comments are provided in accordance with the provisions of the National
Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(c)) and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act
(48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667d).
Our standard recommendations for bridge replacement projects of this scope are as follows:
We generally prefer spanning structures. Spanning structures usually do not require work
within the stream and do not require stream channel realignment. The horizontal and
vertical clearances provided by bridges allows for human and wildlife passage beneath
the structure, does not block fish passage, and does not block navigation by canoeists and
boaters.
2. Bridge deck drains should not discharge directly into the stream.
3. Live concrete should not be allowed to contact the water in or entering into the stream.
4. If possible, bridge supports (bents) should not be placed in the stream.
Mailing Address: Division of Inland Fisheries • 1721 Mail Service Center • Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
Telephone: [phone] ext. 281 0 Fax: [phone]
,'`+ L
Bridge No. 13,1-77
Yadkin River, Surry & Yadkin Counties 2 October 20, 2003
5. If temporary access roads or detours are constructed, they should be removed back to
original ground elevations immediately upon the completion of the project. Disturbed
areas should be seeded or mulched to stabilize the soil and native tree species should be
planted with a spacing of not more than 10'x10'. If possible, when using temporary
structures the area should be cleared but not grubbed. Clearing the area with chain saws,
mowers, bush-hogs, or other mechanized equipment and leaving the stumps and root mat
intact, allows the area to revegetate naturally and minimizes disturbed soil.
6. A clear bank (riprap free) area of at least 10 feet should remain on each side of the steam
underneath the bridge.
7. In trout waters, the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission reviews all U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers nationwide and general `404' permits. We have the option of requesting
additional measures to protect trout and trout habitat and we can recommend that the
project require an individual `404' permit.
8. In streams that contain threatened or endangered species, Mr. Hal Bain with the NCDOT
- ONE should be notified. Special measures to protect these sensitive species may be
required. NCDOT should also contact the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for information
on requirements of the Endangered Species Act as it relates to the project.
9. In streams that are used by anadromous fish, the NCDOT official policy entitled "Stream
Crossing Guidelines for Anadromous Fish Passage (May 12, 1997)" should be followed.
10. In areas with significant fisheries for sunfish, seasonal exclusions may also be
recommended.
11. Sedimentation and erosion control measures sufficient to protect aquatic resources must
be implemented prior to any ground disturbing activities. Structures should be
maintained regularly, especially following rainfall events.
12. Temporary or permanent herbaceous vegetation should be planted on all bare soil within
15 days of ground disturbing activities to provide long-term erosion control.
13. All work in or adjacent to stream waters should be conducted in a dry work area.
Sandbags, rock berms, cofferdams, or other diversion structures should be used where
possible to prevent excavation in flowing water.
14. Heavy equipment should be operated from the bank rather than in stream channels in
order to minimize sedimentation and reduce the likelihood of introducing other pollutants
into streams.
15. Only clean, sediment-free rock should be used as temporary fill (causeways), and should
be removed without excessive disturbance of the natural stream bottom when
construction is completed.
.
Bridge No. 13,1-77
Yadkin River, Surry & Yadkin Counties 3 October 20, 2003
16. During subsurface investigations, equipment should be inspected daily and maintained to
prevent contamination of surface waters from leaking fuels, lubricants, hydraulic fluids,
or other toxic materials.
17. If culvert installation is being considered, conduct subsurface investigations prior to
structure design to determine design options and constraints and to ensure that wildlife
passage issues are addressed.
If corrugated metal pipe arches, reinforced concrete pipes, or concrete box culverts are
used:
The culvert must be designed to allow for aquatic life and fish passage. Generally, the
culvert or pipe invert should be buried at least 1 foot below the natural streambed
(measured from the natural thalweg depth). If multiple barrels are required, barrels other
than the base flow barrel(s) should be placed on or near stream bankfull or floodplain
bench elevation (similar to Lyonsfield design). These should be reconnected to
floodplain benches as appropriate. This may be accomplished by utilizing sills on the
upstream end to restrict or divert flow to the base flow barrel(s). Silled barrels should be
filled with sediment so as not to cause noxious or mosquito breeding conditions.
Sufficient water depth should be provided in the base flow barrel during low flows to
accommodate fish movement. If culverts are longer than 40-50 linear feet, alternating or
notched baffles should be installed in a manner that mimics existing stream pattern. This
should enhance aquatic life passage: 1) by depositing sediments in the barrel, 2) by
maintaining channel depth and flow regimes, and 3) by providing resting places for fish
and other aquatic organisms. In essence, the base flow barrel(s) should provide a
continuum of water depth and channel width without substantial modifications of
velocity.
2. If multiple pipes or cells are used, at least one pipe or box should be designed to remain
dry during normal flows to allow for wildlife passage.
3. Culverts or pipes should be situated along the existing channel alignment whenever
possible to avoid channel realignment. Widening the stream channel must be avoided.
Stream channel widening at the inlet or outlet end of structures typically decreases water
velocity causing sediment deposition that requires increased maintenance and disrupts
aquatic life passage.
4. Riprap should not be placed in the active thalweg channel or placed in the streambed in a
manner that precludes aquatic life passage. Bioengineering boulders or structures should
be professionally designed, sized, and installed.
In most cases, we prefer the replacement of the existing structure at the same location
with road closure. If road closure is not feasible, a temporary detour should be designed and
located to avoid wetland impacts, minimize the need for clearing and to avoid destabilizing
stream banks. If the structure will be on a new alignment, the old structure should be removed
and the approach fills removed from the 100-year floodplain. Approach fills should be removed
? R
Bridge No. 13, I-77
Yadkin River, Surry & Yadkin Counties 4 October 20, 2003
down to the natural ground elevation. The area should be stabilized with grass and planted with
native tree species. Tall fescue should not be used in riparian areas. If the area that is reclaimed
was previously wetlands, NCDOT should restore the area to wetlands. If successful, the site may
be used as wetland mitigation for the subject project or other projects in the watershed.
Project specific comments:
Bridge replacement for I-4025A, Surry and Yadkin Counties, Bridge No. 13 over Yadkin
River, Yadkin Valley Railroad and NC 268. Yadkin River and Falls Creek, a tributary of the
Yadkin River within the study area, are classified as "C" waters. NCDOT indicates that no
vegetated wetlands occur in the project area and no support bents are located in open water.
The brook floater (Alasmidonta varicosa), Federal Species of Concern and state Endangered,
and the creeper (Strophitus undulata), state Threatened, have been observed in the Yadkin
River along the Surry and Yadkin county line. A mussel survey should be conducted in the
project vicinity. While NCWRC is concerned about impacts to spawning warm-water fish in
the area, we do not anticipate recommending a work moratorium for fish for this project.
We request that NCDOT routinely minimize adverse impacts to fish and wildlife
resources in the vicinity of bridge replacements. The NCDOT should install and maintain
sedimentation control measures throughout the life of the project and prevent wet concrete from
contacting water in or entering into these streams. Replacement of bridges with spanning
structures of some type, as opposed to pipe or box culverts, is recommended in most cases.
Spanning structures allow wildlife passage along streambanks, reducing habitat fragmentation
and vehicle related mortality at highway crossings.
If you need further assistance or information on NCWRC concerns regarding bridge
replacements, please contact me at [phone]. Thank you for the opportunity to review and
comment on these projects.
cc: Cynthia Van Der Wiele, DWQ
Marella Buncick, USFWS
Sarah McRae, NBP
fl
Al" R
QG
j
?
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
Coleen H. Sullins, Deputy Director
Division of Water Quality
October 9, 2003
MEMORANDUM
TO: Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Director
NCDOT Project Development & Environmental Analysis Branch
FROM: Cynthia F. Van Der Wiele, NCDOT Coordinator 0104. t)
SUBJECT: Request for Comments on the Proposed Bridge Replacement Project for I-4025A, Southbound
Lane (Bridge No. 13) on I-77 over the Yadkin River, Yadkin Valley Railroad and NC 268, Surry
& Yadkin County.
In reply to your correspondence dated September 4, 2003 in which you requested comments for the referenced
project, NC Division of Water Quality has the following comments:
Desi.en & Construction Issues
1. Within Hydrologic Unit 030702 of the Yadkin-Pee Dee River Basin, the Yadkin River has experienced
elevated turbidity measurements over the past five years of monitoring. As a result, DWQ strongly
recommends the following:
¦ Storm water runoff from this project should be designed to be directed to grassed swales, buffer areas,
preformed scour holes, retention basins or other site-appropriate means of receiving pre-treatment, rather
than routed directly into streams, particularly in Water Supply-classified streams and first order
(headwaters) streams.
¦ NCDOT should adhere to Best Management Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters (March 1997)
throughout the design and construction of this project particularly within Water Supply-classified streams.
2. Although the impacted water resources are classified as C, due to the heavy volume of truck traffic on I-77
and the potential for a significant number of spill incidents, NCDWQ recommends the installation of
hazardous spill catch basins or equivalent devices.
3. NCDWQ recommends the use of best management practices during bridge removal.
Thank you for requesting our input at this time. The DOT is reminded that issuance of a 401 Water Quality
Certification requires that appropriate measures be instituted to ensure that water quality standards are met and
designated uses are not degraded or lost. If you have any questions or require additional information, please
contact Cynthia Van Der Wiele at [phone].
pc: John Thomas, USACE Raleigh Field Office
Chris Militscher, USEPA
Marla Chambers, NCWRC
File Copy
INWR
N. C. Division of Water Quality, 401 Wetlands Certification Unit,
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 (Mailing Address)
2321 Crabtree Blvd., Raleigh, NC 27604-2260 (Location)
[phone] (phone), 919-733-6893 (fax), (httn://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands)
Customer Service #: 1-877-623-6748
I
Am .

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
May 31, 2004
WETLANDS/ 401 GROUP
JUN 0 9 2004
WATER QUALITY STION
LYNDO TIPPETT
SECRETARY
US Army Corps of Engineers
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road, Suite 120
Raleigh, North Carolina 27615 040938
ATTENTION: Mr. John Thomas
NCDOT Coordinator
Dear Mr. Thomas:
Subject: Nationwide 23 and 33 applicatio s, for the replacement of Bridge No. 13
over Yadkin River, Yadkin Valley kailroad and NC 268 on I-77, Yadkin and
Surry County. Federal Aid Project No. IMS-77-1(141)83, State Project No.
8.174101, Division 11, TIP Project No. I4025A, WBS Element 34209.1.1.
Please find enclosed three copies of the PCE and NRTR, PCN Form, permit drawings,
and %2 size plan sheets for the above referenced project. The document states that Bridge
No. 13 will be replaced with a new 760-foot long bridge with a clear deck width of 72
foot on the existing alignment. Traffic will be maintained on site with the use of staged
construction methods. There are no permanent impacts to Waters of the U.S. associated
with this project. The only surface water impacted by this project is the Yadkin River.
All impacts will be temporary consisting of 0.45 ac of temporary fill in surface waters.
The Yadkin River is classified by the Division of Water Quality as Class C.
Bridge Demolition: The superstructure of Bridge No. 14 is composed of a reinforced
concrete floor on I-beams. The substructure consists of reinforced concrete caps on
concrete piles. Approximately 185 feet of the bridge is over water and bents 3, 4, and 5
are located in the stream. NCDOT is committed to avoid dropping bridge demolition
debris into waters of the United States. All guidelines for bridge demolition and removal
will be followed in addition to Best Management Practices for the Protection of Surface
Waters and BMP's for Bridge Demolition and Removal.
MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: [phone] LOCATION:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FAX: [phone] TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER WEBSITE. WWW.NCDOT.ORG RALEIGH NC
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548
i
Temporary f .-.useways
There will be 149 feet of temporary impacts to the Yadkin River from the construction of
two rock causeways in 0.45 acres of the Yadkin River (see permit drawing Sheets 4 and
9 of 9). The causeways will consist of Class I riprap topped with a layer of Class A stone.
Temporary rock causeway will be required to remove the existing interior bents from the
existing bridge and to place the new bents. The contractor will be allowed to determine if
the northern causeway or the southern causeway will be constructed first. The first
causeway will be removed prior to construction of the second causeway.
Restoration Plan: No permanent fill will result from the subject activity. The materials
used as temporary fill in the construction of the causeways will be removed. The
temporary fill areas will be graded back to the original contours. Elevations and contours
in the vicinity of the proposed causeways are available from the field survey notes.
Schedule for Restoration of Temporary Fill Area: It is assumed that the Contractor will
begin construction of the proposed causeways shortly after the date of availability for the
project. The Let date is October 19, 2004 with a date of availability of November 30,
2004.
Removal and Disposal: The causeways will be removed within 90 days of the placement
of the interior bents. The temporary rock causeways will be removed by the Contractor
using excavating equipment. All materials placed in the stream by the Contractor will be
removed. All other materials removed by the Contractor will be disposed of at an off site
upland location.
Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation
The NCDOT is commited to incorporating all reasonable and practicable design features
to avoid and minimize wetland impacts, and to provide full compensatory mitigation of
all remaining wetland impacts. Avoidance and minimization measures were taken during
the planning and NEPA phases; minimization measures were incorporated as part of the
project design and include:
• Temporary rock causeways will not be in the Yadkin River simultaneously.
• In order to avoid crossing Fall Creek with construction equipment, the height
of the existing retaining wall west of the road will be increased. This will
allow enough room for equipment between the stream and the road.
Because all jurisdictional impacts are temporary no mitigation is proposed.
Federally-Protected Species
Plants and animals with federal classifications of Endangered, Threatened, Proposed
Endangered, and Proposed Threatened are protected under provisions of Section 7 and
Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. As of January 29, 2003,
the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) lists two federally protected species for Surry
County, Schweinitz's sunflower and small whorled pagonia, and no species for Yadkin
County.
,rk
I A.
Biological conclusions of "May effect, not likely to adversely effect" were reached for all
listed species as reflected in the attached CE dated March 2004. NCDOT received
concurrence from the USFWS for Schweinitz's sunflower on February 19, 2004. An
updated survey for small whorled pogonia will be conducted prior to the Let Date to
ensure that the original Biological Conclusion remains valid. If applicable, concurrence
will be requested from the USFWS after surveys are conducted.
Regulatory Approvals
Section 404 Permit: It is anticipated that the construction of the causeways will be
authorized under Section 404 Nationwide Permit 33 (Temporary Construction Access and
Dewatering). We are, therefore, requesting the issuance of a Nationwide Permit 33
authorizing construction of the causeway. All other aspects of this project are 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 a Nationwide 23 as authorized by a
Nationwide Permit 23 (FR number 10, pages 2020-2095; January 15, 2002).
Section 401 Permit: We anticipate 401 General Certifications numbers 3361 and 3366
will apply to this project. All general conditions of the WQCs will be met. Therefore, in
accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0501(a) we are providing two copies of this application
to the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of
Water Quality, for their records.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Brett Feulner at
[phone].
Sincerely,
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
Environmental Management Director, PDEA
w/ attachment:
Mr. John Hennessy, NC Division of Water Quality (2 copies)
Mr. Marla Chambers, NCWRC
Mr. Marella Buncick, USFWS
Mr. Greg Perfetti, P.E., Structure Design
w/o attachment
Mr. David Franklin, USACE, Wilmington Ms. Mark Staley, Roadside Env.
Mr. Jay Bennett, P.E., Roadway Design Mr. Heath Slaughter, DEO
Mr. Omar Sultan, Programming and TIP Mr. David Chang, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr. Art McMillan, PE, Highway Design Ms. Missy Dickens, PDEA
Mr. Michael Pettyjohn, P.E., Division 11 Engineer
Alk
Office Use Only: Form Version May 2002
USAC?:; Action ID No. DWQ No.
(If any particular item is not applicable to this project, please enter "Not Applicable" or "N/A".)
1. Processing
1. Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project:
® Section 404 Permit ? Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules
? Section 10 Permit ? Isolated Wetland Permit from DWQ
® 401 Water Quality Certification
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested: NW 23 & 33
3. If this notification is solely a courtesy copy because written approval for the 401 Certification
is not required, check here:
4. If payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program (NCWRP) is proposed for
mitigation of impacts (verify availability with NCWRP prior to submittal of PCN), complete
section VIII and check here: ?
5. If your project is located in any of North Carolina's twenty coastal counties (listed on page
4), and the project is within a North Carolina Division of Coastal Management Area of
Environmental Concern (see the top of page 2 for further details), check here: ?
II. Applicant Information
1. Owner/Applicant Information
Name: NCDOT
Mailing Address: Project Development and Environmental Analysis
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27966-1548
Telephone Number: [phone] Fax Number: [phone]
E-mail Address: tg hgMe(a)dot.state.nc.us
2. Agent/Consultant Information (A signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization letter
must be attached if the Agent has signatory authority for the owner/applicant.)
Name:
Company Affiliation:
Mailing Address:
Telephone Number: Fax Number:
E-mail Address:
Page 1 of 8
.aw
III. Project Information
Attach a vicinity map clearly showing the location of the property with respect to local
landmarks such as towns, rivers, and roads. Also provide a detailed site plan showing property
boundaries and development plans in relation to surrounding properties. Both the vicinity map
and site plan must include a scale and north arrow. The specific footprints of all buildings,
impervious surfaces, or other facilities must be included. If possible, the maps and plans should
include the appropriate USGS Topographic Quad Map and NRCS Soil Survey with the property
boundaries outlined. Plan drawings, or other maps may be included at the applicant's discretion,
so long as the property is clearly defined. For administrative and distribution purposes, the
USACE requires information to be submitted on sheets no larger than 11 by 17-inch format;
however, DWQ may accept paperwork of any size. DWQ prefers full-size construction
drawings rather than a sequential sheet version of the full-size plans. If full-size plans are
reduced to a small scale such that the final version is illegible, the applicant will be informed that
the project has been placed on hold until decipherable maps are provided.
1. Name of project: Replacement of Bridge 14 over Yadkin River, Yadkin Valley Railroad and
NC 268
2. T.I.P. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only): I-4025A
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN):
4. Location
County: Yadkin/ Surry Nearest Town: Jonesville
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number):
Directions to site (include road numbers, landmarks, etc.): The site is located on I-77 on the
Yadkin/SM County Line.
5. Site coordinates, if available (UTM or Lat/Long): 17 516059E 4011727N
(Note - If project is linear, such as a road or utility line, attach a sheet that separately lists the
coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody.)
5. Property size (acres):
6. Nearest body of water (stream/river/sound/ocean/lake): Yadkin River
7. River Basin: Yadkin River
(Note - this must be one of North Carolina's seventeen designated major river basins. The
River Basin map is available at http://h2o.enr.state.ne.us/admin/mVs/.)
8. Describe the existing conditions on the site and general land use in the vicinity of the project
at the time of this application: The area surronding the bridge is forestland.
Page 2 of 8
AM
9. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used: Plans for
replacing the bridge include replacing the current bridge in the same location. Equipment
used will include re lar equipment utilized on bridge replacement projects.
10. Explain the purpose of the proposed work: The purpose is to replace the old bridge that is
functionally obsoleie and structurally deficient.
IV. Prior Project History
If jurisdictional determinations and/or permits have been requested and/or obtained for this
project (including all prior phases of the same subdivision) in the past, please explain. Include
the USACE Action ID Number, DWQ Project Number, application date, and date permits and
certifications were issued or withdrawn. Provide photocopies of previously issued permits,
certifications or other useful information. Describe previously approved wetland, stream and
buffer impacts, along with associated mitigation (where applicable). If this is a NCDOT project,
list and describe permits issued for prior segments of the same T.I.P. project, along with
construction schedules.
N/A
V. Future Project Plans
Are any future permit requests anticipated for this project? If so, describe the anticipated work,
and provide justification for the exclusion of this work from the current application.
N/A
VI. Proposed Impacts to Waters of the United States/Waters of the State
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
wetlands, open water, and stream channels associated with the project. The applicant must also
provide justification for these impacts in Section VII below. All proposed impacts, permanent
and temporary, must be listed herein, and must be clearly identifiable on an accompanying site
plan. All wetlands and waters, and all streams (intermittent and perennial) must be shown on a
delineation map, whether or not impacts are proposed to these systems. Wetland and stream
evaluation and delineation forms should be included as appropriate. Photographs may be
included at the applicant's discretion. If this proposed impact is strictly for wetland or stream
mitigation, list and describe the impact in Section VIII below. If additional space is needed for
listing or description, please attach a separate sheet.
Page 3 of 8
1406
1. Provide a written description of the proposed impacts: The proposed project will temporary
fill .49 acres of Yadkin River. The fill is composed of Class I RipLT and is necessary to
facilitate the removal of the interior bents from the existing bridge and place the new bents.
2. Individually list wetland impacts below:
Wetland Impact
Site Number
(indicate on map)
Type of Impact* Area of
Impact
(acres) Located within
100-year Floodplain**
(yes/no) Distance to
Nearest Stream
(linear feet)
Type of Wetland***

* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: mechanized clearing, grading, fill,
excavation, flooding, ditching/drainage, etc. For dams, separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding.
** 100-Year floodplains are identified through the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps
(FIRM), or FEMA-approved local floodplain maps. Maps are available through the FEMA Map Service Center at 1-800-358-9616, or
online at httn://www.fema.gov.
*** List a wetland type that best describes wetland to be impacted (e.g., freshwater/saltwater marsh, forested wetland, beaver pond,
Carolina Bay, bog, etc.) Indicate if wetland is isolated (determination of isolation to be made by USACE only).
List the total acreage (estimated) of all existing wetlands on the property:
Total area of wetland impact proposed:-
3. Individually list all intermittent and perennial stream impacts below:
Stream Impact
Site Number
(indicate on ma)
Type of Impact* Length of
Impact
(linear feet)
Stream Name** Average Width
of Stream
Before Impact Perennial or
Intermittent?
lease specify)

1 Temporary fill in
surface waters
149 ft
Yadkin River
75 ft
Perennial

* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: culverts and associated rip-rap,
dams (separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding), relocation (include linear feet before and after, and net loss/gain),
stabilization activities (cement wall, rip-rap, crib wall, gabions, etc.), excavation, ditching/straightening, etc. If stream relocation is
proposed, plans and profiles showing the linear footprint for both the original and relocated streams must be included.
** Stream names can be found on USGS topographic maps. If a stream has no name, list as UT (unnamed tributary) to the nearest
downstream named stream into which it flows. USGS maps are available through the USGS at 1-800-358-9616, or online at
www.usgs.¢ov. Several internet sites also allow direct download and printing of USGS maps (e.g., www.tgpozone.com,
www.mapquest.com, etc.).
Cumulative impacts (linear distance in feet) to all streams on site: 149 ft (temporary)
Page 4 of 8
AW
4. Individually list all open water impacts (including lakes, ponds, estuaries, sounds, Atlantic
Ocean and any other water of the U.S.) below:
Open Water Impact
Site Number
(indicate on map)
Type of Impact* Area of
Impact
(acres)
Name Wate)
( applicable) Type of Waterbody
(lake and estuary,
bay, ocean, etc) sound,

* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: fill, excavation, dredging,
flooding, drainage, bulkheads, etc.
5. Pond Creation
If construction of a pond is proposed, associated wetland and stream impacts should be
included above in the wetland and stream impact sections. Also, the proposed pond should
be described here and illustrated on any maps included with this application.
Pond to be created in (check all that apply): ? uplands ? stream ? wetlands
Describe the method of construction (e.g., dam/embankment, excavation, installation of
draw-down valve or spillway, etc.):
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stormwater requirement, etc.):
Size of watershed draining to pond: Expected pond surface area:
VII. Impact Justification (Avoidance and Minimization)
Specifically describe measures taken to avoid the proposed impacts. It may be useful to provide
information related to site constraints such as topography, building ordinances, accessibility, and
financial viability of the project. The applicant may attach drawings of alternative, lower-impact
site layouts, and explain why these design options were not feasible. Also discuss how impacts
were minimized once the desired site plan was developed. If applicable, discuss construction
techniques to be followed during construction to reduce impacts.
The No-Build or "do nothing" alternative was considered but would eventuallv necessitate
closure of the bridge. All guidelines for bridge demolition and removal will be followed in
addition to Best Management Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters and BMP's for
Bridge Demolition and Removal
VIII. Mitigation
DWQ - In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0500, mitigation may be required by the NC
Division of Water Quality for projects involving greater than or equal to one acre of impacts to
freshwater wetlands or greater than or equal to 150 linear feet of total impacts to perennial
streams.
Page 5 of 8
.A?
USACE - In accordance with the Final Notice of Issuance and Modification of Nationwide
Permits, published in the Federal Register on March 9, 2000, mitigation will be required when
necessary to ensure that adverse effects to the aquatic environment are minimal. Factors
including size and type of proposed impact and function and relative value of the impacted
aquatic resource will be considered in determining acceptability of appropriate and practicable
mitigation as proposed. Examples of mitigation that may be appropriate and practicable include,
but are not limited to: reducing the size of the project; establishing and maintaining wetland
and/or upland vegetated buffers to protect open waters such as streams; and replacing losses of
aquatic resource functions and values by creating, restoring, enhancing, or preserving similar
functions and values, preferable in the same watershed.
If mitigation is required for this project, a copy of the mitigation plan must be attached in order
for USACE or DWQ to consider the application complete for processing. Any application
lacking a required mitigation plan or NCWRP concurrence shall be placed on hold as
incomplete. An applicant may also choose to review the current guidelines for stream restoration
in DWQ's Draft Technical Guide for Stream Work in North Carolina, available at
hqp:://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/stnngide.html.
1. Provide a brief description of the proposed mitigation plan. The description should provide
as much information as possible, including, but not limited to: site location (attach directions
and/or map, if offsite), affected stream and river basin, type and amount (acreage/linear feet)
of mitigation proposed (restoration, enhancement, creation, or preservation), a plan view,
preservation mechanism (e.g., deed restrictions, conservation easement, etc.), and a
description of the current site conditions and proposed method of construction. Please attach
a separate sheet if more space is needed.
N/A
2. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration
Program (NCWRP). Please note it is the applicant's responsibility to contact the NCWRP at
[phone] to determine availability and to request written approval of mitigation prior
to submittal of a PCN. For additional information regarding the application process for the
NCWRP, check the NCWRP website at hllp://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/wrp/index.htm. If use of
the NCWRP is proposed, please check the appropriate box on page three and provide the
following information:
Amount of stream mitigation requested (linear feet):
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet):
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres):
Amount of Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres):
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres):
Page 6 of 8
AM
IX. Environmental Documentation (required by DWQ)
Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state) funds or the use of public
(federal/state) land?
Yes ® No ?
If yes, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the
requirements of the National or North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
Note: If you are not sure whether a NEPA/SEPA document is required, call the SEPA
coordinator at [phone] to review current thresholds for environmental documentation.
Yes ® No ?
If yes, has the document review been finalized by the State Clearinghouse? If so, please attach a
copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval letter.
Yes ® No ?
X. Proposed Impacts on Riparian and Watershed Buffers (required by DWQ)
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
required state and local buffers associated with the project. The applicant must also provide
justification for these impacts in Section VII above. All proposed impacts must be listed herein,
and must be clearly identifiable on the accompanying site plan. All buffers must be shown on a
map, whether or not impacts are proposed to the buffers. Correspondence from the DWQ
Regional Office may be included as appropriate. Photographs may also be included at the
applicant's discretion.
Will the project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233
(Meuse), 15A NCAC 2B .0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 2B .0250 (Randleman Rules and
Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please identify. )?
Yes ? No ® If you answered "yes", provide the following information:
Identify the square feet and acreage of impact to each zone of the riparian buffers. If buffer
mitigation is required calculate the required amount of mitigation by applying the buffer
multipliers.
Zone* Impact
(square feet) Multiplier Required
Mitigation
1 3
2 1.5
Total
* Zone 1 extends out 30 feet perpendicular from near bank of channel; Zone 2 extends an
additional 20 feet from the edge of Zone 1.
Page 7 of 8
Am
If buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e., Donation
of Property, Conservation Easement, Riparian Buffer Restoration / Enhancement, Preservation or
Payment into the Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as
identified within 15A NCAC 2B.0242 or.0260.
XI. Stormwater (required by DWQ)
Describe impervious acreage (both existing and proposed) versus total acreage on the site.
Discuss stormwater controls proposed in order to protect surface waters and wetlands
downstream from the property.
XII. Sewage Disposal (required by DWQ)
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of
wastewater generated from the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
XIII. Violations (required by DWQ)
Is this site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500) or any Buffer Rules?
Yes ? No
Is this an after-the-fact permit application?
Yes ? No
XIV. Other Circumstances (Optional):
It is the applicant's responsibility to submit the application sufficiently in advance of desired
construction dates to allow processing time for these permits. However, an applicant may
choose to list constraints associated with construction or sequencing that may impose limits on
work schedules (e.g., draw-down schedules for lakes, dates associated with Endangered and
Threatened Species, accessibility problems, or other issues outside of the applicant's control).

(Agent's
'Agent's Signature bate'
is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)
Z1 C,- `r
Page 8 of 8
AW

vJLAlUd
IL
i ,
i.,y ,.*' t.vvrr IC• S
..ti '?.1;.:1•Ch'll .'r PhY :J .:• .l rerb'••'a alp I
r ti l'C t 11 :l -' ?.I : t I{w•(??+
Par.
Jv S nra ; Fps.
' ir1.7t) 1 `I?ad { hl.i ai•a. y F r naf. r
711.
rate ri1 D
? I -n 't y K-0 1 ? Ur•1 R,?t _ e I
)to 'OV
K I ?, wts_s Iaa?r .,rte ?• r.
Ilrman a•
rhirpalr. +4d'rnlj +v CJ rrr-r &]trSl'e <S t•I:I:UNt :CG:Y le - a
f ?y 7< F 1!r 111 :'I1C1t ] r li. rf41 r}.fel I r L. ° 4 ntJ -•yl
?'; ?-•tJS'? ; ? :r D K • I N •& L':t^an it ???.
'ilr:har r _ r
Cyr
'- {n1 _ _ D•?-t. err o: •.il r •? S'hw'11.• ?r
a Fr-[r •?
? :•IG.,-a 11 ? I
iv;q..k 1 lb ??'? ? ?CWIii1Vi al a
! Z
t _ 1 iaoyV _ i. [ _
7L:.? a IIhIt,.J :?latt•.rnon .? 5rhw
Fill
s
1I D E. R t 1 ??Iljj! ru a?.a•at.;mae ::
1 -Y _ a )mt
! -. Ili • t Hs,:ri nr ,\ )
•1 r?t ' Cf'..i.t i ? ! tt
?uJ II- i 11s 801 1 D A 1 t Y` IrE . ,,,.
90l\ 1:90 .>.t•'.:.k .` 'nr•V•?lur? 1 a - tr' lAriil ?ff he
Pra/•r mmj --r 111 ic-,a alr;a 1`fi
VICINITY
MAP
NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS
YADKIN - SURRY COUNTIES
34209.1.1 0-4025A)
BRIDGE • 13 ON 1-77 SBL OVER YADKIN
RIVER. YADKIN VALLEY RAILROAD
AND NC 268
NOT TO SCALE
04-28-04
SHEET OF
NORTH CAROLINA
.dIL

0
0
E
0
a
E
0
0
SITE MAP
m ?,• 1
i r
Chataa 1144 1 ?'
Hospital ponrall i 77 ' '
??;"•,?";??°?''' END o °
i
° opt" PROJECT' 1L42
.\ `r°eK boo n ? `
? t o
os a °0 1 ?d• ~t?d' I _ .. _yTallings 88 1 165
= St. ooh. Fonds
0
71 = 9 d \ ??lQ? L,
1 ?
1144
EL N _ r - in " ' •n iVec- ` I
?0 1 1 ` IA a
7`. 68 y ??? I ± 1354
• ? ysa'ti i o
rktSt. BEGIN I ?
PROJECT 1353
353
1
c i N 9a
BUS E a 8* Jaxes St. \? 67 i 1417
21 87 w 1403
LIMIT
1310
ONESYILLE$4? 1352) \e
?- l
• \,os4,tee ?? ` to
4 1 1432
1 " !) G '? iv
1310
1403 e? \ 77
300
21 1 •'?
Cedar- pro . ?? Na 1° 5 9a, ?
S I T. E NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS
YADKN - SURRY COUNTIES
34209.1.1 0-4025A)
BRIDGE ' 1.3 ON 1-77 SBL OVER YADKIN
RIVER, YADKIN VALLEY RAILROAD
AND NC 268
NOT TO SCALE
DATE: 04-28-04 SHEET ?F?
AM
.
WETLAND LEGEND
r
E
l
0
0
E
c
0
0
?o
ooa
-WLB- WETLAND BOUNDARY
WETLAND
L
® DENOTES FILL IN
WETLAND
® DENOTES FILL IN
SURFACE WATER
® DENOTES FILL IN
SURFACE WATER
(POND)
® DENOTES TEMPORARY
FILL IN WETLAND
® DENOTES EXCAVATION
IN WETLAND
DENOTES TEMPORARY
® FILL IN SURFACE
WATER
r . r DENOTES MECHANIZED
r'.r r r . CLEARING
-? FLOW DIRECTION
TB
-TB TOP OF BANK
WE EDGE OF WATER
- - - PROP. LIMIT OF CUT
- - -F - PROP.LIMIT OF FILL
-A PROP. RIGHT OF WAY
--NG-- NATURAL GROUND
- PL? - PROPERTY LINE
-TDE- TEMP. DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
- PDE PERMANENT DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
-EAB-- EXIST. ENDANGERED
ANIMAL BOUNDARY
-EPB.- EXIST. ENDANGERED
PLANT BOUNDARY
----•U --- WATER SURFACE
XX XX X X LIVE STAKES
BOULDER
CORE FIBER ROLLS

PROPOSED BRIDGE
PROPOSED BOX CULVERT
PROPOSED PIPE CULVERT
12'-48'
PIPES
(DASHED LINES DENOTE
EXISTNG STRUCTURES) 54' PIPES
ABOVE
0 SINGLE TREE
WOODS LINE
DRAINAGE INLET
ROOTWAD
RIP RAP
5 ADJACENT PROPERTY
OWNER OR PARCEL
NUMBER (IF AVAILABLE)
PREFORMED SCOUR HOLE
h -:::A LEVEL SPREADER (LS)
lz I/- DITCH /
11 N1.1 11-1 GRASS SWALE
-MATCHLINE- STA. 23+00 SEE SHEET NO.4

1 OON or O
m
2 ZC<
CtC? C?
r?C
OHO 5
Z
?A ;pZ ?

yZ0 >.
CZ
oP~
N o m
Z 210

-? >
N,
Q? Z yy
A T `n
Z
-
N
m
C
?
?II
? OTn m?
? G O <

S
X >
m
0
0

W
N
r?
N
Fi

I c
'l I
i ? ?
l I ??? I I ?
i
TT
I I I''?sl ? I
I
I ?ZY
; i i'
I I
f_ I

N ?
so I'. I.
m I..
I I
i I
I
W\ L ind I

I
Q ? N
-?
oll
??K 1
?? I f
YOKIN CWWY
I
SURj-Y CWNTY
N
O SAN I--
o N g T a P /
0 C?
DAN toa p?
? W N
a
a ?
u -
/o N 40
?N A ? 1
orlklm
tin
M o
OV •p
?; ? tZ'1 n A
Ny? a a
,c x y
s c;

?o
i
25.100
YgpK/N ?
? SURRY ? Nry
?Pll
yT
30400
1 n
a
? I
m
\ I I
i
r cc 0
O
??•t! I I STAJ7+E5O
TIE TO EXIST
I '
T D ILI r t o ?? • I s
Al
pu i I I II h
i
.,?

'?
'
i ! It Iii

'
l.:y II
o Ic
71
13 r
? ? I m
'? l i mll I I , ?
a
I II
N
'

'
I
y
I i III
i m II
i I
I I '? Q
I
I
Z
I
i iI m II
i ?I
?'
`*
m
N
I

m
! £ ?
-MATCHLINE- STA. 36 + 50 SEE SHEET NO. 6

A
1 0
I
3540
m
N m
H D
2
-a11 D
N
r
V+

Z
r v
m s
? ?

N
8
8
?r
?z
e ?
?a
2

1 1
i
i
-MATCHLINE- STA. 23+00 SEE SHEET NO. 4
Zm° ?0. _?
^ 051 s
9c
m0Z zc< c?
T
3: 9N°
AI AH
o
L C, N
6..NF ZZm 40
m T Q
c c 40
i,m-N6 td`
yy? T. >2
m r > m N
A ?^
?cr O6 Z
-z m
o ?>
0
F?
11 ? ?'
I !111
? 'I I IIII ?I r ??1 I
?
}?
,1
II . ?,
II, ? I I ~
I
? ? I li
,ll
III I
I Illlll
-''ll l i, 1,
1 1 , /
111111 \ I ' I I ;
II
' !;f,?l`J=• ? I i, 1'Ij
1 I Ill?llj?? II ill??i
I
I
I

??' I ?I ( I
1' '?I,

I
!
? ,.
11
. ?' 1j I
1 II
IIaI I I
II
I I I I I I I I I it
III ,
I
1
t
\
I;
,I. :
.I I
.
I ••r ??. II
.I'I I
? \ IIII
1i
I II
??Ii?1i I il, ,??Ilil'll
I .. I I I
sa?,l-
W\ LIi
i? I I i

I
,,
1
I
Illjll IIII I iI 111

'
l
?Il
.I
II I
.?
? I

h 111
1 .1 T
,V
?p
?l
1 ?';I ' Ifl
N
lj
I
a
1711 IiI IIIq
II, Im,l r. IIII
C
I r I I IIII
R N
?u
?p
a
YADK/N COUNTY VA
SORRY COUNTY
a
rti
a
N ?
-mod •
• u
OR
`?.. Q

I

?'-- -
____ - - - ?_?=?
--- - --_=
%?• Y/
II
, III r111,>
JI/l III
- I
rl / I ?11 r/?p
I
?
IIII
i
?-:Y? ?51 ?•. - r I ? ? IIII ®^
'
?
/ h\? '
?? I I II
I
? w
?
? x
K
!
, /
- ?
¢?
-
? \ ?J• it// ?
? `??
_ ?
-? I
4
r.§
I

? SN -'? +•rr. hill ? ?' -' per. ` = "°==?i?i-'" -= ? '==?
H ?+
' g T aPIP I • \- - ' i ?'?
J r
L•+ o, do <• ? ? / B!g"_! 30400
0
-i
-44
--'.
• •" , ..;999??
050
OJE
BEG C/A AND PAOP NW FENCE O
046 o. 18 i b_ ?. r'I I IIII II/ - m. i TIE TO EXIST (A ;A
a NN I v I I I I IIII '
C
l , I
? J+ /' r". ? •?I'I?? ? ?,I? ?I??.ll L.,I .III ,I? II/i o'
11`x-
1 ?? N' // / -l; Ilill l''1_.?II/:, II ? ; I•'I ,11111 rill la
N +/ /?° IIII I ?I'li? , III IIr l'' / I
? ? i.', ' I I III I ?', II zre 1 III ? I r rl'? ? 'I
1 ? I _/ 'j(° ? . I r' '7?b ? ? •.. ?j 1 It'? I I I?S 1 I I I I z * ?
-1 ,, r/r I _? . I 'II ,I III Ill m ? ?
?., I ^2'6 ? r I'`. GJI? II ? Il III I I ? ? ! N 4
I I •I 'r
1
I 11
f0
i '•. r.i ? I I
1 I I I I I 35400
N 1 N I I I I 1 '
' fl ?I, I I II IIr I
a ;? a
I ,? \I I •I, II "1 II ? .,1 III III IZI ?I r' /.
/ I ? I I I' 1 r 11 ?? ?s i I1, I I ? r I I //
,? I? I I 1 I, (I I I IIr I .m N+
IIII
I \1 I?IISC I ' ? II. II j ICI IIl 1\ .. ,:: i m..
: 11, \ I?1?,1111111 II I I jl /
I O i t ?I r\ .• 1; I II ,, i, .? I I I II r/ I
yC Cytib r11, ?\.11..Ijlll?l/ I ?,ff,' I I II I' // //
i ?•« a Ir I I ? I' IIII / ? ? II :11 1? /I /
,?j?» y? !I I i / IIIIIIIIII I I ?I I .I II ? r•, mr / 1
MATCHLINE- STA. 36 +50 SEE SHEET NO. 6
Aye a a
?? yg
"s
R SURRY
25'100

S^
?z
b
?z
m < <

?
m
?
e
c rm
f
/1 (p
b
9 Ul m
z

m ? g s

t
?K
Z
Z?
O

1
io 100 io i o ?C

WN, w
\
m .
• I
C')
?o m

D Z z i
rn °

m
o N
j
BEGIN BRIDGE
C -SBL- STA 25+15.OC
D 0 ?.. EL. 912.31
m n ?Q
n D
I
Fji
w
0 m n l Xd
?
D -? N-?n
r ( I DO
D? N C ° I
z o? C) cn = I I C)
?D I I rn
C: p
z =O?
?? I O
?
° I
m D I
D

?? I Z

-
C) r
z 0
!© ?I m DO ° I
° 00
m
Lc) 0
<
mD
(A
m
m
pq (D

> 7z m
-i mm
(A x
I
.r ?? --Q (A<00 (A

mzm
\ m CC)
I

0 m

<?0
D •? ?7

z ?
m I
I
I

0 =
I
I
x-?c W>%0 ?

v) m m z

° ??
?n I I
s
m D N 0 I i
C) I I
m< I I
:

-< (A r

I +
CA)
V

i
L

1
I
Y •
c
x < Iii
? _? I
I
Z N Z C3 z 1
=
?( E Z Ap.
mm N o O D
-n M
? l z
R C)
° n 00 OD .p
O N ?e
n O O O O ?y
z i
?;
r
CONTRACT:

O O
V
N

0

0 0
_ V
Z
0
2! I
y (?
O O O
Z
I I

O O
0 0

z o v

n Oo
? v N N
°
S
N + <-a v < NJ
II it II II II II II x
v

D
m
o

w

o

A rj

1

M y
o
0
0
p 0 a
o W
rn
0
n
b. ? b
y A y
y
r
N ? N
u u n
0 0 0
`O
A
y

fl ? 3? ? z a
C) n op

o

to ?
o
A Cnb.

?
,
° =

m

ro
e
;kj

? w P
O ? Sys

IT1 ? y
i
P

to
?a
?b
'b V?1
9 b
?y til
ny
Q
V1.oby
?a
y
ti
OZ
ab
?S
?z
?y
do f
TIP PROJECT: I-4025A
z
0
v
0
0
z
D
0
m m
1-4 m
00
z D
(1) w
<?
0z
m.
'U
Yn
M.
z
M
H
z
m
m
M
z
M
0
0
0
0
H
D
H
z
?^
Q
ab
0
O
wn
y
N
YEN CO.
SURRY CO
402j
Om
0 iw
M m H
D Ir+ v
"
0 "Z
0 -1
z V) 2
o CD U)
r D-u
m ca
v r?
W m
n v?
m w2
m <r
?r
_0 m
0 S m
v m -o
0 m
-{ H m
:o
s
m
v
sx
sr
y?
mz
A >y.
N
z 'C
r'
P
`z
0
0

I
II
II
II
I I

I

I
D
I
L N
D
rn"
<
m

15+00
I
I
I I I
I I
II

20+00
II CD

I II
I I
I !.
It

- --- ---

i I PHI ? 1
1
I

II 1

1
-
;;
- ---
r-
---?---
--
------------

r I

I YADX/N R E

_ ---- -
----.

II
I N
co
r 30+00
1

1

I
890 9N
? ?
? 11
1 I I
I
%
I I
i

I t
35+00
11
I
I
v
------------------------
I

I
Z
? I

I
I I

I
I ?I

I.
I
40+00
I
I
I

I ? I
I

-

5+00
I'

I II
i
I
?
CI o
I CI
I I
I?
II
II II n
II
Iii

i,
II
I?
I I
II V ,
,!I
hj w
1 ?
?b
+?
°o
Z
?b
b0
?b
N ?7
+
,cvn
tin t?
. to
a b
o y
N
a
n
b
w h

1
,
?_ d
0
?Y e? rV
I ?

O
?
v r D
? I

r

-m
C
H?
c7 =
H H
D u)
r -o
H 00
-A m
?n
r
H H
F. CD
H
CDo
H
2
H
z
IXC- RIGHT OF WAY PLANS
h
b
h'1 ,a
y
Oil
p ? Od
W Ci
V
b
n ?
rV__
vJ
p h
V ? p
b? o
l
C
h ?
V
? r
W T -n N N p T 7C N T T T T T T T W 'O m 'O T f7 '9 T T 9 'O T m
a: o c _° `"' o W c??o 0 0 0 o o o o x N < c o o c 0 0 0 0 0 0 °'
P O O N @ 3 (a=' ° O O ?? O rt n O '8 -? ? cD N ° C a + a' V O O "° 'a Q' cD
0 9' a c°D D c 3 0 W N o o o 40 to c n c r) c c °.
c (D to Q.. C ° m O rt 7?1' .Ti. rt (? ~• `G tr D T ° < •0 'O o +r
c N o W W 0 0 0 0 o p o m 3 m a o. ° D a m ro < Q N
o y n ?- . ° a W' c 0 11??,, o c c c° c o c - o c m a
.Or I. j' N y y ° ° ° 7r 7r 7r 7 in
ID
_ fD p ° D O n n 7 '? O `? c 2. Q cD C, 71 O T O vOi v0, -' II
K C` 3 C /? 0 CD ?: H a cD 7 3• O ? < 3 ? 3 N 7 m T n; ?2+
Cr (D (D w
C O 30 o `° 3 T o T° O T
N 7 O ID C O T
m C r O a N m
ro 0 0 ,'D = 3 b _I
cD
y ?
rn
yy Z
a ?
I , I ! I I I ? Z
? -I i ' I ? I I m
I I ? i p ?/ ! ? I II' I I ?
l o l 1 i I` 1) I ! ? I °m °m m m ? IDC?I ? D? ? I ?? ? ?
ICI ? I I I I
Z T \ I I ( ! I
? ? I I I I
to C - _n -1 -1 N N = r f7 -I N N = t7 -I 'v m v -v -v p _v = W
-
°< o °o 'o
Q= co o:
co °c f -'n s f rt ?a °? "- o y o -?` c N.
7 < co ?r 3 =« o v co c M c -o m `0 0 ?o -c ° o o 3. co n. m CL cr 5- 0 o O cnn -I! ? -I o a o ° o 3 o c n• o cD o o` -o` V V •v -o -o ° () a C
w cD to < m c
c(D f°' rt N N Q N f<D s cD t0 ° -I CCD ° N N v W f? O W ?. -Oi. D N m 2. a- c 00
CD :( W o S F W ?- '' rn ° M S C C s s w ( a ?.
a N O -
f7 r. 'C cp O 3 H O O p O_ < S n cr N ? I p p .9 .y % ° W (D 2 -M
m °. G ° s°° 3 3 S o p S Z= M N .v .0 m rD o to C H
ID : r.
p
o 0
-
n W T
O : 30 ° (p ID 2.
p cD O 7 cD
k °u - A o 0 o a; Q' o C
o CL
o " ° a
O
o "
c<oo a °-: y °
n
o \/
®aaOO 80M 8®Oo®?3?0?000+®?Sa== o- .. ? ILI
x O 3= x T OM 7 v R1 () --I f1 ;m D m D 7? p ;o C p 7o p .'o N
in cr
'O - 00. T N_+• n n 'O '0 1 _' p tn, p 7C• N p H. p v p v p v O 7 v O
m (D (D 4 O A C !° r•. Z? _2 r I?, a 7 C. 7 G. o 7 d CL 7 CL 3 7 a 3 d 0 d r
C 3 c ° c°D 0 i- H c o mo o m F o o m ° m N a m° m fl rn
0 0 °- c `o ' 3 c Z n> r m o 02 Oty 3, IcD rt rt cD °- o a° m m CL m °- ° cD a m CL m °-
` p _ 0 0 3 ° a
° ?o = W CL -n a a a a a a (A
a o_
CL ` a,- c p O T 3 7 cp O -4 C -I •O c) N N
O° ` C ° cD 3 3 3 7 N SD r 3 I? ° 3• T Cr "I tD [- O T O 0 ° N ° C G
co cp a `- ` O tr c O N 7' W 0 n W cD ' O N - S W N p G H ° O
W 3 0 rt n '? m <0 CL cD G7 ID to r 7 a
1
Oi d 0
N O <N W p S cD _+ fD
r
°
NO °.
a c. j ` p -pi p. b C O -p v-r' ? N T 0 r r CA
CD
OW CL C 2 S° m n C cD 'O 7 fD 3 A N cp 3 c'D
7 Q G 7 W G C m (? C1 ° V S 7 N c W N O
°°° W= p. c s s ID D °s N c?D T
o W c? °- p (L c m co c? 3:
m c v T o c
° to d 70 N C N O
CL: ° h C a =« C 3 O
to c m 3 °
N r
b m c
V in CA
I
I I I I I I ? I I y i ? i ? ? I I I I ? I? I ? I
I i I i Fx I ?! I I ? ? I I
? 2 I? 1 I I I O O ? Iy Cf C_') i -1 I N N VI ? E ?
'm° b f F f f r l Ol rNI•I 1_1 mO I-9 I I I O C e I I I I V I I I '0 vS
m Nx I I I - I I T
I m m I TEI i I I I I I I I ! I i
I i I I + i I I ( I I I I i I
C Q < O G N N C OW W C 70 (? n = O N N N 0 n T N n G1 G? D T W
-? n O O_ to to S ?. O X O_ < ° S ° " O 3 <D tG ° O S C H -? N C c'
m ° 3 = 3 3 3 ?- o m °
N o ° c
n cn o. ,? T rt o- ° c° T Q a
s m ° ° ° m co c c = T o N
M. :L 0 0 3 °_ S c °-
Q- a °c °o is < cD C c 3• 3 m 3 O o "S3 Cn
3 G1 c°D c m (A 'o to ° H c 3 ?• a, f° c°D 'a = 0 ti
n °
C S S N O tD cnD O A N m
3 CL
y
y
N rr--
ti c Cp
x
C7
I 1 ? y
? I I ?pq?I ! j l j! ? C
N ?a o E
a
iA
,-mC, © 4T 1 1 I o CnQ
w ? I o i ? I ? 1 i
m I I , '
(? 1 1
? J ?? I A I L{ I i
Z -a? . F.C
I =
z ?m
r ? ? r
° m? ??nzn 2OO O
? 2 O 2 = O
?„ m ? w w c? o
?cZil ?o??Op?no~r~
m
n O 1:71 m
--o pq
m rn z p O O2 z p o
z? rVp???cCl?c?pno
0o w?? W 2?'E'D
y N Co O
0
O ti N rn -,
O ti ti
n L
cmi) ~ ? n
0
mm?
K
?a
z°
N
-1Hp
m
N N
o tll o

N ?o
o
o

loo
m
I
I. f zn ?
N
o
+r fTt
N 1
?m>
tnN ?
n0 C
WKH
i
I
?
0
0
o
N
n m ? l
0.5' MIn.
g ? -
H
n I.0' Max.

f

0
v
m
H
a
a
?m
x
q
CD
C&I
O
°a?bw C?
o x ?l tsf c? Q
H N
r°v n

I
f
E
I
' s
i yN
02 02 1
ia' rr r rr
s. ?s.
v, T l ;
m
r
z
v
o ? 4

o r
I {a
'R

?
W N

o ?
a
w

? O
O
O
O ... ' t t

\n
\
\r
\m
\N
\D
IR+ ;f
11m
1? .I
V1 I :a
i
/
/
1-3 ]
/n
n : C"ap VF
1
oDoA r.r?a?.
"I n
r?r ? Zr
1
\ Sock! a ? ? m
\ ° H"°
\ Pa p
\
2 .,
D
_
\n

\b
Im
F-D
I
/0+00
15+00
D
??xD
l n o? r
?mzn
? T W\ O
.y\ A
A m V m
(> A ? S
m
a?O
Sm
m
A
A
It
t ?
'
t

- a o
\
H \

I
l
lj
'"
+
Y
j
m A n
y uAN
r
_ l
`
k
' C9 $O
\ m m 2 20,
.,e

g
<
I. N
by O
I

0, g
8 -
yy
rI I m ' H
ID
rt
,
---?
e p
PN
QpO
d
,
'
+ 02 I
H
°
$
z
,?
I z
rz rx 12 ?
9
g o°
t€aCC??f ?y t? o; ?I

-MATCHLINE- STA. 23+00 SEE SHEET NO. 5
20+00

II 11 II it II II II N
§ ? dl
r
I
om?-I?Op?
II II II II II II II ?
02??-.pAR?N
ww
y?Cb

r
m
M
m
M

Z ,z
?
$ G v
A
D ?
z
z

5
N
Z
N
p
0
Z4
am ?
o °
?a
Z`
A n ,A
o

I ?
-MATCHLINE- STA. 23 + 00 SEE SHEET NO. 4
tpy. 12' !2' 2' 12' - ,?' O I Cb
y ? y rn s^ csP ,.VEies
?$• 02 X02 02 02 _?,O
+250 12'. !r 12' )2' c ° g ° Q i _ Crp
`l \ \ \?\\ \ ??\\\?\ T t? ?'? ' j ti n I
`00007 {{??GGpp`SS+ I??
STA 23+62 RT m rOy c pp= 'I
?-I ?.\\?\???\ \\?\\ rTl WW L m BEG SBG i 6 O` b O I o'^9 N
NNE F! ilttiJ? ?? r?
= W mom p
°.
i (.n
D W ?O 11T f -- 10 I ?msn?! _ m
Nrr 'I O I P"- `,'D o
o?
_._...36. + +? RETAIN °' \(yll?p?I!,` re ?$ l `? 112K
-4 02
O w O p `"yJl I eW °BN - 2 a
I? - '? _yy SOLD - ?m ??n..!!!..' O•? 5"CSP ml ??
?II? I pmo D a off. w ?ae !` -
rn: g o
;u o' p
UD o 25400
10 71 rri
a
o cn o N ?? - -- r z
?yo / Q
VOV?I2 W n gI"' I W ?1
I?IIG7 Nm°>? 0 \ \ NA O
?IyO c n9 J o<-I emtim... 2
C72 I 02 ? ? G?pON p0 ?3? '----- ?n b1?i? ? ? r(,0? ?.
- €a / I I 'im\y I Om[? °I N?^
A
?±^x? Ox ]y
Irnl'[ ?% 2' :2, IG 12' .9 ms p0 p0 ZLZ ?n? tl.' V1Ago2 141°???nn _O?O N IIT V
° a O
H h
I AO ° z0 r y O
I pNV T
p
- I
h t t ..5. / ... .. _ I
2'2r )%t? ? }f,?NI? r. ibX3aGLd
I Qi I
gj y O 02 ! 02 I a
W W ? I c
V - Z
co 0 0 co
Nm r a
O O r Z N O nl rri ? Z N
7 8,
n ?
+r
amD
o N r
a ? -4
1 J.5' YIr,
oL_
m ? ?
A m m
mo
ono
gc
s
eC) v
r
"tea
T r N
mmm
N D N
mom
mom
mmN
N N
mn
S
N C
? N
m
K?
ban ? ?' b
ti• ti C
$4b? p?
N ! y a
Up•Qti w'S
Q [+1 y
N f?

D0W m Ln l I= 2T
w 0) r m _
l? .
W in c c
m co mZ 30+00
I?
zn t+0 ill
rr)

m
-I 'D

o
to
0

Z
' x
-------
-

------
--

N
+
„I LD ID
+
a w
n
i
-----

? ?
I rn
i o

v CO O

I m ?
? ? ? ? ? a N O

- a ? V
$ I S w

C) I
Z * D
,

n
n PS: . MOD CONC RUM

f
N _ _ _ O -d - \ w.'CONC DITCH- BEG C/A AP/O"PROP 'W FENCE m
m N
r O a
N
3
N
I

p
_ lT
STA3+
38
3
t sra 3s+2s.o7 9 ? _ =sB -

rlE TO EXIS

u)
-1
cf,
no
0
a
Ned 13N
i
SBG
-; END O

y N
D z + N w
a P t z
,? m
W n0
Oz N Z
O + N
+ N n
S
o+
? y;

z D 4

o V1O
0
N ID ?

N I I

1 IT`

1
D, G z N + I O _ 0 7
o + m n

n D
l°
? o
`.y?
cea
t
I
c"
? cb
V
+ T' 2'n tY p i m W
0 U x
u
N s5+00

f _E I -- _ . - -----

.. ? 6 P5 I

o

P
I, z z < < r
O o m m 0
-1 --A 3 O
N m m m
l O )I m M
m D -i xo
c ro m c Z
-MATCHLINE- STA. 36 + 50, SEE SHEET NO. 6 0 v
m z D A
3
2 r
v,
D
i
a
0
N
VI
C6
W
0
Z
-i
LP D
+ o
C
0
O
CA)
^Z
Pa

O
Z
N
a
C+7 I
° ly
Z
t7
e =

3 Z

o
/ p
ni D
Z c
nN i

i()c
o$.
?A
gm
r?
J
OJ N a

r CO O

cn
cn
f/I D
D m
r
I m
r
I
a
+ w
L" N
+
t0 ,- Z
am w
cn
z

. O1
N
co
W
11

•

a
6
m
w
0
a
00
O
r ?
-p A
o?
'_I s
mZ
?n
M ,n
mm
0 0
m
In
-i m
.o ?
N
A
2
C
N
m
FA&I
o ?
"o
b ?x ?x b
fn
a
' td
a' y b
Q H
a N b
N G7
-MATCHLINE- STA. 36 + 50 SEE SHEET NO. 5
i.
fn: I N o TIE TO EXI57-ING
ra• to ? ? rasz,e? ----- "'?.
PS. +95 --??? sz•ezz
?a
/^ N m
?2 ON?
Im =?L
I ?o
I
I
r +4.54 ., m
s.
I
I z
I ? ?g
z
I"
I '.
I
I
1
I:
1
1
1
1
1
?I? ,111
I
r I
I
T ..I
40f00
45+00
2
O
m _
N
?y O
n Z
n
a
50+00
orn?-I?oD?
uuuuullu"
n oo N ? m
i W? pLq N
?m??IroD?
nn°I'nnu?
z W}g}%?
l{ N
om -II-Op-0
II II II II II II nII` 4
?t71
05
,o
m?
tO n
V -i
O Z
N
I hN
m °• o
I ? r -4
I ;mn
r
I I map
I
rA I
-Y b." Mln.
.0' Mox.
_ '52-
1,6
I§ `
Ino
mo % m
> ti T ymM
ti

D
}
1 o
:g L= 1 ca
o?
-n

N
~ °m
I
c? x
I
,o
to i

N
Z
N

? O a o

-4
a a
.0 w :? o ?
4
r
0

n .T m=n
y
ti

r 72
b
m m m mz
m
Z a
= x ?c
O m v? g
D 7r
y An

DETAIL OF CAUSEWAY
FOR PROPOSED BRIDGE
FASCIA LINE - -
PROPOSED BRIDGE
12" CLASS "A"
STONE
24'-0"
(MIN.)
TOP EL =869.3,
2'-0„
if .
1.5 OHW
,ter, TKP) 1 867.3
CLASS "1" RIP RAP ----\
STREAM
BED --7
A = \\\ =\\\ _\\\ _\\\ _\,

RIVER BED
CAUSEWAY VOLUME AND AREA OF TEMPORARY FILL
LOCATION (CLASS "1" RIP RAP) BELOW OHW
BENT #2 AREA 0.251 Ac
(SOUTH BANK) VOLUME = 1627 CY
AREA = 0.067 Ac
EX BENT #4 VOLUME = 546 CY
PIPE (60") = 224 LF
BENT #3 AREA = 0.135 Ac
(NORTH BANK) VOLUME = 1011 CY
0
E
O
E
a°
c
0
0
°o < o
o, o

SUMMARY OF AFFECTED PROPERTY OWNERS

TRACT NO. PROPERTY OWNER ADDRESS SITE NO.
NCDOT

WORK WITHIN EXISTING R/W
NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS
YADKIN - SURRY COUNTIES
34209.1.14-4025A)
BRIDGE s 13 ON I-TT SBL OVER YADKIN
RIVER. YADKIN VALLEY RAILROAD
AND NC 268
NOT TO SCALE
DATE: 04-28-04 SHEET OF

E.a

Z
a c B I
.
y a co O
W U E
LL

?
° CO

C14
O
LO
CL

0
E
r

O

v
l
y-
H 0 0

N U
C C
O ?p

O

Uv

c r ?
m o
Z

Q N_ ?
C C O U
L y R
E
O
U - m
F-
U ?m
0
a N
O
>
F X
we
w
a =?
O LL m ?.
z E d
D o
w

N
C
Co

U- d
m CL
3 ? w

O
O
O
O }
N
m O

co O
+
v co
N

N O J
?Z
H
M
H
I
O
t-
111
z>w
>w>
o>o
<vw
.N
Wa'W
W tm7Ur
¢oi?
0
=aZw.
N 0
? H s
p c U
UQavl
t~n<00
3 LL
8
W < z <
mUO?
Y Y U <-
<
ym C
z 4
3QS MMa
ca zOF
<ZUW
L<aIX
Y Y
<<m0
M CO
p F
_ = 7
zmm0
a W l N
Y W ~
0moz
u, z
m UJ z
o 0
y W LL
= Y LL O J
10
8 Q
m
OoW
Wa
W
O"'w
0
z?- af
A
NATURAL SYSTEMS REPORT
Replacement of Bridge No. 13
1-77 over Yadkin River
Yadkin and Surry Counties, North Carolina
(1-4025)
(State Project No. 8.174101)
(Federal Aid No. IMS-77-1(141)83)
Prepared for:
Ko and Associates and

The North Carolina Department of Transportation
Raleigh, North Carolina
November 2003
A
NATURAL SYSTEMS REPORT
Replacement of Bridge No. 13
1-77 over Yadkin River
Yadkin and Surry Counties, North Carolina
(1-4025)
(State Project No. 8.174101)
(Federal Aid No. IMS-77-1(141)83)
Prepared for:
Ko and Associates and

The North Carolina Department of Transportation
. Raleigh, North Carolina
Prepared by:
ECOSCIENCE CORPORATION
1101 Haynes Street, Suite 101
Raleigh, NC 27604
Tel [phone] Fax [phone]
November 2003
.I-
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
' The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to replace Bridge No. 13
located on the south-bound portion of Interstate Highway 77 (1-77) over the Yadkin River in
Yadkin and Surry Counties, North Carolina, TIP No. 1-4025.
' INTRODUCTION
The objectives of this Natural Resource Technical Report are 1) an assessment of biological
features within the project area including descriptions of vegetation, wildlife, protected species,
jurisdictional wetlands, and water quality; 2) a delineation of Section 404 jurisdictional areas and
subsequent survey of jurisdictional boundaries (utilizing Trimble XRS Differential Global
Positioning System (GPS) technology); 3) an evaluation of plant communities and their extent
within the project area; and 4) a preliminary determination of permit needs. These tasks were
accomplished using established data sources and a field visit on December 30, 2002 to
delineate jurisdictional areas, collect flora and fauna data, and verify established data sources.
Field investigators were Kendrick Weeks, M.S. and David O'Laughlin, M.S. The project
boundary was determined by NCDOT and is approximately 10.1 acres (4.1 hectares).
PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS

I

Water Resources
The project area is located within sub-basin 03-07-02 of the Yadkin-Pee Dee River Basin (DWQ
2003b). Two perennial streams, the Yadkin River and Falls Creek, were identified in the project
study area.
A best usage classification of C has been assigned to the Yadkin River and its tributaries,
including Falls Creek, in the project study area. No designated High Quality Waters (HQW),
Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW), Water Supply I (WS-1), or Water Supply II (WS-11) waters
occur within 1.0 mile (1.6 kilometers) of the project study area (DWQ 2003b). No waters
identified on the North Carolina 303(d) list, are located in the project study area.
Biotic Resources
Three distinct plant communities were identified within the project study area: Piedmont Levee
Forest, disturbed/maintained land, and Dry-Mesic Oak Pine Forest (Table 1). The Levee Forest
is disturbed with invasive exotic species, particularly Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense),
forming most of the shrub layer. No Significant Aquatic Endangered Species Habitat exists
within or near the project study area. Because there are no anadromous fish that breed in the
Yadkin River, the replacement of Bridge No. 13 can be classified as Case 3; therefore, there are
no special restrictions beyond those outlined in Best Management Practices for Protection of
Surface Waters.
1

I

Table 1. Project Area Plant Communities
Plant Community Area
Disturbed/Maintained Land
Dry-Mesic Oak Pine Forest
Piedmont Levee Forest
3.1 (1.3)
4.6 (1.9)
2.4(1.0)
Total 10.1 (4.2)
Areas are given in acres (hectares).
Bird species identified during the field survey are American crow (Corvus brachyrhyncos), blue
jay (Cyanocitta cristata), indigo bunting (Passerina cyanea), northern cardinal (Cardinalis
cardinalis), Carolina wren (Thryothorus ludovicianus), Carolina chickadee (Poecile carolinensis),
tufted titmouse (Baeolophus bicolor), mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), red-shouldered hawk
(Buteo lineatus), eastern towhee (Pipilo erythrophthalmus), and Kentucky warbler (Oporornis
formosus). No amphibians were observed during the field visit, a black rat snake (Elaphe
obsoleta) was the only reptile observed, and deer tracks were the only sign of mammals. .
JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS
Surface Waters and Wetlands
Surface waters within the embankments of the Yadkin River and Falls Creek are subject to
jurisdictional consideration under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act as "waters of the United
States" (33 CFR Section 328.3). Two stream systems and no wetlands occur within the project
study area (Table 2). The NWI classification of the Yadkin River is riverine, lower perennial with
an unconsolidated bottom and permanently flooded (R2UBH). During the field visit, Falls Creek
was determined to be riverine, upper perennial with an unconsolidated bottom primarily of mud
that is permanently flooded (R3UBH).
Table 2. Jurisdictional Areas within the Project Study Area
' Cowardin Classification Linear Distance Area DWQ Rating
R2UBH (Yadkin River) 255.0 (77.6) 1.2 (0.5) N/A
' R3UBH (Falls Creek) 590.0 (180) 0.3 (0.1) N/A
Linear distance is expressed in feet (meters), and area is expressed in acres (hectares).
' Permits
This project is being processed as a Programmatic Categorical Exclusion (PCE) under Federal
' Highway Administration (FHWA) guidelines. The COE has made available Nationwide Permit
(NWP) No. 23 (67 FR 2082; January 15, 2002) for CEs due to expected minimal impact. DWQ
has made available a General 401 Water Quality Certification for NWP No. 23 (GC 3403). If
' temporary structures are necessary for construction activities, access fills, or dewatering of the
site, then a NWP 33 (67 FR 2020, 2087; January 15, 2002) permit and associated General 401
Water Quality Certification (GC 3366) will be required. In the event that NWP No. 23 will not
2
i
i suffice, minor impacts attributed to bridging and associated approach improvements are
expected to qualify under General Bridge Permit 031 and its associated General 401 Water
Quality Certification (GC 3375) issued by the Wilmington COE District.
Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation
Mitigation .,of wetland impacts has been defined by the CE-0 to include: avoiding Impacts (to
wetlands), minimizing impacts, rectifying impacts, reducing impacts over time and compensating
' for impacts (40 CFR 1508.20). The three aspects of avoidance, minimization, and
compensatory mitigation must be considered sequentially. Compensatory mitigation is not
normally considered until anticipated impacts to waters of the United States have been avoided
i and minimized to the maximum extent possible. Compensatory mitigation for Section 404
jurisdictional areas may not need to be proposed for this project due to the potentially limited
nature of the project impacts.
Enhancement of Falls Creek is needed because approximately 50 percent of its watershed is
' cultivated, cattle pasture, or developed. The lower 4000 feet (1219 meters) of Falls Creek is
subject to cattle and is characterized by very little vegetated buffer allowing normal rain events
to erode the banks and discharge high sediment loads into the Yadkin River. In addition,
' construction of the retaining wall will require hydrologic consideration to avoid further
degradation of the Falls Creek channel.
Federally Protected Species
Species with the federal classification of Endangered (E), Threatened (T), or officially Proposed
' (P) for such listing are protected under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as
amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). Three federally protected species, the bog turtle (Clemmys
muhlenbergh) (T [S/A]), Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii), and small-whorled
' pogonia (Isotria medeoloides), are listed as occurring in Surry County (February 25, 2003 FWS
list), and no species are listed for Yadkin County (January 29, 2003 FWS list).
Table 3. Federally Protected Species
Common Name Scientific Name Status Biological Conclusion
Bog Turtle Clemmys muhlenbergii T S/A N/A
Schweinitz's Sunflower Helianthus schweinitzii E May Affect, Not Likely
to Adversely Affect
Small Whorled Pogonia Isotria medeoloides T May Affect, Not Likely
to Adverselv Affect
--Endangered; A taxon "in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range
T S/A-Threatened by similarity of appearance
'--Historic record; The species was last observed in the county more than 50 years ago.
3

I
Clemmys muhlenbergii (Bog turtle)
Threatened due to similarity of appearance
Family: Emydidae
Date Listed: November 4, 1997
NHP records (June 2003) document the nearest occurrence of the bog turtle in Surry County
approximately 8.5 miles (13.6 kilometers) north northwest of the project study area. The project
' study area has no habitat for Clemmy muhlenbergii. T (S/A) species are not subject to Section
7 consultation, and a biological conclusion for this species is not required.
Helianthus schweinitzii (Schweinitz's sunflower)
I Endangered
Family: Asteraceae
I Date Listed: May 7, 1991
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: MAY AFFECT, NOT LIKELY TO ADVERSELY AFFECT.
' NHP records (June 2003) document the nearest occurrence of Schweinitz's sunflower in Surry
County approximately 10.6 miles (17.0 kilometers) northeast of the project study area. The
project study area supports suitable habitat for Schweinitz's sunflower in portions of the
' disturbed/maintained areas such as beneath the bridges and along the corridor's maintained
right-of-way. A detailed survey Schweinitz's sunflower was conducted on September 17, 2003.
' The biologists conducting the survey (Ben Brazell and David O'Loughlin) were experienced with
location of suitable habitat and identification of this species. The plant-by-plant survey was
conducted in all suitable habitat (roadside shoulders, a power line corridor, other regularly
maintained areas, and woodland edges) within the project study area. This survey resulted in a
determination that Schweinitz's sunflower does not occur within the project study area.
' Isotria medeoloides (small whorled pogonia)
Threatened
Family: Orchidaceae
' Date Listed: September 9, 1982
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: MAY AFFECT, NOT LIKELY TO ADVERSELY AFFECT.
' NHP records (June 2003) document the nearest occurrence of the small whorled pogonia in
Surry County, approximately 25 miles (40 kilometers) northeast of the project study area. The
project study area contains suitable habitat for small whorled pogonia in the Dry-Mesic Oak Pine
' Forest and along stream banks of Falls Creek and the Yadkin River. Since the site visit was
conducted during the blooming season for this species, biologists conducted systematic surveys
' during the site visit. These surveys involved walking through identified suitable habitat and
carefully observing all plants. This survey found no evidence of small whorled pogonia within
the project study corridor.
4

i
1
1
1
1
1
4
CONCLUSIONS
The project study area contains 845 feet (257.6 meters) of jurisdictional streams that could
potentially be impacted by the proposed project. No wetlands occur within the project study
area. Permits likely to be required for this project area a Section 404 NWP No. 23 and No. 33
along with their corresponding Section 401 Water Quality Certifications.
Impacts to biotic communities will be minimal. Impacts to streams are likely to be associated
with sedimentation and all efforts should be taken to minimize it. Falls Creek will require special
attention in this regard because of the proposed retaining wall. Enhancement of Falls Creek is
an on-site mitigation option. Protected species were not found within the project study area
during surveys for them.
5
i
i
i
i
i

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................................1
1.1 Project Description ........................................................................................... ......1
1.2 Purpose ........................................................................................................... ......1
1.3 Methods ........................................................................................................... ......3
1.4 Qualifications ................................................................................................... ...... 3
1.5 Definitions ........................................................................................................ ......4
2.0 PHYSICAL RESOURCES ........................................................................................... ......4
2.1 Physiography ................................................................................................... ......4
2.2 Water Resources ............................................................................................. ......4
2.3 Best Usage Classifications and Water Quality ................................................. ......6
2.4 Anticipated Impacts to Water Resources ......................................................... ......7
3.0 BIOTIC RESOURCES ................................................................................................. ......7
3.1 Terrestrial Communities ................................................................................... ......7
3.2 Aquatic Communities ....................................................................................... ......9
3.3 Summary of Anticipated Impacts ..................................................................... ......10
4.0 JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS ......................................................................................... ......10
4.1 Waters of the United States ............................................................................. ......10
4.2 Permit Issues ................................................................................................... ......11
4.2.1 Permits ................................................................................................. ......11
4.2.2 Mitigation .............................................................................................. ......13
4.3 Protected Species ............................................................................................ ......14
5.0 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................ ......18
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Project Study Area Plant Communities ...........................................................................10
Table 2. Jurisdictional Areas within the Project Study Area ..........................................................11
Table 3. Federal Species of Concern ...........................................................................................17
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Vicinity Map ................................................................................................................2
Figure 2. Plant Communities ......................................................................................................5
Figure 3. Jurisdictional Areas ...................................................................................................12
IV

Replacement of Bridge No. 13
1-77 over Yadkin River
Yadkin and Surry Counties, North Carolina
(1-4025)

i

1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Project Description
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to replace Bridge No. 13
located on the south-bound portion of Interstate Highway 77 (1-77) over the Yadkin River in
Yadkin and Surry Counties, North Carolina (Figure 1). Bridge No. 13 is located on the boundary
of Yadkin and Surry Counties approximately 0.25 mile (0.4 kilometer) north of the intersection of
1-77 and NC 62 and approximately 0.25 mile (0.4 kilometer) east of Elkin, NC (Figure 1). Bridge
No. 13 spans the Yadkin River and adjacent banks for a distance of approximately 240.0 feet
(73.2 meters). The existing roadway is approximately 30.0 feet (9.1 meters) wide with a total,
maintained right-of-way width of approximately 60.0 feet (18.2 meters).
Bridge No. 13 will be replaced in place with an on-site detour to the east on the north-bound
bridge of 1-77 over the Yadkin River. Bridge No. 13 is a two-lane structure with 12 spans
totaling 766 feet (233.5 meters) and a deck width of 28 feet (8.5 meters). The bridge was
constructed in 1960 and currently has a sufficiency rating of 44.9. The superstructure of the
bridge is a reinforced concrete floor on steel beams. The substructure end bents consist of
reinforced concrete caps on H-piles. The interior bents consist of reinforced concrete post and
beams on concrete footings (bent no. 10 is on pile footings). NCDOT is committed to avoid
dropping bridge demolition debris into "waters of the United States." The use of NCDOT's Best
Management Practices for Bridge Demolition and Removal is recommended. Temporary fill for
a construction platform may be necessary for construction of the new bridge; however, any fill
required should be minimized in the design of the new bridge.
As this reach of the Yadkin River has no potential as a travel corridor for migratory fish (Division
of Marine Fisheries Anadromous Fish Spawning Areas; NCCGIA 1998), this project can be
classified as Case 3, where in-water work will not be restricted by fish moratorium periods
associated with fish migration, spawning, and nursery areas. NCDOT will coordinate with
various resource agencies during project planning to ensure that all concerns regarding bridge
demolition are resolved.
1.2 Purpose
The purpose of this study is to provide an evaluation of biological resources in the immediate
area of potential project impact (project study area). Specifically, the tasks performed for this
study include 1) an assessment of biological features within the project study area including
descriptions of vegetation, wildlife, protected species, wetlands, and water quality and 2) a
delineation of Section 404 jurisdictional areas and subsequent survey of jurisdictional
1
a +
'?L t' s - Ark:•C - i
41 \..-.
Yadklh --River
_ "emu ?-
i S .-N.}a . ?? - may, .j ?_y- T ,,,. _i_- - ?_ • `_-__
Ptoje
:y5 r ?? •, _ ? .. • . -. _ .tom ::?._..•?_ -. .
75
??i 4 ?.. t Y???? f._ of ( '?`'. Fi•,. -" _ -: _? ..'. _ _? .. - .. ''?-'-?
7. N
z.
•.w,
•y. .y.:•'`- -•. ? ?. ?. _ - _,,.? _ : .. .. ;; •?•, __ + `•;.• 1111, -
'?: i. _ ?, ? ,aim ??• .,, ?;
Data: NCDOT County Composite 2001
EcoScience Project Location °i"" by. KC'" Figure
Corporation Replacement of Bridge No. 13 s,? 1:60,000
1-77 over the Yadkin River DOW June 2003
1e 1-4025A
=U.06 FM 1
Yadkin and Surry Counties, North Carolina Pmjeat 03-146
t +
I
I boundaries utilizing Trimble XRS Differential Global Positioning System (DGPS) technology with
reported sub-meter accuracy.
1 1.3 Methods
' Materials and research data in support of this investigation have been derived from a number of
sources including applicable U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) topographic mapping (Elkin North
and Elkin South, NC 7.5-minute quadrangles, 1994 and 1971), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
' (FWS) National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) mapping (FWS NWI 1994), and and North Carolina
Center for Geographic Information and Analysis (NCCGIA) recent aerial photography (NCCGIA
1998). Plant community descriptions are based on a classification system utilized by the N.C.
Natural Heritage Program (NHP) (Schafale and Weakley 1990). When appropriate, community
classifications were modified to better reflect field observations. Vascular plant names generally
' follow nomenclature found in Radford et al. (1968), with adjustments made to reflect more
current nomenclature (Kartesz 1998). Jurisdictional areas were evaluated using the three-
parameter approach following U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) delineation guidelines
' (DOA 1987). Wetland jurisdictional areas were characterized according to a classification
scheme established by Cowardin et al. (1979) and A Field Guide to North Carolina Wetlands
(DEM 1996). Habitat used by terrestrial wildlife and aquatic organisms, as well as expected
' population distributions, were determined through field observations, evaluation of available
habitat, and supportive documentation (Webster et al. 1985, Potter et al. 1980, Martof et al.
1980, Rohde et al. 1994, Menhinick 1991, Palmer and Braswell 1995). Water quality
' information for area streams and tributaries was derived from available sources (DWQ 2002,
2003). Quantitative sampling was not undertaken to support existing data.
' The most current FWS listing of federally protected species with ranges which extend into
Yadkin and Surry Counties (January 29, 2003 and February 25, 2003, respectively) was
obtained prior to initiation of the field investigation. In addition, NHP records documenting the
' presence of federally or state listed species were consulted before commencing the field
investigation.
' Bridge No. 13 was visited on June 3, 2003. The project study area was walked and visually
surveyed for significant features. For purposes of field surveys, the project study area has been
' delineated by EcoScience. Special concerns evaluated in the field include 1) potential habitat
for protected species and 2) wetlands and water quality protection in the Yadkin River.
' 1.4 Qualifications
The field work for this investigation was conducted by EcoScience Corporation (ESC) biologists
' Kendrick Weeks and David O'Loughlin.
Mr. O'Loughlin is a project scientist working toward a M.S. in forestry from North Carolina State
University, with minors in botany and statistics. He has taken pertinent courses including
dendrology, botany, ecology, and wetland soils. His professional expertise includes natural

t

0
0
resources assessment, stream and wetlands delineations, protected species surveys, and
environmental document preparation.
Mr. Weeks is a Project Scientist with five years of experience in the environmental field. He
earned a B.S. in biology from Appalachian State University and worked as a seasonal wildlife
research biologist for five years before continuing his formal education. He earned an M.S. in
zoology from North Carolina State University, with a minor in statistics. His research focused on
the nesting ecology of two species of breeding Neotropical migratory landbirds in the southern
Appalachians. Professional expertise includes ecological relationships, plant and wildlife
identification, protected species surveys, wetland and jurisdictional area delineations, indirect
and cumulative impact assessments, and environmental document preparation.
1.5 Definitions
Definitions for descriptions used in this report are as follows: project study area generally
denotes the area bounded by proposed construction limits; however, since a specific alternative
has not yet been selected, the Project study area (Figure 2) describes the area approximately
250.0 feet (76.2 meters) by 2000.0 feet (609.6 meters), encompassing approximately 10.1 acres
(4.1 hectares); Project Vicinity describes an area extending 0.5 mile (0.8 kilometer) on all sides
of the project study area; and Project Region is equivalent to an area represented by a 7.5
minute USGS topographic quadrangle map with the project occupying the central position.
2.0' PHYSICAL RESOURCES
2.1 Physiography
The project study area occurs within the Inner Piedmont Belt geologic formation within the Inner
Piedmont physiographic province of North Carolina, and is underlain by metamorphic fine-
grained biotite gneiss. The project vicinity is characterized by a large river valley with
approximately 1000 feet (304.8 meters) of total floodplain. The surrounding upland terrain
consists of moderately sloping foothills that rise 100 feet (30.5 meters) or more above the
floodplain of the Yadkin River. The project study area is centered on the river floodplain and
extends to adjacent uplands at the northern and southern boundaries (Figure 1). Elevations in
the project study area are approximately 870 to 940 feet (265 to 286 meters) National Geodetic
Vertical Datum (NGVD) (USGS Elkin North and Elkin South, NC 7.5-minute quadrangles, 1994
and 1971).
2.2 Water Resources
The project study area is located within sub-basin 03-07-02 of the Yadkin-Pee Dee River Basin
(DWQ 2003b). This area is part of USGS accounting unit 03040101 of the South Atlantic-Gulf
Coast Region. The section of the Yadkin River within the project study area has been assigned
Stream Index Number 12-(53) by the N.C. Division of Water Quality (DWQ) (DWQ 2003a).
4

' Falls Creek has been assigned Stream Index Number 12-57. Neither the Yadkin River or Falls
Creek is listed on the DWQ 303d list of impaired streams in the Yadkin River Basin (April 3,
2000 DWQ list).
Within the project study area, the Yadkin River is a fifth-order perennial stream exhibiting
' moderate sinuosity, moderate velocity, and a well-developed riffle-pool sequence. The width of
the stream is approximately 190.0 feet (57.9 meters) at the point of the bridge crossing. During
the field survey, water clarity was poor. The substrate is composed of sand and mud. The
f stream banks are steep and range from 8.0 to 15.0 feet (2.4 to 4.6 meters) in height. The
floodplain is most expansive in the southwest quadrant of the project study area. Falls Creek is
' a first-order perennial stream exhibiting moderate sinuosity, moderate velocity, and well-
developed riffle-pool sequence. The width of the stream is approximately 12.0 feet (3.7 meters)
within the project boundary. The water depth was approximately 6 inches (14 centimeters) and
' water clarity was turbid. The substrate is composed of sand and silt. The stream banks range
from 6 to 8 feet (1.8 to 2.4 meters). This stream is heavily incised with sloughing banks where a
cattle pasture occurs on the floodplain at the edge of the project study area.
' 2.3 Best Usage Classifications and Water Quality
' Classifications are assigned to waters of the State of North Carolina based on the existing or
contemplated best usage of various streams or segments of streams in the basin. A best usage
classification of C has been assigned to the Yadkin River and its tributaries, including Falls
Creek, in the project study area. These waters are protected for Class C uses which include
aquatic life propagation and survival, fishing, wildlife, secondary recreation, and agriculture.
Secondary recreation refers to human body contact with waters on an infrequent or incidental
' basis. No designated High Quality Waters (HQW), Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW),
Water Supply I (WS-11), or Water Supply II (WS-II) waters occur within 1.0 mile (1.6 kilometers)
of the project study area (DWQ 2003b).
The DWQ (previously known as the Division of Environmental Management, Water Quality
' Section) has initiated a whole-basin approach to water quality management for the 17 river
basins within the state. The Yadkin River and Falls Creek have a use support rating of Fully
Supporting in the vicinity of the project study area (DWQ 2002) and are not designated as
' impaired waters regulated under the provisions of the federal Clean Water Act, Section 303(d).
No benthic macroinvertebrate monitoring stations occur within 1.0 mile (1.6 kilometers) of the
project study area (DWQ 2003b). The nearest benthic macroinvertebrate monitoring station is
located approximately 1.8 miles (2.9 kilometers) upstream at the US 21 bridge and the 1996-
2000 sampling data classified the site as "Good" (DWQ 2003b).
The Yadkin-Pee Dee River subbasin 03-07-02 supports three major and 28 minor point source
dischargers. Permitted flow is 8.3 million gallons per day (31.4 million liters per day) for the
major dischargers and 2.1 million gallons per day (7.9 million liters per day) for the minor
' dischargers. Major non-point sources of pollution within the Yadkin-Pee Dee River Basin
include runoff from construction activities, agriculture, timber harvesting, and hydrologic

1 6
IL

modification. Sedimentation is the major problem associated with non-point source discharges
(DWQ 2003b).
2.4 Anticipated Impacts to Water Resources
No support bents are located in open water. Temporary construction impacts due to erosion
and sedimentation will be minimized through implementation of a stringent erosion control
schedule and the use of Best Management Practices (BMPs). The contractor will follow
contract specifications pertaining to erosion control measures as outlined in 23 CFR 650
Subpart B and Article 107-13 entitled Control of Erosion, Siltation, and Pollution (NCDOT,
Specifications for Roads and Structures). These measures include the use of dikes, berms, silt
basins, and other containment measures to control runoff; elimination of construction staging
areas in floodplains and adjacent to waterways; re-seeding of herbaceous cover on disturbed
sites; management of chemicals (herbicides, pesticides, de-icing compounds) with potential
negative impacts on water quality; and avoidance of direct discharges into streams by catch
basins and roadside vegetation. In addition, tall fescue is not suitable for erosion controls along
stream banks.
The proposed bridge replacement will allow for continuation of pre-project stream flows in the
Yadkin River, thereby protecting the integrity of this waterway. Long-term impacts resulting
from construction are expected to be negligible. In order to minimize impacts to water
resources, NCDOT Best Management Practices (BMPs) for the Protection of Surface Waters
will be strictly enforced during the entire life of the project.
NCDOT will coordinate with various resource agencies during project planning to ensure that all
concerns regarding bridge demolition are resolved. The replacement of Bridge No. 13 can be
classified as Case 3; therefore, there are no special restrictions beyond those outlined in Best
Management Practices for Protection of Surface Waters.
3.0 BIOTIC RESOURCES
' 3.1 Terrestrial Communities
' Three distinct plant communities were identified within the project study area: Piedmont Levee
Forest, disturbed/maintained land, and Dry-Mesic Oak Pine Forest (Figure 2). These plant
communities are described below.
Piedmont Levee Forest - Piedmont Levee Forest covers approximately 2.4 acres (1.0
' hectare). Representative canopy trees of this plant community within the project study area
range from 20 to 40 years old. The canopy consists of riparian tree species including box elder
(Acer negundo), river birch (Betula nigra), and sycamore (Platanus occidentalis). There are
' isolated individuals of green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica) and sugar berry (Celtis laevigata).
Subcanopy trees and shrubs include Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense), multiflora rose (Rosa
multiflora), and flowering dogwood (Corpus florida). The shrub layer is dominated by Chinese
7

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
privet, especially in the northwest quadrant. Vines present include Japanese honeysuckle
(Lonicera japonica), poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans), greenbriar (Smilax rotundifolia), and
muscadine grape (Vitis rotundifolia). The herbaceous layer is replaced by Chinese privet
seedlings. Animals that commonly utilize this habitat include northern parulas (Parula
americans), yellow-throated warblers (Dendroica dominica), and Acadian flycatchers
(Empidonax virescens), which breed and forage in deciduous trees growing on banks or on
floodplains of streams and rivers. Belted kingfishers (Ceryle alcyon) also nest in burrows on
high banks and feed on fish in streams and rivers.
Disturbed/Maintained Land - Disturbed/maintained land covers approximately 3.1 acres (1.3
hectare), and occurs as maintained right-of-ways and cattle pasture. The maintained roadside
area is approximately 25 feet (8 meters) wide. No trees and very few shrubs contribute to the
composition of this community. Plant species on the roadside margins include fescue (Festuca
spp.), wing stem (Verbesina occidentalis), wild strawberry (Duchesnea indica), clover (Trifolium
spp.), nightshade (Solanum carolinense), henbit (Lamium amplexicaule), golden rod (Solidago
spp.), smooth sumac (Rhus glabra), trumpet creeper (Campsis radicans), Japanese
honeysuckle, dock (Rumex crispus), and Indian hemp (Apocynum cannabinum). The pasture
land (southwestern quadrant) contained mostly fescue and other disturbance (grazing) adapted
species. Wildlife species that utilize disturbed/maintained land include eastern cottontail
(Sylvilagus floridanus), white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus), and woodchucks (Marmots
monax). Eastern cottontail, white-tailed deer, and woodchucks consume many of the
herbaceous species and some crops. Red-tailed hawks (Buteo jamaicensis), eastern screech
owls (Otus asio), and foxes hunt in large areas of disturbed/maintained habitats for rabbits,
rodents, and insects that also utilize the open habitat.
Dry-Mesic Oak Pine Forest - Dry-Mesic Oak Pine Forest occurs on upland sites in the project
study area and encompasses a total of 4.6 acres (1.9 hectare). This is a modified natural plant
community based upon the Dry-Mesic Oak Hickory Forest as described by Schafale and
Weakly (1990). Canopy trees are approximately 20 years old and may lack hickories because
of limited dispersal abilities. Hickories produce large, heavy seeds that do not disperse well
without help from small mammals (Webb 1986). The canopy is dominated by tulip poplar
(Liriodendron tulipifera), Virginia pine (Pinus virginiana), and white oak (Quercus alba). Less
dominant canopy trees present are red maple (Acer rubrum) and black cherry (Prunus serotina).
Understory trees/shrubs observed were red cedar (Juniperus virginiana), sassafras (Sassafras
albidum), and canopy species. Vines present include greenbriar, muscadine grape, and
Japanese honeysuckle. Herbaceous species were sparse. Many wildlife species use this
habitat for food and cover. Eastern gray squirrels (Sciurus carolinensis), blue jays (Cyanocitta
cristata), wild turkey (Meleagris gallopavo), and white-tailed deer consume acorns from the
oaks. Virginia pine is an important forage tree for wintering birds such as golden-crowned
kinglets (Regulus satrapa) and red-breasted nuthatches (Sitta canadensis). Some bird species
that breed and forage in Dry-Mesic Oak Pine forests include brown-headed nuthatches (Sitta
pusilla), blue-gray gnatcatchers (Polioptila caerulea), great crested flycatchers (Myiarchus
crinitus), and pine warblers (Dendroica pinus).
8

During the field survey there were signs of white-tailed deer. Characteristic mammals expected
to frequent wooded and brushy river corridors in the western Piedmont include Virginia
' opossum (Didelphis virginiana), raccoon (Procyon lotor), eastern gray squirrel, eastern
cottontail, southeastern shrew (Sorex longirostris), least shrew (Cryptotis parva), meadow vole
(Microtus pennsylvanicus), eastern mole (Scalopus aquaticus), red bat (Lasiurus borealis),
' southern flying squirrel (Glaucomys volans), gray fox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus), and mink
(Mustela vision).
' Bird species identified during the field survey are American crow (Corvus brachyrhyncos), blue
jay (Cyanocitta cristata), indigo bunting (Passerina cyanea), northern cardinal (Cardinalis
cardinalis), Carolina wren (Thryothorus ludovicianus), Carolina chickadee (Poecile carolinensis),
I tufted titmouse (Baeolophus bicolor), mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), red-shouldered hawk
(Buteo lineatus), eastern towhee (Pipilo erythrophthalmus), and Kentucky warbler (Oporornis
' formosus). The project study area's wooded and open habitat is expected to support other
species such as red-tailed hawk, American kestrel (Falco sparverius), belted kingfisher,
common flicker (Colaptes auratus), red-bellied woodpecker (Melanerpes carolinus), brown
thrasher (Toxostoma rufum), eastern bluebird (Sialia sialis), and American robin (Turdus
migratorius). Breeding Neotropical migrants that may inhabit the project study area during the
breeding season (April through July) include blue-gray gnatcatcher, great crested flycatcher,
' red-eyed vireo (Vireo olivaceous), northern parula, Louisiana waterthrush (Seiurus motacilla),
Acadian flycatcher, and hooded warbler (Wilsonia citrina). These species capitalize on the
abundant riparian insects and nesting substrates (canopy trees, subcanopy trees, undercut
' banks, and shrubs).
No amphibians were observed, and a black rat snake (Elaphe obsoleta) was the only reptile
' observed during the site visit. Reptile and amphibian species expected in habitats within the
project study area are American toad (Bufo americana), northern cricket frog (Acris crepitans),
gray treefrog (Hyla versicolor), slimy salamander (Plethodon glutinosus), Carolina anole (Anolis
' carolinensis), eastern box turtle (Terrapene carolina), eastern hognose snake (Heterodon
platyrhinos), and eastern garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis).
3.2 Aquatic Communities
' No aquatic amphibians or reptiles were observed during the site visit. Typical amphibian
species found in river, stream, and associated floodplain habitats include spring peeper
(Pseudacris crucifer), eastern newt (Notophthalmus viridescens), and green frog (Rana
' melanota). No reptiles were observed during the site visit. The Yadkin River and Falls Creek
provide suitable habitat for aquatic and semi-aquatic reptiles including painted turtle (Chrysemys
picta), northern water snake (Nerodia sipedon), queen snake (Regina septemvitatta), and
t snapping turtle (Chelydra serpentina). No benthic invertebrates were observed during the field
visit.
' No sampling was undertaken in the Yadkin River or Falls Creek to determine fishery potential.
No fish were noted during the field visit. Species which may be present within the Yadkin River
' or Falls Creek include thicklip chub (Hybopsis labrosa), bluehead chub (Nocomis
1 9

leptocephalus), whitefin shiner (Notropis lutrensis), spottail shiner (Notropis hudsonius), redlip
shiner (Notropis chiliticus), creek chub (Semotilus atromaculatus), white sucker (Catostomus
commersoni), brown bullhead (ictalurus nebulosus), margined madtom (Noturus insignis),
redbreast sunfish (Lepomis auritus), largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides), tessellated
darter (Etheostoma olmstedi), piedmont darter (Percina crassa), and rosyside dace
(Clinostomus funduloides).
3.3 Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Plant community areas are estimated based on the amount of each plant community present
within the project study area (Table 1).
Table 1. Project Study Area Plant Communities.
Plant Community Area
Disturbed/Maintained Land 3.1 (1.3)
Dry-Mesic Oak Pine Forest 4.6 (1.9)
Piedmont Levee Forest 2.4 (1.0)
Total 10.1 (4.2)
' Areas are given in acres (hectares).
' No significant habitat fragmentation will be expected as a result of project activities if potential
improvements are restricted to adjoining roadside margins. Construction noise and associated
disturbances will have short-term impacts on avifauna and migratory wildlife movement
patterns.
Potential on-site and downstream impacts to aquatic habitat are to be avoided by bridging the
' stream system to maintain regular flow and stream integrity. Short-term impacts associated
with turbidity and suspended sediments may affect benthic populations. Benthic invertebrates
form the basis of the food-chain in stream systems. Impacts to downstream habitats associated
with turbidity and suspended sediments resulting from bridge replacement will be minimized
through the use of silt curtains and the implementation of stringent erosion control measures.
' No Significant Aquatic Endangered Species Habitat exists within or near the project study area.
Because there are no anadromous fish that breed in the Yadkin River, the replacement of
Bridge No. 13 can be classified as Case 3; therefore, there are no special restrictions beyond
' those outlined in Best Management Practices for Protection of Surface Waters.
4.0 JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS
' 4.1 Waters of the United States
Surface waters within the embankments of the Yadkin River and Falls Creek are subject to
' jurisdictional consideration under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act as "waters of the United
10
States" (33 CFR Section 328.3). The Yadkin River, within the project study area, has been
characterized on NWI mapping (NWI Elkin North, NC 7.5 minute quadrangle) as riverine that is
lower perennial with an unconsolidated bottom and permanently flooded (R2UBH). During the
field visit, the NWI classification was determined to be accurate. Falls Creek has not been
characterized on NWI mapping. During the field visit, Falls Creek was determined to be
riverine, upper perennial with an unconsolidated bottom primarily of mud that is permanently
flooded (R3UBH). The project study area contains a total of 845.0 linear feet (257.6 linear
meters) and 1.5 acre (0.6 hectare) of perennial streams (Table 2 and Figure 3). Project
planning for bridge replacement calls for the removal of three existing bridge support bents from
the Yadkin River and construction of one new bridge support bent within the Yadkin River.
Project planning for bridge replacement indicates no direct impact to Falls Creek. A narrowing
of the floodplain of Falls Creek by the proposed retaining wall may cause bank erosion during
high water periods.
Vegetated wetlands are subject to jurisdictional consideration under Section 404 of the Clean
Water Act as "waters of the United States" (33 CFR Section 328.3). These areas are defined by
the presence of three primary criteria: hydric soils, hydrophytic vegetation, and evidence of
hydrology at or near the surface for a portion (12.5 percent) of the growing season (DOA 1987).
During the field visit, it was determined that no vegetated wetlands occur within the project study
area.
Table 2. Jurisdictional Areas within the Project Study Area
Cowardin Classification Linear Distance Area DWQ Ratina
R2UBH (Yadkin River)
R3UBH (Falls Creek)
255.0 (77.6) 1.2 (0.5) N/A
590.0 (180) 0.3 (0.1) N/A
Linear distance is expressed in feet (meters), and area is expressed in acres (hectares).
1 4.2 Permit Issues
4.2.1 Permits
This project is being processed as a Programmatic Categorical Exclusion (PCE) under Federal
Highway Administration (FHWA) guidelines. The COE has made available Nationwide Permit
(NWP) No. 23 (67 FR 2082; January 15, 2002) for CEs due to expected minimal impact. DWQ
has made available a General 401 Water Quality Certification for NWP No. 23 (GC 3403). If
temporary structures are necessary for construction activities, access fills, or dewatering of the
site, then a NWP 33 (67 FR 2020, 2087; January 15, 2002) permit and associated General 401
Water Quality Certification (GC 3366) will be required. In the event that NWP No. 23 will not
suffice, minor impacts attributed to bridging and associated approach improvements are
expected to qualify under General Bridge Permit 031 and its associated General 401 Water
Quality Certification (GC 3375) issued by the Wilmington COE District.
As this reach of the Yadkin River has no potential as a travel corridor for migratory fish (Division
of Marine Fisheries Anadromous Fish Spawning Areas; NCCGIA 1998), this project can be
11

PROJECT
STUDY AREA
SURRY COUNTY
YADKIN COUNTY
300 0 300
SCALE IN FEET
EcoScience
Corporation
Rakigh, North Care ina
KO AND
ASSOCIATES
NCDOT
LEGEND
STREAM BOUNDARIES
I? PROPOSED BRIDGE
REPLACEMENT OF
BRIDGE *13 ("025A)
1-77 OVER
YADKIN RIVER
Yadldn and Swrv Counties, North Carolina
PROPOSED
CUT/FILL
BOUNDARY
Y COUNT Y
R? YU COUNTY
#13
PROPOSED
RETAINING WALL
PROPOSED
CUT/FILL
BOUNDARY
MAF KW FIGURE
JUL 2003
r'-300'

03-146
i
classified as Case 3, where in-water work will not be restricted by fish moratorium periods
associated with fish migration, spawning, and nursery areas.
' 4.2.2 Mitigation
' The COE has adopted through the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) a wetland
mitigation policy which embraces the concept of "no net loss of wetlands" and sequencing. The
purpose of this policy is to restore and maintain the chemical, biological, and physical integrity of
' waters of the United States, and specifically wetlands. Mitigation of wetland impacts has been
defined by the CEQ to include: avoiding impacts (to wetlands), minimizing impacts, rectifying
' impacts, reducing impacts over time and compensating for impacts (40 CFR 1508.20). The
three aspects of avoidance, minimization, and compensatory mitigation must be considered
sequentially.

J

J

Avoidance mitigation examines all appropriate and practicable possibilities of averting impacts
to waters of the United States. According to a 1990 Memorandum of Agreement (MOA)
between the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the COE, in determining "appropriate
and practicable" measures to offset unavoidable impacts, such measures should be appropriate
to the scope and degree of those impacts and practicable in terms of cost, existing technology
and logistics in light of overall project purposes. Impacts to streams are expected due to the
nature of the project. Not all sediment can be prevented from entering waters of the United
States.
Minimization includes the examination of appropriate and practicable steps to reduce the
adverse impacts to waters of the United States. Implementation of these steps will be required
through project modifications and permit conditions. Minimization typically focuses on
decreasing the footprint of the proposed project through the reduction of median widths, right-of-
way widths, fill slopes, and/or road shoulder widths. All efforts will be made to decrease impacts
to surface waters.
Compensatory mitigation is not normally considered until anticipated impacts to waters of the
United States have been avoided and minimized to the maximum extent possible. It is
recognized that "no net loss of wetlands" functions and values may not be achieved in each and
every permit action. In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0506(h), DWQ may require
compensatory mitigation for projects with greater to or equal than 1.0 acre (0.4 hectare) of
impacts to jurisdictional wetlands or greater than or equal to 150.0 linear feet (45.7 linear
meters) of total perennial stream impacts. Furthermore, in accordance with 67 FR 2020, 2092;
January 15, 2002, the COE requires compensatory mitigation when necessary to ensure that
adverse effects to the aquatic environment are minimal. The size and type of the proposed
project impact and the function and value of the impacted aquatic resource are factors
considered in determining acceptability of appropriate and practicable compensatory mitigation.
Appropriate and practicable compensatory mitigation is required for unavoidable adverse
impacts which remain after all appropriate and practicable minimization has been required.
Compensatory actions often include restoration, preservation and enhancement, and creation of
13

waters of the United States. Such actions should be undertaken first in areas adjacent to or
contiguous to the discharge site.
' Mitigation for Section 404 jurisdictional area impacts may not need to be proposed for this
project due to the potentially limited nature of the project impacts. However, utilization of BMPs
' is recommended in an effort to minimize impacts. Temporary impacts to floodplains associated
with construction activities could be mitigated by replanting disturbed areas with native riparian
species and removal of temporary fill material upon project completion. Fill or alteration of more
' than 150.0 linear feet (45.8 linear meters) of stream may require compensatory mitigation in
accordance with 15 NCAC 2H .0506(h). A final determination regarding mitigation rests with the
' COE and DWQ.
Opportunities for mitigation are limited within the project study area. Enhancement of Falls
' Creek is needed because approximately 50 percent of its watershed is cultivated, cattle pasture,
or developed. The lower 4000 feet (1219 meters) of Falls Creek is subject to cattle and is
characterized by very little vegetated buffer allowing normal rain events to erode the banks and
' discharge high sediment loads into the Yadkin River.
4.3 Protected Species
' Species with the federal classification of Endangered, Threatened, Threatened due to Similarity
of Appearance (T [S/A]), or officially Proposed for such listing are protected under the
' Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). The term
"Endangered Species" is defined as "any species which is in danger of extinction throughout all
or a significant portion of its range," and the term "Threatened Species" is defined as "any
' species which is likely to become an Endangered species within the foreseeable future
throughout all or a significant portion of its range" (16 U.S.C. 1532). The term "Threatened due
to Similarity of Appearance" is defined as a species which is not "Endangered" or "Threatened,"
' but "closely resembles an Endangered or Threatened species" (16 U.S.C. 1532). Three
federally protected species, the bog turtle (Clemmys muhlenbergii) (T [S/A]), Schweinitz's
' sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzh), and small-whorled pogonia (Isotria medeoloides), are listed
as occurring in Surry County (February 25, 2003 FWS list), and no species are listed for Yadkin
County (January 29, 2003 FWS list).
' Clemmys muhlenbergii (Bog turtle)
Threatened due to similarity of appearance
' Family: Emydidae
Date Listed: November 4, 1997
The bog turtle is a small turtle reaching an adult size of approximately 3 to 4 inches (8 to 10
centimeters) in carapace length. This otherwise dark-colored species is readily identifiable by
the presence of bright orange or yellow blotches on the sides of the head and neck (Martof et al.
' 1980). The bog turtle is typically found in bogs, marshes, and wet pastures, usually in
association with aquatic or semi-aquatic vegetation and small, shallow streams over soft
' bottoms (Palmer and Braswell 1995). In North Carolina, bog turtles have a discontinuous
14

I
i

7

distribution in the mountains and western Piedmont. The bog turtle has declined drastically
within the northern portion of its range due to over-collection and habitat alteration. As a result,
the FWS officially proposed to list bog turtle as threatened within the northern portion of its
range in the January 29, 1997 Federal Register (62 FR 4229). Within the southern portion of its
range, which includes North Carolina, the bog turtle is listed as T (S/A) because of similarity in
appearance to individuals of the northern population.
NHP records (June 2003) document the nearest occurrence of the bog turtle in Surry County
approximately 8.5 miles (13.6 kilometers) north northwest of the project study area. The project
study area has no habitat for Clemmy muhlenbergii. T (S/A) species are not subject to Section
7 consultation, and a biological conclusion for this species is not required.
Helianthus schweinitzii (Schweinitz's sunflower)
Endangered
Family: Asteraceae
Date Listed: May 7, 1991
Schweinitz's sunflower is an erect, unbranched, rhizomatous, perennial herb that grows to
approximately 6.0 feet (1.8 meters) in height. The stem may be purple, usually pubescent, but
sometimes nearly smooth. Leaves are sessile, opposite on the lower stem but alternate above;
in shape they are lanceolate and average 5 to 10 times as long as wide. The leaves are rather
thick and stiff, with a few small serrations. The upper leaf surface is rough and the lower
surface is usually pubescent with soft white hairs. Schweinitz's sunflower blooms from
September to frost; the yellow flower heads are about 0.6 inches (1.5 centimeters) in diameter.
The current range of this species is within 60 miles of Charlotte, North Carolina, occurring on
upland interstream flats or gentle slopes, in soils that are thin or clayey in texture. The species
needs open areas protected from shade or excessive competition, reminiscent of Piedmont
prairies. Disturbances such as fire maintenance or regular mowing help sustain preferred
habitat (FWS 1994).
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: MAY AFFECT, NOT LIKELY TO ADVERSELY AFFECT
NHP records (June 2003) document the nearest occurrence of Schweinitz's sunflower in Surry
County approximately 10.6 miles (17.0 kilometers) northeast of the project study area. The
project study area supports suitable habitat for Schweinitz's sunflower in portions of the
disturbed/maintained areas such as beneath the bridges and along the corridor's maintained
right-of-way. A detailed survey Schweinitz's sunflower was conducted on September 17, 2003.
The biologists conducting the survey (Ben Brazell and David O'Loughlin) were experienced with
location of suitable habitat and identification of this species. The plant-by-plant survey was
conducted in all suitable habitat (roadside shoulders, a power line corridor, other regularly
maintained areas, and woodland edges) within the project study area. This survey resulted in a
determination that Schweinitz's sunflower does not occur within the project study area.
15

Isotria medeoloides (small whorled pogonia)
' Threatened
Family: Orchidaceae
Date Listed: September 9, 1982
' Small whorled pogonia is a terrestrial orchid growing to about 10 inches (25 centimeters) high.
Five or six drooping, pale dusty green, widely rounded leaves with pointed tips are arranged in a
' whorl at the apex of the greenish or purplish, hollow stem. Typically a single, yellowish green,
nearly stalkless flower is produced just above the leaves; a second flower rarely may be
present. Flowers consist of three petals, 0.7 inch (1.7 centimeters) in length, surrounded by
three narrow sepals up to 1.0 inch (2.5 centimeters) in length. Flower production, (May to July)
' is followed by the formation of an erect ellipsoidal capsule 0.7 to 1.2 inches (1.7 to 3.0
centimeters) in length (Massey et al. 1983). This species may remain dormant for periods up to
' 10 years between blooming periods (Newcomb 1977).
The small whorled pogonia is widespread, occurring from southern Maine to northern Georgia,
' but is very local in distribution. In North Carolina, this species is found scattered locations in the
Mountains, Piedmont and Sandhills (Amoroso 2002). Small whorled pogonia is found in open,
dry deciduous or mixed pine-deciduous forest, or along stream banks. Examples of areas
' providing suitable conditions (open canopy and shrub layer with a sparse herb layer) include old
fields, pastures, windthrow areas, cutover forests, old orchards, and semi-permanent canopy
breaks along roads, streams, lakes, and cliffs (Massey et al. 1983). In the Mountains and
' Piedmont of North Carolina, this species is usually found in association with white pine (Pinus
strobus) (Weakley 1993).
' BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: MAY AFFECT, NOT LIKELY TO ADVERSELY AFFECT
NHP records (June 2003) document the nearest occurrence of the small whorled pogonia in
' Surry County, approximately 25 miles (40 kilometers) northeast of the project study area. The
project study area contains suitable habitat for small whorled pogonia in the Dry-Mesic Oak Pine
Forest and along stream banks of Falls Creek and the Yadkin River. Since the site visit was
' conducted during the blooming season for this species, biologists conducted systematic surveys
during the site visit. These surveys involved walking through identified suitable habitat and
' carefully observing all plants. This survey found no evidence of small whorled pogonia within
the project study corridor.
Federal Species of Concern - The February 25, 2003 FWS list also includes a category of
species designated as "Federal species of concern" (FSC) in Surry and Yadkin Counties (Table
3). A species with this designation is one that may or may not be listed in the future (formerly
' C2 candidate species or species under consideration for listing for which there is insufficient
information to support listing).

16
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Table 3. Federal Species of Concern
Common Name Scientific Name Potential State Status**
Habitat
Robust Redhorse Moxostoma robustum Yes E*
Brook Floater Alasmidonta varicosa Yes SR-PE
* Historic record - this species was last observed in Surry and Yadkin County more than 20 years ago
**State Status Codes - E: Endangered; SR-PE: Significantly Rare-Proposed Endangered
The FSC designation provides no federal protection under the ESA for species listed. NHP files
document brook floater approximately 4.5 miles from the project study area in the Mitchell River
drainage that empties to the Yadkin River. No documented occurrences of robust redhorse are
within 100 miles (160 kilometers) of the project study area.
17

5.0 REFERENCES
' Amoroso, J.L. 2002. Natural Heritage Program List of the Rare Plant Species of North
Carolina. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and Recreation,
' N.C. Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources, Raleigh, NC.
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and
' Deepwater Habitats of the United States. FWS/OBS -79/31. Fish and Wildlife Service,
U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, DC. 103 pp.
' Department of the Army (DOA). 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual.
Tech. Rpt. Y-87-1. US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS.
' 100 pp.
Department of Environmental Management (DEM). 1996. A Field Guide to North Carolina
' Wetlands. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Raleigh.
129 pp.
I Division of Water Quality (DWQ). 2002. Yadkin-Pee Dee River Basinwide Assessment Report.
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Raleigh.
' Division of Water Quality (DWQ). 2003a. Basinwide Information Management System (online).
Available: http://h2o.enr.state.ne.us/bims/reports/reports.html [February 21, 2003]. North
Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Raleigh.
Division of Water Quality (DWQ). 2003b. Yadkin-Pee Dee River Basinwide Water Quality
Management Plan. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources,
' Raleigh.
Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). 1994. Schweinitz`s Sunflower Recovery Plan. Atlanta, GA.
' 28 PP
Kartesz, J. 1998. A Synonymized Checklist of the Vascular Flora of the United States, Puerto
' Rico, and the Virgin Islands. Biota of North America Program. North Carolina Botanical
Garden.
' LeGrand, H. E. and S. P. Hall. 2001. Natural Heritage Program List of the Rare Animal
Species of North Carolina. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks
' and Recreation, N.C. Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources,
Raleigh.
' Martof, B.S., W.M. Palmer, J.R. Bailey, and J.R. Harrison III. 1980. Amphibians and Reptiles of
the Carolinas and Virginia. The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC. 264
PP.
t
' 18
-11
' Massey, J.R., D.K.S. Otte, T.A. Atkinson, and R.D. Whetstone. 1983. An Atlas and Illustrated
Guide to the Threatened and Endangered Vascular Plants of the Mountains of North
' Carolina and Virginia. Southeastern Forest Experiment Station, Asheville, North
Carolina. 218 pp.
I Menhinick, E.F. 1991. The Freshwater Fishes of North Carolina. North Carolina Wildlife
Resources Commission, Raleigh. 227 pp.
' Newcomb, L. 1977. Newcomb's Wildflower Guide. Little, Brown, and Company, Boston, MA.
490 pp.
' Palmer, W.M. and A.L. Braswell. 1995. Reptiles of North Carolina. The University of North
Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC. 412 pp.
' Potter, E.F., J.F. Parnell, and R.P. Teulings. 1980. Birds of the Carolinas. The University of
North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC. 408 pp.
' Radford, A.E., H.E. Ahles, and C.R. Bell. 1968. Manual of the Vascular Flora of the Carolinas.
The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC. 1183 pp.
Rohde, F.C., R.G. Arndt, D.G. Lindquist, J.F. Parnell. 1994. Freshwater Fishes of the
Carolinas, Virginia, Maryland, and Deleware. The University of North Carolina Press,
' Chapel Hill, N.C. 222 pp.
Schafale, M.P. and A.S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities of North
' Carolina: Third Approximation. Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and
Recreation, N.C. Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources. Raleigh.
325 pp.
' Weakley, A. S. 1993. Orchidaceae (Orchid Family): Isotria Rafinesque (Whorled Pogonia,
Five-leaves, Fiveleaf Orchid). P. 491 in: Guide to the Flora of the Carolinas and Virginia,
' Working Draft of 22 October 1993.
Webb, Sara L. 1986. Potential role of passenger pigeons and other vertebrates in the rapid
holocene migrations of nut trees. Quaternary Research. 26: 367-375.
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, NC. 255 pp.

n

19
G4
?ATFA
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
Coleen H. Sullins, Deputy Director
Division of Water Quality
October 9, 2003 5
MEMORANDUM
TO: Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Director
NCDOT Project Development & Environmental Analysis Branch
FROM: Cynthia F. Van Der Wiele, NCDOT Coordinator dUdI(_ '
SUBJECT: Request for Comments on the Proposed Bridge Replacement Project for I-4025A, Southbound
Lane (Bridge No. 13) on I-77 over the Yadkin River, Yadkin Valley Railroad and NC 268, Surry
& Yadkin County.
In reply to your correspondence dated September 4, 2003 in which you requested comments for the referenced
project, NC Division of Water Quality has the following comments:
Desikn & Construction Issues
1. Within Hydrologic Unit 030702 of the Yadkin-Pee Dee River Basin, the Yadkin River has experienced
elevated turbidity measurements over the past five years of,monitoring. As a result, DWQ strongly
recommends the following:
¦ Storm water runoff from this project should be designed`to be directed to grassed swales, buffer areas,
preformed scour holes, retention basins or other site-appropriate means of receiving pre-treatment, rather
than routed directly into streams, particularly in Water Supply-classified streams and first order
(headwaters) streams.
¦ NCDOT should adhere to Best Management Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters (March .1997)
throughout the design and construction of this project particularly within Water Supply-classified streams.
2. Although the impacted water resources are classified as C, due to the heavy volume of truck traffic on I-77
and the potential for a significant number of spill incidents, NCDWQ recommends the installation of
hazardous spill catch basins or equivalent devices.
3. NCDWQ recommends the use of best management practices during bridge removal.
Thank you for requesting our input at this time. The DOT is reminded that issuance of a 401 Water Quality
Certification requires that appropriate measures be instituted to ensure that water quality standards are met and
designated uses are not degraded or lost. If you have any questions or require additional information, please
contact Cynthia Van Der Wiele at [phone].
pc: John Thomas, USACE Raleigh Field Office
Chris Militscher, USEPA
Marla Chambers, NCWRC
File Copy

N. C. Division of Water Quality, 401 Wetlands Certification Unit,
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 (Mailing Address)
2321 Crabtree Blvd., Raleigh, NC 27604-2260 (Location)
[phone] (phone), 919-733-6893 (fax), (hqp://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands)
Customer Service #: 1-877-623-6748
daA STATEv
aa,+vrB
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY LYNDO TIPPETT
GovERNOR SECRETARY
September 4, 2003
Ms. Cynthia Van der Wiele ET ' A{ &UP
NC DENR, Division of Water Quality C1 991
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 ?$ 2003
Dear Ms. Van der Wiele,
JVAIEA"M
Subject: Request for Comments on the Proposed Bridge Replacement Project for
I-4025A, Southbound Lane (Bridge No. 13) on I-77 over the Yadkin River, Yadkin
Valley Railroad, and NC 268, Surry / Yadkin Counties.
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to replace the above I-77
southbound two-lane bridge. This project is included in the North Carolina Department of Transportation's
draft 2004-2010 Transportation Improvement Program (I4025) as a rehabilitation project (under
construction) for Bridge No. 6 and No. 13 on I-77. It has been determined that Bridge No. 13 is beyond
rehabilitation and will require replacement.
The southbound bridge will be replaced with new four-lane bridge at its present location and
roadway elevation. Traffic will be maintained on-site using the existing bridge and stage construction of the
new bridge. If any right of way acquisition is required, it is expected to be minor. The environmental
impacts of the project are expected to be minimal and the environmental documentation will likely be a
Federal Programmatic Categorical Exclusion.
Enclosed for your assessment of potential environmental impacts are the vicinity map and a copy
of the Natural Systems Technical Report for the project. Please provide comments regarding the potential
environmental impacts, including any permits or approvals required by your agency. To insure that your
comments are considered in the environmental impact evaluation for the project, please return your
comments by October 20, 2003.
Thank you for your assistance in evaluating the potential environmental impacts for this project. If
you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Missy Dickens at [phone]
extension 218 or by email at [e-mail].
Sincerely,
L?
Gregory J. horpe, Ph.D., Manager
Project Development & Environmental Analysis Branch
GJT/ljw
Attachments
MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: [phone] LOCATION:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FAX: [phone] TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER WEBSITE. WWW.NCDOT.ORG RALEIGH NC
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548
_y - - a?d
113 1213 1138 1138 1138 - /
°IM
21 215
1 »54 V°"r 121 212 11
1138 1144 1 LL. 1139
BUS 11 r
21 X268
119 1 0 1141
83 ?
11 8688> 205 \
i- _ 1 0 21 1
1
C ?
268 i \
0-
U 1149
/ 1144
MN
,..w
268
T'
L us a
21 ?

1354
L _
1149 s P f
N - \
' 7 ?
1
t ll
.. 04- 67
141 53

( 3
e
- 1$55 BRIDGE NO. 13

J 5
m\?

1309
I
l • :t ? 't??
T
}- 1309 ?
30 -r _
3
V ?-
?`? / r133?
C ' 142,
-
o 300 J 1 37
> 13 ^1312 s2 si

131
I

t toe Zeph
wmorM ark rare Ga
+ 01 Cfoss q
S T
2460
Mm,
c
1118
8
>r I

1359\ 1
Pilot Mtn.. oat e r
Sr. vs ?
K IIOHm e
F els_: t^ ea 5 Kin
000
e smrmt?+ e?ri?
os °
ti Ease send I .
i,i s,
S N
Ce w
Y±d 'lie. Bu
mss enna
Its 16 d21 - I :
Lone 4
COwtrry i¦ 6 a ee
'6v k __.......
2r Oi ?' .? 4 .f ......,,o.
n Al 5. Arcaore NORTH CAROLINA DWAR72EENT OF 11tANMRTATION
NI n ?C A
1
erl
Of T.'Mer op
BRIDGE NO. 13
ON 1-77 (SBL) OVER YADKIN RIVER
YADKIN AND SURRY COUNTIES
1-4025-A
VICINITY MAP
GRAPHIC SCALE (MILES) FIGURE I
NATURAL SYSTEMS REPORT
Replacement of Bridge No. 13
1-77 (SBL) over Yadkin River
Yadkin and Surry Counties, North Carolina
(1-4025A)
(State Project No. 8.1741401)
(Federal Aid No. IMS-77-1(141)83)
Prepared for:
Ko and Associates and
The North Carolina Department of Transportation
Raleigh, North Carolina
June 2003
NATURAL SYSTEMS REPORT
Replacement of Bridge No. 13
1-77 (SBL) over Yadkin River
Yadkin and Surry Counties, North Carolina
(1-4025A)
(State Project No. 8.1741401)
(Federal Aid No. IMS-77-1(141)83)
Prepared for:
Ko and Associates and
The North Carolina Department of Transportation
Raleigh, North Carolina
Prepared by:
EcoScience
ECOSCIENCE CORPORATION
1101 Haynes Street, Suite 101
Raleigh, NC 27604
Tel [phone] Fax [phone]
June 2003
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................................1
1.1 Project Description .................................................................................................1
1.2 Purpose .................................................................................................................1
1.3 Methods .................................................................................................................3
1.4 Qualifications .........................................................................................................3
1.5 Definitions ..............................................................................................................4
2.0 PHYSICAL RESOURCES .................................................................................................4
2.1 Physiography .........................................................................................................4
2.2 Water Resources ...................................................................................................4
2.3 Best Usage Classifications and Water Quality .......................................................6
2.4 Anticipated Impacts to Water Resources ...............................................................6
3.0 BIOTIC RESOURCES .......................................................................................................7
3.1 Terrestrial Communities .........................................................................................7
3.2 Aquatic Communities .............................................................................................9
3.3 Summary of Anticipated Impacts ...........................................................................10
4.0 JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS ...............................................................................................10
4.1 Waters of the United States ...................................................................................10
4.2 Permit Issues .........................................................................................................11
4.2.1 Permits .......................................................................................................11
4.2.2 Mitigation ...........................................................................................••.......11
4.3 Protected Species ..................................................................................................14
5.0 REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................17
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Project Study Area Plant Communities ...........................................................................10
Table 2. Jurisdictional Areas within the Project Study Area ..........................................................11
Table 3. Federal Species of Concern ...........................................................................................16
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Vicinity Map 2
Figure 2. Plant Communities 5
Figure 3. Jurisdictional Areas 12
iv
Replacement of Bridge No. 13
1-77 (SBL) over Yadkin River
Yadkin and Surry Counties, North Carolina
(1-4025A)
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Project Description
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to replace Bridge No. 13
located on the south-bound portion of Interstate Highway 77 (1-77) over the Yadkin River in
Yadkin and Surry Counties, North Carolina (Figure 1). Bridge No. 13 is located on the boundary
of Yadkin and Surry Counties approximately 0.25 mile (0.4 kilometer) north of the intersection of
1-77 and NC 62 and approximately 0.25 mile (0.4 kilometer) east of Elkin, NC (Figure 1). Bridge
No. 13 spans the Yadkin River and adjacent banks for a distance of approximately 240.0 feet
(73.2 meters). The existing roadway is approximately 30.0 feet (9.1 meters) wide with a total,
maintained right-of-way width of approximately 60.0 feet (18.2 meters).
Bridge No. 13 will be replaced in place with an on-site detour to the east on the north-bound
bridge of 1-77 over the Yadkin River. Bridge No. 13 is a two-lane structure with 12 spans
totaling 766 feet (233.5 meters) and a deck width of 28 feet (8.5 meters). The bridge was
constructed in 1960 and currently has a sufficiency rating of 44.9. The superstructure of the
bridge is a reinforced concrete floor on steel beams. The substructure end bents consist of
reinforced concrete caps on H-piles. The interior bents consist of reinforced concrete post and
beams on concrete footings (bent no. 10 is on pile footings). NCDOT is committed to avoid
dropping bridge demolition debris into "waters of the United States." The use of NCDOT's Best
Management Practices for Bridge Demolition and Removal is recommended. Temporary fill for
a construction platform may be necessary for construction of the new bridge; however, any fill
required should be minimized in the design of the new bridge.
As this reach of the Yadkin River has no potential as a travel corridor for migratory fish, this
project can be classified as Case 3, where in-water work will not be restricted by fish
moratorium periods associated with fish migration, spawning, and nursery areas. NCDOT will
coordinate with various resource agencies during project planning to ensure that all concerns
regarding bridge demolition are resolved.
1.2 Purpose
The purpose of this study is to provide an evaluation of biological resources in the immediate
area of potential project impact (project study area). Specifically, the tasks performed for this
study include 1) an assessment of biological features within the project study area including
descriptions of vegetation, wildlife, protected species, wetlands, and water quality and 2) a
delineation of Section 404 jurisdictional areas and subsequent survey of jurisdictional
1
I
e,,.,
r q
Cu.
! -! Yadkin `River f r
T
^:,.1 • n ? \ w `rya.-., '??s ?? . ('? ?.?.1 ?? 7_?
R T
?Etl
-? ` Project. Study Area- `
• c }
t-77 H F
...'PVC. ?62
41 Jyl J ` l ` 4A %. f I?..'\'YI?! 1 1• , S\ v.. ;I _ ?, 1.
t _
Source Data NCDOT County Composite 2001
EcoScience Project Location
Corporation Replacement of Bridge No 13
1101 Maybe:$Net, SIR tat 1-77 overthe Yadkin River
Naklgb, NON Ca Alki 77601 1-4025A
919d23J07 F.:, 91950-3$T
id ego:ckb«IC.rom Yadkin and Surry Counties, North Carolina
Dw by KCB
Figure
Scale 1.60,000
Date June 2003 1
Project 03-146
boundaries utilizing Trimble XRS Differential Global Positioning System (DGPS) technology with
reported sub-meter accuracy.
1.3 Methods
Materials and research data in support of this investigation have been derived from a number of
sources including applicable U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) topographic mapping (Elkin North
and Elkin South, NC 7.5-minute quadrangles, 1994 and 1971), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(FWS) National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) mapping (FWS NWI 1994), and recent aerial
photography. Plant community descriptions are based on a classification system utilized by the
N.C. Natural Heritage Program (NHP) (Schafale and Weakley 1990). When appropriate,
community classifications were modified to better reflect field observations. Vascular plant
names generally follow nomenclature found in Radford et al. (1968), with adjustments made to
reflect more current nomenclature (Kartesz 1998). Jurisdictional areas were evaluated using
the three-parameter approach following U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) delineation
guidelines (DOA 1987). Wetland jurisdictional areas were characterized according to a
classification scheme established by Cowardin et al. (1979) and A Field Guide to North Carolina
Wetlands (DEM 1996). Habitat used by terrestrial wildlife and aquatic organisms, as well as
expected population distributions, were determined through field observations, evaluation of
available habitat, and supportive documentation (Webster et al. 1985, Potter et al. 1980, Martof
et al. 1980, Rohde et al. 1994, Menhinick 1991, Palmer and Braswell 1995). Water quality
information for area streams and tributaries was derived from available sources (DWQ 2002,
2003). Quantitative sampling was not undertaken to support existing data.
The most current FWS listing of federally protected species with ranges which extend into
Yadkin and Surry Counties (January 29, 2003 and February 25, 2003, respectively) was
obtained prior to initiation of the field investigation. In addition, NHP records documenting the
presence of federally or state listed species were consulted before commencing the field
investigation.
Bridge No. 13 was visited on June 3, 2003. The project study area was walked and visually
surveyed for significant features. For purposes of field surveys, the project study area has been
delineated by EcoScience. Special concerns evaluated in the field include 1) potential habitat
for protected species and 2) wetlands and water quality protection in the Yadkin River.
1.4 Qualifications
The field work for this investigation was conducted by EcoScience Corporation (ESC) biologists
Kendrick Weeks and David O'Loughlin.
Mr. O'Loughlin is a project scientist working toward a M.S. in forestry from North Carolina State
University, with minors in botany and statistics. He has taken pertinent courses including
dendrology, botany, ecology, and wetland soils. His professional expertise includes natural
resources assessment, stream and wetlands delineations, and environmental document
preparation.
3
Mr. Weeks is a Project Scientist with five years of experience in the environmental field. He
earned a B.S. in biology from Appalachian State University and worked as a seasonal wildlife
research biologist for five years before continuing his formal education. He earned an M.S. in
zoology from North Carolina State University, with a minor in statistics. His research focused on
the nesting ecology of two species of breeding Neotropical migratory landbirds in the southern
Appalachians. Professional expertise includes ecological relationships, plant and wildlife
identification, protected species surveys, wetland and jurisdictional area delineations, indirect
and cumulative impact assessments, and environmental document preparation.
1.5 Definitions
Definitions for descriptions used in this report are as follows: project study area generally
denotes the area bounded by proposed construction limits; however, since a specific alternative
has not yet been selected, the Project study area (Figure 2) describes the area approximately
250.0 feet (76.2 meters) by 2000.0 feet (609.6 meters), encompassing approximately 10.1 acres
(4.1 hectares); Project Vicinity describes an area extending 0.5 mile (0.8 kilometer) on all sides
of the project study area; and Project Region is equivalent to an area represented by a 7.5
minute USGS topographic quadrangle map with the project occupying the central position.
2.0 PHYSICAL RESOURCES
2.1 Physiography
The project study area occurs within the Inner Piedmont Belt geologic formation within the Inner
Piedmont physiographic province of North Carolina, and is underlain by metamorphic fine-
grained biotite gneiss. Elevations in the project study area are approximately 870 to 940 feet
(265 to 286 meters) National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD) (USGS Elkin North and Elkin
South, NC 7.5-minute quadrangles, 1994 and 1971).
2.2 Water Resources
The project study area is located within sub-basin 03-07-02 of the Yadkin-Pee Dee River Basin
(DWQ 2002). This area is part of USGS accounting unit 03040101 of the South Atlantic-Gulf
Coast Region. The section of the Yadkin River within the project study area has been assigned
Stream Index Number 12-(53) by the N.C. Division of Water Quality (DWQ) (DWQ 2003). Falls
Creek has been assigned Stream Index Number 12-57. Neither the Yadkin River or Falls Creek
is listed on the DWQ 303d list of impaired streams in the Yadkin River Basin (April 3, 2000
DWQ list).
Within the project study area, the Yadkin River is a fifth-order perennial stream exhibiting
moderate sinuosity, moderate velocity, and a well-developed riffle-pool sequence. The width. of
the stream is approximately 190.0 feet (57.9 meters) at the point of the bridge crossing. During
the field survey, water clarity was poor. The substrate is composed of sand and mud. The
4
tx :ty ,,
M

LEGEND
Project Study Area
Land Cover and Plant Communities
Distuted/M aintained
Dry-Mesic Oak Pine Forest
?.. Open Water
Piedmont Levee Forest
i
EcoScience Plant Communities within the Project Study Area
Corporation Replacement of Bridge No 13
„u, naynL Sktet. 1-77 over the Yadkin River
flak gl, WM CamI*a 27601 1-4025A
M 919E1EJU3 Fa 9,9418J618
°,°k10°?^ Yadkin and Slurry Counties, North Carolina
¦

Dw by, KCW
Figure
scale. 1.3,000
Date June 2003 2
Project 03-146
stream banks are steep and range from 8.0 to 15.0 feet (2.4 to 4.6 meters) in height. The
floodplain is most expansive in the southwest quadrant of the project study area. Falls Creek is
a first-order perennial stream exhibiting moderate sinuosity, moderate velocity, and well-
developed riffle-pool sequence. The width of the stream is approximately 12.0 feet (3.7 meters)
within the project boundary. The water depth was approximately 6 inches (14 centimeters) and
water clarity was turbid. The substrate is composed of sand and silt. The stream banks range
from 6 to 8 feet (1.8 to 2.4 meters). This stream is heavily incised with sloughing banks where a
cattle pasture occurs on the floodplain at the edge of the project study area.
2.3 Best Usage Classifications and Water Quality
Classifications are assigned to waters of the State of North Carolina based on the existing or
contemplated best usage of various streams or segments of streams in the basin. A best usage
classification of C has been assigned to the Yadkin River and its tributaries, including Falls
Creek, in the project study area. These waters are protected for Class C uses which include
aquatic life propagation and survival, fishing, wildlife, secondary recreation, and agriculture.
Secondary recreation refers to human body contact with waters on an infrequent or incidental
basis. No designated High Quality Waters (HQW), Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW),
Water Supply I (WS-1), or Water Supply II (WS-11) waters occur within 1.0 mile (1.6 kilometers)
of the project study area (DWQ 2002).
The DWQ (previously known as the Division of Environmental Management, Water Quality
Section) has initiated a whole-basin approach to water quality management for the 17 river
basins within the state. The Yadkin River and Falls Creek have a use support rating of Fully
Supporting in the vicinity of the project study area and are not designated as impaired waters
regulated under the provisions of the federal Clean Water Act, Section 303(d). No benthic
macroinvertebrate monitoring stations occur within 1.0 mile (1.6 kilometers) of the project study
area (DWQ 2002). The nearest benthic macroinvertebrate monitoring station is located
approximately 1.8 miles (2.9 kilometers) upstream at the US 21 bridge and the 1996-2000
sampling data classified the site as "Good" (DWQ 2002).
The Yadkin-Pee Dee River subbasin 03-07-02 supports three major and 28 minor point source
dischargers. Permitted flow is 8.3 million gallons per day (31.4 million liters per day) for the
major dischargers and 2.1 million gallons per day (7.9 million liters per day) for the minor
dischargers. Major non-point sources of pollution within the Yadkin-Pee Dee River Basin
include runoff from construction activities, agriculture, timber harvesting, and hydrologic
modification. Sedimentation is the major problem associated with non-point source discharges
(DWQ 2002).
2.4 Anticipated Impacts to Water Resources
No support bents are located in open water. Temporary construction impacts due to erosion
and sedimentation will be minimized through implementation of a stringent erosion control
schedule and the use of Best Management Practices (BMPs). The contractor will follow
contract specifications pertaining to erosion control measures as outlined in 23 CFR 650
6
Subpart B and Article 107-13 entitled Control of Erosion, Siltation, and Pollution (NCDOT,
Specifications for Roads and Structures). These measures include the use of dikes, berms, silt
basins, and other containment measures to control runoff; elimination of construction staging
areas in floodplains and adjacent to waterways; re-seeding of herbaceous cover on disturbed
sites; management of chemicals (herbicides, pesticides, de-icing compounds) with potential
negative impacts on water quality; and avoidance of direct discharges into streams by catch
basins and roadside vegetation. In addition, tall fescue is not suitable for erosion controls along
stream banks.
The proposed bridge replacement will allow for continuation of pre-project stream flows in the
Yadkin River, thereby protecting the integrity of this waterway. Long-term impacts resulting
from construction are expected to be negligible. In order to minimize impacts to water
resources, NCDOT Best Management Practices (BMPs) for the Protection of Surface Waters
will be strictly enforced during the entire life of the project.
NCDOT will coordinate with various resource agencies during project planning to ensure that all
concerns regarding bridge demolition are resolved. The replacement of Bridge No. 13 can be
classified as Case 3; therefore, there are no special restrictions beyond those outlined in Best
Management Practices for Protection of Surface Waters.
Sediment curtains should be utilized to minimize potential water quality degradation as a result
of bridge replacement.
3.0 BIOTIC RESOURCES
3.1 Terrestrial Communities
Three distinct plant communities were identified within the project study area: Piedmont Levee
Forest, disturbed/maintained land, and Dry-Mesic Oak Pine Forest (Figure 2). These plant
communities are described below.
Piedmont Levee Forest - Piedmont Levee Forest covers approximately 2.4 acres (1.0
hectare). Representative canopy trees of this plant community within the project study area
range from 20 to 40 years old. The canopy consists of riparian tree species including box elder
(Acer negundo), river birch (Betula nigra), and sycamore (Platanus occidentalis). There are
isolated individuals of green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica) and sugar berry (Celtis laevigata).
Subcanopy trees and shrubs include Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense), multiflora rose (Rosa
multiflora), and flowering dogwood (Comus f/orida). The shrub layer is dominated by Chinese
privet, especially in the northwest quadrant. Vines present include Japanese honeysuckle
(Lonicera japonica), poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans), greenbriar (Smilax rotundifolia), and
muscadine grape (Vitis rotundifolia). Northern parulas (Parula americana), yellow-throated
warblers (Dendroica dominica), and Acadian flycatchers (Empidonax virescens) breed and
forage in deciduous trees growing on banks or on floodplains of streams and rivers. Belted
7
kingfishers (Ceryle alcyon) nest in burrows on high banks and feed on fish in streams and
rivers.
Disturbed/Maintained Land - Disturbed/maintained land covers approximately 3.1 acres (1.3
hectare), and occurs as maintained right-of-ways and cattle pasture. The maintained roadside
area is approximately 25 feet (8 meters) wide. No trees and very few shrubs contribute to the
composition of this community. Plant species on the roadside margins include fescue (Festuca
spp.), wing stem (Verbesina occidentalis), wild strawberry (Duchesnea indica), clover (Trifolium
spp.), nightshade (Solanum carolinense), henbit (Lamium amplexicaule), golden rod (Solidago
spp.), smooth sumac (Rhus g/abra), trumpet creeper (Campsis radicans), Japanese
honeysuckle, dock (Rumex crispus), and Indian hemp (Apocynum cannabinum). The pasture
land (southwestern quadrant) contained mostly fescue and other disturbance (grazing) adapted
species. Wildlife species that utilize disturbed/maintained land include eastern cottontail
(Sylvilagus floridanus), white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus), and woodchucks (Marmota
monax). Eastern cottontail, white-tailed deer, and woodchucks consume many of the
herbaceous species and some crops. Red-tailed hawks (Buteo jamaicensis), eastern screech
owls (Otus asio), and foxes hunt in large areas of disturbed/maintained habitats for rabbits,
rodents, and insects that also utilize the open habitat.
Dry-Mesic Oak Pine Forest - Dry-Mesic Oak Pine Forest occurs on upland sites in the project
study area and encompasses a total of 4.6 acres (1.9 hectare). This is a modified natural plant
community based upon the Dry-Mesic Oak Hickory Forest as described by Schafale and
Weakly (1990). Canopy trees are approximately 20 years old and may lack hickories because
of limited dispersal abilities. Hickories produce large, heavy seeds that do not disperse well
without help from small mammals (Webb 1986). The canopy is dominated by tulip poplar
(Liriodendron tulipifera), Virginia pine (Pinus virginiana), and white oak (Quercus a/ba). Less
dominant canopy trees present are red maple (Acer rubrum) and black cherry (Prunus serotina).
Understory trees/shrubs observed were red cedar (Juniperus virginiana), sassafras (Sassafras
a/bidum), and canopy species. Vines and herbaceous vegetation include greenbriar,
muscadine grape, and Japanese honeysuckle. Many wildlife species use this habitat for food
and cover. Eastern gray squirrels (Sciurus carolinensis), blue jays (Cyanocitta cristata), wild
turkey (Meleagris gallopavo), and white-tailed deer consume acorns from the oaks. Virginia
pine is an important forage tree for wintering birds such as golden-crowned kinglets (Regulus
satrapa) and red-breasted nuthatches (Sitta canadensis). Some bird species that breed and
forage in Dry-Mesic Oak Pine forests include brown-headed nuthatches (Sitta pusilla), blue-gray
gnatcatchers (Po/ioptila caerulea), great crested flycatchers (Myiarchus crinitus), and pine
warblers (Dendroica pinus).
During the field survey there were signs of white-tailed deer. Characteristic mammals expected
to frequent wooded and brushy river corridors in the western Piedmont include Virginia
opossum (Didelphis virginiana), raccoon (Procyon lotor), eastern gray squirrel, eastern
cottontail, southeastern shrew (Sorex longirostris), least shrew (Cryptotis parva), meadow vole
(Microtus pennsylvanicus), eastern mole (Scalopus aquaticus), red bat (Lasiurus borealis),
southern flying squirrel (Glaucomys volans), gray fox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus), and mink
(Mustela vision).
8
Bird species identified during the field survey are American crow (Corvus brachyrhyncos), blue
jay (Cyanocitta cristata), indigo bunting (Passerina cyanea), northern cardinal (Cardinalis
cardinalis), Carolina wren (Thryothorus ludovicianus), Carolina chickadee (Poecile carolinensis),
tufted titmouse (Baeolophus bicolor), mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), red-shouldered hawk
(Buteo lineatus), eastern towhee (Pipilo erythrophthalmus), and Kentucky warbler (Oporornis
formosus). The project study area's wooded and open habitat is expected to support other
species such as red-tailed hawk, American kestrel (Falco sparverius), belted kingfisher,
common flicker (Colaptes auratus), red-bellied woodpecker (Melanerpes carolinus), brown
thrasher (Toxostoma rufum), eastern bluebird (Sialia sialis), and American robin (Turdus
migratorius). Breeding Neotropical migrants that may inhabit the project study area during the
breeding season (April through July) include blue-gray gnatcatcher, great crested flycatcher,
red-eyed vireo (Vireo olivaceous), northern parula, Louisiana waterthrush (Seiurus motacilla),
Acadian flycatcher, and hooded warbler (Wilsonia citrina). These species capitalize on the
abundant riparian insects and nesting substrates (canopy trees, subcanopy trees, undercut
banks, and shrubs).
No amphibians were observed, and a black rat snake (Elaphe obsoleta) was the only reptile
observed during the site visit. Reptile and amphibian species expected in habitats within the
project study area are American toad (Bufo americana), northern cricket frog (Acris crepitans),
gray treefrog (Hyla versicolor), slimy salamander (Plethodon glutinosus), Carolina anole (Anolis
carolinensis), eastern box turtle (Terrapene caroling), eastern hognose snake (Heterodon
platyrhinos), and eastern garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis).
3.2 Aquatic Communities
No aquatic amphibians or reptiles were observed during the site visit. Typical amphibian
species for these habitat types include spring peeper (Pseudacris crucifer), eastern newt
(Notophthalmus viridescens), and green frog (Rana melanota). No reptiles were observed
during the site visit. The Yadkin River and Falls Creek provide suitable habitat for aquatic and
semi-aquatic reptiles including painted turtle (Chrysemys picta),, northern water snake (Nerodia
sipedon), queen snake (Regina septemvitatta), and snapping turtle (Chelydra serpentina). No
benthic invertebrates were observed during the field visit.
No sampling was undertaken in the Yadkin River or Falls Creek to determine fishery potential.
No fish were noted during the field visit. Species which may be present within the Yadkin River
or Falls Creek include thicklip chub (Hybopsis labrosa), bluehead chub (Nocomis
leptocephalus), whitefin shiner (Notropis lutrensis), spottail shiner (Notropis hudsonius), redlip
shiner (Notropis chiliticus),. creek chub (Semotilus atromaculatus), white sucker (Catostomus
commersoni), brown bullhead (Ictalurus nebulosus), margined madtom (Noturus insignis),
redbreast sunfish (Lepomis auritus), largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides), tessellated
darter (Etheostoma olmstedl), piedmont darter (Percina crassa), and rosyside dace
(Clinostomus funduloides).
9
3.3 Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Plant community areas are estimated based on the amount of each plant community present
within the project study area (Table 1).
Table 1. Project Study Area Plant Communities.
Plant Community Area
Disturbed/Maintained Land 3.1 (1.3)
Dry-Mesic Oak Pine Forest 4.6(l.9)
Piedmont Levee Forest 2.4 (1.0)
Total 10.1 (4.2)
Areas are given in acres (hectares).
No significant habitat fragmentation will be expected as a result of project activities if potential
improvements are restricted to adjoining roadside margins. Construction noise and associated
disturbances will have short-term impacts on avifauna and migratory wildlife movement
patterns.
Potential downstream impacts to aquatic habitat are to be avoided by bridging the stream
system to maintain regular flow and stream integrity. Short-term impacts associated with
turbidity and suspended sediments may affect benthic populations. Benthic invertebrates form
the basis of the food-chain in stream systems. Impacts to downstream habitats associated with
turbidity and suspended sediments resulting from bridge replacement will be minimized through
the use of silt curtains and the implementation of stringent erosion control measures.
No Significant Aquatic Endangered Species Habitat exists within or near the project study area.
Because there are no anadromous fish that breed in the Yadkin River, the replacement of
Bridge No. 13 can be classified as Case 3; therefore, there are no special restrictions beyond
those outlined in Best Management Practices for Protection of Surface Waters.
4.0 JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS
4.1 Waters of the United States
Surface waters within the embankments of the Yadkin River and Falls Creek are subject to
jurisdictional consideration under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act as "waters of the United
States" (33 CFR Section 328.3). The Yadkin River, within the project study area, has been
characterized on NWI mapping (NWI Elkin North, NC 7.5 minute quadrangle) as riverine that is
lower perennial with an unconsolidated bottom and permanently flooded (R2UBH). During the
field visit, the NWI classification was determined to be accurate. Falls Creek has not been
characterized on NWI mapping. During the field visit, Falls Creek was determined to be
riverine, upper perennial with an unconsolidated bottom primarily of mud that is permanently
10
flooded (R3UBH). The project study area contains a total of 845.0 linear feet (257.6 linear
meters) and 1.5 acre (0.6 hectare) of perennial streams (Table 2 and Figure 3).
Vegetated wetlands are subject to jurisdictional consideration under Section 404 of the Clean
Water Act as "waters of the United States" (33 CFR Section 328.3). These areas are defined by
the presence of three primary criteria: hydric soils, hydrophytic vegetation, and evidence of
hydrology at or near the surface for a portion (12.5 percent) of the growing season (DOA 1987).
During the field visit, it was determined that no vegetated wetlands occur within the project study
area.
Table 2. Jurisdictional Areas within the Proiect Studv Area
Cowardin Classification Linear Distance Area DWQ Rating
R2UBH (Yadkin River) 255.0 (77.7) 1.2 (0.5) N/A
R3UBH (Falls Creek) 590.0 (180) 0.3 (0.1) N/A
Linear distance is expressed in feet (meters), and area is expressed in acres (hectares).
4.2 Permit Issues
4.2.1 Permits
This project is being processed as a Programmatic Categorical Exclusion (PCE) under Federal
Highway Administration (FHWA) guidelines. The COE has made available Nationwide Permit
(NWP) No. 23 (67 FR 2082; January 15, 2002) for CE's due to expected minimal impact. DWQ
has made available a General 401 Water Quality Certification for NWP No. 23 (GC 3361). If
temporary structures are necessary for construction activities, access fills, or dewatering of the
site, then a NWP 33 (67 FR 2020, 2087; January 15, 2002) permit and associated General 401
Water Quality Certification (GC 3366) will be required. In the event that NWP No. 23 will not
suffice, minor impacts attributed to bridging and associated approach improvements are
expected to qualify under General Bridge Permit 031 and its associated General 401 Water
Quality Certification (GC 3375) issued by the Wilmington COE District.
As this reach of the Yadkin River has no potential as a travel corridor for migratory fish, this
project can be classified as Case 3, where in-water work will not be restricted by fish
moratorium periods associated with fish migration, spawning, and nursery areas.
4.2.2 Mitigation
The COE has adopted through the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) a wetland
mitigation policy which embraces the concept of "no net loss of wetlands" and sequencing. The
purpose of this policy is to restore and maintain the chemical, biological, and physical integrity of
waters of the United States, and specifically wetlands. Mitigation of wetland impacts has been
defined by the CEQ to include: avoiding impacts (to wetlands), minimizing impacts, rectifying
impacts, reducing impacts over time and compensating for impacts (40 CFR 1508.20). Each of
11
_ FXiri_ o s 7
_ :rS
300 0 3k
SCALE IN FEET
P!
ECOSCIENCE
CORPORATION
NALlIGH. NORTH CAROLINA
:LIEN-: PROJECT:
K<? P.ND
NCDOT
REPLACEMENT OF
BRIDGE #13 (I-4025)
I-77 OVER
YADKIN RIVER
LEGEND
STREAM BOUNDARIES
PROPOSED BRIDGE
YADKIN AND SURRY COUNTIES. NORTH CAROLINA
owri en cre sr:
MAF KW FIGURE
SATE.
JUN 2003
1'-300'
JECT NO. , 3
03-146
these three aspects (avoidance, minimization, and compensatory mitigation) must be
considered sequentially.
Avoidance mitigation examines all appropriate and practicable possibilities of averting impacts
to waters of the United States. According to a 1990 Memorandum of Agreement (MOA)
between the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the COE, in determining "appropriate
and practicable" measures to offset unavoidable impacts, such measures should be appropriate
to the scope and degree of those impacts and practicable in terms of cost, existing technology
and logistics in light of overall project purposes. Impacts to streams are expected due to the
nature of the project. Not all sediment can be prevented from entering waters of the United
States.
Minimization includes the examination of appropriate and practicable steps to reduce the
adverse impacts to waters of the United States. Implementation of these steps will be required
through project modifications and permit conditions. Minimization typically focuses on
decreasing the footprint of the proposed project through the reduction to median widths, right-of-
way widths, fill slopes, and/or road shoulder widths. All efforts will be made to decrease impacts
to surface waters.
Compensatory mitigation is not normally considered until anticipated impacts to waters of the
United States have been avoided and minimized to the maximum extent possible. It is
recognized that "no net loss of wetlands" functions and values may not be achieved in each and
every permit action. In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0506(h), DWQ may require
compensatory mitigation for projects with greater to or equal than 1.0 acre (0.4 hectare) of
impacts to jurisdictional wetlands or greater than or equal to 150.0 linear feet (45.7 linear
meters) of total perennial stream impacts. Furthermore, in accordance with 67 FR 2020, 2092;
January 15, 2002, the COE requires compensatory mitigation when necessary to ensure that
adverse effects to the aquatic environment are minimal. The size and type of the proposed
project impact and the function and value of the impacted aquatic resource are factors
considered in determining acceptability of appropriate and practicable compensatory mitigation.
Appropriate and practicable compensatory mitigation is required for unavoidable adverse
impacts which remain after all appropriate and practicable minimization has been required.
Compensatory actions often include restoration, preservation and enhancement, and creation of
waters of the United States. Such actions should be undertaken first in areas adjacent to or
contiguous to the discharge site.
Mitigation for Section 404 jurisdictional area impacts may not need to be proposed for this
project due to the potentially limited nature of the project impacts. However, utilization of BMPs
is recommended in an effort to minimize impacts. Temporary impacts to floodplains associated
with construction activities could be mitigated by replanting disturbed areas with native riparian
species and removal of temporary fill material upon project completion. Fill or alteration of more
than 150.0 linear feet (45.8 linear meters) of stream may require compensatory mitigation in
accordance with 15 NCAC 2H .0506(h). A final determination regarding mitigation rests with the
COE and DWQ.
13
Opportunities for mitigation are limited within the project study area. Enhancement of Falls
Creek is needed because approximately 50 percent of its watershed is cultivated, cattle pasture,
or developed. The lower 4000 feet (1219 meters) of Falls Creek is subject to cattle and is
characterized by very little vegetated buffer allowing normal rain events to erode the banks and
discharge high sediment loads into the Yadkin River.
4.3 Protected Species
Species with the federal classification of Endangered, Threatened, Threatened due to Similarity
of Appearance (T [S/A]), or officially Proposed for such listing are protected under the
Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). The term
"Endangered Species" is defined as "any species which is in danger of extinction throughout all
or a significant portion of its range," and the term "Threatened Species" is defined as "any
species which is likely to become an Endangered species within the foreseeable future
throughout all or a significant portion of its range" (16 U.S.C. 1532). The term "Threatened due
to Similarity of Appearance" is defined as a species which is not "Endangered" or "Threatened,"
but "closely resembles an Endangered or Threatened species" (16 U.S.C. 1532). Three
federally protected species, the bog turtle (Clemmys muhlenbergii) (T [S/A]), Schweinitz's
sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii), and small-whorled pogonia (lsotria medeoloides), are listed
as occurring in Surry County (February 25, 2003 FWS list), and no species are listed for Yadkin
County (January 29, 2003 FWS list).
Clemmys muhlenbergii (Bog turtle)
Threatened due to similarity of appearance
Family: Emydidae
Date Listed: November 4, 1997
The bog turtle is a small turtle reaching an adult size of approximately 3 to 4 inches (8 to 10
centimeters) in carapace length. This otherwise dark-colored species is readily identifiable by
the presence of bright orange or yellow blotches on the sides of the head and neck (Martof et al.
1980). The bog turtle is typically found in bogs, marshes, and wet pastures, usually in
association with aquatic or semi-aquatic vegetation and small, shallow streams over soft
bottoms (Palmer and Braswell 1995). In North Carolina, bog turtles have a discontinuous
distribution in the mountains and western Piedmont. The bog turtle has declined drastically
within the northern portion of its range due to over-collection and habitat alteration. As a result,
the FWS officially proposed to list bog turtle as threatened within the northern portion of its
range in the January 29, 1997 Federal Register (62 FR 4229). Within the southern portion of its
range, which includes North Carolina, the bog turtle is listed as T (S/A) because of similarity in
appearance to individuals of the northern population.
NHP records document the nearest occurrence of the bog turtle in Surry County approximately
8.5 miles (13.6 kilometers) north northwest of the project study area. The project study area
has no habitat for Clemmy muhlenbergii. T (S/A) species are not subject to Section 7
consultation, and a biological conclusion for this species is not required.
14
Helianthus schweinitzii (Schweinitz's sunflower)
Endangered
Family: Asteraceae
Date Listed: May 7, 1991
Schweinitz's sunflower is an erect, unbranched, rhizomatous, perennial herb that grows to
approximately 6.0 feet (1.8 meters) in height. The stem may be purple, usually pubescent, but
sometimes nearly smooth. Leaves are sessile, opposite on the lower stem but alternate above;
in shape they are lanceolate and average 5 to 10 times as long as wide. The leaves are rather
thick and stiff, with a few small serrations. The upper leaf surface is rough and the lower
surface is usually pubescent with soft white hairs. Schweinitz's sunflower blooms from
September to frost; the yellow flower heads are about 0.6 inches (1.5 centimeters) in diameter.
The current range of this species is within 60 miles of Charlotte, North Carolina, occurring on
upland interstream flats or gentle slopes, in soils that are thin or clayey in texture. The species
needs open areas protected from shade or excessive competition, reminiscent of Piedmont
prairies. Disturbances such as fire maintenance or regular mowing help sustain preferred
habitat (FWS 1994).
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: UNRESOLVED
NHP records document the nearest occurrence of Schweinitz's sunflower in Surry County
approximately 10.6 miles (17.0 kilometers) northeast of the project study area. The project
study area supports suitable habitat for Schweinitz's sunflower in portions of the
disturbed/maintained areas such as beneath the bridges and along the corridor's maintained
right-of-way.
Isotria medeoloides (small whorled pogonia)
Threatened
Family: Orchidaceae
Date Listed: September 9, 1982
Small whorled pogonia is a terrestrial orchid growing to about 10 inches (25 centimeters) high.
Five or six drooping, pale dusty green, widely rounded leaves with pointed tips are arranged in a
whorl at the apex of the greenish or purplish, hollow stem. Typically a single, yellowish green,
nearly stalkless flower is produced just above the leaves; a second flower rarely may be
present. Flowers consist of three petals, 0.7 inch (1.7 centimeters) in length, surrounded by
three narrow sepals up to 1.0 inch (2.5 centimeters) in length. Flower production, (May to July)
is followed by the formation of an erect ellipsoidal capsule 0.7 to 1.2 inches (1.7 to 3.0
centimeters) in length (Massey et al. 1983). This species may remain dormant for periods up to
10 years between blooming periods (Newcomb 1977).
The small whorled pogonia is widespread, occurring from southern Maine to northern Georgia,
but is very local in distribution. In North Carolina, this species is found scattered locations in the
Mountains, Piedmont and Sandhills (Amoroso 2002). Small whorled pogonia is found in open,
dry deciduous or mixed pine-deciduous forest, or along stream banks. Examples of areas
15
providing suitable conditions (open canopy and shrub layer with a sparse herb layer) include old
fields, pastures, windthrow areas, cutover forests, old orchards, and semi-permanent canopy
breaks along roads, streams, lakes, and cliffs (Massey et al. 1983). In the Mountains and
Piedmont of North Carolina, this species is usually found in association with white pine (Pinus
strobus) (Weakley 1993).
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: MAY AFFECT, NOT LIKELY TO ADVERSELY AFFECT
NHP records document the nearest occurrence of the small whorled pogonia in Surry County,
approximately 25 miles (40 kilometers) northeast of the project study area. The project study
area contains suitable habitat for small whorled pogonia in the Dry-Mesic Oak Pine Forest and
along stream banks of Falls Creek and the Yadkin River. Since the site visit was conducted
during the blooming season for this species, biologists conducted systematic surveys during the
site visit. These surveys involved walking through identified suitable habitat and carefully
observing all plants. This survey found no evidence of small whorled pogonia within the project
study corridor.
Federal Species of Concern - The February 25, 2003 FWS list also includes a category of
species designated as "Federal species of concern" (FSC) in Surry and Yadkin Counties (Table
3). A species with this designation is one that may or may not be listed in the future (formerly
C2 candidate species or species under consideration for listing for which there is insufficient
information to support listing).
Table 3. Federal Species of Concern
Common Name Scientific Name Potential Habitat State Status**
Robust Redhorse
Moxostoma robustum
Yes E*
Brook Floater
Alasmidonta varicosa
Yes SR-PE
* Historic record - this species was last observed in Surry and Yadkin County more than 20 years ago
`*State Status Codes - E: Endangered; SR-PE: Significantly Rare-Proposed Endangered
The FSC designation provides no federal protection under the ESA for species listed. NHP files
document brook floater approximately 4.5 miles from the project study area in the Mitchell River
drainage that empties to the Yadkin River. No documented occurrences of robust redhorse are
within 100 miles (160 kilometers) of the project study area.
16
5.0 REFERENCES
Amoroso, J.L. 2002. Natural Heritage Program List of the Rare Plant Species of North
Carolina. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and Recreation,
N.C. Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources, Raleigh, NC.
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and
Deepwater Habitats of the United States. FWS/OBS -79/31. Fish and Wildlife Service,
U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, DC. 103 pp.
Department of the Army (DOA). 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual.
Tech. Rpt. Y-87-1. US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS.
100 pp.
Department of Environmental Management (DEM). 1996. A Field Guide to North Carolina
Wetlands. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Raleigh.
129 pp.
Division of Water Quality (DWQ). 2003. Basinwide Information Management System (online).
Available: http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/bims/reports/reports.html [February 21, 2003]. North
Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Raleigh.
Division of Water Quality (DWQ). 2002- Draft Yadkin-Pee Dee River Basinwide Water Quality
Management Plan. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources,
Raleigh.
Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). 1994. Schweiniffs Sunflower Recovery Plan. Atlanta, GA.
28 pp.
Kartesz, J. 1998. A Synonymized Checklist of the Vascular Flora of the United States, Puerto
Rico, and the Virgin Islands. Biota of North America Program.
LeGrand, H. E. and S. P. Hall. 2001. Natural Heritage Program List of the Rare Animal
Species of North Carolina. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks
and Recreation, N.C. Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources,
Raleigh.
Martof, B.S., W.M. Palmer, J.R. Bailey, and J.R. Harrison III. 1980. Amphibians and Reptiles of
the Carolinas and Virginia. The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC. 264
pp-
Massey, J.R., D.K.S. Otte, T.A. Atkinson, and R.D. Whetstone. 1983. An Atlas and Illustrated
Guide to the Threatened and Endangered Vascular Plants of the Mountains of North
Carolina and Virginia. Southeastern Forest Experiment Station, Asheville, North
Carolina. 218 pp.
17
Menhinick, E.F. 1991. The Freshwater Fishes of North Carolina. North Carolina Wildlife
Resources Commission, Raleigh. 227 pp.
Newcomb, L. 1977. Newcomb's Wildflower Guide. Little, Brown, and Company, Boston, MA.
490 pp.
Palmer, W.M. and A.L. Braswell. 1995. Reptiles of North Carolina. The University of North
Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC. 412 pp.
Potter, E.F., J.F. Parnell, and R.P. Teulings. 1980. Birds of the Carolinas. The University of
North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC. 408 pp.
Radford, A.E., H.E. Ahles, and C.R. Bell. 1968. Manual of the Vascular Flora of the Carolinas.
The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC. 1183 pp.
Rohde, F.C., R.G. Arndt, D.G. Lindquist, J.F. Parnell. 1994. Freshwater Fishes of the
Carolinas, Virginia, Maryland, and Deleware. The University of North Carolina Press,
Chapel Hill, N.C. 222 pp.
Schafale, M.P. and A.S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities of North
Carolina: Third Approximation. Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and
Recreation, N.C. Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources. Raleigh.
325 pp.
Weakley, A. S. 1993. Orchidaceae (Orchid Family): Isotria Rafinesque (Whorled Pogonia,
Five-leaves, Fiveleaf Orchid). P. 491 in: Guide to the Flora of the Carolinas and Virginia,
Working Draft of 22 October 1993.
Webb, Sara L. 1986. Potential role of passenger pigeons and other vertebrates in the rapid
holocene migrations of nut trees. Quaternary Research. 26: 367-375.
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, NC. 255 pp.
18
t
DL? D?.3, U'

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201 DAVID MCCOY
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
10 October 1999
US Army Corps of Engineers
Raleigh Field Office
6508 Falls of Neuse Road, Suite. 120
Raleigh, NC 27615 -+

ATTENTION: Mr. Eric Alsmeyer 1?'CJ? tr_
{
NCDOT Coordinator ?B,

Dear Sir:

Subject: Surry/Yadkin Counties, I-77, Rehabilitation of Bridge Nos. 6 and 13 over
R?P
Yadkin River, Southern Railroad, and NC 268. Federal Aid Project No. IMS-
77-1(141)83, State Project No. 8.1741401, TIP Project No. I-4025.
Please find enclosed three copies of the project planning report for the above referenced
project. This project involves the proposed rehabilitation of Bridge Nos. 6 and 13 on I-77
over the Yadkin River, NC 268, and Southern Railroad in Surry and Yadkin Counties.
Work on the bridges will include deck rehabilitation, upgrading of expansion joints,
cleaning and painting of beam ends and bearings, adding approach slabs, and repairing
caps and columns. Rehabilitation will take place on one bridge at a time, and crossovers
will be used to re-route traffic to the other bridge during the proposed work. Project
length is approximately 1.0 km (0.6 mi).
No wetlands and approximately 1.1 acres of surface waters are contained within the 290-
foot right-of-way. There is a maximum potential fill of 1.0 cubic meter of old concrete
and 0.01 cubic meter of shotcrete to be dropped in Waters of the United States during
substructure work. NCDOT's Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition and
Removal, as well as special precautions during application of the shotcrete, will be
followed to minimize the amount of debris falling in Waters of the United States.
This 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
i
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 and Natural
Resources, Division of Water Quality, for their review.
This project will take place in a mountain trout county. Thus we anticipate that
comments from the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) will be
required. By copy of this letter and attachment, NCDOT hereby requests NCWRC
review.
If you have any questions or need additional information please call Ms. Sue Brady at
[phone].
Sincerely,

?.w William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
cc: w/ attachment
Mr. David Franklin, COE, Wilmington
Mr. Joe Mickey, Jr., NCWRC
Mr. John Dorney, Division of Water Quality
Mr. William Rogers, P.E., Structure Design
w/o attachment
Mr. John Alford, P.E., Roadway Design
Mr. Calvin Leggett, P.E., Program Development
Ms. Deborah Barbour, P.E., Highway Design
Mr. A. L. Hankins, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr. Wade E. Hoke, P.E., Division 11 Engineer
Ms. Missy Dickens, P.E., Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
r ?
A.
B
C
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION ACTION CLASSIFICATION FORM
TIP Project No.
State Project No.
Federal Project No.
I-4025
8.1741401
IMS-77-1(141)83
Project Description: (Include project scope and location and refer to the attached
project location map.)
I-77, REHABILITATE BRIDGE NO. 6 AND BRIDGE NO. 13 OVER
YADKIN RIVER, SOUTHERN RAILROAD, AND NC 268, SURRY/YADKIN
COUNTIES.
Purpose and Need:
TO UPGRADE FUNCTIONALLY OBSOLETE BRIDGES
Proposed Improvements:
Circle one or more of the following Type II improvements which apply to the
project:
Modernization of a highway by resurfacing, restoration, rehabilitation,
reconstruction, adding shoulders, or adding auxiliary lanes (e.g., parking,
weaving, turning, climbing).
a. Restoring, Resurfacing, Rehabilitating, and Reconstructing
pavement (3R and 4R improvements)
b. Widening roadway and shoulders without adding through lanes
c. Modernizing. gore treatments
d. Constructing lane improvements (merge, auxiliary, and turn lanes)
e. Adding shoulder drains
f. Replacing and rehabilitating culverts, inlets, and drainage pipes,
including safety treatments
g. Providing driveway pipes
h. Performing minor bridge widening (less than one through 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
r
Installing bridge safety hardware including bridge rail retrofit
I Bridge rehabilitation, reconstruction, or replacement or the construction of
grade separation to replace existing at-grade railroad crossings.
a Rehabilitating, reconstructing, or replacing bridge approach slabs
b Rehabilitating or replacing bridge decks
c. Rehabilitating bridges including painting (no red lead paint), scour
repair, fender systems, and minor structural improvements
d. Replacing a bridge (structure and/or fill)
4. Transportation corridor fringe parking facilities.
5. Construction of new truck weigh stations or rest areas.
6. Approvals for disposal of excess right-of-way or:for joint. or limited use of
right-of-way, where the proposed use does not have significant adverse
impacts.
7. Approvals for changes in access control.
8. Construction of new bus storage and maintenance facilities in areas used
predominantly for industrial or transportation purposes where such
construction is not inconsistent with existing zoning and located on or near
a street with adequate capacity to handle anticipated bus and support
vehicle traffic.
9. Rehabilitation or reconstruction of existing rail and bus buildings and
ancillary facilities where only minor amounts of additional land are
required and there is not a substantial increase in the number of users.
10. Construction of bus transfer facilities (an open area consisting of
passenger shelters, boarding areas, kiosks and related street
improvements) when located in a commercial area or other high activity
center in which there is adequate street capacity for projected bus traffic.
11. Construction of rail storage and maintenance facilities in areas used
predominantly for industrial or transportation purposes where such
construction is not inconsistent with existing zoning and where there is no
significant noise impact on the surrounding community.
12. Acquisition of land for hardship or protective purposes, advance land
acquisition loans under section 3(b) of the 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 qualify for a CE only
where the acquisition will not limit the evaluation of alternatives,
including shifts in alignment for planned construction projects, which may
be required in the NEPA process. No project development on such land
may proceed until the NEPA process has been completed.
D. Special Proiect Information: (Include Environmental Commitments and Permits
Required.)
Substructure work will include the removal of approximately
1 cubic meter of old concrete and the application of 1
cubic meter of shotcrete (concrete with a low water/cement
ratio propelled by air pressure onto the targeted surface).
Consequently, there is the potential for fill in the Waters
of the United States. Maximum potential fill resulting
from removal techniques is 1 cubic meter of old concrete.
It is estimated that not more than 0.01 cubic meter of wet
concrete will, fall into the water during the shotcrete
application.
NCDOT will utilize Best Management Practices for Bridge
Demolition and Removal to minimize the fill caused by the
removal of the old concrete. Furthermore, special .
precautions will be taken to minimize the amount of wet
concrete that falls into the water.
It is anticipated that the project will require a Section
404 Nationwide Permit for CE's from the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers and a Section 401 Water Quality Certification
from the N.C. Division of Water Quality.
3
E. Threshold Criteria
The following evaluation of threshold criteria must be completed for Type II
actions
ECOLOGICAL YES NO
(1) Will the project have a substantial impact on any
unique or important natural resource? X
(2) Does the project involve habitat where federally
listed endangered or threatened species may occur? X
(3) Will the project affect anadromous fish?
X
(4) If the project involves wetlands, is the amount of
permanent and/or temporary wetland taking less than
one-third (1/3) of an acre and have all practicable measures

to avoid and minimize wetland takings been evaluated?
X ?
(5) Will the project require the use of U. S. Forest Service lands?
?
X
(6) Will the quality of adjacent water resources be adversely
impacted by proposed construction activities? X
(7) Does the project involve waters classified as Outstanding Water
Resources (OWR) and/or High Quality Waters (HQW)? X
(8) Will the project require fill in waters of the United States
in any of the designated mountain trout counties?
(9) Does the project involve any known underground storage
tanks (UST's) or hazardous materials sites? ? X
PERMITS AND COORDINATION YES NO
(10) If the project is located within a CAMA county, will the
project significantly affect the coastal zone and/or any
F
"Area of Environmental Concern" (AEC)? N/A
(11) Does the project involve Coastal Barrier Resources Act

resources? ?
X
(12) Will a U. S. Coast Guard permit be required? ?
X
(13) Will the project result in the modification of any existing

regulatory floodway? ?
X
4
(14) Will the project require an), stream relocations or channel
changes? X
SOCIAL. ECONOMIC. AND CULTURAL RESOURCES YES NO
(15) Will the project induce substantial impacts to planned
growth or land use for the area? X
(16) Will the project require the relocation of any family or
business? X
(17) Will the project have a disproportionately high and adverse
human health and environmental effect on any minority or
low-income population? X
(18) If the project involves the acquisition of right of way, is the
amount of right of way acquisition considered minor? NIA
(19) Will the project involve any changes in access control? ?
X
(20) Will the project substantially alter the usefulness
and/or land use of adjacent property? X
(21) Will the project have an adverse effect on permanent
local traffic patterns or community cohesiveness? X
(22) Is the project included in an approved thoroughfare plan
and/or Transportation Improvement Program (and is,

therefore, in conformance with the Clean Air Act of 1990)? ?
X
(23) Is the project anticipated to cause an increase in traffic

volumes? ?
X
(24) Will traffic be maintained during construction using existing

roads, staged construction, or on-site detours? ?
X
(25) If the project is a bridge replacement project, will the bridge
be replaced at its existing location (along the existing facility)
and will all construction proposed in association with the

bridge replacement project be contained on the existing facility? ?
X
(26) Is there substantial controversy on social, economic, or
environmental grounds concerning the project? X
(27) Is the project consistent with all Federal, State, and local laws

relating to the environmental aspects of the project? ?
X
(28) Will the project have an "effect" on structures/properties
eligible for or listed on the National Register of Historic Places? X
5
(29) Will the project affect any archaeological remains which are
important to history or pre-history? X
(30) Will the project require the use of Section 4(f) resources
(public parks, recreation lands, wildlife and waterfowl refuges,
historic sites, or historic bridges, as defined in Section 4(f)
of the U. S. Department of Transportation Act of 1966)? X
(31) Will the project result in any conversion of assisted public
recreation sites or facilities to non-recreation uses, as defined
by Section 6(f) of the Land and Water Conservation Act
of 1965, as amended? X
(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 System of Wild and Scenic Rivers? X
F. Additional Documentation Required for Unfavorable Responses in Part E
(Discussion regarding all unfavorable responses in Part E should be provided
below. Additional supporting documentation may be attached, as necessary.)
8. Surry County is a designated trout county; however, the
Yadkin River in the project vicinity is not a trout stream.
6
G. CE Approval
TIP Project No. I-4025
State Project No. 8.1741401
Federal-Aid Project No. IMS-77-1 (141) 83
Project Description: (Include project scope and location. Attach location map.)
I-77, REHABILITATE BRIDGE NO. 6 AND BRIDGE NO. 13 OVER
YADKIN RIVER, SOUTHERN RAILROAD, AND NC 268.
Categorical Exclusion Action Classification: (Check one)
TYPE II(A)
X TYPE II(B)
Planning & Environmental Branch
Approved:
r
Da Assistant Manager
?y
Date
? Z3 (99
Date
roject Planning Unit Hea
Planning & Environmental Branch
C? s
-Project Pl nning Engineer
Planning & Environmental Branch
For Type II(B) projects only:
Date Vederal vision Administrator
Highway Administration
7

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
o TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
?y PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS BRANCH
I-77
REHABILITATE BRIDGES
NOS. 6 AND 13
OVER THE YADKIN RIVER
SURRY COUNTY
TIP PROJECT I-4025
K LC !TzEll
o 3 FIGURE 1
?+? LES

STATE of NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. P.O. Box 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201 E. NORRIS TOLSON
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
1 3 May 1999
MEMORANDUM TO: Missy Dickens, P.E.
Project Planning Engineer
FROM: Susan Brady, Natural Systems Specialist
Natural Systems Unit
SUBJECT: Rehabilitate Bridge Nos. 6 and 13 in I-77 over the Yadkin River.
Surry and Yadkin Counties. Federal Aid Project No. (not yet
assigned), State Project No. (not yet assigned), TIP No.
B-4025.
This report is submitted to assist in the preparation of a Programmatic Categorical
Exclusion (PCE) for the subject project. Water resources, biotic resources and jurisdictional
issues such as wetlands and federally protected species are included in this report.
This project is located in the Piedmont physiographic province, and involves the
proposed rehabilitation of Bridge Nos. 6 and 13 on I-77 over the Yadkin River, NC 268, and
Southern Railroad in Surry and Yadkin Counties (Fig. 1). Work on the bridges will include
deck rehabilitation, upgrading of expansion joints, cleaning and painting of beam ends and
bearings, adding approach slabs, and repairing caps and columns. Rehabilitation will take
place on one bridge at a time, and crossovers will be used to re-route traffic to the other
bridge during the work. The existing right of way is approximately 88.4 m (290.0 ft). The
proposed right of way is the same. The existing cross section consists of an 8.5 m (28.0 ft)
clear roadway on each bridge, and the proposed cross-section is the same. Project length is
approximately 1.0 km (0.6 mi).
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
` PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS BRANCH
I-77
REHABILITATE BRIDGES
NOS. 6 AND 13
OVER THE YADKIN RIVER
SURRY COUNTY
TIP PROJECT I-4025
o KI- ZFS 3
10 , FIGURE 1
MI ?$
METHODOLOGY
Information sources used in the pre-field investigation of the study area include U.S.
Geological Survey (USGS) quadrangle maps (Elkin North, Elkin South) and U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (FWS) National Wetland Inventory Maps (Elkin North, Elkin South). Water
resource information was obtained from publications of the NC Department of Environment
and Natural Resources- Division of Water Quality (DWQ, 1997) and from the NC Center for
Geographic Information and Analysis (Environmental Sensitivity Base Maps of Surry and
Yadkin Counties, 1995). Information concerning the occurrence of federal and state
protected species in the study area was gathered from the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS)
list of protected species and species of concern (15 January 1999), and the N.C. Natural
Heritage Program (NHP) database of rare species and unique habitats (checked 15 April
1995
General field surveys were conducted along the proposed alignment by NCDOT
biologists Susan Brady, Leilani Paugh, and Ed Lewis on 22 April 1999. Plant communities
and their associated wildlife were identified and recorded. Wildlife identification involved
using one or more of the following observation techniques: active searching and captur:_
visual observations (binoculars), and identifying characteristic signs of wildlife (sounds, scat;
tracks and burrows). Jurisdictional wetland determinations were performed utilizing
delineation criteria prescribed in the "Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manua"
(Environmental Laboratory, 1987).
DEFINITIONS
Definitions for areal descriptions used in this report are as follows: Project Study
Area denotes the area bounded by proposed ROW limits; Project Vicinity describes an area
extending 0.8 km (0.5 mi) on all sides of the project study area; and Project Region is
equivalent to an area represented by a 7.5 minute USGS quadrangle map.
WATER RESOURCES
The Yadkin River [DWQ index no. 12-(53)] is the only surface water within the
project area. This project lies within subbasin 030702 of the Yadkin River Basin. The
Yadkin River has a Division of Water Quality (DWQ) Best Usage classification of C at this
location. The C classification denotes waters suitable for aquatic life propagation and
survival, fishing, wildlife, secondary recreation, and agriculture.
The Division of Water Quality (DWQ) has initiated a basinwide approach to water
quality management for the 17 river basins within the state. The basinwide approach allows
for more intensive sampling of biological, chemical and physical data that can be used in
basinwide assessment and planning. Likewise, benthic macroinvertebrates are intensively
2
sampled for specific river basins. Benthic macroinvertebrates have proven to be a good
indicator of water quality because they are sensitive to subtle changes in water quality, have a
relatively long life cycle, are non-mobile (compared to fish) and are extremely diverse. The
overall species richness and presence of indicator organisms help to assess the health of
streams and rivers. River basins are reassessed every five years to detect changes in water
quality and to facilitate National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit
review.
A benthic macroinvertebrate monitoring site on the Yadkin River at US 21Business
[approximately 2.5 km (1.6 mi) upstream of the proposed project] was sampled in 1996.
This site received a taxa richness value of 23, a Biotic Index value of 5.12, and a
bioclassification rating of Good-Fair.
The Ambient Monitoring System (AMS) is a network of stream, lake and estuarine
water quality monitoring stations strategically located for the collection of physical and
chemical water quality data. The waterbody's freshwater or saltwater classification and
corresponding water quality standards determine the type of water quality data or parameters
that are collected. An ambient monitoring station on the Yadkin River at US 21Business way
sampled between January 1992 and November 1996. The only parameters with observations
greater than the NC State Criteria are fecal coliform bacteria, copper, iron and zinc; with a
total of 28 out of 98 samples for these parameters exceeding the criteria.
Point source dischargers located throughout North Carolina are permitted through the
NPDES Program. Any discharger is required to register for a permit. One major and four
minor point source dischargers are located within a 1.6 km (1.0 mi) radius of the project
study area, as listed in Table 1.
Table 1. NPDES Permit Holders in the Proiect Area.
Permit Holder Permit # Discharging to Classification Discharge
Elkin WWTP NC0020567 Yadkin River Major municipal 1.8 MGD
Jonesville WWTP NC0021580 Sandberry Creek Minor municipal 0.3 MGD
Carl Rose and Sons, Inc. NCG520034 Yadkin River General Minor
Carl Rose and Sons, Inc. NCG520036 Yadkin River General Minor
Vulcan Materials Qu NCG020159 UT Yadkin River General Minor
Non-point source pollution refers to runoff that enters surface waters through
stormwater flow or no defined point of discharge. There are many types of land use activities
that can serve as sources of non-point source pollution, including land development,
construction, crop production, animal feeding lots, failing septic systems, landfills, roads, and
parking lots. Sediments and nutrients are major pollution-causing substances associated with
non-point source pollution. Others include fecal coliform bacteria, heavy metals, oil and
grease, and any other substance that may be washed off the ground and carried into surface
3
substances associated with non-point source pollution. Others include fecal coliform
bacteria, heavy metals, oil and grease, and any other substance that may be washed off the
ground and carried into surface waters. Road and railroad corridor runoff are the only
identifiable non-point sources that were observed during the site visit.
No waters classified as Water Supplies (WS-I or WS-II) or Outstanding Resource
Waters (ORW) occur within 1.6 km (1.0 mi) of the project study area.
Minimal impacts to surface waters are anticipated as a result of construction
activities. The project.design calls for no additional fill in the river, and NCDOT's bridge
demolition guidelines will be followed to ensure that no debris is allowed to enter the river.
The NCDOT Best Management Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters and
Sedimentation Control Guidelines must be strictly enforced during the construction stage of
the project.
BIOTIC RESOURCES
Maintained/disturbed community is present along the edge of the road and around
the bridges. This community includes herbaceous species such as fescue (Festuca spp.),
foxtail grass (Setaria geniculata), field garlic (Allium vineale), pokeweed (Phytolacca
americana), common mullein (Verbascum thapsus), Queen-Anne's-Lace (Daucas carota),
henbit (Lamium amplexicaule), cleavers (Galium aparine), curly dock (Rumex crispus),
dandelion (Taraxacum officinale), white clover (Trifolium repens), red clover (Trifolium
pratense), narrow-leaved plantain (Plantago lanceolata), geranium (Geranium spp.), and
Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica). Woody species such as tree-of-heaven
(Ailanthus altissima), sycamore (Plantanus occidentalis), redbud (Cercis canadensis), box-
elder (Acer negundo) and blackberry (Rubus spp.) are found in the less-frequently
maintained areas, especially on the slope between the bridges.
One aquatic community, a Piedmont Perennial Stream, is found within project
boundaries. At this location, the Yadkin River is approximately 51.0 m (167.0 ft) wide. The
depth could not be determined because the water was very turbid. The substrate is
composed of sand and gravel, and no submerged aquatic vegetation was observed at the time
of the site visit.
Terrestrial fauna likely to utilize these communities includes Virginia opossum
(Didelphis virginiana), golden mouse (Ochrotomys nuttali), muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus),
raccoon (Procyon lotor), American toad (Bufo americanus), spring peeper (Hyla crucifer),
upland chorus frog (Pseudacris triseriata), eastern box turtle (Terrapene carolina), and
black racer (Coluber consiricter).
sparrow (Melospiza melodia), yellow-rumped warbler (Dendroica coronata), American
crow* (Corvus brachyrhynchos), and turkey vulture* (Cathartes aura).
Aquatic fauna likely to occur in the project area includes various species of insect
larvae, such as mayflies (Order Ephemeroptera), dragonflies and damselflies (Order
Odonata), stoneflies (Order Plecoptera), and caddisflies (Order Trichoptera). Fish which may
be present include rosyside dace (Clinostomous funduloides), bluehead chub (Nocomis
leptocephalus), fieryblack shiner (Notropis pyrrhomelas), spottail shiner (Notropis
hudsonius), redlip shiner (Notropis chiliticus), creek chub (Semotilus atromaculatus), white
sucker (Catostomus commersoni), brown bullhead (Ictalurus nebulosus), redbreast sunfish
(Lepomis auritus), largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides), and fantail darter (Ethoestoma
flabellare). Other aquatic fauna that may be present includes green frog (Rana clamitans),
snapping turtle (Chelydra serpentina), northern water snake (Nerodra sipedon), and queen
snake (Regina septemvittata') .
IMPACTS TO COMMUNITIE.°
The estimated impact, derived using the entire right of way, to the
maintained/disturbed community is 2.31 hectares (5.71 acres). This project will not requin
the entire right of way; therefore, actual impacts will be considerably less.
Plant communities found within the proposed project area serve as nesting and
sheltering habitat for various wildlife species. Due to the size and scope of this project, it is
anticipated that impacts to fauna will be minima!.
Areas modified by construction (but not paved) will become road shoulders and early
successional habitat. Reduced habitat will displace some wildlife further froth the roadway
while attracting other wildlife by the creation of more early-successional habitat. Animals
temporarily displaced by construction activities will repopulate areas suitable for the species.
Aquatic communities are sensitive to even small changes in their environment.
Stream channelization, scouring, siltation, sedimentation and erosion from construction-
related work may affect water quality and biological constituents. Although direct impacts
may be temporary, environmental impacts from these construction processes may result in
long term or irreversible effects.
The removal of streamside vegetation and placement of fill material at the
construction site alters the terrain. Alteration of the streambank enhances the likelihood of
erosion and sedimentation. Revegetation stabilizes and holds the soil thus mitigating these
processes. Erosion and sedimentation carry soils, toxic compounds and other materials into
aquatic communities at the construction site. These processes magnify turbidity and can cause
the formation of sandbars at the site and downstream, thereby altering water flow and the
5
growth of vegetation. Streamside alterations also lead to more direct sunlight penetration
and to elevation of water temperatures, which may impact many species.
JURISDICTIONAL ISSUES
Surface Waters and Wetlands
Surface waters and wetlands fall under the broad category of "Waters of the United
States," as defined in 33 CFR Section 328.3(a). Wetlands, defined in 33 CFR Section
328.3(b), are those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a
frequency and duration sufficient to support, and under normal circumstances do support, a
prevalence of vegetation typically adapted to life in saturated conditions. Any action tha:
proposes to place fill into these areas falls under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (COE), and must follow the statutory provisions under Section 404 of the Clear
Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344.
'Criteria to determine the presence of jurisdictional wetlands include evidence o:
hydric soils, hydrophytic vegetation and hydrology, where all three must be present for an
area to be considered a wetland. No jurisdictional wetlands are present within the
project boundaries.
The Yadkin River is a jurisdictional surface water under Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344). Discussion of the biological, physical, and water
quality aspects of this river are presented in previous sections of this repori.
Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Potential impact to surface waters in the proposed project is 88.4 m (290.0 ft)
determined using the entire ROW width. The actual impact to surface waters from this
project is anticipated to be minimal, as no construction will take place in the river, no
additional fill is proposed, and all falling debris will be caught.
Permit Requirements
No impacts to wetlands or jurisdictional surface waters are anticipated. Therefore, no
permits will be required.
Federally-Protected Species
Plants and animals with federal classifications of Endangered, Threatened, Proposed
Endangered and Proposed Threatened are protected under provisions of Section 7 and
Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended. As of 15 January
6
1999, the FWS lists the following federally protected species for Surry County (Table 2). A
brief description of each species' characteristics and habitat follows. No federally protected
species are listed for Yadkin County.
Table 2. Federally Protected Species for Sum Coun
Scientific Name Common Name Status
Clemmys muhlenbergii Bog turtle T(S/A)
Falco. peregrinus Peregrine falcon E
Isotria meloides Small whorled 20 Sonia T
"E" -Endangered-a species that is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range.
"T" -Threatened-a species that is likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future
throughout all or a significant portion of its range.
Clemmys muhlenbergii (bog turtle) Threatened due to Similarity of Appearance
Family: Emydidae
Federally listed: 5/2/9'
The bog turtle is a small semiaquatic turtle, usually with a bright orange or yellow
blotch on the side of head; carapace elongated, brown to black, often with a low median kee'
and concentric furrows or traces of them. The bog turtle measures 7-10 cm (3-4 in) in
length. It is found in damp grassy fields, bogs, and marshes in the mountains and western
piedmont.
The bog turtle is shy and will burrow rapidly in mud or debris when disturbed. The
bog turtle forages on insects, worms, snails, amphibians, and seeds. In June or July, three to
five eggs are laid in shallow nest in moss or loose soil. The eggs hatch in about fifty-five
days.
Individual bog turtles in the southern population closely resemble individuals in the
northern population, causing problems in enforcing prohibitions protecting the northern
population. As a result, the bog turtle is designated Threatened due to Similarity of
Appearance. This designation prohibits collecting individual turtles from this population and
bans interstate and international commercial trade. They are listed for their protection.
These species are not biologically endangered or threatened and are not subject to Section 7
consultation under the Endangered Species Act.
7

Falco peregrinus (peregrine falcon) Endangered
Animal Family: Falconidae
Date Listed: 3/20/84
The peregrine falcon has a dark plumage along its back and its underside is lighter,
barred and spotted. It is most easily recognized by a dark crown and a dark wedge that
extends below the eye, forming a distinct helmet.
The American peregrine falcon is found throughout the United States in areas with high
cliffs and open land for foraging. This species usually nests on high cliff ledges, but they may
also nest in broken off treetops in the eastern deciduous forest and on skyscrapers and bridges
in urban areas. Nesting occurs from mid-March to May.
Prey for the peregrine falcon consists of small mammals and birds, including mammals
as large as a woodchuck, birds as large as a duck, and insects. The preferred prey are mediun...-
sized birds such as pigeon
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION NO EFFECT
Preferred nesting habitat in the form of high cliffs is not present in or near the project
area. Although there are bridges present, this is not optimal nesting habitat for the peregrine
falcon, and the high volume of traffic over this bridge would likely discourage nesting. No
individuals were observed during the site visit. The NC Natural Heritage Program database of
rare species and unique habitats has no record of the peregrine falcon within the project
vicinity. Therefore, no impact to the peregrine falcon will result from project construction.
Isotria medeoloides (small whorled pogonia) Threatened
Plant Family: Orchidaceae
Federally Listed: 9/10/82
Flowers Present: mid May-mid June
Small whorled pogonia is a perennial orchid having long pubescent roots and a hollow
stem. Stems terminate in a whorl of five or six light green, elliptical leaves that are somewhat
pointed. One or two light green flowers are produced at the end of the stem. Flowers of small
whorled pogonia have short sepals.
The small whorled pogonia grows in "second growth deciduous" or deciduous-
coniferous forests, with an open canopy, open shrub layer, and sparse herb layer. It prefers
acidic soils. Flowering is inhibited in areas where there is relatively high shrub coverage or
high sapling density.
r .1 _.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION NO EFFECT
Habitat in the form of deciduous forest with an open shrub layer and sparse herb layer
is not present within the project area. The only terrestrial habitat present is
maintained/disturbed roadside, which is. not suitable for this species. No individuals were
observed during the site visit, and the NC Natural Heritage Program database of rare species
and unique habitats has no record of the small-whorled pogonia within the project vicinity.
Therefore, no impact to the small-whorled pogonia will result from project construction.
Federal Species of Concern and State Listed Species
Federal Species of Concern (FSC) are not afforded federal protection under the ESF
and are not subject to any of its provisions, including Section 7, until they are formally
proposed or listed as Threatened or Endangered. Federal Species of Concern are defined as
those species that may or may not be listed in the future. These species were formeriv
candidate species, or species under consideration for listing for which there was insufficient
information to support a listing of Endangered, Threatened, Proposed Endangered anc
Proposed Threatened. Organisms which are listed as Endangered, Threatened, or Specia:
Concern by the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program list of rare plant and animal specie
are afforded state protection under the State Endangered Species Act and the North Carolina
Plant Protection and Conservation Act of 1979.
As of 15 January 1999, no'FSC are listed for Yadkin County. One FSC is listed for
Surry County, the brook floater (Alasmidonta varicosa). This species is listed as Threatened
in North Carolina, and there is suitable habitat present within the project corridor.
A survey for this species was not conducted during the site visit, nor was this species
observed. A review of the N.C. Natural Heritage Program (NHP) database of rare species
and unique habitats revealed no records of the brook floater in or near the project study area.
Please contact me at [phone] extension 335 if you have any further questions
regarding this project.
cc: David Schiller, Natural Systems Unit Head
File I-4025
9