20110984 Ver 1_NC 11 (4)_20100930

Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Project Review Form
Profect Number: 11-0096 County: Bladen Date Received: 09/30/2010
Due Date: 10/25/2010
Description: Finding of No Significant Impact - Replacement of Bridge Nos. 12, 18 & 42
on NC 11 over Cap Fear River; TIP No. B-4028
us roiec is being reviewed as m ica e below:
Rcl;ional office Regional Office Area In-house Review
Asheville Air Soil & Water Marine Fisheries
Favetteville Water _ Coastal Management Water Resources
_ Mooresville Aquifer Protection Wildlife ? Environmental Health
Raleigh Land Quality Engineer ? Wildlife - DOT Solid Waste Mgmt
_ Washington Forest Resources Radiation Protection
N'ilminoton _ Land Resources _ Other
Parks & Recreation
Winston-Salem
1 Water Quality
y/' Water. _QUality _DOT=D
An Quality
Sign-Off/Region:
Response (check all applicable)
Reviewer/Agency:
1 _ No objection to project as proposed. _ No Comment
Insufficient information to complete review _ Other (specify or attach comments)
11'% 10U have any questions, please contact:
Mi,lba McGee, Environmental Coordinator at Melba.McGee a.ncdenr.gov
""RfAb q%
"'nq?ryY
Bladen County
Bridge No.'s 12, 1.8 and 42 on NC 11
over Cape Fear River and overflow
Federal Aid Project No. BRSTP-0011 (9)
W.B.S. No. 33395.1.1
State Project No. 8.1421401
S.T.I.P. No. B-4028
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
and
PROGRAMMATIC SECTION 4(f)
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
Submitted Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 4332 (2)(C)
DATE regory J. Thorpe, Ph.D,
Environmental Management Director, PDEA
'DATE
/PY Jolui F. Sullivan, III, P.E. Divisf6n Admims for
Federal Highway Administration
Bladen County
Bridge No.'s 12, 18 and 42 on NC 11
over Cape Fear River and overflow
Federal Aid Project No. BRSTP-0011 (9)
W.B.S. No. 33395.1.1
State Project No. 8.1421401
S.T.I.P. No. B-4028
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
Documentation Prepared in
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch By:
DATE Z-fr?a-
A. Walter
Project Planning Engineer ?,
Bridge Project Development Unit CAR
0
Z ,,
ATE

Bryan 15. Kluchar, PE
Project Engineer
Bridge Project Development Unit
ffi /0,'
q3
SEAL
D. f??l,OJJ ffllilY'?\
PROJECT COMMITMENTS:
Bladen County
Bridge No.'s 12,18 and 42 on NC 11
Over Cape Fear River and overflow
Federal Aid Project No. BRS'IP-ool1 (9)
W.B.S. No. 33395.1.1
State Project No. 8.1421401
S.T.I.P. No. B-4028
All Design Croups/ Division Resident Construcaio i " er --- AkllaCro: a .
A moratorium on in-water construction will be in place from February 1 to June 3Q of
any given year.
Stream Crossing Guidelines for Arnadromous Fish will be implemented in the design and
construction of this project.
PLEA Human Environment Unit - Historic Bridge
Bridge No. 12 has been determined eligible for the National Register and removal will be
considered an Adverse Effect. Mitigation for the adverse effect determination will
include Photo recordation and placement of Bridge 12 in the NCDOT" Bridge Relocation
and Reuse Program; as described in the attached Memorandum of Agreement (MOA).
Division Resident Engineer's Office - Geodetic Markers
There is a Geodetic, survey marker on existing Bridge No. 12 that will be impacted by
this project. The NC Geodetic Survey will be contacted one month prior to the start of
construction.
Division Construction - As Built Plans
This project involves construction activities on or over navigable waters of the United
Staten Therefore, the division shall submit sealed as-built construction plans to the
following:
® The National Ocean Service (NOS) of the National Oceanic and Atmosphere
Administration (NOAA).
Ken Foster
National Ocean Service
N/Cs 26, Room 7317
1315 East-Vest Highway
Silver Springs, MD 20910-3282
The United States Coast Guard (USCG)
Waverly Gregory, Jr.
Chief. Bridge Administration Branch
431 Crawford Street
Portsmouth. VA 23704-5004
Bladen County
Bridge No.'s 12,18 and 42 on NC 11
over Cape Fear River and overflow
Federal Aid Project No. BRSTP-0011 (9)
W.B.S. No. 33395.1.1
State Project No. 8.1421401
S.T.I.P. No. B-4028
TYPE OF ACTION: The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has determined the
replacement of Bridge No.'s 12, 18 and 42 will have no significant impact on the human or
natural environment. Therefore, this is a FHWA Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI).
This Finding of No Significant Impact is based on the January 19, 2010 Environmental
Assessment (EA), which has been independently evaluated by FHWA and determined to
adequately and accurately discuss the environmental issues and impacts of the proposed
project. The EA provides sufficient evidence and analysis for determining that an
Environmental. Impact Statement is not required. Subsequent review of the EA by federal and
state resource agencies and public involvement did not reveal any issues of significance.
Therefore, the FHWA takes frill responsibility for the accuracy, scope, and content of the EA.
1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The replacement of Bridge No.'s 12, 18 and 42 are included in the latest approved North
Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) State Transportation Improvement Program
and are eligible for the Federal-Aid Bridge Replacement Program. The location is shown in
Figure 1. The replacement structures for Bridge No.'s 12, 18, and 42 will consist of a bridge
approximately 1,275-foot long, 375-foot, and 375-foot respectively. These bridge lengths are
based on preliminary design information and are set by hydraulic requirements. The bridges
will be of sufficient width to provide for two 12-foot lanes with 4-foot offsets on each side.
The roadway grade of each new structure will be approximately the same as the existing
grade.
The existing roadway will be widened to a 24-foot pavement width to provide two 12-foot
lanes. Two-foot paved shoulders will be provided on each side.
IT. ESTIMATED COSTS
The estimated costs, based on 2010 prices, are as follows:
Alternative 1
Preferred
Structure $ 6,653,000
Roadway Approaches $ 2,393,000
Detour Structure and Approaches -0-
Structure Removal $ 575,000
Misc. & Mob. $ 1,529,000
Eng. & Contingencies $ 1,650,000
Total Construction Cost $ 12,800,000
Right-of-way Costs $ 40,000
_
Utility Costs $ 590,000
Total Project Cost $ 13,430,000
III. SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMETAL EFFECTS
Physical characteristics, water resources, and biotic resources identified in the EA remain
unchanged. Surface waters and wetlands have been delineated and a Jurisdictional
Determination will be provided with the applicable permit for this project. No residences or
businesses will be relocated by the propose project.
Permits
Coordination with the United States Coast Guard (USCG) has allowed the USCG to place the
project in their Advance Approval category as per Title 33 Code of Federal Regulations Part
115.70. This Advance Approval determination will remain valid for a period of five years,
beginning on the date of May 21, 2010, as long as construction begins before the end of the
five year period.
IV. COMMENTS AND COORDINATION
A notice of opportunity for a public hearing in the proposed project was advertised in local
newspapers for a period of 4 weeks; June 29, 2010 through July 22, 2010. There were no
requests for a public hearing on the project.
Distribution of the Environmental Assessment
Copies of the Environmental Assessment were made available to the public and. to the
following federal, state and local agencies:
US Army Corps of Engineers
US Coast Guard
US Environmental Protection Agency
US Fish and Wildlife Service
NC Department of Cultural Resources
NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources
NC Wildlife Resource Commission
NC Division of Emergency Management
NC Department of Administration - State Clearinghouse
NC Department of Agriculture
NC Dept, of Transportation
Lumber River Council of Governments
Asterisks (*) indicate agencies from which comments on the environmental assessment were
received. Copies of letters received are included in the Appendix of this document.
Comments on the Environmental Assessment
Substantive comments on the Environmental Assessment are discussed below:
US Environmental Protection Agency
Comment: We recommend that NCDOT, FHWA, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACE)
and North Carolina Division of Water Quality (DWQ) consider placing this potentially
complex bridge replacement project in. the established NEPA/Section 404 Merger 01 Process
for multi-agency input and coordination. The NCDOT and FHWA are proposing new
location structures and roadway alignment with potentially substantial wetland impacts that
would lend itself to the established Merger 01 process.
NCDOT Response: NCDOT and FHWA is proposing replacement along a new alignment to
the west; adjacent to the existing roadway and bridges. Although impacts to wetlands could
be considered higher than for standard bridge replacement projects, replacement along the
eastern side of the existing alignment offers approximately the same amount of wetland
impacts. Additionally, on-site wetland restoration may be feasible through removal of
portions of the existing causeway.
Comment: The EA states that the current and estimated projected traffic volume on NC 11 is
3,420 vehicles per day (2009) and 6,900 vehicles per day (2035), respectively. NC 11 is not a
National Highway System Route. EPA does not concur that the traffic volume projections of
more than double the existing traffic are reasonable based upon the very rural nature of the
project study area and that this route does not connect any significant local or regional towns
or communities. While some increases in truck traffic might be expected from logging, hog
and other agricultural uses, these anticipated increases of 28% for trucks and 6% for dual-tired
vehicles do not approach 100% plus increase in 2035 projections.
NCDOT Response: Traffic growth rates obtained from historical trends, and specific
information on planned developments were used as a guide for future year conditions. County
census, housing, and employment data was also considered prior to determination of the
growth rates to be used. Historical trend analyses were conducted at 4 locations in Bladen
County. These observed volumes reflect a growth rate of 3.0% on NC 11 and 1.9% to 2.6%
on NC 87. In addition to historical growth trends, additional traffic volume was considered to
be generated from the proposed NC International Terminal.
Comment: The EA does not describe the length of the existing bridges.
NCDOT Response: The lengths of Bridge No.'s 12, 18 and 42 are 1237-foot, 340-foot, and
340-foot respectively.
Comment: The EA does not include a discussion or an analysis of replacing the existing
structures to the east of their current locations and what the potential impacts and costs would
be for this alternative.
NCDOT Response: Immediately west of the existing alignment is a maintained utility
corridor, which is being utilized to reduce the overall impact to undisturbed jurisdictional
wetlands, as well as terrestrial forested communities. The east side presently is completely
undisturbed jurisdictional wetlands and terrestrial forested communities.
Comment: The EA indicates that the replacement of the 3 bridges with one single bridge
along a new alignment to the west was considered but was eliminated from detailed study due
to high cost. There are no details of the environmental impacts or costs for the different
alternatives or options in the EA.
NCDOT Response: The estimated cost for replacement of 3 bridges with one single bridge
was $14,000,000 for just the structure which would exceed the project cost for the
replacement of three bridges with three bridges ($13,230,000).
Comment: The EA includes a statement that utility impacts are expected to be high. No
details of the type or quantification of the impacts is provided. There are no utilities currently
attached to existing Bridge Nos. 12 and 42 and Bridge No. 18 has utilities attached but they
are apparently not in use. The potential impact information on both alternatives and potential
utility impacts needs to be further analyzed and detailed by NCDOT for future consideration
by resource and permitting agencies.
4
NCDOT Response: The maintained utility corridor to the west of the existing alignment
contains high tension power lines, which will require relocation. Relocation of high tension
power lines is considered a high utility impact.
NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources - Division of Water Quality
Comment: The Cape Fear River is class WS-IV, Sw waters of the state. NCDWQ is very
concerned with sediment and erosion impacts that could result from this project. NCDWQ
recommends that highly protective sediment and erosion control BMP's be implemented to
reduce the risk of nutrient runoff to the Cape Fear River. NCDWQ requests that road design
plans provide treatment of the storm water runoff through best management practices as
detailed in the most recent version of NCDWQ's Stormwater Best Management Practices.
NCDOT Response: Use of best management practices is standard practice for NCDOT
projects, and will be implemented for this project.
NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources - Public Water Supply
Comment: If existing water lines will be relocated during construction, plans must be
submitted to PWS plan review section.
NCDOT Response: Coordination for the relocation of public services is standard practice.
NCDOT Utilities Unit will provide applicable plans and information as necessary.
NC Wildlife Resource Commission
Comment: NCWRC recommends an in-water work moratorium from February 15 through
June 30 for the protection of anadromous species including Shortnose sturgeon.
NCDOT Response: NCDOT will observe an in-water work moratorium from February 1
through June 30; as requested by the National Marine Fisheries service for Shortnose sturgeon.
V. REVISIONS TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
Federally Protected Species
The United States Fish and Wildlife (USFWS) list six species under federal protection for
Bladen County as of August' 0, 2010. The applicable EA identified the following species to
have a biological conclusion of either "Not Required" or "No Effect": American Alligator,
Red-Cockated woodpecker, American Chafseed, and Rough-leaved loosestrife; all
conclusions remaining valid. The EA also listed two species to be "Unresolved" at the time of
acceptance: Shortnose Sturgeon, and Pondberry. Evaluation for these two species has been
completed, rendering a biological conclusion for each as follows:
5
Shortnose Sturgeon
Biological Conclusion: MA:NLAA
Suitable habitat for the shortnose sturgeon does not exist in the study area. Communication
with the National Marine Fisheries Service on July 30, 2010 confirmed the biological
conclusion was appropriate as long as the February 1 through June 30 in-water work
moratorium was adhered to. Additionally, a review of the NHP records updated. July 1, 2010
indicates no known shortnose sturgeon within 1.0 mile of the study area.
Pondberry (Southern Spicebush)
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Suitable habitat for pondberry does not exist in the study area. Surveys were conducted by
NCDOT biologists throughout areas of suitable habitat on August 12, 2010. No individuals of
pondberry were observed. A review of NHP records updated July 1, 2010 indicates no known
pondberry occurrences within 1.0 mile of the study area.
HUMAN ENVIRONMENT
This project is subject to compliance with Section 106 of the National. Historic Preservation
Act of 1966, as amended, and implemented by the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at Title 36 CFR Part
800. Section 106 requires Federal agencies to take into account the effect of their undertakings
(federally funded, licensed, or permitted) on properties included in or eligible for inclusion in
the National Register of Historic Places and afford the Advisory Council a reasonable
opportunity to comment on such undertakings.
The Historic Preservation Office (HPO) reviewed the subject project and determined Bridge
No. 12 to be eligible for listing in the National. Register of Historic Places (see letter dated
May 15, 2008). Removal of the existing bridge has been determined to have an adverse effect
to the historic property. On August 18, 2010 FHWA, NCDOT, and the State Historic
Preservation Officer (SHPO) completed a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) for the
replacement of Bridge No. 12. On September 2, 2010 the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation (ACHP) notified FHWA of the filing of the executed MOA. A copy of the MOA
and notification of filing are attached to this document.
Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act of 1966 (49 U.S.C 303) protects the use
of publicly owned parks, recreational areas, wildlife/waterfowl refuges, and historic
properties.
The proposed project requires the use of Bridge No. 12, a National Register of Historic Places
eligible historic bridge. The existing bridge cannot be preserved due to the extent of
rehabilitation. In addition, the bridge is so structurally deficient that it cannot be rehabilitated
to meet acceptable load requirements. A Programmatic Section 4(f) evaluation has been
prepared and is also attached.
The filing of the MOA, and execution of its terms, completes the requirements of Section 106
of the National Historic Preservation Act and the ACHP's regulations.
VI. BASIS FOR FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
Based on a study of the impacts of the proposed action, as documented in the Environmental
Assessment, and on comments from federal, state, and local agencies, it is the finding of the
North Carolina Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration that
the project will not have a significant impact upon the quality of the human or natural
environment. The proposed action is not controversial from an environmental perspective.
No significant impacts on natural, ecological, cultural, or scenic resources are expected. In
view of the above evaluation, it has been determined that a Finding of No Significant Impact
is applicable for this project. Neither an Envirommental Impact Statement nor further
environmental analysis is required.
APPENDIX
Agency Comments on the Environmental Assessment
f;y F a ?
?,p7 L mss'
x
North Carolina
Department of Administration
Beverly Eaves Perdue, Governor ;Closes Carey, Jr., Secretary.
March 3, 201 0
lvir. Gregory Thorpe
NC: OT
Project Dev. & Environmental Analysis
1548 Mail ;Service Center
Raleigh, NC
Re: C File # 10-E-4220-0276; A, Replacement o Bridge Nos. .2, IS & 4 on N 11 over
Cap `ear River, TIP No. B-402
Dear Mr. Thorpe-,
The above referenced environmental impact information has been submitted to the State Clearinghouse
under the provisions of the National Enviromnental Policy Act. According to G, S. 113A-10, when a
state agency is required to prepare an environmental document under the provisions of federal law, the
environmental document meets the provisions of the State Environmental Policy= Act. Attached to this
letter for your consideration are the comments made by agencies in the course of this review.
If any further environmental review documents are prepared for this project, they should he forwarded to
this office for intergovernmental review.
Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call.
`sincerely,
Ms. Chrys Baggett
State Environmental :Review Clearinghouse
Attachments
cc: Region N
Mailing Address: Telephone. [phone] Location Address:
1301 Mail Service Center Pax [phone] 116 West Jones `street
12alei??Jt, NC 27699-1301 state Courier 451-01-00 Raleigh, North Carolina
e-mail state_elearinheuaBidc?a.nc.gvv
An Equal Opportuni1Y1Affirmattve Action Lmpla} er
i s=
North, Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Beverly Eaves Perclue
Governor
MEMOR4-N oI Df
TO? Valerie McMillan
State Clearinghouse
FROM: Melia McGee
Environmental Review Coordinator
R : 10 021 1<;r'3 Rep acerr. ,nt of Bridges 1..2r 18 and 42 in Bladen
1. sc. iAnt-y
DAT : March 2, 2010
Dee Freetnan
Secretary
The Department of rrivi:rcnmcnt arld Natural Resources has reviewed the
proposed information. The attached eommQnts are for the applicant's
information.
Thank you for the opportunity to review,
Attachments
1601 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1601 One
'
Phone: [phone] \ FAX [phone] Internet: %rww,enr.state.nc.us orthC l?oin`#.
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Ernployer .- 50% Recycled t 10% Post Consumer Pager ;v4d,1111711Y
MEMO R AN U l `Nt
To: Melba .%McCiee, linty ir:>nnrentat Coordinator, Office of Legiskitive and Inierg6 ernmental
Affairs
Frorn: Rob Ridings. NC' DI ision of Water Quality, '1'ran portaticrn Permitting (.init
4
Sail-iect: Comments on the Environmental Assessment related to proposed replacement of Bridges
12, 18, and 42, 131aden County, Federal Aid Project No. BRST11-001 1(9')} State l'rc}tcct
No. 8,142 1401 . TIP No. B-4028, State Clearinghouse Project No. 10-0276,
This office has reviewed the referenced document dated received Flebruary =1„ 2010. The NC Division of.
Water Quality (N(`1.)WQ) is responsible for the issuance of the Section 401 Water Quality Certification
for activities that impact Waters of the U.S., including wvetlrrnds. It is our understanding that the project
as presented wvrll result in impacts toy jurisdictional wetlands, streams, and tither surface waters. NC DW'Q
offers rile following comments based on review of the aforementioned document:
Project Specific Comments:
L The ('ape Fear River is class WS-IV, Sw waters of the State. NCDWQ is very concerned with
sediment and erosion; impacts that could result from this project. NC'I)WQ recommends that highly
protective sediment and erosion control BFI's be implemented to reduce the risk of nutrient runoff to
the Cape Fear River.. NC'DWQ requests that read design plans provide; treatment of the stony, wvater
ri.anoff through best management practices as detailed in the most: recent version ofNt: DWQ's
,5ior-r.nvaler-13est iWGrnzr.gemew Practices.
General Comments:
l , The environmental document shall provide a detailed and itemized presentation of the proposed
impacts to wvetlands snd strea?n.s with crrrresponding, mapping. If mitigation is necessary as required.
ley 155 NC AC 211,0506(h), it is preferabl : to present a conceptual (if not finalized) mitigation plan
with the environmental documentation. Appropriate mitigation plans will be required prior to
issuance of a 101 Water (halt C'e li cati011.
2. 1 nvironMental aSSGSSMent alternatives shall consider design criteria that ,:educe: the impacts to
streams and wetlands frorn storm water runoff. These alternatives shrill inchide read designs that.
allow for treatment of the storm water runoff through. best management practices a,-, detailed in the
t n
NCt`t!.. r#1Fl?I
4
buffer areas, preformed scour holes, retention basins, etc,
:'after the selection of the preferred alternative and prior to an issuance of'the 401 Water Ouality
Certification., the NCI)OT I s respectfully reminded that they will need to demonstrate the avoidance
and innin- rization of impacts to wetlands (and streams) to the maximum extent practical. In
ac.corCiince with the Environmental iManauenlcnt Commission's Rules .h 15A N(-'A(" 2I-I.000(h) .
mingl:lion will b required for Impacts of greater than 1 acre to wetlands. In the event that
tn'ttr-',°.!ro,: is required, the mitigatioor plan should be designed to replace appropriate last functions
and values. The NC IK:, o4);sten? 1:i_nhancezncnt Program may 7e available for use as wetland
rnitigation.
In accordance: w,th the environmental M,:Ma?)erner-it C ommission"s Rules ? I- 5A N('A("
2II.050(){l)}' , 11 on will be required for it lpa t, c>l rcat#4,r. than 150 linUrzr feet to am single
stream. In the event that mitioation is rcquircd, the mitigation plan shall be designed to rep ace
appropriate lost functions and values. Hie NC I_"cos stem Enhancement Program may be: available
for use; as 5trear23 rCrlt.i„i#tI(1t#.
Future d€)i urrimiation, Includinu, the 401 Water QLtalltl Certification Application, should continue
to include an itemized listing of the proposed wetland and stream in'tpacts with corrrespondIM"
mapping.
6, I1ClaWQ is very concerned with sediment and erosion impacts that could result from this project.
N('DO1I shall address these concerns by describing the potential impacts that may occur to the
aquatic environments and any mitigrFtin4g factors that would reduce the impacts.
%, :jn analysis of cumulative and secondary impacts anticipated as a result of this prcj;ec-t is recluircd.
The type and detail of analysis shall conforrn to the NC' Division o'Water duality Policy on the
assessment of secondary and cumulative impacts dated April 10, 2004.
8. NCCDOT is respectfully reminded that all impacts.. including but not limited to, bridging, fill,
excavation and clearing, and rip rap to jurisdictional wetlands.. streams, and riparian buffers need to
be included in the final impact calculations. These impacts, in addition to any construction. impacts,
temporary or otherwise, also need to be included as part of the 401 Water Quality Certification
Application.
Where streams must be crossed. NCDWQ prefers bridges be used in Betz of culverts. However, we
realize that economic considerations often require the use of culverts, Please be advised that.
culverts shall be countersunk to allow unimpeded passage by fish and other aquatic organisms.
Moreover, in areas where high duality wetlands or streams are impacted, a bridge may prove
preferable. When applicable, NC, DOT should not install the bridge heists in the creek„ to the
nlaxiinum extent practicable.
10. Whenever possible. NC'I7G Q prefers spannin=g structures. Spanning structures usually do not
require work %vithin the stream or grubbing ofthc streanrbanks and do not require stream channel
real Ianrnent. The horizontal and vertical clearances provided by bridges shall allow Cor human and
I'Vildli'fe passage beneath the structure;. Fish passage and navigation by canoeists and boaters shall
not be blocked, Bridge supports (bents` shall not be placed in the stream when possible.
l 1. Bridue deck drains shall not discharge directly into the stream, Storrnwatcr shall be directed across
the bridge and pre-treated through sii:e-appropriate means (grassed swales, pre-formed scour Iroles_
vegetated gutters etc,) before entering the stream, Please refer to the most current version of
NCI)`vli Q( s .Stcrr•rrrrvuter BL-?sl rllurutricrnrert! Practices,
12- Sediment and erosion control measures shall not be placed in wetlands or stream,.,.
13. Boi-To waste areas shall ac•ord tvetlands to the nnaxirnurn extent practical. Impacts to wetlands it?
borrtreG-/wastc areas will need to be presented it) the 401 Water Ouality C'ertification and could
precipitate compensatory mitiuation.
14. The 4093 Water Qual tv Certification application will need to spc.';fTca';ly address the proposed
rnetlnoc s I'crr stcnrrn?v<€ter tnana<?tirrrent. More slrecifieally, storm .lter :;hall not be, permitted to
c.,ischar€ e directly into streams or surfaces waten.
15. Based oil'N presented to the clocurrielit. the rnn.at7;rnitudc of impacts to ctc;tlarnds and
stream w,_ require an Individual Pen-nit application to the Corps of Engineers and corresponding
4011 a cr Quality Certification, Please be advised that a 01 Water Quality Certification rcquires
satisfactory protection of %vatcr quality to ensure that Avater quality standards are met and no c?.efland
or stream uses .re lost. Final permit authorization will require the submittal of a formal application
by the N( `L)OT and ",Tittern concurrence from ' (A.,)W ). Please be aware that any approval will be
contingent on a=ppropriate avotdanc=? and minimization of wetland and stream impacts to the
maximum extent practical, the development of an acceptable storinwater management plan, and the
inclusion of appropriate mitigation plans where appropriate.
16. If concrete is used during construction, a dry work area shall be maintained to prevent direct contact
between curin- concrete and strearn water. Water that inadvertently coritacts. uncured concrete shall
not be discharged to surface raters due to the potential for elevated pH and possible aquatic life and
fitsh kills..
17. If temporary access roads or detours are constructed, the site shall be graded to its precon struction
contours and elevations. Disturbed areas shall be seeded Or mulched to stabilize; the soil and
appropriate native woody species shall be planted. When using temporary structures the area shall
be cleared but not grubbed. Clearing the area with chain saws, mowers, bush-hugs, or other
mechanized equipment and leaving the stumps and root neat intact allows the area to re-vegetate
naturally and minimizes soil disturbance.
IS. Placement of culverts and other structures in waters, streams, arid wetlands shall Inc placed below
the elevation of the streambed by one foot for all culverts ckith a diameter greater than 49 inches,
and 20 percent of the culvert diameter for culverts having a diameter less than 48 inches, to allow
low flow passage of water and aquatic life. Design and placement of culverts and other structures
including temporary erosion control measures shall not be conducted in a manner that may result in
dis-equilibrium of'wetlands or streambeds err banks. adjacent to or upstream and down stream of the
above str?rctures. `I'he applicant is required to provide evidence that the equilibrium is being
mainta ,,cd Frcque; ited in writing by NC'I)WC). If this condition is unable to be met due to bedrock.
or other Ili-nit,,.-,g features encountered during construction, please contact the NCDWQ for guidance
on lnotiv to proceed and to deternrfne whether or not a permit modification will be required.
19. l['nn€.iltiplc pipes or barrels are required, they shall he designed to mimic natural stream cross section
as closely as possible including: pipes or barrels at. flood }Main elevation, f7oodplain benches. and/or
sills may be required where appropriate. Widening the stream channel shall 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.
20) If foundation test bonngs are net;cssary: it shall be noted in the document, Geotechnical work is
approved under General 401 C ernfication Nunitier 368 7.r:Nationwvide Permit Nlo. 6 for Survey
Activities.
1. Sediment and c3-osion control Measures sufficient to prot;cca watrer resources must be irriplorn :need
and naaintaained in accordance with the n oM recent version of North Carolina Sedinient and Erosion
Control Planaaing and Design N/lana.aal and the° mast recent version of NC'S000250.
2-1 All work in or adjacent. to streaa i waters shall be. conducted in a (Irv work area. .'approved 13MI
measures from the most current version of N('I)()1 C'on.struction and Maintenance Activities
manual such a: saandbaL?s. rock ben ns, cofferdams and other dive.a soon structures shalt be ui ed to
prcvent excavation in flowing Water.
23. While the use of ltiational 4,Vctland Inventory (NAVI) maps, NC' Coastal Re-ruon I?-valuaation of
Wetland Significance (INC'-CREWS) inap ; and soil sur vey rlnaps are usefi.al tools, their inherent
i accuracies require that gUahfied personnel peiAmn onsatt wvvt:land delineations prior to pen-nit
approval.
24. Heavy equipment shall be operated fi-orn the bank rather than in stream channels in order to
minimize sedimentation and reduce: the likelihood ol'introduc;iny other pollutants into streams. This
egaaipnaent should tie inspected daily and maintained to prevent containinatiton o 'surface. waters
from leaking fuels, lubricants, hydraulic fluids, or other toxic rnaterials.
25. Riprap shall not be placed in the active tha %veg, channel or placed in Vne sttta.anibed in a ananner than
precludes aquatic life passage, 11iocngineering boulders or structures: shall be properly dea igMed,
sized and installed.
26. Riparian vegetation (native trees and shrubs) shall be preserved to the maaxinitat. extent possible,
Riparian vegetation rnust be reestablished within the construction limits of the prqject by the end of
the growing season following completion of construction.
NC':I)WQ appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on your prQlect. Shall you have any questions
or require any additional information, please contact Rob Ridings at 919-733-9817.
cc: Kim Garvey, I,IS Army Corps of Fng veers. Wilnnington Field (;trice
John F. Sullivan, 111, Federal Highway Administration
Dr. Gregory.I. ':Thorpe, Ph.D.. NC DOT F'T}EA
Jiro Rerko, Division 0 Environmental Officer
Travis Wilson, NC Wildlife Resources C'ontnnssi031
Ken Averitte, NC'I)G Q Fayetteville regional Office
Rile Copy

L,

1EPII0RANDZjXf
TO, iN4clba McGee
Office ofLegi.slative: anal lrttergovernzr?ental Affairs, DE'?'vT
FF C Travis Wilson, I?iglX?vay Frcrjcct Cc?orainator
I alaitat Ct?nservatio,n pro ar€r
ATI?: February 12, 2010
SZ. CT: North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) Envirazunent:al Assessment
(FA) for the re la.cenlera.t of bridge r?t€ tiers 12,18 ,ar?d 42. oraion" l 1 . o the sRiver ojeetand Ndo. 1?overf?0272?c. liantleis, Blade County, North Carolina. TIp ?To. m40C?. e pear
l?`o .2g SGT
Staff biologists with the N, C. Wildlife R.esourccs Co3' issiOn (NCW C) ha,, nevi we
subject F ;"A and are familiar with habitat values in the ro ect area.. ? tl t)xe.
asscss Project impacts to fish and wildlife rosotrrcos. C)ur ctrrnm?The ??urpase. of this revicw was t()
ccrtain provisions of the National E viror no#ztal l'clicy Acct m U s Cc p o fed in accordance with
Wildlife Coordination Act d,$ rA ( )( )) and the Fish and
Stat. 401, as amended, l 6 U.S.C. 661-667d) NCDOT is ptoposir#g to replace three deficient bridge structures On NC' l 1 over the Cape Fear River
and adjacent ct r -Ro,v cham iels. Prior wRC comments have beets incorporated into the document,
however cow ..r<*_s reflecting the recommended moratorium are inconsisterntly.referencied. Funhern3.ore
WX no longcr recommends an in water work raora.toriurn for the protection of sunfish, tnis will not h
retlectcd by new moratorium dates but should be rerr+oved as rationale for the moratorium. Jn order to
update and improve unifon-pity of our previous comments all WRC moratorium refexenccs in the FA
should be edited to cxplaisl AT'C recommends an in-water worm moratorium -om F6ruary 15 through
Jane 30 for the protection of anadromous speci.rs including Shortnose sturgeon, Thank you for the
opportunity to comment. If we can be of any further assisltance please call me at [phone],
cc; CTary Jordan, USfNVS. Raleigh
Rob Ridings. DIAIQ
Kim Gart%ey, US,ACE
Chris ilitscher, EPA
Ron Sechl-r. N'' FS
Mallhig address, Division of Ireland Fisheries 4 1721 Mail Service Caster I Raleigh, ivy 27699-1721
Telephone: [phone] ° Fax. [phone]
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND
NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
Inter-Agency Project Review Response
Project Name i C.ov ter/NC-DOT Type of Project
Comments provide; by:
l_ Regional Program Person
Project Dumber
10-0276
County
Bladen
EA - Replacement of
ridge Naas. 12,18 4,2
can NC II ravt Cape
Fear liver T ' No. B-
4028.
Z Regional Supervisor for Public Water Supply Section
I? Central Office program person
Name Date 1 V44444 -
Telephone number:
Program within Division of Environmental Health.
Public Water Supply
Other, Name of Program:
Response (check all applicable):
El No objection to project as proposed
No comment
Insufficient information to complete review
] Comments attached
® See comments below
t??. ;=rw i '??. e .ti s„ •7.+..`""..:4 ?? ? 1,' e,.?..?. ?:t , l? q 1r°as-t .?2..1 is c.:',..?-z..SC.$ ci t,;..?". i .+? C,..;:'1n-°? ? t?c,?i.:.? i x^wa.
ti.A
Public Water Supply Section Environmental Review Coordinator for the
Division of Environmental Health
2010
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND
NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION CE ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
Inter-Agency Project Review Response
Project: Name Bladen County/NI G-f T Type of Project
I Project Number
10-0276
County
Btadera ..._.,_? .
EA - eplaeernent of
Bridge Nos. T 2,19 & 42
on C 11 ?y eP. :arse ear
I ver. T11,1 Nn B-4028
The applicant should be advised that plans and specifications for all water system
improvements must be approved by the Division of Environmental Health prior to the
award of a contract or the initiation of construction (as required by 15A NCAC 18C
.0300et. seq.). For information, contact the Public Water Supply Section, (919)
733-2321.
This project will be classified as a non-community public water supply and must comply
with state and federal drinking water monitoring requirements. For more information the
applicant should contact the Public Water Supply Section, [phone].
17 if this project is constructed as proposed, we will recommend closure of feet of
adjacent waters to the harvest of shellfish. For information regarding the shellfish
sanitation program, the applicant should contact the Shellfish Sanitation Section at (2.52)
726-6827.
[] The soil disposal area(s) proposed for this project may produce a mosquito breeding
problem. For information concerning appropriate mosquito control measures, the
applicant should contact the Public Health Pest Management Section at [phone].
? The applicant should be advised that prior to the removal or demolition of dilapidated
structures, an extensive rodent control program may be necessary in order to prevent the
migration of the rodents to adjacent areas. For information concerning rodent control,
contact the local health department or the Public Health Pest. Management Section at
[phone].
[] The applicant should be advised' to contact the kcal health department regarding their
requirements for septic tank installations (as required under 15A NCAC 18A. 1900 et.
sep.). For information concerning septic tank and other on-site waste disposal methods,
contact the On.-Site Wastewater Section at (919) 733••2895,
[ The applicant should be advised to contact the local health department regarding the
sanitary facilities required for this project.
If existing water lines will be relocated during the construction, plans for the water line
relocation must be submitted to the Division of Environmental Health, Public Water
Supply Section, Technical Services Branch, 1634 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North
Carolina 27699-1634, [phone].
Z For Regional and Central Office comments, see the reverse side of this form.
Jim McRight PWSS 02/04/2010
Reviewer Section/Branch Date

IN TF,RG ")N 'd'?iN'A l N TA- REVIEW, P ?7 ffX'`T' (:'i 9?U?.N4 ?' TS l r ;l. e±
AtLv, c6t_w 6' iiic 0"a, ,3r Leak, nairrn( z ?7lGi ,:>i;rc ? ;u.` ,a ll?9 .r;au n ., a.. r. .,I,ic- f i s.I?.f.?,:F Y IrJrsr: ;
Low . Iy,. e, ed,n er ?.. tw 'N juraz'ii (9f wu 0f, hl.? ,t "' r. :o+n A a}i zntr atioa1 a GrFSCl liriCS
elat . (r, .I,t. 3 ;? ilt'; 1 .. oIT ilk(e _ , v :J
„_._. _.,,.,_.__. -.,..?,...,.....,....w.._..,?,_.?.. ...._n
ocv:s
1C i [ >,tr r f lim,? Lis
n ,
i ?
i
i
i i
0 o' ;r
t
-: Ef kiT if l .
f
c'n 7'I 'S dav_?
ix flYr`t `:., C* _. k r( U„ f i7 Nat'-}Cii I fA.- l1C e4Y
C] '?. .rub,.+,rn Scorct G y.:. 1., A ;'d '..A'... 90 i; ..
}' ^}
ncl r as
r: ,.':?, r J8, - i.
j n)i 1'iC in t t i izrr" e w +r: I A ";'00 -
YC At `tl r V r r 5?Y 78L2 rJ17 L7G `V+t1 67r dr}i
„t Srs t? w €r .?;S}

. IF'....,?Y s4: ?r}.-ci T?.1 rr..}}??.lt .r. ?1.ML .?7? .Ft-.fl,l i
Pci 1K cu ;i ed mkler 15 A tCA
_t .
T ho ,ledii:s; -,oYta^ F u ,i. ral AV (if Y?3 rri>wsi be g r?.?,et ly ntldr =se 3 for arry a di di . i:b mg acc v1ty. An ci vs r §
?mnirirtau ?I.rian. recu.!ed1 tunur r,t r.:t s1bedist .r? `'iq !-d , o:G.tR a` c' iI e uah
S:Ur Ui.? o, iu.wt 3101 day„ hefti t I., zinn my, 1 r141'V. A fet, Of .P65 ',')T tai C. 1,t,t aCr@ur arj'?'J& i> ari dCrt n (;.}71 cz i ."d on; ion is
saii,:nr? atuta 4:iC ? o...Op.criu,.st mus' b.,, dre, c? in acvuadzuci,wi'.? j7urGic:ulna.rimtteAius ul?L: l,:M:.n t.'a
aev ,rsu l ??riu , r afilirn? ;at .r.,rirri tersxA ren'. ral tn? , :: i,r wul; a stab1:. st>imwate, aonvupmces and sutler..

L 1 u,rG?,3rat r,t, LYntt
a an k3uv?irigP riniz -22
N C wilk mg!"InPt; Soils
J i R!a'firs) -'_'iGYies
'a9 y1:aPtl 1 ' 1?3>l._..FaC?.irl..

i 1ir.Ctir (• i e 3(y 1 i'$r
1
a, leant,ri.So.: r:eCo s; aetuxr hun, is}?f.arsncd
?.- F ) C,ti i n [ it ? vt l a Ur r [Li 4??

t F 1V?
?

N C l"
L; ? ?T1>I '? -i ?' it
UT 1 a J? wp?r.
c7 it tC ,- llll r,F, II 21 I' ,

I

1-r ?'}-i'I. E,r? It, an
t?C`b Li?^ul'?. i. PL c. . ?- ?.r.?,>If£.p7i.(Yt'S L@??
-.,.
1:? 190 t.ly`9 i ;ri U. ;C 4C. "3 r..,!7Url 6f
f
0a y
ttn ;:lta 1nspe?:;tion usual. a-%' z blond t;le;i with E.??R Bend amptiri is^e
vi?:Ir [y'p? z?tine and ra;tnbei ci ?c1?s oPaii?4 tuc9 =tfid. +7ny:a; r°i^.cd greats;
' i,ari erne a. If7ii9'C LL ,7can.i!'tett. The ap,??r?j?riatF' ixvsid must ric t eUci-vea
t}etlTiit ciinb>w issu>:tl.
(30 l?
)n- r ctii)a; by ,d.C'. J:visEgr Forest iicantl tes i? 1,err 1 Tcc r 4 ?zys
??+;-site,. r saeaiun by t`?L:. ^ares' J'.eac?ct. Ve: re;}tli d ;f mire iris
fti c s orE,rcuara Glea i g ?tiit;.? aremvoivt,l
jr,
r"rt?

V dnV? 1
n(1dav?;l ?
E
w
l+ t,+,t1 j
1 clay
c)0. r 2" , c:e.y^.
I l r lav t-t:s 1>r1u r?,I;i 1 it+ r is i 1 „
U5! 0?. ; '` r.- fir, : IC: }7c Dale ?.tlai7 , ,...,g7C,CT 4 isak iaCCsbfl
a gyn.`. ,.u e _ '..-rl n? >.i 1:rJ. tRPrc?°'?:u psa;eS.:'?i a bl5p r?."r,r-'
-- ..'..r. _ n?itss4 try itig;aaiYr A r' gfbsl r r:rrrrir hui Co ;i>'..3Ct 't)±i;
i_._ air'+nor rti :;-:,i ,,+11 17CCe Sul,; if},?lagald J.iaSSa'r iA (60 '?.Cy$1
?rNn,irir?=1 <31`$ ,.d.t?'?-'ti=?rd:,GQf,lt,,,i; ;f ., csceir^ ? .nc'?f:35Urai
o<,,ccsi t? t_4 ?,.ra_:,.? on ? p; :ceizrtige r; the 11 i ct ..; s.fl; ue. r; ...
pi ? n __ ? ? t YI
4
ti I .' r
r ,
?.:`L r i . r
1
71 s`PI ,,;°.s

1}t.;r: ;?. I ?rI f, °tr?N IzOC'20 r E ; r Q(II lT M P"NI S.
r,rJs: rf?f° tf' +Jy r, ondi e„al
'f%II:',I f

n 516 w,.h ! NIT , l, r, f"
„h auar lN;= lets.,, ;gip .,iW,I; J s, ,r
-pjj =;oT, 1. x befit .. on S'r" J ;; .r..dudt rl ?I1TSU(?ti3
CxSC.4, wills _ i.:.I LY_'._lif of ?'f) wr' I9

ail
riu T"s
N/A
iA
( 60 u-tys?
1, A.
k \,,

.?. ,.+ m . ..r ?.? G
ta°rJiUic' L u r v -'.p i-4 ry. 7f __ Gll

1
45
1S., h "i t U :.t,rrv?au Ru" „rt,I3y?rssl f
?.?.., n?. f. OF Musc b. I I:! ?:r 3 ulc>y =e4wre6.
.t'5Q,."rt,.
REGIONAL OFFICES
Quesilons regaiding these permits should be, addressed to fl.e; Regional Office marke.d below,
0 Asheville Regional Off-ice
2+090 l <S High-way 70
S? iftlziani3a, NI 2827'7 8
(928i 29£-4500
1'2yetteville Regional Office
225 North (Iattn Street, Suite 714
f'avettcville, NC 258301-5043
(910) 4333-3300
Mooresville. Regional Office (::1 Wilmington Regional Office
01.0 East Center A-venue, Suite 301 127 Cardinal Drive Extensi(M..
Mooresville, NC 281.1'5 Wilmington, NC '2 405
(704') 663-1699 (91 Oj 796-7215
?;.! Raleigh Regional Office
31300411, ai,?rett DTive, Suite 10 1
Raleigh, NC 27609
(91% 791.4200
' Washington Regional ()fr
943 Washington Square Mall
Washington; NTC 2 Sc)
(252) 946-64h1
u Winston-Salem Regional Office
585 Wao-Mown. Suee-t
-?''i.lston-Salem, NC 271.0;'
(336) '7i -5000
- <sa v? tLar1 0,Lft4 Z l.Li sziM L3Y4zEiVl
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION
INTERCO R13 ENTAL REVIEW
COUNTY; s? F02 .i_E t .t+dt a AN '_:.'S
Lf y )..., .•i •..1.
Ri-,L : -W DIS'-" IPUTION
??' L
I } i .J E.M ...Z
J _.r f'f ii LJ?
PROJE T INFORMATION
t:
STATE NUMBER:
DATE RECEIVED: L f , i
AGENCY RESPONSE
REVIEW CLOSED: :. 4

tr?_.? _e.° - c
r

y s?` j

'Vf
STATE C)P NoRTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
$3FVTT RLY EVES PERDUE
February 11, 2010
State Number: 1 O-F-4220-0276
Project "Cities Bridge 12, 18, and 42 on NC I I over Cape Fear River
r-'ucjENF A. C ON 11, X
SIr RETAI Y
After a review of the Bridge 12, 18, and 42 on NC I I over Cape Near liver document, l have no comments to
offer.
Thank You,
Dominique L. Boyd
Transportation Planning Branch
Southeast Unit
MAILING ADDRESS LOCATION:
NQ' DepArsTMENT Or TRArilSPORTATtON - - ? ?? TRANSPORTATION BUll nNG
TRANSPORTATION PLAN aIN<, hRAN01 ""? 1 S?ifTf €' IL.MIN(yTt)N ?TkE€T
1554 Wa L SERVICE CENT,--F; v.,ElGrt, NC 276D1
PALE14G14 NC 27699a 15-4 h1fa. lcdol:nrrgiacYVpreconsbvc#itpb! RALEIG NC 3- 0115
irax: 919-733-2417
y{'a,/RTh UR9L.lU:U. Aki v1m . mo d L.1.: .4..S. L06Y6i4W Va.a
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINl i°-'RATION
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW
COUNTY. ELADEN F02: HIGNWAYS AND ROADS STATE I-UNMER: 10-E-4220--0276
DATE RECEIVED: 02/02/2010
AGENCY RESPONSE-: 02/251/2010
REVIEW CLOSED: ,".3/G'2/2t,10
Ci.FARTN hMSE. C'OORDINATOR
C'C&PS - DIV OF II°S-1: ;.=EN Y MANAGEME,,'T
F11OODPLAT?N MANA -;EMEN`d' PROGRAM
MSC 4 4?19
IAA E.F ? A i`1C
VIEW DIS` RI U'ION v
CC&PS - Dl'-4' FC vi: M NA ,GE 1 N'
iDENR LEGISLATIV AFFAIRS
DEFT OF GRICDLTtIt" E
DEPT OF CUT Tli-Vil, RESOURCES
DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION
I UMBER RIVER COG
PROJECT IN ORM&TION
TYPE: Nationa't f.,nv:i.ranrgental I?c].icv Act
Environmental Assessment
,ESC: Replacement of Bridge NOS. 12, 18 & 42 on NC 11 over. Cap Fc-ar R.ve-
8-4028
The attached projec ? has been submitted to the N. C. 5ta e Ciea ingt GE.'se for
a,T7.te'v"Cfoveri1TIten--al review. Please review and submi t your re^:3'porllse I,, t--he c3hovve
indicated date to 1301 Mail, Service Center, Raleigh NC 2 i 699-1 301
If a:ddit`x.anal review t4.me is needed, please contact th3ls office at i i9) C°?-2415
AS P RESULT OF THIS ItFt?IF31 TIE ,- LLOWING7 IS SUBMIT`-`tD: No COMME;Ta' i? COMMENTS ATTACHED
SIGNED BY: DATE:
s ea 14 ?ltk '{ i d ? C
lb - , 6
p :5 °' r j
L.L 4L'A.1:\Vl11 Ltl i'k a:S.LX
DEPARTNMNT OF AISTRATIO
INTERGOVER ,v.i. REVIEW
COUNTY
x"02 "AYE .Cn., . AF)
S'PA'CE NUk?SER:
DATE: RECEIVED
AGENCY RESPONSE:
REVIEW CLOSED: / F'3:' r'..., 0

D E, 1, TF A.
?: ?p f. .? - .. , . ,..... E r .. ?.?
] 11 7? 71
PROJECT INFOPUMhTION
",
_.: _ C _ ..., u... ,.,,,..E ? ,...... 5 _ x100
;"],.. ?;: J._* ....,.,-. :.?, ...? _ e?,.... w....'I b fw""7P
C,
7 7,
s 7 ??`! a
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Peter B, Sa:adt> ck, Adtrin;straro:
Bur rlr Eaves Perdue, Go ;,c rnor e_ffficc A r^ti. W3 dFlistor?
zattda A. carlis c _:'tar Uivisio i of l..li;torica! IZCl011T S
lei r trr ?:crctarF L)zniti Book, D--, -,tar
"cb iarv 4, 2 0 0
TO: Greg 'Thorpe, Ph,D., Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Btanch
NCDOT Division of Ilighways
3
FROM: Peter Sandbeck &%-, ?e c -
SUBJECT: Environmental Assessment. Approval for Replacennent of Bridges loos. 12, 18, & 4-2 over
Cape. Fear River and overflow, B-=1028, Blades Countir, :E R02-5607
Thank you for your letter of January 27, 2001.0, transtnitdng the Environmental Assessment, Approval for the
above project. ' Ie beheve the document adequately addresses our concerns for historic resources, We u6ll look
fors=ard to consultation to develop a Memorandua of Agreement to address the loss of the historic bridge.
The abov=e comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CFR
Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
please contact Renee Gledhill-Farley, environmental review coordinator, at 919-733-4763. In all future
coxxz,munication concerning this project, please cite the above-referenced tracking number.
cc: John F. Sullivan, Federal High%vay Ad -daistration
Mary Pope l~urr, NCDOT
Lncarinrx: 1Ci9 Bast Jataes Srre .t, Ra!<cit h (f11 Mailing Address: 4617 A111;0 4e ice C(mur, R;%'Kigh NC 27 6 9 9-461 7 Telephone/Fax: (919f 907.6570/807.6599
NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION
FINAL NATIONWIDE SECTION 4(f) EVALUATION AND APPROVAL
FOR FEDERALLY-AIDED HIGHWAY PROJECTS
THAT NECESSITATE THE USE OF HISTORIC BRIDGES
F. A. Project No.: BRSTP-0011 (9)
W.B.S. No.: 33395.1.1
STIP No.: B-4028
Description: Replace Bridge No. 12 on NC 11 over Cape Fear River- in Bladen County. The
new bridge will be on new alignment approximately 60-foot to the east of the
existing bridge. Bridge No. 12 has been determined eligible for the national
register of Historic Places. The replacement of the bridge will be an adverse
effect.
Yes No
1. Is the bridge to be replaced or
rehabilitated with Federal funds? X
2. Does the project require the use of
a historic bridge structure which is ?
on or eligible for listing on the X
National Register of Historic Places?
3. Is the bridge a National Historic
Landmark? X
4. Has agreement been reached among the
FHWA, the State Historic Preservation
Officer (SHPO), and the Advisory Council X
on Historic Preservation (ACHP) through
procedures pursuant to Section 106 of the
National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA)?
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED AND FOUND NOT TO BE FEASIBLE AND PRUDENT
The following alternatives were evaluated and found
not to be feasible and prudent:
Do nothing
Does the "do nothing" alternative:-
Yes No
(a) correct the problem situation that
caused the bridge to be considered ? X
deficient? -
(b) pose serious and unacceptable safety
hazards? X
6
2. Build a new structure at a different location without affecting the historic integrity of
the structure.
(a) The following reasons were reviewed: (circle, as appropriate)
(i) The present bridge has already been located at the only feasible and prudent site
and/or (ii) Adverse social, environmental, or economic impacts were noted
an l/or Cost acid engineering dlfficLllties reach cxtniordirlar yr ;n,1111 nude
and/or (iv) The existing bridge cannot be preserved due to the extent of rehabilitation,
because no responsible party will maintain and preserve the historic bridge, or
the permitting authority requires removal or demolition.
3. Rehabilitate the historic bridge without affecting the historic integrity of the structure.
(a) The following reasons were reviewed: (circle, as appropriate)
(i) The bridge is so structurally deficient that it cannot be rehabilitated to meet the
acceptable load requirements and meet National Register criteria
and/or (ii) The bridge is seriously deficient geometrically and cannot be widened to meet
the required capacity and meet National Register criteria
MINIMIZATION OF HARM
Yes No
The project includes all possible planning to minimize harm. X
2. Measures to minimize harm include the following: (circle as appropriate)
a. For bridges that are to be rehabilitated, the historic integrity of the bridge is
preserved to the greatest extent possible, consistent with unavoidable
transportation needs, safety, and load requirements.
b. For bridges that are to be rehabilitated to the point that the historic integrity is
affected or that are to be removed or demolished, the FHWA ensures that, in
accordance with the Historic American Engineering Record (HAER) standards,
or other suitable means developed through consultation, fully adequate records
are made of the bridge.
c. For bridges that are to be replaced, the existing bridge is made available for an
alternative use, provided a responsible party agrees to maintain and preserve the
bridge.
For bridges that are adversely affected, agreement among the SHPO, ACHP, and
FHWA is reached through the Section 106 process of the NHPA on measures to
minimize harm and those measures are incorporated into the project.
NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION
FINAL NATIONWIDE SECTION 4(f) EVALUATION AND APPROVAL
FOR FEDERALLY-AIDED HIGHWAY PROJECTS
THAT NECESSITATE THE USE OF HISTORIC BRIDGES
F. A. Project No.: BRSTP-0011 (9)
W.B.S. No.: 33395.1.1
STIP No.: B-4028
Description: Replace Bridge No. 12 on NC 11 over Cape Fear River in Bladen County. The
new bridge will be on new alignment approximately 60-foot to the east of the
existing bridge. Bridge No. 12 has been determined eligible for the national
register of Historic Places. The replacement of the bridge will be an adverse
effect.
Yes No
1. Is the bridge to be replaced or
rehabilitated with Federal funds? X
2. Does the project require the use of
a historic bridge structure which is ?
on or eligible for listing on the X
National Register of Historic Places?
3. Is the bridge a National Historic
Landmark? ? X
4. Has agreement been reached among the
FHWA, the State Historic Preservation
Officer (SHPO), and the Advisory Council X
on Historic Preservation (ACHP) through
procedures pursuant to Section 106 of the
National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA)?
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED AND FOUND NOT TO BE FEASIBLE AND PRUDENT
The following alternatives were evaluated and found
not to be feasible and prudent:
Do nothinz
Does the "do nothing" alternative:
Yes No
(a) correct the problem situation that
caused the bridge to be considered ? X
deficient?
(b) pose serious and unacceptable safety
hazards? X
2. Build a new structure at a different location without affecting the historic integrity o
the stnicture_
(a) The following reasons were reviewed: (circle, as appropriate)
(i) The present bridge has already been located at the only feasible and prudent site
and/or (ii) Adverse social, environmental, or economic impacts were noted
and/or (iii) Cost and engineering difficulties reach extraordinary magnitude
and/or (iv) The existing bridge cannot be preserved due to the extent of rehabilitation,
because no responsible party will maintain and preserve the historic bridge, or
the permitting authority requires removal or demolition.
Rehabilitate the historic bridge without affecting the historic integrity of the structure.
(a) The following reasons were reviewed: (circle, as appropriate)
(i) The bridge is so structurally deficient that it cannot be rehabilitated to meet the
acceptable load requirements and meet National Register criteria
and/or (ii) The bridge is seriously deficient geometrically and cannot be widened to meet
the required capacity and meet National Register criteria
MINIMIZATION OF HARM
Yes No
The project includes all possible planning to minimize harm. X
2. Measures to minimize harm include the following: (circle as appropriate)
a. For bridges that are to be rehabilitated, the historic integrity of the bridge is
preserved to the greatest extent possible, consistent with unavoidable
transportation needs, safety, and load requirements.
b. For bridges that are to be rehabilitated to the point that the historic integrity is
affected or that are to be removed or demolished, the FHWA ensures that, in
accordance with the Historic American Engineering Record (HAER) standards,
or other suitable means developed through consultation, fully adequate records
are made of the bridge.
c. For bridges that are to be replaced, the existing bridge is made available for an
alternative use, provided a responsible party agrees to maintain and preserve the
bridge.
O For bridges that are adversely affected, agreement among the SHPO, ACHP, and
FHWA is reached through the Section 106 process of the NHPA on measures to
minimize harm and those measures are incorporated into the project.
3. Specific measures to minimize harm are discussed below:
• The Bridge will be recorded as described in the attached Memorandum of
Agreement.
Note: Any response in a box requires additional information prior to approval. Consult
Nationwide 4(f) evaluation. N/A
COORDINATION
The proposed project has been coordinated with the following (attach correspondence):
a. State Historic Preservation Officer see attached
b. Advisory Council on Historic Preservation see attached
c. Local/State/Federal Agencies not applicable
d. US Coast Guard not applicable
(for bridges requiring bridge permits)
SUMMARY AND APPROVAL
The project meets all criteria included in the programmatic 4(f) evaluation approved on
December 23, 1986.
All required alternatives have been evaluated and the findings made are clearly applicable to
this project.
There are no feasible and prudent alternatives to the use of the historic bridge. The project
includes all possible planning to minimize harm, and there are assurances that the measures to
minimize harm will be incorporated in the project.
All appropriate coordination has been successfully completed.
Approved:
Date Manager, Project
f?
2 Ii/
Date /1171)-ivision Admi:
Environmental Analysis Branch

10
MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT
AMONG THE FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION,
THE NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION,
AND
THE NORTH CAROLINA STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER
FOR
THE REPLACEMENT OF BRIDGES 12,18, AND 42
ON NC 11 OVER THE CAPE FEAR RIVER
BLADEN COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
TIP PROJECT No. B-4028
FEDERAL AID PROJECT No. BRSTP- 0011(9)
WHEREAS, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has determined that the
replacement of Bridges 12, 18, and 42 on NC 11 over the Cape Fear River in Bladen
County, North Carolina (the Undertaking) will have an effect upon Bladen County
Bridge No. 12, a structure determined eligible for listing in the National Register of
Historic Places (NRHP); and
WHEREAS, the FHWA has consulted with the North Carolina State Historic
Preservation Officer (SHPO) pursuant to 36 CFR Part 800, regulations implementing
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 4700; and
WHEREAS, FHWA has notified the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
(Council) of the adverse effect and it has declined to comment or participate in the
consultation; and
WHEREAS, the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) has
participated in the consultation and has been invited by FHWA and the North Carolina
SHPO to concur in this Memorandum of Agreement (MOA);
NOW, THEREFORE, FHWA and the North Carolina SHPO agree that the Undertaking
shall be implemented in accordance with the following stipulations in order to take into
account the effects of the Undertaking on the historic property.
STIPULATIONS
The FHWA will ensure that the following measures are carried out:
1. Photo recordation
Prior to the initiation of construction, NCDOT will record the existing condition of
Bridge No. 12 and its surroundings in accordance with the attached Historic
Structures and Landscape Recordation Plan (Appendix A). Copies of the
documentation will be deposited in the files of the State Historic Preservation Office,
NCDOT Historic Architecture Section, and the Bladen County Public Library in
Elizabethtown, North Carolina.
11. Placement of Bridge No. 12 in the NCDOT Bridge Relocation and Reuse
Program
Bridge No. 12 has been identified as a candidate for the NCDOT Bridge Relocation
and. Reuse Program. As such, the bridge will be advertised on thc'tiCDOT 13nd'oe-
Reuse Program website for relocation and reuse at a new location. NCDOT's 1988
agreement with the North Carolina SHPO and FHWA affords the opportunity for the
relocation and reuse of historic truss bridges. The bridge will be advertised until four
(4) months prior to the construction let date or until a recipient is found and a transfer
of ownership agreement is signed, whichever comes first. If no recipient is found.
four months prior to the let date, the bridge will become the property of the
contractor.
III. Unanticipated Discovery
In accordance with 36 CFR 800.11(a), if NCDOT identifies additional cultural
T R,
resource(s) during connstruction and determine them to be eligible for the IN
IP all
work will be halted within the limits of the NRHP-eligible resource(s) and the
FHWA and SHPO contacted. If after consultation with the Signatory and
Concurring Party(ies) additional mitigation is detennined necessary, the NCDOT, in
consultation with the Signatory and Concurring Party(ies), will develop and
implement appropriate protection/mitigation measures for the resource(s).
Inadvertent or accidental discovery of human remains will be handled in accordance
with North Carolina General Statutes 65 and 70.
IV. Dispute Resolution
Should any of the Signatory or Concurring Party(ies) object within (30) days to any
plans or documentation provided for review pursuant to this Agreement, the FHWA
shall consult with the objecting party(ies) to resolve the objection. If the FHWA or
the objecting party(ies) determines that the objection cannot be resolved, the FHWA
will forward all documentation relevant to the dispute to the Council. Within thirty
(30) days after receipt of all pertinent documentation, the Council will either:
1. Provide the FHWA with recommendations, which the FHWA will take
into account in reaching a final decision regarding the dispute, or
2. Notify the FHWA that it will comment pursuant to 36 CFR Section
800.7(c) and proceed to comment. Any Council comment provided in
response to such a request will be taken into account by the FHWA in
accordance with 36 CFR Section 800.7 (c) (4) with reference to the
subject of the dispute.
Any recommendation or comment provided by the Council will be understood to
pertain only to the subject of the dispute; FHWA and NCDOT's responsibility to
carry out all of the actions under this agreement that are not the subject of the
dispute will remain unchanged.
VAmen(Iments
Ifa any ignatory to this MOA believes tliat its terms cannot be carried out or 'I ?t
amendment to the terms must be treacle, that aarty(ie,s) shall Immediately
with the other party(ies) to develop arnenclm nts in accordance -h 36 C }.
800,6( 6(7'). me rt ca,Tmot be agree unou, thc'. di.soute _ ?,,nll i
set is t't(a ]n 11 be 1611a z ; c .
Vla Termination
f l.`r 7 etlie Signatory t ali'ty(I fy) may t{rE"d1t1;E.tt the a?I._` " t' Pr€31'1d'n 5 11 "--: to
the + then hurt k<;, provided that the signatorie and c oncaza°rin-; parties will a. ; alt
dv, *?!, ? Jh r t- termination to seek agreement on amen do?C:tlts
?°7
d lr"t°Is inatlc)n, l erminatiori (,)['this !b'S,OA will ie"L111'
coo-,#iance 16 6W This iatfOA array be termin ate.d by t.he e. r»n of a
subsequent %tt: A rhat p eitly terminates or supersedes its terms.
'
tn'1n atS;d l?pLa.l't??Tc, L? 7t€l lE,c?ll or a this M(. until
17l A. in t:a nSUltaati0r) - ' i. a ? other Sign a:c)ry aract (_'c7nerarrin. a a ty(ie i.,
deter:iiii:nes that all of its it i,ns l'1:4ave satisfactorily been Fulfilled or il'NCDOT is
unable or decides not to construct the tlndert<alcim?,.
Execution of t.l? rimll oi° a pz ent by 11'l-fWA, NCDOT, and the North
Carolina SIIPO. anal ?a ? ad_at at >i? > terms, evide_nce that I~I-lWA has afforded the
Council an c pportuluty t:-, comment ( l the Utide rtalkit?tf;, and that ?`HWA has taken into
account the effects of the l.Tridei-taking, o the historic properties.
ICI ATO IES:
Datc
Federal l i&h,;. - 1' dn-iinist,a.ion, North Carolina
f ,
F3j
s Date:
North Carol Pr:Ise;rvation Officer
CONCURRING PARTY:
$ t -7
Date: t t
North C rolina 5e,,s t st c f ransportation
MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT
AMONG THE FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION,
THE NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION,
AND
TIIE NORTII CAJIOLIiTA :STATE IIISTOTIZI ' PI111 L? 'A'TIC ' C '?'gCLI
FOR
THE REPLACEMENT OF BRIDGES 12,18, AND 42
ON NC 11 OVER THE CAPE FEAR RIVER
BLADEN COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
TIP PROJECT No. B-4028
FEDERAL AID PROJECT No. BRSTP- 0011(9)
FILED:
By: See attached letter Date: September 2, 2010
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
APPENDIX A
Historic Structures and Landscape Recordation Plan
For
TIP No. B-4028
The Replacement of Bridges 12, 18, and 42
On NC 11 over the Cape Fear River
Bladen County, North Carolina
Federal Aid Project No. BRSTP-0011(9)
Photographic Requirements
Elevations and oblique views of Bridge 'No. 12 and its settiti"
Representative structural and ornamental details of the bridge.
Photographic Format
¦ Color digital images (all views). Images are to be shot on a SLR digital camera with a
minimum resolution of 6 megabyte pixels, at a high quality (preferably RAW) setting,
to be saved in TIF format as the archival masters and labeled according to the State
Historic Preservation Office standards.
¦ All processing to be done to archival standards.
¦ The accompanying printed inventory of the images - including subject, location, date,
and photographer information for each image - is to be completed according to the
State Historic Preservation Office standards.
Copies and Curation
® One (1) set of all above mentioned photographic documentation, including a compact
disc of labeled images, will be deposited with the North Carolina Office of Archives
and History/Historic Preservation Office to be made a permanent part of the statewide
survey and iconographic collection.
¦ One (1) contact sheet shall be deposited in the files of the Historic Architecture
Section of NCDOT.
¦ One (1) contact sheet shall be deposited in the files of the Bladen County Public
Library in Elizabethtown, North Carolina.

Preserving America's Heritage
September 2, 2010
Mr. John F. Sullivan, Ill, P.E.
Division Administrator
Federal Hi-hwav Administration
North Carolina Division
310 New Bern Avenue, Suite 410
Raleigh, NC 27601
REF: Filing ofexeeuted Jllemorandum ofAgreement regarding the Replacement of
Bridges 12, .18, and 42 on NC I1 over the Cape Fear River in Bladen County,
North Carolina
Tip Project No. B-4028
Federal Aid Project No. BRSTP - 0011(9)
Dear Mr. Sullivan:
The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) has received the Memorandum of Agreement
(MOA) for the above referenced project. In accordance with Section 800.6(b)(1)(iv) of the ACHP's
regulations, the ACHP acknowledges receipt of the MOA. The filing of the MOA, and execution of its
terms, completes the requirements of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
ACHP's regulations.
We appreciate your providing us with a copy of the MOA and will retain it for inclusion in our records
regarding this project. Should you have any questions or require additional assistance, please contact me
at [phone] or [e-mail].
Sincerely,
L,aShavio Johnson
Historic Preservation Technician
Office of Federal Agency Programs
ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION
1100 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Suite 803 • Washington, DC 20004
Phone: [phone] • Fax: [phone] [e-mail] • www.achp.gov
t ? Q
E ? w- 3a° 3a
\ rs
\ 1564
\t h i J
t l
\ l oP?
t l c
\ t 53
3.7
\ zio
53 1547
t
I
.S a 6 ` _?? ,_ 11
colly
?2 1541
154U M 210 ? ?`J
'3 e I O
1542 \ 1543 L`
1540 r2 1552 10 TflCUrtIF?

1539 \

l
1543 1545 I
J
\
??
Y
/ 34° 25
. S. LOCK NO. 1
t
V

KINGS BLUFF J e
a
. ,? 1539
? r
1 I
/
1

NOTE : MAP INCLUDES ONLY STATE MAIN
1734 OR IMPORTANT NON-SYSTEM ROA
s b ROADS SHOWN AS OF MAY 11, 20
0
87 g Bridge # 12, 18, & 42
roe o ? o
6V I I N
??a 4qQ? NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF

vi TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
p gj
v PROJECT DEVELOPMENT &
e ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS BRANCH
.M'QF TRANS
BLADEN COUNTY
REPLACE BRIDGE Nols. 12,18, & 42 ON NC I I
OVER CAPE FEAR RIVER
B-4028
Figure I

o •
°
• r
• o m ?a
0
16 a
64, *41
Wflr
• a• • I j 'r ?owi ??
•
00
go*
?a
?e
W .
I, ?a•
• tw '7
?? 0