20000895 Ver 1_Complete File_20000710

~ W qTF Michael F. Easley, Governor
~, Q ,~~ 9 William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
\OC~ pG North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
~ ~ Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
~.. ~ ~ Division of Water Quality

October 17, 2005
Mr. Anthony Roper, P.E.
NCDOT, Division 1
113 Airport Drive Suite 100
Edenton, NC 27932
Dear Mr. Roper:
~ ""a" `.~ L:~~.p 114"x" l,~i
!.:!
dr:~ ra ~ znrJS
~H4ANp A~p~~ 1~q rARANEH
Re: 401 Water Quality Certification Pursuant to Section 401 of the Federal Clean Water Act for improvements to
SR 1149 and SR 1150 in Hyde County.
WQC Project No. 000895
Attached hereto is a copy of Certification No. 3536 issued to The North Carolina Department of Transportation
dated October 17, 2005.
If we can be of further assistance, do not hesitate to contact us.
Sincerely,
L ~ _
for Alan . K ime ,
Director
Attachments
cc: Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Mr. Bill Biddlecome, Corps of Engineers, Washington Field Office
Cathy Brittingham, NCDCM, 1638 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27669
Jay Johnson, Division Environmental Officer, NCDOT Division 1
vlr, Rob Ridings, NCDWQ, Wetlands/401 Unit
Mr. William Gilmore, Ecosystem Enhancement Program
Central Files
File Copy
4~~
_~~
N. C. Division of Water Quality 943 Washington Square Mall Washington, N.C. 27889 Telephone [phone]
FAX [phone]

APPROVAL OF 401 Water Quality Certification and ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS
THIS CERTIFICATION is issued in conformity with the requirements of Section 401 Public Laws 92-500 and
95-217 of the United States and subject to the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (DWQ) Regulations in 15
NCAC 2H, Section .0500, and 15A NCAC 2B .0259. The project shall be constructed pursuant to the application
dated July 5, 2000 and subsequent additional information dated September 19, 2000, January 22, 2001, and August
6, 2003. Any proposed site plans submitted in the July 5, 2000 application that have a subsequent revised site plan
submitted in the September 19, 2000, January 22, 2001, or August 6, 2003 addendums are not authorized by this
certification. Instead, for all impacts where a proposed site design as provided in the original July 5, 2000
application was revised and submitted in the September 19, 2000, January 22, 2001 and August 6, 2003 addendums,
only the latest revisions are authorized, This certification authorizes the NCDOT to impact 2.38 acres of
jurisdictional wetlands in Hyde County for the purpose of widening and paving SR 1149 and SR 1150. The
authorized impacts are as described below:
Wetland imnacts facresl
Site Fill
404 wetlands Drainage
404 wetlands Drainage
Coastal wetlands Total Wetland
Impacts
1 0 0.40 .03 0.43
2 0 0.20 0 0.20
3 0 0.60 0 0.60
4 0 0.05 0 0.05
5 0 0 0 0
6 0 1.01 0 1.01
7 0.09 0 0 0.09
Total 0.09 2.26 .03 2.38
The application provides adequate assurance that the discharge of f Il material into the waters of the Tar/Pamlico
Basin in conjunction with the proposed development will not result in a violation of applicable Water Quality
Standards and discharge guidelines. Therefore, the State of North Carolina certifies that this activity will not violate
the applicable portions of Sections 301, 302, 303, 306, 307 of PL 92-500 and PL 95-217 if conducted in accordance
with the application and conditions hereinafter set forth.
This approval is only valid for the purpose and design that you submitted in your application dated July 5, 2000,
with subsequent additional information dated September 19, 2000, January 22, 2001, and August 6, 2003 as
described in the Public Notice. Should your project change, you are required to notify the DWQ and submit a new
application. If the property is sold, the new owner must be given a copy of this Certification and approval letter, and
is thereby responsible for complying with all the conditions. If any additional wetland impacts, or stream impacts,
for this project (now or in the future) exceed one acre or 150 linear feet, respectively, additional compensatory
mitigation may be required as described in 15A NCAC 2H .0506 (h) (6) and (7), and 15 A NCAC 2B .0259. For
this approval to remain valid, you are required to comply with all the conditions listed below. [n addition, you
should obtain all other federal, state or local permits before proceeding with your project including (but not limited
to) Sediment and Erosion control, Coastal Stormwater, Non-discharge and Water Supply watershed regulations.
This Certification shall expire three years from the date of the cover letter from DWQ or on the same day as the
expiration date of the corresponding Corps of Engineers Permit, whichever is sooner.

Condition(s) of Certification:
1. Erosion and sediment control practices must be in full compliance with all specifications
governing the proper design, installation, operation and maintenance of
such Best Management Practices in order to protect surface waters standards:
a. The erosion and sediment control measures for the project must be designed, installed, operated, and
maintained in accordance with the most recent version of the North Carolina Sediment and Erosion
Control Planning and Design Manual.
b. The design, installation, operation, and maintenance of the sediment and erosion control measures must
be such that they equal, or exceed, the requirements specified in the most recent version of the North
Carolina Sediment and Erosion Control Manual. The devices shall be maintained on all construction
sites, borrow sites, and waste pile (spoil) projects, including contractor-owned or leased borrow pits
associated with the project.
c. For borrow pit sites, the erosion and sediment control measures must be designed, installed, operated,
and maintained in accordance with the most recent version of the North Carolina Surface Mining
Manual.
d. The reclamation measures and implementation must comply with the reclamation in accordance with
the requirements of the Sedimentation Pollution Control Act.
2. All sediment and erosion control measures shall not be placed in wetlands or waters to the maximum
extent practicable. If placement of sediment and erosion control devices in wetlands and waters is
unavoidable, they shall be removed and the natural grade restored after the Division of Land Resources
has released the project;
3. If an environmental document is required, this Certification is not valid until a FONSI
or ROD is issued by the State Clearinghouse. All water quality-related conditions of the FONSI or ROD
shall become conditions of this Certification;
4. No live or fresh concrete shall come into contact with waters of the state until the concrete has hardened.
5. There shall be no excavation from or waste disposal into jurisdictional wetlands or waters associated with
this permit without appropriate modification of this permit. Should waste or borrow sites be located in
wetlands or stream, compensatory mitigation will be required since it is a direct impact from road
construction activities.
6. Placement of culverts and other structures in waters, streams, and wetlands must be placed below the
elevation of the streambed, unless otherwise authorized by this certification, to allow low flow passage of
water and aquatic life unless it can be shown to DWQ that providing passage would be impractical.
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 or banks,
adjacent to or upstream and down stream of the above structures. The applicant is required to provide
evidence that the equilibrium shall be maintained if requested in writing by DWQ.
7. Compensatory mitigation for impacts to 2.35 acres ofnon-riverine wetland and 0.03 acres of coastal marsh
wetland shall be done at a 2:1 ratio at the Bishop Road mitigation site in Hyde County. Thus, a total
mitigation of 4.70 acres ofnon-riverine and 0.06 acres of coastal marsh shall be provided. The mitigation
shall be provided by the Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP), in the Hydrologic Cataloging Unit
03020104 of the Tar-Pamlico River Basin, as outlined in the letter to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
dated May 31, 2005, and in accordance with the Tri-Party MOA signed on July 22, 2003, the addendum
signed on June 19, 2004, and the Dual Party MOU signed on April 12, 2004.

8. During the construction of the project, no staging of equipment of any kind is permitted in waters of the
U.S.
9. All temporary fills in wetlands and surface waters shall be removed upon completion of the project. In
addition, the post-construction removal of any temporary bridge structures or fill will need to return the
project site to its preconstruction contours and elevations. The revegetation of the impacted areas with
appropriate native species will be required.
10. The dimension, pattern and profile of the stream above and below the crossing should not be modified by
widening the stream channel or reducing the depth of the stream. Disturbed floodplains and streams
should be restored to natural geomorphic conditions.
11. Any riprap used must not interfere with thalweg performance and aquatic life passage during low flow
conditions.
12. All mechanized equipment operated near surface waters must be regularly inspected and maintained to
prevent contamination of stream waters from fuels, lubricants, hydraulic fluids, or other toxic materials.
13. Discharging hydroseed mixtures and washing out hydroseeders and other equipment in or adjacent to
surface waters is prohibited.
14. The outside buffer, wetland or water boundary located within the construction corridor approved by this
authorization shall be clearly marked by highly visible fencing prior to any land disturbing activities.
Impacts to areas within the fencing are prohibited unless otherwise authorized by this certification.
15. NCDOT, and its authorized agents, shall conduct its activities in a manner consistent with State water
quality standards (including any requirements resulting from compliance with §303(d) of the Clean Water
Act) and any other appropriate requirements of State law and Federal law. If DWQ determines that such
standards or laws are not being met (including the failure to sustain a designated or achieved use) or that
State or federal law is being violated, or that fiirther conditions are necessary to assure compliance, DWQ
may reevaluate and modify this certification to include conditions appropriate to assure compliance with
such standards and requirements in accordance with 15A NCAC 2H.0507(d).
1G. There shall be no excavation from or waste disposal into jurisdictional wetlands or waters associated with
this permit without appropriate modification of this permit. Should waste or borrow sites be located in
wetlands or stream, compensatory mitigation will be required since it is a direct impact from road
construction activities.
l7. Any violations, during the construction of the approved project, of this 401 Water Quality Certification or
the North Carolina State Water Quality Standards as defined in 15A NCAC 2B .0200 Rules, shall be
reported immediately to the North Carolina Division of Water Quality.
18. Pursuant to NCAC 15A 2B.0259(6), sediment and erosion control devices shall not be placed in Zone 1 of
any Tar-Pamlico buffer without prior approval by the NCDWQ. At this time, the NCDWQ has approved
no sediment and erosion control devices in Zone I, outside of the approved project impacts, anywhere on
this project. Moreover, sediment and erosion control devices shall be allowed in Zone 2 of the buffers
provided that Zone 1 is not compromised and that discharge is released as diffuse flow.
19. A copy of this Water Quality Certification shall be posted on the construction site at all times. In addition,
the Water Quality Certification and all subsequent modifications, if any, shall be maintained with the
Division Engineer and the on-site project manager.

20. Upon completion of the project, the NCDOT shall complete and return the enclosed "Certification of
Completion Form" to notify DWQ when all work included in the 401 Certification has been completed.
The responsible party shall complete the attached form and return it to the 401/Wetlands Unit of the
Division of Water Quality upon completion of the project.
Violations of any condition herein set forth may result in revocation of this Certification and may result
in criminal and/or civil penalties. This Certification shall become null and void unless the above
conditions aze made conditions of the Federal 404 and/or Coastal Area Management Act Permit. This
Certification shall expire upon the expiration of the 404 or CAMA permit.
If this Certification is unacceptable to you have the right to an adjudicatory hearing upon written request within sixty
(60) days following receipt of this Certification. This request must be in the form of a written petition conforming to
Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes and filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings, P.O. Box
27447, Raleigh, N.C. 27611-7447. If modifications are made to an original Certification, you have the right to an
adjudicatory hearing on the modifications upon written request within sixty (60) days following receipt of the
Certification. Unless such demands are made, this Certification shall be final and binding.
This the 17`h day of October, 2005
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
L... ~~>~' ---
for Alan W. Klimek, P.E.
Director
WQC No. 3536

August 3, 2005
#00089.5
Garcy,
This is an odd one. It was applied for in 2000. The most recent action we have on this is
our placing it On Hold in May 2001. Now, years later, this recent packet of information
has come in dated July 2005, and we're trying to figure out what's going on with it.
John asked me to send you everything we got on the file, and wants to see if you can
follow up with Clay to see if they are going to finally continue with the 401 process to
match their 404. If you have any questions, contact John.
Thanks
Rob
~QJ,ON f a~ ~o~~ yew
i~ ~
/mil /IO ~ j ~~
Cv ~io~ k d o r.~-;~-4 f ,
(Om~'~ ~ ~o~~o
JJ-- ~ ~ ct/i
~I ~Y /~/_ J-C~ C
~~(~~ /~ ~ ~ ~J

8. During the construction of the project, no staging of equipment of any kind is permitted in waters of the
U.S.
9. All temporary fills in wetlands and surface waters shall be removed upon completion of the project. In
addition, the post-construction removal of any temporary bridge structures or fill will need to return the
project site to its preconstruction contours and elevations. The revegetation of the impacted areas with
appropriate native species will be required.
10. The dimension, pattern and profile of the stream above and below the crossing should not be modified by
widening the stream channel or reducing the depth of the stream. Disturbed floodplains and streams
should be restored to natural geomorphic conditions.
11. Any riprap used must not interfere with thalweg performance and aquatic life passage during low flow
conditions.
12. All mechanized equipment operated near surface waters must be regularly inspected and maintained to
prevent contamination of stream waters from fuels, lubricants, hydraulic fluids, or other toxic materials.
13. Discharging hydroseed mixtures and washing out hydroseeders and other equipment in or adjacent to
surface waters is prohibited.
l4. The outside buffer, wetland or water boundary located within the construction corridor approved by this
authorization shall be clearly marked by highly visible fencing prior to any land disturbing activities.
Impacts to areas within the fencing are prohibited unless otherwise authorized by this certification.
15. NCDOT, and its authorized agents, shall conduct its activities in a manner consistent with State water
quality standards (including any requirements resulting from compliance with §303(d) of the Clean Water
Act) and any other appropriate requirements of State law and Federal law. If DWQ determines that such
standards or laws are not being met (including the failure to sustain a designated or achieved use) or that
State or federal law is being violated, or that further conditions are necessary to assure compliance, DWQ
may reevaluate and modify this certification to include conditions appropriate to assure compliance with
such standards and requirements in accordance with 15A NCAC 2H.0507(d).
1G. There shall be no excavation from or waste disposal into jurisdictional wetlands or waters associated with
this permit without appropriate modification of this permit. Should waste or borrow sites be located in
wetlands or stream, compensatory mitigation will be required since it is a direct impact from road
construction activities.
17. Any violations, during the construction of the approved project, of this 401 Water Quality Certification or
the North Carolina State Water Quality Standards as defined in 15A NCAC 2B .0200 Rules, shall be
reported immediately to the North Carolina Division of Water Quality.
18. Pursuant to NCAC 15A 2B.0259(6), sediment and erosion control devices shall not be placed in Zone 1 of
any Tar-Pamlico buffer without prior approval by the NCDWQ. At this time, the NCDWQ has approved
no sediment and erosion control devices in Zone 1, outside of the approved project impacts, anywhere on
this project. Moreover, sediment and erosion control devices shall be allowed in Zone 2 of the buffers
provided that Zone 1 is not compromised and that discharge is released as diffuse flow.
19. A copy of this Water Quality Certification shall be posted on the construction site at all times. [n addition,
the Water Quality Certification and all subsequent modifications, if any, shall be maintained with the
Division Engineer and the on-site project manager.

August 3, 2005
#00089.5
Garcy,
This is an odd one. It was applied for in 2000. The most recent action we have on this is
our placing it On Hold in May 2001. Now, years later, this recent packet of information
has come in dated July 2005, and we're trying to figure out what's going on with it.
John asked me to send you everything we got on the file, and wants to see if you can
follow up with Clay to see if they are going to finally continue with the 401 process to
match their 404. If you have any questions, contact John.
Thanks
Rob

r' D~^
~sQ[J
A
NCDENR war oENR, 10/1,5
UNpy WgrF
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resourd~~SroR~°,A~Re
.Division of Coastal Management ~cH
Michael F. Easley, Governor Charles S. Jones, Director William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
August 17, 2005
Clay Willis, Environmental Officer
NCDOT -Division One
113 Airport Drive, Suite 100
Edenton, NC 27932
SUBJECT: Incomplete Notice on Consistency Certification
SR 1149/1150 (Montgomery Road) in Hyde County
Dear Mr. Willis:
The Division of Coastal Management (DCM) received a letter from the NC Department of
Transportation (NCDOT) on July 18, 2005 certifying that the proposed subject development
would be consistent with the enforceable policies of North Carolina's Coastal Management
Program. DCM staff have reviewed the consistency submission and determined that the
submission is incomplete since it does not meet all of the supporting documentation
requirements of 15 CFR 930.58, Necessary Data and Information. A federal consistency
review is required for this project in accordance with Subpart "D" of 15 CFR 930. These
regulations pertain to non-Federal applicants applying for a Federal permit and/or license such
as a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Individual Permit.
The consistency certification must include a set of findings as required by 15 CFR 930.58(a)(3)
relating the identified coastal effects of the proposal to the relevant enforceable policies of the
North Carolina Coastal Management Program. A copy of DCM's guidance, which contains a
sample submission format and relevant sections of 15 CFR 930, is enclosed to provide direction
for developing the findings. The term "coastal effects" refers to any reasonably foreseeable effect
on any coastal use or coastal resource resulting from the proposed project. Coastal effects
include, but are not limited to, project impacts to the following: land and water uses; Areas of
Environmental Concern (AEC); public access; recreation; navigation; water quality; wetlands;
stormwater; fisheries; wildlife; historic resources; and cultural resources.
Supporting documentation must consist of a detailed description of the proposed activity, its
associated facilities, the coastal effects, and comprehensive data and information sufficient to
demonstrate that the activit}~ will be consistent with the enforceable policies of the coastal
program. The Consistency Certification's supporting documentation must evaluate how potential
impacts to coastal resources will be avoided, minimized, or mitigated and should also include a
discussion of the compatibility of the project with the provisions of the local LAMA Land Use
Plan(s).
400 Commerce Avenue, Morehead City, North Carolina 28557-3421
Phone: [phone] \ FAX: [phone] Internet: www.nccoastalmanagement.net
An Equal Opportunity \ Affirmative Action Employer - 50°o Recycled \ 10°o Post Consumer Paper

To address a project's conformance with the; State's coastal program, DCM recommends that a
project's final NEPA/NCEPA document contain a sectiori evaluating the coastal effects of the
project. Since ~a NEPA/NCEPA document was not submitted to DCM with the consistency
certification for this project, a document suppotitirig'th~ certification with a discussion of the
coastal effects and conformance with the enforceable polices is requested. This evaluation should
be in the form of an outlined Executive Summary. The information may be obtained from
documents from the planning and development of the project.
The enforceable policies of the N.C. Coastal Management Program that are relevant for
consistency review of this project are as follows:
• Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA), specifically G.S. 113A-102(a), G.S. 113A-
102(b)(2) and G.S. 113A-102(b)(3);
• NCAC 15A Subchapter 7M -General Policy Guidelines for the Coastal Area, specifically
15A NCAC 07M .0300 (shorefront access policies), 15A NCAC 07M .0500 (post-disaster
policies), 15A NCAC 07M .0700 (mitigation policy) and 15A NCAC 07M .0800 (coastal
water quality policies); and
• The 1997 Hyde County CAMA Land Use Plan policies as certified by the Coastal
Resources Commission on 9/25/98.
Pursuant to 15 CFR 930.62, the State of North Carolina has six months from the receipt of a
complete certification to either concur or object to the consistency certification. Pursuant to 15
CFR 930.60, DCM review of your consistency submission will not be initiated until DCM
receives all the information and analysis required by 15 CFR 930.58. Upon receipt of a complete
submittal, DCM will circulate the consistency certification and the supporting necessary data and
information to the applicable state agencies for review and comment.
Please contact me at [phone], Extension 238 or via e-mail at
Cathy.Brittin~[e-mail] if you have any questions regarding how to comply with the
federal consistency requirements of this project.
Sincerely,
Cathy Brittingham
Transportation Project Coordinator
Enclosure
cc: Lynn Mathis, DCM
Bill Biddlecome, USAC'E
Christina Breen, DWQ
Brian Wrenn, DWQ
Stephen Rynas, DCM

N.C. Division of Coastal Management
NORTHf~CAROLINA F.EDE.RAL;:CONSISTENCY CERTIFICATION.~..~.,,
~ ., _.
BMIS ' ~ U AN E SUBPART "D"~ 15 CFR 930) ~,~ ,: '
This brochure provides guidance to non-Federal applicants applying for a U.S.
Army `Corps:= of;cEngineers Individual permit on how: to submit a consistency.
certification to the State of North Carolina under the Coastal Zone Management Act
(CZMA). This guidance does not apply when a CAMA permit is required for the
proposed project. The suggested format for submitting a consistency certification
under Subpart "D" of 15 CFR 930 is presented. on the second page.
The Coastal Zone Management Act requires that any applicant for a Federal
license or permit (in or outside of the coastal zone when the proposed project will
affect any coastal uses or natural resources within the coastal zone) provide the
Federal agency with a certification that the proposed activity complies with the
enforceable policies of the State's approved coastal management program, and
that the proposed project will be conducted in a manner consistent with that
program. The applicant must also provide the N.C. Division of Coastal
Management (DCM) with a copy of the certification, including all necessary supporting information and data.
This information and data is specified in 15 CFR 930.58. The text of 15 CFR 930.58 is attached to this
brochure for reference.
North Carolina's coastal zone management program consists of, but is not limited to, the Coastal Area
Management Act, the State's Dredge and Fill Law, and the land use plan of the County and/or local
municipality in which the proposed project is located. The consistency process provides applicants with an
opportunity to demonstrate how the proposed project will be consistent with the State's coastal management
program.
State review will commence (15 CFR 930.60) when the State receives a copy of the consistency certification
and all the information and data required by 15 CFR 930.58. The State has a maximum of six (6) months to
either concur or object to the applicant's consistency certification. No license or permit can be granted by the
Federal agency until the State has concurred with the applicant's certification. However, should the State fail
to act within the six-month review period, concurrence can then be presumed. Applicants are encouraged to
contact the Federal Consistency Coordinator at the address below for more information.
FURTHER INFORMATION
• N.C. Division of Coastal Management (DCM): www.nccoastalmanagement.net/rules/rules.htm
• Office of Coastal Resource Management: http://coastalmanagement.noaa.govlpcd/federal_consistency.html
• Government Printing Office (15 CFR 930): www.gpoaccess.gov/cfr/index.html
CONTACT INFORMATION
Stephen Rynas
Federal Consistency Coordinator
NC Division of Coastal Management
400 Commerce Avenue
Morehead City, NC 28557-3421
252-808-2808
[e-mail]
Published Marchr 2005 by the North Carolina Division of Coastal Management -Charles S. Jones, Director
Raleigh: 919-733-2293 or 1-888-4RCOAST /Elizabeth City: 252-264-3901 / Morehead City: 252-808-2808
Washington: 252-946-6481 /Wilmington: 910-395-3900
E-mail: dcmfrontdeskQncmail.net /Web: www.nccoastalmanagement.net

qa SAMPLESUBMISSION~FORMAT ~. ~,,...;:.;.~.,: _, ....... ;,.~ _:." ., ~ ~.:-..: j .. ~ ~ , ~,.. , ,
%} ~ The N.C. Division .of Coastal. Management~(iJCM) recommeh~s a two=part submission consisting of a cover
r , ,, letter. and a supporting', docume0t~that contains the lnforrnation,,required`,by ~15 CFR 930.58.: The text of
15 CFR 930.58 is attached for reference. ~ '
,, ..
Cove~'L•"efte~: The cover letter should stateahe purpose. of the letter (a request for concurrence from DCM of
the applicant's consistency certification)'and then briefly describe the proposed project, its location, the type
of Federalpermit or license that has been applied for, a statement that the applicant has reviewed the State's
coastal program" (citing specific policies as appropriate), a statement that the proposed activity is consistent
with the State's coastal management program and will be conducted in a manner consistent with the program
(see below), and a'statement referring to the supporting document for more detail.
Pursuant of 15 CFR 930.57(b), the cover letter must include the phrase: "The proposed activity complies with
the enforceable policies of North Carolina's approved management program and will be conducted in a
manner consistent with such program."
..
In the event the applicant is using a consultant as a point of contact, the cover letter should designate the
consultant as an authorized representative.
Supporting Document:. -The .supporting document should present the information required by
15 CFR 930.58 and should provide DCM with the data and analysis needed to document that the proposed
project will be consistent with the State's coastal management program. DCM recommends that the State's
coastal program be reviewed and that the project's compliance with specific policies be evaluated. For
example, 15A NCAC 07M .0800 relates to the protection of water quality. The applicant must explain, as
applicable, how the proposed project has been sited and designed to avoid and/or minimize any adverse
impacts to water quality. The applicant should also describe how any unavoidable adverse impacts would be
ameliorated. To the maximum extent practical, adverse impacts to coastal resources and coastal uses must
be avoided. Impacts that cannot be avoided must be minimized and mitigated.
Areas of Environmental Concern: Section 113A-113 of the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA)
defines "Areas of Environmental Concern" (AECs). The proposed project's relationship to an AEC is
important for determining the type of project review that DCM will conduct. DCM will review proposed
development in a coastal county that is outside of an AEC and requires a Federal permit through the
consistency process. However, should any portion of the proposed development occur within an AEC,
then a CAMA permit would be required instead. The supporting document must evaluate whether any of
the proposed development would occur within an AEC to determine whether the consistency process
would be the appropriate form of DCM review.
Other State Permits: The supporting document should discuss other State permits that the proposed
development may require, including the status of the permit applications. DCM suggests that any
required State permits be obtained, if possible, by the applicant prior to initiating the consistency review
process and that any issued permits be included as part of the supporting document. Addressing other
State permits at the consistency stage minimizes the potential for "late hits" in the review process and
aides the applicant in demonstrating implied conformance with the State's coastal management program.
Environmental Documents: If the proposed project requires the preparation of an environmental
document, it can be used as the "Supporting Document" provided that it contains all the information
required by 15 CFR 930.58.
Page 2

.>~, ,
Relevant Sections of 15 CFR 930
' Version of January 2004
(These citations have Been rBformatted and eras therefore unofficial.
Go to http://www.gpoaccess.gov/cfr~ndex.hfml for the o~cia/ version.)
§ 930.57 Consistency certifications.
(a) Following appropriate coordination and cooperation with the State agency, all applicants for
required federal licenses or permits subject to State agency review shall provide in the
application to the federal licensing or permitting agency a certification that the proposed activity
complies with and will be conducted in a manner consistent with the management program. At
the same time, the applicant shall furnish to the State agency a copy of the certification and
necessary data and information.
(b) The applicant's consistency certification shall be in the following form: "The proposed activity
complies with the enforceable policies of (name of State) approved management program and
will be conducted in a manner consistent with such program."
§ 930.58 Necessary data and information.
(a) The applicant shall fumish the State agency with necessary data and information along with the
consistency certification. Such information and data shall include the following:
(1) A detailed description of the proposed activity, its associated facilities, the coastal
effects, and comprehensive data and information sufficient to support the applicant's
consistency certification. Maps, diagrams, technical data and other relevant material
shall be submitted when a written description alone will not adequately describe the
proposal (a copy of the federal application and all supporting material provided to the
Federal agency should also be submitted to the State agency);
(2) Information specifically identified in the management program as required necessary
data and information for an applicant's consistency certification. The management
program as originally approved or amended (pursuant to 15 CFR part 923, subpart H)
may describe data and information necessary to assess the consistency of federal
license or permit activities. Necessary data and information may include State or local
government permits or permit applications which are required for the proposed activity.
Required data and information may not include confidential and proprietary material;
and
(3) An evaluation that includes a set of findings relating the coastal effects of the proposal
and its associated facilities to the relevant enforceable policies of the management
program. Applicants shall demonstrate that the activity will be consistent with the
enforceable policies of the management program. Applicants shall demonstrate
adequate consideration of policies which are in the nature of recommendations.
Applicants need not make findings with respect to coastal effects for which the
management program does not contain enforceable or recommended policies.
(b) At the request of the applicant, interested parties who have access to information and data
required by this section may provide the State agency with all or part of the material required.
Furthermore, upon request by the applicant, the State agency shall provide assistance for
developing the assessment and findings required by this section.
(c) When satisfied that adequate protection against public disclosure exists, applicants should
provide the State agency with confidential and proprietary information which the State agency
maintains is necessary to make a reasoned decision on the consistency of the proposal. State
agency requests for such information must be related to the necessity of having such
information to assess adequately the coastal effects of the proposal.
§ 930.60 Commencement of State agency review.
(a) Except as provided in § 930.54(e) and paragraph (a)(1) of this section, State agency review of
an applicant's consistency certification begins at the time the State agency receives a copy of
the consistency certification, and the information and data required pursuant to § 930.58.
Page 3

(1) If an applicant fails to submit a consistency certification in accordance with § 930.57, or
fails to submit necessary,data and information required pursuant to § 930.58, the State
agency shall, within 30 days of ~~eceipt of the incomplete information, notify the applicant
and the Federal.agency of the missing certification or information, and that:
(i) The State agency's'review~has not yet begun, and that its review will commence
once the necessary certification or information deficiencies have been corrected; or
(ii) The State agency's review has begun, and that the certification or information
deficiencies must be cured by the applicant during the State's review period..,
(2) Under paragraph (a)(1) of this section, State agencies shall notify~the applicant and the
Federal agency, within 30 days of receipt of the completed certification and information, of
the date when necessary certification or information deficiencies have been corrected,
and that the State agency's consistency review commenced on the date that the complete
certification and necessary data and information were received by the State agency.
(3) State agencies and applicants (and persons under subpart E of this part) may mutually
agree to stay the consistency timeclock or extend the sixmonth review period. Such an
agreement shall be in writing and shall be provided to the Federal agency. A Federal
agency shall not presume State agency concurrence with an activity where such an
agreement exists or where a State agency's review period, under paragraph (a)(1)(i) of
this section, has not begun.
(b) A State agency request for information or data in addition to that required by § 930.58 shall not
extend the date of commencement of State agency review.
Pagc 4

i~
r !~'; ; .
i
M ~A~ o ~ l _v /~
9
gyoslgT~ ~~~
O~~p~ s
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA ~~9~~ ~~
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ~y
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
July 8, 2005
Division of Coastal Management
1638 Mail Service Ccntcr
Raleigh, N.C. 27699-1638
Attention: Cathy Brittingham
Subject: SR 1149/1150 (Montgomery Road) in Hyde County
LYNDO TIPPETT
SECRETARY
~c~t~BPs
The purpose of the this letter is to request concurrence from the Division of Coastal Management
that the SR 1149/1150 road improvement project in Hyde County is consistent with DCM regulations
pursuant to IS CFR 930. NCDOT believes "The proposed activity complies with the enforceable policies of
Norilr Carolina's approved management program and will be conducted in a manner consistent with such
program." NCDOT submitted an application for a federal permit for this project in 2000. The DCM was
included in this application process and NCDOT was under the impression that review of the project has
been underway during the last 5 years. The majority of this review time involved the Bishop Road
Mitigation Site approval, which would provide 0.016 acres of coastal wetland mitigation for impacts
associated with the road construction. This impact resulted from drainage by roadside ditches. The drainage
calculations were reviewed for accuracy in 2003 and it was determined that final wetland impacts in the
permit application needed adjustment. The adjustments were made because better data on the pre-
construction depths of the roadside ditches was found in a survey conducted by a private firm. The new
calculations resulted in a decrease in 404 wetland impacts and an increase in coastal wetlands, which totaled
0.03 acres. This information was sent to COE, DWQ, and DCM in 2003, at which time they were reviewed
an accepted by the COE. NCDOT has purchased 660 acres of land that will be restored and preserved as a
wetland system. Through the restoration of this wetland system, NCDOT intends to mitigate for impacts to
coastal wetlands that resulted from the SR 1149/1150 project. Included with this letter are copies of the
project information that was sent to the COE and DWQ for the 404/401 permit. This information has
previously been sent to DCM. There is also a copy of the letter from the Ecological Enhancement Program
verifying that acceptance of the Bishop Road Mitigation site and the mitigation requirements for the SR
1149/1150 project.
If you have any questions or need additional information please call me as soon as possible, at
252-482-7977.
113 Airport Dr., Suite 100, Edenton, NC 27932 -Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]

r ,~+ b
Sincerely,
Anthony Roper, P.E.
Division Engineer
Clay Willis
Division Envir unental Officer
Cc: William J. Biddlecome, COE
Cristina Breen, DWQ
Doug Huggett, DCM
Sterling Baker, NCDOT
113 Airport Dr., Suite 100, Edenton, NC 27932 -Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]

.~ r
Wetland impacts corrected and sent to
agencies in 2003

J
~ ~
~°a STMp~
~' .r*er
1`r
w,,,
STATE of NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY LYNDO TIPPETT
GOVERNOR
August 6, 2003
U.S. Army Coops of Engineers
Wilmington Office
Post Office Box 1890
Wilmington, N.C. 28402-1890
Attention: David Franklin
Subject: SR 1149 (Montgomery Road) in Hyde County
Dear Sir:
SECRETARY
On June 2, 2003 NCDOT submitted a letter to the USACOE detailing the calculations for
evaluating wetland drainage from roadside ditches on Montgomery Road in Hyde County. These ditches
were reconstructed when the road was built in 1999. The wetland drainage calculations were calculated
individually at each wetland site along the road. There are 7 wetland sites along Montgomery Road of
which 6 were impacted by construction. In order to be consistent in a method to quantify impacts to
wetlands, the preexisting ditch depth needs to be established to accurately calculate and differentiate old
drainage limits from the new drainage limits. The preconstruction ditch depths were determined from a
1997 survey of the road. The survey was done by a private firm, Jarvis Associates in Washington, N.C. and
is a registered sealed survey document (included with this letter). This survey included the depth of the
existing crossline pipes along the roadway. The pipes along this project were replaced at the same
elevations as the original pipes shown in the 1997 survey. During construction the ditches were
reconstructed to tic into the elevations of these pipes. Therefore, the ditches were reconstructed at the same
elevation that they were originally constructed. This is a NCDOT hydraulic design specification that insures
the ditch will remove surface water effectively from the road surface and shoulders, and keep the subgrade
from becoming saturated.
For example, at Wetland Site #1 there are two existing crosslines within the wetland delineated
boundary shown on the preconstruction survey (included with this letter). The fast crossline is at station
2+60 and shows the elevation of the existing road surface and the elevation of the bottom of the crossline.
The difference between the two equates to the crossline being 4.05 feet below the road surface, which
would be the established bottom of the ditch. The second crossline within Wetland Site 1 is at station 5+80
and shows the elevation of the existing road surface and elevation of the bottom of the crossline. The
difference between the two equates to the crossline being 2.78 feet below the road surface, which would be
the established bottom of the ditch. Since Wetland Site #1 is approximately 650 feet long and the survey
shows two known ditch depths, the average of the two was taken to establish a preconstruction ditch depth
of 3.415 feet. The ellipse equation can then be applied to this ditch. This was done at each tiVetland Site
location along Montgomery Road. Wetland Site #2 had 1 existing crossline to reference, Wetland Site #3
had 1 existing crossline, Wetland Site #4 had 2, Wetland Site #5 had 2, and Wetland Site #6 had 1 crossline
to reference. Each site had a different ditch depth, which varied from 2.0 feet to 4.35 feet, that was used to
calculate the drainage effect.
113 Airport Dr., Suite 100, Edenton, NC 27932 -Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]

r '
r~
In your letter dated July 17, 2003 the statement is made that NCDOT and USACOE agreed to
measure the ditch depths of the undisturbed area and use this calculation for the disturbed areas. I have not
seen any document in the folder that was provided to me that points to this agreement. I do not understand
why this would be necessary to guess at the ditch depths when a registered sealed survey by a private firm
shows the road prior to construction and the elevation of the bottom of the ditches, which is set by the
crosslines. I calculated the drainage effect on the data that was available to me and believe this is much
more accurate than what was previously submitted to the COE in 2001. I realize that the change in the
acreage from 12.7 acres to 2.3 acres is significant, however I believe it is much more accurate. If any further
clarification is needed, please let me know. I can be available to schedule an on-site meeting to discuss this
in the field. I can be reached at 252-482-7977.
Sincerely,
Don Conner, P.E.
Division Engineer
~~
Clay Willis
Division Environmental Officer
Cc: Mr. Don Conner, NCDOT
Mr. David Allsbrook, NCDOT
Mr. Sterling Baker, P.E. ,District 3
Mr. Doug Huggett, DCM
Mr. Ron Sechler, NMFS
Mr. Gary Jordan, USFWS
Mr. Ronald Mikulak, USEPA
Mr. David Cox, NCWRC
Mr. Travis Wilson, NCWRC
Mr. John Hennessy, NCDWQ
113 Airport Dr., Suite 100, Edenton, NC 27932 -Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]

c
SR 1149/1 150 Mont ome Road H do Coun
Site Number Impact due to
fill (acres) Impact due to
lateral ditch
drainage 404
(acres) Total Impact
404 wetlands
(acres) Wetland Type Impact due to
lateral ditch
drainage
Coastal
Wetland ac
1 0 0.40 0.40 WPF/CW 0.03
2 0 0.20 0.20 WPF 0
3 0 0.60 0.60 WPF 0
4 0 0.05 0.05 WPF 0
5 0 Restored 0.23 0 WPF 0
6 0 1.01 1.01 WPF 0
7 0.09 0 0.09 WPF 0
Total 0.09 2.26 2.35 0.03
Total Wetland Impact = 2.38 acres
The impact due to fill in wetlands column was reduced to zero at sites 1-6 because the drainage effect
from the original ditch had removed the wetland hydrology component beyond the fill slope of the
new roadway.
The roadway at Site 7 has not been built yet and can be built in such a way that roadway drainage
can be accomplished without ditches, so the only wetland Impact would be moving the shoulder out
Into the wetland area which equaled 0.09 acres of fill.
The restored hydrology at Site 5 is due to the bottom of the ditch being raised when the road was
built, from 3.8 feet deep to 3.08 feet deep.
• The ellipse equation used in this way gives a worst case scenario.
• Ditch depths where taken from the Centerline of the road.

-n~~~-~~-~-- C~ 1 J~ C~.1w 1~.-1-,~0
~ 5
JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS
Impacts to Waters of the United States
As requested by the USACE, the NCDOT has re-evaluated the impact totals for this project. As
suggested by the USACE, a field meeting was held to determine the exact limits of the wetlands
impacted. The areas were flagged in the field and located by a survey party to ensure accuracy
on the permit drawings. The Ellipse equation was used to determine the influence of ditching.
In order to determine drainage from the existing ditches as well as the new ditches, the Natural
Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) was contacted. There is currently no published soil
survey for Hyde County. However, information provided by the NRCS shows Acredale soils as
the dominant type along SR 1149 and SR 1150. Table 1. depicts the total impacts associated
with the improvements to SR 1149/1150.
Table 1. Impacts to Jurisdictional Wetlands
Site No. Impact due to
fill and
excavation (ac) Impact due to
lateral drainage
(ac) ~~ Total
impact (ac) WL type Amount of
impact to CW
(ac)
1 0.327 1.162 1.489 WPF/CW* 0.016
2 0.105 0.617 0.722 WPF 0.000
3 0.328 1.813 2.141 WPF 0.000
4 0.362 2.436 2.798 WPF 0.000
5 ~ 0.554 2.038 2.592 WPF 0.000
6 0.391 2.066 2.457 WPF 0.000
7** 0.089 0.491 0.580 WPF 0.000
Total 2.156 10.623 12.779 12.763
WPF 0.016 CW
*WPF denotes Wet Pine Flat, CW denotes Coastal Wetland
**Denotes a future impact
The NCDOT is also proposing to finish the improvements to SR 1150. This includes
approximately 2,756 feet of currently unimproved roadway. Impacts to wetlands from this final
section of SR 1150 tota10.58 acres. Of these, 0.49 acres will be the result of drainage associated
with the new ditches and 0.089 acres will result from fill and excavation. Please note that the
new total for impacts resulting from fill and excavation is 12.779 acres.
Mitigatio~i
As previously stated, this project will have 12.763 acres of pine flatwood wetland
impacts. The NCDOT proposes to mitigate for these unavoidable impacts at the Vann Swamp
Mitigation Bank in Washington and Beaufort Counties. The Vann Swamp mitigation site covers
an area of 4,570 acres. This total consists of approximately 785 acres ofnon-riverine wet
hardwoods restoration, 3,252 acres ofnon-riverine wet hardwoods enhancement, and 533 acres
of pine flatwood enhancement. Tlie NCDOT proposes to debit 12.763 acres ofnon-riverine wet
hardwood restoration and 25.526 acres of wet pine flatwood enhancement from the Vann Swamp

~Eco stem
PROGRAM
May 31, 2005
Mr. BiII Biddlecome
US Army Corps of Engineers
Washington Regulatory Field Office
Post Office Box 1000
Washington, North Carolina 27789-1000
Dear I1~1r. Biddlecome:
Subject: EEP Mitigation Acceptance Letter:
Division One Project - SR 1149A/SR 1150 (Montgomery Road)
Widening, Hyde County; Tar-Pamlico River Basin (Cataloging
Unit 03020104); Northern Outer Coastal Plain Eco-Region
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (EEP) will provide the mitigation for the 2.35 acres of non-riverine wetland and
0.03 acre of coastal marsh wetland impact associated with the above referenced project.
The subject project is not listed in Exhibit 2 of the Memorandum of Agreement
among the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, the North
Carolina Department of Transportation, and the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers,
Wilmington District dated July 22, 2003. The EEP is only committed to provide the
mitigation needs for projects listed on Exhibit 2 during the first two years of the program;
however Amendment 1 details how non-Exhibit 2 projects may be swapped for an
appropriate project included on the Exhibit 2 list. Specifically, Amendment 1 states that:
"Exhibit 2 may be modified if requested jointly by NCDENR and NCDOT, and
approved in writing by the USACE. In no event may the total projected impacts
of projects per cataloging unit on Exhibit 2 exceed the total projected impacts of
projects per cataloging unit on Exhibit 2 as it existed at the time of the original
execution of the MOA, July, 2003."
In this case, the NCDOT has not proposed to swap this project for an appropriate
project included on the Exhibit 2 list. However, EEP currently has surplus riverine
wetland and stream mitigation with sufficient assets to cover this years projected
mitigation requirements plus the mitigation for the above referenced project. Therefore,
the EEP intends to provide compensatory stream mitigation up to a 2: I ratio in
~";_C~S tai ~>'._iJ... ~_ i .i, t-.~-a.' ;t+ ., ~ c ~ +..... , ~~~

Cataloging Unit 03020104 of the Tar-Pamlico River Basin. Mitigation sites currently
containing surplus mitigation assets consists of, but not inclusive of, the ABC Site,
Bishop Site, and Stallings Site.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Ms. Beth
Harmon at [phone].
Sincerely,
<~~M--~
.~
Wi m D. Gilmore, P.E.
EEP Director
cc: Mr. Anthony Roper, Division 1 Engineer
Mr. Clay Willis, Division 1 Environmental Officer
Mr. Phil Hams, Office of Natural Environment, NCDOT
Ms. Cathy Brittingham, Division of Coastal Management
Mr. John Hennessy, Division of Water Quality, Wetlands/401 Unit
File: Division 1 - SR 1149A/SR 1150

. co stem ,
PROGRAM
May 31, 2005
Mr. Anthony Roper, P.E.
Division One Engineer
Division One Office
North Carolina Department of Transportation
113 Airport Drive, Suite 100
Edenton, North Carolina 27932
Dear Mr. Roper:
Subject: EEP Mitigation Acceptance Letter:
SR 1149A/SR 1150 (Montgomery Road) Widening, Hyde
County; State Project Number 1C.048015
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (EEP) will provide the non-riverine and coastal marsh wetland mitigation for the
subject project. Based on the information supplied by you in a letter dated May 16, 2005,
the impacts are located in CU 03020104 of the Tar-Pamlico River Basin in the Northern
Outer Coastal Plain (NOCP) Eco-Region, and areas follows:
Non-Riverine Wetland Impacts: 2.35 acres
Coastal Marsh Wetland Impacts: 0.03 acre
The subject project is not listed in Exhibit 2 of the Memorandum of Agreement
among the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, the North
Carolina Department of Transportation, and the U. S. Anny Corps of Engineers,
Wilmington District dated July 22, 2003. The EEP is only committed to provide the
mitigation needs for projects listed on Exhibit 2 during the first two years of the program;
however Amendment 1 details how non-Exhibit 2 projects may be swapped for an
appropriate project included on the Exhibit 2 list. Specifically, Amendment 1 states that:
"Exhibit 2 may be modified if requested jointly by NCDENR and NCDOT, and
approved in writing by the USACE. In no event may the total projected impacts
of projects per cataloging unit on Exhibit 2 exceed the total projected impacts of
projects per cataloging unit on Exhibit 2 as it existed at the time of the original
execution of the MOA, July, 2003."

~, ~~~
-~< ~~~

In this case, the NCDOT has not proposed to swap this project for an appropriate
project included on the Exhibit 2 list. However, EEP currently has surplus non-riverine
wetland and coastal marsh wetland mitigation with sufficient assets to cover this year's
projected mitigation requirements plus the mitigation for the above referenced project.
Therefore, the EEP agrees to accept this project and will provide compensatory stream
mitigation up to a 2:1 ratio in Cataloging Unit 03020104 of the Tar-Pamlico River Basin.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Ms. Beth
Harmon at 919-715-1929.
Sincerely,
WiIT am D. Gilmore, P.E.
EEP Director
cc: Mr. Bill Biddlecome, USACE-Washington
Ms. Cathy Br-ittingham, Division of Coastal Management
Mr. John Hennessy, Division of Water Quality, Wetlands/401 Unit
File: Division 1 - SR 1149A/SR 1150

Original Permit sent in 2000

J ~ STN[ o~
/~
~~
~~ owr+d~
STATE of NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. DAVID McCOY
GOVENOR SECRETARY
July 5, 2000
Mr. Michael F. Bell, PWS
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Field Office
P. O. Box 1000
Washington, NC 28779
Dear Mr. Bell:
SUBJECT: After-the-fact Individual Permit Application for improvements to SR 1149 and
SR 1150 in Hyde County, North Carolina; USACE Action I. D. No. 200011191.
As you are aware, the NCDOT has undertaken improvements to SR 1149/1150 in Hyde
County prior to receiving Department of the Army authorization. SR 1149/1150 was widened to
improve safety and accommodate pavement. The following is a cluonology of the project as well
as an application for an after-the-fact Individual Permit.
• January 1, 1999: Improvements to include minor widening of SR 1149 are initiated.
• October 1, 1999: The NCDOT District Three Engineer responsible for Hyde County retires.
• October 15, 1999: NCDOT staff discovers that no permits exist for the project and all work
is stopped.
• December 25,1999: New District Engineer is named
• February 1, 2000: New District Engineer begins work in District Three.
• February 10, 2000: After a meeting for a separate project in Williamston, NC, Division
Environmental Officer discusses potential problem with USACE representative.
• February 10-May 17, 2000: Division Environmental Officer in conjunction with the new
District Engineer make repeated trips to the site to determine extent of impacts.
• May 17, 2000: Date is set with representatives from the North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission (WRC), the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (DWQ) and the USACE.
• June 6, 2000: On-site meeting is held with the representatives from the WRC, DWQ, and
the USACE. The USACE issues a "tear sheet" citing the NCDOT for a violation of Section
301 (33 USC 1311) of the Clean Water Act. The NCDOT is required to submit an after the
fact Individual Permit Application on or before July 7, 2000.
P. O. Box 850 Edenton, NC 27932 [phone] FAX: [phone]

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project will upgrade SR 1149 from an unpaved gravel road to a paved facility. The
project will involve minor widening of the roadway and shoulder sections to accommodate the
pavement and improve safety. The project is 4.0 miles in length and runs from SR 1143 through
the SR 1149 and SR 1150 confluence to its terminus at a dead end near the Pungo River in Hyde
County, North Carolina. The first 14,850 feet (2.8 miles) beginning at the intersection of SR
1149 and SR 1143 consists of improving the roadway from a 20.0 feet travel surface with no
recognizable shoulders to a 20.0 feet travel way with 7.0 feet shoulders. The next 6,337 feet (1.2
miles) consists of improving the roadway from an 18.0 feet travel surface with no recognizable
shoulders to a 20.0 feet travel surface with 7.0 feet shoulders. Currently, 3.48 miles of the
project have been completed with 0.52 miles are yet to be constructed. This project is within the
Tar-Pamlico river basin.
PURPOSE acid NEED
Secondary road improvement projects in North Carolina are constructed for several
reasons. SR 1149/1150 serves 8 residences and thousands of acres of merchantable timber
owned by large timber companies. As with most secondary road projects, the primary purpose is
to improve safety. The new roadway width and the eventual addition of pavement will greatly
increase the safety of the travelling public. SR 1149/1150 currently consists of a gravel travel
surface. This surface does not allow for adequate traction and can result in unsafe travel.
However, even though SR 1149/1150 has only been widened and pavement has yet to be added,
the road still has improved safety due to the addition of wider, uniform shoulders where they did
not previously exist.
In addition to safety, there are other reasons for improvements to SR 1149/1150.
According to North Carolina General Statutes, the NCDOT must pave all unpaved roads where
right-of--way is available. Right-of--way must be donated by individual landowners.
Maintenance activities are also considered. Gravel roads require re-grading a minimum of 3-4
times per year. This maybe increased depending on weather patterns and traffic usage. SR
1149/1150 serves a large amount of commercial timber property and each tract is on a separate
harvesting rotation. Consequently, the road is frequently used by logging equipment and trucks,
which creates the need for more frequent maintenance. Conversion from a gravel to a paved
travel surface should reduce the frequency of required maintenance.
ALTERNATIVES
No Build: The no build or do nothing alternative was not a feasible alternative for several
reasons. The no build alternative will not comply with existing state statutes, will not improve
safety, and will not decrease maintenance activities.
Asymmetrical Widening: Asymmetrical widening was not considered feasible because the
improvements are entirely along the existing route. Wetlands are present on either side of the
road for nearly the entire length of SR 1149/1150. However, there is a berm on the outer edge of
the ditch on each side of the road. This berm is considered to be non jurisdictional due to a lack
of hydrology. If the project were conducted all to one side rather than both sides, there would be

an additional 6.0 feet of impacts to jurisdictional wetlands for the entire length of the project.
Therefore, asymmetrical widening would increase wetland impacts by 2.9 acres and would not
offer any additional safety benefit. Therefore, asymmetrical widening is not considered practical.
Symmetrical Widening: Symmetrical widening is the preferred alternative and consists of
widening the existing roadway section from a varying width of 18.0-20.0 feet of travel way with
little or no shoulder section to a uniform 20.0 feet travel width with 7.0 feet shoulders.
Symmetrical widening is preferred due to the smaller wetland impacts and ease of construction
and lower clearing and construction costs.
JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS
Impacts to Waters of the United States
The project has impacted 9.5 acres of jurisdictional wet pine flatwood wetlands. An
additional 1.24 acres is proposed to be impacted by completing the remaining 0.52 miles. A total
of 10.74 acres of jurisdictional wet pine flat woods will be impacted by this project. No
jurisdictional streams have been or will be impacted by the improvements to SR 1149/1150.
However, authorization from the North Carolina Division of Coastal Management is required for
construction of the section within the Estuarine Shoreline Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
adjacent to the Pungo River.
Impacts will result from the increased travel way and shoulder section on SR 1149/1150.
In the areas where the existing roadway width is 18.0 feet, wetland impacts will tota124.0 feet
for the length of the widening. In the areas where the existing roadway width is 20.0 feet,
impacts will tota124.0 feet for the length of the widening. Please note that there is existing
shoreline stabilization in place along the Pungo River through a portion of the project area. The
shoreline protection was authorized previously under a separate permit. In this area, wetland
impact will total 13.0 feet for the length of the improvements. No additional shoreline protection
will be necessary.
Protected Species
There are three species listed by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service for Hyde County that
have the potential to occur within the project area. These species are listed below. Species
descriptions and biological conclusions are also
Picoides borealis (red-cockaded woodpecker) Endangered
Animal Family: Picidae
Date Listed: 10/13/70
Distribution in N.C.: Anson, Beaufort, Bertie, Bladen, Brunswick, Camden, Carteret,
Chatham, Columbus, Craven, Cumberland, Dare, Duplin, Forsyth, Gates, Halifax,
Harnett, Hertford, Hoke, Hyde, Johnston, Jones, Lee, Lenoir, Montgomery, Moore, Nash,
New Hanover, Northliampton, Onslow, Orange, Pamlico, Pender, Perquimans, Pitt,
Riclunond, Robeson, Sampson, Scotland, Tyrrell, Wake, Wayne, Wilson.

The adult red-cockaded woodpecker (RCW) has a plumage that is entirely black
and white except for small red streaks on the sides of the nape in the male. The back of
the RCW is black and white with horizontal stripes. The breast and underside of this
woodpecker are white with streaked flanks. The RCW has a large white cheek patch
surrounded by the black cap, nape, and throat.
The RCW uses open old growth stands of southern pines, particularly longleaf
pine (Pinus palustris), for foraging and nesting habitat. A forested stand must contain at
least 50% pine, lack a thick understory, and be contiguous ~witli other stands to be
appropriate habitat for the RCW. These birds nest exclusively in trees that are >60 years
old and are contiguous with pine stands at least 30 years of age. The foraging range of the
RCW is up to 200 hectares (500 acres). This acreage must be contiguous with suitable
nesting sites.
These woodpeckers nest exclusively in living pine trees and usually in trees that are
infected with the fungus that causes red-heart disease. Cavities are located in colonies from
3.6-30.3 m (12-100 ft) above the ground and average 9.1- 15.7 m (30-50 ft) high. They can be
identified by a large incrustation of running sap that surrounds the tree. The RCW lays its eggs
in April, May, and June; the eggs hatch approximately 38 days later.
The area was visited by NCDOT biologist conducted cursory reconnaissance of project
area in June of 1998. No cavity trees or individuals of this species were observed. Additionally,
there are only a couple of places where pines trees that are even borderline large enough to be
marginal nesting habitat. The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program database of rare and
protected species was also consulted. There are no known natural heritage element occurrences
within the project area. The Department is confident that this portion of this project had no
effect on the red-cockaded woodpecker. However, to insure that the remaining portion of SR
1149 does not affect the RCW, the NCDOT will conduct a survey for the RCW within all
suitable habitat in the project area.
Haliaeetus leucocephalus (bald eagle) Threatened
Animal Family: Accipitridae
Date Listed: 3/11/67
Distribution in N.C.: Anson, Beaufort, Brunswick, Carteret, Chatham, Chowan, Craven,
Dare, Durham, Guilford, Hyde, Montgomery, New Hanover, Northhampton,
Periquimans, Richmond, Stanley, Vance, Wake, Washington.
Adult bald eagles can be identified by their large white head and short white tail.
The body plumage is dark-brown to chocolate-brown in color. In flight bald eagles can
be identified by their flat wing soar.
Eagle nests are found in close proximity to water (within a half mile) with a clear flight
path to the water, in the largest living tree in an area, and having an open view of the surrounding
land. Human disturbance can cause an eagle to abandon otherwise suitable habitat. The
breeding season for the bald eagle begins in December or January. Fish are the major food source
for bald eagles. Other sources include coots, herons, and wounded ducks. Food may be live or
carnon.

Bald eagles are known to forage in the general area of the Pungo River. However, the
project has not and will not affect any foraging or nesting habitat. No trees large enough to
support an eagle nest were or will be impacted by the proposed work. Therefore, this project will
have no effect on the bald eagle.
Sensitive Joint-Vetch (Aeschynomene virginica)
Family: Pea/Bean (Fabaceae)
Federal Status: Threatened; 19 June 1992
Best Search Time: mid-July -September
Distribution: Currently sensitive joint-vetch is known from New Jersey, Maryland, Virginia and
North Carolina. In addition, there are historical records of this species from Pennsylvania and
Delaware, though there are no known extant populations there now.
Sensitive joint-vetch is a tall, annual legume, growing to a height of 1.0 - 2.0 m during
the growing season. The plants typically contain a single stem but are sometimes branched near
the top. The stems contain stiff or bristly hairs. The leaves are 2 - 12 cm long and conain 30 - 56
leaflets that are dotted with glands. The legume-type flowers are yellow with red streaks and are
1.0 - 1.5 cm across. They grow in racemes that are 2.0 - 6.0 cm long. The fruits are 3 - 7 em
long green pods containing 4-10 seeds. The seeds germinate in early June and the plants flower
from July through September. Fruits are produced from July through late October when the
plants typically die back.
The largest populations of sensitive joint-vetch typically occur in tidal, fresh or slightly
brackish rivers where sediments settle out and form extensive marshes. This species is also
found in nutrient deficient interior marshes. These sparsely vegetated areas allow plants to
germinate and grow with little competition from other species.
Threats to this species include, but are not limited to: sedimentation, competition from
exotic plant species, dams, dredging and filling activities, road and bridge construction,
residential and commercial development and water withdrawal projects.
The project does not cross any surface water resources. Only man made roadside ditches
occur in the project area. Therefore, this project does not contain suitable habitat for the
sensitive joint vetch. This project will have no effect on this species.
Roadside Populations: none
Distinct Characteristics:
Source: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1995. Sensitive Joint-Vetch (Aeschynomene virginica)
Recovery Plan. Hadley, MA. 55 pp.
Updated: 31 March 2000

AVOIDANCE:
All improvements were made on existing alignment. No new location routes were
constructed into or through completely undisturbed habitats. Symmetrical widening was used
instead of asymmetrical widening.
MINIMIZATION
All shoulders are 7.0 feet wide rather than 9.0 feet wide. In some cases with secondary
road projects, shoulder widths are less than 7.0 feet. However, in the case of SR 1149, the 7.0
feet wide shoulders were used to improve sight distances and to ensure that the large trucks and
timber industry equipment have a safe operating area. Therefore, shoulder sections were left at
7.0 feet. Additionally, all slopes are 2:1 instead of a more stable 3:1.
MITIGATION
As previously stated, this project will have 10.74 acres of pine flatwood wetland impacts.
The NCDOT proposes to mitigate for these unavoidable impacts at the Vann Swamp Mitigation
Bank in Washington and Beaufort Counties. The Vann Swamp mitigation site covers an area of
4,570 acres. This total consists of approximately 785 acres of non-riverine wet hardwoods
restoration, 3,252 acres of non-riverine wet hardwoods enhancement, and 533 acres of pine
flatwood enhancement. The NCDOT proposes to debit 10.75 acres of non-riverine wet
hardwood restoration and 21.5 acres of wet pine flatwood enhancement from the Vann Swamp
Mitigation Bank in Washington and Beaufort Counties to compensate for impacts associated
with improvements to SR 1149/1150.
The NCDOT is requesting after-the-fact authorization to maintain the work already
accomplished and to finish the remaining portion of the project not completed at the time
NCDOT forces identified the violation. The NCDOT requests that an after-the-fact Department
of the Army Individual Permit be issued for this project. By copy of this letter, the NCDOT also
requests that the North Carolina Division of Water Quality issue the appropriate 401 Water
Quality Certification. The Department appreciates all of your help with this important matter. If
you have any questions or would like additional information, please don't hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
D. R. Conner, PE
Division Engineer
T. Lindsey Riddick, Jr.
Division Environmental Officer
CC: Mr. R. E. Capehart, PE, NCDOT
Mr. David Cox, NCWRC

Ms. Sarah Winslow, NCDMF
Mr. Ron Sechler, NMFS
Mr. Tom McCartney, USFWS
Mr. John Hennessy, NCDWQ
Mr. Steve Trowell, NCDCM
Mr. Sterling Baker, NCDOT

Request from COE for more information
in 2001

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
IN REPLY REFER TO
Regulatory Division
Action ID No. 200011538
Mr. D. R. Conner, PE
April 19, 2001
Division Engineer
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Project Development and Environmental Analysis
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
Dear Mr. Conner:
M '
J , ~'• ` i
\i
/~
J
~-2~- o I
t=y T pn
Reference your application for Department of the Army (DA) after-the-fact authorization to
allow for the proposed and completed clearing, filling and grading for secondary road
improvements within wetlands to facilitate widening of SR 1149/1150 in Hyde County, North
Carolina.
On February 6, 1990, the DA and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) signed
a memorandum of agreement (MOA) establishing procedures to determine the type and level of
mitigation necessary to comply with the Clean Water Act Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines. This
MOA provides for first, avoiding impacts to waters and wetlands through the selection of the
least damaging, practical alternative; second, taking appropriate and practical steps to minimize
impacts on waters and wetlands; and finally, compensating for any remaining unavoidable
impacts to the extent appropriate and practical. To enable us to process your application iii full
compliance with this MOA, we request that you provide the following additional information:
a. Permits for work within wetlands or other special aquatic sites are available only if the
proposed work is the least environmentally damaging, practicable alternative. Please furnish
information regarding any other alternatives, including upland alternatives, to the work for which
you have applied and provide justification that your selected plan is the least damaging to water
or wetland areas.
b. It is necessary for you to have taken all appropriate and practical steps to minimize
wetland losses. Please indicate all that you have done, especially regarding development and
modification of plans and proposed construction techniques, to minimize adverse impacts.

c. The MOA requires that appropriate and practical mitigation will be required for all
unavoidable adverse impacts remaining after all appropriate and practical minimization has been
employed. The Van Swamp Mitigation Bank does not have any credits available. Please
indicate your plan to mitigate for the projected and completed, unavoidable loss of waters or
wetlands or provide information as to the absence of any such appropriate and practical
measures.
This information is essential to our expeditious processing of your application and it should
be forwarded to us by May 17, 2001. Also, a copy of this information must be sent to the North
Carolina Division of Water Quality to enable them to adequately evaluate your application for a
Water Quality Certification pursuant to Section 401 of the Clean Water Act.
Thank you for your time and cooperation. Questions or comments maybe addressed
to Mr. Michael Bell at the Washington Regulatory Field Office, telephone [phone],
extension 26.
Sincerely,
~~~~
E. David Franklin.
Chief, NCDOT Team
Copy Furnished:
Mr. Doug Huggett
Coastal Management Division
North Carolina Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
1638 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1638

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS ,
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
IN REPLY REFER TO April 19, 2001
Regulatory Division
Action ID No. 20001 1538
Mr. D. R. Conner, PE
Division Engineer
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Project Development and Environmental Analysis
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
Dear Mr. Conner:
~i
J^-
Reference your application for Department of the Army (DA) after-the-fact authorization to
allow for the proposed and completed clearing, filling and grading for secondary road
improvements within wetlands to facilitate widening of SR 1 149/1150 in Hyde County, North
Carolina.
By letter dated April 2, 2001(enclosed), we received comments from the US
Environmental Protection Agency. It is the policy of the Department of the Army to provide an
applicant the opportunity to furnish a proposed resolution or rebuttal to all objections from
government agencies and other substantive adverse comments before a final decision is made on
a proposed project. In this regard, I would appreciate receiving any comments that you have on
this matter. If you intend to comment, please give your immediate attention to this matter, so
processing of your permit can be expedited.
Thank you for your time and cooperation. Should you have any questions, you may contact
Mr. Michael F. Bell, NCDOT Coordinator/Regulatory Project Manager at our Washington
Regulatory Field Office, telephone [phone], ext. 26.
Sincerely,
i~ ~ ' v
E. David Franklin
Chief, NCDOT Team

Enclosure
Copy Furnished (without enclosure):
Mr. Doug Huggett
Division of Coastal Management
1638 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1638
National Marine Fisheries Service
Pivers Island
Beaufort, North Carolina 28516
Mr. Tom McCartney
US Fish and Wildlife
Fish and Wildlife Enhancement
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
Mr. William L. Cox, Chief
Wetlands Section -Region IV
Water Management Division
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
61 Forsyth Street, S W
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
Mr. David Cox
Post Office Box 118
Northside, North Carolina 27564
Mr. Nicholas L. Graf
Federal Highway Administration
310 New Bern Avenue, Suite 410
Raleigh, North Carolina 27601
Mr. John Dorney
Division of Water Quality
Wetlands Section
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1638
2

c~QUV ~ IS
UNITED STATES ENVTRONyIEN'fAL PROTECTION AGENCY
~~ REG102Y 4
Sam Nunn Atlnntu Federal Ccntcr
61 Irorsyth Strcct
Atlanta, Georgia 30303 - $960
olonel Jams W. DeLony
District Engineer
.TTN: Mr. Michael Bell
/ashington Regulatory Pield Office
/ilrnington I}istrict, Corps of Engineers
.O. Box 1000
Washington, North Carolina 27889-1000
nPR o z zoos
Q~%~ `J : ~ ~~~~3

NCDOT: After-the-Fact Permit for SR 1149/1150 Widening
Action I.D. No. 200011538
Colonel D~I.ony:
This is in response to the above referenced public notice, dated March 8, 2001.
,ccording to the public notice, the North Carolina Department of 'T'ransportation (NCDOT) is
pplying for an After-the-Fact (A'T~ permit to fill or drain 12.78 acres of wetlands, including
.016 acres of coastal wetlands, for the widening of SR 1149/1150 in 1~Iyde County, North
arolina. Mitigation is proposed in the foiTn of debiting 12.77 acres of non-riverine wet
ardwood restoration ('l: l restoration) and 24.84 acres of wet pine flatwood enhancement (2:1
nhancement) from the proposed Vaffi Swamp Mitigation Bank (VSMB) in Washington and
eaufort Counties. Additionally, the applicant proposes to restore 0.016 acres of coastal
Wetlands along and unnamed tributary to Scranton Creek (1:1 restoration).
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4 Wetlands Section (BPA) has
:viewed this proposal and sees no evidence that there was any attempt to avoid or minimize the
npact generated by the project. Prior to a discharge of fill material into waters of the United
rates, the 404(b)(1) Guidelines of the Clean Water Act require a sequential evaluation and
~riuction in impact. By Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the U.S. Army Corps of
;ngineers (Corps) and EPA dated February 6, 1990, this sequencing may be circumvented when
ie Corps and BPA agree that the proposed discharge is either necessary to avoid environmental
arm, or can be reasonably expected to result in environmental gain or insignificant
nvironrnental loss. At this point in tune, we have not agreed that this project meets these
;quirerr~nts. Areas such as the one impacted are itnportsnt to North Carolina in terms of water
uality, water qu.aatity, sediment stabilization, and wi]rllife habitat and food chain maintenance.
appears that there may be other project designs which will not cause such a significant impact
~ wetlands. We will gladly review the alternatives analysis, if one is available.
~~
~~`~
EPA objects to the use of the VSMB as compensation for the completed and proposed
,pacts. We note that we have no information on this proposed mitigation bank, ocher than a
py of the meeting minutes from the October 26, 2000 MBRT meeting (which we did not

2
cttend). The bank is rather conceptual in nature, and there is no approved Mitigation Plan or
Mitigation Banking Instrument (M>31) for the project. EPA believes that it may be a yeal• or more
Before the VSMB is approved, and longer than that before it is constructed. Although the VSMF
s located within the same 8-digit HUC as the project (03020104), EPA believes that
:ompensatory mitigation for this after-the-fact project should be on-site or as close to the impact
~ite as possible. It appears from the MBRT meeting minutes that many outstanding and rather
ignificant issues remain to be addressed for the bank. We prefer mitigation of the already
:ompleted impacts as quickly as possible, and as close to the project site as possible. Given our
opinion that avoidance and minim;•ration wire not addressed ir1 the construction of the work
beady completed, EPA does not believe it is appropriate to allow of#=site mitigation, especially
gut-of--kind mitigation which may not be completed for many more years. It appears that there
nay be restoration opportunities close to the impact site.
EPA recommends that the applicant be required to provide at least 2:1 in-kind restoration
r the unpacts, on-site or as close to the project as possible. Thus, we recommend at least 25.54
res of pine flatwoods restoration and 0.032 acres of coastal wetlands restoration be required as
mpensacion for the project. Furthermore, until an acceptable mitigation plan is submitted and
proved, the project should not be authorized.
EPA is dismayed at the NCDOT's disregard for proper perinittiug procedwes for this
eject. Due to the particular history and specifics of this violation, we elect not to pursue
forcemeat in this case. However, we wish to stress to both the Corps and to NCDOT that we
ll pwsue enforcement of future unpermitted wetland activities by NCDOT, including the
position of civil penalties up to $137,500 per day, as provided by Section 309(g) of the Clean
ater Act.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this project. If you have an questions
;arding these comments, please contact Kathy Matthews at the above address or by telephone
[phone].
Sincerely,
_/ ~ ~
William L. Cox, Chief
Wetlands Section
USFWS, Raleigh
DCM/NCDENR, Raleigh
DWQ/NCDENR, Raleigh
NCDOT, Raleigh

More information provided in 2001

,.. ~..,,
.~; ~' ~ "~
t s
3 ~ ~=
~ ~ ~
\... J
•~V o. a~
STATE OF NORT'ri CAROLI`:~
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY DIVISION OF HIGH~~'A~-S
GOVERNOR P.O. Box_~201, Rale:;h, N.C. 2"^; l-: ~O1
May 25, 2001
United States Army Corps of Engineers
Post Office Box 1000
Washington, \C 27889-1000
Attention: dike Bell, PWS
Ll'NDO TIPPETT
SECREr.aRY
Subject: After-the-fact Permit Application for improvements to SR 1149 and SR
1150 in Hyde County, DWQ No. 00095, USACE ID No. 200011191
In response to the ACOE letter dated April 19, 2001 : nd the DWQ letter dated I~1ay 4,
2001 this letter will pro~~ide the requested information to complete the application
process. As you are aware, The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
proposes to up`rade SR 1149/110 (Montgomery Road) from SR 1143 to end of SR 1150
in Hyde County. SR 11-19/1150 is an unpa~~ed road~t~ay that a;-ill be upgraded to a paved
roadway. Total project length is 4.0 miles. Currently. 3.48 miles of the project has been
graded to a 20-foot roadway with 7 foot shoulders, but not pared, with 0.52 miles yet to
be constructed. Of the 600 linear feet (1.2 ~ miles) et the total proposed impact to
wetlands, 2,76 feet (0.~ miles) is adjacent to the unimproved roadway. NC DOT
proposes to redesign this 4-mile road to minimize impacts to «~etlands by limiting to a 4-
foot shoulder in wetland areas.
Purpose and need
Transportation and high«~ay laws of North C:.rolina (G.S. 136-44.6, 136-44.7,
136-44.7A, 136-44.8, and 136-44.9) require the NCDOT to develop annual work
programs for construction and maintenance of secon~:ary roads. These general statutes
specifically set forth requirements for annual construction and paving of existing unpaved
roads. Paving of these roads is performed iln priorih order as established by the NCDOT
for each unpaved road within a given county. This number is based on characteristics of
each road, including number of homes, schools, chur:.hes, businesses, industries,
recreational facilities, traffic counts, presence of sch~~ol bus routes, and value as a
thoroughfare. Montgomery Road is scheduled to be paved in the 2000-2001 Secondary
Roads Construction Pro, am.
The purpose and need is to provide a safe, ercient roadway sen•ing as the access
to the forestry industry and eight residence along this road. The new roadway width and

Page 2
May 25, 2001
Mr. Bell
the eventual addition of pavement ~t-ill greatly increase the safet`- of the travelling public.
SR 1149/11 ~0 currently consists of a gravel surface.
Maintenance acti~-ities are also considered. Gravel roads require re-grading a
minimum of 3 to 4 times per year. This may- be increased depending on «-eather patterns
and traffic usage. Due to the fact that SR 1149 serves such a large amount of commercial
timber property and that each tract is on a separate han esting rotation, use by logging
equipment and trucks are a more frequent occurrence. and therefore, creating more
frequent maintenance. The frequency of maintenance is reduced after conversion from a
gravel to a paved travel surface.
Description of the Alternati~•es
Five alternatives have been reviewed with Division One engineers for which a Section
404 after-the-fact individual permit would be required are described belo«' (see table 1).
Currently, the road has been constructed using Alternative 3 standards. \C DOT
proposes to regrade the project to utilize Alternative ?. All alternatives except Alternative
1 meets the stated purpose and need of the project.
• Alternative 1: (no build option) The no build alternative ~;-ould utilize the existing
18 to 20 foot gravel road way. The road would have no recognizable shoulders.
Average depth of ditches about 0.8 feet. No additional wetlands would be impacted.
• Alternative 2: (the preferred alternative) Widen the e.~cisting road to a 20 foot paved
road with 7-foot shoulder through uplands and 4-foot shoulders through wetlands
while following the existing alignment. Slopes ~~-ould be 2:1. Ditches will be 1.3
feet deep on the right and 1.56 feet on the left. Excavation and fill ~~-ould impact
1.62 acres of wetlands. Drainage from ditches ~tiill impact 10.623 acres of wetlands.
• Alternative 3: (currently used alternative) Widen the existing road to 20 foot paved
road with 7-foot shoulders on each side following the existing alignment. Slopes
would be 2:1. Ditches will be 1.3 feet deep on the right and 1.56 feet on left. Fill
would impact 2.156 acres of u-etlands. Calculated drainage using the ellipse
equation would be 10.623 acres of wetlands.
• Alternative 4: Typical section of a 60 Toot right of wav would have included a 20 .
foot paved road with 9 foot shoulders on each side following the existing alignment.
Slopes would be 2:1. Ditches will be 1.3 feet deep on right and 1.56 feet on left. Fill
would impact 2.52 acres of wetlands. Calculated drainage using the ellipse equation
would be 10.623 acres of wetlands.
• Alternative S: Relocating the road to avoid wetlands. The current road intersects
tributary wetlands of Slade Creek along a wide tlat peninsula. Elevation is about 10
feet above sea level across the entire peninsula. Relocation of the road will not avoid
wetlands due to the flat topography, and the presence of wetlands and tributaries

Page 3
May 25, 2001
Mr. Bell
thoughout the peninsula. If the existing road was relocated to a new location,
wetland impacts would be expected alon` the reali;nment. Relocation would involve
moving at least 1.23 miles of road a minimum of0.~ miles north to avoid creek
tributaries. Using the standard 60-foot right-of-wa~~ would include 20 foot paved
roadway with 7-foot wide shoulders. Ditch would be constructed with a 2:1 slope.
Ditches would be dug a minimum of 1.3 foot deep not exceeding 1.~6 feet deep.
Indirect wetland impacts using the ellipse equation also need to be calculated. A new
road built through wetlands could impact as much as 8.95 acres of wetlands plus
10.623 acres according to ellipse equation calculations. Because of the significant
wetland impact, this alternative was not proposed.
Anticipated Impacts to Waters of the ti.S.
The Department has determined that impacts to wetlands and/or surface waters will result
from the construction of Alternatives 2 through 5. Table 1 presents estimated impacts to
wetland sites for each alternative, and a qualitative evaluation of each wetland's relative
value. It is important to note that the identification of wetland sites and the estimated
magnitude of wetland impacts within each alternative is based upon utilizing USDA soil
maps, National Wetland Inventory maps, USGS maps. and extensive ground-truthing.
Drainage from ditch construction vas calculated using the "Ellipse Equation".
Mitigation
The concept of mitigation within the framework of the 404b(1) guidelines requires that
reasonable efforts are made to Avoid wetlands to the maximum extent practicable and,
where avoidance has been demonstrated to be impracticable, practicable measures must
be taken to Ivlinimize impacts to these wetlands. After acceptable minimization efforts
have been taken, Compensation for unavoidable losses to wetlands is often required in
an attempt to offset such losses.
The table below details the impacts to wetlands for all alternatives (Table 1):
AVOIDANCE: In order to achieve the stated purpose and need of the project, total
avoidance of wetland sites and surface waters is not possible. This area is characterized
by low-lying land having an average elevation of 10 feet and elevated water tables. The
landscape is crossed by numerous tributaries and is heavily punctuated with wet flats,
typical of the outer coastal plain. Calculated impact could be as much as 8.95 acres of
wetland impacts for a new footprint that would avoid tributary wetlands. Calculations of
wetland drainage using the ellipse equation is 10.623 acres.
MINIMIZATION:
Alternative 4: NC DOT's standard policy is to utilize the entire 60-foot right of way
during the construction of secondary road projects in order to build a roadway that is as
safe as possible for the traveling public to utilize. A typical 60-foot right of way road is
composed of 20 foot paved roadwav, 9-foot shoulders. and ditches with a 2:1 slope and
11 feet wide. This road would require 2.52 acres of « etland impact due to fill plus
10.623 acres of impact for drainage effects from the ditches.

Page 4
May 25, 2001
Mr. Bell
Alternative 3 (currently used alternative): Widening the existing road to 20-foot
paved road with 7-foot shoulders on each side. Slopes would be 2:1. Ditches will be 1.3
feet deep on the right and 1.66 feet on the left. Fill to be placed in wetland would impact
2.156 acres of wetlands plus ditches would drain 10.623 acres as calculated by the ellipse
equation.
Alternative 2 (preferred alternative): Widening the existing road to 20-foot paved road
with 4-foot shoulder on each side. Slopes would be 2:1. Shoulders would be drastically
reduced through wetland areas and extend to the 7 toot shoulder on upland areas. Ditches
will be 1.3 feet deep on the right and 1.66 feet on the left. Fill to be placed in wetlands
would impact 1.62 acres of wetlands. Calculations of wetland drainage using the ellipse
equation is 10.623 acres.
T.. l.l.. 1
1 ~ Alt~• Roadway Roadway Shoulder Depth of Indirect Impact Total
Length Width Width
~ Ditch impact from Wetland
(miles) :, through
(ft) (feet) from fill impact
i wetlands ft ditch*
1 No Build 4.0 13 to 20 ~ None 1 0.73-0.98 None None None
2 (preferred 4.0 22 ~ 4 foot 1.3-1.56 10.623 1.62 12.24
alternative ~
3 (currently 4.0 22 j 7 foot 1.3-1.56 10.623 2.156 12.779
used
alternative i
4 4.0 22 ~ 9 foot 1.3-1.56 10.623 2.52 13.143
5 1.38 22 7 foot 1.3-1.56 10.623 8.95 19.673
relocation)
*based on the Ellipse Equation
COIVIPENSATION: NCDOT will compensate all unavoidable impacts to these 12.77
acres of pine flat wetlands in a 1:1 ratio at the Bishop Road Mitigation Site, a proposed
mitigation bank site located within the Tar-Pamilico Watershed within Hyde County.
Acquisition of these credits will be contingent upon approval of their use by appropriate
regulatory agencies. NC DOT has provided a wetland mitigation plan for this mitigation
bank as of May 2001 for agency review.
/y~/
~ ,_
~~~ ~~ i~~
,,
~~
ZZy~~

Page 5
May 25, 2001
Mr. Bell
Other Jurisdictional Issues
In addition to a Section 404 permit, the Department must also obtain a Section 401 Water
Quality Certificate. Thank you for your time and cooperation.
Si ,
Conner, PE
Division 1 Engineer
.>
Kristen Shacochis
Division One Environmental Officer
cc: John Hennessy, DWQ
Don Goins, PE Attention: DA Allsbrook Jr., PE
Sterling D. Baker, PE

,~ ~R 1 1 dQ/1 1 ~(1 Nvrla (~ni int~i

~
~

0
.,.~
a~
. r..,
0
N
,-~
O
U
'L~
«i
O
4-.,
O
.O
l^1O
J`(r Y
I _
~'
~~
-;
ij
~ ~
i
.~

,~, .;
t
O
'~
n
• ^+
n
JW
n
l~^1 ~
O
U
'~
c~
O
O
O
. ~..,
O

~
-. i
f
-- - .. ~ = - } ~

- - - -- i

~ ~
- ~ j; i s

i.
- `- - -~ --
f

3

f
f

,`
i

~
EE
f
I
!(
' _
~' i
I

i
~

~

1
•~:~
~:
_ ~~ '~
~~

Portion of road complete, 18' wide with 9' shoulders
,:;~~~{~

i
Portion of road incomplete, 16' wide with 2' shoulders
I,' :I

l ~ ~
1
jj
( ~ ,
_~
~A~,
W
r~
r~^J
J
O
U
a~
.,.,
U
c~
N
~--+
. r..,

i ~ E L~ ~ fi f
I
i
~; i
a
~-
s
.~;
B

j i
~ j

I~
E i
~`
{- - f
i '
: r ~ ~ i
I f 1.

Z to
nV•
W
•r~.nd
~/
_~
~~
W
O
n~
W
O
.~...I
0
0
U
a~

~ ~, } ~

~
~_ s
I ~~
~~.
s ~:
i ,
1

~~

~,.
i~
~, ~ 4
1 ~
't `' r _ _

,.

E ~ '~
Site 1 Area claimed as Coastal wetland

o~~~ WA r~RQ~
`~ r
~ 1
Michael F. Easley
Governor
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
~ ~ Kerr T. Stevens
Division of Water duality
May 4, 2001
Mr. D.R. Conner, P.E.
NCDOT Division 1
P.O. Box 850
Edenton, North Carolina 27932
Re: After-the-Fact Permit Application for improvements to SR 1149 and SR 1150 in Hyde
County, DWQ No. 000895, USACE ID No. 200011191.
Dear Mr. Conner:
The NC Division of Water Quality has reviewed your submittal fora 401 Water Quality
Certification for the aforementioned project. Review of your application revealed it lacking
necessary information required for making an informed permit decision. The permit
application was deficient in the following areas:
The proposed mitigation site (Vann Swamp Mitigation Site) in Washington and Beaufort
Counties is not presently owned by NCDOT, nor has a site plan been approved.
An enforcement action may be pending on this project and as such, all the necessary
information needed to make an informed decision is presently not available.
A plan for the proposed mitigation site located at Scranton Creek has not been completed.
Therefore, pursuant to 15A NCAC 2h.0507(a)(4), we will have to place the permit application
on hold until we are supplied the necessary information. Furthermore, until the information is
received by the NC Division of Water Quality, we request (by copy of this letter) that the US
Army Corps of Engineers place the 401 permit application on hold.
Hopefully, we can work together to expedite the processing of your permit application. If you
have any questions or require additional information, please contact John Hennessy at
91,9.733.5694.
Sincerely,
n R. Dorney
ater Quality Certi cation Program
Cc: Deborah Sawyer, DWQ Regional Office
Mike Bell, USACE Washington Field Office
Central Files
File Copy
North Carolina Division of Water duality, 401 Wetlands Certification Unit, `
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 (Mailing Address)
2321 Crabtree Blvd., Raleigh, NC 27604-2260 (Location)
919-733-1786 (phone), 919-733-6893 (fax), http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources ; ~:~ ~,~.~ ~, ~~ ~~
Division of Water Quality ~~
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Bill Holman, Secretary L
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
May 4, 2001
Mr. D. R. Conner. P.E.
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Division 1
P.O. Box 850
Edenton, North Carolina, 27932
Re: After-the-Fact Permit Application for improvements to SR 1149 and SR 1150 in Hyde County
DWQ No. 000895, USACE ID No. 200011191.
Dear Mr. Conner:
The Division of Water Quality has reviewed your submittal fora 401 Water Quality Certification for the
aforementioned project. Review of your application revealed it lacking necessary information required for
making an informed permit decision. The permit application was deficient in the following areas:
• The proposed mitigation site (Vann Swamp Mitigation Site) in Washington and Beaufort Counties is
not presently owned by the NCDOT, nor has a plan for the site been approved.
• An enforcement action may be pending on this project, and as such, all the necessary information
needed to make an informed decision is presently not available.
• A plan for the proposed mitigation site located at Scranton Creek has not been completed.
Therefore, pursuant to 15A NCAC 2h .0507(x)(4), we will have to place the permit application on hold until
we are supplied the necessary information. Furthermore, until the information is received by the NC
Division of Water Quality, we request (by copy of this letter) that the US Army Corps of Engineers place
the permit application on hold.
Hopefully, we can work together to expedite the processing of your permit application. If you have any
questions or require additional information, please contact John Hennessy at 919-733-5694.
Program
cc: Deborah Sawyer, DVVQ Regional Office
Mike Bell, USACE
Central Files
C:\ncdot\SR 1149\correspondcncc\OOOS9~hld.doc
~Vctlands/401 Unit 1621 A1ai1 Scrvicc Ccntcr Ralci~h, North Carolina 27699-1621
Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmance Action Employer 5070 recycled/I OS5 post consumer paper

~,
co stem
'PROGRAM
May 31, 2005
Mr. Bill Biddlecome
US Army Corps of Engineers
Washington Regulatory Field Office
Post Office Box 1000
Washington, North Carolina 27789-1000
Dear 11~1r. Biddlecome:
Subject: EEP Mitigation Acceptance Letter:
~n
~v
`'G Cho
2 d
C~
~~ woof O
o
Division One Project - SR 1149A/SR 1150 (Montgomery Road)
Widening, Hyde County; Tar-Pamlico River Basin (Cataloging
Unit 03020104); Northern Outer Coastal Plain Eco-Region
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (EEP) will provide the mitigation for the 2.35 acres of non-riverine wetland and
0.03 acre of coastal marsh wetland impact associated with the above referenced project.
The subject project is not listed in Exhibit 2 of the Memorandum of Agreement
among the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, the North
Carolina Department of Transportation, and the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers,
Wilmington District dated July 22, 2003. The EEP is only committed to provide the
mitigation needs for projects listed on Exhibit 2 during the first two years of the program;
however Amendment 1 details how non-Exhibit 2 projects may be swapped for an
appropriate project included on the Exhibit 2 list. Specifically, Amendment 1 states that:
"Exhibit 2 may be modified if requested jointly by NCDENR and NCDOT, and
approved in writing by the USACE. In no event may the total projected impacts
of projects per cataloging unit on Exhibit 2 exceed the total projected impacts of
projects per cataloging unit on Exhibit 2 as it existed at the time of the original
execution of the MOA, July, 2003."
In this case, the NCDOT has not proposed to swap this project for an appropriate
project included on the Exhibit 21ist. However, EEP currently has surplus riverine
wetland and stream mitigation with sufficient assets to cover this years projected
mitigation requirements plus the mitigation for the above referenced project. Therefore,
the EEP intends to provide compensatory stream mitigation up to a 2:1 ratio in
NCD~t
North farolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program, 1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1652 / 919-115-0416 / www.nceep.net

Cataloging Unit 03020104 of the Tar-Pamlico River Basin. Mitigation sites currently
containing surplus mitigation assets consists of, but not inclusive of, the ABC Site,
Bishop Site, and Stallings Site.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Ms. Beth
Harmon at [phone].
Sincerely,
~~~ ~
Wi m D. Gilmore. P.E.
EEP Director
cc: Mr. Anthony Roper, Division 1 Engineer
Mr. Clay Willis, Division 1 Environmental Officer
Mr. Phil Harris, Office of Natural Environment, NCDOT
Ms. Cathy Brittingham, Division of Coastal Management
Mr. John Hennessy, Division of Water Quality, Wetlands/401 Unit
File: Division 1 - SR 1149A/SR 1150

' v
r

v~.vi~.i
. ~ '~ ~ ~ '~
PROGRAM
May 31, 2005
Mr. Anthony Roper, P.E.
Division One Engineer
Division One Office
North Carolina Department of Transportation
113 Airport Drive, Suite 100
Edenton, North Carolina 27932
Dear Mr. Roper:
Subject: EEP Mitigation Acceptance Letter:
SR 1149A/SR 1150 (Montgomery Road) Widening, Hyde
County; State Project Number 1C.048015
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (EEP) will provide the non-riverine and coastal marsh wetland mitigation for the
subject project. Based on the information supplied by you in a letter dated May 16, 2005,
the impacts are located in CU 03020104 of the Tar-Pamlico River Basin in the Northern
Outer Coastal Plain (NOCP) Eco-Region, and are as follows:
Non-Riverine Wetland Impacts: 2.35 acres
Coastal Marsh Wetland Impacts: 0.03 acre
The subject project is not listed in Exhibit 2 of the Memorandum of Agreement
among the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, the North
Carolina Department of Transportation, and the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers,
Wilmington District dated July 22, 2003. The EEP is only committed to provide the
mitigation needs for projects listed on Exhibit 2 during the first two years of the program;
however Amendment 1 details how non-Exhibit 2 projects may be swapped for an
appropriate project included on the Exhibit 2 list. Specifically, Amendment 1 states that:
"Exhibit 2 may be modified if requested jointly by NCDENR and NCDOT, and
approved in writing by the USACE. In no event may the total projected impacts
of projects per cataloging unit un Exhibit 2 exceed the total projected impacts of
projects per cataloging unit on Exhibit 2 as it existed at the time of the original
execution of the MOA, July, 2003."
®~~
_. , .. _ ~ N~C ENR
North Carolim Ecosystem Enhancement Program, 1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1652 / 919-715-0416 / www.nceep.net

r ,
In this case, the NCDOT has not proposed to swap this project for an appropriate
project included on the Exhibit 2 list. However, EEP currently has surplus non-riverine
wetland and coastal marsh wetland mitigation with sufficient assets to cover this year's
projected mitigation requirements plus the mitigation for the above referenced project.
Therefore, the EEP agrees to accept this project and will provide compensatory stream
mitigation up to a 2:1 ratio in Cataloging Unit 03020104 of the Tar-Pamlico River Basin,
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Ms. Beth
Harmon at 919-715-1929.
Sincerely,
Wil 'am D. Gilmore. P.E.
EEP Director
cc: Mr. Bill Biddlecome, USACE-Washington
Ms. Cathy Brittingham, Division of Coastal Management
Mr. John Hennessy, Division of Water Quality, Wetlands/401 Unit
File: Division 1 - SR 1149A/SR 1150

t ~ r
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
,.. STAN[
yd J Mo~
ai ~ ~ 3
.@~~,.
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
V
9t0 ~'q . i v/~/
~~,~
~~
~Cy
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
May 16, 2005
Mr. William D. Gilmore, P.E.
EEP Transition Manager
Ecosystem Enhancement Program
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1652
Dear Sir:
d QC~ ~~~~
LYNDO TIPPETT
SECRETARY
Subject: Hyde County, Secondary Road Construction on SR 1149A/1150 (Montgomery
Road). This project involved widening a 16 to 18 ft. gravel road to a 20 ft. paved
surface roadway. The widening of the road required the relocation of roadside
drainage ditches. This project began in 2000 and was stopped due to
noncompliance with federal and state permit programs. The necessary permits
have since been applied for and awaiting mitigation for wetland impacts provided
through the Bishop Road Mitigation Site. NCDOT turned over this mitigation site
to EEP prior to the site being constructed, with the agreement that mitigation
would be provided for the SR 1149A/1150 (Montgomery Rd.) project in Hyde
County. State Project No. l C.048015.
The purpose of this letter is to request that the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program
(EEP) provide confirmation that you arc willing to provide compensatory mitigation for the
project in accordance with the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) signed July 22, 2003 by the
USACE, the NCDENR and the NCDOT.
RESOURCES UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF SECTION 404 AND 401 OF THE
CLEAN WATER ACT.
We have avoided and minimized the impacts to jurisdictional resources to the greatest extent
possible as described in the permit application. The remaining impacts to jurisdictional resources
will be compensated for by mitigation provided by the EEP program. We have calculated that
2.38 acres of wetlands will be impacted.

.• -
The project is located in the Coastal Plain Physiographic Province in Hyde County in the
Tar-Pamlico River basin in Hydrological Cataloguing Unit 03020104.
There are no stream impacts associated with this project.
The wetland impacts, summarized in Table 1, totals 2.35 acres of non-riverine Pine
Plantation and 0.03 acres of Coastal Marsh Wetland. We propose to provide compensatory
mitigation for wetland impacts by using Bishop Road Mitigation Site tlu-ough EEP for the
2.38 acres of impacts.
Table 1: Summary of Jurisdictional Impacts
Section Coastal Wetlands Permanent Wetlands ac) Streams ft)
SR 1149A/1150 Riverine Non riverine
0.03 0 2.35 0
Please send the letter of confirmation to William J. Biddlecote (USAGE Coordinator)
at, USAGE Washington Regulatory Field Office, P.O. Box 1000 Washington, N.C. 27889-
1000). Mr. William J. Biddlecome fax number is 252-975-1399, office number is 252-975-1616
ext. 31; and to Cathy Brittingham (DCM Coordinator) at, Division of Coastal 1Vlanagement,
Parker-Lincoln Bldg. 2728 Capital Blvd., Raleigh, N.C. 27604.
RESOURCES UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF THE NORTH CAROLINA
RIPARIAN BUFFER PROGRAM
There arc no buffer impacts associated with this project.
Summary of Buffer lmnacts and Mitigation:
Section Zone 1
Im acts Zone 2
Im acts Zone 1
Miti ation* Zone 2
Miti ation* Total Costs
SQ FEET SQ FEET SQ FEET SQ FET None
* Figures reflect total AFTER using multipliers (0.97 cents per sq. ft.)
This amount of mitigation is what NCDOT anticipates is needed to satisfy permit
requirements of the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) for buffer impacts.
Upon receipt of the 401 Water Quality Certification from NCDWQ, NCDOT will transfer funds
to EEP for buffer mitigation.
In order to satisfy regulatory assurances that mitigation will be performed; the NCDWQ
requires a formal letter from EEP indicating their willingness and ability to provide the
mitigation work requested by NCDOT. The NCDOT requests such a letter of confirmation be
addressed to Mr. John Dorney of NCDWQ, with copies submitted to NCDOT.
If you have any questions or need additional information please call Clay Willis at 252-
482-7977.

Sincerely,
Anthony Roper, P.E.
Division One Engineer
,'l (mil
1 Willi
C ay s
Division One Environmental Supervisor
cc: Bill Biddlecome, USACOE
Cathy Brittingham, DCM
John Hennessy, DWQ
Sterling Baker, NCDOT
Phil Harris, NCDOT
Bill Rosser, NCDOT
Ken Pace, NCDOT

. ~
'~~ i
UNITCD STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
~~ e~~~ REGION 4
•
`\~~jf '~ Sam Nunn Atlanta Fcdcral Centcr ,.
~os~~~ 61 Forsyth Strcct -
pn
Atlanta, Georgia 30303 - 8960
.: -_,.
Colonel James W. DeLony APR 0 2 2001
District Engineer
ATTN: Mr. Michael Bell
Washington Regulatory Field Office
Wihrvngton District, Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 1000
Washington, North Carolina 27889-1000
SUBJ: NCDOT: After-the-Fact Permit for SR 1149/1150 Widening
Action I.D. No. 200011538
Dear Colonel DeLony:
This is in response to the above referenced public notice, dated March 8, 2001.
According to the public notice, the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) is
applying for an After-the-Fact (ATF) permit to fill or drain 12.78 acres of wetlands, including
0.016 acres of coastal wetlands, for the widening of SR 1149/1150 in Hyde County, North
Carolina. Mitigation is proposed in the form of debiting 12.77 acres of non-riverine wet
hardwood restoration (1:1 restoration) and 24.84 acres of wet pine flatwood enhancement (2:1
enhancement) from the proposed Vann Swamp Mitigation Bank (VSMB) in Washington and
Beaufort Counties. Additionally, the applicant proposes to restore 0.016 acres of coastal
wetlands along and unnamed tributary to Scranton Creek (l:l restoration).
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4 Wetlands Section (EPA) has
reviewed this proposal and sees no evidence that there was any attempt to avoid or minimize the
impact generated by the project. Prior to a discharge of fill material into waters of the United
States, the 404(b)(1) Guidelines of the Clem Water Act require a sequential evaluation and
reduction in impact. By Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (Corps) and EPA dated February 6, 1990, this sequencing may be circumvented when
the Corps and EPA agree that the proposed discharge is either necessary to avoid environmental
harm, or can be reasonably expected to result in environmental gain or insignificant
environmental loss. At this point in time, we have not agreed that this project meets these
requirements. Areas such as the one impacted are important to North Carolina in terms of water
quality, water quantity, sediment stabilization, and wildlife habitat and food chain maintenance.
It appears that there may be other project designs which will not cause such a significant impact
to wetlands. We will gladly review the alternatives analysis, if one is available.
EPA objects to the use of the VSMB as compensation for the completed and proposed
impacts. We note that we have no information on this proposed mitigation bank, other than a
copy of the meeting minutes from the October 26, 2000 MBRT meeting (which we did not

~' i
2
attend). The bank is rather conceptual in nature, and there is no approved Mitigation Plan or
Mitigation Banking Instrument (MBI) for the project. EPA believes that it may be a year or more
before the VSMB is approved, and longer than that before it is constructed. Although the VSMB
is located within the same 8-digit HUC as the project (03020104), EPA believes that
compensatory mitigation for this after-the-fact project should be on-site or as close to the impact
site as possible. It appears from the MBRT meeting minutes that many outstanding and rather
significant issues remain to be addressed for the bank. We prefer mitigation of the already
completed impacts as quickly as possible, and as close to the project site as possible. Given our
opinion that avoidance and minimisation were not addressed in the construction of the work
already completed, EPA does not believe it is appropriate to allow off-site mitigation, especially
out-of--kind mitigation which may not be completed for many more years. It appears that there
may be restoration opportunities close to the impact site.
EPA recommends that the applicant be required to provide at least 2:1 in-kind restoration
for the impacts, on-site or as close to the project as possible. Thus, we recommend at least 25.54
acres of pine flatwoods restoration and 0.032 acres of coastal wetlands restoration be required as
compensation for the project. Furthermore, until an acceptable mitigation plan is submitted and
approved, the project should not be authorized.
EPA is dismayed at the NCDOT's disregard for proper permitting procedures for this
project. Due to the particular history and specifics of this violation, we elect not to pursue
enforcement in this case. However, we wish to stress to both the Corps and to NCDOT that we
will pursue enforcement of future unpermitted wetland activities by NCDOT, including the
imposition of civil penalties up to 5137,500 per day, as provided by Section 309(8) of the Clean
Water Act.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this project. If you have an questions
regarding these comments, please contact Kathy Matthews at the above address or by telephone
at [phone].
Sincerel/y,
`~„
William L. Cox, Chief
Wetlands Section
cc: USFWS, Raleigh
DCM/NCDENR, Raleigh
DWQ/NCDENR, Raleigh -~
NCDOT, Raleigh

3'~
~d.a ST'A1I
~+.
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
January 22, 2001 _
~__ .._.
Mr. Michael F. Bell, PWS
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Field Office
P. O. Box 1000
Washington, NC 28779
Dear Mr. Bell:
DAVID MCCOY
SECRETARY
SUBJECT: Supplement to the After-the-fact Individual Permit Application for
improvements to SR 1149 and SR 1150 in Hyde County, North Carolina;
USACE Action I. D. No. 200011191.
Please reference the NCDOT's original permit application dated July 5`h 2000 and
supplement to the orignal application dated September 19`h 2000. As you are aware, the
NCDOT has undertaken improvements to SR 1149/1150 in Hyde County prior to
receiving Department of the Arnly authorization. SR 1149/1150 was widened to improve
safety and accommodate pavement. After receiving both the original application and the
supplement, the USACE requested some additional information in order to put the permit
application on public notice. This letter is intended to provide the requested information.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project will upgrade SR 1149 from an unpaved gravel road to a paved
facility. The project will involve minor widening of the roadway and shoulder sections to
accommodate the pavement and improve safety. The project is 4.0 miles in length and
runs from SR 1143 through the SR 1149 and SR 1150 confluence to its terminus at a
dead end near the Pungo River in Hyde County, North Carolina. The first 14,850 feet
(2.8 miles) beginning at the intersection of SR 1149 and SR 1143 consists of improving
the roadway from a 20.0 feet travel surface with no recognizable shoulders to a 20.0 feet
travel way with 7.0 feet shoulders. The next 6,337 feet (1.2 miles) consists of improving
the roadway from an 18.0 feet travel surface with no recognizable shoulders to a 20.0 feet
travel surface with 7.0 feet shoulders. Currently, 3.48 miles of the project have been
completed with 0.52 miles yet to be constructed. This project is within the Tar-Pamlico
river basin.
MAILING ADDRESS:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
1546 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548
TELEPHONE: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
WEBSITE.' WNhY.DOH.DOT.STATE.NC.US
LOCATION:
TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
RALEIGH NC

,, ,
hardwoods enhancement, and 533 acres of pine flatwood enhancement. The NCDOT
proposes to debit 12.763 acres of non-riverine wet hardwood restoration and 25.526 acres
of wet pine flatwood enhancement from the Vann Swamp Mitigation Bank in
Washington and Beaufort Counties to compensate for impacts associated with
improvements to SR 1149/1150. Additionally, to compensate for the 0.016 acres (711
ft2) of coastal wetland impacts, the NCDOT proposes to restore 0.016 acres of coastal
wetlands adjacent to SR 1156 (Bishop Road) in Hyde County, NC. The coastal wetlands
will be restored along an unnamed tributary to Scranton Creek. The NCDOT is currently
preparing a mitigation plan for this site.
The NCDOT is requesting after-the-fact authorization to maintain the work
already accomplished and to finish the remaining portion of the project not completed at
the time NCDOT forces identified the violation. The NCDOT requests that an after-the-
fact Department of the Army Individual Permit be issued for this project. By copy of this
letter, the NCDOT also requests that the North Carolina Division of Water Quality issue
the appropriate 401 Water Quality Certification. The Department appreciates all of your
help with this important matter. If you have any questions or would like additional
information, please don't hesitate to call.
Sincerely, r L~
-~ ~ ~ ~
~. R. Conner, PE
Division Engineer
CC: Mr. R. E. Capehart, PE, NCDOT
Mr. David Cox, NCWRC
Ms. Sarah Winslow, NCDMF
Mr. Ron Sechler, NMFS
Mr. Tom McCartney, USFWS
Mr. John Hennessy, NCDWQ
Mr. Steve Trowell, NCDCM
Mr. Sterling Baker, NCDOT
Mr. J. D. Goins, PE, NCDOT; attn. Mr. D. A. Allsbrook, Jr., PE
Mr. Len Hill, PE, NCDOT

t•
JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS
Impacts to Waters of the United States
As requested by the USACE, the NCDOT has re-evaluated the impact totals for this
project. As suggested by the USACE, a field meeting was held to determine the exact
limits of the wetlands impacted. The areas were flagged in the field and located by a
survey party to ensure accuracy on the permit drawings. The F,llipse equation was used
to determine the influence of ditching. In order to determine drainage from the existing
ditches as well as the new ditches, the Natural Resource Conservation Service (MRCS)
was contacted. There is currently no published soil survey for Hyde County. However,
information provided by the NRCS shows Acredale soils as the dominant type along SR
1149 and SR 1150. Table 1. depicts the total impacts associated with the improvements
to SR 1149/1150.
Table 1. Impacts to Jurisdictional Wetlands
Site No. Impact due to
fill and
excavation (ac) Impact due to
lateral drainage
(ac) Total
impact (ac) WL type Amount of
impact to CW
(ac)
1 0.327 1.162 1.489 WPF/CW* 0.016
2 0.105 0.617 0.722 WPF 0.000
3 0.328 1.813 2.141 WPF 0.000
4 0.362 2.436 2.798 WPF 0.000
5 0.554 2.038 2.592 WPF 0.000
6 0.391 2.066 2.457 WPF 0.000
7** 0.089 0.491 0.580 WPF 0.000
Total 2.156 10.623 12.779 12.763
WPF 0.016 CW
*WPF denotes Wet Pine Flat, CW denotes Coastal Wetland
* * Denotes a future impact
The NCDOT is also proposing to finish the improvements to SR 11 S0. This
includes approximately 2,756 feet of currently unimproved roadway. Impacts to
wetlands from this final section of SR 1150 total 0.58 acres. Of these, 0.49 acres will be
the result of drainage associated with the new ditches and 0.089 acres will result from fill
and excavation. Please note that the new total for impacts resulting from fill and
excavation is 12.779 acres.
Mitigation
As previously stated, this project will have 12.763 acres of pine flatwood wetland
impacts. The NCDOT proposes to mitigate for these unavoidable impacts at the Vann
Swamp Mitigation Bank in Washington and Beaufort Counties. The Vann Swamp
mitigation site covers an area of 4,570 acres. This total consists of approximately 785
acres of non-riverine wet hardwoods restoration, 3,252 acres of non-riverine wet

_~~
i' U N ~ ~ R I V E R ~~
i _ _ .__ ~-, _ -- : ,__,~.
J _ ~-~---_ ~ _. ~ _
_-~ fit"~~~L ~ 115
-~ -
-~ 4
I, ? ~. 1 Iii
,~;~ ~~~ lip
\.._
~~~ ~I b 5
I \ II /
I \ ~
( \ ~`
~ ! V~
~~ M
Jj
R~ i
Q ( ~
~~ nr
\~ \ ~~
\'
~~ ~
~~ ~~
.\
~ ~ ~
~ FC/le
\`-
O ~
~~'`
,Q ~.~
II ~1 ~
~~ \
Sb-rr4N ~
I
I

G
c
~roP~Q~ G1~1
~CSTO R+ATSa ~
NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DMSION OF HIGHWAYS
COUNTY: HyOE
PROJECT: sR'--M9
DATE: I tt ~ O ~
SUBJECT: SCALE:
Vs~is~-y A'~AP
SHEET: ~ of I'~S
~ A 7.O
i15]
KEY TO COUNTY ROAD NUMBERS

..,~~~~

~~ r
Vh ~ -~ o
~ O
~ ~ nil D p w '3q1 l1 .N`~!d W ¢~ ~ ~ ~
,,, O
H ~ c w ~° ~ \ l M~ a~ ~ ~
~ ,. u O u 4~ \ \ O of . c z O p .D
V1
w
~ o
3 ~ ~PG~ °' ~r I \~ s E.N ~ a o
\ \ 3 `Q = ~~
9 \~, II III o zoz~
0
~av~o
~~ II I ~ v o~a~
4.~ I > I I u z mama
_ ~ ~ ~
a.
~ ~
3~m~ry ~
C`
l
l ~ ~ y~l~o
~ /
0
o / 43
o ~ / °~-
~ ~ ~ u
/ ~
_ N >>
/ Z ~
~ !~ . o ~~ ~ j >. cp
"~ \ 6E ~ u ~ \ / r ~ ~
~ ~~ X ~~ / ~ ~ ~ wN
W N
`~ o ~
3 ~ 1S J\ ~m // /~ ~ c~n°- ow
g ~ / / / w • - m ~-
m~ /Z / l~ 30? ~~d
gg.}}N~ /
•- O O ~ hOaG~- ~ ~ ~- p O
1 ,~
C 3 J'
Q J
Wg
J ~ ~O to
/N .h
O~~CH Y ~ ~
= o £Z~ ,L6_66 S2l2!
a a NNd3 3 ~ LI,Ll.Z4 N
a
qZ7 _~ -
DITCH .-- ~ a
-r ~-3 _-3 _~ 3 _r3
3 _ ~ _~ M/~ .09 S ~~ ~, ~. CAS
~ ~,~~Ins~a`d~l

~ v
J ~
d
d
0 c
2 ° o
o a o
~ ~~ r
~, 'a-
N T ~~
r ~ M
OD ~
~ v v
~ M
H 'T s
Q „ M
J ~ a
r
~1
.~°'
~~G
~P~'~
~N
J ~\
'c ~ 1 ~
.+
Wr
Q+
1\
N~
3~
A y~
iD
~ OJ ~+
W
O
U
Ski 9%
P~ S~ P~~/
5}3a,g8
P~ SSA ~ °~
~x
~l
N
~ ~
~ ~ r
w '~
~ SZ P
~m PG
d
~~.~ 2.22
P~ S~ ~~
i
r
o'. o ,
~ •1 `n O
O ~ ~ w
~
~
~ v > pp

o T
r ~ N
a~ ~ ~
~ 3 q
~d No
~ 0
IC ~ N
~
~-
F- =
o ~' N

~ ~ N
U y ~
,

_ ~ ~ ~ ~ {fl Z
~ O ~ a m .
~ T ~ O y s Q
.

~ 0
~ ~ w ~ ~
~
° ¢ w
~ o
a
~a
Z UCJma.o n.
0
O
3
J
G
4
b
ooh
~~M
V
o ~ w
e- ~ a
0
C ? !~-
MpRCMLI~aG SZVa `1+ou

C C C ~p
O O p ~ W
U
O U }' m ~
~
~ c
i~
O ~n ~ cn
C to
O ~ N
~
fl _ W
~
O O N O CV .
N 3 ~
N ° O
J~U wU II
it ` ~ o
~°
W ~
O J `- H 2 p ~. N
U M
~ () i fC
C U O O E a
~ U'
}
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O - Z
~ N ~
~ ~.~ ma ~~O
O -. Z ~,> 2H~04f ~

X d ~p
~~
~ W ~ O
H

U a
l-
~
Z Umdov
i a

r
Z I
~ 1 Z
F- { O
~ U `
~
W
~
~

i U

W

~ ~ 1 (/~
~ _ r'1 0 ~
~ ~
~.-a U '
x ' -
~. ~ ~
W _ ~~ V X
h I U
o
N
,--~

° ~
T ~~ ~ { Z
=
~ a ~ F
u \~ O
{ _~
~° W ~ X
~ v, 4. ~ W
Q ~
-Na ~

D
0
`h ~
~

V
rV

o I
:~
~~ .
~
n -

M ~
~~ \ I

r • 1
~
i

~ h
3 ~, `
~ O J
~o ~ d
N ~ ~ os+
G'"M
¢ ~+- r
4 ~ :, I
H r „ I
G N p Ir
Z ~ ~ ~
Q '~ r I
~ ~ ~
I
II
I cn
~ I~
M I
~ r I
I
Q~
~M II
~ ,,, ,~ ~0
~ v Ili.
----- I
OdOLI v~ ~
lIOS 31d~12ld I
---- ~~ Is
~ r
rn
n I~
3 {V--~ "~~~' 1N
1 ~~~
rr~ ' b-1S
1
r //
I I
I
I~
I s~
I ~
I I o~ I
I ~~i
k
Om~'~
I
I I
II
II ~{
0
~ n
II ~
~ PCC STA = 39+21
I ~~
m I I 1

~ I I
~ 3
~

' I II
II
I
W po
P~
~ ~
1~ ~ 1
~ `
~ ~
W ~ ~
h
o ~ ~ 1 ~ a
1 1
d~ 1 \ ~ 3
11 ~ \1 a. ~
1
1 ` `
1
~ \~ ~\
~ ~
~ ~
a On y~N`Y
r
a °o
O ~ ~ w
~. ~
~
i ~ ~ ~~
w
~
o
Q~ r
z ~

~ = o
oP o 0
o
~
~ d ~
H = >. °O
~ ~ N T
r- 4-
0 0 ~ E ~ ~ c.~
= C o C
~ D7 C M Z
`
O
Q~ ~ a n y
~ 5
~
N ° moc; ~- a
.
i ~ = H- ~ D ~
~
H V ~
~
V

Z O~a~a
UC~ma~ w
a
w~ ~
~¢~,~
J
d ~~ f
a ~ -~ *,

oof
3N~~ ~i~ ~s
H~l~w
I

-~
6
~
~ I I
I I.
.
I
~~
Go r^ ~- ~ I~
I I
~~ ~
~ ~, a

H ~~ ~~
i ~ ~

~ ~
~ ~I II

.~ I. ~_
a~
~ II i
~ ~ ~
~
W o ~P ~
~~ I ~
~ I
~I
I g3
a
a I
~I I, ~. ~
o~
~~ I~ I
I
II ~^
~
I I
M I ~
a~
N 11
I
~ I Z
I ~
I
~ Pr sr_ o~.e2
-

I _
r
I
~ ~ o
o
c~ I ~ x
w N
~! I i

d .~ll ~ /~ ~ o roy~r
x I
:~ I y(\I ks
~ a 3
I
I
~ iI ~
n ~
I ~: ~ ~ ~ ~
~
a^o

)
~~
I ~ +
Mm
NO~
.
I
~Z~t
1
' V ~ h ~
~
H
M N
~
1 II ot~~ R c~~
~ o oe ~ cTS °~ ~- o
1 W a
o .
Wl
1
I
l
3 1 j
I o
I j ~ ~ ~
o
05~ `~ ~~
~+~ id W 3
~
N~
a A
J ~ v
i
C ~ O
~~~H

_~
U
i
3

~ ~ '3 M~~``'~~ ~ ~ t QS 4-L~ _
0

d ~ I1
3
o
Q' ~ ~~ ~
~
I ~ °~o o ~~ N
~

~
~ 6 f.
w i
3
I
I N- 3
C L ~
~ o 0
~ p

N
Q O

~ a

/~ I
I I
I ~~
~~ o Jq
~ f7. ~ n' ~
O ~' N
~
'
W {L
~0
~b ~ `
Z
~ r I 11 ~ o
N
~
~
~ a °' E ~,
a c v w
u
L
N ~
y „ i ~ I I ~> _ ~~o -~

a
M
o
I"
I
I
~~
~. o
~ ~ ~
d u o II jl o~ a~a ~ w
,, ~ v
z ~o m~o
a

~ I
~
~ ~
J I
I ~
I ~
I I x o
~ I ~ I W ~
~~
4 ° IO
II I m
vi
~~ of
u

t . ~~
m i Z
~ I
I ~~
N
m
_
PC STA
48+55.53 I ~
I
L
.I f ~
O I • I
co II iI
I a~
a
0 i ~ .
N
~ Q II I I
o! Z I
I.
~
w ~ °' O ~I I
Y I I
W
OU I I
I I D
~ Q X I : Q
w m
~ ~I ~ ~ °
m I
I• ~ Q ~ ~
Z 13 I
~ Q m~ I
i ~ ~ ~

O z -
III ^I~
~
~ y
C
~~H
U W •~o ~~' ~ ~~~
m II z I I O p^ ~ r°
w I I. ~
Z I I~
~ I Z
I I I O
.I I
n4~~1, td1S
N aw

c
0 c
0 ~ ° o
0 ~w
~ U
DJ U
~ ++ ~
~ V ~
O O

0
0 ~'
o
N ~ ~
~3 Na
°
J~ U w U „
~~ ~ ~ ~° r
w~
O
m J ~
Q~ ~ ~ = O TN
w V... U y ~
~ U O O ~ m (~
~ N ~ ~.~ as °'~ «°
~
O
2 ~,> =F~~OS ~

r tv
Z
~ D
~
r_- 7
°C ~ U
~
~
~y ~inO~Q
~mao
~ ~
a
Z
v
i

Z I
~ ~ Z
_ F- ~ p

~,f ~ w ~ H
~ I ~ U
~ !
~ ~ ~
_
~ ~„
_~ ~
U
'j , _
+ a ~
p X ~ i V .~
h W ~--+I
; ~c
o ~ ~ ~
~ ~
T ~
v a ~

O ~
P
~
a
~'
~
w
~ ~

.~ I
o
`''
v ~
a `1 ~ ~
a
,~ ~ _
'~ ' ~ ~ >
,_
~ /'

= ~ 1
~
n;
~
~,(~ I
I
t
t

os~tis~ is
~ 4
J ~NI11rt71tlW
- c r ~ o
~ ~
' O 0~ ~ w
Z
~
°`
~ ~ ~

Z I I I ~, o ~~ ~
~ ~
OQ J ~ I I
I
~ ~" 3 r ~ o O
W WU OQ~O I . CL ~ .Do
~i a
~~ ~~Z
~
W Y~Q
~ I I ~_ ~oPC o~N ~
w~ U S ~ ~
, o o ." ~~ c c~
z
H ~Y ~QW W'x ~~ I I c o a~E i,o
z ~ ~ owe ~mC~ a I I `"' ~~ ~o = ~~o ~ o
Q ? ~, >-- Q o 3 1 11 µ'
w 1~ ~ ~ O ~ _ • ~
~
( O I I ~

J d
Z Z
1
..
L.
I I
I U
Z ~ Q (n ~ F-
~C3mao
J a
\
Z F-
I \
I
Cr
U =
I I
I ~
m ~ ~
I ' '
~
I y
I
° I a
I W~
W
I I
I
Z
I
I I'
\
I Z
~ W
I I
I
W J
'' ~
~I 3 0
. ~
II H
I w
o W
I
'I
I' a p0
~

t o
0. r
..
I i i
I N
O M tp,
O
°'
I
n lu n

PT STA ~ 131

+40.94

~ . N

I z i
I
N
~
O
I I
~~ I 3
I I~
WTI ~
W
3 I
I i.
~
d I
o. I w°
~ ~
d

' I,
a a _
3 v ~
•J _
O
"
x i = ~ ~
.l z ~
G
u~~ ~ ~ r w ~
N ° ~
ca. 3 ~ Mpr~ N ~, ~
sr q Esc *oo ~ ~ry £

00 ~ L£.l dig
'~ K 11 ~r~1bi W c r ~ a
J ~ O ~ ~ W
Q f 6 I ~ I ~ v a>
w
3 r r I I o~ o ~~ ,~
~ ~ = it (I ~ 3 Y a' o 0
~n c r o
O p I i' t`v ~ Cp ~N
p.. I I ~= foc o ~N °'
¢y '' II II O o "~ ~ c~
~ T T w
fy ~' I I ~o a°'~h 3
m
H~o D I I ~ ~.N ~, woad ~^ Q
I II ~ ~ w ~~
~ a w I ~ Z O?~ W ~ ~
!- F- I. a U ~ Q cn O ~- Q ~
3 -' ~ I I a z ~~mao vi a
~ I
Q
h ~ I ~ x
~ ~x d I I I ty o
w I ~ I~
~ II °' ~ I I
~ ~ S I N ~I
~ ~r I~,~I
~ wa) IIN II
I I ~ U
I I
I II ~3 ~,~
I I o.. of ~ ~
I I fl ~ N
I I I a -' w
o L p
d
Ins cp ~ _
_ - to ~ a3r
,,, I ;~
x I x"-
I ~
N
o II .I
~, - I I
~ II I ~ ~-
3 I I -~
a rl I I W W U
.I I. ~~W
I~ ;I ~Qw
I I: _~.
1~5 Obi I ~ ~ ~
I II ~
I I ~~Z
I I Z
I II
MATCK ~,int
STq 13 y ~ bZ!

Y ~
-~ s a
o- ~
~ o
o
J ~~ ~
t ~' ~
a .T.. T-
N w a
p ~ ''~
N ~
~ r~ 5
V
1 ~ r
J ~
~~
N
m
w
O
U
nofgt,l alS
3 N i ~ x~lt~ W
m
I °' ~~
N ~ , ~,_,
IZ I ~dW
I
I
I
i I:
I I,
C } ~~
O ;~ ~ w
=°- o ~' ~
` ~
a y --
f0
w 3 ~
ay, ~
~°
° o
CC ~i JJ
~ C ~ N
L ~
1- = o T N c
~..- w
O O U y
= C
-
(~

= O
O
~

d
~ o -
a ai c
C ~ C
b

n
Z
N p ~l'.~
W ~~r~ahc~S ~- r _N ~ ,~ o~ Q
+SB ~'~'
NI ~
5}w I
. ~ o
~ ~

O
~ >'
H
Z ~ V

?~ W

d F_-

~
U mQ
O m NOf-
Q~ Q ¢
v ~
W

r Z c~C~mao a a

3
~~
x~
W
~-.
W
U
w
~(n Z
~
k r W ~
wA ~=
W
~ `
W
~ A
0'1' ~ G
o w p
O~Z
p ~ ~N
Z O
~ j 01
M
- r,
w
~ H
0.
r T
_N
h Q
W
1 !I `
I~
;: I I
a ~ ~ 'I I.
o. II I I
:i I.
I'
~I I I
.I I.
.I I.
MATCxLiNt
STW 13q +00
h
~.
~3
~d
a
~~_
`~e `~
6~ ~ ~~

~+ _ _
9 a o
O (. C `n ~
o ~ J p ~ ~ ~W
~ O ~ w°. „~ rn _ ~
b ~ ~ c ~ ~ ~
G ~ a. ~ .U ~ o
'~ cn 3 r cn °
d T ~. f0 [~ Q ~ N
~ ~ N O O U ~ ` ~
fl o g 4 p~ •~ ~ c ~ o -- -, z
•- 3 ~( -- O d m c h
Z ~„~ ~ N (1H buS a> .N ~ c ~ ~ ~
.. ~ ~
~ / 3 ~acnOr- ¢ ~
U
rn a. /~ / ri, G Z ~Omao N a
~ ~/ ~/ / W~
. ~ ~ ~ f'
T ~ i ~~
k
tl1 r r I PT STA s 1
o x ~ / ~ ~ ~~~ 405
o y° I /
~ II I ~ x
xq ~ I '~
W CL _ I J
I I ~
I +~' ,Ai z ~
b
I ~ r., I a; w
~ ~U ~ I ~ ~ ~
a ~ ~ G _ ..
f~ ~ I I I W H
•~ ~ s.
~. ~ 0. ~
I,~ G ~ I r
.1 1 ~
`u ~ ~
~ `~N i
A~LH ~
SZ~

t __ ..
J V
~ J J
~ r- d
vl ° O
!~' ~ O
v ti 4
Q ~
s Y~ .%
H y r vJ
O ~ \ ~aL BOG ~~ ~ C /'
fl ~~ ~ ~ off/ W /
Z ~ 0 `
tD 0~3' ~ ' ~ ~ ~
~~ ~ r ~ / y
N ._
~ r
~^ ~a ~ ~ ~ /
~~m 1 i ° ~ . , ~.-
v
e O r `~'D E TL q,N D ~/ '~/
v T j ~~QfYG~ o~ ~ I
w 3 ~' ~ s I
~~ ~
i
~ Ii ~ m
1 °L
A v
i~ ~ 3
wo ~ 4~
~ : I ,~ ~. ~
~ r
°o
_ ~ ~ -~ 4
~, ~ o
P ' 46, 55 N ~~ ~ x o
. 62 ,,, ~
I ~~~
~ u I °'
N ~
~~ Z~~ h
1 ~ ~~
M~TcH ~~NF
STJ~ Jy~ ~-oo
o,
~ ~
O W
~ ~ (
:~ ~ ~
~n ~ w
~ ~~
a b
~ 3 ~ ~o

` ~ p A ~ N
F- 2 ~ ~ o T N
w
O O U
~

... C F
^
p -
O

a~
O ~
_~ c
a. ~
h
.
r N
C ~
~
~, C ()
rc ~ ~ w
>_ _ ~~o
~
O
p
Z O
~ U
?-wiw
U ~Q cnO~-- a
O= Q~Q V
Z Ud maD to
0
N
C7
Z
Q
D
F-
w
n.
w
2 h
yp ?
0. H ~
~~r

C
O C
O C
p vii 0
~ W
~ U
~ U
~ ~
~ ~ N
V ~
~
O cn p7
~n C cn
N
p ` In
p >+ ~ W
~
a in
~ cn
~ ~-
N II. ~
_ ~
~ °
~
~ ~
d X
U W U II C .
Q1 o
acv
J we: L

~ U ~ ~ p p 'E E~ ~
p ~
(/1 i _p ~
d ~
U
~ ~ Q ~ .y i -9
T ~ ~ C
' Q
= ~. Z L > =HBO'= ~
o
~~ cv
a° ~ Z
~
~
w ~' w ~
v a
~mao
~ d
Z v
i

i`
Z I
~ I Z
U - O

~~ ' U
J ~ i W
~ ~
~ t (n
r M ~ ~ ~
_ m Q
l._, ~ Ux '-~.
~ cn
w ~ x
y ~ ~ ~
~ '~ p I z
o ,
?

_ ` v a i ~
~ o
I ~
~° W ~ X
c~ ~ n- ~ W
~
+'o

.
O o
`~' ~
~
V
r~
o
:~ ~

1'y ~ .~'1

- ~
r /
n _ /

ri ~

~~\ I

r I
~
i

C
O
U
~ ~
C ' O
- ~
cn N ~ CV
W U II ~~
W
J ~
~ O ,~-+
N i
•~ ~
~ _
Z
O
H
U
W
O
Ua
Wx
O
a
O
a

C
O
f0
i N
O ~
Q ~
cn 3
C S
~ _~
~'
O O
= C
C~ .O
C N
~ ~ •~
~ ~ Qo
a~
kd o
w~ U
Z
I
I
l
I
o ,
~ O
w
rn N
~ J
W
~~
0
a°
~ N
~ ~ N
U y `
d
~ ~ ~ 0
m°,-~~~
O
= F- ~ D
~ z
~ w o
z?~w-=
~cno~Q
OQ~Q~-
c.~maocn
~~

C
O
~ U
~ ~
N ~
O cn
O O
J ~ U
Q
m
}
~ I

V
t
~ vof>, dls
3 ~ ~ 3Nt1 H'~1b~W
o K ~
y
d
_
~ . O ~
o ~ I I

N ~~
J '' I
~ ~ I
~ ~

:-, ~-
h
4
~ ~ ~
Q 4n ~
~ I
~ I
3~~ ~
~ I

z
~ I
~ ~
~ I

w
o ~ ~ ~ I
~ ~
U ~ ~ I I
~ p
l.n N
.
~-
l.n a ~ 0~ Q
a to I ~.
~j~ ~ \ I~ NI
~
~~1s%~ ` ~ \ ~ I~ I
~ >
c ~~ I
~ ~ ~' ~ O
~ 6 ~o d' k o I I
~ ~
< ~9 ~ I I
<
\~y I I I
s \
\ \ I
I

o ~
+
~ ~ ~

°
I I
z~
~3~ \
~
~
°~
~

~
\ C~
~
W
a \ 111
1
A
W
3
0
J
i
h
~~
3 ~`.'
W \`
h
d
O
a ~°

~/O
~o.
osri vs
oa' ~i-~to 7
oo~p e~1s

v
Z ~'
S = d
~ O
N Q
N a
~ fi
C .~..F
G Y
H ~ .
M
Z ~ ~
Q ~ `J
F ~~ N
S
5
w
O
F--
i,
ova g ass
9N~`1 H~1tJW
O
.~~~ yL
N
T
`~ 3
i ~ 3 c
0
N ~
_w
~ ~
~ '
~o
~ ~°
O ~ N
U ~j
~ G
O - .O
~ a "' ~ ~n
~ ~ u
= F- ~ O
} U ~
I-
Z O Z ~ w .J
~ Q N O H
O ~ Q ~ Q J
U Q [~ a. ~ ~n
N
0
.o
Z
Q
H
w
d
K~
l
V
3~
'~ ~
0
t ty
2
N\f~~v~. •.--
$TP '1+oQ

~
°N ~ o
I

~
I / I
..
~~ ~
O
~ A c > o
.J ~ c`I
.~ I ,
~ N
., ~~
A ~ / I ~ ~ 3 o
~
o r
U 1M ~ ~
J _

J
d
3 _ = z
N W
Ql / O cu.~ ...
~ 4 .- u o ~.
~
~
a
k
u
'
I ~ ~
~` ~ ~
}. ~ ~~
~
I d
~ ~
t. .~
I
v ~ Q to O F- ~ ~
~ c+ o ~ ~ Z ~Uamao N a
y
~ ,,
~, a

o \
~ ~~
ti
J

~

`
J~~
d
3 ~ ~ a ~~o 's

~
r I
h I
'~
I

3
~
I I
~ I
~
~
I
I ~ I

w
~
o ~ ~ ~£
I ~ o I
o ~ I
a I I a l

of I i
I I I
I ~ I ~~ 3

3 ~ ~
1
V
° I
I °
~'
N
I I I
4~
~ A ..
i I
o

I I I
I 3
I
i I
I I
~
I

MAT GH 1 i I
STA -1a0 I

C
O
U
~ ~
C ~ O
cn ~'-
W U II N
W ~
J ~
U w f°
~ C U
O 'w
N
~~ j
i =
Z
~_
U
W
N
0
U~
~ '
W x
(~
O
a
O
a

C
O
f9
~ ~
O ~'
c0
~' 3
C z
i •~
~ _
O O
C C
~ O
~ ~~
` .>
~; Qo
k CC O
w `~ z
I
t
I
o ,
O
w
_N
~ ~
~ ~
~ '
~ o
0
~ o
~ N
~ TN
um
E ~
Ear
'~ a> E c
~a ~ ~o
0
=H~~`C
z
Z ? ~ w
~cnOr-a
oa~a~
Uma~cn
- "
.~
_>
C
O
~ U
~ ~
N ~
O cn
Q cn
~ O O
J ~ U
O
CD
}
N I

.
C o
`^ p
O ~ w
O 0 4 `Ft ~d YS `°
~~~ ~~N ~ N v ~ ~
3N~ a ~
a ~
p o
1 1 , N 3
C L O

'~ N
p
p
~ Q'

..
1 d m CI " N
~ r
1
1
~ ~ = O ~` N
U
_
{ ~
c
3 O O _G v
F o= (~
Z
1 1
V l
1 c >
1
O C
a~ . ~
c~
a ~ ~
b _
~
l
~ ,111
~ c
~ ~ ~
w
Q

J
1 ~
~ ~ ~

3
t ( R ~
~ O1T
1 ~
~ ~
~Q U
v~O~
~ H
~
s ~~ ~
=w ~~ ~ ~ o~ Q~Q ~ w
~~ W 3 1 Z c~CJ maO Vs a
~
N ~° ~ P I
~ , M ~ 6~ PITCH I

TY ~
' PEEP
"'
~ ~ ~ `~ 1 1 ~
~
3
a go ~
.
1 M~ N 1~'
, o
~ h ~ I r
i
3 ~
~ N 1
' 1 ~ r .
1
1
Z b
¢
1 1 x G,

1 1
I
~
I
I
1 1
l
~g~~9~'a \
9L
i ~
V
I
Q ? I \\ I
1
I I
~~ Q
~
1
F
~
y
\
I
~ ~ V ~
I I
I
\ I I
9d -~- 98~S9+St~
~ ~
~
I I I
N I
Q) I
I I
J V I
N ~ 1VbgZ Gl~t~~N t
.^
STS ySi~

a

C
O
U
m ~
C ~ O
cn
cn ~ ~ CV
w U I~ n
W ~
J ~
U y ~0
~ C U
O
N
•~ ~
I =
Z
O
H
U
W
U
.~
Wx
(/1
O
a.
O
a

C
O
f0
~ ~
O ~
a3
c .c
~ ~
~ ~
C C
~ _O
N
`- •-
A ~' >
~„~ a°
kd ~
tJJ ~ Z
I
I
l
1
o ,
vi O
w
~_
v >
W
~o
0
~ o
~ N
O ~ N
U y `
a
~ m ~ O
m a ~ ~
O
= H ~ ~ T
z
z ? ~ w
~cn0E-Q
OQ~QF-
c~maocn
_~
,....
,~~
__~
C
O
.D U
~ ~
N ~
av
N o 0
J ~ U
cm
G
N I

' ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
I19R7 CnE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site : SR 1149 (Montgomery Road) Date : 10/26/00
Applicant/Owner :Department of Transportation County: Hyde
Investigator : Kristen Shacochis State : NC
Normal Circumstances? No Community ID shrub-scru
Significantly Disturbed (atypical)? yeS Transect ID : 1
Potential Problem Area? Yes Plot ID : ~(CAMA)
v~r~~-rnT~r~w~
Dominant Plant Species Strtt. Ind. Dominant Plant Species Strat. Ind.
Helenium amarum herb FACU-
Solidago rugosa herb FAC
Baccharis halimifolia shru FAC
Pinus taeda herb FAC
Spartina patens herb FACW
Juncus roemerianus herb
Remarks:
Percent Dominance go.o °i°
FAC Neutral Test so.o °i°
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (described below): Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Stream, Lake or Tide Gaug Prima
Aerial Photographs: n'~ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
Other:
Depth of Surface Water 0 in
Depth of Saturated Soil 0 in
Depth to FreeWater in Pit 4 in
eM~_ ,-. Secondary:
Soil Series: Acredalc Drainage Class:
Soil Taxonomy Do Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type? '
rote eSCflptlOn: Matrix Mottle Mottle Texture, Concertions
Depth (in.) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
Hlstosol
Sulfidic Odor
saltmarsh muck
WFTI AN11 r~FTFRMINOTIAN
Is Hydrophytic Vegetation Criteria met? Yes Remarks:
Is Hydrology Criteria met? Yes
Is Hydric Soils Criteria met Yes
Is Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes

ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site : SR 1149 (Montgomery Road) Date : 10/26/00
Applicant/Owner :Department of Transportation County: Hyde
Investigator : Kristen Shacochis State : NC
Normal Circumstances? No Community ID Pine Flat
Significantly Disturbed (atypical)? yeS Transect ID : 1
Potential Problem Area? Yes Plot ID : 1 r a
vF.r_F I A 11(1N
Dominant Plant Species Strat. Ind. Dominant Plant Species Strtt. Ind.
Pinus taeda tree FAC
Myrica cerifera shru FAC+
Baccharis halimifolia shru FAC
Helenium amarum herb FACU-
Poa spp.
Remarks:
Percent Dominance ~s.o Rio
FAC Neutral Test so.o Rio
M Y UKULUI~ Y
Recorded Data (described below):
Stream, Lake or Tide Gaug
Aerial Photographs:
Other:
Depth of Surface Water in
Depth of Satut'dted Soil in
Depth to FreeWater in Pit in
c
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary:
Secondary: Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12
1P1t1IPsNeutral Test
Soil Series: Acredale Drainage Class: I
Soil Taxonomy Do Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type?
Depth (in.) llorizon
10 inches
Matrix Mottle Mottle Texture, Concertions
(Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
7.5 YR 6/1 Clay Loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Reducing Conditions
Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
INATI[1N
Is Hydrophytic Vegetation Criteria met? Yes Remarks:
Is Hydrology Criteria met? Yes
Is Hydric Soils Criteria met Yes
Is Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes

ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
/1gR7 [:nF Wp+lanrlc Dplinpation Manuall
Project/Site : SR 1149 (Montgomery Road) Date : 10/26/00
Applicant/Owner :Department of Transportation County: Hyde
Investigator : Kristen Shacochis State : NC
Normal Circumstances? No Community ID Pine flat
Significantly Disturbed (atypical)? yes Transect ID : 1
Potential Problem Area? Yes Plot ID : 3
(J)
Dominant Plant Species Staat. Ind. Dominant Plant Species Strat. Ind.
Pinus taeda shru FAC
Helenium amarum herb FACU-
Andropogon glomeratus herb FACW+
Liquidambar styraciflua shru FAC+
Baccharis halimifolia shru FAC
Remarks:
Percent Dominance so.o pia
FAC Neutral Test 66.7
NvnRnl nrv
Recorded Data (described below):
Stream, Lake or Tide Gaug
Aerial Photographs:
Other:
Depth of Surface Water 0 in
Depth of Saturated Soil 0 in
Depth to FreeWater in Pit 0 in
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary:
Secondary: Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12
1~~lYsNeutral Test
Soil Series: Acredale Drainage Class:
Soil Taxonomy Do Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type?
r0 1 e esCilptton: Matrix Mottle Motlle Texture, Concertions
Depth (in.) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
12 inches 7.5 YR 4/1 Loam
Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Is Hydrophytic Vegetation Criteria met? Yes Remarks:
Is Hydrology Criteria met? Yes
Is Hydric Soils Criteria met Yes
Is Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes

ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
I4ost7 RAF Wptlanr•c 1')plinpatien Manual)
.---
Project/Site : 5R 1149 (Montgomery Road)
Date : 10/26/00
Applicant/Owner :Department of Transportation County: Hyde
Investigator : Kristen 5hacochis State : NC
Normal Circumstances? No Community ID shrub scru
Significantly Disturbed (atypical)? yes Transect ID : 1
Potential Problem Area? Yes Plot ID : t#
Dominant Plant Species Strat. Ind. Dominant Plant Species Strat. Ind.
Pinus taeda tree FAC
Arundinaria gigantea herb FACW
Myrica cerifera shru FAC+
Liquidambar styraciilua tree FAC+
Baccharis halimifolia shru FAC
Andropogon glomeratus herb FACW+
Remarks:
Percent Dominance loo.o Rio
FAC Neutral Test loo.o Rio
uvnnnl nnv
Recorded Data (described below):
Stream, Lake or Tide Gaug
Aerial Photographs:
Other:
Depth of Surface Water 0 in
Depth of Saturated Soil 0 in
Depth to FreeWater in Pit 0 in
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary:
Secondary: Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12
41~t1t!-Stained Leaves
FAC-Neutral Test
Soil Series: Acredale Drainage Class:
Soil Taxonomy Do Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type?
i0 1 e eSCitptlOn: Matrix Mottle Mottle Texture, Concertions
Depth (in.) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
10 inches 7.5 YR 7/i Loam
Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
\A/L'TI nwrn nCTCn11A1w1ATInAI
Is Hydrophytic Vegetation Criteria met? Yes Remarks:
Is Hydrology Criteria met? Yes '
Is Hydric Soils Criteria met Yes
Is Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes

ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
11987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site : SR 1149 (Montgomery Road) Date : 10/26/00
Applicant/Owner :Department of Transportation County: Hyde _
Investigator : Kristen Shacochis State : NC
Normal Circumstances? No Community ID shrub scru
Significantly Disturbed (atypical)? yes Transect ID : 1
Potential Problem Area? Yes Plot ID : ~'

Dominant Plant Species Strat. Ind. Dominant Plant Species Staat. Ind.
Pinus taeda tree FAC
Arundinaria gigantea herb FACW
Myrica cerifera shru FAC+
Liquidambar styraciflua tree FAC+
Baccharis halimifolia shru FAC
Andropogon glomeratus herb FACW+
Remarks:
Percent Dominance loo.o °i°
FAC Neutral Test loo.o °i° .
NYr1RO1 (7(~Y
Recorded Data (described below):
Stream, Lake or Tide Gaug
Aerial Photographs:
Other:
Depth of Surface Water 0 in
Depth of Saturated Soil 0 in
Depth to FreeWater in Pit 0 in
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary:
Secondary: Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12
1A~hlP-Stained Leaves
FAC-Neutral Test
Soil Series: Acredale Drainage Class:
Soil Taxonomy Do Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type?
r0 1 e eSCrlptlOn: Matrix Mottle Mottle Texture, Concertions
Depth (in.) Horizon (Munsetl Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
10 inches 7.5 YR 7/1 Loam
Gleyed or Low-Chrome Colors
1'1FTFRMI
Is Hydrophytic Vegetation Criteria met? Yes Remarks:
Is Hydrology Criteria met? Yes
Is Hydric Soils Criteria met Yes
Is Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes

ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 CAE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site : SR 1149 (Montgomery Road) Date : 10/26/00
Applicant/Owner :Department of Transportation County: Hyde
Investigator : Kristen Shacochis State : NC
Normal Circumstances? No Community ID Pine Flat
Significantly Disturbed (atypical)? yes Transect ID : 1
Potential Problem Area? Yes Plot ID : s~ ~

Dominant Plant Species Strtt. Ind. Dominant Plant Species Staat. Ind.
Pinus taeda tree FAC
Arundinaria gigantea herb FACW
Myrica cerifera shru FAC+
Liquidambar styraciflua tree FAC+
Remarks:
Percent Dominance loo.o Rio
FAC Neutral Test loo.o Rio
NvnRrn nrv
Recorded Data (described below):
Stream, Lake or Tide Gaug
Aerial Photographs:
Other:
Depth of Surface Water in
Depth of Saturated Soil in
Depth to FreeWater in Pit in
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary:
Secondary: Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12
~1l~sNeutral Test
Soil Series: Yonges Drainage Class:
Soil Taxonomy I Do Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type?
Depth (in.) Horizon
10 inches
Matrix Mottle Mottle Texture, Concertions
(Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
7.5 YR 7/1 Loam
Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
r1 r1GTt`RM
Is Hydrophytic Vegetation Criteria met? Yes Remarks:
Is Hydrology Criteria met? Yes
Is Hydric Soils Criteria met Yes
Is Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes

t •
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
`' (1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)

Dominant Plant Species Strat. Ind. Dominant Plant Species Strat. Ind.
Pinus taeda tree FAC
Arundinaria gigantea herb FACW
Eupatorium capillifolium herb FACU
Liquidambar styraciilua tree FAC+
Baccharis halimifolia shru FAC
Andropogon glomeratus herb FACW+
Remarks:
Percent Dominance 83.3
FAC Neutral Test ~s.o Rio
HYI']RAl C~rY
Recorded Data (described below):
Stream, Lake or Tide Gaug
Aerial Photographs:
Other:
Depth of Surface Water 0 in
Depth of Saturated Soil 0 in
Depth to FreeWater in Pit 0 in
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary: Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary:
Soil Series: Yonges Drainage Class:
Soil Taxonomy Do Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type?
r0 1 e eSCilptlon: Matrix Mottle Mottle Texture, Concertions
Depth (in.) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
10 inches 10 YR 2/1 Clay
~ Gleyed or Low-Chrome Colors
Aquic Moisture Regime
Reducing Conditions
f)
Is Hydrophytic Vegetation Criteria met? Yes Remarks:
Is Hydrology Criteria met? Yes
Is Hydric Soils Criteria met Yes
Is Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes
Project/Site : SR 1149 (Montgomery Road) Date : 10/26/00
Applicant/Owner :Department of Transportation County: Hyde
Investigator : Kristen Shacochis State : NC
Normal Circumstances? No Community ID shrub scru
Significantly Disturbed (atypical)? yes Transect ID : 1
Potential Problem Area? Yes Plot ID : '~

~ 1 ~~ ~ ~.
,.~
a..• 5u1t o
y ...,
• ~ ~ ~, '
~~ ~ .
STATE of NORTH CAROLINA ~~~:.` ` ~ ~ ~ ~`\
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ~ ~:~. ,;=~ °
_ .~.
JAMES B. HUNT JR. DAVID McCOY
U
rOVENOR •- SECRETARY
September 19, 2000
~----
Mr. Michael F. Bell, PWS
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Field Office
P. O. Box 1000
Washington, NC 28779
Dear Mr. Bell:
SUBJECT: Supplement to the After-thc-fact Individual Permit Application for
improvements to SR 1149 and SR 1150 in Hyde County, North Carolina; USACE
Action I. D. No. 200011191.
Please reference the NCDOT's original permit application dated July 5`h 2000. As you are
aware, the NCDOT has undertaken improvements to SR 1149/1150 in Hyde County prior to
receiving Department of the Army authorization. SR 1149/1150 was widened to improve safety
and accommodate pavement. After receiving the original application the USACE requested
some additional information in order to put the permit application on public notice. This letter is
intended to provide the requested information.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project will upgrade SR 1149 from an unpaved gravel road to a paved facility. The
project will involve minor widening of the roadway and shoulder sections to accommodate the
pavement and improve safety. The project is 4.0 miles in length and runs from SR 1143 through
the SR 1149 and SR 1150 confluence to its terminus at a dead end near the Pungo River in Hyde
County, North Carolina. The first 14,850 feet (2.8 miles) beginning at the intersection of SR
1149 and SR 1143 consists of improving the roadway from a 20.0 feet travel surface with no
recognizable shoulders to a 20.0 feet travel way with 7.0 feet shoulders. The next 6,337 feet (1.2
miles) consists of improving the roadway from an 18.0 feet travel surface with no recognizable
shoulders to a 20.0 feet travel surface with 7.0 feet shoulders. Currently, 3.48 miles of the
project have been completed with 0.52 miles yet to be constructed. This project is within the
Tar-Pamlico river basin.

ar
S
JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS
Impacts. to Waters of the United States
The original after-the-fact application dated July 5`h 2000 stated the project has impacted
9.5 acres of jurisdictional wet pine flatwood wetlands. The original application also stated that
an additional 1.24 acres is proposed to be impacted by completing the remaining 0.52 miles. No
jurisdictional streams have been or will be impacted by the improvements to SR 1149/1150.
However, authorization from the North Carolina Division of Coastal Management is required for
construction of the section svithin the Estuarine Shoreline Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
adjacent to the Pungo River.
The original application also stated that in the areas where the existing roadway width is
18.0 feet, wetland impacts will total 2~. 0 feet for the length of the widening. In the areas where
the existing roadway width is 20.0 feet, impacts will total 22.0 feet for the length of the widening.
Please note that there is existing shoreline stabilization in place along the Pungo River through
a portion of the project area. The shoreline protection was authorized previously under a
separate permit. In this area, wetland impact will tota113.0 feet for the length of the
improvements. No additional shoreline protection will be necessary.
As requested by the USACE, the NCDOT has re-evaluated the impact totals to reflect
drainage influence from the roadway ditches. As suggested by the USACE, the Ellipse equation
was used to determine the influence of ditching. In order to determine drainage from the existing
ditches as well as the new ditches, the Natural Resource Conservation Service (MRCS) was
contacted. There is currently no published soil survey for Hyde County. However, information
provided by the NRCS shows Acredale soils as the dominant type along SR 1149 and SR 1150.
Additionally, cross sections were taken along SR 1149 and 1150 to determine the depths
of both the current and previously existing ditches. Since there is no way to know the exact
depth of the original ditches prior to construction, the NCDOT measured ditch depths on sections
of SR 1149 and SR 1150 that have not been improved. An average ditch depth prior to any road
improvement was then calculated by taking cross sections at several locations along the
unimproved sections of both SR 1149 and SR 1150. Because the unimproved sections were on
the same maintenance schedule as the sections that were improved, it is assumed that the average
ditch depth would have been the same.
Average ditch depths on the unimproved section of SR 1149 are 1.3 feet on the right and
1.56 feet on the left. The lesser depth of 1.3 feet vas used in the ellipse equation to determine
the influence of the original ditching. Soils information provided by the NRCS and the average
ditch depths measurements from the field were then used to determine lateral drainage effects of
the original ditches. Using a ditch depth of 1.3 feet, the ellipse equation suggests that lateral
drainage below 12.0 inches of the surface, the depth required to sufficiently remove the
hydrology and render an area non jurisdictional, would occur for a distance of 34.0 feet from the
center of the original ditch.
The improvements to SR 1149 included the widening the typical section of the original
ditches. All of the improvements to SR 1149 were made within the 34.0-foot zone of influence.

As a result, all of these activities occurred within drained, non jurisdictional areas. However,
cross sections of the unimproved sections of SR 1150 show an average depth of only 0.84 feet.
Because the depth of the ditch must be more than 1.0 foot in order to drain an adjacent area
sufficiently to be rendered non jurisdictional, the original ditch depths on SR 1150 could not
have provided enough drainage to remove the hydrology from the surrounding area.
As noted above, the drainage model shows that impacts to jurisdictional areas only
occurred on the SR 1150 portion of the project. In this area the average depth of the ne~v ditches
is 1.44 feet. The ellipse equation indicates that drainage will occur for a distance of 44.0 feet
from the center of the new ditch.
Total distance already constructed on SR 1150 is 3,581 feet. Total impacts to
jurisdictional wetlands resulting from work already accomplished is 2.22 acres from widening
the road and excavating a new ditch and an additional 6.08 acres of drainage from the
construction of new ditches. Total impacts to wetlands from fill, excavation, and drainage on the
completed portion of SR 1150 are 8.30 acres.
The NCDOT is also proposing to finish the improvements to SR 1150. Tliis includes
approximately 2,756 feet of currently unimproved roadway. Impacts to wetlands from this final
section of SR 1150 tota14.77 acres. Of these, 3.5 acres will be the result of drainage associated
with the new ditches and 1.27 acres will result from fill and excavation. Please note that the new
total for impacts resulting from fill and excavation is 13.07 acres.
Mitigation
As previously stated, this project will have 13.07 acres of pine flatwood wetland impacts.
The NCDOT proposes to mitigate for these unavoidable impacts at the Vann Swamp Mitigation
Bank in Washington and Beaufort Counties. The Vann Swamp mitigation site covers an area of
4,570 acres. This total consists of approximately 785 acres ofnon-riverine wet hardwoods
restoration, 3,252 acres ofnon-riverine wet hardwoods enhancement, and 533 acres of pine
flatwood enhancement. The NCDOT proposes to debit 13.07 acres ofnon-riverine vet
hardwood restoration and 26.14 acres of wet pine flatwood enhancement from the Vann Swamp
Mitigation Bank in Washington and Beaufort Counties to compensate for impacts associated
with improvements to SR 1149/1150.
The NCDOT is requesting after-the-fact authorization to maintain the work already
accomplished and to finish the remaining portion of the project not completed at the time
NCDOT forces identified the violation. The NCDOT requests that an after-the-fact Department
of the Army Individual Permit be issued for this project. By copy of this letter, the NCDOT also
requests that the North Carolina Division of Water Quality issue the appropriate 401 Water
Quality Certification. The Department appreciates all of your help with this important matter. If

~~.
you have any questions or would like additional information, please don't hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
T
~~,D. R. onner, PE
Division Engineer
CC: Mr. R. E. Capehart, PE, NCDOT
Mr. David Cox, NCWRC
Ms. Sarah Winslow, NCDMF
Mr. Ron Sechler, NMFS
Mr. Tom McCartney, USFWS
Mr. John Hennessy, NCDWQ
Mr. Steve Trowell, NCDCM
Mr. Sterling Baker, NCDOT
Mr. J. D. Goins, PE, NCDOT; attn. Mr. D. A. Allsbrook, Jr., PE
Mr. Len Hill, PE, NCDOT

34-~c~e
33+ CO
32+ OC%
31 +~o
r~~
is
~ ~,,,
i
i ~-
1 ,) I ~~
I'7
i- I IL
ti_ I
i I-
-~:~~~-
i_> =~ ~
(L'
.~ ~ \ I
~n J II
`)
[:~l~II
,~4~,
o~~~
~ ~~ li
i
i-' ~ I
w ~ ~~
~: I I
~' l
~ ~~
~ ~i
G ~~ ~
-`, ~
-- i
I~.
'~ I
I
r ~ 1~ l
I J
I
I~
~ I
I
~ ~ ~ ~~
o ~. ~I
( ~ ~I
~ II
~ ` I
H ~ ~ I~
X i ~)
~-- ~
~~
~, i
'~ ~
;i
7
_I
I
I~
i
i~
~I
I,
~I
i
i-
i
II
C
(~
\•
C
rr1
i 1,
1
(~
(~
,~
~..
~. .
.,
I;
~
~ ,~- _
I ',
~ • v
I ° ~ ~-
~ , ~ H
~ ~
~ «- ~ ~
~ I , r~

N
'
I ` Z
I
J ( H
_
i !•
~
I 1. ~
-,. x

i
~~,
._ ,~
T ~ I
_ ~ i T ~1
=
r
J
i ~
_
~ I J - ~ ''~
~ ~
~ J ~ - Z ~
~
~
.^ ~> .. ~

~ } ~ W

' ~
~
~i Z W ~

J
i .
LJ
D~~O: Z
Q
Z Q
~ UrJ.^_~ a

.~

~,
ti
x
,~

~~
z
J
L
~ c
I~
~(

t

~_ ~ ?
I
I
I
I
I
v ~
n ~
(~ r
L
.+
o ~. I~
~. o
J
O
~N
~ .~
~ O
Z
J

T
~
_ ~ ~'
N
, I
- ~ T
T ~
-~~ ~
X
V'
,.. ~
}
i ,
H
J
ZnZ-,,',j r '
ZGU;O- ~ '
O~cN~ N
vow^_~ W I

i
1
I
,
,~
J I
I

~y
J Q
~
I
~ I
Q ~ ~
N H ~ E- I
~
H _
~ ~
~ ,- -+ I
ti
; ~ J

i
I

34-~~e
33+CO
3,2+ CC
31 ~- o n
s~~~~.,
1 ~~
o I ) ~-
Cc !~
%:
_~
V ~ ~_ \
~ `)
,! I
~ -1-
o 1
~ ~_~ ~ ~ ~
C (L'
1 ~
c0
.~
vial
;~ ~ .
~ ~)
~~
i--
~I I
~Il
O 1~
. ~
Crj I.
~~~
.)
-_ `) I
Cd7
~r-~I
~.
`--
~~
~. ~'
o I. I
~~
v (
~ <
~ )I
X ..~
W 1(
f ~~
111
'~'~
Its
,.
.n
C
~~.
C
~('
1
~~
~~
c"
1
~..
(, .
,~

= ~ ~
=i
~. ___
a
~i ~ -J
~ ~ _ -z--
,
J • _~ j
:> i ~ . ~
-- ~ 1 ~ ,~ W
:~ ..
^J
Z ~' >
-
J Z
7 i O-~„< .J

~
i

I ~~
/
N

. (\ t ~
v ~
~ _~ \. ~ I
'
~~, ( H
I
~- i i, F-
cn
1 ~
~
i ~ w i
t
- ~

i
c
o
i
~ o~
O a~ c
Q ~ ~ ~ L. o
o ~- ~ _ ~_ o
~ F- ~ = c~ Z
a. ,~ _ ;~ °
~ ~ ~ >. F-
~ T ~ ~ 7 V
~ C 1 f- ~ ~ ill
O_
CCY .. . .
r ~ ZpZ-~ W ~
z O~C~Q o
UOmn.o
-s ~~ ~
= ri
~ ~ -_
~-
} t'1
,o ,-,
~° n:
p >-
~ 1-
v
~~P 1 ..
"N
O
O
`lt V
~ ~1
ao-
~~
~ /CJ~ 1
o I\ C
v CYI~
1
1~
Q
~y J
Q Q
~ o J _ "~ ,~
N ~" H ~ O
H _ ~ C
~ o
o > ~~

I I
I I
I II
II I
~ I I I
-~ ~( I I
~ II I
,~ I I I
O
I I
~ ~-1 I I
`~ ° ~I I I
N I
W i mil
o .~
I I I° ~' I
In ~ I
I I^ ~I,II I
Q" I I
I I
~ II I
I I I I
~~ I I I
~ II I
w II
~ I I
~ l
~I~fic~~ ~ ~I I I
:~ ~ ~ I I ~
:J Q .'I I I
I I
~j '' - I I
II I
I I I I
rn.
mot- f i ; .i
~ T- II
:~I c~ -~ oc ~ T--
~ ~ . II
x ~~ I I j
Lu I I I I
II I
~ I I
~I
I I
0
o ;~
Q3
~ L
~.
~ .,_.
c ~
a~ ~
~ .o
~ ~-
co .?
~°
O
U
z
1
0
o ~, o
U ~ O
O
O CV
~ ~ c"7
~ ~-
~ %. C ?~
0
_ ~~-~i
~ U
ZO?Wil1J
~QcnOF-
o~Q~Q
UOmn.o

n
,~
~r
.~
t~

t
'-_

r ~
j

'^
~
,J` ~
f
%~ T vi
~ ~ I
i rl'
.. J

v ~ ~ ~
_~ U O
z
~ ~ H

O ~. U ~ .~~ ^~ {-; i

J

:>
~° ~
~ ~ ~
.
w
Znz. ~
~.
~
z ~~e 0
~
U

~~ I
J I
Q

fJ J
~
~
Q ~ ~
`~ o ~, _ ~~ H ~ .
N H ~ E- i
H - ~ I

V
H
~-1
X
1~
~ ~

I I
I II
I II
I I;
~ I sI I
,_I ~ I I j I
~~ ~ I I ,
o - ' ~~
I I I
/~
`,
.211 -~uP ~ T: I I
~ ~I FI I
vt o ~ I I ~
M i I~
W I I
I ~I
( t o ~~ I I ~
{~ ~ I
I I1`. r111 I
~I~+~'(~ ~ I I
i ~I
~ I I
~ I II
~~ I I I
~~ I I I
w II
~ I I
0 I I
~17fic~~ ~ ~I I I
I I
~ ~ I I
~ ~- - I
I I
~ I I I I.
~ I I ~
~ ~ I
>c ~ f I I I
W ~ I I ~ W
"'
I I a
I I ~ ..
I I ~-
I I I I

o

o;
~~
~

~~ ~ ~,
~~~
~ _ p N
p ~~ ~ ~

A\
O T 'J
r
}
LL1... ~ O
~
~ .
~>
ap
~
?' U

O W
~
z"~z
U ~
~<~O~
z O=Q~Q
U ~~a.0
\~
~
~

W

i
0
Q ~ ~

~ o ~
n. ~
~
~
o
O ~
~ ~ _ ~
=~ `
O
~
F-•~ ~ O
oN
S
G. w =_
O
_M
--• O
~ C T - o T
.-~~ 1
O
L ~ .~
O ~ ~ U h
r z<
z
~
U
z i~Ol
c
-
O~Q~Q ~
_ UO~aO
~(~ ~-
9 l \

(`
y

o

~~ °
`~ '~ (1.
}
~~ V
, \~ ~
. `` ,,
~..7~ ~
.N
0 ~n

O 0
`~'
~1
V
d
a ~Y
;~ Q
_
~~ .~
f~ -
c'i
~ ~
~
l
~r
.,.
~~,
J
Q
~y J
~
J
~ o a _
J Q
_
ri - ~ ~`~ C
o
Z

~ I
( I ,/ O
l
~
'
~ ~
~ v
\
( I I ~
~ ~. ~ ~
i
^
~ ' I ~ ~
, c o tJ~
I I I ~ ~ ;~ p

~ ~
/
i ~
= 7 O
CJ ~` CV

I
I O
~ ~ ~ -. C')
,- ~ .~f-~ ~ ~ ~'

5 ;~ / ~ U zoz~~ z
~- ~Q~OF-

c~l~
~
I
1
;~~
z o~QCQ
v C! m a o ~
a
.
~ ~
;.,
~ a I
~~~

" i
r~P I I ~ ~
' r
,
f Y
/
,~{
'~
1 l
I ~ -L~ _ ~ 'I~
I I
~ ~
~

.~ o
I~
_,I ~ ~
,
- ;; ~ I ~ ~`
~
I ~~
I ~ ~
3 . Z >>
~ ~ s

t
I~
I
, , ,
1 `
~ ~
~,
i ~ S
I 1~
w I V
~ ~
~ I ~ I "-
H q
w ~ i !:
~ h
I ( r ~ : ~
4 J ~

, I ~ !L
C I I a

ti ~- ~
i 4
a
;
~ ~
~ .` ~
~ z 2
~ '
% J
I I
~ •
i~`'
~ .
~
I~-~OQ ~ I , I ° ~ / /
. 1 u ~
~
~ I I ~
~` ;
H

~ I I ~
/ 1
I
i
I
'`.
'

I .
~;
~`

0
/,~
Q
7
LT
J
~lI
Z
I
I
~,.,
c
;,,,
T
r~
I
i
L ~~
_~

o
~ r
c
~=
-~~
z
~i
' ='~ ti N i
_ ~
` _
- ~

o ~
~ T
v
,
c ° T - ~
~. ~
~~
'~ '> ~
c~ ._

..
~

z '~
Z~
W
z ~
U
~
~ J
^_ ~1I
,r
- Q I
~
~
~ ~ I
~
H
~
~ ~ ~
I
~ H I
u
r----+ ~
Z
(.~
H
X
W

yI
i

J -
' I
I I 1/ 1
~ O
;
.` ~ v
~
i < ~ I I I o~
i N ~
' ~ -~~
~ ,,
p ~
_~ r'i
_
~y '
~ '/
I r O

C' H
, v r _

~ N

I ~ _ u
s ~~ ~ I ~ Z^?-,u z

~ ~ I ~ ;i~ z ~~~~~ ~
\q ~~

~a
i , . ,
i.

~~ ~ I I ~

I ~ ~ I 'r'
~ I s
~~
~~ ~
~ ~
Y'j
i•
~
~
W ~ i , H
S ~
~
I ~
io I ~ o
,~, I
N -:, I Z
- ~nI / I 4 H
~ ~ ( ,.,, ' J,

hn
I ,
: ; ,.
L'
3

~ I I ~ I w

f ~ I
D o

~ ~
~1 r ~

y CC
G
I ~~
i
l•
I
I I a
I ~ l Z
% ~ ~ I 4 ,
h
~ . ~~r ~ W
~
~ ' i ~
~~ ~' ~~~ O j I ~~ ~ ~/'`
•

~ .

'r 1 ,~

'
~ ~
H ~ ~: i ~
/

x I
ti I I .
I I ~I
;~.~

1
1
rJ
~~
1
r_
O

O ~

cn ~u
r ~
_ 0 -,
~
~ ~' -
?
-
~
! ~.:v
_
~..._
O `. _ _ ~ "~

~- ~ ~
C c~ _~ i _~1'~ 1 = .s
~ C ~ - ? o
~ ~ -
~ ~ ~ ~ I 1 _ _ - ~ c
4 ~'~ 9 - - ~
I ..1 1 = a~ ` ~r ai
_ ~ N ~
-~ J ` I ~~ - = Z 1`~ H
w 1 -~
~~ +pp ~ t ~ ~ Y r .~ ~
1 -_ ~• ~- w
r ~ ~
~""; ~ I ~ - Z~ 'z i W Z
i l
~; I vCcaa~ n .
~ ~ ` Y~
I ~~ i
~"v ` ~~
,J I ~ ~ ,
l
~ ~ .,~ Z
i ~ ~ i ~~ ti
~~~~
I. ~~
_ ____. L_...~_ ,
a
~I
I I '~ ~ '~
~ N
+ ~ .w
Z ~ ~ ~ I
(DOtOfJ ~ is
~~, ~ 3
~. ~ ~
J ~ a
W I ~ ~ o
i ~ °~ 1
~ F
J ~
~. ~ }--i
s~+~~v w ,
f. ;~~:
_.-- --
f~ /
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ C
~ ~~~ ~
~ _ . ~ ~.

i ~
i ~
~I i
~~
_
Y \
~
` _
-
"
, r

1

~1. H v' i
N o ~ - Z

o[
~ '
_
`Y
> 1

Fes- 1
_ _\ ~'

~~ I
1X l
'
i1
-
1
~- a

=
~
L
1
~
I ~~
~
I
H -t-
d
,~
~~ ~ ~ a
~ >~ ~- `~ ~

W ~ v,
~ f- N Q
J~v

-~'C~'-' ;~ ~
~ V
/
Y~
` O ~\ 7
`
` ~
} \ 7~ ~_
\
/~ \ ~ +~.~
` \' i

~ J
'~u v
;~ ~
H ~~'
.
• ~ J

V- ~ •~
~ ~~
~ ~
C~-
I

V
a
a
(o3fi0d ~-

a•
ti
rs ~ I 1

~ a ' I
O ~ WI
~ ~ ~
I 1
~' i

I
w
1
N

~~ toa
! ,~
~ ~.
I

~, 1
i ~~ I L
~' e N I I
U

i~ ~ .
I
~
~-~
I I L
h~ ~
! I
r
~ I I
I
~ i
1 I
i ~
r--
~ (~i~ro0 __
j ~ ~ I
l
i ~~ 3~
o h'" I
I I

~c~~-an 1
~

J
W I

S`~+C~p 1.
w 1
_..-- ~.

~
lI

~~~. ! t
l'J
i ~ ,
1
~~
~
i
:
r ~ '
~. O ~
1
r ~
I =~"'

=' da :ll
-
.n

- ~ G
3
,
r
s ` - c~
~ r ~ ?~
-= z ~~~
3- ~
z
~'
=
~.z
;
~~
Z
_
~
7 17
~1YQ
vcmac~ 1
n.
ti~ ~ `~
~1 '~,
.~,,,
'' ° 1
{~ ~
~ ~ r
a
T
~ ,,,
LU e
~ ~
Q
o
t~ ~
~
~ ~
~ ~
n ;~
/~,
a

i

a r~- ~o~ ,
~;
_~~
a ~
- _~~
°
~ ~
~ = d >, ti.
'
u
~ ' _ cn~ l
'
o
r ~ ~,
'~

r ~ z~z~w a°; .

z
Uv~2~
O J C N ~
~~!
1
4 M~ ~\

1
/
M
r _.
~ /

` ° .r~
~ C
~
_
o r
~ ~
~ ~
~~ ~

C7~ -X
~ Q
cp
0
o
~
~

- ~ ~
o L ~
~_~ ~

- ---- ~ r
~ C
a
L Q ~'
\\, ~
~_,_ i wad
~ ~ T_. ~V
_~
` ~ H C ~J
Q ~ Q~ P L
` t
~: J

V J
_ ~; ?
`
~ w
J
J
~ ~
C5 ~
~' .

_
..
w
3
c
~_ ~
_ ~ ~N
_ a-
O
~~ OG

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment '
and Natural Resources ,; ~ a ~ ,
Division of ~Vater Quality _ ~,~~}~'r~.~
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor ~,
Bill Holman, Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
August 4, 2000
Mr. Bill Gilmore, P.E., Manager
Plannin; and Environmental Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
P.O. Box 25201 '
Raleigh, North Carolina, 27611
Re: After-the-Fact Permit Application for improvements to SR 1149 and SR 1150 in Hyde County
DWQ No. 000395, USACE ID No. 200011191:
Dear Mr. Gilmore:
The Division of Hater Quality has reviewed your submittal fora 401 Water Quality Certification for the
aforementioned project. Review of your application revealed it lacking necessary information required for
making an informed permit decision. The permit application was deficient in the following areas:
• The proposed mitigation site (Vann Swamp Mitigation Site) in Washington and Beaufort Counties is
not presently owned by the NCDOT, nor has a plan for the site been approved.
• An enforcement action may be pending on this project, and as such, all [he necessary information
needed to make an informed decision is presently not available.
Therefore, pursuant to liA NCAC 2h .0507(x)(4), we will have to place the permit application on hold until
we are supplied the necessary information. Furthermore, until the information is received by the NC
Division of Water Quality, we request (by copy of this letter) that the US Army Corps of Engineers place
the permit application on hold.
Hopefully, we can work together to expedite the processing of your permit application. If you have any
questions or require additional information, please contact John Hennessy at 919-733-5694.
Sincerely,
~~ ,dS1
o R. Dorney
W er Quality Cert fie tion Program
cc: Deborah Sawyer, DWQ Regional Office
Mike Bell, USACE
Central Files
~ '~ ~~
C:\ncdot\SR 1149\cortespondence\000895h1d.doc ~ ~ ~! ~
l~ ~~ ~. -~ t.'~a
Wetlands/401 Unit 1621 Mail Service Center Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1621
Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affumative Action Employer 5096 recycled/10~/o post consumer paper

.' ~ r':
s
~~ : * N ~7
STATE of NORTH CAROLINA"~ _'_'_. _.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. DAVID McCOY
GOVENOR SECRETARY
July 5, 2000
Mr. Michael F. Bell, PWS
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Field Office
P. O. Box 1000
Washington, NC 28779
Dear Mr. Bell:
SUBJECT: After-the-fact Individual Permit Application for improvements to SR 1149 and
SR 1150 in Hyde County, North Carolina; USACE Action I. D. No. 200011191.
As you are aware, the NCDOT has undertaken improvements to SR 1149/1150 in Hyde
County prior to receiving Department of the Army authorization. SR 1149/1150 was widened to
improve safety and accommodate pavement. The following is a chronology of the project as well
as an application for an after-the-fact Individual Permit.
• January 1, 1999: Improvements to include minor widening of SR 1149 are initiated.
• October 1, 1999: The NCDOT District Three Engineer responsible for Hyde County retires.
• October 15,1999: NCDOT staff discovers that no permits exist for the project and all work
is stopped.
• December 25, 1999: New District Engineer is named
• February 1, 2000: New District Engineer begins work in District Three.
• February 10, 2000: After a meeting for a separate project in Williamston, NC, Division
Environmental Officer discusses potential problem with USACE representative.
• February 10-May 17, 2000: Division Environmental Officer in conjunction with the new
District Engineer make repeated trips to the site to determine extent of impacts.
• May 1.7, 2000: Date is set with representatives from the North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission (WRC), the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (DWQ) and the USACE.
• June 6, 2000: On-site meeting is held with the representatives from the WRC, DWQ, and
the USACE. The USACE issues a "tear sheet" citing the NCDOT for a violation of Section
301 (33 USC 1311) of the Clean Water Act. The NCDOT is required to submit an after the
fact Individual Permit Application on or before July 7, 2000.
P. O. Box 850 Edenton, NC 27932 [phone] FAX: [phone]

~.~f
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project will upgrade SR 1149 from an unpaved gravel road to a paved facility. The
project will involve minor widening of the roadway and shoulder sections to accommodate the
pavement and improve safety. The project is 4.0 miles in length and runs from SR 1143 through
the SR 1149 and SR 1150 confluence to its terminus at a dead end near the Pungo River in Hyde
County, North Carolina. The first 14,850 feet (2.8 miles) beginning at the intersection of SR
1149 and SR 1143 consists of improving the roadway from a 20.0 feet travel surface with no
recognizable shoulders to a 20.0 feet travel way with 7.0 feet shoulders. The next 6,337 feet (1.2
miles) consists of improving the roadway from an 18.0 feet travel surface with no recognizable
shoulders to a 20.0 feet travel surface with 7.0 feet shoulders. Currently, 3.48 miles of the
project have been completed with 0.52 miles are yet to be constructed. This project is within the
Tar-Pamlico river basin.
PURPOSE attd NEED
Secondary road improvement projects in North Carolina are constructed for several
reasons. SR 1149/110 serves 8 residences and thousands of acres of merchantable timber
owned by large timber companies. As with most secondary road projects, the primary purpose is
to improve safety. The new roadway width and the eventual addition of pavement will greatly
increase the safety of the travelling public. SR 1149/1150 currently consists of a gravel travel
surface. This surface does not allow for adequate traction and can result in unsafe travel.
However, even though SR 1149/1150 has only been widened and pavement has yet to be added,
the road still has improved safety due to the addition of wider, uniform shoulders where they did
not previously exist.
In addition to safety, there are other reasons for improvements to SR 1149/1150.
According to North Carolina General Statutes, the NCDOT must pave all unpaved roads where
right-of--way is available. Right-of--way must be donated by individual landowners.
Maintenance activities are also considered. Gravel roads require re-grading a minimum of 3-4
times per year. This maybe increased depending on weather patterns and traffic usage. SR
1149/1150 serves a large amount of commercial timber property and each tract is on a separate
harvesting rotation. Consequently, the road is frequently used by logging equipment and trucks,
which creates the need for more frequent maintenance. Conversion from a gravel to a paved
travel surface should reduce the frequency of required maintenance.
ALTERNATIVES
No Build: Tl;e no build or do nothing alternative was not a feasible alternative for several
reasons. The no build alternative will not comply with existing state statutes, will not improve
safety, and will not decrease maintenance activities.
Asymmetrical Widening: Asymmetrical widening was not considered feasible because the
improvements are entirely along the existing route. Wetlands are present on either side of the
road for nearly the entire length of SR 1149/1150. However, there is a berm on the outer edge of
the ditch on each side of the road. This berm is considered to benon-jurisdictional due to a lack
of hydrology. If the project were conducted all to one side rather than both sides, there would be

. ~
an additiona16.0 feet of impacts to jurisdictional wetlands for the entire length of the project.
Therefore, asymmetrical widening would increase wetland impacts by 2.9 acres and would not
offer any additional safety benefit. Therefore, asymmetrical widening is not considered practical.
Symmetrical Widening: Symmetrical widening is the preferred alternative and consists of
widening the existing roadway section from a varying width of 18.0-20.0 feet of travel way with
little or no shoulder section to a uniform 20.0 feet travel width with 7.0 feet shoulders.
Symmetrical widening is preferred due to the smaller wetland impacts and ease of construction
and lower clearing and construction costs.
JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS
Impacts to Waters of the United States
The project has impacted 9.5 acres of jurisdictional wet pine flatwood wetlands. An
additional 1.24 acres is proposed to be impacted by completing the remaining 0.52 miles. A total
of 10.74 acres of jurisdictional wet pine flat woods will be impacted by this project. No
jurisdictional streams have been or will be impacted by the improvements to SR 1149/1150.
However, authorization from the North Carolina Division of Coastal Management is required for
construction of the section within the Estuarine Shoreline Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
adjacent to the Pungo River.
Impacts will result from the increased travel way and shoulder section on SR 1149/1150.
In the areas where the existing roadway width is 18.0 feet, wetland impacts will total 24.0 feet
for the length of the widening. In the areas where the existing roadway width is 20.0 feet,
impacts will total 24.0 feet for the length of the widening. Please note that there is existing
shoreline stabilization in place along the Pungo River through a portion of the project area. The
shoreline protection was authorized previously under a separate permit. In this area, wetland
impact will total 13.0 feet for the length of the improvements. No additional shoreline protection
will be necessary.
Protected Species
There are three species listed by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service for Hyde County that
have the potential to occur within the project area. These species are listed below. Species
descriptions and biological conclusions are also
Picoides borealis (red-cockaded woodpecker) Endangered
Animal Family: Picidae
Date Listed: 10/13/70
Distribution in N.C.: Anson, Beaufort, Bertie, Bladen, Brunswick, Camden, Carteret,
Chatham, Columbus, Craven, Cumberland, Dare, Duplin, Forsyth, Gates, Halifax,
Harnett, Hertford, Hoke, Hyde, Johnston, Jones, Lee, Lenoir, Montgomery, Moore, Nash,
New Hanover, Northhampton, Onslow, Orange, Pamlico, Pender, Perquimans, Pitt,
Richmond, Robeson, Sampson, Scotland, Tyrrell, Wake, Wayne, Wilson.

The adult red-cockaded woodpecker (RCW) has a plumage that is entirely black
and white except for small red streaks on the sides of the nape in the male. The back of
the RCW is black and white with horizontal stripes. The breast and underside of this
woodpecker are white with streaked flanks. The RCW has a large white cheek patch
surrounded by the black cap, nape, and throat.
The RCW uses open old growth stands of southern pines, particularly longleaf
pine (Pinus palustris), for foraging and nesting habitat. A forested stand must contain at
least 50% pine, lack a thick understory, and be contiguous with other stands to be
appropriate habitat for the RCW. These birds nest exclusively in trees that are >60 years
old and are contiguous with pine stands at least 30 years of age. The foraging range of the
RCW is up to 200 hectares (500 acres). This acreage must be contiguous with suitable
nesting sites.
These woodpeckers nest exclusively in living pine trees and usually in trees that are
infected with the fungus that causes red-heart disease. Cavities are located in colonies from
3.6-30.3 m (12-100 ft) above the ground and average 9.1- 15.7 m (30-50 ft) high. They can be
identified by a large incrustation of running sap that surrounds the tree. The RCW lays its eggs
in April, May, and June; the eggs hatch approximately 38 days later.
The area was visited by NCDOT biologist conducted cursory reconnaissance of project
area in June of 1998. No cavity trees or individuals of this species were observed. Additionally,
there are only a couple of places where pines trees that are even borderline large enough to be
marginal nesting habitat. The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program database of rare and
protected species was also consulted. There are no known natural heritage element occurrences
within the project area. The Department is confident that this portion of this project had no
effect on the red-cockaded woodpecker. However, to insure that the remaining portion of SR
1149 does not affect the RCW, the NCDOT will conduct a survey for the RCW within all
suitable habitat in the project area.
Haliaeetus leucoceplralus (bald eagle) Threatened
Animal Family: Accipitridae
Date Listed: 3/11/67
Distribution in N.C.: Anson, Beaufort, Brunswick, Carteret, Chatham, Chowan, Craven,
Dare, Durham, Guilford, Hyde, Montgomery, New Hanover, Northhampton,
Periquimans, Richmond, Stanley, Vance, Wake, Washington.
Adult bald eagles can be identified by their large white head and short white tail.
The body plumage is dark-brown to chocolate-brown in color. In flight bald eagles can
be identified by their flat wing soar.
Eagle nests are found inclose proximity to water (within a half mile) with a clear flight
path to the water, in the largest living tree in an area, and having an open view of the surrounding
land. Human disturbance can cause an eagle to abandon otherwise suitable habitat. The
breeding season for the bald eagle begins in December or January. Fish are the major food source
for bald eagles. Other sources include coots, herons, and wounded ducks. Food maybe live or
camon.

Bald eagles are known to forage in the general area of the Pungo River. However, the
project has not and will not affect any foraging or nesting habitat. No trees large enough to
support an eagle nest were or will be impacted by the proposed work. Therefore, this project will
have no effect on the bald eagle.
Sensitive Joint-Vetch (Aesclrynomene virginica)
Family: Pea/Bean (Fabaceae)
Federal Status: Threatened; 19 June 1992
Best Search Time: mid-July -September
Distribution: Currently sensitive joint-vetch is known from New Jersey, Maryland, Virginia and
North Carolina. In addition, there are historical records of this species from Pennsylvania and
Delaware, though there are no known extant populations there now.
Sensitive joint-vetch is a tall, annual legume, growing to a height of 1.0 - 2.0 m during
the growing season. The plants typically contain a single stem but are sometimes branched near
the top. The stems contain stiff or bristly hairs. The leaves are 2 - 12 cm long and conain 30 - 56
leaflets that are dotted with glands. The legume-type flowers are yellow with red streaks and are
1.0 - 1.5 cm across. They grow in racemes that are 2.0 - 6.0 cm long. The fiuits are 3 - 7 cm
long green pods containing 4-10 seeds. The seeds germinate in early June and the plants flower
from July through September. Fruits are produced from July through late October when the
plants typically die back.
The largest populations of sensitive joint-vetch typically occur in tidal, fresh or slightly
brackish rivers where sediments settle out and form extensive marshes. This species is also
found in nutrient deficient interior marshes. These sparsely vegetated areas allow plants to
germinate and grow with little competition from other species.
Tlueats to this species include, but are not limited to: sedimentation, competition from
exotic plant species, dams, dredging and filling activities, road and bridge construction,
residential and commercial development and water withdrawal projects.
The project does not cross any surface water resources. Only man made roadside ditches
occur in the project area. Therefore, this project does not contain suitable habitat for the
sensitive joint vetch. This project will have no effect on this species.
Roadside Populations: none
Distinct Characteristics:
Source: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1995. Sensitive Joint-Vetch (Aeschynomene virginica)
Recovery Plan. Hadley, MA. ~5 pp.
Updated: 31 March 2000

AVOIDANCE:
All improvements were made on existing alignment. No new location routes were
constructed into or through completely undisturbed habitats. Symmetrical widening was used
instead of asymmetrical widening.
MINIMIZATION
All shoulders are 7.0 feet wide rather than 9.0 feet wide. In some cases with secondary
road projects, shoulder widths are less than 7.0 feet. However, in the case of SR 1149, the 7.0
feet wide shoulders were used to improve sight distances and to ensure that the large trucks and
timber industry equipment have a safe operating area. Therefore, shoulder sections were left at
7.0 feet. Additionally, all slopes are 2:1 instead of a more stable 3:1.
MITIGATION
As previously stated, this project will have 10.74 acres of pine flatwood wetland impacts.
The NCDOT proposes to mitigate for these unavoidable impacts at the Vann Swamp Mitigation
Bank in Washington and Beaufort Counties. The Vann Swamp mitigation site covers an area of
4,570 acres. This total consists of approximately 785 acres of non-riverine wet hardwoods
restoration, 3,252 acres of non-riverine wet hardwoods enhancement, and 533 acres of pine
flatwood enhancement. The NCDOT proposes to debit 10.75 acres of non-riverine wet
hardwood restoration and 21.5 acres of wet pine flatwood enhancement from the Vann Swamp
Mitigation Bank in Washington and Beaufort Counties to compensate for impacts associated
with improvements to SR 1149/1150.
The NCDOT is requesting after-the-fact authorization to maintain the work already
accomplished and to finish the remaining portion of the project not completed at the time
NCDOT forces identified the violation. The NCDOT requests that an after-the-fact Department
of the Army Individual Permit be issued for this project. By copy of this letter, the NCDOT also
requests that the North Carolina Division of Water Quality issue the appropriate 401 Water
Quality Certification. The Department appreciates all of your help with this important matter. If
you have any questions or would like additional information, please don't hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
D. R. Conner, PE
Division Engineer
~ ~~~~
~~
T. Lindsey Riddick, Jr.
Division Environmental Officer
CC: Mr. R. E. Capehart, PE, NCDOT
Mr. David Cox, NCWRC

Ms. Sarah Winslow, NCDMF
Mr. Ron Sechler, NMFS
Mr. Tom McCartney, USFWS
Mr. John Hennessy, NCDWQ
Mr. Steve Trowell, NCDCM
Mr. Sterling Baker, NCDOT

APPLICATION FOR
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PERMIT
(33 CFR 325
OMB APPROVAL No. 0710-003
Expires October 1996
Public reporting burden for this collection of Information is estimated to average 5 hours per response, including the time for
reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and
reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this
collection of Information, Including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Department of Defense, Washington
Headquarters Service Directorate of Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204,
Arlington, VA 22202-4302; and to the Office of Management and budget, Paperwork Reduction Protect (07100003),
Washington, DC 20503. Please DO NOT RETURN your form to either of those addresses. Completed applications must be
submitted to the District Engineer having Jurisdiction aver the location of the proposed activity.
PRIVACY ACT STATEMENT
Authority: 33 USC 401, Section 10: 1413, Section 404. Principal Purpose: These laws require authorizing activities in, or
affecting, navigable waters of the United States, the discharge or fill material Into waters of the United States, and the
Vansportation of dredged material for the purpose of dumping it Into ocean waters. Routine Uses: Information provided on this
form will be used in evaluating the application for a permit. Disclosure: Disclosure of requested information is voluntary. If
information is not provided, however, the permit application cannot be processed nor wn a permit be Issued.
One set of original drawings or good reproducible copies which show the location and character of the proposed activity must
be attached to this appliwUon (see sample drawings and instructions) and be submitted to the District Engineer having
Jurisdiction over the location of the proposed activity. An application that is not completed in full will be returned.
(ITEMS 7 THRU 4 TO BE FILLED BY THE CORPS)
1. APPLICATION NO. 2. FIELD OFFICE CODE 3. DATE RECEIVED 4. DATE APPLICATION
COMPLETED
(ITEMS BELOW TO BE FILLED OUT BY THE APPLICANT)
5. APPLICANT'S NAME 8. AUTHORIZED AGENT'S NAME AND TITLE
(an agent is not required)
N.C Department of Transportation D. R. Conner, P. E. Division Engineer-Division One
6. APPLICANT'S ADDRESS
P. O. Box 850
Edenton, NC 27932
9. AGENT'S ADDRESS
7. APPLICANT'S PHONE NOS. W/AREA CODE 10. AGENTS PHONE NOS. W/AREA CODE
a. Residence a. Residence
b. Business [phone] b. Business
11. STATEMENT OF AUTHORIZATION
I hereby authorize, , to act on my behalf as my agent in the processing of this
appligtion and to furnish, upon request, supplemental information in support of this permit application.
APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE
DATE
NAME, LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT OR ACTIVITY
12. PROJECT NAh1E OR TITLE (see instructions)
SR 1149 (Montgomery Road) in Hyde County, North Carolina

~~~-
I
i ~ ,~
-~,~`~
. ~, ~
-~ ~ i
i
i
~ i
i \
~ ~
,.
`~~ `~
.\
~ F
o ~
t9 ~ _
i~oi -
---~~~
KEY TO :;,Y1NTY ROAD N_wBER$
.•
G

13. NAME OF WATERBODY, IF KNOW (if applicable)
15. LOCATION OF PROJECT
Hyde NC
County
State
14. PROJECT STREET ADDRESS (if applicabl©)
16. OTHER LOCATION DESCRIPTIONS, IF KNOWN (see instructions)
SR 1149
17. DIRECTIONS TO SITE
See applicaticn package
18. Nature of Activity (Description of project, include all features)
improvements to SR 1149 to include minor widening and pavement addition
19. Project Purpose (Describe the reason or purpose of the project, see instructions)
To improve safety on SR 1149, decrease maintenance, fulfill legislative mandate to include to pave all gravel roads in NC
and bring them up to state standards.
USE BLOCKS 20-22 IF DREDGED AND/ OR FILL h1ATERIAL IS TO BE DISCHARGED
20. Reason(s) for discharge
Road construction
21. Type(s) of Material Being Discharged and the Amount of Each Type in Cubic Yards
See application package
22. Surface Area in Acres of Wetlands or Other Waters Filled (see instructions)
10.75 aces wetlands
23. Is Any Portion of the Work Already Complete?
3.48 miles has been widened, no pavement has been added
Yes X No
IF YES, DESCRIBE THE COMPLETED WORK.
24. Addresses of Adjoining Property Owners, Lessees, Etc., Whoso Property Adjoins the Waterbody (if more than can
be entered here, please attach a supplemental list).
See application package
25. List of Other Certifications or Approvals/ Denials Received from other Federal, State, or Local Agents for Work
Described in This Application.
AGENCY TYPE OF IDENTIFICATION DATE APPLIED DATE DENIED
APPROVAL' NUMBER
' Would include but is not restricted to zoning, building and flood plain permits
26. Application is hereby made for a permit or permits to authorize the work described in this application. I certify
that the information in this application is complete and accurate. I further certify that I possess the authority to
undertake the work d scribed herein or am acting as the agent duly authorized agent of the applicant.
-. ~ (J~
SIGNA URE OF APPLICANT ATE SIGNATURE OF AGENT DATE
The application must be signed by the person who desires to undertake the proposed activity (applicant) or it
may be signed by a duly authorized agent if the statement in block 11 has been filled out and signed.
18 U.S.C. Section 1001 provides that: Whoever, in any manner within the jurisdiction of any department or
agency of the United States knowingly and willfully falsifies, conceals, or covers up any trick, scheme, or
disguises a material fact or makes any false, fictitious or fraudulent statements or respresentations or makes
any false writing or document knowing same to contain any false, fictitious or fraudulent statements or entry,
shall be fined not more than 510,000 or imprisoned not more than five years or both.

~ ~ ~ ~
/
I ~ ~ f~ _ ~ _
Y~

' l
~
~ ~ (~ f
I \
,
'f~'-~ ;.
~'
1` rt I~ ~

/`'I %
i 4
f /
~ ~ )11y
' I
I
~ I
~
I
~ ;~
`' ~
~ I
I
r,
\
` 0 0 -~' ~ ~

.
~;-,
, I ~ (..t 1
~
~;% I ~ I V ~
= ~
~ i I ~ i ~~\
~ ~ ~ I ~ ~~
i
.I ~ ~~
i ~

1 %. r
I
'
C
`~ ~ i i I ;
.
~
`
< I
ii
• i
I
~
~ I
j
~
~ ~
~ - I '
-
' JO +~~'
~~
,~ .
~I_~.
~~
G ,
I

i
.`• ~ '~
~
a~ ~

' I i I
I I I ~ 't .
~ ~ ~
\~ I
I
~i~ . i .`.,. ! II , ~l~
,~`~~ ~ I I`- ~
I ~ 0 v + ~~
L i _
I I I ; ~ ~.J
- i I ~
~
I I
; l~
.~ ~ II ~ ,+

~ I
I' ,~
,
!~ c u~pc~ r.. i I /
!z o~~° ~-, ~
,
'I ~ I~ ,~~~ °~.

~C r
m z G Z ~.
~. I
~
~ -1

i~ .. i ~. y. ~=, i , I i - it ~~ ~~ _; ~ ~ y -~ ~'
- ~
-- I I. ?' ~
•
;
..
~'
I W` =~ co '~ C I I I I

C `
~I I~
~~
~ 1
C ~ ~ ,
~
'~ ~ f 'i , I~ ~,~I I1 ` , i
I~ it I ( .

p I ~ 1-~ m A

I
. I H

i --1 ~,.~ a

~ H

_ N
~
~ _
I H •- ~
r °. c~.
~ Q ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~i
~ ~
r
~ m
' ~

D Z
-
'D Ocnj~ ! C7
z m_z.;z
n
~
~ .. ~
:~ { j
~ ~ ~
~~ I <_' =~
~ ! ~
•
I O
1 ~ L ~ =
' ~J
J
1 ~ ~ ~
~ - c
~ ~
C
~I ~
G. ~
G
-. T
~ J ~
I C ~ C: 1 ~
C '< C
~

I :.~ i T

i ~
~
I ~,
Cn ~
~ I ~_
J
I
- ~
t
\ IW)
v I
_ ~
~~
C ~ ~ `
~ ___..
~ I .p`
1 ,
O
4
W
I~
v
o~
I 'o
J ~ _
~ ~ o ~,
I °.
~ J
i -
\/l I _ ~
wl
_ - -
~~ ~
i \
~ J
N,
~i
Cn ~~

3
li
I?
`J
n

G,
~,
- -~ -~
S
X
IZ
Im
z
a
~~
v

z
0
C
R'i
C*~
C'
L1
z
m
n
.~

v o~capc~ z
D
D
D i~D~
ipc (~
z m~z~z
~ ~
<
m -+
~ ~
~~
~ ~.

~
~ O ~
.
~ ~ - c O
w ;~ G ~ T O
~n1 ~
~
~ ~
n
C ~ ~ ~
C `< ..
~ ~ N

~' =' :n o
~ ~
o"
J
i. i
~ i
i
i
I
I I
I

I i
I~
~
I I I
.; ,I ~
~ I
~~ I I
II ~
I ~
I I _,
I I ~ ___,
~ I I
I i CD
, ~ I
;~ I I r
I
;~ I
; I I ~'
I ! =--
.
; I I I. ~ ~
,
~;; I I ;: j
~ i
'~i i I ---~
I ~ ~
I
i I I
~

i
~ i I ~

"~ i ~
it z
i 1
~ I I
~
(~ i I ;;~
I I
I i --~
I ~~ ~
I
I' I ~,
I
~i ~
~;
I
~

i ~- ~-
~~I
I,
II I '
I
I
I I '
I ;, ~ j <»
o
I^ II I l
~
I I
/~
I
I ~ -r,
~: I
~~ I
; I-
r I t
I ~
I
,
I
I
1,
/ I i i
I
~
I ,
C~O+-~I~
~~~~-LIB

t, IJj

E ~

p I ~

L
~
~ ~-~

_
_ m

r
0
Z
~
I `\
r _ ~I
r
I
I ~~
' I
-~ ~ ~ ~
l _ .__
~~ ~ ~ ~,
I-- - - - - - - - - - - --x-
= ~ ~-
` v, -
~ - _ _ ,~
_ - .~,.'
C `
- I ~~' o -
0
Y.
0
n
-j-~- -
I ~
~~ ' - O
I ' o ~'
I r
~E~~ii - - ------------ I - ~ - - - -" -
~i
,~ - - - - - - - - -• --'c
G-~Cn
-
Z
~ p
D;.;D
`
> 1p~nD
c
z r-z~z _

~;, ~ p -_
~ <
v~
O

,<~- c i
~: - ~ :~
_ --
- ~.
s o- - ~~-
-
c _ ~
c~ c
_ _
~
~
_
_ _ f
°~ i =
t -
I r
~ - J
t..? i - 6'
{
''- -
~ i I ._
/Iw I
I
.1
n
x
r h
O H
OO 4`
L
- .,_
~ `
` <
m

z
s

~ i
i
~
-.~L
i

7
V1
~ G uwQC7 ~ Z
O i
C
CG H C'J
Z f~I
.. ~ Z 0 Z
~
~-~ ~ i
m ~ v
<~ =~
J
,
~ i
,
I C
~- ~ ~.

-
C - ~:
r ~
I
c:
~'
_
-
i •~ ~.,
! f C
^
~'( ~ ~ ~ J
i ~ I O
C' J
~ ~- i
~.~=~
~~~ I
II `
,a
~ I ;
~'~ I I ~~
,~
I I :~
~`
~ ~
i ~
~-
.,
~ ~ ~ ~;
-, ~ ~ , ,;
,.r
:i r - , ~ ;~
-,
:,
I ' ~'
,;
,.
:;
.1
_: _ ~i ~
I. I /1
I_ ~_i
_~~,
~~,
:} ,
~, ~ i '.
I
:i;~I i
:~~
f~
G :~
;,
ii i 1
,i - ~~~~
/. /, I ~ '^
-E~ -
~i.
~ ~ , ^i
i
' ~ ~S
'. t~
f ~
~t`.f
!~ ~
~ I i
i
o~~~-~i

~,~r~ ~
.-' -
-r :~~~~~
'? ,
~v~ {
~t.-'~ ~
l~ !

I iTt
O { H
C ~ ~
~'~ ! ~-{
`' ~ z
C. i
I ~
i
~_' ' m
H
D
r
~t ~,J V ~ ~j J ~

~zc
~
m n { ~ ~
~'
~
Lo
J

~
~ ~
~~ ~~,
~ ~ v
~ ~ J7 ~ i
- l
r
O ~ I
c
.- a
p H
- N
W

i ~' m
i .~ -
~~ I~ ~
i ~
~~ - ~
.. . I
~~~ ~ 1 J_ iS
~` ~
~ ` _~_
_ ~.~- - - - - - - -x - -- -
~ ~ G- n
o ~
~ ~ ~~
I- , ~ ~
~- !-_ ~s
_ .~- ~~
~,, ,x,
_w _
X
-
~ i
~_ ' m
• I y
- ~ ~
_;_. __.______ _.____._____.____ X
IZ
~ ~ ~.6
~ `~ ~ ~
I i
I i
~ ,^l
Ci X
~ H
O c"
c,-~, -i
~^Z
1

`~~^ ~
• -1 m
`~
i ~~/% `\ it
r `<" ~~ ;1
~ N :~~~ ~ '~ ~~ ~ ~
•- x
n
~I -~ _:r 4f~~'
% +' ~+ \'
_•
r ~, ~ ~~
. ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~
`~~ ~'~ \
~,,~~~ ~ _
~~~~ _~
. ~,~ ~ : ;
r_'~` ; ,
~.
,:~ • I
.. ~~~ `~;
1 - ~ •~ I
i ..
J -_ _ _ - }lip , _~ l ,_ --
_~ _ ~ -7~ r~ ~ I-. _,
_ -_G _ ~1 ~~_r
- -
ory _ p - _i i : ~~ -•
al _ r, ~y ~'~. ~ _
\' !~ T ~'~
_ ~ -r~~~
., _. ~~
~~
~r:
.\
1 ~
.~ z:.~
,J`._~;~

i
T
H
r Nr+
,~ ~ m
~ ~
~~ ~
~ ~
c~
H
f~
~ o ~
Nm~
n
~ ~ A
0
a `~
p
rte H
~ N
M ~
C --~
c o
~ ~
---,
~
I Xl ~--a
O

~ F-i
~ H
N

'~l ._ ~
I H
_
~ ~ H
n
r
\/ ~~, _
~ ~
~ i
< ~ -
_~ ~
Y ~ I O
O ~^ -(-
S ~ ~ -9 .
I I' ~ o
-e-
~E--~
J-i-- - - - - -- ----''-
~ ~~_ 'S
W ~ / - - - - - - - - - - -
-~- ---- -- - - ^:c
I ~~

~
D -= p ~~
.z rinzGZ C ~ G

- _ ~ 'r
`~ ~ 't
'
\ ~ D
~
C.' i ~
tL - ~ - -
- -- ;_
- ~
.~ -
~ v -u I = C
I g =
j
~ ~~ ~ ~.
c ~ _
i
~ ~
D
-i ~
~ ~
r ~
l-{
R1 ` <
r c1

-~
,~
0
0
:r
m
a
xr'1
H
-~
h
z

,O
--
G H
-N

"~bOS~s
~ ~ z Boa
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers
Post Office Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
ACTION ID No. 200011538 March 8, 2001
PUBLIC NOTICE
THE NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (NCDOT),
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS, Post Office Box 25201, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201, has
applied for a Department of the Army (DA) AFTER-THE-FACT (ATF) PERMIT pursuant to
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act TO ALLOW FOR PROPOSED AND COMPLETED
CLEARING, FILLING AND GRADING FOR SECONDARY ROAD IMPROVEMENTS
WITHIN WETLANDS TO FACILITATE WIDENING OF SR 1149/1150 IN HYDE COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA. Approximately 2.06 acres of wet pine flatwoods and 0.016 acres of
coastal marsh have been filled and 10.13 acres of wet pine flatwood drained without prior DA
approval. The applicant proposes to fill an addition 0.09 acres and drain an additional 0.49 acres
of wet pine flatwoods for a total of 12.78 acres of filled or drained wetland impacts.
This public notice does not imply, on part of the Corps of Engineers or other agencies,
either favorable or unfavorable opinion of the work performed; but it is issued to solicit
comments regarding the factors on which a final decision will be based. Legal action has been
suspended pending the outcome of this consideration.
BACKGROUND: The following is a chronology of the project:
a. January 1, 1999: Widening of SR 1149 is initiated without DA permit approval.
b. October 15, 1999: NCDOT staff discovers that no permits were attained for the project
and all work is stopped.
c. May 17, 2000: Date is set with representatives from the North Carolina Wildlife
Resources Commission (WRC), the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (DWQ) and the
USACE to review the site.
d. June 6, 2000: On-site meeting is held with the representatives from the WRC, DWQ,
and the USACE. The USACE issues a violation notice citing the NCDOT for a violation of
Section 301 (33 USC 1311) of the Clean Water Act. The NCDOT is required to submit an ATF

'` ° i 2
permit application on or before July 7, 2000.
e. July 5, 2000: ATF permit application received but was incomplete. NCDOT was
instructed to include wetland impacts due to drainage.
f. September 19, 2000: Supplement to ATF permit application received and the ditch
measurements were determined to be inaccurate. An on-site investigation was conducted on
October 24, 2000, and the drainage impacts were determined.
g. February 19, 2001: Final ATF permit application was received and application was
determined to be complete.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The following description of the work is taken from data provided by the applicant and
from observations made during onsite inspections by a representative of the Corps of'Engineers.
Plans submitted with the application show that the NCDOT proposes to finish improving SR
1149/1150 from an unpaved road to a paved facility. The project is 4.0 miles in length and runs
from SR 1143 through the SR 1149 and SR 1150 confluence to its terminus at a dead end near
the Pungo River in Hyde County, North Carolina. The first 14,850 feet (2.8 miles) beginning at
the intersection of SR 1149 and SR 1143 consists of improving the roadway from a 20.0' travel
surface with no recognizable shoulders to a 20.0' travel surface with 7.0' shoulders. Currently,
3.48 miles of the project have been completed with 0.52 miles yet to be constructed. This project
is within the Tar-Pamlico river basin.
Wetland impacts occurred at 6 separate site and is proposed to occur at one additional site.
Total impacts to jurisdictional wetlands resulting from work already accomplished is 12.20 acres
from widening the road and excavating a new ditch. NCDOT proposes to fill and drain an
additional .58 acres of wetlands.
NCDOT proposes to mitigate for the 12.77 acres of wet pine flatwood impacts at the
proposed Vann Swamp Mitigation Bank (VSMB) in Washington and Beaufort Counties. A
mitigation banking team has been established but no prospectus or banking instrument has been
approved. The proposed VSMB covers an area of 4,570 acres. This total consists of
approximately 758 acres ofnon-riverine wet hardwoods restoration, 3,252 acres ofnon-riverine
wet hardwoods enhancement, and 533 acres of pine flatwood enhancement. The NCDOT
proposes to debit 12.77 acres ofnon-riverine wet hardwood restoration and 24.84 acres of wet
pine flatwood enhancement from the VSMB to compensate for impacts associated with
improvements to SR 1149/1150. Additionally, to compensate for the 0.016 acres of coastal
wetland impact, the NCDOT proposes to restore 0.016 acres of coastal wetlands adjacent to SR
1156 (Bishop Road) in Hyde County, North Carolina. The coastal wetlands will be restored
along an unnamed tributary to Scranton Creek. The NCDOT is currently preparing a mitigation
plan for this site.

3
According to NCDOT, the purpose of the proposed work is to accommodate placement of
pavement on an unpaved road and to improve safety. SR 1149/1150 serves 8 residences and
large tracts of merchantable timber. Conversion from gravel to a paved travel surface should
reduce the frequency of required road maintenance. A site map is included with this public
notice along with the overall plans showing the proposed and existing construction and wetland
impacts.
The applicant has determined that the proposed work is consistent with the North
Carolina Coastal Zone Management Plan and has submitted this determination to the North
Carolina Division of Coastal Management (NCDCM) for their review and concurrence. This
proposal shall be reviewed for the applicability of other actions by North Carolina agencies such
as:
a. The issuance of a Water Quality Certification under Section 401 of the Clean
Water Act by the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ).
b. The issuance of a permit to dredge and/or fill under North Carolina General
Statute 113-229 by the North Carolina Division of Coastal Management (NCDCM).
c. The issuance of a permit under the North Carolina Coastal Area Management Act
(CAMA) by the North Carolina Division of Coastal Management (NCDCM) or their delegates.
d. The issuance of an easement to fill or otherwise occupy State-Owned submerged land
under North Carolina General Statute 143-341(4), 146-6, 146-11, and 146-12 by the North
Carolina Department of Administration (NCDA) and the North Carolina Council of State.
e. The approval of an Erosion and Sedimentation control Plan by the Land Quality
Section, North Carolina Division of Land Resources (NCDLR), pursuant to the State
Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 (NC G.S. 113 a-50-66).
The State of North Carolina will review this public notice to determine the need for the
applicant to obtain any required State authorization. No Department of the Army (DA) permit
will be issued until the coordinated State viewpoint on the proposal has been received and
reviewed by this agency, nor will a DA permit be issued until the North Carolina Division of
Environmental Management (NCDEM) has determined the applicability of a Water Quality
Certification as required by PL 92-500.
This application is being considered pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33
U&.S.C. 1344). Any person may request, in writing within the comment period specified in this
notice, that a public hearing be held to consider this application. Requests for public hearing
shall state, with particularity, the reasons for holding a public hearing.

4
The District Engineer has consulted the latest published version of the National Register
of Historic Places for the presence or absence of registered properties, or properties listed as
being eligible for inclusion therein, and this site is not registered property or property listed as
being eligible for inclusion in the Register. Consultation on the National Register constitutes the
extent of cultural resource investigations by the District Engineer, and he is otherwise unaware of
the presence of such resources. Presently unknown archeological, scientific, prehistoric, or
historical data maybe lost or destroyed by work under the requested permit.
The District Engineer, based on available information, is not aware that the proposed
activity will affect species, or their critical habitat, designated as endangered or threatened
pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973.
This notice initiates the Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) consultation requirements of the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. The DE's initial determination
is that the proposed project would not adversely impact EFH or associated fisheries managed by
the South Atlantic or Mid Atlantic Fishery Management Councils or the NMFS.
The decision whether to issue a permit will be based on an evaluation of the probable and
existing impacts, including cumulative impacts, of the proposed and existing activity and its
intended use on the public interest. Evaluation of the impacts which the activity may have
on the public interest requires a careful weighing of all those factors which become relevant in
each particular case. The benefits which reasonably maybe expected to accrue from the proposal
must be balanced against its reasonably foreseeable detriments. The decision whether to
authorize a proposal, and if so the conditions under which it will be allowed to occur, are
therefore determined by the outcome of the general balancing process. That decision should
reflect the national concern for both protection and utilization of important resources. All factors
which maybe relevant to the proposal must be considered including the cumulative effects
thereof. Among those are conservation, economics, aesthetics, general environmental concerns,
wetlands, cultural values, fish and wildlife values, flood hazards and flood plain values (in
accordance with Executive Order 11988), land use, navigation, shore erosion and accretion,
recreation, water supply and conservation, water quality, energy needs, safety, food and fiber
production, mineral needs, considerations of property ownership, and, in general, the needs and
welfare of the people. For activities involving the placement of dredged or fill materials in
waters of the United States, a permit will be denied if the discharge that would be authorized
by such permit would not comply with the Environmental Protection Agency's 404(b)(1)
guidelines. Subject to the preceding sentence and any other applicable guidelines or criteria,
a permit will be granted unless the District Engineer determines that it would be contrary to
the public interest.
The Corps of Engineers is soliciting comments from the public; Federal, State and local
agencies and officials; Indian Tribes and other interested parties in order to consider and evaluate
the impacts of this proposed activity. Any comments received will be considered by the Corps
of Engineers to determine whether to issue, modify, condition or deny a permit for this proposal.

1

5
To make this decision, comments are used to assess impacts on endangered species, historic
properties, water quality, general environmental effects and the other public interest factors listed
above. Comments are used in the preparation of an Environmental Assessment (EA) and/or an
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA). Comments are also used to determine the need for a public hearing and to determine
the overall public interest of the proposed/existing activity.
Generally, the decision whether to issue this Department of the Army (DA) permit
will not be made until the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) issues, denies,
or waives State certification required by Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. The NCDWQ
considers whether or not the proposed activity will comply with Sections 301, 302, 306,
and 307 of the Clean Water Act. The application and this public notice for the DA permit serves
as application to the NCDWQ for certification.
Additional information regarding the Clean Water Act certification may be reviewed at
the offices of the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ), at the address specified
below. Copies of such materials will be furnished to any person requesting copies upon payment
of reproduction costs.
All persons desiring to make comments regarding the application for Clean Water
Act certification should do so in writing delivered to the North Carolina Division of Water
Quality (NCDWQ), 1621 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1621, on or
before March 30, 2001, Attention: Mr. John Dorney.
Written comments pertinent to the proposed work, as outlined above, will be received in
this office, Attention: Michael F. Bell, Washington Regulatory Field Office, Post Office Box
1000, Washington, North Carolina 27889-1000, until 4:15 p.m., April 6, 2001, or telephone
[phone], extension 26.

~/ ~ N G p R l V~E R/ ~~
~ -~
I or.. rw~r ~'~~~~--~" ~ ~ ~Oti
~ -~~~~ i.
~~~ ~ ~
.\~ ~' ,, n
? I
j w
~ I
\,~~ MwM
~;,, i ~~~
~. ~
~,.
.\ ~ , ~~~,
~~ '~
~. ~~ ,~
i ~ `~~
'.
~ ° ~
V. /
~l~i \ I it
n~ ~ ~
i
r
i)
i
-~.
l

e
C
~r'opa5~~ c41
(CSTO R.ATSa 1~1
ly9/1150
NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATIC
-_ DMSiON OF FIIGAWAYS
COUNTY: Hype
PROJECT: sR'-ty9
DATE: I I zZ d o t
~un~~c: t': SCALE:
Ys~Ty AAA P
SHEET: ~ of ~'TS
I R ~,p
~~
KEY TO COUNTY R04D NUMBERS

.~
1 ~ ..~
V ~ ~ ~
V
' ~ "' Y w Q
r
d o
~ w ~` c 60~~ ~4 ~ ~
~n ~ iy ^ ~ p
°' N c ~ w 'jq1 l9 .~l7id ~ ¢3 ~ ~ ~ rn ~ l~I
Oo . N O r ~ ., O c>
• " ~, .r m r ~ cr
O
i " u .~ u 4~ \ l o ~ a3 R. No 0
.~
d
~ ~ ~~\ 0. ~ o \ \\ ~ ~ U E~ c C~
~ ~ 1\ \ 3 ~o ~~o I
~ ~ Q ~ o
~ 3 1I ~I v Zo?~w 1
~ r, °a~no~ ¢ ~
ng oL ~ ~ i I~ ~ ~, Z ~ O m a o v~ a
a
a d
7
Iy '' ~ nJ r' a°~
r ` ~ ~'
;~
l f ~ H~1~p
/ / ~ ~
o ~ ~% ~ 3
~ ~ a~
~ ~ N ~ ~ / n
r
/ ~ W N
~~ b1S °``' / w Z~ ~z
3 ° J\ ~m // // ~ a~ x
ggNg /
N / W ~~ mH-
z L~
1 1 ~n v~ ,gyp ~~y~P~ / / / ~j p ~ ~ 0
G. 1 1 ~'~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ (ZZn
~OmWZ ~G ~' ./ /~~ / '0~2 Q
U •~ ~,y N
O J ~ ~ ~~
U {.~`~ h0
/ h°' yJ m .
~ ~
D~SC~ z ° ?
a a2 _
a LZD NNd3 ,L6'fi6 Sb2i3r,
bZ7 3 „LI,Ll.Z4 N
15" DITCH '- -
_ _ _ a
~' i- 3 .---3 -~ 3 ----~'a
. - ~ ~-3 --
3 ---
3 ~_3 _---
(_ ~ _~ M~~ ,09 V
3~~ins

~
J
d ~
~

6

3 O
_ C
°

~ ~
i~ 0
v
N r M ~ 3t1~^~~~~ . ~Y
~ ~., ~ 1
a ~ ~ .~ h
~ M = Z J
N'S s a~ ~
.~ »
z ~ Wr' ~
rn
Zy ~
w ~ a~
rn
~~
N~
W
O
1-
U
r
r
~ ~
7~
x
tsi ~
_ 5k~9
P~ 5~ P~~~
~~3a.9g
P~ SSA
a,
nx
~l
~1
~°'
~~G
~PG~
. 4+~ 2.22
P~ Sl
4 f
r .i
UJ h J
T
z ~ r
W ~
o~ '~},L g4
P ~ S~ P '
m
a
r

C v N p
o E ~w
°
:°
~ ~ ~ .-- ~

3 a ~g
O
d.
fC ~ ~ N
~ ~ ~ N
~.'
O O ~ m `

C - F m
C p .D
°
C a
' d
i .
e ~, °
~ u
~
.> _ ~O
Qo

O r
Z O U
?~
jj
=a ~
~no~
~ ~
Z a mao
0
O
v a,
~~
O J
O
~3
~VIRTGNLING S'T~ `1+OU

.~
c
~ ~-
g
~ o0
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
N
N ~ ~ ~ _
~ ~ J
O cn
C in C N
N cn O
`_. c ~ j~ ~~
C ~ ~
~ ~ ~
d U 'x ~
W U V
II II
- ~ ~ N o
c s
J -
W ~ o
i as ~ ~'
O
m .-
Q ..
~ .. ~ = O T W
~ N
C
C U
V ~ r-. V
u u
O O .
~- (n C G
VJ N ` ~ O to ~ ~ ~

O ~ A C.y ~,~ o ut
~ ~ xr-~ou+
N ~ ~
~
x a
~
W a
z
''
y I,.- U
~
~v~O~Q
U
OQ~QF-
Z Umapcn
r I
Z
O
H ~
~
J ``'I~ W i
~ I
~ ~.

- - to ~ ~
~ ~ O i
= ~ ~
~ U ' ~
x ~ -

} h W

o
°
.
~~ ~ ~
~
a ~ I
,
~ ~
\P ~ I
,^
~ ~ ~' .
o ~~

0
"'

O
~~ v
~
o

_`
`~
~~
_ ~ ~ ` 1
~
n r
/

..
~ I
Fl ~

'
~~

~ I
I
3 I
I
c~
O
M
C~
Z
Q
O
H
tY
W
a
O
U
W
O
~-
U~
Z
_~
X
W

~ Q
3 ~ ~
~ a 5
~ a d
~.~ os~
G `~
~'"
~:
A `
H r v
M ~
O N
~~ e,
~~~
M C,
~ ~
f
P f
M
t J 6
y
~,
"` 3
oeoa „~
IIOS 31V/1t21d
~ ~
n
m
A
1
M
O
'3
d
3
N I7 M'~b ~
~ ,'~ ~ b1S
~~ f
~ ,~
II I
co
I~ ;I
II I ~ ~
~ I ~.
I I~ oil
II I ~ ~~
~~ ~~~w
~~
t ~
~~
i ~, o~
~ ~ n
I
~ PCC STA = 39+21

~ I~ I ~
I n
w
II I I x ~
I
II I
11 1
1 I
I 1
11 I I A
I 1 M
1 1 '~ a
a3
11 ~ 'll
1
1 11 111
1 1
1 1
31 ~ ~Le~ y~`aS`
S'~ N G rt.'p'

o r
~
~~
~~

~ N
> ~ r ~
o
'
m
~ ~. ~ c
3 c v~
rJ 01 ~ C~ ~ n
F-
~ ~
,~ ,.,
O O ~
°'
_ ~_ 4'
_ _
O ~ O L
~ t
_
,- ~ ~, aoc
> _ E-~o
r~
~

° }
~ U
~

~ a w
N
°

Z o= a~
Q
UC7 mao
P ~ ~
U
~ 4 u
n. ~ ~ ¢
~ ~~ f
a~~n

v

~ J v
Q
`~
~ ~ d
T a
~
~
~ ~ M
` T
~ Q
N
11 „
z J
~ -
U
Q ~.
.J ~
r
o
w
~
_
Q5+ ~~
~~
3 N~?l~~N~S
Pr sr o~ e2
~_
3
~ ~
w •- ~
~ +
~ $~'
aor Na~ •~~°~ ~t
Od'1~~HO W~
3
r
0
~ ~ ~
O
. ~w
O ~ >
~
a
~ ~ w
~
Q. ~ ~
cn 3 z ~ o°
Cp `o
i
~ ~N
_
V.. ~ U v
r ~ ~
a`~.o a rnE ~°
~
~ >Z
•
C >

~ ~ ~
D.
~ ~ U ~ H

U
Z
~~mao
w
a
~ A
J ~ v
~ ~~ t
a --wl
o ~ ~
~ ~ N H

o-
v,
V
S2
i

J
3 a ~
o ~ ~
¢ M 6
`p~o
o a
M ~
~ ~ fi
r
4 v
N `~ '`
a -~ O
a, ~
'~ ~ w
J ~
~"
'~ M~~H~~~W °
L~
.
t ~-
Z
~,~~as o

~ r
O ,
>-
°

J
~

i
`

~ w
~
_
C ~,
¢ ~ 1
t
co O

~
A

1 ~

~ ~ z ~~

o d ~N
z (~J 1 F- _ ~ oC o ~• N
W
~0 0~ '•- ~
O o u
-~~
~ p ~ ~ r
a~
~I
~ ~
>
r I
I : _ ~~o
I ~ I R~ ~

i I
~
~..~~,,,..
°
II il v av~o~
>
.
I z ~Qmao
I~
I
I ~
I
I ~
I I I ~
cv I I I
~ `°
o ~ ~
I
I
a II°
~3
~` C
I
II
m p
_ I
_~ ~ V1 I N
~ ~~
FC S7A ~+55.53
~U
w
w
~~
!O
0
~a
~ N
D` Q
~ Z
~ ~-- J
Y ~ ~
Q ~
moo=
~m~-
~ ~
m 0 Z
CL
~ ~
U WCD
w
z
~Z I m
I I
.I I
'I
~~ I ~ ~
I ~.
1 I
~I I
I I
II II
I ~o
I I: ~
~I i ~ ~
:i 3 I ' ~
I" ~~~ ~ W
:I o ~I .
~I Z ~I~ O
.I I
I: ~ C~
II it ~ z
~ I. I p
I ~
n Q ~'l li tllS
,~,
0
°3
aC
o~
~~
~~
a

C
O
~ U
~ ~
N ~
O O
J ~ U
0
m
}
Z
O
H
U
w
U~
X
W
l
i ~
C
O
U
C1 N
_ ~ O
~ N ~ N
x ° n n
~ U W ~
J •'
Q ~
U _ ~
~ ~" U
O :~.
N ~
I

C
O
l9
i ~
O ~
~3
~ ~
H- _
O O
C ~
~ ~~
O ~ ~
~_~ a°
kd O
lU ~ Z
I
I
O
O
W
01 N
? J
'' W
.-~ ~
N o°
o
O ~` ~
u n'
_ ~
~ CJ
C p L' ~
~ ~
da u
c ~
=~~or
>" U Z
~-
w O
~v>OHQ
OQ~QF-
c~maocn
I
t
t
-~,..
-I
._ ~-
`o
r
Z
C
0
F-
w
a
Z
O
U
O
UX
C~
_Z
H
_~
X
W

~ ~
~ ~
d
~

c ~
a~
e"' ~
~ =~

}"
~
a
. J Z
o
~
WW pr-J
U =v~0
u
~~~ ~~Z ~~
YO
~

H
T ~.
s`~ OWE

LiQW U

~X

° ~'
~' 2 LL
0`W~
mCD
z
Q '~
?
O ~ ~
~

1"' ~
w ~~
~ W 0 /
~
W O Z
J ~ 0 O_
Z O
~ Z
U W
D]
W

Z
OS - !, C / tf1S
~ N I'1 ~171t1W
I
II i
F Z
H J
~a
Q
3
O
F-
c~
~'
r
r„
0
0
N
PT STA ~ 131+40.94 ~
--~
i
x '=
z
h
w Gr
c~3~
W
O
~3
d 1
ad
I I~
I 1'`
PJI I~
~I I i ~.
I I
I
r~
I °'
rn
lu
~IZ I.
~I
I
~~I I.
I I.
WII
1
11 ~
rl
1.'
~l ~" 1~
~ ~
~, ~ f
~o
MAr
STp ~s : o ~' ~N e
~v
K ~
wQ

O
3
N
d
3
~~
Y ~c
o ~
~U
~ ~~
a ro ~- °
~
~ 3 -- ~
~s z
i C1 O ~ n
F- _ ~ PL o ~
a

~ ~ n
i
u F ~
_
,- _ ~

a~ .~
~ rn E
a a
r fA ~ ~ C V
O
~ > 2 ~ ~ O
f9 O
~

~ ~'
z o U
Z ~ w
U ~Q cnO--
Z ~Q mao

~- ~
~~
~~
~~
r
i
z~
~~

V
~ Q
3 r
o ~
S -
Vl
~ O
p ,. .
t ~
` ..r T
n
Fi ,o ~
o ++ ~1
4 ~' In
3 ~ ~
0 0 ~ L ~ l ti>.g
~N1~~-71bW
Q
I y
3
N Q
[~ W a
W
O
U
r S
_N ~
k N
W A
I~
M
k I~
P
0
o. ~
o~ ~
I 11
I.
I I
I I
I
I ~ I~
II `~ ^ I I
I N ~I
I ~ ^I
II N I
I
I 1
II I I
I I
) i
I I
118 Cp
I I
(I I
I I
I I
II I I
I I.
I I~
II I I
I I
.I
1~5 Obi
I II
~I i
it II
MgTCK ~.int
ST'f4 13 `i r s~
a
a
~r
h _H
W A
W
h
a
ap 3
C ~
_~
x "-'
a
r
N
~ } `~ O
~
' ~ L'J
~
i ~ v ~ N
i; ~ w
~
O T o '' ~
cn 3 r ~ °
C L o
z
~
L
~ ~
O
~ N
_ ~/
s
L li ~ T ry
~ ~
O O V d ~
-
G y (~

= ~
°iF h _z
i.o
a a
°' c °'
.N i
~ ~ aUi Q
.
~
ao ~ a
~
~ ~' U
zo?~w ~ H
~
U =QcnOr- Q ~
Z ~~mao
~
a
l
P
V
H ~
A ~
o Q ~"~
0. -~ W
~ y O
- d
p- ~ 10-
J
~ ~ W
~~W
O W ~
~ 2 ~
O ~ ~
OHO
Z

_ Y ~
c
2 S 6
~ Q.. ~.,
y o
H ~ O
v '~ `.
i I- '"
o .r. T
E S h
W
o r
a N %,
~ J
f J
J
r~
? ;~
no~ghl bc1S
a N c -~ x~l~a VII
GND Wc~\a•~1 n ~~
~-
J
~ ~ W
W W U
~ (n Z
~ Q W
2 Li
~ W ~
~ ~ Z
Z
cee
~~
~~
o ~°
' ~ ^
~ ~ _~

~ o
h ~ ~
w
o >>
~
a a

~
"c
3 JJQ
C ~ o
(V ~ G G ~ N
~. ._ Z
~ ~

0 0 N
~~
~

_.
` ~ o
~ p
a ~ a a'
`n ; ~ o ~
i > , ,
.T` F- ~ O
~o
~
~ ~ ..
Z O U
? ~ w
U ~ Q ~ o ~
~
Z G mao
0
0
a
MATCHL~Nt
STfl 139 ~Op

--
? °
C ~ N
~ ~ ^ ~
o ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ v _^w eJ
G ~~ o ~ o _
L^ k N "^'r >~ V ~ ~ O
d ~, ~ fn > P N OO
` p N
h ~ w H= f OPL o~ N _
U ~
o ~ ~ nQ o 0 ~ .r. u
Q ~'~ ~° 3 N~~ H J 1 bCl S c, ~ ~, a ~~ h Z
~/ ~ .~
~b ~
~ ~ /^ ^'S ~ N ~ ~ U F-
rn a ~ ~ ¢ z ~amao v`~i a
N ' ~ ~~ ~ w ~
~ ~ ~, ! ~
r ~ _ /.
x
cn ,. r ~ PT SrA ~
J
N ~ ! ! I. W Q
wd ! ~
r J
r
.l ! ~
' ~ 4
~' a n
I I v~ ~~ b 2
~ Iv I I ~ a 4 W
a I I, a.3 r
2a I I O W y ..
.I
~I ~: ~ ~~
I 0.~
11~ G ~. ~ r
tO
o~~~ ~ ~ '. °' .
~~ ' ~ ~..
~m
A~G~ ~~~ i
1~
ST1A 1yS ~pO ~~~!

t
'' u
Z c c
~ J J
~ ~- d
~ ° 0
!yJ'~ ~ O
`~ ti 4
Q y
d T~
2 y T
H S-
o ° 0
N
Q ~ 0
J
F- a a
JN

sTr~7 G~~NF
boo
m ~ /~
~ ~ ~ ~.~
~~ \\ ~' c ~ / 3 l
r,p~ \~ \~ c /3 ~/ /
~ ~ ~ v> ~~l . / c6
tD ~~j~T! \ ~ / „~~ h /I
+ ~° ~ ~ ~ N/
~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ /~ 4/
0
.c c~ cn ' ~ ~ ~ /
a~y2 a `~ a1 /
o J~ 1 J ~ 1 ~ / °;
pG vm ~ ~ /.
~ r ~~ f r~p,N ~ I~ ( ~ I
Q J A, T~ ~~ O IYGi ~~ ~ ~ I
W3d~~ vy
i
I ~~ 1r ~
1
"' r u°
~I s ~
k ~
WC ' 4~
I
~ I ~ ~ r
--- N ~~ f
m
PC STq ~ 5. g2 r
~!
1 ~~~
~ ul
y
~ l z~.
~ ~.
~/I p
h
a
5°a
K ~
,,, ~
0
`r' O
o ~, ^ w
~
~ e
w
~
~ >
~- w
O ~ d "~

~ 3
C Z ~a
~ o A ~ N
~_ ~~ o
~
~... `
0 0 N
V
.
~
o
`o
a~. ~
~~
a
~
G .N ~
~. ~
~ o u
~ _> = i- ~ D
t0 ~ F-

~ ~' U
w
Z C
~Q ?-
iw
~nO~-
U O ~ Q ~ Q ~
Z c~O ma^ ~
J

f

C
O
~ U
O O
~ N
O cn
O O
J d U
O
m
}
N
Z
O
.~
U
W
O
~ m
V
x
w
O
a
O
d
C
O
U
~ ~
C ~ O
N
N ~ e~- N
x ~ n n
WUwe-_
J ~
Q ~ ..
U ~
~ C U
O :..
N ~
•` d
O ~

C
O
c~-v
L N
O >+
c9
°' 3
~ _~
O p
C =
d .O
O _~ N
a a i' ~
o ~ ~
x d a~i
u+ ~ O
U
Z
o ,
~ O
rn N
C ~
~ '
~o
0
~ o
~ N
~ `+ N
u E
F ~
.n
mc~E~
~ a ~ ~ a
=F'-~0 m
U Z
-- w O
~v~O~Q
OQ~QF--
c~maocn
t
I
1
I
~`
_~
i
~~
'`
ry
`o

(.~
z_
Q
H
w
a
Z
O
U
w
vi
O
~~
U }
C~
z
H
_~
X
W

C
O
~ U
O O
~ ~
Q N
~ 0 0
J n- U
00
~-
~ 1
O
U
W
N
0
Ua
W X
O
2
C
O
U
~ N
C p
N N ~ N
W U n n
W ~
..J '"'
Q ~ ..
~ C U
O 'w
`p >
I 2

C
O
f0
~ N
O ~^
f0
~3
f9 ~
F- 2
O O
C =
O O
~ .N
o ~ ~
~~ a~
X °~ p
W ~ U
Z
I
I
I
t
I

v
t
• J
z d
3 r~ ~
o tt ,, -
s _ e
~ ~ o
~
~
Y
J "
~~
4 .r
~ ~
r ~}-
v =
r
0 ~ rJ

Q 4n O

4~
'~ ~~ ~

3 ~ ~ o
,

Z
vof -. d1s
3TN1 ~ ti'~1biW
I
I I ~
I
I I
O ~ 3

o
~, w
~
~
~ ° ~ C

~° , ~ ~
~ ~

v ~ (n
~~
\
~ C-. C ~ l ~
~ s ~ ~,
~ 6' ~~
d'

\ \ I
a ~ ~~~ ~ /

2 ¢ ~
\ h'o I

~ ~~ I
3~
~ ~ \ I
W \
a

C7
ojo
,~O
`~ O
~
y A n N
cC ^ >
4
~
~ w
v .- C N
1 r
~ 3 0 ~~ o
i ~ ,~ ~ o _
d
~
= o a N
W _
Q U :J

J ~ .y ~ ~ ~ <
C - C
~ ~
.. w ~ ~
~' U ~
w H
o Zoz.,w ~
U 4
~ Q v~ O F- ~
Z ~Qmao ~ w
a
~~
y ~
3 ~`'
W \`
h
d
O
F

os~i vs
o~~i~•ro ~
vo/n ,vim

~ 3 J
4
z ~ e
o°
~ 0
J ~
~ ~:
E r~
. r
H ~ .
~-
~ M
~ ~ ~
C V+ a
a
1~ ~' M
S J ~
5
w
J
O
~-
i 1

W
'A~`
1
L
°n~ 8 ais
? Nl'1 N71 t1W
o ,
~ O
O w
~ ;.~ N
~ ~
~. N W
O ~ v C C
~ 3 3 ~~
o
J ~ o
4
~
~
N
_ U `
U
~~~

~_
G
~ ~ c ~
~
~ ~ ~
2 G
F-
~ U
w
~aNO~-
O~QCQ
UOmaO
M I`+ 1 ~, n ~~ rv ~
STR ti+oo

Z
~_
I-
U
W
(n
O
U~
~ '
W x
(n
O
a.
O
tZ
c
0
U
~ N
C N O
~ N ~- N
x ~ II u
WULLJT_
J ~
Q ~ -•
U '~
~ C U
O :..
`p >
I 2

a
__
Y
~' ~ "I
_,-~
0
-~ U
~ U
N N
G ~
J~U
CL1
}
~ 1
c
O
~ ~
O ~
°' 3
~ _rn
f- 2
0 0
C =
~ O
O ~ .~
_~ ~ a ~
kd ~
W ~ V
Z
J

• o
o

O 0 4 V ~+
d' O ~ w
A ~' N
( v > Q

-
1 ~
t~1
0
~ e'~
~N`~~
~ ~, 0 ~ ~
~
~
-

1 i ~ J ~ O
_
~ ~
1~ H = o ~ N
,
~
1
`~~ ~
3 O
~
~ ~
~
=o~
-
z
_
J _N ~ o ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ' 1 a ~ ~: ~ o

~
a j
~ ~J
~ U
z^?~w
'- H-
~
o

y ~. ~ A~ . ~
v ~
W 3 y ~ ~ ~
1
~
U
Z =Q~o~

~ O m a o
~
H
~
a
0 0
o ~ ~ ~ P I
~ ti ~. 5~ p11CH 1
. ts

H
-r r _ _
~ pEE
I
Z ;~
~ ~ '~ \
¢ ~ 1
r ~~ ,.{~
W
~

' °
T
3 ~ N Z
I ~ , 1 I _

~
~
I e
x ~
1
1 ,
_ `~

I ~.
l 1
'
1

,~

I
Q?
~ I ~ I
I ~ ~ ~
~
~
~~ ~
' t
:, ~
I I
i
~ I
~d -~- 98'S9+S-b ~
~ ~
I
I
I I
CV I
~ I
I
r
-~ I
~ I
N 0 Nl~`T Gt~'~Z-~N t
STS ysic~

a

C
O
~ U
~ ~
N N
O v~
~ ~
J~U
m
~ I
C
O
U
G~ ~n
~ N O
.., N ~"'
~ ~ CV
w U ~~ n
w~
J ~
Q ~ ..
U ~
N C U
O :..
N i-
O ~
Z
O
U
W
Cn
Cn
O
U
.o
Ox
W
n.
O

c
~_
O
t0
... N
O ~`
~ 3
~ rn
F- _
O O
..~ .r..
= O
d .~
.y
G `
~~ Qo
x~ o
UJ ~ U
Z
I
I
I
t
I

IF INCORRECT RETURN TO
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
• ' DIVISION O1 OFFICE
252-482-7977
WARRANT NL. 6505
DATE 06/21/2000
INVOICE NUMBER INVOICE DATE INVOICE A1IIOUNT NET ADIOUNT
0621130949 06/21/2000 $475.00
3 ~ 4
~~~ a~..~. ~ $475.00
.
~ y°
+i ~ ,~ '~
~~
',trl ~ i
.~
i ~
~ ' r~
_
~ti_j
~!
• ~ ~ ~
Detach Stub Before Depositing TOTAL: $ 4 7 5. 0 0 $ 4 7 5. 0 0