20050062 Ver 1_Complete File_20060816

DWQ Project No: 050062 County: Pender
Applicant: North Carolina Department of Transportation
Project Name: B-3887. Bridge 116 over Shaken Creek on SR 1520
Date of Issuance of 401 Water Quality Certification: February,23, 2005
Certificate of Completion
Upon completion of all work approved within the 401 Water Quality Certification or applicable Buffer Rules and any subsequent
modifications, the applicant is required to return this certificate to the 401/Wetlands Unit, North Carolina Division of Water Quality,
1621 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC, 27699-1621. This form may be returned to DWQ by the applicant, the applicant's authorized
agent, or the project engineer. It is not necessary to send certificates from all of these.
Applicant's Certification
I, H. Allen Poke ,hereby state that to the best of my abilities, due care and diligence was used in
the observation of the construction such that the construction was observed to be built within substantial compliance and intent of the
401 Water Quality Certificaf and r Rules, the approved plans and specifications, other supporting materials.
Signature:. Date: //
Agent's Certification
I, Mason Herndon hereby state that to the best of my abilities, due care and diligence was used in
the observation of the construction such that the construction was observed to be built within substantial compliance and intent of the
401 Water Quality Certification and Buffer Rules, the approved plans and specifications,. and other supporting materials.
Signature: k!~.~Q,r~ ~=~ Date: ~ l l ~D 6
Engineer's Certification
Partial Final
I, , as a duly registered Professional Engineer in the State of North Carolina,
having been authorized to observe (periodically, weekly, full time) the cons~uction of the project, for the Permittee hereby state that,
to the best of my abilities, due care and diligence was used in the observation of the construction such that the construction was
observed to be built within substantial compliance and intent of the 401 Water Quality Certification and Buffer Rules, the approved
plans and specifications, and other supporting materials.
Signature:
Date:
Registration No.
Q~~~oe~~
AUG 1 6 2006
DENR -WATER QUALITY
WETLANDS AND STORMWATER BRANCH

OF W RTF~ Michael F. Easley, Governor
~ Q William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
~~' ~~,' North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
~.. r
=t Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director
D ~' Division of Water Quality
Coleen H. Sullins, Deputy Director
Division of Water Quality
February 23, 2005
NC DOT
c/o Philip S. Harris III
1598 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1598
SUBJECT: Approval of 401 Water Quality Certification
and Additional Conditions
401 fill for bridge replacement
Bridge # 116 off SR 1520
DWQ Project # 050062
Pender County
Dear Mr. Harris:
You have our approval, in accordance with the attached conditions (WQC # 3400) to conduct the
following activity within the NC DOT ROW off SR 1520 at bridge # 116, Maple Hill in Pender County.
This approval allows you to:
1. Replace old wooden bridge (87' X 22') with a new wider concrete bridge (115' X 39') and fill
0.009 acres of 404/401 type wetlands within the adjacent approaches to accommodate the wider
bridge across Shaken Creek.
This approval is only valid for the purpose and design that you described in your completed CAMA
application received by the Division of Water Quality (DWQ) on February 8, 2005. After reviewing your
application, we have determined that General Water Quality Certification Number 3400 covers this
activity. This Certification can also be found on line at: http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/certs html.
This Certification allows you to use your CAMA Permit when the NC Division of Coastal Management
issues it. Please keep in mind that there may be additional Federal, State or Local regulations applicable
to your project, such as (but not limited to) Sediment and Erosion Control, Non-Discharge and Water
Supply Watershed regulations and Coastal Stormwater. In addition, this approval will expire when the
accompanying CAMA Permit expires unless otherwise specified in the General Certification.
This approval is only valid for the purpose and design that you described in your completed CAMA
Major Permit application received by the Division of Coastal Management on January 27, 2005. If you
change or modify your project, you must notify the Division (DWQ) in writing and you may be required to
send us a new application for a new certification. If the property is sold, the new owner must be given a
copy of the Certification and approval letter and is thereby responsible for complying with all conditions. If
total wetland fills for this project (now or in the future) exceed one acre, compensatory mitigation maybe
required as described in 15A NCAC 2H .0506 (h). For this approval to be valid, you must follow the
conditions listed in the attached certification and the additional conditions listed on the following
page:
N. C. Division of Water Quality 127 Cardinal Drive Extension [phone] Customer Service
Wilmington Regional Office Wilmington, NC 28405 [phone] Fax [phone] QIl2
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycledll0% Post Consumer Paper 1 ~ ~~hCar~llna

Page Two
Philip S. Harris III
Project # 050062
February 23, 2005
1. Upon completion of all work approved within the 401 Water Quality Certification or applicable
Buffer Rules, and any subsequent modifications, the applicant is required to return the attached
certificate of completion to this office and a copy to the 401 Oversight/Express Review Permitting Unit,
North Carolina Division of Water Quality, 1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC, 27699-1650;
2. No excavation and no waste, spoil, solids, or fill of any kind shall occur in wetlands, waters, or
riparian areas beyond the footprint of the impacts depicted in the CAMA Major Application. All
construction activities, including the design, installation, operation, and maintenance of sediment
and erosion control Best Management Practices, shall be performed so that no violations of state
water quality standards, statutes, or rules occur.
Please notify this Office at the number listed below if any problem arises during the construction of
the project that may affect water quality.
If you do not accept any of the conditions of this certification, you may ask for an adjudicatory
hearing. You must act within 60 days of the date that you receive this letter. To ask for a hearing, send a
written petition conforming to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes to the Office of
Administrative Hearings, 6714 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, N.C. 27699-6714. This certification and its
conditions are final and binding unless you ask for a hearing.
This letter completes the review of the DWQ Permit #050062 under Section 401 of the Clean Water
Act. If you have any questions, please telephone Joanne Steenhuis or Edward Beck at 910-395-3900.
Sincerely,
Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director
- Division of Water Quality
Attachments: GC # 3400
Certificate of Completion
cc: Corps of Engineers Wilmington Field Office -Henry Wicker
401 Oversite/Express Permitting Unit - Cyndi Karoly
CAMA Morehead -Bill Arrington
CAMA Morehead -Doug Huggett
WiRO D ~~~~
FED ~ 4 ?005
DENR -WATER QUAi,tTY
1yYETLANDSAND STORMVyATER BRANCH

WQC #3400
CAMA PERMIT CERTIFICATION
GENERAL CERTIFICATION FOR PROJECTS ELIGIBLE FOR CORPS OF ENGINEERS
GENERAL PERMIT NUMBER 198000291 (ISSUED TO THE NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF
COASTAL MANAGEMENT AND RIPARIAN AREA PROTECTION RULES (BUFFER RULES)
This General Certification is issued in conformity with requirement of Section 401, Public
Laws 92-500 and 95-217 of the United States and subject to the North Carolina Division of Water
Quality Regulations in 15 NCAC 2H, Section .0500 and 15 NCAC 26 .0200 for the discharge of
fill material as described in General Permit 198000291 and for the Riparian Area Protection Rules
(Buffer Rules) in 15A NCAC 26 .0200. This Certification replaces Water Quality Certification
Number 3025 issued on September 6, 1995, Water Quality Certification Number 3112 issued on
February 11, 1997, Water Quality Certification Number 3274 issued June 1, 2000 and Water
Quality Certification Number 3371 issued March 18, 2002. This WQC is rescinded when the
Corps of Engineers re-authorizes Regional General Permit 0291 or when deemed appropriate by
the Director of DWQ.
The State of North Carolina certifies that the specified category of activity will not violate
applicable portions of Sections 301, 302, 303, 306 and 307 of the Public Laws 92-500 and 95-217
if conducted in accordance with conditions hereinafter set forth.
Conditions of Certification:
1. Activities authorized by CAMA major permits require written concurrence from the
Division of Water Quality as well as compliance with all conditions of this General
Certification;
2. Activities authorized by Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) Minor or General
Permits do not require written authorization from the Division of Water Quality as long
as they comply with all other conditions of this General Certification;
3. In accordance with North Carolina General Statute Section 143-215.3D(e), any
request for written concurrence fora 401 Water Quality Certification must include the
appropriate fee. If a project also requires a CAMA Permit, one payment to both
agencies shall be submitted and will be the higher of the two fees. The fee shall be
collected and distributed between the two agencies in accordance with agreements
reached between the Division of Water Quality and the Division of Coastal
Management;
4. In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0506 (h) compensatory mitigation may be
required for impacts to 150 linear feet or more of streams and/or one acre or more of
wetlands. In addition, buffer mitigation may be required for any project with Buffer
Rules in effect at the time of application for buffer impacts resulting from activities
classified as "allowable with mitigation" within the "Table of Uses" section of the
Buffer Rules or require a variance under the Buffer Rules. A determination of buffer,
wetland and stream mitigation requirements shall be made for any Certification for
this Nationwide Permit. The most current design and monitoring protocols from DWQ
shall be followed and written plans submitted for DWQ approval as required in those
protocols. When compensatory mitigation is required for a project, the mitigation
plans must be approved by DWQ in writing before the impacts approved by the
Certification occur. The mitigation plan must be implemented and/or constructed
before any permanent building or structure on site is occupied. In the case of public
road projects, the mitigation plan must be implemented before the road is opened to
the travelling public;

WQC #3400
The Director of the North Carolina Division of Water Quality may require submission of a
formal application for individual certitcation for any project in this category of activity that requires
written concurrence under this certification, if it is determined that the project is likely to have a
significant adverse effect upon water quality or degrade the waters so that existing uses of the
wetland or downstream waters are precluded.
Public hearings may be held for specific applications or group of applications prior to a
Certii'ication decision if deemed in the public's best interest by the Director of the North Carolina
Division of Water Quality.
Effective date: March 2003
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
sy
Alan W. Klimek
Director
WQC # 3400

DWQ Project No.:
Applicant:
Project Name:
Date of Issuance of 401 Water Quality Certification:
County:
Certificate of Completion
Upon completion of all work approved within the 401 Water Quality Certification or applicable Buffer Rules, and any subsequent
modifications, the applicant is required to return this certificate to the 401/Wetlands Unit, North Carolina Division of Water
Quality, 1621 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC, 27699-1621. This form maybe returned to DWQ by the applicant, the
applicant's authorized agent, or the project engineer. It is not necessary to send certificates from all of these.
Applicant's Certification
I, ,hereby state that, to the best of my abilities, due care and diligence was used in
the observation of the construction such that the construction was observed to be built within substantial compliance and intent of
the 401 Water Quality Certification and Buffer Rules, the approved plans and specifications, and other supporting materials.
Signature: Date:
Agent's Certification
I, ,hereby state that, to the best of my abilities, due care and diligence was used in
the observation of the construction such that the construction was observed to be built within substantial compliance and intent of
the 401 Water Quality Certification and Buffer Rules, the approved plans and specifications, and other supporting materials.
Signature: Date:
Engineer's Certification
Partial Final
I, , as a duly registered Professional Engineer in the State of North Carolina,
having been authorized to observe (periodically, weekly, full time) the construction of the project,for the Permittee hereby state
that, to the best of my abilities, due care and diligence was used in the observation of the construction such that the construction
was observed to be built within substantial compliance and intent of the 401 Water Quality Certification and Buffer Rules, the
approved plans and specifications, and other supporting materials.
Signature
Date
Mail to: 401 Wetlands Contact
NC Dept. of Environment and Natural Resources
127 Cardnal Drive Ext.
Wilmington, NC 28405-2004
Registration No.

i
0 X006 Z
DIVISION OE COASTAL 1dIANAGEMENT
FIELD INVESTIGATION REPORT
1. APPLICANT'S NAME: North Carolina Department of Transportation
2. LOCATION OF PROJECT SITE: Bridge No. 116, on SR 1520 over Shaken Creek in
Pender County
Photo Index - 2000: No Photo 1995: No Photo
State Plane Coordinates: x 2370736 y: 316939 GPS: Rover File # X010520A
3. INVESTIGATION TYPE: CAMA
4. INVESTIGATIVE PROCEDURE: Dates of Site Visit - 5/18/2004 & 1/5/2005
Was Agent Present -YES (Cheryl Knepp 5/18/2004)
5. PROCESSING PROCEDURE: Application Received asComplete--1/27/2005
Office -Morehead City
6. SITE DESCRIPTION:
(A) .Local Land Use Plan -Pender County
Land Classification from LUP -Rural and Conservation
($) AEC(s) Involved: PTA and PTS
(C) :Water Dependent: Yes
(D) Intended Use: Public
(E) Wastewater Treatment: Existing - N/A
Planned -NIA
(F} -Type of Structures: Existing -Secondary paved road and bridge
Planned -Secondary paved road and bridge
(G) Estimated Annual Rate of Erosion: N/A Source: N/A
7. HABITAT DESCRIPTION: [AREA]
F.Yrava4Pr~ Fillptl (lfihpr
(A} 404 Type Wetlands Clear and Grub 0.009 acres
0.008 acres

B Public Trust Area-Shallow Bottom
() xistmg
h dding 660 sq. ft.
~c~ditional
Shading 510 sq. ft.
(C) Other -High Ground 2.508 acres
(Disturbed within
construction limits,
Approximate)
(D)- High Ground in Coastal 0.083 acres
Shoreline AEC
(E) Total CAMA AEC Disturbed: 0.095 acres
(F) Total area disturbed by project: 2.62 acres
(G) Primary Nursery Area: No
(H) Water Classification: C Sw
(I) Open for Shellfishing: No
8. PROJECT SUMMARY; The N.C. Department of Transportation is proposing to replace the
existing 87-foot long by 22-foot wide timber bridge over Shaken Creek with a 115-foot long by 39-
foot wide concrete bridge.

-.,.d.
t
~ ~
... / ,
FIELID INVESTIGATI®N REPORT
NC DOT - B-3887 Fender County, Bridge No. lI6
PAGE 2
9. PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The site of this proposal is Bridge No. 116, on State Road 1520, at the crossing of Shaken Creek,
approximately 5.5 miles southwest of the intersection of SR 1520 and NC 50, in the community of
Maple Hill, in Fender County. The general purpose of the project is to replace the deteriorated 87-
foot long by 22-foot wide timber bridge with a 115-foot long by 39-foot wide concrete bridge
spanning Shaken Creek, while maintaining traffic flow on an off site detour.
Bridge No. 116 crosses Shaken Creek approximately 200 feet up-stream of its confluence with Holly
Shelter Creek. The narrow fringe of 404 type wetlands between Shaken Creek and the adjacent high
ground is vegetated with cypress, gum, honeysuckle, ash, poison, water oak, and elm, The high
ground is vegetated with various pities and hardwoods. Creek width at the crossing is approximately
30 feet. The vertical clearance between the water and bridge bottom is approximately 11 feet with a
7-foot water depth. Soils in the wetlands are mainly Muckalee loam with Craven and Marvyn loamy
fine sands in the upper elevations of the bridge approaches as classified by the NC Soil Conservation
Service. Approximate elevations on the site range between 1 feet and 11 feet above normal water
level. No evidence of SAV beds was noted. The North Carolina Division of Water Quality classifies
waters of Shaken Creek as C Sw at the project site. Shaken Creek is not Primary Nursery Area, as
designated by the North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries. The Fender County Land Use Plan
designates the project area as Rural, with all CAMA Areas of Environmental Concern designated as
Conservation.
The proposal is to replace the existing 87-foot long by 22-foot wide timber bridge with a 1 I6-foot
long by 39-foot cored slab concrete bridge on the existing alignment. The proposed bridge would
have a vertical clearance equal to the existing bridge (approximately 11 feet). The bridge will be
installed using top down construction. The bridge is being widened from 22 feet to 39 feet to more
closely correspond to the 11 foot paved travel lanes and 4 foot grassed shoulders of SR 1520. An off
site detour on existing roads will be used. NC DOT has committed to adhere to "High Quality Water
Erosion Control Methods" and use Best Management Practices for erosion control and bridge
demolition. On each side of Shaken Creek, Approximately 12 feet of existing causeway that was
installed over high ground will be tapered back to the new bridge bents and armored with rip rap.

T
FIELD INVESTIGATION REPORT
NC DOT - 8-3887_ Pender C®nnty, I;radge N®. 116
PAGE 3
10. ANTICIPATED IMPACTS:
As proposed, the construction of the bridge with 3:1 fill slopes would require the filling of
approximately 0.009 acres and the clearing and grubbing (excavating) of approximately 0.008 acres
of 404 type wetlands. Approximately 2.60 acres of impacts to high ground would occur with the
construction of end bents, installation of rip rap and approach work. The additional width of the
bridge would cause approximately 510 square feet (0.012 acres) of additional shading impacts to
Public Trust Waters AEC. Approximately 0.083 acres (3600 square feet) of the above describe
ground disturbance would be within the CAMA Coastal Shoreline AEC. No disturbance of the creek
bottom is expected during the installation of the bridge.
NC DOT has avoided and minimized the 404 type wetland excavation and fill impacts associated
with this proposal by lengthening the bridge from 87 feet to 116 feet, spanning the open water, hand
clearing all wetlands in the construction area except adjacent to small fill in northwest quadrant of
the bridge, using top down construction and using an off site detour. NC DOT BMP's require
dropping no materials from the bridge demolition in the waters regulated by CAMA. The NC DOT
has proposed to use "High Quality Waters Erosion Control Methods" to minimize the impacts of
erosion.
NC DOT has received an EEP Mitigation Acceptance Letter committing the EEP to provide Riverine
Wetland mitigation in the same cataloging unit of the Cape Fear River Basin, at a ratio of up to 2:1,
for the 0.017 acres of Riverine Wetland that would be impacted by project B-3887.
The collective disturbance area for the project is 2.62 acres.
Bill Arrington
February 1, 2005
Morehead City

Form DCM-MP-1
APPLICATION
(To be completed by all applicants)
1. APPLICANT
a. Landowner:
Name NC. DEpT, or-- 1 e.a,~spo~~ a~r~o~.,(
b. City, town, community or landmark
~a~!_E I~i~~
c. ~ Street address or secondary road number
S2 I S 20
d, is proposed work within city limits or planning
jurisdiction? Yes ~ No
Address. 1S9 ~ Ma~~ <.~-2vt~~- C~~ ~c-~
City _ Lac ~, i v ~-~ State N. ~
e. dame of body of water nearest project (e.g. river,
creek, sound, bay) S ~~-k~ C eEc,~
Zip~~~.55- ISq`d Day Phone 5~~= ~~s_ iso~
Fax g i 5 - ~ . s'- ~ sb ~ 3. DESCRIPTION AND PLANNED USE
OF PROPOSED PROJECT-
b. Authorized Agent:
Name a. List all development activities you propose (e.g.
building a home, motel, marina, bulkhead, pier, and
excavation and/or filling activities.
Address ~cP~r.~c~. ~x~sr~~v i~~,o~~ v-~~Ti-~
Q rick) `i~rz~a~.~_ ~-~o t~lc~ ~~pOuJPu
City .State Q o A R.,~ P c ~a e S
Zip Day Phone b. )s the proposed activity maintenance of an existing
project, new work, or both? I~c.w WoQ~
Fax
c. Will the,.project be for public, private or commercial .
use? Nv~uc TC grisPoP.'a,~,a~.!
c. Project name ~f any) ~- ?~ k"1 Qe~o~~ ~ 1 lCo
w~ V~. S u ~„«~,,~ C ~c ~,~ d. Give a brief description of purpose, use, meibods of '
construction and daily operations of proposes
project. if more space is needed, please attach
NOTE: Pmrct wall !x irzued in name of laa+down~r(t), m+d/or
project nartu. additional pages. i o ~~~~.FCe- n~ o Sreu.cruzt
LJ~Ti-~- Q- rJcw S~C~~c~rk2t: {~,~~ rJcw
. ~c~AOwA~•I ~OPfnf~Ch6~, TA- ~owr-f
/~ ~
. ~ l n ~-lST2U-C T,~ r..~ ~,1 Y~1J C~ ~ ~, i LL ~_;F
2. LOCATION OF PROPOSED c,~~~~.
PROJECT
a. County ~c ~ o ~ E
Reviud 03/95

Form DCM-MP-1
4. LAND AND WATER
CHARACTERISTICS
a. Size of entire tract r~-f"~' ~1`J; ~~ ,~fcz-- Z~G ~ ~ n•.
b. Size of individual lot(s) N ~~-
c. A~~ximate etevat)'on of tract above MHW or
(FOWL 1 I(. , y' (CxI sr1~C> Bev. C~n..1
d. Soil type(s) and texture(s) of tract (PEc~cc sbu^a-r~.~~
51~~+ Sa~o,~ C~~V , ~Jt=_T
~ 1
e. Vegetation on tract QorT~~.~a~o µAQOw~ooS ,
up~a~~ P,N~1m1~-~ DE~~ol~~s ~aES-- ---
m. Describe ezistin wastewater treatment facilities.
Describe location and type of dischazges to waters
of the state. (For example, surface runoff, sanitary
wastewater, industrial/commercial effluent, "wash
down" and residential discharges.)
S~e~Acc ~v.rsoFF
o. Describe existing drinking water supply source.
r~. d ~
f. ^M7~an-made features now on tract Lx~s~.~~+~ ~Rlo`-~~
lLnf+OW~'-4, ~O ~T11-ITIa-~ _
1.
g. What is the CAMA Land Use Plan land
classification of the site? (~~tr the boat laed use pGm.J
Conservation Transitional
Deve}oped Community
Rural Other .
h. How is the tr$ct zoned by local government?
~? C ~O-~jr L~
i. Is the proposed project consistent with the applicable
zoning?. _ ! Yes No
(Attack Zaung eorr~liance eerrificale, tfgppGcvblrJ
Has a professional azchaeological assessment been
done for the tract? X Yes No ,,
If yes, by whom? 1-~isroalc (~2ck~aFT,o„ c~Fr~~.- C~ PO
k. Is the project located in a National Registered
Historic District or does it involve a National.
'~eQister listed or eligible property?
.-
_.._.__ ~ ~ ~ ....~._., i'~ o
1. Are there wetlands on-the site? ~-Yes _ No
Coastal (marsh) Other ~_
If yes, has a delineation been conducted? ~
(.lttack ~a„rtuation, zfa,~~r~J
S. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
In addition to the completed application form, the
following items must be submitted:
• .A copy of the deed (with state application only) or
other instrument under which the applicant claims title
to the affected properties. If the applicant is not
claiming to be the owner, of said property, then
forward a copy of the deed. or other instrument under
which the.owner claims title, plus written permission
from the owner to carry .out the project.
• An accurate, dated work plat (including plan view
and cross-sectional drawings) drawn to scale in black
ink on an 8 1/2" by 11" white paper. (Refer to
Coastal Resources Commission Rule 77.0203 for a
detailed description.)
Please note that original drawings aze preferred and
only high quality copies will be accepted. Blue-line
prints or other larger plats are acceptable only, if an
acl~uate 41ruber of quality copies are provided by
applicant. (Contact the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers regarding that agency's use of larger
drawings.) A site or location map is a part of. plat
requirements and it must be sufficiently detailed to
guide agency personnel unfamiliar with the area to the
IIttvised 03/95

Form DCM-MP-1
site. Include highway or secondary road (SR)
numbers, landmarks, and the like.
• A Stormwate:- Certif cation, if one is necessary .
• A list of the names and complete addresses of the
adjacent waterfront (riparian) landowners and
signed. return receipts as proof that such owners
have received a copy of the application and plats
by certified mail Such landowners must be advised
that they have 30 days in which to submit comments
on the proposed project to the Division of Coastal
Management. Upon signing this form, the applicant
further certifies that such notice has been provided.
Name Sic I-FTTPCt-1Cf~ T~-(cr~~~
Address
Phone
Name
Address
Phone _ _
Name
Address
Phone
~ A list of previous state or federal permits issued for
work on the project tract. Include permit numbers,
permittee, and issuing dates.
• A check for SZSO made payable to the Department of
Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
(DEHNR) to cover the costs of processing the
application.
• A .signed AEC hazard notice for projects in
oceanfront and inlet areas.
• A statement of compliance with the N.C.
Environmental Policy Act (N.C.G.S. 113A - 1 to
10) If the project involves the expenditure of public
funds or use of public land's, attach a statement
documenting compliance with the North Carolina
Environmental Policy Act.
6. CERTIFICATION AND PERNIISSION
TO ENTER ON LAND
I understand that any permit issued in response to this
application will allow only the development described in
the application. The project will be subject to conditions
and restrictions contained i1 the permit.
I certify that to the best~of my knowledge, the proposed
activity complies with the State of North Carolina's
approved Coastal Management Program and will be
conducted in a manner consistent with such program.
I certify that I am authorized to grant, and do in fact,
grant permission to representatives of state and federal
.review agencies to enter on the aforementioned Lands in
connection with evaluating information related to this
permit. application and follow-up monitoring of the
project.
I further certify that the information provided in this
application is truthful to the best of my knowledge.
This is the ~ day of ~ -vA 11~s
Print Name ~~~~~, f' s . ~"'' S .~LT
Signature ~ ~---.-
I.mdo,vner r,4utharized Agent
Please indicate attachments pertaining to your proposed
project.
_ DCM MP-2 Excavation <and Fill Information
_ DCM MP-3 Upland Development
_DCM MP-4 Structures Information
_DCM MP-S Bridges and Culverts
_ DCM MP-6 Marina Development
NOTE: Please sign and date each attachment in the
space provided at the bottom of each form.

^ Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired.
^ Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
^ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
or on the front if space permits.
1. Article Addressed to:
Milton J. Humpluey, Jr.
6265 NC Hwy. 53 W
Burgaw, NC 28425
A, Signature
X
2. Article Number
(Transfer from service label) ~DO~ l ~ ~ ~ oOO ~ (~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t~
PS Form 3811 , AUgUSt 2001 Domestic, Return Receipt 102595-02-M-
^ Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired.
^ Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
^ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
or on the front if space permits.
1. Article Addressed to:
Frank Humphrey, II
705 East Satchwell Street
Burgaw, NC 28425
A. Signature
^ Agent
0 Addre
C. Date of Dal
`~" t ~ f K~-' J L
D. Is delivery address differen from Rem 1? Ye:
If YES, enter delivery address below: ^ No
^ Agent
B. eceived y Printed Nj~rr~} r C. Date of Deliver
D. Is delivery address different f m Rem 1? ^ Yes
if YES, enter delivery address below: ^ No
3: Service Type
Certified Mail
^ Registered
^ Insured Mail
^ Express Mail
^ Return Receipt for Merchandise
^ C.O.D.
4. Restricted- Delivery? (Extra Fee) ^ Yes
2. Article Number
(transfer from service IabeQ ~~~ /~ ~ ~ D~©3 ~ ~~~ l fl t~ P'
PS Form 3811, August 2001 Domestic Retum Receipt ~S C, 102595-02-M-t5
^ Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired.
^ Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
^ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
or on the front if space permits.
1. Article Addressed to
SP Forests, LLC
15 Gum Avenue
Bolton, NC 28423
3. Service Type
' ~ertified Mail ^ Express Mail
^ Registered ^ Return Receipt for Merchant
^ Insured Maif ^ C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) ^ YeS
A. Signature ~~,,``
f~gent
x ^ Address
B. Received by (Printe ame) C. Date of Deliv~
^~ ~ ,~~ t,
D. Is deli ati~r ~di ~''ft~om item 1? ^ Yes
If~*~~ e~d2ltV~p.zress'f~elow: ^ No
1 ~ ,`Y
~~ ~A~ ~~~ 2pCh
~ ,~• ~
Certifi ~--~©`Express Mail
Registered ^ Return Receipt for Merchant
^ Insured Mail ^ C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) ^ Yes

Form DCM-MP-2
EXCAVATION
AND FILL
Attach this form to Joint Application for CAMA Major
Permit, Form DCM-MP-1. Be sure to complete all
other sections of the Joint Application that relate to this
proposed project.
Describe below the purpose of proposed excavation or
fill activities. All values to be given in feet.
Avenge Final.
E~st3ng Project
Length Width Depth Depth
Access
channel
(MLV~ or (NWL)
Canal
Boat
basin
Boat
ramp
Rock
groin
Rock
breakwater
~~~ i~~ We~cnN~~~.
Other
(Excluding
shorclinc
stabilization)

,<';~,
~,~~ .:
Kk"
~~ •~a .. ~
.. ~ -
,<:~<, ' as
s ...::.,r:
..c~..
Za' f 3'
1. EXCAVATION
a. Amount of material to be excavat from below
MHW or NWL in-cubic yards r~l~l-~
b. `Type of material to be excavated r~ ~ ~
c. Does the area to be excavated include coastal
wetlands (marsh), submerged aquatic .vegetation
(SAVs) or other wetlands? Yes ~ No
d. Highground excavation in cubic yards .? 3.~ cw
2.: DISPOSAL OF EXCAVATED
.MATERIAL
a. Locafion of disposal aria Tc ~3E i~~~-emu-C:
b. Dimensions of disposal area N ~ ~
c. Do you claim title to disposal area?
Yes ~- No
If no, attach a letter granting permission from the
owner.
d. Wilt a disposal area be available- for future
maintenance? Yes k No
if yes, where?
'.~es':ed DJ/~S

Form DCM-MP-Z
e. Does the disposal area include any coastal wetlands
(marsh), SAVs or other wetlands?
Yes X No
f. Does the disposal include any area in the water?
Yes X No
3. SHORELINE STABILIZATION ' ~ ` ~
a. Type of shoreline stabilization
Bulkhead Riprap
b. Length
c. Average distance waterward of MHW or NWL
d. Maximum distance waterward of MHW or NWL
e. Shoreline erosion during preceding 12 months
(Sourca of.informafionJ
f. Type of bulkhead or riprap material
g. Amount of fill in cubic yards to be placed below
water level
(1) Riprap
(2) Bulkhead backftll
h. Type of fill material
i. Source of fill material
4. OTHER FILL ACTIVITIES
(Excluding Shoreline Stabilization)
a. Will fill material be brought to site?
X Yes No
If yes,
(1} Amount of material to be placed in the
water Nor1r
(2) Dimensions of fill area S 1-c Pc~m ~ -
(3) Purpose of fill ~I a~~ scL V~ao~,~a~
I
b. Will fill material be placed in coastal wetlands
(marsh), SAVs or other wetlands?
i~ Yes No Cw) CL
If yes, .
(1) Dimensions of fill area 131 x a ~ ~
.SCE PERr..IT'
(2) Purpose of fill T Co~sTQu~r
~RO~~A~I (~-t~~:Aa1rN.r_a1.T
5. GENERAL
a. How will excavated or fill material be kept on site
and erosion controlled? l~Cpt~t i~-~c.,11- QuAU'~r
WA~~.II. ~QO,SIQr.I CO~.ITQ-Oi' ~1-LkJ~S i.JttrL 1
~.= 1~15~n
b. What type of construction equipment will be used
(for example, dragline, backhoe, or hydraulic
dredge)? ,~yt
SrA-BOA-C_p LQ~CC>c= 4r,IC. ~npC~_~Ptl
n
LoniSr¢.kcr~ o„L (-a~a.~ prncr!_
c. Will wetlands be .cr;ssed in transporting equipment
to project site? Yes ~,_ No
If yes, explain steps that will be taken to lessen
environmental impacts.
~~T .
A t or Prn'ett N
~~
Signature
~~5
n~~
Rcrised 03/45

Form DCM-MP-S
BRIDGES AND
CULVERTS
Attach this farm to Joint Application for CAMA Major
Permit, Form DCM-MP-I. Be .sure to complete alt
other sections of the Joint Application that relate to this
proposed project.
1. BRIDGES
a. Public x Private
b. Type of bridge (con^struction material}
~1" Cc~nICRET~ W2`C SLAG
c. Water body to be crossed by bridge
S ua-ic.F~l C2ec~
d. ~ depth at the proposed .crossing at MLW or
+~~ '1 O
e. Will proposed bridge replace an existing bridge?
X Yes No
If yes,
(1) Length of existing bridge ~ ~ S-E ~ T
(2) Width of existing bridge ! k FEET
(3) Navigation clearance underneath existing
bridge t/- I I ~ EEr
(4) Will all, or a part of the existing bridge be
removed? (Explain) ~~c ~F -r-u~ (--x~sT~~tc~
~e~DC,r. ~1«~ T« P~Mo,,,_n Gtio Prc«~.tc
f. Will proposed bridge replace an existing culvert(s)?
Yes ~ No
If yes,
(l) Length of existing culvert
(2) Width of existing culvert
(3) Height of the top of the ezis`ang culvert above
the IviHW or NWL
Revised 03/95
(4) Will all, or a part of, the existing culvert b~
removed? (Explain)
g. Length of proposed bridge I I S l-~ Er
h. Width of proposed bridge 3 `~ l-c~"T
i. Height of proposed bridge above wetlands
9 Fc~r .
j. Will the proposed bridge affect existing water flow?
Yes ~_ No
If yes, explain
k. Navigation clearance underneath proposed bridge
+I- ~ I. S FCCT
1. With the proposed bridge affect navigation by
reducing or increasing the existing navigable-
opening? Yes X No
If yes, explain
m. Will the proposed bridge cross wetlands containing
. no navigable waters? - Yes X No .
If yes, explain
n. Have you contacted the U.S. Coast Guard
concerning their approval?
Yes No
If yes, please provide record of their action.
-11J~~-w ~ L ~~`~-~-h.K.~~ ~ G~vL .J
~~~;~'

Form DCM-MP-S
2. CULVERTS ~ i I ~
a. Water body in which culvert is to be placed
b. Number of culverts proposed
c. Type of culvert (construction material, style)
Will proposed culvert replace an existing bridge?
Yes No
If yes, .
(1) Length of existing bridge
(2) Width of existing.bridge
(3) Navigation clearance underneath existing
bridge
(4) Will all, or a part of, the existing bridge be
removed? (Explain)
e. Will proposed culvert replace an existing culvert?
Yes No
If yes,
(1) Length of existing culvert
(2) Width of existing. culvert
(3) Height of the top of the existing culvert above
the MHW or NWL
~(4) Will all, or a part of, the existing culvert be
removed? (Explain)
f. Length of proposed culvert
g. Width of proposed culvert
h.~ Height of the top of the proposed culvert above the
M1iW or NWL
i. Will the proposed culvert affect existing water flow?
Yes No
If yes, explain
j. Will the proposed culvert affect existing navigation
potential? Yes No
If yes, explain
3. EXCAVATION AND FILL
a. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
require any excavation below the MHW or NWL?
Yes ~ No
If yes,
(1) Length of area to be excavated
(2) Width of area to be excavated
(3) Depth of area to be excavated
(4) Amount of material to be excavated in cubic
yards
b. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
require any excavation.within:
_ Coastal Wetlands - SAVs -Other Wetlands
If yes, . f~~-- m d~ ~--.
(1) Length of area to be excavated
(Z) Width of area to be excavated
(3) Amount of. material to be e~zcavated in cubic
yards
c. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
require-any highground excavation?
_ X Yes No
If yes,
(1) Length of area to be excavated a? ~ FE
(2) Width of area to be excavated '~~ iro ~
(~ Amount of material to be excavated in cubic
yards ~ 3 a e y
d. If the placement of the bridge or culvert involves
. any excavation, please complete the fallowing:
(1) Location of the spoil disposal area
~ Comma-rQ Fc ToC
i o - C-~-r~e~~~~~c u~~
(2) Dimensions of it disposal area
r~ A
(3) Do you claim title to the disposal area?
Yes ~ No
If no, attach a letter granting permission from
the owner.
Revised 03/95

Form DCM-MP-S
(4} Will the disposal area be available for future
maintenance? Yes ~_ No
(~ Does the disposal area include any coastal
wettands (marsh), SAVs, or other wetlands?
Yes _,~ No
If yes, give dimensions if different from (2)
above.
(6) Does the disposal area include any area below
the MHW or NWL? Yes ~ No
If yes, give dimension if different from No. 2
above_
e. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
result in any fill (other than excavated material
described in Item d. above) to be laced below
MHW or NWL? .Yes ~ No
If yes,
(1} Length of area to be filled
(2) Width of area to be filled
(3) Purpose of fill
f. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
result in any fill (other than excavated material
described in Item d. above) to be placed within:
_ Coastal Wetlands _ SAVs ~ Other Wetlands
If yes,.
(1) Length of area to be filled ~ ~ Fc~--~-
(2) Width of area to be filled 13 FCL"`r
(3) Purpose of fill ~2~RC~~,r.,, F. t_~
Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
result in any fill (other than excavated material
described in Item d. above) to be placed on
highground? _~__. Yes No
If yes,
(1) Length of area to be filled q c / ~ErJ°,-~1
00 ~EETI •a.cwny t
(2) Width of area toe filled ~~= ~Er \r10~tA i. %JrCr ~1~
(3) Purpose of fill oA cwP:, F~.~t
4. GENERAL
a. Will the proposed project involve any mitigation?
_~ Yes No
If yes, explain in detail S,~- c.•~ ~~~
Will the proposed project require the relocation of
any existing utility lines? i/ Yes No
If yes, explain in detail ~=-- ~~~,-c_'.. (~ ~z~i
c. Will the proposed project require the construction of
any temporary detour structures?
' . Yes X No
If yes, explain in detail
d. Will the proposed project require any work
.channels? Yes _~ No
If yes, complete Form DCM-MP-2
e. How will excavated or fill material be kept on site
and erosion controlled? . NCCo i ~t~~ Q,~~~_,,-,,
s~1QrF¢ EQncin.:i Carl-QOf_ felt=rµoo~ L~tLI ~rl
use
f. What type of construction equipment will be used
(for example, dragline, backhoe or -hydraulic
dredge)? Sra,~,~eo ~2~ ec,~ ~'-,.~ c I?o/~o~,.~~a~t
_L.O NCT(Ll.~CT I O hI CG U ~ O M E1-i 'i-
g. Will wetlands be crossed in :transporting equipment
to project site? Yes X No
If yes, explain steps -that will be taken to lessen
environmental impacts.
h. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
require y sborel' a stabilization?
es No
If yes, explain in detail _ ~.~ ,.J2~;~ -l~.,r~
psCj~aT
t or Pro~eC /Name
d~~_
~~
5egnaturs
~/7 /6 ~'
Din
Bruised 03!95

0

Z '-
O -- in
~
~ o
}
M ~
~ > ~ m W
~'
~ ~ ~ ~
O
U ~
~ LL
~ ~
~ ~ W M
tL Z ~ M
L`
0
o w ,.
a ~ a- w w
Q Q 0 O
~
~
U ~- t-
Z' w
W

ui

'
a

O
LL
0
W

W
U]
J
J
_

Z

Q
W
J
U
D
Z
Q

U

0
0
J
Q
Z
O
H

Q
Z
Q
Lll
1-

Z

0 0
m
~
~
.~
.
~a~~w
z~0
0 0
m ~ ~

~ = U ^
~ f6 ~ v
i- • X L II.
a w U E

a
~ o 0
Q' _
~
F
Q Q
V
~ R
C

F--
W
U

Q o 0
~
~ ~
om
to m
. _d`-~

O O

7 U
C
R .~..
a ~Z

~ ~ g o
N ~_
.C C O ~
p O
O
~
I.~. ~
L N
U ~~~
Q ~
a
~ N
~~ o 0
0

1 ~ ~
V ~ ~ U
d
~
m
~
~ a X
a, g w c
W O o 0
a g w
-_ -~
~ ~ U
Z W a v ~
~
~ ~

~
p~ m
O
td
C ~ p
Q 4
~
LL N
a> n
~ a
\
.n

v m
~

~~
~ _
~
a~
O
U J
Q
N O
o
CO ~ ' ~
J
J -~
~ O .'..
~ li
~
}
117

~
.~ O J
to Z ~
O
F

w~~~,~~~ ~,~~~~~
-WLB WETLAND BOUNDARY PROPOSED BRIDGE
L
~L WETLAND PROPOSED BOX CULVERT
® DENOTES FILL IN PROPOSED PIPE CULVERT
WETLAND
1~11'LL111J DENOTES FILL IN
- - -F -PROP. LIMIT OF FILL
PROP. RIGHT OF WAY
- - NG- - NATURAL GROUND
- - P-L - PROPERTY LINE
- TDE - TEMP.ORAINAGE
EASEMENT
- PDE - PERMANENT DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
- EAB- • EXIST. ENDANGERED
ANIMAL BOUNDARY
- Epg- ~ EXIST. ENDANGERED
PLANT BOUNDARY
SURFACE WATER
® DENOTES FILL IN
SURFACE WATER
(POND)
® DENOTES TEMPORARY
FILL IN WETLAND
® DENOTES EXCAVATION
IN WETLAND
® DENOTES TEMPORARY
FILL IN SURFACE
WATER
« - _ = DENOTES MECHANIZED
_ _
" = CLEARING
•HC « HC« DENOTES. HAND
_ _ » CLEARING
TB
~~ TOP OF BANK
---- WE EDGE OF WATER
_ - ~ - - PROP. LIMIT OF CUT
- -~ - - - WATER SURFACE
X X X X X LIVE STAKES
X x X
BOULDER
--- COIR FIBER ROLLS
12'-48'
(DASHED- LINES DENOTE PIPES
EXISTNG STRUCTURES) 54' PIPES
& ABOVE
~. SINGLE TREE
• _ , _ ... WOODS LINE
. ~ DRAINAGE INLET
-^~'= ROOTWAD
RIP RAP.
O ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER
OR PARCEL NUMBER
IF AVAILABLE
PREFORMED SCOUR HOLE

LEVEL SPREADER (LS)

DITCH /
GRASS SWALE
~~~~~
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PENDER COUNTY
PROJECT:33326.1.1 (B-3887)
REPLACE BRIDGE X116 OVER
SHAg.EN CREEg ON SR 1520
SHEET ~ OF i REV. 5 d 19 d 0~

rf~ ~ ,
~ a ~ ~~
~sl
~~ 53 '~~'
_ ~J 1411
~- l ~
R ~
/~~~ ' Aft la O

~~~~
~( _/
- L-- las
i1L'~
,s
53 \
~ ~_ ~ -
JJ ~ / ~
`,r', ~ --- `~~
`~ ~ ~
t./ ~® Y
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PENDER COUNTY
PROJECT: 33326.1.1 <B-3887)
REPLACE BRIDGE X116 OVER
SHAgEN CREEg ON SR 1520
SHEET ~ OF : t ~ / 2 / 0~
NORTH CAROLINA

i
- ~w
"'
f eZ
0
i z
e ~
~5'
~ ~~
g~~ow
'"~ r z
d ~ 3i
Q7 `,,,
~ O

N N
W
W {A
= N
y Z
w
W
N d
J
~G
d ~
I ~
J
~ ~
0 0
~~
d~
o n
+ +
~~
O O
t- SrS
d
n o
+ +
,e m
~~
~ ~
O O
~ ~
N
e
o ~
o r
~
Q
w w
N a N
J
N
J

U
J Z

J~ u0
tJ~ WQ
~ Q
W J
~ {- C

AJ
WW m
\
au 0; N
~ W \
~ O N
O
W

W
•F Wo 2 s/ao~vd uo sawou ~aunn p~adad Dasl~H 60-Z2-F
'W 00'90+6! of 00'OOf 01'o!S -7- ' ma! tuauiesaa .f/llUn luauowra0 6u/GPd f'0-9Z-B

,.-
_ -~o stem
PROGRAM
January 4, 2005
Mr. David Timpy
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington. Regulatory Field Office
Post Office Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28403-1890
Dear Mr. Timpy:
Subject: EEP Mitigation Acceptance Letter:
~SQY 6 Z
~ ~ ~~~~~~~~ ~ r
JAN 0 ~ 2005
WE1UiNDSAND S70RMWA ER BNRANGH
~CdYn - YbN7 ~Y5
~NiNDSAND STORMWgTER~B~H
B-3887, Replace Bridge 116 over Shaken Creek on SR 1520,
Pender County; Cape Fear River Basin (Cataloging Unit
03030007); Southern Outer Coastal Plain Eco-Region
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (EEP) will provide mitigation for the 0.017 acre of unavoidable riverine 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; therefore, the EEP intends to provide
compensatory riverine wetland mitigation up to a 2:1 ratio in Cataloging Unit 03030007
of the Cape Fear River Basin.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Ms. Beth
Harmon at [phone].
Sincerely,
~i
~~liam D. Gilmore, P.E.
EEP Director
cc: Phil Harris, Office of Natural Environment, NCDOT
John Hennessy, Division of Water Quality, Wetlands/401 Unit
File: B-3887
~- ~ ~ ®~
j ~ .r ~ NCDENR
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program, IG52 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 21699-1652 / 919-1l5-0476 / www.nceep.net

A Y
~_~~o st~e~.
_____ ~ ~_ ~ ro~ 3~ . ~~.
January 4P~8~~M
Mr. Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
Environmental Management Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1548
Dear D~-. Thorpe:
Subject: EEP Mitigation Acceptance Letter:
B-3887, Bridge 116 over Shaken Creek, Pender County
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the Ecosystem Enhancement Program
(EEP) will provide wetland mitigation for the subject project. Based on the information supplied
by you in a letter dated December 6, 2004, the impacts are located in CU 03030007 of the Cape
Fear River Basin in the Southern Outer Coastal Plain Eco-Region, and are as follows:
Riverine Wetland Impacts: 0.017 acre
The subject project is not listed in Exhibit 2 of the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA)
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, the EEP currently
has sufficient riverine wetland mitigation assets within this CU and will provide the proper
riverine wetland mitigation amount. The EEP intends to provide compensatory riverine wetland
mitigation up to a 2:1 ratio in Cataloging Unit 03030007 of the Cape Fear River Basin.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Ms. Beth
Harmon at 919-715-1929.
Sincerely,
~~~~~ ~~
Wi lam D. Gilmore, P.E.
Director
cc: NIr. Dave Timpy, USACE-Wilmington
Mr. John Hennessy, Division of Water Quality, Wetlands/401 Unit
File: B-3887
~'
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program, (652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 21599-1652 / 919-715-047b / www.nceep.net

~~~~~Z
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
a,w SfA7p°
y = °~,
~ _ s
DEPART7VlENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY LYNDO TIPPETT
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
January 7, 2005 ~ ~--~ ~
Mr. Bill Arrington
NCDOT Coordinator '~'~ ~ %''0G
2877 Highway 70 Ia~~~;~ - ~~a'~~ ::-; cu,<~..~tTr
Beaufort, North Carolina, 28516 ~~s~'~®s~~v~<~='~~-'~~"t.~7v'uai~~,H
Dear Sir:
Subject: Application for LAMA Major Development Permit for the proposed
replacement of Bridge No. 116 on SR 1520 over Shaken Creek, Pender
County, Division 3. Federal-Aid Project No. BRZ-1520 (3), State Project No.
8.2271401, WBS Element 33326.1.1; TIP No. B-3887.
Please find enclosed copies of the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) permit
application (MP, MP2 & MPS), Categorical Exclusion (CE), permit drawings, half size
plans, North Carolina Division of Water Quality Stormwater Exemption, EEP acceptance
letter, green cards from the Adjacent Riparian Land Owners, and a method of debiting $400
to be submitted to the DCM for processing the CAMA permit.
The NCDOT proposes to replace Bridge No. 116 on SR 1520 over Shaken Creek. Bridge
No. 116 is currently 87 feet in length, consisting of five spans with the maximum span at
approximately 18 feet. The clear roadway width for the structure is 19.2 feet, providing two
nine foot travel lanes with 0.6 foot shoulders. The proposed bridge will replace Bridge No.
116 with a new cored slab bridge approximately 115 feet in length. The new bridge will have
three spans, one at 35 feet, one at 50 feet and one at 30 feet with two steel pile interior bents
and spill through end bents. The new structure will provide a 28-foot clear roadway width
providing two 11-foot travel lanes, including three-foot shoulders. The proposed approach
roadway will consist of two 11-foot travel lanes with four-foot grass shoulders. The bridge is
designed for top down construction and no bents will be placed in the water.
Bridge Maintenance Unit records indicated the Bridge No. 116 has a sufficiency rating of
14.7 out of a possible 100 for a new structure. The bridge is considered functionally obsolete
and structurally deficient. The replacement of an inadequate structure will result in safer and
more efficient traffic operations.
MAILING ADDRESS:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
1598 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699-1598
TELEPHONE: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
WEBSITE: WWW.NCDOT.ORG
LOCATION:
2728 CAPITAL BLVD
PLB SUITE 168
RALEIGH NC 27604

r
Areas of Environmental Concern (AFC's) potentially impacted by this project include Public
Trust Areas of Shaken C~ eek: ° Wetlands associated with the floodplain of Shaken Creek
exhibit characteristics of a palustrine, broad leaved, deciduous forest.
An on-site field meeting was held on May 18, 2004. Attendees of this meeting include: Bill
Amngton (NC Division of Coastal Management (DCM)) and Cheryl Knepp (NCDOT
Office of Natural Environment (ONE)). This meeting addressed the following issues:
- Description of the proposed bridge replacement as compared to the existing bridge.
Construction techniques for the bridge replacement including placement of piles and
how they are constructed, and what type of bridge will be constructed.
- No bents will be placed in the water.
- Utility work to be done. Hand Clearing 0.06 acres of wetlands to the Permanent Utility
Easement (PUE) for moving and maintaining electrical utility. Power lines must be clear
of any obstruction within 15 feet. No permanent impact will be associated with this
clearing.
- Concerns with mechanized clearing in wetlands on the east side of the road, revision of
plans was necessary to reflect Hand Clearing methods instead.
- Mechanized Clearing in the wetland on the west side of SR 1520 will have to be
conducted because these wetlands are located within the fill slope. Mechanized Clearing
is necessary for road stabilization when wetlands occur inside the fill slopes.
- Removal of the existing bridge and following BMPs.
PROPOSED IMPACTS TO WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES
General Description: Shaken Creek is located in the Cape Fear River Basin (Hydrological
Cataloging Unit 03030001) and classified by the Division of Water Quality as C Sw.
Neither High Quality Waters (HQW), Water Supplies (WS-I or WS-II), nor
Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW) occur within 1.0 mile of the project area.
The structure targeted for replacement spans the open water stream associated with Shaken
Creek. There is no direct involvement of additional streams or tributaries. This section of
Shaken Creek has been assigned Stream Index Number 18-74-33-4 by the NCDWQ. Shaken
Creek is a tributary of and joins with Holly Shelter Creek approximately 200 feet
downstream (west) of Bridge No. 116. National Wetland Index (NWI) mapping indicates
that floodplains of Shaken Creek exhibit characteristics of a palustrine, broad-leaved,
deciduous forest system that is seasonally flooded [PFO1C; (Cowardin et al. 1979)]. Field
investigations indicate that floodplain wetlands occur along both sides of Shaken Creek east
of SR 1520 and on the north side of Shaken Creek west of SR 1520.
Wetland Impacts: Permanent impacts to wetlands associated with this project total 0.017
acre, including 0.009 acre of permanent fill and 0.008 acre due to mechanized clearing. The
permanent fill is due to the widening of the road. The mechanized clearing is due to fill
slope construction and maintenance (see Wetland Impact Summary Sheet 7 of 7).
B-3887 2

Mechanized Clearing is necessary for road stabilization when wetlands occur inside the fill
slopes.
Utility Impacts: There will be no permanent utility impacts associated with this site. Any
necessary clearing of wetlands for the Permanent Utility Easement [(PUE) aerial utility
relocation] will utilize hand clearing techniques. Hand Clearing will result in a temporary
impact of 0.06 acres in jurisdictional wetlands (see permit drawing sheet 4 of 7). Bell South
will be directional boring. the wetlands and creek approximately 75 feet right of -L- from
approximate station 14+77 to 16+65.
Stream Impacts: Permanent impacts to the stream are limited to bridge shading; bridging
will not result in fill or dredging of wetlands/waters of the United States, and encroachment
into the stream will be avoided.
Bride Demolition: Bridge No. 116 is 87 feet long, consisting of five spans with the
maximum span at approximately 18-feet. The superstructure consists of a timber floor on
timber joists with anasphalt-wearing surface. The substructure is a timber abutment design.
The interior bents consist of timber caps on timber piles. In order to protect the water quality
and aquatic life in the area affected by this project, the NCDOT and all potential contractors
will follow appropriate guidelines for bridge demolition and removal. These guidelines are
presented in three NCDOT documents entitled "Pre-Construction Guidelines for Bridge
Demolition and Removal", "Policy: Bridge Demolition and Removal in Waters of the
United States", and "Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition and Removal" (all
documents dated 9/20/99).
Dropping any portion of the structure into waters of the United States will be avoided unless
there is no other practical method of removal. In the event that no other practical method is
feasible, aworst-case scenario is assumed for calculations of fill entering waters of the US.
Since Bridge No. 116 is composed completely of steel and timber, there is little potential for
components of the bridge to be dropped in the water. Therefore, no temporary fill is
expected to result. from bridge removal. NCDOT will coordinate with the various resource
agencies during project planning to ensure that any concerns regarding bridge demolition are
resolved. Within Pender County, both inland and estuarine surface waters and wetlands are
considered to be high quality habitat and have been designated as Areas of Environmental
Concern (AECs) by the NC Department of Coastal Management (DCM). Consideration will
be given to avoid disturbances within these areas whenever practicable.
Anadromous fish use this section of Shaken Creek including river herring, striped bass,
American and hickory shad. The in water moratorium for these anadromous fish is February
15 to June 15. Sunfish also occupy these waters and require a moratorium from April 1 to
June 30. There is no in water work planned due to the top down construction of the bridge,
therefore, the anadromous fish moratorium on in water construction should not be an issue.
8-3887 3

Schedule for Construction: It is assumed that the Contractor will begin construction of the
proposed bridge shortly after the date of availability for the project. The let date is April 19,
200 with a date of availability of May 31, 2005.
AVOIDANCE, MINIMIZATION AND MITIGATION
Avoidance examines all appropriate and practicable possibilities of averting impacts to
"Waters of the United States". The NCDOT is committed to incorporating all reasonable and
practicable design features to avoid and minimize jurisdictional impacts, and to provide full
compensatory mitigation of all remaining, unavoidable jurisdictional stages; minimization
measures were incorporated as part of the project design.
The impacts to Shaken Creek are minimized by using a maximum slope of 3:1 in the
wetlands, replacing the existing bridge in its current location, and top down construction of
the bridge, which eliminates the need for a temporary work bridge or causeway. The impacts
to Shaken Creek are also minimized by replacing Bridge No. 116 with a new bridge that will
span the creek with no bents in the water. The impacts to the wetlands on the east side of the
bridge were avoided by using hand clearing techniques for the utility relocation rather than
mechanized clearing. However, not all impacts were avoided so compensatory mitigation
will be required for 0.017 acre of wetland impact. The Ecosystem Enhancement Program has
confirmed that they will provide mitigation for all impacts (see attached letter).
FEDERALLY PROTECTED SPECIES
Plants and animals with federal classifications of Endangered (E), Threatened (T), Proposed
Endangered (PE), and Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under provisions of Section 7
of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended.
As of January 29, 2003 the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) lists eleven federally
protected species for Pender County (Table 1). No species have been added to or deleted
from this list since the completion of the referenced document. A survey for these species
and habitat was conducted on January 4, 2001 and June 19, 2001. Habitat was found for two
of the eleven species, however no specimens of these species were found during the survey.
Therefore, biological .conclusions of "No Effect" were given for those species requiring
biological conclusions. Since biological conclusions for species that have habitat expire
after two years, a re-survey of the project area was conducted July 10, 2003, for the two
species with suitable habitat. These surveys were conducted during the flowering period for
rough leaved loosestrife and Cooley's meadowrue. A plant by plant survey revealed neither
species,. therefore a biological conclusion of "No Effect" was be given.
8-3887 4

Tahle 1 _ Federally-Protected Species for Pender County
Scientific Name Comin~~n Name Status Habitat Biological
Determination Conclusion's
__.._
Trichechus manatus Manatee E No No Effect
Picoides borealis Red-cockaded E No No Effect
wood ecker
Charardrius melodus Piping plover T No No Effect
Alligator American Alligator T(S/A) No Not Required
mississi iensis
Caretta caretta Loggerhead Sea T No No Effect
Turtle
Acipenser Shortnose sturgeon E No No Effect
brevirostrum
Amaranthus pumilus Seabeach amaranth T No No Effect
Carex lutea Golden sedge E(P) No No Effect
Lysimachia Rough leaved E Yes No Effect
as erulae olia loosestrife
Schwalbea ainericana American E No No Effect
chaffseed
Thalictrum cooleyi Cooley's E Yes No Effect
meadowrue
* Based on latest survey of July lU, ZUU3.
Essential Fish Habitat: The 1996 amendments to the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Management and Conservation Act (MSFCMA) set forth a new mandate for the National
Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), regional fishery management councils (FMC) and other
Federal agencies to identify and protect important marine and anadromous fish habitat. The
FMCS, with the assistance from NMFS, have delineated "essential fish habitat" (EFH) for
managed species. In the South Atlantic region, waterbodies in Currituck County are listed in
which EFHs are found. Shaken Creek is not a listed waterbody for EFHs. Therefore, the
rules of the MSFCMA will not apply for this project. Fritz Rhode of the Division of Marine
Fisheries Service was contacted on April 19, 2004, and recommended that an EFH
assessment not be done for this project.
REGULATORY APPROVALS
NCDOT requests that the proposed work be authorized under a Coastal Area Management
Act General Major Development Permit. A permit processing fee of $400 will be provided
as indicated in the subject line. NCDOT will also be applying for issuance of a United States
Army Corps of Engineers NWP 23. The NCDOT will adhere to all general conditions of the
Water Quality Certification. Therefore, in accordance with 15A NCAC 2H, Section .0500(a)
we are providing two copies of this application to the North Carolina Department of
Environmental and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality, for their review.
B-3887 $

Thank you for your assistance with this project. If you have any questions or need additional
information please call Cheryl Knepp at [phone].
Sincerely,
4-~---~--~-~
.~ Gregory .Thorpe, Ph.D.
Environmental Management Director, PDEA
cc:
w/attachment
Mr. John Hennessy, Division of Water Quality (2 copies)
Mr. Gary Jordan, USFWS
Mr. Travis Wilson, NCWRC
Ms. Cathy Brittingham, NCDCM
Mr. Greg Perfetti, P.E., Structure Design
Dr. David Chang, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr. Allen Pope, Division 3 Engineer
Mr. Mason Herndon, Division Environmental Officer
Mr. Mark Staley, Roadside Environmental
w/o attachment
Mr. Jay Bennett, P.E., Roadway Design
Mr. Omar Sultan, Programming and TIP
Mr. Art McMillan, P.E., Highway Design
Ms. Stacy Baldwin, P.E., PDEA Project Planning Engineer
Mr. David Franklin, USACE, Wilmington _
Mr. Dave Timpy, USACE
Ms. Beth Harmon, EEP
Mr. Carl Goode, PE
B-3887

Form DCM-MP-1
APPLI ATI
C ON
(To be completed by all applicants)
b. City, town, community or landmark
1. APPLICANT mac' ~E ~ i ~~
a. Landowner:
c. Street address or secondary road number
SE? I s.~o
Name NC. DEpr, or- I ~An~SOoe_i ~-r~o~.,(
Address IS98 M~~~ S~-Rv~~~ C~~~~-2
City ~4c ci~~~ State 1~1~.
d. IS proposed work within city Iimits or planning
jurisdiction? Yes ~ No
e. Name of body of water nearest project (e.g. river,
creek, sound, bay) S~lak~ CeEC~c.
Zip ~'it.SS- isq`f Day Phone ~~~+- "T~s_ Isoy
3. DESCRIPTION AND PLANNED USE
Fax 9 ~ ~ - ~ ~ s- ~ s~ ~
OF PROPOSED PROJECT
b. Authorized Agent:
Name a. List all development activities you propose (e.g,
building a home, motel, marina, bulkhead, pier, and
excavation and/or filling.activities.
Address ~cP~acc ~KiSr~~.l(, I~,2a0(~l= l.J~'rl-F
^^
_J'~ I~CY.1 RJLIPCrI-. ~~lo I~et..~ Y_c~FOI/.IpN
City State ~ APR^ac`a~~ ,
Zip Day Phone b. IS the proposed activity maintenance of an existing
project, new work, or both? -~lc~~ Wo2~
Fax
c. Will the
roject be for public, private or commercial
,~
c. Project name rf any) 3- ?~ ~~ ~~~o~E I l(o ~
use? ~ruc TArisPoQTpT~~~1
w~ ~- S ~ ~~«~~~ ~ Qc c~ d. Give a brief description of purpose, use, methods of '
construction and daily operations of proposed

NOTE: Pcrmir wi!! be irsued in name oflandox~rur(r), and~or _
project. if more space is needed, please attach
~
?
T
o i
~~
additional pages.
~c~_ 1~L0 S~eu.crua~
projccrname. W~TE.~ Q. tlcw SrCuc~-kQE l~ao rJcw
K<,ROwA~-1 ~OPI!elkC~lts, -rp_ ~ow~-1 .
. c~~~,~,-~U~T,o~ m~r,a~~ ;.,,~~
2. LOCATION OF PROPOSED USF_D, .
PROJECT
a. County ~c N o ~ ~
Rtviud 03/95

Form DCM-MP-1
4. LAND AND WATER
CHARACTERISTICS
m. Describe existin wastewater treatment facilities.
A
a. Size of entire tract r~ ~ ~ n. Describe location and type of discharges to waters
~~ of the state. (For example, surface runoff, sanitary
b. Size of individual lot(s) t\!~, ~ wastewater, industrial/commercial effluent, "wash
down" and residential discharges.)
c. A~~ximate elevatJon of tract above MHW or S~QGtacc ~~.~oFF
(FtWL I ICS , o ~ 1 C x ~ sn.~c> Bw. C~~~, ~
d. Soil type(s) and texture(s) of tract (PEe~c~ ~u~a-r~~~ o• Describe existing drinking water supply source.
SIl.T~1 SPrl0~1 CL~~-1 ~ t~LT ~~-~
F' ~
e. Vegetation on tract ion-~~.~a~ao ~Aa_DWoo~s ,
uo~a,~~ P,N~Im~~-~ DE~~o~us ~RES~
---rr
f. MTan-made fneatures now on tract t= K~ s,~ ~~ ~ ~ e~ or..~>,
4LoP.0 W P.4 ~Itr~ O ~T~ ~~ T ~ f$ .
5. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
g. What is the CAIviA Land Use Plan land
classification of the site? (consuit the loco! im:d ust ~,.~
Conservation Transitional
Deweioped Community
Rural Other
h. How is the tract zoned by local governn-ent?
i. Is the proposed project consistent with the applicable
zoning? _~ Yes No
(Attach zoning corr~liance. eelrificate, :f appGrnbfe)
j. Has a professional archaeological assessment been
done for the tract? X Yes No ,
If yes, by whom? I-~isTOe~c. ~2cuevPT~oa c~Fe~~.- ~~ Po 1
k. Is the project located in a National Registered
Historic District or does it involve a National
Resister listed or eli.4ible property?
1. Are there wetlands on the site? ~ Yes _ No
Coastal (marsh) Other ,~_
If yes, has a delineation been conducted? CS
(.ittodi doa~menrarion, if available)
In addition to the completed application form, the
following items must be submitted:
• A copy of the deed (with state application. only) or
other instrument under which the applicant claims title
to the affected properties, If the applicant is not
claiming to be the owner of said property, then
forward a copy of the deed or other instrument under
which the owner claims title, plus written permission
from the owner to carry out the project.
• An accurate, dated work plat (including plan view
and cross-sectional drawings) drawn to scale in black
ink on an 8 1/2" by 11" white paper. (Refer to
Coastal Resources Commission Rule 71.0203 for a
detailed description.)
Please note that original drawings are preferred and
only high quality copies will be accepted. Blue-line
prints or other larger plats are acceptable only if an
ac]~aaic nnrr~ber of quality copies are provided by
applicant. (Contact the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers regarding that agency's use of larger
drawings.) A site or location map is a part of. plat
requirements and it must be sufficiently detailed to
guide agency personnel unfamiliar with the area to the
Revised o3/95

Form DCM-MP-1
site. Include highway or secondary road (SR)
numbers, Landmarks, and the like.
• A Stormwater Certification, if one is necessary.
• A list of the names and complete addresses of the
adjacent waterfront (riparian) landowners and
signed return receipts as proof thaE such owners
have received a copy of the application and plats
by certified mail. Such landowners must be advised
that they have 30 days in which to submit comments
on the proposed project to the Division of Coastal
Management. Upon signing this form, the applicant
further certifies that such notice has been provided.
Name Sic ~T,r-.c_~1c~ ~~-or~~-
Address
Phone
Name
Address
Phone
Name
Address
Phone.
• A list of previous state or federa[ permits issued for
work on the project trail. Include permit numbers,
permittee, and issuing dates.
• A check for X250 made payable to the Department of
Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
(DEHNR) to cover the costs of processing the
application.
• A signed AEC hazard notice for projects in
oceanfront and inlet areas.
• A statement of compliance with the N.C.
Environmental Policy Act (N.C.G.S. 113A - Y to
10) If the project involves the expenditure of public
funds or use of public land's, attach a statement
documenting compliance with the North Carolina
Environmental Policy Act.
6. CERTIFICATION AND PERMISSION
TO ENTER ON LAND
I understand that any permit issued in response to this
application will allow only the development described in
the application. The project will be subject to conditions
and restrictions contained ~~ the permit.
I certify that to the best of my knowledge, the proposed
activity complies with the State- of North Carolina's
approved Coastal Management Program and will be
conducted in a manner consistent with such program.
I certify that I am authorized to grant, and do in fact,
grant permission to representatives of state and federal
review agencies to enter on the aforementioned lands in
connection with evaluating information related to this
permit application and follow-up monitoring of the
project.
I further certify that the information provided in this
application is truthful to the best of my knowledge.
This is the ~ day of ~ VA ~?.se~S
Print Name ~~~~~ f ~ s . ~'' %S
Signature ~ ~..
Lmidoivnrr r ~futhorizrd Agent ,
Please indicate attachments pertaining to your proposed
project.
_ DCM MP-2 Excavation and Fill Information
_ DCM MP-3 Upland Development
_ DCM MP-4 Structures Information
_DCM MP-S Bridges and Culverts
_ DCM MP-b Marina Development
NOTE: Please sign and date each anachment in the
space provided at the bottom of each form.
2e~iseu ~3r35

Form DCM-MP 2
EXCAVATION
AND FILL
(Except bridges and culverts)
Attach this form to Joint Application for CAMA Major
Permit, Form DCM-MP-1. Be sure to complete. all
other sections of the Joint Application that relate to this
proposed project.
Describe below the purpose of proposed excavation or
fill activities. Ail values to be given in feet.
Average Flnat
E~dstlug Project
I,en¢th w'~deb DeDtb DeD~
Access
channel
(MLA or (NWL)
Canal
Boat
basin
Boat
ramp
Rock
groin
Rock
breakwater
FLL Irt WCTCA NHS
Other
(Excluding
shoreline
stabilization)

''
~.:c> .

'~kh .
~~~ ~•~
s

s•
Z $' 13'
1. EXCAVATION
a. Amount of material to be excavat from below
MHW or NWL in cubic yards N~l-~
b. Type of material to be excavated ~ tit ~ ~
c. Does the area to be excavated include coastal
wetlands (marsh), submerged aquatic vegetation
(SAVs) or other wetlands? Yes ~ No
d. Highground excavation in cubic yards .? 3.2 ev
2. DISPOSAL OF EXCAVATED
MATERIAL
a. Location of disposal aria To ~E I~t~r~-~•:~u~~.
"3u Co~z'~~.e.~o2
b. Dimensions of disposal area N ~A-
c. Do you claim title to disposal area?
Yes ~_ No
If no, attach a letter granting permission from the
owner.
d. Will a disposal area be available for future
maintenance? Yes x N_ o
if yes, where?
l',ev:~d D3/~5

Form DCM-MP-2
e. Does the disposal area include any coastal wetlands
(marsh), SAVs or other wetlands?
Yes X No
f. Does the disposal include any area in the water?
Yes X No
3. SIiORELINE STABILIZATION ~ ` ~
a. Type of shoreline stabilization
Bulkhead Riprap
b. Length
c. Average distance waterward of MHW or NWL
d. Maximum distance waterward of MHW or NWL
e. Shoreline erosion during preceding 12 months
(Soarce of information)
f. Type of bulkhead or riprap material.
g. Amount of fill in cubic yards to be placed below
water level
(1) Riprap
(2) Bulkhead backfill
h. Type of fill material
i. Source of fill material
4. OTHER FILL ACTIVITIES
(Excluding Shoreline Stabilization)
a. Will fill material be brought to site?
X Yes No
If yes,
(1) Amount of material to be placed in the
water t~or~C
(2) Dimensions of fill area _ 5 ~ - Pc~m ~ --
(3) Purpose of fill `~a~T sCG l7~ao~ar~~t
i
b. Will fill material be placed in coastal wetlands
(marsh), SAVs or other wetlands?
~ .Yes No ~w ~ ~L,
if y(1) Dimensions of fill area 13~ x a ~ ~
ScE PEa-~~ ~T
(2) Purpose of fill To Co~ssR~r
~R~IN P.U ~tr\l~,A wlrMrh1T
1
5. GENERAI.
a. How will excavated or fill material be kept on site
and erosion controlled? t\IC(Joi I~-~~~~- Qua~~n,
Wt~~~-~2 I`Qos~o,.i Co~~TQot (`~lC-,-uoas ~~~~
~.= ViSFn
b. What type of construction equipment will be used
(for example, dragline, backhoe, or hydraulic
dredge)? nn
SrA-rlpp,-QO ~Q~CC.t- 4+~C ~oar_~,,vPu
n
L-O nl $'rEI.ICT~ Je.! L- q~.li CM~T~ i
c. Will wetlands be Grassed in transporting equipment
to project site? Yes ,~ No
If yes, explain steps that will be taken to lessen
environmental impacts.
6-~~T
A t or Pro'ect N
~-
Signature -
/I ~ /o s
Revised 03/95

Form DCM-MP-S
BRIDGES AND
CULVERTS
Attach this farm to Joint Application far CAMA Major
Permit, Form DCM-MP-1. Be sure to complete all
other sections of the Joint Application that relate to this
proposed project.
1. BRIDGES
a. Public c~ Private
b. Type of bridge (con^^struction material)
_ p2 ~ rr C.c)nIC(ZET~ W Q~ C SAC
c. Water body to be crossed by bridge
Sua-ic.Etil C2EC~
d. /~W~r depth at the proposed crossing at MLW or
V__+~- ~,c~r
e. Wit] proposed bridge replace an existing bridge?
X Yes No
If yes,
(1) Length of existing bridge Sc~ ~-E~T
(2) Width of existing bridge ! k FE ~T
(3) Navigation clearance underneath .existing
bridge +/- I f ~ ~~-
(4) Will all, or a part of the existing bridge be
removed? (Ex`plain)T~« of -rum ~y(= x r snTr,,.!c~
ICQ.\0~+~ WrLI I'~~ QF MUU~=~~ I~J t1O LEI~U'CtC
f. Will proposed bridge replace an existing culvert(s)?
Yes ~c No
If yes,
(1) Length of existing culvert
(2) Width of existing culvert
(3) Height of the top of the existing culvert above
the MHW or NWL
(4) Wilt all, or apart of, the existing culvert be
removed? (Explain)
g. Length of proposed bridge ! I S ~- ~-
h. Width of proposed bridge 3 9 FCt:'T
i. Height of proposed bridge above wetlands
9 FEE,-.
j. Will the proposed bridge affect existing water flow?
Yes ~_ No
If yes, explain
k. Navigation clearance underneath proposed bridge
+1- I I. S Fcc-r
t. Will the proposed bridge affect navigation by
reducing or increasing the existing navigable
opening? :yes Y No
If yes, explain
m. Will the proposed bridge cross wetlands containing
• no navigable waters? - Yes x No
If yes, explain
n. Have you contacted the U.S. Coast Guard
concerning their approval?
Yes ~IVo
If yes, please provide record of their action.
Revised 03/95

Form DCM-MP-S
2. CULVERTS ~ ~ I ~}
a. Water body in which culvert is to be placed
b. Number of culverts proposed
c. Type of culvert (construction material, style)
d. Will proposed culvert replace an existing bridge?
Yes No
If yes,
(1) Length of existing bridge
(2) Width of existing .bridge
(3) Navigation clearance underneath existing
bridge
(4) Will all, or a part of, the existing bridge be
removed? (Explain)
e. Will proposed culvert replace an existing culvert?
Yes No
If yes,
(1) Length of existing culvert
(2) Width of existing culvert
(3) Height of the top of the existing culvert above
the MHW or NWL
~(4) Will all, or a part of, the existing culvert be
removed? (Explain)
£ Length of proposed culvert
g. Width of proposed culvert
h.~ Height of the top of the proposed culvert above the
MIiW or NWL
i. Will the proposed culvert affect existing water flow?
Yes No
If yes, explain
Will the proposed culvert affect ezistuig navigation
potential? Yes No
If yes, explain
3. EXCAVATION AND ~'II..L
a. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
require any excavation below the MHW or NWL?
Yes .~ No
If yes,
(1) Length of area to be excavated
(2) Width of area to be excavated
(3) Depth of area to be excavated
(4) Amount of material to be excavated in cubic
yards
b. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
require any excavation within:
_ Coastal Wetlands _ SAVs _ Other Wetlands
If yes, .
(1) Length of area to be excavated
(2) Width of area to be excavated
(3) Amount of material to be excavated in cubic
yazds
c. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
require any highground excavation?
~_ Yes No
If yes,
(l) .Length of area to be excavated ~~ FtE-r
(2) Width of area to be excavated ~/- ~o F~-r
(~ Amount of material to be excavated in cubic
yards a 3 a e y .
d. If the placement of the bridge or culvert involves
any excavation, please complete the following;
(I) Location of the spoil disposal area C
~ O ~,t=. Cr' TG`EMi r~E~ ~UU CO~..1T'R RCTUr~
(2) Dimensions o~spOil disposal area
(3) Do you claim tittle to the disposal area?
Yes ~ No
If no, attach a letter granting permission from
the owner.
Revised 03/95

Form DCM-MP-S
(4) Will the disposal area be available for future
maintenance? Yes ~ No
(~ Does the disposal area include any coastal
wetlands (marsh), SAVs, or other wetlands?
Yes ~_ No
If yes, give dimensions if different from (2)
above.
(b} Does the disposal area include any area below
the MHW or NWL? Yes ~ No
If yes, give dimension if different from No. 2
above.
e. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
result in any fill (other than excavated material
described in Item d. above) to be laced below
MHW or NWL? .Yes ~ No
If yes,
(1) Length of area to be filled
(2) Width of area to be filled
(3) Purpose of fill
f. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
result in any fill (other than excavated material
described in Item d. above) to be placed within:
_ Coastal Wetlands _ SAVs ~ Other Wetlands
If yes;.
(1) Length of area to be filled ~ ~ Fc~-T .
(2) Width of area to be filled 13 FEL'-'r
(3) Purpose of fill ~f2~aow~v C=1~~
g. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
result in any fill (other than excavated material
described in Item d. above) to be placed on
highground? ~. Yes No
If yes,
E,.1vz-tG
(1) Length of area to be filled qoo ~~~T :~,,,~.,py
(2) Width of area toe filled ~a ~~T fir, .cA,_w~er~l:
(3) Purpose of fill 'oAcwP~, F«~_.
4. GENERAL
a. Will the proposed project involve any mitigation?
Yes No
If yes, explain in detail
b. Will the proposed project require the relocation of
any existing utility lines? Yes No
If yes, explain in detail
c. Will the proposed project require the construction of
any temporary detour structures?
. Yes X No
If yes, explain in detail
d. Will the proposed project require any work
channels? Yes ~_ No
If yes, complete Form DCM-MP-2
e. How will excavated or fill material be kept on site
and erosion controlled? NCCor ~,~~ Qu~u~u
~~.14rt-Q E2nSlrr:t (~O.r1^-Qp(- ~11-T'NoO:. Will ~(=
t,ls co
f. What type of construction equipment will be used
(for example, dragline, backhoe or -hydraulic
d^^redge)? Sra N ~//--~--.~~eo ~1 21 oc>r•. A-~ c !?u~o~~-U
1....OKL'~'(ZI,LCTIO ~ t-=G' U ~ OMEh-~ T 1
g. Wil! wetlands be crossed in trans orting equipment
to project site? Yes x No
If yes, explain steps that will be taken to lessen
environmental impacts.
h. Wil! the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
require any shoreline stabilization?
Yes ~ No
If yes, explain in detail
P~GDaT
t or Projai /Name
d---~ ~.~
s~.w,t
~/6s~
Revised. U3/95

^ Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete A. Signature
item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. ;;'yj~~"
s Print your name and address on the reverse ~R~~<<
so that we can return the card to you. .Recd ed
^ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
or on the front if space permits. ~
1. Article Addressed to:
Millon J. Humpluey, Jr.
6265 NC Hwy. 53 W
Burgaw, NC 28425
^ Agent
C. Datb of
D. Is delivery address differen4 from item 1? t.7 Ye:
If YES, enter delivery address below: ^ No
3. Service Type
~ert'rfied Mail ^ Express Mail
^ Registered ^ Return Receipt for Merchandise
' ^ Insured Mail ^ C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) ^ Yes
2. Article Number
(Transfer from service label) ~ D ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ 0 0 0~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ C/ f
PS Form 3817, August 2001 Domestic Return Receipt 1o25s5-oz-M-1s
^ Complete items 1, 2, and 3.-Also complete
item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired.
^ Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
^ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
or on the front if space permits.
1. Article Addressed to:
Frank Humphrey, II
7Q5 East Satchwell Street
Burgaw, NC 28425
A. Signature
X ^ Agent
^ Addressee
B. eceived y Printed N J h C. Date of Delivery
~,'' 2~~ Q
D. Is delivery address different m item 1? ^ Yes
If YES, enter delivery address below: ^ No
3: Service Type
Certified Mail ^ Express Mail
~O Registered ^ Retum Receipt for Merchandise
^ Insured Mail ^ C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) ^ Yes
2. Article Number
(Transfer from service label) ~~~~ l~ ~ ~ ~f/©~ ~ ~ Q~ [ S3 n ~] q
PS Form 3811, August 2001 Domestic Return Receipt U ~) ~5 1 C> > ozss5-oz-M-tSao
^ Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete A. Si
item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. X
^ Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you. B R,
^ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
or on the front if space permits.
D. Is
1. Article Addressed to: If
SP Forests, LLC
15 Gum Avenue
Bolton, NC 28423
2. Article Number
gent
^ Addresser
(Printe ame) C. Date of Deliver
~~ d d9 m item 1? ^ Yes
'dAftOLrr.o rasa"'below: ^ No
~~~ ~~ ~ ~ 2~~~ , j
~ ~ A'(
.~ ~ _ ~ . ,
Certifi E3'`Express Mail
Registered ^ Return Receipt for Merchandis
^ Insured Mail ^ C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) ^ Yes
Y1 ~ ~ r-i i J i~ n /"1El!'t 7 %! ;='<~rl ~ E7 rf i

UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE
111111
• Sender: Please print your name, address, and ZIP+4 in this box •
N. C. Deparhnent of Transportation
Office of Natural Environment, PDEA
1598 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-158
Attention: Cheryl Knepp
ij ( '} i# i~ ii i 2 i t ~ j i 1 11 i.
~;,• x:.~ t,1.i t s.'.i' 7 Jc,: t !,i s e,! ;.e.i.? t. , y,i i ~ ! }!.t l!.!_~.z (~l.f,~.i,3: j.:,tis.y?
~..... ... t.x
UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE
First-Class Mail
Postage & Fees Paid
USPS
Permit No. G-10
• Sender: Please print your name, address, and ZIP+4 in this box •
N. C. Department of Transportation
Office of Natural Environment, PDEA
1598 Mail Seraice Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1598
Attention: Cheryl Knepp
f.: , i!i~!}fi!?}33~?!t3l??i£IF??i£t9?}£}i}iii!}??}Fl?133~iii!!T;3!1
UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE
First-Class Mail
Postage & Fees Paid
USPS
Permit No. G-10
• Sender: Please print your name, address, and ZIP+4 in this box •
N. C. Department of Transportation
Office of Natural Environment, PDEA
1598 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1598
Attention: Cheryl Knepp
First-Class Mail
Postage & Fees Paid
USPS
Permit No. G-10
j j} 3 Ejj jj } i i l i =~ ii i
Cs ~ {iilii!!!?lili£i!il!it{I!iii!flil{13~!!3{}F333liiFtl! ?!!iFi!{

M SfATF o
~e ~n~ .
~,~~~_.
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMEI`]T OF TRANSPORTATION
Q~c~~oe~p
DEC 1 3 2004
DENR - WATER QUpUl'y
WETLANDS AND STORMyN~'~ g
MICHAEL F. EASLEY LYNDO TIPPETT
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
December 6, 2004
Mr. William D. Gilmore, P.E.
EEP Transition Mana er ~ o
g ~~
Ecosystem Enhancement Program
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1652
Dear Sir:
Subject: Mitigation Request for impacts associated with the proposed replacement of Bridge
No. 116 on SR 1520 over Shaken Creek, Pender County, Division 3. WBS
Element 33326.1.1, Federal-Aid Project No. BRZ-1520 (3), State Project No.
8.2271401, TIP B-3887.
The purpose of this letter is to request that the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program
(EEP) provide confirmation that the EEP is 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.
The NCDOT proposes to replace Bridge No. 116 over Shaken Creek with a new cored slab
bridge approximately 110 feet in length, with a spill through design. The new bridge will have
three spans approximately 30 feet in length with two steel pile bents, which will be pile driven.
The proposed bridge is designed for top down construction. This alternative consists of replacing
the bridge on the existing alignment with an off-site traffic detour.
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 estimate that 0.017
acres of wetlands will be impacted.
The project is located in the Coastal Plain Physiographic Province in Pender County in the Cape
Fear River basin in Hydrological Cataloguing Unit 03030007.

r
The wetland impacts, summarized in Table 1, total 0.017 acre of Coastal Plain Bottomland
Hardwood (Blackwater subtype) forests. We propose to provide. compensatory mitigation
for the wetland impacts by using the EEP for the 0.017 acre of impacts.
Table 1: Summary of Jurisdictional Impacts
Section Permanent Wetlands ac)
Riverine Non riverine
B-3887 0.017 N/A
TOTAL 0.017 N/A
*N/A-denotes non-applicable
Please send the letter of confirmation to Dave Timpy (USAGE Coordinator) at U. S. Army Corps
of Engineers Wilmington Regulatory Field Office, P.O. Box 1890, Wilmington, NC 28402-1890.
Mr. Timpy's FAX number is [phone]. The current let date for the project is 4/19/05.
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 Hennessy of NCDWQ, with copies submitted to NCDOT.
If you have any questions or need additional information please call Cheryl Knepp at
[phone].
Sincerely,
Gregory .Thorpe, Ph.D.,
` Environmental Management Director
Project Development & Environmental Analysis Branch
cc: w/attachment
Mr. John Hennessy, Division of Water Quality
Mr. Travis Wilson, NCWRC
Mr. Gary Jordan, USFWS
Mr. Jay Bennett, P.E., Roadway Design
Mr. Omar Sultan, Programming and TIP
Mr. Art McMillan, P.E., Highway Design
Mr. David Chang, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr. Greg Perfetti, P.E., Structure Design
Mr. Mark Staley, Roadside Environmental
Mr. Dennis Pipkin, P.E., PDEA Project
Planning Engineer
Mr. John F. Sullivan, III, FHWA
Mr. J. M. Mills, P.E.
Mr. Jerry Parker, DEO
Mr. David Franklin, USAGE, Wilmington
Ms. Laurie P. Smith, CPA

~.pao1
~A~O
M.
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTIVIENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY LYNDO TIPPETT
GOVERNOR {~ ~` SECRETARY
v ~ ~ ~ " ~ January 7, 2005
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Field Office ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ (l j
Post Office Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890 pENE~-V~~k"T~I`a C,7tthl.t"CY
r~,ptlOS AND STC>lt~A~Eft BRANCH
ATTN: Mr. Dave Timpy
NCDOT Coordinator
Dear Sir:
Subject: Application for Nationwide Permit 23 for the proposed replacement of Bridge
No. 116 on SR 1520 over Shaken Creek, Pender County, Division 3. Federal-
Aid Project No. BRZ-1520 (3), State Project No. 8.2271401, WBS Element
33326.1.1; T1P No. B-3887.
Please fmd enclosed copies of the Categorical Exclusion (CE), permit drawings, half size plans,
North Carolina Division of Water Quality Stormwater Exemption, and EEP acceptance letter.
The NCDOT proposes to replace Bridge No. 116 on SR 1520 over Shaken Creek. Bridge
No. 116 is currently 87 feet in length, consisting of five spans with the maximum span at
approximately 18 feet. The clear roadway width for the structure is 19.2 feet, providing
two nine foot travel lanes with 0.6 foot shoulders. The proposed bridge will replace
Bridge No. 116 with a new cored slab bridge approximately 115 feet in length. The new
bridge will have three spans, one at 35 feet, one at 50 feet and one at 30 feet with two
steel pile interior bents and spill through end bents. The new structure will provide a 28-
foot clear roadway width providing two 11-foot travel lanes, including three-foot
shoulders. The proposed approach roadway will consist of two 11-foot travel lanes with
four-foot grass shoulders. The bridge is designed for top down construction and no bents
will be placed in the water.
Bridge Maintenance Unit records indicated the Bridge No. 116 has a sufficiency rating of 14.7
out of a possible 100 for a new structure. The bridge is considered functionally obsolete and
structurally deficient. The replacement of an inadequate structure will result in safer and more
efficient traffic operations.
MAILING ADDRESS:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
1598 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699-1598
TELEPHONE: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
WEBSITE: WWW.DOH.DOT.STATE.NC.US
LOCATION:
2728 CAPITAL BLVD
PLB SUITE 168
RALEIGH, NC 27604

s
4
k
Areas of Environmental Concern (AFC's) potentially impacted by this project include Public
Trust Areas of Shaken Creek. Wetlands associated with the floodplain of Shaken Creek exhibit
characteristics of a palustrine, broad leaved, deciduous forest.
PROPOSED IMPACTS TO WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES
General Description: Shaken Creek is located in the Cape Fear ,Ri~easut;,; (Hydrological
Cataloging Unit 03030001) and classified by the Division of Watery ~Quahfy~~as ~ ~Sw. Neither
High Quality Waters (HQW); Water Supplies (WS-I or WS-H), nor Outstanding Resource
Waters (ORW) occur within 1.0 mile of the project area.
The structure targeted for replacement spans the open water stream associated with Shaken
Creek. There is no direct involvement of additional streams or tributaries. This section of Shaken
Creek has been assigned Stream Index Number 18-74-33-4 by the NCDWQ. Shaken Creek is a
tributary of and joins with Holly Shelter Creek approximately 200 feet downstream (west) of
Bridge No. 116. National Wetland Index (NWI) mapping indicates that floodplains of Shaken
Creek exhibit characteristics of a palustrine, broad-leaved, deciduous forest system that is
seasonally flooded [PFO1 C; (Cowazdin et al. 1979)]. Field investigations indicate that floodplain
wetlands occur along both sides of Shaken Creek east of SR 1520 and on the north side of
Shaken Creek west of SR 1520.
Wetland Impacts: Permanent impacts to wetlands associated with this project total 0.017 acre,
including 0.009 acre of permanent fill and 0.008 acre due to mechanized clearing. The permanent
fill is due to the widening of the road. The mechanized clearing is due to fill slope construction
and maintenance (see Wetland Impact Summary Sheet 7 of 7). Mechanized Clearing is
necessary for road stabilization when wetlands occur inside the fill slopes.
Utility Impacts: There will be no permanent utility impacts associated with this site. Any
necessary clearing of wetlands for the Permanent Utility Easement [(PUE) aerial utility
relocation] will utilize hand clearing techniques. Hand Clearing will result in a temporary impact
of 0.06 acres in jurisdictional wetlands (see permit drawing sheet 4 of 7). Bell South will be
directional boring the wetlands and creek approximately 75 feet. right of -L- from approximate
station 14+77 to 16+65.
Stream Impacts: Permanent impacts to the stream are limited to bridge shading; bridging will
not result in fill or dredging of wetlands/waters of the United States, and encroachment into the
stream will be avoided.
Bridge Demolition: Bridge No. 116 is 87 feet long, consisting of five spans with the maximum
span at approximately 18-feet. The superstructure consists of a timber floor on timber joists with
an asphalt-wearing surface. The substructure is a timber abutment design. The interior bents
consist of timber caps on timber piles. In order to protect the water quality and aquatic life in the
azea affected by this project, the NCDOT and all potential contractors will follow appropriate
guidelines for bridge demolition and removal. These guidelines are presented in three NCDOT
documents entitled "Pre-Construction Guidelines for Bridge Demolition and Removal", "Policy:
Bridge Demolition and Removal in Waters of the United States", and "Best Management
Practices for Bridge Demolition and Removal" (all documents dated 9/20/99).
8-3887

Dropping any portion of the structure into waters of the United States will be avoided unless
there is no other practical method of removal. In the event that no other practical method is
feasible, aworst-case scenario is assumed for calculations of fill entering waters of the US. Since
Bridge No. 116 is composed completely of steel and timber, there is little potential for
components of the bridge to be dropped in the water. Therefore, no temporary fill is expected to
result from bridge removal. NCDOT will coordinate with the various resource agencies during
project planning to ensure that any concerns regarding bridge demolition are resolved. Within
Pender County, both inland and estuarine surface waters and wetlands are considered to be high
quality habitat and have been designated as Areas of Environmental Concern (AECs) by the NC
Department of Coastal Management (DCM). Consideration will be given to avoid disturbances.
within these areas whenever practicable.
Anadromous fish use this section of Shaken Creek including river herring, striped .bass,
American and hickory shad. The in water moratorium for these anadromous fish is February 15
to June 15. Sunfish also occupy these waters and require a moratorium from April 1 to June 30.
There is no in water work planned due to the top down construction of the bridge, therefore, the
anadromous fish moratorium on in water construction should not be an issue.
Schedule for Construction: It is assumed that the Contractor will begin construction of the
proposed bridge shortly after the date of availability for the project. The let date is April 19, 2005
with a date of availability of May 31, 2005.
AVOIDANCE, MINIMIZATION AND MITIGATION
Avoidance examines all appropriate and practicable possibilities of averting impacts to "Waters
of the United States". The NCDOT is committed to incorporating all reasonable and practicable
design features to avoid and minimize jurisdictional impacts, and to provide full compensatory
mitigation of all remaining, unavoidable jurisdictional stages; minimisation measures were
incorporated as part of the project design.
The impacts to Shaken Creek are minimized by using a maximum slope of 3:1 in the wetlands,
replacing the existing bridge in its current location, and top down construction of the bridge,
which eliminates the need for a temporary work bridge or causeway. The impacts to Shaken
Creek are also minimized by replacing Bridge No. 116 with a new bridge that will span the creek
with no bents in the water. The impacts to the wetlands were avoided by using hand clearing
techniques for the utility relocation rather than mechanized clearing. However, not all impacts
were avoided so compensatory mitigation will be required for 0.017 acre of wetland impact. The
Ecosystem Enhancement Program has confirmed that they will provide mitigation for all impacts
(see attached letter).
FEDERALLY PROTECTED SPECIES
Plants and animals with federal classifications of Endangered (E), Threatened (T), Proposed
Endangered (PE), and Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under provisions of Section 7 of
the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended.
As of January 29, 2003 the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) lists eleven federally
protected species for Pender County (Table 1). No species have been added to or deleted
from this list since the completion of the referenced document. A survey for these
B-3887 3

species and habitat was conducted on January 4, 2001 and June 19, 2001. Habitat was
found for two of the eleven species, however no specimens of these species were found
during the survey. Therefore, biological conclusions of "No Effect" were given for those
species requiring biological conclusions. Since biological conclusions for species that
have habitat expire after two years, a re-survey of the project area was conducted July 10,
2003, for the two species with suitable habitat. These surveys were conducted during the
flowering period for rough leaved loosestrife and Cooley's meadowrue. A plant by plant
survey revealed neither species, therefore a biological conclusion of "No Effect" was
given.
Table 1. Federall -Protected S ecies for Pender Coun
Scientific Name - Common Name Status Habitat 'Biological`
Determination Conclusion*
Trichechus manatus Manatee E No No Effect
Picoides borealis Red-cockaded E No No Effect
wood ecker
Charardrius melodus Piping plover T No No Effect
Alligator American Alligator T(S/A) No Not Required
mississi iensis
Caretta caretta Loggerhead Sea T No No Effect
Turtle
Acipenser Shortnose sturgeon E No No Effect
brevirostrum
Amaranthus pumilus Seabeach amaranth T No No Effect
Carex lutea Golden sedge E(P) No No Effect
Lysimachia Rough leaved E Yes No Effect
as erulae olia loosestrife
Schwalbea americana American E No No Effect
chaffseed
Thalictrum cooleyi Cooley's E Yes No Effect
meadowrue
* Based on latest survey of July 10, 2003.
Essential Fish Habitat: The 1996 amendments to the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Management
and Conservation Act (MSFCMA) set forth a new mandate for the National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), regional fishery management councils (FMC) and other Federal agencies to
identify and .protect important marine and anadromous fish .habitat.. The FMCs, with the
assistance from NMFS, have delineated "essential fish habitat" (EFH) for managed species. In
the South Atlantic region, waterbodies in Currituck County are listed in which EFHs are found.
Shaken Creek is not a listed waterbody for EFHs. Therefore, the rules of the MSFCMA will not
apply for this project. Fritz Rhode of the Division of Marine Fisheries Service was contacted on
April 19, 2004, and recommended that an EFH assessment not be done for this project.
REGULATORY APPROVALS
Section 404 Permit: This project is being processed by the Federal Highway Administration as a
"Categorical Exclusion" in accordance with 23 CFR 771..115(b). Therefore, we do not anticipate
B-3887 4

this application to the North Carolina Department of Environmental and Natural Resources,
Division of Water Quality, for their review.
A copy of this permit application will be posted on the DOT website at:
http://www.ncdot.org/planning/pe/naturalunit/Permit.html.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Ms. Cheryl Knepp at
cknepp(cr~,dot.state.nc.us or [phone].
Sincerely,
~~
1d----- t--~
Gregory Thorpe, Ph.D.
Environmental Management Director, PDEA
cc:
w/attachment
Mr. John Hennessy, Division of Water Quality
Mr. Travis Wilson, NCWRC
Ms. Cathy Brittingham, NCDCM
Mr. Bill Arrington, NCDCM
Dr. David Chang, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr. Greg Perfetti, P.E., Structure Design
Mr. H. Allen Pope, P.E., Division Engineer
Mr. Mason Herndon, Division Environmental Officer
Mr. Mark Staley, Roadside Environmental
w/o attachment
Mr. Jay Bennett, P.E., Roadway Design
Mr. Omar Sultan, Programming and TIP
Mr. Art McMillan, P.E., Highway Design
Mr. David Franklin, USACE, Wilmington
Ms. Stacy Baldwin, P.E., PDEA Project Planning Engineer
Ms. Beth Harmon, EEP
Mr. Carl Goode, PE
8-3887

`V
L-- 6 .
~ ~~
53
.~
t ~ ~^~- ~
y.,. ~ -
~J ~ -
=5_
>>
53 `b'
~~-r_ `~ r
"~
`` l ~ 1 ~ ~
\ ` ^;
V
~/

~~`l~~l.~l ~~~
~~~~
N V ~®~
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PENDER COUNTY
a PROJECT:33326.1.1 (B-388n
REPLACE BRIDGE X116 OVER
SHAgEN CREEg ON SR 1520
SHEET I OF l ~/2/0~
M
NORTH CAROLINA

VW ~ 1L ~~l~l ~ ~1G~~~~
-~ILB WETLAND BOUNDARY PROPOSED BRIDGE
L
WETLAND PROPOSED BOX CULVERT
L
® DENOTES FILL IN PROPOSED PIPE CULVERT
WETLAND
® DENOTES FILL IN
_ - ~- -PROP. LIMIT OF CUT
SURFACE WATER
I' ® DENOTES FILL IN
SURFACE WATER
(POND)
®DENOTES TEMPORARY
FILL IN WETLAND
®DENOTES EXCAVATION
IN WETLAND
DENOTES TEMPORARY
FILL IN SURFACE
WATER
_ _ = DENOTES MECHANIZED
` *` _ ` = CLEARING
+HC HC= DENOTES HAND
_ . • CLEARING
TB
~~ TOP OF BANK
---• WE EDGE OF WATER
- - -F -PROP. LIMIT OF FILL
~- PROP. RIGHT OF WAY
- - NG- - NATURAL GROUND
- -P-~ - PROPERTY LINE
12'-48'
(DASHED LINES DENOTE PIPES
EXISTNG STRUCTURES) 54' PIPES
& ABOVE
SINGLE TREE
.. .. .. .. WOODS LINE

\~
•' ~ .
~.
DRAINAGE INLET
ROOTWAO
RIP RAP
5 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER
OR PARCEL NUMBER
IF AVAILABLE
PREFORMED SCOUR HOLE

LEVEL SPREADER (LS)
-TDE- TEMP. DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
- PDE - PERMANENT DRAINAGE ~ GRASS SWALE
EASEMENT
- EAB- • EXIST. ENDANGERED
ANIMAL BOUNDARY
- Epg- • EXIST. ENDANGERED
PLANT BOUNDARY
- -~ - - - WATER SURFACE
XX XX X X LIVE STAKES
BOULDER
--- COIR FIBER ROLLS
l~ ~~~
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PENDER COUNTY
PROJECT:33326.11 (8-3887)
REPLACE BRIDGE X116 OVER
SHAgEN CREEg ON SR 1520
SHEET 3 OF 7 REV. S/ 19/0

a-26~s ,mans permoneet ulnny eosemarv tram -c- slo.afanoo ro r~+o6.0o R-.
3-22-09 Revlse0 properly owner homes on Parcels 2 ono 3.
iydraul~cs\Godd\B3887_HYD_DRN.OGN
m

m ~ IJ U
0

N m z r
I
~
~ g~
~umi nm
mv' r~z
m°
~
or im z= p $~18 I 1 1

=

N
m
o

**
p
g
I
,: I
° 8V ~ 1
I SF,~ Z
o
IF
.
~~
~
'

T N
N
mN

~+ I
o
~ o $~ ~~. ~
~
~ - I~-
V
~ ~
a
o I
~ ~.
r
I
0
;~
~~

T > _
0
'^

iQL +
~ m
w ~~O
~ r-1
o
5
y
~ V 8 ~~
a ~ ~ ~°a
~
> >
~ V +. i
O
$T
~ b
~
T ~

® ~1
ppF s~ ~ ~~
m~
A }

O
~ g~
~
q C
A
rA
I
N ~

..,
~
~.
~~
s re~~
~ ~
y

~ra
~
•y .
g
j
Mgid ; .
'a' iUS a
y3
~~+~op v
Y M M N II
~~N~"O
~~~f]1gA r
$ rjy°8
~V~ ~ / ;
fff ~¢ ~
®is
~~
~+
~ ~8
~~
8 O
K
w ~~
T Z~
~° 7o
1i'
~
z m
~v
~ v ~~
Q
T ~ ~~

~^ -r^
rn Z
A
~m A j
}C
N Q Q~
N
m ~ m
~ GO
oZ
m
N N
V
~
C

1
,.
~:
-~
I
~~
~~
Y
/9~
G.
~ W
~~
z aZ ~o
az
~ ~~
O +C
~ ~~
~ o0
1
~ ~~' ~w
\y ~\
K I i l l.
I I t
. \ ~ ~ '~ ~~
~ I~ ~~
:~ ~ - ~ : ~ ~
I . ~ $~
I
~ I ~~
I
,y~ ~ 1 e ~ZZZ
I ~ ~~ ~s
I ~ /I s
i ~
I ~ '~ $
~ '
1' v ~ ~
I ~ jl
I "_ ~
/I~

.\
~~
~~\ ~
~\ E
''\
+ `\ `\
e ~ + ~
\\
~~ \ ~.
~~
,4oq~ sr
.. .. qr. fYr
M33+~ N37NH5 /~.....~ _ _ .. .. ~~
. .. ..
I
5•~ ~{
>
}~
~
+
~. T3
_~
D " v
~ ~

• F F
c rs
y~•
Z
~O

~ rs.
~ A
~
o _T$
aR~
~$ '
'~ T
a

~~

~ ~
~

1 ~ Z
Z

_HYD_DRN.DGN
z
m

m
•
o o
N
~ T
z Z
O
O

~ mm ~
mi ~-o
m
N u r
'~' r as am
z ~ ~'^ ~'^
° _ _
r ~
a ~

Z N
m
0
70 0
~'~.,
y ~ ~
fTf m
v - o
o
a N
o
~~
T T
's a y,
~~ 04-
I
T t ; ~
~ ~
1 V O
t +
~ ~ b ~~
~~~
~ 4 1
~~~
~~~
ao
~~
~~
~~
T
~_~
H
m
m
y VI
4! T
T
VI t7~
c
8-263 AOdirg permonerN uNlly easement from -L- Sto.l0i00.00 to 19+06A0 Rl.
3-22-04 Revised propery owner names on Porce/s 2 and 3.
~vwars
~~
V
~~ ~~~
~o
~ ~~
>~ l~ J 5
t
o
~
V
J
L'
~o
T$
+`Ai
u

~~®~~~~~ ®~~1Ls~J~
NAMES AND ADDRESSES
PARCEL NO.
NAMES
ADDRESSES
1
2
3
FRANK R. HUMPHREY, it
MILTON J. HUMPHREY, JR.
SP FORESTS, LLC
705 EAST SATCHWELL ST.
BURGAW, N.C. 28425
6265 NC HWY. 53 W.
BURGAW, N.C. 28425
15 GUM AVENUE
BOLTON, N.C. 28423

O

Z
O ~. in
r
~~ ~ w
c+~ ~
O ~ ~ °~ w
~ _ ~ ~ ~
(7

O
2
U N
R' lL
M
~ ~
W
LL Z ~ M
O
p
L`
(
W U
a - n- W u-
O O
p
0
~ ~
U ~ ~.-
Z W
W
S
O

ui

a

0
0
W
O

W
m
J
J

C7
Z
Q
W
J
U
O
Z
Q
U

O
J
Q
Z
O
H

Q
Q
W
F-
O
Z

0 0
c
R ~
~
3 N
~~
Z ~ ~
O O
~ ~ N
F~ .N R Q ~
Q W U ~

a
~ 0 0

Q ~~m
c
~ ~
W

Q O O
~ ~ .~
to c d ~
`"
ii
o O
m
3

m
=
~
Q ~ Z
c
G
~ .-. ~ g
N C -

F L ~ L N
~~~
a
d y
o ~ o 0
_ V
E-
a mdm
~
~ X
~_ W c
W
a o 0 0

o g
=~
`~
Z W °'
~
3 ~
H
C

W ~ ~ ~
c ~ v O O
- :_. N

d ~.
7 ~
~
3 ~
N N
~.
~ N ~ In
(/~ ~
~ r
a-
U -!
Q
N O
o
~ ~ H

~~ J J
~ ~ ~
O
°' d Q
~Z ~
O
H

~s
le
^~
00
CO
~~
k
R
r C ) t
~ `~'
O ~
U ~
C5 Q
~ ~ U
z ~ ~
~ Q
~ ~ W
~ a,
,~ g
~n
~g
o
~~
U
~i ~i
¢~
~N
~~

N
ti
a a
y
O
U ~
x~
a
W"
O A
V
~O C
h W
O
N
- ~ ~ X\ ~ /
_ J I ~~
ti /'
_~ ~ v ~ ~ ~ a ~~,
/ ,_
~)~,: I
S y
c~~~
,~ r
~ / ~
F -~
~ -
ca `"
~"'"`w~
y o
L88£-g ~.L~~LO?Id dIZ
..
~. ~,
0
0
f'
H
W
Z~
m
V W
d
m.
N
Z
W
3
N
O
Go
a
rn 4
~ u
~s~
xo
~~ ~ ~ ~
t' ~ gyp' y
4 IV~i
O~ ~~
xx °~
~o
q~
y ~~
ti ~ a
V rC
~~
N ~
y ~ ~ ~
N
V 0
x =
~ "' vi Z
$ ~y Y
~ ~~ ~ s
$ oq
~~
~~~ ~S ~~
Y
y~ ~ ~
N r~ r
~~ ~~
O ~
m
~ O aD
~ ~ O
II ~ p
~ ~ ~
v ~ ~ ~
G
G G
~ ° ~~°.
~,
pQ~. ~ ~ F
a ~ ~ o
3
~ z
W
J
Z Z
J ~ Q
~ ~ ~
o
Q °.-°M~~~~ p
x n n u u n n
A ~ N G •-
°o °o °
y ~ ~
~°n ~°n O °
v, ~ N ~ ~
v = z
~ v J
W
r
° 0 ~ ° LL
'21~~~~

.,
T F R:\Roe~way\Pro~\83887.tsh 5/28/99
~~
~,
°~
1~
~i
(~!
~ n~
N ~

i a
,~
,~
;~
;~
;
;
;
;
I i ;
~ ~ ~ C ~ N ,~ v 71 70Ni .0 ~ 'O 'O ~ 'O '9 g 'O ~ "O Q~ ~ 'O ~ 'O ~ 't> (7 d ;
Z' ~ , , A , , , c , , ,
>o '° :' a 3 ; ~ ~ ~ ~ v •o° v ~v° ~ $ v ~°o ~ ~ ~ m c ~° ~ •°o :~ •ov° ~ ~,ao ~°v~° a- o
m n
,~~,~ ~.~o; ~~c oomoAA~~3:~Pmv a~AcO~~$s~Ny ~~ ;
°' °° .°_ '" ~ a m oo as •° ~° 3 ~ a o "' ~ ~ an o a ° ~ a. $ > > ~ ~ ~ ~ v`, ;
°_o ~ c~ ~; ~~~ a a o -• ~,~.~~-: ~~~,o og~c== °.~3 ~° ~ s it
$ ~ ~; 3 q~ Q mo ~ ~-°-o"o o'sa'"~ as ago ~ _~
~ ~ ~ Q ° ffi rn 's o' ~ ~ A ~ c
° ~ Si ~ m 3 ° 3 S ° S ~ ~'; O
rt ~, , ,
~ ~
~ ~
i
_ n I ~ ~ . ;
I I ~ ~ y rn
;
I"I ~ I ~ ~ ~ R ~O "' m i ~ ` ~ I IA I 70 ,
I~I ~ ~ ~ l y ~ a~ " ~ I '
I I j I I I ~ i i i i l
m C ~ ~ ~ ; ~ ; •v -1 ~ O v ~ ~ c -~ -v to ~ vi A .~ ~ ~ -v ~ -o ~ -o v c ~ = 3
-v ~• O y fl~ N~ ~~~_ ~. m o o zz' 0 3 n~ o ? p o o` a s o 0 0 o v n a c R~ ~° '
N o n 7 ~~~ ~ 7 ~ m ~y 9 3 $ 4 ~ 1~ rt ~ 'fl O m !t ~° O m ;
, ~ y° ~ O ~ O S N S O q 'O ,o C C S S, S° ~ 7
$ ~ ~' ~ ° 3: ~ z to T ~ u ~ ~ -o v o ~ c
~o ~ ~ Z
~~ ~ ; y ~
.,, <~~ ,
®®®~QOOmO®Oo®Ir~peQQ®YapO¢-}¢}o- Imo' 11 O~
r I ~ ~ II
~ Z ®~
~o ~ rn ~ -o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~o v ~ v 7o C v 7o v ~ v N v ~ v v 70 ;
> > ~ ~ C o a ~ 3 a. ° a. ° a ~ a. 3 a. ~ a_ ~ a ° 3 a. r ~
O 4 7 a ; ~ 03 ~ O a O N ~ ~ O w' ~ ~ -I ~ S O -~ ~ C y. C O ~ ~ 1~ ;
~. 0 $° ~ ° ~ ~ ~ m ~ Q 3' C o s~ o C v u ? N C o ..~
>. c c C m ~~ m 3 5
$ °. ~ ~ in ,s ~ , , °
o -= ~ N r
; ; ~ ~ m
I I '
I IIl~~ ~IIII ~ w.
~x I~ I l, ~j oo~7r~~ A l i I'~~ ~I I ;
m m m~~OW~ ~~~ Ill y ~~eol I I I I I I~ ~ ~~ ~ t
I I I • I I ' 1 I ~ O O +~ t ~ i n i -~ i N ~ ~ ~ y ~
~° ~' 3 Q u o N ti ~ 1 a c~ ~~ (~ zo A A= N N~ N p A ~ t/rt A D ~+ oo '
y ~ m ? o ~ m m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ $. a y } $ ~ $ 3 ° _ 3 3 u3~ ~. a c o $ $ o_: ;
o c s ~- ~ N o g s g o °;
o w -~ ~ °c. 3 ; ~ ;
C,j ~ $ ~ ~ y
~~ ~ ~ 3
~~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~~ ~
n I ~ I `~~C,i ~ ,
a p ~; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 'nL ~
a ..~~~ cc!!.~,, Qp~~ i ' 1 I I ~ 0 'il ~ y I I U- ''t^LJj} ~ \ ~ I ;
~~ ~~ Im ~ ~ ~iY ~V ( ~ I 1 I ~ ~ ~ I I ~ E~ N~ II I t_J ~ 1 I ~ ~
A ; I , I , I I ~ LI l 1 \
~ 4 c Q I ; ; I 1 1 I ;
J ~ I I I ~ I ;
A I ~~ ~ I
.. ,~
a~
i

~~ • ,
RS FoBeaonSu~~Veya\b3887_la.contrcl.OiJ':5.ag-~ 07/15/03
H 6~
M ~
0
~~
~~ g~~~~~~ ~ o~ ~
~~ : ~~~oT ~~ ~
H~ ~~~~~~~ ~ „~ t ax T
1 ,
a
~~
~ ~~ ~
"'Z~S
~~ '~~
j ~,~
j 1. ~~~
1$ ~ ~ ~~~
Ig
1~
„~ 1 1 ' I ~
~ ~
~j ~
~~ C
I \ \ ~~
z ~ ~ ~ ~ ~x
~ I ~ "C
~ I ~
N
A i~ ~ o
~ ~ ~ \• y
x ~ ~~ \ ~.
o ~~ \ oa~~
~~~ .~..
% /~ ~ ~ ~ y
~~ ~
b b~ O I I ~~ r 2 W~ N N m a '
~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ m ~ o w
~ 8 ~ ~ ~~~~ ~ ~ oc
.~ ~ ~ :~_ m: O V
'~' m :
8W ~ p , I ~ ~:~my: v
t~ ~~ try ~~•' f + :~~g; ~ n
-a
y Fy O ~ a• ~ ~ L3 ~ ~ N N -i i IJ
V ~ ~ ~ ^ ~ ~ I I ~~y] ~~~ill y y _w W W_
~/ ~m#~m.
Q ~~
a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~
a ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~~~~
~yf N_W q~jj' j
~~
s ,; ~ :
V ~ ~ L D ~ ~ `~ ~im,om~: ~m
i Q •p~~~ / ~$~ ~Y : Xy Tt0 OWN Np~
p9hh'] a~ yO •O ~ a4[ W 'G (1j
y tOV ` ;;e~p ~w w~ w
~y3 r~ ^~
C o ~ ~ ~
Q y ~ ~ mo~nmm'3~" i
m~m~~, ~~
''~~~~

i i
~~ ~,
s-263 AOOJnp permoner6 urlpry eoseme+lt from -L- Sfo.l0t00.00 ro /9+06,00 Rr.
c
r
ah
8 C j ~ ~i
~~ ~~j
~~ ~
a~ ~
~r
y
~
~

1 1 1
~7C
r~
S
~
?
~~

T

25-FEB-2004 12:27
R~\Reoedwe~TXsc \ 638871.dgn
+~
~~ aiwao

25-FEB-2004 12:26
R~\Faoadwe~~Xsc\638871.dgn - ! ~ oi~oioo

a ~0 S$elYl
. _._ :.. .. .. _ .i:.,...
PROGRAM
January 4, 2005
Mr. David Timpy
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmngton Regulatory Field Office
Post Office Box 1890
Wilmington, North Cazolina 28403-1890
Dear Mr. Timpy:
Subject: EEP Mitigation Acceptance Letter:
B-3887, Replace Bridge 116 over Shaken Creek on SR 1520,
Pender County; Cape Fear River Basin (Cataloging Unit
03030007); Southern Outer Coastal Plain Eco-Region
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (EEP). will provide mitigation for the 0.017 acre of unavoidable riverine 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; therefore, the EEP intends to provide
compensatory riverine wetland mitigation up to a 2:1 ratio in Cataloging Unit 03030007
of the Cape Fear River Basin.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Ms. Beth
Harmon at [phone].
Sincerely,
ry~f 1
1
~iam D. Gilmore, P.E.
EEP Director
cc: Phil Harris, Office of Natural Environment, NCDOT
John Hennessy, Division of Water Quality, Wetlands/401 Unit
File: B-3887
~~Q~~
_ ~~~
_ _ NCDENR
North [arolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program, loj2 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, N;r 2759ei-l632 ! 9i~-71~-0416 ; www.nceep.net

--~0S~St~111 .
~, ~- , r ~ ~ z 3 -'
January 4P~$~~M
Mr. Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
Environmental Management Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1548
Dear Dr. Thorpe:
Subject: EEP Mitigation Acceptance Letter:
B-3887, Bridge 116 over Shaken Creek, Pender County
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the Ecosystem Enhancement Program
(EEP) will provide wetland mitigation for the subject project. Based on the information supplied
by you in a letter dated December 6, 2004, the impacts are located in CU 03030007 of the Cape
Fear River Basin in the Southern Outer Coastal Plain Eco-Region, and are as follows:
Riverine Wetland Impacts: 0.017 acre
The subject project is not listed in Exhibit 2 of the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA)
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, the EEP currently
has sufficient riverine wetland mitigation assets within this CU and will provide the proper
riverine wetland mitigation amount. The EEP intends to provide compensatory riverine wetland
mitigation up to a 2:1 ratio in Cataloging Unit 03030007 of the Cape Feaz River Basin.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Ms. Beth
Harmon at 919-715-1929.
Sincerely, ~,,, ~,
Wi ram D. Gilmore, P.E.
Director
cc: Mr. Dave Timpy, USACE-Wilmington
Mr. John Hennessy, Division of Water Quality, Wetlands/401 Unit
File: B-3887
"~ ~~
~.
North Carolina Ecasystem Enhancement Program, lb~2 !fail Service fencer, Raleigi:, NC 2759-lb32 i
- NCDENii
91~-7l5-047b ; www.nceep.nec

_Q
~O~
~~
fl
of
W AT F9
QG
~r~ =.1
,.~
..~. `C
~~k Michael F. Easley, Governor
'~- William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources ~
Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
Coleen H. Sullins, Deputy Director
Division of Water Quality
Mr. D. R. Henderson
NC Department of Transportation
1590 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1590
Dear Mr. Henderson:
~Ul ~ 4 ?OD3
~i
nliflSlON OF Hl~~~~
Subject: EXEMPTION from Ston~~AULlG3 ~,,
Management Permit Regulations -'
Stormwater Project No. SW8 030713
B-3887 8.2271401 Bridge Replacement
Pender County
The Wilmington Regional Office received a copy of your application for the project
known as B-3887 8.2271401 Bridge Replacement. Staff of the Wilmington Regional Office have
reviewed the application for the applicability of the Stormwater Management rules to the
proposed activity at this project. Based on our review, you do not appear to be proposing a
development activity on this site at this point in time .that would be subject to the stormwater
requirements as provided for in 1 SA NCAC 2H.1000. Please be advised that other regulations
will potentially apply to your proposed activities.
If your project disturbs one acre or more and has a point source discharge of stormwater
runoff, then it is subject to the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
stormwater discharge requirements. You are required to have an NPDES permit for stormwater
discharge from projects meeting these criteria.
This exemption applies only to the Coastal Stormwater Management Permit for the
currently proposed activity. If at any time in the future, development of any part of this site is
planned, as defined in NCAC 2H.1000, or if the proposed activities differ in any manner from
what is shown on the plans on file with the Division, you must submit the project for review of
the applicability of the stormwater management rules. If you have any questions concerning this
matter, please do not hesitate to call me at [phone].
Sincerely,
Rick Shiver
''t Water Quality Regional Supervisor
RSS/arl: S:\WQS\STORMWAT\EXEMPT\030713.Ju1
cc:
Jimmy Canady, Pender County Building Inspections
Joanne Steenhuis
Linda Lewis
Wilmington Regional Office
Central Files
N.C. Division of Water Quality
Wiimingtor~ F:~gional Office
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, N.C. 28405
[phone]
(9101350-2004 Fax
Customer Service
1- 800-623-7743
_~~~
'~~~.~~E{ ~'t

i t. ,..
Pender County
SR 1520
Replace Bridge No. 116 Over Shaken Creek
Federal-Aid Project No. BRZ-1520(3)
State Project No. 8.2271401.
T.I.P. No. B-3887
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
APPROVED:
!D - l X6.0(
DATE
j,
William D. Gilm re, P.E., Manager
Project Development and Environmental
Analysis Branch, NCDOT
DATE ~ '
ichotas L. Graf, P.E.
Division Administrator, FHWA

.,
Pender County
SR 1520
Replace Bridge No. 116 Over Shaken Creek
Federal-Aid Project No. BRZ-1520(3)
State Project No. 8.2271401
T.I.P. No. B-3887
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
October 2001
Document Prepared by:
Wang Engineering Company, Inc.
~~ ~ .~~
Greg .Purvis, P.E.
Project Manager
James Wang, Ph.D., P.E.
Principal
~.~`o~~K CAR ~''~,,
0 ,
• N~~ A, ~
• 'Y
~`~ ?.roFESSip ~ y
N'•
• Q.. •
:Q ~~
• -
_ .. _
- SEA -
- ~ -
• 9 „,,,~`
., ~pF ~-•...... J .
For the North Carolina Department of Transportation
z~~-
Stacy B. Harri , P.E.
Project Manager
Consultant Engineering Unit

~ ~.
] ~ ~, ~
PROJECT COMMITMENTS
Pender bounty
SR 1.520
Replace Bridge No. 116 Over Shaken Creek
Federal-Aid Project No. BRZ-1.520(3)
State Project No 8:2271401
T.I.P. No.13~3887
In addition to the- standard Nationwide Permit No. 23 Conditions, the General Nationwide Permit
Conditions, Section 404 Only Conditions, Regional Conditions, State Consistency Conditions,
NCDOTs Guidelines for Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition and Removal,
NCDOT's Guidelines for Best Management Practices. for the Protection of Surface Waters,
General Certfication Conditions, and Section 401 Conditions of Certification, the following
special commitments have been agreed to by NCDOT:
Division Engineer
The Stream Crossing Guidelines for Anadromous Fish Passa4e will be implemented, as
applicable.
A moratorium for no in-stream work or discharges into the river will be in effect from February 15
to June 15, to protect anadromous fish during spawning.
Green Sheet Page ~ ~ ~
Precanstruction
October 2001

i 1
-~ ,~ 1 ,
Pender County
SR 1520
Replace Bridge No. 116 Over Shaken Creek
Federal-Aid Project No. BRZ-1520(3)
State Project No. 8.2271401
T.I.P. No. B-3887
INTRODUCTION: The replacement of Bridge No. 116 is included in the 2002-2008 North
Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) Transportation Improvement Program (TIP)
and the Federal-Aid Bridge Replacement Program. The location is shown in Figure 1. No
substantial environmental impacts are anticipated. The project is classified as a Federal
"Categorical Exclusion.°
I. PURPOSE AND NEED
Bridge Maintenance Unit records indicated the bridge has a sufficiency rating of 14.7 out of a
possible 100 for a new structure. The bridge is considered functionally obsolete and structurally
deficient. The replacement of an inadequate structure will result in safer and more efficient
traffic operations.
II. EXISTING CONDITIONS
SR 1520 (Old Maple Hill Road) is classified as a rural local collector. Land use in the project
area is predominantly undeveloped woodlands. Undeveloped woodlands are adjacent on the
east and west sides of the study area.
Bridge No. 116 was constructed in 1956. The existing structure is 87-feet (26.1 meters) in
length, consisting of five spans with the maximum span at approximately 18-feet (5.4 meters).
The clear roadway width for the structure is 19.2-feet (5.76 meters), providing two nine foot (2.7
meters) travel lanes with 0.6-foot (0.2-meter) shoulders. The superstructure consists of a timber
floor on timber joists with an asphalt-wearing surface. The substructure is a timber abutment
design. The interior bents consist of timber caps on timber piles. The bed to crown height is 18
feet (5.4 meters). The posted weight limit is nine tons (8.16 megagrams [MgJ) for single
vehicles (SV) and 15 tons (13.6 Mg) for truck-tractors semi-trailers (TTST).
A five degree (350 meter radius) approach curve exists on the south end and a 2.5-degree (730
meter radius) approach curve exists on the north end of the existing structure and the structure
is tangent. SR 1520 consists of two ten foot (three meter) lanes with ten foot (three meter)
~' grass shoulders.
The estimated 2001 average daily traffic volume is 150 vehicles per day (vpd). The projected
traffic volume is expected to increase to 400 vpd by the design year 2025. The volumes include
one percent TTST and two percent dual-tired vehicles.
The posted speed limit is 55 miles per hour (mph) [90 kilometers per hour (km/h)].
SR 1520 is not part of a designated bicycle route and there are no indications that an unusual
number of bicyclists are using this route.
2

rt t
~ ~- 1
There are aerial power lines running on the southeast side of SR 1520 that cross the creek.
There is no evidence of underground utilities. Utility impacts are anticipated to be low.
There were zero accidents reported in the vicinity of the bridge during the period from January
1, 1995 to December 31, 1997.
One school bus crosses this bridge twice daily.
III. ALTERNATIVES
A. Project Description
The proposed structure will provide a 28-foot (8.4 meter) clear roadway width providing two
11-foot (3.3-meter) travel lanes, including three foot (one meter) shoulders (Figure 4). The
proposed approach roadway will consist of two 11-foot (3.3 meter) travel lanes with
four foot (1.2 meter) grass shoulders. The design speed will be 60 mph (100 km/h).
Based on a preliminary hydraulic analysis, Bridge No. 116 will be replaced with a cored slab
bridge approximately 110 feet (33 meters) in length, with a spill through design. The
elevation of the new structure will be approximately the same as the existing structure. The
opening size of the proposed structure may increase or decrease as necessary to
accommodate peak flows as determined from a more detailed hydraulic analysis to be
performed during the final design phase of the project.
B. Reasonable and Feasible Alternatives
One (1) reasonable and feasible alternative studied for replacing the existing bridge is
described below.
Alternate A (Preferred) replaces the bridge at the existing location with a new structure.
During construction, traffic will be maintained on an off-site detour (Figure 1) along SR 1523
(Old Blakes Bridge Rd.), NC 53, and NC 50 that is approximately 18 miles (29.0 kilometers)
in length. The length of approach work will be approximately 380 feet (114 meters) on the
west side of the bridge and approximately 375 feet (112.5 meters) on the east side of the
bridge. The right-of-way width varies- from 100 to 210 feet (30 to 63 meters), including
temporary easements.
A road user analysis was performed based on 200 vpd for construction year 2003 and an
average of 18 miles (29.0 kilometers) of indirect travel. The cost of additional travel will be
approximately 427 thousand dollars during atwelve-month construction period.
Alternatives Eliminated From Further Study
Alternate B replaces the bridge at the existing location. During construction, traffic will be
maintained by an on-site detour east of the existing structure with a temporary detour
structure approximately 110 feet (33 meters) in length. Alternate B was eliminated because
of the greater impacts, costs, and construction duration of its detour.
Alternate C replaces the bridge on a new alignment east of the existing structure. During
construction, traffic will be maintained on the existing structure. Alternate C was eliminated
because of its greater cost and additional environmental impacts.
3

~ ~}
.7 .t ~s
The "Do-Nothing" Alternative will eventually necessitate removal of the bridge. This is not
desirable due to the traffic service provided by SR 1520.
Investigation of the existing structure by the Bridge Maintenance Unit indicates the
rehabilitation of the old bridge is not feasible due to its age and deteriorated condition.
C. Preferred Alternative
Alternate A replaces the bridge at the existing location with a new structure while
maintaining traffic during construction with an off-site detour route approximately 18 miles
(29.0 kilometers) in length. Altemate A was selected as the preferred altemate because of
its low user cost and environmental impacts.
The Division Engineer concurs with Altemate A as the preferred altemate.
IV. ESTIMATED COST
The estimated costs, based on current 2001 prices, are as follows:
ARernate A
(Preferred)
Structure Removal (existing) $ 15,300
Structure (proposed) 196,600
Detour Structure and Approaches 0
Roadway Approaches 106,400
Miscellaneous and Mobilization 143,700
Engineering and Contingencies 88,000
ROW/Const. Easements/Utilities 36,400
TOTAL $ 586,400
The estimated cost of the project, as shown in the 2002-2008 Transportation Improvement
Program, is $660,000 including $60,000 for right-of-way and $600,000 for construction.
V. NATURAL RESOURCES
A. Methodology
Materials and literature supporting this investigation have been derived from a number of
sources including U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) topographic mapping (Stag Park, NC 7.5
minute quadrangle), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) National Wetlands Inventory
mapping (NWI) (Stag Park, NC 7.5 minute quadrangle), Natural 'Resources Conservation
Service (NRCS; formerly the Soils Conservation Service) soils mapping (SCS 1990), and
recent aerial photography.
Plant community descriptions are based on a classification system utilized by North Carolina
Natural Heritage Program (NHP) (Schafale and Weakley 1990). When appropriate,
community classifications were modified to better reflect field observations. Vascular plant
4

~~ ~
~~ t, c
names follow nomenclature found in Radford et al. (1968) with exceptions for updated
nomenclature. Jurisdictional areas were evaluated using the three-parameter approach
following U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) delineation guidelines (DOA 1987).
Jurisdictional areas were characterized according to a classification scheme established by
Cowardin et al. (1979). Habitat requirements and distributions of aquatic and terrestrial
wildlife were determined by supportive literature (Martof et al. 1980; Potter et al. 1980;
Webster et al. 1985; Menhinick 1991; Hamel 1992; Palmer and Braswell 1995; Rohde et al.
1994). Water quality information for area streams and tributaries was derived from the NC
Division of Water Quality (DWQ). Quantitative sampling was not undertaken to support
existing data.
The FWS listing of federally protected species with ranges extending into Pender County
(February 26, 2001) was reviewed prior to initiation of the field investigation. In addition,
NHP records documenting presence of federally or state listed .species were consulted
before commencing field investigations. The most current list (March 22, 2001) of federally
protected species has been reviewed since the field investigations and no new species have
been added.
The site was visited on January 4, 2001 and June 19, 2001. The study corridor was walked
and visually surveyed for significant features. For purposes of this evaluation, the study
corridor was assumed to be the same as right-of-way and temporary easement boundaries
(varies from 100 to 210 feet [30 to 63 meters]). Actual impacts will be limited to cut-fill
boundaries and are expected to be less than those shown for the right-of-way. Special
concerns evaluated in the field include 1) potential protected species habitat and 2)
wetlands and water quality protection in Shaken Creek.
B. Physiography and Soils
The study corridor is underlain by the Cretaceous Pee Dee geologic formation within the
inner Coastal Plain physiographic province of North Carolina. Topography is characterized
as gently undulating with wide floodplains and broad, flat interstream divides. The study
corridor is located on uplands and across the floodplain of Shaken Creek. Elevations in the
study corridor are relatively level and average approximately five feet (1.5 meters) National
Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD) (USGS Stag Park, NC quadrangle).
Soil mapping units underlying the study corridor are Baymeade fine sand (Arenic
Hapludults), Pactolus fine sand (Aquic Quartzipsamments), and Manryn (Typic Hapludults)
and Craven (Aquic Hapludults) soils (not mapped separately).
The Baymeade series occurs on low ridges and convex divides on uplands near main
drainageways. This series occurs in the study corridor on upland areas south of Bridge
No. 116. The Baymeade series is well drained and permeability is moderately rapid.
Baymeade soils are non-hydric in Pender County but in low lying areas may have inclusions
of the hydric Leon (Aerie Haplaquods) series (NRCS 1997).
The Pactolus series occurs in slight depressions in uplands near the coast and on low
ridges on terraces. This series occurs in the study corridor on upland areas north of Bridge
No. 116. Pactolus soil is moderately well drained and permeability is rapid. Pactolus soils
are non-hydric in Pender County, but small depressions may have inclusions of the hydric
Leon, Lumbee (Typic Ochraquults), and Murville (Typic Haplaquods) soils.
5

~ • .~ 1
Manryn and Craven soils occur on side slopes in uplands. Within the study corridor, this
series occurs on the Shaken Creek floodplain. Marvyn and Craven soils are well drained
and moderately well drained, respectively. These soils are considered non-hydric in Pender
County, but in narrow drainageways may have inclusions of the hydric Muckalee (Typic
Haplaquods) series (SCS 1990; NRCS 1997).
C. Water Resources
1. Surface Waters
The study corridor is located within sub-basin 03-06-23 of the Cape Fear River Basin
(DWQ 2000a). This area is part of USGS Hydrologic Unit 03030001 of the Mid-
Atlantic/Gulf Region. The drainage area at the project site is approximately 85 square
miles (220 square kilometers). The structure targeted for replacement spans the open
water stream associated with Shaken Creek. There is no direct involvement of
additional streams or tributaries. This section of Shaken Creek has been assigned
Stream Index Number 18-74-33-4 by the DWQ. Shaken Creek is a tributary of and joins
with Holty Shelter Creek approximately 200 feet (60.0 meters) downstream (west) of
Bridge
No. 116.
2. Stream Characteristics
Shaken Creek is awell-defined, Coastal Plain, black-water river with moderate flow over
sandy substrate. At Bridge No. 116, Shaken Creek is approximately 40-feet (12 meters)
wide. The banks are steep and average three feet (one meter) high. During field
investigations of Shaken Creek, water clarity was good, flow velocity was moderate, and
water depth was approximately three feet (one meter). The streambed is composed of
sand and some sift. A narrow floodplain, approximately 30-feet (9 meters) wide, occurs
upstream (east) of the bridge along the south side of Shaken Creek. A narrow slough,
approximately 12-feet (3.6 meters) wide, occurs 60-feet (18.0 meters) east of the bridge
on the north side of Shaken Creek.
Classifications are assigned to .waters of the State of North Carolina based on the
existing or contemplated best usage of various streams or segments of streams in the
basin. A best usage classification of C Sw has been assigned to Shaken Creek. The
designation C denotes that appropriate uses include aquatic life propagation and
survival, fishing, wildlife, secondary recreation, and agriculture. Secondary recreation
refers to human body contact with waters on an infrequent or incidental basis. The Sw
designation refers to swamp waters that are naturally more acidic and lower in dissolved
oxygen levels. No designated High Quality Waters (HQW), Outstanding Resource
Waters (ORW), Water Supply I (WS-1), or Water Supply II (WS-11) waters occur within
one mile (1.6 kilometers) of the study corridor (DWQ 2000b).
DWQ has initiated awhole-basin approach to water quality management for the 17 river
basins within the state. Water quality for the proposed study corridor is summarized in
the Cape Fear River basinwide water quality plan (DWQ 2000a). Shaken Creek is rated
as Fully Supporting of designated uses. Shaken Creek is not rated for ambient water
quality; however, Juniper Swamp, approximately 11.5 miles (18.5 kilometers) west of the
study corridor, has a bioclassification rating of Good-Excellent based on
macroinvertebrate community sampling (DWQ 2000a).
6

+ t
' ~ i_ '(
This sub-basin (03-06-23) supports one major point-source discharger and five minor
point-source dischargers. Total permitted flow for two major dischargers is 1.1 million
gallons per day (MGD) (4.2 million liters per day [MLD]). Total permitted flow for the five
minor dischargers is 1.4 MGD (5.3 MLD). There are no point-source discharges directly
associated with Shaken Creek. Major non-point sources of pollution for the entire Cape
Fear River Basin are agriculture, urban development, construction, forestry, mining,
onsite wastewater disposal, solid waste disposal, and atmospheric deposition.
Sedimentation and nutrient inputs are major problems associated with non-point source
discharges and often result in fecal coliform, heavy metals, oil from roads and parking
lots, and increased nutrient levels in surface waters (DWQ 2000a).
3. Anticipated Impacts
a) Impacts Related to Water Resources
Temporary construction impacts due to erosion and sedimentation will be minimized
through implementation of a standard erosion control schedule and the use of best
management practices. The contractor will follow contract specifications pertaining
to erosion control measures as outlined in 23 CFR 650 Subpart B and Article 107-13
entitled "Control of Erosion, Siltation, and Pollution" (NCDOT, Specifications for
Roads and Structures). These measures include the use of dikes, berms, silt basins,
and other containment measures to control runoff; elimination of construction staging
areas in floodplains and adjacent to waterways; re-seeding of herbaceous cover on
disturbed sites; management of chemicals (herbicides, pesticides, de-icing
compounds) with potential negative impacts on water quality; and avoidance of direct
discharges into steams by catch basins and roadside vegetation.
The proposed bridge replacement will allow for continuation of pre-project stream
flows in Shaken Creek, thereby protecting the integrity of these waterways. Long-
term impacts to adjacent reaches resulting from construction are expected to be
negligible. In order to minimize impacts to water resources, NCDOT Best
Management Practices (BMPs) for the Protection of Surface Waters will be strictly
enforced during the entire life of the project.
b) Impacts Related to Bridge Demolition and Removal
to order to protect the water quality and aquatic life in the area affected by this
project, the NCDOT and all potential contractors will follow appropriate guidelines for
bridge demolition and removal. These guidelines are presented in three NCDOT
documents entitled "Pre-Construction Guidelines for Bridge Demolition and
Removal", "Policy: Bridge Demolition and~Removal in Waters of the United States",
and "Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition and Removal" (all
documents dated 9/20/99). Guidelines followed for bridge demolition and removal
are in addition to those implemented for Best Management Practices for the
Protection of Surface Waters.
Dropping any portion of the structure into waters of the United States will be avoided
unless there is no other practical method of removal. In the event that no other
practical method is feasible, aworst-case scenario is assumed for calculations of fill
entering waters of the United States. Since Bridge No. 116 is composed completely
7

, A r
of steel and timber, there is little potential for components of the bridge to be dropped
into waters of the United States. Therefore, no temporary fill is expected to result
from removal of the existing bridge. NCDOTs Best Management Practices for
Bridge Demolition and Removal (BMP-6DR) will be applied for the removal of this
bridge.
Under the guidelines presented in the documents noted in the first paragraph of this
section, work done in the water for this project wilt fall under Case 2, which states
that no work will be performed in the water during moratorium periods (February 15
to June 15) associated with fish migration, spawning, and larval recruitment into
nursery areas. This conclusion is based upon the classification of the waters within
the project area and vicinity, the Stream Crossing Guidelines for Anadromous Fish
Passage, and comments .received from the North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission (NCW RC).
D. Biotic Resources
1. Plant Communities
Four distinct plant communities were identified within the study corridor: Coastal Plain
Bottomland Hardwoods, Upland pine/mixed deciduous forest, pine plantation, and
roadside/disturbed land. These plant communities are described below.
a) Coastal Plain Bottomland Hardwoods (Blackwater Subtype)
Coastal Plain Bottomland Hardwoods is a natural plant community described by
Schafale and Weakley (1990), and occurs along the Shaken Creek floodplain east of
Bridge No. 116. This community represents approximately five percent of the total
vegetated study corridor area. .The canopy is closed and includes bald cypress
(Taxodium distichum), sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), black gum (Nyssa
sylvatica), and laurel oak (Quercus laurifolia). The sub-canopy/shrub layer is
moderately dense and consists of laurel oak, American holly (Ilex opaca), sweet bay
(Magnolia virginiana), titi (Cyrilla racemiflora), dahoon (Ilex cassine), and cane
(Arundinaria gigantea). Herbaceous vegetation is sparse and includes bluebeny
(Vaccinium sp.), cane, a sedge (Carex sp.), laurel-leaved greenbriar (Smilax
laurifolia), common greenbriar, (Smilax rotundifolia), royal fem (Osmunda regalis),
and peatmoss (Sphagnum sp.).
b) Upland Pine/Mixed Deciduous Forest
Upland pine/mixed deciduous forest occurs in upland areas of the study corridor and
represents approximately 20 percent of the total vegetated study corridor. Canopy
species are loblolly pine (Pious taeda), water oak (Quercus nigra), willow oak
(Quercus phellos), sweetgum (liquidambar styraciflua), river birch (Betula nigra), and
red maple (Acer rubrum). The sub-canopy/shrub community consists of water oak,
red maple, green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), wax myrtle (Morena cerifera),
American holly, cane, blueberry, and sweet bay. Herbaceous vegetation includes
blueberry, bullbriar (Smilax bona-nox), common greenbrier, and St. Johns-wort
(Hypericum sp.). East of SR 1520, this community has been timbered within the last
20 years and is characterized by an open canopy and a dense sub-canopy/shrub
layer. West of SR 1520, this community is represented by a mature stand with a
8

,~ ~. Y '
moderately dense shrub layer and contains mesic hardwood canopy species
associated with the Holly Shelter Creek floodplain.
c) Pine Plantation
Pine plantation occurs along the east side of SR 1520 north of Bridge No. 116. This
is a monoculture stand of loblolly pine approximately 15 years of age. The canopy is
closed and the shrub and herbaceous layers are absent. This community represents
less than one percent of the total vegetated study corridor area.
d) Roadside/disturbed Land
Roadside/disturbed land is defined as the present maintained roadside margins and
powerline corridor within the study corridor. This plant community represents
approximately 75 percent of the total vegetated study corridor area. Plant species
include loblolly pine, water oak, sweetgum, pearly everlasting (Anaphalis
margaritacea), bitterweed (Helenium amarum), crabgrass (Digitaria sp.), panic grass
(Panicum sp.) broomsedge (Andropogon virginicus), dog fennel (Eupatorium
capillifolium), and cane.
e) Anticipated Impacts to Terrestrial Plant Communities
Plant community areas are estimated based on the amount of each plant community
present within the projected right-of-ways and temporary easements (varies from 100
to 210 feet [30.0 to 63.0 meters]). Permanent impacts are considered to be those
impacts that occur within the proposed right-of-way, and temporary impacts are
those impacts that occur outside the right-of way boundary but within the proposed
temporary easement. A summary of potential plant community impacts is presented
in Table 1.
. Table 1
Area Acres Hectares of Antici ated Im acts to Terrestrial Plant Communities
Plant communi
Coastal Upland
Plain Pine/Mixed Roadside/
Impact Bottomland Deciduous Pine Disturbed
Altemate Type Hardwoods Forest Plantation Land Total
Temporary - 0.09 (0.04) - 0.08 (0.03) 0.17 (0.07)
A Permanent - 0.08 (0.03) - 0.65 (0.26) 0.73 (0.29)
Total - 0.17 (0.07) - 0.73 (0.29) 0.90 (0.36)
Altemate A impacts to natural plant communities are 0.17 acres (0.07 hectares).
Altemate A does not require construction of a new alignment or temporary bridge
structure and therefore minimizes impacts.
9

1 t
~.~ rL r
Permanent impacts to plant communities resulting from bridge replacements are
generally restricted to narrow strips adjacent to the existing bridge and roadway
approach segments. Very little area of natural plant community is expected to be
impacted by the proposed project. From an ecological perspective, impacts of
upgrading existing road facilities are minimal. No additional fragmentation of plant
communities will be created, as the project will result only in alteration of community
boundaries. Much of the alignment is currently bounded by a maintained right-of-
way. Therefore, the proposed project may only claim narrow strips of adjacent
natural communities.
Roadside-forest edges typically serve as vectors for movement of invasive species
into adjacent natural communities. An example of an undesirable invasive species
utilizing roadsides is kudzu (Pueraria /obata). The establishment of a hardy
groundcover on road shoulders as soon as practicable will limit the availability of
construction areas to invasive and undesirable plants.
2. Wildlife
a) Terrestrial
Signs of two mammal species, white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) and
raccoon (Procyon lotor), were observed during the site visit. Other mammal species
that .are expected to occur within the study corridor- are black bear (Ursus
americanus), gray fox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus), eastem cottontail (Sylvilagus
f/oridanus), marsh rabbit (Sylvilagus palustris), fox squirrel (Sciurus niger), Virginia
opossum (Didelphis virginiana), muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus), mink (Muste/a vison),
southeastern shrew (Sorex longirostris), and cotton mouse (Peromyscus
gossypinus).
Birds observed within or adjacent to the corridor were turkey vulture (Cathartes
aura), downy woodpecker (Picoides pubescens), red-bellied woodpecker
(Melanevpes carolinus), tufted titmouse (Baeolophus bicolov), Carolina chickadee
(Poecile carolinensis), American robin (Turdus migratorius), hermit thrush (Catharus
guttatus), and wood duck (Aix sponsa). Other avian species expected to occur in the
study corridor are prothonotory warbler (Protonotaria citrea), yellow-billed cuckoo
(Coccyzus americanus), blue-gray gnatcatcher (Polioptila caevulea), Acadian
flycatcher (Empidonax virescens), American redstart (Setophaga vvticilla), pileated
woodpecker (Dryocopus pileatus), barred owl (Strix vavia), and red-shouldered hawk
(Buteo lineatus).
No terrestrial reptile or amphibian species were observed during the site visit. Some
terrestrial reptiles which may occur within the study corridor include eastem box
turtle (Terrapene Carolina), Carolina anole (Anolis carolinensis), eastem fence lizard
(Sceloporus undulatus), five-lined skink (Eumeces fasciatus), rough green snake
(Opheodrys aestivus), worm snake (Cavphophis amoenus), rat snake (E/aphe
obsoleta), eastem kingsnake (Lampropeltis getula), eastem garter snake
(Thamnophis sirtalis), copperhead (Agkistrodon contortrix), green treefrog (Hy/a
cinevia), gray treefrog (Hyla versicolorj, southern toad (Bufo terrestris), and slimy
salamander (Plethodon cylindraceus).
10

,~
~' r
b) Aquatic
Limited surveys resulted. in no observations of aquatic reptile or amphibian species
within the study corridor. Aquatic orsemi-aquatic reptiles and amphibians which are
expected to occur within the study corridor include snapping turtle (Chelydra
serpentina), mud turtle (Kinostemon subrubrum), yellowbelly slider (Trachemys
scripta), river cooter (Pseudemys concinna), brown water snake (Nerodia
taxispilota), redbelly water snake (Nerodia erythrogaster), cottonmouth (Agkisfrodon
piscivorus), eastern newt (Notophtha/mus viridescens), marbled salamander
(Ambystoma opacum), and southern dusky salamander (Desmognathus auriculatus).
No sampling was undertaken in Shaken Creek to determine fishery potential. Visual
surveys of Shaken Creek did not reveal the presence of fish, molluscan fauna, or
other aquatic life; however, fish species that may be present in Shaken Creek
include American shad (Alosa sappidissima), bluehead chub (Nocomis
leptocephalus), margined madtom (Noturus insignis), spottail shiner (Notiopis
hudsonius), tessellated darter (Etheostoma o/msted-), and yellow bullhead (Ameiurus
natalis). Potential game fish that may be present within the study corridor include
redbreast sunfish (Lepomis auritus), bowfin (Amia Galva), yellow perch (Perca
flavescens), and largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides).
c) Anticipated Impacts
Shaken Creek is a Coastal Plain system, and anadromous fish passage should be
considered in the timing of any proposed in-stream activities associated with bridge
replacement. Nine anadromous fish species have been documented to occur in the
Cape Fear River basin and have distributions that include Pender County (Rohde et
al. 1994; Menhinick 1991). Design and scheduling of bridge replacement will avoid
the necessity of in-stream activities during the spring migration period for
anadromous fish species (February 15 to June 15) within the Cape Fear River and
its tributaries, including Shaken Creek.
Due to the limited extent of infringement on natural communities, the proposed
bridge replacement will not result in significant toss or displacement of known
terrestrial animal populations. No significant habitat fragmentation is expected since
most improvements will be restricted to existing roadside margins. Construction
noise and associated disturbances. will have short-term impacts. on avifauna and
migratory wildlife movement patterns. Long-term impacts are expected to be
negligible. Potential down-stream impacts to aquatic habitat will be avoided by
bridging the systems to maintain regular flow and stream integrity. Short-term
impacts associated with turbidity and suspended sediments will affect benthic
populations. Temporary impacts to downstream habitat from increased sediment
during construction will be minimized by the implementation of standard erosion
control measures.
E. Special Topics
1. Waters of the United States
Surface waters within the embankments of Shaken Creek are subject to jurisdictional
consideration under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act as waters of the United States
11

(33 CFR section 328.3). NWI mapping indicates that Shaken Creek exhibits
characteristics of a riverine system with an unconsolidated bottom that is permanently
flooded (R2UBH; Cowardin et al. 1979). Field investigations indicate that within the
study corridor, Shaken Creek is a black water Coastal Plain stream with adjacent
wetlands.
Wetlands adjacent to Shaken Creek are subject to jurisdictional consideration under
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act as waters of the United States (33 CFR section
328.3). These areas are defined by the presence of three primary criteria: hydric soils,
hydrophytic vegetation, and evidence of hydrology at or near the surface for a portion
(12.5 percent) of the growing season (DOA 1987). NWI mapping indicates that
floodplains of Shaken Creek exhibit characteristics of a palustrine, broad-leaved,
deciduous forest system that is seasonally flooded (PF01 C; (Cowardin et a!. 1979).
Field investigations indicate that floodplain wetlands occur along the both sides of
Shaken Creek east of SR 1520 and on the north side of Shaken Creek west of SR 1520.
These wetlands satisfy the three-parameter approach outlined by the COE (DOA 1987;
see attached Routine Wetland Determination data forms). Wetland vegetation species
are bald cypress, sweet bay, titi, laurel oak, laurel-leaved greenbriar, and royal fem.
These plants are growing on Marvyn and Craven soils that exhibit values, chromas, and
mottles characteristic of hydric soils. Evidence of wetland hydrology includes saturated
soil at surface, surface drainage patterns, pooling, stained leaves, and oxidized root
channels.
Permanent impacts to the stream are limited to bridge shading; bridging will not result in
fill or dredging of wetlands/waters of the United States, and encroachment into the
stream will be avoided. Upon completion of construction, temporary impacts associated
with construction activities and temporary alignments will be restored to pre-project
conditions. The areas of wetland within the alternative right-of-ways and the areas and
linear distances of stream shaded by proposed bridging are shown in Table 2.
Table 2
Potential Wetland and O en Water Im acts
Jurisdictional Area

Alternate
Impact Type
Wetland
Stream Stream
Linear Distance
Temporary 0.007 (0.003) 0.03(0.01) 29(8.7)
A Permanent .001 (<0.001) - -.
Total 0.008 (0.003) 0.03(0.01) 29(8.7)
Notes: Area estimations are expressed in acres (hectares) and linear distance is expressed in feet (meters). Stream
area and stream linear distance impacts are from bridge shading.
Alternate A entails reconstruction of Bridge No. 116 in place (approximately 0.007 acre
[0.003 hectare] of vegetated wetlands temporarily impacted). Alternate A includes 0.001
acre (<0.001 hectare) of vegetated wetland within the existing right-of-way that
constitutes permanent impacts.
12

There is little potential that components of the existing bridge may be dropped into
waters of the United States during construction. Therefore, no temporary fill is expected
to result from bridge removal. This project can be classified as Case 2, where no in-
stream work may occur during moratorium periods due to anadromous fish migration.
NCDOT will coordinate with the various resource agencies during project planning to
ensure that any concerns regarding bridge demolition are resolved. Within Pender
County, both inland and estuarine surface waters and wetlands are considered to be
high quality habitat and have been designated as Areas of Environmental Concern
(AECs) by the N.C. Department of Coastal Management (DCM). Consideration will be
given to avoid disturbances within these areas whenever practicable.
2. Permits
This project is being processed as a Categorical Exclusion (CE) under Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) guidelines. The COE has made available Nationwide Permit
(NWP) No.23 (61 FR 65874, 65916; December 13, 1996) for CEs due to minimal
impacts expected with bridge construction. DWQ has made available a General 401
Water Quality Certification for NWP No.23. However, authorization for jurisdictional area
impacts through use of-this permit will require written notice to DWQ. In the event that
NWP No.23 will not suffice, minor impacts attributed to bridging and associated
approach improvements are expected to qualify under General Bridge Permit 031 issued
by the Wilmington COE District. Notification to the Wilmington COE office is required if
this general permit is utilized. The proposed project will also require a Coastal Area
Management Act (CAMA) permit from the DCM because of probable impacts to AECs.
AECs potentially impacted by this project include Public Trust Areas.
3. Mitigation
Compensatory mitigation is recommended for this project due to the scope and nature of
potential project impacts. Fill or alteration of streams will require compensatory
mitigation in accordance with 15 NCAC 2H .0506(h). Required permits must be
obtained from the Division of Water Quality prior to project initiation. Utilization of BMPs
is recommended in an effort to minimize impacts.
Mitigation has been defined in National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) regulations to
include efforts which: a) avoid, b) minimize, or c) compensate for adverse impacts to the
environment (40 CFR 1598.22 (a-e)).
Avoidance. Jurisdictional areas exist on both sides of the existing SR 1520 and Bridge
No. 116, so complete avoidance is not possible. The elimination of staging areas in
lowland sites, careful containment of hazardous materials near Shaken Creek, and
employment of strict erosion and sedimentation control procedures are practices which
can be used to avoid impacts to jurisdictional areas. Existing stream crossings cannot
be avoided by facility improvements.
Minimization. Reduction of fill slopes and canopy removal in or near floodplain systems
will reduce unnecessary wetland losses. Minor shifts in the roadway footprint will also
reduce the amount of additional cut and fill areas necessary for improvements.
Compensation. Compensatory mitigation is recommended for all unavoidable losses.
Few on-site opportunities are available however, restoration opportunities in or near the
13

I 7
i ~
project corridor should be investigated for mitigation potential. Mitigation opportunities
may be available through restoration of existing road surfaces to be obliterated after the
new bridge is completed. A final determination regarding mitigation rests with the COE
and DWQ.
F. Protected Species
1. Federally Protected Species
Species with the federal classification of Endangered (E), Threatened (T), Threatened
due to Similarity of Appearance (T [S/Aj), or officially Proposed (P) for such listing are
protected under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C.
1531 et seq.). The term "Endangered Species" is defined as "any species which is in
danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range", and the term
"Threatened Species" is defined as "any species that is likely to become an Endangered
species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range"
(16 U.S.C. 1532). The term `Threatened due to Similarity of Appearance" is defined as
a species that is not "Endangered" or `Threatened", but "closely resembles an
Endangered or Threatened species" (16 U.S.C. 1532). Federally protected species
listed for Pender County (March 22, 2001 FWS list) are presented in Table 3.
Table 3
Federally Protected Species Listed for Pender County
(March 22, 2001 FWS list)
Common Name Scientific Name Status
Manatee Trichechus Manatus E
Red-Cockaded Woodpecker Picoides Borealis E
Piping Plover Charardrius Melodus T
American Alligator Alligator Mississippiensis T (S/A)
Loggerhead Sea Turtle Caretta Caretta T
Shortnose Sturgeon Acipenser Brevirostrum E
Seabeach Amaranth Amaranthus Pumilus T
Golden Sedge Carex Lutea E (P)
Rough-Leaved Loosestrife Lysimachia Asperulaefolia E
American Chaffseed Schwalbea Americana E
Cooley's Meadowrue Thalictrum Cooleyi E
State Status Codes (Amoroso 1999; LeGrand and Ha111999):
C -Candidate SC -Special Concern
E -Endangered
PE -Proposed Endangered
PT -Proposed Threatened
S/A -Threatened due to similarity
of appearance
SR -Significantly Rare
T -Threatened
W3 -Watch List: rare, but with uncertain documentation
W1: rare, but relatively secure
14

. r
West Indian Manatee -The West Indian Manatee is a large, gray or brown aquatic
mammal that averages. ten to 13-feet (three to four meters) in length and weighs up to
1,000 pounds (455 kilograms). During summer months manatees migrate from their
Florida wintering areas to as far north as coastal Virginia. These mammals inhabit warm
waters, both fresh and salt, where their diet consists mostly of aquatic vegetation
(Webster et al. 1985).
Shaken Creek, within the study corridor, is a small, shallow, Coastal Plain river lacking
submerged aquatic vegetation. Therefore, this tributary does not provide passage or
suitable forage habitat for the manatee. Manatees have not been documented to occur
within one mile (1.6 kilometers) of the study corridor.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NHP records indicate that manatees have not
been documented to occur within one mile (1.6 kilometers) of the study corridor,
and the study corridor contains no suitable habitat for this species. Based on a
NHP record search and the aquatic habitat type within the study corridor, this
project will not affect manatee. NO EFFECT
Red-Cockaded Woodpecker -This small woodpecker (seven to 8.5 inches (17.8 to
21.6 centimeters] long) has a black head, prominent white cheek patch, and black-and-
white barred back. Males often have red markings (cockades) behind the eye, but the
cockades may be absent or difficult to see (Potter et al. 1980). Primary habitat consists
of mature to over-mature southern pine forests dominated by loblolly, long-leaf (P.
palustris), slash (P. ellioti~), and pond (P. serotina) pines (Thompson and Baker 1971).
Nest cavities are constructed in the heartwood of living pines generally older than 70
years, and that have been infected with red-heart disease. Nest cavity trees tend to
occur in clusters, which are referred to as colonies (FWS 1985). The woodpecker drills
holes into the bark around the cavity entrance, resulting in a shiny, resinous buildup
around the entrance that allows for easy detection of active nest trees. Pine flatwoods
or pine-dominated savannas that have been maintained by frequent natural fires serve
as ideal nesting and foraging.
Plant communities within the study corridor are 1) roadside/disturbed land, 2) upland
pine/mixed deciduous forest, 3) pine plantation, and 4) Coastal Plain Bottomland
Hardwoods. Forested, upland areas within the study corridor have a moderately dense
to dense shrub layer and lack the open shrub layer of the pine savannah habitat required
by this species for foraging and nesting. Red cockaded woodpecker has not been
documented to occur within one mile (1.6 kilometers) of the study corridor.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NHP records indicate that the red-cockaded
woodpecker has not been documented to occur within one mile (1.6 kilometers)
of the study corridor, and the study corridor contains no suitable habitat for this
species. Based on a NHP record search and habitat types within the study
corridor, this project will not affect red-cockaded woodpecker: NO EFFECT
Piping Plover -Piping plovers are the smallest of the plovers found in the Carolinas,
measuring only 15 to 20 centimeter (six to eight inches) in length (Golder and Parnell
1987). This species is characterized by a white head and back and white breast and
belly, yellow legs, narrow black neck band and a narrow band above the eyes, and a
black bill in the winter and yellow and black bill in the summer (Potter et al. 1980).
15

1 f
• ,
These small Nearctic birds occur along beaches above the high tide line, sand flats at
the ends of sand spits and barrier islands, gently sloping foredunes, blowout areas
behind primary dunes, and washover areas cut into or between dunes (Dyer et al. 1987).
Nests are most often on open, wide, sandy stretches of beach similar to those
associated with inlets and capes.
Plant communities within the study corridor are 1) roadside/disturbed land, 2) upland
pine/mixed deciduous forest, 3) pine plantation, and 4) Coastal Plain Bottomland
Hardwoods. The study corridor region is not oceanic in nature and the beach habitat
required by this species does not occur within 15 miles (24.1 kilometers) of the study
corridor. Piping plover has not been documented to occur within one mile (1.6
kilometers) of the study corridor.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NHP records indicate that piping plover has not
been documented to occur within one mile (1.6 kilometers) of the study corridor,
and the study corridor contains no suitable habitat for this species. Based on a
NHP record search and habitat types within the study corridor, this project will not
affect piping plover. NO EFFECT
American Alligator -American alligator is listed as Threatened based on Similarity in
Appearance to other federal-listed crocodilians; however, there are no other crocodilians
within North Carolina. American alligators can be found in a variety of freshwater to
estuarine aquatic habitats including swamp forests, marshes, large streams and canals,
and ponds and lakes. NHP records indicate that American alligators have been
documented within one mile (1.6 kilometers) of the study corridor, and areas within the
study corridor do provide suitable habitat for this species. The nearest NHP
documented occurrence of this species is approximately 0.9 mile (1.5 kilometers) west of
the study corridor.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: T S/A species are not subject to Section 7
consultation and a biological conclusion is not required.
Loggerhead Sea Turtle -The loggefiead sea turtle is the most common sea turtle on
the coast of the Carolinas. This species averages 31 to 47 inches (79 to 120
centimeters) in length and weighs from 170 to 500 pounds (77 to 227 kilograms) (Martof
et al. 1980). The loggefiead is temperate or subtropical in nature, and is primarily
oceanic, but may also be found in estuarine bays, sounds, and large coastal rivers. This
species occurs along the coast of North Carolina from late April to October. Preferred
nesting habitat is ocean beaches, generally south of Cape Lookout. Traditionally, the
largest concentration of loggefiead nests each year is on Smith Island at the mouth of
the Cape Fear River (Palmer and Braswell 1995). The loggefiead sea turtle occurs
primarily in oceanic habitat and requires oceanic beaches for nesting; however, Shaken
Creek is a small, Coastal Plain river and does not provide suitable migratory passage or
nesting habitat for loggerhead sea turtles. This species has not been documented to
occur within one mile (1.6 kilometers) of the study corridor.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NHP records indicate that loggerhead sea
turtles have not been documented to occur within one mile (1.6 kilometers) of
the study corridor, and the study corridor contains no suitable habitat for this
species. Based on a NHP record search and habitat types within the study
corridor, this project will not affect loggefiead sea turtle. NO EFFECT
16

shortnose Sturgeon -The shortnose sturgeon is abottom-feeding fish that rarely
exceeds three feet (0.9 meter) in length. Adults have a short, blunt snout; the body is
brown to blackish dorsally, yellowish on the sides, and white ventrally (FWS 1993b).
This species occurs in Atlantic seaboard rivers from the St. Johns River, Florida to
eastern Canada. The usual habitat is estuaries and lower sections of large rivers. The
sturgeon is anadromous, spending most of the year in brackish estuarine environments
and moving into fresh water only when spawning during late summer to early winter
(Gilbert 1989). This species prefers deep water with a soft substrate, and for spawning
prefers fast moving water with a rough bottom (Rhode et al. 1994).
Shaken Creek, within the study corridor, is a shallow, freshwater, Coastal Plain river and
does not provide the deep-water habitat preferred by the shortnose sturgeon. Shaken
Creek does not provide suitable breeding habitat preferred by this species. The
shortnose sturgeon has not been documented to occur one mile (1.6 kilometers) of the
study corridor. Furthermore, the Shaken Creek River Basin is not listed by the National
Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) as supporting of short-nosed sturgeon (based on letter
from NMFS to NCDOT dated July 25, 2000).
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: Shaken Creek does not provide habitat preferred
by this species, and NHP records indicate that shortnose sturgeon has not been
documented to occur within one mile (1.6 kilometers) the study corridor. Shaken
Creek is not listed by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) as
supporting of short-nosed sturgeon. This project will not affect short-nosed
sturgeon. NO EFFECT
seabeach Amaranth - seabeach amaranth is aloes-growing, fleshy, annual herb. The
spatula-shaped leaves are pink and range from 0.5 to one inch (1.3 to 2.5 centimeters)
in diameter. The leaves are clustered near the end of the stem and are notched apically.
Flowers and fruits are inconspicuous, and occur along the stem. This plant is primarily
found on foredunes and sand spits of Atlantic coast barrier beaches and inlets in areas
where periodic over-wash eliminates vegetative competition. Some of the largest
remaining populations of this species occur in North Carolina (FWS 1993a).
Plant communities within the study corridor are 1) roadside/disturbed land, 2) upland
pine/Inixed deciduous forest, 3) pine plantation, and 4) Coastal Plain Bottomland
Hardwoods. None of these plant communities provide suitable beach habitat for
seabeach amaranth, and the species has not been documented to occur within one mile
(1.6 kilometers) of the study corridor.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NHP records indicate that seabeach
amaranth has not been documented to occur within one mile (1.6 kilometers)
of the study corridor, and the study corridor contains no suitable habitat for
this species. Based on a NHP record search and habitat types within the
study corridor, this project will not affect seabeach amaranth. NO EFFECT
Golden Sedge -Golden sedge is a tall, slender, yellowish green perennial of the sedge
family. Fertile stems may reach three feet (0.9 meter) or more in height, with two to four
terminal flowering spikes. Male and female flowers are borne on separate spikes, with
the female spikes being much wider and bright yellow in color. The individual female
florets have long pointed tips, with tips on the lowermost flowers pointing downward.
17

~; .,
Flowering and fruiting occurs from mid April to mid June. The grasslike leaves are ten to
25 inches (25.4 to 63.5 centimeters) long. Golden sedge grows in sandy soils overlying
coquina limestone deposits where the soil pH is high, typically between 5.5 and 7.2.
Soils are very wet to periodically shallowly inundated. The species prefers the ecotone
between pine savannah and adjacent wet hardwood or hardwood/conifer forest, where
occasional to frequent fires favor an herbaceous ground layer and suppress shrub
dominance. Associated plants are tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), pond cypress
(Taxodium ascendens), red maple, wax myrtle, colic root (Aletris farinosa), beakrushes
(Rhynchospora spp.), and Cooley's meadowrue (Thalictrum cooleyi). Continued survival
of golden sedge is threatened by ditching and drainirig, fire suppression, development,
and herbicide use (FWS 1999).
Plant communities within the study corridor are 1) roadside/disturbed land, 2) upland
pine/mixed deciduous forest, 3) pine plantation, and 4) Coastal Plain Bottomland
Hardwoods. Upland, pine dominated areas of the study corridor have a moderately
dense to dense shrub layer that is not characteristic of the open shrub layer habitat
required by this species. Furthermore, transitional areas from pine flatwoods to wet
hardwoods do not occur within the study corridor. Golden sedge has not been
documented to occur within one mile (1.6 kilometers) of the study corridor.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NHP records indicate that golden sedge has not
been documented to occur within one mile (1.6 kilometers) of the study corridor,
and the study corridor contains no suitable habitat for this species. Based on a
NHP record search and habitat types within the study corridor, this project will not
affect golden sedge. NO EFFECT
Rough-Leaved Loosestrife -The rough-leaved loosestrife is a rhizomatous perennial
herb that grows to two feet (0.6 meter) in height. Plants are dormant in the winter, with
the first leaves appearing in late March or early April. The triangular leaves typically
occur in whorls of three or four.. Leaves are typically sessile, entire, 0.3 to 0.4 inch (eight
to ten millimeters) wide, broadest at the base, and have three prominent principal veins.
Five-lobed yellow flowers, approximately 0.6 inch (1.5 centimeters) across, are produced
on a loose terminal raceme one to four inches (three to ten centimeters) long (Godfrey
and Wooten 1981). Rough-leaved loosestrife is reported to flower from late May to June
(FWS 1995). Seeds are formed by August, but the small, rounded capsules do not
dehisce until October. Habitat typical of rough-leaved loosestrife consists of the .wet
ecotone between longleaf pine savannas and wet, shrubby areas, where lack of canopy
vegetation allows abundant sunlight into the herb layer. Kral (1983) indicates that rough-
leaved loosestrife is typically found growing in black sandy peats or sands with a high
organic content. This species is fire maintained; suppression of naturally occurring fires
has contributed to the loss of habitat in our state. In the absence of fire, rough-leaved
loosestrife may persist for several years in an area with dense shrub encroachment;
however, reproduction is reported to be suppressed under these conditions, leading to
eventual local extirpation (FWS 1995a). Because rough-leaved loosestrife is an obligate
wetland species (Reed 1988), drainage of habitat also has an adverse effect on the
plant. Based on NHP records, this species has not been documented to occur within
one mile (1.6 kilometers) of the proposed alternatives.
Plant communities within the study corridor are 1) roadside/disturbed land, 2) upland
pine/mixed deciduous forest, 3) pine plantation, and 4) Coastal Plain Bottomland
Hardwoods. Within the study corridor, a roadside ditch traversing the eastern side of SR
18

1520 does provide suitable habitat for this species. The ditch occurs within the
maintained right-of-way of SR 1520 and parallels a maintained power line corridor.
Rough-leaved loosestr'rfe has not been documented to occur within one mile (1.6
kilometers) of the study corridor.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NHP records indicate that rough-leaved
loosestrife has not been documented to occur within one mile (1.6 kilometers) of
the study corridor; however, the study corridor does contain suitable habitat for
this species. Based on a NHP record search and a systematic search conducted
within areas of suitable habitat and during the flowering period, this project will
not affect rough-leaved loosestrife. NO EFFECT
American chaffseed - chaffseed is a perennial pubescent herb growing 12 to 24
inches (30.5 to 61 centimeters) tall. It is semi-parasitic, without host specificity. The
alternately-leaved plant is erect and simple, or branched only at the base. The fleshy
leaves are lanceolate, sessile, yellow-green or dull green with red undertones, and
become smaller and narrower from the base of the plant to the top (Kral 1983). Flowers
are purplish-yellow, tubular, bilaterally symmetrical, and showy. They are arranged on a
spike-like terminal raceme and bloom from April to June. The fruit is a narrow capsule
approximately 0.5 inch (1.3 centimeters) long that matures in early summer. Seeds are
enclosed in a sac-like structure that provides the common name. American chaffseed
occurs in open grass/sedge assemblages with seasonally moist to dry acidic sandy
loams or sandy peat loams. These assemblages typically exist in moist pine flatwoods,
savannas, bog borders, and open oak woods. In North Carolina, most documented
occurrences are at Fort Bragg, in frequently burned impact zones. These areas consist
of pine/scrub oak sandhills, pine savannas, and ecotones of streamhead pocosins.
Frequent fires maintain a strong dominance and high diversity of herbs in what were
historically fire-dominated communities (FWS 1995b).
Plant communities within the study corridor are 1) roadside/disturbed land, 2) upland
pine/mixed deciduous forest, 3) pine plantation, and 4) Coastal Plain Bottomland
Hardwoods. Forested areas within the study corridor have a moderately dense to dense
shrub layer and a closed canopy, and transitions from pine/ scrub oak or pine savannah
to a wet, open land do not occur within the study corridor. American chaffseed has not
been documented to occur within one mile (1.6 kilometers) of the study corridor.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NHP records indicate that American chaffseed
has not been documented to occur within one mile (1.6 kilometers) of the study
corridor, and the study corridor contains no suitable habitat for this species.
Based on a NHP record search and habitat types within the study corridor, this
project will not affect American chaffseed. NO EFFECT
Cooley's Meadowrue - Cooley's meadowrue is a rhizomatous, perennial herb with a
smooth stem; the three foot (0.9-meter) high plant is normally erect in full sun but lax in
the shade. Leaves are temately divided; the leaflets, less than one inch (2.5
centimeters) long, are narrow, with untoothed margins. The small, unisexual flowers
lack petals and appear on an open panicle in June. The fruits are small ellipsoidal
achenes and mature in August and September. This species is endemic to the
southeastern Coastal Plain of North Carolina (11 locations) and one location in Florida.
Moist bogs and savannas are the preferred habitat, and some form of disturbance is
usually needed to sustain the open quality of meadowrue habitat. Consequently,
19

a
Cooley's meadowrue is sometimes found along utility corridors, roadside margins and
ditches, or other maintained areas. Cooley's meadowrue is threatened by fire
suppression and land disturbing practices such as silvicultrue or agriculture (FWS 1994).
Plant communities within the study corridor are 1) roadside/disturbed land, 2) upland
pine/mixed deciduous forest, 3) pine plantation, and 4) Coastal Plain Bottomland
Hardwoods. Within the study corridor, a roadside ditch traversing the eastern side of SR
1520 does provide suitable habitat for this species. The ditch occurs within the
maintained right-of-way of SR 1520 and parallels a maintained power line corridor.
Cooley's meadowrue has not been documented to occur within one mile (1.6 kilometers)
of the study corridor.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NHP records indicate that Cooley's meadowrue
has not been documented to occur within one mile (1.6 kilometers) of the study
corridor; however, the study corridor contains suitable habitat for this species.
Based on a NHP record search and a systematic search conducted within areas
of suitable habitat and during the flowering period, this project will not affect
Cooley's meadowrue. NO EFFECT
2. Federal Species of Concern
The March 22, 2001 FWS list also includes a category of species designated as "Federal
species of concern' (FSC). A species with this designation is one that may or may not
be listed in the future (formerly C2 candidate species or species under consideration for
listing for which there is insufficient information to support listing). The FSC designation
provides no federal protection under the ESA for the species listed. FSC species listed
for Pender County are presented in Table 4. NHP files have no documentation of FSC
listed species within the study corridor or within one mile (1.6 kilometers) of the study
corridor.
3. State Protected Species
Plant and animal species which are on the North Carolina state list as Endangered (E),
Threatened (T), Special Concern (SC), Candidate (C), Significantly Rare (SR), or
Proposed (P) (Amoroso 1999; LeGrand and Hall 1999) receive limited protection under
the North Carolina Endangered Species Act (G.S. 113-331 et seq.) and the North
Carolina Plant Protection Act of 1979 (G.S. 106-202 et seq.). NHP records indicate that
no state listed species have been document.
20

Table 4
Federal Species of Concern Listed for Pender County
March 22, 2001 FWS List

Common Name
Scientific Name Potential
Habitat State
Status*
Southeastern Bat Myotis Austroriparius yes SC
Bachman's Sparrow Aimophila Aestivalis no SC
Henslow's Sparrow Ammodramus Henslowii no SR
Rafinesque's Big-Eared Bat Corynorhinus Rafinesquii yes SC (PT)
Southern Hognose Snake Heterodon Simus no SR (PSC)
Carolina Gopher Frog Rana Capito Capito no SC
Atlantic Pigtoe Fusconaia Masoni yes T (PE)
Yellow Lampmussel Lampsilis Cariosa yes T (PE)
Croatan Crayfish • Procambarus Plumimanus yes NL
Buchholz's Dart Moth• Agrotis Buchholzi no NL
Venus Flytrap Cutworm Moth Hemipachnobia S. Subporphyrea no SR
Carter's Noctuid Moth Spartiniphaga Carterae no SR
Chapman's Sedge ~ Carex Chapmanii ~ yes W 1
Venus Flytrap Dioneae Muscipula no C-SC
White W icky Kalmia Cuneata no E-SC
Georgia Indigo Bush Amorpha Georgiana Var.
Georgiana no E
Sandhills Milkvetch Astragalus Michauxii no T
Savanna Cowbane Oxypolis Temata no W 1
Carolina Grass-Of-Pamassas Pamassia Caroliniana no E
Pineland Plantain Plantago Sparsiflora no E
Thome's Beaksedge Rhynchospora Thomei no E
Carolina Goldenrod Solidago Pulchra no E
Spring-Flowering Goldenrod Solidago Vema no T
Carolina Asphodel Tofie/dia Glabra no C
Carolina Bogmint Macbridea Vema yes T
Carolina Least Trillium Trillium Pusil/um Var. Pusillum no E
Savanna Cowbane Oxypolis Temata no W 1
21

~ a
•~
'State Status Codes (Amoroso 1999; LeGrand and Ha111999):
C -Candidate
E -Endangered
PE -Proposed Endangered
PT -Proposed Threatened
SC -Special Concern
SR -Significantly Rare
T -Threatened
W1: Watch List: rare, but relatively secure
W3 -Watch List: rare, but with uncertain documentation
VI. CULTURAL RESOURCES
A. Compliance Guidelines
This project is subject to compliance with Section 106 of the National Historical Preservation
Act of 1966, as amended, implemented by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800. Section 106
requires that for federally funded, licensed, or permitted projects having an effect on
properties listed in or eligible for the National Register of Historic Places, the Advisory
Council on Historic Preservation be given the opportunity to comment.
B. Historic Architecture
A field survey of the Area of Potential Effects (APE) was conducted on July 2, 1999. All
structures within the APE were photographed, and later reviewed by the North Carolina
State Historic Preservation Office (HPO). In a concurrence forrn dated October 27, 2000,
the HPO concurred that there are no historic architectural resources either listed in or
eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places within the APE. A copy of the
concurrence form is included in the Appendix.
C. Archaeology
The State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO), in a memorandum dated August 14, 2000,
had no comment on the project as was currently proposed. There is little likelihood of any
National Register archaeological sites occurring in the project area because of the disturbed
landforms, therefore the SHPO recommends no further action. A copy of the SHPO
memorandum is included in the Appendix.
VII. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
The project is expected to have an overall positive impact. Replacement of an inadequate
bridge will result in safer traffic operations.
The project is a Federal "Categorical Exclusion° due to its limited scope and lack of significant
environmental consequences.
The bridge replacement will not have an adverse effect on the quality of the human or natural
environment with the use of current NCDOT standards and specifications.
The project is not in conflict with any plan, existing land use, or zoning regulation. No significant
change in land use is expected to result from construction of the project.

There are no publicly owned recreational facilities, or wildlife and waterfowl refuges of national,
state, or local significance in the vicinity of the project.
No North Carolina Geodetic Survey control monuments will be impacted during construction of
this project.
The Farmland Protection Policy Act requires all federal agencies or their representatives to
consider the potential impacts to prime and important farmland soils by all land acquisition and
construction projects. Prime and important farmland soils are defined by the Natural Resources
Conservation Service (NRCS). Since there are no prime or important farmlands in the
immediate vicinity of the proposed bridge the Farmland Protection Policy does not apply.
This project is located in Pender County, which has been determined to be in compliance with
the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. 40 CFR Part 51 is not applicable, because the
proposed project is located in an attainment area. This project is not anticipated to create any
adverse effects on the air quality of this attainment area.
The traffic volumes will not increase or decrease because of this project. There are no
receptors located in the immediate project area. The project's impact on noise and air quality
will not be significant.
Noise levels could increase during construction but will be temporary. If vegetation is disposed
of by buming, all buming shall be done in accordance with applicable local laws and regulations
of the North Carolina SIP for air quality in compliance with 15 NCAC 2D.0520. This evaluation
completes the assessment requirements for highway traffic noise (23 CFR Part 772) and for air
quality (1990 CAA and NEPA) and no additional reports are required.
An examination of records at the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources, Division of Water Quality, Groundwater Section and the North Carolina Department
of Human Resources, Solid Waste Management Section revealed no hazardous waste sites, no
regulated or unregulated landfills or dumpsites with in the project area. No facility with
underground storage tanks (UST) was identified in the project vicinity.
Pender County is a participant in the National Flood Insurance Regular Program. This site on
the Shaken Creek is located in a 100-year flood hazard zone where no detailed F.E.M.A. flood
study has been performed. Attached is a copy of the Flood Insurance Rate Map, on which are
shown the approximate limits of the 100-year flood plain in the vicinity of the project (Figure 5).
There are no buildings in the existing floodplain near the bridge. The proposed replacement will
not adversely affect the floodplain. The proposed altematives will not modify flow
characteristics and wil- have minimal impact on floodplains due to roadway encroachment. The
existing drainage patterns and groundwater will not be affected.
On the basis of the above discussion, it is concluded that no significant adverse environmental
effects will result from implementation of the project.
VIII. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
Efforts were undertaken early in the planning process to contact local officials to involve them in
the project development with scoping letters and newsletters. A Citizens Informational
Workshop was held at Chinquapin Elementary School on August 13, 2001, where preliminary
altematives were reviewed and discussed with concerned citizens and local officials.
23

IX. AGENCY COMMENTS
The following are comments received during the scoping process:
1. North Carolina Wildlife Resource Commission (NCWRC)
Comment: "Due to the potential for anadromous fish at this location, NCDOT should
closely follow the "Stream Crossing Guidelines for Anadramous Fish Passage" This
includes an in-water work moratorium from February 15 to June 15."
Response: Construction work will be restricted as noted in the Project Commitments.
Comment: "Bridge deck drains should not discharge directly into the stream."
Response: Deck drains will not be allowed to discharge directly into the water.
2. Corps of Engineers (COE)
Comment: "Off-site detours are always preferable to on-site (temporary) detours in
wetlands. "
Response: Traffic will be maintained off-site during replacement of the bridge.
3. Pender County Schools
Comment: If the road is closed, this will add approximately 30 to 40 minutes to the bus
route, add an additional 20 .miles per day, and require students to be picked up before
6:00 a.m.
Response: An off-site detour was selected as the preferred alternate for this project
because of comparatively lower construction costs and environmental impacts. There is
an in-water construction moratorium from February 15 to June 15, otherwise
construction will be scheduled during the summer months to mitigate impacts on the
schools.
24

v° ~'^` _
~ ~c ~ t ~
-' ~ t.C.^teu3~ ita~
Cnr4t ~~ L, ~:.., T.. ,,..~.»t.r
{:r1ROIl11L!
~~~
L"ia~iss~7~y/~yy~ ~xtr~~4 /VyV>~~ip p.~
~a 76~ tlFi/. 1~i[+ i7A~ a7iE ~J6V
v~ a~~ ~r~`~S~
~~ .~~
~~

~ i
B-3887
BRIDGE N0. 116
PENDER COUNTY
ZONE C
ZONE
C
BRIDGE NO. 116
\ ^T
ZONE C
'EXPLANATION OF ZONE DESIGNATIONS
ZONE ~ E%PLANAiION Zrj ~~:L-_~'~ 1
ii
A Artaf of 100-veu IIOOO: east flood tleratlons m0 ,s.~-r¢ ~~
noon nuara O<[on not aetcrmmea. ,~° ~ R •~,
AO Arbs of IOOytar fnallor /IDOdrn6 there dt0tnt -~
are Between one 111 ana mrce 13) tar, artraec atotnt
or inunauion arc tho.n, out no now nuara factor[ KEY TO MAP }
s
~ s.
are ae[ermmea. ~
y~.
,y
~

AN
Arex of IOPYtar [ballot floo0in~ where 0tD[nt
500.Vtar I luw tlDYrldafy '- -' _
~
t
'
~
.- ~ '
r 'w
L
are et[reen o e I1I ,na tnrcc 131 rtes: wse noon _
.
,
ZONE B y1--~.4y
~~„ ;
t4vauons are morn, But no (1000 nuara facton „
IOO~YUr How tluun0uv - -- -- ~~~,,,1.
are aetermmco.
A1~A70 Arcaf or 700.veu noon: ease noo0 tltranOnf ano done Unienauonf•
/loop nuu0 facton Otterm med.
A99 Arcx or 100-rear IIOOO to De Orouctto by flx0
Oro[ecnon frsttm uwrr comtrucnon; bast 11000 IOO~V<u blood tlOYnduV ----'-
elew[rom ana Now nuaN facton not aetermmed. "`ZONE B ""
B Args DetwRn limi6 or Ins IOOytal notes ana 500-. $OO~Year Flow tlOYnaarr ---- -
year /loop: or certain ar<x wejecl [o IOOrur /low•
my rttn x-[rate OtDlnt len [nan one (I 1 loot or mere . tl au h lood Elewnon Lum 573
[nt conmDutrng drainage uta it Ito Nan one uuare = Wtm tkruron In Feet••
dt: Or utx Droltclt0 Dr levees rrom [ne Date 11000.
(.~ItJmm tnaam`I 1 tlxt hlOw Elerauonm FSet lEL 9B 71 ZC
C Arex of minimal Oooamg. (NO tnadmRl where Unrlorm Wilnm Zune•'
0 Areas or un0etermmed. Dut Dosuele, flow nuarOS- ~ Elevauon Rrfrrence AIUA flM7x
v Arcaa Dr t0o-vtar coital now wnn velocnr Iwave
antonl: Dau llow tleratant and flow na:ard ra:mr> Zonr O Bwndur
not aeurmmea. •
J I~V70 ar<x of 100-year Goxtal flow riM reloc0l' (wart ~
~ River Atile eM 1.5
a:uonl: nau now elr.a0om ana flow na: ud tauon ..Rerereoce0 to tnt Npuonx Geooe lH VerUOI Datum or 1929
attermmta.
ZONE C
\\\ZONE
ZONE C
4
0
N
FEMA FLOOD STUDY 100 YEAR FLOOD PLAIN
Panel No. 3703.3 0225 B
Date: February I5. 1985 1000 ft. 0 1000 ft
Street Name: SR 1520
Pender County. North Carolina 305 m Approximate Scale 305 m
FIGURI

v
Z °c~ a~
o
~ 3~xa ~w ti
aC o~~ ~ y~ ~
~~a~ ~ xv
ti ~~~ ~ ~~ ~
vqj O O o \ y ~ ~` 4 U ~ ~
~ N of N ~. y z~~ rY Z
w o o N oo
N N N ~ ~ Z~
E`+ Q ~¢ e A ~ wa
E
r
O
~ E ~I [ ,
_ N rrw~v
-J
E
O to
tr+ ~ E
O ~ O
_E ¢o ~ ~ ~ V
a ~ -~ w
-~ ~ ~
E _ ~ (1~
_~E ~ Nr V
N ~ ~ ~
t
~ N
Z
_n ~a ~ ~
_~
N
E
V
o~
i
~~
¢¢
ov

i./y'~ V 4I
Replacement cif Bridge
No, 1~£ an SR 1520
t~ver Shaken Creek
Fender County
.IR

~ ~ $
~~
A~y~f
. ~p~
c
~`
~~ ~~~
/yA~
i
~R mg
S
.~
~~ ~ ~ ~w ~
C~~C~ NfE.~ HALL F~C}~`°°y~ ~
(~R 15~~
#`
.~
~arn <~~~c c~`MM~rrr
,.~', t
~ °~
,~ ~ ~ s
~ iat~ .~~»..a
~l.t}

r
4r
~° ~w~ ~,
i~ ~`'~'`r••~,
....
.-~
~i.•.~'`~ ~ a:
s~ ~ "~
t
f~1
s ~ ~ 2 ~ ~ R9t€.ES
;.7 Ssr 3isL:

E N
~ { ~+
f'xa.simFi 4nF.q.
y'fy ?raf-'7
4~F VllJ[i3 ~N1[i~L[t{Pi
DBPRRTM~.~A'T (3F ?l2e4hzSppRT~TIOit'
IstYd)14.1UL7C3 ilN?T
p~~ eau~r
Bnrz~ x©. ~~ ox srr rsza
owe sx~x.~r c~~
xlx~ Na. ~--.~~sa
J .L'iC]~'~lY~
sit ~tlKt!'
n~~=
FIG~G''12~ 1

MEMORA:yDUM
TO: Joh ~ Dorney
Non-Discharge Branch
Regional Contact: ~. Steenhuis
WQ Supervisor: F_ Beek
Date:
SUBJECT: WETLAND STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Facility Name NCDOT -Bridge 116 on SR 1520 B-3887
Project Number OS -0062
Recvd Frorn DOT
Received: Date 1/11/05 °Recvd By Region
Project Type replace bridge with bride
County PENDER
County2
Region Wilmington
Certificates Stream
Permit Wetland Wetland Wetland Stream' Class Acres Feet
Type Type. Impact: Score Index Prim. Supp: Basin Req. Req...
23 OTH OO 1' O N ~ 18-74-33-4 r C Sw 30,623. 0.02
Mitigation wetland
MitigationType Type Acres Feet ,
Wetland EEP OTH 0.03
~~~
Is Wetland Rating Sheet Attached? Q Y O N Did you request more info? Q Y ~ N
Have Project Changes/Conditions Been Discussed With Applicant? Q Y ~ N
n ~ ~ , ~G ~F
~~ ~~
MAR E; t~.
DENR - ~« y • ~.1,~ , j y
~TIEiNGS,~,Np STGR;ir9V~tiTwf~ gR~1N%H
Is Mitigation required? Q Y ~ N Recommendation: Q ISSUe Q Issue/Coed ~ Den
Y
Provided by Region: Latitude (ddmmss) 343653 Longitude (ddmmss) 774603
Comments:
This office has no objection to this Roject as nosed r~rovided that all of the conditions of the
general ~~later Q~allty Gertifi .anon #~dn(l anti tha arirlitinnal cnnriitinnc of the ~nirittcn df11 \Alater
Quality Certification are met.
cc: Regional Office
Central Office
Page Number 1
:~
x

Facility Name NCDOT -Bridge 116 on SR 1520 B-3887 County FENDER
Project Number OS 0062 Regional Contact: J. Steenhuis
Date:
Comments (continued from page 1):
,~;
cc: Regional Office Page Number 2
Central Office
r

~QF WATF~ Michael F. Easley, Governor
`O~ pG William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
_~ Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director
4 ~ Division of Water Quality
Coleen H. Sullins, Deputy Director
Division of Water Quality
February 23, 2005
NC DOT
c/o Philip S. Hams III
1598 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1598
SUBJECT: Approval of 401 Water Quality Certification
and Additional Conditions
401 fill for bridge replacement
Bridge # 116 off SR 1520
DWQ Project # 050062
Pender County
Dear Mr. Harris:
You have our approval, in accordance with the attached conditions (WQC # 3400) to conduct the
following activity within the NC DOT ROW off SR 1520 at bridge # 116, Maple Hill in Pender County.
This approval allows you to:
1. Replace old wooden bridge (87' X 22') with a new wider concrete bridge (115' X 39') and fill
0.009 acres. of 404/401 type wetlands within the adjacent approaches to accommodate the wider
bridge across Shaken Creek.
This approval is only valid for the purpose and design that you described in your completed CAMA
application received by the Division of Water Quality (DWQ) on February 8, 2005. After reviewing your
application, we have determined that General Water Quality Certificatior Number 3400 covers this
activity. This Certification can also be found on line at: http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/certs html.
This Certification allows you to use your CAMA Permit when the NC Division of Coastal Management
issues it. Please keep in mind that there may be additional Federal, State or Local regulations applicable
to your project, such as (but not limited to) Sediment and Erosion Control, Non-Discharge and Water
Supply Watershed regulations and Coastal Stormwater. In addition, this approval will expire when the.
accompanying LAMA Permit expires unless otherwise specified in the General Certification.
This approval is only valid for the purpose and design that you described in your completed CAMA
Major Permit application received by the Division of Coastal Management on January 27, 2005. If you
change or modify your project, you must notify the Division (DWQ) in writing and you maybe required to
send us a new application for a new certification. If the property is sold, the new owner must be given a
copy of the Certification and approval letter and is thereby responsible for complying with all conditions. If
total wetland fills for this project (now or in the future) exceed one acre, compensatory mitigation maybe
required as described in 15A NCAC 2H .0506 (h). For this approval to be valid, you must follow the
conditions listed in the attached certification and the additional conditions listed on the following
page:
N. C. Division of Water Quality 127 Cardinal Drive Extension [phone] Customer Service
Wilmington Regional Office Wilmington, NC 28405 [phone] Fax [phone] 'One
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper NOI~~1Ca.TO1111a

Page Two
Philip S. Hams III
Project # 050062
February 23, 2005
1. Upon completion of all work approved within the 401 Water Quality Certification or applicable
Buffer Rules, and any subsequent modifications, the applicant is required to return the attached
certificate of completion to this office and a copy to the 401 Oversight/Express Review Permitting Unit,
North Carolina Division of Water Quality, 1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC, 27699-1650;
2. No excavation and no waste, spoil, solids, or fill of any kind shall occur in wetlands, waters, or
riparian areas beyond the footprint of the impacts depicted in the CAMA Major Application. All
construction activities, including the design, installation, operation, and maintenance of sediment
and erosion control Best Management Practices, shall be performed so that no violations of state
water quality standards, statutes, or rules occur.
Please notify this Office at the number listed below if any problem arises during the construction of
the project that may affect water quality.
If you do not accept any of the conditions of this certification, you may ask for an adjudicatory
hearing. You must act within 60 days of the date that you receive this letter. To ask for a hearing, send a
written petition conforming to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes to the Office of
Administrative Hearings, 6714 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, N.C. 27699-6714. This certification and its
conditions are final and binding unless you ask for a hearing.
This letter completes the review of the DWQ Permit #050062 under Section 401 of the Clean Water
Act. If you have any questions, please telephone Joanne Steenhuis or.Edward Beck at 910-395-3900.
Sincerely,
~~~~~~.
,~ Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director
-~ Division of Water Quality
Attachments: GC # 3400
Certificate of Completion
cc: Corps of Engineers Wilmington Field Office -Henry Wicker
401Oversite/Express Permitting Unit - Cyndi Karoly
LAMA Morehead -Bill Arrington
CAMA Morehead -Doug Huggett
WiRO
•.2

WQC #3400
CAMA PERMIT CERTIFICATION
GENERAL CERTIFICATION FOR PROJECTS ELIGIBLE FOR CORPS OF ENGINEERS
GENERAL PERMIT NUMBER 198000291 (ISSUED TO THE NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF
COASTAL MANAGEMENT AND RIPARIAN AREA PROTECTION RULES fBUFFER RULES)
This General Certification is issued in conformity with requirement of Section 401, Public
Laws 92-500 and 95-217 of the United States and subject to the North Carolina Division of Water
Quality Regulations in 15 NCAC 2H, Section .0500 and 15 NCAC 26 .0200 for the discharge of
fill material as described in General Permit 198000291 and for the Riparian Area Protection Rules
(Buffer Rules) in 15A NCAC 2B .0200. This Certification replaces Water Quality Certification
Number 3025 issued on September 6, 1995, Water Quality Certification Number 3112 issued on
February 11, 1997, Water Quality Certification Number 3274 issued June 1, 2000 and Water
Quality Certification Number 3371 issued March 18, 2002. This WQC is rescinded when the
Corps of Engineers re-authorizes Regional General Permit 0291 or when deemed appropriate by
the Director of DWQ.
The State of North Carolina certifies that the specified category of activity will not violate
applicable portions of Sections 301, 302, 303, 306 and 307 of the Public Laws 92-500 and 95-217
if conducted in accordance with conditions hereinafter set forth.
Conditions of.Certification:
1. Activities authorized by CAMA major permits require written concurrence from the
Division of Water Quality as well as compliance with all conditions of this General
Certification;
2. Activities authorized by Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) Minor or General
Permits do not require written authorization from the Division of Water Quality as long
as they comply with all other conditions of this .General Certification;
3. In accordance with North Carolina General Statute Section 143-215.3D(e), any
request for written concurrence fora 401 Water Quality Certification must include the
appropriate fee. If a project also requires a CAMA Permit, one payment to both
agencies shall be submitted and will be the higher of the two fees. The fee shall be
collected and distributed between the two agencies in accordance with agreements
reached between the Division of Water Quality and the Division of Coastal
Management;
4. In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0506 (h) compensatory mitigation may be
required for impacts to 150 linear feet or more of streams and/or one acre or more of
wetlands. In addition, buffer mitigation may be required for any project with Buffer
Rules in effect at the time of application for buffer impacts resulting from activities
classified as "allowable with mitigation" within the "Table of Uses" section of the
Buffer Rules or require a variance under the Buffer Rules. A determination of buffer,
wetland and stream mitigation requirements shall be made for any Certification for
this Nationwide Permit. The most current design and monitoring protocols from DWQ
shall be followed and written plans submitted for DWQ approval as required in those
protocols. When compensatory mitigation is required for a project, the mitigation
plans must be approved by DWQ in writing before the impacts approved by the
Certification occur. The mitigation plan must be implemented and/or constructed
before any permanent building or structure on site is occupied. In the case of public
road projects, the mitigation plan must be implemented before the road is opened to
the travelling public;

WQC #3400
The Director of the North Carolina Division of Water Quality may require submission of a
formal application for individual certification for any project in this category of activity that requires
written concurrence under this certification, if it is determined that the project is likely to have a
significant adverse effect upon water quality or degrade the waters so that existing uses of the
wetland or downstream waters are precluded.
Public hearings may be held for specific applications or group of applications prior to a
Certification decision if deemed in the public's best interest by the Director of the North Carolina
Division of Water Quality.
Effective date: March 2003
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
By
Alan W. Klimek
Director
WQC # 3400

DWQ Project No.:
Applicant:
Project Name:
Date of Issuance of 401 Water Quality Certification:
County:
Certificate of Completion
Upon completion of all work approved within the 401 Water Quality Certification or applicable Buffer Rules, and any subsequent
modifications, the applicant is required to return this certificate to the 401/Wetlands Unit, North Carolina Division of Water
Quality, 1621 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC, 27699-1621. This form maybe returned to DWQ by the applicant, the
applicant's authorized agent, or the project engineer. It is not necessary to send certificates from all of these.
Applicant's Certification
I, ~ ,hereby state that, to the best of my abilities, due care and diligence was used in
the observation of the construction such that the construction was observed to be built within substantial compliance and intent of
the 401 Water Quality Certification and Buffer Rules, the approved plans and specifications, and other supporting materials.
Signature:
Agent's Certification
Date:
I~ ,hereby state that, to the best of my abilities, due care. and diligence was used in
the observation of the construction such that the construction was observed to be built within substantial compliance and intent of
the 401 Water Quality Certification and Buffer Rules, the approved plans and specifications, and other supporting materials.
Signature:
Engineer's Certification
Partial Final
Date:
I, , as a duly registered Professional Engineer in the State of North Carolina,
having been authorized to observe (periodically, weekly, full time) the construction of the project,for the Permittee hereby state
that, to the best of my abilities, due care and diligence was used in the observation of the construction such that the construction
was observed to be built within substantial compliance and intent of the 401 Water Quality Certification and Buffer Rules, the
approved plans and specifications, and other supporting materials.
Signature
Date
Mail to: 401 Wetlands Contact
NC Dept. of Environment and Natural Resources
127 Cardnal Drive Ext.
Wilmington, NC 28405-2004
Registration No.

~~;:~
~~
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Michael F. Easley, Governor Charles S. Jones, Director William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
February 2, 2005
MEMORANDUM:
I E r' - - ----
TO: Linda Lewis ~ ~ ~_;-~- .a
Noel Lutheran ~ FEB ®~ 20G5
Division of Water Quality i _~~, ~ ~(~
FROM: Doug Huggett
Major Permits Processing Coordinator
SUBJECT: CAMA/DREDGE & FILL Permit Application Review
Applicant: N.C. Dept. of Transportation
Project Location: Pender County, Bridge No. 116, on SR 1520 over Shaken Creek.
Proposed Project: Proposes to replace the existing 87=foot long by 22-foot wide timber bridge over
Shaken Creek with a 115-foot long by 39-foot wide concrete bridge.
Please indicate below your agency's position or viewpoint on the proposed project and return this form
by February 22, 2005. If you have any questions regarding the proposed project, please contact Bill
Arrington at [phone]. When appropriate, in-depth comments with supporting data is requested.
~t~c~ f r~ u. c~
REPLY: ~ This agency has no objection to the project as proposed. 2~Z L 1~.~``
This agency has no comment on the proposed project. ~~
This agency approves of the project only if the recommended changes are
incorporated. See attached.
This agency objects to the project for reasons described in the attached comments.
SIGNED -~~,.~~~~ lyn.~ `~.~~~ DATE ~ Z ~, ~~
a~ -
151-B Hwy. 24, Hestron Plaza II, Morehead City, North Carolina 28557
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: www.nccoastalmanagement.net
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled 110°io Post Consumer Paper

I~IVISI®N ®~' ~~A~TAL iViANAGElO~IENT
FiELi) ileTVESTiGATI®N REP®RT
1. APPLICANT'S NAME: North Carolina Department of Transportation
2. LOCATION OF PROJECT SITE: Bridge No. 116, on SR 1520 over Shaken Creek in
Pender County
Photo Index - 2000: No Photo 1995: No Photo
State Plane Coordinates: x 2370736 y: 316939 GPS: Rover File # X010520A
3. INVESTIGATION TYPE: CAMA
4. INVESTIGATIVE PROCEDURE: Dates of Site Visit - 5/18/2004 & 1/5/2005
Was Agent Present -YES (Cheryl Knepp 5/18/2004)
5. PROCESSING PROCEDURE: Application Received as Complete-1/27/2005
Office -Morehead City
6. SITE DESCRIPTION:
(A} Local Land Use Plan -Pender County
Land Classification from LUP -Rural and Conservation
(B) AEC(s) Involved: PTA and PTS
(C) Water Dependent: Yes
(D) Intended Use: Public
(E) Wastewater Treatment: Existing - N/A
Planned - N/A
(F} Type of StEUCtures: Existing -Secondary paved road and bridge
Planned -Secondary paved road and bridge
(G) Estimated Annual Rate of Erosion: N/A Source: N/A
7. HABITAT DESCRIPTION: [AREA]
FQn~Qn,4n,~ Ti illna llal.o.-
(A) 404 Type Wetlands Clear and Grub 0.009 acres
0.008 acres

(B) Public Trust Area-Shallow Bottom xistu~g
~h~cling 66Q sq. ft.
altiona
Shading 510 sq. ft.
(C) Other -High Ground 2.508 acres
(Disturbed within
construction limits,
Approximate)
(D)- High Ground in Coastal 0.083 acres
Shoreline AEC
(1;) Total CAMA AEC Disturbed: 0.095 acres
(F) Total area disturbed by project: 2.62 acres
(G} Primary Nursery Area: No
(H) Water Classification: C Sw
(I) Open for Shellfishing: No
8. PROJECT SUMMARY: The N.C. Department of Transportation is proposing to replace the
existing $7-foot long by 22-foot wide timber bridge over Shaken Creek with a 115-foot long by 39-
foot wide concrete bridge.

FIELD INVESTIGATI®N IZEPOIIT
NC D®T - 8-3887 Fender County, B~°gdge No. l lb
PAGE 2
9. PIZ®JECT DESCRIPTI®N:
The site of this proposal is Bridge No. l lb, on State Road 1520, at the crossing of Shaken Creek,
approximately 5.5 miles southwest of the intersection of SR 1520 and NC 50, in the community of
Maple Hill, in Fender County. The general purpose of the project is to replace the deteriorated 87-
foot long by 22-foot wide timber bridge with a 115-foot long by 39-foot wide concrete ,bridge
spanning Shaken Creek, while maintaining traffic flow on an off site detour.
Bridge No. 116 crosses Shaken Creek approximately 200 feet up-stream of its confluence with Holly
Shelter Creek. The narrow fringe of 404 type wetlands between Shaken Creek and the adjacent high
ground is vegetated with cypress, gum, honeysuckle, ash, poison, water oak, and elm. The high
ground is vegetated with various pines and hardwoods. Creek width at the crossing is approximately
30 feet. The vertical clearance between the water and bridge bottom is approximately 11 feet with a
7-foot water depth. Soils in the wetlands are mainly Muckalee loam with Craven and Marvyn loamy
fine sands. in the upper elevations of the bridge approaches as classified by the NC Soil Conservation
Service. Approximate elevations on the site range between 1 feet and 11 feet above normal water
level. No evidence of SAV beds was noted. The North Carolina Division of Water Quality classifies
waters of Shaken Creek as C Sw at the project site. Shaken Creek is not Primary Nursery Area, as
designated by the North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries. The Fender County Land Use Plan
designates the project area as Rural, with all CAMA Areas of Environmental Concern designated as
Conservation. '
The proposal is to replace the existing 87-foot long by 22-foot wide timber bridge with a 116-foot
long by 39-foot cored slab concrete bridge on the existing alignment. The proposed bridge would
have a vertical clearance equal to the existing bridge (approximately 11 feet). The bridge will be
installed using top down construction. The bridge is being widened from 22 feet to 39 feet to more
closely correspond to the 11 foot paved travel lanes and 4 foot grassed shoulders of SR 1520. An off
site detour on existing roads will be used. NC DOT has committed to adhere to "High Quality Water
Erosion Control Methods" and use Best Management Practices for erosion control and bridge
demolition. On each side of Shaken Creek, Approximately 12 feet of existing causeway that was
installed over high ground will be tapered back to the new bridge bents and armored with rip rap.

FIELD IN~%ESTIGATI®N I~EP®ItT
NC D®T -$-?8~7 Fender C®unty, I3rgdge No. 115
PALE 3
10. ANTICIPATED I1dIPACTS:
As proposed, the construction of the bridge with 3:1 fill slopes would require the filling of
approximately 0.009 acres and the clearing and grubbing (excavating) of approximately 0.008 acres
of 404 type wetlands. Approximately 2.60 acres of impacts to high ground would occur with the
construction of end bents, installation of rip rap and approach work. The additional width of the
bridge would cause approximately 510 square feet (0.012 acres) of additional shading impacts to
Public Trust Waters AEC. Approximately 0.083 acres (3600 square feet) of the above describe
ground disturbance would be within the CAMA Coastal Shoreline AEC. No disturbance of the creek
bottom is expected during the installation of the bridge.
NC DOT has avoided and minimized the 404 type wetland excavation and fill impacts associated
with this proposal by lengthening the bridge from 87 feet to 116 feet, spanning the open water, hand
clearing all wetlands in the construction area except adjacent to small fill in northwest quadrant of
the bridge, using top down construction and using an off site detour. NC DOT BMP's require
dropping no materials from the bridge demolition in the waters regulated by CAMA. The NC DOT
has proposed to use "High Qualaty Waters Erosion Control Methods" to minimize the impacts of
erosion.
NC DOT has received an EEP Mitigation Acceptance Letter committing the EEP to provide Riverine
Wetland mitigation in the same cataloging unit of the Cape Fear River Basin, at a ratio of up to 2: 1,
for the 0.017 acres of Riverine Wetland that would be impacted by project B-3887:
The collective disturbance area for the project is 2.62 acres.
Bill Arrington
February 1, 2005
Morehead City

Form DCM-MP-1
APPI~I~A~I
OIL
(To be completed by all applicants)
b. City, -town, community or landmark
1. APPLICANT ~ -Lw~~_E I~«~
c. Street address or secondary road number
a. Landowner: ~ , _, S ~ - s .~ ~
Name N f ~Ep t, o r- I eA,~so~ ~; e.r~ o A,!
Address_15~8 M~~~ <:~-Rv~cE Ct~,~-2
City ~Lci~cie,~-~ State tiles
Zip,2~~55- isg8 Day Phone 5~~- `~~S_ is~o
l=ax 9i9-'7~~-lSot
b. Authorized Agent:
Name
Address
City State
Zip Day Phone
Fax
c. Project name (if any) ^ /~- ? ~ k~l Qe~oc,E ~ I ~ co
~VL.'2 S 41 G1~CL~~~ `KC C~ .
NOTE.' Perneir will be ir,ued in name of landowrsrr(t), and/or
Prr~ea ~.
2. LOCATION OF PROPOSED
PROJECT
a. County rC N~~ Q_
Revised 03/95
d. Is proposed work within city limits or planning
jurisdiction? Yes x No
e. 3Vame of body of water nearest project (e.g. river,
creek, sound, bay) _ S aA k~. C eEF ~
3, DESCRIPTION AND PLANNED USE
OF PROPOSED PROJECT
a. List all development activities you propose (e.g.
building a home, motel, marina, bulkhead,.pier, and
excavation and/or filling ac!t~ivities.
A~P~ACt~ ~KiST~~.l(~ I~~~OC~L (~J~'rl~
H t~E1,J R~C~~i'LL_ Q~-!O I~irtiJ f?nA~I:~AW
ADPR.,~Ar ~a~5.,
b. Is the proposed activity maintenance of an existing
project, new work, or both? t~l.r_~w L~lo~~
c. Will the~roject be for public, private or commercial
use?_~ v(?u(' TcA~us~?:~e~az~or!
d. Give a brief description of purpose, use, methods of
construction and daily operations of proposes;
project. if more space is needed, please mach
additional pages. T~~ Q~F~FCc- ~e o Sre~eruCt
~JITN' ~ tJEyJ ~'iCuC.TLIQc: {~.JO IJri..~
/~ ,
l nwleTCy.CT~~e..J. I~~, is ~'~;J f i.l«l_ ~'k-.
t,~~~c,

Form DCM-MP-1
4. LAND A.ND WATER
CHARACTERLSTICS
m. Describe existin wastewater treatment facilities.
F~
a. Size of entire tract 11`x, ts^~~f~.:z- '~~--~~ ~~ n.. Describe location and type of discharges to waters
~~ of the state. (For example, surface runoff, sanitary
b. Size of individual lot(s) N ~ ~- wastewater, industrial/commercial effluent, "wash
down" and residential discharges.)
c. A zimate elevatjon of tract above MHW or S~eF~cc (?~.~oFF
IC.,o' Ex~sr~~~ Q2v, C~FV.
d. Soil type(s) and texture(s) of tract (PEc~cc ~ocx~f4n~..1, o. Describe existing drinking water supply source.
sic ~Sa~o,i C~r.4 , ~.Jc=T ~) ~
e. Vegetation on tract ~joTTO..L0.~D I-IAQOw~JODS ,
UP~n~t~ P,.;clm,~-~ DE~~o,,~us ~Rts;
f. Man-made features now on tract L xi 5T•, ~! e L~-~ o~-~'.
~oaoway~ QT,o l~riu7~E'S
5. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
What is the CAMA Land Use Plan land
classification of the site? (Co,ctutt Ilse local lmd We ptmt.J
conservation Transitional
.Developed Community
Rural „~ Other
h. How is the tract zoned by local government?
~? c: d~-~- ~L~
i. Is the proposed proje.''t consistent with the applicable
zoning? _~ Yes No.
(Attach Zoning tiorr~liance certificate, if appGatbkJ
j. Has a professional azchaeological assessment been
done for the tract? X nYes No ,
If yes, by whom? I~~s,-~e~~ 1'~Ea:4VPr~+~ c~Fr~<- C~Po;
k. ):s the project located in a National Registered
Historic District or does it involve a National.
Resister listed or el.iible property?
1. Are there wetlands on the site? ~ Yes _ No
Coastal (marsh) Other X
If yes, has adelineation-been conducted? ~
(Attach doauncntation, if av~iabicJ
In addition to the completed application form, the
following Items must be submitted:
• A copy of the deed (with state application only) or•
other instrument under which the applicantclaims title
to the affected properties. If the applicant is not
claiming to be the owner. of said property, then
forward a copy of the deed or other instrument under
which the owner claims title, plus written permission
from the owner to carry out the project.
• An accurate, dated work plat (including plan view
and cross-sectional drawings) drawn to scale in black
ink on an 8 1/2" by I1" white paper. (Refer to
Coastal Resources Commission Rule 7J.020~ 'for a
detailed description..)
Please note that original drawings are preferred and
only high quality copies will be accepted. Blue-line
prints or other larger plats are acceptable only if an
arl~uate number of quality copies are provided by
applicant. (Contact the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers regarding that agency's use of larger
drawings.) A site or location map is a part of. plat
requirements and it must be sufficiently detailed w
guide agency personnel unfamiliar with the area to the
12evised 03/9:1

Form DCM-MP-1
site. Include highway or secondary road (SR)
numbers, landmarks, and the like.
• A Stor:nwst~ Ce:-tiG~tion, if one is necessary
• A list of the names and complete addresses of the
adjacent waterfront (riparian) Landowners and
signed return receipts as proof that such owners
have received a copy of the application and plats
by cex-tified mail. Such landowners must be advised
that they have 30 days in which to submit comments
on the proposed project to the Division of Coastal
Management. Upon signing this form, the applicant
further certifies that such notice has been provided.
Name Sce F}TTPC~-!C~(J t"~~cPn~-'
Address
Phone
Name
Address
Phone
Name
Address
Phone
~ A Iist of previous state or federal permits issued for
work on the project tract. Include permit numbers,
permittee, and issuing dates.
• A check for S250 made payable to the Department of
Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
(DEHNR) to cover the costs of processing the
application.
• A signed AEC hazard notice for projecu in
oceanfront and inlet areas.
• A statement of compliance with the N.C.
Environmental Policy Act (N.C.G.S. 113A - 1 to
10) If the project involves the expenditure of public
funds or use of public land's, attach a statement
documenting compliance with the North Carolina
Environmental Policy Act.
6. CERTIFICATION AND PERMISSION
TO ENTER ON LAND
I understand that any permit issued in re$ponse to this
application will allow only the development described in
the application. The project will be subject to conditions
and restrictions contained ~1 the permit.
I certify that to the best of my knowledge, the proposed
activity complies with the State of North Carolina's
approved Coastal Management Program and will be
conducted in a manner consistent with such program.
I certify that I am authorized to grant, and do in fact,
grant permission to representatives of state and federal
.review agencies to enter on the aforementioned lands in
connection with evaluating information related to this
permit. appi~ication and follow-up .monitoring of the
project.
I further certify that the information provided in this
application is truthful. to the best of my knowledge.
This is the ~ day of ~ vA L~~s
Print Name Y ~~~~t' s. ~'"''~S
Signature d------~-• ~---.-
Z.mdowr+er r rfutharized Agrnt
Please indicate attachments pertaining to your proposed
project.
_ DCM MP-2 Excavation and Fill Information
_ DCM MP-3 Upland Development
DCM MP-~ Swctures Information
-DCM MP-S Bridges and Culverts
DCM MP-6 Marina Development
NOTE: Please sign and date each attachment in the
space provided al the bonom of earn form.

^ Complete items 7, 2, and 3. Also complete
item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired.
^ Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
^ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
or on the front if space permits.
1. Article Addressed to:
Milton J. Humpluey, Jr.
6265 NC Hwy. 53 W
Burgaw, NC 28425 .
If YES, enter delivery address below:
^ Agent
^ Addre;
4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) ^ Yes
2. ~ icle Number j ~DO~ / ~ ~ O oDD
ransfer from service label (~ ~ ~ ~ ~(
PS Form 3811, August 2007 Domestic Return Receipt to2ss5-oz-m
^ Complete items 1, 2;-and 3. Also complete .
item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired.
^ Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
^ Attach this card to the back df the mailpiece,
or on the front if space permits.
1. Article Addressed to:
Frank Humphrey, II
705 East Satchwell Street
Burgaw, NC 28425
A. Signature
X ^ Agent
^ Address
B. Received y Printed N } p C. Date of Delivc
~r -= 2~- Q
D. Is delivery address different f m item 1? ^ Yes
If YES, enter delivery address below: ^ No
. 3: Service Type
Certified Mail ^ Express Mail
~^ Registered ^ Return Receipt for Merchandi
^ Insured Mail ^ C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) ^ Yes
2. Article Number
(Transfer from service label) ~~~~ l~ ~ D Df/~~ ~ 5 U y cQ ~] f S7
PS Form 381 1 ,August 2001 Domestic Return Receipt ~~ JJ ~1 r (~ 102595-02-M-1
^ Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired.
^ Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
^ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
or on the front if space permits.
1. Article Addressed to
SP Forests, LLC
15 Gum Avenue
Bolton, NC 28423
A. Signatu e:
,~ gent
X ~ ^ Addre:
B. Received by (Printe ame) C. Date of Deli
^.i t ..~~
D. Is deli ~~~ di~t `t~from item 1? ^ Yes
If Y,lz dOress"below: ^ No
s`~, ~r~~ ~ OC a
~ A ~~ s:
Certi~fidtl~fl4a'!!-^ E7~Express Mail
Registered ^ Return Receipt for Merchar
^ Insured Mail ^ C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) ^ Yes
3. Service Type
~ertified Mail ^ Express Mail
^ Registered ^ Return Receipt for Merchant
^ Insured Mail ^ C.O.D.

Form DCM-MP-2
ESC A.VATIDN
~ ~ ~I~L
A~
(Except bridges and culves~ts)
Attach this form to Joint Application for CAMA Major
Permit, Form DCM-MP-1. Be sure to complete -alt
other sections of the Joint Application that relate to this
proposed project.
Describe below the purpose of proposed excavation or
fill activities. A[1 values to be given in feet.
Average final
E~ Pro,)ed
Lcrutth Width Depth Depth
Access
channel
(MLV~ or (NWL)
Canal
Boat
basin
Boat
ramp
Rock
groin
Rock
breakwater
F~~ iii 6JC~~nNr~~
Other
(Excluding
ehorelinc
stabiliuuon)

~..;,a~~c;;wyx,..
.fir.. ~'::``:~.
:~. ~,
'h' \.
~r~; . ~, ~.

Za` I
1. EXCAVATION
a. Amount of material to be excavate from below
MHW or NWL in cubic yards N- (~
b. Type of material to be excavated r~i ~ ~
c. Does the area to be excavated include coastal
wetlands (marsh), submerged aquatic vegetation
(SAVs) or other wetlands? Yes ~ No
d. Highground excavation in cubic yards .?3.~ Cv
2. DISPOSAL OF EXCAVATED
MATERIAL
a. Location of disposal area Tc ~~F (~ ~-~-eM,u-n
~~_i l.o~Tf_f>~ ~oQ
b. Dimensions of disposal area N ~ A-
c. Do you claim title to disposal area?
Yes x No
If no, attach a letter granting permission from the
owner.
d. Will a disposal area be available for future
maintenance? Yes k No
If yes, where?

Form DCM-MP-2
e. Does the disposal area include any coastal wetlands
(marsh}, SAVs or other wetlands?
Yes x No
f. Does the disposal include any area in the water?
Yes X No
3. SHORELINE STABILIZATION ~ f ~
a. Type of shoreline stabilization
Bulkhead Riprap
b. Length
c. Average distance waterward of MHW or NWL
d. Maximum distance waterward of MHW or NWL
e. Shoreline erosion during preceding 12 months
(Sousce of informadonJ
f. Type of bulkhead or riprap material.
g. Amount of fill in cubic yards to be placed be]ow
water level
(1) Riprap
(2) Bulkhead backfill
h. Type of fill material
i. Source of fill material
4. OTHER FILL ACTIVITIES .
(Excluding Shoreline Stabilization)
a. Will fill material be brought to site?
X Yes No
If yes,
{1) Amount of material to be placed in the
water Nor,r
(2) Dimensions of fill area < <-~ Poem ~ --
(3) Purpose of fiii ra.~TOSC~ ~1,ao~..iAv
b. Will fill material be placed in coastal wetlands
(marsh), SAVs or other wetlands?
}C Yes No
~.,
If yes, . ~ ~ ~ L~ ~
(1) Dimensions of fill area 13 x a ~`
ScE P6Rr, iT~
(2) Purpose of fill T Co~sTe„-~T
~AOvJA~i C--M1~,Ai-1Yr~r_iJ.T
5. GENERAL
a. H•ow will excavated or fill material be kept on site
and erosion controlled? l~!C~<~~ I-~,~~!~- Qua~~~'4
WAr~-Yt. FQoSio,.i COr.rrQDt• (hc-,-uoas w«L
Z~ US n'
b. What type of construction equipment will be used
(for example, dragline, backhoe, or hydraulic
dredge)? r
LON STe.IICTf J~.1 ~Gi.ti f:MCEN!
c. Will wetlands be cr;~ssed in transporting equipment
to project site? Yes ~ Na
If yes, explain steps that will be taken to lessen
environmental impacts.
6y[~oT
A t or Pro'ect K
~~
~~
Signature
O5
Rcv'~sed 03/95

Form DCi`t-MP-S
BRIDGES AND
CULVERTS
Attach this form to Joint Application for CAMA Major
Permit, Form DCM-MP-1. Be sure to complete all
other sections of the Joint Application that relate to this
proposed project.
1. BRIDGES
a. Public ~ Private
b. Type of bridge (con^struction material)
I ~~ CD~CRETC W2~-C SIAC
c. Water body to be crossed by bridge
S u a~~.l C2EC~
d. ~ depth at the proposed .crossing at MLW or
+~- .~ O
(4) WiII all, or a part of, the existing culvert be
removed? (Explain)
g. Length of proposed bridge I I S t=om Er
h. Width of proposed bridge 3 9 >=c~~-
i.. Height of proposed bridge above wetlands
9 FcE-r .
e. Will proposed bridge replace an existing bridge?
X Yes No
If yes,
(1) Length of existing bridge kCo ~E~
{2) Width of existing bridge ! k FEAT
(3) Navigation clearance underneath .existing
bridge +/- I I ~ EE-r-
(4) Will alt, or a part of the existing bridge be
removed? (Explain) ~cc nF "t'U~ ~-X,Snr•!~
~E~ot,c l~J,~~ T« Yf r^U„~_[', ~~!p EE~'tec'.rL
f. Will proposed bridge replace an existing culvert(s)?
Yes X No
j. Will the proposed bridge affect existing water flow?
Yes ~_ No .
If yrs, explain
k. Navigation clearance underneath proposed bridge
+~- I I. S FccT
1. Will the proposed bridge affect navigation by,
reducing or increasing the existing navigable
opening? Yes X No
If yes, ezpl.ain
m. Will the proposed bridge cross wetlands containing
. no navigable waters? - Yes ~` No .
If yes, explain
If yes,
(1) Length of existing culvert n.
(2) Width of existing culvert
(3) Height of the top of the existing culvert above
the MHW or NWL
Revised 03/95
Have you contacted the U.S. Coast Guard
concerning their approval?
/~ Yes No
If yes, please provide record of their action. r
GG 4J

Form DCM-MP-S
2. CULVERTS t ~ ~
a. Rater body in which culvert is to be placed
b. Number of culverts proposed
c. Type of culvert (construction material, style)
Will proposed culvert replace an existing bridge?
Yes No
If yes, .
(1) Length of existing bridge
(2) Width of existing.bridge
(3) Navigation clearance underneath existing
bridge
(4) Will all, or a part of, the existing bridge be
removed? (Explain)
e. Will proposed culvert replace an existing culvert?
Yes No
If yes,
(1) Length of existing culvert
(Z) Width of existing culvert .
(3) Height of the top of the existing culvert above
the MHW or NWL
~(4) Will all, or a part of, the existing culvert be
removed? (Explain)
f. Length of proposed culvert
g. Width of proposed culvert
h.~ Height of the top of the proposed culvert above the
MHW or NWL
i. Will the proposed culvert affect existing water flow?
Yes No
If yes, explain
j. Will the proposed culvert affect ezis[~ng navigation
potential? Yes No
If yes, explain
3. EXCAVATION AND FII.L
a. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
require any excavation below the MHW or NWL?
Yes _~ No
If yes,
(1) Length of area tq be excavated
(Z) Width of area to be excavated
(3) Depth of area to be excavated
(4) Amount of material to be excavated in cubic
yards
b. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
require any excavation within:
_ Coastal Wetlands _ SAVs _ Other Wetlands
If yes,. ~y~- r~(~ ;.~'.~
(1) Length of area to be excavated
(2} Width of area to be excavated
(3) Amount of material to be excavated in cubic
yards
c. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
require any highground excavation?
_~ Yes ~ No
If yes,
(1) Length of area to be excavated a~7 F~~
(2) Width of area to be excavated +~- ~o ~E ;
(~ Amount of material to be excavated in cubic
yards ~' 3 ~ c y
d. If the placement of the bridge or culvert involves
any excavation, please complete the following:
(1) _Locaiion of the spoil disposal arcs
~ v ~::: GrTtEr^~,-ll.~) U\I Co~~-R RCTC~C
(2) Dimensions of soil disposal area
~ I A.
(3) Do you claim title to the disposal area?
Yes ~ No
If no, attach a letter granting permission fmm
the owner.
Reriscd D3/95

Form DCM-MP-S
(4) Will the disposal area be available for future
maintenance? Yes X No
(~ Does the disposal area include any coastal
wetlands (marsh), SAVs, or other wetlands?
Yes _,~ No
If yes, give dimensions if different from (2)
above.
(6) Does the disposal area include any area below
the MHW or NWL? Yes ~- No
If yes, give dimension if different from No. 2
above.
b. Will the proposed project require the relocation of
any existing utility lines? ti Yes No
If yes, explain in detail ~.:-- «;u-c_~~ %~: ~~~
Will the proposed project require the construction of
any temporary detour structures?
Yes X ~ No
If yes, explain in detail
e. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culveR
result in any fill (other than excavated material
described in Item d. above) to be laced below
MHW or NWL? Yes ~ No
If yes,
(1) Length of area to be filled
(2) Width of area to be filled
(3) Purpose of fill
f. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
result in any fill (other than excavated material
described in Item d. above) to be placed within:
_ Coastal Wetlands _ SAVs ~ Other Wetlands
If yes,.
(1) Length of area to be filled ~ ~ Fct-T
(2) Width of area to be filled 13 FR'-"r
(3) Purpose of fill ~12~a c~~,r.,, (_, c_c_
d. Will the proposed project require any work
.channels? Yes _~ No
If yes, complete Form DCM-MP-2
e. How will excavated or fill material be kept on site
and erosion controlled? NCCo i 4~,~,~ Q,aF~_~n,
~~.)4r~-4 EQrX.inN ~o,.-t-4.ol.. t'rli=~o~~ wir_t ~r=~
us
What type of construction equipment will be used
(for example, dragline, backhoe or -hydraulic
dredge)? Sra,~'r~eo ~4 ~ oc-r ~ . (?o/~cuJ~c.i_r
//~~ ~
L.D r1CT'Qt.~eT~O h LG U ~ OMEr-~'1-
g. Will wetlands be crossed in transporting equipment
to. project site? Yes X No
If yes, explain steps that will be taken to lessen
environmental impacts.
Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
result in any fill (other than excavated material.
described in Item d. above) to be placed on
highground? ~_ Yes No h
If yes,
ErJ<T~ \
(1) Length of area to be filled qoo ~~<~r~:~,Qn~Ay,
(2) Width of area toe filled `I~ SET (TID~cAI.L~~Cr~l,
(3) Purpose of fill occwa., F`~~t ~ '
4. GENERAL
a. Will the proposed project involve any mitigation?
_~ Yes No
If yes, explain in detail ~.a~- ~~ X..~.
Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
require y shoreline stabilization?
Yes No
If yes, explain in detail _ r"-~'~ .R,~~`n~~
s~-ter c"~~.c,~v~-~.e~m
D/CUoT"
t or Project Name
Z' ..~
Segnaauz
~ 7 ~~
R~viud Q3/95

O
O
Z
O -- ~
~ o
}
M ~
~ ~ ~ m W
_
~
~ t-
fA
~ _
O
U ~
~ LL
d' M
~ O w ~

C
~- Z D ~
O
O W U
w> ~ ~ O
0o a ~
ti a- F-
z w
w.

W

a
O
LL
W

W
CD
J
J_

Z
_
Q
W
J
U

Z
Q
2
U
Q
O
O
O
J
Q
Z
O
H
D
Q
Z
Q
W
F
O
Z

0 0
~ ~ c
m .~ r.
~ ai m .::
is ~ ~
Z ~ O
O O
O~ C. ~

~ U ^
N lII II.~•-
.
,
.
w U E

a
~ 0 0
Q.
W
Q O. O ~
v
~S N C
H
W
U
Q O O
A
~ v .,
c
-
o m
W =
~~
~
0 O

C 3 U
(Q .~-.
QQ LL Z
G
c
G ~ ~ p
N p> = O
N C C O U O O
M s ~ ~ m
~
U ~~~
a ~
a p p
C
C ~,
C ~
O
f- ~ ff{
Q R N l0
..
~ a x~
_~ W C
W o o 0
a N
.~
0 g LL ~
Z w ;u
~
~ ~
J ~ C

W O O
N
C c ~ p
p O
O
~9 ~
LL ~ "
d a
~ ~
U ~
~ .D
~
3
~. N O _
~ ~ ~ ~
N ~
U -~
Q
c~ O
O
O ~ ^ J
.m J
O
~ ~ ...
~

u~

N
'- J
Q
(n Z
O

-~JLB WETLAND BOUNDARY PROPOSED BRIDGE
~L~ WETLAND PROPOSED BOX CULVERT
® DENOTES FILL IN ~~~ PROPOSED PIPE CULVERT
WETLAND
i ® DENOTES FILL IN
SURFACE WATER
® DENOTES FILL IN
SURFACE WATER
(POND)
®DENOTES TEMPORARY
FILL IN WETLAND
~ ®DENOTES EXCAVATION
IN WETLAND
I DENOTES TEMPORARY
® FILL IN SURFACE
i WATER
• _ = DENOTES~.MECHANIZEO
. _
» CLEARING
» ~ DENOTES HAND
»HC HC• CLEARING
•~'~- TOP OF BANK
•---- WE EDGE OF WATER
_ - ~ - -PROP. LIMIT OF CUT
i
-• - -F -PROP. LIMIT OF FILL
-~ PROP. RIG+iT OF WAY
- - NG- - NATURAL 'GROUND
- -P•••L - PROPERTY LINE
-TDE- TEMP. DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
- PDE - PERMANENT DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
- EAB- • EXIST. ENDANGERED
ANIMAL BOUNDARY
- EPB- ' E PLANT BOUNDAR ~
I
- -~ - - - WATER SURFACE
xX XXX X X LIVE STAKES
BOULDER
- - - COIR FIBER ROLLS
12'-48'
(DASHED LINES DENOTE PIPES
EXISTNG STRUCTURES) 54" PIPES
& ABOVE
SINGLE TREE
WOODS LINE
^
--~--

DRAINAGE INLET
ROOTWAD
RIP RAP
ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER
5 OR PARCEL NUMBER
IF AVAILABLE
PREFORMED SCOUR HOLE

LEVEL SPREADER (LS)
DITCH /
GRASS SWALE
~~~~~
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PENDER COUNTY
PROJECT: 33326.1.1 (B-3887)
REPLACE BRIDGE X116 OVER
SHAgEN CREEg ON SR 1520
SHEET ~ OF ~ REV. 5 /' 19 d 0~

..
~~ ~
L - - ,6
S iii
,sz
53 ,\ ~
l ,
_ 7 04 ~ - '~ `' '!~
'z,
151 --'
53 `~ .~~ --; f
_ ~J ~ 14tt ? Y
~ 1 ~ ~
s
_ ~ - ., ,
.~-- ~
~~ ~ 16
,~ 7 ~
\ ~i
~~~~
V JV ®~
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PENDER COUNTY
PROJECT: 33326.1.1 (B-38B7)
REPLACE BRIDGE X116 OVER
SHAgEN CREEg ON SR 1520
SHEET ~ OF ~ ~ / 2 f 0~
NORTH CAROLINA

t
~'
Excavation and/or filfing pursuant to NCGS 113-229
Authorizing development in Pender County at SR 1520 over Shaken Creek;
Bridge No. 116 8-3887) as requested in the permittee's application dated 1/7/04
including the attached (one)1/2-size drawing dated 12/17/04. - '.'
This permit, issued on 3/15/05 , is subject to compliance with the application (where consistent
with the permit), all applicable regulations, special conditions and notes set forth below. Any violation of these terms may
be subject to fines, imprisonment or civil action; or may cause the permit to be null and void.
Bridge No. 116 Replacement (TIP No. B-3887)
1) .Due to the presence of juvenile finfish and anadromous fish in Shaken Creek, no in-water work shall
be conducted from February 15~' to June 30~ of any year without prior approval of the NC Division of
Coastal Management (DCM), in consultation with the NC Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC).
r
2) The permittee shall implement NC DOT's Stream Crossing Guidelines for Anadromous Fish Passage,
except as modified in Condition No. 1 of this permit. ,r
3) The NCDOT document."Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition and Removal" (final .
9/20/99) shall be followed during demolition and construction activities.
(See attached sheets for Additional Conditions) ~
This permit action may be appealed by the permittee or
other qualified persons within twenty (20) days of the issuing
date. An appeal requires resolution prior to work initiation or
continuance as the case may be.
This permit must be accessible on-site to .Department
personnel when the project is inspected for compliancc.
Any maintenance work or project modification not covered
hereunder requires further Division approval.
All work must cease when the permit expires on
No Expiration Date, pursuant to GS 136-44.7B
In issuing this permit, the State of North Carolina agrees
that your project is consistent with the North Carolina Coasta]
Management Program.
Signed by the authority of the ,Secretary of DENR and the
Chairman of the Coastal Resources. Commission.
~' .
Charles S. Jones, Director
Division of Coastal Management
This permit and its conditions are hereby accepted.
Signature of Permittee
Issued to N.C. Department of Transportation,1548 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1548

_ % 3x tP -v ax Y ~:i.- ~ -
- x ~ ,~~.- ~ ~ k'H ~{ R'~'..f ',;' ~ ""~~~ r,k 'f'".' t tai i
Y .~:%l ~,~ F

1 ~_ t t ~ s

N.G Department of Trans rtation _
- p° _ _ ~.. f ~:
Permit #-39-05'
-
__
~' «
- ..Page 2 of 3`
r
. ...
_ -
~~r . _ _
;~,. ;..
,: j ~ ND
ADDITIONAL C ITIO S

~

4), _ Bridge deck drains shall not be located~over waters of tfie State.
.

.._ ~ ..., ~ t ~o , -~
.;
5)'` Pilings-from the existing bridge, acid any temporary bridge(s), as welhas any remnant pilings from
previous bridges'shall be-removed in their entirety: In the event°that a piling breaks during removal and
cannot be removed in its entirety, the piling may be cut off flush with the bed of the water body if prior
approval is received from DCM.
6) Turbidity curtains shall be used to isolate all work areas from Shaken Creek, including pile or casement
installation; placement:.of. riprap, excavation or filling..The turbidity curtains shall be installed parallel~'°
to the banks on each side of.the stream.. The turbidity curtains shall extend past the construction limits
::, _.
- .. .~.,,
and attach to the silt fences containing`the work site: The turbidity curtains shall not fully encircle the=.`=
- ~,.
work area or extend across Shaken Creek `y-The turbidity..curtains shall be properly maintained and
_.
retained m the water until construction is complete and all of the..work._area contained by,theaurbidity
_
°' curtains has been-stabilized by vegetation or other means. Theturbidity curtains shall be removed when
turbidity within the curtains reaches ambient levels. - --
7) - -All excavated materials and debris associated with the removal of the existing bridge and existing
causeway shall be disposed of on an approved upland site.
$) =:~ Debris resulting from demolition of the existing bridgelncluding deck components'shall not enter
wetlands ~r waters of the State, even temporarily. -
9) The temporary-placement or double. handling of excavated or fill materials within waters or vegetated
wetlands are not authorized.
f
10) All excavated materials shall be confined above normal high water level `and landward of regularly or
irregularly flooded wetlands'~ehind adequate dikes or other retaining structures to prevent spillover of
solids into any wetlands or surrounding waters.
11) No excavated or fill material shall be placed at any time in any.~egetated wetlands or surrounding , f
waters outside of the alignment of the fill area indicated on the work plan drawing(s).
12) The fill material shall be clean and free of any pollutants except in trace quantities.
13) No excavation shall take place at any time in any vegetated wetlands or surrounding waters outside of
the alignment of the fill areas indicated on the workplan drawing(s).
14) Placement of riprap shall be limited to the areas as depicted on the attached work plan drawings. The
riprap material shall be free from loose dirt or any pollutant. It shall be of a size sufficient to prevent its
movement from the site by wave or can ent action. The riprap material shall consist of clean rock or
masonry materials, such as but not limited to, granite or broken concrete.
15) Live concrete shall not be allowed to contact waters of the State or water that will enter waters of the
State.

t . •;'sr -... F : k'` i `~ ~~ ~ 5 i ~} < b ~+ - *v.iY ~.,, ;, 4 V4 E3 ~4~+" ~..
- ~ N.C Department of Transportation ~ ~ t7 3 ~~,„ - ~ > ~~, Pernut # 39-05
. ~ ~ _ - , ~ ~ =~ ~ _ =t ~ ~ - PageJ3 of 3~-
i lb ~Y`,,,,...r ~ r z°4 F
~'~s '~ _ ~ ~" _- s- rk- ~~ ~ -ivKy { ~~ f ~~~ ~ ~d~ ~ ~ s~
..
~ ,~ - ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS ~ ~ „ _ -
.- ..
+ ~ _ -: 4 ~ - - ~-
;,,
- .:
',,.~ -'Sedimentation and Er'osiori Control -~~ -
`~ _ 16) ~ The permittee shall follow `Best Management.Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters" and shall
• also implement sedimentation and erosion control measures sufficient to protect aquatic resources. -
- 17) Appropriate sedimentation and erosion control devices, measures or structures-shall be implemented to
ensure that eroded materials do not enter adjacent wetlands, watercourses and property (e.g. -silt fence,
diversion swales or berms, etc.).
18) ~~~:This project shall conform to all requirements of the NC Sedimentation Pollution Control Act and NC
r, _;~.DOT's Memorandum of Agreement with the Division of Land Resources..
;~,
~,. - .
., ~~ ,.
~.~' ~ Mitigation
NOTE:..:: The Ecosystem Enhancement Program (F.EP) agreed to provide. compensatory wetland
mitigation at a ratio of up to 2:1 for 0:017 acres of riverine wetland in Cataloging Unit 03030007
of the Cape Fear River Basin for wetlands impacted by this project, in accordance with the letters
from the EEP to the USACE and NCDOT dated 1/4/05.
General
19) Any relocation of utility lines that is not akeady depicted on the attached work plan drawings; or
;: described within the attached permit application, shall require approval by DCM, either under the
authority of this permit, or by the utility company obtaining separate authorization.
20) F:~~'If it is determined that additional permanent and/or temporary impacts w~l occur that are not shown on
.~~: the attached permit drawings, additional authorization from DCM shall be required.
21) This permit does not eliminate the need to obtain any additional permits, approvals or authorizations `that `
may be required. '' ~
22) The N.C. Division of Water Quality (DWQ) has authorized the proposed project under General Water
Quality Certification Number 3400 (DWQ Project No. OS-0062), which was issued on 2/23/05. Any
violation of the Certification approved by the DWQ shall be considered a violation of this.CAMA
permit.
NOTE: The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers authorized the proposed project under Nationwide Permit
Number 23 (COE Action ID No. 200001528), which was issued on 2/16/05.

x s~e...
ii
ZC
_t
S
'~ J
4-
6
~
h
i
,}~
. 5 ~ Z
7
1 ~ r'
'r ~ ~ ~ 'hl{ _
- _- t~
.I~

T `~ ~ `~{ ~'~ ~, ~t9,;~ o ~ a a
q; ~~ ~
.
rb ~e+

o-
~
~
~
~
-~i.-- '1 -_ f r i F~ 5K.
j I.~
I
~
.. _
~.~ ^
'~ ~
d 3"
Hr
'~ H j
~,
a.
;.. _

... - .._
;r
!'

,~

~ i
8-26-03 AOdirq permonent uti0fy eosemen- t'rom. -L- Stal0t00.00 to /9f06A0 Rt.
3-22-09 Revised property owner Homes on Porcds 2 and 3.
~~-o~c-zo4a ea•ii
P.:\ ydrau ~cs~Codd\E3887_NYD_DRN.OGN
.. _e e_ DT _. _.
Y
z .~,
m
m ~
•o
N m i
_ Z O O
~ t~ nm c~z
~ rnrn rrn ro
m
Z-n ~m z~n
or z= z=
r c~D ciD
z
Z N o
0
~ o
N
n
N a ~
m m
o
-' o
x
a
.A. o
1-
? ~~ 10
g~
25
g
m
P
O +
d
~~
~~
~~
F~
~m
y
r

O O
3 ~
T T
° P
+ +
P g
0 0
T Y
+ +q
S S
m
N
m
C
m
n
a
~v
° C /~
z~ m /,~1
m~ ~.' ~+
~
T }~
_
tZ
mm
o
~$ +
u= ~m
Q
N
•
? • F
F
~
G
~S ~S
~
G
i
~
D
~~ ~
~O
~ ~
m
m
~ }o
r
pp
7
fn A °
v ~~+

N ~
o
v >L
~`
~{
~~~-op v
nnnn~~cn
a
~~ ~gA
~~~
y
y3% ~ g°o a
~
G ri
~
~ c

m~~
v
~~~ m
®?
~v
+m
Lg$
~~ pGl
o
n
=
'.3
v
m v C
R ° T

~
$
~1
+ ~
~~ 8 : I ~ I
i
s ~ ~ ~ ~~
~ A
~~
i
c~
A
C
r
m
'C y
m
m
N N
N
m
m
Vl U
c

a
p~m
n
L°~
>"~
~n
J= y
tiy~
Q
Z
o 1 v
~~ '• / .~ p
~~
N
D
m ~O
~N
J1A '' ~ '
'o
A ~#- C
p[l
= ~
~j,L ~ •.
.
/
`m
-
-1 -O1I
p-
GZ /p~~
`u ~x r~
~~> ~ I
I ~l
W
W
~ ~ ~~
,,p (
,~, ~ N~NVZi9 ti31YMYYilp1S ONV SONy11~N1
A111d110 a311IM - aN3~
~ °

~ ~
r,
~~~
~o~~ ~ ~ ~+avy
n ~ ~-~-

20
'~
C3
~ ~ = ~~:.

n ~ _{{
~ ~ ~~~L7

J
p t

,
N '~'~
~ ~
T ~ _
O ~ZZ
® C.n ~„ ~~~~ O
~~ _~
m~ 1 .
~~

imap://john.hennessy%40dwq.denr.ncmail.net C~cros.ncmail.net:143/f...
Subject ar roadway width ~
From: "Cheryl .Knepp" <[e-mail]> ~'tj" O~ ~D Z.
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 10:18:05 -0500
To: John Hennessy <[e-mail]>, [e-mail], gary [e-mail],
[e-mail], [e-mail], Greg Perfetti
<[e-mail]>, "David S. Chang, PE" <[e-mail]>, Allen Pope
<[e-mail]>, Mason Herndon <[e-mail]>, Mark Staley
<[e-mail]>, "Jay A. Bennett PE" <[e-mail]>, "Omar S. Sultan"
<[e-mail]>, "Art McMillan, PE" <[e-mail]>, Stacy Baldwin
<[e-mail]>, [e-mail], Dave Timpy
<David.L:[e-mail]>, Bill Arrington <[e-mail]>, Carl Goode
<cgoode @ dot.state.nc.us>
Hello,
In the cover letter sent with the permit appl., the clear roadway
width for project B-3887 was listed as 28 feet (as described in
the CE dated 10/2001). The actual proposed roadway width will be
39 .feet. The CAMA.MP forms and plans show 39 ft clear roadway
width. Please note this change in the cover letter.
Please let me know if you have any questions [phone].
Thank you.
Cheryl L. Knepp <[e-mail]>
Natural Systems Specialist
Project Devlopment & Environmental Analysis

1 of 1 2/2/2005 12:15 PM

~ y
L
~ ~ ( ~Z
~ ~G
~W
0
~ z
z ~
L
3~ IoW
.., ~Z
~ oW
i O
+\
1
~b/G1.

~. ~
-~ n
n
~1-
_ J ~ ~

~~~ ~~

q ~_ Q~
~ C~
U

~....i..
~
y
~p
Y
6.~..-~J
~-R~~
OZ
~ti
~~v
'- 8
Z
~r
~i
~e
iuQf
n
m
G
d
F-
N
O
Z
w
`Y
asp ~~
j cD111NQ~~r~j
ONNv~~'c~i
call u u u u
a 4o~ti~

F-
~ N
F- W
LLJ LLl
W .n
_ ~,
H Z
W Q
W _7
h p,
J
O=
~G
d ~
I ~
i ~
oC ~
p O
o ~ ~~
s ~
~ w'~
' }
/// Z
{ W~
u
i O u~
M
•, $
i
s~ ~
,~
d
~ t--
~ ~~<
u. ~~a
~+ ~a~
o
0
7 W® ~~W
~~~
~ ~ c~
a ~~ -m~
w ~^ ~ ~b . ~EE%
~ ~~
• 'L 8 8
~F ~
~. ~'~°
b °_
} ~m
a
m
'u
d
W /''~
W 6 / \
~v
{+
~~
gd
d
I
rte` ~~ o

~
O~ ~
~G W
`
WT
a
m
~ 1
ors
u
~
U
ZZ
2
<Q
aa
d ~
z
'S'J
' T~

:I1=~E U' O
. rzl
a a H
~ u /1 J
3
0 0
O+
m^~
d
,11
.Il t$
~
~
ZC
', _ ~
<
t
mT =rn
`
mT
0~ L6. IZIww
1 V
m~ m
S
g~
~+
~~
n o
+ +
,e m
~ ~
~ ~
~ P~^
N \
7~ ^\
O
0 ~"'
o Q
u,
N a N
V
VI
O
0
w
au ¢~ J
_~ UZ JO
lnK WK la.a
wa as ~
~w w ~~ m
zu wu ~jl ~
W !- O ~
O O Z ~
W O N
O O
M
_• >
'u" ¢
•F puo Z sJaoio,~ uo s~awou ,aun» p~ado~d Oasl~H 60-ZZ-F
'Ja Ol190+6/ of 00'OO+OI'~JS -7- uwi~ Juawasoe Ni1JM luauauls~l buJVCd CO-9Z-B
sNO~u3a

., ~.
U.S. Department
of Transportation
United States
Coast Guard
commander 431 Crawford Street
UnBed States coast Guard Portsmouth. Va. 237045004
Atlantic Aroe SfaB Symbok (Aowb)
Phone: [phone]
16590
15 FEB O1
Mr. William D. Gilmore, P.E.
Manager, Project Development and Environmental
Analysis Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
Dear Mr. Gilmore:
Our Bridge Staffhas reviewed your plans and specifications dated July 3, 2000, for the
replacement of 14 bridges in 10 different counties of North Carolina.
All of the waterways involved in this project are considered navigable waterways of the United
States for Bridge Adn,in;_ctrr*ion purposes. Must also meet the criteria for advance approval
waterway set forth in Title 33, Code of Federal Re¢ulations. Section 115.70, at all of the bridge
sites. Advance approval waterways are those that are navigable in Iaw, but not actually
navigated by other than small boats. In such cases, the Commandant of the Coast Guard has
given his advance approval to the construction of bridges across such waterways. The North
Carolina State projects include bridge #143 over Northeast Cape Fear River, bridge #26 over a
branch of the Newport River, bridge #16 over Merchants Mill Pond, bridge #30 over Green Mill
Run, bridge 42 over Neese River, bridge #88 over Falling Creek, bridge #64 over Pungo Creek,
bridge #272 over Big Swamp, bridge #64 over Dog Branch, bridge #40 over Squires Run and
- ~ ~• bridge # 116 over Shaken Creek which all qualify for the Advance Approval category.
Accordingly, individual Coast Guard bridge penults will not be required for the new bridges
across these waterways.
The fact that a Coast Guard permit will not be required for these advance approval bridges, does
not relieve you of the responsibility for compliance with the requirements of any other Federal,
State, or local agency who may have jurisdiction over any aspect of these projects.
Sincerely,
J~,
ANN B. DEATON
Chief, Bridge Administration Offiice
By direction of the Commander
Fifth Coast Guard District

d / ~~,.,....,~ ~
' ~`~-"'~ ~ DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY ~~~
• L -~ , ~~ WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS x ~
P.O. BOX 1890 +'
- ~~, ~~ WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890 ~i ~;: ~ ~
~^ .. .Y
IN REPLY REFER 70 August 2, 2000 •.. ~~ ~
- -~ .~
Regulatory Division •~ ~' -
_.,
~;:
Action ID No. 200001525, 200001526, 200001527, 200001528, 200001529, 200001530,. ~~~ -
200001531.
Mr. William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manager
Project Development & Environmental Analysis Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, N.C. 27699-1548
Dear Mr. Gilmore:
Reference your letters dated June 7, 2000, June 28, 2000, and July 3, 2000
regarding the following proposed bridge replacement projects, including those of Group
XXVII:
1. TIP Project B-3449, Duplin County, Bridge No. 204 on SR 1827 over Northeast
Cape Fear River, Action ID 200001525.
2. TIP Project B-3626, Carteret County, Bridge No. 26 on SR 1154 over a branch
of the Newport River, Action ID 200001526.
3. TIP Project B-3884, Onslow County, Bridge No. 40 on. SR 1308 over Squires
Run, Action ID 200001527.
4. TIP Project B-3887, Pender County, Bridge No. 116 on SR 1520 over Shaken
Creek, Action ID 200001528.
5. TIP Project B-3516, Scotland County, Bridge No. 59 on SR 1614 over Gum
Swamp Creek, Action ID 200001529.
6. TIP Project B-3515, Scotland County, Bridge No. 46 on SR 1612 over Big Shoe
Heel Creek, Action ID 200001530.
7. TIP Project B-3613, Bladen/Sampson County, Bridge No. 44 on NC 41 over
South River, Action ID 200001531.
Based on the information provided in the referenced letters, it appears that each
proposed bridge replacement project may impact jurisdictional wetlands. Department of
the Army (DA) permit authorization, pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act of
1977, as amended, will be required for the discharge of excavated or fill material in waters
of the United States or any adjacent wetlands in conjunction with these projects, including

disposal of construction debris. Specific penmit requirements will depend on design of the
projects, extent of fill work within the waters of the United States, including wetlands,
construction methods, and other factors.
Although these projects may qualify as a Categorical Exclusion, to qualify for
nationwide permit authorization under Nationwide Permit #23, the project planning
report should contain sufficient information to document that the proposed activity does
not have more than a minimal individual or cumulative impact on the aquatic
environment. Our experience has shown that replacing bridges with culverts often results
in sufficient adverse impacts to consider the work as having more than minimal impacts
on the aquatic environment. Accordingly, the following items need to be addressed in the
project planning report:
a. The report should contain the amount of permanent and temporary impacts to
waters and wetlands as well as a description of the type of habitat that will be affected.
b. Ofd site detours are always preferable to on-site (temporary) detours in wetlands.
If an on-site detour is the recommended action, justification should be provided. On-site
detours can cause permanent wetland impacts due to sediment consolidation resulting
from the on-site detour itself and associated heavy equipment. Substantial sediment
consolidation in wetland systems may in turn cause fragmentation of the wetland and
impair the ecological and hydrologic functions of the wetland. Thus, on-site detours
constructed in wetlands can result in more than minimal wetland impacts. These types of
wetland impacts will be considered as permanent wetland impacts.
For proposed projects and associated on-site detours that cause minimal losses of .
wetlands, an approved wetland restoration plan will be required prior to issuance of a DA
nationwide or general permit. For proposed projects and associated on-site detours that
cause significant wetland losses, an individual DA pernut and a mitigation proposal for
the unavoidable wetland impacts may be required.
In view of our concerns related to onsite detours constructed in wetlands, recent
field inspections were conducted at each of the proposed project sites and a cursory
determination was made on the potential for sediment consolidation due to an onsite
detour. Based on these inspections, potential for sediment consolidation in wetlands
exists at several of the proposed projects. Therefore, it is recommended that geotechnical
evaluations be conducted at each project site to estimate the magnitude of sediment
consolidation that can occur due to an on-site detour and the results be provided in the
project planning report.
2

Based on our field inspections, we strongly recommend that geotechnical evaluations be
conducted at the following proposed project sites:
1) TIP Project B-3626, Carteret County, Bridge No. 226 on SR 1154 over a
branch of the Newport River, Action ID 200001526.
2) TIP Project B-3884, Onslow County, Bridge No. 40 on SR 1308 over
Squires Run, Action ID 200001527.
3) TIP Project B-3887, Pender County, Bridge No. 116 on SR 1520 over
Shaken Creek, Action ID 200001528.
4) TIP Project B-3516, Scotland County, Bridge No. 59 on SR 1614 over Gum
Swamp Creek, Action ID 200001529.
S) TIP Project B-3515, Scotland County, Bridge No. 46 on SR 1612 over Big
Shoe Heel Creek, Action ID 200001530.
c. Project commitments should include the removal of all temporary fills from
waters and wetlands and "time-of-year" restrictions on in-stream work if recommended
by the NC Wildlife Resources Commission. In addition, if undercutting is necessary for
temporary detours, the undercut material should be stockpiled to be used to restore the
site.
d. All restored areas should be planted with endemic vegetation including trees, if
appropriate.
e. The report should provide an estimate of the linear feet of new impacts to
streams resulting from construction of the project.
f. If a bridge is proposed to be replaced with a culvert, NCDOT must demonstrate
that the work will not result in more than minimal impacts on the aquatic environment,
specifically addressing the passage of aquatic life including anadromous fish. In addition,
the report should address the impacts that the culvert would have on recreational
navigation.
g. The report should discuss and recommend bridge demolition methods and shall
include the impacts of bridge demolition and debris removal in addition to the impacts of
constructing the bridge. The report should also incorporate the bridge demolition policy
recommendations pursuant to the NCDOT policy entitled "Bridge Demolition and
Removal in Waters of the United States" dated September 20, 1999.
3

Should you have any questions, please call Mr. David L. Timpy at the Wilmington
Field office at 910-251-4634.
Sincerely,

E. David Franklin
NCDOT Team Leader

p~~ENi Oa,y United S fates Department of the Interior
a~
O~ Z~
~ 9
a FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
' Raleigh Feld Office
,y -- ~ - -~A Posc Ofrice Boz 33726
ACM ~ `g Raleigh, North Carolina 27636.3726
July 25, 2000
Mr. William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manager
NCDOT
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1548
Dear Mr. Gilmore:
Thank you for your July 3, 2000 request for information from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(Service) on the potential environmental impacts of fourteen proposed bridge replacements in
various counties in eastern North Carolina. This report provides scoping information and is
provided in accordance with provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) (16
U.S.C. 661-667d) and Section 7 ofthe Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16
U.S.C. 1531-1543). This report also serves as initial scoping comments to federal and state
resource agencies for use in their permitting and/or certification processes for this project.
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to replace the following
bridge structures:
1. B-3449, Bridge No. 204 on SR 1827 over the Northeast Cape Fear River, Duplin County;
2. B-3612, Bridge No. 143 on SR 1123 over Branch of Indian Creek, Bertie County;
3. B-3626, Bridge No. 26 on SR 1154 over Branch of Netivport River, Carteret County;
4. B-3640, Bridge No. 16 on SR 1400 over Merchants Mill Pond, Gates County;
5. B-3684, Bridge No. 129 on SR 1565 over the Tar River, Pitt County;
6. B-3685, Bridge No. 30 on SR 1703 over Green Mill Run, Greenville, Pitt County;
7. B-3708, Bridge No. 66 on SR 1325/SR 1583 over Welch Creek, Washington/Martin
Counties;

8. B-3711, Bridge No. 42 on NC 111 over the Neuse River Outflow, Wayne County;

,,
-3712, Bridge No. 88 over SR 1006, Falling Creek, Wayne County;
10. B-3809, Bridge No. 64 on NC 99 over Pungo Creek, Beaufort County;
11. B-3810, Bridge No. 272 on SR 1514 over Big Swamp, Beaufort County;
12. B-3871, Bridge No. 64 on SR 1001 over Dog Branch, Martin County;
13. B-3884, Bridge No. 40 on SR 1308 over Squires Run, Onslow County; and,
14. B-3887, Bridge No. 116 on SR 1520 over Shaken Creek, Pender County
The following recommendations are provided to assist you in your planning process and to
facilitate a thorough and timely review of the project.
Generally, the Service recommends that wetland impacts be avoided and minimized to the.
maximum extent practical as outlined in Section 404 (b)(1) of the Clean Water Act Amendments
of 1977. In regard to avoidance and minimization of impacts, we recommend that proposed
highway projects be aligned along or adjacent to existing roadways, utility corridors, or
previously developed areas in order to minimize habitat fragmentation and encroachment. Areas
exhibiting high biodiversity or ecological value important to the watershed and region should be
avoided. Crossings of streams and associated wetland systems should use existing crossings
and/or occur on a structure wherever feasible. Where bridging is not feasible, culvert structures
that maintain natural water flows and hydraulic regimes without scouring, or impeding fish and
wildlife passagc, should be employed. Highway shoulder and median widths should be reduced
through wetland areas. Roadway embankments and fill areas should be stabilized by using
appropriate erosion control devices and techniques. Wherever appropriate, construction in
sensitive areas should occur outside fish spawning and migratory bird nesting seasons.
The National Wetlands Inventory (NWl] maps of the Chinquapin, Grantham,GreenviIle SW,
Grimesland, Merchants Mill Pond, Newport, Old Ford, Ransomville, Richlands, SE Goldsboro,
Stag Park, Washington, Williamston, and Woodville 7.5 Minute Quadrangles show wetland
resources in the specific work areas. However, while the NWI maps are useful for providing an
overview of a given area, they should not be relied upon in lieu of a detailed wetland delineation
by trained personnel using an acceptable wetland classification methodology. Therefore, in
addition to the above guidance, we recommend that the environmental documentation for this
project include the following insufficient detail to facilitate a thorough review of the action.
1. The extent and acreage of waters of the U.S., including wetlands, that are to be impacted by
filling, dredging, clearing, ditching, or draining. Acres of wetland impact should be
differentiated by habitat type based on the wetland classification scheme of the National
Wetlands Inventory. Wetland boundaries should be determined by using the 1987 s of
Wetlands Delineation Manual and verified by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Cotes).
2. If unavoidable wetland impacts are proposed, we recommend that every effort be made to

.~
identify compensatory mitigation sites in advance. Project planning should include a detailed
compensatory mitigation plan for offsetting unavoidable wetland impacts. Opportunities to
protect mitigation areas in perpetuity, preferably via conservation easement, should be
explored at the outset.
The enclosed lists identify the federally-listed endangered and threatened species, and Federal
Species of Concern (FSC) that are known to occur in Beaufort, Bertie, Carteret, Duplin, Gates,
Martin, OnsIow, Pender, Pitt, Washington, and Wayne Counties. The Service recommends that
habitat requirements for the listed species be compared with the available habitats at the
respective project sites. If suitable habitat is present within the action area of the. project,
biological surveys for the listed species should be performed. Environmental documentation that
includes survey methodologies, results, and NCDOT's recommendations based on those results,
should be provided to this office for review and cotnnient.
FSC's are those plant and animal species for which the Service remains concerned, but further
biological research and field study are needed to resolve the conservation status of these taxa.
Although FSC's receive no statutory protection under the ESA; we would encourage the NCDOT
to be alert to their potential presence, and to make every reasonable effort'to conserve them if
found. The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program should be contacted for information on
species under state protection.
The Service appreciates the opportunity to comment on this project. Please continue to advise us
during the progression of the planning process, including your official. determination of the
impacts of this project. If you have any questions regarding these comments, please contact Tom
McCartney at 919-856-4520, ext. 32.
Sincerely,
~.~~~~.
Dr. Garland B. Pazdue
Ecological Services Supervisor
Enclosures
cc:
COE, Washington, NC (Michael Bell)
COE, Wilmington, NC (David Timpy)
NCDWQ, Raleigh, NC (John Hennessey)
NCDNR, Northside, NC (David Cox)
FHWA, Raleigh, NC (Nicholas Gra fl
EPA, Atlanta, GA (Ted Bisterfield)
FWS/R4:T1VIcCartney:TM:07/24/00:919/856-4520 extension 32:\14brdgs.var

i f ~ e
~'~~ we~~
•~= UNITED STATES OEPARiTMENT OF COMMEgCE
National Oceanic end Atmospheric Administration
` r'
~•. •• NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE
`•+n~ a'~
Southeast Regional Office
9721 Executive Center Drive N
St. Petersburg, Florida 33702
July 25, 2000
Colonel James W. DeLony,.
District Engineer, Wilmington District
Department of the Anny, Corps of Engineers
P. O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
Attention Dave Timpy/Mike Bell
Dear Colonel DeLony:
Please reference the July 3, 2000, letter (copy enclosed) from the North Carolina Department of
Transportation requesting National Marine Fisheries Service's (NMFS) comments on the proposed
replacement of eleven highway bridges in eastern North Carolina under the Federal Categorical
Exclusion (CE). The letter specifically addresses the potential impacts of demolition and removal
of the existing structure and other environmental concerns in the project areas. We have reviewed
the information provided with the letter and offer the following comments for consideration.
A. Anadromous Fishery ResourcesJWetlands
Project No. 1 B-3449, DupIin County, Replace Bridge No. 204 on SR 1827 over the
Northeast Cape Fear River
Project No. 2 B-3612, Bertie County, Replace Bridge No. 143 on SR 1123 over Branch of
Indian Creek ,
Proj act No. 4 B-3684, Pitt County, Replace Bridge No.129 on SR 1565 over the Tar River
Project No. 5 B-3708, Washington/Martin Counties, Replace Bridge No. 66 on SR
1325/SR1583 over Welch Creek
Project No. 7 B-3712, Wayne County, Replace Bridge No. 88 on SR 1006 over Falling
Creek
Projeci No. 8 B-3809, Beaufort County, Replace Bridge No. 64 on NC 99 over Pungo
Creek
Project No. 11 B-3887, Pander County, Replace Bridge No. 116 on SR 1520 over Shaken
Creek
The projects listed above span waters that support anadromous fishery resources for which the
NMFS is responsible. Anadromous fish species commonly found through the project area include
American shad (Alosa sapidissima), hickory shad (Alosa mediocris), blueback herring (Alos ~~ ,,,~.
~ ,.. ~_
t
4'•~.,MO•~''

. ~ ~ e
aestiva/is), alewi fc (A/osa pser~do/iarei:gus), striped bass (Moro~:e saxatilis), and Atlantic sturgeon
(Acipeirser orp~•l~v~:ch:is). Each of the above project areas provide spawning and nursery habitat for
some subset of these anadromous species. Bridge demolition and construction can result in
sediment disturbing activities and discharges ofhighway construction materials and pollutants that
are detrimental to early life history stages ofthese species. In addition to habitat, wooded wetlands
within the project area provide water quality maintenance functions that are important for the
production of fishery resources in downstream waters. Any wetland losses associated with these
seven projects will add to the cumulative loss of wetlands that are detrimental to the continued
production of NMFS trust resources.
Therefore, in order to minimize adverse impacts to fisheries, we recommend that these projects not
be processed under the Federal CE unless the following conditions are incorporated:
"No construction or demolition activities shall be allowed in the water between February 15
and June 1 of any year."
"Mitigation shall be provided for any unavoidable wetland losses."
In addition to the above, Project Nos. 1, 2, and 5 are located in river basins that support the
endangered shortnose sturgeon (Acipenserbrevirostrunr). Accordingly, we recommend coordination
with our Protected Resources Division at the letterhead address or at 727/570-5312.
B. Wetlands
Project No. 6 B-3711, Wayne County, Replace Bridge No. 42 on NC 111 over Neuse River
Overflow
Project No. 9 B-3810, Beaufort County, Replace Bridge No. 272 on SR 1514 over Big
Swamp
Project No. 10 B-3884, Onslow County, Replace Bridge No. 44 on SR 1308 over Squires
Run
Wooded wetlands within these project areas provide water quality maintenance functions that are
important for the continued production of fishery resources in downstream waters. Therefore, in
order to minimize adverse impacts to fishery resources, we recommend that this work not be
processed under the Federal CE unless the following condition is incorporated:
"Mitigation shall be provided for any unavoidable wetland losses."
C. Estuarine Fishery Resources/Wetlands
Project No. 3 B-3626 Carteret County, Replace Bridge No.26 on SR 1154 over Branch of
Newport River

J 1~
Wooded wetlands within the project area provide water quality maintenance functions that are
important forthe continued production ofestuarine dependent fishery resources. Therefore, in order
to minimize adverse impacts to estuarine resources, we recommend that this work not be processed
under the Federal CE unless the following condition is incorporated:
"Mitigation shall be provided for any unavoidable wetland losses."
Thank you for the opportunity to provide these comments. If we can be of further assistance, please
advise.
Sincerely,
Andreas Mager, Jr.
Assistant Regional Administrator
Habitat Conservation Division
Enclosure
cc: FWS, ATLA, GA
FWS, Raleigh, NC
EPA, ATLA, GA
NCDENR, Raleigh, NC
NCDENR, Morehead City, NC
NCDOT, Raleigh, NC
F/SER4

r ~~
_ ~ North Carolina Wildlife Resources C mmission
- -- ~- -
ChsrlaRFnUwrood.FsecnrmeDire~.tor - -
TO: Stacy Hams, PE
Project Engineer, NCDOT
1-RO'N: David C.ox, Highway Project for
Habitat Conservation Ptn '
DATE: .lone 8, 2001
SUHJECI': NCDOT Bridge Replacements is Duplirt, BeRie, Carteret, Gates, pill, Wayne,
Beaufort. Marcia Onstow, and Pereder counties of Noah Carolina. TIP Nos.
B-3449, H-3612, 8-3626, H 3640, H-3684, B-3683, 8-3711. B-3712, II-3809, g_
3810, D-3871. B-3884, and 8-3887.
Biologists with the N. C. Wildlife Resources Commiaaon (NCWRC) have reviewed the
information provided and have the following preliminary comments on the subject project. Our
comments are provided in accordartee with ppmvtsroas of the Nations! Ettvironmrntal Policy Act
(42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(c)) and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16
U.S.C.1i61-G67d).
On bridge replaccrrtrni projects of this. scope our standard rccommeadations are as
follows:
1. Wr generally prefer spanning tttrttcttues. Spacuting stroctura usually do not rryuire
wort: within the stream and do not require sttroarn channel rtaligrnttent. The horizontal
and vertical clearsrtccx provided by bridga~ allows for htanan and wildUfe passage
beneath the stntcttur, does not block fish paasa80. and does trot block navigation by
canoeists sad boaters.
2. 13ridge deck Drains should not discharge duectly into the streatrt.
3: live concrete should not be allowed to contact the water in or entering inw the stream.
4. If possible, bridge supports (beats) should trot be placed in the stream.
5. If to:rtlwrary access roads or detouts are cot>stnteted. they, s>rould br removes back to
original ground elevations imtaediately upon We completion of the project. l)istunc~d
areas should be srrxled or mulched to stabilize tree soil and native tree spet;ies should
be pianicd with a spacing of not most than !0'x10'. Ifpossible, when using temporary
.'Mlailing Addsesc: Divici~~n of Inland Fuhecies • r 721 Mail Service (:enter • tiakigl~, NC 27695--t 721
Telephone. [phone] e:t. 281 • Fyu [phone]

,-
Bridge Memo
June 8, 2UOl
strictures the area should be cleared but not grubbed. CIearittg the area with chain
saws, rnowcrs, bush-hogs, or other mechanized equipment and leaving the stumps and
root mat intact, allows the area to revegetate naturally and minimises disturbed soil.
6. A clear bank (t7prap free) area of at leant 10 feet should remain on each side of the
steam underneath the badge.
7. 6t trout waters, the N.C. Wildlife Resotut:es Commission reviews all U.5. ,~rrt,y
Corps of Engineers nationwide and general `404' permits, We have the option of
requesting additional measures to protect trout and trout habitat and we can
recommend that the project regain an individual •qpq, permit.
8. In streams that contain threatened or endangered species, NCDOT biologist Mr. Tim
Savidge should be notified. Special measures to protect these sensitive species may be
reyuircd. NCDOT should also contact the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for
information on requirements of the Endangered Species Aci as it relates to the prvject.
9. In streams that are used by anadromoua fish, the NCDOT official policy entitled
"Stream Crossing Guidelines for Anadroraous Fish Passage (May 12, 1997)" should
be followed.
10. In areas with significant fisheries for sunfish, seasonal exclusions may also be
recomtncnded.
11. Sedimentation and erosion control rneaattres sufficient to protect aquatic resources
must be implemented prior to any ground dietttrbing activities. Structures should be
mawitained regularly, ospecially following rainfall events.
12. Temporary or permanent herbaeoous vegetation should be planted on all bare sot 1
within 1 S days of ground diatnrbirtg activities to provide long-term erosion control.
13. All work in yr adjacent to sfr+esat waters should be conducted in a d work azea.
Sandbags, rock berms, coffat+dataa, ~ other diversion structures should be used
where possible to prevent excavation in flowing water.
14. Heavy equipment should be operated fivm the bank father than in stream channels in
order to minimize sedimetrtapon and reduce the likelihood of introducing other
pollutants into streams.
1 S. Only clean, sediment-free rock should be used as temporary till (causeways), and
should br removed without eatcesaive dittturbance of the natural stream bottom when
construction is completed.
16. During subsurface investigatiotut, equipment should be inspected daily and
maintained to prevent contatrtiaation of tturface waters from lung fuels, lubricants,
hydraulic fluids, or other toxin matcrisla.
I C corrugated metal pipe arehcs, reinforced concrete pipes, or concrete box culverts are
used:
The cttlvcrt must be designed to allow for fish passage. Generally, this means that the
culvert or pine ic~vert is buried ar react 1 foot below rho natural stream bed. If
mu]tiple cells are required the second and/or third cells should be placed so that their

Bridge Memo

lone 8, 2001
bottoms arc at stream bankfttl stage (sittailar to Lyonsfield design). This could be
accomplished by constructing a low sill on the upstrtam end of the other cells that
will divert low flows to another cell. lhia will allow aufiicient water depth in the
culvert or pipe during normal flows to atxommodate fish movements. If culverts ;ire
long, notched baffles should be placed in ttiaforeed concrete box culverts at l S foot
intervals to allow for the colloetion ofatedunents in the culvert, to reduce flow
velocities, and to provide resting places for futh end other aquatic organisms movins
through the swctura
2. If multiple piers or cells arc used, at least one pipe or box should be designed to
remain dry during normal flows to allow for wtldlife passage.
3. Culverts or pipes should be situated so that no chaaael reali
required. Widening of the stream chamtel at the iNet or outlet~oJ atructuresu stwlly
causes a dccrrase in water velocity causing sediment deposition that will require furore
maintenance.
4. Riprap should not be placed on-the streattt bed.
Tn most casts, we prefer the replacement offfie tntisting structure at the same location
wi tlr road closure. if road closure is not feasible, a temporary detour should be designed and
]ocatrd to avoid wetland impacts, mimmi?at; the rued for clearing and to avoid destabiii~ing
sveam banks. If the structure will be on a new all
and thr approach fills removed from the 100- ~~' ~ old structtttC should be removed
Y~ fltwdplaih. Approach fills should be removed
down to the natural gmund i:levation. The at+ea ahould be stabilized with grass and planted with
native tree species. If the area that is reclaimed wss previously wetlands, NCDO I' should restore
the area to wetlands. If successful, the site may be used as wetland mitigation for the subject
project or other projects iu the watershed,
Projcc;t specific commems:
l . H-3449 - Duplin County -Bridge No. 204 ova Northeast Cape Fear River. Doc to the
potential for anadromous fish at this location, NCDt7f should closely follow the "Stream
Crassitrs Guidelines for Artadromous Fish Passage". Thin includes ~ ~_v,~a work
rnoratonum from February 1 to June 15 for area: where there is the potential for Shortnosc
sturgeon, an endangered species. We tegtreat that High Quality Sedrraentation and )erosion
Convol Measures be used due W the presence ofHQW waters,
2. D-3ti 12 -Buie County - Bridge. No. 143 over a btytnch of Indian Crta:lc. Due to the potrntial
for nnadrotnous fish at this location, NCDOT' should closely follow the "Strcars Crossing
Guidclinec for Anadromous Fish Passage". This includes aft inwater work monrtotium from
February 1 S to June 1 S. We are not aware of any threatated of endangered ecics in the
~rrojeet vicinity. NCDOT should be aware that NCI~VRC hat dtxigtrsted NCWRC gartrelauda
to the vicinity of this bridge. Impacts to gamelaad properties should be avoided
3. B-3626 -Carteret County -Bridge No. 26 ova a breach of the Ncw Port River. Standard
comments apply. Wr are not aware of any threatened of endangered species is the project
vicinity.
• , ~'
.. ,

4. R-?G40 - Gates County -Bridge No. l6 ova Merchant's Mill Pond. Standard comments
apriy. We are not aware ofany threatened ofondangered species in the project vicinity.

~ '' r
B
S.
rrdge Mcmo 4 June R, 2001
B-3684 Pitt County -Bridge No. 129 over Tar River. Due to the potential for tutadromous
fish at this location, NCDOT should closely follow the "Stream Crossing Guidelines for
Anudrottrotu Fish Passage". This include: an in-water work moratorium from February 1 S to
Junc I S. We ate not aware ofany threatened of endangored species in the project vicinity.
Standard comments apply.
h. B-3685 -Pitt County -Bridge No. 30 over Green Mill Run. Due to the potential for
anadromous fish at this location, NCDOT should closely follow the "Stream Crossing
Cuidelittcs for Anadromous Fiah Paatrage". ?his includes an in-water work moratorium from
February I S to June 1 S. We are not aware of any threatened of endangered species in the
project vtcinity. Standard comments apply,
7. H-3711 -Wayne County -Bridge No. 42 over the Neuse River Ovcrllow. Duc to the
putential for anadromous fish at this [ocation, N®OT should closely follow tltc "Stream
Crossing Guidelines for Anadromous Fish Pasttage' ; This includes art in-water work
moratorium from February I S to June 1 S. We are not .aware of any threatened of endangered
species in the project victnity. Standard eornntett~ apply.
8. B-371? - Way~te County - Dridge No 88 over Falling Creek. Standard comments apply. We
are not nwarc ol'any threatened of endanger:d species in the project vicinity.
9. II-3809 -Beaufort Cuunty -Bridge No. 64 over Pmtgo Creek. Due to the potential fur
anadrotnotts fish at this location, NCDOT should closely follow the ''Stream Crossing
Guidelines for Madromous Fiah Passage". This includes as in-water work moratorium from
February 1 S to Junc 1 S. We are not aware of any threatened of endangered cpecics in the
project vicinity. Standard comments sppIy.
10. B-3810 -Beaufort County-Bridge No. 272 over Big Swamp. Standard comments apply.
We are not aware of say threatened of endangered species in the project vicintty.
11. D-3871 - Mmtitt County -Bridge No. 64 over Dog Branch. Due to the potential for
anadrontotts fish at this location, NCDOT Should closely follow the "Stream Grossing
(iuidrlincs for Anadromous Fish Passage", This incltrdw as in-water work moraWrium from
rebruary 1 S to June 1 S. We are not aware of eny threatened of endangered epecies in the
project vtcinity. Standard comments apply.
12. B-3884 nttslow County -Bridge No. 40 over Squires Rita. Due to the potential for
anadr~tnotts fish at this location, NCDOT should ciost~ly follow the ''Stream Crossing
Guidelines for Anadromous Fish Passage". This includes an in-water work moratorium from
rcbruary 15 to June 1 S. We are not aware of say ttmeateaed of endangered spades in the
project vtcinity. Standard comments apply.
13. B-3887 Pender County -Bridge No. 116 over Shaken Croak. Dire W the potential for
anadromous fish at this location, NCDQT should closely follow the'•Stream Crossing
Guidelines for Anadromous Fah Passage". This inelttdes ea in-water work moratorium from
February 1 S to Junc 1 S. We are not aware of any threatened of endangered species in the
project vtcittity. Standard comments apply,
we request that NCDOT routinely tnraimize adverse impacts to fish and wildlife
resources in the vicinity of bridge replacements. The NCDOT should install and maintain
sedimentation control measwes throughout the life of the project and prevent wet concrete from
contacting water in yr catering into these streatas. Replacement ofbndgea with spanning
structures of"some type, as opposed to pipe or box culverts, is recommended inmost cases.

~` ~
~r ~
Hridge Memo s .
lone 8, 2001
Spanning structures allow wildlife passage along atreambanka, reducing habitat fragmentation
and vehicle 'related mortality at ~~y~,a
y croastnga.
If you need further assistance or information on NCWRC concerns regarding bridge
replacements, please contact me at [phone]. Thank you for the opportunity to review and
comme~it on these projects.

r ~~ ~
r ~
~~ `

Federal Aid #BRZ-1520(3) TIP #B-3887. County: Pender
CONCURRENCE FORM FOR~PROPERTIES NOT ELIGIBLE FOR THE NATIONAL
REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES
Project Description: Reoiace Bride No. 116 on SR 1520 over Shaken Creek
On September 21, 2000, representatives of the
North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA).
North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO)
Reviewed the subject project at
Q a scoping meeting
photograph review session consultation
other
All parties present agreed
there aze no properties over fifty years old within the project's azea of potential effect.
there are no properties less than fifty years old which are considered to meet Criterion
Consideration G within the project's azea of potential effect.
there aze properties over fifty years old (list attached) within the project's azea of potential effect,
but based on the historical information available and the photographs of each property, properties
identified as are considered not eligible for the National
Register and no further evaluation of them is necessary.
~] there aze no National Register-listed properties located within the project's azea of potential effect.
Signed:
Y

State Historic Preservation Officer
Date
~n .
1~;;~,
Date
If a survey report is prepared, a final copy of this form and the attached list will be included.
FHWA, for the Division Administrator, or other Federal Agency ~ Date

1 L~ ~
~~~~,~
~~ Sr~rE v~
.r •~ S
Nj
/_ ! ~~
•~rpwwA••
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation O>~ce
David L. S. Brook, Administrator
James B. Hunt Jr., Governor Division of Archives and History
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary Jeffrey J. Crow, Director
August 14, 2000
MEMORANDUM
To: William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manager
Project Development & Environmental Analysis Branch
From: David Brook G~. ~e,~~J`~-~~-
De ut State Historib'Preservation Officer
P Y
Re: B-3887, Pender County, Replace Bridge 116, SR 1520 over Shaken Creek, ER 01-7097
Thank you for your memorandum of July 3, 2000, concerning the above project.
We have conducted a review of the project and are awaze of no properties of azchitectural,
historic, or archaeological significance which would be affected by the project. Therefore, we
have no comment on the project as currently proposed.
The above comments aze made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act
and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section
106 codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above
comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Eazley, Environmental Review Coordinator, at 919/733-
4763.
DB:kgc
• Location Mailing Address Telephone/Faz
ADMINISTRATION X07 N. Blount St., Raleigh NC 4617 Mail Service Center. Raleigh NC 27699-4617 (9t9) 733-4763 733-8653
ARCHAEOLOGY 321 N. Blount St., Raleigh NC 4619 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4619 [phone] • 715-2671
RESTORATION 515 N. Blount St.. Raleigh NC 4613 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4613 [phone] • 7I5-4301
SURVEY & PLANNING 515 N. Blount St., Raleigh NC 4618 Mail Service Center. Raleieh NC 27699-4618 (919) 733-G535 ~1.-~8U1

l~ f
~~ •
92/18/1995 19:43 19102590142 FENDER COlN7~' TRANS PAGE 01
NTif eOSGABA6E ~ ~Ln~ . u~.c~-Hv~n'
p~l1DER C80 ~~~ ! 1 99S PFN
~f[)RCtwW, N.C. X23
iTOne riu•.a~v.+~
r'~ 9iazs~~a2
~au.+l-pobw.r(~t' p+tar.net
DATE: J CJI,Y 19, 2000
TO: 'WILLIAM D. GII~VIORE, P.E., MANAGER
PR03ECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL
ANALYSIS BRANCH
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH, N,C.
(~'~/~'
FROM: THUR11IAly CASEY
TRANSPORTATION COORDINATOR
XtE: B-3887, PENDER~COUNTY, REPY.ACEMENT OF BRIDGE Y0.116
OVER SHAKEN CREEK
AT THE PRESENT TIIYIF., FENDER COUNTY SCHOOLS HAS OlYE BUS THAT
CROSSES BRIDGE N0.116. ~ THIS BUS NOW CONrES FROM SHAW XIWY•
(SR 1532) AND PICKS UP STUDENTS AT T~ IN7ER5ECTION OF GLADE RIDGE
ROAD/OLD MAPLE HILL ROAD(SR 1520).AND. CO1~iTIl~lUE3 ON OLD MAPLE
HILL ROAD(SR 1520) TO 5425 WW1~1tE WE• PICK UP TWO STUDENTS AND TUR1~iS
AROUND. IF TSE ROAD IS CLOSED, OUR BUS WILL HAVE TO COME FROM
NC 50 Ili MAPLE HQ.L TO 3425 OLn MAPLE HII.L ROAD T'~N RETURN 5.425
MILES BACK TO NC 30, ~'SF,N TRAVEL NC 50 TO NC 53, NC 53 TO SIIA'W
HWY.(SR 1523), SHAW HWY. TO OLD MAPLE HII.L ROAD, TEEN TO THE GLADE
RIDGT lOLI? MAPLE HII.L ROAD STOP, TEEN RETURN TO NC 53. THYS WII.L
ADD APPROXIII'1ATELY 30 TO 401V~lYJTES TO TffiS BUS ROUTE AND AN
.ADDITIONAL ZO NlII•ES PER DAY. T>HS BUS ~3 NOW S'i'ARTIIKG AT
APPROXIMATELY 6:15 A11L AT THE PRESENT TII1'IE, NO STUDENTS ART
PYCIOJD UP BEFORE 6:00 A:11Z IN FENDER COUNTY AND WE WOULD LIKE TO
I~EP TINS POLICX IlY EFFECT. .
I WOULD LII{E TO TANK YOO~ BR ~ CLOSURE AND IF I C~AN~BE OF
CONCERNS IN RELATION
FUR'TI3ER ASSISTANCE, PLEASE CONTACT ME. .

j ~ ~:
a ~.

Wetland Rating Worksheet
{~. ~ _-
Project name 4?.- ~ v~~ 0~1N r- ti~.t kH~:! L ~`, Nearest road *> ! ~ :~-
County ~ ~ ;~~ :J ~~ ~r Name of Evaluator~'4~,,,~ GG~ r ~~~ Date n l /~ :,~ : ~~ i
Wetland location
on pond or lake
' perennial stream
_ on intermittent stream
_ within interstream divide
' _ other
Soil Series /~~'~'~'/"~ ~ ..~ ..; rP./~,
_ predominantly organic-humus,
muck, or peat
_ predominantly mineral- non-sandy
~edomuiantly sandy
Hydraulic Factors
Adjacent land use (within:l/2 mile upstream)
forested/natural vegetation l~ r")
agriculture, urban/suburban
impervious surface
Dominant Vegetation

Flooding and Wetness
_ semipermanently to permanently flooded
or inundated
/seasonally flooded or inundated
_ intermittently flooded or temporary
surface water
_ no evidence of flooding or surface water
_ steep topography
_ ditched or channeIized
.!wetland width >/= 50 feet
Wetland Type (select one) .
~ttomhutd hardwood forest _ Pine savamta
-„Headwater forest _ Freshwater marsh
_ Swamp forest _ Bog/fen
_ Wet flat _ Ephemeral wetland
_ Pocosin _ Other
*The rating system cannot be applied to salt or brackish marshes
Wafer storage -`~ * 4 = ~ ~~
Banlc/Shoreiine stabilization ' ~- * 4 = 1 i~ Total score
Pollutant removal i * 5 =
;ail
~
" ~-
Wildlife habitat '~' * 2 = _
6
Aquatic life value ~-~ * 4 =
Recreation/Education '"• * 1 = `.=i~
Add I point if in sensitive watershed and > 10% nonpaint disturbance wi[hin I/2 mile upstream

~ " ~
f ~
uP~Ah a c,~o~
~~..
r
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site:.a~,3~'J; SR1520 nv~ Sh4.~yt ~ree~ Date: / ~0
Appiicam/Owner. County. ,~,~~:,~/~~
Investigator: .~~ v~2~ cS~iav' are, o~- State: ~/
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? ~e No Community 10: /~`ral/ ~~XE
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situationl? Yest~ Transact ID: GrPc~~v-.~
Is the area a potential Problem Areal Ye I~~ Plot 10: C~ eZ
(lf needed, explain on reverser
VEGETATION
m a2~ mmcato r t7ominarK Plain Soeeies ~ ledicator
1. oG ~_ ,~_ 9.
2. 'nus ~ 10.
~
3. ~ i is F~ 11.
4.S . ~a I U/ E F/~ 12.
5. Gam' ui d~ra bJ i' . ~ urn. ~~%ttti ~/' `/"S_
~ FNC t 13.
6.
~ 14.
7. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that aro OBL. FACW or 0 °J'
FAC Isxduding FAC-1 a
a ~ ~
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
-Recorded Data (Describe in Remarksl: Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
-Stream. Lake or Tide Gauge Primary 1
-Aerial Photographs _Irttatdated
Other _Ssttrrated In Upper 121nches
/f~o Recorded Data Avaiisbls -Water Marks
~. Dritt Lhtee
S
d
t D
i
_
e
anen
spot
ts
Field Observations: _Drainags Pattams in Wetlands
Secondary Irtdieemra (2 or more rogtriredl:
Dspth of Surface Water: M~.r~ (in.! _Oxldted Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Depth to Froe Water in Pit: - (In.) -W~°~~^°d L°°Yef
Depth to Saturated Soli: N~MC lin.l Local So~T Survey Date
_FAC-Neutral Tsst
Other (E~cplain in Remarkal
Remarks: ~V~~~+'~•4ii4+
• (/;~

~~
l 1
r
>A
SOILS
~~ r x
Map Unit Name ~_ . , ..., ,,~ ` f~, r~;l ~ '.':.7:: ~~ Drainage Class: ~~' ~Ts{ /~-~'.~
(Series end Phasel: ~ ~~ Rdd Observations .~
~____,...... /Cut~n~euol: ,fti'd,(~i~(: ~'/ '~~+~Yi ~~ Confirm Mapped Type: Yes iYQ~
Pigtile Dessriotion: Moths Texture,
Depth Matrix Color Moths Colors
Concretions.
i e oriz IMunsell Mgoistl jMunsel~ Moistl AbundaneelContrast StruLture. etc
T O t /\ /1~'L 7a,~'~Q/7;(_' ~OCLT~2~ ~54N~9~IP/R/
~- - Nv ~t4 uG,C c~ ,ni ~e~k~
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosoi
Histie ipipsdon
Suifidie Odor
--Aquic Moisture Regime
Reducing Cond(tions
,iGleyed ar Low'Chr°n's C/olors/ I
Remarks: ~ai~5 hOn - f~yd<+G
Concretions
_High Organic Content in Surface layer in Sandy Soiis
Organic Streaking in Sandy Sods
LJated on Local Hydric Soils List
--Listed on National Hydric Soiis List
Other IF.xplain in Remarks)

J
i~

WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation preseMi' ®f~o (Cirdsi
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes
Hydrie Soils Present? Yes
Remarks:
(Cirde)
Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yss

Approved by HaUSACE 2192

HJL
S/93

~ ~~ ~
r ~
~~ .
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)

VEGETATION
Gt/c-7L.r1 /V c7 C'r~ OL
i
1
' ~~
+ S Indicator ~arinant f~lant Soaeies a Ine6ester
.
~
t ~ 9.
2. /'~ ,~
3 ~ ~ 10.
- 11.
4 ~^ ~
5. ~. , /l R/
.~ .Et4L,f~ 12.
13.
i/ ,' ~ ynp Fro/ u! -f- 14.
7. 16.
8. 16.
f'meent of Dominant Species that are OBL. FACW or
FAC texduding FAC-) Q
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
-Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks!: Wetbnd Hydrdogy Indicators:
_Streem, Lake or Tids Gauge peimary ndicators:
_Aeri~ Photographs rxatdatsd
Other ~~usturatsd in Upper 121nehes
~Recordsd Data Available Watet Marks
Drift Lktes
5~ I
~~
iffirrrerK Deposit
Field Observations: Pattsms ~ Wetlands ~
Sacaidsry ktdicators (2 or moro required!:
Depth of Surface Water: ~' (in.! O~1t~zad Root Cfumnsls in Upper 12 Inches
Depth to Free Water in Pit: ~- (in.l
D atar~Stamsd Lesws
~-ocal Sort Surve~r Data
epth to Saturated Sod: /--? (in.)
_FAC-Netttr~ Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:

~ t' ~.
• - _ ~
~,
SOILS
Map Unit Name /)/J ~~ ~. „ _ Drainage Class: WCi ~~ ~l`~ WG~~~lrl N
(Series and Phasel: //I a rV~'' // ", ~L~p~ Reld Observations
~_____~., rc..l.....,..n-e wit r! HAD~ur~u~~ /A9NrG ~u. ui Confirm Mapped Type: Yes ~~_
Profile Des 'on: Mottle Texture.
Oepth Matrix Color Mottle Calory
Concretions.
(inched Horizon lMunsel~ lVloisti (Munsell Moistl Abundance/Contrast Stru~/t~ure. etc.
O/ aru ~LtLlGI` Y
O-1 ~~
~_3 ~ /0- G Z ..
f
_____
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosd
Hlstic Epipedon
Sulftdic Odor
~./~~ c Moisture Regime
vifeducing Conditions
/(~leved or Low-CMroma Colors
Remarks:
Cwrcretions
~gh Organic Corrterrt in Surh~cs layer in Sandy Soas
O Stroaking in Sandy Soils
=id on Local Hyddc Sorts Ust
_llsted on National Hydric Sois List

r

WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytle Vegetation pnner-t7 ~No (Cirdel
Wetland Hydrdogy pressrrtT No
Hydric Sods Present? ~ No is this
Remarks:
(Circle!
within a wetland: Ye ~No
^

Approved by HQUSACE 2192

HJL
8/93

. ~ ~~"~ ~"_CJG .
~,
L ~~
~ "'
~ ~ _
U ~~~
4~
- August 2, 2001
y _ ;
/ ~ /ti
Ms. Gaii Grimes, P.E., Assistant Manager
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch ~ •
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1548
`~
ATTENTION: Ms. Stacy Hams, P E.
SUBJECT: Group XXVII Bridge Replacement Projects
Dear Ms. Grimes:
We are requesting a supplement to the Engineering Contract for the Group XXV!`.
Bridge Replacement Projects. Ecoscience Corporation conducted detailed natural resource
investigations at these bridge sites in January and February 2001 at which time we identified
potential habitat areas for federally protected species listed by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife
Service for the respective counties in which the projects are located. .
During the investigations, potential habitat for the following species was identified at the
associated bridge replacement sites: ~l p~
B-3685 (Pitt County) Tar River Spinymussel (`~
• 8-3809 (Beaufort County) Sensitive Jointvetch `G~
-8-3810 (Beaufort County) Rough-leaved loosestrife
B-3887 (fender County) ~R/ough-leaved loosestrife and Cooley's meadowrue
11-ka`Kie/'/'1an~n~c+e Cc~++p/~1~7 co~t~s~%,~a~e ~ /„~ i~ •acna
NCDOT will conduct the survey for the Tar ~ver 5pinyifiussel on B-3685. In order to
resolve the habitat assessment for the remaining projects Ecoscience Corporation is conducting
an additional field visit to complete this endeavour. We would like to request a supplement to
our existing contract in order to complete these assessments.
If you need any additional information or have any questions, please call Mr. Greg S.
Purvis, P. E. at [phone].
Respectfully,
ry •,/~'
James Wang, Ph.D., P.E. /-
IS'_ou ~rl•:~-I'ON P:\ftl<~Y~':\~'. ~tJl'1'I•: tut c:.\Itl~, ~c: ~75t~
PIIO`1?: 919-67i-954 I~.\\: 91')-(.''-97i;