20110765 Ver 1_Application_20110816

~° ~` „~
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
BEVERLY EAVES PERDUE
GOVERNOR
Augu& 8, 2011
EUGENE A. CONTT, JR.
SHCRETARY
~~®765
Ms. Amy Euliss
NC DENR Division of Water Quality
585 Waughtown Stree[
Winston-Salem, NC 27107
Mr. Andrew Williams
US Army Corps of Engineers
6508 Falls of the Neuse Suite 120
Raleigh, NC 27615-6814
(Two Copies)
Subject: Bennett Road (SR 1354), Rockingham County,
Project Number- #7B.207911
To Whom It May Concern:
Q~c~~oe~~
AUG 1 6 2011
DENR-IMATERal1ALITY
WETIANDSAND STORMWATER BRANCH
The North Cazolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to replace a structurally deficient
bridge with two lines of 95" X 67° X 60' culverts on Bennett Road (SR 1354) in Rockingham County. The
project is located in the northwest quadrant of Rockingham County west of US. 220. Replacement is
necessary in order to reduce future maintenance needs and increase traffic safety. This activity will result
in permanent impacts to Hickory Creek. The NCDOT anticipates that the activity will be authorized under
Nationwide Permit (NWP) 14. This application is intended as a request for written authorization from the
US Army Corps of Engineers for the Nationwide 14. This package is also being forwazded to the NC
Division of Water Quality for authorization as prescribed under General Water Quality Certification #3820.
No road widening or additional travel lanes are proposed. The fallowing information is being provided to
satisfy conditions of the Nationwide Permit and General Water Quality Certification.
P.O. Box 14996 Greensboro, NC 27415-4995 Telephone No. [phone] Fax No. [phone]

PROJECT INFORMATION
Road Name Stream Project Length
miles) Classification
Bennett Road Hicko Creek N/A Subdivision
River Basin: DID Detsir lion % Impervious Surface
Roanoke 22-30-5 Class C N/A
Buffer Rules ~ Buffer Rule Conditions (where applicable)
Yes Jordan lake Buffer
Protected Species Presentb Mapped Historic
Pro erties CAIviA
AEC Essential Fishery Habitat
No No No No
° Separate documentation attached as needed: See the attached Endangered Species Review Sheet for further information: `When
Applicable -See the attached Historic Review Letter for further information
BRIDGE REPLACEMENT
Site Station WA Stream T Perennial
Foisting Stream 5~ feet Proposed 5~ teat
Width Stream Width
Construction Replace existing bridge with two lines of Dewatering Pump around
Method 95in X 67 in X 60 ft Ion culverts Device'
Burial Depth One foot or 20% of danreter of culverts E/C Plan N/A
Date
Construction As soon as practicable Duration Two weeks
Date
I is ft. roximatel 60 linear feet of nent stream i cts and 20 linear feet of tem re i cts
Special
Condtions
Restoration Plan Within 15 working days of the project completion any disturbed area adjacent to the stream will be
restored and seeded.
RCP =reinforced concrete pipe; CMP = Cortugated metal pipe; CMPA =Corrugated metal pipe arch; E/C =Erosion control. 'A less inWsive
dewatering device may be used in lieu of the one proposed.

MINIMIZATION INFORMATION
Impacts will be minimized by strict enforcement of Bast Management Practices for the protection of
surface waters and wetlands, restrictions against the staging of equipment is or adjacent to waters of
the U8, end coordination (iaclndiag a pre-constrnction meeting( with the Division Envhvameatal
Officer.
MITIGATION INFORMATION
Stream mitigation is sot anticipated, as the impacts to any iadividnal stream do not exceed 160 feet
Wetland mitigation is sot anticipated, ss wetLzad impacts do sot exceed 0.10 acres sad do not occur
is a unique natural wetland.
APPLICATION INFORMATION
Enclosed please find the Pre-constrnctioa Notification Form end supporting docnmeatation for the
above referenced projoct. If yon have any questions or neod any additional laformation, please
contact Jerry Parker at [phone]. Your time sad effort are appreciated.
Sincerely,
Mr. .Mills, P.E.
D' sion Engineer, Division 7
Enclosures
CC: Jeremy Watten, Bridge Maintenance NCDOT
Barry Harrington, NCDOT
Jason Juliaq NCDOT
NC DENR DWQ Wetlands/401 unit (Six copies)

o/2~~FryWjAiF~9OG
O ~ Y
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.3 Dec 10 2006
Pre-Construction Notification PCN Form
A. A licant Information
1. Processing
1 a. Type(s) of approval sought from the
Corps:
®Section 404 Permit ^ Section 10 Permit
1b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 14 or General Permit (GP) number:
1 c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps? ^ Yes ®No
1d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
® 401 Water Quality Certification -Regular ^ Non~04 Jurisdictional General Permit
^ 401 Water Quality Certification -Express ^ Riparian Buffer Authorization
1 e. Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required? For the record only for DWQ 401
Certification:
^ Yes ®No For the record only for Corps Permit:

^ Yes ®No
1 f. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in-lieu fee program proposed for mitigation
of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank or in-lieu
fee program. ^ Yes ®No

i
1 g. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal courrties. If yes, answer 1 h
below. ^ Yes ®No
th. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)? ^ Yes ®No
2. Project Information
2a. Name of project: Bennett Road (SR 1354) i
2b. County: Rockingham
2c. Nearest municipality /town: Ayersville, NC
2d. Subdivision name: N/A
2e. NCDOT onty, T.LP. or state
project no:
WBS # 78.207911 'i
3. Owner Information
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
3b. Deed Book and Page No.
3c. Responsible Party (for LLC 'rf
applicable):
3d. Street address:
3e. City, state, zip:
3f. Telephone no.:
3g. Fax no.:
3h. Emeil address:
Page 1 of 12
PCN Fonn -Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is: ®Agent ^ Other, specify:
4b. Name: J. M. Mills
4c. Business name
(rf applicable): Division Engineer NCDOT Division Seven
4d. Street address: P.O. Box 14996
4e. City, state, zip: Greensboro, NC 27415
4f. Telephone no.: 336 334-3297
4g. Fax no.:
4h. Email address:
b. Agent/Consulfant Information ("tF applicable)
Sa. Name: Jerry Parker
5b. Business name
(if applicable): Division Environmerrtal Supervisor
5c. Street address: P.O. Box 14996
5d. Cily, state, zip: Greensboro, NC 27415
5e. Telephone no.: 336 256-2063
Sf. Fax no.:
5g. Email address:
Page 2 of 12
PCN Form -Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a. Property identification no. (taz PIN or parcel ID): NIA
Latitude: 36.5036629° N Longitude: -
1b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees): 80.0048518° W
(DD.DDDDDD) (-OD.DDDDDD)
1 c. Property size: N/A acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc.) to
Hickory Creek
proposed project:
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water: Class C Roanoke 22-30.5
2c. River basin: Roanoke
3. Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time"of this
application:
Rural Forest Area
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
0
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
60 feet
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
Replace structurally deficient bridge with culverts to reduce maintenance and increase traffic safety.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
The bridge will be removed utilizing Best Mg[ Practices and the site will be de-watered utilizing a pump around with sift
bags. Culverts will be installed at one foot depth. A concrete seal, 12 to 1 B inches high, will be placed in the high flow
pipe. The low flow pipe will be aligned with Thalwag of the existing stream. Equipment utilized will include backhoe and/or
trackhoe.
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
^ Yes ®No ^ Unknown
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
Comments:
4b. If the Corps made tfie jurisdictional determination, what type
^ Preliminary ^ Final
of detemnination was made?
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas? Agency/Consultant Company:
Name ('d known): Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
5. Project History -
Sa. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
^ Yes ®No ^ Unknown
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
Sb'. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
Page 3 of 12
PCN Forn -Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project? ^ Yes ®No
6b. If yes, e~lain.
Page 4 of 12
PCN Fonn -Version 1.3 December 1D, 2008 Version

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1 a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
^ Wetlands ®Streams -tributaries ^ Buffers
^ Open Waters ^ Pond Construction
Page 5 of 12
PCN Forth -Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

__
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a. 2b. 2c. 2d. 2e. 2f.
Wetland impact Type of jurisdiction
number - Type of impact Type of wetland Forested (Corps - 404, 10 Area of impact
Permanent (P) or (if known) DWO -non-404, other) (acres)
Tem ora
W1 ^ P ^ T ^ Yes
^ No ^ Corps
^ DWO
W2 ^ P ^ T ^ Yes ^ Corps
^ No ^DWQ
W3 ^ P ^ T ^ Yes ^ Corps
^ No ^ DWO
W4 ^ P ^ T ^ Yes ^ Corps
^ No ^ DWO
W6 ^ P ^ T ^ Yes ^ Corps
^ No ^ DWO
W6 ^ P ^ T ^ Yes ^ Corps
^ No ^ DWO
2g. Total wetland imparts
2h. Comments:
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sties impacted.
3a. 3b. 3c. 3d. 3e. 3f. 3g.
Stream impact Type of impact Stream name Perennial Type of jurisdiction Average Impact
number - (PER) or (Corps - 404, 10 stream length
Permanent (P) or intermittent DWQ -non-404, width (linear
Temporary (T) (INT)? other) (feet) feet)
60 ft

St ®P ®T Replacement of
Hickory Creek ®PER ®Corps
6-10 ft permenent
impacts
bridge with two ~ INT ®DWo 20 ft temp
lines of pipes impacts
S2 ^ P ^ T ^PER ^ Corps
^ INT ^ DWO
S3 ^ P ^ T ^PER ^ Corps
^INT ^ DWO
S4 ^ P ^ T ^PER ^ Corps
^ INT ^DWQ
SS ^ P ^ T ^PER ^ Corps
^ INT ^ DWO
S6 ^ P ^ T ^PER ^ Corps
^ INT ^ DWO
60 ft
permenent
3h Total stream and tributary impacts impacts
20 ft temp
impacts
3i. Comments: Replacement of the bridge with culverts has been recommended by the Hydraulics Section of NCDOT. It is
estimated that the difference in cost of utilizing culverts as opposed to replacing with a bridge is approximately $60,000 versus
$400,000. Also, anticipated maintenace for culverts is lower than maintenance for bridges .
Page6of12
PCN Forrn -Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then individually list all open water impacts below.
4a. 4b. 4c. 4d. 4e.
Open water Name of waterbody
impact number - (if applicable) Type of impact Waterbody type Area of impact (acres)
Permanent (P) or
Tem ora
Ot ^P^T
02 ^P^T
03 ^P^T
04 ^P^T
4f. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments:
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If and or lake construction ro osed, then com lete the chart below.
5a. 5b. 5c. 5d. 5e.
Wetland Impacts (acres) Stream Impacts (feet) Upland
PondlD Proposed use or purpose (acres)
number of pond
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
P1
P2
3f. Total
Sg. Comments:
Sh. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
^ Yes ^ No If yes, permit ID no:
Si. Expected pond surface area (acres):
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWG)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individualty list all buffer impacts
below. If an im acts re uire miti ation, then ou MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a.
^ Neuse ^Tar-Pamlico ^ Other:
Project is in which protected basin? ^ Catawba ^ Randleman
6b. 6c. 6d. 6e. 6f. 6g.
Buffer impact
number - Reason Buffer Zone 1 impact Zone 2 impact
Permanent (P) or for Stream name mitigation (square feet) (square feet)
Tem ora im act re wired?
61 ^P^T ^Yes
_ ^ No
62 ^P^T ^Yes
^ No
63 ^P^T ^Yes
^ No
I 6h Total buffer impacts
6i. Comments:
Page 7 of 12
PCN Fonn -Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1 a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
Impacts will be minimized by utilization of Best Management Practices and by performing work in the dry.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
Best Management Practices will be utilized during construction. Pre-construction meeting with Environmental Superevisor will
take place prior to commencing construction
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project regtrire Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State? ^ Yes ®No
26. If yes, mitigation is retptited by (check all that apply): ^ DWQ ^ Corps

2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project? ^ Mitigation bank
^ payment to in-lieu fee program

^ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete'rf Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter) Type Quantity
3c. Comments:
4. Complete'rf Making a Paymentto In-lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in-lieu fee program is attached. ^ Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested: linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature: ^ warm ^ cool ^cold
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ oNy): square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested: acres
4f. Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested: acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested: acres
4h. Commends:
5. Complete if Using a Perrnittee Responsible MFtigation Plan
5a. If using a permittee resportsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
Page 8 of 12
PCN Form -Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) -required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
buffer mitigation? ^ Yes ®No
6b. If yes, then identity the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required.

Zone 6c.
Reason for impact 6d.
Total impact
(square feet)
Multiplier 6e.
Required mitigation
(square feet)
Zone 1 3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2 1.5
6f. Total buffer mitigation required:
6g. If buffer mtgation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in-lieu fee fund).
6h. Comments:
Page 9 of 12
PCN Fonn -Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1 a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified ^Yes ®No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1 b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
^ Yes ®No
Comments:
2. Stormwater Mana emerrt Plan
2a . What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project? N/A
2b . Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan? ®Yes ^ No
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why:
2d . If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
Stormwater will be managed according to plans submitted and approved by the Roadside Environmental Unit of NCDOT
^ Certified Local Government
2e . Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan? ^ DWO Stormwater Program
® DWO 401 Unit
3. Cert~ed Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which local governments jurisdiction is this project? N/A
^ Phase II
^ NSW
3b . Which of the following locally-implemented Stormwater management programs ^ USMP
apply (check all that apply): ^ Water Supply Watershed
^ Other:
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been ^Yes ®No
attached?
4. DWQ Stormwater P ram Review
^ Coastal counties
^ HQW
4a . Which of the following state-implemented Stormwater management programs apply ^ O~
(check all that apply): ^ Session Law 2006-246
^ Other:
4b . Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
^Yes ®No
attached?
5. DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a . Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements? ^Yes ^ No
Sb. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met? ^Yes ^ No
Page 10 of 12
PCN Form -Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

F. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1 a. :Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the ®Yes ^ No
use of public (federaUstate) land?
1 b. If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation. of an -
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State ^ Yes ®No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1 c. If you answered 'des" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
^ Yes
^ No
letter.)
Comments:
2. Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surtace Water or Wetland Standards, ^ Yes ®No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b. Is this an after-the-fact permd application? ^ Yes ®No
2c. If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s):
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in ^ Yes ®No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b. If you answered yes" to the above, submft a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no; provide a short Hortative description.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a. Clearly detail the ulfimate treatment methods and disposifion (non-discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
NA
Page 11 of 12
PCN Fomt -Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or ^ Yes ®No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act ®Yes ^ No
impacts?
® Raleigh
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
^ Asheville
Sd. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
Survey was conducted by Natural Environment Unit of NCDOT and approved by US Fish and Wildlife (see attached).
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat? ^-Yes ®No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
N1A
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation ^ Yes ®No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
Cultural Resource Review survey was conducted by Human Environment Unit of NCDOT which is sanctioned by State
Historic Preservation Office (see attached).
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain? ^ Yes ®No
Sb. If yes, e~lain how project meets FEMA requirements:
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? NC Floodplain Mapping Information System

J.M. Mills 8-8-11 ''
IicanVAgent's Printed Name A pl' nVAgent's Signature Date
(Agent's ignature rs v d only B an au[hor¢ation letter from the applicant ~,
is rovided. '
Page IZ of 12
PCN Form -Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

Project Tacking Na. (Internal U~eJ
11-07-0024
NO SURVEY REQUIIIED FORM
PROJECT INFORMATION
Project No: N/A County: Rockingham
WBSNo: 7B.207911 Document: Minimum Criteria Sheet
F.A. No.• N/A Funding: ®State ^ Federal
Federal (USAGE) Permit Required? ®Yes ^ No Permit Type: NWP #14
Project Description:
The project calls for the replacement of Bridge No. 159 on SR 1354 (Bennett Roac9 over Hickory Creek
The archaeological Area of Potential Effects (APE) for the project is defined as a 400 foot (121.92 m)
long corridor running 200 feet (60.96 m) northwest and 200 feet (60.96 m) southeast along SR 1354 from
the center of Bridge No. 159. The corridor is approximately 100 feet (30.48 m) wide extending 50 feet
(15.24 m) northeast and 50 feet (15.24 m) southwest from the present center of SR 1354.
SUMMARY OF CULTURAL RESOURCES REVIEW
Brief description of review activities, results of review, and conclusions:
The project area is north of Mayodan and west of the Mayo River near the North Carolina-Virginia state
line in the northwestern portion of Rockingham County, North Carolina (Figure 1). The project area is
found on the Spencer USGS 7.5' topographic quadrangle
A map review and site file seazch was conducted at the Office of State Archaeology (OSA) on July 25,
2011. No previously recorded azchaeological sites have been identified within, adjacent, or within a mile
radius of the defined APE. In additioq no existing National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), State
Study Listed (SL), Locally Designated (LD), Determined Eligible (DE), or Surveyed Site (SS) properties
are within or adjacern to the APE. Topographic maps, USDA soi] survey maps, aerial photographs
(Google and NCDOT), historic maps (North Carolina maps website), and Google street view map
application were utilized to gage environmental factors that may have contributed to historic or
prehistoric settlement within the project limits, and to assess the level of modem, residential,
hydrological, and other erosive type disturbances within the surrounding archaeological APE.
Bridge No. 159 crosses over Hickory Creek from the northwest to the southeast (Figure 2). The project
area is situated on terraces and hillside slope. Tyne Road (SR 1355} intersects with SR 1354 just north of
bridge and on the eastside. From aerial photos and Google street view, modem disturbance to the project
area appears light with forest on either side of SR 1354. Hickory Creek is a tributary of the Mayo River,
which is part of the Roanoke drainage basin.
A review of the USDA soil survey maps indicates that etdtre APE is composed of Madison sandy loam
(MaE) (see Figure 2). This is awell-drained soil that formed in material weathered from mica schist and
mica gneiss. Erosion is often severe in areas where the ground surface is exposed. The particular
Madison soil series within the project area has a slope of I S to 35 percent. However, review of Lidar
imagery of 2-foot contour irnervals and images from Google street view suggest that the. slope percentage
could be slightly less than 15 percent south of the bridge. It is highly unlikely any significant
archaeological sites would be found on landforms with slope of IS percent or more.

II-o~-oo2a
No identified archaeological sites have been recorded within a mile of the project area. This is due to no
previous investigations conducted in the vicinity of the project. The nearest investigations have been
carried-out along the Mayo River. In which, several sites have been identified along its banks. The
eligibility to Ute NRHP for most of these sites has not been assessed. These sites are situated on broad
floodplains and terraces with very gradual slopes, unlike the current project area. It appears unlikely that
a significant azchaeologiral site would be found within the curre~ APE based upon the setting of
previously known sites in the county.
Early maps of the region from the 19th century show few details of the project area. It is not until the
early 20th century that maps with any details of the general area are produced A post office map
showing rural delivery routes from circa 1910 is one of the clearest maps to illustrate the county (Figure
3). It shows a crossing on Hickory Creek, but no historic structures are plotted within or adjacent to the
project area. Subsequent early 20th century maps such as the 1926 soil survey for Rockingham County
and the 1938 North Carolina Highway map show no new information (Figures 4 and 5). It seems from
the review of historic maps that no historic azchaeological deposits should be affected by the proposed
bridge replacement.
BriefExplanation of why the available information provides a reliable basis for reasonably predicting
that there are na unidentified historic properties in the APE:
The defined archaeological APE for the proposed replacement of Bridge No. 159 is located along hillside
slope and terraces. It is unlikely intact and significant archaeological deposits will be present in this area.
This is primarily due to the small scope of the proposed bridge replacement on the existing location,
which is unlikely to cause any major impact to undisturbed properties. In addition, the area north ofthe
bridge is on slope of I S percent or greater. This landform is unsuitable for archaeological sites due to the
steep slope. Lastly, the review of historic maps suggests no former historic structures aze present within
the project area. As long as impacts to the subsurface occur within the defined APE, no further
archaeological work is recommended for the replacement of Bridge No. 159 in Rockingham County. If
construction should affect subsurface azeas beyond the defined APE, further azchaeological consultation
might be necessary.
SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION
See attached: Map(s), Previous Survey Info, Photos, Correspondence, Photocopy of notes from county
survey.
FINDING BY NCDOT CULTURAL RESOURCES PROFESSIONAL NO SURVEY REQUIRED
ARCHAEOLOGY HLSTORIC ARCHITECTURE (CIItCLE ONE)
7/26/ 11
NCDOT Cuhural Resources Specialist Date

~~
.~.~
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARI'MEI~IT OF TRANSPORTATION
BEVERLY EAVES PERDUE
GOVERNOR
June 30, 2011
Memorandum to: Jerry Pazker, Division Environmental Supervisor
Division 7
From: Kazen M. Lynch, Environmental Supervisor
Natural Environment Unit, Biological Surveys Group
EUGENE A. CONTI, JR.
SECRETARY
Subject: Freshwater mussel survey report for Bennett Road crossings of
Buffalo Creek and Hickory Creek
Two streams (Buffalo and Hickory Creeks) on Bennett Road (SR 1354) in
Rockingham County were assessed for habitat by NCDOT biologists for the James
spinymussel in preparation for a structure replacement and a detour route for the structure
replacement. The federally endangered James spinymussel (Pleurobema collina) is listed
by the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) as occumng in Rockingham County.
Habitat assessmentJsurveys were conducted by NCDOT biologists, Karen M. Lynch
(permit NC-2011 ES 165), Logan Williams and USFWS biologist, Gary Jordan on May
25, 2011 and by K.M. Lynch on June 22, 2011.
Both Buffalo and Hickory Creeks aze tributaries of the Mayo River, which has
known populations of the James spinymussel. Buffalo Creek (B-5163) has been
surveyed for mussels twice in recent years by NCDOT biologists. The most recent
survey was on May 25, 2011. Buffalo Creek flows into the Mayo River two miles below
the bridge site. The channel of Buffalo Creek was I S - 22 ft. wide and substrate was
dominated by sand and with cobble and gavel subdominant. Bedrock, boulder, silt were
also found. No mussels were found in Buffalo Creek during this survey or prior surveys
and perhaps the creek is too small to support the James spinymussel.
On June 22, 2011, a habitat assessment of Hickory Creek was conducted.
Hickory Creek originates 2 miles upstream of the crossing and from the bridge site flows
2 miles to the confluence with the Mayo River. The Hickory Creek channel was typically
14 to 18 ft. wide then narrowed to 4 ft. wide in places. The amount of bedrock in areas
influenced stream width as the stream was constricted in some azeas. Substrate in
Hickory Creek consisted of bedrock, cobble, sand and silt. No mussels were found in
Hickory Creek. No mussels were found during either habitat assessment in these two
tributaries to the Mayo River and these streams are likely too small to provide habitat for
the James spinymussel.
The James spinymussel (Pleurobema collina) was once found throughout the
main stem of the James River and all of its major tributaries upstream of Richmond VA.
Nulnq AOORELR: TELEPNDNE: 919.431-2000 LgCl1TpR:
NC DEPMIMEM OF TRANSPORTATON FAC: 919-031-2001 PROJECT DEVELOPMENT B~
NATURAL ENNRONAEM Uwr ENNROMfrNTALAlLLLY95BRANOR-
1S9B MAIL $ERVICE CENTER ~~•____. ______ ENVIROIDAEMAL RESOURCE CENTER

The species has experienced a decline over the past two decades and now exists only in
small, headwater tributaries of the upper James River basin in Virginia and West Virginia
and the upper Roanoke River drainage of Virginia and North Carolina. In NC, the James
spinymussel has only been found in mid-sized rYVers, including the Dan and Mayo.
Rivers. The James spinymussel is found in waters with slow to moderate current and
relatively hard water on sand and mixed sand-gravel substrates that are free from silt.
Despite numerous surveys in smaller tributaries to the Dan and Mayo Rivers, this
mussel has never been located in tributaries to the Dan or Mayo Rivers.
No mussels were found in Buffalo or Hickory Creeks and they are apparently too
small to provide habitat for the federally endangered James spinymussel. These two
Division 7 projects will have No Effect on the James spinymussel.

i
\EZv. i i~ og; ! Mm
3 r`--)
9~ ~L/(
1 . ~~
~~ l
- ~
~ g
C ~ ~/ ~ ~
~ '-5
1
}
F
~ :1 ~ e
v~,~ \
~
1,_ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , j
/
\
"o+a
~ ~ 99
c
~ / ,,

tt
~. ~' ~oi~
/
•`' A, ~ I~
~_
~~~ ~ ''I ~ `~ ~~ f

((I \_ ,(
r er ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Y ~i ~ ~ 7
' <

~~ ~
r ~ 4
i -~
f
~v `
~ ~
`~ t~
~
/
l
a ~~
_
v
. ~
1
- y -1
'' )
/
j
y--'

4
~_ ~/
~
~ ~ ~
4
~ T 9 a 'i A ~/~ ~~ x P ~. T
~ ~
/

5~ ~Z

~
~ y' a
x'\ \ r
d _I~

~ ~
~
s _

x .
6 ~ __ ~
_ e
b ~
YV
1 ~~ -~
LJ ~ ~~
° ~~ ~ ~ ~~
~ ( ~~ i
\~'
~ /~ ~< 1
-
~
~
~ /
17~'T 1'Syd
x,8" 'i v,
~y ~o Rn y}~`Y ~
~I"~ P°
~ `e
e ~ ~\/
~,1
~~j ~ 1\ o'
. 1 _
T1YV~'IN i000M0 `
`i~l l , / / \ ~ ~
~/J >
y
~ ~~
f
rvP -~ A~~
, ~ ~ p~;r ~
~~ J'
~
, f :+~
~ ~/ ~ /
~
~ ~ /
.IDe
~I
Yy
A )
~ ~~
~
\ ~
~
~ ~ ~ ice'
-•r~ AyersN le
' ~ -
~
~ r
~
a 7 ,~ a
n}'
~~ ~
' R' __
a
0'2
~ ~ ~ Ra
i
r a aA
-
no .
, u
~ ,
~
~ ~
~~ .
~ ~ 1
~
n
.
o
~~l ~ A I
~
I ~~
~~
~ e
~ ~
/
~

~ ~
z ~
1
~ ~~.~ ~~
''
~:~ / _ / v" k,,.
/
~
e a
4 -ice ~E \ ~
/ I
11 ~ ~ I
\I V lore Z`.
,~NGYg qqQ,/f
!SY>T ~
~~ ¢° PIOE DEPT.
~
~
~ "IY[
~
~ ~ S
~ ~ ~
~
-•~ ~ _ \

~ ~
+ /
! 1,_ ~' -
`~ a
gym`
/
~
~ J/

,. f 1 S

~ne I f
-
~ q
~i.
l
/ -
~ ~, ~~ J
l`
'
t
4
a,
~ ~
~ ~
~
~
,~~,
~~e
o
~
tttn

~

~~ ~ ~ f

~
~ ~

~~
~ ~

~ ~~~
~
t' nA
uns &°~p ~\ .i

~ ~
~

~
f+ _~ ~ ~
qa ~-
b / " ~` f~.
~ ~~
e 5
T
~ c ~~ ~,
.,° i ~ Me U; ~;
~ Pe ~~ n Rla n^
~
o; e°
~ _
US 1
..~
/

.
,
M ': ~e
~ Rem En or.
3P
~~ $1 - ~ orP'P
s F i~. 2 2(1 j
~
~ ~a .

+'
\
~ y a
ln. -
' B~wmM
kl N9J6INq 6 7 7ri _7 ~ ~ 7~~' 7 ~~ ~ x~ 7q~~ ~
1., . - - C m ._~ A ~~ ~ ~ ~, n .xCi' ~~~FD ~ve $! i ~~ ~ % ~ ~ - 1~ ~ A~

N.C. D.O.T.
BRIDGE MAINT. DEPT.
EROSION CONTROL SEQUENCE
COUNTY Rockingham
S.R. No. 1354 Bennett RD
BRIDGE No. 159
PROJECT No.
DESCRIPTION: REMOVAL OF EXISTING BRIDGE STRUCTURE & REPLACE WITH NEW
2 lines of 95 X 67 CM Pipe
Note:
All Erosion Control devices 8 proper installation plus maintenance of erosion control will be pertormed
by using - NCDOT Beat Management Practices for Construction and Maintenance Activites Manual
1. PLACE FILTER FABRIC UNDER BRIDGE TO CATCH ASPHALT & DEBRIS
2. REMOVE EXISTING BRIDGE THEN REMOVE FILTER FABRIC
3. USE SILT BAG FOR STILLING BASIN
4. Note: IF NEEDED -BUILD ABC COFFER DAMS WRAPPED WITH FILER FABIC in WORST CASE
6. INSTALL SILT FENCE AS NEEDED (1605.00)
6. INSTALL COFFER DAM TO DIVERT STREAM AWAY FROM PIPE #1
7. INSTALL SILT FENCE AS SITE CONDITION REQUIRE
8. BEGIN EXCAVATION FOR 1st CM PIPE
EXCAVATE to SUFFICIENT DEPTH to ALLOW BURIAL of the PIPE to 1 foot BELOW
STREAMBED PLACE BASE STONE & SECTIONS CM PIPE
9. DEWATER WORK AREA & PUMP WATER into SILT BAG
10. DIVERT STREAM INTO PIPE #1
11. BEGIN EXCAVATION FOR 2nd CM PIPE
EXCAVATE to SUFFICIENT DEPTH to ALLOW BURIAL of the PIPE to 1 foot BELOW
STREAMBED PLACE BASE STONE & SECTIONS CM PIPE
12. POUR CONCRETE SEAL in 2nd CM PIPE
13. BACKFILL PIPE & SHOULDER AREA
14. PLACE FILTER FABRIC AROUND PIPE & SLOPE AREA THEN RIP RAP
KEEPING RIP RAP OUT of STREAM
1b. REMOVE BOTH DAMS of ABC AGGREGATE or LESS INTRUSIVE DEWATERING
DEVICE to ALLOW NORMAL STREAM FLOW
16. RESEED all EXPOSED AREAS as NEEDED
17. REMOVE ALL EROSION CONTROL DEVICES AFTER VEGETATION is ESTABLISHED
APPROXIMATE PROJECT START DATE
PREPARED BY Van Hodges Date 4/19/2011
APPROVAL
TRANSPORTATION SUPERVISOR III
DATE
DIV. BRIDGE ENG. DATE

COUNTY Rockingham
3.R. No. 1354 Bennett RD
BRIDGE No 159
SEQUENCEI
1. PLACE FILTER FABRIC UNDER BRIDGE TO CATCH ASPHALT & DEBRIS
2. REMOVE EXISTING BRIDGE THEN REMOVE FILTER FABRIC
1354
FILTER FABRIC
UNDER BRIDGE
'~
- BRIDGE a STREAM FLOW
~_- 159
1354
LEGENDS
~'~
„ ~, trees

COUNTY Rockingham
S.R. No. 1354 Bennett RD
BRIDGE No 159
SEQUENCE2
1. DAM BOTH ENDS of STREAM with ABC AGGREGATE (underlain 8 wrapped with
Filter Fabric) or LESS INTRUSIVE DEVICE to ALLOW DEWATERING of WORK AREA
2. fNSTALL PUMPS to DIVERT FLOW AROUND WORK AREA
PUMP CLEAN WATER AROUND WORK AREA if NEEDED
3. INSTALL SILT FENCE AS SITE CONDITION REQUIRE
4. BEGIN EXCAVATION FOR 1st CM PIPE
EXCAVATE to SUFFICIENT DEPTH to ALLOW BURIAL of the PIPE to 1 foot BELOW
STREAMBED PLACE BASE STONE & SECTIONS CM PIPE
6. DEWATER WORK AREA & PUMP WATER into SILT BAG

SILT FENCE
AS NEEDED
PUMP
BAG

I SILT FENCE
~./ AS NEEDED
SILT FENCE
AS NEEDED

PIPE 1 ~_
BURIED 7 ft. BELOW STREAM BED STREAM FLOW
1~\ (underlain
SILT FENCE
AS NEEDED
& wrapped with Filter Fabric)
LEGENDS
a
frees `"$

COUNTY Rockingham
S.R. No. 1354 Bennett RD
BRIDGE No 159
SEQUENCE3
1. BEGIN EXCAVATION FOR 2nd CM PIPE
EXCAVATE to SUFFICIENT DEPTH to ALLOW BURIAL of the PIPE to 1 foot BELOW
STREAMBED PLACE BASE STONE & SECTIONS CM PIPE
2. POUR CONCRETE SEAL in 2nd CM PIPE
3. BACKFILL PIPES & SHOULDER AREA
4. PLACE FILTER FABRIC AROUND PIPE & SLOPE AREA THEN RIP RAP
KEEPING RIP RAP OUT of STREAM
BAG ~ I PIPE 2
BURIED 1 K. BELOW STREAM BEO
SILT FENCE
AS NEEDED

'SILT FENCE
AS NEEDED
CONCRETE SEAL
LEGENDS
~ ~ .: ,, ,:
-f;
..trees

COUNTY Rockingham
S.R. No. 1354 Bennett RD
BRIDGE Nc 159
SEQUENCE4
1. RESEED ALL EXPOSED AREAS AS NEEDED
2. REMOVE ALL TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL DEVICES UPON COMPLETION of PROJECT

RIP RAP on STREAM BANKS
not in STREAM :t:~:r~ ^~kf~y~
i
'i

1354
urn ~,
PIPE 1
k
.~ar;.~ ~~~ Main Strom Flow

PIPE 2 I' k" Iti~' Concrete Seal
~~, ~ ~ 12" to 78" high
T FENCE
NEEDED
7354

Bennett Rd (SR 1354) Rockingham County. View looking north
Bennett Rd (SR 1354) Rockingham County. View looking south.

Bennett Rd (SR 1354) Downstream view from bridge
Bennett Rd (SR 1354) Upstream view from bridge

~~
~,
~, 59
^~:)~-
/! Cem ~\1 ~ ~~: \ 1056 ~ ~ r ~~\,~ ~. ~1 ~ \j i,1 \~ ~t~`~y ( \ \ J ~ ~~'.
Name: SPENCER Location: 036.5192685° N 080.0232257° W
Date: 8/8/2011 Caption: Bennett Rd (SR 1354)
Scale: 1 inch equals 2000 feet Rockingham Courrty