U-2817 (3)

(' -?0/7
Natural Resources
Technical Report
T I P Project No U -2817
SR 1700 Widening
(Evans Street and Old Tar Road)
Pitt County,
North Carolina
Prepared For
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Project Development and Environmental Analysis
r
�F Na RTff C,Q�
1M
a Z
4
�MrOF TRA��'�a
February 12, 2008

Table of Contents
page #
Executive Summary
1 -v
10
Introduction
1
1 1 Protect Description
1
12 Protect Purpose
1
13 Methodology
2
14 Quahfications of Principal Investigators
3
15 Definitions
3
20
Physical Characteristics
3
21 Soils
4
22 Water Resources
5
30
Biotic Resources
7
31 Terrestrial Communities
7
3 1 1 Bottomland Hardwood Forest
7
3 12 Mixed Pine Hardwood Forest
8
3 13 Urban /Disturbed Community
8
3 14 Terrestrial Wildlife
9
32 Aquatic Communities
10
33 Summary of Anticipated Impacts
11
3 3 1 Anticipated Impacts to Terrestrial Communities
11
3 3 2 Anticipated Impacts to Aquatic Communities
12
40
Jurisdictional Topics
12
41 Waters of the United States
13
4 1 1 Surface Waters
13
4 12 Jurisdictional Wetlands
14
4 1 3 Neuse River Buffers
15
4 1 4 Impacts to Waters of the United States
16
42 Permit Issues
16
4 2 1 Mitigation
17
4 2 1 1 On site Mitigation Opportunities
18
43 Protected Species
19
4 3 1 Federally Protected Species
19
4 3 1 1 West Indian manatee (Tncbecbus manatus)
20
4 3 12 Red cockaded woodpecker (P=odes boiealzs)
20
4 3 13 Tar River spiny mussel (Ellzptzo steznstansana)
21
432 Federal Species of Concern and State Listed Species
22
433 Bald Eagle
22
50
References
23

Tables
Table 1
Table 2
Table 3
Table 4
Vegetative Communities
Jurisdictional Streams
Jurisdictional Wetlands
Federally Protected Species for Pitt County
AV12enchces
Appendix A Figures
1
2a 2b
3a 3e
4a 4e
Project Vicuuty Map
Project Topography
Vegetative Communities
Waters of the U S
Appendix B Site Photography
Appendix C Tables
1 Soils Summary — Evans Street widening Pitt County NC
2 Protected Species Listed for Pitt County North Carolina
Appendix D Stream and Wetland Data Forms and Rating Worksheets
Appendix E Agency Correspondence
7
14
14
20

10 Introduction
Mulkey Engineers and Consultants Inc (Mulkey) was retained by the North Carolina
Department of Transportation ( NCDOT) to prepare a Natural Resources Technical Report
(NRTR) for the Transportation Improvement Project (TIP) identified as U 2817 The
NCDOT proposes to conduct roadway improvements along SR 1700 (Evans Street and Old
Tar Road) in Pitt County North Carolina The following NRTR is submitted to assist in
consideration of alternative designs for the proposed project as part of National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requirements Figures (Appendix A) site photography
(Appendix B) tables (Appendix C) stream and wetland data forms (Appendix D) and
agency correspondence (Appendix E) cited within this document are included in the
Appendices at the end of this report
11 Project Descnption
The project study area is along the existing SR 1700 (Evans Street and Old Tar Road) from
Worthington Road (SR 1711) in Wi nterville to NC Highway 43 /US 264A in Greenville in
the central portion of Pitt County The northern project terminus is approximately 2 5 miles
southwest of the East Carolina University main campus and the southern project terminus
is approximately 10 mile east of downtown Wiinterville The existing roadway is a two lane
roadway with shoulders along both sides of the road and receives between 7 200 to 21 900
automobiles per day
The proposed project will widen the existing two lane roadway to a four lane divided
roadway with a grass median and construct intersection improvements The proposed
widening improvements for the project will occur along both sides of the existing roadway
facility No specific design alternatives have been selected at this time however it can be
anticipated that the widening widths will vary from side to side depending upon various
constraints Natural resource investigations were completed using a 500 foot wide study
corridor centered on the existing centerline
12 Project Purpose
The purpose of this technical report is to inventory catalog describe and quantify impacts
to the natural systems within the project study area and to make recommendations that
would result in the least harm to the natural environment without compromising the project
purpose and need Direct impacts resulting from the proposed action have not been
estimated at this time Estimated natural systems impacts are described in Section 3 3 of this
report These descriptions and estimates are relevant only in the context of existing width of
the project study area If parameters and criteria change additional field investigations may
need to be conducted
Page 1 of 25

13 Methodology
The field investigations performed by qualified Mulkey biologists were primarily conducted
from May 23 through May 25 2005 Field surveys were undertaken to determine natural
I resource conditions and to document natural communities wildlife and the presence of
protected species or their habitats
Published information regarding the project study area and region was derived from a
number of resources including United States Geological Survey (USGS) 7 5 minute
topographical quadrangle map (Greenville SW and Greenville SE North Carolina) U S Fish
and Wildlife Service ( USFWS) National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) maps USGS aerial
photomosaics of the project area (1 =100) and Natural Resources Conservation Service
(MRCS) soil survey maps for Pitt County Water resources information was obtained from
publications of the North Carolina Division of Water Quality ( NCDWQ) Information
concerning the occurrence of federal and state protected species within the project study
area and vicinity was gathered from the USFWS list of protected species and the North
Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) database of rare species and unique habitats
Aerial photography of the project study area was provided by NCDOT and NRCS
Dominant plant species were identified in each stratum for all natural communities
encountered Plant community descriptions are based on those classified in Schafale and
Weakley (1990) where applicable Names and descriptions of plant species generally follow
Radford et al (1968) unless more current information is available Animal names and
descriptions follow Alsop (2001) Bogan (2002) Conant and Collins (1998) Lee et al (1980 et
seg) Martof et al (1980) Stokes (1966) and Webster et al (1985) Scientific names and
common names (when applicable) are provided for each plant and animal species listed
Subsequent references to the same organism include the common name only
During field surveys wildlife identification involved a variety of observation techniques
active searching and capture visual observations (both with and without the use of
binoculars) and observing the characteristic signs of wildlife (sounds scat tracks and
burrows) Any organisms that may have been captured during these searches were identified
and released without injury Quantitative water sampling was not undertaken to support
existing data
Jurisdictional wetland determinations and subsequent delineations were performed using the
three parameter approach as prescribed in the 1987 Corp of Engineers Wetlands Delineation
Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987) Supplementary technical literature describing the
parameters of hydrophytic vegetation hydric soils and hydrological indicators were also
utilized Wetland functions were evaluated according to the NCDWQ s rating system 4`h
version (1995) Surface waters in the project study area were originally evaluated and
classified based on perennial and intermittent stream characteristics as defined in NCDWQ s
Stream Classification Method 2 d version (1999) Data taken at these streams was subsequently
used to complete the stream assessment evaluations in NCDWQ s Stream Classification
Method 3 d version (2005) Also included in Appendix D is the United States Army Corps of
Engineers (USACE) Stream Quality Assessment Worksheet (2003)
Page 2 of 25

14 Qualifications of Principal Investigators
Investigator Harold M Brady, Scientist
Education BS Ecosystem Assessment North Carolina State University
Experience Mulkey Engineers & Consultants October 2003 to present
ARCADIS January 2000 to September 2003
Certifications Benthic Collection Protocols for Stream Restoration NCDWQ
Expertise Wetland and stream determination and delineation Section 401 and 404
perntting stream and wetland restoration and post -, iolation remediation
Section 7 field investigations CAMA and Section 10 permitting and Phase
I environmental site assessments
Investigator Mark Mickley, Scientist
Education BS Biology Bridgewater College
Experience Mulkey Engineers & Consultants June 2004 to present
Certifications Benthic Collection Protocols for Stream Restoration NCDWQ
Expertise Wetland determination and delineation stream determination and
delineation stream and wetland restoration Rosgen stream assessment and
classification
15 Definitions
As used in this report the project study area denotes the area bounded by the defined study
corridor limits The project vicinity describes a larger area that extends approximately 0 5 mile
on all sides of the study area The project region is the area approximately represented on a
standard 7 5 minute U S Geological Survey (USGS) topographic quadrangle map with the
project study area occupying the central position
20 Physical Characteristics
The project study area is located in the central portion of Pitt County (Figure 1) Pitt County
is situated in the eastern part of the state in the Coastal Plain physiographic province The
geography of the county consists predominantly of flat land with large swamp areas
following major streams The medium to large sized streams contain large floodplams with
significant micro topography Elevations in the project study area range from approximately
16 feet above mean sea level (msl) along the perennial UT to Fork Swamp to approximately
22 feet above msl at the far northern and southern ends of the project study area as depicted
on the Greenville SE North Carolina USGS topographic quadrangle map The topography
of the project study area is depicted in Figures 2a and 2b
The project vicinity consists of both urban and rural settings The urban areas are primarily
concentrated in the northern portion of the project area associated with a large commercial
district along both sides of NC Highway 43 /US 264A A few areas of commercial and
industrial development are present throughout the project area however the majority of the
project study area consists of residential properties with scattered agricultural and forested
land Many of the residential communities have been recently constructed and several more
Page 3 of 25

were in various construction phases during the site visit in May 2005 These new residential
developments are primarily on land previously used for agriculture
The geology underlying the project study area is part of the Yorktown Formation This
formation is comprised of fossiliferous clay with varying amounts of fine grained sand and
bluish gray shell material commonly concentrated in lenses This mapping unit includes
both the Yorktown and Duphn formations depicted undivided throughout the central and
northern Coastal Plain The Yorktown Formation is roughly located north of the Neuse
River within the boundaries of the mapping unit (NCDLR 1985)
21 Soils
The process of soil development depends upon both biotic and abiotic influences These
influences include past geologic activities nature of parent materials human influences plant
and animal activity time climate and topographical position Due to the large number of
soil mapping units in the project area soil associations are a more manageable means of
discussing the general nature of soils within the project area Soil associations are areas in
the landscape that have a distinctive proportional pattern of soils containing one or more
major soils and at least one minor soil The soils in one association may occur in another
but in a different pattern The Lynchburg Rains Goldsboro association is the only general soil
mapping association present within the project study area A list of all the soil series mapped
in the project study area and a discussion of prevalent soil information is presented in
Appendix C — Table 1
Soils within the Lynchburg Rains- Goldsboro general soil association are moderately well
drained to poorly drained soils that are located on broad smooth flats and divides and in
slight depressions It occupies approximately 24 percent of the county with Lynchburg and
Rains soils equally dominant Minor soils often present within this soil association include
Goldsboro Norfolk Aycock Nahunta Byars Exum Coxville and Ocilla Soils of this map
unit are most often used for cropland pastureland and urban development however
flooding can be a major hazard along streams and in low lying areas
Hydric soils are defined as soils that are saturated flooded or ponded long enough during
the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions that favor the growth and regeneration
of hydrophytic vegetation (Cowardin et al 1979) A growing season is the portion of a year
when the soil temperature measured 20 inches below the soil surface is above 41 °F
(Environmental Laboratory 1987) Based on data available from the NRCS National
Weather and Climate Center stations the growing season for Pitt County generally occurs
between mid March and mid November (MRCS 1999)
Soils referred to as Hydric A are generally hydric throughout the mapped soil unit
Hydric B soils are non hydric soils that contain inclusions of hydric soils usually in
depressional areas or along the border with other soil units Based on the Pitt County Soil
Survey (Ka nowski 1974) four hydric A soils and three hydric B soils occur in the project
area The soil series that are considered hydric A are Coxville fine sandy loam Rains fine
sandy loam Bibb complex and Tuckerman fine sandy loam The soil series that are
considered hydric B include Ocilla loamy file sand Lynchburg fine sandy loam and
Page 4 of 25

Goldsboro sandy loam Ocilla Lynchburg and Goldsboro soils are all known to contain
hydric inclusions of Rams soils No areas of hydric inclusions were found within any of the
hydric B sods Most of the areas mapped as hydric A hai e been significantly altered since
the original mapping of the soils therefore many of the locales identified as areas with
hydric A soils no longer demonstrate hydric characteristics
22 Water Resources
The project study area is located within the Neuse River Basin (subbasin 03 04 09) The
study area is in USGS hydrologic unit 03020202 ( NCDWQ 2002) Fork Swamp ( NCDWQ
Stream Index # 27 97 4) and its unnamed tributaries make up the water resources present in
the study area Fork Swamp empties into Swift Creek approximately 9 5 miles south of the
SR 1700 crossing of Fork Swamp Swift Creek drains into the Neuse River approximately
22 0 miles southeast from its confluence with Fork Swamp Detailed information
concerning all of the jurisdictional streams in the project study area is included in Table 2
located in Section 4 1 1
The NCDWQ classifies surface waters of the state based on their intended best uses Fork
Swamp has a Best Usage Classification of C, Sw, NSW Streams which have not been
assigned a best usage classification or rating carry the same classification or rating as
the receiving waters The C classification denotes waters protected for uses such as
secondary recreation fishing wildlife fish consumption aquatic life including propagation
survival and maintenance of biological integrity and agriculture Secondary recreation
includes wading boating and other uses involving human body contact with water where
such activities take place in an infrequent unorganized or incidental manner The Sw and
the NSW are supplemental classifications The Sw classification denotes waters that
have naturally occurring low pH low dissolved oxygen low velocities and are often referred
to as blackwater swamps The NSW classification is intended for waters needing
additional nutrient management due to their being subject to excessive growth of
microscopic or macroscopic vegetation Strict measures to control stormwater runoff and
hazardous material spills will be an essential component of the project
Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act (CWA) requires states to develop a list of waters not
meeting water quality standards or which have impaired uses Waters may be excluded from
the list if existing control strategies for point and nonpoint source pollution will achieve the
standards or uses North Carolina s 303(d) report is a comprehensive public accounting of all
impaired waterbodies in the state There are no streams within the project study area that
have been listed as 303(d) waters The nearest 303(d) stream is Swift Creek located
approximately 15 miles to the south and west of the project area Swift Creek was listed in
1998 due to impaired biological integrity The report suspects that the problem is from
long term agricultural practices and channehzation ( NCDWQ 2006)
The Ambient Monitoring System (AMS) is a network of stream lake and estuarine water
quality monitoring stations strategically located for the collection of physical and chemical
water quality data The type of water quality data or parameters collected is determined by
the waterbody s classification and corresponding water quality standards The AMS
determines the use support status of waterbodies meaning how well a waterbody supports
Page 5 of 25

its designated uses An ambient monitoring station (AMS) is located on Swift Creek at NC
Highway 43 in Craven County Q8230000) approximately 22 5 miles downstream of the SR
1700 crossing of Fork Swamp In addition another AMS station is located on Swift Creek
Just 7 5 miles downstream of AMS station No J8230000 near the confluence with the
Neuse River Both AMS stations list Swift Creek as an Impaired water implying that
Swift Creek may not support its designated uses ( NCDWQ 2002)
The North Carolina Index of Biotic Integrity ( NCIBI) is used to assess the biological
integrity of streams by exam mmng the structure and health of the fish community The
scores resulting from this index are a measure of the ecological health of the waterbody
One NCIBI station is located in the sub basin at the crossing of Clay Root Road (SR 1941)
over Clayroot Swamp in Pitt County approximately 14 5 miles southeast and downstream of
the project area This station has not been rated ( NCDWQ 2002)
Bioclassification criteria have been developed that are based on the number and type of
benthic macroinvertebrates (primarily Orders Ephemeroptera Plecoptera and Tncoptera)
present in streams and rivers because they are very sensitive to the effects of water pollution
Streams and river reaches are then given a bioclassification rating that ranges from
Excellent to Poor based on benthic macroinvertebrate collection data These
bioclassifications which have been developed for North Carolina s major ecoreglons are
used to assess the various impacts of both point source discharges and non point source
runoff Six NCDWQ benthic macroinvertebrate monitoring stations are located within the
sub basin however only one site is located downstream of the study area This site is
located at the crossing of NC Highway 118 over Swift Creek in Craven County
approximately 20 5 miles downstream of the project area This site was rated Fair in both
1995 and 2000 There are no macrobenthic sampling sites upstream of the project study
area ( NCDWQ 2002)
Point source dischargers throughout North Carolina are regulated through the National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ( NPDES) program Dischargers are required by
law to register for a permit According to the February 18 2002 list of active NPDES
permits issued by NCDWQ there are three permitted dischargers within the 03 04 09
subbasin There are no major dischargers within the sub basin and all of the dischargers are
more than 20 miles downstream of the project area ( NCDWQ 2002)
The primary sources of water quality degradation in rural and moderately undeveloped areas
are non point sources of discharge which include agriculture surface water runoff and
construction activities Short term impacts to water quality from construction related
activities include increased sediment loading and turbidity Long term construction related
impacts to water resources include substrate destabilization bank erosion increased
turbidity altered flow rates and possible temperature fluctuations within the channel due to
removal of streamside vegetation Precautions should be taken to minmmze impacts to water
resources from runoff and erosion in the project area
Dave Rosgen of Wildland Hydrology has established a classification system for stream
channels based on fluvial geomorphologic principles and landscape position Based on the
Rosgen classification method and field observations the streams within the project area are
Page 6 of 25

generally classified as G (5 6) type streams Additional information concerning the streams
within the project study area is included in Table 2 located in Section 4 1 1
30 Biotic Resources
This section describes the existing vegetation and associated wildlife that occur within the
project study area The project study area is composed of different vegetative communities
based primarily on topography soils hydrology and disturbance These systems are
interrelated and in many aspects interdependent Scientific name and common name (when
applicable) are provided for each plant and animal species listed Subsequent references to
the same organism include only the common name
31 Terrestrial Commumties
The Mulkey field survey team observed three primary vegetative communities in the project
study area bottomland hardwood forest mixed pine /hardwood forest and urban/ disturbed
land The acreage for the urban/disturbed land also includes pavement associated with SR
1700 and crossing roadways within the project study area These vegetative communities are
described below and their locations are presented in Figures 3a through 3e Table 1 depicts
the three primary vegetative communities found within the project study area their acreage
and relative percentages of the entire project study area
Table 1 Vegetative Commumttes G �, r, 11 11 1
Commumty Type
Total Area ac
Relative Percentage
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
276
2%
Mixed Pine /Hardwood Forest
911
5%
Urban/Disturbed Land
16558
93%
Total
17745
100%
311 Bottomland Hardwood Forest
The bottomland hardwood forest community occurs along river and stream floodplains in
the Coastal Plain of North Carolina with small indistinguishable fluvial landforms and
vegetation zones It is best classified as a variation of Schafale and Weakley s (1990) Coastal
Plain Bottomland Hardwood Forest — Brownwater subtype Vegetation within the
bottomland hardwood forest community is comprised of plants specifically adapted to
moister conditions The canopy is relatively closed with a thick understory in the areas not
flooded however areas that are flooded tend to have an open understory Jurisdictional
wetlands are often found within this community type This vegetative community is found
within the project area along the perennial UT to Fork Swamp
The canopy is dominated by bald cypress (Taxodzum dzstzcbum) swamp black gum (Nysra
Mora) red elm (Ulmus rubra) red maple (Acer rubrum) and swamp chestnut oak (Quercus
mzcbauxu) The mid and under stories are diverse and especially thick near the edges of the
bottomland forest community with other vegetative communites Vegetation within these
areas includes species such as elderberry (Sambucus canadenszs) Chinese privet (L.zgurtrum
sinense) blackberry (Dubuc argutur) loblolly pixie (Pznur taeda) giant cane (Arundznarzagzgantea)
Page 7 of 25

I1
sweet bay (Magnolia vargzniana) tag alder (Alnus serrulata) and black gum (Nyssa ylvatzca) Vine
species present include laurel leaved greenbriar (Smilax launfolza) greenbriar (Smilax
rotund foha) rataan vine (Berchemza scandens) and poison ivy (Toxzcodendron radzcans) The
ground cover encompasses very short plants that are usually found in flooded environments
which include sedges (Car-ex spp) touch me not (Impatiens ca
pensis) rush (funcus effusus) wool
grass (Saipus cypennus) false nettle (Boehmena cylzndnca) clearweed (Pzlea pumila) Japanese stilt
grass (Microstegium vzmzneum) and lizards tail (Saururus cernuus)
312 Mixed Pine /Hardwood Forest
The mixed pine /hardwood forest community is generally found in the non wetland
undisturbed portions of the project study area This community is a variation of the Mesic
Pine Flatwood identified by Schafale and Weakley (1990) where the area has not been
burned and hardwoods have been allowed to share the canopy with pines These
communities occur on acidic soils in lower slopes steep north facing slopes ravines and
occasionally well drained small stream bottoms Under natural conditions they are uneven
aged with old trees present however within the project study area there were only a few
older trees observed This general lack of older trees or large areas of uneven aged timber
can be attributed to past disturbance activities such as agriculture and forest management
The few trees that were allowed to exist in the agricultural fields when agriculture activities
dominated the landscape were likely left to provide shade This community commonly
represents the stage in the succession of forest development following disturbance
Reproduction occurs mainly in canopy gaps with disturbed areas having increased amounts
of pines and weedy hardwoods such as red maple and sweetgum (Schafale and Weakley
1990)
Vegetation within the mixed pine /hardwood community in the project study area is
dominated in the canopy by loblolly pine with sweet gum (Lzguzdambar styraciva) willow oak
(Quercus phellos) and red maple extremely prevalent Other tree species present with this
community include northern red oak (Q rubra) southern red oak `Q falcata) white oak (Q
alba) black gum water oak (Q nzgra) eastern red cedar (Junzperus vzrgzniana) yellow poplar
(Lznodendron tulzpzfera) and black cherry (Prunus serotina) Shrub and herbaceous vegetation
observed include sweet pepperbush (Clethra aln folza) giant cane southern lady fern
(Athynum asrplenozdes) wax myrtle (Mynca cenfera) and huckleberry (Vacanzum stamineum)
Unburned areas within this community can often create a thick mtertangled thicket of vine
species including greenbriar Virginia creeper (Parthenocassus guznguefolza) Japanese
honeysuckle (Lonzcerajaponzca) and muscadine grape (Vztzs raundifolza)
3 13 Urban /Disturbed Community
The urban/disturbed community is the most dominant vegetative community within the
project study area and consists of areas that are periodically maintained by human influences
such as roadside and power line rights of way regularly mowed lawns commercial and
industrial properties and open areas Agricultural activities have dominated the land use in
this region since its original settlement Over the past 20 years however the area
surrounding Greenville and Winterville including the project area has witnessed increasing
Page 8 of 25

amounts of residential development During the field visit several large residential
developments were in the construction phases on land previously used for agriculture
The dominant vegetation within the urban/disturbed vegetative community tends to be low
growing and contain many species of annuals Residential /commercial development often
contains more trees and shrubs including some non native species The tree species often
observed include eastern red cedar red maple sweet gum sycamore (Platanus ocadentalzs)
black cherry American elm (Ulmus amencana) white oak river birch (Betula nzgra) black
willow (Salzx nzgra) and loblolly pine Residential properties tend to have a wide range of
large tree species depending on property owners preferences including non native species
such as tree of heaven (Ailanthus altzsszma) crepe myrtle (Lagerstroemia indica) and Chinese
privet Two shrubs common to this vegetative sub type that occur both naturally and as
escaped plants are wild and cultivated roses (Rosa spp ) and wax myrtle Fescue (Festuca spp )
is the dominant groundcover species throughout most of these areas Other groundcover
and herbaceous species include goldenrod (Solzdago spp ) rice cut grass (Leersza spp )
broomsedge (Andropogon vzrgznzcus) dog fennel (Eu.p ato rz m capzll folzum) Bermuda grass
(Cynodon dactylon) silverling (Bacchans halzm folza) poison ivy and Japanese honeysuckle
Agricultural areas contain few trees but the ones that are present are usually tall with large
crowns Oaks are typically the large wolf trees found in agricultural fields however other
trees such as the flowering dogwood (Cornus Honda) winged elm (Ulmus alata) and loblolly
pines are observed scattered in these field environments
314 Terrestnal Wildhfe
The forested and man dominated communities in the project study area offer good diversity
of foraging nesting and cover habitat for many species of amphibians reptiles birds and
mammals Species that may be associated with these types of communities are described
below An asterisk ( *) indicates the species that were directly observed or for which
evidence was noted during field reconnaissance
Terrestrial reptile species may include snakes such as the rough green snake (Opheodrys
aestzvus) and eastern milk snake (Lampropeltzs tnangulum tnangulum) Other reptiles such as the
eastern box turtle* (Terra
pene carohna) eastern fence lizard* (Sceloporus undulatus) and five
lined skink (Eumeces fasaatus) can often be found in this portion of the Carolinas
Many bird species may inhabit or migrate through the project study area Birds generally
tend to nest and forage within distinct vegetative communities depending upon many factors
including food source protection and predation Inhabitants of bottomland hardwood
forests generally require a water source and thick cover for foraging and nesting Birds likely
to occur within this community include woodcock (Scolopax minor) hooded warbler (Wilsonza
atnne) and white eyed vireo (Vireo gnseus) Inhabitants of the mixed pine hardwood
community often prefer medium to large tracts of upland timber to forage and for nest
protection Bird species often observed within these areas include the northern flicker
(Colaptes auntus) eastern towhee (Pzpzlo erythrophthalmus) wood thrush* (Hyloczchla mustelzna)
downy woodpecker* (Pumdes pubescens) and tufted titmouse (Baeolophus bicolor) Inhabitants
of the urban/disturbed community tend to be songbirds and birds who utilize man made
structures for nesting The birds often observed in the urban /disturbed community include
Page 9 of 25

mourning dove* (Zenatda macroura) red winged blackbird* (Agelatus phoentceus) Carolina
chickadee* (Poeale carolanensts) American robin* (Turdus magratorzus) northern cardinal*
(Cardanaks cardtnabs) northern mockingbird* (Mtmus poly lottos) house finch (Carpodacus
mexzcanus) Carolina wren* (Thryothorzts ludovzctanus) and dark eyed junco (Junco hyemaks)
Predatory species are usually found wherever food opportunities exist and therefore can not
be described as bound to a certain area These species may include American crow* (Corvus
brachyrhynchos) red tailed hawk* (Buteo jamatcensts) turkey vulture* (Cathartes aura) eastern
screech owl (Otus asao) and barred owl (Strzx varta)
A wide variety of mammals are expected to inhabit the terrestrial portions of the project area
and surrounding landscape Mammals tend to move through vegetative communities readily
in search of food or shelter however there are certain tendencies mammals will
demonstrate Some mammals are observed in residential and commercial areas at night due
to their nocturnal feeding habits these include Virginia opossum (Dade phzs vzrgtntana) and
eastern spotted skunk (Spalogale putonus) Some mammals such as the bobcat (Felts rufus) and
gray fox (Urncyon anereoargenteus) are very secretive and hide as deep as possible in
undisturbed wooded areas Whale still other mammals such as the coyote (Cants latrans) and
eastern harvest mouse (Reathrodontomys humults) take advantage of agricultural land and forest
edge ecotones Some mammals can truly be found throughout the entire project area from
urban development to bottomland hardwood forests these mammals include the gray
squirrel* (Scaurus carolanensts) chipmunk (Tamaas straatus) raccoon (Procyon lotor) eastern
cottontail (Sylvalagus flondanus) and white tailed deer* (Odocoileus vtrgtntanus) Bats such as the
eastern pipistrelle (Papastrellus subflavus) the eastern red (L.asturzts borealis) and the evening bat
(Nyctzceaus humeralas) may be present in the project study area
32 Aquatic Commumties
The waters within the project area are somewhat varied in their sizes and flow rates
however there are no deep major streams This situation creates a somewhat poor species
diversity of amplmbnans reptiles mammals and fish living interdependently Detailed
information including water body size for all of the streams within the project study area is
presented in Table 2 located in Section 41 1
The majority of the project study area likely has a limited amphibian population except for
areas along Fork Swamp and wetlands associated with its perennial unnamed tributary to the
south The primary amphibians anticipated to be located within these areas are species of
salamanders and frogs Salamanders such as the marbled salamander (Ambystoma opacum) and
southern dusky salamander (Desmognathus aurzculatus) are likely to be observed along streams
and in bottomland hardwood forests in the Coastal Plain Other amplubnans such as spring
peepers (Hyla crucifer) pickerel frogs (Rana palustras) bullfrogs* (Rana catesbeiana) and eastern
narrowmouth toad (Gastrophryne carolanensts) are likely present within the project area Spring
peepers and eastern narrowmouth toads mainly inhabit woodlands while pickerel frogs and
bullfrogs are found along shaded streams and wet areas All of the frogs and toads forage on
small invertebrates
Reptiles that spend the majority of their lives in aquatic communities and are somewhat
common throughout this portion of North Carolina include the snapping turtle (Chelydra
Page 10 of 25

serpentina) eastern musk turtle (Sternotl)erus odoratus) yellowbelly slider (Cbrysemys scnpta) and
redbelly water snake (Nerodia erytbrogaster) Turtles eat small invertebrates insects snails and
small aquatic plants and they nest both in the water and on dry land The redbelly water
snake will eat primarily small fish and amphibians and are often found on the edges of
streams in wetlands and on low overhanging vegetation
There are several aquatic mammals in the Coastal Plain including muskrat* (Ondatra
.Zibetbicus) and beaver (Castor canadensis) Muskrats feed on a variety of semiaquatic plants and
reside in dens beneath large mounds of vegetation Muskrat scat was observed within the
project area along the perennial UT to Fork Swamp Beaver are herbivores who spend
much of their lives constructing dams along water bodies to flood areas which act to protect
their dens and lodges from predation
Species composition of fish vanes to some degree with the size flow rate and type of food
present within any given water body There are only two streams within the project area
large enough to support sustainable fish populations Even still these are small headwater
streams anticipated to contain limited species diversity and total population Fish that are
likely to utilize the perennial streams within the project area include yellow bullhead
(Ameiurus natalzs) American eel (Anguilla rostrata) dusky shiner (Notropsis cummingsae) and red
breast sunfish (Lepomis auntus) These fish thrive in the slow flowing soft substrate waters
present within project area The overhanging vegetation provides good locales for foraging
on vegetation and benthic organisms and hiding from predators
Crustaceans and clam populations are expected to be limited due to the size of the water
bodies and amount of historic impact within the project area Crustacean species are
expected to be limited to crayfish (Cambarus spp) however clam species are expected to be
somewhat more diverse Clams and freshwater mussels potentially present in streams within
the project area include eastern elliptio* (Ellzptio complanata) eastern floater (Pyganodon
cataracta) and notched rainbow (Villosa constncta)
33 Summary of Anticipated Impacts
This section describes the anticipated impacts for the proposed SR 1700 widening project
Due to the lack of final designs no direct impacts can be calculated at this time Therefore
the following section is a general discussion of issues related to terrestrial and aquatic
impacts including methods in which these impacts can be reduced and best management
practices that must be followed
3 31 Anticipated Impacts to Terrestrial Communities
Preliminary designs for the SR 1700 widening project have not yet been completed
Therefore specific impacts can not be determined NCDOT has made a commitment to
widen within the existing right of way in as much as possible
Temporary fluctuation in populations of animal species which utilize terrestrial areas is
anticipated during the course of construction Slow moving burrowing and subterranean
organisms will be directly impacted by construction activities while mobile organisms will be
Page 11 of 25

displaced to adjacent communities Habitat reduction or fragmentation may also occur
{ when an ecosystem is disturbed and can lead to creation of smaller or isolated biotic
I j communities however because this is a xidenmg project increased ecosystem fragmentation
is not expected It should be noted that competitive forces in the adapted communities will
result in a redefinition of population equilibria
3 3 2 Anticipated Impacts to Aquatic Communities
Aquatic organisms are very sensitive to the discharges and inputs resulting from construction
activities Impacts usually associated with in stream construction include increased
channelization and scouring of the streambed In stream construction alters the substrate
and impacts adjacent stream side vegetation Such disturbances within the substrate lead to
increased siltation that can clog the gills and feeding mechanisms of benthic organisms fish
and amphibian species These organisms are slow to recover and may never recover once
the stream has been severely impacted
Appropriate measures must be taken to avoid spillage of construction materials and control
runoff Such measures should include an erosion and sedimentation control plan provisions
for disposal and handling of waste materials and storage stormwater management measures
and appropriate road maintenance measures NCDOT s Best Management Practices for Protection
of Surface Waters (BMP PSW) and Sedimentation Control guidelines should be strictly
enforced during the construction stages of the project Longterm impacts to water
resources may include permanent changes to the stream banks and temperature increases
caused by the removal of stream side vegetation
The removal of stream side vegetation and placement of fill material during construction
contributes to erosion and possible sedimentation Quick revegetation of these areas helps
to reduce the impacts by supporting the underlying soils Erosion and sedimentation may
carry soils toxic compounds trash and other materials into the aquatic communities at the
construction site As a result sand bars may be formed both at the construction site and
downstream Increased light penetration from the removal of stream side vegetation may
increase water temperatures Warmer water contains less oxygen thus reducing aquatic life
that depends on high oxygen concentrations
40 Jurisdictional Topics
Any activity that results in a discharge of fill material into jurisdictional waters will require
acquisition of federal and state environmental permits Jurisdictional waters include
perennial and intermittent surface waters forested and non forested wetlands and riparian
buffers During the permitting process mitigation is addressed which studies in sequential
order the avoidance nummization and compensatory mitigation for unavoidable losses to
Waters of the United States
Page 12 of 25

41 Waters of the United States
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act requires regulation of discharges into `Waters of the
United States The U S Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) is the principal
administrative agency of the Clean Water Act however the USACE has the responsibility
for implementation permitting and enforcement of the provisions of the Act The USACE
regulatory program is defined in 33 CFR 320 330
Surface waters (lakes ponds rivers and streams) and wetlands are subject to Jurisdictional
consideration under the Section 404 program Any action that proposes to place fill into
these areas falls under the Jurisdiction of the USACE under Section 404 of the Clean Water
Act (33 U S C 1344) Section 401 of the Clean Water Act grants authority to individual
States for regulation of discharges into `Waters of the United States Under North
Carolina General Statutes 113A Pollution Control and Environment and codified in
NCAC 15A the NCDWQ has the responsibility for implementation permitting and
enforcement of the provisions of the Act
There are currently no bridges on this project and none are anticipated to be built in order to
replace existing pipes and culverts However most of the existing pipes and culverts will
likely be removed and replaced with longer larger and improved materials All NCDOT
BMP s will be followed in the removal and subsequent replacement of any pipe or culvert
placed within jurisdictional Waters of the United States
411 Surface Waters
The NCDWQ defines a perennial stream as a clearly defined channel that contains water for
the majority of the year (greater than 90 percent of the tune) These channels usually have
some or all of the following characteristics distinctive stream bed and bank aquatic life and
groundwater flow or discharge An intermittent stream is a clearly defined channel that
contains water for all but the driest months of the year Both perennial and intermittent
streams are jurisdictional under state and federal regulations An ephemeral stream is used
to convey surface water to a larger intermittent or perennial stream only during and after
storm events Flow within these channels usually lasts for 24 to 48 hours These streams are
not considered jurisdictional under the Clean Water Act
There are seven Jurisdictional stream channels located within the project study area two
perennial stream and five intermittent streams Fork Swamp and all of its unnamed
tributaries (UTs) within the project study area appear to have been historically channehzed
for agricultural purposes throughout its length from its source to its confluence with Swift
Creek This channehzatton has led to a reduction in riparian wetlands and significant
siltation of the streams resulting in a homogenous bed material of sand and silt Detailed
stream characteristics including specific water quality designations are presented in Section
2 2 and Table 2 All jurisdictional streams are depicted in Figures 4a through 4e located in
Appendix A Stream rating forms are included in Appendix D
Page 13 of 25

Table 2 Jurisdictional Streams
Stream
USACE
NCDWQ
Bankfull
Bank
Water
Stream
Name
Score
Score
Width (ft)
Height
Depth
Type
SB
Good
(ft
(in)
SAA
12
195
10
7
2 6
intermittent
SAB
(Fork
33
31
15
8 10
3 9
perennial
Swam
SAC
20
1925
10
5
2 6
intermittent
SB
58
355
15
34
3 9
perenrual
SBA
33
2075
2
1
1 4
intermittent
SBB
32
2725
15
5 6
3 9
1 mterinittent
SBC
21
2225
10
46
26
1 intermittent
Scope ig letter response comments have not been received from the NCWRC indicating that
there are any construction moratoriums related to pipe or culvert construction along streams
within the project area however none are anticipated
412 Jurisdictional Wetlands
Wetlands as defined in 33 CFR 328 3 are those areas that are inundated or saturated by
surface water or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support and under
normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in
saturated soil conditions (Environmental Laboratory 1987) Based on this definition and
the guidance provided in the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual delineation
of Jurisdictional wetlands is based on the presence of three diagnostic indicators
hydrophytic vegetation hydnc soils and hydrology
There are two Jurisdictional wetland areas that have been identified and located within the
project study area These wetland areas were field verified by the USACE in July 2005 by
Mr Bill Biddlecome USACE regulatory specialist Due to the relatively few jurisdictional
resources this verification of the Waters of the U S was conducted without the presence of
Mulkey biologists or NCDOT representatives The jurisdictional determination letter from
Mr Biddlecome dated March 30 2006 is included in Appendix E All jurisdictional
wetland areas within the project study area are depicted in Figures 4a through 4e found in
Appendix A USACE Wetland data forms and associated NCDWQ wetland rating
worksheets are included in Appendix D The specific characteristics of these wetland areas
are discussed in Table 3
Table 3 Junsdictlonal
Wetlands
Wetland
Name
NCDWQ
Score
Cowardin
Classification
Stream
Drainage
Quality'
WA
46
PF01A2
SB
Fair
WB
54
PFO1A
SB
Good
1 Based on rating scale of 0 24 Poor 25 49 Fair 50 79 Good and 80 100 Excellent
Z Palustrine Forested Broadleaved Deciduous Temporarily Flooded
Page 14 of 25

413 Neuse River Buffer Rules
The Neuse River Riparian Buffer Rules apply to 50 foot wide riparian buffers directly
adjacent to perennial and intermittent surface waters in the Neuse River Basin This rule
applies to surface waters depicted as blue line streams depicted on the most recent USGS
topographical quadrangle maps or NRCS soil survey maps Exemptions to this will be
allowed if the stream can be shown to be non jurisdictional The Neuse River Buffer rules
do not apply to portions of the riparian buffer where a use is existing and ongoing Any
change in land use within the riparian buffer is characterized as an impact The Nutrient
Sensitive Waters Management Strategy for the Protection and Maintenance of Riparian
Buffers (15 A NCAC 2B 0233) provides a designation for uses that cause impacts to
riparian buffers within the Neuse Basin
Simple perpendicular bridge crossings are designated Allowable within the riparian buffer
assuming project impacts are below 150 linear feet of buffer (measured parallel to the
stream) and /or 0 33 acre The Allowable designation means that the intended uses may
proceed within the riparian buffer provided that there are no practical alternates Allowable
with Mitigation buffer impacts for linear transportation projects are addressed when
parallel impacts to jurisdictional waters occur and when a bridge or culvert is replaced with a
culvert Allowable and Allowable with Mitigation buffer impacts require written
authorization from the NCDWQ prior to project development
This project is expected to have only Allowable with Mitigation buffer impacts due to the
replacement of existing culverts and pipes with culverts and pipes and not bridges Wetlands
adjacent to the perennial UT to Fork Swamp (Stream SB) will likely be impacted along with
the associated Neuse River buffers as a result of this proposed project however impacts
totals are unknown at this time
Any junscctional stream wetland or riparian buffer impacts that occur as a result of a
temporary on site detour roadway will need to be restored following the conditions of the
permit allowing such activity Wetland impacts can be considered either permanent or
temporary along on site temporary detours depending largely upon the amount of soil
compaction within the affected wetland area The handling of temporary and permanent
buffer impacts is based upon whether they he within Zone 1 or Zone 2 Impacts within
Zone 1 from top of bank to 20 feet landward on both sides of the channel will be
considered permanent because clearing activities are not allowed Impacts within Zone 2
from 20 feet landward to 50 feet landward on both sides of the channel will be considered
temporary if the area is simply being cleared and replanted and permanent if the area is
being graded ( NCDWQ 2004)
Page 15 of 25

414 Impacts to Waters of the United States
Impacts to Waters of the U S are anticipated at various locations throughout the length of
the project including stream crossings and wetland areas located within or adjacent to the
existing NCDOT right of way HoweN er at this time no design plans have been produced
therefore impact estimations would be unreahstic
42 Permit Issues
The USACE issues general and individual permits JP) Nationwide permits (NWP) are a
type of general permit used throughout the United States that authorizes certain routine
activities that are expected to have minimal advgrse consequences to the environment
Regional general permits are authorizations deemed to address activities that are unique or
germane to a region These permits are issued for specific activities that are expected to
have a limited environmental impact Individual permits are generally reserved for projects
with potential for substantial environmental impacts This permit requires a full public
interest review including public notices and coordination with involved agencies interested
parties and the general public When impacts to streams or wetlands cannot be avoided a
permit application may be required by the Wilmington District The type of activity the
extent of the impacts and the specific environment impacted will be considered by the
Wilmington District before a determination is made to issue a permit Conditions attached
to the permit address general regional and project specific issues
Due to the length of the project and the number of jurisdictional streams within the project
area an IP is anticipated to be required The IP will need to be submitted to the applicable
regulatory field office The Washington Regulatory Field Office reviews and approves
permit applications for Pitt County An IP is needed when
• Impacts are equal to or more than 300 linear feet of perennial or intermittent stream
channel
• Jurisdictional wetland impacts are greater than 0 5 acres
• The USACE holds discretion to put any project into the IP process if a sensitive
wetland or stream system is being impacted or if the community presents significant
concerns
The USACE will still require these items regardless of the permit type
• Placing heavy equipment working in wetlands on mats or other measures to
minimize soil disturbance
• Removal of any temporary fill in its entirety and returning affected areas to their
preexisting elevation
• Preventing live or fresh concrete including bags of uncured concrete from coming
into contact with waters of the state until the concrete has hardened
• Placing filter cloth under any riprap material used for bank stabilization
The USACE issues Nationwide Permit 33 when construction activities necessitate the use of
temporary structures such as cofferdams placement of access fill material or dewaterng of
Page 16 of 25

the construction site unless these activities are not adequately addressed in the
Environmental Assessment (EA) However if these structures are anticipated in advance
the temporary and permanent impacts can be discussed in the IP In addition to the permit
requirements listed for the IP above any work below the ordinary high water mark must be
permanently stabilized at the earliest practicable date and a restoration plan of reasonable
measures to avoid and minimize adverse effects to aquatic resources must be included with
the permit submittal Regional conditions identify certain waters that have restrictions or are
excluded from the use of this pemut including anadromous fish spawning areas
(moratoriums applied) designated waters (HQW ORW IPNA PNA) and Areas of
Environmental Concern (AECs) in the 20 counties covered by the Coastal Area
Management Act (CAMA) Regional conditions also require compliance with General
Condition 13 concerning notification and coordination with the USACE
A Section 401 General Water Quality Certification (WQC) is issued for any activity
including bridge repair maintenance or construction activities which may result in a
discharge into Waters of the United States The NCDWQ issues its own Individual Permit
and may issue a WQC #3688 if a NWP 33 is required by the USACE
4 21 Mitigation
The USACE has adopted through the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) a
mitigation policy which embraces the concepts of no net loss of wetlands and sequencing
The purpose of this policy is to restore and maintain the chemical biological and physical
integrity of Waters of the United States specifically wetlands Mitigation of wetland impacts
has been defined by the CEQ to include avoidance of impacts (to wetlands) minimizing
impacts rectifying impacts reducing impacts over time and compensating for impacts
(40 CFR 1508 20) Each of these three aspects (avoidance mimmization and compensatory
mitigation) must be considered in sequential order
Avoidance mitigation examines all appropriate and practicable possibilities of averting impacts
to Waters of the United States According to a 1990 Memorandum of Agreement (MOA)
between the USEPA and the USACE in determining appropriate and practicable
measures to offset unavoidable impacts such measures should be appropriate to the scope
and degree of those impacts and practicable in terms of cost existing technology and
logistics in light of overall project purposes The following methods are suggested to avoid
adverse impacts to Waters of the United States
• Consideration of all alternative courses of action including a no build
alternative
• Within constraints related to the purpose and need of the project, and where
possible move roadway alignment away from surface waters and wetlands
It is not feasible for this roadway to completely avoid impacts to Waters of the U S
and still meet the purpose and need of the project
Minzmz .Zatzon includes the examination of appropriate and practicable steps to reduce the
adverse impacts to Waters of the United States Implementation of these steps will be
Page 17 of 25

required through project modifications and permit conditions Minimization typically
focuses on decreasing the footprint of the proposed project through the reduction of
median widths right of way widths fill slopes and /or road shoulder widths The following
methods are suggested to mtri,mize adverse impacts to Waters of the United States
• Strictly enforce Best Management Practices (BMPs) to control sedimentation
during project construction
• Clearing and grubbing activity should be minimized
• Reestablishment of vegetation on exposed areas with judicious pesticide and
herbicide management
• Minuzmzation of in stream activity
• Use responsible litter control practices
Widening will be performed within the existing grassed shoulders to the maximum
extent possible This will sigmficandy minimize the amount of impacts to areas
already significantly disturbed
Compensatory mitigation includes restoration enhancement or creation for wetland and stream
functions and values that are lost when these systems are converted to other uses
Compensatory mitigation is not normally considered until anticipated impacts to Waters of
the United States have been avoided and minimized to the maximum extent possible It is
recognized that no net loss of wetland functions and values may not be achieved in each
and every permit action Appropriate and practicable compensatory mitigation is required
for unavoidable adverse impacts which remain after all appropriate and practicable
minimization has been required
It is the decision of the USACE and NCDWQ to require mitigation for impacts associated
with project construction The USACE usually requires compensatory mitigation for
activities authorized under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act when there are any
unavoidable impacts to jurisdictional wetlands or greater than (or equal to) 150 linear feet of
jurisdictional stream The NCDWQ may require compensatory mitigation for activities
authorized under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act for unavoidable impacts to more than
10 acre of wetlands or more than 150 linear feet of perennial or intermittent streams A July
22 2003 Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between NCDOT and the North Carolina
Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) states that EEP will provide compensatory
mitigation to NCDOT for jurisdictional impacts related to roadway projects after onsite
mitigation measures are exhausted
4 211 On site mitigation opportunities
During the natural resource investigation of the project study area an exhaustive search for
potential onsite mitigation areas was conducted These are areas that are either within the
existing NCDOT or potentially will be in the future NCDOT right of way once
construction of the proposed project commences Due to the unknown width of the future
right of way all potential stream and /or wetland mitigation areas wnthin the project study
area have been identified
Page 18 of 25

All seven of the streams within the project study area are potentially suitable sites for on site
stream restoration due to the ditched and channehzed nature of the water bodies Stream
SAB has the greatest mitigation potential of the streams within the project study area due to
unstable bed and banks causing severe incision and entrenchment Furthermore there
appear to be few property owners along this stream Though the other stream locations
could benefit from stream restoration or stabilization activities potential issues include too
many property owners wooded areas and construction within residential yards
Wetland restoration or creation could occur in conjunction with any stream restoration
project in the study area However significant expansion of existing wetlands is not feasible
due to the encroachment of residential properties in the areas surrounding the jurisdictional
streams and wetlands Therefore any wetland restoration within the project area would be
severely limited
43 Protected Species
Some populations of fauna and flora have been or are in the process of decline due to
either natural forces or their inability to coexist with humans Federal law (under the
provisions of Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act [ESA] of 1973 as amended) requires
that any action likely to adversely affect a species classified as federally protected be subject
to review by the USFWS Prohibited actions which may affect any species protected under
the ESA are outlined in Section 9 of the Act Other species may receive additional
protection under separate laws such as the Lacey Act Amendments of 1981 the Migratory
Bird Treaty of 1999 the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972 or the Eagle Protection
Act of 1940
4 3 1 Federally Protected Species
Species which are listed or are proposed for listing as endangered or threatened are
recorded in Section 4 of the ESA As defined by the Act, an endangered species is any plant
or animal which is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range
within the foreseeable future A threatened species is any species which is likely to become
an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of
its range
As of January 16 2008 the USFWS identified three Endangered (E) species known to occur
in Pitt County The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) maps were
reviewed on January 23 2008 utilizing data updated on September 28 2007 to determine if
any protected species have been identified near the project study area This map review
confirmed that no species identified as Endangered or Threatened by the USFWS have been
identified within a one mile radius of the project study area Table 4 lists the three federally
protected species for Pitt County North Carolina It should be noted that the bald eagle
was formerly listed as a Threatened species for Pitt County however as of August 8 2007 it
has been formally delisted Information regarding the bald eagle is included in Section 4 3 3
Page 19 of 25

Table 4 Federall Protected Species for Pitt County, North Carolina
Suitable
Biological
Common Name
Scientific Name
Federal Listing
Habitat
Conclusion
West Indian
Trichechus manatus
Endangered
No
No Effect
manatee
Red cockaded
Piczodes borealis
Endangered
Yes
No Effect
woodpecker
Tar spinymussel
Ellptzo steinstansana
Endangered
No
No Effect
4 3 11 West Indian manatee (Trwhechus manatus)
Federal Status Endangered
State Status Endangered
Date Listed March 11 1967
The manatee is a large gray or brown aquatic mammal Adults average approximately 10 feet
in length and weigh up to 1000 lbs Manatees inhabit both salt and fresh water of a
sufficient depth (5 0 to 20 0 feet) They may be encountered in canals rivers estuarine
habitats saltwater bays and in nearshore waters Manatees prefer water temperatures
warmer than approximately 34° Fahrenheit however they have been occasionally observed
in waters of a lower temperature (Webster et al 1985) They may be encountered in North
Carolina waters during the warmer summer months however they are much more common
in the waters of Georgia and Florida (USFWS 1996)
Biological Conclusion No Effect
Suitable habitat consisting of canals rivers estuarine habitats saltwater bays and in
nearshore waters is not present in the study area None of the streams within the project
area have sufficient flow or water depth to support the West Indian manatee NCNHP
maps were reviewed on January 22 2008 (utilizing data updated on September 28 2007) to
determine if any protected species have been identified within one mile of the project study
area This map review confirmed that no manatees are known to be located within a one
mile radius of the project study area Therefore proposed project construction will have No
Effect on the West Indian manatee
4 312 Red - cockaded woodpecker (Picoldes boreahs)
Federal Status Endangered
State Status Endangered
Date listed October 13 1970
This bird is a small 7 to 8 inch tall woodpecker with a black and white barred back
conspicuous large white cheek surrounded by a black cap nape and throat Males have a
very small red mark at the upper edge of the white cheek and just behind the eye The red
cockaded woodpecker (RCW) is found in open pine forests in the southeastern United
States The RCW uses open old growth stands of southern pines particularly longleaf pine
for foraging and nesting habitat A forested stand optimally should contain at least 50
percent pine and lack a thick understory The RCW is unique among woodpeckers because
Page 20 of 25

it nests exclusively in living pine trees These birds excavate nests in pines greater than 60
years old that are contiguous with open pule dominated foraging habitat The foraging
range of the RCW may extend to 500 acres and must be contiguous with suitable nesting
sites (USFWS 1992)
Living pines infected with red heart disease (Fomes pine) are often selected for cavity
excavation because the inner heartwood is usually weakened Cavities are located from 12 to
100 feet above ground level and below live branches These trees can be identified by
candles large encrustations of running sap that surrounds the tree Colonies consist of
one to many of these candle trees The RCW lays its eggs in April May and June the eggs
hatch approximately 10 to 12 days later (USFWS 1992)
Biological Conclusion No Effect
Suitable habitat for the RCW consisting of open mature stands of southern pines is present
within the project area There is a small area near the northern end of the project area that
contains a loblolly pine dominated forest The DBH of the pines present are approximately
10 to 18 inches Mulkey conducted a red cockaded woodpecker survey of this area in May
2005 no cavity trees or individuals were observed In addition Mulkey performed a 0 5 mile
radius RCW survey surrounding the area determined to contain suitable habitat on August
2005 No individuals or cavity trees were observed during this survey NCNHP maps were
reviewed on January 22 2008 (utilizing data updated on September 28 2007) to determine if
any protected species have been identified within one mile of the project study area This
map review confirmed that no RCWs are known to be located within a one mile radius of
the project study area Therefore proposed project construction will have No Effect on the
RCW
4 3 13 Tar Spinymussel (Ellrptro sterrnstansana)
Federal Status Endangered
State Status Endangered
Date Listed July 29 1985
The Tar spmymussel measures approximately 2 5 inches in length The outer shell surface of
young specimens is orange brown with greenish rays Adults are darker colored with
inconspicuous rays The inner shell color is yellow or pinkish at one end and bluish white at
the other Juveniles may have up to 12 spines which they tend to lose as they mature
(USFWS 1987)
This species lives in relatively silt free uncompacted gravel or coarse sand in fast flowing
well oxygenated stream reaches It feeds by syphoning and filtering small food particles that
are suspended in the water The Tar spmymussel is found in association with other mussels
but it is never very numerous The total known population of this species is estimated to be
between 100 to 500 individuals The Tar spiinymussel is often located in the central channel
of the river (USFWS 1987)
Page 21 of 25

Biological Conclusion No Effect
Suitable habitat for the Tar spinymussel consisting of relatively silt free uncompacted gravel
or coarse sand in fast flowing well oxygenated stream reaches are not present within the
project study area The streams within the project study area have been channehzed and the
bed materials consist solely of silt sand and organic material NCNHP maps were reviewed
on January 22 2008 (utilizing data updated on September 28 2007) to determine if any
protected species have been identified within one mile of the project study area This map
review confirmed that no Tar spinymussel individuals are known to be located within a one
mile radius of the project study area Therefore proposed project construction will have No
Effect on the Tar spinymussel
4 3 2 Federal Species of Concern and State Listed Species
Federal Species of Concern (FSC) are not legally protected under the ESA and are not
subject to any of its provisions including Section 7 Species designated as FSC are defined
as taxa which may or may not be listed in the future These species were formerly
Candidate 2 (C2) species or species under consideration for hsting for which there is
insufficient information to support listing The USFWS lists nine FSCs that are known to
occur in Pitt County These species are listed with habitat descriptions in Appendix C —
Table 2
Species identified as Endangered Threatened or Special Concern (SC) by the state of North
Carolina are afforded state protection under the State Endangered Species Act and the
North Carolina Plant Protection and Conservation Act of 1979 The NCNHP lists for Pitt
County last updated July 2005 identified 21 species that have state protection No
populations of state or federally listed species are known to occur within one mile of the
project study area The federally and state protected species their status and the existence
of suitable habitat within the project study area are shown in Appendix C Table 2
4 3 3 Bald eagle (Hahaeetus leucocephalus)
As of August 8 2007 the bald eagle has been delisted (formerly Threatened) from the
USFWS Endangered Species list According to the January 16 2008 USFWS list of federally
protected species for Pitt County the bald eagle receives protection from the Bald and
Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGPA) This federal law prohibits "taking" killing selling
or otherwise harming eagles their nests or eggs Due to the bald eagle s current delisted
status a biological conclusion is no longer necessary for this species
Suitable habitat for the bald eagle consisting of large areas of open water is not present
within the project study area or within 660 feet of the project study area NCNHP maps
were reviewed on January 22 2008 (utilizing data updated on September 28 2007) to
determine if any protected species have been identified within or near the project study area
This map review confirmed that no sightings of bald eagles have been documented within a
one mile radius of the project study area Therefore it is anticipated that the proposed
project construction will not impact bald eagles or their habitat
Page 22 of 25

i
I 50 References
Alsop Fred J III 2001 Birds of North America Eastern Region Smithsonian Handbooks
DK Publishing New York NY
Bogan Arthur E 2002 Workbook and Key to the Freshwater Bivalves of North Carolina
North Carolina Museum of Natural Sciences Raleigh NC
Conant R and J T Collins 1998 A Field Guide to Reptiles and Amphibians of Eastern
and Central North America Third Edition Expanded Peterson Field Guides
Houghton Mifflin Publishers New York NY
Cowardin L M V Carter F C Golet and E T LaRoe 1979 Classification of Wetlands
and Deepwater Habitat of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service United States
Department of the Interior US Government Printing Office Washington DC
Environmental Laboratory 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual
Technical Report Y 87 1 United States Army Engineer Waterways Experiment
Station Vicksburg MS
Lee D S C R Gilbert C H Hocutt R E Jenkins D E McAllister and J R Stauffer Jr
1980 et seq Atlas of North American Freshwater Fishes North Carolina Museum
of Natural History North Carolina Department of Agriculture Raleigh NC North
Carolina Biological Survey #1980 12
Martof Bernard S William M Palmer Joseph R Bailey Julian R Harrison and Jack
Dernud 1980 Amphibians and Reptiles of the Carolinas and Virginia The
University of North Carolina Press Chapel Hill NC
Kamowski Edwin H 1974 Soil Survey of Pitt County North Carolina Soil Conservation
Service United States Department of Agriculture US Government Printing Office
Washington DC
Natural Resource Conservation Service (MRCS) 1999 Growing Season Dates and Lengths
for Cabarrus and Rowan Counties North Carolina Raleigh NC
North Carolina Division of Land Resources (NCDLR) 1985 Geologic Map of North
Carolina North Carolina Geological Survey Raleigh NC
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) 2004 Redbook Surface Waters and
Wetlands Standards North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources Division of Environmental Management Raleigh NC
Page 23 of 25

North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) 1995 Guidance for Rating the
Values of Wetlands in North Carolina 4d' Version North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources Division of Environmental Management
Raleigh NC
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) 1999 Internal Guidance Manual
Stream Classification Method 2 d version North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources Division of Environmental Management
Raleigh NC
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) 2002 Neuse River Basiinwide Water
Quality Management Plan Water Quality Section Raleigh NC
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) 2005 Identification Methods for the
On
gins of Intermittent and Perennial Streams North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources Division of Environmental Management
Raleigh NC
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) 2006 North Carolina Water Quality
Assessment and Impaired Waters List (2006 Final Integrated 305(b) and 303(d)
Report) North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality Raleigh NC
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) 2002 List of Active NPDES
Permits North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality Raleigh NC
Radford A E H E Ahles and C R Bell 1968 Manual of the Vascular Flora of the
Carolinas University of North Carolina Press Chapel Hill NC
Schafale M P and A S Weakley 1990 Classification of the Natural Communities of
North Carolina A Third Approximation North Carolina Natural Heritage Program
Division of Parks and Recreation Department of Environment Health and Natural
Resources Raleigh NC
Stokes Donald and Lillian Stokes 1966 Stokes Field Guide to Birds Eastern Region Little
Brown and Company New York NY
United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) 2003 Stream Quality Assessment
Worksheet Wilmington Regional District Wilmington North Carolina
United States Fish and Wildlife Service 1992 Endangered and Threatened Species of the
Southeastern United States (The Red Book) Region 4 Department of the Interior
Division of Endangered Species
United States Fish and Wildlife Service 1996 Recovery Plan for West Indian manatee —
florida population (Tnchechus manatus) Atlanta GA 194pp
Page 24 of 25

United States Fish and Wildlife Service 1987 Recovery Plan for the Tar spmymussel (Ellotzo
stemstansana) Atlanta Georgia 40pp
Webster W D J F Parnell and W C Biggs Jr 1985 Mammals of the Carolinas
Virginia and Maryland University of North Carolina Press Chapel Hill NC
Page 25 of 25

APPENDIX A
FIGURES

UMMEN A�►i��`1
,i►�,1 *ice .
43I� 42
is 33 J
3 stn
42 64A M A 1R� T
2 r �1j3� 30
�smar,
Figure 1
Project Vicinity
TIP No U -2817
SR 1700 from SR 1711 in Winterville
to NC 43 /US 264 A in Greenville
Pitt County, North Carolina
North Carolina
Department of Transportation
h 9

.ai a— H IIDr E
= South '
eo
e
3
Fit .Yj
co
P=4 210
r
- Can, roads
Corn
5 0
• 4 dw�1
er R o a o
? i � ,r Firetow
`g 1
•III ' "A O. � I ' ps
- ■, li�
' I
IL
4 I'
I + � It •,
Ln
LI_
4 h
i
1 4z
r
`o t 1( A
f M �
a I y
■ o ^y �._• n� 1 Tabard Rd
, Milton Dr ^� 41'' T
` + � Jeanette St � +� '' 0
M Worthington N w CT9r.r "
r .
z
*now Q Channel Dr p
o° Corbett St
iI �;� + HillcrestAve
Rob, _, . Co
�1�'�' • ;�;�, �I..r... 4, . AIma.Dr�_.;, � WI
9 i i nterfield Dr
cla
o
r m co
KD
IINf
"Q Gee Blvd y
E I Southern'
a •, E Q Project ,
>,� Terminus
CD
worthin ton d -
ti�..
pr t E %unl •
x1 �4�r Lora Ln 'y t
S cal 11
S ' F
ibex St
4
PROJECT TOPOGRAPHY
M L 1711 to NC 43 /US 264A U -2817
SR 1700 from SR Figure No.
E N G I N E E P S & CON S lJ Pitt County, North Carolina
Prepared For. 1:10,000
Feet
0 380 760 1,520 2,280 3,040 2 a
USGS 7.5- Minute Topographic Quadrangles:
Greenville SW

idle.. t Co �M ' +' �. qP
nc o �
qr Northern , -
�" ei Project �` f
�! Terminus' , + �''
ej
Hollo t Dexter St o�� 'f f' �J� ,r t * •
o � � � . ' 4 • a . ° a off` �'' � ' M � ' �
)cLawhorn Dr &5
i 7 V41 r
Deed Dr E ., �. ter' - •;�
It" 10
r M - *. s
arm
y_ ■�d .- " tea` Hartford St x� on sb `fit o
�� yy
!Radio TV
■ / G_ Y 1
It
It
�Ih 0
_ Cz r ■ - - - -
p * i
I
fir'` /a.a, �+�_. �"+/ r ■ .,t'" Dup i
ont t Y.
19r st
Warwick Dr
++ * ■ * Ripley Dr 0 � 1 Ii
! , - . ! Club Pines
�■„ Caver h 8ayleY Ln
* 0 Crestlme Blvd_ _. � 0 —. -- -
�. ,.., hu .- r o ti m
0
,a � ; � � a R / „ Cedarrst Rd
~` st. given
e '+_-�
/
L !! +^ Stira� 4
f
L LU
cn
5 t
•_ t Water Oak Ln
Rh ,tit
Hall Dr
r So th . ,y , +--
i
, � .._tea.. --- -••- --
4 _
3
\te +"
Pam 2LO
f
r anno
i, 4
Ce 1 i 9 '�"'y ] O
iretower_Rd _ p
PROJECT TOPOGRAPHY
M U LKEY 2817 Figure No.
SR 1700 from SR 1711 to NC 43 /US 264A
ENGINEERS & CONSULTANTS Pitt County, North Carolina
Prepared For: 1:10,000
1 Feet
0 390 780 1,560 2,340 3,120 2
x
o z
•,�F °a�° USGS 7.5- Minute Topographic Quadrangles:
N01 fps "qv Greenville SW

U.,
7
ZmNN
h>
4r
it
IV
PA#'
Lw
i'k j
/lTlh
uv-
z
0,
M
.1
En .3
0
0
Z
Oro .
OZ
5y
C)
Z
Lw
i'k j
/lTlh
uv-
z
0,
M
.1
En .3
0
0
Z
Oro .
OZ

�
:d
y § 77f \ \
eR Z�
;M
}�
\
k � \
\ #�
\
�
!
�
jjlz�-
�

APPENDIX B
SITE PHOTOGRAPHY

U -2817
Evans Road Widening
Pitt County
1. Looking north from residential development toward Wetland WA.
2. Looking west from Evans Road toward Stream SB.
Page 1 of 2

U -2817
Evans Road Widening
Pitt County
3. Looking southwest from Evans Road toward stream �)tskl.
4. fine stand along Evans Road near the northern project terminus.
Page 2 of 2

APPENDIX C
TABLES

Table 1 Soils Summary - Evans Street Widening, Pitt County, NC
High
Water Site
Taxonomy Slope Hydnc Drainage Table Index
Symbol Series (Subgroup) ( %) Class Class" (ft) Productivity° Other
AyB
Aycock fine sandy
Typic
1 6
Well Drained
>50
90
Strongly to very strongly acid
loam
Paleudults
Bb
Bibb complex
Typic
01
A
Poorly
0
90
Low organic matter content
Fluvaquents
Drained
Co
Coxville fine sandy
Typic
0-2
A
Poorly
0
90
Very strongly to extremely acid
loam
Paleaquults
Drained
moderately slow permeability
ExA
Exum fine sandy
Aquic
01
Well Drained
25
90
High available water capacity
loam
Paleudults
GoA
Goldsboro sandy
Aquic
01
B
Moderately
25
90
Slow runoff
loam
Paleudults
Well Drained
GoB
Goldsboro sandy
Aquic
1-6
B
Moderately
25
90
Medium runoff
loam
Paleudults
Well Drained
Ly
Lynchburg fine
Aenc
0-1
B
Somewhat
15
90
Low shnnk swell potential
sandy loam
Paleaquults
Poorly
Drained
NrB
Norfolk sandy loam
Typic
1 6
Well Drained
>50
90
Low organic matter content
Kandwdults
OcB
Ocilla loamy fine
Aquic Arenic
04
B
Somewhat
25
80
Low available water capacity
sand
Paleudults
Poorly
Drained
Ra
Rains fine sandy
Typic
01
A
Poorly
0
90
Runoff is slow to ponded
loam
Paleaquults
Drained
Tu
Tuckerman fine
Typic
01
A
Poorly
0
90
Slightly to medium acid
sandy loam
Endoaqualfs
Drained
WaB
Wagram loamy sand
Arernc
0 6
Well Drained
>5 0
80
Low to very low organic matter
Kandwdults
content moderately rapid
permeability
A Drainage Classifications W = Well SP = Somewhat Poorly
B Site Index Based on a base age of 50 years the range presented covers the species listed by the USDA P

O O 0 O
} Z } Z Z
d
a
C
`y
m
>_
.a
C
f6
d
N
3
C
f6
m
N
z
O
E
R
C
m
a
a
d
0
d
m
d
d
w
R
R
c
c
m
0
°
o
E
0
U
0
L
C
a
O
Z
O
z}
CO)
N
N
N
O
Z
N
}
N
}
O
z}
N
N
O
z
a+
N
>�
>�
=
O
0
m
N
o
R
At
d
N
w
O
O
a)
0
m
co
m
O
N
m
U
0
N
d d
aN s
O
N
R
O
...
N
N
>
N
L
a)
w
C
O
w
N
O)
N
O
N
N
°
c
N
a
m
O
E
o
U
N
N
E
v
a
ca
N
0)
O
O
=
O
t
m
C
—
N
°
N
a)
m
a O
C
o
a
O C
N
N
U-
>
O
E
m
w
N E
O
W E
C
�
U�'
Q
U
a
a
a
d
c_
.0
F-
>
w
w
F-
f-
m
w
w
CO
U-
w
m
C,
N
a)
-M
a
N
�
�
a)
N
ro
0
0
E
m
U
ro
L
a
ct,
Z
°
c
m
_-rz
0
N
N
N
cn
N
a)
C
m
d
N
N
a )
0
N
Y
R
�m
O
m
4)
Z
m
a
EL
10
F-
y
c
m
�
w
t+
0
N
>
a)
�a
m
a)
O
L
F-
Q
C
w
N
=
N
=
C
a
fl-
l6
N
c
O
E
y
a
m
a
N
F
m
°
d
N
a)
d
E
0
c
m
a)
a
c
C
o
L
fn
a
a
o
c
N
3
O
O
a
U)
E
a
o
-0
a
N
N
m
O
a
N
N
C
N
Z
c
a)
m
m
R
T
C
E
m
m
m
O
N
O
U
>
�p
E
N
N
Q)
L
C
7
_�
N
>i
a)
m
_O
O
r
N
m
N
O
c
U
>�
a
C
a
N
a)
N
N
a)
O
O
a)
C
Q
N
N
N
C
N
N
N
O_
N
N
°
O
N
O
O
C
C
N
R
iQ
U
°o
O
N
°o
o
N
n
m
m
°
c
00
Q
7
°
a
N
m
c
a
m
a
°
w
a
L-
`
w
Y
2
E
m
E
f0
d
m
N
°'
>
d
c cu
E
cc
U
cu
m
U)
d
U
U
7
N
>
J
LL
(E
F-
d
t
4, �
Z
r
U
U
U
U
U
U
w
U
w
N r
y
LO
U)
U)
co
c
V)
w
=
a rn
3
R fq
N c
-
U
3
II R
(0
a
U)
0
Q. v
CO
w
w
N
w
LL
LL
0 a
w
`y
o
w
V
o
Q
Q
m
_
co
O
U
y
O
m
to
m
m
U
d
Z
„
°
cm
? s
w
2
r
Q
Cl)
V
Q
Q
o
U
°
U
m
=
co
J
m
2
m
J
Z
Z
'0
F-
4%
a)
Y
U
G1
i+
m
O
N
>.
rn
"0
a
a
y
o
E
E
N
R
s
'�
E
C
d
R
Z
a N
a)
o o
m
c
c
E
L
m
m
E
C
y N
++ m
a
N
<a
O
y
-O
m
a
C
N
C
`
N
a) 3
L
o
a)
m
>
E
ai
E
a y
d
O O
Q
d
C
.a
m
L
d
�
m
C
U
U
o
C
E
C
N
2
C
C
N
Q)
m
N
O
>•
E
N
cu
O
d o
m
m m
E
o
m
m
o
a)
m
a)
0)
d
F-
U
> wo
z
in a
F=
U)
3
m
z
UU�
a3:
O O 0 O
} Z } Z Z
N
O
Qi
0)
ca
a-
a
C
`y
m
>_
C
f6
d
N
3
C
f6
m
N
z
O
E
N
m
C
m
a
a
d
0
d
m
d
d
w
R
c
c
m
0
°
o
E
0
U
0
L
C
a)
U
a
°
a
;)
m
a
o
N
.L
a)
m
c
=
O
0
m
N
o
d)
d
N
w
O
O
a)
0
N
co
m
O
N
m
U
0
N
d d
aN s
O
N
U
O
...
N
N
>
N
L
a)
w
C
O
w
N
O)
N
O
N
N
°
c
N
a
m
O
E
o
U
N
m
N
v
a
ca
N
0)
O
O
=
O
t
m
C
—
N
a
C
°
m
a O
C
o
a
O C
N
N
U-
>
O
E
-0 O
w
N E
O
W E
C
�
U�'
Q
U
a
a
a
d
Om
w
.0
F-
w
w
w
F-
f-
w
w
CO
U-
w
C,
a)
a)
-M
a
N
�
�
a)
ro
0
0
E
m
U
ro
L
c�i
O
ct,
°
Co
_-rz
N
a)
d
N
O
E
0
O
N
Y
R
�m
O
m
m
a
EL
II
y
m
�
d
t+
0
>
o
�a
m
C H
Otf
F-
Q
a)
>-
w
a
F-
N
O
Qi
0)
ca
a-

cis
0
co
U
..L
L
O
Z
C
0
a
w
'C
N
J
Q
.a
i+
v
a
N
d
F—
d
= L
L
R
O a)
> p
p N
N N
N N
N L
L
Z �
� N
N O
o�
d
R R
R N
= c
c
a V
O
O
N N
N 2
N y
y 2) C_
N 1
N C c
a) C
N N
c
O
CL C
m
CL
m U
N w
w N
N
N C
C y
w °)
N N
Q C
C- N
N w N
a) '
N -o C
N "
" m
m a
a) m
C N
° C
N °
m N
N p
p) N
m L
N O O
N
O c
c0 c
c C
"m >
> L
L
co F O
O 7
C ~
N t
t`c a
N c
m °
° U
7 v
d F
F �
C N
N Z Ln Cn m °
i -
m 3
�>° C
N U
U y
y C L C O
a) 0
N L
0 a
N �
C a
a m C c m c>
L N
3 C
C C
C N
N C
C L
a)
a)
m Z
a) E
E O
O— C
C Q) C L
c N
.Lm. N
N L
L —
— U
U= E c o
m
�+ c
m 3
3 N
N f
f0
Y
N C
o
Y L
N
N p
) N
lQ O
O N
N O
O
N
C
m O
N a
'
L
C 3
3 N
U N
C
Q L
L C
N >
> O
N p
N U
N E C
L
W m
C N
N L
O '
Q U
C E
O m
L Q
_ O
O O
m t
L >
> c
Q L
LL c
c N N
N C
w N L
d U
Cl y L
H N
LA N o
o° p) ?a? N C m '_ 0 N
N m C
w w U
U H
N a) y
y y Z
N
N N O
O a) w
72 N
0) L
w a
a) ?
rn E a
0 L c
c .
5
lQ fA t
t Z
.L. d> s
a) p a
d r U
U° 4
43 2 o d° o �a o C N w
w p c
LL. y C
C 2 w 3 y
C
o o
o cm 16 C
N
0
N
O
CD
N
CL

APPENDIX D
STREAM AND WETLAND
DATA FORMS AND
RATING WORKSHEETS

North Carolina Division of Water Quality — Stream Identification Form Version 3 1
Stream SAA
Original Collection Date
Absent
Weak
05/24/2005
Project TIP# U 2817,
Location App % mile south of
Transfer to Revised 3 1 Form
Evans Street Widening
the Evans Street and NC43
01/23/2008
15 Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain or
Water in channel — dry or growing season
❑1
®1
❑2
intersection
Evaluator H Brady
Nearest Named Stream Fork
❑3
Swam
2 Sinuosity
17 Sediment on plants or debris
USGS Quad Greenville SW
Total Points 19 5
Stream is at least intermittent
County Pltt
River Basin Neuse
If ?!19 or perennial i �o
❑2
El
A Geomorphology (Subtotal= 10
Absent
Weak
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1a Continuous bed and bank
01
00
❑3
15 Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain or
Water in channel — dry or growing season
❑1
®1
❑2
®2
16 Leaflitter
❑1 5
❑3
❑0 5
2 Sinuosity
17 Sediment on plants or debris
®0
❑0 5
❑1
❑1
18 Organic debris lines or piles Wrack lines
®0
❑2
El
❑1 5
❑3
❑No = 0
3 In Channel structure riffle pool sequence
❑O
21
5
❑2
❑3
5
4 Soil texture or stream substrate sorting
❑0
El
®2
❑3
5 Active /relic flood lain
❑0
®1
5
❑2
❑3
5
6 Depositional bars or benches
❑0
®1
5
❑2
❑3
5
7 Braided channel
®0
❑1
5
❑2
❑3
5
8 Recent alluvial deposits
®0
❑1
❑2
❑3
9a Natural levees
00
®1
5
❑2
❑3
5
10 Headcuts
❑FAC =O 5 ❑FACW =O 75 ❑OBL =1 5
❑SAV =2 0 ®Other or None =O
❑0
®1
❑2
❑3
11 Grade controls
❑O
®0
5
❑1
I
❑1
5
12 Natural valley or drainageway
❑0
®0
5
El
1
015
13 Second or greater order channel on existing
USGS or NRCS map or other documented
evidence
®No = 0
❑Yes = 3
a Man made ditches are not rated see discussions in manual
B Hydrology Subtotal = 45
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
14 Groundwater flow/discharge
❑0
01
❑2
❑3
15 Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain or
Water in channel — dry or growing season
❑O
®1
❑2
❑3
16 Leaflitter
❑1 5
®1
❑0 5
❑0
17 Sediment on plants or debris
®0
❑0 5
❑1
❑1 5
18 Organic debris lines or piles Wrack lines
®0
❑0 5
El
❑1 5
19 H dric soils redoximor hic features resent?
❑No = 0
®Yes = 1 5
C Biology Subtotal = 5
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
20 Fibrous roots in channel
❑3
®2
❑1
❑0
21b Rooted plants in channel
03
02
❑1
❑0
22 Crayfish
®0
❑0
5
El
El
5
23 Bivalves
®0
El
❑2
❑3
24 Fish
®0
00
5
El
El
5
25 Amphibians
®0
❑0
5
❑1
❑1
5
26 Macrobenthos note diversity and abundance
®0
❑0
5
El
El
5
27 Filamentous algae periphyton
®0
El
❑2
❑3
28 Iron Oxidizing bacteria/fungus
00
00
5
El
❑1
5
29 Wetland plants in streambed
❑FAC =O 5 ❑FACW =O 75 ❑OBL =1 5
❑SAV =2 0 ®Other or None =O
Items 20 and 21 focus on the presence of upland plants Item 29 focuses on the presence of aquatic or wetland
plants
Notes (Use back side of this form for additional notes ) Sketch

5o,4
USACE AID# DWQ # Site # (indicate on attached map)
FE 71 STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment
1 Applicant s name tiitDo'
3 Date of evaluation - /z,w% ?a��
5 Name of stream Ur 70 FQi? � � !s✓ � N7 7
7 Approximate drainage area
9 Length of reach evaluated
11 Site coordinates (if known) prefer in decimal degrees
Latitude (ex 34 87312)
2 Evaluator s name 9 &RAID '
4 Time of evaluation /0100
6 River basin &` �v5 45
8 Stream order / s'
10 County 171 TT
12 Subdivision name (if any)
Longitude (ex -77 556611)
Method location determined (circle) GPS Topo Sheet Ortho (Aerial) Photo /GIS Other GIS Other
13 Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location)
AnP 3 /-► SovTXI of 7l- wh ,s 577ZZ:f T" 1-74 1Z 5Ec 77 OA
14 Proposed channel work (if any)
15 Recent weather conditions
16 Site conditions at time of visit
17 Identify any special waterway classifications known _Section 10 _Tidal Waters _Essential Fisheries Habitat
_Trout Waters _Outstanding Resource Waters _ Nutrient Sensitive Waters _Water Supply Watershed (I IV)
18 Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point9 YES (1ZD If yes estimate the water surface area
19 Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YESiNO0, 20 Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES
21 Estimated watershed land use _% Residential _% Commercial _% Industrial _% Agricultural
_% Forested _% Cleared / Logged _% Other (
22 Bankfull width -/O `c.�:7T 23 Bank height (from bed to top of bank) V ffE
24 Channel slope down center of stream _Flat (0 to 2 %) _Gentle (2 to 4 %) _Moderate (4 to 10 %) _Steep ( >10 %)
25 Channel sinuosity _ (X Straight _Occasional bends _Frequent meander _Very sinuous _Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2) Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location terrain vegetation stream classification etc Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion Assign points
to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e g the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest) the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100 with a score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality
Total Score (from reverse) % Z Comments �� G
Evaluator s Signature Date
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement Form subject to change - version 06/03 To Comment please call 919 876 8441 x 26

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams
IV m2a, kv
ECOREGIO P6JNt
RANVE,.�
��CHARAGTERISTICS�
-!� r�CoastaCPiedmoaf
�,MK
Mountain
�3SCOREF
,��
-
1
Presence of flow /persistent pools in stream
0 5 y
0 4
E 0- 5 �F
no flow or saturation = 0 strong flow = max oints
vx-
f
2_
Evidence of past human alteration
-
0 -6-"
0 5�
_
0 S
(extensive alteration = 0 no alteration = max points)
-� _. 6 _
3
Riparian zone
r 6F
F 4„�
no buffer = 0 contiguous wide buffer = max points)
.
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
-
�` -F,
r],0 -5 -4"
T 0- -4 ;.�
' ^0 `4
i4
(extensive discharges = 0 no discharges = max points)
� kr t
� -" �
.:,
.i J w
5
water
s wet
0�
0 -r-4 �
no discharge = 0 nnns see ps andseetc = ma oints�
"',
6
Presence of adjacent flood lam 2 -� ` I
I P _-
, 4"- __ a r
0 -4 ,-I'W
'`
r 0=4
0 -2 -ate
d
(no flood lam = 0 extensive flood lam = max points)
°_
-��
_
z
7,
Entrenchment / floodplaui access �� �w 3
- ' ;
a r-
_0 -5
A
(deeply entrenched = 0 frequent floodin = max points) ;a
,
8
Presence of adjacent wetlands, _F
W�
Y 0= 6� i
x_ 0 4+�
0
a
{no wetlands = 0 large adjacent wetlands = mx points)' u
9
Channel sinuosity -
0�
Q
(extensive channelization = 0 natural meander = max points)
- ^ R
10
Sediment input
3< `0 4
°"<f
0 4��
Z
(extensive de osition-- 0 little or no sediment = max points}
- x+
-4
kk e
11
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
0 °4
0 5"b
(fine homogenous = 0 large diverse sizes =max lints)
�� Evidence of channel incision or widening n
~0= 5- -
04�
05
j.,
TI2
(deeply mcised = 0 stable bed & banks = max points)
r
13
'"Presence of major bank failures f" 4
0 0.x5
0- 'fSwr�0-
S�r
Z
(severe erosion= 0 no erosion stable banks= max point-) .
T
1
pa
1 4
-i- Root depth and density on banks - Y'�
s� i -�
0 -3 �,
-I
� 't, T"
5 m
i
d
no visible roots = 0 dense roots throughout = max points)
r _�
�s �
b
r 4
IS
4Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
p 5
A'!W-°
_
(substantial impact =0 no evidence = max points)
16
Presence of riffle pool/ripple pool complexes �-"-,'
�45-�
0-3
0 -5s
-i
�
_
(no nffles /npples or pools = 0 well developed = max points)
�,_
-
-Z'AL
�fl q6
,+ } F� ��°C
S"
d
17
Habitat complexity
0 =6 �
"rs
i %0 -s.h
a -6�
p
H
(little or no habitat = 0 frequent vaned habitats = max oints)
X -e
- x maces
'
18
Canopy coverage over stTeambeds
r-
TO � 'r
{
no shading vegetation = 0 continuous canopy ^ max omts
Substrate embeddedness r,- H
7
N*i
`)
- ��
19
Oeepl embedded = 0 loose structure = max) w x
I
��
s
20
Presence of stream invertebrates (see. page 4)��
�- - ?
4
�
(no evidence = 0 common, numerous types = max oints)
'r0
_
^y
21
Presence of amphibians 4 _ =4
Q
(no evidence = 0 common numerous es = ma;c omts)`
O
22
Presence of fish zJ w
, "p a4
��0 4
r-+
no evidence = 0 common numerous es = max oints 1 P
sir
23
Evidence of wildlife use r �uw f r
r x :Z
��r -
t a
_�A 6
� 0'5
no evidence = 0 abundant evidence = max Pom ts
y+-r-t,� 7�+x,��s y��+a q Y« '"'r 1r "t( -tn..— .r
'- otal Points Possible ��w�
x'70 n_la
0
" °'j
100 ;,
[OOs a
r ti �- 4 �_
r
tt.
{} �tievyv r+� t�
..' �'. J }511 .{ L'
�� � a5 y rT0TALSCORE (also enter on first gage
_ w X!
�Ag
I Z
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams

North Carolina Division of Water Quality — Stream Identification Form Version 3 1
Stream SAB
Original Collection Date
Absent
Weak
05/24/2005
Project TIP# U 2817,
Strong
Transfer to Revised 3 1 Form
Evans Street Wideninq
Location App % mile north of
01/23/2008
15 Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain or
Water in channel — dry or growing season
Cannon s Crossroads
Evaluator H Brady
Nearest Named Stream Fork
®2
Swam
01 5
County Pitt
USGS Quad Greenville SW
River Basin Neuse
Total Points 31
Stream is at least intermittent
If >19or erenn:al f�0
A Geomorphology Subtotal = 135
Absent
Weak
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1a Continuous bed and bank
❑1
❑0
❑3
15 Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain or
Water in channel — dry or growing season
El
®2
®2
16 Leaflitter
01 5
❑3
00 5
2 Sinuosity
17 Sediment on plants or debris
®0
❑0 5
®1
❑1
18 Or anic debris lines or Iles Wrack lines
❑0
❑2
01
❑1 5
❑3
❑No = 0
3 In Channel structure riffle pool sequence
❑0
5
®1
❑2
5
23 Bivalves
❑3
❑O
4 Soil texture or stream substrate sorting
®1
00
❑2
01
❑3
❑2
24 Fish
❑3
5 Active /relic flood lain
❑0
❑1
®1
❑1
5
❑2
❑0
❑3
00
6 Depositional bars or benches
❑0
El
26 Macrobenthos note diversity and abundance
®2
❑0
❑3
7 Braided channel
❑1
®0
❑1
El
❑2
❑1
❑3
8 Recent alluvial deposits
00
❑3
®1
®0
❑2
❑0
5
❑3
❑1
9a Natural levees
❑0
5
29 Wetland plants in streambed
®1
❑2
❑3
10 Headcuts
®0
❑1
❑2
❑3
11 Grade controls
❑0
®0
5
El
❑1
5
12 Natural valley or drains ewa
❑0
❑0
5
®1
❑1
5
13 Second or greater order channel on existing
USGS or NRCS map or other documented
evidence
❑No = 0
®Yes = 3
a Man made ditches are not rated see discussions in manual
B Hydrology Subtotal = 8
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
14 Groundwater flow/discharge
❑0
❑1
®2
❑3
15 Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain or
Water in channel — dry or growing season
00
El
®2
❑3
16 Leaflitter
01 5
®1
00 5
❑O
17 Sediment on plants or debris
❑0
❑0 5
®1
❑1 5
18 Or anic debris lines or Iles Wrack lines
❑0
Z05
01
❑1 5
19 H dric soils redoximor hic features resent?
❑No = 0
®Yes = 1 5
C Biology Subtotal = 95
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
20 Fibrous roots in channel
®3
❑2
❑1
❑0
21 Rooted plants in channel
®3
❑2
❑1
❑0
22 Crayfish
❑0
®0
5
❑1
❑1
5
23 Bivalves
❑O
®1
❑2
❑3
24 Fish
❑0
Z05
❑1
❑1
5
25 Amphibians
❑0
00
5
01
❑1
5
26 Macrobenthos note diversity and abundance
❑0
Z05
❑1
❑1
5
27 Filamentous algae periphyton
®0
❑1
❑2
❑3
28 Iron Oxidizing bacteria/fungus
®0
❑0
5
❑1
❑1
5
29 Wetland plants in streambed
❑FAC =O 5 ❑FACW =O 75 ❑OBL =1 5
❑SAV =2 0 ®Other or None =O
Items 20 and 21 focus on the presence of upland plants Item 29 focuses on the presence of aquatic or wetland
plants
Notes (Use back side of this form for additional notes ) Sketch

I L S-C: -sD= t%Q= tic - r-_:_ °0 ���� M
M-.- STRE kNI QL kLITI -,kSSE�SMLNT Ni ORKSHEET
Protide silt folloAin; information far the s4mam reach under assessment
1 -�Lpptii:..rit s r ne fi i v 2 Eta wa or S --m3 3 A Y
a Dar of \J- on � fz ����� - 4 -im- of -N -1.atior, 47 !�/'O F
r op*o� r^..i_ d tit~ gr a.-:a
9 L n;c? or -^ & al Tatea
1 i St- coordirztes kii p-efcr n dcc mal d.cre-
,".I- X. - £ , t i.
I _ Sabco sion rn'-ia (Tf a3V)
•,tet�ud Inc- -- d - it-d £ r-1 3 CDb Taco r� _r 0 b� Gt S 0:S
1 S Lo ion 0 ..= ',. n jr &- - -l.antior i' 0 e re`L v, oa-:, -Tr d 1 C i_ ks 2'i- _ .._a ^ id t LiY c 5S 3 !cc-- to f
14 Prop :,5-d c'- an-i -I uo k (ifzn' )
15 P,- an st =,, r GonCItr;i3S - --
16 Si t coliV ons -t ime ^f Nisi -,f 5-
17 IUD -u r ar :)- -.d v L z-1c at cl.sst icy tads knosti' _ _Sv 3�n 10 _ r i�al tti atr s �E rcn-J F 5%!-t- T-aa Lt
_Tv- 1i.L-s ,{)i.ts.r�1�g1c tiNkac -s \s-:-=-tfic*s i _N a---s
19 3o-id or laL- loo -t.d uo iM�-n of the c%al,. Lion point' '-ES `i-• if xis e"tL--I -te -ie a et-- stnr- Ce
10 Discs c'iw=cl -ppe, a-i LSGS gi.adciao" 4 NO 20 Does rl-- vigil apnta� on USDA So I � 2, \0
21 1 Rw lt3snD -1 ^_11 C0r--- 1°'cis,l db TncC .t-al
22 .fi 1r L'i _ }} 23 E,.r1 pply° :!It { 0-a rem to W3 cf n sue.,
24 C:-- ".-ell Slope do yr cen ° o a -a Lrl _I'idt �0 a, 2' d �.�G nt'° (2 0 - O � o �?' ode — t :' (, o 1OF /t) ( >I J )
2, C`h--m l s nLzn h- X Str�i;h ,__Oc -,mai al rocs area_ �it n-cv-d_ t D stnuo,s E -idcd cl a -i, t
instructions for completion of siorksneet (located on page 21 3rg r na cc r- aria -g t-)a -:)s ate, p�� t^-D-bor 4s,dt o`i
tL3t s :r'i C ci °e. is l"in, ; x 'S CYSTS ^d%C3 C Lt °ii =C °' ? C T Os =r�d -u c.zo- ; o A.S _ni :33.=.s
3 :3� i i4iE �u °^T5 i iii .:7° "-,z- &"ititAT or n .'_,..ti a'-3a. n.. C s' a-u 1d S a "fief Ce 7" lot 0 -*A 0 "1 i °W s
Ci,2 -2ct -- t Ct ld.,n -zd *a c-I Wo 1,.h t SG? £s sl,-n- f ref cct a o Call -S el ^? +a° e- I. ..rz- -% al. for Tf a
C a,= -cis l C. -.o,% b- -d d-: 70 Si L 0 *d .F'....t,'s° conct 10-5, vi C n s.a- ra °o"rn b-° % ana n- `id- =: u p1-:i -iin a .._
cor.,. --l' a a 10 W"e �° a.e 0+u '10-S ." 1i tai th- G T '3i C ',r 2 -m-c.' re, l- r t - s,:--= floAl =o:n a ;,S La.-
itita a 3 es ) tie SL c_rn =^ N D. Cl --, into srz ils re -c-ics Lam - isplay rzcir �:o-itrnaa% a-nd L s °parat- 7o-n t4 c to - %aii-at I=
�°aciT -*Is for I scorn a.si rd to a strczrn r -aca *n"t =g- ber , -zn b and 100 A ith a tzort of I Ott -ep rs-r a-� a st r-ri of he
Total Score (froth reterse) Comments
Evaluator s Signature mate
€`kris channel etalua ion form is intended to be used onts as a guide to assist landoAners and emtroamental professionals in
gn hering ttte data required bt the Lnited States 4-n,. Corps of Enginevs to make a preitmtri2n assessment of sLream
qualm Tne o al scare result n; from the cample iota of this forth s sublcct to LSkCE apprtnzi and does not i nph a
p roc.ilar m tilation ratio or requirement , -^ i g - ozPJs -,) co—= +e— Nil- ie : s T o 9 S'76 a - -1 x 4a.
t
k
l
i
t
t
i
_�
�.. �,:.�. .,.r..,�,�.�. .,�.i�, a�r yea .vv `��,,� zo

STREAM QLALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Y
t
t
a,,, vi�rac-en4= a.e not a messed in coz., _I str=, s.
a
:,.,z, -".N ."-, ,��..}'�"
'— "Ti1.OMS (� 111\ L71.�t 1 iL'SSI LSL'r
7��' C�"sTn��e
yi'„' `CHXk,, CTJ[:.JLti.+ STd'4�S` `" -.,` �- ��
r a�
x:4 ,>--. .`.�r� .r* K,
Co �staT ��P i�uuta�n
* ORE
edmont
7;
Presence of floii /perstAstcnt pools in strearu ^r
�
(10 I-W o s4r- .-_Linn = sV=2 PONE - rIMX mints)
a
r ildenceof past human alterancr,
(:x'mS'ic at a Ltmn = 0 no alteratioa= Max hits)
t�
-
> Riparian zone
(no isufret 3 et�ntiQutn� de b>-frer = mvt perirta
W
€
t
Eiidenee of nutrient or cherruml discharges
�
exmnsii" d_&cb r es - 0- ao d scharvs - nnixvosms}
x
w/ Grauxrd"Ater discharg e
\rte dsc'aar-ee — it m-ripra. Sv°.- .'Is. vi AtZal:dS. iii— = max po na:)
�.
s
Presence of adjacent fioodplain r£
X
a (no fl vla-z = 0 -)-t 7-1 e flood late l m Lx bt -.s}
Entrenchment /floodplavi access
� ?
ec y caten re auvit loongnso: tc) x
$
- Presence of adjacent *wetlands *� ��� �_ -
�
i3 -6
.�
_
tan x eel maids = 0 large so €3Ge"2E i4C IaTlis = max poin s} K
��
� .� ° � -� �
� -� .� ;
r
1
M CiAIlnel s€nuosiEV
w .• -
M0 - Z.
U a
$ � �
i �t,F-
� vTi�riESti ri Gtia�.P A vliT_ 3q C}LS it � tiaiti-al wY.n aw a�i�CiM "' tYS ..aaA ,w� ywy-v h.y yJ.[.}
& `
✓
r Sediment input}
r
k r. . n31i rr de O' lion= 0 I rle o no fJtIIw"3L'rEt � m, poor S)
}
l l
r,= & dii ersit� of eh in_nd bed substrate
(fine hnz roc°zr s = 0 l a$e carcrse ssz tnaac� nun
- Evidences of channel incision or %identa
€
(de alp m iS °d - 0 bed & banns - `n,.x :)o
-w Presence of major bank failures
(scN ere e o i, . n t -io ; resign, r-.ablw n=k, = maz po- S 1�
Root depth and densitN on banks
-(no
3�� ��
`
,.�
k i isibte rnvs = U sense rocs tZ�€-ouel; �'Lt f biax -,otntb) =
� �« . J
_,impact bi a -u trure, lit estotk. or timber1production` -
5
'1
✓
s t _
zmal ..n::acl —) T o e%jd=ca - inai ✓��+�ta� mom^.
-�J '� .. .�°
;
"15a
Presence of rxMe pooL'ripple -pool complexes
0�3
(no n tlevn')': es ti pools = 0 A eel -d-ti elraD-. d - -Dax voi&s)
t
Habitat cotrzplc*�ti ?
`; d -� �«r
�
A 6
b
-+
a
(l,tig¢ fi-cau..nt, arie.i
1
Canopy cowcr�age oier streambed
-
tro s ad�e i eQ^trua^ ti caa muous canon = max t3inis)
rr r
i s
t
Substrateembeddedness
fde eo i embedd >d = 4 leis si. is sire = raax?
_
-Presence of stream in'tertebrat s
-~
•h
4n't o idt t = Q cori�trni n ruint i5 ti AL`S inEX Crint3)
r. 21i_.0-TU0
Presence of amphibians
�r
roes �0denc_ - 0 coon4 rt r1 z �e mzx oo -ita1'
�W
Presence offish
's,
(i3 Ci idence ° 0 ti'OMii3IIn, Il.t£.'� 'u 3"�e$ = max OX .�
-« -, .' , ,,�
'� �.'-^_ ° ' �: =.`
x-ax°}
EN idence of vnldUfe usez���� "�
-0:
(-W ei del-e 23 in irti "i �eerice = rr x �c E LS}
.an- ..h� ..e..a" � t".'..Y<"`C'&r'tr+a».� -+.. 'roq �.Y' ` 4 aµ^• '° — r'iG.s�..
%'•i J^N r p f ti r+""t - ya.. .G.^ar, `tA -S
' '7 =
�,,., -`x d ts,^,,ga.�. i i e.. ':^ = rX
'.,a„' -,2`.„ c TdtR1 DiiIliSo5$3bi A9'."ws'.�^.. j w = ".+- u ".3.+� «s.�
�a =r,°�' ,� s'
�'.L..• rII"E
""k .1".I%@"— �'" / � 1"W� ^�j ce +P'
�* +t.«.T� �.
:s.VV
0
�
�.r'.'.� 'wen' "'
+
� r.S
y, r-"' �+r
,
r'- » =
,g ,...- , � "y .,`�.aa
rEP�...
« w. r - .`,.�„-"r.«i, j ,y „ .t
' � . , .— .....:.'t .�.�.�- r- ••,'��^� ��.'v.R..R,Y,•'�- - t .� , 'F" �,+ ..--= .E .
rw ✓
."'
s .���r �
��+.-1 ;.�,.. _
� .a°i V, �+-{
TOT CO balsa e a� fit �= - --�
'T.-Oa page] � '
Y
t
t
a,,, vi�rac-en4= a.e not a messed in coz., _I str=, s.
a

North Carolina Division of Water Quality — Stream Identification Form Version 3 1
Stream SAC
Original Collection Date
Absent
Weak
05/24/2005
Project TIP# U 2817,
Strong
Transfer to Revised 3 1 Form
Evans Street Wideninq
Location App % mile north of
01/23/2008
01
Cannon's Crossroads
Evaluator H Brady
Nearest Named Stream Fork
❑3
Swam
❑3
El
USGS Quad Greenville SW
Total Points 1925
Stream is at least intermittent
County Pitt
River Basin Neuse
If >_19 or perennial if ?30
❑1 5
❑2
A Geomorphology Subtotal = 75
Absent
Weak
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1a Continuous bed and bank
Ell
❑0
03
01
❑0
®1
®2
❑3
16 Leaflitter
❑3
El
2 Sinuosity
❑O
®0
❑0
El
❑1 5
❑2
®0
I ❑O 5
❑3
❑1 5
3 In Channel structure riffle pool sequence
I ❑No = 0
❑0
5
®1
El
❑2
5
23 Bivalves
❑3
No
4 Soil texture or stream substrate sorting
❑1
❑0
01
❑3
❑2
24 Fish
❑3
5 Active /relic flood lain
5
00
El
®1
❑1
5
❑2
❑0
❑3
Z05
6 Depositional bars or benches
❑0
®1
5
26 Macrobenthos note diversity and abundance
❑2
❑0
❑3
7 Braided channel
El
®0
El
❑1
27 Filamentous algae periphyton
❑2
El
❑3
8 Recent alluvial deposits
00
®1
®0
❑2
❑0
5
❑3
❑1
9a Natural levees
❑1
®0
29b Wetland plants in streambed
❑1
❑2
❑3
10 Headcuts
®0
❑1
❑2
❑3
11 Grade controls
❑0
®0
5
❑1
I
❑1
5
12 Natural valley or drainageway
®0
❑0
5
❑1
❑1
5
13 Second or greater order channel on existing
USGS or NRCS map or other documented
evidence
®No = 0
❑Yes = 3
Man made ditches are not rated see discussions in manual
B Hydrology Subtotal = 65
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
14 Groundwater flow/discharge
❑0
Ell
❑2
03
15 Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain or
Water in channel — dry or growing season
❑0
®1
❑2
❑3
16 Leaflitter
❑1 5
El
®0 5
❑O
17 Sediment on plants or debris
❑0
❑0 5
Ni
❑1 5
18 Organic debris lines or piles Wrack lines
®0
I ❑O 5
❑1
❑1 5
19 H dric soils redoximor hic features resents
I ❑No = 0
®Yes = 1 5
C Biology Subtotal = 525
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
20 Fibrous roots in channel
❑3
❑2
®1
❑0
21 Rooted plants in channel
03
®2
❑1
❑0
22 Crayfish
❑0
®0
5
El
❑1
5
23 Bivalves
No
❑1
❑2
❑3
24 Fish
®0
❑0
5
El
❑1
5
25 Amphibians
❑0
Z05
El
❑1
5
26 Macrobenthos note diversity and abundance
❑0
Z05
El
El
5
27 Filamentous algae periphyton
®0
El
❑2
❑3
28 Iron Oxidizing bacteria/fungus
®0
❑0
5
❑1
❑1
5
29b Wetland plants in streambed
❑FAC =O 5 ®FACW =O 75 ❑OBL =1 5
❑SAV =2 0 ❑Other or None =O
Items 20 and 21 focus on the presence of upland plants Item 29 focuses on the presence of aquatic or wetland
plants
Notes (Use backside of this form for additional notes) Sketch

SA �
USACE AID# DWQ # Site # (indicate on attached map)
M1 STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment
1 Applicants name /V4 '005-1 2 Evaluator s name �qi l324�Y
3 Date of evaluation 7­117,10-1 4 Time of evaluation 00
5 Name of stream V7 7V Four s1 4 6 River basin ti/ y4E
7 Approximate drainage area 8 Stream order �r
9 Length of reach evaluated
11 Site coordinates (if known) prefer in decimal degrees
Latitude (ex 34 871312)
10 County P/ 77—
12 Subdivision name (if any)
Longitude (ex —77 556611) _
Method location determined (circle) GPS Topo Sheet Ortho (Aerial) Photo /GIS Other GIS Other
13 Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location)
/l ip /7 c 4z1 ioAv 5 , 7 r-
14 G/IOSi/Z04li S
Proposed channel work (if any)
15 Recent weather conditions
16 Site conditions at time of visit
17 Identify any special waterway classifications known _Section 10 _Tidal Waters _Essential Fisheries Habitat
_Trout Waters _Outstanding Resource Waters _ Nutrient Sensitive Waters _Water Supply Watershed (I IV)
18 Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point9 YES (g If yes estimate the water surface area
19 Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES ) 20 Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES TIO
21 Estimated watershed land use _% Residential _% Commercial _% Industrial _% Agricultural
_% Forested _% Cleared / Logged _% Other ( )
22 Bankfull width S -/O 23 Bank height (from bed to top of bank) cis i
24 Channel slope down center of stream _Flat (0 to 2 %) _Gentle (2 to 4 %) _Moderate (4 to 10 %) _Steep ( >10 %)
25 Channel sinuosity K Straight _Occasional bends _Frequent meander _Very sinuous _Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2) Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location terrain vegetation stream classification etc Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion Assign points
to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion_ Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e g the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest) the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100 with a score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality
Total Score (from reverse) ZO Comments Z) /T
Evaluator's Signature Date
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement Form subject to change - version 06/03 To Comment please call 919 876 8441 x 26

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams
#
��CHARACTERISTICS ��
RANGE...
-�
u�
SCORE
l
�- FW +r4a °' -�
�,
"stal piedmont
w
` Iountam
�r
1
Presence of now / persistent pools in stream
O -5 -_
L O -4
'
0 -5
no flow or saturation = 0 strop flow = max otnts
r
" ��e !A
�r �
s
2
Evidence of past human alteration ti fi- �^
-
�OY= 6 -�
+g 05 v
(extensive alteration = 0 no alteration = max points)
_
+
3
Ri P artan zone
�'""
� 0- 6 ,�
D y;�,;0
no buffer = 0 contiguous wide buffer = max points)
c,
_.L
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
4
0
�4
(extensive discharges = 0 no discharges = max points)
,0 -5 v7c'�0
K4
Z
5
_ Groundwater discharge
03 ,"
0 - 4�
0 4-
I
Q
no discharge = 0 springs sees wetlands etc mx points)
r
�0- "T t
T J
V
6
Presence of adjacent flood lam ` _
r"' °��r�
0 - 4 �w
�r 0 4
�r
2 �
I
(no flood lam = 0 extensive flood lam = max points)
��
4 - i
Entrenchment / floodplain access rtx aw h0-
5
r�?''s
�� 2�F�
2
P+
(deeply entrenched = 0 frequent flooding = max points)
+
CFO
8
Presence of adlacentw�etlands w„ � � - �
- } '�
-,0-6
� air
0 -4 �
rTr��� ,
a; 0 ���
0
`(no wetlands = 0 large adjacent wetlands = max points)' y�
9
Channel sinuosity _
courts)
! ,LO - 5 a k
; - 4 � {
0= {3�"�c
(extensive channelization = 0 natural meander = max
_O
- R
10
Sediment input r _
Wry
�
- 0 -5
:, -0 -4
a °
O0 =45
i
(extensive deposition-- 0 little or no sediment = max pomts}
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
i1A
0 -4r
0�5
(fine homogenous = 0 large diverse sizes =.max points)
�a _
��`�,
{
12
ti Evidence of channel incision or widenin g i
����
04���`
0 5,
2
(deeply incised = 0 stable bed & banks = max pomts)
F'+
13
- Presence of major bank failures
t ]
0= 57�,�0
-5�s -ter
%""0�5
(severe erosion = 0 no erosion stable banks = max oints)"
g�
14
Root depth and density on banks � -
0 - 3
"�
no visible roots = 0 dense roots throu hout =max bints
MOt`�
s�0
�5
y
15
Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
��0 r 5Q
�4�'
X45`
O
_
- (substantial impact no evidence = max points)
~ ,. _
-�
16
Presence of riffle pool/ripple pool coin lexes
`(no
0
- 3���
0 5" `F
A� =
nffles/npples or pools = 0 well develo ed = max points)
d.
17
r Habitat complexity --A h �
' „- 0 = 6 *�
I 0 6.
E
little or no habitat = 0 frequent vaned habitats = max points
k
p
18
Canopy coverage over streambed V
r
Z 0 5
0 S -k
� 110z 5,�
no shading vegetation =0 continuous canopy= max omfs
+
- a-
-
-
19
Substrate embeddedness s ��
_
'N'�`.3'- �' -�"Y'�
*4 5w
-�,suf-
O 4 Wr
w
(deeply embedded = 0 loose structure = max)
ti
20
Presence of stream invertebrates (see page
`
- 4�
�
,f ��{�
5
(no evidence = 0 common numerous es = max points)
X50 RSR
_"
21
Presence of amphibians - =_Q $,
`
t U- 4 ti
-
x0 4
O
(no evidence = 0 common numerous es = max omts)
-
Fa
O
Presence of fish d
�a
i`5 ' V. _
0 = 4 �
��
+ -4
h-r
22
no evidence = 0 common, numerous types =max po mts
s
LO
23
_ - Evidence of wildlife use
- 6
n
-4 0 -S�
5
no evidence = 0 abundant evidence =max' ointts �0
�0
ks � *-- �a •, � �a�,t� '� iaF�,XS,
al Points Possible
A.9������0
`�q ,� y
=% 100�x
c
TOTAL ~SCORE (als6 enter�fifstp e�
MR'
� �'� z �. a.. .,t .try `i .y, - t�+� i .YLh—�G^ i� ytn •.v,.
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams

North Carolina Division of Water Quality — Stream Identification Form Version 3 1
Stream SB
Original Collection Date
Absent
Weak
05/24/2005
Project TIP# U 2817,
Strong
Transfer to Revised 3 1 Form
Evans Street Widening
Location App 2/3 mile south
01/23/2008
15 Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain or
Water in channel — dry or growing season
of Cannon's Crossroads
Evaluator H Brady
Nearest Named Stream Fork
®2
Swam
❑1 5
County Pitt
USGS Quad Greenville SW
River Basin Neuse
Total Points 35 5
Stream is at least intermittent
1 ?19 or perennial if ?30
A Geomorphology Subtotal = 165
Absent
Weak
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1a Continuous bed and bank
01
❑0
❑3
15 Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain or
Water in channel — dry or growing season
❑1
®1
❑2
®2
16 Leaflitter
❑1 5
❑3
005
2 Sinuosity
17 Sediment on plants or debris
®0
❑0 5
®1
El
❑0
❑2
®1
El 5
❑3
I ❑No = 0
3 In Channel structure riffle pool sequence
❑0
El
®2
❑3
5
4 Soil texture or stream substrate sorting
❑O
®1
❑2
❑3
5 Active /relic flood lain
❑O
El
❑2
03
5
6 Depositional bars or benches
❑0
El
®2
❑3
5
7 Braided channel
®0
❑1
5
❑2
❑3
5
8 Recent alluvial deposits
❑O
❑1
®2
❑3
9a Natural levees
00
®1
5
❑2
❑3
5
10 Headcuts
❑FAC =O 5 ❑FACW =O 75 ❑OBL =1 5
❑SAV =2 0 ®Other or None =O
NO
El
❑2
❑3
11 Grade controls
❑O
®0
5
El
❑1
5
12 Natural valley or drainageway
❑O
❑0
5
01
❑1
5
13 Second or greater order channel on existing
USGS or NRCS map or other documented
evidence
❑No = 0
®Yes = 3
a Man made ditches are not rated see discussions in manual
B Hydrology Subtotal = 75
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
14 Groundwater flow/discharge
❑O
01
®2
❑3
15 Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain or
Water in channel — dry or growing season
00
®1
❑2
❑3
16 Leaflitter
❑1 5
®1
005
❑0
17 Sediment on plants or debris
❑O
❑0 5
®1
❑1 5
18 Organic debris lines or piles rack lines
❑0
❑0 5
®1
El 5
19 H dric soils redoximor hic features resents
I ❑No = 0
I ®Yes = 1 5
C Biology Subtotal = 11 5
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
20 Fibrous roots in channel
®3
❑2
❑1
❑0
21 Rooted plants in channel
®3
❑2
0
❑O
22 Crayfish
❑O
❑0
5
®1
❑1
5
23 Bivalves
❑O
El
®2
❑3
24 Fish
00
❑0
5
®1
❑1
5
25 Amphibians
❑0
❑0
5
®1
❑1
5
26 Macrobenthos note diversity and abundance
❑0
®0
5
El
El
5
27 Filamentous algae periphyton
00
El
❑2
❑3
28 Iron Oxidizing bacteria/fungus
®0
❑0
5
❑1
❑1
5
29 Wetland plants in streambed
❑FAC =O 5 ❑FACW =O 75 ❑OBL =1 5
❑SAV =2 0 ®Other or None =O
Items 20 and 21 focus on the presence of upland plants Item 29 focuses on the presence of aquatic or wetland
plants
Notes (Use back side of this form for additional notes ) Sketch

C::
I t,a_tr E: - -I)= iDv-, Q ^ S le = i .._ ax --i _wc- _d n--) t
M SIRE -VNI Qt, AL M ASSESS -NIENT Ni ORKSHEET
Pro „ide the folloising information for the str-a -ti reach under asstssriert
1 ^ -u'It s "a s- , � 7- 2 E, 4 L- n 5 --I- r t ,tea
i Daw o"c 1,1 -ion -- /-` � 4 T -ie of M -,90
0 -moo ” Eft ac- 4ela- 4.
6 L. er `a.s n
10 co"-rt
1 I Sit- CO- � Ine? s (it 12 SL= sion an- t ?-IN)
T rid -x a U `) Lo ZI ^id t - -` < a, }
I It Fad o , tlan d --1 -d (C:-r-- } (Pb TDpo Sne r i? ,Io t el-1) h1010 GIS O her G S O.ar
13 LoLB on of ezc*", L ^d ° ion (-o - nt=r , -oads avid 3,.rd -r, i > d -t�vi -z!;r id P l'-j -8 strzam((s) To-; -- or)
f, ✓ ✓ ` tc a b N;'2 Zz 1 `a's "� za° r✓%r P w k sM
14 Y _d r`i w -i aor (11 ivy
I-% R- oncitions ,
16 S1- emir: Ior s at 1-1 of v`isir .r
17 lzxn ii> wry 1;n -c J ;; M- ;c; cw t 1catlM, L--OA n _Section 10 YTid-1 W- yrs � .Ess - tai r a ,e BAs Hab -
� � 0. t etc- 0, crag sot.= -1, .. C:.S — NIu --It Se% 1� e a _'�� -r S,:--plr W a,-- s1i d
19 c u le - tocdt -d uast yarn of i inn pair 7 es +ri to the %-* at- sur '4,t - ..a
29 Does &Karel -1ppea, on LSCS -j-d �p� hTES %t`t� 20 Does cranrcl a,= .r oz LSDA, Solt Sx,. 0 1�0
21 Es i u �° a Co.-i.--ae clat _ °'¢ td� _t ` A. Z
a Cl-z. e Log; co-s wd — _-_%, 0 ne (
24 C .a-rcl slop � c� NN r, c : r e 0T s, --L Flat (0 to 2 ) _C "✓c �2 o ,t) _klod-m c (4 to 10 %) _S c-:) (> 10° r.)
2= C't, Svl -osl^, *° S_Pi -t" —0=.S ori..l b^ _dS �c -° °nt - I. -nd-.r —\ c-% Sir La� -S �B -za- -d clarn-1
instructions for completion of wori, -heel (located on p-t e 2) B °g n ce °"mi'1 mas � =03 ate �_o c�a�a w »� � 0-
_tick -co-ed -.r- t& S- r ecoravon- ooU-Ls
{9 l r ta^ir� er a it, In L4Se --z- SI)o Ij o 'ne -co _- 0:1.. pap 0%gdes a * ^t des. -ID -10.1 ',t `ID " o ­'j, ti
=iwecit -ixt s der fie En t e k o l,"hvtt. 5-o -cs sSo% a -e'1 --t a oN =I assesvnzr<t of _ ch und- -k J, i0'1 It _
crra-a^ cis c C-wnat 5-- er al.zited Iaq o st e or is ea loo caId bons cnt r 3 n a- tormg br'x ar+d proved - e. ^l_r__a i n ht
C✓ 1" i $ io- �5 1� £' ier r 3v ioL� c --r,"s in C1iu1F9s to Of_
b1 ..7 i U j 1.° 3 S' titer Bs '3ri 5 SV a SLS 4
in v --C—M ai3j ^k C VI std II O Sr — It - .,.." S 4,1- isplaa rna-- CO- ^3 i' .n;1 I rO-i ta.d to t%11 ,2 :` '-
-
-e-,L T 01_1 sco- ,s I -ze3 to a ­ zM C�,: n =I-st -a, 3 --nd 100 with a sea e at 1110 ^`tea sss -2
Total Score (from reterse) .6,-8 CG1riMLYIts_
%aluator s Signature Date
This channel vi2luation form is intended to be used onIN as a guide to assist landoviners nd en,, ironmental professionals in
gathertne the data rcquired bi the Lnited S aites 4rm) Craps of Englicers to ma),e a prel mwirr wessment of stream
iluatin the otal score resulting fro•n the ctimplctiin of this Corm is SLI3 ect o LSACF appro%_1 and dcics not impli a
parricalar in t za`,on ratio or requ remenL -u-n �z -biec o c.-s ,n 3o,0_ -o Ca-r -lent, ple_t ml a19 8 "6 » -1 x 2a
a
e
a
S
i
i

STRE k�l QL ALITY 43SESSINTENT NN ORKSBIET
T" ese chwact -SLC:S are I Ot ass,s in cos-41 str-a-ns
MEV
I
ECOREGIW�61N'T--
CiL TERISTICS,
-COZsial
4 on un
Presence of clots persistent pools in stre-m
0-1
(-10 fl,)w or wLrmom = 0, stro-ig I ow = nex pnnts)_ f - 4- �.f
Ei idence, of past human altLr2tion 0
I (extrnsir Jwm ion =G noalt-e-tLon —n-xPoints)
Rinarian zone
fno bufl-.t = 0 co ti--Lo.Ls wide buTcr = rn-x Domts)
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
-4
47
d s#v s = 0 no c scparges = m.x pomts)
Groun&arer discharge
0
0 -
0 --4 -
(no stharg-, sp-ines. seeps v etlands e c- rrax �01ns'y I
zu
f
Presence ofadj scent floodplain
(no toodjlam = 0 erxnir, e floodplain = rr ax :)01-lts) 4K
Ei3trtnchmLnt / floodplain access
(dccPlyc=-cncbed=0
1�
Presence of idl-icent Aetland
0- . 6-Z,
4
4,1
::,_I
(no A edzz& = 0 kee adwent etlands max
9
ChAnnel sinuosit) � I T -- -,
0 -
0- 4 -,ttom
c Cianrchza�tlan - 0 raftiral -nezund-- - m-x poina)
a
i0
Sediment input
-V4
4
tt), emve ze.-sos Lion= 0 I-rle Q -10 ealment = Mzx pCmtsj
Size & dot ersAN of channel bcd substrRW'
(-irie ;`iomq -nax -zt, n sl
gc-qus -rge ci erseb-==
12
--Ei idence oft} than nel, incision or widening
6:", V
5.�
-;r()L�,4
t-
faenl�v L=--,scd = - stable bed & barli =
� -V
,
Presence of major bank fa lures
e - e-�Osion - 0 no erosion itaol� b.:1s = =i.-� V nl�) J
X14
Root depth and densit% on bards'
(no "01c -00.. = 0 dcn.,,- 0,)ts Throjw'.1'-t -rax -10 r
Impact b) agriculture, liy estoLk, or timber producnon
(sL, al �m2a no ey~eeoce; ;r ax
Presence of riffle pool,ripple pool complex s -hr��
'
r;
J
tno or vools = 0 treed M-X pointsi
17
H2bitat COMPIM
0 6
(linle or toh.biLit = 0- L =u-F, -1ried lzb ",tLZ2=12pLna
Canopy coAcragge mer streambed
sh�dlr -zCMt1or - O'c"WWWOLS May, dots)
Substrate embeddedness
19
4�Lx-21_—ibtzdi-d - 0 lops- struc
WA
--A
Presence of stream mi criebrates JsSe
iq
tj
t) -i
0- corn no�-L nu==Ls max
,Presence ofamphibitins;
-,0 4
(no evidence 0 co -ninon ni--ntrous max T)?,IM, c5)
Presence of fish �y _µ_ --'t -
',�e, ��, -V
(no evloAz 0 coma= TLM-ro us 12SS MIX Ei3-t�)-
-q
2.1
Evidence of wildlife use
--G
- Points
W 1;1
K
✓ k
-11775;
-:z--TOTAL SCORE
q,
ME-
T" ese chwact -SLC:S are I Ot ass,s in cos-41 str-a-ns
MEV
I

North Carolina Division of Water Quality — Stream Identification Form Version 3 1
Stream SBA
Original Collection Date
Absent
Weak
05/24/2005
Project TIP# U 2817,
Strong
Transfer to Revised 3 1 Form
Evans Street Wideninq
Location App '/Z mile south of
01/23/2008
15 Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain or
Water in channel — dry or growing season
Cannon's Crossroads
Evaluator H Brady
Nearest Named Stream Fork
❑2
Swam
❑1 5
County Pitt
USGS Quad Greenville SW
River Basin Neuse
Total Points 2075
Stream is at least intermittent
If ?19 or erennial i �o
A Geomorphology Subtotal = 10
Absent
Weak
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1a Continuous bed and bank
®1
00
❑3
15 Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain or
Water in channel — dry or growing season
01
®1
❑2
❑2
16 Leaflitter
❑1 5
❑3
❑0 5
2 Sinuosity
17 Sediment on plants or debris
00
005
❑1
®1
18 Organic debris lines or piles rack lines
❑0
❑2
❑1
❑1 5
❑3
❑No = 0
3 In Channel structure riffle pool sequence
❑0
®1
❑2
5
23 Bivalves
❑3
no
4 Soil texture or stream substrate sorting
El
❑0
❑2
®1
❑3
❑2
24 Fish
❑3
5 Active /relic flood lain
5
❑O
El
El
5
02
❑0
❑3
005
6 Depositional bars or benches
®0
El
26 Macrobenthos note diversity and abundance
❑2
❑0
❑3
5
7 Braided channel
El
®0
❑1
❑1
27 Filamentous algae periphyton
❑2
El
❑3
8 Recent alluvial deposits
❑0
❑3
®1
NO
❑2
❑0
5
❑3
El
95 Natural levees
❑0
5
29 Wetland plants in streambed
®1
❑2
❑3
10 Headcuts
20
❑1
❑2
❑3
11 Grade controls
❑0
❑0
5
®1
❑1
5
12 Natural valley or drainageway
❑0
❑0
5
01
❑1
5
13 Second or greater order channel on existing
USGS or NRCS map or other documented
evidence
®No = 0
❑Yes = 3
a Man made ditches are not rated see discussions in manual
B Hydrology Subtotal = 55
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
14 Groundwater flow/discharge
❑0
®1
❑2
❑3
15 Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain or
Water in channel — dry or growing season
❑0
®1
❑2
❑3
16 Leaflitter
❑1 5
®1
❑0 5
❑0
17 Sediment on plants or debris
❑0
005
❑1
❑1 5
18 Organic debris lines or piles rack lines
❑0
®0 5
❑1
❑1 5
19 H dric soils redoximor hic features resent?
❑No = 0
®Yes = 1 5
C Biology Subtotal = 525
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
20 Fibrous roots in channel
❑3
❑2
01
❑0
21 Rooted plants in channel
❑3
®2
El
❑0
22 Crayfish
❑0
005
El
❑1
5
23 Bivalves
no
El
❑2
❑3
24 Fish
No
❑0
5
El
❑1
5
25 Amphibians
❑0
005
El
❑1
5
26 Macrobenthos note diversity and abundance
❑0
®0
5
El
❑1
5
27 Filamentous algae periphyton
®0
El
❑2
❑3
28 Iron Oxidizing bacteria/fungus
NO
❑0
5
El
❑1
5
29 Wetland plants in streambed
❑FAC =O 5 ®FACW =O 75 ❑OBL =1 5
❑SAV =2 0 ❑Other or None =O
Items 20 and 21 focus on the presence of upland plants Item 29 focuses on the presence of aquatic or wetland
plants
Notes (Use back side of this form for additional notes ) Sketch

M
I-C: -SID= MN Q ° - t r*r 8"_ I I - -)
M STRE -OI QU kLITI kSSESSNIEN F Nt ORKSHEET
Pro-,ide the folio-Aing inforni-i ton for tilt strcirn rtach under assessment
i ails - s -Z-n- " /-I> ' E I- 0- s---iQ I - 5-; . -, -�
Da f t Iva nn - 4 Ti— cf -u,a z
a N,—n-0" ea-r- ~' 'r b kite' b4sm +
ipro -nut cra nags ar a
o t _n -.h , r - -ct � al. - e-
1€ S tc am" tes (t
& 5 .t'1 C, ile"'
i.P
12. S: buvt ,ice r an- ( i anN )
Ls it ci x sz n _.a -) Lcieetttid ( x. -- -! 55311
le had In -tion t .-mir o Scir^) ) GPS Topo Sh at 0-ft r 4:: ati 711haI&Gt5 01= G €S O..DC
€3 l o-a Ior o e_ ' Lnde n Juatic- (To e P ;,.-oy op-s rd 1- ncry -1 a. a a-h rrap id -- ~ rg at e.-I S) lo—jo
f ✓ s y s f r- ? --,� e 0,'' z'' ,r .sue° I �` 7 .+ .a
14 " -- D�- " d c a::r -I A Iy i Y all j
is Re=—I li ca.-C con dors '-, i^�F" 4 ✓ t
16 Stta Condatlais at ar^° of4istr
17 i:! .n 31�% a-^ s-N to t -A-- te,`u— clssv Ice-tici -s knau-a ____,S -z-on €0 ^Tice..€ --°s , F -Ssent al F .-It-ts flab qB-T
�T o- %vP t--s Oi a �' ti -� GCSE - -P Nk AX-S _' a» ' It S -ISi t t aa_-s „W at° S-polS
1S €> t _ - a po 2d o 1.i c loc -tro zs> >� r I of tae C at.ia ion pot ~11 s S � cs esL=a e -Ie 'n to
to Daes - ratLicl aptae -r on riSCS ;uad rrap'i YES 20 Dves c- ...-m-1 poem on USDk Sol Ston cN ° )\O
21 E_; in- -d isL s -d l-ac cse ._.._% rRaze idenn -1 Coma.-=4 Ll 0F0 to :t r-n.
� '�G cS :i'� .,,,,,,,..� �)�°� � Ana �i ���o � -•r it
24 Slope slope do yr 9 a St. -ain _Fl, kO to 2%) _G--n a- i- to ="e3 'j-e-at- (- a _Sx -- (> 10,,0
2a Crzw nef st` os r St. <agl - �O�c�s on t `cs _F .; Lc-tt a I: —% rt stn I is _.B ud-d cl --- -1
instru, cars `or completion of rso; -L. eet (locat >d on p - &i. 2) 3 gin e- -cs am ez c°n 0..
I$,'' Szta a f''c, :t °" C}`...,— n' C ""'- ^.x' SC" 4�
o each t.,i- -, nz zli3 n or n acco—po P-;c E t? OSYics a r : Sc ---inn o4 nt`+u t0 r"S Y
--!I_-- erYstic is -r --d -I I.Ic Sco --s sooulo ie: t an a-�prall .s�,°ts ne% of ioc B ream -ca b -t e_4 10.1 '1 s
&aract tstic to -mr t �- esslua ed d.a to size or ueaEher crnditio s = er tl in the sco -tro box and o vtidc = cxp- xation n I-
cOiL —ca scCuo- W--- ° ; '' ar 10" 01,E zes - Jh- Cl' .s.ic cf a st:- -:— 1o: -- -n-n i (e -R to- ,�-, a.-r ],%,s i3 0-i 8 p-s we
E 10 es) - sLr-m y o c. -cd r o s-- ter -ac-ics th-t caspla} rc coy -ni r =d sea --atz "o-n -dc t- _ •af>-t�
_h» is j c - assi�td to `Lr ca a b�A:n't 0 rd JO xi 4 a sca ar Its � � t: a of ,
I c v
Total Score tfrom reverse) 55 COMMLnts
l; a4ttor s Sianattire Date
This chuiinct t,tAuation farm is intzndtd to be ustd onIN as a guide to assist landoKners and t:nwonmental professionals in
vatherinl; the data required ht the United States krmr Corps of Engineers to mate a preliminan assessment of s ream
gualit*v The to al score resulting rom the completion of this rorm is sa '),iect to LS4,CE approtal and dos not €trpl a
pp2r'ocular m ti,4ation rand or r'quirement. -0-- SLIn 'I a(2 --I 3 T1 Cis"wrt -l-. S° CE@ 7 9 , �" *�I x 25
0

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSNI.ENT NI ORKSHEET
Tl e°�- cl;arawtei stics at not asacssed in coastal _,trtanq
2
0
t
i
1
,.L z
�s7 tr ll lli. y,
0Unt2l17:� tT�,
'
Presence of floe l perststent pools in stream
0 -3 �
�Z
n = 0 sre flo v = rrzx o ns)
00 -DX 0 S- tara� u
-
a -0 Y
Evidence of past human alteration
s k' (cx zr., e .I e motion = 0 no alp s—ticn- -rte oin.$)
1.2 Riparian, zone M
'
f # - 5
GA:
tut_ b+uf s = cor tz atiot s � d i er = iziax u s �
r _j -
,� a-
Etizdence of nutrient or chemical di. schirges
' ` l fez ersn e d ac.�tarees � O1 no discSa ^aes = � x petits)
,»
..
Croundisstar discharge m
�r
loo eiscnaree = 0 s-srtras s us �. U_x%dfi etc - nsaa ot,1
s
"s`
i Presence of adjacent floadplain
7'
- k '= �"
�" 6-
„'�,:,�
Entrenchment i floodplatn _cress . �< r���
Q� g D '=,` i
r
!d * ssly enz:el -hv d = 0 fs vct�-� floodz = max t3otiits)
-
Presence of adjacent wetlands : -� �
0 _!5
0 _' � �0 °?
no we lands - 0 I e edtac =t Nmlanas =a-nax note -s)
Channel sinuosir9 � � � :: I
�w�O --a � €.�
w
0 -. �� � flea �
t
{e, }erst. L ch -in bz� Yon ffi � na`uml r ar�der � raax �r'tnfisI
��
� �� -e �✓'
lD
-
Stetchmerztinput �
w t tcasn- de-posmoi- fi IttEre cr ro sedum = MX LtS}
�4 tF
0�
_
I l
Sze & onemix) of channel bt.d zubstratc����
'' �Ji�'�
'ail its
w
friar hom cr -as = 0• tame ca Arse sizes = sn x cola's
;p � r �
'� � � � •� � ��ti� ��, -- -
Evidence of channel inctsion or milenin�
t
titea[v ariscd = to ta'�te oed & ­< ^ls = m� girt;) ,.
_
_-'
13
—Presence of major bank failures % yr�
-4.- ��
_ _ r
i o w-t = 0 -lo cresim stable b
»
RoK depth and density on banks _w *
' x,,0 3
(to � -tvble -onts = 0 dense roofs t- a..�+Lzhott � rrax ootrs �`
l �
i„ Impact b-. agriculture, hN estock or timber production W
-
_
�
- F
kc ( a
r
fsLDstantij ism :) to 0 no - L)dance = - ta. Ou sr
i
-^'
`�
15
Y», ,'”
Presence of rtfllc- p�oolrripple -pool complexes _
0
- Jy C4
rV 0
j
(no ri�e..ntan -s o- pools 0 w_il -d vtlo ed �.i�x tan otws� »
im
w I3abtt�a #eompieriri-
writ
6�i�4
-5=
r�
futile or =0'1 aJimt = 0 r Lqn ar bd n Si��
- Cznop -, coserageotier_streambefl_
(Ati fii3yd7L° S''£BL1LIUx`I ^ {) C6iit„TtS'+175 cl ovy ° max .70iilaS)
Substrates erx►iaet?dedkkess =4
�uee iv ezro°dd�d = 0 lasc =.'tic L re m$x) .� x _� s i
ta
-
3 Preserscc ofsiream fntiertebrates>�es =c" -J �` a
'l �" � = - - :g
'
no v.1�'IDre - � Cora moo. n- Moots IN Cs - max Douit�)
Presence of amphibians
' �'
C:
(no r }.td=e = 0 c011MO -1 ni- tae-xits INves max c rrs3
22
�£ $ Presence of fish W? �d_Q
---
`' 0
ex id: =e = r camera a ime-ous s - max Qantsl
�
-� -
Evidence of wddlife use
ino es -ideac = 0- amnidan oI idenc
t-
Wi;,
-`� �-�.M
= zA
MTOTCUtaisti �srst�ag) -��-
Tl e°�- cl;arawtei stics at not asacssed in coastal _,trtanq
2
0
t
i
1
,.L z

North Carolina Division of Water Quality — Stream Identification Form Version 3 1
Stream SBB
Original Collection Date
Absent
Weak
05/25/2005
Project TIP# U 2817,
Strong
Transfer to Revised 3 1 Form
Evans Street Wideninq
Location App % mile south of
01/24/2008
15 Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain or
Water in channel — dry or growing season
Cannon s Crossroads
Evaluator H Brady
Nearest Named Stream Fork
22
Swam
El 5
County Pitt
USGS Quad Greenville SW
River Basin Neuse
Total Points 27 25
Stream is at least intermittent
If ?19 or perennial rf?i0
A Geomorphology Subtotal = 14
Absent
Weak
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1a Continuous bed and bank
El
00
❑3
15 Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain or
Water in channel — dry or growing season
El
❑2
22
16 Leaflitter
El 5
❑3
®0 5
2 Sinuosity
17 Sediment on plants or debris
®0
❑O 5
®1
El
❑0
❑2
®1
❑1 5
❑3
I ❑No = 0
3 In Channel structure riffle pool sequence
❑0
®1
❑2
❑3
5
4 Soil texture or stream substrate sorting
❑O
®1
❑2
❑3
5 Active /relic flood lain
❑0
®1
02
❑3
5
6 Depositional bars or benches
❑0
❑1
®2
❑3
5
7 Braided channel
®0
El
❑2
❑3
5
8 Recent alluvial deposits
❑0
®1
❑2
03
9a Natural levees
❑0
01
5
❑2
❑3
5
10 Headcuts
❑FAC =O 5 ®FACW =O 75 ❑OBL =1 5
❑SAV =2 0 ❑Other or None =O
®0
❑1
❑2
❑3
11 Grade controls
❑0
❑0
5
®1
❑1
5
12 Natural valley or drainageway
❑0
❑0
5
®1
❑1
5
13 Second or greater order channel on existing
USGS or NRCS map or other documented
evidence
❑No = 0
®Yes = 3
a Man made ditches are not rated see discussions in manual
B Hydrology Subtotal = 7
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
14 Groundwater flow/discharge
00
El
®2
❑3
15 Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain or
Water in channel — dry or growing season
00
®1
❑2
❑3
16 Leaflitter
El 5
El
®0 5
❑O
17 Sediment on plants or debris
❑O
❑O 5
®1
❑1 5
18 Organic debris lines or piles Wrack lines
❑0
1 005
®1
❑1 5
19 H dric soils redoximor hic features resents
I ❑No = 0
®Yes = 1 5
C Biology Subtotal = 625
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
20 Fibrous roots in channel
❑3
❑2
®1
❑0
21 b Rooted plants in channel
❑3
02
❑1
00
22 Crayfish
❑O
Z05
El
❑1
5
23 Bivalves
®0
❑1
❑2
❑3
24 Fish
❑O
Z05
❑1
❑1
5
25 Amphibians
❑0
005
®1
❑1
5
26 Macrobenthos note diversity and abundance
❑0
Z05
❑1
El
5
27 Filamentous algae periphyton
®0
El
❑2
❑3
28 Iron Oxidizing bacteria/fungus
®0
❑0
5
El
01
5
29 Wetland plants in streambed
❑FAC =O 5 ®FACW =O 75 ❑OBL =1 5
❑SAV =2 0 ❑Other or None =O
° Items 20 and 21 focus on the presence of upland plants Item 29 focuses on the presence of aquatic or wetland
plants
Notes (Use back side of this form for additional notes ) Sketch

�5p
LS CE A D= D%NQ= SI W ( -_ - - -n a-1 r) j
S1 RE-VNI QL '-ZITY ASSESSMENT NN ORKSHEET
Pro% ide he following informa� ion for the stream reach under ssscssinen
fia.M
s Data of - o- 4 T me o C%? �dtlo
Of-cam _ � 1 ' S iti�rc.sta
t -,ND ki nz e c a n_p c, a o
0 Lenz of -eavl e%alua t- 10 CCL"ity
11 Sit -00 elnatzs (if kno Amj Y r r - de -im-1 d -, -s 12 subdis ision aetne (if -ny)
T, _..c z s" ! I ) Lo-i.. *,jd- {x - 166 1
t od SJC.. 7CP � vrmir -d (ci- "} GPS T 3po Sn :t 0-ho ? C"2'} ?1cz G S Oh GS 0-,-,
13 cl5 L i$�°« e $ +r tr a ° n «a- � d, -'Id L.rci~r_ .a Lrd a ?u -'i -lao Id
.i
14 Pr-,pos:d o ^ati -el 'A ork ( f
15 P- --at cord
lb S t° cond titer at ir-i- ofN sit -7- •- �
17 IcL Curti .r s�D ^tal k a t-43" - sslila tin sh=own se-ion I) _Tid.I 1V_ `-s ,__,_ES.- J H-b
.; o t',ate, C_. urarinoas °sc�t� -�e1 �t_> v 1-i -nt�,er _c-s Via S4=k tk ---s -cd IV)
�
18 I l « e -sor tar lr e located Lis a ri a` he °+ 1> a +on actni� No I °ves
19 .Does -t _n t mpea on [ SGS q j d na.n1 \a 20 Do--s cl ,rirel a-�pczr o-i LSD 4 Sall S-n-,O �� h(7
21 Es i m.t -d .,a s" ea nand ze Rtstcel tai �. 9� C€ - 1-n—Ij _ at x -1
x
r a ro - ted a Cl= A o L -L 3 _�i 0,11 T (. 1
-2 �3S`k':..3� o-t"a.a's x "„F +� .� 3J ✓� � 'ttig ^.; (.ii 'n 1� td to 0 its.. F7
24 ao aT Z.= k of � m `3-t tO o = r) ___rj n I- (2 to 47 } _ _t iodµ� to o 10 � �S _a (>
s
25 Ch-r I STLasitti Z SLatgat _Occamo --1 D -nds eau °ter Bm-.zd c- i -r.:,_1
Instructions for completion of Nzorlsheet Oocaad on pages 2) Bea n a c e^rvi ng tae waost a -7o tcor t?i>n b� td or
Ewa ion t -- t,z - iso'i sz -a-°l Ci.a.itica.ior, cc Eve-s. 1113.'. a.t" lslic In at b.. -o cd Lsi> g trw a.i18 =a ; ivi -%, z" n i S
y? aaC ` F311 iS Si A ll nib- "antge 5-0 'C f`, taw �".�i —zlo l ?--= .7 iim% ld -s a t, cat! " � �C¢ C f "10,11 t D ,%
c: fl. m-.ta..r z, ics .'',.. -rti i d in .... n �o-; -s l eL Sco - s:ia llL c -'.Z-E = o Ci�7 r.3.......5�"�ik o S - •••sa4iri —ach — 1- ::`~ e%-1. 'l I a
C-.`aC --b—C t r , Cal alU tt:d CL C S - 0 CO2C U014 elle 0 74 ^' a J :+oX aid wovi- _- Gs - On ^ .
C3 r e ^t S"Nisi'' 11— a z o 1 IOUs in LR" Ol a act -T of . a ---n i-nder ' w-N (« i .. � -= :�{ vs i am a p-. -ta "
R
rl % a Xo CS ) tai- � r am -nz2 t"- ti %idea irto s-n ller r!~=l —q I-at �;aiaV -no ".t.-ort:i -ivy an! a re-i .-ate to-n. "cd tb s<ml -a,.e Cd It
-ach. "Le total s-or- aJsi -^' o a ,tr- m reac'i mist - -..n-e b--tu e i 0 and 100 u th a scare of 100 repose itmg a Jue r -ot -�m
-lip-lies aL_Iit.,
Total Score (from re,. erse) 3 Z Comments
Ekaluator's Signature Date
This channel etialuition form is intended to be used onl♦ -s a guide to assist 1- ndo -*s,icrs and Lmironmental professionals in
gather'ng tl-e data mquirtd bN the United States -Armi Corps of Engineers to make a prelimirsri asstssment of stream
quah-% The to 21 score resulting from the completion of this forth is sLblect to LSACE app -rreal and does net imp]-, a
�
particul. in agation ratio or requirement. "o--n sic} to c- OWOa To Co--. -cat. -Icz-e --419 9 Sri N - -t x 26
�
I
I
e
s�

f
STREAM QUALITk �SSESSNIENT NN OR.KSHEET
s
4p J� 7_ CH.k�CTERISTICS `= -
_
-
;_7 n
CoasialPiedlnoile4'(otirtal`nt
J-
!�
Presence or fio" f percisteot pools in stream
_
Et idence« of past human alterat)ou
6
0
r _Itt-ation= ZLx oir- S)
_
#-
Y Riparian zone ° _;
��
ti -,�
�� 5��,
j a
,
r (ro 'mi-fe = Q ££dt,'nEzuoi s vrid I}ut;er - Tie x DO 7l S
u
„� a
Evidence of nutrmert or chemical discharacs r � �
= r {�}�� °�
� �- �” *
(exxerisn e ciscsa. ees = 0 no disci =mcs = max <rts)
- Ground-,* dlscharne x �Y
3 f-
4-�'
_„may
- °fly=
s" v
Fp.
(10 CI4C S-ee {) S rin}.S S 5 A 114c 1 � etc. = tli i oini
s - �
w « n
:f:31 �r
Preserve of adjace*tt lloodplatq -
�.A0 -4-
(no kloodnIzi-i = € c?tt:isL c floodRlam = nax-carits)
Entrenchment I Iioodplain access
0.7-
: rt
U -r+t eiiXenclitd = L ut Lkopaltlz = M" ry 's)
"_0-2, _
`
�» Presence of adjacent wetl2nds
fl6
0�
0 Z
0
Y,(na
�,tiauds = it l�r�c $IlIZCtlIt tlan s = sic no*ns_
Ctauneisinnos #fiy -
0_5
,0- 4
`
Ln _
( t'fi ers �e• chw ,°l z pa n- (Y ma tdral mear "er - m x �I'Itsl
-
Sediment Input a � rt
»
it
k
0- y
F,,-....
h 0�
(_Xtensi e d-:)=t )on- 0 Tin e d no sod_-Itnt - mac o r' sI .
= { �
� _ � :
-� �
Size & di,t,rsa) of channel bpd substrate M
l
}flz�Ie hZInO W Ous = 0 lti e dI 4 se r
! I~ �' 2ties `iwx t»i'�SES)M
�2tlei%CCOf Cilfln4pl mcisidn ortSldeIllIIa� w -a
>1
�&.Zll In-Ised _ D srabie'Itd w 1� K = rl x DOMES)
»
L�
�- Preseilc- of major bank failures
�"
>
�0���
(set �-- e n >r-�n = 0 no e esjon s-bie b_rl s - srzx c rtsi _ w � a
� --ate
»�
d
_ ROUE depth and density on banks i - - » - ,s'•
I -3 �� 0 -,
_10'
1
(-no v)>#ble roots 0 rasa ;ooI L:Loupatirst = max seals ) t
r
j3
impact bA agriculture, b- ,estock, or timber production �_W
-' 0,=4
e- Z
� !�
A
»a (sLbstanti.J LiI cT t=' no e%ldcacC = .�`i�'X �brifs)� +` � �
..0
}
PresLnce of rif€1e -trout ripple -pool compieses -
0 3 r _
(~ion 1�s nn ^lQs o Dods = 0 °i1 3e4cloao9 -wlaz no rtsi
w z' -Z
1
habitat complezz_
rs
p�
�
^i
I`IlC cr IILrI'al'iltft = 0 ti�1::'IL, Lxa�d S��t�I S � S'�X $4ntnLi
�
*
1
Canopy coverage oL cr streambeci
-
.�
_
(Tito s1"_d PE v.ew wioa = =ntriu�i cano v =Pma; Da r3
Substrate embed dedness. -,;,..
4 °V
if l� emo,:Adtd = it €ccse s'`osc t= max)
f....
u
Presence of stream tali ertebraxes (Ssipaie
a ..a
�
r�.v'rt -..4 ..-
I 3 ,
•nom ..
No >N #deoce 0" omnpA 7 .Poops tS cy = max polats)
Presence of amphibians
^
(-)d eL-idcnc° = 4 carinon, narmerotS Mes Max enr
Presence of fish
'
r
(no evidence = U CO- ion, -i e OUS tees =radix ants
mss-
H12-2
L #dente of vs ildIIfe use
U -�;
�
(tio �dcc = GCD^c^S :N idenca = 1i87Coitits} r
=
J
u ^ T
i&n £tT s Po. sey s ibNple
h'a+G4t
GlJ+(s0i Fl& �
ll
-",
�` i +w+4u.'tlr'•�^'°.ry a "w. .R `n `�-
✓ ^ gi- ,L
y
Y'��y12+.d+�'.rs•'xk'M1w"�
=t °¢A'?v..+�"'�
a � .,� � �- � ..� r '�'�, .��� �' � =�� _�„�, �a ,. ate•- ,�,:::�, -� ��.�.
e The _e ;;w� clens`i s --e Lion vI COc SLA S`*=_- -Z
i
t
77-77- I- - —1 ��
I
a
I
k
w
r
k
x

North Carolina Division of Water Quality — Stream Identification Form Version 3 1
Stream SBC
Original Collection Date
Absent
Weak
05/25/2005
Project TIP# U 2817,
Location App 1/3 mile north
Transfer to Revised 3 1 Form
Evans Street Widening
of Evans Street and
01/24/2008
15 Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain or
Water in channel — dry or growing season
Worthington Road
®1
❑2
intersection
Evaluator H Brady
Nearest Named Stream Fork
❑3
Swam
2 Sinuosity
17 Sediment on plants or debris
USGS Quad Greenville SW
Total Points 2225
Streams at least intermittent
County Pitt
River Basin Neuse
If >19 or erennial:f?30
❑2
El
A Geomorphology Subtotal = 95
Absent
Weak
Weak
Moderate
Strong
la Continuous bed and bank
®1
❑0
❑3
15 Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain or
Water in channel — dry or growing season
❑1
®1
❑2
02
16 Leaflitter
❑1 5
❑3
❑0 5
2 Sinuosity
17 Sediment on plants or debris
®0
❑0 5
®1
El
❑0
❑2
El
❑l 5
❑3
❑No = 0
3 In Channel structure riffle pool sequence
❑0
01
❑2
❑3
5
4 Soil texture or stream substrate sorting
❑0
01
❑2
❑3
5 Active /relic flood lain
❑0
®1
❑2
❑3
6 Depositional bars or benches
❑0
®1
❑2
❑3
5
7 Braided channel
®0
El
❑2
❑3
5
8 Recent alluvial deposits
❑O
21
❑2
❑3
9a Natural levees
00
01
5
❑2
❑3
5
10 Headcuts
❑FAC =O 5 ®FACW =O 75 ❑OBL =1 5
❑SAV =2 0 ❑Other or None =O
®0
El
02
❑3
11 Grade controls
❑0
®0
5
El
❑1
5
12 Natural valley or drainageway
❑O
❑0
5
®1
❑l
5
13 Second or greater order channel on existing
USGS or NRCS map or other documented
evidence
®No = 0
❑Yes = 3
a Man made ditches are not rated see discussions in manual
B Hydrology Subtotal = 6
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
14 Groundwater flow/discharge
00
®1
❑2
❑3
15 Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain or
Water in channel — dry or growing season
❑O
®1
❑2
03
16 Leaflitter
❑1 5
®1
❑0 5
❑0
17 Sediment on plants or debris
❑0
❑0 5
®1
❑1 5
18 Organic debris lines or piles rack lines
❑0
I ®0 5
El
❑l 5
19 H dric soils redoximor hic features resent?
❑No = 0
®Yes = 1 5
C Biology Subtotal = 675
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
20 Fibrous roots in channel
❑3
®2
❑l
❑0
21 Rooted plants in channel
❑3
®2
❑l
00
22 Crayfish
❑0
Z05
❑l
❑l
5
23 Bivalves
®0
❑l
❑2
❑3
24 Fish
❑0
Z05
El
015
25 Amphibians
❑O
005
❑l
❑l
5
26 Macrobenthos note diversity and abundance
❑0
Z05
❑l
El
5
27 Filamentous algae periphyton
®0
❑l
❑2
❑3
28 Iron Oxidizing bacteria/fungus
®0
❑O
5
❑1
❑l
5
29 Wetland plants in streambed
❑FAC =O 5 ®FACW =O 75 ❑OBL =1 5
❑SAV =2 0 ❑Other or None =O
° Items 20 and 21 focus on the presence of upland plants Item 29 focuses on the presence of aquatic or wetland
plants
Notes (Use back side of this form for additional notes ) Sketch

US -CZ l)__ DN I c01 f
$� STREAM QV-kLITY -kSSESSNIENT NN OF2hSHEET _
P -o,, ide the foilo ; +tng tnf armation fo the strt,aru reach under assessrnen
W txf l titPt - w 4 _ -°t° G 't _ �✓� r -"
. \--n- R v e masin 9 f
h �Al�ticl a ^fl *� a-cu Q ST ea-n o 3e
9 __rg h tit £avi 1 -!-a sa 10 C.o.anr
11 _DC atNa es fit 'o �,_" D- C� In 12 St lea � tsrtr�z Ram e > a� �a41
i4ethod oczinon d -.-nr n-3 t" c' j CPS Topo ah_ct 0-t�-o (A- alb P io J Grp 01' e GIS G 1-c
13 -oc .'r w ---ca --id -r .-Iua to- (note r� -ay oads and lana- _ ks en a azk reap id°-it -� ing ID 6 o-) �
r
Lie 0,
14 n r Z-2-1 XO k.l"ii - � I
k€
1 a qe ^^tt 4 + and titers 12111: ".?4Ar,_"�,_
16 Site condi o s at rt n° of . istt'
i t i �� i
1; d r +tom az .�rt_i �4 A--�..� �` ..ss1`rc� o s tr;��.. �„Se:: oa {i „Tica1 � .. _-s ���° ..1 F shed � IF its.
s �f? i �t� ot_g R � r� i� r tr -e � NLL-°s ° -It S-Z-S i ° V� ate S _V, __r Sun) y �N L ° �_� „ _t r I �
18 is tn- c a no- or W e io"t -d L2—r = of ti,e tszlu ion po r '7 1 ES ii %-s es gnat_ h, %;ptc s c a--a
19 Do-s char -1 ap r 4 r on USG qt. d -r to° Y v,s 2t1 Does c' a tnPl app�kr o� LrSrJA Soil San E 1 i
21 :s i - -t -d u - e Ind �� _ � 0A n._- tac-in-1 � °4 Comm--c -]J Ufa tnd- s,r^ -I _ ° Am- LI7L.-i
_so -o t, eel ._1a C'=-ed Log-ed 4fm Ot" f
22 _.� �. d x iaa # ; ��° ..3 B_-_i tc ;ht 4u-n bed to toe of Dz: �,11
24 C)._rrirl slog° Go k I ce -ter of s'rea^t, _,.,_Fl_t (0 o 2 °f ) _G - -t1t (_ o -,In) ,t lodes-, e t-d o , 0%) _' -,t,ep (s 10r'r)
24 Ci - uter s s *} Sralght _ _G ^c, to -! ae-is =test - d- _ IV "-v s I n bta _ aid -z cl-a -m -I
Instructions for couplet on of tiiorl sheet i'locat d on pact 2} -g I ''-t ; e--r -t s" �V- llzo t _ :r op- ec0 Vc- :,-el o-1
10C on Sze_- clr _,Ills Jo-_ ° c E. , t- &_-ac ._s n "s o'£d Lsi" g .. ° s_-.n: t,o'rpiv i 30 `r.s
o G iL"M d.- n snu-w) for :it -c ^: Di. ge 3 d s a b-c$ d_sc -i-� i-I o '7t' w to ra tech t_.E
c _n t-_ s r- aoc- it -d m th- %o- S' -tt. Sco cs saot.ld e1ty a, o- zera..1 �K�ess-i °rt of Ala° st am retch urccr c J" for If a
c�sractt -stic ca -root ti° es atL,atea d se to site or %ea � r ewiditlors cm cr it n »r^ scoring; box Lnd p cai lo° an v pL i_tio,1 in tai°
corrurn rt st -- 3 _ th— a ° obvtoLs c- rQcr ixt vi itu^ 36t cf undt -v ­A (£ o �e st -e_ri flo,&s a a
it o a o _ j Lie -a o c %td-d :-to °-ast-r c -1--s tli.t erspl v r-o- wo °t m. rr via a o•-n o ­�..I,rat° -�_cn
=I- T. t� l s.o asp -n_d o a ��� r:z a mLS -any b--,% r fl d tfr� etch � S a ° of iflO va `nom g a St-c a tai �,
xi¢ ^CS c__hn
Total Score (from reN (,rse) 2 I Comments
E; aluator s Sign .Ature Date
This channti e'~ata.ation form is intended to be used truly as a guide to assist landoliners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data requ r °d bt the L sited States krmy Corps of i ngmeers to make a preltminan assessment of s�r£am
qu.ibt� The total sci e reSLIt°ng frorr the eorrsglttion of this form is subject to LS -kCE approtal and does not imply a
particul -r m ti!zation -itio or req�iremtnL -o-r S_b -et 4 0o t?.i o Co rn° ., Dl_.y.. e =d I;, � -�, -S- 1 x ?c
l
1
f
a
z
f
9

STREAM QU -k ITX ASSESSNMIN T ' 8 OR SHEET
w S y
.- .*.� {-r- •+ '"
✓
° --Es.. �1.>». i1V�Z o2if 1
.—.
C t CTERisT1CS1 � ;
Cnasti r
tiflnr
►�=
A
Presence of flog f persistent pools to stream,
-low
r
l :07
(3!0 a Stwra )�a = 0- Suns flow = M_x no n S)
1 J-1
r
2
Evidence of past human alteration- � �"
� �
-p �
4
t { ;atrt95 ° C zbon = 0 no a x° atio i = -n7 x pa Lfs)
l3�
x Rtpartan zone
b-
x 5F_
�fia^��
rail-
no b-aj er = 0 ca °t1 at s c IdK s cr = r�aat ao nisi
'
,1rt
by
Enid €nee of nutrient or chemical discharges
��
M=
me
y
(GX €-, tsive disch i-ecs = 0 no d- ,ena. -ges = Tr_c cpoirts
4
Groundwater discharge
�Cno
dJSGba-ee'� sans seAas atiandsr etc = rn z "n> its
' A
o
Presence of adjacent flood�lai�
=.2
`
< (no floodolain = 0 er, -zsrE R floodpt��t = naa� pc nts
i
Y �
7�;
; Entrenchment 1 iloodplain access
-+
re
b dtt ly c-titrcar'bad = 0 freaueiu flood== =treat
z ; , Prccmnce of adjacent wetlands ry
µ V O h `
�
:
�
Yno r r �
�r
�
Channel sinuosity
r w d —
a
C1- a -incli =aeon _ {} n_t --al "' -W CC1 = T 2X C rtS�
Ifl
Sediment Input ro z 3�rx
4- Y
r 0
Al
4--
z
A
yer (extez>arye deDosluon =0- little or ro sea.mcri = *ax Mints)
-
w Size & dnerslty of channel bed substrate
(ins harre ants is it ' :rer do erse slzrs = max rants
'gv
i A
ENidenct ofch2nnel )ncision orvkideni 1'-
b SR'
1
.M
.�+�
.
i
f{ ee*ly tact ;ed = 0- v ble ocd & oarks = -nax rtsl
- �
w I
13
t Presence of major bank failures �w `�
`zii '- 3 tl-
(sz' C c e o ton = G no MS1on st�uJlb bans ia r Ri, O 'tal
0 -5
-5�
­14
_;5w p Root depth and den$iCG on bsalls 1 , ` n� t 0- �� �
0 «�
_gk (oo � Stbl. G.s = 0 d=se pis �kro.a..`S� .tt = Mzx i30?'itS IT
'
✓
r =
loa
r4lmpact b-. affnculture, lay cstoci., or limber production" �
al m act =G -a Max
16
Presence of rife pool ripple pool cornpleies � _
e
0
(no -11fles.�"roo es o = 0 u eat -dot doped = sn x alerts )
-3�0
I?
Habitat cornplezatc — '
g
,�
0 -t
z' =
"
it r3_ or ao hz±n tat it f M twit ancd Iris = maxo n }
..
I a
Z-1 Canopy coerabe otter streambed a
_ 0 $5
,»d
( ^ s % � -toz = 0 ca rt aus ca sa et r anoav =
19
N Suhsu-ate eambeddedness
-
` (dew £k ^robec-dsd -70 1t1casn str�e R=)
i Presence of stream InNertt.brate$(s r'pae�-4)
___
I
(r*o cN i6cuco = 0 o arr: -no-L n meroLS "--s Mzx oar's
17 — «
e
i
1 21
/ �yPresence of amphibians ,
t fno eviaenc °!S U cor'=ari nvrss: zip s t' RLS -nax 0012 $�
_
x - Presence of fish
"s
zS
no erac£ -ic 4 i znon. iL=- _ro.s o's xYs
V —
ti s
1
1
Etiadenre ofwaldirfe use � �
�6
=
�
2.
no ­6dnrce -306 4)
ti
1_/
€ � U n
r-.
Tata1>ofnts Prsst�le _ ,�
` S..A*
'€"� °
i
`..- w,.aa
'"� tie
`x � I�t�a�
"21Y'l�'V,.a};
�.
"""•`"�''`'^ „',,',,', +"� 1 s,.. e. e, - -yry
y
x.-i
c�ac .�
•...',�- w
w r F- 4w+Ya-
. �.r �.MW
s x —TOT SCORE Calso en,d6on r'
* 7'esc rh�ractt- tstacs are slat ass sst^ in cons -A streams.
e
k
I

NCDNN Q Ni ETLkND RATING NN 0Rh5HEET (4th A ERSIONli
f raj ct Natrc i F ° J f4 COL') L,
r--
N a -s R d 4 C `3 D.ite > / /-57� 2
'4 c -ld .-i_. -a i -to 15 vG e0a d ; dtli rt) 15`r0 Frc
Narc of Evaluak. Is - iAj?f
4'P CILAND LOCATION
ut UUAI a c to uar- pond or lake
un pererntay stear
1n int> r1 ter , ream
4E htrn ictGr Lrea_-n dt ode
.dh
cc1II.rS
5c.11 Scrlcs 6/33 COr.- Pz -z C
prrd mrardl u canic I ,amtj rn k, or neat)
pstcl4mtran h mn ral (nor sandy`
p d rriran i% and%
Hl DRAL'LIC F kCTORS
-,LC p (, prgr ipb)
d Lch J cr harn Itz d
le tr, al xct and w)dLb .= 1L4 fc t
Vt h I LAND I I Fk, scic,torc'
A U l k C ENT LA IUD L SE
{„ tmn 112 m Ic LFSLre m up lope or radw
fnresL J a tzr l %e La n /J
a r wlw A t_ bartzed ��- 0,
LMP rtitaua UrI.> e a,
,l� c
it Spcctal N.)tural 1 as
DON [IN A NT'VEGET+DTION
1 '
3 t-?l ,k1 7-114
4 �1 L / s rf7L t / rz l JJr2 t�E
FLOODING 4ND NVETNESs
'Iriperurarer lv LD pcim -ncrtl lloo -ra or 1 unda d
s zzona'h fixes ca or irun Iatctl
Lat rrn t ntly fl000ca Dr mpc ark urfac ,,atrr
rao -. d n e of r1cc -1m, or sai fay ,a ex
>4� ButLmlund Hari x ,fir] Rrest
BoreFrn
S xamo Forest
Headwater Forest
Carolina Bay
B-g Forest
foewin
Epb moral Ss n❑
Ptnc Sa gnah
O her
Frr hwat r Oar b
�
The rdt rte c Stunt cannot tie applLeJ D salt
and b a ai h mashes or s r ar; hann I
DEM RATING
1 N ATER STOR.,GE
2 BAJNY, SH0UUNE,, TA.BUJZkTION
✓
X 4 00 =
3 Pr}LLLT51'1T REM 0% -.L.
i
X 5 UO =
�
- �'+CI.DLIFE HABITAT
J
k =
] I QL ATIC LIFE HABIT 4T
LL
X > '+0 =
6 RECRF-AMN EDLCATION
r
`t 1 r0 =
TOTAL WFrLAND SCORE = I/
` n.d ore p -omt Lf n sensttl -,e water b d and 10't norpolnt dlsLurbdl'L- +.L h,a I t rut upcscam ups Dye c, radl.s
3
l
s
t
E
t
E
E
l

"/3
\CDI� Q «ETL-�ND RATING NN ORKSHEET (4th N ERSION)
F'ruf-Lt Name l- �r$ c, Cartr �'/
N ar- C Rea] t- /LM J Dat
' ul ard ,rc h I :a Ar G dart ti tdtn l tt i
A me of E a uatL s v'
'4 CfL4ND LOCNT1ON
on sOLrd or - cu a try. pord H Imo}
>, on perennial steam
un int rrnsttent dream
utthtn to ^rs[ man LTV kte
ort er
AD7ACENT LAND USE
A,ithin 1 2 rule uost -am upsrop^ -r actL 1
20rcct -CI na L I 'C ctltt n 7✓ %
a,n ulturat, urban zed r
tmpr^ tvu ur 0, __ r
aula t Spect l JNu u ,1 Are—
SOILS
DONIINA.tiT "vEC ET4TION
4ort Jrrtcs I
1 5.e .a f:_4. i 5
rytedurru i nt14 organic hLmus muck or pea[) AC '- C, al-
Pi cdomirl ntivruIc 1(non sa d\)
a -,ZV ra r2- i 26/>&AA-15
prclornn..ntly sandy
4 � v11 o,5
H', DRaULIC F tCTORs
FLOODIINC AND 'WETNESS
Ire h xatcr
so- mper-n n ntly top - menenth t �v]ed or nun.Iat d
bra0u,,n
y( season l N 11ooi,d or irurdat�d
st- p tcp�,c Lib
inte nr i t r1� rlo-ded or to poran urf ace r
y itched or cn_-rnehzeL
no evtdcrc ?t to dung � 5u f ee v.atcr
wtar Jetland vtdth >= 1u0 ct
\SLILAND 11PE (set`c -mci
$ct rrland FL-SL
3 F^ r
Scan p Fnrest
F aLtttat Fcr tit
C oltri BaN
Bo Fa ° t
Pcx t-)
E,�hcmcral �vctlard
Pipe Sax annah
Other
Fr ,wacr%la h
The ra n, } C m c vinot be appl ea to alt and h
cl,i b mar51'cc or t atn CI nret
DEM XkTING
1 VvATER STORnGE
2 B- NK SHORELDNE ST -tBi ATION
X s 00 = l�
3 POLLL TANT REh104 AL
A X = 17
4 1�TLDL TE H_.BITAT Z
'k 200 =
5 kQT_ATIC LTE H4B1TaT �1
X 400
6 KECRE AT ICJX /EDUCATION !
X 1 (10
TOTAL'WETU ND SCORE _
* n .Id or- point if n sensttioe %, ter hed ana >Mo r¢npatnt din u banc u, thin 112 mul q trr�m upst./p ccr radt1s
3
r� d i fi m i
.�.e.e_°'- "- ..a..°�.....a.1;,

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site Evans Road Widening Date ,)/15/200
Applicant/Owner NCDOT County Pitt
Investigator(s) H Brady M Mickley State NC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the situ Yes No Community ID PFO
Is the site sisnificantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes HN Transect ID WA
Is this area a potential Problem Area? Yes Plot ID 47A3
(If needed explain on reverse)
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species
Stratum
Indicator
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1 Carex spp
herbaceous
FACW
9 Ligustruni sinense shrub FAC
2 Acer rubrum
tree
FAC
10 Nj ssa sylvakca tree FAC
3 Arundmaria gigantea
herbaceous
FACW
11
4 Magnolia virgmiana
tree
FACW+
12
5 Impatiens capensis
herbaceous
FACW
13
6 Saururus ceinuus
herbaceous
OBL
14
7 Minus rubra
tree
FAC
15
8 Snulax rotundifolia
vine
FAC
16
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL FACW or FAC (excluding FAC) 100/
Remarks
HYDROLOGY
_Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks)
Stream Lake or tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Primary Indicators
_Inundated
z Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
_ Water Marks
• Drift Lines
• Sediment Deposits
Field Observations
z Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Depth of Surface Water (in )
a Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
a Water Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit (in )
_Local Soil Survey Data
Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil surface (in )
—FAC
_Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks

SOILS
Map Unit Name
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
(Series and Phase)
Bibb complex
Drama,e Class Poorly Drained
Hydric Soils Presents lYes I No
Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup)
Typic Haplaquents
Confirm Mapped Type? Yes I No
Profile Describtion
Depth
Matrix Color Mottle Colors
Mottle Texture Concretions
(inches) Horizon
(Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist)
Abundance /Contrast Structure etc
0 7 A
7 5YR 312
sandy loam
712+ B
2 5YR 311
sandy loam
Hydric Soil Indicators
Histosol
_ Concretions
Histic Epipedon
—High Oroanic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor
-Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moisture Regime
_ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Reducing Conditions
—Listed on National Hydric Soils List
x Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors
_Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks
WETLAND DETERNIINATION
Approveo by HQUNAUt _3iy2
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Presents lYes I No
Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks
plot taken --15 dou nslope of WA3
Approveo by HQUNAUt _3iy2

Project/Site
Applicant/Owner
Investigator(s)
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Evans Road Widening
NCDOT
H Brady M Mickley
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes No
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes Ld Is this area a potential Problem Area? Yes
(If needed explain on reverse)
VEGETATION
Date 5/15/2005
County Pitt
State NC
Community ID Upland
Transect ID WA
Plot ID N,A3
Dominant Plant Species
Stratum
Indicator
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1 Carex spp
herbaceous
FACW
9
2 Juncus effusus
herbaceous
FACW+
10
3 Festuca spp
herbaceous
FA
11
4 Eupatorium capilhfohum
herbaceous
FACU
12
5 Sambucus canadensis
shrub
FACW
13
6
14
7
1�p
8
16
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL FACW or FAC (excluding FAC) 801
Remarks
HYDROLOGY
_Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks)
Stream Lake or tide Gaube
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Primary Indicators
_Inundated
a Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
_ Water Marls
_ Drift Lines
—Sediment Deposits
Field Observations
_Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Depth of Surface Water (in)
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit (m )
—Water
_Local Soil Survey Data
Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil 6 (in )
_FAC
_Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks

SOILS
Map Unit Name
Hydrophytic Vebetation Present? B No
(Series and Phase)
Exum fine sandy loam
Drainage Class Moderately Well Drained
Hydnc Soils Present? Yes No
Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup)
Aquic Paleudulis
Confirm Mapped Type9 Yes No
Profile Description
Depth
Matrix Color Mottle Colors
Mottle Texture Concretions
inches Horizon
(Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist)
Abundance /Contrast Structure etc
04 A
7 5YR 312
sandy loan:
412 B
5 YR 313
sandy loan:
Hydnc Sod Indicators
Histosol
—Concretions
_Histic Epipedon
_High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor
_Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
_ Aquic Moisture Regime
_Listed on Local Hydnc Soils List
_Reducing Conditions
_Listed on National Hydnc Soils List
Gleyed or Low - Chroma Colors
—Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks
WETLAND DETERNUNATION
Approved by HQUNAUE 3/92
Hydrophytic Vebetation Present? B No
Wetland Hydrology Present? No
Hydnc Soils Present? Yes No
Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks
plot taken --20 uphill of WA3
Approved by HQUNAUE 3/92

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site Evans Road Widening
Date 5/14/2005
Applicant/Owner NCDOT
County Pitt
Investigator(s) H Brady M Mickley
State NC
FACW
9
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the situ Yes No
Community ID PFO
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)9 Yes HNo
Transect ID RIB
Is this area a potential Problem Area9 Yes
Plot ID WB23
(If needed explain on reverse)
11
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species
Stratum
Indicator
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1 Sambucus canadensis
shrub
FACW
9
2 Acer rubrum
tree
FAC
10
3 Toxicodendron radicans
vine
FAC
11
4 Rubus argutus
herbaceous
FAC
12
5 Pmus taeda
tree
FAC
13
6 Ligustrum sinense
shrub
FAC
14
7 Ulmus rubra
tree
FAC
15
8 Snulax rotundifolia
i me
FAC
16
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL FACW or FAC (excludino FAC) 100/
Remarks
HYDROLOGY
_ Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks)
Stream Lake or tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Primary Indicators
_Inundated
z Satu ated in Upper 12 Inches
_ Water Marks
• Drift Lines
• Sediment Deposits
Field Observations
z Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Depth of Surface Water (in )
z Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
z Water Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit (in )
_Local Soil Survey Data
Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil surface (in )
_FAC
—Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks

SOILS
Map Unit Name
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
(Series and Phase)
Bibb complex
Remarks
Drainage Class Poorly Drained
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup)
Typic Haplaguents
Confirm Mapped Type? Yes I No
Profile Description
Depth
Matrix Color
Mottle Colors
Mottle Texture Concretions
inches Honzon
(Munsell Moist)
(Munsell Moist)
Abundance /Contrast Structure etc
01 A
7 5YR 2 512
sandy loam
14 BI
IOYR 714
sandy loam
48 B2
2 5YR 312
1OYR 516
common fine distinct sandy loam
812+ B3
2 5YR 2 511
10YR 516
few fine distinct sandy loam
Hydnc Soil Indicators
Histosol
—Concretions
Histic Epipedon
—High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor
—Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moisture Regime
—Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Reducing Conditions
—Listed on National Hydnc Soils List
x Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors
—Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks
WETLAND DETERM[NATION
Approved by HQUJAUh 3192
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydnc Soils Presents lye, No
Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetlands Yes No
Remarks
plot taken —20 dou nslope of WB23
Approved by HQUJAUh 3192

Project/Site
Appltcant/Ow ner
Investtgator(s)
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Evans Road Widening
NCDOT
H Brady M Mickley
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the situ L__Yesj No
Is the site sismficantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)9 Yes Ld Is this area a potential Problem Area9 Yes
(If needed explain on reverse)
VEGETATION
Date 5/14/2005
County Pitt
State NC
Community ID Upland
Transect ID WB
Plot ID WB23
Dominant Plant Species
Stratum
Indicator
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
I Ouercus phellos
tree
FACW
9
2 Smilax rotundifoha
vine
FAC
10
3 Festuca spp
herbaceous
FAC
11
4 Eupatorium capill:folkum
herbaceous
FACU
12
5 Sambucus canadensis
shrub
FACW
13
6
14
7
15
8
16
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL FACW or FAC (excluding FAC) 801
Remarks
HYDROLOGY
_Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks)
Stream Lake or tide Gaube
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Primary Indicators
_Inundated
—Saturated in Upper 12 I-iches
—Water Marks
_Drift Lines
—Sediment Deposits
Field Observations
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Depth of Surface Water (in)
—Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit (m)
—Water
_Local Soil Survey Data
FAC Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Sod (in)
_
_Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks

SOILS
Map Unit Name
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
(Series and Phase)
Tuckerman fine sandy loam
Drainage Class Poorly Drained
Hydnc Soils Present? Yes No
Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup)
Typ:c Ochraqualfs
Confirm Mapped Types Yes I No
Profile Description
Depth
Matrix Color Mottle Colors
Mottle Texture Concretions
inches Horizon
(Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist)
Abundance /Contrast Structure etc
04 A
7 SYR 312
sandy loam
412 B
2 SYR 312
sandy loam
H}dric Soil Indicators
_ Histosol
—Concretions
_Histic Epipedon
_High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor
_ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
_Aquic Moisture Regime
_Listed on Local Hydnc Soils List
Reducing Conditions
_ Listed on National Hydnc Soils List
Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors
—Other (Explain in Remark)
Remarks
WETLAND DETERAHNATION
Approveo by myuzsAut: _1192
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydnc Soils Present? Yes No
Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks
plot taken --20 uphill of WB23
Approveo by myuzsAut: _1192

APPENDIX E
AGENCY CORRESPONDENCE

U S ARMY CORPS OF ENGMERS
WTLNINGTON DISTRICT
Action Id 200510883 Cotuiq Pitt U S G S Quad C'reensfIIe SW
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETER_NIINAfION
Property Owner /kgent North Carolina Department of Transportation
Addrehs Greaory J Thorpe, Ph D
1548 Maki Service Center
Raleigh North Car ohna 27699 1548
Telephone No 919) 733 3141
Property description
Size (acres) 174 5 acres Nearest Town VFmtersille &. Greenv lle
Nearest Watcnsa} Fork Swamp Rns er Basin Neuse
USGS HUC 03020202 Coondtnates N 3; 5420633 W 77 3849869
Location des mption The protect area is a corridor 400 feet sindc bN apnroximatel-, 3 6 nules long done NC49R 1700
(Es ans Street) starting at the intersection of NCSR 1700 and NC I fighwati 43 (Greenville Boulevard) in Greenville and
ending at the intersection of \CSR 1700 vod 1711 ( R orthuieton Road) in ' intem ille adi scent to and crossing sea eral
unanmed tnbritanes to Fort. Sw amu and Fork Stivamtj TJP * (4—Z81-7
Indicate NN hrch of the Follo`�mg Apply
A Preliminary Determination
Based on preluiunary information, there may be wetlands on the above d- scribed property We strongly suggest you haN e
this property inspected to determine the extent of Department of the Army (DA) juiisdnction To be considered final a
junsdicttonal deternanation must be N enfned by The Corps This preliminary deteanumnon is not an appealable action
under the Regulatory Program Adnunistrative Appeal Process ( Reference 33 CFR Part 331)
D Appros ed Determination
_ There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the abot e drscnbcd propert) subject to the pmt requirements of
Section 10 of the RiN ers and Harborh Act and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act Unless there is a change in the lass or
our published regulations this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed fi4 e sears from the date of this
notification
1 There are waters of the US itncludmg w erlands on the above described project area subject to the permit requirements of
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 LTSC § 1344) Unless them is a change in the la-w or our published
regulations this detemunation may be relied upon for a period not to exceed fn a years from the date of this notification
«c strongly suggest) ou has a the netlands on jour property delineated Due to the size of your property and or our
present Ns orlload the Corps may not be able to accomplish thus w edand delineation tit a timely manner For a more ttmeIv
dchneation you may wish to obtain a consultant To be considered final any delineation must be s enfied by the Corps
X The smatcrs of the U S including wetland on your project area hase been delineated and the delineation has been
4erified by the Corps We strongly suggest you hase this delineation surveyed Upon completion, thus sun ey should be
rcvitss ed and verified by the Corps Once N enfied this surs ey will pnonde an accurate depiction of all areas subject to
CWA junsdiction on) our property w1uch, pros ided there is no change in the law or our published regulations maybe
relied upon for a period not to exceed fit e y ears
The wetlands have been delineated and surs eyed and are accurately depicted on the plat signed b} the Corp.
Regulatory Official ndertifned beloss on Unless there is a change in the lain or our published regulations this
deternunatnon may be relied upon for a period not to exceed fir e , ears from the date of this notification
I
There arc no waters of the U S to include wetlands present on the abos e described property which are subject to the
permit requirements of Section 401 of the Clean Water Act (,,'A USC 1344) L nless there is a change in the taw or our �
published regulations this deterirunanon may be relied upon for a period not to exceed fis a )ears from the date of this
notification
Page 1 of 2

property is located in one of the 20 Coastal Counties subject to regulation under the Coastal Area Mana,, -went act
u) You should contact the Dic ision of Coastal Management in Washuigton, IBC at (2:,2) 946 6481 to determine
requu- emcnts
Action ID 200510883
Placement of dredged or fill material u2tliin waters of the US andtoi vietiand, ,without a Department of the Army peinut may
constitute a � iolation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Ac-t (13 USC § 1311) If )ou ha%a any questions regarding thus
determination and'or the Corpz. regulatory program, please contact Bull Biddlecome or William «escort at (252) 975 -1616
ext 26 or 31
C Basis For Deternunation
This site exhibits netland enteria as deceribed in the 1987 Corps Wetland Delineation Manual and is pat t of a broad
continuum of -A etlands conneeeted to Fork S," anip, a tributary to Sa Ift Creek. s�hich is a tributary to the Neuse Rider..
D Remarlks
E Appeals Information (This information applies only to appra -sed junsdietional determinations as indicated in
B abor e)
This correspondence constitutes an apprmedlunsdictional deternunattan for the above described site If you object to this
determination 3 ou inay request an adi imstratn a appeal under Corps regulations at 33 CFR part 331 Enclosed ) ou NN ill find a
Notification of Appeal Process (NAP) fact sheet and request for appeal (RFk) forth. If you request to appeal this
determination ) ou must submit a completed RFA form to the South Atlantic DiN ision Division Office at the Follownig
address
Mr Michael F Belt, Administrative Appeal Re,, iev6 Officer
CESAD ET CO R
U S Armp Corps of I=.nngrneers South Atlantic Division
60 Forsyth Street, Room 9M13
4tlanta Georgia 30303 8501
In order for an RF A to be accepted by the Corps the Corps must deterrinne that it is complete that it meets the criteria for
appeal under 33 CFR part as 15 and that it has been rccened by the Division Office «ithin 60 days of the date of the NAP
Should 4 o decide to submit an RFA form, it niLst be received at the above address by MaN 30 2006
* *It is not necessary to submit an RFA form to the DiNision Office if you do not object to the derermination in this
correspondence **
Corps Regulator, Of waI t'Y Q2;�
Date 011101-7006 Expiration Date 0313012011
Copy furnished
Harold Brady
Nfully Engme�rs & Consultants
P O Box 33127
Ralzt ,h North Carolina 27636
Page 2 of 2
e J a.. �� 'i

TIP # U 2817 Comments
Subject TIP # U 2817 Comments
Date Mon 25 Apr 2005 11 20 00 -0400
From Biddlecome William J SAW <Wllllam J Blddlecome @saw02 usace army mll>
To Gail Grimes \(E- mall \) <ggrimes @dot state nc us>
Gail
I reference NCDOT s letter dated March 28 2005 for comments on the proposed widening of NCSR 1700 (Evan
Street) from US 264/NC43 to NCSR 1711 in Pitt County We have the following comment U S Department of
Army (DA) permit authorization pursuant to Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 and 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 borrow and waste sites
Specific permit requirements will depend on design of the project extent of fill work within streams and wetland
areas (dimensions fill amounts etc ) construction methods and other factors Under our mitigation policy
impacts to wetlands should first be avoided and then minimized We will then consider compensatory mitigation
for unavoidable impacts When final plans are completed including the extent and location of any work in
wetlands our Regulatory Division would appreciate the opportunity to review these plans for project specific
determinations of DA permit requirements If you have any questions related to permits or any other DA issues
concerning these projects please feel free to contact me by a mail or call me at [phone] ext 31 Thank
You i
Sincerely
Bill Biddlecome
Regulatory Project Manager
1 of 1 4/25/2005 11 35 AM

QPQ< EWr op United States Department of the Interior
N �-o FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
� a
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
�gRCH 3 �a R-ilei-h North Carolina 27636 3726
April 22 2005
Gregory J Thorpe PhD
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Project Development and Environmental Analysts
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh North Carolina 27699 1548
Duai Dr Thorpe
RECEIVED
APR 2 r 1005
HMMAYS
APR 12C 2110)
UZ
y
Di V, J OF %Z-
��{ it J 15 YS '�
C P
This letter is in response to your request for comments from the U S Fish and Wildlife Service (Service)
on the potential environmental effects of the proposed widening of SR 1700 (Evans Street) from US
264/NC 43 to SR 1711 in Pitt County North Carolina (TIP No U 2817) These comments provide
scoping information in accordance with provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (16 U S C
661 667d) and section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973 as amended (16 U S C 1531
1543)
For road widening projects the Service recommends the following general conservation measures to avoid
or minimize environmental impacts to fish and wildlife resources
Wetland and forest impacts should be avoided and minimized to the maximal extent practical
Areas exhibiting high biodiversity or ecological value important to the watershed or region
should be avoided Highway shoulder and median widths should be reduced through v etland
areas
2 Crossings of streams and associated v etland s) stems should use existing crossings and/or occur
on a bridge structure wherever feasible Bridges should be long enough to allom for sufficient
wildlife passage along stream corridors Where bridging is not feasible culvert structures that
maintain natural water flour and hydraulic regimes v ithout scouring or impeding fish and wildlife
passage should be employed
Bridges and approaches should be designed to avoid any fill that will result in dammin€ or
constriction of the channel or flood plain To the extent possible piers and bents should be
placed outside the bank full width of the stream If spanning the flood plain is not feasible
culverts should be installed in the flood plain portion of the approach to restore some of the
hydrological functions of the flood plain and reduce high velocities of flood v aters a ithin the
affected area
4 Bridge designs should include provisions for roadbed and deck drainage to flov through a
vegetated buffer prior to i eaching the affected stream This buffer should be large enough to
alleN late any potential effects from run off of storm A ater and pollutants
Off site detours should be used rather than construction of temporal-ti on site bridges For
projects requii ing an on site detour in v etlands or open v ater such detours should be aligned
along the side of the existmg structure which has the least and/or least qualin of fish and NN ildur-
nabitaL At the completion of construction the detour area should be entnelx remoNed and tti°
nnnacted area-, be plantea v itl appropriate N egetatioi including pees i, necessan

6 If unavoidable wetland or stream impacts are proposed a plan for compensatory mitigation to
offset unavoidable impacts should be provided early in the planning process Opportunities to
protect mitigation areas in perpetuity via conservation easements land trusts or by other means
should be explored at the outset
7 Wherever appropriate construction in sensitive areas should occur outside fish spawning and
migratory bird nesting seasons In watem ays that may serve as travel corridors for fish in water
work should be avoided during moratorium periods associated with migration spawning and
sensitive pre adult life stages The general moratorium period for anadromous fish is February 15
June 30
8 Best Management Practices (BMP) for Protection of Surface Waters should be implemented and
9 Activities within designated ripanan buffers should be avoided or minimized
Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act requires that all federal action agencies (or their designated
non federal representatives) in consultation with the Service insure that any action federally authorized
funded or carried out by such agencies is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any
federally listed threatened or endangered species A biological assessment/evaluation may be prepared to
fulfill the section 7(a)(2) requirement and will expedite the consultation process To assist you a count}
by county list of federally protected species known to occur in North Carolina and information on their
life histories and habitats can be found on our web page at http / /nc es fives gov /es/countvfr html
Although the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program ( NCNHP) database does not indicate any knov" n
occurrences of listed species near the project vicinity use of the NCNHP data should not be substituted
for actual field surveys if suitable habitat occurs near the project site The NCNHP database only
indicates the presence of known occurrences of listed species and does not necessarily mean that such
species are not present It may simply mean that the area has not been surveyed If suitable habitat
occurs within the project vicinity for any listed species surveys should be conducted to determine
presence or absence of the species
If you determine that the proposed action may affect (i e likely to adversely affect or not likely to
adversely affect) a listed species you should notify this office with your determination the results of your
surveys survey methodologies and an analysis of the effects of the action on listed species including
consideration of direct indirect and cumulative effects before conducting any activities that might affect
the species If you determine that the proposed action will have no effect (i a no beneficial or adverse
direct or indirect effect) on listed species then you are not required to contact our office for concurrence
We reserve the right to review any federal permits that maybe iequired for this project at the public
notice stage Therefore it is important that resource agency coordination occur early in the planning
process in order to resolve any conflicts that may arise and minimize delays in project implementation In
addition to the above guidance we recommend that the environmental documentation for this project
include the following in sufficient detail to facilitate a thorough review of the action
1 A clearly defined and detailed purpose and need for the proposed project supported by
tabular data if available and including a discussion of the project s independent utiht}
2 A description of the proposed action with an analysis of all alternatives being considered
including the upgrading of existing roads and a no action alternati" e
3 A description of the fish and a ildlife resources and their habitats within the project impact area
that may be du ectly or indu ectly affected

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 (NWI) Wetland boundaries should be determined by using the 1987 Corps
of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual and verified by the U S Army Corps of Engineers
5 The anticipated environmental impacts both temporary and permanent, that would be likely to
occur as a direct result of the proposed project The assessment should also include the extent to
which the proposed project would result in secondary impacts to natural resources and how this
and similar projects contribute to cumulative adverse effects
6 Design features and construction techniques which would be employed to avoid or minimize
impacts to fish and wildlife resources both direct and indirect and including fragmentation and
direct loss of habitat
7 Design features construction techniques or any other mitigation measures which would be
employed at wetland crossings and stream channel relocations to avoid or minimize impacts to
waters of the US and
8 If unavoidable wetland or stream impacts are proposed project planning should include a
compensatory mitigation plan for offsetting the unavoidable impacts
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 our response please contact Mr Gary Jordan at (919) 856
4520 ext 32
Sincerely
{ JL�,, •��-J 1 f
ohn Hammond
Acting Ecological Services Supervisor
cc Bill Biddlecome USACE Washington NC
Nicole Thomson NCDWQ Raleigh NC
Travis Wilson NCWRC Creedmoor NC
Chris Militscher USEPA Raleigh NC