20210046 Ver 1_ePCN Application_20210208

I I DWR
Division of Water Resources
Pre-Construction Notification (PCN) Form
October 26,2020 Ver 3.3
Initial Review
Has this project met the requirements for acceptance in to the review process?*
6 Yes
✓ No
Is this project a public transportation project?*
0 Yes r No
Change only if needed.
BIMS#Assigned* Version#*
20210046 1
Is a payment required for this project?*
✓ No payment required Reviewing Office*
6 Fee received Winston-Salem Regional Office-(336)776-
✓ Fee needed-send electronic notification 9800
Select Project Reviewer*
Dave Wanucha:eads\djwanucha
Information for Initial Review
1a.Name of project:
Ashe Bridge#355 replacement
1a.Who is the Primary Contact?*
Kevin Hining-NCDOT Division 11
lb.Primary Contact Email:* 1c.Primary Contact Phone:*
[e-mail] [phone]
Date Submitted
2/8/2021
Nearest Body of Water
South Fork New River
Basin
New
Water Classification
WS-V;HQW
Site Coordinates
Latitude: Longitude:
36.316973 -81.423102
Pre-Filing Meeting Information
ID# Version
20210046 1
Pre-fling Meeting or Request Date*
1/7/2021
Attach documentation of Pre-Filing Meeting Request here:*
DWR Pre-Filing Meeting Request Form.pdf 51.03KB
A. Processing Information C^U
County(or Counties)where the project is located:
Ashe

Is this a NCDMS Project
✓ Yes r No
Is this project a public transportation project?*
✓ Yes r No
Is this a NCDOT Project?*
✓ Yes r No
(NCDOT only)T.I.P.or state project number:
B-5825
WBS#(2)
17BP.11.R.162
1a.Type(s)of approval sought from the Corps:
fJ Section 404 Permit(wetlands,streams and waters,Clean Water Act)
r Section 10 Permit(navigable waters,tidal waters,Rivers and Harbors Act)
Has this PCN previously been submitted?*
✓ Yes
r No
lb.What type(s)of permit(s)do you wish to seek authorization?
fJ Nationwide Permit(NWP)
r Regional General Permit(RGP)
r Standard(IP)
1c.Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
C Yes rNo
Nationwide Permit(NWP)Number: 14-Linear transportation
NWP Numbers(for multiple NWPS):
Id.Type(s)of approval sought from the DWR:
17 401 Water Quality Certification-Regular r 401 Water Quality Certification-Express
r Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit r Riparian Buffer Authorization
r Individual Permit
le.Is this notification solely for the record because written approval is not required? *
For the record only for DWR 401 Certification: r Yes r No
For the record only for Corps Permit: r Yes r No
If.Is this an after-the-fact permit application?*
✓ Yes rNo
1g.Is payment into a mitigation bank or in-lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
CYes rNo
1g.Is payment into a mitigation bank or in-lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
✓ Yes rNo
Acceptance Letter Attachment
lh.Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties?
CYes rNo
1j.Is the project located in a designated trout watershed?
r Yes r No
B. Applicant Information
Id.Who is applying for the permit?
7 Owner r Applicant(other than owner)
le.Is there an Agent/Consultant for this project?*
✓ Yes r No
2.Owner Information
2a.Name(s)on recorded deed:
NCDOT

2b.Deed book and page no.:
2c.Responsible party:
2d.Address
Street Address
801 Statesville Road
Address Line 2
Oty State/Bovine/Region
North Wilkesboro NC
Postal/Zip Corte Country
28659 United States
2e.Telephone Number: 2f.Fax Number:
[phone]
2g.Email Address:*
[e-mail]
....__.........
C. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Project Information
lb.Subdivision name:
(if appropriate)
1c.Nearest municipality I town:
West Jefferson
2. Project Identification
2a.Property Identification Number: 2b.Property size:
2c.Project Address
Street Address
Address Line 2
Qly State/Bovine/Ftgion
Postal/Zip Code Country
3.Surface Waters
3a.Name of the nearest body of water to proposed project:*
South Fork New River
3b.Water Resources Classification of nearest receiving water:*
WS-V;HQW
3c. What river basin(s)is your project located in?*
New
3d.Please provide the 12-digit HUC in which the project is located.
050500010206
4. Project Description and History
4a.Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this application:*
Replacing the existing 120'long by 12'wide,timber floored,single lane,four-span low water bridge with a 170'long by 30'wide,concrete(18"cored slab units),two lane,four-span
bridge.The existing bridge,built in 1968,scored a sufficiency rating of 38 in 2007,and is functionally obsolete.Land use is rural,and contains a mix of residential,agricultural,and
forested land.
4b.Have Corps permits or DWR certifications been obtained for this project(including all prior phases)in the past?*
C Yes f• No C Unknown
4d.Attach an 8 1/2 X 11 excerpt from the most recent version of the USGS topographic map indicating the location of the project site.(for DWR)
Ashe 355 Vicinity Map.pdf 434.36KB
4e.Attach an 8 1/2 X 11 excerpt from the most recent version of the published County NRCS Soil Survey map depicting the project site.(for DWR)
4f.List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
none
4g.List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams on the property:

200'
4h.Explain the purpose of the proposed project:*
NCDOT structure management unit indicates Bridge No.355,had a structural sufficiency rating of 38 in 2007,and was deemed functionally obsolete at that time.Since 2007,the 53
year old bridge has become even more dilapidated and currently has numerous holes in the wooden deck.In addition to the low sufficiency rating,the bridge is also unsafe because it is
a single lane bridge in a curve with poor visibility for approaching motorists,with no guardrails on the bridge.The existing bridge also causes unsafe conditions for river users,as it is a
low water bridge,with a clearance of less than 1'at normal flows.As a result,paddlers cannot float underneath it and there is currently not a safe place to get out and portage the
bridge.The low profile of the bridge also causes it to collect debris,and it is often overtopped during high flows.
The proposed core slab bridge will provide two lanes of traffic and include a 32"tall guardrail for safety.It will also be at a different skew,providing more visibility to motorist prior to
entering and existing the bridge.While the new bridge will still be lower than typical crossing structures,it will be approximately 2'higher than the old bridge,which will allow paddlers to
more safely float under it.This new height should result in less debris catching onto the bridge,and fewer days that the bridge is overtopped during high flows.Finally,to further
improve river access,NCDOT is working with NCWRC to install a public canoe access between the new structure and the old bridge location.
4i.Describe the overall project in detail,including indirect impacts and the type of equipment to be used:*
The new bridge will be built just upstream of the old bridge,allowing the road to remain open with no detour.The new bridge will be skewed,which will lessen the curvature of the road at
the entrance and exist of the bridge.Due to FEMA requirements,the bridge could not be elevated more than proposed due to potential upstream flooding caused by raising the
approaches to the bridge.Furthermore,FEMA restrictions limited the size of the core slabs used to construct the bridge structure.As a result,the new bridge will also have 4 spans,like
the old bridge,as longer and fewer spans would require a thicker core slab.This could result in potential flooding of upstream structures.As previously mentioned,the new bridge will
be 2'higher then the old bridge,improving access for river users and lessening debris jams and times that the bridge is flooded.Runoff from the existing bridge discharges directly into
the South Fork New River,but the proposed new bridge will redirect all stormwater runoff to the west side of the bridge,where it will discharge onto a rip rap pad.
There are two perinneal streams that enter the South Fork New River at the project site.The existing culverts that carry these two UTs will be replaced with a slightly larger and longer
culvert,and a rip rap pad will be placed between the culvert outlets and the South Fork New River.These culvert extensions are needed to widen out the road,making it safer for
vehicle traffic.The larger culvert size will help handle high flow events better and reduce downstream scour.Both culvert outlets are incised and perched.The proposed rip rap pads will
help stabilize the outlet side of each culvert,providing better habitat and aquatic passage.Furthermore,these rip rap pads should cover quickly with sediments and natural stream
material from the UT's and South Fork New River.
A third pipe will be replaced with the same size and length of pipe that is currently there.This pipe only carries stormwater,but causes some erosion where it discharges into the South
Fork New River.To remedy this issue,rip rap will be placed on the river embankment at the outlet of this pipe.All work will be done in the dry,using appropriate dewatering techniques
and erosion control devices.The erosion control measures have been increased to fulfill design standards for sensitive watershed requirements.Standard road and bridge building
equipment will be used during the projects such as trucks,track hoes,and cranes.
4j.Please upload project drawings for the proposed project.
Ashe355_Permit Drawings_20201228.pdf 3.87MB
Ashe 355 EC plans for PCN.pdf 2.72MB
5.Jurisdictional Determinations
5a.Have the wetlands or streams been delineated on the property or proposed impact areas?*
G Yes C- No Cl Unknown
Comments:
See attached NRTR.
5b.If the Corps made a jurisdictional determination,what type of determination was made?*
r Preliminary r Approved r Not Verified r Unknown r N/A
Corps AID Number:
5c.If 5a is yes,who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name(if known): NCDOT Staff-James Mason,William Barrett and Jeffrey Hemphill
Agency/Consultant Company: NCDOT
Other:
5d1.Jurisdictional determination upload
B-5823_NRTR_October 2016.pdf 4.61MB
6. Future Project Plans
6a.Is this a phased project?*
CYes 6No
Are any other NWP(s),regional general permit(s),or individual permits(s)used,or intended to be used,to authorize any part of the proposed project or related activity?
No
D. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
la.Where are the impacts associated with your project?(check all that apply):
r Wetlands fJ Streams-tributaries r Buffers
I—Open Waters r Pond Construction
3.Stream Impacts

3a.Reason for impact(?) 3b.Impact type* 3c.Type of impact* 3d.S.name* 3e.Stream Type* 3f.Type of 3g.S.width* 3h.Impact
(?) Jurisdiction* length*
S1 New bridge construction Temporary Workpad/Causeway South Fork New River Perennial Both 100 92
Average(feet) (linear feet)
S2 Old bridge removal Temporary Workpad/Causeway South Fork New River Perennial Both 100 24
Average(feet) (linear feet)
S3 pipe extension Permanent Fill UT-SE Perennial Both 2 1
Average(feet) (linear feet)
S4 pipe extension Temporary Dewatering UT-SE Perennial Both 2 39
Average(feet) (linear feet)
S5 pipe outlet protection Permanent Rip Rap Fill UT-SE Perennial Both 2 14
Average(feet) (linear feet)
S6 pipe outlet protection Temporary Dewatering UT-SE Perennial Both 2 6
Average(feet) (linear feet)
S7 stormwater outlet protection Permanent Bank Stabilization South Fork New River Perennial Both 100 6
Average(feet) (linear feet)
S6 stormwater outlet protection Temporary Dewatering South Fork New River Perennial Both 100 6
Average(feet) (linear feet)
S9 pipe extension Permanent Fill UT-SA Perennial Both 2 13
Average(feet) (linear feet)
S10 pipe extension Temporary Dewatering UT-SA Perennial Both 2 34
Average(feet) (linear feet)
S11 pipe outlet protection Permanent Rip Rap Fill UT-SA Perennial Both 2 12
Average(feet) (linear feet)
812 pipe outlet protection Temporary Dewatering UT-SA Perennial Both 2 6
Average(feet) (linear feet)
3i.Total jurisdictional ditch impact in square feet:
0
3i.Total permanent stream impacts: 3i.Total temporary stream impacts:
46 207
3i.Total stream and ditch impacts:
253
3j.Comments:
E. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1.Avoidance and Mnimization
1a.Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing the project:
The existing bridge will remain in place during construction,preventing the need for a detour.Temporary construction impacts from causeways will be
reduced to no more than 50%of the river width at a time.Portions of the causeway will only be installed when needed,and removed once that portion
of the project is complete.All work will be done in the dry,and no direct discharge of sediment will occur in the South Fork New River or the two UT's
within the project site.
lb.Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques:
Temporary impacts will be in place only as long as needed and then removed as soon as construction at that location is complete.All Best
Management Practices will be adhered to.The erosion control measures have been improved to fulfill design standards for sensitive watershed
requirements.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S.or Waters of the State
2a.Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for impacts to Waters of the U.S.or Waters of the State?
rYes 6' No
2b.If this project DOES NOT require Compensatory Mitigation,explain why:
The culvert extension on the two UT's is necessary for widening the road and approaches to the bridge,which will improve motorist safety.Furthermore,the outlet of both UT pipes are
perched and the portion of stream between the pipe outlets and South Fork New River are scoured out and incised.Installing a slightly larger culvert in conjunction with providing a solid
rip rap base at the outlet of the culverts will lessen scour during high flow events,and help improve and maintain aquatic passage.While culvert extensions and lining perennial stream
channels with rip rap are typically mitigated for,it is in our opinion that these items are justified at this location to improve driver safety and reduce future roadway maintenance.
Furthermore,the work should improve stream habitat between the two pipe outlets and the South Fork New River.If the USACE deems mitigation is necessary for all or some of these
proposed impacts,then NCDOT will quickly acquire the necessary mitigation via our Payment to in-lieu fee program with NCDMS.
F. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWR)

1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1a.Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
✓ Yes ( No
If no,explain why:
2.Stormwater Management Plan
2a.Is this a NCDOT project subject to compliance with NCDOT's Individual NPDES permit NCS000250?*
(' Yes r No
Comments:
G. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation
1a.Does the project involve an expenditure of public(federal/state/local)funds or the use of public(federal/state)land?*
✓ Yes r No
lb.If you answered"yes"to the above,does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State(North Carolina)
Environmental Policy Act(NEPA/SEPA)?*
6 Yes r No
1c.If you answered"yes"to the above,has the document review been finalized by the State Clearing House?*
(r Yes r No
NEPA or SEPA Final Approval Letter
SMCD Ashe 355 13Dec2018.pdf 1.92MB
2.Violations(DWR Requirement)
2a.Is the site in violation of DWR Water Quality Certification Rules(15ANCAC 2H.0500),Isolated Wetland Rules(15A NCAC 2H.1300),or DWR Surface Water or Wetland Standards or
Riparian Buffer Rules(15A NCAC 2B.0200)?*
✓ Yes 6- No
3. Cumulative Impacts(DWR Requirement)
3a.Will this project result in additional development,which could impact nearby downstream water quality?*
✓ Yes ( No
3b.If you answered"no,"provide a short narrative description.
Due to its relatively small size,the project will have a minimal impact on land use and growth.
4.Sewage Disposal(DWR Requirement)
4a.Is sewage disposal required by DWR for this project?*
✓ Yes ( No r N/A
5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat(Corps Requirement)
5a.Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or habitat?*
(7 Yes r No
5b.Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act impacts?*
✓ Yes ( No
5d.Is another Federal agency involved?*
✓ Yes a No r Unknown
5e.Is this a DOT project located within Division's 1-8?
✓ Yes C7 No
5f.Will you cut any trees in order to conduct the work in waters of the U.S.?
(' Yes r No
5g.Does this project involve bridge maintenance or removal?
( Yes r No
5g(1).If yes,have you inspected the bridge for signs of bat use such as staining,guano,bats,etc.?
(' Yes r No

If you answered"Yes"to 5g(1),did you discover any signs of bat use?
✓ Yes 6 No r Unknown
5h.Does this project involve the construction/installation of a wind turbine(s)?*
✓ Yes 0' No
5i.Does this project involve(1)blasting,and/or(2)other percussive activities that will be conducted by machines,such as jackhammers,mechanized pile drivers,etc.?
✓ Yes r No
If yes,please provide details to include type of percussive activity,purpose,duration,and specific location of this activity on the property.
Ashe 355 structure plans for PCN.pdf 2.15MB
5j.What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical Habitat?
USFWS website,NCDOT Biological Surveys Unit,and NC Natural Heritage Data Explorer.
Consultation Documentation Upload
project_report_ashe_355_replacement_28610_28610.pdf 3.14MB
6. Essential Fish Habitat(Corps Requirement)
6a.Will this project occur in or near an area designated as an Essential Fish Habitat?*
✓ Yes ( No
6b.What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact an Essential Fish Habitat?*
NOAA
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources(Corps Requirement)
7a.Will this project occur in or near an area that the state,federal or tribal governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation status?*
✓ Yes RNo
7b.What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?*
NCDOT Cultural Resources Staff,and sent a tribal coordination letter to the appropriate tribes(letter and responses attached below)
7c.Historic or Prehistoric Information Upload
Ashe 355 Archaeology.pdf 36.44KB
Ashe 355 Architecture.pdf 1.05MB
Catawba Ashe 355 notification.pdf 513.78KB
Cherokee Nation Ashe 355 notification.pdf 512.57KB
EBCI Ashe 355 notification.pdf 512.65KB
Muskogee Ashe 355 notification.pdf 512.34KB
UKBCI Ashe 355 notification.pdf 512.64KB
Ashe Bridge 355-UKB response.pdf 180.62KB
Ashe 355-Catawba response.pdf 341.85KB
Ashe 355-Cherokee nation response.pdf 215.35KB
8. Flood Zone Designation(Corps Requirement)
8a.Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-yearfloodplain?*
s Yes r No
8b.If yes,explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
NCDOT Hydraulic Design Unit will coordinate with the NC Floodplain Mapping Program(FMP)to determine the status of the project with regard to
applicability of NCDOT'S Memorandum of Agreement,or approval of a Conditional Letter of Map Revision(CLOMR)and subsequent final Letter of
Map Revision(LOMR).
8c.What source(s)did you use to make the floodplain determination?*
FEMA flood maps
Miscellaneous
Comments
The project is>20 miles upstream of the portion of the South Fork New River designated as wild and scenic.While the project will divert some flow at the project site,due to the
necessary causeway,it should not reduce the river flow.However,previous communication about this project suggested that it may need to be reviewed for possible impacts to the wild
and scenic section.As part of that process,NCDOT met with New River State Park staff Jeff Matheson at the project location,and emailed Jeff Duncan with the National Park Service.
Attached below are correspondence from those discussions.If NCDOT can assist with any additional correspondence,please let me know.
Miscellaneous attachments not previously requested.
Ashe 355 Wild and scenic correspondance.pdf 159.06KB
Ashe 355 distance from Wild and Scenic.pdf 156.23KB
Ashe 355 PCN Summary letter.pdf 190.9KB
Signature
*

R By checking the box and signing below,I certify that:
• The project proponent hereby certifies that all information contained herein is true,accurate,and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief;and
• The project proponent hereby requests that the certifying authority review and take action on this CWA 401 certification request within the applicable reasonable period of time.
• I have given true,accurate,and complete information on this form;
• I agree that submission of this PCN form is a"transaction"subject to Chapter 66,Article 40 of the NC General Statutes(the"Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
• I agree to conduct this transaction by electronic means pursuant to Chapter 66,Article 40 of the NC General Statutes(the"Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
• I understand that an electronic signature has the same legal effect and can be enforced in the same way as a written signature;AND
• I intend to electronically sign and submit the PCN form.
Full Name:
Kevin Hining
Signature
4/
Date
2/8/2021