20131210 Ver 1_Application_20131120

O�OY W A TF9OG /� V
1 3 9 2 1 0
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.4 January 2009
Pre - Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A. Applicant Information
1. Processing
1 a. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
X❑ Section 404 Permit ❑ Section 10 Permit
1 b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 14 or General Permit (GP) number:
1c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
Q Yes ❑ No
1 d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
401 Water Quality Certification — Regular ❑ Non -404 Jurisdictional General Permit
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification — Express ❑ Riparian Buffer Authorization
1 e. Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWQ
401 Certification:
❑ Yes ❑X No
For the record only for Corps Permit:
❑ Yes ❑X No
1f. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for
mitigation of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank
or in -lieu fee program.
❑ Yes X❑ No
1 g. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below.
❑ Yes © No
1 h. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ Yes © No
2. Project Information
2a. Name of project:
Sampson County Bridge #38
2b. County:
Sampson
2c. Nearest municipality / town:
Harrells
2d. Subdivision name:
n/a
2e. NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state project no:
T.I.P. BD -5103U
3. Owner Information
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
n/a
3b. Deed Book and Page No.
n/a
3c. Responsible Parry (for LLC if
applicable):
North Carolina Department of Transportation, Highway Division 3, Attn: Amanda
Glynn
3d. Street address:
5501 Barbados Blvd
3e. City, state, zip:
Castle Hayne, NC 28429
3f. Telephone no.:
910 - 341 -2000
3g. Fax no.:
910 - 675 -0143
3h. Email address:
atglynn @ncdot.gov
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is:
❑ Agent ❑ Other, specify:
4b. Name:
4c. Business name
(if applicable):
4d. Street address:
4e. City, state, zip:
4f. Telephone no.:
4g. Fax no.:
4h. Email address:
5. Agent /Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name:
Robert Turnbull
5b. Business name
(if applicable):
Environmental Services, Inc.
5c. Street address:
524 South New Hope Road
5d. City, state, zip:
Raleigh, NC
5e. Telephone no.:
919 - 212 -1760
5f. Fax no.:
919 - 212 -1707
5g. Email address:
[e-mail]
Page 2 of 10

B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
n/a
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
I Latitude: 34.68051 Longitude: - 78.22519
1c. Property size:
acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water to proposed project:
Wildcat Creek
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
C;Sw
2c. River basin:
Cape Fear
3. Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
The project study area and vicinity consist of rural agricultural areas, silvicultural areas, and undeveloped forested communities. The proposed project
and associated impacts are within existing NCDOT rights -of -way
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property: 0.25
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property: 250
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
The purpose of the proposed project is to replace the existing bridge over Wildcat Creek and to improve the T- intersection at Wildcat Road (SR1007) an
Ivanhoe Road (SR 1100) The project will improve driver safety by replacing the degrading bridge and enhancing driver sight lines at the intersection.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
See Attachment A.
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
❑X Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
Comments:
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
of determination was made?
Q Preliminary ❑ Final
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known): Robert Turnbull
Agency /Consultant Company: Environmental Services, Inc.
Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
USACE and NCDWR visited the site on 7/25/2013 No documentation has been received by NCDOT or Environmental Services, Inc.
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑X Unknown
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?
❑ Yes ❑X No
6b. If yes, explain.
Page 3 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
❑ Wetlands Q Streams — tributaries ❑ Buffers ❑ Open Waters ❑ Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a.
Wetland impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
2b.
Type of impact
2c.
Type of wetland
2d.
Forested
2e.
Type of jurisdiction
Corps (404,10) or
DWQ (401, other)
2f.
Area of
impact
(acres)
W1
Choose one
Choose one
Yes /No
-
W2
Choose one
Choose one
Yes /No
-
W3
Choose one
Choose one
Yes /No
-
W4
Choose one
Choose one
Yes /No
-
W5
Choose one
Choose one
Yes /No
W6
Choose one
Choose one
Yes /No
2g. Total Wetland Impacts:
2h. Comments:
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a.
Stream impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
3b.
Type of impact
3c.
Stream name
3d.
Perennial (PER) or
intermittent (INT)?
3e.
Type of
jurisdiction
3f.
Average
stream
width
(feet)
3g.
Impact
length
(linear
feet)
S1 P
Relocation
UT to Wild Cat Creek
INT
Corps
3
171
S2
Choose one
S3
Choose one
S4
Choose one
S5 -
Choose one
-
S6 -
Choose one
-
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
171
3i. Comments:
Stream impacts are associated with Site 2 on the attached drawings.
Page 4 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then indivii ually list all open water impacts below.
4a.
Open water
impact number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
4b.
Name of waterbody
(if applicable)
4c.
Type of impact
4d.
Waterbody
type
4e.
Area of impact (acres)
01 -
Choose one
Choose
02 -
Choose one
Choose
03 -
Choose one
Choose
04 -
Choose one
Choose
4f. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments:
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, the complete the chart below.
5a.
Pond ID number
5b.
Proposed use or
purpose of pond
5c.
Wetland Impacts (acres)
5d.
Stream Impacts (feet)
5e.
Upland
(acres)
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
P1
Choose one
P2
Choose one
5f. Total:
5g. Comments:
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If any impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a. Project is in which protected basin?
❑ Neuse ❑ Tar - Pamlico ❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman ❑ Other:
6b.
Buffer Impact
number —
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Stream name
6e.
Buffer
mitigation
required?
6f.
Zone 1
impact
(square
feet )
6g.
Zone 2
impact
(square
feet
B1
Yes /No
B2 -
Yes /No
B3 -
Yes /No
64 -
Yes /No
B5 -
Yes /No
B6 -
Yes /No
6h. Total Buffer Impacts:
6i. Comments:
Page 5 of 10

D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1 a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
The proposed bridge replacement will occur as much as practicable within the footprint of the existing bridge and roadway The proposed roadway
realignment requires the relocation of the stream segment in order meet the purpose and need of the project; however, the relocation will return the
jurisdictional stream to its relic channel
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
All in- stream work will be done "in the dry" or using a temporary coffer dam. All necessary sediment and erosion control BMPs will be installed and
maintained through construction. Disturbed ground will be restored and stabilized with permanent vegetative cover. NCDOT Best Management
Practices will be implemented during all phases of construction.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
❑X Yes ❑ No
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
X❑ DWQ Q Corps
❑ Mitigation bank
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
El Payment to in -lieu fee program
project?
❑X Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
Type: Choose one
Quantity:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type: Choose one
Quantity:
Type: Choose one
Quantity:
3c. Comments:
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached.
❑ Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested:
linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
Choose one
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4f. Non- riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4h. Comments:
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
The relocation of the stream channel at Site 2 so that offsite drainage will be conveyed to the original relic channel on the north side of Ivanhoe Road.
This will be accomplished by creating 20 feet of channel on the inlet side and 74 feet of channel on the outlet side of the relocated Ivanhoe Road.
Downstream from the created channel, 115 feet of natural channel (the relic channel) will provide conveyance to Wildcat Creek. It is the applicant's
understanding that no monitoring of the created /restored channel will be required after construction activities are complete.
Page 6 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) — required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
buffer mitigation?
❑ Yes ❑X No
6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required.
Zone
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Total impact
(square feet)
Multiplier
6e.
Required mitigation
(square feet)
Zone 1
3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2
1.5
6f. Total buffer mitigation required:
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in -lieu fee fund).
6h. Comments:
Page 7 of 10

E.
Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1.
Diffuse Flow Plan
1 a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
❑ Yes Q No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1 b.
If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
❑ Yes ❑ No
2.
Stormwater Management Plan
2a.
What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
%
2b.
Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
59 Yes ❑ No
2c.
If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why:
2d.
If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative
description of the plan:
The new bridge does not utilize deck drains. Therefore, all stormwater from the bridge will be directed into
a closed drainage system via shoulder
berm gutter to an inlet at -L- Sta. 17 +55.00 (LT) and then discharged All runoff from the roadway not captured by this drainage system will flow
across the vegetated roadway shoulders into existing and /or proposed roadside swales.
2e.
Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
DWR Stormwater Unit - Linda Lewis
3.
Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a.
In which local government's jurisdiction is this project?
n/a
❑ Phase II
❑ NSW
3b.
Which of the following locally - implemented stormwater management programs
❑ USMP
apply (check all that apply):
❑ Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other:
3c.
Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑Yes X❑ No
attached?
4.
DWQ Stormwater Program Review
❑Coastal counties
❑HQW
4a.
Which of the following state - implemented stormwater management programs apply
❑ORW
(check all that apply):
❑Session Law 2006 -246
❑Other:
4b.
Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes Q No
attached.
5.
DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a.
Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
X❑ Yes ❑ No
5b.
Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
❑X Yes ❑ No
Page 8 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

F. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1 a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal /state /local) funds or the
Yes
❑ No
use of public (federal /state) land?
1 b. If you answered `yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State
El Yes
No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1 c. If you answered 'yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
❑ Yes
❑ No
letter.)
Comments:
2. Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
❑Yes
❑X No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b. Is this an after - the -fact permit application?
El Yes
X❑ No
2c. If you answered `yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s):
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in
❑Yes
0 No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b. If you answered 'yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
The proposed project will result in little new impervious surface and will not result in downstream impacts or growth- stimulating effects The existing
use of Wildcat Creek (C;Sw) should not change as a result of this project.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a. Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non- discharge or discharge) of wastewater
generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
No wastewater will be produced as a result of this project.
Page 9 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
❑ Yes Q No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
❑ Yes X❑ No
impacts?
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
-
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program Data (updated October 2013) and onsite evaluation by ESI Staff.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
❑ Yes Q No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 2009 List of EFH Species by Waterbody in North Carolina
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
Yes ❑ No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
A cultural resources review was conducted by NCDOT in September 2013 Documentation pertaining to this review is attached.
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA- designated 100 -year floodplain?
❑X Yes ❑ No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
No floodway revision is required since the project design meets MOA 2a criteria (maximum decrease of 0 26 feet). Wildcat Creek is a FEMA Limited
Detailed Study Stream
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?
www ncfloodmaps.com
Robert Turnbull (Agent)
ie'""� C ✓
l!� /S�o /?
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
Applicant/Agent's Signature
Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization
letter from the applicant is provided
Page 10 of 10

PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
SP—
PARCEL ID: c� r-{ S n
STREET ADDRESS: e 1.1 C� 00
PROPERTY OWNER (PLEASE PRINT): y1 `)h Om low Wt. dr- ranspQr Q-I I m
PROPERTY OWN
The undersigned, registered property owners of the above noted property, do hereby authorize
Robert Turnbull , of Environmental Services, Inc.
to act on my behalf and take all actions necessary for the processing, issuance, and acceptance of this
permit or certification and any and all standard and special conditions attached.
PROPERTY OWNER ADDRESS (if different from above):
� -Barbados VvA. C e, vne, QG �2 -
Telephone: RID— 311- 2000
We hereby certify the above information submitted in this application is true an accurate to the best of
our knowledge.
Authori ed Signatu(ree
Date: / 13
Authorized Signature
Date:
v'k—

Attachment A: BD- 51030, Sampson County Bridge #38
Section B, 3e.
The proposed project will replace the bridge on Wildcat Road (SR 1007) over Wildcat Creek in Sampson
County. The project will also re -align the intersection of Wildcat Road and Ivanhoe Road (SR 1100). The
project will include the following:
- Replacement of existing 2 -span bridge with 1 -span cored slab bridge
- Improvements to 435 total linear feet of approach roadway
- Realignment of 450 linear feet on Ivanhoe Road
- Relocation of the main cross pipe under Ivanhoe Road and construction of a new outlet channel
to promote drainage of stream channel to relic channel on north side of Ivanhoe Road
The project work will consist of grading, widening, drainage improvements, bridge replacement,
roadway relocation, pavement markings, and pavement markers. This work will be conducted using
standard road construction equipment. Bridge replacement activities at Site 1 will avoid all impacts to
Wildcat Creek and other jurisdictional features in the area. Site 2 stream impacts are necessary to
facilitate improvement of the existing intersection and will result in the re- establishment of the tributary
to Wildcat Creek in its relic channel.

\k£�
e � =
o
=
°
) m
k «3�
<
\
E$\a�
\ \ \
j � 2
(\
/
±o£�
CL
�� 4g
/ \ § 6
E£E§§2
) \ } A
elm
= E
�
>
73q£ƒ
) /
)
\
/ «k7=\
z
�
\
-
ƒ
2
�
) / /_@
\
} \
■
(
v
�
a
= #
2 � E �
■
0
0
CD
R
f
\ )
S
Im
a
EEk
c
��
/ / 2 °
CL cu
$Q «�
/ \
w
\
�
c
o
\ \
�
/� g a
\
� �
E
�
\
& =k�
/
E %
_
_
\ƒ
)�
\ \
U)
\±7�
}
}
/\
�
0
co
�
I 4
\}
)
@
° a
\
7 z
ID
e E
�
(
e
§\U)
of
\\
�\
cq
co
LO
00
((
k
\ ) \
ID
C-4
\ )\
cc 2 2
/0 0
g ¥
}
\ƒ
)�
}
}
�
�
\}
)
@
° a
\
7 z
(
e

Project Tracking No.:
13 -07 -0028
NO ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY REQUIRED FORM
`GXs15 4" ,00 This form only pertains to ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES for this project. It is not
6'1 pjt valid for Historic Architecture and Landscapes. You must consult separately with the L ©�
b -,
Historic Architecture and Landscapes Group.
PROJECT INFORMATION
Project No: BD -5103U (resubmit) County: Sampson
WBSNo: 45349.1.21 Document: MCS
F. A. No. BRZ- 1007(23) Funding: ❑ State ® Federal
Permit Type:
Federal Permit Required? ® Yes ❑ No NWP141WQC3886
Project Description: Replace Bridge No. 38 over Wildcat Creek on SR1007 (Wildcat Rd) in Sampson
County, North Carolina. The re- routing of a smaller stream through a culvert beneath Ivanhoe Road
and the installation of a new stream via channel construction along the northern side of SR1100
(Ivanhoe Road) has been proposed.
SUMMARY OF CULTURAL RESOURCES REVIEW
Brief description of review activities, results of review, and conclusions:
Following cultural resource review activities for the proposed replacement of Bridge 38 in Sampson County, the
cultural resource specialist recommended an expedient reconnaissance and subsurface survey of the APE.
Environmental and ecological considerations pointed to a heightened archaeological site potential, particularly to
the prehistoric end, in this section of Sampson County which lies relatively proximal to the Black River and adjacent
to Wildcat Creek. In addition, the APE along the northern portion of SR1100 embraces the John B. Seavey House
and Cemetery (SP01125), a National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) recognized /listed property. While the
potential for documenting historic archaeological features or deposits related to the Seavey family historic
occupation of these lands in the diminutive APE is remote, a pedestrian reconnaissance and subsurface survey will
be necessary to insure no significant resources are impacted by the undertaking.
An on- ground investigation and archaeological survey of the Bridge 38 APE in Sampson County, North Carolina was
conducted on Thursday, August 8, 2013. This work involved the complete inspection of the defined APE limits,
those areas directly proximal or bordering, and excavation of twenty -six shovel test pits. One prehistoric
archaeological site (31SP410) was identified and documented as a result of the archaeological survey. Located
about 300ft north of the bridge along both the eastern and western sides of SR1007 (Wildcat Rd), the subsurface
ceramic scatter is considered not eligible for listing on the NRHP and will not be affected by the proposed stream
channel construction or culvert installation. Further, the initial archaeological work evidenced numerous
disturbance elements characterizing the proposed stream channel construction and culvert installation area.
Although contained within the boundaries of the John B. Seavy House and Cemetery, the proposed improvements
are to be confined to an area typified by extreme erosion, a by- product of recent land clearing activities. Shovel
testing (##'s 1— 5) at this general locale returned no artifacts or other evidence of past cultural activity, but did
confirm a high level of disturbance and erosion as seen in the shallow subsurface soil profiles. Additionally,
impacted ground surfaces rife with erosional gullies and trills were present beyond the existing right -of -way. As
such, the subsequent stream channel construction is unlikely to impact any prehistoric deposits or artifacts, nor
historic artifacts or features related to the Seavy property.
Brief Explanation of why the available information provides a reliable basis for reasonably predicting
that there are no unidentified historic properties in the APE:
Because the archaeological survey found no evidence of cultural resources in the vicinity of the supplementary
stream construction, and since the proposed improvement work does not appear to encompass any undisturbed
"No ARCHAEOLOGY SURVEY REQUIRED "jor m for Afinor Ti anspor tatron Projects as Qua(rfred in the 2007 Progr anunatic Agreement.
I oft

Project Tracking No.
areas, significant NRHP eligible archaeological resources are unlikely to be affected by the project. No further
archaeological input or work will be necessary for this state - funded NCDOT Division 2 road extension project.
SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION
See attached: ® Map(s) ® Previous Survey Info
❑ Photocopy of County Survey Notes
FINDING BY NCDOT ARCHAEOLOGIST
NO ARCHAEOLOGY SUR VEY RE, 0 UIRLD
® Photos ❑Correspondence
Other:
5/10
"No ARCHAEOLOGY SURVEY REQUIRED" J i ur Jor Ham Transpor lotion Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Pi ogr ammaiic Agreement.
2 of 2

13 -07 -0028
NO NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES _
ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES�3 :?C�
PRESENT OR AFFECTED FORM ! o
This form only pertains to ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES for this project. It is not
i valid for Historic Architecture and Landscapes. You must consult separately with the
Historic Architecture and Landscapes Group.
PROJECT INFORMATION
Project No: BD -5103U County: Sampson
WBSNo: 45349.1.21 Document: PCE
F.A. No: BRZ- 1007(23) Funding: ® State ❑ Federal
Federal Permit Required? ® Yes ❑ No Permit Type: NWP14 — WQC3886
Project Description: Replace Bridge No. 38 over Wildcat Creek on SR1007 (Wildcat Rd) in Sampson
County, North Carolina. Because of the slightly longer proposed bridge structure, an intersection
realignment to the south/southwest of the existing intersection is planned: Along SR1007, the
archaeological Area of Potential Effects (APE) will measure 500ft front each bridge end point and
artend 50ft front each side of the SR1007 center -line. Approximately 20ft of work is scheduled to occur
beyond the existing Right -of -Way (ROW) boundaries on each side of the subject road Along SR1100,
the archaeological APE will measure 500ft to the southeast from the intersection, and 50ft front each
side of the Ivanhoe Road center -line. The project is federally funded and includes federal permitting
interaction.
SUMMARY OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL FINDINGS
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (T/CDOT) Archaeology Group reviewed
the subjectproject and determined:
® There are no National Register listed ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES within the project's
area of potential effects.
❑ No subsurface archaeological investigations are required for this project.
❑ Subsurface investigations did not reveal the presence of any archaeological resources.
® Subsurface investigations did not reveal the presence of any archaeological resources
considered eligible for the National Register.
® All identified archaeological sites located within the APE have been considered and all
compliance for archaeological resources with Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act and GS 121 -12(a) has been completed for this project.
® There are no National Register Eligible or Listed ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES present
or affected by this project. (Attach any notes or documents as needed)
"NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES PRESENT OR AFFECTED
foini fo Alinor Dansportntion Piojects ns Qun1 Jied in die 1007 Ptoginnmratic Agreenient.
I of 3

L 13 -07 -0028
�I
Brief description of review activities, results of review, and carckisions:
Following cultural resource review activities for the proposed replacement of Bridge 38 in Sampson County, the
cultural resource specialist recommends an expedient reconnaissance and subsurface survey of the APE.
Environmental and ecological considerations point to a heightened archaeological site potential, particularly to the
prehistoric end, in this section of Sampson County which lies relatively proximal to the Black River and adjacent to
Wildcat Creek. In addition, the APE along the northern portion of SR1100 embraces the John B. Seavey House and
Cemetery (SP01125), a National Register of Historic Places recognized /listed property. While the potential for
documenting historic archaeological features or deposits related to the Seavey family historic occupation of these
lands in the diminutive APE is remote, a pedestrian reconnaissance and subsurface survey will be necessary to
insure no significant resources are impacted by the undertaking.
An on- ground investigation of the APE was conducted on Thursday, April 4, 2013. First, a walk -over of all APE
ground surfaces was completed. This served to identify any above - ground archaeological or historical remains, and
to determine the location and extent of subsurface investigation necessary for project compliance. The entire
project study area was photographed and descriptive notes were taken at this time. Excepting for the forested
banks of Wildcat Creek, clear- cutting and other ground disturbing activities have impacted the lands along the
northern side of Ivanhoe Road, which encompasses the John B. Seavy NRHP property, and along the eastern side
of Wildcat Road. The western side of Wildcat Road was characterized by wetlands and a semi - impacted landform
north of the bridge structure, and a disturbed section south of the bridge typified by residences, a garden plot, and
other evidence of past land alteration. Along the southern side of Ivanhoe Road were wetlands and a small
landform feature near the eastern project limits. Finally, the eastern portion of Wildcat Road, south of the bridge
structure, contained a restricted and altered APE between a cut hillside and the subject roadway.
Shovel testing began at the eastern project limits on the northern side of Ivanhoe Road, within the NRHP listed
Seavy property. Shovel test pits (STP) were excavated 50ft from the center -line and were spaced at 100ft intervals
to capture any historic or prehistoric artifactual materials or subsurface features. Each STP location was
investigated and noted whether actual subsurface inquiry was conducted, resulting in several "no dig" locations
based on disturbance and environmental constraints. The excavation and numbering of STP locations followed a
counter - clockwise rotation covering the entire APE of both subject roadways: STP #'s 1 -5 were located along the
northern side of Ivanhoe Road; STP #'s 6 -10 were situated along the eastern side of Wildcat Road north of the
bridge; STP #'s 11 -20 were located along the western side of Wildcat Road; STP #'s 21 -25 were located along the
eastern side of Wildcat Road south of the bridge; and STP #'s 26 -30 were excavated along the northern side of
Ivanhoe Road. In total, of the 30 total survey STP locations, 21 of these were investigated through excavation and
nine were determined to contain no archaeological site potential. Subsurface soil profiles varied from one location
to another, but for the most part, the low -lying areas closest the bridge typically embraced dark gray and dark
grayish brown sandy loams, and the landform situations presented olive and yellow brown sandy soils atop clayey
sand subsoil layers. All excavated shovel test pit profiles can be viewed in the attachment to this form.
During the initial survey phase, STP #'s 8 and 13, each situated roughly 300ft north of Bridge 38 on either side of
SR1007, returned a single prehistoric ceramic sherd (see attached map). As a result, radial STP's were excavated to
determine the boundaries of the site as they relate to the proposed project APE. Because of profound land -
clearing impacts to the east and the roadway to the west, radial test pits were excavated 50ft north and south of
STP# 8 (east side SR1007). Neither of these locations recovered additional prehistoric artifacts. Across the road,
radial STP's were excavated to the north, south, and west of STP# 13. Only the radial test situated 50ft north of
STP #13 was positive for supplementary artifacts, another single prehistoric ceramic sherd. The two prehistoric
sherds recovered from tests along the western side of Ivanhoe were sand /grog tempered, cord - marked, and
possibly associated with a Hanover ceramic technologies. The sherd found in STP# 8 across the road was eroded
and indistinguishable in terms of cultural phase affiliation. This location of past prehistoric activity was obviously
impacted by the construction of SR1007, which truncated the site into two halves. The site may also have
extended to the east, but land- clearing event(s) and heavy machinery operation at this location would have
eradicated and dispersed any near surface artifacts from their original contexts. The site likely served as a short -
term campsite or possibly a resource extraction point. The prehistoric resource was designated as NC
archaeological site 31SP410 with the appropriate forms completed and submitted to the Office of State
Archaeology.
"NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES PRESENT OR AFFECTED
fam for Alwor bansportauon Projects as Qualifier! to the 2007 Progtauusatic Agreement.
2 of 3

Following archaeological survey of the Bridge 38 APE in Sampson County, North Carolina, no further archaeological
input or work is recommended for the proposed project. One prehistoric archaeological site (31SP410) was
documented by the survey. 31SP410 is a subsurface prehistoric ceramic scatter considered NOT ELIGIBLE for listing
on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). Additional work at the site is unlikely to recover significant or
meaningful data. A finding of "no historic properties affected" is considered appropriate for the project.
SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION
See attached: � Map(s) � Previous Survey Info Photos OCorrespondence
Other:
Signed:
"NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES PRESENT OR AFFECTED
fam for Minor Trmupatation Projects as Qualified in the 1007 Programmatic Agieenient.
3 of 3

Sampson 38 Bridge Replacement and Intersection Realignment —
USGS Topo limp
LN

v
= /:� _ —
I C 8)
1007
92
C
1108
Y
It
Z
1106
, 4
A
V) \A
P
' 'Newkirk
Newkirk
�k Bridge
I 'I,
5,
vkirk.-.
Cem \N�(,,i'San
pit
'
1106
-- --
-p
II
II
Ezzelltown
Cerri
qj�(
it
eterso
c
Ro)al
4-
Cem
JJ
f
QCs
)n)
ct
m
A
I.
-4)
it
It
Cem
it
RoyAl
Chapel

IS•`r' ' — V, SS x' vg4F3�1 " Y.r.s; x "K�TS' A }i z� :. Jt+' t + - ts- -;" •1 t
t
4 •>_.' •,_ . -y' t ?•i: "`4` '' °��'4. Yom. _ ` "t "' h _ - _
f
• (I^ i
-
: +ie
�I-
'f
- ro.
9
°F
�S
k
- -- � ,' }, r � . Rya•':.
�Y•
p °£
3 a
-'Fr4f
-Chi' _ _ ..4. •_} a,4�
- `5J `'+.,'Y•.v,i Spa_.'., i. - -
r�`,
-
1
,t•
a�
y
p ` .. • f _ - Ott^ -', -
NN, °3.
•' J� - > +roe,.'" ` � - , - - r � -
Jai
O
�Cf
z {i
0 r
1
4 `
A

.Y
t ,
S +R
WS
i
1
s
•
a � ia. �. �. 4 ) -441 ,Y^S•. {t '
D *ax <�� r
34! r 9
�
S ,v f � r`�� §i�fa t'���e✓� t�'��a � '�'
� � 1h•-^a •� Y Y�' .o`r'�
wo NOW
NO
(t alti •p, j�l'3 C
`�M �iY. {,Jr
,rj�..
s J 4
fl� �,
y s fPrrr
1, Y {�u
� -,`
of
.Y
t ,

C
N
•''�';
�
c
umi
E
',
E
y
N+
m
V
C
O
C V
(O
T ja
3 �
O
.�
�
e ;vp
C,
o
m
N
C
C
C
C
� =;ti�'�"�'-
v v
m
.o
o
n`
�
o
•c m
�
n
1O
a
c
a
o
n
.o
a
'o
w
E
0
E
m>
E
E
H
E
o
E
E
E
n
�t
v
Q
7
o
o
m
c
N
3
x
2
'3
0
0
0
7
N
o
a
o
7
;tf
N
•'L'
O
x.L'
O
O
N
O
O
O
Q
U
a
O
O
N
yta'�trq'�i
i;3•:f�<. #ice
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
C
C
m
C
N
'O
C
c G
m
m
C
C
C
C
C
�
C
N
C
N
C
N
C
N
C
N
C
N
�
c
c
c
m
3
3
c
c
o
c
c
o
c
c
0
c
0
3
c
0
0
c
Q
0
0
a
�o
C
D
m
30
N
D
p
N
N
Cm
N
Y
N
@
L
D
C
C
N
>
0
.0
3
O
a
o
O
a
o
O
n
o
0
m
CY.
°
t
o
—°
t
r
t
4^�H
of
O:f
Er
of
W
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
}
O
O
O
O
O
N
N
N
N
N
.,,,_3 Fes;;,•
UJ
O
N
M
N
M
N
M
N
N
N
N
M
,i=D±ry
L
L
L
L
L
m
m
m
m
m
W
v
C)
o
O
o
m
a
v
m
(L)
3
3
�,m
o
0
0
0
0
.O
-O
' a
H
N
M
C
N
O
r
CO
O)
O
N
{fA

O
c
m E
m E
o
u.
m
C
N O
N O
'O
O
C
p
p
a
EO
a
+
O
L O
p
E
En
E
0
cu
0
a
N
N
.O-. 9
X
IF ayr jZ
m
Q m
Z
a)
L Z
3 Z
C:
a
o
o
a)
a
d
m
cm
m
m
a)
a
@ a
o
U
`
a
v p
a
a
'o
a
c
a
'2
a
.°o
m@
�a
m m
�a3
m z
m
v
e�5
D
g`��'£
E
o�
—
E
Eu
E
E
n
—°
E
E
mm
aoao
mm
me
-oo
me
0o
x
FE
o
Q� O
0
N
0
N
0
oc
o
.�-
0
w
o
N
a
N
o
.�
o
•-
Q1
a)
a) U
N U
a
i
r-
C
a M
U
U
r--
C
w
;t:f N
+K
N
-2
C
a
n
fl
C
p
m N
a
a
O
O V
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
C
OC
Oc
C
y C
C
C
c
C
C
c
C
Y
rL
a
a
a
a
.'`r:
E
a
Kgo
a
a
a
m
@
a
m
N
a
s
a
a
a
N
m
N
a
C
a
C
N
N
C C
C
@
m
@
@
m
C
C
m
C
m
C
C
@
a)
C
m
C
@
C
m
G
m
C
m
N
C
E
@
N
m
N
y
E
m
N
@
N
C
C
G
C
C
S 44 R
m
O
O
Y
3
2]
Y
j
n
n
C
pGrN,£zt�
f0
J
}
ip f.-
co
V
M
r
}
(p
a7
r
Q
(`O
$� d +
c o
V'
u
°
(ri
m
�'
V
M
u�
v
V'
N
af
m
or
1�
e
Of
(D
W
1�
X
m
m
m
m
m
r.4. C O
ggi
}
}
C
}
}
}
}
N
}
}
G
}
O
}
O
}
O
}'
}
O
}
O
-
O
C
C
C
C
c
`.�`p -'�V
O
N
N
O
O
O
O
O
N
N
O
O
d
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
f0
CO
N
N
co
N
l0
tU
d
Ifi
M
1�
00
IO
a0
m -a
° N
3
m
3
m
3
a)
3
o
3
m
3
d
3
m
3
m
a
m
o
m
(D
m
a)
m
m
°'
'OD
V
a
a
C
C
:2
2
a
a
a
j
m
N
eD
r
ui

,i
o
m
F-
UJ
;�N
{ #i;p
p
Z
r?
O
U
m
C
co
D
in
yysr
a
m
F
F
H
E
co
cn
o
ttv 1z"v
D
_
N
L
O
L
O
O r
w
O
of
°
of
+
w
cu
C
C,
N
-E
,K
0
N
3
d
C
U
C
d
�,y$hlt
d
V
E
tOf1
LLO'l d
L
0
N
N O
to
d
+
in
+
+
+
+
+
om
V
t W
rij, w
O
C
O
C
c C
c C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
�"�s4ia3A.•
C
m
"o
c
m
ra
'O
C
m
N
U
C
m
N
"O
C
m
N
O
D
C
m
N
'O
C
m
N
'O
C
m
N
'O
C
m
N
"O
c
m
N
C
m
N
'o
C
m
N
c
N
m
N
N
_0
N
"O
N
"O
N
'O
N
N
110P'O
VJ
N
V
U
R ME"
',c'idti,
rf� xi
c
5
3
0
3
o
c
3
3
0
3
o
c
a
c
30
3
o
c
3
c
3
c
3
EE
3°
3
Q
3
°
c
3
c
30
g�
O
3
fi•
m
m
L
N
L
N
Q
L
N
Y
L
L
N
L
N
N
D
Y
L
L
N
d
L
N
m
d
`
@
O
L
N
L
N
OO
Lu
O
O
d
J
c
L
L
O
O
m
d
@
m
m
m
00
}
O
J
J
p
}
}
of
(O
t0
N
V
V'
N
f -
t0
W
\
I�
E-0
W
tp
>p
M
w
Sao
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
O
}
O
}
O
}
o
N
N
g N ;d
=.r
/ f
,Xx�y xa
�f3i d; w
V
(0 D
V
O
n
M
n
N
(D
N
,n
—
d
N
M
V
N
M
N
M
V
y
o
0
0
a)
a)
3
3
3
3
d
y
O
L
O
L
d
O
co
U
V
U
9
U
O
U
p
U
c
m
m
m
@
m

Ptoject Trading No. (Internal Use
13- 07-0028
HISTORIC ARCHICTECTURE AND LANDSCAPES
,. T, ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS FORM
This form only pertains to Historic Architecture and Landscapes for this project. It
.1: , If is not valid for Archaeological Resources. You must consult separately with the
Archaeology Group.
PROJECT INFORMATION
Project No:
BD -5103U
County:
Sampson
WBSNo.:
45349.1.21
Document
CE
Type:
Fed. Aid No:
BRZ- 1007(23)
Funding:
® State ® Federal
Federal
® Yes ❑ No
Permit
NWP 14 & WQC 3886
Permit(s):
Typ e (s):
Project Description:
Replace Bridge No 38 over Wildcat Creek and realign intersection of SR 1007 (Wildcat Rd) and
SR 1100 (Ivanhoe Rd) and converting drainage
to a relic channel.
SUMMARY OF HISTORIC ARCHICTECTURE AND LANDSCAPES REVIEW
Description of review activities, results, and conclusions:
The Dr. John B. Seavey House and Cemetery (SP 125) were listed on the National Register in
1985. A site visit was conducted by NCDOT on September 16, 2013. The corner of the
property where the project in being constructed in heavily wooded and a fair distance from the
historic resources, including the cemetery, that are within the historic boundary.
ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS
Property Name: Dr. Jolur B. Seavey House Status: NR
and Cemetery
Survey Site No.: SP 125 PIN.-
Effects
❑ No Effect ;K No Adverse Effect ❑ Adverse Effect
Hworic Arclulecna e and Land c•ape.i lil TEC %:ti'. LtiSliS.11Jli:1'l (n ai (n et luron %tamporlcaion P,nteu, a% Unaltt ed in (ne 2007 Programmatic Agreement
Page I of 2

Explanation of Effects Deterinhiation:
ems..
List of Environmental Commitments:
1 S GT � nr�.tV�� ►'V`l� S
a �,,.e �-i .e,- -. o� o�� ci ; s -k� ►-� c�
SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION
❑Map(s) ❑Previous Survey Info. ❑Photos ❑Correspondence ®Design Plans
FINDING BY NCDOT AND STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE
Historic Architecture and Landscapes - ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS
SL /7 20�
NCDOT Architectu His rian Date
Co-,,, A(? Lo -(F... g
State Historic Preservation Office
ntative Date
7 -17-1-S
FHWA, for the Division Administrator, or other Federal Agency Date
1 J" .�hL W'l�t- cc� a
�j�,SIS 6+ a
/a v 4c �.. otr.► a . S�
` ` %t +tutec•Atchetechur a rpc•. 7+(.j;j!i.15,17iSSA9F.A' %:(rian for h•Anor h•amponanon Prolem av Una1ijied m ilie 2007l'rngtaurmanc• Agieanerrt
Page 2 of 2
� C iiwk�

cn <
Ln C
C �
fA
cD
i m
a,
z-
f" ,
f

8000 -LO -£i
sdn-D - ntoany -md auoxiH v aoloaoyxtNJ,OQ. .ON
"-waaa8v onnwwoi8oid Loot alp to paf font} m r!x ?fol, f uopajaodruruJ aouijy aojnuo.l paainhaa,tan nS

1
�I jjy
�r 9i E
.: of �..�
rn
�• i rn �,4. �� a �t.
.:� >' � 1 s,�'.�'.{c t '�- • tit a£ ".f..�.
T
4 �1
Cn
IV
i 3x. +4�: f• a ' t., it �a AF
*A!
11 RAM � wc
IL
- •fit s 2 v.•
�� 1

,I
� itf Y•� I
AA
i � t CD
�'• fS' .1� � ",� � � ^� �•' `�# any' `5.i
,_ ?it

r
F�
a.
5a
f 41

v,j
CL
(C)
(D
z
0
w
00
O-
0
:3
0
k
ir
o
ra
6
z

lV
mmf1
� ^V
Z
00
D
-\V m
_-
• / � • Y � nr ` t�P ' / t to
6) S 1 � � • ,y
i.
'•.F 3'�y, j N
t ,r
d. CIL, a
1 14
1`,0

or 7
r 1
1 t 4f
0 41
I/
3
t
f� •

O O J
W LI I
I�
1 ,
0
Ln
d
i'
`
I
� II
� I QJ �
I i
,
Ju
x-
I
I
O
^I-
�
j
viC P
v�
N
1 �
to
y.
oQZC
W �Q
Z�
I
J �
ui
Z N
Z_
1
1
V d
i
J m
oV m �
J (
4
N
14- O
z m
i L',`°
O
m+ o o t
�
N
4Q
ca
N TE
L
� II
� I QJ �
I i
Ju
x-
I
O
^I-
�
j
N
0
V
Z�
I
J �
QV)
Z N
Z_
V d
v
N�
Z
w
m °o
ti
0
r d
0
J �
J N
M
J L'`
J
3
Z
O
LC
V
Z Q
OO �
W I
O
I I
�U
Q
tv^
v 1
� I QJ �
I i
I
I
^I-
�
j
r0
V
Z�
I
J �
J
Z N
Z_
v
N�
Z
w
m °o
ti
0
r d
0
J �
J N
M
J L'`
J
3
Z
O
LC
V
Z Q
OO �
W I
O
I I
�U
Q
tv^
v 1

3
a
Ilk
Zz
04 'y
WS
AU

y, �g7i
Vii; � l ' - � �. •
�y
. tom'•. R
:a
r
v ^Ex y •� -�
2 IL
,i' it � z��� � � � ':' �� • �1'
r �r 'fig -•'� ��,�1�';� � � ����'�'>' •�J�'- k
t

F.�.. /'7;
-,.:_ tour � \ � r lt-•' �\ �. W'• „Q. � ,
a0 `
—
. • + - _ _ � , • / Imo- ,
- 1
47-
i
I
t
i —
I
. I
--
I Project Study Area Boundary -
`Location and extent approximate.
0 2000 4000
f
N \ 0 \l'.
Feet
1
Source 2011 National Geographic Society /ESRI, icubed
seamless USGS quadrangles (Harrells, NC); Project 41
Boundary and features approximated by ESI. Q
Disclaimer. The information depicted on this figure is for informational s,
purposes only and was not prepared for, and is not suitable for legal or . f;
engineering purposes.
Copyright :(D 2
Project: ER11009.26
Project Location
Division 3 Bridges - Sampson 38 Date: Nov 2013
°,Q a1 Sampson County, North Carolina Drwn /Chkd: KT /RT
MEMO „pANSQ °° T.I.P. No. BD - 5103U Figure: 2
Path: PAGeoGre\Projects\2011\ 009\ GIS\ mxd \point_26_29\Fig_loc_S38.mxd Date: 11 /1 8/2 01 3 9:57:58 AM

REVISIONS
10/31/2013
5:29:58 PM
... \131)510311- hyd- prm -s04 cA gn
a!`°
• ., r:.�:: ' m � N me �,y�, �v:e�,•! % % -1; - NKr
�. _ - � - -�yT - �,' ro r8'c _lss�'�,',4,``"•5! /, b'; x' /'14' N� z
' •�Jc '517' -.. �;� '/ ' � ! 1�� yr _ ,+ ..
1
1
I ,, :.8.`G, �^ -�."` .`_ - •. :' _ - •2:�". _.r. .'.,, >> ,� - Sgt- ���.h% � �Fk��- - ;'�.� ..:
,n 'Y ✓ - `ear }� _ � .. _ " � '!� �F 1 '� � NI`-�,J - - _ -
�`- � 'moo��; - 'Ib` SLY - i 1 lr r -= C�fEK;� t>; `;� -_ _ r• ,, �•
1 1 •n _ . _ _,y r.,s >, . >+ J �; �d , `y �a j i i 1 , ,�, �} t � a',\ i �a , '�
�, ;� .�, �' ',;'? !' Yr,', - ' i h.'� : z., 1st a••
' �- _ _ -'_ ,- ', 'la•;,1 - ?:��Y. -., -; ,1, 1' III r^t�,� .b �� ____ � � «•, __ _
I _
IR
It
{{ 1
,
, l V d•
\ "� _ ^,�' - _,�f' c• , � Si - Y „ �IIT,I ''II�r fI'a`'r.)'_ - -!• ,a y
1
a�z
'f t ?ion `°KA
vy
( � r
• f,
_ I 4� I �•' NfG C)
Dm
woi
rOwQ) C3
.K 1 %1 `$ H N£ O m
rnrn ❑ o
s r �e w
' Z im c m rN oz e z
uL I '.3'1 i N z, n o ? m
rn ,
4! pp ti
rn rn m mDA .,Zr- Zp
rnrn _ „ l a
1