HomeMy WebLinkAboutS-20001021-108 Maides II Borrow Pit Reclamation Plan.pdfBalfour Beatty
ZER HARM
Infrastructure Inc.
Submittal
Number:
5-20001021-108
3314 Jaeckle Drive, Suite 140
Date:
6/23/2021
Wilmington, NC 28403
Attention:
Brad McMannen
From:
Robert Mann
Tel No. 910-452-1145
Project name:
US-70 Havelock Bypass
Fax No. 910-452-2481 Contract ID: C204177
Description of Contents: Maides Il Borrow Pit Reclamation Plan
Pages in Document
(including this one)
Date
❑ As requested
80
6-23-21
RR Attached
❑ Under separate cover
For your:
RR Records
Memo:
❑ Use and information
Q Approval
Q Review and comment
Sent Via:
❑ Use and distribution
❑ Overnight mail Q E-mail
Remarks / Comments:
❑ U.S. Mail
❑ Hand delivered to NCDOT Office
Signed as received:
❑ Fax
Fax number:
Copies to:
Division / Field Submittal File /
Number of pages in Fax
Reading File
(including any cover
Sender Signed: Robert T Mann
Sender Printed:
Robert T. Mann
R"'aRln�mlr a it ZER HARM
MAKE PERSONAL
NCDOT Contract C204177
US 70 Havelock Bypass Project
Reference: Submittal S-20001021-108 Maides II Borrow Pit Reclamation
Subject: Plan for Development of a Borrow and Waste Site at the E & J Developers, LLC. Property off
Lake Road in Craven County
Based on the attached documentation, the Balfour Beatty (BB) plans to develop the E & J Developers,
LLC. Property off Lake Road in Craven County into a Pond per NCDOT Specifications.
1. The mine will be excavated as described in the Reclamation Plan (Borrow/Waste) Site.
2. While this site is being developed, material that is deemed unsuitable (either organics or
undercut) will be hauled to and stored temporarily in stockpiles on the E & J Developers,
LLC. Site.
3. Once the bottom of pond is reached, BB will fill the borrow pit slopes back in with this
previously stockpiled material along the pit slopes or pit bottom to its final pond elevations
(See Plan for Details of the "temporary pond"). BB will ensure that the backfill material is
placed to ensure uniform slopes and a reasonably flat bottom. The backfill material will be
soil only.
4. The final bottom of pond will be 4 feet in water depth or greater per the standard minimum
depth given by NCDOT (See Plan for Details of the "bottom of pond").
5. Final grading will then take place with permanent seeding operations, etc. as is required by
NCDOT Standard Specification. This includes the 1 year maintenance / monitoring period.
Additional Notes
- Permanent Seeding operations will take place on the pond slopes after the slopes have been
graded for a permanent condition. Materials left in stockpiles undisturbed will be Temporary
Seeded and Mulched. In addition, where there are exposed erodible slopes with area greater
than 1 acre posing any threat of turbidity loss off the site, seeding will be performed per NCDOT
Standards and Project Special Provisions. (See the attached seeding specifications)
- The dewatering basin to be utilized during borrow excavation and has been designed to handle
maximum flow of 800 GPM. (See attached Dewatering Basin Design Calculations)
- The dewatering pump will be set to float and pump from the surface of the water. The pump
discharge will be set up as shown in the attached detail.
- Using the SKAGGS method, 3 offsets from the adjacent wetlands were determined: 96.0 Ft.
Offset/Setback for the section labeled Goldsboro Loamy Fine Sand (GoA), 82.7 Ft. Offset/ Setback
for the section labeled Lynchburg fine sandy loam (Ly) and 82.0 Ft. Offset/ Setback for the section
labeled Rains fine sandy loam (Ra). With that in mind a field survey will be conducted to determine
this buffer. This will be staked in the field to ensure the minimum offset of 96.0 Ft. from excavation
to wetlands as is required.
Plan Attachments:
Attachment A/B— Reclamation Plan for Contracted Projects (Borrow Pit/ Waste Site)
Attachment C — Drawing of proposed site with Pond Cross Section
Attachment D — Environmental Evaluation with Endangered Species, and Wetland & SCAGGS Data
Attachment E — SKAGGs Offset Calcs
Attachment F—State Historic Preservation Office Evaluation
Attachment G — Soil Survey
Attachment H —Seeding and Mulching Specifications
Attachment I — Dewatering Basin Calculations and Details
Attachment J — Dewatering Discharge Requirements & Turbidity Reduction Options
Please let us know if you require any additional information or clarification regarding this site.
Thanks,
Josh Sommer
Project Manager
US 70 Havelock Project
Balfour Beatty Infrastructure, Inc.
7080 US HWV 70 E, New Bern, NC 28560
TeL 252.631.4127 / l Cell. 614.679.7988
CC: Submittal File 5-20001021-108 / Division File
Reclamation Plan for Operations - Plan Narrative
Please select at least one of the following Plan types:
❑7 Borrow Pit Site a Waste Site Staging Area
Division: 2 County: CRAVEN
Project Number/WBS: C204177 R-1015 34360.3.4
Enter Property Owner and Site Information:
Property Owner Information:
Site Information:
Name:
E & J Developers, LLc.
Site Name:
MAIDES II
Address:
1054 COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE
Address:
1008 LAKE RD
City:
JACKSONVILLE
City:
HAVELOCK
State:
NC
Zip:
28570
State:
NC
Zip:
28560
Phone Number: (910) 389-1825
General Site Information:
Total Proposed Acreage: 16
Expected Depth (pit/waste): 25
Present Land Use: TIMBER
Land Use after Reclamation: POND
Site Distance at SR: N/A - ON SITE HAUL
Other/Additional Information:
NOTE: HAUL/ACCESS ROAD MUST
BE INCLUDED IN THE ACREAGE FOR
THE CANDIDATE SITE.
BORROW PIT LOCATION IS ADJOINING NCDOT PROJECT AND WILL NOT HAVE ON
ROAD HAUL.
Reclamation Plan Site Description:
1. Complete at least one of the following sections based on the planned site use:
a. Borrow Sites:
Describe the proposed sequence of excavation (include the area/amount of clearing & proposes slope rates).
Ensure the existing and final site cross sections are provided with the plan sheets.
First all Erosion Control Measures will be installed. The pond will be dug from the North
boundary towards the Southwestern pit boundary. This will be done sequentially in
approximately 10 ft. lifts. Final slopes will be graded out to 3:1 or flatter.
b. Waste Sites:
Expected type of waste that will be placed in the site (examples: asphalt, concrete, soil, stone, etc.):
Unsuitable soils from the project & Borrow Pit areas only (See Attachment C for Pond Area
Details). Includes Undercut material and other poor materials that are inappropriate for
building a roadway structure.
Describe the proposed sequence of placing waste (include proposed slope rates). Will the area be excavated
prior to wasting material? What will the depth of burial be and the depth of backfill on top of material be, if
any?:
Material will be placed in the bottom of a previously dug pond. Standard 3:1 or flatter
slopes. Soils will be placed in feasible lifts at a time and such to create a uniform bottom of
pond.
c. Staging Areas:
Expected type of material/equipment that will be placed in the site (examples: asphalt, concrete, soil, stone,
pipe, parking, etc.):
Possible Stockpile of topsoil material to be staged within the site boundary.
2. Did the Environmental Evaluation indicate the presence of any wetlands or endangered species? (if yes,
briefly list findings and indicate physical means by which buffer zone will be delineated):
Wetlands were found (See the attached Delineation). Wetlands will not be impacted by the
excavation. Silt fencing, diversion ditching and outlet SDOs will be installed as shown on the
attached plan sheets. These will be inspected weekly as well as after every rain event over 1"
to ensure that devices are functioning properly. No endangered species were found. (See the
attached Report) every rain event over 1" to ensure that devices are functioning properly. No
endangered species were found. (See the attached Report)
3. Is any portion of the candidate site or access & haul roads located within a watershed that has riparian
buffer zone requirements? (if yes, indicate physical means by which buffer will be delineated and how diffuse
flow into the buffer zone will be maintained):
NO
4. Is the site adjacent to High Quality Waters as defined by the Department of Environmental Quality?
(if yes, note how the devices have been designed to meet NCDEQ requirements):
NO
5. Describe the intended plan and sequence for final site reclamation and subsequent use of all affected lands;
indicate the general methods to be used in reclaiming this land, including any stockpile areas, haul roads, and
ditches.
Attach a site map which illustrates this plan, showing the location and design of all temporary and permanent erosion
control devices. All features must comply with the appropriate specifications, NCDOT standards, and reflect Best
Management Practices (BMPs). The plan must indicate setbacks to adjacent properties, buffer zones, and if de -watering is
required, and the pit is located within the 15 county region of the CCPCUA, the GPS coordinate location of any well located
within 1,500 ft. of the pit.
Please see the attached narrative document titled "Plan for Development of Borrow and
Waste Site. This describes the exact sequence of action and references all backup
documentation.
6. Will excavation extend below the water table? (If yes, complete below): Yes
a. Specify how de -watering will be accomplished. Include proposed method of reducing effluent
turbidity so that it meets the requirements of the Division of Water Resources. Show any pit dewatering
basins, construction details, and calculations on the plan:
A dewatering basin will be used to dewater into an outlet from the proposed pond. The pump
that is to be used will be set in the pit installed onto a float to ensure pumping from the
surface. The pump discharge will be placed into a difuser to further prevent erosion or turbidity
creation within the dewatering basin itself. Finally strict monitoring of the discharge will be kept
and corrections made to the plan if they arise.
b. If the pit is located within the Central Coastal Plain Capacity Use Area, has the permit been
approved? If so, list the person responsible for completing the Division of Water
Resources CCPCUA spreadsheet and method of submission to the Engineer. Has the permit been
approved by DWR?
Dail Reed of Balfour Beatty Infrastructure, Inc. will be responsible for completing the CCPCUA
spreadsheet. The amount of dewatering will be based on the pump capacity and the time the
pump is running each day.
c. If water is to remain in the pit after completion, state the estimated depth of the water (minimum
depth is 4 ft.). Indicate the water table depth prior to beginning excavation and the method used to
obtain this information.
Mean high water table elevations are listed in the attached report. This data was gathered
from the soil survey from he site area and was listed as 24"-36" depth below the ground
surface for the soils that are present in the site area. With this information theoretical water
levels with a Pit Depth of 25 Ft. are 22 Ft.
d. If Yes, and a buffer less than 400' has been proposed, has the Skaggs Method report been attached?
YES
7. Describe the proposed schedule of permanent seeding and mulching for the site. Detail the frequency of
permanent seeding and mulching. Note: a stand of permanent vegetation is required prior to a final
inspection.
Permanent Seeding will begin within 15 days of reaching proposed final grades. As final
grades are achieved permanent seeding will be executed accordingly. (See attached Seed
Specifications on proposed types of seed to be used.)
Property Owner's Statement:
I hereby certify that I am in agreement with this development, use, and Reclamation Plan, and any
exceptions noted when approved by the Engineer, and that I understand that I will be responsible for
the site upon completion of its use in the construction of the project noted in the map key. I
understand that this plan, when approved, will serve as a guide in controlling erosion and sediment in
accordance with the Mining Act and the Sediment and Pollution Control Act and as enforced by the
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). I understand that any work exceeding the
minimum necessary for compliance with DEQ requirements, should be negotiated between the
Department of Transportation (DOT) and the Property Owner. My signature below authorizes the DOT,
the DEQ or its agents, to enter upon my property for a period of one year from the date of final
acceptance of the project for which this site plan is executed. If necessary, the DOT will be allowed to
repair any areas that are not in compliance with DEQ requirements. After a one-year inspection is held,
I will be solely responsible for assuring that the site is in compliance with DEQ regulations. I have the
right to change the condition of the site after the final inspection and prior to the one year follow-up
inspection. However, if I make such changes, I acknowledge that DOT is released from all obligations
and conditions of this agreement and I will become solely responsible for the condition of the site
beginning on the date that I change the final inspection condition.
Signatures:
Engineer:
Owners of Record:
Witness:
Owner: I
Exceptions:
Concurrence with exceptions:
Engineer:
Property Owner(s):
Date
Name Date
Name Date
Reclamation Plan for Operations: Plan Review Checklist
Date Received:
Please select at least one of the following Plan types:
❑ Borrow Pit ❑ Waste Site F-1 Staging Area
Enter the following Project information:
Project #/WBS Element:
Please enter property owner information and site address (if different then property owner address):
Property Owner Address same as Site Address? OYes O No
Property Owner information:
Site Information:
Name:
Site Name:
Address:
Address:
City:
City:
State:
Zip:
State:
Zip:
General Site Description and Use:
Reclamation Plan Checklist
YES
NO
N/A
1.
Is the submittal complete?
2.
Is the source commercial? If yes, complete item 3 below.
3.
If commercial, has:
Mining permit number been provided. Provide number below.
Commercial Permit Number:
Copy of Mining Permit cover page submitted?
4.
If there is no permit number has the DEQ Regional Engineer been notified?
Page 1 of 4
Reclamation Plan for Operations - Plan Checklist
5.
Has the Reclamation Plan form been submitted? Including the following items:
❑
❑
Site/Plan Narrative
❑
Site Map(s)
❑
6.
Are all required signatures on narrative, map(s), and plan sheets?
❑
❑
7.
Does the site map or plan sheets include the vicinity map?
❑
❑
8.
Has the site inspection been made?
❑
Was the Property owner invited?
9.
Are all items/questions satisfactorily answered on narrative?
10.
Has the mandatory letter from the SHPO been attached & any required
addressed?
ElElconditions
11.
If this is a waste site, has the type of debris to be wasted been provided and the
amount of cover been addressed?
❑
❑
❑
12.
Are the following map items included?
❑
❑
Name of designer and Level III ESC/Stormwater Cert. Number
❑
Name of responsible party
❑
❑
Name of Property Owner
North Arrow
County
Project Number/WBS
❑
Scale
❑
❑
❑
Date Prepared
EL
❑
13.
Has the Environmental Evaluation been submitted?
El
F I
EL
Are wetlands present?
❑
❑
Have blue line steams been delineated?
❑
❑
❑
Are buffer rules applicable?
❑
❑
If yes, has diffuse flow been provided?
Has a physical method of delineating buffers been described?
Are applicable setbacks shown?
L-1
El
❑
Is site within 100-year floodplain?
❑
Has the DEO reviewed the assessment?
❑
❑
❑
Has the Roadside Environmental Field Operations Engineer reviewed the plan?
El
TT
-FT
Page 2 of 4
Reclamation Plan for Operations - Plan Checklist
YES NO N/A
14.
❑
❑
> 3:1 for Coastal Plain Borrow
❑
❑
> 2:1 for Statewide Criteria
15.
For a Borrow Site, will water remain in the pit?
1:1
El
EL
Is the current water table elevation indicated?
❑
❑
❑
Is the proposed depth of water in the pond indicated?
16.
Will the excavation require temporary de -watering?
❑
❑
❑
Will excavation extend below the water table?
If Yes, and a buffer less than 400' has been proposed, has the Skaggs
Method report been attached?
❑
❑
❑
Method for controlling and reducing turbidity to levels acceptable with Water
Quality standards?
❑
❑
❑
If within 15 county CCPCUA regions, is the responsible person listed?
If within CCPCUA region are wells identified with GPS?
❑
If within CCPCUA region and pumping is required, are pump discharge
indicated?
❑
Elcoordinates
El
Has CCPCUA permit been approved by DWR?
❑
❑
❑
17.
Are haul roads shown in the plan? Must show from site to SR.
❑
❑
❑
18.
Are construction entrances shown and detailed on the plan?
Is sight distance adequate where trucks will enter an existing roadway?
❑
❑
❑
19.
Have temporary devices been checked for location and size?
surface area, spillway capacity)
❑
El
El(size,
Has the method of maintenance for devices been described?
❑
❑
❑
Is the cross slope rate of temporary ditches, including dewatering excavation,
indicated? (typ. > 2:1)
El
❑
❑
20.
Is staged seeding, per acre of exposed erodible slope, provided for?
Is the seed mixture indicated and is it acceptable?
❑
❑
❑
Will the indicated mixture provide long term vegetative cover?
21.
Is maintenance of the site by the property owner, after final acceptance,
accounted for?
❑
❑
❑
22.
Have submittals been signed by all required parties?
❑
❑
❑
Page 3 of 4
Reclamation Plan for Operations - Plan Checklist
YES NO N/A
23.
Have approval letters and approved plans been sent and distributed to the
❑
El
Elfollowing?
Engineer
TT
Division Environmental Officer
Project Inspector
Division Engineer
Roadside Environmental Field Ops. Engineer
DEQ Regional Engineer
Army Corps of Engineers
Property Owner
Comments: (include missing/incomplete items, required edits/revisions, etc.)
Reviewed By: (Signature)
Date
Page 4 of 4
c,4
o
I I I
m
w _
-
N m
--------------------------
eY.
�
o
o ?o�
FTI
C7
D I�
�7
III
I
D
III
I
Ill
111
F7
III
'11
I F—
D
/ll
III
o
III
I
D
III
m
I
I
Ill
III
III
D
0
70
-n
m
O
O
(n
N
O�
D
ZO
K
z
�
C)1rnn
0=
O��D
=
m
*
m
z
=
o
-n
n
�
C"
C�m�moo
>
C)
oz
MG)
m
�0c�n
o
D
<
U)
m
W
o
�
o
�O
C
o
t�
z
N00
�
�
d
t�
o
�
n
h-
co
ca
o
v
o
m
n
0
A
m
O 1
m r
D-1
o
K
m !�
Z m
z
�
Z 9
D
Za m
_
m
A
m
co A
o
Z
D
m
En
c
c
m
0
O
m
D
m
m
El
0
ID
F- 000
C:) D -u
0
D
C— 0
C C7
D Z
0 C
�zF-
--------------
Co
\
\
\
Flap
� FST S TGRga i
Sy G
I III •- / Cf.
Ill �
I �
111 � 1
ill - I I g
-
D
0 rTI
FT-1
Tin
FTI Ill At
h � � III V
III 5
— e
FTIy
III IAvIvs Z6
I
Ai
AIM �lr
69(7 (\j01 , --
III 00 �� I LOL — 98
III II yl j b/ � o
I111 FT]
I
Ill CT)
'11 0 0 � I I o`�
III ► I' d
III z z I it 96
D ci I i 00 I
Ill � ► C� " c I,
Ill OC ► �Z d °
Ill z I � ���
0 S 0C,
III D I FTI
Iw
III I I II I
Ill I I 00 I
ill I I 0
i
111 II II z ZOO S j
II I I (:D
l l
I I I ' �s,
ill I Lsd� �dNss\` o
1 1 0 li°d N�Ls�XC��N� I I
II FTI s\ II I
4 I I
l�l P9I �\
Ill �1 V \ I I I
4
g
-
III = I —
III \ I D I
III
Ill w N I I
STse Rip
� S SyGH
GF
0
IT1
z
�i
o
III .. .. .. I I FT1
III IIIIIIIIIlI l -0�o0��zcn
coo 0
mo0 -00--> \ \ I I z 7�x10
���m-7\�0
zo�rO=O�zoo
mr*z�mcz �II ZQ'g ��1N�� III / / z°�~'•
OC—C D.M`/)0� 0�C7 r�
llI �� Fo = F ::E Cf)
� -9
'�'
co W
m
I �g�l g�o�
�J
I
m0
om
SS
070
O m
to C)
m 0
O�
�D
c
mF-
-9�
zm
I I
D
°o
O�
DO
D
z
_
z m
D �
�
—
o0
O s
O D
r
=
m
o
rzz
m
mm
o
m
�
m�
C
C/)
3
m
D
D
mm
>
I
cn
Cn
Z �
70
CO z
0 m
O
0 �
-T1
I
zo
zz
F-o
om
D O
D
Oc
C/)
o
I
�;o
0
C/)
m o
D
D
Z
I
2 <
C)
4
m
z
I
[7
ti_
IA
I o X .
cn � m
p��m-ommm-ocnLf) �mx
�mU��xxDM�r� �mmcn
n�mOOu�C,�;Q0M -ZnC_
2 r m --j� 0-0 n Z
r z z O O z z r 0-u m D
zommmc>c� mOO< O�cn
mM oo-K oommcn cno
O ��DZC-0�7 C �
z D Z O� m Z z
O O ;,0 D z
D �7 n 0 �7 � Frl D �
nC�0
0< OC
00 Z E z 0 00
Z z, 0 o m o z
O c � D
m O
m
o m
rn z
o m
(D
�o
D
I
Q
N;
O
�1
N
F-
0
0cn
_
O
O
CD
Q
0
C)
0
m
D
D
CD
0
—
z
z
X
D
z
O
cD
m
Q
F-
O
CA
J
3
N
O
:5•
O
3
N
Q
O
O
O
O
_
O
Q_
rn
CD
Q
N
Or
Q
Q_
<.
CD
X
W,
/— -W
I
HAL OWEN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
SOIL & ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS
P.O. Box 400, Lillington, NC 27546-0400
Phone (910) 893-8743 / Fax (910) 893-3594
www.halowensoil.com
3 June 2021
Mr. Josh Sommer
Balfour Beatty
430 Eastwood Road
Wilmington, NC 28403
Reference: Environmental Evaluation
US-70 (Havelock Bypass) TIP Project R-1015
Maides 2 Tract
Dear Mr. Sommer,
A site investigation has been conducted for the above referenced property, located on the
southeastern side of Lake Road (SR 1756) in Craven County, North Carolina (Figure 1). The
purpose of this investigation was to determine the presence or absence of sensitive
environmental resources at the candidate site (Figure 2). A site investigation and records review
was conducted to determine the presence or absence of wetlands, surface waters (streams, lakes
or ponds), regulated riparian buffers, and federally protected species. This report has been
prepared in accordance with the NCDOT "Borrow and Waste Site Reclamation Plan
Procedures".
METHODOLOGY
This evaluation included a site investigation and review of public records for the subject
site and its immediate vicinity. The records review included aerial photographs, North Carolina
Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) Data Explorer, United States Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS) Environmental Conservation Online System, United States Geological Survey (USGS)
topographic maps, the Natural Resources Conservation Service (MRCS) soil survey, and Craven
County GIS data.
The site investigation was accomplished by direct examination of the physical attributes
of the site. Soil auger borings were taken at various points across the site to observe the soil
profile, verify soil series, and identify hydric soils. Vegetation composition and structure were
surveyed to identify plant communities.
SITE DESCRIPTION
The project area is located within the Atlantic Coastal Plain physiographic region of
North Carolina. The USGS topographic map, Masontown Quadrangle (Figure 3), shows the site
drains east toward an unnamed tributary of Southwest Prong Slocumb Creek, which is in the
Neuse River Basin (USGS 03020204-0502). The site is relatively flat with an average elevation
of approximately 25 feet above mean sea level. Center coordinates for the site are 34.869081
degrees latitude and-76.930987 degrees longitude.
Soil Science Investigations * Wetland Delineations, Permitting, and Consulting
HAL OWEN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
The nearest named water body to the site is Southwest Prong Slocumb Creek which has a
North Carolina surface water classification of C, Sw, NSW. There are no designated anadromous
fish waters or Primary Nursery Areas (PNA) present in the study area. There are no Outstanding
Resource Waters (ORW), High Quality Waters (HQW), water supply watersheds (WS-I or WS-
II), or Class SA Waters within 1 mile of the project study area and within 1 mile downstream.
Geology of the area is mapped Yorktown Formation and Duplin Formation, Undivided.
The Yorktown Formation is described as fossiliferous clay with varying amounts of fine-grained
sand, bluish gray, shell material commonly concentrated in lenses; mainly in area north of Neuse
River. The Duplin Formation is described as shelly, medium- to coarse -grained sand, sandy marl,
and limestone, bluish gray; mainly in area south of Neuse River.
The NRCS Soil Survey indicates the site contains soils of the Goldsboro Series,
Lynchburg Series, Pantego Series, and Rains Series (Figure 4). Observations at the site
confirmed the presence of these soil series.
The candidate site was recently timbered and there is no overstory vegetation and few
herbs and shrubs remain. Land use at the site was forested (pine plantation), to the north is
commercial, to the west is residential, and to the south and east is forested.
JURISDICTIONAL SURFACE WATERS AND WETLANDS INVESTIGATION
All wetland determinations were made in accordance with the Regional Supplement to
the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region.
This report represents my professional opinion as a Licensed Soil Scientist but does not represent
concurrence by the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) or the NC Division of Water
Resources (NCDWR).
Areas that clearly meet the required criteria for jurisdictional wetlands were observed
within 400 feet of the proposed pit. The boundaries of the wetland areas were delineated on the
ground and are shown at Figure 5. Within the wetlands the soils had a dark, loamy, sometimes
mucky, surface to about 12 inches underlain by a depleted matrix. Various hydrology indicators
observed at the site included inundation, a shallow water table, and saturation within 12 inches of
the soil surface.
Within the uplands the surface layers were typically 5 to 8 inches thick, sandy or loamy
textured, and not particularly high in organic matter. The subsoils varied from two to four
chroma matrix colors. Wetland hydrology was clearly missing throughout most of the site. As
previously mentioned, the timber had been recently harvested and the remaining vegetation was
sparse, consisting of a few sweetgum shrubs and broom sedge.
Wetland Determination Data Forms are attached.
Soil Science Investigations * Wetland Delineations, Permitting, and Consulting
HAL OWEN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
LATERAL EFFECT ANALYSIS
Regulated wetlands were noted within 400 feet of the proposed pit boundary and
excavation will occur below the water table. The wetland areas were observed to be depressions
within a flat landscape, and it was difficult to visually determine if this would be a Type 2 pit. It
is recommended that lateral effect analysis be conducted using the Skaggs Method. Due to past
silviculture practices, the surface depressional storage of water at the site was observed to be
high (2 inches). Published hydraulic conductivity data for the Goldsboro soil series would be
appropriate for use in the analysis.
RIPARIAN BUFFERS
The candidate site is located in the Neuse River Basin. Riparian zones adjacent to streams
documented by the most recently published NRCS soil survey manuscript or the USGS 7.5
Minute series topographic map are subject to the state riparian buffer protection program (15A
NCAC 2B). The Craven County Soil Survey and the USGS topographic map both show an
unnamed intermittent stream flowing south to north at the western end of the site. Project
disturbances will occur at least 50 feet from the stream and outside of the regulatory riparian
buffer.
THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES
Federally listed Endangered and Threatened species are protected under the provisions of
the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. In addition, the American Bald Eagle
(Haliaeetus leucocephalus) has federal protection status through the Bald and Golden Eagle
Protection Act (BGPA).
As of 3 June 2021 the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Environmental
Conservation Online System lists 10 federally protected species that may occur in the proposed
project area and/or may be affected by the proposed project (Table 1). A brief description of each
species' habitat requirements follows, along with the Biological Conclusion rendered based on
survey results in the study area. Habitat requirements for each species are based on the current
best available information from referenced literature and/or USFWS.
Aeschynomene virginica (Sensitive Joint -vetch)
• Habitat: Sensitive Joint -vetch is an annual plant in the pea family that flowers from July
through September. It typically grows in the intertidal zone of coastal marshes where plants
are flooded twice daily. It is frequently found in the estuarine meander zone of tidal rivers
where sediments transported from upriver settle out and extensive marshes are formed. Bare
to sparsely vegetated substrates appear to be a habitat feature of critical importance to this
plant. In North Carolina, Sensitive joint -vetch is most often found in roadside ditches, often
with some connection to nearby brackish marshes.
(hlt2s://www.fws. ovg /raleigh/species/es_sensitive joint-vetch.html)
• Biological Conclusion: No Effect. No suitable habitat present in the project area. The site
does not contain coastal marsh habitat. A review of the NCNHP records indicates no known
occurrence within 1 mile of the study area.
Soil Science Investigations * Wetland Delineations, Permitting, and Consulting
HAL OWEN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Table 1— Federally protected species listed by USFWS
Scientific Name
Common Name
Federal
Status
Habitat
Present
Biological
Conclusion
Aeschynomene virginica
Sensitive Joint -vetch
T
No
No Effect
Alligator mississippiensis
American Alligator
T(S/A)
No
No Effect
Calidris canutus rufa
Red Knot
T
No
No Effect
Chelonia mydas
Green Sea Turtle
T
No
No Effect
Dermochelys coriacea
Leatherback Sea Turtle
E
No
No Effect
Laterallus jamaicensis
jamaicensis
Eastern Black Rail
T
No
No Effect
Lysimachia asperulaefolia
Rough -leaved Loosestrife
E
Yes
No Effect
Myotis septentrionalis
Northern Long-eared Bat
T
No
No Effect
Picoides borealis
Red -cockaded woodpecker
E
No
No Effect
Trichechus manatus
West Indian Manatee
T
No
No Effect
Critical Habitat
none
No
No Effect
E- Endangered T — Threatened T(S/A) - Threatened due to Similarity of Appearance BGPA - Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act
P— -Proposed C - Candidate
Alligator mississippiensis (American Alligator)
• Habitat: This once -endangered reptile occurs in refuge marshes, slow -moving streams, and
manmade canals. They prefer areas where the water turbidity is low and the water quality is
high, with the presence of an adequate food source.
(http://www.fws. ova e�gator_River/wildlife_and habitat/american_alligator.html)
• Biological Conclusion: No Effect. Species listed as Threatened due to Similarity of
Appearance are not subject to Section 7 consultation with the USFWS. No suitable habitat
present in the project area. The limits of disturbance exclude aquatic resources.
Calidris canutus rufa (Red Knot)
• Habitat: This medium-sized shorebird migrates annually between its breeding grounds in the
Canadian Arctic and several wintering regions, including the Southeast United States
(Southeast). Habitats used by red knots in migration and wintering areas are generally coastal
marine and estuarine (partially enclosed tidal area where fresh and salt water mixes) habitats
with large areas of exposed intertidal sediments. Red knots are commonly found along sandy,
gravel, or cobble beaches, tidal mudflats, salt marshes, shallow coastal impoundments and
lagoons, and peat banks. They forage along sandy beaches during spring and fall migration
from Maryland through Florida. During migration, knots also use the tidal mudflats in
Maryland and along North Carolina's barrier islands.
(=.fws.gov/northeast/redknot/pdf/20130923 REKN PL SLIpplement02_ Ecology%20Ab
undance_Final.pdf)
• Biological Conclusion: No Effect. No suitable habitat present in the project area. The site
does not contain coastal marine or estuarine habitat. A review of the NCNHP records
indicates no known occurrence within 1 mile of the study area.
Soil Science Investigations * Wetland Delineations, Permitting, and Consulting
HAL OWEN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Chelonia mydas (Green Seaturtle)
• Habitat: Green turtles are generally found in fairly shallow waters (except when migrating)
inside reefs, bays, and inlets. The turtles are attracted to lagoons and shoals with an
abundance of marine grass and algae. Open beaches with a sloping platform and minimal
disturbance are required for nesting.
(hlt2:Hecos.fws. ovg /tess public/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=COOS)
• Biological Conclusion: No Effect. No suitable habitat present in the project area. The site
does not contain coastal marine or estuarine habitat.
Dermochelys coriacea (Leatherback Seaturtle)
• Habitat: Leatherbacks are the most pelagic of the sea turtles. Adult females require sandy
nesting beaches backed with vegetation and sloped sufficiently so the distance to dry sand is
limited. Their preferred beaches have proximity to deep water and generally rough seas.
(http://www. fws. gov/northflorida/SeaTurtles/Turtle%20Factsheets/leatherback-sea-
turtle.htm)
• Biological Conclusion: No Effect. No suitable habitat present in the project area. The site
does not contain coastal marine or estuarine habitat.
Laterallus jamaicensis jamaicensis (Eastern Black Rail)
• Habitat: The habitat of this small, marsh bird can be tidally or non -tidally influenced, and
range in salinity from salt to brackish to fresh. Tidal height and volume vary greatly between
the Atlantic and Gulf coasts and therefore contribute to differences in salt marsh cover plants
in the bird's habitat. Along the Atlantic coast, eastern black rail habitat includes impounded
and unimpounded salt and brackish marshes.
(hlt 2s://www.fws.gov/southeast/wildlife/birds/eastem-black-rLilD
• Biological Conclusion: No Effect. No suitable habitat present in the project area. The site
does not contain marshes or impoundments.
Lysimachia asperulifolia (Rough -leaved Loosestrife)
• Habitat: This plant "generally occurs in the ecotones or edges between longleaf pine uplands
and pond pine pocosins (areas of dense shrub and vine growth usually on a wet, peaty, poorly
drained soil) on moist to seasonally saturated sands and on shallow organic soils overlaying
sand. Rough -leaf loosestrife has also been found on deep peat in the low shrub community of
large Carolina bays (shallow, elliptical, poorly drained depressions of unknown origin). The
grass -shrub ecotone, where rough -leaf loosestrife is found, is fire -maintained, as are the
adjacent plant communities (longleaf pine - scrub oak, savanna, flatwoods, and pocosin).
Suppression of naturally -occurring fire in these ecotones results in shrubs increasing in
density and height and expanding to eliminate the open edges required by this plant. Several
populations are known from roadsides and power line rights of way where regular
maintenance mimics fire and maintains vegetation so that herbaceous species are open to
sunlight. (http://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/es_rou rough -leaf loosestrife.html)
• Biological Conclusion: No Effect. Suitable habitat is present within the power line easement
where the haul road is proposed. A review of the NCNHP records indicates no known
occurrence within 1 mile of the study area. A detailed survey for this protected plant was
conducted within the haul road and its vicinity at the beginning of June during the optimal
survey window. No individuals of this species were observed.
Soil Science Investigations * Wetland Delineations, Permitting, and Consulting
HAL OWEN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Myotis septentrionalis (The Northern Long-eared Bat)
• Habitat: The northern long-eared bat is found across much of the eastern and north central
United States. During summer, northern long-eared bats roost singly or in colonies
underneath bark, in cavities, or in crevices of both live and dead trees. Males and non -
reproductive females may also roost in cooler places, like caves and mines. This bat seems
opportunistic in selecting roosts, using tree species based on suitability to retain bark or
provide cavities or crevices. It has also been found, rarely, roosting in structures like barns
and sheds. Northern long-eared bats spend winter hibernating in caves and mines, called
hibernacula. They typically use large caves or mines with large passages and entrances;
constant temperatures; and high humidity with no air currents. Specific areas where they
hibernate have very high humidity, so much so that droplets of water are often seen on their
fur. Within hibernacula, surveyors find them in small crevices or cracks, often with only the
nose and ears visible. (hllps://ecos.fws.gov/ec]20/profile/speciesProfile?sld=9045)
• Biological Conclusion: No Effect. The project action area is not within suitable Indiana bat
and/or NLEB summer habitat and is outside of 0.5 miles of a hibernaculum. The site was
previously forestland that has been timbered by the landowner.
Picoides borealis (The Red -cockaded Woodpecker)
• Habitat: For nesting and roosting habitat, red -cockaded woodpeckers need open stands of
pine containing trees 60 years old and older. RCWs need live, large older pines in which to
excavate their cavities. Longleaf pines (Pinus palustris) are preferred, but other species of
southern pine are also acceptable. Dense stands, stands that are primarily hardwoods, or that
have a dense hardwood understory are avoided. Foraging habitat is provided in pine and pine
hardwood stands 30 years old or older with foraging preference for pine trees 10 inches or
larger in diameter. In good, moderately -stocked, pine habitat, sufficient foraging substrate
can be provided on 80 to 125 acres.
(hlt2://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/es red -cockaded_ woodpecker.html)
• Biological Conclusion: No Effect. No suitable habitat present in the project area. The site
was previously forestland that has been timbered by the landowner.
Trichechus manatus (West Indian Manatee)
• Habitat: Manatees are large, elongated marine mammals that move between fresh -water,
brackish, and saltwater environments. They prefer large, slow -moving rivers, river mouths,
and shallow coastal areas such as coves and bays. During the summer manatees expand their
range, and on rare occasions are seen as far north as Massachusetts on the Atlantic coast and
as far west as Texas on the Gulf coast.
(hqp://www.fws.gov/endangered/esa-librar�/pdf/mangte .pdf)
• Biological Conclusion: No Effect. No suitable habitat present in the project area. The limits
of disturbance exclude marine, estuarine, and riverine waters.
Soil Science Investigations * Wetland Delineations, Permitting, and Consulting
HAL OWEN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
CONCLUSION
In summary, the site investigation found the following sensitive environmental resources
at the candidate site:
➢ Jurisdictional features (wetlands) were observed within 400 feet of the proposed pit. The
anticipated Lateral Effect of the pit was calculated and used to determine the appropriate
setback to wetlands.
➢ The site is subject to state riparian buffer regulation. Regulatory buffers are not located
within the project area.
➢ The site does not contain suitable habitat for federally protected species except for the
Rough -leaved Loosestrife (Lysimachia asperulifolia). A plant survey for the protected
species was conducted during the optimal survey window and individuals were not
found. The project will have no effect on federally protected species.
We appreciated the opportunity to provide this service. If you have any questions or need
additional information, please contact us at your convenience.
Sincerely,
Krissina B. Newcomb
Environmental Scientist
iWA�-
Hal Owen
Licensed Soil Scientist
Qualifications of Investigator
Hal Owen is a Licensed Soil Scientist by the state of North Carolina (NCLSS 1102) and
Senior Environmental Consultant with Hal Owen & Associates, Inc. He is the President of that
corporation and owner of the company. He has a bachelor's degree from North Carolina State
University in Conservation of Natural Resources with a Concentration in Soil Science, 1982. He
was originally trained to conduct these type investigations by Dr. Jan Sassaman while employed
as a soil scientist project manager with Westinghouse Environmental and Geotechnical Services,
Inc. in 1989. Mr. Owen has conducted hundreds of environmental investigations, including
Phase I Environmental Site Assessments, and jurisdictional determinations during his over thirty
year career.
Krissina Newcomb is an Environmental Scientist with Hal Owen & Associates, Inc. She
received a bachelor's degree from North Carolina State University in Natural Resources with
Coastal Concentration in 1998. She has worked for Hal Owen & Associates since 1998
specializing in wetland investigations, permitting, and state riparian buffer assessments. In
addition, she has trained under Mr. Owen to conducted Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessments
and Environmental Evaluations for NCDOT Borrow/Waste Sites.
Soil Science Investigations * Wetland Delineations, Permitting, and Consulting
HAL OWEN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Figure 1. Vicinity Map
The subject property is located south of Lake Road in Craven County, North Carolina.
Center coordinates for the site are 34.869081 latitude and-76.930987 longitude.
New Rem
law
iR -
Carteret County, NC
Map data C2620 Unwed States Terms send feedback 2D00 ft
Go gle
.lames City
i
Croatan
National Forest
Croatan
Larne Land
Minnesotl
Meuse Forest Beach
Havelock
tat
Harlowe
Mewport Site
Marine Corps Air
Station Cherry Point
4
ss Wh❑
Qriental
Men
Havelock F
Soil Science Investigations * Wetland Delineations, Permitting, and Consulting
HAL OWEN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Figure 2. Map of candidate site provided by Balfour Beatty
v
/
1�
o
1
to
ICE
/
I[
I
5� LOL/SCC 8Q
Aim
6az£ a
L6L - 9£29
aal
\ Nab„
.QO9
z
o
I,
S3CS � W
A
V'm
Lea Sip
I y
Zg Z�S
A
I
I
I
JjI I
J I I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
1
i
Soil Science Investigations * Wetland Delineations, Permitting, and Consulting
HAL OWEN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Figure 3. USGS 7.5 Minute Series Topographic Map
Quadrangle: Masontown, NC 2019
22 23 24 25
N V) LL
Slte q
.s
3aia
-4A
40 a M64 al
r P ° 4W
Ob
V* Q
q .u
GiU
A_
V +c ac CIF 4W _4W
W 4
6 a s�[ �Il _ � 4W wba _
F
-L4 -19
v
fir_ ti
LL� SCALE 1:24 000
1 0.5 a KILOMETERS 1 2
100a 509 0 METERS 10oa 2000
11 0.5 0 1
MILES
10oa 0 10oo 20a0 3000 4000 500a 600o 7000 3-.c 40W i _,,.._
FEET
N
C014TOUR INTERVAL 5 FEET
NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988 W +P
S
Soil Science Investigations * Wetland Delineations, Permitting, and Consulting
HAL OWEN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Figure 4. NRCS Soil Survey $YMBOL NAME
AaA Altaytsta fine sarsay loam. 0 to 2 parcanl slopas
AcA Altavista Oman Ina complex. 0 to 2 percaat sipiass
1 AR Aualrsla Nee Sandy loam
Alapahee fmt yandy loam
Mu 1 ' • Ni10 aA 4Ye Aulyyydle laamv send_ 0 ID 6 wrC/nl arapes
5" f {tiJ � - ge 9aybaa mucky loam
9r13' N—ag "S. 0 to percent rlppes
Rn _ Cn6 Con.1P. barns sand, 0 m Soo cent Mapes
Le - rrevon trlt lows. 1 m 1 pNb.nt wWas
tr C7 17-01—11
�Ir S�tC l e' fJ
much
a w
DA Dare +note Y r
t M 4*lcss Flea seedy loam
Ado 4 r I Uq G4 an rorck, frea.anny fwd ,ed ]r
r• Ya ..-� /: jj : - ...rN ExA l!N , silt raam, u lb R pill, unt slopes
' J I L• u# GeA GnldRboeo loamy frrv* sand,4to Zoercenl slopes
LY j _ L* 1 L'r GuA Ge1dst10F0 Urban land Co plot, It to i O;rtent abpef
gl Grantham tilt loom
4Y
ti 1 L •, -•� Kue %wee sane. 0 In fr percent siwas
ne r
vo '
/'La +'f• M;, � Ha ' La Lai} }et leprt5
``} Lc Lyrichbwtj Wben land cumple.
` 0.. Le Len61h "T 10A d
LF Lalltln e nnvck. 1—quany ficoded if
La 5 Ln LOen Senn
-4 LY Lynchbw; Ime sandy loam
Me Megil l saner bem
R. 3{ �� - MM Masontown tlllreklr nne SendY loom end
l Ril Mrr[ka;ea ;ands 19arf1. lrrouentry itp0 doe I
to
/// Mu Mranrale muckv loarny Sand
' 0 NoA Nwfn;k Mam, line fend. 0 to 2 percent aleper
LY Ire '� - Nob Ndrfelk Mh—V !-nand, 2 ma p.rcen[ slops
ku6 N.rfelk,rlrtten land camplas, 0 to 0 pertMl ;I.pea
Lin
4 In 1h We
- � Lr un an gnslpra laan'y nano
f f },oft Pa Pente/a ;kre sandy loam
f l -
{ P6 Pon r.r muck if
_ U Pt Fits
^ - R■ Rama fine sendr loam
t- ,-Sf' Aa ���r '• � R[ Rains.11rbm land r=omPl.x
To P■ _ _ We Roanoke Nnr sandy loam
_ Ra Pa Se Se ehraok to amy sand
10 - 5[ 3..hrook.48b*n I*nd comp;..
SYA State ;oernv sand. (Iin P percent slope.
r Qu, `Y S.•P sot Folk Inrmr sand, 19 Rr 30 p.rtenl slPp.s
�— TaO TarEere land. 0 to 4 percent slopes
j'. ZXR'4RHhyf 7r Tarhunra thben land co- Mp
Tm TGrnolley fine sandy learn
io Tomyn to fine skndy loam
Tug Tarboro Urban ;and camplsr. 0 to d percent Srp6*s
Ud Udnrlhanik_ learns
Ur Urban Land
.Goa �•.o-G no-o-a :uao :aaa o- eaod loaoa�rr�
SLAI4 1 ,door)
I. 7fyse moo units are 1niNa dips ano wur rlesrgntd for less wltny.t use
fRAVF_?: COUNTY. NORTH f'AR4I INA NLI YY Th.,tyre sal dalueratbns teal are us.wn, larLvr 3nfl murr �araGle than
Mhers n the sur," area
Soil Science Investigations * Wetland Delineations, Permitting, and Consulting
HAL OWEN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Figure 5. Sketch of Jurisdictional Features within 400 feet of proposed excavation area
and in the vicinity of the proposed haul road.
s
Scale 1 in = 400 ft
- �I
o / <> \ Potential
Wetland / l \ Wetlands
Determination „ \
> > t
Data Form #2 < < <
>>
o ill! > > > > > > > > > > 691 R
psi nr! < < < < < < < < -- Till & ' /
A� „> > > .> > Wetland
ti � lllf `�� •� - / F
yy / Determination
Data Form #1
rl f
+
A
111
Excavation Area cs�
III
fl O y�y !y
II! 0 N f j111 I I g e
11 � —
u
----- -__- - - ' 400ft buffer
__ from pit,
gq and haul
road corridor
} { 3 P —nn
II
Soil Science Investigations * Wetland Delineations, Permitting, and Consulting
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: Meades 2 Pit City/County: Craven Sampling Date: 24 Mar 2021
Applicant/Owner: Balfour Beatty State: NC Sampling Point: 1
Investigator(s): Krissina Newcomb Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): terrace Local relief (concave, convex, none): none Slope (%): 0-2
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR T, MLRA 153A Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Rains NWI classification: none
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X X
within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
❑
Surface Water (Al) El Aquatic Fauna (1313)
❑
High Water Table (A2)
U Marl Deposits (1315) (LRR U)
❑ Drainage Patterns (1310)
❑
Saturation (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑
Water Marks (131)
iII
I --I Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
❑ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
❑
Sediment Deposits (62)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
❑
Drift Deposits (B3)
❑_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Q
Algal Mat or Crust (64)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Geomorphic Position (D2)
Q
Iron Deposits (135)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
❑ FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
❑
Water -Stained Leaves (69)
❑ Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes
No X Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes
No X Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes
No X Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
includes capillary frin e
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Version 2.0
VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: 1
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft radius )
% Cover Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A)
2.
Total Number of Dominant
3•
Species Across All Strata: 3 (B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
5.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B)
6.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7
8
Total % Cover of: Multiply bv:
= Total Cover
OBL species x 1 =
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
FACW species x 2 =
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft radius )
FAC species x 3 =
1 Liquidambar styracaflua
30 Y FAC
FACU species x 4 =
2 Pinus taeda
15 Y FAC
UPL species x 5 =
3 Acer rubrum
10 N FAC
Column Totals: (A) (B)
4
Prevalence Index = B/A =
5.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
6.
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
7.
_ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
8.
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
55 = Total Cover
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation (Explain)
50% of total cover: 27.5
20% of total cover: 11
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft radius )
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
1 Andropogon virginicus
10 Y FAC
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
2.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
3•
Tree —Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
4.
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
5
height.
6•
Sapling/Shrub — Woody plants, excluding vines, less
7,
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
8.
Herb —All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
g,
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
10.
Woody vine — All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
11.
height.
12.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft radius )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5•
Hydrophytic
= Total Cover
Vegetation
Present? Yes X No
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below)
unmanaged dearcut, no trees.
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Version 2.0
SOIL
Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix
(inches) Color (moist) %
Redox Features
Color (moist) % Type' Loc2
Texture Remarks
0-5 10YR 5/2 100
LS
5-12 10YR 6/3 100
LS
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric
Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs,
unless otherwise noted.)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑
Histosol (Al)
❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U) ❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
❑
Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
U 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
❑
Black Histic (A3)
❑ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O)
1 Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
_E1
❑
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
I
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
❑
Stratified Layers (A5)
❑ Depleted Matrix (F3)
u Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20)
❑
Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
(MLRA 1536)
❑
5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)❑
Red Parent Material (TF2)
❑
Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
F-1 Redox Depressions (F8)
uI Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T) _E]
Marl (F10) (LRR U)
0 Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑
Depleted Below Dark Surface (Al 1)
❑ Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
❑
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
E1 Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
❑
Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
wetland hydrology must be present,
❑
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)
Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151)
unless disturbed or problematic.
❑
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 150B)
❑
Sandy Redox (S5)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C9 153D)
❑
Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: Meades 2 Pit City/County: Craven Sampling Date: 24 Mar 2021
Applicant/Owner: Balfour Beatty State: NC Sampling Point: 2
Investigator(s): Krissina Newcomb Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 1
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR T, MLRA 153A Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Rains NWI classification: none
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No X
within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
❑
Surface Water (Al) El Aquatic Fauna (1313)
❑�
High Water Table (A2)
U Marl Deposits (1315) (LRR U)
❑ Drainage Patterns (1310)
❑�
Saturation (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑
Water Marks (131)
iII
I --I Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
❑ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
❑
Sediment Deposits (62)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
❑
Drift Deposits (B3)
❑_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Q
Algal Mat or Crust (64)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Geomorphic Position (D2)
Q
Iron Deposits (135)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery
(137)
❑ FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
❑
Water -Stained Leaves (69)
❑ Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes
No X Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes X
No Depth (inches): 8
Saturation Present? Yes X
No Depth (inches): 6
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge,
monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Version 2.0
VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: 2
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft radius )
% Cover
Species?
Status
Number of Dominant Species
1 Liquidambar styracaflua
35
Y
FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 7 (A)
2 Gordonia lasianthus
20
Y
FACW
Total Number of Dominant
3• Acer rubrum
20
Y
FAC
Species Across All Strata: 7 (B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
5•
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B)
6.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
8
75
= Total Cover
OBL species x 1 =
50% of total cover: 37.5
20% of
total cover:
15
FACW species x 2 =
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft radius )
FAC species x 3 =
1 Liquidambar styracaflua
20
Y
FAC
FACU species x 4 =
2 Persea palustris
15
Y
FACW
UPL species x 5 =
3 Ilex glabra
5
N
FACW
Column Totals: (A) (B)
4
Prevalence Index = B/A =
5•
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
6.
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
7.
_ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
8.
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
40
= Total Cover
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation (Explain)
50% of total cover: 20
20% of total cover:
8
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft radius )
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
1 Pinus taeda
5
Y
FAC
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
2 Arundinaria tecta
15
Y
FACW
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
3'
Tree —Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
4.
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
5
height.
6•
Sapling/Shrub — Woody plants, excluding vines, less
7,
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
8.
Herb —All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
g,
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
10.
Woody vine — All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
11.
height.
12.
20
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 10
20% of total cover:
4
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft radius )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5
Hydrophytic
= Total Cover
Vegetation
Present? Yes X No
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below)
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Version 2.0
SOIL
Sampling Point: 2
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix
Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) %
Color (moist) % Type' Loc2
Texture Remarks
0-7 10YR 3/1 100
SL
7-12 10YR 6/2 95
10YR 5/6 5 C M
SL
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric
Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs,
unless otherwise noted.)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑
Histosol (Al)
❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U) ❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
❑
Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
U 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
❑
Black Histic (A3)
❑ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O)
1 Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
_E1
❑
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
I
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
❑
Stratified Layers (A5)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
u Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20)
❑
Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
(MLRA 1536)
❑
5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)❑
Red Parent Material (TF2)
❑
Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
F-1 Redox Depressions (F8)
uI Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T) _E]
Marl (F10) (LRR U)
0 Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑
Depleted Below Dark Surface (Al 1)
❑ Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
❑
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
E1 Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
❑
Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
wetland hydrology must be present,
❑
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)
Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151)
unless disturbed or problematic.
❑
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 150B)
❑
Sandy Redox (S5)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C9 153D)
❑
Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Version 2.0
(f
� *_.- United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
0'R Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
Phone: (919) 856-4520 Fax: (919) 856-4556
In Reply Refer To:
Consultation Code: 04EN2000-2021-SLI-0875
Event Code: 04EN2000-2021-E-02787
Project Name: BBII-Havelock Byp_Meades
June 03, 2021
Subject: Updated list of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed
project location or may be affected by your proposed project
To Whom It May Concern:
The species list generated pursuant to the information you provided identifies threatened,
endangered, proposed and candidate species, as well as proposed and final designated critical
habitat, that may occur within the boundary of your proposed project and/or may be affected by
your proposed project. The species list fulfills the requirements of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (Service) under section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended
(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
New information based on updated surveys, changes in the abundance and distribution of
species, changed habitat conditions, or other factors could change this list. Please feel free to
contact us if you need more current information or assistance regarding the potential impacts to
federally proposed, listed, and candidate species and federally designated and proposed critical
habitat. Please note that under 50 CFR 402.12(e) of the regulations implementing section 7 of the
Act, the accuracy of this species list should be verified after 90 days. This verification can be
completed formally or informally as desired. The Service recommends that verification be
completed by visiting the ECOS-IPaC website at regular intervals during project planning and
implementation for updates to species lists and information. An updated list may be requested
through the ECOS-IPaC system by completing the same process used to receive the enclosed list.
Section 7 of the Act requires that all federal agencies (or their designated non-federal
representative), 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 endangered or threatened species. A biological assessment or evaluation may be
prepared to fulfill that requirement and in determining whether additional consultation with the
Service is necessary. In addition to the federally -protected species list, information on the
species' life histories and habitats and information on completing a biological assessment or
06/03/2021 Event Code: 04EN2000-2021-E-02787
evaluation and can be found on our web page at http://www.fws.gov/raleigh. Please check the
web site often for updated information or changes
If your project contains suitable habitat for any of the federally -listed species known to be
present within the county where your project occurs, the proposed action has the potential to
adversely affect those species. As such, we recommend that surveys be conducted to determine
the species' presence or absence within the project area. The use of North Carolina Natural
Heritage program data should not be substituted for actual field surveys.
If you determine that the proposed action may affect (i.e., likely to adversely affect or not likely
to adversely affect) a federally -protected 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.e., no beneficial or adverse, direct or indirect effect) on federally
listed species, then you are not required to contact our office for concurrence (unless an
Environmental Impact Statement is prepared). However, you should maintain a complete record
of the assessment, including steps leading to your determination of effect, the qualified personnel
conducting the assessment, habitat conditions, site photographs, and any other related articles.
Please be aware that bald and golden eagles are protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle
Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668 et seq.), and projects affecting these species may require
development of an eagle conservation plan (http://www.fws.gov/windenergy/
eagle_guidance.html). Additionally, wind energy projects should follow the wind energy
guidelines (http://www.fws.gov/windenergy/) for minimizing impacts to migratory birds and
bats.
Guidance for minimizing impacts to migratory birds for projects including communications
towers (e.g., cellular, digital television, radio, and emergency broadcast) can be found at: http://
www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdlssues/Hazards/towers/towers.htm; http://
www.towerkill.com; and http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdIssues/Hazards/
towers/comtow.html.
Not all Threatened and Endangered Species that occur in North Carolina are subject to section 7
consultation with the U.S Fish and Wildlife Service. Atlantic and shortnose sturgeon, sea
turtles,when in the water, and certain marine mammals are under purview of the National Marine
Fisheries Service. If your project occurs in marine, estuarine, or coastal river systems you should
also contact the National Marine Fisheries Service, http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/
We appreciate your concern for threatened and endangered species. The Service encourages
Federal agencies to include conservation of threatened and endangered species into their project
planning to further the purposes of the Act. Please include the Consultation Tracking Number in
the header of this letter with any request for consultation or correspondence about your project
that you submit to our office. If you have any questions or comments, please contact John Ellis
of this office at john_ellis@fws.gov.
06/03/2021 Event Code: 04EN2000-2021-E-02787
Attachment(s):
• Official Species List
06/03/2021 Event Code: 04EN2000-2021-E-02787
Official Species List
This list is provided pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and fulfills the
requirement for Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary of the Interior information whether
any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of a proposed
action".
This species list is provided by:
Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
(919) 856-4520
06/03/2021 Event Code: 04EN2000-2021-E-02787 2
Project Summary
Consultation Code: 04EN2000-2021-SLI-0875
Event Code: 04EN2000-2021-E-02787
Project Name: BBII-Havelock Byp_Meades
Project Type: MINING
Project Description: Lake Rd —45 acres
Project Location:
Approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps: https:
www.google.com/maps/(a)34.869137249999994,-76.93077370684458,14z
Counties: Craven County, North Carolina
06/03/2021 Event Code: 04EN2000-2021-E-02787 3
Endangered Species Act Species
There is a total of 10 threatened, endangered, or candidate species on this species list.
Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include
species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species
list because a project could affect downstream species.
IPaC does not display listed species or critical habitats under the sole jurisdiction of NOAA
Fisheries1, as USFWS does not have the authority to speak on behalf of NOAA and the
Department of Commerce.
See the "Critical habitats" section below for those critical habitats that lie wholly or partially
within your project area under this office's jurisdiction. Please contact the designated FWS office
if you have questions.
NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an
office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of
Commerce.
Mammals
NAME STATUS
Northern Long-eared Bat Myotis septentrionalis Threatened
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9045
West Indian Manatee Trichechus manatus Threatened
There is final critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical habitat is not available.
This species is also protected by the Marine Mammal Protection Act, and may have additional
consultation requirements.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/4469
Birds
NAME
STATUS
Eastern Black Rail Laterallus jamaicensis ssp. jamaicensis
Threatened
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/10477
Red Knot Calidris canutus rufa
Threatened
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1864
Red -cockaded Woodpecker Picoides borealis
Endangered
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: httpss:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/7614
06/03/2021 Event Code: 04EN2000-2021-E-02787
4
Reptiles
NAME
American Alligator Alligator mississippiensis
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/776
STATUS
Similarity of
Appearance
(Threatened)
Green Sea Turtle Chelonia mydas Threatened
Population: North Atlantic DPS
There is final critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical habitat is not available.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6199
Leatherback Sea Turtle Dermochelys coriacea Endangered
There is final critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical habitat is not available.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1493
Flowering Plants
NAME STATUS
Rough -leaved Loosestrife Lysimachia asperulaefolia Endangered
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2747
Sensitive Joint -vetch Aeschynomene virginica Threatened
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/855
Critical habitats
THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA UNDER THIS OFFICE'S
JURISDICTION.
Roy Cooper, Governor
■'■1111111■
■! 0 RUC DEPARTMENT OF
■ami■■ NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
■ENNN
March 22, 2021
Krissina Newcomb
Hal Owen & Associates Inc
PO Box 400
Lillington, NC 27546
RE: BBII-Havelock Byp_Meades
Dear Krissina Newcomb:
D. Reid Wilson, Secretary
Wafter Clark
Director, Division of Land and Water Stewardship
NCNHDE-14268
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) appreciates the opportunity to provide
information about natural heritage resources for the project referenced above.
A query of the NCNHP database indicates that there are records for rare species, important natural
communities, natural areas, and/or conservation/managed areas within the proposed project
boundary. These results are presented in the attached `Documented Occurrences' tables and map.
The attached 'Potential Occurrences' table summarizes rare species and natural communities that
have been documented within a one -mile radius of the property boundary. The proximity of these
records suggests that these natural heritage elements may potentially be present in the project area
if suitable habitat exists. Tables of natural areas and conservation/managed areas within a one -mile
radius of the project area, if any, are also included in this report.
If a Federally -listed species is documented within the project area or indicated within a one -mile
radius of the project area, the NCNHP recommends contacting the US Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS) for guidance. Contact information for USFWS offices in North Carolina is found here:
httl2s://www.fws.ciov/offices/Di rectory/ListOffices.cfm?statecode=37.
Please note that natural heritage element data are maintained for the purposes of conservation
planning, project review, and scientific research, and are not intended for use as the primary criteria
for regulatory decisions. Information provided by the NCNHP database may not be published
without prior written notification to the NCNHP, and the NCNHP must be credited as an information
source in these publications. Maps of NCNHP data may not be redistributed without permission.
Also please note that the NC Natural Heritage Program may follow this letter with additional
correspondence if a Dedicated Nature Preserve, Registered Heritage Area, Land and Water Fund
easement, or an occurrence of a Federally -listed species is documented near the project area.
If you have questions regarding the information provided in this letter or need additional assistance,
please contact Rodney A. Butler at rod nev.butler(a)ncdcr.gov or 919-707-8603.
Sincerely,
NC Natural Heritage Program
DEPAR7MEN7 OF NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
fl 121 W. JONES STREET, RALEIGH. NC 27603 • 1GS1 MAIL SERVICE CENTER, RALEIGH. NC 27699
OFC 919.707.9120 • FAX 919.707,9121
Natural Heritage Element Occurrences, Natural Areas, and Managed Areas Intersecting the Project Area
BBII-Havelock Byp_Meades
March 22, 2021
NCNHDE-14268
Element Occurrences Documented Within Project Area _
axonomic Scientific am ommon Name Last Element
Group Observation Occurrence
Date Rank
Bird 13250 Peucaea aestivalis Bachman's Sparrow 2014-06-08 E
Bird
18966 Picoides borealis Red -cockaded 2019 E
Woodpecker
Natural
37052 Mesic Pine Savanna --- 2014-06-08 C
Community
(Coastal Plain
Subtype)
Natural
37053 Wet Loamy Pine --- 2014-06-08 C
Community
Savanna
Natural Areas
Documented Within Project Area
Site Name
Representational Rating
Havelock Station Flatwoods and Powerline Corridor R2 (Very High)
Managed Areas Documented Within Project Area
Accuracy Federal State
Status Status
3-Medium --- Special
Concern
3-Medium Endangered Endangered
Global State
Rank Rank
G3 S3B,S2
N
G3 S2
3-Medium --- --- G2G3 S2
3-Medium --- --- Gl Sl
Collective Rating
Cl (Exceptional)
Managed Area Name wner
Croatan National Forest US Forest Service Federal
NOTE: If the proposed project intersects with a conservation/managed area, please contact the landowner directly for additional information. If the project intersects with a Dedicated Nature Preserve
(DNP), Registered Natural Heritage Area (RHA), or Federally -listed species, NCNHP staff may provide additional correspondence regarding the project.
Definitions and an explanation of status designations and codes can be found at https://ncnhde.natureserve.org/help. Data query generated on March 22, 2021; source: NCNHP, Q4 January 2021. Please
resubmit your information request if more than one year elapses before project initiation as new information is continually added to the NCNHP database.
Page 2 of 6
Natural Heritage Element Occurrences, Natural Areas, and Managed Areas Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
BBII-Havelock Byp_Meades
March 22, 2021
NCNHDE-14268
Element Occurrences Documented Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
Taxonomic EO ID Scientific Name Common NamerObservation
ast Element Accuracy Federal State Global State
Group 2 Occurrence Status Status Rank Rank
ate Rank
Animal 25121 Waterbird Colony Waterbird Colony 2007-07-05 H 2-High --- --- GNR S3
Assemblage
Bird 13250 Peucaea aestivalis Bachman's Sparrow 2014-06-08 E 3-Medium --- Special G3 S3B,S2
Concern N
Bird 18966 Picoides borealis Red -cockaded 2019 E 3-Medium Endangered Endangered G3 S2
Woodpecker
Butterfly 25240 Amblyscirtes alternata Dusky Roadside- 2008-04 E 2-High --- Significantly G2G3 S2
Skipper Rare
Butterfly 20361 Amblyscirtes reversa Reversed Roadside- 2004-08-29 E 3-Medium --- Significantly G3G4 S3
Skipper Rare
Butterfly 20360 Calephelis virginiensis Little Metalmark 2004-09-03 C? 3-Medium --- Significantly G4 S2
Rare
Butterfly 34470 Neonympha areolatus Georgia Satyr 2013-09-01 C? 3-Medium --- Significantly G3G4 S2
Rare
Dragonfly or 38998 Coryphaeschna ingens Regal Darner 2004-Pre H? 5-Very --- Significantly G5 S2?
Damselfly Low Rare
Dragonfly or 33788 Triacanthagyna trifida Phantom Darner 2004-Pre H? 5-Very --- Significantly G5 SH
Damselfly Low Rare
Liverwort 25859 Lejeunea bermudiana A Liverwort 2012-09 B 2-High --- Significantly G3G4 S1
Rare
Peripheral
Liverwort 25860 Lejeunea bermudiana A Liverwort 2005-06-30 B 2-High --- Significantly G3G4 S1
Rare
Peripheral
Liverwort 25861 Lejeunea bermudiana A Liverwort 2005-06-30 B 2-High --- Significantly G3G4 S1
Rare
Peripheral
Liverwort 33013 Plagiochila raddiana A Liverwort 2012-09 E 2-High --- Significantly G5 S1
Rare
Peripheral
Page 3 of 6
Element Occurrences Documented Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
Taxonomic
EO ID
Scientific Name
Common NamIUOb
Element
Accuracy Federal
State
Glo��tate
Group
rvation
Occurrence
Status
ate
Rank
��—
�atus
`Rank
Liverwort
25196
Plagiochila raddiana
A Liverwort
2005-07-12
B
2-High ---
Significantly
G5
S1
Rare
Peripheral
Mammal
24788
Myotis austroriparius
Southeastern Bat
2005-09-20
E
3-Medium ---
Special
G4
S2
Concern
Natural
37052
Mesic Pine Savanna
---
2014-06-08
C
3-Medium ---
---
G2G3
S2
Community
(Coastal Plain
Subtype)
Natural
37053
Wet Loamy Pine
---
2014-06-08
C
3-Medium ---
---
G1
S1
Community
Savanna
Vascular Plant
26514
Andropogon mohrii
Bog Bluestem
2010-09-06
A
2-High ---
Threatened
G4?
S2
Vascular Plant
20362
Cirsium lecontei
Leconte's Thistle
2017-08-21
A
1-Very ---
Special
G3
S2
High
Concern
Vulnerable
Vascular Plant
26997
Dichanthelium spretumEaton's
Witch Grass
1991-05-11
E
2-High ---
Significantly
G5
S1
Rare Disjunct
Vascular Plant
2536
Malaxis spicata
Florida Adder's -mouth
2005-09
D
3-Medium ---
Special
G4?
S1
Concern
Vulnerable
Vascular Plant
170
Platanthera integra
Yellow Fringeless
2014-08-30
D
3-Medium ---
Special
G3G4
S2
Orchid
Concern
Vulnerable
Vascular Plant
18855
Polygala hookeri
Hooker's Milkwort
2013-08-04
BC
2-High ---
Special
G3
S2S3
Concern
Vulnerable
Vascular Plant
13170
Ponthieva racemosa
Shadow -witch
2005-09
A
3-Medium ---
Threatened
G4G5
S2
Vascular Plant
21978
Rhynchospora galeana Short -bristled
2013-08-25
B
3-Medium ---
Significantly
G3?
S2S3
Beaksedge
Rare
Peripheral
Vascular Plant
9935
Solidago verna
Spring -flowering
2015-06-16
A
3-Medium ---
Significantly
G3
S3
Goldenrod
Rare Other
Vascular Plant
15571
Solidago verna
Spring -flowering
2016
A
2-High ---
Significantly
G3
S3
Goldenrod
Rare Other
Vascular Plant
4897
Solidago verna
Spring -flowering
2013-06
A
2-High ---
Significantly
G3
S3
Goldenrod
Rare Other
Page 4 of 6
Element Occurrences Documented Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
Taxonomic EO ID Scientific Name Common Name Element Accuracy Federal State Glo��tate
Group 7Obetion Occurrence Status Status Rank Rank
Rank ON
Vascular Plant 25223 Solidago verna Spring -flowering 2005 C 2-High --- Significantly G3 S3
Goldenrod Rare Other
Vascular Plant 25299 Solidago verna Spring -flowering 2004-06-09 B 3-Medium --- Significantly G3 S3
Goldenrod Rare Other
Vascular Plant 25211 Solidago verna Spring -flowering 2013-05 B 2-High --- Significantly G3 S3
Goldenrod Rare Other
Vascular Plant 25300 Solidago verna Spring -flowering 2004-06-03 D 2-High --- Significantly G3 S3
Goldenrod Rare Other
Vascular Plant 23895 Spiranthes eatonii Eaton's Ladies' -tresses 2008-06-14 F 2-High --- Endangered G3Q S2
Natural Areas Documented Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
Site Name Representational Rating Collective Rating
Southwest Prong Flatwoods R2 (Very High) C2 (Very High)
Masontown Pocosin R3 (High) C4 (Moderate)
Havelock Station Flatwoods and Powerline Corridor R2 (Very High) C1 (Exceptional)
Managed Areas Documented Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
Managed Area Name Owner
Croatan National Forest US Forest Service Federal
NC Land and Water Fund Project NC DNCR, NC Land and Water Fund State
NC Land and Water Fund Project NC DNCR, NC Land and Water Fund State
Definitions and an explanation of status designations and codes can be found at https://ncnhde.natureserve.org/help. Data query generated on March 22, 2021; source: NCNHP, Q4 January 2021. Please
resubmit your information request if more than one year elapses before project initiation as new information is continually added to the NCNHP database.
Page 5 of 6
C°
o°
`Q.
N 3'
W+E wester`'
S
March 22, 2021
Project Boundary
Buffered Project Boundary
NHP Natural Area (NHNA)
Managed Area (MAREA)
NCNHDE-14268: BBII-Havelock Byp_Meades
�
JJJ.❖J
...❖..J.,.
:O:•0��,'i'i'Oi'i0•ii'ii•Ji
•:40 i❖O:i•O:•i:':':i❖:
i•O:i�i
•moo! •i'i'iii'iii'iiii'iii'i'i'Jii
.00i'Oi'i'i'O.O•ii'OOi'i0•i'Oi'i'i'i
/�i
••i0•ii'i'i'i'ii'i'iii0•i'i0•iiii'ii
i•O:❖O:i❖:4'is'i:':i•O:i❖:❖:•:'i:':':•i'•O••i
.•ii'o'iiiiii'i'i'i'i'i'i'ii'i'iiiiii'i'i'i'i'i'ii.
•O'''''<•O'••J''•••'''J•''O'J''•••O'JJ'O•O''eS:':!;!;O!O•:
`
��,o,�,�,00•�,0000•�•oo,�,�,o•�•�,000,�,o,0i•,�,�,o,�,��
``',
Oii'Oi'OOi'OJi'i'Ji'OOi'OOi'Oii'JOO.04••J'Oi'i
;
0:•O00:�00:�:4�:�00:•00:•:'Oi::0�:0�:��••00•
`N
�
�` `:•O:•0
`�:❖i
O�:':':i••❖O:•OOO:i':':':':•:':':❖O:❖O:•i:':':':':•O
'Oi'i'ii'•JOii'Jii'Oi'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'iiii•Ji'i'i'i'i'i'i'i�
ii.
�
`,,,
y0:•O:iisi•:�':❖i:❖J:':'i:4•i:ii':ii:i:;:;:;:;:;
'i00:' is0i'Oi:'00:•O:i:ii:':':i:i•:'
�0�;�;�;�;�;pOJ�;�00;�;�;OJi;�;�;�;�;�;�0;�;�0;0�;�;0�;�;�;00�;�0�
i•O:'s0i'OO�J'I•ii:i:':':i•O:i•O:i':`.
/ •�:i;:�;:�;:;:;:;i;�� i;:;
40;OO��JJ•i;�;�;�;O�;�O;O�;O�;�;�;p��.S
1
1:24,799
0 0.2 0.4 0.8 mi
0 0.325 0.65 1.3 km
Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS,
FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan,
METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS
User Community
Page 6 of 6
********************************************************************************
----Lateral Effect Program Summary ----
Application of Skaggs Method
Copyright 2006-2014. Brian D Phillips, R Wayne Skaggs, G M Chescheir
North Carolina State University Dept of Biological & Agricultural Engineering
Version: 2.8.1.0
Project Run Date and Time: 3/29/2021 11:08:31 AM
Output Filename: C:\LateralEffect\outputs\Lateral_Effect_Summary.txt
********************************************************************************
Project Information
Project : Havelock
User: Dail Reed
Company / Agency: Balfour Beatty
Department: ENV
Project Location: Maides 2 Lake Road
Project Coordinates:
Soil ID: GoA
Notes:
Site Parameters
------------------------------------------------------------------
State: North Carolina
County / Parish: Craven
Surface Storage: 2_inch_(5.0_cm)
Ditch Depth or Depth to Water Surface: 2 ft
Depth to Restrictive Layer: 25 ft
Drainable Porosity: 0.04
Hydroperiod: 14 days
User defined T25 or Default T25: DEFAULT
T25 value: 3.4 days
User Conductivity or Soil Survey Conductivity: SOIL SURVEY
Weighted Hydraulic Conductivity: 1.6963 in/hr
Hydraulic Conductivity Data by Layer for Soil: GoA_Goldsboro
Weighted Hydraulic Conductivity Calculated Using: Average K Values
Bottom Depth in Low K in/hr High K in/hr Average K in/hr
Layer 1 10.00 1.98 19.98 10.98423
Layer 2 13.00 1.98 19.98 10.98423
Layer 3 72.00 0.57 1.98 1.275588
Layer
4
300
0.57
1.98
1.275588
Layer
5
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Layer
6
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Layer
7
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Layer
8
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
----------------------------------------------
Lateral Effect: 96.0 ft
********************************************************************************
----Lateral Effect Program Summary ----
Application of Skaggs Method
Copyright 2006-2014. Brian D Phillips, R Wayne Skaggs, G M Chescheir
North Carolina State University Dept of Biological & Agricultural Engineering
Version: 2.8.1.0
Project Run Date and Time: 6/14/2021 12:54:07 PM
Output Filename: C:\LateralEffect\outputs\Lateral_Effect_Summary.txt
********************************************************************************
Project Information
Project : R1015-MAIDED II
User: Dail Reed
Company / Agency: Balfour Beatty
Department:
Project Location: LAKE ROAD
Project Coordinates:
Soil ID: ly
Notes:
Site Parameters
------------------------------------------------------------------
State: North Carolina
County / Parish: Craven
Surface Storage: 2_inch_(5.0_cm)
Ditch Depth or Depth to Water Surface: 2 ft
Depth to Restrictive Layer: 25 ft
Drainable Porosity: 0.04
Hydroperiod: 14 days
User defined T25 or Default T25: DEFAULT
T25 value: 3.4 days
User Conductivity or Soil Survey Conductivity: SOIL SURVEY
Weighted Hydraulic Conductivity: 1.2569 in/hr
Hydraulic Conductivity Data by Layer for Soil: Ly_Lynchburg
Weighted Hydraulic Conductivity Calculated Using: Average K Values
Bottom Depth in Low K in/hr High K in/hr Average K in/hr
Layer 1 9.00 1.98 5.95 3.968496
Layer 2 14.00 1.98 5.95 3.968496
Layer 3 65.00 0.57 1.98 1.275588
Layer
4
300
0.20
1.98
1.0913364
Layer
5
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Layer
6
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Layer
7
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Layer
8
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
----------------------------------------------
Lateral Effect: 82.7 ft
********************************************************************************
----Lateral Effect Program Summary ----
Application of Skaggs Method
Copyright 2006-2014. Brian D Phillips, R Wayne Skaggs, G M Chescheir
North Carolina State University Dept of Biological & Agricultural Engineering
Version: 2.8.1.0
Project Run Date and Time: 6/14/2021 12:52:33 PM
Output Filename: C:\LateralEffect\outputs\Lateral_Effect_Summary.txt
********************************************************************************
Project Information
Project : R1015-MAIDED II
User: Dail Reed
Company / Agency: Balfour Beatty
Department:
Project Location: LAKE ROAD
Project Coordinates:
Soil ID: Ra
Notes:
Site Parameters
------------------------------------------------------------------
State: North Carolina
County / Parish: Craven
Surface Storage: 2_inch_(5.0_cm)
Ditch Depth or Depth to Water Surface: 2 ft
Depth to Restrictive Layer: 25 ft
Drainable Porosity: 0.04
Hydroperiod: 14 days
User defined T25 or Default T25: DEFAULT
T25 value: 3.4 days
User Conductivity or Soil Survey Conductivity: SOIL SURVEY
Weighted Hydraulic Conductivity: 1.2371 in/hr
Hydraulic Conductivity Data by Layer for Soil: Ra_Rains _drained
Weighted Hydraulic Conductivity Calculated Using: Average K Values
Bottom Depth in Low K in/hr High K in/hr Average K in/hr
Layer 1 7.00 1.98 5.95 3.968496
Layer 2 12.00 1.98 5.95 3.968496
Layer 3 20.00 0.57 1.98 1.275588
Layer
4
62.00
0.57
1.98
1.275588
Layer
5
300
0.20
1.98
1.0913364
Layer
6
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Layer
7
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Layer
8
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
----------------------------------------------
Lateral Effect: 82.0 ft
BORROW PIT/WASTE AREA INFORMATION FORM
FOR STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE REVIEW
Date Submitted 5/24/21 County CRAVEN PitName MAIDES II
Highway Project No. and Description C204177 R-1015 HAVELOCK BYPASS
Submitted by DAIL REED / BALFOUR BEATTY
Preparer Name/Company
314 JAECKLE DRIVE, SUITE 140, WILMINGTON NC 28403
Company Address
910-599-1911 DREED@BALFOURBEATTYUS.COM
SITE TYPE:
SITE INFO:
1 RIZW.1r 0 0]01
Phone/Email
FOR HPO USE ONLY
ER 21-1416
A -DUE 6/17/2021
NC - SBA
6/17/2021
S - DUE 6/17/2021
NC - DLB
6/21 /2021
Borrow Pit ® Waste Area ® Both e
Acreage 16 Borrow Depth 25
Street Address/PIN 1008 LAKE RD. HAVELOCK NC (6-218-038 & 6-218-19000)
GPS Coordinates (decimal degrees) 34.871144,-76.930008
ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES:
1. Are there any buildings or structures on the project site? (Include abandoned barns, farmhouses, tobacco sheds, bridges, etc.)
NONE
2. If yes, photographs of structures which appear to be 50 years or older, are required. Photos must show each elevation of the
structure and surrounding landscape.
ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES:
1. Present and previous land uses of the proposed borrow pit/waste area. TIMBER LAND
2. What kind of site preparation, if any, has taken place on the project site? TEST HOLES
3. Have any artifacts (arrowheads, pottery, etc.) been found on the site? NO
4. Are any marked or unmarked cemeteries located within the proposed pit area? NO
S. Has the area been surveyed by an archaeologist? If yes, give the name of the archaeologist and the date of the survey.
NO
ro ensure timely review, submittal must include a map (aerial, topographic, labelled street, etc.) and/or KML
riles clearly showing the proposed borrow pit/waste area location and boundaries (entire extent of
disturbance). Submit the completed form and map to: Renee Gledhill -Earley, Environmental Review
Coordinator, State Historic Preservation Office, at Environmental.Review(ancdcr.gov, or by LISPS, 4617 Mail
Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-4617 (phone 919-814-6584). **Allow at least 30 days for our review and comment**
FOR HPO USE ONLY
X We have no comment on the project as proposed.
Additional information is needed to complete our review.
An archaeological survey is recommended.
Date: 6/23/2021
Renee Gledhill -Earley, ER Coordinator
November 2019
ER-KBH
USDA United States
Department of
Agriculture
N RCS
Natural
Resources
Conservation
Service
A product of the National
Cooperative Soil Survey,
a joint effort of the United
States Department of
Agriculture and other
Federal agencies, State
agencies including the
Agricultural Experiment
Stations, and local
participants
Custom Soil Resource
Report for
Craven County,
North Carolina
MAIDES #2
February 5, 2021
Preface
Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas.
They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information
about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for
many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban
planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers.
Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste
disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand,
protect, or enhance the environment.
Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose
special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil
properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions.
The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of
soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for
identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations.
Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area
planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some
cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/
portal/nres/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering
applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center
(https://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nres) or your NRCS State Soil
Scientist (http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/soils/contactus/?
cid=nres142p2_053951).
Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are
seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a
foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as
septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to
basements or underground installations.
The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States
Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the
Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources
Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National
Cooperative Soil Survey.
Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available
through the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its
programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability,
and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion,
sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a
part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not
all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require
2
alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print,
audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice
and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of
Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or
call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity
provider and employer.
3
Contents
Preface.................................................................................................................... 2
How Soil Surveys Are Made..................................................................................5
SoilMap..................................................................................................................
8
SoilMap................................................................................................................9
Legend................................................................................................................10
MapUnit Legend................................................................................................
11
MapUnit Descriptions.........................................................................................11
Craven County, North Carolina.......................................................................
13
GoA—Goldsboro loamy fine sand, 0 to 2 percent slopes ...........................
13
Ly—Lynchburg fine sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, Atlantic Coast
Flatwoods..............................................................................................14
Ra—Rains fine sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, Atlantic Coast
Flatwoods..............................................................................................15
References............................................................................................................18
4
How Soil Surveys Are Made
Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous
areas in a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous
areas and their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and
limitations affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length,
and shape of the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and
native plants; and the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil
profiles. A soil profile is the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The
profile extends from the surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the
soil formed or from the surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is
devoid of roots and other living organisms and has not been changed by other
biological activity.
Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource
areas (MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that
share common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water
resources, soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey
areas typically consist of parts of one or more MLRA.
The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that
is related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the
area. Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind
of landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and
miscellaneous areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific
segments of the landform, a soil scientist develops a concept, or model, of how they
were formed. Thus, during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict
with a considerable degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a
specific location on the landscape.
Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their
characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil
scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only
a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented
by an understanding of the soil -vegetation -landscape relationship, are sufficient to
verify predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries.
Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They
noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock
fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them
to identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their
properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units).
Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil
characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for
comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic
classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character
of soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil
5
Custom Soil Resource Report
scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the
individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that
they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and
research.
The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the
objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that
have similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a
unique combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable
proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components
of the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way
diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such
landforms and landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the
development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite
investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas.
Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map.
The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of
mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape,
and experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the
soil -landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at
specific locations. Once the soil -landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller
number of measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded.
These measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color,
depth to bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for
content of sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil
typically vary from one point to another across the landscape.
Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of
characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct
measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit
component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other
properties.
While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally
are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists
interpret the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field -observed
characteristics and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the
soils under different uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through
observation of the soils in different uses and under different levels of management.
Some interpretations are modified to fit local conditions, and some new
interpretations are developed to meet local needs. Data are assembled from other
sources, such as research information, production records, and field experience of
specialists. For example, data on crop yields under defined levels of management
are assembled from farm records and from field or plot experiments on the same
kinds of soil.
Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on
such variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over
long periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example,
soil scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will
have a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict
that a high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date.
After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the
survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and
0
Custom Soil Resource Report
identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings,
fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately.
7
Soil Map
The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of
soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols
displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to
produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit.
0
3
32340D
34' 52' 23" N il
R
I
Custom Soil Resource Report
Soil Map
323470 323540 323610
t
4h I� Aft4
r
/
T
}
L
4trY
34° 52' 1" N
323400 323470 323540
3
Map Scale: 1:1,940 i printed on B portrait (11" x 17") sheet
ER
Meters
N 0 25 50 100 150
Feet
0 50 100 200 300
Map projection: Web Mercator Comer coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 18N WGS84
9
323610 323680
323750
3
I
34' 52' 23" N
34' 52' 1" N
323750
3
S
MAP LEGEND
Area of Interest (AOI)
0
Area of Interest (AOI)
Soils
0
Soil Map Unit Polygons
im 0
Soil Map Unit Lines
■
Soil Map Unit Points
Special
Point Features
Blowout
Borrow Pit
Clay Spot
Closed Depression
Gravel Pit
.4
Gravelly Spot
0
Landfill
Lava Flow
Marsh or swamp
+
Mine or Quarry
Miscellaneous Water
Perennial Water
Rock Outcrop
Saline Spot
Sandy Spot
Severely Eroded Spot
Sinkhole
Slide or Slip
oa
Sodic Spot
Custom Soil Resource Report
MAP INFORMATION
A
Spoil Area
The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at
1:24,000.
Stony Spot
Very Stony Spot
Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.
Wet Spot
Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause
Other
misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil
.-
Special Line Features
line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of
contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed
Water Features
scale.
-
Streams and Canals
Transportation
Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map
�}}
Rails
measurements.
Interstate Highways
Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service
US Routes
Web Soil Survey URL:
Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857)
Major Roads
Local Roads
Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator
projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts
Background
distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the
Aerial Photography
Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more
accurate calculations of distance or area are required.
This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as
of the version date(s) listed below.
Soil Survey Area: Craven County, North Carolina
Survey Area Data: Version 23, Jun 2, 2020
Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales
1:50,000 or larger.
Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Dec 31, 2009—Oct
30, 2017
The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were
compiled and digitized probably differs from the background
imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor
shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident.
10
Custom Soil Resource Report
Map Unit Legend
Map Unit Symbol
Map Unit Name
Acres in AOI
Percent of AOI
GoA
Goldsboro loamy fine sand, 0 to
3.1
14.8%
2 percent slopes
Lynchburg fine sandy loam, 0 to
Ly
4.2
19.9%
2 percent slopes, Atlantic
Coast Flatwoods
Ra
Rains fine sandy loam, 0 to 2
13.8
65.2%
percent slopes, Atlantic Coast
Flatwoods
Totals for Area of Interest
21.2
100.0%
Map Unit Descriptions
The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the
soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along
with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit.
A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more
major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named
according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic
class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the
landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the
characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some
observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class.
Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without
including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made
up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor
components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils.
Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the
map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called
noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a
particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties
and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different
management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They
generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the
scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas
are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a
given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit
descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor
components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not
mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it
was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and
miscellaneous areas on the landscape.
The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the
usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate
11
Custom Soil Resource Report
pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or
landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The
delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the
development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however,
onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous
areas.
An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions.
Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil
properties and qualities.
Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for
differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major
horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement.
Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness,
salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the
basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas
shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase
commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha
silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series.
Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas.
These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups.
A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate
pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps.
The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar
in all areas. Alpha -Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example.
An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or
miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present
or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered
practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The
pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat
similar. Alpha -Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.
An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas
that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar
interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion
of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can
be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made
up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.
Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil
material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example.
12
Custom Soil Resource Report
Craven County, North Carolina
GoA—Goldsboro loamy fine sand, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 3wfs
Elevation: 20 to 330 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 38 to 55 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 59 to 70 degrees F
Frost -free period: 200 to 280 days
Farmland classification: All areas are prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Goldsboro and similar soils: 90 percent
Minor components: 6 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Goldsboro
Setting
Landform: Flats on marine terraces, broad interstream divides on marine terraces
Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit
Down -slope shape: Linear
Across -slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Loamy marine deposits
Typical profile
Ap - 0 to 10 inches: loamy fine sand
BE - 10 to 13 inches: fine sandy loam
Bt - 13 to 72 inches: sandy clay loam
Cg - 72 to 80 inches: clay loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 2 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Moderately well drained
Runoff class: Low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high
(0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 24 to 36 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water capacity. Moderate (about 7.7 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 2w
Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Rains, undrained
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Flats on marine terraces, carolina bays on marine terraces, broad
interstream divides on marine terraces
13
Custom Soil Resource Report
Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit
Down -slope shape: Linear
Across -slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Muckalee, undrained
Percent of map unit: 1 percent
Landform: Flood plains
Down -slope shape: Concave
Across -slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Ly—Lynchburg fine sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, Atlantic Coast
Flatwoods
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2vx8k
Elevation: 0 to 100 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 40 to 55 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 64 to 70 degrees F
Frost -free period: 200 to 310 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if drained
Map Unit Composition
Lynchburg and similar soils: 82 percent
Minor components: 18 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Lynchburg
Setting
Landform: Marine terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down -slope shape: Linear
Across -slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Loamy marine deposits
Typical profile
Ap - 0 to 6 inches: fine sandy loam
E - 6 to 13 inches: fine sandy loam
Bt - 13 to 21 inches: sandy clay loam
Btg - 21 to 45 inches: sandy clay loam
BCg - 45 to 63 inches: sandy clay loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 2 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Somewhat poorly drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high
(0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 6 to 18 inches
14
Custom Soil Resource Report
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water capacity: Low (about 5.1 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 2w
Hydrologic Soil Group: B/D
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Goldsboro
Percent of map unit: 8 percent
Landform: Flats on marine terraces, broad interstream divides on marine terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional): Talf
Down -slope shape: Linear
Across -slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No
Rains, undrained
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Carolina bays on marine terraces, flats on marine terraces, broad
interstream divides on marine terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional): Dip, talf
Down -slope shape: Linear
Across -slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Rains, drained
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Carolina bays on marine terraces, flats on marine terraces, broad
interstream divides on marine terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional): Dip, talf
Down -slope shape: Linear
Across -slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Ra—Rains fine sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, Atlantic Coast
Flatwoods
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2tn9g
Elevation: 20 to 160 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 40 to 55 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 59 to 70 degrees F
Frost -free period: 200 to 280 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if drained
Map Unit Composition
Rains, undrained, and similar soils: 70 percent
15
Custom Soil Resource Report
Rains, drained, and similar soils: 16 percent
Minor components: 14 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Rains, Undrained
Setting
Landform: Carolina bays on marine terraces, broad interstream divides on marine
terraces, flats on marine terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional): Dip, talf
Down -slope shape: Linear
Across -slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Loamy marine deposits
Typical profile
Ap - 0 to 7 inches: fine sandy loam
Eg - 7 to 16 inches: fine sandy loam
Btg - 16 to 41 inches: sandy clay loam
BCg - 41 to 66 inches: sandy clay loam
Cg - 66 to 80 inches: sandy clay loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 2 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Poorly drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high
(0.20 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 0 to 12 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water capacity. High (about 9.6 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4w
Hydrologic Soil Group: B/D
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Description of Rains, Drained
Setting
Landform: Carolina bays on marine terraces, broad interstream divides on marine
terraces, flats on marine terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional): Dip, talf
Down -slope shape: Linear
Across -slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Loamy marine deposits
Typical profile
Ap - 0 to 7 inches: fine sandy loam
Eg - 7 to 16 inches: fine sandy loam
Btg - 16 to 41 inches: sandy clay loam
BCg - 41 to 66 inches: sandy clay loam
Cg - 66 to 80 inches: sandy clay loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 2 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
16
Custom Soil Resource Report
Drainage class: Poorly drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high
(0.20 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 24 to 36 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water capacity: High (about 9.6 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3w
Hydrologic Soil Group: B/D
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Minor Components
Lynchburg
Percent of map unit: 8 percent
Landform: Broad interstream divides on marine terraces, flats on marine terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional): Talf
Down -slope shape: Linear
Across -slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No
Pantego, ponded
Percent of map unit: 6 percent
Landform: Flats, broad interstream divides
Landform position (three-dimensional): Talf
Down -slope shape: Linear
Across -slope shape: Concave
Hydric soil rating: Yes
17
References
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO).
2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling
and testing. 24th edition.
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of
soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00.
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of
wetlands and deep -water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service FWS/OBS-79/31.
Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States.
Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States.
Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric
soils in the United States.
National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries.
Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service.
U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/
nres/detail/national/soils/?cid=nres 142p2_054262
Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for
making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation
Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http://
www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/national/soils/?cid=nres142p2_053577
Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http://
www. nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/national/soils/?cid=nres142p2_053580
Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and
Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands
Section.
United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of
Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical
Report Y-87-1.
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National forestry manual. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/soils/
home/?cid=nres142p2_053374
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National range and pasture handbook. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/
detail/national/landuse/rangepasture/?cid=stelprdb1043084
18
Custom Soil Resource Report
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/
nres/detail/soils/scientists/?cid=nres142p2_054242
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States,
the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook
296. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/national/soils/?
cid=nres142p2_053624
United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land
capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http://
www.nrcs.usda.gov/lnternet/FSE—DOCUMENTS/nrcsl 42p2_052290.pdf
19
C204177 R-1015 SSP-Z Carteret and Craven Counties
STANDARD SPECIAL PROVISION
NCDOT GENERAL SEED SPECIFICATION FOR SEED QUALITY
(5-17-11)
Z-3
Seed shall be sampled and tested by the North Carolina Department of Agriculture and Consumer
Services, Seed Testing Laboratory. When said samples are collected, the vendor shall supply an
independent laboratory report for each lot to be tested. Results from seed so sampled shall be final.
Seed not meeting the specifications shall be rejected by the Department of Transportation and shall
not be delivered to North Carolina Department of Transportation warehouses. If seed has been
delivered it shall be available for pickup and replacement at the supplier's expense.
Any re -labeling required by the North Carolina Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services,
Seed Testing Laboratory, that would cause the label to reflect as otherwise specified herein shall
be rejected by the North Carolina Department of Transportation.
Seed shall be free from seeds of the noxious weeds Johnsongrass, Balloonvine, Jimsonweed,
Witchweed, Itchgrass, Serrated Tussock, Showy Crotalaria, Smooth Crotalaria, Sicklepod,
Sandbur, Wild Onion, and Wild Garlic. Seed shall not be labeled with the above weed species on
the seed analysis label. Tolerances as applied by the Association of Official Seed Analysts will
NOT be allowed for the above noxious weeds except for Wild Onion and Wild Garlic.
Tolerances established by the Association of Official Seed Analysts will generally be recognized.
However, for the purpose of figuring pure live seed, the found pure seed and found germination
percentages as reported by the North Carolina Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services,
Seed Testing Laboratory will be used. Allowances, as established by the NCDOT, will be
recognized for minimum pure live seed as listed on the following pages.
The specifications for restricted noxious weed seed refers to the number per pound as follows:
Restricted Noxious
Limitations per
Restricted Noxious
Limitations per
Weed
Lb. Of Seed
Weed
Lb. of Seed
Blessed Thistle
4 seeds
Cornflower (Ragged
27 seeds
Robin)
Cocklebur
4 seeds
Texas Panicum
27 seeds
Spurred Anoda
4 seeds
Bracted Plantain
54 seeds
Velvetleaf
4 seeds
Buckhorn Plantain
54 seeds
Morning-glory
8 seeds
Broadleaf Dock
54 seeds
Corn Cockle
10 seeds
Curly Dock
54 seeds
Wild Radish
12 seeds
Dodder
54 seeds
Purple Nutsedge
27 seeds
Giant Foxtail
54 seeds
Yellow Nutsedge
27 seeds
Horsenettle
54 seeds
Canada Thistle
27 seeds
Quackgrass
54 seeds
Field Bindweed
27 seeds
Wild Mustard
54 seeds
Hedge Bindweed
27 seeds
Seed of Pensacola Bahiagrass shall not contain more than 7% inert matter, Kentucky Bluegrass,
Centipede and Fine or Hard Fescue shall not contain more than 5% inert matter whereas a
maximum of 2% inert matter will be allowed on all other kinds of seed. In addition, all seed shall
C204177 R-1015 SSP-3 Carteret and Craven Counties
not contain more than 2% other crop seed nor more than 1 % total weed seed. The germination
rate as tested by the North Carolina Department of Agriculture shall not fall below 70%, which
includes both dormant and hard seed. Seed shall be labeled with not more than 7%, 5% or 2%
inert matter (according to above specifications), 2% other crop seed and 1 % total weed seed.
Exceptions may be made for minimum pure live seed allowances when cases of seed variety
shortages are verified. Pure live seed percentages will be applied in a verified shortage situation.
Those purchase orders of deficient seed lots will be credited with the percentage that the seed is
deficient.
FURTHER SPECIFICATIONS FOR EACH SEED GROUP ARE GIVEN BELOW:
Minimum 85% pure live seed; maximum 1 % total weed seed; maximum 2% total other crop seed;
maximum 144 restricted noxious weed seed per pound. Seed less than 83% pure live seed will not
be approved.
Sericea Lespedeza
Oats (seeds)
Minimum 80% pure live seed; maximum 1% total weed seed; maximum 2% total other crop;
maximum 144 restricted noxious weed seed per pound. Seed less than 78% pure live seed will not
be approved.
Tall Fescue (all approved varieties)
Kobe Lespedeza
Korean Lespedeza
Weeping Lovegrass
Carpetgrass
Bermudagrass
Browntop Millet
German Millet — Strain R
Clover — Red/White/Crimson
Minimum 78% pure live seed; maximum 1 % total weed seed; maximum 2% total other crop seed;
maximum 144 restricted noxious weed seed per pound. Seed less than 76% pure live seed will not
be approved.
Common or Sweet Sundangrass
Minimum 76% pure live seed; maximum 1 % total weed seed; maximum 2% total other crop seed;
maximum 144 restricted noxious weed seed per pound. Seed less than 74% pure live seed will not
be approved.
Rye (grain; all varieties)
Kentucky Bluegrass (all approved varieties)
Hard Fescue (all approved varieties)
Shrub (bicolor) Lespedeza
Minimum 70% pure live seed; maximum 1 % total weed seed; maximum 2% total other crop seed;
maximum 144 noxious weed seed per pound. Seed less than 70% pure live seed will not be
approved.
Centipedegrass Japanese Millet
Crownvetch Reed Canary Grass
Pensacola Bahiagrass Zoysia
Creeping Red Fescue
C204177 R-1015 SSP-4 Carteret and Craven Counties
Minimum 70% pure live seed; maximum 1 % total weed seed; maximum 2% total other crop
seed; maximum 5% inert matter; maximum 144 restricted noxious weed seed per pound.
Barnyard Grass
Big Bluestem
Little Bluestem
Bristly Locust
Birdsfoot Trefoil
Indiangrass
Orchardgrass
Switchgrass
Yellow Blossom Sweet Clover
Gray Family Borrow Pit Basin Calculations
Pump Rate = 1000 gpm = 133.8 cfm = 2.23 ft3/s Detention Time = 2 Hours Depth =aft
Volume Needed = V=Td*Q = 2hrs*2.23(ft3/s)*3600(s/hr) = 16042 ft3
Minimum Surface Area = A = V/d = 16042ft3(Vol)/3ft(Depth)= 5347 ft2
Basin Size = 45'&150' Top Width x 36'&141' Top Length x 3' Depth (1.5:1 Slopes)
Basin Ratio = (45'+ 1 50')/2W / (36'+141')/2L = 3.59:1 Ratio
Basin Surface Area = 6750 Ft2 (Meets Min 5347 ft2)(At wier elevation)
Calculations are as follows:
Basin base width & Base length with 1.5:1 sideslopes:
Wbase=Wtop -(depth x 1.5 x 2 sides) = 45-(3x1.5x2) = 36 Wbase
Lbase=Ltop -(depth x 1.5 x 2 sides) = 150-(3x1.5x2) = 141 Lbase
Basin Volume calculations (Min Required = 16042 ft3)
Vol=Depth/3 {Wtop Ltop+ Wbase Lbase+[( Wtop Lbase+ Wbase Ltop)/2]1
Vol=3/3{(45*150+36*141)+[(45*141+36*150)/2]1
Basin Volume = 17699 ft3 (Meets Min 16042 ft3)(17699 ft3/0.13368Gal=132394Gal)
Attachment J
C204177 R-1015 G-40 Carteret and Craven Counties
PROCEDURE FOR MONITORING BORROW PIT DISCHARGE:
(2-20-07) (Rev. 3-19-13) 105-16, 230, 801 SPl G181
Water discharge from borrow pit sites shall not cause surface waters to exceed 50 NTUs
(nephelometric turbidity unit) in streams not designated as trout waters and 10 NTUs in streams,
lakes or reservoirs designated as trout waters. For lakes and reservoirs not designated as trout
waters, the turbidity shall not exceed 25 NTUs. If the turbidity exceeds these levels due to natural
background conditions, the existing turbidity level shall not be increased.
If during any operating day, the downstream water quality exceeds the standard, the Contractor
shall do all of the following:
(A) Either cease discharge or modify the discharge volume or turbidity levels to bring the
downstream turbidity levels into compliance, or
(B) Evaluate the upstream conditions to determine if the exceedance of the standard is due to
natural background conditions. If the background turbidity measurements exceed the
standard, operation of the pit and discharge can continue as long as the stream turbidity
levels are not increased due to the discharge.
(C) Measure and record the turbidity test results (time, date and sampler) at all defined
sampling locations 30 minutes after startup and at a minimum, one additional sampling of
all sampling locations during that 24-hour period in which the borrow pit is discharging.
(D) Notify DWQ within 24 hours of any stream turbidity standard exceedances that are not
brought into compliance.
During the Environmental Assessment required by Article 230-4 of the 2018 Standard
Specifications, the Contractor shall define the point at which the discharge enters into the State's
surface waters and the appropriate sampling locations. Sampling locations shall include points
upstream and downstream from the point at which the discharge enters these waters. Upstream
sampling location shall be located so that it is not influenced by backwater conditions and
C204177 R-1015 G-41 Carteret and Craven Counties
represents natural background conditions. Downstream sampling location shall be located at the
point where complete mixing of the discharge and receiving water has occurred.
The discharge shall be closely monitored when water from the dewatering activities is introduced
into jurisdictional wetlands. Any time visible sedimentation (deposition of sediment) on the
wetland surface is observed, the dewatering activity will be suspended until turbidity levels in the
stilling basin can be reduced to a level where sediment deposition does not occur. Staining of
wetland surfaces from suspended clay particles, occurring after evaporation or infiltration, does
not constitute sedimentation. No activities shall occur in wetlands that adversely affect the
functioning of a wetland. Visible sedimentation will be considered an indication of possible
adverse impacts on wetland use.
The Engineer will perform independent turbidity tests on a random basis. These results will be
maintained in a log within the project records. Records will include, at a minimum, turbidity test
results, time, date and name of sampler. Should the Department's test results exceed those of the
Contractor's test results, an immediate test shall be performed jointly with the results superseding
the previous test results of both the Department and the Contractor.
The Contractor shall use the NCDOT Turbidity Reduction Options for Borrow Pits Matrix,
available at:
htips:Hconnect.nedot. gov/resources/roadside/FieldOperationsDocuments/TurbidityReductionOpt
ionSheet.pdf to plan, design, construct, and maintain BMPs to address water quality standards.
Tier I Methods include stilling basins which are standard compensatory BMPs. Other Tier I
methods are noncompensatory and shall be used when needed to meet the stream turbidity
standards. Tier II Methods are also noncompensatory and are options that may be needed for
protection of rare or unique resources or where special environmental conditions exist at the site
which have led to additional requirements being placed in the DWQ's 401 Certifications and
approval letters, Isolated Wetland Permits, Riparian Buffer Authorization or a DOT Reclamation
Plan's Environmental Assessment for the specific site. Should the Contractor exhaust all Tier I
Methods on a site exclusive of rare or unique resources or special environmental conditions, Tier
II Methods may be required by regulators on a case by case basis per supplemental agreement.
The Contractor may use cation exchange capacity (CEC) values from proposed site borings to plan
and develop the bid for the project. CEC values exceeding 15 milliequivalents per 100 grams of
soil may indicate a high potential for turbidity and should be avoided when dewatering into surface
water is proposed.
No additional compensation for monitoring borrow pit discharge will be paid.
Attachment J
IL
O
In
mId°
G
� a
m �•
.mra
�
� �
� � A
m � m
CZ o m
m
N
m
E m
E m t
a
CL
E
a m
m
�y
N
m
a
U m
v
a l4
Q
u
G
O
F C
E
Q 'a rm
m Tmc
m a
W vm, v�
C 7 m
Y�
13
2 3 m
mm
C N
C F
c E
{�
`
}
9
N S
m
C
LU
E 9 a
c�i
a m
n a
v # 3
8 3
m"
a c
P1 E E
m= m
m
C
W p
W
m
le C
= m
E
O m m
C U
0 C W 3 E
N G.
T L IY
mmx 4 N
0 Q p j
O
a my. 1�- N
y�yl
G
W y
C A
K m U N
o m
C
19
O
g"
°
N
a
-cfl e°
p
t a E m
t a m
m
m +�
=
a
3
6 ro n Ec°
m 6
ID
o n n$
n
m n m 8,
m E m
q m m .Q Q m p
•— •c
r 2
n es
5 a o
m " Rom,
s$ d
S s
m a r
tl1
v m
ua. $ m m
v
$ m
n
75
3
7a
m
n
lki
Attachment J
N
yyC
`m
16
U
a a
m
ran
m
$
FmF
.=, E
d a�
Z
Ws
c
�o o
E
g i c
U E
E
> m
O
C
c
21m
E
$ a x
o n
m a a
a
Q
m
v
v v
m
n W
E E
9
C
m V
Q,
5 r. m 52
N E m
C m
T
Z
w cE;-a
C v>
m
�
E g v
a
Iz m
o a
n
N
W
N
IL
W
Tf
D
_ �
D
oc
ia
c4
m
tl j N
.2 m
-n o$
a o
E O m
i y EcD
v
'mao
E w
t m_
10 rn
Z w n
Q' n�a W
m a Ti
'�
ro
G
a= m
S 3
F 9FL
E
q E
a
C
�
U
4g LL
o$
p k
d
rn
W
}—
O
Z