20240265 Ver 1_BP9.R006 Cover Letter w_Attachments_021324_20240214

s SrA�TEo,
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Roy COOPER
GOVERNOR
February 13, 2024
Mr. Steve Brumagin
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
8430 University Executive Park Drive
Charlotte, NC 28262
J.R. "JOEY" Homms
SECRETARY
SUBJECT: Pre -Construction Notification Pursuant to Nationwide Permit 913
NCDOT Division 9 Bridge Replacement Program Project
Bridge No. 246 on SR 2351 (Flat Swamp Rd) over Lick Creek (Class WS-IV),
Davidson County, NC
Dear Mr. Brumagin
We are requesting a Section 404 Nationwide Permit (NWP) 13 authorization for work associated
with the replacement of Bridge No. 246 with a new bridge at the same location over Lick Creek
(Class WS-IV) on SR 2351(Flat Swamp Road) in Davidson County (Attachment A and B). The
project will permanently impact 51 linear feet of Lick Creek for bank stabilization (Attachment Q.
There will be 62 linear feet of temporary stream impacts associated with the installation of a water
line. No mitigation is proposed since the permanent bank stabilization impacts are not a loss of
water.
The existing bridge is a 2 @ 45-foot, 3.5-inch span precast prestressed concrete cored slabs. The
replacement bridge is proposed to be a two span bridge with one 70-foot, 24-inch cored slab and
one 35-foot, 24-inch cored slab structure with 11-foot travel lanes and paved shoulders ranging
between four to five feet in width. The drainage is comprised of a traffic bearing flat grade with 15"
pipes that outlets into a riprap pad. The existing bridge will be removed.
There will be no wetland impacts.
Section 106
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 requires Federal agencies to take into
account the efforts of their undertakings on historic properties. NCDOT Cultural Resource staff
reviewed the project for Historic Architectural and Archaeological Resources. A No Survey
Required Form for Historic Architecture and Landscapes was provided by a NCDOT Architectural
Historian on March 11, 2020. A No Archaeology Survey Required Form was provided by the
NCDOT Archaeologist on April 4, 2020 (Attachment D). A letter was sent to the Catawba Indian
Nation informing them of the proposed bridge replacement project on March 4, 2020 (Attachment
D). No response was received from the Catawba Indian Nation.
Mailing Address:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION 9
375 SILAS CREEK PARKWAY
WINSTON-SALEM, NC 27127
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Customer Service: 1-877-368-4968
Website: www.ncdot.gov
Location:
375 SILAS CREEK PARKWAY
WINSTON-SALEM, NC 27127

Protected Species
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (USFWS) Information for Planning and Consultation (Impact)
website lists Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii), as endangered. Additionally, the
tricolored bat (Perimyotis subflavus - PESU) has been proposed endangered and is included
although the species is not currently protected. A habitat assessment and structure survey was
conducted on June 30, 2022 and a Bridge Survey for Bats Memo was prepared along with a Section
7 Concurrence Request for tricolored bat (Attachment F). The action area for the project includes
woody habitats that qualify as suitable habitat for PESU. There is one perennial stream that will be
impacted by the project. Therefore, PESU foraging, commuting, and roosting behaviors may be
impacted by project construction. The Section 7 Concurrence Request for tricolored bat is
requesting a biological conclusion of "May Affect -Not Likely to Adversely Affect" be rendered for
tricolored bat. There is habitat in the study area for Schweinitz's sunflower. No Schweinitz's
sunflowers were found during field surveys of the study area conducted on October 26, 2022. A
search of the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) database, accessed January 25,
2024, found no occurrences of Schweinitz's sunflower within 1.0 mile of the study area. A
biological conclusion of "May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect" was reached for
Schweinitz's sunflower.
Bald eagles are protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. A desktop-GIS
assessment of the study area, as well as the area within a 1.13-mile radius (1.0 mile plus 660 feet)
of the project limits was performed by NCDOT on February 13, 2017 and determined that this
project would not affect this species. Additionally, a review of the NCNHP database on June 5,
2023 revealed no known occurrences of this species within 1.0 mile of the study area.
If you have any questions, comments or need additional information after reviewing this material
please contact me at [phone]. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
Amy Euliss
Division 9 PDEA Engineer, NCDOT

Attachment A — Preliminary Jurisdictional Delineation & SAW No. 2020-00258
Attachment B — Representative Photographs use signed copy
Attachment C — Permit Drawings with Stormwater Management Plan https://
Attachment D — Historic Architecture and Landscapes No Survey Required Forn connect.ncdot.gov
Archaeological No Survey Required Form; Tribal Coordination /site/
Attachment E — Minimum Criteria Determination Checklist
Attachment F — Section 7 Concurrence Request for the Tricolored bat & Sch
sunflower; Bridge Survey for Bats Memo
Preconstruction/
division/
div09/17BP.9.R.9
2%20Bridge%
20246%
20Davidson/
Natural%
20Environment/ 1
7BP.9.R.92_PJD
%20package%
2011.15.19.ndf

NCDOT Division 9 Bridge Replacement
Bridge 246 on SR 2351 (Flat Swamp Road) over Lick Creek— PCN for NWP 14
Attachment A
Preliminary Jurisdictional Delineation
& SAW No. 2020-00258

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Roy COOPER
GOVERNOR
November 15, 2019
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Asheville Regulatory Field Office
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, NC 28801-5006
ATTN: Ms. Nicholle Braspennickx
NCDOT Division 9 Coordinator
JAMEs H.TROGDON, III
SECRETARY
SUBJECT: Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Package: WBS No. 17BP.9.R.74:
Replace Bridge No. 246 on SR 2351 (Flat Swamp Road) over Lick Creek in
Davidson County, North Carolina.
Ms. Braspennickx
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes the replacement of Bridge
No. 246 on SR 2351 (Flat Swamp Road) over Lick Creek in Davidson County, North Carolina.
Below and attached are a brief description of the project, figures depicting all features, and
appropriate forms.
On July 9 and September 18, 2019, WSP USA (WSP) Environmental Scientists Caleb Sullivan
and Amanda Johnson conducted a site investigation (Figure 1). One potential jurisdictional feature,
a potential stream, was identified in the study area (Table 1; Figures 2 and 3). A North Carolina
Division of Water Resources (NCDWR) Stream Identification form was not completed for the
potential stream because it is shown as a named perennial stream on United States Geological
Survey (USGS) topographic maps and jurisdictionality was obvious. No potential open waters or
wetlands were identified in the study area. A United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)
wetland determination form is included to document upland conditions in the study area.
Table 1: Potential jurisdictional stream in the study area
Map
Stream
Length
NCDWR
Best Usage
Compensatory
River Basin
ID
Name
(feet)
Classification
Index Number
Classification
Mitigation
Buffer
Required
SA
Lick Creek
217
Perennial
12-126-(3)
WS-IV
Yes
Not Subject
Telephone: [phone]
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Customer Service: 1-877-368-4968 375 SILAS CREEK PARKWAY
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS — DIVISION 9 Website: www.ncdot.gov WINSTON-SALEM, NC 27127

If you have any questions, require additional information, or would like to schedule a site visit,
please contact me at [phone] or by email at [e-mail]. This is a request for
concurrence with our assessment. We appreciate your assistance on this project.
Sincerely,
Amy Euliss
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Highway Division 9
Cc: Dave Wanucha, NCDWR

Corps Submittal Cover Sheet
Please prof idc tilt fo110%. ill irlfo:
1 . Project Itiarne Bridge No.246 on SR 2351 over Lick Creek (17BP.9.R.92)
2of Property O ner; _applicant: NCDOT Division 9
Itialnt of Consultant,_ cent: WSP USA/Adam Karagosian, PWS
au'hmiyatio:
4. RelatL(i I'1-ev ions Action ED nulnbcr(s):
5. Site Adciress: Flat Swamp Road
6. Subdli ision -Nalnc:
City: Denton
S. county: Davidson
g• Lat: 35.637086 Loner:-80.150872 (Decimal Dew Les Please }
10. Quadranalc Namc: Grist Mountain
11. �'atci��av: Lick Creek
t2. Watershed: HUC 03040103
t3. Requesteci action:
-Nation«ide Pennit
General Pcrmit
aJrsdctoal Leteninatinn �cglcst iiiPreliminary Jurisdictional Determination
Prc-Application Request
The following infonnation NI,111 be completed by Corps office:
?.ID:
Prepare File Folder Asslgn number in OR -NI
tithorication: Section 10 Seetio_i 404
Project Dc cription;' \Tatum of Activity,." Project Purpose:
Sitc.iWaters Itiarnit:
Ktr,vofds.
Bc-in Date

urisdictional Determination Reauest
US Army Cwpai
of En0lnnern
Allmngim District
This form is intended for use by anyone requesting a jurisdictional determination (JD) from the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District (Corps). Please include all supporting
information, as described within each category, with your request. You may submit your request
via mail, electronic mail, or facsimile. Requests should be sent to the appropriate project
manager of the county in which the property is located. A current list of project managers by
assigned counties can be found on-line at:
http://www.saw.usace.aimy.mil/Missions/Re ul�atoiyPermitProi4ram/Contact/CountyLocator.aspx,
by calling 910-251-4633, or by contacting any of the field offices listed below. Once your
request is received you will be contacted by a Corps project manager.
ASHEVILLE & CHARLOTTE REGULATORY
FIELD OFFICES
US Army Corps of Engineers
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801-5006
General Number: [phone]
Fax Number: [phone]
RALEIGH REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US Army Corps of Engineers
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
General Number: [phone]
Fax Number: [phone]
INSTRUCTIONS:
WASHINGTON REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US Army Corps of Engineers
2407 West Fifth Street
Washington, North Carolina 27889
General Number: [phone]
Fax Number: [phone]
WILMINGTON REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US Army Corps of Engineers
69 Darlington Avenue
Wilmington, North Carolina 28403
General Number: 910-251-4633
Fax Number: [phone]
All requestors must complete Parts A, B, C, D, E, F and G.
NOTE TO CONSULTANTS AND AGENCIES: If you are requesting a JD on behalf of a
paying client or your agency, please note the specific submittal requirements in Part H.
NOTE ON PART D — PROPERTY OWNER AUTHORIZATION: Please be aware that
all JD requests must include the current property owner authorization for the Corps to
proceed with the determination, which may include inspection of the property when
necessary. This form must be signed by the current property owner(s) or the owner(s)
authorized agent to be considered a complete request.
NOTE ON PART D - NCDOT REQUESTS: Property owner authorization/notification for
JD requests associated with North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
projects will be conducted according to the current NCDOT/USACE protocols.
NOTE TO USDA PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS: A Corps approved or preliminary JD
may not be valid for the wetland conservation provisions of the Food Security Act of
1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation in
USDA programs, you should also request a certified wetland determination from the local
office of the Natural Resources Conservation Service, prior to starting work.
Version: May 2017 Page 1

Jurisdictional Determination Request
A. PARCEL INFORMATION
Street Address: Flat Swamp Road
City, State:
County:
Denton, NC
Davidson
Parcel Index Number(s) (PIN): Multiple
B. REQUESTOR INFORMATION
Name: Amv Euliss
Mailing Address: 375 Silas Creek Parkway
Telephone Number:
Electronic Mail Address:
Select one:
Winston-Salem, NC 27127
336-747-7800
[e-mail]
❑ I am the current property owner.
❑ I am an Authorized Agent or Environmental Consultanti
❑ Interested Buyer or Under Contract to Purchase
❑✓ Other, please explain. NCDOT Representative
C. PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION'
Name: Multiple Owners
Mailing Address:
Telephone Number:
Electronic Mail Address:
' Must provide completed Agent Authorization Form/Letter.
z Documentation of ownership also needs to be provided with request (copy of Deed, County GIS/Parcel/Tax Record).
Version: May 2017 Page 2

Jurisdictional Determination Request
D. PROPERTY ACCESS CERTIFICATION',4
By signing below, I authorize representatives of the Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (Corps) to enter upon the property herein described for the purpose of conducting on -
site investigations, if necessary, and issuing a jurisdictional determination pursuant to Section
404 of the Clean Water Act and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899. I, the
undersigned, am either a duly authorized owner of record of the property identified herein, or
acting as the duly authorized agent of the owner of record of the property.
Print Name
Capacity: ❑ Owner ❑ Authorized Agents
Date
Signature
E. REASON FOR JD REQUEST: (Check as many as applicable)
❑ I intend to construct/develop a projector perform activities on this parcel which would be
designed to avoid all aquatic resources.
❑ I intend to construct/develop a projector perform activities on this parcel which would be
designed to avoid all jurisdictional aquatic resources under Corps authority.
0 I intend to construct/develop a projector perform activities on this parcel which may
require authorization from the Corps, and the JD would be used to avoid and minimize
impacts to jurisdictional aquatic resources and as an initial step in a future permitting
process.
❑ I intend to construct/develop a projector perform activities on this parcel which may
require authorization from the Corps; this request is accompanied by my permit application
and the JD is to be used in the permitting process.
❑ I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities in a navigable water of the
U.S. which is included on the district Section 10 list and/or is subject to the ebb and flow of
the tide.
❑ A Corps JD is required in order obtain my local/state authorization.
❑ I intend to contest jurisdiction over a particular aquatic resource and request the Corps
confirm that jurisdiction does/does not exist over the aquatic resource on the parcel.
❑ I believe that the site may be comprised entirely of dry land.
❑ Other:
s For NCDOT requests following the current NCDOT/USACE protocols, skip to Part E.
a If there are multiple parcels owned by different parties, please provide the following for each additional parcel on a
continuation sheet.
s Must provide agent authorization form/letter signed by owner(s).
Version: May 2017 Page 3

Jurisdictional Determination Request
F. JURISDICTIONAL DETERNIINATION (JD) TYPE (Select One)
7 I am requesting that the Corps provide a preliminM JD for the property identified herein.
A Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination (PJD) provides an indication that there may
be "waters of the United States" or "navigable waters of the United States"on a property.
PJDs are sufficient as the basis for permit decisions. For the purposes of permitting, all
waters and wetlands on the property will be treated as if they are jurisdictional "waters of
the United States". PJDs cannot be appealed (33 C.F.R. 331.2); however, a PJD is
"preliminary" in the sense that an approved JD can be requested at any time. PJDs do
not expire.
❑ I am requesting that the Corps provide an approved JD for the property identified herein.
An Approved Jurisdictional Determination (AJD) is a determination that
jurisdictional "waters of the United States" or "navigable waters of the United
States" are either present or absent on a site. An approved JD identifies the limits of
waters on a site determined to be jurisdictional under the Clean Water Act and/or
Rivers and Harbors Act. Approved JDs are sufficient as the basis for permit
decisions. AJDs are appealable (33 C.F.R. 331.2). The results of the AJD will be
posted on the Corps website. A landowner, permit applicant, or other "affected
party" (33 C.F.R. 331.2) who receives an AJD may rely upon the AJD for five years
(subject to certain limited exceptions explained in Regulatory Guidance Letter 05-
02).
❑ I am unclear as to which JD I would like to request and require additional information
to inform my decision.
G. ALL REQUESTS
Map of Property or Project Area. This Map must clearly depict the boundaries of the
review area.
✓❑ Size of Property or Review Area 2.8 acres.
❑ The property boundary (or review area boundary) is clearly physically marked on the site.
Version: May 2017 Page 4

Jurisdictional Determination Request
H. REQUESTS FROM CONSULTANTS
Project Coordinates (Decimal Degrees): Latitude:
35.637086
Longitude:-80.150872
A legible delineation map depicting the aquatic resources and the property/review area.
Delineation maps must be no larger than I Ix17 and should contain the following: (Corps
signature of submitted survey plats will occur after the submitted delineation map has been
reviewed and approved).6
■ North Arrow
■ Graphical Scale
■ Boundary of Review Area
■ Date
■ Location of data points for each Wetland Determination Data Form or tributary
assessment reach.
For Approved Jurisdictional Determinations:
■ Jurisdictional wetland features should be labeled as Wetland Waters of the US, 404
wetlands, etc. Please include the acreage of these features.
■ Jurisdictional non -wetland features (i.e. tidal/navigable waters, tributaries,
impoundments) should be labeled as Non -Wetland Waters of the US, stream, tributary,
open water, relatively permanent water, pond, etc. Please include the acreage or linear
length of each of these features as appropriate.
■ Isolated waters, waters that lack a significant nexus to navigable waters, or non -
jurisdictional upland features should be identified as Non -Jurisdictional. Please
include a justification in the label regarding why the feature is non jurisdictional (i.e.
"Isolated", "No Significant Nexus", or "Upland Feature"). Please include the acreage
or linear length of these features as appropriate.
For Preliminary Jurisdictional Determinations:
Wetland and non -wetland features should not be identified as Jurisdictional, 404,
Waters of the United States, or anything that implies jurisdiction. These features can be
identified as Potential Waters of the United States, Potential Non -wetland Waters of
the United States, wetland, stream, open water, etc. Please include the acreage and
linear length of these features as appropriate.
Completed Wetland Determination Data Forms for appropriate region
(at least one wetland and one upland form needs to be completed for each wetland type)
6 Please refer to the guidance document titled "Survey Standards for Jurisdictional Determinations" to ensure that the
supplied map meets the necessary mapping standards. hM2://www.saw.usace.4rmy.mil/Missions/Regulatoly-Permit-
Pro gram/Jurisdiction/
Version: May 2017 Page 5

Jurisdictional Determination Request
F4Completed appropriate Jurisdictional Determination form
• PJDs, please complete a Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Form' and include the
Aquatic Resource Table
• AJDS• please complete an Approved Jurisdictional Determination Form'.
F4 Vicinity Map
zAerial Photograph
z USGS Topographic Map
Soil Survey Map
Other Maps, as appropriate (e.g. National Wetland Inventory Map, Proposed Site
Plan, previous delineation maps, LIDAR maps, FEMA floodplain maps)
Landscape Photos (if taken)
NCSAM and/or NCWAM Assessment Forms and Rating Sheets
❑ NC Division of Water Resources Stream Identification Forms
hJ Other Assessment Forms
' www.saw.usace.4rmy.mil/Portals/59/docs/regulatory/readocs/JD/RGL 08-02_App A Prelim _JD_Form fillable.pdf
8 Please see hM2://www.saw.usace.4M.mil/Missions/Regulatory-Permit-Program/Jurisdiction/
Principal Purpose: The information that you provide will be used in evaluating your request to determine
whether there are any aquatic resources within the project area subject to federaljurisdiction under the regulatory
authorities referenced above.
Routine Uses: This information may be shared with the Department of Justice and other federal, state, and local
government agencies, and the public, and may be made available as part of a public notice as required by federal
law. Your name and property location where federal jurisdiction is to be determined will be included in the
approved jurisdictional determination (AJD), which will be made available to the public on the District's website
and on the Headquarters USAGE website.
Disclosure: Submission of requested information is voluntary; however, if information is not provided, the
request for an AJD cannot be evaluated nor can an AJD be issued.
Version: May 2017 Page 6

Appendix 2 - PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (PJD) FORM
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PJD: 11 /12/19
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PJD: Amy EUIISs, NCDOT Division 9
C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: 375 Silas Creek Parkway, Winston-Salem, NC 27127
D. PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
(USE THE TABLE BELOW TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE AQUATIC RESOURCES AND/OR
AQUATIC RESOURCES AT DIFFERENT SITES)
State: NC County/parish/borough: Davidson City: Denton
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format):
Lat.: 35.637086 Long.:-80.150872
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Lick Creek
E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
❑ Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
■❑ Field Determination. Date(s): 9/18/19
TABLE OF AQUATIC RESOURCES IN REVIEW AREA WHICH "MAY BE" SUBJECT TO REGULATORY
JURISDICTION.
Site
number
Latitude
(decimal
degrees)
Longitude
(decimal
degrees)
Estimated amount
of aquatic resource
in review area
(acreage and linear
feet, if applicable)
Type of aquatic
resource (i.e., wetland
vs. non -wetland
waters)
Geographic authority
to which the aquatic
resource "may be"
subject (i.e., Section
404 or Section 10/404)
SA
35.637011
-80.150919
217 If
Non -wetland waters
Section 404

1) The Corps of Engineers believes that there may be jurisdictional aquatic resources in
the review area, and the requestor of this PJD is hereby advised of his or her option
to request and obtain an approved JD (AJD) for that review area based on an
informed decision after having discussed the various types of JDs and their
characteristics and circumstances when they may be appropriate.
2) In any circumstance where a permit applicant obtains an individual permit, or a
Nationwide General Permit (NWP) or other general permit verification requiring "pre -
construction notification" (PCN), or requests verification for a non -reporting NWP or
other general permit, and the permit applicant has not requested an AJD for the
activity, the permit applicant is hereby made aware that: (1) the permit applicant has
elected to seek a permit authorization based on a PJD, which does not make an
official determination of jurisdictional aquatic resources; (2) the applicant has the
option to request an AJD before accepting the terms and conditions of the permit
authorization, and that basing a permit authorization on an AJD could possibly result
in less compensatory mitigation being required or different special conditions; (3) the
applicant has the right to request an individual permit rather than accepting the terms
and conditions of the NWP or other general permit authorization; (4) the applicant can
accept a permit authorization and thereby agree to comply with all the terms and
conditions of that permit, including whatever mitigation requirements the Corps has
determined to be necessary; (5) undertaking any activity in reliance upon the subject
permit authorization without requesting an AJD constitutes the applicant's acceptance
of the use of the PJD; (6) accepting a permit authorization (e.g., signing a proffered
individual permit) or undertaking any activity in reliance on any form of Corps permit
authorization based on a PJD constitutes agreement that all aquatic resources in the
review area affected in any way by that activity will be treated as jurisdictional, and
waives any challenge to such jurisdiction in any administrative or judicial compliance
or enforcement action, or in any administrative appeal or in any Federal court; and (7)
whether the applicant elects to use either an AJD or a PJD, the JD will be processed
as soon as practicable. Further, an AJD, a proffered individual permit (and all terms
and conditions contained therein), or individual permit denial can be administratively
appealed pursuant to 33 C.F.R. Part 331. If, during an administrative appeal, it
becomes appropriate to make an official determination whether geographic
jurisdiction exists over aquatic resources in the review area, or to provide an official
delineation of jurisdictional aquatic resources in the review area, the Corps will
provide an AJD to accomplish that result, as soon as is practicable. This PJD finds
that there "may be" waters of the U.S. and/or that there "may be" navigable waters of
the U.S. on the subject review area, and identifies all aquatic features in the review
area that could be affected by the proposed activity, based on the following
information:

AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Project Name: Bridge No. 246on SR 2351 over Lick Creek
Project Number: No.17BP.9.R.92
Date: September 2019
The North Carolina Department of Transportation, undersigned, does hereby authorize:
The Professional Engineers and Scientists WSP USA
of
(Contractor/Agent)
(Name of Consulting Firm)
To act on our behalf and take all actions necessary for the processing, issuance, and acceptance of this
permit or certification and any and all standard and special conditions attached.
NCDOT Highway Division 9
375 Silas Creek Parkway
Winston Salem, NC 27127
[phone]
I hereby acknowledge the above information submitted in this application is true and accurate to the best
of my knowledge.
Amy Euliss
NCDOT Division 9
Environmental Officer
Date

SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for PJD (check all that apply)
Checked items should be included in subject file. Appropriately reference sources
below where indicated for all checked items:
■❑ Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor:
Map:
0 Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor.
❑ Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report. Rationale:
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:
❑ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data.
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
■❑ U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:
USGS The National Map
❑ Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:
❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
❑ State/local wetland inventory map(s):
❑ FEMA/FIRM maps:
❑ 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: .(National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929)
■❑ Photographs: ■❑ Aerial (Name & Date): Esri Aerial Imagery, 2018
or ❑ Other (Name & Date):
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
❑ Other information (please specify):
IMPORTANT NOTE: The information recorded on this form has not necessarily
been verified by the Corps and should not be relied upon for later jurisdictional
determinations.
Signature and date of
Regulatory staff member
completing PJD
Signature and date of
person requesting PJD
(REQUIRED, unless obtaining
the signature is impracticable)'
' Districts may establish timeframes for requestor to return signed PJD forms. If the requestor does not respond
within the established time frame, the district may presume concurrence and no additional follow up is
necessary prior to finalizing an action.

Waters Upload Sheet
Waters Name HGM_Code Waters_Type Latitil fit...1P Local Waterway
Lick Creek (SA) NORTH CAROLINA R21LIB RIVERINE Linear 217 FOOT RPW 35.63704500 -80.150979

h CcOdP Ln
Or
czzbaeg`y4mA R"
$10.
vmp '00 Wo
Q
6
Legend
Study Area (2.8 ac.)
Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P,
0 1,000 2,000 NRCan, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri
Feet (Thailand), NGCC, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS
User Community
Vicinity Map
Bridge No. 246 on SR 2351 over Lick Creek
Project No. 17BP.9.R.92
of rp
#+ November 2019 Figure 1
Davidson County, North Carolina

TT
Notes: +' ti Y1 ? f'{. �� 1#..rr 1p
- Jurisdictional Waters of the U.S. were delineated4,
in the study area on July 7 and September 18, 2019. ; i +�'+ f• ' ��•- -Y;r y` -` '- 'll
- This map is intended for planning purposes only. ,' /„ ,t }+ f ,
- This map is not intended for design, construction, '.
or purposes.
legal ur
g p p
40
1%F/-� rr
I
' j, •-41� r r fil 'rr` '�r'i.r. " . ate'
SA
(Lick Creek)
Y 217 If '� �•'� ��t� � R
i2 La. 1§a I Ll,
AV
3rY+�,
y
Ail
Le
` }� 4 7►f 'i , {•'� }• ` f r R �Y �.7 'y,(y. . fi {+,, rY
•f ^i ]- � _' } F� i IlIF�TT .r ',_f '�{ tiK_-
k,�.f�, ;. Legend
Study Area (2.8 ac.)
* �. # *' .;, L ' •�- f,r; Potential Non -wetland Waters of the U.S.
Upland Data Point
r Stream Flow Direction
it
0 100 200
Feet " r. r *,*.r 't Source: Esri Aerial Imagery dated 2/3/18
Rr � 14 Potential Jurisdictional Features Map Figure 2
Bridge No. 256 on SR 2351 over Lick Creek
Project No. 17BP.9.R.92
November 2019
"oF,�+° Davidson County, North Carolina

Notes:
- Jurisdictional Waters of the U.S. were delineated
in the study area on July 7 and September 18, 2019.
- This map is intended for planning purposes only.
- This map is not intended for design, construction,
or legal purposes.
N
0 100 200
Feet
4
r
i
Source: USGS The National Map: National Boundaries Dataset, 3DEP Elevation Program, Geographic Names Information System, National Hydrography Dataset, National Land Cover Database,
National Structures Dataset, and National Transportation Dataset; USGS Global Ecosystems; U.S. Census Bureau TIGER/Line data; USFS Road Data; Natural Earth Data; U.S. Department of State
Humanitarian Information Unit; and NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information, U.S. Coastal Relief Model. Data refreshed October 2018.
�' USGS Topographic MapFigure 3
CID
g,ITBrid a No. 256 on SR 2351 over Lick Creek
`'
Project No. 17BP.9.R.92 AN
November 2019
C)FTHA Davidson County, North Carolina

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers OMB Control #: 0710-xxxx, Exp: Pending
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT.•
See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R (Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a)
Project/Site: Bridge No. 246 on SR 2351 over Lick Creek City/County: Davidson Sampling Date: 9/18/19
Applicant/Owner: NCDOT State: NC Sampling Point: Upl A
Investigator(s): A. Johnson & C. Sullivan Section, Township, Range: Denton
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): flat Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 0-5
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.636828 Long:-80.150454 Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: OkA - Oakboro silt loam, 0 to 2% slopes, frequently flooded 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 within a Wetland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
—Surface Soil Cracks (136)
—Surface Water (Al) —True
Aquatic Plants (1314)
—Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2) —Hydrogen
Sulfide Odor (Cl)
—Drainage Patterns (1310)
—Saturation (A3) —Oxidized
Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
—Moss Trim Lines (1316)
—Water Marks (131) —Presence
of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
_Sediment Deposits (132) _Recent
Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (133) _Thin
Muck Surface (C7)
—Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_Algal Mat or Crust (134) _Other
(Explain in Remarks)
_Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
—Iron Deposits (135)
—Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
—Shallow Aquitard (D3)
—Water-Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
X FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
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 fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Wetland hydrology not present at this location.
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: Upl A
Absolute Uominant
Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
% Cover Species?
Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
1
Number of Dominant Species
2.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 5 (A)
3.
Total Number of Dominant
4.
Species Across All Strata: 5 (B)
5.
Percent of Dominant Species
6.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100.0% (A/B)
7.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
=Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
OBL species 2 x 1 = 2
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15'
)
FACW species 26 x 2 = 52
1.
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
2
Yes
FACW
FAC species 19 x 3 = 57
2.
Acerrubrum
2
Yes
FAC
FACU species 0 x 4 = 0
3.
Quercus laurifolia
1
Yes
FACW
UPL species 0 x 5 = 0
4.
Column Totals: 47 (A) ill (B)
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.36
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9.
X 3 - Prevalence Index is <_3.0'
5
=Total Cover
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
50% of total cover:
3
20% of total cover:
1
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5' )
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1.
Carex intumescens
20
Yes
FACW
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
2.
Dichanthelium acuminatum
15
Yes
FAC
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
3. Mikania scandens 2 No FACW
4.
Lycopus virginicus
2
No
OBL
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
5.
Juncus effusus
1
No
FACW
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
6.
Toxicodendron radicans
1
No
FAC
height.
7.
Campsis radicans
1
No
FAC
Sapling/Shrub -Woody plants, excluding vines, less
8.
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
9
(1 m) tall.
10.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
11.
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
42
=Total Cover
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
50% of total cover:
21
20% of total cover:
9
height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5
Hydrophytic
=Total Cover
Vegetation
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Present? Yes X No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Hydrophytic vegetation present at this location.
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: Upl A
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
0-2 2.5Y 6/4 95 10YR 5/6 5 Loamy/Clayey
2-12 2.5Y 6/4 100 Loamy/Clayey
Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion,
Hydric Soil Indicators.
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
—Black Histic (A3)
—Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
—Stratified Layers (A5)
_2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
—Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
—Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
—Sandy Redox (S5)
—Stripped Matrix (S6)
Dark Surface (S7)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type: rocks
Depth (inches): 12
Remarks:
Hydric soil not present at this location.
RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
—Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Redox Depressions(F8)
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soil
_2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
—Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
Red Parent Material (F21)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
_Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

17BP.9.R.92 (Bridge No. 246 on SR 2351 over Lick Creek)
Page 1 of 2
A
. _ jkk •
r
;-
a
Photo 1: Stream A (Lick Creek), facing downstream (photo taken 7.9.19).
WSP USA
C' 4

17BP.9.R.92 (Bridge No. 246 on SR 2351 over Lick Creek)
Page 2 of 2
•r YJF`
F� 1
Of
d- „ a
`
�
. . �
-
•��' a ~ ��.
.mil, ,_
•
h=.
+
.. lY
`,�
Photo 3: Upland A, facing west (photo taken 9.18.19).
WSP USA

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action Id. SAW No. 2020-00258 County: Davidson U.S.G.S. Quad: NC- Grist Mountain
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERNUNATION
Requestor: North Carolina Department of Transportation
Amy Euliss
Address: 375 Silas Creek Parkway
Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27127-7167
Telephone Number: 336-747-7802
E-mail: aeulissnncdot.2ov
Size (acres) 2.8 acres Nearest Town Denton
Nearest Waterway Lick Creek River Basin Upper Pee Dee
USGS HUC 03040103 Coordinates Latitude: 35.637086
Longitude:-80.150872
Location description: SR 2351 (Flat Swamp Rd.) over Lick Creek Bridue, Davidson County, North Carolina.
Indicate Which of the Following Apply:
A. Preliminary Determination
® There appear to be waters on the above described project area/property, that may be subject to Section 404 of the Clean Water
Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403). The waters have been
delineated, and the delineation has been verified by the Corps to be sufficiently accurate and reliable. The approximate boundaries
of these waters are shown on the enclosed delineation maps, Figures 1-3 dated 11/1/2019. Therefore this preliminary
jurisdiction determination may be used in the permit evaluation process, including determining compensatory mitigation. For
purposes of computation of impacts, compensatory mitigation requirements, and other resource protection measures, a permit
decision made on the basis of a preliminary JD will treat all waters and wetlands that would be affected in any way by the
permitted activity on the site as if they are jurisdictional waters of the U.S. This preliminary determination is not an appealable
action under the Regulatory Program Administrative Appeal Process (Reference 33 CFR Part 331). However, you may request an
approved JD, which is an appealable action, by contacting the Corps district for further instruction.
❑ There appear to be waters on the above described project area/property, that may be subject to Section 404 of the Clean Water
Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403). However, since the waters
have not been properly delineated, this preliminary jurisdiction determination may not be used in the permit evaluation process.
Without a verified wetland delineation, this preliminary determination is merely an effective presumption of CWA/RHA
jurisdiction over all of the waters at the project area, which is not sufficiently accurate and reliable to support an enforceable
permit decision. We recommend that you have the waters on your project area/property delineated. As the Corps may not be able
to accomplish this wetland delineation in a timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that can
be verified by the Corps.
B. Approved Determination
❑ There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described project area/property subject to the permit
requirements of Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403) and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(CWA)(33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in law or our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for
a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ There are waterson the above described project area/property subject to the permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean
Water Act (CWA) (33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this determination may be
relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ We recommend you have the waters on your project area/property delineated. As the Corps may not be able to accomplish
this wetland delineation in a timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that can be verified by
the Corps.
❑ The waters on your project area/property have been delineated and the delineation has been verified by the Corps. The
approximate boundaries of these waters are shown on the enclosed delineation map dated DATE. We strongly suggest you have
this delineation surveyed. Upon completion, this survey should be reviewed and verified by the Corps. Once verified, this survey

SAW No. 2020-00258
will provide an accurate depiction of all areas subject to CWA jurisdiction on your property which, provided there is no change in
the law or our published regulations, may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years.
❑ The waters have been delineated and surveyed and are accurately depicted on the plat signed by the Corps Regulatory Official
identified below onDATE. Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this determination may be relied
upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ There are no waters of the U.S., to include wetlands, present on the above described project area/property which are subject to the
permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published
regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ The property is located in one of the 20 Coastal Counties subject to regulation under the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA).
You should contact the Division of Coastal Management in Morehead City, NC, at [phone] to determine their
requirements.
Placement of dredged or fill material within waters of the US, including wetlands, without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC § 1311). Placement of dredged or fill material, construction or
placement of structures, or work within navigable waters of the United States without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Sections 9 and/or 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (33 USC § 401 and/or 403). If you have any questions
regarding this determination and/or the Corps regulatory program, please contact Nicholle Braspennickx at 704-510-0162 or
Nicholle.M.Brasnennickx.us ace.army.mil.
C. Basis For Determination: Basis For Determination: See the preliminary jurisdictional determination
form dated 02/11/2020.
D. Remarks: None.
E. Attention USDA Program Participants
This delineation/determination has been conducted to identify the limits of Corps' Clean Water Act jurisdiction for the particular site
identified in this request. The delineation/determination may not be valid for the wetland conservation provisions of the Food Security
Act of 1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation in USDA programs, you should request
a certified wetland determination from the local office of the Natural Resources Conservation Service, prior to starting work.
F. Appeals Information (This information applies only to approved jurisdictional determinations as indicated in B.
above)
This correspondence constitutes an approved jurisdictional determination for the above described site. If you object to this
determination, you may request an administrative appeal under Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331. Enclosed you will find a
Notification of Appeal Process (NAP) fact sheet and request for appeal (RFA) form. If you request to appeal this determination you
must submit a completed RFA form to the following address:
US Army Corps of Engineers
South Atlantic Division
Attn: Phillip Shannin, Review Officer
60 Forsyth Street SW, Room 10M15
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
In order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps, the Corps must determine that it is complete, that it meets the criteria for appeal
under 33 CFR part 331.5, and that it has been received by the Division Office within 60 days of the date of the NAP. Should you
decide to submit an RFA form, it must be received at the above address by Not applicable.
**It is not necessary to submit an RFA form to the Division Office if you do not object to the determination in this correspondence.**
Corps Regulatory Official:
J-, , Date: 2020.02.10 15:26:12-05'00'
Date of JD: 02/11/2020 Expiration Date of JD: Not applicable

SAW No. 2020-00258
The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure we
continue to do so, please complete the Customer Satisfaction Survey located at
http://corpsmapu.usace.army.mil/cm_apex/f?p=136 A 0

NOTIFICATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL OPTIONS AND PROCESS AND
REQUEST FOR APPEAL
Applicant: North Carolina Department of
File Number: SAW No. 2020-00258
Date: 02/11/2020
Transportation, Amy Euliss
Attached
is:
See Section below
❑
INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission)
A
❑
PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission)
B
❑
PERMIT DENIAL
C
❑
APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
D
®
PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
E
SECTION I - The following identifies your rights and options regarding an administrative appeal of the above decision.
Additional information may be found at or http://www.usace.army.mil/Missions/CivilWorks/RegulatoryProgramandPermits.aspx
or the Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331.
A: INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit.
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your
signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all
rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the
permit.
• OBJECT: If you object to the permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may request
that the permit be modified accordingly. You must complete Section II of this form and return the form to the district
engineer. Your objections must be received by the district engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice, or you will
forfeit your right to appeal the permit in the future. Upon receipt of your letter, the district engineer will evaluate your
objections and may: (a) modify the permit to address all of your concerns, (b) modify the permit to address some of your
objections, or (c) not modify the permit having deternimed that the permit should be issued as previously written. After
evaluating your objections, the district engineer will send you a proffered permit for your reconsideration, as indicated in
Section B below.
B: PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or appeal the permit
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your
signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all
rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the
permit.
• APPEAL: If you choose to decline the proffered permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein,
you may appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of
this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days
of the date of this notice.
C: PERMIT DENIAL: You may appeal the denial of a permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by
completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division
engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.
D: APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You may accept or appeal the approved JD or provide new
information.
• ACCEPT: You do not need to notify the Corps to accept an approved JD. Failure to notify the Corps within 60 days of the
date of this notice, means that you accept the approved JD in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the approved JD.
• APPEAL: If you disagree with the approved JD, you may appeal the approved JD under the Corps of Engineers
Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the district engineer. This form
must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.

E: PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You do not need to respond to the Corps regarding the
preliminary JD. The Preliminary JD is not appealable. If you wish, you may request an approved JD (which may be appealed),
by contacting the Corps district for further instruction. Also you may provide new information for further consideration by the
Corps to reevaluate the JD.
SECTION II - REQUEST FOR APPEAL or OBJECTIONS TO AN INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT
REASONS FOR APPEAL OR OBJECTIONS: (Describe your reasons for appealing the decision or your objections to an initial
proffered permit in clear concise statements. You may attach additional information to this form to clarify where your reasons or
objections are addressed in the administrative record.)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The appeal is limited to a review of the administrative record, the Corps memorandum for the
record of the appeal conference or meeting, and any supplemental information that the review officer has determined is needed to
clarify the administrative record. Neither the appellant nor the Corps may add new information or analyses to the record.
However, you may provide additional information to clarify the location of information that is already in the administrative
record.
POINT OF CONTACT FOR QUESTIONS OR INFORMATION:
If you have questions regarding this decision and/or the
If you only have questions regarding the appeal process you may
appeal process you may contact:
also contact:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division
Mr. Phillip Shannin, Administrative Appeal Review Officer
Attn: Nicholle Braspennickx
CESAD-PDO
Charlotte Regulatory Office
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, South Atlantic Division
U.S Army Corps of Engineers
60 Forsyth Street, Room 1OM15
8430 University Executive Park Drive, Suite 615
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
Charlotte, North Carolina 28262
Phone: [phone]
RIGHT OF ENTRY: Your signature below grants the right of entry to Corps of Engineers personnel, and any government
consultants, to conduct investigations of the project site during the course of the appeal process. You will be provided a 15 day
notice of any site investigation, and will have the opportunity to participate in all site investigations.
Date:
Telephone number:
Signature of appellant or agent.
For appeals on Initial Proffered Permits send this form to:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division, Attn: Nicholle Braspennickx, 69 Darlington Avenue, Wilmington, North
Carolina 28403
For Permit denials, Proffered Permits and Approved Jurisdictional Determinations send this form to:
Division Engineer, Commander, U.S. Army Engineer Division, South Atlantic, Attn: Mr. Phillip Shannin, Administrative
Appeal Officer, CESAD-PDO, 60 Forsyth Street, Room 1OM15, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
Phone: [phone]

PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (PJD) FORM
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PJD: 02/11/2020
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PJD: North Carolina Department of Transportation,
Amy Euliss, 375 Silas Creek Parkway, Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27127-7167
C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Wilmington District, NCDOT/SR 2351 (Flat Swamp
Road), Lick Creek Br. No. 246, SAW No. 2020-00258
D. PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: SR 2351 (Flat Swamp Rd.) over Lick Creek
Bridge, Davidson County, North Carolina.
(USE THE TABLE BELOW TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE AQUATIC RESOURCES AND/OR
AQUATIC RESOURCES AT DIFFERENT STIES)
State: NC County: Davidson City: Denton
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Latitude: 35.637086 Longitude:-80.150872
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Lick Creek
E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
® Office (Desk) Determination. Date: February 7, 2020
❑ Field Determination. Date(s):
TABLE OF AQUATIC RESOURCES INREVIEWAREA WHICH "MAY BE" SUBJECT TO REGULATORY
JURISDICTION.
Estimated amount of
Type of aquatic
Geographic authority to
Latitude (decimal
Longitude (decimal
aquatic resources in
resources (i.e.,
which the aquatic resource
Site Number
degrees)
degrees)
review area (acreage
wetland vs. non-
'may be" subject (i.e.,
and linear feet, if
wetland waters)
Section 404 or Section
applicable
10/404)
SA — Lick
Creek
35.637086
-80.150872
217 Lf.
Non -wetland
Section 404
1) The Corps of Engineers believes that there may be jurisdictional aquatic resources in the review
area, and the requestor of this PJD is hereby advised of his or her option to request and obtain an
approved JD (AJD) for that review area based on an informed decision after having discussed the
various types of JDs and their characteristics and circumstances when they may be appropriate.
2) In any circumstance where a permit applicant obtains an individual permit, or a Nationwide General
Permit (NWP) or other general permit verification requiring "pre- construction notification" (PCN), or
requests verification for a non -reporting NWP or other general permit, and the permit applicant has
not requested an AJD for the activity, the permit applicant is hereby made aware that: (1) the permit
applicant has elected to seek a permit authorization based on a PJD, which does not make an official
determination of jurisdictional aquatic resources; (2) the applicant has the option to request an AJD
before accepting the terms and conditions of the permit authorization, and that basing a permit
authorization on an AJD could possibly result in less compensatory mitigation being required or
different special conditions; (3) the applicant has the right to request an individual permit rather than
accepting the terms and conditions of the NWP or other general permit authorization; (4) the applicant
can accept a permit authorization and thereby agree to comply with all the terms and conditions of that
permit, including whatever mitigation requirements the Corps has determined to be necessary; (5)
undertaking any activity in reliance upon the subject permit authorization without requesting an AJD

constitutes the applicant's acceptance of the use of the PJD; (6) accepting a permit authorization (e.g.,
signing a proffered individual permit) or undertaking any activity in reliance on any form of Corps
permit authorization based on a PJD constitutes agreement that all aquatic resources in the review area
affected in any way by that activity will be treated as jurisdictional, and waives any challenge to such
jurisdiction in any administrative orjudicial compliance or enforcement action, or in any
administrative appeal or in any Federal court; and (7) whether the applicant elects to use either an AID
or a PJD, the JD will be processed as soon as practicable. Further, an AJD, a proffered individual
permit (and all terms and conditions contained therein), or individual permit denial can be
administratively appealed pursuant to 33 C.F.R. Part 331. If, during an administrative appeal, it
becomes appropriate to make an official determination whether geographic jurisdiction exists over
aquatic resources in the review area, or to provide an official delineation of jurisdictional aquatic
resources in the review area, the Corps will provide an AJD to accomplish that result, as soon as is
practicable. This PJD finds that there "may be" waters of the U.S. and/or that there "may be"
navigable waters of the U.S. on the subject review area, and identifies all aquatic features in the
review area that could be affected by the proposed activity, based on the following information:
SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for PJD (check all that apply)
Checked items should be included in subject file. Appropriately reference sources below where
indicated for all checked items:
® Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor: Figures 1-3,
dated November 2019, prepared by WSP.
® Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor.
® Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report. Rationale:
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:_
❑ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data.
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
❑ U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:
❑ Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:
❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
❑ State/local wetland inventory map(s):
❑ FEMA/FIRM maps:
❑ 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929)
❑ Photographs: ❑Aerial (Name & Date):
or ❑Other (Name & Date):
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
® Other information (please specify):
Lick Creek flows to the Tuckertown Reservoir. The Tuckertown Reservoir is a impoundment
of the Yadkin River. The Yadkin River in an interstate water of the U.S. which flows to the
Pee Dee River. Corps of Engineers regulations at 33 CFR Part 328.3(a)(5) assert Clean Water
Act jurisdiction over tributaries to other waters of the U.S. Therefore, Lick Creek maybe a
water of the U.S.

IMPORTANT NOTE: The information recorded on this form has not necessarily been
verified by the Corps and should not be relied upon for later Jurisdictional determinations.
11>4k-
A14L
Date: 2020.02.10
15:26:47-05'00'
Signature and date of Regulatory
staff member completing PJD
02/ 11 /2020
Signature and date of person requesting PJD
(REQUIRED, unless obtaining the signature is
impracticable)1
1 Districts may establish timeframes for requester to return signed PJD forms. If the requester does not respond within the
established time frame, the district may presume concurrence and no additional follow up is necessary prior to finalizing an
action.

NCDOT Division 9 Bridge Replacement
Bridge 246 on SR 2351 (Flat Swamp Road) over Lick Creek— PCN for NWP 14
Attachment 6
Representative Photographs

NCDOT Division 9 Bridge Replacement Program
Bridge 246 on SR 2351 (Flat Swamp Rd) over Lick Creek
Photo 1: Underside of Bridge #246 on SR 2351 over Lick Creek, facing east (photo taken 7.9.19)
P,
Y
r_."'/ �.
Photo 2: Stream A (Lick Creek), facing downstream (photo taken 7.9.19)

NCDOT Division 9 Bridge Replacement Program
Bridge 246 on SR 2351 (Flat Swamp Rd) over Lick Creek
Ir
TUN
- JAW -
'IL
Photo 3: Stream A (Lick Creek), facing upstream (photo taken 7.9.19)

NCDOT Division 9 Bridge Replacement
Bridge 246 on SR 2351 (Flat Swamp Road) over Lick Creek— PCN for NWP 14
Attachment C
Permit Drawings with Stormwater
Management Plan

[ighway
North Carolina Department of Transportation1�
Highway Stormwater Program
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
(Version 3.00; Released August 2021)
FOR NCDOT PROJECTS
2A
WBS Element: BP9.R006
TIP/Prof No: SF-280246 County(ies): Davidson Page 1 of 2
General Project Information
WBS Element:
BP9.R006 ITIP Number: SF-28 2246 Project Type: JBridge Replacement I Date: 01/24/2024
NCDOT Contact:
Galen Cail, PE
Contractor) Designer:
WSP - Charles Heafner, PE
Address:
Hydraulics Unit
Address:
1001 Morehead Square Drive
1000 Birch Ridge Road
Suite 610
Raleigh NC 27610
Charlotte, NC 28203
Phone:
919-707-6711
Phone:
704-342-5409
Email:
gcail(cbncdot.goy
Email:
charles.heafne1bwsD.2om
City/Town:
Denton
County(ies):
Davidson
River Basin(s):
Yadkin -Pee Dee
CAMACounty?
I No
Wetlands within Project Limits?
No
Project Description
Project Length (lin. miles or feet):
0.07 mi Surrounding Land Use: 1RURAL
Proposed Project
Existing Site
Project Built -Upon Area (ac.)
0.5 lac.
0.2 Jac.
Typical Cross Section Description:
Proposed Roadway is from -L- Station 13+85 to 15+27.5 and -L- 16+32.5 to 17+53.7 - Travel lanes
2-10' Travel Lanes. The existing bridge is a precast concrete cored slab with 2 Spans
at 1 V-0" with varying Shoulders with varying side slopes. The proposed bridge is 21" and 24"
@ 45'-3.5" ppc caps on steel piles
cored slabs with 4'-0" end bents. The proposed bridge is 33'-0" out to out and 30'-10" of clear
roadway
Annual Avg Daily Traffic (veh/hrlday):
I Design/Future: 2250 1 Year: 12021
Existing: 1 2250 Year: 1 2022
General Project Narrative:
This project is a bridge replacement with toe protection and riprap on embankment to stablize the fill slopes. The proposed bridge 2 spans 24" cored slab 1 @70' and 1 @35' . The
(Description of Minimization of Water
bridge has 4'-0" end bent caps with class II riprap spill thru slopes. The drainage is comprised of an traffic bearing flat grate with a 15" pipes that outlets into a riprap pad.
Quality Impacts)

I lighway North Carolina Department of Transportation
Stormwatcr {a
_ Highway Stormwater Program
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN o
(Version 3.00; Released August 2021) FOR NCDOT PROJECTS
WBS Element: BP9.R006 TIP/Pro' No.: SF-280246 Count ies : Davidson Page 2 of 2
General Project Information
Waterbody Information
Surface Water Body (1): Lick Creek
NCDWR Stream Index No.:
12-126-(3)
NCDWR Surface Water Classification for Water Body
Primary Classification:
Water Supply IV (WS-IV)
Supplemental Classification:
Other Stream Classification:
Impairments:
None
Aquatic T&E Species?
No I Comments:
NRTR Stream ID:
SA
Buffer Rules in Effect: N/A
Project Includes Bridge Spanning Water Body?
Yes
Deck Drains Discharge Over Buffer? N/A
Dissi ator Pads Provided in Buffer? INo
Deck Drains Discharge Over Water Body?
No
(If yes, provide justification in the General Project Narrative)
(If yes, describe in the General Project Narrative; if no, justify in the
General Project Narrative)
(If yes, provide justification in the General Project Narrative)
Surface Water Body (2): 1
NCDWR Stream Index No.:
NCDWR Surface Water Classification for Water Body
Primary Classification:
Supplemental Classification:
Other Stream Classification:
Impairments:
Aquatic T&E Species?
Comments:
NRTR Stream ID:
Buffer Rules in Effect:
Project Includes Bridge Spanning Water Body?
Deck Drains Discharge Over Buffer?
Dissipator Pads Provided in Buffer?
Deck Drains Discharge Over Water Body?
(If yes, provide justification in the General Project Narrative)
(If yes, describe in the General Project Narrative; if no, justify in the
General Project Narrative)
(If yes, provide justification in the General Project Narrative) I
Surface Water Body (3): 1
NCDWR Stream Index No.:
NCDWR Surface Water Classification for Water Body
Primary Classification:
Supplemental Classification:
Other Stream Classification:
Impairments:
Aquatic T&E Species?
Comments:
NRTR Stream ID:
Buffer Rules in Effect:
Project Includes Bridge Spanning Water Body?
Deck Drains Discharge Over Buffer?
Dissi ator Pads Provided in Buffer?
Deck Drains Discharge Over Water Body?
(If yes, provide justification in the General Project Narrative)
(If yes, describe in the General Project Narrative; if no, justify in the
General Project Narrative)
(If yes, provide justification in the General Project Narrative)

V
0
`14
04
_J
See Sheet 1A For Index of Sleets (Not Included)
See Sheet 1 B For Symbology Sheet
2308 0 2310 2311 3303
3336 `' 2346
z 1
F
466
2348'
2351 2351
8 al w
Rd
sp
3321
2351
PROJECT
2350
2434
LOCATION
22CC
3 Rtl2349
2352
Creek
1002
2504
2353
Cp
Y zrgs
=`OO
m
�zsuz
VICINITY MAP
�--�� DETOUR ROUTE
CLEARING ON THIS PROJECT SHALL BE PERFORMED
TO THE LIMITS ESTABLISHED BY METHOD III.
GRAPHIC SCALES
50 25 0 50 100
PLANS
50 25 0 50 100
PROFILE (HORIZONTAL)
10 5 0 10 20
PROFILE (VERTICAL)
DESIGN DATA
ADT 2021 = 2250
V = 60 MPH
* SUB —REGIONAL TIER
GUIDELINES
FUNC CLASS = LOCAL
STATUTORY SPEED LIMIT
55 MPH
5°Il°A°l[°]E OF NOIB°I°]H[ CAROILIINA
IDIVdSION OF HIGHWAYS
DA VID SON C 0 UNTY
LOCATION. REPLACE BRIDGE #246 ON SR 2351
(FLAT SWAMP RD) OVER LICK CREEK
TYPE OF WORK: GRADING, DRAINAGE, PAVING AND STRUCTURE
WETLAND AND SURFACE WATER IMPACTS PERMIT
BEGIN PROJECT BP9.R006
-L- POT STA. 13+85.00
IICO
GREU TL-3
TO NC 8
BEGIN BRIDGE
-L- POT STA. 15+26.31
PROJECT LENGTH
LENGTH ROADWAY PROJECT BP9.R006
LENGTH STRUCTURE PROJECT BP9.R006
TOTAL LENGTH PROJECT BP9.R006
= 0.050 MI
= 0.020 MI
= 0.070 MI
erATs
ersa Honer em�ra No,aRPBT
NQ
TOTAL
9H' !1'a
•C•
BP9.R006
1
"Am P141.Na
F-PUN.N0.
FeFI@DOx
BP9.R006.1
WA
PE
BP9.R006.2
WA
R/W & UTIL.
PERMIT DRAWING
SHEET 1 OF 4
END PROJECT BP9.R006
-1 - PhT CTA 174-F'� q7
GREU TL­37 FLAT SWAMP RD SR 2351
GREU TLC
Prepared In Me Office of
q.n.aoin srarrr
" I I F� 1500
F4X: 1.919.R3fi.4099
LI('1+..\RE NO. E 6l
FOR THE NORTH CAROEINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
2018 STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS
RONYELL THIGPEN, PE
RIGHT OF WAY DATE:
J U LY 5, 2 02 2
PROJECT ENGINEER
ERIC MISAK
LETTING DATE:
APRIL 14, 2023
PROJECT DESIGN ENGINEER
NCDOT CONTACT: DANIEL DAGENHART
DIVISION 9 BRIDGE PROGRAM MANAGER
TO HWY 109 _
HYDRAULICS ENGINEER
P.E.
SIGNATURE.
ROADWAY DESIGN
ENGINEER
P.E.
SIGNATURE -
INCOMPLETE PLANS
DO NOT USE FOR R/W ACCUI9ITWN
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED

A:::

T
2 1 A-3911 W., I Ell spil I I a H I'M I I 12
05 171111,114 MwEi I 191 ;" 0 11 Kim I I m 05
FFA� ji A IRT-,4'41 FfA�PjCJT.�;: 47�e
ANNEI'll
4 N, ll R II WAI OSPI

WETLAND AND SURACE WATER IMPACTS SUMMARY
WETLAND IMPACT6 SURFACE WATER IMPACTS
Site
No.
Station
(From/To)
Structure
Size / Type
Permanent
Fill In
Wetlands
(ac)
Temp.
Fill In
Wetlands
(ac)
Excavation
in
Wetlands
(ac)
Mechanized
Clearing
in Wetlands
(ac)
Hand
Clearing
in
Wetlands
(ac)
Permanent
SW
impacts
(ac)
Temp.
SW
impacts
(ac)
Existing
Channel
Impacts
Permanent
(ft)
Existing
Channel
Impacts
Temp.
(ft)
Natural
Stream
Design
(ft)
1
-L- 15+62 TO 15+82
PIER REMOVAL/RIPRAP ON
EMBANKMENT**
< 0.01
< 0.01
51
20
1
-L-15+87 TO 15+94
RIPRAP ON EMBANKMENT
< 0.01
< 0.01
42
TOTALS*:
0.01
0.01
51
62
0
*Rounded totals are sum of actual impacts
NOTES:
**Exisitng Channel Permanent Impacts accounts for total LF of stream impacted due to pier removal and riprap on embankment
Revised 2018 Feb

NCDOT Division 9 Bridge Replacement
Bridge 246 on SR 2351 (Flat Swamp Road) over Lick Creek— PCN for NWP 14
Attachment D
Historic Architecture and Landscapes No Survey
Required Form; Archaeological No Survey
Required Form; Tribal Coordination

Prc'rev Trnekrirg Nu. rfnlowdl Ch4
17-B5-I?Q60
HISTORIC ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPES
NO SURVEY REQUIRED FORM
This firm iupereedes that daft d 23 .fungi 2017
J This form only pertains to I istoric Architecture and Landscapes for this project. It
is not valid foF Archaeological Resources- You must consult separateIy with the
Archaeology Group.
PROJECT INFORMATION
Projecl No;
County:
Davidson
f11'BaS o.:
178P,9.R.92
Document
Type:
Fed. A id No:
i
Frrrrding:
X state Federal
Federal
Permif s :
X Yes No
Permit
T e s
USAGE
Pro'ect Descri door. Replace Bridge Number 246 on SR 2351 (Flat Swamp Road) over
Lick Creep (off -site detour planned). Expanded study area March 2020.
SUMMARY OF HISTORIC ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPES REVIEW
Descr_ipfian of review activities, results, and concinsions_ HPOWeb revJewed on 22 June 2017 and
22 March 2020 and yielded no NR, 51., I.D, DE, or SS properties In the Area of Potential Effects (APE).
Davidson County current GIS mapp€ng, aerfal photography, and tax information indicated an APE of
cultivated fields and woodland with several resources dating to the 20OQs-2010s (►fewed 221une 2017
and 11 March 2020), Bridge No. 246, built in 1968, is not eligible for the National Register as It Is not
representat€ve of any distinctive engineering or aesthetic type. Googie Maps "Street View" confirmed the
absence of critical historic structures and landscapes in the APE (viewed 22 June 2017 and 11 March
2020).
No architectural survey is re uIred for the project as cu rrently defined.
Why the available inoryaafr-orr proviries c reliable basis for reavvpsably prediclipirtheir there
are, no rrrridenfr'f ed sienificant Jrlsroric atriritectrrral or landscape resources in flee uroiect
area: APE extends 675 feet from either end of the existing bridge (-E) and 350 feet to either side of
the Sid 2351 (Flat Swamp Road) centerline (N-S) to encompass proposed comtruction activities and
possibte impacts. The comprehensive county architectural survey (1981) and later Investigatiar)5 recorded
no properties in the project area (Paul 0. Towrtr &WdJ ?gMe8ankccurM : MeAa*rtE7er,WMti Iauya Das� Cou ty,
Ab th C&nAw (€Lexington, Hc1: The Davldson Courity Historical Awssudabon, 1987)). County GISjtax materials and other
visuals clearly illustrate the absence of architectural or landscape resources of concern in the APE. No
National Register -listed properties are located within the APE or along the proposed off -site detour route.
Should the design of the project change, please notify NCDOT Historic Architecture
as a
SUP Olin* D4J1,U1f1ENTA7FION
Maps) ❑Previous Surrey Info. ❑I'hutoi []Correspondence ❑Design Plans
31►1111CI1`JI-�I'd C101II0]IW11t WIIIIIKOWIIIJ:75 � C . ►
is A rch i teqaV 4ul"dsca} s -- N0 SURVL`,C REQ U I RE D
N DOT Architectural Historian
Date
rrisrarwArdweerk"and 1.LNd%c:serrsryjerr;rMara.7i&I.Worlaf mPtWehrm(hy, ordin1ho-2%7Frv&o,umabc4gree,ne,rr.

je
f
I -D?
Proji
- F1
-'3 I
� i r
h
x] 4
C I
J jr /'N-4
1
err ACK MOUNTA11V''`-
,-
1
Den on.
r
�I 4
AU
}
dP rr
f 2 Miles
Legend
I I
Detour Route
Saurryr,; Esri, HERE, Garmfn, lntermap, Invameni FS f arp„ GEECO, U5C5, FAO,
NPS, NRCAN, GaoSam, IGN, ►(ada ter NL, Ordrrance Survey, Eari Japan. METI.
ESFI Ch na ; Hung Kong}, (a) CpenSlreetMap conlrihulnrs, and the GIS User
Carrrm�rrrty � .,
wr+nlrVicinity Map
Replace Bridge No. 246 on SR 2351 (Flat Swamp
Road) over trick Creek Ff ur 1
1 B8 #178P-9. .9
Davidson County
-rrmckol o, 0 - O D June 2019

IIIR
r -
NW,_- �4
. . . . . . . . . ...... . . . . .
. M1
4
4'
�r
i
4r
Study Area
x'
T4 . % ` UISGS The N ational Map- Nallanal Boundaries Daiaset, National Elaviiion Dartant,
U 0.25 0.5 Miles Geographic Namas Iniarmairan System, Nalle m? Rydrography Oataset, Natonal
Land Cwrer Dstatrese, Natlonal Structures �)6Uauat, and National Transportation
Dataaat; U.S. Census Buaau- TiGEIVLine; HERE toed data_ Data Reft"hedJuly.
2017.
Study Area Map
Replace Bridge No. 246 on SIR 2351 (Flat Swamp
Road) over Lick Creep Figure
WBS #17BR9.R.92
Davidson County
LILOq N19. l7 67- D06o June 2019

Prn}ea prackrrrg ho,;
17-05-0060
Resubrnft
;¢+ NO ARCH AF0LOG ICAL S URVEY REQUIRED FORM
Thus form only pertains to ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES for this project, It is not
4 & �¢ valid for Historic Architecture and Landscapes. You must consult separately with the
Historic Architecture and Landscapes Group -
PROJECT INFORMATION
Pr,nj,.l u;
i BLS" No:
F:A, No;
Bridge 246
17HP.9.R.92
Federal Permit Require[
County:
Docurneni:
David,gon
Federal CI
Funding: Z state ❑ )Federal
Yes ❑ No Perma Type, USACE
Project Dercripriam- The project involves the replacement of Bridge No, 246 on SR 2351 (Flat Swamp
l?A) over I..ick Creek in Davidson Counter, North Carolina. The archaeological Area of Potential Effects
(APE) measures 11,03 acres in area.
SUMMARY OF CULTURAL RESOURCES REVIEW
Brief desefipfion of review activities, resells of review, mid coaclusio►is:
Permitting arLd funding information was reviewed for determining the level of archaeological €nput required by
state and federal laws. Based on the submitted "requesIt for cultural resources review" farm, the proiect is state -
funded with federal permit Interaction, As such, Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act wlII apply
and the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) will serve as the lead federal agency. Next, construction
design and other data was examined (when applicable) to define the charactef and extent of potential impacts to
the ground surfaces ern bra eing the project locale. Because the project appears to be an in=place replacement of
the structure, the APE was primarily designed to capture any federal permit area or any areas of potential ground
disturbing act€vity-
Once an APE was outlined, a map review and site file search was conducted utillzing resources from the Office of
State Archaeology (05A) on Thursday, April 2, 2020, No previously documented archaeoiagiral sites are located in
the APE or directly adjacent, nor are any sites situated within a 2-mile radius of the designated project study area.
Examination of National Register of Histarlc Places (NRHP), State Study Listed (SLR, Locally Designated (LI)),
Determined Eligible (DE), and Surveyed SIte (SS) properties employing resources ava€table on the NCSHPO webs iteh
is important in establishing the lacatlon of noteworthy historic occupatlons relater! to a perspective construction
Impact area. A crass -check of these mapped resources concluded that none of the above properties with potential
contributing archaeological components are situated wlthin or proximal to the APE. In ddditlon, historic reaps of
Davidson County were appraised to identify former structure locations, land use patterns, or other Confirmation of
historic occupation In the project viclnity. Archaeological/historical reference materials were Inspected as well - in
general, the cultural bac4round review established that no previously recorded archaeological sites, NRHP
properties, or cemeterles are located within the API`. Based on cultural -historical factors, the APE Is cDasidered to
have a Jow potential for the documentation of archa eotcgi cal resources.
Further, topographic, geologlr, flood boundary, and NR{S soil survey reaps (CK Ba13) were referenced to evaluate
pedeological, Seomorphologlcal, hydrological, and other environmental determinants that may have resulted in
past occupation at this location. Aerial and on -ground photographs (NCDOT Spatial Data VlewerM and the C2oDgle
Street View map application (when amenable) were also examinedfutilized For additlonal assessment of
disturbances, bath natural and human induced, which compramise the Integrity of archaeological sites.
Erivimnmental/impact factors da riot suggest a heightened potential for archaeologlcal resource recovery,
-+Vu AR HARXOGY&JRMY RggUIRLD"JbrurfOr lilt An"wA1dMj)w Tmor.Tarlaohm Pmjrcfs nF Qnrj1jp-die dw 144$ 1rFWowm9k Agwxmt.
I are

Projed Fmckhag No.:
Resubmit
Brief Explanarlon oj'why llte aPailohle hifornialion provides it rellrrhle husls for reasonably predicting
Mal there are ito sixldeiff fled historic properties in the APE:
Nearly 3/4 of the APE is underlain by frequently flooded and sornewhat Poorly drained soils. The remaining ground
surfaces, located In the western project quadrants, though well -drained, have suffered Impacts related to tree
farming and residential landscaping and construction, Intact and preserved archaeologl ca I dep*sits eligible for the
NA HP are unlikely to be present In the defined APE. Since the current project arua is sktuated in a frequently
flooded area, the APE is considered to have Very low archaeological site potEintlal_ As currently proposed as a
state -funded project with federal permit interaction, no further consultation is advocated, A Flnding of "no
archaeological survey required" is comAdered approprlate,
This project falls within a North CaraIIna County In which the Catawba Indian Nation has expressed an Interest=
Davldson County. It is recommended that you contact each federal agency involved with your project to determine
thelr Section 106 Tribal consultation requirements,
SUPPORT UOCClMENTAIION
"See attached: Z Map(s) 0 Previous Survey Info
❑ Photocopy of Cminty Survey Notes,
FINDILNG BY NCDOT AR HAEOLOGIST
�Vf1.4RCL#. EOLOCTYSURVEYREOli}RED
NCDOT
❑ Mows ❑Correspondence
Other:
z - 61IE7 t�
"No.RCHAROIDGYSURWi`YAVURED"ft-finrtheAM-ded.Wura' ProkOSar12wiyrraFni692015Po%FmmaujrAgrffAvhV
2 of

4�'
a
I�� c4t08 Chi-4
Proji
r
u i
Y
A; �6
P 5`
r � �
f } ',.Bridge No. 246°
� x� tick Ce- - ,
r
Den
1 IF
k
i� 4y r. -� cnh,n Rd
rc l + r
x
" C7
Miles
Legend
A
' Detour ROULe
n
Saureea- Earl, HERE. Garmin. Intormep, Increment P Corp., CESCO, USGS, FAO, J
HPS, NROAN. GaRaw, IGN. Kmdei> W NL, Ordnanoe %my, Evi Japan, M E71, 101
EwR China {Hong KOrtg}, (0) CpanSkreaWap aor*IbuWr8, end the CIS User
Community 13w u
Vicinity Map
'rogn4 Replace Bridge No. 246 on SIR 231 (Flat Swamp
•� Road) over Lick Creek Figure 1
WBS # ❑
Davidson Counter
June 2019

N '
Q 0,25 O.5 Mlles
Study Area
USGS The Nwimnal Mop: National Ro jndarses t}aiasei, National Elevalion. Dalasot,
Geographic Names Inforrnaiian System, Naiionai Hydrography Daiaaet, National
Lend Cover Database, National 8truetur95 Daiasm, and National Transportation
Daiaset; U-S. Cen6Us 94rregij - TI5r R?Lin9; Hl="Fir= Road Data. Data Refroshad J uty,
2t}1 T_
Study Area Map
sr "°R' Replace Bridge No. 246 an SR 21 (Flat Swamp
Road) over Lick Creek
WBS #17BR 9.R.92
Davidson Counter
,dune 2019
Figure

Portion of the Grist Mountain topographic map illustrating the location and boundaries
of the archaeological APE in Davidson County, North Carolina,

BaB—Kadin channery slit I darn, 2 to 8 percent slopes
Map UnIt Setting
+ Notionol map unit symbol. ?t8CN
• Elevotianr300to1,100feet
• Mear? onnuolprecipitotiorF, 43 to 49 inches
+ Mean ann uai air temperature, 59 to 63 degrees F
Fros t-free per+od_ 215 to 245 days
+ Forrrrlandefossi#7cotion Farm lando#statewide lmportance
Map Unit Connpasitaon
■ 8vdin and sfrn fry soois_ 90 pe reent
+ Mirror comporrerrts:10Vercerit
M Estrmares are based an observabons, de5criptiarr5, and tronsects of the mapLmit.
Descrlptfan of Oadfn
Setting
• Londform; interfluves
+ Loadform position (two-dimensional): Summit, shoulder
+ tandform pasrtion (three-dimens Onal),1nterfWe
+ Down-siopeshope:LInear
* Across -Slope shape; Convex
■ Parentrrmoterial:Reslduumweathe red from metasedImentaryrock and/ormetavoicanlcs
Typical profile
* A -0 to 6inches; channery slit loam
+ 6 t - 6 to 35 inches; silty clay
• Cr - 35 to 43 inches- bedrock
0 R - 43 to .53 inches, bedroc k

Propertiles and qualities
• Slope, 2 to 8 percent
M Depth to restrtrtt ve feature: 24 tD 40 Inches to paraIIthlc bedrock; 40 to 59 inches t0 IltMC bedrock
■ Noruma drairage class: Well drained
• Runoff class; Medlum
* Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to high (0-00 to 1-98 in f fr
* Depth to water table, More than 80 Inches
a Frequency of flooding; None
■ Frequency of pondfng- None
• AVOHoble water storoge IF; profile: low (about 6.0 Inches)
OkA—Oakboro silt loam, (Ito 2 per€ent slopes, frequently flooded
Map Unit Setting
■ ,Notion ai inap uni[ symbol_ 2 mnd7
• Elevation, 200 to 1,400 feet
• Mean ann" pnedpitotiwr, 37 to 60 Inches
IP Mean urinuO air ternperaeure, 59 to 66 degrees F
■ Frost free period. 200 to 240 days
• Formland dossifcatiorr Prime farmland If drained and either protected from flooding or not frequently flooded
during the growing season
Map Unit Composition
• Dakboroand sirrrrlarsods: 85percent
• Minor components- 4 percent
• E5tomate5 ore based on ebservcr fans, descrlppons, and aunsecls of the mapan t,
Descriptla n c f Oakhoro
Setting
• tandform: Flood plains
• Down -slope Shape, Linear
• Across -Slope shape- Unear
f Parentmatericl; Loamy alluvium derived from Igneous and rnetamarphlc rock
Typical profile
• A - 0 to 10 inches: silt loam
a 8w -10 to 46 h3ches, sl Ity clay loam
• R - 46 to 80Inches, u nweathered bedrock
properties and qualities
• Slope: 0 to 2 percent
• Oepth to restrictive feoturt: 40 to 601aches to IlthIC bedrock
• Natural drainage cuss- Moderately well drained
• Runoff class; Very low
* Capacity of the most limitFng foyer to transm t worer (Ksat): Very low to high (Q-OD to 1-98 inf hr)
• Depth to worer ruble_ About 12 to 2e4 Inches
* Fregereacy of flooding,• Frequent
• Frequency of ponding, None
a AvaiJoble water xtor•age In profile: H Igh (about 9.0 I naves)
KyB—Kirkspy silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Map UnIt Setting
• Notional wrap unit symboi:3rge
• EteVatibn-r 200 to 650 feet
* Mean opnual precipitatfon, 37 to 60 Inches
• A4ear) onnuol Oar temperatures 59 to 56 degrees F
r Frost free period; 200 to 240 days
0 Formfund dosOficatfar+, Al l areas are prl me farmland

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Roy COOPER
GOVERNOR
March 4, 2020
Dr. Wenonah Haire
Catawba Indian Nation
Tribal Historic Preservation Office
1536 Tom Steven Road
Rock Hill, SC 29730
Dear Dr. Haire,
J. ERIC BOYETTE
SECRETARY
The North Carolina Department of Transportation is starting the project development, environmental, and
engineering studies for the replacement of Bridge No. 246 on SR 2351 (Flat Swamp Road) over Lick Creek
in Davidson County as project 17BP.9.R.92. The US Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE) is the lead
federal agency for compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and Section 106 of the
National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) and a Permit is anticipated under the Section 404 Process with
the USAGE. The project vicinity map is attached. The coordinates of this project are approximately
35.637104,-80150966.
We would appreciate any information you might have that would be helpful in evaluating potential
environmental impacts of the project including recommendation of alternates to be studied. Your comments
may be used in the preparation of a NEPA/ State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Environmental
Document.
In accordance with Section 106 of the NHPA, we also request that you inform us of any historic properties
of traditional religious or cultural importance that you are aware of that may be affected by the proposed
project. Be assured that, in accordance with confidentiality and disclosure stipulations in Section 304 of
the NHPA, we will maintain strict confidentiality about certain types of information regarding historic
properties.
Please respond by March 31st so that your comments can be used in the scoping of this project. If you have
any questions concerning this project, or would like any additional information, please contact me at
[e-mail] or [phone].
Thank you,
Amy���
Euliss
NCDOT Division 9 Environmental Officer
cc: Matt Wilkerson, NCDOT Archaeology Team Leader
Nicholle Braspennickx, USACE Project Manager
Daniel Dagenhart, NCDOT Division 9 Bridge Program Manager
Mailing Address: Telephone: [phone] Location:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Fax: [phone] SILAS CREEK PARKWAY
DIVISION 9 Customer Service: 1-877-368-4968 WINSTON-SALEM, NC 27127
375 SILAS CREEK PARKWAY
WINSTON SALEM, NC 27127
Website: ncdot.gov

C I
Study Area
N USGS The National Map: National Boundaries Dataset, National Elevation Dataset,
1 0 0.25 0.5 Miles Geographic Names Information System, National Hydrography Dataset, National
Land Cover Database, National Structures Dataset, and National Transportation
Dataset; U.S. Census Bureau - TIGER/Line; HERE Road Data. Data Refreshed July,
2017.
Study Area Map
�'�� Replace Bridge No. 246 on SR 2351 (Flat Swamp
�. .� Road) over Lick Creek Figure 1
WBS #17BP.9.R.92
Davidson County
June 2019

NCDOT Division 9 Bridge Replacement
Bridge 246 on SR 2351 (Flat Swamp Road) over Lick Creek— PCN for NWP 14
Attachment E
Categorical Exclusion

DocuSign Envelope ID: 4865B8A8-B371-4D46-8D93-22C7156A6651
Type I or II Categorical Exclusion Action Classification Form
STIP Project No.
WBS Element
Federal Project No.
A. Project Description:
BP9.R006
N/A
BP9.R006 (previously 17BP.9.R.92) proposes to replace Bridge No. 246 on Flat Swamp Road (SR
2351) over Lick Creek in Davidson County. The existing bridge is a 2@45', 3.5" span precast
prestressed concrete cored slabs. The replacement bridge is proposed to be a three span 1@ 25' —
21" cored slab, 1@ 60' — 24" cored slab, 1@ 25' — 21" cored slab structure with 11-foot travel lanes
and paved shoulders ranging between four to five feet in width.
B. Description of Need and Purpose:
The purpose of the project is to replace existing Bridge No. 246. Though not considered structural
deficient or functionally obsolete, the bridge condition is beginning to deteriorate with the 2020
Structure Safety Report for the bridge indicating delay and section loss on the existing abutments and
the substructure having a rating of five out of nine.
C. Categorical Exclusion Action Classification:
Type I(A) - Ground Disturbing Action
D. Proposed Improvements:
28. Bridge rehabilitation, reconstruction, or replacement or the construction of grade separation to
replace existing at -grade railroad crossings, if the actions meet the constraints in 23 CFR
771.117(e)(1-6).
E. Special Project Information:
Alternatives Discussion
No Build. The No Build Alternative would result in eventually closing the road, which is unacceptable
given the necessary property access Flat Swamp Road provides.
Rehabilitation. Due to the age and extensive deterioration of the existing bridge, rehabilitation would
result in effectively replacing the bridge.
Replace In -Place with Onsite Detour. An onsite detour route was not evaluated due to the presence
of an acceptable offsite detour route.
Replace In -Place with Staged Construction. Staged construction was not considered because of
the availability of an acceptable offsite detour route.
Replace on New Alignment. Given that the alignment for Flat Swamp Road is acceptable, and a new
alignment would unnecessarily increase project impacts, replacing the bridge on new alignment was
not considered as an alternative.
v2019.1 BP9.R006 Type I(A) CE Page 1

DocuSign Envelope ID: 4865B8A8-B371-4D46-8D93-22C7156A6651
Replace In -Place with Offsite Detour (Preferred). Bridge No. 246 is proposed for replacement on
the existing alignment. Traffic would be detoured offsite during the construction period (Figure 1). The
offsite detour route for this project (approximately seven miles in length) would include Flat Swamp
Road (SR 2351), Buie Road (SR 2350), Denton Road (SR 1002), and NC Highway 8.
Cultural Resources
The Historic Architecture and Landscapes No Survey Required Form for BP9.R006, dated March 11,
2020, indicated there are no previously recorded historic sites within the Area of Potential Effects
(APE) and no structures over 50 years in age were identified within the APE. Therefore, a Historic
Architecture and Landscapes survey was determined to not be required for the project.
The No Archaeological Survey Requested Form for BP9.R006, dated April 2, 2020, indicated no
previously recorded archaeological sites within the APE. Due to the presence of frequently flooded
and poorly drained soils and impacts related to tree farming and residential landscaping and
construction, there is limited potential for archaeological sites. An archaeological survey was
determined to not be required for the project.
A Start of Study letter was mailed to the Catawba Indian Nation in March 2020. As of March 2022, a
response was not received. If a response is received, it will be placed on the project SharePoint site.
Documentation of the cultural resource reviews can be found on the project SharePoint site.
School and Emergency Service Transportation
While property along Flat Swamp Road is predominantly undeveloped, there some residences that
indicate the road may be used by school and emergency service vehicles. The proposed detour route
would alter travel patterns and increase travel time for these vehicles during construction. Responses
were not received from Davidson County Schools or Davidson County Department of Emergency
Services during project scoping.
Bicvcle and Pedestrian Facilities
There are no existing bicycle or pedestrian facilities within the project study area. In accordance with
the 2019 North Carolina Department of Transportation's (NCDOT) Complete Streets Policy, no on -
street bicycle or pedestrian facilities were recommended in High Point Metropolitan Planning
Organization (MPO) 2020 Comprehensive Transportation Plan (CTP), the MPO's 2045 Metropolitan
Transportation Plan (MTP), or in locally adopted plans. A greenway along Lick Creek and on the north
side of Flat Swamp Road west of the creek is proposed in the High Point MPO 2020 CTP and 2045
MTP. Coordination with the MPO in 2019 indicted the proposed greenway was unfunded and planning
efforts had not begun on the facility. Therefore, accommodation for the greenway was not included in
this project. The need for bicycle or pedestrian facilities was not demonstrated by local stakeholders
during project development.
Although on -street bicycle and pedestrian facilities are not recommended by applicable planning
documents, a memorandum prepared by NCDOT's Integrated Mobility Unit in October 2019
recommended four -foot paved shoulders to accommodate potential bicyclists and pedestrians. A copy
of the memorandum can be found on the project SharePoint site. The project satisfies this
recommendation by including shoulders at least four feet in width.
A Complete Streets Project Sheet was submitted for approval in March 2022.
GeoEnvironmental
The Phase I GeoEnvironmental Report for the project, issued, indicated no sites of concern within the
project study area. A copy of the report can be found on the project SharePoint site.
v2019.1 BP9.R006 Type I(A) CE Page 2

DocuSign Envelope ID: 4865B8A8-B371-4D46-8D93-22C7156A6651
Right -of -Way Impacts
Based on preliminary plans, the project would result in 0.33 acres of right-of-way acquisition. These
impacts would occur on undeveloped land and would not result in relocation.
Cost Estimate
Preliminary cost estimates for the project from November 2020 are listed in Table 1.
Table 1: Preliminary Project Costs
Right -of -Way
$70,000
Construction Costs
$900,000
Total Costs
$970,000
Anticipated Permits and Agency Coordination
Water Resources
Delineations for potential jurisdictional waters occurred in July 2019 and are documented in the
Natural Resources Technical Report (NRTR) that can be found on the project SharePoint site. One
creek, Lick Creek, was delineated and is classified as a WS-IV resource. Lick Creek is listed in the
Final 2020 Final 303(d) List of Impaired Waters as the result of exceeding the criteria for benthos and
fish community. Wetlands were not identified during the delineation. Using preliminary right-of-way
limits, approximately 104 feet of stream impacts are anticipated.
A Nationwide or Regional General Permit from the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE),
along with a corresponding 401 Certification is anticipated for this project.
Endangered Species Coordination
As documented in the project NRTR, a survey for potential habitat during July 2019 indicated that
suitable habitat for the Northern long-eared bat (NLEB) (Myotis septentrionalis) is present within the
project study area and on Bridge No. 246. Although the bridge represents suitable habitat, a review of
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program records, on June 19, 2019 indicated no known NLEB
occurrence within one mile of the study area. Furthermore, a review of the United States Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS) Asheville Ecological Services Field Office web page at
www.fws.gov/asheville/htmis/project review/NLEB in WNC.html on June 19, 2019 indicated that
watersheds with known maternity trees or hibernation sites for this species do not occur in Davidson
County.
The USACE will act as the lead agency for issues related to the NLEB. The USACE has developed a
Standard Local Operating Procedure for Endangered Species (SLOPES) to address NLEB when they
are the lead agency, which NCDOT will be required to follow for this project. This procedure applies to
projects in NCDOT Divisions 9-14. The requirements of the SLOPES for NLEB will be completed prior
to Let and should be submitted to USACE. Final design, tree clearing, and percussive activities
information should be provided in the permit application. Due to the presence of suitable habitat within
the study area, a biological conclusion of May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect was determined.
The existing bridge will be surveyed for the NLEB will take place during the 2022 survey window (May
15- August 15).
Suitable habitat for Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii) was identified during the field
surveys in support of the NRTR. Dedicated surveys for the species were conducted in October 2016
and no individuals were found. A review of North Carolina Natural Heritage Program records in July
2019 indicated no occurrences of Schweinitz's sunflower within one mile of the project study area.
v2019.1 BP9.R006 Type I(A) CE Page 3

DocuSign Envelope ID: 4865B8A8-B371-4D46-8D93-22C7156A6651
Therefore, due to the lack of individuals found during the October 2016 survey, a biological conclusion
of No Effect was determined.
Survey for the bald eagle was conducted in February 2017 and concluded the project would not affect
the species. A review of North Carolina Natural Heritage Program records in June 2019 did not reveal
occurrences of the species within one mile of the project study area.
Floodplains
The study area has approximately 6.67 acres of the Lick Creek 100-year floodplains. Hydraulic
modeling will be required to determine if the proposed bridge replacement would affect the base flood
elevation of Lick Creek.
v2019.1 BP9.R006 Type I(A) CE Page 4

DocuSign Envelope ID: 4865B8A8-B371-4D46-8D93-22C7156A6651
F. Project Impact Criteria Checklists:
F2. Ground Disturbing Actions — Type I (Appendix A) & Type II (Appendix B)
Proposed improvement(s) that fit Type I Actions (NCDOT-FHWA CE Programmatic Agreement,
Appendix A) including 2, 3, 6, 7, 9, 12, 18, 21, 22 (ground disturbing), 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, &/or 30;
&/or Type 11 Actions (NCDOT-FHWA CE Programmatic Agreement, Appendix B) answer the project
impact threshold questions (below) and questions 8 — 31.
• If any question 1-7 is checked "Yes" then NCDOT certification for FHWA approval is required.
• If any question 8-31 is checked "Yes" then additional information will be required for those questions
in Section G.
PROJECT IMPACT THRESHOLDS
Yes
No
(FHWA signature required if any of the questions 1-7 are marked "Yes".)
1
Does the project require formal consultation with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
❑
2
(USFWS) or National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)?
2
Does the project result in impacts subject to the conditions of the Bald and Golden
❑
R1
Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA)?
3
Does the project generate substantial controversy or public opposition, for any
❑
R1
reason, following appropriate public involvement?
4
Does the project cause disproportionately high and adverse impacts relative to low-
❑
R1
income and/or minority populations?
5
Does the project involve a residential or commercial displacement, or a substantial
❑
R1
amount of right of way acquisition?
6
Does the project require an Individual Section 4(f) approval?
❑
[1
Does the project include adverse effects that cannot be resolved with a
7
Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) under Section 106 of the National Historic
❑
R1
Preservation Act (NHPA) or have an adverse effect on a National Historic
Landmark (NHL)?
If any question 8-31 is checked "Yes" then additional information will be required for those questions in
Section G.
Other Considerations
Yes
No
8
Is an Endangered Species Act (ESA) determination unresolved or is the project
❑
R1
covered by a Programmatic Agreement under Section 7?
9
Is the project located in anadromous fish spawning waters?
❑
[1
Does the project impact waters classified as Outstanding Resource Water (ORW),
10
High Quality Water (HQW), Water Supply Watershed Critical Areas, 303(d) listed
[1
❑
impaired water bodies, buffer rules, or Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (SAV)?
11
Does the project impact Waters of the United States in any of the designated
❑
R1
mountain trout streams?
12
Does the project require a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Individual
❑
R1
Section 404 Permit?
13
Will the project require an easement from a Federal Energy Regulatory
❑
Commission FERC licensed facility?
v2019.1 BP9.R006 Type I(A) CE Page 5

DocuSign Envelope ID: 4865B8A8-B371-4D46-8D93-22C7156A6651
Other Considerations for Type I and II Ground Disturbing Actions (continued)
Yes
No
Does the project include a Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act
14
(NHPA) effects determination other than a No Effect, including archaeological
❑
2
remains?
15
Does the project involve GeoEnvironmental Sites of Concerns such as gas
❑
2
stations, dry cleaners, landfills, etc.?
Does the project require work encroaching and adversely affecting a regulatory
16
floodway or work affecting the base floodplain (100-year flood) elevations of a
❑
2
water course or lake, pursuant to Executive Order 11988 and 23 CFR 650 subpart
A?
17
Is the project in a Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) county and substantially
❑
2
affects the coastal zone and/or any Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
18
Does the project require a U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) permit?
❑
2
19
Does the project involve construction activities in, across, or adjacent to a
❑
2
designated Wild and Scenic River present within the project area?
20
Does the project involve Coastal Barrier Resources Act (CBRA) resources?
❑
[1
21
Does the project impact federal lands (e.g. U.S. Forest Service (USFS), USFWS,
❑
R1
etc.) or Tribal Lands?
22
Does the project involve any changes in access control or the modification or
❑
R1
construction of an interchange on an interstate?
23
Does the project have a permanent adverse effect on local traffic patterns or
❑
R1
community cohesiveness?
24
Will maintenance of traffic cause substantial disruption?
❑
[1
25
Is the project inconsistent with the STIP, and where applicable, the Metropolitan
❑
R1
Planning Or anization's MPO's Transportation Improvement Program (TIP)?
Does the project require the acquisition of lands under the protection of Section 6(f)
of the Land and Water Conservation Act, the Federal Aid in Fish Restoration Act,
26
the Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act, Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA),
❑
R1
Tribal Lands, or other unique areas or special lands that were acquired in fee or
easement with public -use money and have deed restrictions or covenants on the
property?
27
Does the project involve Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) buyout
❑
R1
properties under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program HMGP ?
28
Does the project include a de minimis or programmatic Section 4(f)?
❑
[1
29
Is the project considered a Type I under the NCDOT Noise Policy?
❑
[1
30
Is there prime or important farmland soil impacted by this project as defined by the
❑
R1
Farmland Protection Policy Act FPPA ?
31
Are there other issues that arose during the project development process that
❑
2
affected the project decision?
v2019.1 BP9.R006 Type I(A) CE Page 6

DocuSign Envelope ID: 4865B8A8-B371-4D46-8D93-22C7156A6651
G. Additional Documentation as Required from Section F (ONLY for questions marked `Yes'):
Response to Question 10
Lick Creek is listed in the Final 2020 Final 303(d) List of Impaired Waters as the result of exceeding the
criteria for benthos and fish community. Erosion and sediment control measures should be taken during
construction to avoid impacts to water quality.
v2019.1 BP9.R006 Type I(A) CE Page 7

DocuSign Envelope ID: 4865B8A8-B371-4D46-8D93-22C7156A6651
Project Commitments (attach as Green Sheet to CE Form):
NCDOT PROJECT COMMITMENTS
WBS Element BP9.R006
Replacement of Bridge No. 246 on SR 2351 over Lick Creek
Davidson County
Federal Aid Project No. N/A
NCDOT Division 9
• Surveys for the Northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis) and other bat species will occur
during the 2022 survey window (May 15 — August 15).
• Survey for Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii) will occur during the 2022 survey
window (late August through October).

DocuSign Envelope ID: 4865B8A8-B371-4D46-8D93-22C7156A6651
I. Categorical Exclusion Approval:
STIP Project No. BP9.R006
WBS Element BP9.R006
Federal Project No. N/A
Prepared By:
❑omiNgnedtry:
3/15/2022E Di
A�4�r
Date Katharine Mather, AICP
WSP
Prepared For: Highways Division 9
Reviewed By: r—Doouagned by
3/15/2022 t
L
--yes±ssl�sr_._a6--
Date Amy Euliss, Division 9 PDEA Engineer
North Carolina Department of Transportation
• If NO grey boxes are checked in Section F (pages 2
[� Approved and 3), NCDOT approves the Type I or Type II
Categorical Exclusion.
• If ANY grey boxes are checked in Section F (pages 2
❑ Certified and 3), NCDOT certifies the Type I or Type II
Categorical Exclusion for FHWA approval.
• If classified as Type III Categorical Exclusion.
Doco8lyiiad 4:
3/15/2022 �y+�
Date S. P. Ivey, PE, Division 9 Engineer
North Carolina Department of Transportation
FHWA Approved: For Projects Certified by NCDOT (above), FHWA signature required.
Date for John F. Sullivan, III, PE, Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Note: Prior to ROW or Construction authorization, a consultation may be required (please see
Section Vll of the NCDOT-FHWA CE Programmatic Agreement for more details).
v2019.1 BP9.R006 Type I(A) CE Page 9

DocuSign Envelope ID: 4865B8A8-B371-4D46-8D93-22C7156A6651
Appendix: Attachments
A. Figures
v2019.1 BP9.R006 Type I(A) CE Page 10

DocuSign Envelope ID: 4865B8A8-B371-4D46-8D93-22C7156A6651
v
O
3
1
l} W dA
�r{Q�7�2Nh
4P
1 — `Y
L .,Bridge No. 246
� !15k _cs+ HIGH R6CK _`
/ 1
* 1 1
Denfun Rd
x
C
�Q
U
f
0 e'c 2 Miles
Proji
a
€ 4-
Den on'.
Legend
1------1
I I
1 1 Detour Route
I I
1 -----J
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 4
Community
: U .,
Vicinity Map
Replace Bridge No. 246 on SR 2351 (Flat Swamp
\1�5 ti Road) over Lick Creek
AT/ WBS Element BP9.R006
.Svr FTA- Davidson County
June 2019
Figure 1

DocuSign Envelope ID: 4865B8A8-B371-4D46-8D93-22C7156A6651
Study Area
N USGS The National Map: National Boundaries Dataset, National Elevation Dataset,
0 0.25 0.5 Miles Geographic Names Information System, National Hydrography Dataset, National
Land Cover Database, National Structures Dataset, and National Transportation
Dataset; U.S. Census Bureau - TIGER/Line; HERE Road Data. Data Refreshed July,
2017.
Study Area Map
Replace Bridge No. 246 on SR 2351 (Flat Swamp
., Road) over Lick Creek Figure 2
I, WBS Element BP9.R006
Davidson County
June 2019

/00, Oe
.01
irf- �Ilmq
��Y'r000l
0
FL
f.6j Li
vsp
04
Bridge No. 246 Study Area 000,;
rrr pe '00
HighI RockCowboy Church
Ma 'IM Ucial, CuTillumv

NCDOT Division 9 Bridge Replacement
Bridge 246 on SR 2351 (Flat Swamp Road) over Lick Creek— PCN for NWP 14
Attachment F
Section 7 Concurrence Request for the
Tricolored bat & Schweinitz's sunflower; Bridge
Survey for Bats Memo

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Roy COOPER
GOVERNOR
January 31, 2024
Ms. Holland Youngman
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, NC 28801
Subject: Section 7 Concurrence Request for the Tricolored bat
sunflower for the proposed replacement of Bridge No. 246 on Flat
2351) in Davidson County. WBS No. BP9.R006 (formerly WBS No.
Dear Ms. Youngman:
J.R. "JOEY" Homms
SECRETARY
and Schweinitz's
Swamp Road (SR
17BP.9.R006).
Please accept this Section 7 Concurrence Request for the Tricolored bat and Schweinitz's
sunflower for the proposed replacement of Bridge No. 246 on Flat Swamp Road (SR
2351) in Davidson County.
BP9.R006 (previously 17BP.9.R.92) proposes to replace Bridge No. 246 on Flat Swamp
Road (SR 2351) over Lick Creek in Davidson County. The existing bridge is a 2@45',
3.5" span precast prestressed concrete cored slabs. The replacement bridge is proposed to
be a three span 1@ 25' — 2 1 " cored slab, 1@ 60' — 24" cored slab, 1@ 25' — 2 1 " cored
slab structure with 11-foot travel lanes and paved shoulders ranging between four to five
feet in width.
The purpose of the project is to replace existing Bridge No. 246. Though not considered
structural deficient or functionally obsolete, the bridge condition is beginning to
deteriorate with the 2020 Structure Safety Report for the bridge indicating delay and
section loss on the existing abutments and the substructure having a rating of five out of
nine.
IPAC identifies one species for the USACE action area as endangered: Schweinitz's
sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii). It also identifies the Tricolored bat (Perimyotis
subflavus) as proposed endangered in the project area. NCDOT wishes to consult on the
PESU since the species is anticipated to be listed prior to construction of the project.
Mailing Address: Telephone: [phone] Location:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Fax: [phone] SILAS CREEK PARKWAY
DIVISION 9 Customer Service: 1-877-368-4968 WINSTON-SALEM, NC 27127
375 SILAS CREEK PARKWAY
WINSTON SALEM, NC 27127
Website: ncdot.gov

A Categorical Exclusion has been completed for the project in anticipation of federal
funding. The project is currently state funded, and a 404 permit will be required from the
USACE. The FHWA is the anticipated lead federal agency.
The project is scheduled to Let for construction in June 2024.
Bat Survey Report is attached.
Effects to the Tricolored Bat
Foraging„ Commuting„ and Roosting behavior for PESU/Tree Clearing
The Tricolored bat (PESU) utilizes a variety of structures, including culverts, bridges and
abandoned structures for roosting in the summer. Maternity roosts are found in a variety
of terrestrial habitats, including live and dead trees and in live and dead foliage and
lichens in the tree canopies (NaturServe 2022). There is element occurrence data for the
tricolored bat approximately 10 miles from the action area at Russell Site (NCNHP EO
ID 37588) in Montgomery County. This site element occurrence data represents a known
hibernaculum of PESU (Katherine Etchison, NCWRC-email communication).
PESU primarily utilizes abandoned caves and underground mines for their hibernacula in
the winter. They can be found emerging from the hibernacula in the spring and fall.
For PESU, habitat types that were assessed for impacts associated with the project
include roosting locations in caves, mines, and foraging/commuting locations in a variety
of woody habitats. The action area for the project includes woody habitats that qualify
as suitable habitat for PESU. There is a stream that will be impacted by the project.
Therefore, PESU foraging, commuting, and roosting behaviors may be impacted by
project construction.
There is one bridge in the action area. There are no existing culverts in the action area.
The bridge was surveyed for bats on June 30, 2022, and no evidence of bats was found.
The bridge was surveyed in accordance with the 2022 Bat SOP.
Based on the most circuitous alternative and widest slope stakes, the total limits of tree
clearing are estimated to be 0.2 acres remaining in the project study area and the length in
the limits of construction is approximately 0.7 miles. There will be clearing along the
road corridor and clearing along the streams and wetlands. Because the suitable habitat
for PESU is so broadly defined, the potential effect that clearing of woody vegetation
anywhere within the project study area may have on PESU commuting, foraging and
roosting behavior cannot be completely ruled out. However, effects from a reduction in
commuting and foraging areas are expected to be discountable and insignificant due to
the availability of alternative forested areas in the surrounding landscape. NCDOT
will commit to a tree clearing moratorium from April 1 to October 15 effective with the
listing of the tricolored bat. NCDOT will utilize Method III clearing. The clearing limits
will be marked for the contractor to meet the requirements of the NCDOT Standards.
Roosting Foraging & Commuting behavior of PESU/Lighting:

The potential exists that the addition of lighting could indirectly affect commuting bats
that may be present in the area by avoiding lit areas, causing them to use other areas,
possibly impacting individual bat fitness due to longer flight distances or threats from
predation or vehicle traffic in new routes. However, these potential effects from PESU
choosing alternate commuting areas due to additional lighting are expected to be
insignificant due to the abundance of alternative forested area that is available in the
surrounding landscape.
There is no existing street lighting in the action area. There is no proposed permanent
lighting in the action area. There will be no effect to roosting, foraging and community
behavior from permanent lighting.
Night work is not anticipated. However, if unanticipated nightwork is needed, temporary
lighting at night will be required for the safety of the construction crews, and for visibility
to complete the work. Lighting used for nighttime construction work will be limited to
what is necessary to maintain safety standards and will only be directed toward active
work areas.
Effects from temporary lighting may affect but should not adversely affect roosting,
foraging and community behavior; however, these effects will be minimized as much as
possible by directing temporary lighting away from habitat as much as feasible while
maintaining a safe working environment for workers and the travelling public.
Noise and PESU
Percussive activities for the project include may include blasting, pile driving,
jackhammers, guardrail installation and road grading. While these activities are
anticipated for the project, these activities are not anticipated within 0.5 mile of a known
PESU maternity roost. Furthermore, there are no known PESU hibernacula within 10
miles of the action area, and there are no underground mines located within the project
study area or within 0.5 mile of the project study area. No impacts to PESU roosting
habitat are anticipated from noise.
Known winter roost data was provided by NCWRC. This agency surveys areas they
have determined have potential for hibernacula. The reason that blasting information is
provided is to demonstrate due diligence for evaluating impacts associated with this
activity on habitat (winter and summer). Hibernacula locations and underground mine
data were reviewed to determine if this activity may impact winter roosting habitat for
cave dwelling bat species. This is because of the vibratory nature of percussive activities;
the percussive activity imparts energy into the substrate which may cause an impact to
bats roosting underground. This cave/subsurface mine habitat does not exist within the
project area. In addition, WRC's records do not indicate they have found any hibernacula
for PESU within the project study area. This addresses lack of winter habitat
(hibernacula) in the area. As far as the summer roosting habitat (trees), because the
spectra of traffic and construction noise do not appreciably overlap with most bat
echolocation calls or their hearing of them, echolocation in most species of bats is likely
not affected by highway noise. In addition, the dBA of natural background sounds are
within the same dBA range of the traffic and construction sounds except for the most
extreme sound level for explosives. The maximum noise level for activities that will

occur as part of this project is 112 dBA, blasting). See comparison tables from Caltrans
Effects of Traffic Noise and Road Construction on Bats report 2016.
All noise attenuates (diminishes) with distance from the source (see California
Department of Transportation 2013 & 2016 for technical analysis procedures). This
occurs through geometric spreading and signal reduction from ground and atmospheric
absorption. Attenuation also varies with source type -point sources (e.g., construction
equipment) or linear sources (e.g., highway traffic). Noise from point sources traveling
over a hard site (e.g., bare soil or rock substrate) attenuates at approximately 6 dBA for
each doubling of distance. Noise from linear sources traveling over the same site
attenuates at approximately 3 dBA per doubling of distance. If the noise travels through a
soft site (e.g., a forest or meadow), these values are reduced further by 1.5 dBA, giving
standard attenuation rates of 7 .5 dBA and 4.5 dBA, respectively, for point and linear
sources. The point source attenuation equation for determining noise levels at specific
distances from a source (construction) is dBA2 = dBAI + 10 * log10 (DO / D) 2+ a
Assuming listed bat species are roosting in nearby trees and percussive activities will
occur (112 dBA, Table 4 below), then it has been determined that the noise level at a
potential bat tree roost in the surrounding forest that is 250 feet from the project
generating the noise is 95 dBA. Therefore, we anticipate that bats exposed to the blasting
(and other percussive activities) noise associated with this project will not respond in a
meaningful or detectable manner as this is within the dBA for naturally occurring sounds
in the surrounding environment (Table 1). Please note that the blasting noise has been
used since it generates the highest noise decibels, and we do not anticipate any other
construction noises to cause the bats to respond in a meaningful or detectable manner.
The geotechnical work has been completed for this project. We will have 14 piles to
drive for the new structure. The pile driving should take 2-3 weeks to complete.

Table 1. Natural Background sounds
Sound dBA
Thunderclap
120
Thunder
110
Stream, water Ilowing
73
Surf, pounding
70
Wind. breeze through trees
62
Birds, singing
60
Wind, gusty with rustling tree foliage
55
Rainfall, maderate
50
Rainfall, light
40
Rustling leaves
40
Olympic National Forest
40
Mountaintop
35
Wilderness :ambient
35
Lake, quiet
30
Meadow, low wind conditions
3D
Insects
25
Mountain slope, open
23
Rustling leaves
20
Grand Canyon, remote trail
15
Grand Canyon at night
10
Haleakala volcano crater, no wind
5
Source: Federal Highway Administration 2dl i_
dBA = A•weiehted deeffids
Table 2. Background Noise Associated with Urban Areas of Different Population
Densities
Population Density (people/sq. mi.) dBA
30,000 +
65
10,000 -3 0,000
60
3,00 0-10,0 00
55
1,0fl0-3,000
50
30 0-1 r00 0
45
100-300
40
Source: FedereJ Transit Administration 2046_
ley = background noise level
dBA=A.weiehteddecibels

Table 3. Traffic Noise Levels (dBA) at 50' at Various Speeds and Traffic Volumes
'Traffic
Vehicle Speed (mph)
Volume (vph)
30
35
48
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
125
53
55
57
58
60
61
62
64
65
66
250
56
s8
68
G1
63
64
65
67
fib
69
540
59
61
63
64
66
67
68
70
71
72
1,040
62
64
66
67
69
76
71
73
74
75
2,040
65
67
69
70
72
73
74
76
77
78
3,040
67
69
71
72
74
75
76
77
78
79
4,000
6,6
70
73
73
75
76
77
79
80
81
5,000
6,9
71
73
74
76
77
78
80
81
82
6,040
7,0
72
74
75
77
78
79
80
81
82
Nate Noise calculations are based on the total acoustic energy generate by traffic on a straight roadway on flat,
acoustically hard terrain with 100% automobiles and no truc -Typical freeway lanes are limited to a bout 2,000
passenger cars per lanes per hour. These calculations do not take into account the effect -of traffic on multiple
lanes-
dBA =A -weighted decibels
1-q = Background noise level
vph = vehicles per hour
mph = miles per hour

Table 4. Average maximum noise levels (Leq at 50 feet) for common construction
equipment
(Colors indicate relative sound level; red = extreme, orange = very high; yellow = high; green =
moderate; blue = low; purple = very low; mauve = background. Asterisks shove impact noise
sources.,
Explosives
Ruck Blast
Pneurnalir Tools, Iackhamrners & Pile Driver
Track Hoe
Impart Pile Driver
Guardrall Installatton and Pile Driving
Truck Horn
Pile Driving
Rork Drill and Diesel Generator
Rork Drill
Dump Truck
Rack Drills and Jackhammers
Pneumatic Wrenches, Ruck Drills
Vibratory (Sonic) Pile Driver
Diesel Truck
Pneumatic Chipper
Hyd romulcher
Clam Shovel
Slurry Machine
Pneumatic RIVeter
Circular Saw (hand held]
Mounted Impart Hammer Hue -Ram
Concrete Saw
Compressor
Srraper
Paver
Large Truck
Jackhammer
Drill Rig
Dozer
Crane
Pumps, Generators, Compressors
Front-end Loader
Large Diesel Engine
Gradall
Chain saws
Road Grader
Noise (dEA)
Low High 11111jacV,
94
91
96
95
74 _
SO 99
S5 98
82 98
82 97
36 97
95 96
85 96
91 95
B7 94
93 93
S2 91
91 91
91 91
85 90
`]0 90
BO 90
85 89
BO 89
84 89
74 89
85 88
S4 88
85 88
B1 87
BO 87
86 86
85 86
75 86
83 85

Table 4 contd.
Noise (dBA)
Low High Impacts
Pump 77 85
Impact Wrench
B5
85
Concrete Truck
B1
85
Concrete Mixer
$o
85
Auger D rill Rig
B5
Flat Bed Truck
84
84
Backhoe
80
84
Generator
52
84
Ground Compactor
80
82
Concrete Pump
82
82
Cat 5kidder
81
81
Roller
Horizontal Boring HydraulleJack BO 8D
Concrete Vibrator 76 76
Welder 73
Pickup Truck 55 71
Yelling
Background Sound Level —Forest Habitats 25 44
Speech [normal) 41 41
Source; U.S_ F€sh and Wildtife Servke 2005.
Impact noise = sadden, loud impulsive sound
d$A =A -weighted decibels
Biological Conclusion for PESU
Lighting, noise, vibration and removal of woody vegetation are anticipated as part of
construction activities associated with the project. The project effects are expected to be
insignificant, as explained above. Construction of the project is not anticipated to have
adverse impacts to commuting, foraging, and breeding or roosting habitat for PESU. The
closest known element occurrence data for the Tricolored bat is approximately 10 miles
from the project study area at Russell Site (NCNHP EO ID 37588) in Montgomery
County. The following Avoidance and Minimizations Measures will be utilized to
reduce impacts to the PESU:
1. Pile driving will occur once the trees within the project clearing limits that are
immediately adjacent to the pile driving site have been removed.
2. A tree clearing moratorium will be implemented for the USACE project study area
during the maternity season, April I -October 15 to protect bats during the active
season effective with the federal listing of the tricolored bat.
3. The clearing limits will be marked for the contractor to meet the requirements of the
NCDOT Standards.
4. NCDOT will ensure tree removal is limited to that specified in project plans and
ensure that contractors understand clearing limits and how they are marked in the
field. Clearing limits follow the most recent version of the NCDOT Manual for

Construction Layout and are typically marked by placing blue and white striped
flagging on 36-inch stakes or trees.
5. There will be no permanent lighting.
6. Lighting used for nighttime construction will be limited to what is necessary to
maintain safety standards. Temporary lighting will only direct light towards active
work areas except in instances necessitating balloon lighting.
7. Blast monitoring will occur per NCDOT standard specifications for blasting in the
project area. Blast mats or soil cover will be used for all blast sites per the standard
specifications.
8. Blasting will occur once the trees within the project clearing limits that are
immediately adjacent to the blasting site have been removed.
9. No blasting will occur at night.
10. The existing bridge will be resurveyed for bats in the 2024 survey window if it has
not been demoed by the end of the survey window (i.e. August 15, 2024).
NCDOT requests concurrence on a "May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect" for
the PESU.
Effects to Schweinitz's sunflower
NCDOT is requesting concurrence on the remaining species that IPAC lists for the
project area.
Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii): May Affect Not Likely to Adversely
Affect. Habitat is present within the project action area. The project was surveyed on
October 26, 2022, and none were found. There are no populations within one mile of the
project study area.
NCDOT believes that the requirements of Section 7 (a)(2) of the ESA have been satisfied
and hereby request your concurrence on a May Affect Not Likely to Adversely Affect
determinations for the Tricolored bat and Schweinitz's sunflower. Thank you for your
assistance with this project. If you have any questions or need additional information,
please contact me at [phone] or at aeuliss e,ncdot.gov.
Sincerely,
Amy Euliss
Division 9 PDEA Engineer, NCDOT
Cc:
Daniel Dagenhart, NCDOT Division 9 Bridge Program Manager
Cheryl Knepp, NCDOT Biological Surveys Group
Steve Brumagin, USACE

(3 Stantec Memo
To: Amy Euliss From
NCDOT Division 9
File: BP9.R006 (R.92) Date
Reference: Bridge 280246 — Bridge Survey for Bats
Trevor Walker
Stantec
January 18, 2023
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT, Division 9) proposes to replace Bridge No.
280246 over Lick Creek on SR2351 in Davidson County, North Carolina. The existing bridge is a concrete
deck on concrete bents and abutments.
A bat habitat assessment and structure survey were conducted on June 30, 2022. At that time, the northern
long-eared bat (NLEB) was listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) as Threatened within the study
area. According to the USFWS Information Planning and Consultation (IPaC) database (reviewed January
18, 2023), NLEB is no longer listed within the study area. However, tri-colored bat (Perimyotis subflavus) now
appears on the list. On September 14, 2022, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service published a proposal in the
Federal Register to list the tri-colored bat (PESU) as endangered under the Endangered Species Act. The
Service has up to 12-months from the proposal publish date to make a final determination to either list the tri-
colored bat or withdraw the proposal. PESU faces extinction primarily due to range -wide impacts of white -
nose syndrome (WNS), which is a deadly fungal disease that affects cave -dwelling bats across North
America. Surviving PESU populations are now more vulnerable to other stressors such as habitat loss and
human disturbance due to the reduction in population from WNS. Species proposed for listing are not
afforded protection under the ESA, but as soon as listing becomes effective (usually 30 days after the
publication of the final rule in the Federal register), prohibitions against jeopardizing PESU's surviving
populations and "take" will apply.
According to the USFWS Species Status Assessment of the Tri-Colored Bat (Perimyotis subflavus) (2021),
during the spring, summer, and fall, tri-colored bats primarily roost among live and dead leaf clusters of live or
recently dead deciduous hardwood trees and have been documented roosting within artificial roosts (i.e.
bridges, culverts, barns, and concrete bunkers) as well. Other roosting sites include pine trees, eastern red
cedar, and rarely within caves. Females are also documented to exhibit high site fidelity, returning to the
same summer roosting locations year after year. During the winter, tri-colored bats hibernate in caves and
mines, however here in the foothills of NC, where caves are sparse, tri-colored bats often use road -
associated culverts. Tri-colored bats also exhibit high site fidelity with culverts returning year after year to the
same hibernacula.
On June 30, 2022 Stantec biologists assessed Bridge No. 280246 for potential bat habitat. Suitable roosting
crevices were present. No evidence (bats, staining, and guano) of bats using the bridge was observed.
Survey information was documented in the 2022 BSG Bat Habitat Assessment Bridge Survey Form and is
attached. Summer roosting habitat was observed in the surrounding wooded areas for tri-colored bats. A
desktop analysis evaluating habitat within the project footprint using high resolution aerial imagery in
GIS(ESRI ArcMap 10.8) showed forested areas containing live and dead leaf clusters as well as dead or
dying deciduous hardwood trees. Approximately 0.09 acres of suitable roosting habitat will be removed as
part of the project. A North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NHP) data explorer report dated January 18,
2023 shows no known occurrences of tri-colored bats or any other bats within 1.0 mile of the study area.
wt u:\172610054\transportation\planning\report\archive\bridge280246.docx

January 18, 2023
Amy Euliss
Page 2 of 2
Reference: Bridge 280246 — Bridge Survey for Bats
Biological Conclusions:
Tri-colored bat- Not required at this time
Stantec Consulting Services Inc.
Trevor Walker
Environmental Scientist/Bat Biologist
Phone: [phone]
[e-mail]
Attachment: Bat Survey Form
wt u:\172610054\transportation\planning\report\archive\bridge280246.docx

NCDOT Bat Bridge Habitat Assessment Form Updated 7/25/2022
00 Bat Habitat Assessment
NCDOT Bridges
Observers: K Abare / S Wender
Date: June 30, 2022
County: DAVIDSON
Waterbody/Road/Rail: Lick Creek
TIP or DOT project number: BP9.R006 (R.92
Road Name/SR Number: SR2351
Bridge Number: 280246
% Surrounding habitat w/in 1 mi. Forested: 50% Wetland: 0%
of project footprint (approx) Urban/Commercial: 0% Suburban/Residential: 0%
Agricultural: 0%
Herbaceous/ Shrub/ Grassland/ Barren Land: 50%
Any trees >3" DBH within project footprint? Yes
Bridge located within Indiana Bat Critical Habitat? No
Mines in Vicinity? No Caves in Vicinity? No
Mines in Project Footprint? No Caves in Project Footprint? No
If 'yes' to any of the above, provide photos, description, and location in Photo Appendix.
Water Features
Major water source in project footprint: Stream/Creek
Suitable drinking habitat in the form of non -stagnant, smooth or slack water? Yes
Bridge Features
Artificial Lighting: No Guard Rails: Metal Deck Type(s): Concrete
Beam Type(s): Concrete End/Back Wall Type(s): Timber Creosote Evidence: Yes
Suitable roosting crevices present (%— 1 %"wide): Yes Deck Drain(s): No
Max height of bridge deck above ground (ft): 15 Night roost habitat protected: N/A
Bridge Alignment: NW/SE Hours of sun exposure to bridge: >3
Human disturbance under bridge: None
Notes:
Bat Evidence/Activity
Emergence count performed? No
Evidence of bats using bird nests, if present? No
Evidence of bats using bridge? No [If Yes, Photos in Photo Appendix]
Type of evidence:
Roost Type:
Roost Material:
Bat Species: Bat Species 2: Bat Species 3:
Notes (bat location and count): No staining or guano
1