20071962 Ver 1_Application_20071120

,.. STATE a~
Mwn
.@ ~~.
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
fir: ~/~~
.',~~! /~
~N~SgNQST~~Uugf ~OJ
MWgTF ~Y
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION icy
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
US Army Corps of Engineers
Raleigh Field Office
6508 Falls of Neuse Road, Suite 120
Raleigh, NC 27615-6814
ATTENTION: Eric Alsmeyer
NCDOT Coordinator
Dear Sir:
November 9, 2007
LYNDO TIPPETT
SECRETARY
071962
Subject: Application for Section 404 Nationwide 33 Permit, Section 401 Water Quality
Certification, and Tar-Pamlico Riparian Buffer Authorization for the replacement of
Bridge No. 84 over the Tar River on SR 1141 (Moriah Road), Granville County. Federal Aid
Project Number BRZ-11141 (10), WBS No. 33477.1.1, State Project No. 8.2371301, Division
5, T.I.P No. B-4124
Debit WBS No. 33477.1.1 $240.00.
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to replace the 179-foot Bridge No.
84 over the Tar River with a new 3 span bridge approximately 232 feet in length. The new structure will
be a 3-span 54-inch pre-stressed concrete girder bridge that will span the Tar River. The project will
replace the current bridge with a new bridge slightly north of the existing bridge, while using an offsite
detour to maintain traffic during construction. A temporary access road and workpad will be constructed
to provide access for demolition of the old bridge and construction of the new bridge.
Please see the enclosed copies of the pre-construction notification (PCN), permit drawings, half size plan
sheets, Categorical Exclusion (CE) document, Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) letter, and
Rapanos form.
IMPACTS TO WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES
The prvject is located in the Tar-Pamlico River Basin (subbasin 03-02-01). This area is part of
Hydrologic Cataloging Unit 03020101 of the South Atlantic-Gulf Coast Region. The Tar River, DWQ
Index # 28-(1), is the only water resource within the project area. The Tar River is assigned a Best Usage
Classification of WS-IV NSW. No designated Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW), High Quality
Waters (HQW), Water Supply I (WS-I), or Water Supply (WS-II), waters occur within 1.0 mile of the
study corridor. This section of the Tar River is not listed as a 303(d) stream according to the Fina12006
303(d) list for the Tar-Pamlico River Basin nor does it drain into any 303(d) waters within 1-mile of the
project.
MAILING ADDRESS:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
NATURAL ENVIRONMENT UNIT
1598 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699-1598
TELEPHONE: [phone] or
919-715-1335
FAX: [phone]
WEBS/TE: WWW.NCDOT.ORG
LOCATION:
2728 CAPITAL BLVD. SUITE 240
RALEIGH NC 27604

Permanent Impacts
There are no permanent impacts to streams or wetlands located within the project area.
Temporary Im,~acts
There will be 0.01 acres (32 feet) of surface water impacts resulting from the construction of a causeway
that will provide a workpad to be used for removal of the interior bent located in the river. The workpad
will be located between the stream bank and the interior bent and will be removed upon completion of
construction.
Utility Impacts
There are no utility impacts associated with this project.
Bridge Demolition
The existing 5-span bridge was constructed in 1958 and is 179 feet in length. The superstructure consists
of an asphalt-wearing surface, timer deck on steel I-beams supported by timber end bents and timber
piles with concrete caps. The substructure is composed entirely of timber except for the concrete sills at
the base of two of the three interior bents. One of the interior bents is located in the stream, one in the
floodplain, and one adjacent to the stream. The interior bent located in the floodplain that does not have a
monolithic concrete sill will be removed by sawing the timber piles flush with the existing ground. The
two remaining interior bents have timber piles on concrete footings. One is located adjacent to the
stream embankment. The other bent is located in the channel. The interior bent adjacent to the stream
embankment will be removed by sawing the timber piles at the footing and leaving the footing in place.
The interior bent located in the river maybe removed by sawing the timber piles off at the base of the
footing. The contractor will utilize a rock causeway (workpad) or timber matting between the stream
bank and the interior bent for removal (Project Commitment, 10/07).
There is a small potential for components of Bridges No. 84 to be dropped into Waters of the United
States during bridge removal. The maximum potential temporary fill is 25 cubic yards that will be
immediately removed. The contractor may use a tarp placed around the interior bent to further minimize
debris in the water (Project Commitments, 10/2007). Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition
and Removal will be implemented during demolition and construction.
IMPACTS TO TAR-PAMLICO RIPARIAN BUFFER
Construction of the new bridge and approaches will result in impacts to the buffers of the Tar River.
Buffer impacts are described in Table 1 below. Under the Tar-Pamlico Buffer Rules: Site 1-impacts to
buffers resulting from the construction of bridges are allowable and impacts resulting from construction
of the approaches fall under road crossing impacts and are allowable due to the impacts being less than
150 feet or 1/3 of an acre. Sites 2 and 3 are impacts other than road crossings and require mitigation.
Table 1. Tar-Pamlico Buffer Impacts
Bridge Road
Crossin * Impacts other than Road
Crossin
Zone 1 Im act (ft2) 7052 0 1400
Zone 2 Irri act ft 4995 260 3260
Miti ation re uirements Allowable Allowable Allowable with miti ation
*Road Crossing impacts total less than 1/3 acre
B-4124 Permit Application
Page 2 of 6

An existing roadbed will be used as a temporary access road for conveying construction equipment
through the buffer to the causeway on the southeast side of the existing bridge (Project Commitments,
10/2007). On the northwest side of the existing bridge, a temporary road will be constructed to set the
steel I-beams for the new bridge. Impacts occurring from the temporary road, on the northwest side of
bridge, are included in the bridge construction buffer impacts.
This bridge has been determined to be structurally deficient. The replacement of this inadequate
structure will result in safer and more efficient traffic operations. Because this bridge needs to be
replaced, impacts to the riparian buffers are unavoidable. Compensatory mitigation for these buffer
impacts will be provided through the EEP.
Utility Impacts to Riparian Buffers
A new overhead power and telephone pole line shall be installed further left of the existing overhead
power and telephone pole line. This work will cross buffer zones 1 & 2 and will not be a perpendicular
crossing of the buffers. No poles will be installed inside the buffers. The work will involve non-
mechanical clearing of vegetation. The existing overhead power and telephone pole line will be
dismantled and removed after the new line is put into service. Trees that are felled will be cut into 10-
foot sections and left onsite. Trunks and limbs 8 inches or greater in diameter will be left in place. Any
material less than this will be hauled out by hand.
Both crossings (Sites 1 and 2) fall under the exempt category for overhead electric line that are other than
perpendicular crossings and the criteria for non-perpendicular crossing will be followed.
RESTORATION PLAN
Following construction of the bridge, all material used in the construction of the structure will be
removed. The impact area associated with the bridge is expected to recover naturally, since the natural
streambed and plant material will not be removed. NCDOT does not propose any additional planting in
this area. Class II riprap and filter fabric will be used for bank stabilization. Pre-project elevations will
be restored.
Following construction of the bridge, all material used in the construction of the structure will be
removed. Class II riprap and filter fabric will be used for bank stabilization. Pre-project elevations will
be restored.
REMOVAL AND DISPOSAL PLAN
The contractor will be required to submit a reclamation plan for the removal of and disposal of all
material off-site at an upland location. The contractor will use excavation equipment for removal of any
earthen material. Heavy-duty trucks, dozers, cranes and various other pieces of mechanical equipment
necessary for construction of roadways and bridges will be used on site. The contractor will have the
option of reusing any of the materials that the engineer deems suitable in the construction of project.
After the erosion control devices are no longer needed, all temporary materials will become the property
of the contractor.
MITIGATION OPTIONS
Avoidance and Minimization and Compensatory Mitigation
The NCDOT is committed to incorporating all reasonable and practicable design features to avoid and
minimize jurisdictional impacts, and to provide full compensatory mitigation of all remaining,
B-4124 Permit Application
Page 3 of 6

unavoidable jurisdictional impacts. Avoidance measures were taken during the planning and NEPA
compliance stages; minimization measures were incorporated as part of the project design.
According to the Clean Water Act (CWA) §404(b)(1) guidelines, NCDOT must avoid, minimize, and
mitigate, in sequential order, impacts to waters of the US. The following is a list of the project's
jurisdictional stream and Tar-Pamlico Buffer avoidance/minimization activities proposed or completed
by NCDOT:
Avoidance/Minimization
• Design Standards in Sensitive Watersheds will be implemented (Project Comnutments, 10/2007).
• Best Management Practices for Protection of Surface Waters and for Demolition and Removal will
be implemented.
• Traffic will be detoured offsite.
• Where possible, steeper fill slopes were used to reduce the footprint of the project reducing impacts
to riparian buffers.
• Two preformed scour holes will be constructed on the northwest and northeast side of the bridge.
• No bents will be placed in the channel.
• A longer bridge will be constructed, which will allow for better floodplain access.
• Removal of the existing bents will take place when water flow level is at a minimum point allowable
within the project schedule and will be done in such a manner to minimize disturbance to the
streambed.
• Install special sediment control fence along the top of the stream bank. (Project Commitments,
10/07).
• Embankment construction and grading shall be managed in such a manner to prevent surface
runoff/drainage from discharging in the riparian buffer at all times. All interim surfaces will be
graded to drain to temporary erosion control devices. Temporary berms, ditches, etc. will be
incorporated as necessary to prevent temporary runoff from discharging into the riparian buffer
(Project Commitments, 10/07).
Compensatory Miti ation:
The project will only permanently impact riparian buffers. Compensatory mitigation is required for the
1,400 ft2 of impact to Buffer Zone 1 and 3,260 ftZ of impacts to Buffer Zone 2 categorized as "allowable
with mitigation." Compensatory mitigation will be provided through the EEP (see attached letter dated
10/8/07). The offsetting mitigation will derive from an inventory of assets already in existence within the
same 8-digit cataloguing unit.
FEDERALLY PROTECTED SPECIES
Plants and animals with federal classifications of Endangered (E), Threatened (T), Proposed Endangered
(PE), and Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under provisions of Section 7 and Section 9 of the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. The United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
lists four species for Granville County. Table 2 lists the species and their federal status.
B-4124 Permit Application
Page 4 of 6

Table 2. Federally Protected Species in Granville Countv, NC
Common Name Scientific Name Federal Status* Biological Conclusion Habitat
Present
Bald eagle Haliaeetus Delisted N/`~ No
leucoce halus
Harperella Ptilimnium E No Effect yes
nodosum
Dwarf Alasmidonta May Affect Likely to

wed emussel
heterodon E
Adversel Affect yes
Smooth coneflower Echinacea E No Effect yes
laevi ata
*E= endangered
Biological conclusions of "No Effect" were issued for the harperella and smooth coneflower based on
marginal habitat, but no species of either plant were found. Marginal habitat is located within the project
area for harperella along the edges of rocky shoals and for smooth coneflower along the roadside of
Moriah Road. The most recent surveys were completed on August 9, 2006. No specimens of harperella
or smooth coneflower were observed during survey, therefore, the biological conclusion of "No Effect"
remains valid.
The bald eagle has been delisted as of August 8, 2007 and is not subject to Section 7 consultation and a
biological conclusion is not required. However, the bald eagle remains protected by the Bald and Golden
Eagle Protection Act. No nesting or foraging habitat for bald eagles is present.
A Biological Assessment (BA) was sent to the USFWS on September 4, 2007. The BA discusses the
impacts of the bridge replacement project to the dwarf wedgemussel (DWM) and the avoidance and
minimization measures that will be incorporated into the design and replacement of the bridge. In the
BA, NCDOT concludes that the appropriate biological conclusion for the DWM is May Affect, Likely to
Adversely Affect. The conclusion is based on documented occurrences of the DWM within the Tar
River, unsuccessful attempts in locating DWM in the project area in 2004 and 2007 during surveys, and
incorporation of the avoidance and minimization measures listed in the BA. The Biological Opinion
(BO) was received on November 7, 2007 from the USFWS. The USFWS did agree with the BA and
stated that the project, as proposed, is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the DWM.
Copies of the BO have been provided to the USACE and North Carolina Wildlife Resources (NCWRC).
Additional copies will be provided upon request.
NCDOT will complete apre-construction mussel survey approximately 1-2 months prior to let. Any
federally protected mussel species will be moved out of the project footprint (Project Commitments,
10/07).
SCHEDULE
The project calls for a letting of February 19, 2008 (review date of January 1, 2008) with a date of
availability of April 1, 2008. It is expected that the contractor will choose to start construction in April.
REGULATORY APPROVALS
Section 404 Permit: Application is hereby made for the~Department of Army Section 404 for the issuance
of a Nationwide Permit 33 for the above-described activities
Section 401 Permit: We anticipate a 401 General Certification number 3688 will apply to this project.
This project will also impact Tar-Pamlico Riparian Buffers, therefore written concurrence will be
B-4124 Permit Application
Page 5 of 6

required. In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H 0.0501(a) and 15A NCAC 2B 0.200 we are providing five
copies of this application to the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources,
Division of Water Quality, for review. In compliance with Section 143-215.3D(e) of the NCAC we will
provide $240.00 to act as payment for processing the Section 401 permit application.
Buffer Certification: The project has been designed to comply with the Tar-Pamlico Riparian Buffer
Regulations (15A NCAC 2B.0212). NCDOT requests aTar-Pamlico Riparian Buffer Authorization from
the Division of Water Quality.
A copy of this permit application will be posted on the NCDOT Website at:
http://www.ncdot.org/doh/preconstruct/pe/neu/permit.html. If you have any questions or need additional
information, please call Deanna Riffey at [phone].
Sincere
~~ '
(,~/ Gregory .Thorpe, Ph.D.
`_ Environmental Management Director, PDEA
W/attachment
Mr. John Hennessy, NCDWQ (5 Copies)
Mr. Travis Wilson, NCWRC
Mr. Gary Jordan, USFWS
W/o attachment (see Permits Website referenced above for copies of attachments)
Dr. David Chang, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr. Mark Staley, Roadside Environmental
Mr. Greg Perfetti, P.E., Structure Design
Mr. Victor Barbour, Project Services Unit
Mr. J. Wally Bowman, PE, Division Engineer
Mr. Chris Murray, DEO
Mr. Jay Bennett, P.E., Roadway Design
Mr. Majed Alghandour, P. E., Programming and TIP
Mr. Art McMillan, P.E., Highway Design
Mr. Scott McLendon, USACE, Wilmington
Mr. Tracy Walters, PDEA
Ms. Beth Harmon, EEP
Mr. Todd Jones, NCDOT External Audit Branch
B-4124 Permit Application
Page 6 of 6

Office Use Only• Form Version March OS
USACE Action ID No DWQ No. ? 0 0 7 1 A ~ ~
(If any particular item is not applicable to this project, please enter "Not Applicable" or "N/A".)
I. Processing
1. Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project:
® Section 404 Permit ® Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules
^ Section 10 Permit ^ Isolated Wetland Permit from DWQ
® 401 Water Quality Certification ^ Express 401 Water Quality Certification
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested: NW 33
3. If this notification is solely a courtesy copy because written approval for the 401 Certification
is not required, check here: ^
4. If payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) is proposed
for mitigation of impacts, attach the acceptance letter from NCEEP, complete section VIII,
and check here:
5. If your project is located in any of North Carolina's twenty coastal counties (listed on page
4), and the project is within a North Carolina Division of Coastal Management Area of
Environmental Concern (see the top of page 2 for further details), check here: ^
II. Applicant Information
1. Owner/Applicant Information
Name: Gregory J Thorpe PhD Environmental Management Director
Mailing Address: 1598 Mail Service Center
Raleigh NC 27699-1548
Telephone Number:~919) 733-3141 Fax Number:~919~733-9794
E-mail Address:
2. Agent/Consultant Information (A signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization letter
must be attached if the Agent has signatory authority for the owner/applicant.)
Name: N/A
Company Affiliation:
Mailing Address:
Telephone Number: Fax Number:
E-mail Address:
Page 1 of 9

III. Project Information
Attach a vicinity map clearly showing the location of the property with respect to local
landmarks such as towns, rivers, and roads. Also provide a detailed site plan showing property
boundaries and development plans in relation to surrounding properties. Both the vicinity map
and site plan must include a scale and north arrow. The specific footprints of all buildings,
impervious surfaces, or other facilities must be included. If possible, the maps and plans should
include the appropriate USGS Topographic Quad Map and NRCS Soil Survey with the property
boundaries outlined. Plan drawings, or other maps maybe included at the applicant's discretion,
so long as the property is clearly defined. For administrative and distribution purposes, the
USACE requires information to be submitted on sheets no larger than 11 by 17-inch format;
however, DWQ may accept paperwork of any size. DWQ prefers full-size construction
drawings rather than a sequential sheet version of the full-size plans. If full-size plans are
reduced to a small scale such that the final version is illegible, the applicant will be informed that
the project has been placed on hold until decipherable maps are provided.
1. Name of project: Replacement of Bridge No. 84 over the Tar River on SR 1141
2. T.I.P. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only):
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN): N/A
4. Location
County: Granville Nearest Town: Berea
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number):
Directions to site (include road numbers/names, landmarks, etc.): see map in permit
drawings
5. Site coordinates (For linear projects, such as a road or utility line, attach a sheet that
separately lists the coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody.)
Decimal Degrees (6 digits minimum): 36.3103 °N 78.7509 °W
6. Property size (acres): N/.
7. Name of nearest receiving body of water: Tar River
8. River Basin: Tar-Pamilco
(Note -this must be one of North Carolina's seventeen designated major river basins. The
River Basin map is available at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/admin/maps/.)
9. Describe the existing conditions on the site and general land use in the vicinity of the project
at the time of this application: The land use in the surrounding area consists primarily of
residential development with some forested areas.
B-4124
Page 2 of 9

10. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
Bride No. 84 will be replaced sli hg_tly north of the existing location. Traffic will be
detoured offsite during construction. Heavyy duty excavation equipment will be used such as
trucks, dozers, cranes and other various equipment necessary for roadway construction.
11. Explain the purpose of the proposed work: To replace a deteriorating bridge
IV. Prior Project History
If jurisdictional determinations and/or permits have been requested and/or obtained for this
project (including all prior phases of the same subdivision) in the past, please explain. Include
the USAGE Action ID Number, DWQ Project Number, application date, and date permits and
certifications were issued or withdrawn. Provide photocopies of previously issued permits,
certifications or other useful information. Describe previously approved wetland, stream and
buffer impacts, along with associated mitigation (where applicable). If this is a NCDOT project,
list and describe permits issued for prior segments of the same T.I.P. project, along with
construction schedules. N/A
V. Future Project Plans
Are any future permit requests anticipated for this project? If so, describe the anticipated work,
and provide justification for the exclusion of this work from the current application.
N/A
VI. Proposed Impacts to Waters of the United States/Waters of the State
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
wetlands, open water, and stream channels associated with the project. Each impact must be
listed separately in the tables below (e.g., culvert installation should be listed separately from
riprap dissipater pads). Be sure to indicate if an impact is temporary. All proposed impacts,
permanent and temporary, must be listed, and must be labeled and clearly identifiable on an
accompanying site plan. All wetlands and waters, and all streams (intermittent and perennial)
should be shown on a delineation map, whether or not impacts are proposed to these systems.
Wetland and stream evaluation and delineation forms should be included as appropriate.
Photographs may be included at the applicant's discretion. If this proposed impact is strictly for
wetland or stream mitigation, list and describe the impact in Section VIII below. If additional
space is needed for listing or description, please attach a separate sheet.
1. Provide a written description of the proposed impacts: see cover letter
Page 3 of 9

2. Individually list wetland impacts. Types of impacts include, but are not limited to
mechanized clearing, grading, fill, excavation, flooding, ditching/drainage, etc. For dams,
separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding.
Wetland Impact
Site Number
(indicate on map)
Type of Impact Type of Wetland
(e.g., forested, marsh,
herbaceous, bog, etc.) Located within
100-year
Floodplain
( es/no Distance to
Nearest
Stream
linear feet Area of
Impact
(acres)
None

Total Wetland Impact (acres)
3. List the total acreage (estimated) of all existing wetlands on the property:
4. Individually list all intermittent and perennial stream impacts. Be sure to identify.temporary
impacts. Stream impacts include, but are not limited to placement of fill or culverts, dam
construction, flooding, relocation, stabilization activities (e.g., cement walls, rip-rap, crib
walls, gabions, etc.), excavation, ditching/straightening, etc. If stream relocation is proposed,
plans and profiles showing the linear footprint for both the original and relocated streams
must be included. To calculate acreage, multiply length X width, then divide by 43,560.
Stream Impact
Number
(indicate on ma)
Stream Name
Type of Impact
Perennial or
Intermittent? Average
Stream Width
Before Im act Impact
Length
(linear feet Area of
Impact
acres
Site 1 Tar River Temporary Fill P 40 32 0.01

Total Stream Impact (by length and acreage) 32 0.01
Page 4 of 9

5. Individually list all open water impacts (including lakes, ponds, estuaries, sounds, Atlantic
Ocean and any other water of the U.S.). Open water impacts include, but are not limited to
fill, excavation, dredging, flooding, drainage, bulkheads, etc.
Open Water Impact

Site Number
(indicate on ma)
Name of Waterbody
(if applicable)

Type of Impact Type of Waterbody

(lake, pond, estuary, sound, bay,
ocean, etc. Area of

Impact
(acres)

Total Open Water Impact (acres)
6. List the cumulative impact to all Waters of the U.S. resulting from the proiect:
Stream Im act (acres): 0.01
Wetland Impact (acres): 0
Open Water Im act (acres): 0
Total Impact to Waters of the U.S. (acres) 0
Total Stream Impact (linear feet): 32
7. Isolated Waters
Do any isolated waters exist on the property? ^ Yes ®No
Describe all impacts to isolated waters, and include the type of water (wetland or stream) and
the size of the proposed impact (acres or linear feet). Please note that this section only
applies to waters that have specifically been determined to be isolated by the USACE.
8. Pond Creation
If construction of a pond is proposed, associated wetland and stream impacts should be
included above in the wetland and stream impact sections. Also, the proposed pond should
be described here and illustrated on any maps included with this application.
Pond to be created in (check all that apply): ^ uplands ^ stream ^ wetlands
Describe the method of construction (e.g., dam/embankment, excavation, installation of
draw-down valve or spillway, etc.):
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stormwater requirement, etc.):
Current land use in the vicinity of the pond:
Size of watershed draining to pond: Expected pond surface area:
Page 5 of 9

VII. Impact Justification (Avoidance and Minimization)
Specifically describe measures taken to avoid the proposed impacts. It may be useful to provide
information related to site constraints such as topography, building ordinances, accessibility, and
financial viability of the project. The applicant may attach drawings of alternative, lower-impact
site layouts, and explain why these design options were not feasible. Also discuss how impacts
were minimized once the desired site plan was developed. If applicable, discuss construction
techniques to be followed during construction to reduce impacts. Please refer to the attached
cover letter
VIII. Mitigation
DWQ - In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0500, mitigation may be required by the NC
Division of Water Quality for projects involving greater than or equal to one acre of impacts to
freshwater wetlands or greater than or equal to 150 linear feet of total impacts to perennial
streams.
USACE - In accordance with the Final Notice of Issuance and Modification of Nationwide
Permits, published in the Federal Register on January 15, 2002, mitigation will be required when
necessary to ensure that adverse effects to the aquatic environment are minimal. Factors
including size and type of proposed impact and function and relative value of the impacted
aquatic resource will be considered in determining acceptability of appropriate and practicable
mitigation as proposed. Examples of mitigation that maybe appropriate and practicable include,
but are not limited to: reducing the size of the project; establishing and maintaining wetland
and/or upland vegetated buffers to protect open waters such as streams; and replacing losses of
aquatic resource functions and values by creating, restoring, enhancing, or preserving similar
functions and values, preferable in the same watershed.
If mitigation is required for this project, a copy of the mitigation plan must be attached in order
for USACE or DWQ to consider the application complete for processing. Any application
lacking a required mitigation plan or NCEEP concurrence shall be placed on hold as incomplete.
An applicant may also choose to review the current guidelines for stream restoration in DWQ's
Draft Technical Guide for Stream Work in North Carolina, available at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/strmgide.html.
Page 6 of 9

1. Provide a brief description of the proposed mitigation plan. The description should provide
as much information as possible, including, but not limited to: site location (attach directions
and/or map, if offsite), affected stream and river basin, type and amount (acreage/linear feet)
of mitigation proposed (restoration, enhancement, creation, or preservation), a plan view,
preservation mechanism (e.g., deed restrictions, conservation easement, etc.), and a
description of the current site conditions and proposed method of construction. Please attach
a separate sheet if more space is needed.
Mitigation will be provided through EEP.
2. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (NCEEP). Please note it is the applicant's responsibility to contact the NCEEP at
[phone] to determine availability, and written approval from the NCEEP indicating
that they are will to accept payment for the mitigation must be attached to this form. For
additional information regarding the application process for the NCEEP, check the NCEEP
website at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/wr,~/index.htm. If use of the NCEEP is proposed, please
check the appropriate box on page five and provide the following information:
Amount of stream mitigation requested (linear feet): NA
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet): 4,660
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres):
Amount ofNon-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres):
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres):
IX. Environmental Documentation (required by DWQ)
1. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federaUstate/local) funds or the use of
public (federal/state) land? Yes ® No ^
2. If yes, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the
requirements of the National or North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
Note: If you are not sure whether a NEPA/SEPA document is required, call the SEPA
coordinator at [phone] to review current thresholds for environmental documentation.
Yes ® No ^
3. If yes, has the document review been finalized by the State Clearinghouse? If so, please
attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval letter. Yes ® No ^
Page 7 of 9

X. Proposed Impacts on Riparian and Watershed Buffers (required by DWQ)
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
required state and local buffers associated with the project. The applicant must also provide
justification for these impacts in Section VII above. All proposed impacts must be listed herein,
and must be clearly identifiable on the accompanying site plan. All buffers must be shown on a
map, whether or not impacts are proposed to the buffers. Correspondence from the DWQ
Regional Office may be included as appropriate. Photographs may also be included at the
applicant's discretion.
1. Will the project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233
(Meuse), 15A NCAC 2B .0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 02B .0243 (Catawba) 15A NCAC
2B .0250 (Randleman Rules and Water ®pply Buffer Requirements), or other (please
identify Tar-Pamiico )? Yes No
2. If "yes", identify the square feet and acreage of impact to each zone of the riparian buffers.
If buffer mitigation is required calculate the required amount of mitigation by applying the
buffer multinliers_

Zone* Im act
s ware feet
( )
Multiplier
Required
Miti ation
1 1400 3 (2 for Catawba) 4200
2 3260 1.5 4890
Total 4660 9090
* Zone 1 extends out 30 feet perpendicular from the top of the near bank of channel; Zone 2 extends an
additional 20 feet from the edge of Zone 1.
3. If buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e.,
Donation of Property, Riparian Buffer Restoration /Enhancement, or Payment into the
Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as identified
within 15A NCAC 2B .0242 or .0244, or .0260. Mitigation will be provided through EEP
XI. Stormwater (required by DWQ)
Describe impervious acreage (existing and proposed) versus total acreage on the site. Discuss
stormwater controls proposed in order to protect surface waters and wetlands downstream from
the property. If percent impervious surface exceeds 20%, please provide calculations
demonstrating total proposed impervious level. N/A
XII. Sewage Disposal (required by DWQ)
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of
wastewater generated from the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
Page 8 of 9

XIII. Violations (required by DWQ)
Is this site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500) or any Buffer Rules?
Yes ^ No
Is this anafter-the-fact permit application? Yes ^ No
XIV. Cumulative Impacts (required by DWQ)
Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in additional
development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality? Yes ^ No
If yes, please submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with
the most recent North Carolina Division of Water Quality policy posted on our website at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands. If no, please provide a short narrative description:
XV. Other Circumstances (Optional):
It is the applicant's responsibility to submit the application sufficiently in advance of desired
construction dates to allow processing time for these permits. However, an applicant may
choose to list constraints associated with construction or sequencing that may impose limits on
work schedules (e.g., draw-down schedules for lakes, dates associated with Endangered and
Threatened Species, accessibility problems, or other issues outside of the applicant's control).
None

Applic~Cnt/Agent's Signature Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)
I• s -off
Page 9 of 9

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: B-4124
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
State:NC County/parish/borough: Granville City: Berea
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 36.3103° N, Long. 78.7509° W.
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Tar River
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) Into which the aquatic resource flows: Tar River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): Tar-Pamilico
Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc...) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
[] Field Determination. Date(s):
SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Are the "navigable waters of the U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review area. [Required]
Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Are "waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply): t
`~ TNWs, including territorial seas
^ Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
^ Relatively permanent watersZ (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
^ Non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
^ Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
^ Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
^ Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
^ Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
^ Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non-wetland waters: 124 linear feet: 40 width (ft) and/or acres.
Wetlands: acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on:l~~tabllahed by OHWM
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
2. Non-regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable):'
Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain:
~ Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
Z For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year-round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally"
(e.g., typically 3 months).
' Supporting documentation is presented in Section III. F.

SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete
Section III.A.1 and Section III.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections III.A.1 and 2
and Section III.D.1.; otherwise, see Section III.B below.
TN W
Identify TNW: Tar River.
Summarize rationale supporting determination: Tar River is a navigable water of the US.
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent":
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non-navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year-round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section III.D.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section III.D.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of s significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbody° is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section III.B.1 for
the tributary, Section III.B.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section III.B.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section III.C below.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: Pick List
Drainage area: ..Pick List
Average annual rainfall: inches
Average annual snowfall: inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
^ Tributary flows directly into TNW.
^ Tributary flows through Pick List tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are Pick Liet river miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List river miles from RPW.
Project waters are PickLlst aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNWS:
Tributary stream order, if known:
° Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and
West.
s Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.

(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apply):
Tributary is: ^ Natural
^ Artificial (man-made). Explain:
^ Manipulated (man-altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: feet
Average depth: feet
Average side slopes: Pick List.
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
^ Silts ^ Sands
^ Cobbles ^ Gravel
^ Bedrock ^ Vegetation. Type/% cover:
^ Other. Explain:
^ Concrete
^ Muck
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain:
Presence of run/riffle/pool complexes. Explain:
Tributary geometry: P1ck List
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope):
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: Pick List
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year: Pick List
Describe flow regime:
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: PickList. Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Piek Lit. Explain findings:
^ Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
^ Bed and banks
^ OHWM6 (check all indicators that apply):
^ clear, natural line impressed on the bank ^
^ changes in the character of soil ^
^ shelving ^
^ vegetation matted down, bent, or absent ^
^ leaf litter disturbed or washed away ^
^ sediment deposition ^
^ water staining ^
^ other (list):
^ Discontinuous OHWM.~ Explain:
the presence of litter and debris
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
the presence of wrack line
sediment sorting
scour
multiple observed or predicted flow events
abrupt change in plant community
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
High Tide Line indicated by: ^ Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
^ oil or scum line along shore objects ^ survey to available datum;
^ fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore) ^ physical markings;
^ physical markings/characteristics ^ vegetation lines/changes in vegetation types.
^ tidal gauges
^ other (list):
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
fiA natural or man-made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
'Ibid.

(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
^ Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width):
^ Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
^ Habitat for:
^ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
^ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
^ Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
^ Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non-TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size: acres
Wetland type. Explain:
Wetland quality. Explain:
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non-TNW:
Flow is: Pick List. Explain:
Surface flow is: Pick List
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Pick Lfat. Explain findings:
^ Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adiacencv Determination with Non-TNW:
^ Directly abutting
^ Not directly abutting
^ Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
^ Ecological connection. Explain:
^ Separated by benm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationshinl to TNW
Project wetlands are Pick List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick Llst aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: Pick List.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the Fick List floodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
^ Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
^ Vegetation type/percent cover. Explain:
^ Habitat for:
^ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
^ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
^ Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
^ Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis: Pic1c List
Approximately ( )acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.

For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (YM) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and/or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
Significant nexus findings for non-RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section III.D:
Significant nexus findings for non-RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non-RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section III.D:
3. Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to
Section III.D:
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
TNWs: 124 linear feet 40 width (ft), Or, acres.
[~ Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
2. RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year-round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial:
Tributaries of TN W where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally:

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
^ Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
3. Non-RPWsB that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
[~ Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
4. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
^ Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
^ Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year-round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW:
^ Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section III.B and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW:
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
6. Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters 9
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
^ Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1-6), or
Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA-STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):10
Q which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
^ from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
^ Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
^ Other factors. Explain:
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
SSee Footnote # 3.
v To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III.D.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos..

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check alt that apply):
Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
^ Wetlands: acres.
F. NON-JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
[~ Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
^ Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
Other: (explain, if not covered above):
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
judgment (check all that apply):
^ Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
^ Lakes/ponds: acres.
Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
Wetlands: acres.
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
^ Lakes/ponds: acres.
^ Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
^ Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply -checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
^ Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:
^ Data sheets prepazed/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
^ Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
^ Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report.
^ 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:
USDA 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 Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
^ Photographs: ^ Aerial (Name & Date):
or ^ Other (Name & Date):
^ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
^ Applicable/supporting case law:
^ Applicablelsupporting scientific literature:
^ Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:

' ~ ~
7
PROGRAM
October 8, 2007
Mr. Eric Alsmeyer
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road, Suite 120
Raleigh, North Carolina 27615
Dear Mr. Alsmeyer:
Subject: EEP Mitigation Acceptance Letter:

OC! 8 C~d~

B-4124, Replace Bridge Number 84 on SR 1141 over the Tar River,
Granville County; Tar-Pamlico River Basin (Cataloging Unit 03020101);
Central Piedmont (CP) Eco-Region
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the Ecosystem Enhancement Program
(EEP) will provide the buffer mitigation for the unavoidable impact associated with the above
referenced project. As indicated in the NCDOT's mitigation request dated October 3, 2007,
buffer mitigation from EEP is required for 1,400 sq.ft. in Zone 1 and 3,260 sq.ft. in Zone 2.
Buffer mitigation associated with this project will be provided in accordance with Section
X of the Amendment No. 2 to the Memorandum of Agreement between the N. C. Department of
Environment and Natural Resources, the N. C. Department of Transportation, and the U. S. Army
Corps of Engineers fully executed on March 8, 2007 (Tri-Party MOA). EEP commits to
implement sufficient buffer credits to offset the impacts associated with this project by the end of
the MOA year in which this project is permitted. If the above referenced impact amounts are
revised, then this mitigation acceptance letter will no longer be valid and a new mitigation
acceptance letter will be required from EEP.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Ms. Beth
Harmon at 919-715-1929.
Si ely,
' i m Gilmore, .E.
EEP Dire or
cc: Mr. Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., NCDOT-PDEA
Mr. John Hennessy, Division of Water Quality, Wetlands/401 Unit
Fite: B-4124

October 8, 2007
Mr. Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
Environmental Management Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
Dear Dr. Thorpe
Subject: EEP Mitigation Acceptance Letter:
B-4124, Replace Bridge Number 84 on SR 1141 over the Tar
River, Granville County
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (EEP) will provide the compensatory stream mitigation for the subject project.
Based on the information supplied by you on October 3, 2007, the impacts are located in
CU 03020101 of the Tar-Pamlico River Basin in the Central Piedmont (CP) Eco-Region,
and are as follows:
Buffer Zone 1: 1,400 sq.ft.
Buffer Zone 2: 3,260 sq.ft.
During the review of this request, it was noted the buffer in Zone 2 has increased
from 2,459 sq.ft. to 3,260 sq.ft. EEP will provide the requested buffer mitigation.
EEP commits to implementing sufficient compensatory mitigation to offset the
impacts associated with this project by the end of the MOA Year in which this project is
permitted, in accordance with Section X of the Amendment No. 2 to the Memorandum of
Agreement between the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources, the North Carolina Department of Transportation, and the U. S. Army Corps
of Engineers, fully executed on March 8, 2007. If the above referenced impact amounts
are revised, then this mitigation acceptance letter will no longer. be valid and a new
mitigation acceptance letter will be required from EEP.

If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Ms. Beth
Harmon at 919-71 ~-1929.
Sincerely,
~~ ~
William D. Gilmore, P.E.
EEP Director
cc: Mr. Eric Alsmeyer, USACE -Raleigh
1~4r. John Hennessy, Division of Water Quality, Wetlands/401 Unit
File: B-4124

o
1
146 O~a
L D /e/s
o ~
+n 'f~ ~~
O ~ nso
+se O 1309
'P r
„aa _ -R~~~R Berea
;m ~ END PROJECT ~
~ee
U ~
o BEGIN PROJECT ~
Rd• ~ `
~ a1 y
+
se
n39
G~ ~
t

1143
Goe e
1141 ~
., 6
p N
s - ~ nso
v
°
She
n r
o~a TAR
Russell o
y
Ran Rd. ~
na>' ,Q~L
cqQ nae • i
'~
o~.J ~
a
,
112fi 1139 ~
~~

Range ~
X4'0. -
'P ~ i
~ ,
,., „29
o.
v _

m
„<~

1150
-~~~ OFF-SITE DETOUR (NOT T® SCALE)
~~®~
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
GRANVILLE COUNTY
PROJECT: (B-4124)
BRIDGE N0.84 OVER ON
SR 1141 OVER TAR RIVER
SHEET t OF ~ 12 B 27 .~ 05

NAMES AND ADDRESSES
REFERENCE N®. NAMES ADDRESSES
1. Edwin W. Melvin 3613 Dade SE. Raleigh, NC 27612
2. R.E. Pendergrass 530 Tomahawk Rd. Harrells, NC 2844
3. David Sanderson P.®. Boa 110 Harrells, NC 28~~~
4. Norman WBESOn 3613 Dade SE. Raleigh, NC 27612
5. Jose£Ee Wessel 209 Bogue )-,ending COLrE NewporE, NC 28570

TO SR 1
~~
~ ~~-
~~~ ~~~
///

//
mA
t
-_ -.,
-~-~ _
`~ ~
~-~~
~T~~®~
I)IVISY®N ®]F I~[IGI~iR'.~YS
GRANVILLE C®LINTY
~~~~ ~~~

1~RIDGE N®.8~4 ®VER ®N
SR 111 ®VER T.4R RIVER
SHEET ~ ®]F ~ 12 ~ 27

WETLAND PERMIT IMPACT SUMMARY
WETLAND IMPACTS SURFACE WATER IMPACTS

Site
No.

Station
(From/To)

Structure
Size /Type
Permanent
Fillln
Wetlands
(ac)
Temp.
Fillln
Wetlands
(ac)
Excavation
in
Wetlands
(ac)
Mechanized
Clearing
in Wetlands
(ac and
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 20+02 to 20+36 CAUSEWAY 0.01 32

TOTALS: 0.01 32

t
J ~ O /els
a.
~~ 1150
m -
109 p^
__
Beta
`~B~
0
J ~~
~p
11aa RiLFR
.m ~ END PROJECT
U ~ °
= BEGIN PROJECT Ftd
~ ~~
TqR
1126
~~~~~~~~
.l°~1~~~
(NOT TO SCALE>
~~~®~
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
GRANVILLE COUNTY
PROJECT: (B-~124>
BRIDGE N0.84 OVER ON
SR 111 OVER TAR RIVER
SHEET ' OF ~ 12 // 27 % 05
o~
~ 1138 ~~ 16e D `~
• 1
15 _ ~ toSD
v ~ ~~
O
r7
Russell ~~'
L~(. 1148 ~ °
~ ~
~~ r
' nse 10 0
- P
_ ~ ~e~
ti ~a ~
~~~~ OFF-SITE DETOUR
~u ~~~~

~r '~,
_ ~
~ - ~ i
r ~: ~4 - }
e~+~ 4 LFd
ti° ~:.':
Ly „ }``
1 ~ ~ ~y"~ ~ ys~r +
.,, ~~ _ f .
~; ~- 1I ~~
,, ~ _ ~ ~,_
K ~' '4
- f -.~c,~~, a. r jJA/
PROJECT ii ~ ~`~~~
,, ~ ~.
B-4124 a
d ~ ~ J i
~~ ,.
~. _ ~-
~ , ~tis
~~ ~
_ 1 i ;e
~ ... ~ ..
=~_
~ ~-'
. ~ ~ -
-, ,
_ ~~~~ ~ ~`
~~ ti -
_ ~ ~~s'' '
~~ ~
~•, ~ ~~
' ~ ~ i
,~"
~~~® ~~~
SCALE: 1" :1000'
~~~®~
DIVISION ®F HIGHWAYS
GRANVILLE COUNTY
IDR®JECT: (8-4124)
BRIDGE N®. 84 ®VER ®N
SR 1141 ®VER TAR RIVER
H

fN'

~~~~~~~ 11 ®~~~~
NAMES AND ADDRESSES
REFERENCE N®. NAMES ADDRESSES
1. Edwin W. Melvin 3613 Dade S~. Raleigh, NC 27612
2. R.E. l~endergrass 5340 ~'omahawk Rd. Harrells, NC 28444
3. David Sanderson P.®. Bo, 110 Harrells, NC 28444
4. Norman WBESOn 3613 Dade SE. Raleigh, NC 27612
5. doseEEe Wessel 209 Bogae Landing CourE NewporE, NC `)8570

C TO SR 1
~-- --
- ~~_
/~~ -~~~ -
//~
~A
f
i -.,
~ ~_
-~~~_~
1
~_/~
J
~T~~®~
DIVISION OF HIGHW.~YS
GR.~NVILLE COUNTX
PROJECT: (B-~12Q)
~~~~ ~~~
lal ®~ ~® ~'l~~~slls
BRIDGE. N0.8~ OVER ON
SR 111 OVER 'T.~R RIVER
SHEET `] OF / 12 % 27

BUFFER IMPACTS SUMMARY
IMPACT BUFFER
TYPE AL LOWABLE MITIGABLE REPLACEMENT

SITE NO. STRUCTURE SIZE
/TYPE STATION
(FROM/TO) ROAD
CROSSING
BRIDGE PARALLEL
IMPACT ZONE 1
(ft2) ZONE 2
(ftZ) TOTAL
(ftZ) ZONE 1
(ft2) ZONE 2
(ft2) TOTAL
(ftZ) ZONE 1
(ft2) ZONE 2
(ft2)
1 BRIDGE 18+58 to 21+86 X 7052 4995 12047
1 18+48 to 18+87 RT X 195 195
1 21+81 to 22+00 LT X 65 65
2 24+04 to 26+20 X 645 2370 3015
3 27+40 to 29+44 X 755 890 1645

TOTAL: 7052 5255 12307 1400 3260 4660

~7[°]F~IEAII~l[ ~ ~]E°]~1L,~1~T~ ~1~1[If~A~C~~

N
//
~ jig
ii
ii
ii
~ /~
~ ~ f
II II
I
II
I
~I~
~ •f~
I fl
~ ~

pt)GS
~~~~
S ~~
\_i'~~ B~
/1
_ ~ ~
~ \\ ~ 1~ i i
i i
\ ~~ ~ i ~
1 ~--
~~~~ 1 ~ I f
~c\\L~~ 1, l ~- J ~ ~ ~f ~f
l Y r /
BEG APPROACH SLAB
STA r9*ODIA
END ?.?1~t
• TYPEau Si A ~ Ala? • n'P>:-at

o ~/ o= IE I I ~x ~- L
• TYPES
I • Yr<-ill
BEG BRIE EYO ~ ==`t4CH SLAB
SA !O*14.C0 SA 21+581X1

DETAIL SHGW/NG P WE~E,'t': - ~ ; .<. i r'a KiYSHIP
~~f
~~~~
l~
O
SPED YDITQI-
SEE DEU6 4
6T9
`I~ .)/
~~~ .~ i
` .~
_~\ ~~
DENOTES TEMPORARY
FLL N SIFiFAOE HATERS
E7(CAYATION OF
1mADfAT FY1
^ -
o
0
N~
O
OISSIQ
EST 706 .~
6T SY tf
~ ~
ureuL v Drta !
E~srio a ~ ~ ~ ...~~ _ r. _.
~ ~~
i ~ ~'
,,,~Y-- ~ .oms
~- _ ~~__~ S>1
E ...//
YOOnl
tzAS ~~ s~P-
pTa rAr ~
8 RIP RAt
EST 1 TONS
EST 7 SY FF ,ry

0
~~~
P
c*F
DETAIL I DETAIL2 DET"'
LATERAL 'Y' DITCH LATi~AL BASE DITCH S~3L "%~~~
t rear to icmet t Not ra swel ~.r '=
b
xaturm
xarira ~ a -~ Sbpe 7q~na .2> p T) f/Ft. Sots G^~./ ~ ~ \ ~
LrpW ?Y 0 2~ r/Fr. Mn.O = I.0 Ft.
pimp=l.O Ft. J B=2:0 Ft, ~
STA, 16+50 LT. TD STA, 18+00 L1. STA.ff+00 LT, TO STA. 19+00 LT. 5T~6 ~ _-- - --- -- -T-
- STA. 21+3D RT. TO STA. 29+50 RT. _
SITE 1 ~~
^ppps R ` ~.
.. .. .. ..
'~ .
p ~ PAY REAQ
aASS u RR uv/ ~~,'>4' F
PAY USEWAY,~
ENGLISH
causEwar auA1lnrres
VOUIYE OF CLASS 11 R1P RAP
BELOW ORDINARY HIGH WATER= 22 YD'
°pm: 0
O
0
N)ADWAY DESIGN HYOPMRICS
FNGNEER BIDIP!®l
PRELIMIN RY PLANS
p0 NQI' O>a CON5IAUCIPpN
---...• ~ ~~ 9
..,:.~ :,::n
~ m tlx
°~ ~ ~i1B$bN
> ~
UTERAL'Y' DOC}
SEE DETMI.1
ESf sos cY DDE
ti
W
xo
V).R
WN
~d
~I
Z
DETAIL 3
PREFORMED SCOLUt HOLE
Permanent son
Reinforcement mattltp
RY11 / SRN
hStaAleveluxl flu9n
p~ ~ a;~ .Itn nahrol~ouM.
dryer
a A
so~ae PrefprmeQ.
Scair ide pya ~
t/'mirriyp)-
Rm n
Ro B~
_
ocm .rt s'ro.n 0 ji.
rot co-tryr
e~
.m na,r.e a9.i
9ra55e5 pi
vutv4aflcn s-Cnprr A-~
c OOE =S.S!
Pip°
c CL'B'RW R0.P -ZS?OHS
~~ pica =
"
c FETER FABRIC ,§fJ1Y
- 6./tlet
E
RyW
> a
2Y ' PSR4 _3~,Y
Narurd
[
cer: vrs 5' Rip Rop f r •~ WoW
/

STA 19+OS LT.
NOTES:
D TAPER SHOULDERS PARA~L TO
GUARDRAIL WITH 3'OFFSET ON
ALL FOUR CORNERS OF BP,ICGE.
21SHBG DENOTES SHOULDER BERM
GUTTER.
FOR -L- PROFIIF SEE SHc'~ of

~~ ~~
~ ,~
:~ .
~, ..
//
//
/~
//
//
a~i ~.
/'/
~ ~~
l~ ~~
l ~ . SR IW Yyyp IImA
7 190 BStl~~ r
-~ ~ `~ y / I I ,e~
~ ~
~.~'\ \~ t~ I °... ~ 11
~\ _ ~ ~ / 1
'SbY /
\~ ~ /
Y `
o ~ ,~
\\ ~~ ~ / //
\ - r r ~/ ~
\ ~~~ ~ ~ t
_t~ f
y e \) ll ti /I
~ 11 /~
~ l l `~'~
\lly tl/ i ,I 1 /
BEG APPROACH SLAB
STA 19~OOD0
_~ ~~~
• TYPe-01 w A 2~4~ -Tr~~
a /~ '~~ 16~6~ ~.T3Q~Aa tom.
~ o ••- o= ~ss~ I err+x ~
• TreEau M~
BEG BP,1!~E BPD ; ;= ~~ H SL"
srA Ls71a.L;o sa ti+~aoo

DETAIL SHOVING PAVEME•~ - ~ ~_ : =,."-~'S ~';P

~, ~ _! i

Q
~'
0
r
ErAn.
To sy

ENGLISH ~ ~'"
DEiWT~S TEIIPDRARY
FN.L N SURFACE NATERS
CAUSEWAY WANfLTlES
EYfAYAT10N OF PRELIMIN RY PLANS
AOWtAY FLL VOLUYf OF CLASS !I RIP RAP c° Nor me cwaYNVCmNI
BELOW OROlNARY HIGH WATER= 22 YD'
Permit D
N Sheet 7

0 ~° °~~ ,~ Gf BSON
~~,~
0
N ~ NAr~
To/4s
~ FF
.,~~
'~~ .
.~'p „
q
6
,
DETAIL 3
PREFORUED SCOIRt NOLE
P
A
~N A
,Y,
O

uTERU rowro-
SEE DETAIL 1
EST 305 CY WE
matttr~4
Q
w
_°
~~
WN
~d
Wy
jl.
J
~I
Q
~~
E ?,as ~ Ofttll rcn nanroaraana.
WNe!
A A
Saae Prefrmea °
sar tde esA u'am traA
~ e~
D~
a ~.
Sys e~ retie a95:
DETAIL I DETAIL 2 D~".•-_ 4 ~,~ raa*, crwx ~~A NOTES:
LATERAL 'V' DITCH LATERAL RASE DITLH Sr<_^•3L 'V' ~~- ~`- OOE `~
INOr ro saael ,Por to xael ~M' ~ ~ ~ c 4'R'RIP RAP =ZS?ONi OTAPER SHOULDERS PARALLFL TO
e ;~+ `~ °E nrER FARwL :4QSr GUARDRAIL WITH 3'OFFSET ON
I ~+~tl ° ~ ~ I ~N" = ALL FOUR CORNERS OF BRLDGE.
Nanra 1 ~ F° ?y ~ qJ -" Sboe Nn.aa ~ ~: Curkt PSRU PSRU ,~Y
Pape tra,s,0 f/Fr. >z
Wawa 2'/ 2a f/Ft. ~ ~ «. I I y 1d a Naturtl
° I el "'I"' o = `o F'. -~.,:..~`y' ~ ~ c~o,„,a 2J SHBG DENOTES SHOUI~ER BERM
um.0 : i.o T+. a = z.o Ft. ; ' _a:-n= s yc R~ ~ T ru< GUTTER.
b = i.O Ft. O = S.0 Ft, ~ ~'_' - -~ -~ ~ ~ ..-:mac w; ; Fora Fabrie 8 S; v02
STA. 16*SO LT. TD 5TA. 18*00 LT. 57A.IE+00 Ii. TO STA. I9+CO LT. Si a. I$+DC ~ ~ ~_ =`_' := stale+a5 LT. FOR -L- PROFLLE SEE SHEET b
5TA. 21+30 RT. TO 5TA. 24+50 AT.

-L-
PI = 15+00.00
EL = 439.01'
YC = 200'
K = 300
10 11
12
PI = 25+00.00
EL = 424.16'
YC = 650'
K = 116
24 25 26
BEGIN BRIDGE
19+14.00
18 19 20 21

BR10GE HYDRAULIC DATA
DESIGN DISCHARGE = 5,700 CFS
DESIGN FREQUENCY = 25 YRS
DESIGN hNY ELEVATION = 420JO fT
BASE DISCHARGE = 8300 CFS
BASE FREQUENCY = 100 YRS
BASE hIW ELEVATION = 42320 FT
OVERTOPPING DISCHARGE = 15,000 CFS
OVERTOPPING FREQUENCY = )500 YRS
OVER70PP1NG ELEVATION = 428.40 F7
DATE OF SURVEY = 2-22-OS
WS.ELEVATlON
AT DATE OF SURVEY = 40430 FT
BENCH MARKS
BM 1: RR SPINE SET IN POWER POLE N0. EUC45
BEGIN GRADE
PI = 14+00.00
EL = 439.83'
13 14 15
16
17
-L-
PROA{7 REFERENCE SHEET N0.
8171 b
ROADWAY DESIGN HYOAAUDa
FNGWff0. ENGINEER
PRELIMIN RY PLANS
DO NOT U58 CONSTRVCfgN
Pemnt
t S
sn ~9
ot
~
~e „,
„
~ ~
°"R'° °~ ~ G[BSON
ENGMEFAS, PC
vamcu scuE Hoazorrtu scAIE
END BRIDGE
21+44.00
22 23 24 I
•BL• STA 5+43 LEFT 36'
N 931,529 E 2,072,689 J; ); STRUCTURE EXCAVATION
EL = 432.87
FOR LlNITS SEE STRUCTURE PLANS
(STRUCTURE PAY (TEMI
BM 2: RR SPIKE 5ET IN 30" OAK
-BL• STA 13+94 LEFT 73' DITCH ON LEfT S/DE - - - -
-L- STA 19+47.23 LEFT 84.72'
N 932,099 E 2,073,339
EL = 417.45 DITCH ON RIGHT SIDE -
FOR -L- PLAN VIEW SEE SHEET 4 & 5

l~~T]FIFIEII$ ~~1[]I~A~°]C~
„.
,.
~~~
.j, i~
• ~~ ..
/ /
//
// \~
~~
4 ~ ~
I
I~
II I
I I
I I
I
I~ i
1 • ~ ~
I ~I ~~
i
a ~~
0
0
:% ~ o
O N~
;I:
/' H Q
.. ~/ % ., 44~~~ . SPEUAL'Y DITCFI
' ,~ Sff OETA6 4
a uTau v ara~
J~''T- ~ sff DELL 1 . f
~~~/.~~ D ESf 70 CY~
>SF
~, .. ' / ~ ~
\ f I
~~~~
~ ~~ ~~ _
~ - - 1 ~ ~' ~ ~' --
i
v esT , .~ PoaD,
h/
.~\\\ r `~I ~ IQ/
~~~~ I t ~ l
m
~~~ v
11 L` ~.~'G. ///~
\` .. .~ f ~//~/ yr+
__- ~~-\ !~
C~J ~ I
~~ ~~f~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~
i~
/ ~~
8EG APPROACH STAB
5TA l9f00D0
;,-i~' aDrixE
• TYPE-01 S' A ~ • Tr~a
r
c ~y o, 1561 ~r,.,LYA'
~- ,}
' TYPHII • I'_~-rt - -
BEG BR1L~= =t1 ti ;;- -,i- SLE
,
srA I9r14.Cb ~A ?,-,~?~

DETAIL SHOIl1NG PAVEMENT - ~..~:; ?=~~sti+;L'

O
a O
MSS B PW 1AP
Esr z mNs
FsT T sY Pf
~, r~,~
T
SE'
DETAIL I OETAIL2
LATERdL 'V' DITCH LATERAL BASE DITCH
Ixor to sea_I :Nor +o seael
D
xatura ~
Fl 9me
noru-a l ` shoe ~~c^a ~ ~° p 1~ rrF+.
Drama ~Y 0 1• rvFt• ~ Uln. D = L0 Ft,
Uln. D c I.0 FT. 8 ' 2.0 Fr,
b =S.OFi. - b=5.0 Ft,
STA. 16+50 li. TO STA. 18+00 LT. STA. 18«00 LT. TO STA. 19+00 LT:
STd_ 71+10 RL 70 STe_ Jd«SD HL
CT.gS B @ tAF
6F T016
,~~{{AA 6T . SY FF
4;dEF ORCII
z
FST 50 DDE
I iT0
® ~Ne
~~ A ENGLISH
1
B E
DENOTES YPACTS TO
&FFEA 201E 2
WLLOSABLEI
DENOTES YPACTS TO
®
m
~
~ z
1
T
ICA
Bl
EXCAVATION OF
ROAOtAT Fll
N

a~ ~.
6 ~
` SITE 1
•~
~
+
V ti~+'~;,~~
'1 d w N - .. ~
Mf6 o AIP R
PAY
~.A Ji

DAp
AP ~~e

3e.

ar~RU'r Dlrcr
ff OETAX 1
5T 305 CT ODE
W
yo
'~ +
WN
~~
W
21
JJ
Z (
a
a
NOTES:
11 TAPER SHOULDERS PARALLEL TO
GUARDRAIL W1TH" 3'OFFSET ON
ALL FOUR CORNERS OF BRfDGE.
215HBG DENOTES SHOULDER EE.Ru
GUTTER.
~ FOR -L- PROFILE SEE SHEET 6 ~
e.,l..
lOAOWAY OWGN HYDPAWC
BJGi~I 97GIN®t
PRELIMIN RY PLANS
W NOT U!E PO CONSTRUCTION
BUffef Draw 1'19
Sheet of ~,,,,,,
.d 'n
,~GlesoN
ENGUlEERS, PC
/~
~/~o
V~
STA. 15+00 LT, ~,: ~~- w _ = STa, 19.05 lT.

]~~7lFlF]Ell$ ~1~'III~?~~~~
a
W
Z ~
~~
WN
~d
ti
W~
21
J
U
ti
~~
DETAIL I
LATERAL 'V' D11CH
l xpi rp Scaa)
Nppf~ ~ I FII
a y U d nFr, gOpB
Min. 0 = LO Ft.
h = h.0 Ft.
STA. 21+30 RT, TO STA. 24+BO A7
DETAIL 4
SPEpaI 'v' DITCH
1 Npr ro Scpw
Na}„rd ~ A~ ie( FiW
prauna 2,y 0 \g+ swpe
Min.0 = L0 Fr.
STA. 25+50 RT. TO STA. 27+OORT.
~O
~~
DETAIL 3
PREFORMED SCOUA HOLE
Parmmenf Soll

dX W Aelnforcemant mp}tinq
IPSRNI
InsiaA level ana Huan
Pipa or pitrJ: rich narurol grcuna.
Gnat
a 4
SV~ara Preformed W
Stour Xala (P$XI IX'min typ.)
IppflID, AOp Ins
fa~thrif IhOrn
Y 03.2
0~
f11~
seas rlin native
grasses pr tl 9.5_
Instabrlort ~"4
DOE
7iSY
c
~ ?
Cl'B' RIP AAP -7R TONS
rp p
pkcn E F~TEfl FAAAIL -5tLL-57
~s OutNt - PSAN
1.v 1' a PSRM _ c7iSY
xa}urpl

Llner•. Class 'B' Rlp R
ap ~ Nck Ground
ihiok rich Filter Fo oric I~B a/1102
STA. 2349 LT,
NOTE:SHBG DENOTES SHOULDER BERM
GUTTER.
FOR -L- PROFILE SEE SHEET 6
® DENOTES IMPACTS TO
BUFFER ZONE I
(MITIGABLEI
DENOTES IMPACTS TO
BUFFER ZONE 2
(MITICABIEI
ENG~,ISH

-_~ -
__ ~~
~-. _ ~~
J " ¢¢ ~~
I OI -~ ~ ~-~~ \\
I> ~~~-~- // ~ ~~~ ~
~ ~ I I ~ ~
I I ~ ti
\ I ~ 1 1
I ~ ~ l'
/ I
I I ~ _ ~}G~ ~ 1~ •
I I Q ~~! \ I I
~ I ~ ~ ~~_~~ ~ ~ ~
~ I I I // 0 ~\ I l~
~ © I i /// 1 I / /
~ °i I ~I ~} '11 / //
©I I I I I `- _ ~i ~
~O~II I - i
1 i ~~

P
SEE SHEET f-A FOR INDEX OF SHEETS
m
P SEE SHEET 1-B FOR CONVENTIONAL SYMBOLS TJ.P.NO. s~eT nro.
~A~ ~
t ~~C~~
~
®F N®1~~C
~
[
~~
~®~,~N~
1 ~a~~a P-o~
/
~
~ T
yp'~~n
(//y
u~'
/rnT
1/
~
~~
~~1~
®F
~
~~~
\
IM
'' ~, V LL
d ~
iJLl \J+
1'
'
~
`
~ ~~
~ ~
~ PERh~t T DRAWING
,
~ ~r c
a ~ ~ ~ GRAKVILLE co vx~
~ r R II {
- Rd. ~
LOCATION: FRIDGE N0, 84 ON SR 1141 OVER
`-`~ TAR RIVER
~~
TYPE OF WORK: UTILITIES
~~ OFF-SITE DETOUR
VICINITY MAP
da ,
~-
N B GIN TI 0.0JECT 8-414 \ ~ - ~
~ Sh.U+00°00 ~ ~ - - ~

I I~ 1'~. ~- ~ - ~
- - ~ ~ ~
~.
'~ '~
_ i _ .~

/ . j '" ~ ~ ~~_ ' \ ~
\ /~~ SR 1141 i0 U~ S 151,E = -- --'
~
-
`~ ~~ ;~ II
;~/ `~~~/ 8R 1141_` ~
~~
~- _____ _\
/
`1 ~ _ --
~ ~

I
_ !
~
--
l 1

I I
`''~ \
~
~
I ~ STA.19+14°00 / / ~ ~) f
_ \ \ ~~ 5~ 1` . ~
/ ~ ~, , -L- STA. 21+44.00
~ END ill PROTECT B-4124 ~~ ~~
~
~~
~
/
1~ ? \ % y~ 1 ~~ /~ , " ~,~te
9VD BRIDGE -Ir Sia. 29+50°00 ) ^
\
/
.
~

1 ~~ l ~
~ 1%~/
'
a
t
m
n
0 ~

-
Q INDBX OF SIiEETS UTILITY OWNERS ON PROJECT ~ a ~ ~ ~
n
o SI~ST NQ D$SCRIPTlON
{1) PROGRESS IDIBRGY DNlSION OP fIICdIR'AYS
~~ ~~

,°
P-01 T11ZE (2) SPRIIYT
S~BT ~'~ SRC770N

T~
P-02 IfatU R03 PERMIT DRAWA'GS ~~ ~
~
-ate
_
W
~
o ~z
°~~ Roca IiaaYrmaPJL U1IIJ1~3 .48G7TON SNQQ128R
saw PJi vmJ7Rit uAn ulnmt
S4 rRWecr mYrn~
~
a+~
~i ,
Haw Yonan UlIIlf~t PAQjBCf DS41Gl~p
~
~~ ~a

W
i!~
LJ.1
U
W
~7
1 6r ~ ~ PROJECT REFERENCE N0. SHEET N0.
/ .~•'.
13~~
~~
' UTILITIES BY OTHERS
a
® 3
7~~ ~~ /
o
_
0.00
30.00' ~," m " ~ NOTE:
~
o
~ ALL PROP03ED UTILITY WORK
,~~ DENOTE IMPACT AREA SHOWN ON THIS SHEET WILL
IN BUFFER ZONE BZ 1 FOA BE DONE BY OTHERS
DENOTE IMPACT AREA PROPOSED POWER POLE LINE R
IN BUFFER ZONE BZ 2 FOR AREA = 0.0914 ACRES a
PROPOSED POWER POLE LINE uLKL.coPPER ~, (NON -MECHANIZED CLEARING) 6
+ av>~ &~" ~ 0
AREA = 0.0492 ACRES
PMv 01T1,00.9-020T
(NON -MECHANIZED CLEARING) ddT16,Paw ^ ~; uEKATA7FxO.EARLE

- -d Q P0.?9 nRAtiro s 6 OIIE01 C. EARLE
m A PM• 0917A0.72.61A
o "• + Odi2r,P0,nr
~ Kt~~TM / N ao t V .y, ~ LL Pd4PGA (TRACT •O / L~t~I 7, ~

q
• v N /~
EARL LEE 610PFf1ER ~ ~} ~ a s " NS
// TMr 09r7,00.2NT6A ~ /', ? e ., • / ~ - _^
,\// 6duA,ro.lncTlrACrro / •• ~ ~R J~~ei I'
// O N1P ~ E ALEK 0. EAOJ.E a ry
~ .. .. ~ 0
~
~
' / ~ /
~
Wr ~' ~ ~~
I ~ Nj5 p4 M-~09TNS.00.9-099! a ~ Pi ~ ppROP O
/ R
/ ~^ / rIKIRUAU cooPER xEIRS ~'' odu7.PG.T11
;
~ m
8
TEL
~ ~
N ~ •-
'
~,,
~.
s
L
1
.
r7
/ / - ~. ~ Pdl• 09r0AP'22.961i .E IdIECOWED PU,T 6T ~ ~ N , ~ N
•' N°v- ~ Q0.6b PG01 p54 Pf(d901 $1FYEY5 1 41 W aa. ~,
.ti'' ) / / ': ~ / ~ Pdrl,PG291TRlCr m N .,~~ m TONI ~, ~ ~ ~/ OEK9dr ~ ''
~' •BL• 3 F'NC 0.67.66 ~ m . n n +~ ~
/ )RA B.OEAxr
.
\~\
•
s ~
•
/ ~'s.a
/ ~
,
~
au
2
P
0
v'f m •L- STA IAE;SIOFF AST' LT DITQI r9 -L- SrA.I9+m.27 raa•9s69s ~
d .. y
/
/
f
~
/ /
y
>' `4 \ /y: ~ •a $ $ s~~ (, ~ 7 84.72' LT 2S9.PG 206
~~ ~
_ ~ mil dDE -BL• ST4, 094 +~ ~
..
'
+
~
~
/ / 9
\
"
~ \ -
72.69
Li v~' ~ + ,.
y
~~ ~ ''s''a. dRA6I
/ ~ '. "/
.~ +i6 ~1. ~m n9 a brll v. alT
/ I
a ~ ,ga OUAAOdAR voao6 r A
\ EARL LEE SRATFrlER 66• ~
w \ _ .
: ~
'
~
~
'
~
,
,
II ~.p~>.~.b~,U
~~ ~,•
~/'
od 224YG 1761 s , F
A \.. ~ I / dIPIAP , ~ F ~

I _ pp~~ ~ ~~+~ ~ ~ ~/ xul
i~ ~ {
J r00d5 K p"
~
1
r i ~ N
m ~
~
8A1 ~ q ~' .. r 7aK' R ~ r W
~' '~ AL- STA.5~43.30 ~ ~ /- - ~ b~
1
-36.09' LT i
I PMT 0lTl.O~ R•9~6 ~ ELEV~.4J287 re~ ~, _ ' ~y ~p f ~ .., r~s •~9 / .ne M II / F ?~
u
~
0d 2000, PG l69 Apps
~} ~ (~ ~ ~ -~ ~ ~
4 ~ ~
1 I I sPe,n,PG2dr rtmcr + ~•,• ~ N pg ~ / °' I
• ~w,am ~5 t
~

~ q0~~ ~
rp015 +OD +~ +10 ~
.~
y
O
/ ~l~_~-~ ~~~ o +00 +TD
~T
Y /0' v
Y-
~
Q
+
+
B
-
~
M
.E
B' ,~ Dd1At0 OEINT 6
IY y, + II Ad' +90
3 KArAT $.OEINY s
_ ~ . -~ ~ ~ I3I
R MY IP +S, ~f 9M OIr3A133i696
'
~
..
4
n T
'A
"b
(
// N~'77-dd r», IQ I06 N ~
~~"~`
QI "~ ~ CLA9i1AP IAP
..
~
\ ~{11 ~ AIIrt N.OEAR d (~ I 4~ m U X R / ~76~
\\~,.fN 01T3A0f+~2,•SSk Ip~ :.r~6 s I I ~ ~ q + v drAOVe ermrn+G
I ~' ~ 3
\4i'\ n,~202 [ Mcr ,O ~ °.:
+
v 0' / ~
' I
O
/
~ dnu I
~
i5B'
I
^
~ DOAIS K COOPER ET AL
\ ` ~ ,
:
6"~ ~
~ PM• 09t~,p0•JI+66T / d 6 m ids a 001
~ O
m =C-
~
/
T
\ ~ ~ ~
~
(~ ~ rdxPGk ~r-~
P I&+2854 Dry ALEIUROErt O,EARLE
• ~ ~ / / „ _. p5T' JIT (RTY
6 WEFlI C. EARLE
.
\ \ / / ~ k y 4 ~ D/~ 4'~6' 329' 1w 01T7.00.32•N79
1 \ 9C O / / '~ m' is « T !~ / ~ Pd A tt70~ 1IKACT -O J
_
a / ~ 4
~
~
~ ~ , / R ' 43IOA0'
\ \ ~ ~'~ / / O
\ r / PAAAOI ,IOIES J+, ~ SE • SEff~ LAN EW O
1 as r2r, Pu 166 ~ LOUS caaPEa i TRANC COOPER
~ \ r _ ~ b 1 GELK L. COPPER -dn.PUlo rtRitr•a /' ~. tAUSTEES ~ ~7Cao~- •w>r K r tRUSt
S 62'9'77•r h 1.6.~/0,90t
• ~^
~
I
~
1 ~ 6PM' 0lT0
]-020T
00
1 .

~\~
~
,
~
gJ.95. L-~ 662''P,u'r ~ INECOKOEO AAT m PA9g61QN TIRvENS
e~ ~+t
~ ~ \1 ~ ~+' II PdIAPU 291TRACiro y
~
.
9JaP /
N7 I
1
v ~ \1 ' // of J
~ OJ DPl\,~; ~ I'
1\ / a / / f J;\J
p~~ ~ 11/'ti // .. s62.9']rv ~ cMU 060
~
p
9 81.7r

~
m
U a
4n'
te n 8EO APP
A
$
Y"
~OACH
r..
~ ' L (
{
y~/~
~/

Lzl,
a STA l9'P~AO
ENO BRIDGE
z ~ ~Trre•R STA Z+A4,00 •mE.d~ E / P J
'
s\ ~ .-.
N ~ z N
~ ~ e SJCffA9 ~ ~
ATE s~ ~'~ IROIpv ~ al
_ z ~
~
~~Q
R~
D
~
V 4AIG
t
~
~ EN
M ° Trnal
• rrreae AC~
OF GUARDRNL ,4ND SHOULDER
Gp =~ ~ "' % B C BRIDGE x0 MPROpCN S P
.

~ z ~
~~ STA 19+1~AO STA Z+58D0
21~~ MOTES ShtlC/LDER EERY
Q zi • 6/A A1Ch09 UNIT REOIiREO
~« DETAIL ShgYIMG PAVEMENT - BRIDGE REGU'gAISHIP FOR -L- PROt=1LE SEE SHEET 6

~_-~
PROJECT REFERENCE N0. SHEET N0.
UTILITIES BY OTHERS
\
NOTE:
• ALL PROPOSED UTILITY WORK
~
/
SHOWN ON THIS SHEET WILL
/
•
~, ,' BE DONE BY OTHERS
~
/
\

.
\
2p 5rE /
/ ~.
l/ ~ T ' /~
~' _ ~
O
i
~+
d' ~ ~ • / x SPq' 35' E~~ ~•~~ ~
~ ' OONaLD DEMm d
% ~
/
/ ' - PI`n~o9~TS.~wa~-sale ~3
/ \ _ _ D.a.2SA PG 201
-_--~ /
`
-
_
,~ ~ ~
END TIP PROJECT' 8-41241 -
~ "
~
'
~ ~j1 F:\'~ .. ~ ~~ I ~i
''/// '^'~..fp~ . ~ . . o -al• a Tor zz«sa.~3 /
~0 . -l- STA 28«92.80 OFF 13,9T' ~
-

~
woods , . ~
- - ~ 3 _~ ~--_
'
110005
V ~ ~ - Si N« ~~ - -- -
~

N
y
~ r
I
I
~ r on..~ a r R
o~~ ~ ~` s n•a•,S
~
W ~ _ .~ ~ ~ ~ / F woods +~ ~ `L I ~ ~ ~mas\ ~ S r
I I N
!lIDRA /~H
t
a~
~
~
4 ~ti
R
~
ar `
D
i;
_, ~, ~~ Shea
J / PREOIpN SIIIKS'S
o A w.0 hrq
+Te vaew v DDaS I ~ ~ I
w0065 q Itf DITNE 1 - ~ L • 'y~
I I
~ fR.Sr riT 701 CT DDI « O • .' e" \ ~
/
~ \
~ ~ 1
V
"
s Joxr1E c a1Mx I I ~i ~~ ^ ~
5
-~
~
J
II
j
s
~_ ~
~
5 ~ . P/ Sla 24+0928 Pi Sf0 27+56.85 a I ~
l`vJ o~ •'
O
/
~ I ~ ~
~
v
~
~' ,
~- 13'~'342(LT1 ~~ 16'38'O6,EfRT1 ~
i.a,s caoPEx d PRANG cooPER 0 =4'16' 323' D = 416' 329 /~1
Q I ~ ~~. I I ~ ~ ~ ~
/ ~ E C. EvANS +
I I ~
~
,~°
~
~ TRUSTEES w
~r TRUST
'~
T
i
M
~
0~
^%
\ \ "~ I
~ I
=
~ i ~ ;
r
L
5
^P' ol+xaD-asssr
0
9
7
JI
]FI
' S usmwROEO Pur erP6vRi01asgN SwwM R • 1,340417 R ~ 1,341140' ~ ~ ~ / " ~ u.o aR m r uT e.
. SE =SEE PLAN Vlfll' Sf =SEE VIElI' O ~ ~} 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ / ~ ' Su+wEra k~k`
/
r\
/
r1
3
l I ~
~
/
f~'I~r t3 ©©~/
\~~ ~ ~l~/
/
7 ~ ~ ~ ~
«w
30.00 ~ A)s
.)PER
{T TRUST T ~W. sf
A
I ~
_ ~5 T~
DENOTE IMPACT AREA /
IN BUFFER ZONE BZ 2 FOR

4 /
PROPOSED POWER POLE LINE
""~ AREA = 0.0221 ACRES /
(NON -MECHANIZED CLEARINGI
a
i
a ~~ /
~~
t ~

<
.
/
n
mp
n ,
h
a ~,;v / ~\ XOT& SEER EMOTES SMOULDER EERY
~

~m "
-"'~ FOR -L- PROFILE SEE SMEET 6

_,
SEE SHEET 1-A FOR INDEX OF SHEETS ""' eR'n..o.er.ouela:a X06 ~~
SEE SHEET f-B FDR CDNVENTIONAL SYMBOLS }~,} ~p
~~~~~~?f`~~C ~11f~ 1~'f®~~°~~ ~~~~®~~~~1V`~1\
d
ll
~
Jl L'e 0
A `?I .C. 8-L~124 1

Me °
~eJa 1~ ~7~~}{y ~Y
~
~
~
j~7
~ ®~ iE!E~~LII U'V' ~ It ~
011
~~~~~~ rt~n ~u.w
477
1
1 a~nmw c~osms
1141 0 PE
BRZ
~
y ;1
A .
.
33 -
~ im
c
33477.2.1
BRZ-114110 ROWAITL
709
O ,,, `~ 33477.3.1 BRZ-1141 5 CONST
yp
~ BeE~
I
~~
~
D
R
m ~ END OJECT i JI A ~
~ ~U> \Ll ~ 11 ll
~
~ ~

N ^

a
'm
~ o BEGIN PROJECT Rd' _
b ~
V JL .!lam/ 1LA
.
,
. r
~ n3e A~ . ,u °
,
Q Ivsa
I nya G un m
°e
v
e
l Rq`
R Bssell ~
~ ~ LOCATION: BRIDGE N0. 84 ON SR 11410VER TAR RIVER
~~
Ran
Rd.
~ ~' ~ '-
I20 I,~: TYPE OF WORK GRADING, DRAINAGE, PAVING, ~ STRUCTURE
V

W Range ~
,:, I,X 9 Ra v
1117 7
IIS
•-~--+-~+-+ OFF-SITE DETOUR
~ vrclxr~Y JYII'll-
~ 4 5
BEGIN TIP PROJECT 8-4124
-L- SIa.14+00.00
ro~
~o
~
i0 U
S i5g~
MORIAH RD
SR 1141 ~_
T~ _.. ,
,~~
-L- 5TA.19+14.00 ~PQ-
BEGIN BRIDGE
21+44
00
-l- STA
END TIP PROJECT 8-4124
.
.
END BRIDGE -L- SM. 29+50.00
v
!
M
r
V
'
^
v J
0
V
NCDOT CONTACT: CATHY ROUSER, PE, ENGINEERING COORDINATION, ROADWAY DESIGN UNIT
Prepared Jn IM 0%Joe d: HYDRAULICS ENGINEER DH7SION OF HIGHWAYS
GRAPHIC SCALES DESIGN DATA PROJECT LENGTH GIBBON ENGINEEES, PC
ro ~1I~
GIBBON STATE OF NOR1H CAROLINA

50 25 0 50 100
ADT 2008 = 917 LENGTH

LENGTH ROADWAY TIP PROJECT B-4124 = 0.250 MILES

STRUCTURES T1P PROJECT 8-4124 = 0.044 MILES n1~UAY VAgNA, N.C.71526
PHONE [phone]
E,uc si9asl-ns~
ENGINEERS, PC

o~'0e a
y ADT 2028 = 1250 TOTAL LE NGTH OF TIP PROJECT 8-4124 = 0.294 MILES 20~ nANDAR° se~c~'r,A"°xs ~
s
PLANS DHV = 14 °k
PE
~
` A
A
E BON
PE SIGNAIVRE~
N •
l~ 50 25 0 50 100 D = 55 % :
Y D
T
RIGHT OF W ,
GLENDA M. GIB
R ROAD W
D
ESIGN
~ y 3 % ' FEBRUARY 17.2006 PROJECf ENGINEE G~E
~
E P '
f
T = Te~M
` ^I PROFILE (HORIZONTALS V = 60 MPH
a I.ETITNG DATE: MICHAEL PEKAREK, PE
i 10 5 0 10 20
FEBRUARY 19 2008 PROIECr nESIGN ENCmrEEx
' TTST 1 % DUAL 2 % PE PE
° PROFILE (VERTICALS SIGNATURE: STATE MCNIPAY DESIGN ENGINEER
L~
F<
0
nOiu
~v
mC

- ~
c
m
v
d
v
N
a
m
0
a
i
r
oav
N~+a
0
~~o
m_,
~o~

GENERAL NOTES:
2006 SPECIFICATIONS
EFFECTIVE: 0T-18-06
REVISED: 0T-18-06
GRADE L[NE:
GRADING AND SURFACING:
THE GRADE L1NE5 SHOMN DENOTE THE FINISHED ELEVATION ff THE PROPOSED
SURFACING AT GRADE POINTS SHOMN ON THE TYPICAL SECTIONS. GRADE LINES NAY BE
ADJUSTED AT THEIR BEGINNING AND ENDING ANO AT STRUCTURES AS D]RECTED BY THE
ENGINEER IN ORDER TO SECURE A PRIER TIE-IN.
CLEARING:
CLEARING DN THIS PROJECT SHALL BE PERFORMED TO THE UNITS ESTABLISHED BY
AETHOD III.
SUPERELEVATION:
ALL CURVES ON THIS PROJECT SHALL BE SUPERELEVATEO IN ACCORDANCE MITH STD.
N0. 225.04 USING THE RATE OF SUPERELEVATION AND RUNOFF SHOMN ON THE PLANS.
SUPERELEVATION IS TO BE REVOLVED ABOUT THE GRADE POINTS SHOMN ON THE TYPICAL
SECTIONS.
SHOULDER CONSTRUCTION:
ASPHALT. EARTH, AiD CONCRETE SHOULDER CONSTRUCTION ON THE HIGH SIDE ~
SUPERELEYATED CURVES SHALL BE 1N ACCORDANCE MITH STD. N0. 560.01.
SIDE ROADS:
THE CONTRACTOR MILL BE REQUIRED TO 00 ALL NECESSARY MKIRI( TO PROVIDE
SUITABLE CONNECTIONS MITH AIL ROADS. STREETS. AND DRIVES ENTERING THIS PROJECT.
THIS YIORK HILL BE PAID FOR AT THE CONTRACT UNIT PRICE FOR THE PARTICULAR [TENS
INVOLVED.
UNQERDRA[NS:
UNDERDRAINS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED AT LOCATIONS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER.
DRIVEYAYS:
DRIVEYAYS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED AT LOCATIONS SHOWN ON PLANS OR AS DIRECTED BY THE
ENGINEER.
GUARDRAIL:
THE GUARDRAIL LOCATIONS SHOWN ON THE PLANS MAY BE ADJUSTED DURING
CONSTRUCTION AS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER. THE CONTRACTOR SHOULD CONSULT
WITH THE ENGINEER PRIOR TO ORDERING GUARDRAIL AuTERIAI.
TEAPORAAY SHORING:
SHORING REIXIIRED FOR THE MAINTENANCE OF TRAFFIC MILL BE PAID FOR AS 'EXTRA
WORK" 1N ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 104-7.
SUBSURFACE PLANS:
NO SUBSURFACE PLANS ARE AVAILABLE ON THIS PROJECT. THE CONTRACTOR SHOULD
MW(E HIS OWN INVESTIGATION AS TO THE SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS.
END BENTS:
THE ENGINEER SHALL CHECK THE STRUCTURE END BENT PLANS, QETA]LS. AND CROSS-
SECTION PRIOR TO SETTING OF THE SLOPE STAKES FOR THE EMBANKMENT OA EXCAVATION
APPROACHING ABRIDGE.
UTILITIES:
UTILITY OWNERS ON THIS PROJECT ARE Carolina Parer b Light. vM Corolina
Telephone d Teie0raph.
ANY RELOCATION OF EXISTING UTILITIES WILL BE ACCOMPLISHED BY OTHERS.
RIGHT-Of-MAY MARKERS:
ALL RICHT-0F-NAY MARKERS ON THIS PROJECT SHALL BE PLACED BY CONTRACT.
EFF. OT-18-06
REV. 01-02-07 ~
2006 ROADIIAY ENGLISH STANDARD ORAMINGS ~
,The follovlnQ Roadray Standa-de ae appear In 'Roadvay Standard Draringe" Highwy DeslQn Branch -
N. C. DepartmerM of Transpartatlon - RalelQh. N. C.. Dated July 1B. 2006 are opplloable to this project
~d by reference hereby are ca:aldered c part of these plans:
STD.NO. TITLE
DIVISION 2 - EARTHMOAK
200.03 Method of Clearlnq - Method 111
225.02 Cutde far CradlnQ Subgrade - Secondary and local
225.04 Method of Obtainlnq Superslevation - TMD Lane Pavement
DIVISION 3 -PIPE CULVERTS
300.01 Method of Pipe Installatlm -Method 'A'
310.10 Driveray Plpe Constructlan
DIVISION 4 - MAJOR STRUCTURES
422.10 Reir:farced BrtdOe Approach Ftlls
DIVISION 5 - SUBGRADE. BASES AND SHOULDERS
560.01 Method of Shoulder Conetructlan - HIQh Slde of Superelevated Curve - Method I
DIVISION B - INCIDENTALS
806.01 Caxrete RIOIttroF-Yay Marker
806.02 Granite RlQhtrof-ray Marker
815.03 Ptpe Undxdraln and Blind Qraln
816.01 Cma'ete Pads -far Shoulder Draln Installotlan
816.04 Markers far Dralnape Struot:rs and Cawrete Pad
840.00 Concrete Baee Pad far Dralna0s Struct:ree
840.29 Frames and Narror Slot Flat Grates
840.35 Traffic BearlnQ Grated Drop Inlet -for Coat ]ran Double Frame a:d Grotea
840.46 Traffic BearlnQ Precast Oralnape Struohre
840.66 Drainage Structure Steps
846.01 Concrete Curb, Gutter and Curb b Gutter
846.04 Dralna0e Installation In Shoulder Berm Gutter
862.01 Guardrail Placenemt
862.02 Guardrail Installation
862.03 Structure Anchor Units
862.04 AnoharinQ End of Cu~afail - B-17 and B-83 Anchor Unite
876.02 Guide far RID Rap at Ptpe Outlets
SHEET NUMBER SHEET
1 TITLE SHEET
1-A INDEX OF SHEETS. GENERAL NOTES AND
LIST OF STANDARDS
1~ CONVENTIONAL SYMBOLS
1'C SURVEY CONTROL SHEET
2 TYPICAL SECTIONS. AND PAVEMENT SCHEDULE
2-A ANCHORAGE FWI FRAMES DETAIL
3 SUNIARY OF QUANTITIES
3-A EARTHM~IK. PAVEMENT REMOVAL. AND
GUARDRAIL SUMWIRIES
3-B DRAINAGE SUMMARY
3~ PARCEL INDEX SHEET
4'i PLAN SHEETS
6 PROFILE SHEET
TCP-1 THRU TCP- TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANS
~ PM-1 THRU PM- PAVEMENT NARKING PLANS
EC-1 THRU EC- EROSION CONTROL PLANS
UD-1 THRU UO- UTILITIES BY OTHERS PLANS
X-1A CROSS SECTION SUMMARY SNEET
X-1 THRU X-9 CROSS SECTIONS
S-1 THRU S- STRUCTURE PLANS

Note.• Not to Scale
*S.UE. = Subsurface Utility Engineering
CONVENTIONAL PLAN SHEET
BOUNDARIES AND PROPF,RTY.•
State Line
County Une
Township Line
i

-
ty Une
C
Reservation Line
- - -
Property Line
Existing Iron Pin 0
v
Property Comer -«
Property Monument
Parcel/Sequence Number
Existing Fence Line -x-x-x-
Proposed Woven Wire fence e
Proposed Chain Unk Fence e
Proposed Barbed Wire Fence
Existing Wetland Boundary ----~----
Proposed Wetland Boundary N
Existing Endangered Animal Boundary
Existing Endangered Plant Boundary
BUILDINGS AND OTHER CULTURE.•
Gas Pump Vent or lJ•G Tank Cap 0
Sign
Well °
Small Mine 'Sz
Foundation Q
Area Outline ~
Cemetery 0
Building ~~
School
Church
Dam
HYDROLOGY
Stream or Body of Water
Hydro, Pool or Reservoir
lurisdidional Stream
Buffer Zone 1
Buffer Zone 2
Flow Arrow
Disappearing Stream
Spring
Wetland
Proposed Lateral, Tail, Head Ditch
False Sump
~-<
NO
m
.a
r----,
----J
-a... -
-B2 1 -
RAlLROADS.•
Standard Gauge -
RR Signal Milepost
Switch
RR Abandoned -
RR Dismantled -
RrGHT of wAY
ar rawyperaav
0
m~rosr ~s
s>nral
Baseline Control Point .
Existing Right of Way Marker ~
Existing Right of Way Line -
Proposed Right of Way Line -~--
Proposed Right of Way Line with
Iron Pin and Cap Marker
Proposed Right of Way Line with
Concrete or Granite Marker
Existing Control of Access - ~±--
Proposed Conhol of Access ~~
Existing Easement Une - -E--
Proposed Temporary Construction Easement - E
Proposed Temporary Drainage Easement- -me-
Proposed Permanent Drainage Easement - -Poe-
Proposed Permanent Utility Easement -rue-
ROADS AND RELATED FF.ATURES.•
Existing Edge of Pavement --
Existing Curb -
Proposed Slope Slakes Cut ---~---
Proposed Slope Stakes Fill --- F---
Proposed Wheel Chair Ramp
Proposed Wheel Chair Ramp Curb Cut -
Curb Cut for Future Wheel Chair Ramp - cr
Existing Metal Guardrail
P
d
d T ~ T
ropose
Guar
rail
E
i
ti
C
bl
G
id
il "
x
s
ng
a
e
era
u
Proposed Cable Guiderail "
Equality Symbol
Pavement Removal
-RZ 2- I~EGETATION.•
E Single Tree 4
Single Shrub
c~l~^ Hedge ,.,.~.-..,,~.,,..
'~ Woods Line ~"u"""'-`"u"L
Orchard 0 d Q Q
Vineyard +I~rarc
PROkCr REFERENCE SHEET N0.
6J121 IA
SYMBOLS
EXISTING STRUCTURES.•
MAJOR:
Bridge, Tunnel or Box Culvert coNc
Bridge Wing Wall, Head Wall and End Wall - ~ ~+c
MINOR:
Head and End Wall c RR
Pipe Cubert
Footbridge )----~
Drainage Box: Catch Basin, DI or JB ~ca
Paved Ditch Gutter -----
Storm Sewer Manhole 0
Storm Sewer •
UTILITIES.•
POWER:
Existing Power Pole
Proposed Power Pole V
Existing Joint Use Pole ~-
Proposed Joint Use Pole
Power Manhole
Power Une Tower
Power Transformer (]
USG Power Cable Hand Hole
H-Frame Pole
Recorded lLG Power Line
Designated lLG Power Line (S.U.E.')
TELEPHONE:
Existing Telephone Pole -t
Proposed Telephone Pole ~
Telephone Manhole 0
Telephone Booth D
Telephone Pedestal ~
Telephone Cell Tower ~,.
lLG Telephone Cable Hand Hole
Recorded lYG Tele
hone Cable 1
p
Designated lLG Telephone Cable (S.U.E.'j- ----1----
Recorded WG Telephone Conduit n
Designated U'G Telephone Conduit (S.U.E.'}-
Recorded LDG Fiber Optics Cable
Designated WG Fiber Optirs Cable (S.U.E.`r
WATER:
Water Manhole
Water Meter o
Water Valve
Water Hydrant -0
Recorded llG Water line
Designated llG Water Line (S.U.E.'~---- - ---~----
Above Ground Water Une uc Rcr.r
N:
N Satellite Dish p
N Pedestal p
N Tower
lLG N Cable Hand Hole p
Recorded WG N Cable
Designated USG N Cable (S.U.E.`j
Recorded llG Fiber Optic Cable
Designated USG Fiber Optic Cable (S.U.E.")-
GAS:
Gas Valve Q
Gas Meter
Recorded IJ~G Gas Line
Designated USG Gas Line (S.U.E.'j ----"----
Above Ground Gas Line uc c"•
SANITARY SEWER:
Sanitary Sewer Manhole
Sanitary Sewer Cleanout ~
l1G Sanitary Sewer Line ss
Above Ground Sanitary Sewer ac s~,l+~ se.~
Recorded SS Forced Main Line ~~-
Designated SS Forced Main Line (S.U.E.') - ----~-___
MISCELLANEOUS:
Utility Pole ~
Utility Pole with Base ~
Utility Located Object 0
Utility Traffic Signal Bax
Utility Unknown USG Line -,~„-
U~G Tank; Water, Gas, Oil a
AEG Tank; Water, Gas, Oil a
WG Test Hole (S.U.E.') ~
Abandoned According to Utility Records - AATUR
End of Information E.0.1.

r
NO.
N
I
i~yo ~~.
µ ~~ -
D END OJECT
ur
N PROJ CT
n.
a r R
d. 9
R
~'~"~"~'+ OFF-SITE DETOUR
VICINITY MAP
Bi
I
~'e-.
__ ~®_
TOTO L)~~ ' - ,
` ~ NOTES:
m
N
m
u
N
y
0
A
sq
r~
-° o-
.°/
i.
BMl ELEVgTIDN 432.87
N 931529 E 2072689
L STRTION 18.90 51 LEFT
........................................
........................................
BN2 ELEVgTIDN 4V.45
N 932099 E 2073339
L STRTIDN 19.47 85 LEFT
N0.
THE CONTROL DATA FOR THIS PROJECT CAN BE FOUND ELECTRONICALLY BY SELECTING
BL /T,rry~u ~Mp~prr}~
uu~~VV YY1~ JW1 f ~ i
PmNT OESC. NORTH ERST ELEVgTIDN L STRTION OFFSET PROJECT CONTROL DATA AT:
----------- ------- - - --- ---------------- -- -------------- ---------------- ---- ----------- ---------------- THE IDCKIIED IBAROIMATE SI'STEY DEVEIAPED FBR THIS PA0.1ECf
ORGDOH/PRECONSTRUCT/HIGHWAY/LOCATION/PROJECT/
HTTPliR'4YW
NCDOT
1 BL-1 931473.6169 2072679.5628 439.08 1B•47.ss 13.37 Lr fS BASED DN THE STATE PL4NE D76RDINATES ESTABLISHED lA' .
.
2 BL-2 931682.6206 207292L.9542 439.19 13.68.93 12.61 LT ACI)Of ~ ~ ~ 611&-1• 84124_LS_CONTROL O5O3023.TXT
3 8L-3 931925.4484 2073110.6827 432.84 ll• 12.51 31.67 LT MTlH MAD 1 STATE DIANE 6Ri0 WASUiNATES OF SITE CALIBRATION INFORMATION HAS NOT BEEN PROVIDED FOR THIS PROJECT.
4 BL-4 932029.5206 2073362.3727 424.87 19.28.90 13.75 LT ~~~~~EASTIN&~M11.~i1~'fD
PLEASE CONTACT THE LOCATION AND SURVEYS UNIT
IF FURTHER INFORMATION IS NEEDED
5 BL-5 932162.8423 2073645.0431 426.67 22.38.53 ze.7e RT
TIE AVfJGCE CDYBINED 6RI0 FACT(H USED pl TNIS PHONiCf ,
.
6 BL-6 932346.3617 2073834.0651 427.67 24.98.39 0.05 LT ANI7UID N BRIDI lSa 131 ®INDICATES GEODETIC CONTROL MONUMENTS USED OR SET FOR HORIZONTAL PROJECT CONTROL
7
e BL-7
BL-e 932498.3341
93zsle.sa7e 2073981.4992
ze7alze.352s 432.99
aae.lz 21.09.47
ze•9z.ee 8.94 LT
13.97 LT THE NGLAIN:>FRf GRID AEARGC MD BY THE NCDOT LOCATION AND SURVEYS UNIT.
IDCN.I1Ep IptIIDNIAL 6f~0 DISTAM'E FICW PROJECT CONTROL ESTABLISHED USING GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM

BPS B112f1' TO { SGP[OA 11400 IS S 5JMO2i7K IBHID/ .
NETWORK ESTABLISHED FROM NGS ONLINE POSITIONING USER SERVICE (OPUS)
AI! LINEAR DI[~IISI[N5 ARE IOCALRED fICR1I0NTA! DISTANCES SEE GPS CALIBRATION SHEET FOR HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL COORDINATE VALUES.
VERTICAL DATUM USED iS MATD 8B
NOTE: DRAWING NOT TO SCALE
SURVEY C011tTROL SHEET 8-4124
`VJ~~~ V ~~~AJLd ~®~~ ll 1l
BRIDGE N0.84 ON SR 11410VER TAR RIVER
THIS PROJECT IS NOT WITHIN ANY MUNICIPAL BOUNDARIES
~y
0
2~0
EIND STaE PAWECI re1r~

~~~~1['e ®lI' ~®~~~ ~~~~.®~~L~'
lI~~~V~~~®~" ®~ ~[~~!H[~~~Y~
~~~I[~~[~1~~" ®~ ~~1~~ i~i[°1C'~1~~
FQ
O
ON
NN
m~
\Q

1 ~
ae a
~,
t a ir
r
(`~y/~s7~i a
~
V
a

~~
`
~
:
I ~
~~ ~
a ~'
~
y
y
~°
~ ~ ~~

a ir
;~
~_
88 r
~~1 - ~ z ~ <.m'^m
1 ` d
C W~N t
(t~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~~
i I.; N~a
.., j ..~ m-iW
2 ~ i ~ ~ , F - o ZB \bb
250.x• 4.. ~ ~ I " 3,\t bZ'6
_ ~
p
y0 b0.45$ II ~ ~, ~ ' r
P
,os 9
(zgzr Z I
`~ ~ ~ 1 I
`S' - ~, ~~
N r
! ~ O 4 ~~~~
0ac
a - ~~^ AB'9BZ
+~ ". _9.6b AZ .bb 5
/ ~
~ ~~
~ p, ~~o
rm
r
o a' ~ ? r
~~
o~ ~1
$„
~s
~ Y * q~
~~m°
-ri ~ D
~ ~ ~~N
~i
v m
u n n
~ G ~ s i
i i
1
O
o ~
~~~
O O
~~~
t ~ 4A
~ o
5
~~
~ ~ ~~
T
~~ ~~~~ ~
~v
D
W
~~ ~
~ ~~~ ~~
r
1
~.
y~y~
O~ '
O
~--- ~
oc•
~ .
tzt
3.96 ,6Y,L- Z~
~
~
~~
~p°'
al~nv

~ //^~
T'
...~.r`' .. SOB 5925 5
'90.45/ 3g0 a•
~,
,' ~' ~ 15
. ~~ ~~
.o ~$ ~ ~i~
n
a
o4'zyz
,..,.. 3.81 ~t1.9b 5
Z :.
+ ~
N N~,
~ ~ ~ ~ 1 i\k $, aj
o\ ~ ~\
~ '' 3 s
1L65U 65 5 r '\ ~ ~
~m~ >u ~
+ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~'
~Li ~ $~a
~~n., ~ ~
MATCH UNE SEE SHt
-L- STA22t50

~
i
~~ ry
NO ~
T
~~ NN
VN
J` ~
Z ~
~Nm
~ y m

m p TZ~
r
OZ 46\ 65 `'
~,LS•bb
~~~
O
~.
m W
In
N
~ Q
(~ Z
~o
0
_~ o
~f
Z<z ~
~z
~a
Z€
~n

AM
124_rdy_psh5.dgn
1
r ~
~ ~ v
-Ai o ~- ~ a
0 2r
~ p ~g-
~ v o I
~ ~~ ~~
~a
~~*~~
~N
0
~g°m
a o ~ ~ -~
~~
N nA
~ * S
rO
1 5
7
J

~~~~ N
~a o
~° T~
~~~
MATCN
SHEET 4
,66'1[1
~.SZ.66.5[ N 1
9 °. ~!
to qh /',~~ ~••~ ~F
ZY 4N
• O~
~ ~ _
q0
,Qy ~S,
`~~
r~ ~ 4'... y~_.
~~
~i~ ~
. ~ ~.
y
O
a
N°a•~
s e
Oy/s '~
\1F~~ .~~.~%91eYTT~~ -
.~ ~ 3b6 ,SL .IC S~'
r ~6H 955
,~ 3 60 5r '
' 7
~ ~~~~i

~~
bl/
•/~
,~~rrrrr
~~~~~
~ ~~
Tj~ v
i
~'i~~~ep
r~rrrr
~ ~~
~ ~~
1
r ~
~~"
°~ .16'2Z
~ ~~~ 3.62,16.22 S ..
~~
`~
M.si 2°2r
6r`
N
..... ,CL'SQ

O
z
N ~.
i
Z
j
Np
6. J~
T
T
~~~~
~~ O
~ ~~

Z~ O
Zi
H °~
cf ~ m
gn
'z vo
(~ Z
A
x

f
ti<
0
NO
~~
~O

0 5 10 PRO1. REFERENCE N0. SHEET N0.
L~.l «I &4124 X-3
11
L
lJ
150 140 130 120 110 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 p 10 20 30 40 50 .
_
60 70 BO 90 1

^ P~ ~ _ _:
_~JO _..
__ _ __
. _ ' ~
e
.
',
~
~' _.
_
. ._ / 429.87 ~ ..
~y~

TGi/.
_.
._

__
.. ...
_.. _ ....
_ .. ~y~
XL
_. '_ \
~~~~~~~~
2r ~' ~
a5b7 . ~ ~ _
. `
~~yy~~ _ ~N

_...
-_
r.~
~
z f A~/~/~/~/~

_~. ~ .: _ ..... .... . _. __.. ._._.. _. _. _.." ~_._ _.. _.._~. .._.__. _.. _. _r. ~ _._.. ... _. _ ._ ~... .._ .... ._.... _.. .. .._.~..

~ ~. ~ / ~~ ~~~~~~
~~~~~~~
116.69 \

~,..

,

~~yy~~ .~

i

i

'
~
~

'
.
.. ~ ,
`.
I ~
` ~ .~
~~//yy~~
.. _._. '.__ .. .. ._._. ... _.. _._.__ ...._. _.___ ~ ' ~ .... _. - __ _ .TJ4---.
... t _ _ _ . _ _. R . ;._

~.. .~.~~
~ ~ ~~
~
_ _
~ ~ x`3).23\ ~ -

.:
n
_! _. '.. _. ... \ \
~ ~~
~~~~~~
am
N..
,M

_ ' __ .
_
18-f00A0 _ _ , _

_. _. _ _ ~ _
~..
,m
a~
a

:

: '..
a
an
m~a
nom
a ~
~"
150
140 130 120 110 100 90 BO 70 60 50 40
30
20 10 0 10 20 30
40 50
60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150

w
0 5 1D rKw. nerercrnu nu. ancoi n~
,_ L_L~ 8-4124
l_llill X-4

150 140 130 120 110 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 1
4b0 _ . _.~ __ ._ ... __ ~___.., _. _ _- --_.. _ -- - . _~

~ amao o,~o ~ : ~ _ __~_
_--.----
_ _v
-;._-- _
__ _
', ~
~ _ _
~
_
~ -

-------
-~ _- ,_ - - - __ __._. _.._ _ _ - --- -.. __
_ . --__ __ ._--- --- -._ _ ._ _. _
~n
.
~~
~
,. i f + _ \ °. ~ 408.44 ; ~ ~ '
..
20+50A0

Ira~o
__ . _.* ._ _ _. _ . __ ,_ _
_ _ _ .__ _____ _ ____ __ _ _ ._ ~ _
.
_ Mp _. _ '_ __ . _ . _ . _:._ _ _ _ __ _ - _ _~o
~ o~ o~~ 11

~,~o.
~_. ___-- ---- __ _G- -- _ _
__ _ - _ -- _ ___ _ --- -__ ._._ _ moo.-
_

,-
~~~
---- ~~

~a _.' _ ~.
_

~__
_ _ _ _ _ ____..__ __.. __ _ _ _. _-- _ -_-- -~ _ _._ ~._ _ __ _ _ _. __ ___ _ ..___ ._._ __ - - ...

_ .-_ . -- __.._ ___ -- - ._.___ ... _ _ .. ___ .

_. _ _
~

---
-----
_.~-- 0 ,z
___ .-__ _- ' - -- __ _.__ _._ ~_~
20+0'0.00 _ ~ _ _ - -
_
1 ~~
_ __..---
---- - - - -
, - -_ioar. _
i -.
~,

.. . ~ ~

,- _
_...
'\ /I .. _.
.~^ .,

L '~_
- - -- ,
> r

i8o ...

_.. _..., _
.' _. _ _ .._ _.. i ._ .

_. .._ __ ~ - - _ .

480
41&4 \
~' / ~
~
\ \
, i ,

714/. .. ~ \ _ ./_ ...
~, ..711!
. . '. \ ',
19+50.00
BEGIN BRIDE , . _ _ _
_ _~-
150 140 130 120 110 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150

0 5 10 rKw. Kertncn~e nu.
L-LJ 8-4124 X-5
LLl1JJ
150 140 130 120 110 100 90 80 ' 70 6D 50 40 30 20 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 69 70 ~ ~ 1
450 I ... _ .._ ._.... ~. ~_,~.._ _. _ ! __ ___ ._.' _' _..._. .. ...'' ~ _ ._ _'.. _ . __ __..__ .., _. __
4,p '' _ .._ ! _ . '1'IQ
_.. .._ .... . ,.......~.. .. Y~IY..... ...,. .WUW._ ... .: ......
~
_~
~
. :, ^,
eta 59
~ I
~ fNd ~
~
,. 7LY ., ;..._. ..._._.. .._ __, .. ~ j ..._._ .. .. .__,. __

- . ~~...~

~ ._.
_.. _ .. ..
~ry~
. ... ..~ ._...
_..,.. ... .. .. _. , .... _..
'. ,

1
~

•

' / / ~
i
f
~

7

-
i
'
-

_ ~ ~ , ~
t a
~y~

~K1Q _ ~5Q
,~,~ ~ _ _ . . _ _ 410.
?J(1
;_
__ ._.. __ _
~- h ~- _ _ _ _ ._ . _ 4,'J0.
_.
_,

~.
_...

.. ~
' ~ / X419.10
i ~
~

~~yq~ /
r
~ ~~~

,
'.
'.

- - .:_ . . .

~~/yy~~
~a
t _ _. _ __ __ _.. _ .. _

_
_ ~o __ . _

_ . _n.. __ r ~ _
_ ;_
~

~ . ~,_ ._ .. _

' .... u~ ~
_
~

11
~ ;.
- - _ ._ .

._,
_ _ . _ ..._ _ _ .. _ _ .- - - -_ __~o__
_-
:
. ~__
,.
m ~\
~ __
__

s
~
' ___-
, ",:
/ I 1
ao~
N~
v~ ~.

, -.._.. _ _. _.. .. i

_.: ...,. ./

~.~~~.~~~.. ~..-710.9E .. _. _

__: __

.,. __. _...._, _... _ .. .. _.
~

0 ~~. ~/y~
K .... ... .._.. .. ..... ...
.+ ON _ _
•r 0\
~~~
150 140
130 120 110 100 90 80 70
60 50 40
30 20 10 0 10
20 30 40 50
60 70 80 90 100 110 110 130 140 150

0 5 10 ~~ ncrcncn~c ~~. -~ -
~ ~ 8-4124 X-6
_ _

150 140 130 120 110 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 1
'
'
' ' 450_
450. _ .. _ _. _
_ .
...
..... ._ _ __ .____ _..~__.. , _ _._ _ _.. , --_ - __
,- - .__ __._ _ _ . __ _ .. - - _
440 ' __ _ _ _ -...__ _--_ _.. -- -- __ . ~.
1

- ~~~ ~~~
~ ` ~ y
_
~

~ ~
. ~
~ ~ `
~ ~'
~~ - _ \
.
~~

i

_
~
~_~~.___.~__
~ LJ~~OaJIJ
- --
` -~.
410 _- ° ----- - - ---- - _ - _ ____ - - __. ----..- - _.._
_ -'-- - --'
' : '~
.450 _ __ . _:_ __ _ __ _. .. _. ; _.
_ __.. _ __ ._ _ __
440
440 - --__ - _. _ _ _ _ ._ - _ _ __-
~__~~
430 ;
_ ~ :. _ ,~Y,9~\,
_.
.
_
.. ..
_ _ - .' -- - ~~ _.._ _ _ ____ __... _ _.~. _.~
. .
_
._. _._ _ _. ,_ _.. _.._ _
~. ._. ...___. - -- \
P~
~
0~~

_.
_
i.
~ .
i t ~.
/.~ .._
~~~ ~,~i i
__ - -- --- - _~_....__.. _ _ __. _- __-~__ .._ -23
-- -'
__ J
~ ~ - _ _400_
400 ._.
__ __..__. ~___... _'_._.. ~. _ "___._~_ ____. . _ _- -- _
_. _ _.- _ ____ __.____. ____ __.._. _ _
,,
j
-
440. _
440_ ,_ _ -_ _. _ .. .. - - -_
_ _ _ -

,_
_ - ---

~
_~ ___ ___. __ _ _
_ u._.._ __ _ ___ _. ___ ___ .__.. -- _ o~ . o.~oo _ _ . _ _ .. _
- ~ ..~__ ____ .. _ __ _..
-
-
-
2 --- ----- -
m ~~ I
z ~
~ ~ ~..
., .

La
of ~i
_ ', i i ~
'`
_. _
_... _ ~..
_. _.

a~
410 '
~~.~~
r'____V/'
_
___ _.. __ _ __ _ __ -
_ 4l0.
~~

i A/n~ //~~//~~

u
n -

~

.
:
.

~....

j
T ~
... _ _... .. ... .. ... .. .. _ _.
~ ...
.. ......
..
_..
.. _ . .:_ . .. _..._ .. . ..........
„,m
.,oN
_ L
$~~ 150 140 130 120 110 100 90 BO 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 BO 90 100 110 120 130 140 150
a ~~

~ 0 5 10 PRO1. REFERENCE N0. sntti rvu.
_ _. ~ _.. 1. _. ... _ _. I_. ;.. L_.L~ 8-4124 X-7
lL/lJ
150 140 130 120 110 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 ID p 10 2D 30 QO 50 by ~ ~ ~ 1
_950. _ _ '. _ _ . _ . .~ .__ !. ' _ ._. _ ..__ __ . _. u _ _. _ _ ... _ .',._~.. _ _....~. :....x150..
9+p 490

_ '~
4J0_. , , . _ . _ _

_'; ._._ _.

_ _ ~ _ _. __

-. ~ ..:
.

. -

.
.
V~I dell _ _ _

930
_
. _ w.m. ~
..
._
.
~. ~
_ __
_ ..... _. -
_ ._ __ ~_.._ ,._ _ ._.. _, ....

-
~ ~.- -
@8.78
~ .`
6:1 '.
~
.. .. ~. . ...._.... _. ~
....._, .. _.....
s.
.
.
~+ . .
: x120
-
-
\
........
a.
_ ..
_
~ .. ._.
.....
...
.....,ems ..... ... ...
~
.. ...... _ ...__.. _.

__
.~ .. ,,,..
___ .. ._.
_. _-
~~~~ 25150.00. L
4ln. . _ _ ... .. _ _ _ . ... .. ..... ... ~ . _ _. _
- .. ... _
, _ _._ ._ _ .._ ...

99G1

j
s

f
; .
i

90
_ _
1
.._930v._...__>__. .~ _ ..
~
__ ._._._
.._,_..__.
__.
~
_
.
:, i r 9

i ?~ '. ~ It175

t
~/~
7 ~

a
_ ,

25~Ifl0.Or1 ~

~q -.
,.771[._._, ~_. t. ..
{
~.
'.
....x130_.. _. ._ _ _ .. _.___ ._ ~yy
~UJMW _.. _ .._...

... . . __ r -- 144

,
~ ~
: ~ ~ . r
~
~. i :. '. 23 ~
r~l]615 ~
;
~ ~~~
-
.
_.. _.. ... _ _ _ .. _ _ _.
...
~

.~
_.... -4_.. _.__.'.
. -'.
~_ __ - ._ -
'. _ ~~~ ~~~~ .r _ ._
9~

:
_
.

.~
.,

i ` '. ~ ~

•-
-~,

,

~

_

.
'.
,_ ~

7M.. -~ ~• r . ,...
~ ~
~ .-~
~
:
I

I

~

~ j
i
7 4

~

. _ ~._ _

~~/1

_ ~~ _. _. - _
,_
]
_'150..-. _ ~_ ..._ ~_. __... I.._

~_
~ ~
~i
'

.._ ... .. _.,.. ~_,~ .._

~
~

.._ _' _._._ ~_ _.__.

t
i ~
~.
.___.

~

_

._ _. _ _.__..__ __ .._
___
1 j

i

__.~ .._. ____
~_

'. i.
d
_ _ . _.~___ _ _ .. .. __ 950_

- .

~

~~~~//~1 i

~
~. ~ ~

t I

i

!

I

1 ~
_ _

.

~ f

..
~

I

_ ~..
.. _
i I
~
i

-
..u. ..~. _ .. v„ ~ _ ....
c

I
j ~

r

_. ««„
I.
_ _ __ s

r

I
'

- _
~.~:f/^~ ; I

A~~
e
...:... .. ..... ~ _

~ i . .. .
~~ ~

-
. \ ~
` ~ y
/
I, ~ a
~~
__ 24-I~0.00 _ _. _ ._ .. _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~0___.
_~_
150 140 130 110 110 100 90 BO 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 ~ 90 100 110 120 130 140 150

o s to
.... _ _.. '. ~... _' _.... ~~J 8-4124 X-$
LLl/JJ
150 140 130 120 1
0
1
100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 TO BO 90 1
r
~ _ ~
~ ~
~

__ _. _
;_ _r_m
-
~~
~~_
MQ.
_. _ .__
_
, ._.
/ice _ _ __
`.
_~
_
_ ~~
_ ,
_ _.
~
~;~ , ~ .~

._ _ ,~

_.
,
_
,~
. :._ ._
~
~ \
-
' ' ~ _n ~
_
.._ _ - --_
4718 _.,___.. _ .. ._. ~_ __
_. ..
I I

. 'KiI _ .. ._
':
'. ' '
; ',

€ Y
' '
's _

__
, ~.
i
~
.. ~,
,
1

_~_
~

i
__ ~~
p~pq i ~
.r^ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,=^
\ ~ ~ ~
`~
-. \ ~ . ~.~ ..
- ~
/ ~
~~~.... ~... ~ . ~
..
~, 430!1 ~.
`" / ..
~~/~
Td1/ _.

~~''~~//~~

`` ..

;....

_ _. _.

_ ... _ _ ._ ~ _.~
. µ~
_a.. n. _. _....'_. _..
.___ _ _. _ _ ._.~ .~± _. ._.. 410.1/ _ __. ...

_. ^>~~p _ .. __..
~~n
__... _.__ ._ ...... .__.....__ '' _ .. .......7.Al..._.
~
~,~. ~
.

4 ` W~VV~. ..~_. .......__ ..............~ ...~... .. ..._..._.., .._. _. ,. ._...... ._ ____.. ., _.._.., .._...._
~.

~
d
3
1

i -

t
__ ,
~
a

x ~
Tll/ .. _..
i

-

..~.. '.

. _ _. .._... .. _... ^p~'
I. ~NfA WUY

_.~. _
~ ..
~ ~ ~ ~
i
~Q

~
',.
'.. _ ... __.. ....._.
~ / ~ ~ 119.95
~ ~ 6J... _. _..._. ....... _ .._ _
._.
~
_ _
p
NN ...
~ ~~~ ~~ ~ ~.
~\ -~~~~. ~'.~~. ~. 1874

' 26 7 W.IJIJ !
u
n
x ..
a~m
,.~ ON L
~
a'm
~ ~a 150 140 130 120 110 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 1d0 150

~.r~~'~
DFHR,:e : r~
~,c;
Granville County
Bridge No. 84 on SR 1141
over Tar River.
Federal Aid Project No. BRZ-1141(10)
W.B.S. No. 33477.1.1
State Project No. 8.2371301
T.I.P. No. B-4124
p71962
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
~Q ~ 6
DA ~ regory J. Thorpe, PhD,
Environmental Management Director, PDEA
G. " 1 c3 C' ~ ~~s-~.-
D TE Jo F. Sullivan, III, Division Ad in strator
~~- Federal Highway Administration

Granville County
Bridge No. 84 on SR 1141
over Tar River.
Federal Aid Project No. BRZ-1141(10)
W.B.S. No. 33477.1.1
State Project No. 8.2371301
T.I.P. No. B-4124
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
Documentation Prepared in
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch By:
/v~g/o~
DATE Trac A. Walter
Project Planning Engineer ~~.~~`"~~~~~"''~~~,,
Bridge Project Development Unit ,~.``~Q~~~AR~~/,~,'~.,~
/a i9 ~ 7
DATE
.~. ~ L-
Bryan D`. Kluchar, PE
Project Engineer
Bridge Project Development Unit
~ ~FESS/p ••.9
~ ~9`
~ SEAL
26877
~~~•FNcir~Es~'.z~
••~~~qN tit' `` ~~ ,~,.

PROJECT COMMITMENTS
Granville County
Bridge No. 84 on SR 1141
Over Tar River
Federal Aid Project No. BRZ-1141(10)
State Project No. 8.2371301
W.B.S. No. 33477.1.1
T.I.P. No. B-4124
Division 5 Construction
The contractor will be required to submit for approval a bridge demolition plan before
demolition can begin. The Resident Engineer will be required to send a copy of the
demolition plan to USFWS for review and continent.
In order to have time to adequately reroute school busses, Granville County Schools
should be contacted at least one month prior to road closure.
Granville County Emergency Services needs to be contacted at least one month prior to
road closure to make the necessary temporary reassignments to primary response units.
This project falls within the Tar-Pamlico river basin. Tar-Pamlico riparian buffer rules
shall apply.
Install special sediment control fence along the top of the steam bank. Install silt fence
along the toe of slope parallel to the stream. Once the disturbed areas of the project
draining to the special sediment control fence have been stabilized, the special sediment
control fence and all built up sediment adjacent to the fence will be removed to natural
ground and stabilized with a native grass mix.
A temporary access road for conveying construction equipment in the floodplain/buffer
will be stabilized with rock or timber matting. A rock work pad or timber matting will
also be utilized between the streambank and the interior bent in the river for removal of
the interior bent. The contractor may use a tarp placed around the interior bent to further
minimize debris in the water.
Embankment construction and grading shall be managed in such a manner to prevent
surface runoff/drainage from discharging in the riparian buffer at all times. All interim
surfaces will be graded to drain to temporary erosion control devices. Temporary berms,
ditches, etc. will be incorporated as necessary to prevent temporary runoff from
discharging into the riparian buffer.
The NCDOT resident engineer is responsible for providing a written invitation to the
North Carolina Wildlife Resource Commission: Non-game and Protected Species Branch
and the US Fish and Wildlife Service prior to attend the Pre-Construction meeting.
Categorical Exclusion Page 1 of 2
Green Sheet
October 2007

Division 5 Construction, Roadside Environmental Unit
Design standards in sensitive watersheds will apply.
PD & EA Natural Environment Unit
NCDOT will complete apre-construction mussel survey approximately 1-2 months prior
to LET. Any and Federally Protected mussel species will be moved out of the project
footprint. The Natural Environment Unit will provide a copy of the survey report to
USFWS.
Categorical Exclusion Page 2 of 2
Green Sheet
October 2007

Granville County
Bridge No. 84 on SR 1141
over Tar River
Federal Aid Project No. BRZ-1141(10)
W.B.S. No. 33477.1.1
State Project No. 8.2371301
T.I.P. No. B-4124
INTRODUCTION: Bridge No. 84 is included in the latest approved North Carolina
Department of Transportation (NCDOT) Transportation Improvement Program and is eligible
for the Federal-Aid Bridge Replacement Program. The location is shown in Figure 1. No
substantial environmental impacts are anticipated. The project is classified as a Federal
"Categorical Exclusion".
This project was originally processed as a "Programmatic Categorical Exclusion" that was
considered to be inadequate when USFWS requested to change from an informal Section 7
consultation to a Formal Section 7 consultation under the Endangered Species Act.
I. PURPOSE AND NEED STATEMENT
NCDOT Bridge Maintenance Unit records indicate Bridge No. 84 has a sufficiency rating of
20.5 out of a possible 100 for a new structure. The bridge is considered structurally deficient
due to structural appraisal of 2 out of 9 according to Federal Highway Administration
(FHWA) standards and therefore eligible for FHWA's Bridge Replacement Program. In
addition, the structure is considered functionally obsolete due to a deck geometry appraisal of
3 out of a possible 9.
Bridge No. 84 has aforty-nine year old timber substructure with a typical life expectancy
between 40 to 50 years due to the natural deterioration rate of wood. Rehabilitation of a timber
structure is generally practical only when a few members are damaged or prematurely
deteriorated. However, past a certain degree of deterioration, timber structures become
impractical to maintain and upon eligibility are programmed for replacement. Bridge No. 84
has approached the end of its useful life.
II. EXISTING CONDITIONS
The project is located south of Berea and west of Culbreth (see Figure 1). Development in the
area is agricultural and residential in nature.
SR 1141 is classified as a rural local route in the Statewide Functional Classification System
and it is not a National Highway System Route. This route is not a designated bicycle route.
However, the bridge is frequently used by recreational bicyclists. The Division of Bicycle and
Pedestrian Transportation requested that bicycle safe rails be added to the project.
Unfortunately,, the request came at a time where final plans had been completed for the

structure and such a change would have required a complete redesign. Therefore, bicycle
accommodations were not accounted for on the structure.
In the vicinity of the bridge, SR 1141 has a 19-foot pavement width with grass shoulders (see
Figure 3). The roadway grade is in a sag vertical curve through the project area. The existing
bridge is on a tangent. The roadway is situated approximately 23.0 feet above the creek bed.
Bridge No. 84 is a five-span structure that consists of timber deck on I-beams with anasphalt-
wearing surface. The end bents consist of timber caps on timber pile abutments, and interior
bents consist of timber caps on timber piles with concrete sills. The existing bridge (see
Figure 3) was constructed in 1958. The overall length of the structure is 179 feet with a clear
roadway width of 20.6 feet. The posted weight limit on this bridge is 14 tons for single
vehicles and 17 tons for TTST's.
There are no utilities attached to the existing structure, but overhead power lines cross the Tar
River just west of the bridge. Utility impacts are anticipated to be low.
The current traffic volume of 800 vehicles per day (VPD) is expected to increase to 1,200
VPD by the year 2035. The projected volume includes two percent truck-tractor semi-trailer
(TTST) and four percent dual-tired vehicles (DT). The speed limit is not posted in the project
area. Four school buses cross the bridge daily on their morning and afternoon routes.
There were no accidents reported in the vicinity of Bridge No. 84 during a recent three-year
period.
III. ALTERNATIVES
A. Project Description
The replacement structure will consist of a bridge approximately 230-foot long. The bridge
length is based on preliminary design information and is set by hydraulic requirements. The
bridge will be of sufficient width to provide for two 11-foot lanes with 5.5-foot offsets on each
side. The roadway grade of the new structure will be raised approximately five-foot above the
existing grade.
B. Reasonable and Feasible Alternatives
One alternative for replacing Bridge No. 84 was studied in detail and described below.
Alternate 1
Alternate 1 involves replacement of the structure along the existing roadway alignment.
Improvements to the approach roadways will be required for a distance of approximately 500
feet to the west and 800 feet to the east of the new structure. Design exceptions are not
required for this project. Traffic will be detoured offsite (see Figure 1) during the construction
period.

NCDOT Guidelines for Evaluation of Offsite Detours for Bridge Replacement Projects
considers multiple project variables beginning with the additional time traveled by the average
road user resulting from the offsite detour. The offsite detour for this project would include
US 158, SR 1138, and SR 1147. The majority of traffic on the road is through traffic. The
detour for the average road user would result in approximately six minutes additional travel
time (2.64 miles additional travel). Up to a twelve-month duration of construction is expected
on this project.
Based on the Guidelines, the criteria above indicate that on the basis of delay along the detour
is acceptable. Granville County Emergency Services along with Granville County Schools
Transportation have also indicated that the detour is acceptable. NCDOT Division 5 has
indicated the condition of all roads, bridges and intersections on the offsite detour aze
acceptable without improvement and concurs with the use of the detour. Therefore, no
additional funds will be required for detour improvements or maintenance.
C. Alternatives Eliminated From Further Consideration
The "do-nothing" alternative will eventually necessitate closure of the bridge. This is not
acceptable due to the traffic service provided by SR 1141.
"Rehabilitation" of the existing timber bridge is not considered practical due to the
substructure needing repair. Replacement of existing timber substructure piles would result in
a complete structure replacement.
Staged Construction was not considered practical due to the availability of an offsite detour.
A new alignment alternative which would replace the structure to the south while maintaining
traffic on the existing structure was considered and eliminated due to the environmental
impacts and the availability of an acceptable offsite detour.
D. Preferred Alternative
Bridge No. 84 will be replaced at the existing location as shown by Alternative 1 in Figure 2.
NCDOT Division 5 concurs with the selection of Alternative 1 as the preferred alternative.

IV. ESTIMATED COSTS
The estimated costs, based on 2007 prices, are as follows:
Alternative 1
Preferred
Structure $ 915,000
Roadwa A roaches $ 506,000
Detour Structure and A roaches - 0 -
Structure Removal $ 41,000
Misc. & Mob. $ 172,000
En . & Contin encies $ 266,000
Total Construction Cost $ 1,900,000
Ri t-of--way Costs________`___ __ $ 60,000_
Utili Costs $ 35,000
Total Pro~ect Cost $ 1,995,000
V. NATURAL ENVIRONMENT
Physical Characteristics
The project area is underlain by the Lazge River Valleys and Flood Plain System soil region in
the Piedmont physiographic province of North Cazolina. Large river valleys with narrow
floodplains characterize the region. Sediments in the river valleys range from gravel to sand.
Sand and gravel deposits aze found on existing and historic point bars in river channels, with
areas of large rocky substrate. The project area is located within a relatively level, narrow
floodplain valley surrounded by moderately steep valley walls. Elevations in the project area
range from a high of approximately 440 feet National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD) on
the east and west slope of the Taz River floodplain to a low of approximately 390 feet NGVD
within the Taz River channel.
Water Resources
The project area is located within sub-basin 030201 of the Tar River Basin (DWQ 1999).
This area is part of USGS Hydrologic Unit 03020101 of the South Atlantic/Gulf Region. This
section of the Tar River has been assigned Stream Index Number 28-(1) by the N.C. Division
of Water Quality (DWQ 1997).
Classifications are assigned to waters of the State of North Carolina based on the existing or
contemplated best usage of various streams or segments of streams in the basin. A best usage
classification of WS-IV NSW has been assigned to this reach of the Tar River. The
designation of WS-IV denotes waters protected as water supplies which are generally in
moderately to highly developed watersheds. The supplemental classification of NSW is
intended for waters needing additional nutrient management due to their being subject to

excessive growth of microscopic or macroscopic vegetation. No designated High Quality
Waters (HQW), Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW), Water Supply I (WS-I), or Water
supply II (WS-II) waters occur within 1.0 mile of the project area (DWQ 2001).
Biotic Resources
Five distinct plant communities were identified within the project area: disturbed/maintained
land, mesic mixed hardwood forest, mixed pine forest, bottomland hardwood forest, and early
successional bottomland hardwood forest. Plant community designations are based on a
classification system utilized by the NHP.
Jurisdictional Topics
Surface Waters and Wetlands
Surface waters within the embankments of the Tar River are subject to jurisdictional
consideration under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act as waters of the United States (33
CFR Section 328.3). NWI mapping indicates that the Tar River exhibits characteristics of a
lower, perennial, riverine system with an unconsolidated bottom.
Vegetated wetlands are defined by the presence of three primary criteria: hydric soils,
hydrophytic vegetation, and evidence of hydrology at or near the surface for a portion of the
growing season. No vegetated wetlands subject to jurisdictional consideration under Section
404 of the Clean Water Act as "waters of the United States" occur within the project area.
Permits
In accordance with provisions of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344), a
section 404 Nationwide Permit (NWP) 23 from the USACE is likely to be applicable for all
impacts to Waters of the United States resulting from the proposed project. A NWP 33 may
be required if temporary construction including cofferdams, access and dewatering are
required for this project. A North Carolina Division of Water Quality (DWQ) Section 401
Water Quality General Certification is required prior to the issuance of the Section 404 NWP
23 and/or NWP 33.
Existing Bridge Removal
The existing structure will be removed using the guidelines established within the Best
Management Practices for Construction and Maintenance Activities. Temporary fill
anticipated to result from bridge demolition is approximately 25 cubic yards.

Federally Protected Species
Plants and animals with a federal classification of Endangered or Threatened are protected
under the provisions of Section 7 and Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973. The
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) lists four species under federal protection
for Granville County as of August 22, 2007.
Dwarf wedgemussel (Alasmidonta heterodon) Endangered
Biological Conclusion: May Affect, Likely to Adversely Affect
Surveys for Dwarf Wedgemussel have been conducted at the project site at 1-6 year intervals
since 1986 providing either live specimens or remnant shells. Recent surveys have not
produced neither a live specimen nor a shell, but have identified the area to contain excellent
habitat for the Dwarf Wedgemussel. In addition, numerous other mussel species were
identified to exist in the project area which are believed to commonly co-exist with the Dwarf
Wedgemussel. Therefore, there is a high probability that the Dwarf Wedgemussel remains to
exist in the project area.
Smooth coneflower (Echinacea laevigata) Endangered
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
The smooth coneflower occurs in open and disturbed areas with basic soils. An evaluation of
the project area determined that the disturbed/maintained road shoulders provide the only
suitable habitat for smooth coneflower. Systematic surveys were conducted within the road
shoulders during the site visit, but no species of smooth coneflower was found. NHP has no
documentation of smooth coneflower within 2.0 miles of the project .
Harperella (Ptilimnium nodosum) Endangered
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Harperella requires swift to moderate flowing water to prepare bare and scoured areas within
the stream channel for suitable habitat. The Tar River within the project study area contains
several small islands and patchy scoured shorelines. The area of suitable habitat within the
Tar River and its adjacent shoreline were systematically surveyed during the field visit, but no
harperella was found. NHP has no documentation of harperella in the project vicinity.
Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) Protected
Biological Conclusion: Not Applicable
The bald eagle has been de-listed and is not subject to Section 7 consultation and a biological
conclusion is not required. However, the bald eagle remains protected by the Bald and Golden
Eagle Protection Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and subject to the USFWS National
Bald Eagle Management Guidelines. Therefore, under the guidelines a radius up to 660 feet
from the edge of the project boundary is imposed for road construction activities. No habitat
or eagles were seen within 660 feet of the project boundary. The project does not contain
suitable nesting, perching, or foraging habitat for the bald eagle.

VI. HUMAN ENVIRONMENT
Section 106 Compliance Guidelines
This project is subject to compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act of 1966, as amended, and implemented by the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at Title 36 CFR Part
800. Section 106 requires Federal agencies to take into account the effect of their undertakings
(federally funded, licensed, or permitted) on properties included in or eligible for inclusion in
the National Register of Historic Places and afford the Advisory Council a reasonable
opportunity to comment on such undertakings.
Historic Architecture
The Historic Preservation Office (HPO) reviewed the subject project noted that at that time
NCDOT was in the process of surveying and evaluating eligibility of bridges within the state
for the National Register (see letter dated March 21, 2002). This bridge has since been
evaluated and found not to be eligible.
Archaeology
The State Historic Preservation Office (HPO) reviewed the subject project. There are no
known archaeological sites within the proposed project area, and no azchaeological
investigation need to be conducted.
Community Impacts
No adverse impact on families or communities is anticipated. right-of--way acquisition will be
limited. No relocatees are expected with implementation of the proposed alternative.
No adverse effect on public facilities or services is expected. The project is not expected to
adversely affect social, economic, or religious opportunities in the area.
The project is not in conflict with any plan, existing land use, or zoning regulation. No change
in land use is expected to result from the construction of the project.
The Farmland Protection Policy Act requires all federal agencies or their representatives to
consider the potential impact to prime farmland of all land acquisition and construction
projects. All construction will take place along existing alignment. There aze no soils
classified as prime, unique, or having state or local importance in the vicinity of the project.
Therefore, the project will not involve the direct conversion of farmland acreage within these
classifications.
The project will not have a disproportionately high and adverse human health and
environmental effect on any minority orlow-income population.

Noise & Air Quality
This project is exempt from the requirement to determine conformity per 40 CFR 93.126
(reconstructing bridges (no additional travel lanes)). This project will not result in any
meaningful changes in traffic volumes, vehicle mix, location of the existing facility, or any
other factor that would cause an increase in emissions impacts relative to the no-build
alternative. Therefore, FHWA has determined that this project will generate minimal air
quality impacts for Clean Air Act criteria pollutants and has not been linked with any special
MSAT concerns. Consequently, this effort is exempt from analysis for MSATs. Any burning
of vegetation shall be performed in accordance with applicable local laws and regulations of
the North Carolina State Implementation Plan (SIP) for air quality compliance with 15 NCAC
2D.0520.
Noise levels may increase during project construction; however, these impacts are not
expected to be substantial considering the relatively short-term nature of construction noise
and the limitation of construction to daytime hours. The transmission loss characteristics of
nearby natural elements and man-made structures aze believed to be sufficient to moderate the
effects of intrusive construction noise.
VII. GENERAL ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
The project is expected to have an overall positive impact. Replacement of an inadequate
bridge will result in safer traffic operations.
The bridge replacement will not have an adverse effect on the quality of the human or natural
environment with the use of the current North Carolina Department of Transportation
standazds and specifications.
Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act of 1966 (49 U.S.C. 303) protects the use
of publicly owned pazks, recreational areas, wildlife/waterfowl refuges, and historic
properties. The proposed project will not require right-of--way acquisition or easement from
any land protected under Section 4(f).
An examination of records at the North Cazolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources, Division of Environmental Management, Groundwater Section and the North
Carolina Department of Human Resources, Solid Waste Management Section revealed no
underground storage tanks or hazardous waste sites in the project area.
Granville County is a participant in the National Flood Insurance Program. There are no
practical alternatives to crossing the floodplain area. Any shift in alignment will result in an
impact area of about the same magnitude. The proposed project is not anticipated to increase
the level or extent of upstream flood potential.

VIII. COORDINATION & AGENCY COMMENTS
NCDOT has sought input from the following agencies as a part of the project development:
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, NC Department of Natural Resources, U.S. Fish & Wildlife
Service, N.C Wildlife Resource Commission, N.C. Division of Parks & Recreation, North
Carolina State Historic Preservation Office, and Granville County Planning Department.
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service provided information relating it's concern for endangered
species and requested that this project be processed through informal Section 7 consultation.
In 2007, USFWS rescinded concurrence and requested the project be processed as a formal
Section 7 consultation.
Response: NCDOT is providing the documentation suitable for formal consultation as
required by Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers requested to be included in all correspondence relating to the
formal Section 7 consultation after being advised of the change.
Response: Request granted.
Granville County Planning Department, through contact with the Division of Bicycle and
Pedestrian Transportation, identified the project area as a greenway corridor and requested that
accommodations be made for a future greenway trail.
Response: The NCDOT is unable to provide for this request due to the uncertainty of a
location for the future greenway trail.
N.C. Division of Parks & Recreation, and the North Carolina State Historic Preservation had
no special concerns.
IX. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
A letter was sent by the Location & Surveys Unit to all property owners affected directly by
this project. Property owners were invited to comment. No comments have been received to
date.
There is not substantial controversy on social, economic, or environmental grounds
concerning the project.
X. CONCLUSION
On the basis of the above discussion, it is concluded that no substantial adverse environmental
impacts will result from implementation of the project. The project is therefore considered to
be a federal "Categorical Exclusion" due to its limited scope and lack of substantial
environmental consequences.

/ a ~~ 0
~ ~ Hebron
~ ~~
'r ~ a/ ` 1304
i ~
i ^
s ~ o
1307 ~~
_.,.ry, ..~...<,
x i[4:
? -
` ,~'L ~ _y 1241
\ 1306
1151
~ ~~
~. :o
1306
_ \ _ 1308
...~ ~ 0 1152
~ 1304 ~
~ ~ m r~~ - ~ 1150
~'f ~ ~
n L
-8 ~ ``~ 7~
3 c,t' ~~ • ' ~, / '
`~' t.s ~~ 1148 L 1149
~'~ 1 •4 -7
'•~' ~ 7.., t.s ~~ 11 115
~ i 9 - pi
1310 ~, ~ a RSV °~
1147 s
n 1146 yo ~
~P 1~ ~ 113 ~~
1126 3B `~~
~ 44 ' 147 Culbnsth
r- t 1143 N
114 w ` J \ :~ ~'
..-
o ~ ~
158 ~ 1145 1141
Bridge No. 84
~ \ ~ ^' s'!' 11 0
~ ~ ~ o" ~^
~ ~ \ ~ 1126 ~~
l 1143
v ~
,~ (~ ~..
.~
1193 ° d~
Durham County ., 114o a
` g ~ ~ d--
Studied Detour
Sto•s~~ 1
UsY nrn ]5 I w.IL
% ~
` ~
~
N V
LE
be.ea a

-~ ~u~ • L:.ky
o~
~~~~y y ~
' ~~

i ~ ~ ~~.,
~ '4 C

~ulner,._ ` E Sb, _
~
R ~ ~p~ ., am~~
n~:~.,,,ot °, ~.
~~
~~i+arnr'i~ ~`~_`
~
C' / ~!'
~ NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
4
q
,
l'~ ~=;
iy
TRANSPORTATION
~
~~ ~2j DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
'~~9 / ; ~y~°r
;
~ PROJECT DEVELOPMENT RC
.9
--- r
l~"yf' ~'
/ ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS BRANCH
`~OFTR~~'~~
GRANVILLE COUNTY
REPLACE BRIDGE NO. 84 ON SR 1141
OVER TAR RIVER
R-4124

~ Fi?ure
~

Bridge booking
west

'
~
EI ~ ~.~ .~
~'>
~;;:
y~ L
~ ~~
Y y~ ~ 1!~
~~ j~-.. aL~'- 3~~3 }
J f r
~. ! _
North Side of
Bridge
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT &
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS BRANCH

GRANVILLE COUNTY
REPLACE BRIDGE NO.84 ON SR 1141
OVER TAR RIVER
B-4124
~la~-~

~- ,.
~,. -~ ~'.
orth Carolina De artment of Cultural Resources ~ ~~
N p (,
State Historic Preservation Office
David L. S. Brook, Administrator
Michael F. Easley, Governor Division of Historical Resources
Lisbeth C. Evans, Secretary David J. Olson, Director
Jeffrey J. Crow, Deputy Secretary
O'~Iarciz `~l,h~~,~ntd History
l~IEI~•IORr1ND U1~4
TO: William D. Gilmore, Manager
Project Development and Environmental.l~nalvsis Branch
Division of Highways
Department of Transportation
FROM: David Brook
SUBJECT: Replacement of Bridge 84 on SR 11-11, B-4124, Gran~-ille County, ER 02-8592
We appreciate the project being plotted on the USGS quadrangle. This facilitated our revie~v.
There are no recorded archaeological sites within the project boundaries. However, the project area has never
been systematically sur~-eved to determine the location or significance of archaeological resources. Therefore
eve recommend an archaeological survey be conducted of the project area.
The principal investigator for the project will need to apply for a permit in accordance with North Carolina
~~rchaeological Resources Protection rlct (1~RP.-~) since the project is on state-owned or controlled property.
supplications for permits may be obtained from the Office of State archaeology, 4619 ~~Iail Service Center,
Department of Cultural Resources, Raleigh, NC 27699-4619. Issuance of an aRPA permit may take up to
thim~ days, so applications should be submitted well in advance of the planned archaeological investigation.
Because the Department of Transportation is in the process of surveying and evaluating the National Register
eligibility of all of its concrete bridges, we are unable to comment on the National Register eligibility of the
subject bridge. Please contact Marv Pope Furr, in the architectural History Section, to determine if further
studN of the bridge is needed.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of National Historic Preservaaon act and Advison~
Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CPR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763. In all future
communication concerning this project, please cite the above-referenced tracking number.
cc: ~~1att Willcerson, NCUOT
Location Mailing,! ~\ddress Telephone/Fas
Administration ~~)' !\ i3iunnt 5i. iZAICII'~l. ~~ -lh~? ~•iail icrvic~ i cntcr. I:aiciti: ?7hu~+-:J~~'- rylc~l ;;, ~--~7G? •?= ~-~1r,~.
<csmratior ".. Fii~xm; ~:. k,iici~~i.. ~ -i~~ ~ `„i~..._,.~._ _nt_. i<;u:__ . _ ,•'u,_-+ "~~~ _r~S~ %~ -_~yr
~ur~.,. ._ ..._nnii.: ,.~.__

~,

United States Department of the Interior
f F ~ a `~ 2005
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE ,,~~~ ,
Raleigh Field Office. D1tIi~;~:+ ~ra~HN1~YS
Post Office Box 33 726 ~'-0~1Cc Ot' i~~; u'~,~ ~~(~( ,~,t~~~
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
February 2, 2005
Philip Harris, III, PE
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Project Development and Environmental Analysis
1598 Mai] Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1598
Dear Mr. Hams:
This letter is in response to your letter of 3anuary 19, 2005 which provided the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service) with the biological determination of the North Carolina Department of
Transportation (NCDOT) that the replacement of Bridge No. 84 on SR 1141 over the Tar River
in Granville County (TIP No. B-4124) may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the
federally endangered dwarf wedgemussel (fllasmidonta heterodon). In addition, NCDOT has
determined that the project will have no effect on the federally protected bald eagle (Haliaeetus
leucocephalus), harperella (Ptilimnium nodosum) and smooth coneflower (Echinacea laevigata).
These comments are provided in accordance with section 7 of the. Endangered Species Act
(ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543).
Mussel surveys conducted in 1986, 1992 and 1998 by the North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission (NCWRC) have revealed the •presenee of the dwarf wedgemussel in the vicinity of
Bridge No. 84. According to the information provided, subsequent surveys conducted by
NCDOT and a consultant in 2002 and 2004, respectively, did not locate the dwarf wedgemussel.
The 2004 survey extended 100 meters upstream and 400 meters downstream of the bridge.
Service biologists Gary Jordan and Daie Suiter met with NCDOT staff and NC-vVRC staff on-site
on November 13, 2002 to discuss the project. During the meeting, several conservation
measures were discussed and agreed upon by all parties. These conservation measures aze listed
in your attached November 24, 2004 Biological Evaluation.
Based on the recent mussel survey results and the commitment to the conservation measures
listed in the Biological Evaluation, the Service concurs with your determination that the
proposed bridge replacement may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the dwarf
wedgemussel. However, since the dwarf wedgemussel has been previously found three times at
or near the site, and since the let date for the project is November 2006, we request that another
survey be conducted prior to the let date. The survey should be timed so as to allow sufficient
time for a formal consultation should dwarf wedgemussel'be found at the site. We recommend a
late 2005 or early 2006 surve~~. NCDOT has agreed to relocate mussels out of the project

footprint and immediate vicinity. In order for NCDOT to relocate the federally endangered
dwarf wedgemussel, NCDOT must have an Incidental Take Statement provided in a Biological
Opinion issued by the Service. After receiving a complete Biological Assessment, the Service
requires up to 135 days to complete a Biological Opinion.
In addition to relocating federally protected species, we request, at a minimum, that all federal
species of concern (e.g. Atlantic pigtoe (Fusconaia masoni)) and the currently undescribed
Lampsilis species be relocated to suitable habitat. We also encourage NCDOT to relocate all
mussel species out of the project footprint and immediate vicinity. Mussel relocation should
occur just prior to project construction. It is understood that NCDOT will develop a relocation
plan with input from the Service and NCWRC.
Based on the lack of habitat, the Service concurs with your determination that the project will
have no effect on the bald eagle. Based on the plant survey results, the Service concurs with
your determination that the project will have no effect on harperella and smooth coneflower.
We believe that the requirements of section 7(a)(2) of the ESA have been satisfied to date. We
remind you that obligations under section 7 consultation must be reconsidered if: (1) new
information reveals impacts of this identified action that may affect listed species or critical
habitat in a manner not previously considered in this review; (2) this action is subsequently
modified in a manner that was not considered in this review; or (3) a new species is listed or
critical habitat determined that may be affected by this identified action.
The Service appreciates the opportunity to review this project. If you have any questions
regarding our response, please contact Mr. Gary Jordan at [phone] (Ext. 32).
Ecological Services Supervisor
cc: Eric Alsmeyer, USACE, Raleigh, NC
Nicole Thomson, NCDWQ, Raleigh, NC
Travis Wilson, NCWRC, Creedmoor, NC
Chris Miiitscher, USEPA, Raleigh, NC

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh,.North Carolina 27636-3726
June 8, 2007
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Project Development and Environmental Analysis
Attn: Deanna Riffey
1598 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1598
Dear Dr. Thorpe:
~~ .........e.. 4,
....
I i
~ur~ ~ ~ 200;
I
IVI~~;~~~~ ~~ r~iu,:,~AYS
PDEA-OFFICE OF.NATURAL ENVIRONMENT
On February 2, 2005, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) provided concurrence with the
biological determination of the North Cazolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) that the
replacement of Bridge No. 84 on SR 1141 over Tar River in Granville County (TIP No. B-4124}
may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the federally endangered dwarf wedgemussel
(Alasmidonta heterodon) and Tar spinymussel (Elliptio steinstansana). The concurrence was
provided in accordance with section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as
amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543). The concurrence was based, in part, upon information current
at that time and upon several conservation measures that NCDOT agreed to implement.
In June 2005, NCDOT requested a modification of the conservation measures, and the Service
approved the modifications. In September 2005, NCDOT made minor changes in alignment and
grade designs. The Service stated that the section 7 concurrence would remain valid. In June
2007 the NCDOT again requested a modification of the conservation measures. Upon additional
review of the project and after obtaining additional information regarding the dwarf
wedgemussel, the Service has decided to withdraw our previous concurrence.
We no.v believe that the project has significant potential to have an adverse affect un the dwarf
wedgemussel. Therefore, a formal section 7 consultation for this project is appropriate. In
addition to B-4124, we believe that B-3841, B-4522, B-4523 and B-4524 should also undergo
formal section 7 consultation. In the interest of streamlining the process, and due to the fact that
all five projects are in the upper Tar Basin and in close proximity, we believe that a "batched"
consultation would be appropriate. In other words, one Biological Assessment which addresses
all five projects would be prepazed by NCDOT and FHWA. In response, one Biological Opinion
which addresses all five projects would be prepared by the Service. Our Biological Opinion
would provide an Incidental Take Statement which would allow NCDOT to relocate any
federally listed mussels should they be observed during the final preconstruction surveys.
~.

Mr. Gary Jordan of my staff is communicating with appropriate Natural Environment Unit staff
to initiate this process. If you have any questions regarding our response, please contact Mr.
Gary Jordan at [phone] (Ext. 32).
Sincerely,
~- Pete Benjamin
Field Supervisor
cc: Eric Alsmeyer, USACE, Raleigh, NC
Rob Ridings, NCDWQ, Raleigh, NC
Travis Wilson, NCWRC, Creedmoor, NC
Chris Militscher, USEPA, Raleigh, NC
Sohn Sullivan, FHWA, Raleigh, NC
David Hams, NCDOT, Raleigh, NC

PO

a
j ~, o
b
,1 .
,~ ` ~ °
~ ~
I~~r
,~ ~ c
~~ ~~~ ~
~Q~
.~ ~~ d
I~
~l
o--
/~ 4
t~° ,
ii+ 6
.i
.,
~ ,
1 ~i'
_,~` O
~~ i
~+
Gi ~~~
ii
~~
~i ~~

s~
fdailr>9 Erl4pe Mn84
fl0 bs fl9lpnl0l

A
Iii ~+.~
0
r , .~ III 4
s .oas I:I
G3 ~o
~ © II
II
"' I I
~S F'~
II
~ II
II d
(} b I I
If ~
~ ~ ~ ~ I I
a II
~ t'i ~ I I
n ~ ~ ~I I
•`~_i 1
ad ~ ~ , ~ ~
f5 ~ ° i i
~,
~ "" , NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT
OF TRANSPORTATION
DMSION OF HIGHWAYS
> PROJECT DEVELOPMENT ANO
„, „~ ENVIRONMEMAL ANALY515 BRANCH
GRANVILLE COUNTY
REPLACE BRIDGE NCt. 64 ON 5R 1141
OVER TAR RIVER
8-4124
FIGURE 2
^~
0
a
~ r
l