20160202 Ver 1_Application_20160301

Carpenter,Kristi
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Follow Up Flag:
Flag Status:
Thomson, Nicole J
Tuesday, March O1, 2016 3:06 PM
[e-mail]; Wanucha, Dave
Carpenter,Kristi; Parker, Jerry A; Powers, Tim
Bridge No. 271 over North Prong Stinking Quarter Creek on SR 3343 (Coble Church
Rd), Guilford Co.; WBS No. 17BP.7.R.86
Cover letter_Att L bridge 271.pdf; Attachment G.pdf; Bridge 271 USGS.pdf; Bridge 271
soils.pdf; 400271 WB wetland form.doc; 400271 SA DWR stream form.pdf; 400271 WA
wetland form.doc; 400271 WA-WB upland form.doc; SF-400271 Buffer Impact
Summary Sheet_20160216.pdf; SF-400271 Wetland Impact Summary Sheet_
20160216.pdf; SF-400271 Wetlands in Buffers Impact Summary Sheet_20160216.pdf;
SF-400271_HYD_SM P_20160216.pdf
Follow up
Flagged
Please see the attached Low Impact Design Bridge Replacement project and supplemental information. Due to file size, I
may have to split this up into multiple emails. I apologize in advance.
Please feel free to contact me with any questions or concerns.
Thank you!
Nikki
Nicole J. Thomson
Division Environmental Supervisor Assistant
Division Environmental Office
919-754-7806 Mobile
PO Box 14996
Greensboro, NC 27415-4996
�;��
,,,,
�
,M II 1� �� ,
Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N,C, Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties,

Lo i i a lm ct Brid e eo ect D t Sheet
TIP NO aoo271
W BS 178PJ.R.86
Count Guiiford
Bridqe Number 2�1
Dascfiptlon Replace bridge no. 271 over NoAh Prong Stinking Duader
Creek an SR 3343
Basin Cape Fear
Classification ws�v; Nsw
Stream SIN is�ls-a-1
'�' Pg North Prong S�inking Quartar Creek: Perennial
Size Narih Prong Stinking Quader Creek: 10�12 ft. wide
Type Timber deck on tim6er joists, limber caps and piles at end
and interior 6enis, timber bulkheads, Iri le span
Existing Structure SiZe ss «. x 2s «.
Suff. Ratin 5d.4
Proposed StfUCtufe TY e 24' Cored SIa6 Bridge-Single Span
SR0 (wltl�hrout b oW) 70 N, z 301�.
Stream USACE Im ects YM - Y
Non 404 Im acts V!N N
USACE Im acis (YM) Y
Wetlands Non 4041m acts (YM� N
CAMA Im acts YM� N
NC DW� Buftefs Im ects (Y/N Y(Jordan Lake WaterSupply watershed)
Buffer A plication Re uired (>40 ft YM) y
NC DW� StormWater Permit Permit He uired Y1N N
HdbltB� (Y/N1 Bald Eagle--No Whoded pogonia--No �
T&E SPeCieSPlesenf BaldEagle--No Whotletlpogonfa--No
6i0 COnClU9iOn No Elfect
Moratorium Type N/A
Dates N/A
Native/Hatchery N
Trout S ecies Present N
Trout Waters prout Conditions (Y/N) N
WRC Reviewer Travis Wilson
CAMA AECs N
Essential Fish Hebitat (YM N
Nav. Opening N�A
USCG Permit N
Historic Pro erties N
Archaeoloqical Resources N
Tribal Lands N
4 f Resources N
6 f [LWCF] Resources N
Wild and Scenic River N
Forest Service Lands N
TVA Area N
FEMA Bu out N
FEMp Flood SWd V (MOA)
USTs Haz Mets N
Relocatees N
Location �AT a5�9ss7764
LONG -79.60376273
There are iwo wetiands associated with ihls projec�, WA and W B. WA is a large nomtidal
freshwaler marshl6ottomland hardwood foresl weNand and WB is a small drainaga pa�tern
influenced by backflow (mm �he creek and seasonal flow Irom a pond nearby. Per NHP records,
ihere are no T&E element ocwrences within 1.0 mile of the bridge. There is no bald eagle
PfojeCt Comments foraging habitat wi�hin 1.13 miles of fhe bridge (7.0 mile plus 660 f�.); lhere�ore, a survey for bald
eagle withln a 660 fl. radius o( the project was not comple�ed.
Noie; Blue te�1 atlded b TGS �n Ine , Black teM vided b NCooT
� Completedy:,oav�dPeiry,Peznsizots
. _..— - --- .__ _.— - ---- __. _..
--
. e Engln �._ .�.
._ ._ _.. . .... _ .. . . �, _ . _ . . .. . . . . . . . . . .. . . ... . . _ . . .
_ _- ____—_.—__.__-_ _ —_ ., . .
._.._. __ —_— ___ __ _ , .
IEn wnmentelONicer
?116/2016 11

1�C I)�VQ Sfreaan Identification I+orrn Version 4.11
Date;'� � ��'� ProjectlSite:4Q(j'2�-� �' �j/�' Latitude: '?��j � ����`L
Evaluator; �-,,��,��� � J _ ���-7 County: �'(,� p'�� Longifude: � �[=i �,�j�[�
Total Polnts: Stream Determination (circle one) �ther
St�eamisatleastintermittent '�� Fnhmm�ral Intnrmiffant Parannial an nnar/Nama•
A. �eor�oF holo -{�ubtotal= �;�J ) ,4bs�nt - �Uga�- fUloder-afe
1 a Continuity of channel bed and bank 0 1
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg 0 �
3. In-channel structure: ex. riffle-pool, step-pool, � ��
ri le- ool se uence
4. Particle size of stream substrate 0 1
5. Active/relict floodplain 0 1
6. Depositional bars or benches 1
7. Recent alluvial deposits 1
8. Headcuts (� 1
9. Grade control 0 0.5
10. Natural valley 0 5
11. Second or greater order channel o= 0
a arfificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = �, J )
12. Presence of Baseflow 0 1
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria 0 1
14. Leaf litter 1.5 1
15. Sediment on plants or debris 0 0.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles 0
17. Soil-based evidence of high water table7 No = 0
C. Biology (Subtotal = )
18. Fibrous roots in streambed '3 2
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed 2
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance) 1
21. Aquatic Mollusks 0 1
22. Fish 0' 0.5
23. Crayfish 0 0.5
24. Amphibians 0 0.5
25. Algae 0.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1
`perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. 5ee p. 35 of manual.
Notes: ,�Uc�r.Y.�s:v, ��� ��-,., v-rri n., u�.�,;t :, 3 n-� r �C��t1,�,.n,•,�i,
Sketch:
�
�
0
0
0
�
�iron
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
1.5
1.5
Yes = 3
2
2 3
0.5 0
1 1.5
1 1,5
es=3
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
� O�the�r--

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
ProjecUSite: 400271 City/County: Guilford Sampling Date: 9/4/2014
ApplicanUOwner: NCDOT State: NC Sampling Point: WB wet
Investigator(s): A. James and J. Mason Section, Township, Range: Kimesville
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): P Lat: 35.933664 Long: -79.603922 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Wehadkee loam NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes � No ❑ (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑, Soil ❑, or Hydrology ❑, significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes � No ❑
Are Vegetation ❑, Soil ❑, or Hydrology ❑, naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes � No ❑
Hydric Soil Present? Yes � No � Is the Sampled A?ea Yes � No ❑
within a Wetland.
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes � No ❑
Rema�ks: Non-tidal freshwater marsh NC WAM wetland type.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondarv Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) ❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (A1) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) ❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
❑ High Water Table (A2) � Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) � Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Saturation (A3) ❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) ❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (B1) ❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) ❑ Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits (B2) ❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7) ❑ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
❑ Drift Deposits (B3) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks) ❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4) ❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5) � Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) ❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Water-Stained Leaves (B9) ❑ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
❑ Aquatic Fauna (B13) ❑ FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes ❑ No � Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes ❑ No � Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes � No ❑
(includes capillary fringe) Yes ❑ No � Depth (inches):
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont—Interim Version

V CVC IF111VIY - VJC JI:ICI llllll: IIQIIICJ VI IQIILJ JdfIl�Jllll(�j I"Ullll:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) Absolute Dominant Indicator pominance Test Worksheet:
% Cover Species? Status
� Number of Dominant Species
2. That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
3� Total Number of Dominant
q, Species Across All Strata:
5 Percent of Dominant Species
g That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
7. Prevalence Index worksheet:
8. Total % Cover of :
= Total Cover OBL species
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover: FACW species
Saplinq/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) FAC species
1. FACU species
2. UPL species
2
2
100
Multiplv bv:
x1 = _
x2 = _
x3 = _
x4 = _
x5 =
3. Column Totals: (A) (B)
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Herb Stratum (Plot size:5x5)
1. Murdannia keisak
2. Carex lurida
3. PolVaonum pennsVlvanicum
4. Commelina communis
5. Boehmeria cvlindrica
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
35
20
1
10
5
Y
Y
N
N
N
OBL
OBL
FACW
FAC
FACW
85 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 42.5 20% of total cover: 17
Woodv Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
❑ 1- Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
� 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
❑ 3 - Prevalence Index is <3.0�
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
�Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in
diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of height.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less than 3 in. DBH
and greater than 3.28 ft tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless of size, and
woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
Yes � No ❑
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region -Interim Version

SOIL Sampling Point: WB wet
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type� Locz Texture Remarks
0-10 GIev1 6/10GY 60 10YR 5/1 20 C PL clav
5YR 3/4 20 C PL
10-12+ GIev1 6/10GY 80 7.5Y 4/4 20 C PL clav
�Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. zLocation: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ Histosol (A1) ❑ Dark Surface (S7) ❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2) ❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148) ❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Black Histic (A3) ❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) � Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) (MLRA 136, 147)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5) ❑ Depleted Matrix (F3) ❑ Red Parent Material (TF2)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N) ❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6) ❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) ❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2) ❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N, MLRA Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N, MLRA
� 147, 148) � 136)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ❑ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
❑ Sandy Redox (S5) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6) wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soils Present? Yes � No ❑
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont—Interim Version

L i 1 f�1 �� .. ,p„ 4i' 1 i. . ` ''irti. �"r j . _
� �i i y . � 'f r, Y �,�. . � . .' 14; }"� ` _ s`_ i
t1 � �.
� � ' � �
� ;r � �� � � � *
a 4 y v
a? . � .4� , .I
1 i � �`� � !r,
� .�; -;, , '�' � �' 1� �`,.
� �� �' � � �, �. . ,
, #� � � , � r �
�� , �
, , -
, .. ,. , . .
� . : - _ . , _. _ �} :� ` � �;, .
; ��
��• . °�� Bridge 271 ,� '° �
""� • +�� '�"° � - '', �f+��
. � - � 1� f V. b ..,+-,�^•�
. ��. � ' : y - . . t' .
,
. w
f, , 4
, �� * �
��/ s ��
V C� � # � f `
, 4 �� ���
�_�� � '�:.
—�' ,�9f r . .� . r .
. �
. �'' i � � t �I .
. .. � + r AtqWi.� .
.
, � � r - �� ` _ .� . .-
� , �, �. ��•► � .. , . . � •
� � . . . � � .. .. - .
.� � A �` r ��f �� '° R . 6
� . �pi�+ . r^ . . . d �` � �. � Y�� • �' . . '
� '��`�' � � � �����, �T ��
` ��'� _ � _ ;_ ,4�,�, � . . . � ` �
`l�°, ,�' � c
�' � �, �"* * '' ' ,�`'' � �F i } �� �' e� i� .
. ��� �z � �] � � � �1 �
� ���
�`"---� . ' � � "�,. ' ' � � � .;.�
, ,��� � , � #`� � , s -
�
... �, ��C� p�� , ,
,� �a B � �� � ��,�,,
r" . Y+MF3 .
� �� ��� _ x���
ti�
��� � � ' �'� ���r� �"f�l� ���
; _
r,r.. ,
, ,.
. . ��
, � �
.. , .
, „ .} � �
� � � , r�" � rs" I�'^ f�1 u�
��`,•�`�1� � � '� � ���r�T r� r.�yh��r �� a
. n w t '� � r ti k�mL '11 �� �-
,�r *� �!� � t 1' 7,� � �
� "�` � '# °' ��. �n T �,'`�: . r
�. ��. e t'ge'z. ,�,1 .�� a 4,j�� P .�,y .� '�'
p�. 'I ,. , y ,Y I' .1
Map Location Soil Map Figure 2
NCDOT Bridge 271 over rQ��,�Rr+i�.�� ,
North Prong Stinking Quarter Creek N ,A �,�, � Gr,�.
GUILFORD Coble Church Rd, Liberty, NC �r'�� ��
ALAMANCE Guilford County yr. �-� ' �� � �
. � �"`�. �.
Guildford County Soil Survey, 1977 �'tQ �'''� �
Soil Sheet 48
� �� ��
RANDOLPH CHATHAM February 22, 2016 �j<`'�.��F7�A�SQ��
1 inch = 1.000 feet

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
ProjecUSite: 400271 City/County: Guilford Sampling Date: 12/3/2013
ApplicanUOwner: NCDOT State: NC Sampling Point: WA wetland
Investigator(s): A. James and J. Mason Section, Township, Range: Kimesville
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): P Lat: 35.933374 Long: -79.603260 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Wehadkee loam NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes � No ❑ (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑, Soil ❑, or Hydrology ❑, significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes � No ❑
Are Vegetation ❑, Soil ❑, or Hydrology ❑, naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes � No ❑
Hydric Soil Present? Yes � No � Is the Sampled A?ea Yes � No ❑
within a Wetland.
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes � No ❑
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondarv Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) ❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (A1) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) ❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
� High Water Table (A2) � Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) � Drainage Patterns (B10)
� Saturation (A3) ❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) ❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (B1) ❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) ❑ Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits (B2) ❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7) ❑ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
❑ Drift Deposits (B3) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks) ❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4) ❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5) � Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) ❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Water-Stained Leaves (B9) ❑ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
❑ Aquatic Fauna (B13) ❑ FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes ❑ No � Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes � No ❑ Depth (inches): 4
Saturation Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes � No ❑
(includes capillary fringe) Yes � No ❑ Depth (inches): 0
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont—Interim Version

V CVC IF111VIY - VJC JI:ICI llllll: IIQIIICJ VI IQIILJ JdfIl�Jllll(�j I"Ullll:
Tree Stratum (Plot size:30x30) Absolute Dominant Indicator pominance Test Worksheet:
% Cover Species? Status
1. Salix nipra 7 Yes OBL Number of Dominant Species
2. That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
3� Total Number of Dominant
q, Species Across All Strata:
5 Percent of Dominant Species
g That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
7. Prevalence Index worksheet:
8. Total % Cover of :
7 = Total Cover OBL species
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover: FACW species
Saplinq/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:30x30) FAC species
1. Cephalanthus occidentalis 5 Yes OBL FACU species
2. Sambucus nipra 5 Yes FAC UPL species
6
6
100
Multiplv bv:
x1 = _
x2 = _
x3 = _
x4 = _
x5 =
3. Rubus spp. 5 Yes NI Column Totals: (A) (B)
4. Prevalence Index = B/A =
5. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
6. ❑ 1- Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
7. � 2- Dominance Test is >50%
8. ❑ 3- Prevalence Index is <3.0�
Herb Stratum (Plot size:30x30)
1. Leersia orVzoides
2. Persicaria sapittata
3. Carex spp.
4. Impatiens capensis
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
15 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 7.5 20% of total cover: 3
45
50
25
10
Yes
Yes
No
No
OBL
OBL
NI
FACW
130 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 65 20% of total cover: 26
Woodv Vine Stratum (Plot size:30x30)
1. Lonicera iaponica 5 Yes FAC
2.
3.
4.
5.
5 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
�Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in
diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of height.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less than 3 in. DBH
and greater than 3.28 ft tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless of size, and
woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
Yes � No ❑
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region -Interim Version

SOIL Sampling Point: WAwetland
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type� Locz Texture Remarks
0-11 2.5Y 6/2 70 10YR 4/4 30 C PL M siltv clav
11-12+ 2.5Y 6/1 75 10YR 4/4 25 C PL M siltv clav
�Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. zLocation: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ Histosol (A1) ❑ Dark Surface (S7) ❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2) ❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148) ❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Black Histic (A3) ❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) ❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) (MLRA 136, 147)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5) � Depleted Matrix (F3) ❑ Red Parent Material (TF2)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N) ❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6) ❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) ❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2) ❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N, MLRA Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N, MLRA
� 147, 148) � 136)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ❑ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
❑ Sandy Redox (S5) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6) wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soils Present? Yes � No ❑
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont—Interim Version

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
ProjecUSite: 400271 City/County: Guilford Sampling Date: 12/3/2013
ApplicanUOwner: NCDOT State: NC Sampling Point: WA upland
Investigator(s): J. Mason and A. James Section, Township, Range: Kimesville
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): P Lat: 35.933493 Long: -79.603924 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Wehadkee loam NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes � No ❑ (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑, Soil ❑, or Hydrology ❑, significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes � No ❑
Are Vegetation ❑, Soil ❑, or Hydrology ❑, naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes � No ❑
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No � Is the Sampled A?ea Yes ❑ No �
within a Wetland.
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ❑ No �
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondarv Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) ❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (A1) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) ❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
❑ High Water Table (A2) ❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) ❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Saturation (A3) ❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) ❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (B1) ❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) ❑ Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits (B2) ❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7) ❑ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
❑ Drift Deposits (B3) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks) ❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4) ❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5) � Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) ❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Water-Stained Leaves (B9) ❑ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
❑ Aquatic Fauna (B13) ❑ FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes ❑ No � Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes ❑ No � Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ❑ No �
(includes capillary fringe) Yes ❑ No � Depth (inches):
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont—Interim Version

VCVCIF111VIY- VJCJI:ICIIIIIII:IIQIIICJ VI �JIQIILJ
Tree Stratum (Plot size:30x30) Absolute Dominant Indicator
% Cover Species? Status
1. Quercus phellos 35 Yes FAC
2. Liquidambar stVraciflua 20 Yes FAC
3. NVssa sVlvatica 10 No FAC
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
65 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 32.5 20% of total cover: 13
Saplinq/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:30x30)
1. Quercus phellos 5 Yes FAC
2. Ulmus alata 2 Yes FACU
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Herb Stratum (Plot size:30x30)
1. Carex lurida
2. Eriperon spp.
3. Solidapo spp.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
7 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 3.5 20% of total cover: 1.4
30 Yes OBL
20 Yes NI
10 No NI
60 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 30 20% of total cover: 12
Woodv Vine Stratum (Plot size:30x30)
1. Smilax rotundifolia ?0 Yes FAC
2. Toxicodendron radicans 15 Yes FAC
3. Lonicera iaponica 10 Yes FAC
4.
5.
45 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 22.5 20% of total cover: 9
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
JdfIl�Jllll(�j I"Ullll: WHU�1dRQ
Dominance Test Worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species �
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: -
Total Number of Dominant $
Species Across All Strata: -
Percent of Dominant Species $�
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: -
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of : Multiplv bv:
OBL species x1 = _
FACW species x2 = _
FAC species x3 = _
FACU species x4 = _
UPL species x5 = _
Column Totals: (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
❑ 1- Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
� 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
❑ 3 - Prevalence Index is <3.0�
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
�Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in
diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of height.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less than 3 in. DBH
and greater than 3.28 ft tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless of size, and
woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in height.
Hydrophytic yes � No ❑
Vegetation
Present?
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region -Interim Version

SOIL Sampling Point: WAupland
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type� Locz Texture Remarks
0-12 2.5Y 6/3 90 10YR 5/6 10 C M silt loam
�Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. zLocation: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ Histosol (A1) ❑ Dark Surface (S7) ❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2) ❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148) ❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Black Histic (A3) ❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) ❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) (MLRA 136, 147)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5) ❑ Depleted Matrix (F3) ❑ Red Parent Material (TF2)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N) ❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6) ❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) ❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2) ❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N, MLRA Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N, MLRA
� 147, 148) � 136)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ❑ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
❑ Sandy Redox (S5) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6) wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soils Present? Yes ❑ No �
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont—Interim Version

BUFFER IMPACTS SUMMARY
IMPACT BUFFER
TYPE ALLOWABLE MITIGABLE REPLACEMENT
STRUCTURE SIZE / STATION ROAD PARALLEL ZONE 1 ZONE 2 TOTAL ZONE 1 ZONE 2 TOTAL ZONE 1 ZONE 2
SITE NO. TYPE (FROM/TO) CROSSING BRIDGE IMPACT (ft2) (ftz) (ft2) (ft2) (ftZ) (ftZ) (ftZ) (ft2)
70'x30' single span 12+57/14+01 X 2467 986 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL: 2467.0 986.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

WETLAND PERMIT IMPACT SUMMARY
WETLAND IMPACTS SURFACE WATER IMPACTS
Han Existing Existing
Permanent Temp. Excavation Mechanized Clearing Permanent Temp. Channel Channel Natural
Site Station Structure Fillln Fillln in Clearing in SW SW Impacts Impacts Stream
No. (From/To) Size / Type Wetlands Wetlands Wetlands in Wetlands Wetlands impacts impacts Permanent Temp. Design
(ac) (ac) (ac) (ac) (ac) (ac) (ac) (tt) (tt) (tt)
13+07 70'x30' single span 13
12+90/12+99 70'x30' single span < 0.01
14+58/14+65 70'x30' single span < 0.01
TOTALS�: < 0.01 < 0.01 13 0 0
*Rounded totals are sum of actual impacts
NOTES

H �
i hw�l North Carolina Department of Transportation �/
�Storniwc7ter Highway Stormwater Program �
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN �'�� c-�����
(Version 2.04; Released November 2015) FOR NCDOT PROJECTS
WBS Element: 17BP.7.R.86 TIP No.: SF-400271 Count ies : Guilford Pa e 1 of 2
General Project Information
WBS Element: 17BP.7.R.86 TIP Number: SF-400271 Project T pe: Brid e Replacement Date: 2/16/2016
NCDOT Contact: William G. (Galen) Cail, PE Contractor / Designer: TGS Engineers (David B. Petty, PE)
Address: 1590 Mail Seroice Center Address: 706 Hillsborough Street
Raleigh, NC 27699-1590 Suite 200
Ralei h, NC 27603
Phone: [phone] Phone: [phone] (Ext. 104)
Email: cail ncdot. ov Email: dpett t sen ineers.com
CitylTown: Liberty County(ies): Guilford
River Basin s: Ca e Fear CAMA Count ? No
Wetlands within Project Limits? Yes
Pro'ect Description
Project Length (lin. miles or feet): 390 ft. Surrounding Land Use: Forest, Cropland, Rural Residential
Proposed Pro'ect Existin Site
Project Built-Upon Area (ac.) 0.3 ac. 0.3 ac.
Typical Cross Section Description: Two 10' wide paved travel lanes w/ shoulders paved to face of guardrails (varies 0' to 5') Two 10' wide paved travel lanes with 2' to 4' wide grassed shoulders and grassed side
and 3' wide grassed shoulders behind guardrail. Outside of guardrails are 3' wide slopes ranging from about 10(H):1(V) to 2(H):1(V).
grassed shoulders and 4(H):1(V) to 2(H):1(V) grassed side slopes.
Annual Avg Daily Traffic (veh/hr/day): Design/Future: 400 Year: 2015 Existing: 400 Year: 2015
General Project Narrative: Replacement of Bridge No. 400271 on SR 3343 (Coble Church Road) over North Prong Stinking Quarter Creek in Guilford County northwest of Liberty, NC. Proposed 70' long
(Description of Minimization of Water by 30' wide single-span bridge to replace existing 53' long by 26' wide triple-span bridge. The proposed grade is about 0.5' above existing ground in the vicinity of the bridge and
Quality Impacts) roughly matching existing by about 130' left of stream and about 130' right of stream (looking downstream). The proposed bridge will have no direct discharge into the water or
buffers. Stormwater runoff on the existing bridge discharges directly into the water for the full length of the bridge. No deck drains will be installed. Stormwater runoff from the
proposed bridge is to flow to two (2) proposed drop inlets at the east approach and to one (1) proposed drop inlet at the west approach. Discharge from the pipe outlets will be
attenuated on a riprap pad outside of the buffer zones, flow away from the buffers and be fully diffused by the existing topographic conditions before sheet flowing toward the
buffer zones. A drive pipe in the northwest quadrant is to be realigned due to slightly wider shoulder to satisfy minimum roadway design requirements. The pipe will outlet on a
base ditch lined with Class I Rip Rap on geotextile to dissipate flow. Stormwater runoff will be discharged at minimum practicable slopes, yielding minimum velocities. The
project will involve 13 linear feet of impacts in northwest quadrant due to streambank stablization. Anticipate minor impacts to wetlands at southwest bridge corner due to
proposed excavation (<0.01 acres) and at crosspipe east of bridge due to proposed headwall/fill (<0.01 acres). The project will require the relocation of an existing underground
telephone line north of the proposed bridge. The new UG telephone will be installed by directional drilling and will not result in any impacts to buffers, wetlands or the stream.
Otherwise, no changes are anticipated to existing utilty alignments/locations.
Waterbody Information
Surface Water Bod 1): North Pron Stinking Quarter Creek NCDWR Stream Index No.: 16-19-8-1
NCDWR Surface Water Classification for Water Body Primary Classification: Water Supply V(WS-V)
Supplemental Classification: Nutrient Sensitive Waters NSW
Other Stream Classification: None
Impairments: None
Aquatic T&E Species? No Comments:
NRTR Stream ID: North Pron Stinkin Quarter Creek Buffer Rules in Effect: Jordan Lake
Project Includes Bridge Spanning Water Body? Yes Deck Drains Discharge Over Buffer? No Dissipator Pads Provided in Buffer? No
Deck Drains Dischar e Over Water Bod ? No (If yes, provide justification in the General Project Narrative) (If yes, describe in the General Project Narrative; if no, justify in the
(If yes, provide justification in the General Project Narrative) General Project Narrative)

H„ ;-_..
i hwa North Carolina Department of Transportation �
�'St��rr71�N�t�E'r' Highway Stormwater Program
�,
��•,.
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
(Version 2.04; Released November 2015) FOR NCDOT PROJECTS
WBS Element: TIP No.: SF-400271 County(ies): Guilford Page 2 of 2
Preformed Scour Holes and Energy Dissipators
ta ion oor inates rainage ipe ructure
Sheet (Road and Non Road Surface Energy Dissipator Area Conveyance Dimensions Q10 V10 Associated w/
No. Projects) Water Body Type Riprap Type (ac) Structure (in) (cfs) (fps) Buffer Rules?
� 2 -L- 12+57 RT (1)North Riprap Apron / Pad Class'B' <0.1 Pipe 15 0.1 0.3 N/A
35.93363°, -079.60404° Pron
� 2 -L- 13+86 LT (1)North Riprap Apron / Pad Class'B' <0.10 Pipe 15 0.3 0.3 N/A
35.93375°, -079.60359° Pron
� 2 -L- 13+00 LT (1)North Riprap Apron / Pad Class I 17.0 Pipe 30 29.6 2.6 N/A
35.93381°, -079.60391° Prong
Additional Comments
e er to t e est anagement ractices o0 ox , tan ar s, t e e era ig way ministration y rau ic ngineering ircu ar o. - ir ition, y rau ic esign o nergy
Dissipators for Culverts and Channels (July 2006), as applicable, for design guidance and criteria.