Extension of NC 94 (4)

APPLICATION FOR DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PERMIT OMB APPROVAL NO. 0710-003
(33 CFR 325)
Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 10 hours per response, although the majority of applications should
require 5 hours or less. This includes the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed,
and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of
information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Service Directorate of Information
Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302; and to the Office of Management and Budget,
Paperwork Reduction Project (0710-0003), Washington, DC 20503. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no
person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number.
Please DO NOT RETURN your form to either of those addresses. Completed applications must be submitted to the District Engineer having jurisdiction
over the location of the proposed activity.
PRIVACY ACT STATEMENT
Authority: Rivers and Harbors Act, Section 10, 33 USC 403: Clean Water Act, Section 404, 33 USC 1344; Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries
Act, 33 USC 1413, Section 103. Principal Purpose: Information provided on this form will be used in evaluating the application for a permit. Routine
Uses: This information may be shared with the Department of Justice and other federal, state, and local government agencies. Submission of
requested information is voluntary, however, if information is not provided the permit application cannot be evaluated nor can a permit be issued.
One set of original drawings or good reproducible copies which show the location and character of the proposed activity must be attached to this
application (see sample drawings and instructions) and be submitted to the District Engineer having jurisdiction over the location of the proposed
activity. An application that is not completed in full will be returned.
ITEMS 1 THRU 4 TO BE ILLED BY THE CORPS
1. APPLICATION NO. 2. FIELD OFFICE CODE 3. DATE RECEIVED 4. DATE APPLICATION COMPLETED
ITEMS BELOW TO BE F LLED BY APPLICAN
5. APPLICANT'S NAME 8. AUTHORIZED AGENT'S NAME AND TITLE (an agent is not required)
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Project Development & Environmental Analysis
6. APPLICANT'S ADDRESS 9. AGENT'S ADDRESS
1598 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1548
7. APPLICANT'S PHONE NOS. W/AREA CODE 10. AGENT'S PHONE NOS. W/AREA CODE
a. Residence a. Residence
b. Business 919-733-7844 ext 301 b. Business
11. STATEMENT OF AUTHORIZATION
I hereby authorize, to act in my behalf as my agent in the processing of this application and to furnish, upon
request, supplemental information in support of this permit application.
APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE DATE

NAME, LOCATION, AND DESCRIPTION OR PROJECT OR ACTIVITY
12. PROJECT NAME OR TITLE (see instructions
TIP U-3419 Extension of NC 94 from NC 32 to US 17
Bypass in Edenton, Chowan County, North Carolina
13. NAME OF WATERBODY, IF KNOWN (if applicable) 14. PROJECT STREET ADDRESS (if applicable)
Queen Anne Creek
15. LOCATION OF PROJECT
Chowan NC
COUNTY STATE
16. OTHER LOCATION DESCRIPTIONS, IF KNOWN (see instructions) Section, Township, Range, Lat/Lon, and/or Accessory's Parcel Number, for example.

17. DIRECTIONS TO THE SITE
Please see attached vicinity map and cover letter.

ENG FORM 4345, Jul 97 EDITION OF FEB 94 IS OBSOLETE (Proponent: CECW-OR)

18. Nature of Activity (Description of project, include all features)

The proposed two-lane facility will have 12-foot lanes with 8-foot shoulders (2-foot paved). The total length of the project is
approximately 3.0 miles, depending on the alternative chosen. The design speed for the proposed project is 60 mph. The new facility will
have limited control of access.
19. Project Purpose (Describe the reason or purpose of the project, see instructions)

The purpose of the project is to reduce truck traffic along existing NC 32 within downtown Edenton by providing an alternate route.

USE BLOCKS 20-22 IF DREDGED AND/OR FILL MATERIAL IS TO BE DISCHARGED
20. Reason(s) for Discharge

21. Type(s) of Material Being Discharged and the Amount of Each Type in Cubic Yards

Fill from roadway.

22. Surface Area in Acres of Wetlands or Other Waters Filled (see instructions)
Please see Merger Permit Application Letter

23. Is Any Portion of the Work Already Complete? Yes - No X IF YES, DESCRIBE THE COMPLETED WORK

24. Addresses of Adjoining Property Owners, Lessees, Etc., Whose Property Adjoins the Waterbody (If more than can be entered here, please attach a supplemental list).

25. List of Other Certifications or Approvals/Denials Received from other Federal, State, or Local Agencies for Work Described in This Application.
AGENCY TYPE APPROVAL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER DATE APPLIED DATE APPROVED DATE DENIED

Would include but is not restricted to zoning, building, and flood plain permits
26. Application is hereby made for a permit or permits to authorize the work described in this application. I certify that the information in this application is
complete and accurate. I further certify that I possess the authority to undertake the work described herein or am acting as the duly authorized agent
of the Q'
~V
SI A APPLICA DATE SIGNATURE OF AGENT DATE
The p licatto must be sign by the person who desires to undertake the proposed activity (applicant) or it may be signed by a duly authorized
agent i the s tement in block 11 has been filled out and signed.
18 U.S.C. Section 1001 provides that: Whoever, in any manner within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States knowingly
and willfully falsifies, conceals, or covers up any trick, scheme, or disguises a material fact or makes any false, fictitious or fraudulent statements or
representations or makes or uses any false writing or document knowing same to contain any false, fictitious or fraudulent statements or entry, shall
be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than five years or both.

ENG FORM 4345, Jul 97 EDITION OF FEB 94 IS OBSOLETE (Proponent: CECW-OR)

e SfA7E o ( ti J

sT

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA a~~~y
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION %/C,h

MICHAEL F. EASLEY LYNDO TIPPETT
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
July 8, 2008

Mr. Bill Biddlecome, Transportation Project Manager
Department of the Army; Corps of Engineers
Washington Regulatory Field Office
Post Office Box 1000
Washington, North Carolina 27889-1000

Dear Mr. Biddlecome:

SUBJECT: SECTION 404 - N.E.P.A MERGER PROCESS Application for a
Department of the Army (DOA) Permit pursuant to Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act TO DISCHARGE DREDGED OR FILL MATERIAL
INTO WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES TO CONSTRUCT the
proposed extension of NC 94 from NC 32 to US 17 Bypass, Chowan
County. Federal Aid Project STP-1114(2), WBS No. 34949.1.1, T.I.P.
No. U-3419

The following application, including separate attachments for (1) ENG Form 4345
and (2) mailing list (labels) is submitted for your consideration. As you are aware, this
project was selected for treatment under the "Merger 01" process. At this juncture, the
Merger Project Team has provided concurrence with Purpose and Need, with the
selection of Detailed Study Alternatives and that no bridging alternatives are feasible. An
Environmental Assessment (EA) was prepared and signed on April 4, 2008. A copy is
attached.

Please issue your public notice at the earliest opportunity so that we can jointly
proceed toward selecting the LEDPA (least environmentally damaging, practicable
alternative which meets the purpose and need of the project) following analysis of public
input. Once the LEDPA is selected and approved, efforts will be undertaken to further
minimize impacts to Waters of the U.S. in the LEDPA corridor and to propose suitable
compensatory mitigation to offset unavoidable impacts.

The following information is a summary of relevant project details and is being
provided to assist in the Section 404 regulatory review of the project. Please note that
more detailed information is available in the EA.

MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: [phone] LOCATION:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FAX: [phone] TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER WEBSITE: WWW.DOH.DOT.STATE.NC.US RALEIGH NC
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548

INTRODUCTION

The NCDOT, in consultation with the FHWA, proposes the construction of a two-
lane road on new location from NC 941NC 32 to US 17 Bypass in Edenton, Chowan
County, North Carolina.

The proposed two-lane facility will have 12-foot lanes with 8-foot shoulders
(2-foot paved). The total length of the project is approximately 3.0 miles, depending on
the alternative chosen. The design speed for the proposed project is 60 mph. The new
facility will have limited control of access.

NEPA/404 MERGER PROCESS DOCUMENTATION

The proposed project is being developed through the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA)/404 Merger 01 Process to ensure systematic evaluation of the project
plus avoidance and minimization of all potential impacts. Concurrence Point 1 (Purpose
& Need) was signed by Merger Team members on March 14, 2001. Concurrence Point 2
(Alternatives for Detailed Study) was signed on April 17, 2002 & March 26 2003.
Concurrence Point 2a (Bridging and Alignment Review) was signed on September 20,
2007.

PURPOSE AND NEED

a. Proiect Need

Three major highways serve Edenton area: US 17, NC 32, and NC 94. The main
industrial area near Edenton is located on NC 94 near the Edenton Airport. Heavy trucks
are introduced onto the street network by logging and other industries off of NC 94. Most
of the traffic that currently accesses the industrial area travels from US 17 to NC 32. NC
32 carries this traffic through the Central Business District and the Edenton Historic
District.

According to the 2005 traffic volumes, over 760 trucks passed through downtown
Edenton on NC 32. By 2030, it is expected that over 1400 trucks will travel through
downtown Edenton each day. Trucks must maneuver through several difficult turns
going through downtown (in the historic district) to follow NC 32.

For over 20 years, the Edenton Historical Commission has expressed concern
about the effects that heavy truck volumes have on the historic district. A 1987 letter

stated that the trucks:
• Cause excessive vibrations in the c. 1773 James Iredell House State Historic Site.
• Damage has occurred to walls and foundation of the house.

2

• Dishes and breakable items in the house have been known to move across tables due
to the vibrations.

Tourism has been an important part of downtown Edenton's economy because of
the well preserved historic district. Walking tours in the historic district have been
endangered by the excessive number of trucks.

NC 32 currently runs by the John A. Holmes High School. This school has a high
pedestrian population. The superintendent of the school system has in past
correspondence requested a re-routing of this highway due to potential safety hazards
involving school buses and school children pedestrians.

The Edenton thoroughfare plan states that "the most evident deficiency in the
Edenton road network is the lack of a circumferential route that would allow traffic to
access the US 17 Bypass without passing through the center of town. Improvement of
existing streets downtown is limited by the abundance of historic properties and the large
trees that line the pavement edge." The lack of a route around Edenton from the
southeast is a major driving force for this project. Past attempts to reroute truck traffic to
other streets downtown were not successful.

b. Proiect Purpose

The purpose of the project is to reduce truck traffic along existing NC 32 within
downtown Edenton.

ALTERNATIVES

a. No-Build Alternative

The no-build alternative would forego any improvements to existing roads with
exception of routine maintenance. This alternative does not meet the purpose of the
project because it would not improve safety or reduce truck traffic through downtown
Edenton. It is used as a basis for comparison of other alternatives.

b. Alternative Modes of Transportation

Considering the size and location of Edenton, alternate modes of transportation
are not considered viable alternatives for the project. Expansion of rail service and
implementation of bus service in the project area would not meet the purpose of the
project. The Industrial Park is currently not served by rail. A military base was once
served by rail in the vicinity of the Industrial Park, however, an ice storm wiped out the
railroad bridge over the Albemarle Sound in the 1970s and Norfolk Southern decided it
would be unprofitable to replace the bridge. Chowan County did not disagree with this

3

decision. Subsequently, the railroad tracks between Queen Anne Creek and the
Albemarle Sound were removed.

In general, "just in time" inventories negatively affected train shipments in
Chowan County. This refers to the ability of trucks to ship items more quickly than rail.
In addition, small shipments are not well served by rail as economies of scale are reached
more easily with large loads. Rail shipments are less flexible than truck shipments in that
due to the lower frequency of rail shipping, product may be required to sit in storage
while waiting for shipment. This rigidity also limits rail shipment of perishable goods.
Considering all of this, it is not surprising that for the types of shipping that occur in
Edenton, rail rates are not competitive with the trucking rates.

C. New Location Alternatives

There are currently three build alternatives being considered for this project. All
three alternatives begin at the intersection of NC 32, NC 94 (Soundside Road), and SR
1103 (Hobbs Lane) east of downtown Edenton. The alternatives utilize the existing SR
1103 (Hobbs Lane) alignment before turning north and crossing an unnamed tributary of
Queen Anne Creek. The alternatives incorporate a service road near the beginning of the
project in order to maintain access to fields that are currently accessed via Hobbs Lane.
Construction for this service road ends before the unnamed tributary of Queen Anne
Creek. The current intersection of SR 1102 (Yeopim Road) and NC 32 will be moved
east of the existing intersection.

Paradise Road #2: From the south terminal, this alternative turns northwest, crosses an
agricultural field then crosses another tributary of Queen Anne Creek. This alternative
continues in a northwesterly direction across another agricultural field, then crosses
Queen Anne Creek before reaching the intersection of Old Hertford Road. The
alternative proposes an at-grade crossing at Old Hertford Road. The alternative proceeds
across more agricultural fields, includes an at-grade crossing at US 17 Business (N. Broad
Street), a grade separation of the Chesapeake and Albemarle Railroad, and a new half
diamond/cloverleaf interchange with US 17 Bypass. The existing Paradise Road Bridge
over US 17 Bypass will remain in place to provide access to the properties along Paradise
Road, but the ramps will be removed.

Peanut Drive #1: From the south terminal, this alternative turns northwest, crosses an

agricultural field then crosses another tributary of Queen Anne Creek. This alternative
proceeds north along the edge of the large wooded tract before turning west and crossing
Queen Anne Creek (to the north of the Paradise Road proposed location). This
alternative then crosses US 17 Business (N. Broad Street) and follows the existing Peanut
Drive. A grade-separation over the Railroad and a new half-diamond/cloverleaf
interchange with US 17 Bypass and proposed. The existing Paradise Road Bridge over
US 17 Bypass will remain in place to provide access to the properties along Paradise
Road, but the ramps will be removed. Old Hertford Road will not have direct access to
the new road, but will be redirected to align with US 17 Business.

4

Soundside Road Western: From the south terminal, this alternative crosses an
agricultural field then crosses another tributary of Queen Anne Creek. The alignment
then continues north along the edge of the large wooded tract and crosses Butternut Lane
before ending just south of the existing interchange of US 17 Business and US 17 Bypass.
The existing interchange will remain in place with no improvements. In addition, a
realignment of US 17 Business near the interchange with US 17 is required to meet
current design standards.

Table 1: Comparison of Current Alternatives

Paradise Road Peanut Drive Soundside
Impacted Resource #2 #1 Road Western
Length 3.1 miles 3.1 miles 2.9 miles
New Interchanges 1 1 0
Railroad Crossings 1 1 0
Schools 0 0 0
Recreational Areas and Parks 0 0 0
Churches 0 0 0
Cemeteries 0 0 0
Residential Relocations 6 14 2
Business Relocations 3 10 0
Historic Properties (Eligible or Listed on 0 0 0
the National Register)
Section 4(f) Properties 0 0 0
Archeological Sites Undetermined Undetermined Undetermined
NRCS - Potential Farmland Conversion 43 acres 51 acres 37 acres

Wetland Impacts 6.1 acres 6 acres 7.3 acres
Stream Impacts 370 ft 120 ft 0 ft
Water Supply Watershed Protected Areas 0 0 0
Wildlife Refuges and Gamelands 0 0 0
Federally Listed Species Within Corridor No Effect No Effect No Effect
Major Utility Crossings 0 0 0
Known Hazardous Material Sites or 0 0 0
Hazardous Spill Basins
Noise Receptors Impacted 1 1 0
Minority / Low Income Populations No No No
(Adverse & Disproportionate Impacts)
Construction Cost $30,541,000 $38,741,000 $14,399,000
Right of Way Cost $7,230,900 $22,786,300 $5,588,800
Utilities Cost $1,106,900 $1,677,800 $433,600
Mitigation Cost $539,400 $411,000 $428,500
Total Project Cost $39,418,200 $63,616,100 $20,849,900
Notes:
(1) Archeological surveys will be performed once the preferred alternative is selected.

5

COST ESTIMATES AND SCHEDULE

This project is included in the approved 2009-2015 State Transportation
Improvement Program (STIP). The total cost in the STIP is $29,670,000, which includes
$6,400,000 for right of way, $640,000 for utilities, $630,000 for mitigation and
$22,000,000 for construction. The current estimated construction cost ranges from
$5,588,750 to $22,786,250 and estimated construction cost ranges from $14,399,000 to
$38,549,000 depending on the alternative selected. Right of way acquisition is scheduled
to begin in Federal Fiscal Year (FFY) 2010 with construction to begin in FFY 2012.

WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES

a. Water Resources

The project study area is situated in NCDWQ Sub-basin 03-01-04, and in
Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) 03010205 of the Chowan River drainage basin. Queen
Anne Creek, three unnamed tributaries (UTs) of Queen Anne Creek, and a pond represent
the surface waters in the project study area. Queen Anne Creek and UT1 are perennial
waters while UT2 and UT3 contain both intermittent and perennial reaches. One pond is
located within the southwest portion of the project study area. The pond is jurisdictional
and hydrologically connected to surface waters of the U.S. The pond flows into
Pembroke Creek, which flows into a series of impoundments that eventually discharge
into the Albemarle Sound.

The North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) classifies surface
waters of the state based on their intended best uses. This section of Queen Anne Creek
and its tributaries are classified as "C NSW" waters. NCDWQ defines class "C" as
waters suitable for aquatic life propagation and maintenance of biological integrity,
wildlife, secondary recreation, and agriculture. Sources of water pollution that preclude
any of these uses on either a short-term or long-term basis shall be considered to be in
violation of water quality standards. "Nutrient Sensitive Waters" (NSW) is a
supplemental surface water classification intended for waters needing additional nutrient
management due to their being subject to excessive growth of microscopic or
macroscopic vegetation.

6

Table 2: Stream Characteristics

Stream Name NCDWQ Water Benthos NCDWQ USACE Class.
Index # Quality Present Rating # Score
Queen Anne Creek 26-1-2 C NSW Yes 36 61 Perennial

UT1 to Queen Anne 26-1-2 C NSW Yes 30 68 Perennial
Creek
UT2 to Queen Anne 26-1-2 C NSW Yes 34 26 Intermittent
Creek (Upper Reach)
UT2 to Queen Anne 26-1-2 C NSW Yes 20 56 Perennial
Creek (Lower Reach)
UT3 to Queen Anne 26-1-2 C NSW Yes 22.5 29 Intermittent
Creek (Upper Reach)
UT3 to Queen Anne 26-1-2 C NSW Yes 33.5 56 Perennial
Creek (Lower Reach)

No High Quality Waters (HQW), Water Supplies (WS-I or WS-II), or
Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW) occur within 1 mile of the project study area. This
section of Queen Anne Creek is not listed on the DWQ 2006 Draft 303 (d) list of
impaired waters.

The Division of Coastal Management (DCM) within the N.C. Department of
Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR) carries out the state's Coastal Area
Management Act (LAMA). Chowan County is one of the 20 CAMA regulated counties.

Areas of Environmental Concern (AECs) are the foundation of the DCM's
permitting program for coastal development. The DCM classifies areas as AECs to
protect them from uncontrolled development, which may cause irreversible damage to
property, public health, or the environment.

According to the DCM, the project is likely in an AEC if it is among other
criteria, in or on navigable waters within the 20 CAMA regulated counties. Based on this
information, Queen Anne Creek and UT1 of Queen Anne Creek would likely be
considered navigable waters and therefore, impacts to either of these streams. Therefore
it is likely that a CAMA Major Development Permit will be required for this project.

b. Point and Non-Point Source Discharges

Point source discharges are permitted through the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) program. Dischargers are required by law to register for a
permit. Based upon NCDWQ's database (accessed 02/14/06), two NPDES permitted
sites (both located at the Edenton Wastewater Treatment plant) are located within one

7

mile of the project study area. However, both of these sites discharge into Filbert Creek,
which flows into the Albemarle Sound and does not flow through the project study area.

Non-point source (NPS) discharge refers to runoff that enters surface waters
through stormwater, snowmelt, or atmospheric deposition. Land use activities such as
land development, construction, mining operations, crop production, animal feeding lots,
failing septic systems, landfills, roads, and parking lots are contributors of non-point
source pollutants. The dominant land uses surrounding and within the project study area
are agriculture and forestry. The western portion of the study area contains limited
residential and commercial development. The town of Edenton is located immediately
west/southwest of the project study area.

C. Water Resource Impacts

Aquatic organisms are acutely sensitive to changes in their environment and
environmental impacts from construction activities may result in long term or irreversible
effects. Impacts usually associated with in-stream construction include alterations to the
substrate and impacts to adjacent streamside vegetation. Such disturbances within the
substrate lead to increased siltation, which can clog the gills and/or feeding mechanisms
of benthic organisms, fish, and amphibian species. Siltation may also cover benthic
macroinvertebrates with excessive amounts of sediment that inhibit their ability to obtain
oxygen.

The removal of streamside vegetation and placement of fill material during
construction enhances erosion and possible sedimentation. Quick revegetation of these
areas helps to reduce the impacts by supporting the underlying soils. Erosion and
sedimentation may carry soils, toxic compounds, trash, and other materials into the
aquatic communities at the construction site. As a result, bars may form at and
downstream of the site. Increased light penetration from the removal of streamside
vegetation may increase water temperatures. Warmer water contains less oxygen, thus
reducing aquatic life that depends on high oxygen concentrations.

The primary sources of water-quality degradation in rural areas are nonpoint-
source discharges and stormwater runoff. Precautions should be taken to minimize
impacts to water sources in the project vicinity. Aquatic organisms are very sensitive to
discharges and inputs from construction. Appropriate measures must be taken to avoid
petroleum spillage and control runoff.

Measures to minimize these potential impacts include formulation of an erosion
and sedimentation control plan, provisions for waste material and storage, stormwater
management measures, and appropriate road-maintenance measures. NCDOT's Best
Management Practices for Protection of Surface Waters (BMPs-PSKT and Sedimentation
Control guidelines should be strictly enforced during the construction stages of the
project. Limiting in-stream activities and revegetating stream banks immediately

8

following the completion of grading can further reduce impacts. No adverse long-term
impacts to water resources are expected to result from the proposed project.

d. Jurisdictional Wetlands and Streams

Impacts to wetlands, Queen Anne Creek, and its associated tributaries are
anticipated for the proposed project. Table 3 describes the acreage of the wetlands, the
linear footage of the streams, and the acreage of open waters located within the project
study area.

Table 3: Jurisdictional Wetlands, Streams, and Open Waters

Wetlands
Wetland Number Area within Project Stud Area
Wetland 1 182 acres
Wetland 2 233 acres
Wetland 3 11 acres

Wetland 4 19 acres
Streams
Stream Name Length within the Project Stud Area
Queen Anne Creek 9,810 linear feet
UT #1 to Queen Anne Creek 32520 linear feet
UT #2 to Queen Anne Creek 1,720 linear feet intermittent
1,320 linear feet perennial
UT #3 to Queen Anne Creek 1,180 linear feet intermittent

4,360 linear feet perennial
Pond
Pond Number Area within the Project Stud Area
Waters of the U.S. - Pond 1 1.9 acres

As per WRC, an anadromous fish moratorium would apply to in-water activities
from February 15th to June 15th to portions of Queen Anne Creek and UT's.

Wetland and stream impacts were calculated based on the current alternatives.
Wetland impacts are calculated from slope stake to slope stake plus an additional 25 feet
outside of each limit as determined from the current functional design plans for each
alternative studied. They are rounded to the nearest 0.1 acre for wetlands and to the
nearest 10 feet for streams. Bridges are recommended at several locations and impacts
reflect these recommendations.

9

Table 4: Wetland and Stream Impacts
Alt. Wetland Wetland/ Wetland Area Length of NC DWQ USACE

Type # Stream ID Impacted Stream Rating Stream
(acres) Impacted (ft) Score
Paradise UTl 0 30 68
Sw-For W 1 A 1.6 82
Sw-For W 1 B 0.9 82
Sw-For WIC 1.6 82
QA1 0 36 61
Sw-For W 1 D 1.9 82
UW2 0.1 -
UT3 370 22.5 29

Total 6.1 acres 370 feet
Peanut UT1 0 30 68
Sw-For W 1 B 0.9 82
Sw-For W 1 A 2.1 82
Sw-For WIC 1.3 82
Sw-For UW 1 A 0.1 82
SB 120 - -
QA2 0 36 61
Sw-For W 1 E 0.8 82

UW4 0.8 -
Total 6 acres 120 feet
Soundside UTl 0 30 68
Sw-For W 1 A 1.9 82
Sw-For W 1 B 0.9 82
Sw-For WIC 1.1 82
Bot-HF W2 3.2 54
UW5A 0.1 -

UW5B 0.1
Total 7.3 acres 0 feet
Notes: Sw-For = Swamp forest; Bot-HF = Bottomland hardwood forest Wet-F1= Wet flat

10

MITIGATION EVALUATION

The USACE has adopted, through the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ),
a mitigation policy that embraces the concepts of "no net loss of wetlands" and
sequencing. Mitigation of wetland impacts has been defined by the CEQ to include:
avoiding impacts (to wetlands), minimizing impacts, rectifying impacts, reducing impacts
over time, and compensating for impacts (40 CFR 1508.20). Avoidance, minimization,
and compensatory mitigation must be considered in sequential order.

a. Avoidance

Avoidance examines all appropriate and practicable possibilities of averting
impacts to Waters of the United States. According to a 1990 Memorandum of Agreement
(MOA) between the USEPA and the USACE, "appropriate and practicable" measures to
offset unavoidable impacts should be appropriate to the scope and degree of those
impacts and practicable in terms of cost, existing technology, and logistics in light of
overall project purposes. Total avoidance of wetlands and streams was not possible
because of the extensive location of Queen Anne Creek and the tributaries within the
study area

b. Minimization

Minimization includes the examination of appropriate and practicable steps to
reduce the adverse impacts to Waters of the United States. Implementation of these steps
will be required through project modifications and permit conditions. Minimization
typically focuses on decreasing the footprint of the proposed project through the reduction

of median widths, right-of-way widths, fill slopes, and/or road shoulder widths. The
following other methods are suggested to minimize adverse impacts to water resources.

• Strictly enforce BMPs to control sedimentation during project construction
• Bridge high quality, linear wetland systems
• Minimize clearing and grubbing activity
• Decrease or eliminate discharges into streams
• Re-establish vegetation on exposed areas
• Minimize in-stream activity

Project specific minimization efforts include:

• Both Soundside and Paradise alternatives were shifted to reduce wetland
impacts
• Bridges are recommended at two locations (UT1, and Queen Anne Creek) to
minimize wetland/stream impacts
• Equalizer pipes are recommended at several locations

11

C. Compensatory Mitilzation

Compensatory mitigation is not normally considered until anticipated impacts to
Waters of the United States have been avoided or minimized to the maximum extent
possible. It is recognized that "no net loss of wetlands" functions and values may not be
achieved in each and every permit action. Appropriate and practicable compensatory
mitigation is required for unavoidable adverse impacts that remain after all appropriate
and practicable minimization has been completed. Compensatory actions often include
restoration, creation, and enhancement of Waters of the United States. Such action should
be undertaken in areas adjacent to the discharge site when feasible.

The NCDOT will investigate potential on-site stream and wetland mitigation
opportunities once a final decision has been rendered with regard to the location of the
preferred alternative. If on-site mitigation is not feasible, mitigation will be provided by
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources Ecosystem
Enhancement Program (EEP). In accordance with the "Memorandum of Agreement
Among the North Carolina Department of Transportation, and the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, Wilmington District" (MOA), July 22, 2003, the EEP, will be requested to
provide off-site mitigation to satisfy the federal Clean Water Act compensatory
mitigation requirements for this project.

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 ESA. According to the November 5, 2007 USFWS
county species listing, there are no species listed for federal protection for Chowan
County. On August 8, 2007, the USFWS removed the bald eagle from the list of
threatened and endangered species protected under the ESA. The Bald Eagle is now
protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA).

WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS

There are no Wild and Scenic Rivers within the project, therefore, the Wild and
Scenic Rivers Act does not apply.

12

CULTURAL RESOURCES

This project is subject to compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966, as amended, and implemented by the Advisory
Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106,
codified as 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 on the National Register of Historic Places (NR) and
to afford the Advisory Council a reasonable opportunity to comment on such
undertakings.

a. Historic Architecture

There are no historic structures eligible for the National Register located within
the Area of Potential Effects (APE). The Edenton Historic District is outside the APE.
(See Appendix C of the EA for the Concurrence Form).

b. ArcheoloVy

No archeological surveys have been completed so far. A survey will,be
completed once the recommended alternative is selected.

SECTION 4M RESOURCES

No Section 4(f) protected properties will be impacted by this project.

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

The NCDOT GeoEnvironmental Unit investigated a Superfund site within the
project vicinity. The former facility of Pelikan, Inc was located on Hertford Road,
originally included as an alternative. According to the GeoEnvironmental Unit review,
NCDENR was working with the responsible party to try to close the site and/or remove
the site from the Superfund list. This site should not be a concern for the current
alternatives.

13

LOGICAL TERMINI / INDEPENDENT UTILITY

Federal Highway Authority (FHWA) regulations [23 CFR 771.111(Q outline three
general principals to determine project limits. The regulations state:

In order to ensure meaningful evaluation of alternatives and to avoid
commitments to transportation improvements before they are fully evaluated, the
action evaluated in each EIS or FONSI shall.
• Connect logical termini and be of sufficient length to address environmental
matters on a broad scope;
• Have independent utility or interdependent significance, i.e.; be usable and be
a reasonable expenditure even if no additional transportation improvements
in the area are made; and,
• Not restrict consideration of alternatives for other reasonably foreseeable
transportation improvements.

The project's termini and other elements meet the FHWA's criteria for logical
termini. The project would provide additional capacity at the intersection of US 64 and
NC 345 between The Town of Manteo and the Outer Banks.

The project is of sufficient length (between 2.9 and 3.1 miles) to address
environmental matters on a broad scope. The potential for segmentation was avoided
during the planning for this project by evaluating environmental impacts for the entire
length of the proposed project.

The project would have independent utility, even if no additional transportation
improvements were made in the area. The proposed project would not restrict
consideration of alternatives for other reasonably foreseeable transportation
improvements in the area.

14

Enclosed you will find a completed ENG Form 4345 and mailing labels. This
submittal is in accordance with Step 4 of the guidelines for integrating project review
under the National Environmental Policy Act and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act.
This letter, along with the previously distributed EA, should provide sufficient
information for the issuance of a Public Notice for the project. The public hearing is
scheduled for August 19, 2008.

If you have any questions, or need additional information, please contact
Charles R. Cox, P.E., at [phone] extension 301.

Sincerely,

Grego . Th e, Ph.D Manager
Proje e opment an Environmental Analysis

CRC/cc

CC: Mr. Scott McLendon, USACE, Wilmington
Mr. David Wainwright, NCDWQ (5 copies)
Mr. Travis Wilson, NCWRC
Mr. Chris Militscher, USEPA

Mr. Gary Jordan, USFWS
Mr. Clarence W. Coleman, P.E., FHWA
Mr. Jay Bennett, P.E., Roadway Design
Mr. Phil Harris, P.E., Natural Environment Unit
Mr. Drew Joyner, Human Environment Unit
Mr. Majed Al-Ghandour, P.E., Programming and TIP
Mr. Art McMillian, P.E., Highway Design
Mr. David Chang, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr. Greg Perfetti, P.E., Structure Design
Mr. Mark Staley, Roadside Environmental
Mr. Jerry Jennings, P.E., Division 1 Engineer (Acting)
Mr. Clay Willis, DEO Division 1

15