20171287 Ver 1_R 85 NWP 3 and 13 Application_20171010

Carpenter,Kristi
From:Hood, Donna
Sent:Tuesday, October 10, 2017 11:15 AM
To:Carpenter,Kristi
Subject:FW: 17BP.10.R.85 Bridge 03005 (Anson County)
Attachments:R.85 NWP 3 and 13 Application.pdf
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Flagged
Kristi Lynn,
Who is supposed to enter these into Laser Fiche? Me? Larry? It is a NW3 NW13, non-
notifying.

Just wondering.

Thanks,
Donna

From: Thompson, Larry B
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2017 10:56 AM
To: Hood, Donna <[e-mail]>; Amschler, Crystal C CIV USARMY CESAW
(US) <[e-mail]>
Cc: Howard, Joel M <[e-mail]>; Haywood, Luther G
<[e-mail]>
Subject: 17BP.10.R.85 Bridge 03005 (Anson County)

Crystal, Donna:

Attached you will find information pertaining to a non-notifying bridge replacement
project in Anson County. This is Bridge No. 03005 on SR 1806 (Blue Water Road) over
Branch of Jones Creek. We are proposing to remove the existing 22-foot single span
bridge with a 45-foot long single span cored-slab bridge. There is 54 linear feet of
stream bank stabilization around the bridge abutments proposed as part of this
project.

If you feel that this project requires written authorization, please let me know and I will
submit an online application.

Thank you!
Larry

Larry Thompson, PWS, LSS
Division Environmental Officer
Division 10
1

North Carolina Department of Transportation

704.301.4881 cell
[e-mail]

716 West Main Street
Albemarle, North Carolina 28001-4626

Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N.C. Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third
parties.
2

Corps Submittal Cover Sheet
Please provide the following information:
1. Project Name:_Brid�placement No. 030035 on SR 1806 over Branch of Jones Creek
2. Name of Property Owner/Applicant: NCDOT Division 10, Scott Cole, P.E.
3. Name of Consultant/Agent: STV En ineers Inc.
*Agent Authorization needs to be attached.
4. Related/Previous Action ID number(s): N/A
5. Site Address: SR 1806 (Blue Water Road) over Branch of Jones Creek, Wadesboro,
NC
6. Subdivision Name: N/A
7. City: Wadesboro, NC
8. County:
9. Lat: _34.912810° N _Long: -79.931666° W
10. Quadrangle Name:_Lilesville, NC (1982)
11. Waterway:_ Branch of Jones Creek (Class C�
12. Watershed:_ Yadkin-Pee Dee�HUC 03040201)
13. Requested Action:
X Nationwide Permit # 3 and 13
General Permit #
= Jurisdictional Determination Request
Pre-Application Request
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following information will be completed by Corps office:
AID:
Prepare File Folder Assign Number in ORM Begin Date
Authorization: Section 10 Section 404
Project Description/Nature of Activity/Project Purpose:
Site/Waters Name:
Keywords:

!
��'�% ��oo
� -�` � = ��.r�:
�
October 3, 2017
Ms. Crystal Amschler
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Asheville Regulatory Field Office
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801-5006
SUBJECT: Pre-Construction Notification Pursuant to Nationwide Permit #3 and #13
NCDOT Division 10 Bridge Replacement No. 030035
SR 1806 (Blue Water Road) over Branch of Jones Creek, Anson County, NC
State WBS Number: 17BP.10.R.85
STV Engineers, Inc. Project No. 4017864
Dear Ms. Amschler:
On behalf of the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) — Division 10, STV
Engineers, Inc. (STV) is submitting a Pre-Construction Notification Form (See Attachment A)
pursuant to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Section 404 Nationwide Permit (NWP) #3 —
Maintenance and NWP #13 — Bank Sfabilization. The NCDOT has retained STV to assist in
matters related to wetland permitting services for this project. Materials supporting our
Jurisdictional Determination regarding the approximate location and extent of jurisdictional
waters of the U.S. within the approximate 2.4-acre project study area (PSA) including North
Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR) Stream Identification Forms, Wetland
Determination Data Forms, an Approved Jurisdictional Determination (Rapanos) Form,
Approximate Waters of the U.S. and Wetlands Boundary Map, and photographs, are found in
Attachment B. Accompanying figures, permit drawings, list of property owners, and an impact
summary are included in Attachment C. A"No Archaeological Survey Required Form" and
"Historic Architecture and Landscapes No Survey Required Form" are included as Attachment
D.
Based on NC OneMap aerial photography for Anson County and verified by field review, the
approximate 2.4-acre PSA consists primarily of undeveloped forest, disturbed (maintained)
right-of-way (R/W), and the improved paved roadway.
Pra�ect De��riptic�n�Pu�ra�se anci h�e�d
STV was retained by the NCDOT to provide engineering and environmental services for the
bridge replacement project on SR 1806 (Blue Water Road). The SR 1806 bridge over Branch of
Jones Creek PSA is located southeast of Wadesboro in the southeastern portion of Anson
County, northwest of NC 145; see Attachment C— Figures 1 and 2. The existing bridge consists
of a 22' span and the proposed structure is a 45' single span, cored-slab bridge. The existing
R/W is 60' wide. The new bridge will essentially be on the same horizontal alignment as the
existing bridge.
This project is part of the NCDOT's Division Managed Bridge Replacement Program. This
program is intended to replace the State's aging, deficient bridges in an efficient and cost
effective manner. Many of the State's bridges were built in the 1950's and are now deteriorating

NCDOT Division 10 Bridge Replacement Program October 3, 2017
Bridge 035 on SR 1806 over Branch of Jones Creek - PCN for NWP #3 and #13
faster than funds are available to replace them. It is estimated that for every bridge replaced,
finro additional ones become deficient. It is the goal of this program that all bridge replacements
meet state and federal environmental regulations while providing the maximum benefit to the
public.
The existing bridge conditions were most recently evaluated on January 8, 2013 by the NCDOT.
Subsequently, the NCDOT prepared an updated Structural Inventory and Appraisal report for
the SR 1806 bridge over Branch of Jones Creek (identified as Bridge No. 030035). This
Structural Inventory and Appraisal report gives the bridge a sufficiency rating of 56.8 out of 100,
with a status considered "functionally obsolete." The NCDOT is planning to replace the existing
SR 1806 Bridge No. 030035 over Branch of Jones Creek, while funding is available, with an
improved modern structure. During construction, the SR 1806 roadway will be closed to traffic,
and traffic will be detoured off-site.
It is anticipated that this bridge replacement project qualifies for a NWP #3 and NWP #13. NWP
#3 authorizes the replacement of currently serviceable structures and allows minor deviations in
the structure's configuration due to current construction code or safety standards. NWP #13
authorizes bank stabilization activities necessary for erosion prevention.
Bac#c�round and Me#hodvlas�v
The scoping meeting for this bridge replacement project, SR 1806 over Branch of Jones Creek
Bridge Replacement, was held on November 18, 2015 at the proposed SR 1806 over Branch of
Jones Creek project site; see Attachment B— Photograph 1. Representatives from the NCDOT
and STV attended. No regulatory agency representatives attended the field meeting. It was
agreed by the NCDOT and STV that a NWP #3 would be appropriate for this bridge
replacement project. The 2017 reauthorization of the Nationwide Permits included a change in
NWP #3 so that the bank stabilization typically associated with bridge replacement is no longer
authorized by NWP #3. Therefore, the use of a NWP #13 will also now be required.
Field surveys were conducted within the proposed SR 1806 over Branch of Jones Creek Bridge
Replacement project study area (PSA) by STV environmental scientists on April 14, 2016. A
PSA that was approximately 150 feet wide and 600 feet in length, centered along the existing
bridge, and that extended upstream of SR 1806 for 100 feet and downstream for approximately
200 feet was field reviewed. Streams and wetlands within the PSA were assessed and plant
communities and their associated wildlife were identified and recorded.
Jurisdictional waters of the U.S. are defined by 33 CFR 328.3(b) and protected by Section 404
of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344), which is administered and enforced in North Carolina
by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Wilmington District. Potential wetland areas
were defined using the USACE Routine On-Site Determination method as described in the 1987
"Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual."' This technique uses a multi-parameter
approach, which requires positive evidence of hydrophytic vegetation, wetland hydrology, and
hydric soils. In addition, the USACE "Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland
Delineation Manual: Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region (Version 2.0)"2 was utilized for
further procedural and technical guidance. Potential jurisdictional stream channels were
� Environmental Laboratory, 1987, "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, " Technical Report Y-87-1, US Army
Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
z U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2012. Regional Supplement to the Corps ofEngineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Eastern
Mountains and Piedmont Region. Vicksburg MS: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center.
2

NCDOT Division 10 Bridge Rep/acemenf Program October 3, 2017
Bridge 035 on SR 1806 over Branch of Jones Creek - PCN for NWP #3 and #13
classified according to the most recent North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR)3
methodology and USACE guidance. The wetland boundaries and stream centerlines and
breakpoints (transition from intermittent flow to perennial flow) were approximated with a
Trimble Geo7X hand-held Global Positioning System (GPS) unit capable of subfoot accuracy
and mapped using ArcGIS 10.3 soffinrare.
NCDWR Stream Identification Forms are included in Attachment B. The Approved Jurisdictional
Determination (Rapanos) Form and representative photographs of the jurisdictional features
located in the PSA are also included in Attachment B.
Prior to fieldwork, the following references were reviewed to identify possible waters of the U.S.,
including wetland areas:
• U.S. Geological Service (USGS) 7.5-minute quadrangle maps [Lilesville, NC (1982)]
• U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) Map (Lilesville,
NC)
• U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Soil Conservation Service (SCS), now known as
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), Soils Series Data Map for Anson County,
NC (2014)
• USDA NRCS Web Soil Survey
The USGS map and Soil Survey each depict a stream within the PSA. The USFWS NWI map
depicts Branch of Jones Creek as a potential jurisdictional feature within the PSA and is
identified as riverine, unknown perennial, unconsolidated bottom, permanently flooded
(R5UBH). Jurisdictional stream boundaries were delineated and flagged in the field by STV
Senior Environmental Scientist Brandon Phillips, CHMM, with blue and white striped tape at the
ordinary high water mark near the top of the stream bank. The boundaries were approximated
and mapped using ArcGIS 10.3 software for preliminary planning purposes. The delineated
boundaries were subsequently surveyed by the NCDOT.
The proposed SR 1806 over Branch of Jones Creek Bridge Replacement project (Attachment B
— Photograph 1) is located entirely within the southern outer Piedmont Physiographic Province
of North Carolina, which is characterized by broad, gently rolling interstream areas and by
steeper slopes along drainageways. Based on topographic mapping, elevations in the PSA
range from approximately 180 feet above National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD) to 220 feet
NGVD (Attachment C— Figure 2). The highest elevation in the PSA is located on SR 1806 on
the west end of the PSA. The lowest elevation in the PSA is located within the Branch of Jones
Creek where it exits the southern portion of the PSA.
According to the NRCS SCS, the project study area contains two soil types: Pacolet gravelly
sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes (PgC) and, Riverview loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes,
occasionally flooded (RmA); see Attachment C— Figure 3. The Riverview soil series is included
on the NRCS List of Hydric Soils due to inclusions of the Wehadkee, undrained, soil type.
The proposed PSA is located in the Lower Pee Dee drainage basin, subbasin 03-04-02-01. The
major stream in the project vicinity is Branch of Jones Creek. Branch of Jones Creek is a Class
3 North Carolina Division of Water Quality. 2010. Methodology for ldentification of Intermittent and Perennial Streams and their
Origins. Version 4.11. North Carolina Deparhnent of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality. Raleigh,
NC.
3

NCDOT Division 10 Bridge Rep/acement Program October 3, 2017
Bridge 035 on SR 1806 over Branch of Jones Creek - PCN for NWP #3 and #13
C water that generally flows in a southern direction to Jones Creek. Jones Creek flows to the
Pee Dee River.
Jurisdictional Waters of the U.S.
The results of the on-site field review conducted by STV environmental scientists indicate that
finro jurisdictional relatively permanent waters (RPWs), RPW Stream A(aka, Branch of Jones
Creek), and RPW Stream B(Unnamed Tributary {U.T.} to Branch of Jones Creek) are located
within the PSA. The figure entitled Approximate Waters of the U.S. and Wetlands Boundary
Map Exhibit (Attachment B) depicts the approximate location of these jurisdictional features.
One potential jurisdictional wetland was identified in the PSA. Representative photographs of
the jurisdictional features that are located within the PSA are included in Attachment B. The
PSA is located in Anson County which is not one of the 25 designated trout counties of NC.
Streams or Relafrvely Permaner►t Wafers
RPW Stream A(Branch of Jones Creek) was concluded to be an RPW with perennial hydrology
(Attachment B- Photographs 2 through 4). Branch of Jones Creek, also concluded to be
providing important aquatic function, begins off-site to the north and flows south across the
PSA. Approximately 353 linear feet (0.11 acre) of Branch of Jones Creek is located within the
PSA (Attachment C- Figure 4). Branch of Jones Creek is depicted as a blue line stream on the
USGS topographic quadrangle and is depicted as a stream on the NRCS Soils Series Data Map
of Anson County (Attachment C- Figures 2 and 3, respectively).
RPW Stream B(U.T. to Branch of Jones Creek) was concluded to be an RPW with perennial
hydrology (Attachment B- Photograph 5). RPW Stream B, also concluded to be providing
important aquatic function, begins off-site to the east and flows west into the PSA.
Approximately 308 linear feet (0.02 acre) of RPW Stream B is located within the PSA
(Attachment C- Figure 4). RPW Stream B is not depicted as a blue line stream on the USGS
topographic quadrangle or depicted as a stream on the NRCS Soils Series Data Map of Anson
County (Attachment C- Figures 2 and 3, respectively).
RPW Stream B flows into RPW Stream A. RPW Stream A flows to Jones Creek (RPW). Jones
Creek flows to the Pee Dee River, a traditional navigable water. More information on the
individual stream characteristics of RPW Stream A and RPW Stream B can be found on the
NCDWR Stream Identification Forms included in Attachment B.
Wetlands
Wetland A was determined to be a palustrine scrub/shrub wetland. Wetland A is located north of
SR 1806 and east of bridge 035 and extends off-site to the north where it abuts and drains into
RPW Stream A. Dominant shrub vegetation in Wetland A includes silky dogwood (Cornus
amomum) and American holly (l/ex opaca). Herbaceous species include soft rush (Juncus
effusus) and sedges (Carex spp.); see Attachment B- Photograph 6.
Impacts to Waters of the U.S.
The project involves the replacement of the existing bridge that carries Branch of Jones Creek
under SR 1806 with a cored slab bridge. Permanent impacts to waters of the U.S. would result
from the project. Approximately 54 linear feet (<0.01 acre) of Branch of Jones Creek would be
permanently impacted (designated by the symbol "S" on Attachment C- Sheets 4 and 4A).
Permanent impacts would result from the riprap lining of the stream banks around the bridge
4

NCDOT Division 10 Bridge Replacement Program October 3, 2017
Bridge 035 on SR 1806 over Branch of Jones Creek - PCN for NWP #3 and #13
abutments. Minor temporary impacts (designated by the symbol "TS" on Attachment C- Sheets
4 and 4A) may occur to a maximum of 110 linear feet (approximately 0.03 acre) of RPW Stream
A(Branch of Jones Creek) and RPW Stream B due to the removal of the existing bridge, the
removal of the existing abutments, and the construction of the new ridge abutments that may
potentially cause incidental debris to fall into the channel (See Attachment C— Sheets 4 and
4A). Roadway approach work has been minimized to that which is absolutely necessary within
the scope of replacing the bridge and will result in no additional impacts to waters of the U.S. No
major utility relocations would be required as part of the bridge replacement; no additional
impacts would occur as a result of utility relocations.
Hydraulic calculations have been prepared based on the placement of the new bridge. No
increase in the upstream flood elevations is anticipated based on these calculations. Based on
the results of the HEC-RAS model for SR 1806 over Branch of Jones Creek, the existing bridge
can be replaced with a longer bridge without causing a rise to the established 100-year flood
elevations and meets the requirements of Federal Highway Administration, Federal-Aid Policy
Guide, 23 CFR 650A, "Location and Hydraulic Design of Encroachments on Floodplains," and
the Memorandum of Agreement between the NCDOT and the North Carolina Floodplain
Mapping Program.
Project activities will be done in compliance with Water Quality Certification No. 4085 and No.
4087. All work in or adjacent to stream waters shall be conducted so that the flowing stream
does not come into contact with the disturbed area. No untreated runoff shall be discharged into
the stream. All necessary measures shall be taken to prevent direct contact between uncured or
curing concrete and waters of the state. Matting that incorporates plastic mesh and/or plastic
twine shall not be used in the stream or floodplains. No temporary fills or access roads will be
used.
Avoidance and Minimization
Due to the nature of the project, avoiding the minor permanent and potential temporary impacts
to Branch of Jones Creek while achieving project goals is not possible. There is not a
practicable alternative that would achieve the project purpose of replacing the bridge, stabilizing
the streambank, and improving the roadway approaches without causing minor permanent
impacts as well as potential minor debris impacts to Branch of Jones Creek and the unnamed
tributary to Branch of Jones Creek. Best management practices (BMPs) and appropriate
erosion and sedimentation controls will be installed and maintained during construction activities
to allow for the least adverse effect on the stream channel and associated water quality.
Potential temporary impacts to Branch of Jones Creek and the unnamed tributary to Branch of
Jones Creek are unavoidable due to the requirement to replace the bridge with a longer cored
slab bridge, and the removal of the existing abutments. Efforts to minimize impacts to this
stream included:
The crossing of Branch of Jones Creek will essentially remain in the same location within
the existing SR 1806 R/W in order to reduce the need for additional roadway fill and to
avoid additional impacts to Branch of Jones Creek.
The construction of the new cored slab bridge from either of the stream embankments
will eliminate the need for heavy equipment to enter jurisdictional waters of the U.S. and
will allow demolition of the existing structure and construction of the new bridge with
minimal temporary impacts to the stream channel. The road will be closed during
construction and work will be performed from the existing roadway approaches.
5

NCDOT Division 10 Bridge Rep/acement Program October 3, 2017
Bridge 035 on SR 1806 over Branch of Jones Creek - PCN for NWP #3 and #13
Activities on the project site involving impacts to waters of the U.S. will be required to follow the
General Conditions of the USACE Nationwide Permits (Federal Register Vol. 82, No. 4; updated
January 6, 2017), applicable USACE Wilmington District Regional Conditions (March 17, 2017),
and applicable NCDWR consistency conditions (March 19, 2017).
Compensatory Miti�ation
As described above, efforts have been made to avoid and minimize impacts to waters of the
U.S. to the maximum extent practicable. The replacement of the existing bridge with a longer
cored slab bridge will cause permanent impacts to 30 linear feet of RPW Stream A(Branch of
Jones Creek) and 24 linear feet of RPW Stream B(unnamed tributary to Branch of Jones
Creek) for a total of 54 linear feet of impact (<0.01 acre) for bank stabilization. Overlapping
potential temporary impacts are anticipated to 110 linear feet (approximately 0.03 acre) of RPW
Stream A and RPW Stream B; see Attachment C— Sheets 4 and 4A. Given the magnitude of
permanent impacts, compensatory mitigation is not anticipated. In the event the USACE
requires mitigation then the NCDENR Division of Mitigation Services, formerly known as the
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program, will be utilized.
Stormwa#er Manas�ement Plan
A bridge replacement project is considered to be a`re-development' procedure and
redevelopment procedures do not require a state stormwater permit although the project is
covered by NCDOT Individual NPDES Permit No. NCS000250. A Stormwater Management
Plan has been prepared and Best Management Practices (BMPs) and runoff controls will be
implemented during construction to reduce the stormwater impacts to the receiving stream due
to erosion and unfiltered runoff; see Attachment C— Stormwater Management Plan. Temporary
construction runoff will be controlled by using silt fence, coir fiber wattle breaks, coir fiber wattles
with polyacrylamide, rock silt checks, a rock inlet sediment trap, impervious dikes, and
temporary matting and grassing.
The proposed roadway will have a 4% superelevation and will drain through paved shoulders
and a grated traffic bearing inlet. The water is conveyed from the grated inlet through an 18"
reinforced concrete pipe and through a riprap apron before discharging into the stream.
Impervious dikes will be used to prevent the mixing of sediment laden water with the stream
during construction activities close to the water. The existing bridge will be removed.
Cultural Resources
In a document dated September 26, 2017, the NCDOT Archaeologist made a determination that
"No Archaeological Survey Required" for the Area of Potential Effects (APE) (Attachment D—
No Archaeological Survey Required Form). In a document dated August 29, 2017, the NCDOT
Architectural Historian made a determination of "No Survey Required" for Historic Architecture
and Landscapes for the APE (Attachment D— Historic Architecture and Landscapes No Survey
Required Form).
Protected Species
STV conducted a protected species habitat assessment and review of the PSA on April 14,
2016 and September 20, 2017. Prior to the field reviews, STV reviewed the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS) and North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) databases,
C

NCDOT Division 10 Bridge Rep/acement Program Ocfober 3, 2017
Bridge 035 on SR 1806 over Branch of Jones Creek - PCN for NWP #3 and #13
which provided existing data concerning the potential occurrence of federally and state
protected (threatened or endangered) species in Anson County. The databases were reviewed
again on September 7, 2017. These databases indicate that there are three federal and state
endangered species that may occur in Anson County. These protected species and their
physical descriptions and habitat requirements are described below.
Shortnose sturqean {Acipenser brevirosirum) — Federall5tate Endanqered
The shortnose sturgeon is an anadromous fish species which spends most of the year in
brackish or salt water in large rivers, and rarely ventures into the ocean. The shortnose sturgeon
is dark-colored on its dorsal side and light on the ventral side. This species of sturgeon has a
wide mouth pointed downward beneath a short snout and can grow up to three feet long. The
sides of its body contain five rows of sharp, pointed plates. As water temperatures rise in the
spring, shortnose sturgeon migrate to swift moving upstream reaches of rivers and spawn over
the gravel bottom in the river. The shortnose sturgeon has occurred as far inland as Anson
County in the Pee Dee River.
Potential habitat does not exist within the reach of perennial RPW Stream A, aka, Branch of
Jones Creek, or RPW Stream B, unnamed tributary to Branch of Jones Creek located within the
project study area. The shallow waters of Branch of Jones Creek and distance from the Pee
Dee River would not be suitable for shortnose sturgeon. There are no records of shortnose
sturgeon being located in the Lilesville, NC USGS quadrangle. Based on the field review, the
available databases, and the limited area of proposed stream disturbance, it is determined that
this project will have `no effect' on shortnose sturgeon.
Bialopical Conclusion: Na Effect
Schweinitz's sunffawer {Heliar+fhus schweinifzii� - FederallState Endangered
Schweinitz's sunflower is a perennial herbaceous plant limited to the Piedmont counties of North
and South Carolina. The plant grows from one to two meters tall from a cluster of tuberous
roots. The sunflower consists of a flower with a yellow disk and ray flowers formed on small
heads. The disc is less than 1.5 centimeter (cm) across and the petals are two to three cm
long. The lanceolate leaves are opposite on the lower stem and alternate near the flowers. The
typical habitat for this plant includes roadsides, old pastures, transmission line rights-of-way
(R/Ws), open areas, and edges of upland woods. Periodically maintained R/Ws are typically
considered good potential habitat for the Schweinitz's sunflower. Major characteristics of soils
associated with suitable Schweinitz's sunflower habitat include thin soils, soils on upland
interstream flats or gentle slopes, those which are clayey in texture (and often with substantial
rock fragments), those which have a high shrink-swell capacity, and those which vary over the
course of the year from very wet to very dry. Flowering occurs from August to the first frost of
the year.
There are no records of Schweinitz's sunflower being located in the Lilesville, NC USGS
quadrangle. The NC Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) website was reviewed to determine
the Iocations of the nearest populations of Schweinitz's sunflower in April 2016 and September
7, 2017. The NCNHP determined that no populations of Schweinitz's sunflower were present
within one mile of the project study area. The project study area has some of the proper habitat
requirements preferred by this species, however, no individuals of Schweinitz's sunflower were
observed within the project study area and the area was reviewed during the flowering season.
Based on the field review, the available databases, and the limited area of proposed roadside
disturbance, it is determined that this project will have `no effect' on Schweinitz's sunflower.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
7

NCDOT Division 10 Bridge Rep/acement Program October 3, 2017
Bridge 035 on SR 1806 over Branch of Jones Creek - PCN for NWP #3 and #13
Red-cockaded woodoecker [Picardes barealis) — FederallState Endanaered
Adult red-cockaded woodpeckers are approximately 18 to 20 cm long with a wingspan of 35 to
38 cm. Adults have a black cap, throat, and stripe on the side of the neck and white cheeks and
underparts. The back is barred with black and white horizontal stripes. Adult males have a
small red spot on each side of the black cap. The bird is native to southern pine forests and
typically nests within open pine stands with trees 80 years or older. Roosting cavities are
excavated within live pines, which are often infected with a fungus which causes what is known
as red-heart disease. Foraging may occur in pine and/or mixed pine/hardwood stands 30 years
or older with trees 10" or larger in diameter at breast height (dbh).
No individuals of red-cockaded woodpecker were observed within the project study area. A
limited number of suitable foraging trees and no nesting trees are present within the PSA. The
NCNHP website was reviewed to determine the locations of the nearest populations of red-
cockaded woodpecker. The NCNHP determined that only historical occurrences of red-
cockaded woodpecker were present within Anson County. There are no records of red-
cockaded woodpecker being located in the Lilesville, NC USGS quadrangle. Based on the field
review, the available databases, the limited amount of mature trees suitable for foraging, and
the limited area of proposed disturbance'to forested areas, it is determined that this project will
have `no effect' on red-cockaded woodpecker.
Biolaqical Gonciusion: Na Effect
Closinq
Please feel free to contact the undersigned at [phone] should you have any questions or
concerns regarding this PCN pursuant to Nationwide Permit #3 and #13.
Sincerely,
STV Engineers, Inc.
r �Brandon J. Phillips, CH
Environmental Science ertior Manager
cc
Michael A. lag o , PWS
Senior Scientis
Attachment A— Pre-Construction Notification Form
Attachment B— Jurisdictional Determination Materials
Attachment C — Figures
Attachment D— No Archaeological Survey Required Form and Historic Architecture and
Landscapes No Survey Required Form
Garland Haywood - NCDOT
Larry Thompson — NCDOT
Donna Hood - NCDWR
:

NCDOT Division 10 Bridge Replacemenf Program October 3, 2017
Bridge 035 on SR 1806 over Branch of Jones Creek - PCN for NWP #3 and. #13
Attachment A
Pre-Construction Notification Form

o��� wA rEqQc
� Y
� �
o �
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.4 January 2009
Pre-Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A. Applicant Information
1. Processing
1 a. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps: ❑X Section 404 Permit ❑ Section 10 Permit
1 b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 3 and 13 or General Permit (GP) number:
1c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps? ❑X Yes ❑ No
1 d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular ❑ Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification — Express ❑ Riparian Buffer Authorization
1 e. Is this notification solely for the record For the record only for DWQ For the record only for Corps Permit:
because written approval is not required? 401 Certification:
❑ Yes ❑X No ❑ Yes ❑X No
1f. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in-lieu fee program proposed for
mitigation of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank � Yes ❑X No
or in-lieu fee program.
1 g. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h � Yes ❑X No
below.
1 h. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)? ❑ Yes ❑X No
2. Project Information
2a. Name of project: Bridge No. 030035 on SR 1806 over Branch of Jones Creek
2b. County: Anson
2c. Nearest municipality / town: Wadesboro
2d. Subdivision name: N/A
2e. NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state project no: 17BP.10.R.85
3. Owner Information
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed: NCDOT Div 10
3b. Deed Book and Page No. N/A
3c. Responsible Party (for LLC if Scott Cole, P.E.
applicable):
3d. Street address: 716 West Main Street
3e. City, state, zip: Albemarle, NC 28001
3f. Telephone no.: 704 983-4400
3g. Fax no.: 704 982-3146
3h. Email address: [e-mail]
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is: ❑ Agent ❑ Other, specify:
4b. Name:
4c. Business name
(if applicable):
4d. Street address:
4e. City, state, zip:
4f. Telephone no.:
4g. Fax no.:
4h. Email address:
5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name:
5b. Business name
if ap licable):
5c. Street address:
5d. City, state, zip:
5e. Telephone no.:
5f. Fax no.:
5g. Email address:
Page 2 of 10

B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID): State Project No.: 176P.10.R.85
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees): Latitude: Longitude: -79.931666
1 c. Property size: 2.4 acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water to proposed project: Branch of Jones Creek
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water: C
2c. River basin: Yadkin-Pee Dee
3. Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
Existing conditions include SR 1806 (Wall Road) and the deteriorated Bridge No. 030035, undeveloped forest, and disturbed/maintained right-of-way.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property: 0.01
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property: 661
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
To replace Bridge No. 030035, rated as functionally obsolete, with an improved, modern bridge structure.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
Erosion and sedimentation measures will be installed. Bridge replacement using heavy construction equipment such as track hoes,
cranes, dump trucks, bulldozers, paving equipment, and various hand tools.
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the � Yes ❑x No ❑ Unknown
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
ro'ect includin all rior hases in the ast? Comments:
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type � Preliminary ❑ Final
of determination was made?
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas? Agency/Consultant Company:
Name (if known): Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for � Yes ❑ No ❑x Unknown
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project? ❑ Yes ❑x No
6b. If yes, explain.
Page 3 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1 a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
❑ Wetlands ❑x Streams — tributaries ❑ Buffers ❑ Open Waters ❑ Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a. 2b. 2c. 2d. 2e. 2f.
Wetland impact Type of impact Type of wetland � Forested Type of jurisdiction Area of
number Corps (404,10) or impact
Permanent (P) or DWQ (401, other) (acres)
Tem ora T
W1 - Choose one Choose one YeslNo
W2 - Choose one Choose one Yes/No
W3 - Choose one Choose one Yes/No -
W4 - Choose one Choose one Yes/No
W5 - Choose one Choose one Yes/No
W6 - Choose one Choose one Yes/No -
2g. Total Wetland Impacts:
2h. Comments:
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a. 3b. 3c. 3d. 3e. 3f. 3g.
Stream impact Type of impact Stream name Perennial (PER) or Type of Average Impact
number intermittent (INT)? jurisdiction stream length
Permanent (P) or width (linear
Temporary (T) (feet feet)
S1 P Stabilization Branch of Jones Creek PER Corps 18 30
S2 P Stabilization RPW Stream B PER Corps 3 24
S3 T Demolition Branch of Jones Creek PER Corps 18 80
S4 T Demolition RPW Stream B PER Corps 3 30
S5 - Choose one
S6 - Choose one
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts 54
3i. Comments:
Stream Impacts are depicted on Attachment C- Permit Drawings Sheets 4 and 4A.
Page 4 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then individuall list all o en water im acts below.
4a. 4b. 4c. 4d. 4e.
Open water Name of waterbody '
impact number (if applicable ) Type of impact Waterbody Area of impact (acres)
Permanent (P) or type
Tem ora T
01 - Choose one Choose
02 - Choose one Choose
03 - Choose one Choose
04 - Choose one Choose
4f. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments:
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If ond or lake construction ro osed then com lete the chart below.
5a. 5b. 5c. 5d. 5e.
Pond ID number Proposed use or Wetland Impacts (acres) Stream Impacts (feet) Upland
purpose of pond {acres
Flooded Filled Excavated Flooded Filled Excavated
P1 Choose one
P2 Choose one
5f. Total:
5g. Comments:
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required? ❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surFace area (acres):
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If an im acts re uire miti ation then ou MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a. Project is in which protected basin? ❑ Neuse � Tar-Pamlico � Catawba � Randleman ❑ Other:
6b. 6c. 6d. 6e. 6f. 6g.
Buffer Impact Reason for impact Stream name Buffer Zone 1 Zone 2
number - mitigation impact impact
Permanent (P) or required? (square (square
Tem ora T feet feet
B 1 - YeslNo
B2 - Yes/No
B3 - YeslNo
B4 - Yes/No
65 - Yes/No
B6 - YeslNo
6h. Total Buffer Impacts: o.00000000 0.00000000
6i. Comments:
Page 5 of 10

D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
Best management practices (BMPs) and appropriate erosion and sedimentation controls will be installed and maintained during construction activities
to allow for the least adverse effect on the stream channel and associated water quality. Temporary impacts to Branch of Jones Creek and the
unnamed tributary to Jones Creek are unavoidable due to the requirement to remove the existing bridge; see cover letter for additional details.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
Construction of the new cored-slab bridge will take place from roadway approaches which will minimize stream impact.
2. Com ensato Miti ation for Im acts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for � Yes 0 No
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply): ❑ DWQ ❑ Corps
❑ Mitigation bank
2c. If yes, which mitigation optioh will be used for this ❑ Payment to in-lieu fee program
project?
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Com lete if Usin a Miti ation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
Type: Choose one Quantity:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter) Type: Choose one Quantity:
Type: Choose one Quantity:
3c. Comments:
4. Com lete if Makin a Pa ment to In-lieu Fee Pro ram
4a. Approval letter from in-lieu fee program is attached. ❑ Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested: linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature: Choose one
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only): square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested: acres
4f. Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested: acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested: acres
4h. Comments:
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
Page 6 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) — required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires � Yes ❑ No
buffer mitigation?
6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required.
6c. 6d. 6e.
Zone Reason for impact Total impact Multiplier Required mitigation
(square feet) (square feet)
Zone 1 3(2 for Catawba)
Zone 2 1.5
6f. Total buffer mitigation required: o.00000000
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in-lieu fee fund).
6h. Comments:
Page 7 of 10

E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1 a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified � Yes ❑X No
within one of the NC Ri arian Buffer Protection Rules?
1 b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Stormwater Mana ement Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project? Q o�o
2b. Does this ro'ect re uire a Stormwater Mana ement Plan? 0 Yes ❑ No
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why:
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
Project is covered by NCDOT Individual NPDES Permit No. NCS000250. BMP's and runoff controls will be implemented during construction to
reduce the stormwater impacts to the receiving stream due to erosion and runoff. Sediment and erosion control will adhere to "Design for Sensitive
Watershed" standards; see Attachment C- Stormwater Management Plan.
2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan? DWR 401 Unit
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which local ovemment's 'urisdiction is this ro'ect? N/A
❑ Phase II
3b. Which of the following locally-implemented stormwater management programs ❑ NSW
apply (check all that apply): � USMP
� Water Supply Watershed
� Other:
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been ❑ Yes ❑ No
attached?
4. DWQ Stormwater Pro ram Review
�Coastal counties
❑HQW
4a. Which of the following state-implemented stormwater management programs apply �pR�
(check all that apply): Session Law 2006-246
❑ Other:
4b. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been ❑ Yes ❑ No
attached?
5. DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a. Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements? 0 Yes � No
5b. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met? � Yes � No
Page8of10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

F. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1 a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federalJstate/local) funds or the 0 Yes ❑ No
use of public (federal/state) land?
1 b. If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State ❑ Yes ❑X No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1 c. If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
letter.) ❑ Yes ❑ No
Comments:
2. Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards, ❑Yes ❑x No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b. Is this an after-the-fact permit application? ❑Yes x❑ No
2c. If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s):
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in �Yes ❑X No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b. If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
Project involves the replacement of an existing structure. The bridge is being replaced to standard load limits and width to improve safety to the
traveling public. The crossing upgrade is not anticipated to have any significant impact on future development.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a. 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.
N/A
Page 9 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or � Yes ❑X No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act � Yes ❑X No
impacts?
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted. -
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat? ❑ Yes ❑X No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
NOAA EFH Webpage. There are no marine or estuarine communities within the PSA.
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation � Yes ❑X No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
The project was reviewed by the NCDOT for potential effects on historic architecture and archaeology. Please see NCDOT "No Survey Required
Forms", Attachment D.
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain? ❑X Yes ❑ No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
Hydraulic calculations have been prepared based on the placement of the new bridge. No increase in the upstream flood elevations is anticipated
based on these calculations. Based on the results of the HEC-RAS model for SR 1806 over Branch of Jones Creek, the existing bridge can be
replaced without causing a rise to the established 100-year flood elevations and meets the requirements of Federal Highway Administration,
Federal-Aid Polic Guide 23 CFR 650A Location and H draulic Desi n of Encroachments on Flood lains and the NCDOT MOA.
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?
FEMA FIRM maps on-line
J. Scott Cole, PE. -� 10-03-2017
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name ApplicanUAgent's Signature Date
(AgenYs signature is valid only if an authorization
letter from the a licant is rovided.
Page 10 of 10

NCDOT Division 10 Bridge Rep/acement Program October 3, 2017
Bridge 035 on SR 1806 over Branch of Jones Creek - PCN for NWP #3 and #13
Attachment B
Jurisdictional Determination Materials
-NCDWR Stream Identification Forms
- Wetland Determination Data Forms
-Approved Jurisdictional Determination (Rapanos) Form
-Approximate Waters of the U.S. and Wetlands Boundary Map Exhibit
-Photographs

RPW Stream A(Branch of Jones Creek)
NC DW Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: 4/14/2016 Project/S�edge 035 an SR 1806 over Latitude: 34.912719
$r�nch of Jones Creek
Evaluator: Brandon Phillips County: Anson County Longitude:-79.931675
Total Points: Stream peterminatian �cir Other Lilesville, NC Qi
Stream is at least intermittent 47 Ephgmeral Il7termittep PerennlBE e.g. Quad Name:
if z 19 or perennial if z 30*
A. Geomo holo Subtotal = 22 Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1 a� Continuity of channel bed and bank 0 1 2 3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg 0 1 2 3
3. In-channel structure: ex. riffle-pool, step-pool, 0 1 Q 3
ri le- ool se uence
4. Particle size of stream substrate 0 1 2 3
5. Active/relict floodplain 0 1 2 3
6. Depositional bars or benches 0 1 2 3
7. Recent alluvial deposits 0 1 2 3
8. Headcuts 0 1 2 3
9. Grade control 0 0.5 1 1.5
10. Natural valley 0 0.5 1 1.5
11. Second or greater order channel No = 0 es = 3
a
Gl lllllil�l UI14..11GJ GIG IIUL IQIGU� JGG UIJli1JJJIVIIJ 111 IIIOIIUQI
B. Hydrolagy (5ubtotal = 11.5 )
12. Presence of Baseflow
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
14. Leaf litter
15. Sediment on plants or debris
16. Organic debris lines or piles
17. Soil-based evidence of high water table?
1
1
1
0.5
0.5
2
2
0.5
1
1
3
3
0
1.5
C. Bi010 Subtotal =
18. Fibrous roots in streambed 3 2 1 0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed 3 2 1 0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance) 0 1 2 3
21. Aquatic Mollusks 0 1 2 3
22. Fish 0 0.5 1 1.5
23. Cra�sh 0 0.5 1 1.5
24. Amphibians 0 0.5 1 1.5
25. Algae 0 0.5 1 1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1. Dther = 0
"perenn?�! c4rn?mc mav nlen hc irlun}i£ori � icinn nthor mc4hnrlc Coc n'l�i nf mnni iol
._ ..._� _'__ __ '__.._...__ __...� _'.._. ..._"'___' ___ r. __ _. ..._.._,.
Notes: RPW S re m A Br nch of nes Cr k w d termine o be erenni I wi hin ro' ct limits.
Sketch:

RPW Stream B(U.T. to Branch of Jones Creek)
NC DW Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: 4/14/2016 Pro ect/Ssed$e D35 on SR 1806 over Latitude: 34.912861
� BranCh of Jones Creek
Evaluator: Brandon Phillips
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent 33.�J
if Z 19 or perennial if Z 30k
County: Anson County
Stream Determination
Ephemeral Intermlttei
Long itude: -79.931562
Other Lilesville, NC (�uad
e.g. Quad Name:
A. Geomor hofo Subtotal = 14 Absent Weak Moderate Strong
18' Continuity of channel bed and bank 0 1 2 3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg 0 1 2 3
3. In-channel structure: ex. riffle-pool, step-pool, 0 1 � 3
ri le- ool se uence
4. Particle size of stream substrate 0 1 2 3
5. Active/relict floodplain 0 1 2 3
6. Depositional bars or benches 0 1 2 3
7. Recent alluvial deposits 0 1 2 3
8. Headcuts 0 1 2 3
9. Grade control 0 0.5 1 1.5
10. Natural valley 0 0.5 1 1.5
11. Second or greater order channel o= Yes = 3
g
muu�.�ai wn,nca oic iiv� iowu� occ u�a�.uoow�ia ui nio�iuoi
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = 10 ]
12. Presence of Baseflow
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
14. Leaf litter
15. Sediment on plants or debris
16. Organic debris lines or piles
17. Soil-based evidence of high water table?
No=O
1
1
1
�
0.5
�.
0.5
2
2
0.5
1
1
3
3
0
1.5
1.5
C. Biolo 5ubtntal =
18. Fibrous roots in streambed 3 2 1 0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed 3 2 1 0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance) 0 1 2 3
21. Aquatic Mollusks 0 1 2 3
22. Fish 0 0.5 1 1.5
23. Cra�sh 0 0.5 1 1.5
24. Amphibians 0 0.5 1 1.5
25. Algae 0 0.5 1 1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1. Other = 0
"perenn��! etro?mc m�u �Icn hc irinnti£ori iicinn nthcr mc4hn�ic Cco n Z�i nf m�niiol
Notes: RPW Stre �m B U.T. t Br n�h f n r kr w rmin er nni I within ro�ect limits.
Sketch:

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site�►�*�n 8ridge U35 on SR 18�76 over Branch afJ.ones Crectc (Ii.85�itylCounty: �'�desboro/Anson Sampling Data; �-�4-t6
Applicantl0wner: NCDOTDivisio,�10 State: NC SamplingPoint:DP#t
Investigator(s): Brandon Phillips, CHMM Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, �tc.): Basi�� Local relief {concave, convex, none}: Concave Slope {°/o): —I
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR-P Lat: 34912681 N Long; -�9.930215 W Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Riverview loam NINI classification: PSS1
Are climatic 1 hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Ye5 X No (If no, explain in Remarks.}
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present7 Yes X No
Are Vec�etation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If ne�ded, explain any answers in Remarks.}
SUMMARY �F FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No
Is the Sampted Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes 7z No
Wetland Hydrology� Present? Yes X No
Rem arks:
DP#1 is representative of the wetland area (See Exhibit - Approximate Waters of the U.S. and Wetlands Boundary Map for approximate location of DP#1).
HYDR OLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Seccx�rla�V Indlcacdrs fminimum of two reauiredl
PrimatvinsJicators (tninimum of o��e is reauirer;. check all That annlvl _ Surface Soil Cracks (B6}
_ Surface Water (A1) _ True Aquatic Plants {B14j _ Sparsely Vegetated Concade Surface {g8)
_ High W�ter Tabl� {A2) _ Hydro�en Sulfide Odor {C1) X Drainage Patterns {B10}
X Saturation (A3) _ Oxidized Rhizosph�res on Living Roots {C3) _ Moss Trim Lines (616)
_ VVater Marks (B1) _ Presence of Reduced Iron {CAJ _ Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (82} _ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6} � Crayfish Burrows (C8}
_ Drift Deposits {B3) _ Thin Muck Surface {C7) _ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery {C9}
_ Algal Mat or Crust {Bzl) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) _ Stunted orStressed Plants {D1)
_ Iron Deposits (B5) X Geomorphic Position (D2)
� Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) _ Shallow Aquitard (D3}
X Water-Stained Leaves (g9) _ Microtopographic Relief (D4}
_ ,�quatic Fauna (B13} _ FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No X Depth {inchesJ:
Water Table Present7 Yes No X Depth (inches):
Saturation PresenY? Yes x No Qepth (inchesJ: �o" Wetland HydrologyPresent? Yes x No
includes capilla frin e
Describe F2ecorded D�ta (stream gauge, monitoring v+rell, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Rem arks:
Wetland Hydrology Indicators are present.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont—Version 2.0

VEGETATI�N (Four Strataj = Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicatar
Tree Sar�tum (Pl Ot SIZe: 30' radius ) COV6f C AS? Status
1.
4
7.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
S�DIin4f rub::'d,r,�k�m (Plot siae: 10' radius }
'� , /lex opaca 20 Yes FACU
2, Cornus amomum 15 yes FACW
7
35 = Total Cover
50°fo of t�tal cover: 17•5 20°Io of total cover: 7
H&rb �rafurt1 (Plot size: 1 meter �
1. Juncus el`t�u,cu,s 60 Yes FACW
2. Lnnicera ianr�nicn 30 Yes FAC
3. Ca� e.r so. 5 No V
7
10
11
50°/0 of total cover:
WoadY V1D8 Sttatilm (Plot size: _ �4'radie�s )
1.
Sampling Paint: Dr#1
Dominance Tast watksheet:
IVumber of Dominant Species
That Are OgL, FACW, or FAC: 3 {A)
�
Total Number of Daninant
Species Across All Strata: 4 {g)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACUV, or FAC 75 (AB}
Prevaience Index worksheet:
Total °� Cover of: Mtt�itifotv bv:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x A =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: {A} {8)
Prevalence Index = BIA =
Hydropliytic Va�etatlon Indicators:
_ 1- Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
g 2- Dominance Test is �5096
3- Prevalence Index is <_3_0'
_ 4- Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain}
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problema6c.
baTinitions �t Four 1lenatation Strata:
Tree – Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. {7.6 cm} or
more in ciameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
SaplinglShrub – Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greaterthan or equal to 3_28 ft(1
m} tall.
— Herb – All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless
95 - Total Cover of size, andwoody plants less than 3,28fttall.
47.5 20°/0 of total cover: ly
Woody vine – All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
50°/0 of total cover:
arks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate
Hydrophytic vegetation is present.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
= Total Cover Present? Yes 7 No
20°/0 of total cover:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastem Maantains and Piedmont–Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: DP#i
Profiie Description: (Describe to the depth needed to documentthe IndiCator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
fir?Chas1 Color fmoistl �,� Color {rnQistl °Io Tvoe' Loc2 Texture _ Remarks
q-7 lD Yft 3/3 _ I� Silty sand
7-20 L 0 YR 4/2 70 7.5 YR 4/6 30 � PL Sitiy sand
�r�e? C=Concentration, ��eptetron, l
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_ Histosol (A1}
_ Histic Epipedon (A�)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4}
_ Stratified Layers (A5j
_ 2 c:m Muck (A1�) (LRR t�
_, Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Thick Dark Surfaee (Al2}
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Sandy Redox (S5}
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
R em arks:
9�Ced M80'i�c. MS=Masked Sand Grains_ 2Location: PL=Pore Llnin�,�� M=Metfix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soilsa
_ Dark Surface (S7} _ 2 cm Muck {A10) (MLRA 147)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface {S8J {MLRA 147, 148} _ Coast Prairie Redox (A16j
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148) (MLRA 147,148}
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) _ Piedmont Floodplain Soils {F19)
X Depleted Matrix (F3) (MLRA 136, 147)
_ Redox Dark Surface {F6J _ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12}
_ Depleted Dark Surface {F7) _ Other (Explain in Remarks}
_ Redox Depressions {F8)
_ Iron-Manganese Masses (F12} (LRR N,
M LRA 136)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
_ Red Parent Material {F21) (MLRA 127, 147) unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Indicators were present.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
ProjectlSite�nson Brid e 035 on $R I8U6 over Branch of lanes Creek (�i.$S�itylCounty: Wadesboro/Anson Sampling Date: ��4'«
ApplicantlOwner: NCDOT Division l0 State: �� Sampling Point DP#2
Investigator(s): Brandon Phillips, CHMM Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terraee, etC.J: Terrace Local relief (concau�e, convex, none}� Convex Slope {°!o): �l
Subregion (LRR or MLRA}: LRR-P Lat: 34.912681 N Long: -�9.9302i5 W Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map UnitName: Riverview NWI classification: NA
Are climatic! hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year7 Yes X No {If no, explain in Remarks.}
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed4 Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? tlf needed, explain any answers in Remarks.j
SUMMARY �F FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X Wimin a Wetland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
DP#2 is representative of the upland areas (See Exhibit - Approximate Waters of the U.S. and Wetlands Boundary Map for approximate location of DP#2).
HYDR OLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators: SecondBN lndf.c8tors (rttinimum .of tv�o reauired�,
Primaru lndicators (minimum of one is reauired: check all That anpJvl _ Surface Soil Cracks {B6}
_ Surface Water {A1) _ True Aquatic Plants (B14} _ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surtace {B8J
_ High Water Table (A2) _ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) _ Drainage Pattems (610}
_ S�turation (A3J _ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) _ Moss Trim Lines (616}
� Water Marks {B1 j _ Presence of Reduced Iron (CA} _ Dry-Season Water Table (G2}
� Sediment Deposits (B2} _ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6J _ Crayfish Burro+ns (C8}
_ Drift Deposits {B3) _ Thin Muck Surtace {C7} _ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery {C9)
_�llgal Mat or Crust {E4) _ Other (Explain in RemarksJ _ Stunted orStressed Plants {D1)
_ Iron Deposits (B5) _ Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery {B7} _ Shallrnv Aquitard (D3)
_ Water-Stainad Leaves (B9} _ Microtopographic Relief (D4}
_ Aquatic Fauna (B13} _ FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface W�ter Present? Yes No X Depth (inchesJ:
Water Table Present? Y�s Na X Depth (inches}:
Saturation Present? Yes No X Depth (inchesj: Wetland HydrologyPreserrt? Yes No X
(includes capilla frin e
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Rem arks:
Wetland Hydrology indicators are not present.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
, ifeB SG'2,�17n'I {Plot siZe: 30' radius } 96 GOVe( gCies`? Status
1.. Liqi►idqmharsry�•ari}lua 45 Yes FACW
2. Betulanig�a 25 Yes FACW
7.
70 = Total Cover
50°/0 of total cover: 35 20°/0 of total cover: 14
�(ifli](S�Ijf�t�$�E�UITI (PIOt slZe: 10' radius i
1. Betula nigra 20 Yes FACU
�. j,jt•+odmdr.»± r,�1rf1� f�-a 15 Yes FACU
3. Pr�nus serotina S No FACU
4.
7,
8.
40 = Total Cover
50°/0 of total cover: Zo 20°/0 of total cover: 8
Nerb Str'etum (Plot size: 1 meter �
1. LUuicera iaw��ica 15 Yes FAC
2. Pal�dsenncissus qui�wuefalia 5 Yes FACU
3. Tosicodendronra�jjFans 5 Yes FAC
4.
5.
7
11
50% of total cover: 12.5
Woodv`Vina Stretum (Plot size: 3o'raa;us }
1.
2.
3.
4.
ZS = Total Cover
20°l0 of total cover: 5
= Total Cover
50°/o of total cover: 20°/0 of total cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet,)
Hydrophytic vegetation is present.
Sampling Point: D�
Dominance Test worksheet: �
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC 4 {A}
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 7 (g)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACUV, or FAC 57 (AB}
rrevaience inaex worKsneet:
7oLal °� GovQt' ot Multinlv bv:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FI1CU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: {A) (B}
Prevalence Index = B1A =
drophytic Vegetation Indicators:
_ 1- Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
g 2- Dominance Test is >50� �
3- Prevalence Index is <3.0'
_ 4 - Morphological Adapta6ons' (Provide supporting
data in R�marks or on a separate sheet}
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' {Explain}
'Indicators of hydric soil and weUand hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree — Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. {7,6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
SaplinglShrub — Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greaterthan or equal to 3.28 ft (1
m) 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
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes ) No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont—Version 20

SOIL
Sampling Point: Dr�2
Profii.e Qesc�#�ion; {Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of I1ldicata!'s.j
Depth Matrix Redox Features
,�inchest ��lor fmoistl ,� Color (moistl % Tvoe' Loc2 Texture Rsmerks
0-4 10 YR 313 IO(Y sansly loam
¢20 10 YR 3/4 l00 sandy loam
TyA�: G=Concentration,�Dspletron,.RM=Reduced
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_ Histosol {A1j •
_ Histic: Epipedon (A2)
_ glack Histic {A3}
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4}
_ Stratified Layers {A5)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) {LRR M
_ Depleted Below Dark Surtace (A11)
� Tf�ick Dark Surface (Al2}
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix {S4)
_ Sandy Redox (S5j
Stripped Matrix (S6}
Restrictive Laver fif observed►:
Type:
Depth {inches}:
Rem arks:
_ Dark Surfaee (S7}
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Thin Dark Surface {S9j (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix tF2}
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Iron-Manganese Masses (F12} (LRR N,
M LRA 136)
_ Umbric Surtace (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19] (MLRA 148)
_ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147j
Hydric Soil Indicators were not present.
On: PL=Pore Lininq, M=Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soi
_ 2 cm Muck (A10} (MLRA 147)
_ Coast Prairie Redox {A16}
(MLRA 147, 748)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136,147)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface {TF12)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks}
3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problema�ic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mour�tains and Piedmont—Version 2.0

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:
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: NCDOT Div 10 Bridge Replacement - SR 1806 over Branch of
Jones Creek
State:NC County/parish/borough: Anson City: Lilesville
Center coordinates of site (ladlong in degree decimal format): Lat. 34.91210° �, Long. -79.931666° �.
Universal Transverse Mercator: N 3863894.87 E 597592.52
Name of nearest waterbody: Branch of Jones Creek
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (T'NW) lnto which the aquatic resource flows: Pee Dee River
iVame of wat�rs�ed or E•iydralcsgic [init Cr�de (kiC1C�: Q�3Q?�4�D21)'I
� Chec:k 'af niapl�li�s�,�m a1'r�;vi�w arca ��n�lfor pc�lci�[ial _jurisc�iclional areas islare availablc upan r�quest.
❑ Check if ptl�er site5 {e.�., c�t�'sice micigation sitcs, dispos�l sites, ete...) are assrsciated wdth d7is ��.tic�n and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. [ZEV [E'�i' P�R�DR1�1�D ra�[t S[TE �VA�,UA'd'ION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLl�:
�, �f�ce (�eskJ Dek�rntinataan. Date: Q4l13116.
� �'ield I3ctermimatiors. Date(s): (14I14/16
SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Are n� "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]
eJ Waters srabject ts� clie ebla and flow oF the ti�le.
❑ Waters ar�; pres�i7tly used, or have beert 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. [Requiredj
1. Waters of the U.S.
a. 1ndY�ate presence of waters ot' U.S. in revicw area (check all that apply):'
Q `D'NWs, inc�u�iing terrikcarial seas
� 1�lctiands adjacent tc3 `i'I�IWs
� 1Zelakively pennanea�t waters= {�i'1��'s} dhat flow direcdy or indirectly into TNWs
❑ IhJo��-�i�'Ws that f�ow clirectly or intlirecily into TNWs
� WeTlands directly til�uttin� i2'f'WS that t`�ow directly or indirectly into TNWs
� Wetlands acijacent k� bui na� �iiret;cly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
� Wetland4 adjacc��t Go rs�n-RPWs iiaax tlow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑ [mpourn�lcnents r�fju�isciicti€ra��1 water�
❑ Istrl�ted (interstate a¢- intr�statc) w�tcrs, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the O.S. in the review area:
Non-wetland waters: Stream A= 353 linear feet: 14 width (ft) and or 0.11 acre; Stream B= 308 linear feet: 3 width (ft) and/or
0.02 acres.
Wetlands: Wetland A= 0.01 acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: E9tab���dl�:�'�
Elevation of established OHWM (if known): .
2. Non-reg�alated waterslwetia�rds (check if applicable):3
� Potentially jurisdicticmal 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 5ection III below.
Z For piuposes 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.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent":
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNVh AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS ([F 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 permane�t
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 sigoificant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that dacuments the existence of a 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 Iaw.
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 signiticant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significaot nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in wmbination 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 signifcant nexus exists is determined in Section III.0 below.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: square miles
Drainage area: square miles
Average annual rainfall: inches
Average annual snowfall: inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) lteiationship with `�'NV4':
❑ Tributary flows directly into TNW.
❑ Tributary flows through 3 tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are Piek List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List river miles from RPW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are Piek 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 arid
W est.
5 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 inko TNW.

(b) Ceneral "Cri6utarv Ch�Pacteris�ics [clicek all tht�i annlv�:
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 ❑ Concrete
❑ Cobbles ❑ Gravel ❑ Muck
❑ Bedrock ❑ Vegetation. Type/% cover:
❑ Other. Explain: .
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain:
Presence of run/riffle/pool complexes. Explain: .
Tributary geomehy: Pick 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: Pick List. Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Pick List. 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 tenestrial 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 l-Iigh 'J�+'�tcr Mark ir��lic:ated by:
❑ oil or scum line along shore objects ❑ survey �cr �uailable da�um;
❑ 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, discolared, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain: .
Identify specific pollutants, if known: .
6A natuial 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 comdor. 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) �rcncral Wc:tlaar� Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size: acres
Wetland type. Explain: .
Wetland quality. Explain: .
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) C�nee•a� �'lo�v �tcl7ti�nship with 1Van=TNW:
Flow is: Pick List. Explain: .
Surface flow is: Pick List
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Pick List. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed: .
(c) Wetaancl �1r�jac�.a�cy 1'letermi�atic�f� tivitlti FUan-T�IW:
0 Directly abutting
❑ Not directly abutting
❑ Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain: non jurisdictional stormwater conveyance.
❑ Ecological connection. Explain: .
❑ Separated by berm/barrier. Explain: .
(d) Proxunity_�RelatiaiashsE�} ts� "I�iJb'J
Project wetlands are Piek List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are Piek List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: Pick List.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the Pick Ltst floodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surfaee; water quality; general watershed
chazacteristics; 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: Pick List
Approximately ( ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.

For each wetland, specify the following:
i�ir�.ctlw al�t�ts7 {''flirfl Size (on acres� 1]irectl�+ ubuts'? QYiNi
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:
C. STGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
5sze (in aere.vy
A significant nexus anatysis 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 signiticant 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 biolagical integrity of a TNW.
Considerutions when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water io 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 ou any specitic threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNV1�. 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 identitied 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 T'NW?
• Does the h-ibutary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the h-ibutary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the T'NW?
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 ri-ibutary itself, then go to Section III.D: .
SigniFcant nexus fi�dings for non-RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non-RPW flows directiy 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: .
Signiticant 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 APPLl�:
TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands.
❑ TNWs: linear feet
❑ Wetlands adjacent to TNWs:
Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
width (ft), Or, acres.
acres.
2. R�'Ws th�t flaw directiy or indirectly ie�to TNWs.
� Tribut�ries of Tl'�,1Ws w}isre 4r�butnsies 4ypic�lly flow year-round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial: RPW Stream A, aka, Branch of Jones Creek, has an OHWM, well-defined bed and banks, fish and
moderate flow and is depicted as a blue line on the USGS topographic quadrangle and as a stream on the NRCS Soil Series
Map. RPW Stream B has an OHWM, well-defined bed and banks, fish and moderate flow and is not depicted as a blue line on
the USGS topographic quadrangle or as a stream on the NRCS Soil Series Map. RPW Stream B drains to RPW Stream A.
RPW Stream A drains to Jones Creek (RPW), which drains to the Pee Dee River (TNW).

Q Tributaries of TNW 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 wl4ers: 661 iincar feet 14 width (ft).
[� f)t�ier non�wetld�d waters: acres.
Idantify type(s) of waters: .
3. Non-RPWse 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 ik 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 water;�: linear fti;�;l width (ft).
❑ Qrher non-wetiaa�d waters: acs�es.
Identify type(s) of waters: .
4. '9�Weklands d�rect�y abutting atm [tPW dht�f i�4w al�reck3y +�r indi�'eetly inko TIVWs.
� WctlanrJs r��rcTe;tly al�ut �2T�W �znd tht�s arejuris�lietiQnal as acijac:ent wetl�nc�s.
� W�;tlanels clirect�y abuttin,g an RP'w'V wE7erc trii�u�ari�;.s typically Ilow y�;ar-�•ound. 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: Wetland A shares a boundary with the RPW Stream A off-site to the north.
� Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where Mbutaries 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: Wetland A= 0.01 acres.
'4Vetlan�Cs usljacent to bu# not directly mbutting an RPW rhat florr� dircckly nr in[Ifrectly anto l"N Wa.
Q 4�'eEians�s ¢h�tt do not ciirectly abut an RP1N, but when considered ir� co�s�hination with thc tribwtary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW aze jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
VlWetlands �dj�cent to rn[rn-FtPWs fhat flow direetly ar ircdirectly into TNWs.
[� Vl+el�ancis adjacent to such watcr:;, and have when considered in cc�m�in�tion 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.
Impoundments of jurisdictional waters 9
r1s a genera! r�a1e, th�; im¢aaundr�ent �ia jurisdiclional t�ibutary r�sraains juri�d�cticrnal.
��emonstrate that impou�ndrrQent was crc:ated frcisri "waters af the U.S.," or
[� i}enrc�nstr`atc that wa4er m�ec:ts the crite��;t �c�c nne o� �he aategc�mc.� preses�ted aberve (1-6), or
❑ Dem�nstrate �ha4 watcr is ist�laQcd with a nexus ta conlsn�crce {see E b�lqw).
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA-STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, TEIE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH Wk°ATFRS (CHECK AL� THA'1" AI'f'L,Y):�o
[� which are or coul�l be usc,�1 by interstat� or forc�i�r� travelers for recreational or other purposes.
BSee Footnote # 3.
9 To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III. D.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
10 Prior to asserting or decGning 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 Juri;rdlctran Following Rapanos.

❑ from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
❑ which are or could be used for indush-ial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
❑ Interstate isolated waters. Explain: .
❑ Other factors. Explain: .
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
ProWide cstirtiates for jurisdicEional waters in the rcview area (check all that apply):
❑ `Tributary waters: 3inear fe�t width {�i).
❑ Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters: .
❑ Wetlands: acres.
F. NON-JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPL17:
❑ 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 so]elv 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 azea that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding i:� require�l for ju�isdictivn (check all that ap�>Zy):
❑ 1'�ica�-�,vetland watcrs (i.e., rivtrs, slr�ams): linesx f��t, 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 applicandconsultant: Figure 4-Approximate Waters of the U.S. and
Wetlands Boundary Map.
� Data sheets prepared/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:124000, Lilesville, NC (1982).
� USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: NRCS Soil Series Data for Anson County (2014).
� National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name: Lilesville, NC.
❑ State/Local wetland inventory map(s): .
❑ FEMA/FIRM maps: .
❑ 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (Nationa] Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
� Photographs: � Aerial (Name & Date): NC OneMap.
or � Other (Name & Date): Photos (04/14/16).
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter: .
❑ Applicable/supporting case law: .
❑ Applicable/supporting scientific literature: ,

� Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD: The limits of jurisdictional waters of the U.S., including Stream A, Stream B and
Wetland A were delineated by STV and the locations were approximated using a Trimble Geo7X hand-held GPS unit capable of subfoot
accuracy and were surveyed by the NCDOT (Exhibit - Approximate Waters of the U.S. and Wetlands Boundary Map). Stream A(Branch of
Jones Creek) was detetmined to be a relatively permanent water (RPVI� with perennial flow based on an OHWM, well-defined bed and
banks, fish and moderate flow and is depicted on the USGS and Soils maps as a stream. Stream B(unnamed tributary to Branch of Jones
Creek) was determined to be a relatively permanent water (RPW) with perennial flow based on an OHWM, weIl-defined bed and banks, fish
and moderate flow and is not depicted on the USGS or Soils maps as a stream. Wetland A was determined to be a palustrine scrub/shrub
wetland that drains off-site to the north and into RPW Stream A(Branch of Jones Creek). RPW Stream B drains to RPW Stream A(Branch
of Jones Creek). RPW Stream A drains into Jones Creek (RPW), which drains to the Pee Dee River (TNt�.

Wetland A is abutting and drains to RPW Stream A(Branch of Jones Creek)I, '� �' '�. F ���' '�`_ �� �� '
RPW Stream B flows to RPW Stream A which flows to Jones Creek (RPW)I y°� '� `,• ,'���'� 100
vvhich �h�ro flovw� to th� ��� C��e Riv�r. a Tr�diti�n�l iV�viaa�l� ',�t�t�r. " • :�, _
,. �, �i}'P� ' •`k J'� �t .�'� �; iJ,,
. {£'Y'� �,h : , , : � ` f . �— ++ '� T; t �:- • � ti ,f� +�. a � " ' �
-., .. r • , • ' � 5 '� . P. � � .
�'� y ,�� r•. '�Y '_�t •� YJ.� 'r"� � �!) � '�_�Y' • �, n ��'�•�+. �� �. � .''� ' , Clieof: —
'Eyi�. . � 'T�` �' �.., M �►i 1� ,. �� i, L f � ��`' q Nonrti�.
i,.a1� ` �' � '���� ;� ° �' o � T , '•• -'� + _ � 9C �ti. �� . 1 •h` P.``o4 '" o
R �.
: �. !• � `ro�.
�, *
;+: , �. ;,�'jr'�r� +� _ t. _,: Mk. �` . ��� > � J-� . - , ��•� . . •`�
.� }�;, � ;� - ,.� .�. •► �.� � - •� '''�,: 'b ��
{ 2. �,: - . . �l��'A 4 .
J �
_ ��'� _ ' •,�. . � V
.�w. �' . .5 v,.
� � ✓ _
4
*
. . f �
1 )
•.�. -� J M i .� � , :=�r,- - _ . r a `''�,
'e%i. 'l.�. � � �j � f . �t �ti .- \,e
M, .� � � . �4 �' £Z "`♦ rT''n+� .1 � } :��✓ , � . `I• � � � t . •�!IOF Tpe.�y� �
�4, � � '� �Y�•� /��:-. �_�. _- ,_. . r
" ''^� � E `_„ ,��. � Wetland A (� 0.01 acre) �,1 ',�:�yy
- ^ . , j''�°�� ' (34.912972 °N, -79.931407 °W) w .�M`, Projecf:
',t� �' Division 10
:r�, -„�S, � • � � . _` ' "� . . =.' �'�' ' '' Bridge Replacement
f � _� �,� /._ ti�'• r � ��
� d• � �� ,a .+ � ,,, l�v `? I�► -, " � NCDOT WBS No.:
�, - • ` �'` • ' .�_ - � • rl -� -�—� ���'y 17BP10.R85
' `! -. •�� . R ,, '��y � � �'�+,r �� RPW Stream B (-- 30� If}
�v �. � .�' ,�i��, , ;�' � �.,� � SR 1806 (Bridge 035)
- , � � �, `� , ,;�j � �+� , ,y� (34.912861 N, -i9.931562 °W)
A �� °��(���- .�r �.�_�,��F"� � , �. ����.���f_. � A�r ,Y _�� y�#Y.. �VC�
� �_{ � � Branch of Jones Creek
� I,�
� ,+ .,� ft ' " ; �Y ?�' ��." ..�"�. ��' i�i , , �����{•' ,,/v' "�' Anson County, NC
1� _ � —
r i,,:,
� �.' •� � �� (�i�� � � . �. "7 . i '� rs - ' � {i � �I Title:
y 17L . . - ..e �, �—
�• � r • `i�,C'f �� .'M1►'C.�A4'' I�Y;D^P�«s�'', •�+irl��� \.
`"S�.} � �u'I `; r, . . : _ ^ . I APPROXIMATE
�' � � � � �`•� - . r ''� :ti' ' ►� � R'ATERS OF THE U.S.
y�����f , r 1, - .� :.�� Y � ,'r, I s: ' � _` i� � i ;^ .y..,;, AND WETLANDS
�q/ ' BOUNDARY MAP
', 3 ,, �'-' � � . ;'�" Y
� ����� � . �t' _ , -�` '
y� � ,�� x r t . E, . -
x � �.'
� � � , � Soorce�:Aerialtmngery-NCOoeMap
_�� .� . �r �` � �r
- �•'* . � �} � . ' arr.�, :y� ,���r �� �� - Notes�
. _ . .. ,� � a . _ r
� si � � : , . �t � �p�� �� ' �� ' � , � 3 . n _ _ _, � �'-_ 1. Jurisdictional waters of the U.S.
y�r � - �, ' vrere definsai�d by STV En�gine�rs.
� ` �'�. � � � ���i �$f��iiY � -- �f�i1Gi1 C1s ,��3�l�� �i��� 4^' ��3 (�i� � `* � tna eur�ng �ie�� reviews caneuc�ed
. '}`� r .. �s'� � « � ....�t 1 • un �C nt 1�Q. 2p16. Juc4sd;cUcnak
- . . S� � ,�� �yd�-�, ��j�.��j��1� °�, -��.��"l�,r� "�(� boundarieshavebeenmaAcedinthe
A , � � � � •� 1- ,�Y,� �. - -- -- ��eld with blue �nC whife sSnped iape
4 � �, � N �4 � • -.,�� ,J .. and fiaggina lo�iimns wcre .vrv�yed '
� '• �, ✓ � � r � �f _ � ��T Gy Ne Norl�h Ca�ol�� CJepa:i��m�int of
' � t i- � �ransporFatiacr 'fhis map is ir•ieax]ea
N •,� � '^� �. A {� � 1 , ror lannan
Legend -� T _ P 9 Purposes nn6y
� • � + � • " . 2 JunsA�ctional houndaries of the
�^' E �� � � �� I �, � - >r' � � � wafers of the U.S, have not been
� �1,�c� �� , r�� varified Gy 1he U.S. Army Corps of
5 / �� .�'�" foplawi g v�M Gon ubject to change
� Project Study Area (� 2.4 acres) 1,,r -y ��� _ :.1.. * -_- �
, � :.,
, = Jurisdietional RPW Stream _ � ''� '� ��f _v�� � UrewnBy: CheckedBy:
� X� - _'rJ� , � - , ` � JLK BJP
• a . . 4_ .y,� � -, � � � 1
Potentially Jurisdictional Wetland '� � � � � � ��_� �� � ,� —
. . `. . ► Approved By: Date:
� Data Point ..,'.� � .�� ��•°� � _ MAI 9/7/2U17
� .� T T '�
! S '� f �I �'� � ~ �+ STV Eegiueers, Inc. Project No.
Photograph Location .,F�<<,i� , •�:' - f� �
0 50 100 200 �; ��`�� y�t t� Y' �� }�' ;_ � 4017864
Feet ,� *{'' ,,• . ' � - � , �,
� � � , y ,a � - EXHIBIT
_ s�'`►:' . �' � �r..�.� , .

NCDOT Division 10 Bridge Replacement Program October 3, 20?7
Bridge 035 on SR 1806 over Branch of Jones Creek — PCN for NWP #3 and #13
--�t •�•. �Fd .'Sr .� " � � �3 i�` k��� i ��. i
�� � ��� �-{�"iC Q>„� � 1 1: �wi' �..y� r . , ° ��`� � ;� �c�; �" ��
t7 �� ��r �� � 4 , , C�r,
�,� 1� r �h �P � �2' �j�,���. .._ y ,� �b y1r��
.�� .i � w ;l ,� � Y^-� , �- � ��� � � A7F,..�'
'K': {� •
� i���t', ��� ,.�} .�y�,�1.� i .� _.�,1+jJ�
lc �R�„ ' � �y � •
...� _Q� � �o-i r ..,n r� w
^ ���� r� -� x nfd � i � , , � �� } �� � ,� ��
� r ��"� i
nr
� �: �,,� � ' . i. � . ��,gga � � � �
�'�� i, p j� ��: ; a� . f �' . . Y�'a���: �-.V! ; Y ' � � , > �
�^. r"��+?. � 7 ,'M��'C h �. F ���� «� � _ � �
.� 1 4 r .+ti ' � 4��� -
yq�c� •r � ,.�a L ,�.� '�� ti. : p.
L� f+." `� "'�tK,r �.y'�S4.�� Y. ,L�`.,.pP'=����'�n'• i �.���y' ���I
u�[!�3�•a� �' � r �]�,.� �17 �kv G..
�J.. , S .. �!,YT.n.� c� I_.. aYf . � s � + � � � �� Y�I�IL�f!L.�i� "�.� .� ;�►� I
- �.�� ' . a.r�: ' F •.
r �i ",,F� a' r �`- - � �� .
�1 { � � j .+� _ � ++ l} �
�'�� : .; i'�,. = _� ` , -
� � ,'�:�;,.' � �i
.��1 � 'rl
�
•;'r_`.:t_.�,1, �.r .� � � .
. ��st I'
r•
� � r*�i =i,;_,
Photograph 1— A view of the SR 1806 (Blue Water Road) bridge over Branch of Jones Creek
looking to the east.
1� .,o,t� ..I�� . .q( y, yY J � � { .
� 'e �f OIJr o r�"� ��� � (
'��. �a ° 3y,� �.., �'���. .
} s�.�', , t . _ ;�t'�:�
'1?�- � ,r �„ . r"•
�rl����� b.�, �� 4.w � ��� � ' �' ���
� � . � J��i A� ,� �� �y4 aF` . ��
y I�
.�4�-� 1 �r p � �. .'�'�l'� �a� + %r�
�ry. . , l ��� , _ y2� �' �1 ; �'
��. . 4 ,a, r �- ���r�,�� �� f �
_ ������• ,} 4 . � '
\- �� � �
.� r t` r � l'� a `�,
,�,V���E�ti� ,� ,�
�r �' t s
� ,. ��
:-"'` � [i+ �"r�i '^� '�'�'' ° �` -_ , �
;p � �,� � �ti � �� �a,as.. , �' �� �r,-.e �` - �
- , �. `;�+ ' '�� �,h + . �.+ _ j� ,_ a ,, � � a •"
� ' ° _ ,' � �'{��'�`��-�' c_ i . . + .
' � . . _ t � �.;y�� � �. 1F" ' .�.� `� rr, wi �. '� p ��
�R � � .�� 4!{,�
�` . y'Y "'' > t -�y�.,�':""'� _. } �_ _ � - ' + �r � �<7� �'', -' � i{W-ts,' ��
�?R' . � � � '„- �'�'0���'.= '�' � ' '� �, w.:� n - ��.
:,- f m ,4 's�r.: �74� ' �, �,��a' r yc' �;.�
+ � " � r ti. � � ro`�!` ��"�'
.t�.� . tl��'"� �.n �., - ? - �k`i .. � 5C � . . gY.;: 4 �. �:,� i ��.
�"�. � . . �i"�d�ft�.-.a : .11��►S� .e�' «J" 5 . � , :: r � �. i,� r+ � �• ,�..��,a..._
,i } `�" ' N : .,r, h I �r . ,� +.,�- y, k. .
.
y +_
� ��' .'' �.������ � r���" : 'r �.,� `�q' y, "
- ` � �� ��"r��{�� � - � . � .� '� v; � � f ti � ,.'�..`
�,Y �.��� ..i .: ,�{ ��. � . `�7�:�y�, d'. �� �,k��.A � r .' �. .�S,Y'.4�
��z �f/' � � .•, .. , � �i � � �� ,�e;e�e .
f Y . � � � � .�- �' - � ~ � � ` � yYs �. d�",
^y+\' �`' �
b �,'4 � -'�*►���" � 'is � - �` rv � �� r' r" .lK.t' ', .
� �
�� r� �. - r, �'�..,� •. r �'^ .i�. ��"'' " ..-.., � � .
�.� �y, !�y�.._ 7�, ' '�' �'�
, � -"t-�" ' '_i- �:a ' . M� �7p6 - r-.w r.
� ,��,,:�,,��,;�'r � * ,i r.y ,�Ir• ' � ; .h i -
� �•Y . , R � �_`A.�.�-
. . .� K _ ��M9�R���� y ...��
. . . ' .� . _ . . ' ,
Photograph 2— A view of perennial RPW Stream A(Branch of Jones Creek) at the SR 1806
(Blue Water Road) bridge, looking upstream to the north.

NCDOT Division 10 Bridge Rep/acemen# Program October 3, 2017
Bridge 035 on SR 1806 over Branch of Jones Creek — PCN for NWP #3 and #13
� . �. , ,��� : � � . � . _ . , ;�r: � �•..
�:`��'c�,r�f %� •a ''�'� A:f�' . :� • � � iS��" , t ..�
+c i..! � . f ' y� � k"y �. {� r �` �' ' . _ . .',!
.�y�, 'r 4^ +,��' y, .. ���1 ;� t• �;•�iy.a.'"tti „��°it s� r(�P� F
���i�y"_aY,,�s����.�" �:�. � �3"�'*��..�r',�� - t���. ��
s �� . . . .� �7�'
Photograph 3— A view of perennial RPW Stream A(Branch of Jones Creek) at the SR 1806
(Blue Water Road) bridge, looking downstream to the south.
� , � ' e',l, !S7r
'( IY - ilJ—.i "�t,. "�—r' �+ ' . 'Q j
..+
F �.7� ���1 • .:.1, � .� - � � J
���fi' *_��`�:��y1�, ..� �a��`6����� ^ , � ^"�yr ��` � � � �
�
'� _., -
,'d�i' °� <
, . �y
,- �,. � -+�i.�' �y, � ._ . ��°� . ' 3��
�w v�� � �
� ;P.. Yq y „¢ �Y ,�.� - . � , �,� � �.- �i:
=� �_'�;; � y� � `+-; �; � ..
'.�� � x•_ , r� i:.��+r�OGR..�SyT "� ._d � �.�..b y ' � �':
� � � ^RY. ',� rPf2 �
�1'��ix!� � `R- iM.'�j • . ; � . . . � , ,� : . '� �M ;'� F7�v�-
i+�%& ! k`: ,trYy�!�i �"�-- -•, c. "�'
�t-� •: .1 . � A�l: :'1� 7 i ' : . ��.r-- i! .ti.1r'r���-_� a ,
� 't . . . ' �... � . ._ � . ' - ' - . .
=�`�'� •.,14`''F.r'�" f � � - r� . u _ - . . F � ' _ � +�.... ..y ..' � �y-e'� . . .- � � � �
Photograph 4— A vi�w (facing downstream) of RPW Stream A(Branch of Jones Creek) flowing
under the SR 1806 (Blue Water Road) bridge.

NCDOT Division 10 Bridge Rep/acement Program October 3, 2017
Bridge 035 on SR 1806 over Branch of Jones Creek — PCN for NWP #3 and #13
..� .,�- ��� •
`Q ;fE4 �a � e1 , ff; ` y, , " {'
9 w � �S ..
, .. �' t
Jf 'to. !`�,. `+ �� � �1'� � �� i.
. �� i nY ^ 4',�` �"br«� �' .'7 .
��� C -
�� ' � � '� ! } '7lj ;
_' : • f . � , �.f,,
� .�; �,� ; •�;� ,, n:<;y�
� � ; � . �,C� r .'Y� . � 'r`fl
4�`` t � ..l � 1' � Gu< �(� �, ...5 ��� � �� � ' ,,� .fk,
.. ' ,!,yr r , ,, .'�"V��r+ f'.• �J` . ��9�ya •t,'�„�;F'�'F��
��IA�� _ . ��:Y�„�( ,3• �� ',,�� 'r.n,�.�n��,, 'ir:��,y- - ��r• �
A ��.! � '� � .�. ��.. ` �,w'"��l j,' ���R�+ .� ������
x +-
���Y�✓� � ��'•.. . ��'�{�� `, ��; I �+.�-M�,����h"�� ,+
4 r �.. �a_ .� �' ��.p � ., .� �r� ^�.. i.��=��J�I
1 y� ' � " �� �. ' -... -�� �4 +'� q'�h v.yy �.Lrt � ''� � � a -j �
o�. , ` , � �� * M�-,y I ��,��A��� �. . <��„+�f�;���. '+�4�y.-�,.� � ;� '^:. �.�� �
t � . . }� . :�yt�, S�'� CR. . �' J -.�� k� ��.r.���
► ��'1 . �� 'a 3 � ` - � �' ' � � ~ N ��f „i,;�
� . � 4,�'� .� _. _ , �, �a�'If'.� y . y _.�y,�'��,,
•�a "��at` ��'- t i'ia, � �'ti..c �.�. •��"� � �eY�rt yi ,.� �A6�.
$ . � ' ��'�i •-.3r''+�v �
�' „: �r % •:p�►,, '" , ,. = g � �4'.�'NI h., � `- :�I
� _ �L � ''`��n,�
�'' � % �j" � �� ..!. '�1'+'t�� y'4, a Fr. � - �l •� .r` ' ,..��' � .� , �" ' a '�';�
a�r^'t�-,��.� � -� �� {+��� :� ��w _ ��_,,. � �! �Q'.'i
�y ���. � ;
' , ��`0. �, r � � ti. '�1 � ,
� ,�1� ��''' ti , .;��,"I /��i�h, .a � .•-T�
� �, y � , �, �� , +�;; e � �-�
�'► �" _ . � r � .;�' r' � � .p; i � � �1
�,�+ � � , ,.� � n, � -�`� ,ti� ' .� - F M ;,�
�: �r �' ', : } ,n; �,�.r ; '� `. ,,� � - Y� � "�, ` �="
��a�` �,� ��' � Y � ,�� �� . � ti� . `�°"' -
Photograph 5— A view of RPW Stream B(U.T. to Branch of Jones Creek) flowing parallel to SR
1806 (Blue Water Road) looking west.
�t ,ti���*� y� ti
�` �' �� �
, ��"{ `' �,� � r��� y" �` � �
•r M + �
r ti
I
�� �,` � � � �I
�y.yx ;
s ':;
� �� � �e o
i � �r ' i4 '
''�' � � � �f �
� �. ri r �
.l ' �
t/ � ���'
�j� h�..�- �a.�-. �y!..'i+�� 7��r �,
• � ykl�s�. t. �� i '-�b)
t
.Z\t.,.....'. ��.:.s`._.��.•e� � a 5��-: � - .
.�.r 1�� �F;: �� "'a : � �: i. "� 1 � '
y�r tN, :�. Ld i � l �; �( — � \ . .. �
. ' ����[ �',� . � � "i � ,�� ~^� ��?��`
�p�. r� ' 1!' �
�.� `^^R� J �k ��� 1N.� �,� k�i�� '� 1�R��,� Y�, �F I� pl �,.
F�. €
' � bN � ��f�GJr ��lib .� _ h
�T �
.� �. �. .s�Yi I- �,4 P
��' �i� J 1�#i��� '� r A� i� .. i
'�•�y C�� + �
�J. N` 7`- J�'� YP �.+r" S� '��1� i �
.����' � r `•� Y + { �I`��
fi ;� � '��. �Jl � � '�
,� ��?f� +�l' ��� tA�
. �ri d�s-: J
� i ��� . � � Jr��_�M"R
��: i � � : : 4 � � �r
4�' r..,�, r.- t. . s. c
�l} 4 R;_ ,';�;:� : :; '��;�'-�
�. , �� _ ,,*�,
��`'�9 P � � ���rl ,��'�' i i
�. �.,�. _ ♦ I'�- 9 ['�s'�,
�' � � . . _ . . . ,. _ � � ��`'�
• ky
�
,. ��.
��.. �rp , �. ..,a Y . �e :7'� ra -.Mr' .�`. .''�,�y.�..T+Lu'.;1�.'�L e, ��i
}Y'., r ' t F ��'. �n ��✓f� ra�•Z. .,y Y lb 1�.�.� v�yY� ������, �r��.l �
' /_ � r�Y .. '- • '1k� �J ��K�'., _ -���} s.���,���-���.� - . .
Photograph 6— A view of Wetland A located northeast of the SR 1806 (Blue Water Road) bridge.

NCDOT Division 10 Bridge Replacement Program October 3, 2017
Bridge 035 on SR 1806 over Branch of Jones Creek - PCN for NWP #3 and #13
Attachment C
Figures

. �ti ri ` - , '���,`` , ' `
.�L . . � '4� f - ' � . � �' ` �]
' � f.��r r F � � �`• � � •, .'+ � e� � � ��y 5 . , � '' _ tiJ i '4' J� I;JI}
! � � � � ' � �, � a,f+ , ` � �. � : . : , ' �.
�'� �' �� �� i I � � .. � � �''/'� �,• '� � � � ' � l. ^ � _— (,��.' i O�
* ''' f'f � `I/ , � . / � ' \J : ��f�` � ' _ � � 7
•-'�, � ,�-�. � �1 �'
• � �, � _ � � , ` - } ' `�_ � • � .
' y�-, � . � i . T ; ' _ / , ' '� ' � � �.' ` � ! i � C.lienl:
�a 1. 1� . . i � `� . . � ' � � - +� , r�`-+ .��� ' i�t�
; t. � � ! +, ' - 1 � �� �� _` � ` �r �' � ; � � ' ' � � ' � ` — �_�� -'`'�,,,i°Y'—'�: . � . . �� 4p �� ,ter�7'N� .`�
� � f � ^ i Y _ . �� `�`
i i � � . _ � r. • � e_�.+E , - � � ,
�l . . '. , .r� e - - ,� '" r �- � . � • . ' _ � 1 ' , a r>
,
+ •f . � . � . `1 '. r.^�� `�:���. \ '_ �,4_ � � _` �'' f . � � _ .�� '- �y� $,"
� . (� • __ '�l . .r �`�� �_� ' ,..--, z. � ' . , - :�..��/.- � � �, �'
� « �,` ` , � `_ ,� � ,,.,._ � � � �.�I i � : �r ;
�`� _� ,� p � � ��� �
� �� � -� ' � 9[i��i � � � .}. ` i• ` �. ti.. ,
' " — � _ �` _ 9 �I / ' (} ` �. - '� � . � � 1 � ` - " � ,�! � � ,_
'\ _ » _ . � � •� . r, . �� �i f !'*--� _ `} / � � ' f l " � ', ��,. �� � Projerf:
1 ` � �; � � � Division 10
� . - - . / ' � i - ��; _ J " - • ,� � �� •. . � ''` � �'1,�- � � Bridge Replacement
f � � �.�" � • , - � `• ��
� � i .
i � � D T
", . NC O WBSNo.:
�' . I
3!2 , '`� ) .� � � .�
,,.,.� . �'' •. , � � � 1��.. � ` ! y � � 17BP.10.R.85
r
��---`� , � � r' � SR 1806 (Bridge 035)
. � . , f . --- •- ----
�. � : � � � " ���,,�� Over
� .( 1 �� - Branch of Jones Creek
' ��� �� f' _,,7 . , . ` �,; ; ; - � -
� � , : f C� � t�1� , � '� �� ♦ rP � � R � ��- � Anson County, NC
j _ `-' , .^. � . - =_ � � � � f �'f �.1�� �l_ ,'.'� � ��'. . — - i Title:
'� -- '� J �d _ + ��. r1 � r ' . �� �. � �. ' _
�''�^� . �w../ ��n`� .
` r ' , - _ - __._ , . ;
~ / � USGSTOPOGRAPHIC I
��� i � y ' � _ "-„'�'SR • • �
•t � �� _ �� 1806 (Blue Water Rd� `
� �,'-- . � �F9 � MAN
�' i ;� 'I. �� . �_� , ��, . � A,.� -� _ _
��. � ,. . � �
.� r� � r �� � - - , f�r��� � / � ?"� �r " ' Ref. USGS 7.S Minute Topography
`�'� � ' 7 . �• ' i � '��� �^ � � � ' Quadrangle Map �Lilesville, NC (19821]
`.. (' �` i,�} " I,,� . , -' '�` _ __
i , � Y > 145 � '� 1
•.� j ��`r � • ' � ' 1�, � � , , S
� - •' r � ;�i� � ,l � �� � . - I `_,� �.
�`�1 � , 1 ' � .'� . •_ -_ � � � ' � M � � - � �
i 1 1;� . 4 � �,��� �,1`-'". � _ � 7 � ~ � �_.�I' � � . f ` � y
r / rT
�� �� � ��( � �� ����, t � �y ! ��L t� , � � f ! ,�`' ..� r_t..'" ' �
. ' f • ��'� � , a �
� ��
ti � J 1 �- ` . � _ �' � � �
� � �. 1 � - �1 �i . -,-, 1 ��Y'C„ . � , r
. f �r � � � � _ i _ � a � _ 1 - . : $ � , _ 4����' i^? � i — -
. �''� �', G, � '� S"r. �' �`� _ _ �{
� . '1 ' . :
� � . ��
. _ �
� _- - � .
�_ ."`�. .- - ----��__.._�...._. ,_�->-.,._ ._�_..._..�T_ ; '`� --�,,.�/' �
f. - � t � � , s"! ` , _ _ --�r—�---�--- ._ •. Lilesville Quad
,� . r.� �, y
— - � .' � i � " lti . - , .
�. �,. . . Urawn By: Checked Ry:
N - � � ; ,,-,r r. `�: �: -:� - � � `-�� JLx SJP
� � �..
g . '.
Le e n d W � E ��;1,, ,�--` ��� :� �� . � ; u , � , .:, �
`��-� � , y� � � L , r � , ApproveJ By: ➢ate:
� � r� ���a''�= � `s'� • - �F _ �'� � ' �� MAI 9/7/2017
� Project Study Area (� 2.4 acres) J •'� �, r�/ ` ~� 4\ ,', _' •�� _ � STV Enginccrs, Inc.Projecl Nu.
� ��� , �� I •, ` �1 `..2 � � � � ♦
0 500 1,000 2,000 /%S' ,'' �. �_ � 4017864
.. �� � — -� � ; � :�,._ - '"G,,���,.� d. — —
� `
Feet � � i i �,� �``) � -+�� FIGURE 2
- f s. `Copyriqht'C�y2013 National Geographic'Socrety, i-cubed

Wetland A is abutting and drains to RPW Stream A(Branch of Jones Creek} , ,r-
RPW Stream B flows to RPW Stream A which flows to Jones Creek (R'PV'J} ��' � � -� f
� � � ���,� �TV a
whi�h theo� fior�rs to the P'�e D�� Riv�r: � Traaitf�nal �l�vi �bl� VV�ter. -' �`.�1 •. ' ',`'.t� � /j ��U
�` ' + _'M � • • � '` �,' '�r.
�'�. , ` .: � � .t `' : ,� l .g • "' � �! ,, ' �. ' ; q,' . _ .
� �'' � '- � ' � a �i' �
� d �t� .r '�t' f rr �.����. 1��'��,�.� ,� t . ",� 1` � ix
, r c�oNnc:
�' , � � ��' `_�j �� , � �. ' � r .;4I� �� � `,�)r' � ���` � j` 1 . I � �' r'rT'ic
� y� Y . �']] �' � f' �y . r��
. �.J� � •�. f ����' �- . � �- , . � � !y u�� �. ' .. c , � s'� �, ��C y .t ' . i �9p�y,.
�'. ;�, r �� ..'. � r� . . . � � : _ ' ''.'.r �T � .,: ^.
�i �. . �.� , � ?'' � .I .�,�, .' '+ - . . � .
� � 1' C .�. _ , i . .. �t ' k _ Q�
1•7�-' ,� j. ���_ . '+ �.. •'� �
~ ��`� �, � ',Y .�.�.I� � �y � J � ��}•Ml � ��� __ TWA�
- ' i�+ �,�y;•' i,� ��jr ����M�-� _
'`� '�'� f � �,� f ` '�� ��' Wetland A (� 0.01 acre)
's` 'i��' _ "��i' ~��y� (34.912972 °N -79.931407 °W) p19Je":
,�� �•. - ',�. . .�' t �' � � DIV1910O �O
,. �.,�, ' . '� , � r ;, Bridge Replacement
{_ `'�> � :�., � �, i „. : �, - � >• /. .�'' � r - -� ; NCDOT WBS No.:
,,, � ,
, . � �.,,ti : �" � �q j�, + `�`� -•- _ __ _ . � _�' �� i�Br.io.x.ss
''� -� ���r f � • RPW Stream B(� 308 Ifj
t � o,'� � _' �� : ' ,��' . ,�"► 'T• .� i .1� � - i;r�' (34.912861 �N, -79.931562 °W) SR 1806 (Bridge 035)
�A f' ; � ��r ����,�, + � ' �' . � �. '�; r-' Branch ofJanes Creek
- _ .,�'.4r �� �� fy 4, `.� t • �c;, ���_-' ��, �,' .�'�� . ` l���: �'�'� _; "'�; '��,a
'-� �1 � ��'' � Y, �a (F, � Anson County, NC
l �� � ,��6 �f�/�� . . � ' 1 � �� ; ` . ��� �? J r ' �� -. i � TiUe:
. r L;�r ,,,� � ;x _/'�_ �
4't(�� 1� i�b ,"y`r.�a�"" .._.-.�e�4-'1. ew�.�:� �.�� • ".�
�J ..3. �a �
y `'�,r . . l s , ,. . h' ^ APPROXIMATE
�� =1= +••� � ,•� ,� `,C . . ,• �t �; - WATERS OF THE U.S.
,� �''',�� ', _� lI •`�- ` ,;,' � � ?,>�' w � OLJNDARYMAP
.�� �a ,1 ,� '!I � ^ , ,r � '� �
� , . � �.�,,-��•'�'� X' �
� - ' / � � Soorce.:Aeriallmagery-NCOneMop
? ��, . �r� ;' .� , +n ��.' � �� _ � _
-��• .
�k �., . �i1Fy,., �'-:i. " ','� n,ote5
'.3 � ' � �," .�' � � � - r� .. — � � 1. Junsdidional waters oF the U.S.
• � r � � � ;� • �;��� •t �' � w6re d�.6irr�ai�a b STV Ena€neers.
� s': *�' RPW Stream A- Branch of Jones Creek (� 353 Ifl "g Y
� ��� Inc dueSn.9 fceld reviews candu�ed
�� �.:r� + `� � 4''' (34.912719 °N, -79.931675 °W) p� ap�r t4, 2a16. Jured,c�+onal
� � � . . ;�'�.�i �+ � � ,�i r � r. A � � _ _ boundaries have been markPd in tpe
� i _ . ' . .' �. � .. •�..� ; � f h � Aeid vnth blue and� whitE ssrY �d ia e
atldlla�g �� �Op;�oRS v.v:rp 5urv�y0d
- � �.,� . -_yy � F, , ' ' -,. , ], .' �r . � - . r .. ' � 72n5pa 1 �n. athis m pe�r, en�edf
�k
N . a �� �'-� �-'� 1 fo�r planrurty purpusfs �nly,
Legend �� � �._.�_:: . .
� Y �7��. �". 2. Jurisdictional boundaries of the
°P� f K ;��� _ waters of the U.S have not been
'�� R������� venfied by lh�e U.S. Army Corps of
� 5 j,�y� <' tngmaers and are subjed fo change
Project Study Area (� 2.4 acres) ° �' ""8 ' �'- �0�tl°'"�� `�`�"a°"°n
%'�.� � .,., �.
t/ � ���
�._ Jurisdietional RPW Stream 6 I: ' M,t�\ � • � '� � �• Draw�nBy: CheckedBy:
e
�`Y� ': f � �- `�'� ,�;. �: '... � JLK BJP
, Potentially Jurisdictional Wetland 1 Y " � . '. - � �`
s, . . c r
� , ► ��. 4' - (-, � 1� Approved By: Dare:
. � Data Point '' f �'-� -.,� •. ,� ` � 9��i2o1�
i ♦�f yjf N � __rr�{�) _ _ MAT
' �� .
, ��. � `t- f �'`� � - y ST V Eo eers, Ine. Pro ect Na
Photograph Location �►�•�; `�c , - :^� �a� �v - �'° �
0 50 100 200 `� �� . _ � i �" r ' 4017564
a r • : � �,` « * �, *
�' "� ��` 'r
.� .� _� = , _ : _ Feet �,"'�' 'i . _ �i . - � � �'� FIGURE 4
. ,,.,
- — .: i

See Sheef 9A For IrMex o� Shee�s
See Sl�f 1B Fo� 5loiWord Sym�lagy 5/.ee/
BEGIN PROJE+CT
� -Ir STA.I3+00.00
�
o � �
0
E
E
.;
U
E �� GRAPH/C SCALES DESIGN DAT.9
C
so io o so �o ADT 2011 = 160
N C AOT 2025 = 320
[�y PL4N5 DHV = N/A
� �20 lo 0 20 4� D= N/A
� O T = 6%
. PROFILE �HORIZONTALJ y— 50 MPH
M1�� V , . 2 0 , � $
' FUNC. CLASSIFICATION:
� � PRO�FI4E ('VEI[nU1J LOCAL
mct E
z
�
V
❑
w
�7l"A°][°]E �]F N�lft°][°]H CA��]LINA
�l�V'I�I�N �� ]H[IC��IW1��S
A111S0111 COU11tTY
LOCATION: BRIDGE #35 OVER BRANCH OF JONES CREEK
01V SR 1806 (BLUE WATER RD)
7YPE OF WORK GRADING, PAVING, DRAINAGE, £� STRUCTURE
�
WETLAND f� SURFACE WATER IMPACTS PERMIT
PROJECT LENGTH
L&NGTN OF ROADWAY PROJECT WBS 77BYJOX85 = 0.q46 M!I$S
rcuGTH OF SIRfICT�fRE PROJ&CT WBS 17BPJOR85 = 0.009 MIlFC
70TqL ZENGTH OF PROjEC7 WBS 17tlPJORHS = 0.095 M/!�C
NCDOT CONTAC�: GARIAN� HAYWOOD, PE
DiviziOn Bridge Manaper
3
�
END YR4JL4'CT i
—U STA.18+00.00
eo• o� eo•
Permit Drawing
GRAPHIC SCALE Sheet � of s
PL9NS PREPARED FOR 7NE NCDOT BY: HYDRAULICS
rJ�'�` � OU �n�.,���-�Y. r�a,� I excnvFFR
,� �>.
RIGHT OF WAY A+tTE NIKKI T. HONEYCUTf. PE �!¢U.�IDx;ts'
JULY 14. 2017 ''1O�°�'r `'1L1A1J" DESIGN
fiNG7NGSR
LETfWG DAT6: MAA^nOON K f.B�ELA212 I
NOVEMBER 15. 2017 "" �"T �"'`�"
17BP.10. R.B�
��
_.'�.�i:��
..,
� '��' /I5 ��
r�

�3�Yi�T.J]� �uV��.v�rai...u�v !."rS�:�:!d� I 9
LEGEND - .J � 'E. '.�' » wnwe
STREAM PERMIT IMPACT ' "
��/�iJ///y�yj��y OENOTES TEMPORARY pREA (AC� LENGTX (FT
[lGCf1.Lt IMPhCTS IN SURFACE WATER � \� '�� @� wcii+[o rrvawEEu
PERMANENT �001 56
Ft���f,I�� DENOTES IMPACTS IN $W IMPACTS
i/fJ/ SURFACE WATEN TENPORARY
SW IMPACTS 003 I I�0 � � �•�i
� 9 , Pr � Q 27
ti JI �lM�}4p / � e �� .
O \ � �f / '� O OOCYMEMTMOTCONf1UEREOFlILL
� 0� _ � / REO YWNi�M ilY9Eq C0. I, LLC b
�jf UNLEBi I1LL i1GI1�TYREB COYPLEim
� SEEFIGURE �� �J �_ _ �
� _ - �SITE1 � ' � � �N �
~ ` SITE 1 �)5 � —`—�5 �
-_ ._ —
�"
=�r— - =. � - �j �� )5�-- ���'
._
_. . � _._
-_
. c ,� . E � .. -
� � y. - .. E � F� _ � -� .
_ » '-4 �• '. - . --_-'�__ ' i . �_ .
� ` �S
`~"� �_-- ---- --- -- � __ - —_ a�� .. _. _. _ . , � . .. .. _ . . .. _. ., � _ _ .
---� " -- -
- t -- - -..
,._ �'.. . . . .-�-�-� � :.' - -c. _ ^ ". _ , - . F _ _ . '
•' r
".__" '" . � . ,; / ' _-_�_.`____-
- -. _ . .�-,�.�,,,_ .. �.. . . - . -_"� F .___-�_
-. .� , .{___`_
ir - '_ - -`_____ _ _ _ _
r ...._� . ' _ - _ _ - . r ..
F .•� 1� � ' J Y_:.�.�._ _ _ _- - ..
.r -.� _ ."_ I I � �lv 1 - ___-' - . . -
0
.-� �. � � _' _ _ _ _ _
_ . ._' _,_�..
oea .T T
... �� .�:Gi iY'AI£R `_ a ` . _-� - _.._ ��'�-� F .
_
�i�.. _
. f' � o � ��e Rti i I .�-
�. �. � � • - ___- -_ . . .
. . �� �a � : .. - .
; _�y � �_ -- � , i.:.,.�'., _—_ -' ..-.
.. .� ' - `F ... ". .
. . �F ;_'�-___'--� .... ., , f . . ...., :,,. �v-.=_ .,. . '_' _"- ...
- - F '__- ' � t . - _ _ =F ` F u,..
�.'
Q
� � FEO MWNIqIN TMBQt C0. I, LLL
��
40' 0' 40 `
PermitDrawing � �xY
Sheet 2 of s �`:
LRAPhIIC SCALE . — _ � � � �
216 ' H07E:
DESIGN SPEED SHpWN FOR VER71CAi GUR✓E %5 UP i0 216
20 MPH LE55 rHPN GVERML OESrGN SFEcO PE�R
SUB-REGlONN. rIER GFSIGN GUlOEIJNE_.
212 272
B�Gih PR � LT WdS ? Rd� �,p 7 W 5 tY 2OB
�OB ��SiAx3+IX7 7
EL = 2D2ji 5TAl8+ORti7
£NO dRIOGE EL ��c"n33�5
q 204 �� Pl= 13+85P0 dECrN BRViG£ i� S�A �5+�
- EL = IY7T5' :fAM .Y.YNF PI = 16+70D0 ' 204
`EX/ �.' KC - Ild L SfA ie,)�7 VC • ffi0' ��
STq.rS�T?94-
200 Sr ��` DS 30 NPH' �C •��� OS =330 NPH` E 7��£���
x�s 200
Pt = r3 RtY1,pp CT ` --- � �. `- _ �--- 3•�SEc� GRADE _ - '
— ; 196 Fr: a9p3p -" --_ _ 2 �-nE7+Cu �� _,�___-_ _ e__--- 196
BRILIGE N1'DRAUUC OA7A r_i�:.. �_ ` _ _� - -----------'-'�` ��_ f'v+KJj`�`7.��
,o,B�'+�•r. �
; DESIGN DISCHPRGE a 650 CFS
� 192 OE5/6N FREOUENLY = 25 YRS -_ 7 y`�- c"XI51 iNG G.ROUNO 192
_ OES/GN HW EL£VAl/ON = /953 FT
-�`� BaSE l7VSCHaRGE = 950 CFS I �_r�"
£ BASE FRELYIENLY _ I00 YRS F
1BB B�E MY EIEVAT10N - 559 FT �
OVERTOPP/NG 0/SCNAHGE= 1400 CFS �- �Si 85 G: uNC�.155!FIEO 188
O✓ERTOPPlNG FREWENLY= `.�* YRS �,-�y srirucruke EXCpVa7/ON
� {NERiOPP/NG fl£VAiION = �97D FT �TOT/+1 ^o�iri 5/DFSJ
� l ea oarE � suAVEr - av�azar a� l ea
W AS�(£VATOF SUINEY ' 1905 FT 'a w
a�.. 1B0 ... 1@9
,.t,�% 13+00 14+00 15+00 16+00 17+00 18+00

LEGEND
STREAM PERMIT IMPACT
�i�%�.rf� OENOTES TEMPOLIRY ; ARFA IA�I LENGTH �FTI
�/f//� IMPRCTS IN SUNFACE WATER --
PERMAN�NT �001 58
�%�%%� DENOTES IMPACrS 1N Sw I�n Ci5 -
�ft SURFACE WATER TFMPORARY p 03 �10
SW IMP�CiS
� �
-1^�l- .. _. -. ..
� � _�`� .. - ..
I I
�� ���
� t
� sr_
I
SEEFIGURE )�,, �
SITE � /
� F_ � 'ti,;;._ � - d €~~F'— -_—".,�
_ � ^�_-�t._ ___ _____ _ _ r____
'. . .- .. ,� �. --"�tii�
F _ -
,...` `-•^s'• - - �F '-- _ - -- �1SR � �.s
`}F -- - _ -' '....�
__ F � �
��i:� r)� Q�� _
- , � Permd Drawing I ,
.,-,.�r ,. S[l:l.t $heEi 3 07 6 .
216
212
BEC�u'l.%'�SJFCI' w85 17Bp,GR85
206 grA+J�c+7m
EL - 2025/
Z04 �� Pl= 13+BSA7 {�u;N $Al�
� `- � EL = 14775'
EXi �� �c_ na � L S7'ti �4rla_
� �`%�TTfjy AS = 30 MPH'
200
Ne • �9�C70l7G eA �-I��.� -�
� �..__ � -�---�..__ _ Y
196 £r 2m2o - ~r-,pg� , "_---.____---
192
� 88
1B4
BR/pGE M'ORAUUC DATA
Of51GN O/SCHARGE - 650 CFS
OES�GM FREWENCI ^ 25 YRS
OESIGN NN ELEVAT/ON = 19,53 FT i
9/SE bSCHAflGE = 950 CFS
BASE FREQUENGY � l00 YFS
BASE hAY EIfVAT10N �959 FT I
d✓ERTOPP/NG OISCNARGE - �� CFS
�0✓ERTOPPINfi FREWENLY� SOb+ yR5 �
O✓ERTOPPING ELEVA7/0N = �97D FT '�.
OATE OF SUMEY ' �/lZ� I
WS.fLEVAT�ON
AT OArE OF SUR✓EY " 1905 Fr I
_ �,� �,i
�
��
v �
o. 4,
13+00 14+00
��
J
•'7M1�1? a.'yrc �`-�. tnrt�
��]'�.,�L1ii0�� �� � 7=yF_i7�8; {�
� ww.:. •xsc, ��
.erwa.iu' ��4 + i'
Y�W
Q Y�
� �, ,rt, � � � Q � �� i
/ aE� �OUNiNN iIHBEF CO +. LLC WCUMEIRMOTCOMBIGEYEYFlWL
� b IINLpS�LLiWM11TUREfCOYPLETm
j � � �
�SITE 1 �S— � - .. -- — - 1S �`�� g
___ . . . i� �S—._" � , �SS _ . . .
��.� ' j.�_3� ., . �.., �-J.-�. .F... ...� ,. _..__-_�...F_� .".-_,.,.
_L'_`:> _ - - - - - - - - � - - - — _ - - F
. ^ _� F _--_���_- F--r -- ,. .�. � _ -� _ _ .- ,..<
s� ,.
� .. -.- . :=' . - .
�ft-�?'I�_ � rF.-{ -- _— F '•-. '___
R
�
Rm NWNiAIH 11YBEH Cp. I, LLC
IF.t = 19G�5
{
� -- ---- �-__-__-�--'ti---
1-
-.s
r-
\.
�- E5T &��� LY uNCcn;SlfrEG
STfiUC1 URE EXCN' ATiOM
fTQTA( �7�H `>Ip{�l
15+00
16+00
PI = 16+TOD0
EL a /95.40'
vC = 260'
K= 37
OS - 30 MPH'
GR,aDE
<
i EYIST!Nf, CROUMD
NOTE:
DESIfiN SPE`D SHOWN FOR VERT�CaL CU.a✓t IS" UP 70 216
20 Mr'H LE55 rHPN OVcR.�:l. OcSIGN SPEc"0 ?t�R
SUB-R£GIONAL TIE.R DG51IJN GWDEL'NES.
212
x . riwst . 0 206
STaJ@+C�7DT
EL = 20335
- 204
�-
ExiSt �*�'�.
�r 2D0
195
192
168
184
17+00
18+00

DIVI�I�N �F �IIGffiW.�YS
ANS�N C�UN'�'�
�R�J EC?': 17�3�.10.R.85
�RIIDG� �035 �V1EI3
�R.4NCH �F J�N�S CA]EE�
�DN SR 1806
(�d.,U� W.^�°I'EI� R�.�D)
SHEE°1' �B �F 6 10 // 2// 2017
� 1L 1L I � A �L
Permit Drawing
Sheet a of s
2 0' 0' 20'
GRAPHIC SCALE
LEGEND
STREAM PERMIT IMPACT
�Gt�![:1Lr! DENOTES TEMPORARY AREA (AC) _ LENGTM (FT)
IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
PERMANENT �0.01 54
, �� DENOTES IMPACTS IN SW IMPACTS
� �// - SURFACE WATER TEMPORnRY Il �
SW IMPACTS I 0.03 � 110

WETLAND PERMIT IMPACT SUMMARY
WETLAND IMPACTS SURFACE WATER 1DAPACTS
Nan txisiing Exisiing
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 ft ft ft
1 -L- 14+78 to 15+26 45' Sin Ie S an Brid e <0.01 0.03 54 110
TOTAI,$': <0.01 0.03 54 110
'Rounded totals are sum of actual impacts
NOTES:

11i};�n����� Narih Carolina FTepartr�rent af 7ransporWttan �
Fiigl�w�y S#arvnwater Prpgra�n
'���i
STOR141W1VATEit MANAG�MENT PLAW
�@rsiA� 20Yx: R41oa56d lvria 20t8) FQR NC�DT PRiDJECT$
WBS Elemen[: 17f3P.�q R.ES TIP No.: SF-�93UG35 Cqunt ie3 : Anc�i; Fa e 1 oF 1
General €�ro �cl Er�for�alion
YV95 Element: 1�BP.1I�.R.C45 TIP IVumber: SF-O�+OG35 Pro'ect T e: f3ri�lc e 6�e ;accni�ai! Date: 5f3�2�t7
NCDOT Contact: paul Fisher ConVactor / Desi ner. Shirshant Shartna
Address: NCDOT Hydraulics Unit Address: g00 W Trade Street, Suite 715
1590 Mail Service Cen4er Chariotte, NC 28202 - 1144
Ralei h, NC - 27699-1590
Phone: 919-707�700 Phone: [phone]
Email: pfisher ncdot. ov EmaiL•' shirshartLshartna stvinc.com
Ci lfown: Franklin Coun ies : Anson
River Basi s: Yadkin-Pee Dee CAMA Coun ? No I
Wetlands within Pro'ect Limits? No
Prs ct 6escri rioa
Pro'ect Le th lin. miles or feet : 500 ft Surroundi Land Use: VJ�ex1s (fturaY)
— Pro Pro �� S�
Pro'ect Built-U n Area ac. 0.3 ac. 02 ac.
Typical Cross Section Description: (Approach) 2- 11' lanes with 0' - 4'-5" paved shoulders {Approach) 2- 10' lanes with 4' grass shoulders (LT), 4' grass shoulder (RT)
(Bridge) 2- 11'-0" lane with 4'-5" paved shoulders {Bridge) 2- 9.5' lanes with no shoulders
Annual Avg Daily Traffic (vehlhrlday): Desi NFuture: 140 Year: 2025 Existin : 70 Year: �995
�Ceneral Project Narrative: The existing single span 22'�" bridge is 6eing replace� with a proposed CS' single span (27" cored slab) structure. The bridge will be superelevated at 4!0, witri 19'travel lanes
(Liescnplion of Minimization of Water arid 5'-5" shoulders, 30'-10" Clear Width and 33' (OTO Width). Existing drainage pattems are being maintained. No deck drains required. A drainage inlet has been added at the
Qarality Impacts) end of The bridge to pick up runoff from the bridge. ExisGng bridge structure will be removed.
WaAexi'rod lnformation
5urdace Water BocE 1: Beari�h of Jones Creek NCI3WR Stream Irrdex No.: 13-42
NCDWR SurFace Water Classfication for Water Body Prima Classification: Class C
Su lemental Classification: None
Other SVeam Classification: None
Om airments• None
A uatic T8E S cies? No Comments:
--
NRTR Stream ID: Buffer Rules in Effect: N/A
Pro'ect Includes Brid e S annin Water Bod ? Yes Deck Drains Dischar e Over Buffer? N/A Dissi ator Pads Provided in Buffer? N/A
Oeck Drains Dischar e Over Water Bod ? No (If yes, provide justification in the General Project Narrative) (If yes, describe in fhe General Project Narrative; 'rf no, justify in the
(If es. rovide'ustification in the General Proect Narrative General Project Narrative) I

NCDOT Division 10 Bridge Replacement Program October 3, 2017
Bridge 035 on SR 1806 over Branch of Jones Creek - PCN for NWP #3 and #13
Attachment D
No Archaeological Survey Required Form and Historic Architecture
and Landscapes No Survey Required Form

Project Tracking No.
17-OS-0029
-�;���� NO ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY REQUIRED FORM �.�A�
�,�''�� ��4� • This form only pertains to ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES for this project. It is not �'�? : F ���
`�' �'��� valid for Historic Architecture and Landscapes. You must consult separately with the �,.ti�� :��
;r . , � .�.��,'j �� �
`O: �E�y Historic Architecture and Landscapes Group. �J7,'a�
PROJECT INFORMATION
Project No:
WBS No: 17BP.10.R.85
Federal Aid No:
Federal Permit Reguired? � Yes
County:
Document
Funding:
❑ No
Anson
State Minimum Criteria Checklist
� State ❑ Federal
Permit Type: USACE
Project Description: Replace Bridge 35 on SR 1806 (Blue Water Rd.) over a branch of Jones
Creek in Anson County. Area of Potential Effects (A.P.E.) is approximately 153 meters (500 ft.)
long and 23 meters (75 ft.) wide. Design plans show that the impacts will occur within the
existing right of way. The project is State-funded, will require Federal permits, and will require
easements.
SUMMARY OF CULTURAL RESOURCE5 REVIEW
Brief description of review activities, results of review, and conclusions:
The review included an examination of a topographic map (Lilesville, N.C.), the Anson County
soil survey, an aerial photograph, and listings of previously recorded sites, previous
archaeological surveys, and previous environmental reviews at the Office of 5tate Archaeology
(O.S.A.). The bridge is oriented east-west.
The topographic map shows the bridge is located in a narrow creek valley with steep slopes on
each side. The landform in the A.P.E. is floodplain on both sides of the bridge. There appear to
be drainage valleys in both the northwest and northeast quadrants. (Design plans show a stream
in the northeast quadrant next to the A.P.E.) The A.P.E. is shown as being wooded. There are
no structures near the A.P.E.
The Anson County soil survey shows the soils in the A.P.E. are Pacolet gravelly sandy loam (8-
15% slopes) on the west side, and Riverview loam (0-2% slopes), occasionally flooded, and
Pacolet sandy loam on the east side. Pacolet gravelly sandy loam is a well-drained soil found on
hillslopes on ridges. Riverview loam is a well-drained soil found on floodplains. In general,
floodplains with well-drained soil have a moderate to high potential for archaeological sites.
The aerial photograph shows the A.P.E. is wooded in the northwest and southeast quadrants.
The southwest and northeast quadrants appear to have been recently cleared. (A slightly older
aerial photograph shows these quadrants as being wooded.) There is an access road at the west
edge of the southwest quadrant.
A review of infortnation at the O.S.A. shows no previously recorded archaeological sites within
or adjacent to the A.P.E. The A.P.E. has not been previously surveyed for archaeological sites.
"No ARCHAEOLOGYSURVEY REQUIRED"fo�m for Minor Ti•ansporfafion Projecls as Qualified in fhe 2015 Programmnfic Agreement
1 of 7

Project Tracking No.
17-08-0029
The A.P.E. is not within any projects that have been reviewed by the State Historic Preservation
Office (HPO).
Brief Explanation of why the available information provides a reliable basis for reasonably
predict�rtg that there ure no unide�rtt�ed hrstaric properties in the APE:
The A.P.E. is located in a narrvw creek �alley. Although the soil in the floodplain on the east
side of the bridge is well-drained, the floodplain appears too narrow to have much potential for
archaeological sites. The northwest and northeast quadrants appear to be in drainage valleys.
Also, the design plans show the bridge replacement will not impact any land outside of the
existing right of way.
SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION
See attached: � Map(s) ❑ Previous Survey Info
❑ Photocopy of County Survey Notes
FINDING BY NCDOT ARCHAEOLOGIST
NO ARCHAEOLOGYSURVEYREQUIRED
Caleb 5mith
NCDOT ARCHAEOLOGIST II
❑ Photos ❑Correspondence
Other:
9/26/2017
Date
"No ARCHAEOLOGYSURVEYREQUIRED "fonn for Minor Trnnsportafion ProjeGs as Qualified in (he ?0/5 Programmnfic Agreemenf.
2 of 7

Pr•qject TrncGi�rg No. (/nterual Use�
1 %-�8-��2,9
HISTORIC ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPES
NO SURVEY REQUIRED FORM
This form only pertains to Historic Architecture and Landscapes for this project. It
is not valid for Archaeological Resources. You must consult separately with the
Archaeology Group.
PROJECT INFORMATION
Project No: County: Anson
WBSNo.: 17BP.10.R.85 Document MCC
T e:
Fe�l Aid No: N/A Funding: State Federal
Fe�lernl Yes No Permit USACE
Permit s: T e s:
Praiect Descripfion: Replace Bridge No. 35 on Sr 1806 (Wall Road) over branch of Jones Creek.
SUMMARY OF HISTORIC ARCHICTECTURE AND LANDSCAPES REVIEW
Description af review rrctivities. results. ar�d co►tclusions:
Review of HPO quad maps, HPO GIS information, historic designations roster, and indexes was
undertaken on August 29, 2017. Based on this review, there are no existing NR, SL, LD, DE, or
SS properties in the Area of Potential Effects, which is 300' from each end of the bridge and 75'
from the centerline each way. There are no properties within the APE, and Bridge No. 35, built
1962 is not eligible for NR listing. There are no National Register listed or eligible properties
and no survey is required. If design plans change, additional review will be required.
Wlev tlie auailrr6le in%rm�rtion nravides re reliable 6asis fnr rerrsn►rablv pred�ctin� tlrat �here
rrre no unrtfentified si�ni�cant liisfaric nrclei��ctural or lan�lscape resources in the proiect
area:
HPO quad maps and GIS information recording NR, SL, LD, DE, and SS properties for the
Anson County survey, Anson County GIS/Tax information, and Google Maps are considered
valid for the purposes of determining the likelihood of historic resources being present. There
are no National Register listed or eligible properties within the APE and no survey is required.
SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION
Map(s) ❑Previous Survey Info. ❑Photos ❑Correspondence ❑Design Plans
FINDING BY IYCDUT ARCHITECTURAL HISTORIAN
NCDOT Architectural Historian
-- NO SURVEY REQUIRED
Date
Hi.rinric Archilech�re and Lnnd.ccapes NO SURVIsY RIiQUl2/iD forni jor Minor �rmrsporrafion Projecls as Qualified in Ihe 2007 N�•ogi•anu�mlic Agree�rienl
Page 1 of 3