19920254 Ver 1_COMPLETE FILE_19920101

t

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
512 North Salisbury Street • Ralei h, North Carolina 27604
James G. Martin, Governor Mar. cn 24, 1 92 George T. Everett, Ph.D.
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary Director
Mr. Walter J. Muchowski
Willbros Butler Engineers, Inc.
802 North Howe Street
Southport, North Carolina 28461
Dear Mr. Muchowski:
SUBJECT; 401 WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION
Brunswick County
COE Project # 199201128
On March 10, 1992, I received a letter from the Corps of
Engineers advising that your project entitled Gas Pipeline from
Leland to Southport in Brunswick County qualifies for a
Nationwide Permit 12. Please be advised that this Nationwide
permit is not valid until a 401 Water Quality Certificate is
issued by the State of North Carolina.
Our existing regulations (15A NCAC 2H .0501(a)) require that
all applicants for 401 Certifications submit seven complete
copies of 401 Applications. These copies must be supplied by the
Division of Environmental Management to various state and federal
agencies.
Therefore, please complete the attached form and send six
additional copies (a total of seven copies) of your 401
Certification application so we can initiate the comprehensive
review required by our rules. If you have any questions, please
call me at 919-733-1786.
Sincerely,
Jahn R. Dorney
Applic.ltr/JRD
cc: Corps of Engineers Wilmington Regional Office
Wilmington DEM Regional Office
Mr. John R. Dorney REGIONAL O EKES
Division of Coastal Managemenrt
Asheville Fayetteville Mooresville Raleigh Washington Wilmington Winston-Salem
704/251-6208 919/486-1541 704/663-1699 919/733 -23 14 919/946-6481 919/395-3900 919/896-7007
Pollution Prevention Pavs
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

Pyrr
f
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
IN REPLY REFER TO
Regulatory Branch
March 3, 1992

Action ID. 199201128 and Nationwide Permit No. 12 ( tility Line Backfill and
Bedding)
Mr. Walter J. Muchowski
Willbros Butler Engineers, Inc.
802 North Howe Street
Southport, North Carolina 28461
Dear Mr. Muchowski:
Reference your application of September 19, 1991, for Department of the
Army authorization to place a Gas-Pipeline from Leland to Southport, Brunswick
County, North Carolina.
For the purposes of the Corps of Engineers' Regulatory Program, Title 33,
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 330.6, published in the Federal
Register on November 22, 1991, lists nationwide permits. Authorization,
pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, was provided for the discharge
of material for backfill or bedding for utility lines, including outfall and
intake structures, provided there is no change in pre-construction contours.
Your work is authorized by this nationwide permit provided it is
accomplished in strict accordance with the enclosed conditions. This
nationwide permit does not relieve you of the responsibility to obtain any
required State or local approval. Additionally, you should notify Mr. Jim
Gregson, Wilmington Regional Office, North Carolina Division of Coastal
Management, 127 Cardinal Drive Extension, Wilmington, North Carolina 28405,
Tel. [phone].
This verification will be valid for 2 years from the date of this letter
unless the nationwide authorization is modified, reissued, or revoked. Also,
this verification will remain valid for the 2 years if, during that period,
the NWP authorization is reissued without modification or the activity
complies with any subsequent modification of the NWP authorization. If during
the 2 years, the NWP permit authorization expires or is suspended or revoked,
or is modified, such that the activity would no longer comply with the terms
and conditions of the NWP permit, activities which have commenced (i.e., are
under construction) or are under contract to commence in reliance upon the NWP
will remain authorized provided the activity is completed within 12 months of
the date of the NWP's expiration, modification or revocation, unless
discretionary authority has been exercised on a case-by-case basis to modify,
suspend, or revoke the authorization.

-2-
Questions or comments may be addressed to Mr. Rudolf Schiener, Wilmington
Field Office, Regulatory Branch, telephone [phone].
Sincerely,
G. Wayne Wright
Chief, Regulatory Branch
Enclosure
Copies Furnished (without enclosure):
Mr. John Parker
North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health and
Natural Resources
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
Mr. John Dorney
Water Quality Section
Division of Environmental Management
Nortt Carolina Department of
;Environment, Health and
Natural Resources
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
Mr. Jim Gregson
Wilmington Regional Office
North Carolina Division of
Coastal Management
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, North Carolina 28405
a • ?l?f ryo; '
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
IN REPLY REFER TO
Regulatory Branch
March 16, 1992
Action ID. 199201128 and Nationwide Permit No, 12 (Utility Line Backfill and
Bedding) _. ?_.._.
Mr. Walter J. Muchowski
Willbros Butler Engineers, Inc.
802 North Howe Street
Southport, North Carolina 28461
Dear Mr. Muchowski:
MAR I

Reference your application of September 19, 1991, for Department of the
Army authorization to place a Gas-Pipeline from Leland to Southport, Brunswick
County, North Carolina.
For the purposes of the Corps of Engineers' Regulatory Program, Title 33,
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 330.6, published in the Federal
Register on November 22, 1991, lists nationwide permits. Authorization,
pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, was provided for the discharge
of material for backfill or bedding for utility lines, including outfall and
intake structures, provided there is no change in pre-construction contours.
Your work is authorized by this nationwide permit provided it is
accomplished in strict accordance with the enclosed conditions. This
nationwide permit does not relieve you of the responsibility to obtain any
required State or local approval. Additionally, you should notify Mr. Jim
Gregson, Wilmington Regional Office, North Carolina Division of Coastal
Management, 127 Cardinal Drive Extension, Wilmington, North Carolina 28405,
Tel. [phone].
This verification will be valid for 2 years from the date of this letter
unless the nationwide authorization is modified, reissued, or revoked. Also,
this verification will remain valid for the 2 years if, during that period,
the NWP authorization is reissued without modification or the activity
complies with any subsequent modification of the NWP authorization. If during
the 2 years, the NWP authorization expires or is suspended or revoked, or is
modified, such that the activity would no longer comply with the terms and
conditions of the NWP authorization, activities which have commenced (i.e.,
are under construction) or are under contract to commence in reliance upon the
NWP will remain authorized provided the activity is completed within 12 months
of the date of the NWP's expiration, modification or revocation, unless
discretionary authority has been exercised on a case-by-case basis to modify,
suspend, or revoke the authorization.

-2-
Questions or comments may be addressed to Mr. Rudolf Schiener, Wilmington
Field Office, Regulatory Branch, telephone [phone].
Sincerely,
G. Wayne Wright
Chief, Regulatory Branch
Enclosure
Copies Furnished (without enclosure):
Mr. John Parker
North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health and
Natural Resources
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
Mr. John Dorney
Water Quality Section
Division of Environmental Management
North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health and
Natural Resources
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
Mr. Jim Gregson
Wilmington Regional Office
North Carolina Division of
Coastal Management
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, North Carolina 28405-3845
Mr. Tony Gaw
Military Ocean Terminal
Sunny Point
MTEA-SU-FEL
Southport, North Carolina 28461

R-,y .04
a'"Smrcoy
.?
Vv
w..
FJUN I Y Q92

State of North -Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural ftesoumes
Division of Coastal Management
225 fdorth McDowell Street • Rakigh, North Carolina 276D2
James -G. Martin, Covernor Roger N. Schecter
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary Director
June 15, 1992
Mr. William Wilson
North Carolina Natural Can Corporation
PO Box 909
Fayetteville, NC 26302
RSFSRENCZ: DBM ID 92.254, Nationwide-Permit Application for an Activity
Located in Brunswick County, NC.
Dear Mr. Wilson:
A CAM General Permit has been issued for the above referenecd
Nationwide Permit Application by the kr Division of Ceastall 14 aegcatr mt
Wilmington Regional Office. A State position that the proposal. i.-
consistent with the North Carolina Coastal Management Program is
provided with the issuance of the LAMA Permit. No further authorisa=ion is
required from the NC Division o_° Coastal Management.
Thank you for your consideration. Please call me at [phone] if
you have any questions or need further assistance.
Sincar ly,
Stephen B. Benton
Consistency Coordinator
cc: Jim Herstine, NC Division of Coastal Management, Wilmington
C,)hn Dorney, NC Division of Environmental Management, Raleigh
Wilmington Dirtrict Engineer
ATTN: CESAW-CO-E
-r
PO. Flex 2766,7, R.1lcigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Teleplane 919-733-2293
Q
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
l? P.O. BOX 1890
i? WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
IN REPLY REFER TO June 4, 1992
Regulatory Branch
Action ID. 199201128
Mr. Martin C. Rogers
North Carolina Natural Gas Corporation
Post Office Box 909
150 Rowan St.
Fayetteville, North Carolina 28302-0909
Dear Mr. Rogers:
(1
?1UN ! x.1992
WETI_;idi:5 lii;i
WATER OUAIITY `,I:, i s
This is in reply to your letter of May 22, 1992, notifying this office of
the change from a directional bore to a conventional subaqueous crossing at
Town Creek for the natural gas line installation from Leland to Southport,
-11runstwick County, North Carolina.
Please refer the Nationwide Permit No. 12 (Utility Line and Bedding)
issued to Wilbros Butler Engineers, Inc. on March 16, 1992. The proposed
change is authorized provided all terms and conditions are complied with. You
should note that the maximum corridor width for such crossings is restricted
to no more than 40 feet as to the proposed 50 feet as stated in your letter.
We further recommend that you notify Mr. Jim Gregson, Wilmington Regional
Office, North Carolina Division of Coastal Management. This change may
require individuall 401 water quality certification.
Any questions or comments regarding this issue may be addressed to Mr.
Rudolf Schiener, Wilmington Field Office, Regulatory Branch, telephone (919)
251-4629.
Sincerely,
G. Wayne Wright
Chief, Regulatory Branch
-mwAFM
AMV, -V
-2-
Copies Furnished:
Mr. John Parker
North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health and
Natural Resources
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
?Mr. John Dorney
Water Quality Section
Division of Environmental Management
North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health and
Natural Resources
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
Mr. Jim Gregson
Wilmington Regional Office
North Carolina Division of
Coastal Management
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, North Carolina 28405-3845
IMPORTANT
To __
Date Time
WHILE YOU WERE OUT
M
of _
Phone
AREA CODE NUMBER EXTENSION
N?;U
Messag
' S ?-Rli/l.?lA
Signed
TELEPHONED PLEASE CALL
CALLED TO SEE YOU WILL CALL AGAIN
WANTS TO SEE YOU URGENT
RETURNED YOUR CALL
N.C. Dept. of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
1Z01
Printed on Recycled Paper
IMPORTANT
To
Date Time
WHILE YOU WERE OUT
M- 4f? t sc,--
of
Phone
AREA CODE NUMBER EXTENSION
,) 41 -
'
Mesa a
?V
Signed
TELEPHONED PLEASE CALL
CALLED TO SEE YOU WILL CALL AGAIN
WANTS TO SEE YOU URGENT
RETURNED YOUR CALL
N.C. Dept. of Environment. Health, and Natural Resources
PIFI01
Printed on Recycled Paper
d •M StA1[ p
y emu„
Sa?
Y
•py?r • pY
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
James G. Martin, Governor
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary
Mr. Martin C. Rogers
N.C. Nat1ara3 Gas
Post Office Box 909
J.50 Rowan Street
Fayetteville, North
Dear Mr. Rogers:
,:Trine 3, 1992
Carolina 28302-0909
Subject: Proposed Fill in Waters and Wetlands
NCNG pipeline construction
Brunswick County
DEM Project #92254
George T. Everett, Ph.D.
Director
Upon review of your xequest for Water Quality Certification
to place fill material in 5.78 acres of wetlands for NCNG
pipeline installation located at Town Creek, in New Hanover
County, we have determined that the proposed fill can be covered
by General Water Quality Certification No. 2664 issued January
21, 1992. A copy of the General Certification is attached. This
Certification may be used in qualifying for coverage under Corps
of Engineers' Nationwide Permit No. 12. The additional 1.1 acres
of wetland fill needed to cross Town Creek is approved only if
drilling is not feasible. If a permanent corridor wider than 10
feet is needed, separate approval from DEM will be needed.
If you have any questions, please contact John Dorney at
919/733-1786 or 919/733-1787.
Sincerely,
.e ge T. Everett
GTE:JD I
Attachment
cc: Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Wilmington DEM Regional Office
Mr. John Dorney
Central Files kF(A)NAI. OFFI(]S
Atihcvdle Fayetteville ?ltxtrctivillc Raleigh Watihington Wilmington
704/251-6208 919/480-1541 714'(4) ; 1699 919/57147(X) 919/9460481 919/395-3(XX)
Pollution Prevention Pays
I,O ling ?953 s, Raleigh, North (?arohna 270200535 Tlephonc 919-733-7015
.A,iIqua Op??rtninm Arts-„aI-- V nnn Implo?ai
Winston-Salem
919/89&7007

?yys®
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
James G. Martin, Governor June 3, 1992 George T Everett, Ph.D.
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary Director
Mr. Martin Rodgers
Director of Engineering Services
N. C. Natural Gas Corporation
P.O. Box 909
Fayetteville, N.C. 28302
Dear Mr. Rodgers:
Subject: Proposed Fill in Wetlands
Natural gas pipeline from Leland to Southport
DEM Project #92254, COE # 199201128
Upon review of your request for Water Quality Certification
to place fill material in 5.78 acres of wetlands for
install 27 miles of pipeline from Leland to Southport located at
in Brunswick County, we have determined that the proposed fill
can be covered by General Water Quality Certification No. 2664
issued January 21, 1992. A copy of the General Certification is
attached. This Certification may be used in qualifying for
coverage under Corps of Engineers' Nationwide Permit No. 12.
Additional conditions are 1) that 1.1 acres of wetland fill for
the pipeline under Town Creek is allowed only if drilling under
the creek is not feasible and 2) that a permanent corridor
greater than 10 feet wide will require an additional
Certification from DEM.
If you have any questions, please contact John Dorney at
919/733-5083.
Sincerely,
orge T. Everett
GTE:JD `
Attachment
cc: Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Corps of Engineers Wilmington Regional Office
Wilmington DEM Regional Office
Mr. John Dorney
Central Files REGIONAI-OFFICES
A,heville I ayettmIlc M,X)rc.vdlc Raleigh WaJ)ington Wilmington Vlimton Salem
741/251-6208 919/480-1541 7(W063-1091) 919/571-47(X) 919/94(,(481 919/395-39(x) 919/89)-7(X)7
Pollution Prevention Pays
1)0. Box 29;35, Raleigh, North Carolina 2762.0-0535 "Mcphonc 919-733 7015
An I quad Upl-u tv A)hnnauv - A, n,,, I mph"T
h;
! • ..ST 7z
y
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
P.O. Box 29535
Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
TELECOPY TO:

FAX NUMBER
FROM: F
I, I
C7y l
PHONE.
NO. OF PAGES, INCLUDING COVER SHEET:
COMMENTS: O CQA
WATER QUALITY SECTION
FAX # [phone]

NEW FILE REPORT
( JUN 03 '92 02:51PM l
*
*
* FILE FILE TYPE DEPT. PAGES GROUP REMOTE TERMINAL
* NO. CODE IDENTIFICATION
*
* 022 SEND IMMEDIATE 4 89194830336
* *
* *
* *
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
* *
*
*
* REMAINING CALL CAPACITY 399
*
il- _ * `
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
Date:
To:
From:
Through:
June 4, 1992
John Dorney
Planning Branch
James H. Gregson--Jt
Wilmington lagLol OfC-fice
Dave Adkins
Wilmington nal office
zlx
vs
6
Subject: Regional Office Review and Recommendations
Application for Permit for Excavation and/or Fill
Central Office Permit #92254
North Carolina Natural Gas Corporation
Line 99, Southport Lateral
Brunswick County
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is proposing to install 27
miles of 12" natural gas pipeline from Leeland, NC to Southport,
NC. Under the original proposal, the pipeline crossing of Town
Creek and the CP&L discharge canal would be directionally bored.
Total wetland impacts under the original proposal were 4.68
acres. On May 26, 1992, Bob Stroud and I met with NCNG personnel
at the Town Creek crossing to discuss a change in the original
application proposal. By letter dated May 22, 1992, NCNG
notified the review agencies that it would be necessary to
abandon the directional bore of Town Creek and the adjacent
wetlands. The new proposal included the conventional ditching
and trenching of the pipeline through the Town Creek area.
Clearing of this area would affect 1.1 additional wetland acres.
Recent conversations with Marty Rogers with NCNG indicate that
the directional boring of Town Creek may still be a possibility,
however, NCNG wishes to continue with the application procedures
under the new proposal. I informed Mr. Rogers that in order to
qualify for a General Certification, permanent access corridors
through wetland areas could not exceed 10 feet. Mr. Rogers
stated that if 10 foot corridors were later found not to be
acceptable, a individual permit would be applied for.
The project has been reviewed to determine impacts to water
quality. The following comments have been provided.
1. The project will require a 401 Water Quality Certification.
2. The project complies with the General 401 Water Quality
Certification No. 2664 for Utility Line Backfilling and
Bedding.
92254.Jun
Page Two
3. It is also recommended that the Certification specify that
the ditching and trenching of the pipeline across Town Creek
is only approved if other less environmentally damaging
methods are exhausted and that it is still recommended that
the directional boring of the creek be considered as a less
environmentally damaging alternative.
This office has no objection to the project as proposed.
JHG:92254.Jun
cc: Wilmington Regional Office Files
Central Files
NORTH CAROUNAE4-CORPORATION
NaturaGas
POST OFFICE BOX 909 • 150 ROWAN ST. • 483.0315
FAYETTEVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA 28302.0909
May 27, 1992
Mr. Robert Stroud
Wilmington Regional Office
North Carolina Division of Coastal Management
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, North Carolina 28405-3845
Dear Mr. Stroud:
JUN - 3 IV
On Tuesday, May 26, North Carolina Natural Gas and Patterson Wilder
(contractor) representatives met with you and Mr. Jim Gregson of
the Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources. After
reviewing the proposed crossing at the job site, you and Mr.
Gregson approved the open cut crossing of Town Creek and the
adjoining wet area subject to the following condition:
1. Shift the center line of the pipeline to maintain the short
construction side adjacent to the D.O.D. railroad
right-of-way.
2. No additional right-of-way shall be cleared through the wet
area.
3. A pre-construction original grade survey shall be obtained
across Town Creek and the wet area.
4. All ditch materials through the creek and wet area should be
stored on site in "pens or boxes" constructed utilizing silt
fences to minimize sedimentation from run-off.
5. Trees and existing brush should be removed where necessary to
facilitate No. 4, and to allow for the ditchline to be shifted
more near to the railroad right-of-way.
6. Town Creek shall be ditched from both banks.
7. Ditch material from Town Creek and the wet area shall be
removed as detailed in No. 4. If this material is
non-suitable as ditch back fill material, it should be
replaced with clean sand, sandbags would be allowed on the
creek banks and bottom.

Page 2
8. The site should be restored to original grade as soon as
possible following back-filling of the ditch.
9. Construction through the creek and swamp shall be completed in
the shortest time frame possible (10-20 days).
Please call if you have questions, comments, or suggestions
regarding construction through the Town Creek area. Attached is a
copy of the "job site" agreement.
Yours truly,
Martin C. odgers
Director of Engineering Services
Attachment
MCR/dbb
cc: Mr. John R. Dorney
Water Quality Planning
Division of Environmental Management
North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
P.O. Box 29535
Raleigh, N.C. 27626-0535
Mr. G. Wayne Wright
Chief, Regulatory Branch
Wilmington District
Corps of Engineers
Department of the Army
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, N.C. 28402-1890
Mr. B. Clinton Jobe
Director, State Property Office
116 West Jones Street
Raleigh, N.C. 27603-8003

Page 3
Mr. Jim Gregson
Water Quality Section
Division of Environmental Management
North Carolina Department of Environment
Health and Natural Resources
P.O. Box 27687
Raleigh, N.C. 27611-7687
Mr. Daniel Sams, P.E.
Regional Engineer
Land Quality Section
North Carolina Department of. Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
P.O. Box 27687
Raleigh, N.C. 27611-7687
Mr. Denis Stewart
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
512 N. Salisbury Street
Raleigh, N.C. 27604-1188
C. B. Wells
W. Wilson
T. D. Davis
W. W. Todd
B. S. Jackson
C. J. Monroe
File

S °1 t 9 39 S- 3 Cl
Tczea a.6 . - _40? 3S"a - ZOo -
/? ??L7' o f?/?E 9'?? ?D T9?-?ti7 y?l A?). pL. 0. /Q /? rho w
S ?i?G.?r ,4s Passic3c? ??S`) AdJ?T C-iif W1?7. Wide
n

---------- ------------------------ -
- z
IMPORTANT
r?
To

Time
M,
?HILE YOU ERE OUT
M_
of
Phone
AREA CODE NUMBER EXTENSION
TELEPHONED PLEASE CALL
CALLED TO SEE YOU WILL CALL AGAIN
WANTS TO SEE YOU URGENT
RETURNED YOUR CALL
Message
s --- N w
Z
J
0 Signed
N.C. Dept. of Environment, Health, d Natural Resources
/(fin,
Gk d n Recycled Paper

NORTH CAROUNA_
Natures/ Gas
CORPORATION
Mr. G. Wayne Wright
Chief, Regulatory Branch
Wilmington District
Corps of Engineers
Department of the Army
P. O. Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890
p [ C? L 0 ';V' .
I? 2 7 ?
Re: Line 99, Southport Lateral, COE Project: 199201128
Town Creek
Dear Mr. Wright:
Due to circumstances beyond the control of North Carolina Natural
Gas Corporation, its contractor, and agent (Willbros Butler
Engineers, Inc.), it has become necessary to abandon the
Directional bore of Town Creek and the adjacent wetland area.
NCNG,s Contractor began the directional bore from the north
approach to the wetland area last Tuesday. He encountered a
formation of Limestone at a depth of thirteen feet. Continuing to
bore through Limestone would add approximately $250,000. to the
cost of the bore through soil as it was bid.
Boring was suspended and the applicability of crossing this area
utilizing conventional ditching and trenching methods was
addressed. Installation by conventional methods would result in
approximately 1658 feet of construction through wetland adjacent to
and including Town Creek. Clearing a fifty-foot wide strip of
right-of-way would affect 1.9 acres etland. The impact of
construction could further be reduc d clearing a thirty foot
wide strip of right-of-way. Only 1. acres would be cleared
utilizing the reduced right-of-way 'd Where possible, stumps
will be removed only were absolutely ecessary to allow ditching
and backfill operations.
Through this area, the pipeline right of-way lies adjacent to the
existing right-of-way of the Departure t of Defense Railroad. This
route was chosen in order that the a vironmental impact resulting
from clearing and construction wo d be minimized. However,
because of the terrain at the location of the railroad bridge at
Town Creek, we were forced to shift the right-of-way slightly east
of the railroad right-of-way. At the furthest point, the right-of-
ways are 85 feet apart. Attachment No.l is a portion of the
project alignment sheet showing the,Town Creek area.
n
POST OFFICE BOX 909 • 150 ROWAN ST. • 483.0315
FAYETTEVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA 28302.0909
May 22, 1992
.OF
-2-
Construction through Town Creek and the adjacent wet area is
proposed as follows:
1. Conventional ditching utilizing equipment mats will be
performed up to the approach of both banks of Town Creek.
2. A box-section consisting of the actual creek crossing will
be prefabricated. The portion of this box section to be
installed in the bottom of Town Creek will be concrete
coated.
3. The creek banks will be cut and a ditch will be cut into
the three foot deep silt in the creek bottom.
4. The box-section will be installed across the creek and the
silt will be allowed to naturally cover the concrete coated
pipe. Town creek is approximately seventeen feet deep at
the crossing point.
5. Backfilling and all remedial erosion and sedimentation
measures will be performed as soon as the pipe is installed
through the creek and wet area.
Installation of the Town Creek crossing by this method could be
accomplished within several days. The work could also be scheduled
to avoid the natural spawning season of the fish in Town Creek.
Reportedly, an early June construction date through the creek area
would miss most of the spawning season. A cross-section of the
creek crossing is presented in Attachment No.2.
Please expedite your review of this proposed change. Since verbal
indication of tentative approval has been received from most
parties receiving this correspondence, NCNG does not plan on
delaying construction.
Please let me known if you require additional information.
Yours truly,
Martin C. Rodgers
Director of Engineering Services
att
cc: Mr. John R. Dorney
Water Quality Planning
Division of Environmental Management
North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
P.O. Box 29535
Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
-3-
Mr. B. Clinton Jobe
Director, State Property Office
116 West Jones Street
Raleigh, NC 27603-8003
Mr. Robert Stroud
Wilmington Regional Office
North Carolina Division of Coastal Management
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, NC 28405-3845
Mr. Jim Gregson
Water Quality Section
Division of Environmental Management
North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
P.O. Box 27687
Raleigh, NC 27611-7687
Mr. Daniel Sams, P.E.
Regional Engineer
Land Quality Section
North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resouyrces
P.O. Box 27687
Raleigh, NC 27611-7687
Mr. Denis Stewart
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
512 N. Salisbury Street
Raleigh, NC 27604-1188
C. B. Wells
W. Wilson
T. D. Davis
W. W. Todd
B. S. Jackson
C. J. Monroe
SANDY SOIL
0 <2> O
r,

O O ? 0
4887' Q,
+ 71' cy 160'N -1578'00 5641

co
P ATTACHMENT NO I
CLASS 1
'^ -a + +
Y
?' Y W

Z F- W
W F- Y
Q Z
QQ D
U 3Q
co
-.?.?.
W W
00
3
O WO
O W
6 a_ CL F- 0(1-
m
Z W F- Z
O r-GD N 00O O
re)
+
LD + +
D LO
? v
+ + + +
0000 03
_
Ln n Ln Ln Ln Lc)
PROPOSED NCNG P/L
O PLAN
SCALE: 1" = 60' PLAN REF.
T.B.M. TOP I BEAM PILING BOOK 1, PAGES 51.52
NORTHEAST SIDE TOWN CR EEK
N.E. ABUTMENT

cr
Y cr
W

ZF- W
W ?-
QZ

3
m

U m

?

Li L l
00
Z W
O Li
O
W
L7 Or n-

00 F- (, a-
Cj
cm O
z ter- c? WH z
? a0 cV O O ?
+ ++ '7 ++ +
tO co LO r+ ao cn a0
Ln Ln Ln Ln Lo U-) Ln
100 - - 100
3' MIN.
L
90 - N. - 90
80 - - 80
70 - SEE
- 70
----------- Na.4
160 't 12" X 0.375" W.T., GR X-42
60 - HIGH PRESSURE PIPELINE - 60
NOTE: 12" X 0.188" W.T.
12
0.
1) CROSSING TO BE PREFABRICATED. X
CONCRETE
2) SEE ENVIRONMENT MANAGEMENT P LAN PROFILE COATED PIPE
3) PIPELINE TO BE CONCRETE COATED IN
WET AREAS, AND CREEK BOTTOM. VERT. SCALE: 1" = 30'
4) 3' OF SILT. HORIZ. SCALE: 1" = 60'
PROFILE REF.
BOOK PI, PAGE 32,33
REFERENCE ALIGN. SHT. 99-3

NORTH CAROLINA NATURAL GAS CORP.

ENGINEERING DEPT. - FAYETTEVILLE, N.C.

PROPOSED PIPELINE CROSSING
TOWN CREEK
> 0 ISSUED FOR PERMIT 9
8
M
P
i PIO REVISION BT DATE APP .
.
.
BRUNSWICK C NORTH CAROLINA
:
BUTLGR eNGNMO
W PPR
SC ACE A NOTED DATE 1 - -92
I
[
WILLBROS
:1 .
_
' W NAWN By D CHECKED BY JJC
CG
STR-99-5
Pmo
.
zfa3s[105.1]torn.COr, -ATTACHMENT NO.2 REVISED 5-22-92

NORTH CAROLINA.
Natural
Gas
CORPORATION
May 5, 1992
I
s
Mr. John Dorney
Water Quality Planning T
Division of Environmental Management
North Carolina Departmgrnt of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
P.O. Box 29535
Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535
Dear Mr. Dorney:
RE: Line 99, Southport Lateral
Joint Application Form, Nationwide Permit 12,
401 Certification
COE Project: 199201128
Dear Mr. Dorney:
MAY 12 W2
TL ANDS GKOi.ip
UALITY SEch'v.;
Per your March 24, 1992 letter to Mr. Walter J. Muchowski of Willbros Butler
Engineers, Inc., we are forwarding for your distribution and review six (6)
copies of a Joint Application Form including required supporting materials. Also
included are copies of the Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan approval letter
with Permit, and a copy of the Corps of Engineers Nationwide Permit No. 12
approval letter for your convenience.
The seventh copy of this certification package is being hand delivered to Mr. Jim
Gregson, at your Wilmington office. Please expedite your review and approval.
North Carolina Natural Gas is ready to immediately begin construction on this
pipeline. Additional delay could interfere with our ability to meet our
contractual obligations to provide natural gas service.
If you require additional information or I can be of any assistance in expediting
this review, please do not hesitate to call.
Yours truly,
Martin C. Rodgers
Director of Engineering Services
Enclosures
MCR/dbb
cc: W. Wilson
T. D. Davis
J. Gregson
J. Parker
T. Gaw
POST OFFICE BOX 909 • 150 ROWAN ST. • 4830315
FAYETTEVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA 28302.0909
DEM ID: 7 ?5 ACTION ID:
199201128
< JOINT APPLICATION FORM FOR
NATIONWIDE PERMITSITHAT REQUIRE NOTIFICATION TO THE DISTRICT ENGINEER
NATIONWIDE PERMITS HAT REQUIRE SECTION 401 CERTIFICATION CONCURRENCE
NATIONWIDE PERMITS HAT REQUIRE INDIVIDUAL SECTION 401 CERTIFICATION
WILMINGTON DISTRICT ENGINEER
CORP OF ENGINEERS
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
POST OFFICE 1890
WILMINGTON, NC 28402-1890
ATTN; CESAW-CO-E
Telephone [phone]
WATER QUALITY PLANNING
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
NC DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH,
AND NATURAL RESOURCES
P.O. BOX 29535
RALEIGH, NC 27626-0535
ATTN: MR. JOHN DORNEY
Telephone [phone]
ONE (1) COPY OF THIS COMPLETED APPLICATION SHOULD BE SENT TO THE CORPS
OF ENGINEERS. SEVEN (7) COPIES SHOULD BE SENT TO THE N.C. DIVISION OF
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLEASE PRINT.
1. OWNERS NAME : North Carolina Natural Gas Corporation
2. OWNERS ADDRESS: Post Office Box 909
• Fayetteville, N.C. 28302
3. OWNERS PHONE NUMBER (HOME):
(WORK) : [phone]
4. IF APPLICABLE: AGENT'S NAME OR RESPONSIBLE CORPORATE OFFICIAL,
ADDRESS, PHONE NUMBER: William Wilson
Post Office Box 909
Fayetteville, N.C. 28302
5. LOCATION OF PLANNED WORK (ATTACH MAP).
COUNTY: Brunswick
NEAREST TOWN OR CITY: Leland/Southport
SPECIFIC LOCATION (INCLUDE ROAD NUMBERS, LANDMARKS, ETC.):
Begins at existing NCNG pipeline north of Leland Industrial Park, prnc-PPctc cnuth arrngc i1S E14
74/76 to follow Department of Defense propcrty and east- Pdge nf railroad right-of-way to
Boiling Springs, then following CP&L powerline right-of-way to south of the Nuclear Power Plant,
terminating at AEM Facility.
6. NAME OF CLOSEST STREAM/RIVER: Town Creek
7. RIVER BASIN: Cape Fear (not involved)
8. IS THIS PROJECT LOCATED IN A WATERSHED CLASSIFIED AS TROUT, SA,
HQW, ORW, WS I, OR WS II? YES ( ) NO (X)
9. HAVE ANY SECTION 404 PERMITS BEEN PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED FOR USE ON
THIS PROPERTY? YES ( ) NO (X)
10. ESTIMATED TOTAL NUMBER OF ACRES OF WETLANDS LOCATED ON PROJECT
SITE: 4.68
11. NUMBER OF ACRES OF WETLAND IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT:
FILLED: 0
DRAINED: 0
FLOODED: t 0
EXCAVATED : 4.68
TOTAL IMPACTED: 4.68
12. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED WORK (ATTACH PLANS) : install by conventional
methods, 27 miles of 12" Natural Gas Pipeline from Leland, N.C. to Southport, N.C. Pipeline will
be buried a m mmu m of 36 in depth, Town Creek and CP&L discharge canal will be directionally
bored, pipe shall be encased in concrete through all wet areas.
13. PURPOSE OF PROPOSED WORK. Provide natural gas service to Archer Daniels Midland
Plant and to Brunswick County Franchise Area.
14. STATE REASONS WHY THE APPLICANT BELIEVES THAT THIS ACTIVITY MUST
BE CARRIED OUT IN WETLANDS. ALSO, NOTE MEASURES TAKEN TO MINIMIZE
WETLAND IMPACTS. Route follows existing utility and railway corridors where possible.
This route affects wetland areas as little as possible. Town Creek wet area and CP&L Discharge
Canal will be directionally bored thus leaving the surface grade unaltered.
15. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO CONTACT THE U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
(USFWS) AND/OR NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE (NMFS) REGARDING
THE PRESENCE OR ANY FEDERALLY LISTED OR PROPOSED FOR LISTING
ENDANGERED OR THREATENED SPECIES OR CRITICAL HABITAT IN THE PERMIT
AREA THAT MAY BE AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT. HAVE YOU DONE
SO? YES (X) NO ( )
16. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO CONTACT THE STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION
OFFICER (SHPO) REGARDING THE PRESENCE OF HISTORIC PROPERTIES IN
THE PERMIT AREA WHICH MAY BE AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT.
HAVE YOU DONE SO? YES (X) NO ( )
RESPONSE FROM THE SHPO SHOULD BE ATTACHED.
17. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUIRED BY DEM:
A. WETLAND DELINEATION MAP SHOWING ALL WETLANDS, STREAMS, AND
LAKES ON THE PROPERTY.
B. IF AVAILABLE, REPRESENTATIVE PHOTOGRAPH OF WETLANDS TO BE
IMPACTED BY PROJECT. Alignment Sheet with aerial photo backdrop is attached.
C. IF DELINEATION WAS PERFORMED BY A CONSULTANT, INCLUDE ALL
DATA SHEETS RELEVANT TO THE PLACEMENT OF THE DELINEATION LINE.
N/A
D. IF A STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN IS REQUIRED FOR THIS PROJECT,
ATTACH COPY. N/A
E. WHAT IS LAND USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTY? Timber
F. IF APPLICABLE, WHAT IS PROPOSED METHOD OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL?
N/A
S S 92-
OWNER'S SIGNA DATE
TITLE: Director of Engineering Services
North Carolina Natural Gas Corporation
r
W

1

(M W 0.?
J1
W
0 0 ? .
-Yr .r
E aes w
N * ? or

N yT w
LEGEND 0 r
E NORRH CAROLINA NATURAL GAS COIIPd1ATION w
IO LINE SIZE
EXISTING LINES
O Y•
O •`
OE IOL r !
}
!

Z •

,1 ti.y O
M

' 1
I p

'IUUGI P
-

.P

r 1? " u
0

• s
S t
O
wr ,A `\ •
• ?
1
Z •

i17
?.? "+r. • I III?I A
t • ;J. W
!
/ARTY.
IOM1
A '?' r r r M- MK
1.
r-r
raw 6
f: BRUNSWICK CC
r? NORTH CAROLIN/
101111011111111, N on
. r
NORTH GROLM DeMMPff Of TWIN
DMSIO.1 Of NIONW/dS-fiA1N10 NO RSIM1
Y.S.DWAII'11OR CM 1SANNOMM
/ swim 1SO?MM1?Alivan om"
Am J y
O `? NiW
o •raa••• r•wwwr era
Yw for •••Yr ar wart. er•a
wr •oYr r a ru 1. 1?M.
/ '?, N01RN CAiIOLII?I???s
?ilRon
' ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
2110 Anderson Ferry Road ¦ Cincinnati, Ohio 45238 ¦ Telephone [phone] ¦ FAX [phone]
Project # 7019 April 29, 1992
Combination Phase I and Phase II Archaeological
Survey and Eligibility Testing for the Wilmington
to Southport 12-inch Lateral Proposed Gas
' Transmission Line Located in
Brunswick County, North Carolina
1 By:
Laura Cl f rd
Principal Investigator
1 Conducted for:
North Carolina Natural Gas Company
150 Rowan Street
Fayetteville, North Carolina 28302-0909
1
Conducted by:
' KEMRON Environmental Services, Inc.
1 2110 Anderson Ferry Road
Cincinnati, Ohio 45238
ga Protecting Our Environmental Future
Printed on
Recycled Paper

ABSTRACT
During the months of March and April, 1992, KEMRON Environmental Services, Inc.
' conducted a Phase I survey for North Carolina Natural Gas Company for a proposed 13,500
feet (4,114 meters) of natural gas transmission line. The length of the entire line extends
between Southport and Leland, North Carolina. With the exception of the 13,500 feet, the
' line will parallel existing pipeline right-of-way. The 13,500 feet that underwent Phase I
archaeological survey will be a new right-of-way.
' A single prehistoric site (K-1) was identified during the Phase I survey. This site was
originally identified as being approximately 150m2 as it occurs within the project corridor.
Prehistoric artifacts recovered included a biface of silicified argillite, two lithic flakes, and
13 ceramic sherds. A Phase II strategy was submitted to the North Carolina State Historic
Preservation Office on April 13, 1992. The Eligibility plan was given verbal approval on
' April 16, 1992 (Steven Claggett, personal communication).
A combination of 5m interval shovel testing and six 1x1 meter excavation units comprised
' the eligibility testing at site K-1. Artifacts recovered during the Phase II eligibility testing
from the six lxlm excavation units included two projectile point/bifaces, lithic debitage, and
ceramic material. One of the projectile point/bifaces recovered is a Morrow Mountain
' projectile point dating to the Middle Archaic period (approximately 4500 B.C.). No
evidence of cultural features was present. The pottery recovered at the site includes two
major types of tempering agent, sand tempered or fiber. Culturally, the pottery may be
related to several phases or groups, including Stallings of the Late Archaic into the Early
' . Woodland, and Cape Fear/Mount Pleasant of the Middle to Late Woodland time periods.
' The apparent lack of sub-surface features and a general lack of stratigraphic separation
indicate that although there is potential for artifact recovery, data on chronology and
adaptation will not be obtainable from this site as it occurs within the proposed project
' corridor. This site is not considered to contain information that could contribute
significantly to prehistory or history (Criterion D of the requirements for inclusion in the
National Register of Historic Places).
No other archaeological sites were encountered within the project right-of-way. It is
therefore the recommendation of KEMRON that no further archaeological work be
required for the Wilmington-Southport 12-inch Lateral and that construction be permitted
to proceed as scheduled through the area surveyed.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ABSTRACT ...................................................... 2
TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................. 3
LIST OF FIGURES ................................................. 5
LIST OF TABLES .................................................. 6
INTRODUCTION .................................................. 1
ENVIRONMENTAL OVERVIEW ..................................... 5
Physiography and Geology .................................... . 5
Soils ....................................................... 5
Climate ..................................................... 8
Flora and Fauna .............................................. 9
CULTURAL OVERVIEW .......................................... 11
Paleo-Indian ................................................ 11
The Archaic Period ........................................... 12
Woodland Period ............................................. 13
LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................... 15
FIELD METHODOLOGY .......................................... 18
PhaseI .................................................... 18
Phase II .................................................... 18
LAB METHODOLOGY ............................................ 19
Lithic Artifact Analysis ........................................ 19
Prehistoric Ceramics .......................................... 23
Historical Artifact Analysis ..................................... 24
PHASEI RESULTS ............................................... 25
Field Work ................................................. 25
Phase I Materials Recovered . _ _ _ _ 34
Phase I Summary and Recommendations ........................... 35
PHASE II RESULTS ............................................... 36
Field Results ................................................ 36
Phase II Materials Recovered ................................... 41
Lithic Material .............................................. 41
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
Prehistoric Ceramics .......................................... 42
Phase II Summary and Recommendations .......................... 44
REFERENCES CITED ............................................. 45
APPENDIX A: Artifact Data From Shovel Tests
APPENDIX B: Artifact Data From Units
APPENDIX C: Artifact Illustrations
APPENDIX D: Profile Drawings
APPENDIX E. Resumes of Key Personnel
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Figure 1. Map of North Carolina showing project area . ...................... 2
Figure 2. Portion of Funston North Carolina topographic quadrangle showing
project area . ................................................. 4
Figure 3. Key and paradigm used for classifying lithic artifacts .............. 20
Figure 4. Figure showing Transect 1 .................................... 26
Figure 5. Figure showing Transect 2 .................................... 27
Figure 6. Figure showing Transect 3 .................................... 28
Figure 7. Figure showing Transect 4 .................................... 30
Figure 8. Figure showing Transect 5 .................................... 31
Figure 9. Figure showing Transects 6 and 7 . ............................. 33
Figure 10. Portion of Funston topographic map showing site location. .......... 37
Figure 11. Figure showing excavation layout at site K-1 ...................... 38

1

LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table 1. Prehistoric pottery recovered from Phase I investigations .............. 34
Table 2. Prehistoric pottery recovered from Phase II investigations . ............ 42

F?l

INTRODUCTION
This report documents the background research, survey methods, and findings resulting from
a cultural resources management survey of the proposed Wilmington to Southport 12-inch
Lateral Project Area in Brunswick County, North Carolina (Figure 1). The survey was
conducted at the request of North Carolina Natural Gas Company (NCNG) by KEMRON
Environmental Services, Incorporated. Mr. Martin Rodgers, Director of Engineering
Services, was the NCNG contact person. Fieldwork was directed by Paul Thomas during
the months of March and April, 1992.
The Phase I and Phase H investigations were carried out in compliance with Section 106 of
the National Preservation Act of 1966 as amended. The Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission's (FERC) requirements for the performance of cultural resource investigations,
National Park Service guidelines (36CFR800, 36CFR66) and the Advisory Council on
Historic Preservation standards provided the basis for archaeological field work
methodology. In particular, the Secretary of the Interior's Standards Historic Preservation (48
FR 44716-447420), and a Phase II strategy developed in consultation with the North
Carolina State Historic Preservation Office guided the conduct of archaeological fieldwork.
The purpose of conducting an archaeological survey is three-fold. First, it is necessary to
' locate and identify any cultural resources within a proposed project corridor. Second, upon
their identification, the potential significance of these resources (as it pertains to inclusion
in the National Register of Historic Places) must be determined. Finally, determination of
avoidance or mitigation procedures need to be made. To accomplish these goals, as they
relate to the Wilmington to Southport 12-inch Lateral, the following tasks were defined:
' Project planning.
• Data Recovery. Interviews with local historians,
' residents, and archaeologists. A literature search
and physiographic review. Field reconnaissance.
' Artifact analysis. Identification of age, form, and
function.
• Report preparation.
• Curation.
The analysis and report preparation were the responsibility of Principal Investigator, Laura
' Clifford, Field Director, Paul Thomas, and Senior Archaeologist Jeannine Kreinbrink. Paul
Thomas was responsible for reporting field results and graphics, with contributions by Tim
King and. Ed Cooper. Patricia Hartman served as Laboratory Director. Field Crew
Members included Ed Cooper (Crew Chief), Theresa Kintz, and Patricia Hartman. Copies

H
cd
ti
cd
U
O
N
bA
?i
3
0
0
cd
N
0
Z
0
a
cd

14
(1)
a
on
-4
N
r

' of this report are on file with the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office, North
Carolina Natural Gas Company, and KEMRON.

The following report documents the results of the Phase I and Phase II archaeological
survey and eligibility testing for one project area in Brunswick County, North Carolina. The
project area is located in the Inner Coastal Plain, but falls near the Tidewater area
boundary (Phelps 1983:3). The proposed line will consist of 13,500 feet (4,114m) of 12-inch
pipeline from Survey Station 782 + 95 to Survey Station 917 + 95 as depicted on the project
corridor illustration (Figure 2).
The proposed corridor and facilities will be constructed on new and existing pipeline right-
of-ways. In areas where the proposed pipeline parallels an existing line, the permanent
right-of-way will be increased by X meters (10 feet). The existing right-of-way will be
utilized for construction working space. The permanently maintained right-of-way on new
corridors will be X meters (50 feet). The total width of maintained right-of-way will be --m
(50 feet), unless the width is reduced to comply with construction under Nationwide Permit
No. 12. Where the corridor parallels existing line, the ROW width will vary from 100 feet
to less than 50 feet. NCNG will only maintain the additional 10 ft strip for which they have
acquired easement.
3

I

t

f

54

` _
-
782+95 - c-
- - .r
- 52
-
- ?J
55
\ . P Y d
f.
Pretty ;? ..
J Pond
60

/ 0
J \\? /
'Project Corrido r

zi h

- - •,'` ? o \ 1 f
' ? o

_
?- 917+95
_
_ _

`
\ I \
-
P
n ?? fi ? 50

SCALE 1:24 000
1 .5 0 KILOMETERS 1 2
1000 0 METERS 1000 2000
1 .5 0 1

1000 MILES
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
7000 8000 9000 10 000
FEET
CONTOUR INTERVALS FEET
NATIONAL GEODETIC VERTICAL DATUM OF 1929
' Figure 2. Portion of Funston North Carolina topographic quadrangle showing project area.
4

ENVIRONMENTAL OVERVIEW
Any discussion of past human lifeways must include an examination of environmental
conditions. An understanding of an area's climate, vegetation, faunal resources, soils, water
resources, and geomorphic agencies are paramount when considering where archaeological
sites are likely to occur. All of these variables influence what types of resources were
available to past human inhabitants within a given area. This, in turn, will affect the
prehistoric and historic subsistence, settlement, and land use patterns. The following
' summary of the natural history of southeastern North Carolina describes the environmental
setting in which the region's cultural history developed.

r]
L

r

PWsiography and Geolosv
The project area is located in central Brunswick County, in southeastern North Carolina.
Physiographically delineated as Inner Coastal Plain, the proposed corridor falls near the
Tidewater area boundary (Phelps 1983:3). This section of the county is nearly level, with
elevations ranging from 75 feet to sea level. The project area is west of the Cape Fear
River, near Boiling Springs Lakes. The territory is described as a drainage area in which
there are "numerous irregularly shaped ponds and lakes created by the dissolution and
removal of underlying limestone" (USDA 1986:2). At one section, the project area runs 65
meters to the west of Pretty Pond. The corridor also crosses Allen Creek, which is wide and
shallow (typical of the region). None of the topographic features known as pocosins were
identified in the vicinity of the project area. The project area is primarily woodland.
The major soils found in the project area are the Leon-Murville-Mandarin and the Kureb-
Wando patterns (USDA 1986:General Map). These soil types are predominantly stratified
marine sediments. The topography is a mixture of undulating sand uplands and depressions.
The Leon-Murville-Mandarin pattern is described as "Nearly level, very poorly drained to
somewhat poorly drained soils that have a weakly cemented, sandy subsoil" (USDA 1986:5).
The Kureb-Wando pattern is "Nearly level to sloping, excessively drained soils that are sandy
throughout" (USDA 1986:9).
I Soils

The following is a description of the major soil associations that are found along the project
corridor:
Baymeade fine sand.
This soil is found on low ridges and convex divides, usually in woodland settings, but it can
be found in cropland or urban settings. Slope is from one to six percent. Individual areas
of these soils are generally broad and long, ranging from 35 to 250 acres. The surface layer
is a dark gray fine sand that is found to a depth of three inches (7.6cm). The subsurface
layer is a 20 inch (50.8cm) thick light gray fine sand in its upper section with a very pale
5

' brown fine sand below. Under this is a 39 inch (99.1) thick subsoil, a yellowish brown fine
sandy loam in the upper part, a light yellowish brown fine sandy loam in the middle section,
and a light yellowish brown loamy fine sand in the lower part. The underlying material is
a pale brown fine sand which can be found to a depth of 80 inches (203.2cm). The surface
runoff is slow; permeability is moderately rapid, and the available water capacity is low.
The soil is strongly to very strongly acid throughout, unless the surface area has been limed.
' The seasonal water table is 4 to 5 feet (121.9 to 152.4cm) below the surface. Included are
small areas of Blanton, Kureb, Foreston, Onslow, and Leon soils. The Kureb soils are
found on small, slightly higher, ridges. Blanton soils are found near drainageways.
Foreston, Onslow, and Leon soils are slightly lower on the landscape than Baymeade soils.
These additional soils comprise approximately 20 percent of the soil type (USDA 1986:54).
' Baymeade and Marvyn soils.
' These soil units are composed of both Baymeade and Marvyn soils. These do not occur in
a regular pattern, as some mapped areas vary from dominantly Baymeade soils to
dominantly Marvyn soils. Both are found on short side slopes of from six to 12 percent, and
both are well drained. Most of these soils are in woodland or openland settings. Marvyn
soil has a 5 inch (12.7cm) thick surface layer of grayish brown loamy fine sand. The
subsurface layer is a yellowish brown loamy fine sand 6 inches (15.2cm) thick. The subsoil
' can be found to 34 (86.4cm) inches below the subsurface layer and it is a yellowish brown
fine sandy loam in the upper section, a yellowish brown sandy clay loam, with a brownish
yellowish sandy clay. The underlying material, to depth of 80 inches (203.2cm), is a gray
sandy clay loam in the upper part and a mottled light gray, yellow, and strong brown sandy
loam in the lower part. The surface runoff is medium, permeability is moderate, and the
available water capacity is medium. The soil is very strongly to strongly acid throughout,
' unless the surface has been limed. Baymeade soils have a surface layer that is a dark gray
fine sand which is found to a depth of 3 inches (7.6cm). The subsurface layer is a 20 inch
thick light gray fine sand in the upper section with a very pale brown fine sand below.
Under this is a 39 inch (99.1cm) thick subsoil that is yellowish brown fine sandy loam in the
upper part, a light yellowish brown fine sandy loam in the middle section, and a light
' yellowish brown loamy fine sand in the lower part. The underlying material is a pale brown
fine sand which can be found to a depth of 80 inches (203.2cm). The surface runoff is slow;
permeability is moderately rapid, and the available water capacity is low. The soil is
' strongly to very strongly acid throughout, unless the surface area has been limed. The
seasonal water table is 4 to 5 feet (121.9 to 152.9cm) below the surface. Included in these
soil types are small areas of greater than 12 percent slope and small eroded area on which
' are found Blanton soils intermingled with a soil that has a clayey subsoil. Also, small areas
of Muckalee soils are found in narrow, wet drainages. These additional soils comprise
approximately 10 percent of the soil type (USDA 1986:54,63).

6

' Dorovan Muck.
This soil is found on the low flood plains of freshwater streams in woodland settings. It is
' nearly level and poorly drained. Generally, individual areas of the soil are long and
irregular in width, ranging from 20 to 400 acres in extent. The soil is a black, well
decomposed organic mass with a live root mat in the uppermost inches; the muck typically
' extends to a depth of 99 inches (251.5cm). Surface runoff is very slow, permeability is
moderate; volume change is high when the soil dries. The water table is found at or near
the ground surface during dry periods, and during wet periods the surface is frequently
' flooded or ponded. Included in the soil type are small areas (approximately 10 percent of
the soil type) of Muckalee soils found near stream banks (USDA 1986:57).

Kureb fine sand.
This is an excessively drained soil found in undulating woodland settings. Individual areas
of the soil are generally long and irregular in width, with convex slopes that are longer on
the side nearest the drainageway. The size of individual areas typically range from 30 to 100
acres, but in the southeastern section of Brunswick County, individual areas can be found
which range up to a 1,000 acres in size. The slope ranges from 1 to 8 percent. The surface
layer is a 4 inch (10.2cm) thick, gray fine sand. The subsurface layer is a 16 inch (40.6cm)
thick, light gray fine sand. The underlying material, to a depth of 80 inches (203.2cm), is
a brownish yellow fine sand in the upper section while the lower section is a light yellowish
brown fine sand. Surface runoff is slow, permeability is rapid, and the available water
capacity is very low. Seepage is rapid and trench walls and ditchbanks are subject to cave-
ins. The soil ranges from strongly acid to neutral throughout, unless the surface layer has
been limed. Included in this soil type are small areas of Wando and Blanton soils and a soil
which has a hardpan between 35 and 60 inches (88.9 to 152.4cm). These soils are
intermingled throughout. Also included are small areas of Baymeade, Mandarin, Leon, and
Murville soils. These are found in either narrow depressions or wet drainageways. These
additional soils comprise approximately 15 percent of the soil type (USDA 1986:60).
Leon fine sand.
This is a nearly level, poorly drained soil that is found in broad, smooth, interstream areas
and in depressions in undulating areas. It is found primarily in woodland settings. Individual
areas of the soil are irregular in shape and range from 10 to 200 acres in extent, but some
areas in the southeastern section of the county range up to 900 acres in size. The surface
layer is a 6 inch (15.2cm) thick, dark gray fine sand. The subsurface layer is a light gray fine
sand that is 8 inches (20.3cm) thick. The subsoil is a 9 inch (22.9cm) thick, black and dark
reddish brown fine sand. The underlying material, to 80 inches (203.2cm), is a light gray
fine sand in the upper section, the middle section is a black and brown fine sand, and the
lower section is a black fine sand. Runoff is slow, permeability is rapid in the surface layer
and moderate to rapid in the subsoil. The seepage rate is high while the available water
capacity is low. Ditchbanks cave-in. The soil is extremely acid or very strongly acid
throughout, unless the surface layer has been limed. The seasonally high water table is at
7

u

u
u

0

or near the ground surface. Included in this soil type are small areas of Murville soils and
a soil that has a thicker surface layer than is typical for Murville soils, found in depressions.
Also, Tomahawk and Mandarin soils can be found on low ridges and near drainageways.
These additional soils comprise approximately 20 percent of the type (USDA 1986:61).
Murville mucky fine sand.
This is a nearly level, very poorly drained soil that is found in depressions in broad
interstream woodland settings, primarily in the southern section of the county. The
depressions are oval shaped, long and narrow; they are found between sand ridges. Most
individual areas of the soil type range from 25 to 100 acres in size, but some individual areas
in the southeastern section of Brunswick County range up to 400 acres. The surface layer
is a 5 inch thick, black mucky fine sand. The subsoil is a black and dark reddish brown fine
sand that can be found to a depth of 80 inches. Surface runoff is slow. Permeability is
rapid in the surface layer and moderately rapid in the subsoil. The available water capacity
is low. The soil ranges from extremely acid to strongly acid throughout, unless the surface
layer has been limed. The seasonal high water table is at or near the ground surface.
Included in this soil type are intermingled areas of Murville soils that have a fine sand
surface layer, a soil which has a shallow light gray subsurface layer, and small areas of Leon,
Torhunta, and Croatan soils. These additional soils comprise approximately 20 percent of
the soil type (USDA 1986:64).
Mandarin fine sand.
This is a nearly level, somewhat poorly drained soil that is found in depressions in broad
interstream woodland settings, primarily in the southern section of the county. Most
individual areas of the soil type range from 5 to 200 acres in size. The surface layer is a 5
inch (12.7cm) thick, gray fine sand. The subsurface layer is a 13 inch (33cm) thick, white
fine sand. The subsoil is a dark brown and black fine sand that is 17 inches (43.2cm) thick.
The underlying material, to a depth of 80 inches (203.2cm), is a light gray and black sand
in the upper section, a dark reddish brown fine sand in the middle section, while the lower
section is a dark reddish brown sand. Surface runoff is slow. Permeability is moderate to
rapid; the available water capacity is low. The soil is extremely acid or very strongly acid
in the surface, subsurface, and upper section of the subsoil unless it has been limed. The
lower section of subsoil ranges from very strongly acid to neutral. The seasonal high water
table is 1.5 to 3.5 feet (45.7 to 105.7cm) below the surface. Included in the soil type are
small areas of intermingled Leon and Tomahawk soils throughout. Also, small areas of
Murville soils are found in narrow drainageways. These additional soils comprise
approximately 20 percent of the soil type (USDA 1986:62).
Climate

The project area lies near the Suffolk Scarp, the boundary delineator between the Inner
Coastal Plain and the Tidewater regions, where the beach line of the Sangamon Interglacial
8

sea stood some 100,000 years ago. Sea level continues to rise at a rate of approximately one
foot per century (Phelps 1983:5), rising 300 feet (91.4m) since the Wisconsin glacial stage
18,000 years ago. The inner Coastal Plain region as it exists today has a general
configuration representative of only the last 5000 years. Palynological evidence provides the
majority of information concerning past climatic conditions. Whitehead's research (Phelps
1983:5) in North Carolina and Virginia has revealed the North Carolina Coastal Plain
underwent a major climatic change during the late Pleistocene epoch at which time there
was a shift from a boreal pine-spruce forest, to a white pine-hemlock-northern hardwood
forest, around 8,000 B.C.. The next major shift occurred around 6,000 B.C., when the present
oak-hickory and gum-cypress communities became dominant (Phelps 1983:5).
The present climatic conditions for Brunswick County are characterized by hot, humid
summers with occasional sea breezes, and relatively cool winters with infrequent cold spells.
Precipitation is fairly heavy, rain falls throughout the year. Occasional hurricanes blow
inland from the coast. Prevailing winds are from the south-southwest (USDA 1986:2).
Flora and Fauna
The physiographical/vegetational pattern of this region during the earliest period of human
occupation has been described as one of "broad river valleys in which the stream channels
braided around numerous sandbars, freshwater marshes along the upstream edges and a
boreal pine-spruce forest on the interstream uplands" (Phelps 1983:22). The scarcity of
preserved food remains from sites of this period have made it difficult to infer the
subsistence strategy of inhabitants of the region, however the patterns are assumed to have
followed a classic model of generalized hunting and gathering.
More is known about the environment of the Archaic period, during which "pines, hemlock,
' birch, and northern hardwoods, such as beech and maple, gradually replaced the earlier
boreal forests and provided environments for different and more extensive faunal
communities" (Phelps 1983:23). Palynological evidence suggests this change took place
' sometime around 6,000 B.C.. The ecosystem evolved into the present vegetational pattern
of deciduous forest lands which produced hickory nuts, acorns, walnuts, and a variety of
edible plants (Phelps, 1983:5). These hardwood forests also provided important raw
materials for the manufacture of wooden implements. The coniferous plants furnish browse
and seeds, providing food sources for a variety of forest mammals. Large swamps, shallow
' lakes, ponds and pocosins, with their own potential foods and other resources, make up
much of this region's landscape. Wetland plants such as wild millet, saltgrass, cutgrass and
cattail are typical of the area.
A variety of fauna have inhabited this region's forests and wetlands. Archaeological
excavations have revealed the remains of bear, deer, raccoon, possum, turkey, and rabbit.
' Typical fauna of the wetland environment, including turtles, terrapin, alligators, marine and
riverine shellfish and fish, were also part of this region's prehistoric subsistence base (Phelps
1983:40). In addition to the available natural foods, later cultural phases (such as the
9

Cashie and Collington phases) are associated with the cultigens maize and beans in certain
areas (Phelps 1983:46).
In the past 300 years, the Inner Coastal region of North Carolina has seen drastic changes
occur in the natural environment. Present environmental conditions surrounding the project
area reflect land use patterns typical of the region; commercial forests cover about 430,862
acres of the land area of Brunswick County (USDA 1986:40). Forest land management
practices often have an adverse affect on the archaeological record. Practices such as
"ditching" to create artificial drainageways, (conditions encountered in part of the project
' area) disturb original stratigraphy. The influence of successive years of logging and re-
planting can also be observed in the distribution of plant species. Planted slash pine is the
' predominant species in the project area. There are a few specimens of hickory, magnolia,
long-leaf pine and sassafras. Ground cover is sparse on the floor of the forest's rises, while
the lower lying depressions are covered with dense wetland grasses and shrubs and
' groundwater is often visible on the surface.

10

CULTURAL OVERVIEW
The North Carolina Coastal Plain has historically been one of the least understood areas
in the state regarding chronology and culture history. This is attributable to the lack of a
sufficient database due to the scarcity of sustained research. No comprehensive chronology
or culture history exists for the region (Phelps 1983:1). The region lies near the boundary
generally given between the Northeastern and Southeastern North American culture
traditions. Therefore, the following culture sequence should be considered broad and
provisional.
Paleo-Indian (12,500 to 8,000 B.C.)
Three separate phase sequences based in part on projectile point attribute seriation have
been proposed for the region. The formal point types represented include the standard ones
found in paleo-Indian assemblages: Clovis, Cumberland, Quad, Dalton, and Hardaway.
Williams has proposed a temporal sequence for these types in the Southeast (Williams 1965
in Phelps 1983:18). Unfortunately, there is little stratigraphic or chronometric evidence to
support the seriation study (Phelps 1983:18). Funk (Funk 1978 in Phelps 1983:18) has
outlined a two part sequence for the Northeast, dividing the period into Early Paleo-Indian
(10,500 B.C. to 8,000 B.C.) and Late Paleo-Indian (8,000 B.C. to 6,000 B.C.). However, it
should be noted that the later dates fall into what is generally accepted in the East as the
Archaic Period. Gardner (Gardner and Verrey 1979 in Phelps 1983:19) has a three phase
sequence based on work at the Thunderbird site in Virginia. He divides the period, from
earliest to latest, into a Fluted Point phase, a Middle Paleo phase that is comprised of
smaller fluted points, and a Dalton-Hardaway phase. The later can be seen as a "Paleo-
Indian Transitional" between fluted and notched points (Phelps 1983:19).
Almost all Paleo-Indian material is reported from surface finds and that which is not is
almost always found in a mixed context. The Clovis style radiocarbon dates are generally
accepted to fall within the date range of 12,000 B.C. to 8,000 B.C. (Justice 1987:18). Some
early excavated sites on the nearby Carolina Piedmont are from the Hardaway Projectile
Point Complex (Coe 1964:120). This style is similar to the Dalton style that is found west
of the Mississippi. Points of this generalized type are found throughout the southeastern
and parts of the midwestern United States and have been dated from 8,000 B.C. to 6,000
B.C. at the Stanfield-Worley Bluff Shelter's Zone D and from 8,000 B.C. to 7,000 B.C. at
the Hardaway site (Justice 1987:40-44). Again, it should be noted that these dates fall into
what is commonly given as the Early Archaic Period.
It must be noted that the sample size for all of these Coastal Plain chronologies is small,
numbering less than fifty (Phelps 1983:18). Most are located in upland settings (Phelps
1983:20). It is hypothesized that mobile Paleo-Indian bands occupied sites of small size for
temporary periods. Sites located on major streams may represent base camps while those
found on tributary streams served as specialized (subsistence) activity areas (Phelps
1983:21). Gardner's Dismal Swamp settlement model is based on lithic resource
11

1

procurement strategy rather than subsistence needs. It involves Paleo-Indian bands
organizing around "central quarries" which provide a critical resource (Gardner 1979 in
Phelps 1983:21-22).
In general, it is assumed that Paleo-Indian bands were oriented toward the hunting of post-
Pleistocene megafauna. In the eastern United States this may not have been the case
because species such as caribou and white-tailed deer may have predominated. The extent
to which the populations relied on plant collection is difficult to ascertain due to the lack
of preservation of plant remains in this region (Wapora 1990:12). The lifeways of the Paleo-
Indian peoples probably was similar to ethnographically recorded hunter-gathers which lived
in tundra and parkland settings which would have similar to the glacial margins on which
the Paleo-Indians lived.
The Archaic Period (8,000 B.C. to 1,000 B.C.)
Although intact sites are lacking in the Coastal Plain, the nearby Piedmont has similar
diagnostic artifacts which are found in firmly controlled stratigraphic context. This period
is commonly divided into Early (8,000 B.C. to 6,000 B.C.), Middle (6,000 B.C. to 4,000 B.C.),
and Late (4,000 to 1,500 B.C.). The Archaic Period is considered a time of increased
population and gradually increasing sedentism in Eastern North America. An expanding
subsistence base utilized a broader econiche. Some sites dating to this period are associated
with large shell middens; both fresh and salt water species were utilized.
Concomitant with this expanded resource base is an increased diversity of tool types that can
be found throughout all subdivisions of the Archaic. The Early Archaic is well represented
in the sites and collections in North Carolina. It appears that archaeological data somewhat
parallel the fossil pollen record, since little developmental succession from the Paleo-Indian
to the Archaic has been noted. Furthermore, by 4,000 B.C., several full-blown Late Archaic
cultures appeared in the Northeast, suggesting to some researchers that these cultures may
have been transplants from adjacent areas. Concurrent with the shift in environment, the
large fluted points of the Paleo-Indian period were replaced in the Early Archaic by smaller,
more diversified types. These correspond to Phelps's "transitional Paleo-Indian" points.
The appearance of Hardaway-Dalton, Kirk, LeCroy, and several bifurcated-base style points,
ubiquitous throughout the Southeast and Midwest, indicate the continued exploitation of
large territories by small hunting bands. The Middle Archaic Period is one which continues
the bifurcate projectile point tradition (St. Albans, Lecroy, Stanley Stemmed, and Kanawha
Stemmed points being typical) began in the Early Archaic. These are followed by other
stemmed types. In general, "Middle Archaic assemblages are often characterized by hastily
manufactured projectile points and expediently produced cores and scrapers" (Wapora
1990:14). The earliest stone atlatl weights in the eastern United States date from this period
(Oliver 1983 in Wapora 1990).
Paleo-Indians exploited post-Pleistocene biotic communities that were diverse in nature,
while Archaic cultures were adaptations to the rather recent zonation of floral and faunal
12

' assemblages. This zonation of biotic communities presented Archaic peoples with particular
geographic regions occupied by specifically adapted flora and fauna. The consolidation of
differently maturing resources into zones allowed Archaic groups to schedule the
procurement of subsistence items as they became seasonally available. Archaic inhabitants
lived as part of this developing system, and their subsistence strategies and settlement
' patterns reflected the changing environmental conditions. Around 6,000 B.C. opening faunal
ecological niches, replete with important mast foods like acorns, chestnuts, beechnuts, and
hickory nuts, began to fill with a variety of smaller game animals, particularly white-tailed
' deer and wild turkeys (Wapora 1990). There is an increase in the number of sites from the
Early Archaic through the Middle Archaic. Site density remained relatively stable into the
Late Archaic, except for a reduction in sites found along tributary streams (Phelps 1983:25).

The Late Archaic is marked by the emergence of the first regional traditions in North
Carolina costal area. Circa 2,000 B.C. formative ceramic sequences of fiber tempered ware
can be distinguished. The only type so far reported from this period is Stallings Plain Ware.
This implies that the "full-fledged ceramic series with its decorative types did not extend into
the South Coastal region" (Phelps 1983:26). Such ceramic have been associated with other
typically Late Archaic artifacts: Savannah River points, steatite vessel sherds, grooved net
sinkers, winged atlatl weights, and grooved axes (Phelps 1983:26). Also dating to this
period are the beginnings of plant cultivation. Although other factors seem to remain
constant, the appearance of ceramics in the latter part of the Late Archaic is used to
arbitrarily divide the Late Archaic from Early Woodland.
Woodland Period (1,000 B.C. to European Contact)
The Woodland period is marked by an continued increase, and finally a dependence on
cultivated plants for subsistence. Maize agriculture formed the base for increasing
population and sedentism. Social organization also shifted to a more stratified form. The
tool kit expanded to included specialized agricultural implements. Hunting and gathering
was still practiced; this was facilitated by the introduction of the bow and arrow. Projectile
points can be used to differentiate phases, but the Woodland phases of North Carolina are
commonly recognized by variations in ceramics. These are based most often on stylistic
changes, but do include technological variations as well.
On the Coastal Plain the following chronological sequence is recognized for prehistoric
ceramics by the North Carolina Archaeological Council: Hanover Sherd Tempered Series;
Cape Fear Sand Tempered Series; Oak Island Shell Tempered Series; Tooled Interiors
Series; Sand Tempered Plain Series; and the Historic Brunswick Series (Hay et al 1982:11).
A three phase sequence has been proposed for the Early Woodland. Deep Creek I
represents the initial introduction of ceramics and triangular points from the north. The
ceramics from this phase were first recognized at the Parker site. These were steatite and
coarse sand tempered, cord marked pottery. A small quantity is net impressed, fabric
impressed or simple stamped. Also found at this site were a few Stallings Plain fiber
13

n

11

tempered and Marcey Creek Plain pottery. Roanoke large triangular points and Gypsy
points were found associated with the Deep Creep I phase ceramics. Deep Creek II is
believed to have begun around 800 B.C. This phase has an increase in net and fabric
impressed surface decoration. Deptford simple stamped type pottery was popular. Shell
and grit tempered wares are both found. In Deep Creek III simple stamping waned and
disappeared. Cord, net, and fabric impressed surfaces continued (Phelps 1983:29-31).
The Middle Woodland period is composed of two phases, one northern (Mount Pleasant
phase) and one southern (Cape Fear phase). The ceramics are essentially the same: a fine
sand tempered ware with types defined by the surface finish, whether it is fabric impressed,
cord marked, net impressed, or smoothed. Some wares are also grit tempered. A small
amount of shell tempered pottery is also found. In the south, the Hanover Series of pottery
(200 to 100 B.C.) is a clay or sherd tempered ware found along the coast itself. Other
artifacts often found in association include sandstone abraders, shell pendants, shell or stone
gorgets, celts, black needle-rush marsh woven mats, and Roanoke Island small points are
typical artifacts from this period. Burial patterns were of both primary inhumation and
cremation. In the north, a primary burial from the Baum site produced a radiocarbon date
of A.D. 360 + /-65 radiocarbon years. A distinctive feature of the southern Middle
Woodland is the extensive distribution of low, sand burial mounds. They contain a high
frequency of secondary cremation, platform pipes (and other grave goods). The mounds are
located away from habitation sites. Their spacial distribution seems limited to this region
only (Phelps 1983:32-35).
Two Middle Woodland sites are recorded in the county. Surface material similar to these
ceramic types was recovered at 31Bw136 and 31Bw137, Boiling Springs lake, in Brunswick
County, North Carolina. Four clay tempered and two sand tempered sherds were recovered
I at 31Bw137. Cord marked and fabric impressed pottery was present in both groups. Six
sherds were recovered from 31Bw136. All were sand tempered, and are either cord marked
or plain in surface treatment (Kimmel 1985). Two Middle Woodland sites (Indigo 1 and
2) of ephemeral occupation were recorded by Loftfield in 1989. Recovery at these sites was
sparse, a small number of clay tempered Hanover ceramics were found (Loftfield 1989).

I
The Late Woodland period shows an even greater variation among the regions. The Oak
Island phase name has been adopted for the South Coastal Plain. It is best known from the
coast proper. Traits include: Shell tempered ceramics (cord marked, fabric impressed, and
net impressed) and a marine oriented subsistence base for gathered foods. The period is
one of a fully developed maize agriculture. The region is believed to have been inhabited
by Siouian speaking groups since the beginning of the Woodland period (Phelps 1983:47-48).
These groups persisted until Euro-American contact.
14

LITERATURE REVIEW
Preliminary research done at the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office in
preparation for the Phase I archaeological survey in Brunswick County, North Carolina
' revealed the presence of 9 previously recorded archaeological sites located on the same
quad map as the project area (Funston USGS quadrangle map). Kemron was able to
retrieve site reports for 4 of the 9 sites pinpointed on the state archaeologist's site maps.
' Ms. Rowland-White, Site Registrar, assisted the research team in an archival search for
available background materials. The researchers were allowed to photocopy all pertinent
materials, however reports for 5 of the 9 sites identified on the maps could not be located
in the archives by Ms. Rowland-White.
The site numbers recorded for Funston Quad were 31Bwl36, 31Bw137, 31Bw283, 31Bw284,
' 31Bw480, 31Bw481, 31Bw482, 31Bw483, and 31Bw546.Out of these 9, the researchers were
able to obtain the site reports for 31Bwl36, 31Bw137, 31Bw283 and 31Bw2834. The site
reports were reviewed as part of the background research on the archaeological record in
the project area. The following is a brief discussion of the information contained in those
site reports.
Sites 31Bw136 and 31Bwl37
Sites 31Bw136 and 31Bw137 were originally recorded in 1979 by Steve Leonard and Tucker
Littleton. The sites were tested in March, 1985, by Richard Kimmel and Craig Schillinger.
The report by Kimmel and Schillinger was prepared for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
' Kimmel reports that the area of the two sites had been highly disturbed by the construction
of three sand roads, a railroad, land clearing, powerline construction and subsequent
erosion. A surface survey was conducted and a total of 12 pottery sherds were recovered.
Six were recovered from the surface at Bw136 and six were recovered from the surface
survey at Bwl37. All of the sherds recovered at Bw136 were sand tempered, cordmarked
or plain. Kimmel has attributed the pottery at Bw136 to Middle Woodland or possibly Early
Woodland culture groups. Of the six sherds recovered at Bw137, four are clay tempered
and two are sand tempered; all six are cordmarked or fabric marked. Kimmel notes that
' ceramic identification was difficult due to the layered nature of the paste. He dates the
pottery recovered at Bw137 as Early to Late Woodland.
At sites Bw136 and Bw137, four 1.5xl.5m test units were excavated as well. No cultural
materials were recovered from the test units. Sites 31Bwl36 and 31Bw137 are
approximately 20km south of the project area.

15

r
f

I
1
1
Sites 31Bw283 and 31Bw284
The information available on sites 31Bw283 and 31Bw284 consists of a one paragraph
summary description and a map indicating the site location. The sites are identified only
as being "the remains of a tar kiln bed with the lightwood sticks still in place and
underbrush beneath a layer of charcoal and ashes" (North Carolina Archaeological Survey
1978). On this site survey form the type of vegetation is indicated only as "pine" and the
type of soil is indicated as "clay". A notation states no artifactual materials were collected
at the site. Sites Bw283 and Bw284 are within 5km of the project area, to the west.
During the Phase I survey of the project corridor two large depressions were encountered
on Transect 3. The two depressions are obvious topographical anomalies and appear to be
cultural features of an unknown nature or function. One depression is within the project
area boundary, the other is located 10 meters west of the project corridor. In the course of
preliminary research, site reports were obtained which included descriptions of tar kilns.
These formations, associated with early commercial production of tar, are commonly
encountered in the woodland areas of the region. As has been previously noted, that there
are two tar kiln sites recorded within 5km of the project area (31Bw283 and 31Bw284).
More detailed descriptions of tar kilns were found in the report on sites 31Bw401, 402, 403,
and 404. These are all tar kilns located on the grounds of the Military Ocean Terminal,
Sunny Point grounds. These sites were recorded in 1984 by Cultural Heritage Research
Services, Inc. and the site reports are on file in the State Archaeologist's archives.
The two depressions encountered in our Phase I survey bear some resemblance to those
described in that 1984 report by Ted Payne and Ann Brown. (See site maps and profiles:
tables p#) They are of the same general size in terms of depths and circumference,
however, there is no evidence of use; i.e., there was no burned material associated with
these features, on the surface or below surface. The soil profile was the same in the
features as in the surrounding area (see Transect 3, shovel test #12). No cultural materials
were recovered in the vicinity of these two features. The possibility exists that these features
are the remnants of tar kilns that were perhaps never used, or were cleaned up very well.
' Orton Plantation
Background information was also collected on Orton Plantation, a National Register of
Historic Places site, due to its historical significance and proximity to the project location.
Orton Plantation is referred to in the NRHP nomination form as "perhaps the best known
antebellum showplace in North Carolina". The original property owner was Roger Moore
and the first structures were built on the site in 1735. Subsequent additions were made in
the 1840's, again in 1910 and in 1960. The extensive grounds that were once used for rice
cultivation are now leased to the North Carolina Wildlife Commission as a waterfowl
sanctuary and the elaborate irrigation system that once facilitated the rice cultivation now
' used to flood the fields for the autumn migration of birds. The famous Orton Plantation
16
L

gardens were developed in the early 20th century and include extensive plantings of
flowering trees and shrubs. Orton Plantation is a well preserved and important site that
contributes to the understanding of the economic and social development of historic North
Carolina.

L

17

' Phase I

FIELD METHODOLOGY
The field testing methods employed during the Phase I consisted of shovel tests at 15 meter
intervals along the proposed centerline of the pipeline corridor. These shovel test were
approximately 50 centimeters in diameter and were excavated to an average depth of 66
centimeters below surface. One-hundred percent of the soil in each of the shovel tests was
screened through 1/4" hardware cloth. When artifactual material was recovered in a shovel
test, intersiting was conducted in order to establish site boundaries. Intersiting consisted of
excavating additional shovel tests, in the four cardinal directions, in 5 meter intervals.
Intersiting on original positive shovel tests continued until project area boundaries were
encountered, or until two consecutively negative shovel tests were recorded. All artifacts
collected were bagged and labeled according to their location and depth.
The presence of standing water prevented the excavation of shovel tests in less than 25
percent of total project area. These areas were photographed to document ground surface
conditions.
Phase II

The field testing methods for the Phase II consisted of six lxlm units. The units were hand
excavated in arbitrary 10 centimeter levels and 100% of the soil in each unit was screened
through 1/4" hardware cloth. All artifacts were collected from each unit. Artifacts were
bagged according to their location within the site and the unit in order to determine an
accurate representation of how the artifacts were distributed both vertically and horizontally.
Each bag was labeled with the appropriate information. Excavation was discontinued after
two consecutive sterile levels. One wall of each unit was troweled and examined for the
presence of artifacts as well as soil color and texture changes that would indicate the
presence of intact cultural material. Profile drawings were made of all of the test units.
Finally, all units were photographed, back-filled, and tamped.
18

J

LAB METHODOLOGY
A variety of different lab methods were applied to differing classes of artifacts. The
following discussion details those methods of analysis applied to lithic artifacts, prehistoric
ceramics, and historical artifacts. Artifacts were washed and sorted at the KEMRON
Cincinnati laboratory.
Lithic Artifact Analysis
To the extent possible, projectile points were assigned to types with traditionally accepted
chronological spans, using standard references such as Ritchie (1971) and Justice (1987).
Analysis of prehistoric artifact assemblage functional composition involved assigning artifacts
to one of the following typological categories: projectile points, scrapers, other shaped tools,
utilized flakes, unidentified modified edge fragments, biface preforms, and lithic debitage.
Lithic material found during the Phase II investigations were divided into chipped stone
tools and flakes. Chipped stone tools are herein defined as pieces of lithic raw material that
show modification by percussion and/or pressure flaking. Flakes are defined as the by-
products of the tool manufacturing process. These two categories were then subdivided into
raw material types.
When the sample size is sufficient, the analysis of the lithic artifacts is accomplished using
an analytic system similar to the one developed by Jay Johnson and Carol Raspet at the
University of Mississippi (Johnson and Raspet 1980, Raspet 1979, and Raspet and Morgan
1979). The goal of the analysis was to determine what stage, or stages, of the lithic
reduction sequence a chipped stone assemblage represented. Though originally designed
for use with assemblages derived from secondarily deposited cobble cherts, the paradigm
has been successfully applied to artifacts made from cherts derived from primary deposits
(Johnson 1985, 1986, and 1989).
Chipped Stone Artifacts
The chipped stone artifacts were classified by using the key shown in Figure 3. This key is
similar to the one presented in Johnson and Raspet (1980:Figure 1). Based on this analysis
system, the tools were classified as follows:
Amorphous Cores - These are cobbles or chunks of rock from which flakes
have been removed. However, the flaking appears to be random (i.e., they
show no signs of intentional bifacial reduction or patterned flake removal).
Patterned Cores - These are artifacts that do not show signs of intentional
bifacial reduction, but flake removal does not appear to be random. This
category is best represented by Hopewell bladelett cores. No patterned cores
were found during the Phase II work.
19

n
J

UTHIC ANALYSIS KEY
BI!•cl.l Edo. Pr•w.0
Na I
P.t I R k. t,at•r•1 ""&-t
a.m•?.It• c.md.t+lr w•ft?wt
1 ? rl.
N. Y•• I 1
I I
Am-Ph- P•tt•rn•d C•r• B/.r.k l.t.r•1 Edp.a
C•r• / SV•Iphl.e.•d?
1
No Ye•
Nall EI•m•.?t N•ft EI•mMt
Pre•mtt Pre.mt?
I I
Na Ye. No Ye•
I I /
Preform 2 Preform i
Fl.t-d Bit-
FLAKE PARADIGM

i
i
U Dorsal Conc. Presc rn Ob -d
cscr
pt
on Total
> 75% < 759 090
1 Z J
Plal(orru Missing
? / S e
Con- on Platform

2 fa«IS of las oo 7 g 9
Platform
r^.
;VO,
.31
ll
More than 2 facets N•+'
on Pladorm
Obsclsed Tout
The Obser ed Tbuh do na iodude Celh L Z or 3.
Figure 3.

Key and paradigm used for classifying lithic artifacts.
20

LI

Blank - Artifacts classified as blanks are rocks that display intentional bifacial
chipping around a portion of their lateral margin; however, the lateral margins
of the piece have not been completely worked. These unworked margins are
easily recognized since they will still be covered with cortex and/or patina.
Usually, cortex and/or patina is still present on 50 percent or more of one or
both faces of these artifacts. Blanks represent the earliest stage of the biface
reduction sequence.
Preform 1 - Preform 1 artifacts represent the next stage in the biface
reduction sequence. The lateral margins of these tools have been completely
worked, but the edges have not been straightened by fine percussion flaking
or pressure retouch. This gives the edges a somewhat wavy appearance. No
haft element is present, and the cortex may or may not be present on the
artifact.
Preform 2 - The lateral margins of these bifacial artifacts have been
straightened by fine percussion and/or pressure flaking, and a haft element
is absent. Most, if not all, of the cortex has been removed from both faces.
Preform 2 artifacts represent the next-to-last stage in the bifacial reduction
process.
Finished Biface - These artifacts may have characteristics of both Preforms 1
and 2. What distinguishes the finished biface is that a haft element is present
on the distal end of the artifact. These tools are commonly classified as
projectile point/knives or drills, and they represent the final stage in the
biface reduction sequence.
A limited number of flakes that had been retouched along their lateral margin were
' recovered during the Phase II investigation. These artifacts could not be classified using the
above key, thus they are defined below.

Retouched Flakes - These artifacts are pieces of debitage that display four or
more consecutive unifacial retouch flakes along one or more margins. These
artifacts do not resemble other formal tool categories such as unifacial drills
or burins.
Flakes
Flakes were classified using the paradigm presented in Figure 3. Flakes were assigned to
one of twelve cells using two attributes: amount of cortex remaining on the dorsal surface
and platform configuration. Providing exact parameters for classification removes much of
the subjectivity often inherent in debitage analysis. Using a paradigm also provides an
21
r

1

explicit definition of each flake type. This flake classification system is also set up for
simple statistical analysis (Johnson 1980:3-4).
The expected value for each cell (the number of flakes that should occur in a cell if the
loading is random) was calculated using the following formula (Thomas 1986:275):
Ei =
(row total) (column total)
grand total
Flakes which fit in cells 1-3 were not used in the calculation of expected values since they
lack platforms-a critical attribute used in assessing the individual flake and the assemblage
as a whole.

When the observed value is larger than the expected value the cell is said to have "positive"
loading. ("Negative" loading if less than expected value.) Positive loading demonstrates that
there are more flakes present in a particular cell than would be expected if the loading was
random. Johnson (1990) has used the pattern of positive loading to help distinguish lithic
assemblages derived from biface production from those derived from the reduction of
amorphous cores. By taking the cumulative proportion of the cells and presenting them in
an ogive (i.e., frequency distribution table), Johnson has also been able to distinguish early
from late stage lithic reduction sites (1990).
If the sample is sufficiently large (see Thomas 1986:298), the pattern of loading can be
tested using the chi-square statistic (Thomas 1986:265) as follows:
X2 = k (0i _ Ei)2
i=1 Ei
This procedure is used to determine whether or not the loading in the cells is random.
When the calculated chi-square value (x2) exceeds the critical value (Thomas 1986:498-499)
at a =.05, a significant relationship between the two variables is demonstrated, thus the
expected versus observed loading of the cells is considered to be non-random.
When the expected value was less than 5 in two or more cells, the Yates Correction for
Continuity (x,2) was applied (Thomas 1986:281).
This test adjusts the normal chi-square statistic so that small samples can be adequately
evaluated (Thomas 1986:280). For both tests, the region of rejection is a calculated value
22

X2 = k ([Oi - E,] - 0.5)2
Et
i
greater than 9.49 at a =.05 with four degrees of freedom (Thomas 1986:499). In an attempt
to maintain the validity of the statistical testing, only sites that have a total of 30 or more
flakes in Cells 4-12 are evaluated using the Chi-square or Yates Correction tests.
Prehistoric Ceramics
The prehistoric ceramic artifacts were analyzed macroscopically. Sherds larger than 1 cm2
were sorted according to temper type, surface treatment, and sherd type (base, body, rim).

0

11

The ceramic assemblages were first sorted by size. Since very small sherds usually do not
contain elements, such as temper and surface treatment, visible in the larger pieces of
pottery, sherds less than 1 cm2 were counted and excluded from further analysis. Ceramic
artifacts larger than 1 cm2 were next sorted by temper and surface treatment. These two
elements are usually the most diagnostic attributes, and are commonly used in ceramic
artifact analysis. Finally, the assemblage was sorted by sherd type (i.e., base, body, and/or
rim). Once this analysis was complete, the literature was searched for ceramic assemblages
with similar attributes.
The goal of this ceramic analysis was threefold. The first goal was to determine the
temporal span represented by the sherds. The above elements, except for size, can be used
alone or in combination to determine the temporal affiliation of a sherd. The second goal
was to reconstruct the vessel shape, if possible. Shape is sometimes used as a temporal
indicator, and can also serve as an indicator of vessel function (Rally 1986). The third goal
was to try to determine how the ceramic assemblage fit into the regional framework.
23

Historical Artifact Analysis
Historic archaeologists have begun to use material culture to discern how patterns in the
archaeological record may provide data on cultural patterns such as economics, social
change, ethnicity, and human choices and behavior (Miller 1991; Cheek and Friedlander
1990; Spencer-Wood 1987; Genheimer 1988).
Phase II artifact recovery methods routinely include artifacts recovered from patterned
' shovel testing, or from excavation units. These techniques are designed to provide a sample
of artifacts from which to assess the significance of the site discovered, not a complete
collection. While these collections do not usually include artifacts from intact subsurface
' features such as privies or cellars, Phase II collections may provide useful information on
site chronology, site function, and the spatial distribution of artifact concentrations (Blank-
Roper 1987). This information may then be used to determine eligibility for inclusion in
' the National Register of Historic Places, and to determine research topics for later work
(Wilson 1990).
' Artifacts recovered during this survey were washed and sorted at the WAPORA, Inc.,
Cincinnati laboratory. Morphology and decoration defined each artifact. Once the artifacts
were sorted, temporal diagnostic attributes were recorded in a DBASE IV generated
catalog. This type of analysis served to define temporal site affiliation. References such as
' Jones and Sullivan (1985), Majewski and O'Brien (1987), Genheimer (1987), Ball (1983),
and others, provided source material for historic artifact typological and morphological
' descriptions.

24

1
1

L

f

fl

r

PHASE I RESULTS
Field Work
The Phase I field work for the Wilmington to Southport 12-inch Lateral proposed pipeline
corridor consisted of shovel testing at 15m intervals for the length of the line where no
standing water was present. Areas where surface visibility exceeded 80 percent underwent
surface reconnaissance. The average depth of the shovel tests was 66cmbs. To facilitate the
field work the line was divided into 7 transects. Each transect will be discussed separately.
Transect 1.
Transect 1 began at the southwest corner of the fence surrounding Pretty Pond and
extended approximately 390m to the south, south-east (Figure 4). This transect included 27
shovel tests all of which were culturally sterile. Shovel test #2 was located in a disturbed
context (roadway) and was not excavated. Shovel tests # 16, # 17, # 18, # 19, and #20 were
not excavated because they were located in the floodplain of a small tributary to Allen
Creek (the water table was sufficiently high to cause standing water on the ground surface).
This unnamed tributary was approximately lm wide and split into many smaller channels
across the floodplain. All of the existing small topographic depressions were filled with
water. All of the shovel tests excavated along Transect 1 had varied soil profiles. The most
common feature among the profiles was a black, partially cemented sand starting at
approximately 40cmbs. A complete description of the soil profiles is included in Appendix
D.
Transect 2.
Transect 2 began 405m south southeast of the south west corner of the fence surrounding
Pretty Pond (Figure 5). A total of 38 shovel tests were located along Transect 2. Shovel
tests that were located within the boundaries of several unnamed tributaries to Allen Creek
were not excavated due to standing water. The transect extended 540m south southwest
from the same point. The soil profiles along this transect varied considerably, but were not
as varied as those occurring along transect 1 (see Appendix D for soil profile descriptions).
The profiles of the first 29 shovel tests resembled those excavated along transect 1. A
typical soil profile included light grey sand followed by grey quicksand and finally the black
compact soil. Shovel tests #3, #4, #5, and #35 were not excavated due to standing water
on the ground surface. The above stated shovel tests were located in the drainage area of
a small unnamed tributary of Allen Creek. All of the shovel tests excavated along Transect
2 were culturally sterile.
Transect 3.
Transect 3 began 960m south southwest of the southwest corner of the fence surrounding
Pretty Pond (Figure 6). It extended 510m south southwest to within 65m of the swamp
25

Cyclone
Transect 1 Fence
Legend
p Sterile Shovel Test Transect 1
Shovel Test 1
O Unexcavated Sample Locus
Scale
T
0 15 30 Meters

West Edge of R.O.W
ST 10
i
Unpaved Access
Roads to Pretty Pond
Concrete Monument
East E e of R.O.W.
Edges of
Wet Area
f Unnamed Tributary
to Allen Creek
Proposed
Centerline
ST
Figure 4. Figure showing Transect 1.
26

27

rigure -?. rigure snowing iransect z,.
1
1
? Transect 2 111
Unpaved Access Roads
Scale
T
0 15 30 Meters
Figure 6. Figure showing Transect 3.
28

' along Allen Creek. Prehistoric ceramics were encountered in shovel test #34. Four positive
shovel tests resulted from intersiting. This site was designated KEMRON site #1 (K-1).
Shovel test #34 is located 65m north of the edge of the water in a wet area surrounding
' Allen Creek. The surface of the site area was disturbed in places due to recent timbering,
but the prehistoric stratum was intact. No historic artifacts were recovered with the
prehistoric materials. The maximum depth of artifact recovery was in shovel test #34 at
approximately 40cmbs. Transect 3 ended approximately lm from the standing water
surrounding Allen Creek.
' Transect 4.
Transect 4 started 7.5m north-northeast of East Boiling Springs road, along the proposed
' centerline (Figure 7). A recent. historic scatter was observed while excavating shovel test
#7. Shovel test #7 contained modern nails and an ammunition cartridge. A scatter of
t bricks, metal, glass, and plastic surrounded the shovel test. All other shovel tests on
Transect 4 (including the intersites around shovel test #7) were sterile. The scatter
extended 5m south and 20m north of shovel test 7. A systematic pedestrian survey was
' conducted in the area, in conjunction with shovel testing. The majority of the artifacts were
collected from the pedestrian survey. The center line in Transect 4 goes through a pine tree
plantation. The ground in this area has been trenched to a depth of about 40cm to drain
the area so that the trees can be grown. The trenches are 1.5 to 1.7 meters wide, alternating
with raised strips 1.5 to 1.7m wide. The undisturbed soil on the raised strips varies in width
from 1 to 1.5m. A minimum of 50 percent of the site in the project area is disturbed due
to trenching. An unpaved road parallels the centerline, approximately 7m to the west along
transect 4. To the west of the unpaved road is a longleaf pine forest. The trees in the
plantation are slash pine. The cultural materials recovered from this area included
' twentieth and late nineteenth century artifacts. There were no signs of remnant foundations,
fencelines, wells, etc. Standing water became a problem after shovel test #18.
A systematic pedestrian survey was conducted on the road next to Pretty Pond. No cultural
materials were recovered. The center line along Pretty Pond was shovel tested and no
cultural materials were recovered. The center line is approximately 3m east of the road
' leading into the girl scout camp across the pond.
Transect 5.
' Transect 5 began 15m north of Transect 1, shovel test 1. This is located 10m north of the
south end of the fence along Pretty Pond (Figure 8). This transect extended northward
' 405m and consisted of 28 shovel tests. The transect was lm east of an unpaved access road
along Pretty Pond. Vegetation in the area was longleaf pine. Topography was slightly
undulating, The transect was 30-40 meters west of the break in elevation surrounding Pretty
Pond.

29

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
30

C
4) 1 ?
T

^
,O
L G

C

d
O , N >
4- O I 0
U a N I ?-
QD VNf Z z
I
N

v
cz o

cc 'D 1 CO
C O j d N
:z) Q
o I o
F-

U) `) i N
I
? I
8
'
a
>
o LL a?

c

I

m m o ? I

0
a?

U
r 1
O o
CL ,
0
a ,
I
1
I
I
C) O
N
~
U) I O
I
I a
I ?o
w
? I

O I w
d
0-

¢
I m
I
'
C'
w I .

N
i
w
` C
a
1 c
1
I

/ / co
w

I
V
N
cd
bn
O
h
N
i0
Lw
M
Ii?I I
l?
' The transect ended at the northwest corner of the fence near the junction of the unpaved
access road and East Boiling Springs road. The last shovel test on the transect was
approximately 10m east of East Boiling Springs Road.
Transect 6.
Transect 6 was located near the north end of the project area. This was in a clearing of
pines in the swampy end of the project area. The transect started 20m west northwest of
station 802+ 00 and extended west northwest 135 meters (Figure 9). The topography was
' very gently undulating and slightly higher than the surrounding swampy areas. The
vegetation was long leaf pine. The last 5 shovel tests extended into the wet area. Areas
that were too wet to test were on either end of the transect.
Transect 7.
Transect 7 began at Station 836 + 00 and extended west northwest 120 meters (Figure 9).
Transect 7 consisted of 3 shovel tests in the driest spots of the wet end of the project area.
Shovel tests #1 and #2 were 15m apart. Shovel test #3 was 105m west northwest of shovel
test #2. The vegetation along transect 7 was wetland scrub. The topography was flat. Six
of the shovel tests were not excavated due to standing water on the ground surface.

1

1

32

r

Figure 9. Figure showing Transects 6 and 7.
' 33

I Phase I Materials Recovered
A total of 15 prehistoric artifacts were recovered during the Phase I reconnaissance at site
K-1. Twelve pottery sherds were found during the shovel testing. Ten of the sherds are
tempered with fiber and six have cordmarked exterior surfaces. The other four fiber
tempered sherds are possibly cordmarked, but the surface treatment is too worn to
' distinguish clearly. The remaining two sherds are sand tempered with cordmarked exteriors.
Two of the fiber tempered sherds are two parts of one rim sherd (mended in lab from an
old break). The rim is direct, with a flat, possibly cordmarked lip (illustration in Appendix
' C, illustration Q.

Table 1. Prehistoric pottery recovered from Phase I investigations.
Temper Decoration Quantity verage Thickness
(mm)
Fiber cordmarked 6 6.3
Fiber indeterminate* 4 6.1
Sand cordmarked 1 7.7
Sand cordmarked 1 8.6
TOTAL POTTERY 12
exterior treatment in istineuts a e. m ay be west ere or smoothed
cordmarking.
Compared to the sites studied during the literature review for this project, the sand
tempered sherds may date to the Middle to Late Woodland time period, while the fiber
tempered sherds are probably somewhat earlier. They may date to the Stallings period of
the Late Archaic into Early Woodland (circa 2,000 B.C.) (Phelps 1983).
The remaining three artifacts are lithic material and include one biface fragment and two
flakes. The biface fragment is manufactured from silicified argillite and is highly fractured.
One intact lateral edge of the fragment shows evidence of bifacial reduction. The two
debitage flakes are small, complete flakes. One if of silicified argillite and the second is
unidentified to material, but is probably of a similar material. The argillite is available in
the Piedmont area of North Carolina and would have had to be imported into the coastal
region (Lee Otte, March 1992, personal communication)
' A small scatter of twentieth century historical artifacts was also located along the project
corridor. Artifacts recovered included such recently made items as an STP oil treatment
' plastic bottle, juice and beer cans, machine made glass bottle fragments, and so forth. The
artifact catalog is included in Appendix 1.

34
1

Phase I Summary and Recommendations
One prehistoric site was located during the Phase I survey. This site is located
approximately 65m north of the edge of the wetland occurring on the north side of Allen
Creek. This site consisted of a flake recovered from the surface, as well as cultural material
recovered from five shovel tests. This material included eleven sand tempered, cord marked
ceramic sherds, one biface fragment and one flake. Intersiting at five meter intervals
indicated that this site occurs in an approximately 150m2 area within the proposed pipeline
corridor. Although no features were encountered during the shovel testing it is KEMRON's
' opinion that eligibility testing should be conducted within the site area. It is recommended
that one percent of the site area be excavated.
The historic artifacts recovered during the reconnaissance survey are of recent origin and
the apparent dumping area does not appear significant. No further work is recommended
' on this area. No other artifactual or cultural remains were recovered from the remainder
of the project corridor. Clearance is recommended for all portions of the project area
except that designated as site K-1.
A Phase II strategy was submitted to the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office
on April 13, 1992. The Eligibility plan was given verbal approval on April 16, 1992 (Steven
Claggett, personal communication).

35

PHASE II RESULTS
Field Results
A single prehistoric site termed K-1 in this report) was identified during the Phase I survey
of the Wilmington to Southport 12-inch Lateral proposed gas pipeline (Figure 10). A
' Management Summary of the Phase I work and a Phase II strategy was reviewed and
approved by the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office on April 16, 1992 (Steven
Claggett, personal communication). At that time it was agreed that five lxlm excavation
units be hand dug in 10cm arbitrary levels with attention paid to any natural or cultural
stratigraphy.
' During the Phase I work it was estimated that the site area of K-1 was approximately 150m2.
Based on this site estimate an approximately 3 percent sample was recommended (5 lxlm
' units). During the Phase II fieldwork an extremely small artifact concentration was found
adjacent to site K-1 and an additional lxlm test unit was added to the Phase II work. All
of the soil would be screened through 1/4 inch hardware cloth and 50 percent of any
' features encountered would undergo flotation analysis. Each unit will be discussed
separately below. Unit locations are presented in Figure 11.
Unit 1
Unit 1 was a lxlm unit hand excavated in 10cm arbitrary levels to 60cmbs. Excavation on
' the unit was terminated after two consecutively sterile levels were encountered. The
following is a description of the soils present in Unit 1. Appendix B contains a complete
artifact list for the Phase II field work.
The uppermost stratum is a humic layer of 5YR 3/1 very dark grey sand
mixed with organic material to a depth of 3 to 5cmbs. Under-lying this is a
5 to 10cm layer of 10YR 6/1 gray sand. These upper two layers contained an
abundance of roots. The third stratum is a 2.5Y 7/4 pale yellow fine sand
that extends to a depth of 30cmbs. This stratum contained numerous small
sandstone concretions. A small concentration of charcoal flecking is evident
from 20 to 30cmbs. Roots are present throughout this third stratum and the
sand is mottled with root molds. The final stratum that extends from 30cmbs
to the terminus of the unit is a 2.5Y 7/3 pale yellow sand containing few roots
and few concretions.
Unit 1, levels 2, 3, and 4 contained prehistoric materials. Small areas of charcoal flecking
were first encountered in level 3 and small amounts were present in each level below
including level 6.

11
36

i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
??

Fj

fl

1
C
O) ?
C °' I
C
e Y cl J m
d ?' U L U Q
? L ?"? G1 61 I 6j +? N +?
C .N N .1-+ lv N
U N C y
c 41)
C I
d t-- C7 ~ !-
o V O _ ?-
W Q - - H I f'- O > L O
t
cn vU y n I U) o U)
r
L L Z U ` U
a a s p O L U O
0 O N +,
Q Z, y
V L N N t
(x? y
O C? d t
L ? Q. L
I I a L a_
cm > 10 4j c
? I W o N d N
a) Z (L
O O O Z a= = a
Z .'
ro
p O O CC) a a a a
I ?I I w
J O • p ? ? d
Y ? O I I
I
w O O ? O
I(D
(/) I • O O
y • •
N I ? I ?I
L • ? O ?
a O • CIO O o
10 I I I
O p M O ? O
? I I
a w
O O O a
? ?
CD
w c I I U
'
N O~ O O O
w
0
O O O O N
I I ( I
?i
v
x
a?
a
0
a?
CA
sue.
w
00
M

Unit 2
Unit 2 was a lxlm unit hand excavated in 10cm arbitrary levels to 50cmbs. All 5 levels
were culturally sterile. The following is a description of the soils present in Unit 2.
Unit 3

The first stratum is an approximately 4cm thick humic layer of organic
material mixed with 10YR 2/1 black sand. The stratum below is primarily
10YR 2/1 black sand with areas of 10YR 6/1 gray sand and extends from 5
to 8cmbs. The third stratum is a thin layer of 10YR 6/1 gray sand with an
average thickness of 5cm. The next stratum is predominantly 10YR 4/4 dark
yellowish brown in the southern portion of the unit, with the remaining area
comprised of mottled 10YR 6/1 gray sand and 10YR 2/1 black sand. At the
interface between this fourth stratum and the underlying stratum, at 35 to
45cmbs, is a large root mold in the west wall that contains 7.5YR 3/2 dark
brown sand. The final layer extends from 40cmbs to the terminus of the unit
and is a 10YR 5/4 yellowish brown sand. Some charcoal flecking was
observed in levels 3 and 4. No cultural materials were recovered from this
unit.
Unit 3 was a lxlm unit hand excavated in 10cm arbitrary levels to 50cmbs. No cultural
materials were recovered in Unit 3. The following is a description of the soils present in
unit 3.
The uppermost stratum consisted of 3 to 5cm of decaying organic material.
The underlying soil is a 10YR 6/1 gray sand mottled with 10YR 7/1 light gray
sand to an average depth of 33cmbs. The third layer is a 10YR 5/4 yellowish
brown sand and is from 10 to 20cm thick. The final stratum extends from 40
to 50cmbs and is a 10YR 6/4 light yellowish brown sand with a concentration
of 10YR 3/2 very dark grayish brown compact sand in the northeast portion
of the unit. No cultural materials were recovered from Unit 3.
Unit 4
' Unit 4 was a lxlm unit hand excavated in arbitrary 10cm levels to a depth of 80cmbs. This
unit was terminated after groundwater was encountered. This was after two consecutively
sterile levels had been excavated. The following is a description of the soils present in Unit
4.
The uppermost stratum is a 3 to 5cm thick layer of decaying organic material.
The underlying stratum is a 10YR 6/1 gray sand mottled with 10YR 7/1 light
gray sand which extends to an average depth of 20cmbs. A small amount of
charcoal flecking is present in this second stratum. Below this is a 10YR 5/4
39
p
LJ

u

1

yellowish brown sand layer which extends to a depth of 60cmbs. Charcoal is
still present in smaller amounts. The fourth stratum extends from 60cmbs to
the terminus of the unit. It is a 10YR 6/3 pale brown sand. The moisture
content increased with depth until groundwater filled the unit at 80cmbs.
Unit 4 contained prehistoric materials in levels 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6. Charcoal flecking was
present in levels 2, 3, and 4.
Unit 5
Unit 5 is a lxlm unit hand excavated in 10cm arbitrary levels to a depth of 70cmbs.
Excavation in unit 5 was terminated after three consecutively sterile levels were
encountered. The following is a description of the soils present in unit 5.
The first stratum is a 3 to 5cm thick layer of humic material. The underlying
stratum is a 10YR 511 gray sand which extends to a depth of 12cmbs. A
small amount of charcoal flecking is present in this second stratum. Below
this, the third stratum is a 2.5Y 5/4 light olive brown sand which extends to
a depth of 32cmbs. Small sandstone concretions are present throughout this
layer. The final stratum is a 2.5Y 7/2 light gray sand which extends from
32cmbs to the terminus of the unit. A very small amount of charcoal flecking
is observed throughout stratum four. Moisture content increases with depth.
Unit 5 contained prehistoric materials in levels 3 and 4. Charcoal flecking was evident in
levels 2 through 7, in decreasing amounts.
Unit 6
Unit 6 was a lxlm unit hand excavated in 10cm arbitrary levels to a depth of 70cmbs.
' Excavation in Unit 6 was terminated after 2 consecutively sterile levels were encountered.
The following is a description of the soils present in unit 6.

The first stratum is a 3 to 5cm thick layer of decaying organic material. The
underlying stratum is a IOYR 511 gray fine sand that is approximately 15cm
thick. The third stratum is predominantly a 2.5Y 6/4 light yellowish brown
sand mottled with 2.5Y 7/4 pale yellow sand. A few sandstone concretions
are encountered in this stratum. Below this is a 2.5Y 7/3 pale yellow fine
loamy sand which extends from approximately 35cmbs to the terminus of the
unit. At the interface between strata three and four there is a small
concentration of charcoal. The soil change from a fine sand to a fine loamy
sand also occurs at this point (approximately 40 cmbs).
Unit 6 contained prehistoric materials in levels 3, 4, and 5. Charcoal flecking was present
throughout the unit with a small concentration in level 3.
40

Phase II Materials Recovered
A total of 39 prehistoric artifacts were recovered during the Phase II excavations at site K-1.
Of these, 31 are ceramic sherds and eight are lithic artifacts. Artifacts are first described
in the context of the Unit in which they were found, then each artifact type is discussed
separately.
Unit 1 contained prehistoric material in levels 2, 3, and 4. Level 1 contained a single
ceramic sherd. Level 3 contained a mixture of flakes and ceramic material, a projectile
point and a piece of fire cracked rock. Level four of Unit 1 contained a single prehistoric
ceramic fragment.
Units 2 and 3 were culturally sterile. Unit 4 contained prehistoric material in levels 2, 3,
4, 5, and 6. Levels 2 through 6 each contained a single ceramic sherd each. Unit 5
contained cultural material in levels 3 and 4. One ceramic sherd was recovered from each
level. Unit 6 contained prehistoric material in levels 3, 4, and 5. Level 4 contained a flake,
while level 5 contained flakes and a projectile point.
Lithic Material
One projectile point was recovered during the Phase II excavations at site K-1. The
projectile point consists of the contracting stem and shoulder section of a Morrow Mountain
II projectile point manufactured from silicified argillite. The fragment measures 28.57 mm
in maximum length and 8.34 mm is maximum thickness. Stem length is 16.29 mm. The
maximum width, located at the shoulders (shoulder width), measures 25.62 mm.
Defined as a Morrow Mountain II, this type is from the Middle Archaic and dates to
approximately 4,500 B.C. Radiocarbon dates ranging from 4030 B.C. +/-200 to 4360 +/-
140 were obtained at the Russell Cave Site for the Morrow Mountain complex. A date of
' 4500 B.C. +/-120 was obtained for a Morrow Mountain occupation at Stucks Bluff Rock
Shelter. The earliest date obtained yet for Morrow Mountain II is 5045 +/-245; this was
obtained at the Ice House Bottom site in Tennessee. The Morrow Mountain postdates the
Eva II and Stanly types. It became obsolete before the appearance of the Savannah River
type. The Morrow Mountain type ranges throughout the southeastern United States (Justice
1978:104-107). The type is found along the Atlantic Coastal Plain from New Hampshire to
the Carolinas. It is rarely found in the Northeast. The name is derived from Morrow
Mountain, North Carolina (Fogelman 1988:94).
One biface was also recovered from the testing. The biface recovered from Unit 6, level
5, consists of a distal and medial section manufactured from silicified argillite. The
fragment maximum length is 41.68 mm. The maximum width is located at the shoulder
(21.15 mm). The basal width is 14.45 mm. The blade length is 24.7 mm. The maximum
thickness is 9.61 mm.
t
41

The remaining six lithic artifacts are fragments of debitage from lithic reduction. One of
the six flakes is a complete flake of silicified argillite. The other five are flakes or shatter
of Bull Quartz.
Prehistoric Ceramics
A total of 31 sherds of prehistoric ceramic were recovered during the Phase II excavations
at site K-1. Table 2 lists the ceramics by tempering agent and exterior decoration. The one
rim sherd recovered is a flat, fiber tempered, rim with cordmarked exterior. The cordage
was applied with a z-twist cord (Appendix C, illustration A).

i
Table 2. Prehistoric pottery recovered from Phase II investigations.
Temper Decoration Quantity verage Thickness
(mm)
Fiber fabric impressed 3 7.1
Sand/fiber cordmarked 2 7.5
Sand/fiber indeterminate/plain?* 3 5.6
Sand/fiber indeterminate/plain 1 6.8
Sand fabric impressed 3 6.9
Sand cordmarked 4 7.6
Sand indeterminate/plain 10 7.4
Sand/fiber/clay fabric impressed 4 8.3
Sand/clay cordmarked 1 8.2
TOTAL
POTTERY 31
I The classification of ceramic types for the North Carolina Coastal Plain is still based
primarily on the cultural sequences devised by early researchers (Phelps 1983:11) While
progress has been made toward better understanding ceramic chronology in the last two
' decades, the scarcity of professionally excavated stratified sites has meant that
interpretations be considered tentative, pending the development of more reliable
ethnohistorical models of North Carolina prehistory.
i
All the pottery recovered at site K-1 contained sand particles ranging from very small to
medium grains. Ceramics with any other tempering agent as well has been defined using
the differing tempering materials. The presence of sand is probably due as much to the
nature of the sandy clay present in the area as to purposeful tempering. Ceramics with any
' amount of fiber tempering are tentatively assigned to the Stallings Phase. The sand and
sand/clay, and so forth, ceramic sherds have been assigned to Mount
' Pleasant/Hanover/Cape Fear. All designated as Middle Woodland, little is known about
Cape Fear, Hanover, or even the larger type; Mount Pleasant. Each pottery type is briefly
defined below.
42

I

Stallings Phase
The Stallings phase ceramic type is the earliest one associated with cultures of this region.
It is distinguished by the use of fiber as a tempering material, a practice that may have its
origins in northern South America (Justice 1987:164). Determined to be Late Archaic,
associated with the Savannah River cultural tradition, it is certainly the oldest ceramic phase
"This pottery pre-dates all presently known indigenous Early Woodland ceramic complexes"
(Justice 1987:164). "Fiber-tempered pottery has been known in the extreme southern part
of the region at least since 1959, when it was reported from the Turner site (31Cb4), and
it was first formally reported in Brunswick County in 1960 with the assumption that it was
limited to the South Carolina border area" (Phelps 1983:26). There are approximately 38
sites in the Coastal Plain region where Stallings has been identified. These ceramics are
associated with Late Archaic complex artifacts such as net-sinkers, winged atlatl weights,
grooved axes and Savannah River points. The existence of fiber-tempered pottery in the
extreme southern region differentiates the South Coastal Plain from the North Coastal Plain
in terms of cultural sequences.
Mount Pleasant Phase
The Mount Pleasant phase is a Middle Woodland Period ceramic type. It is known from
a number of inland and coastal sites. The Mount Pleasant ceramic series is a sand
tempered ware that often contains large clastic inclusions, (pieces of grit). Surface finish
varies widely; there are examples of cord-marked, fabric-impressed, net-impressed and plain
in this series. The beginning of the Mount Pleasant ceramic series derives from a number
of radio-carbon dates of around 300 B.C. (Phelps 1983:32) Geographically, it is associated
with both the North and South Coastal regions, as well as the Tidewater region. The Mount
Pleasant complex is associated with changing settlement patterns to a more seasonal and
riverine adaptation. Artifact assemblages for the Mount Pleasant Phase include abrading
stones, shell pendants, celts and woven mats.
The Hanover series is closely associated with the Mount Pleasant phase. "The Hanover
' cord-marked and fabric-impressed clay tempered pottery defined by South is frequently
found in minor quantities with the Mount Pleasant series in both the Tidewater and Inner
Coastal Plain, as is a fine sand tempered ware with the same surface finishes. Whether or
not there is a temporal differential in the relationship of the clay and fine sand types within
the Mount Pleasant series is not known" (Phelps 1983:32)

L

43

7-1

Phase II Summary and Recommendations
The Wilmington to Southport 12-inch Lateral underwent Phase I survey during which time
a single prehistoric site was identified. After consultation with the North Carolina State
Historic Preservation Office, a Phase II eligibility strategy was developed. The results of
both the Phase I and the Phase II are included in this report.
With the exception of the single prehistoric site, the entire 13,500 feet of proposed gas
transmission pipeline corridor contained culturally sterile shovel tests or shovel tests
containing modern artifacts (indicative of disturbance). The site that was identified has
been termed K-1 for the purposes of this report. Six lxlm excavation units were excavated
in the area of K-1.
Based on the artifacts recovered, the site's occupation appears to span the time period from
the Middle Archaic (the Morrow Mountain point) to Late Archaic (Stallings phase pottery)
to at least Middle Woodland (Mount Pleasant, etc, pottery). Because of the small amount
of material recovered from each of these time periods, the site probably served as a short
occupation campsite through much of the area's prehistory. Its location near fresh water
would have provided good location for procurement of local resources. The presence of
Piedmont lithic materials, the silicified argillite, indicates a continued contact with the
interior areas of the Carolina region.
It is KEMRON's opinion that although site K-1 has the potential for artifact recovery, the
lack of sub-surface features and a general lack of stratigraphic separation indicate that data
on chronology and adaptation will not be obtainable from this site as it occurs within the
proposed project corridor. This site is not considered to contain any information that could
contribute significantly to prehistory or history (Criterion D of the requirements of National
Register of Historic Places). It is therefore recommended that no further archaeological work
be required for the Wilmington to Southport 12-inch Lateral.

1

Three small formations of mounded earth are located outside of the project corridor
adjacent to site K-1. This area was not surveyed due to the fact that it does not fall within
the proposed project boundaries. However, attention should be paid to this area during
construction to ensure that no heavy equipment impacts the area. In addition, should the
project corridor move this area should undergo a Phase I survey.
44

7
' REFERENCES CITED
Coe, Joffre L.
1964 The Formative Cultures of the Carolina Piedmont. Transactions of the American
Philosophical Society 54:5. Philadelphia.
Funk, Robert E.
1978 Post-Pleistocene Adaptations. In Northeast, edited by B.G. Trigger, pp.16-27.
Handbook of North American Indians, No. 15, William G. Sturtevant, general editor.
Smithsonian Institution, Washington D.C.
Gardner, William M.
1979 Paleo-Indian Settlement Patterns and Site Distribution in the Middle Atlantic.
Manuscript on file, Department of Anthropology, the Catholic University.
Gardner, William M., and R.A. Verrey
1979 Typology and Chronology of Fluted Points from the Flint Run Area. Pennsylvania
Archaeologist 19(1):13-46.
Hay, Conran A., and Alan N. Snavely, Thomas E. Scheitlin, Catherine E. Bollinger, Thomas
0. Maher
1982 Archaeological Predictive Models: A New hanover County Test Case. North
Carolina Archaeological Council Publication Number 18. North Carolina
' Archaeological Council and the Archaeological Branch, Division of Archives and
History, North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources, Raleigh.
Justice, Noel D.
1987 Stone Age Spear and Arrow Points of the Midcontinental and Eastern United States.
Indiana University Press, Bloomington.
Kimmel, Richard
1985 Memorandum: Archaeological Testing at #1Bwl36 and 31Bw137, Boiling Springs
Lake, Brunswick County, N.C. Manuscript on file, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
Wilmington District. ER-83-7238 and ER-85-7889 (tracking).

Loftfield, Thomas C.
1989 Archaeological testing and evaluation at two sites on Indigo Plantation Development,
Southport, Brunswick County, North Carolina. Manuscript on file, University of
North Carolina, Wilmington.
45
1

Oliver, B.L.
1983 Refinement of the North Carolina Chronological Projectile Point Sequence. In
Piedmont Archaeology, Special Publication No. 10, edited by J.M. Wittofski and L.E.
1 Browning. Archaeological Society of Virginia. Richmond, Virginia.
Phelps, David Sutton
1983 Archaeology of the North Carolina Coast and Coastal Plain: Problems and
Hypotheses. In The Prehistory, of North Carolina. An Archaeological Symposium,
edited by Mark A. Mathis and Jeffrey Crow, pp. 1-51. North Carolina Division of
Archives and History, Department of Cultural Resources.
Wapora, Inc.
1990 Phase I Archaeological Survey Report: U.S. 321 Corridor, from Patterson to Blowing
Rock in Caldwell and Watauga Counties. North Carolina. TIP #R-2237. Submitted
to Parsons, Brinckerhoff, Quade, and Douglas, Inc., Raleigh, North Carolina.
Wapora, Inc., McLean, Virginia.
Williams, Stephen (editor)
1965 The Paleo-Indian era: Proceedings of the 20th Southeastern Archaeological
Conference. Southeastern Archaeological Conference Bulletin No. 2
i
P

t
III

t
1

I
46

I
APPENDIX A: Artifact Data From Shovel Tests
47
NCNG-PHASE I SHOVEL TESTS

1
0

G
r
11
u
Page: 1
TRANS SHOVEL DEPTH COUNT DIAG? FUNCTION DESCRIPTION
0 0 0 1 no 0 0 0 lithic, flakes, unidentified

------
----
- SURFACE OF UNPAVED ROAD, 100M E OF SW END PRETTY POND FENC
-
-
--
2 0 --------
0 ------
1 -------
no --
--
2 ---
2 ---
3 -
-------------
---------------------------------------------
glass, machine-made lip bottle, aqua
SURFACE 5M E OF S.T. 36 whole; threaded lip; Tropicana 0
0 1 no 2 2 3 metal, storage, tin can
SURFACE 5M E OF S.T. 36
0 1 no 1 6 0 metal, storage, other storage
SURFACE 5M E OF S.T. 36 aluminum beer can, Budweiser
0 1 no 2 2 3 plastic, other plastic
SURFACE 5M E OF S.T. 36 juice container w/ alum. foil se
0 1 no 4 2 0 plastic, other plastic
SURFACE 5M E OF S.T. 36 STP Gas Treatment bottle
0 1 no 1 7 0 plastic, other plastic

------------
--------
------
-------
-----
---
--- SURFACE 5M E OF S.T. 36 3-ring binder (rings are metal)
---------------------------------------------------------

3 34
30
1
no
0
0
0 ----
lithic, flakes, silicified argillite
ACTUAL TEST 34-1S
30 1 no 0 0 0 lithic, lithic tools, biface
ACTUAL TEST 34-15 fragment
30 1 no 0 0 0 ceramic, sand tempered, cord marked surface
ACTUAL TEST 34-2N body sherd
35 1 no 0 0 0 ceramic, sand tempered, cord marked surface
ACTUAL TEST 34-1E body sherd
40 1 no 0 0 0 ceramic, fiber tempered, cord marked surface
ACTUAL TEST 34-1W
40 1 no 0 0 0 ceramic, fiber tempered, cord marked surface
ACTUAL TEST 34-1W body sherd
50 1 no 0 0 0 ceramic, fiber tempered, cord marked surface
body sherd
50 1 no 0 0 0 ceramic, fiber tempered, cord marked surface
body sherd
50 1 no 0 0 0 ceramic, fiber tempered, cord marked surface
body sherd
50 1 no 0 0 0 ceramic, fiber tempered, cord marked surface
body sherd
50 1 no 0 0 0 ceramic, fiber tempered, indeterminate surface
rimsherd
50 1 no 0 0 0 ceramic, fiber tempered, indeterminate surface
rimsherd
50 1 no 0 0 0 ceramic, fiber tempered, indeterminate surface
body sherd

------------ 50
-------- 1
------ no
-------- 0
---- 0
--- 0
---- ceramic, fiber tempered, indeterminate surface
------------------------------------------
--
----
-
--
-

4 0
0
9
no
2
2
2 -
-
-
-
---
-
ceramic, later porcelain type, other later porcelain
SURFACE NEAR S.T. 7 Blue Chinese print; plate fragments
0 1 no 8 2 0 glass, machine-made lip bottle, clear
SURFACE NEAR S.T. 7 whole bottle; threaded lip
0 1 no 8 2 0 glass, burnt or melted glass, light green
SURFACE NEAR S.T. 7 narrow bottle neck
0 1 no 8 2 0 glass, unidentified container glass, aqua
SURFACE NEAR S.T. 7
0 1 no 8 2 0 glass, unidentified glass, clear
SURFACE NEAR S.T. 7
0 1 no 5 2 0 metal, ammunition, other ammunition
SURFACE NEAR S.T. 7 lead cartridge
0 1 no 8 3 0 metal, other metal
SURFACE NEAR S.T. 7 metal fastener or rivet
0 1 no 5 1 0 metal, other metal
SURFACE NEAR S.T. 7
0 4 no 3 1 4 stone, brick, brick fragments
SURFACE NEAR S.T. 7 2 fragments are burnt
0 1 no 3 1 4 stone, mortar
SURFACE NEAR S.T. 7
0 1 no 1 2 0 rubber, other rubber
SURFACE NEAR S.T. 7 shoe sole

4 7
25
1
no
3
1
9 - ------------------------
metal, wire common nails, 8d
25 1 no 3 1 9 metal, wire common nails, 9d
25 1 no 3 1 9 metal, wire common nails, 20d
25 1 no 3 1 9 metal, wire common nails, fragment

NCNG-PHASE I SHOVEL TESTS Page; 2
TRANS SHOVEL DEPTH COUNT DIAG? FUNCTION DESCRIPTION
' 25 1 no 5 2 0 metal, ammunition, other ammunition
lead cartridge

C'

a

NCNG-PHASE 11 SHOVEL TESTS Page: 1
TRANS SHOVEL DEPTH COUNT DIAL? FUNCTION DESCRIPTION
101 4 25 1 no 0 0 0 ceramic, mix tempered, cord marked surface
ACTUAL TRANSECT: B
-
--
- sand/clay tempered, body sherd
-
-----
101 -------
6 --------
30 -------
1 -------
no ----
0 ---
0 ----
0 -----------
---
-----
-
ceramic, mix tempered, ---------------
--------------------
cord marked surface
ACTUAL TRANSECT: B
- sand/fiber rimsherd
--------------------
-
-----
101 -------
9 --------
25 -------
2 -------
no ----
0 ---
0 ----
0 ----
------------
-
ceramic, sand tempered, ----------
-
----
fabric impressed surface

- ACTUAL TRANSECT: B
----------------------- includes 1 body sherd
------------------------------------
101
----- 12
------- --------
17 -------
1 no
------- 0
---- ---
0 ---
0 ceramic, mix tempered,
- cord marked surface
ACTUAL TRANSECT: B sand/grit tempered, body sherd
----------------
-
-----
102 -------
4 --------
30 -------
4 -------
no ----
0 ---
0 ----
0 ------------------------
ceramic, mix tempered, ---------------
----
fabric impressed surface
-ACTUAL TRANSECT: C
--
------------------- sand/fiber/clay temp.; 2 body sher
------------------------------------
-
103 -
6 - -
25 3 no 0 -
0 -
0 -
ceramic, fiber tempered, fabric impressed surface
ACTUAL TRANSECT: D includes 2 body sherds

C'.

APPENDIX B: Artifact Data From Units

J

I
I
NCNG-PHASE II EXCAVATION UNITS Page: 1
TRNCH LEVEL COUNT DIAG? FUNCTION DESCRIPTION

1 2 1 no 0 0 0 ceramic, sand tempered, cord marked surface
rimsherd
1 no 0 0 0 ceramic, sand tempered, indeterminate surface
---------
1 ---------
3 ----------
1 -- -
no
0
0
0
lithic, flakes, silicified argillite
1 no 0 0 0 lithic, projectile points, Morrow Mountain
material type-silicified argillite
3 no 0 0 0 ceramic, sand tempered, indeterminate surface
1 no 0 0 0 ceramic, sand tempered, indeterminate surface
rimsherd
1 no 0 0 0 botanical, seeds and nuts
-------------------------------------------------
-
---------
1 ---------
4 ----------
1 ------
no ----
0 ---
0 ----
0 ---------
-
ceramic, sand tempered, indeterminate surface
---------
4 ---------
2 ----------
1 --- -
no
0
0
0
ceramic, sand tempered, indeterminate surface
1 no 0 0 0 ceramic, mix tempered, cord marked surface

----
----
---
---- body sherd
------------------------------------------------------------
---------
4 ---------
3 ----------
1 --
no 0 0 0 ceramic, sand tempered, cord marked surface
2
---
--- no
------ 0
---- 0
--- 0
---- ceramic, sand tempered, indeterminate surface
------------------------------------------------------------
---------
4 ---------
4 ---
-
1 no 0 0 0

-------
------
----
---
---- sand/fiber tempered
----
---------
4 ---------
5 ---
2 no 0 0 0 ceramic, mix tempered, indeterminate surface

----
----
---
---- sand/fiber tempered
------------------------------------------------------------
---------
4 ---------
6 ----------
1 --
no 0 0 0 ceramic, sand tempered, cord marked surface

---
----
---
---- body sherd
------------------------------------------------------------
---------
5 ---------
3 ----------
1 ---
no 0 0 0 ceramic, sand tempered, indeterminate surface

-
body sherd
5 4 1 no
-- 0
---- 0
--- 0
---- ceramic, sand tempered, cord marked surface
------------------------------------------------------------
---------
6 ---------
3 ----------
1 ----
no 0 0 0 lithic flakes, quartz
1 no 0 0 0 ceramic, fiber tempered, indeterminate surface
-------------------------------------------
---
-
6 - -
4 ----
1 ------
no ----
0 ---
0 ----
0 -------------
-
lithic, flakes, quartz
--------------------------------------------------
---------
6 ---------
5 ----------
1 ------
no ----
0 ---
0 ----
0 ----------
lithic, flakes, quartz
1 no 0 0 0 lithic, flakes, quartz
1 no 0 0 0 lithic, flakes, quartz
1 no 0 0 0 lithic, projectile points, other projectile points
material type-silicified argillite; point type unknown
I
II

I

APPENDIX C: Artifact Illustrations

1

11

f;
A: Fiber Tempered, Cordmarked Rimsherd. Unit 1 Level 2 (10-20 cmbs). 1
B: Fiber and Sand Tempered, Cordmarked Bodysherd. Unit 4 Level 2 (10-20 cmbs).
C: Fiber Tempered, Indeterminate Rimsherd. Transect 3 Shovel Test 34 (15-50
cmbs).
D: Morrow Mountain Point Fragment. Unit 1 Level 3 (20-30 cmbs). ,
E: Indeterminate Point Fragment. Unit 6 Level 5 (40-50).

n
I_:

C

L

1 ?./ if ,
r
I ?
A

B

E

[I

1
11
11

APPENDIX D: Profile Drawings

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
SOIL PROFILE OF WEST WALL, UNIT 1
S
DATUM I INF
F-1 ? 5YR 3/1 VERY DARK
GREY SANDY HUMUS
IN =10YR 6/1 GREY SAND
2.5Y 7/4 PALE YELLOW
SAND
2.5Y 7/3 PALE YELLOW
SAND
N
10CMBS
23CMBS
30CMBS
60CMBS
t
t
SOIL PROFILE OF WEST WALL, UNIT 2
S
DATUM
GROUND SURFACE
N
'.2 Y? • . Yx Yx Y? Yx rx r? YZ Y? Y2 Y? Y2 Y.t Yx r2 Yx Z'
2 yt
i.?Y:?v:?Y. •• •••••,•.•••.,•••••••r!f?!ft. `C?!C.?i:<v.`?.?. `(?..`?.?..• ...??.?.!f?'t?!f.?.V.?.'t.?..`<<,!I ?.:<.?.!??.`<<.;iv??.?
50CMBS
04 1
FTLEAF MOLD
LEGEND
=10YR 4/4 BROWN SAND
=10YR 5/4 BROWN SAND
-7.5YR 3/2 BROWN SAN[
ROOT MOLD
t
SOIL PROFILE OF WEST WALL, UNIT 3
S
DATUM LINE
1
N
20CMBS
50CMBS
LEGEND
E =HUMUS =10YR 6/4 LIGHT YELLOWISH
BROWN SAND
10YR 6/1 GREY SAND z <x <z =10YR 3/2 CEMENTED
WITH 10YR 7/1 LIGHT GREY SAND KYY
BROWN SAND
•;•;. =10YR 5/4 BROWN SAND

t
1
1
i
1
1
SOIL PROFILE OF WEST WALL, UNIT 4

DATUM LINE
44 1
=LEAF MOLD
a=10YR 6/1 GREY SAND
N
20CMBS
62CMBS
80CMBS
LEGEND
10YR 5/4 YELLOWISH BROWN SAND
WITH 10YR 5/3 BROWN SAND
ml"RU -10YR 6/3 PALE BROWN SAND
?Y?Y?
e
i
i
i
SOIL PROFILE OF WEST WALL, UNIT 5
S
DATUM
04 1
30CMBS
70CMBS
LEGEND
=HUMUS/ROOT MOLD
E =10YR 5/1 GREY SAND
-2.5YR 5/4 REDDISH BROWN SAND
7/2 LIGHT GREY SAND

SOIL PROFILE OF WEST WALL, UNIT 6
S
DATUM LINE
N
GROUND SURFACE
22CMBS
c • \ \ \ • 33CMBS
\ \ \ \ \ \ t \ \ ? \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ? \
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ? \ \ ? t \ \ \ ? \ \ \ \ \ \ ? \ \
\ \ \ \ ? \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ t \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ t \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ? \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ t \ \ \ \ \ t \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
70CMBS
1
=HUMUS/ROOT MOLD
=10YR 5/1 GREY SAND
x <? =25Y 7/4 PALE
YELLOW SAND
=2.5Y 7/3 PALE
YELLOW SAND

L

1

fl

1

11
C
APPENDIX E: Resumes of Key Personnel

Laura Clifford
Principal Investigator/Archaeology
M EDUCATION

11

Ll

rg??
MA., Archaeology, University of South Florida, 1990
BA., Anthropology, Oregon State University, 1986
EXPERIENCE
NWROn
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
Ms. Clifford is a Senior Archaeologist and serves as Principal Investigator in KEMRON's Cincinnati office for
archaeological projects. She is experienced in both historical and prehistoric archaeology with a background in
cultural resource management, osteology, historic architecture, and architectural illustrating.
Her responsibilities include designing and implementing field surveys, coordinating with state and federal
agencies, report preparation, laboratory analysis oversight, and making recommendations regarding cultural
resource management and National Register eligibility. Prior to joining KEMRON, Ms. Clifford worked for
several archaeological consulting firms in the South Eastern United States. She is currently serving as Principal
Investigator or Co-PI on projects in Ohio and Pennsylvania.
SELECTED PROJECT EXPERIENCE
• Principal Investigator. Work-in-Progress, Phase II Testing of Six Sites in Beaver, Butler,
Cameron, and Clinton Counties, Pennsylvania, for CNG Transmission Corporation.
• Principal Investigator. Phase I and Phase II Testing in Hamilton County, Ohio, for
Metropolitan Sewer District (subcontract with Proctor, Davis and Ray, Engineers).
• Principal Investigator. Phase IV Testing of site in Hamilton County, Ohio, for Metropolitan
Sewer District (subcontract with BBS Corporation).
• An Archaeological Assessment of Warm Spring Run, Berkeley Springs, West Virginia.
• An Archaeological Assessment of Hillsborough, Pasco, Manatee, and Pinellas Counties, Florida.
• Staff Archaeologist: Phase I, Il, and III surveys for Thunderbird Archaeological Consultants
in Virginia and West Virginia.
• Architectural Assistant: with Archaeological Consultants, Inc.,
• Historical Archaeologist: with HDR Engineering, Inc., Tampa, Florida.
• Archaeologist: Piper Archaeological Research, Inc., St. Petersburg, Florida.
TECHNICAL REPOR
• Addendum Report to the Cultural Resources Survey of Five Compressor Stations on the
Lebanon to Leidy Project, Warren, Fayett, Franklin, Licking, and Carroll Counties, Ohio.
Included the results of two Phase tI surveys (work in process).
Pled o,, Rec?tled Paper

• Addendum To: Phase I Cultural Resources report for Proposed Natural Gas Pipeline TL-400,
Extension I, and TL-479, extensions I and II, (86 miles) and Related Facilities in Pennsylvania.
Included the results of a Phase I survey in Beaver County, Pennsylvania. Written during
October 1991.

• Addendum To: Phase I Cultural Resource Report for Proposed Natural Gas Pipeline TL-400,
Extension I, and TL-479, Extensions I and Il, (86 miles) and Related Facilities in Pennsylvania.
Included the results of six Phase I surveys and one Phase II site located in Clinton, Cameron,
and Beaver Counties, Pennsylvania. Written during August 1991.
• An Archaeological Assessment of Warm Spring Run, Berkeley Springs, West Virginia, October
1990. Manuscript on file with Thunderbird Archaeological Associates, Woodstock, Virginia.
• An Archaeological Assessment of Hillsborough, Pasco, Manatee, and Pinellas Counties, Florida,
September 1989. Co-authored with Lee Hutchinson-Neff. Manuscript on file with the Tampa
Bay Regional Planning Council, St. Petersburg, Florida.
• "Analysis of Skeletal Data from the Yellow Houseboat Site," Appendix II, pp. 205-210,
Archaeological Test Excavations in Apalachicola Valley, July, 1989." Text authored by Nancy
Marie White. Manuscript on file with the Anthropology Department at the University of South
Florida, Tampa, Florida.
• An Archaeological Assessment of Sites 8-Pa-157D and 8-Pa-53E Agri-Timber Park, Pasco
County, Florida, November 1988. Co-authored with Dr. J. Raymond Williams, Sylvia M.
Layman, Annette L. Snapp, and Lee Hutchinson-Neff. Manuscript on file with the
Anthropology Department at the University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida.
• A Description of the Dutch Reformed Church, St. Eustatius, Netherland Antilles. Manuscript
on file with the Department of Anthropology at the College of William and Mary,
Williamsburg, Virginia.

t
i

PAPERS PRESENTED
• "The Hunchback Effigy Ceramics of the Prehistoric Southeast," at the 1989 Southeastern
Archaeological Conference. Paper authored by Susan Lee.
• "Investigations of Two Prehistoric Human Burials From the Apalachicola River Valley,
Northwest Florida," at the 1989 Florida Anthropological Society Meetings. Paper co-authored
with Dr. Nancy M. White, Sylvia M. Layman, and Charles Fuhrmeister.
2

AFFILIATIONS
Archaeological Institute of America
Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council
Archaeological Society of Virginia
CODES
Major Industrial Code(s): 3.2,9,11,18,21,22,28,31,32,33,34
KEMRON Service Area(s): 18,19,20
DATE

November 1991

3

t
Paul Tilook"
Field Director
EDUCATION
B.A., Kutztown State College 1982, Geography
A.A., Penn State University/Wdkes-Barre, Surveying Technology
mwwn
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
I EXPERIENCE
r

I
1

7?

Mr. Thomas serves as Field Director/Field Archaeologist on projects requiring Phase I surveys, Phase II
eligibility testing and Phase III mitigation. As Field Director, his established leadership ability, supervisory and
organizational skills have led to the successful completion of highly complex projects involving management of
large excavation and deep testing project teams.
In the area of survey technology, Mr. Thomas' field maps, field illustrations and profiles epitomize the high
degree of accuracy, detail and quality control mandated by statigraphic and site excavation projects. He has
analyzed, identified and documented hundreds of historical artifacts and has assisted in the preparation and
production of difficult reports. Mr. Thomas has worked as technical writer on projects involving national
education and is familiar with the strict regulations and requirements which govern production of government
publications, manuals an other instructional materials.
RECENT PROJECT EXPERIENCE
• Field Director: CNG Transmission Corporation. Phase II eligibility testing of two floodplain
sites in Cameron County, Pennsylvania, for a proposed CNG natural gas pipeline.
• Field Director. CNG Transmission Corporation. Floodplain deep testing at seven river
crossings for proposed natural gas pipeline in Clinton, Cameron, and Beaver counties,
Pennsylvania.
• Field Director. CNG Transmission Corporation. Phase I survey and deep testing of river
crossing and two compressor stations in Beaver and Cameron Counties, Pennsylvania.
• Field Director: BBS Corporation & the Metropolitan Sewer District. Ohio Phase III eligibility
testing of one Site in Hamilton County, Ohio.
• Field Archaeologist: Breathitt County, Kentucky. Phase I and II survey and testing of 108
acres and a rock shelter on the North Fork Mineral Company.
• Field Director: CNG Transmission Corporation, licking County, Ohio. Phase III testing of
three site options for the CNG Compressor Station.
• Field Archaeologist: CNG Transmission Corporation. Chemung, Schuyler, and Tompkins
Counties, New York. Phase I cultural resources investigation for a proposed 5.96 mile natural
gas pipeline extension.
• Field Archaeologist: Herkimer and Oneida Counties, New York. Phase I cultural resources
investigation for CNG Corporation's proposed 1296 mile gas pipeline.
r
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Paul Thomas
Page Two
• Fidd Archaeologist: New World Research, Inc. Phase U eligibility and Phase III mitigation
of two prehistoric sites in Pennsylvania.
• Fidd Archaeologist: New World Research, Inc. Phase I survey for proposed gas pipeline in
New Jersey.
• Field Arehaeologist: Gray and Pape, Inc. Phase IV mitigation of one site in Clermont County,
Ohio.

1

1

mRon
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
Timothy King
Field/Lab Director
EDUCATION
Coursework in Anthropology and Education, 1975-1982
Miami University, Oxford, Ohio.
EXPERIENCE
Mr. King has field experience in all phases of prehistoric and historic archaeology, including Phase I survey,
Phase II testing, and Phase III recovery. His repertoire includes broad area surveys, deep testing of floodplain
deposits, historic structure documentation and testing of Woodland and Archaic sites.
Mr. King serves as Laboratory Director, Field Director, Crew Chief, and Photographer on archaeological
projects. In addition to overall responsibility for laboratory activity and artifact curation, Mr. King's present duties
include implementing field surveys, supervising field crew activities, project background research, photographic
documentation of survey areas, report production, and artifact photo-illustrations.
SELECIED PROJECT EXPERIENCE
• Field Director/Lab Director/Report Co-Author. Phase II cultural resources survey for five
miles of proposed sewer line in Newtown, Ohio.
• Field Director/I.ab Director/Report Author. Site monitoring program in Spencer County,
Indiana for three prehistoric sites along the Ohio River for Indiana Michigan Power Company.
• Lab Director/Field Archaeologist: Phase III testing of one site in Hamilton County, Ohio, for
Metropolitan Sewer District, subcontracted from BBS Corporation.
• Lab Director: Phase I pipeline survey of 18.5 miles, and Phase II testing of six sites in Beaver,
Butler, Cameron, and Clinton Counties, Pennsylvania, for CNG Transmission Corporation.
• Lab Director. Phase III testing of three sites in Licking County, Ohio, for CNG Transmission
Corporation's Compressor Station.
• Field Director/Photographer. Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for proposed 5.96 mile gas
pipeline in Chemung, Schuyler and TompkinsCounties, New York.
• Field Director/Photographer. Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for proposed 12.94 mile gas
pipeline in Herkimer and Oneida Counties, New York.
• Report Production/Co-Author. Phase I cultural resources report on proposed 5.96 mile gas
pipeline in Chemung, Schuyler and Tompkins Counties, New York.
• Report Production/Co-Author. Phase I cultural resources report on proposed 12.94 mile gas
pipeline in Herkimer and Oneida Counties, New York.
• Field Director/Photographer: Phase I Cultural Resources Survey of 1,590 acres in Wayne
National Forest.
Printed on Recycled Paper

I I

1

r

G
• Report Production: Revised report of Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for 86 miles of
proposed gas pipeline in Pennsylvania.
• Field Director/Photographer: Phase I Cultural Resources Survey of 18 miles of proposed fiber
optic line in Illinois.
• Archaeologist/Photographer: Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for proposed 100 acre gas
compressor station in Arkansas.
• Photographer. Artifact illustrations for report on Phase III mitigation site in Pennsylvania.
• Archaeologist/Photographer. Phase I Cultural Resources Survey of 86 miles of proposed gas
pipeline in Pennsylvania.
• Archaeologist/Photographer. Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for 62.5 miles of proposed
gas pipeline in Kentucky.
• Archaeologist/Photographer: Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for 14.25 miles of proposed
gas pipeline in Kentucky, Indiana, and Ohio.
• Field Supervisor/Photographer: Phase I Cultural Resources Survey of 35 miles of proposed
gas pipeline in Virginia and West Virginia.
• Archaeologist/Photographer. Phase III mitigation at Camp Atterbury Military Installation,
Indiana.
• Archaeologist/Photographer: Phase I Cultural Resources Survey of proposed 13 mile fiber
optic line in Kentucky.
• Archaeologist/Photographer. Phase I Cultural Resources Survey of 14 mile and 32 mile
proposed highway corridor in Roanoke, Va.
• Archaeologist/Photographer. Phase I Cultural Resources Survey of 26 mile proposed Dulles
Toll Road Extension in northern Virginia.
• Archaeologist/Photographer. Phase II excavations of 14 sites along the 26 mile proposed
Dulles Toll Road Extension in Virginia.
• Archaeologist/Photographer: Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for proposed gas pipeline
through Camp Atterbury Military Installation in Indiana.
• Archaeologist/Photographer: Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for proposed gas pipeline
replacement in Athens county, Ohio.
• Archaeologist/Photographer. Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for proposed gas pipeline
replacement in Hocking county, Ohio.
• Archaeologist/Photographer. Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for proposed gas pipeline
replacement in Hancock and Wyandot counties, Ohio.
' November 1991
?P r s nree? n A-1 Wy ?` ?f
W 1 L D;
?E
J ff
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Wilmington Regional Office
James G. Martin, Governor
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary
February 12, 1992
T EITER OF APPROVAL
North Carolina Natural Gas Corporation
Mr. Calvin B. Wells, Registered Agent
Post Office Box 909
Fayetteville, North Carolina 28302
Bob Jamieson
Regional Manager
RECEIVED
President's Office
FEB 13 1992
North Carolina Natural
Gas COrPOration
Re: Letter of Approval
Project Name: Line 99, Southport Lateral Gas Line
Location: Leland to Southport - Brunswick County
Submitted by: North Carolina Natural Gas Corp.
Date Received: January 24, 1992
New Submittal
Dear Mr. Wells:
This office has reviewed the subject sedimentation and erosion control Plan.
We find the plan to be acceptable and hereby issue this letter of approval with
comments as attached.
Please be advised that Title 15A, of the North Carolina Administrative Code,
4B.0017(a) requires that a copy of the approved plan be on file at the job site.
Also, you should consider this letter to give the Notice required by GS 113A-61(d)
approved plan. The last page which lists approval comments should be copied and
attached to the sedimentation and erosion control plan that is maintained on site.
North Carolina's Sedimentation Pollution Control Program is performance
oriented, requiring protection of the natural resources and adjoining properties.
If, following the commencement of this project, it is determined that the erosion
and sedimentation control plan is inadequate to meet the requirements of the
Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 (North Carolina General Statute 113A-51
thru 66), this office may require revisions to the plan and its implementation to
insure compliance with the Act.
Recognizing the desirability of early coordination of sedimentation control, we
believe that it would be beneficial if a pre-construction conference could be
arranged to discuss the approved plan for this project. Please contact this office
and let us ]mow the date of construction start-up and the date of pre-construction
conference so that we may attend.
?l
127 Cardinal Drive Extension, Wilmington, N.C. 28405-3845 • Telephone [phone] • Fax [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
North Carolina Natural Gas Corporation
February 12, 1992
Page 2
We look forward to working with you on this project. If you have any
questions, please contact our office.
Sincerely,
'o?40
Daniel Sams, P.E.
Regional Engineer
Land Quality Section
DS/sfc
PRfl7FX.T NAME: Line 99, Southport Lateral Gas Line
IO=CN: Leland to Southport - Brunswick County
SUBMrrTED BY: North Carolina Natural Gas Corp.
DAZE RIVED: January 24, 1992
APPROVAL CCHME TS AND CONDITIONS
1. The developer is responsible for the control of sediment on-site. If the
approved erosion measures prove insufficient, the developer must take those
additional steps necessary to stop erosion from leaving this site.
2. Any and all existing ditches on this project site are assumed to be left
undisturbed by the proposed develognent; unless otherwise noted. The removal
of vegetation within any existing ditch or channel is prohibited unless the ditch
or channel is to be regraded with side slopes of 2 horizontal to 1 vertical or
less steep. Bank slopes may be mowed, but stripping of vegetation is
considered new earth work and is subject to the same erosion control
requirements as new ditches.
3. The developer is responsible for obtaining any and all permits and approvals
necessary for the development of this project prior to the commencement of this
land disturbing activity. This could include the Division of Coastal Management
under CAIIA requirements, the Division of Environmental Management under
stormwater regulations, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers under Article 404
jurisdiction, local County or Town Agencies under their local ordinances, or
others that may be required. This approval cannot supersede any other permit or
approval; however, in the case of a Cease and Desist Order from the Corps of
Engineers, that Order would only apply to wetland areas. All highland would
still have to be in compliance with the Sedimentation Pollution Control Act.
4. If any area on site falls under the jurisdiction of Section 404 of the Clean
Water Act, the developer is responsible to the orders of the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers. Any erosion control measures that fall within jurisdictional wetland
area must be relocated to the transition point between the wetlands and the
highlands to assure that the migration of sediment will not occur. If that
relocation presents a problem or contradicts any requiremexits of the Corps of
Engineers, it is the responsibility of the developer to inform the Land Quality
Section Regional Office so that an adequate contingency plan can be made to
assure sufficient erosion control on site. Failure to do so will be considered
a violation of this approval.
5. Any borrow material brought onto this site must be from a legally operated mine
or other approved source. A single use borrow site or an area to waste material
is only permissible if it is operated under total control of the Financially
Responsible person or firm who is developing this site and a plan modification
is submitted to this office that includes the area in question.
6. This permit allows for a land disturban
plan, not to exceed 160 acres. E}axxedin
this permit and would require a revised
Any addition in imgpervicus surface, ove:
plan, would also require a revised plan
erosion control measures and stormwater rE
ce, as called for on the application
j that acreage will be a violation of
plan and additional application fee.
r that already noted on the approved
to verify the appropriateness of the
:tention measures.
WWI r'
M c 0 0
c ? ? Cs. O O ?--? Ate, ,,,,? ?
e .? n n Q• W ?. O n
CD M
CD"
o
CD cju
so `C p ? ?? C ? ? ,? a O
b
w 1 °^ O Z o VO
?. o?oo 'moo ° ?o
CD
Ar Qr cm o O c
o• . n' O ? C'? ?' ?
O y
C tz W ?. o
= CD O
° ? CD ?"

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
IN REPLY REFER TO March 16, 1992
Regulatory Branch
Action ID. 199201128 and Nationwide Permit No. 12 (Utility Line Backfill and
Bedding)
Mr. Walter J. Muchowski
Willbros Butler Engineers, Inc.
802 North Howe Street
Southport, North Carolina 28461
Dear Mr. Muchowski:
Reference your application of September 19, 1991, for Department of the
Army authorization to place a Gas-Pipeline from Leland to Southport, Brunswick
County, North Carolina.
For the purposes of the Corps of Engineers' Regulatory Program, Title 33,
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 330.6, published in the Federal
Register on November 22, 1991, lists nationwide permis. Authorization,
pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, was provided for the discharge
of material for backfill or bedding for utility lines, including outfall and
intake structures, provided there is no change in pre-construction contours.
Your work is authorized by this nationwide permit provided it is
accomplished in strict accordance with the enclosed conditions. This
nationwide permit does not relieve you of the responsibility to obtain any
required State or local approval. Additionally, you should notify Mr. Jim
Gregson, Wilmington Regional Office, North Carolina Division of Coastal
Management, 127 Cardinal Drive Extension, Wilmington, North Carolina 28405,
Tel. [phone].
This verification will be valid for 2 years from the date of this letter
unless the nationwide authorization is modified, reissued, or revoked. Also,
this verification will remain valid for the 2 years if, during that period,
the NWP authorization is reissued without modification or the activity
complies with any subsequent modification of the NWP authorization. If during
the 2 years, the NWP authorization expires or is suspended or revoked, or is
modified, such that the activity would no longer comply with the terms and
conditions of the NWP authorization, activities which have commenced (i.e.,
are under construction) or are under contract to commence in reliance upon the
NWP will remain authorized provided the activity is completed within 12 months
of the date of the NWP's expiration, modification or revocation, unless
discretionary authority has been exercised on a case-by-case basis to modify,
suspend, or revoke the authorization.
-2-
Questions or comments may be addressed to Mr. Rudolf Schiener, Wilmington
Field Office, Regulatory Branch, telephone [phone].
Sincerely,

G. Wayne Wright
Chief, Regulatory Branch
Enclosure
Copies Furnished (without enclosure):
Mr. John Parker
North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health and
Natural Resources
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
Mr. John Dorney
Water Quality Section
Division of Environmental Management
North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health and
Natural Resources
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
Mr. Jim Gregson
Wilmington Regional Office
North Carolina Division of
Coastal Management
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, North Carolina 28405-3845
Mr. Tony Gaw
Military Ocean Terminal
Sunny Point
MTEA-SU-FEL
Southport, North Carolina 28461
GENERAL CONDITIONS
1. Navigation. No activity may cause more than a minimal adverse effect on
navigation.
2. Proper Maintenance. Any structure or fill authorized shall be properly
maintained, including maintenance to ensure public safety.
3. Erosion and Siltation Controls. Appropriate erosion and siltation
controls must be used and maintained in effective operating condition during
construction, and all exposed soil and other fills must be permanently
stabilized at the earliest practicable date.
4. Aquatic Life Movements. No activity may substantially disrupt the
movement of those species of aquatic life indigenous to the waterbody,
including those species which normally migrate through the area, unless the
activity's primary purpose is to impound water.
5. Equipment. Heavy equipment working in wetlands must be placed on mats or
other measures must be taken to minimize soil disturbance.
6. Regional and Case-by-case Conditions. The activity must comply with any
regional conditions which may have been added by the Division Engineer and any
case specific conditions added by the Corps.
7. Wild and Scenic Rivers. No activity may occur in a component of the
National Wild and Scenic River System; or in a river officially designated by
Congress as a "study river" for possible inclusion in the system, while the
river is in an official study status. Information on Wild and Scenic Rivers
may be obtained from the National Park Service and the U.S. Forest Service.
8. Tribal Rights. No activity or its operation may impair reserved tribal
rights, including, but not limited to, reserved water rights and treaty
fishing and hunting rights.
9. Water Quality Certification. In certain states, an individual state
water quality certification must be obtained or waived.
10. Coastal Zone Management. In certain states, an individual state coastal
zone management consistency concurrence must be obtained or waived.
11. Endangered Species. No activity is authorized under any NWP which is
likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a threatened or endangered
species or a species proposed for such designation, as identified under the
Federal Endangered Species Act, or which is likely to destroy or adversely
modify the critical habitat of such species. Non-Federal permittees shall
-2-
notify the District Engineer if any listed species or critical habitat might
be affected or is in the vicinity of the project and shall not begin work on
the activity until notified by the District Engineer that the requirements of
the Endangered Species Act have been satisfied and that the activity is
authorized. Information on the location of threatened and endangered species
can be obtained from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine
Fisheries Service.
12. Historic Properties. No activity which may affect Historic Properties
listed, or eligible for listing, in the National Register of Historic Places
is authorized, until the District Engineer has complied with the provisions of
33 CFR 325, Appendix C. The prospective permittee must notify the District
Engineer if the authorized activity may affect any historic properties listed,
determined to be eligible, or which the prospective permittee has reason to
believe may be eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic
Places, and shall not begin the activity until notified by the District
Engineer that the requirements of the National Historic Preservation Act have
been satisfied and that the activity is authorized. Information on the
location and existence of historic resources can be obtained from the State
Historic Preservation Office and the National Register of Historic Places (see
33 CFR 330.4(g)).
13. Water Supply Intakes. No discharge of dredged or fill material may occur
in the proximity of a public water supply intake except where the discharge is
repair of the public water supply intake structures or adjacent bank
stabilization.
14. Shellfish Production. No discharge of dredged or fill material may occur
in areas of concentrated shellfish production, unless the discharge is
directly related to a shellfish harvest activity authorized by nationwide
permit.
15. Suitable Material. No discharge of dredged or fill material may consist
of unsuitable material (e.g., trash, debris, car bodies, etc.) and material
discharged must be free from toxic pollutants in toxic amounts.
16. Mitigation. Discharges of dredged or fill material into waters of the
United States must be minimized or avoided to the maximum extent practicable
at the project site (i.e., on-site), unless the District Engineer has approved
a compensation mitigation plan for the specific regulated activity.
17. Spawning Areas. Discharges in spawning areas during spawning seasons
must be avoided to the maximum extent practicable.
18. Obstructions of High Flows. To the maximum extent practicable,
discharges must not permanently restrict or impede the passage of normal or
expected high flows or cause the relocation of the water (unless the primary
purpose of the fill is to impound waters).
-3-
19. Adverse Impacts from Impoundments. If the discharge creates an
impoundment of water, adverse impacts on the aquatic system caused by the
accelerated passage of water and/or the restriction of its flow shall be
minimized to the maximum extent practicable.
20. Waterfowl Breeding Areas. Discharges into breeding areas for migratory
waterfowl must be avoided to the maximum extent practicable.
21. Removal of Temporary Fills. Any temporary fills must be removed in their
entirety and the affected areas returned to their preexisting elevation.
The temporary placement of excavated or fill material in waters or
wetlands will be for the absolute minimum period of time necessary to
accomplish the work.
REGIONAL CONDITIONS
1. Notification to the Wilmington District Engineer will be required, and the
applicant must receive written approval before starting work.
a. The prospective permittee must notify the District Engineer as early
as possible and shall not begin the activity:
(1) until notified by the District Engineer that the activity may
proceed under the NWP with any special conditions imposed by the District or
Division Engineer; or
(2) if notified by the District or Division Engineer that an
individual permit is required; or
(3) unless 30 days have passed from the District Engineer's receipt
of the notification and the prospective permittee has not received notice from
the District or Division Engineer. Subsequently, the permittee's right to
proceed under the NWP may be modified, suspended or revoked only in accordance
with the procedure set forth in 33 CFR 330.5(d)(2).
b. The notification must be in writing and include the following
information and any required fees:
(1) name, address and telephone number of the prospective permittee;
(2) location of the proposed project;
(3) brief description of the proposed project; the project's purpose;
-4-
direct and indirect adverse environmental effects the project would cause; any
other NWP(s), regional general permit(s) or individual permit(s) used or
intended to be used to authorize any part of the proposed project or related
activity; and
(4) a delineation of affected special aquatic sites, including
wetlands.
2. Restoration plans, including a. schedule for the restoration, shall be
submitted to the District Engineer at the time of notification.
3. The total width of the access corridor, excavation, and temporary fill
area is restricted to no more than 40 feet and must be minimized to the
maximum extent practicable. For site specific projects, such as foundation
construction for transmission towers, construction areas will be limited to no
more than 150 feet square per site and preexisting contours must be
reestablished.
4. All utility lines must be either completely elevated or buried so as not
to impact hydrology.
5. Stabilization is required immediately on completion of each individual
crossing.
STATE CONSISTENCY CONDITIONS
1. To be eligible for this permit, all utility lines must be either
completely elevated or buried so as not to impact hydrology.
2. Removal of temporary excavated or fill materials in waters or wetlands and
stabilization is required immediately on completion of each individual
crossing.
3. Proposed fill or substantial modification of wetlands and waters is
limited to 40 feet in width under this permit and must be minimized to the
maximum extent practicable.
4. Permanent access corridors shall be restricted to the minimum width
practicable and may not exceed 10 feet in width except in locations specified
on maps for vehicular access purposes.
5. Established erosion control practices shall be utilized to prevent
violations of the appropriate turbidity water quality standard (50 NTU's in
streams and rivers not designated as trout waters by the North Carolina
Division of Environmental Management; 25 NTU's in all saltwater classes and
all lakes and reservoirs and 10 NTU's in trout waters).
-5-
6. The applicant must receive written concurrence from the North Carolina
Division of Environmental Management that the proposal is certified under the
Section 401 Water Quality Certification Program.
7. If the proposed activity is within the North Carolina Coastal Area, the
applicant must receive written concurrence from the North Carolina Division of
Coastal Management that the activity is consistent with the North Carolina
Coastal Management Program.
GENERAL CERTIFICATION CONDITIONS
1. Proposed fill or substantial modification of wetlands and waters is
limited to 40 feet in width and must be minimized to the maximum extent
practicable.
2. Written concurrence is required from the North Carolina Division of
Environmental Management.
3. Permanent access corridors shall be restricted to the minimum width
practicable and may not exceed 10 feet in width except in locations specified
on maps for vehicular access purposes.
4. Established sediment and erosion control practices will be utilized to
prevent violations of the appropriate turbidity water quality standard (50
NTU's in streams and rivers not designated as trout waters by the North
Carolina Division of Environmental Management, 25 NTU's in all saltwater
classes and all lakes and reservoirs and 10 NTU's in trout waters).
5. Work plans must be legible and sized to 8-1/2 by 11 inches.
6. Measures shall be taken to prevent live or fresh concrete from coming into
contact with waters of the State until the concrete has hardened.
7. Additional site-specific conditions may be added to this Certification in
order to ensure compliance with all applicable water quality and effluent
standards.
8. Concurrence from the North Carolina Division of Environmental Management
that this Certification applies to an individual project shall expire three
years from the date of the cover letter from the North Carolina Division of
Environmental Management.

NORTH CAROUNA_,
?atun0a Gas POST OFFICE BOX 909 • 150 ROWAN ST. • 4830315
CORPORATION FAYETTEVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA 28302.0909
May 22, 1992
Mr. G. Wayne Wright
Chief, Regulatory Branch
Wilmington District
Corps'of Engineers
Department of the Army
P. O. Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890
Re: Line 99, Southport Lateral, COE Project: 199201128
Town Creek
Dear Mr. Wright:
Due to circumstances beyond the control of North Carolina Natural
Gas Corporation, its contractor, and agent (Willbros Butler
Engineers, Inc.), it has become necessary to abandon the
Directional bore of Town Creek and the adjacent wetland area.
NCNG,s Contractor began the directional bore from the north
approach to the wetland area last Tuesday. He encountered a
formation of Limestone at a depth of thirteen feet. Continuing to
bore through Limestone would add approximately $250,000. to the
cost of the bore through soil as it was bid.
Boring was suspended and the applicability of crossing this area
utilizing conventional ditching and trenching methods was
addressed. Installation by conventional methods would result in
approximately 1658 feet of construction through wetland adjacent to
and including Town Creek. Clearing a fifty-foot wide strip of
right-of-way would affect 1.9 acres of wetland. The impact of
construction could further be reduced by clearing a thirty foot
wide strip of right-of-way. Only 1.1 acres would be cleared
utilizing the reduced right-of-way width. Where possible, stumps
will be removed only were absolutely necessary to allow ditching
and backfill operations.
Through this area, the pipeline right-of-way lies adjacent to the
existing right-of-way of the Department of Defense Railroad. This
route was chosen in order that the environmental impact resulting
from clearing and construction would be minimized. However,
because of the terrain at the location of the railroad bridge at
Town Creek, we were forced to shift the right-of-way slightly east
of the railroad right-of-way. At the furthest point, the right-of-
ways are 85 feet apart. Attachment No.l is a portion of the
project alignment sheet showing the Town Creek area.
-2-
Construction through Town Creek and the adjacent wet area is
proposed as follows:
1. Conventional ditching utilizing equipment mats will be
performed up to the approach of both banks of Town Creek.
2. A box-section consisting of the actual creek crossing will
be prefabricated. The portion of this box section to be
installed in the bottom of Town Creek will be concrete
coated.
3: The creek banks will be cut and a ditch will be cut into
the three foot deep silt in the creek bottom.
4. The box-section will be installed across the creek and the
silt will be allowed to naturally cover the concrete coated
pipe. Town Creek is approximately seventeen feet deep at
the crossing point.
5. Backfilling and all remedial erosion and sedimentation
measures will be performed as soon as the pipe is installed
through the creek and wet area.
Installation of the Town Creek crossing by this method could be
accomplished within several days. The work could also be scheduled
to avoid the natural spawning season of the fish in Town Creek.
Reportedly, an early June construction date through the creek area
would miss most of the spawning season. A cross-section of the
creek crossing is presented in Attachment No.2.
Please expedite your review of this proposed change. Since verbal
indication of tentative approval has been received from most
parties receiving this correspondence, NCNG does not plan on
delaying construction.
Please let me known if you require additional information.
Yours truly,
Martin C. Rodgers
Director of Engineering services
att
cc: Mr. John R. Dorney
Water Quality Planning
Division of Environmental Management
North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
P.O. Box 2!9535
Raleigh, NC 27626-0535

-3-
Mr. B. Clinton Jobe
Director, State Property Office
116 West.Jones Street
Raleigh, NC 27603-8003
Mr. Robert Stroud
Wilmington Regional Office
North Carolina Division of Coastal Management
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, NC 28405-3845
Mr. Jim Gregson
Water Quality Section
Division of Environmental Management
North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
P.O. Box 27687
Raleigh, NC 27611-7687
Mr. Daniel Sams, P.E.
Regional Engineer
Land Quality Section
North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resouyrces
P.O. Box 27687
Raleigh, NC 27611-7687
Mr. Denis Stewart
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
512 N. Salisbury Street
Raleigh, NC 27604-1188
C. B. Wells
W. Wilson
T. D. Davis
W. W. Todd
B. S. Jackson
C. J. Monroe
,- mow. 1 7 ??+?.?j? J ''r? ? i' • _ 'ate '
., -. ? 2 - _a. ... t?y.,-s[•'1°' '?'• "11C :': *r - •'41.7 •,.•?
•Y. t .. l I y .r ? ' .t•r: I.. f \ /...•' ? ^? - '?1 /'•'et??,t~ ^ ? t' ?"r; ? `A 4 ?•' w -'/? `••
24L -4
_As
r A.- ? •. ! ',•,• J•? ;.Rr¢. ?q. ..,?
r? s - to 7.
V4 r . 4. 41V A
' ?" a% r?`'~ •1 _Z ? '? t 1C'.? ' y I
.s ?. .. .^.LFt '^ = 'ate. '?f•+.:ti ,?,•,'• _ ^ ,f'k,,,. + "vi
f-I
hti \w?r' 'ti. ...? `?l- .'IrY ?• ..\ R'-!'te'a 44.r•.. ri? _ • , '?
4 ,L ALP. J 4:7-..frf?pp?I w l; / •k Y}?ti =t .
In 41
cc 44- 14c.
-Wee 0.
.,
. law
w p ' 7 ?a K?t-
•f.., •, ? }4 '?:.,'•''
ac .. .Y `. .
`.:•?
ISM '??-?- r '? , : we•-' ?• S n.. ': - 4 ? ? ¢< ? o oac •utr-, .:n ? ,? ? : ,?..
~?C.- `L t?.+Yr.sn - '..j,-? Lf G r. rl s ?• t. f.-
75,
0, ?•? '?:i ? \, i.`?'+a" ? ' .rx.. iws. -.?. ? ? •.a.. may..
`r? "!1?`+ - ' _ - - : y- : `'`' y?r=• ,? a ?b - w--.r•' o as o r -coo* .+ a «Q, (? 444 1- • •-? , ; ?`; R • Tom. M1 . D't!n; " • . ?r?` -_ : i
* + , ,
•r>fe' Y44 Nth +y t
((?? ?-1?'• + 3?, '^?.M ..? `•1 ? `• ? - K..?^ "l- rrlly-, 'Sri ?}???`; 5'?• } 1??^
?•'RC^f? t.1?,'y• ii.'` r' ?1r'I•?`..'??'?,'' '1 ,!'.... ?:. ?f .la,}. v.Y.. try: y^',.
y ?? •
?et?? T x? 1- w III 1 ? 1. Jr
3 yp t??k .r _'Y• » fry X41.1 r..R { ! 'std, .?M--yiR° N '?'[sv}}?? t
?1,?lti'? ? •'D. •• K 7?. ..•?r .7??,.0 ? i?y%??: •a.• .•\ .:t. ^.C tea. - •? .
SANDY SOIL LOW WET AREA SAND'
0 <2> 5

0 `-
4887' 71'x" 160'x' 1578'o 564
ATTACHMENT NO.I
IA IA N \A
1.LA,J I

Y w
as Y
w
at w
Q z
?a
a? 3 m

?-?
00
at LL
O O

(9

CL a O
~ w

L) (L

0
Z 0 0 C1r 0
OWO Z
Ln r_co
_ co
cv
Q OLn
00
M
+
t0 ++
t0 t0
+ ++
TT +
00

PROPOSED NCNG P/L
O PLAN
SCALE: 1" = 6
0'
PLAN REF.
T.B.M. TOP I BEAM PILING BOOK I. PAGES 51.52
NORTHEAST SIDE TOWN CREEK
N.E. ABUTMENT
i

zuJ Y
w
w w
i-

as
m W

V az
3a
m
00 3 0 0

J
CL CL O w
0a
z
00
I—-
_
1=0
Ww -

z
Ln
+ r-
+ +
c 00
+ + rn
+
to o o + mm co
Ln ,n ,n uiin Ln
100 - - 100

L 3' MIN.
90 - N. I - 90
80 - - BO
70 N0.• 70
160 ----------
'* 12" x 0.375" W -
.T., GR x-42
60 - HIGH PRESSURE PIPELINE - 60
NOTE:
1) CROSSING TO BE PREFABRICATED. 12" X 0.188" W.T.
GR X-60 CONCRETE
2) SEE ENVIRONMENT MANAGEMENT PLAN PROFILE COATED PIPE
3) PIPELINE TO BE CONCRETE COATED IN
WET AREAS, AND CREEK BOTTOM. VERT. SCALE: 1 " = 30'
4) 3' OF SILT. HORI2. SCALE: 1" = 60'
R
F
.
PROFILE
E
BOOK PI, PAGE 32.33
REFERENCE ALIGN. SHT.99-3
RT H CAROLI NA NATURAL GAS CORP
NO .

ENGIN EERING DEP T. - FAYETTEVILLE, N.C.

PR OPOSED PIPELINE CROSSING
TOWN CREEK
0 ISSUED FOR PERMIT 9
8
M
P
NO REVISION h? DATE AN 18R NSWIC .
.
.
K RTH CAROLINA
r SC E A N DATE 1-6-92 APPR
WN.LBR09 ER pa DRANN By DCG CHECK ED By JJC No. TR- 9-5
z f o3sE 105. I if orn.ogn
-ATTACHMENT NM2 REVIULU a=?-Wc
-i