20190188 Ver 1_PCN Form Submission_20190212

D1�VR
�irlslan af Water Resources
Pre-Construction Notification (PCN) Form
September 29, 2018 Ver 3
Initial Review
Has this project met the requirements for acceptance in to the review process?*
F Yes
C' No
Is this project a public transportation project?"
� Yes r No
Change only rf needed.
BIMS # Assigned *
20190188
Is a payment required for this project?*
f No paymentrequired
� Fee received
f Fee needed - send electronic notification
Select Project Reviewer"
Rob Ridings:eads\rgridings
Information for Initial Review
Ve rsion# *
1
Reviewing Office *
Central Office - [phone]
1a. Name of project:
US 70 Improvements to control access freeway standards from US 70 Bus to the Neuse River Bridge in Johnston Co.
1a. Who is the PrimaryContact?*
Chad Coggins
1b. PrimaryContact Email:* 1c. PrimaryContact Phone:*
[e-mail] [phone]
Date Submitted
2/12/2019
Nearest Body of Water
Reedy Branch / Poplar Creek / Neuse River
Basin
Neuse
Water Classification
WS-IV: NSW
Site Coordinates
Latitude: Longitude:
35.58069 -78.36805
A. Processing Information
County (or Counties) where the project is located:
Johnston
Is this project a public transportation project?*
r Yes r No
Is this a NCDOT Project?*
G Yes r No
(NCDOT only) T.I.P. or state project number:
TIP W-5600 (FederalFunded Project)
WBS # (�)
50056.1.1
1a. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
::

fJ Section 404 Permit (wetlands, streams and waters, Clean Water Act)
r Section 10 Permit (navigable waters, tidal waters, Rivers and Harbors Act)
1b. What type(s) of permit(s) do you wish to seek authorization?
r Nationwide Permit (NWP)
rJ Regional General Permit (RGP)
� Standard (IP)
1c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified bythe Corps?
F Yes r No
Regional General Permit (RGP) Number:
198200031 - NCDOT Bridges, Widening Projects 2015
RGP Numbers (for multiple RGPS):
1d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWR:
fJ 401 Water Quality Certification - Regular
r' Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
r Individual Permit
1e. Is this notification solelyfor the record because written approval is not required?
Forthe record onlyfor DWR401 Certification:
For the record onlyfor Corps Permit:
r 401 Water Quality Certification - E�ress
rJ Riparian Buffer Authorization
x
C' Yes R No
C' Yes G No
1f. Is this an after-the-fact permit application?*
� Yes r No
1g. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in-lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
F Yes r No
1g. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in-lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
� Yes r No
Acceptance LetterAttachment
DMS W-5600 - Division 4- STR - RW - Buffer - NS 01.pdf
1h. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties?
C' Yes r No
1j. Is the project located in a designated trout watershed?
� Yes r No
B. Applicant Information
1d. Who is applying for the permit?
r Owner rJ Applicant (other than owner)
1e. Is there an Agent/Consultant for this project?
� Yes r No
2. Owner Information
2a. Name(s) on recorded deed:
State of North Carolina (NCDOT)
2b. Deed book and page no.:
2c. Responsible party:
NCDOT Div 4
2d. Address
Street Address
P.O. Box 3165
Address Line 2
�Y
Wilson
Fbstal / Zip Code
27548
2e. Telephone Number:
[phone]
S[ate / FYovince I Region
NC
Cauntry
USA
2f. Fax Number:
116.08KB
�,

2g. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
3. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
3a. Name:
Chad Coggins
3b. Business Name:
NCDOT Div 4
3c. Address
Street Address
P.O. Box 3165
Address Line 2
�ty
Wilson
Postal / Zip Code
27828
3d. Telephone Number:
[phone]
3f. Email Address:"
[e-mail]
S[ate / Awince I Region
NC
Country
USA
3e. Fax Number:
C. Project Information and Prior Project History �
1. Project Information �
1b. Subdivision name:
(rf appropriate)
1 c. Nearest municipality l town:
Wilson's Mills
2. Project Identification
2a. Propertyldentification Number:
2c. Project Address
Street Address
Address Line 2
6ty
Postal / Zip Code
3. SurFace Waters
3a. Name of the nearest body of water to proposed project:*
Reedy Branch / Poplar Creek / Neuse River
3b. Water Resources Classification of nearest receiving water:*
W S-IV; NSW
3c. What river basin(s) is your project located in?*
Neuse
3d. Please provide the 12-digit HUC in which the project is located.
030202011105 Poplar Creek // 030202011007 Reedy Branch
4. Project Description and History
2b. Property size:
S[ate I Rovince I Region
Country
4a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this application:*
The project area site is an urban connection / connector between Clayton and Selma. The project site includes some agricultural / forestry land, but is mostly commercial / light industrial
with rural single-family residential housing induding the Wilson's Mills residential areas.
4b. Have Corps permits or DWR certifications been obtained for this project (including all prior phases) in the past?*
� Yes r No � Unknown
4d. Attach an 8 7/2 X 11 excerpt from the most recent version of the USGS topographic map indicating the location of the project site. (for DWR)
W-5600 topo map.pdf 1.34MB
4e. Attach an 8 1/2 X 11 excerpt from the most recent version of the published County NRCS Soil Survey map depicting the project site. (for DWR)

W-5600 Soils Map 1.pdf
W-5600 Soils Map 2.pdf
4f. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
66
4g. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams on the property:
4000
4h. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:"
The purpose of the project is to improve the safety and mobility of vehicular travel along US 70 within the project limits.
1.42 MB
1.61 MB
Detailed crash data was collected within the project study limits betwaen May 2009 and April 2014. The data indicates 137 crashes occurred within the project limits during this time
period. T�nro of those crashes resulted in fatalities. One other crash resulted in serious injuries to twn people. The fatal crash rate for the section of US 70 within the project limits is
higher than the statewide average for similar facilities.
The epsting traffic signals along the section of US 70 within the project limits result in delays to traffic. These conflict points cause the substantial regional through traffic on US 70 to
stop or slow down to accommodate vehicles crossing and turning onto US 70, as wall as vehicles turning from US 70. The mobility of US 70 will continue to erode as traffic volumes
increase on US 70 and intersecting roadways. In addition, the speed limit can only be set to 55 miles per hour (mph) because of the at-grade intersections. The speed limit of the
adjoining freeway section of US 70 to the �st is 70 mph.
4i. Describe the overall project in detail, including indirect impacts and the type of equipment to be used:'�
The proposed project involves upgrading US 70 to a freeway from US 70 Business to the Neuse River in Johnston County. The project includes construction of interchanges at the
intersections of US 70 with SR 1501 (Swift Creek Road) and SR 1903 (Wilson's Mills Road). It also includes closing the remaining at-grade intersections and median openings that
provide direct access to US 70 from adjacent properties. Access to properties adjacent to US 70 will be provided via newiy constructed service roads. Staged construction with onsite
routing of traffic are included during the proposed project construction. Heavy road and bridge building equipment will be used.
4j. Please upload project drawings for the proposed project.
W-5600_Permit Drawings_20190121.pdf 27.02MB
W-5600_Permit Drawings_Buffer_20190121.pdf 8.14MB
W-5600_HYD_SMPv2.07_(20180517)(Oct2016).pdf 139.16KB
5. Jurisdictional Determinations
Sa. Have the wetlands or streams been delineated on the property or proposed impact areas?*
F Yes f No C' Unknown
Comments
Sb. If the Corps made a jurisdictional determination, what type of determination was made?*
C' Preliminary �' Approved C' Not Verified F Unknown C' WA
Corps AID Number:
Sc. If 5a is yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known):
Agency/Consultant Company: Stantec Consulting Ltd.
Other:
Sd1. Jurisdictional determination upload
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?*
C' Yes r No
Are any other NWP(s), regional general permit(s), or individual permits(s) used, or intended to be used, to authorize any part of the proposed project or related activity?
No, single and complete linear transportation project with independent utility.
D. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1a. Where are the impacts associated with your project? (check all that apply):
rJ Wetlands IrJ Streams-tributaries rJ Buffers
fJ Open Waters I� Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
�' I
2a. Site #* (') 2a1 Reason (�) 2b. Impact type *(') 2c. Type of W. * 2d. W. name * 2e. Forested * Zf. Type of 2g. Impact
Jurisdicition*(�) area*

Site 1a Slope Toe Protection fill P Bottomland Hardwood Forest Reedy Branch Yes Both 0.660
(acres)
Site 1a Mechanized Clearing P Bottomland Hardwood Forest Reedy Branch Yes Both 0.070
(acres)
Site 1 b Slope Toe Protection P Bottomland Hardv�rood Forest Reedy Branch Yes Both 0.090
(acres)
Site 1 b Mechanized Clearing P Bottomland Hard�naod Forest Reedy Branch Yes Both 0.080
(acres)
Site 2 Rip-Rap Pad Fill & P Bottomland Hard�nrood Forest Little Poplar Creek Yes Both 0.020
Excavation (acres)
Site 2 Mechanized Clearing P Bottomland Hard�nrood Forest Little Poplar Creek Yes Both 0.010
(acres)
Site 3a Ditch/Excavation P Bottomland Hardwood Forest Little Poplar Creek Yes Both 0.020
(acres)
Site 3a Mechanized Clearing P Bottomland Hardwood Forest Little Poplar Creek Yes Both 0.010
(acres)
Site 4a Pipe Outlet Protection P Bottomland Hardwood Forest Litttle Poplar Creek Yes Both 0.010
Fill (acres)
Site 4a Mechanized Clearing P Bottomland Hardwood Forest Little Poplar Creek Yes Both 0.010
(acres)
Site 4b Pipe Fill & Erosion P Bottomland Hardwuod Forest Little Poplar Creek Yes Both 0.010
Control (acres)
Site 4b Mechanized Clearing P Bottomland Hardwood Forest Little Poplar Creek Yes Both 0.070
(acres)
Site 5 Mechanized Clearing P Bottomland Hard�,wod Forest Poplar Creek Yes Both 0.020
(Easement) (acres)
Site 6a Service Road Fill P Bottomland Hardwood Forest Poplar Creek Yes Both 1.840
(acres)
Site 6a Mechanized Clearing P Bottomland Hardwood Forest Poplar Creek Yes Both 0.450
(acres)
Site 8a Slope toe protection fill P Bottomland Hardwood Forest Poplar Creek Yes Both 0.010
(acres)
Site 8a Mechanized Clearing P Bottomland Hard�nrood Forest Poplar Creek Yes Both 0.020
(acres)
Site 8b Y7RPC Ramp P Bottomland Hard�wod Forest Poplar Creek Yes Both 0.020
Excavation (acres)
Site 8b Mechanized Clearing P Bottomland Hardwood Forest Poplar Creek Yes Both 0.010
(acres)
Site 9 Service Road Fill P Bottomland Hardwood Forest Poplar Creek Yes Both 0.390
(acres)
Site 9 Service Road P Bottomland Hardwood Forest Poplar Creek Yes Both 0.030
Excavation (acres)
Site 9 Mechanized Clearing P Bottomland Hardwood Forest Poplar Creek Yes Both 0.140
(acres)
Site 10a Slope Toe Protection P Bottomland Hard�nrood Forest Poplar Creek Yes Both 0.110
Fill (acres)
Site 10a Mechanized Clearing P Bottomland Hard�nrood Forest Poplar Creek Yes Both 0.140
(acres)
Site 10b Rip-Rap Fill Slope P Bottomland Hardwood Forest Poplar Creek Yes Both 0.030
(acres)
Site 10b Mechanized Clearing P Bottomland Hardwood Forest Poplar Creek Yes Both 0.050
(acres)
Site 11a Ramp Fill P Bottomland Hard�nood Forest Poplar Creek No Both 0200
(acres)
Site 11a Mechanized Clearing P Bottomland Hard�nnod Forest Poplar Creek No Both 0.070
(acres)
Site 116 Outlet Protection P Bottomland Hard�nrood Forest Poplar Creek Yes Both 0.010
(acres)
Site 11b Mechanized Clearing P Bottomland Hard�nood Forest Poplar Creek Yes Both 0.020
(acres)
Site 13a Bore Pit Fill P Bottomland Hard�nvod Forest Poplar Creek Yes Both 0.010
(acres)

Site 13a Bore Pit Excavation P Bottomland Hardwood Forest Poplar Creek Yes Both 0.060
(acres)
Site 14a Roadway Fill P Bottomland Hardwood Forest Poplar Creek Yes Both 0.550
(acres)
Site 14a Roadway Excavation P Bottomland Hardwood Forest Poplar Creek Yes Both 0.040
(acres)
Site 14a Mechanized Clearing P Bottomland Hard�naod Forest Poplar Creek Yes Both 0.110
(acres)
Site 14b Roadway Excavation P Bottomland Hard�nrood Forest Poplar Creek Yes Both 0.040
(acres)
Site 14b Mechanized Clearing P Bottomland Hard�nood Forest Poplar Creek Yes Both 0.030
(acres)
Site 15 Culvert Fill P Bottomland Hardwood Forest Neuse River Yes Both 0.100
(acres)
Site 15 Mechanized Clearing P Bottomland Hard�nrood Forest Neuse River Yes Both 0.030
(acres)
Site 16 Roadway Fill P Bottomland Hardwood Forest Neuse River Yes Both 0220
(acres)
Site 16 Mechanized Clearing P Bottomland Hard�nood Forest Neuse River Yes Both 0.060
(acres)
Site 6 Outlet Protection P Bottomland Hard�nvod Forest Poplar Creek Yes Both 0.010
(acres)
Site 6 Mechanized Clearing P Bottomland Hard�nrood Forest Poplar Creek Yes Both 0.040
(acres)
2g. Total Temporary Wetland Impact
0.000
2g. Total Wetland Impact
5.920
2h. Comments:
2g. Total Permanent Wetland Impact
5.920
All <0.01 acre impacts rounded to 0.01 acre impact.
Project includes jurisdictional hand clearing (Site 1 a@ 0.14 acre, Site 1 b@ 0.05 acre, Site 3a @ 0.02 acre, Site 4a @ 0.07 acre, Site 11 a@ 0.06
acre, Site 14a @ 0.05 acre, Site 14b @ 0.03 acre, Site 15 @ 0.04 acre, and Site 16 @ 0.04 acre --> Total 0.5 acre).......(Site 6 culvert outlet
protection added at the end of table.)
Memo telephone conversation with Eric Alsmyeyer (Corps Project Manager): Corps will not require compensatory mitigation for Mechanized Clearing
induded with this project.
3. Stream Impacts
❑ 3a. Reason for impact (?) 3b.lmpact type * 3c. Type of impact* 3d. S. name * 3e. Stream Type * 3f. Type of 3g. S. width* 3h. Impact
(?) Jurisdiction* length*
Site 1 Culvert EMension Permanent Culvert Reed Branch Perennial Both 10 121
S1 Y
Average(Feet) (linearfeet)
gy Site 1 Dewatering Temporary Dewatering Reedy Branch Perennial Both 10 18
Average(Feet) (linearfeet)
S3 Site 1 Bank Stabilization Permanent Bank Stabilization Reedy Branch Perennial Both 10 32
Average(feet) (linearfeet)
❑Site 3 Culvert Extension / Permanent Relocation Little Poplar Creek Perennial Corps � 280
Stream Relocation Average(feet) pinearfeet)
SS Site 3 Dewatering Temporary Dewatering Little Poplar Creek Perennial Corps 5 40
Average(feet) (linearfeet)
Site 3 Bank Stabilization Permanent Bank Stabilization Little Po lar Creek Perennial Cor s 5 14
S6 P P
Average(feet) (linearfeet)
Site 4 Culvert Extension Permanent Culvert Little Po lar Creek Intermittent Both 5 42
S7 P
Average(feet) (linearfeet)
gg Site 4 Dewatering Temporary Dewatering Little Poplar Creek Intermittent Both 5 20
Average(feet) (linearfeet)
Site 4 Bank Stabilization Permanent Bank Stabili�ation Little Po lar Creek Intermittent Both 5 23
S9 P
Average(feet) (linearfeet)
Site 7 Culvert Permanent Culvert Po lar Creek Perennial Both 5 84
S10 p
Average(Feet) (linearfeet)
S11 Site 7 Dewatering Temporary Dewatering Poplar Creek Perennial Both 5 42
nverage(feery pinearfeet)

S12 Site 7 Bank Stabilization Permanent
S13 Site 8 Culvert 6ctension Permanent
S14 Site 8 Dewatering Temporary
S15 Site 10 Culvert 6ctension Permanent
S16 Site 10 Relocation Permanent
S17 Site 10 Dewatering Temporary
S18 Site 10 Bank Stabilization Permanent
S19 Site 13 Culvert Permanent
S20 Site 13 Dewatering Temporary
S21 Site 13 Bank Stabilization Permanent
324 Site 14 Culvert Permanent
S23 Site 14 Dewatering Temporary
S24 Site 14 Bank Stabilization Permanent
S25 Site 17 Culvert Permanent
S26 Site 17 Dewatering Temporary
gp7 Site 11 Culvert Permanent
gyg Site 11 Dewatering Temporary
gyg Site 11 Bank Stabilization Permanent
Stabilization
Stabilization
Stabilization
Stabilization
Stabilization
Creek
Creek
Creek
Creek
Creek
Creek
Creek
Creek
Creek
Creek
Creek
Creek
Creek
River
River
Creek
Creek
Creek
Perennial
Intermittent
Intermittent
Perennial
Perennial
Perennial
Perennial
Intermittent
Intermittent
Intermittent
Perennial
Perennial
Perennial
Intermittent
Intermittent
Intermittent
Intermittent
Intermittent
3i. Total jurisdictional ditch impact in square feet:
0
3i. Total permanent stream impacts: 3i. Total temporary stream impacts:
2,163 395
3i. Total stream and ditch impacts:
2558
3j. Comments:
Site 14, please reference memo for site inspections conducted on April 4, 2018, with Tom Steffens of the Corps of Engineers. Mr. Steffens determined
that the stream channel impacts associated with Site 14 would not be assessed as stream relocation impacts. However, for the purposes of
compensatory mitigation the referenced stream impacts wuuld be allotted an 1:1 compensatory mitigation ratio. Also reference merzw for approved
stream impact compensatory mitigation ratios ....................._ (Site 11 stream impacts added at the end of table).
4. Open Water Impacts
4g. Total temporary open water Impacts:
0.00
4g. Total open water impacts:
022
4h. Comments:
The project includes the draining and fill of two farm ponds for an exit ramp.
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWR)
4g. Total permanent open water impacts:
0.22
�4�
Average (feet) Qinear feet)
� 125
Average (feet) (linear feet)
�10
Average (feet) (linear feet)
1� 95
Average (feet) (linear feet)
1� 75
Average (feet) (linear feel)
1� 92
Average (feet) (linear feet)
1� 285
Average (feet) Qinear feel)
� 63
Average(feet) Qinearfeet)
� 40
Average(feet) Qinearfeet)
� 27
Average(feet) (linearfeet)
� 501
Average(feet) (linearfeet)
� 30
Average(feet) (linearfeet)
� 44
Average(feet) (linearfeet)
� 97
Average(feet) (linearfeet)
� 20
Average(Feet) (linearfeet)
� 157
Average(feet) Qinearfeet)
� 83
Average(feet) Qinearfeet)
5 157
Average (feet) � Qinear feet)

6a. Project is in which protect basin(s)?
Q�eck all tha[ apply.
fJ Neuse
r Catawba
r Goose Creek
r Other
r Tar-Pamlico
r Randleman
r Jordan Lake
6h. Total buffer impacts:
Total Temporary impacts:
Zone 1
0.00
Zone 2
0.00
Total Permanent impacts:
Total combined buffer impacts:
6i. Comments:
Zone 1
121,823.00
Zone 1
121.823.00
Supporting Documentation
W-5600_Permit Drawings_20190121.pdf
W-5600_Permit Drawings_Buffer_20190121.pdf
W-5600 Memo for Record 04 04 2018.pdf
W-5600 Memo for Record 01 30 2019.pdf
Compensatory Mitigation Units Table.pdf
DMS W-5600 - Division 4- STR - RW - Buffer - NS 01.pdf
E. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
Zone 2
78,393.00
Zone 2
78,393.00
27.02MB
8.14M6
112.25KB
2129KB
104.37KB
116.08KB
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing the project:
This project was reviewed through the full NEPA/Section 404 process. On June 15, 2016, the NEPAA/Section 404 Merger Team concurred that
Alternative 2A (the alternative included in this PCN application) was the least environmentally damaging practicable alternative (LEDPA).
In order to reduce stream and wetland impacts along the western end of the project, Service Roads 1A and 2 were realigned closer to US 70, utiliang
a concrete barrier to provide the separation. These miniimi�ation efforts reduced the stream and �netland impacts of the project by 230 feet and 1.0
acres, respectively. Where practical and safe, steeper slopes (no greater than 3:1) will be utilized along the project. During project design, special
consideration was given to slopes in wetland areas and near streams.
1b. Specificallydescribe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques:
All construction equipment will be staged and operated from upland areas. DOT will also install silt fencing to protect the streams and wetlands
adjacent to the projecL Safety fencing will be used to delineate jurisdictional and environmentally sensitive areas from encroachment.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
r Yes r No
�
2c. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):

�J DWR
fJ Corps
2d. If yes, which mitigation option(s) will be used for this project?
r' Mitigation bank rJ Payment to in-lieu fee r Permittee Responsible
program Mitigation
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In-lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in-lieu fee program is attached.
r Yes r No
4b. Stream mitigation requested:
Qinearfeet)
2097
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWR only):
(square feet)
352085
4f. Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested:
(acres)
4c. If using stream mitigation, what is the stream temperature:
warm
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
(acres)
8.96
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
(acres)
4h. Comments
Memo telephone conversation with Eric Alsmyeyer (Corps Project Manager): Corps will not require compensatory mitigation for Mechanized Clearing
included with this project.
Site 14, please reference merrw for site inspections conducted on April 4, 201 S, with Tom Steffens of the Corps of Engineers. Mr. Steffens determined
that the stream channel impacts associated with Site 14 �nrould not be assessed as stream relocation impacts. However, for the purposes of
compensatory mitigation the referenced stream impacts would be allotted an 1:1 compensatory mitigation ratio. Also reference memo for approved
stream impact compensatory mitigation ratios. (Referenced memo included in Miscellaneous section.)
6. Buffer mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) - required by DWR
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires buffer mitigation? If yes, you must fill out this entire form - please contact DWR for more
information.
r Yes r No
6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact.
Reasonforimpact
�
Roadway Construction
Zone 2 Transportation Roadway Construction
6f. Total buffer mitigation required
352065
6d. Total impact Multiplier
(square feet)
88,463 �
57,754 1.5
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, is payment to a mitigation bank or NC Division of Mitigation Services proposed?
G Yes r No
6h. Attach the acceptance letter from the mitigation bank or NC Division of Mitigation Services.
DMS W-5600 - Division 4- STR - RW - Buffer - NS 01.pdf
W-5600 Memo for Record 04 04 2018.pdf
W-5600 Memo for Record 01 30 2019.pdf
Compensatory Mitigation Units Table.pdf
DMS W-5600 - Division 4- STR - RW - Buffer - NS 01.pdf
6j. Comments:
116.08KB
112.25KB
21.29KB
104.37KB
116.08KB
F. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWR)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
Required mitigation
.�are feet)
86,676
1a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
F Yes � No
What type of SCM are you providing?
r Level Spreader
fJ Vegetated Conveyance (lower SHWT)
r Wetland Swale (higher SMNT)
r Other SCM that removes minimum 30 % nitrogen
r Proposed project will not create concentrated stormwater flow through the buffer

Diffuse Flow Documentation
W-5600_HYD_SMPv2.07_(20180517)(Oct2016).pdf
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. Is this a NCDOT project subject to compliance with NCDOT's Individual NPDES permit NCS000250?*
� Yes r No
Comments:
139.16KB
I G. Supplementary Information " I
1. Environmental Documentation
1a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federallstate/local) funds or the use of public (federal/state) land? *
� Yes r No
1b. If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State (North Carolina)
Environmental PolicyAct (NEPA/SEPA)?*
C' Yes r No
Comments:
*
Federal Administrative Action "Categorical Exclusion" included in Miscellaneous Attachments
2. Violations (DWR Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWR Water Quality Certification Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), or DWR Surface Water or Wetland Standards or
Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?*
� Yes r No
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWR Requirement)
3a. Will this project result in additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water qualit�/? *
C' Yes r No
3b. If you answered "no," provide a short narretive description.
The project is a safety and mobility projecL It is expected to improve safety concerns based on detailed cresh data for the project area and improve
mobility through the area, and cumulatively with other US 70 corridor projects, would contribute to improved mobility for the 134-mile US 70 corridor
between I-40 and the Port of Morehead City, wfiich is designated as the future Interstate 42.
The project has the potential to influence the specific location of development along the US 70 corridor, as the proposed interchange locations would
be more conducive to non-residential, highway oriented commercial development. How2ver, the project is not likely to attract development to the area.
When considered in combination with the US 70 Clayton Bypass, the project could play a role in influencing development in the area and into eastern
Johnston County. However, the Johnston County 2030 Comprehensive Plan acknowiedges development at the terminus of the Clayton Bypass, a
freeway facility, will likely extend east of I-95, with or without the project. The contribution of the project to cumulative impacts resulting from future
development is expected to be negligible.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWR Requirement)
4a. Is sewage disposal required by DWR for this project?*
f Yes r No � WA
5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or habitat?*
� Yes r No
Sb. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act impacts?*
� Yes r No
Sc. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
Raleigh
Sd. Is another Federal agency involved?*
r Yes
r No
C' Unknown
What Federal Agency is involved?
FHWA (i.e. Federal Funded Project)
Se. Is this a DOT project located within Division's 1-8?
F Yes r No
Sj. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical Habitat?

Red-cockaded v�,nodpecker foraging or nesting habitat is not found adjacent to the project area. NCNHP database records no element occurrence
within a mile of the project area. (No Affect) / Michauxs sumac is listed as Historic for Johnston Co. NCNHP database rewrds no element occurrence
within a mile of the project area. (No Affect) // Programmatic BO of MALTAA for NLEB /// Dwarf Wedgemussel and Yellow Lance are listed as TE
species that may occur in the proposed project area. NCNHP database records no element occurrence of these two mussels within a mile of the
project area. Also, surveys conducted for the 2016 CE document found no occurrence of the Dwarf Wedgemussel in the project area. Therefore, this
project meets the Section 7 Mussel Programmatic protocols of a Programmatic BO of MA-NLAA for these tv�n listed TE species. Atlantic Pigtoe was
proposed "Threaten° on October, 2018, with anticipated listing on October, 2019. Consultation with Gary Jordan, FWS Raleigh, confirmed the FWS is
processing the Atlantic Pigtoe listing to coincide with being included in the protocols of the ebsting Section 7 Mussel Programmatic Process
Programmatic BO for North Carolina. NCNHP database records no element occurrence of Atlantic Pigtoe within a mile of the project area. Therefore
based on this consultation with FWS, it is anticipated that Atlantic Pigtoe would comply with PBO protocols of MA-NLAA for this project.
Consultation Documentation Upload
IPaC FWS TE List.pdf
NCNHP element occurence report.pdf
W5600_CEpdf
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as an Essential Fish Habitat?*
C' Yes r No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact an Essential Fish Habitat?*
GIS / NOAA Atlantic Sturgeon proposed rule dated 06/03/2016.
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
241.79KB
321MB
16.08MB
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation status?*
C' Yes r No
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources7*
HEU Clearance
7c. Historic or Prehistoric Information Upload
Archaelogical Survey no historic properties .pdf
Historic Architecture no eligibile resources .pdf
Historic Structures Survey Report Renee.pdf
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain?"
� Yes
r No
1.03 MB
100.02KB
67.98KB
Sb. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
NCDOT will coordinate with NC Floodplain Mapping Program (FMP), to determine the status of the project with regard to applicability of NVDOT's
Memorandum of Agreement, or approval of a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) and subsequent Letter of Map Revision (LOMR).
Sc. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?*
FRIS
Miscellaneous
Comments
Cover letter for this PCN package is attached below in the miscellaneous uploads for this proposed project.
Miscellaneous attachments not previously requested.
W5600_CE.pdf
W-5600 Memo for Record 04 04 2018.pdf
W-5600 Merrw for Record 01 30 2019.pdf
Compensatory Mitigation Units Table.pdf
W-5600 Cover Letter final.pdf
Signature
*
,r! By checking the box and signing below, I certify that:
16.08MB
112.25KB
21.29KB
104.37KB
170.03KB
. I have given true, accurate, and complete information on this form;
• I agree that submission of this PCN form is a"transaction" subject to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
. I agree to conduct this hansaction by electronic means pursuant to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
• I understand that an electronic signature has the same legal effect and can be enforced in the same way as a written signature; AND
• I intend to electronically sign and submit the PCN form.
Full Name:
Chad Coggins
�
�I
Signature

�%rrti�a�jr��/
Date
2/12/2019