20190622 Ver 1_B5795 NRTR_20190510

NATURAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL REPORT
Replace Bridge No. 217 on SR 1654 over Lanes Creek
Anson County, North Carolina
TIP B-5795
Federal Aid Project No. BRZ-1654(003)
WBS Element No. 45749.1.1
THE NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Unit
Natural Environment Section
September 2016

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................1
2.0 METHODOLOGY AND QUALIFICATIONS...................................................... 1
3.0 PHYSICAL RESOURCES.......................................................................................1
3.1 Soils.......................................................................................................................... 2
3.2 Water Resources..................................................................................................... 2
4.0 BIOTIC RESOURCES.............................................................................................. 3
4.1 Terrestrial Communities........................................................................................ 3
4.1.1 Maintained/Disturbed........................................................................................ 3
4.1.2 Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest......................................................................... 3
4.1.3 Piedmont/Mountain Bottomland Hardwood Forest ........................................... 3
4.1.4 Pine Plantation................................................................................................... 4
4.1.5 Terrestrial Community Impacts......................................................................... 4
4.2 Terrestrial Wildlife................................................................................................. 4
4.3 Aquatic Communities............................................................................................. 5
4.4 Invasive Species....................................................................................................... 5
5.0 JURISDICTIONAL ISSUES.................................................................................... 5
5.1 Clean Water Act Waters of the U.S...................................................................... 5
5.2 Clean Water Act Permits....................................................................................... 5
5.3 Coastal Area Management Act Areas of Environmental Concern .................... 6
5.4 Construction Moratoria......................................................................................... 6
5.5 N.C. River Basin Buffer Rules............................................................................... 6
5.6 Rivers and Harbors Act Section 10 Navigable Waters ....................................... 6
5.7 Wetland and Stream Mitigation............................................................................ 6
5.7.1 Avoidance and Minimization of Impacts........................................................ 6
5.7.2 Compensatory Mitigation of Impacts............................................................. 6
5.8 Endangered Species Act Protected Species.......................................................... 6
5.9 Bald Eagle and Golden Eagle Protection Act ...................................................... 8
5.10 Endangered Species Act Candidate Species....................................................... 9
5.11 Essential Fish Habitat.......................................................................................... 9
Appendix A Figures
Figure 1. Vicinity Map
Figure 2. Project Study Area Map
Figure 3. Jurisdictional Features Map
Figure 4. Terrestrial Communities Map
Appendix B Scientific Names of Species Identified in Report
Appendix C Stream Forms
Appendix D Qualifications of Contributors
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Soils in the study area....................................................................................... 2
Table 2. Water resources in the study area................................................................... 2
Table 3. Physical characteristics of water resources in the study area ....................... 2
Table 4. Coverage of terrestrial communities in the study area .................................. 4
Table 5. Jurisdictional characteristics of water resources in the study area ............. 5
Table 6. Federally protected species listed for Anson County ..................................... 7

Natural Resources Technical Report TIP B-5795, Anson County, N.C.
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to replace bridge
number 217 on SR 1654 (Hough Road) over Lanes Creek (TIP B-5795) in Anson County
(Figure 1). The following Natural Resources Technical Report (NRTR) has been
prepared to assist in the preparation of a Categorical Exclusion (CE) for the proposed
project.
2.0 METHODOLOGY AND QUALIFICATIONS
All work was conducted in accordance with the NCDOT Natural Environment Section
standard operating procedures and July 2012 NRTR template. Field work was conducted
on March 29, 2016. Preliminary jurisdictional determination request is in preparation at
the time of this writing. Documentation of the jurisdictional determination will be
inserted into the appendices upon finalization of the document. The principal
contributors to this document were:
Principal
Investigator: Hal Bain, Rummel Klepper and Kahl, LLP
Education: M.S. Coastal Ecology Track, UNC Wilmington, 1989
B.S. Biology, Campbell University, 1985
Experience: Senior Environmental Project Scientist, Rummel Klepper and Kahl,
LLP, 2009-Present
Natural Resources Team Leader, ARCADIS, 2003-2008
Biological Surveys Group Leader, NCDOT, 1995-2003
Senior Biologist, NCDOT, 1992-1995
Biology Teacher/Coach, Wake County Public Schools, 1989-1992
Responsibilities: wetland and stream identification, natural community assessments, T/E
species assessment, agency determinations, NRTR document
preparation, and QA/QC
Investigator: Pete Stafford, PWS, Rummel Klepper and Kahl, LLP
Education: B.S. Environmental Science, UNC Wilmington, 2000
Experience: Environmental Scientist, Rummel Klepper and Kahl, LLP, 2001-
Present
Responsibilities: Preparation of forms, wetland and stream delineations, T/E surveys,
natural communities assessment, NRTR document preparation
Additional personnel who contributed to portions of the field work and/or documentation
for this project were David Ward and John Merritt. Appendix D lists the qualifications of
these contributors.
3.0 PHYSICAL RESOURCES
The study area lies in the piedmont physiographic region of North Carolina (Figure 2).
Topography in the project vicinity is comprised of gently rolling hills with narrow, level
September 2016

Natural Resources Technical Report
TIP B-5795, Anson County, N.C.
floodplains along streams. Elevations in the study area range from 238-298 feet above
sea level. Land use in the project vicinity consists primarily of mixed forestland,
residential, and agriculture.
3.1 Soils
The Anson County Soil Survey identifies four soil types within the study area
(Table 1).
Table 1. Soils in the study area
Soil Series
Mapping
Drainage Class
Hydric
Unit
Status
Badin-Goldston complex, 8 to 15
BgC
Well Drained
Nonhydric
percent slopes
Badin-Goldston complex, 15 to 25
BgD
Well Drained
Nonhydric
percent slopes
Goldston channery silt loam, 25 to
GoE
Well Drained
Nonhydric
45 percent slopes
Shellbluff loam, 0 to 2 percent
slopes, occasionally flooded
ShA
Well Drained
Nonhydric
3.2 Water Resources
Water resources in the study area are part of the Yadkin River basin [U.S. Geological
Survey (USGS) Hydrologic Unit 03040105)]. Two streams were identified in the study
area (Table 2). The location of water resources is shown in Figure 3. Physical
characteristics of these streams are summarized in Table 3.
Table 2. Water resources in the study area
Stream Name
Map ID
NCDWR Index
Best Usage
Number
Classification
Lanes Creek
Lanes Creek
13-17-40-(12)
C
UT to Lanes Creek
SA
13-17-40- 12
C
Table 3. Physical characteristics of water resources in the study area
Bank
Bankful
Water
Channel
Map ID
Height
Width
Depth (in)
Substrate
Velocity
Clarity
(ft)
(ft)
Silt, Sand,
Lanes Creek
8
80 to 95
6 to 60
Gravel,
Slow
Turbid
Cobble
Stream SA
1 .75 to 2
1 3 to 7
0 to 6
1 Silt, Sand
Slow
I Clear
2 September 2016

Natural Resources Technical Report TIP B-5795, Anson County, N.C.
No waters classified as High Quality Waters (HQW), Water Supplies (WS-I:
undeveloped watersheds or WS-II: predominately undeveloped watersheds), or
Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW) occur within one mile of the study area. No waters
in the study area are designated as a North Carolina Natural or Scenic River, or as a
National Wild and Scenic River. There are no designated Primary Nursery Areas (PNA)
present in the study area. The North Carolina 2014 Final 303(d) list of impaired waters
identifies Lanes Creek, within the study area and 1.0 mile downstream of the study area,
as being impaired due to a "Fair" rating from benthic monitoring.
No benthic or fish community samples have been taken within 1.0 mile downstream of
the study area. No benthic or fish community sampling sites or ratings are listed by
NCDWR within Lanes Creek, its headwaters, or within 1.0 mile downstream of the study
area.
4.0 BIOTIC RESOURCES
4.1 Terrestrial Communities
Four terrestrial communities were identified in the study area; maintained/disturbed,
mesic mixed hardwood forest, piedmont/mountain bottomland hardwood forest, and pine
plantation. Figure 3 shows the location and extent of these terrestrial communities in the
study area. A brief description of each community type follows. Scientific names of all
species identified are included in Appendix B.
4.1.1 Maintained/Disturbed
Maintained/disturbed habitat is present throughout the study area in places such as
roadside shoulders and agricultural fields. The vegetation in this community is
comprised of row crops, low growing grasses and herbs, including: fescue, crabgrass,
clover, annual bluegrass, Japanese stiltgrass and violet.
4.1.2 Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest
The mesic mixed hardwood forest community is located along the slope uphill of the
Lanes Creek floodplain. Dominant canopy species within this community consist of -
white oak, black oak, red maple, sweetgum, yellow poplar, and loblolly pine.
Constituents from the canopy, along with eastern red cedar and black cherry are dominant
in the understory and shrub layers. Roundleaf greenbrier, blackberry, and poison ivy are
present in the herb/vine layer.
4.1.3 Piedmont/Mountain Bottomland Hardwood Forest
The piedmont/mountain bottomland hardwood forest community occurs along the
floodplain of Lanes Creek where infrequent overbank flooding occurs. Green ash, black
willow, black walnut, boxelder, hackberry, sweetgum, and willow oak dominate the
canopy while American hornbeam, Chinese privet, and constituents from the canopy
species are found in the understory. Multiflora rose, pawpaw, and Chinese privet are
September 2016

Natural Resources Technical Report
TIP B-5795, Anson County, N.C.
present in the shrub layer. The vine/herb layer is comprised of poison ivy, roundleaf
greenbrier, Japanese honeysuckle, violet, trout lily, wingstem, Asiatic dayflower, and
Christmas fern.
4.1.4 Pine Plantation
This community consists of planted pine species that are managed for timber production.
Loblolly pine is the dominant canopy species. The understory consisted of sweetgum, red
maple, and Chinese privet. The shrub layer contained constiuents from the understory
along with eastern red cedar and black cherry. The vine/herb layer is comprised of
Japanese honeysuckle, poison ivy, and wingstem.
4.1.5 Terrestrial Community Impacts
Terrestrial communities in the study area may be impacted by project construction as a
result of grading and paving of portions of the study area. At this time, decisions
regarding the final location and design of the proposed bridge replacement have not been
made. Therefore, community data are presented in the context of total coverage of each
type within the study area (Table 4). Once a final alignment and preliminary design have
been determined, probable impacts to each community type will be calculated.
Table 4. Coverage of terrestrial communities in the study area
Community
overage (ac.)
Maintained/Disturbed
6.69
Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest
0.17
Piedmont/Mountain Bottomland
Hardwood Forest
2.13
Pine Plantation
4.31
Total
13.3
4.2 Terrestrial Wildlife
Terrestrial communities in the study area are comprised of both natural and disturbed
habitats that may support a diversity of wildlife species (those species actually observed
are indicated with *). Mammal species that commonly exploit forested habitats and
stream corridors found within the study area include species such as gray squirrel*,
raccoon*, Virginia opossum, and white-tailed deer*. Birds that commonly use forest and
forest edge habitats include the red -shouldered hawk, American crow*, blue jay, Carolina
wren*, Carolina chickadee*, tufted titmouse*, yellow-rumped warbler* and northern
cardinal*. Birds that may use the open habitat or water bodies within the study area
include American kestrel, red-tailed hawk*, belted kingfisher*, eastern bluebird*, eastern
meadowlark, and turkey vulture*. Reptile and amphibian species that may use the
project study area include the black rat snake, eastern box turtle, and American toad.
4 September 2016

Natural Resources Technical Report
TIP B-5795, Anson County, N.C.
4.3 Aquatic Communities
Two aquatic communities are present in the project study area. Lanes Creek is capable of
supporting such fish species as largemouth bass, pumpkinseed, green sunfish, bluegill,
redbreast sunfish, American pickerel, golden shiner, and white sucker. Reptile and
amphibian species expected to occur in these communities include the northern water
snake, brown water snake, common snapping turtle, common musk turtle, river cooter,
bull frog and the green frog. Various benthic macroinvertebrates and crayfish would also
be expected.
4.4 Invasive Species
Four species from the NCDOT Invasive Exotic Plant List for North Carolina were found
to occur in the study area. The species identified were Asiatic dayflower (Threat),
Japanese honeysuckle (Moderate Threat), Chinese privet (Threat) and multiflora rose
(Threat). NCDOT will manage invasive plant species as appropriate.
5.0 JURISDICTIONAL ISSUES
5.1 Clean Water Act Waters of the U.S.
Two streams were identified in the project study area (Table 5). The location of this
stream is shown on Figure 3. USACE and NCDWR stream delineation forms are
included in Appendix C. The physical characteristics and water quality designations of
Lanes Creek are detailed in Section 3.2. All tributaries in the project study area, have
been designated as a warm water stream for the purposes of stream mitigation.
Table 5. Jurisdictional characteristics of water resources in the study area
Length
Compensatory
River Basin
Map ID
Classification
ft.
Miti ation Required
Buffer
Lanes Creek
153
Perennial
Yes
Not Subject
SA
521
Intermittent
Yes
Not Subject
No wetlands were identified within the study area.
5.2 Clean Water Act Permits
The proposed project has been designated as a Categorical Exclusion (CE) for the
purposes of National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation. As a result, a
Nationwide Permit (NWT) 23 will likely be applicable. A NWP No. 33 may also apply
for temporary construction activities such as stream dewatering, work bridges, or
temporary causeways that are often used during bridge construction or rehabilitation.
The USACE holds the final discretion as to what permit will be required to authorize
project construction. If a Section 404 permit is required, then a Section 401 Water
Quality Certification (WQC) from the NCDWR will be needed.
5 September 2016

Natural Resources Technical Report
TIP B-5795, Anson County, N.C.
5.3 Coastal Area Management Act Areas of Environmental Concern
Anson County is not one of the twenty counties under the jurisdiction of the Coastal Area
Management Act (CAMA). A CAMA permit from the North Carolina Division of
Coastal Management (NCDCM) will not be required.
5.4 Construction Moratoria
Lanes Creek is not considered an NCWRC trout water or anadromous fish habitat. No
moratoria will be required for this project.
5.5 N.C. River Basin Buffer Rules
No streams within the study area are subject to any North Carolina river basin buffer
rules.
5.6 Rivers and Harbors Act Section 10 Navigable Waters
There are no Navigable Waters under Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act located in
the project study area.
5.7 Wetland and Stream Mitigation
5.7.1 Avoidance and Minimization of Impacts
The NCDOT has attempted to avoid and minimize impacts to streams and wetlands to the
greatest extent practicable in choosing and designing the preferred alternative. No
impacts to study area streams or wetlands are anticipated at this time.
5.7.2 Compensatory Mitigation of Impacts
If impacts are determined as the project progresses. NCDOT will investigate potential on -
site stream and wetland mitigation opportunities. If unsuitable on -site mitigation is not
feasible, mitigation will be provided by North Carolina Department of Environment and
Natural Division of Mitigation Services (DMS).
5.8 Endangered Species Act Protected Species
As of July 14, 2015 the United States Fish and Wildlife (USFWS) lists three federally
protected species for Anson County (Table 6). A brief description of each species'
habitat requirements follows, along with the Biological Conclusion rendered based on
survey results in the study area. Habitat requirements for each species are based on the
current best available information from referenced literature and/or USFWS.
6 September 2016

Natural Resources Technical Report
TIP B-5795, Anson County, N.C.
Table 6. Federally protected species listed for Anson County.
Scientific Name
Common Name
Federal
Status*
Habitat
Present
Biological
Conclusion
Lasmigona decorata
Carolina heelsplitter
E
Undetermined
Unresolved
Helianthis schweinitzii
Schweinitz's sunflower
E
Yes
No Effect
Picoides borealis
Red -cockaded woodpecker
E
No
No Effect
*E - Endangered
Carolina heelsplitter
USFWS optimal survey window: year round
Habitat Description: The Carolina heelsplitter was historically known from several
locations within the Catawba and Pee Dee River systems in North Carolina and
the Pee Dee and Savannah River systems, and possibly the Saluda River system,
in South Carolina. In North Carolina, the species is now known only from a
handful of streams in the Rocky and Catawba River systems. The species exists
in very low abundances, usually within 6 feet of shorelines, throughout its known
range. The general habitat requirements for the Carolina heelsplitter are shaded
areas in large rivers to small streams, often burrowed into clay banks between the
root systems of trees, or in runs along steep banks with moderate current. The
more recent habitat where the Carolina heelsplitter has been found is in sections
of streams containing bedrock with perpendicular crevices filled with sand and
gravel, and with wide riparian buffers.
Biological Conclusion: Unresolved. NCDOT BSG will provide this information.
Schweinitz's sunflower
USFWS Optimal Survey Window: late August -October
Habitat Description: Schweinitz's sunflower, endemic to the Piedmont of North and
South Carolina. The few sites where this rhizomatous perennial herb occurs in
relatively natural vegetation are found in Xeric Hardpan Forests. The species is
also found along roadside rights -of -way, maintained power lines and other utility
rights -of -way, edges of thickets and old pastures, clearings and edges of upland
oak -pine -hickory woods and Piedmont longleaf pine forests, and other sunny or
semi -sunny habitats where disturbances (e.g., mowing, clearing, grazing, blow
downs, storms, frequent fire) help create open or partially open areas for sunlight.
It is intolerant of full shade and excessive competition from other vegetation.
Schweinitz's sunflower occurs in a variety of soil series, including Badin, Cecil,
Cid, Enon, Gaston, Georgeville, Iredell, Mecklenburg, Misenheimer, Secrest,
Tatum, Uwharrie, and Zion, among others. It is generally found growing on
shallow sandy soils with high gravel content; shallow, poor, clayey hardpans; or
shallow rocky soils, especially those derived from mafic rocks.
7 September 2016

Natural Resources Technical Report
TIP B-5795, Anson County, N.C.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
A review of NCNHP records, updated July 2016, indicates no occurrence within
1.0 mile of the study area. Habitat for Schweinitz's sunflower is not present in
the project study area. Vegetated habitat along roadside shoulders and utility
easements in the project study area is managed by intense mowing and herbicide
application or is densely overgrown. No sunflower species were observed during
field studies. Therefore, it can be concluded that this project will not impact this
species.
Red -cockaded woodpecker
USFWS Recommended Survey Window: year round; November -early March (optimal)
Habitat Description: The red -cockaded woodpecker (RCW) typically occupies open,
mature stands of southern pines, particularly longleaf pine, for foraging and
nesting/roosting habitat. The RCW excavates cavities for nesting and roosting in
living pine trees, aged 60 years or older, which are contiguous with pine stands at
least 30 years of age to provided foraging habitat. The foraging range of the
RCW is normally no more than 0.5 miles.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Habitat for RCW is not present in the study area. Vegetated habitat along roadside
shoulders and utility easements in the project study area is managed by intense
mowing, herbicide application or is heavily overgrown. A review of NCNHP
records, updated July 2016, indicates no known occurrences within 1.0 mile of the
study area. Pine trees within the study area 15 to 25 years in age and do not meet
age requirements for nesting or foraging. No RCW were observed during field
studies. Therefore, it can be concluded that this project will not impact this
species.
5.9 Bald Eagle and Golden Eagle Protection Act
Habitat for the bald eagle primarily consists of mature forest in proximity to large bodies
of open water for foraging. Large dominant trees are utilized for nesting sites, typically
within 1.0 mile of open water.
A desktop-GIS assessment of the project study area, as well as the area within a 1.13 mile
radius (1.0 mile plus 660 feet) of the project limits, was performed on March 7, 2016
using 2015 color aerials. No water bodies large enough or sufficiently open to be
considered potential feeding sources were identified. Since there was no foraging habitat
within the review area, a survey of the project study area and the area within 660 feet of
the project limits was not conducted. Additionally, a review of the NCNHP database on
March 7, 2016 revealed no known occurrences of this species within 1.0 mile of the
project study area. Due to the lack of habitat, known occurrences, and minimal impact
8 September 2016

Natural Resources Technical Report
TIP B-5795, Anson County, N.C.
anticipated for this project, it has been determined that this project will not affect this
species.
5.10 Endangered Species Act Candidate Species
As of July 14, 2015, the USFWS lists no Candidate species for Anson County.
5.11 Essential Fish Habitat
There are no Essential Fish Habitat areas identified by the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Fisheries in the study area.
9 September 2016

Natural Resources Technical Report
TIP B-5795, Anson County, N.C.
6.0 REFERENCES
Burt, W.H. and R.P. Grossenheider. 1976. A Field Guide to the Mammals: North
America North of Mexico. 3rd ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. 255 pp.
Conant, R. and J.T. Collins. 1991. A Field Guide to Reptiles and Amphibians (Eastern
and Central North America). 3rd ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. 450 pp.
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual.
Technical Report Y-87-1, U. S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station.
Vicksburg, Mississippi.
Harrar, E.S. and J.G. Harrar. 1962. Guide to Southern Trees. New York: Dover
Publications. 2nd ed. 709 pp.
Martof, B.S., W.M. Palmer, J.R. Bailey, and J.R. Harrison III. 1980. Amphibians and
Reptiles of the Carolinas and Virginia. Chapel Hill: The University of North
Carolina Press. 264 pp.
National Geographic. 1999. Field Guide to the Birds of North America. 3rd ed.
Washington, D.C. National Geographic Society.
N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality.
1995. Guidance for Rating the Values of Wetlands in North Carolina. Fourth
version.
N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality.
2008. Basinwide Water Quality Plan, Yadkin/Pee-Dee River Basin. Raleigh,
North Carolina. https:Hdeq.nc.gov/about/divisions/water-
resources/plannin /bg asin-planning/water-resource-plans/vadkin-pee-dee
N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water Resources.
2014.2014 Category 5 Water Quality Assessments — 303(d) List. Available at
http://portal.ncdenr.org/c/document_ library/get_file?uuid=28b97405-55da-4b21-
aac3-f580ee810593&groupId=38364
N.C. Department of Transportation. 2012 Invasive Exotic Plants of North Carolina.
North Carolina Wetland Functional Assessment Team. 2016. N.C. Wetland Assessment
Method (NCWAM) User Manual, Version 5. 49 pp., Appendices.
Newcomb, L. 1977. Newcomb's Wildflower Guide. Boston: Little, Brown and
Company. 490 pp.
Peterson, R.T., editor. 1980. A Field Guide to the Birds of Eastern and Central North
America. 4th ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. 384 pp.
10 September 2016

Natural Resources Technical Report
TIP B-5795, Anson County, N.C.
Radford, A.E., H.E. Ahles, and C.R. Bell. 1968. Manual of the Vascular Flora of the
Carolinas. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press. 1183 pp.
Rhode, F.C., R.G. Arndt, D.G. Lindquist, and J.F. Parnell. 1994. Freshwater Fishes of
the Carolinas, Virginia, Maryland, and Delaware. Chapel Hill: University of
North Carolina Press. 222 pp.
Schafale, M.P. and A.S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities of
North Carolina: Third Approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program,
Division of Parks and Recreation, NCDEHNR. Raleigh, North Carolina. 325 pp.
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. Web
Soil Survey of Anson County, North Carolina.
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 1998.
Hydrologic Units -North Carolina (metadata). Raleigh, North Carolina.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 4: Southeast Region, North Carolina
Ecological Services. 2014. Threatened and Endangered Species in North Carolina:
Anson County. Updated March 25, 2015.
hlt2://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/cpiylist/Anson.html
United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 1994. Schweinitz's Sunflower Recovery Plan.
Atlanta, GA. 28 pp.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service. Schweinitz's Sunflower (Helianthus
schweinitzii). hqp://www.fws.gov/nc-es/plant/schwsun.html.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 2006. Optimal Survey Windows for North
Carolina's Federally Threatened and Endangered Plant Species.
hqp://www.fws.gov/nces/es/Tlant survey.h
United States Army Corps of Engineers. 2012. Regional Supplement to the Corps of
Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
(Version 2.0). ERDC/EL TR-12-9. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Research
and Development Center.
httn://www.usace.armv.mil/Portals/2/docs/civilworks/reizulatorv/reii subb/EMP
Piedmont_v2b.pdf
Webster, W.D., J.F. Parnell, and W.C. Biggs. 1985. Mammals of the Carolinas, Virginia,
and Maryland. Chapel Hill, University of North Carolina Press. 255 pp.
11 September 2016

Appendix A
Figures

E
0
a
Q
C�
o
W 4 �
tp
�s r
m
0
`n049h Rd
O
O l
NC OneMap'NC Center for Geographic
Information and Analysis; NC Dept. of
44'O� NOPiH FAO NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
(4,
� F PROJECT DEVELOPMENT &
9TOF T14RH5QP ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS UNIT
B-5795
BRIDGE NO. 217 ON SR 1654
OVER LANES CREEK
ANSON COUNTY
VICINITY MAP
FIGURE 1

Y
L:
„ ��V
00
t `
Legend
Q Study Area
�r �a
Qua1
0
m
J
� � �1�� f�"� ���� # �� Lit • �.�y^
0
�J
101
u
OF NOHTI, . NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
,e '4qo
q ` TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
Jr > P PROJECT DEVELOPMENT &
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS UNIT
B-5795
BRIDGE NO.217 ON SR 1654
OVER LANES CREEK
ANSON COUNTY
r r
USGS STUDY MAP
��
SOURCE: USGS 7.5 MINUTE QUADRANGLE, POLKTON, NC
FIGURE 2

'A.IT
41k.V
J a a4`"Y:'- ,afA„ - ` t - _' `+;,d'"j - •r ..rs b .(• °`_ a ti-
w
� s
t .ham :� - �P � - : • i7F
�2 t
No -w
41.
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
1 DEVELOPMENT
r
ENVIRONMENTAL
�►'Legend BRIDGE 1 ON SR 1654
Study Area
OVER LANES CREEK
ANSON COUNTY
Intermittent Stream
44�-
Perennial Stream
JURISDICTIONAL FEAT'
1

LW
,t3'S7's
�R
� ,T
ads k.40
AF .�
-� } 4 . 5 �� ', i t -5 `''�111' tit�11 '� �11 k�`•� 1Vtf >! 1:, t V �, 5 �f�4 .. � ti.
u � - % sll, ,i ""ij5 �I�1i1rti 1;�'�i �•, ` it ,��; ail'; i �: `,�y l `�. ,
X7•-1 � 1} � 114: 1:1;�1�',1 t� ,4 � '1,: (�,[. �i,il�_R` ._,,,s� � ...
„1X�
it , , 1 ]', t1i•, � ' �11 � y 5 �1
f. � � •,•t �St;;'.�
Al
X.
�-
1
:e` � '•- 1 l j5 : 11 '. � t It ,,/ -R' _.# 4 --C. _ . .rr � ✓soh
.. ' r '� � "'^�' Sin• .'a ki ��;��',I1�Ii�\k`� \
� ,,t4k41t`1y`ltySCF��II �11�`+�1 •—. ,+
n
l 1
�:` �- ' �'.,. _ ,,.�;_ a _.- � 54,ti1,`i'1,j t�\ 1,151y =� �._ `� ` Y• +s `. 4:
1 �1
0 a :i---�•�C'e �`K_ e``�'. +%r �: r�'r. �Y�� .'�{ .. �'Tyt' ;,11,,, 1.�.�1.` �'1 'li`41-� i �� '.'�i -.`
" of 14ONTH Oay NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
Legend q`� TRANSPORTATION
a Fairview DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
2'8 Study Area V. PROJECT DEVELOPMENT &
9 P
Terrestrial Communities �OFTpPN5Q0� ENVIRONMENTALANALYSIS UNIT
Unionville �
f - Pine Plantation (4.31)
4 • Wingato Marshville B-5795
15 Monroe 74 2fl Maintained/Disturbed (6.69 Ac.) `. - _ - - BRIDGE NO.217 ON SR 1654
1
-.• Wesley Che pel Open Water (1.05 AC.)
OVER LANES CREEK
•Min.ral2prings
Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest (0.17 Ac.) s ' ~L ANSON COUNTY
,:.. -
c ZSoi Piedmont/Mountain Bottomland Hardwood Forest (2.13 Ac.)
TERRESTRIAL COMMUNITIES
FIGURE 4

Appendix B
Scientific Names of Species Identified in Report
Plants
Common Name
Scientific Name
American hornbeam
Carpinus caroliniana
Asiatic dayflower
Commelina communis
Blackberry
Rubus sp.
Black cherry
Prunus serotina
Black Oak
Quercus velutina
Black walnut
Juglans nigra
Black willow
Salix nigra
Boxelder
Acer negundo
Chinese privet
Ligustrum sinense
Christmas fern
Polystichum acrostichoides
Clover
Trifolium sp.
Common rush
Juncus effusus
Crabgrass
Digitaria sp.
Eastern red cedar
Junipercus virginiana
Fescue
Festuca sp.
Green ash
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Hackberry
Celtis occidentalis
Japanese honeysuckle
Lonicera japonica
Japanese stiltgrass
Microstegium vimineum
Loblolly pine
Pinus taeda
Meadow grass
Poa annua
Multiflora rose
Rosa multiflora
Pawpaw
Asimina triloba
Poison ivy
Toxicodendron radicans
Red maple
Acer rubrum
River birch
Betula nigra
Roundleaf greenbrier
Smilax rotundifolia
Sweetgum
Liquidambar styraciflua
Trout lily
Erythronium americanum
Violet
Viola sp.
Willow oak
Quercus phellos
Wingstem
Verbesina alternifolia
White oak
Quercus alba
Yellow poplar
Liriodendron tulipifera

Animals
Common Name
Scientific Name
American crow
Corvus brachyrhynchos
American kestrel
Falco sparverius
American pickerel
Esox americanus
American toad
Bufo americanus
Belted kingfisher
Ceryle alcyon
Black rat snake
Elaphe obsoleta obsoleta
Bluegill
Lepomis macrochirus
Blue jay
Cyanocitta cristata
Brown water snake
Nerodia taxispilota
Bullfrog
Lithobates catesbeianus
Carolina chickadee
Poecile carolinensis
Carolina wren
Thryothorus ludovicianus
Common musk turtle
Sternotherus odoratus
Common snapping turtle
Chelydra serpentina
Crayfish
Cambarus spp.
Eastern bluebird
Sialia sialis
Eastern box turtle
Terrapene carolina
Eastern meadowlark
Sturnella magna
Gray squirrel
Sciurus carolinensis
Golden shiner
Notemigonus crysoleucas
Green frog
Lithobates clamitans
Green sunfish
Lepomis cyanellus
Largemouth bass
Micropterus salmoides
Northern cardinal
Cardinalis cardinalis
Northern water snake
Nerodia sipedon sipedon
Pumpkinseed
Lepomis gibbosus
Raccoon
Procyon lotor
Redbreast sunfish
Lepomis auritus
Red -shouldered hawk
Buteo lineatus
Red-tailed hawk
Buteo jamaicensis
River cooter
Pseudemys concinna
Tufted titmouse
Baeolophus bicolor
Turkey vulture
Cathartes aura
Virginia opossum
Didelphis virginiana
White-tailed deer
Odocoileus virginianus
White sucker
Catostomus commersonii
Yellow-rumped warbler
Dendroica coronata

Appendix C
Stream Forms

USACE AID#
Stream SA
DWQ # Site # B..... (indicate on attached map)
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: NCDOT 2. Evaluator's name: P. Stafford, H. Bain
3. Date of evaluation: 03/29/16
5. Name of stream: SA - UT to Lanes Creek
7. Approximate drainage area: 100 acres
9. Length of reach evaluated: 521 ft
11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees
Latitude (ex. 34.872312): 35.107425
4. Time of evaluation: afternoon
6. River basin: Yadkin
8. Stream order: 1 st
10. County: Anson
12. Subdivision name (if any): N/A
Longitude (ex.-77.556611): -80.183573
Method location determined (circle): �✓ GPS ❑ Topo Sheet ❑Ortho (Aerial) Photo/GIS Other GIS Other
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
See attached Figure
14. Proposed channel work (if any): No proposed channel work at this time.
15. Recent weather conditions: Rain on 03/27/16
16. Site conditions at time of visit: 72 degrees, Sunny, light breeze
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: Election 10 ❑Tidal Waters [:]Essential Fisheries Habitat
rout Waters ❑Outstanding Resource Waters ❑ Nutrient Sensitive Waters ❑Water Supply Watershed ❑ (I -IV)
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES N0 If yes, estimate the water surface area:
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map?YES NO�✓
21. Estimated watershed land use: % Residential
85 % Forested
37ft
20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey?❑YES NO ❑✓
% Commercial % Industrial 15 % Agricultural
% Cleared / Logged % Other ( )
22. Bankfull width: - 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank):.75-2 ft
24. Channel slope down center of stream: ❑Flat (0 to 2%) ✓❑Gentle (2 to 4%) ❑Moderate (4 to 10%) Dteep (>10%)
25. Channel sinuosity: ❑Straight ❑Occasional bends aFrequent meander ❑Very sinuous ❑Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points
to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 46
Comments: Stream SA is an intermittent stream channel.
D Evaluator's Signature Hal Bain �r��.C�,�r�>� Date 3/29/2016 Revised 9/22/2016
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.

Stream SA
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
#
CHARACTERISTICS
ECOREGION POINT
RANGE
SCORE
Coastal
Piedmont
Mountain
1
Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream
0-5
0-4
0-5
1
(no flow or saturation = 0; strong flow = max points)
2
Evidence of past human alteration
0-6
0-5
0-5
2
(extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max points)
3
Riparian zone
0-6
0-4
0-5
3
(no buffer = 0; contiguous, wide buffer = max points)
4
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
0-5
0-4
0-4
2
(extensive discharges = 0; no discharges = max points)
5
Groundwater discharge
0-3
0-4
0-4
2
U(no
discharge = 0; springs, seeps, wetlands, etc. = max points)
6
Presence of adjacent floodplain
0-4
0-4
0-2
2
(no floodplain = 0; extensive floodplain = max points)
Entrenchment / floodplain access
0— 5
0— 4
0— 2
3
(deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding = max points)
8
Presence of adjacent wetlands
0-6
0-4
0-2
0
(no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands = max points)
9
Channel sinuosity
0-5
0-4
0-3
2
(extensive channelization = 0; natural meander = max points)
10
Sediment input
0-5
0-4
0-4
3
(extensive deposition= 0; little or no sediment = max points)
11
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
NA*
0-4
0-5
3
(fine, homogenous = 0; large, diverse sizes = max points)
12
Evidence of channel incision or widening
0-5
0 4
0 5
3
(deeply incised = 0; stable bed & banks = max points)
13
Presence of major bank failures
0-5
0-5
0-5
3
a
(severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = max points)
14
Root depth and density on banks
0-3
0-4
0-5
3
F
(no visible roots = 0; dense roots throughout = max points)
1s
Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
o-s
0-4
o-s
3
(substantial impact =0; no evidence = max points)
16
Presence of riffle-pool/ripple-pool complexes
0-3
0-5
0-6
2
(no riffles/ripples or pools = 0; well -developed = max points)
H
17
Habitat complexity
0-6
0-6
0-6
2
(little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = max points)
QC1
18
Canopy coverage over streambed
0-5
0-5
0-5
3
x
(no shading vegetation = 0; continuous canopy = max points)
19
Substrate embeddedness
NA*
0-4
0-4
3
(deeply embedded = 0; loose structure = max)
20
Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
0-4
0 5
0-5
0
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
21
Presence of amphibians
0-4
0-4
0-4
0
O
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
22
Presence offish
0-4
0-4
0-4
0
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
23
Evidence of wildlife use
0-6
0-5
0-5
1
(no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = max points)
Total Points Possible
100
100
100
-7 TOTAL CORE (also enter on first page)
46
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.

Stream SA
NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: 03/29/16 Revised 9/22/2016
Project/Site: B-5795
Latitude: 35.107425
Evaluator: Pete Stafford, Hal Bain
county: Anson
Longitude:-80.183573
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent 21
Stream Determin ion (circle one)
Other
PO I kto n
.25
if > 19 or perennial if 2: 30*
Ephemeral ntermitten Perennial
e.g. Quad Name:
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 12.5 )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0 ❑
1 ✓
2 ❑
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0 ❑
1 ✓
2 ❑
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
00
1 ❑
2 ❑✓
3 ❑
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0 ❑
1 ❑
2 ✓❑
3 ❑
5. Active/relict floodplain
0❑
1 ❑
2 ❑✓
3 ❑
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2 F1
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0 ❑
1
2 ❑
3
8. Headcuts
07
1 ❑✓
2 ❑
3 ❑
9. Grade control
0
0.5 ❑✓
1 ❑
1.5 ❑
10. Natural valley
o ❑
0.5 ❑
1 ❑✓
1.5 ❑
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0 ED
Yes = 3 ❑
Q artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = 4 )
12. Presence of Baseflow
0 ❑
1 ✓❑
2 ❑
3 ❑
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0 ❑
1 ✓❑
2 ❑
3 ❑
14. Leaf litter
1.5 ❑
1 ❑✓
0.5 ❑
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0 ❑
0.5 ❑✓
1
1.5❑
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0 ❑
1 0.52]
1 ❑
1 1.5❑
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0 ✓❑
Yes = 3 ❑
C. Biology (Subtotal = 4.75
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3 ❑
2 ✓❑
10
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
30
2 ✓❑
1 ❑
0 ❑
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0 ❑✓
1
2 D
3 ❑
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0 El
1 ❑
2 ❑
3 ❑
22. Fish
0 ✓
0.5 ❑
1 ❑
1.5❑
23. Crayfish
0
0.5 ❑✓
1
1.5 ❑
24. Amphibians
0 ✓
0.5 ❑
1 ❑
1.5❑
25. Algae
0171
1
0.5 M
1 ❑
1.5 ❑
26. Wetland plants in streambed
E:I:ACW = 0.75; DL
= 1.5 Other = 0
perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Stream SA: an intermittent stream channel.
Sketch: See figures for sketch.

Appendix D
Qualifications of Contributors
Investigator: David Ward, Rummel Klepper and Kahl, LLP
Education: B.S. Geography, Bloomsburg University, 1999
Experience: GIS specialist, Rummel Klepper and Kahl, LLP
2002 - Present
Responsibilities: GIS surveys and mapping
Investigator: John Merritt, Rummel Klepper and Kahl, LLP
Education: B.S. Biology and Environmental Science, Trine University, 1999
Experience: Senior Environmental Scientist, Rummel Klepper and Kahl, LLP, June
2016-Present
Environmental Biologist, NCDOT, March 2006-May 2016
Biology and Environmental Science teacher, Randolph County
High Schools, August 2002-March 2006
Staff Scientist, Professional Service Industries (PSI), July 2000 — July
2002
Responsibilities: Preparation of forms, wetland and stream delineations, T/E surveys,
natural communities assessment, NRTR document preparation