19950203 Ver 1_Complete File_19990825

..

~f:i N 12-

",-.-

:, ; J)( ~ m.. J ,m 11 .n,i.? -,'-2 ""..-':.' \
" -'.,...-. ~j~, III
lUll ." II 1
_'II .'\ r _, ,/ 1
I I. - ) ~'\ 'r- ~'l '! i
. ~ ~ '. V k<>:J C j
i
; .

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA L,"_"._.!'1,~n~T{,'lj'! ,~:;',:~QF.:."
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION -...,..--., , , J
JAMES B. HUNT JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS DA VlD McCOY
GOVERNOR SECRETARY

August 19, 1999

State Project:
F. A, Project:
County:
Description:

8.T340308 (R-I023AB) Contract No, C I 05196
NHS-264( 19)
Wilson
US 264 (Wilson Bypass) from East ofSR 1136 to East of US 301

FROM:

Mr. S. D. DeWitt, PE
State Construction Engineer

Wendi L. Oglesby, PE ( I tN ILJ-/'
Division Construction E~~ 0

MEMORANDUM TO:

SUBJECT:

Approved Preconstruct ion Conference Minutes

We are transmitting an approved copy of minutes covering the preconstruction conference for the above
project, which was held on July 28, 1999. These minutes were approved by the Contractor, S. T. Wooten
Corporation, as submitted,
It
attachment

cc W. R. Brown, PE
R. W.Reaves, PE
J. M, Lynch, PE
J. E. Grady, PE
W. D. Johnson
Willie Bryant
W. L. Moore, III
T, M. Sherrod
Haywood Daughtry, PE
D. A. Pridgen
A, L. Hankins, PE
T. L. Turnage
Carolina Power & Light Co.
Corps of Engineers (Eric Alsmeyer)
FHWA

Bridge Const. Engr.
Roadway Const. Engr,
L. R. Ward, PE
Frank Andrews
B. E. Eatmon, Jr., PE
L. R. Chrisa\\TI
Harold Pittman
Lloyd Johnston, Jr.
John B. Williamson, Jr.
Aydren Flowers
Sprint
Bell South
City of Wilson
NC DEHNR

"

Post Office Box 3165, Wilson, North Carolina 27895-3165
Telephone [phone] Fax [phone]

PRECONSTRUCTION CONFERENCE MINUTES

State Project: 8.T340308 (R-I023AB) Contract No. CI05196
F. A. Number: NHS-264(19) /
County: Wilson
Description: US 264 (Wilson Bypass) from East ofSR 1136 to East of US 301

The preconstruction conference for the above project was held on July 28, 1999 in the
Conference Room at the Wilson Division office. The following persons were in
attendance:

NAME
f'.tVJ>{f,.- 6;..>,."
Arthur R. Collie
Erick Frazier
Bill Henegar
Craig Taylor
Martin Joncs
Richard Vick
William Sawyer
Eugene Scott
Ray Vainwright
Ed Eatmon
Kevin Bowen
T. E. Davis
W. L. Long, Jr.
H. R. Fulghum, Jr.
Hemang Surti
Jason Elliott
Andy Pridgen
Steve Grimes
Warren Walker
Joe Milkovits, Jr.

REPRESENTING

5. r: w#.f- ~'fJ.I"'f,..'1.
S. T. Wooten Corporation
S. T. Wooten Corporation
S. T. Wooten Corporation
S. T. Wooten Corporation
S. T; Wooten Corporation
S. T. Wooten Corporation
Sawyer's Land Developing, Inc.
Sprint
Sprint
DOT - Resident Engineer
DOT - Asst. Rcsident Engineer
DOT - Construction
DOT - Construction
DOT - Construction
DOT - Signals & Geometries
DOT - Roadside Envirorunental
DOT - Division QA Supervisor
DOT - Right of Way
DOT - Roadway Const. Engr.
DOT - Geotechnical Unit

Ms. Wendi Oglcsby presided over the conference. She bcgan the Conferencc by asking all
prescnt to introduce themselves and thcir company affiliation.

Arthur Collie will act as Project Superintendent and Traffic Control Coordinator for the
Contractor.

Wade Boughman will be Project Inspector and Traffic Control Coordinator for the DOT
on the roadway and bridge.

. ,

A letter naming persons authorized to sign supplemental agreements was presented.

The Contractor stated he would begin work on August 2, 1999 putting up construction
signs. After signs have been erected clearing & grubbing operations will begin at
Contentnea Creek.

The Contractor presented his progress schedule and he was advised it would be checked
and he would be advised if satisfactory. By copy of these minutes, we are advising the
Contractor his progress schedule has been checked and approved as submitted.

RIGHT OF WAY

At this time Ms. Oglesby called on IMr. Steve Grin1es with our Division Right of Way
Department to cover the status of right of way for this project. Mr. Grimes advised that
all right of way has been acquired for the construction of this project. The following
parcels were acquired through condemnation: Parcell, 4,6, 6A, 7, 8,10,11,12,17,18,
19,20,21,27,31,32,45,46,56,58 and 60.

Mr. Grimes advised, under Section 215, the following items can be deleted from the
contract: 2-14, 16-18,20,29-31,33,34,36-42,46-57,61,62, and 65-69.

There are no known asbestos contaminated building materials within the right of way of
this project.

Mr. Grimes advised those present of the special provisions regarding Parcels 26, 26A,
40A and 60, and advised the Contractor to abide by these provisions.

Mr. Grimes stressed that the Contractor contains his work within the right of way and
construction limits. Should it become necessary to exceed these limits to perform work,
the Contractor should secure written permission from the property owner before
performing work on the property and a copy be forwarded to the Resident Engineer for
his files.

There was no further discussion regarding right of way.

Ms. Oglesby asked everyone to turn to page 1 of the contract and the following was
discussed:

PROJECT SPECIAL PROVISIONS
GENERAL

Contract Time and Liquidated Damages:
Date of Availability - August 2, 1999, except as follows: The portion of the project
between Station 89+00 and the end of the project at Station 93+20 will not be available
until October 1, 2000, unless otherwise permitted by the Engineer.

Contract Completion Date_- June 1,2003

Liquidated Damages - $2,800.00 per calendar day

Ms. Oglesby advised the Contractor, when observation periods arc required by the Special
Provisions, they arc not a part of the work to be completed by the completion date and/or
intermediate contract times stated in the contract. Should an observation period extend
beyond the fmal completion date, the acceptable completion of the observation period
shall be a part of the work covered by the Performance and Payment bonds.
Intermediate Contract Number J and Liquidated Damages - The Contractor shall
complete the required work of installing, maintaining, and removing the traffic control
2

devices for lane closures and restoring traffic to a 4-lane, 2-way traffic pattern. The
Contractor shall not close a lane of traffic on US 301 during the following time
restrictions.

MONDAY THRU FRIDAY 6:00 A.M. TO 8:30 P.M.
MONDAY THRU FRIDAY 4:30 P.M. TO 6:00 P.M.
/

In addition, the Contractor shall not narrow or close a lane of traffic on US 301, detain
and/or alter the traffic flow on or during holidays, holiday weekends, special events, or any
other time when traffic is unusually heaving, including the schedule listed in the contract.

The time of availability for this intermediate contract work shall be the time the Contractor
begins to install all traffic control devices for daytime and nighttime lane closures.

The intermediate completion time shall be the time the Contractor is required to complete
the removal of all traffic control devices for daytime and nighttime lane closures and place
traffic in a 4-lane - 2-way pattern.

The Liquidated damages for this internlediate contract time are $500.00 per hour.

Intermediate Contract Time Number 2 and Liquidated Damages - Contractor shall
complete the required work of installing, maintaining and removing traffic control devices
for road closures and restoring traffic to a 4-lane- 2-way traffic pattern, and the
Contractor shall not close US 301 NBL and SBL during the following time restrictions:

DAY AND TIME RESTRICTIONS
MONDAY TI-IRU SUNDAY FROM 6:00 A.M. TO 10:00 P.M.
The maximum allowable time for the road closure is 30.MIN. The
Contractor shall reopen the travcllanes to traffic until the existing
Traffic queue is depleted.

The time of availability for this intermediate contract time will be the time the Contractor
begins to install traffic control devices required for the road closures. The completion
time for this intermediate contract tinle will be the time the Contractor is required to
complete the removal of traffic control devices required for the road closures and restore
traffic to a 4-lane, 2-way pattern. Liquidated damages for this intermediate contract time
are $500.00 per hour or any portion thereof.

Intermediate Contract Time Number 3 and Liquidated Damages - Contractor shall
complete the work required of Area 6, Phase 1, Step 5 shown on Sheet TCP-15 and shall
place and maintain traffic on same.

Time of availability for tIus intermediate contract time will be the FRIDAY at 6:00 P.M.
that the Contractor elects to begin the work. The completion time will be the following
MONDA Y at 6:00 A.M. after the FRIDAY at 6:00 P.M. the Contractor begins work.
Liquidated damages for this intermediate contract time are $500.00 per hour.

Cooperation Between Contractors -The Contractor on this project shall cooperate with
the Contractor working within or adjacent to the limits of tlus project to the extent that
the work can be carried out to the best advantage of all concerned.

J

Construction Moratorium for Contentnea Creek - The Contractor was reminded that no
construction is permitted in Contentnea Creek between February 15 and May 15 of any
year without prior approval of the NC Wildlife Resources Commission and the NC
Division of Marine Fisheries.

Nfajor Contract Items & Specialty Items - As outlined in the contract.

Price Adjustment - Asphalt Cement for Plant Mix - The base price index for asphalt
cement for plant mix is $130.85.

Fuel Price Adjustment - The base index price for DIESEL #2 FUEL is $0.1273 per liter.

EROSION CONTROL

Ms. Oglesby asked Mr. Jason Elliott, Area Roadside Environmental Engineer, to cover
this portion of the contract. Mr. Elliott called attention to the following:

Seeding and Mulching - He covered kinds of seed and fertilizer and rates of application of
seed, fertilizer and limestone to be used on this project during periods of overlapping
dates. All rates are in kilograms per hectare.

On cut and fill slopes 2: 1 or steeper add 35 KG sericea lespedeza January I-December 31.

Fertilizer shall be 10-20-20.

Temporary Seeding - As stipulated.

Fertilizer Topdressing - Fertilizer used for topdressing on all roadway areas except slopes
2: 1 and steeper shall be 10-20-20 grade and shall be applied at the rate of 560 KG per
hectare. Fertilizer used for topdressing on slopes 2:1 and steeper and waste and borrow
areas shall be 16-8-8 and applied at the rate of 560 KG per hectare.

Supplemental Seeding - No centipede shall be used in the seed mix for supplemental
seeding. The rate of application may vary from 28 KG to 85 KG per hectare. The actual
rate per hectare shall be determined by the Engineer prior to the time of topdressing and
the Contractor will be notified in writing of the rate per hectare, total quantity needed and
areas on which to apply the supplemental seed. Minimum tillage equipment shall be used
for incorporating seed into the soil to prevent disturbance of existing vegetation.

Mowing height shall be 100 MM.

Crimping Strmv Mulch - Crimping of straw in lieu of asphalt tack will be allowed on this
project subject to the conditions noted in the contract.

Culvert Diversion Channel - The Contractor shall construct a diversion channel to detour
the existing stream around the culvert construction site at locations shown on the plans.
The Contractor shall construct with the material noted and in accordance with the
construction methods. Contractor shall remove materials, backfill diversion channel area
with suitable material and provide proper drainage when the diversion channel area is
abandoned.

4

Impervious Dike - The Contractor shall furnish~ install, maintain and remove an
impervious dike for the purpose of diverting normal stream flow around the construction
site as so noted in the requirements set forth. It shall not permit seepage of water into the
construction site or contribute to siltation of the stream. The Contractor was reminded of
acceptable materials that can be used as noted on page 155 of the contract. No earth
material shall be used to construct an impervious dike when it is in direct contact with the
stream unless vegetation can be established before contact with the stream takes place. /

Specialized Hand ~Howing - This is to be performed around or under fixed objects,
including but not limited to guardrails, signs, barriers and slopes. Type of equipment
noted in the contract shall be used for this operation. The quantity of mowing to be
performed will be affected by the actual conditions, which occur during construction of
the project. It may be increased, decreased or eliminated' entirely at the direction of the
Engineer, and any variations in quantity will not be considered as alterations in the details
of construction or change in the character ofthe work.

Temporary Pipe for Culvert Construction - The Contractor shall furnish, install, maintain
and remove any and all temporary pipe used on this project in conjunction with the culvert
construction as stipulated herein.

Waste Areas and Borrow Sources - Payment for temporary erosion control measures,
except those made necessary by the Contractor's own negligence or for his convenience,
will be paid for at the appropriate contract unit price as noted in the contract.

Sodding (Centipede) - Mr. Elliott advised sod handling and placement should be a
continuous process of cutting, transporting, and installing without appreciable delays. Sod
shall always be installed within 48 hours after being cut and shall be watered immediately
following installation. This supercedes the 5 days noted in the Specifications.

After rolling, it shall be watered thoroughly so that the underside of the new sod pad and
soil immediately below the sod is completely wet. Tamping will be required.

The Contractor shall be responsible for watering required to maintain the liveability of the
sod until final acccptance. Watering requirements are noted in the contract.

Observation Period_- The Contractor shall maintain responsibility for the sod for a 60 day
observation period beginning upon the satisfactory complction of all work required. The
Contractor shall guarantee the sod under his Paymcnt and Performance Bond. At the end
of the 60 day observation period, the sod furnished and installed on the project must be in
a living and healthy condition. The Contractor shall replace any sod that is not in a living
and healthy condition during the 60 day observation period at no additional expensc to the
DOT.

Wetland Reforestation - Wetland reforestation will be planted at locations designated by
thc Engineer and shall consist of a minimum of 2 rows of trees betwccn the slope stakc
line and the clcaring limits.

Scedlings shall be planted from November 15 through March 15 and shall be planted as
soon as practical following permanent seeding and mulching. Root Dip shall bc used and
applied as stipulated herein.

5

Prior to planting, areas determined by the Engineer to be compacted will be ripped in
accordance with the Special Provision entitled "Ripping" as stipulated on page161.

Stream bank Reforestation - See the Streambank Reforestation Detail Sheet. Seedlings
shall be planted as soon as practical following permanent seeding and mulching. Type I
seedlings shall be planted along both streambanks, and Type II seedlings shall be planted
in a 26' (8 meters) wide swath froht top of bank along both sides of stream. Seedlings
shall be planted from November 15 through March 15. Root Dip shall be used and
applied as stipulated herein.

PLANTING

Planting - The initial planting and replacement of plans shall be done from October 15
thru March 31. Mulch for planting shall consist of shredded pine bark or shredded
hardwood bark.

Response for Erosion Control - As stipulated in the contract.

Mr. Elliott reviewed "Method of Measurement", pointing out the following:

The quantity of responses for erosion control to be paid for will be the actual number of
tin1es the erosion control Contractor moves onto the project to perform work related to
any of the items listed and provided Items A thru E apply.

Permanent Seeding and Mulching_- Mr. Elliott advised the Contractor this item is in the
contract as an incentive to the Contractor to perform permanent seeding and mulching as
soon as practical after slopes or portions of slopes have been graded.

There were no questions concerning any erosion control items.

Schedule of Estimated Completion Progress - The Contractor was advised, if he
anticipates accelerating the progress shown, he should submit a request and approval
would have to be obtained should he want payment for performing work beyond that
progress noted.

Disadvantaged Business Enterprises - Ms. Oglesby called attention to pages 8 thru the
top of page 18 of the contract concerning the DOT's stance to DBE's. DBE goals were
established at 10.0% and the contract was awarded with a utilization of 14.7%. Reports
and certifications required by the Contractor, as noted on page 17 and the top of page 18,
were reviewed.

The Contractor presented his letter naming their Company EEO Officer and Minority
Liaison Officer.

Training Requirements - There arc 6 trainees to be trained on this project. The
Contractor participates in the NC DOT's annual training program. Mr. Eatmon advised
this is addressed in the white pages of the Project Special Provisions.

Mr. Eatmon reminded the Contractor that he is required to furnish a glass-covered bulletin
displaying required posters and their Company EEO Policy. Mr. Eatmon furnished the
required posters to the Contractor. The bulletin board will be displayed at the
6

Contractor's field office on site.

Partial Payment - As stipulated.

Contractor's License Requirements - If the prime Contractor does not hold the proper
license to perform any specialized work in this contract, he will be required to sublet such
work to a properly licensed Contractor for the specified work.

Domestic Steel and Iron Products - Ms. Oglesby advised the Contractor is familiar with
this Special Provision. Specific attention was called to the third and fourth paragraphs
regarding notarized certification required, that a notation be made on the purchase order
that steel products were processed in the United States and that separate files will be kept
on steel products for verification.

US Department of Transportation Hotline
1800-424-9071

Quality Management System for Asphalt Pavements - Ms. Oglesby called on Mr. Andy
Pridgen, Division QA Supervisor, to cover this portion of the contract. Mr. Pridgen
reviewed the following:

Section 609 of the 1995 Standard Specifications shall be deleted in its entirety and shall be
replaced as noted in the contract.

The Contractor is advised he shall have at least one certified Asphalt Technician Level I at
each plant site and he shall also have a Certified QMS Roadway Technician on the project
site during the placement of asphalt. The Contractor shall furnish and maintain a DOT
certified laboratory at the plant site.

The Certified Weight Certificates shall also include the DOH Job Mix Formula Number if
the ticket is to be issued for asphalt plant mix and he also called attention to the
dust/asphalt cement ratio requirements.

Mr. Pridgen asked if the Contractor would be performing the asphalt paving on the
project, and the Contractor advised yes. Mr. Pridgen asked would nuclear testing or core
sampling be performed. The Contractor advised that nuclear testing would be used. Mr.
Pridgen advised, if nuclear testing is performed personnel from the QA Lab will be
handling; however, project personnel will perform core sampling.

Mr. Pridgen asked if the Contractor would like to convert project to Superpave. The
Contractor advised he would have to check with his paving division for them to determine
if they would do so and he would advise the Resident Engineer accordingly.

. ,

Mr. Pridgen called attention to the second and fourth paragraphs on page 34 regarding
minimum sampling and testing. On page 35 he covered the first and second paragraphs
regarding reductions for failure to meet testing requirements.

Mr. Pridgen called attention to a letter from Mr. Len Sanderson dated March 4, 1997, sent
to all asphalt Contractors regarding paving and noted the DOT would be adhering to the
requirements outlined.

7

Mr. Pridgen also called attention to a letter dated August 18, 1997, from Mr. Sanderson,
regarding asphalt detennination, sampling and testing. He advised the Resident Engineer
to make sure we get verification cores when using core sampling. This is a FHW A
requirement that we apply to all projects, whereby 10% sampling is done independently
from the Contractor. These are random samples.

Final Surface Testing - Asphalt Pavements - Mr. Pridgen reviewed this Special Provision
calling attention to the following:

Type of straightedge to be furnished and operated by the Contractor to determine and
record the longitudinal profile of the pavement on a continuous graph. Final surface
testing is considered to be an integral part of the paving operation and is subject to
observation and inspection by the Engineer. Proper procedures for use of the straightedge
were pointed out. The Contractor was reminded, at the completion of each day's testing,
he should evaluate the graph and submit to the Engineer within 24 hours after profiles are
completed. The Resident Engineer will furnish results of the acceptance evaluation to the
Contractor within 48 hours after receipt. The Engineer shall retain all graphs.

Mr. Pridgen asked if there were any questions regarding acceptance and/or corrective
actions as noted on pages 51 and 52 of the contract. There were none.

Asphalt Bases and Pavements - As stipulated.

Tack Coat - The maximum rate of tack coat shall be increased to 0.04 to 0.07 gallons per
square yard.

Mr. Pridgen advised that patching is to be performed and all QMS requirements shall
apply.

He advised the Contractor, should he have any questions please contact him.

ELECTRIC UTILITY CONSTRUCTION

The Towns of Black Creek and Lucama own these facilities. The Contractor shall furnish
any and all materials, services, labor, equipment, and incidentals necessary to complete the
proposed electric utility work on this project.

Specific attention is called to safety precautions when working around high voltage
facilities, availability for authorized representatives of the Town's Public Works
Departments to review and observe construction, approval of the Engineer of work and
materials, request for fmal inspection, submission of catalog cuts and/or shop drawings,
and data to be submitted to the Resident Engineer upon completion and acceptance.

The Contractor shall abide by the requirements set forth in the section covering "Special
Conditions-Removals" on pages 131 thm 136..

Attention is also called to pages 137 thru 141 covering "Electric Utility Line Right-of-
Way Clearing-Description", "Special Conditions-Clearing & Grubbing" and "General
Conditions" for Selective Stump RemovaVGrinding-Description.

WATER AND SEWER UTILITY CONSTRUCTION

s

These Special Provisions cover requirements for all water mains, new sewer lines, tic-ins,
etc. construction on this project. The existing water and sewer utilities belong to the City
of Wilson. The Contractor shall provide access to the owner's representative to all phases
of construction, and the owners shall be notified two weeks prior to commencement of
any work and one week prior to service interruption.

/

The Contractor is reminded he should submit his proposed method of anchoring for
review and approval by the Engineer prior to any sewer force mains construction. This
shall not relieve the Contractor of his responsibility of properly anchoring the sewer force
mains system.

The Contractor is also advised he might possibly have to vary the dept of the pipeline
installation to achieve minimum clearance for existing or proposed utilities or storm
drainage while maintaining minimum cover specified.

The Contractor shall be responsible for determining the exact location, size, and type
material of the existing facilities.

A vacuum test shall be performed on manhole assembly prior to backftlling using vacuum
tester noted in the contract, provided by the Contractor. If the test fails, necessary repairs
shall be made using a non-shrink grout while the vacuum is still being drawn, and re-
testing shall proceed until the manhole is acceptable.

Upon completion of the line, the Contractor shall request a fmal inspection by the City,
which will be performed as outlined - all inspections will be put on videotape. Upon
notification from the City advising that the line has passed fmal inspection, the Resident
Engineer shall complete the Engineer's Certification and send to the Division of
Environmental Management with a copy to the City. The City shall then issue an
acceptance letter for the line.

UTILITY CONFLICTS

The following utility companies have facilities that will be in conflict with the construction
ofthis project:

City of Wilson - Power (Distribution) - Remaining areas of conflict are as follows: NC 42
(waiting on clearing); Downing Street (waiting on clearing); Shirley Road and Wiggins
Mill Road (currently relocating facilities)

City of Wilson - Power (Transmission) -Transmission lines have been raised and poles
moved between Wiggins Mill and Downing Street. Quaker Road and all other areas are
complete.

City of Wilson (Sewer) - There is a manhole to be relocated in the coming few weeks
when material comes in at Turnage Road. The existing sewer line along Turnage Road
is to be relocated up existing St. Mary's Church Road to tic in \vith a new line on US 30 I
to be installed under this contract. These will be coordinated.

CP&L (Transmission) - Transmission line is complete. Transmission lines over Wiggins
Mill Road have been raised.

9

Sprint Carolina Telephone -Sprint is waiting for the Contractor to do clearing at NC 42
and Downing Street locations before work can begin. There is a question regarding
Wiggins Mill Road, as to when work will begin at this location. It will possibly be after
grading has been done. Work at US 301 is almost 100% complete (tie ins, etc. remain).
Work at US 117, for the most part, is complete and work at Quaker Road has been
completed. . /

Time Warner Cable. Inc. -Has made several adjustments. To my knowledge, the work
that needed to be done has been completed. If any additional adjustments are necessary
they will be made in place.

AT&T -. There is a fiber optic cable on the project that will be adjusted in-place as
necessary. We do not anticipate this being a conflict.

Metric Documentation - All quantities submitted by the Contractor on bills of lading and
all other paperwork shall be in Standard Metric Units. The DOT will not accept any
quantities in English units only; however, the DOT will allow this information to be
submitted with both units of measurement being shown.

Metric High Strength Bolts - The Contractor may substitute AASHTO M164 (ASTM
A436) English high strength bolts provided the criteria noted in the contract is met.

Guardrail Offset Blocks - The Contractor has the option of using timber, plastic, or
composite offset blocks. The use of steel offset blocks with steel beam guardrail will not
be allowed. All guardrail offset blocks must conform to the dimensions shown on page 41
of the contract.

Plant Pest Quarantines - The Contractor was advised that he shall obtain a certificate or
limited permit issued from the NC Department of Agriculture/US Department of
Agriculture for any regulated article used on this project originating in a quarantined
county and the certificate shall accompany the article when it arrives at the project site.
Items 1 thru 9 were called to the Contractor's attention, which may contain the plant pest
quarantined.

Recycled Products or Solid Waste Materials - The DOT encourages Contractors to
initiate, develop and utilize products or construction methods that incorporate the use of
recycled or solid waste products in this project. Should the Contractor come up with a
way to utilize recycled products or solid waste materials on the project, he should submit
to the Resident Engineer for review and if approved, a supplemental agreement will be
executed.

Pavement Marking General Requirements - As stipulated in the contract. Ms. Oglesby
asked who would be performing pavement marking work and was advised that Clark
Pavement Marking would do this work. The Contractor's attention was called to Item J
on page 46, reminding the Contractor that at least one member of every pavement
marking crew shall be certified by the ATSSA Pavement Marking Division and the
certification shall remain current throughout the crew members work on the project.

Drainage opening in solid pavement marking lines should be spaced every 100'.

10

F/owable Fill - Contractor has the option to use (a controlled low-strength material)
flowable fill as a substitute for conventional fill material. If this option is chose, the
Contractor shall adhere to requirements stipulated herein. The Contractor was reminded
that he would have to submit ajob mix formula.

Aggregate Production and Concrete Brick & Block Production. - The Contractor was
reminded he should use a producer who utilizes the new QC/A program, which is in effect /
on the date of the letting.

Fine Aggregate - As stipulated.

Shear Studs - As stipulated.

Timber Posts & Braces - As stipulated.

Recruitment of Department Employees - The Contractor is reminded that he shall not
recruit DOT employees for employment. However, should the Contractor employ a DOT
employee, he may not perform any work on a project that he had been involved in as an
engineer or a technician during employment with the DOT. Any person employed by the
Contractor and assigned to a project who has previously been involved in the project as a
DOT employee shall be removed from the project-at the written request of the Engineer.

Failure of the Contractor to comply may be justification for disqualifying the Contractor
from further bidding.

Coal Fly Ash in Embankments - The Contractor, at his option, is allowed to use coal fly
ash in embankments as a substitute for conventional borrow material, and when fly ash is
used the Contractor shall adhere to requirements noted at the bottom of page 56 and top
of page 57. The Contractor will be notified if all requirements have been met before
placement is allowed.
On page 57, fly ash that is unacceptable is listed. Construction methods were reviewed
and there were no questions regarding same.

Metric Roadway Standard Drmvings - All existing "hard" metric sign dimensions should
be replaced with the new "soft" metric sign dimensions listed in the contract.

Early Fencing - As part of the Contractor's first operation, he shall install the control of
access fence prior to removing the existing fence between the following survey stations:
Right of Station 92+42-L- to Station 98+45.a48-L-. This fence is necessary to constrain
the livestock in the appropriate arca.

Submission of Records - Federal-Aid Projects - The Contractor was advised that federal
form FHW A-47 will be required on this project.

ROADW A Y

Field Office - The Contractor shall furnish and maintain a field office for the exclusive use
of the Engineer at the construction site during construction of this projcct. Ms. Oglesby
called attention to the requirements of the field office as noted on pages 60 thru the top of
page 62. She also called attcntion to page 62 regarding the Contractor's responsibilities
regarding site, sewer, watcr and electrical hook-ups and obtaining required pcnnits.
11

The Contractor will provide two separate trailers on the AD & B projects. They will be
locatcd on the same site.

Subsurface Information - Subsurface Information is available on this projcct.

Clearing and Grubbing - Method III

/

Select Granular Material - As stipulated. The select granular material used over the soil
stabilization fabric and construction in water shall be Class II, III or IV.

Fabric for Soil Stabilization - Ms. Oglesby pointed out requirements of this fabric.
During pcriods of shipmcnt and storage, the cloth shall be wrapped in a hcavy duty
protective covering to protect the cloth from direct sunlight, etc., and shall not be exposed
to temperatures greater than 140 degrees F. After this protective wrapping has been
removed, the fabric shall not be left uncovered under any circumstance for longer than 4
days. The Contractor shall furnish Type 1, Type 2 or Type 3 Material Certification;
however, the material shall be subject to inspection, test or rejection by the Engineer at
any time.

False Slumps - As stipulated.

Embankment Monitoring - The instrumentation will consist of four settlemcnt gauges.
The Contractor shall furnish and install the scttlcmcnt gauges at locations dcsignated in the
plans. The Contractor shall conduct his operation in such a manner that the gauges shall
not be damaged, and fill around the gauge pipes and plates shall be compacted to the same
density as the surrounding material. Any settlemcnt gauge pipe damaged or destroyed due
to fault or ncgligcnce on the part of the Contractor shall bc restored or rcplaced by the
Contractor at no additional cost to the DOT. No additional payment will be made for
compaction of fill around and over the scttlement gauges or for interference with the
Contractor's operations resulting from settlement gauge installations. Care shall be taken
that the 63-mm pipe remains plumb.

Restriction on Construction of Embankment - The Contractor shall construct the
embankments between the stations noted in the contract to finished graded roadway
section and will not be allowed to being any work on the bridge end bents listed in the
contract until the specified fill settlement times have elapsed. There shall be a 90-day
waiting period for construction on end bents as specified in the contract. The Contractor
shall be required to maintain the embankmcnts at finished graded roadway section during
the waiting pcriod, and additional earth material required to maintain embankment of
finishcd graded roadway section will be paid for as stipulatcd, as the case may be.

Temporary Shoring - Contractor shall install temporary shoring from Station 20+00j: to
Station 20+ 35.00j: (- Y8-Rev.). This work shall be pcrfon11ed in accordance with the
requiremcnts noted hcrein.

. ,

Preparation of Subgrade and Base - On mainline portions and ramps of this project the
subgrade and base beneath the pavement structure shall be prcpared as stipulated, except
the Contractor shall use an automatically controlled fme grading machine utilizing string
lincs, laser controls or other approvcd methods to produce fmal subgrade and basc
surfaces meeting the line, grade, and cross sections.
12

Shoulder Materia(- As stipulated.

Shoulder and Fill Slope Material- The top 6" (150-MM) of shoulder and fill slopes shall
be constructed with soils capable of supporting vegetation. Ms. Oglesby called attention
to requirements for soil to be used for this operation. Material shall be obtained from
within the projec't limits or an approved borrow source.

Bitumen content of Asphalt Plant Mixes - As stipulated.

Asphalt Plant Mixtures - ACHC material shall be placed in trench sections with asphalt
pavement spreaders made for the purpose or with other approved equipment.

Milled Rumble Strips - Contractor shall construction rumble strips in accordance with the
details in the plans and as directed by the Engineer.

Funnel Drain Pipe - As stipulated in the contract.

Sand Cement Headwall - As stipulated. Ms. Oglesby called attention to the type of bags
that can be used. The Contractor shall submit samples of the sand and cement at least 30
days prior to construction of the sand cement headwall. Construction methods were
reviewed, and it was pointed out, after sand cement headwall has served its purpose the
Contractor shall remove the sand cement headwall and dispose of same in waste areas he
has furnished.

Temporary Detours - Temporary detours required on this project should be constructed in
accordance with the typical sections in the plans or as directed by the Engineer. After the
detours have served their purpose the portions deemed unsuitable for use, as a permanent
part of the project shall be removed as directed by the Engineer. Ms. Oglesby reviewed
materials that are to be salvaged and stockpiled for removal by State Forces, materials to
be utilized on the project and items to be removed and disposed of by the Contractor.

Reinforced Bridge Approach Fills - Ms. Oglesby asked if the Contractor would perform
this work, and the Contractor advised yes. She advised the Contractor to be guided by the
special provisions and that all work shall be, done in the presence of the Engineer or
Inspector.

Modified Concrete Flume with Concrete Outlet - As stipulated in the contract.

Removal of Existing Pavement (Metricl - As outlined.

Structural Timber & Limber - As stipulated.

Guardrail End Delineation - As stipulated.

. ,

Impact Attenuator Units, Type 350 - As stipulated. The Contractor, at his option, may
furnish anyone of the impacts attenuator units noted in the contract or an approved equal.

Guardrail Anchor Units, Type M-350 and Type 350 - The various types of guardrail
anchor units were pointed out as noted on pages 83 thru 84. Contractor has the option to
furnish anyone of the units noted under each of the Special Provisions.
13

It was also pointed out that guardrail end delineation is required on all approach and
training end guardrail buffer end sections for both temporary and permanent.

Double Faced Cable Guiderail- As stipulated in the contract.

Building Removal - Previously discussed.

Payments for Materials - Portable Concrete Barrier- If authorized by the Engineer,
partial materials payments will be made up to 90% of the delivered cost of these materials,
provided these materials have been delivered on or in the vicinity of the project, and stored
in an acceptable manner

Payments for Materials - Removal Pavement .Marking Material - If authorized by the
Engineer, partial materials payments will be made up to 90% of the delivered cost of these
materials, provided these materials have been delivered on or in the vicinity of the project,
stored in an acceptable manner, not to exceed the shelf life recommended by the
manufacturer, and documents required by the Standard Specifications have been furnished
to the Engineer. The Contractor shall be responsible for the material and the satisfactory
performance of the material when used in the work.

Department Furnished Signs -Ms. Oglesby reminded the Contractor that the State would
furnish the signs for tIlis project. After award of the contract, the Contractor shall notifY
the Engineer in writing of the date he requires the signs be made available to him, and the
Contractor shall notify the Resident Engineer a minimum of four months prior to the date
he desires these signs be made available for pick up and delivery by the Contractor to the
project. After notification that the requested signs are available, the Contractor shall have
a maximum of90 calendar days to pick up the state furnished signs.

Early Acceptance of Signs - Ms. Oglesby advised the Contractor that he may request
early DOT acceptance of part of all the highway signs, including sign panels,
retroreflective sheeting, and associated hardware, before fmal project acceptance;
however, the signs must be required for traffic control at that phase of project
construction. If accepted by the DOT, the Contractor will be relived of the responsibility
for any damage and/or theft that may occur to the signs, retroreflective sheeting, or
associated hardware, with the exception of any damage caused by the Contractor or any
Subcontractor working on the project.

Should clearing be necessary for sight distance, it shall be performed as stipulated at the
bottom of page 72 of the contract.

On pages 73 and 74, Ms. Oglesby advised the Contractor to adhere to requirements noted
for removal and disposal of existing signs and wood posts and existing signs and "U"
channel posts.

Ms. Oglesby reviewed pages 1 02 thru 104 concerning installation of overhead sign
assemblies, test documents for direct tension indicators, samples required for tests by the
DOT. She asked if there were any questions concerning this Special Provision and there
were none.

14

Reforestation - Seedlings shall be planted from November 15 thru March 15 and shall be
planted as soon as practical following pennanent seeding and mulching

TRAFFIC SIGNALS

Watson Electrical Company will perfonn the signal work on this project. Mr. Hemang
Surti with our Signals & Geometrics Unit was asked to cover this seCtion. Mr. Surti /
discussed if DOT and Contractor would like to change the red ball in the signal head to
LED. The Contractor will have to submit a price for this change.

Ms. Oglesby advised these Special Provisions cover the general requirements for
installation, and acceptance and reminded the Contractor that he should be guided by the
requirements stated herein. She asked ifthere were any further questions.

TRAFFIC CONTROL AND PAVEMENT MARKINGS

Profiled Pavement Markings - Work shall be perfonned as outlined in these Special
Provisions. Ms. Oglesby asked who would be performing this work, and was advised it
would be Clark Pavement Marking. She-advised the Contractor perfonning this work
shall be certified to place the material by the Manufacturer of that material. At least one
member of each crew shall have completed the "training, and shall furnish the Engineer
written confonnation of this training from the material manufacturer prior to beginning the
work. A manufacturer technical representative shall be onsite during the entire installation
of the project.

Traffic Control Devices To Remain On Project - The Contractor shall install and leave on
the project the traffic control devices necessary to accommodate the traffic pattern shown
on sheet TCP-210 of the Traffic Control Plan and PM-8 of the Pavement Marking Plan.
The devices remaining shall meet the requirements of their respective specifications.

All devices that are required to remain on the project at its completion shall be in good
condition subject to the approval of the Engineer, and will become the property of the
DOT.

Flexible Delineators -As Stipulated.

STRUCTURES AND CULVERTS

Mr. Warren Walker covered this portion of the contract. He advised that these Special
Provisions had been discussed with Mr. Ellis Powell in the Construction Unit in Raleigh.
Mr. Powell asked that he cover the following items:

The following applies to all structures for this project.

The decks should be poured in accordance with the pouring sequences shown
on the plans.
If the concrete base option is used for the approach slab base, the base must
extend 10' beyond the end of the approach slab.

For structures #2 and #3 a plan revision is necessary for the armored evazote joints This
will require extra work and a supplemental agreement. The joint detail will be changed to
15

show a shallow depth unreinforced blockout that will be filled with elastomeric concrete.
This will allow the angle to be set after the span is poured.

Mr. Eatmon covered the following.

Maintenance and Protection of Traffic Beneath Proposed Structure @STA. 85+06.042 - /
L-. Traffic is to be maintained on US 30 I as shown in the TCP and as directed by the
Engineer. A minimum temporary vertical clearance of 4.85m is to be maintained at all
times during construction and methods used in constructing the proposed bridge shall be
such as to cause minimum restriction in clearance.

The Contractor shall submit his plans for protecting traffic at the above station before
beginning work at this location to the Resident Engineer and Mr. Walker reviewed items
to be covered in the Contractor's Protective System. He also pointed out, for these same
areas, the overhang falsework shall remain in place until after the rails have been poured.
The protective system shall be installed before any construction operations begin over
traffic.

Direct Tension Indicators - The Contractor has the option of using direct. tension
indicators in lieu of the turn-of-nut method on' all ASTM A325M high strength bolt
connections in bridges.

He reviewed test documents and samples to be furnished by the Contractor.

Temporary Haul Road @ Station 33+81.235 -L-: Mr. Eatmon reminded the Contractor
that he shall submit a method of access for construction of the dual structures at the above
station prior to beginning any construction which requires crossing any wetland area. The
Contractor shall also submit 5 sets of prints describing the method of access for
construction, which includes a sketch showing the limits of temporary access. The
temporary access shall be completely removed prior to acceptance of the project.

Stmclure Drainage System @ Station 85+06.042 -L-: Mr. Eatmon reviewed the
requirements and advised the Contractor to adhere to same.

Mr. Eatmon advised the Special Provisions covering this section are standard; however, if
there are questions and/or comments he would be glad to discuss.

PERMITS

Ms. Oglesby covered the permits issued by the US Army Corps of Engineers and the
DEHNR in conjunction with this project.

On page 266, Ms. Oglesby called attention to the 3 significant general conditions listed.

She advised the Contractor he should adhere to all requirements stipulated in the permit.
She also advised, should the Contractor have any doubts that the work he might be
performing will violate any requirements of the permits he should contact the Corps of
Engineers.

16

She called specific attention to pages 272 through 279 regarding Special Conditions,
Gurley Wetlands Mitigation, Mitigation Monitoring, Onsite Stream Relocation, Wiggins
Mill Stream Relocation, General Mitigation, and other conditions.

The pennit authorized certain footprints within the waters of the US (wetlands, streams,
and ponds, etc.) as sho\'m in the plans. The Contractor cannot perform work beyond that
footprint without approval from the Corps of Engineers.

Borrow or spoil areas are not authorized in the pennit for wetlands or streams. Stream
crossings are not allowed and authorization will have to be secured to do so. Mr.
Alsmeyer advised the Corps would prefer the Contractor not cross any.

Contractor should keep up with sediment and erosion control day by day. After a storm
the Contractor should check all erosion control devices and correct any problems,
especially in wetlands.

An additional meeting will be held on August 9, 1999 to discuss this project, the Wiggins
Mill mitigation Site and R-1023B. If there are any questions, Eric Alsmeyer can be
contacted at [phone], extension 23.

Ms. Oglesby asked if there were any further questions and/or comments concerning the
pennits and there were none.

Mr. Walker asked who would perform seeding operations on this project. He was advised
that Parrish Company would do this work.

Contractor will perform clearing but will not do grubbing 10' around culvert.

There were no further comments and/or discussion and the meeting was adjourned.

S. T. WOOTEN CORPORATION

g-\~-'1~
DATE APPROVED

BY:~--~~*-(U~

NMIE AND TITLE

/t
07/28/99

17

JAMES B. HUNT JIt
GOVERNOR

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
P.O. BOX 25201. RALEIGH. N.C 27611-5201

R. SM\UEL HUNT III
SECRETARY

August 9, 1995

ill" rn@rnu w ~ f:'\l
ur~-:!!:i
I !. ,.:,

rL L AUGI 0 iSC5 ",'i

,',:";L .'_
\"-!1\7:~~ :~'. ~ I..': -.. .

Ms. Jean Manuele -
Regulatory Field Office.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
6512 Falls of the Neuse Road, Suite 105
Raleigh, North Carolina 27615

Dear Ms. Manuele:

Subject:

Wilson County, First segment of the Wilson By-Pass ProjecL TIP No. R-I023AA,
Federal Aid Project No. F-38-1(54), State Project No. 8.13~0301, USACOE
Action ill No. 199201219

Please find enclosed a copy of the Mitigation Plan for the above referenced project.
Pursuant to the your agency's July 21, 1995 letter, this plan is to modify and supplement our
current Pre-Construction Notification that is being processed by your office. The proposed plan
will compensate for wetland impacts associated with the first segment of the Wilson By-Pass
project by providing wetland restoration, enhancement and preservation on approximately 190
acres of property along Nahunta Swamp in Greene County. Based on this information the
mitigation site offers opportunities for providing both riverine and nonriverine wetland mitigation
which are the type wetland impacts associated with the project.

The implementation of the enclosed plan will provide compensatory mitigation for all
impacts associated with this project. The remaining credits are expected to be available for
unavoidable wetland impacts associated with future segments of the Wilson Bypass.

As a result of this modified proposal, it is NCDOT's opinion that the impacts associated
with this project will not "result in more than minimal adverse environmental effects either
individually or cumulatively" (33 CFR 330). Therefore NCDOT request that the project still be

--- ,

<-
'..,

@

.....

'w

. t

MITIGATION PLAN

N.C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FIRST SEGMENT OF THE WILSON BYPASS
TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (TIP): R-1023AA
WILSON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA

Prepared for:

The North Carolina Department of Transportation

Raleigh, North Carolina

Prepared by:

Environmental Services, Inc.
1318 Dale Street, Suite 220
Raleigh, North Carolina 27605

August 1995

!iDI~K'~Rf'~L Qj): "F". -',
f WII AUG J 0 iS~ ~i
! .
l j

t

TABLE OF CONTENTS

~

LIST OF FIGURES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii

LIST OF TABLES .................................................. iii

1.0 INTRODUCTION.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

1 .1 Methodology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

2.0, IMPACTED WETLAND RESOURCES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

3.0 MITIGATION POLICY ........................................... 9

4.0 MITIGATION SITE ...................,......................... 11

4.1 General. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

4.2 Existing Conditions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
4.2.1 Plant Communities ............................. 11

4.2.2 Soils....................................... 15

4.2.3 Geology and Hydrogeology ....................... 15
4.2.4 Jurisdictional Wetlands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

5.0 MITIGATION PLAN. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
5.1 Wetland Hydrological Restoration ......................... 21
5.2 Plant Community Restoration ............................ 22
5.2.1 Planting Plan ................................. 23
5.2.2 Planting Program .............................. 23
5.3 Wetland Soil Restoration ............................... 23

6.0 MONITORING PLAN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
6.1 Hydrology Monitoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
6.2 Hydrology Success Criteria ............................ 27

6.3 Vegetation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

6.4 Vegetation Success Criteria. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

7.0 WETLAND MITIGATION POTENTIAL. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

8.0 DISPENSATION OF PROPERTY ................................... 31

9.0 REFERENCES CITED. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

,'.

,

Figure 1 -

Figure 2 -

Figure 3 -

Figure 4 -

Figure 5 -

Figure 6 -

Figure 7 -

Figure 8 -

LIST OF FIGURES

Eili;ill

Project Site Location (R-1023AA) ............................. 2

Nahunta Swamp Mitigation Site. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Plant Communities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) Soil Survey .......... 16

Hydrologic Pathways ............... ~ . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . 18

. "
Jurisdictional Wetland Estimates ............................. 20

Example of Community Types for Wetland

Restoration and Enhancement Plantings ........................ 25

Potential Wetland Mitigation Credit ........................... 30

ii

t

Table 1 -

Table 2 -

Table 3 -

LIST OF TABLES

Page

Wetland Impacts by Class. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Example of Target Community Types and Species
for Wetland Restoration and Enhancement Planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

Mitigation Credit Potential. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . '_' . . . . . . 29

III

,

MITIGATION PLAN

N.C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FIRST SEGMENT OF THE WILSON BYPASS
TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (TIP): R-1023AA
WILSON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to construct a US 264
bypass around the town of Wilson, in Wilson County, North Carolina. This proposed 21
kilometer (13 mile) project entails-highway construction on new location.extending from the
approach of US 264 to US 264A to the US 264 merg~with NC 58 southeast of Wilson. The
environmental impacts of this project were studied in an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
(NCDOT 1991). This document evaluated several alternatives, including a no-build option, and
several bypass corridors south of the town of Wilson. Subsequently, the preferred alternative
was selected to avoid and minimize wetland impacts while considering public need and travel
safety.

The first segment of the Wilson Bypass entails construction of a four-lane divided highway
extending approximately 5.3 kilometers (3.3 miles) from the western end of the proposed
alignment at US 264A to just east of SR 1136 (Figure 1). A Section 404 permit application
was submitted in May, 1994 for 7.2 hectares (17.8 acres) of wetland impacts associated with
development of the initial segment. This mitigation plan has been developed to propose a
mitigation strategy for dealing with these anticipated wetland losses. Information contained
in this report is intended to supplement and support NCDOT's Section 404 permit application
and request for 401 Water Quality Certification.

1.1 Methodology
Wetlands within the project corridor were initially mapped and classified in 1991 by NCDOT
personnel as part of the EIS. Wetlands were identified based upon parameters outlined in the
"Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineatino Jurisdictional Wetlands /89 Manual}" (FICWD'
1989). Subsequently, wetlands were revisited in 1995 by NCDOT personnel to conform
jurisdictional mapping to wetland parameters enumerated in the "COrDS of Enqineers Wetland
Delineation Manual /87 Manual}" (DOA 1987). Wetlands were classified using the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service (USFWS) manual, Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of
~he United States" (Cowardin et al. 1979).

1

v

~

"

\
,

,
'\
,/
,

I

.'

...

(
:r
)"b

\

D~~: Augu:>t 1995

..~
~~~"-n~~ q\
J li- l\)..~:q
~,~I '. ~ n,' 1. . c:Y. . q}~h
~ _' / , . \)""C~J I
.<f-.\\' \" ' ,_, 17.--.'-' . ~J<.-..! .'t .-~
L6....:..!- . "T\;', r I \" ':'-0''''/
l~/-.>-\~",.""/
")-.,''-7
,. \
,,_

-"'.

tZJ

Envlroruncntal
Scnices, Ine.
1313 Dale Street
Suite 220
Raleigh, r\C 27605

Figure:

Sile Location
A,1023AA
Fir:>t Segment 01 the US 264
Wil:>on Bypa:>3
Wilson County, NC

Project: EA94018,10

2

During wetland evaluations, the Department of Environmental Management (DEM) Wetland
Rating System was employed to characterize wetland quality relative to DEM standards (DEM
1993). The primary use of this rating system is as a tool for making decisions regarding 401
Water Quality Certification by DEM. The rating system uses a step down key to rate 10 values
of wetlands including: 1) water storage; 2) bank/shoreline stabilization; 3) pollutant removal;
4) sensitive watershed; 5) travel corridor; 6) special ecological attributes; 7) wildlife habitat;
8) aquatic life value; 9) recreation/education; and 10) economic value. Wetland values within
each category are combined to generate a total score on a 100 point scale. Lower scores
denote a wetland site considered less important for protection of water quality and other
wetland values.

Design specifications and avoidance/minimization issues for the Wilson Bypass initial segment
were addressed in the Section 404 permit application and in the EIS. Secondary impacts to
wetlands through roadside ditching and clearing were also quantified and added to anticipated
wetland impacts (Letter from NCDOT to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE); dated
6/27/95).

In the spring of 1995, NCDOT performed a search for suitable wetland mitigation sites within
the Wilson Bypass region. Subsequently, a preferred mitigation site was identified within
Nahunta Swamp near the Wayne County/Greene County line in eastern North Carolina. ESI
scientists performed preliminary field investigations in July 1995, including cursory
hydrological evaluations, general confirmation of Natural Resource Conservation Service soil
survey map units (USDA 1980), evaluation of on-site resources and existing jurisdictional
status of the tract. Subsequently, this compensatory mitigation strategy has been developed
to provide compensation for direct and indirect impacts to approximately 7.2 hectares (17.8
acres of wetlands impacted by R-1023AA.

3

2.0 IMPACTED WETLAND RESOURCES

Approximately 7.2 hectares (17.8 acres) of wetlands may be directly impacted along the 5.3
kilometer (3.3 mile) segment of the proposed US 264 Wilson Bypass. Impacted wetland types
within the project corridor have been grouped into riverine/bottomland wetlands and
nonriverinelinterstream wetlands for descriptive purposes. Wetland classes and primary
wetland types within proposed construction limits are quantified in Table 1. Table 1 also
depicts Division of Environmental Management (OEM) wetland rating system average scores
for the riverine and nonriverine wetland classes. A total of 19 wetland crossings were
evaluated using the OEM system.

TABLE 1: Wetland Impacts by Class

Nonriverine Wetland Class Nonriverine Wetland Class Riverine Wetland Class
Wetland Palustrine forested and Palustrine emergent; Palustrine forested.
palustrine shrub.scrub, temporarily to permanently broad.leaved deciduous;
Type broad-leaved deciduous / flooded, excavated; temporarily to TOTAL
(needle-leaved evergreen); PEM 1 Ax and PEM 1 Hx seasonally flooded;
temporarily flooded; PF01A and PF01C
PF01A, PF01/4A, PSSl/4
Area Impacted
hectare (acre) 4.6 (11.3) 0.9 (2.2) 1.7 (4.3) 7.2
(17.8)
DEM # of sites sampled: 11 # of sites sampled: 3 # of sites sampled: 5
Wetland Rating Range; 12-16 Range: 12-63 Range: 40-73
System Average (mean): 13 Average (mean): 34 Average (mean): 60 .
..'. .

A brief description of affected wetland types is provided. Although no detailed wetland
functional assessment was performed, a brief description of wetland functions discerned from
the OEM wetland rating process and wetland characterizations is provided.

Nonriverine Wetlands: Palustrine forested and shrub-scrub, broad-leaved deciduous/(needle-
leaved evergreen), temporarily flooded wetlands (PFO 1 A, (PFO 1 /4A), PSS 1 /4A)
Impacts to nonriverine pine/hardwood forested wetlands (4.6 hectares (11.3 acres)) represent
a majority of wetland impacts associated with this segment of the Wilson Bypass. For
descriptive purposes, wetland types include' all successional stages of nonriverine wet
hardwood forests and wet hardwood/pine mixed forest intergrades. These wetlands are
positioned along the center of interstream tracts which are temporarily saturated or inundated
during early portions of the growing season. Interstream wetlands are typically located within
farmed landscapes or road networks and exhibit limited forest connectivity with
riverine/bottomland corridors. Interstream wetlands exhibit indications of disturbance such as

4

antecedent farming, direct or indirect drainage, and systematic logging. Included within this
wetland class is minimal acreage of palustrine, shrub scrub, broad leaved deciduous/needle-
leaved evergreen, temporarily flooded wetlands (PSS 1 /4A). This community represents
interstream wetland forest which has been clear cut in the last 15 years.

Soil types within interstream wetlands include the Rains (Typic Ochraquults), Grantham (Typic
Paleaquults), and Toisnot (Typic Fragiaquults) series (USDA 1983). These soils are nearly
level, poorly drained, with the seasonal high water table at or near the surface. Permeability
is moderate to slow with perching of rainwater and ponding most likely upon a fragipan within
the Toisnot soil map unit. The fragipan consists of a compact, brittle layer between the depths
of 25 and 56 inches. When drained, The Rains and Grantham series are well suited for
agriculture. Within the Toisnot series, fragipan depth and thickness limits drainage potential
required for agricultural production.

Characteristic tree species include sweet gum !Liquidambar styraciflua), tulip poplar
(Liriodendron tulipifera), sweet bay (Magnolia virginiana), red maple (Acer rubrum), water oak
(Quercus nigra), and loblolly pine (Pinus taeda). Common understory/shrub elements include
swamp red bay (Persea palustris), highbush blueberry (Vaccinium corymbosum), horsesugar
(Symplocus tinctoria), American holly (!lex opaca) and sweet pepperbush (Clethra alnifolia).
Ground cover species include partridge berry (Mitchella repens), switch cane (Arundinaria
gigantea), beauty berry (Callicarpa americana), cinnamon fern (Osmunda cinnamomea), and ink
berry (flex glabra).

Nonriverine forested wetlands, when compared to riverine systems, appear to exhibit relatively
low value for performance of most physical wetland functions as indicated by the OEM
wetland ratings. The OEM wetland ratings, which weight physical processes, ranged from 12
to 16 out of 100 possible points. Expected physical functions include long-term water storage
during periods of groundwater drawdown, moderation of groundwater flow/movement within
the watershed, and attenuation of surface runoff into streams and agricultural (slope) areas
of lower landscape position (Adamus et al. 1991). In essence, relatively undisturbed
nonriverine wetlands may act as effective retention areas for rainfall and potentially
groundwater. Stored water is then released in moderation through subsurface flow or first
order stream flow towards the lower watershed.

The ability of impacted interstream wetland resources to perform physical wetland functions
appears to be degraded by adjacent land use practices. Channelization of first order streams
and fragmentation within farm fields surrounding interstream wetlands has accelerated the
transport of stored water and rainfall from these interstream flats, into downstream areas.
Ditching has also lowered the seasonal high water table to marginal wetland levels in some

5

areas. Evidence of above ground hydrology within these systems is limited to isolated, very
small pockets which fill with water during winter and early spring. Therefore, the primary
function of interstream wetland areas may be to support biotic resources in the region which
are dependent upon forested wetlands for survival.

Interstream wetlands often provide a large majority of remaining forested habitat for native
wildlife (Adamus and Stockwell 1983). Interstream wetlands represent a substantial
component of remaining forest acreage within the coastal plain of North Carolina. Most
uplands and historical wetland areas in the region are currently farmed. Therefore, the
maintenance of species distributions and abundance is dependent, in part, upon intact
nonriverine wetlands. Habitat value of interstream wetlands, when interspersed and connected
with bottomland systems, is considered important to maintenance of characteristic wildlife
guilds (USFWS 1981). No net loss of interstream wetland function and connectivity for
-wildlife in the region should assist in maintaining species distributions and abundance.

,
Evaluations of aerial photography indicate that impacted nonriverine wetlands exhibit low to
moderate connectivity with regional bottomland corridors. The proximity of these areas to the
Contentnea Creek corridor may provide for movement (genetic or migratory) of regional wildlife
guilds capable of traversing open fields and road corridors. However, the fragmentation of
impacted interstream wetlands within the farmed landscape limits travel and migration for
many wildlife populations such as black bear (Ursus americana). Further reductions in wildlife
value for reptile and amphibian reproduction may have resulted from partial drainage of these
tracts and reductions in surface inundation within depressional areas during the early growing
season. Extensive clear-cutting and selective harvesting have further altered the spatial
habitat structure these wetlands once provided to area wildlife. Mitigation requirements to
provide no net loss of function should include restoration of spatial habitat structure within a
contiguous nonriverine wetland area that exhibits connectivity to a regional wildlife corridor.

Nonriverine Wetlands: Palustrine emergent, persistent, temporarily to permanently flooded,
excavated (PEM 1 Ax and PEM 1 Hx)
Approximately 0.9 hectares (2.2 acres) of palustrine emergent wetlands occur within man-
made structures such as borrow ponds and/or incidental impoundments. These systems are
nonriverine in function and occur along broad slopes positioned between interstream flats and
bottomland systems.

Soils consist primarily of the Udorthents series characteristic of areas where the soil solum and
portions of underlying parent material have been removed. The soil surface is often
characterized by sediments and nutrients imported by runoff from pond spoil banks, adjacent
farmland, and/or roadway corridors. The sediments are intermixed with coarse marino

6

sediments which constitute the predominant parent material in the Wilson Bypass area. In
some instances, underlying granite bedrock is exposed in borrow pits excavated for coarse
sand and gravel.

The plant communities which inhabit palustrine emergent systems are adapted to varying
degrees of inundation. Characteristic species include cattail (Typha latifolia), bullrush (Scirpus
cyperinus), soft rush (Juncus effusus, Juncus sp.), blackberry (Rubus sp.), smartweed
(Polygonum sp.), sedge (Carex sp.), flat sedge (Cyperus sp.), spikerush (Eleocharis sp.), lizard
tail (Saururus cernuus), and occasional black willow (Salix nigra). Plant species diversity tends
to be relatively high within palustrine emergent communities.

These systems tend to perform limited physical wetland function. For the most part, these
wetland communities represent perturbations in the landscape; hydric conditions appear to
have been caused by human disturbances. Because of the small size, altered hydrogeology,
and isolated nature of borrow ponds, physical functions such as sediment stabilization,
sediment/toxicant retention, nutrient removal/transformation and flood flow alteration are
considered minimal. In some cases, the presence of borrow ponds and surrounding soil
disturbance may actually increase the quantity of sediments and overland runoff in lower
landscape areas.

DEM wetland ratings ranged from 12 to 63 for the three borrow ponds potentially impacted
by the road corridor. One PEM site rated relatively high during the wetland rating process
(score 63, See table 1 and Section 404 permit application). This system may support a
stabilized borrow pond and palustrine emergent community that is positioned between
farmfields and stream corridors. The system may intercept overland runoff and associated
sediments before these pollutants enter the stream. Therefore, protection of water quality
may increase the wetland value of this borrow pond.

Biological wetland function in impacted palustrine emergent systems is expected to be limited
due to the small size, disturbed soil substrate, and isolated nature of the systems. Although
these wetlands may provide occasional food and cover for passerine birds, wildlife usage is
considered minimal. Proposed replacement of wetland function within impacted borrow ponds
consists of stringent erosion and sediment control adjacent to wetlands, use of best
management practices (BMPs), and consolidation of wildlife function within a contiguous
nonriverine wetland mitigation area.

Palustrine forested, broad.leaved deciduous, seasonally flooded wetlands (PF01 C)
Impacted riverine/bottomland wetlands are concentrated within the floodplain of Shephards
Branch and several minor tributaries. Approximately 1.7 hectares (4.3 acres) of bottomland

7

wetlands may be impacted at these stream crossings. These systems are riverine in character
and support bottomland wetland functions associated with the interface of surface and
groundwater systems. Expression of wetland function in bottomland systems is often
correlated to overbank flooding and related hydrodynamics.

Hydric soil types occurring in these alluvial systems consist primarily of the Bibb loam (Typic
Fluvaquents) (USDA 1983). These are poorly drained, floodplain soils characteristic of major
streams in the region. The seasonal high water table is at a depth of 6 to 18 inches with the
map unit subject to frequent overbank flooding.

Character canopy species include sweet gum (Liquidambar styraciflua), red maple (Acer
rubrum), tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), willow oak (Quercus phellos), river birch (Betula
nigra), and loblolly pine (Pinus taeda). Understory species include sweet bay (Magnolia
virginiana), Carolina ash (Fraxinus caroliniana), privet (Ligustrum sinense), switch cane
(A run din aria gigantea), and sweet pepper bush ,(Clethra alnifolia). Netted-chain fern
(Woodwardia areolata), lizard's tail, false nettle (Boehmeria cylindrica), and Japanese
honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica) represent common groundcover components..

PFO 1 C wetlands are functionally valuable ecosystems. Because of their position in the
landscape (Le. interspersed between agricultural fields and stream channels), these bottomland
communities act as major receptors of upland runoff (Cooper et al. 1986, Peterjohn and Correll
1984)). As such, important biogeochemical functions performed by floodplains which dissect
agricultural regions include removal of elements and compounds, retention of particulates (farm
sediments), organic carbon export, and nutrient cycling (Brinson et al. 1994).

Bottomland ecosystems provide valuable habitat for biotic resources in the region. Habitat
value of bottomland forests, especially for migrating and wintering species, is considered
important to maintenance of characteristic wildlife guilds and migratory species. Vegetational
diversity and aquatic affiliation offer all the necessary components (food, water, cover) needed
to support a variety of mammals and birds. In addition, seasonal inundation provides ideal
habitat opportunities for waterfowl, such as wood ducks, as well as a variety of reptiles and
amphibians.

Compensatory mitigation for unavoidable bottomland losses should entail in-kind replacement
of lost wetland function associated with riverine dynamics. Target replacement functions may
include retention of particulates, removal of elements and compounds, organic carbon export,
dynamic surface water storage, long-term surface water storage, and energy dissipation.

8

3.0 MITIGATION POLICY

Mitigation for wetland losses from the proposed project is recommended in accordance with
Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines of the Clean Water Act (40 CFR 230), mitigation policy mandates
articulated in the COE/EPA Memorandum of Agreement (MOA; Page and Wilcher 1990),
Executive Order 11990 (42 FR 26961 (1977)), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
mitigation policy directives (46 FR 7644-7663 (1981 )), and Federal Highway Administration
(FHW A) stepdown procedures (23 CFR 777.1-777.11). Mitigation has been defined in
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) regulations to include efforts which: a) avoid; b)
minimize; c) rectify; d) reduce or eliminate; or e) compensate for adverse impacts to the
environment (40 CFR 1508.22 (a-e)).

Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines, the COE/EPA MOA, and Executive Order 11990, stress
avoidance and minimization as primary considerations for protection of "waters of the United
States." Practicable alternatives must be fully evalua~ed before compensatory mitigation can
be discussed.

USFWS policy also emphasizes avoidance and minimization. However, for unavoidable losses,
USFWS recommends that mitigation efforts be correlated with value and scarcity of the habitat
at risk. Habitat is classified into four Resource Categories based on decreasing importance and
value, with subsequent decreases in mitigation planning objectives (46 FR 7657-7658). The
forested wetlands in the project corridor would be considered Resource Category 2 (riverine
systems) or 3 (nonriverine systems) (high to moderate value), requiring a mitigation goal of no
net loss of habitat (compensation through replacement of lost habitat function). Methods used
to achieve this goal include: the physical modification of replacement habitat to convert it to
the type that is lost, restoration or rehabilitation of previously altered habitat, increased
management of similar replacement habitat so that in-kind value of the lost habitat is replaced,
or a combination of these measures.

FHWA policy stresses that all practicable measures should be taken to avoid or minimize harm
to wetlands which will be affected by federally funded highway construction. A sequencing
(stepdown) procedure is recommended in the event that avoidance is impossible. First,
consideration must be given to providing for mitigation within highway right-of-way limits,
generally through enhancement, restoration, or creation. Mitigation employed outside of the
highway right-of-way must be reviewed and approved on a case-by-case basis. Measures
should be designed "to reestablish, to the extent reasonable, a condition similar to that which
would have existed if the project were not built" (23 CFR 777.9(b)).

9

Existing policy guidelines on mitigation sequencing have been employed for this project.
Measures to avoid, minimize, reduce, and eliminate wetland impacts have been employed
where feasible. NCDOT's efforts at impact avoidance and minimization are more fully
addressed in the Section 404 permit application and in the EIS.

Compensatory mitigation is proposed for all unavoidable impacts resulting from roadway
construction associated with the initial segment of the Wilson Bypass. Replacement of lost
wetland functions is considered paramount.

Mitigation banking - Mitigation banking may be considered as an integral part of this mitigation
project. After debiting for R-1023AA impacts, remaining credits from the Nahunta Swamp
site, if available, are expected to be "banked" for future use by NCDOT. This plan has been
formulated under recent guidance for the use and operation of mitigation banks (60 FR 12286-
12293, 1995) in order to facilitate the banking process. Mitigation banking is recognized as
a potential benefit in facilitating the permit process a!1d providing more effective mitigation for
impacted wetlands.

10

4.0 MITIGATION SITE

4.1 General
The Nahunta Swamp mitigation site is being proposed to provide compensatory mitigation
needs for R-1023AA. The preliminary mitigation study area encompasses approximately 80
hectares (195 acres); however, the final acreage of the site will be dependent upon landowner
negotiations and the extent of wetland functional replacement available within the area. The
Nahunta Swamp site is located at the intersection of SR 1058 and Nahunta Swamp in western
Greene County, North Carolina. Figure 2 depicts the mitigation site overlaid upon U.S.
Geological Survey (USGS) topographic mapping.

The study area is interposed at the confluence of Beaver Branch and Nahunta Swamp. The
mitigation area contains primary and secondary floodplain terraces associated with both stream
corridors. Surface and groundwater hydrologic interactions are expected to be complex at the
confluence and also expected to interact with SR 1058, which transects the site. The site is
primarily riverine in historic condition and provides the potential to restore characteristic
riverine wetland function. The site may be used to compensate for riverine wetland impacts
associated with the proposed Wilson Bypass corridor.

Environmental Services, Inc. (ESI) personnel visited the mitigation site on July 17, 20, and 31,
1995 to evaluate existing plant communities and perform cursory assessments of soil and
hydrogeological conditions. Jurisdictional wetlands, degraded or eliminated wetlands, and
uplands were mapped on 1993 aerial photography based primarily on NRCS soil map units and
the extent and arrangement of ditches on the site. Subsequently, existing conditions were
described and a mitigation planning strategy developed to discern wetland mitigation potential.

4.2 Existing Conditions

4.2.1 Plant Communities
Distribution and composition of plant communities reflect landscape-level variations in
topography, soils, hydrology, and past or present land use practices. Communities identified
on the site include upland hardwood forest, agricultural fields on hydric soils, agricultural fields
on non-hydric soils, early successional forest on artificially drained hydric soils, and remaining
swamp forest immediately adjacent to Nahunta Swamp and Beaver Branch. Figure 3 depicts
the plant community map units on recent aerial photography.

Upland hardwood forest and successional forest regeneration occurs within upland portions
of the site. Mixed mesophytic hardwoods such as northern red oak (Quercus rubra), American
beech (Fagus grandifolial swamp chestnut oak (Quercus michauxilj, white oak (Quercus alba),
and mockernut hickory (Carya tomentosa) reside upon relic levies in the southern section of
the mitigation area. Elevated upland ridges in western and northern sections of the site
support more xeric community elements including southern red oak (Quercus falcata), black

11

~. '\ Envlronm"nt:lI
~ ' S"rvh:es, Inc.
l 13111 Oal.. Sired
Suit" 220
1b1"lllh. NC 27605

Project: ER94018.10 FI gure:
Site Loc::ltlon
N::lhunt::l SW::lmp Mltlg::ltlon Study Are::l Drawn By: JM Scale:
Groen.. County. NC
Checke~ Byl JWD I Dalc: I I
, I , Aug,uot 1995
12 I I I I 1,1
'.

"

Z'" Envlronmentnl
Services. Inc.
13111 Onle Street
Suite 2::0
n.,lels:h. NC 27605

~ .
Plnn! Communities
Nnhunta Swamp MItigation Study Area
Greene County, NC

Project: ER94018.10' Figure::

Ornwn F~: I JM: Scale: 1 In r ~O Ft
Checke~ ~yl JWO I ohlc: AugL!lt1995

I 13

I I
,

I ; I

I' I

I' I
lit' .
I <.

oak (Quercus velutina), sassafras (Sassafras albidum), loblolly pine (Pinus taeda), and black
cherry (Prunus seratina).

Successional areas occupy effectively drained land on poorly, to very poorly drained hydric
soils. This area appears to support old-field succession or portions of the system may have
been clear-cut in the last 15 years. The high density of vegetation makes cursory evaluation
of interior community dynamics difficult. In areas within 30 meters (100 feet) of numerous
ditches, river birch (Betula nigra) often represents a majority of the developing tree canopy.
These monotypic patches of river birch range from 10 to 15 feet in height. Saplings of red
maple, eastern red cedar (Juniperus virginiana), swamp black gum (Nyssa biflora), sweet gum,
loblolly pine, and pond pine (Pinus serotina) were also observed as interior stems under 20 feet
tall. Dense herbaceous vegetation has restricted tree growth and includes an almost
impenetrable thicket of pioneer species such as black berry (Rubus spp.), greenbrier (Smilax
spp.), muscadine (Vitis rotundifolia), switch cane, dog fennel (Eupatorium capillifolium), asters
(Aster spp.), devil's walking stick (Aralia spinosa), Virginia creeper (Parthenocissus-
quinquefolia), pokeweed (Phytolacca americana), winged sumac (Rhus copallina), and
impatiens (Impatiens capensis).

Agricultural fields occupy eastern and northern peripheries of the mitigation site. Agricultural
fields on hydric soils occur adjacent to SR 1058 and support varying degrees of organic soil
content and sporadic relic fluvial layers. Agricultural fields on non-hydric soils occupy a relic
levy adjacent to Nahunta Swamp and a broad convex ridge in the northern extreme of the site.
The complexity of soil and hydrologic interactions within prior converted farmland is difficult
to evaluate based on cursory field assessments. In addition the presence of the SR 1058
roadway fill and roadside ditch make evaluations of historic topographic and community
gradients unclear. Detailed topographic surveys, and hydrological studies may be required to
discern the historic community patterns in these areas.

Swamp forest fringes persist along the primary floodplains of Nahunta Swamp and Beaver
Branch. These areas appear to sustain periodic overbank flooding and reduced groundwater
inputs. Incoming groundwater appears to have been diverted from the floodplain into
numerous ditches and shunted directly into the stream channel. Canopy species observed
during preliminary assessments include sycamore (Platanus occidentalis), river birch, swamp
black gum, red maple, laurel oak (Quercus laurifolia), overcup oak (Quercus Iyrata), cherrybark
oak (Quercus pagoda), Carolina ash, green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), and American elm
(Ulmus americana). Based on the presence of stumps in the map unit, cypress may have been
systematically logged from the community. Understory and groundcover species include
character species such as dog hobble (Leucothoe axillaris), sweet pepper bush, highbush
blueberry (Vaccinium corymbosum), false nettle (Boehmeria cylindrica), lizard tail, impatiens,
and switch cane.

14

4.2.2 Soils
The primary soil-landform association on the mitigation site consists of the Bibb-Johnston-
Kinston complex associated with the primary and secondary floodplain terraces, stream levies,
and feeder tributaries of Nahunta Swamp (USDA 1980). Figure 4 depicts Natural Resource
Conservation Service (NRCS) hydric and non-hydric soil map units overlaid upon recent aerial
photography. Soil types include the Johnston series (Cumulic Humaquepts), the Paxville series
(Typic Umbraquults), the Lumbee series (Typic Ochraquults), the Pactolus series (Aquic
Quartzipsamments), and the Blanton series (Grossarenic Paleudults).

Soil texture within most of the site ranges from loam to sand of moderate to rapid permeability
In undrained condition, the seasonal high water table varies along the topographic gradient
from surface flooding to more than 2 meters (6 feet) below the soil surface.

Hydric soils are defined as "soils that are saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the
growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part (USDA 1987). NRCS
mapping (Figure 4) identifies hydric soils within the primary floodplains of Nahunta Swamp and
Beaver Branch in southern, eastern, and central portions of the mitigation site (Cumulic
Humaquepts, Johnston series). Areas further north of Nahunta Swamp support poorly drained
to very poorly drained, hydric soils (Umbraquults, Paxville series; Ochraquults, Lumbee series)
associated with a secondary stream terrace and small tributary between the confluence of
Beaver Branch and Nahunta Swamp.

Several upland areas in the mitigation area support moderately well drained, non-hydric soils.
Upland systems include a narrow stream bank/levy system supporting the Pactolus series and
a broad, convex ridge supporting Blanton, Cowarts, and Wag ram soils.

4.2.3 Geology and Hydrogeology

Geology
The subject site is located within the central to western portion of the Inner Coastal Plain
Physiographic Province. The topography of the Inner Coastal Plain is characterized by broad
relatively flat stream valleys, and low to rolling hills. The surficial soils of Greene County are
predominantly underlain by sediments of the Yorktown Formation, which is described as
consisting of fossiliferous clay with varying amounts of fine-grained sand, bluish gray, with
shell material concentrated in lenses (Brown 1985). The Cape Fear and Black Creek
Formations are also present along a northwest to southeast trending belt that follows the path
of Contentnea Creek as it flows towards the Neuse River.

The mitigation site is wedge shaped, and bounded by Nahunta Swamp on the south and
Beaver Branch on the east. The surficial soils consist of alluvial sediments and weathered
marine sediments typical of the region. Surficial soil types are discussed in Section 3.2.2.
Based upon the USGS topographic map, total relief within the mitigation study area is

15

~ "".'~"m."'.'
~ S"rviccs, Inc.
13 III Dale Street
Suite ZZU
l 14>",11:11. NC Z76US

Natural Resource Conservation Service Soil Survey
Nahunta Swamp Mitlgalion Study Area
Greene County, NC

16

Project:

Drawn By:

JM
I

S~alc:
I

I
111" .. 630 Ft \

Chc~kcd By:

I JWO
I I

Dale:
,

1ugU!lt 199 I'
I
I

I '
II I .

,--

approximately 3.5 meters (12 ft). The estimated thickness of the surficial sediments is 4.5
to 6 meters (15 to 20 ft).

Hydrooeologv
Regional groundwater flow in the Coastal Plain generally flows in a down dip direction, which
generally trends southeast in North Carolina. The rivers generally flow from northwest to
southeast in the Coastal Plain, roughly paralleling the dip direction. Shallow groundwater
occurs under unconfined conditions within 1.5 meters (5 feet) of the surface in much of the
region, as evidenced by the large expanses of hydric soils, and the extensive use of drainage
systems in agricultural fields.

The local hydrology is controlled by three factors, topography, geology, and human
intervention. Under unconfined conditions groundwater generally follows the topography of
the land flowing from northern and western portions of the site into Nahunta Swamp and
Beaver Branch to the south and east. Groundwater was encountered within 1.5 meters (5
feet) of the surface in a series of six exploratory borings performed during a site visit on- 31
July 1995. The soils onsite are conducive to rapid infiltration and exhibit relatively high
hydraulic conductivities (35-50 cm/hr). Human impacts on the site include construction of
numerous drainage ditches, channelization and possible diversion of stream segments, and the
construction of several roads, including SR 1058, in the immediate vicinity. Figure 5 depicts
the arrangement of ditches and channelized stream segments identified on the site during
preliminary investigations.

Approximately 3,300 linear meters (10,000 ft.) of ditches or channelized stream segments
are identified on the site (Figure 5). The drainage ditches and/or channelized streams are
placed primarily along drainageways and slews ranging from approximately 30 meters (100
ft.) to 200 meters (600 ft) apart. Ditches and canals range from approximately 1 foot deep
in northern portions of the site to approximately 5 feet deep at confluence with Nahunta
Swamp.

Stream and groundwater drainage on the site is predominantly southward towards Nahunta
Swamp, however drainage on the eastern edge of the site appears to flow towards Beaver
Branch, a tributary of Nahunta Swamp. USGS topographic mapping and National Wetland
Inventory (NWI) mapping places the primary Beaver Branch drainageway through the center
of the mitigation site (Figure 2). NRCS soil surveys also indicate a floodplain map unit
(Johnston series) extending through the site center from Nahunta Swamp north towards
Beaver Branch (Figure 4). Available resources indicate that stream flow within Beaver Branch
may have been diverted off the mitigation site and shunted along the eastern edge of SR
1058. Detailed topographic mapping, groundwater modeling, and stream modeling will be
performed to accurately locate hydrologic pathways and potential for stream redirection
strategies.

17

--......~..". Environmental
~ S~rylces, Inc.
l 13 III Dale Street
Suite 2211
1~lcil:h. NC 27605

Project: ER94018.10

I 5
I
1 I~ ';" 630 Ft
I II
AUP~7t 1995

Figure:

Hydrologic Pathwayo
Nahunta Swamp MItigation Study Area
Greene County, NC

Drawn OY:\
I I

I ' I
Checked Oy:
I ,

JMI
JW01
I

Scale:

I
Dalc:
I

18

II l

I ~

In addition to Beaver Branch and Nahunta Swamp, a small unnamed tributary, and a stream
head depression provide stream and floodplain dynamics within the mitigation area. A small
unnamed tributary enters the mitigation area along the western site boundary. This stream has
been channelized throughout a majority of its course but appears to have supported overbank
flooding and a backwater floodplain near its confluence with Nahunta Swamp.

A stream head depression and relic channel may occur within the northern extent of the NRCS
Johnston soil map unit (Figure 4). The density of successional vegetation made evaluation of
this system difficult during preliminary field studies. However, a seasonally to semi-
permanently saturated flat to depressional pocket was encountered at the base of a
pronounced toe slope. This system may be a groundwater fed depression that historically
supplied surface water to the mitigation site. Aerial photography indicates that a ditch
currently extends from this area to Nahunta Swamp.

4.2.4 Jurisdictional Wetlands
Jurisdictional wetlands were evaluated from cursory field surveys, NRCS soil map units, and
interpretation of ditch arrangements within the study area. Potential jurisdiction was evaluated
relative to the criteria set forth in the COE Wetlands Delineation Manual (DOA 1987).
Estimates of jurisdictional extent are depicted in Figure 6. Jurisdictional wetlands most likely
persist within the lower floodplains of Nahunta Swamp and Beaver Branch. Remaining hydric
soil areas support systematic drainage and are not expected to maintain wetland hydrology as
defined in the 1987 wetland delineation manual. Jurisdictional open waters are expected to
persist within the drainage canals and ditches.

19

~. Environment:>1
-,..; Services. Inc.
l 13111 Dale Street
Suite 2::11
Rnlell:h. NC 276115

20

Project: ER9401a.10 Figure:: 6
Dr~wlI By: JM S<.:ulc: 1 In = 630 Ft
I
I I D~l~: AU9u9t 1'995
Checked Gy: JWD
,
I I I III I
- I

Jurl~dlctlon:>1 Wetl:>nd E~t1m:1te
Nllhunto. Swo.mp M11I9"lIon StUdy A,eo.
Greene County, NC

5.0 MITIGATION PLAN

5.1 Wetland Hvdrological Restoration
Additional studies will be necessary to define the limits of hydrological influence on the subject
property. Even so, certain restoration techniques can be employed to restore wetland
hydrological integrity of the site regardless of the extent of current degradation.

The current COE criterion for wetland hydrological restoration is saturation of the soil to within
30 cm (12 inches) of the surface for 5%, or in some instances 12.5% percent of the growing
season. Additional hydrological restoration goals include reintroduction of surface and
floodplain hydrology to restore diversity within the Nahunta Swamp wetland complex. Based
upon NRCS data, the average growing season for Greene County is 242 days. Using the 5 %
standard, 12 consecutive days of water at or near the surface will meet wetland hydrology
criteria. Under the 12.5% standard, 30 consecutive days would be required to meet wetland
hydrology criteria (USDA 1980). The extent of hydric soils and historic stream contours
suggests that wetland hydrology criteria and mitigation goals are achievable on the mitigation
site.

Based on cursory field analysis and available information, wetland hydrological restoration
would require backfilling of ditches, construction of cross-sectional clay dikes, floodplain
restoration along channelized and/or diverted stream segments, provisions to avoid impacts
to adjacent properties, and modifications to prevent inundation or de-stabilization of SR 1058.

The ditches on the site (Figure 5) will be back-filled in a manner to minimize the former ditches
serving as pathways for preferential migration of groundwater. Failure to minimize preferential
migration will allow the former canals to function as french drains and short circuit the
groundwater flow at the site thereby jeopardizing restoration efforts. Construction of cross-
sectional clay dikes, mixing of bentonite or montmorillonite clays, and monitoring of post-fill
hydraulic conductivity of deposited material will be implemented to minimize preferential flow.
The filling of the ditches will both increase infiltration by increasing sheet flow across the
surface, and delay loss of infiltrated water through artificial drainage.

Along with backfilling the existing drainage system, channelized and/or relocated stream
segments may be modified to reintroduce overbank flow dynamics. During the course of field
investigations, several drainage features were encountered in the southwest portion of the site
which appear to be channelized streams. Partial filling, dechannelization, and/or weir
installation will facilitate reintroduction of overbank flooding, decrease erosion and sediment
loads, and reduce flow velocity of water in the stream channel. The frequency, duration, and
extent of overbank flooding which might be achieved cannot be forecast within the scope of

21

this study. The soil survey indicates that soils typical of floodplains are present at the site.
Additional detailed study is recommended to forecast the area which would be subject to
renewed flooding.

Available resources indicate that the primary Beaver Branch drainageway may have historically
passed through the center of the mitigation site (Figure 2). Currently, the stream is contained
to the east of SR 1058. Re-diversion of historic stream flow onto the mitigation site will be
investigated during hydrological modeling and implementation planning. Detailed topographic
mapping, groundwater modeling, and stream modeling will be performed to accurately locate
hydrologic pathways and to aid in planning for stream restoration efforts.

Levee construction along restored stream segments will be incorporated as needed to restore
backwater areas to native condition. Constructed levees are expected to reproduce the
functions of a natural levee by delaying the recession of flood waters back into the channel,
.thus extending the period of water storage within the floodplain. As needed, openings in the
levee will be constructed to facilitate the desired frequency of diversion of flood waters onto
the site. Restoration of stream dynamics within channelized tributaries will be studied through
appropriate stream gauge placement and stream/groundwater modeling.

Restoration of wetland hydrological criteria on the subject site may be achieved with minimal
impact on adjacent properties. However, more detailed studies need to be conducted to more
accurately forecast the acreage and the impacts of restoration.

The proximity of SR 1058 to the wetland restoration area and the lack of relief between the
road and Beaver Branch makes it difficult to assess the impact of modifying or culverting
roadside ditches and farm field ditches within the scope of this study. Additional detailed
study is recommended to assess the impacts of hydrological alterations on both SR 1058 and
Beaver Branch.

5.2 Plant Community Restoration
Restoration of wetland forested communities will provide habitat for area wildlife and allows
development and expansion of characteristic wetland dependent species across the landscape.
Ecotonal changes between community types developed through a landscape approach to
wetland community restoration contribute to area diversity and .provide secondary benefits,
such as enhanced feeding and nesting opportunities for mammals, birds, amphibians, and other
wildlife.

Reference Forest Ecosystem (RFE) data, field soil mapping, review of available literature,
ecosystem classification methodology, and predictions based on hydrological models will be

22

used to develop the final plant community associations that will be promoted during
community restoration activities. Community types proposed for restoration are discerned
from NRCS soil map units, and steady state structure described in Classification of the Natural
Communities of North Carolina (Schafale and Weakley 1990).

Table 2 and Figure 7 depict an example of the potential target community types and selected
species for planting within portions of each NRCS soil map unit. The final planting plan will
be dependent upon field soil mapping, hydrological model predictions, ecosystem classification
methodology, and RFE data. Communities potentially restored or enhanced include: 1) Coastal
Plain riverine swamp forest, blackwater subtype (Johnston soil map unit, Figure 4); 2) Coastal
Plain bottomland hardwood forest (Pactolus and Lumbee soil map unit); 3) stream head
Atlantic white cedar forest (Johnston soil map area in northern extreme); 4) wet hardwood
forest (wetland/upland transitions); and 5) mixed mesophytic to dry-mesic hardwood forest
(non-hydric.soil units). Stream habitat and associated stream-side micro-communities such as
Coastal Plain levy forest inclusions may also be restored or enhanced on the site as a result
of restoration efforts.

5.2.1 Planting Plan
A planting plan is proposed for the mitigation areas to reestablish wetland community patterns
across the landscape. The plan consists of: 1) acquisition of available wetland species; 2)
implementation of proposed surface topography improvements; and 3) planting of selected
species on site.

The species selected for planting will be dependent upon the availability of local seedling
sources at the time of planting and the results of ecological analyses. Target planting densities
and total stems needed by species will be designed according to COE bottomland hardwood
forest mitigation guidelines (DOA 1993).

5.2.2 Planting Program
Bare root seedlings of tree species will be planted on 8-foot (2.4 m) centers (680 trees/acre)
within the specified map areas. In restoration areas, species at desired relative densities will
be alternated within adjacent centers whenever feasible. Planting will be performed between
December 1 and March 15 to allow plants to stabilize during the dormant period and set root
during the spring season. Removal or control of competing nuisance vegeta.tion will be
implemented as necessary to facilitate adequate survival of target wetland and upland plants.

5.3 Wetland Soil Restoration
Land use practices have impacted soil characteristics on the mitigation site. Impacts include
the minimization of hydric conditions in upper soil horizons, the reduction in organic matter

23

TABLE 2

EXAMPLE OF TARGET COMMUNITY TYPES AND SPECIES FOR
WETLAND RESTORATION AND ENHANCEMENT PLANNING

I. Coastal Plain Riverine Swamp Forest (blackwater subtype) (Johnston soil map unit, Figure 4)

1. Bald Cypress (Taxodium distichum)
2. Tupelo Gum (Nyssa aquatica)
3. Swamp Black Gum (Nyssa bif/ora)
4. Swamp Cottonwood (Popu/us heterophylla)
5. Swamp Hickory (Carya aquatica)
6. Carolina Ash (Fraxinus caro/iniana)
7. Laurel Oak (Quercus /aurifo/ia)

II. Bottomland Hardwood Forest (blackwater subtype) (Lumbee, Pactolus, Paxville soil map unit)

1. Laurel Oak (Quercus /aurifo/ia)
2. Overcup Oak (Quercus /yrata)
3. Green Ash (Fraxinus pennsy/vanica)
4. Cherrybark Oak (Quercus pagoda)
5. Willow Oak (Quercus phellos)
6. Yellow Poplar (Liriodendron tu/ipifera)
7. American Elm (U/mus americana)
8. Atlantic White Cedar (Chamaecyparis thyoides)

III. Stream Head Atlantic White Cedar Forest (Johnston soil map unit)

1. Atlantic White Cedar (Chamaecyparis thyoides)

IV. Wet Hardwood Forest (wetland/upland transitional areas)

1. Willow Oak (Quercus phellos)
2. Swamp Chestnut Oak (Quercus michauxiJ1
3. Water Oak (Quercus nigra)
4. Laurel Oak (Quercus /aurifo/ia)
5. Cherrybark Oak (Quercus pagoda)
6. Yellow Poplar (Liriodendron tu/ipifera)

V. Mixed Mesophytic to Dry-Mesic Hardwood Forest (Blanton, Wagram, Cow arts soil map units)

1. Water Oak (Quercus nigra)
2. Swamp chestnut oak (Quercus michauxiJ1
3. White oak (Quercus alba)
4. Mockernut Hickory (Carya tomentosa)
5. American beech (Fagus grandifo/ia)
6. Black Walnut (Jug/ans nigra)
7. Southern Red Oak (Quercus fa/cata)
8. Pignut Hickory (Carya g/abra)

24

~ E."I~"",,,...,,I
~ S",'vlces.Illc.
l 13111 Dnle Slr"el
Suite ~~II
1~llel\.:h. NC 276115

Example 01 Community Types
For Wetland Restoration
And Enhancement Planting:>
Nahunla Swamp MItigation Study Aroa
Q,eene County, NC

I I I

25

I I
I

. ..!:\'~~~,"'"
I"J'. -" f,.~'>J'...' .rf':.- .,.
-.:~. r . _ ~ '-'.oj..'\". \.........

Figure:

7

Drown By:

Project: ER940 18. 10

S~alc:

Checked By:

JM
I
1 GWD
, I

I
1 In = 630 ~l
I I
~ugu:>t 19 51 I

Dale:
~

I \ I

\ \

II

content through accelerated decomposition, excavation and periodic cleaning of drainage
ditches, and the elimination of surface microtopography in agricultural areas.

The filling of canals and ditches as proposed during hydrological restoration should serve to
reintroduce hydric soil conditions and halt the long-term reductions in organic matter content.
Further soil remediation tasks include reestablishment of surface microtopography, and
construction of natural levee formations, as needed, within former floodplains on the mitigation
site.

Undisturbed wetlands of similar type to the mitigation area often exhibit complex surface
microtopography. Small concavities, swales, exposed root systems, and hummocks
associated with vegetative growth and hydrological patterns are usually common. Large
woody debris and partially decomposed litter provide additional complexity across the wetland
soil surface. Efforts to advance the development of characteristic surface roughness will be
implemented on the mitigation site.

Levee construction along restored stream segments will be incorporated as needed to restore
natural soil banks adjacent to channelized streams. This soil remediation task will facilitate
reintroduction of stream bank micro-communities and potentially reproduce the functions of
a natural levee by delaying the recession of flood waters back into the channel.

26

6.0 MONITORING PLAN

Monitoring of wetland restoration and enhancement efforts will be performed until success
criteria are fulfilled. Monitoring is proposed for two wetland components, vegetation and
hydrology. Wetland soils currently exist within restoration areas and monitoring is not
considered necessary to verify hydric soil requirements for a jurisdictional determination.

6.1 Hydrology Monitoring
While hydrological modifications are being performed on the site, surficial monitoring wells will
be designed and placed in accordance with specifications in U.S. Corps of Engineers', Installing
Monitoring Wells/Piezometers in Wetlands (WRP Technical Note HY-IA-3.1, August 1993).
Monitoring wells will be set to a depth 60 centimeters (24 inches) below the soil surface.

Monitoring wells will be imbedded within vegetation sampling plots. to provide representative
coverage within each of the wetland ecosystem types: Ecosystem types support similar soils,
landform, and target community structure. Hydrological sampling will be performed throughout
the growing season at intervals necessary to satisfy the hydrology success criteria within each
community restoration area (EPA 1990).

In order to substantiate the extent of floodplain restoration, stream gauge data will be used,
if needed, to determine the elevational reach and frequency of overbank flooding events.

6,2 Hydrologv Success Criteria
Target hydrological characteristics include saturation or inundation for at least 12.5 % of the
growing season at lower landscape positions, during average climatic conditions. Upper
landscape reaches may exhibit surface saturationlinundation between 5% and 12.5% of the
growing season based on well data. These 5%-12.5% areas are expected to support
hydrophytic vegetation. If wetland parameters are marginal as indicated by vegetation and
hydrology monitoring, a jurisdictional determination will be performed in the questionable area.

Stream gauge data, including flood event frequency and the elevation of each flood event, will
be utilized to substantiate the area of floodplain restoration. Stream gauge monitoring and
floodplain area calculations will require average climatic condition including an average
distribution of peak storm events.

6.3 Vegetation
Restoration monitoring procedures for vegetation are designed in accordance with EPA
guidelines enumerated in Mitigation Site Type (MiST) documentation (EPA 1990) and COE

27

.- ,

. .
Compensatory Hardwood Mitigation Guidelines (DOA 1993). A general discussion of the
restoration monitoring program is provided.

After planting has been completed in winter or early spring, an initial evaluation will be
performed by the agent to verify planting methods and to determine initial species composition
and density. Supplemental planting and additional site modifications will be implemented, if
necessary.

During the first year, vegetation will receive cursory, visual evaluation on a periodic basis to
ascertain the degree of overtopping of planted elements by nuisance species. Subsequently,
quantitative sampling of vegetation will be performed between August 1 and September 31
after each growing season until the vegetation success criteria is achieved.

\

During quantitative vegetation sampling in early fall of the first year, sample plots will be
randomly placed within each restored ecosystem type. Sample plot distributions will be
correlated with hydrological monitoring locations to provide point-related data on hydrological
and vegetation parameters. In each sample plot, vegetation parameters to be monitored
include average tree height, species composition, density, and basal area. Visual observations
of the percent cover of shrub and herbaceous species will also be recorded.

6.4 Vegetation Success Criteria
Success criteria have been established to verify that the wetland vegetation component
supports community components necessary for a jurisdictional determination. Additional
success criteria are dependent upon the density and growth of characteristic forest species.
Specifically, a minimum mean density of 320 characteristic tree species/acre must be surviving
for at least 3 years after initial planting. At least five character tree species must be present,
and no species can comprise more than 20% of the 320 stem/acre total. Supplemental
plantings will be performed as needed to achieve the vegetation success criteria.

No quantitative sampling requirements are proposed for herb and shrub assemblages as part
of the vegetation success criteria. Development of a swamp forest canopy over several
decades and restoration of wetland hydrology will dictate the success in migration and
establishment of desired wetland understory and groundcover populations. Visual estimates
of the percent cover of shrub and herbaceous species and photographic evidence will be
reported for information purposes.

28

.. .

7.0 WETLAND MITIGATION POTENTIAL

Restoration and enhancement strategies at the Nahunta Swamp site will be designed to restore
a riverine wetland complex which supports an array of native plant, wildlife, and stream
communities. Activities are expected to restore or enhance important physical wetland
functions including organic carbon export, removal of elements and compounds, nutrient
cycling, and retention of particulates. . Provisions for overbank flooding and dynamic surface
water storage are also in planning stages. In addition, the location of the mitigation site at the
confluence of Beaver Branch and Nahunta swamp will provide spatial wetland habitat structure
within a regional wildlife corridor.

Wetland restoration will restore wetland/upland ecotonal habitat. The wetland/upland edge
is among the most diverse and productive environments for wildlife (Brinson et al 1981).
Simultaneously,-riparian transport of groundwater into the bottomland system will be enhanced
through protection and reforestation of upland buffers adjacent to the wetland complex.
Therefore, protection and reforestation of proximal upland buffers and upland/wetland
ecotones on the mitigation site is considered an integral part of wetland functional gain and
generated mitigation credit. However, upland areas in the northern extreme of the mitigation
site may not generate mitigation credit through wetland enhancement.

Based on cursory evaluations of mitigation potential, the Nahunta Swamp Mitigation area
appears to provide opportunities for a mixture of wetland restoration and enhancement along
with restoration of wetlandlupland ecotones. Table 3 and Figure 8 depict the estimated areas
exhibiting potential for wetland mitigation credit.

Table 3: Mitigation Credit Potential

Mitigation Activity
Wetland Restoration
Wetland Enhancement
Wetland/Upland Ecotone Restoration
Remaining Upland Area
TOTAL

Area
hectare
28
25
8
16
77

acre
68
62
20
40
190'

* The SR 1058 Right-of-Way comprises approximately five acres of the total 195 acre mitigation study area.

This mitigation plan is expected to provide ample mitigation credit for riverine wetland impacts
associated with R-1023AA. Approximately 17.8 acres of wetlands may be impacted during
construction. After debiting for R-1023AA, additional credits are expected to remain for
unavoidable wetland impacts associated with future segments of the Wilson Bypass.

29

~. '\. Ellvlrolln,untal
~ Survlcus. IlIc.
l 13111 Dlllu Slrcut
SIIItU 2211
R.lllulJ.:h. NC 27605

Potontlo' Mltlgotlon Crodlt
Nohunto Swomp Mltlgotlon Sludy Area
Greene County, NC

I I

30

I
Project: ER94018.10

Drown ?V,: !
, . I
Chcckc~ ~V:I

III

Fi ~W'C:

JM I
JWO

1 In b 630 FI
I
I
Auguot1995
, I

S~~lc:
I

O'ate:

of ' , f

8.0 DISPENSATION OF PROPERTY

NCDOT is in the process of soliciting conservation groups and natural resource agencies for
final dispensation of properties. However, until an acceptable agreement can be reached with
an appropriate recipient of the property, ownership of the mitigation site will remain with
NCDOT. NCDOT will also remain responsible for meeting success criteria established in the
mitigation plan. Stipulations will be incorporated into the deed upon transfer to a recipient to
insure that the property remains as conservation land in perpetuity.

wptext\esi\project\94erO 18. 1 O/final/gurley.rpt

31

-
" i

,- -

9.0 REFERENCES CITED

Adamus P.R., L.T. Stockwell, E.J. Clairain Jr., M.E. Morrow, L.P. Rozas, R.D. Smith. 1991.
Wetland Evaluation Technique (WET), Volume 1: Literature Review and Evaluation
Rationale. Wetlands Research Program Technical Report WRP-DE-2. U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers Waterways Experiment Station. Vicksburg, MS.

Adamus P.R., L.T. Stockwell. 1983. A Method for Wetland Functional Assessment, Volume
I. Critical Review and Evaluation Concepts. Federal Highway Administration Report
no. FHWA-IP-82-23. U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, D.C.

Brinson, M.M., F.R. Hauer, L.C. Lee, R.P. Novitzki, W.L. Nutter, and D.F. Whingham. 1994.
Guidebook for Application of Hydrogeomorphic Assessments to Riverine Wetlands. The
National Wetlands Science Training Cooperative. Seattle, WA.

Brinson M., B. Swift, R. Plantico, J. Barclay. 1981. Riparian Ecosystems: Their ecology and
status. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FWS/OBS 81117

Brown, Philip M., et ai, 1985, Geologic Map of North Carolina, North Carolina Department
of Natural Resources and Community Development, 1-.500,000 scale.

Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F. C. Golet, and Edward T. Laroe. 1979. Classification of Wetland
and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S.
Department of Interior.

Department of the Army (DOA). 1993 (unpublished). Corps of Engineers Wilmington District.
Compensatory Hardwood Mitigation Guidelines (12/8/93).

Department of the Army (DOA). 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual.
Tech. Rpt. Y-87-1, Waterways Experiment Station, COE, Vicksburg, MississippL

Federal Interagency Committee for Wetland Delineation (FICWD). 1989. Federal Manual for
Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and U.S.D.A.
Soil Conservation Service, Washington, D.C. Cooperative Technical Publication.- 76
pp. plus appendices.

Page, R.W. and L.S. Wilcher. 1990. Memorandum of Agreement Between the EPA and the
DOE Concerning the Determination of Mitigation Under the Clean Water Act, Section
404(b)( 1) Guidelines. Washington, DC.

32

" .. c (.

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). 1983. Soil Survey of Wilson County, North Carolina,

USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service.

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). 1980. Soil Survey of Greene County, North Carolina,

USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service.

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). 1987. Hydric Soils of the United States. In
cooperation with the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils, USDA Natural
Resource Conservation Service.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1981. Habitat Evaluation Procedures Workbook.

National Ecology Research Center.

33

... ...... ..

JAMES B. HUNT. JIt
GOVERNOR

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
P.O. BOX 25201. RALEIGH. N.C. 27611-5201

R. SAMUEL HUNT III
SECRETARY

July 27, 1995

Ms. Jean Manuele
Regulatory Field Office
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
6512 Falls of the Neuse Road Suite 105
Raleigh, North Carolina

Dear Ms. Manuele:

Subject: Wilson County, First segment of the Wilson Bypass Project, TIP No.
R-I023 AA, Federal Aid Project No. NHF-38-1(66), State Project No.
8.T340305, USACOE Action ID No. 19920219

The following is in response to your recent correspondence regarding the Nationwide Pennit
application for the above referenced project. As discussed in our June 27, 1995 letter we will
submit a modified proposal that will reduce wetland impacts through compensatory
mitigation. A mitigation plan is in the process of being prepared for the Gurley tract located
adjacent to Nahunta Swamp a tributary of Contentnea Creek in Greene County. This
information will be submitted to your office by August 10, 1995 for your review. If you have
any questions concerning this letter, please do not hesitate to call Scott P. Gottfried at 919-
733-3141, Ext. 307.

Sincerely,

~J\.~d~J~J~?-

H. Franklin Vick, P .E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch

HFV /plr
Enclosures
cc: District Engineer, COE Wilmington
John Dorney, DEM
Kelly Barger, P .E., Project Management Unit
Don Morton, P.E., HighwayDesign Branch
A.L. Hankins, P .E., Hydraulics
D.R. Dupree, P.E., Division 4 Engineer
Charles Cox, P.E., Project Planning Engineer

@