20120776 Ver 1_401 Application_20120812

Message I Secure File Transfer
Secure File Transfer
From
To
wmarotti @wkdickson. com
b ev. Strickland @ncdenr. gov
Anyone can download
Subject
Boone PCN
Message Expires
August 29, 2012
Attached files
9 Boone—intake—PCN.ir)iijj[gllUg=
Page 1 of 1
Ms. Strickland:
Five copies of a PCN application and a $240 check for a raw water project in Watauga County will be
delivered to DWQ's Archdale office today.
Please use the link below to download a PDF of the application.
As with Albemarle, should you have questions, please call.
Ward Marotti
Senior Scientist /Project Manager
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
720 Corporate Center Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
Office: 919- 782 -0495, ext. 5655
Direct: 919- 256 -5655
Mobile: [phone]
www.wkdickson.com
https://transfer.wkdickson.com/message/jIkiK9ZK2C93EKeNphIlvv 8/16/2012

20120776
LETTER WtWK
TTER OF TRANSMITTAL WDICKSON
community Infrastructure consultants
720 Corporate Center Drive Raleigh, North Carolina 27607 919.782.0495 tel. [phone] fax
K Ur ED
NC Division of Water Quality — ►'
TO: Permitting Section DATE: 15 August 2012
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699 -1650
ATTENTION
: Ms. Laurie Dennison
401 Permitting — Boone Water
RE: Transmission Line
Watauga and Ashe counties, NC
We are sending via: ❑ Overnight ❑ Regular Mail ❑ Pick -up ® Hand Delivered
The following items: ❑ Correspondence ❑ Plans ❑ Specifications ❑ Other as listed
below:
- • '
E", xm®'
. •
THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below:
® For Approval ❑ As Requested ❑ Approved as Submitted ❑ Returned for Corrections
❑ For Your Use ❑ For Review and Comment ❑ Approved as Noted ❑ Forward to Subcontractor
REMARKS:
COPY TO:
SIGNED:
WartrMarotti

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL lftWK
WDICKSON
community infriustructure consultants
720 Corporate Center Drive Raleigh, North Carolina 27607 919.782.0495 tel. [phone] fax
NC Division of Water Quality —
TO: Permitting Section
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleiah. NC 27699 -1650
ATTENTION
: Ms. Laurie Dennison
DATE: 15 August 2012
401 Permitting — Boone Water
RE: Transmission Line
Watauga and Ashe counties, NC
We are sending via: ❑ Overnight ❑ Regular Mail ❑ Pick -up ® Hand Delivered
The following items: ❑ Correspondence ❑ Plans ❑ Specifications ❑ Other as listed
below:
COPIES DATE NO. DESCRIPTION
5 404/401 Permit Application
1 Application check ($240)
THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below:
❑ For Approval ❑ As Requested ❑ Approved as Submitted ❑ Returned for Corrections
❑ For Your Use ❑ For Review and Comment ❑ Approved as Noted ❑ Forward to Subcontractor
REMARKS:
COPY TO: SIGNED:
Ward Marotti

Ph W I <
WDICKSON
community infrastructure consultants
July 27, 2012
Tasha McCormick
US Army Corps of Engineers
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, NC 28801 -5006
Subject: Town of Boone Water System Improvements Pre - Construction Notification
Dear Ms. McCormick:
Enclosed please find two copies of the Pre - Construction Notification for the Town of Boone Water System
Improvements Project in Watauga County, NC.
As you know, the project includes of construction of a new raw water intake within the South Fork of the
New River near Brownwood and a primary raw water pump station, both located approximately 0.5 mile
upstream of the Cranberry Springs Road Bridge in Watauga County; approximately 11.6 miles of new 24
inch raw water transmission line; a raw water booster pump station, located along the west side of
Brownwood Road, approximately 0.25 mile north of US 421; and expansion of the treatment capacity of
Boone's existing water treatment plant from 3.0 million gallons per day (mgd) to 4.5 mgd within its existing
footprint, located on Deck Hill Road, approximately 0.25 mile south of its intersection with Greenway Road.
These improvements will:
• Install a new raw water intake to serve the Town's future needs
• Improve the water treatment plant which is old, problematic, underrated and operating near 80% of its
rated capacity
• Expand the Town's water treatment works to meet the Town's future needs
There have been 0.16 acres of wetland impacts identified, 0.132 acres of which will be permanent and 0.028
acres will be temporary. Of the 606 feet of stream impacts, only 95 will be permanent, while 511 feet will be
temporary. The proposed raw water transmission main and booster pump station are routed and located along
and within roadways and existing utility easements throughout most of their length, which nearly eliminates
new land clearing. By using horizontal directional drilling at all crossings of the South Fork New River, direct
impacts to this important resource will be avoided. Culverts that are installed to access the new intake and
pump stations have been designed to allow fish passage at low flow and maintain aquatic ecological
connectivity.
On June 24, 2010, the State Office of the US Department of Agriculture Rural Development released a
Finding of No Significant Impact for the project. During the early phases of project planning, a population of
the NC Special Concern spike (Elliptio dilatata) was located at the selected intake location. The NC Wildlife
Resources Commission and NC Natural Heritage Program requested that a relocation of mussels be
720 Corporate Center Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
Tel. [phone]
Fax [phone]
www.wkdickson.com Transportation • Water Resources • Urban Development • Geomatics

Ms. McCormick
July 27, 2011
Page 2
conducted at the intake site in order to minimize impacts to this population. The mussels will be relocated to
another site with existing muscle populations. No other impacts to state or federally protected species are
anticipated.
In response to comments from the NC State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), a formal archaeological
investigation was conducted in all proposed disturbance areas outside existing NC Department of
Transportation maintained rights of way. As SHPO has confirmed, as a result of the primary pump station's
design, and after a formal archaeological site investigation, there will be no impacts to significant
archaeological or historical resources.
A floodplain analysis was conducted to determine if the construction of the new raw water intake pump
station and access road would significantly raise the 100 -year flood level. Based on this analysis, there will be
"No Rise" to the base flood water - surface elevation.
I appreciate your assistance facilitating the timely and complete review of this important public infrastructure
project's PCN.
Sincerely,
W.K. Dickson & Co., Inc.
Ward Marotti
Project Manager
Attachments
�D CKSON

Corps Submittal Cover Sheet
Please provide the following info:
1. Project Name Town of Boone Water System Improvements
2. Name of Property Owner /Applicant: Town of Boone
3. Name of Consultant/Agent: WK Dickson / Ward Marotti
*Agent authorization needs to be attached
4. Related /Previous Action ID number(s): N/A
5. Site Address: Brownwood Road
7. City: Boone
8. County: Watauga and Ashe
9. Lat: 36.247473 Long: - 81.558917 (Decimal Degrees Please)
10. Quadrangle Name: Todd, Deep Gap, and Boone quadrangles
11. Waterway: South Fork New River
12. Watershed: New River (HUC 05050001)
13. Requested Action:
X Nationwide Permit 4 12
General Permit 4
Jurisdictional Determination Request
Pre - Application Request
The following information will be completed by the Corps office:
AID:
Prepare File Folder Assign number in ORM
Authorization: Section 10 Section 404
Project Description/ Nature of Activity/ Project Purpose:
Site/Waters Name:
Keywords:
Begin Date

wArE9Q�
� r
1
4 ^C
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.4 January 2009
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009
Pre - Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A.
Applicant Information
1.
Processing
1 a.
Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
❑X Section 404 Permit ❑ Section 10 Permit
1 b.
Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 12 or General Permit (GP) number:
1 c.
Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
❑X Yes ❑ No
1 d.
Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
❑X 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular ❑ Non -404 Jurisdictional General Permit
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification — Express ❑ Riparian Buffer Authorization
1 e.
Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWQ
401 Certification:
❑ Yes ❑X No
For the record only for Corps Permit:
❑ Yes ❑X No
1f.
Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for
mitigation of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank
or in -lieu fee program.
❑X Yes ❑ No
1 g.
Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 In
below.
❑ Yes ❑X No
1 h.
Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ Yes ❑X No
2.
Project Information
2a.
Name of project:
Town of Boone Water System Improvements
2b.
County:
Watauga and Ashe
2c.
Nearest municipality / town:
Town of Boone
2d.
Subdivision name:
NA
2e.
NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state project no:
3.
Owner Information
3a.
Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
3b.
Deed Book and Page No.
3c.
Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
3d.
Street address:
Brownwood Road
3e.
City, state, zip:
Watuaga County, NC
3f.
Telephone no.:
828- 964 -1071
3g.
Fax no.:
3h.
Email address:
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4.
Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a.
Applicant is:
❑ Agent ❑X Other, specify: Public Utilities Director, Town of Boone
4b.
Name:
Greg Young
4c.
Business name
(if applicable):
Town of Boone
4d.
Street address:
567 W. King Street
4e.
City, state, zip:
Boone, NC 28607
4f.
Telephone no.:
828 - 964 -1071
4g.
Fax no.:
4h.
Email address:
rick.miller @townofboone.net
5.
Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a.
Name:
Ward Marotti
5b.
Business name
(if applicable):
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
5c.
Street address:
720 Corporate Center Dr.
5d.
City, state, zip:
Raleigh, NC 27607
5e.
Telephone no.:
919 - 782 -0495
5f.
Fax no.:
919- 782 -9672
5g.
Email address:
wmarotti @wkdickson.com
Page 2 of 10

B.
Project Information and Prior Project History
1.
Property Identification
1a.
Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
2942583170000 and 2951073927000
1b.
Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
Latitude: 36.247473
Longitude: - 81.558917
1 c.
Property size:
acres
2.
Surface Waters
2a.
Name of nearest body of water to proposed project:
South Fork New River
2b.
Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
C; HQW
2c.
River basin:
New River (HUC 05050001 and 03040101)
3.
Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
See attached narrative.
3b.
List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the
property: 1.39
3c.
List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property: 2,500
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
See attached narrative.
3e.
See
Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
attached narrative.
4.
Jurisdictional Determinations
4a.
Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
❑X Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
Comments:
4b.
If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
of determination was made?
❑ preliminary ❑X Final
4c.
If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known): Ward Marotti
Agency /Consultant Company:
Other: WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
19 July 2011
5.
Project History
5a.
Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
El Yes ❑X No ❑ Unknown
5b.
If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
6.
Future Project Plans
6a.
Is this a phased project?
❑ Yes ❑X No
6b.
If yes, explain.
Page 3 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

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

4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then indivi ually list all open water impacts below.
4a.
Open water
impact number
Permanent (P) or
Tem ora T
4b.
Name of waterbody
(if applicable)
4c.
Type of impact
4d.
Waterbody
type
4e.
Area of impact (acres)
01
Choose one
Choose
02
Choose one
Choose
03
Choose one
Choose
04
Choose one
Choose
4f. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments:
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, the complete the chart below.
5a.
Pond ID number
5b.
Proposed use or
purpose of pond
5c.
Wetland Impacts (acres)
5d.
Stream Impacts (feet)
5e.
Upland
(acres)
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
P1
Choose one
P2
Choose one
5f. Total:
5g. Comments:
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If any impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a. Project is in which protected basin?
❑ Neuse ❑ Tar - Pamlico ❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman ❑ Other:
6b.
Buffer Impact
number —
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Stream name
6e.
Buffer
mitigation
required?
6f.
Zone 1
impact
(square
feet)
6g.
Zone 2
impact
(square
feet)
B1
Yes /No
B2
Yes /No
B3
Yes /No
B4
Yes /No
B5
Yes /No
B6
Yes /No
6h. Total Buffer Impacts:
6i. Comments:
Page 5 of 10

D.
Impact Justification and Mitigation
1.
Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
See attached narrative.
1b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
See attached narrative.
2.
Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a.
Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
❑X Yes ❑ No
2b.
If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
❑X DWQ ❑X Corps
2c.
If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project?
❑ Mitigation bank
❑X Payment to in -lieu fee program
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3.
Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a.
Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b.
Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type: Choose one
Type: Choose one
Type: Choose one
Quantity:
Quantity:
Quantity:
3c.
Comments:
4.
Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program
4a.
Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached.
❑X Yes
4b.
Stream mitigation requested:
95 linear feet
4c.
If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
cold
4d.
Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
0 square feet
4e.
Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
0.132 acres
4f.
Non - riparian wetland mitigation requested:
0 acres
4g.
Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
0 acres
4h.
Comments: See attached narrative.
5.
Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a.
If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
Page 6 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

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

E.
Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1.
Diffuse Flow Plan
1 a.
Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
❑ Yes ❑X No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1 b.
If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
❑ Yes ❑ No
2.
Stormwater Management Plan
2a.
What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
21.2%
2b.
Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
❑ Yes 0 No
2c.
If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why:
Due
to the nature and percent imperviousness of the project, all that is needed for the portion of this project requiring a 404/401 permit is an Erosion
and Sediment Control Permit. See attached documentation for approval of the project site and the criteria for meeting that approval. A Stormwater
Management
Plan for improvements to the water treatment plant, which will have no impacts to wetlands and waters, has been approved.
2d.
If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
The stormwater management plan for the water treatment plant located in Boone, NC consists of a hydrologic analysis for the 10 -year 24 -hour
frequency storm event for pre- & post- development conditions. The proposed increase in impervious area
associated with building additions, a
covered
clearwell, and new pavement results in increases of runoff for the post - development 10 -year 24 -hour frequency storm event. In order to
reduce
post - development peak flows to pre - development peak flows for the 10 -year storm event, two stormwater management facilities (dry detention
ponds) are proposed within the site plan.
2e.
Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
NCDWQ - Sue Homewood
3.
Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a.
In which local government's jurisdiction is this project?
Town of Boone
❑ Phase II
❑ NSW
3b.
Which of the following locally - implemented stormwater management programs
❑ USMP
apply (check all that apply):
❑X Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other:
3c.
Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑X Yes ❑ No
attached?
4.
DWQ Stormwater Program Review
❑Coastal counties
❑X HQW
4a.
Which of the following state - implemented stormwater management programs apply
❑ORW
(check all that apply):
F1 Session Law 2006 -246
❑ Other:
4b.
Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑X Yes ❑ No
attached?
5.
DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a.
Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
❑X Yes ❑ No
5b.
Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
❑X Yes ❑ No
Page 8 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

F. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1 a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal /state /local) funds or the
❑X Yes ❑ No
use of public (federal /state) land?
1 b. If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State
❑X Yes ❑ No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1 c. If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
letter.) On June 24, 2010, the State Office of the US Department of Agriculture Rural
❑%� Yes ❑ No
Comments: Development released a Finding of No Significant Impact for this project (attached).
2. Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
❑ Yes ❑X No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b. Is this an after - the -fact permit application?
❑ Yes ❑X No
2c. If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s):
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in
El Yes ❑X No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b. If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
On June 24, 2010, the state office of the US Department of Agriculture, Rural Development issued a finding of no significant impact for this project.
Local land use ordinances and regulations that help minimize adverse environmental impacts of new development are discussed in the Mitigation
Summary section of this document, including floodplain development, subdivisions and manufactured home parks, stream buffers outside water supply
watersheds, and water connection policies. Pursuant to requirements in water supply watersheds, allowable land use, including development density,
upstream of the proposed intake, will have to be modified to protect water quality, after the use classification is approved. The resulting restrictions will
help preserve water quality and aesthetics in the Todd and Brownwood areas of Ashe County.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a. Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non- discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
The Town currently supplies an average of 1.8 MGD (2.6 MGD maximum day) to a population of about 16,400. This population includes many
university students that live off - campus and use Town water. This current system average day demand is anticipated to grow by the year
2030 to 2.75 MGD. Assuming the potential for 0.5 MGD for the Town of Blowing Rock's emergency use and 1.0 MGD of unallocated reserve, the
future 2030 average day demand for planning purposes should be 4.25 MGD (6.8 MGD maximum day). Standards for design of water treatment
facilities recommend that the facilities be able to deliver the maximum day design therefore we have utilized 6.8 MGD for our future 2030 supply and
treatment capacity.
Page 9 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
❑ Yes No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
RI Yes ❑ No
impacts?
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS f=ield Office you have contacted.
Asheville
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program database, correspondence withlreview by USFWS and NCWRC (see attached).
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
❑ Yes ❑X No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
NOAAs National Marine Fisheries Service database
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
Yes ❑ No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
See attached narrative.
8. Flood ,Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA- designated 140 -year floodplain?
❑X Yes ❑ No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
Watauga County and the Town of Boone regulate new development in FEMA flood hazard areas following a Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance that
meets FEMA standards, discussed further In section 4.0. In accordance with floodp[aln development requirements, an analysis was compieted that
concluded there will be "no rise" to the base flood water - surface elevation.
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?
FEMA Flood Insurance Risk Maps
Greg Young
S• �/ 4 q
%
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
Date
Appli ant! gen s S) nature
(Agent's signature is valid only f an authorization
4
letter from the a I[cant rovided.
Page 10 of 10

PCN Narrative
Town of Boone Water System Improvements
Town of Boone Public Utilities
Nationwide Permit 12
Pre - Construction Notification
Name and Address of Applicant:
Town of Boone Public Utilities
Rick Miller
567 W. King Street
Boone, NC 28607
Section B. Project Information & Prior Project History
B.3a. Existing Conditions and General Land Use
The Town of Boone currently operates a 3.0 million gallons per day (mgd) conventional water treatment
plant. According to available 2008 data, the Town currently supplies an average daily demand (ADD) of
1.8 MGD (2.6 MGD maximum day - MDD) to a population of about 16,400. This population includes
many university students that live off - campus and use Town water. This current system average day
demand (ADD) is anticipated to grow by the year 2030 to 2.75 MGD. Assuming the potential for 0.5
MGD emergency allocation to the Town of Blowing Rock and 1.0 MGD of unallocated reserve for
unincorporated areas of the County, its other municipalities, and industry, the future 2030 average day
demand (ADD) for planning purposes should be 4.25 MGD (6.8 MGD maximum day).
The WTP expansion will be contained entirely within existing WTP and no impacts to direct land use are
anticipated. The intake pump station and its associated access road will permanently impact
approximately five acres of active agricultural land. The surrounding agricultural use will not be
impacted. Where raw water transmission mains cross agricultural fields and utility and transportation
rights of way, the pre - construction use will be restored.
The Environmental Assessment describes existing biological resources throughout the WWTP service
area in detail, including threatened and endangered species and a detailed flow impact evaluation.
B.3d: Purpose of Proposed Work
The Town of Boone needs to complete improvements to their raw water supply and water treatment
system. The issues which need to be addressed through the completion of a capital improvements project
include:
- Find an additional source of water supply to augment the Town's existing water supply intakes
- Install a new raw water supply and intake to supply the Town's future needs
- Improve water treatment plant which is old, problematic, underrated and operating near 80% of
the rated capacity of the facility
- Expand the Town's water treatment works to meet the Town's future needs

B.3e: Project Description
The proposed raw water intake pump station (30 feet by 50 feet) will be constructed along the south bank
of the South Fork New River approximately 0.5 mile upstream of the Cranberry Springs Road Bridge in
Watauga County. It will pump raw water from the South Fork New River and be located at the bottom of
an existing slope, at the edge of an existing agricultural field.
A sand eductor and pump will be provided to allow sand to be removed from the wetwell back to the
river. Each intake line will be equipped with a shut -off valve in the wetwell and a backwash line from the
backwash pump to allow each line to be backwashed at 4 MGD, or twice the intake capacity.
Backwashing will be able to be programmed to occur any time during the day or night, which will
minimize or eliminate impacts to recreational use of the river.
The raw water intake will be an infiltration gallery (approximately 120 feet by 30 feet) that will be
installed in the South Fork New River, approximately five feet below the existing channel elevation. The
infiltration gallery will be entirely in Watauga County, and have screened intakes that will be sized to
keep intake velocities at the screen surface less than 0.5 feet per second. The screens will be backfilled
with gravel under graded stone with large rocks sized and installed atop the gravel and stone to protect the
intake. Because the channel will be returned to original slope and contour following construction, and the
gallery will be underwater, permanent aesthetic and recreational impacts will not occur.
Transmission lines will convey raw water approximately 2.6 miles from the intake site, south along
Brownwood Road (NC 1359) to the booster pump station. Throughout most of the
Brownwood Road alignment the lines will be installed under existing pavement. Where necessary, they
will be routed close to the existing edge of pavement. Lines will be entirely in the Brownwood Road right
of way. Transmission lines will follow US 421 for approximately 6.1 miles, cross the South Fork New
River immediately upstream of the existing bridge, and turn south along Charlie Hollar Road. They will
follow Charlie Hollar Road for approximately 0.7 mile, cross the South Fork New River, and parallel an
existing gravity sewer interceptor along a Town of Boone greenway trail for approximately 1.5 miles,
before discharging into an existing raw water transmission line that serves the Town's existing water
treatment plant.

Section C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
2a.
2b.
2c.
2d.
2e.
2f.
Wetland Impact
Type of
Type of Wetland
Forested
Type of
Area of
Number
Impact
Jurisidiction
Impact
Permanent (P)
Corps (404, 10),
(acres)
or Temporary
(T)
or
DWQ (401,
other)
W1 (T)
Land clearing
Bottomland
No
Corps
0.008
Hardwood
Forest
W2 (T)
Land clearing
Bottomland
No
Corps
0.007
Hardwood
Forest
W3 (P)
Culvert
Bottomland
No
Corps
0.022
Hardwood
Forest
W4 (T)
Land clearing
Bottomland
No
Corps
0.009
Hardwood
Forest
W5 (P)
Culvert
Bottomland
No
Corps
0.04
Hardwood
Forest
W6 (T)
Land clearing
Bottomland
No
Corps
0.004
Hardwood
Forest
W7 (P)
Culvert
Bottomland
No
Corps
0.07
Hardwood
Forest
2g. Total Wetland Impacts
0.16
Total Temporary Impacts:
0.028
Total Permanent Impacts:
0.132

C.2h: Description of Proposed Wetland Impacts
Proposed Wetland Impacts 1 through 6 will occur at the access road and intake site. The temporary
impacts within the temporary construction corridor will total 0.028 acres. Because these herbaceous
wetlands will be returned to their original slope and contour and replanted with native herbaceous species,
these will not be permanent impacts. The permanent impacts at the access road and intake site will total
0.062 acres where culverts will be installed. Proposed Wetland Impact 7 will occur at the booster pump
station site. This permanent impact will total 0.07 acres where a culvert will be installed. The temporary
impacts will total 0.028 acres and the permanent impacts will total 0.132 acres for a total of 0.16 acres of
impacts.
3a.
Stream Impact
Number
Permanent (P)
or Temporary
(T)
3b.
Type of
Impact
3c.
Stream Name
3d.
Perennial
(PER) or
Intermittent
(I NT)?
3e.
Type of
Jurisdiction
3f.
Average
Stream
Width
(feet)
3g.
Impact
Length
(linear
feet)
S1 (T)
excavation
UT- South Fork New
River
PER
Corps
4
10
S2 (T)
excavation
Hardin Creek
PER
Corps
10
10
S3 (T)
excavation
Rocky Branch
PER
Corps
2
10
S4 (T)
excavation
Laxon Creek
PER
Corps
5
10
S5 (T)
excavation
UT- Gap Creek
PER
Corps
3
75
S6 (P)
culvert
UT- Gap Creek
PER
Corps
3
40
S7 (T)
excavation
Meadow Creek
PER
Corps
4
10
S8 (T)
excavation
UT- Meadow Creek
PER
Corps
3
10
S9 (T)
excavation
Meadow Creek
PER
Corps
6
10
S10 (T)
excavation
Meadow Creek
PER
Corps
10
10
S11 (T)
excavation
Meadow Creek
PER
Corps
6
13
S12 (P)
culvert
Meadow Creek
PER
Corps
5
55
S13 (T)
excavation
Meadow Creek
INT
Corps
10
103
S14 (T)
excavation
UT -South Fork New
River
PER
Corps
5
80
S15 (T)
Intake
gallery
construction
South Fork New River
PER
Corps
100
160
3h. Total Stream and Tributary Impacts
606
Total Temporary Impacts:
Total Permanent Impacts:
511
95
C.3i: Description of Proposed Stream Impacts
The raw water transmission main construction corridor will cross the South Fork New River
at five locations (see plan details). All five crossings will be installed under the channel using the
Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD) method, which will insure that the raw water line is at a
minimum depth of 10 feet below the river bed. All HDD operations will stay outside the river
riparian buffer zones. The downstream -most crossing of the South Fork New River will be located just
upstream of the US Hwy 421 bridge. At this location there is a public canoe access. This is the most
upstream canoe access on the South Fork New River. Upstream from this location a low water bridge and
multiple existing aerial sewer crossings inhibit recreational canoeing. The second river crossing will be

located approximately 650 linear feet downstream from the Casey Lane low -water Town of Boone Water
System Improvements — Environmental Assessment 25 bridge. The three remaining river crossings will
cross the South Fork New River adjacent to existing aerial sewer crossings following the ASU greenway
trail. No impacts the South Fork New River associated with the raw water transmission main are therefore
anticipated (see the detailed flow impact evaluation in Section 3.4.2 of the attached Environmental
Assessment).
The raw water transmission main will temporarily impact one unnamed perennial tributary to the South
Fork New River (Stream Impact 1) and Hardin Creek (Stream Impact 2). Both crossings will be inside the
existing sanitary sewer gravity interceptor easement, which is actively maintained. No clearing of mature
woody vegetation will be necessary at either of these stream crossings. No permanent impacts will occur
at either stream. Temporary impacts to these streams will be 20 linear feet assuming a 10 foot average
trench width.
Between the intake site and Meadow Creek's headwaters, the raw water transmission main
will cross Meadow Creek at three locations (Stream Impacts 7, 10, and 11). It will also cross two
unnamed tributaries of Meadow Creek (Stream Impacts 8 and 9). These temporary impacts will total 53
feet. At the booster pump station, an access road will have to be constructed across an unnamed tributary
to Gap Creek. This will result in a 40 foot permanent stream impact (Stream Impact 6) and a 75 foot
temporary stream impact (Stream Impact 5).
An open trenching method will be used across streams between the intake site and US 421, which
consists of Stream Impacts 3, 4, and 14. Because these tributaries are relatively small, during installation
flow will be pumped around the worksite. Following installation, all stream crossings will be returned to
original slope and contour. Because these crossings occur in agricultural areas or will require no clearing
of mature woody vegetation, no permanent impacts will occur at these crossings.
Where a culvert will be installed at the entrance of the access road there will be a permanent stream
impact totaling 55 feet of stream (Stream Impact 12) and a temporary stream impact totaled 103 feet
(Stream Impact 13). To minimize impacts, the culvert will be designed to allow fish passage at low flow
and maintain aquatic ecological connectivity. These details can be seen in details of the engineering plans
attached.
The proposed raw water intake, an infiltration gallery, will be installed below the South Fork New River's
existing channel. Pre - construction elevation, slope, and contour will be restored after installation, as will
the channel's cross - sectional area and flow conditions (see the attached Environmental Assessment). The
resulting 160 foot impact will be temporary (Stream Impact 1). Approximately 100 feet of the existing
narrow treeline along the river's banks will be cleared for construction. Of that, approximately 15 feet
(immediately over the intake pipes) will be permanently maintained. The balance, approximately 85 feet,
will be re- planted with native riparian trees and shrubs.
PCN Section D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
D.Ia & D.Ib: Avoidance and minimization
The proposed raw water transmission main and booster pump stations are routed along roadsides and
existing utility easements throughout nearly their entire length to almost eliminate the need for new land
clearing. By using horizontal directional drilling, impacts to the South Fork New River will be
minimized. The expanded WTP will be built on previously cleared land adjacent to the existing WTP,
which will also eliminate the need for new land clearing. Culverts that are installed will be designed to

allow fish passage at low flow and maintain aquatic ecological connectivity. Additional minor impacts
during construction will be minimized by following all relevant Section 404/401 permit conditions and a
DENR- approved Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan.
D.4h: In -lieu Fee Program
In -lieu fee mitigation credits for a total of 95 feet of cold water stream impacts and 0.132 acre of riparian
wetland impacts have been requested from the NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program. Attached is a copy
of the in -lieu request form for this project.
Section F. Supplementary Information
F.4a. Available Capacity of the Proposed Facility
The Town currently supplies an average of 1.8 MGD (2.6 MGD maximum day) to a population of about
16,400. This population includes many university students that live off - campus and use Town water. This
current system average day demand is anticipated to grow by the year
2030 to 2.75 MGD. Assuming the potential for 0.5 MGD for the Town of Blowing Rock's emergency use
and 1.0 MGD of unallocated reserve, the future 2030 average day demand for planning purposes should
be 4.25 MGD (6.8 MGD maximum day). Standards for design of water treatment facilities recommend
that the facilities be able to deliver the maximum day design therefore we have utilized 6.8 MGD for our
future 2030 supply and treatment capacity.
F.7b. Data Sources for Historical or Archaeological Resource Impacts
The following language was taken directly from the EA's sections 3.5.1 and 3.5.2:
In response to SHPO scoping comments a formal archaeological investigation was conducted in all
proposed disturbance areas outside existing NCDOT- maintained rights of way. In response to concerns
over viewshed impacts, a 3d model was created and several alternatives were evaluated.
None of the remaining previously recorded resources in the survey areas will be impacted by the proposed
improvements to the Town of Boone water system.
There will be no direct impacts on historic resource AH524. However, the proposed pump station will
impact this resource's viewshed. Direct project impacts to historic resource AH40 will be minimal. The
proposed water line will cross through a field area within the resource boundaries but the pipe will be
buried and thus pose no viewshed impacts. The proposed pump station will be visible from the building
complex at AH40. To mitigate these viewshed impacts, the pump station has been designed to resemble a
barn. This design will allow the facility to blend into the agricultural setting without posing an adverse
impact to the historic resources.
Construction plans associated with the proposed improvements of the Town of Boone's water system will
not affect significant archaeological resources. Nor will the construction adversely impact the significant
historic resources in the project vicinity.
No further management considerations are deemed necessary.

Greg Young
Town of Boone
567 W. King St.
Boone, NC 28607
Project: Town of Boone Water System Improvements
Expiration of Acceptance: November 15, 2012
County: Ashe/Watauga
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) is willing to accept
payment for compensatory mitigation for impacts associated with the above referenced project as indicated in the table below. Please
note that this decision does not assure that participation in the NCEEP will be approved by the permit issuing agencies as mitigation
for project impacts. It is the responsibility of the applicant to contact these agencies to determine if payment to the NCEEP will be
approved. You must also comply with all other state federal or local government permits, regulations or authorizations associated
with the proposed activity including SL 2009 -337: An Act to Promote the Use of Compensatory Mitigation Banks as amended by
S.L. 2011 -343.
This acceptance is valid for six months from the date of this letter and is not transferable. If we have not received a copy of the
issued 404 Permit/401 Certifrcation/CAMA permit within this time frame, this acceptance will expire. It is the applicant's
responsibility to send copies of the permits to NCEEP. Once NCEEP receives a copy of the permit(s) an invoice will be issued based
on the required mitigation in that permit and payment must be made prior to conducting the authorized work. The amount of the In
Lieu Fee to be paid to NCEEP by an applicant is calculated based upon the Fee Schedule and policies listed at www.nceep.net.
Based on the information supplied by you in your request to use the NCEEP, the impacts that may require compensatory mitigation are
summarized in the following table. The amount of mitigation required for this impact is determined by permitting agencies.
Upon receipt of payment, EEP will take responsibility for providing the compensatory mitigation. The mitigation will be performed in
accordance with the N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources' Ecosystem Enhancement Program In -Lieu Fee
Instrument dated July 28, 2010.
Thank you for your interest in the NCEEP. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Kelly Williams at
(919) 716 -1921.
Sincerely,
V
Mi h el Ellison
Deputy Director
cc: Karen Higgins, NCDWQ Wetlands /401 Unit
Tasha McCormick, USACE - Asheville
Sue Homewood, NCDWQ - Winston -Salem
Ward Marotti, agent
File
RP�StDYl.GL9... 'E ... Proti 7, oar Stat&
�T AA
NCDENR
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program, 1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1652 / 919-715-0476 / www.nceep.net
River
Basin
CU
Location
Stream (feet)
Wetlands (acres)
Buffer I
(Sq. Ft.)
Buffer II
(Sq. Ft.)
Cold
Cool
Warm
Non - Riparian
Coastal Marsh
Impact
New
05050001
95
0
--Riparian
0
0.132 0
1 0
0
0
Upon receipt of payment, EEP will take responsibility for providing the compensatory mitigation. The mitigation will be performed in
accordance with the N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources' Ecosystem Enhancement Program In -Lieu Fee
Instrument dated July 28, 2010.
Thank you for your interest in the NCEEP. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Kelly Williams at
(919) 716 -1921.
Sincerely,
V
Mi h el Ellison
Deputy Director
cc: Karen Higgins, NCDWQ Wetlands /401 Unit
Tasha McCormick, USACE - Asheville
Sue Homewood, NCDWQ - Winston -Salem
Ward Marotti, agent
File
RP�StDYl.GL9... 'E ... Proti 7, oar Stat&
�T AA
NCDENR
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program, 1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1652 / 919-715-0476 / www.nceep.net

r y --
Ck.
St's
f
s
a
Ad
Y #lyari a E,- ps
m
i
S;R
Sort
Ashe County
Watauga County
L
Ilk
p�{4.rresk .
I42�
� r
CrY
3{�11tap
T
MWO
Figure 1 Legend
Town of Boone Streams
�►INI< Proposed Water System Improvements
W DICKSON Vicinity Map Roads
community IMrpslruoturo contuitonic Mlles
0 0.25 0.5 1
1 in = 0.5 miles Project Area

' - - .gbh ''�`:. _. - . i :': -, v *} _w i - ':.._ - M 'i �'�s::yk, :l_1. '
"'. ,'
421 .�- - rzs �a:+. -..'. ,;. _ : a, -t4 :% _ ;_,.pry ;ry . `I', .'f' ''... ,..,,; 11
194 - '' +,i+,r� # _ :�..- -,.:x }�' �i F�.}t. *.::.^ - i °° ^ ?. ' ZF,
� ":� '.fir}' i -- ;,�� `,. � ti_- .. ". -} :l - ..�y dr-""' -
,iE �a,i_.,;. -. ',.- .l, - %'- {: y- ,.. ; {9 +r: • '' %e+j., Y .�.. w
t ", ;.
321 :: - _ .�- _ .,> v . : . 'y; -
_ . i1: - icy, „ -;' :{ .k . .; ..
p ,- "_ " M1� -% + - }fix. '
105' e - ?`i :','- _ #'Y,4.' x�.'. ::}`.' _ % - r: +'`f
+ #'` ..SFr'_.. e::__ {;ir . �'�.' r-, ... , :1 :i'.. %
321 '.,e�+, .. i +'." +j' . : 1 - .'..%- ' _�. � ` ' �. T -K�01, „ - %
WI OC %.
+ m, ,'J Y f:+M1 ''''+- Y % �' FI , M1 ntt.. k..'. "f ..\ it'I tl�_ .' M1'
t z ti ;�.._. l7" ,'enr' Z-', ii;- .,.-_1..�- .::}:_' R'..' _ _ f' ._-
-
'41J' rF :. °: _. l,` -'1= r.'Y .,-•* �.. �� ~4', '�, +f , +,. -} �%)'-' I:': t' +, k' : <' :�' %
E. :l.: f . *1'fr, C i1f. k, .1 %, :rt 1:. ',`f,i: .ti:
:.. }C "• - a"'.,Y.i. : -.: '! '` '~l ^y. 5•. °-5, M1:. r "l "
, I C: f -k 1 r �. - {. Y - - t v dS .,y v' _ v�� ' I _ - _ .I - k . % i'Y '- ,' _ -1{:x . �. �- }frk $_ �„cs'Ei: r ��" - y'S"{]... I -- ',- %.",. - - - - - i I % /"!'' , -' i4 .}� @€_ -' ki7.' 'r _��' i.; - - ear " { -' '7{k -_ %
sG . c+ ' y .
k' I =gym _ ;1. ;�. �. S* .
5 Y' o-:,
1
:: % 5: (.' ._= "." I '�., - ,• Ste_..% _ - . ,� :', / t:'+" 5:'r',-' _$'" _ �kr-
M I i \ 51' uC - .1* '. ,� ti,' 1_ 'v .: -5 i'.. - 4i.y� SM1 .
% y '5...
:I - k >�'C. _ {wry{ - __ % 4 \' "l.{I __, _-' f' ' I . F �' ~i, " - .O' {.- :.�=._ �y`� oc:�: ti.ry �I }': li - rte_. 'f_ k , % -
f - :i.~ n k,t; % ') .'
%. S
• %" t. y'
- 4 !i_
<ry _
,T' -
r
�i' +r
'1 <.. ': M1ryM1.
.'4 rte; F.t- _ _ � �} �., -k�} . ..,r ,�_'rT . af: s ���rvy` -:n;z;;;, .: `' - , � %t, � - =;�+ %: . '1. %
I • - . I:i - : ' is -
` �,�{�; '> ;try'.' }}
.k �' "F, t'14.. .: _:✓. =2 r_ - '1:, ..I" �.. xsti''r,+ .M1 f 1M1.
- hi` 'l4_. +V %. = zs -';.; - "k• ^::',fir I,, 1
I~ / :� ° ' }.~ - - ti .d'k., _ t fry.,: :.p ..'t• f Y - I: % ^L�%
} xI' nix, _ ' }r j+v '-- '• x. ,f ti i S ( �'
_ -t. ,- +i 1`- 5f �f 'r'krl` �'yf!•,`r . I.- .. :" y lyh /� � - .. -. :' F '7 - - ', r
:_ _ _
i
.� `:x' _
�. - . �: ..
q. - -- =war, _ri }� -.?,' -..../ - - '.k.'(•i. ` kk �f k#- Y.lSi` - '� \ Y y�... - .'i:.. ''
" •. - - -7 'I ..4 :, S -_< ti _ J ~I t /:5�, 1 `� �'I"k ,-~ -r. 'I .. • -,. Y' J rrv.k ''Y-,,
- - ' + :..'r, .x , � 1, :4 ` k . ��.��: x _ - -r '' : f - r r - , ,}, y ' - - , : r$o-
.k _
_ ,
. .. 5 , .. -
rY._ t, . :.f+{ .... f .c...; -.: - $,std' , •,�...: y_ /:' . . i z 11:. ,,r 'i _ {: ., %
Y" -�.: -: L': X. 4�.s. �_ -.',Q .: r�tJ _ _ I _ . . __S�_T.'! - ' :..:- 1; {� jam' ' -- 5 ' , - /�~ % .�_ . +: .'- -- t' -__ ?w �o!'<:,_%# = }:_., .yam;, _ ,.1,..f- x.':F, •7", -�'' {M1 .I 1. -. _sP� r,4f�r�" s• "; .t_yM1'
lti '. ',, _ k i� °.LS''°.- r'V,'}. - ^. yyk''l 1' - �4?4 x -. _ ' `
r ., . �
}. %
f'Y.'�r, \ - ',:ex41~ .. , •'IlV , ''��k - xxti rv+ .- , :'~ -A 'k4`Ji"9' }.I ��/ - _ -r} .Y� ('� '', it ,' %
.. - Y...�.k= L.ry M1aw .Y ;�,. ry.4k f'. - S __ _' - s.. -.r1� _ 't- r' '.- r
M_`_
fx I - '1,k - - :' ryV .. - -- s <F... "\ Li 0. -a l .. , .,-k- - 5. . % . %_ �s
. _.. .:_-
! r ''
;,:
s _ _
r v
:.. _,
.,
_ r
rr '- ;,fi.� /'1: 'x4,'IJI� lC,i �Y,,s :Y'l tiff._' ::\ rt 5:? .. 4',
kf 4 N , , .F' l 1 - _ tiny .
5 - .. ry . r � . +' S Y!x . ' i. -- -- .1. . , .. , ' iv.+f. - f'/ - ' ' - . 1.
='.�'' �jk'4. `x.�6`. G= - }_ \\ - °p "' `y'_::fc,, ) - L� - 'p+r. t, ..},, ~� -.y , .. . % ' - E... r i ' d
- .. :Y- - 'r) ' ,' l , i ' :3 R is }'r .:. +. u Ik f . : f t� , %
1.5. ,i y ,�" �. _�7t.�� =__: - - - . , v - ': ,:. .I. , I I: i _,- . r - :f\ ",,%, __ _' > - „ ' ' } , - -
I "*� _ ��� / _3 �:ryr.:',_x - \ .'N �_k' __ mil_ :... _ M1JM1 :, -I- -{ .G % .
,�. ti. '. . . tM1. , mil -r.�
= S'--5o1ae,J i.::,Fi' 'sY+? f f -.`` -'i ;:x - _ -�l' -
f � ;:q. I .-. rf _ - :!1} ' X43'., - s)? �
4. ! i p4 {. -i' 'r r-J �% .. - '.nSll.' „' . 1'_:r L*.'`.' ..# <'. % e. .
-.. x ' fi ., ~ . ,, . % % mss.•- t /' _' R -
_. i+ 1 ,� ., T - -.
V. ... .� ..._ 'r {. -_ t.- rr�7 _ h_ /. V t , V . Y .. ..
"k�'- ' I_z' ,> r� f _ a M1 . -L _ � r y�. _ 3.. ..: 1 . •n .5l' '•t'.
_' _ _ -_ G:. _ ?+a'+i., t- -: "S= :lf' F¢' Y Mfr % x"�p� M1 - �% �M�y'Fr /' s'r`{`a M1 . ;�!s` : �x # -\ l �5'.:�_ ,. *::+F ' , i _. r
f,'*' ..''LyG� t.r ', f .''1
f_'' /f:J ;�,. _ /,. - _ % � - '' '+� -. . % F - L~ ,,,r: I{rf 1 _ . , ..
..: - -1 (' "f - :'. ter:1 -7 - : - " .1•'. -�. -� i..'s''1 •+: ,
:. {i.k ,'f..i { Y1,e:,c.'r,.ry {r �_.Ktx 'r -£._.: .:�;.:r ,r _ .� - �. _, %
1 . `'` j,/ 'ice" -_- _ _ �',yL ` .5', ,f %, _. �.,4 , - t _ ,. +5 " - { v % f{,',k¢ ...: .5 "%' - �� -Z�z kl{'"4 - k :: k :'r_:7f{d_ __ 4'. ii -Y \. t i ,
:a. :'S: v� ryf I ,:�-. - -- � r -' + - - , .. ' .,.. M1' ._ 'r.. .,
r:1. , I % - xvz '!' ' }' w _- v_ T � r, -17 `. , { - ?',,- - , %... ': .F I -- k -
- _ P . ° , _ ..
B .- f �. %
'{ :{ .- _ ��.. gp i '3 -1.- I.SL' - 5 j . % . .% _ % 'J =-, -5 +'.�~ �`' 4 rs I III' I . -. % { f -',t } : <f i � M1 i i 4 L -Y a.' 3; `.fs'i�4 �+ r-y?. - I f ,'} ,: -I l r b : + Ir %
%. ,f., '�� .) �: `-% I� ";- - ..{ -�, _ # fit .K`: . '1? ". "'. ' ' k.: tx :�. -i . . % _ ..�% �� ' J - / . .%- Yom,, �- , � , _ 4
+{ �' = Y �` r +'t.£ f 'r {'. .14,'''. k.y - i . .'I kb. /. - '+$ .. - , � t %
_ bil l M1 -- _ M1�. ,r {. #' 4`.` M1� `,+v` -r Z. - -1`:M1 • }1 f. �. .. �;r= ,.:4 1 - ' . . ,
5 . . �r•.. YV�" '-+ '`R .l - �q ,r:.% jury - i s ,,, U, % {:''' .v t ' ' 5...�� ^`mot : "•: _ C :k �.5' % +- -. - -1f �1 �_Y'YYti S' f/: R . � � k>r C. }. f � 2�.. ; 5
yy { 1'k r J, �LS�C, �} f ;�,' .,F �, �'.Y"4- , .4 Y.,y' Y
yif f -', ik rx - f ^i - -k ': +^1 -M1+,. _ t \,_Ja :' {+,- rk :
f� 1: �: =...; - p�5�y.�' -. I':... ?4::. ':,.;,+:•Y.;*,rtv (: ' - rte` % ' O'���+,�C/'rfVVfr•. _ - -- --O-r" ',.I �~{.I1y'< .'- _ L "r �`k. ./ �., "' ,_ - +'" 'Fy 'M1 "4�- Y. " -+ . %
#7 ';' Y:�� .l , L .-- ' ,. � -:, - - 91. ''fit k.L- , - ".'- . +,- ? -1 :`r-. - _ �' f' _ .' ' `T .^4C_ .i. ,.I - , i +
..� . - 1„ .�' = 'i Y. - -. r rh' {" ., YC. ';;; ';,; -y 5.�_'i5' _ - y` fi: ', ;�`;- ;r=' , x:n '-
' ,fir: : {: ,` , r.n. _ ' f n w - �f '^r
v'} �L�'�:: . "_ � � .' � fl ,ft' '✓ -.� -'M1M1� I .T - ,- 'r r,....+.... . .. - _ ryLT. % .-rN ��. ~Y -� t.:." ,K. "�', .: rr �� y_, 4 -',�'r _ . f." Yf t: :.. - _ , i '+ _ 'j %
may, I /. Y ,C..��: `.:1�:",. - - i. . �,+ ` � �yf.''- l w - - - 'f , r` x �''l 9 L fi:- - -_= wry { . /.^ .
- :;.g,i', _ ,4 `_l l ;: j .' ..F ork % -4 , 1 If } w- v � ...'.., r.% . � , -- ry -. :ice,. - "^; ` ?~ � _ _ M1f r? Z. ,.rts`-. _- ``x- ':4 } } ff f. f ,, �- �' F r t,,r' f^ _, F .. i•. - r n3:;1`� 4 ff & f. .
w.
v 1, ,-''' L �� �a rr'rL ;�+ - / -4 } r L L' � J. f,:'�'i i' _ 1 �" '- '
' a, :ti' 'o'C r} '"' =+'s: • . , yJ- w - �' j ,:"` _. I f �^ -7 �" _ .._.r y� 61-'': _ ` .
s< } ,�w . r `7.. _''{ �{ .'Cr yo- :°' °}' - 7. _ _Y f ''��k " :¢'
,AST';' r� -` __ -°.. 4' ,` l'' _ '- is k ✓- -r-�,. _Y:} _ -�i ; --
-ro- Kd: *` r'LtS"K= c'k�' --�`r r" ,C #-1 A_pF'YSLLT'J4LL €'rt :'S ;�,�,. 5�.. {;+tvr. '�ti 1+ - ,a.'
Y'f i -- �i - E5 ,R7'` - .• a' �,�_ Y _ ! I' /'- '.;y.l_ "f,c a - ?''
-_: °i iTss�r _ v' lI , 1. `/* 'i, `M1 i4 i ' 4M1y - I' 4 �. , -= s' T: y'
` .r-'* -%ttl �.+ *, `' i .. 1 5 1 �:. - - ; "_. �__ �:�.f .* �11�r44- ` !y - ..'Sf'. i'..1' - _'. - '
' . .�•.1. Lr, cl a� � h. -7 r ., X � '' +�_ �...�J.j'. - _ _ .So •..55•.. Vim, - -- � I ��{
- �--7 ` '_ - � ` x.47 '' 4 �. .%: .` - ? - ' \ - "" l 1.„ l �-1 - , ,d-
Source:r IJ�SGS Topo Tile'023.sid a u, r,. c ,'.:', ;.: ;, : t; L -. , .s.. - a L .- -- -
' �www.nedot orf`1 - d � rs ; " . 1. - �;' ; ?, . I :. ,; "' ";i. }: � _ � . � �� � z '
p7P 9�F.. 7' %`. n.ti -= .•!?f_ C` 4'�: -i? '}M1'vi r- :.-.Fi' \ +t'-:.:�:, S" }
Figure 2
Town of Boone ,k.,, Legend
P%wl< Proposed Water System Improvements
W DICKSON USGS Map Project Area
community IMrpsrrUoturo Con$ultanlb Feet
0 1,500 3,000 6,000
1 in = 3,000 feet

-
a
s.�
' f
r
� 1
11
9-
o
r(7-"
0
RIVER
MILTOP
yLN
LL RD
��r c
1 C
� 1
p
rl
W U
l
S �
W D CKSON
oommunIN IMrpsrrUoturo Oon6Wtonl4
R��FN
i
rwIl x
i
r �
iA
U,
• Y ,
I
C R °o
Ro
vQ
�Q
2
ti
WILDCAT RD
d �/A I 'M 1,194
5 a la
ar_�__W* All
O7.(
o �
J � i
m IF
o ny
r m RD
N
p BAMBOO�RD \Np O� LN
LIT�TiLE1LAUREL RD
_ ��� CARA LN �AWN'DR
TONtYE ST Project Area
Q Q Symbol Soil Name Acres Percent
Z 2 AcE Ashe- Chestnut complex, 30 to 50 percent slopes, very rocky 0.85 0.8%
y Q� BrF Brownwood fine sandy loam, 50 to 95 percent slopes, very rocky 0.14 0.1%
A;fjO CaF Chandler loam, 25 to 65 percent slopes 0.23 0.2%
Z CdE Chandler fine sandy loam, 30 to 50 percent slopes 21.10 19.0%
CkE Chestnut- Edne ille complex, 30 to 50 percent slopes, stony 1.82 1.69/6
tj (♦ CsD Cullasa a very cobbly loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes, very stony 1.56 1.49/.
�.C,P�jO� (♦ EvD Evard -Cowee complex, 15 to 30 percent slopes, stony 0.31 0.3%
0 EvE Evard -Co wee complex, 30 to 50 percent slo es, stony 2.42 2.291.
pR NkA Nikwasi loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes, frequently flooded 10.45 9.49/.
�VV��� (♦ RoA Rosman fine sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes, occasionally flooded 17.58 15.89/.
0 SnB Saunook loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes 0.69 0.6%
yQ� SnC Saunook loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes 14.63 13.2%
SnD Saunook loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes 5.28 4.8%
(♦ SwC Saunook - Nikwasi complex, 2 to 15 percent slopes 5.26 4.7%
r A TxA Toxaway loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, frequently Flooded 5.11 4.69/.
Ud Udorthents, loamy 3.06 2.8%
�� (♦ Ur Urban land 1.18 1.1%
0 Ux Urban land, Flooded 1.34 1.2%
2W Water 0.71 0.6%
C Watauga loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes 1.69 1.5%
WaD Watauga loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes 15.64 14.1%
Figure 3 Legend
Town of Boone Streams
Proposed Water System Improvements
Soils Map Roads
Feet
0 1,550 3,100 6,200
1 in = 3,000 feet Project Area

USDA i�
_ opment
United States Department of Agriculture
Rural Development
State Office
(Exh. E. - SI 1794 -1)
SUBJECT: Town of Boone
Proposed Water System Improvements — Water Treatment Plant
Improvements, New Raw Water Supply and Transmission Main
Finding of No Significant Impact
TO: Project File
The attached Environmental Assessment (June 22, 2010 revison) has been
prepared and reviewed in accordance with the National Environmental Policy
Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 6941 et seq.); the Council on Environmental Quality
Regulations for Implementing the Procedural Provisions of the National
Environmental Policy Act (40 CFR Parts 1500 - 1508); and 7 CFR Part 1794,
Rural Utilities Service's Environmental Policies and Procedures. Upon review of
the environmental documentation included and referenced in the Environmental
Assessment, I find that the proposed project will not have a significant impact on
the human environment and for which an Environmental Impact Statement will
not be prepared.
)0J,60
Randall A. Gore
State Director
Rural Development
Date
4405 Bland Road, Suite 260 Raleigh, North Carolina 27609
Phone: [phone] • Fax: [phone] • TDD: (919) 873 -2003 • Web: http: / /www.rurdev.usda.gov /nc
Committed to the future of rural communities.
"USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer and lender."
To file a complaint of discrimination write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W.,
Washington, DC 20250 -9410 or call (800) 795 -3272 (voice), or (202) 720 -6382 (TDD).

State Stormwater Management Systems
Permit No. SWG040000
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
GENERAL PERMIT
FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A LINEAR UTILITY LINE PROJECT AND
ASSOCIATED INCIDENTAL BUILT -UPON AREA
UNDER 15A NCAC 211.1000, SESSION LAW 2006 -246, and SESSION LAW 2008 -211
In compliance with the provisions of Article 21 of Chapter 143, General Statutes of North
Carolina as amended, and other applicable Laws, Rules and Regulations promulgated and
adopted by the North Carolina Environmental Management Commission.
All owners or developers of projects where either a CAMA Major Permit or a Sedimentation
Erosion Control Plan approval is required, and that involve the construction of utility lines such
as water, sewer, gas, telephone and electric, with incidental built -upon area as herein defined, are
hereby authorized to construct such utility lines and incidental built -upon areas in compliance
with the General Permit conditions and the provisions of 15A NCAC 2H .1000, S.L. 2006 -246,
and S.L. 2008 -211 (hereafter referred to as the " stormwater rules"), the approved stormwater
management plans and specifications, and other supporting data as attached and on file with and
approved by the Division of Water Quality and considered a part of this general permit.
The General Permit shall become effective on July 1, 2010.
Signed this 16th day of June , 2010.
Original signed by Matt Matthews for
Coleen H. Sullins, Director
Division of Water Quality
By the Authority of the Environmental Management Commission

State Stormwater Management Systems
Permit No. SWG040000
PERMITTED ACTIVITIES
Until this permit is modified or rescinded, permittees are authorized to construct such incidental
built -upon area directly associated with the installation of a water line, sewer line, gas line,
telephone conduit, electric line, or other linear utility project, subject to the following standards.
All stormwater runoff from these projects shall be in accordance with the attached schedules as
follows.
Section A — Final Limitation and Controls for Stormwater Discharges
Section B — Schedule of Compliance
Section C — General Conditions
STANDARD CONDITIONS FOR GENERAL PERMITS
This permit covers only stormwater discharges. Any other discharge to surface waters of the
state is prohibited unless covered by another permit, authorization or approval.
This General Permit does not relieve the permittee from responsibility for compliance with any
other applicable federal, state, or local law, rule, standard, ordinance, order, judgement, or
decree.
GENERAL PERMIT COVERAGE
All persons desiring to be covered by this General Permit must register with the DWQ by the
filing of a Notice of Intent (NOI) and applicable fees. The NOI shall be submitted and a
certificate of coverage issued prior to the installation of utility lines and prior to the construction
of any incidental built -upon area.
Any owner or developer not wishing to be covered or limited by this General Permit may make
application for an individual Stormwater Management Permit in accordance with the stormwater
rules, stating the reasons supporting the request. Any application for an individual permit should
be made at least 90 days prior to the time the permit is needed.
This General Permit does not cover activities or discharges covered by an individual permit. Any
person conducting an activity covered by an individual permit but which could be covered by
this General Permit may request that the individual permit be rescinded and coverage under this
General Permit be provided.
The definition of any word or phrase in this General Permit shall be the same as given in Article
21, Chapter 143 of the General Statutes of North Carolina, as amended. Other words and phrases
used in the General Permit are defined in the stormwater rules.
SECTION A: FINAL LIMITATIONS AND CONTROLS
During the period beginning on the effective date of the general permit, the Permittee is
authorized to clear and grade a proposed site. Stormwater runoff from the site shall be in
accordance with the following conditions:
1. Only the installation of utility lines and the construction of incidental built -upon area
associated with the project, as shown on the approved plans, are permitted. The permittee
must submit a modification and receive approval prior to any changes of the proposed
project.
2. Incidental built -upon area, for purposes of this permit, shall be limited to manhole covers,
small single pump stations, gravel access roads that have minimized their built -upon area,
and concrete pads.

State Stormwater Management Systems
Permit No. SWG040000
3. Approved plans and specifications for projects covered by this permit are incorporated by
reference and are enforceable parts of the permit.
4. A vegetated buffer /setback is required to be maintained between all impervious surfaces
and surface waters. Minimum required buffer /setback widths shall be provided as per
Table 1.
Table 1:
Location
COC Issue Date
Minimum Width
20 coastal counties
June 1, 2007 - Oct 1, 2008
30'
20 coastal counties
After October 1, 2008
50' (30' —redevelopment)
Phase II areas (non - coastal)
After July 1, 2006
30' (setback)
Non -Ph.II & non - coastal
After Sept. 1, 2003
30'
5. No new stormwater piping shall be allowed except that minimum amount necessary to
direct runoff beneath an impervious surface such as a road and that minimum amount
needed under driveways to provide access to lots, or that amount as shown on the
approved plans.
6. The only runoff conveyance systems allowed will be vegetated conveyances such as
swales with minimum side slopes of 3:1 (H:V) as defined in the stormwater rules and
approved by the Division.
7. The approved Site & Grading plan for the incidental built -upon area shall contain the
following items:
a. A clear vicinity map showing the direction and distance to the nearest town or
city, street name, street number and the nearest intersection of two major roads.
b. The receiving waters.
C. The site drawn to scale showing all proposed built -upon surfaces.
d. All existing and proposed contours and spot elevations.
e. A legend of all symbols used on the site plan.
f. A delineation of the property and /or easement lines with bearings and distances.
g. A delineation of jurisdictional 401 /404 wetlands and coastal wetlands, or a note
on the plans stating that none exist. (Note: only a person trained to identify
wetlands can make this determination.)
h. A delineation of the 575' ORW AEC area as applicable.
i. A delineation of the buffer /setback area.
j. A calculation of the proposed amount of built -upon area.
k. Dimensions for all proposed built -upon area.
SECTION B: SCHEDULE OF COMPLIANCE
The permittee shall at all times provide adequate stabilization measures in conformance
with the approved Site & Grading Plan and Erosion Control Plan.
2. The permittee shall submit all information requested by the Director or his representative
within the time frame specified in the written information request.

State Stormwater Management Systems
Permit No. SWG040000
3. The permittee shall submit to the Director and shall have received approval for revised
plans, specifications, and calculations prior to construction, including, but not limited to,
the following items:
a. Any revision to the approved plans, regardless of size.
b. Project name change.
C. Transfer of ownership.
d. Any changes in the location of, layout of, regrading of, addition to, or deletion of
the approved amount of incidental built -upon area, regardless of size.
e. Further subdivision or sale of the project area, in whole or in part.
f. Alteration of the proposed drainage.
4. The Director may determine that revisions to the project will require a modification to
permit coverage.
5. The Director may notify the permittee when the permitted site does not meet one or more
of the minimum requirements of the General Permit. Within the time frame specified in
the notice, the permittee shall submit a written time schedule to the Director for
modifying the site to meet minimum requirements. The permittee shall provide copies of
revised plans and certification in writing to the Director that the changes have been made.
SECTION C: GENERAL CONDITIONS
1. Failure to abide by the conditions and limitations contained in the General Permit is
considered a violation of the stormwater rules, and is grounds for enforcement action in
accordance with North Carolina General Statutes 143- 215.6A to 143- 215.6C, or for
certificate of coverage termination, revocation and reissuance, or modification in
accordance with NCGS 143 - 215.1.
2. The certificate of coverage is not transferable except after notice to and approval by the
Director. In the event of an ownership change, the Director may require a separate NOI
and certificate of coverage. The approval of this request will be considered on its merits,
and may or may not be approved. The permittee is responsible for compliance with all
permit conditions until such time as the Director approves the transfer.
3. The issuance of this general permit does not prohibit the Director from reopening and
modifying the general permit, revoking and reissuing the general permit, or terminating
the general permit as allowed by the laws, rules, and regulations contained in NCGS 143-
215.1 and the stormwater rules.
4. The certificate of coverage is issued in accordance with this general permit and may be
modified, revoked and reissued, or terminated for cause. The notification of planned
modifications or non - compliance does not stay any general permit condition.
5. Upon the presentation of proper credentials, and during normal business hours, the
permittee shall allow the Director, an authorized representative of the Director, or DENR
staff, to enter the property, inspect the project for compliance with the permit, and sample
or monitor for water quality.
6. The permittee shall notify the Division of any name, ownership or mailing address
changes within 30 days.
7. Any person who knowingly makes any false statement, representation, or certification
regarding the project shall be subject to a fine of up to $25,000 per day, per violation.
8. The General Permit, Notice of Intent, Certificate of Coverage, approved plans and
supporting documentation are considered public record and are open for inspection
during normal business hours.

Beverly Eaves Perdue Charles Wakild, RE,
Governor Director
March 1., 2012
Mr. Greg Young
Town of Boone
567 West King Street
Boone, NC 28607
Natural Resources
Subject: Stormwater Permit COC lino. SWG040046
Boone USDA Raw Water Project
General Permit - Linear Utility Line Project
Watauga County
Dear Mr. Young:
Dee Freeman
Secretary
In accordance with your application to be covered under the State Stormwater General Permit Number SWG040000
for a Linear Utility Line project, received on F=ebruary 6, 2012, we are forwarding herewith the subject Certificate of
Coverage Number SWG040046 for the construction of a linear utility line project with associated incidental built -
upon area. The General Permit is issued pursuant to the requirements of North Carolina General Statute 143 - 215.1,
Title 15A NCAC 2H .1000, and S.L. 2006 -246, the stormwater management rules.
Please take notice that this Certificate of Coverage is not transferable except by action of the Division of Water
Quality (DWQ). The DWQ may require modification or revocation and reissuance of the Certificate of Coverage.
Please take notice that this project includes an access road to be used for utility access, future modification or use of
this road for access to adjacent development may require modification or revocation of this Certificate of Coverage.
This permit does not affect the legal requirement to obtain other permits which may be required by the Division of
Water Quality, the Division of Land Resources, Coastal Area Management Act, or any other federal, state, or local
agency, law, rule, or ordinance.
If you need a copy of the General Permit, or have any questions concerning this permit, or need additional
information on this matter, please contact Sue Homewood at 336 - 771 -4964 or sue.homewood(oncderin ov.
Sincerely, ,
*f 1
Charles Wakild, RE,
cc: DWQ SWG040046 File
Randy Brookshire, WK Dickson (via email)
Wetlands and Stormwater Branch ATOne
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699 -1617 1 vI C rthCcaro na
Location: M 512 N. Salisbury 6t. Raleigh, 4941 Carolina 27604 Naturally
����
Phone: [phone] FAX: 919 - 807 -64941 Customer Service: 1-877-623-6748 f/ /�/ d�L
Internet: wwwr.ncwaterquality.org
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer

State Stormwater Management Systems
COC# SWG040046
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
STATE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT GENERAL PERMIT NO. SWG040000
CERTIFICATE OF COVERAGE NO. SWG040046
LINEAR UTILITY LINE PROJECT AND
ASSOCIATED INCIDENTAL BUILT -UPON AREA
In compliance with the provisions of North Carolina General Statute 143- 215.1, as
amended, other lawful standards and regulations promulgated and adopted by the
North Carolina Environmental Management Commission, and 15A NCAC 2H.1000 and
S.L. 2006 -246, the Stormwater Rules,
The Town of Boone
is hereby authorized to construct 73,181 square feet of built -upon area incidental to the
proposed utility line installation located at
Boone USDA Raw Water Project
Brownwood Rd
Deep Gap
Watauga County
and to discharge Stormwater to receiving waters designated as UT to South Fork New
River and South Fork New River, class C, HQW waters in the New River Basin, in
accordance with the provisions of the General Permit for a Linear Utility Line,
No.SWG040000, and the approved stormwater management plans and specifications,
and other supporting data as attached and on file with and approved by the Division of
Water Quality and considered a part of this permit for the subject project.
This Certificate of Coverage shall become effective March 4, 2011.
Signed this the 1St day of March, 2012.
for
Charles Wa ild, P.E., Di ector
Division of Water Quality
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission
Page 1 of 1

North
Beverly Eaves Perdue
Governor
Mr. Ward Marotti
WK Dickson
720 Corporate Center Dr
Raleigh, NC 27607
NCDENR
Carolina Department of Environment and
Division of Water Quality
Coleen H. Sullins
Director
Natural Resources
Dee Freeman
Secretary
September 27, 2011
Subject Property: Town of Boone New Intake Site and Associated Water Line Improvements, Watauga County
On -Site Determination for Applicability to the Mitigation Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0506(h))
Dear Mr. Marotti:
On July 19, 2011, at your request and in your attendance, Sue Homewood conducted an on -site determination to
review features located within the subject project limits for intermittent/perennial determinations with regards to
the above noted state regulations. Tasha McCormick and Amanda Jones with the US Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE) was also present at the site visit. The features that were reviewed are identified on the attached maps.
The Division acknowledges the areas and boundaries identified as jurisdictional wetlands by the USACE.
With regards to the stream determinations, the September 14, 2011 sealed survey maps provided by WK
Dickson were determined to be accurate reflections of the stream determinations made during our site visit and
are attached as reference. Tributary 1 was determined to be a perennial stream throughout the project
boundaries. Tributary 2 was determined to be perennial as it comes down a hillside, out of the wooded area,
into the pastured area where it degrades into an intermittent channel. All other streams throughout the project
boundaries were determined to be perennial streams.
Please note that at the time of this letter, all intermittent and perennial stream channels and jurisdictional
wetlands found on the property are subject to the mitigation rules cited above. These regulations are subject to
change in the future.
The owner (or future owners) should notify the DWQ (and other relevant agencies) of this decision in any
future correspondences concerning this property. This on -site determination shall expire five (5) years from the
date of this letter. In addition, the streams identified maybe subject to the Jordan Lake Buffer Protection Rules
02B .0267.
North Carolina Division of Water Quality, Winston -Salem Regional Office
Location: 585 Waughtown St. Winston - Salem, North Carolina 27107
Phone: 336 - 771 -5000 \ FAX [phone] \ Customer Service: 1- 877 - 623 -6748
Internet: www.ncwaterquality.org
An Equal Opportunity \Affirmative Action Employer
NorthCarolina
Nahmally

Ward Marotti
September 27, 2011
Page 2 of 2
Landowners or affected parties that dispute a determination made by the DWQ or Delegated Local Authority
that a surface water exists and that it is subject to the buffer rule may request a determination by the Director. A
request for a determination by the Director shall be referred to the Director in writing c/o Cyndi Karoly, DWQ,
401 Oversight/Express Review Permitting Unit, 2321 Crabtree Blvd., Suite 250, Raleigh, NC 27604 -2260.
Individuals that dispute a determination by the DWQ or Delegated Local Authority that "exempts" surface
water from the buffer rule may ask for an adjudicatory hearing. You must act within 60 days of the date that
you receive this letter. Applicants are hereby notified that the 60 -day statutory appeal time does not start until
the affected party (including downstream and adjacent landowners) is notified of this decision. DWQ
recommends that the applicant conduct this notification in order to be certain that third party appeals are made
in a timely manner. To ask for a hearing, send a written petition, which conforms to Chapter 150B of the North
Carolina General Statutes to the Office of Administrative Hearings, 6714 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, N.C.
27699 -6714. This determination is final and binding unless you ask for a hearing within 60 days.
This letter only addresses the applicability to the mitigation rules and the buffer rules and does not approve any
activity within Waters of the United States or Waters of the State or their associated buffers. If you have any
additional questions or require additional information please contact me at 336- 771 -4964 or
sue.homewood @ncdenr.gov
Sincerely,
Sue Homewood
DWQ Winston -Salem Regional Office
Enclosures: WK Dickson Survey map
cc: Tasha McCormick, USACE Asheville Regulatory Office (via email)
DWQ, Winston -Salem Regional Office

Page intentionally left blank

NT QF ry
p
� O
7 a
A'4CH 3 �a
United States Department of the Interior
Mr. Ward Marotti
Project Manager
WK Dickson
720 Corporate Center Drive
Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
Dear Mr. Marotti:
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
May 2, 2012
Subject: Proposed Water Treatment Plant Expansion, Boone, Watauga County, North Carolina
On May 1, 2012, we received a phone call and email from you requesting confirmation our
previous comments on the subject project. We previously commented on this project in letters to
you dated November 14, 2008, and December 16, 2009. We are providing the following
comments in accordance with the provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA);
the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, as amended (16 U. S.C. 661- 667e); and section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 -1543) (Act).
In the aforementioned phone conversation you stated that there had been no changes to the
subject project (expand the treatment capacity of the water treatment plant from 3.0 million
gallons per day (mgd) to 4.5 mgd, construct a new raw water intake on the South Fork of the
New River, add 11.6 miles of new raw water transmission line, and construct two pump stations)
since we last commented. As such, we have no additional comments beyond those provided to
you in our letter of November 14, 2008. Similarly, because the project has not been modified,
we continue to believe the proposed water treatment plant expansion will not affect any federally
listed species or designated critical habitat. Therefore, the requirements under section 7(c) of the
Act are fulfilled. However, obligations under section 7 of the Act must be reconsidered if:
(1) new information reveals impacts of this identified action that may affect listed species or
critical habitat in a manner not previously considered, (2) this action is subsequently modified in
a manner that was not considered in this review, or (3) a new species is listed or critical habitat is
determined that may be affected by the identified action.
Thank you for informing us about this project. If you have any questions about these comments,
please contact Mr. Allen Ratzlaff of our staff at 828/258 -3939, Ext. 229. In any future
correspondence pertaining to this matter, please reference our Log Number 4 -2 -09 -017.

cc:
Mr. David McHenry, Mountain Region Reviewer, North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission, 20830 Great Smoky Mtn. Expressway, Waynesville, NC 28786

TAWARYI
TRWARY2 AA=ADOwder I 1
AEADOWCFM2
&- MAAID WA r
AEADIMCFEEK
7MffARYS MWARY3
1NWARY4
TI�lrARl' 8
AEADOW
GEC 4
TI�/rAR1'7
K ILAW
ilE
LAAUV
Ig CFEW
BOONE
TOWN UMITS
US MW 40 S
IIF
{
FDW ? N
TM �
CF
GJ�C
BOONE
TOWN LIMITS
t =L�
�i-
"THIS CERTIFIES THAT THIS COPY OF THIS PLAT ACCURATELY DEPICTS THE BOUNDARY -
OF THE JURISDICTION OF SECTION 404 OF THE CLEAN WATER ACT WITHIN THE
DESIGNATED INSET AREA, AS DETERMINED BY THE UNDERSIGNED ON THIS DATE.
OTHER AREAS OF JURISDICTION MAY BE PRESENT ON THE SITE BUT HAVE NOT BEEN
DELINEATED. UNLESS THERE IS CHANGE IN THE LAW OR OUR PUBLISHED
REGULATIONS, THIS DETERMINATION OF SECTION 404 JURISDICTION MAY BE RELIED
UPON FOR A PERIOD NOT TO EXCEED FIVE YEARS FROM THIS DATE. THIS
DETERMINATION WAS MADE UTILIZING THE APPROPRIATE REGIONAL SUPPLEMENT TO
THE 1987 CORPS OF ENGINEERS WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL"
REGULATORY OFFICIAL
TITLE
DATE
USACE ACTION ID
720 CORPORATE
RALEIGH, NC 27607 Dote : 11/21/11
VW (919) 782 -0465 Scale: AS SHOWN
DDIClvv~*^%NFN Office Locations: North Carolina Drawn : JRM
community infrastructure consultants South Carolina Chk: GVC
ur , rueceun i c
v -n -t-YA Proi. No: 8032WA
PREPARED FOR: TOWN OF BOONE
WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
I, GUY V. COOKE, CERTIFY THAT THIS MAP WAS DRAWN UNDER MY SUPERVISION FROM AN ACTUAL
GPS SURVEY MADE UNDER MY SUPERVISION; THAT THIS GPS SURVEY WAS PERFORMED TO RURAL
CLASS B LIS /GIS SURVEY SPECIFICATIONS WITH ALL POINTS BEING ACCURATE TO WITHIN 5.61 FEET
A 95% CONFIDENCE LEVEL AND THAT I USED MAPPING GRADE GPS FIELD PROCEDURES AND
COORDINATES WERE OBTAINED BY POST PROCESSING AGAINST THE NORTH CAROLINA GEODETIC
SURVEY BOONE - (ASUB) STATION. THAT THIS SURVEY WAS PERFORMED ON AUGUST 4, 2011 AND
AUGUST 5, 2011, USING A TRIMBLE PROXH AND TRIMBLE GEOXT RECEIVERS AND ALL COORDINATES
ARE BASED ON THE NAD 983 STATE PLANE NORTH CAROLINA DATUM.
- V, GUY V. COOKE NC PL # L -4596
AT
SURVEYORS NOTES:
1)THE PROPERTY LINES AND CREEKS SHOWN HEREIN DO NOT REPRESENT ACTUAL FIELD SURVEYS
CONDUCTED UNDER MY SUPERVISION AND AS SUCH ARE SHOWN AS BROKEN LINES REPRESENTING
APPROXIMATE PROPERTY BOUNDARIES AS TAKEN FROM SURVEYS BY ROGER MORGAN, WK DICKSON &
CO, INC.; NC PLS L -3847, DATED OCTOBER 17, 2008, AND WATAUGA COUNTY AND ASHE COUNTY GIS
SYSTEMS.
2) NOTWITHSTANDING ANY OTHER PROVISION CONTAINED IN THIS SECTION, IT IS THE DUTY OF THE
SURVEYOR, BY A CERTIFICATE ON THE FACE OF THE PLAT, TO CERTIFY:
c. ANY OF THE FOLLOWING:
1.THAT THE SURVEY IS OF AN EXISTING PARCEL OR PARCELS OF LAND AND DOES NOT CREATE A
NEW STREET OR CHANGE AND EXISTING STREETS;
2. THAT THE SURVEY IS OF AN EXISTING BUILDING OR OTHER STRUCTURE, OR NATURAL FEATURE,
SUCH AS A WATERCOURSE;
I, GUY V. COOKE, HEREBY STATE THAT THE.000RDINATES OF THE STREAM AND WETLAND POINTS
SHOWN HEREIN WERE CREATED USING MAPPING GRADE GPS RECEIVERS WITH AN ACCURACY OF +/ -1
METER AND ARE BASED UPON 'SHE NORTH CAROLINA STATE PLANE COORDINATE SYSTEM, NAD83
DATUM. 1- 1 1 � ,¢
11 -z1 -001l
GU COOKE NC PLS i L -4596
SHEET
CONTENTS
"HAMPTON"
TRIBUTARY 1
2
TRIBUTARY 2
N 905739
E 1211366
WETLAND WA
3
WETLAND WA
4
WETLAND WA
MEADOW CREEK 1
MEADOW CREEK 2
MEADOW CREEK 3
5
MEADOW CREEK 4
LAXON CREEK
TRIBUTARY 6
TRIBUTARY 3
6
TRIBUTARY 4
TRIBUTARY 5
WETLAND WE
7
WETLAND WF
ROCK BRANCH
TRIBUTARY 7
8
HARDIN CREEK
TRIBUTARY 8
CORDINATE TABLES
9
WETLAND AREA TABLE
STREAM LENGTH TABLE
o H I C A ROB ii��
a SEAL y9 {;
' r L -4596 a:
�0
I1R v.
S
v i COOS
CONTROL POINT
NCGS MONUMENT
"HAMPTON"
NCGS NAD 83
COORDINATES
N 905736.03
E 1211369.28
FIELD
COORDINATES
N 905739
E 1211366
SHEET 1 OF 9
TITLE: JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
OF WATERS OF THE US
ALONG PROJECT ALIGNMENT

/ \ \ "THIS CERTIFIES THAT THIS COPY OF THIS PLAT ACCURATELY DEPICTS THE BOUNDARY
\ y / OF THE JURISDICTION OF SECTION 404 OF THE CLEAN WATER ACT WITHIN THE
\ / DESIGNATED INSET AREA, AS DETERMINED BY THE UNDERSIGNED ON THIS DATE.
OTHER AREAS OF JURISDICTION MAY BE PRESENT ON THE 51TE BUT HAVE NOT BEEN
DELINEATED. UNLESS THERE IS CHANGE IN THE LAW OR OUR PUBLISHED
\ REGULATIONS, THIS DETERMINATION OF SECTION 404 JURISDICTION MAY BE RELIED
OM
UPON FOR A PERIOD NOT TO EXCEED FIVE YEARS FROM THIS DATE. THIS
\ /J DETERMINATION WAS MADE UTILIZING THE APPROPRIATE REGIONAL SUPPLEMENT TO
\ / / THE 1957 CORPS OF ENGINEERS WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL."
\ / REGULATORY OFFICIAL �
TITLE
\ / DATE
y R��ER uSACE ACTION ID
UPLANDS
433
434 432
431 430
STREAM CONNECTION TO RIVER LARRY COOPER UPLANDS
D.B. 1122, PG. 238 435
PID 2942684470000 LI-I
21
Lla
1 +•.. 20 V)
2 9 TRIBUTARY 1
% :..
:..:...113
4 .. 17
.... ......:::..:..
5 J WEUND WA
1B Z466 ANDS 485 f�-
g
468 467 Q
28
TR�9UTARY 2
27 469
15
7
238 470
239 '• 14 26
e 1p 13 \�,+`11I1IiIll�
11 479478 471 \O�� H C A.9 O`'
12 WEMMD WA
460 481 472 25
LARRY COOPER 477 24 E
D.B. 1122. PG. 230 UPLANDS
PID 2942684470000 J� �•� 476 475 474 473
' j/1 . LARRY COOPER �' Q * - S'URV��O•.
DL8. 1122. PQ 238
PID 2942654-470000 y V coo��\���
NCGS MONUMENT
O
N 9057738 03 °, GRAPHIC SCALE
E 1211369.28 0
SCALE: 1"=100' SHEET 2 OF 9
720 aolzPORr�1GH, NC 27$07 Date : 11/21/11 PREPARED FOR: TITLE:
DWK c919I 7132 -0495 Scale: AS SHOWN TOWN OF BOONE JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
DICKSON Office Locations: North Carolina Drawn : ARM OF WATERS OF THE US
community inhastructure consultants South Carolina Chk: GVC WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
u�„mu Fm�1F_n;7AProt. Na :�z300RA ALONG PROJECT ALIGNMENT

MATCH LINE SHEET 4
Amw 314 362
AHHV309 LARRY COOPER
"THIS CERTIFIES THAT THIS COPY OF THIS PLAT ACCURATELY DEPICTS THE BOUNDARY 307 361 7p y D.B. 334, PG. 2053
OF THE JURISDICTION OF SECTION 404 OF THE CLEAN WATER ACT WITHIN THE 3a6 'ryGn PID 15163-002
DESIGNATED INSET AREA, AS DETERMINED BY THE UNDERSIGNED ON THIS DATE. 360 c
OTHER AREAS OF JURISDICTION MAY BE PRESENT ON THE SITE BUT HAVE NOT BEEN 315
DELINEATED. UNLESS THERE IS CHANGE IN THE -LAW OR OUR PUBLISHED 359 Nay3
REGULATIONS, THIS DETERMINATION OF SECTION 404 JURISDICTION MAY BE RELIED 358 /
UPON FOR A PERIOD NOT TO EXCEED FIVE PEARS FROM THIS DATE. THIS
DETERMINATION WAS MADE UTILIZING THE APPROPRIATE REGIONAL SUPPLEMENT TO 357 LARRY COOPER
THE 1987 CORPS OF ENGINEERS WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL" 356 D.B. 1122, PG. 238 \ /
316 P10 2942584470000
REGULATORY OFFICIAL 355
354
TITLE 353 \
LARRY COOPER DATE WETLAND `I A 317 352
D.B. 1122, PG. 238
PID 2942684470000 USACE ACTION ID 351 UPLANDS
350 / \
318 349 /
/UPLANDS 348 347
319 344 /
423 320 43
UPLANDS 424 422 s 324 323 322 321 341
425 440 421 325 /
340 �°
441 420 326 327 328 338 I.S. COOPER
439 442 337 / D.B. 1288, PG. 634
429 426 419 UPLANDS 329 33345 / PID 2942871802000
N 428 427 UPLANDS LARRY COOPER
438 44 PID 294 884470000 330 332
437
TIE LINE 331
= TIE 418 N24'43'59'E 409
22.90' 5
Ln 444
W 417 410 446
Z 445 411
_I 461 480 416 413 412 395 6 39
= 463 462 446 414 450 451 405]% e
C, 464 415 "" UND WA
Q459 447 449 452
448 398
� 458 ��/�� � � //� �/ 394
457 WE l J�AINOD WA 453 404 UPLANDS
LARRY COOPER I.S, COOPER UPLANDS
0,13, 1122, PG. 238 D.B. 1286, PG. 634
PIQ 2942684470000 393 PID 2942871802000
LARRY COOPER X56 454 399
O.B. 1122, PG. 238
PIQ 2942684470000 455 4GO 403 \ \%A CAR /I/i
392 UFUNDS ao2 `\� \�+�� , , • .RDA //�
i
391 390 401 = .1 O� �$,�' • ,�y, =
389
r•
Jdf'.yl 388 96
I.S. COOPER ��;y% ,III„ 387 �• y O'
D.B. 1288, PG. 634 ya��,1r10• r • S vCG``.�
j PID 2942871802400 �4 384 386 �icG U. •'
fJ 385 /�� Y V C o \�\
GRAPHIC SCALE CON
GS MONUMENT of
1a0 i N 905738.03 . / d�A�'
SCALE: 1"=100' E 1211389.28 l
SHEET 3 OF 9
720 LMPWAIE CENTER DRIVE
RALEIGH NC 27507 Date: 11/21/11 PREPARED FOR: TITLE: JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
WK (919) - 782 -0495 Scaie: AS SHOWN TOWN OF BOONS
DDlCvQe-lN �es Locctions: North Carolina Drawn : ARM OF WATERS OF THE US
carnmunity infrastructure coneultonta South Carolina Chk: GYC WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
Nrn,,rirmmnv_nx- mProi. NO: W32=A ALONG PROJECT ALIGNMENT

\ THIS CERTIFIES THAT THIS COPY OF THIS PLAT ACCURATELY DEPICTS THE BOUNDARY
OF THE JURISDICTION OF SECTION 404 OF THE CLEAN WATER ACT WITHIN THE
\ DESIGNATED INSET AREA, AS DETERMINED BY THE UNDERSIGNED ON THIS DATE.
OTHER AREAS OF JURISDICTION MAY BE PRESENT ON THE SITE BUT HAVE NOT BEEN
91 DELINEATED. UNLESS THERE IS CHANGE IN THE LAW OR OUR PUBLISHED
/ REGULATIONS, THIS DETERMINATION OF SECTION 404 JURISDICTION MAY BE RELIED
7 1 \ UPON FOR A PERIOD NOT TO EXCEED FIVE YEARS FROM THIS DATE. THIS
rn / DETERMINATION WAS MADE UTILIZING THE APPROPRIATE REGIONAL SUPPLEMENT TO
\ THE 1987 CORPS OF ENGINEERS WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL"
1 \ / REGULATORY OFFICIAL
TITLE .
\ / DATE
r ` t USACE ACTION ID
_j
_ 1 /
1 �
CR�NB£RRr SP � �
00 n
�DOp ASE Gv11� /STREAM CONNECTION T IVER
' �TALyGA ' 377 376 MEADOW CREEK 1
nF
— l 376 374
NEW RIVER 373 CARO' %/
f TH FORK 72 36 .:;.;.,. 43 ��\\ jp' 'F S+S%
r SQL ;.. �OF y. 9
379 37''r.::;: 362 \ _
WE I A D WA 371 \ 363 42 r
- 6 cc
38 370 \ - • 2 _-
LARRY COOPER EFLAHns 369 s'iiR��G��
J O.B. 1122, PG. 238 381 %! �• \
PID 2942684470000 358 ' ;.. 40 /� V. Coo �
GRAPHIC SCALE
00
SCALE: 1"=100'
MATCH LINE SHEET 3
39
LARRY COOPER
D.B. 3 2053
15 \
PID 15163 -3- 002
rzu aurrMurrnA�TdinNC 276+7 Date : 11/21/11 PREPARED FOR: TITLE:
[phone] Scale- AS SHOWN TOWN OF BOONE JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
WDKSON florae Loaatione: North Carolina Drawn : JRM OF WATERS OF THE US
community Infrastructure consultants South Carolina Chk: GVC
rsunic M WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS ALONG ALIGNMENT
ue uevuce 3

52
Cp
tp
55
54
NCGS MONUMENT
HAMPTON'
N 905738.03 GRAPHIC SCALE .
E 1211369.28 0 25 50 _ X00
SCALE: 1"=100'
'THIS CERTIFIES THAT THIS COPY OF THIS PLAT ACCURATELY DEPICTS THE BOUNDARY
OF THE JURISDICTION OF SECTION 404 OF THE CLEAN WATER ACT WITHIN THE
DESIGNATED INSET AREA, AS DETERMINED BY THE UNDERSIGNED ON THIS DATE.
OTHER AREAS OF JURISDICTION MAY BE PRESENT ON THE SITE BUT HAVE NOT BEEN
DELINEATED. UNLESS THERE IS CHANGE IN THE LAW OR OUR PUBLISHED
REGULATIONS, THIS DETERMINATION OF SECTION 404 JURISDICTION MAY BE RELIED
UPON FOR A PERIOD NOT TO EXCEED FIVE YEARS FROM THIS DATE. THIS
DETERMINATION WAS MADE UTILIZING THE APPROPRIATE REGIONAL SUPPLEMENT TO
THE 1987 CORPS OF ENGINEERS WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL"
REGULATORY OFFICIAL
TITLE
62
DATE 63 ';i +r`2 73
USACE ACTION ID 64.
JERRY BROWN : � �o
D.B. 790, PG. 803 65 , 70
\ PID 2942843544000 66
68�f. {
NCGS MONUMENT MEADOW CREEK 3
HAMPTON'
N 9D5736.03
E 1211359.28 GRAPHIC SCALE
0 25 50 100
SCALE: 1" =100'
VIRGINIA M. SMITH
LIFE ESTATE' 3f Z
D.B. 93, PG. 69 gg,
PID 2942631833000 o RONALD L. KELLY �P`o ° q
g D.B. 73, PG. 412 p \ B JAMES C. WATSON \ 1\���9- - • •ROC/����
TRl►BUTARY 6 t00 99 PID 2942704591000 d LIVING TRUST O , ASS/ y
101 108 109 D.B. 1485, PG. 885 ?• • Q� • • 9 =
102 ' 1
i1 121 PID 2251OB70080DO
1041031 107 120 S
�A/�•� 11 r 1 f
�.y gyp• 105 M11 =/`iWW 112 119 f 163 _
WON /may s Q,
Ot q`p� �•y �'L 1 /►����/ ,/ \ i65 164 182 L!'IAO C*- O •
d P+r 39 1 70 4l1E 4 113 ' 11g � 16667168,... 61 6a %��CU• 3�1R. •�4,
�' o \ 1B9p gg ,Ss �ii�Y, V •C00y�
VNEw�15 114 1157 O \ 1717 15185 i Iirlijli111�
"HAMPTON' MONUMENT N 9 31 �0 �� ��� 174176 5 1 154 ( l IS
E 2�3 9.28 / µSCP� S7g.1q'Z y 177
S
GRAPHIC SCALE n 421
0 25 5 0 1 NCGS MONUMENT �/ GRAPHIC SCALE NCGS MONUMENT �S � rr r GRAPHIC SCALE
" ' N 9a573
6.Q3 D 25 50 100 N 905736.03
SCALE: 1 =100' o z5 s 1oa
E 1211369.25 SCALE: 1" =100' E 1211369.28
SCALE: 1"=100'
SHEET 5 OF 9
720 COWWAII
RALEIGHNNC 27607 Daie : 11/21/11 PREPARED FOR: TOWN OF BOONS TITLE: JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
DDEKSON office Locations: 782 -0445 Some: AS SHDMRi
a North Carafna Drawn : JRM OF WATERS OF THE US
community infrastructure consultants South Carolina Chk: GVC
Georgia WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
NC uCENSf N0. F -6374 Pro]. No: 8032300RA ALONG PROJECT ALIGNMENT
g0 1 \
59
'50
9
57
A EADOW CFEEK 2
\
56
I.S. COOPER
51 Q.B. 1288, PG. 634
Z
PID 2942871802000
52
Cp
tp
55
54
NCGS MONUMENT
HAMPTON'
N 905738.03 GRAPHIC SCALE .
E 1211369.28 0 25 50 _ X00
SCALE: 1"=100'
'THIS CERTIFIES THAT THIS COPY OF THIS PLAT ACCURATELY DEPICTS THE BOUNDARY
OF THE JURISDICTION OF SECTION 404 OF THE CLEAN WATER ACT WITHIN THE
DESIGNATED INSET AREA, AS DETERMINED BY THE UNDERSIGNED ON THIS DATE.
OTHER AREAS OF JURISDICTION MAY BE PRESENT ON THE SITE BUT HAVE NOT BEEN
DELINEATED. UNLESS THERE IS CHANGE IN THE LAW OR OUR PUBLISHED
REGULATIONS, THIS DETERMINATION OF SECTION 404 JURISDICTION MAY BE RELIED
UPON FOR A PERIOD NOT TO EXCEED FIVE YEARS FROM THIS DATE. THIS
DETERMINATION WAS MADE UTILIZING THE APPROPRIATE REGIONAL SUPPLEMENT TO
THE 1987 CORPS OF ENGINEERS WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL"
REGULATORY OFFICIAL
TITLE
62
DATE 63 ';i +r`2 73
USACE ACTION ID 64.
JERRY BROWN : � �o
D.B. 790, PG. 803 65 , 70
\ PID 2942843544000 66
68�f. {
NCGS MONUMENT MEADOW CREEK 3
HAMPTON'
N 9D5736.03
E 1211359.28 GRAPHIC SCALE
0 25 50 100
SCALE: 1" =100'
VIRGINIA M. SMITH
LIFE ESTATE' 3f Z
D.B. 93, PG. 69 gg,
PID 2942631833000 o RONALD L. KELLY �P`o ° q
g D.B. 73, PG. 412 p \ B JAMES C. WATSON \ 1\���9- - • •ROC/����
TRl►BUTARY 6 t00 99 PID 2942704591000 d LIVING TRUST O , ASS/ y
101 108 109 D.B. 1485, PG. 885 ?• • Q� • • 9 =
102 ' 1
i1 121 PID 2251OB70080DO
1041031 107 120 S
�A/�•� 11 r 1 f
�.y gyp• 105 M11 =/`iWW 112 119 f 163 _
WON /may s Q,
Ot q`p� �•y �'L 1 /►����/ ,/ \ i65 164 182 L!'IAO C*- O •
d P+r 39 1 70 4l1E 4 113 ' 11g � 16667168,... 61 6a %��CU• 3�1R. •�4,
�' o \ 1B9p gg ,Ss �ii�Y, V •C00y�
VNEw�15 114 1157 O \ 1717 15185 i Iirlijli111�
"HAMPTON' MONUMENT N 9 31 �0 �� ��� 174176 5 1 154 ( l IS
E 2�3 9.28 / µSCP� S7g.1q'Z y 177
S
GRAPHIC SCALE n 421
0 25 5 0 1 NCGS MONUMENT �/ GRAPHIC SCALE NCGS MONUMENT �S � rr r GRAPHIC SCALE
" ' N 9a573
6.Q3 D 25 50 100 N 905736.03
SCALE: 1 =100' o z5 s 1oa
E 1211369.25 SCALE: 1" =100' E 1211369.28
SCALE: 1"=100'
SHEET 5 OF 9
720 COWWAII
RALEIGHNNC 27607 Daie : 11/21/11 PREPARED FOR: TOWN OF BOONS TITLE: JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
DDEKSON office Locations: 782 -0445 Some: AS SHDMRi
a North Carafna Drawn : JRM OF WATERS OF THE US
community infrastructure consultants South Carolina Chk: GVC
Georgia WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
NC uCENSf N0. F -6374 Pro]. No: 8032300RA ALONG PROJECT ALIGNMENT

}� f BETTY ELLEN WATSON 7N ARY 3 77
D.B. 1043. PG. 111 76 r
PID 2942769503000
74
f TRIBUTARY 4
5 8
f / 85 1� i
g� /
RO �
MACK BROWN
X90 \ (LIFE ESTATE)
0_B. 395, PG. 315
/ PIO 2942665677000
�a 1A11BUTARY 5
\ 90 89 /
/ 91
94 'THIS CERTIFIES THAT THIS COPY OF THIS PLAT ACCURATELY DEPICTS THE BOUNDARY
/ \ g4 93 g• 96 \ \ \CAR, <I /// OF THE JURISDICTION OF SECTION 404 OF THE CLEAN WATER ACT WITHIN THE
s 7 / `����'(i, . , •0�/ /�� DESIGNATED INSET AREA, AS DETERMINED BY THE UNDERSIGNED ON THIS DATE.
� 0. f�SS/ •'�' �i OTHER AREAS OF JURISDICTION MAY BE PRESENT ON THE SITE BUT HAVE NOT BEEN
0 .9 DELINEATED. UNLESS THERE IS CHANGE IN THE LAW OR OUR PUBLISHED
/ _ _ REGULATIONS. THIS DETERMINATION OF SECTION 404 JURISDICTION MAY BE RELIED
5fD L r . UPON FOR A PERIOD NOT TO EXCEED FIVE YEARS FROM THIS DATE. THIS
dot °rte / (. DETERMINATION WAS MADE UTILIZING THE APPROPRIATE REGIONAL SUPPLEMENT TO
THE 1987 CORPS OF ENGINEERS WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL'
i ••� S�R`;��C�, \�� REGULATORY OFFICIAL
/GiUy U• [
"�� �� TITLE
NCGS MONUMENT / ��f!1I f�j1,��
/ "HAMPTON" / l (/
N 905736.03 DATA /
/ E 1211389.28
USACE ACTION ID
/ GRAPHIC SCALE
25 5 0
/ SCALE, 1" =100'
r
SHEET 6 OF 9
7 a ca1POR�ALEICGHNNC 276D7 Date : 11/21/11 PREPARED FOR: TITLE: JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
(919) 782 -0495 Saale: AS SHOWN TOWN OF BOONS
DICKSONOffice Locatlone: North Carolina Drawn : JRM OF WATERS OF THE US
community infrastructure consultants South Carolina Chk: GVC WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
NC LICENSE NO F -0374 ra,. No:80323MA ALONG PROJECT ALIGNMENT

w
WILLIAM DOYLE CHURCH
D.B. 80, PG. 449 122 6 I
PID. 2941989247000 ' 484 X748 I `�� '`�� / 524
483 , IIJ� I L.!`I Illr / 525
48222�x 528
521 489 UPLANDS 6 _
520 � $ � 1 � 529 528 S27
519 `� 534
51 ' 49D 0�0 ¢2r µE 532 531 530 UPLANDS
52� 533
/ 517
40 .110 0 o
UPLANDS 17 514 gg 512'
1525 126 �o
NWT �2
511 o 1
NCGS MONUMENT
127 `::. 492 HAMPTON' S
509 a TAlB�UTARY7 N 905756.03 GRAPHIC SCALE
128 147 E 1211369.28 00
506
12 807 493 SCALE: 1"=100'
494
506
TOWN OF
BOONE t45
D.B. 1488, PG. 519
PID 2851073927000 5D5 495
496
504 UPLANDS /
WFILAND WE
I 503 4 497 6
41
UPLANDS
4UPLANDS 498
rt� uµe 2 Soo ROCKY aily 1`�� of ES S��
501 `{ NCGS MO ENT 9.
138 L13940 RAMP 185 ' a r, e
N 90 8.03 186 184 1 �-
µoi �O JAMES C. WATSON E 1 1369.28 ,s 182 1B 180179 4 6
LIVING TRUST BLUE RIDGE ` VA 87 � • y �4;
D.B. 1485, PG. 88 ELECTRIC SO o"'43, % 1$Be 1$1 192 194 178 �j ••� �, �(�• \�
NCGS MONUMENT PID 295toB70080D�RAPHIC SCALE MEMBERSHIP OZ 5�s.91 193 196 // fi •�;R. • ��
N 90PTON" 5 O CORPORATION 50 ` � ' 195 //� y'lICO�
E 1211369.28 D.B. 74, PG. 501
SCALE: 1 " =50' PID 2951074891000 O.St MILES TO
OLD 421 S l I
"THIS CERTIFIES THAT THIS COPY OF THIS PLAT ACCURATELY DEPICTS THE BOUNDARY OF THE JURISDICTION OF SECTION 404 OF THE CLEAN WATER GRAPHIC SCALE
ACT WITHIN THE DESIGNATED INSET AREA, AS DETERMINED BY THE UNDERSIGNED ON THIS DATE OTHER AREAS OF JURISDICTION MAY BE PRESENT 0 US HWY 421 S
ON THE SITE BUT HAVE NOT BEEN DELINEATED. UNLESS THERE IS CHANGE IN THE LAW OR OUR PUBLISHED REGULATIONS, THIS DETERMINATION OF
SECTION 404 JURISDICTION MAY BE RELIED UPON FOR A PERIOD NOT TO EXCEED FIVE YEARS FROM THIS DATE. THIS DETERMINATION WAS MADE SCALE: 1" =100'
UTILIZING THE APPROPRIATE REGIONAL SUPPLEMENT TO THE 1987 CORPS OF ENGINEERS WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL."
REGULATORY OFFICIAL
TITLE
DATE
USACE ACTION ID SHEET 7 OF 9
WK ° ° RALEIGHNNC 702-0495 Scale: : AS SKO11 PREPARED FOR: TOWN OF BOONE TITLE: JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
,WK (s: N 762- 04955ca n As sFIOWN
O1Res Locations: North Carolina Drown JRM OF WATERS OF THE US
community Infrastructure consultants South Carolina Pfik: GVC WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
UPIlerme?TV c_na7AProL No:8=31)ORA ALONG PROJECT ALIGNMENT

WATAUGA COUNTY
D.B. 20, PG. 7B
PID 2910883455DDD
NOT TO
TIE LINE
SCALE
S84-23'16 ",
77B5.04'
NCGS MONUMENT
HAMPTON"
N 905736.03
E 1211369.28
HARDEN CREEK
.4 203
G
TOWN OF
\ BOONE
PID 2910986718000
197
198 2708
2
200
201 1
206
205
GRAPHIC
SCALE: 1"=4100'
"THIS CERTIFIES THAT THIS COPY OF THIS PLAT ACCURATELY DEPICTS THE BOUNDARY
OF THE JURISDICTION OF SECTION 404 OF THE CLEAN WATER ACT WITHIN THE
DESIGNATED INSET AREA, AS DETERMINED BY THE UNDERSIGNED ON THIS DATE.
OTHER AREAS OF JURISDICTION MAY BE PRESENT ON THE SITE BUT HAVE NOT BEEN
DELINEATED. UNLESS THERE IS CHANGE IN THE LAW OR OUR PUBLISHED
REGULATIONS, THIS DETERMINATION OF SECTION 404 JURISDICTION MAY BE RELIED
UPON FOR A PERIOD NOT TO EXCEED FIVE YEARS FROM THIS DATE. THIS
DETERMINATION WAS MADE UTILIZING THE APPROPRIATE REGIONAL SUPPLEMENT TO
THE 1987 CORPS OF ENGINEERS WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL"
REGULATORY OFFICIAL
TITLE
DATE
USACE ACTION ID
CARp���Y�'�/
�$pQ; •��SSJp • 9 _��
• Q7 SE �.
c.4 0.
• y0 v
��,��•
V. "Coo
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
PID 291066882400D 235
212 210
21 209
214
215 237
TRlRUTARY 8 2 234
218 233
219 231 232
220 230
221 29
NOT ro 222 •:. r 2za
SCALE rtE LINE e
223 '` TOWN OF
N8219'37•w 227 BOONE
6065.5` 224 226 D.B. 200, PG. 443
NCGS MONUMENT PID 2910746397000
"HAMPTON" 42S
N 905736.03
1211
E 1211369.2.2
8
GRAPHIC SCALE
25 50 100
SCALE: 1"=50'
SHEET 8 of 9
/iU UUKf UKA 1L ULM= URIYC
�(�
RALEIGH, NC 27607 Date: 11/21/11 PREPARED FOR: TOWN of BOONE
WDICKSON TITLE: JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
(919) 782-04115 Scale: A5 SNDwN
OMcs Laoatlone: North Carolina Drawn : ,1RM OF WATERS OF THE US
community inlrasiruekuro eonaultants South Carolina hk: GVC
Georgia WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
ALONG PROJECT ALIGNMENT
NC LJCENSE N0. F-1337* ro} No: 8432300RA

11
12
13
30
31
928117
928105
928059
1245532
12451
TABLE
TRIBUTARY 7 COORDINATE TABLE
POINT
NORTH
EAST
122
918105
1250330
123
918105
1250328
124
918092
1250333
125
918059
1250341
126
918056
1250363
127
918041
1250363
128
918033
1250366
129
918027
1250372
130
918028
1250382
131
918023
1250390
132
917991
12504118
133
917974
1250435
134
917950
1250452
135
917925
1250469
136
917903
1250483
137
917896
1250493
138
917875
1250505
139
917874
1250507
140
917875
1250509
141
917899
1250494
142
917905
1250466
143
917953
1250454
144
917927
1250472
145
917978 1
1250438
146
917993
1250421
147
918024
1250393
148
918032
1250382
149
918030
1250374
150
918042
1250388
151
918"59
1250366
152
918071
i 1250343
153
918095
1 1250334
TRIBUTARY 8 COORDINATE TABLE
POINT
NORTH
EAST
209
905006
1217465
210
905004
1217461
211
905000
1217453
212
905010
1217446
213
905010
1217441
214
905005
1217437
215
904994
1217443
216
904992
1217439
217
904985
1217433
218
904981
1217422
219
904974
1217416
22D
904968
1217412
221
904954
1217409
222
904955
1217400
223
904945
1217395
224
904926
1217380
225
904921
1217384
226
904943
1217399
227
904951
1217402
228
904951
1217412
229
904964
1217413
230
904975
1217424
231
904983
1217435
232
904989
1217441
233
904994
1217448
234
905005
1217440
235
905007
1217444
236
904995
1217453
237
905003
1 1217466
�2o�o�ESSlpy, y'�
'cL SE =
i
Cf�`� L�
NAME ACRES
WETLAND WA
1.04
WETLAND WE
0.22
WETLAND WF
0.13
SHEET 9 OF 9
"a L;LlKv R ititit "NC zKIM Date : 11/21/11 PREPARED FOR: TITLE:
D WK (919) 782 -0495 Scale: AS SHOWN TOWN OF BOONS JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
DICKSON ONlea Loaattona North Carolina Drawn : ARM OF WATERS OF THE US
community infrastructure consultants South Cerollno Chk: Gvc WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
uciircuecunnc _n.'q-IaPrOL NO: 8032MA ALONG PROJECT ALIGNMENT

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION L• BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Town of Boone, Proposed Water System Improvements (South
Fork New River)
State:NC County/parish/borough: Watauga / Ashe City: Brownwood
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 36.274739'1, Long. - 81.558917° �.
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: South Fork New River
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: South Fork New River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): New River 05050001020030
Check if map /diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is /are available upon request.
Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc... ) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
Field Determination. Date(s): 7 -19 -2011
SECTION IL• SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Tre "navigable waters of the U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the review
area. [Required]
❑ Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There M "waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply): i
TNWs, including territorial seas
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
Relatively permanent waters (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑ Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑ Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
JIsolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non - wetland waters: 25501inear feet: I00width (ft) and/or 5.85 acres.
Wetlands: 0 acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on:
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
2. Non - regulated waters /wetlands (check if applicable):3
' Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
2 For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year -round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally'
(e.g., typically 3 months).
3 Supporting documentation is presented in Section IILF.

Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain:

SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete
Section II1A.1 and Section IH.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections HLA.1 and 2
and Section 1H.D.1.; otherwise, see Section 1H.B below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW: South Fork New River.
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacenf':
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non - navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year -round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year -round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section IILD.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section IILD.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbody4 is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section IILB.1 for
the tributary, Section IILB.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section IILB.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section IILC below.
1. Characteristics of non -TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size:
Drainage area:
Average annual rainfall: inches
Average annual snowfall inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
❑ Tributary flows directly into TNW.
❑ Tributary flows through � tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are Pick List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List river miles from RPW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNWs:
Tributary stream order, if known:
4 Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and
West.
5 Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.

(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apps
Tributary is: ❑ Natural
❑ Artificial (man- made). Explain:
❑ Manipulated (man - altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: feet
Average depth: feet
Average side slopes: --
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
❑ Silts ❑ Sands
❑ Cobbles ❑ Gravel
❑ Bedrock ❑ Vegetation. Type /% cover:
❑ Other. Explain:
❑ Concrete
❑ Muck
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain:
Presence of run/riffle/ op of complexes. Explain:
Tributary geometry:
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: Pick List
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year:
Describe flow regime:
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: � Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: -. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
❑ Bed and banks
❑ OI IWM6 (check all indicators that apply):
❑ clear, natural line impressed on the bank
❑
the presence of litter and debris
❑ changes in the character of soil
❑
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
❑ shelving
❑
the presence of wrack line
❑ vegetation matted down, bent, or absent
❑
sediment sorting
❑ leaf litter disturbed or washed away
❑
scour
❑ sediment deposition
❑
multiple observed or predicted flow events
❑ water staining
❑
abrupt change in plant community
❑ other (list):
❑ Discontinuous OHWM.7 Explain:
If factors other than the OIIWM were used to determine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
High Tide Line indicated by: 17 Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
❑ oil or scum line along shore objects ❑ survey to available datum,
❑ fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore) ❑ physical markings;
❑ physical markings /characteristics ❑ vegetation lines /changes in vegetation types.
❑ tidal gauges
❑ other (list):
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film, water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
6A natural or man -made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
'Ibid.

(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width):
❑ Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatic /wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non -TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size: acres
Wetland type. Explain:
Wetland quality. Explain:
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non -TNW:
Flow is: Pick Lisi. Explain:
Surface flow is: -
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: -. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non -TNW:
❑ Directly abutting
❑ Not directly abutting
❑ Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
❑ Ecological connection. Explain:
❑ Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are 'ck List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are ck List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: Mlist.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the � floodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface, water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
❑ Vegetation type /percent cover. Explain:
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatic /wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if an�
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis:
Approximately ( ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.

For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and /or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
Significant nexus findings for non -RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
fmdings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section IILD:
Significant nexus findings for non -RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non -RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain fmdings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section IILD:
Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go
Section IILD:
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
® TNWs: 2550 linear feet 100 width (ft), Or, 5.85 acres.
❑ Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year -round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial:
❑ Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally:

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
El Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Non -RPWs8 that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section IILC.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
T7 Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
Q Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year- round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section lILB and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW:
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
El Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section 111. C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.9
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
❑ Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1 -6), or
❑ Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA- STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): 10
Irl which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
❑ from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
❑ which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
❑ Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
❑ Other factors. Explain:
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
'See Footnote # 3.
9 To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section IILD.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps /EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
EJ Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
F. NON - JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
❑ Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
Other: (explain, if not covered above):
Provide acreage estimates for non - jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
udgment (check all that apply)
Non - wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
❑ Lakes /ponds: acres.
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
EJ Non - wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
❑ Lakes /ponds: acres.
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
® Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:
® Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
® Office concurs with data sheets /delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets /delineation report.
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:
❑ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data.
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
® U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:USGS TopoTile023 1:24000 Source:www.ncdot.org.
® USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:NRCS Soil Survey of Watauga County GIS data NCI 89.
❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
❑ State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
❑ FEMA/FIRM maps:
❑ 100 -year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
® Photographs: ® Aerial (Name & Date): 2005 Watauga/Ashe County Source: www.nconemap.com .
or ❑ Other (Name & Date):
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
❑ Applicable /supporting case law:
❑ Applicable /supporting scientific literature:
❑ Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION L• BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Town of Boone, Proposed Water System Improvements (Ut
to South Fork New River)
State:NC County /parish/borough: Watauga / Ashe City: Brownwood
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 36.273617° 1, Long. - 81.559599° �.
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: South Fork New River
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: South Fork New River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): New River 05050001020030
Check if map /diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is /are available upon request.
Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc... ) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
Field Determination. Date(s): 7 -19 -2011
SECTION IL• SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Tre "navigable waters of the U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the review
area. [Required]
❑ Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There M "waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply): i
TNWs, including territorial seas
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
Relatively permanent waters (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑ Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑ Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
JIsolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non - wetland waters: 550 linear feet: 3.Owidth (ft) and/or 0.04 acres.
Wetlands: acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on:
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
2. Non - regulated waters /wetlands (check if applicable):3
' Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
2 For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year -round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally'
(e.g., typically 3 months).
s Supporting documentation is presented in Section IILF.

Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain:

SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete
Section IILA.1 and Section IH.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections HLA.1 and 2
and Section 1H.D.1.; otherwise, see Section 1H.B below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacenf':
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non - navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year -round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year -round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section IILD.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section IILD.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbody4 is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section IILB.1 for
the tributary, Section IILB.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section IILB.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section IILC below.
1. Characteristics of non -TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size:
Drainage area:
Average annual rainfall: inches
Average annual snowfall inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
❑ Tributary flows directly into TNW.
❑ Tributary flows through � tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are Pick List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List river miles from RPW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNWs:
Tributary stream order, if known:
4 Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and
West.
5 Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.

(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apps
Tributary is: ❑ Natural
❑ Artificial (man- made). Explain:
❑ Manipulated (man - altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: feet
Average depth: feet
Average side slopes: --
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
❑ Silts ❑ Sands
❑ Cobbles ❑ Gravel
❑ Bedrock ❑ Vegetation. Type /% cover:
❑ Other. Explain:
❑ Concrete
❑ Muck
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain:
Presence of run/riffle/ op of complexes. Explain:
Tributary geometry:
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: Pick List
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year:
Describe flow regime:
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: � Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: -. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
❑ Bed and banks
❑ OI IWM6 (check all indicators that apply):
❑ clear, natural line impressed on the bank
❑
the presence of litter and debris
❑ changes in the character of soil
❑
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
❑ shelving
❑
the presence of wrack line
❑ vegetation matted down, bent, or absent
❑
sediment sorting
❑ leaf litter disturbed or washed away
❑
scour
❑ sediment deposition
❑
multiple observed or predicted flow events
❑ water staining
❑
abrupt change in plant community
❑ other (list):
❑ Discontinuous OHWM.7 Explain:
If factors other than the OIIWM were used to determine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
High Tide Line indicated by: 17 Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
❑ oil or scum line along shore objects ❑ survey to available datum,
❑ fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore) ❑ physical markings;
❑ physical markings /characteristics ❑ vegetation lines /changes in vegetation types.
❑ tidal gauges
❑ other (list):
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film, water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
6A natural or man -made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
'Ibid.

(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width):
❑ Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatic /wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non -TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size: acres
Wetland type. Explain:
Wetland quality. Explain:
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non -TNW:
Flow is: Pick Lisi. Explain:
Surface flow is: -
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: -. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non -TNW:
❑ Directly abutting
❑ Not directly abutting
❑ Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
❑ Ecological connection. Explain:
❑ Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are 'ck List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are ck List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: Mlist.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the � floodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface, water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
❑ Vegetation type /percent cover. Explain:
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatic /wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if an�
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis:
Approximately ( ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.

For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and /or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
Significant nexus findings for non -RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
fmdings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section IILD:
Significant nexus findings for non -RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non -RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain fmdings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section IILD:
Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go
Section IILD:
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
TNWs: linear feet width (ft), Or, acres.
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year -round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial: A NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11 was completed to reach this conclusion.
Q Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally:

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: 550 linear feet3.0width (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Non -RPWs8 that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section 111. C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
T7 Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
Q Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year- round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section IILB and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW:
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
El Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III. C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III. C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.9
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
❑ Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1 -6), or
❑ Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA- STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): 10
Irl which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
❑ from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
❑ which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
❑ Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
❑ Other factors. Explain:
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
'See Footnote # 3.
9 To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section IILD.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps /EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
EJ Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
F. NON - JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
❑ Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
Other: (explain, if not covered above):
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
udgment (check all that apply)
Non - wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
❑ Lakes /ponds: acres.
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
EJ Non - wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
❑ Lakes /ponds: acres.
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
® Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:
® Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
® Office concurs with data sheets /delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets /delineation report.
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:
❑ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data.
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
® U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:USGS TopoTile023 1:24000 Source:www.ncdot.org.
® USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:NRCS Soil Survey of Watauga County GIS data NC189.
❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
❑ State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
❑ FEMA/FIRM maps:
❑ 100 -year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
® Photographs: ® Aerial (Name & Date): 2005 Watauga/Ashe County Source: www.nconemap.com .
or ❑ Other (Name & Date):
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
❑ Applicable /supporting case law:
❑ Applicable /supporting scientific literature:
❑ Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION L• BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Town of Boone, Proposed Water System Improvements
(Meadow Creek)
State:NC County /parish/borough: Watauga City: Brownwood
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 36.252201 ° 1, Long. - 81.551058° �.
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: South Fork New River
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: South Fork New River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): New River 05050001020030
Check if map /diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is /are available upon request.
Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc... ) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
Field Determination. Date(s): 7 -19 -2011
SECTION IL• SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There r "navigable waters of the U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review area. [Required]
❑ Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There M "waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply): '
TNWs, including territorial seas
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
® Relatively permanent waters (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑ Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non - wetland waters: 30.0 linear feet: 6.Owidth (ft) and/or 0.00 acres.
Wetlands: acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on:
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
2. Non - regulated waters /wetlands (check if applicable):3
❑ Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain:
' Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
2 For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year -round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally'
(e.g., typically months).
s Supporting documentation is presented in Section IILF.

SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete
Section IILA.1 and Section III.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections III.A.1 and 2
and Section IH.D.I.; otherwise, see Section HLB below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent':
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non - navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year -round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year -round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section HLD.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section III.D.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbody4 is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section III.B.1 for
the tributary, Section IILB.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section IILB.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section IILC below.
1. Characteristics of non -TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: Pick List
Drainage area: Pick List
Average annual rainfall: inches
Average annual snowfall: inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
❑ Tributary flows directly into TNW.
❑ Tributary flows through � tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are Pick List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List river miles from RPW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNWs:
Tributary stream order, if known:
4 Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and
West.
5 Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.

(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apps
Tributary is: ❑ Natural
❑ Artificial (man- made). Explain:
❑ Manipulated (man- altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: feet
Average depth: feet
Average side slopes: --
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
❑ Silts ❑ Sands ❑ Concrete
❑ Cobbles ❑ Gravel ❑ Muck
❑ Bedrock ❑ Vegetation. Type /% cover:
❑ Other. Explain:
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain:
Presence of run/riffle /pool complexes. Explain:
Tributary geometry: W List
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: Pick List
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year:
Describe flow regime:
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: � Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: -. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
❑ Bed and banks
❑ OHWM6 (check all indicators that apply):
❑ clear, natural line impressed on the bank
❑
the presence of litter and debris
❑ changes in the character of soil
❑
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
❑ shelving
❑
the presence of wrack line
❑ vegetation matted down, bent, or absent
❑
sediment sorting
❑ leaf litter disturbed or washed away
❑
scour
❑ sediment deposition
❑
multiple observed or predicted flow events
❑ water staining
❑
abrupt change in plant community
❑ other (list):
❑ Discontinuous OHWM.7 Explain:
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determi
High Tide Line indicated by: 17
❑ oil or scum line along shore objects
❑ fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore)
❑ physical markings /characteristics
❑ tidal gauges
❑ other (list):
ne lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply)
Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
❑ survey to available datum,
❑ physical markings;
❑ vegetation lines /changes in vegetation types.
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film, water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
6A natural or man -made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
'Ibid.

(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width):
❑ Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatic /wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non -TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size: acres
Wetland type. Explain:
Wetland quality. Explain:
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non -TNW:
Flow is: Pick Lisi. Explain:
Surface flow is: -
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: -. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non -TNW:
❑ Directly abutting
❑ Not directly abutting
❑ Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
❑ Ecological connection. Explain:
❑ Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are 'ck List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are ck List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: ist.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the � floodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
❑ Vegetation type /percent cover. Explain:
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatic /wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if an�
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis:
Approximately ( ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.

For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and /or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
Significant nexus findings for non -RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section IILD:
Significant nexus findings for non -RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non -RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section III.D:
Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go
Section III.D:
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
❑ TNWs: linear feet width (ft), Or, acres.
❑ Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year -round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial: A NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11 was completed to reach this conclusion.
Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally:

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: 30 linear feet 6.Owidth (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Non -RPWs8 that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section IILC.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
T7 Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
r Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
Q Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year- round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section I1I.13 and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW:
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III. C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.9
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
A Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
❑ Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1 -6), or
❑ Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA- STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY) :"
❑ which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
❑ from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
❑ which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
❑ Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
❑ Other factors. Explain:
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
'See Footnote # 3.
9 To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section IILD.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps /EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
0 Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
NON - JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
❑ Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
Other: (explain, if not covered above):
Provide acreage estimates for non - jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
judgment (check all that apply):
Q Non - wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
❑ Lakes /ponds: acres.
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
Provide acreage estimates for non - jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
R Non - wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
❑ Lakes /ponds: acres.
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
® Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:
® Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
® Office concurs with data sheets /delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets /delineation report.
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:
❑ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data.
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
® U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:USGS TopoTile023 1:24000 Source:www.ncdot.org.
® USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: NRCS Soil Survey of Watauga County GIS data NC189.
❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
❑ State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
❑ FEMA /FIRM maps:
❑ 100 -year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
® Photographs: ® Aerial (Name & Date): 2005 Watauga/Ashe County Source:www.nconemap.com .
or ❑ Other (Name & Date):
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
❑ Applicable /supporting case law:
❑ Applicable /supporting scientific literature:
❑ Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION L• BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Town of Boone, Proposed Water System Improvements
(Meadow Creek - 2)
State:NC County /parish/borough: Watauga City: Brownwood
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 36.275921 ° 1, Long. - 81.551131 ° �.
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: South Fork New River
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: South Fork New River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): New River 05050001020030
Check if map /diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is /are available upon request.
Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc... ) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
Field Determination. Date(s): 7 -19 -2011
SECTION IL• SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There r "navigable waters of the U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review area. [Required]
❑ Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There M "waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply): '
TNWs, including territorial seas
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
Relatively permanent waters (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑ Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
JIsolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non - wetland waters: 75 linear feet: 15.Owidth (ft) and/or 0.03 acres.
Wetlands: 1.79 acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on:
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
2. Non - regulated waters /wetlands (check if applicable):3
❑ Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain:
' Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
2 For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year -round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally'
(e.g., typically months).
s Supporting documentation is presented in Section IILF.

SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete
Section IILA.1 and Section III.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections III.A.1 and 2
and Section IH.D.I.; otherwise, see Section HLB below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent':
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non - navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year -round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year -round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section HLD.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section III.D.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbody4 is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section III.B.1 for
the tributary, Section IILB.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section IILB.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section IILC below.
1. Characteristics of non -TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: Pick List
Drainage area: Pick List
Average annual rainfall: inches
Average annual snowfall: inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
❑ Tributary flows directly into TNW.
❑ Tributary flows through � tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are Pick List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List river miles from RPW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNWs:
Tributary stream order, if known:
4 Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and
West.
5 Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.

(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apps
Tributary is: ❑ Natural
❑ Artificial (man- made). Explain:
❑ Manipulated (man- altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: feet
Average depth: feet
Average side slopes: --
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
❑ Silts ❑ Sands ❑ Concrete
❑ Cobbles ❑ Gravel ❑ Muck
❑ Bedrock ❑ Vegetation. Type /% cover:
❑ Other. Explain:
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain:
Presence of run/riffle /pool complexes. Explain:
Tributary geometry: W List
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: Pick List
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year:
Describe flow regime:
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: � Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: -. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
❑ Bed and banks
❑ OHWM6 (check all indicators that apply):
❑ clear, natural line impressed on the bank
❑
the presence of litter and debris
❑ changes in the character of soil
❑
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
❑ shelving
❑
the presence of wrack line
❑ vegetation matted down, bent, or absent
❑
sediment sorting
❑ leaf litter disturbed or washed away
❑
scour
❑ sediment deposition
❑
multiple observed or predicted flow events
❑ water staining
❑
abrupt change in plant community
❑ other (list):
❑ Discontinuous OHWM.7 Explain:
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determi
High Tide Line indicated by: 17
❑ oil or scum line along shore objects
❑ fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore)
❑ physical markings /characteristics
❑ tidal gauges
❑ other (list):
ne lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply)
Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
❑ survey to available datum,
❑ physical markings;
❑ vegetation lines /changes in vegetation types.
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film, water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
6A natural or man -made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
'Ibid.

(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width):
❑ Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatic /wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non -TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size: acres
Wetland type. Explain:
Wetland quality. Explain:
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non -TNW:
Flow is: Pick Lisi. Explain:
Surface flow is: -
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: -. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non -TNW:
❑ Directly abutting
❑ Not directly abutting
❑ Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
❑ Ecological connection. Explain:
❑ Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are 'ck List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are ck List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: ist.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the � floodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
❑ Vegetation type /percent cover. Explain:
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatic /wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if an�
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis:
Approximately ( ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.

For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and /or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
Significant nexus findings for non -RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section IILD:
Significant nexus findings for non -RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non -RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section III.D:
Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go
Section III.D:
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
❑ TNWs: linear feet width (ft), Or, acres.
❑ Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year -round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial: A NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11 was completed to reach this conclusion.
Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally:

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: 75 linear feet 15.0width (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
3. Non -RPWs8 that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section IILC.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
T7 Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
4. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
® Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year- round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW: Wetlands have direct hydrologic connection to the stream which flows directly into
TNWs.
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section I1I.13 and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW:
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: 1.79 acres.
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III. C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
6. Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III. C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.9
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
❑ Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
❑ Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1 -6), or
❑ Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA- STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY) :"
19 which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
❑ from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
❑ which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
❑ Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
❑ Other factors. Explain:
'See Footnote # 3.
9 To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section IILD.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps /EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.

Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
❑ Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
JJ Wetlands: acres.
NON - JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
IF] If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
❑ Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
❑ Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
❑ Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
JZJ Other: (explain, if not covered above):
Provide acreage estimates for non - jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
judgment (check all that apply):
Non - wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
❑ Lakes /ponds: acres.
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
Provide acreage estimates for non - jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
Non - wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
❑ Lakes /ponds: acres.
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:
Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
® Office concurs with data sheets /delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets /delineation report.
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:
❑ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data.
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
® U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:USGS TopoTile023 1:24000 Source:www.ncdot.org.
® USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: NRCS Soil Survey of Watauga County GIS data NC189.
❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
❑ State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
❑ FEMA /FIRM maps:
❑ 100 -year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
® Photographs: ® Aerial (Name & Date): 2005 Watauga/Ashe County Source:www.nconemap.com .
or ❑ Other (Name & Date):
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
❑ Applicable /supporting case law:
❑ Applicable /supporting scientific literature:
❑ Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Project/Site: Boone Water System Improvements City/County:
Applicant/Owner: Town of Boone
Boone, Watauga Sampling Date: 11 -Ju� iy
U land WA
State: NC Sampling Point: P
Investigator(s): W. Marottl Section, Township, Range:
Hillslo e none): Concave Slope ( %): 1 -2%
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): P Local relief (concave, convex,
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR Lat: 36.274219 N Long: -81.552339.W Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: RoA - Rosman fine sandy loam, TxA - Toxaway loam, NkA - Nikwasi loam NWI classification: NA
Are climatic I hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes Lj No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology E] significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ❑� No ❑
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology = naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ❑ No Is the Sampled Area El
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No ❑
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Seconda Indicators minimum of two re wired
Prima Indicators minimum of one is re uiredo
check all that apply)
=Surface Soil Cracks (136)
=Surface Water (A1)
=True Aquatic Plants (B14)
=Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (198)
= High Water Table (A2)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
=Drainage Patterns (1910)
=Saturation (A3)
= Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
=Moss Trim Lines (1316)
=Water Marks (61)
=Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
=Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
=Sediment Deposits (62)
= Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
oCrayfish Burrows (C8)
= Drift Deposits (B3)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
=Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
=Algal Mat or Crust (64)
=Other (Explain in Remarks)
=Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
= Iron Deposits (B5)
=Geomorphic Position (D2)
=Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
=Shallow Aquitard (D3)
=Wafer - Stained i.eaves (B9)
=Microtopographic Relief (D4)
=Aquatic Fauna (1313)
=FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes ❑
No ❑ Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes ❑
No ❑. Depth (inches):
❑ No g
Saturation Present? Yes ❑
No ❑ Depth (inches):
Wetland
Hydrology Present? Yes
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers
Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

VEGETATION (Four Strata). - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Paint: upland WA
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )
% Cover Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
(A)
1
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
2.
Total Number of Dominant
(B)
3.
Species Across All Strata:
4.
- -
Percent of Dominant Species (�B)
5.
That Are 013L. FACW, or FAC:
6.
-
prevalence lndex worksheet:
7.
o Multiply by: -
Total /o Cover of
8.
OBL species �� x 1 =
Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
= Total Cover
)
FACW species x 2 =
1
FAC species x 3 =
2.
FACU species x 4 =
3
UPL species x 5 =
4
Column Totals: (A) (B)
5.
- -
Prevalence Index = B/A =
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
❑ 2 - Dominance Test is X50%
9.
_
❑ 3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0
10.
_
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
= Total Cover
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) -
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
Fl Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1.
2.
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
3.
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
5.
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
height (DBH), regardless of
6•
more in diameter at breast
7
height.
8.
Sapling /Shrub -Woody plants, excluding vines, less
g.
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
10.
Herb -All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, regardless
11.
_
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 it tall.
12.
- -
Woody vine -All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
=Total Cover
height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
)
1.
2,
3.
4,
5.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation Ll
Yes No
6.
Present?
= Total Cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Interim Version

Sampling Point: upland
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features Remarks
(inches) Color moist % Color (moist) % Type Loc Texture
10YR3/3
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Q Histosol (Al)
Q Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
Q 2 cm Muck (Al 0) (LRR N)
®Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
0 Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147,14B)
Q Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
0 Sandy Redox (S5)
0 Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type•
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
educed Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains. `Location: ri_ rMAU U 11 b '-
Indicators for Probl l emaatiti c Hydric Soils,:
Q Dark Surface (S7)
0 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Q Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
0 Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Q Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
= Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
Q Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
(MLRA 136, 147)
Q Depleted Matrix (F3)
Q Redox Dark Surface (F6)
= Red Parent Material (TF2)
Q Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
=Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Q Redox Depressions (F8)
Q Other (Explain in Remarks)
Q Iron- Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
Q Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
hydrology must be present,
Q Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes _a No W]
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont— Interim Version

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Boone Wafter System improvements Boone, Watauga Sampling Date! X11 -Jug
Project/Site: Y p CitylCounty: Wetland WA
Applicant/Owner:
Town of Bootle State: NC Sampling Point: .
Investigator(s): W. Marotti Section, Township, Range: Hillslo a Concave Slope ( %): "2o
�°
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): � Local relief (concave, convex, none): NA(] $3
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR Lat: 36.274477 N Long: -gy •551 X73 W Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: RoA - Rosman fine sandy loam, TxA - Toxaway loam, NkA - Nikwasi loam NWI classification: NA
Are climatic 1 hydro�lo is conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ✓ No (if no, explain in Remarks.) ❑
Are Vegetation I r � , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances' present? Yes ❑ No
Are Vegetation _F_ - Soil =, or Hydrology = naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No . ❑ Is the Sampled Area ❑
Hydric Soil Present? Yes � No within a Wetland? Yes . No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
HYDROLOGY
Seconds Indicators minimum of two re uired
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Prima Indicators minimum of one is re uired check all that apply)
=Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
=Surface Water (Al)
=True Aquatic Plants (1314)
=Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
=High Water Table (A2)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
ODrainage Patterns (1310)
=Saturation (A3)
=Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
=Moss Trim Lines (1316)
=Water Marks (Bi)
=Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
=Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
=Sediment Deposits (132)
=Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
=Crayfish Burrows (C8)
=Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
=Drift Deposits (63)
=Algal Mat or Crust (134)
=Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
=Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
=Iron Deposits (135)
=Geomorphic Position (D2)
=Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
=Shallow Aquitard (D3)
=Water- Stained Leaves (B9)
=Microtopographic Relief (D4)
=Aquatic Fauna (1313)
=FAC- Neutral Test (1)5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes ❑
No ❑ Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes ❑
No ❑ Depth (inches):
Yes No
Saturation Present? Yes g
No E-1 Depth (inches): Wetland
Hydrology Present?
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers
Eastern Mountains and Piedmont– Interim Version

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point:
Wetland WA
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )
% Cover Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
(A}
1.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: �-
2 •
Total Number of Dominant
(B)
3.
Species Across All Strata:
4.
"
Percent of Dominant Species
(A/B)
5.
- _
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
6.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7.
_ _
Total % Cover of: Multiply b
8
OBL species x 1
=Total Cover
FACW species x 2 =
SaplinglShrub Stratum (Plot size:
)
x 3 =
1.
FAC species ��
2
FACU species x 4 =
3
UPL species x5=
Column Totals: (A) (B)
4
5.
Prevalence Index = BIA=
6.
_
Hydrophytic Vegetation indicators:
7.
L 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
2 - Dominance Test is X50%
9.
0 3 - Prevalence index is 53.0'
10.
4 Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
= Total Cover
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
Fl Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1. Gaaliium aparine
FACU
2. Clematis virginiana
FAC
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
3 Polygonum sagittatum
OBL
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4. Impatiens capensis
FACW
pefinitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
5. Scirpus pungens
FACW
Tree -� Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm)
8. Carex iurida
OBL
of
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless
7, Mentha piperita
FACW
height.
8. Carex gynandra
FACW
SaplinglShrub -Woody plants, excluding vines, less
g Lysimachia terrestris
OBL
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
10. Eupatorium maculatum
FACW
Herb- All herbaceous (non - woody) plants, regardless
11. Sagittaria latifolia
DBL
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
12.
Woody vine -All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
=Total Cover
height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
)
1.
2.
3.
4.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Yes No
5,
[i .
Present?
= Total Cover
numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont- Interim Version

Sampling Point:
Wetland WA
uProfile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features Remarks
(inches) Color (moist) % Color moist % _IypeL Lo c Texture
1OYR4/1 75 5YR4/4 25
'Type: C= Concentration, D =De letion, F
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Q Histosol (Al)
Q Histic Epipedon (A2)
Q Black Histic (A3)
Q Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Q Stratified Layers (A5)
Q 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
El Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Q Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Q Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
HSandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
QStripped Matrix (86)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):'
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
educed Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains. Location: P
Q Dark Surface (S7)
Q Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
Q Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
Q Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Q Depleted Matrix (F3)
0 Redox Dark Surface (F6)
0 Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
0 Redox Depressions (F8)
Q Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
0 Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
0 Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils ":
0 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
0 Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
0 Piedmont Floodplain Soils fl 9)
(MLRA 136, 147)
Red Parent Material (TF2)
0 Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
0 Other (Explain in Remarks)
'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes z No ii
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION L• BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Town of Boone, Proposed Water System Improvements
(UT - Meadow Creek)
State:NC County /parish/borough: Watauga City: Brownwood
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 36.262283'1, Long. - 81.555383° �.
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: South Fork New River
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: South Fork New River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): New River 05050001020030
Check if map /diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is /are available upon request.
Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc... ) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
Field Determination. Date(s): 7 -19 -2011
SECTION IL• SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There r "navigable waters of the U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review area. [Required]
❑ Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There M "waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply): i
TNWs, including territorial seas
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
® Relatively permanent waters (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑ Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non - wetland waters: 30 linear feet: 6.Owidth (ft) and/or 0.00 acres.
Wetlands: acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on:
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
2. Non - regulated waters /wetlands (check if applicable):3
' Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
2 For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year -round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally'
(e.g., typically 3 months).
s Supporting documentation is presented in Section IILF.

Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain:

SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete
Section IILA.1 and Section IH.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections HLA.1 and 2
and Section 1H.D.1.; otherwise, see Section 1H.B below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacenf':
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non - navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year -round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year -round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section IILD.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section IILD.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbody4 is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section IILB.1 for
the tributary, Section IILB.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section IILB.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section IILC below.
1. Characteristics of non -TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size:
Drainage area:
Average annual rainfall: inches
Average annual snowfall inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
❑ Tributary flows directly into TNW.
❑ Tributary flows through � tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are Pick List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List river miles from RPW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNWs:
Tributary stream order, if known:
4 Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and
West.
5 Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.

(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apps
Tributary is: ❑ Natural
❑ Artificial (man- made). Explain:
❑ Manipulated (man - altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: feet
Average depth: feet
Average side slopes: --
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
❑ Silts ❑ Sands
❑ Cobbles ❑ Gravel
❑ Bedrock ❑ Vegetation. Type /% cover:
❑ Other. Explain:
❑ Concrete
❑ Muck
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain:
Presence of run/riffle/ op of complexes. Explain:
Tributary geometry:
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: Pick List
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year:
Describe flow regime:
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: � Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: -. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
❑ Bed and banks
❑ OI IWM6 (check all indicators that apply):
❑ clear, natural line impressed on the bank
❑
the presence of litter and debris
❑ changes in the character of soil
❑
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
❑ shelving
❑
the presence of wrack line
❑ vegetation matted down, bent, or absent
❑
sediment sorting
❑ leaf litter disturbed or washed away
❑
scour
❑ sediment deposition
❑
multiple observed or predicted flow events
❑ water staining
❑
abrupt change in plant community
❑ other (list):
❑ Discontinuous OHWM.7 Explain:
If factors other than the OIIWM were used to determine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
High Tide Line indicated by: 17 Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
❑ oil or scum line along shore objects ❑ survey to available datum,
❑ fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore) ❑ physical markings;
❑ physical markings /characteristics ❑ vegetation lines /changes in vegetation types.
❑ tidal gauges
❑ other (list):
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film, water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
6A natural or man -made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
'Ibid.

(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width):
❑ Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatic /wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non -TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size: acres
Wetland type. Explain:
Wetland quality. Explain:
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non -TNW:
Flow is: Pick Lisi. Explain:
Surface flow is: -
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: -. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non -TNW:
❑ Directly abutting
❑ Not directly abutting
❑ Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
❑ Ecological connection. Explain:
❑ Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are 'ck List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are ck List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: Mlist.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the � floodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface, water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
❑ Vegetation type /percent cover. Explain:
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatic /wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if an�
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis:
Approximately ( ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.

For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and /or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
Significant nexus findings for non -RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
fmdings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section IILD:
Significant nexus findings for non -RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non -RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain fmdings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section IILD:
Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go
Section IILD:
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
TNWs: linear feet width (ft), Or, acres.
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year -round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial: A NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11 was completed to reach this conclusion.
Q Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally:

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: 30 linear feet 6.Owidth (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Non -RPWs8 that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section 111. C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
T7 Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
Q Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year- round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section IILB and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW:
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
El Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III. C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III. C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.9
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
❑ Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1 -6), or
❑ Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA- STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): 10
Irl which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
❑ from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
❑ which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
❑ Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
❑ Other factors. Explain:
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
'See Footnote # 3.
9 To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section IILD.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps /EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
EJ Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
F. NON - JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
❑ Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
Other: (explain, if not covered above):
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
udgment (check all that apply)
Non - wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
❑ Lakes /ponds: acres.
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
EJ Non - wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
❑ Lakes /ponds: acres.
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
® Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:
® Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
® Office concurs with data sheets /delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets /delineation report.
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:
❑ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data.
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
® U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:USGS TopoTile023 1:24000 Source:www.ncdot.org.
® USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: NRCS Soil Survey of Watauga County GIS data NC189.
❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
❑ State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
❑ FEMA/FIRM maps:
❑ 100 -year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
® Photographs: ® Aerial (Name & Date): 2005 Watauga/Ashe County Source: www.nconemap.com .
or ❑ Other (Name & Date):
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
❑ Applicable /supporting case law:
❑ Applicable /supporting scientific literature:
❑ Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION L• BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Town of Boone, Proposed Water System Improvements
(UT - Meadow Creek)
State:NC County /parish/borough: Watauga City: Brownwood
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 36.266554'1, Long. - 81.553625° �.
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: South Fork New River
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: South Fork New River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): New River 05050001020030
Check if map /diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is /are available upon request.
Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc... ) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
Field Determination. Date(s): 7 -19 -2011
SECTION IL• SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There r "navigable waters of the U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review area. [Required]
❑ Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There M "waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply): i
TNWs, including territorial seas
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
® Relatively permanent waters (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑ Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non - wetland waters: 30 linear feet: S.Owidth (ft) and/or 0.00 acres.
Wetlands: acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on:
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
2. Non - regulated waters /wetlands (check if applicable):3
' Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
2 For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year -round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally'
(e.g., typically 3 months).
s Supporting documentation is presented in Section IILF.

Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain:

SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete
Section IILA.1 and Section IH.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections HLA.1 and 2
and Section 1H.D.1.; otherwise, see Section 1H.B below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacenf':
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non - navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year -round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year -round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section IILD.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section IILD.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbody4 is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section IILB.1 for
the tributary, Section IILB.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section IILB.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section IILC below.
1. Characteristics of non -TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size:
Drainage area:
Average annual rainfall: inches
Average annual snowfall inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
❑ Tributary flows directly into TNW.
❑ Tributary flows through � tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are Pick List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List river miles from RPW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNWs:
Tributary stream order, if known:
4 Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and
West.
5 Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.

(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apps
Tributary is: ❑ Natural
❑ Artificial (man- made). Explain:
❑ Manipulated (man - altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: feet
Average depth: feet
Average side slopes: --
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
❑ Silts ❑ Sands
❑ Cobbles ❑ Gravel
❑ Bedrock ❑ Vegetation. Type /% cover:
❑ Other. Explain:
❑ Concrete
❑ Muck
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain:
Presence of run/riffle/ op of complexes. Explain:
Tributary geometry:
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: Pick List
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year:
Describe flow regime:
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: � Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: -. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
❑ Bed and banks
❑ OI IWM6 (check all indicators that apply):
❑ clear, natural line impressed on the bank
❑
the presence of litter and debris
❑ changes in the character of soil
❑
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
❑ shelving
❑
the presence of wrack line
❑ vegetation matted down, bent, or absent
❑
sediment sorting
❑ leaf litter disturbed or washed away
❑
scour
❑ sediment deposition
❑
multiple observed or predicted flow events
❑ water staining
❑
abrupt change in plant community
❑ other (list):
❑ Discontinuous OHWM.7 Explain:
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
High Tide Line indicated by: 17 Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
❑ oil or scum line along shore objects ❑ survey to available datum,
❑ fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore) ❑ physical markings;
❑ physical markings /characteristics ❑ vegetation lines /changes in vegetation types.
❑ tidal gauges
❑ other (list):
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film, water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
6A natural or man -made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
'Ibid.

(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width):
❑ Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatic /wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non -TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size: acres
Wetland type. Explain:
Wetland quality. Explain:
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non -TNW:
Flow is: Pick Lisi. Explain:
Surface flow is: -
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: -. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non -TNW:
❑ Directly abutting
❑ Not directly abutting
❑ Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
❑ Ecological connection. Explain:
❑ Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are 'ck List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are ck List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: Mlist.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the � floodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface, water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
❑ Vegetation type /percent cover. Explain:
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatic /wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if an�
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis:
Approximately ( ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.

For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and /or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
Significant nexus findings for non -RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
fmdings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section IILD:
Significant nexus findings for non -RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non -RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain fmdings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section IILD:
Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go
Section IILD:
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
TNWs: linear feet width (ft), Or, acres.
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year -round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial: A NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11 was completed to reach this conclusion.
Q Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally:

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: 30 linear feet S.Owidth (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Non -RPWs8 that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section 111. C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
T7 Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
Q Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year- round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section IILB and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW:
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
El Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III. C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III. C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.9
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
❑ Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1 -6), or
❑ Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA- STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): 10
Irl which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
❑ from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
❑ which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
❑ Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
❑ Other factors. Explain:
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
'See Footnote # 3.
9 To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section IILD.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps /EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
EJ Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
F. NON - JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
❑ Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
Other: (explain, if not covered above):
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
udgment (check all that apply)
Non - wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
❑ Lakes /ponds: acres.
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
EJ Non - wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
❑ Lakes /ponds: acres.
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
® Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:
® Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
® Office concurs with data sheets /delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets /delineation report.
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:
❑ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data.
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
® U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:USGS TopoTile023 1:24000 Source:www.ncdot.org.
® USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: NRCS Soil Survey of Watauga County GIS data NC189.
❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
❑ State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
❑ FEMA/FIRM maps:
❑ 100 -year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
® Photographs: ® Aerial (Name & Date): 2005 Watauga/Ashe County Source: www.nconemap.com .
or ❑ Other (Name & Date):
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
❑ Applicable /supporting case law:
❑ Applicable /supporting scientific literature:
❑ Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION L• BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Town of Boone, Proposed Water System Improvements
(UT - Meadow Creek)
State:NC County /parish/borough: Watauga City: Brownwood
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 36.267612'1, Long. - 81.551541 ° �.
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: South Fork New River
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: South Fork New River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): New River 05050001020030
Check if map /diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is /are available upon request.
Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc... ) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
Field Determination. Date(s): 7 -19 -2011
SECTION IL• SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There r "navigable waters of the U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review area. [Required]
❑ Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There M "waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply): i
TNWs, including territorial seas
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
® Relatively permanent waters (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑ Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non - wetland waters: 30 linear feet: 1.Owidth (ft) and/or 0.00 acres.
Wetlands: acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on:
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
2. Non - regulated waters /wetlands (check if applicable):3
' Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
2 For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year -round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally'
(e.g., typically 3 months).
s Supporting documentation is presented in Section IILF.

Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain:

SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete
Section IILA.1 and Section IH.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections HLA.1 and 2
and Section 1H.D.1.; otherwise, see Section 1H.B below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacenf':
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non - navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year -round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year -round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section IILD.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section IILD.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbody4 is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section IILB.1 for
the tributary, Section IILB.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section IILB.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section IILC below.
1. Characteristics of non -TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: 0.01=
Drainage area: 1.33
Average annual rainfall: 51.5 inches
Average annual snowfall: - -- inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
❑ Tributary flows directly into TNW.
® Tributary flows through 4 tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are 17RFVess) river miles from TNW.
Project waters are 1 (or less) river miles from RPW.
Project waters are 1 (or less) aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are 1 (or less) aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNW5: Tributary flows into Meadow Creek which flow directly into South Fork New River.
Tributary stream order, if known: 1.
4 Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and
West.
5 Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.

(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apps
Tributary is: ® Natural
❑ Artificial (man- made). Explain:
❑ Manipulated (man - altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: 1.0 feet
Average depth: 1.0 feet
Average side slopes: a
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
® Silts ® Sands
® Cobbles ® Gravel
❑ Bedrock ❑ Vegetation. Type /% cover:
❑ Other. Explain:
❑ Concrete
❑ Muck
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain: Stable.
Presence of run/riffle/ ool co m lexes. Explain:
Tributary geometry:
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: Intermitt asonal flow
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year:
Describe flow regime: Flows northwest to southeast before entering Meadow Creek.
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: �. Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: 0. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
® Bed and banks
® OI IWM6 (check all indicators that apply):
® clear, natural line impressed on the bank
®
the presence of litter and debris
❑ changes in the character of soil
❑
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
® shelving
❑
the presence of wrack line
❑ vegetation matted down, bent, or absent
®
sediment sorting
® leaf litter disturbed or washed away
❑
scour
❑ sediment deposition
®
multiple observed or predicted flow events
® water staining
®
abrupt change in plant community
❑ other (list):
❑ Discontinuous OHWM.7 Explain:
If factors other than the OIIWM were used to determine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
High Tide Line indicated by: 17 Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
❑ oil or scum line along shore objects ❑ survey to available datum,
❑ fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore) ❑ physical markings;
❑ physical markings /characteristics ❑ vegetation lines /changes in vegetation types.
❑ tidal gauges
❑ other (list):
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film, water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain: Water appearance was clear.
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
6A natural or man -made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
'Ibid.

(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
® Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width): 10 -15 feet.
❑ Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatic /wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non -TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size: acres
Wetland type. Explain:
Wetland quality. Explain:
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non -TNW:
Flow is: Pick Lisi. Explain:
Surface flow is: -
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: -. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non -TNW:
❑ Directly abutting
❑ Not directly abutting
❑ Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
❑ Ecological connection. Explain:
❑ Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are 'ck List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are ck List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: Mlist.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the � floodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface, water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
❑ Vegetation type /percent cover. Explain:
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatic /wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if an�
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis:
Approximately ( ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.

For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and /or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
Significant nexus findings for non -RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
fmdings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section IILD:
Significant nexus findings for non -RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non -RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain fmdings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section IILD:
Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go
Section IILD:
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
TNWs: linear feet width (ft), Or, acres.
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year -round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial: A NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11 was completed to reach this conclusion.
Q Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally:

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: 30 linear feet 1.0width (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Non -RPWs8 that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section 111. C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
T7 Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
Q Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year- round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section lILB and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW:
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
El Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III. C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III. C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.9
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
❑ Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1 -6), or
❑ Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA- STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): 10
Irl which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
❑ from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
❑ which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
❑ Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
❑ Other factors. Explain:
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
'See Footnote # 3.
9 To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section IILD.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps /EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
EJ Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
F. NON - JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
❑ Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
Other: (explain, if not covered above):
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
udgment (check all that apply)
Non - wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
❑ Lakes /ponds: acres.
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
EJ Non - wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
❑ Lakes /ponds: acres.
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
® Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:
® Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
® Office concurs with data sheets /delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets /delineation report.
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:
❑ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data.
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
® U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:USGS TopoTile023 1:24000 Source:www.ncdot.org.
® USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: NRCS Soil Survey of Watauga County GIS data NC189.
❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
❑ State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
❑ FEMA/FIRM maps:
❑ 100 -year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
® Photographs: ® Aerial (Name & Date): 2005 Watauga/Ashe County Source: www.nconemap.com .
or ❑ Other (Name & Date):
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
❑ Applicable /supporting case law:
❑ Applicable /supporting scientific literature:
❑ Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION L• BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Town of Boone, Proposed Water System Improvements
(UT - Meadow Creek)
State:NC County /parish/borough: Watauga City: Brownwood
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 36.268053° 1, Long. - 81.550391° �.
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: South Fork New River
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: South Fork New River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): New River 05050001020030
Check if map /diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is /are available upon request.
Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc... ) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
Field Determination. Date(s): 7 -19 -2011
SECTION IL• SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There r "navigable waters of the U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review area. [Required]
❑ Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There M "waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply): '
TNWs, including territorial seas
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
® Relatively permanent waters (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑ Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non - wetland waters: 30 linear feet: 3.Owidth (ft) and/or 0.00 acres.
Wetlands: acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on:
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
2. Non - regulated waters /wetlands (check if applicable):3
❑ Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain:
' Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
2 For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year -round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally'
(e.g., typically months).
s Supporting documentation is presented in Section IILF.

SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete
Section IILA.1 and Section III.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections III.A.1 and 2
and Section IH.D.I.; otherwise, see Section HLB below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent':
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non - navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year -round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year -round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section HLD.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section III.D.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbody4 is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section III.B.1 for
the tributary, Section IILB.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section IILB.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section IILC below.
1. Characteristics of non -TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: Pick List
Drainage area: Pick List
Average annual rainfall: inches
Average annual snowfall: inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
❑ Tributary flows directly into TNW.
❑ Tributary flows through � tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are Pick List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List river miles from RPW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNWs:
Tributary stream order, if known:
4 Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and
West.
5 Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.

(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apps
Tributary is: ❑ Natural
❑ Artificial (man- made). Explain:
❑ Manipulated (man- altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: feet
Average depth: feet
Average side slopes: --
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
❑ Silts ❑ Sands ❑ Concrete
❑ Cobbles ❑ Gravel ❑ Muck
❑ Bedrock ❑ Vegetation. Type /% cover:
❑ Other. Explain:
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain:
Presence of run/riffle /pool complexes. Explain:
Tributary geometry: W List
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: Pick List
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year:
Describe flow regime:
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: � Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: -. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
❑ Bed and banks
❑ OHWM6 (check all indicators that apply):
❑ clear, natural line impressed on the bank
❑
the presence of litter and debris
❑ changes in the character of soil
❑
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
❑ shelving
❑
the presence of wrack line
❑ vegetation matted down, bent, or absent
❑
sediment sorting
❑ leaf litter disturbed or washed away
❑
scour
❑ sediment deposition
❑
multiple observed or predicted flow events
❑ water staining
❑
abrupt change in plant community
❑ other (list):
❑ Discontinuous OHWM.7 Explain:
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determi
High Tide Line indicated by: 17
❑ oil or scum line along shore objects
❑ fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore)
❑ physical markings /characteristics
❑ tidal gauges
❑ other (list):
ne lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply)
Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
❑ survey to available datum,
❑ physical markings;
❑ vegetation lines /changes in vegetation types.
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film, water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
6A natural or man -made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
'Ibid.

(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width):
❑ Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatic /wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non -TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size: acres
Wetland type. Explain:
Wetland quality. Explain:
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non -TNW:
Flow is: Pick Lisi. Explain:
Surface flow is: -
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: -. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non -TNW:
❑ Directly abutting
❑ Not directly abutting
❑ Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
❑ Ecological connection. Explain:
❑ Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are 'ck List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are ck List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: ist.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the � floodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
❑ Vegetation type /percent cover. Explain:
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatic /wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if an�
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis:
Approximately ( ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.

For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and /or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
Significant nexus findings for non -RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section IILD:
Significant nexus findings for non -RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non -RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section III.D:
Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go
Section III.D:
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
❑ TNWs: linear feet width (ft), Or, acres.
❑ Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year -round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial: A NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11 was completed to reach this conclusion.
Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally:

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: 30 linear feet 3.Owidth (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Non -RPWs8 that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section IILC.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
T7 Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
r Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
Q Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year- round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section I1I.13 and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW:
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III. C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.9
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
A Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
❑ Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1 -6), or
❑ Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA- STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY) :"
❑ which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
❑ from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
❑ which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
❑ Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
❑ Other factors. Explain:
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
'See Footnote # 3.
9 To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section IILD.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps /EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
0 Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
NON - JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
❑ Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
Other: (explain, if not covered above):
Provide acreage estimates for non - jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
judgment (check all that apply):
Q Non - wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
❑ Lakes /ponds: acres.
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
Provide acreage estimates for non - jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
R Non - wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
❑ Lakes /ponds: acres.
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
® Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:
® Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
® Office concurs with data sheets /delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets /delineation report.
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:
❑ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data.
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
® U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:USGS TopoTile023 1:24000 Source:www.ncdot.org.
® USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: NRCS Soil Survey of Watauga County GIS data NC189.
❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
❑ State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
❑ FEMA /FIRM maps:
❑ 100 -year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
® Photographs: ® Aerial (Name & Date): 2005 Watauga/Ashe County Source:www.nconemap.com .
or ❑ Other (Name & Date):
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
❑ Applicable /supporting case law:
❑ Applicable /supporting scientific literature:
❑ Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION L• BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Town of Boone, Proposed Water System Improvements
(UT - Meadow Creek)
State:NC County /parish/borough: Watauga City: Brownwood
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 36.273174° 1, Long. - 81.557462° �.
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: South Fork New River
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: South Fork New River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): New River 05050001020030
Check if map /diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is /are available upon request.
Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc... ) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
Field Determination. Date(s): 7 -19 -2011
SECTION IL• SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There r "navigable waters of the U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review area. [Required]
❑ Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There M "waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply): i
TNWs, including territorial seas
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
Relatively permanent waters (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non - wetland waters: 50 linear feet: 3.Owidth (ft) and/or 0.00 acres.
Wetlands: 0.10 acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on:
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
2. Non - regulated waters /wetlands (check if applicable):3
' Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
2 For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year -round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally"
(e.g., typically 3 months).
s Supporting documentation is presented in Section IILF.

Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain:

SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete
Section II1A.1 and Section IH.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections HLA.1 and 2
and Section 1H.D.1.; otherwise, see Section 1H.B below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacenf':
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non - navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year -round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year -round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section IILD.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section IILD.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbody4 is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section IILB.1 for
the tributary, Section IILB.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section IILB.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section IILC below.
1. Characteristics of non -TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size:
Drainage area:
Average annual rainfall: inches
Average annual snowfall inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
❑ Tributary flows directly into TNW.
❑ Tributary flows through � tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are Pick List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List river miles from RPW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNWs:
Tributary stream order, if known:
4 Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and
West.
5 Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.

(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apps
Tributary is: ❑ Natural
❑ Artificial (man- made). Explain:
❑ Manipulated (man - altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: feet
Average depth: feet
Average side slopes: --
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
❑ Silts ❑ Sands
❑ Cobbles ❑ Gravel
❑ Bedrock ❑ Vegetation. Type /% cover:
❑ Other. Explain:
❑ Concrete
❑ Muck
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain:
Presence of run/riffle/ op of complexes. Explain:
Tributary geometry:
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: Pick List
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year:
Describe flow regime:
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: � Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: -. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
❑ Bed and banks
❑ OI IWM6 (check all indicators that apply):
❑ clear, natural line impressed on the bank
❑
the presence of litter and debris
❑ changes in the character of soil
❑
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
❑ shelving
❑
the presence of wrack line
❑ vegetation matted down, bent, or absent
❑
sediment sorting
❑ leaf litter disturbed or washed away
❑
scour
❑ sediment deposition
❑
multiple observed or predicted flow events
❑ water staining
❑
abrupt change in plant community
❑ other (list):
❑ Discontinuous OHWM.7 Explain:
If factors other than the OIIWM were used to determine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
High Tide Line indicated by: 17 Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
❑ oil or scum line along shore objects ❑ survey to available datum,
❑ fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore) ❑ physical markings;
❑ physical markings /characteristics ❑ vegetation lines /changes in vegetation types.
❑ tidal gauges
❑ other (list):
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film, water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
6A natural or man -made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
'Ibid.

(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width):
❑ Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatic /wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non -TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size: acres
Wetland type. Explain:
Wetland quality. Explain:
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non -TNW:
Flow is: Pick Lisi. Explain:
Surface flow is: -
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: -. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non -TNW:
❑ Directly abutting
❑ Not directly abutting
❑ Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
❑ Ecological connection. Explain:
❑ Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are 'ck List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are ck List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: Mlist.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the � floodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface, water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
❑ Vegetation type /percent cover. Explain:
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatic /wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if an�
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis:
Approximately ( ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.

For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and /or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
Significant nexus findings for non -RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
fmdings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section IILD:
Significant nexus findings for non -RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non -RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain fmdings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section IILD:
Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go
Section IILD:
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
TNWs: linear feet width (ft), Or, acres.
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year -round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial: A NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11 was completed to reach this conclusion.
Q Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally:

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: 30 linear feet 3.Owidth (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Non -RPWs8 that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section 111. C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
T7 Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
® Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year- round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW: Wetlands have direct hydrologic connection to the stream which flows directly into
TNWs.
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section lILB and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW:
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: 0.10 acres.
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section 111. C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.9
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
❑ Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
❑ Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1 -6), or
❑ Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA- STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): 10
I which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
❑ from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
❑ which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
❑ Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
❑ Other factors. Explain:
'See Footnote # 3.
9 To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section IILD.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps /EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.

Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
❑ Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Wetlands: acres.
F. NON - JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
❑ Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
❑ Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
Ll Other: (explain, if not covered above):
Provide acreage estimates for non - jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
judgment (check all that apply):
M Non - wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
❑ Lakes /ponds: acres.
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
Non - wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
❑ Lakes /ponds: acres.
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:
Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
® Office concurs with data sheets /delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets /delineation report.
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:
❑ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data.
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
® U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:USGS TopoTile023 1:24000 Source:www.ncdot.org.
® USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: NRCS Soil Survey of Watauga County GIS data NC189.
❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
❑ State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
❑ FEMA/FIRM maps:
❑ 100 -year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
® Photographs: ® Aerial (Name & Date): 2005 Watauga/Ashe County Source: www.nconemap.com .
or ❑ Other (Name & Date):
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
❑ Applicable /supporting case law:
❑ Applicable /supporting scientific literature:
❑ Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Project/Site: Boone Water System Improvements City/County:
Applicant/Owner: Town of Boone
Boone, Watauga Sampling Date: 11 -Ju� iy
U land WA
State: NC Sampling Point: P
Investigator(s): W. Marottl Section, Township, Range:
Hillslo e none): Concave Slope ( %): 1 -2%
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): P Local relief (concave, convex,
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR Lat: 36.274219 N Long: -81.552339.W Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: RoA - Rosman fine sandy loam, TxA - Toxaway loam, NkA - Nikwasi loam NWI classification: NA
Are climatic I hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes Lj No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology E] significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ❑� No ❑
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology = naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ❑ No Is the Sampled Area El
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No ❑
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Seconda Indicators minimum of two re wired
Prima Indicators minimum of one is re uiredo
check all that apply)
=Surface Soil Cracks (136)
=Surface Water (A1)
=True Aquatic Plants (B14)
=Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (198)
= High Water Table (A2)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
=Drainage Patterns (1910)
=Saturation (A3)
= Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
=Moss Trim Lines (1316)
=Water Marks (61)
=Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
=Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
=Sediment Deposits (62)
= Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
oCrayfish Burrows (C8)
= Drift Deposits (B3)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
=Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
=Algal Mat or Crust (64)
=Other (Explain in Remarks)
=Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
= Iron Deposits (B5)
=Geomorphic Position (D2)
=Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
=Shallow Aquitard (D3)
=Wafer - Stained i.eaves (B9)
=Microtopographic Relief (D4)
=Aquatic Fauna (1313)
=FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes ❑
No ❑ Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes ❑
No ❑. Depth (inches):
❑ No g
Saturation Present? Yes ❑
No ❑ Depth (inches):
Wetland
Hydrology Present? Yes
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers
Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

VEGETATION (Four Strata). - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Paint: upland WA
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )
% Cover Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
(A)
1
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
2.
Total Number of Dominant
(B)
3.
Species Across All Strata:
4.
- -
Percent of Dominant Species (�B)
5.
That Are 013L. FACW, or FAC:
6.
-
prevalence lndex worksheet:
7.
o Multiply by: -
Total /o Cover of
8.
OBL species �� x 1 =
Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
= Total Cover
)
FACW species x 2 =
1
FAC species x 3 =
2.
FACU species x 4 =
3
UPL species x 5 =
4
Column Totals: (A) (B)
5.
- -
Prevalence Index = B/A =
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
❑ 2 - Dominance Test is X50%
9.
_
❑ 3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0
10.
_
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
= Total Cover
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) -
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
Fl Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1.
2.
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
3.
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
5.
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
height (DBH), regardless of
6•
more in diameter at breast
7
height.
8.
Sapling /Shrub -Woody plants, excluding vines, less
g.
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
10.
Herb -All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, regardless
11.
_
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 it tall.
12.
- -
Woody vine -All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
=Total Cover
height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
)
1.
2,
3.
4,
5.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation Ll
Yes No
6.
Present?
= Total Cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Interim Version

Sampling Point: upland
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features Remarks
(inches) Color moist % Color (moist) % Type Loc Texture
10YR3/3
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Q Histosol (Al)
Q Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
Q 2 cm Muck (Al 0) (LRR N)
®Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
0 Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147,14B)
Q Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
0 Sandy Redox (S5)
0 Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type•
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
educed Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains. `Location: ri_ rMAU U 11 b '-
Indicators for Probl l emaatiti c Hydric Soils,:
Q Dark Surface (S7)
0 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Q Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
0 Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Q Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
= Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
Q Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
(MLRA 136, 147)
Q Depleted Matrix (F3)
Q Redox Dark Surface (F6)
= Red Parent Material (TF2)
Q Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
=Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Q Redox Depressions (F8)
Q Other (Explain in Remarks)
Q Iron- Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
Q Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
hydrology must be present,
Q Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes _a No W]
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont— Interim Version

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Boone Wafter System improvements Boone, Watauga Sampling Date! X11 -Jug
Project/Site: Y p CitylCounty: Wetland WA
Applicant/Owner:
Town of Bootle State: NC Sampling Point: .
Investigator(s): W. Marotti Section, Township, Range: Hillslo a Concave Slope ( %): "2o
�°
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): � Local relief (concave, convex, none): NA(] $3
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR Lat: 36.274477 N Long: -gy •551 X73 W Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: RoA - Rosman fine sandy loam, TxA - Toxaway loam, NkA - Nikwasi loam NWI classification: NA
Are climatic 1 hydro�lo is conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ✓ No (if no, explain in Remarks.) ❑
Are Vegetation I r � , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances' present? Yes ❑ No
Are Vegetation _F_ - Soil =, or Hydrology = naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No . ❑ Is the Sampled Area ❑
Hydric Soil Present? Yes � No within a Wetland? Yes . No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
HYDROLOGY
Seconds Indicators minimum of two re uired
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Prima Indicators minimum of one is re uired check all that apply)
=Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
=Surface Water (Al)
=True Aquatic Plants (1314)
=Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
=High Water Table (A2)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
ODrainage Patterns (1310)
=Saturation (A3)
=Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
=Moss Trim Lines (1316)
=Water Marks (Bi)
=Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
=Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
=Sediment Deposits (132)
=Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
=Crayfish Burrows (C8)
=Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
=Drift Deposits (63)
=Algal Mat or Crust (134)
=Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
=Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
=Iron Deposits (135)
=Geomorphic Position (D2)
=Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
=Shallow Aquitard (D3)
=Water- Stained Leaves (B9)
=Microtopographic Relief (D4)
=Aquatic Fauna (1313)
=FAC- Neutral Test (1)5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes ❑
No ❑ Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes ❑
No ❑ Depth (inches):
Yes No
Saturation Present? Yes g
No E-1 Depth (inches): Wetland
Hydrology Present?
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers
Eastern Mountains and Piedmont– Interim Version

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point:
Wetland WA
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )
% Cover Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
(A}
1.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: �-
2 •
Total Number of Dominant
(B)
3.
Species Across All Strata:
4.
"
Percent of Dominant Species
(A/B)
5.
- _
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
6.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7.
_ _
Total % Cover of: Multiply b
8
OBL species x 1
=Total Cover
FACW species x 2 =
SaplinglShrub Stratum (Plot size:
)
x 3 =
1.
FAC species ��
2
FACU species x 4 =
3
UPL species x5=
Column Totals: (A) (B)
4
5.
Prevalence Index = BIA=
6.
_
Hydrophytic Vegetation indicators:
7.
L 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
2 - Dominance Test is X50%
9.
0 3 - Prevalence index is 53.0'
10.
4 Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
= Total Cover
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
Fl Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1. Gaaliium aparine
FACU
2. Clematis virginiana
FAC
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
3 Polygonum sagittatum
OBL
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4. Impatiens capensis
FACW
pefinitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
5. Scirpus pungens
FACW
Tree -� Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm)
8. Carex iurida
OBL
of
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless
7, Mentha piperita
FACW
height.
8. Carex gynandra
FACW
SaplinglShrub -Woody plants, excluding vines, less
g Lysimachia terrestris
OBL
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
10. Eupatorium maculatum
FACW
Herb- All herbaceous (non - woody) plants, regardless
11. Sagittaria latifolia
DBL
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
12.
Woody vine -All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
=Total Cover
height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
)
1.
2.
3.
4.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Yes No
5,
[i .
Present?
= Total Cover
numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont- Interim Version

Sampling Point:
Wetland WA
uProfile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features Remarks
(inches) Color (moist) % Color moist % _IypeL Lo c Texture
1OYR4/1 75 5YR4/4 25
'Type: C= Concentration, D =De letion, F
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Q Histosol (Al)
Q Histic Epipedon (A2)
Q Black Histic (A3)
Q Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Q Stratified Layers (A5)
Q 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
El Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Q Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Q Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
HSandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
QStripped Matrix (86)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):'
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
educed Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains. Location: P
Q Dark Surface (S7)
Q Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
Q Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
Q Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Q Depleted Matrix (F3)
0 Redox Dark Surface (F6)
0 Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
0 Redox Depressions (F8)
Q Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
0 Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
0 Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils ":
0 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
0 Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
0 Piedmont Floodplain Soils fl 9)
(MLRA 136, 147)
Red Parent Material (TF2)
0 Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
0 Other (Explain in Remarks)
'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes z No ii
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION L• BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Town of Boone, Proposed Water System Improvements
(UT - Gap Creek)
State:NC County /parish/borough: Watauga City: Brownwood
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 36.24597° Pa,ong. - 81.54229° WE
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: South Fork New River
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: South Fork New River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): New River 05050001020030
Check if map /diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is /are available upon request.
Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc... ) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
Field Determination. Date(s): 7 -19 -2011
SECTION IL• SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There r "navigable waters of the U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review area. [Required]
❑ Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There M "waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply): i
TNWs, including territorial seas
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
Relatively permanent waters (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non - wetland waters: 115 linear feet: 5.Owidth (ft) and/or 0.01 acres.
Wetlands: 0.13 acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on:
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
2. Non - regulated waters /wetlands (check if applicable):3
' Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
2 For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year -round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally'
(e.g., typically 3 months).
s Supporting documentation is presented in Section IILF.

Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain:

SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete
Section IILA.1 and Section IH.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections HLA.1 and 2
and Section 1H.D.1.; otherwise, see Section 1H.B below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacenf':
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non - navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year -round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year -round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section IILD.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section IILD.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbody4 is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section IILB.1 for
the tributary, Section IILB.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section IILB.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section IILC below.
1. Characteristics of non -TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size:
Drainage area:
Average annual rainfall: inches
Average annual snowfall inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
❑ Tributary flows directly into TNW.
❑ Tributary flows through � tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are Pick List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List river miles from RPW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNWs:
Tributary stream order, if known:
4 Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and
West.
5 Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.

(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apps
Tributary is: ❑ Natural
❑ Artificial (man- made). Explain:
❑ Manipulated (man - altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: feet
Average depth: feet
Average side slopes: --
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
❑ Silts ❑ Sands
❑ Cobbles ❑ Gravel
❑ Bedrock ❑ Vegetation. Type /% cover:
❑ Other. Explain:
❑ Concrete
❑ Muck
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain:
Presence of run/riffle/ op of complexes. Explain:
Tributary geometry:
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: Pick List
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year:
Describe flow regime:
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: � Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: -. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
❑ Bed and banks
❑ OI IWM6 (check all indicators that apply):
❑ clear, natural line impressed on the bank
❑
the presence of litter and debris
❑ changes in the character of soil
❑
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
❑ shelving
❑
the presence of wrack line
❑ vegetation matted down, bent, or absent
❑
sediment sorting
❑ leaf litter disturbed or washed away
❑
scour
❑ sediment deposition
❑
multiple observed or predicted flow events
❑ water staining
❑
abrupt change in plant community
❑ other (list):
❑ Discontinuous OHWM.7 Explain:
If factors other than the OIIWM were used to determine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
High Tide Line indicated by: 17 Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
❑ oil or scum line along shore objects ❑ survey to available datum,
❑ fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore) ❑ physical markings;
❑ physical markings /characteristics ❑ vegetation lines /changes in vegetation types.
❑ tidal gauges
❑ other (list):
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film, water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
6A natural or man -made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
'Ibid.

(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width):
❑ Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatic /wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non -TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size: acres
Wetland type. Explain:
Wetland quality. Explain:
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non -TNW:
Flow is: Pick Lisi. Explain:
Surface flow is: -
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: -. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non -TNW:
❑ Directly abutting
❑ Not directly abutting
❑ Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
❑ Ecological connection. Explain:
❑ Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are 'ck List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are ck List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: Mlist.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the � floodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface, water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
❑ Vegetation type /percent cover. Explain:
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatic /wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if an�
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis:
Approximately ( ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.

For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and /or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
Significant nexus findings for non -RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
fmdings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section IILD:
Significant nexus findings for non -RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non -RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain fmdings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section IILD:
Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go
Section IILD:
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
TNWs: linear feet width (ft), Or, acres.
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year -round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial: A NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11 was completed to reach this conclusion.
Q Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally:

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: 115 linear feet 5.Owidth (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Non -RPWs8 that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section IILC.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
T7 Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
® Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year- round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW: Wetlands have direct hydrologic connection to the stream which flows directly into
TNWs.
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section lILB and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW:
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: 0.13 acres.
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section 111. C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.9
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
❑ Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
❑ Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1 -6), or
❑ Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA- STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): 10
I which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
❑ from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
❑ which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
❑ Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
❑ Other factors. Explain:
'See Footnote # 3.
9 To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section IILD.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps /EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.

Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
❑ Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Wetlands: acres.
F. NON - JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
❑ Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
❑ Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
Ll Other: (explain, if not covered above):
Provide acreage estimates for non - jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
judgment (check all that apply):
M Non - wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
❑ Lakes /ponds: acres.
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
Non - wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
❑ Lakes /ponds: acres.
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:
Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
® Office concurs with data sheets /delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets /delineation report.
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:
❑ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data.
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
® U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:USGS TopoTile023 1:24000 Source:www.ncdot.org.
® USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: NRCS Soil Survey of Watauga County GIS data NC189.
❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
❑ State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
❑ FEMA/FIRM maps:
❑ 100 -year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
® Photographs: ® Aerial (Name & Date): 2005 Watauga/Ashe County Source: www.nconemap.com .
or ❑ Other (Name & Date):
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
❑ Applicable /supporting case law:
❑ Applicable /supporting scientific literature:
❑ Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Project/Site: Boone Water System improvements CitylCounty: Boone, Watauga Sampling Date: 11 -,! u 1y -2011 �^
Applicant/Owner: Town Of Bootle State: NC
Sampling Point: _Upland
Investigator(s): W • Marotti Section, Township, Range: o
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): HIIIslope Local relief (concave, convex, none):
Concave Slope ( °%°): 1 -2 /o
Datum: NA� $3
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR Lat: Long:
NWI classification:
Soil Map Unit Name: NA
Are climatic I hydrolo is conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
✓
Are Vegetation , Soil El , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No
❑
Are Vegetation n, Soil E, or Hydrology El naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ❑ No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes � No 0 within a Wetland? Yes ❑ No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes F—I No 0
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Seconda Indicators minimum of two re uired
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Prima Indicators minimum of one is re uired� check all that a l
=Surface Soil Cracks (66)
=Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
=Surface Water (Al)
❑ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
= Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
ODrainage Patterns (B 10)
=Saturation (A3)
=Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
=Moss Trim Lines (B16)
=Water Marks (B1)
=Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
=Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
=Sediment Deposits (62)
❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Cra ish Burrows (C8)
Yf
OSaturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Drift Deposits (93)
=Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
=Thin Muck Surface (C7)
=Other (Explain in Remarks)
=Stunted or Stressed Plants (131)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
=Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
=Shallow Aquilard (D3)
=Microtopographic Relief (D4)
=Water- Stained Leaves (B9)
=Aquatic Fauna (B13)
OFAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes ❑
Water Table Present? Yes ❑
No ❑ Depth (inches):
No ❑ Depth (inches):
✓
Yes ❑
No Depth (inches): Wetland
Hydrology Present? Yes No
Saturation Present?
Ja
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Interim Version
US Army Corps of Engineers

VEGETATION (Four Strata) —Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: Upland WE
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )
% Cover Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
(A)
1
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
2.
Total Number of Dominant
(B)
3.
Species Across All Strata:
4.
Percent of Dominant Species (�B)
5.
_
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
6.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7•
_ _
Total ° /° Cover of: Multiply bv: —
8.
_ _
OBL species x 1
SaplingIShrub Stratum {Plot size:
= Total Cover
)
FACW species x 2 =
1
FAC species x 3 =
2
FACU species x 4 =
3
-
UPL species x 5 =
4
Column Totals: (A) (B)
5.
- -
Prevalence Index = B/A = ��
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
a.
2 - Dominan Test is >50%
� ce
9.
_
F-13 - Prevalence Index is 53.0
10.
_
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
= Total Cover
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
Fl Problematic HydrophytieVegetation' (Explain)
1.
2.
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
3.
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
5.
Tree -Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
height (DBH), regardless of
6
more in diameter at breast
7
height.
8•
Sapling /Shrub- Woody plants, excluding vines, less
9,
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
10.
Herb - All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, regardless
11.
_ _
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
12.
Woody vine -All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
=Total Cover
height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
)
1.
2.
3.
4
5.
- -
Hydrophytic
Vegetation n
yes I� No EL
6.
Present?
= Total Cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Interim Version

Sampling Point: Upland
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features Remarks
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type _ Loc Texture
'Type: C= Concentration, D =De letion, RM= Reduced Matrix, MS= Masked Sand grains. Uouauu11. F—
Indicators for Problematic Hydric So
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol (Al)
= Dark Surface (S7)
= 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147}
= Histic Epipedon (A2)
= Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
=Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
= Black Histic (A3)
= Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
= Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
= Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
= Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
(MLRA 136, 147)
=Stratified Layers (A5)
= Depleted Matrix (F3)
Red Parent Material (TF2)
=2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
= Redox Dark Surface (F6)
= Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
= Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
= Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
= Other (Explain in Remarks)
= Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
= Redox Depressions (F8)
=Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
= Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
= Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
MLRA 136)
= Urnbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must.be present,
0 Sandy Redox (S5)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils F19 MLRA 148
� mon ( ) ( )
unless disturbed or problematic.
=Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Z
LHydriSlil
Depth (inches):
Present? Yes No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont– Interim Version

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Project/Site: Boone Water System Improvements City!County: Boone, Watauga Sampling Date: 11 -July -2011 �11
WE
ApplicantlOwner:
Town of Boone State: NC Sampling Point: wetland
Investigator(s): W • Marotti
Landform (hillsiope, terrace, etc.):
Hillslope
Section, Township, Range:
Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR Lat: 36.245987 N Long: - 81.542310 W
Soil Map Unit Name: SwC - Saunook- Nikwasi complex, 2 -15 percent slopes NWI classification: NA
�/ k
Slope ( %): 1 -2%
Datum: NAD 83
Are climatic / hydro�lo is conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remar s.) ❑
Are Vegetation l!J , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ia No
Are Vegetation �, Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Remarks:
Yes 0 No ❑ Is the Sampled Area ❑
Yes ❑ No ❑ within a Wetland? Yes No
Yes ❑✓ No
HYDROLOGY
Secondary Indicators minimum of two re aired
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Prima Indicators minimum of one is re uired�
check all that apply)
=Surface Soil Cracks (66)
=Surface Water (Al)
=True Aquatic Plants (1314)
=Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (BB)
0 High Water Table (A2)
= Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
=Drainage Patterns (B10)
=Saturation (A3)
= Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
=Moss Trim Lines (916)
=Water Marks (131)
= Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
=Dry- Season Wafer Table (C2)
=Sediment Deposits (B2)
=Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑Crayfish Burrows (CB)
=Drift Deposits (B3)
= Thin Muck Surface (C7)
=Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
=Algal Mat or Crust (94)
= Other (Explain in Remarks)
=Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
=Iron Deposits (135)
=Geomorphic Position (D2)
=Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
=Shallow Aquitard (D3)
=Water - Stained Leaves (1313)
QMicrotopographic Relief (D4)
=Aquatic Fauna (1313)
=FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes =
No _a Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes=
No ❑ Depth (inches):
No
Saturation Present? Yes ❑
No ❑ Depth (inches): Wetland
Hydrology Present? Yes
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers
Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Remarks: (Include photo
or on a
= Total Cover Woody vine
height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
=Total Cover
Yes 2L No 0—
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version
Wetland WE
VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific
names of plants.
Sampling Point:
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )
% Cover Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species A
( )
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: _�—
1
2.
Total Number of Dominant
(B)
3.
-
Species Across All Strata: _
4•
Percent of Dominant Species
(A1B)
5.
-
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
6.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7.
Total % Cover of: Multi I b :
B
OBL species x 1
= Total Cover
�� = �1
FACW species x 2
Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
)
x 3 =
1.
-
FAC species
FACU species x4
2.
3.
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
4
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A = �-
6-
Hydrophytic Vegetation In
7.
1 Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
2 - Dominance Test is >54%
9•
� 3 - Prevalence index is 53.4'
10.
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
= Total Cover
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
Probiematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1. Gaalium aparine
- FACU
2. Clematis virginiana
FAC
Indicators of hydnc soil and wetland hydrology must
3 Polygonum sagittatum
OBL
be present, unless disturbed or problematic,
4_ impatiens capensis
FACW
gefinitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
5. Scirpus pungens
Carex lurida
FACW
_ OBL
Tree -- Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
height (DBH), regardless of
6.
more in diameter at breast
7 Mentha piperita
FACW
height.
g. Carex gynandra
FACW
SaplinglShrub— Woody plants, excluding vines, less
g• Lysimachia terrestris
OBL
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
14. Eupatorium maculatum
FACW
Herb regardless
Herb —All herbaceous (non - woody) p re 9
11.
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
12.
— All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Remarks: (Include photo
or on a
= Total Cover Woody vine
height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
=Total Cover
Yes 2L No 0—
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

Sampling Point: Wetland WE
vProfile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) _ % Color (moist) % Type Loc Texture Remarks
10YR411 80 5YR416 20
'Type: C= Concentration, D =De letion, F
Hydric Soil Indicators:
OHistosol (A1)
Q Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Q Stratified Layers (A5)
�2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
QThick Dark Surface (Al2)
QSandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (85)
Q Stripped Matrix (S6)
Type:
Depth (inches):
educed Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains. `LOCatlon: r
Indicators for P° robb le mat i c Hydric Soils':
0 Dark Surface (87)
0 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
0 Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
Q Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
0 Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Q Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
Q Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Q Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
Q Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Red Parent Material (TF2)
Q Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Q Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Q Redox Depressions (F8)
Q Other (Explain in Remarks)
Q iron- Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
Q Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Q Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes 2— No 11
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont —Interim Version

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION L• BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Town of Boone, Proposed Water System Improvements
(UT - Laxon Creek)
State:NC County /parish/borough: Watauga City: Brownwood
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 36.235666° 1, Long. - 81.562494° �.
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: South Fork New River
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: South Fork New River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): New River 05050001020030
Check if map /diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is /are available upon request.
Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc... ) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
Field Determination. Date(s): 7 -19 -2011
SECTION IL• SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There r "navigable waters of the U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review area. [Required]
❑ Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There M "waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply): i
TNWs, including territorial seas
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
® Relatively permanent waters (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑ Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non - wetland waters: 80 linear feet: 4.Owidth (ft) and/or 0.01 acres.
Wetlands: acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on:
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
2. Non - regulated waters /wetlands (check if applicable):3
' Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
2 For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year -round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally'
(e.g., typically 3 months).
3 Supporting documentation is presented in Section IILF.

Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain:

SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete
Section IILA.1 and Section IH.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections HLA.1 and 2
and Section 1H.D.1.; otherwise, see Section 1H.B below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacenf':
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non - navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year -round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year -round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section IILD.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section IILD.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbody4 is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section IILB.1 for
the tributary, Section IILB.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section IILB.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section IILC below.
1. Characteristics of non -TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size:
Drainage area:
Average annual rainfall: inches
Average annual snowfall inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
❑ Tributary flows directly into TNW.
❑ Tributary flows through � tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are Pick List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List river miles from RPW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNWs:
Tributary stream order, if known:
4 Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and
West.
5 Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.

(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apps
Tributary is: ❑ Natural
❑ Artificial (man- made). Explain:
❑ Manipulated (man - altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: feet
Average depth: feet
Average side slopes: --
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
❑ Silts ❑ Sands
❑ Cobbles ❑ Gravel
❑ Bedrock ❑ Vegetation. Type /% cover:
❑ Other. Explain:
❑ Concrete
❑ Muck
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain:
Presence of run/riffle/ op of complexes. Explain:
Tributary geometry:
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: Pick List
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year:
Describe flow regime:
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: � Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: -. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
❑ Bed and banks
❑ OI IWM6 (check all indicators that apply):
❑ clear, natural line impressed on the bank
❑
the presence of litter and debris
❑ changes in the character of soil
❑
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
❑ shelving
❑
the presence of wrack line
❑ vegetation matted down, bent, or absent
❑
sediment sorting
❑ leaf litter disturbed or washed away
❑
scour
❑ sediment deposition
❑
multiple observed or predicted flow events
❑ water staining
❑
abrupt change in plant community
❑ other (list):
❑ Discontinuous OHWM.7 Explain:
If factors other than the OIIWM were used to determine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
High Tide Line indicated by: 17 Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
❑ oil or scum line along shore objects ❑ survey to available datum,
❑ fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore) ❑ physical markings;
❑ physical markings /characteristics ❑ vegetation lines /changes in vegetation types.
❑ tidal gauges
❑ other (list):
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film, water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
6A natural or man -made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
'Ibid.

(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width):
❑ Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatic /wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non -TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size: acres
Wetland type. Explain:
Wetland quality. Explain:
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non -TNW:
Flow is: Pick Lisi. Explain:
Surface flow is: -
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: -. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non -TNW:
❑ Directly abutting
❑ Not directly abutting
❑ Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
❑ Ecological connection. Explain:
❑ Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are 'ck List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are ck List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: Mlist.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the � floodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface, water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
❑ Vegetation type /percent cover. Explain:
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatic /wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if an�
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis:
Approximately ( ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.

For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and /or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
Significant nexus findings for non -RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
fmdings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section IILD:
Significant nexus findings for non -RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non -RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain fmdings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section IILD:
Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go
Section IILD:
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
TNWs: linear feet width (ft), Or, acres.
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year -round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial: A NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11 was completed to reach this conclusion.
Q Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally:

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: 80 linear feet 4.Owidth (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Non -RPWs8 that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section 111. C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
T7 Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
Q Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year- round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section IILB and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW:
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
El Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III. C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III. C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.9
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
❑ Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1 -6), or
❑ Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA- STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): 10
Irl which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
❑ from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
❑ which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
❑ Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
❑ Other factors. Explain:
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
'See Footnote # 3.
9 To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section IILD.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps /EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
EJ Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
F. NON - JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
❑ Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
Other: (explain, if not covered above):
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
udgment (check all that apply)
Non - wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
❑ Lakes /ponds: acres.
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
EJ Non - wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
❑ Lakes /ponds: acres.
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
® Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:
® Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
® Office concurs with data sheets /delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets /delineation report.
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:
❑ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data.
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
® U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:USGS TopoTile023 1:24000 Source:www.ncdot.org.
® USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: NRCS Soil Survey of Watauga County GIS data NC189.
❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
❑ State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
❑ FEMA/FIRM maps:
❑ 100 -year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
® Photographs: ® Aerial (Name & Date): 2005 Watauga/Ashe County Source: www.nconemap.com .
or ❑ Other (Name & Date):
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
❑ Applicable /supporting case law:
❑ Applicable /supporting scientific literature:
❑ Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION L• BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Town of Boone, Proposed Water System Improvements
(Wetland WF )
State:NC County /parish/borough: Watauga City: Brownwood
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 36.226693° 1, Long. - 81.606738° �.
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: South Fork New River
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: South Fork New River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): New River 05050001020030
Check if map /diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is /are available upon request.
Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc... ) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
Field Determination. Date(s): 7 -19 -2011
SECTION IL• SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There r "navigable waters of the U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review area. [Required]
❑ Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There M "waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply): i
TNWs, including territorial seas
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
❑ Relatively permanent waters (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑ Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non - wetland waters: linear feet: width (ft) and/or acres.
Wetlands: 0.17 acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on:
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
2. Non - regulated waters /wetlands (check if applicable):3
' Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
2 For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year -round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally'
(e.g., typically 3 months).
3 Supporting documentation is presented in Section IILF.

Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain:

SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete
Section II1A.1 and Section IH.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections HLA.1 and 2
and Section 1H.D.1.; otherwise, see Section 1H.B below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacenf':
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non - navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year -round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year -round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section IILD.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section IILD.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbody4 is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section IILB.1 for
the tributary, Section IILB.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section IILB.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section IILC below.
1. Characteristics of non -TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: 0.03square MIN
Drainage area: 0.46 Pick List
Average annual rainfall: 51.5 inches
Average annual snowfall inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
® Tributary flows directly into TNW.
❑ Tributary flows through - tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are 1 -2 river miles from TNW.
Project waters are 1 (or= river miles from RPW.
Project waters are 1 -2 aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are 1 (or less] aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNWs: Wetland WF is the headwwaters to Brown Branch which flows directly into South Fork
New River.
4 Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and
West.
5 Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.

Tributary stream order, if known: 1.
(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apps
Tributary is: ® Natural
❑ Artificial (man- made). Explain:
❑ Manipulated (man - altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: 4.0 feet
Average depth: 1.0 feet
Average side slopes: a
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
® Silts ® Sands
® Cobbles ® Gravel
❑ Bedrock ❑ Vegetation. Type /% cover:
❑ Other. Explain:
❑ Concrete
❑ Muck
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain: Stable.
Presence of run/riffle/ ool complexes. Explain:
Tributary geometry: can ering
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: -
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year:
Describe flow regime: Brown Branch flows west - northwest before entering the South Fork New River.
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: �. Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: -. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
® Bed and banks
® OI IWM6 (check all indicators that apply):
® clear, natural line impressed on the bank
®
the presence of litter and debris
® changes in the character of soil
❑
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
® shelving
®
the presence of wrack line
❑ vegetation matted down, bent, or absent
®
sediment sorting
® leaf litter disturbed or washed away
®
scour
❑ sediment deposition
®
multiple observed or predicted flow events
® water staining
❑
abrupt change in plant community
❑ other (list):
❑ Discontinuous OHWM.7 Explain:
If factors other than the OIIWM were used to determine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
High Tide Line indicated by: ❑ Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
❑ oil or scum line along shore objects ❑ survey to available datum,
❑ fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore) ❑ physical markings;
❑ physical markings /characteristics ❑ vegetation lines /changes in vegetation types.
❑ tidal gauges
❑ other (list):
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film, water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain: Clear.
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
6A natural or man -made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
'Ibid.

(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
® Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width): 15.
❑ Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatic /wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non -TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size: 0.17acres
Wetland type. Explain: Roadside ditch depression.
Wetland quality. Explain: fair.
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain: No.
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non -TNW:
Flow is: dal flow. Explain:
Surface flow is: -
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: -. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non -TNW:
❑ Directly abutting
® Not directly abutting
❑ Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
❑ Ecological connection. Explain:
® Separated by berm/barrier. Explain: Wetland is seperated by DOT roadway. Brown Branch is just downstream of
road crossing.
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are M river miles from TNW.
Project waters are 1 -2 aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: &tland to navigable water.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the floodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface, water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain: Wetland is within the DOT HWY 421 ROW. Surface water is minimal..
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
❑ Vegetation type /percent cover. Explain:
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatic /wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis: Pick List
Approximately ( ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.

For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and /or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
Significant nexus findings for non -RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
fmdings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section IILD:
Significant nexus findings for non -RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non -RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section IILD:
Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go tc
Section IILD: Wetland WF is the headwaters to Brown Branch. This wetland is seperated by aroad intersection, however still is
hydrologically connected by a culvert..
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
TNWs: linear feet width (ft), Or, acres.
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year -round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial:
Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally:

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
❑ Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Non -RPWs8 that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section IILC.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
❑ Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
EJ Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year- round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section lILB and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW:
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: 0.17acres.
Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section 111. C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.9
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
❑ Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
❑ Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1 -6), or
❑ Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA- STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): 10
I which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
❑ from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
❑ which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
❑ Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
❑ Other factors. Explain:
'See Footnote # 3.
9 To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section IILD.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps /EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.

Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
❑ Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Wetlands: acres.
F. NON - JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
❑ Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
❑ Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
Ll Other: (explain, if not covered above):
Provide acreage estimates for non - jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
judgment (check all that apply):
M Non - wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
❑ Lakes /ponds: acres.
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
Non - wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
❑ Lakes /ponds: acres.
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:
Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
® Office concurs with data sheets /delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets /delineation report.
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:
❑ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data.
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
® U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:USGS TopoTile023 1:24000 Source:www.ncdot.org.
® USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: NRCS Soil Survey of Watauga County GIS data NC189.
❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
❑ State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
❑ FEMA/FIRM maps:
❑ 100 -year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
® Photographs: ® Aerial (Name & Date): 2005 Watauga/Ashe County Source: www.nconemap.com .
or ❑ Other (Name & Date):
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
❑ Applicable /supporting case law:
❑ Applicable /supporting scientific literature:
❑ Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
11 -July -2011
Proiect[Site: Boone Water System Improvements Cityrcounty: Boone, Watauga Sampling Date: _—
Applicant/Owner:
Town of Boone State: NC Sampling Point: Upland WF
Investigator(s): W Marottl Section, Township, Range: 1 -2 /
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Hillslo a Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope ( %):
NAD 83
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR Lat: 36.226595 N Long: -81.606805 W Datum:
Soil Map unit Name: SnC - Saunook loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes NWI classification: NA
Are climatic 1 hydrolo is conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes LZJ No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ❑ No
❑
Are Vegetation Jam, Soil n, or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes ❑ No ❑
Yes ❑ No ❑
Yes No 0
Is the Sampled Area 11 No Z
within a Wetland? Yes
HYDROLOGY
Secornda.y indicators (mini7re
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
=Surface Soil Cracks (BSurface
Prima Indicators minimum of one is re uired�
Water (A1)
check all that a I
=True Aquatic Plants (B14)
=Sparsely Vegetated CoHigh
Water Table (A2)
= Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
=Drainage Patterns (B1Saturation
(A3)
=Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
=Moss Trim Lines (B16)
=Water Marks (B1)
= Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
=Dry- Season Water Tab
=Sediment Deposits (B2)
= Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
=Crayfish Burrows (CB)
=Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
=Drift Deposits (133)
=Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
=Thin Muck Surface (C7)
=Other (Explain in Remarks)
OStunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
=Iron Deposits (135)
=Geomorphic Position (D2)
= Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (67)
=Shallow Aquitard (D3)
=Water- Stained Leaves (139)
=Microtopographic Relief (D4)
=Aquatic Fauna (B13)
=FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes g
No ❑ Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes =
No ❑ Depth (inches):
Yes ❑ No
Saturation Present? Yes O
No ❑ Depth (inches): Wetland
Hydrology Present?
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Eastern Mountains and Piedmont— Interim Version
US Army Corps of Engineers

US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont —Interim Version
Upland nd WF
VEGETATION (Four Strata) —Use scientific names of
plants.
Sampling Point:
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test Worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) % Cover
Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
(A)
1
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
2.
Total Number of Dominant
(B)
3.
Species Across All Strata:
4.
_
Percent of Dominant Species (,q�B}
5.
That Are 013L, FACW, or FAC: __�
6.
prevalence Index worksheet:
7.
Total % Cover of: Multiply b
8.
09L species x 1 = ��
Sapling/-Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
= Total Cover
FACW species x 2 =
1
FAC species x 3 =
2.
-
FACU species x 4 =
3
UP species x 5 =
4
Column Totals: (A) (B)
5.
Prevalence Index = B1A= f�
6.
_
Hydrophytic Vegetation indicators:
7.
Ej 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
2 - Dominance Test is X50%
9.
❑ 3 Prevalence Index is s3.0
10.
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
= Total Cover
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herr Stratum (Plot size: )
Fl Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
2.
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
3.
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
5.
_ _
Tree —Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
height (DSH), regardless of
6•
more in diameter at breast
7
height.
8.
Sapling /Shrub — Woody plants, excluding vines, less
g,
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
10.
Herb —All herbaceous (non- woody) p lants, regardless
11.
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
12.
Woody vine —All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
=Total Cover
height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
2.
3.
4,
5.
-
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Yes No
6
Present?
= Total Cover
Remarks: (include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont —Interim Version

WIF
Sampling Point: VAisn
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features -01­
t)
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (mois % Type to Texture
1 OYR416
'T e: C =Concentration, D =De letion, F
Hydric Soil Indicators:
0 Histosol (Al)
[DHistic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
[--]Sandy Mucky Mineral (Si) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
0 Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
0Sandy Red ox (S5)
OStripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
educed Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL =Pore Lining M= Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils 9:
0 Dark Surface (S7)
0 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
0 Polyvalue Below Surface (S 8) (MLRA 147, 148)
0 Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
[] Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
0 Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
0 Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
(MLRA 136, 147)
0 Depleted Matrix (F3)
0 Redox Dark Surface (F6)
0 Red Parent Material (TF2)
0 Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
0 Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
0 Redox Depressions (F8)
0 Other (Explain in Remarks)
[] Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
0 Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
'Indicators hytic arid
0 Piedmont Flood plain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
we hydrology be present
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes Ll No 0
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont– Interim Version

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM -- Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Project/Site: Boone Water System Improvements City/County: Boone, Watauga Sampling Date:
11 -July -2011
Town of Boone State: NC
Sampling Point:
Wetland WF
Applicant/Owner:
investigator(s): W. Marottl
Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR Lat: 36.226682 N Long: - 81.606722 W
Soil Map Unit Name: Snc - Saunook loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes, SnD - Saunook loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes NWI classification: NA
ks )
Slope ( %): 1 -2%
Datum: NAD 83
Are climatic I hydrolo is conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (if no, explain in Remar ❑
Are Vegetation � , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes
✓❑ No
Are Vegetation n, Soil Ea, or Hydrology –F—L naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important feat"res, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology I
Yes No ❑
Yes No
Yes No ❑
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that a
is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
=Surface Water (A1)
-]True Aquatic Plants (BI 4)
=High Water Table (A2)
= Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
=Saturation (A3)
=Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
=Water Marks (131)
= Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
=Sediment Deposits (132)
❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (06)
=Drift Deposits (133)
=Thin Muck Surface (07)
=Algal Mat or Crust (134)
=Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Iron Deposits (135)
=Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
=Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
=Aquatic Fauna (W3)
Surface Water Present? Yes No ❑ Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes ❑ No ❑ Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes ❑ No ❑ Depth (inches):
(includes caoillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photo:
Remarks:
Yes a No ❑
;e Soil Cracks (B6)
ely Vegetated Concave surface (B8)
rge Patterns (1310)
Trim Lines (B16)
eason Water Table (C2)
sh Burrows (C8)
ation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
ed or Stressed Plants (D1)
lorphic Position (D2)
ow Aquitard (D3)
,topographic Relief (D4)
Neutral Test (D5)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes Z No a
, previous inspections),
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – interim Version

US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont —Interim Version
Wetland WF
VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of
plants.
Sampling Point:
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) % Cover
Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species (A}
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAG:
1
2.
Total Number of Dominant
B
3.
Species Across All Strata:
4.
Percent of Dominant Species - (A!B)
6.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: �—
6
- -
Prevalence index worksheet:
7.
Total % Cover of: Multiply by�
8.
OBL species x1 =�—
= Total Cover
FACW species x 2 =
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
x 3 =
1, Salix nigra
OBL
FAC species _�
2.
FACU species x 4 =
3
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (S)
4
5.
Prevalence Index = BIA = ,
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
F71 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8
❑ 2 - Dominance Test is X50%
9
3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
10.
❑ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
= Total Cover
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation (Explain)
Typha domingensis Pers.
OBL
2. Juncus effusus
FACW
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
3.
_
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
5.
Tree —Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in: (7.6 cm) or
breast height (DBH), regardless of
6.
more in diameter at
7
height.
8•
Sapling /Shrub —Woody plants, excluding vines, less
g,
-
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
i 0.
Herb — All herbaceous (non - woody) plants, regardless
11.
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
12.
Woody vine —All woody vines greater than 3.28 sn
=Total Cover
height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
2.
3.
4.
5,
-
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
6.
= Total Cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) .
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont —Interim Version

enii
Sampling Point: Wetland WF
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type Loc Texture Re arks
10YR5/1 85 5YR3/4 15
RM= Reduced Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains.
Hydric Soil indicators:
= Histosol (Al)
QHistic Epipedon (A2)
Q Black Histic (A3)
®Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
Q 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
®Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
QSandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
=Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
=Sandy Redox (S5)
QStripped Matrix (S6)
Type:
Depth (inches):
0 Dark Surface (87)
0 Poiyvaiue Below Surface (SB) (MLRA 147, 148)
Q Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
Q Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Q Depleted Matrix (F3)
Q Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Q Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Q Redox Depressions (FS)
Q Iron - Manganese Masses (1712) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
Q Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
Q Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1719) (MLRA 148)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Sol
0 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Q Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Q Piedmont Floodpiain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
Q Red Parent Material (TF2)
Q Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Q Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes Z No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — interim Version

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION L• BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Town of Boone, Proposed Water System Improvements
(Hardin Creek)
State:NC County /parish/borough: Watauga City: Brownwood
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 36.211749° 1, Long. - 81.647234° �.
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: South Fork New River
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: South Fork New River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): New River 05050001020030
Check if map /diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is /are available upon request.
Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc... ) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
Field Determination. Date(s): 7 -19 -2011
SECTION IL• SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There r "navigable waters of the U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review area. [Required]
❑ Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There M "waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply): i
TNWs, including territorial seas
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
® Relatively permanent waters (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑ Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non - wetland waters: 105.0 linear feet: 14.Owidth (ft) and/or 0.03 acres.
Wetlands: acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on:
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
2. Non - regulated waters /wetlands (check if applicable):3
' Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
2 For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year -round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally'
(e.g., typically 3 months).
s Supporting documentation is presented in Section IILF.

Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain:

SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete
Section IILA.1 and Section IH.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections HLA.1 and 2
and Section 1H.D.1.; otherwise, see Section 1H.B below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacenf':
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non - navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year -round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year -round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section IILD.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section IILD.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbody4 is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section IILB.1 for
the tributary, Section IILB.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section IILB.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section IILC below.
1. Characteristics of non -TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size:
Drainage area:
Average annual rainfall: inches
Average annual snowfall inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
❑ Tributary flows directly into TNW.
❑ Tributary flows through � tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are Pick List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List river miles from RPW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNWs:
Tributary stream order, if known:
4 Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and
West.
5 Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.

(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apps
Tributary is: ❑ Natural
❑ Artificial (man- made). Explain:
❑ Manipulated (man - altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: feet
Average depth: feet
Average side slopes: --
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
❑ Silts ❑ Sands
❑ Cobbles ❑ Gravel
❑ Bedrock ❑ Vegetation. Type /% cover:
❑ Other. Explain:
❑ Concrete
❑ Muck
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain:
Presence of run/riffle/ op of complexes. Explain:
Tributary geometry:
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: Pick List
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year:
Describe flow regime:
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: � Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: -. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
❑ Bed and banks
❑ OI IWM6 (check all indicators that apply):
❑ clear, natural line impressed on the bank
❑
the presence of litter and debris
❑ changes in the character of soil
❑
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
❑ shelving
❑
the presence of wrack line
❑ vegetation matted down, bent, or absent
❑
sediment sorting
❑ leaf litter disturbed or washed away
❑
scour
❑ sediment deposition
❑
multiple observed or predicted flow events
❑ water staining
❑
abrupt change in plant community
❑ other (list):
❑ Discontinuous OHWM.7 Explain:
If factors other than the OIIWM were used to determine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
High Tide Line indicated by: 17 Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
❑ oil or scum line along shore objects ❑ survey to available datum,
❑ fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore) ❑ physical markings;
❑ physical markings /characteristics ❑ vegetation lines /changes in vegetation types.
❑ tidal gauges
❑ other (list):
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film, water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
6A natural or man -made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
'Ibid.

(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width):
❑ Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatic /wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non -TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size: acres
Wetland type. Explain:
Wetland quality. Explain:
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non -TNW:
Flow is: Pick Lisi. Explain:
Surface flow is: -
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: -. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non -TNW:
❑ Directly abutting
❑ Not directly abutting
❑ Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
❑ Ecological connection. Explain:
❑ Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are 'ck List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are ck List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: Mlist.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the � floodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface, water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
❑ Vegetation type /percent cover. Explain:
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatic /wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if an�
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis:
Approximately ( ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.

For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and /or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
Significant nexus findings for non -RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
fmdings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section IILD:
Significant nexus findings for non -RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non -RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain fmdings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section IILD:
Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go
Section IILD:
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
TNWs: linear feet width (ft), Or, acres.
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year -round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial: A NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11 was completed to reach this conclusion.
Q Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally:

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: 105.0 linear feetl4.0width (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Non -RPWs8 that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section IILC.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
T7 Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
Q Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year- round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section lILB and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW:
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
El Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section 111. C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III. C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.9
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
❑ Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1 -6), or
❑ Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA- STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): 10
Irl which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
❑ from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
❑ which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
❑ Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
❑ Other factors. Explain:
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
'See Footnote # 3.
9 To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section IILD.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps /EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
EJ Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
F. NON - JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
❑ Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
Other: (explain, if not covered above):
Provide acreage estimates for non - jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
udgment (check all that apply)
Non - wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
❑ Lakes /ponds: acres.
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
EJ Non - wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
❑ Lakes /ponds: acres.
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
® Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:
® Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
® Office concurs with data sheets /delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets /delineation report.
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:
❑ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data.
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
® U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:USGS TopoTile023 1:24000 Source:www.ncdot.org.
® USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: NRCS Soil Survey of Watauga County GIS data NC189.
❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
❑ State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
❑ FEMA/FIRM maps:
❑ 100 -year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
® Photographs: ® Aerial (Name & Date): 2005 Watauga/Ashe County Source: www.nconemap.com .
or ❑ Other (Name & Date):
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
❑ Applicable /supporting case law:
❑ Applicable /supporting scientific literature:
❑ Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION L• BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Town of Boone, Proposed Water System Improvements (South
Fork New River)
State:NC County/parish/borough: Watauga / Ashe City: Brownwood
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 36.208414'1, Long. - 81.653455° �.
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: South Fork New River
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: South Fork New River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): New River 05050001020030
Check if map /diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is /are available upon request.
Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc... ) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
Field Determination. Date(s): 7 -19 -2011
SECTION IL• SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Tre "navigable waters of the U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the review
area. [Required]
❑ Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There M "waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply): i
TNWs, including territorial seas
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
Relatively permanent waters (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑ Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non - wetland waters: 70.0 linear feet: 35.0 width (ft) and/or 0.06 acres.
Wetlands: acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on:
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
2. Non - regulated waters /wetlands (check if applicable):3
' Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
2 For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year -round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally'
(e.g., typically 3 months).
s Supporting documentation is presented in Section IILF.

Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain:

SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete
Section IILA.1 and Section IH.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections HLA.1 and 2
and Section 1H.D.1.; otherwise, see Section 1H.B below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW: South Fork New River.
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacenf':
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non - navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year -round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year -round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section IILD.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section IILD.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbody4 is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section IILB.1 for
the tributary, Section IILB.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section IILB.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section IILC below.
1. Characteristics of non -TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size:
Drainage area:
Average annual rainfall: inches
Average annual snowfall inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
❑ Tributary flows directly into TNW.
❑ Tributary flows through � tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are Pick List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List river miles from RPW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNWs:
Tributary stream order, if known:
4 Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and
West.
5 Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.

(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apps
Tributary is: ❑ Natural
❑ Artificial (man- made). Explain:
❑ Manipulated (man - altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: feet
Average depth: feet
Average side slopes: --
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
❑ Silts ❑ Sands
❑ Cobbles ❑ Gravel
❑ Bedrock ❑ Vegetation. Type /% cover:
❑ Other. Explain:
❑ Concrete
❑ Muck
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain:
Presence of run/riffle/ op of complexes. Explain:
Tributary geometry:
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: Pick List
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year:
Describe flow regime:
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: � Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: -. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
❑ Bed and banks
❑ OI IWM6 (check all indicators that apply):
❑ clear, natural line impressed on the bank
❑
the presence of litter and debris
❑ changes in the character of soil
❑
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
❑ shelving
❑
the presence of wrack line
❑ vegetation matted down, bent, or absent
❑
sediment sorting
❑ leaf litter disturbed or washed away
❑
scour
❑ sediment deposition
❑
multiple observed or predicted flow events
❑ water staining
❑
abrupt change in plant community
❑ other (list):
❑ Discontinuous OHWM.7 Explain:
If factors other than the OIIWM were used to determine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
High Tide Line indicated by: 17 Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
❑ oil or scum line along shore objects ❑ survey to available datum,
❑ fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore) ❑ physical markings;
❑ physical markings /characteristics ❑ vegetation lines /changes in vegetation types.
❑ tidal gauges
❑ other (list):
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film, water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
6A natural or man -made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
'Ibid.

(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width):
❑ Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatic /wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non -TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size: acres
Wetland type. Explain:
Wetland quality. Explain:
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non -TNW:
Flow is: Pick Lisi. Explain:
Surface flow is: -
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: -. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non -TNW:
❑ Directly abutting
❑ Not directly abutting
❑ Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
❑ Ecological connection. Explain:
❑ Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are 'ck List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are ck List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: Mlist.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the � floodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface, water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
❑ Vegetation type /percent cover. Explain:
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatic /wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if an�
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis:
Approximately ( ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.

For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and /or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
Significant nexus findings for non -RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
fmdings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section IILD:
Significant nexus findings for non -RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non -RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain fmdings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section IILD:
Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go
Section IILD:
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
® TNWs: 70 linear feet 35 width (ft), Or, 0.06 acres.
❑ Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year -round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial:
❑ Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally:

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
El Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Non -RPWs8 that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section IILC.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
T7 Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
Q Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year- round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section IILB and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW:
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
El Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III. C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.9
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
❑ Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1 -6), or
❑ Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA- STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): 10
Irl which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
❑ from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
❑ which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
❑ Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
❑ Other factors. Explain:
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
'See Footnote # 3.
9 To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section IILD.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps /EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
EJ Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
F. NON - JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
❑ Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
Other: (explain, if not covered above):
Provide acreage estimates for non - jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
udgment (check all that apply)
Non - wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
❑ Lakes /ponds: acres.
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
EJ Non - wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
❑ Lakes /ponds: acres.
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
® Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:
® Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
® Office concurs with data sheets /delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets /delineation report.
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:
❑ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data.
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
® U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:USGS TopoTile023 1:24000 Source:www.ncdot.org.
® USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:NRCS Soil Survey of Watauga County GIS data NC189.
❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
❑ State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
❑ FEMA/FIRM maps:
❑ 100 -year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
® Photographs: ® Aerial (Name & Date): 2005 Watauga/Ashe County Source: www.nconemap.com .
or ❑ Other (Name & Date):
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
❑ Applicable /supporting case law:
❑ Applicable /supporting scientific literature:
❑ Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION L• BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Town of Boone, Proposed Water System Improvements
(UT to South FOrmk New River)
State:NC County /parish/borough: Watauga City: Brownwood
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 36.207701 ° 1, Long. - 81.652818° �.
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: South Fork New River
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: South Fork New River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): New River 05050001020030
Check if map /diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is /are available upon request.
Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc... ) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
Field Determination. Date(s): 7 -19 -2011
SECTION IL• SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There r "navigable waters of the U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review area. [Required]
❑ Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There M "waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply): i
TNWs, including territorial seas
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
® Relatively permanent waters (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑ Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non - wetland waters: 90.0 linear feet: S.Owidth (ft) and/or 0.01 acres.
Wetlands: acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on:
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
2. Non - regulated waters /wetlands (check if applicable):3
' Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
2 For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year -round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally"
(e.g., typically 3 months).
3 Supporting documentation is presented in Section IILF.

Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain:

SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete
Section IILA.1 and Section IH.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections HLA.1 and 2
and Section 1H.D.1.; otherwise, see Section 1H.B below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacenf':
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non - navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year -round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year -round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section IILD.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section IILD.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbody4 is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section IILB.1 for
the tributary, Section IILB.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section IILB.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section IILC below.
1. Characteristics of non -TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size:
Drainage area:
Average annual rainfall: inches
Average annual snowfall inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
❑ Tributary flows directly into TNW.
❑ Tributary flows through � tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are Pick List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List river miles from RPW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNWs:
Tributary stream order, if known:
4 Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and
West.
5 Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.

(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apps
Tributary is: ❑ Natural
❑ Artificial (man- made). Explain:
❑ Manipulated (man - altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: feet
Average depth: feet
Average side slopes: --
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
❑ Silts ❑ Sands
❑ Cobbles ❑ Gravel
❑ Bedrock ❑ Vegetation. Type /% cover:
❑ Other. Explain:
❑ Concrete
❑ Muck
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain:
Presence of run/riffle/ op of complexes. Explain:
Tributary geometry:
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: Pick List
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year:
Describe flow regime:
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: � Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: -. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
❑ Bed and banks
❑ OI IWM6 (check all indicators that apply):
❑ clear, natural line impressed on the bank
❑
the presence of litter and debris
❑ changes in the character of soil
❑
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
❑ shelving
❑
the presence of wrack line
❑ vegetation matted down, bent, or absent
❑
sediment sorting
❑ leaf litter disturbed or washed away
❑
scour
❑ sediment deposition
❑
multiple observed or predicted flow events
❑ water staining
❑
abrupt change in plant community
❑ other (list):
❑ Discontinuous OHWM.7 Explain:
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
High Tide Line indicated by: 17 Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
❑ oil or scum line along shore objects ❑ survey to available datum,
❑ fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore) ❑ physical markings;
❑ physical markings /characteristics ❑ vegetation lines /changes in vegetation types.
❑ tidal gauges
❑ other (list):
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film, water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
6A natural or man -made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
'Ibid.

(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width):
❑ Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatic /wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non -TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size: acres
Wetland type. Explain:
Wetland quality. Explain:
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non -TNW:
Flow is: Pick Lisi. Explain:
Surface flow is: -
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: -. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non -TNW:
❑ Directly abutting
❑ Not directly abutting
❑ Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
❑ Ecological connection. Explain:
❑ Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are 'ck List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are ck List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: Mlist.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the � floodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface, water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
❑ Vegetation type /percent cover. Explain:
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatic /wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if an�
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis:
Approximately ( ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.

For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and /or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
Significant nexus findings for non -RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
fmdings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section IILD:
Significant nexus findings for non -RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non -RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain fmdings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section IILD:
Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go
Section IILD:
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
TNWs: linear feet width (ft), Or, acres.
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year -round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial: A NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11 was completed to reach this conclusion.
Q Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally:

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: 90.0 linear feet 5.0 width (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Non -RPWs8 that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section IILC.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
T7 Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
Q Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year- round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section IILB and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW:
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
El Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section 111. C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III. C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.9
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
❑ Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1 -6), or
❑ Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA- STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): 10
Irl which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
❑ from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
❑ which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
❑ Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
❑ Other factors. Explain:
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
'See Footnote # 3.
9 To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section IILD.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps /EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
EJ Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
F. NON - JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
❑ Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
Other: (explain, if not covered above):
Provide acreage estimates for non - jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
udgment (check all that apply)
Non - wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
❑ Lakes /ponds: acres.
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
EJ Non - wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
❑ Lakes /ponds: acres.
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
® Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:
® Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
® Office concurs with data sheets /delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets /delineation report.
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:
❑ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data.
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
® U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:USGS TopoTile023 1:24000 Source:www.ncdot.org.
® USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: NRCS Soil Survey of Watauga County GIS data NC189.
❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
❑ State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
❑ FEMA/FIRM maps:
❑ 100 -year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
® Photographs: ® Aerial (Name & Date): 2005 Watauga/Ashe County Source: www.nconemap.com .
or ❑ Other (Name & Date):
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
❑ Applicable /supporting case law:
❑ Applicable /supporting scientific literature:
❑ Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD: