20080781 Ver 1_Individual_20080506

CWS
.. Carolina Wetland Services
May 5, 2008
550 E WESTINGHOUSE BLVD.
CHARLOTTE, NC 28273
704-527-1177 (v)
704-527-1133 (fax)
Mr. Steve Chapin D ��
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 0 8 0 7 8
J k
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208 MAY 6 2008
Asheville, NC 28801
DENR - WATER UUAU Y
WETLANDS AND STORMWATER BRAKH
Subject: Section 404 Individual Permit Application
Gaston Mall Redevelopment
Gastonia, North Carolina
Carolina Wetland Services Project No. 2007-1860
The Gaston Mall Redevelopment project is located in Gastonia, North Carolina in the northwest
corner of the intersection of Cox Road and Franklin Boulevard, exit 21 off Interstate 85. (Sheets 1 and
2, enclosed). The purpose of this project is to renovate and expand the existing commercial
development known as Gaston Mall. Pearson Properties, Inc. has contracted Carolina Wetland
Services, Inc. (CWS) to provide Section 404/401 permitting services for this project.
Applicant Name: Pearson Properties, Inc.; P.O.C.: Joe Pearson
Mailing Address: 1422 Burtonwood Drive, Gastonia, NC 28054
Phone Number of Owner/Applicant: [phone]
Street Address of Project: 401 Cox Road, Gastonia, NC
Waterways: Duharts Creek and UT to Duharts Creek
Basin: Catawba River (HU# 03050101)
City: Gastonia
County: Gaston
Decimal Degree Coordinate Location of Project Site: N 35.24940, W 81.13720
USGS Quadrangle Name: Gastonia North, North Carolina quadrangle, 1993
Current Land Use
The project area is zoned commercial and includes an existing shopping mall (Gaston Mall), large
expanses of paved parking, an adjacent wooded area, and a fallow field (Sheets 3 and 4, enclosed).
Dominant vegetation along the woodland edges consists of common blackberry (Rubus argutus),
Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense), Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), winged elm (Ulmus
alata), meadow garlic (Allium canadense), soft rush (Juncus effuses), red cedar (Juniperus
virginiana), and goldenrod (Solidago sp.). Dominant vegetation within the field includes broomsedge
(Andropogon virginicus), common blackberry, Japanese honeysuckle, goldenrod, dogfennel
(Eupatorium capillifolium), and eastern baccharis (Baccharis halimifolia).
According to the Soil Survey of Gaston Countyl, on-site soils consist of approximately: 60% Urban
land (Ur); 25% Chewacla loam, frequently flooded (Ch); 10% Pacolet sandy loam, 15 to 25% slopes
(PaE); and 5% Cecil -Urban land complex, 2 to 8 percent slopes (CfB) (Sheet 5, enclosed). Urban land
soils include areas where more than 85% of the surface is covered with asphalt, concrete, buildings, or
other non -impervious surfaces. The Chewacla soil series consists of frequently flooded, somewhat
poorly drained, moderately permeable soils often located on flood plains. This soil is listed as a
1 United States Department of Agriculture, 1989. Soil Survey of Gaston County, North Carolina.
CHARLOTTE, NC - FORT MILL, SC
WWW.CWS-INC.NET

May 5, 2008
Mr. Steve Chapin
Page 2 of 8
hydric soil in Gaston County2. The Pacolet soil series consists of well drained, moderately permeable
soils on uplands. The Cecil -Urban land complex soil series consists of intermingled areas of Cecil
soil and Urban land. Cecil soil is well drained, has moderate permeability, and low shrink -swell
potential, and areas of urban land are covered with buildings, streets, driveways, parking lots, and
runways.
Jurisdictional Determination
A wetland delineation was conducted in May 2005 by Spangler Environmental. On January 24, 2006,
CWS biologists revisited the site to investigate on-site jurisdictional wetlands of the U.S. using the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE) Routine On -Site Determination Method (Sheet 6, enclosed).
This method is defined in the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual.3 Routine On
Site Data Forms representative of on-site jurisdictional wetland areas and non jurisdictional upland
areas are enclosed (DPI — DP5). Jurisdictional waters of the U.S. were classified according to recent
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ)4 and USACE guidance. NCDWQ Stream
Classification Forms, USACE Stream Quality Assessment Worksheets Streams A and B (SCP1 and
SCP2), and USACE Jurisdictional Determination Forms for all jurisdictional features are enclosed.
The results of the on-site field investigation indicate that there are two jurisdictional stream channels
(Streams A and B), and four jurisdictional wetland areas (Wetlands AA — DD) located within the
project area (Sheet 6, enclosed). On -Site jurisdictional waters are Duharts Creek and an unnamed
tributary to Duharts Creek. These waters are within the Catawba River basin (HU# 03050101)5.
Duharts Creek is classified as "Class C waters" by the NCDWQ. On -Site jurisdictional waters of the
U.S. were surveyed using a sub -meter GPS unit and total approximately 1.42 acres (61,855 square
feet). Linear footage and acreage of on-site jurisdictional waters are summarized as follows:
Table 1: On -Site Jurisdictional Waters
Streams
Stream A enters the project area in the northwestern corner and flows southeast across the property
for approximately 1,575 linear feet (Sheet 6, enclosed). Stream A is a named stream (Duharts Creek)
and on the day of the field review exhibited strong continuous bed and bank, flow, and riffle -pool
sequences. There was also a moderate presence of fish, amphibians, crayfish, snails, and
macrobenthic invertebrates. Stream A scored 45.5 out of a possible 71 points on the NCDWQ Stream
2 MRCS Hydric Soils of North Carolina, December 15, 1995.
3 Environmental Laboratory. "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual," Technical Report Y-87-1, US Army Engineer Waterways
Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
A North Carolina Division of Water Quality, 1999. Stream Classification Method. Version 3.1.
' "HU#" is the Hydrologic Unit Code. U.S. Geological Survey, 1974. Hydrologic Unit Map, State of North Carolina

May 5, 2008
Mr. Steve Chapin
Page 3 of 8
Classification Form indicating perennial status and 62 out of a possible 100 points on the USACE
Stream Quality Assessment Worksheet (SCP I, enclosed). A photograph of Stream A is enclosed as
Photograph A.
Stream B was classified as perennial and enters the property at a central northern point (Sheet 6,
enclosed). Stream B flows south until its on-site confluence with Duharts Creek. The on-site portion
of Stream B has been channelized and is approximately 660 linear feet in length. The stream
exhibited a moderate riffle -pool sequence and flow. Biological sampling within Stream B indicated a
weak presence of macrobenthic invertebrates and crayfish. Perennial Stream B scored 28.5 out of a
possible 71 points on the NCDWQ Stream Classification Form indicating perennial status and 46 out
of a possible 100 points on the USACE Stream Quality Assessment Worksheet indicating perennial
status (SCP3, enclosed). A photograph of Stream B is enclosed as Photograph B.
Wetlands
Wetland AA is located north of Duharts Creek and west of Stream B and is approximately 0.68 acre in
size (Sheet 6, enclosed). A Routine Wetland Determination Data Form representing this wetland area
is enclosed (DP4). This wetland area exhibited hydrophytic vegetation including green ash (Fraxinus
pennsylvanica), black willow (Salix nigra), red maple (Acer rubrum), jewelweed (Impatiens
capensis), privet (Ligustrum sinense), tag alder (Alnus serrulata), arrowwood (Vibernum dentatum),
sedges (Carex sp.), and common elderberry (Sambucus canadensis). The soils were saturated within
12 inches of the surface and were observed to be low-chroma (10YR4/1 in the upper 3 inches and
10YR5/1 at 3 to 12 inch depth) and mottled (2.5YR4/8 in the upper 3 inches and 7.5YR5/6 at 3 to 12
inch depth). A photograph of Wetland AA is enclosed as Photograph C. A photograph of the
adjacent upland area is enclosed as Photograph D.
Wetland BB and CC are located southwest of Duharts Creek and are 0.18 and 0.04 acre in size,
respectively (Sheet 6, enclosed). A Routine Wetland Determination Data Form representing these
areas is enclosed (DP3). These wetlands were dominated by hydrophytic vegetation including privet,
box elder (Acer negundo), red maple, sedges, and tag alder. The soils were inundated and exhibited
low chroma color (2.5 YR 5/2) and many distinct mottles (7.5 YR 5/6).
Wetland DD is located south of Duharts Creek and is 0.05 acre in size (Sheet 6, enclosed). A Routine
Wetland Determination Data Form representing this area is enclosed (DPI). This wetland was
dominated by hydrophytic vegetation including privet, red maple, sweetgum (Liquidambar
styraciva), ironwood (Carpinus caroliniana), and river cane (Arundinaria sp.). The soils were
inundated and exhibited low chroma color (1.0 YR 5/2) and many distinct mottles (2.5 YR 3/6). A
photograph of Wetland DD is enclosed as Photograph E.
Macroinvertebrate Study Report
On February 12, 2003, Olver Laboratories collected benthic macroinverebrate samples from six
locations in on-site reaches of Duharts Creek (Stream A) and its tributary (Stream B) to evaluate the
health of the indigenous aquatic community in this watershed. A Benthic Macroinvertebrate
Evaluation was performed based on the Environmental Protection Agency document "Rapid
Bioassessment Protocols for Use in Streams and Wadeable Rivers: Periphyton, Benthic
Macroinvertebrates, and Fish" Second Edition (EPA 841-B-99-002). The evaluation found that
Stream B (referred to as Tributary D-8 in the report) lacked suitable habitat for most
macroinvertebrates throughout the length of the sampled area (Macroinvetebrate Study Report,
enclosed). There was general absence of rock substrates and coarse particulate organic matter and a
prevalence of accumulated silt and sand resulting in poor habitat for a healthy macroinvertebrate

May 5, 2008
Mr. Steve Chapin
Page 4 of 8
community. There are indicators of non -point source pollution in both streams and the few
macrobenthic invertebrates that were sampled are classified as "pollutions -tolerant."
Channel Geormorphic Assessment
A geomorphic survey was performed by CWS biologists Thomas Blackwell, Patty Perino and Paul
Brighton May 11, 2007, of a 400 -foot on-site reach of Duharts Creek. The creek was assessed using
Rosgen Level H Classification methods consisting of a longitudinal profile, a cross-sectional survey,
substrate sampling (reach -wide pebble count), and photographic documentation. The enclosed
Geomorphic Conditions and Evaluation Report provides data collected during the survey and
describes the existing conditions of the stream.
Based on this evaluation, CWS believes the best option is to relocate and reconstruct portions of on-
site Duharts Creek to re-establish a natural meandering pattern. The relocated areas will be graded to
match closely with the existing cross sections. Relocating the channel will allow the sinuosity to be
increased, thus reducing the shear stress along these reaches. The restored area can be graded to
include floodplain benches, floodplain wetlands, and native riparian vegetation which will help to
improve the water quality and capacity within this channel.
Due to the excavation of the entire floodplain at or below the bed elevation of the existing stream,
reconstruction will be necessary to restore the channel. Restoration will involve natural channel
design tow ensure stream stability and floodplain access.
Agency Correspondence
Cultural Resources
A letter was forwarded to the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) on June 12,
2007, to determine the presence of any areas of architectural, historical, or archaeological significance
that would be affected by the project. In a response letter, dated July 11, 2007 (enclosed), SHPO
states that their review of the proposed project area revealed that no historic resources would be
affected by the project. Therefore, no further action concerning Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act is necessary.
Protected Species
A letter was forwarded to the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) on June 11, 2007,
to determine the potential for the occurrence of animal and plant species formally proposed or listed
as endangered or threatened by current Federal regulations [Federal Endangered Species Act of 1973
(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.)] within the subject project area. In a response letter dated June 19, 2007, the
NCNHP replied that they have no record of rare species, significant natural communities, or
significant natural heritage areas at the site or within a mile of the project area. A protected species
survey was conducted by CWS biologists Patty Perrino and James Collins on May 29, 2007. Species
surveyed for include the Endangered Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii), Threatened
bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), Endangered bog turtle (Clemmys muhlenbergii), and
Candidate Georgia aster (Symphyotrichum georgianum). No individuals of these species were found
during the field investigation, and will therefore not be affected by the proposed project. A letter was
forwarded to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) on June 18, 2007, requesting concurrence
with the finding of the field survey. The USFWS concurred with these findings in a letter dated July
18, 2007 (enclosed).

May 5, 2008
Mr. Steve Chapin
Page 5 of 8
Purpose of the Project
The purpose of the Gaston Mall Redevelopment project is to renovate and update the existing
shopping mall located at the intersections of Interstate 85, Cox Road, and Franklin Boulevard in
Gastonia, North Carolina. The renovation will include the refurbishment or replacement of older
buildings and the addition of new retail space as specified by a lease agreement with a new retail
tenant for the property. The City of Gastonia and Gaston County have identified this property as one
of the key locations for new business development to support the rapidly growing local population and
economy. The mall redevelopment project will provide 137,253 square feet of floor area for
additional tenant(s) and the parking requirements for the land use must satisfy both the tenant needs
and city requirements of at least four parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of floor area. Provisions
for handicap spaces and landscape requirements must also be met. The site must be designed in a
manner to accommodate delivery vehicles and emergency vehicles. A new access road connection is
needed between Cox Road and Franklin Boulevard to improve traffic flow and safety at signalized
intersections and to provide access to interior portions of the site. In order to secure FEMA approvals,
the entire floodplain of Duhart's Creek will be regraded to accommodate floodwaters storage per the
accepted engineering design.
Alternatives Analysis
In an effort to minimize impacts to jurisdictional areas, an alternatives analysis was performed to
determine the least damaging plan for the project that would still achieve the project's goals. It was
determined that impacts to Perennial Stream B and on-site wetlands are unavoidable. The different
alternatives each propose to pipe the entire on-site length of Perennial Stream B (560 If) and to fill
Wetlands AA -DD (0.95 acre total).
Alternative A proposes to pipe the entire on-site length of Perennial Stream A (Duharts Creek) (Sheet
7, enclosed). This alternative would result in approximately 1,252 linear feet of impacts to Perennial
Stream A. The construction and mitigation costs for a pipe of this size and length was not determined
to be cost effective for this development. In order to eliminate the pipe system, portions of Duharts
Creek would need to be relocated. Alternatives B, C, and D involve relocating portions of Duharts
Creek to minimize the overall impacts. Alternative A was determined to be unacceptable to FEMA to
satisfy floodplain requirements.
Alternative B proposes to fill approximately 500 linear feet of Duharts Creek. This alternative would
re-establish approximately 740 linear feet of restored channel along the toe of the slope in the newly
graded floodplain (Sheet 8, enclosed). It was determined that relocating the channel too close to the
fill slopes could jeopardize the integrity of the slope and would eliminate any floodplain access on the
right bank. A culvert would also be necessary to access the southern side of Duharts Creek. This
alternative proposes a 180 linear -foot box culvert. Alternative B was determined to be unacceptable
to FEMA to satisfy floodplain requirements.
Alternative C also utilizes the 180 linear -foot box culvert on Duharts Creek. The truck turn -around
area was relocated to the northwestern portion of the proposed building. This relocation reduced the
amount of grading near Duharts Creek and allowed for a smaller stream relocation (Sheet 9,
enclosed). This alternative proposed to relocate 105 linear feet of Duharts Creek to avoid the building
footprint. This relocation could be located in the floodplain and would allow for a "natural channel
design" approach to the relocated stream. Alternative C was determined to be unacceptable to FEMA
to satisfy floodplain requirements.

May 5, 2008
Mr. Steve Chapin
Page 6 of 8
Alternative D reduces the grading in the southwest corner of the proposed building and originally
proposed for the relocation to be reduced to 198 linear feet of Duharts Creek if the remainder of the
floodplain were not altered. FEMA requirements dictate that the entire floodplain elevation be
excavated to a depth at or below the existing bed elevation of Stream A (Sheet 10, enclosed). As
such, the length of Stream A to be impacted by excavation was analyzed using geomorphic methods
so that it could be relocated using natural channel design at the new floodplain elevation. Alternative
D was determined to be acceptable to FEMA to satisfy floodplain requirements and was primarily
selected as the preferred alternative for this reason. Alternative D was also selected as the preferred
alternative since wetland impacts could be mitigated on site due to the floodplain excavation and
stream impacts could be mitigated through a combination of on-site natural channel design and
payment into the NCEEP. impacts to Duharts Creek resulting from fill or culvert have been reduced
to the greatest extent practicable and have resulted in a 418 -linear -foot net gain of stream channel.
Approximate impact totals for Alternatives A — D are summarized below in Table 2.
Fable 2. Summary of Alternatives Analysis
Jurisdictional
Alternatives
Feature
Alternative A
Alternative D
Alternative C
Alternative D
1801f— culvert
1,575 if excavated
Perennial Stream A
1,252 1f — piping
1801f — culvert
1,993 if relocated
105 if —relocated
Net Gain — 4181f
Perennial Stream B
6601f — piping
6601f — piping
6601f — piping
6601f — piping
Wetland AA
Fill — 0.68 acre
Fill — 0.68 acre
Fill — 0.68 acre
Fill — 0.68 acre
Wetland BB
Fill — 0.18 acre
Fill — 0.18 acre
Fill — 0.18 acre
Fill — 0.18 acre
Wetland CC
Fill — 0.04 acre
Fill — 0.04 acre
Fill — 0.04 acre
Fill — 0.04 acre
Wetland DD
Fill — 0.05 acre
Fill — 0.05 acre
Fill — 0.05 acre
Fill — 0.05 acre
840 If — Perennial Stream
2,235 If — Total
1,912 if — Perennial
Impacts
945 if —Perennial
Perennial Stream
Stream Impacts
0.95 ac. —Wetland
Stream Impacts
Impacts
Impact Totals
0.95 ac. — Wetland
Impacts
0.95 ac. — Wetland
418 1f Net Gain to
Impacts
Impacts
Stream A
0.95 ac. — Wetland
Impacts
Proposed Impacts to Jurisdictional Waters
Alternative D was chosen for the construction plan of the Gaston Mall Redevelopment site in order to
reduce or mitigate for overall impacts to on-site jurisdictional waters. Perennial Stream A will be
need to be reconstructed and restored due to the floodplain excavation necessary to satisfy FEMA
requirements. Reconstruction will include a culverted or bridged crossing as part of new road
construction. Unavoidable impacts to Perennial Stream B include 660 linear feet of piping as a result
of parking lot construction which requires the inclusion of four parking spaces per 1,000 square feet
of retail floor area. New culverts will be 640 linear feet of triple 72" CMP. Unavoidable impacts to
Wetlands AA -DD total approximately 0.95 acre and are the result of fill activities associated with
grading activities, stream relocation, and construction. Impacts to on-site jurisdictional features are
summarized in Table 3.

May 5, 2008
Mr. Steve Chapin
Page 7 of 8
Table 3. Proposed Impacts to Jurisdictional Waters
On behalf of Pearson Properties, CWS is submitting a Section 404 Individual Permit Application with
attachments for impacts to on-site jurisdictional streams and wetlands and a Jurisdictional
Determination Request (enclosed).
Compensatory Mitigation
During the design phase of this project, efforts were made to minimize jurisdictional waters impacts.
In addition, the impacted portion of Duharts Creek (Stream A) and the perennial tributary (Stream B)
are part of what is considered a "non -supporting" stream system. The streams are highly disturbed
and do not support the expected aquatic life for such streams. Additionally, the need to excavate the
existing floodplain to at or below existing bed grade to satisfy FEMA flood requirements will
necessitate reconstruction and restoring Stream A. Restoring and relocating the Stream A will allow
the sinuosity to be increased, thus reducing the shear stress along these reaches. The relocated area
can be graded to include floodplain benches, floodplain wetlands, and native riparian vegetation
which will help to improve the water quality and capacity within this channel (Figure 6, enclosed).
An 85% survival rate of planted species will be maintained, and five years of monitoring will occur to
maintain that rate. The relocation of Duharts Creek will improve the conditions of this system and
will thus be self -mitigating. Approximately one acre of additional wetland will be created with the re-
grading and lowering of the floodplain to below seasonal groundwater level as well as increased
overbank flooding events from Stream A (Duhart's Creek). These activities will also be self
mitigating.
In summary, Pearson Properties is proposing mitigation for unavoidable impacts to on-site
jurisdictional waters impacts in the form of a combination of on-site in-kind stream and wetland
restoration and a donation to the Environmental Enhancement Program (EEP). Acceptance letters
from the NCEEP state that stream credits are available in an adjacent FIUC but wetland credits are not
available at this time.
Please do not hesitate to contact me at 704-527-1177 or through email at [e-mail] should
you have any questions or comments regarding these findings.
Craig Wyant, RLA/ S
'Mice President of Natural Resources
116_� C1. 7k��
Gregory C. Antemann, PWS
President
I
t Sr g1G
. ,,
, _ z
Perennial Stream A
Excavation and grading activities
1,575 if =418 if Net Gain
Stream relocation and restoration
1,993 if
Perennial Stream B
Fill and Pie
6601f
Wetland AA
Fill and grading activities
0.68 acre
Wetland BB
Fill and grading activities
0,03 acre
Wetland CC
Fill and gyading activities
0.01 acre
Wetland DD
Fill and grading activities
0.008 acre
Net 242 If Permanent Perennial
Impact Totals
Stream Impacts
0.95 Acre Wetland Impacts
On behalf of Pearson Properties, CWS is submitting a Section 404 Individual Permit Application with
attachments for impacts to on-site jurisdictional streams and wetlands and a Jurisdictional
Determination Request (enclosed).
Compensatory Mitigation
During the design phase of this project, efforts were made to minimize jurisdictional waters impacts.
In addition, the impacted portion of Duharts Creek (Stream A) and the perennial tributary (Stream B)
are part of what is considered a "non -supporting" stream system. The streams are highly disturbed
and do not support the expected aquatic life for such streams. Additionally, the need to excavate the
existing floodplain to at or below existing bed grade to satisfy FEMA flood requirements will
necessitate reconstruction and restoring Stream A. Restoring and relocating the Stream A will allow
the sinuosity to be increased, thus reducing the shear stress along these reaches. The relocated area
can be graded to include floodplain benches, floodplain wetlands, and native riparian vegetation
which will help to improve the water quality and capacity within this channel (Figure 6, enclosed).
An 85% survival rate of planted species will be maintained, and five years of monitoring will occur to
maintain that rate. The relocation of Duharts Creek will improve the conditions of this system and
will thus be self -mitigating. Approximately one acre of additional wetland will be created with the re-
grading and lowering of the floodplain to below seasonal groundwater level as well as increased
overbank flooding events from Stream A (Duhart's Creek). These activities will also be self
mitigating.
In summary, Pearson Properties is proposing mitigation for unavoidable impacts to on-site
jurisdictional waters impacts in the form of a combination of on-site in-kind stream and wetland
restoration and a donation to the Environmental Enhancement Program (EEP). Acceptance letters
from the NCEEP state that stream credits are available in an adjacent FIUC but wetland credits are not
available at this time.
Please do not hesitate to contact me at 704-527-1177 or through email at [e-mail] should
you have any questions or comments regarding these findings.
Craig Wyant, RLA/ S
'Mice President of Natural Resources
116_� C1. 7k��
Gregory C. Antemann, PWS
President

May 5, 2008
Mr. Steve Chapin
Page 8 of 8
Enclosures: Corps Submittal Cover Sheet
Section 404 Individual Permit Application (ENG FORM 4345)
Agent Certification of Authorization Form
Addresses of Adjoining Property Owners
Sheet 1 of 26 Project Vicinity Map
Sheet 2 of 26 USGS Topographic Map
Sheet 3 of 26 City of Gastonia Zoning Map
Sheet 4 of 26 Gaston County Aerial Photograph
Sheet 5 of 26 NRCS Gaston County Soil Survey
Sheet 6 of 26 Approximate Jurisdictional Boundary Map
Sheet 7 of 26 Alternative A
Sheet 8 of 26 Alternative B
Sheet 9 of 26 Alternative C
Sheet 10 of 26 Alternative D (Preferred Alternative)
Sheet 11 of 26 Alternative D Detail
Sheet 12 of 26 Alternative D Planting Notes and Sections
Sheet 13 of 26 Existing Site Conditions
Sheet 14 of 26 Existing Site Topography
Sheet 15 of 26 Phasing Plan
Sheet 16 of 26 Overall Site Plan (Final Plan — Alternative D)
Sheet 17 of 26 Northwest Portion of Final Plan
Sheet 18 of 26 Northeast Portion of Final Plan
Sheet 19 of 26 Southeast Portion of Final Plan
Sheet 20 of 26 Southwest Portion of Final Plan
Sheet 21 of 26 Overall Grading Plan
Sheet 22 of 26 Northwest Portion of Grading Plan
Sheet 23 of 26 Northeast Portion of Grading Plan
Sheet 24 of 26 Southeast Portion of Grading Plan
Sheet 25 of 26 Southwest Portion of Grading Plan
Sheet 26 of 26 Road Crossing Plan View and Section View
Agency Correspondence
NCEEP Acceptance Letter for Stream Impacts
NCEEP Denial Letter for Wetland Impacts
FEMA Conditional Letter of Map Revisions
NCDENR response letter, June 19, 2007
NC SHPO concurrence letter, July 11, 2007
USFWS concurrence letter, July 18, 2007
Letter from Mayor of City of Gastonia
Letter from Gaston Chamber of Commerce
Letter from Gaston County Economic Development Commission
Stream and Wetland Data Forms
USACE Routine Wetland Determination Data Form (DPI — DP5)
NCDWQ Stream Classification Forms (SCP1 — SCP2)
USACE Stream Quality Assessment Worksheets (SCPI — SCP2)
USACE Jurisdictional Determination Forms
Representative Photographs (A — F)
Macroinvertebrate Study Report
Channel Geomorphic Assessment Report
Storm Water Management Plan
cc: Ms. Cyndi Karoly, NCDWQ; Mr. Joe Pearson, Pearson Properties

Corps Submittal Cover Sheet
08 0781
Please provide the following info:
1. Project Name Gaston Mall Redevelopment
2. Name of Property Owner/Applicant: Pearson Properties, Inc.
3. Name of Consultant/Agent: Carolina Wetland Services, Inc., POC Craig R. Wyant 704-496-1696
*Agent authorization needs to be attached.
4. Related/Previous Action ID number(s):
5. Site Address: 401 Cox Road, Gastonia, NC
6. Subdivision Name: N/A
7. City: Gastonia
8. County: Gaston
9. Lat: N 35.24940 Long: W 81.13721 (Decimal Degrees Please)
10. Quadrangle Name: Gastonia North, North Carolina quadrangle, 1993
11. Waterway: Duharts Creek and UT to Duharts Creek
12. Watershed: Catawba River (HLT# 03050101)
13. Requested Action:
X Individual Permit
General Permit #
Jurisdictional Determination Request
Pre -Application Request
The following information will be completed by Corps office:
AID:
Prepare File Folder Assign number in ORM Begin Date
Authorization: Section 10 Section 404
Project Description/ Nature of Activity/ Project Purpose:
Site/Waters Name:
Keywords:

APPLICATION FOR DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PERMIT O 8 7 S OMB APPROVAL NO. 0710-0003
(33 GFR 325) Expires December 31, 2004
The Public burden for this collection of information is sestimated to average 10 hours per response, although the majority of applications should require
5 hours or less. This includes the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and
completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of
information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Service Directorate of Information
Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302; and to the Office of Management and Budget,
Paperwork Reduction Project (0710-0003), Washington, DC 20503. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law,
no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control
number. Please DO NOT RETURN your form to either of those addresses. Completed applications must be submitted to the District Engineer having
jurisdiction over the location of the proposed activity.
PRIVACY ACT STATEMENT
Authorities: Rivers and Harbors Act, Section 10, 33 USC 403; Clean Water Act, Section 404, 33 USC 1344; Marine Protection , Research and
Sanctuaries Act, 33 USC 1413, Section 103. Principal Purpose: Information provided on this form will be used in evaluating the application for a
permit. Routine Uses: This information may be shared with the Department of Justice and other federal, state, and local government agencies.
Submission of requested information is voluntary, however, if information is not provided the permit application cannot be evaluated nor can a permit
be issued.
One set of original drawings or good reproducible copies which show the location and character of the proposed activity must be attached to this
application (see sample drawings and instructions) and be submitted to the District Engineer having jurisdiction over the location of the proposed
activity. An application that is not completed in full will be returned.
ITEMS 1 THRU 4 TO BE
FILLED BY THE CORPS
1. APPLICATION NO.
2. FIELD OFFICE CODE
3. DATE RECEIVED
4. DATE APPLICATION COMPLETED
aTFMS RF/ nW Tn RF Fu i Fn Rv Appi rceein
5. APPLICANT'S NAME Joe Pearson
8. AUTHORIZED AGENT'S NAME AND TITLE Ian agent is not required)
Carolina Wetland Services, Attn: Craig R. Wyant
6. APPLICANT'S ADDRESS
9. AGENT'S ADDRESS
Pearson Properties, Inc.
550 East Westinghouse Boulevard
1422 Burtonwood Dr., Gastonia, NC 28054-4009
Charlotte NC 28273
7.. APPLICANT'S PHONE NOS. W/AREA CODE
10 AGENT'S PHONE NOS W/AREA CODE
a. Residence n/a
a. Residence
b. Business [phone]
' b. Business [phone] cell: [phone]
11, STATEMENT OF AUTHORIZATION
I hereby authorize, to act in my behalf as my agent in the processing of this application and to
furnish, upon request, supplemental information in support of this permit application.
Signed Agent Authorization Form Attached
APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE DATE
NAME, LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT OR ACTIVITY
12. PROJECT NAME OR TITLE (seeinsvucrions:
Gaston Mall Redevelopment
'13. NAME OF WATERBODY, IF KNOWN alappiicabie) 1 14. PROJECT STREET ADDRESS wapp)icab)e)
Duhart's Creek and UT to Duhart's Creek
15. LOCATION OF PROJECT
Gaston NC
COUNTY STATE
16. OTHER LOCATION DESCRIPTIONS, IF KNOWN, (see instructions)
Franklin Boulevard / Cox Road / I-85
Gastonia, NC
®CCtOr� p
N35.2494 W80.1372 DENR- WATERQUALlTY
ANIf TLANN AND STORM ATER :3)24"('4
17. DIRECTIONS TO THE SITE
From Charlotte, travel south on 1-85. Take Cox Rd. exit (exit 21). Turn left onto Cox Rd. and then right into Gaston Mall.
NG FORM 4346, Jul7 1 EDITION OF FEB 94 IS OBSOLETE. (Proponent: CECW-OR)

18. Nature of Activity (Description of project, include all features)
The Gaston Mall Redevelopment project will involve the reconstruction of existing retail structures and parking on upland, construction
of a new access road crossing Duhart's Creek, and the construction of new retail space and parking within portions of a mapped FEMA
floodplain. The construction of the new retail facilities will require an expansion and relocation of FEMA floodplain with agency ap-
proval, as well as the placement of fill in wetlands, culverting of one perennial stream and the reconstruction and relocation of Duhart's
Creek. Mitigation will be provided with a combination of on-site, in-kind restoration/creation and/or payment of in -lieu fees to the
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program. See report for details.
19. Project Purpose (Describe the reason or purpose of the project, see instructions)
The purpose of the Gaston Mall Redevelopment project is to renovate and update the existing shopping mail located at the intersections of Interstate
85, Cox Road, and Franklin Boulevard in Gastonia, North Carolina. The renovation will include the refurbishment or replacement of older build-
ings and the addition of new retail space as specified by a lease agreement with a new retail tenant for the property. The City of Gastonia and Gas-
ton County have identified this property as one of the key locations for new business development to support the rapidly growing local population
and economy. The mall redevelopment project will provide 137,253 square feet of floor area for additional tenant(s) and the parking requirements
for the land use must satisfy both the tenant needs and city requirements of at least four parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of floor area. Provi-
sions for handicap spaces and landscape requirements must also be met. The site must be designed in a manner to accommodate delivery vehicles
and emergency vehicles. A new access road connection is needed between Cox Road and Franklin Boulevard to improve traffic flow and safety at
signalized intersections and to provide access to interior portions of the site. In order to secure FEMA approvals, the entire floodplain of Duhart's
Creek will be regraded to accommodate floodwaters storage per the accepted engineering design.
USE BLOCKS 20-22 IF DREDGED AND/OR FILL MATERIAL IS TO BE DISCHARGED
20. Reason(s) for Discharge
Discharges are necessary to modify the approved FEMA floodplain to accommodate new retail space construction and new road
crossing. The activity will result in the placement of fill in wetlands, culverting one perennial stream and relocation and reconstruc-
tion of Duhart's Creek.
21. Type(s) of Material Being Discharged and the Amount of Each Type in Cubic Yards
1,533 CY Natural Soil Fill in wetland. 200 CY Natural Soil fill in Stream B. Excavation only in Stream A.
22. Surface Area in Acres of Wetlands or Other Waters Filled /seeinstrcrins)
0.95 acre wetland filled. 0.08 other waters (Stream B) filled. All other activities are excavation.
23. Is Any Portion of the Work Already Complete? Yes No IF YES, DESCRIBE THE COMPLETED WORK
Yes, wetland delineation has been completed .
24. Addresses of Adjoining Property Owners, Lessees, Etc., Whose Property Adjoins the Waterbody (If more than can be entered here,
please attach a supplemental list).
List of Adjacent Property Owners Attached.
25. List of Other Certifications or Approvals/Denials Received from other Federal, State or Local Agencies for Work Described in This Application.
AGENCY TYPE APPROVAL* IDENTIFICATION NUMBER DATE APPLIED DATE APPROVED DATE DENIED
*Would include but is not restricted to zoning, building and flood plain permits
26. Application is hereby made for a permit or permits to authorize the work described in this application. I certify that the information in this
application is complete and accurate. I further certify that I possess the authority to undertake the work described herein or am acting as the
duly authorized agent of the applicant.
"e 4; 5/5/2008
SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT DATE SIGNATURE OF AGENT DATE
The application must be signed by the person who desires to undertake the proposed activity (applicant) or it may be signed by a duly
authorized agent if the statement in block 11 has been filled out and signed.
18 U.S.C. Section 1001 provides that: Whoever, in any manner within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States
knowingly and willfully falsifies, conceals, or covers up any trick, scheme, or disguises a material fact or makes any false, fictitious or
fraudulent statements or representations or makes or uses any false writing or document knowing same to contain any false, fictitious or
fraudulent statements or entry, shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than five years or both.

JUN -18-2005 09:40 FROM:PEARSON PROPERTIES 7048670465 TO:7045271133 P.002/002
I., Joe Pcmon, representing P=Non Pro Pcrties, .Inc., hmby ccrti.fy that I have authoriacd,
Craig R,. Wyant, of CarolWa Wetland Smices, Inc. to act O -n my behalf and take atl
actions necessary to the processing, imancce, and acceptance of this Individual Permit
Application and any and all standard and spial, conditions attached.
We hereby certify dw tli.e above info tion Submitted in this application is true and
accurate to the best of our knowledge.
�esmgna=��
Agent's signat=
SO ' r
rr�4
Date
co.mpietion or this form will affo w the agent to sigm nH futmim Applim nit corrmpondenm

Adjoining Property Owners Addresses
Parcel
Number:
Owner Name:
Address:
City/State:
Zip Code:
3565370257
GASTONIA CITY OF BOARD OF
GASTONIA, NC
28052
3565171664
LEDFORD RALPH G
534 E CLUB DR
GASTONIA, NC
28054
3565171495
LEDFORD RALPH GARNETT AND
CHARLES DOUGLAS LEDFORD
"i 550 WOODCROFT DR
FORT MILL, SC
29708
3565171587
LEDFORD RALPH GARNETT
534 E CLUB DR
GASTONIA, NC
28054
3565171260
GASTONIA BYB LLC C/O THE FLYING
COLONEL (KORB)
505 N CARROLL ST
MADISON, WI
53703
3565175397
LANIER JERRY SIDNEY
1701 E PERRY ST
GASTONIA, NC
28054
3565177543
4 CORNERS REALTY LLC
1328 GREENWOOD CLIFF
CHARLOTTE, NC
28054
3565178374
4 CORNERS REALTY LLC
1328 GREENWOOD CLIFF
CHARLOTTE, NC
28054
3565270392
RGP FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
425 DUNHAM RD
GASTONIA, NC
28054
3565272279
RIDDLE MICHAEL H
P 0 BOX 550487
GASTONIA, NC
28055
3565273286
M II PROPERTIES A NORTH CAROLINA
506 JOHNSFIELD RD
SHELBY, NC
28150

Cws
Applicant No:
CWS, INC.
550 E. Westinghouse Blvd.
Charlotte, NC 28273
Vicinity Map
Gaston Mall Redevelopment
Gaston County, North Carolina
CWS Project Number: 2007-1860
Date: 5-24-07 1 Sheet 1OF26

Gaston Mall Redevelopment Project No. 2007-1860
Section 404 Individual Permit Application
ve
11A� �����
N Soh 1' 1; �1 II r
At
aI �A
� , / _
tr1 '`� ^�� ),�- • it r,\� ^-� . ' I'�_ �'' �.
: �. �� q/ �� 1 Cox Roads
Project Area
.,s,; ' t'�• -.i�,� -� f ��g1lyl
•ov
r ��+/� l' �r� ' 1 'a4i � �� t ''� _ l ( C� � {t��f`1 .n� r '- y\6-::.•, .. H
N.
,� �_r� ! ' w..y77 \ .1 � ,> 1 • R � '•� t,. c rI 1 � f"' .\ 'R,%I .•'.r'� \�'\ 1
six=s�'�� r'1` �,• � •� � �9rs� � � `' .� 1� f�• I .J•7, _
I
Rest
i
Jo
r / ; cn East Franklin Blvd
' '« ``• o I V ii�P f /P �� 6960
�'=•i(}fi¢r SrPEj[Ih yin
1 �Mu eum t, �-t '+,ti ,..c, a• � �.i,,r I�``P'�i � r� �a
L'IITt(%\ad' 'a ,�.••\� ,•Ir r� s 1
Stat
�nhopedic Hasp .Wti i� r
Gasfort Mer
erwood �
� •ate
� 7
•' o
i� �: � ' , � 7 \ ; , �\ t •. y, I1 ,--� timed i \ \, - � " �
Igh
y I `� ;-z. -rte F-� 1 ��i• .
oa
�l .. i - r
1 (�
5
•I � i
iiti �� ^���rri • O .I\. r h\il�t. II 1' 4i1. Ir 1 p•N V.
Rmage cCouff esy ®f the U.S. Geological Survey 2 of 26
7.5 Minute Topographic Map Series, Gastonia North, North Carolina, dated 1993.
Approximate Scale 1" = 2000'

0-1
�4I-U:
Q-2
+�-CUD +►
i
. I
0-2 CUD, s'
R�4 }h'1 " ^�
RMF CUD
C2.1 CUD C-2 ' I-�—,„�
RMF ! I -G
C " �r- ; 1 ` i , _P !. C-3 Site Area�7-'�*--�
tir 1 ,
C -P
C -P R -2C ,`��voanof r CAA `�
T t CA CUD -0-2
'� ' B -2C ' � !}
CUD B-fC y
'k'
J 19p pA r,
CJ ( RA
Legend
R4. Zoning Codes (within Project Area)
- _ C -P Planned Commercial District
Na�►tP R-3 C-3 General Business District
R-3 Single and Multi -family
p M� v , RMF Residential District
I CWS, INC.
J CWS 550 E. Westinghouse Blvd.
Charlotte, NC 28273
Applicant No:
Gaston County Zoning
Gaston Mall Redevelopment
Gaston County, North Carolina
CWS Project Number: 2007-1860
Date: 5-24-07 Sheet: 3 OF 26

i�
4;:Z-
-
L "�
*� r
w;4"
- p•
CWS, INC.
W�550 E. Westinghouse Blvd.
Charlotte, NC 28273
Applicant No.
.,� t'A tom.' P, r'As1er
30:0 160 1 300 Feet
Aerial Photograph
Gaston Mall Redevelopment
Gaston County, North Carolina
CWS Project Number: 2007-1860
®ate: 6-19-07 Sheet 4 OF 26
e
ti
kl
t
4
J.
_
- p•
CWS, INC.
W�550 E. Westinghouse Blvd.
Charlotte, NC 28273
Applicant No.
.,� t'A tom.' P, r'As1er
30:0 160 1 300 Feet
Aerial Photograph
Gaston Mall Redevelopment
Gaston County, North Carolina
CWS Project Number: 2007-1860
®ate: 6-19-07 Sheet 4 OF 26

Gaston Niall Redevelopment Project No. _2007-1860
Section 404 Individual Permit Application 0 3n,a46
�rE�'_' "ir `� * y~f`y�'f� rLk` C f D * ,,�• iy-0" t 't., t L � � ; c� , - � .,
A1C , ti,.�;' •'/' , I �� *�� ,�, �tus �,. i _'+ I
rto
:f'aD2 Cfc'-�T "'•� ; Y � 1, �„ ,� ? fi�,��f �I�V �1". +`-��,5i1tw1 ' .. 1. ,r `TaD,r'ti ;j,
` a-►ST`EA y tl ` Ur�� i-Ur�
s
'3� :�f •'ly'� � � s � ' "'_ ,11�P' ,UItn+M �•• M�.F _ `� vet' ,' �, i ,�,i
? r", r�G �' �� h,, y' : vr-• ,. � P.'1 4T e�„r• ,` •v
fin r 6 : Of v '�'K i� Y^ar, ••,��
•� ` �:`5 rf . o
fg
Nt . �8, 7 �C"rr
tr y i t Z' f kC�B jJ' �i rye
v: - YC•,� any�l�. n� `aB2 �2 ;. ,fir • { r
� / '-y,b'`� +.`•yi . � w3 J � X � _ ` a8 - • +A• rt, r t,�,zae'. I _ •� � rl
.a
- t e
a
'O
� 4 fir.z'U
4
�•!�/ ,' .dam a,�i."•.+ � � 'ia �. 1• ,• ai. c. 2�
►D Tower Y
i7
Ulr .,f � Inter ���f� "• '� '' ,•�
_ �• a{ , e a state
Jy f• i �., r d� (h� ,n aB Le
S� • \ ,lrb ';� r � Ur • �f �.v ? g , eJ�/ 1`� D• kfyj it ;
�, .s ,zY- i� - � r• M'9�^^ w .� aY J'F�� �"S:al4 iii
�"i• ''_:•t. .��
�U r s� � .,r , _ — U r; i�,
�II � � � •` - _ �� E F j • ` it A r♦r �' 1'{�'JY�1r"r
.-� - ,�' , /,`� �; �,�;>�a 4 ,~-•=�, � r
tt� �► ,,�j F p
faN4y fyt\ Cf� IA eY� r i BI:J(� Ab� ;{ �,• .A a
K. ki�:r , � r .!� i� ,{�� a .�'#, ;G h l i4��� 1 �i �' "' df •'' �� S g :.. � J i +' +
'•,,i` ,bB "i ,t._ „t yY �r ' r: r + .ar'tC...•' `� ,•a; ,. SAI ",� .;
,{t'I�
rit,' K -� � �)"'1aa 1 '�t,:�tC`� `", ' ',.. }�'1 ••r t J CfD '•i' �
y ► I` h !. a CH
f6
f { B
f
G
^'e'n,b8'.� • r'' . c' S, . s ,� �r�`'�� t*' y 1, ,,r O ut,
CH r
6f8 ry 41i !� '� • i , #.:.A
•Stet* Oitho-Oe
r r' w "' ' . , ,�, r r• �, + v� , o GA►STO,N IA"
At r�.„.��•ty seat�Wu{1+�P'
04 po 4 tGCf�Bw x. •i i . a dS es r1.:25. b . + i r 1 YTH a
Of6 CfB i \ nom'! I t CfB . CfD k CfD
CfBIV r�yd G. a7
r y+r. - . \ �A•.,, , cP'• r t •CfB 2329
rt r/ Ir ,Ur GASTO. 9/�a ,
•g_ . i4 t4 t� s-r+ l • Tian t f
07�
1 .+ dCeQ2r Pr r4j k y'4.•r yO pry if6 r, j�` W. j t (county seat)
C d _I
it
CfB CfB+ --
�+lrY h.CfB
(J;,a. 9kr,
GaB2 Fi CtD
f :{ ;' 1 2457 Y•.:' V %d t r; • ' I Ur r' YCf. f
/ ..., i�ri pl, y�.n3�,?•7�1 �, �'� , � �� r'7 �',�^tl .. s. � ( ip a� f , fB 3 r � `; �.
CfB Ce8$
CfB
NMY,
S 1'Y i t tf rsi : O FS." r)
�,4. �
�. ns'isi
2470(
a :�L -•. I ' Y .r n st\ , r .' r�f1f t y I, } + ` + .S aLf %! T �Q@9'� Cf 8
” f h d •M` ,F i s /,y�S,, k `htr(iJ ,p �'g� 1j1 � � + `� R� I �� •
l.i+� /� � 1 ,,C�t; C ng � 1, 5,�,+_ � � 1<f{'I#s 1 i'i�?F ��' �1,.�F a � , ��,"'1�`i��'i .i � � 1•.�. A� ., �,.. '�� 2302 '. �_
�,• aka. c ... a ` �, d:, 'Y, ti n
Soil Survey Courtesy ®f the USDA-NRCS
50F26
NRCS Soil Survey of Gaston County, North Carolina, Sheet No. 3, dated 1989.
Approximate Scale 1" = 2000'

N
r
NLL
O
4-
0
3
s 0
y
Gayz
o
Cco
W
itn
4-
0
itn

M
r
N
"p N
co
N
�0
oa e
LL
O
�
� o �
C/1 air i
l
C o'o
�3z
U= o
d
d V N
L
cod
O
N
z
d
0
C $ o.
U
a
u
L
f I
lC..7 cz)
c 1
�i
i
2

0. G
C
L p
ct
o d' o.•o � J f I j �
W c y y01 c
L O F f
c`cd
`
10
17
t r i. F; xi Y d It � .��( •Tt �
x
r %
f
Q r
Ea
CL Cc
�� � nf,�'t�� �i r it ���-��-�"/• /' '-� •,
v _
�..,� � .. . � --�; -_ , ; l , � • � �� `fir,;. j� ._ - - �-;
r/
I Noy '
0 W ... •�
I � �� d'/ � r''•.'. lr~fir, a" _ E m
'o
30
0
'I n
�o C�
� O

M
co
.. 9 00
�
LL
� W C
a
a
6*■
>
a
>
'a'
>
a
c}3
w
'�!'
co
a
m
cid
oa
`d
ao
•^O
�.
O
�'.
R3�
A �uN
O
(•1
W e
C m t C
z
,..
M
c
'�
o
n
c
i�
t0 U
u a °1
0
C•1
0
C7
0
M
0
M
EQ'3
O
�1
b
c
a
E
N
a
N
�
0
a
a
a
6*■
>
a
>
'a'
>
a
c}3
w
'�!'
co
a
m
cid
oa
`d
ao
•^O
�.
O
�'.
O
�
O
('1
O
(•1
O
Cl
O
M
,..
M
c
'�
o
n
c
i�
o
.�—
0
t'1
0
C•1
0
C7
0
M
0
M
EQ'3
O
L
b
c
a
N
q
_z
o
to
u
,!Ns
ommamll"ll,
H j
ra. R 9
W

P
F
Q
O O
O
4! M
V �
0 0
0 0
y N
L p N
m
0 0
�
N
.�.
Cn pa c
LL
o
b y o
00
0
7 Q
� z U
coo
'
000
.. .
C
. _ ........
3rr O
z
£ ~
oo�
a Ali) uvnew�3 a a
moo=
O > U N
z 9�o
O
vO O H
oz
bb
c�
az d
� •o
COcd
O
r � y)
o
u
a
6
P
F
Q
O O
O
p 0
0 0
0 0
0
0
m
0 0
N
0
N Pl m
0 0 0
a
O
00
0
0 0
coo
'
000
.. .
:....
. _ ........
V
rn
a Ali) uvnew�3 a a
Ck
C
O
vO O H
bb
O
-04
O
rz
COcd
y
cc w
vi
=-0
Oy,
wo
o
8
®
N
N
m
!y
15
.IR
y
0
y0
y
N
0
v
N
o
tl N
�
0
9
O
`d
E
�d
E
C
o
o
� �
m �
�C.���wv
�'
.va.
F
o a'
o�
o
N
0
w
°_
Q.
1
[
on.5
p
T •d
.��
y
v
0
a
v
o°
rpt
7"
.�
h
a o
.v. o
v
N
tl
a
a
c a
71
iv
`m
UO
NcC
y y
C y
-a
o
��°w
o'
0H
o,b
S c
VI
= o f ao
g bqG
�?
o
n
>c
"�
P F
v
•O •LS
'� tl
C 0
O=
4=
o
�tiZ't-UQ
Z
ii
14 yhklWxO
j
N ~yoa
U
m
Wx�
P
F
0 o
0
d
o p
E � �
e
o
ct4
o
ai
y
e
'
a �cd
.. .
:....
. _ ........
V
rn
a Ali) uvnew�3 a a
0 o
N V.`o k
0 O �
o �
o p
E � �
w y
o
ct4
o
ai
y
'
a �cd
-
'ao N
N o
o C o
a
to
tU'd
O
vO O H
bb
O
-04
O
rz
COcd
y
cc w
vi
=-0
Oy,
wo
o
8
N w
C y •b
!y
15
N
vs
OW
as
`d
E
�d
o
°q p w
3
° o`
y o b
° wv
�C.���wv
ld
o a'
o�
o
N
0
w
°_
M o y
�F
on.5
°'
y
x
y
N
y Oy
O
UO
NcC
y y
C y
-a
o
��°w
_
0H
o,b
S c
VI
= o f ao
g bqG
�?
o
n
>c
w y
°
o
°
d
J-1
�A a
o
Z
j
N ~yoa
ry dy
1
0p d
y o
b
'n
bA
o
a
y .'a' d°
rCC
0e
y
y�
y
>O
•
'OtCd
y
U�>
C
z"'
e
>
° O
I� /�
'.O.
O00
.b
d�•
U
A
>
a•"
O
,_y,
C
i°
y g
°
0
O
d)
C
y C
O
•
4-j
y_=yy
e+
y
T
0 O
Q
O
d
vi
OC
O
g
x
O�UO
d.,
°c
cn
�
�
o
>o
�n °
>
°o° o
N.
a¢i aai eCd d oayi o aoi ece
�. C O y_ Rr ' N N. a .�
FSI Z Rl r O yd O W d x m d On ° o N

Wd eS:OC:Z '9002 '6 4onuof:paugd F!I... .....Wycl:Fe prylge 6xp'aup0-19619\p]\ppa]\IIOW u%co0 19669\luayMola.•p•tl IIaX ugao0\crsalwd\0S\:]
Vf0 gi:Z6:8 [OOZ/6Z/9 '�p!Ilpy:l...... lap.
gxpxxlyllsgb9 :fixpd-99690 :gxo'p-9gb9n :aa.v .nl Znrn 6.cnlmZ-erv.]Sila -nl tmn eltnrmTlya]S1w :cafiowl '1n1 � .vwou pol Inplm
N
LL0
r
F-
W
W
2
N
W
F-
0
Z
N
X
W
s �
T�
• w� 7 S$ 5 G
Z
00:=_
®�
LU
J
3 r o
w
W tf ,w•
00000`o©
Y
\\\
aao S
cQ
9W 5i
Wd eS:OC:Z '9002 '6 4onuof:paugd F!I... .....Wycl:Fe prylge 6xp'aup0-19619\p]\ppa]\IIOW u%co0 19669\luayMola.•p•tl IIaX ugao0\crsalwd\0S\:]
Vf0 gi:Z6:8 [OOZ/6Z/9 '�p!Ilpy:l...... lap.
gxpxxlyllsgb9 :fixpd-99690 :gxo'p-9gb9n :aa.v .nl Znrn 6.cnlmZ-erv.]Sila -nl tmn eltnrmTlya]S1w :cafiowl '1n1 � .vwou pol Inplm
N
LL0
r
F-
W
W
2
N
W
F-
0
Z
N
X
W

_ 'OM] 6ZS3'SZS'bOL%tl� ,1,yg�7pQ�Y Usld Suol;ipuoO 6ul;slx3
.tl0 98Z9SZS90L tlNl'IOtltl0 N1tlON'tlIN01Stl0 0
8S6f-GlZBZ
- 530 ..11-0 "YON 'ailONO40 ]ll'lItlN NO18tl0•dd 10
CO 40 31tl0 101 al!O$ 'PHB 9NI '1H6d100M Gab LfLB 1N3WdOI3A34321 IIVW NOISVE)I""
"
09669 '0NI
NOISIA3U 31tl0 'pN � N103fOtld
qi
w
ug 53.2 38g,aaS U
CL
CD 2
--n
g3 -.y $a a3� a Yv8 Q W
i
lit! 1d1
g1 '�� is 1■.eQ
3'x43a51 14 11i3��iaa¢aSi, ❑ ix - .�`�� 9 «� % $ 3 r• .I I.
3
pppg % i Liy __ — {
a a
a
0gA Y � L
a 4 ��3 �� 7�as YNSIs
�
��� 6
$a4 call
I�II!n1�r�//u;/;/;//. t a \�.•.\� � �. rte:=„ t �rc yY �_',
Xy'i
14
Ilu � .1 1 r gx _ •„� �r �t i � —
If
i"0
N
LL
O
V
H
W
W
S
2
LL
Q
cc
0
O
CL
O
H
c�
_Z
H
cn
X
W
RRG_
.d 11 Zf Z BOOZ 6 p 1 P--ld .IMw +1 VCVsy 6 v Id 6wp'ws3-19fi49\v]\pva�\IIOW upuo'J +9649\tusugpiwMtl IIM up)m]\s1pMp�d\O6\ �
NV 91�Z4�8 [OOZ/9Z/OL 'nV a"nyxg pwq )cul
6so xaowlioaeo :6.p a -sawn :6.0 a -Dawn .v.s.v .n. sn,vr«icnim� vnneiu .vn iron -.i en•v,r....,e. ��.a N,i_. >,aw aai aa[.,
i"0
N
LL
O
V
H
W
W
S
2
LL
Q
cc
0
O
CL
O
H
c�
_Z
H
cn
X
W

11
1
11
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
I
1
1
1
I
I
aak
....�.,_
7� R.w✓'C'�rr
!/ �2
-�
LU
I
W
1
1
0 Lu
i
1 5 J >
/ LIIIIIIILLie w I ;�
IIIIII a #i giFl Q ; i
CL
L wIII�Ih (L- -�
U) �fffll i 1
..IIIIIIIIIIIIIIffQ� j � � 1
e ;/ Llllllll =IIID � �d�i ;) 1
� Illllll.a llllb � ���e I 1 i
1
LU
I I U) 1
'1 lal
I` 0 -
II
I W� II
1
i 1
ONO
_ .ua
— 'S3O011'lItlM
cO 9 9 31tlU
19869
bzs9 szs>oL ro� IVMIOpy
1919SZ59OL
B96f-LL29Z
ouila+oO 4P N 'HH -Y-40
.1 a)!^S 'P^19 'too liceja
'SNI '1tl3d1O0M
ainpayog 6uisEyd Juawanordwl a;lS
N
o
1
VNllONVO N1NON'MOI.WO
NO1HtlPdd
1N3Wd0�3A3a321 ll\/W NO1S1/�J
;2
j9
1jig
it
�I
I I
11
1
11
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
I
1
1
1
I
I
aak
....�.,_
7� R.w✓'C'�rr
!/ �2
-�
LU
I
W
1
1
0 Lu
i
1 5 J >
/ LIIIIIIILLie w I ;�
IIIIII a #i giFl Q ; i
CL
L wIII�Ih (L- -�
U) �fffll i 1
..IIIIIIIIIIIIIIffQ� j � � 1
e ;/ Llllllll =IIID � �d�i ;) 1
� Illllll.a llllb � ���e I 1 i
1
LU
I I U) 1
'1 lal
I` 0 -
II
I W� II
1
i 1
1
o
;2
j9
1jig
p o
fa 1
�I
I I
�
I
a
iO
11
1
11
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
I
1
1
1
I
I
aak
....�.,_
7� R.w✓'C'�rr
!/ �2
-�
LU
I
W
1
1
0 Lu
i
1 5 J >
/ LIIIIIIILLie w I ;�
IIIIII a #i giFl Q ; i
CL
L wIII�Ih (L- -�
U) �fffll i 1
..IIIIIIIIIIIIIIffQ� j � � 1
e ;/ Llllllll =IIID � �d�i ;) 1
� Illllll.a llllb � ���e I 1 i
1
LU
I I U) 1
'1 lal
I` 0 -
II
I W� II
LU
�I
I I
�
I
a
to
IT -
71 N
•` \ I I j
\ I i
I � j
i(
_ - t
!i
i.
- x
(n
N
LL
0
L0
H
Lll
uj
x
N
0
Z
W
a
x
CL
F-
0
W
0
CL

I — vWOLt dO — v ilartl — I./9z/l I I I
0910 6Z68'SZS'4oL '% J 1)MXMOIN UvId ONS IILIJGAO
'a0 +9Z9-Sz6'40L VNllOatlO N1a0NVNOISVO
9S6£–L1Z82
—F'05 '530 6u�p16] 4YPN '%1PNP4] 011'lltlW NO14tl0-dd
+0 31ro Ion wms •o.1a ONI ']NI
19649 vaa I£LeIke. IMMOl3A31CM IIVW NOISVO
'l UIOOM
:PN Io3POad
O
U
§§mow
�r FIA 9
&R� N'P
VM g?
9
C
I
U
Lu
0.
�g
0910 6Z68'SZS'4oL '% J 1)MXMOIN UvId ONS IILIJGAO
'a0 +9Z9-Sz6'40L VNllOatlO N1a0NVNOISVO
9S6£–L1Z82
—F'05 '530 6u�p16] 4YPN '%1PNP4] 011'lltlW NO14tl0-dd
+0 31ro Ion wms •o.1a ONI ']NI
19649 vaa I£LeIke. IMMOl3A31CM IIVW NOISVO
'l UIOOM
:PN Io3POad
O
U
i o I l
SIP
wd 61:11:Z 'BOOL '1Z tiwu—Paµaid hue'V. Iv a P-11- 6.P'al:.–l9619\PO\PPPe\Pow uo><oO 196+9\n.wdPi.wMe iie. ugPoe\voMond\O8\O
3-16589 pd -16599 :6xpgagqlee99 :6uP'd-96p90 :6.p'9-96090 :alu%']1L Z6u�,pu6gad.:dLL 6u OwOs60d8 .�u Po–nz–L Tne xe .ui znnn elrninn� xrxaw .ax lmn slmim� enncaw :641-dow Ivun�n :dwa inrixnio.cooun .dwa�ou u.�n/68e1/L MONPVw I:%8 PonoS^��
N
LL
O
to
ui
uj
Z
Q
J
a
LU
L—
W
J
J
Q
Q
LAI
O
�g
oz
uj
N! €mil
y
z
o�
s
I
42
All
,
I
i o I l
SIP
wd 61:11:Z 'BOOL '1Z tiwu—Paµaid hue'V. Iv a P-11- 6.P'al:.–l9619\PO\PPPe\Pow uo><oO 196+9\n.wdPi.wMe iie. ugPoe\voMond\O8\O
3-16589 pd -16599 :6xpgagqlee99 :6uP'd-96p90 :6.p'9-96090 :alu%']1L Z6u�,pu6gad.:dLL 6u OwOs60d8 .�u Po–nz–L Tne xe .ui znnn elrninn� xrxaw .ax lmn slmim� enncaw :641-dow Ivun�n :dwa inrixnio.cooun .dwa�ou u.�n/68e1/L MONPVw I:%8 PonoS^��
N
LL
O
to
ui
uj
Z
Q
J
a
LU
L—
W
J
J
Q
Q
LAI
O

"aao fizs9"szs'nOL :"J,7, ppy Ueld a31$
u 'Na 99z9'SZS'>ot VNIIONtla NlnON'—MSV0
996C-LIz9zO
' '530 011'nvw NOISMdd
Co 90 —1-0 N7+ -N '=N
31tl0 OPO4J o N
]Nl nHOlm dO uu a Ooro a3e Bo/u/1 l LOl =7!^S •Pae Nb0 P=a (fL9 2 IN3WdO-13A343N T VW NOISVS V
19fi09 "]NI 'l 3dlooM
NOISIA3N 3ttla 'ON :-N 1031'Oad
® gg�Oi�l
L
3gg � i
d P o zs Zvf 1 .CdAl), fM
� Z1:'
ZZ
POP
rOG O OOILL
G ui¢ e
;€
MLU
J
W� o�
("a I II 1 ^3�
if
W
LU
J /1�
m
I I 42
1
I � I
I
R
'
I b
II /
le �
II 1 1
1
~y 3i:222; 2 1 S W
W ��
Z5 30) I
j58�
a ig G ff I - 4 oli
0 f
ti w pyo I
f rc i J 1 0 // 1
a
ga� � �'-----------�= --�
U si&Si Z ff 1
i
6 '
m� 1
m €
6'-2
s GG 4R8� j
I i
ui
ui a o gra
LU
1 / /
1 , i
pp I
I aha ,
Nd 6l is t 9002 '( /�x�Va(:pulVld xupvy •FopYleH:(B Pellgd 6xp'al!a-!96f9\p]\PPV]\IIVN uV1a00 18661-1:Zdolu / uVM uVµo.Rl. dad\0I—
P w 0-8levod :fixP'8-16999 :b Pd-!fi999 PM 19119619 Pd -98f90 :6 pV-96f90 NX ]LL'Zb�?pube9ode d WPP+9al!Pd d—.(u�a!a d.q 4031P�NZ]OOZ/9/Z'fn :--N q, ,
' LL' S �iI1 2000 f1f0[OOZ NaJ91.1Y :JLL'1000 blf0(002 Nv]SW :bd!' 1 dwV'(OS1601PKPPVO V'IeeS .aebwµ 'LOZ-0 � Vol NVFPI
N
LL
O
n

6ZSH'9ZS'90L !XVA JA9nooA Ueld GIIS
aNa
•+�' b u
'930 No 9929"SZ59oL tlNIlONY0 NIYON'YINO14Y0 O N
��� _i _ SW3WYN)] OYI WNOLSYJ f0 AIO A 1N3I10 Yid 9J/1l/Z C 9.-..011'IIVM NOISY—d O
Z Da o: a' SlN3MN00 l lrouY N3d BO/Z/1 Z pu!Iwo� 4N- '-1)aVO4J N
bpHb �:u QOe� GO 9 90 31tl0 l01 al!BS 'P^N3 ONI Patl GOO 1N3WdOISAMM IIVW NO1SVE) U
O!LL rINOliYJ f0 AIU A IN300 dad [B/LI 09699 'ON '1i13d1o0M
NOISIA3 31v0 'pN N 3031'OLd
r
OE
CO
-'`
rvGrE
m w $ G Ir
C w3 r r.. Imp:. i0^r nle
W r a Y Y m m., ;< -:-- i r IH$ IS ^ z ,Ir g�
� < o �� z i I$� I IVn'�LLIC R,I
a
r / _
:9 ad
m
El
LU
zd
r
I , r
O
BaWo
LL i �/ •�� , \�I• �•� � \\ \ ',f�� \ � •���� \\ jam �' aa- �o'
iHsMuu
P,
H Lu
.��
I � � - m
Z mem ayp 8-0?j
W
.Y ryg .,� .off ms3
I I
I
,r 1 I Hl
l
I ' 1
I
f o I i I
}� I
I
i
Wu I
Y� I
1
wd 62:M:Z 'SOOZ 'lZ 4waioad:wuad 6atl 'VewpN:xB 71d 6dp'elrc-19699\90\ppo6\IIaW umcp0 19699\1VawdplaropaY IIM—\..4—VaV\
wd ZS:ZBY 9002/9l/Z 'aruW WCN�9 P— —
�� .�i>�m-ainninn�-um,w .n, imn wi cnimZ uv,ciw :-dwu 111- 1
W

low
11111 -
=I
LL I
w
.
Jill.
Neai
Uy3Id GMS
LL.
LL.
a o
ONO
6ZS8'SZS'90L :Xtl3 yNfldlppy
bBZS'SZS'bOL
ms
YNIl011YO M1NON'tlIN018tl0
011'lltlW N018tl0-dd
t�!a i 6'
p}S ui'w Q
—may- '830
-0797t-03140
8S6f-Ll Z9ZTIM
OU1lOJO� 4400 'au°0040
atlnS 'PH8
o
z ♦N�
Su13nn00 OtLL aN01SYJ d0 .uU a 1N3lq a3a 80/41/2 i
SW3Nn00 1 1NL a3e80/Z/L 2—L
9699
:°N103r ONd
LOl 400 PaN LfLB
ONI '1N3d100M
1N3WdOl3A343a IIVW NOlSb
J
V
MN— eo uO s uaro ala 90/sz/1 1
NOISIA3N 3140 H.
S M
O '
-H+1
I
M*
500.36
I
X
I�-
�
1
15 F
00@000 QQ�t
I
LLI
fl Z 1
I
_?
��..
LN
r ,GZ'LSf
1
I I
low
11111 -
=I
LL I
w
.
Jill.
Neai
LL.
LL.
a o
V oho
g.
ms
xo
Mil
�2
I0�
=I
LL I
w
Neai
LL.
LL.
a o
V oho
g.
ms
xo
Mil
-(•I
OW
LU
LUui
z °p0' LL
S M
O '
-H+1
I
M*
I
I�-
�
1
00@000 QQ�t
I
IN
Nd 92�9i�Z '8002 'l2 .(Iow4ad:payPid 6u0 'Veu�oN:19 papold fi p ay -19619\PJ\PPoO\lion uolw0
•..... ...�.,, a.,.,._..e...,. .. .. ,�rt......rt....n..,,, ni,iw,.,.i,edc .n o,._,.�_� „ne wn .i� �nm-«icninn� uv�caw .ni �nm airnimn�viciw :6dfdow A�woin .awp inciam°xPou�
al®0\alaelwa\OS\::
aaVPVSllvlg P
N
U-
0 0
w
w
Z
Q
J
(L
w
U)
LL
0
Z
0
0
a
W
Q
w
F
D
0
I0�
lin �
LL.
LL.
.93
ms
moo
91
OW
LU
LUui
z °p0' LL
-H+1
I
�
I
M. .49 L
LN
r ,GZ'LSf
_S
LU
_
I d
H Lu
W W
y �3
i
Z
'oawG
a„
O a
LU
Z M -j
W
W
W
c7F=z
3
Z
ea
i
i,1 I
�
'�
M.LZ,OL8B5 I
_ ,68�OS � ••M.9Z.ZLL05
'14101 ,88'OLS
1
'I
t '1
\ I
LL, <WZ
`I�1
IL 2
CO
F-
if = W O
CL w
In
`i
I
11 rye
Nd 92�9i�Z '8002 'l2 .(Iow4ad:payPid 6u0 'Veu�oN:19 papold fi p ay -19619\PJ\PPoO\lion uolw0
•..... ...�.,, a.,.,._..e...,. .. .. ,�rt......rt....n..,,, ni,iw,.,.i,edc .n o,._,.�_� „ne wn .i� �nm-«icninn� uv�caw .ni �nm airnimn�viciw :6dfdow A�woin .awp inciam°xPou�
al®0\alaelwa\OS\::
aaVPVSllvlg P
N
U-
0 0
w
w
Z
Q
J
(L
w
U)
LL
0
Z
0
0
a
W
Q
w
F
D
0

- Ueld ®i!S
NO 6ZSB'SZS'a04 '%Yd IMMOO,y
'BO 9929'SZS'40L tlNIIONtlO N1NON "tlINO1SY0 M
9S6£-GIZBZcm
530 ouilauO "ON 011'IItlW MO1SYPdd N
"�NPl+P40 o
L >0 31Ya 10l 9WS 'P•re 100 PON I£L9 1NMdOl3 aam llVW NO1SVE) V
Jill vINOISM e0 .W] A Lo. 2/./L 19609 'ONI "1N3d100M
NOISIA3N 31,10 ON
ON lo3PONd
9a O a�
UY
77
LU
3 I t I. I I II cYi B
z _
N
r
I — -
0a
1 II I II 'i I II i i \I �,! �/ •6� ._ _ �� I i, ,F O I
M.S9,ZZ.S0
Ss 'd
�_ I lil
�q
90
659 5d '^iZ
H3lNY1'S AAsr I
.99o0f
M.Sf Z
Z
pE3 8
'l9 _ IYyO s I I II� �I III
13,
<
` i��. 00—
y
�ysF I LU
,*
1Giz O -tom 11 QQ '1 ,I' II II
./x•0045"W \ G NooV1'53W
915 S \ \ d
.Ila
N _
� lal
�j o 5
210
92��
zj. w ao 3 sW
2 o s
OIm omY W r a 4 Y b 5 Lus
Ne SC H l 8001 [ onwa9.PeN id acv N.F9 P— 6vv'y!a—t964g\P]\Pw]\iloN uyaPO 19699\l—dolens 8 I- wlw]\alav!I
90S IZ e00Z/9/Z 'Aww4a,1�9 PoioS Iavl
odc -dl Imo sls0im[ IauKaw .6df dow Fluan .dwctmle0lovsPun .dwc love Poc] .ev6owl sm.—] .awuu col InoFol
N
LL
O
O
N
LU
w
x
N
z
Q
J
0-
W
F -
(f) N
LL
O
z
O
cc
O
a
U)
N
W
2
O

.Oy0 6z99,9z9VOL :XVA lNgamm — U21d O6L'UIBJ(3 Pus 15ul.PLJ!D IIBJGAo
9z9*qz9, '04VNII0WV2 HIMOK'ANOISVO 0
ogsc-auz
"
.930 ..!,..o . 311'11tlW NO1SV�dd .14-P-4� !N
----0 31va 0.8
.3. 40797, LOL al!nS 'pAja 1.0 tM -13A3(331d IIVW NOISVE)
L96VI ONt �3dlOOM WM IN3WdO
NaSIA3H -liVG -N ;ON 103rOHd
z
2
9 C
L2
2
0
-------
0
25
0
0
RwqR
zo
'o
�7
----------
Z,�
----
-7/
1.13
87 9
V
Z
JI
x
57
Id --'9002', k—,.,:—- 6

'ONO 6ZS8'SZS'90L :W3 JAMIOCK UBld 86BUIBJ(3 pug 5u1PWO
4829"SZS'90L
rn y0 tlNIIOLYO H1YON'tlIN014Y0 r
956E-[1292
�i 5 430 011'IItlW NO14tlRdd -
L0 9 40 31tl0 ms 'm 440N 'a1 LU9 0 (�
]Yl vM01Sf0 10 .W7 b —M Lad m�sz�L I poi a�m5 'P^B NI W If m � IMMOIM31CMM 11VW NO1SVE) � U
96690X1 '1M3d100M
NOISIA3M 31tl0 'oN :-N 1O3fOtld
ZO£O133HS3393NIIHOIVW GN sy ry
m
i
ppO ^
' � Cryo I i `�E "� s➢ __.� � 'v �� _� `"� �
W>
r
a
� ' �i 'm�� e�� r •` f 3- I I
WIu4o 4 _ I
I I F�
fk
��/
--+ --- T /
IC-
0l
47
I_-
4 1
J Q pq
_m
L
p o s S e±g' ----s
a o g ° d•° d�'Y- �Rjm 3 & sp5 m i illll illy_
° x °
�•� i IIIII�I���
086
LL o a
a F
$ Wei momtu
Jnp
7 - 'il��
Ih
$, o �Ililli
°� g°. ' 11jIIIII
0
i t - VIII II
W
N
fAF Z
/ F
33
M.
®;x„w arc_ �� fa'1.=rc Q-rc_ I me;�+ .✓ ; 0Pi
/. 9aI
8 ^b w xii, h
vugm xrRw =igo � ~ <
wd OS 96Z '8002 '0 ^mn+iad PnU�id +>•PW '^PP!IpH:^4 Po11Pld 6npydr19669\PJ\PP°]\IIPN uolw0 19669\1wuMalaw Ilow uoun0\sVn!O�d\Y A-1
6upd-9fi990 :6 PO-96990 P .Pw6 :6npyaolyll9669 :eluX 512000 IlfO[002 ua]Suv .�0 i 6imimTd
—^nn�c�wZ eabowi4'/aP.11 u ao inafm
C14
N
LL
0
N
N
h
W
W
2
Cn
z
Q
a
a
z_
O
Q
fi
z
0
F -
Q
0
CL
H
Cn
W
2
f—
0
z

'ONO 6ZS8'SZS'a04 :XVJ j,�gdfpd�
.ya aers'szs'aot
1 euro a3a W/sIR f 'S30 BS6fMz–LIZ9Z
I W13a a3e 8o/i/I Z .- p0 4"N130
co s ao 31v0 �o� aimsS 'wle >too M3 LM
ua3ro N3a BO/SZ/� 1g6a9 "ONI 1HWOOM
31V0 'oN :oN103rONd
<
s
w I
g 4
I
HI
?
LL
p^
zW C
Sow
Ir
y—�.
fp~0ww
W oLL
g
rcrc�
W
0
Ta--
Ee5
K����
5&8 o$ ms
/ A
Ir-` —
��
Rio rP <
oi8g
U.
CDoaWry5
W
ILU
Z
S z
oo:
_
Z
U.
O
0
3y3a�v
I
I =
/ j$�ou z
F Z
I
<
s
w I
g 4
I
HI
?
LL
p^
zW C
Sow
few
�
y—�.
fp~0ww
W oLL
g
rcrc�
Ta--
Ee5
eg
5&8 o$ ms
/ A
g�
}g
Rio rP <
oi8g
U.
CDoaWry5
W
ILU
Z
S z
12
Y^ = / I
`' /
sI �
nv:_ naafi naafi_ nerc_ n.rc�1_ n�l I'
wl I
ao� I I
6 LU
I wl
`.4
vyo a �e$� rc�d8�
pue
VNIIONVO H1NON'MNOISVO
OII"I" NO13VPdd
.MM0l3/ MMI TIVW NO1SVO
3NIIH31tlW
N
� U
N '-
LL
O
m
N
W
W
2
2
Q
IL
C7
z
0
C7
z
O
Cr
O
LL
F-
¢
W
2
H
(t
O
z
LL
p^
zW C
Sow
few
�
y—�.
fp~0ww
W oLL
rcrc�
Ta--
eg
M
g�=
W
}g
O
rig
U.
CDoaWry5
W
�L<... w
S z
3NIIH31tlW
N
� U
N '-
LL
O
m
N
W
W
2
2
Q
IL
C7
z
0
C7
z
O
Cr
O
LL
F-
¢
W
2
H
(t
O
z

W.
_ ami) SZSH'9ZS'90L :XYd ueld obeulejd pue bulpejO
9gz9'SZS-90L
! �ug E[ SW3wW00 61ll NNOISYJ d0 llq A 113f10 a3tl 80/61/2 S L' HO YtlNll0ytl0 M1HONtlIN01Stl0
�i 3 '930 BSfif
ou!-LIZHZ Q i oa 4Y'a116P640 011'IIYW NO15tl0 dd o ri
b., �PfO�t sIN3NwPl 1 lroi3a a3a 80/2/t 2 LO i0 31tlO LOL al!^S "PPfli ^IB '160-O Pay IfLH
L9699 'ONI '1 3d100M 1N3WdOl3A3432! IIVW NOlS11J V
NOISIA3H 31YO '6N :M133f ONd
uj
ul
e`
vo
LC
1 z •� - V -s. \.{ 1;x..,4 :;1
1 IJ
InNo 1.
hw Wj o�
O�a°p� ` i
u.« „
I I' v
i
I Iiap,�
�y�yi$a
2 o I f
g Im +I i'3j I l
J
� Z W I
Z��
r; I ?a
LU zk,
'! WWW
j M 3 a Z 5 5-�a L34y vy. My
am
-.,e--�­ ,
< /
I
LUI i
?ma's_
jawlL �_ zt
LL = W ••,Lj 16, �I j I. I �%�J
------------
fOf0133HS33S3NI7H?1YW------------
we ob:obz 'eo6z 'lz �,. a.d wuoid 6w0 'u.!P 6w:.c9 wnPia 6nPtla0-196ss\Po\PP66\aPw �=uo9 1 s69Vx•�w•^•P.a n=w PP9\ao,ro,a\esV9
6nP-d-96490 :6 Pa -96490 :i :fixP'YPPIa119649NSY,X' �dLL"Z000 bIf00002'MOSAN �dLL 1060 41fo[002 xm^w ai an-ni90Sf1 90/02/K2U�aVOu aoA�nMPm
N
LL
O
N
H
w
w
x
N
z
Q
J
CL
0
z
Q
Cr
z
O
Cc
O
CL
N
Q
w
M
H
O
N

'ONO 6Z99'9Z9" OL ;%J liwooM ueld a6euie U pue 6uipea0
-
1
2Z9 91, *01
*0L
N 90 tlNllOtltlO HltlON bWot$tl0
956
—7i G3 '530011 iT/W NO15tlPdd
—1-0 4YoN 'aROHo40 o V
71
Lo 9 >o mv0 tOL OITS 'F^ie �ro a=N �£LaIla
LN3Wd013A3a3M TIM NO1SVO �
196f9 ON •1H3dlo0M
NOISIA3N 31tl0 ON :6N 1O3rONd
I'M 13a HS 33S 3NI'IHO1tlW a ;Nj¢'
rp - -
T _
a CL
co
ji
---------------
M
-------------
z
_ _. z - - 1 _\
,.,,`
FIR, 1
Mill N,
Son,
N
N
LL
O
N
f...
W
W
2
N
z
Q
CL
C9
Z_
Q
Cl)
z
O
F_
2
O
CL
H
LU
W
2
F
7
O
N
ol
o
W.
mecew
fA
'YP:
V Z�
r n Z
Yr O
5k
1
s z
Z� ui3
'��LLj
Q
JOi
•� �'^
V �� �S����� ��n�
SJ
3ozw:n ���t`+x x
xn T�YQ(D g o
o
9713 o
.moo:___
Md ros\ s eoo , m—l—ld a•.Pw. viwNse valloia 6.vvao-Ivsss\vo\PPooV;^N
6W'd-96roy :6 PZ P,P°•6VD31b6tlm :6nP a-assao .fiwp 6uiPm6 :6...P,�Po�miaxrn :6wP'a-ex.en swz .ni xmn >«arv.,.
-1— Lg \V�awaoia:,.v.e uon oP\oPo\mro.a\osVo
Mo�,o .��� ;�..,-.���.�,:�.:,�; �osowi �a;au.duo� oo �,�,
N
LL
O
N
f...
W
W
2
N
z
Q
CL
C9
Z_
Q
Cl)
z
O
F_
2
O
CL
H
LU
W
2
F
7
O
N

6a0'6Nipoi6 :6ap'ha01p119699 :6ap'4-96990 :6--g-0 :—X - :-- :-90-0Z–Z — NO :dLLZ000 9Lf0G00iNtlpSllY :iLL'Ip00 9lfOL00Z NYJfiAW :sa6ewl 'ZOSO :a N Vol yioLol
N
U-
0
(9
N
W
W
U)
W
J
LL
O
x
CL
0
z
Q
z
Q
CL
_z
a
U
0
Q
a
allb°Jd T U81d
_6ZS9'SZS'90L
ON0
:%Vj Ilarloox
VNIIONVO NINON'MMStl0
0ll'lItlWNO Stl0•dd
Nd
'530
9929 SZS-90L
BS&f-LIZ9Z
N
O
S1N3nW00 JiLL MNO1Sb0 d0
Alq A lw3fYJ
bad SO/9t/L f
_
9 90 31tla
ouil0a0] yyON 'al�olCoyO
I., R -s 'PNB bp0 1Z L£L9
1N3WdOISA3a321 IIVW NOISVE)
i
W)m
V
Sll13nnW l lroutl tl3d W/2/l Z
19669
:oN 103f ONd
'ONI 1N3d100M
NOISIA3N 31tla 'oN
•." -
0f
W 01
WU
t
[
�F
_
�m
U
C<
kkk
Y
W
96+Cf Spn3. I f�lfL
o
Q
$i
V
dy�
I—L
�� ,
r
OSffG 30%S \ L"lCL
hI
00'SfC n3ll L,d 1
:.
OL 103NN00 OZiOf YL5 S> .�
9040133HS 33S 3NIl HOIVW
$
£043 J.33HS
-
-- - - — —
33S 3NIl HOIVW
F "uI
:
aF.
=
3015 Jb
T-
I
_
�I
w �
p
Op+a2. tlLS W
(
2'plL
r
I
•
i
o m w
( w U
A U
II
W
r
�
m
ti
m
g
3
r
I
_01G
B"LOL
' 1
" �
I
9060[ - A3➢ Vld
n
St
69 Llf
--
"I
9f'0LL $
"w.
F6 nr
I
�;
x�l
n
.94411.:d0a3
S—z :SOAl
-
I
Y�
I
S'90L
a
a w�
m
S9 m
-
_ -----------
-
,
3pA3 LO'Kt 15 - _
i
r_4
_JV71
aCCiG sS
��
��
9922 03a
ONO 644-o NI N J ..
(SIOL
•N 0 00' I 1S
n
$6040133H§ 33S 3NI-I POIVW $ �$
4
wd Ol:ZO:L '9002 12 WdYpnlold fiwp 'Vawvw:L9 pall- 6ap'upld–aVlaW–lggs9\YJ\ppa0\clow uo,ap0 19699\luawdplaupab
doW po1m9\alaalad\OS\�p
6a0'6Nipoi6 :6ap'ha01p119699 :6ap'4-96990 :6--g-0 :—X - :-- :-90-0Z–Z — NO :dLLZ000 9Lf0G00iNtlpSllY :iLL'Ip00 9lfOL00Z NYJfiAW :sa6ewl 'ZOSO :a N Vol yioLol
N
U-
0
(9
N
W
W
U)
W
J
LL
O
x
CL
0
z
Q
z
Q
CL
_z
a
U
0
Q
a

Joe Pearson
Pearson Properties
1422 Burtonwood Drive
Gastonia, NC 28054
corstem
IC -I
PROGRAM
April 29, 2008
Project: Gaston Mall Redevelopment
Expiration of Acceptance: October 29, 2008
County: Gaston
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) is willing to accept
payment for impacts associated with the above referenced project. Please note that this decision does not assure that the payment 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.
This acceptance is valid for six months from the date of this tetter and is not transferable. If we have not received a copy of the
issued 404 Permit/401 Certification/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 the impacts that may require compensatory mitigation are summarized in the following
table.
Upon receipt of payment, EEP wilt take responsibility for providing the compensatory mitigation. If the regulatory agencies require
mitigation credits greater than indicated above, and the applicant wants NCEEP to be responsible for the additional mitigation, the
applicant will need to submit a mitigation request to NCEEP for approval prior to permit issuance. The mitigation will be performed
in accordance with the Memorandum of Understanding between the N. C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources and the
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers dated November 4, 1998.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Valerie Mitchener at [phone].
Sincerely,
, �R, a4�0 ok
Willi . Gilmore, PE
Director
cc: Cyndi Karoly, NCDWQ Wetlands/401 Unit
Steve Chapin, USACE-Asheville
Gregg Antemann, agent
File
Prat", oar State,
p'��3
NCDENR
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program, 1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1652 / 919-715-0476 / www.nceep.net
River
Basin
CU Stream (feet) Wetlands (acres) Buffer I Buffer 1I
Location (Sq. Ft.) (Sq. Ft.)
Cold Cool Warm Riparian
Non -Riparian
Coastal Marsh
Impacts
Catawba
03050101 0 0 634 0
0
0 0 0
Credits
Catawba
03050102 0 0 11268 1 0
0
0 0 0
Upon receipt of payment, EEP wilt take responsibility for providing the compensatory mitigation. If the regulatory agencies require
mitigation credits greater than indicated above, and the applicant wants NCEEP to be responsible for the additional mitigation, the
applicant will need to submit a mitigation request to NCEEP for approval prior to permit issuance. The mitigation will be performed
in accordance with the Memorandum of Understanding between the N. C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources and the
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers dated November 4, 1998.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Valerie Mitchener at [phone].
Sincerely,
, �R, a4�0 ok
Willi . Gilmore, PE
Director
cc: Cyndi Karoly, NCDWQ Wetlands/401 Unit
Steve Chapin, USACE-Asheville
Gregg Antemann, agent
File
Prat", oar State,
p'��3
NCDENR
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program, 1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1652 / 919-715-0476 / www.nceep.net

Joe Pearson
Pearson Properties
1422 Burtonwood Drive
Gastonia, NC 28054
c0 istem ,
PROGRAM
April 29, 2008
Project: Gaston Mall Redevelopment County: Gaston
We have received your request to access the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program's (NCEEP) In -Lieu Fee mitigation
program for the above referenced project. We regret that we are unable to accept payment for the following impacts at this time:
Impacts
Credits
River
Basin
CU
Location
Stream (feet) Wetlands (acres) Buffer I Buffer 11
(Sq. Ft.) (Sq. Ft.)
Cold
Cool Warm Riparian on -Riparian Coastal Marsh
Catawba
03050101
0
0 0 0.95 0 0 0 0
0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
EEP recently proposed revisions to the fee schedule for wetland and stream mitigation as a means of allowing the program to generate
revenue commensurate with our project implementation costs. Although the revision was passed by the Environmental Management
Commission and Rules Review Commission, implementation of the revision has been delayed due to administrative rules regarding
comment submittals.. Per established protocols for rule-making, the fee revision must now be considered during the next legislative
session beginning in May 2008. Until that time, EEP has developed a strategy that considers the financial implications to the program
for new requests to access the In -Lieu Fee Program and has determined that we are unable to provide your mitigation as requested.
If you want to resubmit your request form at a later time, EEP will reconsider the request in the future. We anticipate updating our
strategy as new data and opportunities become available. EEP is accepting requests in some areas and will consider all new requests
on a case by case basis.
Thank you for your interest in our program. If you have any questions or need additional information on other mitigation options,
please contact Kelly Williams at [phone].
Sincerely,
Willia ] I Gilmore, PE
Director
cc: Cyndi Karoly, NCDWQ Wetlands/401 Unit
Steve Chapin, USACE-Asheville
Alan Johnson, NCDWQ-Mooresville
Gregg Antemann, agent
File
R"tolli ag... 'EKh "... Protect. our St -a te,
A
NCDEENR
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program, 1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-16521919-715-0476/ www.nceep.net

y�a Federal Emergency Management Agency
�rnRxsu
. T Washington, DC 20472^: as
North Carolina Floodplain Mapping Program
C
n s ooperatmg Technical State «w,
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
The Honorable Jennifer T. Stultz
Mayor, City of Gastonia
P.O. Box 1748
Gastonia, NC 28053
Dear Mayor Stultz:
April 8, 2008
IN REPLY REFER TO:
Case No.:
Community Name:
Community No.:
07-04-4590R
City of Gastonia, NC
370100
We are providing our comments with this enclosed Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR), on a
proposed project within your community that if constructed as proposed, could revise the effective Flood
Insurance Study report and Flood Insurance Rate Map for your community.
If you have any questions regarding floodplain management regulations for your community or the National
Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) in general, please contact the Floodplain Administrator for your community.
If you have any technical questions regarding this CLOMR, please contact the North Carolina Floodplain
Mapping Program (NCFMP) at [phone] ext. 106, or the Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) Map Assistance Center toll free at 1-877-336-2627 (1 -877 -FEMA MAP). Additional information
about the NFIP is available on FEMA's website at http://www.fema.gov/business/nfip, and additional
information about the NCFMP is available at http://www.ncfloodmaps.com.
Sincerely,
Beth A. Norton, CFM, Program Specialist
Federal Emergency Management Agency
Engineering Management Branch
Mitigation Directorate
List of Enclosures:
Conditional Letter of Map Revision
John K. Dorman, Program Director
North Carolina Floodplain Mapping Program
cc: Mr. Joseph P. Pearson, Pearson Properties
Mr. Thorne A. Martin, P.E., Assistant City Engineer, City of Gastonia
Mr. Greg Harnish, P.E., Woolpert, Inc.
Mr. John Gerber, P.E., CFM, North Carolina Floodplain Mapping Program

YA
Federal Emergency Management Agency
N.
Washington, D.C. 20472
April 8, 2008
CERTIFIED MAIL IN REPLY REFER TO:
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
The Honorable Jennifer T. Stultz
Mayor, City of Gastonia
P.O. Box 1748
Gastonia, NC 28053
Dear Mayor Stultz:
Case No.: 07-04-4590R
Community: City of Gastonia, NC
Community No.: 370100
n
This responds to a request that the Department of Homeland Security's Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) comment on the effects that a proposed project would have on the effective Flood
Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) and Flood Insurance Study (FIS) report for your community, in accordance
with Part 65 of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) regulations. In a letter dated May 31, 2007,
Mr. Greg Hamish, P.E., of Woolpert, Inc., requested that FEMA evaluate the effects that the proposed
Gaston Mall Redevelopment Project would have on the flood hazard information shown along Duharts
Creek and Tributary D-8 on the effective FIRM and FIS report. The proposed project, which will include
the construction of dual 285 -foot long, 12 -foot by 6 -foot box culverts and the placement of fill along
Tributary D-8, will be located immediately upstream of the confluence with Duharts Creek and will impact
an area located along Tributary D-8 from the confluence with Duharts Creek to a point approximately
1,000 feet upstream of the confluence with Duharts Creek. In addition to the dual culverts on Tributary D-
8 there will be a new bridge over Duharts Creek to provide additional access to the project. The bridge
will be located just upstream of the confluence with Tributary D-8 and will consist of two-Conspan Arch
culverts, each with a 48 -foot span and length of 200 feet. The bridge crossing for this project will impact
an area along Duharts Creek from a point approximately 1,600 feet downstream of the confluence with
Tributary D-8 to a point approximately 1,300 feet upstream of the confluence with Tributary D-8. The
area of the proposed project is shown on North Carolina FIRM number 3710356500J, dated September 28,
2007.
All data required to complete our review of this request for a Conditional Letter of Map Revision
(CLOMR) were submitted with letters from Mr. Harold E. Clarkson, CFM, and Mr. Hamish of Woolpert,
Inc.
To determine the changes in flood hazards that will be caused by the proposed project, we compare the
hydraulic modeling reflecting the proposed project (referred to as the proposed conditions model) to the
hydraulic modeling used to prepare the FIS (referred to as the effective model). If the effective model does
not provide enough detail to evaluate the effects of the proposed project, an existing conditions model must
be developed to provide this detail. This existing conditions model is then compared to the effective
model and the proposed conditions model to differentiate increases or decreases in flood hazards caused by
more detailed modeling from increases or decreases in flood hazards that will be caused by the proposed
project.
We reviewed the submitted data and the data used to prepare the effective FIRM and FIS report for your
community and determined that the proposed project meets the minimum floodplain management criteria
of the NFIP. The submitted existing conditions HEC -RAS version 3.1.3 hydraulic computer model, dated

December 19, 2007, was used as the base conditions model in our review of the proposed conditions
model for this CLOMR request. We believe that, if the proposed project is constructed as shown on the
submitted plan set entitled "Gaston Mall Redevelopment", dated October 7, 2007, prepared by Woolpert,
Inc., and the data listed below are received, a revision to the FIRM and FIS report would be warranted.
The submitted existing conditions HEC -RAS version 3.1.3 hydraulic computer model, dated December 19,
2007, used more up-to-date topographic information and survey data than the effective model. When
compared to the effective model, the existing conditions model reflects increases in the Base (1 -percent
annual chance) Flood Elevations (BFEs) along Duharts Creek, with a maximum increase of 0.6 foot at a
point approximately 1,100 feet upstream of the confluence with Tributary D-8, and increases and decreases
in the BFEs along Tributary D-8 with a maximum increase of 0.4 foot at a point approximately 200 feet
upstream of the confluence with Duharts Creek, and a maximum decrease of 0.2 foot at a point
approximately 520 feet upstream of the confluence with Duharts Creek.
The proposed conditions model incorporates the proposed project into the existing conditions model.
When we compared the existing conditions model to the proposed conditions model, we determined that
the proposed project will cause decreases in the BFEs along Duharts Creek, with a maximum decrease of
0.6 foot occurring approximately 1,100 feet upstream of the confluence with Tributary D-8, and decreases
in the BFEs along Tributary D-8, with a maximum decrease of 3.0 feet occurring approximately 200 feet
upstream of the confluence with Duharts Creek.
The updated existing conditions and proposed project will have the following impacts:
Base Flood Elevations
When compared to the effective data, the BFEs will decrease along Duharts Creek, with a maximum
decrease of 0. l foot occurring approximately 540 feet downstream of the confluence of Tributary D-8.
When compared to the effective data, the BFEs will increase and decrease along Tributary D-8 with a
maximum increase of 0.2 foot occurring just upstream of Remount Road, and a maximum decrease of 2.6
feet occurring at a point approximately 760 feet upstream of the confluence with Duharts Creek. Please
note that backwater from Duharts Creek will control the regulatory BFEs along Tributary D-8 to a point
approximately 780 feet upstream of the confluence. Therefore, the maximum BFE decrease of 2.6 feet
will not be reflected on the effective FIRM.
I -Percent Annual Chance Floodplain
When compared to the effective data, the width of the Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA), the area that
would be inundated by the base flood, will increase and decrease along Duharts Creek. The maximum
increase of 150 feet occurs at a point approximately 800 feet upstream of the confluence with Tributary D-
8. The maximum decrease of 700 feet occurs at a point immediately upstream of the confluence of
Tributary D-8.
When compared to the effective data, the width of the SFHA will increase and decrease along Tributary D-
8. The maximum increase of 300 feet occurs at a point approximately 780 feet upstream of the confluence
with Duharts Creek. The maximum decrease of 960 feet occurs at a point just upstream of the confluence
with Duharts Creek.
Floodway
When compared to the effective data, the floodway width will increase and decrease along Duharts Creek.
The maximum increase of 50 feet occurs approximately 1,000 feet upstream of the confluence of Tributary
D-8. The maximum decrease of 220 feet occurs immediately upstream of the confluence of Tributary D-8.

When compared to the effective data, the floodway width will increase and decrease along Tributary D-8.
The maximum increase of 20 feet occurs at a point approximately 780 feet upstream of the confluence with
Duharts Creek. The maximum decrease of 50 feet occurs at a point approximately 200 feet upstream of
the proposed culvert (215 feet upstream of the old existing culvert).
Upon completion of the project, your community may submit the data listed below and request that we
make a final determination on revising the effective FIRM and FIS report.
® Detailed application and certification forms, which were used in processing this request, must be
used for requesting final revisions to the maps. Therefore, when the map revision request for the
area covered by this letter is submitted, Form 1, entitled "Overview & Concurrence Form," must
be included.
• The detailed application and certification forms listed below may be required if as -built conditions
differ from the preliminary plans. If required, please submit new forms or annotated copies of the
previously submitted forms showing the revised information.
Form 2, entitled "Riverine Hydrology & Hydraulics Form"
Form 3, entitled "Riverine Structures Form"
Hydraulic analyses, for as -built conditions, of the base flood; the l0 -percent, 2 -percent, and
0.2 -percent annual chance floods; and the regulatory floodway, together with a certified
topographic work map showing the revised floodplain and floodway boundaries, must be
submitted with Form 2.
�► A copy of the effective FIRM for the entire area of revision, annotated to reflect the as -built
conditions l -percent and 0.2 -percent annual chance floodplains and floodway along Duharts Creek
and Tributary D-8.
Effective October 1, 2007, FEMA revised the fee schedule for reviewing and processing requests
for conditional and final modifications to published flood information and maps. In accordance
with this schedule, the current fee for this map revision request is $4,800 and must be received
before we can begin processing the request. Please note, however, that the fee schedule is subject
to change, and requesters are required to submit the fee in effect at the time of the submittal.
Payment of this fee shall be made in the form of a check or money order, made payable in U.S.
funds to the National Flood Insurance Program, or by credit card (Visa or MasterCard only). The
payment, along with the revision application, must be forwarded to the following address:
Using U.S. Postal Service: Using Overnight Service:
North Carolina MT -2 LOMC Depot NC MT -2 LOMC- Collection System Administrator
P.O. Box 300025 c/o Dewberry & Davis, Inc.
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-0025 2301 Rexwoods Drive, Suite 200
Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
As -built plans, certified by a registered professional engineer, of all proposed project elements.

® Community acknowledgment of the map revision request.
® A copy of the public notice distributed by your community stating its intent to revise the regulatory
floodway, or a statement by your community that it has notified all affected property owners and
affected adjacent jurisdictions.
Evidence of notification of the property owners impacted by the increases in the ] -percent annual
chance water surface elevations and floodplain widths along Duharts Creek and Tributary D-8.
The property owners' written acceptance of the increases is required for the LOMR to become
effective on the date of issuance.
After receiving appropriate documentation to show that the project has been completed, FEMA will initiate
a revision to the FIRM and FIS report. The North Carolina Floodplain Mapping Program (NCFMP) will
review all revision requests in accordance with an agreement signed with FEMA on June 1, 2006, under
the FEMA Cooperating Technical Partners initiative. For more information on this initiative, we
encourage you to visit the dedicated portion of the FEMA Flood Hazard Mapping website at
httj)://www.fei-na.gov/plan/prevent/fhnVctp main.shtm or visit the NCFMP website at
http://www.ncfloodmaps.com. Because the BFEs would change as a result of the project, a 90 -day appeal
period would be initiated, during which community officials and interested persons may appeal the revised
BFEs based on scientific or technical data.
The; basis of this CLOMR is, in whole or in part, a channel-modification/culvert project. NFIP regulations,
as cited in Paragraph 60.3(b)(7), require that communities assure that the flood -carrying capacity within
the altered or relocated portion of any watercourse is maintained. This provision is incorporated into your
community's existing floodplain management regulations. Consequently, the ultimate responsibility for
maintenance of modified channel and culvert rests with your community.
This CLOMR is based on minimum floodplain management criteria established under the NFIR Your
community is responsible for approving all floodplain development and for ensuring all necessary permits
required by Federal or State law have been received. State, county, and community officials, based on
knowledge of local conditions and in the interest of safety, may set higher standards for construction in the
SFHA. If the State, county, or community has adopted more restrictive or comprehensive floodplain
management criteria, these criteria take precedence over the minimum NFIP criteria.
If you have any questions regarding floodplain management regulations for your community or the NF1P in
general, please contact the Consultation Coordination Officer (CCO) for your community. Information on
the CCO for your community may be obtained by calling the Director, Federal Insurance and Mitigation
Division of FEMA in Atlanta, Georgia, at [phone]. If you have any technical questions regarding
this CLOMR, please contact the NCFMP at [phone] ext. 106, or the FEMA Map Assistance
Center, toll free, at 1 -877 -FEMA MAP (1-877-336-2627).
Sincerely,
Beth A. Norton, CFM, Program Specialist For: William R. Blanton Jr., CFM, Chief
Engineering Management Branch Engineering Management Branch
Mitigation Directorate Mitigation Directorate

United States Department ®f the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
July 18, 2007
Ms. Andrea Hughes Cook
Ms. Patty Perrino
Carolina Wetland Services
550 E. Westinghouse Blvd.
Charlotte, North Carolina 28273
Dear Ms. Cook and Ms. Perrino:
Subject: Proposed Gaston Mall Redevelopment, Gastonia, Gaston County, North Carolina
(CWS Project No. 2007-1860)
On June 22, 2007; we received. your Jetter,dated.June.11,2007, in which you requested`our
comments about the subject project. We initially responded to a scoping letter from
ECS Carolinas, LLP, regarding the.subject project; on December 20, 2006. (The original scoping
letter from ECS Carolinas did not include information regarding impacts to jurisdictional waters
of the United States.) We have reviewed the information you presented and are providing the
following comments in accordance with the provisions of the National Environmental Policy
Act; 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).
Project Description - The proposed redevelopment will occur at the Gaston Mall on a 54 -acre
parcel. The mall is bordered on three sides by other development, and a wooded area containing
Dunharts Creek forms the western border. According to the information preserited, the inali
redevelopment will cause unavoidable impacts to jurisdictional waters of the United States and
will require Section 404/401 permitting.
Federally Listed Species — Based on the results of your field survey for federally listed species,
we do not believe that any listed species or their habitats occur on the site or that the proposed
project will affect endangered or threatened species or their habitats. Therefore, we believe the
requirements under section 7 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.

Fish and Wildlife Resources — As stated above, the project will cause unavoidable impacts to
jurisdictional waters of the United States, and Section 404/401 permitting will be required. We
remind you that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Clean Water Act 404/401 Permit Program
requires your client to first minimize or avoid impacts to the aquatic resources located on the
property. The permit application should clearly show why impacts are unavoidable and how
impacts that are unavoidable have been minimized. Unavoidable impacts will require mitigation.
According to the 404 (b)(1) guidelines, no discharge or fill material shall be permitted in streams
or wetlands if there is a practicable alternative to the proposed discharge that would have less
adverse impacts on the aquatic ecosystem (40 CFR 230.10); therefore, we suggest that a suitable,
alternative be found that will eliminate or minimize impacts to aquatic resources. We
recommend the following measures to help minimize project impacts:
Use grassed swales in place of curb and gutter and on-site storm -water
management (i.e., bioretention areas) that will result in no net change in the
hydrology of the watershed. Without proper planning, this development will
create more impervious surfaces (such as roofs, roads, and parking lots), which
collect pathogens, metals, sediment, and chemical pollutants and quickly transmit
them to receiving waters. Therefore, all storm -water outlets should drain through
a vegetated upland area prior to reaching any stream or wetland area. Sufficient
retention designs should be implemented to allow for the slow discharge of storm
water, attenuating the potential adverse effects of storm -water surges; thermal
spikes; and sediment, nutrient, and chemical discharges.
2. Preserve and/or restore forested riparian buffers. Given the close proximity of
this project to aquatic resources and the increased impervious surface area that
will occur as a result of this development, we are concerned about the loss and
lack of riparian buffers. Forested riparian buffers (a minimum of 100 feet wide
along perennial streams and 50 feet wide along intermittent streams) should be
created and/or maintained along all aquatic areas. Riparian buffers provide travel
corridors and habitat for wildlife displaced by development. In addition, riparian
buffers protect water quality by stabilizing stream banks, filtering storm -water
runoff, and providing habitat for aquatic and fisheries resources.
Install and maintain stringent measures to control erosion and sediment in order to
prevent unnecessary impacts to aquatic resources within and downstream of the
project site. Disturbed areas should be reseeded with seed mixtures that are
beneficial to wildlife. Fescue -based mixtures should be avoided. Native annual
small grains appropriate for the season are preferred and recommended.
Perimeter erosion -control devices should be installed prior to any on -the -ground
activities. Frequent maintenance of these devices is critical to their proper
function in order to minimize sediment discharge from the project site.
2

4. Avoid development and/or the placement of fill in the 100 -year floodplain. We
strongly discourage the in -fill of 100 -year floodplains because it increases the
potential for flooding to adjacent and downstream properties and interferes with
the natural hydrological process of the waterways. We believe the recent
examples of flooding in North Carolina highlight the importance of avoiding
direct and indirect impacts associated with the occupancy and modification of
floodplains. We remind you that Executive Order 11988 requires federal agencies
(or their designated nonfederal representative) to consider and protect floodplain
functions.
5. Use bridges for all permanent roadway crossings of streams and associated
wetlands because they minimize impacts to aquatic resources, allow for the
movement of aquatic organisms, and eliminate the need to fill and install culverts.
All stream crossings should be made perpendicular to the stream. If culverts are
the only option, we suggest using bottomless culverts. Bottomless culverts do not
need to be buried, thereby minimizing the adverse impacts to streams. Any type
of culvert that is used should be designed to allow for the passage of fish and
other aquatic life. The culvert should be sized to accommodate the movement of
debris and bed material within a channel during a bank -full event. We
recommend the use of multiple barrels (other than the base -flow barrel), placed on
or near stream bank -full or floodplain bench elevation in order to accommodate
floodwaters within the stream corridor. These should be reconnected to
floodplain benches as appropriate. This may be accomplished by using sills on
the upstream end to restrict or divert flow to the base -flow barrel(s). Sufficient
water depth should be maintained in the base -flow barrel during low flows to
accommodate fish movement. If the culvert is longer than 40 linear feet,
alternating or notched baffles should be installed in a manner that mimics the
existing stream pattern. This should enhance the passage of aquatic life by:
(a) depositing sediment in the barrel, (b) maintaining channel depth and flow
regimes, and (c) providing resting places for fish and other aquatic organisms.
6. Avoid the complete clearing of land. If clearing is necessary, efforts should be
made to avoid the removal of large trees at the edges of construction areas.
Disturbed areas should be reseeded with seed mixtures that are beneficial to
wildlife. Fescue -based mixtures should be avoided. Native annual small grains
appropriate for the season are preferred and recommended. Where feasible, use
woody debris and logs from clearing activities to establish brush piles and
downed logs at the edges (just in the woods) of all cleared areas to improve
habitat for wildlife. Allowing the area to develop into a brush/scrub habitat would
maximize benefits to wildlife.
7. Install utility lines (i.e., sewer, gas, water) outside the above -recommended buffer
widths. All utility crossings should be kept to a minimum, and all utility
infrastructure should be kept out, of riparian buffer areas. The directional bore
stream -crossing method (installation of utilities beneath the riverbed, avoiding

impacts to the stream and buffer) should be used for utility crossings. Manholes
or similar access structures should not be allowed within buffer areas. Stream
crossings should be near perpendicular to stream flow and should be monitored at
least every 3 months for maintenance needs during the first 24 months of the
project and annually thereafter. Sewer lines associated with crossing areas should
be maintained and operated at all times to prevent discharges to land or surface
waters. In circumstances where minimum setbacks cannot be attained, sewer
lines shall be constructed of ductile iron or a substance of equal durability.
8. Keep equipment out of streams by operating from the banks in a fashion that
minimizes disturbance to woody vegetation. Equipment should be inspected daily
and should. be maintained to prevent the contamination of surface waters from
leaking fuels, lubricants, hydraulic fluids, or other toxic materials. All fuels,
lubricants, and other toxic materials should be stored outside the riparian
management area of the stream, in a location where the material can be contained.
Equipment should be checked for leaks of hydraulic fluids, cooling system
liquids, and fuel and should be cleaned before fording any stream. Also, all
fueling operations should be accomplished outside the riparian management area.
If an alternatives analysis confirms that impacts to streams and wetlands are unavoidable, a
sufficient mitigation plan must be provided for all unavoidable impacts. As a general rule, we
recommend that all direct impacts to wetlands and streams be mitigated with the restoration of
comparable on-site streams and wetlands at a ratio of at least 2:1. If an in-kind, on-site
mitigation plan cannot be established; we recommend the creation of an in-kind, off-site
mitigation plan. If an in-kind, off-site mitigation plan cannot be provided and a buy -in to the
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program becomes necessary for mitigation of the
impacts, we recommend that the restoration ratio of 2:1 be used to calculate the payment amount.
At this stage and without more specifics about construction locations or techniques, it is difficult
for us to fully assess the potential environmental impacts (direct, indirect, secondary and
cumulative) of this project. We therefore recommend that any environmental document prepared
for this project include the following (if applicable):
1. A detailed analysis of stream and wetland impact areas and locations,
particularly the locations of stream crossings and the construction techniques
proposed for stream crossings within the project area. Plans for all proposed
impact areas should include a complete analysis and comparison of the
available construction techniques and alternatives (including a no -build
alternative).
2. An assessment of any development that will impact the 100 -year floodplain.
Any development that will impact the floodplain will need to be assessed.
3. Details of all surveys and assessments, including the acreage and a description
of the wetlands that will be filled or impacted and the extent (linear feet as well
0

as discharge) of any water courses that will be impacted as a result of the
proposed project. A description of any streams should include the
classification (Rosgen 1995, 1996) and a description of the biotic resources,
and any wetlands affected by the proposed project should be mapped in
accordance with the Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating
Jurisdictional Wetlands.
4. A description of the fishery and wildlife resources within existing and required
additional rights-of-way and any areas,. such as borrow areas, that maybe
affected directly or indirectly by the proposed project.
An assessment of all expected secondary and cumulative environmental
impacts associated with this proposed work. The assessment should specify
the extent and type of development proposed for the project area once the work
is complete and how future growth will be maintained and supported with
regard to sewer lines, water lines, parking areas, and any proposed roadways.
6. A discussion about the extent to which the project will result in the loss,
degradation, or fragmentation of wildlife habitat from direct construction
impacts and from secondary development impacts. The acreage and location
of upland habitat, by cover type, that will be eliminated because of the
proposed project must be noted.
7. Mitigation measures that will be employed to avoid, eliminate, reduce, or
compensate for habitat value losses (wetland, riverine, and upland) associated
with any phase of the proposed project.
We appreciate the opportunity to provide these comments. If we can be of assistance or if you
have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact Mr. Bryan Tompkins of our staff at
828/258-3939, Ext. 240. In any future correspondence concerning this project, please reference
our Log Number 4-2-07-076.
Sincerely,
Brian P. Cole
Field Supervisor

North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Peter B. Sandbeck, Administrator
Michael F. Easley, Governor
Lisbeth C. Evans, Secretary
Jeffrey J. Crow, Deputy Secretary
July 11, 2007
Andrea Hughes
Carolina Wetland Services
550 E Westinghouse Blvd.
Charlotte, NC 28273
Office of Archives and History
Division of Historical Resources
David Brook, Director
Re: Gaston Mall Redevelopment, Cox Road, Gastonia, Gaston County, ER 07-1285
Dear Ms. Hughes:
Thank you for your letter of June 12, 2007, concerning the above project.
We have conducted a review of the proposed undertaking and are aware of no historic resources that would be
affected. by the project. Therefore, we have no comment on the undertaking as proposed.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CFR
Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
contact Renee Gledhill -Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763, ext. 246. In all future
communication concerning this project, please cite the above referenced tracking number.
Sincerely,
A �wruo�d
Peter - andbeck Irl,
�i7�
Location Mailing Address l elepnone/ rax
ADMINISTRATION 507 N. Blount Street, Raleigh NC 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 [phone]/733-8653
RESTORATION 515 N. Blount Street, Raleigh NC 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 [phone]/715-4801
SURVEY & PL.kNNING 515 N. Blount Street, Raleigh, NC 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 [phone]/715-4801

North Carolina
Michael F. Easley, Governor
Ms. Andrea Hughes Cook
Carolina Wetland Services
550 E. Westinghouse Blvd.
Charlotte, NC 28273
T WA
its
NCDENR
Department of Environment and
June 19, 2007
Subject: Gaston Mall Redevelopment; Gastonia, Ga: -.ton County
CWS Project No. 2007-1860
Dear Ms. Cook:
Natural Resources
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
The Natural Heritage Program has no record of rare species, significant natural communities, or
significant natural heritage areas at the site nor within a mile of the project area. Although our maps do
not show records of such natural heritage elements in the project area, it does not necessarily mean that
they are not present. It may simply mean that the area has not been surveyed. The use of Natural
Heritage Program data should not be substituted for actual field surveys, particularly if the project area
contains suitable habitat for rare species, significant natural communities, or priority natural areas.
You may wish to check the Natural Heritage Program database website at w-,vw.ncnhp.org for a listing of
rare plants and animals and significant natural communities in the county and on the quad map.
NC OneMap now provides digital Natural Heritage clata online for free. This service provides site
specific information on GIS layers with Natural Her;(age Program rare species occurrences and
Significant Natural Heritage Areas. The NC OneM,1,) website provides Element Occurrence (EO) ID
numbers (instead of species name), and the data user is then encouraged to contact the Natural Heritage
Pro ,ram for detailed information. This service alloy 's the user to quickly and efficiently get site specific
NHP data without visiting the NHP workroom or waiting for the Information Request to be answered by
N -HP stair. For more 1nforinauion about data Lorn ata and access, viSli'��.- v�'.1 :CriC,i..: t^.� 11.�dat :.htiTil>,
or email NC OneMap at <[e-mail]>.
Plese do not hesitate to contact me at 919-715-8697 if you have questions or need further information.
Sin4.;erely, J
Har... -y E. LeGrand, Jr., Zoologist
Nat n-ai Heritage Program
1601 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1601
Phone: 9°'9-733-49841 FAX: [phone] Internet: www.enr.state.nc.us/ENR/
An Equal Opp.,rtunity / Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled 1 10 % Post Consumer Paper
NNaturally
o�e Carolina

DEC -10-2005 09:49 FROM:PEARSON PROPERTIES 7048670465 TO:7045271133 P.002/002
s--
STONIIA-
NC
GreatPIace. GreatPeoyle. GreatPromise.
Office of the Mayor
December 5, 2007
To Whom It May Concern:
The City of Gastonia anticipates the redevelopment of Gaston Mail and its association
with Pearson Properties.
The mall was originally developed in the early 1970s design, which has been antiquated
and functionally inadequate for decades.
We are encouraged by the design Improvements and the economic impact of this
important retail area of our city. With Its location in our 1-85 corridor, the city staff and
city council have worked with Pearson Properties in creating a retail center of which we
can all be proud.
Respectfully,
j
ennife T. Stultz
ayor
P.O. Sox 1748 - Gastonia, NC 26053-1748 • Phone: 704.866,6720 • fax: [phone]
www.cityofgastonia.com

DEC -02-2005 09:01 FROM:PEARSON PROPERTIES 7048670465 TO:7045271133 P.002/004
STON
r"CNAMBER
OF COMMERCE
November 28, 2007
Mr. Joe Pearson
Pearson Properties
1422 Burtonwood Drive
Suite 200
Gastonia, NC 28054
RE: Support for Re -development of Gaston Mall Property
Dear Mr. Pearson:
The Gaston Chamber of Commerce, on behalf of over 2,500 business representatives, wishes to
express support for the proposed renovation of the Gaston Mall property owned by Pearson
Properties, Located off Cox Road (Exit 21) and U.S. Interstate 85, this property is a gateway into
Gastonia and is by far the most rapidly developing interchange serving Gaston County form 1-85.
Additionally, the Gaston Mall is a primary economic development generator for our community by
providing jobs and significant sales tax base for our growing region. The estimated $30 million this
renovation will yield in investment will more than triple the current property value, thus enhancing
our property tax base. This redevelopment project is critically Important to support our current and
future marketing efforts for new business and new residents.
Please advise If the Chamber can assist in any manner with the furtherance of this project.
Sincerely,
Elysrillegass
U
President/CEO
va'�.,.ya+Y'n".4•i!!.�Y�'+...^�:'^. �: ^^.'Y'1,*;'�!YK•'y'�'%� rT�.. °��ve+�+.W"' '• ��•:�I Si ' I i i
PO"Bo 0.,.
www gastonchamber, r, om

DEC -02-2005 09:01 FROM:PEARSON PROPERTIES 7048670465 TO:7045271133 P.003/004
E..
GASTON
COUNTY ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
November 26, 2007
Mr, Charles W. Pearson, Jr.
Pearson Properties
1422 Burtonwood
Suite 200
Gastonia, NC 28054
Dear Mr. Pearson:
The Gaston County Economic Development Commission strongly supports the
redevelopment of the Gaston Mall property located at Cox Road and Franklin
Boulevard. This area is an important segment of the County's economy, a majority of
retail sales occur within a mile of this site.
The redevelopment of this property will ensure that this area remains strong and viable.
Gastonia has avoided the problems of abandoned retail centers and has been able to
keep this main retail corridor occupied and vibrant through new and redeveloped
properties. Pearson Properties plan will modernize this site and make it fit current retail
requirements, and improve the existing site and drainage. In addition, the future
potential traffic flow is accommodated with the development proposal and will generally
improve access to the site. Their plans have been reviewed extensively and are
meeting some of the most stringent requirements I have seen placed on any project in
the County.
Because of the reasons cited above, the Economic Development Commission would
support the proposed redevelopment of the property. If any agencies have questions
they can reach me at 70.4825-4046.
Sincerely,
D ny-IN ks
Executive Director
C.1 W.UTT11
P. D. Bax 7339, Gestnnta, Noah GardLna 2BUS3.2339 704•,625-4046 Fox 704-825-4068 www.gastmarq 1.15A

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Gaston Mall Redevelopment Site
Date: 01/24/06
Applicant/Owner: Pearson Properties, Inc.
County: Gaston
Investigator(s): Matt Jenkins and Ron Johnson
State: NC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? YesNo
Community ID: we
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes No
Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes No
Plot ID: DP1
(If needed, explain on reverse.)
plant species are FAC or wetter.
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant S ecies
1. Ligustrum sinense
Stratum Indicator
shurb FAC
Dominant Plant Species, Stratum Indicator
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
2. Acer rubrum tree FAC
3. Liquidambar styraciva tree FAC+
4. Carpinus caroliniana tree/shrub FAC
5. Arundinaria sp. subshrub FACW
6.
7.
S.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC
100%
Remarks:
100% of the dominant
plant species are FAC or wetter.
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in remarks):
Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
Inundated
Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Field Observations:
—Sediment Deposits (on leaves)
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth of Surface Water: N/A (in.)
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Depth to Free Water in Pit: N/A (in.)
_Oxidized
_Water -Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Depth to Saturated Soil: <12 (in.)
�_ FAC -Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
Indicators of wetland hydrology are present.
Routine On -Site Data Form Page 1 of 2 11/7/2007

SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Chewacla loam,
frequently flooded Drainage Class undrained
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Fine -loamy, mixed, active, thermic Fluvaguentic Dystrudepts Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color
Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist)
(Munsell Moist( Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-12 B 10YR5/2
2.5YR3/6 many/distinct silt loam
Histosol
Concretions
Histic Epipedon
_
_ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor.
Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moisture Regime
_
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List (Inclusions)
Reducing Conditions
Listed on National Hydric Soils List
—Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
Hydric soils are present.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No (Circle)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No (Circle)
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
Datapoint is representative of a jurisdictional wetland area.
Approved by HQUSACE 2/92
Routine On -Site Data Form Page 2 of 2 11/7/2007

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Gaston Mall Redevelopment Site
Date: 01/24/06
Applicant/Owner: Pearson Properties, Inc.
County: Gaston
Investigator(s): Matt Jenkins and Ron Johnson
State: NC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes No
Community ID: upland
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes No
Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes No
Plot ID: DP2
(If needed, explain on reverse.)
plant species are FAC or wetter.
LMM10:411if_AIII 161Z
Dominant Plant S ecies
1 Acer rubrum
Stratum Indicator
tree FAC
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
2 Quercus falcata tree FACU-
3 Quercus rubra tree FACU
4 Fagus grandifolia tree FACU
5 Ligustrum sinense shrub FAC
6 Polystichum acrostichoides herb FAC
7 Liquidambar styraciva tree FAC+
8
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC
57%
Remarks:
57% of all the dominant
plant species are FAC or wetter.
I no V[110011[sicYJ
Recorded Data (Describe in remarks):
Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
_Inundated
_Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Field Observations:
Sediment Deposits (on leaves)
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth of Surface Water: N/A
(in.)
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Depth to Free Water in Pit: N/A
(in.)
_Oxidized
_Water -Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Depth to Saturated Soil: >12
(in.)
_
_ FAC -Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
Indicators of wetland hydrology are not
present.
Routine On -Site Data Form Page 1 of 2 11/7/2007

]ILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Chewaela loam, frequently flooded Drainage Class undrained
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Fine -loamy, mixed active thermic Fluvaguentic Dystrudepts Confirm Mapped Type? YesCNc
Depth
Matrix Color
Mottle Colors Mottle
Texture, Concretions,
(inches)
Horizon (Munsell Moist)
(Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast
Structure, etc.
0-12
B 7.5YR4/4
none
silt loam
Histosol
Histic Epipedon
Sul idic Odor
Aquic Moisture Regime
Reducing Conditions
Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
are not
WETLAND DETERMINATION
_ Concretions
High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
_Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List (Inclusions)
Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No (Circle)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No (Circle)
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
Data point is representative of a non -jurisdictional upland area.
I JI
Approved by HQUSACE 2/92
Routine On -Site Data Form Page 2 of 2 11/712007

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Gaston Mall Redevelopment Site
Date: 01/24/06
Applicant/Owner: Pearson Properties, Inc.
County: Gaston
Investigator(s): Matt Jenkins and Ron Johnson
State: NC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes No
Community ID: wetland
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes No
Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes No
Plot ID: DP3
(If needed, explain on reverse.)
plant species are FAC or wetter.
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant S ecies
1. Ligustrum sinense
Stratum Indicator
shrub FAC
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
2. Acer negundo tree FACW
3. Acer rubrum tree FAC
4. Carex sp. herb FAC+
5. Alnus serrulata shrub FACW+
6.
7.
S.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC
100%
Remarks:
100% of the dominant
plant species are FAC or wetter.
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in remarks):
Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
X Inundated
—Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
_ Water Marks
Drift Lines
Field Observations:
Sediment Deposits (on leaves)
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth of Surface Water: 6 (in.)
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 0 (in.)
_Water -Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Depth to Saturated Soil: <12 (in.)
FAC -Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
Indicators of wetland hydrology are present.
Routine On -Site Data Form Page 1 of 2 1117/2007

Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Chewacla loam, frequently flooded Drainage Class undrained
Field Observations
—,Vpd ng-tivP_ thermic Ftuvaauentic Dvstrudeuts Confirm Mapped Type? YesC
Depth
Matrix Color
Mottle Colors
Mottle
Texture, Concretions,
(inches)
Horizon (Munsell Moist)
(Munsell Moist)
Abundance/Contrast
Structure, etc.
0-12
B 2.5YR5/2
7.5YR5/6
many/distinct
silt loam
Histosol
Histic Epipedon
Sulfidic Odor
Aquic Moisture Regime
Reducing Conditions
Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
=-r A61r► n='r=011A1AIAT1r1K1
_ Concretions
High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
_ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List (Inclusions)
Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in Remarks)
YYG 1 LMI\LJ 1vV
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No (Circle)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No (Circle)
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
Data point is representative of a jurisdictional wetland area.
Approved by HUUSA:t
Routine On -Site Data Form Page 2 of 2 11/7/2007

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Gaston Mall Redevelopment Site
Date: 05/11/07
Applicant/Owner: Pearson Properties, Inc.
County: Gaston
Investigator(s): Paul Bright, Tom Blackwell, Patty Perrino
State: NC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes No
Community ID: wetland
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes No
Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes No
Plot ID: DP4
(If needed, explain on reverse.)
plant species are FAC or wetter.
VFt ;FTATInN
Dominant Plant Species
1. Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Stratum Indicator
sap & tree FACW
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator',
9. Sambucus canadensis shrub FACW-
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
2. Salix nigra tree OBL
3. Acer rubrum tree FAC
4. Impatiens capensis herb FACW
5. Ligustrum sinense shrub FAC
6. Alnus serrulata shrub FACW+
7. Vibernum dentatum shrub FAC
8. Carex sp. . herb FAC+
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC
100%
Remarks:
100% of the dominant
plant species are FAC or wetter.
10- LYJ§T TS1 r.TIEVA
Recorded Data (Describe in remarks):
Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
Inundated
Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Field Observations:
�-Sediment Deposits (on leaves)
—� Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth of Surface Water: N/A (in.)
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 4 (in.)
-V_Water-Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Depth to Saturated Soil: <12 (in.)
_
_ FAC -Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
Indicators of wetland hydrology are present.
Routine On -Site Data Form Page 1 of 2 11/7/2007

nu R
Unit Name
as and Phase): Chewacla loam, frequently flooded Drainage Class undrained
Field Observations
nnmv /Ciihnm�in\• Fine_Inamv_ mixed. active. thermic Fluvaauentic Dvstrudeats Confirm Mapped Type? Yes( N
Depth
Matrix Color
Mottle Colors
Mottle
Texture, Concretions,
(inches)
Horizon (Munsell Moist)
(Munsell Moist)
Abundance/Contrast
Structure, etc.
0-3
B 10YR4/1
2.5YR4/8
many distinct
clay loam
3-12
B 10YR5/1
7.5YR5/6
many distinct
clay loam
Histosol
Histic Epipedon
Sulfidic Odor
Aquic Moisture Regime
Reducing Conditions
Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
arks:
vators of hvdric soils are pry
WETLAND DETERMINATION
_ Concretions
_ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
_ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List (Inclusions)
—� Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No (Circle)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No (Circle)
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
Data point is representative of a jurisdictional wetland area.
Approved by HQUSACE 2/92
Routine On -Site Data Form Page 2 of 2 11/7/2007

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Gaston Mall Redevelopment Site
Date: 05/11/07
Applicant/Owner: Pearson Properties, Inc.
County: Gaston
Investigator(s): Paul Bright, Tom Blackwell, Patty Perrino
State: NC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes No
Community ID: upland
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes No
Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes No
Plot ID: DP5
(If needed, explain on reverse.)
Remarks:
44% of all the dominant
rT CTIA\1
V GVG IMI IV114
Dominant Plant S ecies
1 Rubus argutus
Stratum Indicator
subshrub FACU+
Dominant Plant Species StratumIndicator
9 Prunus serotina shrub FACU
10 Liquidambar styracii lua tree FAC+
11
12
13
14
15
16
2 Sambucus canadensis shrub FACU-
3 Lonicera japonica vine FAC-
4 Solidago sp. herb Unknown
5 Carex sp. herb FAC+
6 Juncus effusus herb FACW+
7 Eupatorium capillifolium herb FACU
8 Vitus rotundifolia vine FAC
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC
44%
Remarks:
44% of all the dominant
plant species are FAC or wetter.
n r vrwl..vv 1
Recorded Data (Describe in remarks):
Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
Inundated
Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Field Observations:
Sediment Deposits (on leaves)
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth of Surface Water: N/A
(in.)
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Depth to Free Water in Pit: N/A
(in.)
Water -Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Depth to Saturated Soil: N/A
(in.)
_
_ FAC -Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
Indicators of wetland hydrology are not
present.
Routine On -Site Data Form Page 1 Of 2 11/7/2007

Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Chewacla loam, frequently flooded Drainage Class undrained
Field Observations
T ,., �c„ti . �• Tiina_Inamv mixed_ active_ thermic Fluvaouentic Dvstrudeuts Confirm Mapped Type? YesC
Depth
Matrix Color
Mottle Colors Mottle
Texture, Concretions,
(inches)
Horizon (Munsell Moist)
(Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast
Structure, etc.
0-6
B 10YR5/2
none
silt loam
6-12
B 10YR5/3
7.5YR5/8 few/faint
silt loam
Histosol _ Concretions
Histic Epipedon _ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor _ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List (Inclusions)
Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _Other (Explain in Remarks)
rs of hvdric soils are not
CTI AAM nI=r=0MIAIAT10AI
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No (Circle)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No (Circle)
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
Data point is representative of a non -jurisdictional upland area.
Approved by HQUSACE 2/92
Routine On -Site Data Form Page 2 of 2 19/7/2007

North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identification Form; Version 3.1
Date: 05/11/2007 Project: Gaston Mall Site Latitude: N350 15' 14.5"
Evaluator: TJB, PABA PMP site: Perennial Stream A Longitude: W810 8' 22"
Total Points: Other
Stream is at least intermittent 45.50 county: Gaston e.g. Quad Name: SCP1
if? 19 or perennial if >_ 30
A. Geomorghaloav (Subtotal = 26.5 i Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1'. Continuous bed and bank
3.01
0
i 1
2 1
3
2. Sinuosity
2.0 j
0
1 1
2
3
3. In -channel structure: riffle -pool sequence
3.0 i
0
1
0.0
0
4. Soil texture or stream substrate sorting
3.0E
0
1
2
3
5. Active/relic floodplain
3.01
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
3.0 1
0
1
2
3
7_ Braided channel
0.01
0
1
2
3
8. Recent alluvial deposits
3.0
0
1
2
3
9' Natural levees
1.0 j
0
1
2
3 !
10, Headcuts
0.01
0
1
2
11. Grade controls
1.01
0
0.5
1
1.5
12_ Natural valley or drainagewray
1.51
0
0.5
1 I
1.5
13. Second or greater order channel on existing
t1SGS or NRCS map or other documented
evidence.
Ii
3.0 ;
No = 0
Yes = 3
- Man-made ditches are not rated: see discussions in manuai
B. Hvdroloav (Subtotal = 10.0 }
14� Groundwater flowffdischarge
2.01
0
1
2
i 3
15. Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain, or
Water in channel -- d or rowin season
3.01
0
1
2
3
16. Leaflitter
1.51
1.5
1
0.0
0
17. Sediment on plants or debris1.0
'
0
0.5
1
{ 1.5 E
18. Organic debris lines or piles (Wrack lines)
1.0 ,
0
0.5
1 1
1.5
19. Hydric soils (redoximorphic features) present?1.5
1.011
No = 0
0.5
Yes= 1.5 i
C. Bioloqv (Subtotal = 9.00 }
20 . Fibrous roots in channel
3.0 (
3
2
210. Rooted plants in channel
3.0 i
3
2
1 0
22_ Crayfish
0.5 !
0
0.5
1 1.5
23. Bivalves
0.0
0
1
2 3
24, Fish
1.0
0
10.5
1 1.5
25. Amphibians
0.51
0
0.5
1 1.5
26_ Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
1.011
0
0.5
1 1.5
27. Filamentous algae; periphyton
0.0 i
0
1
2 3
28. Iron oxidizing bacteria/fungus.
0
0.5
1 1.5
290 Wetland plants in streambed
0.00 j
FAC = 0.5;
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5
SAV = 2.0; Other = 0
Items 20 and 21 focus on the presence of upland plants. Item 29 tocuses on the presence or aquatic or w.retianu prams.
Sketch_
Notes: (use back side of this form for additional notes.)
Many small fish; two frogs heard; one crayfish observed,
abundant ca isflies, snails, and gelatinous eggs on roc
bot -toms

North Carolina Division of Water Quality -Stream Identification Form; Version 3.1
Date: 05/11/2007 Project: Gaston Mall Latitude: N350 15' 52"
EvaluatorpAB, Pmp Site: Perennial Stream B Longitude: W810 8' 17.5x►
Total Points: Other
Stream Is at least intermittent '1 Q 50 County• e.g. Quad Alame:
SCP2
If >_ 19 or erennial if >_ 2 O 30 • Gaston
A. Geomorphology (subtotal= 10.5
3.0
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong j
1'. Continuous bed and bank
2. Sinuosity
0.0
0.0
0
0
1
1
1 2
2
3
3��
3. In -channel structure: riffle -pool sequence2.0
1.0
0
1
2
3
4. Soil texture or stream substrate sorting
2.0
0
1
2
3
5. Activetrelic floodplain
3.0
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
1.0
0
1
2 i
3
7. Braided channel
0.0
0
1
2 (
3
8. Recent alluvial deposits
1.0
0
1
2 E
3
Natural levees
0.0
0
f 1
2
3
_9'
10. Headcuts
0.0
0
1
2
3
11. Grade controls
1.0
0
0.5
1
1.5
12- Natural valley or drainageway
0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
13. Second or greater order channel on existin
USES or NRCS map or other documented
evidence.
0.0
No= 0�
Yes = 3
` Man-made ditches are not rated: see aiscussions in manual
14. Groundwater ffo4discharge
3.0
0
1 {
2
3
15. Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain, or
Water in channel --..dry or grmAting season
3.0
0
1
2
3
16. Leaflitter
1.0
1-5
1
0.5
; 0
17. Sediment on plants or debris
0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
18- Organic debris lines or piles (Wrack lines)
1.0
0
_ 0.5
1
1.5
19. Hydric soils (redoximorphic features) present 4.5
0.0
No = 0
_
Yes = 1-5 I
rc:_R_-..-. .^.-_,._o _ U 1111 X
- _, _Z:jr e. �. .
20 . Fibrous roots in channel
3.0
3
2
1 '
0
21 . Rooted plants in channel
3.0
3
F 2
1
0
22, Crayfish
0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Bivalves
0.0
0
1
2 I
3
24. Fish
0.0
0
0-5
1
1.5
25. Amphibians
0.0
0
10.5
1
1.5
26. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
27. Filamentous algae; periphyton
0.0
0
1
2
3
28. Iron oxidizing bacterialfungus.
1.0
0
0.5
1
1.5
29 °. Wetland plants in streambed
0.00
FAC = 0.5;
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5
SAV = 2.0;
Other = 0
Items 23 and 21 Locus on the presence or upiano plants, item ,:e focuses Vii LIM JJIC5�111� � -1j- ­ �• as ••�.• r -•••�-
Sketch:
Notes: (use back side of this form for additional notes.)
Man-made channelized stream; therefore, parameters 1 and
9 were not rated.

I
OFFICE USE ONLY: USACE AID# DWQ #
SCP1— Perennial Channel A
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
1. Applicant's Name: Pearson Properties 2. Evaluator's Name: Paul Bright Tom Blackwell Patty Perrino
3. Date of Evaluation: 5-11-07
5. Name of Stream: Duharts Creek
7. Approximate Drainage Area: 10 square miles
9. Length of Reach Evaluated: 400 linear feet
4. Time of Evaluation: 4.00 pm
6. River Basin: Catawba
8. Stream Order: second
10. County: Gaston
11. Location of reach under evaluation (include nearby roads and landmarks): From Charlotte travel south on I-85. take Cox Rd exit
(exit 21)Turn left onto Cox Rd and then right into Gaston Mall Go all the way to the back corner of the mall.
12. Site Coordinates (if known): N35° 15' 14.5" W81° 8'22"
13. Proposed Channel Work (if any): stream relocation
14. Recent Weather Conditions: no rain within past 48 hours
15. Site conditions at time of visit: sunny. 80 degrees
16. Identify any special waterway classifications known: _Section 10 _Tidal Waters _Essential Fisheries Habitat
_Trout Waters _Outstanding Resource Waters _ Nutrient Sensitive Waters _Water Supply Watershed (I-IV)
17. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES NO If yes, estimate the water surface area: 0.23 acre
18. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES NO 19. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES NO
20. Estimated Watershed Land Use: 50 % Residential 20 % Commercial _% Industrial _% Agricultural
30 % Forested _% Cleared / Logged % Other (Institutional )
21. Bankfull Width: 10' 22. Bank Height (from bed to top of bank): 5"
23. Channel slope down center of stream: _Flat (0 to 2%) X Gentle (2 to 4%) _Moderate (4 to 10%) _Steep (>10%)
24. Channel Sinuosity: Straight X Occasional Bends _Frequent Meander _Very Sinuous _Braided Channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points to each
characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the characteristics identified in the
worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or
weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character
of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more
continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of
100 representing a stream of the highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 62 Comments:
Evaluator's Signature Date
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers in order to make a preliminary assessment of
stream quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change — version 05/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
SCP1—Perennial Channel A
1
Presence of flow/ persistent pools in stream
0-5
0 - 4
0 — 5
4
no flow or saturation= 0; strongflow = max points)
2
Evidence of past human alteration
0-6
01-5
0' 5
2
extensive alteration= 0; no alteration = maxpoints)
3
Riparian zone
0— 6
0— 4
0-15.
3
no buffer = 0; contiguous, wide buffer = maxpoints)
4
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
0— 5
0-4
0-4
4
extensive discharges = 0• no discharges = max oints
5
Groundwater discharge
0-3
0-4,
0-4
2
no discharge = 0• springssees wetlands etc, = max oints
6
Presence of adjacent floodplain'
0'— 4
0 -- 4
01-2
3
no floodplain = 0; extensive floodplain = maxpoints)
Entrenchment / floodplain access0-
5
0 :— 4
0— 2,
2
(dee0y entrenched = 0; frequent flooding = max oints
8
Presence of adjacent wetlands
0-6
0- 4
0— 2
4
no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands = maxpoints)
9
Channel sinuosity,
0— 5
0— 4
0— 3
2
extensive channelization = 0; natural meander: = max p2ints
10
Sediment input
0=5
0'— 4
0— 4
2
extensive de osition=°0; little or no sediment = max oints
11
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
0`-4
0-5
2
fine, homo enous = 0; large, diverse sizes = max oints
12
Evidence of channel incision or widening
0-51
0=4
0 — 5
1
(deeply incised = 0• stable bed & banks = maxpoints)
13
Presence of major bank failures
0 = 5
0-5
0-5
0
severe erosion= 0• no erosion stable banks = maxpoints)
14
Root depth and density on banks
'throu
0-3
0-4
0-5
2
no visible roots = 0; dense roots hout.= max oints
15
Impact by agriculture or livestock production
0-5
0 — 4
0-5
4
substantial hn act =0; no evidence = maxpoints)
16
Presence of riffle.pool/ripple-pool complexes.0—
3
0-5
0-16
3
no riffles/ripples or pools = 0; well-developed = maxpoints)
17
Habitat complexity
0-6
0-6
o-6
4
little or no habitat = 0• frequent, varied habitats = maxpoints)
18
Canopy coverage over streambed
0-5
0-5
0-5
3
no shading vegetation = 0; continuous canopy = maxpoints)
19
Substrate embeddedness
NA*
0— 4
0— 4
3
(deeply embedded = 0; loose structure= max
20
Presence of stream invertebrates
0-4
0-5
0-5
4
no evidence = 0• common, numerous types = maxpoints)
21
Presence of amphibians
0-4
0-4
0-4
1
no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max oints
22
Presence of fish.
0-4
0-4
0-4
3
no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = maxpoints)
23
Evidence of wildlife use
0— 6
0-5
0-5
4
no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = maxpoints)
TOTAL SCORE (also enter oii first page) I 62
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
N

OFFICE USE ONLY
USACE AID#
SCP2 — Perennial Stream B
DWQ#
3 ( STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
1. Applicant's Name: Pearson Properties 2. Evaluator's Name: Paul Bright Patty Perrino
3. Date of Evaluation: 5-11-07
5. Name of Stream: UT to Duharts Creek
7. Approximate Drainage Area: 170 acres
4. Time of Evaluation: 4.30 pm
6. River Basin: Catawba
8. Stream Order:
9. Length of Reach Evaluated: 300 linear feet 10. County: Gaston
11. Location of reach under evaluation (include nearby roads and landmarks): From Charlotte travel south on I-85, take Cox Rd exit
(exit 2 t) Turn left onto Cox Rd and then right into Gaston Mall Go all the way to the back comer of the mall.
12. Site Coordinates (if known): N35° 15' 52" W810 8' 17.5"
13. Proposed Channel Work (if any): wipe entire channel
14. Recent Weather Conditions: no rain within past 48 hours
15. Site conditions at time of visit: sunny 80 degrees -
16. Identify any special waterway classifications known: _Section 10 _Tidal Waters _Essential Fisheries Habitat
_Trout Waters _Outstanding Resource Waters e Nutrient Sensitive Waters _Water Supply Watershed (I-IV)
17. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES (�DIf yes, estimate the water surface area:
18. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES NO 19. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES NO
20. Estimated Watershed Land Use: 60 % Residential 10 % Commercial % Industrial % Agricultural
30 % Forested _% Cleared / Logged % Other (Institutional )
21. Bankfull Width: 20' 22. Bank Height (from bed to top of bank): 5"
23. Channel slope down center of stream: X Flat (0 to 2%) _Gentle (2 to 4%) _Moderate (4 to 10%) _Steep (>10%)
24. Channel Sinuosity: X Straight _Occasional Bends _Frequent Meander _Very Sinuous _Braided Channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points to each
characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the characteristics identified in the
worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or
weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character
of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more
continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of
100 representing a stream of the highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 46 Comments: Channelized stream.
Evaluator's Signature Late
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers in order to make a preliminary assessment of
stream quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change — version 05/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
SCP2 — Perennial Stream B
1
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
0
Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream
0-5
0 - 4
O-5
2
no flow or saturation= 0 strong flow= maxpoints)
r
2
Evidence of past human alteration
0-6
0-5
0 - 5
1
extensive alteration .= 0• no alteration .= max oints
3
Riparian zone
0— 6
0 — 4
0 - 5
2
no buffer = 0; contiguous, wide buffer = max oints
4 ;
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
0-5
0 = 4
0 — 4
4
extensive discharges = 0• no discharges = maxpoints)
5
Groundwater discharge
0-3
0-4
0- 4
2
no discharge = 0; springs, see s, wetlands, etc. = maxpoints)
6
Presence of adjacent floodplain
0 -.4
0 - 2
2
no floodplain = 0; extensive flood lain = maxpoints)0-4
Entrenchment / floodplain access
0-5
0 - 4
0 -.2
2
dee 1 entrenched = 0;_frequent flooding = max points)
8
Presence of adjacent wetlands
0-6
0-4
0- 2
2
no wetlands 0; large adjacent wetlands = maxpoints)
9
.=
- Channel sinuosity
0-5
0-4
0-3
0
extensive channelization = 0; natural meander = max oints
10
Sediment input
0= 5
0= 4
0- 4
2
extensive de osition= O; little or no sediment ,= maxpoints)
"
11
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
NA x
U. = 4
0-5
2
fine, homogenous = 0; large, diverse sizes = max oints
...tet
12
Evidence of channel incision or widening
0=5
0=4
0-5
2
(deeply incised = 0; stable bed & banks = max points).
H`
13
Presence of major bank failures'
0 - 5
0 —5
0 = 5
2
severe erosion = 0• no erosion,` stable banks = maxpoints)
140-3
Root depth and density on banks
=
0-4
0-5
1
no visible roots= 0• dense roots throu out maxpoints)
'=
15
Impact by agriculture or livestock production
0 = 4
0 - 5
4
substantial impact =0; no evidence= max points)0-5
16
presence of riffle-pool/ripple-pool complexes
0= 3
0` 5
0-6
2
no riffles/ripples or pools = 0; well-developed = maxpoints)
17
Habitat complexity
Habitat
0-6
0-6
0-6
2
or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = maxpoints)
i--
18
Canopy coverage over streambed
0-5
0'— 5
0-5
5
no shading ve etation = 0; continuous canopy = maxpoints)
19
Substrate embeddedness
0-4
0 — 4
3
(deeply embedded = 0; loose structure = max)NA*
20
Presence of stream invertebrates
0-4
0-5
0-5
1
no evidence = 0; common numerous types =maxpoints)
21
Presence of amphibians
0-4
0-4
0-4
0
O
no evidence = 0; common numerous types = maxpoints)
O
220-4
Presence of fish
0-4
0=4
0
(no evidence = 0: common. numerous tvnes = max noints)
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
0

� `' t �/l'�, �t� t yam• �� n r � :R• ri ;' "y ti�l*.3 �'�' � t
I' I t
Y ': 1 �"� 1 4, y• A1�1+'RI ,'�
• i , � s Y� t i� ^b� �
fe�rl til 1'��'1 �t ��t ,` 1... ♦fy..
^. it•,�a. .at'��lik�lrei6;/� .SM"_K _�. J�eReA''.�.S,e�\V

Gaston Mall Redeveplopment
Section 404 Individual Permit Application
August 8, 2007
Photograph C: Wetland AA
Photograph D: Upland adjacent to weiianu PKzA, Lr -3

Gaston Mall Redeveplopment
Section 404 Individual Permit Application
August 8, 2007
Photograph 1;: Wetland lili
Photograph F: Power line right-ot-way surveyea ror rruLnULUU OVUc,Ic3

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 I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD): August 8, 2007
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Asheville Field Office
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: D,J,).j •4-S Cit ee,\C, 5}c cr_, a �fii • d
State: NC County/parish/borough: Gaston City: Gastonia
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 35.2494° N, Long. 81.1372° W.
Universal Transverse Mercator: Zone 17
Name of nearest waterbody: Duhart Creek
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: South Fork Catawba River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 03050101
E Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
F 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):
Q. Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
Field Determination. Date(s): January 24 and 25, 2006
SECTION H: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Are a_o "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]
0 Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
0 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 Are "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): r
0 TNWs, including territorial seas
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
® Relatively permanent waters2 (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
0 Non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Z Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Q 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: 1142 linear feet: 20 width (ft) and/or 0.52 acres.
Wetlands: 0.27 acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: 1987,DelineatiorrManunl
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 3 months).
' Supporting documentation is presented in Section III.F.

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 III.A.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 III.D.1.; otherwise, see Section III.B below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW: N/A.
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent': N/A.
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 III.D.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 waterbody° 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 III.B.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section III.13.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section III.0 below.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: Pick List
Drainage area: P'Ick List
Average annual rainfall: inches
Average annual snowfall: inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
❑ Tributary flows directly into TNW.
❑ Tributary flows through Pick List 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'Lisf aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNW5:
Tributary stream order, if known:
"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 apow:
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: Pick List.
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
F]Silts ElSands ❑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 geometryPick.Lisf
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for Pick List
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year: Pick List
Describe flow regime:
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: Pick Li§t. Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Pick List. 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):
F1Discontinuous OHWM.' 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: ❑ 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.
7Ibid.

(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 -
Flow is: Pick List. Explain:
Surface flow is: Pick Lisi
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Pick List. 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 Pick -List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick -List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: Pick List.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the Pick List 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 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:
1. 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 III.D:
2. 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 IIID:
3. Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RTW. 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 IIID:
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
1. 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.
2. 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: Duharts Creek scored 45.5 on NCDWQ form.
Fj 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: 1142 linear feet 20 width (ft).
0 Other non -wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
3. Non-RPWss 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 III. C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
Q Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
0 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: All three wetlands flow directly into Dubarts Creek.
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section III.B 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: 0.27 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.
Q 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
FJ 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):"
Qwhich 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.
Q which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
Q Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
0 Other factors. Explain:
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
Nee Footnote # 3.
'To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III.D.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
"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):
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
judgment (check all that apply):
❑; Non -wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
El 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: 1 "=2,000' Gastonia North, NC, 1993.
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: Soil Survey of Gaston County, NC, Sheet No. 3, 1989.
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): Gaston County, 2005 Orthos.
or ® Other (Name & Date): See attached report.
❑ 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 I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD): August 8, 2007
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Asheville Field Office
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Skcesxq-� Q)
State: NC County/parish/borough: Gaston City: Gastonia
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 35.2494° N, Long. 81.13720 W.
Universal Transverse Mercator: Zone 17
Name of nearest waterbody: Duhart Creek
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: South Fork Catawba River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 03050101
ZCheck if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
0 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):
Q Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
El Field Determination. Date(s): January 24 and 25, 2006
SECTION H: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Are no "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]
Q Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
0 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 Are "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): r
Q TNWs, including territorial seas
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
Relatively permanent waterS2 (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
El 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: 660 linear feet: 10 width (ft) and/or 0.15 acres.
Wetlands: 0.68 acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: 1987.1)elineatt6n Manual
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.
' 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).
' Supporting documentation is presented in Section III.F.

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 HI.A.1 and Section HI.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections III.A.1 and 2
and Section III.D.1.; otherwise, see Section HI.B below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW: N/A.
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent": N/A.
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 III.D.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 III.B.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section M.B.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section III.0 below.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: Picktist
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 Pick List 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 TNW5:
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.
'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 apply):
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: Pick List-.
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
❑ Silts ❑ Sands ❑ Concrete
❑ Cobbles ❑ Gravel ❑ Muck
EI -Bedrock _____ ____ ❑. Vegetation.__ Type_ /% cover;
❑ Other. Explain:
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain:
Presence of run/riffle/pool complexes. Explain:
Tributary geometryPick!At
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for Pick List
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year: Pick List
Describe flow regime:
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: Pick List. Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Pick List. 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 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:
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 List. Explain:
Surface flow is: Pick List
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow PckLi'st. 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 Pick i;ist river miles from TNW.
Project waters are 01ok List' aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from Pick.List.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the Pick List 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 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? (YM 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:
1. 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 IIID:
2. 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:
3. 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 to
Section IIID:
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:
7 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: Even with extensive channelization, stream scored 28.5 on NCDWQ form, and a crayfish was spotted.
0 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):
Z Tributary waters: 660 linear feet 10 width (ft).
0 Other non -wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
3. Non-RPWss 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 IH.C.
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.
® 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: Wetland AA flows southeast directly into perennial stream.
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section III.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: 0.68 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.
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.
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):io
0 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.
Q; Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
0 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 III.D.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
io 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):
Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
❑ Other non -wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
M 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):
❑ Non -wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
El 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):
Z 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: 1"=2,000' Gastonia North, NC, 1993.
® USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: Soil Survey of Gaston County, NC, Sheet No. 3, 1989.
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): Gaston County, 2005 Orthos.
or ® Other (Name & Date): See attached report.
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 I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD): August 8, 2007
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Asheville Field Office
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: �u9nc� f� S � � a�W�S y2 a—,Y, a,e S (,
State: NC County/parish/borough: Gaston City: Gastonia
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 35.24940 N, Long. 81.1372° W.
Universal Transverse Mercator: Zone 17
Name of nearest waterbody: Duhart Creek
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: South Fork Catawba River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 03050101
EDCheck if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
Q 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):
Q Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
Z Field Determination. Date(s): January 24 and 25, 2006
SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Are_no "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.
0 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 Are "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): 1
F1 TNWs, including territorial seas
[] Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
Relatively permanent waters2 (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
0 Non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Q Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
R 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: 1142 linear feet: 20 width (ft) and/or 0.52 acres.
Wetlands: 0.27 acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: 1987 Delineation Manual
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.
z 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 III.F.

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 III.A.1 and Section III.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections M.A.1 and 2
and Section M.D.I.; otherwise, see Section III.B below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW: N/A.
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent": N/A.
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 Rapanoshave 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 III.D.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section M.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 waterbody° 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 III.B.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section III.B.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 Pick List 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 TNW5:
Tributary stream order, if known:
'Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and
West.
s 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 apply):
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: ErckList.
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 geometryNck L1S
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for Puck List
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year: Pick )v,5t
Describe flow regime:
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: AKki t. Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: P�. 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 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:
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 Li, t. Explain:
Surface flow is: Prek )Dist
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Pick List. 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 PickLisf river miles from TNW.
Project waters are Piek List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: ist.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the P!ekList 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 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:
1. 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 III.D:
2. 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:
3. 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 to
Section IIID:
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
1. TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
n TNWs: linear feet width (ft), Or, acres.
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
2. 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: Duharts Creek scored 45.5 on NCDWQ form.
❑ 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: 800 linear feet 20 width (ft).
El Other non -wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Non-RPWss that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
r] 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 III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
F1 Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
Q 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.
F-1 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 III.B 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.
F1 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.
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
0 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):io
which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
Q 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.
0 Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
] Other factors. Explain:
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
8See Footnote # 3.
s To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III.D.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):
❑ 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
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:
El 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):
Z 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: 1"=2,000' Gastonia North, NC, 1993.
® USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: Soil Survey of Gaston County, NC, Sheet No. 3, 1989.
❑ 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)
Z Photographs: ® Aerial (Name & Date): Gaston County, 2005 Orthos.
or ® Other (Name & Date): See attached report.
Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
El Applicable/supporting case law:
Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD: