20071470_Reports_20071109

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):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Western Wake Freeway, R-2635, S 9, WL 13, WL 20
State:NC County/parish/borough: Wake City: Apex
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 35.69143° , Long. 78.86753° .
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Big Branch
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: Cape Fear River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 03030004
Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
? Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc...) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Office (Desk) Determination. Date: October 2007
Field Determination. Date(s): June 2001, October 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]
[I Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
? Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:
*B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Pick Litt "waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply):
? TNWs, including territorial seas
? Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
Relatively permanent waters2 (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TN.W.&
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: 455 linear feet: T width (ft) and/or acres.
Wetlands: 0.38 acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: 1957 Delineation ?iManual
Elevation of established OHWM (if known): not 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).
' 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.I.; otherwise, see Section HIM below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent":
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non-navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year-round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section III.D.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section II1.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 waterbodya 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 III.C below.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: 7 acres
Drainage area: 5 acres
Average annual raintail: 44.19 inches
Average annual snowfall: 4.5 inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
? Tributary flows directly into TNW.
®Tributary flows through tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are 15-20 river miles from TNW.
Project waters are I (or less) river miles from RPW.
Project waters are 10-15 aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are 1 (or,less) aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
_a*
Identify flow route to TNW5: Big Branch, White Oak Creek, Harris Lake, Cape Fear River.
Tributary stream order, if known: 1 S`
r
f
•
° 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: 3 feet
Average depth: 2-4 feet
Average side slopes: 2:1.
areas.
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: tributary ehibits signs of erosion in some
Presence of run/riffle/pool complexes. Explain: weekly developed riffle/pool complexes.
Tributary geometry: Relatively straight
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): 2-4 %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: $ easonal flow
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year: 11-20
Describe flow regime: moderate flow at time of site visit.
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: Nscrctc and confine. Characteristics: well defined channel, with moderately developed floodplain.
Subsurface flow: Unknown. Explain findings: no tests conducted.
? 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
? changes in the character of soil ?
? shelving
? vegetation matted down, bent, or absent
® leaf litter disturbed or washed away ?
® sediment deposition
? water staining ?
? other (list):
? Discontinuous OHWM.' Explain:
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determ
? High Tide Line indicated by: ?
? oil or scum line along shore objects
? fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore)
? physical markings/characteristics
? tidal gauges
? other (list):
the presence of litter and debris
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
the presence of wrack line
sediment sorting
scour
multiple observed or predicted flow events
abrupt change in-plant community
ne lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
? survey to available datum;
? physical markings;
? vegetation lines/changes in vegetation types.
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain: top of watershed is crossed by US HWY 1. Water color was clear, waterhed mostly forested, except near
highway.
Identify specific pollutants, if known: Potential for highway runoff, sediment.
•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): forested, >100' in most places.
? 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: crayfish present, evidence of use by terrestrial wildlife.
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:WL 13 and WL 20 toal 0.38 acres
Wetland type. Explain: Bottomland hardwood/headwater forest.
Wetland quality. Explain:low-medium, wetlands are relatively small, but are within the headwater region of S 9.
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non-TNW:
Flow is: Intermittent flog. Explain: wetlands are found on both sides of US I at the top of natural valley for S 9. WL 20
begins at the base of a pond.
Surface flow is: Not present
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Lliiknown. Explain findings: no tests conducted.
? Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non-TNW:
? Directly abutting
® Not directly abutting
® Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain: wetlands are the headwaters for S 9 within the natural valley •
for S 9.
? Ecological connection. Explain:
? Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are I5-20 river miles from TNW.
Project waters arc 10-15 , mnl (straieht) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: Wetland to navigable wipers.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the 101) - 500-year 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: no surface water during site visits.
Identify specific pollutants, if known: none specifically identified, potential for highway runoff.
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
® Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):forested, >100' in most areas.
® Vegetation type/percent cover. Explain: forested, herbaceous, 75%.
® Habitat for:
? Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
? Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
? Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
® Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings: evidence of use by terrestrial wildlife, birds, may provide habitat in late
winter/early spring for amphibians such as frogs and salamanders.
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis:
Approximately ( 0.38 ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.
0
For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (YIN) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (YIN) Size (in acres)
• N 0.18 N 0.20
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed: nutrient uptake, pollutant removal,
water storage, energy dissipation, wildlife habitat.
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 th 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 III.D: Both wetlands are in the natural valley for S 9. Their position upslope of S 9 and their proximity to the highway
provide the potential for drainage from the highway to move through the wetlands to S 9 and receiving waters downstream. This
water may carry pollutants from highway runoff. The wetlands provide the first line of defense and as such may filter some of the
pollutants before they enter S 9. In times of heavy rainfall, the organic matter and detritus may be flushed from the wetlands and
be carried downstream to support the food web in receiving waters.
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:
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: S 9 begins as an ephemeral drain without clearly defined banks or stream geomorphology. Downstream of the
wetlands a continuous bed and bank forms and the stream displays geomorphological caharacteristics that would be expected •
of streams that flow continuously for significant periods. The stream has continuous bed and bank and has a moderately
developed floodplain. There are depositional bars/benches and substrate sorting .
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
EJ Tributary waters: 455 linear feet 3' width (ft).
[] Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
3. Non-RPWss that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
[Q 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):
Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
4. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year-round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW:
El 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.
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
® Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: 0.38 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 TN W 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.'
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):"
•
8See Footnote # 3.
9 To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III.D.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
? which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
? from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
? which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
•
? Other factors. Explain:
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
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:
? 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: New Hill, NC 1:24,000.
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: Cawthorn, Joel. 1970. Soil Survey of Wake County, North
Carolina. United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, now Natural Resource Conservation Service. Raleigh,
NC.
National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
? FEMA/FIRM maps:
010 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.
El. 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
Photographs: ? Aerial (Name & Date):
or ? Other (Name & Date):
Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
Applicable/supporting case law:
[ Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
Q Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:
- 40
•
•
0
67-271,?
North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identification Form; Version 3.1
•
•
Date: Project (z ato'31?- Latitude: 3So L
Evaluator. _ site, Longitude: J$° 152r $.
YYl I f=?lP 1?j
Total Points: Other
Stream is at least intermittent S County:
if a 19 or perennial if a 30 O W( e.g. Quad Name: w
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal= 1S- : < °pbsent ..>. .,... 1t111eak : ;. , NJdrte . Str
18. Continuous bed and bank 0 1 2
2. Sinuosity 0 2 3
3. In-channel structure: riffle-pool sequence 0 1 2 3
4. Soil texture or stream substrate sorting 0 2 3
5. Activetrelic floodplain 0 1 3
6. Depositional bars or benches 0 1 2 3
7. Braided channel no 1 2 3
8. Recent alluvial deposits 0 1 2 3
9a Natural levees 1 2 3
10. Headcuts 0 1 3
11. Grade controls 0 C0 1 1.5
12. Natural valley or drainageway 0 0.5 1 1.
13. Second or greater order channel on existing
USGS or NRCS map or other documented
evidence.
tTo =
Yes = 3
- Man-made ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
R Hvrirnlnnv (Suhtntal = 1.S )
14. Groundwater flow/discharge 0 1 2 3
15. Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain, or
Water in channel - d or growing season 0 1
v 3
16. Leaflitter 1.5 1 0. 0
17. Sediment on plants or debris 0 0 1 1.5
18. Organic debris lines or piles (Wrack lines) 0 0.5 1 1.5
19. Hydric soils (redoximorphic features) present? No = 0 es =
C_ Bioloov (Subtotal = (., 1
26b. Fibrous roots in channel 3 2 - • 1 0
21 . Rooted plants in channel ? 2 1 0
22. Crayfish 0 0.5 1 1.5
23. Bivalves 0 1 2 3
24. Fish 0 0.5 1 1.5
25. Amphibians 0 0.5 1 1.5
26. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance) 0 1 1.5
27. Filamentous algae; periphyton 1 2 3
28. Iron oxidizing bacteria/fungus: C97 1 0.5 1 1.5
29 . Wetland plants in streambed FAC = 0.5; FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 SAV = 2.0; er =
"Items 20 and 21 focus on the presence of upland plants, Item 29 focuses on the presence of aquatic or wetland plants.
Sketch:
Notes: (use back side of this form for additional notes.)
• iS Ca?C''t .
USACE AID# DWQ # Site # ?' ! (indicate on attached map)
;,?,? STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET M&M
larovide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
;? ?rt3VJ ?1(?r.????h?IZ2srt?JY
1. Applicant's name: W nOf 2. Evaluator's name: 1 ?.
3. Date of evaluation: 1 4. Time of evaluation: 11 = t7t3
5. Name of stream: {z: 4? ?l3 6. River basin: C,0-1 P:!!-
7. Approximate drainage area: 8. Stream order: 1 ik
9. Length of reach evaluated: _14 0 10. County: nk o
11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees. 12. Subdivision name (if any):
Latitude (ex. 34.872312): 350VIAUSII N Longitude (ex. -77.556611): 18052' 5•)S??W
Method location determined (circle): GPS Topo Sheet Ortho (Aerial) Photo/GIS Other GIS Other
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
14. Proposed channel work (if any): W N
15. Recent weather conditions: (`? , ?v"n n i `rat t? ?) a - Q- ga
16. Site conditions at time of visit: M h ' hCI ?r
17. Identify any special waterway classifications own: -Section 10 -Tidal Waters Essential Fisheries Habitat
Trout Waters -Outstanding Resource Waters _ Nutrient Sensitive Waters -Water Supply Watershed (I-IV)
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES & If yes, estimate the water surface area:
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YE NO
&1. Estimated watershed land use: fD % Residential _% Commercial _% Industrial _% Agricultural
Ca'a% Forested _% Cleared / Logged _% Other (
22. Bankfull width: 3 -`J' ?k 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): °c/
24. Channel slope down center of stream: -Flat (0 to 2%)?entle (2 to 4%) -Moderate (4 to 10%) ,-Steep (>10%)
25. Channel sinuosity: 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 usingthe 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): 'S 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 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
&articular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
•
•
•
2
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
Zo
WETLAND RATING WORKSHEET (4th VERSION)
•
•
Project Name: Western Wake Freeway: R-2635 County: Wake
Nearest Road: Tingen Road Date: 61812001
Wetland Area (ac): 0.23 acres Wetland Width (ft): 25 feet
Name of Evaluator(s)HaroldM. Brady Wetland ID: delta IS
WETLAND LOCATION:
X on sound or estusuary, pond or lake
on perennial steam
on intermittent stream
within interstream divide
other
ADJACENT LAND USE:
(within 1/2 mile upstream, upslope or radius)
X forested/natural vegetation 60 %
X agriculturaU urbanized 35 %
Y -impervious surface 5 %
Adjacent Special Natural Areas
SOILS: DOMINANT VEGETATION:
Soil Series: Worsham sandy loam 1 Arundinaria gigantea
predominantly organic (humus, muck or peat) 2 Liquidambar styraci/lua
x predominantly mineral (non-sandy) 3 Carex sp.
predominantly sandy 4 Toxicodendron radicans
HYDRAULIC FACTORS: FLOODING AND WETNESS:
X freshwater semipermanently to permanently flooded or inundated
brackish seasonally flooded or inundated
steep topography X intermittently flooded or temporary surface water
ditched or channelized no evidence of flooding or surface water
total wetland width >= 100 feet
WETLAND TYPE: (select one)*
X Bottomland Hardwood Forest Bog/Fen
Swamp Forest Headwater Forest
Carolina Bay Bog Forest
Pocosin Ephemeral Wetland
Pine Savannah Other:
Freshwater Marsh
* The rating system cannot be applied to salt and brackish marshes or stream channels.
DEM RATING
WATER STORAGE
BANK, SHORELINE STABILIZATION
POLLUTANT REMOVAL
WILDLIFE HABITAT
AQUATIC LIFE HABITAT
RECREATION/EDUCATION
1 X 4.00 = 4
3 X 4.00 = 12
3 * X5.00= 15
3 X 2.00 = 6
3 X 4.00 = 12
1 X 1.00 = 1
TOTAL WETLAND SCORE = 50
* Add one point if in sensitive watershed and >10% nonpoint disturbance within 1/2 mile upstream, upslope, or radius.
0
DATA FORM
• ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Western Wake Freeway
Applicant/Owner: NCDOT
Investigator(s): Harold M. Brady
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? es No
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? es o
Is this area a potential Problem Area? Yes I "o
(If needed, explain on reverse)
Date: 11 Apr
County: Wake
State: North Carolina
Community ID: Big Branch
Transect ID: A IS
Plot ID:
1r, ll TT A TT r%XT

0
VIr" IL t111V11
Dominant ant Species
Stratum
Indicator
Dominant P ant pecres tratum Indicator
1. Arundinaria Rigantea grass FACW 9.
2. Liguidambar styraciflua tree FAC+ 10.
3. Carex sp1 grass FACW 11.
4. Toxicodendron radicans shrub PAC 12.
5. Smilax rotundifolia vine FAC 13.
6. Acer rubrum tree FAC 14.
7. Leueothoe racemosa shrub FACW 15.
8. Osmunda cinnamomea fern FACW+ 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC-). 100%
Remarks:
irlMr,nni'lir I'll-AT
rr 1 LnvL V V i
_ Recorded Data (Describe m Remarks)
Stream, Lake, or tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available
anHydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicator`s:
Inundated
X Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
-Water Marks
Drift Lines

Field Observations: X. Sediment Deposits
X Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water: (in.) X Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
X Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 6 (in.) Local Soil Survey Data
X FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: 0 (in.) -Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks Wetland area located at the outfall of the large Council farm pond.
RMI N
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Worsham sandy loam Drainage Class: Poorly
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup Typic Ochraquults Confirm Mapped Type? es No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-2 A 10YR 416 sandy loam, coarse sand
2-10 BI 2.5YR 612 2.5YR 418 few sandy clay loam
10+ B2 2.5YR 611 sandy clay
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol X Concretions
_
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
X Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
X Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
X Reducing Conditions X Listed on National Hydric Soils List
X Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
UWTT.ANn nF.T1P'.RM1NATinN
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No
Remarks Plot taken approximately S feet downhill from A IS17

Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland. Yes No

r?
C.
•
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Western Wake Freeway
Applicant/owner: NCDOT
Investigator(s): Harold M. Brady
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? es No
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? es o
Is this area a potential Problem Area? Yes o
Date: 11 Apr
County: Wake
State: North Carolina
Community ID: Big Branch
Transect ID: 4
Plot ID:
on

0
VF.f_FTATInN
y Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Cornus florida tree FACU 9.
2. Liquidambar styraciflua tree FAC 10.
3. Quercus albs tree FACU 11.
4. Liriodendron tulipifera tree FAC 12.
5. 13.
6. 14.
7. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC-). 72%
Remarks The majority of the vegetation is facultative.
HVDROLOGY
_ Recorded Data escn e in Remarks)
Stream, Lake, or tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available anHydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
Inundated
_ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
_ Water Marks
-Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Field Observations: _
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _ Local Soil Survey Data
FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.) -Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks 10-15% slope
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Mayodan sandy loam Drainage Class: Well
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup Typic Hapludults Confirm Mapped Type? es No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-4 A 10YR 716 sandy loam
4+ B 7.5YR 616 sandy clay loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
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
_
Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
_Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WWMANn nF.TF.RMINATinN
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No - •
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks Plot was taken approximately 20 feet uphill from Plot AISI7
•
•
0
13
WETLAND RATING WORKSHEET (4th VERSION)
•
•
Project Name: Western Wake Freeway: R-2635 County: Wake
Nearest Road: Highway US 1 Date: 61812001
Wetland Area (ac): 0.20 acres Wetland Width (ft): 25 feet
Name of Evaluator(s)HaroldM. Brady Wetland ID: delta Ii
WETLAND LOCATION: ADJACENT LAND USE:
(wr 1/2 mile upstream, ups lope or radius)
on sound or estusuary, pond or lake X forested/natural vegetation 75 %
on perennial steam x agricultural/ urbanized 20 %
on intermittent stream X impervious surface 5 %
within interstream divide Adjacent Special Natural Areas
X other ephemeral stream head
SOILS: DOMINANT VEGETATION:
Soil Series: Worsham sandy loam 1 Arundinaria gigantea
predominantly organic (humus, muck or peat) 2 Microstelium vimineum
x predominantly mineral (non-sandy) 3 Liguidamhar styraciflua
predominantly sandy 4
HYDRAULIC FACTORS: FLOODING AND WETNESS:
X freshwater semipermanently to permenently flooded or inundated
brackish seasonally flooded or inundated
steep topography X intermittently flooded or temporary surface water
ditched or channelized no evidence of flooding or surface water
total wetland width >= 100 feet
WETLAND TYPE: (select one)*
Bottomland Hardwood Forest Bog/Fen
Swamp Forest X Headwater Forest
Carolina Bay Bog Forest
Pocosin Ephemeral Wetland
Pine Savannah Other:
Freshwater Marsh
* The rating system cannot be applied to salt and brackish marshes or stream channels.
DEM RATING
WATER STORAGE 1 X 4.00 = 4
BANK, SHORELINE STABILIZATION 3 X 4.00 = 12
POLLUTANT REMOVAL 2 * X 5.00 = 10
WILDLIFE HABITAT 1 X 2.00 = 2
AQUATIC LIFE HABITAT 3 X 4.00 = 12
RECREATION/EDUCATION 1 X 1.00 = 1
TOTAL WETLAND SCORE = 41
* Add one point if in sensitive watershed and >10% nonpoint disturbance within 1/2 mile upstream, upslope, or radius.
L`

•
0
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Western Wake Freeway
Applicant/Owner: NCDOT
Investigator(s): Harold M. Brady
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? es No
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? es o
Is this area a potential Problem Area? Yes o
(If needed, explain on reverse)
Date: 4 -Apr
County: Wake
State: North Carolina
Community ID: Big Branch
Transect ID:
Plot ID: AIJ7
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant P ant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Arundinaria gigantea grass FACW 9.
2. Liquidambar styraciflua tree FAC+ 10.
3. Rubus sp. shrub FAC 11.
4. Carex sp. grass FACW 12.
5. Smilax rotundifolia vine FAC 13.
6. 14.
7. 15.
g. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC-). 100%
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Stream, Lake, or tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water: (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 4 (in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil: 0 (in.)
Primary Indicators:
Inundated
X Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
_ Water Marks
_Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
X Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
X Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
X Water-Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
X FAC-Neutral Test
-Other (Explain in Remarks)
RemarksA portion of the wetland area is found along an over-head electrical power line right-of-way, the other is in the woods.
C(lii .C
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Worsham sandy loam Drainage Class: Poorly
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup Typic Ochraquults Confirm Mapped Type? es No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Mansell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-2 -p 2.5YR 312 sandy loam
2-6 BI 10YR 514 sandy clay loam
6+ B2 2. SYR 511 2. SYR 416 common sandy clay
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol Concretions
_
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
X Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
X Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
X Reducing Conditions X Listed on National Hydric Soils List
X Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No - •
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland. Yes No
Remarks Plot taken approximately 1 S feet downhill from AY7.
•
•
0
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
• (1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Western Wake Freeway
Applicantlowner: NCDOT
Investigator(s): Harold M. Brady
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? es No
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? es o
Is this area a potential Problem Area? Yes o
on
Date: 4 -Apr
County: Wake
State: North Carolina
Community ID: Big Branch
Transect ID: 0
Plot ID:
VEGETATION
•
is
Dommant ant Species Stratum Indicator Domnant P ant pecies Stratum In cator
1. Acer rubrum tree FAC 9.
2. Liquidambar styraci?lua tree FAC 10.
3. Quereus alba tree FACU 11.
4. 12.
5. 13.
6. 14.
15.
g 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC-). 70%
Remarks Majority of facultative plants present.
uVnl?ni .nr_v
AAA -A-- i
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
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water: (in.) _Oxidized Root Charnels in Upper 12 Inches
Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) -Local Soil Survey Data
FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.) _
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks 10-15% slope
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Mayodan sandy loam Drainage Class: Well
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup Typic Hapludults Confirm Mapped Type? es No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches Horizon (.Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-7 A 10YR 512 sandy loam
7+ B 5YR 516 clay loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
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
Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
_Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes o
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks Plot was taken approximately 15 feet uphill from Plot OIJ7
•
is
0
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):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Western Wake Freeway, R-2635, S 7, WL 11, WL 12, WL 19..
State:NC County/parish/borough: Wake City: Apex
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 35.68854° N, Long. 78.86831°'x.
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Big Branch
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: Cape Fear River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 03030004
Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
E] 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):
0 Office (Desk) Determination. Date: October 2007
Field Determination. Date(s): June 2001, October 2007
SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There :arc 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.
[? 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):
TNWs, including territorial seas
E2 Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
Relatively permanent waters2 (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TIC %i
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: 5,150 linear feet: 6' width (ft) and/or acres.
Wetlands: 0.85 acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: 1987 llclineation hLi nial
Elevation of established OHWM (if known): not known.
2. Non-regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable):;
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).
3 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:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent":
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non-navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year-round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section 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 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 III.C below.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: 120 acres
Drainage area: 20 acres
Average annual raintall: 44.19 inches
Average annual snowfall: 4.5 inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
? Tributary flows directly into TNW.
® Tributary flows through tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are 15-20 river miles from TNW.
Project waters are I (or less) river miles from RPW.
Project waters are 10-11 aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are 1 (oi lessj. aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
-40
Identify flow route to TNW5: Big Branch, White Oak Creek, Harris Lake, Cape Fear River.
Tributary stream order, if known: 2"d
•
° 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 apply):
Tributary is: ® Natural
• ? Artificial (man-made). Explain:
? Manipulated (man-altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: 6 feet
Average depth: 1.5-3 feet
Average side slopes: 3; I .
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: weekly developed riffle/pool complexes.
Tributary geometry: le:indering
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): 2-4 %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: Pick Lift
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year: 20 (or greater)
Describe flow regime: stream is perrenial.
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: Discrete and 'confined. Characteristics: perrenial stream.
Subsurface flow: Unknown. Explain findings: no tests conducted.
? 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
? changes in the character of soil ?
? shelving
? vegetation matted down, bent, or absent
® leaf litter disturbed or washed away
® sediment deposition
? water staining ?
? other (list):
? Discontinuous OHWM.7 Explain:
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determ
High Tide Line indicated by:
? oil or scum line along shore objects
? fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore)
? physical markings/characteristics
? tidal gauges
? other (list):
the presence of litter and debris
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
the presence of wrack line
sediment sorting
scour
multiple observed or predicted flow events
abrupt change in plant community
-.0
ine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
? survey to available datum;
? physical markings;
? vegetation lines/changes in vegetation types.
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain: Water color was clear, water quality assumed to be good as there are no visual indications to the contrary.
Identify specific pollutants, if known: none 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): mostly forested, >100'.
? 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: fish, macrobenthos, amohibians, and evidence of use by terrestrial
wildlife.
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non-TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size:0.65, 0.08, 0.12 = 0.85 acres
Wetland type. Explain: headwater forest/bottomland hardwood.
Wetland quality. Explain: low, relatively small size, low value for pollutant removal due to lack of source for
pollutants.
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non-TNW:
Flow is: 'Ephemeral flow. Explain:
Surface flow is: Not present
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Unknown. Explain findings: no tests conducted.
? Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non-TNW:
® Directly abutting
® Not directly abutting •
® Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain: WL 11 directly abuting, WL 12 and WL 19 adjacent and
within natural valley draining to perrenial stream (S 7).
? Ecological connection. Explain:
? Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are 15-20 river miles from TNW.
Project waters are 10-I5 aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: Wetland to navigable waters.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the 100 - 500-year floodpain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain: no surface water, watershed is generally undeveloped.
Identify specific pollutants, if known: none known.
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
® Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width): forested, >100'.
? 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 find ings:terrestrial mammals, birds, potentially for amphibians during late
winter/early spring.
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis:
Approximately ( 0.85 ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.
r?
For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (YIN) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)
• Y 0.65 N 0.08
N 0.12
12
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed: headwater wetlands provide water
storage, energy dissipation, pollutant removal and wildlife habitat.
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 th 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 III.D: All wetlands are in a natural valley. The position of WL's 12 and 19 within an ephemeral drainage and upslope of
S7, make them the first line of defense and as such may filter pollutants before they enter ST In times of heavy rainfall, the
organic matter and detritus may be flushed from the wetlands and be carried downstream to support the food web in receiving
waters.
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: S7 has defined bed and bank, sediment sorting, fish, macrobenthos, and amphibians present.
El 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:
is
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: 5,150 linear feet 6' width (ft).
01, 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):
El Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
E Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
4. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
El 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 is directly connected to channel.
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.
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs. •
Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: 0.20 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.
n Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1-6), or
Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA-STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):"
[] which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
'See Footnote # 3. •
' 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.
? from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
? which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
? Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
• ? Other factors. Explain:
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
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):
Q Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
? Lakes/ponds: acres.
? Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
? Wetlands: acres.
• Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall-beIncluded 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.
F1 Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
El 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:
F] USGS NHD data.
El USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
? U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: New Hill, NC 1:24,000.
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: Cawthorn, Joel. 1970. Soil Survey of Wake County, North
Carolina. United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, now Natural Resource Conservation Service. Raleigh,
NC.
F1 National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
? State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
F] FEMA/FIRM maps:
? 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
Photographs: F1 Aerial (Name & Date):
• or El Other (Name & Date):
Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
Applicable/supporting case law:
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.
a SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
? Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD: •
L'
-as
0
NCDWO Stream Classification Form
57
roject Name: River Basin: County: Evaluator:
stern Wake Freeway R-2635 Cape Fear Wake Harold M. Brady
eld ID Number: Nearest Named Stream: Latitude: Signature:
Sigma IA Big Branch 359 41' 31.7-r N
Date: USGS QUAD: Longitude: Location:
June 12, 2001 Apex, NC J$° $ 2' q. %4"W Old Apex Holly Springs Road
*PLEASE NOTE: If evaluator and landowner agree that the feature is a man-made ditch, then use of this form is not necessary.
Also, if in the best professional judgement of the evaluator, the jeature is a man-made ditch and not a modified natural stream-this
rating system should not be used*
Primary Field Indicators: (Circle One Number Per Line)
1. Geomorphology Absent Weak Moderate Strom
1) Is There A Riffle-Pool Sequence? 0 (1) 2 3
2) Is The USDA Texture In Streambed
Different From Surrounding Terrain?
0
1
(2)
3
3) Are Natural Levees Present? 0 1 (2) 3
4) Is The Channel Sinuous? 0 1 (2) 3
5) Is There An Active (Or Relic)
Floodplain Present?
0
1
(2)
3
6) Is The Channel Braided? (0) 1 2 3
7) Are Recent Alluvial Deposits Present? 0 1 (2) 3
8) Is There A Bankfull Bench Present? 0 1 (2) 3
9) Is A Continuous Bed & Bank Present? 0 1 2 (3)
Is A 2' Order Or Greater Channel (As Indicated
PRIMARY GEOMORPHOL OGY INDICA TOR POINTS: 19
H. Hydrology Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1) Is There A Groundwater
Flow/Discharge Present?
0
1
(2)
3
PRIMARYHYDROLOGYINDICA TOR POINTS: 2
III. Biology Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1) Are Fibrous Roots Present In Streambed? 3 (2) 1 0
2) Are Rooted Plants Present In Streambed? (3) 2 1 0
3) Is Periphyton Present? 0 (1) 2 3
4) Are Bivalves Present? (0) 1 2 3
PRIMARY BIOLOGYINDICA TOR POINTS: 6
Secondary Field Indicators: (Circle One Number Per Line)
1. Geomorphology Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1) Is There A Head Cut Present In Channel? (0) .5 1 1.5
2) Is There A Grade Control Point In Channel? 0 .5 (1) 1.5
3) Does Topography Indicate A
Natural Drainage Wav? 0 .5 1 (1.5)
SECONDARY GEOMORPHOLOGYINDICA TOR POINTS: 2.5
0
II. Hydrology Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1) Is This Year's (Or Last's) Leaflitter
Present In Streambed?
1.5
(1)
.5
0

2) Is Sediment On Plants (Or Debris) Present?
0
(.5)
1 •
1.5
3) Are Wrack Lines Present? 0 (.5) 1 1.5
4) Is Water In Channel And >48 Hrs. Since 0 .5
Last Known Rain? (WOTE. yDitch Indicated In #9 Above Slap 77ds Stec And #5 Below*) 1 (1.5)
5) Is There Water In Channel During Dry
Conditions Or In Growing, Season
l? 0 .5 1 (1.5)
6) Are Hvdric Soils Present In Sides Of Channel (Or In Headcut)? Yes=1.5 No=(O)-- SECONDARYFIYDROLOGYINDICATOR POINTS: S

III. Biolopry Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1) Are Fish Present? 0 .5 (1) 1.5
2 Are Amphibians Present? 0 .5 (1) 1.5
3) Are AquaticTurtles Present? 0 .5 (1) 1.5
4 Are Crayfish Present? 0 (.5) 1 1.5
5) Are Macrobenthos Present? 0 .5 (1) 1.5
6) Are Iron Oxidizing Bacteria/Funggs Present? 0 (3) 1 1.5
7) Is Filamentous Algae Present? 0 (5) 1 1.5
8) Are Wetland Plants In Streambed?
(* NOTE. If Total Absence Of All Plants In Streambed
As Noted Above Skin This Step UNLESS SAV Present*). SAV Mostly OBL
2 1 Mostly FACW
.75 Mostly FAC
.5 Mostly FACU Mostly UPL
0 0
SECONDAR Y BIOL 0 G Y INDICA TOR POINTS: 5.5
TOTAL POINTS (Primary + Secondary)=_40 (If Greater Than Or Equal To 19 Points The Stream Is At Least
Intermittent) •
_.0
0
/9
WETLAND RATING WORKSHEET (4th VERSION)
•

Project Name: Western Wake Freeway. R-2635 County: Wake
Nearest Road: Highway US I Date: 1812001
Wetland Area (ac): 0.16 acres Wetland Width (ft): 25 Peet
Name of Evaluator(s) Harold M. Brady Wetland ID: delta 1
WETLAND LOCATION:
on sound or estusuary, pond or lake
on perennial steam
on intermittent stream
within interstream divide
X other on ephemeral stream
ADJACENT LAND USE:
(within 1 e upstream, upslope or radius)
X forested/natural vegetation 60 %
-Y -agricultural/ urbanized 35 %
X impervious surface 5 %
Adjacent Special Natural Areas
SOILS: DOMINANT VEGETATION:
Soil Series: Worsham sandy loam 1 Arundinaria gigantea
predominantly organic (humus, muck or peat) 2 Liguidambar styraci/lua
x predominantly mineral (non-sandy) 3 Carex sp.
predominantly sandy 4 Toxicodendron radicans
HYDRAULIC FACTORS: FLOODING AND WETNESS:
X freshwater semipermanently to permenently flooded or inundated
brackish seasonally flooded or inundated
steep topography X intermittently flooded or temporary surface water
ditched or channelized no evidence of flooding or surface water
total wetland width >= 100 feet
WETLAND TYPE: (select one)'
Bottomland Hardwood Forest Bog/Fen
Swamp Forest X Headwater Forest
Carolina Bay Bog Forest
Pocosin Ephemeral Wetland
Pine Savannah Other:
Freshwater Marsh
* The rating system cannot be applied to salt and brackish marshes or stream channels.
DEM RATING
WATER STORAGE
1 X 4.00 =
BANK, SHORELINE STABILIZATION 4
POLLUTANT REMOVAL 2
WILDLIFE HABITAT 3
AQUATIC LIFE HABITAT 4
RECREATION/EDUCATION 1
X 4.00 =
X 5.00 =
X 2.00 =
X 4.00 =
X 1.00 =
TOTAL WETLAND SCORE =
4
16
10
6
16
1
53
* Add one point if insensitive watershed and >10% nonpoint disturbance within 1/2 mile upstream, upslope, or radius.
•
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
• (1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Western Wake Freeway
Applicant/Owner: NCDOT
Investigator(s): Harold M. Brady
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? es No
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? es o
is this area a potential Problem Area? Yes
(If needed, explain on reverse)
Date: 11 Apr
County: Wake
State: North Carolina
Community ID: BigBranch
Transect ID: 4
Plot ID: AIQ7
VEGETATION
•
0
Dominant Plant penes Stratum Indicator Dominant Plantpecies Stratum Indicator
1. Cornus Honda tree FACU 9.
2. Liquidambarstyraciflua tree FAC 10.
3. quercus alba tree FACU 11.
4. Linodendron tulipifera tree FAC 12.
5. 13.
6. 14.
7. 15.
9. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC-). 72%
Remarks The majority of the vegetation is facultative.
HYDROLOGY
_ ecor a ata (Describe in emar s)
Stream, Lake, or tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicator's:
-Inundated
_ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
_ Water Marks
-Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Field Observations: _
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Sectary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water: (in.) _ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _
_ Local Soil Survey Data
FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.) _ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks 6-10% slope
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Creedmoor sandy loam Drainage Class: Well
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup Typic Hapludults Confirm Mapped Type? es No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) AbundancelContrast Structure, etc.
0-4 A 10YR 413 sandy loam
4+ B 1OYR 614 sandy clay loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
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
Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
_ Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No _
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes o
Hydric Soils Present? Yes o Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks Plot was taken approximately 20 feet uphill from Plot AIQ7

•

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
. (1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Western Wake Freeway
Applicant/Owner: NCDOT
Investigator(s): Harold M. Brady
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? es No
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? es o
Is this area a potential Problem Area? Yes o
on reverse
Date: 11 Apr
County: Wake
State: North Carolina
Community ID: BigBranch
Transect ID:
Plot ID: AIQ7
VEGETATION
•
0
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Amndinaria gigantea grass FACW 9.
2. Liquidambarstyraciflua tree FAC+ 10.
3. Carex sp. grass FACW 11.
4. Toxicodendron radicans shrub FAC 12.
5. Smilax rotundifolia vine FAC 13.
6. Acer rubmni tree FAC 14.
7. Leucothoe racemosa shrub FACW 15-
8. Osmunda cinnamomea fern FACW+ 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC-). 100%
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Recor a Data ( escn e in Remarks)
Stream, Lake, or tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available Wetland Indicators:
Primary Indicators: "
Inundated
X Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
-Water Marks
Drift Lines
X Sediment Deposits
Field Observations: X Drainage Patterns in Wetlands

Indicators (2 or more required):
Secon
Jary
Depth of Surface Water: (in.) X Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
X Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 6 (in.) Local Soil Survey Data
X FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: 0 (in.) _ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks Wetland area found on the opposite side of Highway US] from AH.
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Worsham sandy loam Drainage Class: Poorly
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup Typic Ochraquults Confirm Mapped Type? es No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-2 A 10YR 416 sandy loam, coarse sand
2-10 Bl 2.5YR 612 2.5YR 418 jew sandy clay loam
10+ BZ 2.5YR 611 sandy clay
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol X Concretions
_
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
X Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
X Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
X Reducing Conditions X Listed on National Hydric Soils List
X Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland. Yes No
Remarks Plot taken approximately S feet downhill from AIQ7
Approved y HQUSACE 3/92
•
•
0
•
•
WETLAND RATING WORKSHEET (4th VERSION)
1 2
Project Name: Western Wake Freeway: R-2635 County: Wake
Nearest Road: Highway US 1 Date: 61812001
Wetland Area (ac): 0.08 acres Wetland Width (ft): 25 feet
Name of Evaluator(s)HaroldM. Brady Wetland ID: delta II
WETLAND LOCATION: ADJACENT LAND USE:
(wr 1/2 mile upstream, ups lope or radius)
on sound or estusuary, pond or lake X forested/natural vegetation 75 %
on perennial steam X agricultural/ urbanized 20 %
on intermittent stream x impervious surface 5 %
within interstream divide Adjacent Special Natural Areas
X other ephemeral stream head
SOILS: DOMINANT VEGETATION:
Soil Series: Worsham sandy loam 1 Arundinaria gigantea
predominantly organic (humus, muck or peat) 2 Microstegium vimineum
x predominantly mineral (non-sandy) 3 Liquidambar styraciflua
predominantly sandy 4
HYDRAULIC FACTORS: FLOODING AND WETNESS:
X freshwater semipermanently to permenently flooded or inundated
brackish seasonally flooded or inundated
steep topography X intermittently flooded or temporary surface water
ditched or channelized no evidence of flooding or surface water
total wetland width >= 100 feet
WETLAND TYPE: (select one)*
X Bottomland Hardwood Forest Bog/Fen
Swamp Forest Headwater Forest
Carolina Bay Bog Forest
Pocosin Ephemeral Wetland
Pine Savannah Other:
Freshwater Marsh
* The rating system cannot be applied to salt and brackish marshes or stream channels.
DEM RATING
WATER STORAGE I X 4.00 = 4
BANK, SHORELINE STABILIZATION 3 X 4.00 = 12
POLLUTANT REMOVAL 2 * X 5.00 = 10
WILDLIFE HABITAT 1 X 2.00 = 2
AQUATIC LIFE HABITAT 3 X 4.00 = 12
RECREATION/EDUCATION 1 X 1.00 = 1
TOTAL WETLAND SCORE = 41
* Add one point if in sensitive watershed and >10% nonpoint disturbance within 1/2 mile upstream, upslope, or radius.
is
f2
DATA FORM
• ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Western Wake Freeway
Applicant/Owner: NCDOT
Investigator(s): Harold M. Brady
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? es No
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? es o
Is this area a potential Problem Area? Yes o
(If needed, explain on reverse)
Date: 4 -Apr
County: Wake
State: North Carolina
Community ID: BigBranch
Transect ID: All
Plot ID:
XTV f _Ti T A TT(1N
11
0
ommant D"=--7 7- ntSpecies Stratum
1. Cornus florida tree FACU 9.
2. Liquidambarstyraciflua tree FAC 10.
3. Quercus rubra tree FACU 11.
4. Smilax rotundifolia vine FAC 12.
5. Liriodendron tulipifera tree FAC 13.
6. Lonieera japonica vine FAC- 14.
15.
g 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC-). 46%
Remarks Some hydrophytie vegetation present.
NVinR(n1.(nGV
y y Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks)
Stream, Lake, or tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available anHydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
-Inundated
_ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
_ Water Marks
-Drift Lines

Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water: (in.) -Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _ Local Soil Survey Data
FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.) -Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks 6-10% slope
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Mayodan sandy loam Drainage Class: Well
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup Typic Hapludults Confirm Mapped Type? es No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-7 A 10YR 512 sandy loam
7+ B SYR S/ clay loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
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
Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
_Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No - •
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks Plot was taken approximately 20 feet uphill from Plot D H5.

•
0
DATA FORM
• ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Western Wake Freeway
Applicant/Owner: NCDOT
Investigator(s): Harold M. Brady
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? es No
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? es 17o
Is this area a potential Problem Area? Yes o
(If needed, explain on reverse)
Date: 4 -Apr
County: Wake
State: North Carolina
Community ID: Big Branch
Transect ID: 2KII
Plot ID: A 115
VF.C.RTATION
•
0
Dominant Plant Species Stratum icator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Arundinaria gigantea grass FACW 9.
2. Liquidambar styraeinua tree FAC+ 10.
3. Microstegium vimineum grass FAC+ 11.
4. 12.
5. 13.
6. 14.
7. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC-). 100%
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Recor a ata (Descn e in Remarks)
Stream, Lake, or tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology cators:
Primary Indicator`s:
Inundated
X Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
-Water Marks
Drift Lines
X Sediment Deposits
Field Observations: X Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water: (in.) X Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
X Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 4 (in.) Local Soil Survey Data
X FAC Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: 0 (in.) -Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks Wetland area found along an over-head electrical power line right-of-way.
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Worsham sandy loam Drainage Class: Poorly
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup Typic Ochraquults Confirm Mapped Type? es No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-2 Ap_ 2.5YR 312 sandy loam
2-6 BI IOYR S/4 sandy clay loam
6+ B2 2.5YR 511 2.5YR 416 common sandy clay
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol Concretions
_
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
X Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
X Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
X Reducing Conditions X Listed on National Hydric Soils List
X Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WRTI,AND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? El No Wetland Hydrology Present? No
Hydric Soils Present? No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland. Yes No
Remarks Plot taken approximately 5 feet downhill from AIIS.
Approved by HQUSACE 3/92
•
is
0
iI
WETLAND RATING WORKSHEET (4th VERSION)
•
Project Name: Western Wake Freeway: R-2635 County: Wake
Nearest Road: Highway US 1 Date: 61812001
Wetland Area (ac): 0.65 acres Wetland Width (ft): 50 feet
Name of Evaluator(s)HaroldM. Brady Wetland ID: delta IH
WETLAND LOCATION:
on sound or estusuary, pond or lake
on perennial steam
X on intermittent stream
within interstream divide
other
Sons:
ADJACENT LAND USE:
(7 1/2 mile upstream, ups lope or radius)
X forested/natural vegetation 75 %
X agricultural/ urbanized 20 %
X impervious surface 5 %
Adjacent Special Natural Areas
DOMINANT VEGETATION:
Arundinaria F;igantea
Mierostegium vimineum
Liquidambar styraciflua
Soil Series: Worsham sandy loam 1
predominantly organic (humus, muck or peat) 2
X predominantly mineral (non-sandy) 3
predominantly sandy 4
HYDRAULIC FACTORS:
X freshwater
brackish
steep topography
ditched or channelized
total wetland width >= 100 feet
WETLAND TYPE: (select one)*
FLOODING AND WETNESS:
_ semipermanently to permanently flooded or inundated
_ seasonally flooded or inundated
X_ intermittently flooded or temporary surface water
no evidence of flooding or surface water
• X Bottomland Hardwood Forest Bog/Fen
Swamp Forest Headwater Forest
Carolina Bay Bog Forest
Pocosin Ephemeral Wetland
Pine Savannah Other:
Freshwater Marsh
* The rating system cannot be applied to salt and brackish marshes or stream channels.
DEM RATING
WATER STORAGE 1 X 4.00 = 4
BANK, SHORELINE STABILIZATION 3 X 4.00 = 12
POLLUTANT REMOVAL 2 * X 5.00 = 10
WILDLIFE HABITAT I X 2.00 = 2
AQUATIC LIFE HABITAT 3 X 4.00 = 12
RECREATION/EDUCATION 1 X 1.00 = 1
TOTAL WETLAND SCORE = 41
* Add one point if insensitive watershed and >10% nonpoint disturbance within 1/2 mile upstream, upslope, or radius.

•
•
0
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Western Wake Freeway
Applicant/Owner: NCDOT
Investigator(s): Harold M. Brady
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? es No
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? es Is this area a potential Problem Area? Yes 1701
°
(If needed, explain on reverse)
Date: 4 -Apr
County: Wake
State: North Carolina
Community ID: BigBranch
Transect ID:
Plot ID:
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant penes Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant penes Stratum Indicator
1. Corpus Florida tree FACU 9.
2. Liquidambar styraeijlua tree FAC 10.
3. Quercus rubra tree FACU 11.
4. Smilax rotundifolia vine FAC 12.
5. Arundinaria gigantea grass FACW 13.
6. Lonicera japonica vine FAC- 14.
7. Liriodendron tulipi sera tree FAC 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC-). 57%
Remarks Facultative vegetation is dominant.
HYDROLOGY
_ Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks)
Stream, Lake, or tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available Wetland Indicators:
Primary Indicator's:
Inundated
_ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
Water Marks
_Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Field Observations: _
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water: (in.) _ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _
Local Soil Survey Data
FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.) _Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks 10-15% slope
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Granville sandy loam Drainage Class: Well
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup Typic Hapludults Confirm Mapped Type? es No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Mansell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-7 A 7.5YR 413 sandy loam, fibrous roots
7+ B 75YR 514 sandy clay loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
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
Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
_Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No _
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes o
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks Plot was taken approximately 20 feet uphill from Plot D IH1 S.
•
•
0
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
• (1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Western Wake Freeway
Applicant/owner: NCDOT
Investigator(s): Harold M. Brady
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? es No
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? es o
Is this area a potential Problem Area? Yes o
(If needed, explain on reverse)
Date: 4 -Apr
County: Wake
State: North Carolina
Community ID: Big Branch
Transect ID: A 111
Plot ID: 4
VF..GF.TATION
CJ
0
ommant Plant Reties Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum -Indicator
1. Arundinaria gigantea grass FACW 9.
2. Liquidamhar styraciflua tree FAC+ 10.
3. Mierostegium vimineum grass FAC+ 11.
4. 12.
5. 13.
6. 14.
7. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC-). 100%
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
_ ecor a Data (Descn e in Remarks)
Stream, Lake, or tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available W anHydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators' •
Inundated
X Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
_ Water Marks
Drift Lines
X Sediment Deposits
Field Observations: X Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water: (in.) X Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
X Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 4 (in.) Local Soil Survey Data
X FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: 0 (in.) -Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks Wetland area found along an over-head electrical power line right-of-way.
soiLS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Worsham sandy loam Drainage Class: Poorly
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup Typic Ochraquults Confirm Mapped Type? es No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches Horizon (Mansell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-2 Ap 2.5YR 312 sandy loam
2-6 BI 10YR 514 sandy clay loam
6+ B2 2.5YR 511 2.5YR 416 common sandy clay
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol Concretions
_
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
X Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
X Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
X Reducing Conditions X Listed on National Hydric Soils List
X Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WF,TI.AND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? MNo No _
Wetland Hydrology Present? No
Hydric Soils Present? Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland. Yes No
Remarks Plot taken approximately 15 feet downhill from A H115.
Approved by HQUSACE 3/92
•
•
0
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):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Western Wake Freeway, R-2635, S 10, WL 15
State:NC County/parish/borough: Wake City: Apex
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 35.6916° , Long. 78.85944',,W.
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Big Branch
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: Cape Fear River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 03030004
Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
? Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc...) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Office (Desk) Determination. Date: October 2007
Field Determination. Date(s): June 2001
SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Are nqi "navigable waters of the U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review area. [Required]
? Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
? Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:
•B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There re "waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply):
? TNWs, including territorial seas
C1 Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
® Relatively permanent waters2 (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNW,&
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: 131 linear feet: Y width (ft) and/or acres.
Wetlands: 0.04 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).
' 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.I.; otherwise, see Section III.B below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent":
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non-navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year-round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section 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 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 III.C below.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: 20 acres
Drainage area: 20 acres
Average annual raintali: 44.19 inches
Average annual snowfall: 4.5 inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
? Tributary flows directly into TNW.
® Tributary flows through tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are 15-20 river miles from TNW.
Project waters are 1 (or less) river miles from RPW.
Project waters are 5-10 aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are I (r r less) aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
_.0
Identify flow route to TNW5: Big Branch, White Oak Creek, Harris Lake, Cape Fear River.
Tributary stream order, if known: Is'.
•
4 Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and
West.
3 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: 3 feet
Average depth: 1.5 - 3 feet
Average side slopes: ?:1.
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: tributary is generally stable.
Presence of run/riffle/pool complexes. Explain: weakly developed.
Tributary geometry: Nleanderin
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): 2-4 %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: Seasonal Flow
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year: 11-20
Describe flow regime: moderate flow.
Other information on duration and volume: none available.
Surface flow is: Discrete mid confirieal. Characteristics: confined within a well defined channel.
Subsurface flow: Unknm n. Explain findings: no tests conducted.
? 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
? changes in the character of soil ?
? shelving
? vegetation matted down, bent, or absent ?
® leaf litter disturbed or washed away ?
® sediment deposition ?
? water staining ?
? other (list):
? Discontinuous OHWM.7 Explain:
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determ
High Tide Line indicated by: ?
? oil or scum line along shore objects
? fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore)
? physical markings/characteristics
? tidal gauges
? other (list):
the presence of litter and debris
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
the presence of wrack line
sediment sorting
scour
multiple observed or predicted flow events
abrupt change in plant community
ine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply)
Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
? survey to available datum;
? physical markings;
? vegetation lines/changes in vegetation types.
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain: clear, no evidence of pollutants or contamination, watershed is generally forested.
Identify specific pollutants, if known: none known.
106A 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): forested, >100'.
? 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: used by terrestrial wildlife, portion of tributary that carries seasonal to
perrenial flow is very short, but does contain fish and macrbenthos as well as habitat for aquatic salamanders.
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non-TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size: 0.04 acres
Wetland type. Explain: headwater forestfbottomland hardwood.
Wetland quality. Explain:low due to small size and limited ability to filter pollutants, but does provide cover and
food for wildlife.
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non-TNW:
Flow is: EphemeralfloNOL Explain: wetland is a small headwater depression. Its position on the landscape and the
surrounding topography limit its water storage capacity and how often it discharges water.
Surface flow is: Not Present
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Unknown. Explain findings: no tests conducted.
? Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adiacency Determination with Non-TNW:
? Directly abutting •
® Not directly abutting
® Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain: wetland is at the headwater area for the stream. The
topographic gradient drains water to S 10. There are clear physical signs of overland flow to the receiving waters.
? Ecological connection. Explain:
? Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are 15-20 river miles from TNW.
Project waters are 10-1.5 aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: Weiland to navil,ablc Nvaters.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the 100 - 500-rear floodptffln.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain: no surface water.
Identify specific pollutants, if known: none known.
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
® Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width): forested, >100'.
? 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: terrestrial mammals and birds would be expected to utilize the wetland
for food and cover. Depressions within the wetland provide habitat for salamanders and other amphibians during wetter monts of later
winter/early spring.
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis: •
Approximately ( 0.04 ) 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? (YIN) Size (in acres)
• N 0.04
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed: wetland provides water filtration and
storage as part of the headwater system of S 10. It also provides wildlife habitat.
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 III.D: Wetland is in a natural valley. The position of WL 15 within an ephemeral drainage and upslope of SIO, make it the
first line of defense and as such may filter pollutants before they enter S 10. In times of heavy rainfall, the organic matter and
detritus may be flushed from the wetlands and be carried downstream to support the food web in receiving waters. When taken
sigularly, neither S 10 nor WL 15 contribute significantly to the wellfare of the Cape Fear River. However, when taken
cumulatively with simlar wetlands and tribs, they form the backbone of a healthy river system. Without them, all drainage, good or
bad would mainline directly into the Cape Fear River.
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:
Q TNWs: linear feet width (ft), Or, acres.
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
02. RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year-round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial:
Tributaries ofTNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally:
•
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
? Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
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):
Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
? Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
4. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
? Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
? Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year-round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW:
Wetlands 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.
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs. •
® Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: 0.04 acres.
6. Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters .9
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1-6), or
[] Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA-STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):10
which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
BSee Footnote # 3. •
' 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.
from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
? which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
? Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
? Other factors. Explain:
• Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
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:
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-best icluded 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: New Hill, NC 1:24,000.
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: Cawthorn, Joel. 1970. Soil Survey of Wake County, North
Carolina. United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, now Natural Resource Conservation Service. Raleigh,
NC.
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):
• or ? Other (Name & Date):
? Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
[? Applicable/supporting case law:
?Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
?' Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD: •
•
_.0

d
NCDWQ Stream Classification Form
oect Name:
' River Basin: County: Evaluator:
esters Wake Freeway R-2635
41
l Cape Fear Wake Harold M. Brady
ID Number:
e
d Nearest Named Stream: Latitude: Signature:
Sigma IAC Big Branch 35° Lit I LAA011, N
Date: USGS QUAD: Longitude: Location:
June 12, 2001 Apex, NC -+$° 51' Slo • l05" Y11 Old Tingen Road
*PLEASE NOTE: If evaluator and landowner agree that the feature is a man-made ditch, then use of this form is not necessary.
Also, if in the best professional judgement of the evaluator, the feature is a man-made ditch and not a modified natural stream-this
rating system should not be used*
Primary Field Indicators: (Circle One Number Per Line
I Geomorphology Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1) Is There A Riffle-Pool Sequence? 0 (1) 2 3
2) Is The USDA Texture In Streambed
Different From Surrounding Terrain?
0
(1)
2
3
3) Are Natural Levees Present? 0 (1) 2 3
Is The Channel Sinuous? 0 1 (2) 3
5) Is There An Active (Or Relic)
Floodplain Present?
0
1
(2)
3
6) Is The Channel Braided? 0 (1) 2 3
7) Are Recent Alluvial Deposits Present? 0 1 (2) 3
8) Is There A Bankfull Bench Present? 0 (1) 2 3
9) Is A Continuous Bed & Bank Present? 0 (1)
LBed & Bank Caused By Ditching And WITHOUT Sinuosity Then Score=0*)
(*NOTE.- I 2 3
,
Is A 2nd Order Or Greater Channel (As Indicated
On To-Do Man And/Or In Field) Present?
Yes=3_
No=(0)
PRIMARY GEOMORPHOLOGYINDICA TOR POINTS: 12
II. Hydrology Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1) Is There A Groundwater
Flow/Discharae Present? 0 (1) 2 3
PRIMARYHYDROLOGYINDICA TOR POINTS. I
_40
III. Biology Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1) Are Fibrous Roots Present In Streambed? 3 2 (1) 0
2) Are Rooted Plants Present In Streambed? 3 2 (1) 0
3) Is Perinhyton Present? 0 (1) 2 3
4) Are Bivalves Present? (0) 1 2 3
PRIMARYBIOLOGYINDICA TOR POINTS. 3
Secondary Field Indicators: (Circle One Number Per Line)
I. Geomorphology Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1) Is There A Head Cut Present In Channel? 0 (.5) 1 1.5
2) Is There A Grade Control Point In Channel? 0 (5) 1 1.5
3) Does Topography Indicate A
Natural Drainage Way? 0 .5 1 _ (1.5)
SECONDARY GEOMORPHOLOGY INDICATOR POINTS. 2.5
0
II Hydrology Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1) Is This Year's (Or Last's) Leaflitter
Present In Streambed? 1.5 1 (.5) 0
4) Is Water In Channel And >48 Hrs. Since 0 .5
(1S)
Last Known Rain (*NOTE. If Ditch Indicated In #9 Above Skip This Step And #5 Below*)
5) Is There Water In Channel During Dry 0 (.5) 1 1.5
Conditions Or In Growing Season)?
6) Are Hvdric Soils Present In Sides Of Channel (Or In Headcut)? Yes=(1.5) No=O
SECONDARYHYDROLOGYINDICA TOR POINTS. 5.55
III Biology Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1) Are Fish Present? 0 (.5) 1 1.5
2 Are Amphibians Present? 0 (.5) 1 1.5
3 Are AquaticTurtles Present? 0 .5 (1) 1.5
4 Are Crayfish Present? 0 .5 (1) 1.5
5) Are Macrobenthos Present? 0 .5 (1) 1.5
6) Are Iron Oxidizing Bacteria/Fungus Present? 0 (.5) 1 1.5
7) Is Filamentous Algae Present? 0 (.5) 1 1.5
8) Are Wetland Plants In Streambed?
(* NOTE. If Total Absence Of All Plants In Streambed SAV Mostly OBL
2 1 Mostly FACW
(.75) Mostly FAC
.5 Mostly FACU Mostly UPL
0 0
As Noted Above Skip This Step UNLESS SAV Present*).
SECONDAR Y BIOL OG Y INDICA TOR POINTS. 5.75
TOTAL POINTS (Primary + Secondary= 29.75 (If Greater Than Or Equal To 19 Points The Stream Is At Least
Intermittent)
•

r?
L_J
rs
WETLAND RATING WORKSHEET (4th VERSION)
•
C
Project Name: Western Wake Freeway: R-2635 County: Wake
Nearest Road: Old Apex Holly Springs Road Date: 61812001
Wetland Area (ac): 0.04 acres Wetland Width (ft): 25 feet
Name of Evaluator(s)Haro&M. Brady Wetland ID: delta IL
WETLAND LOCATION:
on sound or estusuary, pond or lake
on perennial steam
X on intermittent stream
within interstream divide
other
ADJACENT LAND USE:
(wvjun 112 mile upstream, upslope or radius)
X forested/natural vegetation 75 %
X agricultural/ urbanized 20 %
X impervious surface 5 %
Adjacent Special Natural Areas
SOILS: DOMINANT VEGETATION:
Soil Series: Worsham sandy loam 1 Rubus sp.
predominantly organic (humus, muck or peat) 2 Lipuidambar styraciflua
X predominantly mineral (non-sandy) 3 Arundinaria gigantea
predominantly sandy 4 Microstegium vimineum
HYDRAULIC FACTORS: FLOODING AND WETNESS:
X freshwater semipermanently to permenently flooded or inundated
brackish X seasonally flooded or inundated
steep topography intermittently flooded or temporary surface water
ditched or channelized no evidence of flooding or surface water
total wetland width >= 100 feet
WETLAND TYPE: (select one)*

X Bottomland Hardwood Forest Bog/Fen
Swamp Forest Headwater Forest
Carolina Bay Bog Forest
Pocosin Ephemeral Wetland
Pine Savannah Other:
Freshwater Marsh
* The rating system cannot be applied to salt and brackish marshes or stream channels.
DEM RATING

WATER STORAGE 1 X 4.00 = 4
BANK, SHORELINE STABILIZATION 3 X 4.00 = 12
POLLUTANT REMOVAL 1 * X 5.00 = 5
WILDLIFE HABITAT 1 X 2.00 = 2
AQUATIC LIFE HABITAT 3 X 4.00 = 12
RECREATION/EDUCATION 0 X 1.00 = 0
TOTAL WETLAND SCORE = 35
* Add one point if insensitive watershed and >10% nonpoint disturbance within 1 /2 mile upstream, upslope, or radius.
11
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
• (1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Western Wake Freeway
Applicant/Owner: NCDOT
Investigator(s): Harold M. Brady
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? es No
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? es o
Is this area a potential Problem Area? Yes o
(If needed, explain on reverse)
Date: 5 -Apr
County: Wake
State: North Carolina
Community ID: Big Branch
Transect ID: A IL
Plot ID: 4 IL5
VF!';F.TATinN
rI
0
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant ant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Cornus florida tree FACU 9.
2. Liquidambarstyraciflua tree FAC 10.
3. Quereus rubra tree FACU 11.
4. Smilax rotundifolia vine FAC 12.
5. Arundinaria gigantea grass FACW 13.
6. Lonicera japonica vine FAC- 14.
7. Liriodendron tulipi(era tree FAC 15.
g. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC-). 57%
Remarks Some hydrophytic vegetation present.
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
Sediment Deposits
Field Observations: _
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water: (in.) _ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _
Local Soil Survey Data
_
FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.) -Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks 10-20% slope
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): White Store sandy loam Drainage Class: Well
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup Vertic Hapludult Confirm Mapped Type? es No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-7 A 10YR 614 sandy loam
7+ B SYR 516 clay loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
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
Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
-1
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes o
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks Plot was taken approximately 20 feet uphill from Plot AILS
•
1r?
u
0
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
• (1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Western Wake Freeway
Applicant/owner: NCDOT
Investigator(s): Harold )W Brady
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? es No
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? es 11 o
Is this area a potential Problem Area? Yes o
Date: 4 -Apr
County: Wake
State: North Carolina
Community ID: Big Branch
Transect ID: 47E-
Plot ID: ALL5
on reverse
VF.(tFTATTnN
•
Dommant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Arundinaria gigantea grass FACW 9.
2. Liquidambar styraciflua tree FAC+ 10.
3. Mierostegium vimineum grass FAC+ 11.
4. 12.
5. 13.
6. 14.
7. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC-). 100%
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks)
Stream, Lake, or tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available Wetland
Prima

X Indicators:
ry Indicators: "
Inundated
Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
Water Marks
Drift Lines
X Sediment Deposits
Field Observations: X Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water: (in.) X Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
X Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 4 (in.) Local Soil Survey Data
X FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: 0 (in.) - Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks Wetland area found along an over-head electrical power line right-of-way.
•
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Worsham sandy loam Drainage Class: Poorly
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup Typic Ochraquults Confirm Mapped Type? es No
Profile Descrivttion:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches Horizon (,Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-2 _p 2.5YR 312 sandy loam
2-6 BI 10YR 514 sandy clay loam
6+ B2 2.5YR 511 2.5YR 416 common sandy clay
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_ Histosol Concretions
_Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
X Sutfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
X Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
X Reducing Conditions X Listed on National Hydric Soils List
X Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? NJ No
Wetland Hydrology Present? No
Hydric Soils Present? No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland. Yes No
Remarks Plot taken approximately 15 feet downhill from AM5
Approved by HQUSACE 3/92
•

0
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):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Western Wake Freeway, R-2635, S 7, S 8, WL 9, WL 10, WL-
4W
State:NC County/parish/borough: Wake City: Apex
Center coordinates of site (]at/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 35.68826° , Long. 78.86807° W.
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Big Branch
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: Cape Fear River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 03030004
Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc...) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Office (Desk) Determination. Date: October 2007
{g[ Field Determination. Date(s): June 2001, October 2006
SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There A re 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.
• ? 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):
? TNWs, including territorial seas
? Wetlands adjacent to TNWs - •
® Relatively permanent waters2 (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
? Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
? Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non-wetland waters: 5,150 + 1,701 = 6,851 linear feet: 6', 4' width (ft) and/or acres.
Wetlands: 0.09+0.05+0.08 = 0.22 acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: 1987 Delineation 11anual
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).
' 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.I. 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:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent":
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non-navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year-round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section 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 waterbodyo 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 III.C below.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: 60 acres
Drainage area: 50 acres
Average annual rainfall: 44.19 inches
Average annual snowfall: 4.5 inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
? Tributary flows directly into TNW.
® Tributary flows through 3 tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are 15-20 river miles from TNW.
Project waters are I (or less) river miles from RPW.
Project waters are 10-15 aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are 1 (or less) aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
_40
Identify flow route to TNW5: Big Branch, White Oak Creek, Harris Lake, Cape Fear River.
Tributary stream order, if known: I st.
Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and
West.
3 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: 4 feet
Average depth: 1-2 feet
Average side slopes: 2:1.
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: relatively stable, reach above pond appears
to have previously been impounded by beavers.
Presence of run/riffle/pool complexes. Explain: weak, stream is re-establishing following previous impoundment by
beavers.
Tributary geometry: Meandering
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): 2-4 %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: Seasonal flow
Estimate average number of Clow events in review area/year: 11-20
Describe flow regime: stream is borderline perrenial and may flow year round in some years.
Other information on duration and volume: none available.
Surface flow is: Discrete and confined. Characteristics: continuous bed and bank, substrate sorting, bankfull benches,
low flow noted during site visits.
. Subsurface flow: Unknown. Explain findings: no tests conducted.
? 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
? changes in the character of soil ?
? shelving
? vegetation matted down, bent, or absent
® leaf litter disturbed or washed away ?
? sediment deposition ?
? water staining ?
? other (list):
the presence of litter and debris
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
the presence of wrack line
sediment sorting
scour - •
multiple observed or predicted flow events
abrupt change in plant community
F1 Discontinuous OHWM.' Explain:
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determ
High Tide Line indicated by:
? oil or scum line along shore objects
? fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore)
? physical markings/characteristics
? tidal gauges
? other (list):
ine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply)
Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
? survey to available datum;
? physical markings;
? vegetation lines/changes in vegetation types.
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain: watershed is generally forested with scattered residential development. Water color was clear and quality
06A 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.
presumed to be good. Reach above pond contained extensive amounts of sand that settled out during recent beaver
impoundment.
Identify specific pollutants, if known: none known.
is
•
-.0
0
(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
® Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width): forested, generally >100'.
? Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
40r-1 Habitat for:
? Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
? Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
? Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
® Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings: fish, amphibians, macrobenthos, and crayfish noted during site visit.
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non-TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size:0.05 acres
Wetland type. Explain: bottomland hardwood forest behind natural levee of perrenial stream.
Wetland quality. Explain: low, small size, low score on NCDWQ rating worksheet b/c worksheet is weighted
towards pollutant removal.
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non-TNW:
Flow is: Ephemeral flow. Explain: wetland waters only expected to spill into S 7 during precipitation events where S 7
accesses its floodplain.
Surface flow is: Not present
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Unknowik. Explain findings: no tests conducted.
? 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: behind natural levee in floodplain of perrenial stream.
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are 15-20 river miles from TNW.
Project waters are 10-15 :.erial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: Wetland to nas i-able waters.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the 100 -; 500-year 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: no surface water.
Identify specific pollutants, if known: none known.
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
® Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):forested, > 100'.
® Vegetation type/percent cover. Explain: forested, herbaceous, 70%.
® Habitat for:
? Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
? Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
? Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
® Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings: terrestrial wildlife, birds. Potential salamander and other amphibian
breeding pools within depressions during wet Spring seasons.
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if an )
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis:
Approximately ( 0.05 ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.
:7
For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (YIN) Size (in acres)
N 0.05 •
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed: wildlife habitat, sediment trapping,
carbon transport during flood events as organic matter is flushed from the system.
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_RgW 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 III.D: Tributary is a perrenial stream (S 7). Wetland is behind natural levee and within floodplain. Wetland provides
sediment trapping, nutrient removal, wildlife habitat. Also provides potential amphibian breeding area in wet Spring seasons..
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.
Q, Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: 0.05 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:
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: tributary is border line perrenial with well defined bed and bank, substrate sorting, bankfull benches present. Fish,
macrobenthos, crayfish and amphibians present.
• Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: 1,701 linear feet 4' width (ft).
? 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):
? Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
4. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
[ Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year-round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW:
Wetlands 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: wetlands are directly connected and boundaries extend to stream channel.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: 0.08 + 0.09 = 0.17 acres abuting acres.
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
• and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: 0.05 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 TN W are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters 9
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
? Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
? Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1-6), or
Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA-STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):"
?, which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
? from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
'See Footnote 11*
0 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.
Other factors. Explain:
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
? Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
? Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
? Wetlands: acres.
F. NON-JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
? If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
? Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
? Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
? Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
? Other: (explain, if not covered above):
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
judgment (check all that apply):
? Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
? Lakes/ponds: acres.
? Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
Wetlands: acres.
0
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:
g( 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:New Hill, NC 1:24,000.
? USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: Cawthorn, Joel. 1970. Soil Survey of Wake County, North
Carolina. United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, now Natural Resource Conservation Service. Raleigh,
NC.
[I 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):
or ? Other (Name & Date):
Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
Applicable/supporting case law:
Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
Other information (please specify):
r
J
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:
•
•
- 4p
0
NCDWO Stream Classification Form
glLroject Name: River Basin:
,
stern Wake Freeway R-2635 Cape Fear
'Weld ID Number: Nearest Named Stream:
Sigma IA Big Branch
Date: USGS QUAD:
June 12, 2001 Apex, NC
County:
Wake
Latitude:
35° 41' 51.Ir N
Longitude:
Evaluator:
Harold M. Brady
Signature:
Location:
j6° S 2.19.84"W Old Apex Holly Springs Road
*PLEASE NOTE: If evaluator and landowner agree that the feature is a man-made ditch, then use of this form is not necessary.
Also, if in the best professional judgement of the evaluator, the feature is a man-made ditch and not a modified natural stream-this
rating system should not be used*
Primary Field Indicators: (Circle One Number Per Line
1. Geomorphology Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1) Is There A Riffle-Pool Sequence? 0 (1) 2 3
2) Is The USDA Texture In Streambed
Different From Surrounding Terrain?
0
1
(2)
3
3) Are Natural Levees Present? 0 1 (2) 3
4) Is The Channel Sinuous? 0 1 (2) 3
5) Is There An Active (Or Relic)
Floodplain Present?
0
1
(2)
3
6) Is The Channel Braided? (0) 1 2 3
7) Are Recent Alluvial Deposits Present? 0 1 (2) 3
8) Is There A Bankfnll Bench Present? 0 1 (2) 3
9) Is A Continuous Bed & Bank Present? 0 1 2 (3)
Is A 2' Order Or Greater Channel (As Indicated
PRIMARY GEOMORPHOLOGYINDICA TOR POINTS: 19
II. Hydrology Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1) Is There A Groundwater
Flow/Discharge Present?
0
1
(2)
3
PRIMARYHYDROLOGYINDICA TOR POINTS: 2
III. Biology Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1) Are Fibrous Roots Present In Streambed? 3 (2) 1 0
2) Are Rooted Plants Present In Streambed? (3) 2 1 0
3 Is Periphvton Present? 0 (1) 2 3 _
4) Are Bivalves Present? (0) 1 2 3
PRIMARYBIOLOGYINDICATOR POINTS.-.6
Secondary Field Indicators: (Circle One Number Per Line)
1. Geomorphology Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1) Is There A Head Cut Present In Channel? (0) .5 1 1.5
2) Is There A Grade Control Point In Channel? 0 .5 (1) 1.5
3) Does Topography Indicate A
Natural Drainage Wav? 0 .5 1 (1.5)
SECONDARY GEOMORPHOLOGY INDICATOR POINTS: 2.5
r?
U. Hydrology Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1) Is This Year's (Or Last's) Leaflitter
Present In Streambed?
1.5
(1)
.5
0

2) Is Sediment On Plants (Or Debris) Present?
0
(.5)
1 •
1.5
3) Are Wrack Lines Present? 0 (.5) 1 1.5
4) Is Water In Channel And >48 Hrs. Since 0 .5
Last Known Rain? (VOTE. IfDitch Indicated In #9 Above Skip This Stev And #5 Below*) 1 (1S)
5) Is There Water In Channel During Dry
Conditions Or In Growing Season)? 0 .5 1 (1.5)
6) Are Hydric Soils Present In Sides Of Channel (Or In Headcut)? Yes=1.5 No=(0)
SECONDARYIIYDROLOGYINDICATOR POINTS. -5
III. Biology Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1) Are Fish Present? 0 .5 (1) 1.5
2 Are Amphibians Present? 0 .5 (1) 1.5
3 Are AquaticTurtles Present? 0 .5 (1) 1.5
4 Are Crayfish Present? 0 (S) 1 1.5
5) Are Macrobenthos Present? 0 .5 (1) 1.5
6) Are Iron Oxidizing Bacteria/Fungus Present? 0 (.5) 1 1.5
7) Is Filamentous Algae Present? 0 (.5) 1 1.5
8) Are Wetland Plants In Streambed?
(* NOTE. If Total Absence Of All Plants In Streambed
As Noted Above Skin This Step UNLESS SAV Present*). SAV Mostly OBL
2 1 Mostly FACW
.75 Mostly FAC
.5 Mostly FACU Mostly UPL
0 0
SECONDARYBIOLOGYINDICA TOR POINTS: 5.5
TOTAL POINTS (Primary + Secondary) =40 (If Greater Than Or Equal To 19 Points The Stream Is At Least
Intermittent) is
_?0
0
NCDWQ Stream Classification Form
Project Name: River Basin: County: Evaluator:
stem Wake Freeway R-2635
Qe Cape Fear Wake Harold M. Brady
ld ID Number: Nearest Named Stream: Latitude: Signature:
Sigma IAA Big Branch 3S° 41'21.:5+" W
Date: USGS QUAD: Longitude: Location:
June 12, 2001 Apex, NC :W 5 2: 8, qv, W Old Tingen Road
*PLEASE NOTE: If evaluator and landowner agree that the feature is a man-made ditch, then use of this form is not necessary.
Also, if in the best professional judgement of the evaluator, the feature is a man-made ditch and not a modified natural stream-this
rating system should not be used*
Primary Field Indicators: (Circle One Number Per Line)
I. Geomorphology Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1) Is There A Riffle-Pool Sequence? 0 (1) 2 3
2) Is The USDA Texture In Streambed
Different From Surrounding Terrain?
0
(1)
2
3
3) Are Natural Levees Present? 0 (1) 2 3
4) Is The Channel Sinuous? 0 1 (2) 3
5) Is There An Active (Or Relic)
Floodplain Present?
0
1
(2)
3
6) Is The Channel Braided? 0 (1) 2 3
7) Are Recent Alluvial Deposits Present? 0 1 (2) 3
8) Is There A Bankfull Bench Present? 0 (1) 2 3
9) Is A Continuous Bed & Bank Present? 0 (1)
(*NOTE. If Bed & Bank Caused By Ditching And WITHOUT Sinuosity Then Score=0*) 2 3
Is A 2°d Order Or Greater Channel (As Indicated
On Tono Map And/Or In Field) Present?
Yes=3
No=(0)
PRIMARY GEOMORPHOLOGYINDICA TOR POINTS: 12
II. Hydrology Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1) Is There A Groundwater
Flow/Discharge Present?
0
(11)
2
3
PRIMAR Y HYDR OL 0 G Y INDICA TOR POINTS. I
III. Biology Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1) Are Fibrous Roots Present In Streambed? 3 2 (1) 0
2) Are Rooted Plants Present In Streambed? 3 2 (1) 0
3) Is Pedphyton Present? 0 (1) 2 3
4) Are Bivalves Present? (0) 1 2 3
PRIAL RYBIOLOGYINDICATOR POINTS. 3
Secondary Field Indicators: (Circle One Number Per Line)
1. Geomorphology Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1) Is There A Head Cut Present In Channel? 0 (.5) 1 1.5
2) Is There A Grade Control Point In Channel? 0 .5 (1) 1.5
3) Does Topography Indicate A
Natural Drainage Way? 0 .5 (1) 1.5
SECONDARY GEOMORPHOL OGY INDICA TOR POINTS.--Z 5
11
H. Hydrology Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1) Is This Year's (Or Last's) Leaflitter
Present In Streambed?
1.5
1
(.5)
0

2) Is Sediment On Plants (Or Debris) Present?
0
(.5)
1 •
1.5
3) Are Wrack Lines Present? 0 .5 (1) 1.5
4) Is Water In Channel And >48 Hrs. Since 0 .5
Last Known Rain? ('NOTE: If Ditch Indicated In #9 Above Skin This Step And #5 Below') 1 (1.5)
5) Is There Water In Channel During Dry
Conditions Or In Growing Season)? 0 (.5) 1 1.5
6) Are Hvdric Soils Present In Sides Of Channel (Or In Headcut)? Yes=(1.5) No=O
SECONDARYHYDROLOGYINDICA TOR POINTS. 5.5
III. Biology Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1) Are Fish Present? 0 (5) 1 1.5
2 Are Amphibians Present? 0 (.5) 1 1.5
3) Are AquaticTurtles Present? 0 .5 (1) 1.5
4) Are Crayfish Present? 0 .5 (1) 1.5
5) Are Macrobenthos Present? 0 .5 (1) 1.5
6) Are Iron Oxidizing Bacteria/Fungus Present? 0 (.5) 1 1.5
7) Is Filamentous Algae Present? 0 (3) 1 1.5
8) Are Wetland Plants In Streambed?
(' NOTE. If Total Absence Of All Plants In Streambed
As Noted Above Skip This Step UNLESS SAV Present'). SAV Mostly OBL
2 1 Mostly FACW
(.75) Mostly FAC
.5 Mostly FACU Mostly UPL
0 0
SECONDARYBIOLOGYINDICA TOR POINTS: 5.75
TOTAL POINTS (Primary + Secondary)= 29.75 (If Greater Than Or Equal To 19 Points The Stream Is At Least
Intermittent)
•

0
to
WETLAND RATING WORKSHEET (4th VERSION)
f
U
11 X Bottomland Hardwood Forest Bog/Fen
Project Name: Western Wake Freeway. R-2635 County: Wake
Nearest Road: Old Tingen Road Date: 61812001
Wetland Area (ac): 0.05 acres Wetland Width (ft): 25 Peet
Name of Evaluator(s)HaroldM. Brady Wetland ID: delta ICY
WETLAND LOCATION:
on sound or estusuary, pond or lake
X on perennial steam
on intermittent stream
within interstream divide
other
ADJACENT LAND USE:
(vn 1/2 mile upstream, upslope or radius)
X forested/natural vegetation 75 %
X agricultural/ urbanized 20 %
X impervious surface 5 %
Adjacent Special Natural Areas
SOILS: DOMINANT VEGETATION:
Soil Series: Worsham sandy loam 1 Rubus sp.
predominantly organic (humus, muck or peat) 2 Liquidambar styraci/lua
x predominantly mineral (non-sandy) 3 Juncus sp.
predominantly sandy 4 Pinus taeda
HYDRAULIC FACTORS: FLOODING AND WETNESS:
X freshwater semipermanently to permenently flooded or inundated
brackish seasonally flooded or inundated
steep topography X intermittently flooded or temporary surface water
ditched or channelized no evidence of flooding or surface water
total wetland width>= 100 feet
WETLAND TYPE: (select one)*

Swamp Forest Headwater Forest
Carolina Bay Bog Forest
Pocosin Ephemeral Wetland
Pine Savannah Other:
Freshwater Marsh
* The rating system cannot be applied to salt and brackish marshes or stream channels.
DEM RATING

WATER STORAGE 1 X 4.00 = 4
BANK, SHORELINE STABILIZATION 1 X 4.00 = 4
POLLUTANT REMOVAL I * X 5.00 = 5
WILDLIFE HABITAT 3 X 2.00 = 6
AQUATIC LIFE HABITAT 4 X 4.00 = 16
RECREATION/EDUCATION 0 X 1.00 = 0
TOTAL WETLAND SCORE = 35
* Add one point if in sensitive watershed and >10% nonpoint disturbance within 1/2 mile upstream, upslope, or radius.

DATA FORM
• ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Western Wake Freeway
Applicant/owner: NCDOT
Investigator(s): Harold M. Brady
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? es No
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? es
Is this area a potential Problem Area? Yes o
on reverse
Date: 2 -Apr
County: Wake
State: North Carolina
Community ID: Big Branch
Transect ID: AIG
Plot ID:
X7L'!' - T A TinN
•

?Au%j J LlAA-1
Dommant Plant Species Stratum
Indicator
Dommant ant pecies Stratum Indicator
1. Pinus taeda tree FAC 9.
2. Liquidambar styraciflua tree FAC 10.
3. Ilex opaca tree FAC- 11.
4. Smilax rotundifolia vine FAC 12.
5. 13.
6. 14.
15.
g 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC-). 90%
Remarks Facultative vegetation is dominant.
uvnun1.nr_v
l 1 Recorded v Data (Describe in Remarks)
Stream, Lake, or tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology In Mors:
Primary Indicators:
-Inundated
_ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
_ Water Marks
_ Drift Lines

Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water: (in.) _Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _ Local Soil Survey Data
FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.) _ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks Relatively flat slope along natural stream levee.
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Creedmoor sandy loam Drainage Class: Moderately well
Field Observations
Taxonomy (SubgroupAquic Hapludults Confirm Mapped Type? es No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-1 A 10YR 313 sandy loam
1-8 BI 10YR 513 sandy loam
8+ B2 10YR 512 sandy clay loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
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
_
Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
_ Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No - •
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks Plot was taken approximately 40 feet uphill from Plot AIG8.
•
•
0
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
• (1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Western Wake Freeway
Applicant/Owner: NCDOT
investigator(s): Harold M. Brady
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? es No
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? es
Is this area a potential Problem Area? Yes o
(If needed, explain on reverse)
Date: 2 -Apr
County: Wake
State: North Carolina
Community ID: Big Branch
Transect ID:
Plot ID: 4 IG8
«r_1WT a Trnw
•
0
? •.•v ..,.... av I
Dominant P ant Species
Stratum
Indicator
Dommant P ant pecies Stratum Indicator
1. Rubus sp. shrub FAC 9.
2. Liquidambar styraeiflua tree FAC+ 10.
3. Pinus taeda tree FAC 11.
4. Juncus sp. grass FACW 12.
5. Ilex opaca tree FAC 13.
6. 14.
15.
g 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC-). 100%
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Recor a ata (Describe in Remarks)
Stream, Lake, or tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available Wetland Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
Inundated
X Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
_ Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Field Observations: X Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water: (in.) X Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
X Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 6 (in.) Local Soil Survey Data
X FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: 0 (in.) -Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks Wetland area found along the eastern side of EIA at EIA57.
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Worsham sandy loam Drainage Class: Poorly
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup Typic Ochraquults Confirm Mapped Type? es No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches Horizon (Mansell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-3 A 2.5YR 512 sandy loam
3+ B 2.5 YR 611 2.5 YR 718 common sandy clay loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol Concretions
_
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
X Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
X Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
X Reducing Conditions X Listed on National Hydric Soils List
X Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WF.TI.AND DF.TF.RMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland. Yes No
Remarks Plot taken approximately 5 feet downhill from AIG8.
Approved by HQUSACE 3/92
•
•
0
9
WETLAND RATING WORKSHEET (4th VERSION)
•
•
Project Name: Western Wake Freeway: R-2635 County: Wake
Nearest Road: Old Apex Holly Springs Road Date: 61812001
Wetland Area (ac): 0.09 acres Wetland Width (ft): 25 feet
Name of Evaluator(s)Harold M. Brady Wetland ID: delta IE
WETLAND LOCATION:
on sound or estusuary, pond or lake
on perennial steam
x on intermittent stream
within interstream divide
other
ADJACENT LAND USE:
(wr 1/2 mile upstream, upslope or radius)
X forested/natural vegetation 60 %
X agricultural/ urbanized 35 %
X impervious surface 5 %
Adjacent Special Natural Areas
SOILS: DOMINANT VEGETATION:
Soil Series: Worsham sandy loam I Rubus sp.
predominantly organic (humus, muck or peat) 2 Liquidambar styraci flua
x predominantly mineral (non-sandy) 3 Juncus sp.
predominantly sandy 4 Pinus taeda
HYDRAULIC FACTORS: FLOODING AND WETNESS:
X freshwater semipermanently to permenently flooded or inundated
brackish seasonally flooded or inundated
steep topography X intermittently flooded or temporary surface water
ditched or channelized no evidence of flooding or surface water
total wetland width >= 100 feet
WETLAND TYPE: (select one)*
X Bottomland Hardwood Forest Bog/Fen
Swamp Forest Headwater Forest
Carolina Bay Bog Forest
Pocosin Ephemeral Wetland
Pine Savannah Other:
Freshwater Marsh
* The rating system cannot be applied to salt and brackish marshes or stream channels.
DEM RATING

WATER STORAGE 1 - dip
X 4.00 = 4
BANK, SHORELINE STABILIZATION
POLLUTANT REMOVAL
WILDLIFE HABITAT
AQUATIC LIFE HABITAT
RECREATION/EDUCATION
2
2 * X 5.00 =
10
3 X 2.00 = 6
3 X 4.00 = 12
0 X 1.00 = 0
TOTAL WETLAND SCORE = 40
X 4.00 =
8
* Add one point if in sensitive watershed and >10% nonpoint disturbance within 1 /2 mile upstream, upslope, or radius.
•
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
• (1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Western Wake Freeway
Applicant/Owner: NCDOT
Investigator(s): Harold M. Brady
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? es No
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? es ro-I
Is this area a potential Problem Area? Yes o
(If needed, explain on reverse)
Date: 28 Mar
County: Wake
State: North Carolina
Community ID: Big Branch
TransectID: AIE
Plot ID: 4 IE6
VEGETATION
•
0
Dommant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant pecnes Stratum Indicator
1. Rubus sp. shrub FAC 9.
2. Liquidambarstyraciflua tree FAC+ 10.
3. Juncus sp. grass FACW 11.
4. Pinus taeda tree FAC 12.
5. 13.
6. 14.
7. 15.
g. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC-). 100%
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks)
Stream, Lake, or tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology ogy Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
Inundated
X Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
_ Water Marks
_Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Field Observations: X Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water: (in.) X Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
X Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 6 (in.) Local Soil Survey Data
X FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: 0 (in.) -Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks Wetland area found along a tributary of Big Branch that is feed by a farm pond (Poe pond).
Topography is relativelyJlat.
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Worsham sandy loam Drainage Class: Poorly
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup Typic Ochraquults Confirm Mapped Type? es No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-3 A 2.5YR 512 sandy loam
3+ B 2.5 YR 611 2.5 YR 718 common sandy clay loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol Concretions
_
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
X Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
X Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
X Reducing Conditions X Listed on National Hydric Soils List
X Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks Significant root channels present.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No ..,
Wetland Hydrology Present? es No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland. Yes No
Remarks Plot taken approximately 5 feet downhill from A IE6
Approved by HQUSACE 3/92
C,
•
0
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
• (1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Western Wake Freeway
Applicant/Owner: NCDOT
Investigator(s): Harold M. Brady
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? es No
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? es ®o
Is this area a potential Problem Area? Yes o
(If needed, explain on reverse)
Date: 28 Mar
County: Wake
State: North Carolina
Community ID: Big Branch
Transect ID:
Plot ID:
VEGETATION
•
L]
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant P ant pecies tratum In icator
1. Pinus taeda tree FAC 9.
2. Liquidamhar styraci/lua tree FAC 10.
3. Ilex opaea tree FAC- 11.
4. 12.
5. 13.
6. 14.
7. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC-). 90%
Remarks No hydrophytic vegetation present.
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks)
Stream, Lake, or tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available Wetland Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
Inundated
_ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
_ Water Marks
Drift Lines
_
_ Sediment Deposits
Field Observations: -Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water: (in.) -Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _
Local Soil Survey Data
FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.) _ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks 10-20% slope
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Creedmoor sandy loam Drainage Class: Moderately well
Field Observations
Taxonomy (SubgroupAquic Hapludults Confirm Mapped Type? es No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Mansell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-1 A 10YR 313 sandy loan:
1-8 B1 10YR 513 sandy loam
8+ B2 10YR 512 sandy clay loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
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
Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
_Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No - •
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks Plot was taken approximately 40 feet uphill from Plot AX6.
•
L'
0

WETLAND RATING WORKSHEET (4th VERSION)
•
•
Project Name: R - a X35 County: U3
Nearest Road: S- I i Date: o 5i U a
Wetland Area (ac): Wetland Width (ft):
Name of Evaluator(s): - f q Wetland ID: qt.v
WETLAND LOCATION: ADJACENT LAND USE:
(within 1/2 mile upstream, upslope or radius)
on sound or estuary, pond or lake ?forested/natural vegetation 90 %
on perennial stream -agricultural/ urbanized 10 %
on intermittent stream tmipervious surface %
within interstream divide Adjacent Special Natural Areas
other

SOE S: DOMINANT VEGETATION:
Soil Series: ? [&' k a A k4t 'f I? Im m 1 Vyy i ur
predominantly organic (humus, muck or peat) 2
1/ predominantly mineral (non-sandy) 3
predominantly sandy 4 P1
HYDRAULIC FACTORS: FLOODING AND WETNESS:
_ ,,f eshwater fsemipermanently to permenently flooded or inundated
brackish seasonally flooded or inundated
steep topography intermittently flooded or temporary surface water
ditched or channelized no evidence of flooding or surface water
total wetland width > 100 feet
WETLAND TYPE: (select one)*
Bottomland Hardwood Forest Bog/Fen
Swamp Forest Headwater Forest
Carolina Bay Bog Forest
Pocosin Ephemeral Wetland '
Pine Savannah ? Other A C?-L '
Freshwater Marsh
* The rating system cannot be applied to salt and brackish marshes or stream channels.
DEM RATING
WATER STORAGE a X 4.00 =
BANK, SHORELINE STABILIZATION oZ X 4.00 =
POLLUTANT REMOVAL * X 5.00 = 5
WILDLIFE HABITAT _ X 2.00 =
?
AQUATIC LIFE L
X 4.00 =
RECREATION/EDUCATION X 1.00 = 0
TOTAL WETLAND SCORE _ ?1
* Add one point if in sensitive watershed and >10% nonpoint disturbance within 1/2 mile upstream, upslope, or radius.
0
DATA FORM - ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
•
•
•
Prolec Site: " - s Date: 1 c a` u
Applicant/Owner. • C County. _ tom, L kA
lnvestigator(s? JYf State. ?C .
Do Normal Circums exist on the site? No Community ID: t l .%In -tit (inir
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes Transect ID: W 3tn
Is this area a potential Problem Area? Yes aR, Plot ID: ,4. i5 F is !Plrk:
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Inds for
1.
?.s?,, r+?r?. - 1,17 G1
9.
2. Al Ixu% e-CA64tr-a*-rXkA, 5Y?ruh (--ACA.6+ lo-
3. q_m r-ukwum ??, F=AC 11.
4. r Y?utar?. mil f Ac-W 12.
5. ?' F .r !tC r 13.
6. 14.
7. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC-). 1 O (f ?v
Remarks:
- R uc d ocL*j ?6 V u tX be.,t 110?reASt cx.c?C:, Vu a_LW
J YYNG, }vac. -tYee-.5 S U r V Lvt
J _JJ
Recorded
Data (Describe in Remarks) Primary Indicators:
Stream, Lake, or tide Gauge Inundated
Aerial Photographs _ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
Other
X _ Water Marks
No Recorded Data Available --Drift Lines
,Sediment Deposits
Field Observations: / Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water. - (in.) / Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit -' (in.) _
Local Soil Survey Data
?FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil- -r?)_(in.) _
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
- .tcr,r5 {fit NYC VSC i?acvYG?: C 1llaii `

pi? ? j?Yeccnm tS
1 , ? (Jcrvir`?_I try)
?e-tll?l?1?SY?iY7` ('?(Y1?N??W?. ?()t? C1Yl
2
'?
,,
?
Map Unit Name (Series & Phase),
V e ?A? Sj }- l o,, ,q
Drainage Class:
Taxonomy (Subgroup) f- % „v e o t, c K `` P to li
- c.r y-S Confirm Mapped T be? t-Ye3 No
Depth Matrix Color - Mottle Colors Mottle exture, Concretions,
°
inches Horizon unsell Moist (Mansell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure etc.
0-3 ?
?S 2 -- 5tkM
_
tom! (7- 1.„-, l
_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
Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
at to ]
VXk
J d
Hydrophytic egetation Present? No
Wetland Hydrology Present? es No
Hydric Soils Present? No Is this Sampling Point Within a WetlanA Ss No
Remarks:
O
H
0
O
a
O
d?
a
O
m
O
H
yU
Fri
?10)
Z
nATA MUM _ ROTTTTNF. WF,TT.ANn nF.TFRMWATTON
?a o
d
H
W
C7
Ch
O
a
O
a
a!
a
O
W
2
O
Q
M
U
Project/Site: 1L . Date: G S u o
Applicant/Own County:
Investigator(s): r u y <Ai State: IJ?
Do Nomal Circumstandeb exist on the site? <f[W No Community ID_Ujolr rv,
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes 4o Transect ID: WZ 1-1 lw
Is this area a potential Problem Area? Ye-s---a Plot ID: A, g
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum icator
1. 1:vr? h,/rYo - C.r 9.
2. - YhC.r 10.
3. t, Y`A 1 aZK 1 l .
4. rl- Pt CC 12.
5. " A C-V 13.
6. . 14.
7. , 15.
8. 16.
FAC (excluding FAC ). to in°7n
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or
i1
Remarks:.- ?0 +rnki ??? Maax? L'kcM)kx?Cf? "J ,- Sous toy-
0
Recorded
Data (Describe in Remarks) Primary Indicators:
Stream, Lake, or tide Gauge -Inundated
Aerial Photographs -Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
Other _ Water Marks
r No Recorded Data Available _ Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Field Observations: -
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
-
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water. 'r (in.) _ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Water tamed Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit (in.) _
Local Soil Survey Data
FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: -" (in.) -Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
- ? s1opA c,-? ? o? pl cu?n e.? - v?o obv ? cx?. hc?lc,?
Map Unit Name (Series & Phase): Crce port s, ,A t oa M Drainage Class:

Taxonomy (Subgroup) Z H2,41 µAµ I b No
Confum Mapped Type? . Yes
Depth ' Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Mansell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
,S a
23 t -- 1

C
1^
?
1iq
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
Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
-
Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
Sow C ed o? ? n(ce?l?l - V)OL 1?n U f1&'r>0(
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? ?
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes o
Hydric Soils Present? Yes ' o Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes
Remarks:
i
461
i
U
u

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):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Western Wake Freeway, R-2635, WL6, WL 7
State:NC County/parish/borough: Wake City: Apex
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 35.68507° , Long. 78.8597°
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Big Branch
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: Cape Fear River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 03030004
0 Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc... ) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Office (Desk) Determination. Date: October 2007
Field Determination. Date(s): June 2001, October 2007
SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There kre 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.
? 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):
[? TNWs, including territorial seas
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
Relatively permanent waters2 (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TN- W*
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
E) Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non-wetland waters: linear feet: width (ft) and/or acres.
Wetlands: 1.39 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:
401 Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
2 For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year-round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally"
(e.g., typically 3 months).
3 Supporting documentation is presented in Section 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 is
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.I.; otherwise, see Section III.B below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent":
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non-navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year-round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section 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 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 III.C below.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: 25 acres
Drainage area: 23 acres
Average annual ramiali: 44.19 inches
Average annual snowfall: 4.5 inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
? Tributary flows directly into TNW.
® Tributary flows through tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are 15-20 river miles from TNW.
Project waters are 1 (or less) river miles from RPW.
Project waters are 10-15 aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are 1_(or less) aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
-.0
Identify flow route to TNW5: Little Branch, Big Branch, White Oak Creek, Harris Lake, Cape Fear River.
?J
o Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and
West.
3 Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.
Tributary stream order, if known: No tributary within review area. Wetlands are below outfall for a large farm pond.
Wetlands likely caused by seepage under the dam.
• (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
? Bedrock ? Vegetation. Type/%cover:
? Other. Explain:
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain:
Presence of run/riffle/pool complexes. Explain:
Tributary geometry: Pick List
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: Pick List
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year: Pick L
Describe flow regime:
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: kick 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
? changes in the character of soil
? shelving
? vegetation matted down, bent, or absent
? leaf litter disturbed or washed away
? sediment deposition
? water staining
? other (list):
El Discontinuous OHWM.' Explain:
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determ
ffl High Tide Line indicated by:
? oil or scum line along shore objects
? fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore)
? physical markings/characteristics
? tidal gauges
? other (list):
? the presence of litter and debris
? destruction of terrestrial vegetation
? the presence of wrack line
? sediment sorting
? scour
? multiple observed t?? predicted flow events
? abrupt change in plant community
ne lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
? survey to available datum;
? physical markings;
? vegetation lines/changes in vegetation types.
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
• 6A natural or man-made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
'Ibid.
(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
? Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width):
? Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
? Habitat for: •
? Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
? Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
? Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
? Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non-TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size: 1.03, 0.36 = total 1.39 acres
Wetland type. Explain: Bottomland hardwood, forested.
Wetland quality. Explain: low to medium. low score on NCDWQ wetland rating sheet, but significant size in
relation to watershed size. However, NCDWQ worksheet is weighted towards pollutant removal. With no identifiable pollutant source,
the wetland scores lower than might be expected.
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non-TNW:
Flow is: Vo Flow Explain:
Surface flow is: Not present
Characteristic:
Subsurface flow: Unknowi. Explain findings: no tests conducted.
? Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adiacency Determination with Non-TNW:
? Directly abutting
® Not directly abutting •
® Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain: wetlands arise from pond drainage. The pond and wetlands
are at the top of a natural drainage. There is no identifiable stream channel entering or leaving the pond. There are drainage patterns
indicating flow towards Little Branch.
? Ecological connection. Explain:
? Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are 15)-20 river miles from TNW.
Project waters are W-1-5 aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: Wetland to navi?uable waters.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the 100 - 500-year floodplam.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain: no surface water present, watershed relatively undeveloped.
Identify specific pollutants, if known: none known.
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
® Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width): forested, >50'.
® Vegetation type/percent cover. Explain: forested, 70%.
® Habitat for:
? Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
? Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
? Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
? Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:terrestrial wildlife, birds.
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis:
Approximately ( 0.28 ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.
0
For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)
N 0.36
N 1.03
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed: energy dissipation, water storage,
nurtient removal.
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 th ltributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section III.D: Located in natural drainage below a farm pond. May filter pollutants from livestock
waste in pond, slow water enrgey and prevent erosion and sedimentation of receiving waters. Wetlands such as these in the
headwater regions of drainages provide the first line of defense for preventing degradation of receiving waters. Organic material
and detritus may be washed from the wetland and into the downstream food chain during times of significant rainfall.
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 III.D:
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:
Q 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:
Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally:
•
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
? Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
[ Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
3. Non-RPWs8 that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.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:
4. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
[? Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year-round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW:
Wetlands 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.
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 TN W 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: 0.28 acres.
7. 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
Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1-6), or
n Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA-STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):10
which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
'See Footnote # 3. •
9 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.
? from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
? which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
? Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
0 ? Other factors. Explain:
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
? Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Wetlands: acres.
F. NON-JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
? If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
? Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
? Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
? Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
? Other: (explain, if not covered above):
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
judgment (check all that apply):
? Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
? Lakes/ponds: acres.
? Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
Wetlands: acres.
do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
• [] Provide Non
E] Other Wetlands: non-wetland acres.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall-be?ncluded 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:
E[ Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
F1 Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
F1 Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report.
El Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
Corps navigable waters' study:
U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
El USGS NHD data.
El USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
® U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: 1:24,000, New Hill, NC.
® USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: Cawthorn, Joel. 1970. Soil Survey of Wake County, North
Carolina. United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, now Natural Resource Conservation Service. Raleigh,
NC.
F1 National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
? State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
F] FEMA/FIRM maps:
F1 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
F1 Photographs: El Aerial (Name & Date):
• or F] Other (Name & Date):
? Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
? Applicable/supporting case law:
waters: rivers, non-jurisdictional
width that (ft).
Lakes/ponds: -acreagewetland waters estimates (i.e.for, acres.
List type waters of in linear the feet, aquatic review area resource:
a fiSECTIONnding IV: is DATA required forjSOURCES.urisdiction (check all that apply):
? Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
? Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD: wetlands are below a large farm pond at the top of a natural drainage that becomes •
an unnamed tributary to Little Branch. These wetlands along with similar wetlands within the watershed contribute to the overall health of
the Cape Fear River. Individually, these wetlands may be relatively insignificant, but cummulatively they prevent the TNW from being
overwhelmed with sediment and/or other pollutants.
l?
u
- 40
0
7
WETLAND RATING WORKSHEET (4th VERSION)
•
•
Project Name: Western Wake Freeway: R-2635 County: Wake
Nearest Road: Old Apex Holly Springs Road Date: 61812001
Wetland Area (ac): 1.03 acres Wetland Width (ft): 50 feet
Name of Evaluator(s)Harold M. Brady Wetland ID: delta IC
WETLAND LOCATION: ADJACENT LAND USE:
(wi 1 2 mile upstream, ups lope or radius)
X on sound or estusuary, pond or lake X forested/natural vegetation 60 %
on perennial steam X agricultural/ urbanized 35 %
on intermittent stream X impervious surface 5 %
within interstream divide Adjacent Special Natural Areas
other
SOILS: DOMINANT VEGETATION:
Soil Series: Worsham sandy loam 1 Arundinaria gigantea
predominantly organic (humus, muck or peat) 2 Liquidambar styraciflua
x predominantly mineral (non-sandy) 3 Myrica cerifera
predominantly sandy 4 Pinus taeda
HYDRAULIC FACTORS: FLOODING AND WETNESS:
X freshwater X semipermanently to permenently flooded or inundated
brackish seasonally flooded or inundated
steep topography intermittently flooded or temporary surface water
ditched or channelized no evidence of flooding or surface water
total wetland width >= 100 feet
WETLAND TYPE: (select one)*
X Bottomland Hardwood Forest Bog/Fen
Swamp Forest Headwater Forest
Carolina Bay Bog Forest
Pocosin Ephemeral Wetland
Pine Savannah Other:
Freshwater Marsh
* The rating system cannot be applied to salt and brackish marshes or stream channels.
DEM RATING
WATER STORAGE 3 X 4.00 = 12
BANK, SHORELINE STABILIZATION 1 X 4.00 = 4
POLLUTANT REMOVAL 3 * X 5.00 = 15
WILDLIFE HABITAT 4 X 2.00 = 8
AQUATIC LIFE HABITAT 4 X 4.00 = 16
RECREATION/EDUCATION 2 X 1.00 = 2
TOTAL WETLAND SCORE = 57
* Add one point if insensitive watershed and >10% nonpoint disturbance within 1/2 mile upstream, upslope, or radius.
0
•
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Proj ect/Site: Western Wake Freeway
Applicant/Owner: NCDOT
Investigator(s): Harold M. Brady
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? es No
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? es ®°
Is this area a potential Problem Area? Yes o
Date: 26-Mar
County: Wake
State: North Carolina
Community ID: Big Branch
Transect ID: 4T7-
Plot ID:
on
VEGETATION
•
0
Dominant M ant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Pinus taeda tree FAC 9.
2. Liquidambarstyraciflua tree FAC 10.
3. 11.
4. 12.
5. 13.
6. 14.
7. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC-). 100%
Remarks No hydrophytic vegetation present in this recently logged area; however, facultative vegetation dominates the site.
HYDROLOGY
_ Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks)
Stream, Lake, or tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available anHydrology cators:
Primary Indicator`s: •
Inundated
_ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
_ Water Marks
_Drift Lines
_ Sediment Deposits
Field Observations: Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
_
Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _ Local Soil Survey Data
FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.) -Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks 6-10% slope
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Creedmoor silt loam Drainage Class: Moderately well
Field Observations
Taxonomy (SubgroupAquic Hapludults Confirm Mapped Type? es No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches Horizon (Mansell Moist) (Mansell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-1 A IOYR 313 silt loam
1-8 BI IOYR 513 silt loam
8+ B2 IOYR 512 silty clay loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
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
Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
_ Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes Ho Hydric Soils Present? Yes Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks Plot was taken approximately 40 feet uphill from Plot AICI1.
•
L'
E
E
C7
0
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Western Wake Freeway
Applicant/Owner: NCDOT
Investigator(s): Harold M. Brady
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? es No
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? es o
Is this area a potential Problem Area? Yes o
(If needed, explain on reverse)
Date: 26-Ma r
County: Wake
State: North Carolina
Community ID: Big Branch
Transect ID: AIC
Plot ID:
VF.f:FTATTON
Dominant Plant pecies Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Microstegium vimineum grass FAC+ 9.
2. Liquidambar styraciflua tree FAC+ 10.
3. Aeer rubrum tree FAC 11.
4. Pinus taeda tree FAC 12.
5. Carer sp. grass FACW 13.
6. 14.
7. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC-). 100%
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks)
Stream, Lake, or tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicatois:'
Inundated
X Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
-Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Field Observations: X Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water: (in.) X Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
X Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 4 (in.) Local Soil Survey Data
X FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: 0 (in.) _ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks Wetland is feed by a large farm pond, and eventually feeds a stream which is within the Big Branch drainage basin.
Includes a 1 acre pond.
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Worsham sandy loam Drainage Class: Poorly
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup Typic Ochraquults Confirm Mapped Type? es No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-3 A 2.5YR 512 sandy loam
3+ B 2.5 YR 611 2.5 YR 718 common sandy clay loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol Concretions
_
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
X Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
X Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
X Reducing Conditions X Listed on National Hydric Soils List
X Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks Significant root channels present.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No _
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland. Yes No
Remarks Plot taken approximately 5 feet downhill from AICI1.
Approved by HQUSACE 3/92
•
?J
0

WETLAND RATING WORKSHEET (4th VERSION)
L-]
•
Project Name: Western Wake Freeway. R-2635 County Wake
Nearest Road: Old Apex Holly Springs Road Date: 61812001
Wetland Area (ac): 0.36 acres Wetland Width (ft): 25 feet
Name of Evaluator(s)HaroldM. Brady Wetland ID: delta IB
WETLAND LOCATION: ADJACENT LAND USE:
(wl 1 e upstream, upslope or radius)
X on sound or estusuary, pond or lake X forested/natural vegetation 60 %
on perennial steam X agricultural/ urbanized 35 %
on intermittent stream X impervious surface 5 %
within interstream divide Adjacent Special Natural Areas
other
SOILS: DOMINANT VEGETATION:
Soil Series: Worsham sandy loam 1 Arundinaria gigantea
predominantly organic (humus, muck or peat) 2 Liquidambar styraciflua
x predominantly mineral (non-sandy) 3 Myrica cerifera
predominantly sandy 4 Pinus taeda
HYDRAULIC FACTORS: FLOODING AND WETNESS:
X freshwater semipermanently to permenently flooded or inundated
brackish seasonally flooded or inundated
steep topography X intermittently flooded or temporary surface water
ditched or channelized no evidence of flooding or surface water
total wetland width >= 100 feet
WETLAND TYPE: (select one)"
X Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Swamp Forest
Carolina Bay
Pocosin
Pine Savannah
Freshwater Marsh
Bog/Fen
Headwater Forest
Bog Forest
Ephemeral Wetland
Other:
* The rating system cannot be applied to salt and brackish marshes or stream channels.
DEM RATING
WATER STORAGE 1 X 4.00 = 4
BANK, SHORELINE STABILIZATION 1 X 4.00 = 4
POLLUTANT REMOVAL 2 * X 5.00 = 10
WILDLIFE HABITAT I X 2.00 = 2
AQUATIC LIFE HABITAT 3 X 4.00 = 12
RECREATION/EDUCATION 1 X 1.00 = I
TOTAL WETLAND SCORE = 33
* Add one point if insensitive watershed and >10% nonpoint disturbance within 1 /2 mile upstream, upslope, or radius.
0
•
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Western Wake Freeway
Applicant/Owner: NCDOT
Investigator(s): Harold M. Brady
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? CPS No
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? es ®o
Is this area a potential Problem Area? Yes o
Date: 26 Mar
county. Wake
State: North Carolina
Community ID: Big Branch
Transect ID:
Plot ID:
on
•
0
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Pinus taeda tree FAC 9.
2. Liquidambarstyraciflua tree FAC 10.
3. 11.
4. 12.
5. 13.
6. 14.
7. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC-). 100%
Remarks No hydrophytic vegetation present, recently logged area.
HYDROLOGY
_ Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks)
Stream, Lake, or tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology In tors:
Primary Indicators:
Inundated
Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
Water Marks
Drift Lines
_
Sediment Deposits
Field Observations: _
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
SeconJary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water: (in.) _ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _
Local Soil Survey Data
FAC Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.) _ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks 2-6% slope
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): White Store sandy loam Drainage Class: Moderately well
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup Vertic Hapludults Confine Mapped Type? es No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-6 A 10YR 614 sandy loam
6-9 BI SYR 516 clay loam
9+ B2 2.5YR 414 clay
Hydric Soil Indicators:
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
Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
_Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes o - •
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks Plot was taken approximately 40 feet uphill from Plot A IB18.
•
•

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
• (1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Western Wake Freeway
Applicant/Owner: NCDOT
Investigator(s): Harold M. Brady
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? es No
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? es o
is this area a potential Problem Area? Yes o
(If needed, explain on reverse)
Date: 26 Mar
County: Wake
State: North Carolina
Community ID: Big Branch
Transect ID: A 1B
Plot ID:
VEGETATION
•
0
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dornmant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Mierostegium vimineum grass FAC+ 9.
2. Liquidambarstyraeiflua tree FAC+ 10.
3. Aeer rubrum tree FAC 11.
4. Pinus taeda tree FAC 12.
5. Caret sp. grass FACW 13.
6. 14.
7. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC-). 100%
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks)
Stream, Lake, or tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available Wetland Indicators:
Primary Indicator`s:
Inundated
X Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
-Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Field Observations: X Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water: (in.) X Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
X Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 4 (in.) Local Soil Survey Data
X FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: 0 (in.) _ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks Wetland is feed by a large farm pond, and eventually feeds a stream which is within the Big Branch drainage basin.
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Worsham sandy loam Drainage Class: Poorly
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup Typic Ochraquults Confirm Mapped Type? es No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-3 A 2.5YR 512 sandy loam
3+ B 2.5 YR 611 2.5 YR 718 common sandy clay loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol Concretions
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
X Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
X Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
X Reducing Conditions X Listed on National Hydric Soils List
X Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks Significant root channels present.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland. Yes No
Remarks Plot taken approximately 5 feet downhill from AIB18.
Approved by HQUSACE 3/92
•
C7

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):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Western Wake Freeway, R-2635, WL 1, WL 2
State:NC County/parish/borough: Wake City: Apex
Center coordinates of site (]at/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 35.6869° , Long. 78.85672' S-M.
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Little Branch
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: Cape Fear River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 03030004
71 Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
? Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc... ) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Office (Desk) Determination. Date: October 2007
Field Determination. Date(s): June 2001, October 2007
SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There arc 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.
? 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 :1 re "waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply):'
? TNWs, including territorial seas
? Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
? Relatively permanent waters2 (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into ThDA(s
Non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
® Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non-wetland waters: linear feet: width (ft) and/or acres.
Wetlands: 0.28 acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: 1957 Delineation Manua€
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
2. Non-regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable):3
E 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).
3 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:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent":
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non-navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year-round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section 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.I 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 III.C below.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Ceneral Area Conditions:
Watershed size: 25 acres
Drainage area: 23 acres
Average annual rainfall: 44.19 inches
Average annual snowfall: 4.5 inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
? Tributary flows directly into TNW.
® Tributary flows through 4 tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are 15-20 river miles from TNW.
Project waters are I (or less) river miles from RPW.
Project waters are 10-15 a i lal (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are 1 (or less) aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
--V
Identify flow route to TNW5: Little Branch, Big Branch, White Oak Creek, Harris Lake, Cape Fear River.
.7
a 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.
Tributary stream order, if known: No tributary within review area. Wetlands are below outfall for a large farm pond.
Wetlands likely caused by seepage under the dam.
(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apply):
0 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
? Bedrock ? Vegetation. Type/% cover:
? Other. Explain:
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain:
Presence of run/riffle/pool complexes. Explain:
Tributary geometry: Pick List
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: Pick List
Estimate average number of Clow 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
? changes in the character of soil
? shelving
? vegetation matted down, bent, or absent
? leaf litter disturbed or washed away
? sediment deposition
? water staining
? other (list):
F1 Discontinuous OHWM.' Explain:
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determ
High Tide Line indicated by:
? oil or scum line along shore objects
? fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore)
? physical markings/characteristics
? tidal gauges
? other (list):
? the presence of litter and debris
? destruction of terrestrial vegetation
? the presence of wrack line
? sediment sorting
? scour
? multiple observcd of predicted flow events
? abrupt change in plant community
ne lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
? survey to available datum;
? physical markings;
? vegetation lines/changes in vegetation types.
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
6A natural or man-made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
'Ibid.
(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
? Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width):
? Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
? Habitat for: •
? Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
? Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
? Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
? Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non-TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size:0.09, 0.19 = total 0.28 acres
Wetland type. Explain: Bottomland hardwood, forested.
Wetland quality. Explain: low based on NCDWQ rating worksheet. Worksheet weighted towards pollutant removal
and the size of the wetlands and the lack of a clear pollution source results in a low rating.
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flew Relationship with Non-TNW:
Flow is: No Flow` Explain:
Surface flow is: Not present
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Unknown Explain findings: no tests conducted.
? Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adiacency Determination with Non-TNW:
? Directly abutting
® Not directly abutting
® Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain: wetlands arise from pond drainage. The pond and wetlands •
are at the top of a natural drainage. There is no identifiable stream channel entering or leaving the pond. There are drainage patterns
indicating flow towards Little Branch.
? Ecological connection. Explain:
? Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are 15-20 river miles from TNW.
Project waters air 111-15 : vial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: Wetland to navig;ible waters.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the i oo - SOU-year floodplain.
_0
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain: no surface water present, watershed relatively undeveloped.
Identify specific pollutants, if known: none known.
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
® Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width): forested, >50'.
® Vegetation type/percent cover. Explaimforested, 70%.
® Habitat for:
? Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
? Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
? Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
? Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:terrestrial wildlife, birds.
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if an )
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis:
Approximately ( 0.28 ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.
0
For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (YIN) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)
N 0.09
•
N 0.19
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed: energy dissipation, water storage,
nurtient removal.
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 tie ttributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section III.D: Located in natural drainage below a farm pond. May filter pollutants from livestock
waste in pond, slow water enrgey and prevent erosion and sedimentation of receiving waters. Wetlands such as these in the
headwater regions of drainages provide the first line of defense for preventing degradation of receiving waters. Organic material
and detritus may be washed from the wetland and into the downstream food chain during times of significant rainfall.
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 III.D:
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:
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:
is
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters
? Tributary waters: linear feet
? Other non-wetland waters: acres
Identify type(s) of waters:
in the review area (check all that apply):
width (ft).
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):
Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
4. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year-round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW:
? Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary
seasonal in Section 111.13 and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW:
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs. •
Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
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: 0.28 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
[] 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):'o
? which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
'See Footnote # 3. •
' To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III.D.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
'o 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.
? from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
? Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
• ? Other factors. Explain:
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
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:
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-beTncluded 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: 1:24,000, New Hill, NC.
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: Cawthorn, Joel. 1970. Soil Survey of Wake County, North
Carolina. United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, now Natural Resource Conservation Service. Raleigh,
NC.
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):
• or ? Other (Name & Date):
Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
Q Applicable/supporting case law:
? Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
?' Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD: wetlands are below a large farm pond at the top of a natural drainage that becomes is
an unnamed tributary to Little Branch. These wetlands along with similar wetlands within the watershed contribute to the overall health of
the Cape Fear River. Individually, these wetlands may be relatively insignificant, but cummulatively they prevent the TNW from being
overwhelmed with sediment and/or other pollutants.
•
-- ..

WETLAND RATING WORKSHEET (4th VERSION)
•
C7
Project Name: Western Wake Freeway: R-2635 County: Wake
Nearest Road: Old Apex Holly Springs Road Date: 61812001
Wetland Area (ac): 0.19 acres Wetland Width (ft): 20 feet
Name of Evaluator(s)HaroldM. Brady Wetland ID: delta JD
WETLAND LOCATION:
X on sound or estusuary, pond or lake
on perennial steam
on intermittent stream
within interstream divide
other
ADJACENT LAND USE:
(wi 1 mile upstream, upslope or radius)
X forested/natural vegetation 50 %
X agricultural/ urbanized 45 %
X impervious surface 5 %
Adjacent Special Natural Areas
Sons: DOMINANT VEGETATION:
Soil Series: Worsham sandy loam 1 Microstegium vimineum
predominantly organic (humus, muck or peat) 2 Liguidambar styraciflua
x predominantly mineral (non-sandy) 3 Acer rubrum
predominantly sandy 4 Pinus taeda
HYDRAULIC FACTORS: FLOODING AND WETNESS:
X freshwater semipermanently to permanently flooded or inundated
brackish seasonally flooded or inundated
steep topography X intermittently flooded or temporary surface water
ditched or channelized no evidence of flooding or surface water
total wetland width >= 100 feet
WETLAND TYPE: (select one)*
X Bottomland Hardwood Forest Bog/Fen
Swamp Forest Headwater Forest
Carolina Bay Bog Forest
Pocosin Ephemeral Wetland
Pine Savannah Other:
Freshwater Marsh
* The rating system cannot be applied to salt and brackish marshes or stream channels.
DEM RATING
WATER STORAGE
BANK, SHORELINE STABILIZATION
POLLUTANT REMOVAL
WILDLIFE HABITAT
AQUATIC LIFE HABITAT
RECREATION/EDUCATION
1 X 4.00 = 4
3 X 4.00 = 12
2 * X5.00= 10
2 X 2.00 = 4
2 X 4.00 = 8
1 X 1.00 = 1
TOTAL WETLAND SCORE = 39
* Add one point if insensitive watershed and >10% nonpoint disturbance within 1/2 mile upstream, upslope, or radius.
0
DATA FORM
• ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Western Wake Freeway
Applicant/Owner: NCDOT
Investigator(s): Harold M. Brady
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? es No
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? es 11 o
Is this area a potential Problem Area? Yes I "o
(If needed, explain on reverse)
Date: 21 Mar
County: Wake
State: North Carolina
Community ID: Little Branch
Transect ID: 4
Plot ID:
It rirrl T A Tlrr%m
•
0
V KJlll`J l A l iVl\
Dominant Plant Species Stratum
Indicator
Domu?at?t P ant pecies Stratum Indicator
1. Pinus taeda tree FAC 9.
2. Quereus alba tree FACU 10.
3. Aeer rubrum tree FAC 11.
4. 12.
5. 13.
6. 14.
15.
8 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC-). 75%
Remarks Facultative vegetation dominant.
HYDROLOGY
Recor a ata (Describe in Remarks)
Stream, Lake, or tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available anHydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
-Inundated
_ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
-Water Marks
-Drift Lines

Field Observations: -Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water: (in.) _ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) -Local Soil Survey Data
FAC Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.) -Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks 6-10% slope
cnri.c
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Creedmoor sandy loam Drainage Class: Moderately well
Field Observations
Taxonomy (SubgroupAquic Hapludults Confirm Mapped Type? es No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-6 A 2.5YR 714 sandy loam
6+ B 10YR 718 clay loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
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
_
Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
_ Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WFTi.AlVn nF.TRUMINATInN
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks Plot was taken approximately 40 feet uphill from Plot AJD20
is
is
0
DATA FORM
• ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Western Wake Freeway
Applicant/Owner: NCDOT
Investigator(s): Harold M. Brady
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? es No
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? es ®o
Is this area a potential Problem Area? Yes o
(if needed, explain on reverse)
Date: 21 Mar
County: Wake
State: North Carolina
Community ID: Little Branch
Transect ID. 0
Plot ID: 0
VEGETATION
r ?
?J
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator ommant P ant pecies tratum Indicator
1. Microstegium vimineum grass FAC+ 9.
2. Liquidambar styraciJlua tree FAC+ 10.
3. Acer rubrum tree FAC 11.
4. Pinus taeda tree FAC 12.
5. 13.
6. 14.
15.
g 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC-). 100%
Remarks:
uvnunl .nr_V
y ecor a Data (Descn e in Remarks)
Stream, Lake, or tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available anH
Primar

X
_ ydrology Indicators:
y Indicators: •
Inundated
Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
Water Marks
Drift Lines

Field Observations:
X Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water: (in.) X Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
X Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 8 (in.) Local Soil Survey Data
X FAC Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: 0 (in.) - Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks Wetland is feed by a large farm pond.
0
CCITT C
1JV1LV
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Worsham sandy loam
Drainage Class: Poorly
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup Typic Ochraquults Confirm Mapped Type? es No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color
Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-2 A 2.5YR 414 sandy loam
2+ B 2.5 YR 51I 2.5 YR S/8 common sandy clay loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_Histosol
Histic Epipedon Concretions
High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
X Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
X Reducing Conditions X Listed on National Hydric Soils List
X Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
t17TTT A 1ATY% 'n1MrrT. Dl?iTTAT A' nT%J
?1 L' 1LL1L?Y La+
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? El No
Wetland Hydrology Present? No
Hydric Soils Present? No
Remarks Plot taken approximately 5 feet downhill from AJD20
_.0
Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland. Yes No
•
is
11
Z
WETLAND RATING WORKSHEET (4th VERSION)

1?1
Project Name: Western Wake Freeway. R-2635 County: Wake
Nearest Road: Old Apex Holly Springs Road Date: 61812001
Wetland Area (ac): 0.09 acres Wetland Width (ft): 20 feet
Name of Evaluator(s)HaroldM. Brady Wetland ID: delta JC
WETLAND LOCATION:
X on sound or estusuary, pond or lake
on perennial steam
on intermittent stream
within interstream divide
other
ADJACENT LAND USE:
(within 1/2 mile upstream, upslope or radius)
X forested/natural vegetation 50 %
X agricultural/ urbanized 45 %
X impervious surface 5 %
Adjacent Special Natural Areas
SOILS: DOMINANT VEGETATION:
Soil Series: Worsham sandy loam 1 Microstegium vimineum
predominantly organic (humus, muck or peat) 2 Liquidambar styraciflua
X predominantly mineral (non-sandy) 3 Acer rubrum
predominantly sandy 4 Pinus taeda
HYDRAULIC FACTORS: FLOODING AND WETNESS:
X freshwater semipermanently to permanently flooded or inundated
brackish seasonally flooded or inundated
steep topography X intermittently flooded or temporary surface water
ditched or channelized no evidence of flooding or surface water
total wetland width >= 100 feet
WETLAND TYPE: (select one)"
X Bottomland Hardwood Forest Bog/Fen
Swamp Forest Headwater Forest
Carolina Bay Bog Forest
Pocosin Ephemeral Wetland
Pine Savannah Other:
Freshwater Marsh
* The rating system cannot be applied to salt and brackish marshes or stream channels.
DEM RATING
WATER STORAGE 1 X 4.00 = 4
BANK, SHORELINE STABILIZATION 3 X 4.00 = 12
POLLUTANT REMOVAL 2 * X 5.00 = 10
WILDLIFE HABITAT 2 X 2.00 = 4
AQUATIC LIFE HABITAT 2 X 4.00 = 8
RECREATION/EDUCATION I X 1.00 = 1
TOTAL WETLAND SCORE = 39
* Add one point if in sensitive watershed and >10% nonpoint disturbance within 1/2 mile upstream, upslope, or radius.
•
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
• (1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Western Wake Freeway
Applicant/Owner: NCDOT
Investigator(s): Harold M. Brady
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? es No
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? es o
Is this area a potential Problem Area? Yes o
(If needed, explain on reverse)
Date: 21 Mar
County: Wake
State: North Carolina
Community ID: Little Branch
Transect ID: 0
Plot ID: AJC8
ATION
0 Remarks Facultative vegetation dominant.
VEGET
Dommant Plant SPecies Stratum
-e
1. Pinus taeda tree FAC 9.
2. Ouercus alba tree FACU 10.
3. Aeer rubrum tree PAC: 11.
4. 12.
5. 13.
6. 14.
15.
8 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC-). 75%

inm7TDnr nnv
111 L1?VLV V 1
Recorded Data (Desch e in Remarks)
Stream, Lake, or tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available
Wetland o logy Indicators:
Primary Indicator:"
-Inundated
_ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
_ Water Marks
-Drift Lines

Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Sectary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water: (in.) _ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _ Local Soil Survey Data
FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.) _ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks 6-10% slope
0
cnir.c
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Creedmoor sandy loam Drainage Class: Moderately well
Field Observations
Taxonomy (SubgroupAquic Hapludults Confirm Mapped Type? es No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/contrast Structure, etc.
0-6 A 2.5YR 714 sandy loam
6+ B IOYR 718 clay loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
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
_
Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
_ Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WRTLAND DR..TF.RMINATION
771
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No - •
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks Plot was taken approximately 40 feet uphill from Plot AJC8.
r?
L`
is
DATA FORM
is ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Western Wake Freeway
Applicant/Owner: NCDOT
Investigator(s): Harold M. Brady
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? es No
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? es
Is this area a potential Problem Area? Yes o
on
Date: 21 Mar
County: Wake
State: North Carolina
Community ID: Little Branch
TransectID: AJC
Plot ID: AJC8
A7L'd"Vrr A T7nN

? 1:4V lJ A C1 1 1 V 1 I
Dominant Plant Species
Stratum
Indicator
ommant P ant pecies tratum Indicator
1. Microstegium vimineum grass FAC+ 9.
2. Liquidambar styraciflua tree FAC+ 10.
3. Aeer rubrum tree FAC 11.
4. Pinus taeda tree FAC 12.
5. 13.
6. 14.
15.
8 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC-). 100%
Remarks: •
uViYUn7 nr_v
111 AXA VJ-VV a
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks)
Stream, Lake, or tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available
anHydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
Inundated
X Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
-Water Marks
Drift Lines

Field Observations: Sediment Deposits
X Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water: (in.) X Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
X Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 8 (in.) Local Soil Survey Data
X FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: 0 (in.) -Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks Wetland is feed by a large farm pond.
0
enli C

Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Worsham sandy loam
Drainage Class: Poorly
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup Typic Ochraquults Confirm Mapped Type? es No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color
Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches Horizon (Mansell Moist) (Mansell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-2 A 2.5YR 414 sandy loam
2+ B 2.5 YR 511 2.5 YR 518 common sandy clay loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol Concretions
X Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
X Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
X Reducing Conditions X Listed on National Hydric Soils List
X Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
vu T7 AXrn " 1r1WD1k41W A T1nN
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No - •
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland. Yes No
Remarks Plot taken approximately 5 feet doxnhill from AJC8
! 1
•
0
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):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Western Wake Freeway, R-2635, S I,WL 3, WL4, WL 5
State:NC County/parish/borough: Wake City: Apex
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 35.68692° N, Long. 78.85099° W.
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Little Branch
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: Cape Fear River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 03030004
M Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
? Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc...) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Office (Desk) Determination. Date: October 2007
ED Field Determination. Date(s): June 2001, October 2006
SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There ;ire 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.
? 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 US." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply):
TNWs, including territorial seas
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
® Relatively permanent waters2 (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWS
Non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
? Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non-wetland waters: 5,150 + 1,701 = 6,851 linear feet: 6', 4' width (ft) and/or acres.
Wetlands: 0.09+0.05+0.08 = 0.22 acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: 1957 Qelineation :Manual
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
2. Non-regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable) :3
[l 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 40
Section II1.A.1 and Section III.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections III.A.I and 2
and Section III.D.1.; otherwise, see Section II1.B below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent":
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non-navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year-round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section 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 waterbodya 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 III.C below.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: acres
Drainage area: acres
Average annual rainfall: 44.19 inches
Average annual snowfall: 4.5 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:
_.0
4 Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and
West.
5 Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.
•
•
(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that 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: 7'ickList.
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: relatively stable, reach above pond appears
to have previously been impounded by beavers.
Presence of run/riffle/pool complexes. Explain: weak, stream is re-establishing following previous impoundment by
beavers.
Tributary geometry: Pick List
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: I nknown 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 ?
? changes in the character of soil ?
? shelving ?
? vegetation matted down, bent, or absent ?
? leaf litter disturbed or washed away ?
? sediment deposition ?
? water staining ?
? other (list):
the presence of litter and debris
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
the presence of wrack line
sediment sorting
scour
multiple observed ofpredicted flow events
abrupt change in plant community
El Discontinuous OHWM.' Explain:
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determ
High Tide Line indicated by:
? oil or scum line along shore objects
? fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore)
? physical markings/characteristics
? tidal gauges
? other (list):
ine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply)
Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
? survey to available datum;
? physical markings;
? vegetation lines/changes in vegetation types.
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
6A natural or man-made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
'Ibid.
(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
? Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width): forested, generally >1 00'.
? Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
? Habitat for:
El •
Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
? Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
? Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
? Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings: fish, amphibians, macrobenthos, and crayfish noted during site visit.
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: 2.6 acres
Wetland type. Explain: bottomland hardwood forest behind natural levee of perrenial stream (WL 5), and headwater
wetland within a swale on side slope of natural drainageway..
Wetland quality. Explain: low, low score on NCDWQ rating worksheet b/c worksheet is weighted towards pollutant
removal, the very slight elevation difference within the larger wetlands reduces the water storage capacity, although the relatively dense
vegetation does provide for energy dissipation and sediment removal.
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non-TNW:
Flow is: ephemeral flog. Explain: surface water observe infrequently in micro depressions during site visits. Duration
of flow from these depressions dependent on frequency and intensity of rainfal events.
Surface flow is: Not present,
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: UnknoNN n. Explain findings: no tests conducted.
? Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non-TNW: •
? Directly abutting
® Not directly abutting
® Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain: WL 3 and WL 4 are a depressional swale within a natural
drainage.
? Ecological connection. Explain:
® Separated by berm/barrier. Explain: behind natural levee in floodplain of perrenial stream (WL 5).
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are 15-20 river miles from TNW.
Project waters are 10-15 ici J (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: Welland to navigable maters.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the 100 - 500-year 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: no surface water.
Identify specific pollutants, if known: none known.
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
® Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width): forested, > 100'.
® Vegetation type/percent cover. Exp I ain: forested, herbaceous, 80%.
® Habitat for:
? Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
? Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
? Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
® Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:terrestrial wildlife, birds. Potential salamander and other amphibian
breeding pools within depressions during wet Spring seasons.
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis: 311,
•
Approximately ( 2.6 ) 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)
• N 0.25 N 1.87
N 0.48 .48
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed: wildlife habitat, sediment trapping,
carbon transport during flood events as organic matter is flushed from the system.
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 1II.13: Tributary is a perrenial stream (S 1). Wetland 5 is behind natural levee and within floodplain. Wetland provides
sediment trapping, nutrient removal, wildlife habitat. Also provides potential amphibian breeding area in wet Spring seasons..
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: 2.6 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: Tributary has well defined bed and bank, substrate sorting, bankfull benches present, natural levee, and
an active floodplain. Fish, macrobenthos, crayfish and amphibians present.
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: 1,510 linear feet 15' width (ft).
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):
"LQ Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
4. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
? Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year-round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section 111.13 and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW:
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
•
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: 2.6 acres.
6. Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C. _ •
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.9
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1-6), or
Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
E. ISOLATED JINTERSTATE OR INTRA-STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):"
which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
8See Footnote # 3. •
9 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.
( Other factors. Explain:
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
•
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
? Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
? Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
? Wetlands: acres.
F. NON-JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
[] Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
? Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
? Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
? Other: (explain, if not covered above):
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
judgment (check all that apply):
? Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
? Lakes/ponds: acres.
? Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
? Wetlands: acres.
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
Lakes/ponds: acres.
? Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply -checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
? Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:
® Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant. - •
? Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
? Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report.
Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
Corps navigable waters' study:
U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
? USGS NHD data.
? USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
? U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: Apex, NC 1:24,000.
® USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: Cawthorn, Joel. 1970. Soil Survey of Wake County, North
Carolina. United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, now Natural Resource Conservation Service. Raleigh,
NC.
[Q 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):
or ? Other (Name & Date):
? Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
? Applicable/supporting case law:
• ?, Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
? Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:
•

-.0
J
NCDWQ Stream Classification Form
roject Name: River Basin: County: Evaluator:
stern Wake Freeway R-2635 Cape Fear Wake Harold M. Brady
Weld ID Number: Nearest Named Stream: Latitude: Signature:
Sigma J Little Branch 350 40-1 -SO" tJ
Date: USGS QUAD: Longitude: Location:
June 12, 2001 Apex, NC :jt'SI' 5.q4"W Old Apex Holly Springs Road
*PLEASE NOTE: If evaluator and landowner agree that the feature is a man-made ditch, then use of this form is not necessary.
Also, if in the best professional judgement of the evaluator, the feature is a man-made ditch and not a modified natural stream-this
rating system should not be used*
Primary Field Indicators: (Circle One Number Per Line)
1. Geomorphology Absent Weak Moderate Strom
1) Is There A Riffle-Pool Sequence? 0 1 (2) 3
2) Is The USDA Texture In Streambed
Different From Surrounding Terrain?
0
1
(2)
3
3) Are Natural Levees Present? 0 1 (2) 3
4) Is The Channel Sinuous? 0 1 (2) 3
5) Is There An Active (Or Relic)
Floodplain Present?
0
1
(2)
3
6) Is The Channel Braided? (0) 1 2 3
7) Are Recent Alluvial Deposits Present? 0 1 (2) 3
Is There A Bankfull Bench Present? 0 1 (2) 3
9) Is A Continuous Bed & Bank Present? 0 1
(*NOTE. UBed & Bank Caused By Ditching And WITHOUT Sinuosity Then Score=0*) 2 (3)
Is A 2nd Order Or Greater Channel (As Indicated
On TODD Man And/Or In Field) Present?
Yes--(3)
No=O
PRIMARY GEOMORPHOLOGY INDICATOR POINTS: 20
II. Hydrology Absent Weak Moderate Strom
1) Is There A Groundwater
Flow/Discharge Present?
0
1
(22)
3
PRIMARYHYDROLOGYINDICATOR POINTS. 2
III. Biology Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strom
1) Are Fibrous Roots Present In Streambed? 3 (2) 1 0
2) Are Rooted Plants Present In Streambed? (3) 2 1 0
3 Is Periphyton Present? 0 (1) 2 3
4) Are Bivalves Present? (0) 1 2 3
PRIMARYBIOLOGYINDICATOR POINTS. 6
Secondary Field Indicators: (Circle One Number Per Line)
1. Geomorphology Absent Weak Moderate Strom
1) Is There A Head Cut Present In Channel? (0) .5 1 1.5
2) Is There A Grade Control Point In Channel? (0) .5 1 1.5
3) Does Topography Indicate A
Natural Drainaee Wav? 0 .5 1 (1.5)
SECONDARY GEOMORPHOLOGYINOICATOR POINTS. 1.5
0
II. Hydrology Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1) Is This Year's (Or Last's) Leaflitter
Present In Streambed? 1.5 (1) .5 0

2) Is Sediment On Plants (Or Debris) Present?
0
0)
1 •
1.5
3) Are Wrack Lines Present? 0 .5 (1) 1.5
4) Is Water In Channel And >48 Hrs. Since 0 .5 1 (1.5)
Last Known Rain? (*NOTE. If Ditch Indicated In #9 Above Skip This Step And #5 Below*)
5) Is There Water In Channel During Dry 0 .5 1 (1.5)
Conditions Or In Growing Season j? 6) Are Hydric Soils Present In Sides Of Channel (Or In Headcut)? Yes=1.5 No=(0)
SECONDARYHYDROLOGYINDICATOR POINTS: 5.5
III. Biology Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1) Are Fish Present? 0 .5 (1) 1.5
2) Are Amphibians Present? 0 .5 (1) 1.5
3 Are AquaticTurtles Present? 0 .5 (1) 1.5
4) Are Crayfish Present? 0 (.5) 1 1.5
5) Are Macrobenthos Present? 0 .5 (1) 1.5
6) Are Iron Oxidizing Bacteria/Fungus Present? 0 (.5) 1 1.5
7) Is Filamentous Algae Present? 0 (.5) 1 1.5
8) Are Wetland Plants In Streambed?
(* NOTE. If Total Absence Of All Plants In Streambed
As Noted Above Skip This Step UNLESS SA VPresent*). SAV Mostly OBL
2 1 Mostly FACW
.75 Mostly FAC
.5 Mostly FACU Mostly UPL
0 0
SECONDARYBIOLOGYINDICA TOR POINTS: 5.5
TOTAL POINTS (Primary + Secondary= 4a5 (If Greater Than Or Equal To 19 Points The Stream Is At Least
Intermittent) •

0

WETLAND RATING WORKSHEET (4th VERSION)
10
11
Project Name: Q - 2 (o 3s'' County:
Nearest Road: Date:
Wetland Area (ac): L q.c. Wetland Width (ft):
Name of Evaluator(s): Wetland ID: %J0.1.0 WETLAND LOCATION: ADJACENT LAND USE:
di
t
l
ope or ra
us)
ream, ups
(within 1/2 mile ups
on sound or estuary, pond or lake ? forested/nabmal vegetation %
on perennial stream agricultural/ urbanized %
on intermittent stream unpervious surface %
within interstream divide Adjacent Special Natural Areas
other
1 &1-4 '
( J
I ?"
iG ?^ c 54 ,
SOILS: DOMINANT VEGETATION:
Soilseries: f!:j,4si2, ?i, sw.?a wl 1 61 - ni -A
predo tly organic (humus, muck or peat) 2 pq 4C 0-1 e N
? predominantly mineral (non-sandy) 3 ,T s' ru.
predominantly sandy 4 ,

HYDRAULIC FACTORS: FLOODING AND WETNESS:
freshwater semipermanently to permenently flooded or inundated
brackish seasonally flooded or inundated
steep topography Intermittently flooded or temporary surface water
ditched or channelized no evidence of flooding or surface water
total wetland width > 100 feet
WETLAND TYPE: (select one)*
Bottomland Hardwood Forest Bog/Fen
Swamp Forest ? Headwater Forest
Carolina Bay Bog Forest
Pocosin Ephemeral Wetland
Pine Savannah Other.
Freshwater Marsh
* The rating system cannot be applied to salt and brackish marshes or stream channels. _
DEM RATING
WATER STORAGE _L X 4.00 =
BANK, SHORELINE STABILIZATION X 4.00 =
*
X 5.00 =
POLLUTANT REMOVAL
WILDLIFE HABITAT X 2.00 =
AQUATIC LIFE X 4.00 = (7
RECREATION/EDUCATION Q X 1.00 = 0
TOTAL WETLAND SCORE= 13
* Add one point if in sensitive watershed and >10% nonpoint disturbance within 1 /2 mile upstream, upslope, or radius.
0
r ?
L J

•
DATA FORM - ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
Pro? Site:. Date:. / 40 10 If
Applicant/Owne_r. WL on r- county. W "A
Investigator(s): .• A,.w• State: ^* 4.
Do Normal Circumstances a ist on the sits. a No Community ID: s...
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes Transect ID: W H 1
Is this area a potential Problem Area? Yes Plot ID: ,.y t «. WM 3.0 a
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
- Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1.
if L
&6n4vild r
9.
?
2- u b 10.
3. ?*_ 047ows "dw), t FptiC- 11.
z 4• 12.
O 5. 11 unruS .fr„??s H F 13.
E4 6. L t rr deg....;ri ?l ` F-PtC.C ' 14.
H 7. 15.
W 8. 16.
C7
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC-). bo
Remarks:

S?
_ Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks) Primary Indicators:
Stream, Lake, or tide Gauge ? Inundated ?^ S6 me f i u M
Aerial Photographs- ? Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
Other Water Marks
No Recorded Data Available Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
U' Field Observations. %
/Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
0 __
_
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
00 Depth of Surface Water. 0 - 1 (in.) _ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
>Z+ %.
Depth to Free Water in Pit jj (in
) _-Water-Stained Leaves
Local S
il Su
Data
ve
. -
y
o
r
t? 7,74AC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: C5 (in.) Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
G t4 iW44 k of w G?? ? ,?.J?,v Esrb tt, w? Na kr
!nr , ' ?(n ca
Map Unit Name (Series & Phase): An ? s hL l oa ,, Drainage Class:
Taxonomy (SubgroupL,Cr,,,Z p (A I t5 Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,

V) inches Horizon unsell Most (Munsell Moistl
Y VI Abundance/Contrast Structure etc.
0

a _Histosol Concretions
O Histic Epipedon _ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
H
` _ Sulfidic Odor
A
uic Moisture R
i Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
M _
q
eg
me Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Reducing Conditions
' Listed on National Hydric Soils List
V
Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
U Remarks: -

Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? No
Wetland Hydrology Present? No
Hydric Soils Present? No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
i

u
DATA FORM - ROIITM WF.TI,AND DF.TVRMINATION
Projec Site:. Q*tM ,w Date:
Applicant/Owner. County ?../a
Investigator(sLa State: ?? c
Do Normal. Circrunstan exist on the s te? No Community ID_ 9P1 w.••
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Transect ID, 14 a J
1s this area a potential Problem Area? Yes Plot ID, 1*., Wild-
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. at%t«.IS DkeIIs S.f '{I!,r1A)"
- 9.
2. Awb..t
.,4 0
A# Ott 10.
3. L.w;jdekL1me- 11.
4.
..ti+ st., xw s s 1-A C 1-.
12.
5. pot
?t. ? FAC.- 13.
6. "..4r amt C IF Cr
l 14.
7• lOf n Nf ?C/•t?'./? jS
F? 15.
8. L,y?.'?•..do?' stc?Rt+'/%t 1?? FACE 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAG).
Remarks:
aij CL C" ll?P +,rl ?r+ ti y.Vnc 045
_Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks) Primary Indicators:
Stream, Lake, or tide Gauge Inundated
Aerial Photographs Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
Other
,/No Recorded Data Available _ Water Marks
_ Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Field Observations:
/ over _Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Seco
da
di
e
ui
ed
I
t
2
ca
q
):
n
n
ors (
or more r
r
ry
Depth of Surface Water: J?OW(in.) Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches

Depth to Free Water in Pit Z/ (in.) Water?tained Leaves
_Local Soil Survey Data
FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: / Z (in) -Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
tb+o*c obv: oNS 4+po .{5xeAk. nio l- W b f W H 2b
Map Unit Name (Series & Phase „) to a ,.h Drainage Class:
Taxonomy (Subgroup) Ac,; O? ti r, i r in t f5 Confum Mapped Type? Yes No
Depth Matrix Colo Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
finches) Horizon (Mansell Moist) Mansell Moist Abundance/Contrast Structure. etc.
-- '7 _2 • S `/O SIB .Of %I !+E";w C. ,t w •?

IfiAW& 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
Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
SAra? sy,! ?L /^.lt,f' r.6014' G y ?oAAw4 , r10 71L41w

Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Y N
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes <99
Hydric Soils Present? Yes
N
Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes
Remarks:
Z
O
H

O
a
O
P4

O
rn
O
U
U

•
•
`i
WETLAND RATING WORKSHEET (4th VERSION)
•
•
Project Name: Western Wake Freeway. R-2635 County: Wake
Nearest Road: Old Apex Holly Springs Road Date: 61812001
Wetland Area (ac): 0.48 acres Wetland Width (ft): 50 feet
Name of Evaluator(s)HaroldM. Brady Wetland ID: delta JF
WETLAND LOCATION:
on sound or estusuary, pond or lake
X on perennial steam
on intermittent stream
within interstream divide
other
ADJACENT LAND USE:
(within 1/2 mile upstream, ups lope or radius)
X forestedinatural vegetation 60 %
X agricultural/ urbanized 35 %
X impervious surface 5 %
Adjacent Special Natural Areas
SOILS: DOMINANT VEGETATION:
Soil Series: Augusta fine sandy loam 1 Arundinaria gigantea
predominantly organic (humus, muck or peat) 2 Liquidambar styraciflua
x predominantly mineral (non-sandy) 3 Myriea cerifera
predominantly sandy 4 Pinus taeda
HYDRAULIC FACTORS: FLOODING AND WETNESS:
X freshwater semipermanently to permenently flooded or inundated
brackish X seasonally flooded or inundated
steep topography intermittently flooded or temporary surface water
ditched or channelized no evidence of flooding or surface water
total wetland width >= 100 feet
WETLAND TYPE: (select one)*
X Bottomland Hardwood Forest Bog/Fen
Swamp Forest Headwater Forest
Carolina Bay Bog Forest
Pocosin Ephemeral Wetland
Pine Savannah Other:
Freshwater Marsh
* The rating system cannot be applied to salt and brackish marshes or stream channels.
DEM RATING
WATER STORAGE 2 X 4.00 = 8
BANK, SHORELINE STABILIZATION 0 X 4.00 = 0
POLLUTANT REMOVAL 3 * X 5.00 = 15
WILDLIFE HABITAT 4 X 2.00 = 8
AQUATIC LIFE HABITAT 5 X 4.00 = 20
RECREATION/EDUCATION I X 1.00 = 1
TOTAL WETLAND SCORE = 52
* Add one point if insensitive watershed and >10% nonpoint disturbance within 1/2 mile upstream, upslope, or radius.
•
DATA FORM
• ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Western Wake Freeway
Applicant/Owner: NCDOT
Investigator(s): Harold M. Brady
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? es No
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? es o
Is this area a potential Problem Area? Yes o
(If needed, explain on reverse)
Date: 23 Mar
County: Wake
State: North Carolina
Community ID: Little Branch
Transect ID: 0
Plot ID:
ITUCI TATInN
•
• LDominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum In icator
1. Pinus taeda tree FAC 9.
2. Liquidambar styraciflua tree FAC+ 10.
3. Quereus rubra tree FACU 11.
4. Lonicera japonica vine FAC- 12.
5. Rubus sp. shrub FAC 13.
6. Andropogon virginicus grass FAC- 14.
15.
g. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC-). 40%
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks)
Stream, Lake, or tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available anHydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators: •
-Inundated
_ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
_ Water Marks
-Drift Lines

Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
-
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water: (in.) _ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _
Local Soil Survey Data
_
FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.) _ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks Slight elevation change between upland to wetland
0
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Augusta fine sandy loam Drainage Class: Somewhat poorly
Field Observations
Taxonomy (SubgroupAeric Ochraquult Confirm Mapped Type? Yes ®o
Profile DescriRtion:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-6 A 10YR 313 sandy loam
6+ B 10YR 714 clay loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
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
Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
_Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes o
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes o
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks Plot was taken approximately 40 feet uphill from Plot AJF14.
•
1r?
u
lr
u
V
DATA FORM
• ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Western Wake Freeway
Applicant/Owner: NCDOT
Investigator(s): Harold M. Brady
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? es No
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? es
Is this area a potential Problem Area? Yes o
(If needed, explain on reverse)
Date: 23 Mar
County: Wake
State: North Carolina
Community ID: Little Branch
Transect ID:
Plot ID:
VF.C,F.T A TinN
•
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Arundinaria gigantea grass FAC+ 9.
2. Liquidambar siyracilua tree FAC+ 10.
3. Myrica cerifera tree FAC 11.
4. Pinus taeda tree FAC 12.
5. Rubus sp. shrub FAC 13.
6. Juncus sp. grass FACW 14.
7. 15.
g. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC-). 100%
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
_ Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks)
Stream, Lake, or tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available an Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
Inundated
X Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
_ Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Field Observations: X Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water: (in.) X Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
X Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 8 (in.) Local Soil Survey Data
X FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: 0 (in.) -Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks Wetland is hydraulically connected to Little Branch, located approximately 100 feet east of AJF.
0
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Augusta fine sandy loam Drainage Class: Somewhat poorly
Field Observations
Taxonomy (SubgroupAeric Ochraquults Confirm Mapped Type? es No
Profile Desgd tion:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Mansell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-2 A 2.5YR 313 sandy loam
2+ B 2.5 YR 611 10YR 618 common sandy clay loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol Concretions
_
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
X Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
X Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
X Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
X Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No - •
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland. Yes No
Remarks Plot taken approximately S feet downhill from AJF14
Approved by HQUSACE 3/92
•
•
1x11
u
WETLAND RATING WORKSHEET (4th VERSION)
•

Project Name: Western Wake Freeway: R-2635 County: Wake
Nearest Road: Old Apex Holly Springs Road Date: 61812001
Wetland Area (ac): 0.25 acres Wetland Width (ft): 25 feet
Name of Evaluator(s)HaroldM. Brady Wetland ID: delta JG
WETLAND LOCATION:
on sound or estusuary, pond or lake
X on perennial steam
on intermittent stream
within interstream divide
other
SOILS: DOMINANT VEGETATION:
Soil Series: Chewacla soils 1 Arundinaria gigantea
predominantly organic (humus, muck or peat) 2 Liquidambar styraciJlua
x predominantly mineral (non-sandy) 3 Myrica cerifera
predominantly sandy 4 Anus taeda
HYDRAULIC FACTORS: FLOODING AND WETNESS:
X freshwater X semipermanently to permenently flooded or inundated
brackish seasonally flooded or inundated
steep topography intermittently flooded or temporary surface water
ditched or channelized no evidence of flooding or surface water
total wetland width >= 100 feet
WETLAND TYPE: (select one)*
X Bottomland Hardwood Forest Bog/Fen
Swamp Forest Headwater Forest
Carolina Bay Bog Forest
Pocosin Ephemeral Wetland
Pine Savannah Other:
Freshwater Marsh
* The rating system cannot be applied to salt and brackish marshes or stream channels.
DEM RATING
WATER STORAGE
BANK, SHORELINE STABILIZATION
POLLUTANT REMOVAL
WILDLIFE HABITAT
AQUATIC LIFE HABITAT
RECREATION/EDUCATION
X 4.00 =
2 X 4.00 =
2 * X 5.00 =
X 2.00 =
4
0
ADJACENT LAND USE:
(-Aithin 1/2 mile upstream, ups lope or radius)
X forested/natural vegetation 60 %
X agricultural/ urbanized 35 %
X _impervious surface 5 %
Adjacent Special Natural Areas
X 4.00 =
X 1.00 =
4
8
10
2
16
0
TOTAL WETLAND SCORE = 40
* Add one point if insensitive watershed and >10% nonpoint disturbance within 1/2 mile upstream, upslope, or radius.
0
s
DATA FORM
• ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Western Wake Freeway
Applicant/Owner: NCDOT
Investigator(s): Harold M. Brady
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? es No
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? es 17-ol
Is this area a potential Problem Area? Yes I "o
(If needed, explain on reverse)
Date: 21 Mar
County: Wake
State: North Carolina
Community ID: Little Branch
Transect ID: AJG
Plot ID: AJG7
VEGETATION
.7
0
Dommant Plant penes Stratum Indicator Dominant P ant )ecies Stratum Indicator
1. Pinus taeda tree FAC 9.
2. Liquidambarstyraei/lua tree FAC+ 10.
3. Quereus rubra tree FACU " 11.
4. Lonicera japonica vine FAC- 12.
5. Rubus sp. shrub FAC 13.
6. Andropogon virginicus grass FAC- 14.
15-
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC-). 40%
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks)
Stream, Lake, or tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available anHydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
-Inundated
_ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
_ Water Marks
-Drift Lines

Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water: (in.) _Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _ Local Soil Survey Data
FAC Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.) _ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks Levee area between the former beaverdam and Little Branch.
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Chewacla Drainage Class: Somewhat poorly
Field Observations
Taxonomy (SubgroupAquic Fluventic Dystrochrept Confirm Mapped Type? Yes ®o
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-6 A 10YR 414 sandy loam
- +? B IOYR 613 clay loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
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
Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
_Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No - •
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks Plot was taken approximately 40 feet uphill from Plot AJG7
•
•
0
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
• (1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Western Wake Freeway
Applicant/Owner: NCDOT
Investigator(s): Harold M. Brady
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? es No
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? es o
Is this area a potential Problem Area? Yes
on reverse
Date: 23 Mar
County: Wake
State: North Carolina
Community ID: Little Branch
Transect ID: AJU
Plot ID: AJG7
VEGETATION
•
•
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant S;ecies Stratum Indicator
1. Arundinaria gigantea grass FAC+ 9.
2. Liquidambar styraeiflua tree FAC+ 10.
3. Myrica cerifera tree FAC 11.
4. Pinus taeda tree FAC 12.
5. Rubus sp. shrub FAC 13.
6. Juncus sp. grass FACW 14.
7. 15.
g 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC-). 100%
Remarks:
mvnR nT .nGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks)
Stream, Lake, or tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available Wetland Indicators:
Primary Indicators: •
Inundated
X Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
_ Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Field Observations: X Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water: 12 (in.) X Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
X Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) Local Soil Survey Data
X FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: 0 (in.) _ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks Wetland area was enhanced by a former beaver dam
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Chewacla Drainage Class: Somewhat poorly
Field Observations
Taxonomy (SubgroupAquic F7uvemtic Dystrochrepts Confirm Mapped Type? es No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-2 A 10YR 414 sandy loam
2+ B 2.5 YR 611 10YR 618 common sandy clay loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol X Concretions
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
X Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
X Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
X Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
X Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WIW..Ti.ANn i)F.TRRMINATinN
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No _ 40
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland. Yes No
Remarks Plot taken approximately 5 feet downhill from AJG7
Approved by HQUSACE 3/92
•
lr
u
0
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):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Western Wake Freeway, R-2635, S 3
State:NC County/parish/borough: Wake City: Apex
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 35.68635° , Long. 78.84258° W,
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Big Branch
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: Cape Fear River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 0303004
Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
? Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc... ) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
ED Office (Desk) Determination. Date: October 2007
Field Determination. Date(s): June 2001, October 2006
SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There :ire 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.
? 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 re "waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply):
TNWs, including territorial seas
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
N Relatively permanent waters2 (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TbLW,&
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: 2704 linear feet: width (ft) and/or acres.
Wetlands: acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: Fstablished by OI11VNI.
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
2. Non-regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable):3
T7 Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain:
• 1 Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
2 For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year-round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally"
(e.g., typically 3 months).
3 Supporting documentation is presented in Section 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:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent":
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non-navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year-round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section 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 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 III.C below.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditinns:
Watershed size: Pick Lis(
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 Gist 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:
-.0
1r
u
4 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: Pick Lift.
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/honi complexes. Explain:
Tributary geometry: Pick List
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: Pick List
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year: Fick 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
? OH WM6 (check all indicators that apply):
? clear, natural line impressed on the bank ?
? changes in the character of soil ?
? shelving ?
? vegetation matted down, bent, or absent ?
? leaf litter disturbed or washed away ?
? sediment deposition ?
? water staining ?
? other (list):
? Discontinuous OHWM.7 Explain:
the presence of litter and debris
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
the presence of wrack line
sediment sorting
scour
multiple observed or predicted flow events
abrupt change in plant community
-- •
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:
106A 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
Characteristic;
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 lase, river miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pict: 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.
•

11
For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (YIN) 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 111.13:
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 III.D:
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: Moderately developed riffle/pool comlex, substrate sorting, natural levee, 2"d order on USGS topo map,
bankfull benches present. Fish, macrobenthos, amphibians and crayfish present.
E Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
• seasonally:
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
Other non-wetland waters: acres. •
Identify type(s) of waters:
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):
? Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
? Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
Q Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year-round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW:
? Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section 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.
[ 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!
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):"
? which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
? from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
? which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
? Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
? Other factors. Explain:
'See Footnote # 3.
'To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III.D.6 of the Instructional Guidebook. 41
10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
• Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
? Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
? Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
? Wetlands: acres.
F. NON-JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
? If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
? Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
? Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
? Other: (explain, if not covered above):
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
judgment (check all that apply):
? Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
? Lakes/ponds: acres.
? Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
? Wetlands: acres.
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
? Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
? Lakes/ponds: acres.
? Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
• ? Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
® Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:
? Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
? Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
? Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report. •
Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
? Corps navigable waters' study:
U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
? USGS NHD data.
? USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
® U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: 1:24,000, Apex, NC.
® USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: Cawthorn, Joel. 1970. Soil Survey of Wake County, North
Carolina. United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, now Natural Resource Conservation Service. Raleigh,
NC.
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):
or ? Other (Name & Date):
Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
? Applicable/supporting case law:
Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
Other information (please specify):
•
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:
NCDWQ Stream Classification Form
Project Name: River Basin: County: Evaluator:
stern Wake Freeway R-2635
40ee Cape Fear Wake Harold M. Brady
ID Number:
ld Nearest Named Stream: Latitude: Signature:
Sigma JB Little Branch 35 * y 1' ? 2.08" N
Date: USGS QUAD: Longitude: Location:
June 12, 2001 Apex, NC 4V s0' 55•` v" Vv NC Highway 55
*PLEASE NOTE: If evaluator and landowner agree that the feature is a man-made ditch, then use of this form is not necessary.
Also, if in the best professional judgement of the evaluator, the feature is a man-made ditch and not a modified natural stream--this
rating system should not be used*
Primary Field Indicators: (Circle One Number Per Line)
1. Geomorphology Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1) Is There A Riffle-Pool Senuence? 0 1 (2) 3
2) Is The USDA Texture In Streambed
Different From Surroundine Terrain?
0
1
(2)
3
3) Are Natural Levees Present? 0 1 (2) 3
4) Is The Channel Sinuous? 0 1 2 (3)
5) Is There An Active (Or Relic)
Floodplain Present?
0
1
(2)
3
6) Is The Channel Braided? (0) 1 2 3
7) Are Recent Alluvial Deposits Present? 0 1 (2) 3
8) Is There A Bankfull Bench Present? 0 (1) 2 3
9) Is A Continuous Bed & Bank Present? 0 1
(*NOTE. If Bed & Bank Caused By Ditching And WITHOUT Sinuosity Then Score=0*) 2 (3)
J1) Is A 2nd Order Or Greater Channel (As Indicated
Y GEOMORPHOLOGYINDICA TOR POINTS: 20
II. Hydrology Absent Weak Moderate Strom
1) Is There A Groundwater
Flow/Discharge Present? 0 1 (2) 3
PRIMARYHYDROLOGYINDICA TOR POINTS. 2

M. Biology
Absent _.0
Weak Moderate
Strom
1) Are Fibrous Roots Present In Streambed? 3 (2) 1 0
2) Are Rooted Plants Present In Streambed? (3) 2 1 0
3) Is Periphvton Present? 0 (1) 2 3
4) Are Bivalves Present? (0) 1 2 3
PRIMARYBIOLOGYINDICATOR POINTS. -6
Secondary Field Indicators: (Circle One Number Per Line)
1. Geomorphology Absent Weak Moderate Strom
1) Is There A Head Cut Present In Channel? (0) 5 1 1.5
2) Is There A Grade Control Point In Channel? 0 5 (1) 1.5
3) Does Topography Indicate A
Natural Drainage Way? 0 5 1 (1.5)
SECONDARY GEOMORPHOLOGYINDICA TOR POINTS: 1.5
0
H. Hydrology Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1) Is This Year's (Or Last's) Leaflitter
Present In Streambed?
1.5
(11)
.5
0
2) Is Sediment On Plants (Or Debris) Present? 0 (.5) 1 1.5 •
3) Are Wrack Lines Present? 0 .5 (1) 1.5
4) Is Water In Channel And >48 Hrs. Since 0 .5
Last Known Rain? ('NOTE. If Ditch Indicated In #9 Above Skip This Step And #5 Below') 1 (1.5)
5) Is There Water In Channel During Dry
Conditions Or In Growing Season)? 0 .5 1 (1.5)
6) Are Hvdric Soils Present In Sides Of Channel (Or In Headcut)? Yes=1.5 No=(0)
SECONDARYHYDROLOGYINDICATOR POINTS: 5.5
III. Biology Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1) Are Fish Present? 0 .5 (1) 1.5
2 Are Amphibians Present? 0 .5 (1) 1.5
3 Are AquaticTurtles Present? 0 .5 (1) 1.5
4 Are Crayfish Present? 0 (.5) 1 1.5
5) Are Macrobenthos Present? 0 .5 (1) 1.5
6) Are Iron Oxidizing Bacteria/Fungus Present? 0 (.5) 1 1.5
7) Is Filamentous Algae Present? 0 (.5) 1 1.5
8) Are Wetland Plants In Streambed?
(" NOTE. If Total Absence Of All Plants In Streambed
As Noted Above Skip This Step UNLESS SAV Present'"). SAV Mostly OBL
2 1 Mostly FACW
.75 Mostly FAC
.5 Mostly FACU Mostly UPL
0 0
SECONDARY BIOLOGYINDICATOR POINTS: 5.5
TOTAL POINTS (Primary + Secondary) =40.5 (If Greater Than Or Equal To 19 Points The Stream Is At Least
Intermittent)
_.0

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
his form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
OT,
SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Western Wake Freeway, R-2635, S 5, WL 90
State:NC County/parish/borough: Wake City: Apex
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 35.68473° 11, Long. 78.83843°.
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Little Branch
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: Cape Fear River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 03030004
Q Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
? Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc...) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Q( Office (Desk) Determination. Date: October 2007
Field Determination. Date(s): June 2001, October 2006
SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Ai e 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]
El Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There 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):
? TNWs, including territorial seas
? Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
El Relatively permanent waters2 (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TI?L%%
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: 275 linear feet: 5' width (ft) and/or acres.
Wetlands: 0.12 acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on. 1987 Delinention Nlanua[
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):not 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).
3 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:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent":
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under 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 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 waterbodya 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.I 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 III.C below.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions-
Watershed size: `Nick List
Drainage area: Nick List
Average annual raintall: 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 l_.ist 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:
- .0

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 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
? Bedrock ? Vegetation. Type/% cover:
? Other. Explain:
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain: banks are relatively stable.
Presence of run/riffle/pool complexes. Explain: .
Tributary geometry: Fick List
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 ?
? changes in the character of soil ?
? shelving ?
? vegetation matted down, bent, or absent ?
? leaf litter disturbed or washed away ?
? sediment deposition ?
? water staining ?
? other (list):
? Discontinuous OHWM.7 Explain:
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determ
E] High Tide Line indicated by: ?'
? oil or scum line along shore objects
? fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore)
? physical markings/characteristics
? tidal gauges
? other (list):
the presence of litter and debris
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
the presence of wrack line
sediment sorting
scour
multiple observed or predicted flow events
abrupt change in plant community
- 40
ine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
? survey to available datum;
? physical markings;
? vegetation lines/changes in vegetation types.
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
'A 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:0.12 acres
Wetland type. Explain:headwater forest within recent cutover.
Wetland quality. Explain: low score on the NCDWQ wetland rating worksheet, no specific point source for
pollutants.
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non-TNW:
Flow is: intermittent flow. Explain: wetland is a headwater wetland. Flow regime is dependent on available rainfall and
climatic conditions.
Surface flow is: Not present
Characteristic,
Subsurface flow: Unknown Explain findings: not tests conducted.
? Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non-TNW:
? Directly abutting
Not directly abutting •
® Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain: located at the head of a natural valley.
? Ecological connection. Explain:
? Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are 15-20 river miles from TNW.
Project waters are 10-15 . wi A (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: Wetland to navigable waters.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the 100 - 500-yenr 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: surface water only presnt near sewer line where flow is impeded by fill, water color is
stained from leaves and other detritus, upper end of watershed is recent cutover.
Identify specific pollutants, if known: none known.
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
® Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):50 ->100'.
® Vegetation type/percent cover. Explaimearly succesional trees, heabaceous veg..
® Habitat for:
? Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
? Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
? Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
® Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings: birds, terrestrial mammals, reptiles. Amphibians in lower portion where
impounded by sewer line.
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis:
Approximately ( 0.12 ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.
40
For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (YIN) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)
• N 0.12
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed: water storage, energy dissipation,
sediment trapping, nutrient removal by vegetation.
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?
is 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 thtributary 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 III.D: The wetland is within a natural drainage feature draining to S 5. The wetland is enhanced by a sewer line crossing
the drainage that is backing up flow from the wetland. The wetland flows into an ephemeral swale that empties directly into S 5.
The wetland dissipates energy, stores water and when flushed by rains contributes organic carbon to S 5.
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:
Q 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: natural levee present, riffle pool complexes present, recent alluvial deposits, bankfull benches, and
active floodplain present. Fish, macrobenthos, and amphibians present.
? 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:
.7
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:
3. Non-RPWs8 that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.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:
4. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
? Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
? Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year-round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW:
Wetlands 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.
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 TN W are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: 0.12 acres.
6. Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
? Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.9
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
? Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
? Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1-6), or
? Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA-STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):'o
? which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
8See 9 To Footnote # 3. •
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.
? from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
? which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
? Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
• ? Other factors. Explain:
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
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.
Q 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
i?idgment (check all that apply):
? Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
? Lakes/ponds: acres.
? Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
? Wetlands: acres.
• Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
Lakes/ponds: acres.
? Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
? Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.

A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shalt-beZncluded 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: 1:24,000, Apex, NC.
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: Cawthorn, Joel. 1970. Soil Survey of Wake County, North
Carolina. United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, now Natural Resource Conservation Service. Raleigh,
NC.
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):
• or ? Other (Name & Date):
? Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
? Applicable/supporting case law:
? Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
? Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:
•
-.0
0
NCDWO Stream Classification Form
o.ect Name: River Basin: County: Evaluator:
stem Wake Freeway R-2635 Cape Fear
- Wake Harold M. Brady
ld ID Number: Nearest Named Stream:
Weld Latitude: Signature:
Sigma JC Little Branch 35° LAV c6sll N
Date: USGS QUAD: Longitude: Location:
June 12, 2001 Apex, NC :'$" 50l 30.ID0"WI
NC Highway 55
*PLEASE NOTE: If evaluator and landowner agree that the feature is a man-made ditch, then use of this form is not necessary.
Also, if in the best professional judgement of the evaluator, the feature is a man-made ditch and not a modified natural stream-this
rating system should not be used*
Primary Field Indicators: (Circle One Number Per Line)
I Geomorphology Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1) Is There A Riffle Pool Sequence? 0 (1) 2 3
2) Is The USDA Texture In Streambed
Different From Surrounding Terrain?
0
1
(2)
3
3) Are Natural Levees Present? 0 1 (2) 3
4) Is The Channel Sinuous? 0 1 (2) 3
5) Is There An Active (Or Relic)
Floodplain Present?
0
1
(2)
3
6) Is The Channel Braided? (0) 1 2 3 -
7) Are Recent Alluvial Deposits Present? 0 1 (2) 3
8) Is There A Bankfull Bench Present? 0 (1) 2 3
9) Is A Continuous Bed & Bank Present? 0 _ 1 2 (3)
II Hydrology Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1) Is There A Groundwater
Flow/Discharge Present?
0
1
(2)
3
PRIMARYHYDROLOGYINDICATOR POINTS. 2
III Biology Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1) Are Fibrous Roots Present In Streambed? 3 2 (1) 0
2) Are Rooted Plants Present In Streambed? 3 (2) 1 0
3) Is Periphyton Present? 0 (1) 2 3
4) Are Bivalves Present? (0) 1 2 3
PRIMARYBIOLOGYINDICATOR POINTS. 4
Secondary Field Indicators: (Circle One Number Per Line)
I Geomorphology Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1) Is There A Head Cut Present In Channel? 0 5 (1) 1.5
2) Is There A Grade Control Point In Channel? 0 (5) 1 1.5
3) Does Topography Indicate A
Natural Drainage Way? 0 5 1 (1.5)
SECONDARY GEOMORPHOLOGYINDICA TOR POINTS. 3

PRIMARY GEOMORPHOLOGY INDICATOR POINTS: 15
II. Hydrology Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1) Is This Year's (Or Last's) Leaflitter
Present In Streambed?
1.5
1
(.5)
0

2) Is Sediment On Plants (Or Debris) Present?
0
(.5)
1 •
1.5
3) Are Wrack Lines Present? 0 .5 (1) 1.5
4) Is Water In Channel And >48 Hrs. Since 0 .5
Last Known Rain? CNOTE• ILDitch Indicated In #9 Above Skit/ This Stet/ And #5 Below*) 1 (1.5)
5) Is There Water In Channel During Dry
Conditions Or In Growing Season)? 0 .5 (1) 1.5
6) Are Hvdric Soils Present In Sides Of Channel (Or In Headcut)? Yes=1.5 No=(0)
SECONDARYHYDROLOGYINDICA TOR POINTS. 4.55
III Biology Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1) Are Fish Present? 0 .5 (1) 1.5
2 Are Amplubians Present? 0 .5 (1) 1.5
3 Are AquaticTurtles Present? 0 .5 (1) 1.5
4) Are Crash Present? 0 (.5) 1 1.5
5) Are Macrobenthos Present? 0 .5 (1) 1.5
6) Are Iron Oxidizing Bacteria/Fungus Present? 0 (.5) 1 1.5
7) Is Filamentous Algae Present? 0 (.5) 1 1.5
8) Are Wetland Plants In Streambed?
(* NOTE: If Total Absence OfAll Plants In Streambed SAV Mostly OBL
2 1 Mostly FACW
.75 Mostly FAC
(.5) Mostly FACU Mostly UPL
0 0
As Noted Above Skin This Step UNLESS SAV Present*).
SECONDARYBIOLOGYINDICA TOR POINTS. 6
TOTAL POINTS (Primary + Secondary) =34.5 (If Greater Than Or Equal To 19 Points The Stream Is At Least
Intermittent) •
-40
0
WETLAND RATING WORKSHEET (4th VERSION)

•
Project Name: to • L G ,I S- County:
Nearest Road: Date:
Wetland Area (ac): Wetland Width (ft):
Name of Evaluator(s): Wetland ID: ,r It
WETLAND LOCATION: ADJACENT LAND USE:
(within 1/2 mile upstream, upslope or radius)
on sound or estuary, pond or lake forested/natural vegetation 7 c7 %
on perennial stream agricultural/ urbanized
%
on intermittent stream _
impervious surface %
within interstream divide Adjacent Special Natural Areas
? other

SOILS: DOMINANT VEGETATION:
Soil Series: C re?dmany- San" I oars 1 Xygf)f /i.
predominantly organic (humus, mu k or peat) 2
predominantly mineral (non-sandy) 3
predominantly sandy 4
HYDRAULIC FACTORS: FLOODING AND WETNESS:
? freshwater semipermanently, to permenently flooded or inundated
brackish seasonally flooded or inundated
steep topography ? intermittently flooded or temporary surface water
ditched or channelized no evidence of flooding or surface water
total wetland width > 100 feet
WETLAND TYPE: (select one)*
Bottomland Hardwood Forest Bog/Fen
Swamp Forest Headwater Forest
Carolina Bay Bog Forest
Pocosin Ephemeral Wetland
Pine Savannah ? Other: ")%^I f r.+/r 1..?
Freshwater Marsh
* The rating system cannot be applied to salt and brackish marshes or stream channels. -.0
DEM RATING
WATER STORAGE X 4.00 = !Y
BANK, SHORELINE STABILIZATION X 4.00 = 10
POLLUTANT REMOVAL X 5.00 = 10
WILDLIFE HABITAT ( X 2.00 = Z.
AQUATIC LIFE X 4.00 =
RECREATION/EDUCATION O X 1.00 = O
TOTAL WETLAND SCORE = . Z/
* Add one point if insensitive watershed and >10% nonpoint disturbance within 1/2 mile upstream, upslope, or radius-
0
n A T A L?l1imur - Dny"Yw i` WT.TT.A1M 'nVTV11?MMATT0N
0
•
•
Project/Site- Date: At/ z/ a 4
Applicaut/Own .. 4 c Des y County: L./wKg
Investigator(s): i...,3kj e.AA.* /I. i A!j State: _Pi
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? No community ID: yr / a -4
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes no Transect ID: w N
Is this area a potential Problem Area? Yes Plot ID: -?t+i - 0 fi
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. ?A 'PAS-- 9. -
2. 1?:Ac- 10.
3. Q.,.yoa w/fig tS 'FAC.U 11.
4. A..Jns g e.. of >4 12.
5. jt..b
,.1 4 f+.s 14 SAC V t 13.
_
6.
- 14.

?
7.
15.
g. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC-). sd!20
Remarks:

-Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks) Primary Indicators:
Stream, Lake, or tide Gauge Inundated
Aerial Photographs -Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
Other _ Water Marks
No Recorded Data Available Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Field Observations: Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
-
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water on.) _ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit *J0I L (in.) _
-Local Soil Survey Data
FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: f 2 (in.) _
-Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
` y,
Map Unit Name (Series & Phase)- Gr{,rt Sn ?vyf G ?pztw y- Drainage Class:
ModY&AW
Taxonomy (Subgroup)
AgL4 c I ItS Confirm Mapped Type? Yd!s
_
Depth v MMatriColor Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches Horizon unsell Moist Munsell Moist Abundance/Contrast Structure. etc.
12-6 + 2., loci r /*w...

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
_Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
Aw 24 Q
v+.t(«.? Iwt?e? d by Itv?i'-- twst.+-a,/1'
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes
Hydric Soils Present? Yes o Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes ?Io
Remarks:
R ct l7 ?/ jfw?rbe.? pip a ee` aka•v+q c« •rr.: V4
t%'V w?y wt f 1Aw? r?0 t d M tt
?d , j a+ k., ? ?. Ab f 1?iP .s 1 %N" J-_"
O
d
W
Ch
0
OM
O
a

a
O
rn
ti
O
M
U

DATA FORM - ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
Project/Site- - 2,6.3 Date: s
ApplicanUOwmr Ai c an T County. w.
Investigator(s): v% State: ../ a

Do Normal Circumstances exist an the site? Cc No
Community II7 ^V-p Wt,, t
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes o Transect ID: &4#4 Sr
Is this area a tential Problem Area? Yes 0 Plot ID: W t -.0
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant PlantSM?1es Stratum Indicator ?.
1. srbY Alg/b is
2- ML
3
7
4: 9'
10.
IL

i
-
.? wcrr
.? A s
Z 4• 12.
O 5•
6• 1.3.
14

F
7• .
15.
8• 16. .
?
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC-). 1 O 6 {
Remarks:
?Vt? Ve?• rKtwr?-

i
-Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks) Primary Indicators:
Stream, Lake, or tide Gauge
/Inundated
_
Aerial Photographs "Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
Other Water Marks
,,'No Recorded Data Available -Drift Lines

-Sediment Deposits #

0
Field Observations:
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands 1
O -
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
O Depth of Surface Water. -"Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
p4 Water-Stained Leaves
_
Depth to Free Water in Pit: C7 (in.) -Local Soil Survey Data
(t! ?FAC Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: O (irL) -Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
le -Qr

w../ ,N??0/>y1NatCt ?y rt??? /. •,t tor?.l?+ws.ltrt 1
i
Map Unit Name (Series & Phase : M dr n Drainage Class: Ama&At
N(,(,?
Taxonomy (Subgroup `t Confirm Mapped Type? Y o
Depth Matri Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions, j
inches Horizon unsell Moist unsell Moist Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc. !
rn I Z•r l . .r .- ..?
E j IZ 2
.aN»
/*
K
c1
9

O t
^Af
Y
1,40
1MV
-

to _Histosol
jr<oncretions
O _
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
4 _Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
U _Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
-Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
: FGleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
re.-k-)
as a tkSKl ? • f ft.?.tr /,..a ?a•.1a?.??fw•.
4
4 s.+j.t
046"t ,f t /rw.wlr r. pH?
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? No
Wetland Hydrology Present? No
Hydric Soils Present? No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? No
Remarks:
rcya-b1y ovat- &t fr4stti F .? ,,f 4.-
s<?..t l'wt G ?IJ 06%4 a . ??

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):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Western Wake Freeway, R-2635, WL 89
State:NC County/parish/borough: Wake City: Apex
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 35.68654° N. Long. 78.83875° W
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Little Branch
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: Cape Fear River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 03030004
Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc... ) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
{ Office (Desk) Determination. Date: October 2007
Field Determination. Date(s): June 2001, November 2006
SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There A rc 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.
? 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 re, "waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply):
? TNWs, including territorial seas
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
? Relatively permanent waters2 (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TbLWS
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
M Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non-wetland waters: linear feet: width (ft) and/or acres.
Wetlands: 0.07 acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: 1987 1)elincation blanwd
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:
is ' 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).
' 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.I and 2
and Section III.D.1.; otherwise, see Section III.B below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent":
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non-navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year-round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section 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.l 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 III.C 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:
_40
4 Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and
West.
5 Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.
•
(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apps
Tributary is: ? Natural
? Artificial (man-made). Explain:
? Manipulated (man-altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: feet
Average depth: feet
Average side slopes: Pick List.
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
? Silts ? Sands ? Concrete
? Cobbles ? Gravel ? Muck
? Bedrock ? Vegetation. Type/% cover:
? Other. Explain:
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain:
Presence of run/riffle/pool complexes. Explain:
Tributary geometry: ck List
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: Fick 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 ?
? changes in the character of soil ?
? shelving ?
? vegetation matted down, bent, or absent ?
? leaf litter disturbed or washed away ?
? sediment deposition ?
? water staining ?
? other (list):
El Discontinuous OHWM.' Explain:
the presence of litter and debris
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
the presence of wrack line
sediment sorting
scour
multiple observed or predicted flow events
abrupt change in plant community
-.0
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: 0.07 acres
Wetland type. Explain: sediment pond.
Wetland quality. Explain: low, wetland is the result of construction of a sewer line and a large spoil pile. The erosion
control features, rock dams and earthen berms have created this narrow area of impounded water. Runoff from the spoil pile and sewer
line are trapped.
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non-TNW:
Flow is: Lp emeral flow. Explain:
Surface flow is: Not present
Characteristics: water is stagnant. Outflow is prevented, except during large rain events, by earthen berms and rock
check dams.
Subsurface flow: UnknoNso. Explain findings: no test performed. .
? 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 15-20 river miles from TNW.
Project waters arc 10-15 aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: No Flow.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the 100- 500-year floodplain.
_?v
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain: wetland is the result of construction of a sewer line and a large spoil pile. The erosion
control features, rock dams and earthen berms have created this narrow area of impounded water. Runoff from the spoil
pile and sewer line are trapped.
Identify specific pollutants, if known: sediment from spoil pile and sewer line fill.
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
? Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
® Vegetation type/percent cover. Explain: herbaceous, shrub/scrub, 50% cover.
® Habitat for:
? Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
? Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
? Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
® Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings: frogs, posiibly used by birds and terrestrial mammals.
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if an?v)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis: JE
Approximately ( 0.07 ) 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)
N 0.07
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed: catches and traps sediment, allowing
pollutants to settle out.
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
C7
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: no significant nexus. The wetland is not within a natural drainage and is entirely the
result of human disturbance and activity. Flow from the wetland is infrequent.
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 III.D:
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:
• [ Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally:
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft). •
[1 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):
? Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
? Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
4. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
[l 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:
d Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section 111.13 and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW:
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
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 jurisidiction a]. 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.
_.0
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.9
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
? Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
? Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1-6), or
? Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA-STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):10
which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
? from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
? which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
? Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
? Other factors. Explain:
8See Footnote # 3. •
9 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.
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
• Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
? Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
? Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
? Wetlands: acres.
F. NON-JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
? Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solel on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain: Small wetland
created by human disturbance and not physically, chemically, or ecologically connected to the Cape Fear River.
? Other: (explain, if not covered above):
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
judgment (check all that apply):
? Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
? Lakes/ponds: acres.
? Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
?, Wetlands: acres.
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
?' Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
is F] 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:
L...1 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: 1:24000, Apex, NC .
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: Cawthorn, Joel. 1970. Soil Survey of Wake County, North
Carolina. United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, now Natural Resource Conservation Service. Raleigh,
NC.
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):
or ? Other (Name & Date):
? Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
? Applicable/supporting case law:
• ? Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
? Other information (please specify):
WETLAND RATING WORKSHEET (4th VERSION)
•
•
Project Name: R - L F 11- County: ta ,r KI
Nearest Road: '-'0W X f S-- Date: , 1 / A r
Wetland Area (ac): Wetland Width (ft)::
Name of Evaluator(s): .,a I!; A -PA, k_ t,A„/ dsa'm Wetland ID: L_'M Me IC-)
WETLAND LOCATION: ADJACENT LAND USE:
(within 1 /2 mile upstream, upslope or radius)
on sound or estuary, pond or lake ?? forested/natural vegetation Jd %
on perennial stream ? agricultural/ urbanized %
on intermittent stream impervious surface %
within interstream divide Adjacent Special Natural Areas
? other

SOILS: DOMINANT VEGETATION:
Soil Series: Cr-e-eAmoor sqn& lbalm
d
i
l
i 1 - io
pre
nant
om
y organ
c (humus, m k or peat) 2 o*A4#.
? predominantly mineral (non-sandy) 3 1
predominantly sandy 4

HYDRAULIC FACTORS: FLOODING AND WETNESS:
? freshwater semipermanently to permenently flooded or inundated
brackish seasonally flooded or inundated
steep topography ,.-intermittently flooded or temporary surface water
ditched or channelized no evidence of flooding or surface water
total wetland width > 100 feet
WETLAND TYPE: (select one)*
Bottomland Hardwood Forest Bog/Fen
Swamp Forest Headwater Forest
Carolina Bay Bog Forest
Pocosin Ephemeral Wetland
Pine Savannah Other. cf I as. ??t*M t.?v
Freshwater Marsh t SPhi lt.fef.«IfiJ t>/rzdpa.re-")
'60v to
* The rating system cannot be applied to salt and brackish marshes or stream channels.
_ ?
DEM RATING
WATER STORAGE X 4.00 = a
BANK, SHORELINE STABILIZATION V X 4.00 =
POLLUTANT REMOVAL * X 5.00 = /
WILDLIFE HABITAT X 2.00 =
AQUATIC LIFE X 4.00 = Z
RECREATION/EDUCATION X 1.00 =
TOTAL WETLAND SCORE = 3 ??
* Add one point if in sensitive watershed and >10% nonpoint disturbance within 1/2 mile upstream, upslope, or radius.
•
DATA FORM - ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
i40
I
•

Z
O
H
O
O
a
O
a

a
O
rn
Go
a
O
Q
H
U
Project/Site: Date: Li
Applicant/Owner. Z- County: 65s/e n
Investigator(s? State: T. C.-
Do Normal Circumstan exist on the s' ? e No Community ID: W 4 _
Is the site significantly disturbed (AtypicaIS
ituation)? es
R
Transect ID: W
Is this area a potential Problem Area? Yes I Plot ID: - i i
Dominant Plant S ecies Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. YALa ! L4. 013L, 9.
2. !t_ S1 bat- 10.
3. 14 FAC.W 1- IL
4. ? A!&f 1,4? VAC- 12.
5. 13.
6. 14.
7. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC-). t
Remarks:
,P,-,0,J4j a/tN pots, b(? ro,.lf- of rt?0"4/" 4--j0A--}-C"P,?4'64s-

dw .) S. A h rot. t o",4wt I lCta 4•?
`Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks) Primary Indicators:
Stream, Lake, or tide Gauge _--Inundated
Aerial Photographs ,•-Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
Other
,-/No Recorded Data Available _ Water Marks
Drift Lines
_
Sediment Deposits
Field Observations. _Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
t y` SP ??
Depth of Surface Water Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
-Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _
_Local Soil Survey Data
.-FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: O (in.) _Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:

Map Unit Name (Series & Phase : mo Drainage Class:
Taxonomy (Subgroup , Confirm Mapped Type? Y6 No
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, oncretions,
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (ivlunsell moist)
- Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
s/ ' ?
0,40 YIC
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
Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
ZGleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
_
Remarks:
? ??a?7 f i,irafs111 60+
. Ztr1f( 4J j&cf^? P; tC
a
e ?
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? ffer/ No
Wetland Hydrology Present? No
Hydric Soils Present? Is thi
s Sampling Point Within a Wetland? je No
Remarks:
61 CL-rOM^ l? etd w S ??.` t ay e,.r
DATA RnRM - ROTITM WETLAND DETFRMYNATION
Project/Site: - ` - Date:
2? IQ (A
A
pplicant/Owner. tip J? County: ?.laK.t
Investigator(s): - State: .rL
Do Normal Circumstances exist on a site? MO No Community ID: so
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? No Transect ID:
Is this area a potential Problem Area? Yes o Plot ID:
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1• N`vl.a ..e ?. JS ?AC?r 9.
2. - ,,, . f?.. S FAC t 10.
3. P. H i
4. - 12.
5. 13.
6. 14.
7. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL. FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC-).
Remarks:
J`? a+ pa-e' slop a,
-Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks) Primary Indicators:
Stream, Lake, or tide Gauge Inundated
Aerial Photographs _ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
Other _ Water Marks
? No Recorded Data Available _ Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Field Observations: -Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water- (in.) _ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
_ Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in•) -Local Soil Survey Data
c,-FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: (in) _ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
> 1
G J S? L / ?L1r t" { 11 tt
d? t A OJt fj
Map Unit Name (Series & Phase : S Drainage Class: 9Ad c r&fct ,J ralmd
Taxonomy (Subgroup ?L Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No
Depth Matrik Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, oncretions,
inches Horizon unsell Moist (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure. etc.

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
_ Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:

Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? i
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes
Soils Present? Yes Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes 6
Remarks.

z
O
H
W
O

O
a
O
C4
W
a
0
m
O
4
U

E 7
ly
3
i
1l
H
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 1: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Western Wake Freeway, R-2635, S 4
State:NC County/parish/borough: Wake City: Apex
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 35.68711` N. Long. 78.8379°
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Litt] Branch
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: Cape Fear River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 0303004
0 Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc...) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Office (Desk) Determination. Date: October 2007
El Field Determination. Date(s): June 2001, October 2006
SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There A re nib "navigable waters of the U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review area. [Required]
? Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
? Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There :1 re "waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply):'
TNWs, including territorial seas
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
E) Relatively permanent waters2 (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TN-W,&
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: 816 linear feet: width (ft) and/or acres.
Wetlands: acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: established by OIIW NI.
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
2. Non-regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable):;
? 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 is
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:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent":
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non-navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year-round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section 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.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.C below.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditioner
Watershed size: Pick List
Drainage area: Pick List
Average annual rainfall: 44.19 inches
Average annual snowfall: 4.5 inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
? Tributary flows directly into TNW.
® Tributary flows through 5 tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are 15-20 river miles from TNW.
Project waters are 1 (or less) river miles from RPW.
Project waters are 10-15 aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are I (or less) aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:

Identify flow route to TNW5: Little Branch, Big Branch, White Oak Creek, Harris Lake, Cape Fear River.
Tributary stream order, if known: V .
•
a 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: 4 feet
Average depth: 0.5 - 1.0 feet
Average side slopes: 3:1.
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: tributary is relatively stable.
Presence of run/riffle/pool complexes. Explain: well developed riffle/pool complexes.
Tributary geometry: iNleandering
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): 2-4 %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: Seasomil Ilow
Estimate average number ofilow events in review area/year: 20 (or greater)
Describe flow regime:
Other information on duration and volume: tributary is borderline perrenial.
Surface flow is: Discrete and confined. Characteristics: moderate to fast flow observed during site visits.
Subsurface flow: L'nl:nown. Explain findings: no tests conducted.
? Dye (or other) test performed: none.
Tributary has (check all that apply):
•
® Bed and banks
® OHWM6 (check all indicators that apply):
® clear, natural line impressed on the bank
? changes in the character of soil ?
? shelving
® vegetation matted down, bent, or absent
® leaf litter disturbed or washed away ?
® sediment deposition
? water staining ?
? other (list):
? Discontinuous OHWM.7 Explain:
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determ
High Tide Line indicated by: ?
? oil or scum line along shore objects
? fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore)
? physical markings/characteristics
? tidal gauges
? other (list):
the presence of litter and debris
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
the presence of wrack line
sediment sorting
scour
multiple observed or predicted flow events
abrupt change in plant community
-.0
ine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
? survey to available datum;
? physical markings;
? vegetation lines/changes in vegetation types.
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain: water is relatively clear, watershed mostly forested.
Identify specific pollutants, if known: none 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): forested, 50-100'.
? 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: fish, amphibians, crayfish, macrobenthos.
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 Lis r
Characteristic:
Subsurface flow: Pick Li. 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; Wiler 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.
•
U
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.?ributary 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 III.D:
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.
n Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
2. RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
L] Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year-round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial:
Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
• seasonally: Well developed riffle/pool comlex, continuous bed an bank, substrate sorting, natural levee, bankfull benches
present. Fish, macrobenthos, amphibians and crayfish present.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: 816 linear feet 4 width (ft).
Other non-wetland waters: acres. is
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):
Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
4. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
? Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year-round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW:
Wetlands 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.
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 TN W 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 TN W are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres. -10
7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.9
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
?, Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
?' Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1-6), or
? Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA-STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):'o
? which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
? from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
? which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
? Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
? Other factors. Explain:
8See Footnote # 3. •
' 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.
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
• Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
? Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
? Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
? Wetlands: acres.
F. NON-JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
? If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
? Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
? Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
? Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
? Other: (explain, if not covered above):
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
judgment (check all that apply):
? Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
? Lakes/ponds: acres.
? Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
? Wetlands: acres.
Provide acreage estimates for non-jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
? Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
? Lakes/ponds: acres.
? Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
• ? Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
? Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:
? Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
? Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
? Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report. _
Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
Corps navigable waters' study:
? U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
? USGS NHD data.
? USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
® U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: 1:24,000, Apex, NC.
® USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: Cawthorn, Joel. 1970. Soil Survey of Wake County, North
Carolina. United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, now Natural Resource Conservation Service. Raleigh,
NC.
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):
or ? Other (Name & Date):
? Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
? Applicable/supporting case law:
? Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
• ? Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:
q
NCDWQ Stream Classification Form
roject Name: River Basin: County: Evaluator:
stem Wake Freeway R-2635 Cape Fear Wake Harold M. Brady
'Weld ID Number: Nearest Named Stream: Latitude: Signature:
Sigma JBA Little Branch '• y1' 22.(pip" N
Date: ' USGS QUAD: Longitude: Location:
June 12, 2001 Apex, NC 11.50' 23;42 " W NC Highway 55
*PLEASE NOTE: If evaluator and landowner agree that the feature is a man-made ditch, then use of this form is not necessary.
Also, if in the best professional judgement of the evaluator, the feature is a man-made ditch and not a modified natural stream-this
rating system should not be used*
Primary Field Indicators: (Circle One Number Per Line)
1. Geomorphology Absent Weak Moderate Strom
1) Is There A Riffle-Pool Sequence? 0 1 2 (3)
2) Is The USDA Texture In Streambed
Different From Surrounding Terrain?
0
1
(2)
3
3) Are Natural Levees Present? 0 (1) 2 3
4) Is The Channel Sinuous? 0 1 (2) 3
5) Is There An Active (Or Relic)
Floodplain Present?
0
(1)
2
3
6) Is The Channel Braided? (0) 1 2 3
7) Are Recent Alluvial Deposits Present? 0 1 (2) 3
8) Is There A Bankfull Bench Present? (0) 1 2 3
9) Is A Continuous Bed & Bank Present? 0 (1) 2 3
Is A 2°° Order Or Greater Channel (As Indicated
PRIMARY GEOMORPHOLOGYINDICA TOR POINTS: 12
II. Hydrology Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1) Is There A Groundwater
Flow/Discharge Present?
0
(1)
2
3
PRIMAR Y HYDR OL OGY INDICA TOR POINTS. 1
III. Biology Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1) Are Fibrous Roots Present In Streambed? 3 2 U 0
2) Are Rooted Plants Present In Streambed? 3 2 (1) 0
33) Is Pedphyton Present? 0 (1) 2 3
4) Are Bivalves Present? (0) 1 2 3
PRIMARYBIOLOGYINDICA TOR POINTS. 3
Secondary Field Indicators: (Circle One Number Per Line)
1. Geomorphology Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1) Is There A Head Cut Present In Channel? (0,) .5 1 1.5
,2) Is There A Grade Control Point In Channel? (0) .5 1 1.5
3) Does Topography Indicate A
Natural Draina¢e Wav? 0 (.5) 1 1.5
SECONDARY GEOMORPHOLOGYINDICA TOR POINTS. .5
0
II. Hydrology Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1) Is This Year's (Or Last's) Leaflitter
Present In Streambed?
1.5
1
(.5)
0
2) Is Sediment On Plants (Or Debris) Present? 0 (.5) 1 1.5
3) Are Wrack Lines Present? 0 (.5) 1 1.5
4) Is Water In Channel And >48 Hrs. Since 0 .5
Last Known Rain? (*NOTE- If Ditch Indicated In #9 Above Skin This Step And #5 Below*) 1 (1S)
5) Is There Water In Channel During Dry
Conditions Or In Growing S?eason). 0 (.5) 1 1.5
6) Are Hvdric Soils Present In Sides Of Channel (Or In Headcut)? Yes=1.5 No=(0)
SECONDARYHYDROLOGYINDICA TOR POINTS. 3.5
III Biology Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1) Are Fish Present? 0 (.5) 1 1.5
2) Are Amphibians Present? 0 (.5) I 1.5
3) Are AgnaticTurtles Present? 0 .5 (1) 1.5
4 Are Crayfish Present? 0 .5 (1) 1.5
5) Are Macrobenthos Present? 0 .5 (1) 1.5
6) Are Iron Oxidizing Bacteria/Fungus Present? 0 (.5) 1 1.5
7) Is Filamentous Algae Present? 0 (.5) 1 1.5
8) Are Wetland Plants In Streambed?
(* NOTE: If Total Absence Of All Plants In Streambed SAV Mostly OBL
2 1 Mostly FACW
(.75) Mostly FAC
.5 Mostly FACU Mostly UPL
0 0
As Noted Above Skip This Step UNLESS SAV Present*).
SECONDARY BIOLOGYINDICA TOR POINTS. 5.75
TOTAL POINTS (Primary + Secondary=_25.75 (If Greater Than Or Equal To 19 Points The Stream Is At Least
Intermittent)
_.0
•
0
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):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Western Wake Freeway, R-2635, S 59
State:NC County/parish/borough: Wake City: Apex
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 35.6876° Long. 78.83682° °I .
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Littl Branch
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: Cape Fear River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 0303004
? Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
[] Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc...) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Office (Desk) Determination. Date: October 2007
EJ Field Determination. Date(s): June 2001, October 2006, October 2007
SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There A re 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.
? 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're "waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply): r
? TNWs, including territorial seas
? Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
Relatively permanent waters2 (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TAW4
? 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: 622 linear feet: Y width (ft) and/or acres.
Wetlands: acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: Established by 01IWM.
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.
s 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 II1.D.1.; otherwise, see Section III.B below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent":
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non-navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year-round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section 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 waterbodyo 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 III.C below.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: 20 :Icres
Drainage area: 16 Pick List
Average annual rainfall: 44.19 inches
Average annual snowfall: 4.5 inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
? Tributary flows directly into TNW.
® Tributary flows through 4 tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are 15-20 river miles from TNW.
Project waters are I (or less) river miles from RPW.
Project waters are 10-I5 aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are 1 (or Icss) aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:

Identify flow route to TNW5: Big Branch, White Oak Creek, Harris Lake, Cape Fear River.
Tributary stream order, if known: 151
r
?J
Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and
West.
3 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: 3 feet
Average depth: 1.5 - 3.0 feet
Average side slopes: ?:1.
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: tributary is relatively stable.
Presence of run/riffle/pool complexes. Explain: weakly developed riffle/pool complexes.
Tributary geometry: 'Meandering
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): 2-4 %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: Seasonal flow
Estimate average number offlow events in review area/year: 20 (or greater)
Describe flow regime:
Other information on duration and volume: tributary is borderline perrenial.
Surface flow is: Discrete :md confined. Characteristics: moderate to fast flow observed during site visits.
Subsurface flow: t nknown Explain findings: no tests conducted.
? Dye (or other) test performed: none.
Tributary has (check all that apply):
•
® Bed and banks
® OHWM6 (check all indicators that apply):
® clear, natural line impressed on the bank
? changes in the character of soil ?
? shelving
® vegetation matted down, bent, or absent
® leaf litter disturbed or washed away ?
® sediment deposition
? water staining ?
? other (list):
? Discontinuous OHWM.' Explain:
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determ
[] High Tide Line indicated by:
? oil or scum line along shore objects
? fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore)
? physical markings/characteristics
? tidal gauges
? other (list):
the presence of litter and debris
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
the presence of wrack line
sediment sorting
scour
multiple observed or predicted flow events
abrupt change in plant community
ine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
? survey to available datum;
? physical markings;
? vegetation lines/changes in vegetation types.
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain: water is relatively clear, watershed mostly forested.
Identify specific pollutants, if known: none 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): forested, 50-100'.
? 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: fish, amphibians, crayfish, macrobenthos.
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: Fick Fist. Explain:
Surface flow is: Nick List,
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) tn 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.
C J
0
For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (YIN) 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 I11.1):
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 theme tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section 111.13: 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 III.D:
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:
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: Weakly developed riffle/pool comlex, continuous bed an bank, substrate sorting, and active floodplain present.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
® Tributary waters: 816 linear feet 4 width (ft).
Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
3. Non-RPWss that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Ea, 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):
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:
E] Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section 111.13 and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW:
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
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 TN W 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
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):"
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.
?, Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
[] Other factors. Explain:
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
'See Footnote # 3.
9 To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section 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.
?J
•
A I'-
• 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.
L?j 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:
? 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: -.0
? 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: 1:24,000, New Hill, NC.
® USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: Cawthorn, Joel. 1970. Soil Survey of Wake County, North
Carolina. United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, now Natural Resource Conservation Service. Raleigh,
NC.
? 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):
or ? Other (Name & Date):
? Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
? Applicable/supporting case law:
? Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
? Other information (please specify):
• B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:
ARCADIS
• Infrastructure, environment, facilities
•
Transmittal Letter
To: Copies:
Ryan White Tony Houser
1 South Wilmington Street
Raleigh NC 27601
From: Date:
Steve Smallwood November 15, 2007
Subject: ARCADIS Project No.:
NC 49
ARCADIS G&M of North Carolina,
Inc.
801 Corporate Center Drive
Suite 300
Raleigh
North Carolina 27607
Tel [phone]
Fax [phone]
We are sending you:
? Attached ? Under Separate Cover Via the Following Items:
? Shop Drawings ? Plans ? Specifications ? Change Order
? Prints ? Samples ? Copy of Letter ? Reports
? Other:
Copies Date Drawing No. Rev. Description Action*
1 11/15/07 Draft Map of NC 49/US 52 overpass RC
1 11/15/07 Draft Map of Railroad overpass RC
1 11/15/07 Draft Design assumptions RC
1 11/15/07 Draft Highway Capacity Analysis RC
1 11/15/07 Traffic projections

Action*
? A Approved ? CR Correct and Resubmit ? Resubmit Copies
? AN Approved As Noted ? F File ? Return Copies
? AS As Requested ? FA For Approval ® Review and Comment
? Other:
Mailing Method
? U.S. Postal Service 1" Class ? Courier/Hand Delivery ? FedEx Priority Overnight ? FedEx 2-Day Delivery
? Certified/Registered Mail ? United Parcel Service (UPS) ? FedEx Standard Overnight
?FedEx Economy
El Other:
0
Comments: We are providing draft functional designs to Ton Houser for discussion before finalizing. Please contact
Len Hill or mvself. Thanks.
Page:
r.4oad*ayWx4afl 1"boriM ryw* ite.doc 1 /2
North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identification Form; Version 3.1
C]
•
Date: I0 Project: _ab Latitude: 15° 4? ZSADD N
Evaluator: Site: .1-016 Longitude: qte s u 20.41" Yq
Total Points: Other
Stream is at least intermittent County:
if>-19 or perennial i2 30 e.g. Quad Name: A pcX

A. Geomorphology Sub -
total
bs t::«: ... ...... .
.>::>lN ak:;< ::...:......:.
: "fe>:
:: <Stron
2. Continuous bed and bank 0 1 2
2. Sinuosity 0 1 2 3
3. In-channel structure: riffle-pool sequence 0 2 3
4. Soil texture or stream substrate sorting 0 1 2 3
5. Active/relic floodplain 0 1 2 3 "
6. Depositional bars or benches 1 2 3
7. Braided channel 0 2 3
8. Recent alluvial deposits 0 1 .2
9 a Natural levees 0 1 2 3
10. Headcuts 0 1 2 3
11. Grade controls 0 1 1.5
12. Natural valley or drainageway 0 0.5 1 1.
13. Second or greater order channel on existing
USGS or NRCS map or other documented
evidence.
No _Q
Yes = 3
-Man-made ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hvdroloav (Subtotal = .47-3 1
14. Groundwater flow/discharge 0 2 3
15. Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain, or
Water in channel - d or growing season c 1 2 3
16. Leaflitter 1.5 0.5 0
17. Sediment on plants or debris 0 0.5 1 1.5
118. Organic debris lines or piles (Wrack lines) 0 0.5 1.5
19. Hydric soils (redoximorphic features) present? No = 0 es = 13'
C. Biology (Subtotal =)
20b. Fibrous roots in channel 3 2 - 1 0
21D. Rooted plants in channel 3' 1 0
22. Crayfish 0, 0.5 1 1.5
23. Bivalves 1 2 3
24. Fish 0.5 1 1.5
25. Amphibians 0 1 1.5
26. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance) 0.5 1 1.5
27. Filamentous algae; periphyton 0 1 2 3
28. Iron oxidizing bacteria/fungus. 0 0.5 1 1.5
29 . Wetland plants in streambed FAC = 0.5; FA CW = 0.75; OBL =1.5 SAV = 2.0; Other = 0
Items 20 and 21 focus on the presence of upland plants, Item 29 focuses on the presence of aquatic or wetland plants.
Sketch:
Notes: (use back side of this form for additional notes.)
r
I USACE AID# DWQ # Site # (indicate on attached map)
,„ STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Orovide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: OT 2. Evaluator's name: `N
3. Date of evaluation:? J g5) lib 4. Time of evaluation:rY1 :t
5. Name ofstream: t?:cc: rat 56$ 6. River basin: Ci ?e c? r
7. Approximate drainage area: 8. Stream order: 1 a J?
9. Length of reach evaluated: :) 10. County:
11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees. 12. Subdivision name (if any):
Latitude (ex 34.872312): Mo %AV 25.(00" N Longitude (ex.-77.55661 1):
Method location determined (circle): GP Topo Sheet Ortho (Aerial) Photo/GIS Other GIS Other
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
14. Proposed channel work (if any):
15. Recent weather conditions: Y s 6`11
16. Site conditions at time of visit: '30YIYI -''-
k4^4 0
17. Identify any special waterway classifications own: -Section 10 -Tidal Waters -Essential Fisheries Habitat
Trout Waters -Outstanding Resource Waters _ Nutrient Sensitive Waters -Water Supply Watershed (I-IV)
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES (a If yes, estimate the water surface area:
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES
21. Estimated watershed land use: 1b %Residential
• IAO '/o Forested
20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? 'E NO
_% Commercial _ % Industrial _% Agricultural
_% Cleared / Logged _% Other
22. Bankfull width: a'1 3 1 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): 1- a
U U
24. Channel slope down center of stream: -Flat (0 to 21/o) t%f'entle (2 to 4%) -Moderate (4 to 10%) -Steep (>10%)
25. Channel sinuosity: Straight -Occasional bends Sequent 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 briefidescription 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): 5y 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 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
Warticular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change -version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
•
•
$40
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.