20191271 Ver 1_PCN Form Submission_20191016

Corps Submittal Cover Sheet
Please provide the following info:
1. Project Name
Dutch Creek Streambank Stabilization - BRC Property
2. Narne of Property Owner/Applicant: Blue Ridge Conservancy
3. Name of Consultant/Agent: Adam Williams PWS, BFEC Inc.
*Agent authorization needs to be attached.
4. Related/Previous Action ID number(s):
5. Site Address: XXX NC Hwy 194 S
6. Subdivision Name:
7. City: Valle Crucis
8. County: Watauga
9. Lat: 36.212357 Long:-81.781567 (Decimal Degrees Please)
10. Quadrangle Name: Valle Crucis NC
11. Waterway: Dutch Creek, UT1
12. Watershed: Dutch Creek - Watauga River
13. Requested Action:
x Nationwide Permit # 13
General Permit #
Jurisdictional Determination Request
— Pre -Application Request
The following information will be completed by Corps office:
Prepare File Folder
�
Assign number in ORM
Authorization: Section 10
Project Description/ Nature of Activity/ Project Purpose:
Site/Waters Name:
Keywords:
Section 404
Begin Date

DWR
MOM— of Water Resources
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
September 29, 2018 Ver 3
21nitial Review
Has this project met the requirements for acceptance in to the review process?*
r Yes
r No
Is this project a public transportation project?*
G Yes r No
Oange only if needed.
BIMS # Assigned * Version#*
20191271 1
Is a payment required for this project?*
r No payment required Reviewing Office*
r Fee received Winston-Salem Regional Office - (336) 776-
r Fee needed - send electronic notification 9800
Select Project Reviewer*
Sue Homewood:eads\slhomewood
Information for Initial Review
1a. Name of project:
Dutch Creek WNCSI Project
1a. Who is the Primary Contact?*
Josselyn Lucas
1b. Primary Contact Email:* 1c. Primary Contact Phone:*
[e-mail] [phone]
Date Submitted
10/16/2019
Nearest Body of Water
Dutch Creek
Basin
Watauga
Water Classification
B; Tr
Site Coordinates
Latitude: Longitude:
36.212357-81.781567
FA. Processing Information U
County (or Counties) where the project is located:
Watauga
Is this project a public transportation project?*
r Yes r No
1a. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
* Section 404 Permit (wetlands, streams and waters, Clean Water Act)
r Section 10 Permit (navigable waters, tidal waters, Rivers and Harbors Act)
1b. What type(s) of permit(s) do you wish to seek authorization?
rJ Nationwide Permit (NWP)
r- Regional General Permit (RGP)
r Standard (IP)

1c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
r Yes r No
Nationwide Permit (NWP) Number:
NWP Numbers (for multiple NWPS):
1d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWR:
W 401 Water Quality Certification - Regular
r Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
r Individual Permit
13 - Bank Stabilization
le. Is this notification solelyfor the record because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWR 401 Certification:
For the record only for Corps Permit:
r 401 Water Quality Certification - Express
r Riparian Buffer Authorization
1f. Is this an after -the -fact permit application?*
r Yes r No
1g. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
r Yes r No
1g. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
r Yes r No
Acceptance Letter Attachment
1h. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties?
r Yes r No
1j. Is the project located in a designated trout watershed?
O Yes r No
B. Applicant Information
1d. Who is applying for the permit?
r Owner W Applicant (other than owner)
le. Is there an Agent/Consultant for this project?*
r Yes r No
2. Owner Information
2a. Name(s) on recorded deed:
Blue Ridge Conservancy
2b. Deed book and page no.:
DB 1839, pg 252
2c. Responsible party:
2d.Address
Street Address
PO Box 568
Address Line 2
City
Boone
Postal / Zip Oide
28607
2e. Telephone Number:
[phone]
2g. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
3. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
3a. Name:
Adam Williams
State / Rovime / fegim
NC
Country
USA
2f. Fax Number:
r Yes r No
r Yes r No

3b. Business Name:
Brushy Fork Environmental Consulting, Inc
3c.Address
Street Address
10565 Highway 421 South
Address Line 2
City
Trade
Postal / Zip Code
37691
3d. Telephone Number:
[phone]
3f. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
4. Agent/Consultant (if applicable)
4a. Name:
Adam Williams
4b. Business Name:
Brushy Fork Environmental Consulting, Inc
4c.Address
Street Address
10565 Highway 421 South
Address Line 2
City
Trade
Postal / Zip Code
37691
4d. Telephone Number:
[phone]
4f. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
Agent Authorization Letter*
SIGNED AA Dutch Ck.pdf
C. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Project Information
1b. Subdivision name:
(i appropriate)
1c. Nearest municipality / town
Valle Crucis, NC
2. Project Identification
State / Rovince / legion
TN
Country
USA
3e. Fax Number:
State / Province / Region
TN
Country
USA
4e. Fax Number:
2a. Property Identification Number:
2b. Property size:
1970987112000,1970972309000
21.71
2c. Project Address
Street Address
3565 NC Fly 194 S
Address Line 2
aty
State / Rovince / Pagion
Sugar Grove
NC
Postal / Zip Code
Country
28679
USA
3. Surface Waters
3a. Name of the nearest body of water to proposed project:*
Dutch Creek
3b. Water Resources Classification of nearest receiving water:*
B; Tr
389.49KB

3c. What river basin(s) is your project located in?*
Watauga
3d. Please provide the 12-digit HUC in which the project is located.
060101030303
4. Project Description and History
4a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this application:*
This site is on the periphery of the small community of Valle Crucis in Watauga County, NC behind the Mast General Store Annex Primary land uses in the vicinity include agriculture
(grazing, hay, small crop fields), undeveloped forest land, and single family rural residences. The project property is being used for hay and grazing with no buffer between active
agricultural lands and Dutch Creek. The address listed in Section C2c. is for the Mast General Store Annex in Valle Crucis, however the Subject Property is located roughly 600 feet
northeast of the Mast store.
4b. Have Corps permits or DWR certifications been obtained for this project (including all prior phases) in the past?*
r^ Yes r No r^ Unknown
4d. Attach an 8 1/2 X 11 excerpt from the most recent version of the USGS topographic map indicating the location of the project site. (for DWR)
Dutch Creek Topographic Map.pdf 658.51 KB
4e. Attach an 81/2 X 11 excerpt from the most recent version of the published County NRCS Soil Survey map depicting the project site. (for DWR)
Dutch Creek Soil Map.pdf 745.31 KB
4f. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
0
4g. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams on the property:
1082
4h. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:*
The purpose of the project is to stabilize eroding stream banks on Dutch Creek and an unnamed tributary. Lack of riparian vegetation and an increased sediment load due to upstream
agricultural land use has caused degradation of the reach. Streambank benching and sloping, natural channel structures, and a planted riparian forest buffer will be used to restore the
reach.
41. Describe the overall project in detail, including indirect impacts and the type of equipment to be used:*
The project will provide bank stabilization and grade control using natural channel design structures including cross vanes, toe wood, j-hooks, and rock steps. A bankfull bench will be
constructed and the banks will be sloped back and stabilized using coir matting and live stakes and a riparian buffer of native tree and shrub species will be planted. Equipment used for
this proposed construction includes track -hoes, skid steers, and dump trucks.
4j. Please upload project drawings for the proposed project.
Dutch_FINAL_60%.pdf 13.38MB
5. Jurisdictional Determinations
5a. Have the wetlands or streams been delineated on the property or proposed impact areas?*
r Yes r No r Unknown
Comments:
5b. If the Corps made a jurisdictional determination, what type of determination was made?*
r Preliminary r Approved r Not Verified r Unknown r NIA
Corps AID Number:
5c. If 5a is yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known): Josselyn Lucas
Agency/Consultant Company: Brushy Fork Environmental Consulting
Other:
5d1. Jurisdictional determination upload
Dutch PJD.pdf 120.68KB
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?*
r Yes r No
Are any other NWP(s), regional general permit(s), or individual permits(s) used, or intended to be used, to authorize any part of the proposed project or related activity?
No
D. Proposed Impacts Inventory

1. Impacts Summary
la. Where are the impacts associated with your project? (check all that apply):
r Wetlands W Streams -tributaries ❑ Buffers
r Open Waters r Pond Construction
3. Stream Impacts
3a. Reason for impact (?)
3b.lmpact type *
3c. Type of impact*
3d. S. name*
3e. Stream Type *
3f. Type of
3g. S. width *
3h. Impact
❑
(?)
Jurisdiction*
length*
S1
Project
Stabilization Pro 1
Tem ora
p ry
Bank Stabilization
Dutch Creek
Perennial
Both
28
945
Average (feet)
(linearfeet)
S2
Stabilization Project
Temporary
Bank Stabilization J
Unnamed Tributary
Perennial
Both
6
137
Avenge(fee[)
(linear feet)
S3
Stream Crossing 1
9
Permanent
Other
Dutch Creek
Perennial
Both
28
12
Average (feet)
(linearfeet)
�
Stream Crossing2
Permanent
Other
Dutch Creek
Perennial
Both
28
12
Average (feet)
(linear feet)
S5
UT Stream Crossing
g
Permanent
Other
Unnamed Tributary
ry
Perennial
Both
6
12
Average (feet)
(linearfeet)
3i. Total jurisdictional ditch impact in square feet:
3i. Total permanent stream impacts:
36
3i. Total stream and ditch impacts:
1118
3j. Comments:
E. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
3i. Total temporary stream impacts:
1,082
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing the project:
The proposed work and associated impacts are intended to stabilize approArnately 1,082 In It of stream bank along Dutch Creek and an unnamed
tributary. Design measures which minimize impacts include installation of natural channel design structures which will improve stream stability and
provide habitat. All disturbed buffer areas will be immediately seeded upon completion, matted (coir matting) and stabilized at the close of each day.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques:
All streambank disturbances will be stabilized same day and covered with coir matting and live staked to reduce sedimentation during construction.
Only well maintained equipment vdll be used; no leaks will be tolerated. Equipment will work from streambanks whenever possible while performing the
work and will only work in the channel when absolutely necessary. Following construction the banks of the restored channel will be seeded with a mix
of rye (temporary cover) and perennial grasses and clover (permanent seed). The forested riparian buffer will be planted with a variety of native 1-
gallon trees and shrubs following construction.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
r^ Yes r No
2b. If this project DOES NOT require Compensatory Mitigation, explain why:
This project aims to improve the overall condition of the streams by repairing bank erosion and installing natural channel design structures. No mitigation is required.
F. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWR)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
r^ Yes r No
If no, explain why:
Project is not within a NC Riparian Buffer Protection area.
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. Is this a NCDOT project subject to compliance with NCDOT's Individual NPDES permit NCS000250?*
r Yes r No

2b. Does this project meet the requirements for low density projects as defined in 15A NCAC 02H .1003(2)?
r Yes r- No
Comments:
G. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation
la. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the use of public (federal/state) land?*
r Yes r No
2. Violations (DWR Requirement)
U
2a. Is the site in violation of DWR Water Quality Certification Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), or DWR Surface Water or Wetland Standards or
Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)? *
r Yes r No
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWR Requirement)
3a. Will this project result in additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?*
f Yes r No
3b. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
The proposed project will improve streambank stability and install agricultural BMPs on crop land. No additional development is anticipated at the site.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWR Requirement)
4a. Is sewage disposal required by DWR for this project?*
r' Yes C No (- N/A
5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or habitat?
r Yes r No
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act impacts?*
r Yes r No
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
Asheville
5d. Is another Federal agency involved?*
f Yes r No
5e. Is this a DOT project located within Division's 1-8?
r Yes r No
5f. Will you cut any trees in order to conduct the work in waters of the U.S.?
f Yes r No
5g. Does this project involve bridge maintenance or removal?
r Yes r No
5h. Does this project involve the construction/installation of a wind turbine(s)?*
f Yes r No
r Unknown
5i. Does this project involve (1) blasting, and/or (2) other percussive activities that will be conducted by machines, such as jackhammers, mechanized pile drivers, etc.?
r- Yes r No
5j. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical Habitat?
BFEC completed the USFW IPaC regulatory review process. BFEC then reviewed information for each species listed on the provided species list,
using the Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office pace and USFWS fact sheets. No Critical Habitat is located at this site. Habitat requirements are not
met for the species on the list due to specific habitat requirements such as high elevation rocky outcrops/summits or spruce fir forest. No known caves
are located at the project site. No bat maternity roosts are known on site and mature trees are not present in the project area.
Consultation Documentation Upload
Dutch_ Creek_ Species List_ Asheville Ecological Services Field Office.pdf 296.03KB
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as an Essential Fish Habitat?*
r- Yes r No

6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact an Essential Fish Habitat?*
NOAA Essential Fish Habitat Mapper: https://mr.w.habitat.noaa.gov/protection/efh/efhmapper/
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation status?*
r Yes
r No
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?*
HPOWEB: NCHPO GIS Service. This project will take place within the Valle Crucis Historic District. The proposed project is on active farm land and will
have no impact on any historic structures or archaeological resources in the area.
7c. Historic or Prehistoric Information Upload
Dutch Creek SHPO Map.pdf 565.68KB
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain?*
r: Yes
r No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
The proposed project is not anticipated to cause an increase in flood elevation. A No -Rise Certification will be submitted by Brushy Fork Engineering
Division PLLC to the Watauga County floodplain administrator.
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?*
FEMA Flood Map Service Center online mapping tool
Miscellaneous
Comments
Miscellaneous attachments not previously requested.
Dutch Creek USACE Submittal Coversheet.pdf 116.7KB
Dutch Wetland Delineation.pdf 1.47MB
Dutch_Creek_FIRMETTE.pdf 575.3KB
Dutch Photosheets.pdf 2.53MB
Signature
jJ By checking the box and signing below, I certify that:
• I have given true, accurate, and complete information on this form;
• I agree that submission of this PCN form is a "transaction" subject to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
• I agree to conduct this transaction by electronic means pursuant to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act');
• I understand that an electronic signature has the same legal effect and can be enforced in the same way as a written signature; AND
• I intend to electronically sign and submit the PCN form.
Full Name:
Josselyn Lucas
Signature
Date
10/16/2019

AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM FOR WNCSI STREAM PROJECTS
PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
LOT NO. N/A PLAN NO. N/A PARCEL ID: 1970987112000,
1970972309000
STREET ADDRESS: NC Hwy 194 S, Sugar Grove, NC 28679
Property Owner:
Blue Ridge Conservancy
Property Owners Street Address (if different than above):
PO Box 568 Boone, NC 28607
The undersigned, registered property owners of the above noted property, do hereby authorize
Adam Williams , of Brushy Fork Environmental Consulting, Inc.
(Contractor/Agent) (Consulting Firm)
to act on my behalf and take all actions necessary for the processing, issuance and acceptance
of this permit or certification and any and all standard and special conditions attached.
We hereby cer ify the above information submitted in this application is true and accurate to
the best of ur nowledge. A% ,
Authorized Signature:
Date: 'g- Z " l l

081 ° 48' 00.00" W 081 ° 47' 00.00" W 081 ° 46' 00.00" W
b
N Olt) FH �Rkv-
TRIVINQUIZ�'r-J, A&h- R'
QE,�,t�—A
I
((((C�
o
Dutch Creek WNCSI Project Topographic Map
o
6
O
6
o
M
M
._ _r •
Nilrr=j
q'�`
�i � �
(rr1� �f 1
5 tom•
k' N
r
l
-_/] r
ri
I 1
r
r
�
i
CY)r�
O
l � ,
1 1 000
❑ _ 3
L
r d
oo
O
/ �1,1�
r ect
�
"r n
� ��
tt
Valle ci
a
J•
d
rb
`�1
N
d � 5q Q•`
�a
,I
1
— �— �� ��
>> J
�
1j
J }r ��� I f
f
��
y, p
z
o
o
O
r�
— a
/'�_
r` 4 a !
3
o
O
Cross
- - - -
o
Declination
u11 ce
'
oopp
•
�I
1
y _ �_ adstone Lodge'
Ilr
SCALE 1:24000
0 1 MILE
0 1000 YARDS
MN 6.79°
W
�0
0 1 KILOMETER
081 ° 48' 00.00" W 081 ° 47' 00.00" W 081 ° 46' 00.00" W
Name: VALLE CRUCIS (NC) Location: 036' 12' 48.42" N 081° 46' 52.91" W
Date: 05/22/19
Scale: 1 inch = 2,000 ft.
Copyright (C) 2008, MyTopo
Datum: NAD83

Dutch Creek WNCSI Project Soil MapW.
`
r �
rA.
. W
A J.
f .
.
4 J"
RoA' -,fire w
RdA
s
SnB SnBIdL
. p
Legend N En
Roads Rosman fine sandy loam
Dutch Creek Parcels Saunook loam 0J
Soils Ww Water 0 55 110 220 330 440 c'oA ti4v
8ultin4r
- Reddies loam Feet
Map is not to be construed as surveyed data. All boundaries are approximate GIs data taken from public data sources. BFEC 2019.

Appendix 2 - PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (PJD) FORM
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PJD: 8/26/19
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PJD: Blue Ridge ConServency
C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
D. PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
(USE THE TABLE BELOW TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE AQUATIC RESOURCES AND/OR
AQUATIC RESOURCES AT DIFFERENT SITES)
State: NC County/parish/borough: Watauga City: Sugar Grove
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format):
Lat.: 36.212357 Long.:-81.781567
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Dutch Creek
E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
❑■ Office (Desk) Determination. Date: 8/22/19
❑■ Field Determination. Date(s): 8/22/19
TABLE OF AQUATIC RESOURCES IN REVIEW AREA WHICH "MAY BE" SUBJECT TO REGULATORY
JURISDICTION.
Site
number
Latitude
(decimal
degrees)
Longitude
(decimal
degrees)
Estimated amount
of aquatic resource
in review area
(acreage and linear
feet, if applicable)
Type of aquatic
resource (i.e., wetland
vs. non -wetland
waters)
Geographic authority
to which the aquatic
resource "may be"
subject (i.e., Section
404 or Section 10/404)
S 1
36.21209
-81.7808
0
Ditch
404

1) The Corps of Engineers believes that there may be jurisdictional aquatic resources in
the review area, and the requestor of this PJD is hereby advised of his or her option
to request and obtain an approved JD (AJD) for that review area based on an
informed decision after having discussed the various types of JDs and their
characteristics and circumstances when they may be appropriate.
2) In any circumstance where a permit applicant obtains an individual permit, or a
Nationwide General Permit (NWP) or other general permit verification requiring "pre -
construction notification" (PCN), or requests verification for a non -reporting NWP or
other general permit, and the permit applicant has not requested an AJD for the
activity, the permit applicant is hereby made aware that: (1) the permit applicant has
elected to seek a permit authorization based on a PJD, which does not make an
official determination of jurisdictional aquatic resources; (2) the applicant has the
option to request an AJD before accepting the terms and conditions of the permit
authorization, and that basing a permit authorization on an AJD could possibly result
in less compensatory mitigation being required or different special conditions; (3) the
applicant has the right to request an individual permit rather than accepting the terms
and conditions of the NWP or other general permit authorization; (4) the applicant can
accept a permit authorization and thereby agree to comply with all the terms and
conditions of that permit, including whatever mitigation requirements the Corps has
determined to be necessary; (5) undertaking any activity in reliance upon the subject
permit authorization without requesting an AJD constitutes the applicant's acceptance
of the use of the PJD; (6) accepting a permit authorization (e.g., signing a proffered
individual permit) or undertaking any activity in reliance on any form of Corps permit
authorization based on a PJD constitutes agreement that all aquatic resources in the
review area affected in any way by that activity will be treated as jurisdictional, and
waives any challenge to such jurisdiction in any administrative or judicial compliance
or enforcement action, or in any administrative appeal or in any Federal court; and (7)
whether the applicant elects to use either an AJD or a PJD, the JD will be processed
as soon as practicable. Further, an AJD, a proffered individual permit (and all terms
and conditions contained therein), or individual permit denial can be administratively
appealed pursuant to 33 C.F.R. Part 331. If, during an administrative appeal, it
becomes appropriate to make an official determination whether geographic
jurisdiction exists over aquatic resources in the review area, or to provide an official
delineation of jurisdictional aquatic resources in the review area, the Corps will
provide an AJD to accomplish that result, as soon as is practicable. This PJD finds
that there "may be" waters of the U.S. and/or that there "may be" navigable waters of
the U.S. on the subject review area, and identifies all aquatic features in the review
area that could be affected by the proposed activity, based on the following
information:

SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for PJD (check all that apply)
Checked items should be included in subject file. Appropriately reference sources
below where indicated for all checked items:
■❑ Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor:
Map:
❑ Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor.
❑ Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report. Rationale:
❑ 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:
1:12,000 Valle Crucis, NC
■❑ Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:
❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
❑ State/local wetland inventory map(s):
❑ FEMA/FIRM maps:
❑ 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: .(National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929)
■❑ Photographs: ❑ Aerial (Name & Date):
or ■❑ Other (Name & Date): Dutch WNC Stream Initiative Photosheets
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
❑ Other information (please specify):
IMPORTANT NOTE: The information recorded on this form has not necessarily
been verified by the Corps and should not be relied upon for later jurisdictional
determinations.
Signature and date of
Regulatory staff member
completing PJD
Signature and date of
person requesting PJD
(REQUIRED, unless obtaining
the signature is impracticable)'
' Districts may establish timeframes for requestor to return signed PJD forms. If the requestor does not respond
within the established time frame, the district may presume concurrence and no additional follow up is
necessary prior to finalizing an action.

Dutch Creek WNCSI Project SHPO Map
v TDD1 V4LLE CRUCIS
HI Tl' I- 'ISTRICT 2DD5
fir, �•}. �� � i'� � - .
Proct Area r �.
r` ..'..
May 22, 2019
NR Points fDational NRBoundaries
NR Individual Listin Register Boundary
* NR Listing, Gone
Eloundary of Destroyed/Removed NR Listing
NRHD Center Point SL Points
SL Individual Entry
7J81,
WTDDD3 Mast General
•Y Stare 197a '
{� Y
"7s1�� a a.•
■.
1:10,031
0 0.05 0.1 0.2 mi
0 0.1 0.2
NC Center for Geographic Information & Analysis
0.4 km
L• i

Dutch Creek WNCSI Project Wetland Map
F `
0
41
1'
Sample ID Wetland? Wetland Imacts (Ac.)
<: = 14 S1 No 0
•Source: E-sri, DigitalGiobe, GeoERe, E rthstar Geographies, ONES/Airbus DS, USDA, USES, er—leU-RID,
,� IGN, and the GIS User Community
Legend N °`'�'��
087.5175 350 525 700,E
Streams Feet
Project Parecls oo tac'
ASulrin'b+
)t to be construed as surveyed data. All boundaries are approximate GIS data taken from public data sources. BFEC 2019.

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Dutch Creek Phase II City/County: Valle Crucis, Watauga Sampling Date: 8/15/19
Applicant/Owner: Blue Ridge Conservancy State: NC Sampling Point: S1
Investigator(s): Josselyn Lucan, Paige Seago, Jordan Bailey Section, Township, Range: Valle Crucis, NC
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 0-1
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR N Lat: 36.21209 Long:-81.7808 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Reddie's loam NWI classification: None
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X within a Wetland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
Man-made ditch with no obvious hydrology
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
—Surface Water (Al) —True
Aquatic Plants (1314)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2) —Hydrogen
Sulfide Odor (Cl)
_ Drainage Patterns (B10)
—Saturation (A3) —Oxidized
Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
—Moss Trim Lines (B16)
—Water Marks (B1) —Presence
of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
—Sediment Deposits (132) —Recent
Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (133) _Thin
Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_Algal Mat or Crust (134) —Other
(Explain in Remarks)
—Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
—Iron Deposits (135)
X Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
—Shallow Aquitard (D3)
—Water-Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: S1
Absolute
Dominant
Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30'x30' )
% Cover
Species?
Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
1.
Salix nigra
15
Yes
OBL
Number of Dominant Species
2.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A)
3.
Total Number of Dominant
4.
Species Across All Strata: 3 (B)
5.
Percent of Dominant Species
6.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 66.7% (A/B)
7.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
15
=Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover:
8 20% of total cover:
3
OBL species 16 x 1 = 16
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15'xl5'
)
FACW species 82 x 2 = 164
1.
Rubus allegheniensis
50
Yes
FAC species 0 x 3 = 0
2.
Rosa multiflora
10
No
FACU
FACU species 11 x 4 = 44
3.
UPL species 3 x 5 = 15
4.
Column Totals: 112 (A) 239 (B)
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.13
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9.
3 - Prevalence Index is <_3.01
60
=Total Cover
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
50% of total cover:
30 20% of total cover:
12
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5'x5' )
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1.
Phalaris arundinacea
80
Yes
FACW
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
2.
Impatiens capensis
2
No
FACW
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
3. Carex lurida 1 No OBL
4.
Polygonum sagittatum
1
No
OBL
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
5.
Ipomoea purpurea
3
No
UPL
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
6.
Polygonum sp.
1
No
FACU
height.
7.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
8.
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
9
(1 m) tall.
10.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
11.
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
88
=Total Cover
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
50% of total cover:
44 20% of total cover:
18
height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Hydrophytic
=Total Cover
Vegetation
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Present? Yes X No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Most of the herb stratum was dead/dormant. Seed pods could not be located making identification to species level difficult. However, area appears to
host upland community of plants in general.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: S1
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Types Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-6 10YR 4/6 100 Loamy/Clayey
6-12 10YR 4/2 80 10YR 5/1 18 D M Loamy/Clayey 2% 7.5YR 4/5 Concentration, Pore Lining
D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
—Black Histic (A3)
—Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
_2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
—Sandy Mucky Mineral(S1)
—Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
—Sandy Redox (S5)
—Stripped Matrix (S6)
Dark Surface (S7)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
_2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
—Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
—Red Parent Material (F21)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
_Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

Western North Carolina Stream
Initiative: Dutch Creek Phase II
Dutch Creek Wetland Delineation Photosheets
Enw
o�
c�
Site Visit: 8/15/19

Site of core sample
7
S1 &Core
12 inch core sample

National Flood Hazard Layer FIRMette
O FEMA Legend
36° 12' 59.33"N
0 250 500 1,000 1,500 2,000
SEE FIS REPORT FOR DETAILED LEGEND AND INDEX MAP FOR FIRM PANEL LAYOUT
Without Base Flood Elevation (BFE)
Zone A. V. A99
SPECIAL FLOOD With BFE or Depth zone AE, AD, AH, VE, AR
HAZARD AREAS Regulatory Floodway
0.2%Annual Chance Flood Hazard, Areas
of 1%annual chance flood with average
depth less than one foot or with drainage
areas of less than one square mile zone x
„�I Future Conditions 1%Annual
Chance Flood Hazard zone x
pr Area with Reduced Flood Risk due to
ITHER AREAS OF Levee. See Notes. zone x
FLOOD HAZARD FA d' Area with Flood Risk due to Leveezono D
NO SCREEN Area of Minimal Flood Hazard zone x
Q Effective LOMRs
OTHER AREAS Area of Undetermined Flood Hazard zone D
GENERAL ---- Channel, Culvert, or Storm Sewer
STRUCTURES IIIIIIII Levee, Dike, or Floodwall
e xo.s Cross Sections with 1%Annual Chance
17•5 Water Surface Elevation
o- — — Coastal Transect
—513— Base Flood Elevation Line (BFE)
Limit of Study
Jurisdiction Boundary
-- --- Coastal Transect Baseline
OTHER _ Profile Baseline
FEATURES Hydrographic Feature
Digital Data Available N
No Digital Data Available
MAP PANELS ® Unmapped
9 The pin displayed on the map is an approximate
point selected by the user and does not represent
an authoritative property location.
This map complies with FEMA's standards for the use of
digital flood maps if it is not void as described below.
The basemap shown complies with FEMA's basemap
accuracy standards
The flood hazard information is derived directly from the
authoritative NFHL web services provided by FEMA. This map
was exported on 5/22/2019 at 3:53:50 PM and does not
reflect changes or amendments subsequent to this date and
time. The NFHL and effective information may change or
become superseded by new data over time.
This map image is void if the one or more of the following map
elements do not appear: basemap imagery, flood zone labels,
legend, scale bar, map creation date, community identifiers,
FIRM panel number, and FIRM effective date. Map images for
unmapped and unmodernized areas cannot be used for
regulatory purposes.

Brushy Fork Environmental Consulting
Dutch Creek WNCSI Project
Site Photosheets
Photographed by BFEC on 02/11/16 & 06/17/2019

-�•$, i -k., _ C v"as sawy.� tl°'��` ,�#i �v �V .n, Y ��'N -44
! g•( "�I - .1i, . iP `� ' Via, yr; a.y� � `�, � � �,�ti i �
OF
i; Q t�^
1 4 ik Aa. ^ Law . I S I '(y < f�, i .' 1 ♦` lid
�p;-��i� � rA4'�� �_ �� '-s S�1►. �^�. �.��. {:e
Lis

r j y
u sm
'� � _ p• Mi . _ 45�4 , � ` � _#ice �, � q._

View upstream along Dutch Creek showing
undercut banks on stream right.
Recent mass wasting of stream banks is evident at
cross section 2.
3

k � '
i

View upstream along UT1 showing denuded banks
resulting from cattle access to stream. View downstream from culverted stream crossing at
cross section 6 showing cattle trampled banks.
5

View downstream below cross section 7
showing existing cattle crossing.
View upstream from cross section 8 on UT1
showing cattle trampling on banks.
L

Stream left on UT1 at cross section 9
showing near vertical bank.
View downstream from cross section 9 on UT1
showing steep bank on stream right.
7

Vertical bank erosion on UT1 stream left at
cross section 10.
View downstream from cross section 10,
showing steep bank on stream right.
�7

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Asheville Ecological Services Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, NC 28801-1082
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
http://www.fws.2ov/nc-es/es/cog fr
In Reply Refer To:
Consultation Code: 04EN1000-2019-SLI-0377
Event Code: 04EN1000-2019-E-00975
Project Name: Dutch Creek WNCSI Project
71.
Fisdi s WIIJJUrV.
14L'][ ,N,pf
t
May 29, 2019
Subject: List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project
location, and/or may be affected by your proposed project
To Whom It May Concern:
The attached species list identifies threatened, endangered, proposed and candidate species, as
well as proposed and final designated critical habitat, that may occur within the boundary of your
proposed project and/or may be affected by your proposed project. Although not required by
section 7, many agencies request species lists to start the informal consultation process and begin
their fulfillment of the requirements under section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act (Act) of
1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
This list, along with other helpful resources, is also available on the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (Service) Asheville Field Office's (AFO) website: htips://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/
cntylist/nc_counties.html. The AFO website list includes "species of concern" species that could
potentially be placed on the federal list of threatened and endangered species in the future. Also
available are:
Design and Construction Recommendations
htlps://www.fws.Gov/asheville/htmls/Troject review/Recommendations.html
Optimal Survey Times for Federally Listed Plants
htlps://www.fws.gov/nc-es/Tlant�/plant survey
Northern long-eared bat Guidance
hLtps://www.fws.lzov/asheville/htmls/Troject reviewNLEB in WNC.htmI
Predictive Habitat Model for Aquatic Species
htlps://www.fws.gov/asheville/htmls/Maxent/Maxent.html

05/29/2019 Event Code: 04EN1000-2019-E-00975
New information based on updated surveys, changes in the abundance and distribution of
species, changed habitat conditions, or other factors could require modifications of these lists.
Please note that under 50 CFR 402.12(e) of the regulations implementing section 7 of the Act,
the accuracy of the species lists should be verified after 90 days. This verification can be
completed formally or informally as desired. The Service recommends that verification be
completed by visiting the ECOS-IPaC website or the AFO website (the AFO website dates each
county list with the day of the most recent update/change) at regular intervals during project
planning and implementation for updates to species lists and information. An updated list may be
requested through the ECOS-IPaC system by completing the same process used to receive the
enclosed list or by going to the AFO website.
The purpose of the Act is to provide a means whereby threatened and endangered species and the
ecosystems upon which they depend may be conserved. Under sections 7(a)(1) and 7(a)(2) of the
Act and its implementing regulations (50 CFR 402 et seq.), Federal agencies are required to
utilize their authorities to carry out programs for the conservation of threatened and endangered
species and to determine whether projects may affect threatened and endangered species and/or
designated critical habitat.
A Biological Assessment is required for construction projects (or other undertakings having
similar physical impacts) that are major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the
human environment as defined in the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)
(c)). For projects other than major construction activities, the Service suggests that a Biological
Evaluation similar to a Biological Assessment be prepared to determine whether the project may
affect listed or proposed species and/or designated or proposed critical habitat. Recommended
contents of a Biological Assessment are described at 50 CFR 402.12 and on our office's website
at https://www.fws.gov/asheville/htmis/project_review/assessment_guidance.html.
If a Federal agency (or their non-federal representative) determines, based on the Biological
Assessment or Biological Evaluation, that listed species and/or designated critical habitat may be
affected by the proposed project, the agency is required to consult with the Service pursuant to
50 CFR 402. In addition, the Service recommends that candidate species, proposed species, and
proposed critical habitat be addressed within the consultation. More information on the
regulations and procedures for section 7 consultation, including the role of permit or license
applicants, can be found in the "Endangered Species Consultation Handbook" at: http://
www.fws.gov/endangered/esa-librgI3L/Vdf/TOC-GLOS.PDF.
Though the bald eagle is no longer protected under the Endangered Species Act, please be aware
that bald and golden eagles are protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16
U.S.C. 668 et seq.), and projects affecting these species may require additional consultation (see
https://www.fws.gov/southeast/our-services/permits/eagles/). Wind energy projects should follow
the wind energy guidelines(http://www.fws.gov/windenergy/) for minimizing impacts to
migratory birds (including bald and golden eagles) and bats.
Guidance for minimizing impacts to migratory birds for projects including communications
towers (e.g., cellular, digital television, radio, and emergency broadcast) can be found at: http://

05/29/2019 Event Code: 04EN1000-2019-E-00975
3
www.fws. o� rg atorybirds/CurrentBirdIssues/Hazards/towers/towers.htm;
http://www.towerkill.com; and http://www.fws. omi rg atorybirds/CurrentBirdIssues/Hazards/
towers/comtow.html.
We appreciate your concern for threatened and endangered species. The Service encourages
Federal agencies to include conservation of threatened and endangered species into their project
planning to further the purposes of the Act. Please include the Consultation Tracking Number in
the header of this letter with any request for consultation or correspondence about your project
that you submit to our office.
Attachment(s):
• Official Species List
• Migratory Birds
• Wetlands

05/29/2019 Event Code: 04EN 1 000-2019-E-00975
Official Species List
This list is provided pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and fulfills the
requirement for Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary of the Interior information whether
any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of a proposed
action".
This species list is provided by:
Asheville Ecological Services Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, NC 28801-1082
[phone]

05/29/2019 Event Code: 04EN 1 000-2019-E-00975 2
Project Summary
Consultation Code: 04EN1000-2019-SLI-0377
Event Code: 04EN1000-2019-E-00975
Project Name: Dutch Creek WNCSI Project
Project Type: STREAM / WATERBODY / CANALS / LEVEES / DIKES
Project Description: Stabilize stream banks on approximately 940 linear feet of Dutch Creek
and an unnamed tributary.
Project Location:
Approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps: https:
www.google.com/mgps/Tlace/36.212909736957315N81.78119465727706W
9
Counties: Watauga, NC
Valle Crucis

05/29/2019 Event Code: 04EN1000-2019-E-00975 3
Endangered Species Act Species
There is a total of 9 threatened, endangered, or candidate species on this species list.
Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include
species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species
list because a project could affect downstream species.
IPaC does not display listed species or critical habitats under the sole jurisdiction of NOAA
Fisheriesl, as USFWS does not have the authority to speak on behalf of NOAA and the
Department of Commerce.
See the "Critical habitats" section below for those critical habitats that lie wholly or partially
within your project area under this office's jurisdiction. Please contact the designated FWS office
if you have questions.
NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an
office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of
Commerce.
Mammals
NAME
Carolina Northern Flying Squirrel Glaucomys sabrinus coloratus
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws. og v/ecp/species/2657
Gray Bat Myotis grisescens
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws. og v/ecp/species/6329
Northern Long-eared Bat Myotis septentrionalis
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws. og v/ecp/species/9045
Virginia Big -eared Bat Corynorhinus (=Plecotus) townsendii virginianus
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location is outside the critical habitat.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws. og v/ecp/species/8369
Arachnids
NAME
Spruce -fir Moss Spider Microhexura montivaga
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location is outside the critical habitat.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws. og v/ecp/species/4801
STATUS
Endangered
Endangered
Threatened
Endangered
STATUS
Endangered

05/29/2019
Event Code: 04EN1000-2019-E-00975
Flowering Plants
NAM L STATUS
Blue Ridge Goldenrod Solidago spithamaea Threatened
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws. og v/eo/species/5821
Heller's Blazingstar Liatris helleri Threatened
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/eo/species/5962
Roan Mountain Bluet Hedyotis purpurea var montana Endangered
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws. og v/eo/species/1087
Spreading Avens Geum radiatum Endangered
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws. og v/eo/species/6854
Critical habitats
THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA UNDER THIS OFFICE'S
JURISDICTION.

05/29/2019
Event Code: 04EN1000-2019-E-00975
Migratory Birds
Certain birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act! and the Bald and Golden Eagle
Protection Acts.
Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to
migratory birds, eagles, and their habitats should follow appropriate regulations and consider
implementing appropriate conservation measures, as described below.
1. The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918.
2. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940.
3. 50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a)
The birds listed below are birds of particular concern either because they occur on the USFWS
Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) list or warrant special attention in your project location.
To learn more about the levels of concern for birds on your list and how this list is generated, see
the FAQ below. This is not a list of every bird you may find in this location, nor a guarantee that
every bird on this list will be found in your project area. To see exact locations of where birders
and the general public have sighted birds in and around your project area, visit the E-bird data
mapping tool (Tip: enter your location, desired date range and a species on your list). For
projects that occur off the Atlantic Coast, additional maps and models detailing the relative
occurrence and abundance of bird species on your list are available. Links to additional
information about Atlantic Coast birds, and other important information about your migratory
bird list, including how to properly interpret and use your migratory bird report, can be found
below.
For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures
to reduce impacts to migratory birds on your list, click on the PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE
SUMMARY at the top of your list to see when these birds are most likely to be present and
breeding in your project area.
NAME BREEDING SEASON
Bobolink Dolichonyx oryzivorus Breeds May 20 to
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental Jul 31
USA and Alaska.
Eastern Whip -poor -will Antrostomus vociferus Breeds May 1 to
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental Aug 20
USA and Alaska.
Northern Saw -whet Owl Aegolius acadicus acadicus Breeds Mar 1 to Jul
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation 31
Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA

05/29/2019 Event Code: 04EN1000-2019-E-00975 2
NAME
BREEDING SEASON
Prairie Warbler Dendroica discolor Breeds May 1 to Jul
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental 31
USA and Alaska.
Red-headed Woodpecker Melanerpes erythrocephalus Breeds May 10 to
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental Sep 10
USA and Alaska.
Rusty Blackbird Euphagus carolinus Breeds elsewhere
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental
USA and Alaska.
Wood Thrush Hylocichla mustelina Breeds May 10 to
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental Aug 31
USA and Alaska.
Yellow -bellied Sapsucker sphyrapicus varius Breeds May 10 to
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Jul 15
Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA
https://ecos.fws. og v/eo/species/8792
Probability Of Presence Summary
The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be
present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your project
activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read and understand the
FAQ "Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report" before using or attempting
to interpret this report.
Probability of Presence (■)
Each green bar represents the bird's relative probability of presence in the 1 Okm grid cell(s) your
project overlaps during a particular week of the year. (A year is represented as 12 4-week
months.) A taller bar indicates a higher probability of species presence. The survey effort (see
below) can be used to establish a level of confidence in the presence score. One can have higher
confidence in the presence score if the corresponding survey effort is also high.
How is the probability of presence score calculated? The calculation is done in three steps:
1. The probability of presence for each week is calculated as the number of survey events in
the week where the species was detected divided by the total number of survey events for
that week. For example, if in week 12 there were 20 survey events and the Spotted Towhee
was found in 5 of them, the probability of presence of the Spotted Towhee in week 12 is
0.25.
2. To properly present the pattern of presence across the year, the relative probability of
presence is calculated. This is the probability of presence divided by the maximum

05/29/2019 Event Code: 04EN 1 000-2019-E-00975 3
probability of presence across all weeks. For example, imagine the probability of presence
in week 20 for the Spotted Towhee is 0.05, and that the probability of presence at week 12
(0.25) is the maximum of any week of the year. The relative probability of presence on
week 12 is 0.25/0.25 = 1; at week 20 it is 0.05/0.25 = 0.2.
3. The relative probability of presence calculated in the previous step undergoes a statistical
conversion so that all possible values fall between 0 and 10, inclusive. This is the
probability of presence score.
Breeding Season( )
Yellow bars denote a very liberal estimate of the time -frame inside which the bird breeds across
its entire range. If there are no yellow bars shown for a bird, it does not breed in your project
area.
Survey Effort (1)
Vertical black lines superimposed on probability of presence bars indicate the number of surveys
performed for that species in the IOkm grid cell(s) your project area overlaps. The number of
surveys is expressed as a range, for example, 33 to 64 surveys.
No Data (—)
A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week.
Survey Timeframe
Surveys from only the last 10 years are used in order to ensure delivery of currently relevant
information. The exception to this is areas off the Atlantic coast, where bird returns are based on
all years of available data, since data in these areas is currently much more sparse.
■ probability of presence breeding season 1 survey effort — no data
SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
Bobolink ---- ---- ---- - --�I Jill JJ --
---- ---1 ---- ---- ----
BCC Rangcwidc (COI)
Eastern Whip -Poor- ---- ---- ---- - Jill Jill lij III- ---- ---- ---- ----
will
BCC Rangcwidc (COI)
Northern Saw whet ---- ---- Jill Jill Jill Jill Jill — — — — — — — -
- — — -
- — — -
- — — —
Owl
BCC -BCR
Prairie Warbler ---- ---- +—�—
BCC Rangewide (CON) Jill Jill Jill
Red-headed
Woodpecker — — — — — — — — — — — — -4--
BCC Rangewide (CON) 1— —111 Jill Jill Jill 11-- — — — — — — — — — — — —
Rusty Blackbird — — — — — — — +--- --+— +—
BCC Rangewide (COI)
BCC
d ��dc (CON)---- ---- — — — — +--- —III Jill Jill Jill — — — — — — — — — — —

05/29/2019 Event Code: 04EN1000-2019-E-00975 4
SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
Yellow-bellied--
Sapsucker—�—
BCC -BCR
Additional information can be found using the following links:
• Birds of Conservation Concern http://www.fws.�zov/birds/management/managed-species/
birds-of-conservation-concern.php
• Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds htip://www.fws.gov/birds/
mana e�project-assessment-tools-and-guidance/
conservation-measures.php
• Nationwide conservation measures for birds http://www.fws. o� rg ato . bra irds/pdf/
management/nationwidestandardconservationmeasures.pdf
Migratory Birds FAQ
Tell me more about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts
to migratory birds.
Nationwide Conservation Measures describes measures that can help avoid and minimize
impacts to all birds at any location year round. Implementation of these measures is particularly
important when birds are most likely to occur in the project area. When birds may be breeding in
the area, identifying the locations of any active nests and avoiding their destruction is a very
helpful impact minimization measure. To see when birds are most likely to occur and be breeding
in your project area, view the Probability of Presence Summary. Additional measures and/or
permits may be advisable depending on the type of activity you are conducting and the type of
infrastructure or bird species present on your project site.
What does IPaC use to generate the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specified
location?
The Migratory Bird Resource List is comprised of USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern
(BCQ and other species that may warrant special attention in your project location.
The migratory bird list generated for your project is derived from data provided by the Avian
Knowledge Network (Aj Nn. The AKN data is based on a growing collection of survey, banding,
and citizen science datasets and is queried and filtered to return a list of those birds reported as
occurring in the IOkm grid cell(s) which your project intersects, and that have been identified as
warranting special attention because they are a BCC species in that area, an eagle (Eagle
requirements may apply), or a species that has a particular vulnerability to offshore activities or
development.
Again, the Migratory Bird Resource list includes only a subset of birds that may occur in your
project area. It is not representative of all birds that may occur in your project area. To get a list
of all birds potentially present in your project area, please visit the AKN Phenologyy Tool.

05/29/2019 Event Code: 04EN1000-2019-E-00975 5
What does IPaC use to generate the probability of presence graphs for the migratory birds
potentially occurring in my specified location?
The probability of presence graphs associated with your migratory bird list are based on data
provided by the Avian Knowledge Network (AKN). This data is derived from a growing
collection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets .
Probability of presence data is continuously being updated as new and better information
becomes available. To learn more about how the probability of presence graphs are produced and
how to interpret them, go the Probability of Presence Summary and then click on the "Tell me
about these graphs" link.
How do I know if a bird is breeding, wintering, migrating or present year-round in my
project area?
To see what part of a particular bird's range your project area falls within (i.e. breeding,
wintering, migrating or year-round), you may refer to the following resources: The Cornell Lab
of Ornithology All About Birds Bird Guide, or (if you are unsuccessful in locating the bird of
interest there), the Cornell Lab of Ornithology Neotropical Birds u�. If a bird on your
migratory bird species list has a breeding season associated with it, if that bird does occur in your
project area, there may be nests present at some point within the timeframe specified. If "Breeds
elsewhere" is indicated, then the bird likely does not breed in your project area.
What are the levels of concern for migratory birds?
Migratory birds delivered through IPaC fall into the following distinct categories of concern:
1. "BCC Rangewide" birds are Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) that are of concern
throughout their range anywhere within the USA (including Hawaii, the Pacific Islands,
Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands);
2. "BCC - BCR" birds are BCCs that are of concern only in particular Bird Conservation
Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA; and
3. "Non -BCC - Vulnerable" birds are not BCC species in your project area, but appear on
your list either because of the Eagle requirements (for eagles) or (for non -eagles)
potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities
(e.g. offshore energy development or longline fishing).
Although it is important to try to avoid and minimize impacts to all birds, efforts should be made,
in particular, to avoid and minimize impacts to the birds on this list, especially eagles and BCC
species of rangewide concern. For more information on conservation measures you can
implement to help avoid and minimize migratory bird impacts and requirements for eagles,
please see the FAQs for these topics.
Details about birds that are potentially affected by offshore projects
For additional details about the relative occurrence and abundance of both individual bird species
and groups of bird species within your project area off the Atlantic Coast, please visit the
Northeast Ocean Data Portal. The Portal also offers data and information about other taxa besides
birds that may be helpful to you in your project review. Alternately, you may download the bird

05/29/2019 Event Code: 04EN1000-2019-E-00975 6
model results files underlying the portal maps through the NOAA NCCOS Integrative Statistical
Modeling and Predictive Mapping of Marine Bird Distributions and Abundance on the Atlantic
Outer Continental Shelf project webpage.
Bird tracking data can also provide additional details about occurrence and habitat use
throughout the year, including migration. Models relying on survey data may not include this
information. For additional information on marine bird tracking data, see the Diving Bird Study
and the nanotag studies or contact Caleb Spiegel or Pam LOI ng.
What if I have eagles on my list?
If your project has the potential to disturb or kill eagles, you may need to obtain a permit to avoid
violating the Eagle Act should such impacts occur.
Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report
The migratory bird list generated is not a list of all birds in your project area, only a subset of
birds of priority concern. To learn more about how your list is generated, and see options for
identifying what other birds may be in your project area, please see the FAQ "What does IPaC
use to generate the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specified location". Please be
aware this report provides the "probability of presence" of birds within the 10 km grid cell(s) that
overlap your project; not your exact project footprint. On the graphs provided, please also look
carefully at the survey effort (indicated by the black vertical bar) and for the existence of the "no
data" indicator (a red horizontal bar). A high survey effort is the key component. If the survey
effort is high, then the probability of presence score can be viewed as more dependable. In
contrast, a low survey effort bar or no data bar means a lack of data and, therefore, a lack of
certainty about presence of the species. This list is not perfect; it is simply a starting point for
identifying what birds of concern have the potential to be in your project area, when they might
be there, and if they might be breeding (which means nests might be present). The list helps you
know what to look for to confirm presence, and helps guide you in knowing when to implement
conservation measures to avoid or minimize potential impacts from your project activities,
should presence be confirmed. To learn more about conservation measures, visit the FAQ "Tell
me about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory
birds" at the bottom of your migratory bird trust resources page.

05/29/2019 Event Code: 04EN1000-2019-E-00975
Wetlands
Impacts to NWI wetlands and other aquatic habitats may be subject to regulation under Section
404 of the Clean Water Act, or other State/Federal statutes.
For more information please contact the Regulatory Program of the local U.S. Armorps of
Engineers District.
Please note that the NWI data being shown may be out of date. We are currently working to
update our NWI data set. We recommend you verify these results with a site visit to determine
the actual extent of wetlands on site.
RIVERINE
• R3UBH