20091094 Ver 1_Stream Call Letter_20071120

THE LOUIS BERGER GROUP, INC.
1001 Wade Ave. Raleigh, North Carolina 27605-3323 V /?!\
Tel [phone] Fax [phone] wmw.louisberger.com
/?OV ?sU )???S \
November 13, 2007NOFH? . 4?? Q
5 Npsp, .'? 00?
Mr. Eric Alsmeyer pR?1q?7Y
US Army Corps of Engineers ko y.
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road, Suite 120 cy
Raleigh, North Carolina 27615
Re: Request for Jurisdictional Verification; Proposed Bridge Replacement Site,
Bridge No. 43 on SR 1112, TIP No. B-4600, Person County, NC
Dear Mr. Alsmeyer,
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to replace Bridge
No. 43 on SR 1112 (Charlie Long Road), spanning the South Flat River in Person
County (Figure 1). Bridge No. 43 is a 41-foot-long two-lane bridge with a timber floor on
I-beams overlaid by asphalt, built in 1955. The project study area is approximately 41.39
acres. NCDOT has contracted with The Louis Berger Group Inc. (Berger) to conduct
jurisdictional waters surveys within the project study area. The jurisdictional waters
surveys were conducted on August 7, 2007 using the three parameter method
described in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (USAGE,
1987). All surveyed points were collected by submeter GPS for submission to the
USACE.
Within the project study area, Berger surveyed the banks of the South Flat River and a
tributary to it which enters the river approximately 275 feet northeast of the bridge
(Figure 2). This stream was assessed a DWQ score of_31 b The stream is shown on
the USGS topographic map as an unnamed tributary to the South Flat River.
Approximately 1,085 stream feet of the South Flat River and 188 stream feet of the
unnamed tributary were identified within the project study area. No other potentially
jurisdictional waters were identified within the project study area.
The existing bridge structure spans the channel with the endbents approximately at the
tops of left and right banks and is approximately 20 feet wide. Preliminary design for
the proposed replacement structure positions the endbents upslope from the tops of the
banks outside of the channel. The proposed alternatives would be approximately 31
feet wide. The approach slopes will be widened to accommodate the increased width of
the roadbed, however no fill will be placed within the channel.. Impacts to the river
would be limited to temporary impacts from possible disturbance of substrates as the
existing structure is demolished, increased sediment loading due to construction
activities, and increased thermal loading as the shading canopy is reduced by clearing
for the increased width of the approach slopes, and a slight increase in thermal loading
as an additional clearing will be required for the increased width of the approach slopes.
No new or additional impacts from pier construction are expected for this project.
No impacts to other jurisdictional waters or wetlands are anticipated
Berger is requesting verification of the delineated jurisdictional boundaries at this time.
Please contact us at your first convenience to discuss any questions and schedule a
site inspection. In the interest of time, we will attempt to coordinate the scheduling such
that both the USACE and NCDWQ may attend the same site visit.
Best regards,
Ray Bode, PWS
Senior Environmental Scientist
The Louis Berger Group Inc.
1001 Wade Ave.
Suite 400
Raleigh NC 27605
main: 919-866-4400
direct: 919-866-4420
fax: [phone]
cc: Mr. Rob Ridings,_NCDWQ7
2

Detour during
bridge replacement
a d Lep¢nd
Prgea smMArea Q
ht? :y
USGS Topographk 5}mtwk
t bJ + .. RDADS AND RELATED FEATURES
?y lA ?/ Pkw na?a.RUmpRdduauHawn mam ere rM aambN
? , / ¢ pRaaarl aecnmarc>Igrain.TMfe rum ell WfekC a
y,??at3 ?,y? Prm?a aeasaM m.edeaam.v rnpa aevraaac
p? ? Pmaarr p? fmtt
- re w #`"' ??r ., Saco?ary hiDlmN - ? ..-
T `" Aa'S C tight 60 rood .. ..
../ a x Vsx ^ Eight do"d Fade"
tight duly mm ar ea'
,cnlight Min rwa mrr
a ,.e ``i re`T?"'ir ,?r Light naly read Pauliai
i , umvwa ed wr -----
------------ ------
4miroad
ProjectStudyArea'zi

Project O had
--
-' 4leayar0 y??'=?.a
00 =1-7-1

?yfh F/Q RIVERS. EAIES. AND GXAIS

PerenmlStream
'P #^N
. Pcrvnmd mgr __ . -
u ?
\
a hgamnlfmA pteam .__. ._ _ .._
hdm,? MI
a i % tom- __
DiuPPT g MA. ".
--...t :. '
l 4
!
Pem real laEaJpona
? < ? IrtermmeMlaENLnnd .- E.;d.? ,?
_

N Figure 1. Vicinity Map
B-4600 - Bridge Replacement for NCDOT
Bridge Number 43, Person County, NC
North Carolina Department °°" of
of Transportation
0 1,250 2,500 Feet 4.30.07°
A
Figure 2. Jurisdictional Waters Map
B-4600 - Bridge Replacement for. NCDOT
Aerial taken
2 Bridge Number 43, Person County, NC
on o
phot
245 490 Feet
North Carolina Department
of Transpatlah.
8.8.07
8??
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 1D Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION 1: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:Wilmington District
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Statc:NC County/parish/borough: Person City: Hurdle Mills
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 36.29470 N, Long. -79.06490 E.
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: South Flat River
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: South Flat River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 03020201010020
® Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
El Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc...) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different 1D form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Q Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
® Field Determination. Date(s): 8/7/2007
SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. BHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Are "navigable waters of the US." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the review
area. [Required]
Q Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
® Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain: The Tar River has been used for transporting goods in the past and the river powered many grist mills.
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Me "waters ojrhe 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): t
Q TNWs, including territorial seas
Q Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
® Relatively permanent waters' (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
E] Non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Q Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
0 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
Q Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
Q 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: 1283 linear feet: 20 width (ft) and/or acres.
Wetlands: acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: Established`by-OHWM?
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 IILF.
SECTION Ill: CWA ANALYSIS
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TN Ws. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete
Section III.A.I and Section III.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections I11.A.1 and 2
and Section III.D.1.; otherwise, see Section III.B below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW: South Flat River.
Summarize rationale supporting determination: The South Flat River flows to Lake Michie which is used for power generation and
recreation.
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 IILC below.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: 1200aces
Drainage area: 490 aches
Average annual rainfall: 5.85 inches
Average annual snowfall: inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
® Tributary flows directly into TNW.
? Tributary flows through Pick+L'ist tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are 1 (oe less) river miles from TNW.
Project waters are PlekLiSt river miles from RPW.
o-h le's.,
Project waters are 1§(orfle,"s*s) aerial (straight) miles from TNW
Project waters are Pi&Tist aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNW': Stream flows directly to TNW.
Note that the instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and
West.
' Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.
Tributary stream order, if known: 3.
(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: 10 feet
Average depth: 2 feet
Average side slopes: 711.
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: Somewhat incised with minor bank
failures. Banks are well vegetated.
Presence of run/riffle/pool complexes. Explain: Feature sequence is appropriate for stream.
Tributary geometry: Meandering
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): 4 %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: easo?"° na } bw
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year: IT,
Describe flow regime:
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: Discrete a? ndc &]. Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: No. 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.' Explain:
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determ
Q High Tide Line indicated by: Q
? 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: Water is clear.
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
'A natural or man-made discontinuity in the OH WM does not necessarily severjurisdiction (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.
IN) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
® Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width): 300 feet.
? Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
? Habitat for:
? Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
? Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
? Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
? Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non-TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size: acres
Wetland type. Explain:
Wetland quality. Explain:
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non-TN
W:
Flow is: Pick'List. Explain:
Surface flow is: .iek Liist
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Unknown. Explain findings:
? Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adiacencv Determination with Non-TNW:
? Directly abutting
? Not directly abutting
? Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
? Ecological connection. Explain:
? Separated by bernr/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are $i&List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are?Pick "Gist aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: Pick Lis
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the Pick' List floodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
? Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
? Vegetation type/percent cover. Explain:
? Habitat for:
? Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
? Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings: .
? Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
? Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis: Pick-List
Approximately ( ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.
For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and/or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
1. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section III.D:
2. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non-RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section 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:
® TN Ws: 1095 linear feet 20 width (ft), Or, acres.
El 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: NCDWQ Stream Rating Form attached.
Q Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally:
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
® Tributary waters: 190 linear feetl0width (ft).
Q Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
3. Non-RPWs 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):
tc 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.
Q Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
El 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:
ED Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section 111.6 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.
Q 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.
E 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.
j]a Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
(] Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1-6), or
Q 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):'a
s?Q which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
Q from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
Q which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
Q Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
Other factors. Explain:
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
'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.
Provide estimates forjurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
ED Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
0 Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Q Wetlands: acres.
F. NON-JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Q 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
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:
Q 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 forjurisdiction (check all that apply):
0 Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
Q Lakes/ponds: acres.
Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
Q 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:
Q Corps navigable waters' study:
Q 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 Hurdle Mills.
® USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: 1990, Soil Survey of Person County, NC.
El National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
Q FEMA/FIRM maps:
Q 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
Q Photographs: ? Aerial (Name & Date):
or ? Other (Name & Date):
Previous deternimation(s). File no. and date of response letter:
Applicable/supporting case law:
Eg Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:
B4fiO0, STREAM Ss
USACE A1D# DWQ # Site # (indicate on attached map)I
M STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: NCDOT 2. Evaluator's name: Bode, Johnson
3. Date of evaluation: 8/7/07 4. Time of evaluation:
5. Name of stream: UT South Flat River
7. Approximate drainage area: 1200 Acres
9. Length of reach evaluated:
190 Feet
11 Site coordinates (if known): Prefer in decimal degrees.
6. River basin: Neuse
8. Stream order: 3
10. County: Persor
12. Subdivision name (if any):
Latitude (ex. 34.872312): 36.2947 Longitude (ex. - 77.556611): -79.0649
Method location determined (circle): GPS Topo Sheet Ortho (Aerial) Photo/GIS Other GIS Other Field
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location): Stream is located
approximately 275 feet east of Bridge No 43 on SR 1112 (Charlie Long Road)spanning the South Flat River
14. Proposed channel work (if any):
15. Recent weather conditions: Sunny and approximately 90 F
16. Site conditions at time of visit: Sunny and approximately 90 F
17. Identify any special waterway classification known: _ 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 FQ- If yes, estimate the water surface area:
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? EYES NO 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? j7TS NO
21. Estimated watershed land use: -% Residential -% Commercial Industrial 25 %Agricultural
50% Forested '25 % Cleared / Logged Other ( 1
22. Bankfull width: 10 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): 3
24. Channel slope down center of stream: _% Flat (Oto 2%) X % Gentle (2 to 4%) _% Moderate (4 to 100%) _% Steep (>10%
25. Channel sinuosity: -Straight X Occasional bends -Frequent meander % Very sinuous -Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on location, terrain,
vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points to each characteristic within the
range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should
reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions enter 0 in
the scoring box and provide an explanation in the comments 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 evaluated 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): 61 Comments:
Evaluator's Signature:
Date:
This channel evaluation form is irffended tc be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in gathering the
data required by the United tales 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 particular mitigation ration or requirement. Form
subject to change - version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919-8776-8441 x 26.
B4600, STREAM SB
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

CHARACTERISTICS ". ECOREGION POINT RANGE r SCORE
-
'Coastal Eiedmbrit- ....Mountain,'.
`
.
t 1 7; / persgsten poo Is stream ^,
r reseeace o rflow
P. 0 fi 5 ' y 3 4
t0 4 g 0 Sa .
?
"
` e (no'flow or saturation 0„strop flow tnax omts)£
2 rEvidence 6f:&4 tiuman alteration a +"
« s
{ -.,
-
:
r- a x
a ;
0._ 6
' 3
?? 0"' S ?, Sp.•
"
"
? f -
L _
s
?
te
alteration?itax omts ?r "
(extensive alteration 0 no ^ F ?` ?
?"` ?
?
3€

At _
s? ti 2 sRipanan?zone x r
r xn xm -fir`. r

tti0 `-6
3
x° 0 5
f 0, 4;,x
' .
(no buffer0 conb uous wide buffer=mix omts) ?= a? 'cl
?s
° 4x;
w * 7 Evidence ofnutrient'or'chemical dischargers's t 4
. .ems r? ae? z-r,,s mob, ix`$-
F° Aa, ` u';-
0? S.u 4
0 ¢41wva - 04
,
extenstvedischar es 0 modischar es3inax omts)h a . r- x
5 R 1- `,14 Groundwater°discharge
tlands etc -max omts ro
h
0
? bx s rip ssee s-we
az e
no disc
6° x f Presence of adjacent floodplam.- #
as:^ -a..n,. ' ,

=
°

4
° 0 -
!

0 4 0 •2
r
? d ittax omts)
r.I
r(no.flood lam 0 extensive*flood lam, s
?
a 7n., s a # ".g. .,r7EntteirchmmehVZ. floa66c pla ac f

"
r0-5a
Loa
a 0 4 0 2
= uentfloodm -max omts ? ?
f A dee I entrenched 0 fre .?_
t ,?,..
8 ad?acentwoc°-d
?'. `y ?,
nceof
e`se
?'?`°.? :Pr 0
'2 1
r
??
.,.
y-
u
?
(no wetlands 0 .jar a ad scent wetlands max omts
le
,,,
*a.'
9c.` Channel-.sinosit?y sT 0`__ 5 0 4 s 03
- '(extensive channeliiahon 0 °natural meander-max omts) i = a` `A,_Y x b .-

L
10:
f °> Sediment'mput z a 71-

0
5
X10 2
-1 T7_??N7 a
0 4 0 4

:.

y a
r? :<
,
(extensive de osition> 0; litt le,or, no sediment max omts)
-
.'
,
x '? ski' ?` -•
s 11. tve'rsaty?of hannel bred substrates -.; a
TSize &'d NA* 1 m `V 4,1 0 4 0 51 3
s % i
(fine ;fiomo eneous ,0,>lar e, dtverse.stzes max omts)
,12r ? r< Eviden ofch tine tsto o?wide g,
` ?0-S x a } 0. 4
r _ banks,max omts)t
(dee 1 m6sed0 stable bed &
F x'13?- ,. z''r ` PreSeiice of malo`r bankfailiires n.' t r ` ° " `a .,g,0 5 1
? ?*??' v severe erosion 0 no erosion; sable banks max omts)k, ?, Stu c?? " '^ ?."
?
C a-14:•,? v` Root,de't h and"deansto?ntianks y --r-`s
p ty s° -??`a
0` 3& µ sr$-,. v. 4
0 4? 0 5
F y (no visible rootsMO =dense roots throu hout?t ax omts i
X15;

?Impact'by agnculture bves'tock or timber production
r* Fes-

m N `
1
,0?
5

` - tt 2
- b 4 0 5'=
as ?n substantial im act 0, no evidenced ax omts 1 MA
Presence'of'riffle-pooUr`ipple poolcomplexe
' a :M
A ?• 3
0 ? G6-
edema omts
(no riffles/n' les o ool 0 well develo ".IN
? 17 a 7 a ? Habitk complexity r v - v 4
?0 6
(tittle orno habrtaYO fre uentfvaned habitats max omts)? but a
Q "18z^,? Canopy coverage ovrtstreainbedi 4>^
no shadin ve etation 0 continuous cano max omts r _ f
Substrateembeddedness f?"
" "NA* 0 4uA 0 4 Z' 4
x =
` e ructurmax omts) ,rl E
r (dee 1 embedded 0 looses
"°
s x 20, ve• crates (see page?4).a s
Pesence?of streamtn s 04
k 0
{ `0 5"S
- ?
r
? no evidence 0 common,-numerous es-max omts)
_e
t?. a

>s:s?a "?-• -
j " 21?? ,
Presence of.amphtbiansV? `'+ r b
x i.,
4 s gam-- ` 2
0 4 s?0
o nts)g7?:
no evidence O; common numerous ty es ma -
s :
422' Presence of fish'', .T- .'J' '.v
:
.?
0" 4 l 0 0
F
,- 0
4
m ..
om
(no evidence 0 :'common numerous es-max ts) x a ?
?

F23'
E, - a
E ` E'vidence of ivddhfe use -

6
rj' ?0
?
- s
(tin evidence-0 abdfidan evidence max omts) J
x
Total Points Possible `100 100' * 100 ?
L
,?
?K x?ti z -
.`
°

+
e)
first
a
t
l
RE
T rv ' 61
.
2
p
g
er on
(a
sogen
OTAL SCO r
Stream Channel SB
North Carolina Division of Water Quality- Stream Identification Form; Version 3.1
Date: /0?- Project 13- of oo Latitude: L, 3 yclye5
evaluator: - n S Site: S, F IA f TLongitude: y p) (9 )r-A/
Total Points: / /-7 Other
Stream if z 2 19 Oselleast intermittent 3? h County:
Yey?fj? e.g. Quad Name:
if 19 orperennial if a 30 I
A. Geomorphology Subtotal = 5 Absent Weak- Moderate Strong
1e. Continuous bed and bank 0 1 2 3
2. Sinuosity 0 1 2 3
3. In-channel structure: riffle-pool sequence 0 1 3
4. Soil texture or stream substrate sorting 0 1 2 3
5. Active/relic floodplain 0 2 3 -
6. Depositional bars or benches 0 1 2 3
7. Braided channel 0 1 2 3
S. Recent alluvial deposits 0 1,19 2 3
9' Natural levees 1 2 3
10. Headcuts 1 2 3
11. Grade controls 0 0. 1 1.5
12. Natural valley or drainageway 0 0.5 1 1.5
13. Second or greater order channel on existing
USGS or NRCS map or other documented
evidence.
o -0
Yes = 3
"Man-made ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
R 41..rlrninnv r6 iMnl?l= ?.? 1
14. Groundwatertlow/discharge 0 2 3
15. Water in channel and > 48 him since rain, or
Water in channel - d or growing season 0 1 3
16. Leagitter 1.5 1 0.5 0
17. Sediment on plants or debris
4 0.5 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 Yes = 1.5
C. Rinlnnv (Cuhtntnl=
206. Fibrous roots in channel 2 1 0
21b. Rooted plants in channel 3 2 1 0
22. Crayfish 0 0.5 1 1.5
23. Bivalves 1 2 3
24. Fish 0 1 1.5
25. Amphibians 0.5 1 1.5
26. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance) 0 0.5 1 1.5
27. Filamentous algae; periphyton - 0 1 2 3
28. Iron oxidizing bacteria/fungus. 0 D.5 1 1.5
29 . Welland plants in streambed FAC = 0.5; FACW = 0.75; OBI = 1.5 SAV = 2.0; Other - 0
Items 20 and 21 focus on the presence of upland plants, item 29 lotuses an me presence or aquave or weaana plants.
Sketch;
Notes: (use back side of this form for additional notes.) -
T,•br. f, ?f o ? ?nc7ee