20070481 Ver 1_401 Application_20070307

550 E WESTINGHOUSE BLVD.
1CW,, CHARLOTTE, N 28273
704-527-1177 (v) )
Carolina Wetland Services 704-527-1133 (fax) 2 0 V 7 0 4 8 1
March 15, 2007
Mr. Steve Chapin
U.S. Army Corps. of Engineers
151 Patton Avenue
Asheville, NC 28801
Subject: Pre-Construction Notification Pursuant to Nationwide Permit No. 14
and Water Quality Certification No. 3375
Lake Twitty Site
Monroe, North Carolina
Carolina Wetland Services Project No. 2007-1777
The Lake Twitty Site is located in Monroe, North Carolina, on Old Camden Road approximately'/2
mile south of the Old Camden Road - New Salem Road intersection (Figure 1, enclosed). The
purpose of this project is to develop approximately 160 acres into a single-family residential
development comprised of 116 lots. Frontier Land Surveying has contracted Carolina Wetland
Services, Inc. (CWS) to provide Section 404/401 permitting services for this project. Please see the
attached, signed Agent Certification of Authorization Form.
Applicant Name: Ron Rushing Construction Company, Mr. Ron Rushing
Contact: Frontier Land Surveying, Mr. Jeff Gordon
Mailing Address: 1394-B Walkup Avenue, Monroe, NC 28110 U1#k/0;zkR0WRJ
Phone Number of Owner/Applicant: 704-238-9726 Street Address of Project: Old Camden Road, Monroe, NC -1
Waterway: UT's to Stewarts Creek and Richardson Creek MAR ?T
Basin: Yadkin River (14U# 03040105) ??.
1A11 !
City: Monroe
County: Union
Decimal Degree Coordinate Location of Project Site: N35.04201°, W80.47280°
USGS Quadrangle Name: Watson, North Carolina, 1991
Current Land Use
The current land use for the project area is agricultural with large adjacent wooded areas. Dominant
vegetation within the project area consists of white oak (Quercus alba), red maple (Acer rubrum),
Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense), red cedar
(Juniperus virginiana), green catbriar (Smilax rotundifolia), and common blackberry (Rubus argutus).
According to the Soil Survey of Union County', on-site soils consist of Baden channery silt loam
(BaB and BaC), Baden channery silty clay loam (BdB2 and BdC2), Goldston very channery silt loam
(GoE), and Chewacla silt loam (ChA). Chewacla soils are listed by the NRCS as having potential
inclusions of hydric soil for Union County2. Baden and Goldston soils are well-drained and exhibit
moderate permeability, while Chewacla soils are somewhat poorly drained and exhibit moderate
permeability.
1 United States Department of Agriculture, 1980. Soil Survey of Union County, North Carolina.
2 NRCS Hydric Soils of North Carolina, December 15, 1995.
CHARLOTTE • COLUMBIA • RALEIGH
WWW.CWS-INC.NET
March 15, 2007
Mr. Steve Chapin
Page 2 of 4
Jurisdictional Delineation
On March 6, 2007 CWS's Matt Jenkins, WPIT and Paul Bright delineated (flagged in the field) and
classified on-site jurisdictional waters of the U.S. using the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) -
Routine On-Site Determination Method. Jurisdictional waters of the U.S. were classified according to
recent North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ)3 and USACE guidance. NCDWQ Stream
Classification Forms and USACE Stream Quality Assessment Worksheets representative of Streams
A - K are enclosed (SCP1 - SCP9).
The results of the on-site field investigation indicate that there are seven jurisdictional stream
channels (Streams A, B, E, F, and H - K), two jurisdictional wetland areas (Wetlands AA and BB),
and one jurisdictional open water area (Pond A) located within the project area (Figure 1, enclosed).
Routine On-Site Data Forms representative of Wetlands AA and BB as well as non jurisdictional
upland areas have been enclosed (DPI - DP2). On-Site jurisdictional waters of the U.S. include
Stewarts Creek, Richardson Creek, and unnamed tributaries to Stewarts Creek and Richardson Creek.
Stewarts Creek and Richardson Creek are within the Yadkin River basin (HU# 03040105)4 and are
classified as "Class C" waters by the NCDWQ. On-Site jurisdictional waters of the U.S. were
surveyed using a sub-meter GPS unit and total approximately 3.54 acres (154,202.4 square feet).
Linear footage and acreage of on-site jurisdictional waters are summarized in Table 1.
Tahle 1. Summarv of On-Site Jurisdictional Waters
Potential
Jurisdiction
Classification Approximate Length Approximate
Acrea e
Stream A Perennial 2,829 0.22
Stream B Unimportant Intermittent 369 0.01
Stream B Perennial 900 0.05
Stream E Unimportant Intermittent 203 0.01
Stream E Perennial 1,916 0.14
Stream F Perennial 123 0.01
Stream H (Stewarts Creek) Perennial 2,065 0.57
Stream J (Richardson Creek) Perennial 2,549 1.87
Stream K Perennial 101 0.01
Stream Subtotal: 11,055 2.89
Wetland AA Forested 0.16
Wetland BB Forested 0.36
Wetland Subtotal: 0.52
Pond A Open Water 0.13
On-Site Total: 11,055 3.54
Perennial Streams
On-Site perennial stream channels (Streams A, B, E, F, and H - K) are located throughout the central
portion of the property and exhibited average ordinary high water widths of 3 to5 feet (Streams A, B,
E, F, and K) and 20 to 25 feet (Streams H and J), significant aquatic life including crayfish and
benthic macroinvertebrates, perennial flow, and substrate consisting of silt to large cobbles
(Figure 1, enclosed). USACE Stream Quality Assessment scores for these channels ranged from 49 to
65 out of a possible 100 points and from 30.5 to 41.5 out of 71 possible points on the NCDWQ Stream
Classification Form, indicating perennial status (SCP1, SCP4, and SCP7, enclosed). Photographs of
Perennial Streams J and A are enclosed as Photographs A and B, respectively.
3 North Carolina Division of Water Quality, 1999. Stream Classification Method. Version 2.0.
4 "HU#" is the Hydrologic Unit Code. U.S. Geological Survey, 1974. Hydrologic Unit Map, State of North Carolina.
March 15, 2007
Mr. Steve Chapin
Page 3 of 4
Intermittent Streams
On-Site unimportant intermittent stream channels (Streams B and E) are located in the northern and
southern portions of the property (Figure 1, enclosed). These channels typically exhibited average
ordinary high water widths of 1 to 3 feet, intermittent flow, and substrate consisting of silt to fine
gravel. USACE Stream Quality Assessment scores for these channels ranged from 26 to 45 out of a
possible 100 points and from 23.5 to 25.5 out of 71 possible points on the NCDWQ Stream
Classification Form, indicating intermittent status (SCP3 and SCP8, enclosed). Photographs of
Unimportant Intermittent Streams E and B are enclosed as Photographs C and D.
Wetlands
Wetlands AA and BB are located in the southeast portion of the project area and are approximately
0.16 and 0.36 acre in size, respectively (Figure 1, enclosed). These floodplain wetland areas are
hydrologically connected to Perennial Streams A and K. Dominant vegetation within these areas
includes river cane (Arundinaria gigantea), sycamore (Platanus occidentalis), ironwood
(Carpinus caroliniana), and various sedges (Carex spp.). These areas exhibited low chroma soils
(2.5Y 5/2), many distinct mottles (7.5YR 4/4), inundation from 0 to 36 inches, drainage patterns,
sediment deposits, water-stained leaves, and saturation within the upper 12 inches of the soil profile.
A Routine On-Site Determination Form representative of Wetlands AA and BB is enclosed (DPI). A
photograph of Wetland AA is enclosed as Photograph E. A Routine On-Site Determination Form
representative of on-site non jurisdictional upland areas is also enclosed (DP2).
Open Water
Pond A is located in the southeast portion of project area and is approximately 0.13 acre in size. This
open water area is hydrologically connected to Wetland BB. A photograph of Pond A is enclosed as
Photograph F.
Agency Correspondence
Cultural Resources
A letter was forwarded to the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) on March 5, 2007 to
determine the presence of any areas of architectural, historic, or archaeological significance that
would be affected by the project. As of the date of this submittal, a response from SHPO has not yet
been received.
Protected Species
A letter was forwarded to the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) on
March 5, 2007 to determine the presence of any federally-listed, candidate endangered, threatened
species or critical habitat located within the project area. As of the date of this submittal, a response
from the NCNHP has not yet been received.
Purpose and Need for the Project
The purpose of this project is to develop approximately 160 acres of property into a single-family
residential development comprised of 116 lots. This project will provide residential housing to an
area of Union County that is experiencing significant population growth due to proximity of the City
of Monroe. Impacts to on-site jurisdictional waters are necessary to provide roadway construction.
March 15, 2007
Mr. Steve Chapin
Page 4 of 4
Avoidance and Minimization
Impacts to on-site jurisdictional waters of the U.S. have been reduced to the maximum extent
practicable. Construction of this project will completely avoid any impacts to on-site jurisdictional
wetland areas. Impacts associated with each separate and complete road crossing have been reduced
to less than 150 linear feet per crossing. Impervious coverage for the proposed subdivision will be
approximately 20% and includes roads (3.6 acres) and houses and driveways (16 acres). Proper
sediment and erosion control measures will be used to minimize disturbances to downstream waters.
Proposed Impacts to Jurisdictional Waters
Unavoidable impacts to on-site perennial stream channels total approximately 447 linear feet and are
the result of culvert placement and grading activities associated with roadway construction. These
impacts include approximately 149 linear feet to Perennial Stream A, approximately 149 linear feet of
impacts to Perennial Stream B, and approximately 149 linear feet of impacts to Perennial Stream E
(Figure 2, enclosed). On behalf of Ron Rushing Construction Company, CWS is submitting a Pre-
Construction Notification Application with attachments in accordance with Nationwide Permit
General Condition No. 13, and pursuant to Nationwide Permit No. 14 and Water Quality Certification
No. 3375 (enclosed).
Compensatory Mitigation
Construction of this project has limited the amount of perennial stream impacts per separate and
complete road crossing to less than 150 linear feet and completely avoided impacts to jurisdictional
wetland and open water areas. Approximately 32 acres of buffer preservation is being proposed for
this project. This buffer includes Wetlands AA and BB, Pond A, and the avoided portions of
Perennial Streams A and E (Figure 3, enclosed).
Please do not hesitate to contact me at 704-527-1177 or through email at [e-mail] should
you have any questions or comments regarding these findings.
Gregg C. Antemann, PWS
Principal Biologist
Matt L. Jenkins, WRIT
Staff Biologist II
Enclosures: USGS 7.5' Watson, NC Topographic Quadrangle
NRCS Union County Soil Survey
Figure 1. Wetland Boundary Survey
Figure 2. Proposed Impacts
Figure 3. Proposed Mitigation
Pre-Construction Notification Pursuant to a Nationwide Permit No. 14
Request for Jurisdictional Determination Form
Agent Certification of Authorization Form
NCDWQ Stream Classification Fonns (SCP1 - SCP9)
USACE Stream Quality Assessment Worksheets (SCP 1 - SCP9)
USACE Routine Wetland Determination Data Forms (DPI - DP2)
Representative Photographs (A - F)
cc: Ms. Cyndi Karoly, North Carolina Division of Water Quality
Mr. Ron Rushing, Ron Rushing Construction Company
Mr. Jeff Gordon, Frontier Land Surveying
ZA2007\Prcjeds\2007-1777 Lake Tw Wennitting\NWP39 reportdoc
Image Courtesy of the U.S. Geological Survey
7.5 Minute Topographic Map Series, Watson, North Carolina, dated 1991.
Approximate Scale 1" = 2000'
Lake Twitty Site
Nationwide Permit No 14 Project No. 2007-1777
Lake Twitty Site
Nationwide Permit No 14 Project No. 2007-1777
NRCS Soil Survey of Union County, North Carolina, Sheet Nos. 14 and 19, dated 1996.
Approximate Scale V = 2000'
Soil Survey Courtesy of the USDA-NRCS
NOTE: JURISDICTIONAL WATERS OF THE U.S. WERE DELINEATED AND SURVEYED USING A
SUB-METER GPS UNIT BY CAROLINA WETLAND SERVICES, INC. (CWS) ON MARCH 6, 2007.
JURISDICTIONAL FEATURES HAVE NOT BEEN VERIFIED BY THE USACE.
Unimportant Intermittent Stream E
203 Linear Feet
SCP8
„x
\v,.., -"
Perennial Stream F
121 Lineat.:Feet
Non-Jurisdictional
Ephemeral Channel,D , Non-Jurisdictional
Ephemeral Channel G
MlZ,
SCP6
nial dream, A SC P1 - 1i erenn)al; tr am E
?2 9Linear_ Peet,\yM, 6-LIne r eet
Non-Jurisdictional
\ Ephemeral Channel 13,1
5GP2 ¦
/Int. Break Pond A?
0.13 Acre
?SCP -?- etandAA
Unimportant Intermittent tryaarn B
/ \
DP2 ere
369 Linear Feet
i? Int./Per. Beak
/?( Nqp-Jurisdictional
Ep. oemeral Channel; C - ?
-? ff SCP4 1
,?Cl Wetlan?
III
' Per?nnlal Stream 0.36' SCP5
I, 900 Linear-Feet
Perennial Stream J
(Richardson Creek)
'` -
2,549 Linear Feet
\\\ /_ ?, .
eren I Stream H Perennial Stream K
??If = C Stewarts . _
( Creek) - 101 Linear Feet
2,065 Linear Feet
z
I LEGEND
PROPERTY BOUNDARY
JURISDICTIONAL STREAM CHANNEL
------ NON-JURISDICTIONAL CHANNEL
® JURISDICTIONAL WETLAND AREA
L:J JURISDICTIONAL OPEN WATER AREA
• DPI DATA POINT
• SCPI STREAM CLASSIFICATION POINT
PHOTO LOCATION AND DIRECTION
APPROXIMATE SCALE: V = 400'
i? Carolina Wetland Services
CWS 550 East Westinghouse Blvd.
Charlotte, North Carolina 28273
REFERENCE. SITE SURVEY PROVIDED BY FKONIIER LAND SURVEYING. DATED 2006.
Figure 1. Wetland Boundary Survey
Lake Twitty Site
Monroe, North Carolina
CWS Project No. 2007-1777
PR?E,P?^RED BY DATE CHECKED DATE
u
/"' 3' 'o -7 1 GGi2 31 ?
NOTE: JURISDICTIONAL WATERS OF THE U.S. WERE DELINEATED AND SURVEYED USING A
SUB-METER GPS UNIT BY CAROLINA WETLAND SERVICES, INC. (CWS) ON MARCH 6, 2007.
JURISDICTIONAL FEATURES HAVE NOT BEEN VERIFIED BY THE USACE.
Unimportant Intermittent Stream E
i
1 ` \
Perennial Stream F
eo-
X IPerennial S?rea171' E
\ , . ?i \\\
`143 Linear Feet 1m.,p acted
\ n. faro: J 1 \ , 6'~ /? L I Ioa roue Fc 'l UNE
\
0 _ y
\\ \
V' - _ - 1 _ - f
P nia1 Stream; A
[49_Lin?ar reet frnpacted , , 77 lr1 ) ??? ;_/ i d
T?17 t a?I AA
Unimportantlntermittent d
BB
iereriqah trem \?• , „ ly- ?.,_
149 Linea F3rl pacted
till
I -
- v
1 ?-
.109 "°W `1 Perennial Stream J
Perennial Stream H
erennial Stream K
LEGEND
PROPERTY BOUNDARY
JURISDICTIONAL STREAM CHANNEL
--- IMPACTED JURISDICTIONAL CHANNEL
JURISDICTIONAL WETLAND AREA
JURISDICTIONAL OPEN WATER AREA
APPROXIMATE SCALE: V =400'
Carolina Wetland Services
•
?, CWS 550 East Westinghouse Blvd.
Charlotte, North Carolina 28273
REFERENCE. SIZE SURVEY PROVIDED BY FRONTIER LAND SURVEYING, DATED 2006.
Figure 2. Proposed Impacts
Lake Twitty Site
Monroe, North Carolina
CWS Project No. 2007-1777
PREPARED BY DATE CHECKED DATE I
41--1- 3 • / 3 • o7 4--lva-
3/? 10?
NOTE: JURISDICTIONAL WATERS OF THE U.S. WERE DELINEATED AND SURVEYED USING A
SUB-METER GPS UNIT BY CAROLINA WETLAND SERVICES, INC. (CWS) ON MARCH 6, 2007.
JURISDICTIONAL FEATURES HAVE NOT BEEN VERIFIED BY THE USACE.
Unimportant Intermittent Stream E
-
?,?-
v'
Perennial Stream F
t I ,
_
IV,
•1--
N----
Perennial Strearn'
VIM
??'= -_ ,/? _ ?? .? i II ??? I?• ' 149! Linear Feet Ir>7pacted?
,,j,. -
100YEAa,FLOPO L UNE I 1
fio
f? n
A\ Pr osed--
4
' - I1 7 r /
Acre
Pe n-1_q1 Strum,/'-149 LinoarF,?eet,'mpacted i I?? tv
d.
I \ .?_ t
Unimportant Int nd AA
ermittent ?..
Z,
Iny/Per: rea
0
BB
\\
I,,,
;Persue al treOm
J1411 149 Linea fi rl pacted
2
-?-.:
41, 'T
Perennial Stream J
?0 ,
\?\ Perennial Stream H erennial Stream K
Zzi:
LEGEND
L I PROPERTY BOUNDARY
JURISDICTIONAL STREAM CHANNEL
--- - IMPACTED JURISDICTIONAL CHANNEL
JURISDICTIONAL WETLAND AREA
JURISDICTIONAL OPEN WATER AREA
- PROPOSED BUFFER PRESERVATION
APPROXIMATE SCALE: I" =400'
Carolina Wetland Services
550 East Westinghouse Blvd.
1: ' CWS
Charlotte, North Carolina 28273
REFERENCE: SITE SURVEY PROVIDED BY FRONTIER LAND SURVEYING, DATED 2006.
Figure 3. Proposed Mitigation
Lake Twitty Site
Monroe, North Carolina
CWS Project No. 2007-1777
PREPARED BY DATE CHECKED DATE
/yL T 3 •ly•07 6CA 3.1'•07
ATE..
ZO UYa 4 8 1
Office Use Only: Form Version April 2001
USACE Action ID No. DWQ No.
If any particular item is not applicable to this project, please enter "Not Applicable" or "N/A" rather than
leaving the space blank.
1.
II.
Processing
Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project:
® Section 404 Permit
? Section 10 Permit
® 401 Water Quality Certification
? Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested:
Nationwide Permit No. 14 and Water Quality Certification No. 3375
3. If this notification is solely a courtesy copy because written approval for the 401 Certification
is not required, check here: ?
4. If payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program (NCWRP) is proposed for
mitigation of impacts (see section VIII - Mitigation), check here: ?
Applicant Information
gL9(_%^!5,fflU\Y/Lg M
MAR 1 8 ZA97
Owner/Applicant Information
Name: Ron Rushing Construction Company.; Mr. Ron Rushing WM AWE e?w
Mailing Address: 3615 Lake Twitty Drive
Monroe, North Carolina 28110
Telephone Number: 704-534-9966 Fax Number:
E-mail Address:
2. Consultant Information (A signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization letter must be
attached if the Agent has signatory authority for the owner/applicant.)
Name: Mr. Gregg C. Antemann
Company Affiliation: Carolina Wetland Services Inc.
Mailing Address: 550 East Westinghouse Blvd.
Charlotte NC 28273
Telephone Number: [phone] Fax Number: (704) 527-1.133
E-mail Address: gregg(a-),cws-inc.net
Page I of 7
III. Project Information
1. Name of project: Lake Twitty Site
2. T.I.P. Project Number (NCDOT Only): N/A
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN): 09-072-008
4. Location
County: Union Nearest Town: Monroe
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number): N/A
Directions to site (include road numbers, landmarks, etc.): Travel south on Interstate 74 to
Morgan Mill Road. Turn left onto Morgan Mill Road and travel approximately 4 miles to
New Salem Road. Turn right onto New Salem Road and travel approximately 1.2 miles to
Old Camden Road. Travel approximately '/z mile, site is on the left.
5. Site coordinates, if available (UTM or Lat/Long): N35.04201°, W80.47280°
(Note - If project is linear, such as a road or utility line, attach a sheet that separately lists the
coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody.)
6. Describe the existing land use or condition of the site at the time of this application:
The current land use for the project area is agricultural with large adjacent wooded areas.
7. Property size (acres): approximately 160 acres
8. Nearest body of water (stream/river/sound/ocean/lake): Stewarts and Richardson Creek
9. River Basin: Yadkin River
(Note - this must be one of North Carolina's seventeen designated major river basins. The
River Basin map is available at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/admin/maps/.)
10. Describe the purpose of the proposed work: The purpose of this project is to develop
approximately 160 acres of property into a single-family residential development comprised
of 116 lots. This project will provide residential housing to an area of Union County that is
experiencing significant population growth due to proximity of the City of Monroe. Impacts
to on-site jurisdictional waters are necessary to provide roadway construction.
11. List the type of equipment to be used to construct the project: A trackhoe and typical
excavation equipment will be used for this project.
12. Describe the land use in the vicinity of this project: The land use surrounding the project is
mainly wooded with adjacent agricultural and residential areas.
Page 2 of 7
IV. Prior Project History
This project has no prior history.
V. Future Project Plans
There are no future project plans for this site.
VI. Proposed Impacts to Waters of the United States/Waters of the State
1. Wetland Impacts
Wetland Impact Located within Distance to
Site Number Type of Impact* Area of Impact
(acres) 100-year *
Floodplain Nearest Stream Type of Wetland***
indicate on map)
( (yes/no) (linear feet)
N/A
* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: mechanized clearing, grading, fill,
excavation, flooding, ditching/drainage, etc. For dams, separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding.
** 100-Year floodplains are identified through the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps
(FIRM), or FEMA-approved local floodplain maps. Maps are available through the FEMA Map Service Center at 1-800-358-9616, or
online at http://www.fema.gov.
*** List a wetland type that best describes wetland to be impacted (e.g., freshwater/saltwater marsh, forested wetland, beaver pond,
Carolina Bay, bog, etc.)
List the total acreage (estimated) of existing wetlands on the property: 0.65 acre
Total area of wetland impact proposed: N/A
2. Stream Impacts, including all intermittent and perennial streams
Stream Impact Length of Average Width Perennial or
Site Number Type of Impact* Impact Stream Name** of Stream Intermittent?
(indicate on map) (linear feet) Before Impact (please specify)
Stream A Pipe Placement 149 if UT to Richardson 5-6' Perennial
Creek
Stream B Pipe Placement 149 if UT to Stewarts Creek 2-3' Perennial
Stream E Pipe Placement 1491f UT to Richardson 5-6' Perennial
Creek
* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: culverts and associated rip-rap,
dams (separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding), relocation (include linear feet before and after, and net loss/gain),
stabilization activities (cement wall, rip-rap, crib wall, gabions, etc.), excavation, ditching/straightening, etc. If stream relocation is
proposed, plans and profiles showing the linear footprint for both the original and relocated streams must be included.
** Stream names can be found on USGS topographic maps. If a stream has no name, list as UT (unnamed tributary) to the nearest
downstream named stream into which it flows. USGS maps are available through the USGS at 1-800-358-9616, or online at
www.usgs.gov. Several internet sites also allow direct download and printing of USGS maps (e.g., www.topozone.com,
www.mapquest.com, etc.).
Cumulative impacts (linear distance in feet) to all streams on site: 447 linear feet (149 linear
feet per separate and complete stream crossing)
Page 3 of 7
3. Open Water Impacts, including Lakes, Ponds, Estuaries, Sounds, Atlantic Ocean and any
other Water of the U.S. N/A
Open Water Impact Area of Name of Waterbody Type of Waterbody
Site Number Type of Impact* Impact (if applicable) (lake, pond, estuary, sound,
(indicate on map) (acres) bay, ocean, etc.)
N/A
k List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: till, excavation, dredging,
flooding, drainage, bulkheads, etc.
4. Pond Creation
If construction of a pond is proposed, associated wetland and stream impacts should be
included above in the wetland and stream impact sections. Also, the proposed pond should
be described here and illustrated on any maps included with this application.
Pond to be created in (check all that apply): ? uplands ? stream ? wetlands
Describe the method of construction (e.g., dam/embankment, excavation, installation of
draw-down valve or spillway, etc.): N/A
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stormwater requirement, etc.): N/A
Size of watershed draining to pond: N/A
Expected pond surface area: N/A
VII. Impact Justification (Avoidance and Minimization)
Impacts to on-site iurisdictional waters of the U.S. have been reduced to the maximum extent
practicable. Construction of this project will completely avoid any impacts to on-site
jurisdictional wetland areas. Impacts associated with each separate and complete road
crossing have been reduced to less than 150 linear feet per crossing. Impervious coverage for
the proposed subdivision will be approximately 20% and includes roads (3.6 acres) and
houses and driveways (16 acres). Proper sediment and erosion control measures will be used
to minimize disturbances to downstream waters.
VIII. Mitigation
Construction of this proiect has limited the amount of perennial stream impacts per separate
and complete road crossing to less than 150 linear feet and completely avoided impacts to
iurisdictional wetland and open water areas. Approximately 32 acres of buffer preservation
is being proposed for this project. This buffer includes Wetlands AA and BB, Pond A, and
the avoided portions of Perennial Streams A and E (Figure 3, enclosed).
Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration
Program (NCWRP) with the NCWRP's written agreement. Check the box indicating that
Page 4 of 7
J
you would like to pay into the NCWRP. Please note that payment into the NCWRP must be
reviewed and approved before it can be used to satisfy mitigation requirements. Applicants
will be notified early in the review process by the 401/Wetlands Unit if payment into the
NCWRP is available as an option. For additional information regarding the application
process for the NCWRP, check the NCWRP website at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/wrp/index.htm. If
use of the NCWRP is proposed, please check the appropriate box on page three and provide
the following information:
Amount of stream mitigation requested (linear feet): N/A
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet): N/A
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
Amount of Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
IX. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Only)
Does the project involve an expenditure of public funds or the use of public (federal/state/local)
land?
Yes ? No
If yes, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the
requirements of the National or North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
Note: If you are not sure whether a NEPA/SEPA document is required, call the SEPA
coordinator at [phone] to review current thresholds for environmental documentation.
Yes ? No
If yes, has the document review been finalized by the State Clearinghouse? If so, please attach a
copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval letter.
Yes ? No ?
X. Proposed Impacts on Riparian and Watershed Buffers (DWQ Only)
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
required state and local buffers associated with the project. The applicant must also provide
justification for these impacts in Section VII above. All proposed impacts must be listed herein,
and must be clearly identifiable on the accompanying site plan. All buffers must be shown on a
map, whether or not impacts are proposed to the buffers. Correspondence from the DWQ
Regional Office may be included as appropriate. Photographs may also be included at the
applicant's discretion.
Will the project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233
(Meuse), 15A NCAC 2B .0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 2B .0250 (Randleman Rules and
Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please identify: )?
Yes ? No ® If you answered "yes", provide the following information:
Identify the square feet and acreage of impact to each zone of the riparian buffers. If buffer
mitigation is required calculate the required amount of mitigation by applying the buffer
multipliers. N/A
Page 5 of 7
Zone* Impact
(square feet) Multiplier Required
Mitigation
1 3
2 1.5
Total
Zone 1 extends out 30 feet perpendicular from near bank of channel; Zone 2 extends an
additional 20 feet from the edge of Zone 1.
If buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e., Donation
of Property, Conservation Easement, Riparian Buffer Restoration / Enhancement, Preservation or
Payment into the Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as
identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0242 or .0260.
XI. Stormwater (DWQ Only)
Describe impervious acreage (both existing and proposed) versus total acreage on the site.
Discuss stormwater controls proposed in order to protect surface waters and wetlands
downstream from the property.
Sources of nearbv impervious cover include roads. drivewavs. and rooftops. This proiect will
cause an increase in the impervious coverage of the project area of approximately 20%.
Impervious cover includes roads (3.6 acres) and homes and driveways (16 acres).
XII. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Only)
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of
wastewater generated from the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
XIII. Violations (DWQ Only)
Is this site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500) or any Buffer Rules?
Yes ? No
Is this an after-the-fact permit application?
Yes ? No
Page 6 of 7
XIV. Other Circumstances (Optional):
It is the applicant's responsibility to submit the application sufficiently in advance of desired
construction dates to allow processing time for these permits. However, an applicant may
choose to list constraints associated with construction or sequencing that may impose limits on
work schedules (e.g., draw-down schedules for lakes, dates associated with Endangered and
Threatened Species, accessibility problems, or other issues outside of the applicant's control).
Construction is scheduled to begin immediately following receipt of the appropriate permits.
Signature
Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)
Page 7 of 7
REQUEST FOR JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
DATE: March 15, 2006
COUNTY Union County, North Carolina TOTAL ACREAGE OF TRACT -160 acres
PROJECT NAME (if applicable) Lake Twitty Site
PROPERTY OWNER/APPLICANT (name, address and phone):
Ron Rushing Construction Company
POC: Mr. Ron Rushing, at [phone]
3615 Lake Twitty Drive
Monroe, North Carolina 28110
NAME OF CONSULTANT, ENGINEER, DEVELOPER (if applicable):
Carolina Wetland Services, Inc
POC: Mr. Gregg C. Antemann, at [phone]
550 East Westinghouse Boulevard
Charlotte, NC 28273
STATUS OF PROJECT (check one):
( ) On-going site work for development purposes
( X) Project in planning stages
(Type of project: residential development )
( ) No specific development planned at present
( ) Project already completed
(Type of project: )
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUIRED:
Check items submitted - forward as much information as is available. At a minimum, the following fast two items must be
forwarded.
(X) USGS 7.5-Minute Watson, NC Topographic Quadrangle
(X ) NRCS Union County Soil Survey
(X) Wetland Boundary Survey (Figure 1)
(X ) Proposed Impacts (Figure 2)
(X ) Proposed Mitigation (Figure 3)
(X) Pre-Construction Notification Pursuant to Nationwide Permit No. 14
(X) NCDWQ Stream Classification Forms (SCP1 - SCP9)
(X) USACE Stream Quality Assessment Worksheets (SCP1 - SCP9)
(X) Routine On-Site Data Forms (DPI - DP2)
(X) Representative Photographs (A - F)
Z-ra- (!:?? 74U?-?
Signature of Property Owner or
Authorized Agent
Mr. Gregg C. Antemann
t
MAR. 14. 20077 7:38A% CENTRAL CAROLINA
AUNT CERTIFICATION OF AUTHORIZATION
NO. 5533, P. 2
11V-IU/? r'- 2
1, Ron Rushing, representing Ron Rushing Construction Company, horcby certify that I
have authorized Gregg C. Antemann of Carolina Wetland Services, Xne. to act on my
behalf and take all actions necessary to the processing, issuance, and acceptance of this
request for wetlands permitting and any and all tandard and special conditions attached.
We hereby certify that the above information submitted in this application is true and
accurate to the best of our knowledge.
Agent' signature
3 /17167
Date
Completion of dais form will allow the agent to sign all future application correspondence_
311Y16 :Z
Dam
r
North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identification Form; Version 3.1
Date: 01/22/2007 Project: Lake Twitty Site Latitude: N 35.04201
Evaluator: RGJ & AnJ Site: SCP1 Longitude: W 80.47280
Total Points: Other Perennial Stream A
Stream is at Last;nternrttent County:
if? 19 or perennial if? 30 0.50Union e.g. Quad Warne:
A. Geomor holo (Subtotal = 13.0 1 Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1 3. Continuous bed and bank 2.0 0 1 2 3
2. Sinuosity 2.0 0 1 2 3
3. In-channel structure: riffle-pool sequence 1.0 0 1 2 3
4. Soil texture or stream substrate sorting 2.0 0 1 2 3
5. Active/relicfloodplain 2.0 0 1 2 3
6. Depositional bars or benches 1.0 0 - 1 2 3
7. Braided channel 0.0 0 1 2 3
8. Recent alluvial deposits 1.0 0 1 2 3
9 a Natural levees 0.0 0 1 2 3
10. Headcuts 1.0 0 1 2 3
11. Grade controls 0.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
12. Natural valley or drainageway 1.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
13. Second or greater order channel on existing
USGS or MRCS map or other documented
evidence.

0.0
No= 0
Yes= 3
Man-made ditches are not rated: see discussions in manual
B. Hvdrolocv (Subtotal = 8.5 1
14. Groundwater flovddischarge 2.0 0 1 2 3
15. Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain, or
Water in channel -- dry or growing season
2.0 0 1 2 3
16. Leaflitter 1.0 1.5 1 0.5 0
17. Sediment on plants or debris 0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
18. Organic debris lines or piles (Wrack lines) 1.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
19. Hydric soils (redoximorphic features) present?1,5 No = 0 Yes = 1.5
C. Bioloav (Subtotal = 9.00 )
20 . Fibrous roots in channel 3.0 3 2 1 0
21 . Rooted plants in channel 3,0 3 2 1 0
22. Crayfish 1,0 0 0.5 1 1.5
23. Bivalves 0.0 0 1 2 3
24. Fish 0.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
25. Amphibians 1.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
26. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance) 1,0 0 0.5 1 1.5
27. Filamentous algae: periphyton 0.0 0 1 2 3
28. Iron oxidizing bacteriatfungus. 0.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
29b. Wetland plants in streambed 0.00 FAC = 0.5; FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 SAV = 2.0; Other = 0
Notes: (use back side of this form for additional notes)
Crayfish, salamanders, isopods, amphipods
' Items 20 and 21 focus on the presence of upland plants, Item 29 focuses on the presence of aquatic or %vetland plants.
Sketch:
a7

North Carolina Division of Water Quality -Stream Identification Form; Version 3.1
Date: 01/22/2007 Project: Lake Twitty Site Latitude: N 35.04201
Evaluator: RGJ & MLJ Site: SCP2 Longitude: W 80.47280
Total Points: Other Ephemeral Channel B
Stream is at least intermittent County:
if? 18 or perennial if? 30 15.OU Union e.g. Quad 1Varne:
A. Geomor holo (Subtotal = 7.0 i Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1 ?_ Continuous bed and bank 1.0 0 1 2 3
2. Sinuosity 0.0 0 1 2 3
3. In-channel structure: riffle-pool sequence 1.0 0 1 2 3
4. Soil texture or stream substrate sorting 1.0 0 1 2 3
5. Active/relic floodplain 0.0 0 1 2 3
6. Depositional bars or benches 1.0 0 1 2 3
7. Braided channel 0.0 0 1 2 3
8. Recent alluvial deposits 1.0 0 1 2 3
9 a Natural levees 0.0 0 1 2 3
10. Headcuts 0.0 0 1 2 3
11. Grade controls 1.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
12. Natural valley or drainagev+ray 1.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
13. Second or greater order channel on existing
USGS or N RCS map or other documented
evidence.

0.0
No= 0
Yes= 3
Man-made ditches are not rated: see discussions in manual
B. Hvdroloav (Subtotal = 2.0 1
14. Groundwater flov+ddischarge 0.0 0 1 2 3
15. Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain, or
Water in channel -- dry or growing season
0.0 0 1 2 3
16. Leaflitter 1.5 1.5 1 0.5 0
17. Sediment on plants or debris 0,0 0 0.5 1 1.5
18. Organic debris lines or piles (Wrack lines) 0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
19. Hydric soils (redoximorphic features) present?0,0 No = 0 Yes= 1.5
C. Bioloqv (Subtotal = 6.00 )
20 . Fibrous roots in channel 2.0 3 2 1 0
21 . Rooted plants in channel 3.0 3 2 1 0
22. Crayfish 0,0 0 0.5 1 1.5
23. Bivalves 0.0 0 1 2 3
24. Fish 0.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
25. Amphibians 0.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
26. Macrcbenthos (note diversity and abundance) 0.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
27. Filamentous algae: periphyton 1.0 0 1 2 3
28. Iron oxidizing bacteriatfungus. 0.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
29". Wetland plants in streambed 0.00 FAC = 0.5; FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 SAV = 2.0; Other = 0
Items 20 and 21 focus on the presence of upland plants. Item 29 focuses on the presence of aquatic or+,vetland plants.
Sketch:
Notes: (use back side of this form for additional notes)
7

L`
North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identification Form; Version 3.1
Date: 01/22/2007 Project: Lake Twitty Site Latitude: N 35.04201
Evaluator: RGJ & MLJ Site: SCP3 Longitude: W 80.47280
Total Points: Other Unimportant Intermittent
Stream is at least interr4ttent County:
if? 19 or erennialif? 30 23.501 Union e.g. QuadiVame: Stream B
A Geomoroholoov (Subtotal = 1 1.5 1 Absent Weak I Moderate Strong
19. Continuous bed and bank 2.0 0 1 2 3
2. Sinuosity 1.0 0 1 2 3
3. In-channel structure: riffle-pool sequence 1.0 0 1 2 3
4. Soil texture or stream substrate sorting 2.0 0 1 2 3
5. Active/relic floodplain 0.0 0 1 2 3
6. Depositional bars or benches 1.0 0 1 2 3
7. Braided channel 0.0 0 1 2 3
8. Recent alluvial deposits 1.0 0 1 2 3
9 a Natural levees 0.0 0 1 2 3
10. Headcuts 2.0 0 1 2 3
11. Grade controls 0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
12. Natural valley or drainageviay 1.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
13. Second or greater order channel on existing
USGS or NRCS• map or other documented
evidence.

0.0
No= 0
Yes= 3
` Man-made ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B Hvdroloav (Subtotal = 5.5 1
14. Groundwater flovvldischarge 1.0 0 1 2 3
15. Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain, or
Water in channel -- dry or growing season
1.0 0 1 2 3
16. Leaf Iitter 1.5 1.5 1 0.5 0
17. Sediment on plants or debris 0.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
18. Organic debris lines or piles (Wrack lines) 0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
19. Hydric soils (redoximorphic features) present?1.5 No = 0 Yes= 1.5
C Rinlnnv (Subtotal = 6.50 1
20 . Fibrous roots in channel 2.0 3 2 1 0
21 . Rooted plants in channel 3,0 3 2 1 0
22. Crayfish 0.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
23. Bivalves 0.0 0 1 2 3
24. Fish 0.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
25. Amphibians 0.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
26. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance) 0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
27. Filamentous algae: periphyton 1.0 0 1 2 3
28. Iron oxidizing bacteriatfungus_ 0.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
29b. Wetland plants in streambed 0.00 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 focuses on the presence of aquatic orwetlana plants.
Sketch:
Notes: (use back side of this form for additional notes:)
weak amphipods
7

North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identification Form; Version 3.1
Date: 01/22/2007 Project: Lake Twitty Site Latitude: N 35.04201
Evaluator: RGJ & NMJ Site: SCP4 Longitude: W 80.47280
Total Points: Other Perennial Stream B
Stream is at least intermittent County: e.a. Qvad)vame:
if ? 19 or perennial if >_ 30 26.501 Union
A. Geomomholoav (Subtotal = 20.5 1 Absent Weak Moderate Strang I
1 ?. Continuous bed and bank 2.0 0 1 2 3
2. Sinuosity 2.0 0 1 2 3
3. In-channel structure: riffle-pool sequence 3,0 0 1 2 3
4. Soil texture or stream substrate sorting 3.0 0 1 2 3
5. Active/relic floodplain 1.0 0 1 2 3
6. Depositional bars or benches 1.0 0 1 2 3
7. Braided channel 0.0 0 1 2 3
8. Recent alluvial deposits 2.0 0 1 2 3
9 a Natural levees 1.0 0 1 2 3
10. Headcuts 3,0 0 1 2 3
11. Grade controls 1.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
12. Natural valley or drainageway 1.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
13. Second or greater order channel on existing
USGS or NRCS map or other documented
evidence.

0.0
No = 0
Yes= 3
` Man-made ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hvdrolocv (Subtotal = 8.0 1
14. Groundwater flovddischarge 2.0 0 1 2 3
15. Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain, or
Water in channel -- dry or growing season
2.0 0 1 2 3
16. Leaflitter 1.0 1.5 1 0.5 0
17. Sediment on plants or debris 0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
18. Organic debris lines or piles (Wrack lines) 1.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
19. Hydric soils (redoximorphic features) present?1,5 No = 0 Yes= 1.5
C. Bioloav (Subtotal = 8.00 l
20 . Fibrous roots in channel 3,0 3 2 1 0
21 . Rooted plants in channel 3,0 3 2 1 0
22_ Crayfish 1.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
23. Bivalves 0,0 0 1 2 3
24. Fish 0.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
25. Amphibians 0.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
26. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance) 1,0 0 0.5 1 1.5
27. Filamentous algae- periphyton 0.0 0 1 2 3
28. Iron oxidizing bacteriatfungus. 0.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
29 b. Wetland plants in streambed 0.00 FAC = 0.5: FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 SAV = 2.0; Other = 0
Items 20 and 21 focus on the presence of upland plants, Item 29 focuses on the presence of aquatic or wetland plants.
Sketch:
Notes: (use back side of this form for additional notes)
3-foot headcut from unimportant portion. Moderate
amp po an crayfish.
7

North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identification Form; Version 3.1
Date: 01/22/2007 Project: Lake Twitty Site Latitude: N 35.04201
Evaluator: RGJ & NMJ Site: SCP5 Longitude: W 80.47280
Total Points: Other Ephemeral Channel C
Stream is at leastintermittenf 23.501 County: Union e.g. Quad Name:
if? 19 or perennial if ? 30
A. Geomor holo (Subtotal = 12.0 ) Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1 a_ Continuous bed and bank 2.0 0 1 2 3
2. Sinuosity 1.0 0 1 2 3
3. In-channel structure: riffle-pool sequence 1.0 0 1 2 3
4. Soil texture or stream substrate sorting 2.0 0 1 2 3
5. Active/relic floodplain 1.0 0 1 2 3
6. Depositional bars or benches 1.0 0 1 2 3
7. Braided channel 1.0 0 1 2 3
8. Recent alluvial deposits 1.0 0 1 2 3
9a Natural levees 0.0 0 1 2 3
10. Headcuts 1.0 0 1 2 3
11. Grade controls 0.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
12. Natural valley or d rainageway 1.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
13. Second or greater order channel on existing
USGS or MRCS map or other documented
evidence.

0.0
No= 0
Yes= 3
Man-made ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B_ Hvdrolocv (Subtotal = 5.5 1
14. Groundwater flovvldischarge 1.0 0 1 2 3
15. Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain, or
Water in channel -- dr or growing season
1.0 0 1 2 3
16. Leaflitter 0.5 1.5 1 0.5 0
17. Sediment on plants or debris 0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
18. Organic debris lines or piles (Wrack lines) 1.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
19. Hydric soils (redoximorphic features) present?1,5 No = 0 Yes = 1.5
C. Bioloov (Subtotal = 6.00 ]
20 . Fibrous roots in channel 3.0 3 2 1 0
21 . Rooted plants in channel 2.0 3 2 1 0
22. Crayfish 0.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
23. Bivalves 0.0 0 1 2 3
24. Fish 0.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
25. Amphibians 0.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
26. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance) 1,0 0 0.5 1 1.5
27. Filamentous algae: periphyton 0.0 0 1 2 3
28. Iron oxidizing bacteria/fungus. 0.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
29 b. Wetland plants in streambed 0.00 FAC = 0.5: FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 SAV = 2.0; Other = 0
Items 20 and 21 focus on the presence of upland plants, Item 29 focuses on the presence of aquatic or Weiland plants.
Sketch:
Notes: (use back side of this form for additional notes.)
Lacks surface water connection. Moderate amphipods.
7

North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identification Form; Version 3.1
Date: 01/19/2007 Project: Lake Twitty Site Latitude: N 35.04201
Evaluator: RGJ & MLJ Site: SCP6 Longitude: W 80.47280
Total Points: Other Ephemeral Channel D
Stream is at least interrnittenf 1 Q County:
Cuad Name:
ifL 19 or perennial if = 30 18.00 Union e. g.
A. Geomorpholo (Subtotal = 9.0 ) Absent Weak Moderate Strong
I". Continuous bed and bank 1.0 0 1 2 3
2. Sinuosity 2.0 0 1 2 3
3. In-channel structure: riffle-pool sequence 1.0 0 1 2 3
4. Soil texture or stream substrate sorting 1.0 0 1 2 3
5. Active/relic floodplain 1.0 0 1 2 3
6. Depositional bars or benches 1.0 0 1 2 3
7. Braided channel 0.0 0 1 2 3
8. Recent alluvial deposits 1.0 0 1 2 3
9 a Natural levees 0.0 0 1 2 3
10. Headcuts 0.0 0 1 2 3
11. Grade controls 0.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
12. Natural valley or drainageway 1.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
13. Second or greater order channel on existing
USGS or MRCS map or other documented
evidence.

0.0
No= 0
Yes= 3
` Man-made ditches are not rated: see discussions in manual
9. Hvdroloov (Subtotal = 4.0 1
14. Groundwater flow/discharge 1.0 0 1 2 3
15. Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain, or
Water in channel -- dry or growing season
0.0 0 1 2 3
16. Leaflitter 0.5 1.5 1 0.5 0
17. Sediment on plants or debris 0.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
18. Organic debris lines or piles (Wrack lines) 1.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
19. Hydric soils (redoximorphic features) present?1.5 No = 0 Yes= 1.5
C. Bioloav (Subtotal = 5.00 )
20 . Fibrous roots in channel 3,0 3 2 1 0
21 . Rooted plants in channel 2.0 3 2 1 0
22. Crayfish 0.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
23. Bivalves 0.0 0 1 2 3
24. Fish 0.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
25. Amphibians 0.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
26. Macrobenthos (mote diversity and abundance) 0.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
27. Filamentous algae: periphyton 0.0 0 1 2 3
28. Iron oxidizing bacteriatfungus. 0.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
29b. Wetland plants in streambed 0.00 FAC = 05; FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 SAV = 2.0; Other = 0
Notes: fuse back side of this form for additional notes)
Lacks surface water connection.
.:se 2
Items 20 and 21 focus on the presence of upland plants, Item 29 focuses on the presence of aquatic or wetland plants.
Sketch:

North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identification Form; Version 3.1
Date: 01/19/2007 Project: Lake Twitty Site Latitude: N 35.04201
Evaluator: RGJ & 1VMJ Site: SCP7 Longitude: W 80.47280
Total Points: Other Perennial Streams E & F
Stream is at least;ntert*ttent County:
if _ 19 or perennial if?30 41.501 Union e.g.Quadiveme:
A. Geomor holo
(subtotal -
- 25.0--)

-Absent

Weak

Moderate

Strong
1 a. Continuous bed and bank 3,0 0 1 2 3
2. Sinuosity 2.0 0 1 2 3
3. In-channel structure: riffle-pool sequence 3,0 0 1 2 3
4. Soil texture or stream substrate sorting 2.0 0 1 2 3
5. Active/relic fIoodplain 2.0 0 1 2 3
6. Depositional bars or benches 2.0 0 1 2 3
7. Braided channel 0.0 0 1 2 3
8. Recent alluvial deposits 2.0 0 1 2 3
9 a Natural levees 2.0 0 1 2 3
10. Headcuts 2.0 0 1 2 3
11. Grade controls 1.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
12. Natural valley or drainageway 1.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
13. Second or greater order channel on existing
USGS or NRCS map or other documented
evidence.

3.0
No = 0
Yes= 3
Wean-mace aitcnes are not rated: see discussions in manual
B_ Hvdroloav (Suhtntal = 8.5 1
14. Groundwater flovildischarge 2.0 0 1 2 3
15. Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain, or
Water in channel -- dry or growing season
2.0 0 1 2 3
16. Leaflitter 1.5 1.5 1 0.5 0
17. Sediment on plants or debris 0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
18. Crganic debris lines or piles (Wrack lines) 1.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
19. Hydric soils (redoximorphic features) present?1.5 No = 0 Yes = 1.5
C. Bioloav (Subtotal = 8.00 1
20b. Fibrous roots in channel 3,0 3 2 1 0
21 . Rooted plants in channel 3,0 3 2 1 0
22. Crayfish 1.0 0 0.5 1 t5
23. Bivalves 0.0 0 1 2 3
24. Fish 0.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
25. Amphibians 0.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
26. Macrobenthos in ate diversity and abundance) 1.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
27. Filamentous algae: periphyton 0.0 0 1 2 3
28. Iron oxidizing bacteriatfungus. 0,0 0 0.5 1 1.5
29b. Wetland plants in streambed 0.00 FAC = 0.5; FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 SAV = 2.0: Other = 0
Notes: fuse back side of this form for additional notes.)
items 2u and 21 locus on the presence of upland plants, Item 29 focuses on the presence of aquatic or wetland plants.
Glrafrh-
Moderate crayfish, amphipods, caddisflies.
7
r
v
North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identification Form; Version 3.1
Date: 01/19/2007 Project: Lake Twitty Site Latitude: N 35.04201
Evaluator: RGJ & NMJ Site: SCP8 Longitude: W 80,47280
Total Points: Other Unimportant Intermittent
Stream is at least intermit tent county:
if? 19 or erennial if>_ 30 25.5U Union e.g. CuadiVame: Stream E
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 13.0 ) Absent Weak Moderate Strong
13. Continuous bed and bank 1.0 0 1 2 3
2. Sinuosity 2.0 0 1 2 3
3. In-channel structure: riffle-pool sequence 2.0 0 1 2 3
4. Soil texture or stream substrate sorting 1.0 0 1 2 3
5. Active/relic floodplain 2,0 0 1 2 3
6. Depositional bars or benches 1.0 0 1 2 3
7. Braided channel 0.0 0 1 2 3
8. Recent alluvial deposits 2.0 0 1 2 3
9 a Natural levees 1.0 0 1 2 3
10. Headcuts 0.0 0 1 2 3
11. Grade controls 0,0 0 0.5 1 1.5
12. Natural valley or drainageway 1.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
13. Second or greater order channel on existing
USGS or NRCS map or other documented
evidence.

0.0
No = 0
Yes= 3
` Man-made ditches are not rated: see discussions in manual
B. Hvdroloav (Subtotal = 6.0 1
14. Groundwater floV,ddischarge 1.0 0 1 2 3
15. Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain, or
Water in channel -- dry or growing season
1.0 0 1 2 3
16. Leaflitter 1.0 1.5 1 0.5 0
17. Sediment on plants or debris 0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
18. Organic debris lines or piles (Wrack lines) 1.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
19. Hydric soils (redcximorphic features) present?1.5 No = 0 Yes= 1.5
C. Biolow (Subtotal = 6.50 )
20 . Fibrous roots in channel 3,0 3 2 1 0
21 . Rooted plants in channel 3,0 3 2 1 0
22. Crayfish 0.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
23. Bivalves 0.0 0 1 2 3
24. Fish 0.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
25. Amphibians 0,0 0 0.5 1 1.5
26. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance) 0,5 0 0.5 1 1.5
27. Filamentous algae: periphyton 0.0 0 1 2 3
28. Iron oxidizing bacteria/fungus. 0.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
29 b. Wetland plants in streambed 0.00 FAC = 05 FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 SAV = 2.0: Other = 0
Items 20 and 21 focus on the presence of upland plants, Item 29 focuses on the presence of aquatic or wetland plants.
Sketch:
Notes: fuse back side of this form for additional notes.)
Weak amphipods, ca?sfhes.
A
/? (9 ?^>
10
North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identification Form; Version 3.1
Date: 01/19/2007 Project: Lake Twitty Site Latitude: N 35.04201
Evaluator: RGJ & MLJ Site: SCP9 Longitude: W 80.47280
Total Points: Other Ephemeral Channel G
Stream is at Last intermittent 18.001 County:
if? 19 or perennial if _ 30 Union e.g. QuadiVame:
A. Geomorloholoav (Subtotal = 10.5 1 Absent Weak i Moderate Strong
13. Continuous bed and bank 2.0 0 1 2 3
2. Sinuosity 1.0 0 1 2 3
3. In-channel structure: riffle-pool sequence 1.0 0 1 2 3
4. Soil texture or stream substrate sorting 1.0 0 1 2 3
5. Active/relicfloodplain 1.0 0 1 2 3
6. Depositional bars or benches 1.0 0 1 2 3
7. Braided channel 0.0 0 1 2 3
8. Recent alluvial deposits 1.0 0 1 2 3
9 a Natural levees 0.0 0 1 2 3
10. Headcuts 2.0 0 1 2 3
11. Grade controls 0.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
12. Natural valley or drainagerray 0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
13. Second or greater order channel on existing
USGS or NRCS map or other documented
evidence.

0.0
No= 0
Yes= 3
` Man-made ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
3. Hvdroloov (Subtotal = 1.5 )
14. Groundwater flovddischarge 0.0 0 1 2 3
15. Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain, or
Water in channel -- dry or growing season
0.0 0 1 2 3
16. Leaflitter 0.5 1.5 1 0.5 0
17. Sediment on plants or debris 0,0 0 0.5 1 1.5
18. Organic debris lines or piles (Wrack lines) 1.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
19. Hydric soils (redoximorphic features) present?0,0 No = 0 Yes= 1.5
C. Biologv (Subtotal = 6.00 )
20 . Fibrous roots in channel 3.0 3 2 1 0
21 . Rooted plants in channel 3,0 3 2 1 0
22 Crayfish 0,0 0 0.5 1 1.5
23. Bivalves 0,0 0 1 2 3
24. Fish 0.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
25. Amphibians 0,0 0 0.5 1 1.5
26. Macrobenthos(note diversityand abundance) 0,0 0 0.5 1 1.5
27. Filamentous algae; periphyton 0.0 0 1 2 3
28. Iron oxidizing bacteria/fungus. 0.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
29 b. Wetland plants in streambed 0.00 FAC = 0.5: FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 SAV = 2.0; Other = 0
Notes: (use back side of this form for additional notes)
-5y i i
Items 20 and 21 focus on the presence of upland plants, Item 29 focuses cn the presence of aquatic or wetland plants.
Sketch:
7
OFFICE USE ONLY: USACE AID# DWQ # f
SCP1- Perennial Stream A
M STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
1. Applicant's Name: Frontier Land Surveying 2. Evaluator's Name: Ron Johnson and Matt Jenkins
3. Date of Evaluation: 1/22/07 4. Time of Evaluation: 1:00 pm
5. Name of Stream: UT to Richardson Creek 6. River Basin: Yadkin
7. Approximate Drainage Area: 80 acres 8. Stream Order: First
9. Length of Reach Evaluated: 300 if 10. County: Union
11. Location of reach under evaluation (include nearby roads and landmarks): From Monroe, take NC-200/Morgan Mill Road east for
approximately 4 miles Turn right onto New Salem Road. Travel approximately 1.2 miles and turn right onto Old Camden Road.
12. Site Coordinates (if known): N35.04201 W80.47280
13. Proposed Channel Work (if any): N/A
14. Recent Weather Conditions: rain within the past 24 hours
15. Site conditions at time of visit: overcast, 50 degrees
16. Identify any special waterway classifications known:
-Trout Waters -Outstanding Resource Waters
17. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluati
18. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? (a) NO
20. Estimated Watershed Land Use: 20 % Residential
Section 10 Tidal Waters Essential Fisheries Habitat
Nutrient Sensitive Waters -Water Supply Watershed (I-IV)
on point? YES (]DIf yes, estimate the water surface area:
19. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? (a) NO
_% Commercial _% Industrial 70 % Agricultural
10 % Forested _% Cleared / Logged _% Other ( )
21. Bankfull Width: 3-4' 22. Bank Height (from bed to top of bank): 0-2'
23. Channel slope down center of stream: -Flat (0 to 2%) X Gentle (2 to 4%) -Moderate (4 to 10%) -Steep (> 10%)
24. Channel Sinuosity: Straight X Occasional Bends -Frequent Meander -Very Sinuous -Braided Channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points to each
characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the characteristics identified in the
worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or
weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character
of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more
continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of
100 representing a stream of the highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 50 Comments:
0111 , l ,?Z V7
Evaluator's Signature Date This channel evaluation form is ' tended to be used, only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers in order to make a preliminary assessment of
stream quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 05/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
SCP1 - Perennial Stream A
G1 .. ?."; `.

p Presence of'flow ! persisfentpoolsrin stream

(na flaw or saturation - 0; strong flow- max oints) 0_5
4 4 ti
E}
3
2? Evidence. of.past human alteration=
extensive alteration- 0; no alteration= max points)
0 6
0 -5'
U-5.
2
Riparian zone
nu huttr U; contI
=uai , v.-ide buffer - maxutntti? 0 6

O 1 0 5 2
F? idence of nutrient or chemical discharges _
("extensive dfischar?es 0_ no dischar<"es max Points) 0 -`) o -`} 3
Groundwater-discharge

no discharge = 0: s rings, see ?s_ wetlands, etc. max points) 0-3 _4 U 3

6 Presence of adjacent flnodplain
(nollood lain 0, extensive °tlood lain- max points)
Entrenchment f floodplain access
F'
x (dee ply entrenched- 0'; frequent flooding= mar points} 0 - 5 0. d' U 3

8 Presence of adjacent wetlands
'
'

`
no wetlands = 0: large adjacent wetlands`- max Dints)

0 6

9
-4

? 0
` 9 ChanneLsinuosity

(extensive channelLmtion - Q natural meander mar points) -5 U 0
si 2
I O Sediment input '

(extensive de osjtion= 0: tittle or no sediment max Dints) 0-5 (f- 4 U 4 2
Size& diversity of channel bed substrate
f 1 (fine, homogenous 0; large, diverse sizesmaX oints) ? 4 4 4 2
12 Evidence of channel incision or widening ,
(dee Iv incised =0 stahle bed & banks;- max points)
0-5
0 4
4-5.
3
N 13 Presence of major bank failures >

'
(severe erosion 0, no erosion, stable banI s'- max points) 0-5 U ?r 3
' 14
Knot depth and density on banks

(no' visibl.e roots= 0; denw: roots throughout ? max points) ' 2
I S Impact by agriculture or livestock production
substantial impact -0; no evidence --
-.y 16 Presence of riffle-pnoUripple-pool complexes
no rifTlesri les or pools, = 0; well-developed = max points) 0 - 3 0 - S U 6. 2
ea,
1
7
[>abitat complexity
0
-
(little or no habitat = 0; fre
uent
varied habitats=
i
t 0-6 0 6 6 4
q
..
max po
n
s)
'
18 Canopy coverage over streambed
>

(no shading vegetation - 0: continuous canopy - max Points) 4 --5

? 0
S 2
' 19 Substrate embeddedness _
n ( .

(deeply embedded - 0. loose: structure ? ma,<) s f -4
Q .
2

0 Presence of stream invertebrates
(no-evidence=0; common-numerousty es-max points) 0- 0 $ 3

l Presence of amphibians ,
Qy ` - na.evidence = O; common, numerous tv es = may amts) Q d 0 t 0 2

.
?.
z ,
}-+ 22 Presence of fish
(no evidence - 0; common
numerous t
es
=
m
a- ousts) 0_4 s Q `: 0 :. 0
,
yp
,
, V
23 Evidence of wildlife use
no evidence - 0; abundant evidence . max points) ?' 0 5 l

,K ?{?
,, in
rty 'A
a .
1
,w Ik ,F a 1 aKK `yr
Kt ?+k
1
?
,...

R
Tip >'-t '-r
Aa e'i•?'t.`, .,kY `\'.
t/' ilfl ? ??f fat
f 5 Kf C
50
111CJC L;naracACnstres are not assessea m eoastai streams.
I OFFICE USE ONLY: USACE AID# DWQ # I
a
SCP2 - Non-Jurisdictional Ephemeral Channel B
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
1. Applicant's Name: Frontier Land Surveying 2. Evaluator's Name: Ron Johnson and Matt Jenkins
3. Date of Evaluation: 1/22/07 4. Time of Evaluation: 1:30 pm
5. Name of Stream: UT to Stewarts Creek 6. River Basin: Yadkin
7. Approximate Drainage Area: 15 acres 8. Stream Order: First
9. Length of Reach Evaluated: 100 if 10. County: Union
11. Location of reach under evaluation (include nearby roads and landmarks): From Monroe, take NC-200/Morgan Mill Road east for
approximately 4 miles Turn right onto New Salem Road. Travel approximately 1.2 miles and tam right onto Old Camden Road.
12. Site Coordinates (if known): N35.04201 W80.47280
13. Proposed Channel Work (if
14. Recent Weather Conditions: rain within the past 24 hours
15. Site conditions at time of visit: overcast, 50 degrees
16. Identify any special waterway classifications known: -Section 10 -Tidal Waters -Essential Fisheries Habitat
-Trout Waters Outstanding Resource Waters _ Nutrient Sensitive Waters -Water Supply Watershed (I-IV)
17. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES (Q)If yes, estimate the water surface area:
18. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES Q 19. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? (a) NO
20. Estimated Watershed Land Use: _% Residential _% Commercial _% Industrial 100 % Agricultural
_% Forested _% Cleared / Logged _% Other
21. Bankfull Width: 1-3' 22. Bank Height (from bed to top of bank): 1-3'
23. Channel slope down center of stream: -Flat (0 to 2%) X Gentle (2 to 4%) -Moderate (4 to 10%) -Steep (>101/6)
24. Channel Sinuosity: Straight X Occasional Bends -Frequent Meander -Very Sinuous -Braided Channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points to each
characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the characteristics identified in the
worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or
weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character
of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more
continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of
100 representing a stream of the highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 21 Comments:
Evaluator's Signature Date
This channel evaluation form is in ended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners na e vironmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers in order to make a preliminary assessment of
stream quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 05/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
SCP2 - Non-Jurisdictional Enhemt-ral ChnnnA R

< HA14 EWSTIC
? ? r . '?^'L? k? ..,?L
jL^t

fi
t`, 1 Presence offlow / persistentpgols in stream

no -flow or saturation - 0; strop flow-miax omts) Or 5 0 4° C}>
z , 1
2 Evidence of past human alteration r s
(esternsivc alteration 0, no alteration = max points') 0, 6
Riparian zone
(rio bufici -_O, cunti?uuus, wide bu er"= max oints j O 6 - 0
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges

(extcn?u c dischar,es 0; nv discharges = mrLx Dints) 0-? 0- } 0-t 1
5 Groundwater discliarge
`
0 3
0 4
' ?, .
0 4 0
no discharge - 0; s rotas, see
s, wetlands
etc. - max points) , .
,
Presence of adjacent floodplain 'O 4

(Tio flood lain 0; extensive flood plain = max points) ' 0 4 0
2
?., .
7 Entrenchment / floodplain access
(deeply entrenched - 0: frc went flooding = max point, 0 _ 5 0 d 0? ? 2
8 Presence of adjacent wetlands

(no wetlands = 0;>Iarge adjacent wetlands --max p 0 7 0

q Channel. sinuosity -;

(extensive channeliza[ion - 0 nat=1 meander max oiu(s) 0-5 0f--4 2
10
Sediment input
J
'
'
1
a
?
(extensive deposition- 0, little. or no sediment max points) 0 0, 17 1
t 1 Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
(fine, homogenous = 0; large, diversc Sizes = max oints) 0 ` 4

17 Evidence of channel incision or widening,
(deeply incised 0; stable bed _ banks ? max points)
13 Presence of major bank. failures

`(severe erosion 0, no erosion, stable-banks = max points) < 5 2
Pa`- Root depth and density on banks
?
(no visible roots 0; dense roots: throughout = max
oint.sy
5 Impact by agriculture or livestock production
`
(substantial impact -0: no evidence max points} 0 _ 5 0 4 0 S
.. 0

16 Presence ofriffle- pool/ripple-pool complexes

no riffles/ ripples or pools = 0; well develo ?ed max oinL,; 0_3. p,-5.' 0._, 1
17 Habitat complexity
(little or no habitat 0
fre
ue
t
ried h
bit
= m
im
0-6.
0-6
0;.
1
;
q
n
, va
a
ats
ax a
s)
+
Is Canopy coverage over streambed 4
dr ,
(no shadin vegetation = 0; eontiiruous canopy max aims) 0 5 0 5 0,5 . 0
:
19 Substrate embeddedness brit NO P,

(dee Iv embedded = 0; loose structure = max) W {) 4 0 4 1

f>;
0 Presence of stream, invertebrates

© f

0 5
,.6
1
?: no evidence - O; common- numerous es = max oint5) .

?l
Presence of ampbibia.ns:
.
-
?
0-4 '.
0 4 a art`
(ls .;
0
: (no evidence
0-common, numerous types
max ousts)'

r-r Presence of fish'
(no evidence - 0, common
numerous type3 max
0 - 4 "
0 4
0 J ?
0
,
p
k 3
Evidence of wildlife use

:
i
ri na evidence 0, abundant e`ndenee max Points

) 0-
0 5
Qx
??.
0
>?'{ _. .t4t - r„ay_.?•xX' I i?'?L :+?? ?? _ 3r'Q

i
?
3
Fr;
AL?
" 50 N 21
w
, k <
I se cnaractensucs are not assessed m coastal streams.
OFFICE USE ONLY: USACE AID# DWQ #
SCP3 - Unimportant Intermittent Stream B
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
1. Applicant's Name: Frontier Land Surveying 2. Evaluator's Name: Ron Johnson and Matt Jenkins
3. Date of Evaluation: 1/22/07 4. Time of Evaluation: 1:35 pm
5. Name of Stream: UT to Stewarts Creek 6. River Basin: Yadkin
7. Approximate Drainage Area: 25 acres S. Stream Order: First
9. Length of Reach Evaluated: 200 if 10. County: Union
11. Location of reach under evaluation (include nearby roads and landmarks): From Monroe, take NC-200/Morgan Mill Road east for
approximately 4 miles Turn right onto New Salem Road. Travel approximately 1.2 miles and turn right onto Old Camden Road.
12. Site Coordinates (if known): N35.04201, W80.47280
13. Proposed Channel Work (if any): N/A
14. Recent Weather Conditions: rain within the past 24 hours
15. Site conditions at time of visit: overcast 50 degrees
16. Identify any special waterway classifications known: -Section 10 -Tidal Waters -Essential Fisheries Habitat
-Trout Waters -Outstanding Resource Waters _ Nutrient Sensitive Waters -Water Supply Watershed (I-IV)
17. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES (?DIf yes, estimate the water surface area:
18. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES (]?D 19. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? (D NO
20. Estimated Watershed Land Use: _% Residential _% Commercial _% Industrial 100 % Agricultural
% Forested _% Cleared / Logged % Other
21. Bankfull Width: 1-3' 22. Bank Height (from bed to top of bank): 2-3'
23. Channel slope down center of stream: -Flat (0 to 2%) X Gentle (2 to 4%) -Moderate (4 to 10%) -Steep (>10%)
24. Channel Sinuosity: Straight X Occasional Bends -Frequent Meander -Very Sinuous -Braided Channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points to each
characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the characteristics identified in the
worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or
weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character
of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more
continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of
100 representing a stream of the highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 26 Comments:
Evaluator's Signature .?? Date o -;;,
This channel evaluation form ' intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers in order to make a preliminary assessment of
stream quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 05/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
SCP3 - UnimDortant Intermittent Stream R
?RC?I}TtS

:? ;? ryyyu

J v

?.
1 Presence of flow /-persistent pools in stream
.
,

no now or. saturation. = 0; strong flow= max points) 0 5 4- 0 2
1 Evidence of past human alteration

(extensive alteration = 0: nn alteration - may points) '0-6 0-5 : 0 5 1
Riparian zone

_
no butler- 0: wntuguous, wide buffer= max points) ) ) n _ 0
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges ` -

(extcnsi%c dlscbar?cs 0; no discharges = max U tl ) - } 1
points) Groundwater discharge
no discharge - 0: s rings, seeps, wetlands. etc. - max oinrs)
0- 3
0 4'
: 0 ''4`
2
-, Presence of adjacent_floodplain
(no flood Iain 0, extensive flood lain - max amts) 0 4 0 4' 0 .a2 2
Entrenchment / floodplain access'
'.
(deeply entrenched = 0; fi-e uent flooding, = max points) 0 5 0 - 4, 0 ? 2
4 Presence of adjacent,wetlands
(.no wctlands - 0; large adjacent wetlands== max points) 0 - 6 0 4 0 0
g Channel sinuosity

r
(extensive channelizaHon - 0: natural meander max,points) 0 5 0 '4:

;. 0

. ' 2
10 Sediment input
e
0. ' S
0 .4
fl`?
1
(ext
nsive de osirion- 0; little or no sediment - max points
[ 1 Size & diversity of channel bed substrate =
(fine, homogenous = 0; large, diverse sizes= max oinrs) F"I
r"t A „ 0-4 0 2
12 Evidence of channel incision or widening
(deeply incised-- 0: stable bed & banks = max oint4) 0 5 0 - 0 5: 1

13 Presence of major bank failures
5
a
(severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks max points) 0-5 0--
r 0 2

14 Root depth and density on, banks
0 3
0 ' c
(no visible roots 0; dense mots throughout- max OIAN) ' 4 (k 2

15 Impact by agriculture or livestock production r-
;

(substantial impact -0; no evidence = mar p oinrs)

0-5

0 4.

0 , 5; 0
'
16 Presence of riffle-pool/ripple-pool complexes

(no riffles/ripples or pools _ 0; well-developed -? max point-,) 0-3 0 5. O G. 2
Q'
17 Habitat complexity
0 - 6
0 6'
U -&
1
little or no habitat - 0; fre uent, varied habitats = max aims}
?^t 14 Canopy coverage over streambed

(no shading vegetation - 0: continuous canopy -max points)
0-
0 -'S
0 S'

;' s'
0
19 Substrate embeddedness f 0 0
1
(deep lv embedded 0, loose structure -max 7T i

i
0 Presence of stream invertebrates
0 4
a 5.'"i
?, ? 0 ?5k. `- '
1
no evidencL = 0; common_ numerous -t eS= maa omes

- Presence of amphibians
na evidence= 0; common, numerous types - max points), II 4 (1 4' 0 ?r 1
??
*=w Presence of fish
(no evidences - 0; corrLmon-numerous t
es ° mar
oints) 0 - 4 0 4 : , 0 $z 0

' yp
p
,

wi 23 Evidence of wildlife use

0-6 r

=,

0

0
(no evidence 0; abundant evidence = max pint`s)
,
F
? V

t ?t BsYrd;i+?' N :??C
7i
,,
^
l d
ra `? ,
s
c? erar
s ,. ?
r r t
M
l
:

26
f A? i
l
i nese cnaractensttcs are not assessed to coastal streams.
OFFICE USE ONLY: USACE AID# DWQ #
SCP4 - Perennial Stream B
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
I?
1. Applicant's Name: Frontier Land Surveying 2. Evaluator's Name: Ron Johnson and Matt Jenkins
3. Date of Evaluation: 1/22/07 4. Time of Evaluation: 1:45 pm
5. Name of Stream: UT to Stewarts Creek 6. River Basin: Yadkin
7. Approximate Drainage Area: 40 acres
8. Stream Order: First
9. Length of Reach Evaluated: 300 if 10. County: Union
11. Location of reach under evaluation (include nearby roads and landmarks): From Monroe, take NC-200/Morgan Mill Road east for
approximately 4 miles. Turn right onto New Salem Road. Travel approximately 1.2 miles and turn right onto Old Camden Road.
12. Site Coordinates (if known): N35.04201 W80.47280
13. Proposed Channel Work (if any):
14. Recent Weather Conditions: rain within the past 24 hours
15. Site conditions at time of visit: overcast. 50 degrees
16. Identify any special waterway classifications known: -Section 10 -Tidal Waters -Essential Fisheries Habitat
-Trout Waters -Outstanding Resource Waters _ Nutrient Sensitive Waters -Water Supply Watershed (I-IV)
17. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES (?DIf yes, estimate the water surface area:
18. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES (?D 19. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? (D NO
20. Estimated Watershed Land Use: % Residential _% Commercial _% Industrial 70 % Agricultural
30 % Forested _% Cleared / Logged _% Other
21. Bankfull Width: 3-4' 22. Bank Height (from bed to top of bank): 2-3'
23. Channel slope down center of stream: -Flat (0 to 2%) -Gentle (2 to 4%) X Moderate (4 to 10%) -Steep (>10%)
24. Channel Sinuosity: Straight X Occasional Bends -Frequent Meander -Very Sinuous -Braided Channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points to each
characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the characteristics identified in the
worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or
weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character
of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more
continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of
100 representing a stream of the highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 49 Comments:
Evaluator's Signature ®' -% Date, %±:f/o /
This channel evaluation form i mtended.to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers in order to make a preliminary assessment of
stream quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 05/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
SCP4 - Perennial Stream B

CTIF, S KAW
K ?• n-
Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream
-
'
'
i
3
l
(no fTo%v or saturation - 0; strong flow max points)
0-5 4'
0
4'
4
f3 x.
Evidence ofpasthuman alteration 5

(extensive alteration - 0; no alteration - mas points) 0-6 (1- 5 0 3
Riparian zone
-

-- -? n?, hut'?r crnu?uc?u?, idu hritier- Tml:i O -6 )-4
0-? 3
Evidence of,nutrient ,or chemical dischar«es
}
;vtcn?n c discharges 0: no discharges - max oints) o 5 -4 0 _4 2

5 Groundwater discharge _
'
'
Nt_ no discharge = 0; sprin
s
see
s
wetlands
etc
- mar ointsY 0 3 0 0 4
. 3
g
,
p
,
,
.

6 Presence of adjacent floodplain
K
(no flood lain - 0; extensive flood lam- max points) 0 4 0

"

0 2r
?-
1
Entrenchment / floodplain access
a;
(deeply entrenched ? 0-, fie went flooding - max oir j 0-5 0 1 4::
i 2

S Presence of adjacent wetlands
0, h
0 4' F,
0
(na wetlands - 0; large ad acentwetlands - max points)
g Channel sinuosity

(extensi
h
liz
i
0
al
d
m
i
t
0 5
0
3
ve c
anne
at
on
; natur
,
ean
er max o
n
s)

10 Sediment input
0 5
4
0
? 0 4.
2
(extensive deposition - 0_ little or-no sediment= max points) . ,
.
j l Size & diversity of channel'ibed substrate r??
0
4
0
(fine, homoii = 0, large, diverse sizes - max Dints) :. - 3
1 Evidence of channel incision or widening
0
5
,
(deeply incised. - 0: stable bed & banks - mxx points)
-
15
2
.
13 Presence of major bank failures ; * -
(severe erosion - 0-
no erosion
stable banks max
oints 0-5-, 0 S 0 N 2
,
p
)
,
I4 Root depth and.density. on banks

0

0 4'
,
0 z 5 '
(no visible roots - 0; dense roots throughout max ointrs) ,
2
15. lmpact by agriculture or livestock productio n `
x
(substantial impact °0; no evidence = max. Dints)
0-5
0 4x
0
5" :.:
2
16 Presence of riffle-pool/ripple-pool complexes ?

40 z, toles/ripples or cols - 0 well-developed -, ma.,: Dints) 0 - 3 0 0 &? 3
•
'
17 habitat complexity
-
0 6
O III

O

3
. little or no habitat
0; fie gent, vaned habitats = max Dints)
rn
18 Canopy coverage over streambed

no shading veketation 0. continuous canopy max points)

0 S

O 5 #; i .. <`

,xz• 0

4
19
Substrate embeddedness
"'
W,11 0-4

'".
"Or,** 2
(deeply embedded = 0; loose structure max ?
2,0 Presence of stream invertebrates
.
0 ` 4
` -0
0
3
YT" (no.evidence-?? = 0; common, numerous es -=
ointc) ?:.. '

Presence of amphibians

0 4.

0 4 a

fl 4`

1
(no evidence - 0; common, numerous. t es, max omtsl` s 6'
Presence of fish

•-st
; (no evidence = 0: common; numerous t?Tes= maC Dints 0-4 4
t .

ri
23 Evidence of wildlife use
'

(no evidence - O
abund,,mr=del = max points), 0-6 ?
0--75 o> 0
ss
irfi'w Pp

k 1

*These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
OFFICE USE ONLY: USACE AID# DWQ #
SCP5 - Non-Jurisdictional Ephemeral Channel C
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
1. Applicant's Name: Frontier Land Surveying 2. Evaluator's Name: Ron Johnson and Matt Jenkins
3. Date of Evaluation: 1/22/07 4. Time of Evaluation: 2:00 pm
5. Name of Stream: UT to Stewarts Creek
6. River Basin: Yadkin
7. Approximate Drainage Area: 12 acres 8. Stream Order: First
9. Length of Reach Evaluated: 300 if 10. County: Union
11. Location of reach under evaluation (include nearby roads and landmarks): From Monroe, take NC-200/Morgan Mill Road east for
approximately 4 miles. Turn right onto New Salem Road. Travel approximately 1.2 miles and turn right onto Old Camden Road.
12. Site Coordinates (if known): N35.04201, W80.47280
13. Proposed Channel Work (if any): N/A
14. Recent Weather Conditions: rain within the past 24 hours
15. Site conditions at time of visit: overcast 50 degrees
16. Identify any special waterway classifications known: -Section 10 -Tidal Waters -Essential Fisheries Habitat
-Trout Waters -Outstanding Resource Waters _ Nutrient Sensitive Waters -Water Supply Watershed (I-IV)
17. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES (?DIf yes, estimate the water surface area:
18. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES Q 19. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES 0
20. Estimated Watershed Land Use: _% Residential _% Commercial _% Industrial 30 % Agricultural
70 % Forested _% Cleared / Logged _% Other
21. Bankfull Width: 1-3'
22. Bank Height (from bed to top of bank): 0-2'
23. Channel slope down center of stream: -Flat (0 to 2%) X Gentle (2 to 4%) -Moderate (4 to 10%) -Steep (>10%)
24. Channel Sinuosity: Straight X Occasional Bends -Frequent Meander -Very Sinuous -Braided Channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points to each
characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the characteristics identified in the
worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or
weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character
of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more
continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of
100 representing a stream of the highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 37 Comments:
Evaluator's Signature l/° o ?/ - Date Z??L7
This channel evaluation form is tended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers in order to make a preliminary assessment of
stream quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 05/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
SCP5 - Non-Jurisdictional Euhemeral Channel C

Presence of flow 1persistent; pools in strew '
(no flow or saturation - O;. strong fkw -max points) 0 5 i 0 4 ' .k Q = y 2
Evidence of past' human alteration -
(extensive alteration 0; no alteration --- max pints) 0-6 0 5 0-5 2

I Riparian zone
I

(uv h1)1Lr - D; c?ntiuous, ride buffer - n1ai f,oint 0 + () 3
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges -
4
(cxtcn,?tve dischar?"es - ? no dtschar yes = max of its) 0 5 0 f 0 4 1
5 Groundwater discharge

no. discharge = 0; s rings, Seeps, wetlands: etc_ - maxoints)

0-3
?
0 - ,
0:4 1

6 Presench, of `adjacent floodplaun •
}
(no- flood lain 0; extensive flood lain= max point-,) 0 0 4 0
2. 2

7 Entrenchment! floodplain access.

?.
(dee 1 entrenched= 0: fre uent flooding =- max hints) 0 5 0 4.-' 0 2. 2

b Presence of adjacent wetlands

(no wetlands 0; large adjacent wetlands = max points) 0-6 0-4 0--2 0
7 , Channel sinuosity
'

(exrensive channelization = 0: natural meander= max points) 0-5 ,
0--4 3
10 Sediment input
0 -
0 4
0?
2
(extensive de osition- 0; little or no sediment - max
oints) .
p

11 Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
-;
,:
(fine
homOIenolis = 0; lame
diverse sizes
= max
oints) a--4 Q ,
,
,
-
p

12 Evidence of channel incision or widening t
(deeply incised - Q: stable bed banks >= max pints) 0 - 5 0 - 4 2
.; Presence of major bank failures

(severe erosion --0; no erasion
stable banks max. Diknts
0-5
0-5 -
0 5
2
,

d=
t4 Root depth and density on ban"..
0 3
0 4
0
',5
2
(no visible roots - 0, dense roots throughout max points) -
,
15 Impact by agriculture or livestock production
n :.
(substantial impact =0; no evidence = max Points) 0 5 0' 4 fl^ 5 3
16 Presence ofriffle-poollripple-pool'complexes.
'
(no riflTeslripples or ooLs - 0, -well-developed - max oints) 0 - 3 0 5 l- O -
6
2

17 Habitat complexity
0 6
0-6-
0
'6
1
(little or no habitat - O, frequent. varied habitats max points) :
Canopy coverage over streambed

3 IR
(no shading vegetation.-- 0, continuou canopy max 0 51
point's) 0-5 3

19 Substrate embeddedness
z. (dee ply embedded - 0: loose structure max

. >
t.*> r
414

0-4

Q

2
?0. Presence of stream invertebrates n t=
r no evidence - 0, common, numerous types max oiats)
Presence of amphibians

no evidence - 0; common, numerous rypes = max points)
0-4
0-4 r? 0 4 w 0
Presence of fish =.

' 22
(no e?ddence 0; common; numerous types max pints) 0 4, C4 0 l 0

23 Evidence of wildlife use. 0
b 0
Q 5
0
° (no ev idence - 0;.abundant evidence = max oints)_ - . _
'

,
y
4 Y
,a a
J&
? ; ? ?
R??`
x?
? t
4 37
T I liese charactenstics are not assessed in coastal streams.
OFFICE USE ONLY: USACE AID# DWQ #
SCP6 - Non-Jurisdictional. Ephemeral Channel D
M STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
1. Applicant's Name: Frontier Land Surveying 2. Evaluator's Name: Ron Johnson and Matt Jenkins
3. Date of Evaluation: 1/19/07 4. Time of Evaluation: 3:00 pm
5. Name of Stream: UT to Stewarts Creek 6. River Basin: Yadkin
7. Approximate Drainage Area: 20 acres
8. Stream Order: First
9. Length of Reach Evaluated: 300 if 10. County: Union
11. Location of reach under evaluation (include nearby roads and landmarks): From Monroe, take NC-200/Morgan Mill Road east for
approximately 4 miles. Turn rieht onto New Salem Road. Travel approximately 1.2 miles and turn right onto Old Camden Road.
12. Site Coordinates (if known): N35.04201 W80.47280
13. Proposed Channel Work (if any): N/A
14. Recent Weather Conditions: no rain within the past 48 hours
15. Site conditions at time of visit: overcast 45 degrees
16. Identify any special waterway classifications known: -Section 10 -Tidal Waters -Essential Fisheries Habitat
-Trout Waters -Outstanding Resource Waters _ Nutrient Sensitive Waters -Water Supply Watershed (I-IV)
17. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES (Q) If yes, estimate the water surface area:
18. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES (?D 19. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES Q
20. Estimated Watershed Land Use: _% Residential % Commercial _% Industrial 20 % Agricultural
80 % Forested _% Cleared / Logged _% Other
21. Bankfull Width: 1-2' 22. Bank Height (from bed to top of bank): 0-1'
23. Channel slope down center of stream: -Flat (0 to 2%) X Gentle (2 to 4%) -Moderate (4 to 10%) -Steep (>10%)
24. Channel Sinuosity: Straight -Occasional Bends X Frequent Meander -Very Sinuous -Braided Channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points to each
characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the characteristics identified in the
worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or
weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character
of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more
continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of
100 representing a stream of the highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 35 Comments:
Evaluator's Signature ?> • Date t ZI7 o 2
This channel evaluation form is ' nded to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers in order to make a preliminary assessment of
stream quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 05/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
SCP6 - Non-Jurisdictional Ephemeral Channel D
f, '...it' <r9l
? j \.r 4l1\i:J. ?
:ys
=3
?r
?a
?'
_ ':3yR ?
x ??Q
EdJ
" ,? 4i.l:A.
Y •
?
+
.
" .
.
??
CtIIIl4 Q R
k ?, l Presence of flow l:persistentpools in stream 3_
(no flowor saturation- 0; strong Obw - max points) 0 5 0 0
2 Fvidence of past human alteration

(extensive alteration - 0; no alteration == max points) 0 -- ?, 0
5 -
0S
1
Riparian zone
no h?iLcr L1; ?oilliruous, ?.?idc buffer »uints)
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
("extcn,iti e dD chargfe5 - 0: no discharges - IMMIX points)
r 5 Groundwater discharge
(no, discharge - 0: springs, seeps, wetlands
ate. = max points)
0 3
0 4-
0 '4
l
U ,
L
r
fi Presence of adjacent,floodplain
11
x !
(no floo ta.in 0.` extensive flood lain= max point,;) 0 0 - - 2 2
Entrenchment/ floodplain access
-
"
(deeply entrenched= '0; frequent flooding = max oiut5 0 5 U - 4 0 -2 2

8 Presence of adjacent wetlands
'
`

(no_ wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands == max points) 0 0-4:
'. 0--2: 0
'> 9 Channel sinuosity " -

(extensive ehannelizadon - 0; natural meander = ma:,( points) 0-5 0 4 0
3 2
14 Sediment input

(extensive de ositio n= 0; tittle or no sediment - max points) 0-5 O 0 4 3
C
l L Size S, diversity of channel bed substrate "
0 4
0"-S
1
(fine; homogenous-0; large_ di-verse sizes -max points)-
t' I Evidence of channel incision or widening

?4
(dee ly incised-- 0; stable bed & banks = mart points) 0 5 0-4 `.
' _0-5 2
13 Presence of major bank failures

(severe erosion - 0; no erosion, stable banks - max oints} 0-5 0-5 0-5 i 3
l4 Root depth and density on banks '

no visible roots - 0-. dense riots throughout max points) 0-3 0 4; 0 ; 5 2
`; Impact by agriculture or livestock production

;? 15

F
(substantial 'impact 0; no evidence = maw points)

r
16 Presence ofriffle- poollripple-pool'complexes ? '

(no riffleslr lesor pools --=0; well-developed max points) 0-3 0 0-6 2
' 7
1 Habitat compfexity
, (little or no habitat - 0; frequent, vaiied liabitaLs max points) 0 ' 6 0 6 0 6 1

f is Canopy coverage over streambed 0
5 0 5 '. 0` 4
?. (no shading vegetation. 0: continuous Canopy max points)? - S
I9 Substrate embeddedness
0 4
0 4'
1
(de
ly embedded - 0
loose structure == ma
i)
e
;
x
?U Presence of stream invertebrates

do evidence -- 0; common, numerous types = max ointsy 0-4 0 0-5 0
1 Presence of amphibians U 4 0 4 t} 0
to evidence - 0, common, numerous types = max omts)

C : 22
y Presence of fish 0_ 4 0 4 0 y 4 0
--? (no evidence. 0: common, numerous types, = max points)

23 Evidence of wildlife use

'
-

0-6 s
no evi
dencr
0; abundant evidence max pints)
h ? .?? ?: r?. i;: ' "`•at ? f!?? ? }•>: ? ''. Sr t .? ? + i x..# .' i
? ?q 1
«x s*
x i r.•9 '..
}.

»
c
EN"
4 f
i
1 ?.. ?dh y? •P t w'
f
L
WO (asp
eat
3

5
M
?.? ',a~'+ .?
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
OFFICE USE ONLY: USACE AID# DWQ #
SCP7 - Perennial Streams E & F
M STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET Q
1. Applicant's Name: Frontier Land Surveying 2. Evaluator's Name: Ron Johnson and Matt Jenkins
3. Date of Evaluation: 1/19/07 4. Time of Evaluation: 1:00 pm
5. Name of Stream: UT to Richardson Creek 6. River Basin: Yadkin
7. Approximate Drainage Area: 120 acres S. Stream Order: Second
9. Length of Reach Evaluated: 500 if
10. County: Union
11. Location of reach under evaluation (include nearby roads and landmarks): From Monroe, take NC-200/Morgan Mill Road east for
approximately 4 miles. Turn right onto New Salem Road. Travel approximately 1.2 miles and turn risht onto Old Camden Road.
12. Site Coordinates (if known): N35.04201, W80.47280
13. Proposed Channel Work (if any): N/A
14. Recent Weather Conditions: no rain within the past 48 hours
15. Site conditions at time of visit: overcast, 45 degrees
16. Identify any special waterway classifications known: -Section 10 -Tidal Waters -Essential Fisheries Habitat
-Trout Waters -Outstanding Resource Waters Nutrient Sensitive Waters -Water Supply Watershed (I-IV)
17. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES (?DIf yes, estimate the water surface area:
18. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YE NO 19. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? (D NO
20. Estimated Watershed Land Use: _% Residential _% Commercial _% Industrial 10 % Agricultural
90 % Forested _% Cleared / Logged % Other (
21. Bankfull Width: 3-5' 22. Bank Height (from bed to top of bank): 1-3'
23. Channel slope down center of stream: -Flat (0 to 2%) X Gentle (2 to 4%) -Moderate (4 to 10%) -Steep (>10%)
24. Channel Sinuosity: Straight -Occasional Bends X Frequent Meander -Very Sinuous -Braided Channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points to each
characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the characteristics identified in the
worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or
weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character
of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more
continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of
100 representing a stream of the highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse)
65 Comments:
Evaluator's Signature 1 ? C Date I/ t'7 0 /
This channel evaluation form is tended to be used, only as a guide to assist landowners andff environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers in order to make a preliminary assessment of
stream quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change _ version 05/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
SCP7 - Perennial Streams E & F
x
, clumi S GTKt1S
?TC?
'N CQRCXtN PQ
w ?
"
f -7
t ? Coata" < edni
~
Presence of-flow-1 persistent pools: in stream,
- (no flow or saturation - 0, strong, flow= max points) U 5 0 4 0 4
Evidence of past human alteration
(extensive a1terat1onno alteration max Points) 0 --6 0 5 0--5, 4
Riparian cone
- ? (no build- v, contiguous, wide buffer= max points) 4
Evidence ofnutrient `or chemical discharges

(extensive dischareea 0; ziu dischaq;cs -max Dints) U ?) -
4 3
Groundwater discharge
U 3'"
0-?4, .
0-4
4
no discharue - 0; sprigs, see s, wetlands, etc_ - mac points) .
?
.
6- Presence of adjacent floodplain
0-4
0-4 i
0 T
3
!
(.no flood lain = 0_ extensive flood lain -- max points) ,
' Entrenchment! floodplain access
7 (deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding = max -ousts) 0 - U 4 Q 2' 3
Presence of adjacent wetlands '

(no wetlands = 0 large adjacent wetland§_= max pint's 0 6 0 4 . 0 ?' 0
'
s Channel `sinuosity
`

(extensive channelization 0. natural meander- max points) 0-5 0 4 3
[0 Sediment input 0 1 (}_ 4 .: G- 4 2
(extensive de osrtion-- 0, littler or no sediment= max 0int-34 -

1I Size & diversity of channel bed substrate r
t
0 4
0-5"
3
(fine-,homoeenous = 0, large, diverse sizes =max points) A? ,, .
12 Evidence of channel, incision or widening
' ?

>-?'
(dee t incisecf= 0; stable bed & banks;- max oints 0-5 0-4 0- 5 4

13 Presence of major bank failures
'
,"

(severe erosion-- 0; no erosion
stable banks= ma
oints) ? U, 5 0 S 0 5 3
,
p
p? 14 Root depth and density on banks

0
3

'
0
4
1 ;
0

.(no visible roots -= 0; dense root, throughout - mah pints) - .
- 2
15 Impact by agriculture or livestock production
(substantial impact -0: no evidence = max points 0 $ - 0 0 : 4

16 Presence of riffle-pool/ripple-pool complexes:
0
3
0
6
?
(no-riffles/ripples or pools - 0: well-developed - max omts) -
' - = .
Q 4

17 Habitat complexity
0-6
0 6'
-
0 6_
4
(little or no habitat - 0: frequent, varied habitats - max point,;) . =
1 Canopy. coverage over streambed - 0

(no shading vegaition • 0- continuous canopy rnax. points) 5 0 5 0 5 5

19 Substrate embeddeduess _
:
0 4
0 4,
2
-(deeply embedded - U; loose str-uchue - max) ? .
-
20 Presence of stream invertebrates
'

(no evidence = 0, common.. numerous types = max oints)' 0-4 0-5,
.
CXl
2
21 Presence of amphibians 0 4 0-4 f:
03 4

0
s (no evidence = 0-, common, numerous types = max points) ,
?t
22 Presence of fish

(no evidence- 0; common
numerous t
es
=
ax
i
t
) 0-4 0 4 E v`
0 4
0
,
yp
,
m
po
n
s

23 Evidence of wildlife use.
0-6
0 5,
0 5
2

(no evidence --0- abundant evidence - max Points) 11
.,

y., A

.. .Y 'y,•E ` i.+..T6 N Mai' x?
4` uSa k. •. r
r4P?5(?,'°?4}K>E•t`g1I't
i i
- - 65
.
4f I
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
OFFICE USE ONLY: USACE AID# DWQ #
SCP8 - Unimportant Intermittent Stream E
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
1. Applicant's Name: Frontier Land Surveying 2. Evaluator's Name: Ron Johnson and Matt Jenkins
3. Date of Evaluation: 1/19/07 4. Time of Evaluation: 2:00 pm
5. Name of Stream: UT to Richardson Creek
7. Approximate Drainage Area: 39 acres
6. River Basin: Yadkin
8. Stream Order: First
9. Length of Reach Evaluated: 1001f 10. County:
11. Location of reach under evaluation (include nearby roads and landmarks): From Monroe, take NC-200/Morgan Mill Road east for
approximately 4 miles. Turn right onto New Salem Road. Travel approximately 1.2 miles and turn right onto Old Camden Road.
12. Site Coordinates (if known): N35.04201, W80.47280
13. Proposed Channel Work (if any): N/A
14. Recent Weather Conditions: no rain within the past 48 hours
15. Site conditions at time of visit: overcast, 45 degrees
16. Identify any special waterway classifications known: -Section 10 -Tidal Waters -Essential Fisheries Habitat
-Trout Waters -Outstanding Resource Waters _ Nutrient Sensitive Waters -Water Supply Watershed (I-IV)
17. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES (?DIf yes, estimate the water surface area:
18. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES (?D 19. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YE NO
20. Estimated Watershed Land Use: 5 % Residential
95 % Forested
_% Commercial _% Industrial _% Agricultural
% Cleared / Logged _% Other ( )
21. Bankfull Width: 1-3' 22. Bank Height (from bed to top of bank): 0-2'
23. Channel slope down center of stream: -Flat (0 to 2%) X Gentle (2 to 4%) -Moderate (4 to 10%) -Steep (>10%)
24. Channel Sinuosity: Straight -Occasional Bends X Frequent Meander -Very Sinuous -Braided Channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points to each
characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the characteristics identified in the
worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or
weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character
of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more
continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of
100 representing a stream of the highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 45 Comments:
Evaluator's Signature Date tll gl,Q7
This channel evaluation for is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and eTnv ronmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers in order to make a preliminary assessment of
stream quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 05/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.
r
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
SCPS - Unimportant Intermittent Stream E

i
1 Presence of flow /,persistent pools in stream

` °r

(no fl6%v or saturation -
0
stron
flow -' m
in
) 00
0
??
2
,
;
g
ax po
ts
4 r
2
Evidence of past human alteration
?.
;
(extensive alteration 0, no alteration - rmLx ointc) 0 0 ??? 0 -S 4
Riparian zone
(no buffer = O; COntIaL10US', .1 ldc l?U CfCj- Itl?iy O1ntS) 3
Fvidence of-nnfrient or chemical dlscharhes
(extcnsrvc discharLcs - 0? no discharges - ma.
x points) 0 0 - d 0 - 4 3
5 GroundW3ter discharge
?
Q ? ?(no discharge = 0: s rim*s_ seeps-, werlands,.etc. -max points) 0 3' 0 ,. 0 4t 1
c Presence of adjacent floodplain
(no food la n = O; extensive flood lain- max omts) © 4' 0' 4s 0 2
i.
7 Entrenchment/'floodplain access

(dec ly enrrenched = 0; to nent flooding ma' points) 0-5 0 v' , 0 2 3

1. Presence of adjacent wetlands
0-6
A 4 .
0
(nowctlands = 0: Jar ?e adjacenrwetlands -`max points)

9' Channel sinuosity
-

?,
.
(extensive channclization- 0;'hatural meander=max points). 0-5- 0-4 y 0 ;r s. 3
is
JO Sediment input

0'-5

-0,-- 4:
°
ltl 4;
. ...

2
l TI Size & diversity of channel bed substrate 0

(fine; homocenons = O; Iarge, diverse sizes = max points) -
2

- i nese cnaractensttcs are not assessed m coastal streams.
i OFFICE USE ONLY: USACE AID# DWQ #
SCP9 - Non-Jurisdictional Ephemeral Channel G
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET -AQF
1. Applicant's Name: Frontier Land Surveying 2. Evaluator's Name: Ron Johnson and Matt Jenkins
3. Date of Evaluation: 1/19/07 4. Time of Evaluation: 1:30 pm
5. Name of Stream: UT to Richardson Creek
6. River Basin: Yadkin
7. Approximate Drainage Area: 5 acres S. Stream Order: First
9. Length of Reach Evaluated: 500 if 10. County: Union
11. Location of reach under evaluation (include nearby roads and landmarks): From Monroe, take NC-200/Morgan Mill Road east for
approximately 4 miles. Turn right onto New Salem Road. Travel approximately 1.2 miles and turn right onto Old Camden Road.
12. Site Coordinates (if known): N35.04201. W80.47280
13. Proposed Channel Work (if any): N/A
14. Recent Weather Conditions: no rain within the past 48 hours
15. Site conditions at time of visit: overcast 45 degrees
16. Identify any special waterway classifications known: -Section 10 Tidal Waters -Essential Fisheries Habitat
-Trout Waters -Outstanding Resource Waters _ Nutrient Sensitive Waters -Water Supply Watershed (I-IV)
17. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES Q) If yes, estimate the water surface area:
18. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES Q 19. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES Q
20. Estimated Watershed Land Use: _% Residential _% Commercial _% Industrial _% Agricultural
100 % Forested _% Cleared / Logged _% Other
21. Bankfull Width: 2-3'
22. Bank Height (from bed to top of bank): 3'
23. Channel slope down center of stream: X Flat (0 to 2%) -Gentle (2 to 4%) -Moderate (4 to 10%) -Steep (>10%)
24. Channel Sinuosity: X Straight -Occasional Bends -Frequent Meander -Very Sinuous -Braided Channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points to each
characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the characteristics identified in the
worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or
weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character
of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more
continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of
100 representing a stream of the highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse):
Comments:
Evaluator's Signature 7 • Date ?9 D 7
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers in order to make a preliminary assessment of
stream quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 05/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
a%.ry -lion-jurisuictionai r, nemerai t- nannet u

... `. «!i r1n:•r: i`1 Y.'` i kt??'» r."t. vf` Aas ?_- A'th
t k v •,.fi
` Presence of flaw I persistent pooli in stream

(uo flow or saturation = O; strong flow = max oint4). 0-5 01 - 4
Evidence of past human alteration

(extensive alteration - 0; no alteration = max oints) 0 (I' ` 0 4
Riparian zone

tno buffer = u: contiguous, wide buffer = max points) D 4
Evidence of mitrient or chemical discharlTes
4 ?
(extensive discharge, - 0: no discharg(cs - nlax U J 0 4 ? 0 -4 2
point-S) Groundwater discharge
(no discharge = 0; s rims
wetlands
; max
see
s
etc
oints)
,
p
,
;
.
p
r-F
6 Presence of adjacentfloodplain
'

(no flood lam 0: extensive flood lain--max points) 0 4 0-4
0-
2
3
7 Entrenchment / floodplain access a.
'
= (dee Iv entrenched= 0; frequent t1oodin- max ointst 0 - 5 0 - 4 0 _ 2 2
Presence of adjacent wetlands,
?
(no
wetlands 0: lars,e adjacent fvetlands = max oims) 0 - 6c 0 4 0 _2 0
,.' 9 Channel sinuosity
'
(extensive channelization = 0: natural meander- max points) 0 _.5 0 - 4 0 .3;:` 1
E.
10
Sediment input

(extensive de ositiori-0;littleornosediment max oints) 0-5 0 1
l l Size & diversity of channel bed substrate '
?
(fine, homogenous --- 0, lu2c, diverse sizes - max points) 0 - 4 0 1
12 Evidence of channel incision or widening
?
(deeply incised - 0 stable bed & banks-max points) '0 - 5 a - # 4,-5 2
?? l3 Presence of major bank failures
.a.
.,?
(severe erosion - 0; no erosion, stable banks - max: points) 0-5 0-5 - 0--5 2
14 Root depth and density on, banks 5'

'
(no visible roots -- O; dense roots thr
oughout max points)
0
0-4
0 3
Impact by agriculture or livestock production
15
(substantial irn act-0: no evidence= max oints) 0-5 0-4' 0--5 4
16 Presence of riffle-pool/ripple-pool' complexes

? (no riffles/riles or pools - 0; well-develo ed max point- 0 3 = s 0 - 5 0 - G 1
+
eE
L Habitat complexity.
'

(little or no habitat 0,, fre uent, varied habitats max oinrs) 0-6,
' 0
6 0 z6 e 0
t s Canopy coverage over streambed
(no shading vegetatiou 0. conrinuous-cano max points)
a: [? Substrate embeddedness
L x (deeply embedded -'0; Loose structure - max) ' ; y .. 0 - l 0 4 2
Presence of stream invertebrates
(no evidence - 0; comznon_ numerous types. max points)
?' 2) Presence of amphibians ; .

no evidence - 0; common, numerous types _ max outs)' p

Y
2 Presence of fish
0 1'.
0 - 4-
0 4S
0
(no evidence 0: coznunon, numerous types max points)
23 Evidence of wildlife use 0 6 0 5' y'
0
v (no evidence 4, abundant evidence max pints) ?f

x
•
'? r 'l}. 8II r 7? 36
F

T 1 nese cnaractensttcs are not assessed m coastal streams.
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Lake Twitty Date: 03/06/07
Applicant/Owner: Frontier Land Surveying County: Union
Investigator(s): Matt Jenkins, WPIT and Paul Bright State: NC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes No Community ID: wetland
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes No Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes No Plot ID: DPI
(If needed, explain on reverse.)
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species
1 Arundinaria gigantea Stratum Indicator
herb FACW Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
9
2 Platanus occidentalis tree FACW- 10
3 Carex spp. herb 11
4 Carpinus caroliniana tree FAC 12
5 13
6 14
7 15
8 16
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC
100%
Remarks:
All of the dominant
plant. species are FAC or wetter.
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in remarks):
Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
X Inundated
Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Field Observations: Sediment Deposits (on leaves)
?- Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth of Surface Water: 0-12 (in.) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Depth to Free Water in Pit: N/A (in.) Water-Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Depth to Saturated Soil: <12 (in.) ?-FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
Indicators of wetland hydrology are resent.
Routine On-Site Data Forms Page 1 of 2 3/7/2007
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Chewacla silt loam (ChA) Drainage Class poorly-drained
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup): thermic Fluva uentic D strude is Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(inches) Horizon (Munsell Moistl (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-12 B 2.5Y 5/2 7.5YR 4/4 many/distinct clay loam
Histosol Concretions
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List (Inclusions)
Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
?- Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
Indicators of h dric soils are resent.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No (Circle)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No (Circle)
Hydric Soils Present? Ye No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Ye No
Remarks:
Data point is representative of a Jurisdictional wetland area.
Approved by HQUSACE 2/92
Routine On-Site Data Forms Page 2 of 2 3/7/2007
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species
1 Ligustrum sinense Stratum Indicator
shrub FAC Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
9
2 Betula nigra tree FACW+ 10
3 Carex sp. herb 11
4 Quercus rubra tree FACU 12
5 Liriodendron tulipifera tree FACU 13
6 Acer rubrum tree FAC 14
7 15
8 16
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC
60%
Remarks:
More than 50% of the dominant
plant species are FAC or wetter.
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in remarks):
Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
Inundated
Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Field Observations: Sediment Deposits (on leaves)
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth of Surface Water: N/A (in.) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Depth to Free Water in Pit: N/A (in.) Water-Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Depth to Saturated Soil: >12 (in.) FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
No indicators of wetland hydrology are resent.
Routine On-Site Data Forms Page 1 of 2 3/712007
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
t
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Chewacla silt loam (CW Drainage Class poorly-drained
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup): thermic Fluva uentic D strude is Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No
Profile Descri tion:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(inches) Horizon (Munsell Moistl (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-12 B 7.5YR 4/4 N/A N/A silt loam
Histosol Concretions
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List (Inclusions)
Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
No indicators of h dric soils are resent.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Ye No (Circle)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
(Circle)
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
Data point is representative of a non-jurisdictional upland area.
Approved by HQUSACE 2/92
Routine On-Site Data Forms Page 2 of 2
3/7/2007
Lake Twitty Site
Nationwide Permit No 14 Project No. 2007-1777

N't

' ?' .?? ° "
ter a 1 z

?44.??.JI?.`." 'A'?? ? t:.aN'i- ...}v.e? .A?•?t.'.??v1A"????ty
i e,- '` V h, . ?r''.` =(,???_prol-+. ? A.. XC'J. ,?Re _.Qy4h??b. ? ,r ? ?, y? i'
Y,. C xti 1"
"
.k. ?

7, X4
a
Photograph A. View of Perennial Stream J (Richardson Creek), lacing downstream.
ti }' w G. i.sa
? t
L
:
?
•
e
?
.
?.?' ??,?;
?} e. fx?
ar.
f
f ??
?? b .
. ?a??' ? ? e `r 9 A s r b !' ? v. P ? ? ?? ?., y.1t 4• ? r i • !?f.??t e?
.iFWk t air t? xr.#K .,,R ?r4' ? > '1,K t r?u": ?1 ?P 9, x<7r?p
• ?.`(` ? `[, ,? ? "a.,.r ? ..,,,y 'Erie +? j'., +W r ,q'. R' e4. rs
.. ?•" ? ? r`e..?Y ??1`??a1?,?q.,LnyT??Sax ilk- ? ?g_: ,?rSr ?"t`?''p'??'? ? ..;

jif

r ,.
y -
10 -T-

aw ?*
1 ?

t Ar,? 3
?
x 1?4
j'

x
ifl?•r /
'
1
; S I {l+R
44
40
f
'
lSM' _
.?r
'P ?i
Photograph B. View of Perennial Stream A, facing upstream.
Lake Twitty Site
Nationwide Permit No 14 Project No. 2007-1777
J
?'1yp' {rf
e

?3? 1y
, a?" F t
?? YI J

Photograph C. View of Unimportant Intermittent Stream E, facing downstream,

*'
??
?.K,. ?? I?4Y y •?'V??y1 4y Y'
Photograph D. View of Unimportant Intermittent Stream B, facing upstream.
Lake Twitty Site
Nationwide Permit No 14 Project No. 2007-1777
Photograph E. View of Wetland AA, facing south.
Photograph F. View of jurisdictional open water area, facing south.