R4901

31825753
July 20, 2007
Mr. Eric Alsmeyer
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
US Army Corps of Engineers
6508 Falls of Neuse Road
Raleigh, NC 27615-6814
RE: Request for 404 Wetland Jurisdictional Concurrence
Falls of Neuse Road Widening and Relocation Project
Wake County, North Carolina
TIP Project No: 4901
Dear Mr. Alsmeyer:
URS Corporation - North Carolina (URS) has been contracted by the City of Raleigh to conduct a wetland
and stream delineation for the above referenced project. The proposed widening project study area (Section
1) includes existing Falls of Neuse Road from Raven Ridge Road north until the intersection with Fonville
Road. The proposed relocation project study area (Section 2) includes the 86-acre property east of the Falls of
Neuse Road and Fonville Road intersection. Section 1 will proceed from Raven Ridge Road north
approximately 1.31 miles to where the alignment will go on new location. This section will widen the existing
2-lane roadway to a 4-lane divided road. Section 2 will begin at the Fonville Road intersection and will
continue north 0.77 miles and tie to the existing section of new Falls of Neuse Road in the Wakefield
Development.
Enclosed you will find the following information:
USACE/EPA Jurisdictional Determination Forms
USACE Route Wetland Delineation Forms
USACE Stream Quality Assessment Worksheet
NCDWQ Stream Classification Forms
NCDWQ Wedand Rating Forms
Figures 1-4
Once you have received and reviewed the enclosed information, please contact me at 919-461-1459 or
[e-mail] with a date and time you have available to schedule a field visit. I look forward
to working with you.
Sincerely,
URS Corporation - North Carolina
Ouvx& "A"
Tina L. Randazzo r
Environmental Scientist
TLR: bkc
Enclosures
cc: Rob Ridings, NCDWQ (w/enclosure)
Sylvester Percival, El, City of Raleigh
Vince Rhea, PE, NCDOT
Kim Leight, AICP, URS
URS Corporation - North Carolina
1600 Perimeter Park Drive, Suite 400
Morrisville, NC 27560
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
JU
2001-1
Re: Falls Neuse Rd delineation
Subject: Re: Falls Neuse Rd delineation VZA R
From: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 09:21:21 -0400
To: Rob Ridings <[e-mail]>
30
Great.
If you are traveling north on Falls of Neuse, the site is before the Neuse River bridge, before the big bend in the road.
You'll see a big white "For Sale" sign, which marks the property. A dirt road is located before the sign. Turn right
onto the dirt road and it'll take you in the center of the project area. The dirt road is pretty long and will lead you to a
residential area. We'll be parking there.
If you have any problems my cell phone number is: 696-9506.
Otherwise, I'll see you there.
Tina (Randazzo) Sekula
Environmental Scientist
URS Corporation
1600 Perimeter Park Drive
Morrisville, NC 27560
Main Number: 919-461-1100
Direct Number: 919-461-1459
[e-mail]
This e-mail and any attachments are confidential. If you receive this message in error or are not the intended recipient, you
should not retain, distribute, disclose or use any of this information and you should destroy the e-mail and any attachments or
copies.
Rob Ridings <[e-mail]>
That's perfectly fine
-rob
Rob Ridings
<[e-mail]>
07/27/2007 09:11 AM
I'll be there.
[e-mail] wrote:
[e-mail]
cc
SubjectRe: Falls Neuse Rd delineation
> Hi Rob,
> Eric called yesterday and we have a JD scheduled for the Falls of
> Neuse Road project. Right now we have it scheduled for Thursday
> September eat 8:30am, on site.
> P5
> Please let me know if you are able to make this.
> Thanks.
> Tina (Randazzo) Sekula
1 of 2 9/5/2007 11:01 AM
Re: Falls Neuse Rd delineation
> Environmental Scientist
> URS Corporation
> 1600 Perimeter Park Drive
> Morrisville, NC 27560
> Main Number: 919-461-1100
> Direct Number: 919-461-1459
> [e-mail]
> This e-mail and any attachments are confidential. If you receive this
> message in error or are not the intended recipient, you should not
> retain, distribute, disclose or use any of this information and you
> should destroy the e-mail and any attachments or copies.
> Inactive hide details for Rob Ridings <[e-mail]>Rob
> Ridings <[e-mail]>
> *Rob Ridings <[e-mail]>*
>
> 07/25/2007 02:12 PM
> To
> [e-mail]
> cc
> Subject
> Falls Neuse Rd delineation
> Tina,
> I got the Delineation package today for Fall of Neuse Road. When Eric
> schedules the field visit with you, let me know and if I can, I'll
> accompany.
> Thanks,
> Rob Ridings,
> DWQ
Content-Type: image/gif
picl0498.gif'
Content-Encoding: base64
2 of 2 9/5/2007 11:01 AM
CD
0
v
0-
0
00
w
O
O
Q
7
O
N
O
O
v
v
W
U'1
D
CD
0
v
Q
v
O
00
C.)
O
O
v
Q
cQ
O
A
N
O
O
v
v
cn
O
ot4
4
CD
_0
na
ao
s.
"(D Z
z ;a 0) CD
Cow
c CD. CD
=CD O
Q
O
CD
0
o •
z I
Z % =o \
n Z M \
-, y ? v
0
z '? N \
om 0 o yo
v-n M H
w v, M
,6v
°
N N
1 ?.
i
D
Falls of Neuse Road Widening
and Relocation Project
Wake County, North Carolina
TIP No. U-4901
Jurisdictional Stream and Wetland Data Forms
Prepared for:
The City of Raleigh
Prepared by:
URS Corporation - North Carolina
1600 Perimeter Park Drive
Suite 400
Morrisville, North Carolina 27560
July 20, 2007
?I

1

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Falls of Neuse Widening and Relocation Project -Neuse River
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
State: North Carolina County/parish/borough: Wake County City: Raleigh
Center coordinates of site (]at/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 35 56 1 V N, Long. 78 34 31° ?.
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Falls Lake
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: Neuse River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 03020201
Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
? Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc...) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
? Field Determination. Date(s):
SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There hre no "navigable waters of the U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review arca. [Required]
? Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
[ Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There :are "waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply):
Eg TNWs, including territorial seas
? Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
? Relatively permanent waters2 (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
? Non-RPWs that flow.directly or indirectly into TNWs
? Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
? Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
? Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
? Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
? Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non-wetland waters: Aprox 1800 linear feet: 125-150 width (ft) and/or acres.
Wetlands: acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: 1957 Delineation Nlanual
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
Non-regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable):'
Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain:
Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year-round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally"
(e.g., typically 3 months).
3 Supporting documentation is presented in Section III.F.

SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS ,
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete ,
Section III.A.1 and Section III.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections III.A.1 and 2
and Section III.D.1.; otherwise, see Section III.B below.
1. TNW ,
Identify TNW: Neuse River.
Summarize rationale supporting determination: Confirmed by USACE rep.
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW '
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent": .
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY): ,
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met. '
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non-navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year-round

(perennial) flow, skip to Section III.D.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow, '
skip to Section III.D.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and

EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a '
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbody° is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the '
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is

the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section III.B.1 for '
the tributary, Section III.B.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section III.B.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section III.C below.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW '
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: square miles
Drainage area: square miles
Average annual rainfall: inches
Average annual snowfall: inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics: '
(a) Relationship with TNW:
? Tributary flows directly into TNW.
? Tributary flows through 10 (or more) tributaries before entering TNW.

Project waters are 30 (or more) river miles from TNW.
Project waters are I (or less) nver miles from RPW.
Project waters are 30 (or morel aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are 1 (or less) aerial (straight) miles from RPW. '
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNW5:
Tributary stream order, if known: '
° Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and
West.
s Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW

F1

r

7

r

C
(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apply):
Tributary is: ? Natural
? Artificial (man-made). Explain:
? Manipulated (man-altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: feet
Average depth: feet
Average side slopes: Vertical (1:1 or less).
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
? Silts ? Sands ? Concrete
? Cobbles ? Gravel ? Muck
? Bedrock ? Vegetation. Type/%cover:
? Other. Explain:
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain:
Presence of run/riffle/pool complexes. Explain:
Tributary geometry: iZelatiJely straight
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: Intermittent but. not seasonal flows
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year 20 (or greater]
Describe flow regime:
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: Discrete and confined. Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: ',linlLiir_q. Explain findings:
? Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
? Bed and banks
? OHWM6 (check all indicators that apply):
? clear, natural line impressed on the bank
? changes in the character of soil
? shelving
? vegetation matted down, bent, or absent
? leaf litter disturbed or washed away
? sediment deposition
? water staining
? other (list):
? Discontinuous OHWM.7 Explain:
? the presence of litter and debris
? destruction of terrestrial vegetation
? the presence of wrack line
? sediment sorting
? scour
? multiple observed or predicted flow events
? abrupt change in plant community
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
?, High Tide Line indicated by: ? Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
? oil or scum line along shore objects ? survey to available datum;
? fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore) ? physical markings;
? physical markings/characteristics ? vegetation lines/changes in vegetation types.
? tidal gauges
? other (list):
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
'A natural or man-made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
' the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
'Ibid.

(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
? Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width):
? Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
? Habitat for:
? Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
? Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
? Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
? Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non-TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size: acres
Wetland type. Explain:
Wetland quality. Explain:
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non-TNW:
Flow is lntermtttent"flow. Explain:
Surface flow is: Discrete and confined
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Unknown. Explain findings:
? Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non-TNW:
? Directly abutting
? Not directly abutting
? Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
? Ecological connection. Explain:
? Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are .3,0,(o_r more) river miles from TNW.
Project waters are M (or more) rria] (straiehtl miles from TNW.
Flow is from: }Ve_tlaad tolfrom navigablewaters.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the ,500-}ear or greater floodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
? Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
? Vegetation type/percent cover. Explain:
? Habitat for:
? Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
? Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
? Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
? Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis: 30 (or more)
Approximately ( ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.

H

C

7

For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and/or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
1. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section III.D:
Significant nexus findings for non-RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non-RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section III.D:
Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to
Section III.D:
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
TNWs: 1800 linear feet, 125-150 width (ft), Or, acres.
? Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year-round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial:
Q Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally:
1

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply): '
Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
3
N
RPW
s th
t fl
di
l
i
di '
.
on-
s
a
ow
rect
y or
n
rectly into TNWs.
Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within th
revi
h
ll th
k
t
l
e
ew area (c
ec
a
a
app
y):
El Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters: '
4. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Q Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.

? Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year-round. Provide data and rationale '
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is '
seasonal in Section 111.13 and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW:
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres. '
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs. '
?' Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.

6. Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.

Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and ,
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres. '
7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters 2
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
? Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or '
? Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1-6), or
? Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
,
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA-STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):10
? which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes. ,
? from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
? which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
? Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
? Other factors. Explain: '
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
'See Footnote # 3. '
9 To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III.D.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos. '

fl

' Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
? Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
' Wetlands: acres.
F. NON-JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
' ? If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
? Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
' "Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
Q Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
? Other: (explain, if not covered above):
Provide acreage estimates for non-jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
' factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
judgment (check all that apply):
? Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
? Lakes/ponds: acres.
' ? Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
? Wetlands: acres.
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
' ? Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
? Lakes/ponds: acres.
? Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
' ? Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
' A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
19 Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:
Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
' ? Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
? Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report.
Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
? Corps navigable waters' study:
? U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
? USGS NHD data.
? USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:7.5 minute series, Wake Forest. NC Quadrangle.
' ? USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:
? National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
? FEMA/FIRM maps:
' ? 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
Photographs: ? Aerial (Name & Date):
or ? Other (Name & Date):

?l Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
Applicable/supporting case law:
Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
' This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION 1: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Falls of Neuse Widening and Relocation Project - UT to Neuse River (SI)
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
State: North Carolina County/parish/borough: Wake County City: Raleigh
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 35 56 11 ° N. Long. 78 34 31 ° .
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Falls Lake
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: Neuse River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 03020201
[} Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
? Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc...) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
' different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
' ? Field Determination. Date(s):
SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
' There Are no "navigable waters of the U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review urea. [Required]
? Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Nre "waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply): t
' ? TNWs, including territorial seas
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
Relatively permanent waters2 (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
? Non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
' ? Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
' Non-wetland waters: Aprox 550 linear feet: 2-3 width (ft) and/or acres.
Wetlands: acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: 1987 Delineation Manual
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
2. Non-regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable):'
Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain:
1
Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year-round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally"
(e.g., typically 3 months).
' Supporting documentation is presented in Section III.F.

SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete
Section III.A.I and Section III.D.l. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections III.A.1 and 2
and Section III.D.1.; otherwise, see Section III.B below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent": .
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non-navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year-round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section III.D.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section III.D.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbody° is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section III.B.1 for
the tributary, Section III.B.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section III.B.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section III.C below.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditionst
Watershed size: square miles
Drainage area: care milgy,
Average annual rainfall: inches
Average annual snowfall: inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
? Tributary flows directly into TNW.
? Tributary flows thronah 10 (or more) tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are 30 (or more) river miles from TNW.
Project waters are 1 (or less) river miles from RPW.
Project waters are 30 (or more) aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are I (or Icss) aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNW5:
Tributary stream order, if known:
Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the arid
West.
s Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.

u

l

fl

(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apply):
Tributary is: ? Natural
? Artificial (man-made). Explain:
' ? Manipulated (man-altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: feet
Average depth: feet
Average side slopes: Vertical (I -I or less).

n
i

1
J

Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
? Silts ? Sands ? Concrete
? Cobbles ? Gravel ? Muck
? Bedrock ? Vegetation. Type/% cover:
? Other. Explain:
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain:
Presence of run/riffle/pool complexes. Explain:
Tributary geometry: Relatively straight
Tributary gradient (approxi n rt c a % crage slope): %
(c) Elow•
Tributary provides for: Intermittent but not seasogal flow
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/yeur: 20 (or greater)
Describe flow regime
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: Discrete and confined. Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: UnknoNNn. Explain findings:
? Dye (or others test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
? Bed and banks
? OHWM6 (check all indicators that apply):
? clear, natural line impressed on the bank ?
? changes in the character of soil ?
? shelving ?
? vegetation matted down, bent, or absent ?
? leaf litter disturbed or washed away ?
? sediment deposition ?
? water staining ?
? other (list):
F1 Discontinuous OHWM.' Explain:
the presence of litter and debris
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
the presence of wrack line
sediment sorting
scour
multiple observed or predicted flow events
abrupt change in plant community
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
10 High Tide Line indicated by: ? Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
? oil or scum line along shore objects ? survey to available datum;
? fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore) ? physical markings;
? physical markings/characteristics ? vegetation lines/changes in vegetation types.
? tidal gauges
? other (list):
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
bA natural or man-made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
'Ibid.
1
(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
? Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width):
? Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
? Habitat for:
? Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
? Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
? Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
? Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non-TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size: acres
Wetland type. Explain:
Wetland quality. Explain:
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non-TNW:
Flow is Inter?ii1"tteat flow. Explain:
Surface flow is: Discrete and confined
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Unknown. Explain findings:
? Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non-TNW:
? Directly abutting
? Not directly abutting
? Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
? Ecological connection. Explain:
? Separated by berm barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are ? 0 (or more), river miles from TNW.
Project waters are 30 (or more) aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: kWetland to/froin navigable_ waters.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the 500-year or greater floodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
? Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
? Vegetation type/percent cover. Explain:
? Habitat for:
? Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
? Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
? Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
? Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis: 30 (or more)
Approximately ( ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.
1

u

For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (YIN) Size (in acres)
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and/or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
1. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section III.D:
t 2. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non-RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section III.D:
3. Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to
Section IILD:
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
' 1. TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
U TNWs: linear feet width (ft), Or, acres.
b Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
2. RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year-round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial: This tributary scored 30.5 on the NCDWQ Stream Classification Form.
Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally:

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: Approx 550 linear feet 2-3 width (ft).
? Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Non-RPWs8 that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
? Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.C. '
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
[ Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
? Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
? Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
? Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year-round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is '
seasonal in Section III.B and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW:
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.

6. Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
? Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.9
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional
? Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
? Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1-6), or
?, Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).

E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA-STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):10
which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes. '
from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
? Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
? Other factors. Explain:
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
'See Footnote # 3.
9 To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III.D.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.

' Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
? Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
? Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
? Wetlands: acres.
F. NON-JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
?l If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
? Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
' "Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
d Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
? Other: (explain, if not covered above):
j rovide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
actors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
udgment (check all that apply):
? Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
? Lakes/ponds: acres.
' ? Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
Wetlands: acres.
' Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
? Lakes/ponds: acres.
Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
' ? Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply -checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:
Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
? Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
? Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report.
? Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
? Corps navigable waters' study:
U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
? USGS NHD data.
? USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:7.5 minute series, Wake Forest. NC Quadrangle.
? USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:
? National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
? State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
? FEMA/FIRM maps:
? 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
Photographs: ? Aerial (Name & Date):
or ? Other (Name & Date):
? Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
' ? Applicable/supporting case law:
? Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
? Other information (please specify):

B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:
?J

IL,

C

i?

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This forti should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Falls of Neuse Widening and Relocation Project - UT to Neuse River (S2)
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
State: North Carolina County/parish/borough: Wake County City: Raleigh
Center coordinates of site (]at/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 35 56 11 ° , Long. 78 34 31 ° NV
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Falls Lake
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: Neuse River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 03020201
Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc...) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
? Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
[; Field Determination. Date(s):
SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There l1re no "navigable waters of the U.S" within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review area. [Required]
Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Are "waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply): t
? TNWs, including territorial seas
? Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
0 Relatively permanent waters2 (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
? Non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
? Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
? Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
? Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non-wetland waters: Aprox 2000 linear feet: 3-4 width (ft) and/or acres.
Wetlands: acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: 1987 Delineation Niauual
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
Non-regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable):
E] Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain:
Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year-round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally"
(e.g., typically 3 months).
3 Supporting documentation is presented in Section III.F.

SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS '
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete '
Section III.A.1 and Section III.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections III.A.1 and 2
and Section III.D.1.; otherwise, see Section III.B below.
1. TNW '
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW '
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent": .
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY): ,
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non-navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year-round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section III.D.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section III.D.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and

EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a '
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbody° is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is

the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section III.B.1 for '
the tributary, Section III.B.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section III.B.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section III.C below.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW '
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: square miles
Drainage area: square miles
Average annual rainfall: inches
Average annual snowfall: inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics: ,
(a) Relationship with TNW:
? Tributary flows directly into TNW.
? Tributary flows through j10 (or morel tributaries before entering TNW.
'
Project waters are 30(,or more) river miles from TNW.
Project waters are I (or less) river miles from RPW.
Project waters are 30 (or more) aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are I (or less) aerial (straight) miles from RPW. '
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNW5:
Tributary stream order, if known: '
Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and

West. ¦
'Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW

n
it
'
(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apply):
Tributary is: ? Natural
? Artificial (man-made). Explain:
? Manipulated (man-altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: feet
Average depth: feet
Average side slopes: Vertical (I:1 or less).
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
' ? Silts ? Sands ? Concrete
? Cobbles ? Gravel ? Muck
? Bedrock ? Vegetation. Type/% cover:
? Other. Explain:
' Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain:
Presence of run/riffle/pool complexes. Explain:
Tributary geometry: Relatiiyely straig #
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope); %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: Intermittent but not seasor)al flow
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year: 20 (orgreater)
Describe flow regime:
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: Discrete and confined. Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Unknown. Explain findings:
? Dye (or other) test performed:
' Tributary has (check all that apply):
? Bed and banks
? OHWM6 (check all indicators that apply):
? clear, natural line impressed on the bank ? the presence of litter and debris
? changes in the character of soil ? destruction of terrestrial vegetation
? shelving ? the presence of wrack line
? vegetation matted down, bent, or absent ? sediment sorting
? leaf litter disturbed or washed away ? scour
? sediment deposition ? multiple observed or predicted flow events
? water staining ? abrupt change in plant community
? other (list):
? Discontinuous OHWM.' Explain:
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
High Tide Line indicated by: R] Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
? oil or scum line along shore objects ? survey to available datum;
' ? fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore) ? physical markings;
? physical markings/characteristics ? vegetation lines/changes in vegetation types.
? tidal gauges
' ? other (list):
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
I
6A natural or man-made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
'Ibid.

(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
? Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width):
? Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
? Habitat for:
? Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
? Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
? Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
? Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non-TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size: acres
Wetland type. Explain:
Wetland quality. Explain:
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non-TNW:
Flow is: In e'!gjiteiit tlow. Explain:
Surface flow is: Discrete and confined,
Characteristics
Subsurface flow: ,Unknown. Explain findings:
? Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adiacencv Determination with Non-TNW:
? Directly abutting
? Not directly abutting
? Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
? Ecological connection. Explain:
? Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are 30 (or more) river miles from TNW.
Project waters are 30 (or more) aerial (etraiQht) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: I'ctiand to/from w tiigable'waters.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the _500-rear or greater floodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
? Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
? Vegetation type/percent cover. Explain:
? Habitat for:
? Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
? Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
? Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
? Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis: 30 (or more)
Approximately ( ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.

1

I?
11

' For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (YIN) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (YIN) Size (in acres)
' Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
I of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands; has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and/or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
' wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
J

L

1
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
1. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section III.D:
2. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non-RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section III.D:
Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to
Section III.D:
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
Q TNWs: linear feet width (ft), Or, acres.
[] Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year-round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial: This tributary displayed strong characteristics of a perennial stream such as strong water flow, distinct
bed and banks, and biology.
Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally:

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: Approx 2000 linear feet 3-4 width (ft).
[] Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Non-RPWss that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
? Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
? Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
E] Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
4. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
EM Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year-round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section III.B and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW:
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Q Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
6. Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Q Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.9
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
[l Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
[J Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1-6), or
? Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA-STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):10
which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
? which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
? Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
? Other factors. Explain:
8See Footnote # 3.
e To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III.D.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.

17

1

r]

E 7

Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
? Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
? Other non-wetland waters: acres.
? Wetlands:
acres.
F. NON-JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
El If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
? Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
? Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
I Other: (explain, if not covered above):
' Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
udgment (check all that apply):
Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
' ? Lakes/ponds: acres.
? Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
? Wetlands: acres.

11

Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
Lakes/ponds: acres.
? Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
? Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:
Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
? Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
? Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report.
[] Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
? Corps navigable waters' study:
? U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
? USGS NHD data.
? USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:7.5 minute series, Wake Forest. NC Quadrangle.
? USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:
? National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
? State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
? FEMA/FIRM maps:
? 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
? Photographs: ? Aerial (Name & Date):
or ? Other (Name & Date):
? Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
? Applicable/supporting case law:
? Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
? Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:
Identify type(s) of waters:

I
?j
u

J
APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Falls of Neuse Widening and Relocation Project - UT to Neuse River (S3)
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
State: North Carolina County/parish/borough: Wake County City: Raleigh
, Long. 78 34 31 ° V4'.
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 35 56 11'
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Falls Lake
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: Neuse River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 03020201
Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
? Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc...) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
[] Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
Field Determination. Date(s):
SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION..
There Are no "navigable waters of the U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review area. [Required]
? Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
I Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There k "waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply):
EJ TNWs, including territorial seas
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
® Relatively permanent waters2 (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
? Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
? Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
? Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
? Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non-wetland waters: Aprox 450 linear feet: 1-3 width (ft) and/or acres.
Wetlands: acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: 1987,nelineation Manual
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
Non-regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable):3
Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain:
Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
' For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year-round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally"
(e.g., typically 3 months).
' Supporting documentation is presented in Section III.F.

SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete '
Section III.A.1 and Section III.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections III.A.1 and 2
and Section III.D.l.; otherwise, see Section IILB below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW '
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent": .
B
CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW
AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS
IF ANY '
.
)
(
):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met. '
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non-navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "°relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year-round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section III.D.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section III.D.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and

EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a '
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbodya is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the '
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is

the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section III.B.1 for '
the tributary, Section III.B.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section III.B.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section III.C below.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW '
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: square rriiles

Drainage area: sure miles '
Average annual rainfall inches
Average annual snowfall: inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics: '
(a) Relationship with TNW:
? Tributary flows directly into TNW
? Tributary flows through 10 (or more) tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are 30 (or more) river miles from TNW.
Project waters are 1 (or less) river miles from RPW.
Project waters are 30 (or more) aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are I (or less) aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNW5:
Tributary stream order, if known: '
a Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the arid
West. ¦
s Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW

I (b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that a
Tributary is: ? Natural
? Artificial (man-made). Explain:
' ? Manipulated (man-altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: feet
Average depth: feet
Average side slopes: Verti calh: odes j.

11

0

Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
? Silts ? Sands ? Concrete
? Cobbles ? Gravel ? Muck
? Bedrock ? Vegetation. Type/% cover:
? Other. Explain:
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain:
Presence of run/riffle/pool complexes. Explain:
Tributary geometry: Relatively straight
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: Ltterm(ttent Out nqt seasonal flow
Estimate average number of Clow events in review area/year: l (or greater)
Describe flow regime:
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: Discrete and cgnfinett. Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Unknown. Explain findings:
? Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
? Bed and banks
? OHWM6 (check all indicators that apply):
? clear, natural line impressed on the bank
? changes in the character of soil
? shelving
? vegetation matted down, bent, or absent
? leaf litter disturbed or washed away
? sediment deposition
? water staining
? other (list):
? Discontinuous OHWM Explain:
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determ
? High Tide Line indicated by: 13,
E] oil or scum line along shore objects
? fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore)
? physical markings/characteristics
? tidal gauges
? other (list):
? the presence of litter and debris
? destruction of terrestrial vegetation
? the presence of wrack line
? sediment sorting
? scour
? multiple observed or predicted flow events
? abrupt change in plant community
ine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply);
Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
? survey to available datum;
? physical markings;
? vegetation lines/changes in vegetation types.
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
6A natural or man-made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
7Ibid.

(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
? Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width):
? Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
? Habitat for:
? Federally Listed species. Explain findings: '
? Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
? Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
? Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non-TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:

(a) General Wetland Characteristics: '
Properties:
Wetland size: acres
Wetland type. Explain:
Wetland quality. Explain: '
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non-TNW:
Flow is: lutermitientft6%. Explain:
Surface flow is: M ii" ? confined
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Uri ow%. Explain findings: '
? Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non-TNW:

? Directly abutting '
? Not directly abutting
? Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
? Ecological connection. Explain:

? Separated by berm/barrier. Explain: '
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are 34_(or more) river miles from TNW.

Project waters are 30 (or more) ecrial (straight) miles from TNW. '
Flow is from: /et d-to/from-nay°i alilew tern.
Estimate approximate location otwetland as within the 500-year or greater floodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics: '
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
? Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
? Vegetation type/percent cover. Explain:

? Habitat for: ,
? Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
? Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
? Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
? Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings: ,
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis: 30 (or more)
Approximately ( ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.
0

For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
' of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and/or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the now
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
' • Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
' Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
1. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section III.D:
' 2. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non-RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section III.D:
3. Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to
Section III.D:
' D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
' 1. TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
TNWs: linear feet width (ft), Or, acres.
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
2. RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year-round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial: This tributary scored a 36.5 on the NCDWQ Stream Classification Form .
' ? Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally:

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
T
ib
A
4
r
utary waters:
pprox
50 linear feet 1-3 width (ft).
Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
s
3. Non-RPWs
that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provid
ti
t
f
i
di
ti
n
l
i
hi
h
i
a
h
k
l
h
e es
ma
es
or jur
s
c
o
a
waters w
t
n t
e rev
ew
rea (c
ec
a
l t
at apply):
El Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
? Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
'

Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs. '
Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year-round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section III.B and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW:
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres. '
Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs. '
Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.

6. Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres. '
7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.9
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
? Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1-6), or
Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
'
E. ISOLATED INTERSTATE OR INTRA-STATE WATERS INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS THE USE
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):10
? which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes. ,
from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
? which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
? Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
Other factors. Explain:
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
8 '
See Footnote # 3.
9 To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III.D.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos. '

1

1

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
? Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Q Wetlands: acres.
NON-JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
? If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
? Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
[ Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
? Other: (explain, if not covered above):
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
judgment (check all that apply):
? Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
? Lakes/ponds: acres.
? Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
? Wetlands: acres.
Provide acreage estimates for non-jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
? Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
? Lakes/ponds: acres.
? Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
?; Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply -checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:
Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
? Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
? Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report.
Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
? Corps navigable waters' study:
? U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
? USGS NHD data.
? USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:7.5 minute series, Wake Forest. NC Quadrangle.
? USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:
? National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
? State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
? FEMA/FIRM maps:
? 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
? Photographs: ? Aerial (Name & Date):
or ? Other (Name & Date):
? Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
? Applicable/supporting case law:
? Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
?( Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:

' APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
' B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Falls of Neuse Widening and Relocation Project - UT to Neuse River (S4)
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
' State: North Carolina County/parish/borough: Wake County City: Raleigh
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 35 56 11 ° 1, Long. 78 34 31 ° NN'.
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Falls Lake
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: Neuse River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 03020201
{ Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
? Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc...) are associated with this action and are recorded on a

different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
Field Determination. Date(s):
SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Jre:,on "navigable waters of the U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review area. [Required]
? Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There ? re "waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply):'
? TNWs, including territorial seas
? Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
?C Relatively permanent waters2 (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
? Non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
? Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
? Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
? Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
? Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non-wetland waters: Aprox 1000 linear feet: 4-5 width (ft) and/or acres.
Wetlands: acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: 1937 Delineation Manual
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
Non-regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable):3
Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain:
' Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
' ' For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year-round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally"
(e.g., typically 3 months).
3 Supporting documentation is presented in Section III.F.

SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS '
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete
Section III.A.1 and Section III.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections III.A.1 and 2
and Section III.D.1.; otherwise, see Section IILB below.
1. TNW '
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent": .
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non-navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year-round '
(perennial) flow, skip to Section III.D.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section III.D.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and '
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbodya is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is

the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section III.B.1 for ,
the tributary, Section III.B.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section III.B.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section III.C below.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW '
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: square miles
Drainage area: Lsqu:W ales
Average annual rainfall: inches
Average annual snowfall: inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
? Tributary flows directly into TNW.
? Tributary flows through 10 (or iuore) tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are 30 (or more) river miles from TNW.
Project waters are 1 (or less) river miles from RPW.
Project waters are 311 (or more) aerial (straight) miles from TNW.

Project waters are 1 (or less) eerial (straight) miles from RPW. '
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNW5:
Tributary stream order, if known:

Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the arid
West.
'Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.

' (b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apply):
Tributary is: ? Natural
? Artificial (man-made). Explain:
' ? Manipulated (man-altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
' Average width: feet
Average depth: feet
Average side slopes: Vertical (1:1 or less).

I

Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
? Silts ? Sands ? Concrete
? Cobbles ? Gravel ? Muck
? Bedrock ? Vegetation. Type/% cover:
? Other. Explain:
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain:
Presence of run/riffle/pool complexes. Explain:
Tributary geometry: kielatively straight
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): %
(c) Elow:
Tributary provides for: Intermittent but not seaspnal ff
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year: 10 (or greater)
Describe flow regime:
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: Discrete and confined. Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Jitlnown. Explain findings:
? Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
? Bed and banks
? OHWM6 (check all indicators that apply):
? clear, natural line impressed on the bank ?
? changes in the character of soil ?
? shelving ?
? vegetation matted down, bent, or absent ?
? leaf litter disturbed or washed away ?
? sediment deposition ?
? water staining ?
? other (list):
? Discontinuous OHWM Explain:
the presence of litter and debris
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
the presence of wrack line
sediment sorting
scour
multiple observed or predicted flow events
abrupt change in plant community
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
High Tide Line indicated by: ? Mean. High Water Mark indicated by:
? oil or scum line along shore objects ? survey to available datum;
? fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore) ? physical markings;
? physical markings/characteristics ? vegetation lines/changes in vegetation types.
? tidal gauges
? other (list):
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
6A natural or man-made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
'Ibid.

(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply): ,
? Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width):
? Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
? Habitat for:
? Federally Listed species. Explain findings: ,
? Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
? Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
? Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non-TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW '
(i) Physical Characteristics:

(a) General Wetland Characteristics: '
Properties:
Wetland size: acres
Wetland type. Explain:
Wetland quality. Explain:
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non-TNW:
Flow is lriiet ttenttloFv. Explain:
Surface flow is: ADiscrend$confiicV
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Ilnknowjj. Explain findings: '
? Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adiacency Determination with Non-TNW:

? Directly abutting '
? Not directly abutting
? Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
? Ecological connection. Explain:

? Separated by berm/barrier. Explain: '
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are 36`?r,more)° river miles from TNW.

Project waters are 30; (or more) ial (straight) miles from TNW. '
Flow is from: ctland to'from navigable AA _
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the X00=year or re: ter floodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
? Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
? Vegetation type/percent cover. Explain:

? Habitat for: ,
? Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
? Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
? Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:

? Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings: ,
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis: 30 (or more)
Approximately ( ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.
,

For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and/or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.

11

Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
1. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section III.D:
Significant nexus findings for non-RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non-RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section III.D:
3. Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to
Section III.D:
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY);
TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
TNWs: linear feet width (ft), Or, acres.
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year-round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial: This tributary displayed strong characteristics of a perennial stream such as strong water flow, distinct
bed and banks, and biology .
Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally:

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
0 Tributary waters: Approx 1000 linear feet 4-5 width (ft).
Other non-wetland waters: acres. ,
Identify type(s) of waters:
3. Non-RPWss that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
? Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft). '
Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
? Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
? Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year-round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section III.B and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW: '
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs. '
Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C. I
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters .9
'
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
? Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
? Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1-6), or
? Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below). r
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA-STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY ,
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):10
? which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
? from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
? which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
? Interstate isolated waters. Explain: ,
? Other factors. Explain:
'See Footnote # 3. 1
9 To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III.D.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos. '

J

j
lJ
1

Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
? Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
? Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
[ Wetlands: acres.
NON-JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
? Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
? Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
Other: (explain, if not covered above):
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
judgment (check all that apply):
Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
Lakes/ponds: acres.
Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
Wetlands: acres.
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
Lakes/ponds: acres.
Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
0 Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:
Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
? Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
? Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report.
Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
? Corps navigable waters' study:
?J U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
? USGS NHD data.
? USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
?' U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:7.5 minute series, Wake Forest. NC Quadrangle.
?' USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:
? National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
? State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
? FEMA/FIRM maps:
? 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
? Photographs: E] Aerial (Name & Date):
or E] Other (Name & Date):
? Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
? Applicable/supporting case law:
? Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
? Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:

I APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Falls of Neuse Widening and Relocation Project - UT to Neuse River (S5)
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
State: North Carolina County/parish/borough: Wake County City. Raleigh
, Long. 78 34 31 °
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 35 56 110
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Falls Lake
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: Neuse River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 03020201
Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
? Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc...) are associated with this action and are recorded on a

Pi

?1

1

different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
? Field Determination. Date(s):
SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Ire no "navigable waters of the U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review area. [Required]
? Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
? Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There 'are "waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply): t
? TNWs, including territorial seas
? Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
? Relatively permanent waters2 (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Z Non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
? Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
? Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
? Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
? Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non-wetland waters: Aprox 50 linear feet: 1-2 width (ft) and/or acres.
Wetlands: acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: 1987 Delineation 1llanual
Elevation of established OHWM(if known):
Non-regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable):3
[] Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain:
' Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
' For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year-round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally"
(e.g., typically 3 months).
' Supporting documentation is presented in Section III.F.

SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete
Section III.A.1 and Section III.D.I. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections III.A.1 and 2
and Section III.D.1.; otherwise, see Section III.B below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent": .
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non-navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year-round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section III.D.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section III.D.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and

EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a '
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbodya is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section III.B.1 for
the tributary, Section III.B.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section III.B.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section III.C below.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: 30aeres

Drainage area: 30 acjes '
Average annual rainfall: Approx 45 inches
Average annual snowfall: Approx 7.5 inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
? Tributary flows directly into TNW.
® Tributary flows through 7 tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are 1 (or less) river miles from TNW.
Project waters are t(or less) river miles from RPW.
Project waters are l (or less) aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are 1 (or Iess) aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
,
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNWS: S5 flows into S6 (direct UT to the Neuse River) which then flows for approximately 350
feet until its confluence with the Neuse River.
a Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and
West. ,
5 Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.

Tributary stream order, if known: 1 st.
(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apply):
Tributary is: ? Natural
? Artificial (man-made). Explain:
® Manipulated (man-altered). Explain: Tributary flows out of culvert and is lined with rip/rap for
the entire length.
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: 1-2 feet
Average depth: 3-4 feet
' Average side slopes: Vertical 0:1 or less).
l
):
he
k all that a
iti
(
t
t
b
ib
i
y
pp
e compos
on
c
c
ra
utary su
s
mary tr
Pr
? Silts ? Sands ? Concrete
? Cobbles ? Gravel ® Muck
' ? Bedrock ? Vegetation. Type/% cover:
® Other. Explain: rip/rap.
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain: stable due to rip/rap.
' Presence of run/riffle/pool complexes. Explain: During field investigation water was pooled.
Tributary geometry:Relativelj str.aigb
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): 2 %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: Ephemerai flow _
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year: - (or greater)
Describe flow regime: Stormwater flow.
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: Discrete and confined. Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: 'Unknw-,n. Explain findings:
? Dye (or others test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
® Bed and banks
? OHWM6 (check all indicators that apply):
? clear, natural line impressed on the bank ? the presence of litter and debris
? changes in the character of soil ? destruction of terrestrial vegetation
? shelving ? the presence of wrack line
' ? vegetation matted down, bent, or absent ? sediment sorting
? leaf litter disturbed or washed away ? scour
? sediment deposition ? multiple observed or predicted flow events
? water staining ? abrupt change in plant community
? other (list):
® Discontinuous OHWM Explain:OHWM is not clear as indicators of OHWM are not strong.
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
? High Tide Line indicated by: ? Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
? oil or scum line along shore objects ? survey to available datum;
? fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore) ? physical markings;
? physical markings/characteristics ? vegetation lines/changes in vegetation types.
' ? tidal gauges
? other (list):
' (iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain: water is mucky with algae. Upstream watershed consists of residential subdivision.
Identify specific pollutants, if known: Possible pollutants from residential stormwater runoff.
6A natural or man-made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
' the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
'Ibid.

(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply): ,
® Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width): Good vegetation cover, but species are exotic.
? Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
? Habitat for:
? Federally Listed species. Explain findings: ,
? Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
? Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
? Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non-TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:

Properties: '
Wetland size: acres
Wetland type. Explain:
Wetland quality. Explain:

Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain: '
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non-TNW:
Flow is:;ntermittentflow. Explain: ,
Surface flow is piscreleandconfined
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Unknown. Explain findings: ,
? Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non-TNW:
? Directly abutting
? Not directly abutting
? Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
? Ecological connection. Explain:

? Separated by berm/barrier. Explain: ,
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are 0 (or more) river miles from TNW.
Project waters are 30 (or more) aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: Vetlsnd to/1romna-0gable ?rnters.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the 500-} car or greater floodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics: '
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iii) Biol
i
l Ch
ct
i
ti
W
l
d
k
og
ca
ara
er
s
cs.
et
an
supports (chec
all that apply):
? Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
? Vegetation type/percent cover. Explain:
? Habitat for:
? Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
? Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
? Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
? Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings: '
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis: 30 (or more)
Approximately ( ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis. '

' For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (YIN) Size (in acres)
' Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
' of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and/or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
' • Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
' • Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW?

Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
Significant nexus findings for non-RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section III.D: The tributary
carries carry pollutants and flood waters to the Neuse River, which is a TNW.
2. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non-RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section III.D:
Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to
Section III.D:
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
? TNWs: linear feet width (ft), Or, acres.
E] Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year-round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial: This tributary displayed strong characteristics of a perennial stream such as strong water flow, distinct
bed and banks, and biology .
Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally:

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
Other non-wetland waters: acres. ,
Identify type(s) of waters:
3. Non-RPWss that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply): '
? Tributary waters: Approx 50 linear feet 1-2 width (ft).
Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs. ,
Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year-round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is '
directly abutting an RPW:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section 111.13 and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly '
abutting an RPW:
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
6. Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.9
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
? Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1-6), or
El, Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA-STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):'"
? which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
? from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
? which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
? Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
,? Other factors. Explain:
$See Footnote # 3.
9 To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III.D.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.

1

Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
' Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
?, Other non-wetland waters: acres.
' Identify type(s) of waters:
Wetlands: acres.
F. NON-JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
' ? If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
? Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
' "Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
? Other: (explain, if not covered above):
' Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
judgment (check all that apply):
Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
? Lakes/ponds: acres.
? Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
? Wetlands: acres.
' Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
? Lakes/ponds: acres.
' ? Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
? Wetlands: acres.
' SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:
Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
? Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
'
? ? Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report.
Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
? Corps navigable waters' study:
? U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
? USGS NHD data.
' ? USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:7.5 minute series, Wake Forest. NC Quadrangle.
? USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:
? National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
' ? State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
FEMA/FIRM maps:
100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
Photographs: ? Aerial (Name & Date):
or ? Other (Name & Date):
Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
? Applicable/supporting case law:
? Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
' ? Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
' This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Falls of Neuse Widening and Relocation Project - UT to Neuse River (S6)
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
' State: North Carolina County/parish/borough: Wake County City: Raleigh
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 35 56 11' ,Long. 78343]'W.
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Falls Lake
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: Neuse River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 03020201
iI Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
? Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc...) are associated with this action and are recorded on a

LI

different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
Field Determination. Date(s):
SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Kce no "navigable waters of the U.S " within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review area. [Required]
Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
? Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There 'are "waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply): t
? TNWs, including territorial seas
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
Relatively permanent waters2 (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
? Non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
[] Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
? Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
? Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
? Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
? Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non-wetland waters: Aprox 350 linear feet: 1-2 width (ft) and/or acres.
Wetlands: acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: 1987 Delineation Manual
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
2. Non-regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable):
? Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain:
'Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
' 2 For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year-round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally"
(e.g., typically 3 months).
' Supporting documentation is presented in Section III.F.

SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete
Section III.A.1 and Section III.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections III.A.1 and 2
and Section III.D.I.; otherwise, see Section III.B below.
I. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent": .
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non-navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year-round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section III.D.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section III.D.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbody° is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section III.B.1 for
the tributary, Section III.B.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section III.B.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section III.C below.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: 26cres
Drainage area: 2 Wires
Average annual rainfall: Approx 45 inches
Average annual snowfall: Approx. 7.5 inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
® Tributary flows directly into TNW.
? Tributary flows through 10 (ty- m AN, tributaries before entering TNW
Project waters are 1 (or less) river miles from TNW.
Project waters are 1 (or Iess) river miles from RPW.
Project waters are 1 (or less) aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are I (or less) aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNW5:
Tributary stream order, if known:
J
Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and
'
West.
5 Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.

1

1
1
(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apply):
Tributary is: ® Natural
? Artificial (man-made). Explain:
? Manipulated (man-altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: 1-2 feet
Average depth: I feet
Average side slopes: 4:1 (or greater).
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
® Silts ® Sands ? Concrete
' ? Cobbles ? Gravel ? Muck
? Bedrock ? Vegetation. Type/% cover:
? Other. Explain:

1?

F

Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain: Stable.
Presence of run/riffle/pool complexes. Explain: Moderate riffle/pool complexes.
Tributary geometry: Relatively straight
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): 2 %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: Womittent but not seasonal tlotr
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year: 20'(or £reater),
Describe flow regime: Light flow from seep, not enough for perennial flow.
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: Discrete and confined. Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Unknown. Explain findings:
? Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
® Bed and banks
® OHWM6 (check all indicators that apply):
? clear, natural line impressed on the bank
® changes in the character of soil ?
? shelving
? vegetation matted down, bent, or absent ?
® leaf litter disturbed or washed away
® sediment deposition ?
? water staining ?
? other (list):
? Discontinuous OHWM.' Explain:
the presence of litter and debris
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
the presence of wrack line
sediment sorting
scour
multiple observed or predicted flow events
abrupt change in plant community
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
? High Tide Line indicated by: ? Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
? oil or scum line along shore objects ? survey to available datum;
? fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore) ? physical markings;
? physical markings/characteristics ? vegetation lines/changes in vegetation types.
? tidal gauges
? other (list):
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain: Watercolor is clear.
Identify specific pollutants, if known: Tributary is adjacent to residential lawn.
6A natural or man-made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
'Ibid.

(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
® Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width): mostly herbacious vegetation with some large woody species.
Riparian corridor is > 100ft with the exception of 50 feet residential lawn along the right bank, upstream stretch.
? Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
? Habitat for: '
? Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
? Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
? Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
? Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non-TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics: t
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size: acres
Wetland type. Explain: '
Wetland quality. Explain:
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non-TNW:

Flow is: t?iteriiiiften , t tlon. Explain: '
Surface flow is:iscrete and confilit
Characteristics: '
Subsurface flow: nkion_n. Explain findings:
? Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non-TNW: '
? Directly abutting
? Not directly abutting
? Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:

? Ecological connection. Explain: '
? Separated by benn/banier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are 30 (or more) river miles from TNW.
Project waters are 30.(or more) aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: Wq'(1indioffrom?navi -?0hle iv. to
, rs.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the 500-year or greater floodplain.
n Chemical Characteristics: '
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain: '
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
? Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
? Vegetation type/percent cover. Explain:
? Habitat for:
? Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
? Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings: '
? Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
? Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis: `30 (or more)
Approximately ( ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.

1
For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and/or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
' of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
' Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
' • Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
1. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section III.D:
2. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non-RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section III.D:
' 3. Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to
Section III.D:
' D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERSIWETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
1. TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
? TNWs: linear feet width (ft), Or, acres.
? Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
' 2. RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Q Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year-round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial: This tributary displayed strong characteristics of a perennial stream such as strong water flow, distinct
' bed and banks, and biology .
Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally: Tributary scored a 27.5 on the NCDWQ Stream Classification Form.

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: Approx 1000 linear feet 4-5 width (ft).
? Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
3. Non-RPWss that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
. EN Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
Other non-wetland waters: acres. '
Identify type(s) of waters:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year-round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW: ,
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section III.B and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW: '
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs. '
Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent.
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C. '
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
6. Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs. '
Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters." ,
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
? Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
? Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1-6), or
? Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below). '
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA-STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):1o
? which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
? from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
? which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
? Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
Other factors. Explain:
'See Footnote # 3.
9 To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III.D.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
" Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction,based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.

P

H

iL

11
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
? Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
? Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Q Wetlands: acres.
NON-JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
[] Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
? Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
? Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
Other: (explain, if not covered above):
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
'judgment (check all that apply):
? Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
Lakes/ponds: acres.
? Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
?l Wetlands: acres.
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
Lakes/ponds: acres.
Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
? Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:
Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
? Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
? Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report.
? Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
? Corps navigable waters' study:
? U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
? USGS NHD data.
? USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
Q U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:7.5 minute series, Wake Forest. NC Quadrangle.
? USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:
? National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
? State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
? FEMA/FIRM maps:
? 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
? Photographs: ? Aerial (Name & Date):
or ? Other (Name & Date):
? Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
? Applicable/supporting case law:
? Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
? Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:

t

1

1

1

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Falls of Neuse Widening and Relocation Project - Wl/W2
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
State: North Carolina County/parish/borough: Wake County City: Raleigh
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 35 56 111 N. Long. 78 34 31 ° IN.
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Falls Lake
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: Neuse River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 03020201
PI Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
? Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc...) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
? Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
? Field Determination. Date(s):
SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
ThereA're n "navigable waters of the U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review area. [Required]
? Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
? Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Are. "waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply): t
? TNWs, including territorial seas
? Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
? Relatively permanent watersZ (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
? Non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
0 Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
? Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
? Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
f] Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non-wetland waters: linear feet: width (ft) and/or acres.
Wetlands: 0.46 acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: 1957 Delineation Nlanua]
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
Non-regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable):
Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain:
Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year-round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally"
(e.g., typically 3 months).
3 Supporting documentation is presented in Section III.F.

SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete
Section III.A.1 and Section III.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections III.A.1 and 2
and Section III.D.1.; otherwise, see Section III.B below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW ,
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent": .
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met. ,
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non-navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year-round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section III.D.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section III.D.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and

EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a '
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbody° is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section III.B.1 for
the tributary, Section III.B.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section III.B.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section III.C below.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW '
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: aremileI
Drainage area: ,sqik?re miles
Average annual rainfall: inches
Average annual snowfall: inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
? Tributary flows directly into TNW.
? Tributary flows through 10 (or more), tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are 30 (or more) river miles from TNW.
Project waters are 1 (or less) , fiver miles from RPW.
Project waters are 30 (or more) aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are t (or less) aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNW5:
Tributary stream order, if known:
a Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and
West.
5 Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.

(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apply):
Tributary is: ? Natural
? Artificial (man-made). Explain:
I ? Manipulated (man-altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: feet
Average depth: feet
Average side slopes: Vertical _(1:Lor less).
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
? Silts ? Sands ? Concrete
? Cobbles ? Gravel ? Muck
? Bedrock ? Vegetation. Type/% cover:
? Other. Explain:
S Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain:
Presence of run/riffle/pool complexes. Explain:
Tributary geometry: ??Relativelystrai'lit
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: !Intermittent but not seasonal flow
Estimate average number of tlow events in review arewyear: ? O (or greater)
Describe flow regime:
Other information on duration and volume:

1

i

1
Surface flow is Discrete and c`onfige . Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: ,unknow1l. Explain findings:
? Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
? Bed and banks
? OHWM6 (check all indicators that apply):
? clear, natural line impressed on the bank ?
? changes in the character of soil ?
? shelving ?
? vegetation matted down, bent, or absent ?
? leaf litter disturbed or washed away ?
? sediment deposition ?
? water staining ?
? other (list):
F1 Discontinuous OHWM.' Explain:
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determ
E: High Tide Line indicated by:
? oil or scum line along shore objects
? fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore)
? physical markings/characteristics
? tidal gauges
? other (list):
the presence of litter and debris
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
the presence of wrack line
sediment sorting
scour
multiple observed or predicted flow events
abrupt change in plant community
me lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
? survey to available datum;
? physical markings;
? vegetation linestchanges in vegetation types.
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
6A natural or man-made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
'Ibid.

(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
? Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width):
? Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
? Habitat for:
? Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
? Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
? Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
? Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non-TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size: acres
Wetland type. Explain:
Wetland quality. Explain:
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non-TNW:
Flow is: llfterlnfteiiGflo. Explain:
Surface flow is: Discrete dnd'con mer
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Unknofr n. Explain findings:
? Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non-TNW:
? Directly abutting
? Not directly abutting
? Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
? Ecological connection. Explain:
? Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationsbip) to TNW
Project wetlands are' 0 (or nW
river miles from TNW.
03
Project waters are 30?(6rpiorcJ aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: ? and`to/frc;n a w er
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the -500-ye4r or xeater floodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
? Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
? Vegetation type/percent cover. Explain:
? Habitat for:
? Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
? Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
? Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
? Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis: 30 (or more)
Approximately ( ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.

' For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and/or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
1. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section III.D:
2. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non-RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section III.D:
3. Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to
Section III.D:
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
1. TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
II TNWs: linear feet, width (ft), Or, acres.
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
2. RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year-round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial: Tributary S1 is associated with W I/W2. This tributary scored 30.5 on the NCDWQ Stream
Classification Form.
Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally:
r

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
?( Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
? Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Non-RPWss that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
?? Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
4. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
{ Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
Q Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year-round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW: Hydrology from WI/W2 flows directly into SI. These two features are physically
connected.
fffl, Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section III.B and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW:
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: 0.46 acres.

5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.

6. Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.9
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
? Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1-6), or
Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA-STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):10
? which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
? from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
? which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
? Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
? Other factors. Explain:
8See Footnote # 3.
9 To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III.D.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.

Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
? Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
? Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
1

1

r?

r,
Wetlands: acres.
NON-JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
? Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
?1 Other: (explain, if not covered above):
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
judgment (check all that apply):
Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
? Lakes/ponds: acres.
? Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
5 Wetlands: acres.
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
Lakes/ponds: acres.
? Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
[] Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:
[X] Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
? Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
? Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report.
? Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
? Corps navigable waters' study:
? U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
? USGS NHD data.
? USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:7.5 minute series, Wake Forest. NC Quadrangle.
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:
National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
? State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
? FEMA/FIRM maps:
? 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
? Photographs: ? Aerial (Name & Date):
or ? Other (Name & Date):
? Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
? Applicable/supporting case law:
Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:

t

1

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Falls of Neuse Widening and Relocation Project -W3
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
State: North Carolina County/parish/borough: Wake County City: Raleigh
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 35 56 11 ° 1, Long. 78 34 31 ° .
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Falls Lake
1

A

Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: Neuse River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 03020201
Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc...) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
[] Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
[l Field Determination. Date(s):
SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Are uo "navigable waters of the U.S" within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review area. [Required]
[] Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Are "waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply): r
TNWs, including territorial seas
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
Relatively permanent waters2 (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Q Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
? Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non-wetland waters: linear feet: width (ft) and/or acres.
Wetlands: 0.02 acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: 1987 Delineation Manual
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
2. Non-regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable):3
Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain:
Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
' For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year-round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally"
(e.g., typically 3 months).
3 Supporting documentation is presented in Section III.F.
D

SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete
Section III.A.1 and Section III.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections III.A.1 and 2
and Section III.D.1.; otherwise, see Section IILB below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent": .
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanoshave been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non-navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year-round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section III.D.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section III.D.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbody° is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section III.B.1 for
the tributary, Section III.B.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section III.B.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section III.C below.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: sq*ire miles
Drainage area: sgWre miles
Average annual rainfall: inches
Average annual snowfall: inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
? Tributary flows directly into TNW.
? Tributary flows through i16 (or more) tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are .0 (or more) river miles from TNW.
Project waters are :1'(or less) ever miles from RPW.
Project waters are 30 (or more) aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are fl (or lcss) aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNW5:
Tributary stream order, if known:
Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and
West.
'Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.

li

11

(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apply):
Tributary is: ? Natural
? Artificial (man-made). Explain:
? Manipulated (man-altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: feet
Average depth: feet
Average side slopes: Vertical (1`.l-or-less).
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
? Silts ? Sands ? Concrete
? Cobbles ? Gravel ? Muck
? Bedrock ? Vegetation. Type/% cover:
? Other. Explain:
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain:
Presence of run/riffle/pool complexes. Explain:
Tributary geometry: ttelatiyely`straight
Tributary gradient (approximatc ?% crage slope): %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: 5 termittent;but Ut seasonal flow
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/yeat. 20 (orgrcater}
Describe flow regime:
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is:. iseretc and confined.. Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: - knoN n. Explain findings:
? Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
? Bed and banks
? OHWW (check all indicators that apply):
? clear, natural line impressed on the bank ?
? changes in the character of soil ?
? shelving ?
? vegetation matted down, bent, or absent ?
? leaf litter disturbed or washed away ?
? sediment deposition ?
? water staining ?
? other (list):
E] Discontinuous OHWM.' Explain:
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determ
? High Tide Line indicated by:
? oil or scum line along shore objects
? fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore)
? physical markings/characteristics
? tidal gauges
? other (list):
the presence of litter and debris
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
the presence of wrack line
sediment sorting
scour
multiple observed or predicted flow events
abrupt change in plant community
ine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
? survey to available datum;
? physical markings;
? vegetation lines/changes in vegetation types.
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
6A natural or man-made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
'Ibid.

it
(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
? Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width):
? Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
? Habitat for:
? Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
? Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
? Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
? Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non-TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size: acres
Wetland type. Explain:
Wetland quality. Explain: ,
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non-TNW:
.
Flow is luterd
tflorj.Explain: '
Surface flow is: a ete and caiifin ,
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: no v Explain findings:
? Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non-TNW:
? Directly abutting
? Not directly abutting
? Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
? Ecological connection. Explain:
? Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proxitnity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are 30 (or mole) river miles from TNW.
Project waters are 30 (or more) aici ial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: "nd tdlfrom iviFbjet i-3.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the 5011 year or treater floodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
? Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
? Vegetation type/percent cover. Explain:

? Habitat for: '
? Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
? Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
? Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
? Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis: 30 (or more)
Approximately ( ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.

t
For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
' of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and/or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
' of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
1. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section III.D:
2. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non-RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section 11I.D:
3. Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to
Section II1.1):
' D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
1. TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
? TNWs: linear feet, width (ft), Or, acres.
? Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
1 2. RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
II Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year-round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial: Tributary S1 is associated with W3. This tributary scored 30.5 on the NCDWQ Stream Classification
Form.
? Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally:

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
0 Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
CI Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
3. Non-RPWss that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Q Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
El Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
Other non-wetland waters: acres. '
Identify type(s) of waters:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year-round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW: Hydrology from W3 flows directly into S1. These two features are physically connected. ,
d Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section III.B and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW:
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: 0.46 acres.
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
6. Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
[] Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1-6), or
E Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA-STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY)•10
0 which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
E which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
Other factors. Explain:
'See Footnote # 3.
9 To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III.D.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.
I

Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
? Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
? Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
? Wetlands: acres.
F. NON-JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
f9 If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
? Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
? Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
' "Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
? Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
Other: (explain, if not covered above):
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
judgment (check all that apply):
? Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
Lakes/ponds: acres.
Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
Wetlands: acres.
.El Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
Lakes/ponds: acres.
Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
? Wetlands: acres.

Lei
1

SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:
Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
? Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
? Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report.
? Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
Corps navigable waters' study:
?, U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
? USGS NHD data.
? USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
Q U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:7.5 minute series, Wake Forest. NC Quadrangle.
? USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:
? National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
? State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
? FEMA/FIRM maps:
? 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
Photographs: ? Aerial (Name & Date):
or ? Other (Name & Date):
Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
? Applicable/supporting case law:
? Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
? Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:
17
1
APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Falls of Neuse Widening and Relocation Project - W4
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
' State: North Carolina County/parish/borough: Wake County City: Raleigh
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 35 56 1 V N. Long. 78 34 31° W.
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Falls Lake
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: Neuse River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 03020201
Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
? Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc...) are associated with this action and are recorded on a

r

1

different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
[J Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
Field Determination. Date(s):
SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Are'no "navigable waters of the U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review area. [Required]
? Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
C] Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Ire "waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply): '
TNWs, including territorial seas
?C Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
? Relatively permanent waterS2 (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
? Non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
? Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
? Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
? Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
? Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non-wetland waters: linear feet: width (ft) and/or acres.
Wetlands: 0.29 acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: 1937 Delineation Manual
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
Non-regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable):3
Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain:
' Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year-round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally"
(e.g., typically 3 months).
' Supporting documentation is presented in Section HIT.

SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete
Section III.A.1 and Section III.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections III.A.1 and 2
and Section III.D.1.; otherwise, see Section HIM below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW: Neuse River.
Summarize rationale supporting determination: Confirmation from USACE rep.
Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent": Hydrology from W4 seep flows directly into the Neuse
River. In addition, hydrology from the Neuse River is attenutated in W4 during floods.
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non-navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year-round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section III.D.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section III.D.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbodya is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section III.B.1 for
the tributary, Section III.B.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section III.B.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section III.C below.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: IS t are Aifes
Drainage area: [square mil
Average annual rainfall: inches
Average annual snowfall: inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
? Tributary flows directly into TNW.
? Tributary flows through 10 (or titore) tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are 30;(or mom) river miles from TNW.
Project waters are 7 (oF'less) river miles from RPW.
Project waters are 0,(pr more) aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are f s) aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNW5:

Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and
West.
'Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.

1

r_

?J

' Tributary stream order, if known:
(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that a
Tributary is: ? Natural
' ? Artificial (man-made). Explain:
? Manipulated (man-altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: feet
Average depth: feet
Average side slopes: yerticaI (I. I or less).
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
' ? Silts ? Sands ? Concrete
? Cobbles ? Gravel ? Muck
? Bedrock ? Vegetation. Type/% cover:
? Other. Explain:
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain:
Presence of run/riffle/ ool complexes. Explain:
V
elatively straight
Tributary geometry:
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: I ntcrmittenf but not seasonal flow
Estimate average number of flow events to review area/year: 20 (or greater)
Describe flow regime:
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: Discrete anil confined. Characteristics:
E

Subsurface flow: Unknown. Explain findings:
? Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
? Bed and banks
? OHWM6 (check all indicators that apply):
? clear, natural line impressed on the bank ?
? changes in the character of soil ?
? shelving ?
? vegetation matted down, bent, or absent ?
? leaf litter disturbed or washed away ?
? sediment deposition ?
? water staining ?
? other (list):
? Discontinuous OHWM Explain:
the presence of litter and debris
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
the presence of wrack line
sediment sorting
scour
multiple observed or predicted flow events
abrupt change in plant community
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
High Tide Line indicated by: IQ, Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
? oil or scum line along shore objects ? survey to available datum;
? fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore) ? physical markings;
? physical markings/characteristics ? vegetation lines/changes in vegetation types.
? tidal gauges
? other (list):
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
GA natural or man-made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
'Ibid.

(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
? Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width):
? Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
? Habitat for:
? Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
? Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
? Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
? Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non-TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size: acres
Wetland type. Explain:
Wetland quality. Explain:
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non-TNW:
Flow is: jnterviittent_: flo t. Explain:
Surface flow is: i screte'and'4nfined
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Unkpo).vn. Explain findings:
? Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non-TNW:
? Directly abutting
? Not directly abutting
? Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
? Ecological connection. Explain:
? Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are ?W(or iriocej river miles from TNW.
Project waters are 30 (or.niore) aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: )Veilar _tqVfrom.navig3bte }wters
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the 5W-N ear or greater floodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general watershed
characteri sties; etc.). Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
? Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
? Vegetation type/percent cover. Explain:
? Habitat for:
? Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
? Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
? Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
? Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis: 30 (or more)
Approximately ( ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.

' For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and/or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
' • Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
1. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section III.D:
2. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non-RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section III.D:
' 3. Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to
Section III.D:
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
' 1. TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
'El TNWs: linear feet, width (ft), Or, acres.
EJ Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: 0.29 acres.
2. RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year-round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial:
? Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally:
11

1
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
T
ib
li
f ,
r
utary waters:
near
eet width (ft).
? Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
3
N
RPW
s
,
.
on-
s
that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimat
f
i
di
ti
l
t
ithi
th
i
h
k
ll
h
l
es
or jur
s
c
ona
wa
ers w
n
e rev
ew area (c
ec
a
t
at app
y):
Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
Ll Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year-round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section III.B and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW:
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: 0.46 acres. i
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs. ,
Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
6. Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
E] Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres. '
7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.9
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
? Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or ,
Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1-6), or
?. Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
'
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA-STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
STICH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):10

which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes. ,
? from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
? which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
? Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
? Other factors. Explain:
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
'See Footnote # 3 ,
.
9 To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III.D.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.

1
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
? Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
? Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Wetlands: acres.
F. NON-JURISDICTIONAL WATERS INCLUDING WETLANDS CHECK ALL THAT APPL :
? If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in he 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
Cl Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
? Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
[] Other: (explain, if not covered above):
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
judgment (check all that apply):
Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
Lakes/ponds: acres.
? Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
? Wetlands: acres.
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet he "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
' a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
Lakes/ponds: acres.
? Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply -checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:
' ? Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of he applicant/consultant.
? Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
? Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report.
Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
? Corps navigable waters' study:
? U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
? USGS NHD data.
? USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:7.5 minute series, Wake Forest. NC Quadrangle.
' ? USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:
? National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
? State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
? FEMA/FIRM maps:
' ? 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
? Photographs: ? Aerial (Name & Date):
or ? Other (Name & Date):
? Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
1 ? Applicable/supporting case law:
? Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
? Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:

LJ
DATA FORM

ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
11987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manuall
Project/Site: Falls of Neuse Road Widening and Relocation Date: 4/24/07
Applicant / Owner: City of Raleigh Coun : Wake
Investigator: Randazzo, Benton State: NC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? NO Community ID:
Is the site si nificantl disturbed (Atypical Situation)? YES Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? If needed, explain on reverse YES Plot ID: W1/W2
0 VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
Sweet um (Liquidambarstyraciflua) T FAC+ Giant cane (Arundinaria i antea) H FACW
Tag alder Alnus serrulata S FACW+ Jewelweed (Impatiens ca ensis H FACW
River birch (Betula nigra) T FACW Lizard tail Saururus cernuus H OBL
Common rush Juncus effusus H FACW+ Sedge Carex s H N/A
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC- : 100
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY

[ ] Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks) WETLAND HYDROLOGY INDICATORS
[ ] Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators:
[ ] Aerial Photographs [ ] Inundated
[ ] Other [ X ] Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
[ ] Water Marks
[ X ] No Recorded Data Available [ ] Drift Lines
[ ] Sediment Deposits
FIELD OBSERVATIONS [ X ] Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth of Surface Water 0 (in) Secondary Indicators (2 or more Required)
[ ] Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches
Depth to Free Water in Pit Surface
(in) [ X ] Water-stained Leaves
[ ] Local Soil Survey Data

Depth to Saturated Soil
Surface (in) [
] FAC-Neutral Test
[ ] Other (Explain in Remarks)

? a,.e
Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): Cecil Sandy Loam Drainage Class: well
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Typic Kanhapludult Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type? YES NO

Depth Horizon Matrix Color
inches Munsell Moist PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Mottle Colors Mottle Abundance/Contrast Texture, Concretions,
Munsell Moist Structure, etc.
0-16+ 7.5YR 2.5/1 Sand loam

HYDRIC SOIL INDI CATORS:
[ ] Histosol
[ ] Histic Epipedon
[ ] Sulfidic Odor
[ ] Aquic Moisture Regime
[ X ] Reducing Conditions
X Gle ed or Low-Chroma Colors [ ] Concretions
[ ] High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
[ ] Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
[ ] Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
[ ] Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in Remarks
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION

tion Present?
Present?
`. NO
YES NO Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? NO
YES NO
Hydric Soil Present?
Remarks:
Source of hydrology is a seep

DATA FORM

ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
114R7 f'.(1F Watlanrlc r1alinaatinn Mnniiall
Project/Site: Falls of Neuse Road Widening and Relocation Date: 4/24/07
Applicant / Owner: City of Raleigh Coun : Wake
Investigator: Randazzo, Benton State: NC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? NO Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? YES Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? If needed, explain on reverse YES Plot ID: W3
VEGETATION

Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
False nettle (Bohmeria cylindrica) H FACW+ Lizard tail Saururus cernuus) H OBL
Japanese stilt grass (Microstegium
vimineum H N/A Sedge (Carex spp.) H N/A
Bed straw (Galium pilosum) H N/A
Common rush Juncus effusus H FACW+
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC- : 100
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY

[ ] Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks) WETLAND HYDROLOGY INDICATORS
[ ] Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators:
[ ] Aerial Photographs [ ] Inundated
[ ] Other [ X ] Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
[ ] Water Marks
[ X ] No Recorded Data Available [ ] Drift Lines
[ ] Sediment Deposits
FIELD OBSERVATIONS [ X ] Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth of Surface Water 0 (in) Secondary Indicators (2 or more Required)
[ ] Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches
Depth to Free Water in Pit 8 (in) [ X ] Water-stained Leaves
[ ] Local Soil Survey Data

Depth to Saturated Soil 6 (in) [ ] FAC-Neutral Test
[ ] Other (Explain in Remarks)
bUiLb

Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): Congaree fine sandy loam Drainage Class: well
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Oxyaquic Udifluvent Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type? YES NO

Depth Horizon Matrix Color
inches Munsell Moist PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Mottle Colors Mottle Abundance/Contrast Texture, Concretions,
Munsell Moist Structure, etc.
0-8 A 10YR 4/1 10YR 4/3 Common, many, distinct Silty clay
8-16+ B/C 10YR 3/1 10YR 4/3 Common, many, distinct Silt

HYDRIC SOIL INDI CATORS:
[ ] Histosol
[ ] Histic Epipedon
[ ] Sulfidic Odor
[ ] Aquic Moisture Regime
[ X ] Reducing Conditions
X Gle ed or Low-Chroma Colors [ ] Concretions
[ ] High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
[ ] Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
[ ] Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
[ ] Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in Remarks
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION

H dro h is Ve etation Present? VE?S NO
Wetland Hydrology Present? ;ES NO Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? NO
H dric Soil Present? t?E$ NO
Remarks:

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
Mg87 COF Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Falls of Neuse Road Widening and Relocation Date: 4/24/07
Applicant / Owner: City of Raleigh Coun : Wake
Investigator: Randazzo, Benton State: NC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? NO Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? YES Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? If needed, explain on reverse YES Plot ID: UP1 1, W2, W3
VFGFTATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
Sweetgum (Liquidambarst raciflua T FAC+ Cat brier (Smilax sp . V N/A
Loblolly pine Pinus taeda T FAC Woodsorrel Oxalis dillenfi H N/A
Willow oak (Quercus hellos T FACW- Wolfber (L cium s . H N/A
Bluestem Andro 0 on s H N/A Clover Trifolium s H N/A
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC- : 38
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
(] Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks) WETLAND HYDROLOGY INDICATORS
[ ] Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators:
[ ] Aerial Photographs [ ] Inundated
[ ] Other [ ] Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
[ ] Water Marks
[ X ] No Recorded Data Available [ ] Drift Lines
[ ] Sediment Deposits
FIELD OBSERVATIONS [ ] Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth of Surface Water 0 (in) Secondary Indicators (2 or more Required)
[ ] Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches
Depth to Free Water in Pit 16+ (in) [ ] Water-stained Leaves
[ ] Local Soil Survey Data
N
t
l Test
FAC
Depth to Saturated Soil 16+ (in) ra
-
eu
[ ]
[ ] Other (Explain in Remarks)
SOILS
Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): Cecil Sandy Loam Drainage Class: well
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Typic Kanhapludult Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type? YES NO

Depth Horizon Matrix Color
inches Munsell Moist PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Mottle Colors Mottle Abundance/Contrast Texture, Concretions,
Munsell Moist Structure, etc.
0-4 A 10YR 5/6 Silt

HYDRIC SOIL INDI CATORS:
[ ] Histosol
[ ] Histic Epipedon
[ ] Sulfidic Odor
[ J Aquic Moisture Regime
[ ] Reducing Conditions
Gle ed or Low-Chroma Colors [ ] Concretions
[ ] High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
[ ] Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
[ ] Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
[ ] Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Refusal at 4 inches
WETLAND DETERMINATION
H dro h is Vegetation Present? YES 40
Wetland Hydrology Present? YES ftC Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? YES
H dric Soil Present? YES
Remarks:
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
11987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Falls of Neuse Road Widening and Relocation Date: 4/24/07
Applicant / Owner: City of Raleigh Count : Wake
Investigator: Randazzo, Benton State: NC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? NO Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? YES Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? If needed, explain on reverse YES Plot ID: W4
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
Pennywort (H drocot le umbellata H OBL
Arrow arum Peltandra sa ittifolia H OBL
Lizard tail Saururus cemuus) H OBL
Sedge Carex s H N/A
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC- : 100
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
[ ] Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks) WETLAND HYDROLOGY INDICATORS
[ ] Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators:
[ ] Aerial Photographs [ ] Inundated
[ ] Other [ X ] Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
[ ] Water Marks
[ X ] No Recorded Data Available [ ] Drift Lines
[ ] Sediment Deposits
FIELD OBSERVATIONS [ X ] Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth of Surface Water 0 (in) Secondary Indicators (2 or more Required)
[ ] Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches
Depth to Free Water in Pit Surface (in) [ X ] Water-stained Leaves
[ ] Local Soil Survey Data
FAC-N
t
l T
t
Depth to Saturated Soil Surface (in) eu
ra
es
[ ]
[ ] Other (Explain in Remarks)
SOILS
Map Unit Name (Series and Phase):Congaree fine sandy loam Drainage Class: well
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Oxyaquic Udifluvent Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type? YES NO

Depth Horizon Matrix Color
inches Munsell Moist PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Mottle Colors Mottle Abundance/Contrast Texture, Concretions,
Munsell Moist Structure, etc.
0-16+ 10YR 4/1 Silty muck

HYDRIC SOIL INDI CATORS:
[ ] Histosol
[ ] Histic Epipedon
[ ] Sulfidic Odor
[ ] Aquic Moisture Regime
[ X ] Reducing Conditions
X Gle ed or Low-Chroma Colors [ ] Concretions
[ ] High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
[ ] Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
[ ] Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
[ ] Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in Remarks
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Hvdric Soil Present?
Remarks:
Source of hydrology is a seep
N
NO Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? NO
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
11987 COF Wptlanrlc Dplinpatinn Manuall
Project/Site: Falls of Neuse Road Widening and Relocation Date: 4/24/07
Applicant / Owner: City of Raleigh Coun : Wake
Investigator: Randazzo, Benton State: NC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? NO Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? YES Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? If needed, explain on reverse YES Plot ID: UP2 4
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
Sweet um (Li uidambarst raciflua) T FAC+ Buckeye Aesculus avia) S FAC
Loblolly pine Pinus taeda T FAC Green ash Fraxinus enns lvanicum T FACW
Red maple Acerrubrum) S FAC American elm (Ulmus americana) T FACW
Box elder Acerne undo T FACW White oak Quercus albs T FACU-
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC- : 87
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
[ ]Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks) WETLAND HYDROLOGY INDICATORS
[ ] Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators:
[ ] Aerial Photographs [ ] Inundated
[ J Other [ ] Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
[ ] Water Marks
[ X ] No Recorded Data Available [ ] Drift Lines
[ ] Sediment Deposits
FIELD OBSERVATIONS [ ] Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth of Surface Water 0 (in) Secondary Indicators (2 or more Required)
[ ] Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches
Depth to Free Water in Pit 16+ (in) [ ] Water-stained Leaves
[ ] Local Soil Survey Data
FAC
N
t
l T
t
Depth to Saturated Soil 16+ (in) -
eu
ra
es
[ ]
[ ] Other (Explain in Remarks)
iUILS
Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): Cecil Sandy Loam Drainage Class: well
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Typic Kanhapludult Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type? YES NO

Depth Horizon Matrix Color
inches Munsell Moist PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Mottle Colors Mottle Abundance/Contrast Texture, Concretions,
Munsell Moist Structure, etc.
0-4 A 10YR 5/6 Silt

HYDRIC SOIL INDI CATORS:
[ ] Histosol
[ ] Histic Epipedon
[ ] Sulfidic Odor
[ ] Aquic Moisture Regime
[ ] Reducing Conditions
Gle ed or Low-Chroma Colors [ ] Concretions
[ ] High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
[ ] Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
[ ] Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
[ ] Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in Remarks
Remarks: Refusal at 4 inches
WETLAND DETERMINATION
H dro h is Ve etation Present? frS NO
etland Hydrology Present? YES Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? YES
dric Soil Present? YES
[!Remarks:

USACE AID# DWQ # Site # Sl (indicate on attached map) i
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Flon s
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: O Df q 2. Evaluator's name: ?Ql 1C?JLZZ c?
3. Date of evaluation: 4. Time of evaluation: MOM-MO 5. Name of stream: UT +0- muse- 1k1w 6. River basin: MCUSt?
7. Approximate drainage area: C red 8. Stream order:
9. Length of reach evaluated: 10. County: WO_
11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees. 12. Subdivision name (if any): q
Latitude (ex. 34.872312): Z6. q 3l o N Longitude (ex -77556611): O . J75 fl
Method location determined (circle): GPS Topo Sheet Ortho (Aerial) Photo/GIS Other GIS Other
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
IWET) Falls of Natse- Rd
14. Proposed channel work (if any):
15. Recent weather conditions: YvO, m -1 by*
16. Site conditions at time of visit: Si ny nor
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: -Section 10 -Tidal Waters -Essential Fisheries Habitat
Tjrout Waters -Outstanding Resource Waters [Nutrient Sensitive Waters -Water Supply Watershed (14V)
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES (?f yes, estimate the water surface area:
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? ES i0
21. Estimated watershed land use: %Residential _% Commercial _% Industrial % Agricultural
U10/6 Forested '% Cleared /Logged _% Other (, )
22. Bankfull width: C? - 3f ~? 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank):
24. Channel slope down center of stream: -Flat (0 to 2%) Gentle (2 to 40%) -Moderate (4 to l0%) -Steep (>10%)
25. Channel sinuosity: Straight Occasional bends -Frequent meander -Very sinuous -Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored 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( i./1(./? t/7f ? ?rr"-? Date A12107
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used ck? as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
C? ECOIZl?(: ION Ia0
1?.R ?C7?R??T]
,4 Coastal ?P?edrnn
] Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream
(no flow`or saturation = 0, strong flow - max points) 0 - 5 0 - T
2 -, EN idence of past human alteration . -

(extensrve alteration 0; no alteration - max points
r 0-6 D-5 S, U
- 1
3 ?,r Riparian zone; rr
fno buffet- fl. conticuous, ?r idebblTf r max ptnnts} - 6 0 =4°' ,
- E
id
n
v
e
ce Of nntri IA ehci al dischages;-
sa
I
ex;enst?ed?e? a`
b Tees no dischar es max
oints

$?

0
4
-
p
kiroundiS' 6r discliaT'?e

0 3 -
?.} t y
?tfl Esc 2Tee 0 s 'rings, see' s -, VMands c tc: = max Duns , 0

Presence of adjnccnt iloodplatnF -
0
onoflocdplain=0,extensiveilo6dp]ain-max points) `_• _ 0 - rirr
' Entrenchment / flood laiu access t -_
?e 7y entrencbed 0; freguen Ioodtn anax Dints) r
Presence of Aincent svetlancl z? ? ? -
;
{`rio wetlands 0;?1ar?e raja en v??3Ta? n?s ira,3 points)
0 - 6?
'' ' ?'
?,3 ,e a
Channel s1ntios3#..e`u
ea(ensne chattnelrzat?on - a; natural meander= Max cints)
3
Sednnt'nt mputz
Cr"JVC. di position 0 little or no sediment -may omts 0 > :{ -
-Z, s Size & d' rsjt , of cliannd bed'
substrate U
t - '
a
.u moo eous= i , laree do erne saes -max oints)
- *-a _ r
N
" x Evtdencc of charmel mcishJn or i?1demng>.% -
d ee inojsed = 0 stable bed & banks -'max points) 0 5
zF "'raeeence of mnjor bank failures
Oe cros?on 17;'no crosio stable banks= max points)
Root depth anc7"density on banks*r
(no ti isible roots 0
dense Tools
tlr
b
u
0 3
fl 4
,.
,
-
,
ouc
o
t max oints)
t ,
?
,
IS- Impact by agriculture livo-tock, or timber production
(s
s

0 - 5

0
4
?
ub
tantial impact =0, no evidence- maxi points -
Pretence of riffle-pool/ripple-pool complexes.
(nonfflesrripplesorrools=O,??el}-devel pea=max Dints) 0 -3 fl-5
0 6

]fi r = }lnbital complexity<
(little or no habitat ='0; frtqucnt varied'hsbitats - max points)
0 b
0- b
]$? [ ?nopy coverage oversireambed'
(no hndine'6 eLelati
= 0
o
o
a
{
A) 5
on
c
ntinu
iLS c
no
= max points)
lg Substrate embcddedness
(deeply embedded -= 0 loose sinicture = Max)
=rte ?'•r -`f
. `
21) Presence of stream invertebrates (see-page 4)
ino evidence - 0. cornmon, numeroils h pes- max points) - 4 - 0 -5
21 ; Presence of amphib?anS _

(no c? idence = 0; common, numerous ri es = max opints-) 4
0 ^
0 - 4
`Q
T`

22 ?. Presence of fish
(noe??dence-??;common,numerous s- max points)
s.
3 0? 4 - •`0-4
Evidence of wildlife use
2

0
(no evidence = 0 abundant evidence max
oints) 6
D S
-
0 5
-
p
taf= o1ntSTosslbl
'el
10

L SQ ? ?r on firs
These charants.r;cr;-
2

! USACE AID# DWQ # Site # (indicate on attached map)
M STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

Provide the followinginformation for the stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: n l fU 01 Vtljelnh 2. Evaluator's name: It QZZO
3. Date of evaluation: '4 1 2q ) ul 4. Time of evaluation: rnr)V'n)V)a
5. Name of stream: V +t N ns ?jva 6. River basin:
7. Approximate drainage area: ZDV Qff4L5 S. Stream order: 2 Y1G?
9. Length of reach evaluated: Z = R 10. County: YtI t? IC e
ll. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees. 12. Subdivision name (if any):
Latitude (ex. 34.872312): &15. 9 3 5(0 G N Longitude (m -77556611): 1$ . 513LI * W
Method location determined (circle): GPS opo Sheet Ortho (Aerial) Photo/GIS Other GIS Other
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note near y roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
1202S Facts o Noine Pd
14. Proposed channel work (if any):
15. Recent weather conditions: oirn
16. Site conditions at time of visit: ?W F 5anm 17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: Section 10 -Tidal Waters Essential Fisheries Habitat
Tjrout Waters -Outstanding Resource Waters d Nutrient Sensitive Waters -Water Supply Watershed (14V)
I& Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES (N-O-)f yes, estimate the water surface area.,
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES O 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES NO
21. Estimated watershed land use: ?Ja% Residential 10 % Commercial Industrial _% Agricultural
C(Dv..1, l teS? 30% Forested 20 % Cleared / Logged _% Other ( r r I o5e fiv N-u-S411 1
22. Bankfull width: n U??kf . Bank height (from bed to top of bank): -6-1 ?i za 6fs+mom
24. Channel slope down center of stream: -Flat (0 to 20/*) Gentle (2 to 4%) -Moderate (4 to 109/0) -Steep (>10%)
25. Channel sinuosity: Straight -Occasional bends ?Frequent meander -Very sinuous . -Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksbeet (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): 510 Comments:
Evaluator's Signature L?,Vy,& &AdA a,.u Date y?, 5)©7
This channel evaluation form is intended to Q411 only as a guide to assist landowners and envir? nmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.
J
11

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
1
1

I

n

,.. ?. w,a,acid-jub are 7101 asS2SSC4 in COasta! streams.

USACE AID# DWQ # Site # t'Z (indicate on attached map)
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the following ?information ,f?o"rLAthe stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: Mu 1? K,4m 2. Evaluator's name: TdYJJLIZZO
3. Date of evaluation: ?_ fl? 4. Time of evaluation: VW rhi ffJ
5. Name of stream: Lt_T -hi NPA tSQ 1V8.t' 6. River basin: KYSU--e
7. Approximate drainage area: ?z 2n aLK&S S. Stream order. 1:S+
9. Length of reach evaluated: ? 004 10. County: wole_
11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees. 12. Subdivision name (if any):
Latitude (ex. 34.srz uy -=5. R351 o N Longitude (ex.a7.ss6611): 79% 5152 ° YJ
Method location determined (circle): GPS Topo Sheet Oriho (Aerial) Photo/GIS Other GIS Other
13. Location of reach under evaluation note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
1207-1 F-dAIS CF W&f
C]

14. Proposed channel work (if any):
IS. Recent weather
16. Site conditions
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: -Section 10 -Tidal Waters Essential Fisheries Habitat
1liout Waters -Outstanding Resource Waters Nutrient Sensitive Waters -Water Supply Watershed-IV)
18. I?there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES 60-)If yes, estimate the water surface area:
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES NO 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES NO
21. Estimated watershed land use: %Residential % Commercial Industrial Agricultural
7J) % Forested M% Cleared / Logged % Other (_ )
22. Bankfull width: I - 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): - Z
24. Channel slope down center of stream: -Flat (0 to 2%) _Gentle (2 to 40/*) Moderate (4 to 10%) -Steep (>10%)
25. Channel sinuosity: Straight -Occasional bends ?Frequent meander -Very sinuous -Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored 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. r,
Total Score (from reverse): G Comments:

1
1-
Evaluator's Signature Jo?, Date 2o.
This channel evaluation form is intended to be use cfily as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
2
_ ..... ........ .aaw? a,c ,ivi assrsscu in coastal streams.

USACE AID# DWQ # Site #221 (indicate on attached map)
M STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: 1
1ty ilf t?i1 If all 2. Evaluator's name: R"azz0
3. Date of evaluation: 4. Time of evaluation: Af- n wfx-
5. Name of stream: T J-'p WLY tyff 6. River basin: Nk11st
7. Approximate drainage area: ?7 Oo QI'.a-5 8. Stream order: 2-nd
9. Length of reach evaluated: ^ 100.0f? 10. County: l?
11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees. 12. Subdivision name (if any)::
Latitude (ex. 34.872312): _j . Q315 IJ Longitude (ex.-77.556611): ?Sc
1 U • 5-110"W
Method location determined (circle): GPS Topo Sheet Ortho (Aerial) Photo/GIS Other GIS Other
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
Term m os 4 New r il% Ck hl,tst- P
14. Proposed channel work (if arty):
15. Recent weather conditions: ?f? W/?i`t?-
16. Site conditions at time of visit: 1 Ylitl,1 .?!` { E'
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: -Section 10 -Tidal Waters Essential Fisheries Habitat
71 rout Waters -Outstanding Resource WatersNutrient Sensitive Waters -Water Supply Watershed (I-IV)
I8. is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES NO If yes, estimate the water surface area
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES O 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? , YES NO
21. Estimated watershed land use: -ND % Residential _% Commercial _% Industrial Agricultural
_Ua% Forested _% Cleared / Logged _% Other ( )
22. Bankfull width:- - 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): 01
24. Channel slope down center of stream: -Flat (0 to 2%) ,Gentle (2 to 4%) -Moderate (4 to 10%) -Steep (> 10%)
25. Channel sinuosity: Straight O
ccasional bends -Frequent meander -Very sinuous -Braided channel
Z
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 LAiJII - ?i7.f, t't!a/7 ? Date _ y /,I, In
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used)Aly as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change-version 06/03. To Comment, please-call 919-876-8441 x 26.
1
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
2

- ----- ----•--•-..?.,..,, wa, iiut abbubzmu III wart J sucams.

j USACE AID# DWQ # Site # 5 (indicate on attached map)
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
M
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: UbA 0(- 2Ia@lC1h 2. Evaluator's name: LY1C &7T-n
3. Date of evaluation: ji2"1 og 4. Time of evaluation: nAynoorL
5. Name of stream:-LL 1 iv ]XJ 154? VJRNr 6. River basin: NeXL%A .
7. Approximate drainage area: CJ?Gye? 8. Stream order: i St
9. Length of reach evaluated: J? 10. County: Vvo-ke.
11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees. 12. Subdivision name (if any): ,,? r
Latitude (ex 34.872312):-s5.9392. IN Longitude (ex. -77556611): _ '19, 5106 ! v
Method location determined (circle): GPS Topo Sheet Ortho (Aerial) Photo/GIS Other GIS Other
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note near y roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
TPXImm of u) 1L of It?nr A
14. Proposed channel work (if any):
15. Recent weather conditions: w0.YVY1 y)4
16. Site conditions at time of visit: S(.t YlYltd . I Y 1JU I Il , nor
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: Section 10 -Tidal Waters Essential Fisheries Habitat
Trout Waters -Outstanding Resource Waters V/ Nutrient Sensitive Waters -Water Supply Watershed (I-IV)
18. I there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES O f yes, estimate the water surface area:
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map. YES NO 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? ES NO
21. Estimated watershed land use: a U)% Residential _% Commercial _% Industrial Agricultural
L% Forested _% Cleared / Logged _% Other ( )
22. Bankfull width: 23.?ank height (from bed to top of bank):
24. Channel slope down center of stream: -Flat (0 to 2%) -Gentle (2 to 4%) -Moderate (4 to l0%) -Steep (>l0%)
25. Channel sinuosity: Straight -Occasional bends -Frequent meander -Very sinuous -Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored 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.

1
1
Evaluator s Signature r Je.tYlC,t d!Y G?x.-? Date
-jam -I&?7
This channel evaluation form is intended to be u only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.
1
1
L-1
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

•. corsitl
,. Piedmon ?.
1 Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream _- ?-
(no pow Dr saturation =6, strop flow - max points) 5 D a
'-:
2 Evidence of past buarian al
ion
W1.1
i

0 - 6

0,
t (extensive alteration - 0; no alterati
x'' max omts)
Riparian z
r
'
?
(no b
;- 0. contiguous, hide u • er?= max points) 0- 6 0
4 a
DO Wence of nutnent3 or chetnieardiscLarges : [
c (cxtensrve discharees -o discha> max Dints)
-'
y
5 Lroundwaiercl
3 All

(nolscll3 0 s"rims Se `t; ?a - max points) p p 4:r
-, .- , O
b- ^ s Presence ofadjacent iloo p atn: -; :,
?p7
i
ns O.q 0 4'_ ?1
?
oo
an7 sx
e
i?e f]oodplam= max points) t
trenelflme' M [ luud lain access -
q
d
en
m
0 = 5 ''
D 4

a
e enc
e >-
u
t d
g max points _

..

scnce
e 0 ?? of adjaeuit?i; tlaut5 0
arse ad?accntwe3la s max points
n

-6
_ Channel sin''' ter' s
°"
'
5
En1
( xlenstve;c ann
:ebmaUon-0; natur?t ieander= max Dints

0
-

o- , O..

Sediment-illy :
(?(extensl've deposition D; little or na;?ment== ma points)'
Y

.= ? s

?.r 3
Stze dcdl?ersrty ofchannell?edsubstrate
`
N.
?
(fine, hornoeenous° 0, lai
e, dnersc slz?;nax Dints) -'
Ev.idenc " ' =channel ?nclsioi or x?denin
?
x ((ice anels 0 stable bid & banks,-mtix Points)

.13=
1.-'rrniajo?aulcattures
(severe eiostn
Iff) rosin an -z = 0 5,
ma points)
14 RoJMUpt aiid denstt fln bank
(
o
ble'
`
b
o
o
-` A
ist
n
r
oots
; dense ro
ts tli
i?ghnut
max Dints)
15 Impact by rnculture, lii estock, or timber production
_
(S6 staintial impact 0, no eviden'ce? niax points) 0-5 0-
16 ° Presence of riffle-pool/ripple-pouf ccimplexes?
0'=3

(no riffle'shi pies of Dols = »°ell-developed = max points) D-5 `
1
l ?- }3 ?brta1 complexity r -

"
`
'
'
0-6
' r- -
0-6'
(little or volt
-
). frequent saneah
abitats= max
points)
18 Canop}? coverage over streambed

(no shadin ieaetation 0; continuous canopy max points) 0,-5 5 0 3

r
Substrateembeddedness
??

(dee
ly embedded 0, loose stnicturel= max-
-??r 6-4 D
?.
20_ Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)

(no evidence 0; cdmmnh, numerous t pes ° ma p points) 0=4 0 5' , fl 5
21 Presence of amplijbians
(nn evidence ?; common, numerous types max points) 0-4 0-4 p
?2

r Pres
enccoffish.
(no evidence 0
common
numerou
tv
=
i
0-4
0-41 0=4.
d
,
,
s
es
max po
nts)
Evidence of wildlife use -

trio evidence-;0.; abundant evidence= max points) 0 - fi 0 - 5 p
'S
?-

rr r ata :.nitrt asst F l
'
211
] 00

l Y
,

----lauca arc nut assesseu in coastal streams.
2
E
1
r
lots of 41
rip! rah
1
?J

1

LF
L
1
USACE AIN DWQ # Site # indicate on attached ma
;.;.; STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: NA u 1?f V l a ah 2. Evaluator's name: 2MCL&7--LU1
3. Date of evaluation: ti H DI 4. Time of evaluation: 6-4unpan
5. Name of stream: u 1 0 ??j (c, { 6. River basin: Apl?S,q
7. Approximate drainage area: (C'.S 8. Stream order.
9. Length of reach evaluated: ;Z Hot) 10. County.
11 Site coordinates (if known): Prefer in decimal degrees. 12. Subdivision name (if any):
Latitude (ex. 34.872312): 85. q3-1 (o . ° N Longitude (ex. -77.556611): IV
Method location determined (circle): <: Topo Sheet Ortho (Aerial) Photo/GIS Other GIS Other
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
1 mlli)VS Of Uw F4115 pf NW5e Rd
14. Proposed channel work (if any):
15. Recent weather conditions: VU, & r%-
16. Site conditions at time of visit: M>nV { W()Llr i
17. Identify any special waterway classification known: _ Section l0 Tidal Waters -Essential Fisheries Habitat
-Trout Waters -Outstanding Resource Waters ,Nutrient Sensitive Waters _Water Supply Watershed (I-IV)
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES NO If yes, estimate the water surface. area:
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES
21. Estimated watershed land use: 10 % Residential Commercial Industrial Agricultural
-kQ% Forested Cleared / Logged _% Other ( )
22. Bankfull width: 1 - 2- / 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): '
24. Channel slope down -center of streamT: % Flat (0to 2%) i/ % Gentle (2 to 41/6) --% Moderate (4 to 195%) _% Steep (>100
25. Channel sinuosity -Straight Occasional bends -Frequent meander Very sinuous -Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on location, terrain,
vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points to each characteristic within the
range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should
reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions enter 0 in
the scoring box and provide an explanation in the comments section. Where there are obvious changes in the character ofa stream under review
(e.g., the stream flows from a pasture into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form
used to evaluated each reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of
the highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 110 Comments:
I
r
Evaluator's Signature: Date: /Y/2(e/07
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a-guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in gathering the
data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream quality. The total score resulting
from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a particular mitigation ration or requirement. Form
subject to change - version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919-8776-8441 x 26.

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
# 5 CHARACTERISTICS ECtIR EGlOIV -POINT R.N+ '.

' SCORE
Coastal: Pied?nont?., 7?lguntain
l Presence of flow/ persistent pools in stream

, (no flow or saturation=O; strop flow--max points) - $ 074 0;-5
yam 2 Evidence of past human alteration
(extensive alteration4; no alteration= max points) 0 - 6 0 - 5 0:.-5
r1
3 Riparian Zone

(no buffet=0; Conti ous, wide buffer=max Dints) 4=6 0-4, 0-5
p?
r ? 4 Evidence of nutrient ur ebemicaf dischargcrs
(extensive disehargei4; no dischar es=anax Dints) 0 - 5 0 - 0 - 4
5 irOundwater discharge':.
No dischar e=4; s rip s, se , wetlands, et&=max points 0 - 3 0 -4 0 - 4
6 Presence of adjacent floodplain
(no flood lai -4; extensive flop lain=7niax ants) 0 ` 4 0 -4 0 - 2
7- Entrenchment / floodplain access
dee 1 entrencbed=0; fre uent°floodin = ax Dints) 0 - 5 ` 0 - 4 0 - 2
8 Presence of adjacent wetlands
'
ono wetlands=0; lar a adjacent wetlands=max Dints 0 6 0 -4 0-2
9 Channel sinuosity
(extensive channelizationl; natural meander=max points 0-5 0-4 0-3
10 Sediment input
(extensive de osition=0; little or no sediment=max points 0 - 5 0 - 4' 0 - 4 f
41 Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
Oine; homo
o
=
l
di
= NA* 0-4 0-5

arge,
ene
us
,
verse siz
max, oints J
12 Evidence of channel incision or widening t
(deeply incised=0; stable bed & banks max ints 0 - 5 0 - 4 0 - 5 t.
13 Presence of major bavk failures
0
5
(severe erosion=0; no erosion, sable banks=max points - 0-51 0-5
L.;
14 Root depth and density on bank
(no visible roots=0; dense roots throughout=max points) 0 ` 3 0-4 -5
r 15 Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production'

(substantial im act`-0; no evidence=max points)

0-5

0-4 # F
16 Presence of riffle-pool/ripple-pool complexes
(no riflles/ri les or ools=0; well-develo ed=max oints 0 - 3 0 - 5
17 Habitat complexity
(little or no habitat-0; frequent, varied habitats=max points) 0 - 6 0 - 6. 0 - b
18 Canopy coverage over-stream bed
x (no shadin ve etation-0; continuous canopy=max points) 0 - 5 0 - 5 0 - 5
19 Substrate embeddedness
(deeply embedded=0; loose structure=max points) NA* 0 - 4' 0 - 4
20 Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
'
(no evidence=Q; common, numerous es=max points) 10-4 0-5 0-5 0
21 Presence of amphibians
0 (no evidencf-0 common, numerous t)Ws=max Dints) 0 - 4 0 - 4 0 - 4
'.22 Presence offish
(no evidence=0; cowman, numerous types=max oints). 0.- 4 0 _ 4 0 - 4 0
23 Evidence of wildlife use
(no evidence, abundant-evidence=wax points). 0 =6
i 0-5 0-5
Total Points Possible 100 .100 100
I l l??_TL SCORE (also enter on first page) .56
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identification Form; Version 3.1
Date: H 17-q ) D1 Project: 'Cads of Mcw x Latitude: 35, q 31$ a N
Evaluator: -gCttl'4zj, /&t ,,f site: 'v. k Longitude: i$ ?-?500
Total Points: Other
Stream is at least intermittent County t n',, ?i
if z 19 or rennial if Z 30 '30-S V r e.g. Quad Name: e
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal= J Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1a. Continuous bed and bank 0 1 2 3
2. Sinuosity 0 1 (,_2). 3
3. In-channel structure: riffle-pool sequence 0 1 2 3
4. Soil texture or stream substrate sorting 0 1 C2) 3
5. Active/relic floodplain 0 1 2 .. 3
6. Depositional bars or benches 0 1 2 3
7. Braided channel 0 1 2 3
8. Recent alluvial deposits 0 1 2 3
9 a Natural levees 0 1 2 3
10. Headcuts 0 2 3
11. Grade controls 0 5 1 1.5
12. Natural valley or drainageway 0 0.5 (1) 1 1.5
13. Second or greater order channel on existi
USGS or NRCS map or other documented
evidence.
No = 0
Yes = 3
- Man-made ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
R. Hvtirnlnnv (Ci ihtntnl = C) 1
14. Groundwater flow/discharge 0 1 2
15. Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain, or
Water in channel - d or growing season 0 1 2
l?
16. Leaflitter 1.5 1 0.5 0
17. Sediment on plants or debris 0 5 1 1.5
18. Organic debris lines or piles (Wrack lines) 0 .5 1 1.5
19. Hydric soils (redoximorphic features) present? No = 0 Yes =1.5
C_ Riolonv (Suhtntni = I 1
20b. Fibrous rots in channel 3 2 A 0
21 . Rooted plants in channel 3 2 1 0
22. Crayfish 0 0.5 1 1.5
23. Bivalves 0 1 2 3
24. Fish 0 0.5 1 1.5
25. Amphibians 0 1 1.5
26. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance) 0 0.5 1 1.5
27. Filamentous algae; periphyton 0" 1 2
28. Iron oxidizing bacteria/fungus. 0` 1 1:5
29 . Wetland plants in streambed FAC = 0.5; FACW = 0.75; OBL =1.5 SAV = 2.0; Ot er = 0
-s- - m iu c 1 iuwb on me presence or upiano pants, nem zu tocuses on me presence t equaac or wetland plants.
Sketch:
Notes: (use backside of this form for additional notes.)
Y YOB D - some ryw, fffi
11 1
1./
C 0? s
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
North Carolina Division of Water Quality- Stream Identification Form; Version 3.1
Date: Z Project:! 15 Latitude: . q 36 a o
Evaluator. ?a? ?Ul LZt) Site: Longitude: sue, V'yV
Total Points: Other
Stream is at least intermittent // County:
if a 19 or perennial if 2 30 e.g. Quad Name: Foirle&+
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1a. Continuous bed and bank 0 1 2
2. Sinuosity 0 1 2 .
3. In-channel structure: riffle-pool sequence 0 1 3
4. Soil texture or stream substrate sorting 0 1 2 3
5. Active/relic floodplain 0 1 2
6. Depositional bars or benches 1 2 3
7. Braided channel 0 1 2 3
8. Recent alluvial deposits 1 2 3
9 a Natural levees 0 1 2 3
10. Headcuts 0 1 3
11. Grade controls 0 0.5 1.5
12. Natural valley or drainageway 0 0.5 1 1.
13. Second or greater order channel on existing
USGS or NRCS map or other documented
evidence.
No 40)
Yes = 3
discussions in manual
" Man-made ditches are not rated; see1P
R_ Hvrirnlonv (Si thtntal = 14. Groundwater flow/discharge 0 1 2

15. Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain, or
Water in channel - d or growing season 0 1 2
16. Leaflitter 1.5 1 0. 0
17. Sediment on plants or debris 0.5 1.5
18. Organic debris lines or piles (Wrack lines) 0.5 1 1.5
19. Hydric soils (redoximorphic features) present? No = 0 Y =1.5
C. Sioloov fSuhtntal = D 1
20b. Fibrous roots in channel 2 1 0
21 . Rooted plants in channel 3 2 1 0
22. Crayfish 0.5 1 1.5
23. Bivalves 0 1 2 3
24. Fish 0.5 1 1.5
25. Amphibians 0.5 1 1.5
26. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance) 0 0. 1 1.5
27. Filamentous algae; periphyton 0 1 2 3
28. Iron oxidizing bacteria/fungus. 0 1 1.5
29 . Wetland plants in streambed FAC = 0.5; FACW = 0.75; OBL =1.5 SAV = 2.0; Other = 0
items zu and zi focus on the presence of upland plants. Item 29 focuses on the presence of aquatic or weuand plants.
Sketch:
Notes: (use back side of this form for additional notes.)

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
North Carolina Division of Water Quality- Stream Identification Form; Version 3.1
Date: j
124 1 D1 Project: ?? Ndcy Witude• ? q 3ct2 ® N Ls &C ?ku?c
J
Evaluator. %Y-,dgvzc> !/ n Site: Longitude: $ rJ-7 fl y?
Total Points: Other
Stream is at least intermittent County: Witt e.g. Quad Name: V ke Forest
if z 19 or erennial it "a 30 19 1
A. Georno holo (Subtotal = ) Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1a. Continuous bed and bank 0 1 2 3 .
2. Sinuosity 0 1 2 . 3
3. In-channel structure: riffle-pool sequence 0 2 3
4. Soil texture or stream substrate sorting 0 1 w i 2 3
5. Active/relic floodplain 0 1 2 3
6. Depositional bars or benches 0 1 2 3
7. Braided channel 0 1 2 3
8. Recent alluvial deposits 0 1 2 3
9a Natural levees 0' 1 2 3
10. Headcuts 1 2 3
11. Grade controls 0 1 1.5
12. Natural valley or drainageway 0 0.5 1 1.5
13. Second or greater order channel on existing
USGS or NRCS map or other documented
evidence.
Ko = 0
Yes = 3
- Man-made ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
R_ Hvrirnlnnv /Ci ehtntA = C, -7-, 1
14. Groundwater flow/discharge 0 1 (2-) 3
15. Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain, or.
Water in channel - d or growing season 0 1 3
16. Leaflitter 1.5 1 0.5 0
17. Sediment on plants or debris 0 0 1.5
18. Organic debris lines or piles (Wrack lines) 0 0.5 1 1.5
19. Hydric soils (redoximorphic features) present? No = 0 Yes =1.5
C_ Riolnnv fSuhtntai = -1 1
20'. Fibrous roots in channel 3 2 1 0
0. Rooted plants in channel 3 2 1 0
22. Crayfish 0 0.5 1 1.5
23. Bivalves C q) 2 3
24. Fish CO) 0.5 1 1.5
25. Amphibians 0 0.5 1 1.5
26. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance) 0 0.5 1 1.5
27. Filamentous algae; periphyton .1 2 3
28. Iron oxidizing bacteriatfungus. 0 0.5 1 1.5
29 . Wetland plants in streambed 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.
Notes: (use back side of this form for additional notes.) Sketch:
UZSACeam 10 been Culytir-td undtf
Sub (it 111StC*1 50 f+ 15 CU14 i IrAhk
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identification Form; Version 3.1
Date: Z?'?? Project: Latitude: ? f.??(q o N,, R? yy
Evaluator. ?..4Z( ? Site: Longitude: -($ 5123' i?
Total Points: t Other
Stream is at least intermittent Z7 County: i s n e.g. Quad Name'
if z 19 or perennial if 2 30 W (,-C3 '
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1a. Continuous bed and bank 0 1 2 CT?
2. Sinuosity 0 2 . 3
3. In-channel structure: riffle-pool sequence 0 Q .2 3
4. Soil texture or stream substrate sorting 0 1 3
5. Activelrelic floodplain 0 1 2
6. Depositional bars or benches 1 2 3
7. Braided channel 1 2 3
8. Recent alluvial deposits
- (Di 1 2 3
91 Natural levees 1 2 3
10. Headcuts 1 2 3
11. Grade controls 0 1 1.5
12. Natural valley or drainageway 0 1 1.5
13. Second or greater order channel on existing
USGS or NRCS map or other documented
evidence.
No E-10
Yes = 3
Man-made ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
R_ Hvrirnlnnv Mi thtninl = q 1
14. Groundwater flow/discharge 0 1 2
15. Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain, or
Water in channel - d or growing season 0 1 2
16. Leaflitter 1.5 0.5 0
17. Sediment on plants or debris 0.5 1 1.5
18. Organic debris lines or piles (Wrack lines) 0 1 1.5
19. Hydric soils (redoximorphic features) present? No = 0 Yes 1.?
C. Bioloov (Subtotal= -7.5 1
200. Fibrous roots in channel 2 1
21 . Rooted plants in channel 2 1 '.0•'
22. Crayfish 0.5 1 1.5
23. Bivalves 1 2 3
24. Fish 0.5 1 1.5
25. Amphibians 0.5 1 1.5
26. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance) no 0.5 1 1.5
27. Filamentous algae; periphyton 0 2 3
28. Iron oxidizing bactenaffungus. 0 0. 1 1.5
29 . Wetland plants in sireambed FAC = 0.5; FACW = 0.75; OBL =1.5 SAV = 2.0; Other = 0
'terns zu and zi locus on me presence of upland plants, item 25 focuses on the presence of aquatic or wetland plants.
Notes: (use bads side of this form for additional notes.) Sketch:
i

1

1

1

I'
J

WET'LAN'D RATING WORKSHEET Fourth Version
WETLAND W1 AND W2
Project Name: Falls of Neuse Widening and Relocation Nearest Road: Falls of Neuse
County: Wake Wetland Area: 0.46 acres Wetland Width: feet
Name of Evaluator: Randazzo Evaluation Date: 4/26/07
and Location
on pond or lake
on perennial stream
on intermittent stream
within interstream divide
other ridge
Series Cecil Sandy Loam
redominantly organic-humus, muck,
Or peat
redominantly mineral - non-sandy
,redominantly sandy
lic factors
steep topography seeps
ditched or channelized
total wetland width >=100 feet
Adjacent land use
(within 1/2 mile upstream, upslope, or radius)
X forested/natural vegetation 50 %
X agriculture, urban/suburban 40 %
X impervious surface 10 %
Dominant Vegetation
(1) Saururus cernuus
(2) Carex spp.
(3) Alnus serrulata
Flooding and wetness
semipermanently to permanently
flooded or inundated
seasonally flooded or inundated
X intermittently flooded or temporary
surface water
No evidence of flooding or
surface water
Wetland type (select one)*
Bottomland hardwood forest Pine savanna
Headwater forest Freshwater marsh
Swamp forest Bog/fen
Wet flat Ephemeral wetland
Pocasin Carolina Bay
Bog forest X Other seep
*tthe rating system cannot be applied to salt or brackish marshes or stream channels - _ - - _ _
Water storage 1 x 4.00 =
Bank/Shoreline stabilization 1 x 4.00 =
Pollutant removal 1 x 5.00 =
Low flow augmentation 3 x 2.00 =
Wildlife Habitat 1 x 2.00 =
Aquatic life value 0 x 4.00 =
Recreation/Education 1 x 1.00 =
1

4
5
6
4
0
1
* Add 1 point if in sensitive watershed and >10% nonpoint disturbance within '/z mile upstream,
upslope, or radius

1

1

WETLAND RATING WORKSHEET Fourth Version
WETLAND W3
Project Name: Falls of Neuse Widening and Relocation Nearest Road: Falls of Neuse
County: Wake Wetland Area: 0.02 acres Wetland Width: feet
Name of Evaluator: Randazzo Evaluation Date: 4/26/07
Location
on pond or lake
on perennial stream
on intermittent stream
within interstream divide
Series Congaree
,redominantly organic-humus, muck,
Or peat
,redominantly mineral - non-sandy
redominantly sandy
ulic factors
X steep topography
ditched or channelized
total wetland width >= 100 feet
Adjacent land use
(within '/z mile upstream, upslope, or radius)
X forested/natural vegetation 50 %
X agriculture, urban/suburban 40 %
X impervious surface 10 %o
Dominant Vegetation
(1) Saururus cernuus
(2) Microstegium vimeneum
(3) Boehmeria cylindrica
Flooding and wetness
semipermanently to permanently
flooded or inundated
seasonally flooded or inundated
X intermittently flooded or temporary
surface water
No evidence of flooding or
surface water
Wetland type (select one)*
Bottomland hardwood forest Pine savanna
X Headwater forest Freshwater marsh
Swamp forest Bog/fen
Wet flat Ephemeral wetland
Pocasin Carolina Bay
Bog forest Other
*tthe rating system cannot be applied to salt or brackish marshes or stream channels
Water storage 1 x 4.00 = 4
' Bank/Shoreline stabilization 2 x 4.00 = 8
Pollutant removal 1 * x 5.00 = 5
Low flow augmentation 1 x 2.00 = 2
Wildlife Habitat 1 x 2.00 = 4
'
Aquatic life value 0 x 4.00 = 0
Recreation/Education 1 x 1.00 = 1
* Add 1 point if in sensitive watershed and >10% nonpoint disturbance within '/z mile upstream,
upslope, or radius
1
1

1

1

f'

WETLAND RATING WORKSHEET Fourth Version
WETLAND W4
Project Name: Falls of Neuse Widening and Relocation Nearest Road: Falls of Neuse
County: Wake Wetland Area: 0.29 acres Wetland Width: feet
Name of Evaluator: Randazzo Evaluation Date: 4126/07
Location
on pond or lake
on perennial stream
on intermittent stream
within interstream divide
other
Series Congaree
redominantly organic-humus, muck,
Or peat
redominantly mineral - non-sandy
redominantly sandy
lic factors
steep topography
-ditched or channelized
total wetland width >=100 feet
Adjacent land use
(within '/z mile upstream, upslope, or radius)
X forested/natural vegetation 50 %
X agriculture, urban/suburban 40 %
X impervious surface 10 %
Dominant Vegetation
(1) Saururus cernuus
(2) Peltandra sagittifo/ia
(3) Hydrocotvle umbellata
Flooding and wetness
semi permanently to permanently
flooded or inundated
seasonally flooded or inundated
X intermittently flooded or temporary
surface water
No evidence of flooding or
surface water
Wetland type (select one)*
Bottomland hardwood forest Pine savanna
Headwater forest Freshwater marsh
Swamp forest Bog/fen
Wet flat Ephemeral wetland
Pocasin Carolina Bay
Bog forest X Other seep
*tthe rating system cannot be applied to salt or brackish marshes or stream-channels
Water storage 1 x 4.00 = 4
Bank/Shoreline stabilization 1 x 4.00 = 8
NI
Pollutant removal 1 x 5.00 - 5
Low flow augmentation 3 x 2.00 2
Wildlife Habitat 1 x 2.00 = 4

Aquatic e
life value 0 x 4.00 = 0
Recreation/Education 1 x 1.00 = 1

Add 1 point if in sensitive watershed and >10% nonpoint disturbance within'/2 mile upstream
upslope, or radius

1APA.TC7 °17? ? qNl
L
Il

Wake Forest

540
401
c
C?
f /
R21eiC7
SJ

7a \??? ?\ ? I N
1 i??i lJ l a
City of Raleigh
North Carolina Legend
Project Location
Interstate
US Route 0 0.5 1 2 3
NC Highway Miles
Local Road
Falls of Neuse Figure 1
Wake County ------ County Boundary
Municipal Boundary
Date: July 2007 Project Location

n
I

W

D
u
11
ri

III
IV

u

City of Raleigh
North Carolina
Falls of Neuse
Wake County
Date: July 2007
Legend
Project Study Area - Cg B2
- Local Road Cg C2
® AgB2 ® CIB3
- AgC2 - CIC3
- APB CnIA
APB2 - CoA
APC2 - LoC
APD UdD
CeB2 W
- CeC2 WEE
CeD
Source: USDA County-Wid e Mosaic. 2005.
NRCS. Wake County. 2007

0
s
0
Streams eligible for Neuse Buffer Rules
City of Raleigh
North Carolina
a
Falls of Neuse
Wake County
Source: USGS Wake Forest
Date: July 2007 topographic quadrangle. 1993.
0.5
Legend
Project Study Area
Delineated Streams
® Delineated Wetland 0 0.25
- - Ephemeral Channel
Miles
/ Figure 4
/
?
6
Jurisdictional Streams
and Wetlands