20090266 Ver 7_Wetland determination_20200817

Greenville Utilities Raw Water Pumping Station Improvements
Nation4cle 12 Pre -Construction Notification
Jurisdictional Wetland Delineation Report
•
ATTACHMENT C

KI?i1�1'�i Atilt
- ---------- ------
Suite 160
Charlotte, NC 28202
Tel: [phone]
F= [phone]
1. FILE tort
November 11, 2008
Mr. Josh Pelletier
USACE
107 Union Drive
Suite 202
Washington, North Carolina 27889
Subject: Greenville Utilities Raw Water intake Improvements
Wetland Delineation- Revised Map
Dear Mr. Pelletier,
134891
On behalf of Greenville Utilities Commission (GUC), Brown and Caldwell
submitted a Jurisdictional Determination Report on August 1, 2008, for the GUC
Raw Water Intake Improvements Project. In response to your comments following
the field confirmation, two copies of an updated Jurisdictional Delineation Map are
enclosed for your review.
The updated Jurisdictional Delineation Map includes the previously -disturbed
wetland area delineated by Spruill and Associates Inc. (for Hazen and Sawyer) on
January 4, 2008, in addition to .the wetland area delineated by Brown and Caldwell
on August 1, 2008. Following your approval, we request that a signed map be
returned with a letter of confirmation regarding the jurisdictional boundaries of the
wetland area. The second copy is for your records.
Should you need any further information to make an approved jurisdictional
determination of the. wetland resources on. site, please contact me at 704-373-7122
or [e-mail].
Very truly yours,
BROWN AND CALDWELL
Abby Rokosch
Watershed Scientist
AER:jml
Enclosures
%%Ml011projects%Gmeoville Utilities%134891 Raw Water Intake%4W Permitting%-300 401-404 Wetlands permits%Wetland
Report%Revisions%Updated Wetland Map L.etter.doe
E n v i r o n m e n t a l E n g i n e e r s -& C 0 Is 5 U l t a n t r

m
S
a
h
m
:Line -
-- ---_
_ jElei3ating Length -
L1
IS37°27'41 "IE
-
12
N44°54'12W ?
_76.22
- 69.08
L3
S4031'01"E J -
116.88
�1-4
S 63 046"IET
82.64
L5 ......
; S39°53'45"!E-
^ 56.31
L6
S52°00'54"E
7_4._67
1-7 ... __ _ _
... 6053'24"E
50.4
L8
S470_51'56"E
79.15
iL9_ 1S38°34'21"E
90.9
L10 -
S40049'33"E� _
v50.51:
S411151'17"E ` -+
45.921
112 _
S31"55'42"E-_- -
41.51 `
_
L13
i_......._..�-.--7
S42°03'45"E
41.061
-_
114
-
1S6'Q°40'31"E F ��
33.73E
L15
S32°29'5r1E _
�—
89.12
mf
L16..-.......-
_ i—OC16-03-E
---_
31.69;
L17 -
_.
7S50°06'38"E '
�19.151
LEGEND
�
DELINEATED WETLAND AREA (08101/08)
PREVIOUSLY DELINEATED
I. _J
WETLAND (01/04108)
WETLAND FLAG
*pp
WETLAND DATA POINT
WB8
6t'�p
\ � of �� j �•'•-', f• `,'
WA
/ O��G � ,�•• • •ter
nJ� A w Pyy •0.17AC.
WETLAND BOUNDARY
EXTENDS BEYOND
PROJECT LIMITS
� 'f III I►/
WB4
�9
B
R
0
WN
AND
C
A
L
D
W
E L
LOC�,AnpN
AllJ
RALI•rIGH,
NORTH
CAROLINA I
WB2
�6,` -%LOO
' WA11
r r
r
WB3- i rr
r ,
yr
/rr
WA12
)ARY
D
'this plat accurately depicts the
Section 404 of the Man Water
t Area, as determined by the
w areas ofkirtsdictlon may be
A been delineated: Unless there is
bed regulations, this
irisdiction may be relied upon for
rs from this date- This
tg the 1987 Corps of Engineers
TER INTAKE
.............,...,.., ���.�.�.. r N MAP
PITT COUNTY 0 25 50
NORTH CAROLINA
SCALE: i' - 50'
FIGURE
6

C 044
)o1b.
GREENVILLE UTILITIES RAW WATER
INTAKE IMPROVEMENTS
WETLAND DELINEATION
August 1, 2008

5410 Trinity Road
Palisades I1, Suite 320
Raleigh, NC 27607
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
August 1,.2009
Mr. Josh Pelletier
USACE
107 Union Drive. Suite 202
Washington, North Carolina 27889
Subject: Greenville Utilities Raw Water Intake Improvements
Wetland Delineation
Dear Mr. Pelletier,
134891
On behalf of Greenville Utilities, Brown and Caldwell performed the necessary
field work to delineate jurisdictional wetlands within the confirmation limits for
the proposed raw water intake structure. This delineation report provides the
required documentation for jurisdictional boundary determinations in conformance
with Section 404 of the Clean- Water Act. The following sections summarize the
procedures and methods followed and the results from completing these tasks.
pw� 4"O a d-
Scientists from Brown and Caldwell (BC) completed a wetland field survey on
June 18, 2008. A project Vicinity Map is provided in Figure 1. In order to
complete the wetland delineation, the following activities were performed:
Prior to field work, data from the following sources were obtained to determine the
location of potential wetlands:
■ USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic Maps (Figure 2)
■ Aerial Photograph (Figure 3)
• United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Web Soil Survey
• United States Fish and Wildlife (USFWS) National Wetland Inventory
m hiesources Conservation I►!1>a-.
A Natural Resources Conservation Service.(NRCS) soil map (Figure 4) showing
the different soil types mapped within the confirmation limits has been included.
Inventory
A National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) map (Figure 5) showing the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife estimation of the extent of wetlands in the project area has been included.
\\6cra101\projectslC=eaville Ublities\134891 Raw Water Intake\ 400 Permitting\-300 401-404 Wetlands Ppndts\Wetland Repon\lD Report
08012008.doc '
E n v i r o n m e n t a l E n !! i n e e r t 6- C 0 n s u 1 t a n

Mr. Pelletier
August 1, 2008
Page 2
Brown and Caldwell used this map as a general reference for initiating the field
verification of wetlands within the confirmation.limits.
Field Method
Primary guidance for the investigation of wetland resources was the. United States
Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental
Laboratory, 1987). Wetlands ,are defined as those areas that are inundated or
saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to
support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of
vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions (Environmental
Laboratory, 1.987).
The presence of established hydrophytic vegetation communities, hydric soils and
surface or near -surface hydrology were used' to delineate wetland resources.
Wetland areas were flagged with surveyors flagging. Flags were located to NC
Class A survey standards by CH Engineering.
Results
Figure 6 depicts the location of a large forested wetland within the projects
confirmation limits; the boundaries of this wetland extend beyond the defined
confirmation limits. The forested community is dominated by mature bald cypress
trees (Taxodium distichum) and river birch (Betula 1Vigra); the understory
community was sparse in most areas and composed of sedges '(Carex sp.) and other
herbaceous wetland vegetation including false nettle (Boehemeria cylindrical and
Polygonum sp.). Several hydrological indicators were observed -including standing
water, drainage patterns, tree water marks and oxidized rhizopheres. The soils are
reduced (low chrome colors) and saturated; these are characteristics of hydric soils.
Photographs of the wetland- can be found in Attachment C.
Jurisdictional fttormination (JD) Dorm
The Approved Jurisdictional Determination Form for the delineated wetland is
included in the attachment B. The JD form was only completed for the wetland
area within the confirmation limits.
AUra101\projects\Greenville Utilities\134891 Raw Water lntakel 400 Pemm tti*-300 401-404 Wetlands PermilslWetland RepurND•Report
08017.008.doc

Mr. Pelletier
August 1, 2008
Page 3
1. www.fws.gov/nwi
2. www. websoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov/app
3. United States Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual
(Environmental Laboratory, 1987).
Should you have any questions or require additional information, please- contact
me at 919-424-1436 or [e-mail].
Very truly yours,
BROWN AND CALDWELL
Abby Rokosch
Watershed Scientist
AER:vb
Enclosure
List of Figures
Figure 1 Site. Vicinity Map
Figure 2 Project Location Map-USGS 7.5 minute Topography
Figure 3. Project Location Map- Aerial Photography
Figure 4 USDA Soils Map
Figure -5 NWI Map
Figure 6 Jurisdictional Delineation
List of Attachments'
Attachment A Wetland Data forms
Attachment B USACE Approved Jurisdictional Determination Forms
Attachment C Site Photographs
Ubcra1011projects\Cnwnville Utilities1134891 Raw Water InWw\ 400 Permitting\-300 401-404 Wetlands PermitsMetlaad ReporAID 11"n
08012008.doe

ON
t

_-�_.�1`(r (ram +1 �' >••� ..� _ .,,C� . , k_:�
33
I ••
77
'It Clark
g Project Location - r 1
t ti Pfl� BRENVIt
E •+� RR I P
F:=✓.. 5 L r'' I t
{ %
:n Crri
LP
I L.
*' 1 inch uals 2 E feet
Caeenvik Utilities Commission project Location Map-
P.O. Box 1847 Figure 2
Greenville, NC 27835 USGS 7,5 Minute -Topography

>-z
z
m
S`
Figure 4. USDA Soils Map
5

L�J
tkw
Soil Map -Pitt County, North Carolina
Map Unit Legend
Pitt County, North Carolina (NC147)
Map Unit Symbol
Map Unit Name Acres in AOI
Percent of Apli
A9B
j Alaga loamy sand, banded
8.3
substratum, 0 to 6 percent
20.4%
slopes (Alpin)
Bb
Bibb complex
8.2
20 2%
LOB
Lakeland send, 0 to 6 percent
6.9
16.8%
slopes
Pa
PactoWs loamy sand
3.7
9.0%
Sw
Swamp (Johnston)
1.8
4.3%
Lw _ _
Water
12.0
29.3%
Totals for Area of Interest (AOI)
40.9 I
too,o%
wr- Natural Resources
Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey 2.0
National Cooperative Soil Survey
7l10/2008
Page 3 of

Om
35-37-50 N 35-U-0 N
I"
N 35-38 20 N 35-MM N
:.6
m
n
aml*
r `~
.. 4
N i'
0
e I I
41 V
V
V
O
N OSIC-SE N 0-K-9E N 0L-BE-SE N OZ-BESE ^N OC-S SE o
D g ZZk k
O$, t o m r w o m y+'
� A •
m
m
L4
cG
C
CD
1
PO
.t-
so
wo
3
c�
0
ml
pr
. Figure 5. NWI Map

4b
CITY OF GREENVILLE
MB6PC19& 19A
PIN: 4679414843
-TIYS certifies trot HYs copy of firs Prot occurafey depicts the
boundary of the JurWcclan of sadlJan of 4D4 of the Clean Water Ad
w1f Yn the designoted lnsot ores. as defertdned by Me urderslgned
On INs dafe.Ofher areas of jurlsdlctlon mW be present on Ile site but
have not been dellneated.Unfess there Is c honge In the law or our
publlSW fWatlonsXY5 deferminoflon of Sedlon 404 jurWIctlon
may be relied upon for a period naf to exoad fhv years from fNs dale.
TN's deferminatlon was made ulUl2ing the M7 Corps of Engineers
Welland Delineofiron Manual.'
Regulatory Official
Title —T
Date
USACE Action /D .
JURISDICTIONAL WETLANDS PLAT FOR:
GRE NffLLE UTILITIES COAMISSION
PITT COUNTY,NC
GREENVILLE TOWNSHIP
JULY 8, 2008
SCALE -- l"= ¢00'
2
'/.Sfgow A Moore Jr certify that fA's project was cmWeled under my direct and responsible crorge
from an actual survey mode under fly supervlsIft trot fNs survey was performed to stlav the localons
of waters of fhe US. or weflands pursuonf to Swfion 404 of fhe Clean Water Ad as dellrgofed by of/or&
witness my hand o sea/ IN$ —31st _ day, or JUL Y,
\E.R.LEWIS CONSTRUCTION CO.
DS 1792 PG. 550 Pink 4679628046 Stepf>en A Moore Jr.,PLS t-3430�--M�-TM���
1
CITY OF GREENVILLE
M8 30 PG 169
PIN: 4679605916
C17Y OF GREENVILLE
08 J43 PG 229 NCCS 'ELKS'
M8 30 PG 169 N= 693.612.03`
PiN: 4679518588
E= 2.477.707.19'
(NAD 83)
N
0 0+
a' ow
pA
og
K►N
o�
c
Lit
SEE SHEET 2 FOR DET,[IL�
NC GRID
N= 689,952.44,
:= 2,475,854.95,
(NAD 83)
IOMAS E. TROLLEY
08 347 PG.352
PINS 4678599658
LEGEND
------ PROPERTY LINE
............ WETLAND BOUNDARY
• WETLAND FLAG
• WETLAND DATA POINT
X COMPUTED POINT
400' Q' 400'
ENGINEERING
..ft.
SCALE- IINCH = 400 FEET 3= GLEN RUM RD. RALaoK Ncmi?
reL (918)7d&M4FAX(919) 788Q=

P
VICINITY MAP
(NOT TO SME1
y 7. Stephen A Moore Jr. certlfy that tNs project woo mnWisfed under my dlrecf and respanslbte Charge
�t from an actual survey mode under ny supervlslon; It4f ift survey was pgrfarmed to show flee locations
�3 of waters of the US•ar wetlands pursuant to Section 4o4 of the Clean Water Act as dellneated by otters
SITE
4
witness my hand and seat ltis _w 3ist. _ , day of ___.,_ JULY _______2
Stephen A
Jr.PLS L-3430
7Ns aerllfles ldat ifs CQW of Ift plot oam ralely depicts the
boundary of Ile jurlsd1clion of section of 404 of the Clean Water Act
we7Nn the designated Inset area.05 determined by the undersigned
an this dote -Other oreas of jurlsdicflon may be present on the site but
hove not been dNineated unless there is Cbr ge in the tow or our
Published regu►atlons.lhis determ/noflan of Secllon 404 jurlsdlcllon
may be reeled upon for a period nat to exceed fA a years from tlNs data
TiNs determination was mode ut11121n9 the M7 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual.'
Regulatory Offidal
Title _
Date
USACE Action ID
JURISDICTIONAL WETLANDS PLAT FOR:
GREEN )MLE UTILITIES COMMISSION
PITY COVN77,NC
GREENVLLLE TOWNS"
JULY 8, 2008
SCALE -- 1"=too'
NOTES GRID COORDINATES ARE BASED ON
tN-693.612.03 E=2.477.707.19 C.F.0
TIE FROM NCGS 'ELKS' TO EX. CONC, MON.
S 26`50'44' W 4102.04' (GROUND)
4101.63' (GRID)
IFS
PROPERTY LINE
•—1+(-e— - WETLAND BOUNDARY
MINOR CONTOUR
• MAJOR CONTOUR /
• WETLAND FLAG
WETLAND DATA POINT i
CITY OF GREENVILLE x COMPUTED POINT
DB J43 PG 229
MB 30 PG 169
PIN: 4679518588
0
,4z vim
a0
/
LS_`♦ —WL— --�
WB3 WBF
Ote► WA12
WET(LNOTDM MAPPED)
ED
L9 -..� .„ WAILI — — —
L8'
� sl.R,-. -�
EXISTING
CONCRETE
MONUMENT
NC GRID
�*-�. N- 689.952.44'
/
E= 2,475,854.95,
/
(NAD 83)
P.
2
.ham.
A�
ati .
2
100' 0' 100'
NOTE:W155.23' SCAL E- [INCH = 100 FEET
2 THE HORIZONTALAND POSITION DATA
OF POINT -O 2` WAS DETERNOT MINED LOCATED.
BROWN & CALDWELL'S FIELD SKETCHES.•
PROPERTY LINE IS APPROXIMATELY
THE CENTERLINE OF THE TAR RIVER
s
O
ss��s�
89,00,18• E
25.55'
CHEN ERNG
MM OWN ROYAL RD. RALOOK NC27617
Tp . (910) 76840224 FAX (919) 786-=

Wetland Data farms
M
ATTACHMENT A

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
- (1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Projed/Site: Greenville Utilities -,Raw Water Intake Improvements Date:
Applicant/Owner: Greenville Utilities County:
Investigator: Rokosch _ State:
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site?
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)?
Is the area a potential Problem Area?
— (If needed, explain on reverse.i
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Spades
Stratum
Indicator
1. Liquidambar s"cif/ua
tree
FAC
2, A_cer rubrum
tree
FAC
3. Fa us randifo/ia
tree
FACU
4. Smilax rotundifolia
herb
FAC-
5.
'
.
7.
8.
"Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC"
(excluding FAC-). 75%
6/18/2008
Pitt County
NC
es No Community ID: Forested
Yes No Transed ID:
Yes o ;Plot ID: DP#1- Upland
Dominant Plant Species
9.
10.
11,
12,
13.
14. _
15.
16.
Remarks:
Other species present include Virginia creeper, trumpet creeper and Carpinus caroliniana
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
_ Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
_ Aerial Photographs
_ Other
x _ No Recorded Data Available
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water no water — (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: no water (in.)
Stratum Indicator
Welland Hydrology Indicators: None observed.
Primary Indicator::
Inundated
Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondaiy Indicators (2 or more required):
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
I Water -Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: NA m.
(� ) Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: - — - -
This sample plot was taken in the upland area between the wetland and the Haw River near DP #2.

Map Unit Name
It. (Series and Phase):
Bb Bibb Complex
Drainage Class
Somewhat Poorly Drained
Taxonomy (Subgroup)
Field Observations
--�- ---�
--
Confirm Mapped Type?
Yes. No
Profile Descriptions:
-
Depth
(inches) Horizon
Matrix Color
Mansell Moist
--
Mottle Colors
Mansell Moist
Mottle Abundance/
Size/Contrast
Texture, Concretions,
A
- __
10 YR 6/4
NA
_
NA
Structure, etc.
0-1 A
_
10 YR 5 6
�
NA
San
--
-
Sandyloam------------
Hydric Sal Indicators:
Histosol
Hlstfc Epipedon
Suifidk; Odor
Aquic Moisture Regime
Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
Remarks
No hydric indicators were observed in the field.
Concretions
High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Organic Streaking In' Sandy Solis
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain In Remarks)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? es No (Circle)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No (Circle)
- � Is this Sampling Paint tMthin a Wetland? Yes
No
Remarks - ------ --- _

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
%plawnvme utilities- Raw Water Intake Improvements
APPlicant/Owner: Greenville Utilities
Investigator. Rokosch
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? �4
-Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? es No
Is the area a potentiat Problem Area? Yes No
- If n�eede_d a>:;:lain on reverse Yes No
Dominant Plant Spades
1. Taxodium•disUchum
2.
3. — -- --
4.
5.
B.
7.
8.
Stratum Indicator
tree OBL
"Percent of Dominant Spades that are OBL, FACW or FAC"
___Lxdudlnp FAC ). 100%
Dominant Plant Species
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
Date: 6/18/2008
County. Pitt Coun
State: NC
Community ID: Forested
Transact ID:
Plot ID: DP#2- Wetland
i Remarks:--
1 There is a very sparse understory community; this community was comprised of Carex spp. and false nettle.
x
Recorded Data (Describe in
StrearnAake, or Tide Gauge-
- Aerial Photographs
Other
No Recorded -Date Available
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water.
Depth to Free Water in Pit:
Depth to Saturated Soil:
NA (in.)
10 . (in.)
0-12 (In.)
Stratum Indicator
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
x Inundated
x Saturated In Upper 12 Inches
x Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
x Drainage Patterns In Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
x Water -Stained Leaves
x Local Soil Survey Data
FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Re
- - -- -- ►narks)
Remarks:
This sample plot was taken in the middle of the wetland area; approximatley 10 feet from the boundary of the 4
wetland A line.

Wetland ID:3W
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Alaga Sandy Loam
Taxonomy (Subgroup)
Drainage Class
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type?
Somewhat Poorly Drained
Yes No
Profile Descriptions:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Abundance/ Texture, Concretions,
(inches) Horizon _Munsell Moir,) _LMunsell Moist, _ SizelContrast SVudure,.etc
0-12" A 1t) YR 311 T_ _ _ Sandv loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Hlstosol
Histic Epipedon
Sulfidlc Odor
Aquic Moisture Regime
x Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
Remarks
vvM I LAWN Ur. I CKMINA I I V N
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Hydric Soils Present?
Remarks
es No (Circle)
es -No
Yes No
Concretions
High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
x Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in Remarks)
(Circle)
Is this Sampling Point Within a Welland? ® No

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 NAMFE AND NUMBER: USACE - Josh Pelletier
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
State: NC County/parish/borough: Pitt City: Greenville
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 33 38' 8"? N. Long.77 33" 56"° W.
Universal Transverse Mercator.
Name of nearest waterbody: Haw River
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: Haw River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): Tar River Basin 03020i 0370
Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas islare 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. RUA 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)
El Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
❑ Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or maybe susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Are "waters ofthe U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply):
TNWs, including territorial seas
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
Relatively permanent-waters2 (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑ Non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑ Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to burnot directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑ Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑ Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
❑ Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non -wetland waters: linear feet: width (it) and/or acres.
Wetlands: acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: 1987 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:
1 Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
r For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TN W and that typically flows year-round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally!'
fe.g., typically 3 months).
Supporting documentation is presented in Section III.F.

SE4' 'ION
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 UI.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a metland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections III.A.1 and 2
and Section III.D.1.; otherwise, see Section HIM below.
I. TNW
Identify TNW: Haw River.
Summarize rationale supporting determination: The Haw River is listed as a traditional navigable water by the state of North
Carolina.
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent": The wetland area is located in an historical river channel
adjacent to the Haw River.
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), Le: tributaries that typically flow year-round or have continuous now 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.DA.
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 flndiag 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 additiohal 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 he
evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area cationIdentitea to the JD request is
the tributary, or Its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section III request
for
the tributary, Section III B.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section UI.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.0 below.
I. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or Indirectly into TNW
(I) General Area Conditlun4:
Watershed size: Pick List
Drainage area: Pick List
Average annual rainfall: inches
Average annual snowfall: inches
(ti) Physical Characteristics:
(a) R at'on hjp�v'th TNW
❑ Tributary flows directly into TNW.
❑ Tributary flows through 3 tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are Pick List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are I (or less) river miles from RPW.
Project waters are Ptck List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Note that the hametional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and
West. erosional features generally and in the grid

Identify flow route to TNWS:
Tributary stream order, if known:
(b) Genera} 1'ri utan+ r'haracteric�ics (_check all that annly�
Tributary is: ❑ Natural
❑ Artificial (man-made). Explain:
❑ Manipulated (man -altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: feet
Average depth: feet
Average side slopes: Pick Lltt.
Primary tributary substrate com osition (check all that apply):
❑ Silts [Sands
❑ Cobbles ❑ Gravel ❑ Concrete
❑ Bedrock ❑ -vegetation. T ❑ Muck
El Other. Explain: YP�%cover
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain:
Presence of run/rifile/pool complexes. Explain:
Tributary geometry. Pick Usit
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): %
(c) Em
Tributary provides for: I'lck List
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year.. pick 1 i,t
Describe flow regime:
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: Pick L.l$d. Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Pick 1Gia¢. 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
❑
El
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 facIJ tors 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
❑ fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore fine to available datum;
❑ physical markings/characteristics ) El Physical markings;
❑
❑ 'tidal gauges vegetation lines/changes in vegetation types.
❑ other (list):
Oil) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oil film; water quality;
Explain: Y 9 ty; general watershed characteristics, etc,).
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
s Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows tbrough the review area, to flow into tributary 6A natural or map -made discontinuity in the OHWM does sot necessarily sever jurisdiction (e area
where the stream tart b, which then flows "into 1 W.
the OHWM has been removed ut development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break is the OHWM that is temporarily
the the underground,
s flow
rrJbid. (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break. erground, or where
ibid.

(fv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width):
❑ Wetland fringe. - Characteristics:
❑ Habitat for.
CV ❑ 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 Charagak im.
Properties:
Wetland size: acres
Wetland type. Explain.
Wetland quality. Explain:
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) Genoa! Flvw Relatiod:Sil1D w11{L Non-TNW:
Flow is: Pick U,". Explain:
Surface flow is: Oick Ust
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow; 94ek List. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adiacencv Deter iination with Non TNW
❑ Directly abutting
❑ Not directly abutting
❑ Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
❑ Ecological connection. Explain:
❑ Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationshin) ►„ ^rr�yy
Project wetlands are Pick i . Esc river miles.from TNW.
Project waters are �Ick f. 4st aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from; Pick Lust.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the Pick list floodplain.
(if) 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 tylWpercent cover. Explain:
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally -sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis: )Pick LIM
Approximately ( ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.

For each wetland, specify the following:
Direct]--v_—abuts L/N1 lkhn a
aw
Directly abu � (y/N) S' in ores)
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
folio'
tributary to determine If they slgniflcautly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
Of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tribute
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and/or biolo ical int ri of a
tributary, in combination with all Of Its adjacent
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency T 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's floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identifled 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
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW? p ty Y p°ll° is or floodwaters to
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support
other species, such as feeding, nesting,s spawning pport functions for fish and
• P pg, 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 ttransfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
o
• 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 combinati
adjacent wetlands, then -go to Section ULD: on with all of its
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.
THAT APPLE: THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
1. TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and pro
TNWs: vide size estimates in review area:
linear feet width (ft), Or, acres.
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: ate.
2. RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries tributary is perennial: During the site vtypically flow year-round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
isit, Stream 2 had flowing water with moderate leaf accumulation; a well defined and
continuous bed and bank$ macroinvertebrates and amphibians -were observed within the stream channel; fish were observed in
El the stream channel during previous visits. Stream 2 flows into Maxey Mill Creek (Stream Z),
Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous now "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide ration
seasonally ale indicating that tributary flows

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
C] 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
TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.C. ' and it has a significant nexus with a
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all ❑] Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft). that apply).
(� Other non -wetland waters: acres.
Identify types) of waters: _
❑Wetlands directly. abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWa,
Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
C] Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow
indicating that tributary is perennial ear -
in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale a
e indicatingta etland is
e
directly abutting an RPW: ,
❑ Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonall '
seasonal in Section III.B and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide ratio ale indicating Provide a indicating
at wetland is directly is
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
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting conclusion is provided at Section III.C. adjacent
this
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in -the review area: acres
6. Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that now directly.or indirectly into TNWs.
D Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary
wtth similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW to which they are adjacent and
conclusion is provided at Section III.C. jurisdictional. Data supporting this
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
7. Impoundments of Jurisdictional waters.9
❑:is a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
❑Demonstrate that impoundment was created from,
CDemonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categorieswatM .S.,,, or
J Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce presend above (1-6), or
(see E below).
R. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR JNTRA-STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL T WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERS
THAT APPL]�:10 TATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANy
which are or could be used by interstate or u foreign travelers forfiom which fish -or shellfish are or could be take d sold ininterstatetor foreign co l or otheronaP erce.
❑ which are or could be used for industrial Purposes by industries in i
Interstate isolated waters. Explain: nterstate commerce.
© Other. factors. Explain:
sSee Footnote # 3.
' To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section 111.D.( of the Instructional Guidebook
Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely oo this cat
review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA M¢inorandpne Regarding CWA Act Jurtsdic8on Following ,R
Category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
apanos.

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-JUJUSDICTIONAL 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 water; 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 sol 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
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).
13 Lakes/ponds: acres.
® Other non -wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
Wetlands: acres.
SE V: 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 RUC maps.
U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale &quad name:
USDA Natural Resouives Conservation Service Soil Survey, Citation.http://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.
National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:www.fws.gov/nwi.
❑ State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
[� FEMA/FIRM maps:
100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
® Photograph's: ® Aerial (Name & Date):
or ® Other (Name & Date): June 18, 2008.
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
Applicabletsupporting case law:
Applicabletsupporting scientific literature:
Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:

ATTACHMENT C
Photographs

igSpruill and Associates Inc.
2747 East Tenth Street
Greenville, NC 27858 252 1757-1200
January 4, 2008
Mr. Josh Pelletier
USACE Washington Field Office
PO Box 1000
Washington, NC 27889
RE: Job No. 071.38
GUC Water Treatment Plant Site
Greenville, N.C.
Tax Parcel 20440
Dear Josh:
Pursuant to our recent site meeting, I am submitting the following information relative to
the subject tract for your review.
One vicinity/location map
One copy of county tax map depicting site
One copy of quadrangle map depicting site (Greenville N)V)
One copy of soils map for site (Sheet 34)
One copy of owner consent form
Copies of field data forms
One copy of field sketch depicting wetland lines
The site being evaluated is a portion of the Greenville Utilities Commission Water
Treatment Plant property known as Pitt County Tax Parcel 20440 and is an area. approximately 150' x 250' located between the Tar River and the raw water pump station building. The
approximate UTM coordinates for the area being evaluated are N = 3946.076 meters and E _ 0282.533 meters,
My delineation revealed a wetland area between the building and the river, the northeast
boundary of which is marked by flags Al through Al2. The southwest boundary of the wetlands
area is marked by flags B 1 through B8. The boundary of Section 10 Waters of the U.S. was also
delineated along the mean high water mark of the Tar River by flags C 1 through C5. When we
met on site on December 13th, 2007, you concurred with these findings.
It is the desire of Greenville Utilities Commission to install a new set of water intake
pipes from within the river to the raw water pump station building, said new pipes to be
tentatively located southeasterly of the existing set of pipes, and to perform maintenance on the
020.67-WETL4NDs. WHEELER

existing set of intake pipes and structures. Hazen and Sawyer will be rendering permitting
assistance for this work and will be contacting you concerning necessary permits. The contact
information is as follows:
Owner:
Greenville Utilities Commission
c% Barrett Lassiter
P.O. Box 1847
Greenville, N.C. 27835-1847
252-329-2160
En ineerin Consultant;
Hazen and Sawyer
do Christopher Belk
4011 Westchase Blvd.
Suite 500
Raleigh, N.C. 27607
919-833-1828
Please review the attached information and let me know if you have any questions or
require any additional information concerning this matter.
Sincerely,
A'�
Stephen N. Spruill, P.L.S.
Cc: Chris Belk, Hazen & Sawyer
071.38-H&S-Wetlands

Map Output
Pitt County Government
m Greenville, North Carolina`'
� I'rT hs�l1
� ► �' �,Pitteountyne.gov
-'f%fu - r nrs tax record Is Prepared the inventory of read' property; within Pit!
County and is compiled from recorded deeds, plats, lax maps, surveys, and other
public records. Users of this data are hereby notified that the aforementioned
public prlmaryInforma8on sources should be consulted for verikation. Pit! Counly
assumes no legal responsibility for the information contained herein.
;ht ® 2D07, Pitt
Parcel
Physical Address
OwnBrNams
OwnerAddreesl
OwnerA ddr*es2
0►rnerAddrass3
'clty rState!Zip
NC AIH
Subdivislon I Section !
Phase
Block Lot
ng Nnnlher r Unit
vurnni Owner
D**dlDocument
Map Book
DOW/Document Date
DaedlDocumrnt Sales
Price
0ulldinp Type! Ilse
Humber of Sul ldin9s
Ya*r 8uil!
�Heated Square Feet
Bvlldinq Volua
Extra Features Value
Land Value
Total Market Value
Reyalusuon year
Town*htp
Fir* District
Census tract
Neighborhood
Elementary School
Middle School
High School
020440
0 SR 1401 HY
GREENVILLE CITY OF
PO BOX 7207
GREENVILLE NC 27835
4679417259
45.47
SEE FILE
MB30-189
0512007
$0
RA20 RESIDENTIAL(Rural
Homesite)
0
$0
$199,870
$199,870
2004
GREENVILLE
GREENVILLE
GREENVILLE
8
001031
BELVOIR ELEM
INELLCOME MID
NORTH P ITT HIGH
PLEASE NOTE:
The parcel ownership information is Updated
nightly; HOWEVER, the value information is
frozen as of the 2007 year due to the 2008
revaluation in process.
page I of I
http://gis.pittcountync.gov/servletleom.esri.esrimap.Esrimap?ScrviceName=opis_ov&ClientVersion=4.0&Fo... I /7/2008

2W ML FORK 73 KM
VANCE00RD 40 KM
2
D 20DO
t
-700D mm 000
S_
PPROXMTE
OF 1929
0.1 METER
1. -ram
f+. STANDARDS
DN, VIRGINIA 22092
is AVAILABLE ON REQUEST
N. C. • 1
QUADRANGLE LOCATION
CONTOURS AND ELEVATIONS
IN METERS
=830081DE - NEfTOM.V11QWO-1117 -
%SAVW MILL 34 KM 7
ROAD CLASSIFICATION
Primary highway. fight -duty road, hard or
hard surface ...... w improved surface .. .
Secondary Mghway,
hard surface ........ _._ Unimproved road...___---
OInterstate Route 0 U S. Route O State Route
GAEENVILLE NW, N.
NW/{ WPMRVILLE 1S- QUADmNGI
N3537.5—W7722.5/7.5
1982
DIVA 5555 111 NW -SERIES V84,

JAN-04-2008 FR1 01:24 FM GUC-WATER RESOURCES
Jnfl•-rk•4•-aOr, 0% 01V.1XP AM SPRUILL & ASSOC.
FAX NO. 2525511598
252 757 1269
I hereby grant peetnissian to Stsphen N, Spruill to act 4s agent for Crraenville: UtMtis$
C:c?u:unlLssion concerning wetland delineation matters for a portion Of that
C Onvilla Utilities COMWsslon located in Fitt County known as the Waft Treatment Plut and
being a put on of Tu P4=1 I.D. Numbers 20439 and 20440. The area being delineated is
iomted between tha raw water irrtako ba9d ng and ihn Tat River,
(irrtertri]lr iJtititus Comm ion
Plain /�+f � tr'-•,....,
071 ?t•elern:rgyq;,.p}.vnttpd9Ull
"
P. 0--
r L�• .a+ f y �•,•..

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(�987 COE Wsdands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: C�[YjLLE tlrlGrfi�s f11. i.1
ApplicantMVwner: L ;. 1T Date: -p7
Invesdpator. E LL County:
State -
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? .
Is the site No Common•
significantly disturbed (Atypical cation)? yes itY ID:
Is the area a pctentW Problem Area? Transect ID:
(If needed, explain on reverse.) Yes No Plot ID: ,
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant 3aaciae
2.
4.
7.
�I1
Percent of Don"nent Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC
(e)Ccluding FAC-).
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
FRO—rdedd
gm in Remarks):
, or Tide Gauge
raphs
va�aW
Reid Observations:
Depth of Surface Water. /17 )
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 22 �ff2�--
^rn.)
Depth to Saturated Soil: u
Mina
Domin t S sties -
9. S�� �oatar
Wetland Hydrology Indicators;
Prknary indicators:
Inundated
_Saturated In Upper 12 Inches
-/Water Marks
pd t urns
eSedknent Deposits
„)Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary kndioators 12 or more required):
_ 03ddtad Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
✓WaterSteined Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
FAC-Neutral Test
other (Explain in Remarksl
Remarks: 7105 SAMPLa pc.oT ?Aul /N 00irdin of s c o ct qH
8r--7Zc.)6e-,11 L I>\I Es8.
w�IT14 T'1-S TAA RlVe: �Nb ,Lo u t.
C79 PA12ALeL_1-
ABA vS
�" 90--90 NE of n/aRT�

SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Seri« and Phase): Q 4
Taxororaw {Subaroun): I vp� G nx1AI
-------- - Drainage pear. 9 �
F9efd Observetlona
/TS COnRIM Mapped Type? Yes No
Protd Deac ' tiara:
Depth
� �
Matrix Color
ns tL
�R—
Motdo Colors Mortis
IMumeU Moiatl AbundwcerContnat
Texture, Conaradona,
Struoh r
d-3 A
/d Z
10
/l1
SL
/0-17
SL
Hoda•Soll IrWlm taro:
_ I Ustoaot
HWo Epipedon
_ SulUdio Odor
_ Aqule Moisture Regime
_ Reducing Conditions .
Gleyed or LOW -Chrome Colors
_ Concretions
Hip' Orger" Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Sods
Orgsdo Streaking In Sandy Save
_ Listed on Local HWdc Sops List
Listed on -National Hyddo Sons List
Other (Explain in Reniorks)
Remarks: SO ! L P96pue JET PL-,_-- pL..dT 5149! L^g -1b *7,4pAGp
F1 Cq-o PotArr.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? es No fordo) (Grata)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes
Hydric SoNs Present? Yes Ito Is this Sampling Point Within a Wedend? You No
Rorrrarks: -r/i%S pLG p Lar ' e;oj Xr /1 Q F .Se. (i U 7
ABoVf; w e7-L/ ,-NP A-P-EA

DATA FORM
i1 LE�
rnNv�' AND D�IWIVATWX
elands Del'meation Manuall
Praject/Site: I.LE UT) GCi►r7 .
App6cant/Ovvner, ui' Tj C.cm Date:
Investigator. C d I L L Cou
—� DO Normal Orcumsumes exist on the site? State: L
�C-�
is the site significantly disturbed (Atycmical Situation)? No Community ID:
Is the area a potential problem Areal Transact ID:
Of needed, explain on reverse.) Yes N Plot ID:
VEWA110N
arninarrt PI . r SnAM.. Spurn
I US Uj4LU __T_ F
z. Tex oPia4J4r .�_
a �
4.Sn1iLAX, �4.acrrt�rnrr_r:.••,e
s. lGE
7. Tf
8.
Percent of Dominant Special that are OBL, FACW or FAC
(excluding FAG).
Remarks: ..-
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Desonbe in Rematka):
Stream. Lake, or Tide Gauge
Aerial Ph"raphe
Other
✓ No Recorded Data Available
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Wallet: -- N'� Gn.l
Depth to Free Water in Frr ��—r-�
Depth to Saturated Soil:
Remarks:
Dorm t Plant 5 de: Stratum rector
9_
11
14.
is.
16.
Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators:
Inundated
Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
_ Water Marks
Drift !Ines
Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (Z or more roquired):
_ O"*11 d Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
_ Wat-Stained leaves
—Local Soil Survey Data
— FAC•Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
4

SOILS
Mep unit Name
(Series and Phase): 61 bb Drainage Claw.. p
ra ranomy (SuhgroupL /g: ,-FAPC Ca7i.IF.IVTS FAld °bserv'dans `
Corm Mapped 7vos7 Y. I -
Profile Descria6orr
Depth
Matrix Color
Mott)e Colon
Mottle
AMlmml
Mall Ma(st3
L)Nunsall Moisti
Abundanao/Contr2a
2 p•
/ D Z
b &' &
ED
Hyddo -Sall Indoators:
Hach Epipedon
Sullidle Odor
Aquic Moisture Regime
Reducing Conditla w
:FZGleyad or Low -Chrome Colors
Texture. Concretions.
5true etc.
5A.Ai
C5 C_ L
Conore4ons
I40 Organic Content in Suriaoe Layer'in SendV Soils
Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
✓Listed on Loom Hydria Soda List
_ Listed an Nadonal Hydric Soils List
_. Other Xxpisin in Remarks)
Rome*= /G/n5T M)LIE A PrC:jecr-5 TO g � SCPtm�iu�-.
p�Pas aT Fwr) PEizr r9 p,c. ,Q iVep- o vwas , 7-H-E A1C-xr-rWo
;+4, .1 ZcuU S -+A\hS Amkc- Gay
_.Py%6FjLE >�-bk SrLi, fir„ r
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hy+draphytic Vegetation Present? Y No (Circle)
Wetland HVdrology Present? es No
Hydric Soils Prosont? es No
,(C.-irrccle)
Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? /ir.. 1 No
Remarks: SLOLt 4i+ %.' /� •-T1�%(;; Ly y /VOW. pLjx1'1Nam.
IV04 AL AAiAj r-AtLr l i?la� S G85�V�T1on15 a� 7A/S
/rA C-A //V P 1 GATC- MA7- T o e A EPTI f ?o
c.o )L,S Lk.)D U.Lp 9E A-F OA i' J GA.A 1744E SuIeFA lie.
7 11

a& � k4o
4r,
*444
s-
a cti`�v
\ N4'y
G
oo rop W�-
�" AU
0
46
2 .00
\� 6
ae OF
6, 22 35'C
s �¢
xro l
• qr
Ar OP
5
e� 4'r f' "
Z�
Gs
PREUMINARY PLAT
NOTFOR REC©RDATt0N
M NVEYACES CIRRAL

Attachment D
River Classification and Endangered Species Information

NC DENR - DIVISON OF WATER QUALITY
.0316 TAR-PAMLICO RIVER BASIN
Name of Stream
Sams Branch
Bryan Creek
Johnsons Mill Run
TAR RIVER
Harris Mill Run
Schoolhouse Branch
TAR RIVER
Parker Creek
Greens Mill Run
Fornes Branch
Reedy Branch
Hardee Creek
Meeting House Branch
Bell Branch
Barber Creek
Mill Branch
Phillippi Branch
Broad Run
Moves Run
Cannon Swamp
Baldwin Swamp
TAR RIVER
Grindle Creek
Suggs Branch
Whichard Branch
Mill Branch
Hunting Run
Chicod Creek
Juniper Swamp
Harding Swamp
Horseway Swamp
Island Swamp
Cow Swamp
Cross Swamp
Cabin Branch
Juniper Branch
Description
Class
From source to
Tar
River
WS-IV;NSW
From source to
Tar
River
WS-IV;NSW
From source to
Tar
River
WS-IV;NSW
From Johnsons Mill Run to
Greenville Raw Water
WS-IV;NSW,CA
Intake
Supply
From source to Tar River
C;NSW
From source to Tar River
C;NSW
From Greenville Raw Water
Supply Intake to a C;NSW
1.2 miles downstreamofmouth of Broad Run
From source to Tar River
C;NSW
From source to Tar River
C;NSW
From source to Greens Mill
Run C;NSW
From source to Greens Mill
Run C;NSW
From source to Tar River
C;NSW
From source to Hardee Creek
C;NSW
From source to Meeting
House Branch
C;NSW
From source to Tar River
C;NSW
From source to Tar River
C;NSW
From source to Tar River
C;NSW
From source to Tar River
C;NSW
From source to Broad Run
C;NSW
From source to Moyes Run
C;NSW
From source to Cannon Swamp
C;NSW
From a point 1.2 miles
downstream
B%NSW
of the mouth of
Broad Run to the upstream
side of the mouth of
Tranters Creek
From source to Tar River
C;NSW
From source to Grindle Creek C;NSW
From source to Grindle Creek C;NSW
From source to Whichard
Branch C;NSW
From source to Grindle Creek
From source to Tar River
From source to Chicod Creek
From source to Chicod Creek
From source to Chicod Creek
From source to Chicod Creek
From source to Chicod Creek
From source to Cow Swamp
From source to Cow Swamp
From source to Chicod Creek
C;NSW
C;NSW
C;NSW
C;NSW
C;NSW
C;NSW
C;NSW
C;NSW
C;NSW
C;NSW
Class
Date Index No.
08/03/92 28-89
08/03/92 28-90
08/03/92 28-91
08/03/92 28-(91.5)
01/01/90 28-92
01/01/90 28-93
01/01/90 28-(94)
01/01/90 28-95
01/01/90 28-96
01/01/90 28-96-1
01/01/90 28-96-2
01/01/90 28-97
01/01/90 28-97-1
01/01/90 28-97-1-1
01/01/90 28-98
01/01/90 28-98.5
01/01/90 28-98.6
01/01/90 28-99
01/01/90 28-99-1
01/01/90 28-99-1-1
01/01/90 28-99-1-1-1
01/01/90 28-(99.5)
01/01/90 28-100
01/01/90 28-100-1
01/01/90 28-100-2
01/01/90 28-100-2-1
01/01/90 28-100-3
01/01/90 28-101
01/01/90 28-101-1
01/01/90 28-101-2
01/01/90 28-101-3
01/01/90 28-101-4
01/01/90 28-101-5
01/01/90 28-101-5-1
01/01/90 28-101-5-2
01/01/90 28-101-6
Page 13 of 33
2013-12-09 10:51:33
2B .0300

Pitt County Endangered Species, Threatened Species,Federal Species of...
http://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/cntylist/Pitt.html
Endangered Species, Threatened Species,Federal Species of
Concern, and Candidate Species,
Pitt County, North Carolina
Note:Marine Threatened and Endangered Species information can be found at the National Marine Fiseries
Service NMFS Endan ered and Threatened S ecies website
Updated: 3-9-2015
Common Name
Scientific name
Federal Record Status
Vertebrate:
Status
American eel
Anguilla rostrata
FSC
Bald ea`ie
Haliaeetus leucocephalus
BGPA
Current
Carolina madtom
Noturus furiosus
Current
Eastern Henslow's sparrow
p
Ammodramus henslowii
FSC
Current
Pinewoods shiner
susurrans
Lythrurus matutinus
FSC
Current
Red -cockaded wood ecker
Picoides borealis
FSC
Obscure
Roanoke bass
A mbloplites cavifrons
E
Historic
Southern hognose snake
Heterodon simus
FSC
Current
West Indian manatee
Trichechus manatus
FSC
Obscure
Invertebrate:
E
Current
Atlantic pigtoe
Fusconaia masoni
FSC
Green floater
Lasmigona subviridis
Current
Tar Rivers in mussel
Elliptio steinstansana
FSC
Current
Yellow lam mussel
p
Lampsilis cariosa
E
Historic
Vascular Plant:
FSC
Current
Grassleaf arrowhead
Sagittaria weatherbiana
FSC
Nonvascular Plant:
Historic
Lichen:
)f 3
7/1/2015 12:56 PM

Fitt County Endangered Species, Threatened Species,Federal Species of...
http://www. fws. gov/raleigh/species/cntylist/pitt.html
Definitions of Federal Status Codes:
E = endangered. A taxon "in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range,
,
T = threatened. A taxon "likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a
significant portion of its range."
C = candidate. A taxon under consideration for official listing for which there is sufficient information to
support listing. (Formerly "C1" candidate species.)
BGPA =Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. See below.
FSC=Federal Species of Concern. FSC is an informal term. It is not defined in the federal Endangered
Species Act. In North Carolina, the Asheville and Raleigh Field Offices of the US Fish and Wildlife Service
(Service) define Federal Species of Concern as those species that appear to be in decline or otherwise in
of conservation and are under consideration for listing or for which there is insufficient information to need
support listing at this time.Subsumed under the term "FSC" are all species petitioned by outside parties and
other selected focal species identified in Service strategic plans, State Wildlife Action Plans, or Natural
Heritage Program Lists.
T(S/A) = threatened due to similarity of appearance. A taxon that is threatened due to similarity of
appearance with another listed species and is listed for its protection. Taxa listed as T(S/A) are not
biologically endangered or threatened and are not subject to Section 7 consultation. See below.
EXP = experimental population. A taxon listed as experimental (either essential or nonessential).
Experimental, nonessential populations of endangered species (e.g., red wolf) are treated as threatened
species on public land, for consultation purposes, and as species proposed for listing on private land.
P = proposed. Taxa proposed for official listing as endangered or threatened will be noted as "PE" or "PT"
respectively.
Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act BGPA :
In the July 9, 2007 Federal Register( 72:37346-37372), the bald eagle was declared recovered, and removed
(de -listed) from the Federal, List of Threatened and Endangered wildlife. This delisting took effect August
8,2007. After delisting, the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (Eagle Act) (16 U.S.C. 668-668d) becomes
the primary law protecting bald eagles. The Eagle Act prohibits take of bald and golden eagles and provide
statutory definition of "take" that includes "disturb". The USFWS has developed National Bald Eagle s a
Management Guidelines to provide guidance to land managers, ldowners, and others as to how to avoid
disturbing bald eagles. For mor information, visit htt ://www.fws. anov/mi rato birds/baldea le.htm
Threatened due to similari of a earance T S/A :
In the November 4, 1997 Federal Register (55822-55825), the northern population of the bog turtle from
New York south to Maryland) was listed as T (threatened), and the southern population (from Virginia south
to Georgia) was listed as T(S/A) (threatened due to similarity of appearance). The T(S/A) designation bans h
the collection and interstate and international commercial trade of bog turtles from the southern Population.
The T(S/A) designation has no effect on land management activities by private landowners in North Carolina,
Part of the southern population of the species. In addition to its official status as T(S/A), the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service considers the southern population of the bog turtle as a Federal species of concern due to
habitat loss.
Definitions of Record Status:
Current - the species has been observed in the county within the last 50 years.
Historic - the species was last observed in the county more than 50 years ago.
Obscure - the date and/or location of observation is uncertain.
if 3
7/1/2015 12:56 PM

Pitt County Endangered Species, Threatened Species,Federal Species of...
http://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/cntylist/pitt.html
Incidental/migrant - the species was observed outside of its normal range or habitat.
Probable/potential - the species is considered likely to occur in this county based on the proximity of known
records (in adjacent counties), the presence of potentially suitable habitat, or both.
of 3
7/1/2015 12:56 PM

k�
|\k |\ƒ}))
Ef/+ }!f!7)
\
§|/1�22■§t]�y
!!mw «f &>lom oomS|
=R&3IEIRl
2§
�)
))@§��@ID
�\
-#,OZ («©!
!2}!!!!/J!§,!a
} -
�■!}})!,\)�!§k
\)
■§l.E�=22a,|■,
f)!!!! ! !!!!!
ao!!&!_!
§i«!«2! $$!)!
22!§ƒ!■?7;;l��
w , 't,'tr.: !