20100536 Ver 1_401 Application_20100710 (2)

®®® Kimley-Horn
® and Associates, Inc.
July 1, 2010
Mr. Ian McMillan
NC Division of Water Quality
2321 Crabtree Blvd.,54c 2S0
Raleigh, North Carolina 27602
Re: U-4916 Beckford Drive Widening
Nationwide Permit # 14 Application Submittal
Vance County, North Carolina
Dear Mr. McMillan:
IV,
JUL,-'S 2010
kttp S10tt1N?
100536
On behalf of the City of Henderson, Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. is
submitting the enclosed joint 404/401 Preconstruction Notification Application
for authorization to construct the above referenced project under Nationwide
Permit Number 14 and General 401 Water Quality Certification Number 3820.
The following information is included as part of this application submittal:
• Project Summary Sheet
• Pre-Construction Notification Form
• Agent Authorization Form
• NCDWQ check for $240 permit application fee
• Project Vicinity/USGS Topographic Map (Figure 1)
• Aerial Photograph (Figure 2)
• Soils Map (Figure 3)
• Project Plans (Figures 4-8)
• SHPO/Office of Archaeology Scoping Response Letters
• Stormwater Management Plan
• Stream Delineation Survey
• Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination request
• NCDWQ Stream Classification Forms
• USACE Stream Quality Assessment Forms
• 11 x 17 Roadway Plans (I, 4, 5, and 6)
Beckford Drive is currently a two-lane roadway through the project corridor with
three-lane curb and gutter roadway sections at each terminus. This project
proposes to widen Beckford Drive to three lanes (two travel lanes and a two-way
left-turn lane) with curb and gutter, storm drainage, and sidewalks on both sides.
The project widens Beckford Drive to a uniform three-lane road between
Harrison Street and North Park Drive and will alleviate traffic congestion.
E_" Kimley-Hom
and Associates, Inc.
Through a municipal agreement the City of Henderson is administering the
construction of Beckford Drive Widening. The project is funded by the City and
federal funds administered by NCDOT.
As part of the roadway widening, an existing 72-inch pipe at a tributary to
Nutbush Creek will be re with a 9'x 6' reinforced concrete box culvert
(buried I foot), resulting in 59 linear feet of perennial stream impact (including
outlet protection). In addition, a 24" reinforced concrete pipe at a second
tributary to Nutbush Creek will be extended resulting in 21 linear feet of
jurisdictional (non-mitigatable) streamimpact. The project is located within the
Roanoke River basin, therefore no regulated riparian buffer impacts occur. Due
to the proposed project resulting in less than 150 linear feet of stream impact, no
mitigation for this project is anticipated.
NCDOT's Division Environmental Department (Chris Murray) and Hydraulics
Unit (Randy Boyd) reviewed and provided comments on the plans. We revised
the plan to address their comments and they have approved the attached plan.
The stream delineation survey was prepared by a licensed surveyor and reviewed
in the field by KHA. Field verification of the jurisdictional features within the
project corridor was conducted on April 6, 2010 by the USACE (Eric Alsmeyer)
and DWQ (Rob Ridings).
If there is any additional information you need to assist in the processing of this
application, please do not hesitate to contact me at [phone].
Very truly yours,
KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
d', Wt-t---
Jeffrey Moore, P.E.
Project Manager
Enclosures
cc:
Mr. Frank Frazier
Deputy City Manager
City of Henderson
134 Rose Avenue
Henderson, NC 27536
Mr. Eric Alsmeyer
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
3331 Heritage Trail Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, NC 27587
Kimley-Hom
® and Associates, Inc.
Project Summary Sheet
Project Name: U4916 Beckford Drive Widening
Applicant Name and Address: City of Henderson
Attn: Mr. Frank Frazier. Deputy City Manager
134 Rose Avenue
Henderson. NC 27536
Telephone Number: [phone]
Type of Request: ® Nationwide PCN (N WP k ? Individual Permit Application
® Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination ? Other:
Included Attachments: ® Project Plans ® USGS Map ® NRCS Soil Survey
® Agent Authorization ® Delineation Sketch ® Delineation Survey
? Data Forms (Up & Wet) ® NCDWQ Stream Forms ® USACE Stream Forms
? NCEEP Confirmation ® Aerial Photo ? Site Photos
® Agency Correspondence ? Other: ? Other:
Check if applicable: ? CAMA County ? Trout County ? Isolated Waters
? Section 7, ESA ? Section 106, NHPA ? EFH
? Mitigation Proposed (? NC EEP ? On-Site ? Off-Site ? Other)
County: Vance
Waterway: UT Nutbush Creek
H.U.C.:03010102
Property Size (acres): - 0.5 mile lone project corridor
Nearest City/Town: Henderson
River Basin: Roanoke
USGS Quad Name: Henderson
Approx. Size of Jurisdiction on Site (acres): - 300 If of jurisdictional stream within project corridor
Site Coordinates (in decimal degrees): 36.3364 °N 78.4275 ow
Project Location: The project is located on existing Beckford Drive between Harrison Street and North Park Drive
Site Description: The project corridor is primarily commercial development with pockets of undeveloped forest
Impact Summary (if applicable): As part of the roadway widening, an existing 72" pipe at a UT to Nutbush Creek
will be replaced with a 9'x 6' RCBC (buried I-foot) resulting in 59 If of perennial stream impact In addition a 24"
RCP at a second u'r to Nutbush Creek will be extended resulting in 21 If of unimportant stream impact
Ri
arian Wetland Stream Channel
NWP p
Buffer(sq ft) (acres) Intermittent and/or Unimportant Perennial and/or Important

# Aquatic Function Aquatic Function

T
P
T
P Tent . Perm. Tem P. Perm.
emp. erm. emp. erm.
If LC If ac If ac If Ac
14 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 0 0 0 89 0
Total Permanent Impact to Waters of the U.S. (If) 115
Kimley-Horn Contact: Jeff Moore
¦
P.0 Box 33066
Raleigh, North Carolina
276363066
Direct Number: 919-677-2175
r
TEL [phone]
FAX [phone]
O/2()- AiF?gOG
O?t
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.3 Dec 10 2008
Pre-Construction Notification PCN Form
A. Applicant Information
1. Processing
la. Type(s) of approval sought from the
Corps:
®Section 404 Permit E] Section 10 Permit
1 b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 14 or General Permit (GP) number:
1c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps? ® Yes ? No
1d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
® 401 Water Quality Certification - Regular ? Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
? 401 Water Quality Certification - Express ? Riparian Buffer Authorization
le. Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required? For the record only for DWQ 401
Certification:
? Yes ® No For the record only for Corps Permit:

? Yes ® No
1f. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in-lieu fee program proposed for mitigation
of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank or in-lieu
fee program. ? Yes ® No
1g. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below. ? Yes ® No
1h. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)? ? Yes ® No
2. Project Information
2a. Name of project: Beckford Drive Widening
2b. County: Vance
2c. Nearest municipality / town: City of Henderson
2d. Subdivision name: N/A
2e. NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state
project no: U-4916
3. Owner Information
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed: N/A - within existing NCDOT right-of-way
3b. Deed Book and Page No.
3c. Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
3d. Street address:
3e. City, state, zip:
3f. Telephone no.:
3g. Fax no.:
3h. Email address:
Page l of 12
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is: ? Agent ® Other, specify: City of Henderson
4b. Name: Frank Frazier, Deputy City Manager
4c. Business name
(if applicable):
City of Henderson
4d. Street address: 134 Rose Avenue
4e. City, state, zip: Henderson, NC 27536
4f. Telephone no.: [phone]
4g. Fax no.:
4h. Email address: [e-mail]
5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name: Jeff Moore, P.E.
5b. Business name
(if applicable): Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
5c. Street address: 3001 Weston Parkway
5d. City, state, zip: Cary, NC 27513
5e. Telephone no.: [phone]
5f. Fax no. [phone]
5g. Email address: [e-mail]
Page 2 of 12
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
Latitude: 36.336442 Longitude: -
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees): 78.427578
(DD.DDDDDD) (-DD.DDDDDD)
1c. Property size: 4.43 acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc.) to Nutbush Creek
proposed project:
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water: Class C
2c. River basin: Roanoke
3. Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
25% of the project corridor is a 3-lane road with curb and gutter and the remaining 75% is a 2 lane road with shoulder.
The surrounding area is forested with commercial development with an existing 80 foot right-of-way.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
0 acres
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
Approximately 300 LF within project corridor
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
Beckford Drive is currently a two-lane roadway through the project corridor with three-lane curb and gutter roadway
sections at each terminus. This project proposes to widen Beckford Drive to three lanes (two travel lanes and a two-way
left-turn lane) with curb and gutter, storm drainage, and sidewalks on both sides. The project widens Beckford Drive to a
uniform three-lane road between Harrison Street and North Park Drive and will alleviate traffic congestion.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
The Beckford Drive Widening is being constructed by the City of Henderson and is funded by City and Federal funds
administered by NCDOT. The project will consist of asphalt road widening, milling, and resurfacing. Equipment will
consist of excavators, backhoes, asphalt pavers, milling machines, and pipe jacking equipment.
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project (including all prior phases) in the past? ? Yes ® No ? Unknown
Comments: preliminary JD request submitted as part of
permit application
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
? Preliminary ? Final
of determination was made?
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas? Agency/Consultant Company: Kimley-Horn and Assoc.,
Inc.
Name (if known): Beth Reed, PWS Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
Page 3 of 12
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
this project (including all prior phases) in the past? ? Yes ® No ? Unknown
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project? ? Yes ® No
61b. If yes, explain.
Page 4 of 12
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
la. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
? Wetlands ® Streams - tributaries ? Buffers
? Open waters ? Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a. 21b. 2c. 2d. 2e. 2f.
Wetland impact Type of jurisdiction
number - Type of impact Type of wetland Forested (Corps - 404, 10 Area of impact
Permanent (P) or (if known) DWQ - non-404, other) (acres)
Temporary T
W1 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
W2 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
W3 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
W4 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
W5 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
W6 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
2g. Total wetland impacts 0 ac
21h. Comments:
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a. 3b. 3c. 3d. 3e. 3f. 3g.
Stream impact Type of impact Stream name Perennial Type of jurisdiction Average Impact
number - (PER) or (Corps - 404, 10 stream length
Permanent (P) or intermittent DWQ - non-404, width (linear
Temporary (T) (INT)? other) (feet) feet)

S1 ®P ? T Replacement of
existing 72" CMP
UT Nutbush Creek ®pER Corps
10
59
with 9'x6' RCBC ? INT ® DWQ
S2 ® P ? T 24"RCP Extension UT Nutbush Creek ? PER
® INT ® Corps
? DWQ 5 21
S3 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
S4 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
S5 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
S6 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts 80
3i. Comments:
Page 5 of 12
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then individually list all open water impacts below.
4a. 4b. 4c. 4d. 4e.
Open water Name of waterbody
impact number- (if applicable) Type of impact Waterbody type Area of impact (acres)
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
01 ?P?T
02 ?P?T
03 ?P?T
04 ?P?T
4f. Total open water impacts 0 ac
4g. Comments:
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If and or lake construction proposed, then complete the chart below.
5a. 5b. 5c. 5d. 5e.
Wetland Impacts (acres) Stream Impacts (feet) Upland
Pond ID Proposed use or purpose (acres)
number of pond
Flooded Filled Excavated Flooded Filled Excavated Flooded
P1
P2
5L Total 0 ac
5g. Comments:
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
? Yes ? No If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If an impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a.
? Neuse ?Tor-Pamlico ? Other:
Project is in which protected basin? ? Catawba ? Randleman
6b. 6c. 6d. 6e. 6f. 6g.
Buffer impact
number- Reason Buffer Zone 1 impact Zone 2 impact
Permanent (P) or for Stream name mitigation (square feet) (square feet)
Temporary T impact required?
B1 ?P?T ?Yes
? No
B2 ?P?T ?Yes
? No
B3 ?P?T ?Yes
? No
6h. Total buffer impacts
6i. Comments:
Page 6 of 12
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
All practical measures have been taken to avoid and minimize impacts to the streams. Topographic constraints have limited
the locations for some impacts. Beckford Drive is being widened symmetrically about the existing road to help stay within the
existing 80' right-of-way.
1b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
The project is utilizing the existing pavement section and widening symetrically. The side slopes are at a maximum 2:1 to
minimize stream impacts. Erosion control measures will be installed during construction to help reduce the impact of sediment
laden water washing into receiving waters. Measures will include skimmer basins, a stilling basin, check dams, rock inlet
protection, temporary ditch liners, and silt fencing.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State? ? Yes ® No
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply): ? DWQ ? Corps

2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this

project? ? Mitigation bank

El Payment to in-lieu fee program

? Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter) Type Quantity
3c. Comments:
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In-lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in-lieu fee program is attached. ? Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested: linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature: ? warm ? cool ?cold
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only): square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested: acres
4f. Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested: acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested: acres
4h. Comments:
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
Page 7 of 12
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) - required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
buffer mitigation? ? Yes ® No
6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required.

Zone 6c.
Reason for impact 6d.
Total impact
(square feet)
Multiplier 6e.
Required mitigation
(square feet)
Zone 1 3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2 1.5
6f. Total buffer mitigation required:
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in-lieu fee fund).
6h. Comments:
Page 9 of 12
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1a . Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified ? Yes ®No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1b . If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
? Yes ? No
Comments:
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a . What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project? %
2b . Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan? ® Yes ? No
2c . If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why: Linear public transportation projects will
be required to treat stormwater runoff to the Maximum Extent Practicable in accordance with the practices described in
the NCDOT Best Management Practices (BMP) Manual.
2d . If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, na rrative description of the plan:
(See Attached Stormwater Management Plan)
? Certified Local Government
2e . Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan? ? DWQ Stormwater Program
® DWQ 401 Unit
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which local government's jurisdiction is this project?
? Phase II
3b . Which of the following locally-implemented stormwater management programs ? NSW
? USMP
apply (check all that apply): ? Water Supply Watershed
® Other: NCDOT
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been ? Yes ® No
attached?
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
? Coastal counties
? HOW
4a. Which of the following state-implemented stormwater management programs apply ? ORW
(check all that apply): ? Session Law 2006-246
® Other: NCDOT
4b. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
attached? ? Yes ® No
5. DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a. Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements? ® Yes ? No
5b. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met? ® Yes ? No
Page 9 of 12
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
F. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the ®Yes ? No
use of public (federal/state) land?
1b. If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State ® Yes ? No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1c. If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
letter.) ? Yes ® No
Comments: A Programmatic Categorical Exclusion is being prepared for this project
and will be submitted to NCDOT for review.
2. Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards, ? Yes ? No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b. Is this an after-the-fact permit application? ? Yes ? No
2c. If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s):
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in ? Yes ® No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b. If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
The purpose of this project is to relieve traffic congestion along Beckford Drive. As such the widening will only addres
existing issues and should not result in additional development.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a. Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
N/A
Page 10 of 12
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
El Yes No
N
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
i
? ®Yes
? No
mpacts
Sc. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
® Raleigh
? Asheville
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
The US Fish and Wildlife Service lists the Dwarf wedge mussel (Alasmidonta heterodon) as the only federally-protected
(endangered) species in Vance County. A survey was completed by The Catena Group, Inc., on December 17, 2009.
No mussel species were found in the survey reach of Nulbush Creek during survey efforts. Due to the degraded nature
of the stream in the project area, it is very unlikely that any mussel species will be directly impacted by the proposed
action.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat? ? Yes N No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
The project does not occur in a coastal county.
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation ? Yes ® No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
See attached SHPO and Office of Archaeology scoping letter.
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain? N Yes ? No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements: Due to replacing the existing 72" CMP with a 9'x 6' RCBC (buried
'
1
) the 100 year water surface elevations lowered a maximum of 0.42'. The model also had to be updated to include an
83" x 57" elliptical CMP immediately upstream of the Beckford Drive crossing at a private driveway. Due to these
changes a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) will be required for FEMA approval.
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? Flood Insurance Study (FIS) number 37181CV000A
and on Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) number 3720196400J (effective date April 16, 2007). Effective model provided
by NC Floodplain Mapping.
JEFF MoDKe (0-30-10
'
Applicant/Agent
s Printed Name App nUAgent's Signature Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant
Page I I of 12
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
Letter of Authorization
Mr. Frank Frazier, with the City of Henderson authorizes Kimley-Horn and
Associates, Inc. to act as our limited agent to coordinate with the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers and North Carolina Division of Water Quality for the
preparation and submittal of jurisdictional determinations and 404/401 permits
applications associated with the U4916 (Beckford Drive Widening) project
located in Vance County, North Carolina. Authorization will terminate on either
final agency action or upon written notification from either parties involved
Company Name: Kimlev-Horn and Associates, Inc.
Contact Name: Jeff Moore, P.E.
Client Address: 134 Rose Avenue
Henderson. NC 27536
Client Phone #: [phone]
Client Fax #: Z5Z-42
Client Email: frank. frazier(a),ci.henderson.nc.us
(Signature of Client)
I -Z6- 10
Date
Y h+.? N
EzE
•?I ?f nJ a ti? > r t 1. •? fS
All
[ a A ! 3
r
End Protect +
4 ? d?I . ??` ?fy1 ??•(YT ?/ S' " ? *'? ?': ? ?? fflf ,r•, y
?? ??'A ? ???^? j1OU?w +?? ? ?; 't?^! / M f A•i0 ``, ? ?? 'w1 /- (/?.. ;? Wes.
Begin Project `??r+; ? '1r ? '{'???;' h >11 4?0 ? r. S?; `?.?!i. ?? ? A?'`` ?tf?-:•, t ? ??
yr ? ? ? r
41
?/' F ? r v ff
4',.?•-n ??tr ?,'? y.?r?h?"ey.iy "7?r `'?? t`? •??tt -?.t .?f?K f ?? 'ff ?f?;? ?L..6_
1 ? Y f ?'? ? `*?f'r fff l??*?„?? - * t??4 . rr '»? ?r ?•y,?,.? SS`2?_ ? ?
:8 ? f" ??E .y ? tv ? . sr£ ? =.t.'.a? , ? yUfgr dr7 ~'? ???'?' ??
fI,,
11 -.1 -N
U?rmvqsw Figure 1 of 8
Proj
ect Vicinity Map
Kimley-Horn TIP Project UA916
®" and Associates, Inc. Beckford Drive, Vance County, NC
G Kimley-Horn
and Associates, Inc.
Figure 2 of 8
Project Vicinity Map
TIP Project U4916
Beckford Drive, Vance County, NC
ao a o v
w M -z
O g ?
C7 N ? c
O O
01 o U
M C c
d N
F >
N
D
O
Y
U
N
CO
N
a
V) C
O
(n >N
U) >>
V `iJ
O
a
O
U y
U E
a) co
C a` in
d
J
CJ
C
N
N
C (d
O O
2 cn
a?i Q
Ea
Y coo
©?= 00
??
\ \ GRAPHIC SCALE
\ 50 Q y 1 l00
\ (IN FEET)
\ /INCH = l00 FT /
I ? er?
°.
now
?An ..am?.!?.rn.rc rac
141, 11 N?,
q' it ? E Juw
Y
_- ac -- E
swn -___ ` `, \? POE
r
mim \
O rye ? \\\
PD ?E PD _ >E \\
STREAM IMPACT I \
STREAM IMPACT 2
? o?
Kimley-Horn
?? and Associates,lnc. BECKFORD DRIVE WIDENING STREAM IMPACT EXHIBIT FIGURE
(D HENDERSON,NC MASTER PLAN 4 of 8
?-,,,INV. 401
s.
,` `, \ Pnq T,
c
INV.-
CONC
INV.
1406.
I
PROPOSED
ROAD
EXISTING
ROAD
STREAM IMPACTS
NORMAL 89 LF
DAILY FLOW
5.50' (RE7,E9NWl,0N POND
).go,
INLET CHANNEL
/
IMPROVEMENTS

IPE I 4 .0' /CONSIST OF
+ LAYING BACK
STREAM B KS GRAPHIC SCALE
NO IN-C NNE IL
IMPRO MENTS 2L
l
240
"
9' x 6' RCBC (BU RIED I') (IN FEETI
V IN = 394.3 /INCH = 40 FT
NV OUT = 392.8

2J3
LT PROPOSED
ROAD
+22
I
.E
4 4

0 LT
-

F-EXISTING
ROAD
4

W?
-? 18" R01
F
INV.
396.4E
18" MP W/-? ? REFER
ELB W TO
FIG 7
ZOUTLET
ss PROTECTION
\ CLASS 'B' RIPRAP
m Kimley-Horn
?m? and Associates, Inc. BECKFORD DRIVE WIDENING FIGURE
O =w ? e HENDERSON, NC STREAM IMPACT 1 5 of 8
mod lsixl ----------- J

i o I
WN

2 I
Z
`
C7 ? I
?VJ
P
?
?i

W_

I ?

I Q]
U
I ?
tO
I X

a ?I
Z
O ?
°I
O

U I
W
U I
;; 05906
,
0

U
N
O
O
OI
I
I

mod 1S xl
cf1
? I
I
I
I

--------------- I
loci load
W OJ
I?
o
?Q0
H
U
Q
W
Q
W
H
U
Z
Z
W
? U
? Z
W Z
> O
D ?
W
O 0
W Z
O W
W =
Y
U
W
m
Z5 y x
E a Ape
Y m 3?
e
1,
STREAM IMPACTS
26 LF

F
GRAPHIC SCALE
2,0 , Q 20 4Q
(IN FEET)
l INCH = 40 FT
PROPOSED
ROAD
EXISTING
- ROAD

F

- - -Z -
REFER TO
FIG 5

PREFORMED
SCOUR HOLE
-NORMAL DAILY
FLOW
N
m
rn 0
M
W
24" RCP
CONC.
COLLAR
\\? B
15"
F
-Horn
?O? IGmley
andASSOCates,lnc. BECKFORD DRIVE WIDENING STREAM IMPACT 2 FIGURE
C), w u? W HENDERSON, NC 7 of 8
V
I 81' F
tQlq:
XI A-24' RCP
CONC. COLLAR
PROPOSED
ROAD
o
N ?

y ? W
N ?
x n MOa LSIXd z
? o
4 Z= -
------------ w
w

?W
N N
WW
J?
?W

\ 1
p0' 1 1
IV 1/1
„
l?
1 1
/1 1
„

1 1
1 1
1 1
z Oj / 1 1
O co I , ,
91
1 1
u
W
I
11
? I 1 1
V) 1 1
ZZ'S06
N
O I
? 1 1
U ? 1 1 d
O 11 U
O 11
1 1
1 1 (\!
1 1 1
1 1 ,
11
M
O
1 ?

X
' I 1 W
r 1 1
11 1

MOa 1SIXd \ ?

Z
_O
-------------- Ln
Cl
dad doad -
?w

NW
/ WW
JCL
/ lPW
W CO
?4-
o
700
N
H
U
a
a
W
O
Z
Z
W
O U
'i?: Z
W Z
> O
N
o?
W
0 Z
W_
W
Y
U
W
CD
m
c m
s H x
E a e
Y m 3,y
?e
" e 9
a
vep
I(ZQ?Ia
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Potcr B. sandhed" Admimstraror
Beverly Execs Perdu, Governor Office nE Archives and I-1f,vm
Lmda A_ C;,A,1e, &,creta7 Dieisinn o! blisusical Rcxnirccs
JcfGcyJ_ Cron, Deputy secretory Uavid Brook, l')ircY:lor
January 25, 2010
Frank Frazier
City of Henderson
PO Box 1434
Henderson, NC 27536
Re: Widening of SR 1165 from Harrison Street to North Park Drive, Henderson, U-4916, Vance County,
13R 10-0135
Dear Mr. Frazier:
Thank you for your letter of January 15, 2010, concerning the above project.
We have conducted a review of the project and arc aware of no historic resources which Would be affected by
the project. Therefore, we have no comment on the project as proposed.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CFR
Part 400.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919-807-6579. In all future
communication concerning this project, please cite the above-referenced uacking number.
Sincerely,
-?
Teter Sandbeck
Y cc: Blatt Wilkerson, NCDOT
Mary Pope Furt, NCDOT
Location: 109 LvstJoncn inaci, Rvl:7ah N(. 27601 Mailing Addressr 4617 Mail Scrvtcc Cc-,mq Itnlcigh NC 27G99 1617 Telephone/Fax'. [phone]/809-6599
Tracking #: ER 10-0135 Other #'s
County: Vance
Appticant: City of Henderson
Project: Widen SR 1165 from Harrison Street to North Park
Drive, Henderson, U4916
britiaiiN.• 1/19/2010 Current IN. 1/19/2010 Client: 1/15/2010 DUE:
Info. Rey.: By:
Info Type:
Stukrs: I
2/2/2010 OUT.
Received:
FLAG INFO Archaeology Survey/Rest.
Survey Req: By. Report: Report:
Testing Req: By: Report: Report:
Mitigation: By: Report: Report:
? DoE
UNK Effect
Bib #: .Sites: 0 Foetus IN.
Ouads: Henderson Acres: Miles: 0.5
Nates:
7ProjectAreaMap ?DoENRMap Cleared Archaeology: 1121/2010
Cleared Survey: 1/19/2010
? Survey Area Map ? Microfeched
Reviewer(s): SGM/CRS
Comments
Arch Comments: 1/20/10: Recd scoping. Due 2/2/10. To SGM. BJS.
1/21/10: Will work whn existing 80' corridor, which is largely developed now thanks to
municipal/industrial construction. One small creek crossing. Significant sites unlikely. NC, Sandbeck to
Frank Frazier, City of Henderson. SGM Survey Comments: 1/19110: Rec'd scoping sheets for project.
Checked GIS maps. No historic properties affected. Cleared. No comment. CRSHPO Comments:
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
TIP No. U-4916 (Beckford Drive)
Vance County
05/13/2010
Hydraulics Project Manager: Dan Robinson, P.E. (Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.),
Marshall Clawson, P.E. (NCDOT Hydraulics Unit)
ROADWAY DESCRIP'T'ION
The project U-4916 consists of widening Beckford Drive (SR 1165) in Vance County to
three lanes with curb and gutter, storm drainage and sidewalks on both sides from
Harrison Street to North Park Drive. The total project length is 0.6 miles. The project
will include constructing a new 136 feet long 9' x 6' Reinforced Concrete Box Culvert
(RCBC, buried I') to replace the existing 72" CMP over Nutbush Creek. It will also
include extending an existing 24" RCP at an Unnamed Tributary to Nutbush Creek. The
project creates impacts to Nutbush Creek and an Unnamed Tributary to Nutbush Creek,
which are located in the Roanoke River Basin. The project drainage systems consist of
catch basins/grated inlets with associated pipe system, grassed swales, preformed scour
holes, and rip rap outlet protection at a pipe outlets.
Jurisdictional Streams: Nutbush Creek
Unnamed Tributary to Nutbush Creek
ENVIRONMENTAL DESCRIPTION
The project is located within the Roanoke River Basin in Vance County, which is not a
CAMA county. Nutbush Creek is classified as Class C. There are no wetlands that will
be impacted with this project.
BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES AND MAJOR STRUCTURES
The primary goal of Best Management Practices (BMPs) is to prevent degradation of the
state's surface waters by the location, construction and operation of the highway system.
The BMPs are activities, practices and procedures taken to prevent or reduce stormwater
pollution. The BMP measures used on this project to reduce stormwater impacts include:
• Preformed scour holes at the drainage system outlets (Sta. 27+24 RT, 28+26 RT
and 29+74 RT)
• Rip rap outlet protection at pipe outlets.
• Grassed swales.
• Retaining existing 24" CMP Riser Barrel Structure at Sta. 13+65 LT. This
structure is serving as a detention basin for offsite drainage.
ATTACHMENT
PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL
DETERMINATION (JD):
Field review by Eric Alsmeyer on April 6, 2010
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PRELIMINARY JD:
Mr. Frank Frazier Agent: Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
Deputy City Manager
City of Henderson
134 Rose Avenue
Henderson, NC 27536
C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
D. PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
(USE THE ATTACHED TABLE TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE WATERBODIES
AT DIFFERENT SITES)
State:NC County/parish/borough: Vance City: Henderson
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat.
36.336442° N, Long. 78.427578W°.
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Nutbush Creek
Identify (estimate) amount of waters in the review area:
Non-wetland waters: 300 linear feet: width (ft) and/or acres.
Cowardin Class: Riverine
Stream Flow: perennial/intermittent
Wetlands: acres.
Cowardin Class:
Name of any water bodies on the site that have been identified as Section 10
waters:
Tidal: N/A
Non-Tidal: N/A
E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT
APPLY):
? Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
® Field Determination. Date(s): April 6, 2010
1
1. The Corps of Engineers believes that there may be jurisdictional waters of the
United States on the subject site, and the permit applicant or other affected party
who requested this preliminary JD is hereby advised of his or her option to
request and obtain an approved jurisdictional determination (JD) for that site.
Nevertheless, the permit applicant or other person who requested this
preliminary JD has declined to exercise the option to obtain an approved JD in
this instance and at this time.
2. In any circumstance where a permit applicant obtains an individual permit, or
a Nationwide General Permit (NWP) or other general permit verification requiring
"pre-construction notification" (PCN), or requests verification for a non-reporting
NWP or other general permit, and the permit applicant has not requested an
approved JD for the activity, the permit applicant is hereby made aware of the
following: (1) the permit applicant has elected to seek a permit authorization
based on a preliminary JD, which does not make an official determination of
jurisdictional waters; (2) that the applicant has the option to request an approved
JD before accepting the terms and conditions of the permit authorization, and
that basing a permit authorization on an approved JD could possibly result in less
compensatory mitigation being required or different special conditions; (3) that
the applicant has the right to request an individual permit rather than accepting
the terms and conditions of the NWP or other general permit authorization; (4)
that the applicant can accept a permit authorization and thereby agree to comply
with all the terms and conditions of that permit, including whatever mitigation
requirements the Corps has determined to be necessary; (5) that undertaking
any activity in reliance upon the subject permit authorization without requesting
an approved JD constitutes the applicant's acceptance of the use of the
preliminary JD, but that either form of JD will be processed as soon as is
practicable; (6) accepting a permit authorization (e.g., signing a proffered
individual permit) or undertaking any activity in reliance on any form of Corps
permit authorization based on a preliminary JD constitutes agreement that all
wetlands and other water bodies on the site affected in any way by that activity
are jurisdictional waters of the United States, and precludes any challenge to
such jurisdiction in any administrative or judicial compliance or enforcement
action, or in any administrative appeal or in any Federal court; and (7) whether
the applicant elects to use either an approved JD or a preliminary JD, that JD
will be processed as soon as is practicable. Further, an approved JD, a proffered
individual permit (and all terms and conditions contained therein), or individual
permit denial can be administratively appealed pursuant to 33 C.F.R. Part 331,
and that in any administrative appeal, jurisdictional issues can be raised (see 33
C.F.R. 331.5(a)(2)). If, during that administrative appeal, it becomes necessary
to make an official determination whether CWA jurisdiction exists over a site, or
to provide an official delineation of jurisdictional waters on the site, the Corps will
provide an approved JD to accomplish that result, as soon as is practicable.
2
This preliminary JD finds that there "maybe"waters of the United States on the
subject project site, and identifies all aquatic features on the site that could be
affected by the proposed activity, based on the following information:
SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for preliminary JD (check all that apply
- checked items should 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: Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
® 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:
? 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:
? Other information (please specify):
Signature and date of
Regulatory Project Manager
(REQUIRED)
(tit nun
nature and date of
person requesting preliminary JD
(REQUIRED, unless obtaining
the signature is impracticable)
Estimated
amount of
Site
number Latitude Longitude Cowardin
Class aquatic
resource Class of aquatic
resource
in review
area
Stream 36.20809 78.254562 Riverine, 100 linear perennial/ important
1 N W Upper feet aquatic function;
Perennial
Stream 36.20908 78.254524 Riverine, 100 linear intermittent/unimport
2 N W Intermit. feet ant aquatic function;

4
s ? q? s
o`?s?a I a I 1 I?? ??.r ly,P
sG'r \ 111 _il; .y =„:p-----_-
4al
-? ??- M/tl i'13 ?n
_______-_
------------
Sea
w e
-LI
=o W
1 ? I ? I
=a z"rf
=1 / - =s ? ,I}?/9?II/W
W`? `iJry\
?o ? SZ6\y u•a
n'
AR
1? moo
lkj?
ax .v. 1'?? Z- veace_
ZZ,
s-r'¢4q"4 -1-_
North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identification Form; Version 3.1
Date: Z t3 /0 Project Latitude: '7d'0;0'1.0 t^f'
V
Evaluator: Site: ?I,4?JSA 9,0-. Longitude: f /. 2•i?
Total Points: STI A1547M -1 Other
Stream is at least intermittent ZS County: k11441-C404
if 2 19 or erennial if 230 AAC6 e.g. Quad Name: A. Geomor holo (Subtotal = ?J Absent Weak Moderate Strong

1 B. Continuous bed and bank 0 1 2
2. Sinuosity 0 1 3
3. In-channel structure: riffle-pool sequence 0 1 3
4. Soil texture or stream substrate sorting 0 1 2 3
5. Active/relic floodplain 0 1 2 3
6. Depositional bars or benches 0 1 2 3
7. Braided channel 0 1 2 3
6. Recent alluvial deposits 0 1 2 3
9' Natural levees 0 1 2 3
10. Headcuts 1 2 3
11. Grade controls 0 0.5 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.
Noo
Yes = 3
- Man-made ditches are not rated; sees discussions in manual
B_ Hvdroloov (Subtotal = "1 1
14. Groundwater flow/discharge 0 1 2 3
15. Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain, or 0 1 2 3
Water in channel - d or growl n season
16. Leaflitter 1.5 1 0.5 0
17. Sediment on plants or debris eD 0.5 1 1.5
18. Organic debris lines or piles (Wrack lines) 0 0.5 1 .5
19. Hydric soils (redoximorphic features) present? No = 0 Yes q'i .5
C. Bioloov (Subtotal = IO 1
20'. Fibrous roots in channel 2 1 0
2lb. Rooted plants in channel 3 2 1 0
22. Crayfish 0 0.5 1 1.5
23. Bivalves 1 2 3
24. Fish r 0D 1 1.5
25. Amphibians 0.5 1 1.5
26. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance) is) 0.5 1 1.5
27. Filamentous algae; periphyton 0 1 2 3
28. Iron oxidizing bacteria/fungus. 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.
Sketch:
Notes: (use back side of this form for additional notes.)

STi??'4yv? 1.
USACE AID# DWQ # Site # (indicate on attached map)
M STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: 2. Evaluator's name: F.JeJJ
3. Date of evaluation: / t7 4. Time of evaluation:
_ ,I1 * 30am
5. Name of stream: IV.tA&uki C<fe 6. River basin: ICvF?K?
ID
7. Approximate drainage area: ? ALIY$ S. Stream order. 10
9. Length of reach evaluated: to 10. County:.'
11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees. 12. Subdivision name (if any): .'1
Latitude (m.34.872312): 3(e. 74;.To°l Longitude (ex.-77.556611): -194540e9'
Method location determined (circle): GPS Topo Sheet Ortho (Aerial) Photo/GIS Other GIS Other
13. Location of reach under evaluauo' n (Uote nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
14. Proposed channel work (if
15. Recent weather
16. Site conditions
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: -Section 10 -Tidal Waters -Essential Fisheries Habitat
-Trout Waters -Outstanding Resource Waters -Nutrient Sensitive Waters -Water Supply Watershed (I-IV)
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? ES NO 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES NO
21. Estimated watershed land use: _% Residential ,3S% Commercial % Industrial _% Agricultural
I% Forested % Cleared /Logged % Other
t
22. Bankfull width: ZOt 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): g
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 .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 Vate v
This channel evaluatio orm is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners a d nvironmental 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.
Sic-am-Z
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
- -ajp '_C??O. M
s ?oa in oun ain-
'?? -, t' Pesence'?of flow / persistent pools m stream - ' 4 -0' S r Ofia 4 ' `x 0 5
TR ?t 11 no fl w oisatuiatibn 0 :strou flow _inax'` omts - .,.. ` . _
^s r° m s " z
) v}dence of past human alteration a,
,
, ?ai 0 6 ' ?
0 5 1 0 5
i
!
?'
L
t
.
, ., .. ,: _ - aa
Q ffl
a
:
l
lt
t
O
`
`
"
1?
MSeXtens
+,ra,y;?lOn.
IIO_a
eIanon
Sl,
S. ._y:.
lY-e,a
terat
r.,?iIDBxf Om
•.h ., .z?
...
A M l Y1?T .RK?fl '+'ff 3B Y` 6. - W[(R Y S I }?{ .5 S l ' SbI- ?*- +J 1 ' C
3 ,3 A yRtPara*u}zone ar 4 a:' 0' 6
0 4 0 5
nn
1
4w
deb
ff
r
m
'
T
b
f
4
o ?
u
e
.
ax, omts , „..
a:.. c
ler?0 con
t u
s,
t
y. Anol
u
x O
'iggwa
of riutnent or chemrcal dtscha'S'ges,b""y 5 1 0 4 `; ?"0 4
«:.

eztenswe,dsotiaz es,, 0, n¢ d}schar es maxi omts ,i

r,. < , u : s, 1 .. ,..:'..,
Mrs t
I
,.4 r F 1"vL tl ! v f ',e h ,r MP 73 lty ,j, [ 5.: Y fah i-r Ytr?P 1! 4i c 1
fi[nLLndwateC?h3Cl?arge. a?I?1 aY
c 0
W u-af
'
!0 0 t1
'S $kt
.
,
iy. !
.Md v!-.; rts?:r ,A9; is m
,;
etc
max: o,dis T
isohar e
0
gs rat si
see s
etlands
r no
.,
,
,
,?
„
.
, .
r
,F

.of adlace?it floodplatu, o ,.,:. `lt ,? •?,'yP a ., t
,1 Tesence
0.. 0 2
I
ood
?:xr???t 1fi law. 0-rextensive:fldod lam "Gmax, otnts !?au??I el, ,,. ?:?! ,r +?:,
=fF ` ?' x Entrenchment / floodplam access" r +,, 'th #y f ,
F ?'? rr I T o:s o ot?2 ',
a
7 y?V
F `"...(dee 1. ,,entrenched 0 fre' 0en lloodm amaR omtsi
.. ;: yl.?,.L?ljlt ?, aSS.lh
N
O .- I1 S i , C p
` %P 0
Y rr }fpip
Q.+5*
dy
8
*i &'ijI
, 0 i ' - ?? 4 II l ?Iry' N
''
a
'
'
r
7

,
t
lar a ad ace
z:;?5ell
and
1p
i
ats
f
axi
" O
lk D
,
.
1 4pY t „- I£4 1 J. 4f><? {'^F Y?' 31• V t Y ,b 1fllikHli tJitl ,1"t I IhY 4 ,ti 1 t , {?] 1??? 11 I 1 ?I IX14 r 1fF, J t n ?,
w Channel?Sluu st{} 4 1 1 r a
-
t
?
i
"4'(a ,?
ne 1 "
i
oirits
°O?
max; t 1
iw;
-i
al7tiaa
isaJs
n
(? ls+
a[
h
I
aCu?
;51i
t
e?e4ann
lizado '9;1b
l"t
. e
s
'°'
y 1
n .
, ,I::hl
?
.
:,,
l!
k
c
?
sl¢
?
c
x
e
e
.
,x
ha
.:,c
a , r 'St as*1 i? n,Sedtmentuu"u`t r ri
?
U
`
T!"PI , NO .
? ?
°' .r
, _ extbf,§We depoi ioo O;?Th1t e of Ino sed?menti=, max Dints
Yya - k diversityAof ch°annel,bed substrate , h?? 'flii% ^ `- 0 Y 4 ; `,,?0 5
]Il"fi
"
?
t
M
l a!L
w
4i-fie;
aWht
l
' d
"
)
;
az e
tvene sues ->;max om
ts
az .;t ?.,..,- -
afine homo enous .10 .
'iqe ?3t" ° n? a`R v } Ey?dence of'channel mcisron or wrdenmg ^} titi ae,yti
4
1'r
0
t
ti:
e ,sed !O itable bed;& banks, °maxomts aiRw'4 . ,_a,
7
!

aft
re.erosLO terostoh liable banksmaxi pmts ,.r
f
s ?' *`17 Raotfdph d4''O i' `5 ?? i.
'? F p f?ipull
14 LI
'

,
..
0;-,den
se
rootsthrou hoot„;,max o}iits ,
88 ,a? novtstbleroots
„
,
t4? 1, W M1 4 !)4tl'4 Y" 1 I 1 4 i y? } l? t h I' 1'
agnculture, hvestock,orhmberllprodpMroni
Im
pactby
t FPRO!I'
1
`
a
?
iyl,l 11
5 0
4
0
yy,,I((yy I
-q H?
maXEOOl t1tSl ;?T?
m aet
O
nO;eVldenC&
<
t
n
` b
l?
'
'
.
,
.
,
,
„
s
an
a
]
, yl E
f41
P L I,1. Sn n 4111
,tl
nfil
e
-pooVn
pplepoolcoiPle.es?lil!, `?,'
ni,?jres?ence?of
t?y;6kq:i"
4:tq Wt
0: 3 5 k 0,
0
JnIlL,
.. ,.

0 develo "ed
r
Do
l
wall
,
a
riffles/n les`os
a7o1 oants
,
ts
12
n
D
ill
tai
5
9
'
,
„
.
,
.
„
.
,
,
y?
'It i
eY
HabttatcomplexLty qC
0'?G „0 6 0 6
" ?7
tittle oraaba4cfat, O; fie dent; vatted habitats::.,m
ax? Qmts ,I 'I ! ?
ry, 4'?I ?tik ?'? nano ?cove'ra cover streamfii;d 11 1 tk'111hri°'' N,! 5 t "+
,pYht i!'lan???i jlll IOt
<0 5 0 5
S
A
'
'
?
,
:
S; ?,? , 1 .
noY$ba e e(attoti'an 0 .continuous canoma7it
A1n
?3 y ul+? !
, <s146?
i
_
;.
.
,sellRE ,
,a.f ?.I. ??? ?' ? Su s?rate embeddedness i?, ?
f' ?0 4
'?
ll?
I
f
.
•
??
i
MW I I
ededl lOtloosestructore=max??,,,r„lr,i

rates(see,paga4)?r'f 1b1"I?`N, q'?I'(1>t!Ip'?,f5`,S' s ,
kI,t9 hU?@ P+ e`H'i"reamimVe eb
"l" z
I
?
m
l
OI??F
s?monlin
e
u
--
en
F'I
k
a
i
max;
u
to
s es
n
n
:e
d
c
c
v!k
*? l t rUklt6" On ?t@presene?ofamphtbians: 1?!, a tf , vl
c
?
a '0 4 0 4..•
l
4
0
`
.-J kwl
w._4eBoru?c?r,,,„,t
1
X21 r
::
I,, .. ?.
a +
m
c
um
d
o
'
n=n
e ous, es
omm
rr no!evt
ence_..,0
1 .,y.:
!r ., t ,1
1"r
i :
j10
.0 4 0 4
22 ..na7? Il U.f.t , r
4?
din
s
e
-
:
l
?
maxi
t
„ ,
vtdence,Z ;ccommon,
numerous. es
noP
, *4 cF' kni
E?fi`lE'VhdencebfWlldhfeuse
O
6
0 5 0 5
,
'
,
a n
no
evidence1LS, to? abi ndant evid`edce max nlntS t1)
C
, ,
„
,
,
,
,
h
y?? a100
?'sws
f
s?'?
=a?1Q
t
e ?' ,?j
,
Q
5

t a
(flsoett r i?Y*
? YO

nloT
S CJ4
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
51ru-a-
North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identification Form; Version 3.1
Date: v 3 Project: U 6e& a Latitude: ;D log
Evaluator: Site: oftitil Longitude: mss, 5-45 3
Total Points: 57f &&M
Other
Stream is at least intermittent ?1 't County: / _?(?
If z 19 or perennial if a 30 Or 1 Vmx e.g. Quad Name: &/ Jrs

%1 J )
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal=
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
18. 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 3
5. Active/relic floodplain 0 1 2 3
6. Depositional bars or benches 2 3
7. Braided channel 0 1 2 3
8. Recent alluvial deposits 0 1 2 3
9s Natural levees 1 2 3
10. Headcuts 1 2 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
Yes = 3
"Man-made ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hvdrologv (Subtotal = 2.6 1
14. Groundwater flow/discharge J 0 2 3
15. Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain, or
Water in channel -dry or growing season ?-?
l% 1 2 3
16. Leaflitter 1.5 1 0. 0
17. Sediment on plants or debris 0 0.5 1 1.5
18. Organic debris lines or piles (Wrack lines) 0 0.5 1 1.5
19. Hydric soils (redoximorphic features) present? No 0 Yes = 1.5
C. Biology (Subtotal= to - t? )
20b. Fibrous roots in channel 3 2 1 0
21 b. Rooted plants in channel 3 1 0
22. Crayfish 0 0.5 1 1.5
23. Bivalves 1 2 3
24. Fish 0.5 1 1.5
25. Amphibians 0 0.5 1 1.5
. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
26 0
0.5
1
1.5
27. Filamentous algae; periphyton 0 1 2 3
28. Iron oxidizing bacteria/fungus. 0.5 1 1.5
29b . Wetland plants in streambed FAC = 0.5; FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 SAV = 2.0; Other = 0
w?4
"Items 20 and 21 focus on the presence of upland plants, Item 29 focuses on the presence of aquatic or wetland plants.
Sketch:
Notes: (use back side of this form for additional notes.)

USACE AID# DWQ # Site # (indicate on attached map)
Full STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the following information ?for/the'stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: I l? or ll(/1Q??]()'Y 2. Evaluator's name:
3. Date of evaluation: 4. Time of evaluation: j?•t'S?
?Er
5. Name of stream: u 6. River basin:
7. Approximate drainage area: SAL • 8. Stream order: t?
9. Length of reach evaluated: ?i 10. County: U,Zr'?!
11. Site coordinates (if known): /yprefer in decimal degrees. 12. Subdivision name (if any):
P?1 Jo
Latitude (ex. 34.872312): Longitude (ex.-77,55661 q: - If-
Method location determined (circle): GP$._ To o 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):
14. Proposed channel work (if any): F.•L/f?C/-ll-(?/???? H15C!
15. Recent weather conditions: sl?DU1 t'R7A, 4 tD u
16. Site conditions at time
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: -Section 10 -Tidal Waters -Essential Fisheries Habitat
-Trout Waters -Outstanding Resource Waters -Nutrient Sensitive Waters -Water Supply Watershed(I-IV)
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 NO ????20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES NO
21. Estimated watershed land use: _% Residential a% Commercial % Industrial Agricultural
66?0/- Forested % Cleared / Logged _% Other
22. Bankfull width: I 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): 3 t
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 ?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.
Evaluator's Signature Date
This channel evaluatio m is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners an a ironmental 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.
Stet-a+u P-
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
45? ? 011- W
f
Qoa ,:?
t t o m
rr`?`, -`? i?e;e`h"cejof,?klow/ a >s?ent lsanstream I'? .? "
?
"
a no?lowaot?satura6on ,
0 ?seron flow -.'niax omts
?
:
,
n >'
++
'. ?
?
I
,??iY1,
, 1-.
.
,.
,
_
_.
,
,.>
...,
.,
?
,???"euceofpast hug alterahon Q?;,a?t
{ ' Y
4'
'
1
?
0
6 .0 5 0
S a
r„ r: ,? axten'stvealteratior1 .0 ,no aIteratron 1. maxa omts a„? ?I9 ?
'? `; tr?`? ",, s n n= o 1?e a al e"! ?'1,a*p e'.t + '. { s ?'kt a , , , ;I
'Mill
:
conla ous;oKaaa?e buffer
;max' oints a
;7
I h a?! ; ,? '
w t
I:,
>?i+?lVY?RI? a
o rs? 0
+
's9
a!
,.
,
..
,
,_
?
.
.,
,_
, .
RI ven' .lA I A , y Ilf k , I,, J:f,l y,({41 bra + 4
1Evtce of nurren4or chemical discharges 2F
w e" t 0 51 0 4 0 4
'
3
extenstped,sehdr
es odIsschar es T?7idSak, omts l[ ?, 4,t1„!,,,,.t

ntf ?{,V V,,hj +, u-' "? 4 Y 1s r c i'? n5't II(/t Sytl4{:
7t
?{I?L3
e
315," tigf ??" qa, r ti[OUDdwaterd- hia
t
?
I
??

1
aschpae F 0 s' Fati' st sae's avetlads,
u
e
c .max 'onits ' ?.,i, 3 c'r i q ?a
£ (ai
.. ..
j3 'p'i' 4C. MN^"L^.NY'I JRM
) N t a i { t1Yfj lij'{{ 1\V1 hC , b
P,rerACe&ofadfe'nttloodplatu r??, -
ai7
?p `-4??r"0 2
l
t
.?
o o , (am,.,0':extensrve,flbod IamI- maxomts)'°s,„ .t .v,,4 ,. \4,
1
F
renchment / floodplain accessmhr i@3
E F-11 ,
!r` ; {' 's r +p4? S'
? 0 4 0 2
V
L
?
,
2I=
r"
:?dee 1;entcenched=Q
fre uenNfloodin ;max omts'.u!-I'
!??
it?
"?
?
1,
,?t
r
! 1
,
,
.
.
, . ?
.,
.
, .,
,
„ „
.?
a$ \ +KrpresePCe of adfaceut,wet?ands x?
?E' 0 ' '6" s ' 3 s O -14
`
i
' mo etiOas 0; lai
a ad acen(wetlands,.
Finax, 4mts {._1. .Prhtj?,4E ?;;ji k u+u?y!y? ?j
F y
U
?.Y vrj Y, YS\W. )N ?ih , , ... 4 IE 1 4 N h l 4 IIHI 112 1{ , 1 Y11 ?1!
rir Channel!Rt osrty IYk.,kF1 a,fllk!, ,9f11"w, ?. s
Oa
5
? 1
11
T
''t1
0
3
"
i
9'
e
?
>
i!
t
0
„1
y
21, t"n,
11 ikli,li,
oints)1
e t?e
¢
e izat ou p?tla ra) me
ax:
' m
fll t;
u
e
, C'??r
.
.
,
.
._
.
.ue
;t 2 S ,h,??9 `411 i Se?1n1e111Ip11t?rYj?1t? ?,t 1 1 t?7t4FY?;,O,i,? I'??,',',?t4H?h , +'YiA ° t, J?r?? '
0
0
5
?I
O
?
4y = - 4 ?
0
e
i
d
s
n
!
1
'
n
"
rr
:
?ir ?
F?
i
I
ensue:
Jtttleioz
t
ent=!max;
oiht3
eo
i
ou
0
?
o3
d
h
ht
n L, „?
lc ..
c
.
„
.
. ,
' W .y "I'll
csubstrate , ", Vii' °
e as4?+?? f+,r1 m a
a-:
4 S ,? 0 5
}k
?
1 t
1
m enoStS4 :,0'Rlar a diveestzesmax, oints i .,; n ,pmt
rs
'
rde
Irot?•vtdencet?o channel4tnctston orwnm g W-4
` h 0 5
m
C
?

3
iy tnctseti
O stable b
e3 & banks
E ,deel
_imax
f ;Sikh ?t
1W
iln ryt, r ilya
5
:a.
.
,
,
.
.
.
., ..
_
1, L NM 7 - I- RiencebfgmaforbsnKfadures,' rl0l?, n? „
0 5 0 5
?
3
_
!;; -
v e
o
stabl
b
;; m
k''' o
it
SF ?`?
ii
1
R TANIS
"xo
nt
'O
k
e iJ
e
sto
,
n
erosion
e
an
s
a
,
;
a .t
.
e
?
f

" t kYn_?goot depth and density onlb
an"hs j' ! rtX?? rt?1 10 `, . 3 0 4 r 1 5r
0
1
a
`
l
?
' 22

„
, !
O;-dense toots throu houttY1,
n , x tiorvJsilile roots
oins ., n
m 7
.
.,
Y -i Tm'bact} agncnlture, hvestocky or hmberj?ProdppofIon !,' .? ,t` a }r- +r ' M= , , .: !Q 5 S e
1 o-
,&
°!,
r
! ?0 4r
"
•
'
t
?:..J. e
Ynx
n•- I_S a>
Iin
d
I
b
t
t
al
et 0
o
id
?
. r
o '
'
W

ev
;, , j „ ,;
an
s
t
nm a
n
ence,,. mak
. r ,
s
a7Mr su
an
5sS ., 1
. ,
d
1
1?6"ter`es,ncbfFrftlepool/npplepoolcomplyexes?i?!i4tlrl!! 0'13 0v"5' 0 6' '
h `
'
,kl,l,_v,„,
4tntS ta}!?
,?t9+S`s?;"+s,Mnoynflle5`.?L'i lesoi:'oo1s,.,0 well=develo ed=3ma1cJ
s a
'(? i 4 Habrtat complemty ' e
ill+?sF' I,>???! p ?? ?
?1?
v?, ,:
R ? ? a?'
1
a"
t
,'?0, a
?
j
r
7s
a
6
0 6
0
6
? ,7
'
tl
b
v
dh
bi
a
oin
5
l61
M
eworno.;ba
ttabe uent ,va
e
a
t
tsH,
naxl
ts,
y u
s + t
1.
fi.a...t61,L .;. .. .
?
8"IS?a13i1iQopy coverage over streambed +'t`"dtl
Cb SK'1 r . ?,0 5 0 5 -,t
"
"
i
4dnoashadtn lve etahbnf O jconnhvous cano _ max,
o nt
s !fit
f t`e'. ;aStirbstta?e?embeddedness ?:.- 4 -'?d+j4 ? -.' I '
.11 ri. i? 4 0 4 ?t i.
,? r t
qu +r£ l r ,.
` e9}"t &`41 hi
4
?
,
.
,i.
1 I embedd`ed
,#-,?0loaae structure -
(d
.
.
IN q t"-0 WIIe W 4. H f l i 1„ 1 i
ce{of,s
treampne4s;l,?'e'tirates (see_page 4)i ' ..I,Y a, !?,!?,. D?a j! a?u: 5 t ` 0 5
0 i4R e? ese<n
ll ?
?

O
i
s
1
'
=i
`oi
ts
t4
'.
e
0
;?cnfi?°'
°I
Z
a
?i rtu
h
`r
1
numerous.e
max
n
;
ev,
n¢ea
.
irr
ion
s'
, .
.VI,<
n
4.a
,
??:.
a
'+?_?? S,? 161,??pt ?m Pfeseuceiofjamphtbtans `- ?.'' ,?,'t<,1, 't+,?6' s Ij .?`
QYL44 VI ,
'
..Q 4 4
V
J:
Ti
'
?
rB.
... tS.
=
.k
4
p
ous es '-;max Olnt$' .y.,1.,??Lx
s^P?6nO.,O
d
en
a
e).LO,cdmmonlniuner
11h.IVlttid..
_
?I??
J
?1
?
r??
b
F ?']f T
.
?IL+A.? a t j?N"'• S Pr1I{40fiC• 4; gjt_t1, 0
KS?[esenae afiJ l$it F !41 It.J ,' 11'? 1
ff
;
4 0 4
0
;
nG
Z
9?

D

??, rc ,
,
1!
aO,dcgrtiinon,'+,riumerous es ._:max' oiriu ,;.
e'
aao a id;
i;
ES,'
?,hll?z

1
Ru??SylttEvtdence.ofjwildbfe use ,lz y tY Wit,
Sit' 5
0
0 0 S
t

1?¢^ ! s 5
,;tO
,aburidant;evidence. :max omts .,; „n „h
y2a??t# kt nb evidence
4Arr5' '.
'.1 ,AYa...
t e ?:`fa?l"oW
enter
p' ? ? Q
,
,>

• These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.