20120053 Ver 1_401 Application_20120112

W
20053
Environmental Consultants, PA
Road • Raleigh, North Carolina 27614 • Phone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]
www.SandEC.com
To: US Army Corps of Engineers
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
Attn: Steve Kichefski
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, NC 28801
From: Wendell Overby
Soil & Environmental Consultants, P.A.
11010 Raven Ridge Road
Raleigh, NC 27614
January 18, 2012
S &EC Project # 11762.W4
N.C. Division of Water Quality
WebSCaPe
Attn: Karen Higgins
512 Salisbury Street-
Raleigh, NC 27603
�, II F� JAN202012
DENR - WATER QUALITY
S� Sr�MWATER WKH
Re: Carolina Golf Lodge, Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, NC
On behalf of the Dillon Lakes, LLC (Attn: Mr. Jon Jarrett) please find attached a complete application and
supplemental information requesting written concurrence from the US Army Corps of Engineers ( USACE) and the
N.C. Division of Water Quality (DWQ) that the activities proposed below may proceed under Nationwide Permit
(NWP) 42 and General Water Quality Certification (GC) 3821. Please contact me at (704) 239 -2001 if you have any
questions or require additional information.
PROJECT SUMMARY
Project Name
Carolina Golf Lodge
Project Tye
Recreational -Golf Lodge Development
Owner / Applicant
Dillon Lakes, LLC
County
Mecklenburg
Nearest Town
Charlotte
Waterbody Name
UTs to Irwin Creek
Basin / Sub -basin
Catawba
Index Number
11 -137 -1
Class
C
USGS Cataloging Unit
03050103
IMPACT SUMMARY
Stream Impact (acres):
0
Wetland Impact (acres):
0.38
Open Water Impact (acres):
0
Total Impact to Waters of the U.S. (acres):
0.38
Total Stream Impact (linear feet):
0
Attachments:
Pre - construction Notification (PCN) Application Form Impact Maps
Agent Authorization Form $240 Application Fee (DWQ Only)
USGS Topographic Site Vicinity Map
NRCS Soil Survey Site Vicinity Map
Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) Acceptance letter (dated December, 2011)
Wetland Data Forms
Rapanos Forms
NC DWQ stream forms
USACE stream forms

o�oF NN rF,�QG
> �- DUD) �
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.3 Dec 10 2008
Page 1 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December ber 10, 2008 Version
Pre - Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A. Applicant Information
1.
Processing
1 a. Type(s) of approval sought from the
Corps:
®Section 404 Permit El Section 10 Permit
1b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 42 or General Permit (GP) number:
1c.
Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
® Yes
❑ No
1 d. 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
1 e.
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
1 g.
Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below.
❑ Yes
® No
,
1 h.
Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ Yes
® No
2.
Project Information
2a.
Name of project:
Carolina Golf Lodge
2b. County:
Mecklenburg
2c.
Nearest municipality / town:
Charlotte
2d. Subdivision name:
N/A
2e.
NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state
project no:
N/A
3.
Owner Information
3a.
Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
Dillon Lake, LLC
3b.
Deed Book and Page No.
2674977
3c.
Responsible Parry (for LLC if
applicable):
Jonathan Jarrett
3d.
Street address:
817 Romany Road
3e. City, state, zip:
Charlotte, NC 28203
3f.
Telephone no.:
(704) 621 -8618
3g.
Fax no.:
3h.
Email address:
I jon @jbenjaminjarrett.com
Page 1 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December ber 10, 2008 Version

4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is:
® Agent ❑ Other, specify:
4b. Name:
4c. Business name
(if applicable):
4d. Street address:
4e. City, state, zip:
4f. Telephone no.:
4g. Fax no.:
4h. Email address:
5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name:
Wendell Overby
5b. Business name
(if applicable):
S &EC
5c. Street address:
11010 Raven Ridge Road
5d. City, state, zip:
Raleigh, NC 27614,
5e. Telephone no.:
(704) 239 -2001
5f. Fax no.:
(919) 846 -9467
5g. Email address:
woverby @sandec.com
Page 2 of 11
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):
04114101
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
Latitude: 35.285842 Longitude: - 80.84494
(DD.DDDDDD) (- DD.DDDDDD)
1 c. Property size:
42 acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc.) to
Irwin Creek
proposed project:
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
C
2c. River basin:
Catawba
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:
Vacant land in forest (upland & btmland hw) and fields (fescue). Site formerly farm operation before church camp.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
0.6
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
1,000
3d. Explain the purpose of the,proposed project:
Development of golf lodge facility including buildings, driving range and associated infrastructure.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
Construction of lodge, golf course, and parking areas requires use of heavy equipment for grading and excavation.
Existing lake and downstream pond, wetlands, stream and overall topography limit buildable areas.
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
®Yes El No El Unknown
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
Comments: Corps has field determined jurisidiction
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
El Preliminary ®Final
of determination was made?
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Agency /Consultant Company: S &EC
Name (if known): Overby
Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
Await survey for JD. Site meeting with Corps (Kichefski) on 11/17/11
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
❑ Yes ❑ No ® Unknown
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?
❑ Yes ® No
6b. If yes, explain.
Page 3 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

C. Proposed Impacts'Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1 a. 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.
2b.
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
Fill
Small basin
® Yes
❑ No
® Corps
❑ DWQ
28
W2 ® P ❑ T
Fill
Small basin
❑ Yes
® No
® Corps
❑ DWQ
1
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
.38
2h. 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
❑ PER
❑ Corps
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
S2 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ PER
❑ Corps
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
`
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
0
3i. Comments:
Page 4 of 11
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
Waterb6dy type
Area of impact (acres)
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
01 ❑P
02 ❑P
03 ❑P ❑T
04 ❑P ❑T
4f. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments:
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond 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
K Total
-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 any impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a.
❑ Neuse ❑ Tar - 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
❑Nas
0
0
B2 ❑P
-
El Yes
❑ No
B3 ❑P
❑Yes
❑ No
6h. Total buffer impacts
0
0
6i. Comments:
Page 5 of 11
PCN Form —Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1 a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
Large pond, small pond, drained pond, two streams and five wetlands avoided in project layout.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
Site plan has been altered to avoid impacts to open waters remaining in drained pond.
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
Payment to in -lieu fee program
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank: N/A
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:
0 linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
❑ warm ❑ cool ❑cold
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
0 square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
.38 acres
4f. Non - riparian wetland mitigation requested:
0 acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
0 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.
N/A
Page 6 of 11
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
0
3 (2 for Catawba)
0
Zone 2
0
1.5
0
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 7 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 Lu'lece I Iber 10, 2008 Version

E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
la. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
❑ Yes ® No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1 b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
Yes El No
Comments:
2. Stormwater Management Plan -
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
8%
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
® Yes ❑ No
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why:
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
Plan to follow City of Charlotte requirements. Plan not completed at time of PCN submission. Approvals to be forwarded
to DWQ. Request conditional 401 approval.
® 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?
Charlotte
® Phase II
3b. Which of the following locally - implemented stormwater management programs
❑ NSW
❑ USMP
apply (check all that apply):
❑ Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other:
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ® No
attached?
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
❑ Coastal counties
❑ HQW
4a. Which of the following state - implemented stormwater management programs apply
❑ ORW
(check all that apply):
❑ Session Law 2006 -246
❑ Other:
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 r
Page 8 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

F.
Supplementary Information
1.
Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1 a.
Does'the project involve an expenditure of public (federal /state /local) funds or the
❑ Yes ® No
use of public (federal /state) land?
1 b.
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)?
1 c.
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:
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.
This project does not meet any of the three criteria of private projects that can clearly result in cumulative impacts. The
proposed development is relatively small in nature, is within a residentially and commercially developed landscape
bounded by existing home -sites and therefore, the utility infrastructure (i.e. water and electricity) are already in place to
service the proposed development. We anticipate that DWQ will advise us if a qualitative or quantitative impact analysis
is required.
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.
Wastewater treatment via sanitary sewer (CMUD)
Page 9 of 11
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
® Yes ❑ No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
❑ Yes ® No
impacts?
El Raleigh
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
❑ Asheville
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
The NCNHP virtual workroom was used to search for elemental occurrences of state and federally protected species in
the vicinity of the project. It was determined based on the search that there are 2 elemental occurrences historically found
within two miles of the project boundaries. A Carolina Heelsplitter occurrence was listed pre -1880. See below.
2 record(s) found within 2 miles of the selected point
Scientific Name EO Nb Common Name Date Last Observed EO Rank EO Accuracy State
Protection Status Federal Protection Status State Rank Global Rank Habitat Comments
Lasmigona decorata 3 Carolina Heelsplitter 1880 -PRE X Very Low E E
S1 G1 Catawba and Pee Dee drainages in Union County (endemic to this area and adjacent South
Carolina)
Triaenodes marginatus 5 a triaenode caddisfly 1990 -02 -27 E Medium SR
S3 G5 Stewart Creek (Mecklenburg), Long Creek (Gaston), Whiteoak Creek (Polk); Lumber River
(Robeson), UT Hitchcock Creek (Richmond), Mill Creek (Moore)
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
❑ Yes ® No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
No essential fish habitat located at project site. http / /www. habitat. noaa. gov / protection /efh /habitatmapper.htm1
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?
Via HPOWEB GIS SERVICE: No cultural ocurrences (structures) on subject property. MK1551/MK1535 PT Christenbury
store and house are located on Hwy 21 approx 1500' east. Proposed development would have no effect.
Page 10 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA- designated 100 -year floodplain?
❑ Yes ® No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?
Wendell Overby
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
1/18/12
Date
Applican gent's Signature
(Agent's signature is valid onItAf an authorization letter from the applicant
is provided.)
Page 11 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

Name:
Soil & Environmental Consultants, PA
11010 Raven Ridge Road • Raleigh, North Carolina 27614 • Phone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]
www SandEC.eom
AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
All Blanks To Be Filled In By The Current Landowner
J�a►� w 6. JAQQEtI
Address: $11 {ZOM00 ti � 0/D C,t1A1ZL0TIE , ►�C 287-03
Phone;
Project Name /Description D<<—L LPtkE 1--1 -C
Date:
The Department of the Army
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402
Attu: Steve Kichefski
Field Office: Asheville
Re: Wetlands Related Consulting and Permitting
To Whom It May Concern:
I, the current property owner, hereby designate and authorize Soil & Environmental Consultants, Inc. to
act in my behalf as my agent in the processing of permit applications, to furnish upon request
supplemental information in support of applications, etc. from this day forward. The 11"M day of
,AwaozY 2012- .
This notification supersedes any previous correspondence concerning the agent for this project
NOTICE. This authorization, for liability and professional courtesy reasons, is valid only for
government officials to enter the property when accompanied by S &EC staff. You should call S &EC
to arrange a site meeting prior to visiting the site.
j E,r.►tnnj S. j AaR t t
Print Property Owner's Name Property Owner's Signature
-cc: Ms. Karen Higgins cc Mr. Wendell Overby
NCDENR — DWQ Soil & Environmental Consultants, PA.
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, NC 27604

osstem
PROGRAM
December 6, 2011
Jonathan, Jarrett
817 Romany Road
Charlotte, NC 28203 Expiration of Acceptance: June 5, 2012
Project: Carolina Golf Lodge County: Mecklenburg
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) is willing to accept
payment for compensatory mitigation for impacts associated with the above referenced project as indicated in the table below. Please
note that this decision does not assure that participation in the NCEEP will be approved by the permit issuing agencies as mitigation
for project impacts. It is the responsibility of the applicant to contact these agencies to determine if payment to the NCEEP will be
approved. You must also comply with all other state federal or local governmentbermits regulations or authorizations associated
with the oroposed activity including SL 2009 -337• An Act to Promote the Use of Compensatory Mitigation Banks as amended by
S.L. 2011 -343.
This acceptance is valid for six months from the date of this letter and is not transferable. If we have not received a copy of the
issued 404 Permit/401 Certification/CAMA permit within this time frame, this acceptance will expire. It is the applicant's
responsibility to send copies of the permits to NCEEP. Once NCEEP receives a copy of the permit(s) an invoice will be issued based
on the required mitigation in that permit and payment must be made prior to conducting the authorized work. The amount of the In
Lieu Fee to be paid to NCEEP by an applicant is calculated based upon the Fee Schedule and policies listed at www.nceep.net.
Based on the information supplied by you in your request to use the NCEEP, the impacts that may require compensatory mitigation are
summarized in the following table. The amount of mitigation required for this-impact is determined by permitting agencies.
Impact
River
Basin
CU
Location
Stream (feet)
Wetlands (acres)
Buffer I
(Sq. Ft.)
Buffer II
(Sq. Ft.)
Cold
Cool
Warm
Ri arian
Non -Ri arian
Coastal Marsh
Catawba
03050103*
0
0
0
0738
0
0
0
0
*Mitigation credit will be Provided in the Catawba 03050103 Expanded Service Area Upon receipt of payment, EEP will take
responsibility for providing the compensatory mitigation. The mitigation will be performed in accordance with the N.C. Department
of Environment and Natural Resources' Ecosystem Enhancement Program In -Lieu Fee Instrument dated July 28, 2010.
Thank you for your interest in the NCEEP. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Kelly Williams at
(919) 716 -1921.
Sincerely,
Mic 1 Ellison a
Deputy Director
cc: Karen Higgins, NCDWQ Wetlands /401 Unit
Steve Kichefski, USACE - Asheville
Alan Johnson, NCDWQ - Mooresville
File
R�.stortt✓t9... ... Pro" ow State
'FMWA
RM—WR
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program, 1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1652,/ 919- 715 -0476 / www.nceep.net

AM-
WOW
j j V, 's" A
.' �
� s
� �''� .mow! -•eA �
" �►ay +`t
"
`Y' d
gF
I4 �

uo3dno_4a3uapsoaa #Am
ISOUSZS'YOL xo!
E002'S2S'YOL au04d
L1282 ]N 1401JU43
pooa uo }uJJ3 N -009
paieaodio:)ul
Man
IDN3IDS539
ZVLV-
N0I1V3Nn3a aNOd /aNVI13M HIM
Aa :Ha
0
NVId 311S AEVNIW1�13bd
;Oefoad
:'ON upo11n8
:a ;ea
03uoiosoo0
VNIIOUVO HIHON 6 3110111VHO
:81BOS
}oa
6ulnneaa
3JaO-i J- 00 VNII0IJ 3 : ;Oofoad
uo3dno_4a3uapsoaa #Am
ISOUSZS'YOL xo!
E002'S2S'YOL au04d
L1282 ]N 1401JU43
pooa uo }uJJ3 N -009
paieaodio:)ul
Man
IDN3IDS539

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: CIr.)oV L✓iNe City /County: Ctl�r2bo -17 Sampling Date: /®-Z/
Applicant/Owner. Jo-n1 JR226-r-r State: NL Sampling Point: Oi ° ®8
Investigator(s): 0V &z r,4y Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc,): D SieP6- Local relief (concave, convex, none): Co" CelVI Slope ( %). 0-f
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): Lat: 3.5. 28 7 IF 75' Long: dU,By! 739 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Gtic(i $rrtr`trrt NWI classification:.
Are climatic ! hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes V No (if no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes V No
Are Vegetation , Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ✓ No ✓
within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ✓ No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Welland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required, check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (86)
_ Surface Water (Al)
_ Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2)1
_ Marl Deposits (1315) (LRR U)
V� Drainage Patterns (810)
_✓ Saturation (A3)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor -(C1)
_ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
_ Water Marks (81)
_✓ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
_ Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (82)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (04)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (83)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Aigal Mat or Crust (134)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Geomorphic Position (02)
_ Iron Deposits (B5)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Shallow Aquitard (D$)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
FAC- Neutral Test (135)
Water- Stained Leaves (139)
_ Sphagnum moss (138) (LRR T, U)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes ✓
No Depth (inches): Z
Water Table Present? Yes ✓
Na Depth (inches): 0-/6
1/
Saturation Present? Yes
No Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring Well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: Zo ) % Cover Soecies? Status
1, Mr-
2. A/YSsq SY4vn -rtcA
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
o?o = Total Cover
50% of total cover: YU 20% of total cover:
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ZO/ )
1. ALUUS Sc-90- 41.-74 /o Y
2. W-US 740m stNENsC S Y
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
!s = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 7.a 20% of total cover: 3
Herb Stratum (Plot size: �� )
1. I+nPA'71ENS c4- 0C-,✓s15 /S Y
2. Ly ConNS V+261A, S Y oaL
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
Zo = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 10 20% of total cover: q
Sampling Point: 06 `Z 9
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 7 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 7 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: /�� (AB)
Prevaience inaex worksneet:
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x2=
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x 4 =
UPL species
x5=
Column Totals:
(A) (B)
Prevalence Index = WA =
v/ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
7 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is 153.01
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling /Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: Zt?' )
1, s,.,tuax Ro-rvA+A+�oL;a 3 `( F�c
2.
3.
4.
5• Hydrophytic
3 = Total Cover Vegetation
50% of total cover: �`' 20% of total cover:
G Present?
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below)
Yes ✓ No
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region -Version 2.0

SOIL -Sampling Point: Zb -z?
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of Indicators.)
Depth Matrix
Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) %
Color (moist) % Tvoel LOC2
Texture Remarks
0- /6 /Vyx S/2 /ou
'Type: C= Concentration, D= Depletion, RM= Reduced Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains.
2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U) _ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
_ Histic Fpipedon (A2)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O)
_ Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
_✓ Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20)
_ Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
(MLRA 1536)
_ 5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Red Parent Material (TF2)
_ Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
_ Redox Depressions (178)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
_ Marl (F10) (LRR U)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
_ Umbric Surface (1713) (LRR P, T, U)
wetland hydrology must be present,
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)
_ Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151)
unless disturbed or problematic.
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 1506)
_ Sandy Redox (85)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
_ Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydric Sol] Present? Yes No
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: CI N O y 10f ry e
ApplicantlOwner. Joe/ J.A imr-7 9
Investigator(s): 0VG Z 6 y
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc,): FLa?U PLO"
Subregion (LRR or MLRA):
Soil Map Unit Name: kilo -RSkttm
Are climatic ! hydrologic conditions on the site typici
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology _
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology _
City /County: i4lRRLp'r7E Sampling Date: /0-2/
State: tic Sampling Point: /10
Section, Township, Range:
Local relief (concave, convex, none): /" `r Slope ( %): O `-S
_ Lat: 35. 2878.56 Long: 6 - 846 Datum:
NWI classification:
it for this time of year? Yes ✓ No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No
naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes `�° No within a Wetland? Yes � No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is reouired: check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (66)
_ Surface Water (Al)
_ Aquatic Fauna (B13)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (88)
_ High Water Table (A2)1
_ Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
�!' Drainage Patterns (610)
Saturation (A3)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
_ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
_ Water Marks (131)
_vf' Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
_ Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (62)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (04)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (B3)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat or Crust (84)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7) .
_ Geomorphic Position (02)
_ iron Deposits (135)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Shallow Aquitard (133)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (67)
FAC- Neutral Test (DS)
Water - Stained leaves (69)
_ Sphagnum moss (138) (LRR T, U)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes
No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes ✓
No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes
No Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point:
��
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )
% Cover
ecies? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1. ULMMS 4r4,fA#CA1VR
30
it i -4C IV
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
2. FAAX1,4 1 P&O -CV1_ IlAr-a1[-4
ZS
Y r&W
Y lZ5,4G
3. L /121paEw020r/ Ye. /12 /Fe -M,4
Zo
Y rAc.
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 9 (B)
4.
5.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
✓ 1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
_ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
6.
7•
Percent of Dominant Species
5.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: ��� (AB)
6.
50% of total cover: ZO
20% of total cover: 8
7
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
8
75 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: '3-7
20% of total cover: 15
FACW species x2=
Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 3a" )
FAC species x 3 =
1. /YYSS'
lS
Y lZ5,4G
FACU species x4=
UPL species X5=
Column Totals: (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
2. ALsvkf S644a L.f 7A /S' VI ENV
3. L16as-tevA4 sl"ewse' /O y FAG
-
4
5.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
✓ 1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
_ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
6.
7•
8
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
' O = Total Cover
50% of total cover: ZO
20% of total cover: 8
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
1. 50r->? YtA'0m4 CY4�1 -041 to
35
Y FACW
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
2. AO S l n6 A441'rR 1.S
'10
y ®sL
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
3'
4.
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling /Shrub -Woody plants, excluding vines, less
5
6.
7,
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
Herb -All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, regardless
8•
9.
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vine -All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
10.
11.
height.
12.
`/S = Total Cover
50% of total cover: Z2 20% of total cover:
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: iV )
1. 5m4 c dtX Rtnun'ni t sez fG Y Fro r-
2.
3.
4.
5. Hydrophytic
y� = Total Cover Vegetation
50% of total cover: Zo 20% of total cover.
8 Present? Yes No
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below)
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region -Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: /° -z�
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix
Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) %
Color (moist) °k Twe Loc
Texture Remarks
I0'/X 3/3 /00
5c�
/o Y2 y %? 7s
We S/i 2S C M
Scc.
/0y)z 5/y 70
I's yx 4A, 30 G w�
SG
Type: C= Concentration, D= Depletion, RM= Reduced Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains.
2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
_ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O)
_ Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20)
_ Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
(MLRA 153B)
_ 5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Red Parent Material (TF2)
_ Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
_ Marl (F10) (LRR U)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T) 31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
wetland hydrology must be present,
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)
_ Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151)
unless disturbed or problematic.
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 1506)
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1719) (MLRA 149A)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) "(MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
_ Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: c/,vo Y 1'e`67 City /County: C,- r-tR.1,o77E Sampling Date-
Applicant/Owner: juri itlenG -"i9 State: "rte Sampling Point: 3/ -311
Investigator(s): 0Vt;?43 Y Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): HERO $40/' E Local relief (concave, convex, none): C- J"I"O' Slope ( %). /%'S
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): Lat: 35, 2V-)767 Long: 9-0-945579- Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: 6VOTL`Aly1r+. NWI ciassification:
Are climatic! hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ✓ No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (if needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site reap showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ✓ No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ✓ No
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Surface Water (Al) _
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2) _
Mari Deposits (1315) (LRR U)
_ Drainage Patterns (610)
Saturation (A3) _
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
_ Moss Trim Lines (616)
_ Water Marks (81) _
Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
_ Dry - Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (132) _
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Crayfish Burrows (CS)
_ Drift Deposits (133) _
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (134) _
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Geomorphic Position (02)
_ Iron Deposits (B5) _
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Shallow Aquitard (133)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
✓ FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Water - Stained Leaves (69)
_ Sphagnum moss (138) (LRR T, U)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes ✓ No
Depth (inches): I �
Water Table Present? Yes ✓ No
Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes ✓ No
Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ✓ No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
1.E n IC u rQa✓,�
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
50% of total cover: 5
Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30�
1. ILEX op".4 .
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Sampling Point: 3 /- 3'f
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Cover c e ? Sat
Number of Dominant Species
S
Y rAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
(A)
Total Number of Dominant
'
Species Across All Strata:
(B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
/OU
(A(B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
OBL species
Multiply by:
x 1 =
/0 = Total Cover
20% of total cover: Z
FACW species
x2=
_
FAC species
x3=
-3 i
FACU species
UPL species
x 4 =
x 5 =
Column Totals:
(A)
(B)
7 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 3,5' 20% of total cover: / `!
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 3o'
1 800- Hrr16'0 4 "t l r' ORUe- A 15 Y
2
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 -Prevalence Index is <_3.0'
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
FACW be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
If = Total Cover
50% cf total cover: 71S _ 20% of total cover: 3
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1. "r4(ci,! GA JHp�)NIEA /D
2. PArL-7116N0 ct SS kt qutw t�uEFoN N ✓`
3.
4.
D. Hydrophytic
15' = Total Cover Vegetation
50% of total cover: '7,5' 20% of total cover: 3 Present?
list morphological adaptations below).
Y 7hc
y Mr-
Tree - Woody plants, excluding nines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling /Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non - woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vine -All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
(If
Yes ✓ No
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region -Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point. 31-311
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix
Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) %
Color (moist) % Type Loc
Texture Remarks
0-3 /oy(L 3/2- /ov
St
3 -lG /Dye 10/2 70
7.5y2 64 30 c >"
SG
'Type: C= Concentration, D= Depletion, RM= Reduced Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains.
2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
_ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O)
_ Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
✓Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20)
_ Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
(MLRA 153B) -
_ 5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Red Parent Material (TF2)
_ Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
_ Marl (F10) (LRR U)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (All)
_ Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T)
31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_ Coast Praine Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
wetland hydrology must be present,
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)
_ Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151)
unless disturbed or problematic.
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Reduced Vertic (1`18) (MLRA 150A, 1506)
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (M LRA
1149A, 153C, 153D)
_ Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region —Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Project/Site: Ciovu y -+#J J City /County: CefA- r, " -r aE Sampling Date: 10- 2J-11
Applicant/Owner. Jot+ U-Av -&611 State: NC Sampling Point: Z13-SG
Investigator(s): Oy Cmay Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Q4 pov4D Local relief (concave, convex, none): Gp"JCrivt� Slope ( %): D"
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): Lat: 35, Z g 5,453 Long: 604>1143 / 9 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: LVEXL S-1 &rw NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes '� No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ✓ No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
- SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ✓ No
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes ✓ No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
'Surface Water (A1)
_ True Aquatic Plants (1314)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138) '
_ High Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
_ Drainage Patterns (610)
_ Saturation (A3)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
_ Water Marks (61)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (62)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ ✓Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (63)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (64)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_ Iron Deposits (135)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
_✓ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
_ Water- Stained Leaves (139)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
_ Aquatic Fauna (1313)
✓ FAC- Neutral Test (135)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes ✓ No
Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes ✓ No
Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes ✓ No
Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont— Interim Version

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: 93 --510
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Interim Version
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 3v )
% Cover
Species? Status
umber of Dominant Species
1. S/fit -�K nr � G 17,4
$
Y 0 Si- di-
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: s (A)
2. LleAutO/�-MIiA�rt.. sTyr2� <lFLuA
8
Y F�4C.
Total Number of Dominant
6
3•
Species Across All Strata: (B)
4.
5.
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
6.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7
8
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
1L
= Total Cover
OBL species x 1 =
Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30
)
FACW species x 2 =
1. /fit&& Iv'trtd -ue&
fS
y FAC
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
2.
3.
UPL species x 5 =
4.
Column Totals: (A) (B)
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A =
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9.
3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
10
16:
_
_ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
30
= Total Cover
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
1. L6C- X14 opyZo "aC5
70
`( r6ca/
- 'Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
2. 3U, C y4 Cffis4 S W
240
`(' r4ew
1,
3. SGi 1" u5 f��y
i5
N d8�
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
5.
6
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
7.
height.
8.
Sapling /Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
9•
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
10.
Herb - All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, regardless
11
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
12.
9S
=Total Cover
Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
)
height.
1.
2.
3.
4.
Hydrophytic
5
Vegetation
kl/
6,
Present? Yes No
= Total Cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Interim Version

SOIL Sampling Point: '�"3 ' 5 (4
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type Loc Texture Remarks
Sy s/t 85- 7 -SY9 s�4 /S C M SC
RM= Reduced Matrix. MS= Masked Sand Grains.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol (Al)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soi
Dark Surface (S7)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
✓ Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Redox Dark Surface (176)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1719)
(MLRA 136, 147)
Red Parent Material (TF2)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ✓ No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project(Site: e!n/OY t. J1Vd City /County: LV�7E Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner. JutJ JTM a'f State: "� � Sampling Point: �G –2 4
Investigator(s): l)vE12eY Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hill slope, terrace, etc): Fcay '^/ Local relief (concave, convex, none): fi-4-r Slope ( %). 0
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): Let: 7528-b731 Long: 80, 9`I7VD& Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification:
Are climatic ! hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ✓ No (if no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are' Normal Circumstances" present? Yes `✓ No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (if needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ✓ No
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ✓ No ✓
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes -' No within a Wetland? Yes No
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
_ Surface Water (A1)
_ Aquatic Fauna (B33)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (88)
_ High Water Table (A2)'
„W,W„ Marl Deposits ;(B15) (LRR U)
✓Drainage Patterns (1310)
_✓ Saturation (A3)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
_ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
_ Water Marks (81)
_✓ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
_ Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (132)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (83)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (Cg)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (64)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Geomorphic Position (02)
_ Iron Deposits (B5)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Shallow Agviitard (D3)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
^_
— FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Water-Stained Leaves (139)
___, Sphagnum moss (138) (LRR T, U)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes
✓ No Depth (inches): f ,r
Water Table Present? Yes
`� No Depth (inches): 0- Z ••
Saturation Present? Yes
✓ No Depth (inches):
'Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes '✓ No
Includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region – Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
1. k142U10A-rA"m -n_ s- rYr,/tc,FLyAr
Absolute
%Cover
30
Dominant Indicator
ecie v Sta us
yr rAC
2.
S441,0(
Ni G-ra,4
30
-_ 0134
3.
ACEP-
t?vd3,7td -M
/0
� Fi4C
4.
(A) (B)
5.
5.
7
B.
50% of total cover:
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30'
1. AL)JN f SCQ.rtv1(,61A
70 = Total Cover
3S 20% of total cover:
)
35 Y r/+c PV
2
MSSR
SYLVA- 1 eA
710
Y F *c
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
5S =Total Cover
50% of total cover: 27 20% of total cover: 1
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1. (iw*(bnf2(A G.YE. //V0atCA $b
2. _SAyvkai4rwf 2T
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10
Sampling Point: 01-08'
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: g (B)
Percent of Dominant Species 67 .5,
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x4=
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals:
(A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A=
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Z7 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is -<3.0'
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
y F>}CW be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
i Fi4cvd Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling /Shrub -Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non - woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
11. height.
12.
75 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 37 20% of total cover: 15*
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1. Sono( -AX AOTLovqfftirai4 IS v
2.
3.
4.
5. Hydrophytic
is =Total Cover Vegetation
50% of total cover. _7­5 20 °k of total cover: 3 Present? _
Remarks: (if observed, list morphological adaptations below)
Yes ✓ No
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region -Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: 01–OF
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the Indicator or confirm the absence of Indicators.)
Depth Matrix
Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) %
Color (moist) % Twe Loc
Texture Remarks
0-2 10YR.Y /z /p -D
SGG
2- 12 2.5Y 51Z 90
g5Tfz T/; zo
SLL
Irl V
7.57il °rlb 7_0 G Al
.SG
7.5 Y y1S t5* c in
'Type: C= Concentration, D= Depletion, RM= Reduced Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains.
21-ocation: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs,
unless othervuise noted.)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
_ Histosol (A1)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U) _ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O)
_ Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20)
_ Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
(MLRA 1536) -
— 5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Red Parent Material (TF2)
_ Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
_ Marl (F10) (LRR U)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T) 31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
wetland hydrology must be present,
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)
_ Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151)
unless disturbed or problematic.
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 1506)
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
_ Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
/
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
�1
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region –Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Project/Site: CANNY G4-�VF% City /County: CA" ItRw-t'16- Sampling Date: )0-Z /-71
Applicant/Owner: 400 J�Z46 T1 State: JVc Sampling Point: /00- /10
Investigator(s): C>yew0 Y Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): mo po""0 Local relief (concave, convex, none): cone c�v� Slope ( %): 0-3
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): Lat 35, y 0714 Long: -'9' gyS5641 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: W612s"RM NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ✓ No (If no, explain in Remarks )
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ✓ No _
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ✓ No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes "' No within a Wetland? Yes ✓ No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes V No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (66)
_ Surface Water (A1)
_ True Aquatic Plants (614)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (68)
_ High Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
_ Drainage Patterns (1310)
Saturation (A3)
_✓ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
_ Water Marks (131)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (132)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
`Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (63)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (134)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_ Iron Deposits (135)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
_✓ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
✓ Water- Stained Leaves (B9)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
_ Aquatic Fauna (B13)
FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
✓ Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
`i Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes ✓ No
Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont- Interim Version

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point: 100-11
3 °
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Tree
Stratum (Plot size: )
% Cover
Species?
Status
Number of Dominant Species
6
1.
Smwx M1 6A.4
Z a
y
051-
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
9.
(A)
2.
ACEA 1ZVt3fZt1m
zv
Y
r-
r4-Total
3v �
= Total Cover
3.
0uC -4&UJ f tl &t -Gas
/O
-
Y
fky
Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
19
(B)
4.
L1c7y1011&;15*f7L - 51YRACrFL,&A
N
r4 r-
3
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4•
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Percent of Dominant Species
5.
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
76'
(A/B)
6.
8.
Sapling /Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
9•
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7
8
Herb - All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, regardless
11
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 It tall.
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
12.
-3,
= Total Cover
OBL species x 1 =
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 3 ��
)
Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
)
!S �( SAG
FACW species x 2 =
1.
&A- CCHAit1S 1044p4lrok.)A
IS
Y
rft
FAC species x3=
2.
5.
Vegetation
'�
FACU species x4=
Present? Yes No
3,
P$ = Total Cover
UPL species x 5 =
4.
Column Totals: (A)
(B)
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A =
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9.
3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
10.
15
_ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
3v �
= Total Cover
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
Y�
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation ' (Explain)
1 CAAE)( Sri
_
2•'LYCUPUS Vt26sw1cIAS
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
3
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4•
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
5.
6
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
7.
height.
8.
Sapling /Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
9•
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
10.
Herb - All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, regardless
11
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 It tall.
12.
qV = Total Cover
Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 3 ��
)
height.
1. Smit,Ax t2V ?ut�Or(�tr/1
!S �( SAG
2.
3.
4.
Hydrophytic
5.
Vegetation
'�
6.
Present? Yes No
P$ = Total Cover
or on a separate
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Interim Version

SOIL Sampling Point: X00 -1/0
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type To c' Texture Remarks
0-/2. 5 Y 6/Z, sw 5 y2 5/4, tq C eel SC a
'Type: C= Concentration, D =De letion, RM= Reduced Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
Histosol (Al)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
Dark Surface (S7)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Matrix (173)
_ Redox Dark Surface (176)
Depleted Dark Surface (177)
Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1719) (MLRA 148)
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
Red Parent Material (TF2)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes / No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: ��j j f
Project/Site: G>nroy L.4t4g
Latitude: 3S.25,4oZ8
Evaluator: OVER 13 y
County: MrcxurmsVR..&
Longitude: 80. &'!N`t`%2
Total Points:
Steam is at least intermittent
Stream Determination (circle one)
Other PCPAJ *4
if _ : 3
19 or perennial if _ 30* ZD
Ephemeral Perennial
e.g. Quad Name:
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = g•S )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1 a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
Q>
1
2
3
3. In- channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple-pool sequence
0
1
©
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
0.5
2
3
5. Active /relict floodplain
V
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
0.5
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 Other = 0
2
3
9. Grade control
0
is o ob a4.4 t d
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No =®
Yes = 3
" artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = 5.5 )
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
Q
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
®
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
m
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
Qrj
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
m
1.5
17: Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No =
Yes = 3
G. Biology (Subtotal = (0 )
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
®
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
m
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
m
1
2
3
22. Fish
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
®
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
®
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
®
0.5 _
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 Other = 0
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes: o r.,. S irc FL AG o4 -ro
is o ob a4.4 t d
Sketch:

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: LD -2f -I
Project/Site: CmrVY LAyS
Latitude:
Evaluator: l�VL(L�Y
County:.MC-C �NbvPh-
Longitude: So, 811/4, 733
Total Points:
Stream Determination (circle one)
Other PC -wt7A "
Stream is at least intermittent if _> Igor perennial if 2:30* Z ?• S
Ephemeral mi en Perennial
e.g. Quad Name:
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal= j Z-5--)
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
,a, Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
d
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
®
3
3. In- channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple-pool sequence
0
d
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
®
1
2
3
5. Active /relict floodplain
0
1
G
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
®
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
m
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
®
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
(D
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No =
Yes = 3
artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hvdroloav (Subtotal = 4 )
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
a
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
®
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
®
1
0.5
0
15:'Sediment on plants or debris
'0
0
1 1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
1 Yes =
U. blolow (Subtotal = V )
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
®
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
4
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
®
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22. Fish
4
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
®
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 Other = 0
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes: FLA /Q
Sketch:

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: /U -Z/ -/1
Project/Site: GINbY 1jfMff
Latitude: a5, Zg76j.4
Evaluator:
Count:
Longitude: n BS0ca$Y S5y
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent
Stream Determination (circle one)
Other DCF-1-rA
if ? 19 or perennial if 2:30* Z?
Ephemeral ermi en Perennial
e.g. Quad Name:
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = ['$ )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
0
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
®
3
3. In- channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple-pool se uence
0
1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
0.5
2
3
5. Active /relict floodplain
0
1
®
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
®
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
®
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
a
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = 4 )
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
Q
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
3
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
0
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
1
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
17: Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes =(9
C. Biology (Subtotal = 5
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
®
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
®
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3-
21. Aquatic Mollusks
m
1
2
3
22. Fish
®
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
Q
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
®
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
®
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
-
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 Other = 0
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes: FI-Ad ;li 30 5"IaEw+K
Sketch:

USACE AID# DWQ # Site # (indicate on attached map)
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET -
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: JorJ J! 94?-9 TT 2. Evaluator's name: b VER6y
3. Date of evaluation: io- Z.!- It 4. Time of"evaluation: Noon
5. Name of stream: U7 12 ww caffK 6. River basin: C474 WSA
7. Approximate drainage area: 3Z 4e- 8. Stream order. /
9. Length of reach evaluated: '.2oo' 10. County: M6GKlzAl S are:
11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees. 12. Subdivision name (if airy):
Latitude (ex. 34.872312): 35. Z" o ZS Longitude (ex. - 77.556611): $0. 84/11 717-_
Method location determined (circle): GPS Topo Sheet Ortho (Aerial) Photo /GIS Other GIS Other Vo FT W*124
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
Fc.+6 04
14. Proposed channel work (if any):
15. Recent weather conditions: Su r N Y
16. Site conditions at time of visit: Fo Q F S?ED
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? <223� NO If yes, estimate the water surface area: 7AC
19: Does channel appear on USGS quad map? tEE3� NO 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? 12) NO
21. Estimated watershed land use: Sri % Residential % Commercial % Industrial % Agricultural
SD % Forested _% Cleared / Logged _% Other ( )
i
22. Bankfull width: g� 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): S-
24. Channel slope down center of stream: Flat (0 to 2 %) _Gentle (2 to 4 %) ✓ Moderate (4 to 10 0/6) _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): AV 5:Z Comments:
Evaluator's Signature lam/ Date /0 - 21- //
This channel evaluation form is inter d to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919- 876 -8441 x 26.

USACE AID# DWQ # Site # (indicate on attached map) I
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET ,
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: JUN J0-JzQE7T 2. Evaluator's name: &VL't4sY
3. Date of evaluation: 10 - 2!- It
5. Name of stream: U7 /Aw/^/ G[,C-E!C
7. Approximate drainage area: 37 .¢c
9. Length of reach evaluated: ~ /DD'
11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees.
4. Time of *evaluation: / #0^1
6. River basin: e-"14 "A
8. Stream order:
10. County: /M EZtL L &-a V0,
12. Subdivision name (if any):
Latitude (ex. 34.872312): 35. 7-9714Z Longitude (ex. - 77.556611): 80. &Y4 73 3
Method location determined (circle): GPS Topo Sheet Ortho (Aerial) Photo /GIS Other GIS <3EEh Se F-r wA26
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
FLi4G l8 W6t� o- 1,410E
14. Proposed channel work (if any):.
15. Recent weather conditions: SOS Y
16. Site conditions at time of visit: F►R.Es7Eo
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 -M
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? � NO 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? 10 NO
21. Estimated watershed land use: S° % Residential _% Commercial % Industrial _% Agricultural
So % Forested _% Cleared / Logged °/a Other (
22. Bank fall width: 3- Iff 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): .
24. Channel slope down center of stream Flat (0 to 2 %) !! Gentle (2 to 4 0/6) Moderate (4 to 10 %) _Steep ( >10 1/o)
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): 5-0-5- Comments:
Evaluator's Signature Date 1!7-21-11
This channel evaluation form is inten)fd to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the Xnited 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.

I' USACE AID# DWQ # Site # (indicate an attached map)
M STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET -
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: JcrJ J,4X2E T7 2. Evaluator's name: e1/G�4y
3. Date of evaluation: le Mal' /I
5. Name of stream: Wr Jk wliJ CF- 661''
7. Approximate drainage area: .Li
9. Length of reach evaluated: �fUd
11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees.
4. Time of evaluation: o?,orn
6. River basin: C.9 74.4, ',4
8. Stream order: IS7
10. County:_ I1?Ccr/,.r3c� ;Z G-
12. Subdivision name (if any):
Latitude (ex. 34.872312): 3'5, 29'7611 Longitude (ex. — 77.556611): 90, 4 35-6 Method location determined (circle): GPS Topo Sheet Ortho (Aerial) Photo /GIS Other GIS t ScF7wrt
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying streams) location):
rZ46 #
14. Proposed channel work (if any):
15. Recent weather conditions: 60"'Ny
16. Site conditions at time of visit f''0I2ES yGD
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? CZ NO If yes, estimate the water surface area:
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES (ED 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES CEDD
21. Estimated watershed land use: LP % Residential r % Commercial _% Industrial _% Agricultural
5a %Forested Cleared / Logged % Other ( )
22. Bankfull width. r 23. Bank height (from bed to top ofbank):
24. Channel slope down center of stream: Flat (0 to 2 %) —!L/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): .5y. S Comments:
Evaluator's Signature W v Date /a
This channel evaluation form is in ded to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by th United States Army Corps of Engineers to ' make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality.. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919 - 876 -8441 x 26.

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
�G�G {{ 3v S�EAwt
$ 2
:o ,1
��':. '�resen�Q= o��Io�;�enSisiEn�C.,' no���.�e � �X
'�•:;�,�:�:� � �����. � �ta�i:Q4���' �'o��'��g �x,�`— '�.'�`"i�.c{� �`S
-
�r ,rc,:�t
;��� -y - x •° ; .
, "' �.."' �" � -�sw
�� � .� ix '�', +emu• d". :�y: 'R::i'" w
�aa.� �
+'ir t. 3+�;x� �-
INS
��14–
arxrA3sr
��� ' ��x.�� �tle�ee�r ,��nxn_��•
"#iia4. 4 —yay
=o����Em�e�. �zfia� :e _ -
�-'..
�=����� �,
_5C
nM
,•
�
tix'�s - r= Ar
o-
«_�'
mks_ - tre�imeunna__s =
a 'a._ - w : i'Y +h - �'- ;3 ��_-- �'�i,._'� 5,- �a��k'f.>�'��Ci_L' Y.`�vx!. • , > t = ? " ,.,LL_1�� _$x3
NEW �
' =-
F°''3'kv9..r�" >.
j��,�vx, °��"n�+•.—r -'s�- hK' Z
= :�'�ri�'�•? v3+� -` _ � #r'���
F-11-311
'��
K TM ��•
. '�i� �'=,, _ _
Op. 1001-NOt
S•p3��r�_�i}Yp �pj''�^ 'j., 'S�,ySS.�` J/Y,� � �r k - r i
Fvc� � _. A`J:aµ- aPizS+vL'��K- .yS_I.LLi'- •�N..�'.� ^'_ "��' �._• +YI.'�' O- .Es'�' _ - � k
- X -
3 i� {������_ - '�
� ii _
tau �Y --� �j •,�
''YY!- .R, ��x� __ "S'
• �3 ,J�•:_ay.:(r'�a.L- 'R`p
- v � p� � x
_
����� },`
� ��_!.����x.f�✓:v�,�JCa1.��T4pf.yc�v iY p '-i-yJ it� r
s_LS�_-
���-
�
Z�'SiG
n'-
/
y (i .; = "�_ '" '� _ � �£- � x r� �� � " �� fi�".���'v� � � 'sri',
03Ry g�Z.xr.liE(:�tt7l111 m
,�:T, '6�+E= i"
"'+� `� '•
7j O' "„1 " .U;`�
a ��ry4?
�y - x:i'a•,: x''> � /,,q�-ry�t�Sr`"�'- .-- .u�-]FF�'3r x L� %xl� ; ���� .j���'"'�`"w+:�:'��.*7�'�'.� �_
'�'�X- a���Y .n'�l`„'�.e�'.�.J:L,+�"+ar',aa� rP+LLrY+T�.1 +f:�4�GU�L%� �•��"�Tl%: a°7�v�Iw.r`v is.
_ -- _ '3+ C
_ _- �' ,5, - /I!
_ � �v! Y
�._'x -��
li.C�E
-� TES
l•
�ma% �'
v:..+%A'w1 ' ' �j ' '
3L • "Ya2' •
"Ei L
s5z'.:><.iYD^ -. ' y:i.
-any
_�E'sI-aS• i y" vr q 'Oip pF.id" , .x,1�'e''^y1i�'.,,` � . .i ♦ '!tn ✓ux• -�
f' 1 ry
.^• x�'N.ix �
ON
�- 7= il Ilff S
"'��s�i�' ��'�3L711117,�. aM
�SWX"��C.1J.L. h•S•' •
�
- '
ux
-- j{�.1�111i11ir:G„�
MR =117.
..x n
� _
an -
u
'fix: 'i• ' .�xiFR°MXYY `�1��'�x'iS:�A°"�J":}y'M1.-G�v iii�� `a.'��`..: Mka,.
� ''y �
vy ,.t".C'_ �i �.e• Y Ji J �� 4
�.�iY.rM
;' '.�12�
_ '"5:x~WxJ1LYL41YLV5, fA.
5 jV iii�iS
aa,1
M-0
- - _
_ lII__ V irlarP.3
_
.0 -Y '+BCieii ."5f•'.'�'v" �'a1`xv:..i�!!s�r2�'--- �:,�xv'" �°.:y' '
-'*�, -��
�
- �
-
"ice—'•
� -
N x
,k
�:1].p1_��'�'r ;
_
G
1 IN'
�
0
­_E x�-y -` nY x.',�'xx.�*,^✓s,'�. h ,... :�xx z „o,«.....»�>, �. �: ���" u .x� 4` '�
x '�. ,FUY� ;- V
NUN 'R -y
�;yx.
'�� _
'{ rJ, -�•,
.
v�d x
."'"'_
- nl:tS'J'� i'1Vf3.Ve:� ,.,,�.,r.✓! -x+'�: ,�: ',�, =,
3Y
K
r
,•'fix
O
�,xx � �yY�»5�'a/:�;'�kp:;�,}�'xxxyT n,rn� x..x.- x.7'� .�' _ _ =..,x, �, ';�- • ,�
A-M
•- ' 'n
wo Ob ME
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
�G�G {{ 3v S�EAwt
$ 2

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): Cindy Lane- 01 -08; 10 -24;
26 -29; 31 -34
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
State:NC County /parish/borough: Meck City: Charlotte
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 35.2876030:f% Long. 80.844481° .
I Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: UT Irwin Creek
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: Catawba River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 03050103
0 Check if map /diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is /are available upon request.
Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc...) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
ID Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
Q Field Determination. Date(s): .
SECTION 11: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There ri, s "navigable waters of the U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review area. [Required]
Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There„ ci_hi "waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply): t
Q TNWs, including territorial seas
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
Relatively permanent waterS2 (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
. Non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
] Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non - wetland waters: --1000 linear feet: 4 width (ft) and/or .09 acres.
Wetlands: .23 acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: 19$= a''QQneali`n t Manun�
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
2. Non - regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable):3
Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain:
1 Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
2 For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year -round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally"
(e.g., typically 3 months).
3 Supporting documentation is presented in Section III.F.

SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete
Section III.A.1 and Section III.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections III.A.1 and 2
and Section III.D.l.; otherwise, see Section III.B below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent ":
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Itapawoshave been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non - navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year -round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year -round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section III.D.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section III.D.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law. >
If the waterbody4 is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section III.B.1 for
the tributary, Section III.B.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section III.B.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both ofsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section III.0 below.
1. Characteristics of non -TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: PiZ t
r
Drainage area: '� k ul
Average annual rainfall: inches
Average annual snowfall: inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
❑ Tributary flows directly into TNW.
E] Tributary flows through -' c Jrj C tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are PSc- liEist river miles from TNW.
Project waters are st river miles from RPW.
MMWO�
Project waters are P�c1cListi aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are Eck s °ist aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNW5:
Tributary stream order, if known:
° Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and
West.
5 Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.

(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apply):
Tributary is: ❑ Natural
❑ Artificial (man- made). Explain:
❑ Manipulated (man- altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: feet
Average depth: feet _
Average side slopes: )SMiii.
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
❑ Silts ❑ Sands ❑ Concrete
❑ Cobbles ❑ Gravel ❑ Muck
❑ Bedrock ❑ Vegetation. Type /% cover:
❑ Other. Explain:
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain:
Presence of run/riffle /pool complexes. Explain:
Tributary geometry:icl fist
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: U0 st
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year: Pic
Describe flow regime:
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: P(411jt Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: PickLr_. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
❑ Bed and banks
❑ OHWM6 (check all indicators that apply):
❑ clear, natural line impressed on the bank
❑
the presence of litter and debris
❑ changes in the character of soil
❑
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
❑ shelving
❑
the presence of wrack line
❑ vegetation matted down, bent, or absent
❑
sediment sorting
❑ leaf litter disturbed or washed away
❑
scour
❑ sediment deposition
❑
multiple observed or predicted flow events
❑ water staining
❑
abrupt change in plant community
❑ other (list):
❑ Discontinuous OHWM.7 Explain:
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determ
E- High Tide Line indicated by:
❑ oil or scum line along shore objects
❑ fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore)
❑ physical markings /characteristics
❑ tidal gauges
❑ other (list):
ne lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
❑ survey to available datum;
❑ physical markings;
❑ vegetation lines /changes in vegetation types.
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
6A natural or man-made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
7Ibid.

(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width):
❑ Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatic /wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non -TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size: acres
Wetland type. Explain:
Wetland quality. Explain:
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non -TNW:
Flow is: Pick List. Explain:
Surface flow is: Pi�FNcklrJ t
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: PiKkZist. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non -TNW:
❑ Directly abutting
❑ Not directly abutting
❑ Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
❑ Ecological connection. Explain:
❑ Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are; Lisi river miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pi-Ust aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from:'ck�<List
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the 1pi�c�knsf floodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
❑ Vegetation type/percent cover. Explain:
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatic /wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis: P f t
Approximately ( ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.

For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and/or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs? I I '
• 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 IH.D:
Significant nexus findings for non -RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non -RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section III.D:
Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to
Section III.D:
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
1. TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
Q TNWs: linear feet width (ft), Or, acres.
Fol Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
]� Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year -round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial:
Q Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally:

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

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
M Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
El Wetlands: acres.
F. NON - JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
F1 If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
Q Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
❑ Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
Other: (explain, if not covered above):
Provide acreage estimates for non - jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
udgment (check all that apply):
Non - wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
ID Lakes /ponds: acres.
1,, Other non - wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
21 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):
Q 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.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:
Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
❑ Office concurs with data sheets /delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets /delineation report.
Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:
_ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data.
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: 1:24,000 Derita.
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:Soil Survey or Meck County.
National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
El FEMA/FIRM maps:
100 -year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
Photographs: ❑ Aerial (Name & Date):
or ❑ Other (Name & Date):
El Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
El Applicable /supporting case law:
Applicable /supporting scientific literature:
Other information (please specify):Digital pics.
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD): Cindy Lane: Southern
drainage
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
State:NC County /parish/borough: Mecklenburg City: Charlotte
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 35.285842 °, Long. 80.844942 °.
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: UT Irwin Creek
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: Catawba River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 03050103
0 Check if map /diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is /are available upon request.
Q 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:
ID Field Determination. Date(s):
SECTION H: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There A� ,navigable waters of the U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review area. - [Required] '
Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain: Drained pond and 2 wetland features with no connection to jurisdictional features (e.g. isolated).
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Pick List "waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply): t
[D TNWs, including territorial seas
ID Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
0 Relatively permanent waters2 (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
E] Non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
E3 Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
ED Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
ID Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
ED Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
Q Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non - wetland waters: linear feet: width (ft) and/or acres.
Wetlands: 0.38 acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: 19$7 TDehneattoz Manual
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
2. Non - regulated waters /wetlands (check if applicable):3
Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain:
' Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
z For purposes of iris form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is riot a TNW and that typically flows year -round or has continuous flow at ieasi "seasonally"
(e.g., typically 3 months).
3 Supporting documentation is presented in Section 1H.F.

SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete
Section HI.A.1 and Section IH.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a weiland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections III.A.1 and 2
and Section HI.D.1.; otherwise, see Section III.B below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent ":
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanoshave been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non - navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries'that typically flow year -round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year -round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section III.D.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section III.D.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbody4 is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant'nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section III.B.1 for
the tributary, Section III.B.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section IH.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.
1. Characteristics of non -TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: Pi -las#
Drainage area: 13 ,acres
Average annual rainfall: 43 inches
Average annual snowfall: 6.4 inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
❑ Tributary flows directly into TNW.
® Tributary flows through 2 tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are 25 3(1 river miles from TNW.
Project waters are 1", g) river miles from RPW.
Project waters are 20-25 aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are for less] aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNW5: UT trib to Irwin Creek to Sugar Creek.
Tributary stream order, if known: 1.
" Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and
West.
5 Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.

(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apply):
Tributary is: ® Natural
® Artificial (man- made). Explain: Stream from large pond man -made in part then confluence with
natural stream.
❑ Manipulated (man- altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: 4 feet
Average depth: .5 feet
Average side slopes: 3
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
® Silts ® Sands ❑ Concrete
❑ Cobbles ❑ Gravel ❑ Muck
❑ Bedrock ❑ Vegetation. Type/% cover:
❑ Other. Explain:
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain:
Presence of run /riffle /pool complexes. Explain: weak or absent riffle pool complex.
Tributary geometry: Relati"vetysfraight
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): 1 %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: Seasonal�floiv
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year: 20 (our greatei;)
Describe flow regime: perennial.
Other information on duration and volume: Upstream pond is flow source.
Surface flow is: Gonfned. Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: llJnkn wo n." Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
® Bed and banks
® OHWM6 (check all indicators that apply):
® clear, natural line impressed on the bank
®
the presence of litter and debris
❑ changes in the character of soil
®
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
® shelving
®
the presence of wrack line
❑ vegetation matted down, bent, or absent
❑
sediment sorting
® leaf litter disturbed or washed away
❑
scour
❑ sediment deposition
❑
multiple observed or predicted flow events
❑ water staining
❑
abrupt change in plant community
❑ other (list):
❑ Discontinuous OHWM Explain:
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
High Tide Line indicated by: ® Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
❑ oil or scum line along shore objects ❑ survey to available datum;
❑ fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore) ❑ physical markings;
❑ physical markings /characteri stics ❑ vegetation lines /changes in vegetation types.
❑ tidal gauges
❑ other (list):
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain: water color is clear; lack of aquatic life.
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
6A natural or man-made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the water body's flow
regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
'Ibid.

(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
® Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width): forested 50 +.
❑ Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species. Explain findings:
® Aquatic /wildlife diversity. Explain findings: Crayfish chimneys.
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non -TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size:0.38 acres
Wetland type. Explaimpalustrine; forested (a), herbaceous (b).
Wetland quality. Explain: wl (a)- drained pond low quality: (b) bird habitat;possible waterfowl.
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non -TNW:
Flow is: No,Elow . Explain:
Surface flow is: OS
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Unla►o -wu. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non -TNW:
❑ Directly abutting
® Not directly abutting
® Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain: wetlands connected via ponds then streams.
❑ Ecological connection. Explain:
❑ Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are 2531 river miles from TNW.
Project waters are2 25 aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: NvFl�ow.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the �C(aearor`g%eatec floodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain: (b) Inundated and saturated soil.
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
® Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):forested 50'.
® Vegetation type /percent cover. Explain:
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species. Explain findings:
® Aquatic /wildlife diversity. Explain findings: Songbird /waterfowl? /crayfish chimneys.
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis: f5cl��„t
Approximately ( ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.

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

El Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally:
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
ED Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
Q Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
3. Non -RPWs8 that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
El Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
4. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
® Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
ED Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year- round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW:
ID Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section III.B and rationale in Section HI.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW:
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: , acres.
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: 0.38acres.
Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs. L
Q Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.9
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
Q Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
El Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1 -6), or
Q Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA- STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY) :"
which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
8See Footnote # 3.
9 To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III.D.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.

from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
0 which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
Q Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
M Other factors. Explain:
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Wetlands: acres.
F. NON - JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
❑ Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
El Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
Other: (explain, if not covered above):
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
judgment (check all that apply):
19 Non - wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
Q Lakes /ponds: acres.
M Other non - wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
® Wetlands: acres. I I I I ,
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).
+'.'l Lakes /ponds: acres.
E1 Other non - wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
0 Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:
0 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.
0 Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
El Corps navigable waters' study:
El U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data.
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: 1: 24,000 Derita.
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:Soil Survey of Meck County.
National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
FEMA/FIRM maps:
Q 100 -year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
Photographs: ❑ Aerial (Name & Date):
or ❑ Other (Name & Date):
Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
Applicable/supporting case law:
Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
Other information (please specify):