20120285 Ver 1_Email_20110808

FW Gaston East West Connector CP 4c Mtg Packet revised agenda/handout Page 1 of 2
FW Gaston East -West Connector CP 4c Mtg Packet - revised
agenda /handout
Lespinasse, Polly
Sent Tuesday May 08 2012 2 55 PM
To Carrillo Sonia
Attachments Gaston_CP4cMtg Handout—rev— I pdf (106 KB) Gaston_CP4cMtg Agenda—revs- I pdf (88 KB)
From Gurak, JIII S [mallto JIII Gurak @atklnsglobal com]
Sent Monday, August 08, 2011 11 25 AM
To JIII Gurak, sarah a hair @usace army mil, george hoops @dot gov, mllltscher chrls @epa gov,
marella_buncick @fws gov, Chambers, Marla J, Lespinasse, Polly, Gledhill earley Renee,
Scott c mclendon @usace army mil, monte k matthews @usace army mil, Wrenn, Brian Holder, Michael L, Moose,
Barry S, Chang, David S, Clawson, Marshall W, Rochelle, Rodger D, Taylor, Bryan D, Houser, Anthony A
Cc Harris, Jennifer, Sweltzer, Shannon, Dewitt, Steve, jabyrd @hntb com, Bass, Klersten R, Ferrell, Ronald E,
Bass, David W, progers @hntb com, Shumate, Christy
Subject RE Gaston East West Connector CP 4c Mtg Packet revised agenda /handout
All
Attached you will find a revised agenda and handout Revisions are noted below
The agenda was revised to show the correct meeting time (correct time is 10 00 am —12 00 pm)
The handout was revised to correct a CP4b action item There was an action item regarding baffles listed under
Site 58 (service road crossing of Stream S312A) This action item has been moved to the correct Site 60
(mainline crossing of Stream S312A)
Please replace the agenda and the handout in your packets
Sincerely
Jill Gurak PE AICP
Project Director Transportation
ATKINS
1616 East Milibrook Rd Ste 310 Raleigh NC 27615 1 Tel [phone] Fax [phone] Cell [phone]
Email dill gurak@atkmsglobal com I Web www atkinsglobal com /northamenca www atkinsalobal com
From dill gurak @atklnsglobal com [mailto fill gurak@ atklnsglobal com]
Sent Friday, August 05, 20115 21 PM
To sarah a hair @usace army mil, george hoops @dot gov, mllltscher chris @epa gov, marella_buncick @fws gov,
marla chambers @ncwildllfe org, polly lespinasse @ncdenr gov, renee gledhill earley @ncdcr gov,
scott c mclendon @usace army mil, monte k matthews @usace army mil, brian wrenn @ncdenr gov,
mholder @ncdot gov, bmoose @ncdot gov, dchang @ncdot gov, mclawson @ncdot gov, rdrochelle @ncdot gov,
bdtaylor @ncdot gov, thouser @ncdot gov
Cc jhharrisl @ncdot gov, cssweitzer @ncdot gov, sddewitt@ncdot gov, jabyrd @hntb com, krbass @ncdot gov,
Ferrell, Ronald E, Bass, David W, progers @hntb com, croshumate @ncdot gov
Subject Gaston East West Connector Concurrence Point 4c Meeting Packet
https //mail nc gov /owa/ ?ae= Item &t =IPM Note &1d= RgAAAADMSzLcd9W2TJH14 %2bm 5/18/2012

FW Gaston East West Connector CP 4c Mtg Packet revised agenda/handout Page 2 of 2
All
Please find attached materials for the upcoming CP4c meeting for the Gaston East West Connector
scheduled for Thursday August 11 at 10 00 am
Attached are minutes from the CP 4b meeting (6/9/11) the CP4b field review meeting (7/15/11) a
meeting agenda meeting handout preferred alternative map jurisdictional site overview maps (Fig 7)
impact summary tables and the permit drawings
Hard copies will be available at the meeting If you require a hard copy prior to the meeting please let
me know and we will send one out to you
Sincerely
Jill Gurak
File(s) will be available for download until 10 August 2011
File 01_ Gaston _FieldVisrt_CP4b_ 071511_ Summary_ Minutes pdf 173 43 KB
File 01_ Gaston _TEACMtg_CP4b_060911 Minutes Final pdf 60 05 KB
File 02 Gaston_CP4cMtg Agenda_081111 pdf 88 69 KB
File 02_Gaston_CP4cMtg Handout 081111 pd f 106 35 KB
File 03_Figure_7 -16_7 22_ Jurisdictional Detail pd f 19 451 85 KB
File 03 PreferredAlternativeMap pdf 424 20 KB
File 04 Buffer Impact Summary_pdf 40 68 KB
File 04 Wetland Impact Summary_pdf 61 98 KB
File 05 U3321_Permit Drawin2s_2011 08 05 pdf, 33,560 47 KB
You have received attachment link(s) within this email sent via Atkins SendIT To retrieve the
attachment(s) please click on the link(s)
New Users Click on the attachment link to register and create a unique password To download a
userguide, visit http //sendit pbsi com
Accellion File Transfer
This message has been checked for all known viruses by MessageLabs
This electronic mad communication may contain privileged confidential and /or proprietary information which is the property of The Atkins North
America Corporation WS Atkins plc or one of its affiliates If you are not the intended recipient or an authorized agent of the intended recipient please
delete this communication and notify the sender that you have received it in error A list of wholly owned Atkins Group companies can be found at
http / /www atkinsglobal com /site services /disclaimer
Consider the environment Please don t print this email unless you really need to
L
https / /mail nc gov /owa/ ?ae= Item &t =IPM Note &id= RgAAAADMSzLcd9W2TJH14 %2bm 5/18/2012

19,00 NORTH CAROLINA
Turnpike Authority
Turnpike Environmental Agency
Coordination (TEAL) Meeting
Gaston East -West Connector
Gaston'and Mecklenburg Counties, STIP No U -3321
Merger Process Concurrence Point 4C — Permit Drawing Review
Project Description
The Gaston East West Connector also known as the Garden Parkway would be a controlled
access toll road extending from 1 85 west of Gastonia in Gaston County to 1 485 near the
Charlotte Douglas International Airport in Mecklenburg County
A Draft Environmental Impact Statement (Draft EIS) was published in April 24 2009 The Draft
EIS evaluated twelve Detailed Study Alternatives (DSAs) with DSA 9 identified as the
Recommended Alternative Public Hearings were held in June 2009 Based on the Draft EIS and
comments received during the public review period the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
North Carolina Turnpike Authority (NCTA) and North Carolina Department of Transportation
(NCDOT) identified DSA 9 as the Preferred Alternative and documented this alternative in the
Final EIS published in December 2010
Final roadway design and schematic hydraulic design have been completed for the portion of the
project from NC 279 (S New Hope Road) to the project terminus east of 1485 an
approximately 6 mile section including mainline bridge crossings of the South Fork Catawba and
Catawba Rivers This section is highlighted in Figure 1
Permit Drawing Review by Site ( *Including 7/15/11 Site Visit)
Site 50 — Sheet Nos 3 10 South Fork Catawba River
Site 51 — Sheet Nos 11 14 Stream S296
(48 Action Item — Consider alternating baffles in the low flow boxes)
Site 52 — Sheet Nos 15 18 Stream S297
(48 Action Item — Consider alternating baffles ►n the low flow boxes)
Site 53 — Sheet Nos 19 22 Stream S300
Site 54 — Sheet Nos 23 29 Stream S300 Wetland W288
(48 Action Item — Consider alternating baffles in the low flow boxes)
Site 55 — Sheet Nos 23 24 30 35 Stream S304 Wetland W289
Site 56 — Sheet Nos 36 39 Pond P52
Site 57 — Sheet Nos 40-46 Catawba River
(413 Action Item — Increase size of energy dissipater at end of bridge)
Site 58 — Sheet Nos 47 53 Stream S312A & S318A Wetland W317*
Site 59 — Sheet Nos 54 56 Stream S318 & S318B
August 11 2011

Gaston East West Connector (STIP U 3321)
Concurrence Point 4C — Permit Drawing Review
August 11 2011
Site 60 — Sheet Nos 57 61 Stream S312A Wetland W321
(4B Action Item — Consider alternating baffles in the low flow boxes Investigate
shifting the Inlet of box culvert crossing slightly west investigate shifting the
alignment of the service road slightly south)
Site 61 — Sheet Nos 63 65 Stream S323
Site 62 — Sheet Nos 6671 Stream S326
Site 63 — Sheet Nos 7276 Stream S304A Wetland W324 Pond P57
Site 64 — Sheet Nos 66 67 77 79 Stream S339
Site 65 — Sheet Nos 8084 Stream S321 & S338A Wetland W332 & W333
Site 66 — Sheet Nos 8590 Stream S321 & S335 Wetland W325
Site 67 — Sheet Nos 91 94 Stream S332
Site 68 — Sheet Nos 9597 Stream S330
Project Schedule
Concurrence Point 1 Purpose and Need
Complete Oct 2008
Concurrence Point 2 Detailed Study Alternatives
Complete Oct 2008
Concurrence Point 2A Bridging
Complete Oct 2008
Draft EIS
Complete Apr 2009
Concurrence Point 3 LEDPA
Complete Oct 2009
Concurrence Point 4A Avoidance & Minimization
Complete Feb 2010
Final EIS
Complete Dec 2010
Concurrence Point 4B Hydraulic Review
June 9 2011
Concurrence Point 4C Permit Drawing Review
August 10/11 2011
Record of Decision
Late August
Submit Permit Application
Late August
Award Construction Contracts
March 2012
Open to Traffic
Dec 2015
2
r

BEVERLY EAVES PERDUE
GOVERNOR
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
TURNPIKE AUTHORITY
AGENDA
Western Concurrence Meeting
August 11 2011
Structure Design Conference Room Century Center Complex
Raleigh North Carolina
TIME 10 00am 12 00am — Jennifer Harris NCTA
STIP No U 3321— Gaston East West Connector
Gaston /Mecklenburg Counties Divisions 12/10
PURPOSE CP4C Permit Drawing Review
TEAM MEMBERS
Jennifer Harris NCTA
Shannon Sweitzer NCTA
Liz Hair USACE
George Hoops FHWA
Chris Militscher USEPA
Marla Chambers WRC
Polly Lespinasse DWQ
Renee Gledhill Earley SHPO
Marella Buncick USFWS
NCDOT TECHNICAL SUPPORT STAFF AND OTHER AGENCY STAFF
EUGENE A CONTI 1R
SECRETARY
Scott McLendon USACE Doug Taylor RDU
Monte Matthews USACE Tony Houser RDU
Brian Wrenn DWQ David Bass Atkins (Design Lead)
Mike Holder Division 12 Ron Ferrell Atkins (Permitting)
Barry Moose Division 10 Jill Gurak Atkins (NEPA)
David Chang Hydraulics Jamie Byrd HNTB (Hydraulics Lead)
Marshall Clawson Hydraulics Kiersten Bass HNTB (NCTA GEC)
Rodger Rochelle TPMU Phillip Rogers HNTB (Hydraulics)
• Introduction and Opening Comments
• Review of CP4B Meeting
• Permit Drawing Review by Site Including CP46 Action Items and 7/15/11 Site Visit
(see handout)
• Jurisdictional Delineation Status
• Project Schedule (see handout)
• Conclusion
NORTH CAROLINA TURNPIKE AUTHORITY
1578 MAIL SERVICE CENTER RALEIGH N C 27699 1578
PHONE [phone] FAX [phone]
http Hwww ncturnpike org

PCL XL error
Subsystem KERNEL
Error IllegalAttributeValue
Operator VendorUm que
Position 9

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U S Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook
SECTION I BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD)
B DISTRICT OFFICE FILE NAME AND NUMBER
C PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION Crowders Creek UT4 W2 W4 W8 W 10
State NC County /pansh/borough Gaston City Gastonia
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format) Lat 35 234825 N Long 8123377 W
Universal Transverse Mercator
Name of nearest waterbody Crowders Creek
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) Into which the aquatic resource flows Catawba River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) 0305010115
Check if map /diagram of review area and /or potential jurisdictional areas is /are available upon request
❑ Check if other sites (e g offsite mitigation sites disposal sites etc ) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form
D REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY)
❑ Office (Desk) Determination Date
® Field Determination Date(s) August 4 2011
SECTION II SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION
There Ah e:t navigable waters of the US within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) junsdichon (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 ARM waters of the U S within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area [Required]
Waters of the U S
a Indicate presence of waters of U S in review area (check all that apply) i
❑ TNWs including territorial seas
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
Relatively permanent watersz (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
® Non RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
® 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
no Impoundments of junsdictional 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 5697( Crowders) 143 (UT4) linear feet 30 ( Crowders) 5 (UT4)width (ft) and /or acres
Wetlands 0 95 acres
c Limits (boundaries) of ,jurisdiction based on T987 Dehneation 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
i Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below
Z 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 adiacent to TNWs If the aquatic resource is a TNW complete
Section HI A 1 and Section III D 1 only if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW complete Sections III A 1 and 2
and Section III D 1 otherwise see Section III B below
1 TNW
Identify TNW
Summarize rationale supporting determination
2 Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is adjacent
B CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY)
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands if any and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are relatively permanent
waters (RPWs) i e tributaries that typically flow year round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e g typically 3
months) A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional If the aquatic resource is not a TNW but has year round
(perennial) flow slap 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 adiacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law
If the waterbody° is not an RPW or a wetland directly abutting an RPW a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW If the tributary has adjacent wetlands the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands This significant nexus evaluation that combines for
analytical purposes the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary or its adjacent wetlands or both If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands complete Section III B 1 for
the tributary Section III B 2 for any ons►te wetlands and Section III B 3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary both onsite
and offsite The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section III C below
1 Characteristics of non TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(►) General Area Conditions
Watershed size 23 8 uare im]
Drainage area 23 8 'Lsquremles
Average annual rainfall inches
Average annual snowfall inches
(n) Physical Characteristics
(a) Relationship with TNW
❑ Tributary flows directly into TNW
® Tributary flows through 2 tributaries before entering TNW
Project waters are X1015 river miles from TNW
Project waters are J (oi` less river miles from RPW
Project waters are 1 15 aerial (straight) miles from TNW
Project waters are I ofI aerial (straight) miles from RPW
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries Explain
Identify flow route to TNW5 UT4 to Crowders Creek to Catawba River
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 dredged straightened
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate)
Average width 30(Crowders) 5 (UT4) feet
Average depth 8(Crowders) 3 (UT4) feet
Average side slopes NVTF—q i il' 1o`r 140
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply)
® Silts ® Sands ❑ Concrete
❑ Cobbles ® Gravel ❑ Muck
❑ Bedrock ❑ Vegetation Type /% cover
❑ Other Explain unknown substrate
Tributary condition /stability [e g highly eroding sloughing banks] Explain incised eroding banks
Presence of run/nffle/ ool complexes Explain
Tributary geometry Relatively straig thth
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope) 1 %
(c) Flow
Tributary provides for Seasonal —k.;�w
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year 20 (oar g eateb
Describe flow regime perennial
Other information on duration and volume
Surface flow is Discrete and canCned Characteristics
Subsurface flow Unknown Explain findings
❑ Dye (or other) test performed
Tributary has (check all that apply)
® Bed and banks
® OHWM6 (check all indicators that apply)
® clear natural line impressed on the bank
❑
❑ changes in the character of soil
❑
❑ shelving
❑
® vegetation matted down bent or absent
❑
• leaf litter disturbed or washed away
❑
• sediment deposition
❑
❑ water staining
❑
❑ other (list)
❑ Discontinuous OHWM 7 Explain
the presence of litter and debris
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
the presence of wrack line
sediment sorting
scour
multiple observed or predicted flow events
abrupt change in plant community
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply)
High Tide Line indicated by ❑ Mean High Water Mark indicated by
❑ oil or scum line along shore objects ❑ survey to available datum
❑ fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore) ❑ physical markings
❑ physical markings / charactenstics ❑ vegetation lines /changes in vegetation types
❑ tidal gauges
❑ other (list)
(iii) Chemical Characteristics
Characterize tributary (e g water color is clear discolored oily film water quality general watershed characteristics etc )
Explain
Identify specific pollutants if known
6A natural or man made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e g where the stream temporarily flows underground or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices) Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody s flow
regime (e g flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert) the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break
fbid

(w) Biological Characteristics Channel supports (check all that apply)
® Riparian corridor Characteristics (type average width) disturbed /maintained
❑ 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 W2 004 W3 0 07 W4 046 W8 0 37 W 10 0 01 acres
Wetland type Explain W2 W4 W10 PSS1Y W8 PFOIY
Wetland quality Explain
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries Explain
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non TNW
Flow is Ephemeral flow Explain
Surface flow is Uverland sheetflotw
Characteristics
Subsurface flow Ye—s Explain findings drainage network within golf course
❑ Dye (or other) test performed
(c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non TNW
® Directly abutting
® Not directly abutting
® Discrete wetland hydrologic connection Explain W3 W4 connected to Crowders Crk by drainage network
❑ Ecological connection Explain
® Separated by berm/bamer Explain W8 separated by berm with culvert outlet
(d) Proxinuty (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are 1Q 1S river miles from TNW
Project waters are 10 is aerial (straight) miles from TNW
Flow is from —
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the $�10 yeah floodplain
(n) Chemical Characteristics
Characterize wetland system (e g water color is clear brown oil film on surface water quality general watershed
characteristics etc ) Explain
Identify specific pollutants if known
(in) 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 4
Approximately ( 0 95 ) 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)
W2 (Y) 004 W 10 (No) 001
W3 (No) 007
W4 (No) 046
W8 (No) 037
Summarize overall biological chemical and physical functions being performed Wetlands are hydrologically connected
to Crowders Creek Wetlands have the capability to store /release pollutants nutrients and sediment from the adjacent golf course
valley side slopes and road
C SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysts 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 tnbutary 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 floodplam is not solely deterrmnative of significant nexus
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook Factors to consider include for example
Does the tributary in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any) have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any) provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species such as feeding nesting spawning or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any) have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any) have other relationships to the physical chemical or
biological integrity of the TNW
Note the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below
1 Significant nexus findings for non RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs Explain
findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below based on the tributary itself then go to Section III D
2 Significant nexus findings for non RPW and its adjacent wetlands where the non RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands then go to Section III D
3 Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands then go to
Section III D W3 4 W8 and W 10 have capacity to store and reduce pollutants and floodwaters to Crowders Creek
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
® Wetlands adjacent to TNWs acres
2 RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
�[ Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year round are jurisdictional Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial >30 score on NCDWQ Stream ID form
Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow seasonally (e g typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III B Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally I

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply)
® Tributary waters 5697 (Crowders) 143 (UT4) linear feet30 5width (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
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands
® Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year round Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III D 2 above Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW wetland boundary is contiguous with stream banks W2 discharges directly into RPW
Q Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow seasonally Provide data indicating that tributary
seasonal in Section III B and rationale in Section III D 2 above Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area 0 04acres
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 junsidictional Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III C
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area 0 91acres
6 Wetlands adjacent to non RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to such waters and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III C
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area acres
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
Q Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below)
ISOLATED (INTERSTATE OR INTRA STATE] WATERS INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS THE USE
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY) 10
which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes
© from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce
which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce
Q Interstate isolated waters Explain
❑ Other factors Explain
"See Footnote # 3 %
v To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III D 6 of the Instructional Guidebook
10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos

Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination
Provide estimates for Jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply)
❑ Tributary waters linear feet width (ft)
Q 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 cntena 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 solel on the
Migratory Bird Rule (MBR)
❑ Waters do not meet the Significant Nexus standard where such a finding is required for Junsdiction 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 a presence of migratory birds presence of endangered species use of water for irrigated agriculture) using best professional
Judgment (check all that apply)
0 Non wetland waters (i a rivers streams) linear feet width (ft)
Q Lakes /ponds acres
❑ Other non wetland waters acres List type of aquatic resource
Q Wetlands acres
Provide acreage estimates for non Jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the Significant Nexus standard where such
a finding is required for Jurisdiction (check all that apply)
❑ Non wetland waters (i a rivers streams) linear feet width (ft)
❑ Lakes /ponds acres
❑ Other non wetland waters acres List type of aquatic resource
❑ Wetlands acres
SECTION IV DATA SOURCES
A SUPPORTING DATA Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply checked items shall be included in case file and where checked
and requested appropriately reference sources below)
Maps plans plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant
Data sheets prepared /submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant
❑ Office concurs with data sheets /delineation report
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets /delineation report
Q Data sheets prepared by the Corps
❑ Corps navigable waters study
❑ U S Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas
❑ USGS NHD data
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps
❑ U S Geological Survey map(s) Cite scale & quad name
® USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey Citation SSURGO database
0 National wetlands inventory map(s) Cite name
R State/Local wetland inventory map(s)
❑ FEMA/FIRM maps
El 100 year Floodplain Elevation is (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
❑ Photographs ❑ Aerial (Name & Date)
or ❑ Other (Name & Date)
® Previous dete nunation(s) File no and date of response letter
Applicable /supporting case law
❑ Applicable /supporting scientific literature
® Other information (please specify)
B ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD