20100752 Ver 2_Application_20120626

ii
MICHAEL F EASLEY
GOVERNOR
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
June 18 2012
U S Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Field Office
3331 Heritage Trade Drive Suite 105
Wake Forest NC 27587
ATTN Mr Monte Matthews
NCDOT Coordinator
'N *o Q% 2p��
LYNDO Tip!
SECRETARY '�y
l D -- 0 -� S ;L U Z
Subject Application for Modification to Individual Section 404 Permit and 401
Certification for the widening of US 321 from SR 1500 (Blackberry Road) to
US 221 at Blowing Rock Watauga and Caldwell Counties State Project No
6 739001T NCDOT Division 11 TIP No R 2237C WBS Element No
3440226
Reference Individual 404 Permit (May 26 2011) and Revised Permit (dated May 5 2011)
(Action ID SAW 2002 31262)
401 Certification (March 9 2011) and Revised Certification (dated May 5
2011) (NCDWQ Project No 20100752)
NCDOT Permit Application dated September 3 2010
NCDOT Revised Permit Application dated February 23 2011
Dear Mr Matthews
This Modification request is being submitted due to the need for construction revisions at Site
XII The revisions entail moving the 84 inch pipe for ease of construction This Modification
application package consists of the cover letter a revised EEP acceptance letter revised Permit
Drawmg Sheets (including a revised Wetland Pernut Impact Summary sheet that includes the
new impacts for Site XIn the associated roadway plan sheet and a Request for Revised JD
package
Jurisdictional Impacts at Site XII
The original impacts at Site XII consisted of only temporary stream impacts for the installation of
a pipe Due to the need for a construction revision there will be 45 if of permanent stream
impacts from fill and the temporary impacts are reduced from 45 if to 21 if Subsequent to the
issuance of the Permit a small wetland was identified at the site The previously unidentified
wetland at Site XII will be temporarily impacted from the revised construction technique There
will be <0 01 acre of temporary impacts to the wetland at Site XII
MAILING ADDRESS
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
1598 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699 1598
TELEPHONE [phone]
FAX [phone]
WEBSITE WWW NCDOT ORG
LOCATION
1020 BIRCH RIDGE DRIVE
RALEIGH NC 276104328

Table 4 from the referenced original and revised applications for impacts to streams in the New
Raver Basin (labeled to maintain consistency) has been modified to reflect the inclusion of 45 if
of permanent stream impacts and the reduction of temporary stream impacts (from 45 if to 21 If)
at Site XII Table 3 from the referenced revised application is unchanged but has been included
in this application to present the stream impacts within the Yadkin Pee Dee River Basin for
reference
Modified Table 4 Impacts to jurisdictional streams in New Raver Basin (HUC 05050001)
Site
s
Stream Type
� l�
*g. i
� 0�
C
impact
lqm
� 'Impact
��
Mitigation
No
Station No
d ��
Stream Name
��
/�
Impact Typed
Length
Acreage
Requirement
Classificahon�
��
1
VI
495 +20 to
UT1 to
Perennial /
Perm fill
2941f
USACE
498 +15 Lr
Middle Fork
WS IV +
& DWQ
Perim fill
1281f
USACE
&DWQ
VII
523 +33 5 L
Middle Fork
Perennial Na +/
Bank
321E
DWQ
Q
Temp fill
261f
0 01 ac
119 if
USACE
UT2 to
Perennial /
Perm fill
& DWQ
141f
N/A c/
LX
540 +20 U
Middle Fork
WS IV +
Temp fill
10 if
<0 01 ac
UT3 to
Perennial /
Perm fill
591f
USACE
&DWQ
Middle Fork
WS IV +
Temp fill
191E
<0 01 ac
X
553 +50 L
USACE
UT4 to
Perennial /
Perm fill
251f
& DWQ
Middle Fork
WS IV +
Temp fill
191E
<0 01 ac
UT5 to
Perennial /
Perm fill
451f
USACE
& DWQ
XU
561 +56 Lr
Middle Fork
WS IV +
Temp fill
21 If
<0 01 ac
" W w irotal Temp
oia Tin acts
951E a
0�02dt
3 Total�Permanent
a
»r�+,.x Impacts
716 iF
z+" C T T ... "E m'' -iK* ." .5`" Y' yssi 5
ff Permanent Impacts Requiring No NLtigation �
,r
14 If
AS�'.s°Y"t'
`4 " 01f
�
- ��
Permanent impacts Requiring DWQ Mitigation (1 1)
747 if
If
X7,47
w Permanent Impacts Requiring USACENLhgahon(2 1)
6701E +
1,3401E +
Middle Fork = Middle Fork of the South Fork of the New River
Mitigation for bank stabilization impact required by DWQ — not required by USACE
C/ area determined to have been already impacted — no mitigation required by USACE or DWQ
d/ value based on rounding due to some of the individual impacts being <0 01 acre
+ Amount of stream impact requiring mitigation (based on mitigation required by the USACE exceeding the amount required by
DWQ)
Modified impact values are bolded
Page 2 of 5

Table 3 Impacts to jurisdictional streams in Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basin (HUC 03040101)
[table unchanged — included for reference]
Site
��
%Stream T e /�
- 7
Impacts
m _paet�
dMrtigation
No
Station No >
-�
Stream Name
�Z 01
Classification
Impact Type
p Length
Acreage
Requirement
385 +70 to
UT1 to Bailey
Perennial /
Perm fill
2941f
USACE
&DWQ
I
389 +45 L
Camp Creek
C Tr
Temp fill
361f
<0 01 ac
Bailey Camp
Perennial /
Perm fill
1191f
USACE
&DWQ
II
403 +30 L
Creek
C Tr
Temp fill
33 if
<0 01 ac
UT1 to
Perennial /
Perm fill
53 if
USACE
Yadkin River
C Tr
& DWQ
Perm fill
1501f
USACE
&DWQ
442 +00 to
III
444 +00 L
UT2 to
Perennial /
Yadkin River
C Tr
stabilization
b
10 if
DWQ
Temp fill
43 if
0 01 ac
444 +65 to
UT2 to
Perennial /
Perm fill
3171f
USACE
&DWQ
N
449 +50 L
Yadkin River
C Tr
Temp fill
461f
0 01 ac
Perm fill
221f
USACE
& DWQ
V
451 +40 L
UT2 to
Yadkin River
Perennial /
C Tr
Bank
l O if
DWQ
stabilization
Temp fill
61f
<0 01 ac
�i 00 m Tatal TemporaryImpacts
164 if
003
� � K Tonal Permanent Impacts -
97,51f
h Permanent Impacts Requuvig DW 1Vbhg tion (1 )
Q
�975If
9(75 If �,z
4
f- V Permanent Impacts Regqurmg USACE Mitigahou,(2 )
, +
955 Ifs
r 1 10 if ± -
,9
Mirigarion for bank stabilization impact required by DWQ — not required by USACE
d Value based on rounding due to some of the individual impacts being <0 01 acre
Mitigation proposed by NCDOT (based on mitigation required by the USACE exceeding the amount required by DWQ)
SUMMARY OF IMPACTS TO WATERS OF THE U S
Surface Waters
Based on the net increase of 45 linear feet of stream impact at Site XII permanent impacts are
proposed on a total of 1 691 (revised from 1 646) linear feet of jurisdictional streams 716 linear
feet within the New River Basin (revised from 671 If) and 975 linear feet within the Yadkin Pee
Dee River Basin (unchanged) Temporary impacts are proposed on 0 05 acre (reduced from 283
If to 259 If) of jurisdictional streams This revised linear footage does not change the area (0 05
acre) of temporary stream impacts presented in the referenced original and revised applications
presented in Modified Table 2 (labeled to maintain consistency)
Page 3 of 5

Wetlands
There will be <0 01 acre of temporary impacts to the wetland at Site XII There is no change to
permanent wetland unpacts on the project therefore the wetland table from the referenced
original application has not been modified nor included with this application and permanent
wetland unpacts have not been modified in Modified Table 2 A JD package for the features at
Site XII including a Rapanos Form wetland data forms figures and photographs are included as
an attachment
Modified Table 2 - Summary of Impacts
River1Basm qP *-�
Permanent Wetland
71
Permanent Stream
W"
kTemporary Stream
� ac v v
34 0
Yadkin Pee Dee
0 13
975
003
New
006
716
002
Totals
019
1,691*
005
t� Values are based on rounding due to some of the individual impacts being <0 01 acre
* Of the 1 691 total linear feet of permanent stream impacts 1 625 if require mitigation (see Table 3 & Modified
Table 4 and the Summary of Mitigation section of this application)
Bolded values have been modified for this application
SUMMARY OF MITIGATION
The previous stream mitigation requirements for this project were based on the USACE
mitigation requirement as they exceeded those of the NCDWQ The USACE had not required
mitigation on 661f of the original 1646 If of stream impacts (see Table 3 and Modified Table 4)
A summary of the previous and modified stream mitigation requirements are as follows
• Previous total project stream impacts 1 646 if
• Previous stream impacts requiring mitigation 1 5801f
(Yadkin Pee Dee River Basin mitigation 9551f)
(New River Basin mitigation 625)
• Modified total project stream impacts 1,6911f
• Modified stream impacts requiring mitigation 1,6251f
(Yadkin Pee Dee River Basin mitigation 9551f)
(New River Basin mitigation 6701f)
The wetland mitigation requirements remain unchanged, as there were no additional permanent
wetland impacts with at Site XII A revised EEP acceptance letter corresponding to the revised
mitigation requirement is attached
Page 4 of 5

A copy of this permit modification application and its distribution list will be posted on the
NCDOT website at http / /www ncdot org /doh/preconstruct/pe /neu/perm t html
If you have any questions or need additional information please contact Mr Bill Barrett by
telephone at [phone] or by a mail at wabarrett@ncdot gov
Sin erel
Gre ry J Thorpe PhD Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Unit
cc NCDOT Permit Application Standard Distribution List
Page 5 of 5

4oT-� em
��
P ROGRAM
June 7 2012
Mr Gregory J Thorpe PhD
Environmental Management Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Unit
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh North Carolina 27699 1548
Dear Dr Thorpe
Subject EEP Mitigation Acceptance Letter
R -2237C US 321 from SR 1500 (Blackberry Road) to US 221 at Blowing Rock
Watauga and Caldwell Counties
References USACE 404 Individual Pen-nit issued May 25 2011 ( USACE Action iD 2002
31262)
NCDWQ 401 Water Quality Certification issued March 9 2011 with Correction
issued May 26 2011 ( NCDWQ Project ID 2010 0752)
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) will
provide the additional stream mitigation for the subject project Based on the information supplied by
you on June 1 2012 the additional impacts are located in CU 05050001 of the New River basin in the
Northern Mountains (NM) Eco Region and are as follows
Tahio 1 _ Additinnal immetc
New
Stream
Wetlands
Buffer (Sq Ft )
05050001
on
Coastal
Zone 1
Zone 2
NM
Cold
Cool
Warm
Riparian
Riparian
Marsh
(3 1)
(1 5 1)
Impacts
45
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
(feet/acres
This impact and associated mitigation need were not projected by the NCDOT in the 2012 impact data
EEP is currently providing stream and riparian wetland for the impacts associated with this project
located in New 05050001 and Yadkin 03040101 as required by the 404 and 401 permits that were issued
in 2011 as shown in the below table (►n mitigation credits)

Dr Thorpe
TiP R 2237C Additional
June 7 2012
Page Two
Table Z — Total Revised Impacts and Mitiestion Credits Provided from EEP
Yadkin 03040101
Permuted
Mitigation Provided by
��
�
Revised Total
Impact Type
Impacts
EEP per Issued
-��
Impacts
Riparian Wetland
0 13
Permits (Credits)
0 13
New 05050001
Stream
625
1 1 250
670
Riparian Wetland
006
012
�w ��#►
0 06
Yadkin 03040101
Stream
955
1 910
955
Riparian Wetland
0 13
026
0 13
EEP commits to providing the additional compensatory stream mitigation credits to offset all of
the impacts located in the New River basin (CU 05050001) associated with this project as determined by
the regulatory agencies in accordance with the N C Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Ecosystem Enhancement Program In Lieu Fee Instrument dated July 28 2010 If the above referenced
impact amounts are revised then this mitigation acceptance letter will no longer be valid and a new
mitigation acceptance letter will be required from EEP
If you have any questions or need additional information please contact Ms Beth Harmon at
919 715 1929
Sincerely -/�
Fvr
Mich I Ellison
EEP Deputy Director
Cc Mr Monte Matthews USACE — Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
Mr David Wainwright NC Division of Water Quality — Wetlands/401 Unit
File R 2237C Additional
Restorutg Prot" Or w .State
TA
NCDENR
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program 1652 Mad Service Center Raleigh NC 27699 1652 / 919 715 0476 / www nceep net

N
z
O N
� � c
rn
F cn
Z
O i a c"v
a
z
V)
C C U d
Vin
N O_y�
O
O
C',
COO
LO
N
x
C7
awU
EH
I'm
paJy
w x
�
O w
C
C C U C
N
r-
zo 3 °v
W
�
y N d�
L
r
�
N
�
CO
N
rn
co
a
a W
W U �
Ca A
w
o e 3
LQL
� m V
0
O
O
O
0
U
U
z w
}?
����
0
0
0
0
O
o
W
Cl)
x
c w
�
�
f6 � fU0 V
O
O
O
O
O
r
E U ��
O
O�
�
O
O r�
f-
N
U
n-
Im
f0 U
Cc C �
N
�
U
0.'
v ui
N
W
IL
Z
��
L � N N
co
O
g�
���
�.
F- U
� �
o_ �
d
�
f0 U
co
O
O
g
X �
W
a ==
o
0
a
0
N
N C N U
O
O
M
E � � �
O
O
O
N
d
� a
�
w
W
a
a
a
�
w
W
a
U�
N
W
�
W
>>
J
(n
CO
N
W
M
�
IT
W
X
O �
N
O
t�
�
co O
�N 0
� L
+
O
�
F-
t
�
+
�
+
CO
CD
J
In
In
11')
Q
F-
0
H
U
J
0 `c
Z
cn Z
x
X
157<
a
s
U Z
a
X
O
F-

JD Request Package

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
State NC County/pansh/borough Watauga City Blowing Rock
Center coordinates of site (]at/long in degree decimal format) Lat 36 1400 N. Long 816690 W,
Universal Transverse Mercator
Name of nearest waterbody Middle Fork Creek
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC)
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)
Office (Desk) Determination Date
Field Determination Date(s)
SECTION II SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION
There „f c .W navigable waters of the US within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) junsdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review area [Required]
Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide
in 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 &e: waters of the US within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area [Required]
I 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 waters Z (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 110 linear feet 2 width (ft) and/or acres
Wetlands 0 02 acres
c Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on X9�e1>u atiatm
.Kai ual
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 this form an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year round or has continuous flow at least seasonally
(e g typically 3 months)
3 Supporting documentation is presented in Section III F

SECTION III CWA ANALYSIS
A TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs If the aquatic resource is a TNW complete
Section III A 1 and Section III D 1 only if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW complete Sections III A 1 and 2
and Section III D 1 otherwise see Section III B below
1 TNW
Identify TNW
Summarize rationale supporting determination
2 Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is adjacent
B CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY)
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands if any and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are relatively permanent
waters (RPWs) i e tributaries that typically flow year round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e g typically 3
months) A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional If the aquatic resource is not a TNW but has year round
(perennial) flow skip to Section III D 2 If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section III D 4
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law
If the 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 onsite
and offsite The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section III C below
1 Characteristics of non TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions
Watershed size Mpal$ Drainage area
Average annual rainfall inches
Average annual snowfall inches
(n) Physical Characteristics
(a) Relationship with TNW
❑ Tributary flows directly into TNW
❑ Tributary flows through tributaries before entering TNW
Project waters are river miles from TNW
Project waters are river miles from RPW
Project waters are NMI-
Project aerial (straight) miles from TNW
waters are f gl 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 c LMAR
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/nffle/ ooI complexes Explain
Tributary geometry
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope) %
(c) Flow
Tributary provides for t
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year 5MIR
Describe flow regime
Other information on duration and volume
Surface flow is P_w'jFQ Characteristics
Subsurface flow k L1T5 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
Q High Tide Line indicated by ❑
❑ oil or scum line along shore objects
❑ fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore)
❑ physical markings /charactenstics
❑ tidal gauges
❑ other (list)
ne lateral extent of CWAjunsdiction (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 junsdiction (e g where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices) Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody s flow
regime (e g flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert) the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
'Ibid

(w) Biological Characteristics Channel supports (check all that apply)
❑ Ripanan 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 sE Explain
Surface flow is
Characteristics
Subsurface flow � 1 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 berni/bamer Explain
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlanLare e river miles from TNW
Project waters aeria l (straight) miles from TNW
Flow is from
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the fig floodplam
(n) Chemical Characteristics
Characterize wetland system (e g water color is clear brown oil film on surface water quality general watershed
characteristics etc ) Explain
Identify specific pollutants if known
(iii) Biological Characteristics Wetland supports (check all that apply)
❑ Riparian buffer Characteristics (type average width)
❑ Vegetation type/percent cover Explain
❑ Habitat for
❑ Federally Listed species Explain findings
❑ Fish/spawn areas Explain findings
❑ Other environmentally sensitive species Explain findings
❑ Aquatic/wildlife diversity Explain findings
3 Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if an
All wetland(s) being considered m the cumulative analysis ws-
Approximately ( ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis

For each wetland specify the following
Directly abuts9 (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
tnbutary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW) Similarly the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook Factors to consider include for example
• Does the tributary in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any) have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any) provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species such as feeding nesting spawning or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any) have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any) have other relationships to the physical chemical or
biological integrity of the TNW?
Note the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below
1 Significant nexus findings for non RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs Explain
findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below based on the tributary itself then go to Section III D
2 Significant nexus findings for non RPW and its adjacent wetlands where the non RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands then go to Section III D
3 Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands then go to
Section III D
D DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY)
1 TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area
n TNWs linear feet width (ft) Or acres
Q Wetlands adjacent to TNWs acres
2 RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
14 Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year round are jurisdictional Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial year round flow
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 junsdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply)
�[ Tributary waters linear feet width (ft)
® Other non wetland waters acres
Identify type(s) of waters
3 Non RPWss that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW and it has a significant nexus with a
TNW is junsdictional 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 The RPW is one of the boundaries of the wetland
Ea Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow seasonally Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section III B and rationale in Section III D 2 above Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area acres
Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
M 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 acres
Wetlands adjacent to non RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to such waters and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III C
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area acres
Impoundments of jurisdictional waters'
As a general rule the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional
M 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)
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
Eg which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes
El from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce
Q 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
BSee Footnote # 3
' To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III D 6 of the Instructional Guidebook
10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.

Provide estimates for Jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply)
® Tributary waters linear feet width (ft)
Q Other non wetland waters acres
Identify type(s) of waters
Wetlands acres
NON JURISDICTIONAL WATERS INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY)
If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements
Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce
❑ Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in SWANCC the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
Migratory Bird Rule (MBR)
Waters do not meet the Significant Nexus standard where such a finding is required for Jurisdiction Explain
Other (explain if not covered above)
Provide acreage estimates for non Jurisdictional waters in the review area where the sole potential basis of Jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i a presence of migratory birds presence of endangered species use of water for irrigated agriculture) using best professional
Judgment (check all that apply)
Non wetland waters (i a rivers streams) lmear feet width (ft)
Lakes/ponds acres
Other non wetland waters acres List type of aquatic resource
M 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 Junsdiction (check a]
Non wetland waters (i a rivers streams
Lakes/ponds acres
Other non wetland waters acres
0) Wetlands acres
SECTION IV DATA SOURCES
that apply)
lmear feet width (ft)
List type of aquatic resource
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
❑ USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey Citation
National wetlands inventory map(s) Cite name
El StatelL.ocal wetland inventory map(s)
In FEMA/FIRM maps
Q 100 year Floodplam Elevation is (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
Photographs ❑ Aerial (Name & Date)
or ❑ Other (Name & Date)
Previous determination(s) File no and date of response letter
❑ Applicable/supporting case law
® Applicable/supporting scientific literature
Other information (please specify)
B ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Project/Site R 2237C City /County Blowing Rock Sampling Date 5-7201 2
ApplicanUOwner NCDOT State NC Sampling Point WET Site XII
Investigators) Barrett, Hemphill Section Township Range N/A
Landform (hillslope terrace etc) floodplain Local relief (concave convex none) concave Slope (/ )
Subregion (LRR or MLRA) P Lat 36 1400 Long -81 6690 Datum
Sod Map Unit Name Saunook loam. 8 15/ slope. very stony NWI classification PEM1
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ® No ❑ (If no explain in Remarks)
Are Vegetation ❑ Sod ❑ or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are Normal Circumstances present? Yes ® No ❑
Are Vegetation ❑ Sod ❑ 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
Hydrophybc Vegetation Present? Yes ® No ❑
Hydnc Sod Present? Yes ® No ❑ Is the Sampled Area Yes ® No ❑
within a Wetland?
Wetland Hydrology Present9 Yes ® No ❑
Remarks Due to mlcrotopographlc relief not all areas within wetland meet the hydric soil criteria
uvnoni nrav
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required check all that apply)
❑
Surface Sod Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
❑
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (68)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
❑
Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
❑
Drainage Patterns (B10)
® Saturation (A3)
❑
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (B1)
❑
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Sods (C6)
❑
Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits (B2)
❑
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
❑ Drift Deposits (B3)
❑
Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (134)
❑
Stunted or Stressed Plants (131)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
®
Geomorphic Position (132)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
❑
Shallow Aqwtard (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
®
Depth (inches)
Saturation Presents Yes ® No
❑
Depth (inches) 0
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ® No ❑
(includes capillary fringe)
Descnbe Recorded Data (stream gauge monitoring well aerial photos previous inspections) if available
Remarks
US Army Corps of Engineers
Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Intenm Version

VEGETATION — Use scientific names of
Tree Stratum (Plot size N /A)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
bampungromt wni bite Au
Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test Worksheet
/ Cover Species? Status
= Total Cover
50 / of total cover 20 / of total cover
Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size 15 )
1 unknown (dead) shrub 4 N
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
= Total Cove
50 / of total cover 20 / of total cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size 15
1
Solidago gigantea
75 Y
2
Juncus effusus
25 Y
3
Renunculus repens
20 N
4
Typha angustifolia
15 N
5
Carex cnnita
5 N
6
Packera aurea
5 N
7
_
r 8
_
9
_
10
_
11
_
12
_
— Number of Dominant Species 2 (A)
That Are OBL FACW or FAC
— Total Number of Dominant 2 (B)
Species Across All Strata
— Percent of Dominant Species 100 (A/B)
That Are OBL FACW or FAC
Prevalence Index worksheet
Total / Cover of Multiply by
OBL species x1 =
FACW species x2 =
FAC species x3 =
? FACU species x4 =
UPL species x5 =
Column Totals (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators
❑ 1 Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
® 2 Dominance Testis >50/
[3 3 Prevalence Index is <3 0'
Cover ❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetatonl (Explain)
'Indicators of hydnc sod and wetland hydrology must
be present unless disturbed or problematic
FACW Definitions of Vegetation Strata
FACW+
Tree –Woody plants excluding vines 3 in (7 6 cm) or more in
FAC diameter at breast height (DBH) regardless of height
OBL Sapling /Shrub – Woody plants excluding vines less than 3 in DBH
FACW+ and greater than 3 28 ft tall
FACW Herb – All herbaceous (non - woody) plants regardless of size and
woody plants less than 3 28 it tall
Woody vine – All woody vines greater than 3 28 It in height.
155 = Total Cover
50 / of total cover 78 200/ of total cover 31
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size N /A)
1
2
3
4
5
= Total Cover
50 / of total cover 20 / of total cover
Remarks (If observed list morphological adaptations below)
* The shrub Is dead and non Identifiable
US Army Corps of Engineers
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
Yes ® No ❑
Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region – Version 2 0

I
SOIL
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' Loc2 Texture
0-6 10YR 2/2 100 clay loam
612 10YR 2/2 90 5YR 4/6 10 C M clay loam
vomi
Type C= Concentration D= Depletion RM= Reduced Matrix CS= Covered or Coated Sand Grains ZLocation PL =Pore Lining M =Mainz
Remarks
Hydnc Soil Indicators (Applicable to all LRRs unless otherwise noted )
Indicators for Problematic Hydnc Soils'
❑
Histosol (Al)
❑
Dark Surface (S7)
❑
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
•
Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147 148)
❑
Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 147 148)
•
Black Histic (A3)
❑
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147 148)
❑
Piedmont Floodplam Sods (F19)
•
Hydrogen Suede (A4)
❑
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
(MLRA 136 147)
❑
Stratified Layers (A5)
❑
Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑
Red Parent Material (TF2)
❑
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
®
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑
Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
❑
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑
Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑
Redox Depressions (F8)
13
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N MLRA
13
Iron Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N MLRA
Iron
147 148)
❑
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
❑
Umbnc Surface (F13) (MLRA 136 122)
❑
Sandy Redox (S5)
❑
Piedmont Floodplam Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
❑
Stripped Matrix (S6)
wetland hydrology must be present
unless disturbed or problematic
Restrictive Layer (if present)
Type
Depth (inches) Hydnc Soils Present? Yes ® No ❑
Remarks
US Army Corps of Engineers
Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Intenm Version

I
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Project/Site R 2237C City /County Blowing Rock Sampling Date 572012
Applicant/Owner NCDOT State NC Sampling Point Upland Site XII
Investigator(s) Barrett. Hemphill Section Township Range N/A
Landform (hdlslope terrace etc ) floodpiam Local re
Subregion (LRR or MLRA) P Lat 36 1400
Sod Map Unit Name Saunook loam. 8 15 / slope, very stony
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes
Are Vegetation ❑ Sod ❑ or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed?
Are Vegetation ❑ Sod ❑ or Hydrology ❑ naturally problematic?
:lief (concave convex none) concave Slope (/ )
Long - 816690 Datum
NWI classification
® No ❑ (If no explain in Remarks)
Are Normal Circumstances present? Yes ® No ❑
(If needed explain any answers in Remarks )
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations transects Important features etc
Hydrophybc Vegetation Present? Yes ❑ No
Hydnc Sod Present? Yes ❑ No ® Is the Sampled Area Yes ❑ No
within Wetland?
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ❑ No
Remarks
uvnonr nr_v
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two repwred)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required check all that apply)
❑
Surface Sod Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
❑
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
❑
Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
❑
Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Saturation (A3)
❑
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (B1)
❑
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Sods (C6)
❑
Dry Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits (B2)
❑
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
❑ Drift Deposits (B3)
❑
Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
❑
Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
❑
Shallow Agwtard (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
®
Depth (inches)
Saturation Presents
Yes ❑ No
®
Depth (inches)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes [I 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 — Intenm Version

VF-t3t I At IUN — use scientiTic names OT
Tree Stratum (Plot size N /A)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
50 A of total cover
Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size 15 )
1 Sahx nigra
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
a
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test Worksheet
/ Cover Species? Status
2 Taraxacum officrnale
30 Y
Number of Dominant Species
20 Y
That Are OBL FACW or FAC
10 N
Total Number of Dominant
_
Species Across All Strata
_
Percent of Dominant Species
_
That Are OBL FACW or FAC
_
Prevalence Index worksheet
_
Total / Cover of
= Total Cover
OBL species
_20/ of total cover
FACW species
FAC species
15 Y OBL
FACU species
UPL species
15 = Total Cove
50 / of total cover 7 20 / of total cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size 15
1 Sohdaao albssima
40 Y
2 Taraxacum officrnale
30 Y
3 Parthenoassus gunguefolia
20 Y
4 Daucus carota
10 N
5
_
6
_
7
_
8
_
9
_
10
_
11
_
12
r•omt
2 (A)
4 (B)
50 (AB)
Multiply by
x1 =
X2 =
x3 =
x4 =
x5 =
Column Totals (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators
11 1 Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
❑ 2 Dominance Testis >50/
❑ 3 Prevalence Index is <3 0'
Cover ❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetationl (Explain)
'Indicators of hydnc sod and wetland hydrology must
be present unless disturbed or problematic
FACU+ Definitions of Vegetation Strata
FACU
Tree — Woody plants excluding vines 3 in (7 6 cm) or more in
FAC diameter at breast height (DBH) regardless of height
not listed
Sapling/Shrub —Woody plants excluding vines less than 3 in DBH
and greater than 3 28 ft 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 it in height
= Total Cover
50 / of total cover 50 20 A of total cover 20
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size N /A)
1 -
2 -
3 -
4
5
= Total Cover
50 / of total cover 20 A of total cover
Remarks (If observed list morphological adaptations below)
US Army Corps of Engineers
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
Yes ❑ No
Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Version 2 0

SOIL
Sampling Point Upland Site XII
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' LocZ
Texture Remarks
0-6 10YR 2/2 100
clay loam
6 12 10YR 2/2 90
5YR 4/6
10 C M
cla oam
'Type C= Concentration D= Depletion RM= Reduced Matrix CS= Covered or Coated Sand Grains 2Location PL =Pore Lining M =Matnx
Hydnc Sod Indicators (Applicable to all LRRs unless othervvnse noted )
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils'
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑
Dark Surface (S7)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147 148)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 147 148)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147 148)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Sods (1719)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
(MLRA 136 147)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
❑
Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ Red Parent Material (TF2)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
❑
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
❑
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑
Redox Depressions (F8)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N MLRA
❑ 13
Iron Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N MLRA
Iron
147 148)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
❑
Umbnc Surface (F13) (MLRA 136 122)
• Sandy Redox (S5)
❑
Piedmont Floodplam Sods (F19) (MLRA 148)
'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
• Stripped Matrix (S6)
wetland hydrology must be present
unless disturbed or problematic
Restrictive Layer (if present)
Type
Depth (inches)
Hydnc Sods Present? Yes ❑ No
Remarks
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont— Intenm Version

0

S
V V
r
r
Q
1

FA
1�
A
rl
N
Cd
wd
I
Cd
0
3
tti
�C
a�
V1
CL
-a 3
o
m
Sri Ln
IRt q*
X (n O O
}; m m
Vsww
.Ln
mV) Ln
�t!.LJ
L
0
M E "

$$$$$$sass
rac;• 1
F r i�rai.z_ i• i
A M F R
Y
AvI
_I' � F 1� �� •�
y
..►;,tea ' �i
ti ZwVC
1
Vol
L
a
N
i
a
� o
co -0 k
IM Mill
s
►e
tl
r Z
'
r
�
o
P
ao
3
u
o
=
e
�
s
a
N
i
a
� o
co -0 k
IM Mill
►e
tl
r Z
r

JSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
I
MATCH IrINE SEE SHEET 18
Pl-
I 11� \I 7
am
I
ig
I� 11111111 � \ I I
_
II � je
vm cm
NN TN r
21 Z^ Tr ym a 1I 1 1 I\ 1 \ \ \\ \ \ \ \\ I
cc zn ZA
DO e l
z Z oA r `� 7
m. Z 1 I
INR IN m
/ I 0 7 �1 1 111 �jl \I II \IllI 0 0 0
n
I
/sA 1` lk
1 ® cow
MATCH LINE SEE SHEET 20 a
m ° z
�\ z

N
-40
*�
f
i
;NSSSSS888SSSSS888
Oy/ I I
0 +n
rL m m i
m
r
r
V1
O y
� z m
m
v
m
m T
LA
I
"I 13
z I I C
rr
c�
I I <
� � I
dY43 U
CA o
MATCH LINE
m
>I<
y
u
0
0 0
D
C)
N
o
m �m c ° m cz
�z xz �o
c7-4 D--i zm
m c') m cn
V) N m cn g
m�
I--
Zm D� m m
3
D -V
C mD z0
�0 x 0 D
l D >
D can
M z
D
m
N
o 15
I
I
1
t I'
I
I
I�
on
I it
1
V N an 15° RCP
1ST ENO /
OI
1
t
X
z
c�
m 70 [ 1
w � N
O ao
Z1 y
2 1
70
,[
-,i
z<
fat
ca
Z
r
Z
CA
O
i�
o
Z
n m
z
ED
Anlpl��J
m.'o=
©>
o
mmz
f7d =
D
m
A
Dwm
v
I
I��,llkll��
X D
T
CONC/
m
I�l
mII
I
III
o �
1
dY43 U
CA o
MATCH LINE
m
>I<
y
u
0
0 0
D
C)
N
o
m �m c ° m cz
�z xz �o
c7-4 D--i zm
m c') m cn
V) N m cn g
m�
I--
Zm D� m m
3
D -V
C mD z0
�0 x 0 D
l D >
D can
M z
D
m
N
o 15
I
I
1
t I'
I
I
I�
on
I it
1
V N an 15° RCP
1ST ENO /
OI
1
t
X
z
c�
m 70 [ 1
w � N
O ao
Z1 y
2 1
70
,[
SEE SHEET 20
2�
�o
tit
0
01
CO "D :t
-,i
z<
fat
Z
r
Z
CA
O
i�
o
Z
9`
z
N
O
Anlpl��J
Z
.�
v
o
I��,llkll��
Mfr
SEE SHEET 20
2�
�o
tit
0
01
CO "D :t
z<
N
Z
Z
CA
O
i�
o
Z
z
N
O
Anlpl��J
Z
.�
v
o

REVISIONS
Const Revision. Realigned —Y/7 ( Y/7REV -1 and revised drolnoge. WTB 51912012
R/W Revision Revised PUE TUE PDE and TDE on Por(W 195 i97 due drainage pipe relocation. WTB 511612012
07 17
,1\ 2237 d p h19 dg _
MATCH LINE SEE SHEET l8 STA.550 +0000
m
I _
88p m
R'O ry I I I AJ RR8$ v\
N
y� III i n
I
o - I III I 4
as
c� I I III I ■�
4 � II111
z?4� Sa ra.
kS E� C 149
Qq
II
pI y
nH a
r
Rm t�11N
Rm � Oyu
rL
I C
S72'16 SPf
t
9668
JIMA
Al N
arc C
� � 1
_�
F�
9
a.yy
4:
e)
0
�o
o
m
�
mmm
VQ
n
999
Kg
r
F JI
n
ti
�
2
as
rn
02
y
I�Z
�.
CVO z
z?4� Sa ra.
kS E� C 149
Qq
II
pI y
nH a
r
Rm t�11N
Rm � Oyu
rL
I C
S72'16 SPf
t
9668
JIMA
Al N
arc C
� � 1
_�
F�
9
a.yy
4:
e)
°
Solon top, i I I o
j
uVam ¢ I�
w \ \k
mmrnm V o a 01 F
v
�ornmw s 3 gal 31, I j
1q: `
1 VVIV T. �T
15 RCP ! ° II II 11 a VI
pp if
I :b bl o c 96 f III s w
2222 m y oao o f III I /A7ne�wy lnL!
2g2��aP2 k �� a
If if 11 11 11
a�sa
Fp t \ pry 4
MATCH LINE SEE SHEET 20 STA.562 +0000
0
m
mmm
VQ
n
999
r
F JI
n
ti
�
2
rn
02
y
I�Z
�.
CVO z
O
O
:f
a
rp!
i is
0
y
No
14 �tll
I�
A
IQ
• 1
a
1-
°
Solon top, i I I o
j
uVam ¢ I�
w \ \k
mmrnm V o a 01 F
v
�ornmw s 3 gal 31, I j
1q: `
1 VVIV T. �T
15 RCP ! ° II II 11 a VI
pp if
I :b bl o c 96 f III s w
2222 m y oao o f III I /A7ne�wy lnL!
2g2��aP2 k �� a
If if 11 11 11
a�sa
Fp t \ pry 4
MATCH LINE SEE SHEET 20 STA.562 +0000
0
m
mmm
VQ
n
999
j?vI
n
ti
�
2
rn
02
y
I�Z
a
CVO z
O
O
a
i is
0