20120557 Ver 2_401 Application_20120712

Strickland, Bev
From: Homewood, Sue
Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2012 1:53 PM
To: Dennison, Laurie; Strickland, Bev
Subject: FW: PCN application, Proposed Sewer line Knox Road
Attachments: PCN submitted 6.10.12.pdf
You are going to be receiving an application for the above noted project in guilford county, owner is city of
Greensboro. They originally submitted as courtesy and they need written approval. project number already
exists, its 12 -0557. Please consider the new app. as a response to my request for additional info if you can do
that in BIMS. Here's an electronic version.
Sue Homewood
NC DENR Winston -Salem Regional Office
Division of Water Quality
585 Waughtown Street
Winston - Salem, NC 27107
Voice: (336) 771 -4964
FAX: [phone]
E -mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be
disclosed to third parties.
From: NOConnor [ mai Ito: NOConnor @ecslimited.com]
Sent: Tuesday, 3uly 10, 2012 9:22 AM
To: Homewood, Sue
Cc: BLuckey
Subject: PCN application, Proposed Sewer line Knox Road
Attached is the application for the sewer line on Knox Road. If you have questions, please contact Brad Luckey.
NANCY O'CONNOR
Administrative Assistant
ECS Carolinas, LLP 4811 Koger Boulevard, Greensboro, NC 27407
T:336- 856 -7150 D:336- 478 -1656 C:336- 362 -4593 F:336- 856 -7160 www.ecslimited.com
Confidential /proprietary message /attachments. Delete message /attachments if not intended recipient.

o Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no. ,
Form Version 1.3 Dec 10 2008
Pre - Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A. Applicant Information
1. Processing
1 a. Type(s) of approval sought from the
Corps: ®Section 404 Permit El Section 10 Permit
1 b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NW P) number: 12 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 For the record only for DWQ 401 For the record only for Corps Permit:
because written approval is not required? Certification:
® Yes ❑ No Q Yes ® No
1f. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation ❑ Yes ® No
of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank or in -lieu
fee program.
1 g. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h ❑ Yes No
below.
1 h. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)? ❑ Yes No
2. Project Information
2a. Name of project: Proposed Sewer Line- Stewart Mill /Knox Road
2b. County: Guilford
....... .... „
2c. Nearest municipality/ town: McCleansville
2d. Subdivision name:
2e. NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state
project no:
3. Owner Information
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed: The proposed sewer line crosses portions of parcels that are owned by multiple
owners, View Attachments
3b. Deed Book and Page No.
3c. Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
3d. Street address: -
3e. City, state, zip:
3f. Telephone no.:
3g. Fax no.:
3h. Email address:
Page 1 of 15
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

4.
Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is:
Agent F1 Other, specify:
4b.
Name:
Mr. Michael Borchers
4c.
Business name
City of Greensboro
(if applicable):
4d.
Street address:
P.O. Box 3136
4e.
City, state, zip:
Greensboro, NC 27402-3136
4f.
Telephone no..
336-373-2494
4g.
Fax no.:
336-412-6305
4h.
Email address:
[e-mail]
5.
AgenttConsultant Information (if applicable)
5a.
Name:
Bradley Luckey
5b.
Business name
ECS Carolinas, LLP
(if applicable):
5c.
Street address.-
4811 Koger Boulevard
5d.
City, state, zip:
Greensboro, NC 27407
5e.
Telephone no.:
[phone]
5g.
Email address:
bluckey@ecs[imited.com
Page 2of15
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
-1 a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID): Multiple Owners, View Attachments
Latitude: 36.063842 Longitude:
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees): 79.645905
1c. Properlysize: NA - Linear Project- acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc.) to Little Alamance Creek
proposed project:
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water: WS-V, nu rient sensitive waters
2c. River basin: Cape Fear
Page 3of15
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

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:
The site contains wooded land and fields. Surrounding properties contain a church, residences,wooded land and fields.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
ECS delineated the proposed sewer line corridor during the preliminary planning process. The sewer line was designed
to avoid and minimize impacts to the jurisdictional areas. Approximately 5 acres of wetlands were delineated. Two small
wetland pockets located within the easement that will be impacted due to project constraints are 0.005 acres in area. The
pockets will be restored to the existing grade and will continue to function as wetlands. However, the pockets will be
converted from bottomland hardwood to low -lying herbaceous vegetation .
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
ECS delineated the proposed sewer line corridor during the preliminary planning process. Approximately 2,000 linear
feet of stream channel were delineated. The stream channel located within the easement that will be impacted will be 81
linear feet in length. The impacts will be temporary with the exception of a concrete pier that must be placed into one of
the streams to support an aerial crossing. The other stream crossings will have rip rap buried in the existing channel for
stabilization and use for crossing the stream to maintain the easement.
.,n��o,uuvuvuu�„vrc., � a.�
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
The purpose of the project is to extend City of Greensboro sanitary sewer services north of Interstate 40 to properties
along Knox Road /Stewart Mill area. The extension is approximately 10,000 linear feet.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
The site contains undeveloped, wooded land and fields. The project consists of the installation of approximately 10,000
linear feet of sanitary sewer line adjacent to an unnamed tributary to Little Alamance Creek. The proposed sewer line will
impact 81 linear feet of stream and 0.005 acres (218 square feet) of wetlands.
The proposed sewer will have two aerial stream crossings. One aerial crossing will consist of two 300 foot sections of
sewer line positioned on piers spaced on 40 foot intervals. Per design, the ductile iron pipe must have a support for every
40 feet. One stream that must be crossed is approximately 40 feet wide. Placing the piers on the edges of the stream
will damage both banks of the stream as well as the bed in two locations, be subject to scour and contribute sediment into
the stream and have greater impact to the stream. Therefore, the pier is designed to be placed near the center of the
stream.
The second aerial crossing will be placed through the banks of a stream approximately three feet above the ordinary high
water mark. The crossing will be stabilized by placing footers within the banks and rip rap beneath the bed of the stream.
The remaining stream crossings will be excavated and stabilized below the natural elevation of the stream bed. The
elevations of the bed and banks of the stream will be returned to pre- construction elevations after the installation of the
proposed sewer line and the exposed bed /banks will be stabilized with matting and vegetated with grass immediately
following installation of the line. Soils will be stockpiled in upland areas adjacent to the crossings and will be used to
backfill the excavated trench /buried line.
The sewer lines have been designed to cross perpendicular to the streams in accordance with NCDWQ guidelines. A 10
foot permament maintenance crossing is being proposed at each of the stream crossings. Temporary construction
easements ranging between 30 and 40 feet will be used at each of the stream crossings (in accordance with "exempt"
activities for underground utility stream /buffer crossings in the NCDENR Red Book, Jordan Lake Buffer Rules). In upland
areas, the permenant sewer easement and temporary construction easements will be greater than at the
stream /wetland /buffer crossings. Haulers, loaders, excavators, cranes and other heavy equipment will be used to clear
and grade the site and install the sewer lines. Coffer dams will be installed in each of the construction areas and water
will be pumped around to prevent sediment from entering the stream.
Page 4 of 15
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property
project (including all prior phases) in the past? 2 Yes El No ❑Unknown
Comments: A portion of the proposed project was verified by
Mr. Andy Williams - USACE and Ms. Sue Homewood
NCDENR DWQ on September 1, 2010
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type Preliminary El Final
of determination was made?
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas? Agency/Consultant Company: ECS Carolinas, ILLP E.
Name (if known): Michael Brame and Brad Luckey Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
September 1, 2010
. .. ..........
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.
One property that the sanitary sewer line will cross is an approximate 45 acre tract that was proposed for development. A
permit has been issued for a temporary road crossing on a portion of the tract (Project Stingray, SAW-2011-01285). The
proposed sewer line and permenant road crossing were initially planned to be the second phase of Project Stingray.
However, the construction of the data center may not occur and the City of Greensboro has decided to proceed with the
extension of the proposed sewer line to provide sewer services to current and future residential /commercial /industrial
development in the vicinity of the site. To meet the needs of the City of Greensboro, the proposed sewer line is going to
be constructed independently of the proposed data center (whether constructed or not) and should, therefore, be
reviewed as a separate and independent project.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project? ❑ Yes No
6b. If yes, explain.
One property that the sanitary sewer line will cross is an approximate 45 acre tract that was proposed for development. A
permit has been issued for a temporary road crossing on a portion of the tract (Project Stingray, SAW-2011-01285). The
proposed sewer line and permenant road crossing were initially planned to be the second phase of Project Stingray.
However, the construction of the data center may not occur and the City of Greensboro has decided to proceed with the
extension of the proposed sewer line to provide sewer services to current and future residential /commercial /industrial
development in the vicinity of the site. To meet the needs of the City of Greensboro, the proposed sewer line is going to
be constructed independently of the proposed data center (whether constructed or not) and should, therefore, be
reviewed as a separate and independent project. —1
Page 5 of 15
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
Page 6 of 15
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

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)
Tem ora
Utility Line Bottomland ®Yes ®Corps
W1 []POT Crossing Hardwoods ❑ No ® DWQ 0.004
Utility Line Bottomland ® Yes ® Corps
W2 ❑ P ®T Crossing Hardwood E] No ® DWQ 0.001
—. ,,,,,,,.
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
2h. Comments: The proposed sewer line was designed to avoid impacts to the majority of wetlands located within the
evaluated corridor. However, it is necessary to impact two wetland pockets for a cumulative impact to 0.005 acres of wetland.
Approximately 0.004 acres of wetland will be impacted by the permanent sewer line easement (exhibit sheet 7). Approximately
0.001 acres of wetland will be impacted by excavation assoicated with a stream crossing (exhibit sheet 6). The proposed
alignment of the sewer line can not avoid this wetland impact due to a large topographic gradient to the west of the proposed
sewer line alignment. The natural elevation of the wetlands that will be impacted by the proposed sewer line will be restored to
pre- construction elevations. The wetlands are bottomland hardwoods that will be converted to low -lying herbaceous. Due to
the proposed wetland impacts being less than one tenth of an acre, mitigation should not be required.
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 i length
Permanent (P) or intermittent DWQ — non -404, width (linear
Temporary (T) (INT)? other) (feet) feet)
S1 ❑ P ®T Utility Line Unnamed ® PER ® Corps B 81
Crossing ❑ 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
i ❑ INT ❑ DWQ
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts 81
3i. Comments: The proposed sewer line has been designed to cross streams at nine locations that have cumulative stream
impacts to 81 linear feet of stream channel (see attached Stream Impact Table). The stream crossings are aligned to cross the
streams at nearly perpendicular (90 degree) intersections. Two stream crossings have been designed to cross streams
aerially, on piers. The first aerial crossing is designed to be supported on piers spaced on 40 feet intervals (exhibits sheets 2
and 3). The stream crossing was designed to position a pier in the stream channel to avoid erosion and scour durin heas.M.M.M.
Page 7 of 15
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

rain events around piers placed in proximity to the stream banks. The second aerial stream crossing has been designed to be
supported by 10 feet by 6 feet by 12 feet foundations constructed outside of the stream limits to span the stream channel
(exhibit sheet 5). This crossing was designed due to the large topographic gradients of the stream channel and areas east of
the stream channel. The two aerial stream crossings will impact 10 linear feet of stream channel with the installation of a 10
feet wide maintenace /vehicle crossing 6 inches below the native stream elevation.
The remaining seven stream crossings will impact a total of 71 linear feet of stream due to the installation of 10 foot wide
vehicle /maintenance crossings (exhibit sheets 4, 6, 8, 9, 10 and 11). As shown on exhibit sheet 8, one stream crossing will be
excavated beneath a culvert currently utilized as a road crossing and will impact one linear foot of stream channel. This
stream crossing was designed as close to 90 degrees as possible, such that a vehicle /maintenance crossing would not be
required (thus reducing stream impacts). At the remaining six stream crossings, the proposed sewer line will be buried below
the native elevation of the stream bed and banks. Soils excavated from the stream bed and bank will be stockpiled in adjacent
upland areas and used with stone to backfill the sewer line excavation such that the elevation of the beds and banks will be
returned to their natural state. The stream banks will be immediately stablized with vegetation and /or matting following the
installation of the line /maintenance corridor. Due to the proposed stream impacts being temporary and less than 150 linear
feet, mitigation should not be required.
4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then individually list all open water impacts below.
4a. 4b. 4c. 4d 4e,
Open water Name of waterbody
impact number - (if applicable) Type of impact Waterbody type Area of impact (acres)
Permanent (P) or
Temporar LT) „rd.
01 ❑P ❑T
02 ❑P ❑T
03 ❑P ❑T
04 ❑P ❑T
4f. Total open water impacts -
4g. Comments: Open water impacts are not proposed.
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, the com lete the chart below.
5a. 5b. 5c, 5 5e.
Wetland Impacts (acres) Stream Impacts (feet) Upland
Pond ID Proposed use or purpose (acres)
number of pond .........� n
Flooded Filled Excavated Flooded Filled Excavated Flooded
P1
2 „a
Sf. Total
u._ .
5g. Comments: Constructed ponds or lakes are not being proposed.
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required? El Yes ❑ No, If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
. - - ...... .... __ a
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
Page 8 of 15
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

6. Buffer Impacts (for DWO)
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: Jordan
Project is in which protected basin? ❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman
6b. 6c.: 6d 60, 1 6,- 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 re wired?
_....mm Utility ❑ Yes
61 ❑ PET Line Unnamed ® No 300 200
Crossing
B2 ❑P ❑T ❑Nos
B3 ❑P FIT ❑Yes
❑ No
6h. Total buffer impacts WO 200
6i. Comments: The proposed sewer line alignment crosses the streams at nearly perpendicular (90 degrees) intersections. f
The aerial and underground stream crossings have been designed to temporarily impact 40 linear feet (or less) of riparian
buffer. Permanent easements (maintenance corridors) have been designed to be 10 feet wide. The existing wooded land
within the permenant easements will be planted in low -lying herbaceous vegetation that can be mowed. Buffer mitiation should
not be required due to stream /buffer crossings being designed in accordance with "exempt' activities for aerial and
underground perpendicular utility crossings in the NCDENR Red Book, Jordan Lake Riparian Buffer Rules.
One stream crossing utilizes an existing roadway /culvert (Exhibit Sheet 8 -Buffer Impact 3). This crossing was designed as
near to perpendicular, such that portions of the existing roadway could be used as a vehicle maintenace easement (thus
reducing stream impacts). The crossing has been designed to impact approximately 300 square feet of Zone 1 and 200
square feet of Zone 2 buffer and utilize approximately 1,000 square feet of exisiting roadway within the buffer limits. This
crossing was designed at a non - perpendicular angle to use the exisiting roadyway /culvert to minimize additional stream,
wetland and buffer impacts. Two alternative crossing locations have been were evaluated. One alternative crossing would
impact an additional 125 square feet of buffer, compared to the proposed crossing. The other alternative crossing would have
additional wetland impacts compared to the proposed crossing. A drawing that shows the alternate locations is included as an
attachment. Based on a net reduction to the stream and buffer impacts by designing the crossing in an area where the stream
and associated buffers have already been impacted, mitigation is not warranted or proposed.
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.
The proposed sewer line has been designed to minimize the number of stream crossings and subsequently
stream /wetland /buffer impacts. One stream crossing has been designed to cross a stream section underground at a culvert
being used as a road crossing, thus eliminating the need for a 10 foot wide maintenace corridor and additional stream
impacts. The stream crossings are at or near 90 degree angles.
The aerial stream crossings have been designed to limit riparian buffer impacts. The temporary construction easements are
30 and 40 feet for the aerial stream crossings and the underground crossings do not exeed 40 feet with the majority being 30
feet. Permanent easements and maintenance corridors have been designed to not exceed 10 feet. Permanent easements will
be replanted with low -lying herbaceous vegetation that can be mowed immediately following the sewer line installation.
The vehicle /maintenance crossings have been designed so that excavated soils will be stockpiled in upland areas and used to
backfill the trench /line. The elevation of the stream channel will be returned to its natural elevation. Slopes will be stablized by
creating 3:1 slopes. Rip -rap will not be placed above the normal high water mark. Stabilization measures above the normal
high water mark will consist of approved matting and /or vegtative cover. Exhibit sheet 13 shows the plans for the permanent
vehicle /maintenance crossings.
The project area contains approximately 5 acres of wetlands and 2,000 linear feet of stream channel. The proposed sewer line
corridor is approximately 10,000 feet in length. The ro osed sewer line has been designed to avoid and minimize the impacts
Page 9 of 15
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

to streams and wetlands within the project area.
One stream crossing utilizes an existing roadway /culvert (Exhibit Sheet 8 -Buffer Impact 1). This crossing was designed as
near to perpendicular, such that portions of the existing roadway could be used as a vehicle maintenace easement (thus
reducing stream impacts). The crossing has been designed to impact approximately 300 square feet of Zone 1 and 200
square feet of Zone 2 buffer and utilize approximately 1,000 square feet of existing roadway within the buffer limits. This
crossing was designed at a non - perpendicular angle to use the existing roadyway /culvert to minimize additional stream,
wetland and buffer impacts. Two alternative crossing locations have been were evaluated. One alternative crossing would
impact an additional 125 square feet of buffer, compared to the proposed crossing. The other alternative crossing would have
additional wetland impacts compared to the proposed crossing. Based on a net reduction to the stream and buffer impacts by
designing the crossing in an area where the stream and associated buffers have already been impacted, mitigation is not
warranted or proposed.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
The clearing limits will be staked and silt fence will be used. The vehicle /maintenace crossings have been designed so that
excavated soils will be stockpiled in upland areas and used to backfill the trench /line /maintenance corridor. The stream
channel will be returned to its natural elevation following the installation of the vehicle /maintenance crossings. Slopes will be
stabilized by creating 3:1 slopes. Rip -rap or stone will not be placed above the normal high water mark. Stabilization measures
above the normal high water mark will consist of approved matting and /or vegtative cover. Exhibit sheet 13 shows the plans
for the permanent vehicle /maintenance crossings.
Temporary coffer dams will be installed upgradient of the proposed maintenance corridor. The temporary coffer dams will be
constructed using earth and stone berms. During construction, water will be pumped around the construction area into
sediment traps (or sediment bags) prior to being discharged downgradient of the construction area. Upon completion of the
sewer line installation, the temporary coffer dams will be removed. Following construction, disturbed slopes will be stablized
with permanent seeding, matting and temporary slopes linings. Best Management Practices (BMPs) willl be implemented
during construction activities to avoid sediment discharge into downgradient streams and wetlands. Exhibit sheet 12,
generated by Stimmel Engineering, shows the temporary creek crossing (pump around system).
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for ❑ Yes EJ No
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
2b, If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply): ❑ DWQ ❑ Corps
❑ Mitigation bank
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project? El Payment to in -lieu fee program
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter) pype Quantity
Page 10 of 15
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

3c. Comments:
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In-lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in-lieu fee program is attached. F� Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested: linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature: El warm El cool []cold
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only): square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested: acres
4f. Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested: acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested: acres
4h. Comments:
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) — required by DWO
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires 0 Yes No
buffer mitigation?
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 Reason for impact Total impact Multiplier Required mitigation
(square feet) (square feet)
Zone 1 3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2 1.5
6f. Total buffer mitigation required:
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in-lieu fee fund).
6h. Comments: Buffer mitiation should not be required due to the stream/buffer crossings being designed in accordance with
1'exempt" activities for aerial and underground perpendicular utility crossings in the NCDENR Red Book, Jordan Lake
Riparian Buffer Rules or being designed to use an existing area to minimize the impacts.
Page llof15
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

u..m. . M,. a ,.0 . . _ uu ,
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.
Comments: The proposed sewer line is not expected to generate /concentrate
stormwater. Existing diffuse flow is not expected to be altered or changed during or
after construction. If diffuse flow is not maintained throughout the riparian buffers ❑ Yes Z No
during construction activities, then periodic corrective actions to restore diffuse flow
will be designed to impede the formation of erosion gullies and ensure that diffuse
flow is maintained throughout the riparian buffer during construction activities.
Therefore, a diffuse flow plan should not be required
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan? El Yes ® No
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why: An increase in impervious surfaces is not
expected due to the installation of the proposed sewer line. Stormwater should not be generated /concentrated during or
after construction activities. Therefore, a stormwater mangement plan should not be required.
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
❑ Certified Local Government
2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan? ❑ DWQ Stormwater Program
❑ DWQ 401 Unit
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which local government's jurisdiction is this project? Guilford County
i
® Phase 11
3b. Which of the following locally - implemented stormwater management programs ❑ NSW
apply (check all that apply): ❑ USMP
❑ 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
Page 12 of 15
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

5a.
Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements? E Yes
E] No
5b. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met? Yes
No
F.
Supplementary Information
1.
Environmental Documentation (DWO 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 Ll 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.) El Yes
No
Comments: To the best of our knowledge, a NEPA or SEPA is not required.
2.
Violations (DWO Requirement)
2a.
Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (1 5A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (1 5A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards, El Yes
No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (1 5A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b.
Is this an after-the-fact permit application? El 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 (DWO Requirement)
3a.
Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in El Yes
No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b.
If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
The site is located in an area of Greensboro that is experiencing growth in residential, commercial and industrial
sectors.
As a result, sanitary sewer services will be needed to accommodate current and future land owners in the area. We are
not aware of additional development that will result, which will impact nearby downstream water quality.
4.
Sewage Disposal (DWO 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 will not be generated by the proposed action.
Page l3of15
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 F1 Yes No
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act 0 Yes F1 No
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted. 11, Raleigh
Asheville
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
ECS consulted the Natural Heritage Program Website to determine if Federally Protected Endangered or Threatened
species inhabit the site quadrangle. The site is located on the Mcleansville, NC Quadrangle. There are no Federally
Listed Endangered or Threatened species identified on the Mcleansville, NC Quadrangle.
ECS contacted the US FWS concerning impacts to Federally Protected Endangered or Threatened species that may be
located within the project area. The USFWS service requested that a detailed study be performed to identify the presence
of Small Whorled Pogonia. Habitat Restoration and Assement Professionals (HARP) has performed a detailed study for
the project site. HARP's study did not identify the Small Whorled Pogonia or suitable habitat for the species on the site. A
copy of HARP's report is included as an attachment.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat? E] Yes No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
The NCDENR has classified the watershed that includes the site as WS-V, nutrient sensitive waters. The endangered
species list does not identify protected fish species that inhabit waterbodies nearby the site. Based on our knowledge of the
site, the project does not occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat.
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 El 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?
There are no structures located on the site that could be considered for historical preservation status. ECS personnel
have visited and walked the site in conjunction with a wetland delineation. We have not observed artifacts on the site. To
the best of our knowledge, the site and adjoining properties are not designated as having historic or cultural preservation
Page l4of15
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: The proposed sewer line alginment is adjacent to an unnamed
tributary to Little Alamance Creek. The majority of the sewer line has been designed to avoid the 100 year flood plain.
However, portions of the proposed sewer line will encroach into the 100 year floodplain. To address the aerial crossings
and their impacts to the floodplain, a CLOMR study has been performed by Stimmel Associates, PA.. The study has
been performed and submitted to the agencies for approval.
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map, Panel Numbers
3710880400J, 3710880300J and 3710881400J.
as .... ;
r u
� 11
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name Applic nt/Agent's Si a ure Cate
(Agent's signature is vale my if an authoh2 n letter from the applicant
is provided J
Page 15 of 15
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

W �
a W
co
Z Z a Q W D X
wo x'00 QW�� zw
LU
J Q D
<
IL
vii
XLL Qz
a W O o W g o
o L 0
L- coYOto�O� a z
j
Ei »
m
�' If
I
O � I
" W 3 ,,
..o O:oL LLl9LlGo TTV83AO : 6mp'e4l4!4x3 6.- "o,o W02JIS 041 -JJO 9090— OL \SJIGIHX3 ONISS080 VN381S F, tNLI0dW3S�Sll91HX3�s0ulmopy \Ei090- 01 \�.:

DRAWNG NAME: P:\2010\100217\Cfvil\100217—ENG—C3Dll.dwg — 30—Inch Grav — PCN Exh2
5/17/2012 4:06 PM I

601 N Trade Street
Suite 200
Stimmel Winston Salem NG
Landscape Architecture 27111.2916
Civil Engineering P 336 123 1067
Stimmel Associates, PA Land Planning F 336 723 1069
im
im
10 L I
OFF Our
Fr�& FE
ILI'
(Y
b j 0. 0
R, W r COG SFD. 214
rx W t 10 WIDE PERMANENT
\Cqj I
fi
59.5
18+50 19+00 19+50 20+00
�"'SMh #104
CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE:
1. INSTALL COFFER DAMS USING
610 SANDBAGS
Y BYPASS STREAM FLOW AROUND
SAND BAGGED AREA.
5 INSTALL SEWER LINE AND
PLACE STREAM STABILIZATION
STONE.
REMOVE COFFER DAMS TO
RESTORE STREAM FLOW.
SEE SHEETS 12 & 13 FOR
BYPASS PUMPING AND
MAINTcNANCE CROSSING
IDETAII-S.
S-SMH
#103
STA =
18+96.00
RIM =
608.88
59.5
18+50 19+00 19+50 20+00
�"'SMh #104
CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE:
1. INSTALL COFFER DAMS USING
610 SANDBAGS
Y BYPASS STREAM FLOW AROUND
SAND BAGGED AREA.
5 INSTALL SEWER LINE AND
PLACE STREAM STABILIZATION
STONE.
REMOVE COFFER DAMS TO
RESTORE STREAM FLOW.
SEE SHEETS 12 & 13 FOR
BYPASS PUMPING AND
MAINTcNANCE CROSSING
IDETAII-S.

h
'd
64x, ! • � %!
i,lna`I`aI!_Nrk��e� °a �
€E$%dPORARy
�''1,7NS7RUCT10��
rPo
I ASE V-
r
5.`='fmu + #I 06A
-ABi 7A ":0 ?11/ ;
bay n.
29 +50 30 +00
titiMH 1U6H - ti ' tl 'lei
L iiI] 29
E iAO,LIZATI€ N/
h�1d91'NTE! a C= CROSSINC
T"' ,.I #107
t
{ 5 ,
V
ND
CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE:
1. INSTALL COFFER DAMS USING
SANDBAGS
?. BYPASS STREAM FLOW AROUND j
SAND BAGGED AREA.
- INSTALL SEWER LINE AND
PLACE STREAM STABILIZATION
STONE.
_ —_ 4. REMOVE COFFER DAMS TO
RESTORE STREAM FLOW.
605 =4 SEE SHEETS 12 & 13 FOR
BYPASS PUMPING AND
MAINTENANCE CROSSING
��
fi a 'Aro"
� � A kV •y., �y qS"
•11

5 MH #I 10
20 PERMANEiVT
SEWER VkMENT
I F,9 5F OF
WETLANDs IMPACT
r.
/I
Ni
0
"tr Ai
Lt �6A
E
t r( N,
w
K7t
1, W i'00t�
Tr llia Q'2( i""I 'I -,11 j if ii,
r'k ""1' 7,111, 1f Yt
X g't
"j ,"I "jr Pr
%
!NEZ
I j1p'
J
1%
40' TIMPORN"
CDNS TRUCTION
EEASEMENT n. X
IN,
ij".
SCALE: 1 "0'
d ti,7 40
- - --- - - - ---------- ---
601 N Trade Street
StImmel
Suite 200
Winston Salem NC
I.,andscap,e, Amd"iltocturet
27101-2916
f-r;gAimp-Nni:
P 336 723 1067
Stimmel Associates, PA Land Planning
F' 336 723 1069
5 MH #I 10
20 PERMANEiVT
SEWER VkMENT
I F,9 5F OF
WETLANDs IMPACT
r.
/I
Ni
0
"tr Ai
Lt �6A
E
t r( N,
w
K7t
1, W i'00t�
Tr llia Q'2( i""I 'I -,11 j if ii,
r'k ""1' 7,111, 1f Yt
X g't
"j ,"I "jr Pr
%
!NEZ
I j1p'
J
1%
40' TIMPORN"
CDNS TRUCTION
EEASEMENT n. X
IN,
ij".
SCALE: 1 "0'
d ti,7 40
- - --- - - - ---------- ---

1 *11 ); AL I,, (,U I` I° H 1 A G% IM,;
1i
N 0 OA G S
SAND IJAC ED AREA.
i. INSTALL SEWI P LINE AN "0 PI"M"
STREAM STABILIZATI'Or4 sroNE�
4 REMOVE 00FFEF� I 'a I,S [t 1�,, TORE
rTRF-A l -ILO �
SEE SHEETS 12 ,:fir 1.3 F OR
6 OYPASS PUMPING, AND
MAIN1 F NXKL CROS IM, # l I AIr S
311
COG STD. 214
10' WIDE
ERMAN[ :NI
AR TWEUANCE
CROS -SIN"C
BYPASS
PUMP
5'-'
SS
•
RIM = 614.17
C/I INV = 601.42
,p E' 120A F
IN
Im
mg
600
00
601 N Trade Street
Stimmel
Suite 200
'
Winston Salem NC
Landscape Architecture
27101 -2916
Civil Engineering
Stimmel Associates, PA Land Planning
P 336723 1067
F 336 723 1069
1 *11 ); AL I,, (,U I` I° H 1 A G% IM,;
1i
N 0 OA G S
SAND IJAC ED AREA.
i. INSTALL SEWI P LINE AN "0 PI"M"
STREAM STABILIZATI'Or4 sroNE�
4 REMOVE 00FFEF� I 'a I,S [t 1�,, TORE
rTRF-A l -ILO �
SEE SHEETS 12 ,:fir 1.3 F OR
6 OYPASS PUMPING, AND
MAIN1 F NXKL CROS IM, # l I AIr S
311
COG STD. 214
10' WIDE
ERMAN[ :NI
AR TWEUANCE
CROS -SIN"C
BYPASS
PUMP
5'-'
SS
•
RIM = 614.17
C/I INV = 601.42
,p E' 120A F
IN
Im
mg
600
00

ME
�f
D,- RMANENT CREED
VAN—, ENANQE
CROSSING 0 6"
STREAM lNVER'T
2 is;' @ C.1
6051.. 1 � _ �._ � _I 605
49 +00 49 +50 50+00 50 +50 51+00 51+50

12 ot
.......... s „rEARM HERM
STREAM CROSSING " 10
rUs "I M'IN ra x to
PFP RAP FLOW
t' :6l r Vii _
LN” J - ,
!
1
/
TIP F
E � 4M,
d R1�.�w�Ff !
R�
l
�t
I.
, D.' r,, POf r CREEK
! ! !
CROSSING DURMG l K. .. ! � I

w
S TREA M
FL OW
TOP OF BANK
EX. INV.
CREEK
20' PERM.
EA SMEN 7- WIN.
11
13 of 13
lr;P OF BANK
RIP-RAP
rYPICAL
SYNTHETIC FrL TER
FABRIC
PLAN
'18" CLASS I
RIP-RAP
i_
AL
SECUON A-A
NA TURA L
GROUND
p.TPF
TOP OF BANK
EX. INV.
CREEK
20' PERM.
EA SMEN 7- WIN.
11
13 of 13
lr;P OF BANK
RIP-RAP
rYPICAL
SYNTHETIC FrL TER
FABRIC
PLAN
'18" CLASS I
RIP-RAP
i_
AL
SECUON A-A

Stream
Type of
Stream
Perennial
-
Type of
— ---------
Average
Impact
Impact
Impact
Name
(Per) or
Jurisdiction(
Stream
Length
Number-
Intermittent
Corps-404,
Width
(linear
P or T
(NT)
10 DWQ-
(feet)
feet)
non 404,
other)
sl
Utility
Unnamed
PER
Corps
8
10
Line
Crossing
papa
S2
Utility
Unnamed
PER
Corps
8
10
Line
Crossing
S3
Utility
L)nnwned
PER.
Corps
8
10
Line
Crossing
Utility
Unnamed
PER
Corps
9
10
Line
Crossing
S5
Utility
Unnamed
PER.
Corps
8
to
Line
Crossing
S6
Utility
Uunamed
PER
Corps
3
1,
Line
Crossing
S7
Utility
L)nnamed
PER
Corps
8;
to
Line
Crossing
S8
Utility
Unnamed
PER
Corps
8
10
Line
Crossing
S9
Utility
Unnamed
PER,
Corps
8
Line
Crossing

ECS Carolinas, LLP
AGENT AUTHORIZATION
Scope of Work: Stream Permitting Services
Location: Proposed Sewer Line Alignment — Knox Road
McLeansville, Guilford County, North Carolina
This form authorizes ECS to act as our agent in stream /wetland matters including U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers and North Carolina Division of Water Quality field verification
and permit application.
Owner /Agent Information:
Name:
G_mnil 4rlrlreec
9
S,k- e..'Je_.. k&-e u.J (XD �„re e v��bot o -- Vn c-1 • o �/

THE STREAM/WETLAND LOCATIONS SHOWN ON THIS MAP ARE APPROXIMATE. THEY HAVE BEEN DELINEATE1
BY ECS. THEY HAVE NOT BEEN VERIFIED BY THE U.S ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS. THEY HAVE NOT BEEN
SURVEYED.
Yl:
—36
%
, ww*
mv,
lk I
asill ON114
1< \
qr! 11 01r,"
e OEM. A LU7
PI-2
N,
T7
L
Proposed Sewer Line Alignment (Subject to Change)
Approximate Location of Perennial Stream
Approximate Location of Intermittent Stream
Approximate Location of Wetland
DP-1 E Flag Number /Approximate Location
SOURCE:
OVERALL OFFSITE PUBLIC SANITARY
SEWER LAYOUT PREPARED BY STIMMEL
ASSOCIATES, P.A. AND FIELD NOTES
PREPARED BY ECS PERSONNEL
04,
................
dw;K.W ca
1V
J, 'Ile A
FIGURE 3A
STREAM/WETLAND LOCATION MAP
PROPOSED SEWER LINE ALIGNMENT
MCLEANSVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA
NOT TO SCALE I CAROLINAS I ECS PROJECT NO. 09-19885

BY ECS. THEY HAVE NOT BEEN VERIFIED BY THE U.S ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS. THEY HAVE NOT BEEN
e: U I°�,;ALL
t
- PLEASE NOTE THAT THE STREAM/WETLAND LOCATIONS SHOWN ON THIS MAP HAVE BEEN PREVIOUSLY
DELINEATED, VERIFIED BY THE AGENCIES AND SURVEYED. DURING THE INITAIL DELINEATION, AN UPLAND
BERM THAT IS LOCATED ADJACENT TO ONE OF THE STREAMS WAS INCLUDED WITHIN THE WETLAND
BOUNDARY FLAGS. ECS REVISITED THE AREA TO DELINEATE THE BOUNDARY BETWEEN THE WETLAND AND
THE UPLAND BERM SO THE EXACT WETLAND IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE SEWER LINE CAN BE
DETERMINED. IT IS NOT NECESSARY TO LOCATE THE OTHER JURISDICTIONAL AREAS THAT HAVE BEEN
PREVIOUSLY SURVEYED,
SOURCE:
PRELIMINARY ONSITE PUBLIC SANITARY
SEWER LAYOUT PREPARED BY STIMMEL
ASSOCIATES, P.A. AND FIELD NOTES
PREPARED BY ECS PERSONNEL
NOT TO SCALE
CAROLINAS I ECS PROJECT NO. 09-19885

Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site?
Yes No
Community ID: Wooded
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation:)?
Yes No
Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area?
Yes No
Field Location: View Figure 3A
(If needed, ex lain on the reverse side)
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species (Latin/Common) Stratum
Indicator
Plant Species (Latin/Common) Stratum Indicator
Woodwardia areolata
Netted chainfern Herb
OBL
Acer saccharinum
Silver ma le Tree/Sap
FACW
Uhnus rubra
Red elm Tree/Sap
FAC
Fraxinus,22jikylvanica
Green ash Tree /Sap
FACW
- I
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC -): 100% FAC Neutral: 100%
Numeric Index:
Remarks:
The dominant vegetation is hydro h tic.
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Primary Indicators
Aerial Photographs
Inundated
Other
Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
Water Marks
® No Recorded Data
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Field Observations
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators
Depth of Surface Water: 0"
Oxidized Rooi Cho nnels in Upper 12 Inches
Water- Staiiaed Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: >12"
Local Soli Survey Data
1
FAC - Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: >12"
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
Wetland hydrology indicators are present.
(Wetform) Page t of 2

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Proposed Sewer Line Alignment - Knox Road
Project No: 6 /15/2011
Applicant /Owner: Holder Construction Company
: Guilford
Investigators: ECS Carolinas, LLP
LDate:
09 -19885 North Carolina
J
: DP -1
Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): Chewacla loam
- --
Map Symbol: ChA
Mapped Hydric Inclusion? ®Yes [_ No
Drainage Class: Somewhat poorly drained
Field Observations Confirm Mapped T Yes No
pPe Type: ® ❑
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Fluvaquentic dystrudepts
Profile Descri tion
Depth
Matrix Color
Mottle Color
Mottle
{ij!c es Horizon
(Munsell Moist)
(Munsell Moist)
Abundance /Contrast
Texture Concretions, Structure, dc.
0 -6
10YR 4/6
0%
Loam
642
2.5Y 4/1
10YR 416
20%
[A)HIM
Hydric Soil Indicators:
❑ Histosol
❑ Concretions
❑ Histic Epipedon
❑ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
❑ Sulfidic Odor
❑ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
❑ Aquic Moisture Regime
❑ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
❑ Reducing Conditions
❑ Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors
--Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
Hydric soil indicators are present.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
-
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Yes No
Is the Sampling Point within the Wetland? Eyes
Wetland Hydrology Present?
No
.,Eyes
Hydric Soils Present? '
,Yes No
Remarks:
The three wetland criteria are present. The sampling point is located within a wetland.
(Wetfoml) Page 2 of 2

=Circumstances umstances exist on the site? Yes (� o Community ID: Wooded
icantly disturbed (Atypical Situation:)? Yes No Transect ID:
ential Problem Area? Yes l'b Field Location: View Figure 3A
lain on the reverse side)
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant S ecies (Latin/Common)
Stratum
Indicator Plant S ecies (Latin/Common) Stratum Indicator
Li ustrum sinense
Chinese rivet
Tree /Sap
FAC
Toxicodendron radicans
Poison ivy
Vine
FAC
Uhnus rubra
Red elm
Tree/Sa
FAC
Fraxinus mnsylvanica
Green ash
Tree /Sap
FACW
Lonicera 'a onica
Japanese honeysuckle
Vine
FAC-
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC -): 80% FAC Neutral: 50%
Numeric Index:
Remarks:
The dominant ve etation is hydrophytic.
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Primary Indicators
Aerial Photographs
Inundated
Other
:Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
Wzjter Marks
® No Recorded Data
C)rift Dines
'iment Deposit-,
Field Observations
_ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators
Depth of Surface Water: 0"
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Water- Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: >12"
Local Soil Survey Data
FAC- Neutral Test
De th to Saturated Soil: >12"
Other (Ex lain in Remarks)
Remarks:
Wetland hydrolog indicators are not gresent.
(Wetform) Page 1 of 2

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Proposed Sewer Line Alignment - Knox Road
Project No: Date: 06/15/2011
Applicant/Owner: City of Greensboro
� County: Guilford
Investigators: ECS Carolinas, LLP
09 -19885 State: North Carolina
Plot 1D: DP -2
Map Uuit Name (Series and Phase): Chewacla loam
Map Symbol: ChA
Mapped Hydric Inclusion? ®Yes [_ No
Drainage Class: Somewhat poorly drained
Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type: Yes Z No
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Fluvaquentic dystrudepts
Profile Descri tion
Depth
Matrix Color
Mottle Color
Mottle
(inches _ Horizon
(Munsell Moist)
(Munsell Moist)
Abundance /Contrast
Texture, Concretions, Structure etc.
0-4
IOYR 4/6
2.5Y 4/3
30%
Loam
i
Hydric Soil Indicators:
❑ Histosol
❑ Concretions
❑ Histic Epipedon
❑ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
❑ Sulfidic Odor
❑
Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
❑ Aquic Moisture Regime
❑
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
❑ Reducing Conditions
❑ Listed on National Hydric Soils List
❑ Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors
Other, (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
Hydric soil indicators are not present.
I
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Is the Sampling Point within the Wetland?
_ _
Yes
No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? ❑yes : ' No
Remarks: -
Wetland hydrology and hydric soil indicators are not present. The sampling point is not located within a wetland.
(Wefforrn) Page 2 of 2

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site?
Yes
o Community ID: Woo
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation:)?
Yes
myes
No Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area?
No Field Location: View Figu're 3A.
(If needed, ex lain on the reverse side)
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant S ecies (Latin/Common) Stratum
Indicator
Plant S cies (Latin/Common) Stratum Indicator
Woodwardia areolata
Netted chainfern Herb
OBL
Acer saccharinum
Silver ma le Tree /Sap
FACW
Ulmus rubra
Red elm Tree/S"
FAC
Fraxinus n[is lvanica
Green ash Tree /Sap
FACW
I
I
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC -): 100% FAC Neutral: 100%
Numeric Index:
Remarks:
The dominant ve etation is hydro hytic.
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Primary Indicators
Aerial Photographs
Inundated
Other
Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
Water Marks
® No Recorded Data
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Field Observations
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators
Depth of Surface Water: 0"
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Water- Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: >12"
Local Soil Survey Data
-
FAC- Neutral Test
De th to Saturated Soil: >12"
Other (Explain in Remarks)_
Remarks:
Wetlandhdrology indicators are present.
(Wetform) Page 1 of 2

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
-1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Proposed Sewer Line Alignment - Knox Road
Project No:
Date: 06/15/2011
Applicant/Owner: City of Greensboro
County: Guilford
Investigators: ECS Carolinas, LLP
09- 19885
State: North Carolina
Plot ID: DP -1
Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): Chewacla loam
Map Symbol: ChA
Mapped Hydric Inclusion? ®Yes ❑ No
Drainage Class: Somewhat poorly drained
Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type: ®Yes ❑ No
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Fluvaquentic dystrudepts
Profile Descri tion
Depth
Matrix Color
Mottle Color
Mottle
(inches IIorizon
(Mansell Moist)
(Mansell Moist)
Abundance /Contrast
Texture Concretions Structure, etc.
1116
10YR 416
0%
Loam
6 -!2
2.5Y 4/1
10YR 4/6
20%
1, uln
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_
❑ Histosol
❑ Concretions
❑ Histic Epipedon
❑ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
❑ Sulfidic Odor
❑ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
❑
Aquic Moisture Regime
❑ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
❑
Reducing Conditions
❑ Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Gle ed or Low Chroma Colors
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
Hydric soil indicators are present.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes LJ No Is the Sampling Point within the Wetland? NYes Li NO
Wetland Hydrology Present? HYes LJ No
Hydric Soils Present? ®yes 0 No
Remarks:
The three wetland criteria are present. The sampling point is located within a wetland.
(Wetform) Page 2 of 2

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Array Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
S ;f-1' tL)N l: A.CKGROUND_I FFORMATION
A, REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD): May 29, 2012
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Raleigh, Proposed Sewer Alignment - Knox Road, ECS Project No. 09-
19885
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
State: NC County/parish/borough: Guilford City: McLeansville
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 36.070831° N Long. - 79.649264° W.
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Little Alamance Creek
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: Big Alamance Creek
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 03030002
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,
)b REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
Field Determination. Date(s): September 1, 2011
ECTI N II: SUv AIY F
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There "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 "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):
TNWs, including territorial seas
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
Relatively permanent waters' (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
`4 Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
1W 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: 2,000 linear feet: 7 width (ft) and/or 0.32 acres.
Wetlands: 5 acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: 1987,,E _. Alawd
Elevation of established OHWM (if known): Unknown.
23 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 shalt 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).
' Supporting documentation is presented in Section III.R

SECTION[ III: M .,'4NA Y11,1111S.
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 M.D.I. 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 HLB below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
Z. Wetlandadjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent ":
Bb 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 Rapenos 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 HI.D.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section HI.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 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. H the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section HLB.1 for
the tributary, Section III.B.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section IILB.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.
to Characteristics of non -TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
di) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: 4,000 +'
Drainage area: 4,000 + ?aim
Average annual rainfall: 42.7 inches
Average annual snowfall: 9.1 inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
® Tributary flows directly into TNW.
® Tributary flows through 2.. tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are f river miles from TNW.
Project waters are � } rMr miles Jimrt RM,
Project waters are tatii fill (sIT411 -to rn lin Inant TNW.
Project waters are Jc ` n-nal (straight) InIles from RPW
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNWS: The unnamed tributaries that cross the site flow into Little Alamance Creek which flows
into Big Alamance Creek which flows into the Haw River and then the Cape Fear.
a 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.

purposes.
fJ -0 General Tributary Characteristic .% 'uI =KAtLhbALQPjA
Tributary is: E Natural
El Artificial (man- made), Explain:
Manipulated (man- altered). Explain: Some areas have been historically altered for agricultural
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: 7 feet
Average depth: 7 feet
Average side slopes:
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
® Silts ® Sands ❑ Concrete
® Cobbles Gravel ® Muck
® Bedrock ® Vegetation. Type /% cover: 80
❑ Other. Explain:
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain: Relatively stable.
Presence of run/riffld- ool complexes. Explain: Moderate amount of riffle -pool complexes.
Tributary geometry
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): 1 -3 %
(0 Flow:
Tributary provides for:
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year: ;
Describe flow regime: Constant.
Other information on duration and volume:
Subsurface flow: .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.' Explain:
If factors other than the OHVv1M were used to determ
High fide Line indicated by
rJ oil or s..,urn litre along �Jiore o jecis
LJ fine shell or debris; de'ptjsits (tttri: h��rr j
❑ physical markings /characteristics
El tidal gauges
❑ other (list):
the presence of litter and debris
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
the presence of wrack line
sediment sorting
seottr
multiple observed or predicted flow events
abrupt change in plant community
ne lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply)
Mean high W&cr Mark indicated by:
❑ Su rvcy to available.dtturn,
❑ physical markings;
❑ vegetation lines /changes in vegetation types.
(M) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain: Water color is relatively clear. There are sediment deposits.
Identify specific pollutants, if known: No sheens observed.
'A 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 iuirelated to the waterbudy "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):
Z Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width): The undeveloped land located adjacent to the streams varies
between bottorriland hardwood to low-lying herbaceous shrubs.
Wetland fringe. Characteristics: There are wetland fringes that result from groundwater seeps.
Habitat for:
Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
Other environmentally - sensitive species. Explain findings:
Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings: Crayfish, minnows, salamanders, frogs and macro - invertebrates were
observed.
Z. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non-TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size:5acres
Wetland type. Explain: Various types, primarily bottomland hardwoods.
Wetland quality, Explain: Various, moderate to good in most areas.
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
IN General Flow ReWisgiship with NotL—JNW,
Flow is: 460�04M%10. Explain: Saturated to surface.
Surface flow is: _
JMQQedA'
p _ gTg1% _
Characteristics: No surface flow.
Subsurface flow: ( i
64
Explain findings;
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
Adiagcncy DeterirdnKiMI ME
&W11 'b_
Directly abutting
Not directly abutting
ED Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain: Adjacent to streams or other direct connection to streams
and/or drainage features.
❑ Ecological connection. Explain:
❑ Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
44 LfuLi—mity (Rela hl ' Iso 4W
_Jio "' ' I '
j - miles Project wetlands are from TNW.
Project waters are -AIFIWI (st ii til) rni�ws from TNW.
Ai
Flow is from:
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the' , > �,�tj floodplain.
(®) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain: Water color is clear in areas where it is present.
Identify specific pollutants, if known: Unknown.
(Hi) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width): At least 50 feet wide in most areas.
Vegetation type/percent cover. Explain: Botton-dand hardwoods and herbaceous, 50-85% in most areas.
Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species. Explain findings:
0 Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain Findings: Crayfish and amphibians.
3, Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis: K
Approximately ( 5 ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis,

For each wetland, specify the following:
1hmmlY'.rubt K ft, hi 4c fian Mi in Q lam
y -All Total of 5 Acres
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed: The wetlands on the site function to
filter and control surface water runnoff. The provide habitat for aquatic species. The add to the diversity of the ecosystem at the
site.
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?
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:
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: They are connected directly to RPWs on this site.
Significaut 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 I11.1): The wetlands are located in the floodplains adjacent to the streams and in other areas are connected by non-
jurisdictional drainage features.
II. 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:
TNWs: linear feet width (ft), Or, facers,
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: 0 Ca ess.
Ws 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: Crayfish, salamanders, frogs, iron oxidizing bacteria, substrate sorting, riffle -pool complexes and
ordinary high water mark were observed.

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.. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally: Some areas of the streams are intermittent. They connect directly to perennial streams.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: 2,000 linear feet 7 width (ft).
Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
.X Non -RPWs8 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.
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 Physically connected or connected by a drainage feature or floodplain hydrology.
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary
seasonal in Section III.13 and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW: Physically connected or connected by a drainage feature or floodplain hydrology.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: 5acres.
S. 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: Rases
,: 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: a es,
Impoundments of jurisdictional waters,
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S ' or
Dernon.lraAe that water um is the .i ileria fol tine of tlic catt;Etatr ew pri sa:ti�uT nkrrwe (l= ),€ar
Demmnstrate that WXer is istako,ed with a nexus to conirnerc. 0wr I" b low).
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):10
El which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
sSee 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.

El from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
I RO 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:
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: 2,000 linear feet7width (ft).
Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Wetlands: 5 acres.
F. NON - JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
El 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 sole( 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): krizar Ibet width (ft).
Lakes/ponds: acres.
Other non - wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
Wetlands: aura
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).
Lakes/ponds: Ares,
Other non - wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
Wetlands: K,-re+%
SE T N 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/consultaazrt.
El 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: McLeansviIle 1 "= 2,000'.
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: Gui[ford County, NCSS Website,
E] National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
FF,MAIFIRM maps: 3710880400J.
100 -year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
Photographs: E Aerial (Name & Date): GPS Map /Aerial Photo Dated 2009.
or ❑ Other (Name & Date):
Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
Applicable /supporting case law:
't` Applicable /supporting scientific literature:
0 Other information (please specify): Verification on portion of the site on September 1, 2010.

IS. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD: There are multiple streams and wetlands on the site. The majority of the streams are
perennial. Potyions of the site were verified by Mr. Andy Williams with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and Ms. Sue Homewood with the
North Carolina Division of Water Quality on September 1, 2010. Permits are required from the USACE and DWQ for impacts to the streams
and wetlands.

PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS AND
LAND OWNERS
Proposed Sewer Line
Knox Road /Stewart Mill Area
The parcel and owner information shown in the above table was obtained
from the Guilford County GIS Website. Portions of parcels not listed will be
crossed by the proposed sewer line; however, are not identifiable features
on the Guilford County GIS website.
The City of Greensboro is currently in the process of acquiring the
easements required for the proposed sewer line. Individual land owners
should NOT be contacted concerning regulatory issues. All
comments, conversations and correspondence concerning regulatory
information should be directed to the City of Greensboro and /or ECS
Carolinas, LLP.

IILL
301 McCullough Drive, Suite 460
Charlotte, NC 28262
C)fflce,, 704--841-2841
Faw 7104-841-2447
Environmental Assessment of the Knox Road Area Outfall for the Possible Occurrence of the
Small Whorled Pogonja (Isotria medeoloides) in the Vicinity of Greensboro, NC (Gibsonville)

ROW dominated by secondary succession species, emerging on to Knox Rd.
I

"e—KIIII. T1__�.TrrFn77j=5M7AM ann Q20
entering the floodplain forest (as described above) crosses Little Alamance Creek to terminate
in a disturbed floodplain forest on the north side of the creek and west of a tributary entering
the main creek.
In comparing the orchid habitat with the habitats present in this sewer project, there is no
comparable habitat in the sewer project area. The combination of pines and hardwood species
is not present, and in general the floodplain vegetation is too dense for the orchid because of
the nutrient-rich soils.
%A
11
WrMAW Ar.
9

--4 .4 j-4­ I,
4 J:'i .'
ON
CIA
A
91�
Ak
77
Yl
I's