20130534 Ver 1_401 Application_20130513

201 30534
CI M Kmley -Han
M an A�odams, I nc.
May 15, 2013 0
P 0 Box 33066
Raleigh,
Mr. Thomas Brown 63 8 Carolina
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
3331 Heritage Trade Drive
Suite 105
Wake Forest, NC 27587
Ms. Sue Homewood
401 /Wetlands Unit
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699 -1650
Re: Nationwide Permit No. 12 PCN Application for
Mitchell WTP Clearwell Replacement
Greensboro, NC
Dear Mr. Brown and Ms. Homewood:
On behalf of our client, the City of Greensboro Water Resources Department,
Kimley -Horn and Associates, Inc. (KHA), is submitting the enclosed request to
modify the Nationwide 12 Permit Application and Jordan Lake Buffer
Authorization for authorization pursuant to Section 404 and 401 of the Clean
Water Act to construct the above referenced project. The impacts to North
Buffalo Creek will be temporary and the impacts to the buffer will be temporary
except for a vegetated 20 foot -wide maintenance corridor.
The following information is included with this PCN application submittal:
• An application fee to the Division of Water Quality (DWQ) for $240 (DWQ
only).
• A Completed PCN Application
• An Agent Authorization
• Figures (A Vicinity Map, USGS Map, Soil Survey Map, and Impacts Map)
• A Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Package
• An 11X17 Outfall Extension Profile
Ly r_% @
E E MAY 1 7 2013
' "ctr,.�..� _ rV
■
TEL [phone]
FAX [phone]

❑ � ❑ IGmley -Hom
and Associates, Inc.
If there is any additional information you need or any way we can assist in
expediting the processing of this application, please do not hesitate to contact me
at (919) 677 -2971
Very truly yours,
KIMLEY -HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
Todd St. John, P.E., LEED AP
Enclosures
■
TEL [phone]
FAX [phone]

f ot wn Y
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.3 Dec 10 2008
Pre - Construction Notification PCN Form
A. Appkant Information
1. Processing
1 a. Type(s) of approval sought from the
Corps:
®Section 404 Permit ❑Section 10 Permit
1b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number:12 or General Permit (GP) number:
1c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
❑ Yes
® No
1d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
® 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular ❑ Non -404 Jurisdictional General Permit
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification — Express N Riparian Buffer Authorization
1e. Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWQ 401
Certification:
❑ Yes ® No
For the record only for Corps Permit:
❑ Yes ® No
1f. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation
of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank or in lieu
fee program.
El Yes
ED No
1g. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below.
❑ Yes
® No
1h. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ Yes
® No
2. Project Information
2a. Name of project:
Mitchell WTP Clearwell Replacement
2b. County:
Guilford
2c. Nearest municipality / town:
Greensboro
2d. Subdivision name:
N/A
2e. NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state
project no:
N/A
3. Owner Information
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
City of Greensboro
Ix
3b. Deed Book and Page No.
Y 7 An
3c. Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
City of Greensboro, Water Resources Department
NR _ Wq
3d. Street address:
2602 S. Elm- Eugene Street
3e. City, state, zip:
Greensboro, NC 27406
3f. Telephone no.:
336 - 373 -7898
3g. Fax no.:
336 - 412 -6305
3h. Email address:
[e-mail]
Page 1 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is:
❑ Agent ❑ Other, specify:
4b. Name:
4c. Business name
(if applicable):
4d. Street address:
4e. City, state, zip:
4f. Telephone no.:
4g. Fax no.:
4h. Email address:
5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name:
Todd St. John, P.E.
5b. Business name
(if applicable):
Kimley -Horn and Associates, Inc.
5c. Street address:
3001 Weston Parkway
5d. City, state, zip:
Cary, NC 27513
5e. Telephone no.:
919 -677 -2000
5f. Fax no.:
919 -677 -2050
5g. Email address:
Todd.StJohn @kimley - horn.com
Page 2 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
1b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
Latitude: 36.081333 Longitude: - 79.803472
(DD.DDDDDD) (- DD.DDDDDD)
1c. Property size: (Project Boundary)
2.9 acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc.) to
North Buffalo Creek
proposed project:
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
C; NSW
2c. River basin:
Cape Fear
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 includes the City's existing N. L. Mitchell Water Treatment Plant that is being upgraded. The area
surrounding the site is predominately urban residential and commercial.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property: Other than North Buffalo Creek itself there were
no other wetlands or waters discovered on the site.
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property: Other than North
Buffalo Creek, there are no other streams on the property. See the attached maps.
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project: The purpose of this project is to upgrade the City of Greensboro's N. L.
Mitchell WTP. The upgrades include a new 1 MG clearwell, upgrades to plant site piping, high service pumping facilities
and piping, electrical fadlities, stormwater facilities, and the disposal of the backwash water and backwash to waste water
ofisite, by extending a gravity collection system from the filter building facilities to a new backwash water and backwash to
waste pumping station located on the plant site. From this pump station the City proposes to extend a large ( >241 force
main from the plant site to the City's existing 54° North Buffalo Creek Interceptor located on the opposite side of North
Buffalo Creek.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used: The project construction approach is to
excavate a temporary open -cut trench across North Buffalo Creek to install the force main. The force main will be
connected to the City's existing 54° North Buffalo Creek Interceptor. Construction equipment typical for this type of pipe
installation includes the use of a track mounted backhoe with rock teeth, front loader, and compaction equipment. After
the force main is installed the open -cut trench will be backfilled with #57 stone bedding, concrete encasement, and
suitable select backfill material in North Buffalo Creek and with #57 stone bedding and suitable select backfill in the
Jordan Riparian Buffer. A 20 -foot wide corridor will be maintained and planted with grass. The remaining disturbed area
within the Jordan Riparian Buffer will be planted with native tree species at 10 -foot centers.
Page 3 of 12
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?
❑ Yes ❑ No ® Unknown
Comments:
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: Kimley -Hom and
Associates, Inc.
Name (if known): Jason Hartshorn
Other
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
The jurisdictional determination is being submitted concurrently with this application.
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
❑ Yes ❑ No ® Unknown
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?
® Yes ❑ No
6b. If yes, explain.
Multiple treatment plant components will be phased in to accommodate keeping the plant fully operational during
construction.
Page 4 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
❑ Wetlands ® Streams - tributaries ® Buffers
❑ Open Waters ❑ Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a.
2b.
2c.
2d.
2e.
2f.
Wetland impact
Type of jurisdiction
number —
Type of impact
Type of wetland
Forested
(Corps - 404, 10
Area of impact
Permanent (P) or
(if known)
DWQ — non -404, other)
(acres)
Temporary
W1 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
W2 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
W3 ❑ P [IT
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
W4 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
W5 ❑ P [IT
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
W6 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
2g. Total wetland impacts
2h. Comments: No wetlands were discovered on the site.
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a.
3b.
3c.
3d.
3e.
3f.
3g.
Stream impact
Type of impact
Stream name
Perennial
Type of jurisdiction
Average
Impact
number -
(PER) or
(Corps - 404, 10
stream
length
Permanent (P) or
intermittent
DWQ — non -404,
width
(linear
Temporary (T)
(INT)?
other)
(feet)
feet)
S1 ❑ P ® T
Temporary trench
North Buffalo
Creek
® PER
❑ INT
® Corps
❑ DWQ
48
40
S2 ❑ P ❑ T
® PER
® Corps
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
40
31. Comments: An open cut trench will be made in North Buffalo Creek. But it will be backfilled with pipe bedding and other
suitable material.
Page 5 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then individually list all open water impacts below.
4a.
4b.
4c.
4d.
4e.
Open water
Name of waterbody
impact number
(if applicable)
Type of impact
Waterbody type
Area of impact (acres)
— Permanent
(P) or
Temporary
01 ❑P [IT
02 ❑P [IT
03 ❑P [IT
04 ❑ PC] T
4E Total open water impacts
4g. Comments: No open waters will be impacted by the proposed project.
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, then com lets the chart below.
5a.
5b.
5c.
5d.
5e.
Wetland Impacts (acres)
Stream Impacts (feet)
Upland
Pond ID
Proposed use or purpose of
(acres)
number
pond
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
P1
P2
5E Total
5g. Comments: No ponds or lakes will be impacted by the
proposed project.
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
❑ Yes No If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
n/a
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
n/a
5k. Method of construction: Tr—lda
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If any impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a.
❑ Neuse ❑ Tar - Pamlico ® Other: Jordan Lake
Project is in which protected basin?
❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman
6b.
6c.
6d.
6e.
6f.
6g.
Buffer impact
number —
Reason for
Buffer
Zone 1 impact
Zone 2 impact
Permanent (P)
impact
Stream name
mitigation
(square feet)
(square feet)
or Temporary
required?
T
61 ❑ P ®T
insta atil
North Buffalo Creek
® Nos 2,471
1,728
B2 ❑P ❑T
❑Yes
❑ No
6h. Total buffer impacts
2,471
1,728
6i. Comments: All buffer impacts are temporary and will be restored using native tree and shrub species outside of a 20 -foot
maintenance corridor. Where there is an existing sewer corridor, herbaceous vegetation will be utilized instead of native trees.
Page 6 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

and shrub species.
D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
la. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
The crossing will be perpendicular to minimize impacts.
1b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
Tree protection fence will be placed along the construction corridor.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
❑ Yes ® No
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
❑ DWQ ❑ Corps
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this project?
❑ Mitigation bank
❑ Payment to in -lieu fee program
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type
Quantity
3c. Comments:
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in4ieu fee program is attached.
❑ Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested:
linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
❑ warm ❑ cool ❑cold
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4f. Non - riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4h. Comments:
S. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
Page 7 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) — required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
buffer mitigation?
❑ Yes ® No
6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required.
Zone
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Total impact
(square feet)
Multiplier
6e.
Required mitigation
(square feet)
Zone 1
3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2
1.5
6f. Total buffer mitigation required:
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in -lieu fee fund).
6h. Comments: The project will fall under the allowable category such that no mitigation will be required.
Page 8 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1 a. 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: Stormwater will be discharged through unimproved existing
❑ Yes ® No
conveyances.
2. Stormwater Management Plan
0 % The extension of the outfall
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
will be completely subsurface
upon completion.
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
❑ Yes ® No
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why: The application is for a NW 12 and WQC
3884 does not specify stormwater management requirements other than those associated with the Jordan Lake Buffer
Rules. All stormwater form the WTP will be discharged through existing conveyances.
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
The project does not require a stormwater plan since the application is for a NW 12. Additionally, no new stormwater will
be discharged through the buffers except by existing, unimproved conveyances.
® 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?
City of Greensboro, NC
® Phase II
3b. Which of the following locally-implemented stormwater management programs
❑ NSW
❑ USMP
apply (check all that apply):
❑ Water Supply Watershed
® Other: Jordan Lake
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ® No
attached?
Not required for NW 12
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
❑ Coastal counties
4a. Which of the following state - implemented stormwater management programs apply
❑ HQW
❑ ORW
(check all that apply):
❑ Session Law 2006 -246
❑ Other:
4b. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
attached?
❑ Yes ® No
5. DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a. Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
® Yes ❑ No
Page 9 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

5b. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
® Yes ❑ No
F. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federaUstate /local) funds or the
® Yes ❑ No
use of public (federal/state) land?
1b. If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State
❑ Yes ® No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1c. If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
❑ Yes ❑ No
letter.)
Comments: n/a
2. Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
❑ Yes ® No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b. Is this an after - the -fact permit application?
❑ Yes ® No
2c. If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s): n/a
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in
❑ Yes ® No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b. If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
The project will not result in an increase in capacity, only modernization and improved efficiency.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a. Cleary 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.
The filter backwash will be to discharged filter backwash water into Greensboro's sewer system.
Page 10 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

S. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
❑ Yes ® No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
❑ Yes ® No
impacts?
❑ Raleigh
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
❑ Asheville
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ( USFWS) database (updated 5/9/2013) was reviewed to determine any federally listed
species identified for Guilford County. The small whorled pogonia (Isotria medeoloides) is listed as federally threatened
for Guilford County. In North Carolina, this perennial orchid is typically found in open, dry deciduous woods and is often
associated with white pine and rhododendron. This species is known to occur at sites that range from 2,000 to 4,000 feet
in elevation. No suitable habitat for the small whorled pogonia is present in the study area based on vegetative
communities and elevations. Elevations in the study area range from 740 to 750 feet above mean sea level as depicted
on the Greensboro, North Carolina, USGS topographic quadrangle map.
Additionally, the Natural Heritage Program database (accessed 05/09/2013) did not indicate any recorded occurrences of
federally protected species within five miles of the study area.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
❑ Yes ® No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
The NOAA Essential Fish Habitat Mapper was reviewed on Monday, February 20, 2012 with no essential fish habitat
found within the project area or within the vicinity of the project.
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
® Yes ❑ No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
The State Historic Preservation Office database was reviewed (May 9, 2013) to determine if any historic resources
occurred in the project boundary. There are no historic or archaeological resources within the project boundary. However,
the map does show the project would cross into the West Market Terrace/Westerwood Historic District Study Area.
Considering the nature of the immediate environs, and the fact that the outfall extension will be buried, there should be no
impact to the area. There is an eligible bridge approximately 1000 feet from the project boundary as well.
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 project will not alter the floodplain or floodway.
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? NC Floodmaps
Page 11 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

Todd St. John AAk D
ApplicanNAgenrs Printed Name Applicant; Agen 's 'nature
(Agents signature is valid only if an auth anon letter from the applicant
Is ovided.
Page 12 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

Letter of Authorization
The City of Greensboro Department of Water Resources authorizes Kimley -Horn
and Associates, Inc. to act as our limited agent to coordinate with the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers and North Carolina Division of Water Quality for the
preparation and submittal of jurisdictional determinations and 404/401 permits
applications associated with the Mitchell Water Treatment Plant located in
Greensboro, North Carolina. Authorization will terminate on either final agency
action or upon written notification from either parties involved.
Owner Name: City of Greensboro Water Resources Department
Contact Name:r
Owner Address: 2602 South Elm- Eugene St.
Greensboro, NC 27406
Owner Phone
Owner Fax #: 33 (y 17- (03e5"'
Owner Email: 6m cihw-ai -too ra)e �gQ
kA4,��,
ignature of C nt)
Date!

�dlewooa0`
hj � eaR`
oe' 6
A/
n
co
e'r►'no%
yak
CU
O
K�
�e�1a��rP
Q
c
a
U
Lakeview St Z
Legend Q
Project Area (U �s�ith 3t
N ci ? U)
0 205 410 A —
I i I Q CD 0
Feet Courtland St Z a
Title Vicinity Map
Prepared For: Mitchell Water Treatment Plant
Project Guilford County, NC
0 Date Project Number Figure
May 15 2013 1 011462021 1

jai

A
a,
.l
Title I NRCS Soil Survey (1977)
Northwest Judd Parkway Soil Legend
Map Unit
Soil Unit Name
H dric
Ch
Chewacla sandy clay loam
No
EuB
Enon -Urban land complex
1
Ur
Urban land
No
k
A
a,
.l
Title I NRCS Soil Survey (1977)
Northwest Judd Parkway Soil Legend
Map Unit
Soil Unit Name
H dric
Ch
Chewacla sandy clay loam
No
EuB
Enon -Urban land complex
No
Ur
Urban land
No
Prepared For: Mitchell Water Treatment Plant
Project Guilford County, NC
OWN Date Project Number Figure
°°°°
May 15 2013 011462021 4

ATTACHMENT
PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL
DETERMINATION (JD):
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PRELIMINARY JD:
Kimley -Horn and Associates, Inc.
Attn: Todd St. John (P.E.), on behalf of the City of Greensboro
P.O. Box 33068
Raleigh, NC 27636
C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
D. PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
(USE THE ATTACHED TABLE TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE WATERBODIES
AT DIFFERENT SITES)
State: NC County /parish /borough: Guilford City: Greensboro
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format):
Lat. 36.08130 N, Long. 79.80340 W.
Universal Transverse Mercator: 17
Name of nearest waterbody: Buffalo Lake
Identify (estimate) amount of waters in the review area:
Non - wetland waters: 398.4 linear feet; 45 width (ft) and /or 0.4 acres.
Cowardin Class: Riverine
Stream Flow: Perennial
Wetlands: n/a
Cowardin Class: n/a
Name of any water bodies on the site that have been identified as Section 10
waters:
Tidal: n/a
Non - Tidal: n/a
E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT
APPLY):
❑ Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
❑ Field Determination. Date(s):

1. The Corps of Engineers believes that there may be jurisdictional waters of the
United States on the subject site, and the permit applicant or other affected party
who requested this preliminary JD is hereby advised of his or her option to
request and obtain an approved jurisdictional determination (JD) for that site.
Nevertheless, the permit applicant or other person who requested this
preliminary JD has declined to exercise the option to obtain an approved JD in
this instance and at this time.
2. In any circumstance where a permit applicant obtains an individual permit, or
a Nationwide General Permit (NWP) or other general permit verification requiring
"pre- construction notification" (PCN), or requests verification for a non - reporting
NWP or other general permit, and the permit applicant has not requested an
approved JD for the activity, the permit applicant is hereby made aware of the
following: (1) the permit applicant has elected to seek a permit authorization
based on a preliminary JD, which does not make an official determination of
jurisdictional waters; (2) that the applicant has the option to request an approved
JD before accepting the terms and conditions of the permit authorization, and
that basing a permit authorization on an approved JD could possibly result in less
compensatory mitigation being required or different special conditions; (3) that
the applicant has the right to request an individual permit rather than accepting
the terms and conditions of the NWP or other general permit authorization; (4)
that the applicant can accept a permit authorization and thereby agree to comply
with all the terms and conditions of that permit, including whatever mitigation
requirements the Corps has determined to be necessary; (5) that undertaking
any activity in reliance upon the subject permit authorization without requesting
an approved JD constitutes the applicant's acceptance of the use of the
preliminary JD, but that either form of JD will be processed as soon as is
practicable; (6) accepting a permit authorization (e.g., signing a proffered
individual permit) or undertaking any activity in reliance on any form of Corps
permit authorization based on a preliminary JD constitutes agreement that all
wetlands and other water bodies on the site affected in any way by that activity
are jurisdictional waters of the United States, and precludes any challenge to
such jurisdiction in any administrative or judicial compliance or enforcement
action, or in any administrative appeal or in any Federal court; and (7) whether
the applicant elects to use either an approved JD or a preliminary JD, that JD
will be processed as soon as is practicable. Further, an approved JD, a proffered
individual permit (and all terms and conditions contained therein), or individual
permit denial can be administratively appealed pursuant to 33 C.F.R. Part 331,
and that in any administrative appeal, jurisdictional issues can be raised (see 33
C.F.R. 331.5(a)(2)). If, during that administrative appeal, it becomes necessary
to make an official determination whether CWA jurisdiction exists over a site, or
to provide an official delineation of jurisdictional waters on the site, the Corps will
provide an approved JD to accomplish that result, as soon as is practicable.
This preliminary JD finds that there "may be" waters of the United States on the
subject project site, and identifies all aquatic features on the site that could be
affected by the proposed activity, based on the following information:

SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for preliminary JD (check all that apply
- checked items should be included in case file and, where checked and
requested, appropriately reference sources below):
® Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the
applicant/consultant:
® Data sheets prepared /submitted by or on behalf of the
applicant/consultant.
❑ Office concurs with data sheets /delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets /delineation report.
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:
❑ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data.
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
® U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:1:24,000 —
Greensboro Quad.
® USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:
❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
❑ State /Local wetland inventory map(s):
❑ FEMA/FIRM maps:
❑ 100 -year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum
of 1929)
® Photographs: ® Aerial (Name & Date):NC Orthoimagery Program (2010).
or ❑ Other (Name & Date):
❑ Previous determination (s). File no. and date of response letter:
❑ Other information (please specify):
IMPORTANT NOTE: The information recorded on this form has not
necessarily been verified by the Corps and should not be relied upon for
later jurisdictional determinations.
Signature and date of
Regulatory Project Manager
(REQUIRED)
3
Signature and date of
person requesting preliminary JD
(REQUIRED, unless obtaining
the signature is impracticable)

Estimated
Site
Cowardin
amount of
Class of
number
Latitude
Longitude
Class
aquatic
aquatic
resource in
resource
review area
SA
36.0814
- 79.8033
Riverine
398.4 linear feet
non - section 10
— non - tidal/
non - wetland

c
� � aoPA �dIeWOOd�
h,�a 6eam
A�
m
em�no%
�r
�a k
�m •.
rilam`rP�
ge
Q
c
Q� N
U
a�
U
Legend Lakeview St Z
^- Stream <
CO
Project Area t �s�ith St
N
0 200 400
N
1 i I
Feet Courtland St Z a
Title Vicinity Map
Prepared For: Mitchell Water Treatment Plant
N Project Guilford County, NC
Date Project Number Figure
May 14 2013 011462021 1

�r
Legend
Stream
Project Area
N
0 150 300
1 1 I
Feet
r: N
o Q
a� v,
— — ,,,,,.
Title NRCS Soil Survey (1977)
Prepared For: Mitchell Water Treatment Plant
Project Guilford County, NC
VO Date Project Number Figure
fFVSra^
May 14, 2013 011462021 4
Northwest Judd Parkway Soil Legend
p Unit
Soil Unit Name
Hydric
Ch
Chewada sandy clay loam
No
EuB
Enon -Urban land complex
No
Ur
Urban land
No
— — ,,,,,.
Title NRCS Soil Survey (1977)
Prepared For: Mitchell Water Treatment Plant
Project Guilford County, NC
VO Date Project Number Figure
fFVSra^
May 14, 2013 011462021 4

North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identification Form, Version 4.11
Date: 5/8/2013
Project/Site: Mitchell WTP
Latitude: 36.0812 N
Evaluator: d Hartshorn (KHA)
County: Guilford
Longitude: 79.8032 W
Total Points: 40.5
0
1
2
Stream Determination
Other Greensboro Quad
Stream is at least intermittent
Ephemeral Intermitte Og
Quad Name -2001
rf a 19 or rennial if 2 30
3
2
A. Geomorphology Subtotal = 23.5
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
Score
1 a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
2
3. In- channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool, ripple-
ol se uence
0
1
2
3
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
3
5. Active/relic flood lain
0
1
2
3
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
2
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
2
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
0
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
3
artificial ditches are not rated, see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology Subtotal = 10
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
0
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
1.5
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
16. Or anic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
3
C. Biology Subtotal =
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
3
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
3
20. Macrobenthos note diversity and abundance
0
1
2
3
0
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
0
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL
= 1.5; Other = 0
0
'perennial streams may also be identfied using other methods See p 35 of manual
Notes: Recent flood
as none were
observed. Channel substrate is rocky with a bedrock protrusion near the data
point. The stream is fast flowing and dear. Evidence of high flow events such
as wrack lines, debris piles, and wrested vegetation were observed within the
channel. Debris piles within the adiacent floodolain indicate overbank floodina
occurs witin this reach.

USACE AID# DWQ # Site # (indicate on attached map)
M STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name City of Greensboro 2. Evaluator's name 1. Hartshorn (KHA)
3. Date of evaluatio 05/08/2013
5. Name of stream: North Buffalo Creek
664 acres
4. Time of evaluatic 11:42 am
6. River basin: Cape Fear
7. Approximate drainage area: 8. Stream orde Third Order
9. Length of reach evaluated: 100' 10. County: Guilford
11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees. 12. Subdivision name (if any): n/a
Latitude (ex. 34.872312): 36'0812 N Longitude (ex. -77.556611): 79.8032 W
Method location determined (circle):EiPSDopo Shee >QDrtho (Aerial) Photo /GISather GISather
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
Stream flows parallel to Benjamin Parkway, and crosses below Battleground Avenue east of project area.
14. Proposed channel work (if any) Open trench and regrade to pre - construction contours.
15. Recent weather conditions: Rainy, with 1.62" of rainfall recorded by NOAA/NWS 48 hours prior to field observations.
16. Site conditions at time of visit: Clear and sunny, approximately 70 degrees Fahrenheit.
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: 12section 10 Tidal Waters Essential Fisheries Habitat
nTrout Waters 00utstanding Resource Waters Q Nutrient Sensitive Waters 2Water Supply Watershed. (I -IV)
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? NO If yes, estimate the water surface area n/a
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? NO
21. Estimated watershed land use: 65 % Residential
5 % Forested
22. Bankfull width: 4$
24. Channel slope down center of stream: OFIat (0 to 2 %)
25. Channel sinuosity: Straight 00ccasional bends
20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES
30,/- Commercial _% Industrial _% Agricultural
_% Cleared / Logged _% Other ( )
23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): 61
QGentle (2 to 4 %) OModerate (4 to 10 %) DSteep ( >10 %)
0Frequent meander Overy sinuous Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points
to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 48 Comments:
The thalweg of the stream is sinuous, but the features of the channel appear constrained and show evidence of erosional
downcutting. A swift flow was observed, likely resulting from significant flow events.
Evaluator's Signature Jason Hartshorn Date 05/08/2013
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919- 876 -8441 x 26.

North Buffalo Creek
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
ECOREGION POINT
RANGE
#
CHARACTERISTICS
SCORE
Coastal
Piedmont
Mountain
1
Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream
0-5
0 - 4
0-5
4
no flow or saturation = 0• strong flow = max points)
2
Evidence of past human alteration
0-6
0-5
0-5
1
extensive alteration = 0• no alteration = max po ints
3
Riparian zone
0-6
0-4
0-5
2
no buffer = 0• contiguous, wide buffer = max points)
4
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
0-5
0-4
0-4
1
extensive discharges = 0• no discharges = max points)
5
Groundwater discharge
0-3
0-4
0-4
0
no discharge = 0• springs, sees wetlands etc. = max points)
6
Presence of adjacent floodplain
0-4
0-4
0-2
3
no floodplain = 0• extensive floodplain = max po ints
7
Entrenchment / floodplain access
0-5
0-4
0-2
2
(deeply entrenched = 0• frequent flooding = max points)
8
Presence of adjacent wetlands
0-6
0-4
0-2
0
no wetlands = 0• large adjacent wetlands = max points)
9
Channel sinuosity
0-5
0-4
0-3
2
extensive channelization = 0• natural meander = max points)
10
Sediment input
0-5
0-4
0-4
2
extensive deposition= 0• little or no sediment = max points)
11
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
NA*
0-4
0 - 5
4
fine homogenous = 0, a diverse sizes = max oints
12
Evidence of channel incision or widening
0-5
0 - 4
0-5
3
(deeply incised = 0• stable bed & banks = max points)
13
Presence of major bank failures
0-5
0 - 5
0-5
3
severe erosion = 0• no erosion stable banks = max points)
14
Root depth and density on banks
0-3
0 - 4
0-5
3
no visible roots = 0• dense roots throughout = max ints
15
Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
0-5
0 - 4
0-5
0
substantial impact =0• no evidence = max point s
16
Presence of riffle- pool/ripple -pool complexes
0-3
0-5
0-6
4
no riffles/ripples or pools = 0- well- . ed = max oints
1
Habitat complexity
0— 6
0— 6
0— 6
4
little or no habitat = 0• frequent varied habitats = max points)
18
Canopy coverage over streambed
0— 5
0— 5
0— 5
3
no shading ve etation = 0• continuous canopy = max points)
19
Substrate embeddedness
NA*
0-4
0-4
3
(deeply embedded = 0• loose structure = max
20
Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
0-4
0 - 5
0-5
0
no evidence = 0. common, numerous types = max points)
i
21
Presence of amphibians
0-4
0-4
0-4
1
no evidence = 0• common, numerous types = max points)
22
Presence of fish
0-4
0-4
0-4
1
no evidence = 0• common, numerous types = max ints
23
Evidence of wildlife use
0-6
0-5
0-5
2
no evidence = 0• abundant evidence = max points)
Total Points Possible
100
X00
100
TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first page)
48
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Mitchell Wastewater Treatment Plant
City /County: Guilford
Sampling Date. 5/08/2013
Applicant/Owner: City of Greensboro State. NC Sampling Point: DPI
Investigator(s): J. Hartshorn (KHA) Section, Township, Range: Morehead Township
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.)- Slight hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): none Slope ( %): 1%
Subregion (LRR or MLRA). I Let: 36.081400 N Long: 79.803300 W Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: Ur - Urban Land & Ch - Chewacla sandy loam NWI classification
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes FTi No= (If no, explain in Remarks)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes EE No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology R naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transacts, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ✓ No
✓ Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes No IZI
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ✓ No
Remarks.
DP1 is located in the geomorphic floodplain of North Buffalo Creek. Bank height of the adjacent channel
is 6' and banks are steep, approaching vertical. DP1 is located approximately 40' northwest of the top
of the left bank. NOAA/NWS recorded 1.62" of rainfall in the 48 hours prior to the field evaluation.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one' required: check all that apply)
i
ondary Indicators (minimum of two reouired)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Water (A1) True Aquatic Plants (B14)
High Water Table (A2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Saturation (A3) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Water Marks (B1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Sediment Deposits (B2) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Drift Deposits (B3) Thin Muds Surface (C7)
Algal Mat or Crust (134) Other (Explain in Remarks)
Iron Deposits (135)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
Water - Stained Leaves (139)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
✓
✓
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No ✓ Depth (inches).
Water Table Present? Yes No ✓ Depth (inches): > 36"
Saturation Present? Yes No IV I Depth (inches): > 36"
includes capillary frin e
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes II No
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Heavy leaf litter around drift deposit indicates deposits may be a result of a single floodlow event in
early to late fall. Leaf litter has fallen on top of drift piles. No saturation was observed and the
water table was within the upper 36" of the soil profile. Despite geomorphic position, heavy recent
rainfall has not left evidence of inundation, flood, or surface flow. Many roots were present in the
upper 12" of the soil profile, but no oxidation was observed.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2 0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: DP1
30'
Tree Stratum (Plot )
._ - - - - --
.f Cover
---- ...._......-
SDBCIeS?
- - - - --
Status
------- - - - - -- --------------- --
Number of Dominant Species
1 Platanus occidentalis
_30%
Y
FACW
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: _6 (A)
21 Quercus phellos
Y
FACW_
�Ju lans ni a
3. g �
_20%
10%
N
FACU
Total Number of Dominant 9
Species Across All Strata: (B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species 67%
5.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
6.
Prevalence Index worksheet
7
8.
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
60%
= Total Cover
OBL species x 1 =
,Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30'
1
FACW species x2=
1 .• Acer rubrum
—10%
Y
FAC
FAC species x3=
2Juniperus virginiana
10%_
FACU
FACU species x4=
3. Juglans nigra
_
5%
_Y
Y
FACU
UPL species x 5 =
4
Column Totals- (A) (B)
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A =
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
s.
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50 °k
9
3 - Prevalence Index is 11113.0'
10
25p/o
_ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
_
=Total Cover
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
1. Poaceae sp.
__10%
Y
FAC
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
2.. Ambrosia sp.
—10%
_Y
FAC
3 Allium canadense
5%
N
FACU
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
5.
6.
Tree— Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
7
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
8.
g
Sapling/Shrub —Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1
10
m) tall.
11.
Herb — All herbaceous (non - woody) plants, regardless
12
of size, and woody plants less than 3 28 ft tall.
30'
—2590 =Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
)
Woody vine — All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
1 Ampelopsis brevipedunculata
_ 5%
Y
_FAC
hei ht.
2 Hedera helix
2%
Y
NI
3.
4.
5
Hydrophytic
Vegetation n
M
6.
Present? Yes No
7%
= Total Cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
A large sycamore is providing the dominant canopy coverage. Mid - canopy willow oaks are prevalant, and the
understory is light. The herbaceous layer is dominated by common grasses and weeds, likely a result of the pro)dmity to
maintained /disturbed right of way.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point. DP1
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the Indicator or confirm the absence of Indicators.)
Depth
(inches)
Matrix
Color (moist)
%
Redox
Color (moist)
Features
% Tvoe' Locz
Texture Remarks
0-4"
4/3
100%
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Clay loam
_
4 -20"
_10YR
10YR 5/3
20%
7.5YR 5/6
80% C M
Clay loam
_
20 -26 "_
5/3
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
7.5YR 5/6
C M
Clay loam
26-36';--
_10YR
5/1
_70%
80%
7.5YR 5/6
_30%
10% - -
Clay *split matrix
Depleted Matrix (F3)
5Y 6/3
10% - -
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
Histosol (A1)
Dark Surface (S7)
2 cm Muck (All 0) (MLRA 147)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Black Histic (A3)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
Stratified Layers (A5)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (All 1)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
❑
MLRA 136)
3Indicators
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
of hydrophytic vegetation and
8
Sandy Redox (S5)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type.
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
Hydric Soil Present? Yes El No IZI
The soil profile is indicative of an active flooplain, but the slope and geomorphic position of the
floodplain in the vicinity of DP1 indicates that the area is inundated after flood events. Soil
composition was varied below 26 ", likely a result of alluvial deposition. No sand was present in the
profile however. No saturation was observed, and the water table was not present in the upper
36 ". Clay content was boo high for removal and analysis below 36 ".
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2 0

Mitchell WTP Filter Backwash Outfall Profile
INofth Buffalo I
Creek
e Iw 11rrw luem 1u+au iwia n+w n+m n+aa 11+1a 1e+w 1z+m 1z+0u 1x+10 1a +w 10140 1a+au 1a�1a 14+w 14+40 14+au 14+10
.......
.......
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
. ..
....
....
. ..
....
....
. ..
....
....
... .
....
....
.. ..
....
....
. .. .
....
....
. . ..
....
....
. .. .
....
. ..
....
....
. .. .
....
....
. . ..
....
....
. . . .
....
....
.. . .
. ..
. .
s
.......
.......
.......
_.
—
—
.. .. .. .
. . . .
. .
. 1
. .
. . . .
.� \;
.......
-m
.. .. ...
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . .
... ....
—_—
.. .. .. .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
... ....
—
. . .
. . . .
. .
. . .
—.
.. .. ..
. . . .
'
`i
—_ —T
. . . .
/Y
... ....
.. .. ..
. .
. . . .
. . .
i
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . .
. .
. .
. .
. .
... ....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
.�
»o
. . . .
. . . .
.. . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
.
`.
7w
_ 7as
.......
.......
.......
.......
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
.
...
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
. .
..
....
....
....
... .
...
....
....
....
.. .
. .
.
....
....
....
....
....
..
....
....
....
....
....
.......
.......
.......
.......
7m
....
70
.......
.......
.......
.......
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
.
....
....
....
...
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
.......
.......
.......
.......
7l0_
....
....
....
.......
.......
.......
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
...
....
.......
.......
.......
.......
e Iw 11rrw luem 1u+au iwia n+w n+m n+aa 11+1a 1e+w 1z+m 1z+0u 1x+10 1a +w 10140 1a+au 1a�1a 14+w 14+40 14+au 14+10