20201461 Ver 1_ePCN Application_20210722

DWR
Division of Water Resources
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
April4,2021 Ver4
Initial Review
Has this project met the requirements for acceptance in to the review process?*
r Yes
r No
Is this project a public transportation project?*
C Yes r No
Change only if needed.
BIMS # Assigned * Version#*
20201461 1
Is a payment required for this project?*
r No payment required
What amout is owed?*
r Fee received
r $240.00
r Fee needed - send electronic notification
r $570.00
Reviewing Office *
Select Project Reviewer*
Central Office - [phone]
Rick Trone:eads\rvtrone
Information for Initial Review
1a. Name of project:
Rocky Branch Sewer
1a. Who is the Primary Contact?*
Heather Smith
1b. Primary Contact Email:*
[e-mail]
Date Submitted
7/22/2021
Nearest Body of Water
Rocky Branch
Basin
Neuse
Water Classification
QNSW
Site Coordinates
Latitude:
35.764030
A. Processing Information
County (or Counties) where the project is located:
Wake
Is this a NCDMS Project
r Yes r No
Is this project a public transportation project?*
r Yes r No
Pre -Filing Meeting Information
Is this a courtesy copy notification?*
r Yes r No
Longitude:
-78.642320
1c. Primary Contact Phone:*
[phone]
U

ID#
20201461
Pre -fling Meeting or Request Date
10/13/2020
Attach documentation of Pre -Filing Meeting Request here:
dick the upload button or drag and drop files here to attach document
20201461 Ver 1_Meeting Request Review_20201013.pdf
File type mast be FCF
1a. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
W Section 404 Permit (wetlands, streams and waters, Clean Water Act)
r Section 10 Permit (navigable waters, tidal waters, Rivers and Harbors Act)
Has this PCN previously been submitted?*
r Yes
r No
1b. What type(s) of permit(s) do you wish to seek authorization?
W Nationwide Permit (NWP)
r Regional General Permit (RGP)
r Standard (IP)
1c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
r Yes r No
Nationwide Permit (NWP) Number:
NWP Numbers (for multiple NWPS):
1d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWR:
W 401 Water Quality Certification - Regular
r Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
r Individual 401 Water Quality Certification
Version
1
91.47 MB
58 - Utility Line Activities for Water and Other Substances (frequently used)
le. Is this notification solelyfor the record because written approval is not required?
For the record onlyfor DWR401 Certification:
For the record onlyfor Corps Permit:
f 401 Water Quality Certification - E)press
V Riparian Buffer Authorization
1f. Is this an after -the -fact permit application?*
r Yes r No
1g. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
r Yes r No
1g. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
r Yes r No
Acceptance Letter Attachment
1h. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties?
r Yes r No
1j. Is the project located in a designated trout watershed?
(- Yes r No
B. Applicant Information
1d. Who is applying for the permit?
W Owner r Applicant (other than owner)
le. Is there an Agent/Consultant for this project?*
r Yes r No
2. Owner Information
2a. Name(s) on recorded deed:
City of Raleigh Public Utilities Dept.
2b. Deed book and page no.:
r Yes r No
r Yes r No

2c. Contact Person:
Matthew Cotton, P.E. - Construction Projects Administrator
2d.Address
Street Address
1 Exchange Plaza
Address tine 2
#620
City
Raleigh
Postal / Zip Code
27601
2e. Telephone Number:
[phone]
2g. Email Address:*
Matthew. [e-mail]
4. Agent/Consultant (if applicable)
4a. Name:
Heather Smith
4b. Business Name:
VHB
4c.Address
Street Address
Venture 1, 940 Main Campus Drive
Address tine 2
Suite 500
city
Raleigh
Postal / Zip (ode
27606
4d. Telephone Number:
[phone]
4f. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
Agent Authorization Letter*
VHB Agent Authorization Form Signed.pdf
State / Amine / F3gion
NC
Country
USA
2f. Fax Number:
State / Rmine / Region
NC
Country
USA
4e. Fax Number:
188.53KB
C. Project Information and Prior Project History C^U
1. Project Information
1b. Subdivision name:
(if appropriate)
1c. Nearest municipality/ town:
Raleigh
2. Project Identification
2a. Property Identification Number:
2c. Project Address
Street Address
Address Line 2
City
Postal / Zip Code
3. Surface Waters
3a. Name of the nearest body of water to proposed project:*
Rocky Branch
3b. Water Resources Classification of nearest receiving water:*
C;NSW
2b. Property size:
26
State / Rmine / Fbgion
Country

3c. What river basin(s) is your project located in?*
Neuse
3d. Please provide the 12-digit HUC in which the project is located.
030202011101
4. Project Description and History
4a. 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 project area consists of an existing sewer line along Rocky Branch as well as some new location sewer line which is currently forested or grassed.
4b. Have Corps permits or DWR certifications been obtained for this project (including all prior phases) in the past?*
r Yes r No r Unknown
4d. Attach an 8 1/2 X 11 excerpt from the most recent version of the USGS topographic map indicating the location of the project site. (for DWR)
Fig1 PJD_USGS_LetterSizePortrait.pdf 2.41MB
4e. Attach an 8 1/2 X 11 excerpt from the most recent version of the published County NRCS Soil Survey map depicting the project site. (for DWR)
Fig2PJD_SoilSurvey_LetterSizePortrait.pdf 2.01 MB
4f. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
1.83
4g. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams on the property:
236
4h. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:*
The project will improve sewer infrastructure by replacing old sewer lines, increasing pipe size as necessary, and adding sewer lines.
4i. Describe the overall project in detail, including indirect impacts and the type of equipment to be used:*
The project primarily consists of existing sewer easements containing sewer lines to be excavated and replaced, and some new location sewer easement which will be cleared by
mechanized clearing. Lines to be replaced will be excavated via trenching. Stream crossings will be open cut, with typical pump -around operations in place to minimize sedimentation in
streams.
4j. Please upload project drawings for the proposed project.
5. Jurisdictional Determinations
5a. Have the wetlands or streams been delineated on the property or proposed impact areas?*
r Yes r No r Unknown
Comments:
PJD submitted, delineation approved by desktop review (e-mail from G. Lyle Phillips 2020-08-19),
no PJD received to date.
5b. If the Corps made a jurisdictional determination, what type of determination was made?
r Preliminary r Approved r Not Verified r Unknown r N/A
Corps AID Number:
SAW-2020-00971
5c. If 5a is yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known): David Cooper
Agency/Consultant Company: VHB
Other:
5d. List the dates of the Corp jurisdiction determination or State determination if a determination was made by the Corps or DWR
USACE concurred with the delineation by e-mail on 8/19/2020 (attached).
NCDWR Surface Water Determination Letter NBRRO #20-164
5d1. Jurisdictional determination upload
USACE_DesktopReview_20200819.pdf 4.34MB
PJDRequest_RockyBranchSewer_20200526.pdf 4.76MB
Rocky Branch Sewer Interceptor.pdf 4.82MB
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?*
r Yes r No
Are any other NWP(s), regional general permit(s), or individual permits(s) used, or intended to be used, to authorize any part of the proposed project or related activity?
D. Proposed Impacts Inventory

1. Impacts Summary
1a. Where are the impacts associated with your project? (check all that apply):
W Wetlands W Streams -tributaries
F Open Waters r Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
P Buffers
2a1 Reason (?) 2b. Impact type*(?) 2c. Type of W.* 2d. W. name * 2e. Forested* �2f.Typeof 2g. Impact
Jurisdicition*(?) area
3
Replace existing sewer
T
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
WB
�No
Both
0.566
(acres)
4
Replace existing sewer
T
ffornland Hardwood Forest
WC
�N.
Both
0.018
(acres)
2g. Total Temporary Wetland Impact 2g. Total Permanent Wetland Impact
0.584 0.000
2g. Total Wetland Impact
0.584
21. Comments:
Wetland impact results from disturbance required to remove and replace the existing sewer line within an existing sewer easement. Area to be
returned to pre -construction contours and seeded with wetland seed mix.
3. Stream Impacts
3a. Reason for impact (?)
3b.lmpact type *
3c. Type of impact*
3d. S. name*
3e. Stream Type*
Type of
3gSwidth *
3h. ImpactM
❑
�[3f.
urisdiction*
length*
S1
Replace existing sewer,
P 9
Permanent
Stabilization
Rocky
Site 1, Roc Branch
Perennial
Both
30
35
stream stabilization
Average (feet)
(linearfeet)
3Y
Erosion control
Temporary
Dewatering
Site 2, Rocky Branch
Perennial
Both
30
5
Average (feet)
(lirearfeet)
S3
Replace existing sewer
p 9 IffJ
Stabilization
Site 3, SA
Intermittent
Both
8
48
Average (feet)
(lirear feet)
31. Total jurisdictional ditch impact in square feet:
0
31. Total permanent stream impacts: 31. Total temporary stream impacts:
83 5
31. Total stream and ditch impacts:
88
3j. Comments:
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWR)
6a. Project is in which protect basin(s)?
Check all that apply.
V Neuse 17- Tar -Pamlico
r Catawba r Randleman
r Goose Creek F Jordan Lake
C Other
6b. Impact Type 6c. Per or Temp 6d. Stream name 6e. Buffer mitigation required? 6f. Zone 1 impact 6g. Zone 2 impact
Allowable
P
SB (Site 5)
No
120
1,420
Allowable
P
Rocky Branch (Site 1)
No
1,150
0
6h. Total buffer impacts:
Zone 1 Zone 2
Total Temporary impacts: 0.00 0.00
Zone 1 Zone 2

Total Permanent impacts: 1,270.00 1,420.00
Zone 1 Zone 2
Total combined buffer impacts: 1,270.00 1,420.00
61. Comments:
Buffer impact to the Stream B buffer clips the top of the buffer upstream of the stream start point with new location sewer easement. The existing area
is sparsely vegetated with few trees and open understory. Buffer impacts to Rocky Branch are associated with installing rip rap for stream bank
stabilization and will occur in the existing sewer easement.
Supporting Documentation
RAL1902 - Rocky Branch —to VHB-2021-07-21.pdf
E. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
3.16MB
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing the project:
The sewer improvement project primarily follows the ebsting sewer line within wasting easement. New location easement was needed in some areas.
Wetland impacts are designed to be put back to ebsting grade and re -seeded in order to avoid a permanent wetland impact. Stream impacts were
limited to streambank stabilization in order to minimize future impacts to downstream waters.
1b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques:
Sedimentation will be controlled by pump -around operations where open cut will be used to replace the ebsting sewer lines. Riprap stream stabilization
will reduce the likelihood of future instability in the reaches to be open cut.
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?
r Yes
r No
2b. If this project DOES NOT require Compensatory Mitigation, explain why:
The project is a necessary repair and replacement of an existing sewer line. All impacts have been avoided and minimized to the extent practicable. The total area of stream impact is
0.035 acres, which is above the threshold in NWP 58 to require mitigation, however the permanent stream impacts are associated with streambank stabilization and do not generally
require mitigation. All wetland impacts are temporary and do not require wetland mitigation.
F. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWR) v I
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
r Yes r No
What type of SCM are you providing?
r Level Spreader
r Vegetated Conveyance (lower SHWT)
r Wetland Swale (higher SMNT)
r Other SCM that removes minimum 30 % nitrogen
W Proposed project will not create concentrated stormwater flow through the buffer
Diffuse Flow Documentation
Diffuse F IowState me nt. pdf
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. Is this a NCDOT project subject to compliance with NCDOT's Individual NPDES permit NCS000250?*
r Yes r No
2b. Does this project meet the requirements for low density projects as defined in 15ANCAC 02H .1003(2)?
r Yes r No
Comments:
G. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation
38.23KB
1a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the use of public (federal/state) land?*
U
r Yes r No

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 (North Carolina)
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)? *
r Yes r No
Comments:*
Project is funded by the City of Raleigh.
2. Violations (DWR Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWR Water Quality Certification Rules (15ANCAC 2H .0500), Isolated Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), or DWR Surface Water or Wetland Standards or
Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?*
r Yes r No
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWR Requirement)
3a. Will this project result in additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?*
r Yes r No
3b. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
The project is a result of epsting degraded and undersized infrastructure, and is not expected to increase development in the surrounding area, which
is already developed.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWR Requirement)
4a. Is sewage disposal required by DWR for this project?*
r Yes r No r NIA
5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or habitat?*
r Yes r No
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act impacts?*
r Yes r No
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
Raleigh
5d. Is another Federal agency involved?*
r Yes r No
What Federal Agency is involved?
FEMA
Se. Is this a DOT project located within Division's 1-8?
r Yes r No
5f. Will you cut anytrees in order to conduct the work in waters of the U.S.?
r Yes r No
5g. Does this project involve bridge maintenance or removal?
r Yes r No
5h. Does this project involve the construction/installation of a wind turbine(s)?'
r Yes r No
r Unknown
51. Does this project involve (1) blasting, and/or (2) other percussive activities that will be conducted by machines, such as jackhammers, mechanized pile drivers, etc.?
r Yes r No
5j. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical Habitat?
VHB reviewed the current list of USFWS protected species for Wake County, NC and submitted biological conclusions based on on -site habitat
evaluation and species surveys to the Raleigh field office. The self -certify letter (attached) was submitted on Nov. 16, 2020 and confirmation that the
self -certify letter is applicable to the project was received on Dec. 7, 2020. Al conclusions were No Effect or May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect,
with the exception of the Northern Long-eared bat, for which the project relies on the findings of the 1/5/2016 PBO. The NLEB is also not currently
listed in Wake County.
Consultation Documentation Upload
USFWS_ConcurrenceRequest_RockyBranchSewer_20201116.pdf 8.38MB
USFWS_Confirmation_20201207.pdf 122.23KB
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as an Essential Fish Habitat?*
r Yes r No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact an Essential Fish Habitat?*

NOAA Fisheries EFH Mapper.
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 status?*
r Yes
r No
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?*
The SHPO HPOweb mapping indicates the Washington Graded and High School historic district, which is on the National Register of Historic Places, is
immediately adjacent to the project corridor. The majority of the project will replace wasting underground sewer line and above -ground manholes, and
Will not change the current character of the historic district. A letter was sent to SHPO on June 3, 2021, attached. As of July 12, 2021, past the 30-day
review period, no comments have been received.
7c. Historic or Prehistoric Information Upload
Email Receipt from SHPO_2021-06-03.pdf 116.68KB
No Historic Properties Affected Letter —Rocky Branch SS Improvements_2021-06-03.pdf 11.28MB
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-yearfloodplain?*
r Yes r No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
The project is being coordinated as a No -Rise certification through the City of Raleigh stormwater management division. The No -Rise package was
submitted to the City of Raleigh on 4/28/2021.
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?*
FEMA DFIRM panel 1703 shows the project is within the 100-year floodplain.
Miscellaneous C^U
Comments
Miscellaneous attachments not previously requested.
Preliminary_DFIRM_NC_3720170300K.pdf 4.82MB
Signature u
W By checking the box and signing below, I certify that:
• The project proponent hereby certifies that all information contained herein is true, accurate, and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief; and
• The project proponent hereby requests that the certifying authority review and take action on this CWA 401 certification request within the applicable reasonable period of time.
• I have given true, accurate, and complete information on this form;
• I agree that submission of this PCN form is a "transaction" subject to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
• I agree to conduct this transaction by electronic means pursuant to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act');
• I understand that an electronic signature has the same legal effect and can be enforced in the same way as a written signature; AND
• I intend to electronically sign and submit the PCN form.
Full Name:
Heather Smith
Signature
Ll�__ _4—,?
Date
7/22/2021

AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
CITY OF RALEIGH
Project Name: Rocky Branch Interceptor Project
Project Location: Raleigh, Wake County
Date: May 2020
The City of Raleigh, undersigned, does hereby authorize:
The Professional Engineers and Scientists
of
(Contractor / Agent)
WIM-0
(Name of consulting firm)
to act on my behalf and take all actions necessary for the processing, issuance and acceptance of
permits or certifications and any and all standard and special conditions attached.
City of Raleigh
Public Utilities Department
Capital Improvement Program
1 Exchange Plaza #620
Raleigh, 27601
[phone]
I hereby certify the above information submitted in this application is true and accurate to the
best of my knowledge.
Matthew Cotton, P.E.
Construction Projects Administrator
5/29/20
Date

The proposed improvements to the Rocky Branch sewer lines will not create channelized flow through
any riparian buffers. The project is a sewer line installation and replacement project, which does not
typically change the existing grade or significantly affect stormwater flow.

Laura Styles
From: DCR - Environmental -Review <[e-mail]>
Sent: Thursday, June 3, 2021 3:50 PM
To: Laura Styles
Subject: Automatic reply: [External] SHPO Project Review Request - Rocky Branch SS
Improvements
[EXTERNAL TO HIEPC]
PLEASE NOTE (updated 06/01/202,M
At this time, Environmental Review Branch staff are currently advised to work from home to
reduce public exposure. As we evolve our work process with new developments, it may not be
possible to review your project within thirty (30) days.
We recommend that ALL projects be submitted digitally to
the Environmental.Review&ncdcr.gov inbox. Prior to sending to the ER inbox contact ER staff
if your submission will require the use of online file sharing services due to file size
MAIL IN and DELIVERY POLICY
Documentation mailed to the Mail Service Center address via USPS is still being delivered to our
offices. However, there may be some delay in receipt and processing.
Items delivered to our office by hand, courier, UPS, FedEx, etc, will only be accepted at the
loading bay door located on Wilmington St. between the hours of 8AM-Noon M-F.
Applicants should knock/ring the door -bell at the loading bay entrance door.
Any packages left outside are left at the deliverer's responsibility. We CANNOT be responsible for
them.
Custodial staff will NOT accept ANY deliveries. Members of the public are NOT allowed inside
the building.
If you have any questions or concerns, please contact Renee Gledhill -Earley, environmental review
coordinator, at 919-814-6579 or environmental. review&ncdcr. gov.
Thank you for your email submission. Please check the below guidelines to ensure your request can
be processed. Please allow 30 days for a response.
1. Only one project per email
2. Include a project description, address/location, and a map showing project boundaries
3. ,hdf attachments are preferred.

4. . � p, domnloads, Or links t0 mebs t2S will not be processed unless prior approval is issued by NCHPO
ER Staff.
5. Message size should be no larger than 25 MB
6. kmll. km,-, files will be accepted if available.
*Please Note: The ER inbox will only send one auto -reply if you submit more than one project within 24hrs. This is a default
setting that cannot be changed.

Legend W'(ABARRUS 5T
Study Area
WSST
ap
r'yER'ICING
Q
LlvtER
r-'H
W DAVIE ST,
r
E,LENoIR,ST,_J
❑ �
,a
v
a' nut ` W
. ce � �
o ? BRAGG ST
t e
Approximate Location of Stream B,
cmt HOP Not shown on USGS Quad.
ROCKY BRANCH CREEK �� Cem CMA1(1N;
HOK_ E ST a
PROSPECT AVE A `a
W cc
Caraleigh PE)
� 4
GILBERT AVE �}
PEN
ysQ zWalnat
BLU F"ST Approximate Location of Stream A,
50 Not shown on USGS Quad.
' ZA0
rM
'~ rM
Li
a
a
0 500 1,000 2,000Feet 250 EBY DR IJEWCo,I,�
ti
PRODUCED BY PRODUCED FOR USGS Topographic Map
N
*#" HIGHFILL Rocky Branch Sewer Project Figure
vlib
� �EERNG Pc Wake County, NC
2013 Raleigh West
Quadrangle

. ;
4 -WI. .
Legend
Study Area
if
CI
E _ AuFV
Ce C, r No surface water observed in this
' k r area. Pipe outlet into Rocky Branch '
r ^' found under Fayetteville Street.
Jie
ROCKY BRANCH CREEK-`-..>�f
G u
r, M i.
M a Ma A�
Potential UT located' _�
outside of Study Area. r0 Approximate Location of Stream B _
4 Not Evaluated. -�
in
Approximate Location of Stream A,
Not shown on Soil Survey.
Ge B '.
V r R 0
ROCKY BRANCH CREEK
CM r
WALNUT CREEF. rT`�
CeC? t �3i r WO
0 350 700 1,400
46
Feet 1` jyAp
PRODUCED BY PRODUCED FOR Soil Survey Map
N
'{ Rock Branch Sewer Project ��� *+" HIGHFILL_ y 1 Figure
FriG NEER G Pc Wake County, NC 2
vlib1970 Wake County Soil Survey,
Map Sheet 59

�0
'0
000
Raleigh
June 3, 2021
Renee Gledhill -Earley
State Historic Preservation Office
4617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-4617
RE: Rocky Branch SS Improvements
1500 S. Wilmington Street, Raleigh NC
Wake County
Dear SHPO:
In accordance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and its
implementing regulations, 36 CFR Part 800, we are providing information for your review and
concurrence regarding the above -referenced project. We are currently in the permitting phase
of a sanitary sewer improvement project that includes the following work:
• Replace in place approximately 300 linear feet of 8-inch pipe;
• Replace in place approximately 100 linear feet of 18-inch pipe;
• Upsize approximately 2,600 linear feet of 18-inch pipe with 24-inch pipe;
• Upsize approximately 2,500 linear feet of 36-inch pipe with 42-inch pipe;
• Remove and replace approximately 28 manholes.
The work spans from the intersection of Fayetteville Street and S. Wilmington Street, along the
Rocky Branch trail to Bright Hope Way, along Fayetteville Street, across the NC Railroad, and
crossing at the intersection of Martin Luther King Junior Boulevard and S. Wilmington Street. The
total area to be disturbed is approximately 5 acres.
The following properties located in vicinity of the project area:
• Mount Hope Cemetery
• Raleigh Water Works/ Bain Water Treatment Plant
• Washington Elementary
• Shaw University Historic District
We have made a Finding of "No Historic Properties Affected" pursuant to 36 CFR 800.4(d)(1)
based on the following:
• The proposed sanitary sewer pipes will replace existing infrastructure in place. All ground
disturbance will take place within existing right-of-way or easements.
RALEIGH WATER • ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE • 1 EXCHANGE PLAZA, SUITE 620 • RALEIGH, NC 27601
MAILING • POST OFFICE BOX 590 • RALEIGH, NC 27602

�0
'0
000
'44) 0
Raleigh
• Research confirms that building(s) on the properties are more than 50 years old and are
registered as individual structures and/or part of an historic district. However, the project
will have no effect on any historic resources on the properties.
Attached for your review are copies of relevant documents supporting our finding, along with
photographs and a map showing the location of the property. This documentation satisfies
requirements set forth at §800.11(d).
In accordance with §800.4(d)(1)(i), your office has thirty days to object to this finding. Please
respond within this timeframe, otherwise we will assume that you concur with our finding. If you
concur, please sign on the line below and return a copy of this letter by email to
[e-mail] and [e-mail].
If you have questions regarding this finding, please direct them to Laura Styles at
[e-mail]. Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Matt Cotton, P.E.
Construction Projects Administrator
Raleigh Water
Enclosures
Concurrence:
State Historic Preservation Officer
Date
RALEIGH WATER • ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE • 1 EXCHANGE PLAZA, SUITE 620 • RALEIGH, NC 27601
MAILING • POST OFFICE BOX 590 • RALEIGH, NC 27602

ouorie p,,, p J s N
SN011F/IH32f88V aNV 1f10J.V1 L33HS
z ` $ CD di
A'aal3Ida
aQ
S1N3W3H08dWl SS HNNV88 AN308
® W = 3
EM
I
LSry
�y0
- a

ouorie p,,, p J s N
OS+OZ LL
01 OO+OI 'V15 — 3Z1102fd I3 NVId
aN 'aoi3iva as
a & nol-va io io
„Nos3a yob
-- --- ---- ""'%� 2=w � w S1N3W30021dW1 SS HSN'd218 ANSOi1
Fa -t_
LL
w `9MVI
aa£�w �� n w/N Nos o
sawwQ �
(sl zz eo'c ez12inN µ �o
n22b.L e& N
/ Mpg o'W * �\I N moz� _ Wi (n
LO mz_
Irk w �m 5
ig
m�
-----------
-
ol
1 -
\V
y
v
o

p,,, p
z ` $
g
J
ILL
S2
�
&'
s
di
=
OS+ZS 01 OS+OZ 'V15 — 3Z1102fd O3 NVId
N
°J
aQ
�
c>
ouorie
ON 'aai3Ida
nsiawa io uo
S1N3W300adWl SS HZNVaB ANOOa
--
•�It
as
A
=o
__--'e-
a
\
In
ag
`lol \
+
r�C. CT
(3S)
Z e9'B12:
BO'92
H
In
N
O
\®
mo /
\
o
- - +
f
\
N
Ji \ 1/ -
u-♦ w
1Ylp}F
h6Pi,
z
I �" 1
1.9
M
—L

p,,, p
J
s
OO+Sb 01 OS+ZS 'V15 — 3Z1102fd I3 NVId
N
a a
6
Door/e
nr
No 53° z06
A 'aol3,va
S1N3W3H021dW1 SS HZN'd218 ANSOi�
All'
�� o
� �/ano>a3.51���
aEo - _
-� �6P � -
e� of
of
im
�d
.sb�l e S NI n° /
z,9z 9 0/, N de
N11m
W IN
j
w1a6 oNls10H v
u° H,nHNNnoH
W I oc9flo[� 'N
ICI £u a9924 15 a�N^13rZa
4 w
o kl
11 w w o=.
a
nW� w
a`
Epr .NId °
_ €I �,I I z N13� / Hr _
IaoH.m °Mzsn'oH ❑o �N � o x _
m �
�W
I _ all
I
- / I
s - s HN13, .1 I
Ix
�e d'I/N4s -�
-�
�o I
oo� M
1
Iall �w
_aa ,/n./o 1a.I� INI55" a N m°
H-1- H° u1N w1a0-1 oNlsno � �t
—
/
o 1.o �.IaoHlll 6N1a off
�o
ccs� ad rssr: ea i
e i
g � e
nc,otSCo[1 NId
o13,da /o uo ulaoHmv nou
or .
1 '4
w a�"
I
✓ Gd�z-W a� Lo
ol3i'."N/p — � �koL4
va ao u1z u1a/rry swsnoH � )� s,
n
z=
�W a
NO
�Ad
,z zo 92z : m o mI
_ Z Zl'9U :NI Nil
(91 .z. -tzz ano Na
(M) .9f SO-Z :NI Nil
(N) ,Z> .— :NI Nil
(99) .,, vz-, ano Na
(N) ,ZV >f'fZZ N1 M1
I
11010101

E s9
41
II j
_ - -
Ikk� e
s_
�
ayoSX
bm ��
a
}
M`
W /
/
� /
O
O
OS+SS 01 OO+Sb 'V1S — 3SId02fd I8 NVId =�
A 'HHi3Hva as o
Hol-va io ;.ao
S1NIVUAOaJJN SS HONVaB A7100a
l
mum
MONSOON
man
Nam

09+Z9 01 OS+SS 'V1S — ITJO0 fd I8 NVId =�
A 'HO131V2 a Q
Hol-va jo u13
S1NIVUAOaJJM SS HONVaB 01100a
m
oil
I I
1 11
1
jJ111111
I
EMISSION
111111111,
MEN

i
Existing manhole to be re laced at Station 44+31. Mount Hope Cemetary is visible in background.
G�.v:
r—Location of existing manhole to be removed and replaced. New sewer will be installed on east side
of street. Washington Elementary School is located on west side of street. Station 46+26.

a A "
135
S. Wilmington Street. Sewer pipe will be removed and replaced on far right. Washington
Elementa School is on left. Station 46+26.
Ili ak
1
I
Martin Luther King Junior Boulevard and S. Wilmington Street intersection. Station 59+34.

Rocky Branch SS Improvement
rvlacnM Mi19
r J,
...........
T
JL
I IN HL
NJ
'-i TH
17 Ligon'G
M
r
N ill 211 et
a* ShL111i", Q rVi sch
0
-1�5 WAY ta
E)
IL
r
Z
r
Lu
Nashinc -n
Magnet
I
El el"n, Sc 11 Ln �I-
-LL'T
BR,4G
qQ
L-.,.
/-'4 1J
1TT- �1
TJ�R
VIN
7� LAI r L
— -I:--- �-4U! Cr..
Carr�,�ge et
0 Ma n Tcjjj
ti Mi si�
19.
I
-'-I: L cc
4A
LU C-1 ,p '47
%
V1
>
0
31.
-S4
%
!�UNCK
4
'-E 57 6-r
xj A3 �Y? % 4A L,
6/3/2021, 11:06:38 AM
Sewer Pipe
RALEIGH W SE QUADRANGLE
1:18,056
0 0.13 0.25 0.5 mi
0 0.2 0.4 0.8 km
USGS The National Map: National Boundaries Dataset, 3DEP Elevation
Program, Geographic Names Information System, National Hydrography
Dataset National Land Cover Database, National Structures Dataset, and
National Transportation Dataset; USGS Global Ecosystems; U.S. Census
USGS
2021 USGS

May 26, 2020
US Army Corps of Engineers
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, NC 27587
[e-mail]
Re: Request for Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination
Rocky Branch Sewer Improvements
Raleigh, Wake County, NC
To Whom it May Concern:
■ fig
`��0hb.
VHB respectfully requests concurrence with the attached request for preliminary jurisdictional determination (PJD)
in association with this proposed City of Raleigh sewer improvement project. VHB is currently under contract with
Highfill Infrastructure Engineering, Inc. (Highfill) to provide natural resources inventories, jurisdictional
assessments and reporting. The proposed project will improve existing and add new sewer infrastructure in
Raleigh, Wake County, NC.
This project is considered a non -electric utility project and the preliminary JD will assist in avoidance and
minimization of unavoidable stream or wetland impacts associated with design and layout of the proposed sewer
improvements. We have attached the following information to assist with your review:
• Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination request forms
• Figures
0 1. 1970 Soil Survey of Wake County, NC
0 2. USGS topographic map
0 3A-3D. Wetland delineation maps
0 4. Parcel Ownership map
• USACE wetland and upland data forms
• NCDWR stream forms
• NCWAM rating forms
• NCSAM rating forms
• Site photographs
• Agent authorization form
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at [phone]. We look forward to hearing
from you soon.
Sincerely,
VHB
David G. Cooper
Senior Environmental Scientist
cc: Laura Styles, P.E., Highfill
Venture I
940 Main Campus Drive, Suite 500
Engineers I Scientists I Planners I Designers Raleigh, North Carolina 27606
P 919.829,0328
F 919.833.0034

urisdictional Determination Reauest
US Army Corps
of Engineers
Wilmington District
This form is intended for use by anyone requesting a jurisdictional determination (JD) from the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District (Corps). Please include all supporting
information, as described within each category, with your request. You may submit your request
via mail, electronic mail, or facsimile. Requests should be sent to the appropriate project
manager of the county in which the property is located. A current list of project managers by
assigned counties can be found on-line at:
http://www.saw.usace.gr y.mil/Missions/Re u_ 1�atoiyPermitProgram/Contact/Coun!yLocator.aspx
by calling 910-251-4633, or by contacting any of the field offices listed below. Once your
request is received you will be contacted by a Corps project manager.
ASHEVILLE & CHARLOTTE REGULATORY
FIELD OFFICES
US Army Corps of Engineers
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801-5006
General Number: [phone]
Fax Number: [phone]
RALEIGH REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US Army Corps of Engineers
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
General Number: [phone]
Fax Number: [phone]
INSTRUCTIONS:
WASHINGTON REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US Army Corps of Engineers
2407 West Fifth Street
Washington, North Carolina 27889
General Number: [phone]
FaxNumber: [phone]
WILNIINGTONREGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US Army Corps of Engineers
69 Darlington Avenue
Wilmington, North Carolina 28403
General Number: 910-251-4633
Fax Number: [phone]
All requestors must complete Parts A, B, C, D, E, F and G.
NOTE TO CONSULTANTS AND AGENCIES: If you are requesting a JD on behalf of a
paying client or your agency, please note the specific submittal requirements in Part H.
NOTE ON PART D — PROPERTY OWNER AUTHORIZATION: Please be aware that
all JD requests must include the current property owner authorization for the Corps to
proceed with the determination, which may include inspection of the property when
necessary. This form must be signed by the current property owner(s) or the owner(s)
authorized agent to be considered a complete request.
NOTE ON PART D - NCDOT REQUESTS: Property owner authorization/notification for
JD requests associated with North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
projects will be conducted according to the current NCDOT/USACE protocols.
NOTE TO USDA PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS: A Corps approved or preliminary JD
may not be valid for the wetland conservation provisions of the Food Security Act of
1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation in
USDA programs, you should also request a certified wetland determination from the local
office of the Natural Resources Conservation Service, prior to starting work.
Version: May 2017 Page 1

Jurisdictional Determination Request
A. PARCEL INFORMATION
Street Address: Multiple, please refer to attached mapping
City, State:
County:
Raleigh, NC
Wake
Parcel Index Number(s) (PIN): Multiple, City of Raleigh Project
B. REQUESTOR INFORMATION
Name: David G. Cooger
Mailing Address: Venture 1, 940 Main Campus Drive
Suite 500, Raleigh, NC 27606
Telephone Number: [phone]
Electronic Mail Address: [e-mail]
Select one:
❑ I am the current property owner.
✓❑ I am an Authorized Agent or Environmental Consultanti
❑ Interested Buyer or Under Contract to Purchase
❑ Other, please explain.
C. PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION
Name: Matthew Cotton, PE - City of Raleigh
Mailing Address: Public Utilities Departmet. 1 Exchange
Plaza # 620. Raleigh, NC 27601
Telephone Number: [phone]
Electronic Mail Address: [e-mail]
' Must provide completed Agent Authorization Form/Letter.
2 Documentation of ownership also needs to be provided with request (copy of Deed, County GIS/Parcel/Tax Record).
Version: May 2017 Page 2

Jurisdictional Determination Request
D. PROPERTY ACCESS CERTIFICATIONS,4
By signing below, I authorize representatives of the Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (Corps) to enter upon the property herein described for the purpose of conducting on -
site investigations, if necessary, and issuing a jurisdictional determination pursuant to Section
404 of the Clean Water Act and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899. I, the
undersigned, am either a duly authorized owner of record of the property identified herein, or
acting as the duly authorized agent of the owner of record of the property.
City project w/landowner notification and easements if needed.
Print Name
Capacity: ❑ Owner ❑✓ Authorized Agents
2020-05-26
Date
David G. Cooper ��
Signature
E. REASON FOR JD REQUEST: (Check as many as applicable)
❑ I intend to construct/develop a projector perform activities on this parcel which would be
designed to avoid all aquatic resources.
❑ I intend to construct/develop a projector perform activities on this parcel which would be
designed to avoid all jurisdictional aquatic resources under Corps authority.
✓❑ I intend to construct/develop a projector perform activities on this parcel which may
require authorization from the Corps, and the JD would be used to avoid and minimize
impacts to jurisdictional aquatic resources and as an initial step in a future permitting
process.
❑ I intend to construct/develop a projector perform activities on this parcel which may
require authorization from the Corps; this request is accompanied by my permit application
and the JD is to be used in the permitting process.
❑ I intend to construct/develop a projector perform activities in a navigable water of the
U.S. which is included on the district Section 10 list and/or is subject to the ebb and flow of
the tide.
A Corps JD is required in order obtain my local/state authorization.
I intend to contest jurisdiction over a particular aquatic resource and request the Corps
confirm that jurisdiction does/does not exist over the aquatic resource on the parcel.
❑ I believe that the site may be comprised entirely of dry land.
❑ Other:
3 For NCDOT requests following the current NCDOT/USACE protocols, skip to Part E.
4 If there are multiple parcels owned by different parties, please provide the following for each additional parcel on a
continuation sheet.
5 Must provide agent authorization form/letter signed by owner(s).
Version: May 2017 Page 3

Jurisdictional Determination Request
F. JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD) TYPE (Select One)
❑✓ I am requesting that the Corps provide a preliminary JD for the property identified herein.
A Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination (PJD) provides an indication that there may
be "waters of the United States" or "navigable waters of the United States"on a property.
PJDs are sufficient as the basis for permit decisions. For the purposes of permitting, all
waters and wetlands on the property will be treated as if they are jurisdictional "waters of
the United States". PJDs cannot be appealed (33 C.F.R. 331.2); however, a PJD is
"preliminary" in the sense that an approved JD can be requested at any time. PJDs do
not expire.
❑ I am requesting that the Corps provide an approved JD for the property identified herein.
An Approved Jurisdictional Determination (AJD) is a determination that
jurisdictional "waters of the United States" or "navigable waters of the United
States" are either present or absent on a site. An approved JD identifies the limits of
waters on a site determined to be jurisdictional under the Clean Water Act and/or
Rivers and Harbors Act. Approved JDs are sufficient as the basis for permit
decisions. AJDs are appealable (33 C.F.R. 331.2). The results of the AJD will be
posted on the Corps website. A landowner, permit applicant, or other "affected
party" (33 C.F.R. 331.2) who receives an AJD may rely upon the AJD for five years
(subject to certain limited exceptions explained in Regulatory Guidance Letter 05-
02).
❑ I am unclear as to which JD I would like to request and require additional information
to inform my decision.
G. ALL REQUESTS
Map of Property or Project Area. This Map must clearly depict the boundaries of the
review area.
✓❑ Size of Property or Review Area +/- 26.5 acres.
❑ The property boundary (or review area boundary) is clearly physically marked on the site.
Version: May 2017 Page 4

Jurisdictional Determination Request
H. REQUESTS FROM CONSULTANTS
Project Coordinates (Decimal Degrees): Latitude:
35.764030
Longitude:-78.642320
zA legible delineation map depicting the aquatic resources and the property/review area.
Delineation maps must be no larger than 1 Ix 17 and should contain the following: (Corps
signature of submitted survey plats will occur after the submitted delineation map has been
reviewed and approved).'
■ North Arrow
■ Graphical Scale
■ Boundary of Review Area
■ Date
■ Location of data points for each Wetland Determination Data Form or tributary
assessment reach.
For Approved Jurisdictional Determinations:
■ Jurisdictional wetland features should be labeled as Wetland Waters of the US, 404
wetlands, etc. Please include the acreage of these features.
■ Jurisdictional non -wetland features (i.e. tidal/navigable waters, tributaries,
impoundments) should be labeled as Non -Wetland Waters of the US, stream, tributary,
open water, relatively permanent water, pond, etc. Please include the acreage or linear
length of each of these features as appropriate.
■ Isolated waters, waters that lack a significant nexus to navigable waters, or non -
jurisdictional upland features should be identified as Non -Jurisdictional. Please
include a justification in the label regarding why the feature is non jurisdictional (i.e.
"Isolated", "No Significant Nexus", or "Upland Feature"). Please include the acreage
or linear length of these features as appropriate.
For Preliminary Jurisdictional Determinations:
Wetland and non -wetland features should not be identified as Jurisdictional, 404,
Waters of the United States, or anything that implies jurisdiction. These features can be
identified as Potential Waters of the United States, Potential Non -wetland Waters of
the United States, wetland, stream, open water, etc. Please include the acreage and
linear length of these features as appropriate.
Completed Wetland Determination Data Forms for appropriate region
(at least one wetland and one upland form needs to be completed for each wetland type)
6 Please refer to the guidance document titled "Survey Standards for Jurisdictional Determinations" to ensure that the
supplied map meets the necessary mapping standards. hlW://www.saw.usace.army.mil/Missions/Regulatoiy-Permit-
Pro gram/Jurisdiction/
Version: May 2017 Page 5

Jurisdictional Determination Request
✓❑ Completed appropriate Jurisdictional Determination form
• PJDs, please complete a Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Form' and include the
Aquatic Resource Table
• AJDS, please complete an Approved Jurisdictional Determination Form'.
✓❑ Vicinity Map
❑✓ Aerial Photograph
❑ USGS Topographic Map
Soil Survey Map
Other Maps, as appropriate (e.g. National Wetland Inventory Map, Proposed Site
Plan, previous delineation maps, LIDAR maps, FEMA floodplain maps)
zLandscape Photos (if taken)
0 NCSAM and/or NCWAM Assessment Forms and Rating Sheets
❑✓ NC Division of Water Resources Stream Identification Forms
Other Assessment Forms
7 www.saw.usace.army.mil/Portals/59/docs/regulatorv/regdocs/JD/RGL_08-02_App A Prelim JD Form fillable.pdf
s Please see http://www.saw.usace.anM.mil/Missions/Re atory-Permit-Program/Juiisdiction%
Principal Purpose: The information that you provide will be used in evaluating your request to determine
whether there are any aquatic resources within the project area subject to federaljurisdiction under the regulatory
authorities referenced above.
Routine Uses: This information may be shared with the Department of Justice and other federal, state, and local
government agencies, and the public, and may be made available as part of a public notice as required by federal
law. Your name and property location where federal jurisdiction is to be determined will be included in the
approved jurisdictional determination (AJD), which will be made available to the public on the District's website
and on the Headquarters USAGE website.
Disclosure: Submission of requested information is voluntary; however, if information is not provided, the
request for an AJD cannot be evaluated nor can an AJD be issued.
Version: May 2017 Page 6

Appendix 2 - PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (PJD) FORM
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PJD:
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PJD: David Cooper, VHB, 940 Main Campus Dr. Suite 500 Raleigh NC 27606
C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
D. PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
(USE THE TABLE BELOW TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE AQUATIC RESOURCES AND/OR
AQUATIC RESOURCES AT DIFFERENT SITES)
State: NC County/parish/borough: Wake City: Raleigh
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format):
Lat.: 35.764030 Long.:-78.642320
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Rocky Branch
E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
❑ Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
❑ Field Determination. Date(s):
TABLE OF AQUATIC RESOURCES IN REVIEW AREA WHICH "MAY BE" SUBJECT TO REGULATORY
JURISDICTION.
Site
number
Latitude
(decimal
degrees)
Longitude
(decimal
degrees)
Estimated amount
of aquatic resource
in review area
(acreage and linear
feet, if applicable)
Type of aquatic
resource (i.e., wetland
vs. non -wetland
waters)
Geographic authority
to which the aquatic
resource "may be"
subject (i.e., Section
404 or Section 10/404)
Please
see
attached
table

1) The Corps of Engineers believes that there may be jurisdictional aquatic resources in
the review area, and the requestor of this PJD is hereby advised of his or her option
to request and obtain an approved JD (AJD) for that review area based on an
informed decision after having discussed the various types of JDs and their
characteristics and circumstances when they may be appropriate.
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 AJD for the
activity, the permit applicant is hereby made aware that: (1) the permit applicant has
elected to seek a permit authorization based on a PJD, which does not make an
official determination of jurisdictional aquatic resources; (2) the applicant has the
option to request an AJD before accepting the terms and conditions of the permit
authorization, and that basing a permit authorization on an AJD could possibly result
in less compensatory mitigation being required or different special conditions; (3) 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) 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) undertaking any activity in reliance upon the subject
permit authorization without requesting an AJD constitutes the applicant's acceptance
of the use of the PJD; (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 PJD constitutes agreement that all aquatic resources in the
review area affected in any way by that activity will be treated as jurisdictional, and
waives 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 AJD or a PJD, the JD will be processed
as soon as practicable. Further, an AJD, 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. If, during an administrative appeal, it
becomes appropriate to make an official determination whether geographic
jurisdiction exists over aquatic resources in the review area, or to provide an official
delineation of jurisdictional aquatic resources in the review area, the Corps will
provide an AJD to accomplish that result, as soon as is practicable. This PJD finds
that there "may be"waters of the U.S. and/or that there "may be" navigable waters of
the U.S. on the subject review area, and identifies all aquatic features in the review
area that could be affected by the proposed activity, based on the following
information:

SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for PJD (check all that apply)
Checked items should be included in subject file. Appropriately reference sources
below where indicated for all checked items:
■❑ Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor:
Map: Delineation Flagging Maps
0 Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor.
❑ Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report. Rationale:
❑ 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 Raleigh West NC
■❑ Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: 1970 Wake Co. Soil Survey
❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
❑ State/local wetland inventory map(s):
❑ FEMA/FIRM maps:
❑ 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: .(National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929)
■❑ Photographs: ❑■ Aerial (Name & Date): 2017 NCOneMap
or ❑■ Other (Name & Date): Site Photographs
❑ 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 staff member
completing PJD
Digitally signed by Cooper, David
Doper, David Date 2020.05.26144105-04'00'
Signature and date of
person requesting PJD
(REQUIRED, unless obtaining
the signature is impracticable)'
1 Districts may establish timeframes for requestor to return signed PJD forms. If the requestor does not respond
within the established time frame, the district may presume concurrence and no additional follow up is
necessary prior to finalizing an action.

Geographic
Estimated amount
authority to which
of aquatic
Type of aquatic
Latitude
Longitude
the aquatic
Site
resource in study
resource (i.e.,
No.
Feature ID
(decimal
(decimal
area (acreage &
wetland vs. non -
resource "may be"
degrees)
degrees)
subject (i.e., Section
linear feet, if
wetland waters)
404 or Section
applicable)
10/404)
0If—immediately
non -wetland
1
Walnut Creek
35.756975'
-78.640809'
adjacent to study
Section 404
perennial stream
area
non -wetland
2
Rocky Branch
35.758914'
-78.640219'
110 If
Section 404
perennial stream
Stream A (UT to Rocky
non -wetland
3
35.759605'
-78.640462'
126 If
Section 404
Branch)
intermittent stream
0 If— immediately
Stream B (UT to Rocky
non -wetland
4
35.762929'
-78.642565'
adjacent to study
Section 404
Branch)
intermittent stream
area
5
Wetland A
35.758817
-78.640379
0.07 ac
wetland
Section 404
6
Wetland B
35.760339
-78.640811
1.63 ac
wetland
Section 404
7
Wetland C
35.762458
-78.641787
0.13 ac
wetland
Section 404

'ghtS � } �I/� I W DAVIE Sr
Legend W CABARRUS sr
)]
Study Area
E� LENOIR,S T_
w "S ,ST % 5v ]
17-
yER'kING R-BLV
a
J ALMER
alnu T l�
t � �
t_ a ce_ aRAcc,sr
Approximate Location of Stream B,
Mt Hap r Not shown on USGS Quad.
ROCKY BRANCH CREEK�Cem CMA1[1N
HOKE ST a
PROSPECT AVE 4
Caraleigh� a U
Ql T
GILBERT AVEJu
R
tnt D i
I
PEN . �Wa l rt U t
BLU FF"5r l- Approximate Location of Stream A,
50 } Not shown on USGS Quad.
a.
0 500 1,000 2,000 0 G r NEWC
Feet E8Y DR oy�
PRODUCED BY PRODUCED FOR USGS Topographic Map
N
Rock Branch Sewer Project
+' HEGHFILL_ yFigure
` Vlib
rNGI'EEMNG` C Wake County, NC
ENGIIVEERlNG Pc
2013 Raleigh West
Quadrangle

r N
Legend
Study Area A �
AP 2 r
A
�* A#A Cc S 2
� L-1
r r ,
Au
Cz ;, .�
Cie No surface water observed in this
area. Pipe outlet into Rocky Branch
• �1T {L r 1 found under Fayetteville Street.
Ee£3
ROCKY BRANCH CREEK
GLr 1
M a .
Potential UT located Atli
- outside of Study Area. f; -. Approximate Location of Stream B
Not Evaluated. y "�
n
Try r � _ r � . •�
L• '
Approximate Location of Stream A,
h Not shown on Soil Survey.
ll N.) y
WALNUT C:REEh
CeC2 C' A fW
0 350 700 1,400 ,
Feet N1 - APB
PRODUCED BY PRODUCED FOR Soil Survey Map
N
{ HIGHFILL_ Rocky Branch Sewer Project Figure
�=-man*wx NFRASTRJCTUR�- Wake County, NC
�r�rin�i=E�rvc i=t 2
Vhb1970 Wake County Soil Survey,
Map Sheet 59

�S
o
z
w n W
WG
C) d 7 Q
< Cl)
Z a LL
C N �
O O �
N 0 �
(p M
w � O
Y L lI• j- O
U CO H O M
90] ALL M
E m
9 E a
t/1 a)O` p-
U E Q w O N
(6 O N
O /
U to n O
O
w a w w
0a°CD
iL<U))
Z N M
I _
h -
U
Q o
a O o
• 3 o rn LZZ
10,
.D N C Z
L= 0 Q LL
- — c > U U E
O D Leo (D
•� Y
m Q .:�•- � m N m
Q
w
f_I
II
m
V orc
• KWE
4
C � j JK=4
m - •�i ; iR FLA
Tea
N J i' 0 2YW
a 0
E W
1
a
U,r" m
i n n s W
5
_ � 1
J a

Y
..
\
nl
„ram � `\. •�.
0#•
0
�1� t
�£OdM �
�IdM �• ZOVM,
. 1 D E1:iM+
11 1
O*AA
° mvaj
y v O v I
\ I
,
t
,
N.

AG
bu

Y
w
Q U
Z
z
w 3
N d
0
IL U ~
I,
Q
Z o
N (�
I
3
cu M
o
=v E
m
r
1�
d
Y o
\
0 a)
w
x
U _
Z
m
YW
Uw
KU
N
1Y Z 2 Ua Q
r- ~ O U
may• 2 00 > _
d � w
_ w w
F• Z LL
0
L p
I
w o
O - �O
p
z J O..
U
Z Z w
.0 0
w `�f�
.� s
p p -
�► .
II
w mw 0
U At
13
J
O
U � F •

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers OMB Control #: 0710-xxxx, Exp: Pending
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT.
See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R (Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a)
Project/Site: Rocky Branch Sewer City/County: Raleigh/Wake Sampling Date: 2020-05-12
Applicant/Owner: City of Raleigh State: NC Sampling Point: WA -wet
Investigator(s): David Cooper (VHB) Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 1
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.758817 Long:-78.640379 Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: Ur - Urban Land NWI classification: N/A
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation X , Soil X , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No X
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
Vegetation is maintained. Roadside/utility corridor. Soil shows historic disturbance where utilities were installed
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
_Surface Soil Cracks (136)
—Surface Water (Al) —True
Aquatic Plants (1314)
—Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2) _
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
—Drainage Patterns (1310)
X Saturation (A3) —Oxidized
Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
—Moss Trim Lines (1316)
—Water Marks (131) —Presence
of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
_Sediment Deposits (132) _Recent
Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (133) _Thin
Muck Surface (C7)
—Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_Algal Mat or Crust (134) —Other
(Explain in Remarks)
—Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
—Iron Deposits (135)
—Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
—Shallow Aquitard (D3)
—Water-Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
X FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes X No
Depth (inches): 0
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: WA -wet
Absolute Uominant Indicatc
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) % Cover Species? Status
1.
No trees rooted in plot.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
=Total Cover
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Sapling Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
No saplings rooted in plot.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
=Total Cover
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
No shrubs rooted in plot.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
=Total Cover
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 10m )
1.
Murdannia keisak
50
Yes
2.
Ludwigia palustris
10
No
3.
Cyperus esculentus
10
No
4.
Juncus effusus
5
No
5.
Eriocaulon sp.
20
Yes
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
95
=Total Cover
50% of total cover:
48
20% of total cover:
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 10m
)
1.
Persicaria sagittata
50
Yes
2.
3.
4.
5.
50
=Total Cover
50% of total cover:
25
20% of total cover:
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 3 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100.0% (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
OBL species
130
x 1 =
130
FACW species
15
x 2 =
30
FAC species
0
x 3 =
0
FACU species
0
x 4 =
0
UPL species
0
x 5 =
0
Column Totals:
145
(A)
160 (B)
Prevalence Index
= B/A =
1.10
X 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
X 3 - Prevalence Index is <_3.0'
_4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
-Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
OBL
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
OBL
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
FACW
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
FACW
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
OBL
Shrub -Woody Plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb -All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
3 ft (1 m) in height.
Woody Vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
OBL
10 I Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes X No
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: WA -wet
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type LoC2 Texture Remarks
0-4 10YR 3/2 85 10YR 5/8 15 C M Loamy/Clayey Prominent redox concentrations
4-12 10YR 5/1 85 5YR 5/8 15 C M Loamy/Clayey Prominent redox concentrations
Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion,
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
—Black Histic (A3)
—Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
—Stratified Layers (A5)
_2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
X Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
—Sandy Mucky Mineral(S1)
—Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
—Stripped Matrix (S6)
Dark Surface (S7)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
X Depleted Matrix (F3)
X Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soil
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_Red Parent Material (F21)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
_Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers OMB Control #: 0710-xxxx, Exp: Pending
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT.
See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R (Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a)
Project/Site: Rocky Branch Sewer City/County: Raleigh/Wake Sampling Date: 2020-05-12
Applicant/Owner: City of Raleigh State: NC Sampling Point: WB-wet
Investigator(s): David Cooper (VHB) Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 1
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.760339 Long:-78.640811 Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: ChA - Chewacla & Wehadkee soils, 0-2% slopes, frequently flooded NWI classification: N/A
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation X , Soil X , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
The portion of the wetland within an existing sewer easement has maintained vegetation and previously disturbed soil from installation of the sewer
line. Considering this "normal' due to lack of other disturbance to hydrology and likelihood this area is a natural wetland.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
_Surface Soil Cracks (136)
—Surface Water (Al) —True
Aquatic Plants (1314)
—Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2) _
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
X Drainage Patterns (1310)
X Saturation (A3) —Oxidized
Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
—Moss Trim Lines (1316)
—Water Marks (131) —Presence
of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
—Sediment Deposits (132) —Recent
Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
X Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (133) _Thin
Muck Surface (C7)
—Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_Algal Mat or Crust (134) —Other
(Explain in Remarks)
—Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
—Iron Deposits (135)
X Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
—Shallow Aquitard (D3)
X Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes X No
Depth (inches): 0
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: WB-wet
Absolute
Uominant
Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 10m )
% Cover
Species?
Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
1. Fraxinus pennsylvanica
90
Yes
FACW
Number of Dominant Species
2. Acer rubrum
10
No
FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 7 (A)
3.
Total Number of Dominant
4.
Species Across All Strata: 9 (B)
5.
Percent of Dominant Species
6.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 77.8% (A/B)
100
=Total Cover
Prevalence Index worksheet:
50% of total cover:
50 20%
of total cover:
20
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
Sapling Stratum (Plot size: 10m )
OBL species 5 x 1 = 5
1. Acer rubrum
10
Yes
FAC
FACW species 125 x 2 = 250
2. Acer negundo
5
Yes
FAC
FAC species 45 x 3 = 135
3. Fraxinus pennsylvanica
5
Yes
FACW
FACU species 5 x 4 = 20
4.
UPL species 20 x 5 = 100
5.
Column Totals: 200 (A) 510 (B)
6.
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.55
20
=Total Cover
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
50% of total cover:
10 20%
of total cover:
4
X 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 10m )
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
1. Ligustrum sinense
5
Yes
FACU
X 3 - Prevalence Index is <_3.0'
2.
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
3
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
4.
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
5.
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
6.
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
5 =Total Cover
50% of total cover:
3 20%
of total cover:
1
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 10m )
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
1. Cyperus esculentus
20
Yes
FACW
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
2. Lycopus amen .canus
5
No
OBL
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
3. Persicaria pensylvanica
10
Yes
FACW
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
4. Microstegium vimineum
10
Yes
FAC
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
5.
Shrub -Woody Plants, excluding woody vines,
6
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
7.
Herb -All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
8.
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
g
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
10.
3 ft (1 m) in height.
11.
Woody Vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
45 =Total Cover
50% of total cover:
23 20%
of total cover:
9
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 10m
)
1. Smilax rotundifolia
5
No
FAC
2. Toxicodendron radicans
5
No
FAC
3. Euonymus fortunei
20
Yes
UPL
4.
5.
Hydrophytic
30
=Total Cover
Vegetation
50% of total cover:
15 20%
of total cover:
6
Present? Yes X No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Note: Euonymus primarily at wetland edges, where
data point was taken.
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: WB-wet
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type LoC2 Texture Remarks
0-3 10YR 4/3 80 10YR 5/8 20 C M Loamy/Clayey Prominent redox concentrations
3-12 10YR 4/2 85 10YR 5/6 15 C M Loamy/Clayey Prominent redox concentrations
Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion,
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
—Black Histic (A3)
—Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
—Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_Thick Dark Surface (Al 2)
—Sandy Mucky Mineral(S1)
—Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
—Stripped Matrix (S6)
Dark Surface (S7)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
X Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soil
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_Red Parent Material (F21)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
_Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers OMB Control #: 0710-xxxx, Exp: Pending
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT.
See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R (Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a)
Project/Site: Rocky Branch Sewer City/County: Raleigh/Wake Sampling Date: 2020-05-12
Applicant/Owner: City of Raleigh State: NC Sampling Point: WC -wet
Investigator(s): David Cooper (VHB) Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 1
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.762458 Long:-78.641787 Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: ChA - Chewacla & Wehadkee soils, 0-2% slopes, frequently flooded NWI classification: N/A
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation X , Soil X , or Hydrology X significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No X
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
Wetland is in a topographic feature remnant between developed/built up parcels with buildings and lots. Hydrology affected by runoff. Soil and
vegetation in a portion of the wetland are disturbed.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
_Surface Soil Cracks (136)
_Surface Water (Al) _True
Aquatic Plants (1314)
X Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2) _
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
X Drainage Patterns (1310)
X Saturation (A3) —Oxidized
Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
—Moss Trim Lines (1316)
—Water Marks (131) —Presence
of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
—Sediment Deposits (132) —Recent
Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
X Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (133) _Thin
Muck Surface (C7)
—Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
X Algal Mat or Crust (134) —Other
(Explain in Remarks)
—Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
—Iron Deposits (135)
X Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
—Shallow Aquitard (D3)
X Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes X No
Depth (inches): 0
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: WC -wet
Absolute
Uominant
Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 10m )
% Cover
Species?
Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
1.
Acerrubrum
40
Yes
FAC
Number of Dominant Species
2.
Populus deltoides
20
Yes
FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 8 (A)
3.
Ulmus americana
20
Yes
FACW
Total Number of Dominant
4.
Species Across All Strata: 9 (B)
5.
Percent of Dominant Species
6.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 88.9% (A/B)
80
=Total Cover
Prevalence Index worksheet:
50% of total cover:
40
20% of total cover:
16
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
Sapling Stratum (Plot size: 10m )
OBL species 10 x 1 = 10
1.
Acer rubrum
15
Yes
FAC
FACW species 50 x 2 = 100
2.
Acer negundo
15
Yes
FAC
FAC species 100 x 3 = 300
3.
FACU species 0 x 4 = 0
4.
UPL species 20 x 5 = 100
5.
Column Totals: 180 (A) 510 (B)
6.
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.83
30
=Total Cover
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
50% of total cover:
15
20% of total cover:
6
X 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 10m )
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
1.
No shrubs rooted in plot.
X 3 - Prevalence Index is <_3.0'
2.
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
3
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
4.
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
5.
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
6.
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
=Total Cover
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 10m )
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
1.
Cyperus esculentus
10
Yes
FACW
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
2.
Bidens aristosa
10
Yes
FACW
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
3.
Boehmeria cylindrica
10
Yes
FACW
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
4.
Ludwigia palustris
5
No
OBL
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
5.
Juncus effusus
5
No
OBL
Shrub -Woody Plants, excluding woody vines,
6
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
7.
Herb -All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
8.
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
g
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
10.
3 ft (1 m) in height.
11.
Woody Vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
40 =Total Cover
50% of total cover:
20
20% of total cover:
8
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 10m
)
1.
Smilax rotundifolia
5
No
FAC
2.
Toxicodendron radicans
5
No
FAC
3.
Euonymus fortunei
20
Yes
UPL
4.
5.
Hydrophytic
30
=Total Cover
Vegetation
50% of total cover:
15
20% of total cover:
6
Present? Yes X No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: WC -wet
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
Matrix
Redox Features
(inches)
Color (moist)
%
Color (moist) % Type
LoC2
Texture Remarks
0-3
10YR 4/1
80
5YR 5/8 20 C
M
Loamy/Clayey Prominent redox concentrations
3-6
10YR 4/1
60
5YR 5/8 40 C
M
Loamy/Clayey Prominent redox concentrations
6-12
10YR 5/1
60
5YR 5/8 40 C
M
Loamy/Clayey Prominent redox concentrations
Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion,
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
—Black Histic (A3)
—Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
—Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_Thick Dark Surface (Al 2)
—Sandy Mucky Mineral(S1)
—Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
—Stripped Matrix (S6)
Dark Surface (S7)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
X Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soil
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_Red Parent Material (F21)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
_Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers OMB Control #: 0710-xxxx, Exp: Pending
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT.
See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R (Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a)
Project/Site: Rocky Branch Sewer City/County: Raleigh/Wake Sampling Date: 2020-05-12
Applicant/Owner: City of Raleigh State: NC Sampling Point: WABC-UPL
Investigator(s): David Cooper (VHB) Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 1
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.762261 Long:-78.641771 Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: ChA - Chewacla & Wehadkee Soils, 0-2% slopes, frequently flooded NWI classification: N/A
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil X , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No X
Are Vegetation Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X within a Wetland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
Soil apparently has been disturbed. Shallow, rocky fill layer
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
_Surface Soil Cracks (136)
—Surface Water (Al) —True
Aquatic Plants (1314)
—Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2) _
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
—Drainage Patterns (1310)
—Saturation (A3) —Oxidized
Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
—Moss Trim Lines (1316)
—Water Marks (131) —Presence
of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
_Sediment Deposits (132) _Recent
Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (133) _Thin
Muck Surface (C7)
—Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_Algal Mat or Crust (134) —Other
(Explain in Remarks)
—Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
—Iron Deposits (135)
—Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
X Shallow Aquitard (D3)
X Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
X FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: WABC-UPL
Absolute
Uominant
Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 10m )
% Cover
Species?
Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
1.
Acerrubrum
35
Yes
FAC
Number of Dominant Species
2.
Ulmus americana
35
Yes
FACW
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 9 (A)
3.
Platanus occidentalis
15
No
FACW
Total Number of Dominant
4.
Species Across All Strata: 10 (B)
5.
Percent of Dominant Species
6.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 90.0% (A/B)
85
=Total Cover
Prevalence Index worksheet:
50% of total cover:
43
20% of total cover:
17
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
Sapling Stratum (Plot size: 10m )
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
1.
Ulmus americana
5
Yes
FACW
FACW species 60 x 2 = 120
2.
Acer rubrum
10
Yes
FAC
FAC species 65 x 3 = 195
3.
Quercus phellos
5
Yes
FAC
FACU species 5 x 4 = 20
4.
UPL species 0 x 5 = 0
5.
Column Totals: 130 (A) 335 (B)
6.
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.58
20
=Total Cover
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
50% of total cover:
10
20% of total cover:
4
X 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 10m )
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
1.
No shrubs rooted in plot.
X 3 - Prevalence Index is <_3.0'
2.
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
3
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
4.
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
5.
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
6.
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
=Total Cover
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 10m )
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
1.
Cyperus esculentus
5
Yes
FACW
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
2.
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
3.
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
4
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
5.
Shrub -Woody Plants, excluding woody vines,
6
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
7.
Herb -All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
8.
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
g
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
10.
3 ft (1 m) in height.
11.
Woody Vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
5 =Total Cover
50% of total cover:
3
20% of total cover:
1
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 10m
)
1.
Toxicodendron radicans
5
Yes
FAC
2.
Clematis virginiana
5
Yes
FAC
3.
Parthenocissus quinquefolia
5
Yes
FACU
4.
Smilax rotundifolia
5
Yes
FAC
5.
Hydrophytic
20
=Total Cover
Vegetation
50% of total cover:
10
20% of total cover:
4
Present? Yes X No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: WABC-UPL
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type LoC2 Texture Remarks
0-3 10YR 4/4 100 Loamy/Clayey
Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
_Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
—Black Histic (A3)
—Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
(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)
_ Red Parent Material (F21)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
_Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
_Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
_Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
_Other (Explain in Remarks)
Gleyed Matrix (S4)
MLRA 136)
_Sandy
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
—Stripped Matrix (S6)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
Dark Surface (S7)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type: Gravel or impervious fill
Depth (inches): 3 1 Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
Cannot dig past gravel or fill layer at 3" deep. Suspect water ponding for short duration above this layer. Adjacent to Wetland C.
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

NC Division of Water Qualitv - Methodology For Identification of Intermittent and
Perennial Streams and Their Orgins v. 4.11
NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: 2020-05-12
Project/Site: Rocky Branch Sewer
Latitude: 35.759605°
Evaluator: David Cooper
County: Wake
Longitude:-78.640462°
Total Points: 26.25
Stream is at least intermittent if >_ 19 or perennial if
>_ 30"
Stream Determination (Circle one)
Intermittent
Other: Stream Form 1,
STREAM A
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 8)
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1 a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
riffle -pool sequence
0
1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hvdroloav (Subtotal = 10.5)
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
C. Bioloav (Subtotal = 7.75)
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FAC=0.5
FACW=0.75
OBL=1.5
SAV=2.0 I Other=0
*perennial streams may also be identified using
other methods. See p.
35 of manual.
Notes: Urban, channelized approx. 5' down, appears ditched. Many Ranid tadpoles. wbkf 4-5', dbkf 15, TOBw 8', TOBht 5', H2O
depth 6", slow flow, turbid w/algae & mud. Substrate silt, mud. Not shown on USGS or Soil Survey mapping.
Sketch:

NC Division of Water Quality - Methodoloey For Identification of Intermittent and
Perennial Streams and Their Orgins v. 4.11
NC DWO Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: 2020-06-12
Project/Site: Rocky Branch Sewer
Latitude: 35.762929°
Evaluator: David Cooper
County: Wake
Longitude:-78.642565°
Total Points: 25.5
Stream is at least intermittent if >_ 19 or perennial
if >_ 30*
Stream Determination (Circle one)
Intermittent
Other: Stream Form 2,
STREAM B at SB-01 Start Channel
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 13)
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1 a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
riffle -pool sequence
0
1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hvdroloav (Subtotal = 8.5)
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
C. Bioloav (Subtotal = 4)
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FAC=0.5
FACW=0.75
OBL=1.5
SAV=2.0 I Other=0
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes: There is a stream shown *near* this area on the NRCS soil survey, which corresponds to a loc. between this stream and
Wetland C. Channel begins just off study area, but if buffered, buffer would include a portion of the study area. Majority of this
any potential historic feature above this general loc. is piped. No stream channel or bed/bank observed in field upstream of this
wbkf 4-5', dbkf F, TOBw 8', TOBht 5', No flow, substr sand 75%, gravel 25%

Rocky Branch Sewer Wetland A
Wetland Site Name
Wetland Type
NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 4.1
Rating Calculator Version 4.1
Wetland A
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Date
Assessor Name/Organization
05/12/2020
DGC/VHB
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
YES
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N)
YES
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y/N)
YES
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N)
NO
Sub -function Ratina Summa
Function
Sub -function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
LOW
Sub -Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
MEDIUM
Water Quality
Pathogen Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Particulate Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Soluble Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Physical Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Habitat
Physical Structure
Condition
LOW
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
LOW
Vegetation Composition
Condition
LOW
Function Ratina Summar
Function
Metrics/Notes
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
LOW
Water Quality
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Habitat
Conditon
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating LOW

NC WAM WETLAND ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 4.1
caicuiaior version 4.,1
Wetland Site Name Wetland A
Rocky Branch Sewer Wetland A
Date 05/12/2020
Wetland Type Bottomland Hardwood Forest Assessor Name/Organization DGC/ VHB
Level III Ecoregion Piedmont —� Nearest Named Water Body Rocky Branch
River Basin Neuse USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit 03020201
Yes E: No Precipitation within 48 hrs? Latitude/Lonaitude (deci-dearees) 35.758817 /-78.640379
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and/or make note on last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if
appropriate, in recent past (for instance, approximately within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited
to the following.
• Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.)
• Surface and sub -surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby
septic tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc.)
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.)
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear -cutting, exotics, etc.)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? JEYes CNo
Regulatory Considerations (select all that apply to the assessment area)
F_ Anadromous fish
r Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
r NCDWQ riparian buffer rule in effect
r Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
r Publicly owned property
r N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
r Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HOW, ORW, or Trout
r Designated NCNHP reference community
FV_ Abuts a 303(d)-listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)-listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (check all that apply)
Blackwater
F Brownwater
r Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) U Lunar r_Wind 17 Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? OYes E' No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver?
Does the assessment area experience overbank
normal rainfall conditions?
UYes LNo
Yes M No
Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition - assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure
(VS) in the assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable,
then rate the assessment area based on evidence of an effect.
GS VS
C A C A Not severely altered
E B E' B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing,
less diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
Surface and Sub -Surface Storage Capacity and Duration - assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub -surface storage capacity and
duration (Sub). Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. Refer to the current NRCS lateral effect of ditching guidance for
North Carolina hydric soils (see USACE Wilmington District website) for the zone of influence of ditches in hydric soils. A ditch
<- 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot deep is expected to affect both surface and ditch
sub -surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable.
Surf Sub
EA CA Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
B B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
C C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation
change) (examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
Water Storage/Surface Relief - assessment area/wetland type condition metric (answer for non -marsh wetlands only)
Check a box in each column for each group below. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland
type (WT).
AA WT
3a. E A U A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 foot deep
B U B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
C U C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
D E D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b. CA Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
C B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
Ce C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot

Rocky Branch Sewer Wetland A
4. Soil Texture/Structure — assessment area condition metric
Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below. Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape
feature. Make soil observations within the 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for
regional indicators.
4a. EA Sandy soil
B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoximorphic features
E D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil
U E Histosol or histic epipedon
4b. EA Soil ribbon < 1 inch
E B Soil ribbon >_ 1 inch
4c. EA No peat or muck presence
E B A peat or muck presence
5. Discharge into Wetland — opportunity metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub -surface pollutants or discharges (Sub).
Examples of sub -surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank, underground storage tank (UST), etc.
Surf Sub
[:A A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
E B B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
C C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
6. Land Use — opportunity metric
Check all that apply (at least one box in each column). Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. Consider sources
draining to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the
assessment area (5M), and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M). Effective riparian buffers
are considered to be 50 feet wide in the Coastal Plain and Piedmont ecoregions and 30 feet wide in the Blue Ridge Mountains ecoregion.
WS 5M 2M
r A r A r A >_ 10% impervious surfaces
F_ B r B r B < 10% impervious surfaces
F_ C F_ C F_ C Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants)
F_ D r D r D >_ 20% coverage of pasture
r E r E r E >_ 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
r F r F r F >_ 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb
r G r G r G >_ 20% coverage of clear-cut land
ff H fs H f� H Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from hydrologic alterations
that prevent drainage or overbank flow from affecting the assessment area.
7. Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer — assessment area/wetland complex condition metric
7a. Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
rYes CNo If Yes, continue to 7b. If No, skip to Metric 8.
Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body. Make buffer judgment based on the average width of the wetland.
Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.
7b. How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is weltand? Descriptor E should be selected if ditches effectively bypass the buffer.
A >_ 50 feet
B From 30 to < 50 feet
C From 15 to < 30 feet
D From 5 to < 15 feet
E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
7c. Tributary width. If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels/braids for a total width.
L: <— 15-feet wide r > 15-feet wide r: Other open water (no tributary present)
7d. Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tributary/open water?
E Yes r No
7e. Is tributary or other open water sheltered or exposed?
Sheltered — adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic.
Exposed — adjacent open water with width >_ 2500 feet or regular boat traffic.
Wetland Width at the Assessment Area — wetland type/wetland complex metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands only)
Check a box
in each column. Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT)
and the wetland complex at the assessment areas (WC). See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries.
WT
WC
E A
EA
>_ 100 feet
E B
E B
From 80 to < 100 feet
E C
E C
From 50 to < 80 feet
D
D
From 40 to < 50 feet
E
E
From 30 to < 40 feet
E F
E: F
From 15 to < 30 feet
E G
E G
From 5 to < 15 feet
EH
EH
<5feet

Rocky Branch Sewer Wetland A
9. Inundation Duration — assessment area condition metric
Answer for assessment area dominant landforn-
E• A Evidence of short -duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days
L] B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundatioi
CC Evidence of long -duration inundation or very long -duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or mor
10. Indicators of Deposition — assessment area condition metric
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition
Le:A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural level:
B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetlanc
�C Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetlanc
11. Wetland Size — wetland type/wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column. Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area: &
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable, see Us
Manual). See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas. If assessment area is clear-cut, select "K" for the FW colun
WT WC FW (if applicable)
EA EA EA >_ 500 acres
B B B From 100 to < 500 acres
EC CC EC From 50 to < 100 acres
D D D From 25 to < 50 acres
E E E From 10 to < 25 acres
F F F From 5 to < 10 acres
G G G From 1 to < 5 acres
H H H From 0.5 to < 1 acre
I I I From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre
• J • J J From 0.01 to < 0.1 acre
K K • K < 0.01 acre or assessment area is clear-cu
12. Wetland Intactness — wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only
EA Pocosin is the full extent a 90%) of its natural landscape size
B Pocosin is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size
13. Connectivity to Other Natural Areas — landscape condition metril
13a. Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column). Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and/or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguo
metric naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundaries are formed by four -lane roads, regularly maintained util
line corridors the width of a four -lane road or wider, urban landscapes, fields (pasture open and agriculture), or water > 300 feet wic
Well Loosely
A A >_ 500 acres
B B From 100 to < 500 acres
C C From 50 to < 100 acres
• D • D From 10 to < 50 acres
E E < 10 acres
F F Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitat
13b. Evaluate for marshes only.
LYes LJ No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters/stream or tidal wetland.
14. Edge Effect — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes;
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment. Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges. Artificial edges includ
non -forested areas >_ 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors and clear-cut
Consider the eight main points of the compass
A No artificial edge within 150 feet in all direction!
B No artificial edge within 150 feet in four (4) to seven (7) direction
• C An artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in more than four (4) directionsor assessment area is clear-cu
15. Vegetative Composition — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flal
CA Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of appropri�
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment are,
B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native speck
characteristic of the wetland type. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting c
clearing. It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strat
L• C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition. Expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of ni
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species). Exotic species are dominant
at least one stratum.
16. Vegetative Diversity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non -tidal Freshwater Marsh only
A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species (<10% cover of exotics
B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics
C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (>50% cover of exotics

Rocky Branch Sewer Wetland A
17. Vegetative Structure — assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a. Is vegetation present,
U• Yes r, No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18
17b. Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetatiofor all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non -marsh wetlands,
EA >_ 25% coverage of vegetation
1] B < 25% coverage of vegetation
17c. Check a box in each column for each stratum. Evaluate this portion of the metric for non -marsh wetlands. Consider structure
in airspace above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separatel
AA WT
i- F,A []A Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural process(
0
m F, B U B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gap
O r• C EC Canopy sparse or absent
e
0 EA EA Dense mid-story/sapling laye
B B Moderate density mid-story/sapling laye
�;• C Us C Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or abser
-0
A A Dense shrub layer
2 B B Moderate density shrub laye
t
C • C Shrub layer sparse or absen
n A PA Dense herb layer
0 B B Moderate density herb laye
= C C Herb layer sparse or absen
18. Snags — wetland type condition metric
A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12-inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stabilit
• B Not A
19. Diameter Class Distribution — wetland type condition metric
[;A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) a
present.
B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12-inch DBF
E C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no tree:
20. Large Woody Debris — wetland type condition metric
Include both natural debris and man -placed natural debris
RA Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stabilit
B Not A
21. Vegetation/Open Water Dispersion —wetland type/open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwatei
Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season. Pattern
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open wate
[:A ®B L;C L;D
22. Hydrologic Connectivity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands only
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intens
ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization, diversion, man-made berms, beaver dams, and stream incisi
A Overbankand overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment are
B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area
C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area
• D Both overbankand overland flow are severely altered in the assessment are,
Notes

Rocky Branch Sewer, Wetland B
Wetland Site Name
Wetland Type
NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 4.1
Rating Calculator Version 4.1
Wetland B
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Date
Assessor Name/Organization
05/12/2020
DGC/VHB
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
YES
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N)
NO
Sub -function Ratina Summa
Function
Sub -function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
LOW
Sub -Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
MEDIUM
Water Quality
Pathogen Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Particulate Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Soluble Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Physical Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Habitat
Physical Structure
Condition
MEDIUM
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
MEDIUM
Vegetation Composition
Condition
LOW
Function Ratina Summar
Function
Metrics/Notes
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
LOW
Water Quality
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Habitat
Conditon
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating LOW

NC WAM WETLAND ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 4.1
caicuiaior version 4.,1
Wetland Site Name Wetland B
Rocky Branch Sewer, Wetland B
Date 05/12/2020
Wetland Type Bottomland Hardwood Forest Assessor Name/Organization DGC/ VHB
Level III Ecoregion Piedmont Nearest Named Water Body Rocky Branch
River Basin Neuse USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit 03020201
Yes E: No Precipitation within 48 hrs? Latitude/Lonaitude (deci-dearees) 35.760339 /-78.640811
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and/or make note on last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if
appropriate, in recent past (for instance, approximately within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited
to the following.
• Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.)
• Surface and sub -surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby
septic tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc.)
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.)
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear -cutting, exotics, etc.)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? CYes JE No
Regulatory Considerations (select all that apply to the assessment area)
F_ Anadromous fish
r Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
r NCDWQ riparian buffer rule in effect
r Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
r Publicly owned property
r N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
r Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HOW, ORW, or Trout
r Designated NCNHP reference community
FV_ Abuts a 303(d)-listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)-listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (check all that apply)
Blackwater
F Brownwater
r Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) U Lunar r_Wind 17 Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? OYes E' No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver?
Does the assessment area experience overbank
normal rainfall conditions?
UYes LNo
Yes M No
Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition - assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure
(VS) in the assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable,
then rate the assessment area based on evidence of an effect.
GS VS
[a:A [a:A Not severely altered
B 0 B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing,
less diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
Surface and Sub -Surface Storage Capacity and Duration - assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub -surface storage capacity and
duration (Sub). Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. Refer to the current NRCS lateral effect of ditching guidance for
North Carolina hydric soils (see USACE Wilmington District website) for the zone of influence of ditches in hydric soils. A ditch
<- 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot deep is expected to affect both surface and ditch
sub -surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable.
Surf Sub
EA CA Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
E B E B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
C C CC Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation
change) (examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
Water Storage/Surface Relief - assessment area/wetland type condition metric (answer for non -marsh wetlands only)
Check a box in each column for each group below. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland
type (WT).
AA WT
3a. E A U A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 foot deep
B U B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
C U C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
D E D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b. CA Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
C B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
Ce C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot

Rocky Branch Sewer, Wetland B
4. Soil Texture/Structure — assessment area condition metric
Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below. Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape
feature. Make soil observations within the 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for
regional indicators.
4a. EA Sandy soil
B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoximorphic features
E D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil
U E Histosol or histic epipedon
4b. EA Soil ribbon < 1 inch
E B Soil ribbon >_ 1 inch
4c. EA No peat or muck presence
E B A peat or muck presence
5. Discharge into Wetland — opportunity metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub -surface pollutants or discharges (Sub).
Examples of sub -surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank, underground storage tank (UST), etc.
Surf Sub
[:A A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
E B B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
C C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
6. Land Use — opportunity metric
Check all that apply (at least one box in each column). Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. Consider sources
draining to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the
assessment area (5M), and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M). Effective riparian buffers
are considered to be 50 feet wide in the Coastal Plain and Piedmont ecoregions and 30 feet wide in the Blue Ridge Mountains ecoregion.
WS 5M 2M
r A r A r A >_ 10% impervious surfaces
F_ B r B r B < 10% impervious surfaces
F_ C F_ C F_ C Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants)
F_ D r D r D >_ 20% coverage of pasture
r E r E r E >_ 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
r F r F r F >_ 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb
r G r G r G >_ 20% coverage of clear-cut land
r H r H r H Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from hydrologic alterations
that prevent drainage or overbank flow from affecting the assessment area.
7. Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer — assessment area/wetland complex condition metric
7a. Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
r;Yes CNo If Yes, continue to 7b. If No, skip to Metric 8.
Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body. Make buffer judgment based on the average width of the wetland.
Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.
7b. How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is weltand? Descriptor E should be selected if ditches effectively bypass the buffer.
A >_ 50 feet
B From 30 to < 50 feet
C From 15 to < 30 feet
D From 5 to < 15 feet
E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
7c. Tributary width. If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels/braids for a total width.
L: <— 15-feet wide r' > 15-feet wide r:Other open water (no tributary present)
7d. Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tributary/open water?
E Yes r_ No
7e. Is tributary or other open water sheltered or exposed?
Sheltered — adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic.
Exposed — adjacent open water with width >_ 2500 feet or regular boat traffic.
Wetland Width at the Assessment Area — wetland type/wetland complex metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands only)
Check a box
in each column. Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT)
and the wetland complex at the assessment areas (WC). See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries.
WT
WC
E A
EA
>_ 100 feet
Ev B
E B
From 80 to < 100 feet
EC
EC
From 50 to < 80 feet
D
D
From 40 to < 50 feet
E
E
From 30 to < 40 feet
E F
E: F
From 15 to < 30 feet
E G
E G
From 5 to < 15 feet
EH
EH
<5feet

Rocky Branch Sewer, Wetland B
9. Inundation Duration — assessment area condition metric
Answer for assessment area dominant landforn-
CA Evidence of short -duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days
L] B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundatioi
L• C Evidence of long -duration inundation or very long -duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or mor
10. Indicators of Deposition — assessment area condition metric
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition
CA Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural level:
E• B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetlanc
EC Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetlanc
11. Wetland Size — wetland type/wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column. Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area: &
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable, see Us
Manual). See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas. If assessment area is clear-cut, select "K" for the FW colun
WT WC FW (if applicable)
EA EA EA >_ 500 acres
B B B From 100 to < 500 acres
EC CC EC From 50 to < 100 acres
D D D From 25 to < 50 acres
E E E From 10 to < 25 acres
F F F From 5 to < 10 acres
• G • G • G From 1 to < 5 acres
H H H From 0.5 to < 1 acre
I I I From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre
J J J From 0.01 to < 0.1 acre
K K K < 0.01 acre or assessment area is clear-cu
12. Wetland Intactness — wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only
EA Pocosin is the full extent a 90%) of its natural landscape size
B Pocosin is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size
13. Connectivity to Other Natural Areas — landscape condition metril
13a. Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column). Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and/or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguo
metric naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundaries are formed by four -lane roads, regularly maintained util
line corridors the width of a four -lane road or wider, urban landscapes, fields (pasture open and agriculture), or water > 300 feet wic
Well Loosely
A A >_ 500 acres
B B From 100 to < 500 acres
C C From 50 to < 100 acres
• D • D From 10 to < 50 acres
E E < 10 acres
F F Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitat
13b. Evaluate for marshes only.
LYes LJ No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters/stream or tidal wetland.
14. Edge Effect — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes;
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment. Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges. Artificial edges includ
non -forested areas >_ 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors and clear-cut
Consider the eight main points of the compass
A No artificial edge within 150 feet in all direction!
• B No artificial edge within 150 feet in four (4) to seven (7) direction
C An artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in more than four (4) directionsor assessment area is clear-cu
15. Vegetative Composition — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flal
CA Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of appropri�
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment are,
B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native speck
characteristic of the wetland type. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting c
clearing. It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strat
L• C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition. Expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of ni
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species). Exotic species are dominant
at least one stratum.
16. Vegetative Diversity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non -tidal Freshwater Marsh only
A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species (<10% cover of exotics
B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics
C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (>50% cover of exotics

Rocky Branch Sewer, Wetland B
17. Vegetative Structure — assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a. Is vegetation present,
U• Yes r, No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18
17b. Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetatiofor all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non -marsh wetlands,
CA >_ 25% coverage of vegetation
1] B < 25% coverage of vegetation
17c. Check a box in each column for each stratum. Evaluate this portion of the metric for non -marsh wetlands. Consider structure
in airspace above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separatel
AA WT
i- F,A CA Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural process(
0
r• B U B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gap
O F,C CC Canopy sparse or absent
e
0 A • A Dense mid-story/sapling laye
• B B Moderate density mid-story/sapling laye
F,C CC Mid-story/sapling layer sparse orabser
n A A Dense shrub layer
• B • B Moderate density shrub laye
U) C C Shrub layer sparse or absen
n • A A Dense herb layer
0• B • B Moderate density herb laye
= C C Herb layer sparse or absen
18. Snags — wetland type condition metric
A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12-inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stabilit
• B Not A
19. Diameter Class Distribution — wetland type condition metric
[;A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) a
present.
E B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12-inch DBF
C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no tree:
20. Large Woody Debris — wetland type condition metric
Include both natural debris and man -placed natural debris
RA Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stabilit
B Not A
21. Vegetation/Open Water Dispersion —wetland type/open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwatei
Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season. Pattern
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open wate
[:A ®B CC L;D
22. Hydrologic Connectivity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands only
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intens
ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization, diversion, man-made berms, beaver dams, and stream incisi
A Overbankand overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment are
• B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area
C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area
D Both overbankand overland flow are severely altered in the assessment are,
Notes

Rocky Branch Sewer, Wetland C
Wetland Site Name
Wetland Type
NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 4.1
Rating Calculator Version 4.1
Wetland C
Headwater Forest
Date
Assessor Name/Organization
05/12/2020
DGC/VHB
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
YES
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
NO
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N)
NO
Sub -function Ratina Summa
Function
Sub -function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
MEDIUM
Sub -Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
HIGH
Water Quality
Pathogen Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Particulate Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Soluble Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Physical Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Habitat
Physical Structure
Condition
HIGH
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
LOW
Vegetation Composition
Condition
HIGH
Function Ratina Summar
Function
Metrics/Notes
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
HIGH
Water Quality
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Habitat
Conditon
HIGH
Overall Wetland Rating HIGH

NC WAM WETLAND ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 4.1
caicuiaior version 4.,1
Wetland Site Name Wetland C
Rocky Branch Sewer, Wetland C
Date 05/12/2020
Wetland Type Headwater Forest Assessor Name/Organization DGC/ VHB
Level III Ecoregion Piedmont Nearest Named Water Body Rocky Branch
River Basin Neuse USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit 03020201
Yes [,'No Precipitation within 48 hrs? Latitude/Lonaitude (deci-dearees) 35.762458 /-78.641787
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and/or make note on last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if
appropriate, in recent past (for instance, approximately within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited
to the following.
• Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.)
• Surface and sub -surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby
septic tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc.)
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.)
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear -cutting, exotics, etc.)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? CYes JE No
Regulatory Considerations (select all that apply to the assessment area)
F Anadromous fish
F Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
F7 NCDWQ riparian buffer rule in effect
F Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
F Publicly owned property
F N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
r Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HOW, ORW, or Trout
r Designated NCNHP reference community
F Abuts a 303(d)-listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)-listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (check all that apply)
® Blackwater
Brownwater
F Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) U Lunar r_Wind 17 Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? OYes E' No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver?
Does the assessment area experience overbank
normal rainfall conditions?
UYes LNo
Yes M No
Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition - assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure
(VS) in the assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable,
then rate the assessment area based on evidence of an effect.
GS VS
[a:A [a:A Not severely altered
B 0 B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing,
less diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
Surface and Sub -Surface Storage Capacity and Duration - assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub -surface storage capacity and
duration (Sub). Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. Refer to the current NRCS lateral effect of ditching guidance for
North Carolina hydric soils (see USACE Wilmington District website) for the zone of influence of ditches in hydric soils. A ditch
<- 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot deep is expected to affect both surface and ditch
sub -surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable.
Surf Sub
Ev A CA Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
E B E B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
C C CC Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation
change) (examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
Water Storage/Surface Relief - assessment area/wetland type condition metric (answer for non -marsh wetlands only)
Check a box in each column for each group below. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland
type (WT).
AA WT
3a. E A U A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 foot deep
B U B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
C U C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
D E D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b. CA Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
C B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
Ce C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot

Rocky Branch Sewer, Wetland C
4. Soil Texture/Structure — assessment area condition metric
Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below. Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape
feature. Make soil observations within the 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for
regional indicators.
4a. CA Sandy soil
E B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
CC Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoximorphic features
D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil
E Histosol or histic epipedon
4b. A Soil ribbon < 1 inch
B Soil ribbon >_ 1 inch
4c. A No peat or muck presence
B A peat or muck presence
5. Discharge into Wetland — opportunity metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub -surface pollutants or discharges (Sub).
Examples of sub -surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank, underground storage tank (UST), etc.
Surf Sub
CA Le:A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
B E: B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
E C EC Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
6. Land Use — opportunity metric
Check all that apply (at least one box in each column). Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. Consider sources
draining to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the
assessment area (5M), and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M). Effective riparian buffers
are considered to be 50 feet wide in the Coastal Plain and Piedmont ecoregions and 30 feet wide in the Blue Ridge Mountains ecoregion.
WS 5M 2M
F1 A F-1 A F7 A >_ 10% impervious surfaces
F_ B F B r B < 10% impervious surfaces
F C F C F C Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants)
F D F D F D >_ 20% coverage of pasture
r E F E F E >_ 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
F F F F F F >_ 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb
F G F G F G >_ 20% coverage of clear-cut land
F-0 H F1_' H F1_1 H Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from hydrologic alterations
that prevent drainage or overbank flow from affecting the assessment area.
7. Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer — assessment area/wetland complex condition metric
7a. Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
r;Yes CNo If Yes, continue to 7b. If No, skip to Metric 8.
Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body. Make buffer judgment based on the average width of the wetland.
Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.
7b. How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is weltand? Descriptor E should be selected if ditches effectively bypass the buffer.
A >_ 50 feet
B From 30 to < 50 feet
C From 15 to < 30 feet
D From 5 to < 15 feet
E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
7c. Tributary width. If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels/braids for a total width.
C <— 15-feet wide [', > 15-feet wide r; Other open water (no tributary present)
7d. Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tributary/open water?
C Yes C No
7e. Is tributary or other open water sheltered or exposed?
Sheltered — adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic.
Exposed — adjacent open water with width >_ 2500 feet or regular boat traffic.
Wetland Width at the Assessment Area — wetland type/wetland complex metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands only)
Check a box
in each column. Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT)
and the wetland complex at the assessment areas (WC). See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries.
WT
WC
E A
CA
>_ 100 feet
Ev B
E B
From 80 to < 100 feet
EC
EC
From 50 to < 80 feet
D
D
From 40 to < 50 feet
E
E
From 30 to < 40 feet
E F
E: F
From 15 to < 30 feet
E G
E G
From 5 to < 15 feet
EH
EH
<5feet

Rocky Branch Sewer, Wetland C
9. Inundation Duration — assessment area condition metric
Answer for assessment area dominant landforrr
CA Evidence of short -duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days
L] B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundatioi
L• C Evidence of long -duration inundation or very long -duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or mor
10. Indicators of Deposition — assessment area condition metric
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition
• A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural level:
B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetlanc
�C Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetlanc
11. Wetland Size — wetland type/wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column. Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area: &
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable, see Us
Manual). See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas. If assessment area is clear-cut, select "K" for the FW colun
WT WC FW (if applicable)
EA EA EA >_ 500 acres
B B B From 100 to < 500 acres
EC CC EC From 50 to < 100 acres
D C D D From 25 to < 50 acres
E E E From 10 to < 25 acres
F F F From 5 to < 10 acres
G G G From 1 to < 5 acres
H H H From 0.5 to < 1 acre
• I • I • I From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre
J J J From 0.01 to < 0.1 acre
K K K < 0.01 acre or assessment area is clear-cu
12. Wetland Intactness — wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only
EA Pocosin is the full extent a 90%) of its natural landscape size
B Pocosin is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size
13. Connectivity to Other Natural Areas — landscape condition metril
13a. Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column). Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and/or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguo
metric naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundaries are formed by four -lane roads, regularly maintained util
line corridors the width of a four -lane road or wider, urban landscapes, fields (pasture open and agriculture), or water > 300 feet wic
Well Loosely
A A >_ 500 acres
B B From 100 to < 500 acres
C C From 50 to < 100 acres
• D • D From 10 to < 50 acres
E E < 10 acres
F F Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitat
13b. Evaluate for marshes only.
LYes LJ No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters/stream or tidal wetland.
14. Edge Effect — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes;
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment. Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges. Artificial edges includ
non -forested areas >_ 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors and clear-cut
Consider the eight main points of the compass
A No artificial edge within 150 feet in all direction!
B No artificial edge within 150 feet in four (4) to seven (7) direction
• C An artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in more than four (4) directionsor assessment area is clear-cu
15. Vegetative Composition — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flal
C• A Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of appropri�
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment are,
B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native speck
characteristic of the wetland type. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting c
clearing. It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strat
L;C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition. Expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of ni
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species). Exotic species are dominant
at least one stratum.
16. Vegetative Diversity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non -tidal Freshwater Marsh only
A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species (<10% cover of exotics
B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics
C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (>50% cover of exotics

Rocky Branch Sewer, Wetland C
17. Vegetative Structure — assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a. Is vegetation present,
s Yes [:No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18
17b. Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetatiofor all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non -marsh wetlands,
CA >_ 25% coverage of vegetation
1] B < 25% coverage of vegetation
17c. Check a box in each column for each stratum. Evaluate this portion of the metric for non -marsh wetlands. Consider structure
in airspace above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separatel
AA WT
i- F,A CA Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural process(
0
r• B U B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gap
O F,C CC Canopy sparse or absent
e
0 A • A Dense mid-story/sapling laye
• B B Moderate density mid-story/sapling laye
F,C CC Mid-story/sapling layer sparse orabser
n A A Dense shrub layer
• B • B Moderate density shrub laye
U) C C Shrub layer sparse or absen
n • A A Dense herb layer
0• B • B Moderate density herb laye
= C C Herb layer sparse or absen
18. Snags — wetland type condition metric
A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12-inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stabilit
• B Not A
19. Diameter Class Distribution — wetland type condition metric
EA Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) a
present.
B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12-inch DBF
C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no tree:
20. Large Woody Debris — wetland type condition metric
Include both natural debris and man -placed natural debris
RA Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stabilit
B Not A
21. Vegetation/Open Water Dispersion —wetland type/open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwatei
Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season. Pattern
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open wate
[:A ®B CC LD
22. Hydrologic Connectivity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands only
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intens
ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization, diversion, man-made berms, beaver dams, and stream incisi
EA Overbankand overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment are
B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area
C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area
D Both overbankand overland flow are severely altered in the assessment are;
Notes
A portion of this wetland appears to be the primary latrine for a nearby homeless encampment

Rocky Branch Sewer, Stream A
NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Rocky Branch Sewer Stream A
Stream Category Pal
Date of Evaluation 2020-05-12
Assessor Name/Organization D. Cooper / VHB
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Function Class Rating Summary
YES
YES
NO
Intermittent
USACE/ NCDWR
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
(2) Baseflow
(2) Flood Flow
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
(4) Floodplain Access
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
(4) Microtopography
(3) Stream Stability
(4) Channel Stability
(4) Sediment Transport
(4) Stream Geomorphology
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
(1) Water Quality
(2) Baseflow
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
(3) Thermoregulation
(2) Indicators of Stressors
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
LOW
YES
HIGH
NA
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
LOW
YES
NA
NA
(1) Habitat
(2) In -stream Habitat
(3) Baseflow
(3) Substrate
(3) Stream Stability
(3) In -stream Habitat
(2) Stream -side Habitat
(3) Stream -side Habitat
(3) Thermoregulation
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
(3) Flow Restriction
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Overall
LOW
LOW

Rocky Branch Sewer, Stream A
NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies user ivianuai version z.i
USACE AID #: NCDWR #:
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic
quadrangle, and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same
property, identify and number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User
Manual for detailed descriptions and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if any supplementary
measurements were performed. See the NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT / SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): Rocky Branch Sewer Stream A 2. Date of evaluation: 2020-05-12
3. Applicant/owner name: City of Raleigh 4. Assessor name/organization: D. Cooper / VHB
5. County: Wake 6. Nearest named water body
7. River Basin: Neuse on USGS 7.5-minute quad: Rocky Branch
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.759605 /-78.640462
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): Stream A 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 100
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 5 F Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 8 13. Is asse...... nt reacn a swamp stream?
14. Feature type: E Perennial flow E Intermittent flow CTidal Marsh Stream
STREAM RATING INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: E Mountains (M) u Piedmont (P) C Inner Coastal Plain (1) E Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic k �+
valley shape (skip for E+ a L; b
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip E Size 1 (< 0.1 mi`) Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mi`) Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mi`) Size 4 (>> 5 mil)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? Yes U No If Yes, check all that appy to the assessment area.
F Section 10 water F Classified Trout Waters _ Water Supply Watershed ( E I Ell E III I] IV I] V)
7 Essential Fish Habitat F Primary Nursery Area High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
F_ Publicly owned property Fv- NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect Fv- Nutrient Sensitive Waters
r Anadromous fish r 303(d) List 7 CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
r Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
_ Designated Critical Habitat (list species):
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? ' Yes s' No
1. Channel Water - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
A Water throughout assessment reach.
• B No flow, water in pools only.
C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction - assessment reach metric
A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is adversely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impounded on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates).
B Not
3. Feature Pattern - assessment reach metric
A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
B Not A.
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile - assessment reach metric
EA Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming,
over widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of
these disturbances).
EB Not
5. Signs of Active Instability -assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
LIA < 10% of channel unstable
UB 10 to 25% of channel unstable
E C > 25% of channel unstable

Rocky Branch Sewer, Stream A
6. Streamside Area Interaction — streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
HALittle or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
B HA
B Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down -cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area,
leaky or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
E C L; C Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision,
disruption of flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples:
impoundments, intensive mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a
man-made feature on an interstream divide
7. Water Quality Stressors — assessment reachlintertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.
F%4 A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
r_ B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)
F_ C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
r_ D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
r E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in the "Notes/Sketch"
section.
F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
r_ G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
r H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc.)
I Other: (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
I J Little to no stressors
8. Recent Weather — watershed metric
For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a
drought.
A Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
B Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
• C No drought conditions
9 Large or Dangerous Stream — assessment reach metric
;Yes u No Is stream is too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10. Natural In -stream Habitat Types — assessment reach metric
1Oa. L;Yes f� No Degraded in -stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in -stream hardening [for example, rip -rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach) (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
r A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses n F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) H m F_ G Submerged aquatic vegetation
r B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent o � F_H Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation N c r I Sand bottom
j- C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) t m r_ J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
r_ D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots U 7 K Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
W E Little or no habitat
*********************************REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS****************************
11. Bedform and Substrate —assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
l la.L�Yes f� No Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11 b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11c)
B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11 c. In riffles sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach — whether or not submerged.
Check at least one box in each row (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain Streams and Tidal Marsh Streams). Not Present (NP) _
absent, Rare (R) = present but < 10%, Common (C) _ > 10-40%, Abundant (A) _ > 40-70%, Predominant (P) _ > 70%. Cumulative
percentages should not exceed 100% for each assessment reach.
NP R C A P
• ' Bedrock/saprolite
• Boulder (256 — 4096 mm)
• Cobble (64 — 256 mm)
• Gravel (2 — 64 mm)

Rocky Branch Sewer, Stream A
Sand (.062 — 2 mm)
Silt/clay (< 0.062 mm)
Z
L;
L;
L;
Detritus
Z+
L;
L;
L;
L;
Artificial (rip -rap, concrete, etc.)
11d.UYes +E No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
12. Aquatic Life — assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a.F,Yes +Ea" No Was an in -stream aquatic life assessment performed as described in the User Manual?
If No, select one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. C No Water E Other: Excessive pollutants deterred full evaluati,
12b.E+ Yes E No Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (look in riffles, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check
all that apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
1 >1 Numbers over columns refer to "individuals" for size 1 and 2 streams and "taxa" for size 3 and 4 streams.
r r_Adult frogs
r Aquatic reptiles
r_ r_ Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
r_ r_ Beetles (including water pennies)
r r Caddisfly larvae (Trichoptera [T])
r_ r Asian clam (Corbicula )
r r_ Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
r r Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
r_ r_ Dipterans (true flies)
r_ r_ Mayfly larvae (Ephemeroptera [E])
r_ r_ Megaloptera (alderfly, fishily, dobsonfly larvae)
r r Midges/mosquito larvae
r r Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
r r_ Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula)
r_ r Other fish
r r_ Salamanders/tadpoles
r_ r Snails
r r_ Stonefly larvae (Plecoptera [P])
r_ r Tipulid larvae
r r Worms/leeches
13. Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Consider storage capacity with regard to both overbank flow and
upland runoff.
LB RB
EA EA Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
B E B Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
C C Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples include: ditches, fill,
soil, compaction, livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14. Streamside Area Water Storage — streamside area metric (skip for Size 1 streams, Tidal Marsh Streams, and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB) of the streamside area.
LB RB
A L; A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water >_ 6 inches deep
B B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
C C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
15. Wetland Presence — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the streamside area or within the
normal wetted perimeter of assessment reach.
LB RB
Y Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area?
• N H
N
16. Baseflow Contributors — assessment reach metric (skip for size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.
r_ A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
r_ B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
r C Obstruction that passes some flow during low -flow periods within assessment area (beaver dam, bottom -release dam)
F%_0 D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron oxidizing bacteria in water indicates seepage)
r_ E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
r F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors — assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
r A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)

Rocky Branch Sewer, Stream A
7 B Obstruction not passing flow during low flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
Fo C Urban stream (>> 24% impervious surface for watershed)
F D Evidence that the stream -side area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
F None of the above
18. Shading — assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider aspect. Consider "leaf -on" condition.
A Stream shading is appropriate for stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes)
B Degraded (example: scattered trees)
C Stream shading is gone or largely absent
19. Buffer Width — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider "vegetated buffer" and "wooded buffer" separately for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) starting at the top
of bank out to the first break.
Vegetated Wooded
LB RB LB RB
A EA EA EA > 100-feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
B E B E B E B From 50 to < 100-feet wide
I; C ;] C L: C L: C From 30 to < 50-feet wide
E D L; D L; D L; D From 10 to < 30-feet wide
L E L; E E; E E; E < 10-feet wide or no trees
20. Buffer Structure — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Vegetated" Buffer Width).
LB
RB
L;A
EA
Mature forest
B
L: B
Non -mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
C
• C
Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
D
D
Maintained shrubs
E
E
Little or no vegetation
21. Buffer Stressors — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts), does not abut but
is within 30 feet of stream (< 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 22_
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB RB LB RB LB RB
A A A A A � Row crops
B
• B • B • B • B • B • B Maintained turf
C C C C C C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture
' D D D DD D Pasture (active livestock use)
22. Stem Density — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Wooded" Buffer Width).
LB RB
'A A Medium to high stem density
B B Low stem density
• C • C No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23. Continuity of Vegetated Buffer — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation > 10-feet wide.
LB
RB
A
A
The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent.
B
B
The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
C
C
The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition — First 100 feet of streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes
to assessment reach habitat.
LB
RB
L; A
L; A
Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native
species, with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
B
B
Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
C
C
Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.

Rocky Branch Sewer, Stream A
25. Conductivity — assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a.L;Yes E No Was a conductivity measurement recorded?
If No, select one of the following reasons. L� No Water � Other: No conductivity meter infield.
,o. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
CA <46 C: B 46 to < 67 J]C 67 to < 79 C: D 79 to < 230 C: E >> 230
Notes/Sketch:
Fair amount of trash, some containing potential bacterial contaminants (feces, spoiled meat, etc.). Many Ranid tadpoles observed. Stagnant.

Rocky Branch Sewer, Stream B
NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Rocky Branch Sewer Stream B
Stream Category Pal
Date of Evaluation 2020-05-12
Assessor Name/Organization D. Cooper / VHB
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Function Class Rating Summary
NO
YES
NO
Intermittent
USACE/ NCDWR
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
(2) Baseflow
(2) Flood Flow
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
(4) Floodplain Access
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
(4) Microtopography
(3) Stream Stability
(4) Channel Stability
(4) Sediment Transport
(4) Stream Geomorphology
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
HIGH
MEDIUM
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
HIGH
MEDIUM
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
(1) Water Quality
(2) Baseflow
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
(3) Thermoregulation
(2) Indicators of Stressors
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
HIGH
NO
MEDIUM
NA
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
HIGH
NO
NA
NA
(1) Habitat
(2) In -stream Habitat
(3) Baseflow
(3) Substrate
(3) Stream Stability
(3) In -stream Habitat
(2) Stream -side Habitat
(3) Stream -side Habitat
(3) Thermoregulation
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
(3) Flow Restriction
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat
HIGH
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
HIGH
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
HIGH
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
HIGH
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Overall
HIGH
HIGH

Rocky Branch Sewer, Stream B
NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies user ivianuai version z.i
USACE AID #: NCDWR #:
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic
quadrangle, and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same
property, identify and number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User
Manual for detailed descriptions and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if any supplementary
measurements were performed. See the NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT / SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): Rocky Branch Sewer Stream B 2. Date of evaluation: 2020-05-12
3. Applicant/owner name: City of Raleigh 4. Assessor name/organization: D. Cooper / VHB
5. County: Wake 6. Nearest named water body
7. River Basin: Neuse on USGS 7.5-minute quad: Rocky Branch
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.762929 /-78.642565
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): Stream B 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 100
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 5 F Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 8 13. Is asse...... nt reacn a swamp stream?
14. Feature type: E Perennial flow E Intermittent flow CTidal Marsh Stream
STREAM RATING INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: E Mountains (M) u Piedmont (P) C Inner Coastal Plain (1) E Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic k �+
valley shape (skip for E+ a L; b
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip E Size 1 (< 0.1 mi`) Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mi`) Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mi`) Size 4 (>> 5 mil)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? Yes U No If Yes, check all that appy to the assessment area.
F Section 10 water F Classified Trout Waters _ Water Supply Watershed ( E I Ell E III I] IV I] V)
7 Essential Fish Habitat F Primary Nursery Area High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
F_ Publicly owned property Fv- NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect Fv- Nutrient Sensitive Waters
r Anadromous fish r 303(d) List 7 CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
r Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
_ Designated Critical Habitat (list species):
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? ' Yes s' No
1. Channel Water - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
A Water throughout assessment reach.
• B No flow, water in pools only.
C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction - assessment reach metric
EA At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is adversely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impounded on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates).
EB Not
3. Feature Pattern - assessment reach metric
Er A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
E B Not A.
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile - assessment reach metric
EA Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming,
over widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of
these disturbances).
EB Not
5. Signs of Active Instability -assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
EA < 10% of channel unstable
B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
C > 25% of channel unstable

Rocky Branch Sewer, Stream B
6. Streamside Area Interaction — streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
EA
EA Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
B B Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down -cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area,
leaky or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
E C L; C Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision,
disruption of flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples:
impoundments, intensive mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a
man-made feature on an interstream divide
7. Water Quality Stressors — assessment reachlintertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.
r_ A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
r_ B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)
F_. Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
r_ D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
r_ E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in the "Notes/Sketch"
section.
F F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
F_ G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
r H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc.)
r I Other: (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
r J Little to no stressors
8. Recent Weather — watershed metric
For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a
drought.
A Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
B Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
• C No drought conditions
9 Large or Dangerous Stream — assessment reach metric
;Yes u No Is stream is too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10. Natural In -stream Habitat Types — assessment reach metric
1Oa. L;Yes f� No Degraded in -stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in -stream hardening [for example, rip -rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach) (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
r A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses n F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) H m F_ G Submerged aquatic vegetation
r B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent o � F_H Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation N c r I Sand bottom
j- C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) t m r_ J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
r_ D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots U 7 K Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
W E Little or no habitat
*********************************REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS****************************
11. Bedform and Substrate —assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
l la.L�Yes f� No Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11 b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11c)
B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11 c. In riffles sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach — whether or not submerged.
Check at least one box in each row (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain Streams and Tidal Marsh Streams). Not Present (NP) _
absent, Rare (R) = present but < 10%, Common (C) _ > 10-40%, Abundant (A) _ > 40-70%, Predominant (P) _ > 70%. Cumulative
percentages should not exceed 100% for each assessment reach.
NP R C A P
• ' Bedrock/saprolite
• Boulder (256 — 4096 mm)
• Cobble (64 — 256 mm)
• Gravel (2 — 64 mm)

Rocky Branch Sewer, Stream B
Sand (.062 — 2 mm)
Silt/clay (< 0.062 mm)
Z+
L;
L;
L;
L;
Detritus
Z+
L;
L;
L;
L;
Artificial (rip -rap, concrete, etc.)
11d.UYes +E No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
12. Aquatic Life — assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a.F,Yes +Ea" No Was an in -stream aquatic life assessment performed as described in the User Manual?
If No, select one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. E No Water []Other: Excessive pollutants deterred full evaluati,
12b.F,Yes +E No Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (look in riffles, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check
all that apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
1 >1 Numbers over columns refer to "individuals" for size 1 and 2 streams and "taxa" for size 3 and 4 streams.
r r_Adult frogs
r Aquatic reptiles
r_ r_ Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
r_ r_ Beetles (including water pennies)
r r Caddisfly larvae (Trichoptera [T])
r_ r Asian clam (Corbicuia)
r r_ Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
r r Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
r_ r_ Dipterans (true flies)
r_ r_ Mayfly larvae (Ephemeroptera [E])
r_ r_ Megaloptera (alderfly, fishily, dobsonfly larvae)
r r Midges/mosquito larvae
r r Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
r r_ Mussels/Clams (not Corbicuia)
r r Other fish
r r_ Salamanders/tadpoles
r_ r Snails
r r_ Stonefly larvae (Plecoptera [P])
r_ r Tipulid larvae
r r Worms/leeches
13. Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Consider storage capacity with regard to both overbank flow and
upland runoff.
LB RB
EA EA Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
B E B Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
C C Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples include: ditches, fill,
soil, compaction, livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14. Streamside Area Water Storage — streamside area metric (skip for Size 1 streams, Tidal Marsh Streams, and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB) of the streamside area.
LB RB
A L; A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water >_ 6 inches deep
B B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
C C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
15. Wetland Presence — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the streamside area or within the
normal wetted perimeter of assessment reach.
LB RB
Y Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area?
• N H
N
16. Baseflow Contributors — assessment reach metric (skip for size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.
r_ A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
r_ B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
r_ C Obstruction that passes some flow during low -flow periods within assessment area (beaver dam, bottom -release dam)
r D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron oxidizing bacteria in water indicates seepage)
r_ E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
r F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors — assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
r A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)

Rocky Branch Sewer, Stream B
7 B Obstruction not passing flow during low flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
F C Urban stream (>> 24% impervious surface for watershed)
F D Evidence that the stream -side area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
F None of the above
18. Shading — assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider aspect. Consider "leaf -on" condition.
EA Stream shading is appropriate for stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes)
B Degraded (example: scattered trees)
C Stream shading is gone or largely absent
19. Buffer Width — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider "vegetated buffer" and "wooded buffer" separately for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) starting at the top
of bank out to the first break.
Vegetated Wooded
LB RB LB RB
EA EA EA EA > 100-feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
B U B E B E B From 50 to < 100-feet wide
C U C L: C L: C From 30 to < 50-feet wide
L D L; D L; D L; D From 10 to < 30-feet wide
L E L; E L; E L; E < 10-feet wide or no trees
20. Buffer Structure — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Vegetated" Buffer Width).
LB
RB
EA
EA
Mature forest
B
B
Non -mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
' C
C
Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
D
D
Maintained shrubs
E
E
Little or no vegetation
21. Buffer Stressors — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts), does not abut but
is within 30 feet of stream (< 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 22
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB RB LB RB LB RB
A A A A A Row crops
B
• B • B B B B B Maintained turf
C C C C C C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture
' D ' D r, D D Pasture (active livestock use)
22. Stem Density — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Wooded" Buffer Width).
LB RB
A • A Medium to high stem density
B B Low stem density
C C No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23. Continuity of Vegetated Buffer — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation > 10-feet wide.
LB
RB
A
A
The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent.
B
B
The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
C
C
The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition — First 100 feet of streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes
to assessment reach habitat.
LB
RB
L; A
L; A
Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native
species, with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
B
B
Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
L] C
L] C
Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.

Rocky Branch Sewer, Stream B
25. Conductivity — assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a.L;Yes E No Was a conductivity measurement recorded?
If No, select one of the following reasons. L� No Water � Other: No conductivity meter infield.
,o. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
CA <46 C: B 46 to < 67 J]C 67 to < 79 C: D 79 to < 230 C: E >> 230
Notes/Sketch:

Rocky Branch Sewer Improvements
Raleigh, Wake County, NC
Site Photographs — Taken May 12, 2020
Walnut Creek Adjacent to Study Area
Stream A, Looking Upstream
Ephemeral/Looking Upstream from SB-01 Start Channel
Rocky Branch Within Study Area
Stream A, Looking Downstream
Ephemeral/Looking Downstream above SB-01 Start Channel
Rocky Branch Sewer Improvements VHB Project No. 39172.00
Site Photographs Page 1 of 2

AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
CITY OF RALEIGH
Project Name: Rocky Branch Interceptor Project
Project Location: Raleigh, Wake County
Date: May 2020
The City of Raleigh, undersigned, does hereby authorize:
The Professional Engineers and Scientists
of
(Contractor / Agent)
WIM-0
(Name of consulting firm)
to act on my behalf and take all actions necessary for the processing, issuance and acceptance of
permits or certifications and any and all standard and special conditions attached.
City of Raleigh
Public Utilities Department
Capital Improvement Program
1 Exchange Plaza #620
Raleigh, 27601
[phone]
I hereby certify the above information submitted in this application is true and accurate to the
best of my knowledge.
Matthew Cotton, P.E.
Construction Projects Administrator
5/29/20
Date

ID#* 20201461 Version* 1
Regional Office * Central Office - [phone]
Reviewer List* Rick Trone
Pre -Filing Meeting Request submitted 10/13/2020
_.. ........ _ _ _ __ ......................................
Contact Name * David Cooper'
Contact Email Address* [e-mail]
Project Name* Rocky Branch Sewer Upgrade
Project Owner* City of Raleigh
Project County* Wake
Owner Address: Street Address
City of Raleigh Public Utilities Department
Address Line 2
1 Exchange Plaza #620
oty State / Province / Pbegion
Raleigh NC
Postal / Zip Code Country
27601 USA
Is this a transportation project?* r Yes r No
Type(s) of approval sought from the DWR:
V 401 Water Quality Certification - r 401 Water Quality Certification
Regular Express
r Individual Permit r Modification
r Shoreline Stabilization
Does this project have an existing project ID#?*
r Yes r No
Please list all existing project ID's associated with this projects.*
NBRRO#20-164
Do you know the name of the staff member you would like to request a meeting with?
No
Please give a brief project description below.*

Sewer upgrade along Rocky Branch Creek from Martin Luther King JR.
Blvd. to S. Wilmington Street, Raleigh, NC. Streams/wetlands delineated by
VHB / David Cooper, verified by USACE by desktop review, and
streams/buffer subjectivity verified on -site by Heather Smith (VHB) and
Cheng Zhang, determination letter dated 7/2/2020.
Project is currently in the design stage. Project will likely have unavoidable
buffer impacts, temporary / possibly permanent wetland impacts, temporary
/ possibly permanent stream impacts for stabilization. More information will
be available as design progresses and permit drawings are created for
submittal with the PCN.
The 75% design plans are attached for reference, but permit drawings
have not yet been created to show impacts to aquatic resources or riparian
buffers.
Please give a couple of dates you are available for a meeting.
11 /4/2020
11 /5/2020
Please attach the documentation you would like to have the meeting about.
RAL1902_Rocky Branch SS Improvement_75%
36.03M6
Design for VHB_2020-10-08.pdf
pdf only
By digitally signing below, I certify that I have read and understood that per the Federal Clean Water Act Section
401 Certification Rule the following statements:
This form completes the requirement of the Pre -Filing Meeting Request in the Clean Water Act Section 401 Certification
Rule.
1 understand by signing this form that I cannot submit my application until 30 calendar days after this pre -filing
meeting request.
1 also understand that DWR is not required to respond or grant the meeting request.
Your project's thirty -day clock started upon receipt of this application. You will receive notification regarding meeting location
and time if a meeting is necessary. You will receive notification when the thirty -day clock has expired, and you can submit an
application.
Signature
Submittal Date 10/13/2020
Reviewer Meeting Request Decision
Has a meeting been scheduled?* r Yes r No

2(ZO61IV8 ON goad TIA-UH) s1N3w3noadwl 55 HONV33 AN7O3
M' d sE s@_ g
s1321a
5 3 o a a g E fi
�g$g e5m�5 �8E'o B � �i OF
S CIE€R8 9 m€g� gag S 01
0
A
N
N H 0 0 0 0 0
ZO N N N N O
W �� 00000
Z Z
w
Ow o 0 0 0 o Q
r O O N N O N
G\ 1 w w o + + + + + CY
J J Z O O N M M
N M N
w �J w a®
a��0aaaaa,, as : ®�
� Z N N N (n N W W W W �;W 8�
/\ N m z w vai tt s =Joa
P....
6Qa 0J0
wwwJ00o d
Z>
C7 Q W >> K
z m__ _ W_z _
mO OOOO w w r I, " "y F. m O Of fh K a- CC O O O O 0 00000 0 m
Q�@Q af
Z Z Z O U O D U U U
Z Z Z g g U U w z n o m w¢ Ci 4
Z 0000JJaaaaa �wwww 33w��N
tL z H w w o 0 0 0 0 J w o w w N a d
(7 z CD
w w Z Z Z Z Z 0 0 0 0 0 0 Z Z Z Z Z w W ¢ z z w a w
w w gggggcS'c'S c �i5 i< ;5 010�
O O O p 0 0 0 0 O O O O O Z p z a a m w 3 to
Z 0 v w w 01 Q_ 1 1 1 _ N M N N M N
- = 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
W W W w7F7F (n N N N N H H
NO @s g
w n H M
UW k ;3"1` sv58 sea $C
1..1...
S33 dddddd y d
pp y5*r��pp 11 €
S'�Bi RY85 12LL
5
5e my8� 6
M=g 2?s was"ES
W O k �SS5L 1Lini Oed 5
`1 3 E`m K'�i ESvu E�uu
CNOMM
O npf
s ° gad€` s I flu
M.
2
MAMA
ss
s
3�mBip MAM
gg5 3yyg 0
E mu.
` �a4S 11
£�ffi ��$ ++��2
3 fi3��a€�$�LL'a3� a
C

o a iaie, :mob .� a HouWHISK03 U®d ®29n313U.WN KU820 s WomW-gaud
s' S310N �V2i3N30 ONV 'SNOIlVV� 8MV 'ON3037LL =m o
0N 'H`JI31V21 s Q O
13
---- ---- ---- „.,,,.„.,,,,,° S1N31143AObdW1 SS HONV?J9 ,1N002i
aM�4 °any
LLJ
z �&$68�se
sgage
HUM
:1 Of*
ea _
n €dal
ILL
ob "aa� €m m as B�pp�EG��i 3
wLLJ
a ?Qsz z�'
baa oil hs � go
9s,
yen
�N��� o � I I� - a� two a
� o —sit "o �'g� � �U' - -- � �� pa � ° o ° �e �a � � =p =o�z o a w� _ >o
= wimp �
_$ y vie yob Nn c ou �e- €�G o= a _
"= o e E� _`
1_°
Ios:
� o� �o�
"y 8o a its woil
f� :N o "= w jp 1 _.� � .z wia �m �� _�
mw 3 pow s low U ° _e - 3 w °
- o�'" ' a' o�`� _gy p ; _ - - C 11 Hill 1111
o� logo �� � �_ _ �a �� --
p> �_ :o e o W z� =c W p -6'1E6 =e "` .$ Q x
�" _ _�� - F� _€ �° o� �4
��_ ���� "_
so H ®_ itNCO
<� a�� p "� oap "� '" boo oa
w � � ° aia p� ��e 02, `� pn= 1d oc -- o�p - FG d9-� mm _� w� go "" ww
op
�= m �w - - t 08 =° =W - w�� w°w s °
oe p < oo€� €es amG ws p„. -En pIS 62�_° 1° � 11
'go �§
08 - e - ` 'nogo
a &� 9
SE Sao 13
n - w ° o£ a _ ow a ao"
es e�� exam ° N�a �a e aw �a ��_ .°, _ 'a so °m� =��o as �o �a sus
� esc WWI "p
�n7 o onop° use
m s� oz=s N° pwo o=
�S� _1N°=� �E� �� s >>"x ��w �� it � _ Qip�o
oil LL�o�'E pffi z �o C - ��s =" B" a8 ill .n�N� C `0
Sa xY `= Zf��o�°p'�� m 1 "m` �� �w =' 1= n � _� � s ws � 1
^�F 1 � �e if �� �3=" �zaeeo�a�° w" ��o � �¢p 1111
wn ��o 1¢w11 N - �_ tog
- ° F � ��_
�� �� - I R S his HIPIN: Q"° Sod ¢ A 11 <! - 1 � a` � � s Ali € z� € 2
z yeas t �� a "S o =f o p - =p s o °� '§ - g'=ALL is E ° §o ° wG
- li " we q m x Ill 1 9; 11 �3
�;p i°Ko=
'°= m
_W §_ 'p
°a= �3x so n
==w a Fo a=wmn°ao
°ss oQ =g wc° g y= ��e L �<�x. � o�
ca a 8 omp m j op =yom wag � sh Q j ��E �s CE tom � ��� J, myj =; R, s
w V€€�°� LL� ova op Wc °o oho p - goo _� ps o �o pc g� oe a sa
� .p a�w" pco = � eso �o�o "° � --_ °w° se ���`�o ° °=e LL �W �_� "p yy _ a° o o„s ��
9VSm�wEw ��_i� � �Wi< Z � � �o�p o �o$ � - �S= _ �� �pwCp: z� Ewa �a � �Gp �>aw �'" _ 8 oow �rc
8 � =O 6& 6�o f " " m � N <m "°J &3uW " "p8 .,�_� m n w B :� 8: 88 8 8.. 8 8 �8 88aS �8 gym' 83 8aa7Y: 88 8iS s� 8,3 U'd 8- Y "aF
R
I
I
III
I
�
V
EMT
�+
0����tgoA
�o
I
O
iiil�lll
F
I
}}

o a iaie :mob .� a Houa ulsmoo U®d ®ESn313U MN Mom s WNW -gaud
o�io�ia J�P,,, si J'n & iAO),V' 133HS `o
j0 ALA
u f of
- - ---- ON 'H`JI31V21 s Q U m H`JI3ltM '
---- ---- �,,,,,,,,, s1N3w3noadwi ss HONvae
og�sag..
6.
sHIM! $
Is
Ld
zz E88�sm� �
0� I
a� ea�`O'9.s uol�wmim s O n
L
6
15 311Ly13AVi�
Q
Fm
T G

Hooafuubsmoo U®d ®ESn313U MN Mom s Wo W-gaud
o�io�ia ='+c,,.
,,,,,s.�y..I.00+O l 'V1S — 3�Id02id D8 NVId =m 4
P!:�Iil'3
OZW3�Ol [---- ---- ,,.„
,,...,,,,,,,,°bdWl SS HONV?JB AN002i
e "HIS
a€�-3ID5
Mi
fit
J. F� 3
ok
s
yip£ saw
.08h �a
— =Pi ,ir
°
92
MIM`x
r
iS ✓'� �`// / � ICI ,� Uo N S �
o
q�Lo
-mill
I Mill
�e z
f I I
�000 �.\No "LLB 1 IS
VT
d �o=cos �
�\
0

HIouaflulsmoo Uod ®ESV313U MN Mom s Wo W-gaud
,..�c,,,,,11 „•'s>".
„•,•,.„. .„.,,,,,°°`. �
J= -
�
„; €
e;omm
LL . '
� m
{
•X
OS+Z� Ol OS+OZ 'V1S - 3NIdOdd D8 NVId
=m
s Q
�_
U
o�io�ia
ON JI31V21 AL
H`JI3ltM j0 J
S1N3W3AOddWl SS HDNVdB ,INDOd
----
----
uY SEE C,�.2
-J I
J
Am
en�o
p�
el
Wo m� 9 LL oy1p1' I
R�Rg.1
A'\
--
-
g
3 0� z08
h/ ✓w
it
i3
Im
A r
pj
I
ki/ zap^ +
+ fl:
N
M V N
C) N 5
O+
N
min N
l ^ �v—•n�P � B
(K
'6 LZ :Lq ANI
mg :NI NII
F
Ul
tt Q
ak
vI
�Y z
71
T77
Ld_
C`
p
I8
Ak
(II�
N
o
M a
I
P
A A IIII.F,
P/kk
n
ry Ili € b us
y� }
Rn� �� pp
A V\
kI �es:$gS�g
H��
W
'
�3=A��mE
p to
II €a_Es�
go�w
yam
>i��AY
Nm
N
I N
I8 � s�ssag=
e
` g
A74 I `� ;.Ea;ilg _
yq
8• 4 � n � a` A -
a
II III uk g €��
- A 4L I FJ cg yv� E "a
a I-o 33s Mn e
S
�
SILI—

Houa ulsm®o U®d ®ESV313U MN Mom s Wo W-gaud
LL09+2y Ol 09+92 'V1S — 3TUOdd D8 NVId =m N
ON 'H`JIIIV 311
U
Am m 1£[
---- ---- ---- ,,,,„ .°`. S1N3W3AObdW1 SS HONV?JB ,1N002i
a�row•wae.•.o.a•ww wo
w�°. wxac+m wa>.uic� www�.w w.u,��w
wS fix° °R JIJ3d5 ONtl SOMH°NO15 H­ 'do
E
i o g[[9
�* cz g r�
a'�°.
��s�3s �gO3 YI
Hoi3ava ao uu waoH"n`�I of
I� 5
uaoa"II
ne EN�m
ua°—d oH,s—
. ]"'s.oH�
,
INso °ry L (,
e� -S
N u° °H
3
a i„o^n
+
�`0000E`
+
ff I
3Nad tl31N3� tl313D <
tj ? 0
LL ==o
Y �
wo
MEN
All
Iff WHE
1,
mmm
LE
MLI

moboflubsmoo Uod GESW313U bow 14DIS2® s Wo W-gaud
�6...a G=
Y$ -304°
"e,a,,,,,'°`. �z
LL,
=Np
��cz—s
_
„; €
12 = m "-� $
qmm
: m
ffi •
09+29 Ol 00+£b 'V1S — 3TUOdd DR NVId
=m
s Q
^^
U
WWa-
____
--_
--_
ON 'H`JI31V21
H`JI3ltM j0 ALJ
S1N3W3A0ddW1 SS HDNVdB ,IN30d
- -
--
----,
----
----
J Ie•mssvwewmiM.0 rsieiawwa
U�C�ynyomm m �'�€� e.N�esi. wewn�oo a��orU1e a�ww&e,a aa:,wy uoueirtca P�e:q�aeoB
o]?�d N e��� wPe,wswa aP u�ieyaeemgwwaswu s�.va�p9 ucueezww�aym4se 4y wq yreepy
�FN— _ � e ryew:5'N�.�gee..gae ue Puo-eaaeigwoa.o, simssmw r>.a a.e s•own�m oea'wnuneem
YYY g a eNew',ew,a.wam ev<eo!pin=m»�ewewaow,aPw„wa�,�+mee, reset u.w�.�nwwm
€? 5 .vl Pm N .i w �.ipima w,wau,auP.a!,�.a,Po as e�su:euPe®em.r wa ma��o a gam% N
<o`wo a' 0 spp�
dINIE ' . 3a3NI
101
so
00
+
dig 'I� _'��
Rm 3
GR
w � o
_ Bi€
�. F5 rcw _
oy Ez
s'a�
S
rag
r `\
d sO
(5)
fZ L£— OM
ANI
(3N
.fZ L-93 :
£rozz
ANI
:wd
off'
�
s
oRS:m
�p�
=o
8�
N
(s)
XZ
(
,L
:I
Z
71
I
%+
o
o°
J
s az
o'££z :ino AN
£L'££Z :NI AN
p�
m
cssrz :wl
R
S
R
ob=
u'
M w
�w
oN
H �
o
o
r+i
a
N
w
L,
o
w
� N

Houaflulsmoo U®d ®ESn313U MN Mom s WNW -gaud
o�io�ia ='+c,,,,,11 .,,,,,s.��Id
+ES 'V1S — 30ad D8 NVId =m a
qmm
---- ---- ,,,,,,,,.,,,,,,,,,°°` � P?�+S'ilf33',I'OadVfl
ss HONvae ANooa
Nea
_ YowNog2Ha rn ae3 a 8as e
-22
SoT5
o°MW
H.
'boos==W'aoi"�io> °m�y3
c°io o`2ry Bi °
EBBbaE� -
Nig
l$ Epp@
_ 9L 111o=
`` m "ssWE
o
11111111 Ell Nil i
p PC
+ vi
lo
a
/" i

o a iaie :mob .� a Houa ulsmoo U®d G2GV313G.WH RUS20 s G NW -gaud
osioiia ....
,s°i S7IV134 LL
70a1N00 NOISOa3 =m o
G M,— ` °`' a a ON 'H`J131 s a o
qmm w
---- - -- ---- S1N3w3A0adw1 SS HONVae ,1Yi00a
mi e,ms°xr3xosisxww NO-355—
11111=IIIIIJIIi,=IIIIIJIII� �=IIIIIJIu�
�Itll—IIIII � ��e e � � moo oaee
imnimsw xoim� om�n�x� V J 3
M31A 3lIJOLd mixuuwmuixm°uw3o3sn,ax°° � 3 � ry
II �,I_III_„y al IF .�emxxa,uexi xwmx3 mn°x°iameuu C o € a
M31A NOUD—S 0d0 3wxaHvxnr
su. � M31—d
VJSOiiOu %
s E
`3,�,a3�rv�umrvm�a,ry
ypy�
i lI
8
UT
a
� e
s
.A
9 IS P �g'v
i 0 0
1 _I © Mo o ❑ s
° g Fs W� s
wa "
13lNl rm—d .y. �g R
N

Houaflulsmoo Uad GESV313ROLON MOM AUMN-gaud
oiioiitt .. . . . .. . . .. .......
S7 C 70d1N00 NOISOd3 6'. q
---- ---- ----
H 131" JO UO
dV11 SS HONV�JO ),NOOd
---- ---- IINI ---- .......... �1,11
'A
M2
on
H
Dun,
Hq 5 43
V-M 0
H
Milt
GAH.
LLL1 d
No
1z
Ld
:4Ki - H a Ld
CL
1,3
LLJ
N,
PRE
W
PP
39
z
r -
T �3 E
N�
K,
ffi
5� z
11 V
a
!
M H UI
21
HIP
-j!
IM
j H
M M;—M amlftfl-
MI.M -4 1
H 04
HL
22
zR."Ll-aiDg
i Zg -tt a -!t
Elm j
s-eJ
-2,
Z � ig
-29
B mn1 I , gi
z
BUB
E M
H Rffl
EB
2:
z
I
u
z
Hm "Hu
!I Rif M,
Big
��Qsma&='�Wbs �
�
Syry

Hodofludsmoo Uod GESVdddU MN MOM aWNW-gaud
JeP,,
oiWWII, s=i J�a m g S7IV134 7Oa1N00 NOISOa3 =m o
�j0 6..�
- - ---- I31H`JtM ALJ
£[ w
---- ---- S1N3w3�0adwl SS HONVae ),NOOa
ob of a
p = $a
�
d o~ =pg Z< 3_ �Aw w �z g��sgp
osoN J & _ wee ¢p
m
., w 1
b<gYg n i of + - w a=wo 3 0 - z I° asyo c
o 6
& 6 €'
O p ss
nSf
e:g
� 3 f
z� o O I I.: og�pez w
Z Wow �g oea` =E
d-wo N rviry .z� uo w w / wopU s€8F5S -
a
z.
tz
-
B°w.w F w
o�
Neozpswz d
w ab
=_ _� $ J gL=<wo god c;
as= - No \ / w=W°
op�
z.
`= swlHUH =g� yo // aks3 =Laoz.
n
o=o<mwtwo <&J ow & �p w zG=hw�z�F. -z8 Z
<
z.
'a N
wo��ww
o
Hal
J _ °• M� M .` pO o�{wwa � Z
N — _ w oo=m" g
q Ta oC °°""• g$ d a 5� W° _N� g� go _=ma g oN
o
z
wyw»a
WC
n = °<_ s LL ob c"Nc. "s3a�=zao=a
cr N X's 6p - oN
5 €
g Pa t _�€� a�b€� o
zBw3uaF p oO�3 ..� �a w" " < Z
s>ow O
_ a< � �S < cps ` G oV)
�aQ�bxo��'�
- < " °��oow O�
O =o�G.E� W0 3doo 03 �3Y °33w mEs�a.o�a`SGW W
o� �'omE ew m wa - ww :w<allos'Wwo
UtTs
o =oo ooNE
o < a N °-.E2
o°�o o
°ooi o° o °� i000 ' �� Z 5p p o€som
°°�o r3a�s " _ wo�� o b G G_ _ 93,-<N po pF F
5z moia ag o 0 00- omLL`�`��-°'a - �o`F" K=€tee
o
wows
e ao e
w
°
° 00°00 o�pp s=woo H -F op °n �w ��==p wok-m
d3 �` °� °` °0°8� Gw o =ws m2b od G m � a�ae wo =s :o=»
- p wax o a=3e�w
" <� G S= w =3 °'aa w= �« , fig'- 5db`'o
IS .paF ego �z� m pn� 40 _ y waw ��g p °� o�
� ISaA Ho�aE °o== 3 m" Gp ma M z-,
�G21

o a iaie :mob .� a Houa ulsmoo U®d ®2Sn313U.WH RUS20 s Wo W-gaud
oiioiia ....
,S7IV134LL
70a1N00 NOISOa3 =m o
HUH. LL £ ' �N 'H`JI31V21 s Q
H H0I31tM j0 ALJ
---- ---- ---- S1N3 W3AOad WI SS HONVa9 ,l>iooa
— n°a Fp�BID's
"a -
c
g is=pia
met � E wEySx E
a gas.
uoran uw.r.nomna3axrxa�rxw M31�3015
.ore.n \I R

Hloboflubsmoo Uod ®ESV313U bo w Mom s Wo W-gaud
SOIVl30 Sf103NVI1 30SIW =m o
ON 'H`JIIIV 3 J
1£[
---- ---- S1N3w3A0adw1 SS H0NVa9 ,1Y�00a
o�C E88�sm� �
paEw
p=oo
- _��._
em u
I B
w3b CiB��&<u
�6
goo d was. s oas a�oE�-- ill w�
u17
bo 2W- S gyp`o
o
LL� wk H jz'om�o
g �ooNLLo alb _e
53
I rc N
a \ a 6 90� aaz
p 4
i pb
_ =.3

o a iaie :mob .� a mobollubsmoo Uod ®ESV313U bow KIDIS20 s UVINIMo-Jaud
Jes,�� Jan m g ' SOIVl30 Sr)031NV1130SIN =m o
ON 'H`J131V21 s Q
H`JI3ltM j0 ALJ
� : m
Maw a
---- ---- ---- S1N3w3A0adwl SS H0NVa9 ,1Y00a
glai o
HiPl a
w's_ s8�ss�a
N s a
U
Z of Eeea�
Q
x ..g Z
J
mo
I I 1= m
w
=op=�
12 N
= _l-K.'.
Ill iI li III III— ee`3e�<_
sw- -
,_� IN
3 _
a=
LLJ
_
s p
c of anowae"��a,aviarn-------- _ d
<� W 9
Z � �
d - IM u
�iii=ll I- J
—III=T 7P= W
p QLI
M
<� s
FM 11-
p- 11 *0111 N1 nenavn�

o n iaia, :ova .a,e moual uism®o U®d ®ESV313U.10H RMS20 s UVIN -Jaud
WWI
S7lV134 (]dVGNV1S
---- ---- S1N3W3�0?JdWI SS HDNV?JB AY��Od
g8u u" HIM -
Pill! ii
mho ¢gsp�a
U,a ,1 fo wnwiNiry r
° ro
a aka a
a3m11".,,raee a3xa3 .1_1Os See „,") cx, IN)
3 aN 3aa ax— ­ as a s a o
\=o.
a3 a 33a xoa w .o E ° s \ - s ou// 3 0
°mz 3 d3aN,Ia
a pa
a�aaN�sr3,33u
N
avw,
M4 s°vis � Nvas 3aia Kvry o s
pe
u�
@°@ a3iaaw Noai 3,a°na 3aia aaea �11 a s 1 I'd III ua a ivaxm MS g ^�
sNO aro s3Nonid.11-0 33SI1Xroi oaiNirviar a vw d—
3axva oaar osc ssa 3e n sNo'­ I— o ava Rdm a s
ITT
a rvi ava-aia rx a a e - S"MONhn
u
Bzm g
<z� It 3H N 33s
§p� �" aazvm ao 3aa3 _
o ,e N33m�3s dIIssxuw
' „xym ae I e- eia
O O
o o 113 I°
_�- - ea aZ
P, a3e 3 aalloa �A oN ax. a -a
o&=�a=LL= eu 3,oxNrw a s-aa s: ° w e a3.aoeens e
Juh a 41n? N,,JF g
a
=saws
r i i v sw�a r� ° �` oae=cw ama�w3
aWps° ° p=s
w zo
a =KKo�5.
os wa= €no m=` aom eE °xa��ma
° Sao=- °no=wa" sao�� `_��&
p�mo:=x "�p�so - a°3Wzm<� 8`
MN° Asa w°s �z�°�'°° ° o mo swwFa
'a�w b„o •o .ru',s �w hw� o�� ° °C MW-HUM
`-'
goa
�s=oaco s wm §mwwa€w
6x I
Lm

ozoz/a/o, :aw ,ma IWoualluismoo Had ®d]SV313U MIN MOM FWNW-gd Jd
oziozia J�P,,,,, si J'n
S7IV130 02iVONV1S ON 'H`JI31 3
6. �bn gg y
j0 HI3l - - ---- `JtM Al1J
' N : £[
2=_w S1N3W3AObdWl SS HONV?JO ,1N00d
g
7
o00
oho -6aK
o c
"w "
�� ►���II �IIIIII
���■III
®eoa®�oa®eoa®eoa®eoa®aoa®
/
/
3
as
o
HIM.
og�s8g..
VIM
�z Eee�a�
m
N
di6 n
a W�
69
dig
LU LLll
W t P
N
/
do ao �p
ou �"m
w� "e �a �pE
=Ww m�soeo
of
� ���
��<�
��3a. ��w��•p'�'„
00
0.�=how
o iod
= rCoa �R "„
�
�3
worm
rc� k�O i�YCa�o"a�ac

Ho aflulsmoo Uod ®ESV313U bo w MOM s Wo W-gaud
oziozia J�P,,,,, si J'n
S7 0 02i IV13VONV1S =m o
- - ____ H`JI3ltM 30 Al1J ' N : £[
2=_w S1N3W3AObdWl SS HONV?JO ,1N00d
❑ _ r Y o g ��g��o�
lit
1� Zoo
L i ��R & 3gi ice$
no
FF
m
o o
It
LL-U
0
s222 �
ICI I �II�II�3
- �IIIIII
1 1�
00)�J
g
HE N
G
s
<

a a Isla, :mob .a d moual uismoo U®d GESV313U.10H Mom s Wo W-gaud
oziozia J�P,,, si J'n
---- --- S7IVl34 02iV4NV1S um a
g �N 'H`JI31V21 3 J
____ ____ SS H�NV?JBWJdAY��Od
2Is
� u z€
n� ;gs�
R �z Cms Hill
�p°
CJ 01
@E;3�a
1.
CB ga `e�a�
��s E eel
n
I I
Nn0�3 NO M z rc
o33rv3� 3e 4 a 5 '�
_ arNn"z
n soF� du r] sZ g u Ey
L
zo 3 .-1 ,o sd
u �94soco�
ode 3diaJ 3rvn3aia a3soaoaa MAO 3dNMdld a3soaaaa
a3
`VS
NO—
nod NO 3,aa.s rvod� ,s.� .sro �,�� 3,e�ss3aarvoo Ho�si .
31a— 01 CMMM33 SO— 3d�d
loan «-)ez-o n,r rva
Uhl' NO-WINrvi 31a— -- ona 0.1.1 rvry
_e rv,r d3 Atl01 rvn 1as ., 3d�d .a ysrvmu 313aorvco 'se oosz
3 ON
rvMoao 3da 3orvds ao. a3ano3a 1rv3w3 MOO
3� & �MI����
wS� GC k
§� C
o a $ s z Gino suurasv3 3 —)
ibveodiynasn rvoir,pn"N0I1
---------------
xsmva io ua .oc

Houa ulsm®o Uad ®ESn313U MN Mom s Wo W-gaud
oz/oz/a �cz` ,rV. J�u Q e
s7lv13a aavaNvls =m
ON 'H0131 s Q
H0131" 30 KUO '� N
---- ---- ---- „���„��,,,,°°`. � S1N3W3AOadW1 SS HDNVaB ,1N30a

Houa ulsmoo U®d ®ESV313U MN Mom s Wo W-gaud
=v"iw
qmm
S�IV134 �Oa1NOC DILUVal
=m
s Q
r
' �N H`JI31V21
s1N3w3n0adw1 ss HONvae ,,>ooa
q lai 0
o MOM
dam
CB ga `e�a�
i yg '•��e��s
S
&Qo S<
p 5
S — Fa—
>1 fR5
¢9@
W fO
3 0 i4a°
g�
3
g s w g�� Y m � 3
�w
? �E��I_I ®LI III 11�1�11=�
o�� g III H
g• - Y
s _
Qa
4 I IEII •II Ir o
IJI III
8�H uy��1
�
az
ao 5
a e�a=aaztu
v
a �
s y

Houaflulsmoo Uad GESV313UMN Mom AWNW-gaud
S7IV134 �OdiNOC DILUVdi ON 'HSIIIV21
H0131" JO UO
S1N3h3A0adV41 SS HDNVaO ),N30d
WINahem
—
0, 'H0131VH —7-Tr
xy
S vm Jo NoISIAI0 1�
is
A HDIH III-3dA1
NOIIVIUOdSNVUI Jo 'Id30 S
VNII HV0 HiBON 3MIUM
A 31V15 80d E)NIMVUII OUVONViS Avmavou
q
i X
r jig
q
Z2 4- . .. ....
;2 g2 fl
E
O'N 'HOI31VU
SAVMHOIH AO NOISIAIG (I S010 3NVI L-.kVMGVOH AVM-E '3NVI-Z
N0IIV180dSNVHI A 'Id30 s3unsoio 3NVI AUVUOdN3.L
VNII UVO HIHON
JO 31V1S WOJ E)NIMVH(l OHVONViS AVMOVOH
U,
3 id I
2 M
1:- M
ID a
`2 :5
2R.-
z
0 U.,
m
A
Z Z z < , t�l
JI
up
M
go ffln
Z
2
IRL2
A .92M. '0 s -
lit I
K a
�-4
age
sg

,.ananFE
.0
4 i J f
CIL h
p qy
J �i: SSA
A € :
s F }
INEs�a�€
a,
d �
kx
ltl4i; fie
tr
I.
iCIT'
IV
• l: _,`� � � / a�^�/•. ^` �q t`.�.e ��ll� ..� roe*�.^. ,:!
`«�-,
b Lr ��
jw I
U 1 F-.LEIC--F1 T
" m
'v /T SIT OH
s.
I
eII 4 T
e 0
..,.. ..
An
�•
���ZZM®MMEMEM�
-
®ZI,,P,MI,,�,�
ZZZ'Zi�y,,,�'®'
®�IP®AP,P�®®�I,®�I,A���I,��I,y��®���,®�,,yx���
MM
-
....'I"{'%11M"EGM�IIM�IIYIIEi°M11�IEI�YI`��,M�,AY'II®®®'�®�I�P'Ip®��F'II®'
-:.. ._... _. ..'_,._
.
.........
- -• - • • '
iYYiYY�OIYIEMMMfYhM
.
I�®5
MEFEATURES
`
P.fileB—lime
ME
. .... ..
NORDI CAROLINA FLOODPIAIN MAPPING PROGRAM
NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM
CC FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP
to NORTH CAROLINA
0 (�
� iEt 1703 too
U
w
Panel contains:
SUFFIX
wEs.cn.nF a,az. .,aa k
O
O
O
Li
C
O
PRELIM INARV
OSp112015
ca
Z

(Z0 LIVVl ON IONd IIIJHOIH) S1N3W30021dM SS HONVg :J1002
Z_ (p
LL
<0
LU
LU
W U)
a
a
—
_� x
CD,,
Is
Z
W _
LLJ
N
0
a
oa
O ED Do
� e
C U G I
G Z w �o
/ O
L.� U7 u a3 3r H
W
W A W
IL.1L S
J I �
LL
w
m O
U -
U L,
O

P90111SON1ab�P9oo Hod ame aaaa LON mousma1 HOd
��
El
2=_w
'a e
€ &
09+OZ 01 OO+OL 'd1S 31Id021d q NOd
o N
=o
0
osiosia
aisza
S1N3W3HOddMI SS HONVdO /0100d
-
-
--
LL
Elf C'4
ws
Of C)sP - - -
- - Goy
G<
sma
s_"
LLI
EL r �3�
1-01
Ak-his
a�
0— ism digp
nj
22
W Mz; — :
hhu Gw9 U 3a MA
MTV
Ida
`oS
\
iF,\fib
x
�oa%e�'n �,
wp m ( W
I 'iG
cW - z�
g 2\j Wz "I`�u�
103 ID 13
�
a`
s s
gN W
rig
all
z a G
q
q

P90111SON1ab�P9oo Hod aNS aaaa MN mousma1 HOd
Jp
��
2=_w
e e o
v
€ &
8
09+ZS 01 09+OZ 'd15 31Id021d NV]d
oN
=o
�
osiosia
nD131da �o uiD
S1NIMIAO2dWl SS HONVdO hN00d
�ziori�o
---
-
----
of
Z (O rc - d F I
ao�
H w e w LU
_F�69A
A o
Of
mho
wTrU
?
v➢aoa
- - �P,' Gig -a 6R� _
��`
w 9
1 ij
I
1 1 �li�
lz z R
o � NzM
`jo F/ <=w-
w
�d
�e74�
-
g�
\Z04
tj
OLn
W }
w � O
O
o
z
I
en J
a oz
z - d
f
ao�w
i W$
i
N
9l5'
l �l
I
SOU
ZZ
cn
ww Paz Sr ��
3pa �
\�
\M
z
i J
3
o�-�3zs .00r oa
4,-
4-��

P90111SON1ab�P90o Hod MG=aaaabMN mousma 1 HOd
oa/oa/a Jp € & oN
OO+Sb 01 09+ZS 'd1S 31Id021d IR NV]d =o
�N 'H�i3wa aQ
nD131da �o uiD �
- - -- 2=_w S1NIMIAOddMl SS HONVdO /0100d
0 F 69>
o mow' G—,_ (,rn \� / Av
i
d '°�„L-➢
H—
ovA�'`_ a
i Ip0 azo
' H`JI3lVl1 JOZUIJ Al tlOH�M 'JNI5110 ` uw `�
a
i11-1 Jo uiJ waaHi �N 1
d /
Hoi3/da Jo ui� uiaoH/ntl o�JiSnoH
Im
0-01
aim
-----
MEN
son
i

P90111SON1ab�P9oo Hod aNS aaaa MN mousma1 HOd
oa/oa/a Jp € & oN
09+5g 01 OO+Sb 'd15 3IId021d IR NVId
�N 'H�i3/va aQ
nD13/da �o uiD �
- - -- 2=_w z S1NIMIAOidWI SS HONVdO /0100d
,ma s�Fs � iilllli j�ii � ao �a� o A�
VZ L-9Z :NANI
o --
> f L NI A9 H s
_—_—_ _ _— OI Nls=.ova
UNN
_
aeeg
isy to it /s, "o
au~---
a3�N Ii ill lo-�r� �3�; g a
g"
--
awS
44ffi i s
�a�
0
i'
oLn
w �I + i' z a M
0 o n w
i3 i" F WIL
a ~
pl I. s lol o/. \ma 0 d
A 2vS J
LT
4�, 44, R�
I`� \� o6n Ia 3Goo Ni. Az'i':
W + � I ✓�G �E z�z - 9aS±B�n
(s).ez
MI
�%1�' }tee a < tlOtlO (N) .9l A—Z
imi-��ENI�zR" m <J (3N) _ Of 9f2
m l \ W@ ^ / I tlOtlO (N) .9L Af 9fZ N Ni
(.N).>Z B1099>Z N
v
(D I �y� a () ez z9
��� -� ��..,ti sa 9pZ"is
LL
LO
L" oil
� i
w
u)
a &

P90111SON1ab�P9oo Hod mousma1 aoa
OS+Zg
01 OS+0g 301d021d 'R
NV�d
=�
w�
ON '19131VJ
a Q
V
n0131va 3o uiO
S1NIMIAOdd WI SS HONVdB /0100d
Ni—
-
=
liiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii.-Illoininimi-
911,111
ONE
11
No
00

ROY COOPER
Governor
MICHAEL S. REGAN
Secretary
S. DANIEL SMITH
Director
Matthew Cotton, P.E.
City of Raleigh
Public Utilities Department
Capital Improvement Program
1 Exchange Plaza #620
Raleigh, 27601
NORTH CAROLINA
Environmental Quality
July 2, 2020
Subject: Surface Water Determination Letter
NBRRO#20-164
Wake County
Determination Type:
Buffer Call
Isolated or EIP Call
® Neuse (15A NCAC 2B .0233)
❑ Tar -Pamlico (15A NCAC 2B .0259)
❑ Ephemeral/Intermittent/Perennial Determination
❑ Isolated Wetland Determination
❑ Jordan (15A NCAC 2B .0267)
Project Name: Rocky Branch Sewer Interceptor
Location/Directions: The project will follow Rocky Branch Creek from Martin Luther King Jr.
Blvd. to S. Wilmington St., in Raleigh, Wake County
Subject Stream: UTs to Rocky Branch Creek
Determination Date: 7/2/2020 Staff: Cheng Zhang
Stream
E/UP
*
Not Subject
to Buffers
Subject to
Buffers
Start@
Stop@
Soil
Survey
USGS
To o
A**
P
X
X
X
B
I
X
DWR flag
X
C**
P
X
X
X
D
***
X
X
*EIVP = Ephemeral/Intermittent/Perennial
** A: Walnut Creek; C: Rocky Branch Creek
*** Piped
**** Feature E, not evaluated in this letter, is on the opposite side of Rocky Branch Creek with the proposed sewer
and will not be impacted by the project.
Explanation: The feature(s) listed above has or have been located on the Soil Survey of Wake County, North Carolina or the
most recent copy of the USGS Topographic map at a 1:24,000 scale. Each feature that is checked "Not Subject" has been
D EQ� North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Water Resources
ti [�PT�t L:AHL�I.IN?. J�
Raleigh Regional Office 13800 Barrett Drive I Raleigh, North Carolina 27609
D.P. eMmG.My � 919.791.4200

determined not to be a stream or is not present on the property. Features that are checked "Subject" have been located on
the property and possess characteristics that qualify it to be a stream. There may be other streams located on your property
that do not show up on the maps referenced above but, still may be considered jurisdictional according to the US Army Corps
of Engineers and/or to the Division of Water Resources (DWR).
This on -site determination shall expire five (5) years from the date of this letter. Landowners or affected parties that
dispute a determination made by the DWR or Delegated Local Authority may request a determination by the
Director. An appeal request must be made within sixty (60) days of date of this letter or from the date the affected
party (including downstream and/or adjacent owners) is notified of this letter. A request for a determination by the
Director shall be referred to the Director in writing If sending via US Postal Service c/o Paul Wojoski DWR — 401 &
Buffer Permitting Unit 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1617. If sending via delivery service (UPS, FedEx,
etc.) Paul Wojoski DWR — 401 & Buffer Permitting Unit, 512 N. Salisbury Street Raleigh, NC 27604
This determination is final and binding unless, as detailed above, you ask for a hearing or appeal within sixty (60)
days.
The owner/future owners should notify the Division of Water Resources (including any other Local, State, and
Federal Agencies) of this decision concerning any future correspondences regarding the subject property (stated
above). This project may require a Section 404/401 Permit for the proposed activity. Any inquiries should be
directed to the Division of Water Resources (Central Office) at (919)-807-6300, and the US Army Corp of Engineers
(Raleigh Regulatory Field Office) at (919)-554-4884.
If you have questions regarding this determination, please feel free to contact Cheng Zhang at [phone].
Sincerely,
DDocuS�igned by:
BCDA9D825D4A46D...
Scott Vinson, Regional Supervisor
Water Quality Regional Operations Section
Raleigh Regional Office
Division of Water Resources
cc: RRO DWR File Copy

Legend RRO # 20-164, 7/2/2020 CZ
. ,
r _
_
>1f.,.. F
t No surface water observes n Ems "
L-- C: subject ' _. r r area. Ppeoutk-t kta Rbc*y Branch " �M
R.r found under FayetL-Offe Street. _ Y�
t D: not subject,99 MR
_.
r
R--KYBRAACHCREEK ,
rr Liu �
1
F...
T L ar 4 . B: subject
- ._
%L-nbia� 91 bcathed M pk
outside of Study ArPr7. '.ca 2J f! 1 5 team F
Nat Evafrrated.
IF
a¢ E: not evaluated I fr
'd Ali :Appruxerliate Location oFS"arn A.
-� Ut shown an Sail Survey.
d� �'rdf
MUG" P UKANUH LI L Lit
7171w,
-01 NUT CREEK
a 350 700 1ADD A: subject
Feet N 1,
vB
PRODUCED BY PRODUCED FOR Sol l Survey Map
N
I=li' H F J; L_ R oc ky Bra nc h S ewer Proj ect ` F igure
Wake County, NC } 2
h 1 @70 Wake County Soil Survey I
Mai _� e e t ?•� L

Legend RRO # 20-164, 7/2/2020 CZ'� +
0 Area
Tq7l'
4�
C5 411 irku t T %
aam
HOKf ST
Lm
C: subject _
4rEl - -
LMOEJRT AVM ,
PE _
A oxu Lit 'Team A
WE MOM OR OJSGS OAdd
r N3
A: subject — pa
°•... �i �� . ` .cam-. ...�.
b 1,aO0,G{k7 — WSJ -
Fee 1
PRORKED B PRCIDuK-'ED FOR USG.& Topognp pie Map
N
f+ HI"_aHFI',I Rock{ Branch Sewer PrOjECt �I F ig urn'
Wake CGurrtyrr HC
h lhl1,- Raie�gr
{.a�13-,r--rc LLI

David Cooper
From: Phillips, George L CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <[e-mail]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2020 9:23 AM
To: Cooper, David
Subject: [External] Rocky Branch Sewer Project / SAW-2020-00971 / Preliminary Jurisdictional
Determination Request [Filed 19 Aug 2020 11:29]
Attachments: Figures 3A - 3D.pdf
David,
I do not need to make a site visit for the above referenced project, and concur with the delineation within the red
outlined "Study Area" on the attached exhibits "Figures 3A — 3D" as submitted. It may take 90-120 days for the issuance
of a standalone written Jurisdictional Determination, however, you may use the delineation for planning and permitting
purposes. Should the need for a permit arise the JD will be issued with the permit verification. The AID for the project is
SAW-2020-00971. I have attached the delineation for reference.
Please let me know if you have any questions/concerns.
Lyle Phillips
Regulatory Specialist
US Army Corps of Engineers
CE-SAW-RG-R
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
Phone: [phone], Ext. 25.
Fax: [phone]
Email: George. L.Phil [e-mail]
We would appreciate your feedback on how we are performing our duties. Our automated Customer Service Survey is
located at: http://corpsmapu.usace.army.mil/cm apex/f?p=136:4:0. Thank you for taking the time to visit this site and
complete the survey.

z
1
a � Y
w n w
w i a U LL'
C) 7 Q
Q z U' Cl)
j f Z LL
.mow. i. {.S •� ?y' 3 3
9 O Z
C N O
ON 6 Ci
U N 0
0 (WD O
V Opp m
>��
�9Ea
x
Q 0 LL -
wEQ� — o m o
w
00 'L- C 9 LL
O N -O ht 1�•' - N
(D
W
=mom= a I
wee -
w a O
0 D _ N -
DawQtn
Z- N M V ,^ w
m
rO
! Z
C
m
Y
N
U
C
w
a
O
C
m
E
�
O
C
Q
0
Q
d
I
®
�
C
w
x
a
Q
C
(p
T
�
C
r
C
d -
p_ Uo
O
0
aZ
v
o
_ M 2D W
z
LL p
c > u
E
O 0
0
Q
LU
w
I wo
Ok =Kw
o C7v
.l' a 2
w
7

• \ �\ ` `� \
90dM
LOYM Qvm\,
,I
80w tOv 1
£OdM 1
ZOt
1 0 I I 1 1 I I I i
�dMll� OdM
0 t � dM
'� ♦ .� I I I 1 I ! I I
\
\ �\
1 �♦
,
011
K-tvs
9VS ° O °
M£8-1 0 + \
i 0a
oo O
� 9VS
MtTl D °
0
tvS O
M99� O
°o
£VS O o
Mt81 ° o°
oD0
MtB'go
,4 fish 000
M8� DD 0�8M Z�BM�
6a A
111 Cann

ZlBV�
6 / ,
o
38M
98
6l8M
nisii
Acinisi1
l8M Z8/\ 'i i `�\ `\`� \�` \ \\`
nisii
9IhBM 0
�o
Acinisi1
Acinisi1 �ZBM
b98M o '--
Z98/�`
� o
098 o c
6t,0 i ____-_--
8b8, i
� r
r
1. 968
�-I 9beM ! _ --
r z.
�I I'
. L£Z8
I
�y I
P� 1
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
A£8N� £8M 0£8M 8Z8M ��ZBM
i --
£8M LZBM
9£8N 4-££8M III
VV
/ I
r�
� r
9Z8A��lafl
S a �Z51Ji
1 I
i�

November 16, 2020
S
0
u
a
t
3
3
3
•0 0
�� �0Vhb.
To: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (via electronic correspondence to [e-mail])
Re: Protected Species Assessment
Rocky Branch Sewer Project
Raleigh, Wake County, NC
VHB is under contract with Highfill Infrastructure Engineers P.C. (Highfill) to provide natural resources
assessments for the proposed Rocky Branch Sewer project. The proposed sewer upgrade project utilizes
City of Raleigh funds.
We have reviewed the most recent USFWS Wake County species list and have received a species list from
USFWS of species and critical habitats that may be present within the project vicinity. The following
protected species assessment provides an evaluation of suitable habitat within the study area and
biological conclusions for each species.
We have attached the following information to assist with your review:
• Protected Species Assessment including project description and biological conclusions for the listed
and proposed species;
• Figures —
0 1. Vicinity Map
0 2. 2019 Aerial Image and Aquatic Resources
• Site Photographs
• Official Species List dated 11/1212020
• Species Conclusion Table
• Self -certification Letter
We respectfully request your input as needed on our findings. Thank you in advance for your assistance
on this project. Please do not hesitate to contact me at [phone] if you have any questions or
concerns.
Sincerely,
VHB
David G. Cooper
Senior Environmental Scientist
cc: Laura Styles, P.E. — Highfill
Venture I
940 Main Campus Drive, Suite 500
Engineers I Scientists I Planners I Designers Raleigh, North Carolina 27606
P 919.829.0328
F 919.833.0034

PROTECTED SPECIES ASSESSMENT
Rocky Branch Sewer
Raleigh, Wake County, NC
PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND SETTING
The evaluated project area is located in south Raleigh. The project begins on the west side of S.
Wilmington Street just north of Walnut Creek, then follows S. Wilmington Street north, crossing over
Rocky Branch at an existing sewer crossing. The project area then generally parallels the east bank of
Rocky Branch to Fayetteville Street, after which the creek diverges to the west, while the project area
continues north along Fayetteville Street to its northern terminus at Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. The
project will upgrade existing sewer infrastructure to larger size piping and add new sections of sewer line
in some areas. Trees will be cut in some areas to accommodate new easements and widen existing
easements. Stream crossings will be accomplished by open cut with pump -around operations at an angle
as close to perpendicular as practicable.
Rocky Branch, Walnut Creek, and their tributaries have been impaired by development, channel relocation,
channel revetments, watershed development, and subsequent runoff and pollutants. The condition of
these reaches and habitats is further described below.
Rocky Branch originates approximately 3.4 river miles northwest and upstream of the study area in
Raleigh and flows southeast through the campus of North Carolina State University before entering a lake
at Pullen Park. It then continues southeast along Western Blvd. and through several culverted reaches
before its crossing of the project area at S. Wilmington Street. Downstream of the study area, Rocky
Branch flows approximately 0.1 mile to its confluence with Walnut Creek in Raleigh.
Over 99 percent of the contributing watershed of Rocky Branch is comprised of urban residential,
institutional, commercial and industrial development. The reach of Rocky Branch within and adjacent to
the project area is included on the 2018 final 303(d) impaired waters list for a PCB fish consumption
advisory.
Conditions of Rocky Branch Creek observed on May 12, 2020 are as follows: Stream substrate of Rocky
Branch at the existing sewer crossing within the study area is primarily sand, with some gravel and few
larger rocks. Upstream of the study area sewer crossing, substrate varies, and includes bedrock, cobble,
gravel, sand, and silt. Baseflow within the study area is approximately 15 to 20 feet wide. A significant
amount of solid waste was observed, including human waste and household waste, plastic bottles, metal
cans, camping gear, oil cans, tires, and carpeting. Algae was observed to be prevalent. No evidence of the
presence of mussels, including mussel shells or Asiatic clams, was incidentally observed, although no
formal mussel survey was conducted. Few fish species were incidentally observed at the existing sewer
crossing, including Gambusia hofbrooki, Lepomis species and a school of Notropis species. No fish survey
was conducted.
Walnut Creek originates at a pond approximately 9.8 river miles west and upstream of the study area in
Cary and flows east through residential and forested areas into Raleigh and continues through Lake
Johnson and Lake Raleigh, then generally follows 1-40 to the study area vicinity at the culvert under S.
Wilmington Street. Multiple reaches are culverted and impounded upstream of the study area vicinity.
Downstream of the study area, Walnut Creek flows approximately 7.5 miles to its confluence with the
Neuse River in east Raleigh.
VHB Project No. 39172.00 Page 2 of 8

Approximately 93 percent of Walnut Creek's watershed upstream of the project area is comprised of
urban residential and commercial development. Every reach of Walnut Creek is shown as impaired on the
2018 Final 303(d) list for exceeding criteria in one or more categories. The reach of Walnut Creek adjacent
to the project area has a PCB fish consumption advisory and a poor fish community. The few forested
areas within the watershed are associated with public parks and the impoundments of Lake Johnson and
Lake Raleigh. These forested areas are disjunct, and are separated by roads and development.
A detailed on -site evaluation of Walnut Creek was not conducted; however, conditions incidentally
observed on May 12, 2020 are as follows: Stream substrate of Walnut Creek at the culvert under S.
Wilmington Street is primarily concrete, riprap, cobble, gravel, and sand. Baseflow is approximately 30 feet
wide. No additional on -site evaluation was conducted within Walnut Creek in the study area vicinity.
VHB Project No. 39172.00 Page 3 of 8

FEDERALLY PROTECTED SPECIES
Endangered Species Act Protected Species
As of the most recently updated county list, dated July 17, 2020, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
lists six federally protected species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) for Wake County. In addition,
the USFWS Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) official species list for the project, dated
November 12, 2020, lists three species proposed for protection as potentially occurring within the project
study area (Table 1). Although not currently listed by USFWS in Wake County, we also discuss the
northern long-eared bat in this section. For each species, a discussion of the presence or absence of
habitat is included below along with the Biological Conclusion rendered based on survey results in the
study area.
Table 1. Federally Protected Species Listed for Wake County
Rhus michauxii
Michaux's sumac
Endangered
Yes
No Effect
Picoides borealis
Red -cockaded
Endangered
No
No Effect
woodpecker
Alasmidonto heterodon
Dwarf wedgemussel
Endangered
Yes
May Affect, Not Likely to
Adversely Affect
Parvaspina
Tar River spinymussel
Endangered
No
No Effect
steinstansana
Elliptio lanceolate
Yellow lance
Threatened
No
No Effect
Notropis mekistocholas
Cape Fear shiner
Endangered
No
No Effect
Fusconaia masoni
Atlantic pigtoe
Proposed
Yes
May Affect, Not Likely to
Threatened
Adversely Affect
Noturus furiosus
Carolina madtom
Proposed
No
No Effect
Endangered
Necturus lewisi
Neuse River waterdog
Proposed
No
No Effect
Threatened
May Affect (Relying on
Northern long-eared
Threatened
findings of 1/5/2016
Myotis septentrionalis
bat
4(d)
Yes
Programmatic Biological
Opinion)
Michaux's sumac
USFWS Optimal Survey Window: May -October
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
A desktop-GIS assessment of the project study area was performed in May 2020 using 2019 color aerials.
Areas with an open canopy such as utility line and sewer rights -of -way, old road beds, forest clearings,
and road edges were identified as potentially suitable habitat for Michaux's sumac and targeted for field
survey. A NCNHP data explorer report dated November 20, 2020 revealed no known occurrences of this
species within 1 mile of the project study area. Visual inspection of the project area determined that
suitable habitat is limited. Most of the open canopy areas identified by desktop assessment were
observed in the field to be generally too moist to support this species, and were within the active
floodplain of Rocky Branch Creek. Plant -by -plant surveys for this species were conducted on May 12, 2020
VHB Project No. 39172.00 Page 4 of 8

with the result that no specimens of Michaux's sumac were located.
Due to the lack of observed specimens, the limited amount of suitable habitat, and the lack of known
occurrences within 1 mile of the study area, this project will not affect this species.
Red -cockaded woodpecker
USFWS Recommended Survey Window: year round; November -early March (optimal)
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
A desktop-GIS assessment of the project study area was performed in May 2020 using 2019 color aerials.
The surrounding area within 112 mile of the study area consists entirely of residential neighborhoods,
commercial and industrial areas, and a multi -lane highway. The very few, small wooded areas in this radius
are predominantly hardwood or mixed pine -hardwood stands. No pine stands are located within the
project area. No potentially suitable foraging or nesting habitat for the red -cockaded woodpecker exists
within the project area or within 112 mile of the project area. On -site observations of the project area on
May 12, 2020 affirmed the conclusion that no habitat for the RCW exists. A NCNHP data explorer report
dated November 12, 2020 revealed no known occurrences of this species within 1 mile of the study area.
Due to the lack of suitable foraging and nesting habitat and the lack of known occurrences within 1 mile
of the study area this project will not affect this species.
Dwarf wedgemussel
USFWS Recommended Survey Window: Year-round
Biological Conclusion: May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect
Marginally suitable habitat for the dwarf wedgemussel exists within Rocky Branch and Walnut Creek
within and adjacent to the project area. The reaches of these streams within and adjacent to the study
area are not USFWS-designated Identified Stream Reaches (ISRs) or within 0.25 mile of an ISR for this
species per the June 2019 ISR layer. The study area is located within the Range by Basin for this species.
The USFWS IPaC official species list for this project, dated November 12, 2020, includes the dwarf
wedgemussel. A NCNHP data explorer report dated November 12, 2020 revealed no known occurrences
of this species within 1 mile of the study area. NCNHP records dated July 2018 show the closest
documented population of the dwarf wedgemussel in the Neuse basin is located approximately 7.5 river
miles downstream of the study area in the main stem of the Neuse River, upstream and downstream of its
confluence with Crabtree Creek. The record for this population is categorized as "historical". The record is
dated 1951, and no more recent information on the population is available in the NCNHP database. No
evidence of mussels was incidentally observed during stream and wetland delineations on May 12, 2020.
Due to the distance from known populations and the degraded condition of potential mussel habitat in
the project vicinity as described in the Project Description and Setting, this project may affect, but is not
likely to adversely affect this species.
Tar River spinymussel
USFWS optimal survey window: year round
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
VHB Project No. 39172.00 Page 5 of 8

Mussel habitat within and adjacent to the project area includes Rocky Branch and Walnut Creek. The
project area is not located within 0.25 mile of a USFWS-designated ISR for this species per the June 2019
ISR layer. The study area is not within the Range by Basin for this species. The USFWS IPaC official species
list for this project, dated November 12, 2020 does not include the Tar River spinymussel. A NCNHP data
explorer report dated November 12, 2020 revealed no known occurrences of this species within 1 mile of
the study area.
Due to the lack of known occurrences in the project watershed, the distance from known populations, and
the degraded condition of potential mussel habitat in the project vicinity as described in the Project
Description and Setting, this project will not affect this species.
Yellow lance
USFWS optimal survey window: Undetermined
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Mussel habitat within and adjacent to the project area includes Rocky Branch and Walnut Creek. The
project area is not located within 0.25 mile of a USFWS-designated ISR for this species per the June 2019
ISR layer. The study area is not within the Range by Basin for this species. The USFWS IPaC official species
list for this project, dated November 12, 2020 does not include the yellow lance. A NCNHP data explorer
report dated November 12, 2020 revealed no known occurrences of this species within 1 mile of the study
area.
Due to the lack of known occurrences in the project watershed, the distance from known populations, and
the degraded condition of potential mussel habitat in the project vicinity as described in the Project
Description and Setting, this project will not affect this species.
Cape Fear shiner
USFWS optimal survey window: April -June (tributaries); year-round (large rivers)
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Fish habitat in the project vicinity includes Rocky Branch and Walnut Creek. The study area is not within
the Range by Basin for this species, and the species has not been documented in the Neuse River basin, in
which the study area is situated. The USFWS IPaC official species list for this project, dated November 12,
2020, does not include the Cape Fear shiner. A NCNHP data explorer report dated November 12, 2020
revealed no known occurrences of this species within 1 mile of the study area.
Due to the lack of known occurrences in the project river basin, the distance from known populations, and
the degraded condition of potential fish habitat in the project vicinity as described in the Project
Description and Setting, this project will not affect this species.
Atlantic pigtoe
USFWS optimal survey window: Undetermined
Biological Conclusion: May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect
Marginally suitable habitat for the Atlantic pigtoe exists within Rocky Branch and Walnut Creek within and
adjacent to the project area. The reach of Walnut Creek adjacent to the study area is a USFWS-designated
ISR for this species per the June 2019 ISR layer. No impacts are proposed to Walnut Creek as part of this
VHB Project No. 39172.00 Page 6 of 8

project. The reach of Rocky Branch within the study area is not an ISR for this species, but the project area
is located within 0.25 river miles upstream of the confluence with Walnut Creek, an ISR. The study area is
located within the Range by Basin for this species. The USFWS IPaC official species list for this project,
dated November 12, 2020, includes the Atlantic pigtoe. A NCNHP data explorer report dated November
12, 2020 revealed a historic occurrence of this species in Walnut Creek adjacent to the project area. The
record for this population is categorized as "historical". The record is dated 1951, and no more recent
information on the population is available in the NCNHP database. No evidence of mussels was
incidentally observed in Rocky Branch during stream and wetland delineations on May 12, 2020.
Due to the historic presence of the Atlantic pigtoe within 0.25 mile upstream of the project area and, the
currently degraded condition of potential mussel habitat in the project vicinity as described in the Project
Description and Setting, this project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect this species.
Neuse River waterdog
USFWS Recommended Survey Window: Undetermined. Trapping surveys typically conducted in winter.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Rocky Branch Creek within the study area does not contain the deep pools or eddies filled with organic
matter where the Neuse River Waterdog is typically found. The study area is not located within 0.25 mile
of a USFWS-designated ISR for this species. The study area is located within the Range by Basin for this
species. The USFWS IPaC official species list for this project, dated November 12, 2020, includes the Neuse
River waterdog and states that the project is not located within its proposed critical habitat. A NCNHP
data explorer report dated November 12, 2020 revealed no known occurrences of this species within 1
mile of the study area. NCNHP records dated July 2018 show the closest documented population of the
dwarf wedgemussel in the Neuse basin is located approximately 7.5 river miles downstream of the study
area in the main stem of the Neuse River, upstream and downstream of its confluence with Crabtree
Creek. The record for this population is categorized as "historical". The record is dated 1987.
Due to the lack of suitable habitat in the study area, the degraded condition of Rocky Branch in the
project vicinity as described in the Project Description and Setting, and the lack of known occurrences in
the project vicinity, this project will not affect this species.
Carolina madtom
USFWS Recommended Survey Window: Undetermined
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Fish habitat in the project vicinity includes Rocky Branch and Walnut Creek; however, water quality in
these creeks is not suitable to support a population of the Carolina madtom. The study area is not located
within 0.25 mile of a USFWS-designated ISR for this species. The study area is located within the Range by
Basin for this species. The USFWS IPaC official species list for this project, dated November 12, 2020,
includes the Carolina madtom and states that the project is not located within its proposed critical habitat.
A NCNHP data explorer report dated November 12, 2020 revealed no known occurrences of this species
within 1 mile of the study area. NCNHP records dated July 2018 show the closest documented population
of the Carolina madtom is located approximately 8.5 river miles from the study area near the confluence
of Crabtree Creek and the Neuse River. The record for this population is categorized as "historical". The
record is dated 1902.
VHB Project No. 39172.00 Page 7 of 8

Due to the lack of known occurrences in the project vicinity, the degraded condition of Rocky Branch in
the project vicinity as described in the Project Description and Setting, and the lack of known occurrences
in the project vicinity, this project will not affect this species.
Northern long-eared bat
This project is relying upon the findings of the 1/5/2016 Programmatic Biological Opinion for Final 4(d)
Rule on the Northern Long -Eared Bat and Activities Excepted from Take Prohibitions to fulfill project -
specific section 7 responsibilities.
Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act
Bald eagle
Optimal Survey Window: year round; November — March (optimal to observe birds and nests); February —
May (optimal to observe active nesting)
Habitat Description: Habitat for the bald eagle primarily consists of mature forest in proximity to large
bodies of open water for foraging. Large dominant trees are utilized for nesting sites, typically within 1
mile of open water.
Biological Conclusion: Not Required
A desktop-GIS assessment of the project study area, as well as the area within a 1.13-mile radius (1.0 mile
plus 660 feet) of the project limits, was performed in May 2020 using 2019 color aerials. There are no
water bodies large enough and sufficiently open to be considered a potential feeding source within this
radius. Because there was no potentially suitable foraging habitat adjacent to the study area, no nest
survey was conducted. A NCNHP data explorer report, dated November 12, 2020, revealed no known
occurrences of this species within 1 mile of the study area. The proposed sewer improvement project will
utilize, to the extent practicable, existing cleared sewer line rights -of -way, avoiding tree clearing in those
areas.
Due to the lack of suitable foraging habitat, the lack of known occurrences, and the minimal impact
anticipated for this project, we have determined that no Eagle Act permit is required.
VHB Project No. 39172.00 Page 8 of 8

Legend W'(ABARRUS 5T
Study Area
WSST
ap
r'yER'ICING
Q
LlvtER
r-'H
W DAVIE ST,
r
E,LENoIR,ST,_J
❑ �
,a
v
a' nut ` W
. ce � �
o ? BRAGG ST
t e
Approximate Location of Stream B,
cmt HOP Not shown on USGS Quad.
ROCKY BRANCH CREEK �� Cem CMA1(1N;
HOK_ E ST a
PROSPECT AVE A `a
W cc
Caraleigh PE)
� 4
GILBERT AVE �}
PEN
ysQ zWalnat
BLU F"ST Approximate Location of Stream A,
50 Not shown on USGS Quad.
' ZA0
rM
'~ rM
Li
a
a
0 500 1,000 2,000Feet 250 EBY DR IJEWCo,I,�
ti
PRODUCED BY PRODUCED FOR USGS Topographic Map
N
*#" HIGHFILL Rocky Branch Sewer Project Figure
vlib
� �EERNG Pc Wake County, NC
2013 Raleigh West
Quadrangle

4ru r
AQ
LU
Y `, ��@• ``� i\� \ `�\�� I ,(�fff� .yf(l�/ �i ICI ` / "AlNY"''U
t \I ilq l -
1 JI 1 \ . \ \ Y,
'INN `L\
�I14:151\ i i i{6i,/rr�r/�-
`\` \ I 1\1I \ 11 I,([
1,1\111k.
\ ,IMM
@@�♦ �\\ -� L �_ i��/
\\\\III
.�� 1 — ♦^.� III II; \I 11 \ 1 `\ j \ r ll �\\
, I r�
mo
i
LU
\ \
1 \ 111 \ \ �Il\5\\\\ \\\ � \ \ \ \ 1110,
N co
\ i 11
list
' 1\
I
5 v1 A
♦ i, `\�II�1-.-__���♦ `\ \\\\\\���`� \III � i>
F IF. �♦\ I \ \\ ♦ II MINI If./, �.� ,
♦. � r In�p,l s
"" lJ ■", i / 1 d I! II rl 11
it I
I ! poi
! IVll \/ 1
It'
1 /
Ull
` 'IIIIII
�I .1 Alllll
F III •• \. :\\` / � _ � _-
NI
I Ir
�-
.:
, to 1
Ill \ \III
it
w'i-
i/+hirri
I I //III 1 I 11 ,.�0\ l//T � 1 `t _. ♦\\�� ..
i`��\•��1
,} - -A

Rocky Branch Sewer
Raleigh, Wake County, NC
Site Photographs — Taken May 12, 2020
Walnut Creek Adjacent to Study Area
Stream A, Looking Upstream
Stream B, Looking Downstream from SB-01 Start Channel
Rocky Branch Sewer Improvements
Site Photographs
Rocky Branch Within Study Area
Stream A, Looking Downstream
Stream B, Looking Downstream from SB-02
VHB Project No. 39172.00
Page 1 of 2

Wetland A
Wetland B
.,c
7..
Wetland C Typical of Area Surveyed for Michaux's Sumac
Rocky Branch Sewer Improvements
Site Photographs
VHB Project No. 39172.00
Page 2 of 2

.:.,.
Mal s WIIJJUrV.
United States Department of the Interior`"
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
In Reply Refer To: November 12, 2020
Consultation Code: 04EN2000-2021-SLI-0232
Event Code: 04EN2000-2021-E-00487
Project Name: Rocky Branch Sewer
Subject: List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project
location, and/or may be affected by your proposed project
To Whom It May Concern:
The species list generated pursuant to the information you provided identifies threatened,
endangered, proposed and candidate species, as well as proposed and final designated critical
habitat, that may occur within the boundary of your proposed project and/or may be affected by
your proposed project. The species list fulfills the requirements of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (Service) under section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended
(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
New information based on updated surveys, changes in the abundance and distribution of
species, changed habitat conditions, or other factors could change this list. Please feel free to
contact us if you need more current information or assistance regarding the potential impacts to
federally proposed, listed, and candidate species and federally designated and proposed critical
habitat. Please note that under 50 CFR 402.12(e) of the regulations implementing section 7 of the
Act, the accuracy of this species list should be verified after 90 days. This verification can be
completed formally or informally as desired. The Service recommends that verification be
completed by visiting the ECOS-IPaC website at regular intervals during project planning and
implementation for updates to species lists and information. An updated list may be requested
through the ECOS-IPaC system by completing the same process used to receive the enclosed list.
Section 7 of the Act requires that all federal agencies (or their designated non-federal
representative), in consultation with the Service, insure that any action federally authorized,
funded, or carried out by such agencies is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any
federally -listed endangered or threatened species. A biological assessment or evaluation may be
prepared to fulfill that requirement and in determining whether additional consultation with the
Service is necessary. In addition to the federally -protected species list, information on the
species' life histories and habitats and information on completing a biological assessment or

11/12/2020 Event Code: 04EN2000-2021-E-00487
evaluation and can be found on our web page at http://www.fws.gov/raleigh. Please check the
web site often for updated information or changes
If your project contains suitable habitat for any of the federally -listed species known to be
present within the county where your project occurs, the proposed action has the potential to
adversely affect those species. As such, we recommend that surveys be conducted to determine
the species' presence or absence within the project area. The use of North Carolina Natural
Heritage program data should not be substituted for actual field surveys.
If you determine that the proposed action may affect (i.e., likely to adversely affect or not likely
to adversely affect) a federally -protected species, you should notify this office with your
determination, the results of your surveys, survey methodologies, and an analysis of the effects
of the action on listed species, including consideration of direct, indirect, and cumulative effects,
before conducting any activities that might affect the species. If you determine that the proposed
action will have no effect (i.e., no beneficial or adverse, direct or indirect effect) on federally
listed species, then you are not required to contact our office for concurrence (unless an
Environmental Impact Statement is prepared). However, you should maintain a complete record
of the assessment, including steps leading to your determination of effect, the qualified personnel
conducting the assessment, habitat conditions, site photographs, and any other related articles.
Please be aware that bald and golden eagles are protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle
Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668 et seq.), and projects affecting these species may require
development of an eagle conservation plan (http://www.fws.gov/windenergy/
eagle_guidance.html). Additionally, wind energy projects should follow the wind energy
guidelines (http://www.fws.gov/windenergy/) for minimizing impacts to migratory birds and
bats.
Guidance for minimizing impacts to migratory birds for projects including communications
towers (e.g., cellular, digital television, radio, and emergency broadcast) can be found at: http://
www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdlssues/Hazards/towers/towers.htm; http://
www.towerkill.com; and http://www.fws.gov/migratory birds/CurrentBirdlssues/Hazards/towers/
comtow.html.
Not all Threatened and Endangered Species that occur in North Carolina are subject to section 7
consultation with the U.S Fish and Wildlife Service. Atlantic and shortnose sturgeon, sea
turtles,when in the water, and certain marine mammals are under purview of the National Marine
Fisheries Service. If your project occurs in marine, estuarine, or coastal river systems you should
also contact the National Marine Fisheries Service, http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/
We appreciate your concern for threatened and endangered species. The Service encourages
Federal agencies to include conservation of threatened and endangered species into their project
planning to further the purposes of the Act. Please include the Consultation Tracking Number in
the header of this letter with any request for consultation or correspondence about your project
that you submit to our office. If you have any questions or comments, please contact John Ellis
of this office at [e-mail].

11/12/2020 Event Code: 04EN2000-2021-E-00487
Attachment(s):
• Official Species List

11/12/2020 Event Code: 04EN2000-2021-E-00487
Official Species List
This list is provided pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and fulfills the
requirement for Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary of the Interior information whether
any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of a proposed
action".
This species list is provided by:
Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
[phone]

11/12/2020 Event Code: 04EN2000-2021-E-00487 2
Project Summary
Consultation Code: 04EN2000-2021-SLI-0232
Event Code: 04EN2000-2021-E-00487
Project Name: Rocky Branch Sewer
Project Type: WASTEWATER PIPELINE
Project Description: Sewer improvement project, City of Raleigh, NC.
Project Location:
Approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps: https:
www.google.com/maps/place/35.76343129749721N78.64233884540612W
Counties: Wake, NC

11/12/2020 Event Code: 04EN2000-2021-E-00487 3
Endangered Species Act Species
There is a total of 6 threatened, endangered, or candidate species on this species list.
Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include
species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species
list because a project could affect downstream species.
IPaC does not display listed species or critical habitats under the sole jurisdiction of NOAA
Fisheriesi, as USFWS does not have the authority to speak on behalf of NOAA and the
Department of Commerce.
See the "Critical habitats" section below for those critical habitats that lie wholly or partially
within your project area under this office's jurisdiction. Please contact the designated FWS office
if you have questions.
NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an
office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of
Commerce.
Birds
NAME
Red -cockaded Woodpecker Picoides borealis
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/7614
Amphibians
NAME
Neuse River Waterdog Necturus lewisi
There is proposed critical habitat for this species. Your location is outside the critical habitat.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6772
Fishes
NAME
STATUS
Endangered
STATUS
Proposed
Threatened
STATUS
Carolina Madtom Noturus furiosus Proposed
There is proposed critical habitat for this species. Your location is outside the critical habitat. Endangered
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/528

11/12/2020 Event Code: 04EN2000-2021-E-00487 4
Clams
NAME STATUS
Atlantic Pigtoe Fusconaia masoni Proposed
There is proposed critical habitat for this species. Your location is outside the critical habitat. Threatened
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5164
Dwarf Wedgemussel Alasmidonta heterodon Endangered
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/784
Flowering Plants
NAME STATUS
Michaux's Sumac Rhus michauxii
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5217
Endangered
Critical habitats
THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA UNDER THIS OFFICE'S
JURISDICTION.

H
N
a
N
t�
O
U
N
N
CL
N
ME
a�
co U
C
c0 OOf
U
tp
C 0
E
0
Co
N ro
co
co
Cco
>
N
co
"C
O
N
i
co
O
0 co
c0
(O -2
vi
vi
vi
N
U ?
� .�
>
� .� (,
LL .0
U
U
�
.N Q
coO
5- N
0-
0-0-
Q coN
C
C.)
N C N
C.) U� 0
L
p 0
0
ON
Z75
E C N
N%
�-
C d
N
Vl
U
c'
Ln�
O
0
L
m>
co
E
: O
O
O
O
m3:
co OD
0)
00
co
co
O
(6
\ C
Co O
C 0 N Np
C
C
C
_0
m_0
co
co fl- N
'� EO
.0
(1)
0
L
N N
m
m
m
U L
N
C
.O
0 0
tp
N
i
N
C
� co
N
0-
>,
>,
>,
O
N
p
"a
� Co
Q -O N
m
U Q
a5_
N
E
C-)>,
Q O
Q
C
C DO
U
_
E
N
N
ca E
Z
>,
E
0
E X
E
w
co
0 �_
c-
a
O N (6 0
co
Of
co
�
co
�
co
co
L
U co
C L N
E
co Vl
L
C D
N .fl' C N
C
C
C
C
C N
co N
O N
0
in
C N
OL
C
O O
'
'�
>
U
C
O
C
Vl
UD Vl
0 N
Cfl Q .N
p
c
j
co
N
O
Z
O
Z
O
Z
.�
.�
ON
L Z
-a
0)Y
N
p C-0
N
0N
N
CU
CN
m
2_
.
Eco_
E
E
E
E
N
C a
C75
ai
00 0E
cu `a
C
"a
-aN 0 NO
O
m
-"C
�
zC
O
co
L
C 2
L co 0)
C
L
C
L
C
L
C)U
U
L 0 tp
U
L 0 tp
.�
0 ti
C
tp
U O
.. co
(6
E
C
N N Nco
-a "a
"a "a
W
U C
_
2i
icd
N "C
O
-2
-2
2 N
C
C
"a 0
O
C
O E C
N
O 0- U
O
O
O
Z p�
C
LO c0
C
co
J m
E o
o E C
U
U
U
U z C
'�
.0
U>
.0
U>
p E U
C
.�
N 0—
N
0
0
O
N 0 C
N 0 C
0
UO
d `p
(6 C
d _- N
d `� Q
d
d
d
.�
N C C
d N C
d N 0)
C N
0
2
p m
>
2 co
0
2 a E a
2'
2
2
2
iE co 0
2 C
S C
p o
Z N
Z (O
U
C
Z
U U
Z N
U UC
Z
U
Z
U
Z
U
j 75
Z'
U
Z'
U
U
z
N
Z -0 N
Z
z
z
z
�.0
z m
z ro
C N
a)
a�
co N
0
0
Q
>-
O
Z
O p
Z 0-
co C
E: 2
O N O
Z 0 Q
0 0
Z Vl m 0
O
Z
O
Z
O
Z
C >,
Y-0 -0
0 0"
Z U Vl
0 0
Z U Vl
Z
N C O
O L
N
N
Q)
N
O
z >
Z >
C O
p '�
C '�
c
U _ -0
Q
_ -0
U Q
U
U U C
Q
N
0
U
U
N 0
U
U
U
N
U
U
U
N
U)
Q N
(6
N E
W
W
¢>1 N
W
W
W
¢>1 N
W
W
W
Q
],
(n c0 N
0
O
0
co 1
O
O
0
co 1
O
O
0
cu
W W D
Z Q
Z
Z
J Q
Z
Z
Z
J Q
Z
Z
Z
N
N
N
C
N
O
�
cu
(p
(O
(O
�
5
(O
0)
0co
U N
N
co
N
75
0-0
N
U CU
O
(O N
L
L
(� N
co
C
0 (6
-0
Co Q
(6 Q C'
N
N
N
N
N
L
V0i
N
0
L tp
C C
N
N
16
(O
Q
N N
O (C
Q
�
�
�
Q 75
U
O
.0)
fn fn
fl- 'O
O
N U
O
U U
O
U U
O
O
U U
O
U U
O
U U
Ocu
U
2 C
U) 0-Z
O
L tp
J L
D
Z Q
D
Z 0-
D
Z Q
J L
D
Z 0-
D
Z Q
D
Z 0-
2
E
=
U
c0
m
N
0-0
N m
Cl)
co
m
0
o
N
va'i m
-2
Q)
i
m
p
orf
Q m
Cl)N
C
a
cu
m
E
a
m-
C
a''m
fl
E
>=
cuU)�
C
�a
X E0
r
'0-
p�
�
Uo
ciro�c
elf
E
C-
tE
c=
g
oC-
�ca0
�o
S
v
va.
°'c
ca i
va
N
m
.
m
.pO
L
m
._
O
CO
co
2EQ�
of6-
(1.
>
UZ
UZ
zz
U
z

O
N
O
N
Qc) (D
N
U
U)
�
cQ(�
V
L
O
O
.�
O
L
F—
U
>
w
CD
ca
_o
o
in
in

T OF F1euSERVICH
N 20 United States Department of the Interior
a
9 FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, F�F
��RCH 3 fah
Raleigh Field Office
P.O. Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
Date: 2020-1 1 -1 6
Self -Certification Letter
Project Name Rocky Branch Sewer
Dear Applicant:
Thank you for using the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) Raleigh Ecological
Services online project review process. By printing this letter in conjunction with your
project review package, you are certifying that you have completed the online project
review process for the project named above in accordance with all instructions
provided, using the best available information to reach your conclusions. This letter,
and the enclosed project review package, completes the review of your project in
accordance with the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531-1544, 87 Stat.
884), as amended (ESA), and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C.
668-668c, 54 Stat. 250), as amended (Eagle Act). This letter also provides
information for your project review under the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (P.L. 91-190, 42 U.S.C. 4321-4347, 83 Stat. 852), as amended. A copy of this
letter and the project review package must be submitted to this office for this
certification to be valid. This letter and the project review package will be maintained
in our records.
The species conclusions table in the enclosed project review package summarizes
your ESA and Eagle Act conclusions. Based on your analysis, mark all the
determinations that apply:
"no effect" determinations for proposed/listed species and/or
❑✓ proposed/designated critical habitat; and/or
❑✓ "may affect, not likely to adversely affect" determinations for proposed/listed
species and/or proposed/designated critical habitat; and/or
❑✓ "may affect, likely to adversely affect" determination for the Northern long-
eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis) and relying on the findings of the January 5,
2016, Programmatic Biological Opinion for the Final 4(d) Rule on the
Northern long-eared bat;
❑✓ "no Eagle Act permit required" determinations for eagles.

Applicant Page 2
We certify that use of the online project review process in strict accordance with the
instructions provided as documented in the enclosed project review package results in
reaching the appropriate determinations. Therefore, we concur with the "no effect" or
"not likely to adversely affect" determinations for proposed and listed species and
proposed and designated critical habitat; the "may affect" determination for Northern
long-eared bat; and/or the "no Eagle Act permit required" determinations for eagles.
Additional coordination with this office is not needed. Candidate species are not
legally protected pursuant to the ESA. However, the Service encourages consideration
of these species by avoiding adverse impacts to them. Please contact this office for
additional coordination if your project action area contains candidate species.
Should project plans change or if additional information on the distribution of
proposed or listed species, proposed or designated critical habitat, or bald eagles
becomes available, this determination may be reconsidered. This certification letter is
valid for 1 year. Information about the online project review process including
instructions, species information, and other information regarding project reviews
within North Carolina is available at our website http://www.fws.gov/raleigh/pp.html.
If you have any questions, you can write to us at Raleigh(c,fws.gov or please contact
Leigh Mann of this office at 919-856-4520, ext. 10.
Sincerely,
/s/Pete Benjamin
Pete Benjamin
Field Supervisor
Raleigh Ecological Services
Enclosures - project review package

Cooper, David
From: Mann, Leigh <[e-mail]> on behalf of Raleigh, FW4 <[e-mail]>
Sent: Monday, December 7, 2020 9:24 AM
To: Cooper, David
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Concurrence Request - Rocky Branch Sewer, Raleigh, NC
Mr. Cooper,
The biologist that reviewed your project was ok with your determinations. You can use the self certification
letter for your records.
Respectfully,
Leigh Mann
From: Cooper, David <[e-mail]>
Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2020 2:46 PM
To: Raleigh, FW4 <[e-mail]>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Concurrence Request - Rocky Branch Sewer, Raleigh, NC
This email has been received from outside of DOI - Use caution before clicking on links, opening attachments, or
responding.
Hello,
I submitted a project review package for the project referenced in the subject line on 11/16/2020 and have not received a
receipt confirmation yet. I've checked myjunk folder. Can you please let me know if the project review package was
received, or whether I need to re -submit?
Thanks so much,
David Cooper
Senior Environmental Scientist
1
Venture 1
940 Main Campus Drive, Suite 500
Raleigh, NC 27606-5217
P 919.741.5784 1 F 919.833.0034
[e-mail]
Engineers I Scientists I Planners I Designers
www.vhb.com
VHB Viewpoints
Explore trends and critical issues with our thought leaders.