20070759 Ver 2_401 Application_20130813

?!tLMG
LAND MANAGEMENT GROUP nic.
AW, Environmental Consultants
July 12, 2013
TO: Ms. Emily Hughes
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
69 Darlington Avenue
Wilmington, NC 28403
C)l- ol5gU2.
RE: NWP 18 Application; Lots 14,15,16 Oceanside at Oak Island; Oak Island, NC
Previous Action ID# SAW- 2007 -01682
Dear Emily:
AUG -62013
D N - WA-TEA uALITY
Enclosed is a NWP 18 application for your review. This application is submitted on behalf of Mr. Mark Palmatier who is
offering to purchase the above- referenced lots that are currently bank - owned. The Oceanside at Oak Island subdivision
obtained land development permits in 2007 and included: (1) CAMA Major Permit #144 -07 (2) Corps GP291 SAW - 2007 -01682
(3) NC DWO WQC3642 DWQ #070759 and (4) NC DWQ Coastal Stormwater Permit No. SW8060911. The CAMA Major
Permit and stormwater permit remain valid. The Corps' 2007 jurisdictional determination, the Corps permit, and the associated
water quality authorization have since expired.
The previous Corps permit authorized wetland impacts associated with access to four oceanfront lots (Lots 13, 14, 15,
and 16) and temporary impacts for installation of subdivision utilities. The oceanfront lots contain part of a freshwater pond at
their landward end and dunestback dunes on their oceanward end. Jurisdictional wetlands fringe the pond and are located in
low swales between the dunes and the pond. Wetlands on the property can generally be classified as emergent freshwater
swales.
In order to access the oceanfront lots, a wooden, slatted bridge was designed over the pond's fringing wetlands to
avoid wetland impact. Each individual lot would then have a private driveway extending from the bridge. Parking would be
located underneath the homes that would be elevated to meet the VE base flood elevation of 18' to 19'. The proposed private
drives were designed to be elevated piling- supported structures less than 3' above the wetland surface. Due to the fact the
drives would be so close to the wetland surface and the fact that a house would be elevated over the drive, wetland impacts
were considered indirect, permanent impacts resulting from shading. Specifically, authorized wetland impacts were: (1)
permanent shading impacts for Lots 13 -16 totaling 4,133.4 -sq.ft. (2) permanent shading impacts for the bridge approach off 690'
Street totaling 194.61 -sq.ft. and (3) temporary cut and fill impacts for utilities totaling 3,720 sq.ft. Permanent impacts totaled
4,328 -sq.ft.
The developer of the subdivision installed the bridge and the utilities which are located in a 20' -wide utility easement
just south, or oceanward, of the bridge. A down payment was made to the Stone Farm Regional Mitigation Bank, but the
remaining balance was not satisfied, presumably due to economic changes. Lot 13, the westem -most oceanfront lot was
purchased and a single family home is constructed on the lot.
The current applicant is seeking to re- authorize wetland impacts associated with the private drivewaysthomes for Lots
14, 15, and 16. 'Of the 4,133.4 -sq.ft. of impact previously authorized for the oceanfront lots, 755.57 -sq.ft. were allocated to Lot
13, leaving 3,378 -sq.ft. of impact previously authorized for Lots 14,15,16.
Jurisdictional wetland limits have been re- delineated, field - approved by you, and are shown on the enclosed existing
conditions survey and site plan. Currently requested impacts for Lots 14, 15, 16 total 3,321 -sq.ft. The private driveways would
www.lmgroup.net - [e-mail] - Phone: [phone] - Fax: [phone]
3805 Wrightsville Ave., Suite 15, Wilmington, NC 28403

extend from the existing bridge at a length to finalized by the contractor. Since future homes may be elevated over the
wetlands, wetland areas outside of the driveways up to the side building setbacks are included in the requested impact area
also. As outlined in the previous permit application, wetlands could not be avoided completely due to the need to site homes
landward of the CAMA small structure setback and avoid frontal dunes, CAMA required placement of the access bridge
landward of the small structure setback, and location of the wetlands. Minimization of impacts has been satisfied by elevating
the structures to maintain above ground storage of water capacity which had been identified as a critical wetland function to
minimize flooding of adjacent streets. The applicant offers to satisfy the previously approved wetland mitigation by payment to
the Stone Farm Regional Mitigation Bank at a 1:1 ratio with purchase of 0.1 -acre of non - riparian wetland credit.
The Pre - Construction Notification form, associated maps, and site plan are enclosed for your review. Please contact
me if you have any questions. Thank you for your assistance with this project.
Sincerely,
/W�
Laura Stasavich
Environmental Scientist
Encl.
Cc: Mr. Chad Coburn, NC DWQ
Ms. Karen Higgins, NC DWQ
Mr. Mark Palmatier, applicant
Ms. Heather Coats, NC DCM
www.lmgroup.net - [e-mail] - Phone: [phone] - Fax: [phone]
3805 Wrightsville Ave., Suite 15, Wilmington, NC 28403

y r
> 1
o �
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.3 Dec 10 2008
Pre - Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A. Applicant Information
1. Processing
1 a. Type(s) of approval sought from the
Corps:
®Section 404 Permit ❑Section 10 Permit
1 b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 18 or General Permit (GP) number:
1c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
® Yes
❑ No
1d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
® 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular ❑ Non -404 Jurisdictional General Permit
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification — Express ❑ Riparian Buffer Authorization
le. Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWQ 401
Certification:
® Yes ❑ No
For the record only for Corps Permit:
❑ Yes ® No
1f. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation
of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank or in -lieu
fee program.
® Yes
❑ No
1g. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below.
® Yes
❑ No
1 h. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
® Yes
❑ No
2. Project Information
2a. Name of project:
Lots 14, 15, 16 Oceanside at Oak Island
2b. County:
Brunswick County
2c. Nearest municipality / town:
Town of Oak Island
2d. Subdivision name:
Oceanside at Oak Island
2e. NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state
project no:
N/A
3. Owner Information
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
Lots 15,6 Atlas NC . Lot 14 BB &T
3b. Deed Book and Page No.
Book 3329, Pg 0971 and Book 3318, Pg 0658
3c. Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
3d. Street address:
Atlas -200 West Second Street, 6'' Floor, Winston Salem, NC, 27102 and
BBT- PO Box 167, Winston Salem, NC, 27102
3e. City, state, zip:
3f. Telephone no.:
3g. Fax no.:
3h. Email address:
Page 1 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

4. Applicant Information (if different from owner):
4a. Applicant is:
❑ Agent ❑ Other, specify:
4b. Name:
Mark Palmatier
4c. Business name
(if applicable):
4d. Street address:
665 Lockwood Folly Road
4e. City, state, zip:
Bolivia, NC 28422
4f. Telephone no.:
910 -612 -3730
4g. Fax no.:
4h. Email address:
5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name:
Laura Stasavich
5b. Business name
(if applicable):
Land Management Group, Inc.
5c. Street address:
3805 Wrightsville Avenue, Suite 15
5d. City, state, zip:
Wilmington, NC 28403
5e. Telephone no.:
(910) 452 -0001
5f. Fax no.:
(910) 452 -0060
5g. Email address:
[e-mail]
Page 2 of 11

B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
Parcel IDs- 250131-02611, 250BL0261Q 250BLO2609
1b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
Latitude: 33.907145 °N Longitude: - 78.096648 °W
DD.DDDDDD - DD.DDDDDD
1c. Property size:
Lots 14, 15,16 combined: 2.5 acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc.) to
Un -named freshwater pond, Atlantic Ocean
proposed project:
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
N/A
2c. River basin:
Cape Fear River Basin (just at border with White Oak)
3. Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
The property contains an elevated slatted, wooden bridge which serves as a private access road to the lots. Utilities were
installed by the subdivision's developer and are located just oceanward of the bridge in a 20' utility easement. Lots are
otherwise undeveloped, with natural contours and vegetation. Subject lots contain back dunes on the oceanward portion
of the lots and a freshwater pond on the landward portion of the lots. Herbaceous freshwater wetlands fringe the pond
and exist in low swales between the dunes and pond. Adjacent use is residential.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
Lots 14, 15, 16 combined = 19,385.5 -sgft. or 0.45 -ac.
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
None
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
The purpose of the project is to provide a buildable footprint and driveway area for three single family homes.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
The development of single family homes will utilize typical equipment such as pile drivers.
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
® Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
Comments:
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
® Preliminary ❑ Final
of determination was made?
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Agency /Consultant Company:
Name (if known): Paul Farley
Other: LMG
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
Emily Hughes with the ACOE field- approved the line in May, 2013, final determination requested with this application.
Previous wetland delineation in 2007 Action IDs# SAW-2007-01682.
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
® Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to 'help file" instructions.
CAMA Major Permit #144 -07 valid until 12 -31 -2013. Corps GP291 SAW-2007-01682. NC DWQ WQC 3642- #070759.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?
❑ Yes ® No
6b. If yes, explain.
Page 3 of 11
PCN Form -Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
la. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
® Wetlands ❑ Streams - tributaries ❑ Buffers
❑ Open Waters ❑ Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts N/A
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a.
2b.
2c.
2d.
2e.
2f.
Wetland impact
Type of jurisdiction
number —
Type of impact
Type of wetland
Forested
(Corps - 404, 10
Area of impact
Permanent (P) or
(if known)
DWQ — non -404, other)
(acres)
Temporary
W1 ®P ❑ T
Lot 14
Indirect, Shading
Freshwater
emergent swale
El Yes
® No
® Corps
❑ DWQ
1857.4 sq.ft.
W2 ®P ❑ T
Indirect, Shading
Freshwater
❑ Yes
® Corps
398.76 sq.ft.
Lot 15
emergent swale
® No
❑ DWQ
W3 ®P ❑ T
Lot 16
Indirect, Shading
Freshwater
emergent Swale
C1 Yes
® No
® Corps
❑ DWQ
1063.94 sq.ft.
W4 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
W5 ❑ P [IT
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
2g. Total wetland Impacts
0.076 -ac
2h. Comments:
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a.
3b.
3c.
3d.
3e.
3f.
3g.
Stream impact
Type of impact
Stream name
Perennial
Type of jurisdiction
Average
Impact
number -
(PER) or
(Corps - 404, 10
stream
length
Permanent (P) or
intermittent
DWQ — non -404,
width
(linear
Temporary (T)
(INT)?
other)
(feet)
feet)
S1 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ PER
❑ Corps
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
S2 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ PER
❑ Corps
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
S3 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ PER
❑ Corps
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
N/A
3i. Comments:
Page 4 of 11
PC Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

4. Open Water Impacts:
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then individually list all open water impacts below.
4a.
Open water
impact number —
Permanent (P) or
Temporary
4b.
Name of waterbody
(if applicable)
4c.
Type of impact
4d.
Waterbody type
4e.
Area of impact (acres)
01 ❑P ❑T
02 ❑P
03 ❑P
04 ❑P ❑T
4f. Total open water impacts
N/A
4g. Comments:
5. Pond or Lake Construction: NIA
If pond or lake construction proposed, then complete the chart below.
5a.
Pond ID
number
5b.
Proposed use or purpose
of pond
5c.
Wetland Impacts (acres)
5d.
Stream Impacts (feet)
5e.
Upland
(acres)
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
P1
P2
5f. Total
5g. Comments:
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
Page 5 of 11

6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ): NIA
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below.
If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If any impacts require mitigation, then
you MUST fill out Section D
of this form.
6a.
❑ Neuse
❑Tar-Pamlico ❑Other:
Project is in which protected basin?
❑ Catawba
❑ Randleman
6b.
6c.
6d.
6e.
6f.
6g.
Buffer impact
number —
Reason
Buffer
Zone 1 impact
Zone 2 impact
Permanent (P) or
for
Stream name
mitigation
(square feet)
(square feet)
Temporary
impact
required?
B1 ❑P ❑T
❑Yes
❑ No
B2 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ No
B3 ❑P ❑T
❑Yes
❑ No
6h. Total buffer impacts
6i. Comments:
Page 6 of 11

D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
la. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
Wetland areas could not be totally avoided due to CAMA rules regarding siting of the house behind the small structure
setback, similar requirements for the access bridge, and the location of wetlands. Wetland impacts have been minimized
by elevating the structures and maintaining above - ground storage capacity which was determined to be an important
function for not worsening adjacent street flooding.
1b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
Construction can be done from upland areas on the front of the lot. No major grading is expected.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
® Yes ❑ No
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
❑ DWQ ® Corps
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project?
® Mitigation bank
❑ Payment to in -lieu fee program
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank:
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank: Stone Farm Regional Mitigation Bank
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type: NonRiparian
Wetland
Quantity: 0.1 -acre
3c. Comments: Previously authorized in 2010, see enclosed letter.
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program: N/A
4a. Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached.
® Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested:
N/A
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
❑ warm ❑ cool ❑cold
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
N/A square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
N/A acres
4f. Non - riparian wetland mitigation requested:
0.1 acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
N/A acres
4h. Comments:
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan: N/A
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
Page 7 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) — required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
❑ Yes ® No
buffer mitigation?
6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required. NIA
6c.
6d.
6e.
Zone
Reason for impact
Total impact
Multiplier
Required mitigation
(square feet)
(square feet)
Zone 1
3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2
1.5
6f. Total buffer mitigation required:
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in -lieu fee fund).
NIA
6h. Comments: NIA
Page 8 of 11

E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
la. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
❑ Yes ® No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
❑ Yes ❑ No
Comments:
2. Stormwater Management Plan
Maximum impervious cover on lots
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
will adhere to previously approved
S/D SW plan
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
❑ Yes ® No
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why: Subdivision plan existing and no
changes in impervious cover requested.
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
❑ Certified Local Government
2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
❑ DWQ Stormwater Program
❑ DWQ 401 Unit
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review:
3a. In which local government's jurisdiction is this project?
Town of Oak Island
❑ Phase II
3b. Which of the following locally- implemented stormwater management programs
❑ NSW
❑ USMP
apply (check all that apply):
❑ Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other:
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ❑ No
attached?
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review:
® Coastal counties
❑ HQW
4a. Which of the following state - implemented stormwater management programs apply
❑ ORW
(check all that apply):
❑ Session Law 2006 -246
❑ Other.
4b. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
attached?
❑ Yes ® No
5. DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review: NIA
5a. Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
❑ Yes ❑ No
5b. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
❑ Yes ❑ No
Page 9 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

F. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
la. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal /stateAocal) funds or the
❑ Yes ® No
use of public (federal/state) land?
1 b. If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State
❑ Yes ❑ No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1c. If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
❑ Yes ❑ No
letter.)
Comments:
2. Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
❑ Yes ® No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b. Is this an after - the -fact permit application?
❑ Yes ® No
2c. If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s):
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in
❑ Yes ® No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b. If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a. Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non- discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
Project will tie into the local sewer system, and utilities were installed by the subdivision's developer.
Page 10 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

S. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
❑ Yes ® No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
❑ Yes ® No
impacts?
❑ Raleigh
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
❑ Asheville
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
The NC Natural Heritage Program GIS layer was used to determine the presence of federally listed species. No federally
protected species were noted within the site. However, the American alligator is known to occur in the freshwater pond.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
❑ Yes ® No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
The NOAA Fisheries Essential Fish Habitat Mapper GIS program was used to determine the presence of Essential Fish
Habitat. No EFH was noted within the project area.
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
❑ Yes ® No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
The NC State Historic Preservation Office HPOWEB GIS mapping resource was used to determine the presence of
historic resources. No historical resources were noted within or adjacent to the site.
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA- designated 100 -year floodplain?
❑ Yes ® No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? The NC Floodplain Mapping Information System
website was used to determine the boundaries of the 100 -year floodplain.
Laura Stasavich
07/12/2013
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
Applicant/Agent's Signature
Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant
is provided
Page 11 of 11

E Oit* 194iOW
2- "Well
f Ap4rh Oak each
1S.1and
If Club
Oak
Island
Sources: Esri, DeLorme, NAVTEQ, USGS, Intermap, iPC, NRCAN, Esri
Japan, MET[, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri (Thailand), TornTorn, 2012
SCALE 1" = 1 -mile
L:\CAMA\2013\02-13-095\mapsetportrait.cdr
LMGLAND MANAGEMLVT GROUP we
www.LMGroup.net
Phone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]
3805 Wrightsville Ave, Suite 15
Wilmington, NC 28403
SITE
Sources: Esri, DeLorme, NAVTEQ, USGS, Intermap, iPC, NRCAN, Esri
Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri (Thailand), TornTorn, 2012
SCALE 1" = 500'
Nationwide #18 Permit Application
Lots 14,15,16 Oceanside
Oak Island, NC
Parcel 246AFO 10
Mark Palmatier, applicant
LMG # 02-13-095
Vicinity Map
1 of 6
July 2013

not meant to be absolute.
Map Source: Holden Beach Quadrangle 7.5 minute (topographic).
L: \CAMA\ 2013 \02 -13- 095 \maosetoortrait.cd r
LMG
CANE MANAGEMP,NT GROUP me
E—'O —root CO -014m,
www.LMGroup.net
Phone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]
3805 Wrightsville Ave, Suite 15
Wilmington, NC 28403
Nationwide #18 Permit Application
Lots 14,15,16 Oceanside
Oak Island, NC
Parcel 246AF010
Mark Palmatier, applicant
LMG # 02 -13 -095
SCALE 1" = 2000'
USGS Topographic Map
2 of 6
July 2013

LMG
LAND MANAGEMENT GROUP
Envtronmtntal Conso�tantz
www.LMGroup.net
Phone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]
3805 Wrightsville Ave, Suite 15
Wilmington, NC 28403
Nationwide #18 Permit Application
Lots 14,15,16 Oceanside
Oak Island, NC
Parcel 246AFO10
Mark Palmatier, applicant
LMG # 02 -13 -095
Soils Map
3 of 6
July 2013

not meant to be absolute.
Map Source: 2008 NAPP Aerial Photography
LACAMA1 2013102- 13- 0951mapsetportrait.cd r
LMG
LAND MANAGEMENT GROUP uw:
'."O"Menrar com jmnu
www.LMGroup.net
Phone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]
3805 Wrightsville Ave, Suite 15
Wilmington, NC 28403
Nationwide #18 Permit Application
Lots 14,15,16 Oceanside
Oak Island, NC
Parcel 246AFO10
Mark Palmatier, applicant
LMG # 02 -13 -095
SCALE 1" =200'
2012 Aerial Photograph
4of6
July 2013

IF
1
I
I
1
1
I
I
I
1
1
I IR
I
I -s
I
wetiana Area
Lots1, -16 combined=
19,385.5 sq.ft.
1
1
I
j 13 Q
I O
I o i
I �
I
1 � �
I ►�
I N
1 ;n
'Via
Do, IO
Z ,
_ CID,
445 Cq-
A4A AEC L I
NOW OR FORMERLY
BRIAN KEITH KEESEE
DEED BOOK 3167, PAGE 407
TAX PARCEL # 250BLO2607
S g -26" E
N 81.31, 30"
I—
LLJ
� o
0
I �
U
m
a
W LO
(/)
it
ir
0
z
0
c�
TRANSFORMER _
/ & UTILITIES
EAST BEqC
WATER H DRI
METERS 60'
PUBLIC RIGHr_OF_WAY
Wetland Limit 2013
Wetland Area
Q Lots14 -16 combined=
~ 19,3 5.5 sq.ft.
O
F—
O
6p_SMAL�UCTURE
. sr7—
1998 S7A77C
G�ATION LINE
ATLANTIC OCEAN NOTE: THIS PROPERTY LIES BETWEEN THE
ATLANTIC OCEAN AND THE 445' CAMA LINE OF
ENVRONMENTAL CONCERN
0 30 60 120
Base Survey provided by VCS, Oak Island.

1
1
� I
1
1
1
I
I
I
1
I IRS
I
I -Z
1 °
W
LfTM �SEMENf
I � '
1 �
Proposed /Driveway Lot 14
Driveway area over wetlands N
1,341.84 -4q.ft. viI
Wetland within building footp o�
515.55 - sq.ft. I
I y
I mi 1
I � I
10I
CD ►�
I o I
I
I o IRS I
I �
1 �
RIDGE I e OF
I W WAARD
EDWARD 1
I N
RIDS
O DDA
CP
445 CA
MA ACC
NOW OR FORMERLY
BRIAN KEITH KEESEE
DEED BOOK 3167, PAGE 407
TAX PARCEL # 250BLO2607
81.07$26's
I—
3
Lij
� o
U
J
ca
a
0
1=
W
W
TRANSFORMER
/ & UTILITIES
WATER AST BEI
cr
0
z
0
0
METERS 60' . ' DRI1
P (JBLIC RIGHT_OF_W `
AY
Propo ed Driveway Lot 16
Drive ay area over wetlands =829.1 7-sq.ft.
Wetland within building footprint= 234.77 -sq.ft.
Proposed Driveway Lot 15
Driveway area over wetlands= 273.01 -sq.ft.
Wetland within building footprint= 125.75 -sq.ft.
60, S "OCTIJR
E SET-
1998 STATIC VEG
L?ATION LINE
LMG Note: Driveways shown to extend to small
structure setback but exact length to be determined by
contractor.
Houses will be elevated over driveway to meet VE
floodzone requirements (BFE 18' and 19'). House
footprints not shown. Homes may extend from
oceanward edge of existing bridge to small structure
setback.
ATLANTIC OCEAN NOTE: THIS PROPERTY LIES BETWEEN THE
ATLANTIC OCEAN AND THE 445' CAMA LINE OF
ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN
0 30 60 120
Base Survey provided by VCS, Oak Island.
LMG
LAND MANAGEMENT GROUP INC.
Environmental Consultants
43805 Wrightsville Ave, Suilel5
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402
Telephone: [phone]
rolect
Nationwide 18 Application
Lots 14,15,16
Oceanside at Oak Island
Dale:
712013
Revision Date:
NIA
scale:
1 " =60'
Job Number:
02 -13 -095
Title:
SITE PLAN
Drawn sy:
DES
Sheet Number:
6 of 6

Army Corps of Engineers
Wetland Data Package
Lots 14,15,16 Oceanside at Oak Island
Oak Island, NC
Property Owner: Atlas NC and BB &T
Applicant: Mark Palmatier
665 Lockwood Folly Rd.
Bolivia, NC 28422
Site address: Oceanside at Oak Island, Oak Island, NC
Subdivision name: Oceanside at Oak Island
@
AUG -62013 �
D NR - WATER QUALITY
�W0ands & §!gWn_atee Branch ,!
Parcel number:
250BL02611, 250BL02610, 250BLO2609
Directions:
From the Wilmington USACE office, head south on Darlington
Ave. towards Broad St. Take a left onto Covil Ave, and then a
right onto Wrightsville Ave. Turn left onto Dawson St. then a right
onto Oleander Dr. Continue onto US -17 BUS/ US -74 W and take
the exit onto US -17 S /Ocean HWY E toward Shallotte/Myrtle
Beach. Turn left onto NC -87 S /George II HWY. Take a slight right
onto NC -133 S/NC -87 S/River Rd. SE. Take a right onto NC -133
S/Dosher Cutoff SE, then take another right onto NC -133 S/ NC-
211 N /Southport- Supply Rd. SE. Turn left onto NC -133 S/ Long
Beach Rd SE. Take a slight right onto E Oak Island Drive. Take a
left onto SE 69`h St and the tract will be at the end of the street to
your right.
Nearest water body:
Atlantic Ocean
Name of watershed:
03030005 Cape Fear River Basin
Coordinates of site:
Latitude: 33.906931 N
Longitude: - 78.096659 W
USGS Quad: Southport, NC
Total size: —2.5 acres
Total size of Wetlands: —0.5 acres

not meant to be absolute.
Map Source: Holden Beach Quadrangle 7.5 minute (topographic).
L:\CAMA \2013 \02 -13- 095 \mapsetportrait. cdr
LMG
LAND MANAGMENT GROUP arc
E.—O— ntal Com.hanrx
www.LMGroup.net
Phone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]
3805 Wrightsville Ave, Suite 15
Wilmington, NC 28403
Jurisdictional Determination Request
Lots 14,15,16 Oceanside
Oak Island, NC
Parcel 246AFO10
Mark Palmatier, applicant
LMG # 02 -13 -095
SCALE 1 " = 2000'
Figure 2
USGS Topographic Map
July 2013

Low: 0 1
*Boundaries are approximate and are
not meant to be absolute.
Map Source: NCDOT LIDAR data.
L:\CAMA\2013\02-13-095\mapsetportrait.cdr
LMG
LAND MANAG ME T GROUP arc.
E—*r .ental C0n1u1r0nt4
www.LMGroup.net
Phone: [phone] a Fax: [phone]
3805 Wrightsville Ave, Suite 15
Wilmington, NC 28403
Jurisdictional Determination Request
Lots 14,15,16 Oceanside
Oak Island, NC
Parcel 246AFO10
Mark Palmatier, applicant
LMG # 02 -13 -095
SCALE 1" = 200'
Figure 4
LIDAR map
July 2013

LMG
LAND MANAGEMENT GROUP +�.
1- 10nm —fdi Taft -pant,
www.LMGroup.net
Phone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]
3805 Wrightsville Ave, Suite 15
Wilmington, NC 28403
Jurisdictional Determination Request
Lots 14,15,16 Oceanside
Oak Island, NC
Parcel 246AF010
Mark Palmatier, applicant
LMG # 02 -13 -095
Figure 5
Soils Map
July 2013

not meant to be absolute.
Map Source: 2008 NAPP Aerial Photography
L:\CAMA \2013 \02 -13- 095 \m apsetportrait. cdr
L1VIG
LAND MANAGHMP.NT GROUP sxc
Env; :onmrnrat Conteltcnrz
www.LMGroup.net
Phone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]
3805 Wrightsville Ave, Suite 15
Wilmington, NC 28403
Jurisdictional Determination Request
Lots 14,15,16 Oceanside
Oak Island, NC
Parcel 246AFO10
Mark Palmatier, applicant
LMG # 02 -13 -095
SCALE 1" =200'
Figure 6
2012 Aerial Photograph
July 2013

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: Lots 14,15,16 Oceanside at Oak Island City/County: Oak Island/Brunswick Sampling Date: 5/16/201,
Applicant/Owner: Mr. Mark Palmatier state: NC Sampling Point: Upland
Investigator(s): P•Farley section, Township, Range: Oak Island /Brunswick
Landform (hllslope, terrace, etc.): dune system Local relief (concave, convex, none): convex -flat Slope (%) 0-5
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): T/153B Lai 33.907145 Long: - 78.096648 Datum. NAD81
Soil Map Unit Name: Duckston sand NWI classification- Upland
Are climatic 1 hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes RL No= (N no, explain in Remarks )
Are Vegetation n, Soil or Hydrology = significantly disturbed? Are 'Normal Circumstances' present? Yes= No=
Are Vegetation Li Sal �, or Hydrology J__L 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 No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
within a Wetland? Yes �_ No
Welland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary indicators (minimum ffouired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required, check all that aooly)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (BS)
p Surface Water (Al) ❑ Aquatic Fauna (B13)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
❑ High Water Table (A2) ❑ Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Saturation (A3) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (818)
0 Water Marks (81) ❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
❑ Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
p Sediment Deposits (62) ❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
❑ Drift Deposits (B3) ❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (CB)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (64) ❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Geomorphic Positron (D2)
❑ Iron Deposits (85) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
❑ FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
❑ Water - Stained Leaves (Bg)
❑ Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes= No 9L Depth (inches)- 0"
Water Table Present? Yes = No 0 Depth (inches)- > 15"
Saturation Present? Yes F1 No 0 Depth (inches). >15"
wattand Hydrology Present? Yes fi No ✓�
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks.
No primary or secondary indicators found.
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Dominance Test
Sampling Point Upland
Tree Stratum (Plot size ) % Cover Species_? Status Number of Dominant Species
1. That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
2.
3
4
5
6.
7.
8.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20°x6 of total cover:
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plat size. 30' rad )
1 Morelia cerifera 5 Yes FAC
2
3
4.
5.
6
7.
8
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
1 Ammoohila brevilioulata
5 = Total Cover
500A artotal cover: 2.5 20% of total cover
30' rad )
20 yam_ t IL
2. Uniola panoculata
15 Yes
FACU
3. Spartina patens
15 Yes
FACW
4 Cakile endentula
5 No
FACU
5. Iva imhrirata
5 No
FACW
6 Yurra alnifolia
2 No
UPL
7 Hydin000tylp hnnaripncic
5 No
FACW
8.1;a6llarrlia pLlrhalla
9.
5 No
NI
10
11
12.
91 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 45 5 20% of total cover 1 R 7
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1
2
3.
4
5.
50% of total cover
below)
ITotal Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
1 (A)
3 (B)
33.3 (AM)
Total % Cover of Multiply by:
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
FACW species 3 x2= 6_
FAC species 1 x3= 3
FACU species 9 x4= R
UPL species 9 X5= 10
Column Totals: R (A) _97 (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.375
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree — Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub — Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
Herb —Ail herbaceous (non - woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3 28 ft tall
Woody vine —All woody vines greater than 3.28 It in
height.
Hydrophytic
= Total Cover Vegetation
20% of total cover _ Present?
Upland is moderately vegetated back dune - barrier flat.
Yes a No —2
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region —Version 2 0

SOIL
or confirm the absence of
Sampling Point, Upland
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Twe 'LoTexture Remarks
0 -15 10 YR 6/2 sand
'Type: C= Concentration, D= Depletion, RM= Reduced Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains. `Location, PL =Pore Lining, M=Matrbc
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)
indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
❑ Histosol (Al)
Q
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
❑
Histic Epipedon (A2)
a
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
❑
Black Histic (A3)
❑,
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O)
❑ Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
❑
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
a
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1719) (LRR P, S, T)
[]
Stratified Layers (A5)
Q
Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ Anomalous Bright Loamy Sods (F20)
❑
Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
(MLRA 1538)
❑
5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Red Parent Material (TF2)
❑
❑
Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Marl (F10) (LRR U)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF72)
❑_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Q
Depleted Ochnc (Fl 1) (MLRA 151)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Q
Iran - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR 0, P, T)
elndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Coast Praine Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A) Q
Umbdc Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
wetland hydrology must be present,
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)
Q
Delta Ochric (1`17) (MLRA 151)
unless disturbed or problematic.
U Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Q Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 150B)
Sandy Redox (S5) Q Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
Stripped Matrix (S6) Anomalous Bright Loamy Solls (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 1530)
Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Type
Depth (inches)
No primary or secondary indicators found.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes,, NoiE
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region —Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Pro)ect(Site. Lots 14,15,16 Oceanside at Oak Island City/County. Oak Island /Brunswick
Sampling Date: 5/16/201,'
Applicant/Owner Mr. Mark Palmatier State NC Sampling Point: Wetland
Investigator(s), P.Farley Section, Township, Range Oak Island /Brunswick
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc), depressional Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave -flat slope (%) 0 -2
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): T/15313 Let 33.907145 Lang. - 78.096648 Datum NAD81
Sod Map Unit Name DUckston sand NWI classification: PEM 1 F
Are climatic I hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes 2L No = (If no, explain in Remarks )
Are Vegetation ,n, Soil F-1, or Hydrology M significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances' present?
Yes -EL No
Are Vegetation J1, Soil _L_L, or Hydrology _L__L 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 No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes -Lid No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 'v ' No u within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks-
HYDROLOGY
Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is muired.
check all that apply)
® Surface Water (At)
❑ Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Q High Water Table (A2)
❑ Marl Deposits (615) (LRR U)
® Saturation (A3)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
D Water Marks (81)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
❑ Sediment Deposits (62)
❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑ Drift Deposits (B3)
❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (84)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery
(B7)
❑ Water - Stained Leaves (89)
Field Observations:
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (Be)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (BIB)
❑ Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Crayfish Burrows (CB)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (Cg)
❑ Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ FAC- Neutral Test (DS)
❑ Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Surface Water Present? Yes El No ]a r Depth (inches) 0"
Water Table Present? Yes ,L No r 1 Depth (inches) 6"
Saturation Present? Yes ], No f2- Depth (incites) 4" Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes i No El
includes capillary fnn e
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available-
Above ground water levels vary across wetland with ponded water at northern end (outside data point).
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2 0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size ) % Cover Species? Status
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
50% of total cover
Saplma/Shrub Stratum (Plot size- 30' rad )
1 Morelia cerifera
= Total Cover
20% of total cover
5 Yes FAC
2.
OBL species
3
FACW species
4
FAC species
5
FACU species
6
UPL species
7
Column Totals*
8.
50% of total cover 2.5
Herb Stratum (Plot size- 30' rad )
1
2. Scirpus olnevi
Total Cover
20% of total cover
20— Yes ORI
3. Fimbristvlis autumnalis
20 Yes OBL
a Hydroco le umbellata
_
15 Yes OBL
5 Cyoentc Pchinatus
15 Yes FAC
6 $hynochnsnnra colnrata
15 Yes FACW
7 AntiQppp n virpinicus
2 No FAC
8 J03 iCariprielrnn rarliranc
2 NO FACU
9 KnStP t7k)1a vippinira
2 No OBL
10
11
12.
_ = Total Cover
50% of total cover dri 5 20°x6 of total cover 1 R
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size )
1
2
3
4
5
50% of total cover
= Total Cover
20% of total cover
Remarks (If observed, list morphological adaptations below)
Sampling Point Wetland
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC 6 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata 6 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC. 1 OO (AB)
rrevarence inaex worusneer:
Total % Cover of
Multiply by
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x4=
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals*
(A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
3 - Prevalence Index is 53 0'
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
' Indicators of hydric sod and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Tree — Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in (7 6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub — Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in DBH and greater than 3 28 ft (1 m) tall.
Herb — All herbaceous (non - woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3 28 ft tall
Woody vine —AII woody vines greater than 3 28 It in
height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes PI, No
Wetland is freshwater herbaceous within interdunal swale adjacent to freshwater pond.
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region —Version 2 0

SOIL
to the depth needed to document the Indicator or c
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Tvoer Loc' Texture
0 -3 10YR 612 m.sand
3 -7 10YR 3/2 10YR 5/6 5 C m sand
7 -15 10YR 6/1 sand
Sampling Pant. Wetland
Remarks
10% shell hash, streaking
10% shell hash
'Type C= Concentration, D= Depletion, RM= Reduced Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains. 2Location, PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless othervNse noted.)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
❑
Histosol (Al)
a
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
❑
Hishc Epipedon (A2)
a
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
❑
Black Histic (A3)
❑,
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O)
❑ Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A, B)
❑
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
a
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Sods (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
❑
Stratified Layers (A5)
Q
Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ Anomalous Bright Loamy Sods (F20)
❑
Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
El
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
(MLRA 153B)
❑
5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Red Parent Material (TF2)
®
Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
rT
u
Redox Depressions (F8)
Marl U)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Other Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Q
(F10) (LRR
Depleted Ochnc (F11) (MLRA 151)
(Explain in
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Q
Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
❑
Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A) Q
Umbric Surface (1713) (LRR P, T, U)
wetland hydrology must be present,
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)
Q
Delta Ochnc (F17) (MLRA 151)
unless disturbed or problematic
LJ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Q Reduced Verfic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 150B)
Sandy Redox (S5) Q Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
Stripped Matrix (S6) Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Type
Depth (inches)*
Hydric Soil Present? Yes F;9 No=
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region —Version 2 0

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook
SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
State: North Carolina County/parish/borough: Brunswick City: Holden Beach
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 33.9072270 Q, Long. - 78.096505° �.
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway (AIWW)
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: AIWW
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 03030005 (very near break with 03040207)
Q Check if map /diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
(� Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc... ) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
Field Determination. Date(s):
SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Piek Li "navigable waters of the U.S " within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review area. [Required]
Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There XR, "waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area [Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply):'
TNWs, including territorial seas
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
Relatively permanent waters (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non - wetland waters: linear feet: width (ft) and/or acres.
Wetlands: sqft or 0.5- acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: 987 Delineairo—n-manuto
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
2. Non - regulated waters /wetlands (check if applicable):3
Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain:
1 Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
2 For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year -round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally"
(e.g., typically 3 months).
' Supporting documentation is presented in Section III.F.

SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete
Section III.A.1 and Section III.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections III.A.1 and
and Section III.D.1.; otherwise, see Section III.B below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW: .
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent'
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non - navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year -round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year -round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section III.D.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section III.D.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbody4 is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section III.B.1 for
the tributary, Section III.B.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section III.B.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section III.0 below.
1. Characteristics of non -TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: ick Lis
P�
Drainage area: ckLis
Average annual rainfall: inches
Average annual snowfall: inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
❑ Tributary flows directly into TNW.
❑ Tributary flows through ick Lis tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are
rtc&k river miles from TNW.
Project waters are
river miles from RPW.
Project waters are
aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
�s! Ak
Project waters are
aerial (straight ) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNWS:
Tributary stream order, if known:
`Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and
West
5 Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.

(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apply):
Tributary is: ❑ Natural
❑ Artificial (man- made). Explain:
❑ Manipulated (man- altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: feet
Average depth: feet
Average side slopes: ick is
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
❑ Silts ❑ Sands ❑ Concrete
❑ Cobbles ❑ Gravel ❑ Muck
❑ Bedrock ❑ Vegetation. Type/0% cover:
❑ Other. Explain:
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain:
Presence of run/rifflel ool complexes. Explain:
Tributary geometry: ick Li
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: ick Lis
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year: ick
Describe flow regime:
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: ick Lis Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: ick L' Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
❑ Bed and banks
❑ OHWM6 (check all indicators that apply):
❑ clear, natural line impressed on the bank
❑
the presence of litter and debris
❑ changes in the character of soil
❑
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
❑ shelving
❑
the presence of wrack line
❑ vegetation matted down, bent, or absent
❑
sediment sorting
❑ leaf litter disturbed or washed away
❑
scour
❑ sediment deposition
❑
multiple observed or predicted flow events
❑ water staining
❑
abrupt change in plant community
❑ other (list):
❑ Discontinuous OHWM.7 Explain:
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
Q High Tide Line indicated by: Q Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
❑ oil or scum line along shore objects ❑ survey to available datum;
❑ fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore) ❑ physical markings;
❑ physical markings/characteristics ❑ vegetation lines/changes in vegetation types.
❑ tidal gauges
❑ other (list):
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
6A natural or man -made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e.g, flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break
'Ibid.

(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width):
❑ Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non -TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size: acres
Wetland type. Explain:
Wetland quality. Explain:
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non -TNW:
Flow is: ick Li . Explain:
Surface flow is: ick Lis
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: ick Lis . Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non -TNW:
❑ Directly abutting
❑ Not directly abutting
❑ Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
❑ Ecological connection. Explain:
❑ Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are ick Lis river miles from TNW.
Project waters are FMck Lisi aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: ickL
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the Sick Leis floodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
❑ Vegetation typelpercent cover. Explain:
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if an
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis: ick Lid
Approximately ( ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.

For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and/or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
Significant nexus findings for non -RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section III.D:
Significant nexus findings for non -RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non -RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section III.D:
3. Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to
Section III.D:
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
0 TNWs: linear feet width (ft), Or, acres.
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: 1,623 -sqft or 0.04- acres.
2. RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
® Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year-round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial: Large channelized ditch approximately 10 -16' wide formed near headwaters of Smith Creek.
Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally:

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
❑ Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
3. Non -RPWss that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
❑ Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
®Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
❑ Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
❑ Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year- round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW:
❑ Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section III.B and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW:
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
❑ Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
6. Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
❑ Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.9
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1-6), or
Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
E. ISOLATED JINTERSTATE OR INTRA- STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):10
which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
Other factors. Explain:
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
8See Footnote # 3.
9 To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III D 6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
F. NON4URISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
❑ If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
❑ Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
❑ Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
Other: (explain, if not covered above): .
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
I dgment (check all that apply):
Non - wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
Lakes/ponds: acres.
Other non - wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
Wetlands: acres.
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
Non - wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
Lakes/ponds: acres.
Other non - wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:
Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
❑ Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report.
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:Hampstead Quad 1000'.
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:GIS Data
National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
FEMA/FIRM maps:
100 -year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
Photographs: ® Aerial (Name & Date): 1998 and 2010 NAPP.
or ❑ Other (Name & Date):
Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
Applicable/supporting case law:
Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD: