20071216 Ver 1_401 Application_20070707

MULKEY
EN6INEER8 & CONSULTA NT5
P^ Box 331 27
RALEIGH, NC 27636
PHONE: [phone]
FAx: [phone]
Job No.:
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
To: Ms. Cyndi Karoly Date:
NC DENR/Division of Water Quality,
Wetlands Unit
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1650
Re: Dare County Justice Center,
Wetland Enhancement Project
I am sending you the following item(s):
1 2 1 6
July 13, 2007
** HAND DELIVER ""
2005180.00
COPIES DATE NO. DESCRIPTION
3 NWP 27 application package for notification

These are transmitted as checked below:
^ As requested
^ For approval
^ For review and comment
~~
JUL 1 3 2007
® For your use '+IVETiAND3ANDSTrEOR~M/A R~9RANCH
^ For Signatures
Remarks:
Ms. Karoly,
Enclosed is the complete permit application package for a USACE NWP 27. Following the
language in the associated NCDWQ GP 3626 in the second paragraph of the first condition,
NCDWQ requests that 3 copies of the project specifications be submitted as notification for
projects involving wetland restoration or enhancement with no compensatory mitigation credit
component. Please contact me if you have any questions concerning this proposed project.
Thank you,
Harold Brady
858-1804

~uLKE~
S .._ ti ., _, _ _~
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ~ 7- ~ 2 ~ 6
Washington Regulatory Field Office
107 Union Drive, Suite 202
Washington, NC 27889 D ~ ~ ~ ~~~ D
ATTN: Mr. Tom Steffens JUL 1 3 2007
Regulatory Permits Specialist
~EN~i - WAl'Ek ctiJq~iTY
DATE: July 12, 2007 WERAN03AND3TOR4M/ATERBRANCN
SUBJECT: Dare County Justice Center Wetland Enhancement Project, Dare County,
North Carolina
Please find attached the Pre-Construction Notification (I'CN) Application Form for
the referenced project. Dare County has proposed a wetland enhancement project within
the Dare County Justice Center property in Manteo, North Carolina. This project is located.
near the intersection of US Highway 64 and US Highway 264 Business. The anticipated let
date for this project is July 2007.
INTRODUCTION
The proposed wetland enhancement area, located immediately south and east of the
existing Dare County Government Complex, will serve to beautify an open space portion of
the Dare County Justice Center property, provide educational opportunities, and improve
water quality and ecology by restoring some wetland functions. The proposed area involves
approximately 1.7 acres between the future administrative building and US 64 Bypass in
Manteo, North Carolina. The project site currently is undeveloped land consisting of two
borrow pits (filled with water) and cleared land. There are no structures on the location of
the proposed wetland enhancement area.
ENHANCEMENT
A major component to this ecological enhancement project will be the site grading to
more accurately reflect the presumed original hydrology on the property. This will involve
the partial filling of both existing borrow pits, as well as, minor grading throughout. The
borrow pits on-site were created to supply dirt at some unknown location and have no
hydrologic surface connection to each other. The borrow pit nearest US 64 is connected to
a large ditch south of the project area on the opposite side of the US 64 by two 36" pipes.
This pipe has been placed nearly level such that the borrow pit nearest US 64 is fed by the
ditch and is therefore tidally influenced. To avoid complications with brackish/tidal waters
this borrow pit will be kept separate from the main portion of the wetland enhancement
area. This will be achieved by the construction of an earthen berm approximately 3 feet tall
and 10 feet wide stretching from the edge of the subject property to the proposed
stormwater pond. This berm will be set back approximately 10 feet from the normal edge of
water from this pond, Pond #1. Pond #1 will be filled with soil to shallow the water levels
and contours will be graded to make this area appear more natural. There will be earthen
MULKEY INC. 6754 TRYON READ CARP, NC 27511 P^ 60X 33727 RALEIGH, NC 27636 PH: 919-851-1912 FAX: [phone] WWW.MULKEYINC.COM

shelves within this area and these shallower shelves will be planted with appropriate salt-
tolerate species. The outfall of the stormwater pond will occur immediately between the
proposed stormwater pond and the existing Pond #1, through use of a 36" pipe with a
headwall structure. To allow surface water drainage witlvn the wetland enhancement area a
small retention pond is proposed on the wetland side of the berm. A riser pipe will be
installed witlvn this retention area with an 18" pipe outfall into Pond #1 (brackish water
pond). The pipe will be set below the berm and will have a rubberized or other non-
corrosive flap at the end. This flap will allow waters from the retention area into Pond #1,
but will not allow waters from Pond #1 into the retention area and wetland enhancement
area. The riser pipe will be set at 1.4 feet above MSL, the outfall pipe will be set at 0.5 feet
above MSL within the wetland retention area, with the outfall set at sea level. Furthermore,
to allow for the construction of this retention area the stormwater pond outfall will need to
be located immediately between the stormwater pond and Pond #1. A headwall will be
constructed around the 36" outfall pipe and the flp rap will encroach into Pond #1
approximately 96 square feet.
The borrow pit (Pond #2) that will be manipulated measures approximately 16 feet
deep (at its deepest point), and appears to be fed by groundwater, precipitation, and minor
surface sheet flow during heavy rains. This proposal will shallow this pond to a maximum
depth of four feet, enabling wetland vegetation to establish, providing a more beneficial area
for wildlife. Off-site organic soil material will likely be needed to fill these borrow ponds.
Beyond the borrow pits, minor grading will be conducted throughout the 1.7-acre site to
assist in the establishment of vegetative communities endemic to Dare County. This will be
working towards the restoration of what may have naturally occurred on this site prior to
human disturbance. The pipes that drain this borrow pit flow south under US 64 into a
tidally influenced ditch surrounded by an undisturbed bottomland bay forest community.
This project will not involve the creation of a stream channel on the project site. More
detailed grading information is included in the attached site design plans. It should be noted
that no stoiYnwater from the Justice Center, future Administrative Building, or their parking
facilities is anticipated to enter this wetland area.
At the completion of the grading, preparing the site for planting will be required to
ensure a greater level of survivability of the plants. Mulkey biologists sampled the existing
soils on the project site and sent these samples to the NCDA sol testing laboratory to
detel7nine whether there would be a need for soil amendments. These soil samples were
taken at two locations (one in the eastern portion and one in the western portion of the
project site) along a single transect across the site. Tlie contracted landscaper, Sadler
Landscaping, has recommended that one ton of gypsum/acre be disked into the soil, only in
' the eastern half of the project site. This recommendation follows information received from
the North Carolina Department of Agriculture (NCDA) laboratory from soil samples taken
within the project site, which shows elevated concentrations of salts in these soils. The
gypsum will work to bind these salt ions in an ineffective state. The NCDA soil analysis
showed fairly normal conditions of salts in the western half of the project site; therefore, Mr.
Sadler did not recommend the amendment of soil with gypsum in this area. After the
amendments to the soil are disked in, a cover seeding will be spread across the project site to
help avoid erosion and maintain the desired ground elevations achieved during the grading
process. All state and local soil and erosion control best management practices will be
followed during the construction of this project.

REFERENCE WETLANDS
Two natural reference wetland sites were studied to assist in the selection of the
vegetative communities. The primacy reference site is located on the opposite of US 64,
south of the project site. THis bottomland bay forest community serves as a good wetland
reference location illustrating Historic natural communities disconnected by the construction
of US 64 and development of Dare County. A transect consisting of three sampling sites
was traversed approximately 500 feet from and running parallel to US 64. This forested
wetland system is dominated by loblolly pine (Pinus taeda), witl~ pond pine (Pinus serotina),
bald cypress (Taxodium distichum) scattered throughout. The mid- and under-stories are
generally thick in areas that are not permanently flooded. The vegetation within this mid-
and understory includes, red bay (Persea palustris), red maple (Acer rubrum), water oak (Quercus
nigra), and sweet bay (Magnolia virginiana), with smaller shrubs such as inkberiy (Ilexglabra),
sweet gallberry (Ilex coriacea), wax myrtle (Myrica cerifera), swamp rose (Rosa palustris), and
fetterbush (Lyonia lucida). Vines and herbaceous vegetation present throughout this wetland
system include greenbriar (Smilax rotundifolia), and laurel-leaved greenbriar (S. laurifolia),
cinnamon fern (Osmunda cinnamomea), silverling (Baccl~aris halimifolia), and poison ivy
(Toxicodendron radicans). Elevations within this transect were determined using traditional
stu-vey techniques (i. e. Total Station), and were found to be approximately 1.5 feet above
MSL. The soils were investigated and found to have a two inch thick A-horizon with a
Mansell color of 10YR 3/4, and a B-horizon deeper than twelve inches below the soil
surface with a Mansell color of 2.5YR 2/1. The entire soil solt,m investigated was
determined to be a sandy loam and roots were observed throughout. These elevation and
soil conditions are similar the existing conditions within the proposed wetland enhancement
axea.
The other reference wetland is located directly behind the existing Dare County
Courthouse. A transect consisting of two sampling sites was traversed approximately 1,000
feet from and n,nning parallel to US 64. This forested wetland was not as mature as die
other reference site; however, it contained much more surface water and as a result
contained small areas of marsh. These marsh areas were dominated by bulrush (Juncos
~usus), with sedges (Carex .rpp. and Cyperus .rpp.) and cat-tail (Typl~a latifolia) scattered
throughout. The forested wetland areas were primarily dominated by red maple and loblolly
pine, wide the understoiy containing primarily wax myrtle. Other vegetation present
includes silverling, red bay, blackberry (13ubus argutus), swamp rose, and poison ivy. The
hydric soils widen dais transect are similar to those observed in the first reference wetland;
however, there is little to no A-horizon. This transect is most useful for assisting witlz the
design of the freshwater marsh area witlvn the proposed wetland enhancement project.
VEGETATION
Three different wetland vegetative communities are proposed for this area to serve
as a demonstration for some of the different types of wetland systems located in Dare
County and specifically on Roanoke Island; freshwater marsh, bottomland bay forest and
brackish marsh.
The freshwater marsh is proposed to be located immediately south of the future
administrative building. The marsh area will be constructed such that the standing water will
be a maximum of approximately 4 feet deep near the center, grading upwards toward the
adjacent vegetative communities. Overtime this should result in the central portion of the

marsh developing a deep layer of muck, further supporting the small microorganisms that
will be the basis of the food chain within this wetland. To encourage larger birds present
within Roanoke Island area to this wetland enhancement area, a large nesting platform is
proposed to be constructed along the edge of the freshwater marsh. It should be
mentioned, that this area will be considered a freshwater marsh due to the lack of a direct
saltwater connection; however, over time the potential exists for this area to witness
increased salinity levels from various sources. However, the most likely source of brackish
waters entering the freshwater marsh system would come from a connection with the tidal
waters within the borrow pit nearest US 64, which could occur during a significant flooding
event. The chances of this potential situation have been reduced by construction of the
wetland flood waters retention area. The water that will support this wetland will be
supplied primaitily by precipitation and groundwater.
This freshwater marsh will contain herbaceous species such as rush, sedges, arrow-
arum (Peltandra virginiana), and rose mallow (Hibi.rcu.r mo.rcheutu.r). The installation of these
herbaceous species is proposed to be achieved by using an existing seed mixture available
from several vendors along the east coast. Small shrubs such as buttonbush (Cephalanthu.r
occidentali.r) and swamp rose will be planted along the shallower edge of the proposed marsh.
The freshwater marsh area will drain into a bottomland bay forest system that will
attempt to mimic the wetland forest on the opposite side of US 64 from the project site.
Tlv wetland system will be vegetated with appropriate bottomland bay forest vegetation and
will contain ephemeral depressional areas. Though titled bottomland bay forest wetland this
area will be a mixture of a bottomland Hardwood, bay forest, and a Coastal Plain small
stream swamp, as described in Schafale and Weakley's "Classification of the Natural
Communities of North Carolina" (DENR, 1990). Tlie soils witlvn this wetland will remain
saturated nearly year round with little standing water except in depressional areas specifically
installed to capture and hold excess water during and immediately following rain events.
These ephemeral depressions are expected to maintain a water depth of approximately 6 to
12 inches during the winter months and will therefore, support a somewhat different flora
than the surrounding bottomland hardwood system. Due to their small size (<0.1 acre) and
location these ephemeral depressions will be included into the description of the bottomland
bay forest wetland. It should be noted, that due to the risk from the spread of the invasive
common reed (Phragmite.r au.rtrali.r), chemical treatment of the freshwater marsh area may
need to be conducted in the future.
Species proposed to be planted widen this bottomland bay forest system include
large woody species such as loblolly pine, pond pine, water oak (Quercu.r nigra), red bay, red
maple, and sweet bay, with smaller shrubs such as inkbexry, sweet gallbeny, and fetterbush.
Species widen the depressional areas and the drainage Swale are typically smaller herbaceous
ox shrubby species more adapt to deal with the permanent saturated and/or flooded
conditions. These species include jack-in-the-pulpit (Ari.raema triphyllum), lizards tail (Saururu.r
cernuu.r), and ferns such as the netted chain fern (i~oodavardia aerolata), cinnamon fern,
sensitive fern (Onoclea .rensibili.r), and die royal fern (O.r~~aunda regali.r).
Widen the area currently occupied by Pond #1, species more adapted to brackish
water conditions will be planted due to the connection with the tidally influenced ditch on
the south of US 64. Species within dlis proposed area will consist of non-woody plants that
can endure long inundated hydroperoids. These species will include rose mallow, salt
meadow cordgrass (Spaatinapatera.r), saltgrass (Di.rtichli.r .r~icata), and sawgrass (Cladiu~n mari.rcus
jamaicen.re).

In addition, to the three proposed wetland vegetative communities, an area of upland
located on the western side of the project site will contain apine-flatwood community.
Somewhat more facultative species such as longleaf pine, loblolly pine, witegrass (Ari.rtida
.rtricta), and braken fern (Pteridiu~n aguilinum) are proposed to be planted in this area. Pine-
flatwood systems are generally very open almost savanna-like ecosystems crucial for many
animal species that requite an adjacent upland community food nesting and foraging. No
grading and little site preparation will be required for this vegetative community.
Planting density for hardwood and needle leaved species will be 680 (8-foot centers)
stems per acre. Proportions of specific species to be planted will be based on availability at
time of installation. The size of the plants during installation is important; a minimum of
one-gallon containers should be used when acquiring all plants from a nursery. An
exception to this will be ifbare-root or containerized trees are purchased from the Nortli
Carolina Division of Forest Resources (NCDFR). The plant material layout should resemble
a random and natural placement of plants rather than a standard landscaped approach with
trees and shrubs in rows. Consideration for microtopography, soil series unit, and spatial
diversity for wildlife habitat will be used in clustering trees and the mixture of species across
tl7e project study area. The exact spacing between trees will vary due to tl~e spatially random
arrangement of the plants installed. In addition, natural seeding from existing native woody
vine, slv-ub, and tree species from adjacent areas is expected to occur to fiutlier speed the
rate of enhancement.
WATER RESOURCES
The project is located in Pasquotank River subbasin 03-01-51 and USGS 8-digit
hydrologic unit 03020105. No streams are located witlvn the project area; however, there
are two 36" pipes beneath US Highway 64 which hydrologically connects the borrow pit
nearest US 64 to a large ditch and associated wetlands on the opposite side of the highway to
the south. This ditch eventually drains into tributaries and ditches which likely empty
toward the Croatan Sound; however, due to the hydrologic nature of Roanoke Island it is
difficult to be totally confident that some of these waters will not drain towaa-ds the Roanoke
Sound. Surface water resources in the vicinity of the subject property include Shallowbag
Bay (Class SC waters) to the north, the Roanoke River (Class SC waters) to the east, and
Croatan Sound (Class SA waters) to the south and west. There are three areas of 303 (d)
waters in die vicinity of the project study area, dze Roanoke Sound from Shallowbag Bay to
Johns Creek approximately 1.5 miles east of the project area, Sandbeach Creek
approximately 1.5 miles southeast of tl~e project area, and dze Roanoke Sound at Mill
Landing approximately 1.5 miles south of the project area. '
The existing jm-isdicdonal wetlands on this property were significantly disturbed in
the past by extensive clearing and placement of mulch throughout. These areas are best
classified as bottomland bay forest wetlands as tlley were once part of the bottomland bay
forest wetland system located to the south bisected by US 64, according to historic aerial
photography. The National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) classification is palustrine saturated
forest (I'FO). This proposed wetland enhancement project will increase the wetland acreage
on the site from 1.12 acres to 1.48 acres. The specific impact numbers are shown in the
attached Pre-Construction Notification and depicted on the permit design drawings.

PROTECTED SPECIES
Federal law requires that any federal action likely to adversely affect a species listed
as federally protected be subject to review by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) or
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) (under the provisions of Section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act [ESA] of 1973, as amended). Prohibited actions which may affect
any species protected under the ESA are outlined in Section 9 of the Act. Other species may
receive additional protection under separate laws such as the Lacey Act Amendments of
1981, the Migratory Bird Treaty of 1999, the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, or the
Eagle Protection Act of 1940. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) maps
were reviewed in May 2005.
The Maxch 9, 2006 USFWS list of federally protected species for Dare County,
North Carolina lists eight Endangered species, five Threatened species, and one Threatened
due to a similarity of appearance (T S/A). Theproject site consists of cleared land, primarily
wetland, with two small borrow ponds and a few young loblolly pine trees throughout. The
subject property contains suitable habitat for only tie American alligator (Alligator
~ni.rri.rrippien.ri.r). This suitable habitat is generally located witvn the wetand areas. No
American alligator individuals or evidence of nesting was observed during the field
investigations. A review of NCNHP records in December 2006 revealed no federally or
state listed species within one-mile of the project study area. Therefore, this project will
have no impact on protected species. Table 1 in the Appendix depicts tie federal and state
protected species listed for Dare County and their status.
CONCLUSION
Improving the visual appearance of tie area between the future Administrative
Building and US 64 is an important part of tie total Dare County Justice Center project.
This proposal provides a landscape design that integrates the natural environment into the
design instead of ignoring the natural environment and planting a standard vegetative buffer.
This project will provide educational benefits to the people of Dare County by displaying a
portion of the diverse ecosystems present within the county. But perhaps more importanty,
construction of this proposed wetand enhancement project will provide improved water
quality and wildlife habitat expected from a functional wetland system. Completion of this
phase of tie government complex project will be the final element needed to make the entire
Dare County government complex property whole.
Following your review and concurrence with tze proposed acton, please issue a
NWP 27 tzat will authorize ecological restoration actvities at the Dare County Justice
Center wetand enhancement site. If you have any questions or comments concerning tze
project, please contact Harold Brady at [phone]. Thank you for your assistance.
Sincerely
.Z~~~ `~-
Harold M. Brady
Staff Scientist
Mulkey, Inc.

Attachments
PCN
USACE Wetland Compensatory Considerations Form
Schedule of Work
Agent Authorization Letter
Figure 1 Project Vicinity
Figure 2 Aerial Photography
Figure 3 Adjoining property Owners
Wind and Climate Data
NCDA Soil Analysis
Sadler Landscaping Recommendations
Site Photography
NCDCM concurrence letter
Jurisdictional Determination
Tables
Table 1 Proposed Plantings
Table 2 Protected Species Potentially Occurring in Dare County
Permit Drawings
W-1: Existing Conditions
W-1A: Property Owner Information
W-2: Proposed Grading Conditions
W-3: Cross-Sections
W-4: Proposed Vegetative Communities
cc: Micheal Allen, Mulkey
Matt Ketchum, Heery

Office Use Only: Form Version March OS
07_12~g
USACE Action ID No. DWQ No.
(If any particular item is not applicable to this project, please enter "Not Applicable" or "N/A".)
I. Processing
1. Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project:
® Section 404 Permit ^ Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules
^ Section 10 Permit ^ Isolated Wetland Permit from DWQ
® 401 Water Quality Certification ^ Express 401 Water Quality Certification
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested: NWP 27
3. If this notification is solely a courtesy copy because written approval for the 401 Certification
is not required, check here: ^
4. If payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) is proposed
for mitigation of impacts, attach the acceptance letter from NCEEP, complete section VIII,
and check here: ^
5. If your project is located in any of North Carolina's twenty coastal counties (listed on page
4), and the project is within a North Carolina Division of Coastal Management Area of
Environmental Concern (see the top of page 2 for further details), check here:
II. Applicant Information ~ ~ ~ ~51J V L5 D
1. Owner/Applicant Information
Name: Dare Count•
JIJL 1 3 2007
Contact: David Clawson, Finance Director
Mailing Address: 211 Budlei~h Street
Manteo, NC 27954
Telephone Number: [phone] Fax Number: [phone]
E-mail Address: [e-mail]
2. Agent/Consultant Information (A signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization letter
must be attached if the Agent has signatory authority for the owner/applicant.)
Name: Harold Bradv, t~roiect biologist
Company Affiliation: Mulkey Engineers and Consultants, Inc.
Mailing Address: 6750 Tryon Road
Carv, NC 27511
Telephone Number: X919) 858-1804 Fax Number: [phone]
E-mail Address: hbrad~(a~mulkeyinc.com
Page I of 9

III. Project Information
Attach a vicinity map clearly showing the location of the property with respect to local
landmarks such as towns, rivers, and roads. Also provide a detailed site plan showing property
boundaries and development plans in relation to surrounding properties. Both the vicinity map
and site plan must include a scale and north arrow. The specific footprints of all buildings,
impervious surfaces, or other facilities must be included. If possible, the maps and plans should
include the appropriate USGS Topographic Quad Map and NRCS Soil Survey with the property
boundaries outlined. Plan drawings, or other maps may be included at the applicant's discretion,
so long as the property is clearly defined. For administrative and distribution purposes, the
USACE requires information to be submitted on sheets no larger than 11 by 17-inch format;
however, DWQ may accept paperwork of any size. DWQ prefers full-size construction
drawings rather than a sequential sheet version of the full-size plans. If full-size plans are
reduced to a small scale such that the final version is illegible, the applicant will be informed that
the project has been placed on hold until decipherable maps are provided.
1. Name of project: Dare County Government Center Wetland Enhancement project
2. T.I.P. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only)
N/A
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PINT): County of Dare; PIN# 978912756346.
4. Location
County: Dare Nearest Town: Manteo
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number): N/A
Directions to site (include road numbers/names, landmarks, etc.):
From Raleigh take US-64 East to Roanoke Island. Make a left onto Business 64, then take
the left into Marshall Collins Drive. The study area is on the left before the Courthouse, near
the US-64 right of way.
5. Site coordinates (For linear projects, such as a road or utility line, attach a sheet that
separately lists the coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody.)
Decimal Degrees (6 digits minimiun): 35° 53' 22.28" °N 75° 39' 48.16" °W
6. Property size (acres): 21.25 acres
7. Name of nearest receiving body of water: Roanoke Sound
8. River Basin: Pasquotank
(Note -this must be one of North Carolina's seventeen designated major river basins. The
River Basin map is available at http://h2o.em~.state.nc.us/admin/maps/.)
9. Describe the existing conditions on the site and general land use in the vicinity of the project
at the time of this application:
The site is currently vacant, containing two borrow pits that have filled with water. Mulch
has been spread across the entire site which has resulted in limited vegetation growth. This
Page 2 of 9

land was apparently cleared and heavily mulch during construction of the first phase Dare
County Justice Facility North of the site is the proposed Dare County Administrative
Building with undeveloped land beyond. The existing Dare County Courthouse is located
immediately west of the site with undeveloped forest beyond. South of the site is the US 64
bypass with undeveloped forest beyond. A vacant lot (formerly a service station) is present
immediately to the east of the site with commercial properties along Business US 64 beyond.
10. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
Wetland enhancement and creation is proposed within the study area. This will involve
minor ~radin tg ~ou~hout the wetland area and filling of two existing borrow pits to a depth
of open water to approximately 4 to 5 feet. This will result in a significantly shallower and
somewhat smaller area of permanent open water For purposes to further assure success of
the proposed project a wetland flood water retention area will be constructed on an upland
portion of the subject property. This structure will be divided from the more salt water areas
b_y an earthen berm aild will serve to drain excess water from the wetland enhancement site
while protecting the proposed site from brackish water intrusion. The entire wetland area
(except for the deepest areas of open water) will then be planted with native vegetation.
Standard construction equipment including an excavator and a dump truck will be used to
grade the site.
l 1. Explain the purpose of the proposed work:
This project will improve the visual appearance of the property natural landscaping1
provide educational opportunities and improve water quality
TV. Prior Project History
If jurisdictional determinations and/or permits have been requested and/or obtained for this
project (including all prior phases of the same subdivision) in the past, please explain. Include
the USACE Action ID Number, DWQ Project Number, application date, and date permits and
certifications were issued or withdrawn. Provide photocopies of previously issued permits,
certifications or other useful information. Describe previously approved wetland, stream and
buffer impacts, along with associated mitigation (where applicable). If this is a NCDOT project,
list and describe permits issued for prior segments of the same T.I.P. project, along with
construction schedules.
A jurisdictional determination has been issued by the USACE for this site dated May 27, 2005
(Action ID# 200511092). An Individual Pernut for the first phase of the Dare County Justice
Center was issued on April 17 2001 (Action ID# 200011238). The Individual Permit for the
second phase of the Dare County Justice Center (Administrative Building) was issued on
November 15 2006 (Action ID# 2006-32369-128). In addition, NCDWQ Section 401 water
quality permits were issued for both of the Individual Permits. NCDCM CAMA Major Permit
issued on A~ri15 2001 (Permit # 41-O1) for the first phase of the Dare County Justice Facility.
Page 3 of 9

V. Future Project Plans
Are any future permit requests anticipated for this project? If so, describe the anticipated work,
and provide justification for the exclusion of this work from the current application.
No additional permitting activities are anticipated for this subject property
VI. Proposed Impacts to Waters of the United States/Waters of the State
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to detern~ine, delineate and map all impacts to
wetlands, open water, and stream channels associated with the project. Each impact must be
listed separately in the tables below (e.g., culvert installation should be listed separately from
riprap dissipater pads). Be sure to indicate if an' impact is temporary. All proposed impacts,
permanent and temporary, must be listed, and must be labeled and clearly identifiable on an
accompanying site plan. All wetlands and waters, and all streams (intermittent and pereruzial)
should be shown on a delineation map, whether or not impacts are proposed to these systems.
Wetland and stream evaluation and delineation forms should be included as appropriate.
Photographs may be included at the applicant's discretion. If this proposed impact is strictly for
wetland or stream mitigation, list and describe the impact in Section VIII below. If additional
space is needed for listing or description, please attach a separate sheet.
1. Provide a written description of the proposed impacts:
These proposed wetland enhancement activities will involve the disturbance of 1.36 acres of
jurisdictional wetlands. All disturbed wetland areas will remain jurisdictional, except for 1220
square feet of fill along Pond #1 that will constitute an earthen berm. Once constructed this area
will no longer demonstrate the three parameters required for jurisdictional wetlands.
2. Individually list wetland impacts. Types of impacts include, but are not limited to
mechanized clearing, grading, fill, excavation, flooding, ditching/drainage, etc. For dams,
separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding.
Wetland Impact
Site Niunber
(indicate on map)
Type of Impact Type of Wetland
(e.g., forested, marsh,
herbaceous, bog, etc.) Located within
100-year
Floodplain
(yes/no) Distance to
Nearest
Stream
(linear feet) Area of
Impact
(acres)

1
Grading
yes 0.5 mile
(Scarboro
Creek)
136

Total Wetland Impact (acres) (excluding open water) 0.76
2
2
Page 4 of 9

3. List the total acreage (estimated) of all existing wetlands on the property: 2.3 acres
4. Individually list all intermittent and peremiial stream impacts. Be sure to identify temporary
impacts. Streaan impacts include, but are not limited to placement of fill or culverts, dam
construction, flooding, relocation, stabilization activities (e.g., cement walls, rip-rap, crib
walls, gabions, etc.), excavation, ditching/straightening, etc. If stream relocation is proposed,
plans and profiles showing the linear footprint for both the original and relocated streams
must be included. To calculate acreage, multiply length X width, then divide by 43,560.
Stream Impact
Ntunber
(indicate on ma)
Stream Name
Type of Impact
Perennial o~
Intermittent. Average
Stream Width
Before Impact linpact
Length
(linear feet) Area of
Impact
(acres)

Total Stream Impact (by length and acreage)
Individually list all open water impacts (including lakes, ponds, estuaries, sounds, Atlantic
Ocean and any other water of the U.S.). Open water impacts include, but are not limited to
fill, excavation, dredging, flooding, drainage, bulkheads, etc.
Open Water Impact

Site Number
(indicate on ma)
Name of Waterbody

(if applicable)

Type of Impact Type of Waterbody

(lake, pond, estuary, sound, bay,
ocean, etc.) Area of

Impact
(acres)
2 Grading and Fill Pond #2 (borrow pit) 036
Grading and Fill Pond #1 (borrow pit) 0.24

Total Open Water Impact (acres) 0.60
6. List the cumulative impact to all Waters of the U.S. resulting from the project:
Stream Impact (acres):
Wetland Impact (acres): 0.76
Open Water Impact (acres): 0.60
Total Impact to Waters of the U.S. (acres): 1.36
Total Stream Impact (linear feet):
7. Isolated Waters
Do any isolated waters exist on the property? ^ Yes ®No
Page 5 of 9

Describe all impacts to isolated waters, and include the type of water (wetland or stream) and
the size of the proposed impact (acres or linear feet). Please note that this section only
applies to waters that have specifically been determined to be isolated by the USACE.
8. Pond Creation
If construction of a pond is proposed, associated wetland and stream impacts should be
included above in the wetland and stream impact sections. Also, the proposed pond should
be described here and illustrated on any maps included with this application.
Pond to be created in (check all that apply): ®uplands ^ stream ^ wetlands
Describe the method of construction (e.g., dam embankment, excavation, installation of
draw-down valve or spillway, etc.): Excavation
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stormwater requirement, etc.): Stonnwater drainage from enhanced wetland area
toward brackish fond (Pond #1).
Current land use in the vicinity of the pond: vacant
Size of watershed draining to pond: 2.2 acres
Expected pond surface area (permanent pool): 0.03 acre
VII. Impact Justification (Avoidance and Minimization)
Specifically describe measures taken to avoid the proposed impacts. It inay be useful to provide
information related to site constraints such as topography, building ordinances, accessibility, and
~- financial viability of the project. The applicant may attach drawings of alternative, lower-impact
site layouts, and explain why these design options were not feasible. Also discuss how impacts
- were minimized once the desired site plan was developed. If applicable, discuss construction
techniques to be followed during construction to reduce impacts.
This proposed wetland enhancement project will in~rove an area of wetlands in which the
~pearance and functions have been severely impacted due to human manipulation over many
years. The lame borrow pit in the center of the site is filled with water and serves little
ecological purpose The wetlands surrounding the borrow pit were heavily mulched several
., ergo and have been cleared recently. Two wetland ve~;etative communities are proposed to
be established in the areas of existing wetlands, freshwater marsh and bay forest. Not only will
these will be used for educational opportunities, but will serve to beautify an area that is vacant
and considered aneye-sore by many. The wetland enhancement area is proposed to increase the
wetland acreage on the site from 1.36 acres to 1.74 acres.
VIII. Mitigation
DWQ - In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0500, mitigation inay be required by the NC
Division of Water Quality for projects involving greater than or equal to one acre of impacts to
freshwater wetlands or greater than or equal to 1.50 linear feet of total impacts to perennial
streams.
USACE - In accordance with the Final Notice of Issuance and Modification of Nationwide
Permits, published in the Federal Register on January 15, 2002, mitigation will be required when
necessary to ensure that adverse effects to the aquatic environment are minimal. Factors
Page 6 of 9

including size and type of proposed impact and function and relative value of the impacted
aquatic resource will be considered in determining acceptability of appropriate and practicable
mitigation as proposed. Examples of mitigation that may be appropriate and practicable include,
but are not limited to: reducing the size of the project; establishing and maintaining wetland
and/or upland vegetated buffers to protect open waters such as streams; and replacing losses of
aquatic resource functions and values by creating, restoring, enhancing, or preserving similar
functions and values, preferable in the wane watershed.
If mitigation is required for tlus project, a copy of the mitigation plan must be attached in order
for USACE or DWQ to consider the application complete for processing. Any application
lacking a required mitigation plan or NCEEP concurrence shall be placed on hold as incomplete.
An applicant may also choose to review the current guidelines for stream restoration in DWQ's
Draft Technical Guide for Stream Work in North Carolina, available at
http://h2o. enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/strmgide.htinl.
1. Provide a brief description of the proposed mitigation plan. The description should provide
as much information as possible, including, but not limited to: site location (attach directions
and/or map, if offsite), affected stream a11d river basin, type and amount (acreage/linear feet)
of mitigation proposed (restoration, enhancement, creation, or preservation), a plan view,
preservation mechanism (e.g., deed restrictions, conservation easement, etc.), and a
description of the current site conditions and proposed method of construction. Please attach
a separate sheet if more space is needed.
2. • Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (NCEEP). Please note it is the applicant's responsibility to contact the NCEEP at
[phone] to determine availability, and written approval from the NCEEP indicating
that they are will to accept payment for the mitigation must be attached to this form. For
additional information regarding the application process for the NCEEP, check the NCEEP
website at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/wrp/index.htm. If use of the NCEEP is proposed, please
check the appropriate box on page five and provide the following information:
Amount of stream mitigation requested (linear feet):
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet):
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres):
Amount ofNon-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres):
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres):
No compensatory mitigation is required for a NWP 27.
IX. Environmental Documentation (required by DWQ)
l.. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the use of
public (federal/state) land? Yes ® No ^
2. If yes, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the
requirements of the National or North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
Page 7 of 9

Note: If you are not sure whether a NEPA/SEPA document is required, call the SEPA
coordinator at [phone] to review current thresholds for environmental documentation.
Yes ^ No
3. If yes, has the document review been finalized by the State Clearinghouse? If so, please
attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval letter. Yes ^ No ^
X. Proposed Impacts on Riparian and Watershed Buffers (required by DWQ)
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
required state and local buffers associated with the project. The applicant must also provide
justification for these impacts in Section VII above. All proposed impacts must be listed herein,
and must be clearly identifiable on the accompanying site plan. All buffers must be shown on a
map, whether or not impacts are proposed to the buffers. Correspondence from the DWQ
Regional Office may be included as appropriate. Photographs may also be included at the
applicant's discretion.
1. Will the project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233
(Meuse), 15A NCAC 2B .0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 02B .0243 (Catawba) 15A NCAC
2B .0250 (Randleman Rules and Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please
identify )? Yes ^ No
2. If "yes", identify the square feet and acreage of impact to each zone of the riparian buffers.
If buffer mitigation is required calculate the required amount of mitigation by applying the
buffer multipliers.
Zone* Impact
(square feet) Multiplier Required
Mitigation
1 3 (2 for Catawba)
2 1.5
Total
* Zone 1 extends out 30 feet perpendiculaz from the top of the near bank of channel; Zone 2 extends an additiona120 feet from the edge of Zone 1.
3. If buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e.,
Donation of Property, Riparian Buffer Restoration /Enhancement, or Payment into the
Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as identified
within 15A NCAC 2B .0242 or .0244, or .0260.
This proposed~roject is not located within a river basin that requires basinwide NCDWQ
stream buffers.
XI. Stormwater (required by DWQ)
Describe impervious acreage (existing and proposed) versus total acreage on the site. Discuss
stormwater controls proposed in order to protect surface waters and wetlands downstream from
the property. If percent impervious surface exceeds 20%, please provide calculations
demonstrating total proposed impervious level.
Page 8 of 9

There is currently no impervious surface within the proposed site. An NCDWQ coastal
stormwater permit was issued for the adjacent Dare County Administrative Building on
December 7 2006 The outfall from the approved stormwater pond is not located within the
proposed wetland enhancement area No permanent impervious surface is anticipated to be
Qenerated from the construction of this wetland enhancement area.
XII. Sewage Disposal (required by DWQ)
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.
No wastewater is anticipated to be produced from this~ro~osed wetland enhancement project.
XIII. Violations (required by DWQ)
Is this site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500) or any Buffer Rules?
Yes ^ No
Is this anafter-the-fact permit application? Yes ^ No
XIV. Cumulative Impacts (required by DWQ)
Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in additional
development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality? Yes ^ No
If yes, please submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with
the most recent North Carolina Division of Water Quality policy posted on our website at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands. If no, please provide a short narrative description:
No negative cumulative impacts are anticipated to occur as a result of this proposed wetland
enhancement project One of the primar~~oals of this project is to improve water quality on
Roanoke Island specifically waters feeding the Roanoke Sound.
XV. Other Circumstances (Optional):
It is the applicant's responsibility to submit the application sufficiently in advance of desired
construction dates to allow processing time for these permits. However, an applicant may
choose to list constraints associated with construction or sequencing that may impose limits on
work schedules (e.g., draw-down schedules for lakes, dates associated with Endangered and
Threatened Species, accessibility problems, or other issues outside of the applicant's control).

JUG /Z, Zc%~7 ~7
Applicant/Agent's Signature Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)
Page 9 of 9

Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Considerations
Action ID:
SiteBank Nalne: Dare County Justice Center Administrative Building Wetland Enhancement Area
Location: Between the Dare County Justice Center Administrative Building and US 64, in Manteo,
North Carolina.
COOrdlnateS (decimal degrees): Latitude (ex. 34.872312): 35.889389 Longitude (ex.-77.556611): 75.6632SO
Method location determined (highlight):. GPS Topo Sheet Ortho (Aerial) Photo/GIS Other GIS Other
USGS Quad Sheet: Manteo, NC
Soil Survey Sheet No.: #6 Manteo
Prepared By: Mu1ke~Ens;ineers & Consultants; Harold Brady
Date March 22, 2007
I. Introduction
A. Is a permit required for this project? ES / NO
B. Type of Mitigation (circle): Restoration / Creatio / nhancemen /Preservation
This proposed project is not acting as a mitigation measure to compensate for any impacts
to Waters of the United States.
C. Identify Wetland Community Type (Shafale and Weakley): Bottomland Bay Forest and
Freshwater Marsh
D. Will Threatened or Endangered Species or designated
Critical Habitats be impacted? YES / ~O
E. Do any Cultural Resource issues exist on the site? YES / ~O
F. Do any Haz/Tox issues exist on the site? YES / ~O
There is a known LUST site adjacent to the wetland enhancement area that is currently being
monitored.
G. Has a wetland determination been undertaken. and verified? ES / NO Signed JD Attached
This project is meant to improve the appearance and restore some wetland functions to a historically
impacted wetland.

II. Foundation of the Mitigation Plan
A. Describe GOALS: This Rroposed wetland enhancement project will improve an area
of wetlands in which the appearance and functions have been severely impacted due to
human manipulation over many years The two lame borrow pits within the project site
are filled with water and serve little ecolo ig cal purpose. The wetlands surrounding the
borrow pits were heavily mulched several years ado and have been recently cleared.
Three wetland vegetative communities are proposed to be established in the areas of
existing ron-vegetated wetlands freshwater marsh bottomland bay forest, and brackish
marsh Not only will these will be used for educational opportunities, but will serve to
beautify an area that is vacant and considered an eve-sore by many. The wetland
enhancement/creation area is proposed to increase the wetland acreage on the site from
1.12 acres to 1.48 acres.
B. List Target FUNCTIONS:
a) Restore the areas currently occupied by the borrow pits to a functioning wetland
system that fills with water and dries with the natural fluctuations of the water table.
b) Replant the entire wetland enhancement area with appropriate wetland plant species.
c) Restore the presence of hvdric soils within the first twelve inches of the soil profile in
a few small spots that currently do not demonstrate hvdric soil characteristics. This
will be achieved by minor rg adin~ as described in the permit application and cover
letter Due to the water table's presence within 2 feet of the soil surface near round,
wetland hydrolog. i~ expected to be achieved naturally.
Are these Specific/Measurable/Attainable/Reasonable/Trackable? 0 / NO
C. Vegetation
1. Was a Reference Ecosystem (RE) report prepared? 0 / NO
Describe comparison between the RE and the Mitigation Site: The reference wetland ecosystem is
located directly across US 64 from the proposed wetland enhancement area. This area was
historically connected to the land involved in the wetland enhancement prior the construction of the
US 64 Manteo bypass and likely appeared similar to the reference wetland before man-made impacts.
Elevation data was taken within the reference site along the study transect through use of traditional
survey techniques and found this area to be between 1.4 and 1.7 feet above MSL. This closely
~.proximates the elevations existing and proposed within the wetland enhancement area, with the
elevations within the proposed wetland enhancement area averaging 0.5 feet higher. Examination of
soil profiles within both sites both approximately match each other as expected. Additional
information concerning the reference wetland site is included within the attached PCN cover letter.
2. Are plantings listed to species? ES / NO
3. Are local (200 miles north/south) propa les to be planted
and verified by nursery certificate? ES / NO
Sadler Enterprise Inc based in Manteo has been contracted to provide the plantings for the
proposed project.
4. Have diversity and density of species within the Reference
Ecosystem been considered in the plan? ES / NO Attached
5. Has consideration been given to planting the wetland u land
interface with suitable transition zone species? ES / NO Attached
Describe the Planting Quality Control Plan: Vegetation survivability will be monitored during the
five year monitoring_,period The minimum number of stems per acre within the wetland
enhancement area will be 320 If the survivability of the wetland plants on the proposed site drops
below this threshold additional plantings will be required.

D. Soils
1. Have site soils been mapped? ES / NO
Soils on the site have been mapped by the NRCS and published in the Dare County Soil Survey
The soil survey was written by Phillip L. Tant and issued in March 1992.
2. List Soil Series and Textures:
a) Leon fine sand, 0 to 2 percent
3. Are soils types appropriate for the target wetland? ES / NO
Describe: The hydric soils that exist on the~roposed wetland enhancement site are snapped as the
same type as those within the reference wetland. Examination of soil profiles from both sites
confirmed their similarity Additionally these soils are suitable to support the vegetation proposed to
be planted.
4. Fertility sampling undertaken in the RE? (Attach Report) ES / NO
5. Fertility sampling undertaken in the mitigation site? (Attach Report) ES / NO
6. Are the fertility results within the standards for the plantings? ES / NO
Describe results/amendments required: Gypsum has been recommended to be applied within the
eastern half of the project site at a rate of 1 ton/acre. Additionally lime has been recommended to be
applied at the rate of 2 tons/acre across the site.
7. If PC Cropland, has site been evaluated for plow pans, field crowns,
the drainage system? YES / NO Not PC farmland
Describe findings: N/A
8. Is disking proposed after grading and/or prior to planting? ES / NO
Disking will be limited as much as possible and the smallest equipment practicable wil be
implemented to hem avoid potential compaction issues.
9. Is there a grading plan? (Attach) ES / NO
Describe: The rg ading will involve the partial filling of both existing borrow pits, as well as,
minor ~radin~ throughout. The borrow pits measure as deep as approximately 16 feet deep.
Pond #2 appears to be fed b~~roundwater precipitation and minor surface sheet flow during
heavy rains while Pond #1 appears to be primarily fed by tidally influenced waters coming up
a ditch from the Roanoke Sound. This proposal will shallow these ponds to a maximum depth
of three to four feet below MSL (approximately 4 to 5 feet deep from normal ground), enabling
wetland v~etation to establish providing a more beneficial area for wildlife. Off-site organic
soil material will potentially be needed to fill this pond. To avoid complications with
brackish/tidal waters these areas will be kept separate from the main portion ofthe-wetland
enhancement area This will be achieved by the construction of an earthen berm approximately
3 feet tall and 10 feet wide stretching from the edge of the subject property to the proposed
stormwater pond This berm will be set back approximately 10 feet from the normal edge of
water from this pond Pond #1 The outfall of the stormwater pond will occur immediately
between the proposed stornwater pond and the existing Pond #1 through use of a 36" pipe
with a headwall structure. To allow surface water drainage within the wetland enhancement
area a small retention pond is~roposed on the wetland side of the berm. Beyond the borrow
pits minor ~radin~ will be conducted throughout the site to assist in the establishment of
vegetative communities endemic to Dare Coun .This project will not involve the creation of
a stream channel on the project site More detailed grading information is included in the
attached site design plans.

E. Hydrology
Because this enhancement project is not being_performed for the purposes of acquiring
compensatory mitigation credits, no hydrologic modeling has been conducted nor are any
h d~~ic monitoring_gauges proposed to be installed.
1. Was a Water Budget prepared for low, average and high conditions
per WETS data? (Attach Report) YES / ~O
Describe and justify type of water budget model used: N/A
2. List the hydrologic inputs:
Pond #2 is influenced by nrecioitation. groundwater, and stormwater only from the fill slope
associated with west bound US 64 and the small upland area to the west adjacent to the proposed
site. The area occupied by Pond #1 is fed primarily by tidally infouenced waters, but is also
influenced by the same factors as Pond #2 listed above.
3. For groundwater driven systems, will monitoring wells be installed pursuant to the most
recent ERDC Technical Note? YES / ~O
4. For surface water driven systems, will flood gauges be installed? YES / ~O
Describe type/methodology: N/A
5. Were the principles of HGM or other classification system considered? YES / DO
Describe:
6. Will the hydrologic regime predicted by the water budget be appropriate
for the target wetland? YES / NO N/A
Are these Specific/Measurable/Attainable/Reasonable/Trackable? ES / NO
The success of the wetland hydrology on the site will be based upon the success of the
survivability of the vegetation and the devel_pment of hydric soils. The project site currently
meets the requirements for wetland h~oloQV as confirmed by the jurisdictional determination.
The proposed rg adingplan will not result in an~ppreciable changes with the existing hydrolo~y
of the site.

III. Success Criteria
A. Vegetation: A minimum of 320 stems per acre survivability of wetland vegetation within the
proposed wetland enhancement area; counted annually. Areas of permanent inundation (freshwater
and brackish marshes) will not be included in this acreage calculation, since this area will not be
appropriate to support woody ve etg a
B. Hydrology: Wetland hydrolo~y currently exists on-site and none of the proposed activities will
cause a significant change in the hydrolo~y of the site. Therefore, the success of the wetland
hydrology will be based upon the survivability of the vegetation and development of hydric soils.
C. Soils: The presence of hydric soils will be determined visually within pits dui annually within
each of the sample plots. Soil profile information will be discussed in the annual monitoring reports.
Are these Specific/Measurable/Attainable/Reasonable/Traekable? 0 / NO
IV. Monitoring
A. Name and telephone number of person responsible for the success of this project:
Currently Mulkey Engineers & Consultants (contact: Harold Brady~919)858-1804) is under
contract for the design and implementation oversight for the proposed project. Beyond this,
responsibility lies with Dare Count~(contact: Dave Clawson - (252) 475-57312
B. Is there a monitoring plan? ES / NO Discussed below and within the PCN cover letter
1. Describe Vegetation monitoring plan: Two 0.10 acreplots will be established within the
proposed wetland enhancement area. All survivin vegetation will be counted by species and the
total number of stems will be calculated.
2. Describe Hydrology monitoring plan: Survivabili . of vegetation and development of h, dric
soils.
Are these Specific/Measurable/Attainable/Reasonable/Trackable? ES / NO

C. As-Built Report to be submitted within 30 days after project construction? ES / NO
D. Date Annual Monitoring Report to be submitted: The annual monitoring report will be submitted to the
Washington Field Office of the USACE on or before Sept. 31 of each year for five years. The first monitoring
report will occur in 2008.
V. Consideration of Factors of Failure
A. Describe how the following have been considered for this project:
1. Elevations biological benchmarks: Ground elevations will be kept to parameters as depicted in
the rg ading_plan sheet.
2. Provisions for Drainage: The project site will be graded such that surface water will drain
towards the freshwater marsh ephemeral depressions and towards the proposed wetland flood water
retention area which drain through a ape with a flap into Pond # 1. Due to the extremely sandmature
of the soils, the majority of the surface water is anticipated to infiltrate through the soil column and to
the water table.
3. Erosion: Due to the relatively flat nature of the site soil erosion is not anticipated to be an issue.
Vegetation including herbaceous species will be planted to further reduce erosion.
4. Human Impacts: Dare County will provide security for possible vandalism that may occur on
the site, as well as, provide maintainence if dumping occurs. This area will be protected from
development in perpetuity.
5. Noxious species invasion: Phra,gmites australis is the most likely of the noxious species can
may enter the site. If Phra mites appears within the this wetland enhancement area especially in and
around the freshwater marsh chemical treatment will be required to exterminate this species AnX
other noxious species that becomes prevalent within the proposed site will be dealt with by Dare
County accordingly
6. Herbivory: _ _ There are no plans at this time to fence the project area or individual plants after
construction is complete However if issues regarding herbivorv become ap~iarent steps will be taken
to resolve the problem.
B. Are there Contingency Plans built into the proposal to address the above
factors? YES /
No formal plans have been drafted beyond the steps outlined in the above answers.
C. Describe how and when the contingency plan(s) will be implemented:
Contingencesplans will be drafted, reviewed, and implemented if demanded b
conditions determined by success criteria within the annual monitoring reports.
Are these Specific/Measurable/Attainable/Reasonable/Trackable? ES / NO

VI. Site Management
A. Describe Final Disposition of the property: The subject property will remain in the ownership of
Dare County. There will be a conservation easement attached to the deed in perpetuity
B. Who will manage the site after the mitigation effort is deemed successful? Dare County will
continue to mana eg the project site after the project completes the monitoring_peroid.
C. Describe proposed Financial Assurances: Dare County will be responsible for any financial
obligations associated with this proposed wetland enhancement area.
D. Will wetland functions be impacted by current or future land use patterns? YES / ~O
Describe: Andadjacent development will have stormwater controls to preclude any water from
entering this site.
E. Describe how this site rates ecologically: Due to the significant historic man-induced impacts
within the project area including the construction of borrow pits, mulching, and the removal of
vegetation this wetland area rates poorly ecolo ig cally. The proposed project will serve to improve
the wetland functions on the site.
NOTES:
**Highlight and address all problems and or inadequacies with the mitigation plan/site as
indicated by this checklist**

PROPOSED SCHEDULE OF WORK
DARE COUNTY JUSTICE CENTER -WETLAND ENHANCEMENT AREA
MANTEO, NORTH CAROLINA
submittals/meetin s/im lementation Ma June Jul Au ust Se tember October November November
Permit a lication submittal
USACE review
Permit ap lication revisions
Formal USACE review
Notification to NCDWQ and NCDCM _
A pl for Roanoke Vo a es Corridor Variance
Earthwork and radin
Plantin
* Monitoring is not specifically mentioned in the schedule but will be required.

-- .....
__, __
_. _ .. _:
. _.
~~ ~ c;a i .a - ,
- r" - -
--
~:

~ta~, 1 a, ~C?C6
H~c~i~ ~r~c'~y
,~Cu~cev ~n~ineers ~: Consulizrt~s
u747~ ~r,~on r~€~~~
~~%, l~?~ X7511
Vie: ~ermi~ ~~~Iie~w~U~r~'r~eess
dare ~~T:?n:~,~ .~ez~~ic~ ~en~.er ~rc~~eu~~, P'11ase ?
~~:~ A~~. ~?r.~~~~:
1~1c~e ~ce~~i t?~, t~n~r as ~~t~~~i~~.n E~~~x'~~~~e~r ~~n?in~e~rs ~ ~:c~ns~.t~r~.~~ tee ~~t ~n
~;~~~ ~~ ~~re C:er~?n~ ~~ tie =~F3=~~~~~~~ ~e,.~Tt ~~~~~FC~~o~~. ~r,~cess fc~r ~l~z ~.C~~G~e re~eren~.e:r
7 TE~~ e~.L.
~~ ~~o~ sl~~~itc1 ~u~~e ~~W a~c~es~F~~ts r~?r ri.~,~c~ ~v, ~~~~.iLion~k iivr~l-~n~tia•~, ~~e~se Lc-n~~e~ ~e ~`r.
;~F~~~r~~l~,
;~~` ~ ~ ..
-~ `J
g~~~ ~ /
~~e~~en ~. ~~'iri~~er, ~E
~ouz~y I::n~eer

s~.; ~ .
..: T. uyti 7,j~~~:
-
..
` - (•'Ji,
tiardv ~~°
!: ~ •
;~
.. ~ ,. .,.. .r ESr: '~
iia~ n CrE~k
. t`!1• _.
. -
.
~. _
i'alifora~ia ~ ,. .
- --
,. ~
..,
. ,' '
1~,

-
_ .... ..
-
....
.. ,. ~
. JJ
._
~ __ -
• _iC .
t c!1 ~ ._.~ _. ~
~,, ... .... _ ..

- ..

~
...... _. .'.ILL' 6 ... _
_' ... "
" _
. ~v
_. ,` __..
.. _
_ . '. _•

....
_ .. 1 ... - .

_

_ -:-

,.,_
.,...

, _. __.

- ~ ..

~.
._ _.. -~ . f. ~ _ .,..
_. ,~ = _ ~o~a~eci ,area ~ -
- - - -
-
..
_ _
«~ s _
_
_ _
-•
-,
~, .. ~..
..
_

_
.
_
, __
- r_ _ _

..
- _ .
-_
_..

_ ~ - _ --

_, v.

- _
-
.- _ _-

_ ,

_;

_
.. - _. -

~. ~ -
-
w.. _
-
~. _ -
-
- ..
.
__ ,. ~
_ _
_ -
a.,
_
~.:
_ -.

_ .
~

.:
,; ._.

- _
~

_..

__
-
- ~ -
-
~:
-

_
_
G" - ~In. .,,
.' .-~
,shbrx 4'ar~r•bar' ~1<:5'co ~ - =t _
".
.
y
.
_
~:
-

~ _
_

._.

_

- ~, . -,

- „

~.
_
_ _ .- ,.
.
_....
._ ,
_
. _ .. < ,. ~---~- r
._ _._.
- - -

_

_"
.,,

;.
`

_ _.. _ _
_ ,
_
,.
".
_.
-
~ Y
~. -
.. -
... I _

_
- 1 : ,
~.::.

..
,
.. ~
.'.
-.- ~

~ ~ _

,Vesp _ ,.
_

~~

L .-~_ -.
._ ..
.._ .,
_ " ~

;_. ~~':
I
- ,-.;r:, (t~i ~ - :1 S _, C ~ ~fJ ° ~J ! T.=,. fit
_
- a,,
~~ ~n~
~.
~tir

T~arP (,.rn,~,iv_ Noit1~ Catoltna
1Tj`n~~ff~ 1N®.

PROP PIN uvuiv~ni , ,,,..,...,_..__..---
HESTER,
1 978912766044 OSBOURNE R 914 HWY fi4/264
RESTER,
2 970911752762 OSBOURNE R 6 HWY 64/264
3 978911750441 DARE COUNTY 0 HWY fi4/264
q 978915744491 NC STATE 0 HWY 64/264
MANTEO
5 978912858565 PARTNERS, LLC 1115 HWY 64/264
107 RUSSELL
6 978912856692 GOLDIE LLC TWIFORD RD

100 QUEEN
7 978912855774 ELIZABETH, LLC 1013 HWY 641264

MURRAY,
8 978912855833 CHARLES F JR 1011 HWY fi4/264
MURRAY,
9 978912853858 C FRED; HWY 64/264
ARTCO
10 978912853913 INVESTMENTS 1081 HWY 64/264

BERRY,
11 978912861175 WHEELER C 935 HWY 64/264

3
~rrririr_isras ,,, car.isi.ir-Tnr.irs
~ ~ r~
2
~~
!i
II
Dare County Property
and site of existing
_ _..
,. ._
~_
. .,
,.
..
,~
Justice Center [3uilding ~ _ - ~~
_ 1,
_ ._.. , ,
_ __ ,: ,
_. :. - r .
- _._
_ r_r ~,
__ _
.,
P6~®J~CT ~V~f~4~1~@N~9
Dare County Justice Center
t Adjoining Property Owners
Dare County, North Carolina
~egure t~9®e

Data provided by: Dare County Panning Department

Wind and Climate Data for Jan. 21 through Jan. 24 (date of ground survey)
highest wind highest wind highest gust highest gust average wind precip. average
Date speed (mph) direction speed (mph) direction speed (mph) (in) temp. (F)
Jan. 21 23 S 28 S 8.1 0.76 54
Jan. 22 23 S 28 SW 8.8 0 42
Jan. 23 13 NW 17 NW 5.9 0 42
Jan. 24 10 NW 13 NW 4.3 0 41
Water surface elevations were surveyed b~Mulkey on January 24, 2007.
In Pond #1 at 1:05 PM (reported lunar high tide) the water surface elevation was found to be at 1.04 ft above MSL
In Pond #1 at 2:10 PM the water surface elevation was found to be at 1.13 ft above MSL.
At 3:10 PM the water surface in the drainage ditch on the oppposite side of US64 was found to be at 1.01 ft above MSL.
Wind and Climate Data for March 5 through March 8 (date of ground survey)
highest wind highest wind highest gust highest gust average wind precip. average
Date speed (mph) direction speed (mph) direction speed (mph) (in) temp. (F)
5-Mar 23 SW 30 SW 15 0 43
6-Mar 22 NE 30 N 11.8 0 50
7-Mar 24 SW 32 SW 12.6 0 41
8-Mar 20 NE 29 N 11.6 0 46
Water surface elevations were surveyed by Seaboard Survey & Planning on March 8, 2007.
In Pond #1 between 1:00 and 3:00 PM the water surface elevation was found to be at 0.57 ft above MSL.
The reported lunar high tide was for 11:35 AM.

Wind and Climate Data for April 15 through April 19
highest wind highest wind highest gust highest gust average wind precip. average
Date speed (mph) direction speed (mph) direction speed (mph) (in) temp. (F)
15-Apr 39 S 58 SW 27.1 1.26 63
16-Apr 30 NW 47 W 18.9 0.04 53
17-Apr 23 NW 38 NW 12.3 0 57
18-Apr 16 NE 26 NE 9.2 0 51
19-Apr 16 NE 25 N 9.8 0 51
Photos (attached) of the site were taken on April 17 through April 19, 2007
These photos depict a significant amount of surface water through many areas of the project area;
however, Pond #1 did not reportedly overtop into the rest of the wetland area.
These surface waters came directly from the 1.3 inches of precipitation on April 14 and April 15.
The reported lunar high tides were: 4/17 = 9:39am 4/18 = 10:28am 4/19 ~ 11:18am

NCDA&CS Agronomic Division Phone: [phone] Web Site: wwFV.ncagr.couz/agrouomi/ Report No: 37104
Grower: Barrett, Thomas Copies To :
• 2611 Wells Ave
~`~
t ~
il T
t Re
rb Raleigh , NC 27608
o
es
o
Faun: DARE I
5/21/2007 SERVING N.C. RESIDENTS FOR OVER 60 YEARS Dare County
Agronomist Comments I -- 11, $
Field Information Applied Linze Recommendations
Sample No. Last Crop Mo Yr T/A Crop or Year Littze A` Pa0s Kz0 Mg S Cu Ztz B Mn See Note
DARAI 1st Crop: Hardwood,E L1T 0.0 70-90 50-70 0 0 $ 0 11
2nd Crop: Hardwood,M 0 80-120 70-90 20-40 0 0 $ 0 I1
Test Results
Soil Class HM% WlV CEC BS% Ac pH P-I K-I Ca% Mg% Mn-I Mtt-AI(1) Mn-AI(Z) Zn-I Zn-AI Cu-I S-I SS-I N03-N NH4-N Na
M[N 3.01 1.08 6.1 48.0 3.2 4.9 0 25 30.0 15.0 22 27 27 15 58 0.2
Field Information Applied Lime Recommendations
Sample No. Last Crop Mo Yr TlA Crop or Year Linze A' PzOs Kz0 Mg S Cu Zn B Mn See Note
DARA2 1st Crop: Hardwood,E .7T 0.0 70-90 50-70 0 0 $ $ 11
2nd Crop: Hardwood,M 0 80-120 70-90 ZO-40 0 0 $ $ I1
Test Results
Soil Class HM% 1V/V CEC BS% ~ Ac pH P-I K-I Ca% Mg% ~Yitz-I Mn-AI(1) Mn-AI(2) Zn-I Zn-AI Cn-I S-I SS-I N03-N NH4-N Na
MIN 3.19
1.08 4.2 33.0 2.8 5.1 0 24
19.0 11.0
7
5
5
13
76
0.2
Field Information Applied Lime Recommendations
Sample Na. Last Crop Mo Yr 2'lA Crop or Year Litne N PzOs ICzO Mg S Cn Zn B Mn See Note
DARB1 lsl Crop: Hardwood,E 0 0.0 20-40 30-50 0 0 0 0 11
2nd G•op: Hardwood,M 0 80-120 20-40 0-20 0 0 0 0 11
Test Results
Soil Class HM% iVIV CEC BS% Ac pH P-I ICI Ca% Mg% Mtz-I Mn-AI(I) Mn-AI(2) Zn-I Zn-AI Cn-I S-I SS-I N03-N NH4-N Na
MIN 1.94 0.75 16.9 91.0 1.5 6.0 23 40 67.0 23.0 58 187 187 52 ~~ Z.0
Field Information Applied Lime Recommendations
Sample No. Last Crop Mo ` Yr T/A Crop or Year Littze N PzOs Kz0 Mg 5 Cu Zzz B M~z See Note
DARB2 1st Crop: Hardwood,E 0 0.0 20-40 20-40 0 0 0 0 11
2nd Crop: Hardwood,M 0 80-120 ZO-40 0 0 0 0 0 11
Test Results
Soil Class HM% IV/V CEC BS% Ac pH P-I K-I Ca% Mg% Mn-I Mn-Al(l) Mn-AI(2) Zn-I Zn-AI Crz-I S-I SS-I N03-N A'H4-N Na
M-0 5.23 0.94 13.3 83.0 2.3 5.7 25 52 56.0 25.0 26 81 101 32 112 Z.0

UL1N.U1.L'JU'/ 1'l:L4LbY4'139Lb'1 SAllLYk YN'1'Y1LYNIS~; 1NC #Ub3'/ Y.UUY
Sadler Landscaping a,nd Tractor Service
PO Box 1923
NFanteo, NC 279.54
June 1, 2UU7
Mulkey'L'ngineers and Consultants
PU Bc~x 33127
Raleigh, NC: 27h3C-3127
Dear 1~2r. Hari>ld Brody,
The following is the iillisnnation you have rcquzsled;
'fC)P SEC'1'!UN
I)ara 1 A - l )era. 2A
No Gypsum
2 lens lime/acre
ZUU-25U lbs. U-46-0
Al! disked in at pre-pla~rting stage
Nitrogcli and potash to be applied at piyst-pleat
F3nTTUly! SF,CTTON
Darn 1.B - Dara 2R
1 ton CTypsum/acrc
No lime
SU-1 UU 1bs. U-4fi-U
A.1! disked in atpre-planting stage
Nitrogen and potash to be a.ppliod ai post=plant
A -first samples top of sheet
B _ Second samples bottom of shoes
llny land cover by sionn water should have gypsum applied as soon as the water recedes
Sincerely,
'Pony Sadler
1'residcnt
Sadler Landscaping and 'Tractor Service

Dare County Justice Center Wetland Ei~llancement Project
Page 1 of 5
1. April 17, 1:OOPM: Outfall pipe levels. This is approximately 1.5 to 2 days after a
major rainstonil/noreaster. Note the lack of surface flooding within the wetland
ei~l~ancement area beyond Pond #1 to the west.
2. April 17, 1:00pm: Looking west across the project site.

I?are County Justice Center Wetland Ei~llancement Project

Page2of5
3. April 17, 1:OOpm: Looking east across the project site. Note the surrace tlooamg
from the recent precipitation.
4. April 18, 10:00am: Outfall pipe levels. Note the slight drop in water level trom the
day before.

Dare Colu~ty Justice Center Wetland Ei~llancement Project
Page 3 of 5
5. April 1~, 10:00am: Looping west across the project site.
6. April 18, 10:00am: Looking south across the project site.

Dare County Justice Center Wetland Ei~llancement Project
Page 4 of 5
7. April 19, 11:OOam: ®utfall water level. Note the continued drop in water level to a
more nornlal condition.
8. April 19, 11:OOam: Looking west across the project site.

Dare County Justice Center Wetland Ei~liancement Project
Page 5 of 5 .
7. April 19, 11:OOam: Looking south across the project site.
8. May 8, 2:OOpm: Outfall pipe from Pond # 1 during normal conUiuuii5.

.~~~.
e~,b.w~r~.rrr.rrrrr
~~~~
~I~rt~i G~rt~iiri~ D~p~rr~~nt of Erivirc~rrrrt~nt ~r~d ~l~tt~raf i~es~urC~s
a~rislt~n ~f ~c~a~taE Mar~ag~m~r~t
t,ficl~a~l F, E~s~ey, Ga~~e~tcr~r Charles ~, Janes, Dir~ct~ar V~iliia~ G, RassJr., Seeretar~
July 3~., 200~i
I~r . i=iarold ~~i. Brady
L~rOj ~Gt ~GlE2Zt1St, IYiulkey, 3nc ,
P . C3 . $'n3C 3. ~ 12 7
Faleigh, 1vC 2`753
RE: Bare County Justice Center, Dare County, ~C
dear I~r . Brady i
This letter is in response to your corresponderace dated ~Tu1y 21f
24]D6 re~ardinc~ furthex dev~lagarnent at the neT~~ Dare Covnty
Cnurthnu~e, which. was arigixxally autht~rizcd by C_i >~lajnr hermit.
#~1-OZ. The permit was issued on ~pri1 5, 2001 and expired on
~ecei~ther 31, 20fl~. ~ have rep+3e~~aTed the draining nt tl~e proposed
project ~~06C~3.~4, ;~hic~i was iz~c],uded with your correspondence,
and. deter tined that the ~.c~na-x~a.strative Funding site is not
7.r~cated wit~-iin a j~risdictiors.al area. T?~erefore, r~4 C~~~~ permit
~ail~. ~e required fnr autht~ri~atibn of r_his project,-
I~ yc~u have any gtzestia.ns, g1ea.~e contact me at 2~2-2t~4-390, in
the B1iza?i~eth,. City Field. Cf~ice,
Sincerely,
FAJ' /y-~G
_ ~ ~ '`
g's, z~~
Coastal Z~Ia.r~agerrt~ent Represent,a,ta.ve
>~ rank ~. J' rgzZir
13~i [J:S, 7l South; ~13zabeth: City, f~ar~ C~raldrta 27909
Ptt4ne; ~~2-2~-399`11FAK; 25~~2&4-3723 fra~rnet '~naw.r~c~aastaCmaryagement.n~t
An E~~ae1 G~pt,ortur~it~ iAffrmatfve,~~I~xr Ernpirryee - 30% Re~yded by ~itt~r'ati~~ig~ht
t~:, ~I .} I. .M,Y~a - .I ~x ,~''+~~ -~+ ~-~ ~~ ~.~,I,q~,~ I: '~},: +Irsr r~>I, M~~~ eK~•w r r - _ -
I~hn~.' .. I~I .:, . ~N ggI. ~ ~ .~ { :4... '~ _ `°.. I~,~,,t~-=lal I~IIF }-~-_ .:: ... ~ , a '~~q'~~u:,~huV ~:1> '+~~ : r I(~, "~. • J~ ~'~~ ~ a y~
f Iw: :~I." ~~h §~~+~~ HI ~ ~r,~;'S I aa~.lr ,s' a ::I~ i ',hhl~li 4~ 6 ,~ ~,~,,, :yl.~ h 1t k rail ~ ~~~ Q y~,~ '9 ~I r '~w~ r~~'J7'~~I'ry{ y~fi
.r.:~"1,u.~_,u~---..u~.~V~..~rt~~~h.:~.~i.a Imo"-~.iti~,,.~,....~.._.....a ~ .+~ ut~ar,,....~.,~o,l~~~',u~GLi9~:: I~', r ~r 5 ~ I'~ ~ ; ~~ ~ 'ti.. T~" 0 ~ II' y ~c h ~~ -'~, p `
"..~:...i,w~a~6:.l.-. S~ '...,mvu~emwug u,C`.C . i~ ~,.~.:L.a:~.~ ~.'.:`tt J"k, ~a~ ~:4n ~ ,7~~. X44. _ ''-~1 s~E~a:~~'..1)t~i:::.~u~..~t.WY~~1ynd ~,~~~7

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMIl~TGTON DISTRICT -
Aciion Id. 260511092 County: Dare U.S.G.S. Quad: Manteo
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETFRlYI7NATION
~_
Property Owner/Agent County of Dare
Address: Atta: Dave CIawsen
Post Office $oz IODD
Manteo, North Carolina 27954
Telephone 1`TO.:
Property description:
Size (acres) 5.14 Nearest Town Manteo
Nearest Waterway Craata.n Sound River Basin Pasauotank
USGS HIJC 03010205 Coordinates N 35.890038 W -75.662742
Location description A 5.14 acre irroiect area (Rarcels 0611 1466 44021 with wetlands (1 54 acresl connected to a
broad continnnm which flows to the Croatan Sound, located on northwest side of the NC 345 and US 64/264
intersection, in Manteo ,Dare County, North Carolina. (PIN #'s 9789-12-85-0611 9789-12-85 1466 9789 12 85 44021
Indicate Which. of the FoIlowiu~ Apt~Iy:
_ Based on preliminary information, there maybe wetlands on the above descnlied praperiy. We strongly suggest you have
this property inspected to determine the extent of Department of the Army (DA) jurisdiction. To be considered final, a
jurisdictional determination must be verified by the Corps. This preliminary determination is not an appealable action
vader the Regulatary Program Admini~irat'rve Appeal Process (Reference 33 CFR Part 331).
_ There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described prapery subject to the permit requirements of
Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act Unless there is a change in the law or
our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this
notifcation_
There are wetlands on the above described project area subject to the permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean
Water Act (CWA)(33 LTSC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this determination
may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
_ We strongly suggest you have the wetlands on your property delineated. Due to the size of your property and/or our
present workload, the Corps may not be able to accomplish this wetland delineation in a timely manner. For a more timely
delineation, you may wish to obtain a consultant. To be considered final, any defeazion must be verified by the Corps.
_ The wetland on your property have been defeated and the delineation has been verified by the Corps. We strongly
suggest you have this delineation surveyed. Upon completion, this survey should be reviewed and verified by the Corps.
Once verified, this survey will provide an accurate depiction of aIl areas subject to CWA jurisdiction on your property
which, provided there is.no change in the law or our published regulations, may be relied upon for a period not to exceed
five years.
X The wetlands have been defeated and surveyed and are accurately depicted on the plat signed by the Corps
Regulatory Official identified below on 6/28/ZDDS. Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this
detern,;nation may be relied upon far a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
_ There are no waters of the U.S., to include wetlands, present an the above described property which are subject ~to the
pe~.it requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our
published regulations, this determination maybe relied upon far a period not to exceed five years from the date of this
notification.
X The property is located in one of the 20 Coastal Counties subject to regulation under the Coastal Area Management Act
(CAMA). You should contact the Division of Coastal Management in Elizabeth City, NC, at [phone] to determine
their requirements.
Page 1 of 2

~tion
~.ged of fill material within wa#ers of the US and/or wet?an ds w;fbout a Department of the Army permit may
~latzon of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC § 1311). If you have any questions regarding this
and/or the Corps regulatory progr~~m, please contact WOliam Wescott at 52521975-1616 eat 25..
~ar Determizration: This site e~bits wetland criteria as described in the 1987 Goss Wetland Delineat;on 1'danual
id is art of a broad continunm of wetlands connected Croatan 5annd.
emm-ks: Description of protect area is three adiacent parcels as depicted in the informainon submitted bQ Quible &
ssociates. P.C. on 05/272005. _
o s Re ry Official: L` "~`~ `~ ~. ~`J , S ,
rp gulaxo
gate 06/28/2005
:opy Furnished: '
Arian Rubino, Qvible & Associates, P.C.
Expiration Date 06/2$/2010
?age 2 of 2

JURISDICTIONAL DETERl`~TaTION Revised 8/13/04
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
DISTRICT OFFICE: GESAW-RG-W
IZLE NUN~3ER: 200511092
PROJECT LOCATION ~~OR2~,ATION:
State: North Carolina '
Counip: Bare
Center coordinates of site (latitude/longitude): N 35.89DD38/ W-75.662742
Approximate size of area (parcel) reviewed, including up}ands: S.I4 acres.
Name of nearest waterway: Croatan Sound
Name of watershed: Pasquotank River Basin
JURI;SDICTIONAII DETERl!'IINATION
Completed: DesL~top determination ~ Date:
Site visit(s) Date(s): OS/DS/20D5
Jurisdictional Determinafion (JD):
PrelJl-ninary JD -Based on available information, ^ there appear to Tie (or) ^ there appear to be no "wafers of the United States"
and/or "navigable waters of the United States" on the project site: A preliminary JD is not appealable (Reference 33 CFR part
331).
Approved JD -An approved JD is an appealable action (Reference 33 CFR part 331).
Check all that apply. .
There are "navigable waters of the United'Stafes" (as defined, by 33 CFR part 329 and associated guidance) within the reviewed
area. Approximate size of jurisdictional area:
There are `waters of the Un;-ted States" (as defined by 33 CFR part 328 and associated guidance) wifirin the reviewed area_
Approximate size of jurisdictional area: 1.54 acres. '
~' There are "isolated non-navigable, infra-state wafers or wetlands" within the reviewed area_
Decision supported by SWANCCMGgratary Bud Rule lnforma]ion Sheet far Determinatjan of No Jurisdictian_
B_ABIS OR JURTSDICTIONAL DETER1Fi~tATION:
A. Waters defined under 33 C.~'R part 329 as "navigable waters of the United States":
The preserice•af waters that are subje~ w the ebb and flow of the tide andlar are presently used, or have been used in
the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce. •
S. Waters defined ender 33 CPR part 3283(a) as "waters of the United States";
(1) 'Ihe presence of waters, which are cusen$y used, or were used in the past, or may be susceptr~ble to use in
interstate or foreign commerce, including aIl waters which are sublject to the ebb and flow of the tide.. '
(2) The presence of interstate waters including interstate wetlands . ~ '
~~' (3) 'Ihe presence of other waters such as intrastate lakes, rivers, streams (including intermitted streams), mudflats, sandflats,
wetlands, sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, or natural ponds, the use, degradation or destruction of which could
affect interstate commerce including any such wafers (check aIl that apply):.
^ (r~ which are or could be used by interstate or foreign havelers for recreational ar other purposes:
^ (ia~ from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
^ (iu) which are ar could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
_ (4} Impoundments of waters otherwise defined as waters of the US.
_ (5) The presence of a tributary to a water identified in (1) - (4) above. •
(6) The presence of territorial seas, '
(7) The presence of wetlands adjaceniy to other waters of the US, except for those wetlands adjacent to other wetlands.
Rationale for the Basis of Jurisdictional Determination (applies to any boxes checked above). If the jurisdictional water or
wetland is not itself a navigable water of the United States, describe connection(s) to the downstream navigable waters. IfB(I) or B(3}
is used as the Bans afJurisdiction, document navigability and/or interstate commerce connection (i.e_, discuss site conditions, including
why the waterbody is navigable and/or how the destruction of the waterbody could affect interstate or foreign commerce). IfB(1, 4, S or
~ is used as the Basis afJurisdiction, document the rationale used to make~the determination. IfB(7J is used as the Basis of
Jurisdiction, document the rationale used to make adjacency determination This site exhibits wetland criteria as descn~bed in the 1987
Corps Wetland Delineation Manual and is part of a broad continuum of wetlands connected to Croatan Sound.

I.ateral>/ztent of?urisdiction: (Reference: 33 CFRpa_*ts 328
Ordinary lgigh Water Mark indicated by.
^ clear, natural line impressed an the dank
^ the presence of litter and debris
^ changes in the character of soil
^ destrnctian of terrestrial vegetation
^ shelving
^ other.
and 32~
Sigh Tide Line indicated by:
^ or7 or scum lice along shore objects
^ fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore)
^ physical markingslrt,~r_±~;rt-~a
^ tidal gages
^ other.
Mean high Water Ma.-k indicated by. •
^ survey to available aatum; ^ physical markings; ^ vegetation Iines/changes m vegeaiion types
Wetland boundaries, as shown on the attached wetland delineation map and/or in a delineation report prepared by: Brian Rubino,
Quible & Associates, P.C. .
Basis For Not Asserting 3ursdiction: ~ -
The reviewed area consists entirely of uplands.
Unable to confirm the presence of waters in 33 CFR part. 328(a)(1, 2, or 4-'7).
_. Headquarters declined to approve jurisdiction on the basis of 33 CFR part 3283(a)(3).
The Corps has made acase-specific dPte'rm;n~r;on that the following waters present ou the site are not Wafers of the United Stases:
[] Waste treatment systems, including treatment ponds ar lagoons, pursuant to 33 CFR part 328.3.
^ Artif~cially.irrigated areas, which w~nld revert to upland if the imgation ceesed_
^ Artificial lakes and ponds created by excavating and/or diking dry land to collect and
retain water and which are used exclusively for such proposes as stock watering, imgation, settling basins, orrice growing.
^ Artificial reflecting ar cwimm;ng pools or other small ornamental bodies of water created
by excavating and/or d~~n' .g dry land to retain wafea for primarily aesthetic reasons.
^ Water-filled depressions created in dry land incidental to construction activity and pits ~cavated in dry land far the purpose
of obtaining fill, sand, or gravel unless and until flee consirnction or excavation operation is abandoned and the resulting
body of water meets the definition of waters of the United States found x133 CFR 3283(a).
^ Lsolated, intrastate wetland with no nexus to interstate commerce.
^ Prior converted cropland, as determined by the Natrual Resources Conservation Service. Explain. rationale:
^ Nan-tidal drainage or irrigation ditches excavated an dry land_ Explain rationale:
^ Other (explain):
>A'pg g~~WED FOR JUILSIDICTIONAL DIST11RIt~IATZON (mark all that apply):
Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant
Data sheets p_*~cpared/submitted by ar• on behalf of the applica~
® This office concros with the delineation reP~ dated 05272005,'prepared by (company): Qruble & Associates
^ This office does not concur with the deIigeatian report, dated > Prepared by (comPanY)=
Data sheets prepared by the Carps
. Corps' navigable waters' studies:
U.S. Geological Survey Flydrologic AtLis: ~~ ' ~ ,
U.S. Geological Srovey 7S Minute Topographic maps: Manteo ___ _
_ _ U.S. Geological Survey ?.5 Mmufe Historic quadrangles: .
U_S. Geological Survey IS Minute l:~storic quadrangles:
USDA Nataz-aI Resources Conservation Service Sort S`cnvey. Dare Counfy sheet 6
National wetlands inventory maps:
Statc/I..ocal wetland inventory maps:
FEMA/F1RM maps (Map Name & Date):
100-year Fioodplain Elevation is: (NGVD)
Aerial Photographs (Name & Date):
Other photographs (Dart):
Advanced Identification'Wetland maps:
Site visitldeterminatian conducted on: OS/052005
Applicable/supporting case law:
Other information (please specify):
Wetlands are identified and delineated using the methods cad criteria established in the Carps Wetland Delineavon Manual ($7 Manual} (i.e., occurrence of
rydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils and wetland hydrology).. '
Ibe turn "adjacent" means bordering contiguous, or neighboring. Wetlands separated from other waters of the U.S. by man made dikes or homers, nafiual
ivcr berms, beach dunes, and the ]r7ce are also adjacent

... ,.
__ _ _ _ _ ~~ ~ J:
v a w u~.~ ~._~''.~i~. ~~ ~ r ...~J.L _ _ _ ~vw ~~C1Ti~V

- __. _. -
RE> _ ~ a` ~ _ -
._ a a.yt34 '~.- ~ -
~~~~ J
~ i
ev ' _ _
_ __ _
pp..~~~~~
,~ _~._ c~~y~a~e~. Snr_.__W. __ _ i
__ _ _ ~_m~."r~.:}~~a9'v~~f .iY
A l licant: County ofDare File Number: 200511082 Date: 06/28/2005
At tached is: See Section below
IlSTITAL PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of A .
~ermissian) ~ .
PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of ermission) ~ B
PERMIT DENIAL C .
APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMII~IATION ~ D
PRELIlvIIl~IARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERI~~Il~IATION E
. .
. ~ a 3
. ~
~, .. _ - -
.

:
_
i
_ -, ~ z ~
~ ~ ~
~: - '~~'
{{'' '
~{{~~ --s
,ice' y . ° r 2 y _'` ~ ~ - ~ Q~~~
.,.-.e ..~
I"~
...,
r.... ..o....,w~r..~~..~.~......,.. .~.,,.. dY-'. :
,~..~.
w
~
wq~'a-'
!r
*~+
~
~ ~
;
~
~
3
4'
^~
~
~
n
m"
~
~
°-'
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
..
.
.-...
._ ~
.. r..r.
.
.. .. ...
~
_r..a
a
._x
.. J~r
_
°
t. _.p-..
.Ms
~u~"
A: INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit
o ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized_ Your signature
on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive aIl rights to appeal the
permit, incluaing its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit.
OBJECT: If you object to the permit (Standard ar LOP) because of.ce~a;n terms and conditions therein
you
,
may request that the permit be modified accordingly. You must complete Section II of this form and return
the farm to the district engineer. Your objections must be received by the district engineer within. 60 days of
the' date of this notice; or you will forfeit your right to-appeal the permit in the future. Upon receipt of your
letter, the district engineer wi]1 evaluate year obj ectians and may: (a) moduy the permit to address all of your
concerns, (b) modify the permit to address same of your objections, or (c) not modify the permit having
determined that the permit should be issued as previously whiten. After evaluating your objections, the
district engineer will send you a proffered permit far your reconsideration, as indicated in Section B below.
B: PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or appeal the permit
a ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized_ Your signature
on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the
permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit.
a .APPEAL: If you choose to decline the proffered permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and
conditions therein, you may appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal
Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must
be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice. .
C: PERMIT DENIAL: You may appeal the denial of a permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative
Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form
must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.

,PPROVED 3IJRISDICTIONAL DETERMIl~TATION: You may accept or appeal the approved TD or
.de new information.
.CCEPT: You do not need to notify the Corps to accept ~ approved JD. Fa~u•e to notify the Corps withifi 60 days of the date of
us notice, means *~,-t yon accept the approved JD in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the approved JD.
;pPEAL: If you disa~ee ~~. the approved 7D, yon~may appeal the approved JD Bnder the Corps of Engineers Au~m;n; ctraive
peal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division eng'r~eer. This farm must be received by
ie division engineer within 60 days of the date of this nofice.
RELII~~TARY 7URISDICTIONAL DETERIvIINATi:ON: You do not need to respond to *J~.e Corps
'ding the prelirni_uary 7D. The i relTminarv JD is not appealable. If you wish, you may request an approved
Nhich may be appealed), by contacting the Corps district for further insfruction_ Also you may provide nevi
mation for further consideration by the Corps to reevaluate the TD.
~ONS~FOR APPEAL OR QB7ECTIONS: (Desei-ibe your reasons for appealing the decision or your •" ~ •' •
;lions to an initial proffered. permit in clear concise statements. You may atfiach additional. information to .
:orm to clarify where your seasons or objections are addressed in the m;nictrative record.)
)TTIONAI, INFORMATION: The appeal is limited to a review of the admil1istrative record, the Corps
~orandum far the record of the appeal conference or meeting, and any supplemental information that the
:w officer has determined i.s needed to clarify ~e arim;ni-~t?ve~ record: Neither the appellant nor the Corps
add new information or analyses to the record. However, you may provide additional information to clarify
oration of information that is already in the a.dm;n; ct,-ative record.
u have questions regarding this decision If you only have questions regarding the appeal process you
~r the appeal process you may contact: may also contact:
tam Wescott, USAGE Mr. Michael F. Bell, Arim~n;ctrative Appeal Review Off cer
Office Box 1000 CESAD-ET-CO-R .__
liiington, North Carolina 27889 U.S. Anny Corps of Engineers, South Atlantic Iivision
} 975-1616 ext 25. 60 Forsyth Street, Room 9M15
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
KT OF ENTRY: Your signature below grants the right of miry to Carps of Engineers personnel, anal any
:mment consultants, to~ conduct investigations of the project site during the course of the appeal process. You
be provided a I S day notice of any site investigation, and will have the opporhulity to participate in all site
>tigations.
Date: Telephone number:
aiure of appellant or agent.
®IVISI®rd E1~IGIlV~J~R:
Coanmarader
[J.S. Army Engineer ]Division, South Atlantic
60 Forsyth Street, Ro®m 91VI15
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-3490
~.

Table 1: Dare County Justice Center -
Wetland Enhancement Site -Recommended Plantings
Based on 1.20 acres of non-inundated wetland area @ 680 stems per acre.

Common Name
Scientific Name Region 2 Indicator
Status
Quantities

Bottomland Ba Forest 566 total
plants
loblolly pine Pinu.r taeda FAC 100
pond pine Pinu.r .rep otina FACW 50
sweet bay Magnolia virginiaJaa FACW 100
redbay Pe~fea palar.rtTZ.r FACW 100
red maple Acer rub~zam FAC 50
water oak Oue~cu.r nigra FAC- 50
fetter-bush Lyonia lucida FACW 42
laurel-leaved greenbrier Smilax lau~zfolia FACW+ 24
bitter gallberry Ilexglabra FACW 50
sweet gallberry (alternate) Ilex co~zacea FACW 50
sweet pepperbush (alternate) Cleth~a alnifolia FACW 50

Ephemeral Depressions 175 total
plants
coastal dog-hobble Leucothoe axillalz.r FACW 31
netted chainfern i~oodsvazdia aleolata OBL 24
cinnamon fern O.rmunda cinnamomea FACW+ 24
Sensitive fern Onoclea .ren.ribili.r FACW 24
Royal fern O.rmunda ~~gali.r OBL 24
jack-in-the-pulpit A~z.raema trzphyllum FACW- 24
lizards tail Sau~zarcr.t ce~~nuu.r FACW 24
false nettle (alternate) Boebme~za cylisadrica FACW+ 24

Freshwater Marsh (or along the edge) 75 total
plants
swamp rose Ko.ra palut~z.r OBL 25
buttonbush Cepl~alanthu.r occidentali.r OBL 25
rose mallow Hibi.rcu.r mo.rcheutu.r OBL 25
auow-arum ~ Peltand9a vi~ginica OBL seed/plugs
rush Juncu.r ~u.ru.r FACW seed/plugs
bulrush Sci9 us erinur OBL seed/ lu s

Freshwater Marsh (or along the edge)
Sedge Carex lu~~zda OBL seed/plugs
duck potato Sagitta~za .rpp. OBL seed/plugs
southern blue flag I~z.r vi~ginica OBL seed/plugs
tearthuinb Polybo~aum .ragittatum OBL seed/plugs
spikerush Eleocharz,r .rpp. OBL seed/plugs

Brackish Marsh (or along the edge)
salt meadow cordgrass Spa~~ina patens FACW seed/plugs
saltgrass Di.rtichli.r .rpicata FACW+ seed/plugs
sawgrass Cladium naa~z.rcu.rjamaicen.re OBL seed/plugs
spikerush Eleocha~z.r spp. OBL seed/plugs
black needlerush Juncu.r roeme~zanur OBL seed/plugs
rose mallow Hibiscus mo.rcheutu.r OBL 25

Pine Flatwood (non-wetland) 250 total

plants
longleaf pine Pi~aus palu.rt~z.r FAC- 50
wiregrass A~z.rtida .rtricta UPL 100
bracken fern Pte~zdium aquilinum UPL 100
Choose at least 6 wetland grass species for the wetland seed mix.
To ensure success of the wetland grass mix approximately 100 pounds
will need to be spread across the freshwater and brackish marsh areas.
Approximately one-half of the number of plants needed for dZe
freshwater marsh have been included as grass species.
Minimum one-gallon containerized plants used; 3-gallon recoirunended,
except for tree seedlings purchased from the North Carolina Division of
Forest Resources.
Woody vegetation in the freshwater marsh should be planted along the
edges of the freshwater marsh- area.
All plant species should be installed randomly within their respective
vegetative communities, this will avoid the same plants being planted
all together and a lack of diversity.

1'ahlc ? Pr~tected`~1>c~ icy Poteritiall~~ (~ccurri.i~ i~~ C> rr G~untt-; ?Vnrth (~u~lfia
Common Name Scientific I~Tame I~cderal Status State Status ' Suitab]e° "-
Habitat
A711f110J'!
American alligator Alligator mi.rri.r.ripprenri.r T(S/A) T Yes
Bald eagle Haliaeetur leucaceplialur T T No
Blaekrail L.atezallu.rjamaicezz.ci.r F$C 5R No
Black skimmer Ryncbopr niger - SC No
`Button Woods" white-footed mouse Peronyrcur lucopu.c bvxtoni FSC SR No
Cazolina water snake Nezrodia.ripedon wilk'ansengelri - SC No
Common tern Stenza hnz/rzdo - SC No
Glossy ibis Plegadi.r falcirzellur - SC Yes
Green sea turtle Chelolria nr~~dar T T No
Gull-billed tern Sterna rzilatica - T No
Hawksbill sea turtle Eretomochelyr imbricaia E $ No
Kemp's ridley sea turtle Lepidocbe~~.r kempii E E No
Least tern Sterna arztillarzrnr - SC No
Leatherback sea turtle Dernrochelyr colzacea E E No
Little blue heron Egretta caeraleo - SC Yes
Loggerhead sea turtle Caretto caretta T T No
Northern diamondback terrapin Malaclemyr terrapin ten~apin - SC No
Outer Banks kingsnake Lamprropeltitgetula.cticticep.r - SC No
Peregrine falcon Falco peregrirzu.r - E No
Piping plover Charadriur melodu.r T T No
Rafinesque's big-eared bat CoynorhinuJ (=Plecotur) rafzrzerquii FSC T No
Red-cockaded woodpecker Picozder borealis E E No
Red wolf Conit rufur EXP SR No
Roseate tern . Sterna dougalliz E E : No
Snowy egret Egr-etta thu/o - SC Yes
Star-nosed mole -Coastal Plain Pop. Condylur-o crirtata pop. 1 - SC Yes
Timber rattlesnake Crotalur honzdut - SC No
Tricolored heron Egretta tricolor - SC Yes
West Indian Manatee Trichechuc manatur E E No
7 .. ~crldr Plaits: ii..
Carolina grasswort Lilaeop.ria carolinen.ci.r - T Yes
"Dune blueaarls" Tlichostema sp. 1 FSC - No
Long beach seedbox Ludmigia brevipe.r FSC - No
Saltmazsh spikerush Eleocharit halophila - T No
Seabeach amaranth .4nraranthutpurr:ilut ~ T T No
Snowy orchid Platanthera rzivea - T No

Legend
Endangered (E) A tacon "in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range."
Threatened (1) A ta~on "likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a
significant portion of its range."
Federal Species of Concern (FSC) A species that may or may not be listed in the future (formerly C2 candidate species or species
Threatened due to similarity of appeazance A speaes that is threatened due to similarity of appeazance with other raze species and is liste
[T(S/A)] for its protection. These species aze not biologically endangered or threatened and aze not subjec
E~.perimental (E~.'P) A taxon that is listed as experimental (either essential or nonessential). Experimental nonessential
endangered species (e.g. red wolf) are treated as threatened on public land, for consultation
purposes, and as species proposed for listing on pavate land.
Special Concem (SC) animal "Any species of wild animal native or once-native to North Carolina which is determined by the
NC Wildlife Resources Commission to require monitoring but which may be taken under
regulations adopted under the provisions of this Article." (Article S of Chapter l l3 of the
General Statutes; 198
Special Concem (SC) plant "Any species of plant in North Cazolina which requires monitoring but which may be collected
and sold under regulations adopted under the provisions of [the Plant Protection and
Conserc*ation Act]" (GS 19B 106:302.12).
Significantly Rare (SR) Species which aze very raze in North Cazolina, generally with 1-100 populations in the state,
generally substantially reduced in numbers by habitat destruction.

4A
yz ~ ~i' '_ Z C @ a v L
~~~ ~ ~~~~~ ~ ~ N ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Z
= B
~~~ ~ a
~ ~
~ O r
m
~ o
~ ?
/ } ~ 7S
~ ~
Q ~
Q
Z
J 0
W m 1
~ ~
Z N
~ w ,~^
V
Q ~ ~'
z ~1. ~~1. N ~~
O 1 q'`
`~'jj~`V'S ~":
U ~` ` y `Q~ir¢ J
1 ~~
i~ ,,~
~ ~ ~ ~ U
~ ~ -=~ q~y~yr i o Cn
~ __ `•T~S
1 . -' ~
\ Y'. / i~ i ~''N I' i ~ ~ 41. I'i.~t~
i ~ ~ 1 11 i ~ .,~ furA
I 1 % 1 :1~~J~Tk
---------------- ~ ~ 11 ~ -~' ~k~y
~ ------ ___ ~ 1
~'' ___ ~__ _~ `~Y`i ' 1 I `__~'' / L
~'- -_--"_ ```„^ •Ch-'' - - ___--- J III 1 .k ` ~ f%~ ~~/'
,~ wry -----d,',,;,,~'',
\`~\~`- '~,,- _ `//~ `,~' `111 ES -,, _ mLL /~/ M~
_ '---- - ~ ' I ~~ _ ~ N/'
_ -- - - /' \~\` ~`1`` i' / 'fir ~ Nx Q
_- M ------ --cn_;_____ ___ _ ~ im m ~ `~ O
M M 4w x N =zi i H
.,
~(r X W~ 1 i w
,.
.~
.<.'
+ 04 OI
~ .,., ,, .~. 1 i ~
,. ~~.
M _. ~., r O Z , .. ~ ~ D
,, z
~'--I"' ~ ~, O W i ~~ I I I N W
.__--- i~~.-'~ ~
11 '1i 1 ~
'l ~ --- -
`~ 111'1 ~ ~ ~_---- -------------- ------------ ----- ~.
--=r4-- 11ii i - __------ __
1.1 ~~ ----" --' 11
'111 .± I`, - _ "~ ',
I~ e O II '
t ~~ { 1 ~
-- ~j 111 A ~ d ~'? ' i ~ ' ' `I 111
1. _~ i1 Z ~ 1 1 i
_ _ 1~ I• '
/ ~ _ ''-1~ ! 1~ ~: 1 1 `1111
,~ `~u7_ i w i ~ i 1 /, ~
~~\/ t y 11 i d' 1 i
- 1
to ~ 11 -
1 1
1 1 -
. i ~ ~,
+, ~ 11 --'- i 1 1
QI ~ --- ------- -- - ~ Y
__ t
'r ~ ~ [ t
1 I ___s 1 _- ti '•y ~ ~ '•1i 1j 1111 ... _ fFP.
~-----~-__~---- -111 CO ~ 111' 1 _ 7~~
1 --- ~------- Q W O_ 1111111 11 '-- ~'/ [
------~---i - - ~ Q 1111 11 ~/f
~ 1 t
j. ~~a 1111 11 ---- - C$~
1111 1 iEf
~' z F-~, 1 j 11 N ~ ~ {
I ~ ~ t~ 1111 _
1 m v 4 111 ----- ~B~
~sk
1. ~ m 111111 ~ FE
1 111 E~$
1 ,
1 •- '11111
~~$
j ~ rC 11111 FpE
.~ ~ c~ m 11 .'~ z $ij
' ~ Z ` 1111 C yS
~ ' Q 11 C EES
~ 1,1, ~ ~- f ~ €
z~ = k
~ m ~ 1111 =^ j~i
~'~ z z i,,
m 1 w~ {$$
•11 O
1111 Z m ~fk
x • 1'1j ~ ~ ,• ~ ;F6
--"- ~ 0 11 ~ ,~'
\ ~ ~ 0 1 r / ~
1 . r
1 ~

~_ ~ ~
~~ z6 ~~SA9~9~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~~ ~ :a~ ~~g~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ O
} o }
~ ~~~= f~~e~
~ ~ =f-

~
~
~ ~

5 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I~~
~
~ ~ ~
8 ~ r 1
n U W
(n ~

1
~
~ ~
~

~ ~
o ~
,n
~
~ ~
I

o
~a
I
I
I
I
~
I
~ °
i ~
i °o

~
i ~
~
' /

1
1
I
I
I o
M
M
I
1
r
I
I ~
~
I
I

r
~
` ~
o
~°~
I
I
0
o

~ I
o
~

\ w
w ~
N ~ ~ ~

~
1 ~~ N

~ 1

O ~
/ N ~
r
O
O
/
~~// r
~ ~
W

i ~ i
i

~
~ ~ r
I ~
~ E

(
I 1
~
I 1
I l
r
I i
f
I
O r
I
I O
o I
~
E
I r
I
E ~
j~

I ~
Z~ jtt!77
S
~f

I
~Z
I j
E{
I
I
I Xp
wU I
O I
~ I F
~ + tF
i~
I t ~ +'
1
/ /
1
~
~i
r~ i ° ts
r ~ ;
i
r i
S i
F
[D ~ V C~7 N ~-- O i i i i ~ i i i ~ O (D In ~F M N r O ~ ~ F ~
i I
- L~ W W I- - Ll_ W W I- ~ fF
~ Ff

cs~
~- ,<
~~' ~ ~~~~~~ ~ ~_. ~ € # II III II I II III
p~~~ o ~i ~ ~ ~ , gW w ~ i
x~ ~ r ~ m
it r~~•~~ ~ ~ ~~~~~ ~ F ~ ~ ~~A:z a a a W LLJ [e
3 W
w~~ m $i~ ~~§s~~~ p ~ ~ ~j ,d ~ ~i oipp~ O ~ ~ d W ~ E
~~ _ ~~m ~~3~a~ '& ~ ~ ~ 8 0 ~ ~ -i' 3 ~ € ~ ~ nom. > ~U 5
~ ~
m
Q ~ $
~~~~-~~ ~
~.
w
~ ~
0
. 1.~.~71.rrAy_ in r
~, Ra • W
~91. ~ ~ ~t J
~gg~$~ k! , ~ aft (~~
'~f'~'' -- ~I '4'i'y v,
- _ - I. f~ A
` ~ I ' 1 , ~1 rTl.
1\ ~~ N I/ 1'- 1 4
, i 1 1 ,' I I ii~~~
I i , , , I VM~'I`.~y~A
' ~ 1' \ 11 1 1 'i yI~M1M1C
/'' ____- I I 1 ' --' I ~~~
~ (n /
'----' ''i _ --'" 1 \ Vie(
i-' ~ N '_"__ ___-
N
M ~ ~ X ~
- / , 111 1 f-
11 // \\
11 / \
/ \
111 IIi / ------- \
~~ -L------- \
~ ~
\\ N L Q i '' i / d
,_ ~ ~i / w w ~ i / o
~- '--- / ' ~ D ~ 3
I \ /_-- i~
\ d
\ I \ \ r ----- ------~ `~~ O f
1 0 _- ,I
_ ~ ~~~
1 - --- -_~ / z ~ ~ 1111'' 111 / e
-----'"_ ~~ / _•_ - ~ ~ m 111' '1 ----- S' ~o ~~5
// / ~ '1111 1 6~d ~~~
it / z~ ;11N ~ ;fit
i // /~ ~ ~ 1111 ~----- O H ~ )r} k({
I / / ~ '111 Z (n . ~ 44•
/ ~ ';'1,111 g ~ M g {~'
/ / ~ a ~,
/ i / I-- '111; z o~ w e
/ i / ~ i1'1 f=~ -~ ~~ 3~p
// ! // Z 1111 w`L ~ om ~' F`€
/ ,' / ~ Z 111 QO fs ftF3
/.~.~•~ / Q Q 111 ~ ~a ~ FF2
J Z J i~
/ L1J ~ 11 r- w !
/ Z C.L] 1 i1 d ~ ~ ~ €
' /'- ~°~
/ 1 t
/ '1 1 ~ ~
/ 11 jt
/ i ~ ~€i
// ~ O 1%j f- -• ~fF
0 11
---- o co 11 ~ ~ ,-
1 ,