20211767 Ver 1_SAW-2021-01727 PCN Submittal_20211206

Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.4 January 2009
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A. Applicant Information SAW- 2 0 21- 017 2 7
1. Processing
1a. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps: ❑X Section 404 Permit ❑ Section 10 Permit
1 b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 29 or General Permit (GP) number:
1 c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps? ❑ Yes ❑X No
1 d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
❑X 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular ❑ Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification — Express ❑ Riparian Buffer Authorization
le. Is this notification solely for the record For the record only for DWQ For the record only for Corps Permit:
because written approval is not required? 401 Certification:
❑ Yes ❑X No ❑ Yes ❑X No
1f. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for
mitigation of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank
or in -lieu fee program.
1 g. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below.
1h. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑X Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑X No
❑ Yes 0 No
2. Project Information
2a. Name of project:
Sagewood
Wake
2b. County:
2c. Nearest municipality / town:
Cary
2d. Subdivision name:
2e. NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state project no:
3. Owner Information
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
Mills Road, LLC
3b. Deed Book and Page No.
3c. Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
Willard Mills
3d. Street address:
3529 Beaver Dam Rd
3e. City, state, zip:
Cary, NC 27519
3f. Telephone no.:
3g. Fax no.:
3h. Email address:
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1 4 January 2009

4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is: ❑ Agent ❑X Other, specify: Developer
4b. Name: Andrew Sandman
4c. Business name Dos Bros, LLC
(if applicable):
4d. Street address:
7101 Creedmoor Rd., Ste 122
Raleigh, NC 27613
919-845-6688
4e. City, state, zip:
4f. Telephone no.:
4g. Fax no.:
4h. Email address: [e-mail]
5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name:
Jeff Harbour
5b. Business name
(if applicable):
Terracon
5c. Street address:
2401 Brentwood Rd, Ste 107
5d. City, state, zip:
Raleigh, NC 27604
5e. Telephone no.:
919-805-4208
5f. Fax no.:
5g. Email address:
[e-mail]
Page 2 of 10

B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
0724-61-9147(partial) & 0724-70-6260
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
Latitude: 35.7856 Longitude:-78.9075
1 c. Property size:
38 acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water to proposed project:
White Oak Creek
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
WS-IV; NSW
2c. River basin:
Cape Fear
3. Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
Property consists of wooded land and an existing home that will be demolished. An upland pond is also on the property and will be removed.
Surrounding land use is primarily residential and wooded land
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property: 0.3 acre
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property: 1,800
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
Purpose is to develop 63 single family lots for homes and construct the necessary road infrastructure to serve the development.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
Apprgximately 0..31 acre of headyvater forest wetlands are proposed for impact to develop the site. Impacts will result from roads and some lot fill.
Typical equipment will be used such as dump trucks, grades, excavators, etc.
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the X❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
Comments: JD submittal with this PCN
ro'ect (includingall prior hoses in the past?
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
El Preliminary El Final
of determination was made?
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas? Agency/Consultant Company: Terracon
Name (if known): Jeff Harbour Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
Town of Cary has performed their riparian buffer determination on the site. Their letters are included with this submittal.
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for ❑Yes 0 No El Unknown
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project? ❑ Yes X❑ No
6b. If yes, explain.
Page 3 of 10
PCN Form — Version 14 January 2009

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
❑X Wetlands ❑ Streams —tributaries ❑ Buffers ❑ Open Waters ❑ Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a. 2b. 2c. 2d. 2e.
2f.
Wetland impact Type of impact Type of wetland Forested Type of jurisdiction
Area of
number Corps (404,10) or
impact
Permanent (P) or DWQ (401, other)
(acres)
Temporary T
W1 P Fill Headwater Wetland Yes Corps
0.1
W2 P
Fill
Headwater Wetland
Yes
Corps
0.11
W3 P
Fill
Headwater Wetland
Yes
Corps
0.1
W4
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
W5
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
W6 Choose one Choose one Yes/No
2g. Total Wetland Impacts:
0.31
2h. Comments:
These 3 wetland impact areas are all located in topographic crenulations, but direct hydrologic connections to the down slope wetland have been
altered due to the existing sewer line easement. The wetlands do not function as riparian wetlands even though they key out as headwater forest.
NCWAM forms were completed for 2 of the 3 areas and are included with this submittal.
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a. 3b. 3c. 3d. 3e. 3f.
3g.
Stream impact Type of impact Stream name Perennial (PER) or Type of Average
Impact
number intermittent (INT)? jurisdiction stream
length
Permanent (P) or width
(linear
Temporary (T) (feet)
feet)
S1 Choose one
S2 Choose one -
S3 - Choose one -
S4 Choose one
S5
Choose one
S6 Choose one -
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
0
3i. Comments:
Page 4 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then individually list all open water impacts below.
4a.
4b.
4c.
4d. 4e.
Open water
Name of waterbody
impact number
(if applicable)
Type of impact
Waterbody Area of impact (acres)
Permanent (P) or
type
Temporary T
01
Choose one
Choose
02
Choose one
Choose
03
Choose one
Choose
04
Choose one
Choose
4f. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments: An upland pond a is not subject o Section 404 jurisdiction is proposed tor impact.
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, the complete the chart below.
5a. 5b. 5c. 5d. 5e.
Pond ID number Proposed use or Wetland Impacts (acres) Stream Impacts (feet) Upland
purpose of pond (acres)
Flooded Filled Excavated Flooded Filled Excavated
P1
Choose one
P2
Choose one
5f. Total:
5g. Comments:
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If any impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a. Project is in which protected basin? ❑ Neuse ❑ Tar -Pamlico ❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman ❑ Other:
6b. 6c. 6d. 6e. 6f. 6g.
Buffer Impact Reason for impact Stream name Buffer Zone 1 Zone 2
number— mitigation impact impact
Permanent (P) or required? (square (square
Temporary T feet) feet
61 - Yes/No
B2 Yes/No
B3
Yes/No
B4
Yes/No
B5 -
Yes/No
B6 -
Yes/No
6h. Total Buffer Impacts:
6i. Comments:
Page 5 of 10

D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1 a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
The design as currently proposed avoids impacts to the large floodplain wetland and tributary complex that occurs along the western property
boundary. The small wetland pockets that remain in the site's crenulations no longer appear to function as they did historically due to them being
essentially severed from overbank flow due to the existing sewer easement. These remaining wetland pockets could not be entirely avoided with the
site design
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
The sensitive floodplain and tributary wetland complex will be protected with all applicable ESC measures throughout the construction period. Other
areas that may be sensitive to erosion or sedimentation will also be protected with applicable ESC measures.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for ❑X Yes ❑ No
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply): ❑ DWQ ❑X Corps
❑ Mitigation bank
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this ❑ Payment to in -lieu fee program
project? Currently coordinating mitigation Y p 9
availability options ❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
Type: Choose one Quantity:
3b, Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter) Type: Choose one Quantity:
Type: Choose one Quantity:
We are requesting USACE consider a 1.5:1 replacement ratio since the wetlands are marginally jurisdictional and no longer riparian
3c. Comments:
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached.
❑ Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested:
linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
Choose one
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4f. Non -riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4h. Comments:
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
Page 6 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) — required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires Yes ❑X No
buffer mitigation?
6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required.
T6G, 6d. 6e.
ZonReason for impact Total impact Multiplier Required mitigation
(square feet) (square feet)
Zone 1 3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2 1.5
6f. Total buffer mitigation required:
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in -lieu fee fund).
6h. Comments:
Page 7 of 10

E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1 a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified ❑X Yes ❑ No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1 b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
The project is currently under design, and the stormwater plan has not been completed yet. Note that the
❑ Yes ❑X NO
stormwater plan will be reviewed by the Town of Cary for approval of SCM's including diffuse flow
requirements.
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
33 %
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
❑X Yes ❑ No
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why:
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
Town of Cary stormwater requirements for projects in the Jordan Lake Watershed include water quality treatment of impervious surfaces to meet 85%
TSS as well as meeting the pre=post-development flow for the 1-, 2-, 5-, 10- and 100-year storm events. The project proposes the construction of two
wet ponds for meeting these requirements.
2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
Town of Cary
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which localgovernment's jurisdiction is thisproject? Town of Cary
X❑ Phase II
❑ NSW
3b. Which of the following locally -implemented stormwater management programs
❑ USMP
apply (check all that apply): ❑ Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other:
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been ❑ Yes ❑X No
attached?
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
❑Coastal counties
❑HQW
4a. Which of the following state -implemented stormwater management programs apply ❑ORW
(check all that apply): El Session Law 2006-246
❑ Other:
4b. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ❑ No
attached?
5. DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a. Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements? ❑ Yes ❑ No
5b. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
❑ Yes ❑ No
Page 8 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1 4 January 2009

F. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
la. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the
use of public (federal/state) land?
1 b. If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1c. If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
letter.)
Comments:
2. Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 213 .0200)?
Is this an after -the -fact permit application?
❑ Yes ❑X No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑X No
❑ Yes X❑ No
If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s):
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in ❑ Yes ❑X No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b. If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
The proposed residential development is not acting as a driver for future development activities. The applicant has no control over adjacent properties
or knowledge the intended plans for those properties (if any).
4. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a. Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non -discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
The Town of Cary will provide sanitary sewer service for the project
Page 9 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or E Yes
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act I ❑ Yes
impacts?
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
❑X No
X❑ No
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
Terracon biologists performed a habitat assessment and current NCNHP element occurrences were obtained to determine if any federal species have
been documented in the area. No occurrences of federal protected species occur within 1 mile per 11/30/2021 NCNHP data
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat? ❑ Yes
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
NOAA EFH Mapper
❑X No
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation ❑X Yes ❑ No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
NCSHPO GIS site. The project is near the Green Level Historic District. However, other residential developments have occurred in this area and
even inside the Historic District (based on the map included with this submittal).
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain?
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?
NC Floodmaps. Developed area is outside any flood zone areas
Jeff Harbour
❑ Yes
❑X No
12-06-2021
rT A e
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name I pllcant/Agent's Signature Date
ge is signature is valid only if an authorization
1 letter from the applicant is provided.]
Page 10 of 10

'f
DATASOURCES:
0 0 1 ,000 2,000 4,000 USGS Topo tile base map service of The National Map (TNM), data Project Study Area refreshed May 2020, Project Study Area provided by Client
Feet M I LLSRD.dwg.
PM:
JH
Project No.
Project Location
EXHIBIT
70217419
NO.
Drawn By:
Scale:
KT
1:24 000
Irerracon
Mills Road Wetlands and Waters Delineation
.�
Checked By:
Filename:
RG
Cary, Wake County,
MillsRoad
North Carolina
Approved By:
Date:
2401 Brentwood Road, Suite 107 Raleigh, NC 27604
JH
October 2021
phone: [phone]„ Fax: [phone]

N ¢' r �! M1 tt G r
r�' J
{ v r
`I r B
1 r
F r�
r
U82
r j+
' I k
f
f
r rt r
u
Soil Mapping
Au Augusta fine sandy loam
CrB2 Creedmoor sandy loam, 2-6% slopes, eroded;
r
CrC Creedmoor sandy loam, 6-10% slopes
CrC2 Creedmoor sandy loam, 6-10% slopes, eroded �r
CrE Creedmoor sandy loam, 10-20% slopes
Wn Wehadkee silt loam r
Wo Wehadkee and Bibb soils
Wy Worsham sandy loam 0 Cape Fear River Basin
1r
DATASOURCES:
0 0 250 500 1 ,000 NRCS Soil Survey of Wake County, 1970, Project Study Area Project Study Area provided by Client MILLSRD.dwg.
Feet
-_J
PM:
Project No.
NRCS Soils
EXHIBIT
JH
70217419
NO.
Drawn By:
Scale:
KT
1:6 000
Irerracon
Mills Road Wetlands and Waters Delineation
2
Checked By:
Filename:
RG
Cary, Wake County,
MillsRoad
North Carolina
Approved By:
Date:
2401 Brentwood Road, Suite 107 Raleigh, NC 27604
JH
October 2021
Phone: (91s)a73-2211 Fax: (s,$)873-9555

V Q C
_ N
P.ine.y Gap Dr � �
}
0 Project Study Area
Potential Wetland 0 150 300
Emex y
0 Cape Fear River Basin m
a
m
0
DATASOURCES:
600 USGS Topo tile base map service of The National Map (TNM), data n
refreshed May 2020, Project Study Area provided by Client
Feet MILLSRD.dwg.
0
0
PM: JH
Project No.
Potential Wetlands and Waters
EXHIBIT
70217419
NO.
Drawn By:
Scale:
KT
1:3 600
Irerracon
Mills Road Wetlands and Waters Delineation
3
Checked By:
Filename:
RG
Cary, Wake County,
Mills oa
I
North Carolina
Approved By:
Date:
2401 Brentwood Road, Suite 107 Raleigh, NC 27604
JH
October 2021
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
2
w

6uiuue1d puel I ivawa6euuv4 uo!Pngsuoz) 6uuaaui6u3llNJ G 9 "' P °.., w df/ W 1O`dd W I
_Q, uNnoo 3,rom u° ouio
011d'JN12133NIE)N3 NOISVA149nG
o
UMOL j)g SqJOr - < g ;" S� 1121�d021d S�1S� a`d0?J -I-iI W �
up
2
°
MH�5���gd
a
z
0
g�
N
Z
Z �
O
Z
\ k
11I Namv
�vaa
aMa¢a
<<
i
i

6.1umId puel I umw BOueVy UOPM4a OO (6 l6u3lm I VI2 v 1Ddd W I
a
011d "EJEJ
uassou v sauoi'NIJ33NIN3s�� i w
Q
z -
O < Q > O W
O J
a u c w m 0
Ozp Wov�� zzr o tip
,I.< Ozo
°�N z�, �a� L
o �
Z a Nam Oda 2 0
a� v dam W6 5 n c�
z s z
r
Q O o Q o o 0 3 Q
0
�Do�a4oz<v--� z 9
O.
QU
C�
�1
Qz
z0
�ry
—' 0
uw
tY_
LL I-
0
z

rmluuRld Pu0l I V—S"h uOPPM—O 6W—Ou3 1.1-0 e V-IJv -L:DvljvT
011d 'ONIN33NION3
(IVO>l GlIM
UOSSOLO v souor
N �
<
131
D
to
p
Li
7
0
_7
R/
0
ry
0
R/
D-

Buiuueld PUei I waumBMV4 wrpnAwco I Bu}meu1Bu31ND G .`^ § � V g-,Av -LDV J W Igal
,
�1ld'ONIMNIDN3 �� OV
uassouJ'8 f p a sgil�;�o�j s�is� * ovo"A GlIM
W J
V q
w�Q QQy �C
O
U L w O
OVp a�� WmN
ozQ ao� NON
O w —z V �- z zQ
o �
z=4 x�m ova o ��
<o�zoo
r
zzw < �-
wnz
4US't(')O�z�Uw1—nJ �"
w -- ,
zO _ N S
O
C,
LU
J
Q
U
T)
o U
N
O
z
O
z~
Q�
J �
L1� C(7
Qz
zQ
�ry
JD
LLl
ry
fL V---
O
z

2.0 J.- . I Aji , i . .�Yl 3
4 0 ?
0
-0
0
"o A
11
I ,r 01
i. A.
0 it IL d t
I
PROJECT
SITE
miw ftmw LAM
A
-1 41d ir
IL
-kilt
4L u
I ,.w

urisdictional Determination Reauest
US Army Corps
of Engineers.
Wilmington District
This form is intended for use by anyone requesting a jurisdictional determination (JD) from the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District (Corps). Please include all supporting
information, as described within each category, with your request. You may submit your request
via mail, electronic mail, or facsimile. Requests should be sent to the appropriate project
manager of the county in which the property is located. A current list of project managers by
assigned counties can be found on-line at:
http://www. saw.usace. army.mil/Missions/Regulatoi yPermitPro2ram/Contact/CountyLocator. aspx,
by calling 910-251-4633, or by contacting any of the field offices listed below. Once your
request is received you will be contacted by a Corps project manager.
ASHEVILLE & CHARLOTTE REGULATORY
FIELD OFFICES
US Army Corps of Engineers
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801-5006
General Number: [phone]
Fax Number: [phone]
RALEIGH REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US Army Corps of Engineers
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
General Number: [phone]
Fax Number: [phone]
INSTRUCTIONS:
WASHINGTON REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US Army Corps of Engineers
2407 West Fifth Street
Washington, North Carolina 27889
General Number: [phone]
Fax Number: [phone]
WILMINGTON REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US Army Corps of Engineers
69 Darlington Avenue
Wilmington, North Carolina 28403
General Number: 910-251-4633
Fax Number: [phone]
All requestors must complete Parts A, B, C, D, E, F and G.
NOTE TO CONSULTANTS AND AGENCIES: If you are requesting a JD on behalf of a
paying client or your agency, please note the specific submittal requirements in Part H.
NOTE ON PART D — PROPERTY OWNER AUTHORIZATION: Please be aware that
all JD requests must include the current property owner authorization for the Corps to
proceed with the determination, which may include inspection of the property when
necessary. This form must be signed by the current property owner(s) or the owner(s)
authorized agent to be considered a complete request.
NOTE ON PART D - NCDOT REQUESTS: Property owner authorization/notification for
JD requests associated with North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
projects will be conducted according to the current NCDOT/USACE protocols.
NOTE TO USDA PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS: A Corps approved or preliminary JD
may not be valid for the wetland conservation provisions of the Food Security Act of
1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation in
USDA programs, you should also request a certified wetland determination from the local
office of the Natural Resources Conservation Service, prior to starting work.
Version: May 2017 Page 1

Jurisdictional Determination Request
A. PARCEL INFORMATION
Street Address: 7921 Mills Road
City, State: Cary, NC
County: Wake
Parcel Index Number(s) (PIN): 0724619147 (portion thereof)
B. REQUESTOR INFORMATION
Name: Dos Bros, LLC Andy Sandman
Mailing Address: 7101-122 Creedmoor Rd
Telephone Number:
Electronic Mail Address
Select one:
✓❑
Raleigh, NC 27613
[e-mail]
I am the current property owner.
I am an Authorized Agent or Environmental Consultant'
Interested Buyer or Under Contract to Purchase
Other, please explain.
C. PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION2
Name: Mills Road, LLC Willard Mills
Mailing Address: 3529 Beaver Dam Rd
Cary, NC 27519
Telephone Number: 919-623-5646
Electronic Mail Address: [e-mail]
' Must provide completed Agent Authorization Form/Letter.
z Documentation of ownership also needs to be provided with request (copy of Deed, County GIS/Parcel/Tax Record).
Version: May 2017 Page 2

Jurisdictional Determination Request
D. PROPERTY ACCESS CERTIFICATION',4
By signing below, I authorize representatives of the Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (Corps) to enter upon the property herein described for the purpose of conducting on -
site investigations, if necessary, and issuing a jurisdictional determination pursuant to Section
404 of the Clean Water Act and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899. I, the
undersigned, am either a duly authorized owner of record of the property identified herein, or
acting as the duly authorized agent of the owner of record of the property.
Jeff Harbour
Print Name
Capacity: ❑ Owner Z Authorized Agents
12/2/2021
Date i4r,to a
Si
E. REASON FOR JD REQUEST: (Check as many as applicable)
❑ I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which would be
designed to avoid all aquatic resources.
❑ I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which would be
designed to avoid all jurisdictional aquatic resources under Corps authority.
❑✓ I intend to construct/develop a projector perform activities on this parcel which may
require authorization from the Corps, and the JD would be used to avoid and minimize
impacts to jurisdictional aquatic resources and as an initial step in a future permitting
process.
❑ I intend to construct/develop a projector perform activities on this parcel which may
require authorization from the Corps; this request is accompanied by my permit application
and the JD is to be used in the permitting process.
❑ I intend to construct/develop a projector perform activities in a navigable water of the
U.S. which is included on the district Section 10 list and/or is subject to the ebb and flow of
the tide.
❑ A Corps JD is required in order obtain my local/state authorization.
❑ I intend to contest jurisdiction over a particular aquatic resource and request the Corps
confirm that jurisdiction does/does not exist over the aquatic resource on the parcel.
❑ I believe that the site may be comprised entirely of dry land.
❑ Other:
3 For NCDOT requests following the current NCDOT/USACE protocols, skip to Part E.
a If there are multiple parcels owned by different parties, please provide the following for each additional parcel on a
continuation sheet.
s Must provide agent authorization form/letter signed by owner(s).
Version: May 2017 Page 3

Jurisdictional Determination Request
F. JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD) TYPE (Select One)
❑✓ I am requesting that the Corps provide a preliminary JD for the property identified herein.
A Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination (PJD) provides an indication that there may
be "waters of the United States" or "navigable waters of the United States"on a property.
PJDs are sufficient as the basis for permit decisions. For the purposes of permitting, all
waters and wetlands on the property will be treated as if they are jurisdictional "waters of
the United States". PJDs cannot be appealed (33 C.F.R. 331.2); however, a PJD is
"preliminary" in the sense that an approved JD can be requested at any time. PJDs do
not expire.
✓❑ I am requesting that the Corps provide an approved JD for the property identified herein.
AJD ONLY FOR THE UPLAND POND
An Approved Jurisdictional Determination (AJD) is a determination that
jurisdictional "waters of the United States" or "navigable waters of the United
States" are either present or absent on a site. An approved JD identifies the limits of
waters on a site determined to be jurisdictional under the Clean Water Act and/or
Rivers and Harbors Act. Approved JDs are sufficient as the basis for permit
decisions. AJDs are appealable (33 C.F.R. 331.2). The results of the AJD will be
posted on the Corps website. A landowner, permit applicant, or other "affected
party" (33 C.F.R. 331.2) who receives an AJD may rely upon the AJD for five years
(subject to certain limited exceptions explained in Regulatory Guidance Letter 05-
02).
❑ I am unclear as to which JD I would like to request and require additional information
to inform my decision.
G. ALL REQUESTS
Map of Property or Project Area. This Map must clearly depict the boundaries of the
review area.
0 Size of Property or Review Area 38 acres.
❑✓ The property boundary (or review area boundary) is clearly physically marked on the site.
Version: May 2017 Page 4

Jurisdictional Determination Request
H. REQUESTS FROM CONSULTANTS
❑✓ Project Coordinates (Decimal Degrees): Latitude: 35.7856
Longitude:-78.9075
A legible delineation map depicting the aquatic resources and the property/review area.
Delineation maps must be no larger than 11x17 and should contain the following: (Corps
signature of submitted survey plats will occur after the submitted delineation map has been
reviewed and approved).6
■ North Arrow
■ Graphical Scale
■ Boundary of Review Area
■ Date
■ Location of data points for each Wetland Determination Data Form or tributary
assessment reach.
For Approved Jurisdictional Determinations:
Jurisdictional wetland features should be labeled as Wetland Waters of the US, 404
wetlands, etc. Please include the acreage of these features.
Jurisdictional non -wetland features (i.e. tidal/navigable waters, tributaries,
impoundments) should be labeled as Non -Wetland Waters of the US, stream, tributary,
open water, relatively permanent water, pond, etc. Please include the acreage or linear
length of each of these features as appropriate.
Isolated waters, waters that lack a significant nexus to navigable waters, or non -
jurisdictional upland features should be identified as Non -Jurisdictional. Please
include a justification in the label regarding why the feature is non jurisdictional (i.e.
"Isolated", "No Significant Nexus", or "Upland Feature"). Please include the acreage
or linear length of these features as appropriate.
For Preliminary Jurisdictional Determinations:
Wetland and non -wetland features should not be identified as Jurisdictional, 404,
Waters of the United States, or anything that implies jurisdiction. These features can be
identified as Potential Waters of the United States, Potential Non -wetland Waters of
the United States, wetland, stream, open water, etc. Please include the acreage and
linear length of these features as appropriate.
Completed Wetland Determination Data Forms for appropriate region
(at least one wetland and one upland form needs to be completed for each wetland type)
6 Please refer to the guidance document titled "Survey Standards for Jurisdictional Determinations" to ensure that the
supplied map meets the necessary mapping standards. hl!p://www.saw.usace.army.mil/Missions/Repulatory-Permit-
Pro uam/Jurisdiction/
Version: May 2017 Page 5

Jurisdictional Determination Request
F4Completed appropriate Jurisdictional Determination form
• PJDs, please complete a Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Form' and include the
Aquatic Resource Table
• AJDs, please complete an Approved Jurisdictional Determination Form
Vicinity Map
Aerial Photograph
F4 USGS Topographic Map
0 Soil Survey Map
Other Maps, as appropriate (e.g. National Wetland Inventory Map, Proposed Site
Plan, previous delineation maps, LIDAR maps, FEMA floodplain maps)
Landscape Photos (if taken)
NCSAM and/or NCWAM Assessment Forms and Rating Sheets
NC Division of Water Resources Stream Identification Forms
zOther Assessment Forms
RAPANOS FORM FOR THE UPLAND POND
TOWN OF CARY BUFFER LETTERS
' www.saw.usace.gM.niil/Portals/59/docs/reaWatoa/relzdocs/JD/RGL 08-02 App A Prelim JD Form fillable.pdf
8 Please seehlt2://www.saw.usace.army.niil/Missions/Re ulatory-Permit-Proaram/Jurisdiction/
Principal Purpose: The information that you provide will be used in evaluating your request to determine
whether there are any aquatic resources within the project area subject to federal jurisdiction under the regulatory
authorities referenced above.
Routine Uses: This information may be shared with the Department of Justice and other federal, state, and local
government agencies, and the public, and may be made available as part of a public notice as required by federal
law. Your name and property location where federal jurisdiction is to be determined will be included in the
approved jurisdictional determination (AJD), which will be made available to the public on the District's website
and on the Headquarters USAGE website.
Disclosure: Submission of requested information is voluntary; however, if information is not provided, the
request for an AJD cannot be evaluated nor can an AJD be issued.
Version: May 2017 Page 6

Appendix 2 - PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (PJD) FORM
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PJD:
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PJD: .left Harbour, Terracon, 2401 Brentwood Rd, Raleigh, NC 27604
C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
D. PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
(USE THE TABLE BELOW TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE AQUATIC RESOURCES AND/OR
AQUATIC RESOURCES AT DIFFERENT SITES)
State: North Carolina County/parish/borough: Wake City: Cary
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format):
Lat.: 35.7856 Long.:-78.9075
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: White Oak Creek
E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
❑ Office (Desk) Determination. Date: 12/2/2021
❑ Field Determination. Date(s):
TABLE OF AQUATIC RESOURCES IN REVIEW AREA WHICH "MAY BE" SUBJECT TO REGULATORY
JURISDICTION.
Site
number
Latitude
(decimal
degrees)
Longitude
(decimal
degrees)
Estimated amount
of aquatic resource
in review area
(acreage and linear
feet, if applicable)
Type of aquatic
resource (i.e., wetland
vs. non -wetland
waters)
Geographic authority
to which the aquatic
resource "may be"
subject (i.e., Section
404 or Section 10/404)
WHA/WHB
35.7834
-78.9087
5 aC
wetland
404
WHD
35.7855
-78.9074
.10
wetland
404
WHE
35.7844
-78.9080
.11
wetland
404
WHF
35.7874
-78.9077
.10
wetland
404

1) The Corps of Engineers believes that there may be jurisdictional aquatic resources in
the review area, and the requestor of this PJD is hereby advised of his or her option
to request and obtain an approved JD (AJD) for that review area based on an
informed decision after having discussed the various types of JDs and their
characteristics and circumstances when they may be appropriate.
2) In any circumstance where a permit applicant obtains an individual permit, or a
Nationwide General Permit (NWP) or other general permit verification requiring "pre -
construction notification" (PCN), or requests verification for a non -reporting NWP or
other general permit, and the permit applicant has not requested an AJD for the
activity, the permit applicant is hereby made aware that: (1) the permit applicant has
elected to seek a permit authorization based on a PJD, which does not make an
official determination of jurisdictional aquatic resources; (2) the applicant has the
option to request an AJD before accepting the terms and conditions of the permit
authorization, and that basing a permit authorization on an AJD could possibly result
in less compensatory mitigation being required or different special conditions; (3) the
applicant has the right to request an individual permit rather than accepting the terms
and conditions of the NWP or other general permit authorization; (4) the applicant can
accept a permit authorization and thereby agree to comply with all the terms and
conditions of that permit, including whatever mitigation requirements the Corps has
determined to be necessary; (5) undertaking any activity in reliance upon the subject
permit authorization without requesting an AJD constitutes the applicant's acceptance
of the use of the PJD; (6) accepting a permit authorization (e.g., signing a proffered
individual permit) or undertaking any activity in reliance on any form of Corps permit
authorization based on a PJD constitutes agreement that all aquatic resources in the
review area affected in any way by that activity will be treated as jurisdictional, and
waives any challenge to such jurisdiction in any administrative or judicial compliance
or enforcement action, or in any administrative appeal or in any Federal court; and (7)
whether the applicant elects to use either an AJD or a PJD, the JD will be processed
as soon as practicable. Further, an AJD, a proffered individual permit (and all terms
and conditions contained therein), or individual permit denial can be administratively
appealed pursuant to 33 C.F.R. Part 331. If, during an administrative appeal, it
becomes appropriate to make an official determination whether geographic
jurisdiction exists over aquatic resources in the review area, or to provide an official
delineation of jurisdictional aquatic resources in the review area, the Corps will
provide an AJD to accomplish that result, as soon as is practicable. This PJD finds
that there "may be"waters of the U.S. and/or that there "may be" navigable waters of
the U.S. on the subject review area, and identifies all aquatic features in the review
area that could be affected by the proposed activity, based on the following
information:

SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for PJD (check all that apply)
Checked items should be included in subject file. Appropriately reference sources
below where indicated for all checked items:
■❑ Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor:
Map: Potential Wetlands and waters
0 Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor.
❑ Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report. Rationale:
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:
❑ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data.
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
■❑ U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: 1 :24000 The National Map
0 Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: USDA 1970
❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
❑ State/local wetland inventory map(s):
❑ FEMA/FIRM maps:
❑ 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: .(National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929)
■❑ Photographs: ❑ Aerial (Name & Date):
or ■❑ Other (Name & Date): Landscape photo pages
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
■❑ Other information (please specify): survey prepared by Barry Scott Land Surveying-.
IMPORTANT NOTE: The information recorded on this form has not necessarily
been verified by the Corps and should not be relied upon for later jurisdictional
determinations.
Signature and date of
Regulatory staff member
completing PJD
Lk_ h) aa."
Signature and date of
person requesting PJD
(REQUIRED, unless obtaining
the signature is impracticable)'
1 Districts may establish timeframes for requestor to return signed PJD forms. If the requestor does not respond
within the established time frame, the district may presume concurrence and no additional follow up is
necessary prior to finalizing an action.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 76B9424C-086C-4AF3-9EDD-ODOODC4F32AE
Irerracon
USACE/NCDWR Agent Authorization Form
Property/Site:
Address of Site:
Mills Rd LLC/ 7921 Mills Rd
7921 MILLS RD
Cary NC 27519
Parcel Identification Number (PIN):
Owner Information:
Name:
0724619147
Mills Road LLC/ Willard Lee Mills II
Address: 3529 Beaver Dam Rd
Cary NC 27519
919 623 5646
Telephone Number:
E-mail Address: [e-mail]
Property Owner Certification:
I, the undersigned, a duly authorized owner of record of the property/properties identified herein,
do authorize representatives of the Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps)
and/ or the North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR) to enter upon the property
herein described for the purpose of conducting on -site investigations and issuing a determination
associated with Waters of the U.S (WOTUS) subject to Federal/State jurisdiction under Section
404 and 401 of the Clean Water Act and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899.
Terracon, as designated by the current property owner, is the authorized consultant to coordinate,
schedule, and provide supplemental information to both agencies in support of this verification
and/or permit application.
Property Owner Signature:
Date: 8/5/2021
'uuKK
—1R 1DIocuSignlIed by: ff hI C uK1
Terracon Consultants Inc. 2401 Brentwood Road, Suite 107, Raleigh, NC 28208-3608
P:919-873-2211 F:919-873-9555 terracon.com

DATASOURCES:
0 0 1 ,000 2,000 4,000 USGS Topo tile base map service of The National Map (TNM), data Project Study Area refreshed May 2020, Project Study Area provided by Client
Feet M I LLSRD.dwg.
PM:
JH
Project No.
Project Location
EXHIBIT
70217419
NO.
Drawn By:
Scale:
KT
1:24 000
Irerracon
Mills Road Wetlands and Waters Delineation
.�
Checked By:
Filename:
RG
Cary, Wake County,
MillsRoad
North Carolina
Approved By:
Date:
2401 Brentwood Road, Suite 107 Raleigh, NC 27604
JH
October 2021
phone: [phone]„ Fax: [phone]

N ¢' r �! M1 tt G r
r�' J
{ v r
`I r B
1 r
F r�
r
U82
r j+
' I k
f
f
r rt r
u
Soil Mapping
Au Augusta fine sandy loam
CrB2 Creedmoor sandy loam, 2-6% slopes, eroded;
r
CrC Creedmoor sandy loam, 6-10% slopes
CrC2 Creedmoor sandy loam, 6-10% slopes, eroded �r
CrE Creedmoor sandy loam, 10-20% slopes
Wn Wehadkee silt loam r
Wo Wehadkee and Bibb soils
Wy Worsham sandy loam 0 Cape Fear River Basin
1r
DATASOURCES:
0 0 250 500 1 ,000 NRCS Soil Survey of Wake County, 1970, Project Study Area Project Study Area provided by Client MILLSRD.dwg.
Feet
-_J
PM:
Project No.
NRCS Soils
EXHIBIT
JH
70217419
NO.
Drawn By:
Scale:
KT
1:6 000
Irerracon
Mills Road Wetlands and Waters Delineation
2
Checked By:
Filename:
RG
Cary, Wake County,
MillsRoad
North Carolina
Approved By:
Date:
2401 Brentwood Road, Suite 107 Raleigh, NC 27604
JH
October 2021
Phone: (91s)a73-2211 Fax: (s,$)873-9555

Unnamed tributary to
White Oak Creek.
Not delineated in the
* field
ago a*
0 Project Study Area
Potential Wetland 0 150 300
Upland Pond ■ Approx. tributary
Emex y
MAIN_
0 Cape Fear River Basin m
a
m
0
DATASOURCES:
600 USGS Topo tile base map service of The National Map (TNM), data n
refreshed May 2020, Project Study Area provided by Client
Feet MILLSRD.dwg.
0
PM: JH
Project No.
Potential Wetlands and Waters
EXHIBIT
70217419
NO.
Drawn By:
Scale:
KT
1:3 600
Irerracon
Mills Road Wetlands and Waters Delineation
3
Checked By:
Filename:
RG
Cary, Wake County,
Mills oa
I
North Carolina
Approved By:
Date:
2401 Brentwood Road, Suite 107 Raleigh, NC 27604
JH
October 2021
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
2
w

$ SW W NW .
180�' ti 2 110 240 x F* 7. 300 330
�1'Mil�-�, •f "�� tirr
• "? s _may •.,�� .�
zip
! 29 Jun 202
A�
5W W IDO NW N
M 240 270 330 0 30
■ I I I i I 1 I! I I l I i I I I I I i
••'kk LTTlffm AMOIC.14-TIV-9m,- •r• ■i •i
^• I
Ik
r f.
;.e ''� ` ` • � � 1 ice" i •�• �
•�..- •�. � � �_•_ � ,fir 1 *+ •��.
}�. .•Y �.i+1 fit. 8S' �r� {w+JL��y T a����.
}} Y
29 .}yn. 20 i" i 'I :04:

Ss W YV
o izo tsd t zto 170
• 1 I I I• '� j' I-� •1 I I `I I I I i I 1
.• r •i !
0rr r ■
+ �. 4 • ..
-• '' of -'f .r - •L
AL
��t�'' 'r r '•� `# 'fir: �_ _ � -r--��
Photograph 5: WHD wetl
5W ! W ,r NW
180 210 240 j 270 360 330
I I •.I- 1 1 I I 1 I I I I I I 1 I i I•
•1 •
1 ` ��
A^ lit
' 466
nr^� .�S .-r fir - -- -• -
St
41
4,1
"•y `. 2 44
il.•�.- �rRR�� 14 Jul 2fl2` + _ ,

NW
210 to 1r270 300
1,2 4
k
f#IP
Ad
14 Jul 2021,10:4 1,10
w NW 14 NE E
270 300 330 0 30 60 90
o 1. & I * I & I * I . I . I * I . I . I * I & I a I a 1 0 1 & 1 0 1 0 1 a I
77'
1'7
V,
f
1 41 At!
7
ai,
14 -41:2Z' JU 2021.10.
.90

'' � �� �, _ Sri. " # -a J• � • ��_
Av
14
J�L� ft.
��. fir` _� - �, - I ���- �•- -
., .. 14,-Jul 2021; 1 1.20:49

iftc4te-114(s I
USACE/NCDWR Agent Authorization Form
7921 Mills Road
Property/Site:
Address of Site: 7921 Mills Road, Cary, NC
Parcel Identification Number (PIN): portion of 0724619147
Owner Information:
Name:
Address:
Dos Bros, LLC Andy Sandman
7101-122 Creedmoor Rd
Raleigh, NC 27613
Telephone Number: 919-845-6688
E-mail Address: [e-mail]
Property Owner Certification:
I, the undersigned, a duly authorized owner of record of the property/properties identified herein,
do authorize representatives of the Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps)
and/ or the North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR) to enter upon the property
herein described for the purpose of conducting on -site investigations and issuing a determination
associated with Waters of the U.S (WOTUS) subject to Federal/State jurisdiction under Section
404 and 401 of the Clean Water Act and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899.
Terracon, as designated by the current property owner, is the authorized consultant to coordinate,
schedule, and provide supplemental information to both agencies in support of this verification
and/or permit application. ,
Property Owner Signature:
Date:
Terracon Consultants Inc. 2401 Brentwood Road, Suite 107, Raleigh. NC 28208-3608
P:919-873-2211 F:919-873-9555 terracon.com

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: 7921 Milk Rd City/County: Cary, WNake_ Sampling Date:
Appticanvowner: Mills Road, LLC State: NC Sampling Point K
investigatw(s): Jeff Harbour section. n. Township, RwW. w--
Landfaxm (hr'lfslope, terrace, etc.): l Dual n=#ief (concave, eorrt+ex, none OO slope (%):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): P Lat: J 7 , F /0 C7
Long: _ 7 l 0 1� 1 i Datum: wgs 84
I
Soft Map Unit Name: Jd I KrPy � NW4 classitica#ion:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for time of year? Yes X No (tf no, a*ain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil �or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are -informal Circumstances' present? Yes
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes _
Hydric Soil Present? Yes _
Welland Hydrology Present? Yes
Remarks:
5;*VC-f
HYDROLOGY
No
Is the Sampled Area
No within a Wetland? Yes No
No
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (xn nianum of one is requin2.d; c .k all 01at apgfy)
Surface Soil Cracks (86)
Surface Water (Al)
_ True Aquatic Plants (614)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
High Water Table (A2)
, Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
Drainage Patterns (610)
Saturation (A3)
— oxidized Rtfunspheres on Living Roots (C3)
Moss Trim Lines (1516)
_ Water Marks (81)
_ Presence of Reduced iron (C4)
� Dry -Season Water Table X2)
Sediment Deposits (62)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tiifed Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Drift Deposits (133)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat or Crust (84)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
! Stunted or Stressed Plants (D 1)
_ iron Deposits (135)
OeonvrWk P031ii`wn (D2)
Inundation Visible on Aerial imagery (67)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
_ Water -Stained Leaves (139)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
s Aquatic Fauna (B13)
_ FAC-Neutral Test (05)
Surface Water Present? Yes No ' Depth (inches): i
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 224a�
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches):7 ao Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes � No
Describe Recorded Data (stream gouge, aaxonA wng we#, :aerial photos, p;,evaous
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scieniiiic names of plants.
Sampling Point: tit
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )
I.-_Nake
50% of total cover:
Sapling Stratum (Plot size: l
i . ❑ ►m A
50% of total cover:
Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
1.
Absolute Dorr*iant Indicator i
% Cover Species? Status
20% of total cover:
—
= Total Cover
20% of total cover:
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size: Y, ) 5- )
1.f�r�en�2st C'unrw�s. 30
7
10.
11.
_ = Total Cover
50% cd low cwver: as � 5 20% of
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
I —A-
2.
Eaf- iI�T�'a�l�-'i
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover.
KemarKs: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
4i5Ii13itWlilT. OCTD aliTf Pl�SJGL'L
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
(A)
Tom Number of Dominant
Speck-s Across AN Strata:
(B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: -
(A/B)
Prevalerme hwex wmksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply bv:
OBL species x i =
-
FACW species x 2 =
FAC spy x 3 =
FACT! species x 4 =
UPL species x .5 =
Column Totals (A)
(B)
Prevalence Index = B!A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
_ 2 - I:ls n*mnce 'Test is >50%
3 - Prevalence Index is s3.0'
_ 4 - Morphological Adaptations (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic H)*Whytic Vegetation, (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
De€h"orm of F e vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH),
i
Saphng -Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
Shrub -Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
appruxirnateiy S to 20 It (I to 6 m) in height.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants. except woody vines, less than approximately 3
It (1 rn) in hit.
Woody vine -All woody vines, regardless of height.
Hydropitytic
Vegetatiim
Prese " yes
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: u,P
Profile Description- (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or conform the absence of indicalors.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features _
(inches) Color mot t) Color fmoisti % Terse= Loci Texture Remarks
'Type. C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM--Reduced Matrix, MS --Masked Sand gains. 'Location: PL=Fore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indircata> m %gr Problematic Hydric Sods3:
f
Histosol (Al) _ Dark Surface (S7) _ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
j _ Hisfic Epipedon (A2) _ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147,148) _ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
— Black Histic (A3) _ Thin Dark Surface (SS) JMLRA 147,148) JULRA 147,148)
„ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Piedmont Fbodptain Soils (F19)
_ Stratified Layers (AS) _,_ Depleted Matrix (F3) (MLRA 136, 147)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N) — Redox Dark Surface (F6) _ _ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (All) _ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Other (Explain in Remarks)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2) __,_ Redox Depressions (FS)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N. _ kan-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148) MLRA 136)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) _ _ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136,122) 31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_ Sandy Redox (S5) _ Piedmont Floodplain Soils {F19) (ULRA 448) wets hydrology must be present,
_ Stripped Matrix (S£) Red Parent tviaterial (F21) (ML'RA 127,147) unless dishirbed or problematic,
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth {aches):. i Hyd a Sale Present? Yes No
Remarks: y
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
RdCary, �Waka G 7
Project/Site: 7921 Milts RCity/County: Sampling Date: Ia r
Appiicant/Owner: Bills Road, LLC State: NC Sampling PointW tftw�
Investigator(s): Jeff Harbour Section, Township, Range:
Landform (htlFshW, terrace, efc.): F1dd J I`r n Local m4ief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%): 40
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): P Lat: 3 S 7�� 7 Long: 2fi, 1013 Datum: wgs 84
Soil Map Unit Name: _ �t. �. NWI ctaswiicatlom P ra
Are dimatic I hydrologic condiiions on the site typ cat for this tune of yeah' Yes X No (if no, exptaki in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Solt or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation . Soli or Hydrology naturally problematic? (if needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes within a Wetland?
Welland Hydrology Present? Yes No I
Yes No
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Irrdicators: Secondary Indicators (minimum of two requiredt
Prsmary tndscaIgD s (rninirnum of one isreariued: &bnE* arts that aRPM Surface Sol Cracks (86)
Surface Water (Al)
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Water Marks (131)
— Sediment Deposits (02)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Algal Mat or Crust (84)
Iron Deposits (85)
_!inundation Visible on Aerial imagery (B7)
✓ Water -Stained Leaves (89)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Surface Water Present? Yes No
Water Table Present? Yes No
Saturation Present? Yes V"' No
(stream ga'.cye,
Remarks:
True Aquatic Plants (B14)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (CS)
✓Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
T Presence of Reduced tron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilted Soils (06)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depth (inches):
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Dralnage Patterns (810)
Moss Trim Lines (816)
Cry -Season Water Table (C2).
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
�ctunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
f;eom"phir, Position (D2)
ShallowAquitard(D3)
— Microtopographic Relief (D4)
FAG -Neutral Test (Da)
Depth (inches): l 11 n
Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes I/ No
4, aerial pesos, pemus, jmpectiom), if araaat#e:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.4

VEGETATION (Five Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Paint: �t-4--
3 a >< 3a At to Borman[ Indk*d"
Tree Stratum (Plot size: } % Cover S rigs? Status
1. A, f Kit!
2.
3. %i..tArua rr,, ra �D _ FA 4-
4.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: .20% of total cover:
Sapling Stratton (Plot size: j
1.
2.
3.
4.
6
= Total Cover
Test wod(sheer
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
TOW Nun N--r of Dorinant
Spesties Across Ali Strata, (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (AB)
Prevaterrce husex worksheet.
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
OBL species
x 1 = _
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x 4 =
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totats:
(A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
50% of total cover 20% of tofat stover _ pid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation.
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 3 D >< 3 a a _ 2 - DoffArmum Test is >50%
1.6U&ILL8 < < 4 FAL 3 - Prevalence Index is s3.01
2. INCrA f.6
A L 4 -Morphological Adaptations (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
3. 4. Problerrnatt, Hydrophytft: VegeW ion:' (Explain)
6.
1_ = Tolat Cover
50% of total cover: — _ 20% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 1 S �- 1 5 }
1-W/), tyhiiO4I,sw Itty"i�,��-. 10 4
FA L
2.6&I%u�Jj,jt A flN �iB1A11CIAt� 4_
7
10.
11.
3 to = Total Cover
5D% of total ccw4er: _ 2". of total stover 6
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: Sit 1 r }
2.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 1 20% of total cover. s 1
photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
'indicators of hydric soil and wetiand hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
DeTmftions of Frive Ve9ftifim Strata:
Tree -- Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
SaphM — Why plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DSH,
Shrub — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
If appfoxirrwWy 3 to 24 It (11 Ao 6 m) in height-
Herb — All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants. except woody vbies, less than approximately 3
ft (1 rn) in height.
Woody vine — All woody vines, regardless of height.
Hydroptnyft
V
Present
,Y. ZM.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point tv N Q w
Prattle Description. (Describe to We depth needed to docurnent the itrdtcator or cot trm the absence of Indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) 0/6Color moist °k, %e Loc Texture _Remarks
-y 2a 2 s
0`I Voa�^-
RM--Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. kocation: PL=Pore LBnin
Hydric So# Indicators:
Histosol (Al)
_ Histic Eplpedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
^ 2 cm Muck (Al0) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dade Surface (At 1)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Sandy Mucky Mural (S1) (LR314.
MLRA 147, 148)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Stripped Matrix (SS)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth,Qnches): _
Remarks-
— Dark Surface (S7)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147,148)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
�y Gfeyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (176)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
_ hor-M-canese Mass- (F12) (LRR ill,
MLRA 136)
Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136,122)
Psedmord Floodplain Soils (F 19) (MLRA 448)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 12-1,147)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Sc
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147,148)
Piedmont Floodptain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136,147)
— Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
'indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetiand hydrology must be present,
w4ess wed or probtematic,
Hydric SOff Present? 'yes V wo
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: 7921 Milk Rd City/County: Cary, Wake sampling Date: %-1 � • Z
Applicant/Owner: Mills Road, LLC State: NG Sampling Point:
Investigator(s): J� Harbour Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc. _ _k. L WW Localrelief(concave, convex, none : _&A x Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR or ML ): `Lat: Long: 7 Datum: W9s 84
Soil Map Unit Name: I NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (if no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No� Is the Sampled Area /
Hydric Soil Present? Yes Nwithin a Wetland? Yes No V
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes _ Nu
Remarks:
%o (4 4 D 14 F1 (,U 1
i
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondaty Indicators (minimum of two required]
Primary Indicators_ minimum of one is required: check all that aprrlvt —
_ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
_ Surface Water (Al)
_ True Aquatic Plants (614)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (68)
— High Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
_ Drainage Patterns (B10)
_ Saturation (A3)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (616)
_ Water Marks (B1)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (62)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (133)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
__ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (134)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_ Iron Deposits (135)
Geomorphic Positron (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_ Shallow Aquitard (133)
Water -Stained Leaves (69)
_ Microtopographic Relief (134)
__ Aquatic Fauna (613)
_ FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes
Water Table Present? Yes
No Depth (inches):
No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes
No Depth (inches):'Zp1�:Q
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No l
includes cailla fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
I
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont- Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: b f't V u
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tr Stratum (plot siz 3y 3 D ) % Cover S es? Status
1- 4Af
2.
3. [tiprel AN IllLAW 144 r. Ba Tf M^_ -
Sapling Stralum (Plot size:
1.
6.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 7 J r 20% of total cover: 3
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 3 o g 3y 1
1. L 1i1 Fi�L
2_ke't, fu—l—
Total Cover
50% of totaE cover.�' f 20% of total cover;
Herb Stratum (Plot size: I $ A I r )
1. r�lntv�aiI3%wl �PuinTto -Q.A
5.
6.
7.
8
9.
10.
== Total Cover
50% of total cover: 2• r20% of total cover:
Woodx Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15>< tt r )
1.IR t5 FU
2.
3.
4.
�_ = Total Cover
50% of total cover. �_ 20% of total cover: I
(Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant / A
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species 9:
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:y (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x 4 =
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 apid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Dominance Test is >50%
3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
_ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 it (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 It (1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
ft (1 m) in height.
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: kA b uP
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color {moist]_ % _ Color lmoist) % Type Co _ Texture Remarks
b -a b I 011k 3 too 1, ,AAPx
RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosoi (Al)
_ Dark Surface (S7)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
— Black Histic (A3)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147,148)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Stratified Layers (A5)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (1712) (LRR N.
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1719) (MLRA 148)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127,147)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
De (inches):µ
Remarks:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Sc
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147,1481
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: 7921 Mills Rd City/County: Cary, Wake Sampling Date: 7' 1 f 4
Applicant/Owner: Mills Road, LLC State: NC Sampling Point: w�
Investigator(s): J� Harbour Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc. Y �.1 i 5) s Local relief (concave, convex, none): Cd rAft4 llf . Slope (%): �p—
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): Lat: IT. % b r to Long: ' 7 f. qp?f Datum: W9s 84
Soil Map Unit Name: elrlple4wa T��r✓L NW) classification: P F o
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS -F Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Remarks: EQa �Gt, Nl
HYDROLOGY
Yes No
Yes � No
Yes No
,,-ppVe.b Ie �7o r
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
WPDJ WNE)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary, Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
_ Surface Water (Al)
_ True Aquatic Plants (614)
High Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Saturation (A3)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Water Marks (131)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4 )
_ Sediment Deposits (B2)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
__ . Drift Deposits (B3)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (64)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Iron Deposits (135)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7 )
Y Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
__ Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Yes `/ No
wwc
Surface Soil Cracks (136)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Geomorphic Position (132)
_s Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Microtopographic Relief (134)
FAC-Neutral Test (135)
Surface Water Present? Yes No V Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): i' a o
Saturation Present? Yes __N/' No Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes _Z6— No
[includes canillary frinael
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: W u D W
30 3!7
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )
% Cover Species?
Status
Number of Dominant Species
``
1. L . d r«l
(D
FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
(A)
2. Y-%A rmfn
15-
F4
— —
Total Number of Dominant
3.
Species Across All Strata:
(B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
5.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0
(A/B)
6.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
= Total Cover
s
Si
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover.
• 20% of total cover.
OBL specie, x 1 =
Sapling Stratum (Plot size: )
FACW species x 2 =
1.
FAC specie, x 3 =
2.
FACU species x 4 =
3.
UPL species x 5 =
4.
Column Totals: (A)
(ey
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 3 o tt 30 1 t,
1. Q tin rk6rugm �— _ L
"D _ - Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 >< } 5700
)
r 2. �ut4�yc�Mria (tTit"N;(�. �
3.
4.
J.
6.
7.
—3 A = Total Cover
50% of total cover. _l.�_ 20% of total cover: _
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
` - —1--
2.
3.
5.
S' = Total Cover
50% of total cover: a. S 20% of total cover:_
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
_ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 It (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
ft (1 m) in height.
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: w N p w
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
[inches] Color (moist) % Color (moistI % _ Type Log Texture Remarks
0-01 J Yry R dij _100 - - A
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Deplelion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: i
_ Histosol (A1)
_ Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (AID) (MLRA 147)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147,148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
oamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136,147)
2 cm Muck (AID) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
T_
a Redox Depressions (F8)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (SQ)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA '136, 122)
)ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_ Sandy Redox (S51
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Red Parent Material (F21 y (MLRA 127,147)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydric
Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section W of the JD Form Instructional
Guidebook
SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
State: NC County/parish/borough: Wake City: Cary
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 35.7856' N, Long.-78.9075 ° W.
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: White Oak Creek
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: Jordon lake (Haw
River)
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): B Everett Jordan Lake -New Hope River 0303000206
'Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc... ) are associated with this action and are
recorded on a different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
'Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
Field Determination. Date(s):
SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There are no "navigable waters of the U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR
part 329) in the review area. [Required]
'Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate
or foreign commerce.
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There are "waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area.
[Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply): '
TNWs, including territorial seas
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
❑ Relatively permanent waters' (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑ Non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑ Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑ Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑ Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑ Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
❑ Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non -wetland waters: linear feet: width (ft) and/or acres.
Wetlands: acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: gck List
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
' Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
2 For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year-round or has continuous
flow at least "seasonally" (e.g., typically 3 months).

2. Non -regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable):3
Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to
be not jurisdictional. Explain: One upland pond that has no significant nexus to downstream RPW
SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is
a TNW, complete Section III.A.1 and Section III.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a
TNW, complete Sections III.A.1 and 2 and Section III.D.1.; otherwise, see Section IIIM below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:.
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent":
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS
(IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if
any, and it helps determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have
been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non -navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are
"relatively permanent waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year-round or have continuous
flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3 months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also
jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year-round (perennial) flow, skip to Section
III.D.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow, skip to Section
III.D.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus
evaluation. Corps districts and EPA regions will include in the record any available information that
documents the existence of a significant nexus between a relatively permanent tributary that is not
perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even though a significant
nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbody4 is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data
to determine if the waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands,
the significant nexus evaluation must consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for analytical purposes, the tributary and all of
its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is the tributary, or its
adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section III.B.1 for
the tributary, Section III.B.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section III.B.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that
tributary, both onsite and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in
Section III.0 below.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: acres
Drainage area: acres
Average annual rainfall: inches
Average annual snowfall: inches
3 Supporting documentation is presented in Section III.F.
° Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features
generally and in the and West.

(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
❑ Tributary flows directly into TNW.
❑ Tributary flows through Pick Lisl tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are river miles from TNW.
Project waters are river miles from RPW.
Project waters are aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:.
Identify flow route to TNW5:
Tributary stream order, if known:
(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apply):
Tributary is: ❑ Natural
❑ Artificial (man-made). Explain:.
❑ Manipulated (man -altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: feet
Average depth: foot
Average side slopes:
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
❑ Silts ❑ Sands ❑ Concrete
❑ Cobbles ❑ Gravel ❑ Muck
❑ Bedrock ❑ Vegetation. Type/% cover:
❑ Other. Explain:
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain:
Presence of run/riffle/pool complexes. Explain:.
Tributary geometry:
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope):
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for:
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year:
Describe flow regime:
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is:. Characteristics:
Subsurface flow:. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
❑ Bed and banks
❑ OHWM6 (check all indicators that apply):
❑ clear, natural line impressed on the bank
❑
❑ changes in the character of soil
❑
❑ shelving
❑
❑ vegetation matted down, bent, or absent
❑
❑ leaf litter disturbed or washed away
❑
the presence of litter and debris
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
the presence of wrack line
sediment sorting
scour
5 Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then
flows into TNW.
6A natural or man-made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows
underground, or where the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the
OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look
for indicators of flow above and below the break.

❑ sediment deposition
❑ water staining
❑ other (list):
❑ Discontinuous OHWM.7 Explain:
❑ multiple observed or predicted flow
❑ abrupt change in plant community
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check
all that apply):
High Tide Line indicated by: Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
❑ oil or scum line along shore objects ❑ survey to available datum;
❑ fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore) ❑ physical markings;
❑ physical markings/characteristics ❑ vegetation lines/changes in vegetation
types.
❑ tidal gauges
❑ other (list):
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed
characteristics, etc.). Explain:.
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width):
❑ Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally -sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:.
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non-TNW that flow directly or indirectIv into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size: acres
Wetland type. Explain.
Wetland quality. Explain:
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain: .
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non-TNW:
Flow is: Explain:
Surface flow is: .
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow:. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non-TNW:
❑ Directly abutting
❑ Not directly abutting
❑ Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain: .
❑ Ecological connection. Explain:
❑ Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are river miles from TNW.
Project waters are aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
7Ibid.

Flow is from%
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the year floodplain
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general
watershed characteristics; etc.). Explain: .
Identify specific pollutants, if known:.
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
❑ Vegetation type/percent cover. Explain .
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally -sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis:
Approximately ( ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.
For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size in
acres
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the
functions performed by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the
chemical, physical, and biological integrity of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant
nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, has more than a speculative or
insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and/or biological integrity of a TNW. Considerations when
evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all
its adjacent wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific
threshold of distance (e.g. between a tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the
TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or outside of a floodplain is not solely
determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the
Rapanos Guidance and discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or
flood waters to TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support
functions for fish and other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are
present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients
and organic carbon that support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical,
chemical, or biological integrity of the TNW?

Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur
should be documented below:
Significant nexus findings for non-RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly
into TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself,
then go to Section III.D:
2. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non-RPW flows directly
or indirectly into TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the
tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to Section III.D:
3. Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW.
Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination
with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to Section III.D:
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE
(CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
1. TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
'TNWs: linear feet, width (ft), Or, acres.
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres
2. RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year-round are jurisdictional. Provide data and
rationale indicating that tributary is perennial:
Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months
each year) are jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide
rationale indicating that tributary flows seasonally:
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
'Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
Other non -wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
3. Non-RPWss that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a
significant nexus with a TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section
III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
Other non -wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
4. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year-round. Provide data and
rationale indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating
that wetland is directly abutting an RPW:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data
indicating that tributary is seasonal in Section III.B and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide
rationale indicating that wetland is directly abutting an RPW:
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
'See Footnote # 3.

5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to
which they are adjacent and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a
TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
6. Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which
they are adjacent and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.'
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1-6), or
Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA-STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS,
THE USE, DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE
COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):10
19 which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
❑ from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
❑ which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
❑ Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
❑ Other factors. Explain:
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
Prude estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
Other non -wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Wetlands: acres.
F. NON -JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987
Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
❑ Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
❑ Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated
based solely on the "Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction.
Explain: The pond was excavated in uplands and does not have a significant nexus to downstream
waters.
Other: (explain, if not covered above):
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of
jurisdiction is the MBR factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for
irrigated agriculture), using best professional judgment (check all that apply):
Non -wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
Lakes/ponds: acres.
g Other non -wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
e To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III.D.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to
Corps and EPA HQ for review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act
Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.

❑ Wetlands:.
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus"
standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
Non -wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
Lakes/ponds: 0.5 acres.
Other non -wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case
file and, where checked and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:.
Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
❑ Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:
❑ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS N14D data.
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:. The National Map 1:24000
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: Wake County Soil Survey 1970.
National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
❑ State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
❑ FEMA/FIRM maps:
❑ 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
® Photographs: ® Aerial (Name & Date):Potential Wetlands and Waters 2021.
or ❑ Other (Name & Date):
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
❑ Applicable/supporting case law:
❑ Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
® Other information (please specify): Town of Cary has reviewed the pond and determined it is not subject to a
riparian buffer because it has no connection to downstream waters.
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:

STORMWATER DIVISION
August 3, 2021
Jeff Harbour
Terracon
2401 Brentwood Road, Suite 107
Raleigh, NC 27604
Subject: Jordan Lake Watershed — Riparian Buffer and Urban Transition Buffer Rules
7921 Mills Road
TCRB 21-005R (Replaces TCRB 15-005 dated May 27, 2021)
Address
Real ID#
PIN 10
7921 Mills Road
0047510
0724619147
Dear Mr. Harbour:
Maps provided by you allowed a determination to be made as to whether or not the referenced site would require compliance
with The Town of Cary Riparian Buffer and Urban Transition Buffer (UTB) Rules. This project, as referenced by the Town of
Cary as TCRB 21-005R, includes features as depicted on the attached maps. The table below summarizes the stream
determination made in a site visit on August 2, 2021. This determination is valid until August 2, 2026.
Reference ID
USGS Map 100 Ft. Buffer
Soil Survey Map 50 Ft. Buffer
Not Subject
Feature A
X
and
Feature B
X
outlet stream
Feature C
X
Not Contested
NOTES: Pond is an isolated pond in high ground with no outlet feature. Evaluated property shown on the attached maps is
part of a larger 118+ acre parcel, and additional mapped features are present on the greater property that were not evaluated.
Landowners or affected parties that dispute a stream origin determination made by the Town of Cary may appeal the
determination to the NC Division of Water Resources. An appeal request must be made within sixty (60) days of date of this
letter. A request for a determination by the Director of DWR shall be referred to the Director in writing. If sending via US
Postal Service: c/o Paul Wojoski; DWR — 401 & Buffer Permitting Unit; 1617 Mail Service Center; Raleigh, NC 27699-1617. If
sending via delivery service (UPS, FedEx, etc.): Paul Wojoski; DWR — 401 & Buffer Permitting Unit; 512 N. Salisbury Street;
Raleigh, NC 27604.
Any appeal submitted shall be related to the origin of the stream channel and/or applicability of the Jordan Lake Buffer Rules
to a stream feature.
This determination is final and binding unless, as detailed above, an appeal is requested within sixty (60) days.
Sincerely,
§e�
Eric W. Kulz
Environmental Specialist
TOWN Of CARY
318 North Academy Street •Cary, NC 27513•PO Box 8005•Cary, NC 27512-8005
te1919-469-4030 • fax [phone]• www.townofcary.org

N
FA(Pond)
i
i
S
F Cape Fear ;tier Bavin '�
Q1 OH '_'.000 4.000 Ozi;�s'npn 1pe a e maple -. a1'heNmarai r.+a, • r,: :. i Project Study Area .ralrm ear EOM Prope sa. y ►..a pro.ie.n ey dare
Feet Mk-LSRC cw¢
Project
Project Location
W
JFi
7l?2174fp
I rerracon
�
1:24,Opp
MillsRcsd Wetlandsand Waters Dermeation
ename
RG
Cary. Wake Ccurftf.
North Carolina
Approved By
Date.
• ";
JR
June 2021

MACH Sauxrr5
507 NRCS Seib sue, - AA m �;.,rN, 19m: Prvk" ft Om
0 Project Study Area - ;Pti,idcd 3* CieptUU.Sr+n.o.q
Fit
Project o.
NRCS SD113
EXHIBIT
JH
70217419
lrerracon
N,
Cr""'By. KT
bcale , a�
Mills Road ~and=_ and Water_ Ue-inestir r
Z
enart�.
RC
u, h
Cary. 'V%%ke :;Ounty,
North Carolina
Approved By
Cate:
JHIJ
June 2021
4,�,,,.;,-

STORMWATER DIVISION
October 25, 2021
Rhiannon Graham
Terracon
2401 Brentwood Road, Suite 107
Raleigh, NC 27604
Subject: Jordan Lake Watershed — Riparian Buffer and Urban Transition Buffer Rules
7921 Mills Road
TCRB 21-005R2 (Replaces TCRB 21-005 dated May 27, 2021 and TCRB 21-005R dated August 3, 2021))
Address
ReallD#
PIN10
7921 Mills Road
0047510
0724619147
7824 Emery Gale Lane
0015183
0724706260
Dear Ms. Graham:
Maps provided by you allowed a determination to be made as to whether or not the referenced site would require compliance with The Town
of Cary Riparian Buffer and Urban Transition Buffer (UTB) Rules. This project, as referenced by the Town of Cary as TCRB 21-005R2,
includes features as depicted on the attached maps. The table below summarizes the stream determination made in a site visit on October
25, 2021. This determination is valid until October 25, 2026.
Reference ID
USGS Ma 100 Ft. Buffer
Soil Survey Ma 50 Ft. Buffer
Not Subject
Feature A and
X
Feature B
outlet stream
X
Feature C
X
Not Contested
Feature D
X
NOTES: Pond is an isolated pond in high ground with no outlet feature. The larger parcel shown on the attached maps is part of a larger
118+ acre parcel (7921 Mills Road), and additional mapped features are present on the greater property that were not evaluated.
Landowners or affected parties that dispute a stream origin determination made by the Town of Cary may appeal the determination to the NC
Division of Water Resources. An appeal request must be made within sixty (60) days of date of this letter. A request for a determination by
the Director of DWR shall be referred to the Director in writing. If sending via US Postal Service: c/o Paul Wojoski; DWR — 401 & Buffer
Permitting Unit; 1617 Mail Service Center; Raleigh, NC 27699-1617. If sending via delivery service (UPS, FedEx, etc.): Paul Wojoski; DWR —
401 & Buffer Permitting Unit; 512 N. Salisbury Street; Raleigh, NC 27604.
Any appeal submitted shall be related to the origin of the stream channel and/or applicability of the Jordan Lake Buffer Rules to a stream
feature.
This determination is final and binding unless, as detailed above, an appeal is requested within sixty (60) days.
Sincerely, /
40e v
Eric W. Kulz
Environmental Specialist
TOWN Of CARY
318 North Academy Street Cary, NC 27513-PO Box 8005 •Cary, NC 27512-8005
te1919-469-4030 • fax [phone]- -,v<v�v.to-,vnofcary.org

DATASOURCES:
0 0 1 ,000 2,000 4,000 USGS Topo tile base map service of The National Map (TNM), data Project Study Area refreshed May 2020, Project Study Area provided by Client
Feet M I LLSRD.dwg.
PM:
JH
Project No.
Project Location
EXHIBIT
70217419
NO.
Drawn By:
Scale:
KT
1:24 000
Irerracon
Mills Road Wetlands and Waters Delineation
.�
Checked By:
Filename:
RG
Cary, Wake County,
MillsRoad
North Carolina
Approved By:
Date:
2401 Brentwood Road, Suite 107 Raleigh, NC 27604
JH
October 2021
phone: [phone]„ Fax: [phone]

N ¢' r �! M1 tt G r
r�' J
{ v r
`I r B
1 r
Cr
r`
i
1 IFIJ
. ^ �+y r j+
. f
C Cle G
r rt r le
u
Soil Mapping
Au Augusta fine sandy loam
CrB2 Creedmoor sandy loam, 2-6% slopes, eroded;
r
CrC Creedmoor sandy loam, 6-10% slopes
CrC2 Creedmoor sandy loam, 6-10% slopes, eroded �r
CrE Creedmoor sandy loam, 10-20% slopes
Wn Wehadkee silt loam r
Wo Wehadkee and Bibb soils
Wy Worsham sandy loam 0 Cape Fear River Basin
Ir
DATASOURCES:
0 0 250 500 1 ,000 NRCS Soil Survey of Wake County, 1970, Project Study Area Project Study Area provided by Client MILLSRD.dwg.
Feet
-_J
PM:
Project No.
NRCS Soils
EXHIBIT
JH
70217419
NO.
Drawn By:
Scale:
KT
1:6 000
Irerracon
Mills Road Wetlands and Waters Delineation
2
Checked By:
Filename:
RG
Cary, Wake County,
MillsRoad
North Carolina
Approved By:
Date:
2401 Brentwood Road, Suite 107 Raleigh, NC 27604
JH
October 2021
Phone: (91s)a73-2211 Fax: (s,$)873-9555

0 Project Study Area
Potential Wetland
0 150 300
V Q C
U,
_N
d
� V
r
E
F— M.
r ..
Mills
Emex y
0 Cape Fear River Basin m
a
m
0
DATASOURCES:
600 USGS Topo tile base map service of The National Map (TNM), data n
refreshed May 2020, Project Study Area provided by Client
Feet MILLSRD.dwg.
0
0
PM: JH
Project No.
Potential Wetlands and Waters
EXHIBIT
70217419
NO.
Drawn By:
Scale:
KT
1:3 600
Irerracon
Mills Road Wetlands and Waters Delineation
3
Checked By:
Filename:
RG
Cary, Wake County,
Mills oa
I
North Carolina
Approved By:
Date:
2401 Brentwood Road, Suite 107 Raleigh, NC 27604
JH
October 2021
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
2
w