HomeMy WebLinkAbout20140727 Ver 1_Jurisdictional Determination_20140804Burdette, Jennifer a
From: Bob Zarzecki <bzarzecki @sandec.com>
Sent: Monday, August 04, 2014 3:51 PM
To: 'david.l.shaeffer @usace.army.mil'; Burdette, Jennifer a; Smith, Cherri L
Subject: HANSON CRABTREE (SAW - 2014- 01246)_JD & Buffer Information
Attachments: HANSON CRABTREE - Stream & Wetland Table-July 2014.xlsx; HANSON CRABTREE
(S &EC Sketch, USGS & Soil Survey).pdf, HANSON Crabtree-JD FORM_South (Richland
Creek).doc; HANSON Crabtree-JD FORM_North (Crabtree Creek).doc
1. Stream & Wetland Table
2. Map Package (Sketch, USGS, Soil)
3. Rappanos JD Forms (South including Richland Creek & North including Crabtree Creek)
I think everything is straight and given this information and what was previously provided you should
have everything you need for the JD and buffer determinations, but let me know if you need anything
The streams and wetlands are being survey located now. I hope to have a survey plat map ready for
sign off soon.
Hanson is still working on their vested right request package and working with the City on some
*rdinance issues. They are also working on their stream bypass plans and anticipated
impacts. Once these are all resolved we'll be proceeding with the anticipated IP application.
Bob Zarzecki
Wetlands Department Manager
Soil & Environmental Consultants, PA
From: Bob Zarzecki
Sent: Monday, July 28, 2014 11:18 AM
To: ' david .Lshaeffer @usace.army.mil'; 'Jennifer.Burdette @ncdenr.gov'; Smith, Cherri L (cherri.smith(a)ncdenr.gov)
Subject: RE: HANSON CRABTREE - Draft Stream Table (SAW- 2014 - 01246)
. IN t • t " ••
Bob Zarzecki
Wetlands Department Manager
Soil & Environmental Consultants, PA
From: Bob Zarzecki
Sent: Friday, July 25, 2014 3:21 PM
To: ' david .Lshaeffer @usace.army.mil'; 'Jennifer.Burdette @ncdenr.gov'; Smith, Cherri L (cherri.smith@)ncdenr.gov)
Subject: HANSON CRABTREE - Draft Stream Table (SAW- 2014 - 01246)
Folks
Attached is the draft stream & wetlands table as promised for the Hanson Crabtree project. Take a
look at it and let me kOOVV if it looks correct O[if I need to rn@k8 changes before I finalize
it. Thanks! I'm available if you have any questions. I'm still cleaning UD the maps @ little, but also
attached is a draft updated sketch map for reference as you review this table.
Dave -I'll send the RbaDD@OOS][) forms over along with the final table and maps iO one nice clean
PDF. I'll also provide the JD forms in IVISWord format in case you want to change them some.
Cheers!
Bob Zarzedki
Ws0onds DePoirtimentMonoger
So0 & EnvimonnnentsU ConsuUtsnts, PA
We've moved to:
North Quarter Office Pork
8412FoUUsofNeuse Road, Suite 1O4
RoUeigh, NC 27615
(919)846-59OOOffice Phone
(919) 256-4517 Direct Line
(919) 846-9467 Fax
(919) 270-2068 Mob0e
Visit usotSandEC.coDl|
Fmue|emmnmcommun|caoon.mc|umngan attachments, |umtenueuon|v for the named addressee (u) and may contamconnuenua|mfomnaoon Tmue|emmnm
commun|caoonmaynotoavepauueummugoourstanuardmwe=/quantycontm|pmceuu oeu|gn data and mcommenuaoonumc|uueuoemm are pmwueuaua
matter ofconven|ence and uoou|unot be Used for nna|ueu|gn lRe|von|vonnna|.oardcopvmatena|ubeanng the conuuuanruongma|u|gnamm and uea| |fvou
are not the named addressee (s), any Use, 6ssemmafion, 6StVR)Ufion or copyxng of tHS COMMUNcafion |s prohRAted. If YOU have rec6ved tHs e|ectroNc
commun|caoonm error, p|eauenofify the sender bvxetumeman and ue|ete the odgma|commun|caoon from voursystem Toanxvou
APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION 1: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD): July 11, 2014
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:Wilmington District, Hanson Crabtree Quarry, SAW- 2014 -01246
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
State: North Carolina County/parish/borough: Wake City: Raleigh
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 35.8474'N, Long. -078.7146'W.
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Richland Creek
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: Crabtree Creek
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): Upper Neuse River 03020201
Check if map /diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is /are available upon request.
�i 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):
1 Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
0i Field Determination. Date(s): July 11, 2014
SECTION 11: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Are "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]
l Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
�i Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain: Crabtree Creek, "navigable -in- fact ", recreational paddling.
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): 1
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
Z, 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
F, Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑, Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
Fi 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: +/- 2,630 (including Richland Creek) linear feet: 3 to 30 width (ft) and/or 1.35 acres.
Wetlands: +/- 1 acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: Estall
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):variable.
2. Non - regulated waters /wetlands (check if applicable) :3
®i Potentially jurisdictional waters and /or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain: NPDES water processing ponds and sediment basins exist and determined non - jurisdictional.
1 Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
2 For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year -round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally" (e.g.,
typically 3 months).
s Supporting documentation is presented in Section IILF.
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 IILD.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 HLB below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW: Crabtree Creek, 40 to 60 feet wide, perennial stream.
Summarize rationale supporting determination: OHWM, named stream on USGS map, multiple paddling guide books.
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent': OHWM; wetland located w/n FEMA mapped floodplain.
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 IILD.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 IILC below.
1. Characteristics of non -TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: 24 (not includng Richland Creek) acres
Drainage area: 24 acres
Average annual rainfall: 42 inches
Average annual snowfall: 7 inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
® Tributary flows directly into TNW.
❑ Tributary flows through Pick List tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are I (or'less) river miles from TNW.
Project waters are 1 �or'less) river miles from RPW.
Project waters are 1 �or'less) aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are 1 (or'less) aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain: n/a.
Identify flow route to TNWS: project waters are 1st order RPW & Richllnd Creek flowing directly to TNW.
Tributary stream order, if known: I" & Richland Creek.
(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apply):
Tributary is: ® Natural
4 Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and West.
s 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.
❑ Artificial (man- made). Explain:
® Manipulated (man - altered). Explain: small pond built on RPW, restricting surface base flow within
channel below for all but storm events, resulting in non jurisdicitonal hydrologic connection.
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: 3 feet
Average depth: 0.2 feet
Average side slopes: Vertical (1:14 less)'.
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: realtively stable.
Presence of run/riffle /pool complexes. Explain: present.
Tributary geometry: Relatively straight
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): 8 %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: Seasonal flow
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year: 20 (or greater)
Describe flow regime: regular base flow.
Other information on duration and volume: biological indicators of regular base flow (macrobenthos).
Surface flow is:
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: UAnown. 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
® sediment deposition
❑ water staining
❑ other (list):
F-1 Discontinuous OHWM.' Explain:
the presence of litter and debris
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
the presence of wrack line
sediment sorting
scour
multiple observed or predicted flow events
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:
water color was clear during base flow, clear at time of delineation; watershed largely wooded and undeveloped with the
exception of Duraleigh Road.
Identify specific pollutants, if known: non - known.
6A natural or man -made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where the
OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow regime (e.g., flow
over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
'Ibid.
(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
® Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width): wooded, >100 in most places.
❑ 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: macroinvertebrates found at time of delineation.
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non -TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size: + /- 1 acres
Wetland type. Explain:headwater forests / riparian.
Wetland quality. Explain: high quality; w/ high- native vegetative diversity & uncommon OBL wl plant (Symplocarpus f.); .
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain: n/a.
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non -TNW:
Flow is: Intermittent flow. Explain:
Surface flow is: Discrete
Characteristics: all wetlands enter RPW via discrete flow paths.
Subsurface flow: Yes. Explain findings: evidence observed by consultant between wetland & RPW via hand auger.
❑ 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 1, (or'less) river miles from TNW.
Project waters are 1, (or'les) aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: Wetland to navigable waters.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the 2 - 5 -yetir 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: no surface water at time of delineaiton; consultant observed clear to murky water previously.
Identify specific pollutants, if known: non - known.
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
® Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):wooded; >100 on average.
® Vegetation type /percent cover. Explain:high vegetative diversity.
® Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species. Explain findings:
® Aquatic /wildlife diversity. Explain findings:wetland seeps with high vegetative diversity & structure; great habitat.
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis:
Approximately ( 1) 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)
W4 - Yes —0.3 W5 - Yes < 0.1
W6 - Yes —0.2 W7- —0.4
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed: high functions for biological & physical;
checmical unknown, no signficant input of polluntants to be removed, ability exists for provide high water quality functions.
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 IILD:
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 IILD:
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 IILD:
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL THAT
APPLY):
TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
TNWs: +/ -1,850 linear feet 30 width (ft), Or, 1.3 acres.
®i Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: 1 acres.
RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
®i Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year -round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that tributary
is perennial: DWR stream form scores above 19 pts; biological indicators present such as macrobenthos (cadis flies, etc.).
❑� 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 IILB. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows seasonally:
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: 780 linear feet 3 width (ft).
QI Other non - wetland waters: 0.05 acres.
Identify type(s) of waters: RPWs - perennial streams.
Non -RPWs8 that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
�i 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 IILC.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
F, Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
FI Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
®i Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
�i Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year- round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section IILD.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW: abuts and flows directly into RPW.
Qi Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section IILB and rationale in Section IILD.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly abutting an
RPW:
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: + / -1 acres.
Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Fi 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 IILC.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
�i 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 IILC.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.9
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
❑, Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
❑, Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1 -6), or
Fi 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):'o
F which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
Fj from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
Fj which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
F, Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
Fi Other factors. Explain:
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
'See Footnote # 3.
9 To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section IILD.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.
Fj Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
❑i Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
❑i 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:
Other: (explain, if not covered above): NPDES water processing ponds and sediment basins exist within review area and determined
non - jurisdictional per Federal Register.
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):
Fi Non - wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
Fj Lakes /ponds: acres.
Fj Other non - wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
❑, Wetlands: acres.
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a
finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
Fi Non - wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
Fj Lakes /ponds: acres.
Fj 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:
�i 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.
1 Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
Fi Corps navigable waters' study:
Fj U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data.
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: 1:24 000 Raleigh West 2013.
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:Wake County 1970.
Fj National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
Fj State /Local wetland inventory map(s):
Fj FEMA /FIRM maps:
Fj 100 -year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
Fj Photographs: ❑ Aerial (Name & Date):
or ❑ Other (Name & Date):
l Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
Fj Applicable /supporting case law:
Fj Applicable /supporting scientific literature:
Fj Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:
�f '� _ s �.– £fit "] • ° se+ �._ _ -tea -
LLI
• .ti � _ -- - .�,�._ SS Start Char, r,e7�
__
YL= -- U Richlar-rd CreeK� `- --
_ �� �J' �• 53 Start Char,n e_74 _
�J� .Stream 3
Im
J'C
Stream 4 -
_
We t-1 and 1 f7 -
-
��.' %J�/ _ .mil': _ ••_�i�' -"s.
T - �� Existir�g Sedim er�t
-
Existir-rg Sedim errt
* wetland 4,•��]ags A v - - -
vilk -low - !i + ___O p we t7 ar,d S f7 a9 s_ A -Q-
} -'-" - Non - jurisdictional connection �' - ss STOP CHAD
�-' - .� -"-'�' - ='F�`k _- tom• - - _ �'' �F ���-- � - �'
ar,d !7 f7a
Nan
pxw a `titer.
art Char, r,e
Retailed Bel in ill on of Waters of the United States 1
Suitable for Preliminary Planning Only -;
`� Orl '
a
Stream nd Wetla d
n Evaluation performed by S8EC _. '- } x .-
between 06/05/20'14 8 06/'16/20'14_ This is not a survey_ �" __ +s -y--'�
s-
Stream and wetland determinations have not been
confirmed by the USACE or NC -BWR_ - -;
0
i 1 _
Oil
F i rz�iti— -
'
r
7
•i
4 'Ar
bbp
j W—WO_"
F _
G -:
� Legend
�����' o00o Non - Jurisdictional Connection
_ Project Area
-• +� = �r Perennial Stream
- - �o Intermittent Stream
F
__ � Jurisdictional Wetland
.� Z Sediment Basin or Processing Pond <Non- Junsdictional�
-_ Contours <2 -Foot Interval
250 500 1,000
Feet
8-372 Fads of �cuse Rua d, 4u,FC 10�- F2alc i�ir_ \C 276��. � Ptiorac: ;'J L4] fiJG -�'3U0 � ]%at3c: {9191 S- Lf. -1 Jf-
sa r�c�cc_cum
Le g e n d
Project Area
0
llo
r
_ 7SZc3 xx 42�
>� ®���� ��,�_ o Hanson Crabt ree Quarry
B� WaKe Co _ NC
I !a -- 'I D ®®®"
®1 4�e (DD 45; °2
A5k
_ a
r_
R
cz
A
�r
•Tcr �=
O 1 ,000
7
}
--
9
�o
�a
4.000
_ E
1
Feet
Sc_>31 �3c Erz�+c�3rvr� ri rital Corisul grits, Y
73X72 ■� ails of Neusr Raad Suite l�.l. RaleigF�, ETC 2765 - Ptiourz {419) fCJ6 -S96Q - Ta >= { 37 3; ti1C -1 J{a7
sa r�clec_com
Existing Sediment
fi
Basin #9
f W E.4Y
IL
Existing
Process
O
Water Pond #1
�r
•Tcr �=
O 1 ,000
7
}
--
9
�o
�a
4.000
_ E
1
Feet
Sc_>31 �3c Erz�+c�3rvr� ri rital Corisul grits, Y
73X72 ■� ails of Neusr Raad Suite l�.l. RaleigF�, ETC 2765 - Ptiourz {419) fCJ6 -S96Q - Ta >= { 37 3; ti1C -1 J{a7
sa r�clec_com
_ Igo'
'- � - � Evaluated area S
Basin #'1 ` ti
-5 INA
vv
f
ja
MOW
jp
c
Project No_
'1'1282_W5 SO11 SurV @y Map O 495 990 1 ,950
Project Mgr_= Hanson Crabtree Quarry Feet
Bz WaKe Co_ NC
Scale=
1 =
ES Q CY Printed WaKa Co_ Soil Survey, �� �Y3''��0 *121�Y1 *Y��3SiSZS�1 *S= gib
$dig F'a§ls
SJ6 -5966 - Fa3c- X919} 846 lA.GT
Map Sheets 37 8� 38 �.,ne£_�o..�
20'1 4 -06 -24
HANSON CRABTREE - Stream & Wetland Table (SAW- 2014 - 01246)
On -site Stream Determinations & Jurisdictional Determinations verified on July 11, 2014
S &EC - Bob Zarzecki / USACE - David Shaeffer / DWR -RRO - Cherri Smith / DWR -401 - Jennifer Burdette
Map Label
S &EC Map Label
Jurisdictional
Neuse Buffers **
Classification
USGS Map
Soil Survey
Notes
STREAMS A
S1
Yes
Subject
perennial
Yes
Yes
B
S2
Yes
Subject
perennial
Yes
Yes
n/d
S3
Yes
Not Subject (n /d)
intermittent
No
No
C
S4
Yes
Subject
perennial
No
Yes
D
S5
No*
Pond Only On property
not present
NO
Yes
* portion of pond open water may extend onto property; no stream from pond dam to "S1"
E
S6
Yes
Subject
intermittent
No
Yes
n/d
S7
Yes
Not Subject (n /d)
intermittent
No
No
F
S8
Yes
Subject
perennial
NO
Yes
"S8" flows into wetladn "W5 ", the outlet channel from "W5" was determined ephemeral & n/i
G
S9
Yes
Subject
intermittent
No
Yes
H
n /d; n/j
No
Not Subject
not present
No
Yes
n /d; n/j
No
Not Subject
not present
No
Yes
J
n /d; n/j
No
Not Subject
not present
No
Yes
K
n /d; n/j
No
Not Subject
not present
No
Yes
L
n /d; n/j
No
Not Subject
not present
No
Yes
M
n /d; n/j
NO
Not Subject
not present
NO
Yes
Wetland "W3" exists in this drainage, but no stream channel
N
S10
Yes
Not Subject
intermittent
Yes
Yes
O
n /d; n/j
No
Not Subject
not present
No
Yes
P
n /d; n/j
No
Not Subject
not present
No
Yes
Q
n /d; n/j
No
Not Subject
not present
No
Yes
R
n /d; n/j
NO
Not Subject
not present
NO
Yes
"R" is the stream channel depicted on soil survey above the "SB1"
S
n /d; n/j
No
Not Subject
not present
No
Yes
Richland Creek
named stream
Yes
Subject
perennial
Yes
Yes
Crabtree Creek
named stream
Yes
Subject
perennial
Yes
Yes
WETLANDS n/d
W1
Yes
n/a
headwater forest / riparian
NO
NO
possible historic stream location; limited vegetative structure ( <25% coverage)
n/d
W2
Yes
n/a
headwater forest / riparian
NO
NO
starts at spring box, limited vegetative structure ( <25% coverage)
n/d
W3
Yes
n/a
headwater forest / riparian
NO
NO
limited vegetative structure ( <25% coverage) except in sewer easement
n/d
W4
Yes
n/a
headwater forest / riparian
NO
NO
high quality wetland w/ high- native vegetative diversity; (contains Symplocarpus foetidus)
n/d
W5
Yes
n/a
headwater forest / riparian
NO
NO
good quality wetland w/n small pond area; NCWAM "B" vegetation /open water dispersion
n/d
W6
Yes
n/a
headwater forest / riparian
No
No
high quality wetland w/ high- native vegetative diversity
n/d
W7
Yes
n/a
headwater forest / riparian
No
No
high quality wetland w/ high- native vegetative diversity
PONDS SB1
SB1
No
Not Subject
NPDES
Yes
Yes
2 ponds shown on soil survey & USGS; only 1 NPDES pond exists; n/j
n/d
SB2
No
Not Subject (n /d)
NPDES
No
No
see "WPP1"
SB3
No
Not Subject
NPDES
Yes
No
see note "WPP1"
n/d
SB4
No
Not Subject (n /d)
NPDES
No
No
WPP1
WPP1
No
Not Subject
NPDES
Yes
No
2 ponds shown on USGS & none on soil survey; NPDES ponds; n/j
n/d
WPP2
No
Not Subject (n /d)
NPDES
No
No
S5 Pond
offsite pond
Yes*
Subject, Pond Only
open water
No
No
portion of open water may extend onto property; no stream from pond dam to "S1"
** Hanson has requested a vested right review and NEUSE BUFFER RULE may NOT apply to project.
Classification = perenial / intermittent / ephemeral / non - existent / NCWAM Wetland Type
"n /d" = not depicted on USGS or Soil Survey
"n /j" = not jurisdictional
"SB" = Sediment Basin
"WWP" = Water Processing Pond
NPDES = part of National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), not jurisdictional