20120285_Other Documents_20111208

Beverly Eaves Perdue
Governor
��������
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and
Division of Water Quality
Coleen H. Sullins
Director
Michael Gloden, PWS, Senior Scientist
Atkins
1616 East Millbrook Road, Suite 310
Raleigh, NC 27609
Natural Resources
/��-
Dee Freeman
Secretary
December 8, 2011
SUBJECT: On-Site Determination for Applicability to the Mitigation Rules [15A NCAC
2H .0506(h)], Linwood Springs Golf Course, Proposed Mitigation Area for
Impacts Associated with the Proposed Construction of the Gaston East-
West Connector, STIP U-3321, Gaston County
Dear Mr. Gloden:
Polly Lespinasse of the Division of Water Quality (DWQ) and Liz Hair of the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (USACE) met with you at the above referenced site on August 4, 2011, in order to provide
verification of potential jurisdictional features previously identified by you for the above referenced
project. The features were evaluated for applicability to the mitigation rules set forth in [15A NCAC
2H .0506(h)]. Based on the site review, several streams and wetlands were identified throughout the
project boundaries. The determinations were based on completion of the NCDWQ Stream
Identification Forms, USACE Wetland Determination Data forms and an evaluation of existing site
conditions. All jurisdictional features, as identified by you and included in the jurisdictional verification
package received electronically December 2, 2011, will be considered accurate.
This letter only addresses the applicability to the mitigation rules and does not approve any activity
within buffers, Waters of the United States, or Waters of the State. Any impacts to wetlands, streams
and buffers must comply with 404/401 regulations, water supply regulations (15A NCAC 2B .0216),
applicable buffer rules, and any other required federal, state and local regulations. Please be aware
that even if no direct impacts are proposed to any protected buffers, sheet flow of all new stormwater
runoff as per 15A NCAC 2B .0250 is required.
Landowners or affected parties that dispute a determination made by the DWQ or Delegated Local
Authority that a surface water exists and that it is subject to the mitigation rules may request a
determination by the Director. A request for a determination by the Director shall be referred to the
Director in writing c/o Karen Higgins, DWQ 401 Permitting Unit, 1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh,
NC 27699-1650.
Mooresville Regional O�ce
Loca6on: 610 East Center Ave., Suite 301 Mooresville, NC 28115
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone] Customer Service: 1-877-623-6748
Intemet: htto:llportal.ncdenr.orqlweblwq
An Equal Opportuniry 1 Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled110% Posl Consumer paper
One
NorthCarolina
�%�!�tlit"ll��l,/

Michael Gloden
Page Two � �`
Individuals that dispute a determination by the DWQ or Delegated Local Authority that "exempts" a
surface water from the mitigation rules may ask for an adjudicatory hearing. You must act within 60
days of the date that you receive this letter. Applicants are hereby notified that the 60-day statutory
appeal time does not start until the affected parties (including downstream and adjacent landowners)
are notified of this decision. DWQ recommends that the applicant conduct this notification in order to
be certain that third party appeals are made in a timely manner. To ask for a hearing, send a written
petition, which conforms to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes to the Office of
Administrative Hearings, 6714 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, N.C. 27699-6714. This determination is
final and binding unless you ask for a hearing within 60 days.
If you have any additional questions or require additional information please contact Polly Lespinasse
at [phone].
Sincerely,
� _-
r�
Robert B. Krebs, Regional Supervisor
Surface Water Protection
cc: Liz Hair, USACE Asheville Field Office (electronic copy)
Sonia Carrillo, DWQ 401 Transportation Permitting Unit
File Copy

n-rKi N s
July 26, 2011
Ms. Polly Lespinasse
NCDWQ Mooresville Regionai Office
610 East Center Avenue, Suite 301
Mooresville, NC 28115
[phone]
Atkins North America, Inc.
1616 East Millbrook Road, Suite 310
Raleigh, North Carolina 27609-4968
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
www.atkinsglobal.com/northamerica
RE: Jurisdictional Delineation for Linwood Springs Golf Course
Gaston County, NC
Dear Ms. Lespinasse,
- -�,
._ ._�.. .!l
. ." <' cJ� �:�dH'e �r_C� QUAU7Y
;� ' 1 2Q11
_, - , �a
Atkins IVorth America Inc. (Atkins) has been tasked with completing jurisdictional area
delineations for the Linwood Springs Golf Course in Gaston County. The golf course was
purchased by NCDOT to be used as on-site mitigation for the Gaston East-West Connector
(STIP U-3321).
The delineation previously completed and verified for the Gaston East-West Connector did
not include all areas within the golf course. Atkins staff has subsequently delineated all
jurisdictional features and request agency verification for inclusion in the Conceptual
Mitigation Plan being developed for the golf course.
Attached is a packet of information containing data forms and delineation mapping for the
site. I have included data forms recently completed within the golf course as well as those
previously completed for the Gaston East-West Connector. I look forward to meeting you at
the site on August 4 at 10:00 AM to review and finalize the delineation.
Thank you for your assistance with this very important project. Please call me at (919) 431-
5269 if you have any questions or concerns.
Sincerely,
Atkins
Michael Gloden, PWS
Senior Scientist
� � ' � + �.
,
, � �� � j�
�
_ ��\ ^�� ��Y l �I
'�,�/�/ ��� � � �%�� . .. � .
�,����1..(C41� .J�-�- C-�/L �i1t,4.Ld�-C, .
, r �
` �/ � _ � � �� L �
��
C �'
�� , �}� , i

Prepared By: Prepared For Dwn By: MCG FIGURE
-� SITE LOCATION
�'°�,� Ckd By.
p JWG
/\TKI N S x LINWOOD SPRINGS RESTORATION SITE �ate.
° JUNE 2011 �
'��"'���a��"`�• GASTON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA Prqed No
t00021642

�
�
a
Z
�'C i� � M � 1� R.
! _� �� -
Prepared 6y:
nTKiNS �
y ; —
IPrepared f-or:
` �HO[�II��q
l
k„' �I
s''h p
*''hror n.w5ao
��:
�f ` : `�"�
� � ;�
�k
__ . .
, �;� ;
,,,�� �r ;�' o
\`` �. R � �h
<•
�. , ��
- + "�
� _:3:< '4 �.
. _ °.,y _
- � * x �,�`
' � ��, . � r..
�. `
� �:
� � ;s t
'., �:
•�
� �� �
�s � ; �
��;;�:. �, .
! - y � �
d - :, � k �. t"
��� k � � �� �� �� ��
y � i ��'�, �.
sur } ,. -
�� '� ,n ..
�jj�p� i^d'_ . - p�
Yi .3p- ..
� t. 1
- � � ���y
t �' .
�. .'.-' .F� .
` �
�� ��, {
��i' ����� ��, ��^ _
��:_- .��. �.
� �a:
.�� °'�� ; �
��, k��� a� » ; �`►,
�_ �' F` =t i �:� '� -
°& s}� � �ge*.
� , ��_ ',� � �
��
.' �?� 1. -
,
, � � �=
p �"L
�� ���.
�
�.: �. �r
���� �`
�� : � �
z
�� ;.'�
%� �
� ,�: , �� °�� �
�` � ���°
,� _ � +�,,, �
k
�'��-=
�` ..
.;,� �,
� - ���- .., ; -�
� '';�� � Y� ` . .
�f . y�� � �i�1
�.��`�'' E
r,' ..�-c ,
,r� ;yy ,:t ���,�� �,�-i .�v-.r�, � v«�-F'��.: - ,�a�t!y �:j
Linwood Springs Site •j � n
Q Proposed Easement
� � O tional Additional Easement
�__ P
� Delineated Wetland
Delineated Stream
�� Delineated Open Water
Data Forms
� NCDWQ Stream ID
• USACE Wetland
U-3321 Jurisdictional Perennial Stream
j�� U-3321 Jurisdictionai Wetland
Roads
Data Sources:
2010 Aerial Photography (CGIA)
Linwood Site (Gaston County parcel data)
U-3321 delineation (NCTA)
Roads (ISRN NCDOT)
0 200 400 800
�
nY~ . +y^ 1r�'! y��.. .- �
, .. � I r '� . �
. � . �, �� �� �'s,f
''. '� e " - `' - �-�
� �;: ,
�'� r �
�� ' � I�,+�.. ',.
:` _ ;��Y .�s +�:.., �, ` .�.
-,.�
:� �_ _ � ,
�� � � .��,z �R
h r� :�.� ,. ,'''�„�
R ���, , �
�` � ��` .. -
�� � �a:F
� _ 3
���-
� ���
� - ; .5 ��.
� ' a ��;
�`i, ` �.
; , ��
�� ' '�,�� , _
�� �� , � �
� ' }.
�� 4 ir s
� ,.4 � „�r'�
1� � � M ,,
�� � �' ` .
� �� ���:�� ,�� � , � �.
� �� �� �,,,
�,. �� � �rl►. �
,;
• ; �: � �' r
~'�� �'��. �+ ,� ''�� - v
�' •.�-: � •����: • ;�'��, . �
� �� �.. � � ��.a�..
� _ . , �. - � :�� � � . � � � �� �- �" . ,.���
- : '�, � \�\� f•,\. �� y . � . .\ �\ � 4 .
� , �� �
�, \ �p (� C . �.
. > - � �t
.`.i. .. ` � �..`1 � �' Y � `` ���, .
��l\, �..� lv� Y`i-�;�4f`_. ..... .Y``
'�..}. � '< �. _
�r ���: l.i � �-
i - �� ;
���"� 'i .� . i
� ��� �<a.� � �'.
Dwn By:
, JURISDICTIONAL D�LINEATION �,����� � CkdBy:
�;
1 ., �. �
C3�»�-' �� INWOOG SPRINGS RESTORATION SITE 1,� ����
��1� � � .;�;�.� Date:
1 ���;�►
��,n� �1 �� �ASTON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
Project:
,�.�..�,
.�_ �-
�
�
n� �
�
FIGURE
MCG
JWG
JULY 2011
100021642 I

� �
_ _ . . ,
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM -�Eastern Mountai s�and Piedmont
Pro�ecusite: Linwood Springs Golf Course c�ryicounry: Gastonia
ApplicanUOwner: Atkins/NCTA state: NC
in�esti9ator�s�: JensGeratz,MichaelGloden,JeremySchmid sect�on, TownsniP, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): COf1C8V2
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P �at: 35.235198 �0�9: -81.235057
I
Sampling Date: 6-22-11
Sampling Point: GC-03Wet
Slope (%):
Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: CheWaC a. NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.)
� X �
Are Vegetation �, Soil �, or Hydrology � significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes 0 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?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Remarks:
Yes '� No �
Yes � No �
Yes 0 No �
normally dry drought advisory (NC Drought Monitor)
HYDROLOGY
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes 'X' No �
Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondarv Indfcators (mmimum ot two reqwred)
Primarv Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that applvl � Surface Soil Cracks (66)
�,`�x Surface Water (A1) � Water-Stained Leaves (69) � Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
fl High Water Table (A2) � Aquatic Fauna (613) � Drainage Patterns (B10)
� Saturation (A3) � True Aquatic Plants (B14) � Moss Trim Lines (B16)
��1 Water Marks (61) � Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) � Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
PJ Sediment Deposits (62) � Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) � Cra�sh Burrows (C8)
� Drift Deposits (B3) � Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) � Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
� Algal Mat or Crust (64) � Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) 0 Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
� Iron Deposits (65) � Thin Muck Surface (C7) ��-I Geomorphic Position (D2)
� Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (67) � Other (Explain in Remarks) �J Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Q Microtopographic Relief (D4)
� FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surtace Water Present? Yes � No � Depth (inches): 4
Water Table Present? Yes � No � Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes � No � Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No �
includes capilla frin e
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: ,
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers
�
I
Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
)
Saplinq Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Sampling Point: GC-03Wet
Absolute Dominant Indicator pominance Test worksheet:
% Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A)
Total Number of Dominant 3
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 67 ��6�
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
� Fraxinus pennsylvanica 20
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
20
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
� Murdannia keisak 15
2 Ludwigia spp. 50
3 Carex spp. 15
q Panicum spp. 20
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12. �
100
Woodv Vine Stratum (Plot size
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological
US Army Corps of Engineers
)
Prevalencelndex worksheet:
= Total Cover Total % Cover of: Multiolv bv:
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:
= Total Cover
Dominance Test is >50%
Y@S FACW Prevalence Index is <_3.0'
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
= Total Cover
No OBL
Yes OBL
No
Yes
= Total Cover
= Total Cover
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of 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).
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. Includes 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 �
Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Interim Version

SOIL
Profile Descriotion:
Sampling Point: GC-03Wet
to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Tvpe Loc Texture Remarks
0-3 2.5Y 4/2 7.5 YR 4/6 15 D M SiltyCla�l many prominent
3-8 2.5Y 4/1 10YR 4/6 20 D M Clay few prominent
8-14+ 5Y 5/1
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion,
Hydric Soil Indicators:
� Histosol (A1)
� Histic Epipedon (A2)
�] Black Histic (A3)
�] Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
� Stratified Layers (A5)
�2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11
�Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MRLA 147,148)
� Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
� Sandy Redox (S5)
� Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
Sandy I�
RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. ZLocation: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
� Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U) � 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
� Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147,148)� Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
QThin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148) (MLRA 147, 148)
� Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) �] Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
x� Depleted Matrix (F3) (MLRA 136, 147)
� Redox Dark Surtace (F6) Q Red Parent Material (TF2)
� Depleted Dark Surface (F7) �] Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Redox Depressions (F8) �] Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
� Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
�.Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes
0 No 0
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains�and Piedmont
Pro�ecusite: Linwood Springs Golf Course CitylCounty: GBStOftla Sampling Date: 6-22-11
Applicant/Owner: Atkins/NCTA State: NC Sampling Point: GC-03up
investi9ator(s): JensGeratz,MichaelGloden,JeremySchmid section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): ConCaV@ Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR or M�RA): LRR P Lat: 35.235198 Long: -81.235057 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Ch2W8C18 NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation 0, Soil �, or Hydrology � significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes � No �
Are Vegetation �, Soil 0, or Hydrology � naturally problematic? Qf needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present? •
Remarks:
Yes � No �
Yes 0 No '�
Yes � No 'X
Abnormally dry drought advisory (NC Drought Monitor)
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes � No 0
Primarv Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that applv)
�] Surface Water (A1) � Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
�] High Water Table (A2) � Aquatic Fauna (613)
� Saturation (A3) � True Aquatic Plants (614)
��I Water Marks (61) � Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
�-I Sediment Deposits (B2) � Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
��y Drift Deposits (B3) � Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
�J Algal Mat or Crust (64) � Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
� Iron Deposits (B5) � Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Q Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (67) � Other (Explain in Remarks)
Secondarv Indfcators (mfnfmum ot two required)
� Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
� Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surtace (BS)
� Drainage Patterns (B10)
� Moss Trim Lines (616)
��1 Dry-Season Water Table (C2) �
�J Cra�sh Burrows (C8)
� Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
� Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
� Geomorphic Position (D2)
� Shallow Aquitard (D3)
� Microtopographic Relief (D4)
� FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Water Present? Yes � No � Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes � No � Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes � No � Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes
includes ca illa frin e
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
� No �
US Army Corps of Engineers � Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6."
7.
Saplinq Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
�
�
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
0
Sampling Point: GC-03up
Absolute Dominant Indicator pominance Test worksheet:
% Cover Saecies? Status Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: � (A)
Total Number of Dominant ,�
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: � (A/B)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
� Cynodon dactylon 90
2 Trifolium repens 10
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
100
Woodv Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations
rrevaience inaex worKSneet:
= Total Cover Total % Cover of: Multiplv bv:
OBL species x 1 = '
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species 100 X q= 400
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A = 4
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
= Total Cover
Dominance Test is >50%
Prevalence Index is <_3.0'
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
= Total Cover approximately 20 ft(6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Yes FACU
No FACU 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. Includes woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
3 ft(1 m) in height.
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
= Total Cover
Hydrophytic
Vegetation �
= Total Cover Present? Yes � No x
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Interim Version

SOIL
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or
Sampling Point: GC-03up
Depth Matrix Redox Features
�inchesl Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Tvoe Loc Texture Remarks
0-14+ 10YR 5/4 silt loam
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion,
Hydric Soil Indicators:
� Histosol (A1)
� Histic Epipedon (A2)
� Black Histic (A3)
� Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
�] Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11
�Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MRLA 147,148)
fl Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
� Sandy Redox (S5)
�] Stripped Matrix (S6)
(if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. ZLocation: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
� Dark Surtace (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U) � 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
� Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147,148)� Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
QThin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148) (MLRA 147, 148)
� Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) � Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
� Depleted Matrix (F3) (MLRA 136, 147)
� Redox Dark Surface (F6) Q Red Parent Material (TF2)
� Depleted Dark Surface (F7) �] Very Shallow Dark Surtace (TF12)
�Redox Depressions (F8) �] Other (Explain in Remarks)
Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
� Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
� Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
_ unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes � No �
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Projecvsite: Linwood Springs Golf Course city�councy: Gastonia Sampling Date: 6-22-11
Applicant/Owner: Atkins/NCTA State: NC Sampling Point: JC-03Wei
i��esti9ator�s�: JensGeratz,MichaelGloden,JeremySchmid Section, Towr,snip, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): COIlC8V2 Slope (%): T
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P Lat: 35 _246619 Long: -81.236281 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Ch@waClB NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.)
__
-- �
Are Vegetation 0, 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?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Remarks:
Yes � No �
Yes � No �
Yes `� No �
ormally dry drought advisory (NC Drought Monitor)
HYDROLOGY
Hydrology Indicators:
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes 'x No 0
Primarv Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
'�]-x Surface Water (A1) � Water-Stained Leaves (69)
� High Water Table (A2) � Aquatic Fauna (613)
� Saturation (A3) � True Aquatic Plants (614)
� Water Marks (B1) � Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
��I Sediment Deposits (B2) � Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living.Roots (C3)
E-1 Drift Deposits (63) � Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
� Algal Mat or Crust (B4) � Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
��T Iron Deposits (65) � Thin Muck Surface (C7)
�-1 Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) �. Other (Explain in Remarks)
� Surtace Soil Cracks (B6)
� Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (68)
� Drainage Patterns (610)
� Moss Trim Lines (B16)
� Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
� Cra�sh Burrows (C8)
� Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
� Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
�� Geomorphic Position (D2)
LJ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Q Microtopographic Relief (D4)
n FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes 0 No � Depth (inches): 4
Water Table Present? Yes � No � Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes 0 No � Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes � No �
includes ca illa frin e
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Interim Version

VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Saplinq Stratum (Plot size
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
� Populus deltoides
2 Salix nigra
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Herb Stratum (Plot size: _
� Juncus effusus
2 Scirpus americana
3 Carex spp.
q Ludwigia spp.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
Woodv Vine Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
st
0
0
Sampling Point: �C-03w@t
Absolute Dominant Indicator pominance Test worksheet:
% Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A)
Total Number of Dominant 3
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 �p�B�
Prevalence Index worksheet:
= Total Cover Total % Cover of: Multiolv bv:
) 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 =
= Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
� _ Dominance Test is >50%
10 YeS FAC Prevalence Index is <_3.0'
10 Y2S OBL Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
0
20
70
10
10
10
100
adaptations below).
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
= Total Cover approximately 20 ft(6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Yes FACW
NO OBL Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
NO than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
No OBL
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft(1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb - All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size. Includes woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
3 ft(1 m) in height.
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
= Total Cover
Hydrophytic
Vegetation �
= Total Cover Present? Yes 0 No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Interim Version

SOIL Sampling Point: �C-03Wet
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Tvoe Loc Texture Remarks
0-6 10YR 4/2 10YR 4/4 20 D M Silty Clay many faint
6-14+ 7.5 YR 4/1 10YR 4/6 35 D M Clay many faint
RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. ZLocation: PL=Pore Lining, M=M
Hydric Soil Indicators:
� Histosol (A1)
� Histic Epipedon (A2)
�Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
�] Stratified Layers (A5)
�2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
�Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MRLA 147,148)
� Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
� Sandy Redox (S5)
�] Stripped Matrix (S6)
strictive Layer
Type:
Depth (inches):
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
� Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U) � 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147) •
� Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147,148)� Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
�Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148) (MLRA 147, 148)
� Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) fl Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
� Depleted Matrix (F3) (MLRA 136, 147)
�Redox Dark Surtace (F6) � Red Parent Material (TF2)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7) .� Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Redox Depressions (F8) � Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
� Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
� Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
�
Hyd�ic Soil Present? Yes 0 No 0
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Linwood S rin s Golf Course Gastonia 6-22-11
ProjecUSite: p g City/County: Sampling Date:
ApplicanUOwner: Atkins/NCTA State: NC Sampling Point: �C-03up
investi9ator(s): �ensGeratz,MichaelGloden,JeremySchmid section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): COnC8V2 Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P �at: 35.246619 �ong: -81.236281 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: CheW8Cl8 NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of yearT Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.)
r -- — �
Are Vegetation �, Soil 0, or Hydrology � significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes � No
Are Vegetation �, Soil �, or Hydrology 0 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?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Remarks:
Yes � No �
Yes � No �
Yes � No !�
ormally dry drought advisory (NC Drought Monitor)
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes � No �
Primarv Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that applv)
�] Surtace Water (A1) � Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
� High Water Table (A2) � Aquatic Fauna (B13)
� Saturation (A3) � True Aquatic Plants (B14)
� Water Marks (61) ��f Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
� Sediment Deposits (62) u Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
� Drift Deposits (B3) � Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
� Algal Mat or Crust (B4) � Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
� Iron Deposits (65) � Thin Muck Surtace (C7)
� Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) � Other (Explain in Remarks)
Field Observations:
� Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
��—y Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surtace (68)
�-I Drainage Patterns (610)
0 Moss Trim Lines (616)
��I Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
�'-� Cra�sh Burrows (C8)
� Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
0 Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
�T�1 Geomorphic Position (D2)
E_J Shallow Aquitard (D3)
� Microtopographic Relief (D4)
� FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Water Present? Yes � No � Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes � No � Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes � No � Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes
includes ca illa frin e
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
� No �
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size:
� Pinus taeda
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
�
Saplinq Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Sampling Point: JC-03up
Absolute Dominant Indicator pominance Test worksheet:
% Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species
80 Yes FAC That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 �a�
Total Number of Dominant 4
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 75 (A/B)
:1
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
i Rubus argutus 20
2 Solidago spp. 30
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
50
Woodv Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
� Campsis radicans 10
2.
3.
4.
5.
10
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
Prevalence Index worksheet:
= Total Cover Total % Cover of: Multiplv bv:
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:
= Total Cover
Dominance Test is >50%
Prevalence Index is <_3.0'
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
�
= Total Cover
Yes FAC
Yes
= Total Cover
Yes FAC
= Total Cover
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of 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).
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. Includes 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 - Interim Version

SOIL Sampling Point: JC-03up
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
linches) Color (moist) °/o Color (moist) % Tvpe Loc Texture Remarks
0-3 2.5Y 5/4 50 7.5YR 5/4 50 D M silt loam
3-6 10YR 4/3 50 10YR 5/8 50 D M silt loam
6-14+ 10YR 5/6 silt loam
'Type: C=Concentration D=Depletion,
Hydric Soil Indicators: .
� Histosol (A1)
� Histic Epipedon (A2)
�] Black Histic (A3)
� Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
�] Stratified Layers (A5)
�2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
�Thick Dark Surtace (Al2)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MRLA 147,148)
�] Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
� Sandy Redox (SS)
� Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. ZLocation: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
� Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U) � 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
� Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147,148)� Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
�Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148) (MLRA 147, 148)
� Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) g] P�edmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
�]. Depleted Matrix (F3) (MLRA 136, 147)
�Redox Dark Surtace (F6) � Red Parent Material (TF2)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7) �] Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Redox Depressions (F8) �] Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
� Umbric Surtace (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
II Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
r__,
Hydric Soil Present? Yes '' No x
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Project�site: Linwood Springs Golf Course c�ty�cour,ty: Gastonia
Applicant/Owner: Atkins/NCTA State: NC
invest�gator�s�: JensGeratz,MichaelGloden,JeremySchmid section, TownsniP, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): COnC8V8
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P �at: 35.246919 �ong: -81.237102
Ch I
Sampling Date: 6-22-11
Sampling Point: JD-04wet
Slope (%):
Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: eWaC a NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No X (If no,�explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation 0, Soil 0, or Hydrology � significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes � No 0
Are Vegetation �, Soil 0, 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?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes � No �
Yes '� No �
Yes '0 No 0
ally dry drought advisory (NC Drought Monitor)
HYDROLOGY
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes � No 0
Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondarv Indicators (minimum ot two requirec
Primarv Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) � Surface Soil Cracks (66)
�] Surface Water (A1) � Water-Stained Leaves (B9) � Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (68)
� High Water Table (A2) � Aquatic Fauna (B13) � Drainage Patterns (610)
� Saturation (A3) � True Aquatic Plants (B14) � Moss Trim Lines (B16)
� Water Marks (B1) � Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1•) � Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
��1 Sediment Deposits (B2) � Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) � Cra�sh Burrows (C8)
i-1 Drift Deposits (63) � Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) � Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
� Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) � Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
&��f Iron Deposits (B5) � Thiri Muck Surtace (C7) � Geomorphic Position (D2)
P—J Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (67) � Other (Explain in Remarks) � Shallow Aquitard (D3)
� Microtopographic Relief (D4)
� � FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?
Water Table Present?
Saturation Present?
Yes � No � Depth (inches):
Yes � No � Depth (inches):
Yes � No � Depth (inches): �— Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes � No �
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Saplinq Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
� Salix nigra
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Herb Stratum (Plot size: _
i Murdannia keisak
2 Juncus effusus
3 Scirpus americana
4 Eleocharis spp.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
)
0
0
)
Woodv Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Sampling Point: �D-04W@t
Absolute Dominant Indicator pominance Test worksheet:
% Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A)
Total Number of Dominant 4
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 75 (A/B)
20
Prevalence Index worksheet:
= Total Cover Total % Cover of: Multiolv bv:
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:
= Total Cover
Dominance Test is >50%
YeS OBL Prevalence Index is <_3.0'
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
. 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Vegetation Strata:
20 Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
= Total Cover approximately 20 ft(6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
' (7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
50 Yes OBL
20 Yes OBL Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft(6 m) or more in height and less
10 No OBL than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
20 Yes
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. Includes woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
3 ft(1 m) in height.
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
100 - Total Cover
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
US Army Corps of Engineers
Hydrophytic
Vegetation �
= Total Cover Present? Yes `0 No
Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Interim Version

SOIL
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or
Sampling Point: JD-04Wet
cators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
1inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Tvoe Loc Texture Remarks
0-16+ 10YR 5/2 7.5 YR 4/6 40 D M Clay loam
C=Concentration. D=Deoletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. ZLocation: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
� Histosol (A1)
� Histic Epipedon (A2)
�] Black Histic (A3)
�] Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
�] Stratified Layers (A5)
�2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
�Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MRLA 147,148)
�] Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
�] Sandy Redox (S5)
� Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
� Dark Surtace (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U) � 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
� Polyvalue Below Surtace (S8) (MLRA 147,148)� Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
�Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148) (MLRA 147, 148)
Q Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) �] Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
� Depleted Matrix (F3) (MLRA 136, 147)
�Redox Dark Surtace (F6) � Red Parent Material (TF2)
Depleted Dark Surtace (F7) .� Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Redox Depressions (F8) �] Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
� Umbric Surtace (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
� Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes '� No �
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Projecvsite: Linwood Springs Golf Course cityicounty: Gastonia Sampling Date: 6-22-11
ApplicantlOwner: AtkinS/NCTA State: NC Sampling Point: JD-04up
in�estigator�s�: JensGeratz,MichaelGloden,JeremySchmid Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): COf1C8v2 Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P �at: 35.246919 �ong: -81.237102 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Ch2W8C18 NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation �, Soil �, or Hydrology � significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes '� 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?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Remarks:
Yes 0 No 0
Yes � No �
Yes 0 No �
ormally dry drought advisory (NC Drought Monitor)
HYDROLOGY
ogy Indicators: .
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes 0 No �
Primarv Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that applv)
� Surface Water (A1) � Water-Stained Leaves (69)
�] High Water Table (A2) � Aquatic Fauna (B13)
� Saturation (A3) � True Aquatic Plants (614)
� Water Marks (B1) � Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
� Sediment Deposits (B2) � Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
� Drift Deposits (63) � Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
� Algal Mat or Crust (64) � Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
� Iron Deposits (B5) � Thin Muck Surtace (C7)
� Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) � Other (Explain in Remarks)
� Surface Soil Cracks (66)
��.1 Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (68)
'LJ Drainage Patterns (B10)
� Moss Trim Lines (B16)
� Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
� Cra�sh Burrows (C8)
� Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
� Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
�T,:I Geomorphic Position (D2)
LJ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
� Microtopographic Relief (D4)
jr-j FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Water Present? Yes � No � Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes 0 No � Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes � No � Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes
includes ca illa frin e
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
0 No �
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )
i Pinus taeda
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Saplinq Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
i Rubus argutus
2 Solidago spp.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
Woodv Vine Stratum (Plot size
� Campsis radicans
2.
3.
4.
5.
Remarks: (If observed, list
Sampling Point: �D-04Up
Absolute Dominant Indicator pominance Test worksheet:
% Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species
80 Yes FAC That Are OBL, FACW, orFAC: 3 �a�
Total Number of Dominant 4
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 75 (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
80 = Total Cover Total % Cover of: Multialv bv:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
20
30
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
= Total Cover
Dominance Test is >50%
Prevalence Index is <_3.0'
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
= Total Cover approximately 20 ft(6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Yes FAC
Yes 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. Includes woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
3 ft(1 m) in height.
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
50 = Total Cover
)
10 Yes FAC
s
10
Hydrophytic
Vegetation �
= Total Cover Present? . Yes � No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Interim Version

SOIL
Sampling Point: JD-04Up
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Tvpe Loc Texture Remarks
0-3 10YR 4/4 Clay loam
3-16+ 7.5YR 5/6 10YR 4/3 30 D M Clay loam
'Type: C=Concentration D=Depletion,
Hydric Soil Indicators:
� Histosol (A1)
� Histic Epipedon (A2)
� Black Histic (A3)
� Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
� Stratified Layers (A5)
�2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
�Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MRLA 147,148)
�] Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
�] Sandy Redox (S5)
� Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. `Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
� Dark Surtace (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U) � 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Q Polyvalue Below Surtace (S8) (MLRA 147,148)� Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
�.Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148) (MLRA 147, 148)
� Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) � Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
� Depleted Matrix (F3) (MLRA 136, 147)
�Redox Dark Surface (F6) � Red Parent Material (TF2)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7) �] Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Redox Depressions (F8) �] Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
II Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
� Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 No
0
�
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Linwood S rin s Golf Course Gastonia 6-22-11
ProjecUSite: p g City/County: Sampling Date:
ApplicanUOwner: AtklnS/NCTA State: NC Sampling Point �E-22W2t
Investigator(s): JenSGe�atz,MichaelGloden,JeremySchmid se�tior,, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): COnCaVe Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P �at: 35.238825 �ong: '81.233128 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Ch8W8C18 NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.)
- �
Are Vegetation �, Soil �, or Hydrology 0 significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes 'x No
Are Vegetation 0, 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?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Remarks:
Yes �� No �
Yes '0 No �
Yes 0 No �
ly dry drought advisory (NC Drought Monitor)
HYDROLOGY
ndicators:
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes � No �
Primarv Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that applv)
,�x Surtace Water (A1) � Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
� High Water Table (A2) � Aquatic Fauna (613)
� Saturation (A3) � True Aquatic Plants (614)
� Water Marks (61) � Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
��1 Sediment Deposits (B2) � Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
�J Drift Deposits (B3) � Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
� Algal Mat or Crust (64) � Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
� Iron Deposits (65) � Thin Muck Surface (C7)
� Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (67) � Other (Explain in Remarks)
SecontlarV Indicators (minimum ot two required)
� Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
��-1 Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surtace (68)
�-1 Drainage Patterns (610)
� Moss Trim Lines (616)
�7-1 Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
LJ Cra�sh Burrows (C8)
� Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
� Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
� Geomorphic Position (D2)
� Shallow Aquitard (D3) '
Q Microtopographic Relief (D4)
� FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes 0 No � Depth (inches): 1
Water Table Present? Yes � No � Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes � No � Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes
includes ca illa frin e
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
� No 0
US Army�Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Interim Version

VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Saplinq Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
) % Cover Species? Status
0
Sampling Point: �E-22W8t
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 6 (A)
Total Number of Dominant 7
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 86 (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
= Total Cover Total % Cover of: Multiolv bv:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
= Total Cover
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
� Populus deltoides 10 Yes FAC
2 Salix nigra 10 Yes OBL
3 Cornus amomum 10 Yes FACW
4 Crataegus spp. 10 Yes
5 Fraxinus pennsylvanica 10 Yes FACW
6.
7.
50
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
� Juncus effusus 25
2 Scirpus americana 10
3 Eleocharis spp. 15
4 Solidago spp. 15
5 Rubus argutus 15
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
$�
Woodv Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
� Campsis radicans 15
2.
3.
4.
5.
15
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
= Total Cover
Yes FACW
No OBL
No
No OBL
No FAC
= Total Cover
Yes FAC
= Total Cover
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Dominance Test is >50%
Prevalence Index is <_3.0'
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of 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).
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. Includes woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
3 ft(1 m) in height.
Woody vine — All woody vines, regardless of height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation O
Present? Yes ❑X No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

SOIL
Sampling Point: �E-22W@t
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 (moistl % Tvoe Loc Texture Remarks
0-6 10YR 2/1 Clay
6-15+ 10YR 4/2
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion,
Hydric Soil Indicators:
� Histosol (A1)
� Histic Epipedon (A2)
� Black Histic (A3)
�] Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
� Stratified Layers (A5)
�2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surtace (A11
�Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MRLA 147,148)
fl Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
� Sandy Redox (S5)
� Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
7.5 YR 4/6 35 D M Clay loam
RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. ZLocation: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
� Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U) � 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
a Polyvalue Below Surtace (S8) (MLRA 147,148)�] Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
�.Thin Dark Surtace (S9) (MLRA 147, 148) (MLRA 147, 148)
� Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) D Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
x� Depleted Matrix (F3) (MLRA 136, 147)
� Redox Dark Surface (F6) � Red Parent Material (TF2)
) Depleted Dark Surtace (F7) � Very Shallow Dark Surtace (TF12)
Redox Depressions (F8) � Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
� Umbric SurFace (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
� Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes � No �
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Projecusice: Linwood Springs Golf Course city�county: Gastonia Sampling Date: 6-22-11
ApplicanVOwner: AtkinS/NCTA State: NC Sampling Point: JE-22up
Investigator(s): �enSGeratz,MichaelGloden,JeremySchmid sect�or,, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): COnCaV2 Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P Lat: 35.238825 �ong: -81.233128 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Ch8W8C12 NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.)
�
—
Are Vegetation 0, 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?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Remarks:
Yes � No �
Yes � No '0
Yes � No '�
normally dry drought advisory (NC Drought Monitor)
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes � No �
Primarv Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that applv)
�] Surface Water (A1) � Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
�] High Water Table (A2) '� Aquatic Fauna (B13)
� Saturation (A3) � True Aquatic Plants (614)
� Water Marks (61) � Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
� Sediment Deposits (62) � Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
� Drift Deposits (B3) � Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
� Algal Mat or Crust (64) � Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
� Iron Deposits (B5) � Thin Muck Surtace (C7)
Q Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) � Other (Explain in Remarks)
Field Observations:
� Surtace Soil Cracks (66)
��1 Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surtace (68)
LJ Drainage Patterns (B10)
��7 Moss Trim Lines (616)
I! J Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
� Cra�sh Burrows (C8)
� Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
� Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
�T�1 Geomorphic Position (D2)
fJ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
� Microtopographic Relief (D4)
� FAC-Neutral Test (DS)
Surface Water Present? Yes 0 No � Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes 0 No � Depth (inches): ,
Saturation Present? Yes 0 No 0 Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes
includes ca illa frin e
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks
� N o '�
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Saplinq Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
0
Sampling Point: JE-22up
Absolute Dominant Indicator pominance Test'worksheet:
% Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: � (A)
Total Number of Dominant ,�
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: � (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
= Total Cover Total % Cover of: Multiolv bv:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
= Total Cover
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
� Cynodon dactylon 90
2 Trifolium repens 5
3 Rubus argutus 5
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
100
Woodv Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
list morphological adaptations below).
= Total Cover
Yes FACU
No FACU
No FAC
= Total Cover
= Total Cover
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Dominance Test is >50%
Prevalence Index is <_3.0'
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
of 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).
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. Includes 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 0 No x
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Interim Version

SOIL
Sampling Point: �E-22up
on: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Tvoe Loc Texture Remarks
0-16+ 10YR 3/4 Loam
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=
Hydric Soil Indicators:
� Histosol (A1)
� Histic Epipedon (A2)
�] Black Histic (A3)
�] Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
�] Stratified Layers (A5)
�2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surtace (A11)
�Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MRLA 147,148)
fl Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
� Sandy Redox (SS)
� Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
�duced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. ZLocation: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
a Dark Surtace (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U) � 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
� Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147,148)� Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
QThin Dark Surtace (S9) (MLRA 147, 148) (MLRA 147, 148)
Q Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) �] Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
� Depleted Matrix (F3) (MLRA 136, 147)
�Redox Dark Surtace (F6) � Red Parent Material (TF2)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7) .� Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Redox Depressions (F8) � Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
� Umbric Surtace (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
� Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes � No �
US Army Gorps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Linwood S rin s Golf Course Gastonia 6-22-11
ProjecUSite: p g City/County: Sampling Date:
ApplicanUOwner. Atklfls/NCTA State: NC Sampling Point: SB-02wet
investi9ator(s): �ensGeratz,MichaelGloden,JeremySchmid Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): COnCaVe Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P Lat: 35.235688 Long: -81.23201 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: CheWaCla NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation 0, Soil 0, or Hydrology � significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes � No 0
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.
Hydropiiytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Remarks:
Yes `� No �
Yes � No �
Yes � No �
Abnormally dry drought advisory (NC Drought Monitor)
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators: .
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes 0 No 0
Primarv Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that applv)
� Surface Water (A1) � Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
� High Water Table (A2) � Aquatic Fauna (613)
� Saturation (A3) � True Aquatic Plants (B14)
� Water Marks (B1) � Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
��I Sediment Deposits (B2) � Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
��-1 Drift Deposits (B3) � Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
IJ Algal Mat or Crust (64) � Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
� Iron Deposits (B5) � Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Q Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) � Other (Explain in Remarks)
� Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
��1 Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (68)
�J Drainage Patterns (610)
0 Moss Trim Lines (616)
�T-� Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
�1 Cra�sh Burrows (C8)
� Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
0 Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
��1 Geomorphic Position (D2)
NJ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
� Microtopographic Relief (D4)
� FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes 0 No � Depth (inches): 6
Water Table Present? Yes � No � Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes � No � Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes
includes ca illa frin e
Describe.Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
� No �
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Saplinq Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Shrub Stratum (Plot size
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Sampling Point: SB-02W2t
Absolute Dominant Indicator pominance Test worksheet:
) % Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2_
Total Number of Dominant 2
Species Across All Strata: _
Percent of Dominant Species 100
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: _
0
0
(A)
�B)
��B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
= Total Cover Total % Cover of: Multiplv bv:
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:
= Total Cover
Dominance Test is >50%
Prevalence Index is <_3.0'
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
= Total Cove
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
� Juncus effusus 10 No
2 Carex spp. 40 Yes
3 Rhynchospora spp. 10 No
4 Ludwigia spp. 40 Yes
5.
6.
7.
8. �
9.
10.
11.
12.
100 = Total Cove
Woodv Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Remarks: (If
adaptations below).
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
r approximately 20 ft(6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
FACW
FAC Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft(6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
OBL
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft(1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb - All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size. Includes woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
3 ft(1 m) in height.
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
Hydrophytic
� Vegetation �
= Total Cover Present? Yes 0 No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Interim Version

SOIL
ption: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence
Sampling Point: SB-02W@t
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Tvoe Loc Texture Remarks
0-14+ 10YR 5/1 10YR 5/4 20 D M Silty Clay
RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. ZLocation: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
� Histosol (A1)
�] Histic Epipedon (A2)
� Black Histic (A3)
�] Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
� Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surtace (A11)
� Thick Dark Surtace (Al2)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MRLA 147,148)
�] Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
� Sandy Redox (S5)
� Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
� Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U) � 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
� Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147,148)� Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
�Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148) (MLRA 147, 148)
--
Q Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
;x� Depleted Matrix (F3) (MLRA 136, 147)
�Redox Dark Surface (F6) Q Red Parent Material (TF2)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7) � Very Shallow Dark Surtace (TF12)
�Redox Depressions (F8) �] Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136) �
� Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
� Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes � No 0
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Projecusite: Linwood Springs Golf Course cityicounty: Gastonia Sampling Date: 6-22-11
ApplicanUOwner: Atkins/NCTA State: NC Sampling Point: SB-02Up
i��esti9ator�s�: JensGeratz,MichaelGloden,JeremySchmid sect�or,, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): COtlC8v2 Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P �at: 35.235688 �ong: -81.23201 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: CheWaClB NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No X (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 0 No 0
Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 No �
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes � No �
Remarks:
�bnormally dry drought advisory (NC Drought Monitor)
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes � No �
Primarv Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that applv)
� Surtace Water (A1) � Water-Stained Leaves (69)
�] High Water Table (A2) � Aquatic Fauna (613)
fl Saturation (A3) � True Aquatic Plants (B14)
� Water Marks (61) � Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
��1 Sediment Deposits (62) � Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
F=-I Drift Deposits (63) � Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
� Algal Mat or Crust (64) � Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
� Iron Deposits (65) � Thin Muck Surface (C7)
� Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (67) � Other (Explain in Remarks)
Field Observations:
Secondarv Indfcators (mmfmum ot two required)
� Surface Soil Cracks (66)
� Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (68)
� Drainage Patterns (610)
� Moss Trim Lines (616)
��t—I Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
�J Cra�sh Burrows (C8)
� Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
r�1 Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
�uI Geomorphic Position (D2)
tJ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Q Microtopographic Relief (D4)
� FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Water Present? Yes � No "� Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes � No 0 Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes � No 0 Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes
includes ca illa frin e
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
� No �
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Interim Version

VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Saplinq Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Sampling Point: SB-02Up
Absolute Dominant Indicator pominance Test worksheet:
% Cover Soecies? Status Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: � (A)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
� Cynodon dactylon 90
2 Trifolium repens 10
3.
4.
5. _
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
100
Woodv Vine Stratum (Plot size
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Remarks: (If observed, list
)
Total Number of Dominant ,�
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 (A/B)
Prevalencelndex worksheet:
= Total Cover Total % Cover of: Multiolv bv:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species 100 X 4= 400
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A = 4
= Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Dominance Test is >50%
Prevalence Index is <_3.0'
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
= Total Cover
Yes FACU
No FACU
= Total Cover
= Total Cover
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of 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).
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. Includes 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 x
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Interim Version

SOIL
Sampling Point: SB-�2Up
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
1nchesl Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Tvpe Loc Texture Remarks
0-10 10YR 3/1 Loam
10-14 10YR 4/2 10YR 4/4 50 D M Loam
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion,
Hydric Soil Indicators:
0 Histosol (A1)
� Histic Epipedon (A2)
� Black Histic (A3)
�] Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
�] Stratified Layers (AS)
�2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depieted Below Dark Surface (A11
�Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MRLA 147,148)
� Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
� Sandy Redox (S5)
� Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. zLocation: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
� Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
� Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U) � 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
� Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147,148)� Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
QThin Dark Surtace (S9) (MLRA 147, 148) (MLRA 147, 148)
� Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) � Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
x� Depleted Matrix (F3) (MLRA 136, 147)
� Redox Dark Surtace (F6) Q Red Parent Material (TF2)
� Depleted Dark Surface (F7) �] Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
�Redox Depressions (F8) �] Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
��.t MLRA 136)
�I Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
� Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes � No �
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: �p-23-�� Project/Site: L�,�w�� �b��
Evaluator: '(��C��� �������,�i1S ", -�.,� County: �jC�S-t-oirl
Total Points: Stream Determination (circle one)
Stream is at least intermittent �� Ephemeral Intermittent Perennial
if >_ 19 or oerennial if ? 30* -J
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = (j,5 )
1 a Continuity of channel bed and bank
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
3. In-channel structure: ex. riffle-pool, step-pool,
ripple-pool sequence
4. Particle size of stream substrate
5. Active/relict floodplain
6. Depositional bars or benches
7. Recent alluvial deposits
8. Headcuts
9. Grade control
10. Natural valley
11. Second or greater order channel
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = �_)
12. Presence of Baseflow
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
14. Leaf litter
15. Sediment on plants or debris
16. Organic debris lines or piles
17. Soil-based evidence of high water table?
C. Biology (Subtotal = ��,..� )
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
20. MaCrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
21. Aquatic Mollusks
22. Fish
23. Crayfish
24. Amphibians
25. Algae
26. Wetland plants in streambed
Absent
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
L;
C�
Weak
�
1
1
0.5
0.5
No=O
1
1
1
0.5
0.5
No=O
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:
Latitude: �j�j, Z�jL��
Longitude: �, Z33�'7
ii
Other GA _ I �
e.g. Quad Name:
Moderate
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
2
2
0.5
�
Y
2 1
2 1
1 2
"1 2
.5 1
0.5 1
0.5 1
0.5 1
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 Other
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
1.5
3
0
1.5
1.5
0
0
3
3
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5

I�TC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: _ 2��_ � � ProjecUSite: �n���� �� ��
Evaluator: m;�' �'��.� � ��,`� ���-- County: ����
Total Points: �, � Stream Determination (circle one)
Stream is at least intermittent E hemeral Intermittent Perennial
if >_ 19 or perennial if _> 30' ��` p
Latitude: �� ����
Longitude: �� � ���C�?�
Other /� , -
e.g. Quad Name: � � - LJ,�
A. Geomor holo (Subtotal = �2 �`� ) Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1 a� Continuity of channel bed and bank 0 1 2 3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg 0 1 2
3. In-channel structure: ex. riffle-pool, step-pool, �``•-
ri le- ool se uence 0 1 2�° 3
4. Particle size of stream substrate 0 1 2 3
5. Active/relict floodplain 0 1 ' 2 3
6. Depositional bars or benches 0 1 2 3
7. Recent alluvial deposits 0 1 2 3
8. Headcuts 0 1 2 3
9. Grade control 0 0.5 1 1.5
10. Natural valley 0 .5 1 1.5
11. Second or greater order channel No = 0 Yes 3
a
mun�.�ai �na.nca aic iivi iaicu, occ u�aa.uaawna u� i�ianuai
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = °� )
12. Presence of Baseflow •
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
14. Leaf litter
15. Sediment on plants or debris
16. Organic debris lines or piles
17. Soil-based evidence of high water table?
C. Biology (Subtotal = �.S )
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
20. MaCfobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
21. Aquatic Mollusks
22. Fish
23. Crayfish
24. Amphibians �
��
.���
���
���
��
.
�
���
��
���
�!�'�
��
��
2
2
0.5
1
0
0
E
�
1
Yes
25. Algae � 0 0.5 � 1') �
26. Wetland plants in streambed FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 Other = 0
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes: '7�_ c.r_�a�,.�,��r�r;n�
Sketch:
3
0
1.5
1.5
0
0
3
3
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: ��,���� ProjecUSite: %}��i�� �d� Latitude: 3j ZL��C�
Evaluator: ��,�� � ��e.y.� j��yr� �,�� County: ('„9� Longitude: _g � � Z��T�
v
Total Points: Stream Determination (circle one) Other �
Sfream is at least intermittent �� � Ephemeral Intermittent Perennial e.g. Quad Name:� ���'
if ? 19 or perennial if ? 30'
A. Geomor holo (Subtotal = 15�`.� ) Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1 a Continuity of channel bed and bank , 0 1 2 3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg 0 1 2
3. In-channel structure: ex. riffle-pool, step-pool, 0 �1 2 3
ri le- ool se uence
4. Particle size of stream substrate 0 1 2� 3
5. Active/relict floodplain 0 2 3
6. Depositional bars or benches 0 1 2 3
7. Recent alluvial deposits 0. 1 � 2 3
8. Headcuts 0 1 2 3
9. Grade control 0 0.5 1 �
10. Natural valley 0 0.5 � 1 1`.5�
11. Second or greater order channel No - 0� W Yes = 3
a ..:�..:..i a:.,.�,.... .. ... . ..... .. .. .r...,�...,.:....,. : ..i 'a✓
.............. ....,..........., .._.._..._� __.. _....._ ........... ... ............
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = 7,S )
12. Presence of Baseflow
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
14. Leaf litter
15. Sediment on plants or debris
16. Organic debris lines or piles
17. Soil-based evidence of high water table?
��
��
��
���
���
. �
2
0.5
1
1
Yes
3
3
0
1.5
1.5
C. Biolo Subtotal = "7.5 ``J
18. Fibrous roots in streambed 3 2 1 0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed 3 2 1 0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance) 0 1 2 3
21. Aquatic Mollusks 0� 1 2 3
22. Fish 5 1 1.5 �
23. Crayfish 0 0.5 1 1.5
24. Amphibians 0_ �D:� 1 1.5
25. Algae 0 0.5 1 1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 Other 0�
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes: ��. ��, '
r �� �
Sketch:

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: � ,Z � ,,�� Project/Site:G�� �� � Latitude: %5 Z 2��l.� ��
Evaluator: ����,�n�, County: C�� � Longitude: _�� Z����i;c�
C./
Totai Points: ,� Stream Determination (circle one) Other /J
Stream is at /east intermittent ��, J Ephemeral Intermittent Perennial e.g. Quad Name: L l'"�D L�
if ? 19 or erennial if ? 30`
A. Geomor holo (Subtotal =�� ��' ) Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1 a Continuity of channel bed and bank 0 1 3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg 0 1 2 3
3. In-channel structure: ex. riffle-pool, step-pool, 0 1 2 3
ri le- ool se uence
4. Particle size of stream substrate 0 1 3`
5. Active/relict floodplain 0 1 3� '
6. Depositional bars or benches 0 2� 3 '
7. Recent alluvial deposits 0 1 2 3
8. Headcuts 0 1 3
9. Grade control 0 0.5 1 1 5
10. Natural valley 0 0.5 1 1.5
11. Second or greater order channel No = 0 Yes 3
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discuss'ons in manual
B. H drolo (Subtotal = �)
12. Presence of Baseflow 0 1 2 3
,-�
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria �, 1 2 3
14. Leaf litter �1.5 1 0.5 0
15. Sediment on plants or debris 0 0 1 1 5
16. Organic debris lines or piles 0 0.5 1 ,�,Y 1.5 )
17. Soil-based evidence of high water table? No = 0 Yes i 3,!
C. Biolo (Subtotal = � `�
18. Fibrous roots in streambed 3_� 2 1 0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed 3 2 1 0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance) 0 1 2 3
21. Aquatic Mollusks 0 1 2 3
22. Fish 0 �? 1 1.5
23. Crayfish 0 0. 1 1.5
24. Amphibians 0 0.5 1 1.5
25. Algae 0 0.5; 1 1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed FAC = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 Other = 0
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:

Gaston East-West Connector (U-3321j
Jurisdictional Delineation Data forms

J
Norfih Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identi#tcation Form; Version 3.'!
Date: 1/16J2007 Project: Gaston E/W Connector Latitude: 35.2529135231
Evaluator: S&ME Site: S1.S15B Longitude: _g1.2413946984
'Total Points County: Gaston ' Other See Fi #13 of A rox.
Stream is at Ieast interrriftent 41 s ��
if Z 19 ar perenniat if>_ 30 e.g. Quad Name: Waters of U.S. maps
2. fT18I1-RtBdB QtLC�18S 8(2 IIOF fBIE?tl: SE8 dISCUSSI0i1S If1 TT18f1U21
B. HydfOlOgy (Subtota3 = 11 )
i4. �roundwaternow�discnar e 3
15. Water in channel and > 48 hours since rain or 3 � 3
Water in channel -- dry or growing season
16. Leaflitter � i
17. Sediment on plants or debris �
. rgan�c e ris mes or pi es rac ines � 5
. y nc soi s re oximorp ic ea ures presen . Yes =1.5
C. B101ogy (Subtotal = 6 �
in chann
2
2
0.5
L3. t�iValV@S 0
24. Fish 0,5
25. Amphibians o.5
26. Macrobenthos {note diversity and abundance) � o.s
27. Filamentous algae; periphyton o
28. Iron bacteria/fun us o
29b. Wetland plants in streambed None = 0
b. Items 20 and 21 focus on the presence of upland plants. Item 29 focuses on the presence of aquatic or wetland p(ants
Notes: (use back side of this form for additional notes} Sketch:
S��
a

North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identification Form; Version 3.1
Date: 11/27/2006 Project: Gaston E/W Connector Latitude: 35.2528729367
Evaluator: S&ME Site: S1.S15 l.ongifude: _81,2633892135
Total Points County: Gaston Other See Fi #4 of A rox.
sveam ts a� ieast tntermittent 52.5 9 PP
ifzl9orperennialifZ3D e.g.QuadName: WatgfSOfU.S.f118�S
a. man-maae aitcnes are not ratetl: see discussions in manual
B. Hyd�Ology (Subtota� = 11.5 )
14. Groundwater flow/discharge
15. Water in channel and > 48 hours since rain or
Water in channel -- dry or growing season
16. Leaflitter
17. Sediment on plants or debris
3
3 3
1
1
Yes = 1.5
b, Items 20 and 21 focus on the presence of upland plants. Item 29 focuses on the presence of aquatic or wetland plants
Notes: (use back side of this form for additional notes) Sketch:
SI�

�
ss�
North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identification Form; Version 3.1
Date: 1/31/2007 Project: Gaston E/W Connector Latitude: 35.2492694104
Evaluator: S&ME Site: S1.S93 Longifude: _81,2355903357
Total Points County: Gaston Ofher See Fi #13 of A rox.
Stream is aUeast intermiUent 38.3 g pp
if x 19 orperenrial if z 30 e.g. Quad Name: Waters of U.S. maps
_ —
A. GeomO�phOlOgy.(subcotat= _19 � Absent Weak I_Moderate Strong
1a. Continuous bed and bank i ( s
2. Sinuosit � 2
3. In-channel structure: riffle-pool sequence � � z
4. Soil #exture or stream substrate sorting � � 3
5. ctiv re ic oorp ain I I Z
6. epositional bars or benc es � � 2
7. Braided channel o � I �
8. Recenf allucial deposits i I I
�v. nCau cui� � z �
11. Gra e confrols � i
12. Natura( valley or drainageway �
13. Secon or greater order on existing I
USGS or NRCS map or oiher documented No = o �
exidence. I
a. man-made ditches are not rated: see discussions in manual
S. H d�olo (Subtotal = 9.5 )
14. Groundwater flow/dischar e � Z �
15. Water in channel and > 48 hours since tain or 3 3
Water in channel -- dry or growing season
16. Leaflitter �.5 �
17. Sediment on plants or debris o.s , I
� I
Yes = 1.5
b. Items 20 and 21 focus on the presence o° upland plants. Item 29 focuses on the presence of aquatic or wetland plants
Notes: (use back side of this form for additional notes) SketCh:

Nor�h Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identification Form; Version 3.1
Daie: 1/31/2007 Project: Gaston E/W Connector Latitude: 352458713759
Evaluator: S&ME Site: . S1.S94 Longitude: _81,235387752
Total Points County: Gaston Other See Fig #15 of Approx.
SVeam is at leasi intermittent 2 s. 5
if > 19 or perenniat if 2 30 e.g. Quad Name: UV8t0�S Of U.S. fl'38pS
A. Geomorphalogy (subcorai = � 3.5 �
1a. Continuous bed and bank
2. SIIlUOSIty
3. In-channel structure: riffie-pool sequ
4. Soil texture or stream substrate sorti
5. Acfive re ic oorp ain
6. Depositional bars or benches
Absent Weak
1
0
t
�
_ _._.......----......_._........_�_.__ _—I _ o _
10. Head cuts
----._..__. _.... ....------------.._.._.
9. rade controls
12. Natural valley or drainageway
13. Second or greater order on existing
USGS or NRCS map or other documented
exidence.
a. man-made ditches are not rated: see discussions in manuaE
B. Hydrology �s�brac�i = 6.5 >
14. Groundwater flow/discharqe
15. Water in channel and > 48 hours since rain or �
Water in channel -- dry o� growing season
16. Leaflitter
17. Sediment on planis or debris
. rgan�c @ fIS 1112S Of pl @S �aC ines
0
No=O
0.5
�
E
Moderate Strong
3
2
1
1
Yes = 9.5
b. items LU antl z1 focus on the presence of upland plants. Item 29 focuses on the presence of aquatic or wetland plants
Notes: (use back side of this form for additional notes) Sketch:
�
S5�

North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identificatian Form; Version 3.1
Date: 12/6/2006 Project: Gaston E/W Connector Latitude: 35.2388512Q2
Evaluator: S&ME Site: S1.S24 Longitude: _g1.2592392012
Total Points C County: Gaston Other See Fig #5 of Approx.
Stream is at least interrriUent 44. J
a a �s x ae�e��� ir a ao e.g. Quad Name: W dt2rS Of U.S. l718pS
A. Geomorphology_(s�bcoEa�_23.5 �
1a. Continuous bed and bank
2. Sinuosity
3. In-channel structure: riffle-pool sequ
4. Soi! texture or stream substrate sorti
5. ctive re ic oorp ain
. Depositional bars or benc es
7. Braided channel
B. Recent allucial deposits
a. atura evees
10. Head cuts
�3. 5econa or greater oraer on existmg
USGS or NRCS map or other documented
exidence.
a. man-rnade ditches are not rated: see discussions in manual
B. Hyd�ology (suttota� = 10 )
14. Groundwater flow/discharqe
15. Water in channel and > 48 hours since rain or
Water in channel -- dry or growing season
16. Leaflitter ,
17. Sediment on plants or debris
Absent Weak I Moderate Strong
I3
2
2
� 2
I 2
I 3
� I
z
1 ---
0.5 —__...__. - --...._...._.
1
�
I Yes = 3
3
3 3
1 I o.�
I �
I Yes = 1.5
b. ttems 20 and 21 focus on the presence of upland plants. Item 29 focuses on the presence of aquatic or wetland plants
Notes: (use back side of this form for additional notes)
Sketch:
�
�

�`
North Carolina Division of Water Quafity - Stream Identification Form; Version 3.1
Date: 2/5/2007 Project: Gaston E/W Connector Latitude: 35.2425038584
Evaluator:S&ME Site: S1.S1Q0 Longitude: _gq.,�g�154891
Tota1 Points County: Gaston Other See Fi #15 of A rox.
SUeam is at leasl intemittenl 4 � � pP
if Z 79 or perennial i(>_ 30 e.g. Quad Name: WatBfS Of U.S. mapS
a. man-made ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Fi df0�0 (Subtotai = 11 )
14. Groundwater flowldischar e �� 2
15. Water in channel and > 48 hours since rain or 3 3
Water in channel -- dry or growing season
16. Leaflitter �.5
17. Sediment on piants or debris �.5
. rgarnc e ns mes or pi es rac ines i.s
. y nc so� s re oximorp ic ea res presen .
Yes = 1.5
C. BIO�O (Subtotal = 10.5 )
20b. Fibrous roots in channel � Z
�
24.
1
1
cv. runNrnuiafES � 7.5
26. Macroben#hos (note diversity and abundance) 1.5
cr. n�an�einvus aiyae; �enNnyivn 2
28. Iron bacteria/fun us �
29b. Wetland p[ants in streambed tvo�e = o
b. Items 20 and 21 focus on the presence of upland plants. Item 29 focuses on the presence of aquatic or wetland plants
Notes: (use back side of this form for additional notes) Sketch:

S�"7
North Caro(ina Division of Water Quality - Stream Edentification Form; Version 3.1
Date: 2/6/2007 Project: Gaston E/W Connector Latitude: 35.2342835329 j
Evaluator: S&ME Site: S1.S102 Longitude: _81,2328432053
Total Points County: Gaston Other See Fi #15 of rox.
Stream is a� least Intermittent g �p
if>_19orperenniatiit3Q 23 � e.g. QuadName: Wafers of U.S. maps
A. Geomorphology csuntora� _ � 0.5 �
1a. Continuous bed and bank
2. Sinuosity
3. In-channe! structure: riffle-pool sequence
4. Soil te�ure or stream substrate sorting
5. ctive re ic oorp ain
6. epositional bars or enches
7. Braided channel
8. Recent allucial deposits
a. atura evees
10. Head cuts �
11. Grade controls ---- --
12. Natural valley or drainageway
13. Second ot grea#er order on existing
USGS or NRCS map o� other documented
exidence.
a. man-made ditches are not rated: see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology csUacoc�i = 7.5 �
14. Groundwater flowldischarqe
15. Water in channel and > 48 hours since rain or
Water in channe! -- dry or growing season
16. Leaflitter
17. Sediment on plants or debris
Absent Weak Moderate Strong
3
a
1
0
z
z
o ..-
0
0
0
�
+�
No=O I
2 I
3 3
� �
0
o �
Yes = 1.5
b. Items 20 and 21 focus on the presence of upland plants. Item 29 focuses on the presence of aquatic or wetland ptants
Notes: (use back side of this iorm for additional'notes) Sketch:

USACO�-Aid-# DW # Site # (indicate on attached ma )
;,�,; STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET �
Provide the foIlowin� information for the sream reach under assessment:
1. ApplicanYs name: PBS&J
3. Date of Evaluaiion: 2/6/2007
5. Name of stream: S1.S15C
2. Evaluator's name:S&ME
4. Time of Evaluation: 09:37:i1am
6. River basin: Catawba
7. Approximate drainage area: — 8. Stream order 3
9. Length of reach evaluated: 429 feet 10. County: Gaston
11.Site coorclinate(if known): prefer in decimal degrees 11. Subdivision name (if any):
Latitude (ex. - 34.872312j 35,2338433463 Longitude (ex. - 77.55661 � -81.2331 52 047 9
Method location determined GPS Topo Sheet Orlho (Aerial Photo/GES) Other GIS Other
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note the nearby roads and tandmarks and attach a map idenEifying stream's location):
See Fig#15 of Approximate Waters of the U.S. Including Wetiands maps
14. Proposed channel work (if any): Unknown
15. Recent weather conditions: sunny cold dry
16. Site conditions at tirne of visit: same
17.Identi{y any special waterway classification known: Section 10 Tidal W aters Essential Fisheries Habitat
Trout Waters Outstanding Resource Waters Nutrient Sensitive Waters Water Supply Watershed (I-IV)
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation pond? NO If yes, estimate the water surface area: �
18. Does the channel appear on a USGS quad map? YES 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey: UNK
� % Residential 0 % Commercial 0 % Indusirial a % Agricultural
21. Estimated watershed land use: 5 % Forested 95 % Cleared/l.ogged % Other
22. Bankful width: 40' 23. Bankful height (from bed to top of bank): 5'
24. Channel slope down center of stream: X Flat (0-2°!0) Gentle (2-4°/a) Moderate (410%) Steep (>10%)
25. Channel sinuosity: X Straight Occasional bends Frequent meander Very sinuous Braided channel
Instruction for completion of worksheet (located on page 2):
Begin by determining the most approp'irate ecoregion based on location, terrain, vegetation, stream classifipfion, etc. Every characteristic rnust be sccored using the
58me ecoregion. Assign points to each characteristic within ihe range shown for the scoregion. Page 3 provide a brieF descripGon of how to review the characteristics
identified in the worksheet. Scores should refled an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. lf characleristic pnnot be evaluated due to site or
u�eather Conditions, enter 0 in the SCOring box and provide an explanatbn in ihe comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the charac;er of a stream under
2view (e.g., the sheam fbws from the pasiure into a Foredtj, the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate fam used to
evaluate each reach. The total score assigned to a sVeam reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the highest quatiy.
Total Score (from reverse):
Evaluators Signature:
44
1
S&ME Personnel
Comments:
�
Date: 2/6/2007
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in gathering
the data required by the United States Corps of Enginee�s to make a prellminary assessment of stream qualiry. The total score resulting
from the completion of tfiis form is subject to USACE approval and does not impky a particular mitigation ratio or requlrement.
Form subject to change - version 06/03. To comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26
1
5iz;

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Presence of flow / persistent.pools in strea.m
�(no flow or satuiation = 0; stron flow =: max oints) 0 5 0-4 0=5. 2
;
-:.
'": Evidence of past human alteration '
extensive alteiarion = 4; no alteration = max' oints 0 6 0-5 0-5 ,. 2
Riparian zone 0 6 0-4 0-5. ".:• 0
�{no buffer = 0; conti uous,'wide:buffer— max oints
Eyidence of nutrient or chemical discharges .. '' �
extensive dischar es =.0; no dischar' es = ma3c oints) 0 5 Q� 0-4 �� 2
`. Groundwater discharge ;; ` ` �0 3 0-4 0-4_ :.. 4
(no dischaige O; s rin s; see s; wetlands; etc max oints) . �
` ' Presence of adjacent floodplain' `
(no flood lam = 0, extensive flood lain = max' oints �� 0�. 0 2.. .,.. 3
' `. :Entrenchment;/�floodplain access �; •
deeply entrenched O, :frequent floodina = max oints 0-5 0-4 0 2". ':. 2
Presence.of.adjacentwetlands ' `
� no wetlaad's = 0; tarQe ad'acent wetlands�= max. oints 0-6 0� 0 2 Q
' `.' ' Channel sinuosity 0-5 0-4. 0-3 1
(extensive channelization`= 0; natural meander = max oints `
' � .:` Sediment input : . �0 5 0,4 0-4` 1
extensive deposirion= 0; littte or no sediinent — inaz omts
': S�ze & diversity of channel:bed; substrate ._' � N�* ��
� � o-� a s 1
fine, homo enous = O; lar e; diverse�size§`= max omts) ` ',,,
Evidence of channel incision orwidening' U-5 0-4. ` 0-5. 2
(dee 1. incised = 0; stable bed & banks = max oints
•:'. Presence of major bank failures
seveie erosion = 0; no erosioa, �stable.bacilcs = ma�c � oints �'S 0-5 0 5. 3
- Root'depth and density on.banks � U-3 �.0� 0-5 3
no visible roots = O; den§e roots througPiout = max oints .:
Impact 8y agriculture, livestock; or timber production ` 2
substantial im act =0; no ev.idence = max oints ': .0-5 `: ' 0-4 `.' 0-5 ::
Presence of;riffle=pooUripple-pool complexes 0-3 . 0-5 0-6 3
(no riffles/ri les or ools = 4, wetI-develo ed = max oints
% AabitaE complexity '' ' p-6 0-6 0-6 3
� l�ttle or no habitat —.0; "fre uent, varied habrtats . max points
' Canopy coyerage'over streambed . q-5 0-5 0-5: �
no shadin ve etation = 0; continuous cano max oints .
Sabstrate'embedde.dness . � � ° l y
(deeply embedded�= O, loose structwre . max} NA* �. 0-4 Q-4 2
<+. : Presence of.stream invertebrates (see page.4j 0,4 0-5 ` 0-5 - �
no evidence = 0; c'oinmon,.nuinerous es ° max omts
Presence of amphibians :
(no evidence = 0;'comnnon;.numerous s = max points) � -�� . ' �� �� �
Presence of fish ' `
(no evidence . O, common,�nuinei�ous es = max points) : :0-4 0-4 0=4 �
Evidence of �vildlife use .` ` p:6 0-5 0 5 3
': (no evidence = 0; abundarit evidence = max voints)
*These characteristics are not assessec! in coasta[ streams
2
44

SI�
USACOEAid-#. DWQ # Site # indicate on attached ma )
;,�„ STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET . �
Provide the %llowing infarmation for the sream reach under assessment:
1. ApplicanYs name: P8S&J .
3. Dafe of Evaluation: 1/16/2007
5. Name of strearn: S1.S15B
2. Evafuators name:S&ME
4. Time of Evaluation: 02:01:56pm
� 6. River basin: Catawba
7. Approximate drainage area: -- 8. Stream order. 3
9. Length of reach evaluated: 3654 feet 10. County: Gaston
11.Site coordinate(if known): prefer in decimal degrees 11. Subdivision name (if anyy:
Latitude {ex. - 34.872392) 35.2529135231 Longitude (ex. - 77.55661 -81.2413946984
Method loca6on determined GPS Topo Sheet Ortho (Aerial Photo/GIS) Other GIS Other
13. LocaGon of reach under evaluation (note the nearby roads and landmarks and attach a map identifying siream's location):
See Fig# 13 of Approximate Waters of the U.S. Including Wetlands maps
14. Proposed channel work (if any): Unknown
95. Recent weather conditions: iight rain overnight
16. Sfte condiUons at time of visit: overcast .
17.Identify any special waterway classification known: Section 10 Tidal Waters Essential Fisheries Habitat
Trout Waters Outstanding Resource Waters Nutrient Sensitive Waters � Water Supply Watershed (I-IV)
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation pond? NO If yes, estimate the water surface area:
i 9. Does the channel appear on a USGS quad map? YES 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soi[ Survey: UNK
20 % Residentiaf 15 % Commercial 0 % IndusUiai � % Agricultural ,
21. Estimated watershed land use: fi5 % Forested 0 % Cteared/Logged °/a Other
22. Bankful width: 45 feet 23. Banl�ul height (from bed to top of bank): 15'
24. Channei slope down center of stream: X Flat (0-2%) Gentle (2-4°10) Moderate (4-10%) SteeP (>10%)
25. Channei sinuosity: Straight X Occasional bends Frequent meander Very sinuous Braided channel
Instruction for completion of worksheet (located on page 2}:
Begin by determining the most appropirate ecoregion based on location, tertain, vegetation, stream dassification, etc. Every characteristic must be sccored using the
same ecoregi0n. Assign points to each characteristiC within the range shown for the scoregion. Page 3 provide a brief description of how io review the charaC,eristics
identified in the worksheet. Scores should reftect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or
weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an expianation in the comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under
review (e.g., the stream fbws from the pasture inEo a foredt), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to
evaluaie each reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between o and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the hghest quality.
Totai Score (from reverse): 6$ Comments:
�
Evatuators Signature: SBME Personnel Date: 1116l2007
This channel evaluation form is intended to he used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in gathering
the data required by the United States Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream quality. The total score resuiting
from fhe comp(etlon of this form is subjeci to USACE approval and does not impky a particular mitigation ratio or requirement.
Fortn subject to change - version 06/03. To comment, please call 919-876-844t x 26
1

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSI3EET
Presence of tlow / pers�stenf.pools.in stream p_5 ' 0,4 0-5 4
' (no flow or saturahon = 0, stron flow =,max oints `
`< Evidence of past human alteration 0-6 0-5 0-5 - 3
extensive alteration = 0; no alteiat2on = max irits
' Riparian, zone.. _ '
no buffer = 0; conti uous, wide biiffer = max oinis) . �'6 �-0 0-5 � 3
Evidence of.natrient.or chemicai discharges
{extensive dischar es = 0; no discfiar es = max oints 0-5 0�. 0-0 2
0
Groand�vater discharge .:. .. -3 0�4 0-4. 4
no dischar e= 0; s rin s,`seeps; wetlands; etc. = max ints}
; Presence,of adjacent floodplain � '
(no flood lain =-0;" extensive floodplain = niax ' oints) �� 0-4 0 2. 4
- � � ` Entrenchment / iloodplain.access �
(dee � ly ent�enched = 0; fr uent #loodin = max oints) 0-5 0� 0 2,:; �
` � � Presence of adjacent fvetlands ' - " �
(no wetlands = 0; lazge adjacent "wetlands ° max oints � 0-6 ; 0.-4 0 2: '.. �
�" :' ChanneI sinuosity . "'
(extensive channelizarion = 0; natural meander = max omts) 0.-5 0-4. 0 3: 2
Sediment:input .
(extensive de ositioa— O; little or no `sediment . max oints) . �'S 0=4. 0-4 . 2
Size:& diversity of channel'bed suhstrate ;. j�A* ' I 0-4 0 5: 3
•.{fine, homo enous = 0; lar e, diverse sizes ° max. oints
' Evidence of channel incision or widen�ng';' 0-5 0=4 0 5; , 2
dee 1 incised = 0;� stable'bed & banks = inax• oints)
'. =: Presence of major bsakfailures 0=5 0-5 0 5" 2
severe erosion =.0; no erosion, stable banks = max omts
,` Root depth and density on banks `
(no visible roots = 0; dense roots throaghout = maz oints) �-3, . 0� 0.-5 .. 3
Impaci by agriculture, tivestock; or timt►er.prodaction !0-5 ' 0-4 ' 0-5 4
subsiantial im act =0; no evidence = max ints) �
' Presence of riffle-pooUripple-Pool complexes 0-3.: : 0-5 `` 0-6 . 4
` no riftles/ri les or ools = 0• well-develo ed = max oints)
Habitaf.complexity -. ` 0-6 0-6 0-6 5
(Iitt1e or no habitat = 0, fie uent, varied habitats — max oints) :
Canopy coverage over streambed 0-5 . 0-5 0 5.: 5
no shadin ve etation = 0; confinnous cano — max oints
Substrate embeddedness .` �.. . - NA* 0-4 ; 0-4 2
� (dee i embedded =.0; loose structure = rnax � ;: ,:� ,
Presence"of stream inyertebrates (see:page 4) 0� 0-5 �• 0-5 • 2
no evidence = 0; common, numerous es = max: omts) •
. Presence of amphibians :, ` � 0-4 'O�l 0-4 2
(no evidence — 0; common; numerous s= max omts)
Presence. of fish
(no evidence — 0; common, numerous types = max omts) ` 0=4 ` 0-4. 0.-4 '" 2
Eyidencebf.wildlife use
- : 0-6 0-5 0-5 5
(no evidence — 0; abundant evidence =.max points)
*These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams
2
[. :

��1
USACOE Aid.# DW # Site # (indicate on attached ma )
;,,,; STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET =�
�..
Provide the followin� information for the sream reach under assessment: .
1. Applicant's name: PBS&J 2. Evaluator's name:SBME
3. Date oP Evaluation: 1/31/2�Q7 4. Time of Evaluation: Q1:1 Q:58pm
5. Name of stream: 51.S93 6. River basin: Catawba
7. Approximate drainage area: --- 8. Stream order: 1
9. Length of reach evaluated: 1488 feet 10. County: Gaston
11.Site coordinate(if knovm): prefer in decimal degrees 11. Subdivision name (if any):
Latitude (ex. - 34.8723i2) 35.2492fi94104 Longitude (ex. - 77.55661 -81.2355903357
Method location determined GPS Topo Sheet Ortho (Aerial Photo/GIS) Other GIS Other
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note the nearby roads and landmarks and attach a map identifying stream's location):
See Fig#13 of Approximate Waters of the U.S. Including Wetlands maps
74. Proposed channel work (if any): Unknown
95. Recent weather conditions: sunny co�d
16. Site conditions at time of visit: same
17.Identify any special waterway classification known: Section 10 Tidal Waters Essential Fisheries Habitat
Trout Waters Outstanding Resource Waters Nutrient Sensitive Waters .Water Supply Watershed (f-]V)
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the eva[uation pond? NO If yes, estimate ihe water surface area:
19. Does the channel appear on a USGS quad map? NO 20. Dces channe[ appear on USDA Soil Survey: UNK
� % Residential 0 °/a Commercial 0 % Industriaf � °� Agricultural
21. Estimated watershed land use: 10 % Forested 90 . °/a Cleared/Logged % Other
22. Bankful width: 4-8' 23. Bankful fieight (irom bed to top oP bank): 1-6 ft
24. Channet sfope down center of stream: Flat (0-2%) Gentle (2-4%) X Moderate (4-10%) Steep (>10%)
25. Channel sinuosity: SVaight X Occasionai bends Frequent meander Very sinuous Braided channel
Instruction for completion of worksheet (located on page 2):
Begin by deteanining the most appropirate ecoregion based on IocaGon, terrain, vegetation, st[eam dassifica6on, etc. Every characteris6c must be sccored using the
same ecoregion. Assign points to eactt characieristic wifhin the range shown for the scoregion. Page 3 provide a brieFdescription of how to review the characteristics
identified in the worksheet. Scores should refiect an overall assessmeni of the stream rea� under e+raluation. If characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or
weather condi#ions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a siream urxfer
review (e.g., ihe stream fbws from the pasture in�o a foredt), the sVeam may be divided into srr�aller reaches that display more continuily, and a separate Form used to
evaluate each reach. The total score assgned fo a stream reach musi range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a sVeam of the highest quality.
Total Score (from �everse): � Comments:
Evaluators Signature: S&ME Personnel Date: 1(31l2907
This channel evaluation form is intertded to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionais in gathering
the data required by the United States Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream quality. The total score resulting
trom the completion of this iorm is subject to USACE approval and does not impky a paiticular mitigation ratio or requirement.
i
Form subject to change - version 06/03. To comment, please call 9i 9-876-8441 x 26
1

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Presence.of flow / persistent pools in stream 0 5 ' 0-4 0=5 2
no flow or saturation = 0; stron flow = maz oints) -
`:. Evidence of past human alteration -- p_6 0-5 ` 0-5 3
extensive alteration = 0; no alteration ='max oints
, Riparian,zone ` . . ` 0_6 ;0-4 0-5, 2
(no buffer = 0; contiQuous, wide buffer =max oints
`. Evidence of nutrient or cheFnical discharges 0-5 0-4 0�4 ' 3
extensive dischar es = 0; no dischar es = max oints) .`
` Groundwater discharge . 0 3 0� 0-4. 3
(no dischar e O; s rin s; see s, wetlands, etc. max ouits)
' Presence of.adjacent:floodplain ' '
(no flood lam"= 0; extensive flood lain = max points) `�� Q� 0-2 ' �
. Entrenchuient /:floodpiain access � '
u 0 5 0-4 0 2, 3
deeply entrenched = 0; frequent floodin = max omts)
Presence of;adjacent wetlands '0 6 0-4 0-2 3
{no wetlands = 0; lar e aii�acent wetlands = inaz oints)
Chanael s.inuos�ty : .
(extensive channelization = 0; natural meander = max oints} . 0 5: ' 0-4 0-3 ` 2
, Sediment input :.. 0 5 0-4 0-4 3
(exfensive deposirion= 0; little or no sediment = max oints}
fine, Size & diversity of channel bed substrate. ' NA* 011 Q-5
homo enous = 0; lar e; diverse siies = max o�nts ' �
,. _.. _. __..., ` 3
Evidence of channel incision or widening : p 5 O-Q� 0-5_ 3
(dee t incised = O; stable bed 8c banks = max oints) •
Presence:of major.bank::failures 0 5 � 0-5 0-5 4
severe erosion .= 0; no erosion, stable banks — max oints
Root depth and density on hanks p_3. ,. . `0-4 0-5 3
`(no visible roots = 0; dense roots throughout = max oints)
Impact by agriculture, Livesto,ck, or timber produckiott. 0-5 � 0-4 . 0-5 2
substantial im act =0; no evidence = max oints
Presence of riffle-pool/ripple-pool cofnplexes 0-3 0-5 0-6 3
(no riffles/ri les or ools = 0; weli-develo ed = max oints) -
� Habitat complexity . 0 6 0-6 0-6 _ 3
(tittle or no habitat = 0; fre uent, varied habitats = max oints)
Canopy coverage over streambed ' ' 3
no shadin ve etation = 0; continuous cano = max oints) '0�5.' .: ' . ".. " `'0'S. :.:., : � ' , 0-5_ • ` . .
' ' .Substrate embeddedness ::
dee 1 embedded = O; loose structure max) ��A* ' '0-4 0-4 3
Presence of.stream invertebrates:(see, page 4) , 0-4 0-5 0-5. 4
{no evidence = 0; coinmon, numerous es = max oints
Presence of amphibians ' ; 0-4 0-4 0-4. 3
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max oints)
Presence of iish. : ' .. .. ..;
.... . _ 0-4 .. :. . 0-4: : : 0-4 ::. ° 0
{no evideace = 0; common, numerous es = max oints
Evidence of wildGfe use ' 0-6 . 0-5.: . 0-5 3
(no evidence = 0: abundant evidence = max noints) ` •
*These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams
�
.�

SS�
USACOE-Aid-# DW # Sitz # (indicate on attached ma )
;,,,; STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET �
Provide the followin� information for the sream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: PBS&J 2. Evaluator's,name:SBME
3. Date of Evaluation: 1/31/2007 4. Time of Evaluation: d3_53:03pm
S. Name of stream: S1.S94 6. River basin: Catawba
7. Approximate drainage area: -- 8. Stream order. 1
9. Length of reach evaluated: 202 feet 10. County: Gaston
11.Site coordinate(if known): prefer in decimal degrees 11. Subdivision name (if any};
Latitude (ex. - 34.872312) 352458713759 Longitude (ex. - 77.55661 -81.235387752
Method location determined GPS Topo Sheet Ortho (Aerial Photo/GIS) Other GIS Other '
13. Locat3on of reach under evaluation (note the nearby roads and landmarks and attach a map identifying stream's location):
See Fig#15 of Approximate Waters of the U.S. Including Wetlands maps '
14. Proposed channei work (if any): Unknown
15. Recent weather conditions: very cold, dry �
16, Site conditions at time of visiE: very coid, sunny '
17.Identify any special waterway classificaHon known: Section 10 Tidal Waters Essentiat Fisheries Habitat
Trout Waters Outstanding Resource Waters Nutrient Sensitive Waters Water Supply Watershed (I-1V)
18. Is there a pond orlake located upstream of the evaluation pond? N� If yes, es6mate the water surface area:
19. Does the channeE appear on a USGS quad map? YES 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey: UNK
'� 0 % Residential 0 % Commercial 0 %[ndustrial 0 % Agricultural
2t. Estimated watershed land use: 25 % Forested 65 % Cleared/LOgged % Other
22. Bankful width: 3' 23. Bankful height (from bed to top of bank): 3'
24. Channel slope down center of stream: Flat (0-2%) X Gentle (2�%) Moderate (4-10%) Steep (>� 0%)
25. Channel sinuosity: X Straight Occasional bends Frequent meander Very sinuous Braided channe
Instruction for completfon of worksheet (located on page 2):
8egin by determining the mosi appropirate ecoregion based on locafion, temain, vegetation, stream classificatio�, etc. Every characteristic must be sccored using the
same ecoregion. Assign points to each characteristic with7n the range shown for the scoregion. Page 3 provide a brief description of how to review the characterisfics
identified in the woricshee[. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream 2ach under evaluation. If characterisGc cannot be evaluated due to SitB Or
weather conditio�s, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a sVeam under
review (e.g., the sVeam fbws irom the pasture into a foredt), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches ihat display more con6nuity, and a separate fortn used to
evaluate each reach. The totaf score assigned to a sVeam reach must range behveen 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the highest qualily.
Total Score (from reverse}: 34 Cornments:
Evaluators Signature: S&ME Personnel Date: t/3112007
7his channel evaluat[on form fs Intended to be used only as a gulde to assist landowners and environmental professionals in gathering
the data required by the United States Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessrnent of stream quality. The total scare tesulting
from the completion of ihis form is subject to USACE approval and does not lmpky a particular mitigation ratio or requirement.
Form subject to change - version 06l03. To comment, please call 913-876-8441 x 26
1

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WQRKSHEET
`Presence of f[ow / persisteat pools in stream .`;..:. "` '
no flow or saturation = 0; stron flow = maz oints) . 0-5 ' 0� `: ;.. Q-5.' :. .: 1
Evidence of past human alteration '.
extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = inaz oints 0-6 ` 0-5 0-5 .," 2
Riparian zone .::., ; .
(no buffer = 0; conti uous, wide buffer = max oints) ` 0-6 . 0-4 ' 0-5 .;: ,. 2
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges.. ._:.' '0=5 4-4 o-4:. 4
extensive dischar es = 0; no discha es - max oints)
Groundw.ater discharge ..:
(no dischar e= 0; s rings, see s; wetlands; etc. = max oints} ` 0-3 _ 4-4. 0-4, . 3
,. � . Presence of adjacenf floodptain
{no flood lain = D; eztensiue flood lain = max points) �� �� -� 0-2. 2
" ' : Entrenchment / floodplain access `
{deeply entrenched = 0;' fre uent floodin = max oints) `0�5 �� ` �-Z 2
°.:: Presenc,e of adjacent. wetlands '` � ; 0-6 �� 0-2 3
(no wetlands = 0; lar e adjacenfwetlands = max oints
-. . . .: �. Channel sinuosity .. :
(extensive channelization = 0; naturaCmeander = max oints) �-5 014 � 0-3 ". 1
, Sediment input :. 0.-5. 0�3 0-4 ,` 0
(extensive de osrtion= 0; little or no sediment = maz points)
'' Size & diversity of channel bed. sabstrate`.... " ,. NA# 0-�4. 0-5 �
fine homo enous = O; lar e, diverse sizes = max oints) _
•.. Evidence of channe! incigion or widening ,,
'(dee 1 incised = 0; stable bed & banks = max ints 0-5 � ,0�} 0-5 2
"'Presence of major bank failures ``' 4-5 0-5. 0-S 2
severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = max omts
Root.depth and density on banks 0-3. .. 0-4 0-5 2
(no visible roots = 0; dense roots throughout = maz oints
Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production ` 0-5 O�l 0-5 �
substantiat im act =0; no evidence =. max oints
Presence of riffle-pooUripple-pool.complexes .. 0-3 0-5 �0-6 Q
(no riffles/ri les or oots = 0; well-develo ed = max oints)
`; Habitat comptenity �` ` p-6 0-6 0-6 1
ittle or no habitat = 0;' frequent, varied habitats = max points �
Canopy coverage over streambed . 0-5 .�:-. ;::0-5 0-5 �2
no shadin ve etation = 0; continuous cano = max oints . -
�.' Sutistrate'embeddedness . ' Nz�* 0-4 0-4 Q
dee ly embedded = O; loose structure = max)
' Pr.esence of stream,invertebrates_(see page 4) . '.. ` ~ ` ,�
no evidence = U; common, numerous es = max oints) 0-4 . ` 0-5 0-5
` - Presenee of amphibians . p� 0� 0� 0
{no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max oints}
, Presence of fish . O
no evidence — 0; common, numerous es = max oints) 0-4 0� 0-4
Evidence of wildlife use
(no evidence = 0; abundant evidence =.max pointsl 0-6: 0-5. . 0-5 . 2
*These characteristics are not assessed in coastal sireams
2
�

0
USACOE.Aid.� DW # Site # (indicate on attached ma )
;,�,; STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET �
Provide the folio�ving information for the sream reach under assessment:
1. ApplicanYs name: PBSBJ 2. Evaluator's name:SBluiE
3. Date of Evaluation: 12/6/2006 4. Time of Evaluation: 11:05:40am
5. Name of stream: S1.S24 6. River basin: Catawba
7. Approximate drainage area: — 8. Stream order: 2
9. Length of reach evaluated: a112 feet 10. County: Gaston
11.Site coordinate(if known): prefer in decimal degrees 11. Subdivision name (if any):
Latitude (ex. - 34.872312) 35.238851202 Longitude (ex. - 77.55661 =8�.2592382012
Method Iocation determined GPS Topo Sheet Ortho (Aerial PhotolGlS) Other GIS Other
13. Location of reach under evaluadon (note the nearby roads and landmarks and attach a map identifying stream's [ocation):
See Fig#5 of Approximate Waters of the U.S. Including Wetlands maps
t4. Proposed channet work (if any): Unknown
15. Recent weather conditions: sunny cold
16. Site conditions at time of visit: same
17.Identify any special waterway ctassification known: Section 10 Tidal Waters Essentiat Fisheries HaBitat
Trout Waters Outstanding Resource Waters Nutrient Sensitive Waters Water Supply Watershed (i-1V)
1H. Is there a pond or lake located upsiream of the evaluation pond? YES if yes, estimate the water surface area: UNK
19. Does the channei appear on a USGS quad map? YES 20. Does channe! appear on USDA Soil Survey: UNK
2� % ResidentiaE 0 % Commercial 0 °/a Industrial 20 % Agricuitural
21. Estimated watershed land use: 60 % Forested 0 % Cfeared/Logged % Other
22. Bankful width: 4-5' 23. eankful height (from bed to top of bank): 4'
24. Channel slope down center of stream: Ftat {0-2%) X Gentle {2-4%) Moderate {4-10%) 5teep (>10%)
25. Channel sinuosity: Straighf Occasional bends X Frequent meander Very sinuous Braided channel
Instruction for completion of worksheet (located on page 2}:
Begin by determining the most appropirate ecoregion based on location, tert'ain, vegetation, stream ctassification, etc. Every characterisfte must be sccored using the
same ecoregion. Assign points io each characteristic within the range shown for the scoregion. Page 3 provide a brief description of how to review 1he characteristics
identified in the workshee:. Scores stwuld reftect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If charaCteristiC Cdnnot be eValuated due to 5ite of
weather condiGons, enter Q in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the comment seclion. Where fhere are obvious changes in the character of a stream under
review (e.g., the sVeam fbws from the pasture into a foredt), lhe stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used io
evaluate each reach. 7he lotal score assigned to a stream reach must 2nge belween 9 and 100, wiih a sco2 of 100 representing a stream of the highest quaiity.
Total Score (from reverse);
Evaluators Signature: S&ME Personnel
66 Comments: �
Date: 12/6l2006
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in gathering
the data required by the United States Gorps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream quality. The total score resulting
from the compietion oithis form is subject to USACE approval and does not Impky a particular mitigaUon ratio or requirement.
Form subject to change - version 06/03. To comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26
1
S 5�

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Presence of tlow / persistent poofs in stream `
(no flow or saturation = 0; atron flow = mas oints} 0-5 . 0-4. , '. 0-5 ';. 2
Evi�dence of past human `alteration
extensive alteration = 0; no aIteration = max oints 0-6 ' 0-5 :. , 0-5 :. 3
� Riparian zone. . :
(no buffer = 0; conti uous; wide buffer = max oints) 0-6.. 0-4 0-5 . 2
Evidence of nutrient or.chemical discharges ' ` ~ '
(extensive dischar es = 0; no dischar es = max oints) 0-5 ,_ ` 0-4 `` '. 0-4 ... 2
,. 4
' Groandwater discharge, - -3 0� 0-4. 4
-(no dischar e= 0; s rin s, see s; wetIands, etc. = max oints
Presence of adjacent.iIoodplain `
`(no flood lain = 0; extensive floodplain = max points) ` 0�1 0-4 0-2 3
�; Eu,trenchment (, i3oodplain access ' 0-5 0=4 ,0.-2 .` 2
'{dee 1 entrenched = O; fre uent fioodin = ma�c omts) ." .
Presence of adj acent wetlands ` `
{no wetlands = O; lar e ad'acent wetlands = max oints 0-b 0-4 0-2. 3
" Channel sinuosity . . ,
(extensive channelization = 0; naturaI meander = max oints) 0-5 `0� `0-3 .:: 3
, Sediment input . Q-5. :.. �. 0-4 • 0-4 J' 3
extensive de osition= .0; little or no sediment = max oints
� Size & diversity of.channel bed subsfrate � N:A* " 0-4� 0 S., 3
(fine, homo enous = U; laz e,'diverse sizes = max omts} : _
:.,� -
Evidence;o.f channei incision or.widening
dee 1 incised = 0; stable bed & banks = max oints 0-5 0-4 . 0-5 .� . 3
Presence of major,bank,failures ` : 0-5 0-5 0-5 3
severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable. banks = max omts
Root depth and density on banks 0-3 .. 0� 0-5 3
no visible roots = 0; dense roots throu out = max oints
Impact by agricu[ture,_livestock, or timber production 0_-5 0� 0-5 2
substantial .im act =0; no evidence = max ints
Presence of riffle-pooUripple-pool complexes
(no riffles% ' les or ols = 0; well-develo ed = max oints) a-3 : 0-5 U-6 4
, Aabitat complexity . p-6 0-6 0-6 4
little or no habitat�= 0; fre uent, varied habitats = max oints
Canopy coverage over streambed ' ` � 4
no shadin ve etation = O; continuous cano = max oints 0-5.. ; :.. _ ; . 0-5 : � . • .. 0-5 . .
' �Substrate,embed"dedness � " NA* 0� 0=4 3
(dee I embedded =.0; loose structure = max) �
Presence of stream invertebrates.(see page 4} � ,�
no evidence = 0; common, nurnerous es = max oints , 0-4 =` 0-S 0-5 4
Presence of amphibians 0-4 ' 0-4 0-4 . 2
(no evidence = 0; common, nurnerous es = max oints)
Presence of fish_ 0
(no eyidence = 0; common, numerous es = max oinks) 0-4 0� � 0-4
Evidence bf wildiife use `
(no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = max t�oints) ` 0-6 0-5 . '.0-5 4
�`These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams
2
.:
(

USACOE Ail # DW! # Site � {indicate on attached ma )
;,�,; STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET �
Provide the following information for the sream reach under assessment:
1. ApplicanPs name: PBS&J Z. Evaluators name:SBME
3. Date of Evaluation: 2!5/2007 4. Time of Evaluation: 03:35:42pm
5. Name of stream: S1.S100 6. River basin: Catawba
7. Approximate drainage area: --- 8. Stream order: 1
9. Lerx�th oF reach evaluated: 2493 feet � 10. County: Gaston
11.Site coordinate(if known): prefer in decimai degrees 11. Subdivision name (f any):
Latitude (ex. - 34.872312) 35.2425038584 Longitude (ex. - 77.55661 -81.2291954891
Method location detetmined GPS Topo Sheet Ortho (Aeriai Photo/GIS) Other GIS . Other
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note the nearby roads and landmarks and attach a rnap identifying stream's location):
See Fig#15 of Approwmate Waters of the U.S. Including Wetiands maps
14. Proposed channei worlc (if any): Unknown
15. Recent weather conditions: clear
16. Site conditions at time of visit: ciear
0
17.Identify any special watervvay classification known: Sectlon 10 Tidai Waters Essenkial Fisheries Ha6itat
Trout Waters Outstanding Resource Waters tJutrient Sensitive Waters Water Supply Watershed (1-IV)
18. Is there a pond or iake bcated upstream of the e"valuation pond? NO If yes, estimate the water surface area:
19. Does the channel appear on a USGS quad map? NO 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey: UNK
� % Residential 0 % Commercia! 0 % Industrial � % Agriculturai
21. Estimated watershed land use: 60 % Forested 40 % Cleared/Logged °/a Other
22. Bankful width: 3-10 ft 23. 8ankful height (from bed to top of bank): 2-7 in
24. Channei slope down center o€ stream: Flat (0-2%) Gentle {2-4%) X Moderate (4-t0°k) Steep (>10%)
25. Channei sinuosity: `Straight Occasional bends X� Frequent meander Very sinuous Braided channel
Instruction for completiort of worksheet (tocated on page 2J:
Begin by detertnining the most appropirate ecoregion based on Iocation, terrain, vegelation, st2am ciassification, etc. Ever,r characteristic must be sccored using ihe
same ecoregion. Assign points to each characteristic within ihe.range shown for the scaegion. Page 3 provide a brief description of how ta review the characterislics
ipencifiee in cne worfcsheet. scores should reFlect an overal! assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or
weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanaGon in the comment section. W here there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under
review (e.g., the sUeam flows from ihe pasture into a foredt}, the sheam may be divided into smaller reaches thal display more confinuity, and a separate form used Yo �
evaluate each reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the highest quality.
TotaI Score (from reverse): �j9 Comments:
�
Evaluators Signature: SB�ME Personnel Date: 2/5/2007
This channel evafuation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in gathering
the data required by the United States Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream quality. The total score resulting
lrom the completion of th15 form Is subJect to USACE approval and does not impky a particular mitigation �atio or requirement.
Form subject to change - version 06/03. To comrnent, please ca11919-876-8441 x 26
1
�

STREAM QUALTTY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
# CHA.RACTERISTICS ECOREGION POINT RANGE SCORE
.°.. . , ..: ..,..;` .. ....:. .. _.'> Goastal...: : Piednnont . ,:Mourit.a�n., . ,{._,._ _ .: .. '
1; Presence of flow % persistent pools in s#ream 0 5 0-4 a=s 3
no flow or saturation = 0; stron flow = inax oints)
2 Evidence, of past human alteration
(extensive alteration = 0• no alterarion = max oints 0-6 0-5 0-S ` 1
3 . Riparian zone
(no buffer — O; conti uous,.wide buffer = max oints) �-6 , 0-4 0-5: ... 2
= 4. ` Evedence of, nutrient or c6emical discharges
,. v' . {extensive dischar es = 0; no dischaz es = max oints) 0-5 ': " 0-4 0� _ 3
5' ; ` Groundwater discharge "` `
!`� , `U-3 0-4 0-4 3
(no discharge = O; springs, see s, wetlands; etc. = max oints)
,� � Presence of adjacent.floodplain , :
(no flood lairi = 0; extensive flood lain = max points) 0-4 a-4 0 2 2
� Entrenchment.) floodplain access . . �
w � o- s ` o� a o- 2... 2
'(dee ly eutrenched — 0; fre uent floodin � max o�nts) ,-:�
•, 8 Presence of adjacent,wetlands 0-6 0-4 0-2 3
_ (no wetlands = 0; large ad'acent wetlands ° ma�c oints)
- 9 ; Channel Sinuosity `. : . , . _ '. . _
�` (extensive channelization = 0; natural meander = max oints) �'$ 0� '.0 3. 3
10' ; Sedi�nent input :: ; , . .
(exfensive deposition= O; little or no sediment = rnax oints) 0-5 0-4 0-4 �
� f Size & diversity of channel bed substrate'. *
1� NA 0-4 0-5. 2
. ,. : .._. _ ' fine, homo enous = O; lar e; diverse sizes = max oints _ . ._ .:... .., �..,, . : `
- 12 Evidence of channel incision or widening
o-s . oa o-s 3
�+ �� (dee 1 incised = 0; stable bed & banks = maz' oints �
`� 13 . Presence of major bank failures 0-5 0-5 . 0.-S .. 3
�.
severe erosion = 0; no erasion, stable banks = max o�nts
� 14 Root depth and density on banks
i ��a
(no visible roots = 0; dense roots throu out = max oints) ` 0-3 0� 0-5 3
� 15 ' Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production . 0-5 0-4 0-5 �
- ,;,: <�: �: (substantial im act =-0; no evidence =.max oints
`' Presence of riffle-pooUripple-pool.complexes 0-3 0-5 0-6 3
I6 : �o rif�les/ri (es or ools = 0; weli-deve(o ed = max oints)
EK: 17 ` Habitat complexity 0-6 0-6 0-6 3
d_ :(little or no habitaY= 0; fre uent varied habitats = max oints)
�- 18 ' Canopy coverage overstreambed .
no shadin ve etarion = 0; continuous eano = max omts ` 0-5 ==: 0-5 = ' 0-5 .: 3
' Su6strate embeddedness._.:
_ . ,...
19 , NA 0-4 0-�
.�,�.; (dee 1 ernbedded = 0; loose struchtre = max) * 2
2Q Presence of stream invertebrates (s.ee page 4) �,
(no evidence = 0; comrrion, numerous es = max oints 0-4 0-5 ` 0-5 .. �j
�_ 21 ` - Presence of amphibians 0-4 0-4 0� . 3
�, (no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max pomts)
O Presence of fish ,�
''a= 22 (no evidence = 0; common, numerous es = max omts 0-4 0-4 - 0-4 `
�
Evidence of wildlife use
�� 23 0-6 . 0-5 ... 0-5 4
no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = max ints
;,
� " ` Totai pamts Poss�ble 3 00 100 100 `
:, .. .; . . :: � •� ,�
. .. _ r..... . ..:_. ,..... .; ..n : , =;: _ _.,_.. ::,.:__
_ � u
. > i'��� r �., s .�� _, � �x ., � _ .�.
; TOTAL SCORE (aIso enter on first page) 59
. �
..':.�.: .. :�.� -.�i:.:�. � �. . ..:� � 4 .'. -
"These cliaracteristics are not assessed in coastal streams

�� `�
� USACOE.Aid_# . DWQ # Site # (indicate on attached map)
;,�,; STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET �
Provide the following information for the sream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name:
3. Date of Evaluation
5. Name of stream:
PBS&J 2. Evaluato�'s name:S&ME
2!6/2007 4. Time of Evaluation: 09:11:49am
S1.St42 6. River basin: Catawba
7. Approximate drainage area: — 8. Stream order: 1 '
9. Length of reach evaluated: 260 feet 10. County: Gaston
11.Site coordinate(if knoam): prefer in decimal degrees 11. Subdivision name (if any):
Latitude (ex. - 34.872312) 352342835329 Longitude {ex. - 77.55861 -81.2328432053
Method location determined GI'S Topo Sheet Q�tho (Aerial PhotolGlS) Other GIS Other
13. Location of reach under evaivation (note the nearby roads and fandmarks and attach a map identifying stream's location):
See Fig#15 of Appro�amate Waters of #he U.S. Including Wetiands maps
14. Proposed channel work (if any): Unknown
15. Recent weather conditions: sunny cold
16. Site conditions at time of visit: same
17.identiiy any special waterway classification known: 5ection 10 Tidal Waters EssenEial Fisheries Habitat
Trout Waters Outstanding Resource Waters Nutrient Sensitive Waters Water Supply Watershed (I-IV)
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation pond? YES !f yes, estimate the water surFace area: UNK
19. Does the channel appear on a USGS quad map? NO 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soii Survey: UNK
� % Residential 0 % Commerciai 0 % Industrial Q % Agricultural
21. Estimated watershed Iand use: 0 % Forested 100 % Cleared/Logged %�Other
22. Bankful width: 8' 23. Bankful heighE (from bed to top of bank): 2'
24. Channet slope down center of stream: X Fiat (0-2%) Gentle (2-4%) Moderate (4-10%) Steep (>10%)
25. Channei sinuosity: X Straight Occasionai bends Frequent meander Very sinuous Braided channel
Instruction for completion of worksheet (located on page 2):
8egin by determining the most appropirate ewregion based on locafion, terrain, vegetafron, stream classification, etc. Every cha2cteristic must i�e sccored using the
same ecoregion. Assign points to each characteristic within the range shown for the scoregion. Page 3 provide a brief description of how to review the characteristics
identified in the worksheet. Scores should refiect an overall assessment of the s[ream reach under evaluation. If characteristic canrrot be evaluated due to site or
weather conditions, enter 0 in Ute scoring box and provide an explanation in the comment sectfon. Where there are obvious changes in the characier of a stream under
review (e.g., the sheam Flows irom the pasture into a foredt), the stream may be divided into smailer reaches that display more continuity, and a separate fortn used to
evaivate each reach. 7he total score assigned m a sveam reach must range beriveen 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse)
Evaluators Signature:
S&ME Personnel
36
Comments:
Date: 2I612007
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist iandowners and environmental professionals in gathering
ihe data required by the United States Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream quality: The total score resulting
from the compfetion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not impky a particular mitigation ratlo or requfrement.
Form subject to change - version 06/03. To comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26
1

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORK�SHEET
: � ECOREGIUN' POINT ,RANGE
; # . CHARACTERISTICS ,, } SCORE '
� .;: . . .. ::; r. : Coastal _ -P�edmont. ,:Mountain. ,,�
_._ . . ... .. .. .. _ . .. . ... . ... .,
Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream .
� ! 0-5 0-4 0-5. 2
(no flow or saturation = 0; stron flow = max oints
'Evidence of past haman alteration
2 extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max oints 0-6 0-5 • 0-5 '�
= 3 Riparian zone _ 0-6 0�} 0-5 . 0
(no buffer = 0; conti uous, wide buffer =.max oints
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
4` extensive dischaz es = 0; no dischar es = max oints a-5 � Q-4 ' 0-4 2
y.,�; Groundwater discharge
s o-3 oa, 0-� 2
�d. (no discharge = 0; springs, see s, wetiands, etc. = max omts)
�' ' Presence of adjaceni tIoodplain .
�` 6' (no fload lain = 0; extensive tlood Iain = max oints) Q� 0-4 0-2 3
�`
,'T,'. Entrenchment / floodplain access :: .
'7 . . 0-5 :. . . , 0-4 � 0-2 2
Q+� :: (dee ly entrenched = 0; fre uent flooding = max points)
8' Presence of adjacent wetlands �
(no wetlands = 0; laz e ad'acent wetlands = max oints) 0-6 0-4 0-2 �
9 Channel sinuosity ` 0-5 0� 0-3 �
(extensive channelization = 0; naiural meander = max points)
� Sediment input_
�0 ` 0-5 0-4: : ` 0-4 Z
_ (extensive deposition= O; tittle or no sediment = max oints)
� Size &.diversity of channel bed substrate : �
,, 11 � NA 0� 0-5. .: �
_....� := fine, homo enous = 0; lar e, diverse sizes = max oints
: Evidence of channel incision or,widening '
12 o-s o-a o-s 3
�y; ,;. (dee 1 incised =. fl; stable bed & banks = max oints)
,,�".,: , Rresence.of major.bank 1'ailures -
Y 3 0-5 .... 0-5 0-5 .`.
._,,,►a„��; _;�+::; `(severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stabie banks = max oints 4
Root depth and densify on banks �
�: 14 ': 0-3 0-4 0-5 2
F; : (no visible.roots = O;.dense xoots throu hout = max points)
�� -: Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber produciion ,�
- ; . ::15; ; 0-5 0-4 0-5
- - substantial im act =0; no evidence = max oints
Presence of riflle-pooUripple-pool complexes 2
�:f 16 _` 0-3 0-5 0-6
no riffleslri les or ools = 0; well-develo ed = max oints
Habitat camplexity 2
E: 17 ' 0-6 0-6. . 0-6
�: (little or no habitat = 0; fre uent, varied habitats = max oints)
�,E"�„�; � Caaopy coverage ov.er streambed O
18 : 0-5 . 0-5 0-5 _.
00; no shadin ve etation = 0; canrinuous eano = max oints
�' Substrate embeddedness ' ' `
'�L'i; 19 : NA�` 0-4 0-4. 2
dee 1 embedded =' 0; loose structure = max �
Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4) O
; 20 _ .. 0-4 0-5 0_5
no evidence = 0; common, numerous es = max ' oints)
', Presence of amphibians
�! 21 ' (no evidence = 0; common, numerous es = max oints) 0-4 0-4 0-4 Q
C7'
O: Presence of flsh
22 : � 0-4. . . 0� ` 0-4.. , . :
a� (no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max poinfs) �
�:� Evidence of wildlife use
aa , 23 0-� 'o-s o-s 3
(no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = max oints
Totai Pomts�Poss�ble , 100 10U: 100 ,
::_ :. ,.::_ � -;� ,..
, : ,. ,_,.. . ...._ , .: ;
_. ..:..:.. . :... .:.. ...: : :,_.__< :......:" .:..: �,
� � ' ,,
�` �
�: `. TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first pa "e) 36
g
*These characteristics are not assessed in coasial streams

Wsg
DATA FORM
ROUT1f�8 WETLAiVD DETERMtNA770N
p987 USnCE Wrtlands Ddfneatlon Tfanuaq
Projeci Sar. Ges�on FlW Connec�or Daie If31f2007
npplieanuOmrer. PBSSl/EcoSCienec County; Gmtoo
]nves�igator. S&ME Stam: NC
Do noanal circums�anaes cxis� an fhesite? Ya[RJ No[] Community ID: WeUand
Is tbe site aignifiwnUy dismrbed (Atypital SiNa�ion)7 Ye�� No� Trmsect ID: W1.
Is the uea e potcnual problem orea? Ya❑ No� Plot ]D: W72
(if nceded, ezploin on rcversej
Lat:3524846829 Lon:.81.236pg9g
VLGCTA'TlON
DaminanlP]antSoecies Sirantm, Indieetor pominan[glamStteia Strntum indialor
�• Luthr/R1oalK�ni/011a H OBL 9. ,
2. Juncvs eJfusut H FACW+ 10.
3. Typha anAVr1lolio H OSL I 1.
A, dGmrrlusrinRrur H OBL 12.
5, OmorLrrobicnnit � p �p� �;.
6. 74.
7. t3.
e. 16.
Percmt of DomimM Species that are OBL, FACW ot FAC: (accpt FAG): 80
Remarks: })ydwph7nic vegetetion ic dominanL
HYDROLOGY
Rew�dod Da�e (besedbe i� Reourks) WNlnnd Hydrology Indipwn:
❑ Streom,Lokeor7ideG+gc
�Aerinf PhotogtaDh � • Inutdnted �
OiAu Q Satu�nted io Upper 121ncl�es
NoRecodulDataAvnileble ❑ WalerMerks
Field Observaelons: � Drill 4ines
❑ Sediment Deposils
� DrainegePmtemsinwcllands
Dryth o(S�uface Wmer: 7 (in.) � Oxidized Root Chanu�is in Upper 12Ine6es
0 Weter•Smined Leavts
DcDCh io Free Wa�er in Pic 4 (in.) ❑ Lout Soi] Survey Da�a
❑ Other{GpteininRenvrks)
Dcpth to Sanuatcd Soit: 0 (in.)
Rem�rks: Wuland fiydrology is eridml.
Adjaan� ro S93 �
6��)lR.9
MopUnitName DminageClus: sonuN9wlpoorl
Serin ond PMse): CAcwada drnin A y.
Field Obicrvations
'faxonomy (Subgtoup): fluwquentie Dystrochrtpu Coafimi M�pped 7ype? Ya � No
ProfileDescription:
jkp� u,�.;rrelor ?RmileColasfMc�.eYMoii1 ie.�uRtmcmihu_
(_p{,�) }jQjffi IMwsellMeiul �ndAbuiM�nee/Cenlnq phj�Mesn
4 A ]OyrG2 tand
6 B 16yr4l1 t0yt2/lmecyind'utinct ' cl�y
12 C 7.Syr4fD IOyr4/1 mmydis�inet cle
Hydric Soillndicaion:
Hiuosot ❑ Concrcrions
Hipie Epipedan ❑ High Otganic Contenl in Surl6ae Loyet
Sulfidc Odnr �_ Organic Svcaking
Aquic Moisture Regimc _� Listed on Locel Hydrie Soile List .
Reducing Condilions ❑ ListW on Natian�! Hydric Soils Lisi
Glcyed or Low•-Chrome Colon ❑ Othec (Fvploin in Remnrks)
Rem.r{u: Soit is hydric.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
HydmpAybc Vegetation Preunt? Yes�] tio0 WeUand HydrotogyP�eunt? Yet� No❑
Hydrie Solis Prexnt? Ycs�f T2o� is �hit Snmpfing Poim WiiAin A Wetland? Yes� No�
Remarks: Dau point is locate3 in a ucOnnd. �
(
/ ` ��. �
. ! I i

W5� ' -
DATA FORIN
ROUTI\L• WETLArA DL•TERMINp7'IUJN
(1987 USACE �YClland� Uclermin�tlon ManuelJ
FhojaiSitc: CastnaFJ1�'Cunni<lor po��; .111/1007
ApylicanVOwnar. YBS&J f EmScienrc Ca��y: G•s�on
Invcsiigmor. S&,11E (S.Hnudsrn g����; i7C �
llpnormcltimumslcnceseaistonlhcsile.^ Ya[X� No❑ � CammunitylD: UpLn1
)s�imsiteiippifitamlydistmbed.(Atypical5i�wtfon)> Yes� No� 7n�uecl7p: W�.
]c thcmcn � poknlinl pcoblcm nrcai Y<s0 No[� Pld ID: �V72
(itneeded, cxpiein on rcvuse)
Lnt:;�qg08966 �^� -61.2762939
VECETATION
DominantPlaniSoccin � 1 n� Indiaaior AominanlPlam$p r�ie� $V�Nm I ro
�• �e�bursn. . H 9.
Z.lonic[m.ioyonlr.�_ n _ 10.
3. PlnfnnrrsamldmMll� T 11. -
4. J'amtodo. � N 12.
5. IS.
6. 1�.
7. IS.
8. 16.
PercemofDOmiromSpceieslTata+eOBL,FACWorFAQ(ncceptFAC-): 1 / 2 . DS
Remarks:lfydrophY7ic veyHalion is dominnnL
HYDROLOCY
AecordeQllata{UeitribtinRemuks) WelfandHydrology]ndiatom
❑ SirortylakeotTideGauge PRTMA1tY
� �Atriel Phao6�vh ❑ Inuadated
O�hV ❑ S�[umcd in Upya 12lnchu
NoRecarded9naAvaif�bk ❑ WaivMarke
❑ Drill Lines "
Field Obsavuiom: ❑ &diment Depasiu
Ae e� of Sorfeee wa�er. 0 � b+���age Pntium in Wetlend:
D (��•) sECONDARY
❑ Oxtdhcd Root Chwieh in Uyper 12 Laha
D�pN�oFfeeWa�erinPiC 1i+ (in.) ❑ Wet<rSmtmdLCaves
❑ L«d Soit Surxy Dmn
ixpm w sam.ica su�c � x+ f��.) Q OUkr (Explsio in Rcomrk�)
Remnrks: WMland Aydrolop,y b abfenl.
SOII.$
Mop I1nu Name Drainobro Clua: eomenhat paorly
Series m0 PDase): CAcrv�d� Lmm
Fdd Olatervalioru
7sxouomy (Sub�vup): tncrmic FluvaQOentie DyrtracArrps Confirm Mappcd 7ypc9 Ycs No
Profile Dest�iptlon:
{kyC M�WxCdx Mnlil<C IenlMUUNIMdnI 7dwe.Ceweliani.
IIMAC� }I01f� �SlpidLA101t0 �rv1Ahy:_�e/f-mrxr elw....nh�_�+Ne.
1S+ 75YrM6 _ �V
Hydr(eSoillnQicnon: ' �
His�osol ❑ Ccopetions �
Hiuic Epipcdon ❑ HiEh Orpnic Content in Sorfaw ]ayvin SandySolls,
Sutfidic Odor ❑ Organic SVeaking m Srndy Sa4
Aquic Moitlore Rcg'vue ❑ I�sled on Loot Hydrie Soils list
Reducing Condi�lons ❑ Lisled on National Hydrie Seils Litl '
Gleyed or Ww•Chmvo Colon � pihcr(L•xpbin in Acmarks)
Rtmarks: Soll ls not Aydrlc.
WETLAND DETERMiNATtON
F[ydrophytic Vegeution Present? Yu[� No❑ Weiland Hydmlogy Pretrnl7 � Yes� No�j
HydricSOlsPrtsrntt Ya[.J No[}� Is�hisSamplingPointWithineWeUand9 Yes❑ NoQJ
Remerks: � matcdal; sewerllne aeenf road
� �J '��

��
DATA FORhI
ROUTINE W67LAND D£7ERMINATION
(1987 USACE WNknds Delirtntien M1ienual)
Projtt� Sitr. Geppu g/W Connctlor Dair. 1
npplieanUOwncr: P&S&)/EwScirnec County. Gosmn
Inves�itator. SdeME _ . S��c NC
Donormalcircumsieneescxis�oniAcsltc7 Yet� No0 ComnwnirylD: Waland
1��he8teupyifiwnUydiscwbed(ArypicelSiNelian)1 Yes� No❑ TransectlD: Wt.
lsthenrea.polcntiaiproblerotrta9 YesQ No� PtotlD; W8$ �
(if nadcd, explun on revcse}
�t:35�d366001 ��r. -81.2741413
VEGETATION
Dominonl Pknt Succi�c _ tr�fu � pnminent Plonl Secctics �pyp� fy��t
�• 9.
2. Alnuiaorufa�a � T FACWa- 10.
3. BNUlani[ro T FACW 11.
4. hncvt e/fww H FA + 12.
5. detrivbiwn 7 FAC 1J.
6. Sdrpurwlidus H OBL 14.
7. �Tvphoonl,v.vrlo!!o , H OHL 15.
8. So/irnixrv SIS OSL 76.
PaceNOfDominenrSpeciathmarcOUL,FACWarFAC:(aeepcFAC-): ]00
Remarlu: Hyd�ophytic vcgetuim is dam(nene
HYDROLOGY
RccordcdDom(Descn�einRemarl's) WetlandHyerologylndicerors:
Stroam, Lakcor7ideGage
AerialPhotogreDh ❑ Inundated
Otha , � Sanmied in Upper 121neLa
NoRecordedDomAvuilable � WmcrMorks �
❑ Driiilinos .
RieldObxrvarione: � Se6unentAeposi�
DepNotS�ufnceW�ter: Z ��n � Dnin�yeP�ItrmsinWcllends
) � QaidizcdRcoiCTuindsinUpper121n�cs
\VmetSt�ined Leuro
Depth co Frm Wmn in Fiu 6 (in.) ❑� Lced Soil Suncy Dar�
❑ OUra(EaplaininRenqtla)
�kylhtoSaNn�uiSoil: 0 (in)
Rcmerkc Weqmd hydrology is eviden�.
r
SOiLS
�
Afap Unit Nome Dnimyc Cfau:
Snia and Phreu): '
Fic]d ObSCrvLiDM1S
7a:anomy{SuLgroup): ConfirtnM�ppedT}7ieT Ya No
Profile D acdp�ion:
A7tE rend.�eier Mr�il�falertMv�.dlMd.l rnn:_co�eR�teo.
(1�[hp) ypd�tp IAImo1lMnial �odAL�uk�nR/Gnnn �
2 A 7.Syr6J2 7.Syr5l6m�nylndininct clayloam
4 D 7.Syr3/4 7Syr3/2mmy/diatinct elaylwm
12 C 7.Syr7l0 7.Syt3/6many/disdnet ela
Hydrie Soii Indieators: � �
Hiuotol ❑ Coneretions
Nisiie Epipedon [] HigL Organic Cortrnt in Surfnce Leya
n SulfiAaOdor ❑ OrgeiricStreakins
Aquie Moi.uure Rcgima `�_ i,isted an lacel Hydric Soils Liu
ReducingConditions �_ ListedonNatanalHyErieSailsiirl �
GleycAorLow-Clxom�COlors _ � O�htt(ExpleMlnRonerks)
Remado: Sailishydrie.
WETLAND DETERMiNATION
RydtophyliC Vegeution P+esenl? Yca� No� Wdlertd Hydroloyy Prestn19 Ya� No�
}{ydrie Soi)s PnuntT Ycs�(j No� Is Wis Sampling Poim \Vith3n A We�lmd? Ycf� No(]
Ncrosrlu: U�ia painl is located in a �vetlmd.
f �: /�

ws~Gi � .
DATA FOR\7
120UT1nE WETLAND D�TERMI�A7'10�
(]987 USAC£ �tiHla nds Dtrerminalfon H7annal)
Proittt Si�c: C�sloo EhV Connamr p���. A/A2007
�vn��nnc'O��ner. PDS3�J/EcoScicncc �oim�y; Cas�or
Imritiga�or. SR�MF. S.Knutlsm Sia��; NC
Donomalareumi�oxescxiftonthcsite9 Yu� No0 CommunirylD: Uptend
1s ihe siic significon�ly Jiztwhal (Atypial5itueiiao)? Yez❑ No� Tronseq iD: W l.
]slhcarcoapolemidpmblemcrca? YesQ No0 pta�U; �ydg
(if naded, upLin on mmc)
���35.]4563247 ��� -81.23;3355
VEGETATION
QgmiiimtPl.+ntSocdes Sintum i�t pominantPhO.�$�ele5 S+latnm
1• .,I,Id.on000n vlmMtenr r� 9. lEdiG!�4L
3.1Y�.t[�lv.. ){ L IO.
3• . Rnbus.,. H 11.
4. �gRy�rondif�a T 12.
S. � m �THm T + 13.
6. I�.
7. I5.
8. 16.
Pcmcnt ofDOmiv�nt Spuia tAm orc0H1, FACW or FAC: (accpl F'AC-): � 2 / 4 - SO
Rcmarkc:HyArapLyUcrcYcinliou6domfmrtt �
HYDRULUGY
RecmdedDap(paaibeinRcmnrka) WcilondHydroiogy7ndicaton:
Sbwm, Lake or 7ide Gauge PRIMAAY
Attial Photogaph ❑ ]mindated
Othcr ❑ Sawnt'd tn Upper 111nthes �
NoRaordcdD�uAvailaDit ❑ WelerMorW
FieldObsavetions: ❑ DriQCinc3
❑ ScdlmentAeposita
❑ Unin�ge Patttms in WtlluHls
DCD� ofSlufxc Watv 0 (in,) SFCONDARY
❑ Oxidized Rao1 Chmnelz in Vpper 121nchet
DeplhtoFraWntainPir. ]2+ (m.) � Weur.SroinedLeeves
0 laN Soi{ SunxyDma
Dep�htoSa;ura[cdSoil: 71+ (inJ ❑ Oiher(Exyl�ininRemorks)
ReuurW: {yNl.nd dydrolepy f� ebfrnt.
SO]LS
Map Unn Nnmc pr�inacc CL cs: �rNl dnfncd
Serics onJ PAnzc): 1iadBon Sandy Cby 4o�m
Field Obscrn�ions
7awnomy(Sub�oup): tAermleT��plcRanheDludults ConlrtnMappeJTypo? Ya No
Prafile Daviylioo: . .
Q�p,l, di,"tcdor Net�kfNCn[M�wvOM •1 Trm�..�{m�,
(16btS} }j�yjtpp INm�e11Alnia�\ �n1AInM�nrelC�nnu RAIi•.nM..�re.
4 7.Svr S1E .___sanJY s�l
12+ 7.SrrNG 7SvrN4nnnvdislinet ailf cB
HyJricSoiilydica�ors: �
HistM01 �] Cbncretiont
Histic Lpipedon ^�_ High Orgaofe Content in Sudace l�yer in SudySoili
❑ Sulfidic Odor ❑ Orgmic $trc�king in Snndy Soib
Aquic Moistwc Regimc �_ lisial on Lad HyJric Soils List
RcducingCoodiiions .. � ❑ LisitdonNalionalHydricSalsList
G1rycd or Low•Chroma Colas ._ ❑ Oifin(Gplain in Remuks)
Remarks: ����snoth1ddt.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
HyJiuphylicVcgcmtionPrtsan? Ya� No[J I WetbndHydrologyPreseml Yes� . No�
Hyd�ie Sails Prescntl Yei No� is �his S�mpling Poinl Wi�hia a We�lnnd7 Ya[] Na�
Dala point u nal lot�led in a neU�nd.
��. :� `\_%

W�Z
DATA FORM
ROUTiNE WETLAND D�TERM1nAT10\
p987 USACE \Vetlands Delinntion A1aau�l)
Pm}ec� Sitc: Gazwn FJW Connec�or 6a�c: YSl2007
Applicmn/Ouner: pB$dtJ / EcoScirncc Counry: Gaston
imestige�or. 5&MG Statr NC
Do normal clrcumsianeesexist on the sirc? Vu� No� Community 1D: Wclland
]sihesitesignificomlyduturbcd(A�yp'�calSituo�inn}7 Yes❑ No� TreneeeilD: WI.
]slbCartaepotrnlialprobinnarcaT YesO No� PIotID: W95
(if nceded, explain on rtverse)
Lec35.2428341� Lcn: -81.2331O81
VECETATION
Ikmiamt Plant Soeties $treNm n icar r 1�4minnnl Plent Soetia Stratum Indienlor
�• CaryiDroieoroliniarc T FAC 9.
2. LiRwlnrmsinenn - S/S FA 10.
3. Juncutrpunrr � H FACW+ ll.
4. Loniteraioponitc H FAC. 12.
S. PlqianasoccidnrlaUr T FACW- 13.
6. 14.
7. 15.
�. 16.
Pcrcent otUominant Specia thot ore OBL, FACW or FAC: (ezcept PAC-p 80
Remnrkc Hydrophric vcgcation is dominam. -
HYDROLOGY
Reeotded Date (Desenbe in Renurks) Waluid Hydrology Indimtors:
Slrcam, Lakc or Tidc Gagc
Aerial Photograph � Inundeted
�� � Sntwated in Uppa 12 Inehes
hoRaordedDamAvailabte " �J WutvMniks
FicldObtcrve�ione: ❑� DriffLines
❑ Sedimenl Deposils
GS� DminegcPeucrosinWedends
Dep�h of SurGro W�tcr. 2 (in.) Q Oxidized RootChannels in Upper 12lnchos
0 WaterStained Leaves —
Dep�h to Free Wa�er in 1'i�: 6 (irt.) ❑ Loeal Soil Survty Dota �
❑ Other(L•splaininRemnrks)
Bcpth to SaNmod $oiL• 0 (in,)
Remsrkc: Wethnd hydrology is evidenL .
Adjacant io 5100
Son..$
MapUn;iName DrainngcCtxs: somcwLa� rl
Series nrtd Phrase): CheNacla � �
i
Ficld Observa�im�s
Taxonomy(Subgmup): flw�aquemicDystroehrepts CenfirmMappcdType? Ycs No
Prohle Ducriprion:
liSptb M�irixCofor MdueCdonfMim�ellxoinl 7nmrt [qKmpqiL
�p�p({j ]�pp=pp Mon+dlAfalp1 �nEAbendmce/CeMrut ?M��omhen.ac
2 A IOyr 7R silry IoMi
12 B IOyr5/1 7.Syr4/4mamdis�inct claytoam
Hydric Soil ]ndicarors: �
Hislosol ❑ CqnCrtlious
Histic Epipedon ❑ High Orgsnic Contenl in Sorface Layer �
Sulfide Odor ❑ Or�ntc Svwking
Aquic Moisnue Regime � Listed on Loen1 HyNic Soils Lisi
Raiucing Cooditione ❑ Lislcd on Nallon�l Hydric Soils Lis1
Gleyed or Low-Chcome Colon ❑ Olfier (Expkio in Remaks)
RemsiYS: Soil is bydric.
WE7'LAND DETERMAVATION
HydrophytieVe�eu�ionPrcum? Ya No� WnlandHydrolagyPresentt Yes� No[j
HydricSoilsPreunl? Ya Alo� 1s�hitSampfingPOimWilhinAWetland4 Ya0 No0
Rcmerks: Ihm point is locncd in a wclknd.
� � �1

DATA FARM
ROUT([VE WETI,A,�7A DETEILYIL`lATIO1V
p9s7 U5.10E �YetlanJs DMerminuion Mannaq
Pmjtt�S�u: GastanPJtvConnntor Dntc: '�nOC7
Appfi�nniOxner. FBSfiJfk;co5ckncc County; G�slon
7nvesilgator. SAn7E I5. Knudfcnl Stmr. RC
Uo notmol eltcumslan[es exist on Ihe �im9 Yes� No0 Commoniry ID: Uybnd �
lsthcsimsigniCcamlyJiuurbN(MypieulSitua�ion)9 Ycs� No� TrwMID: Wi.
b�hearnapoirndalprn6temnre�? Ya� Na� Pto11D: W95
(if nenleJ, eaphin ort mvmc)
li�:35.7A277299 L0": -Bf.2328761
vECETn•r�ota
t�Ynxo�,ocY
RecofdedDam(Dacd6einRemnrY:J WalendHydmlagyfndimton:
Sacam, LnLe ar7tAe Cnuge pR ARY
Aaiel Photapfeph ❑ tnundalcd
ab« ❑ SalwMed inUpper 121nches
NoAecorUedDataAveil�ble � WamrM�rk�
❑ DtiRLi�s �
Field OUcwarione: ❑ Stdimenl Dcposits
❑ DraimgeP.ucnslnWeibnds
UepihofSudaccWoter. 0 (in.j , _SL•CONDARV
❑ Oxidiud Roet Channels in Upper 127ncho
IkylhioFrttWnurinPne 72+ (in.) ❑ WeterSninedLeeva
� Lonl Soi� Survey Data
� Dey1h Io Solun�ed SoiL• 17+ (mJ ❑ Oiher(Fxplain in Rcmuks)
AemerW: �Vctland hydrolop�is absent.
�
W'!� : " . . ..
�
SO1LS "
�inp Unii Name Uroinage Cl�ss: �omcvAm poorT,r
Scricsand Pluse); Ch[waNn Lo�m ' 1
Field Olnervatiom
'lnronomy (SuD�vup): fhcrmie Flursquentic Dyslrochrep�s Confirm Mapped Type1 Ycs No
Profitc DaMplloe: '
Qm1h MiWiCdpe Afnlle[ebn(MUnvllMeial r..��...r..�e,e�.�
tl�Est� ltcomv �+tm�urad.n .�a�h��,d,�n�c���.. aht��i...�..�.
12+ 25y4/2 7Sy514fewindiHinn �II cla
Hydric So'd India�orx � � .
Histosol �_ Conneuons
llislie EpiPedon �_ Hi� Orgnnic Conknt in Sur6ee La�er in Sandy $oils
SuIfiAlo Odar ❑ O�gmic S�rcaking in S�ndy Sols
Aquie MoieAueRe�imo � Li«ed on Luca1 l7ydric Soils [.Lri
Reduting Cooditlora _ ❑ ListM on Naiionel Hydric Soils List
Gtrycd or Low{h�onm Calors [� O�hn (Fxytain in Rennrbj
Rcm�rW: So{tlshydrfa . �
WETLAND DETERMWATTON
Hydrophytie Vegtulion RcenO Ye� Na6� WeUvid Hydrology Prexni7 Yas� No�
HydrieSoilsPRSm�? Yes�J No� IeiAis5unplingPaivtWi�hineWai�nd? Yc�❑ No�
es y
R0R1°'�� .djaernuosmerwicmtnl �
�

W��
DATA FORM
ROUTINB WETLANA DETERMIT�ATtON
(1987 USACE NetLndi Detinnlion �t�nunl)
Pmjtti Si�a Gaston flW Conncnor � Dmc 215120W
Applic�nVOwncr. PIiSA]/EcoScirnce County. Gu�on
Inecsiiguor. S&ME � S�em: NC
Do noiroel circumsLnces exict on tAe site4 Yc� Nod Communiy ID: Wedend
Is�heriu9gni5cemtydu�ufi�d(AiypicalSimuion)? Ya[] No� Tru�uc�ID: WI.
1c�hearwepotaNiolp(nElemuee7 Yu❑ NojRJ Pla)A: W96
{ifneeded, a�plxin on reveru)
Lt:3534263630 lan: _g12721878
VEGETA770N
A24minent Yhm Snerin �p� � Dnminem Plonl Soccics ShnNm ' a�
�- Juncur�(%wvi H FACN+ 9.
2. Scl'ttnl�ro SIS AI. 10.
3. Typhn lalll !!o H OB6 11.
4. BCM1attUtm T pACW 12-
S. Arorvbrum T FAC 13.
b. Isdwi�tioaltemf/olia }T _OBL 14.
7. 15.
8. 16.
PememotDominamSpaia+hatamOR6,FACWorFAC:(eaecptFAC-)t 106
RemarW; Nydrophydc vagaation is domlwni. �
kiYAROLOGY
AaordedDaro(Drscd6einRenwiiks) WulendHydiologylndiw�on:
�Strcom,l�keorTidoGaSc
AerinlPho�ogaph � Inuixlntal
an�r � SmnmOinUpperY2lxhrs
NoRccosdcdDemAv�iLblc � � WatcrMirks
❑ Orift Linea
F'ieltlOhxrvations: ❑ SedimrntDepotib
� DninaeePanansinWnlmdi
DeplhotSurfeeeWoiu: 3 (in.) ❑ OxidlzedROO�C7nnodeinUpprr121MLes
❑ Warcr�Smieed LaVu
Dcpfh to Free Water in Pic 5 (in.) ❑ Loca� Soil Survcy Dua
❑ O�hn(F�cylnlninRemmkt)
Dcpth lo S0.Nmted Soil: 0 (in.)
lirrturlu: Wetland Aydrolog,y isevident.
S07LS
Mup Unil Nama . Dr�inagc Cius: sorckwhol poody
Saia and PArase): Qicuvde ��_nO_��
Fidd Observe�ion5
Taieonomy(SuLgroup): FlunquwieDyur«hrepts ConfittnMappedTypF: Yes No
ProSle Deserip�bn:
(1�yj Mn�.[•_br MaileCdnvlM�e�s.11i.fen�1 Tr�1�2CVe
j�p(Epi ijfAf¢p lFim�eTMninl MA6m�i�M./�� AAiremhnef.nc�L
2 A IOyrA/2 7.Syr4/6manyNsiinct sil clay
]] B " Y.SyU2 claYlomn
Ilydru Soil lndicamn:
Histasol ❑ Concrc�iuns
Hiscc Epipedon ❑ High Orgenic Conani in SbA'ace Ceya
SuIBdeOdor ❑ O�mitStrenYing
❑ Aquic Moislure Regimc ❑ Lislcd on Local Hydrie Sails Liil
Redueing Conditions ❑ I�s�ed on NaGonal Hydrie Soils Lin
GleyedorLow.ChromaCalms ❑ O�her(ExplyininRnnark�)
RcroarW: Soilishydric.
WETLAND DETERMINATYON
H�diophyiicVcgctationPrcxnl7 Yet� NoQ WdlondHyOtolo�Pnttnt? Ya� Na❑
Hydric Soils Prc�em7 Yes� NoQ li Ilus SamDling Poim Wi�h�n A We�tand? Ya� No�
Remarla: Data poim is loeorcd la a wctlend. -
/ '. ' 1 !�

�� .
DATA FORM
ROUTI�$ WE7'LA,�DDETERMINA7JOV
(19D7 U5.\CE 1VCtiends Drlcrmin�l[on Manuat)
Peqee�Si�r. Casron£J�CConncHOr Dule: . '��0a7
Apptirnnt;O.cncr. PBS&J/EcaSelenet Ca�mry: Gesloq
Im•csligamr. SR�btE (S. Hnudun} _ $ia�q ICC
Do nomul cianmsvnce: airt on IM slte? Yetj� NpQ Communhy fD: llplard
I�thetitesi�nificenilydrswrDcdfAtypicalSinuNon)7 Ya[] No+� TrensenlD: Wi.
Is iAcara � yoirn�;�l probiem area? Ya0 No�y] Pla @: W96
(if nccded, rxplein on revcrsc)
�35.2�2>t199 �^� $I.i329261
VLGETAT1oN
I24mjnNllPlen($�r�rs Stratum Indicetor flominnmpin��C ci i N n ice
�• Rr�nem A 9.
z �'oltr ni•rv GC 10.
�. Fe�ns_.rondifnlin T 11.
4- _ Lnnirero innnnlre N Ii.
5- 11.
6. I4.
�• I5.
8. I6.
PuccntofDOminantSpecies�hotnreOBL,FACWOrFAC:(attptFAC-): 1 /3 �33
Rcmnrlu:7[ydroyhytic vcgetatfon 6 not domioauG
llYDROLOGY
Recorded Da�e (Decn'be in Remacks) Wetland }[ydrologylndice�ors:
Sirtam, Likc orTide Gauge PRMARY
Aaid PMtograPh ❑ ]nundttCd
��� ❑ Snturnled in Upper 12 tnchts
�_ NoRecoMedDaiaAVaffebie ❑ WaterMarks �
❑ DriR Lines
FieldObumtians: ❑ SedlmeMAtposits
❑ Drainage Psnaro in Wcilonds
DaplfiofSUrf�teWn�u: 0 (��,) SECONDARV
DcplhmReeWa�etinPic 77,+ ��n. � OsidiudRootCMnne�inUpperl2fntha
) ❑ WeterStoinedLmveb
❑ i.onl5ol15urveyDate
De01h to Soromed Soil: �7+ (in.) ❑ . Otl�v(Fxplein in Rem�rb)
RcmarW: rynland hydro7ogy3s aheent.
SOILS
MapUniiName Drein�geClau: �omenhoipaor[�
$criesandPhau): CAtn�HalA�m
Field Obxrve�bns
Taxoaomy(Subgrovp): tAermleFlu�nquenUcDriw�hrepts CunfianM�pp�JTypc1 Ycs Nu
Profi�e Dapip�ion:
J�� , Mmial�nla �gp�/\WnullMeistl Teamm.0 im�e
llMhal llaima U.twu�ll.M.��J nd�eu�e.neer�neu� gp�,
12+ 2.Sy4/2 15r5/�&windls6Mt rll tIa
klydrie Soil lndicators: '
}iizincol . � Conc�eQOns
Flistic Epipedon Q High O�ganic Contrnt in Surfatt [.nyer io $andy Soils
Stttlidic Odor Q Orpj nic SimakioE in Sa�.tySoils
Aquic Moistum Regime ❑ Lis[ed on Lool Hydric Soils Li�l
Reducing Conlitro� ❑ Listed on NnionN Hydric SoiB List
Gleyedmtvw-CbromeCoian ❑ Other(EeplsininRmvrks)
Remarks: Soilhhydriq
wET1,AND DETECtM3MAT10N .
HydrophyticVtgamtionPreunl7 Yp0 IVo�J \VeHan�Hyt4ologyl'rcsrn�T Yes❑ �100
HyJric Soils Prexnt7 Yes(� No� B ihis Sfmpling Poinl Wilhin n We11uW4 Ya� No�J
R<mnrks. adjxenitose�rernsemtnl
� � '��

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by followina the instructions provided in Section N of the JD Form Iristructional Guidebook.
SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFOILVIATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPRO�'ED JURISDICTIONAL DETER1�91NATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, F1LE NAME, AND NUMBER:�Yilmington District
C. PROJECT LOCAT[ON AND BACKGROUND INFOR�4ATION: Gaston E-W Connector S t4, S37
State:North Carolina County/parish/borough: Gaston City'. Gastonia
Center coordinates of site (latJlon� in deb ee decimal fonnat): Lat. 3�.18° N, Lono. 31.17° V1'.
Universal Transverse Mercator: 48459835 E 3893405.7� N
Name of nearest waterbody: Crowders Creek
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) lnto which the aquatic resource flows: Gowders Creek
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 030�01 Ol
� 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) Detennination. Date:
� Field Determination. Date(s): 5-11-07
SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There A}re "nnvignble wate�s of the U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the review
area. [Reqcrire�l�
0 Vl�aters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
� Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptib(e for use to transport intcrstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMIh'ATION OF JURISDICTION.
There A re "wnte�s oJtlte U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 32S) in the review area. [Reqt.rirec�
1. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply): �
� TNWs, including tenitoiial 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
Q Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Q Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWS
� Wetlands adjacent [o non-RPWs that flow direcdy or indirectly into'INWs
� lmpoundments of jurisdictional waters
Q 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: 805 linear feet: Z, 40 width (ft) and/or acres.
Wetlands: acres.
a Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on 1987�Del�neah n�Ma usl �
Elevation of established OHWM (if known): .
2. Non-regulated watershvetlands (check if applicable):3
f� Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and detennined to be notjurisdictional.
Explain: . ,
� Boxes checked below shall be supponed by completing d�e appropriate sections in Section III belo�v.
'' For putposes of this fonn, 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).
� Supportin� documentation is presented in Section IIIF.

(b) General Tributarv Characteristics (check all that apply�
Tributary is: ❑ Natural
, ❑ Artificial (ma�-made). Explain:
❑ Manipulated (man-altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Avera�e width: feet
Avera�e depth: feet
Avera�e side slopes: Pick<'List.
Primary h-ibutary substrate composition (check all that apply):
❑ Silts ❑ Sands ❑ Concrete
� ❑ Cobbles ❑ Gravel ❑ Muck
❑ Bedrock ❑ Vegetation. Type/% cover:
❑ Other. Explain:
-fributary coridition/stability [e.g., higfily erodin�, sloughing banks]. Explain:
Presence of run/riffle/pool comp(exes. Ezplain: .
Tributary geometry: M`eanderirig
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): %
(c) Ftow:
,_., x:_...�_,
Tributary provides for: PicicrI:ist
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year P�ck List
Describe flow regime: .
Other information on duration and volume:
� � - � �-�-
Surface flow is: D�screte and confined. Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Unkno�vn. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test perfonned: .
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 a�vay ❑
❑ sediment deposition ❑
❑ water staining �
❑ other (list}:
❑ Discontinuous OHWM.� Explain: .
the presence of litter and debris
deshvction of terresh-ial vegetation
the presence of wrack line
sedimentsorting
scour
multiple observed or predicted flow events
abrupt change in plant co�nmunity
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 markin�s/characteristics ❑ vegetation lines/changes in vegetation types.
❑ tidal gauges
❑ other (]ist):
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characteiize hibutary (e.g., �vater color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain: .
Identify specific pollutants, if known: .
"A natwal or man-made discontinuity in the OHWM does no[ necessarily severjurisdiction (e.e., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OH\WM has been removzcl by development or agriculhiral practices). 4Vhere diere is a break in the OHWM that is um•elated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e.�., tlow over a rock outcrop or d�rough a culverl), lhe agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
'Ibid.

For each wedand, specify the following:
Directiv abuts? (Y/1V) Size (in acresl Directiv abuts? (1'/I�') Size (in acres)
Swnmarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being perfonned: .
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERiVIINATION
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 signiFcantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a T\'VV. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination ���ith all of its adjacent
«�etlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and/or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus inctude, but are oot limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flo�v
of tivater in the tributary and its proximity to a TIVW, 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 bet«�een a tributary and the TNV1�. Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections beriveen 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 hibutary, 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 �vaters reaching a TNW?
• Does the h-ibutary, 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 TNV✓?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
1. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flo�i�s directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributa�y itself, then go to Seccio� III.D: .
2. Significant nezus findings for non-RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non-RPW flows directly or indirectly into�
TNWs. Explain findin�s of presence or absence ofsigniticant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then eo 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
prescnce or absence ofsigniticant nexus belo�v, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then jo to
Section III.D: .
D. DETERIVIINATIO\'S OF JURISDICTIO\'AL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLl�:
1. TNWs and Adjacent V1'etlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in revie�v area:
� TN Ws: 545 linear feet 40 width (ft), Or, acres.
0 Wedands adjacenc to TI��Ws: acres.
2. RPWs that flow directly or indirectty into TNVVs.
� Tributaries of TNWs where hibufaries typically flow year-round are jwisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial: NCDWQ Score 23 (SS7) Designated as perennial durin; USACE field veiification.
0 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 hibutary flows
seasonally: .

Provide estimates for jurisdictional u�aters in the review area (check all that apply):
0 T�ibutary waters: linear feet width (ft).
� Other non-wetland �vaters: acres.
[dentify type(s) of waters: .
� Wetiands: acres.
F. NON=JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, [NCLUDING 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 ivlanual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
� Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreion) commerce.
❑ Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been re�ulated based solelv on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
0 Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain: .
0 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 imgated aariculture), using best professionai
judgment (check all that apply):
:� Non-wedand waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
� Lakes/ponds: acres.
'�= Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource: .
� Wetlands: acres.
Provide acreage estiinates 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):
� I��on-wetland �vaters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
� Lakes/ponds: acres.
� Other non-���etland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource: .
� Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data re��ie�ti�ed 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 piat submitted by or on behalf of the applicandconsultant: .
� Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicanticonsultant.
❑ Offce concurs with data sheets/delineation repart.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report.
� Data sheets prepared by the Corps: .
� Corps navigable waters' study: .
� U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas: .
❑ USGS NHD data.
� USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
� U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:124,000 Gastonia South.
� USDA Namral Resources Conservation Seivice Soil Survey. Citation:Gaston County Soil Survey 1989.
0 National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
�= State/Local wetland im�entory map(s): .
�F FEMA/FIRM maps: .
�]00-year Floodplain Elevation is: (I�ational Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
� Photo�raphs: Q Aerial (Name & Date): .
or ❑ Other (Name & Date): . '
� Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter: .
�: Applicable/supponing case law: .
� Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
� Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMNIENT5 TO SUPPORT JD:

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERNIINATION F012NI
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by follo�ving the instructions provided in Section [V of the JD Form inshvctional Guidebook.
SECTION I: BACKGROUND [NFORIVIATION
A. REPORT COVIPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIOtiAL DETERMI\�ATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:Wilmington District
C. PROJEC7 LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORiVIAT10N: Gaston E-W Connector W-5S, S�7
State:North Carolina County/parish/borough: Gaston City: Gastonia
Center coordinates of site (laUlon� in degree decimal fonnat): Lat. 35.18° N, Long. 81.17° W.
Universal Transverse Mercator: 484598.35 E 3893405.75 N
Name of nearest waterbody: Crowders Creek
Name.of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) lnto which the aquatic resource flo�vs: Crowders Creek
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 03050] Ol
� Check if map/dia�ram of review area and/or potential jurisdic[ional areas is/are available upon request.
� Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc...) are associated ��th this action and are recorded on a
different JD fonn.
D. REVIEVV PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
� Office (Desk) Determination. Date: _ ,
� Field Determination. Date(s): 5-11-07
SECTION II: SUNIMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERi�IINATION OF JURISDICTION.
� =-�
There Ar`_e=eno "navigable tivn�ers ofthe U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review area. [Reqt�ireclJ
� Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
� Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain: .
B. C�YA SECT[ON 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Are "tivaters oftl�e U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR pait 328) in the review area. (Re9tiirer�
l. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply): �
�' TN Ws, including territorial seas
� Wetlands adjacent to T�IWs �
� 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 Uut not directly abutting RPWs that flow direct(y or indirectly into TNWs
� Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Q Impoundments of jurisdictional waters ,
� [solated (intecstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. [dentify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non-wetland waters: 1488 linear feet: 4-4 widtli (ft) and/or acres.
Wetlands: 0.06 acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on:
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
2. Non-regulated watershvetlands (check if applicable}:3
� Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and detennined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain: .
� Boxes checked below shall be suppo�ted by completing the appropriate sections in Section [Il below.
' For purposes of tliis fonn, an RPW is defined as a h-ibutary that is not a T�!W and that typically flows yea�-round or has continuous Flow at least "seasonally"
(e.e., typically 3 months).
� Supporting documentation is presented in Section IILF.

(b) General Tributarv Characteristics fcheck all that applvl'
Tributary is: ❑ Natural
❑ Artificial (man-made). Explain:
❑ Manipulated (man-altered). Explain:
Tributary properties �vith respec[ to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: feet
Average depth: feet
•;�,;,--- �-
Average side slopes: Pick-l;ist.
Primary tributary subsfrate 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 ofrun/riffle/pool complexes. Explain: .
Tributary geometry M_eanderuig
Tributary a adient (approximate average slope): %
(c) Flow:
..: .�_°.:.v
Tributary provides for: Pick�;List
Estimate avera�e number of flow e��ents in review area/year P�ckYLisf
Describe flow rcgime: .
Other infom�ation on duration and volume:
Surface flow is:
Characteiistics:
Subsurface Flow: Unknown. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test perfaimed: .
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 a�vay ❑
❑ sediment deposition ❑
❑ water staining �
❑ other (list):
❑ Discotitinuous OHWV1.� Explain: .
the presence of litter and debris
deshuction of ten-estrial vegetation
the presence of wrack line
sediment sorting
scour
multipie observed or prcdicted flow events
abrupt change in plant community
If factors other than the OHWM were used to detennine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
Q High ►'ide 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 markines/characteiistics ❑ vegetation lines/changes in vegetation types.
❑ tidal gauges v '
❑ other Qist):
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize t�ibutary (e.�., water color is clear, discolored; oily film; ��ater quality; �eneral watershed characteristics; etc.).
Explain: .
Identify specific pollutants, if l:nown:
6A natural or man-made discontinuity in d�e OHWM do�s not necessarily severjurisdiction (e.g., �vhere U�e stream temporarily tlorvs underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or a�ricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM tliat is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
rcgime (e.�., flow over a rock outcrop or throu�h a culvzrt), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
'Ibid.

For each wetland, specify the following:
Directiv abuts? (YM) Size (in acresl Directiv abuts? (Y/Nl Size (in acres)
Summarize overall biological; chemical and physical functions being perfonned: .
C. SIGNIFICAIYT NEXUS DETER�'IINATIO\`
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributarv itself and the functions performed
by any �+�edands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they signif►cantly affect the chemical, physical, and biolopical integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a sigoificant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
weHands, 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 tributar,y and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine signiftcant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent �vetland or betv��een a tributary and the TN�. Similarly, the fact an adjacent �r•etland lies within or
outside of a tloodplain is not solely determinative of significant nezus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the T\'W, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for esample:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to cany pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or tlood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycic 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 hibutary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the 1'NW?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documenEed
below:
1. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directty or indirectly into TNWs: Explain
findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the hibutary itself, then go to Section III.D: .
2. Significant nexus tndings for non-RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non-RP�'V flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the hi6utary in combination with all of its
adjacent wet(ands, then go to Section II1.D: .
3. Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directty abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence ofsignificant nexus below, based on che rributary in combination with all of its adjacent wedands, th0n g0 t0
Section IlI.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 esrimates in review area:
;� TNWs: linear feet width (ft), Or, acres.
� Wetlands adjacent toTNWs: acres.
2. RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
� Tributaries of TNWs where h-ibutaries typically flow year-round are jurisdictional. Provide data and cationale indicating that
hibutary is perennial: NCDWQ Score ;S3 (S57).
0 Tributaries of TNW-�ahere h-ibutaries have continuous flou� "seasonally' (e.g., typically three months eac11 year) are
juiisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section I11.B. Provide rationale indicatinQ that tributary flo�vs
seasonally: . V

Provide estimates for jurisdictional warers 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 APPLI�:
� 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.
� Revie�v area induded isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
❑ Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "S61!9NCC," the review area would have been rea lated based solelv on the
"MiQratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
� Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain: .
� Other: (explain, if not covered above): .
Provide acreaoe estimates for nonyurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i.e., presence of mieratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for imgated agriculturz), using best professional
judgment (check all that apply):
� Non-wedand wate�s (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
Q Lakes/ponds: acres.
� Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource: .
� Wetlands: acres.
Provide acreage estimates for non-jurisdictional waters in [he review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for jurisdiction (check al] that apply):
� Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, sh•eams): linear feet, width (ft).
2� Lakes/ponds: acres.
� Other non-wedandlvaters: acres. List type of aquatic resource: .
� wetlands: acres.
SECT[ON 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 applicanUconsultant .
� Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicanUconsultant.
❑ 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. Geotogical Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data.
� USGS 8 and I 2 digit HUC maps.
� U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: I 24,000 Gastonia South.
� USDA Natural Resources Conseivation Service Soil Survey. Citation:Gaston County Soil Survey 1989.
� National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
� State/Local wedand inventory map(s): .
� FEMA/FIRM maps: .
� 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
� Photographs: � Aerial (Name & Date): .
or � Other (Name & Date):
0 Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter: .
� Applicable/suppoitin� case law: .
�� Applicablelsupporting scientific literature: .
'� Other infonnation (please specify): .
B. ADDITIONAL CONIi�IENTS TO SUPYORT JD:

APPROVED JURISDICT[ONAL DETERYIINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section N of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORI�4ATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIOn'AL DETER��IINATiON (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NANIE, AND NUNIBER:Wilmington District
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND In'FORNIATION: Gaston E-W Connecror, W-59, S�3
State:North Caroiina County/parish/borough: Gaston City: Gastonia
Center coordinates of site (ladlong in degree decimal format): Lat. 35.18° N, Lon;. 81.17° W.
Universal Transverse Mercator: 484598.35 E 3893405.75 N
Name of nearest waterbody: Crowders Creek
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water ('CNW) lnto which the aquatic resource flo�vs Crowders Creek
Name of watershed or Hydrolo�ic Unit Code (HUC): 0305010]
� 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 assoeiated �vith this action and are recorded on a
different JD fonn.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
� Office (Desk) Detennination. Date:
� Field Detennination. Date(s): 5-I1-07
�
SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS _
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Are':no "�tnvigable �vaters of the U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review area. [Regurred] �
0 Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
0 Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain: .
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERDIINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Are "ii�aters o the U.S." within Clean Water Act CWA urisdiction as defined b 33 CFR art 328 �n the review area. Re uire
. f � )J � Y p )� � 9 �]
1. Waters of the U.S.
a. [ndicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply): �
� TNWs, including te�ritorial seas � �
Q Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
� Relatively permanent waters'' (RPWs) that flow directly or indirecdy into Ti�?Ws
0 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 abuttin� RPWs that flow dirCCtly or indirecUy into TNWS
Q Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Q Impoundments ofjurisdictional waters
0 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: 202 linear feet: 3 width (ft) and/or acres.
Wetlands: 0.3 aa-es.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on 19,87;Delineahon Manual
Elevation of established OH WM (if known): .
2. Non-regulated waters/�v�etlands (check if applicable):3
� Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and detennined to be not juiisdictional.
Explain: .
� Boxes checked below sha(1 be supported by completing d�e appropriate sections in Section 11l below.
'' For purposes of U�is fonn, an RP W is defined as a tributary tUat is not a TN W and that typically tlows year-round or lias continuous flow at least "seasonally''
(e.g., typically 3 months).
3 Suppoiting documentation is presented in Section 1(I.F.

(b) General Tributarv Characteristics (check all that applvl�
Tributary is: ❑ Natural
❑ Artificial (man-made). Explain:
❑ Manipulated (man-altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estiinate):
Average width: feet
Average depth: feet
Avera�e side slopes Pick List.
Primary eibutary substrate composition (check all that apply):
❑ Silts ❑ Sands ❑ Cona-ete
❑ Cobbles ❑ Gravel ❑ Muck
❑ Bedrock ❑ Veaetation. 1'ype/% cover:
❑ Other. Explain: .
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughinQ banks]. Explain:
Presence ofrun/nffle/pool complexes. Explain: . �
Tributary geometry: iVleanderuig
Tributa�y gradient (approximate average slope): %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: Pick=List
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year Ptck,List
Desciibe flow regime: .
Other infonnation on duration and volume:
Surface tlow is:
Characteristics:
�—}.t..,�
Subsurface flow: Unknown. Explain findings:
: �..
❑ Dye (or other) test perfonned: .
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):
❑ Discontinuous OHWM.� Explain: .
the presence of litter and debris
destruction of tercestrial vegetation
the presence of wrack line
sediment sorting
scour
muttiple obse�ved or predicted flow events
abrupt change in plant community
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determine lateral extent of CWAjutisdiction (check all that apply):
� Hi h 7'ide Line indicated b P^`
g y: �, Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
❑ oil or scu�n line along shore objects ❑ survey to available datum;
❑ fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore) ❑ physical markings;
❑ physical markingsicharacteristics ❑ vegetation lines/changes in vegetation types.
❑ tidal gau�es
❑ other (list):
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize h-ibutary (e.g., water color is dear, discolored, oily tilm; water quality; �eneral watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain: .
Identify specific pollutants, if known: .
�A naWial 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 agriculhiral prxctices). Where there is a break in the OHVVM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or tluou�h a culvert), the agencies «�ill look for indicarors of flow above and below 8�e break.
'Ibid.

For each wetland, specify the following:
Directiv abuts? (Y/Nl Size (in acresl Directly abuts? (YNl Size (in acres)
5umma�ize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being perfonned: .
C. S[GNIFICANT NEXUS DETERI�4INAT(ON
A significant nexus analysis �vill assess the flow characteristics and functions of the triUutary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significanth� affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus esists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
�vetiands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and/or biological integrity of a TNR'.
Considerations when evaluating significant nesus inctude, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of �vater in the h•ibutary and its proximity to a TNW, and tl�e functions performed Uy 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. behveen a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TN�i�. Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplai� is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw conuections behveen the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Facto►•s to consider include, for example:
• Does the h-iUutary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TTIWs, or to reduce the amount of poliutanu or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the h-ibutary, 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 �aetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the h-ibutary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical; or
biological integrity of the TNW?
tiote: the above list of considerations is not inclusi��e and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
1. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directiy or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
findings of prescnce or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section Ill.D: .
2. Significant neYUS findings for non-RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non-RPW flo�vs directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence ofsignificant nexus below, based on the h-ibutary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section lIl.D: .
3. Significant nexus fndings for �vetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not direcdy abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence ofsi�nificant nexus below, based on the tiibutary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to
Section II1.D: .
D. DETERi�iINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUSJECT �VATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
TNVVs and Adjacent VVetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
� TNWs: (inear feet width (ft), Or, acres.
0 Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
� Tributa�ies of TNWs where tributaries typically flo�v year-round arejurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial: I�'CDWQ Score 26.5 (S58) Designated perennial during field verification w�ith USACE.
� Tributaries of'Th'W 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 triUutary flows
seasonally: .

Provide estimates for jurisdictiooal waters in the review area (check atl that apply):
0 Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
0 Other non-ti�edand waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of �s�aters: .
� Wetlands: acres.
F. NON-JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, 1NCLUDING �VETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
� If potential �vetlands 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.
❑ Piior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been rea lated based solelv on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
� Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jmisdiction. Explain: .
0 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 migrarory birds, presence of endangered species, use ofwater for irrigated a�riculture), using best professional
judgment (check all that appiy):
� von-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
� Lakes/ponds: acres.
OOther 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 forjurisdiction (check all that apply):
0 Non-we[land waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, �vidth (ft).
� Lakes/ponds: acres.
� Other non-wedand waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
� Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IY: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data re��ewed for JD (check all that app(y - checked itcros 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 applica�bconsultant: .
� Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicanUconsultant.
❑ Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report.
� Data sheets prepared by the Coips:
� Corps navigable waters' study:
� U.S. Geoloaical Suivey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data.
� liSGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
� U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: l 24,000 Gastonia South.
� USDA Natural Resources Conservation Seivice Soil Survey. Citation: Gaston County Soil Survey 1989.
� Iv`ational wetlands im�entory map(s). Cite name: .
� State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
� FEVlt1/FIRM maps: .
Q 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
0 Photographs: � Ae�ial (Name & Date): .
or � Other (Name & Date): .
� Previous detennination(s). File no. and date of response letter: . , �
� App(icable/supporting case law: .
� Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
0 Other infonnation (please specify): .
B. ADDITIONAL COMAZENTS TO SUPPORT JD:

APPROVED JURISDICTIOI�AL DETERA4INATION FORA7
U.S. Army Corps of Eneineers
This form should be completed by following the insiructions provided in Section IV of the JD Fonn Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORNIATION �
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NANIE, AND NUMBER:Wilmington District
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATLON: Gaston E-W Connector W 77 - W S0, S69
State:North Carolina County(parish/borough: Gaston Ciry: Gastonia
Center coordinates of site (ladlong in degree decimal fonnat): Lat. 35. ( S° N, Long. � 1.17° W.
Universal Transverse f�9ercator: 48459835 E 3893405.75 N
i�Iame of nearest waterbody: Crowders Creek
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water ("ITIW) lnto which the aquatic resource flows: Crowders Creek
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 030501 Ol
� Check if map(diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictiorial areas islare 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 fonn.
D. REVIEW PERFORiVIED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLl�:
�� Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
� Field Determination. Date,(s): 5-1 ]-07
�
SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FIND[NGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Are�no "nnrigahle tivate�•s of dte U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdicrion (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review area. [Requirecf]
Q 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 h�ansport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain: .
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Are "rvate��s ofthe L1.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Requi�•ecf]
l. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply): �
� TNWs, including territorial seas
r� � Wetla�ds adjacent to "INWs
�. Relatively permanent waters'' (RPWs) that flow directly or indirect(y into TNWs
0 Non-RPWs that flow direcdy or indirectly into TNWs
� VVetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directiy or indirectly into TNWs
� Wetlands adjacent to but not direc[ly abutting RPWs that flow direCtly or indiiecdy into TNWS
� Wetlands adjacent to non=RPWs that flou� directly or indirectly into TNWs
� Impoundments of jurisdictional �a�aters •
� Isolated (interstate or inh•astate) waters, including isolated wetlands
Identify (estimate) size of �vaters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non-wetland waters: 2493 linear feet: 4-8 width (ft) and/or acres.
VVetlands: 0.26 acres.
c. Limits boundaries of 'urisdiction based on 1987 Del�ne '��
.. ....
( ) � ahon Manual
_ ._ .._ �....__......___...,
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
2. Non-regulated watershvettands (check if applicable):3
� Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or �vetlands were assessed within the review area and detennined to be not jurisdictional.
Explai n: .
� Boxes checked below shall be suppoited by completing die appropriate sections in Section III below. .
'' For pu�poses of this forni, an RP�'J is defined as a tributary that is not a T�IV1' and diat typically flows year-round or has continuous Flow at least "seasonally"
(e.g., rypically 3 mondis).
' Supporting documentation is presented in Section IILF.

(b) General Tributarv Characteristics (check all that applv)•
Tributary is: ❑ Natural
❑ Artificial (man-made). Explain:
❑ Manipulated (man-altered). Explain:
Tr•ibutary properties withxespect ro top of Uank (estimate):
Average width: feet
Avera;e depth: feet
Avera�e side slopes Puk L'_�st.
Primary fibutary substrate composition (check all [hat apply):
❑ Silts ❑ Sands ❑ Concrete
❑ Cobbles ❑ Gravcl ❑ Muck
❑ Bedrock ❑ Vegetation. Type/°/a cover:
❑ Other. Explain: .
Tiibutary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughinD banks]. Explain:
Presence ofivn/riffle/pool complexes. Explain: .
Tributary geometry Meander�ng
T�ibutary gradient (approximate average slope): %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: P�ck List
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year P�ck List
Describe flow regime: . °
Other information on duration and volume: .
Surface flow is: D�screte and�confined. Characteiistics:
e��-«
Subsurface flow: Unkuowu. Lxplain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test perfoitned: .
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 ❑
❑ shetving ❑
❑ vegetation matted down, bent, or absent ❑
❑ leaf litter disturbed or washed away ❑
❑ sediment deposition ❑
❑ water staining �
❑ other (list):
❑ Discontinuous OHWM.� Explain:
the presence of titter and debris
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
the presence ofwrack line
sediment sorting
scour
multiple obseived or predicted flow events
abrupt change in plant community
If factors other than the OHWM u�ere used to detennine lateral extent of CVVA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
� High Tide Line indicated by: � Mean High Water Mark indicated by: ..
❑ oil or scum line alon� shore objects ❑ survey to available datum;
❑ fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore) ❑ physical markin's;
❑ physical markings/characteristics ❑ vegetation lines/chan�es in vegetation types. �
. ❑ tidal gau�es
❑ other (list):
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., «�ater color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain: .
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
6A natuial or man-made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., whzre the stream temporarily flows undereround, or where
die OHWM has been removed by development or agricuitural practices). Where there is a break in die OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or dvough a culvert), Ihe agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
'Ibid.

I
For each ���edand, specify the following:
Directiv abuts? (Y/T�) Size (in acres) Direcdv abuts? (Y/I`') Size (in acresl
Summarize oveiall biolo�ical, chemical and physical functions being perfonned: .
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERIVIINATION
A significant nexus analysis �vill assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any �vetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physic�l, and biolosical integrity
of a TMV. For each of the following situations, a significant nesus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
�vettands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and/or biological integrity of a Tl�`W.
Considerations �ehen 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. lt is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. bet�veen a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or behveen a t►•ibutary and the TNV1�. SimilarlJ�, 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 Rapa�:os Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the hibutary, in combination with its adjacent wedands (if any), have the capacity to catry pollutants or Flood wateis to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the h-ibutary, in combination with its adjacent wedands (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 tlie hibutary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?�. �
• Does the hibutary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the 1"NW?
Note: the above list of conside►•ations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should Ue documented
belo�v: ,
l. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directty or indirectly into TN�Vs. Explain
findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the t�ibutary'itself, then go to Section [Ii:D: .
2. Sigaificant nezus findings'for`non-RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non-RP1�V flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence ofsignificant nexus be(ow; based on the hibutary in combination with al] of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section I[1.D: .
3. Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly� abut the RPVV. Explain findings of
presence or absence ofsignificant nexus below, based on the tnbutary in co�nbination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to
Section III.D: .
D. DETERA'I1NAT[ONS OF JURISDtCTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
TM�'s and Adjacent Wettands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in revie�v area:
� TNWs: linear feet width (ft); Or, acres.
�WetlandsadjacenttoTNWs: acres.
2. RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
� Tributaries of TNWs ���here h-ibutaries typically flow year-round are jurisdictionaL Provide data and rationale indicating that
hibutary is perennial: NCDWQ Score 41 (S69).
� Tributaries of TNW where h-ibutaries 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 flo�vs
seasonally: .

--c'�'\..':TY.. . -p.' l
`
�
{

/��-
'`'�/
'�� .1�"� / �� ..J,
�„ ! 1
_ �.�s�.,. _ � �
- �� �
�
�
_ :. �# s�,
i
�i , ',.g,
,
YI
.- . � *
- pg : , � -:
� � _ `� :� : �
:��:�
� •� r,
:�
. �- ,
� '� � ��G,
� � � • ,
. K a
�' �
.�5�� �
. t�„_.i�l: i; � .
� .
., � � �� � ����#
. . _ � .{�Y. \ .a,
� w
�� ��<,f�,..,
y .#F. �
, Y `
� �
:, �
x ��� �F �. __
�` �
�. ,x �����
\
� i e �s� ,4',
� �.
�,' � �`
� P8 � �
� �-�.� � - .
P�7 ti _: ;
� - � ��{ �
`.� ,�:
� w � P4�
; ,,�
- ,�'
�i:��;,,,, ���i, �.
�l�::
at�S'�� s
qi ... .
�� � _.
�
Prepared By: Preparetl For:
,��.,�
�c,h
nTKiNs
�
'•*f�� oi n.w9o°�
I
m
-=��` ;
� -- :��
r �_
�-- �! +�,�'
�i����
,3'�` P`"'x: '
� '�
�
Y
�i,
�'r.� ,;, - .
< �
• yv[
t«
bI�� �yt x . '
�..Y % �., . . . r .. .. . �
,.
� �
Linwood Springs Site
0 Proposed Easement
q _ _� Optional Additional Easement
� Delineated Wetland
Delineated Stream
Delineated Open Water
Data Forms
� NCDWQ Stream ID
C` USACE Wetland
U-3321 Jurisdictional Perennial Stream
j1! U-3321 Jurisdictional Wetland
Roads
Note: U3321 labels are shown in parenthesis
Data Sources:
2010 Aerial Photography (CGIA)
Linwood Site (Gaston County parcel data)
U-3321 delineation (NCTA)
Roads (ISRN NCDOT)
0 200 400 800
Feet
�1 � � i � p',-'"= �
� � �"a�=�
� ,*
1\�
�� �. � t
� � �� - �r'�.
; �,
� ���i� �
_ � . ��.
� �.
�._ �'� �
� � �
, �� P6 � ,, _-
� ����
, �
.�_`
, �.
� � �' �
�
�- ���
,
T�x ��~' ` 6, �
� � �� � � �
` 1 '
-` � • 3
�'t ,� x. -.4 °� � ��
�� �: �_ ,� ��: . _�
' �� �„ �� `��i, � �� � P5 ,
P3�' . �.. � _
F �
. � • . ."�V �. ' , ' � L� � �
��� � �
��
�: �,= �� y"�.�� _ �.� . . �°E°"t �
� �r. , P2 � . '��� �-�' -
'��� � � . . �
� ��
. �
� � # � �. �.. , � �
� � � � � � � ��
4 `�
��.. � � ; � .. � I�,� R; �/
P1; � '� �`° � ; �. �..
- - � `,, � ' .�: �
� . �:
.;, ,
,,� . �s • .
�,t� �
�� �:^;
1. . _ _` ...,:. . ,�. , .
JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION
LINWOOD SPRINGS RESTORATION SITE
GASTON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
. �� ! .
a
DwnBy: FIGURE
MCG
Ckd By:
JWG
Date:
AUG 2011
ProJact:
100021642
e

/�TKI NS
Fi'� "... ��
, �„�- � � i 9 ,--•�r
_ . ..-��.LI
October 3, 2011
Ms. Polly Lespinasse
NCDWQ Mooresville Regional Office
610 East Center Avenue, Suite 301
Mooresville, NC 28115
[phone]
, ��,�
�� �._ ��v�
Atkins North America, Inc.
1616 East Millbrook Road, Suite 310
Raleigh, North Carolina 27609-4968
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
www.atkinsglobal.com/northamerica
RE: Revised Jurisdictional Delineation for Linwood Springs Golf Course
Gaston County, NC
Dear Ms. Lespinasse,
Atkins North America Inc. (Atkins) has been tasked with completing jurisdictional area
delineations for the Linwood Springs Golf Course in Gaston County. The golf course was
purchased by NCDOT to be used as on-site mitigation for the Gaston East-West Connector
(STIP U-3321).
We met at the Site on August 4, 2011 along with the USACE, and revisions to the delineation
were requested. Attached is a revised packet of information containing data forms and
delineation mapping for the Site based on those changes. I have included data forms
recently completed within the golf course as well as those previously completed for the
Gaston East-West Connector. By submission of this packet, Atkins, on behalf of the NCTA,
request that a letter of verification regarding the delineation be provided for the Site.
Thank you for your assistance with this very important project. Please call me at (919) 431-
5269 if you have any questions or concerns.
Sincerely,
Atkins
Michael Gloden, PWS
Senior Scientist
�

Prepared By Prepared For: �`^'� BY FIGURE
SITE LOCATION MCG
n "c,�`' Ckd By JWG
/\TKI N S �' LINWOOD SPRINGS RESTORATION SITE oate:
� JUNE 2011 �
'�;�`��n�"s°��' GASTON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA Project No..
10oo216a2