20150446 Ver 1_401 Application_20150515

1L i I
Cws
Carolina Wetland Services
Carolina Wetland Services, Inc.
550 East Westinghouse Boulevard
Charlotte, NC 28273
704 -527 -1177 - Phone {
704 -527 -1133 - Fax
TO: Ms. Karen Higgins
NCDWR — NC DWR, 401 & Buffer Permitting Unit
512 N Salisbury St
9th Floor, Archdale Building
Raleigh NC 27604
I
Date: 51512015
CWS Project #: 2015 -3612
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
WE ARE SENDING YOU: ®Attached ❑Under separate cover via the following items:
❑ Prints ❑ Plans ❑ JD Package ❑ Specifications
❑ Copy of letter ❑ Change order ❑ Wetland Survey ® Other
IF ENCLOSURES ARE NOT AS NOTED_ KINDLY NOTIFY US AT ONCE
THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below:
®For approval ❑Approved as submitted ❑Resubmit copies for approval
®For your use ❑Approved as noted ❑Submit copies for distribution
❑As requested ❑Returned for corrections ❑Return corrected prints
❑For review and comment ❑For your verification and signature
REMARKS: Karen, Please find attached five copies of the Preconstruction Notification and application for
WQC 3883 for the Torrence Tributary Sewer Project. A check for the application fee of $570'is also attached.
Copy to: File
T yo
Kelly Thames, WPIT
Sr. Project Manager
NORTH CAROLINA • SOUTH CAROLINA
1
51512015
5
Application for WQC 3884
2
5/5/2015
1
Application Fee ($570)
THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below:
®For approval ❑Approved as submitted ❑Resubmit copies for approval
®For your use ❑Approved as noted ❑Submit copies for distribution
❑As requested ❑Returned for corrections ❑Return corrected prints
❑For review and comment ❑For your verification and signature
REMARKS: Karen, Please find attached five copies of the Preconstruction Notification and application for
WQC 3883 for the Torrence Tributary Sewer Project. A check for the application fee of $570'is also attached.
Copy to: File
T yo
Kelly Thames, WPIT
Sr. Project Manager
NORTH CAROLINA • SOUTH CAROLINA

Corps Submittal Cover Sheet
Please provide the following info:
1. Project Name Torrence Tributary Sewer
2015446
2. Name of Property Owner /Applicant: Charlotte Water; POC: Mr. Arnold Jarrell
3. Name of Consultant/Agent: Carolina Wetland Services; POC: Ms. Kelly Thames, WPIT
*Agent authorization needs to be attached.
4. Related/Previous Action ID number(s): N/A
5. Site Address: located parallel to a tributary to Torrence Creek extending west of Mt. Holly-
Huntersville Road and north of Hambright Road in Huntersville, North Carolina
6. Subdivision Name: N/A
7. City: Huntersville
8. County: Mecklenburg
Lat: N35.249687° Long: W80.741637° (Decimal Degrees Please)
9. Quadrangle Name: Cornelius, dated 1996
10. Waterway: UT to Torrence Creek
11. Watershed: Santee (HU# 03050101)
12. Requested Action:
X Nationwide Permit # 12
General Permit #
X Jurisdictional Determination Request
Pre - Application Request
The following infonnation will be completed by Corps office:
AID:
Prepare File Folder Assign number in ORM Begin Date
Authorization: Section 10 Section 404
Project Description/ Nature of Activity/ Project Purpose:
Site /Waters Name:
Keywords:

L CWS
Carolina Wetland Services
May 4, 2015
Mr. William Elliott
U.S. Anny Corps of Engineers
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, NC 28801
550 E WESTINGHOUSE BLVD.
CHARLOTTE, NC 28273
866 -527 -1177 (office)
704 -527 -1133 (fax)
Ms. Karen Higgins
NCDWR — Wetlands and Stonnwater Branch
512 N Salisbury St
9th Floor Archdale Building
Raleigh NC 27603
MAY 0 6 2015
Subject: Jurisdictional Delineation and Request for Verification and Pre - Construction
Notification Pursuant to Nationwide Permit No. 12 and Water Quality
Certification No. 3884
Torrence Tributary Sewer
Huntersville, North Carolina
Carolina Wetland Services Project No. 2015 -3612
The Torrence Tributary Sewer project is located in Huntersville, North Carolina (Figure 1. USGS Site
Map, attached). The purpose of this project is to construct approximately 6,850 linear feet of 15 -inch
sanitary sewer line. Under a contract with Charlotte Water (formerly Charlotte - Mecklenburg Utilities
Department), McKim and Creed has subcontracted Carolina Wetland Services, Inc. (CWS) to provide
Section 404/401 permitting services for this project.
Applicant Name: Charlotte Water
Contact Name: Mr. Arnold Jarrell
Mailing Address: 5100 Brookshire Boulevard, Charlotte, NC 28216
Phone Number of Owner /Applicant: 704 - 399 -2221
Street Address of Project: north of Hambright Road to north of Reese Blvd at the confluence of the
UT to Torrence Creek and Torrence Creek in Huntersville, NC
Waterway: UT to Torrence Creek
Basin: Santee (HU# 03050101)
City: Huntersville
County: Mecklenburg
Decimal Degree Coordinate Location of Project Site: N35.249687 °, W80.741637°
USGS Quadrangle Name: Cornelius, North Carolina, 1996
Current Land Use
The Torrence Tributary Sewer project corridor is approximately 46 acres in extent. The project
corridor runs north from Hambright Road to north of Reese Boulevard to the confluence of Torrence
Creek in Huntersville, North Carolina (Figure 1. USGS Site Location Map, attached). The project
area consists of forested and agricultural floodplain parallel to the Torrence Tributary. Typical on -site
vegetation include green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), box elder (Acer negundo), sycamore
(Platanzrs occidentalis), tulip poplar (Lirioendron tulipifera), sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua),
and cottonwood (Populus deltoides). An aerial photograph of the project is attached (Figure 2).
NORTH CAROLINA ' SOUTH CAROLINA
WWW.CWS- INC.NET

Torrence Tributary Sewer May 4, 2015
Nationwide Permit No. 12 and Request for Verification CWS Project No. 2015 -3612
According to the Soil Survey of Mecklenburg County' (Figures 3 and 4. NRCS Soil Survey Maps,
attached), on -site soils consist of members of the Cecil, Enon, Helena, Mecklenburg, Monacan,
Udorthents, Vance, and Wilkes soil series. Cecil, Enon, Pacolet, and Wilkes soils are typically
associated with uplands. Helena and Monocan soils are typically associated with drainageways and
low areas. Both Helena and Monacan soils are listed in the North Carolina Hydric Soils List for
Mecklenburg County' and the National Hydric Soils List' as having the potential for hydric
inclusions. Approximately six percent of the project corridor is located on Helena soils and over 50
percent of the project corridor is located on Monacan soils. Soil units occurring on the site are
summarized in Table 1, below.
Table 1. On -Site Soils
* - Soils which are primarily non hydric, but which may contain hydric inclusions
Jurisdictional Determination
On April 28, 2015 CWS scientists Aliisa Harjuniemii and Erin Bradshaw Settevendemio, Wetland
Professionals in Training (WPIT) delineated jurisdictional waters of the U.S. within the project area
(Figure 5, attached). Jurisdictional areas were delineated (flagged in the field) using the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers ( USACE) Routine On -Site Determination Method. This method is defined in the
1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual', the 2007 USACE Jurisdictional
i United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), 2013 Soil Survey of Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
2 United States Department of Agriculture — Natural Resources Conservation Service, 1999 North Carolina Hydna Soils List, USDA -
NRCS North Carolina State Office, Raleigh
3 United States Department of Agriculture —Natural Resources Conservation Service, 2010 2010 National Hydric Soils List by State
'Environmental Laboratory 1987 "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual ", Technical Report Y -87 -1, US Army Engineer
Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi
2
Ma iri
rains
Percents eof
imi,/W"Clas
Status
Protect flrea
ir
Cecil sandy clay loam, 2
to 8 percent slopes,
Ce132
Well- drained
Non - hdyric
0.30%
moderately eroded
Enon sandy loam, 2 to 8
EnB
+
Well- drained
Non - hdyric
o
0.00 /o
percent slopes
Enon sandy loam, 8 to 15
EnD
Well- drained
Non - hdyric
6.00%
percent slopes
Helena sandy loam, 2 to
HeB
Moderately
Hydric*
6.10%
8 percent slopes
well- drained
Mecklenburg fine sandy
loam, 2 to 8 percent
MeB
Well- drained
Non - hdyric
0.80%
slopes
Monacan loam, 0 to 2
percent slopes,
MO
Somewhat
Hydric*
y
51.40%
poorly drained
frequently flooded
Udorthents, loamy
UL
Well- drained
Non- hdyric
3.40%
Vance sandy loam, 2 to 8
VaB
Well- drained
Non - hdyric
4.70%
percent slopes t
Wilkes loam, 8 to 15
WkD
Well- drained
Non - hdyric
6.50%
percent slopes
Wilkes loam, 15 to 25
WkE
Well- drained
Non - hdyric
20.10%
percent slopes
* - Soils which are primarily non hydric, but which may contain hydric inclusions
Jurisdictional Determination
On April 28, 2015 CWS scientists Aliisa Harjuniemii and Erin Bradshaw Settevendemio, Wetland
Professionals in Training (WPIT) delineated jurisdictional waters of the U.S. within the project area
(Figure 5, attached). Jurisdictional areas were delineated (flagged in the field) using the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers ( USACE) Routine On -Site Determination Method. This method is defined in the
1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual', the 2007 USACE Jurisdictional
i United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), 2013 Soil Survey of Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
2 United States Department of Agriculture — Natural Resources Conservation Service, 1999 North Carolina Hydna Soils List, USDA -
NRCS North Carolina State Office, Raleigh
3 United States Department of Agriculture —Natural Resources Conservation Service, 2010 2010 National Hydric Soils List by State
'Environmental Laboratory 1987 "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual ", Technical Report Y -87 -1, US Army Engineer
Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi
2

Torrence Tributary Sewer May 4, 2015
Nationwide Permit No. 12 and Request for Verification CWS Proiect No. 2015 -3612
Determination Form Instructional Guidebook', with further technical guidance from the Eastern
Mountains & Piedmont Regional Supplement6, dated April 2012. Wetland Determination Data Forms
representative of on -site jurisdictional wetland areas are attached (DPI and DP3). Wetland
Determination Data Forms representative of non jurisdictional upland areas are attached (DP2 and
DP4). The locations of these data points are identified as DPI to DP4 on Figures 6 to 7 (attached).
Jurisdictional stream channels were classified according to recent USACE and North Carolina
Division of Water Resources (NCDWR) guidance. These classifications included sampling with a D-
shaped dip net, taking photographs, and defining approximate breakpoints (location at which a
channel changes classification) within each on -site stream channel.
Results
The results of the on -site field investigation conducted by CWS indicate that there are six
jurisdictional stream channels (Streams A — F) and three jurisdictional wetlands (Wetlands AA,— CC)
located within the project corridor (Figures 5 —7, attached). On -Site jurisdictional waters include
Torrence Creek and an unnamed tributary to Torrence Creek (Torrence Tributary). Torrence Creek is
located in the Santee River basin (HU# 003050101)' and is rated "Class WS-IV Waters" by the
NCDWR. According to the NCDWR, Class WS -IV Waters are defined as: "Waters used as sources
of water supply for drinking, culinary, or food processing purposes where a WS -I, II, or III
classification is not feasible These waters are also protected for Class C uses." .
On -Site jurisdictional waters of the U.S. total approximately 1.71 acres (74,487 square feet), including
7,103 linear feet of jurisdictional stream channel. On -Site jurisdictional waters of the U.S. are
summarized in Table 2 below.
USACE Jurisdictional Determination Form Instructional Guidebook 2007 USACE Regulatory National Standard Operating Procedures
for conducting an approved Jurisdictional determination (JD) and documenting practices to support an approved JD USACE Headquarters,
Washington, DC
6 US Army Corps of Engineers, April 2012 Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual Eastern
Mountains and Piedmont Region US Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, Mississippi
"HU #" is the Hydrologic Unit Code US Geological Survey, 1974 Hydrologic Unit Map, State of North Carolina
3

Torrence Tributary Sewer May 4, 2015
Nationwide Permit No. 12 and Request for Verification CWS Proiect No. 2015 -3612
Table 2. On -Site Jurisdictional Waters of the U.S.
Perennial Relatively Permanent Waters
Perennial Relatively Permanent Waters (RPWs) are those that typically have year -round flow. These
streams typically have greater biological resources than Seasonal RPWs and Non -RPWs and are capable of
supporting those resources that require perennial flow. This section describes the on -site Perennial RPW
Streams and the field observations supporting these determinations.
Stream A (Torrence Creek) is located at the northern end of the project corridor. Stream A is on site for
a total of approximately 542 linear feet (Figure 5, attached). Stream A was determined to be a perennial
stream and exhibited strong flow, strong bed and bank, substrate consisting of coarse sand and gravel,
and an average ordinary high water width of five to six feet. Biological sampling within Stream A
revealed a moderate presence of crayfish and amphibians, and a weak presence of fish and
macrobenthos. Stream A was classified as a Relatively Permanent Water with Perennial Flow (RPW)
according to USACE/EPA guidance. Perennial RPW Stream A scored 40 out of a possible 100 points on
the USACE Stream Quality Assessment Worksheet and 33 out of a possible 69.5 points on the NCDWR
Stream Classification Form, indicating perennial status (SCP1, attached).
Stream B is an unnamed tributary (Torrence Tributary) to Perennial RPW Stream A and is on site for a
total of approximately 5,668 linear feet (Figure 5, attached). Stream B was determined to be a perennial
stream and exhibited strong flow, strong bed and bank, substrate consisting of coarse sand and gravel,
and an average ordinary high water width of three to four feet. Biological sampling within Stream A
Jurisdiction
Stream
NCDWR °
USACE '
Approx.
Jurisdictional
Class: ,
Stream
Stream
Length
Approx
Acreage .
Figure
Feature
USACE/EPA ,`
Intermittent/
Point
Class.
Assess.
Linear
No.
Perennial'
(SCP)
Score
°Score
Feet (If),
(ac')
°
Claspfi ation
Stream A
Perennial
(Torrence
Perennial
542
0.062
5
RPW
Creek )
SCP1
33
40
Stream B
Perennial
(Torrence
Perennial
5,668
0.520
5
Tributary)
RPW
Stream C
SeRass nal
Intermittent
104
0.007
5
Seasonal
Stream D
Intermittent
123
0.005
7
RPW
SCP2
22.5
52
SeRaP�al
Stream E
Intermittent
167
0.007
5
Seasonal
Stream F
Intennittent
499
0.010
5
RPW
On -Site Stream Total:
7,103 If
0.611 ac
Jurisdictional
USACE/EPA Rapinos
Approx.
Figure,
Feature
Classification
Data Point,(DP)
Acreage
No.
ac.
Wetland AA
Directly Abutting RPW
DPI
0.067
6
Wetland BB
Directly Abutting RPW
DP4
1.478
7
Wetland CC
Directly Abutting RPW
DP4
0.165
7
1.71
On -Site Wetland Total:
acres
Perennial Relatively Permanent Waters
Perennial Relatively Permanent Waters (RPWs) are those that typically have year -round flow. These
streams typically have greater biological resources than Seasonal RPWs and Non -RPWs and are capable of
supporting those resources that require perennial flow. This section describes the on -site Perennial RPW
Streams and the field observations supporting these determinations.
Stream A (Torrence Creek) is located at the northern end of the project corridor. Stream A is on site for
a total of approximately 542 linear feet (Figure 5, attached). Stream A was determined to be a perennial
stream and exhibited strong flow, strong bed and bank, substrate consisting of coarse sand and gravel,
and an average ordinary high water width of five to six feet. Biological sampling within Stream A
revealed a moderate presence of crayfish and amphibians, and a weak presence of fish and
macrobenthos. Stream A was classified as a Relatively Permanent Water with Perennial Flow (RPW)
according to USACE/EPA guidance. Perennial RPW Stream A scored 40 out of a possible 100 points on
the USACE Stream Quality Assessment Worksheet and 33 out of a possible 69.5 points on the NCDWR
Stream Classification Form, indicating perennial status (SCP1, attached).
Stream B is an unnamed tributary (Torrence Tributary) to Perennial RPW Stream A and is on site for a
total of approximately 5,668 linear feet (Figure 5, attached). Stream B was determined to be a perennial
stream and exhibited strong flow, strong bed and bank, substrate consisting of coarse sand and gravel,
and an average ordinary high water width of three to four feet. Biological sampling within Stream A

Torrence Tributary Sewer May 4, 2015
Nationwide Permit No. 12 and Request for Verification CWS Proiect No. 2015 -3612
revealed a moderate presence of crayfish and amphibians, and a weak presence of fish and
macrobenthos. Stream B was classified as a Relatively Permanent Water with Perennial Flow (RPW)
according to USACE/EPA guidance. Perennial RPW Stream B scored 40 out of a possible 100 points on
the USACE Stream Quality Assessment Worksheet and 33 out of a possible 69.5 points on the NCDWR
Stream Classification Form, indicating perennial status (SCP1, attached). Photograph A (attached) is
representative of Perennial RPW Stream B.
Seasonal RPWs
Seasonal RPWs are those streams that exhibit continuous flow seasonally. This flow regime is the result of
a lowering of the water table during dry periods that stops groundwater discharge to the stream channel.
Seasonal streams do not typically support aquatic life requiring year -round flow to support reproductive and
maturation stages. This section describes the on -site Seasonal RPW Streams and the field observations
supporting these determinations.
Stream C is an unnamed tributary to Perennial RPW Stream B and is on site for a total of approximately
104 linear feet (Figure 5, attached). Stream C exhibited weak flow, moderate bed and bank, a weak
presence of iron oxidizing bacteria, and an average ordinary high water width of two to three feet.
Biological sampling revealed that there were no observable biological samples at that time within Stream
C. Stream C was classified as a Relatively Permanent Water with Seasonal Flow (RPW) according to
USACE/EPA guidance. Seasonal RPW Stream C scored 52 out of a possible 100 points on the USACE
Stream Quality Assessment Worksheet and 22.5 out of a possible 69.5 points on the NCDWR Stream
Classification Form, indicating intermittent status (SCP2, attached). Photograph B (attached) is
representative of Perennial RPW Stream C.
Stream D is an unnamed tributary that discharges to Wetland BB and is on site for a total of approximately
123 linear feet (Figures 5 and 7, attached). Stream D exhibited weak flow, moderate bed and bank, a
weak presence of iron oxidizing bacteria, and an average ordinary high water width of one to two feet.
Biological sampling revealed that there were no observable biological samples at that time within
Stream D. Stream D was classified as a Relatively Permanent Water with Seasonal Flow (RPW) according
to USACE/EPA guidance. Seasonal RPW Stream D scored 52 out of a possible 100 points on the USACE
Stream Quality Assessment Worksheet and 22.5 out of a possible 69.5 points on the NCDWR Stream
Classification Form, indicating intermittent status (SCP2, attached). Photograph C (attached) is
representative of Seasonal RPW Stream D. ,
Stream E is an unnamed tributary to Perennial RPW Stream B and is on site for a total of approximately 167
linear feet (Figure 5, attached). Stream E exhibited weak flow, moderate bed and bank, a weak presence
of iron oxidizing bacteria, and an average ordinary high water width of one to two feet. Biological
sampling revealed that there were no observable biological samples at that time within Stream E.
Stream E was classified as a Relatively Permanent Water with Seasonal Flow (RPW) according to
USACE/EPA guidance. Seasonal RPW Stream E scored 52 out of a possible 100 points on the USACE
Stream Quality Assessment Worksheet and 22.5 out of a possible 69.5 points on the NCDWR Stream
Classification Form, indicating intermittent status (SCP2, attached). Photograph D (attached) is
representative of Seasonal RPW Stream E.
Stream F is the beginning headwaters of Perennial RPW Stream B and is on site for a total of approximately
499 linear feet before changing jurisdiction to Perennial RPW Stream B (Figure 5, attached). Stream F
exhibited weak flow, moderate bed and bank, a weak presence of iron oxidizing bacteria, and an
average ordinary high water width of one to two feet. Biological sampling revealed that there were no
observable biological samples at that time within Stream F. Stream F was classified as a Relatively
Permanent Water with Seasonal Flow (RPW) according to USACE/EPA guidance. Seasonal RPW Stream
F scored 52 out of a possible 100 points on the USACE Stream Quality Assessment Worksheet and 22.5 out

Torrence Tributary Sewer May 4, 2015
Nationwide Permit No. 12 and Request for Verification CWS Project No. 2015 -3612
of a possible 69.5 points on the NCDWR Stream Classification Form, indicating intermittent status (SCP2,
attached). Photograph E (attached) is representative of Seasonal RPW Stream F.
Wetlands
The USACE and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) define wetlands as: "Those areas that are
inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that
under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated
soil conditions."' The USACE uses three parameters to identify jurisdictional wetlands. These parameters
are as follows: 1) Hydrophytic Vegetation, 2) Wetland Hydrology, and 3) Hydric Soils. Except in certain
atypical situations, all three parameters must be present in order for an area to be detenmined to be a
jurisdictional wetland. This section describes each on -site jurisdictional wetland and the field observations
that led to their determinations.
Wetland AA is a forested floodplain wetland (PFOIE)9, approximately 0.067 acre in extent, and is
located directly abutting Perennial Stream B (Figure 5, attached). Wetland AA exhibits a depleted
matrix (IOYR 4/1), with common, distinct mottles (7.5YR 516), surface water up to 18 inches, aquatic
fauna, and saturation to the surface of the soil profile. Dominant vegetation includes green ash
(Fraxinus pennsylvanica), sweetgum, (Liquidambar styracifula), and mayapple (Phodophyllum
peltatum). A Wetland Determination Data Form representative of Wetland AA is attached as DPI.
Wetland AA was determined to be directly abutting Perennial RPW Stream B. Photograph F
(attached) is representative of Wetland AA.
Wetlands BB and CC are palustrine emergent wetlands (PEMIHb)10, permanently flooded by beaver
activity. Wetlands BB and CC are approximately 1.478 and 0. 165 acres in extent, respectively.
Wetlands BB and CC are located directly abutting Perennial Stream B (Figures 5 and 6, attached).
Wetlands BB and CC exhibit a depleted matrix (IOYR 4/2), surface water up to 24 inches, an algal
mat, aquatic fauna, and oxidized rhizospheres on living roots. Dominant vegetation in these wetlands
include carex ( Carex spp.), tearthumb (Persicaria pensylvanica), and soft rush (Juncus effusus). A
Wetland Determination Data Form representative of Wetlands BB and CC is attached as DP3.
Photographs G and H (attached) are representative of Wetlands BB and CC, respectively.
Agency Correspondence
Cultural Resources
A letter was forwarded to the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) on May 4, 2015 to determine
the presence of any areas of architectural, historic, or archaeological significance that would be
affected by the project. As of the date of this submittal, a response from the SHPO has not yet been
received. CWS also consulted the SHPO online GIS service" and the Charlotte Mecklenburg Historic
Landmarks Commission12 database.
Based on a review of the Historic Preservation Office Web GIS Service, there is one historic property
listed within a quarter -mile of the project limits (Figure 3. SHPO Map, attached). This property is the
Huntersville prison and is no longer.in existence.
'Environmental Laboratory 1987 "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual ", Technical Report Y -87 -1, US Army Engineer
Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi
9 Cowardm, L M , V Carter, F C Golet, E T LaRoe 1979 Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States U S
Department of the interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.0
10 Cowardm, L M , V Carter, F C Golet, E T LaRoe 1979 Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States U S
Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D C
" http / /gis ncdcr gov /hpoweb/ Accessed July 9, 2014
12 http / /www cmhpf org/homehistoneproperties htm Accessed May 4, 2015
6

Torrence Tributary Sewer May 4, 2015
Nationwide Permit No. 12 and Request for Verification CWS Project No. 2015 -3612
Protected Species
A letter was forwarded to the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program ( NCNHP) on May 4, 2015 to
determine the presence of any federally- listed, candidate endangered, threatened species or critical
habitat located within the project area. In a response dated May 4, 2015, NCNHP stated that Element
Occurrence data show three historical records for Carolina birdfoot - trefoil (Acmispon helleri), tall
larkspur (Delphinium exaltatum), and Alabama grape -fern (Sceptridium jenmanii). All three species
are listed at the state level. Habitat for these species does not occur within the project limits, and'no
individuals of these species were observed during the field visit on April 28, 2015. This project will
have no effect on these species. A copy of the correspondence is attached.
Purpose and Need for the Project
The purpose of the project is to construct approximately 6,850 linear feet (LF) of 15 -inch trunk
sanitary sewer along the Torrence Tributary. This project is required to provide sewer service for
future development to take place south of Hambright Road. The proposed sanitary sewer will tie into
the existing sewer located just north of Torrence Creek. The proposed sewer has been designed to
handle flows for the build -out of the service area based on existing zoning.
The proposed Torrence Tributary Sewer is necessary for many reasons. The proposed sanitary sewer
will continue to serve current demand and serve approved future development.
It is necessary to install the proposed sanitary sewer prior to the construction of approved
development. It is preferable, from a water quality perspective, that sewerage from the future
development be treated at a regional wastewater treatment plant rather than relying on private systems
or septic systems.
Avoidance and Minimization
Impacts to on -site jurisdictional waters of the U.S. have been reduced to the maximum extent practicable.
The Torrence Tributary Sewer project has been designed to avoid impacts to jurisdictional waters of the
U.S. wherever possible and minimize the extent of necessary impacts to jurisdictional waters. The
following paragraphs outline the avoidance and minimization efforts undertaken during the planning and
design phase of this project.
Avoidance
Jurisdictional Waters of the U.S. have been avoided wherever possible. Other constraints on the
sewer route were also taken into account. These constraints include significant trees, site topography,
and geology. In addition, the proposed alignment was designed to avoid jurisdictional streams and
wetlands wherever possible
A no -build alternative would result in the continued reliance on septic systems to support current and
ongoing development in the upper drainage are of the Torrence Creek Tributary. With the continued
growth in Huntersville, and northern Mecklenburg County, a no -build alternative would result in a
continued proliferation of private pump stations and package treatment plants to serve the
development that is occurring within the drainage area. The need for public sewer service and the
preference for regionalization of wastewater systems, with the anticipated subsequent increased ability
to effectively monitor and maintain wastewater transport and treatment in the service area, rendered a
no- action alternative impracticable. Therefore, a no -build alternative was eliminated from further
consideration, since it would not be reasonable or feasible given the projected growth, and ongoing
and future development within the service area.

Torrence Tributary Sewer May 4, 2015
Nationwide Permit No. 12 and Request for Verification CWS Project No. 2015 -3612
Constraints identified in identifying a potential alignment were largely based on a literature review
and a preliminary wetlands field determination by CWS. The primary goal of the design effort was to
develop an alignment that would avoid or minimize potential impacts to wetlands, watercourses, steep
slopes, cultural resources, riparian buffers, and other identified environmental constraints, to the
maximum extent practicable, without compromising engineering requirements.
Minimization
The construction corridor will not exceed the 40 -foot maximum corridor width through wetlands as a
condition of the Section 401 Water Quality Certification. The construction corridor has also been
limited to a 40 -foot width at all stream crossings. The permanent maintained portion of the right -of-
way (R /W) corridor will not exceed 15 feet in width through wetlands and at stream crossings.
Proper sediment and erosion control measures will be used to minimize disturbances to downstream
waters. Anti -seep collars will be installed at the downstream wetland boundary and every 150 feet up
the gradient until the sewer trunk exits the wetland. Sewer trunks will be sited greater than 10 feet from
parallel stream channels. All unavoidable stream crossings will be at a near perpendicular angle. All
channel work will be constructed in the dry in accordance with Water Quality Certification No. 3884. In
addition, all permanent maintained right -of -way through wetlands will be permanently marked in the
field to avoid mowing and maintenance of additional wetland areas.
Proposed Impacts to Jurisdictional Waters
Unavoidable impacts associated with the construction of the Torrence Tributary Sewer project include
the mechanized clearing of forested and herbaceous wetland vegetation and jurisdictional stream
crossings. Permanent impacts will be the result of a 15 -foot wide permanently maintained easement
through one forested wetland that will be converted to a maintained herbaceous wetland. Temporary
impacts will be the result of three stream crossings and a 15 -foot wide permanently maintained
easement through two herbaceous wetland crossings.
Stream Impacts
Impacts to jurisdictional stream channels resulting from sewer line crossings total 171.56 linear feet
(Figures 9 and 10, attached). All stream impacts will be temporary. Temporary stream crossings will
be returned to their original grade and stabilized using bioengineering and replanted with native
hardwood trees and shrubs. No rip rap will be placed in the stream bed. Stream impacts are
summarized in Table 3. The number of crossings has been kept to the minimum necessary to provide
access for maintenance and at the request of property owners. The utility crossings will not result in
any loss of waters of the U.S.

Torrence Tributary Sewer May 4, 2015
Nationwide Permit No. 12 and Request for Verification CWS Project No. 2015 -3612
Table 3. Proposed Im acts to Jurisdictional Streams
Wetland Impacts
Unavoidable impacts to jurisdictional wetlands total approximately 0.31 acre. Impacts are the result
of clearing of both forested and herbaceous wetlands to facilitate the construction of the proposed
project (Figures 11 and 12, attached). Permanent impacts to on -site wetlands total 0.018 acre and are
the result of a 15 foot wide permanent maintained easement through Wetland AA in which forested
wetlands will be permanently converted to maintained herbaceous wetlands. The approximately 0.014
acre of temporary impacts to Wetland AA (Figure 11, attached) will be mitigated through
reforestation. The approximately 0.275 acres of temporary impacts to herbaceous Wetlands BB - CC
(Figure 12, attached) will be will be returned to their pre- construction grades. Wetland impacts are
summarized in Table 4.
Table 4. Proposed Impacts to Jurisdictional Wetlands
Ju`risdicti6n_
`
.
Jurisdictional°
Jurisdictional
Impact'
Figure
"
Temporary
�Permanent�
USACE7EPA
Feature
Rapanos
.Intermittent/
T e
Type
No.
Sta. No.
Impact Length
.Impacts
Classification
•Perennial ti
y (�
Length, (if)_ f
Wetland AA
Classification fcation
Forested
Clearing
11
15 +30
0.014
0.018
Stream A
Perennial
Perennial
Utility
9
0 +00
45.96 If
0 if
(Torrence Creek)
RPW
Emergent
Crossin
12
40+60
0.005
0.0
Stream B
Perennial
0.018 acres
Utility
10
46+00
66.9 if
0 if
(Torrence
RPW
Perennial
Crossing
Tributary)
10
50+20
58.7 If
0 if
Total Stream impacts
171.56 linear
0 linear feet
feet
Net Loss of Stream Channel
0 if
Wetland Impacts
Unavoidable impacts to jurisdictional wetlands total approximately 0.31 acre. Impacts are the result
of clearing of both forested and herbaceous wetlands to facilitate the construction of the proposed
project (Figures 11 and 12, attached). Permanent impacts to on -site wetlands total 0.018 acre and are
the result of a 15 foot wide permanent maintained easement through Wetland AA in which forested
wetlands will be permanently converted to maintained herbaceous wetlands. The approximately 0.014
acre of temporary impacts to Wetland AA (Figure 11, attached) will be mitigated through
reforestation. The approximately 0.275 acres of temporary impacts to herbaceous Wetlands BB - CC
(Figure 12, attached) will be will be returned to their pre- construction grades. Wetland impacts are
summarized in Table 4.
Table 4. Proposed Impacts to Jurisdictional Wetlands
The majority of impacts associated with this project are temporary. Permanent impacts have been
limited to a total of approximately 0.018 acre of wetland impact. Wetland impacts are the result of
clearing forested wetlands that fall within the 15 feet permanent easement. Temporary impacts have
been limited to a total of approximately 0.29 acre of wetland impacts 171.56 linear feet of stream
impacts. Temporary wetland impacts are the result of clearing herbaceous wetlands. Temporary
stream impacts are the result of three utility crossings. All impacted areas will be returned to their
pre- impact grades; there will be no above grade fill.
On behalf of Charlotte Water, CWS is submitting a Pre - Construction Notification Application with
attachments in accordance with Nationwide Permit General Condition No. 31 and pursuant to
Nationwide Permit (NWP) No. 12, (attached).
USACE/EPA'.
`
Temporary
'Permanent
Jurisdictional
Wetland
Impact
Figure
Feature
Rapanos
Type
Type
No.
Sta. No.
Impacts
Impacts, Area
Classification
Area acres
, '° acres
Wetland AA
Perennial RPW
Forested
Clearing
11
15 +30
0.014
0.018
Wetland BB
Perennial RPW
Emergent
Clearing
12
33+40
0.27
0.0
Wetland CC
Perennial RPW
Emergent
Clearing
12
40+60
0.005
0.0
Total Wetland,Impacts
0.29 acre
0.018 acres
Net Permanent Wetland Impact
0.31 acres
The majority of impacts associated with this project are temporary. Permanent impacts have been
limited to a total of approximately 0.018 acre of wetland impact. Wetland impacts are the result of
clearing forested wetlands that fall within the 15 feet permanent easement. Temporary impacts have
been limited to a total of approximately 0.29 acre of wetland impacts 171.56 linear feet of stream
impacts. Temporary wetland impacts are the result of clearing herbaceous wetlands. Temporary
stream impacts are the result of three utility crossings. All impacted areas will be returned to their
pre- impact grades; there will be no above grade fill.
On behalf of Charlotte Water, CWS is submitting a Pre - Construction Notification Application with
attachments in accordance with Nationwide Permit General Condition No. 31 and pursuant to
Nationwide Permit (NWP) No. 12, (attached).

Torrence Tributary Sewer May 4, 2015
Nationwide Permit No. 12 and Request for Verification CWS Project No. 2015 -3612
Please do not hesitate to contact Kelly at 704 -527 -1177 or Kelly @cws- inc.net should you have any
questions or comments regarding these findings. i
Sincerely,
Kelly Thames, WRIT
Senior Project Manager
Attachments: Figure 1.
Figure 2.
Figure 3.
Figure 4.
Figure 5.
Figure 6.
Figure 7.
Figure 8.
Figure 9.
Figure 10.
Figure 11.
Aliisa Harjuniemi
Staff Scientist II
USGS 7.5- Minute Cornelius, North Carolina Topographic Quadrangle
Aerial Imagery
USDA -NRCS Historic Mecklenburg County Soil Survey
USDA -NRCS Current Mecklenburg County Soil Survey
Approximate Jurisdictional Boundary Field Map — Overview
Approximate Jurisdictional Boundary Field Map
Approximate Jurisdictional Boundary Field Map
Proposed Impacts - Overview
Proposed Impacts
Proposed Impacts
Proposed Impacts
Figure 12. Impacts
Agent Authorization Form
Pre - Construction Notification Pursuant to Nationwide Permit No. 12
NCDWR Stream Classification Forms (SCP1— SCP2)
USACE Stream Assessment Worksheets (SCPI — SCP2)
Routine Wetland Determination Data Forms (DPI to DP4)
Agency Correspondence
Preliminary JD Form
Representative Photographs
cc: Mr. Bryan Tompkins, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Mr. Arnold Jarrell, Charlotte Water
Mr. Jason Marshall, McKim & Creed
File
H

- if X.-
v k
;r �p,
w ter*
4L
OZ W
.
" z
ly,
AII
is"
v
d 4i
x
T
, V,
4­-
A
V , x
vx�
4r
r
11
it 0--
'a.,•
ir
T
lb
00
ycz j
I
M
A.:
A
W
f f 1%
v
r J P
: q
U J­
Mt. Holly Huntersvil e Road
kN r
rL
­1z"
t. +,' --,Pft0;jf
ZN
J.,
Y
�7
I A V; k4
L 1! , 6,
N •'1
4 V
1Y.:
12
f
r
L
A
Road��-
Hambright J Y."
tj
_k : ;..
_1A p, Le _Qr/ ­N1
Legend ILI
Project limits
V L1 qVLAtI5
i
I L . _. k , �,, . - " . . &
. 1"r•.. 2,000 1,000 0 2,000 Feet
REFERENCE: 7.5 MINUTE TOPOGRAPHIC QUADRANGELS,CORNELiUS, DATED 1996, LAKE:
NORMAN SOUTH, DATED 1996, MT. ISLAND LAKE, DATED 1996, AND DERITA, DATED 1996.
SCALE: 1 2000' DATE: 4-22-2015 USGS Site Location Map FIGURE NO.
CWS PROJECT NO: DRAWN BY: AVH 40�)Cws 1
2015-3612 Torrence Tributary Sewer
APPLICANT NO: CHECKED BY WWW.CWS-1NC.NET Huntersville, North Carolina
GCA CWS Project No. 2015-3612

ti
PS
Pe
0
Y.
k.
GA
r.�
•
Project limits
800 400 0 800 Feet
:ESSED APRIL 2015.

Ce$2 AA eB
�
UL
AV
j Wk
k Q
W k B QJ
CeN °'
Mt. Holly Huntersville Road
/ !r .p
IT
r Celt ?. Wkf)
lri
VaH
CeD 2 Enp
l ;; ,
Hambright Road ,�f V� {
VaB
VaB
10
Soils - Description " `; �� V'�' D
CeB2 —Cecil sandy clay loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes, moderately eroded
EnB —Enon sandy loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes H 1
EnD —Enon sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes
HeB— Helena sandy loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes i _ _ _ _ - 1 = `
MeB— Mecklenburg fine sandy loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes
MO— Monacan loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, frequently flooded Legend
UL— Udorthents, loamy
ater
VaB—Vance sandy loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes
W W Project limits
WkD— Wilkes loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes
WkE— Wilkes loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes
1,000 500 0 1,000 Feet
REFERENCE: HISTORIC USDA -NRCS SOIL SURVEY OF MECKLENBURG COUNTY, DATED 1976
SCALE: 1 " : 1000' DATE: 4 -9 -2015 Historic USDA -NRCS Soil Survey FIGURE NO.
CWS PROJECT NO: DRAWN BY: AV H CWS of Mecklenburg County n
2015 -3612 Torrence Tributary Sewer `�
APPLICANT NO: CHECKED BY: WWW CWS-INC.NET Huntersville, North Carolina
GCA CWS Project No. 2015 -3612

Perennial RPW B
-- 5668 If
Wetland BB
- 1.478 ac.
Cpl
4 /Ad
t
i
H elO,
f
1
Fie. �.�. .T�s Cal Ja�➢Ai�1� A��P.� t �.1�� P�.S �L��A�����i11�
r
Seasonal RPW
- 123 If
D
Cpl
4 /Ad
t
i
H elO,
f
1
Fie. �.�. .T�s Cal Ja�➢Ai�1� A��P.� t �.1�� P�.S �L��A�����i11�

72.0 �
- - -- -�
E
2
�U
55E SSE
SsL ss[ 35266'
sS/ E
IONq
JAM
mIWONN
I" Q( +yar°.
m QO
aQ 40
° II
+I� ,�
°Iq
+ 0.F.
NIA
71.0.
-� II
ti II
ssf— ` --
" W
P P. 5" III PROP. 15"
DErIX =69: D.I. D.I.P.
oEaiN =s vs'
700 SAN/ RY SEWER SANITARY SEWER
00. 15% 00.15
PROP. [ IN = 698.52 PROP. [ IN = 698.87
PROP. [ OUT = 698.67
690
0 +00 1 +00 2 +00
IIIbN PROP '5"
P
SANITARY SEWER
00. 15N —
PROP. IN = 699.35
PROP. [ OUT = 699.15
3 +00 4 +00
� W I13620 Re&Blvd. East
BANK OF AMERICA (BY MERGER) flr
UO SUSAN MELTON
_DEF:A,sXJ14
STA. 0+00 AK wrc4L xp.oraslaB
PROP. STRADDLE MANHOLE /1 E "X
/ TYPE A -2 F/C
& STD. DETAIL /8
Rpj4 U
k
I_j a
h2 NN
rAi 2 Q �
Ala � II
h�a 3
Ixhjk U
W
MIO N of
2 Q Oi
+10.0
to a�u
I
F~nIIa 3 a
PROP. o0v;
15
D.1. P.
I
I SANITARY SEWER
00. 15N
PROP. [ IN = 699.81
PROP. [ OUT = 699.61
5 +00 6 +00 7 +00
- 'ZM6euu
WATERFORD AT THE PARK PROPERTIES• LLC
fr.:rnxan
T.—E1 ­II I­ TBM21260
TBM 3
ELEV. - 708.53
720
710
PROP- 15"
01.122
-- — 700.
iN = 700.53
OUT = 700.13
f- IIiI6�1II0I07
BEGIN CONSTRUCTION
E
55E SSE
SsL ss[ 35266'
sS/ E
TBM 21114
TBM 1
ELEV. 707.05
�
�� -_'
su 348.21 sY
63w
_ ��
'
SSE SSL
pa
_
Sv'� e e
ss[
f
•
ssf— ` --
" W
55,
Perennial RPW Stream A (Torrence Creek)
ssA a �-
�
- 45.961f of Utility crossing (temporary)
STA. 8 +04.73
s,E
y10.55 „4 5�
PROP. MANHOLE #
.
N3 3,;i yy
W/ TYPE A -2 F/C
ss[
55[
A
SSE
STA. 4+56.53
/��
R. /� Blvd.
BANK OF AMERICA (BY MERGER)
STA. 0 +98.45 ROP. MANHOLE 14 C/O SUSAN MELTON
TBM 23152
PROP. MANHOLE W/ TYPE A -2 F/C pEEO NEF O5XJ16
#2 TBM 2 IIXt IAllff! Np.01I -191M
W/ TYPE A -2 F/C ELEV. * 705.49
Reese 'I . East STA. 2+26. 18
BANK OF AMERICA (BY MERGER)
4 ROP. MANHOLE f%3
0 SUSAN MELTON
IAXoffD'"F_ouJls W/ TYPE A -2 F/C
rMCFl xo. p11.191a6 \
690
10 +00 10+
KIES
ll EOFISifI:Tkm Lma BE N ACCOApVFCE WIM to LMEX CfIFMBUR IlIM
C94TMEMSiA�DWMWOM
DI ME CDXIXAE !LULL VRF, lDGi MD%K DfALL poEM WUDMR
r 10CDNSNUC
EIALLVUBBIbNW!l NAQVAp1ra110D1W1IRk "NIGSIAIIDMDS N.N� Im
BIIIr"I r, uueNRD loan
rl AM MCESSAIN iAMI nOaU "S SNw<! fplDW e1KrIMfS pR:xfD IN iN[ AINNJ4 w
VNFO "I IufK(ON�,Dl prKLSAXD'MCaVi.WR4AAA �NYK(DNINR
MNOYAf IrVARXI
SnE Mf rADAYDYVRf AWlSNSiYYO WiTNN lY MNMpxEC10x NEAMILLIOr
NMV,MklYI FlIOIAA4BS MAiN iiKXiNCC➢MMCIRISNIL G1 AND NaDAAI'H
A"A01MR W5 EpnrAw
bl ME (pI1KY10NLW1YFDPIOMDilx41 MF .OF DOW
'IMD FMGVAigN WIMN MF U EM NCDVrxV ]pa 54V I BF IFn ORM wfAXIDNT
15.
Know what's below.
Call before you dig.
aartHWnme °ryori
I 033157
Vi9V�II1FmPp�o\"

43 +00 44 +00 45 +00 46 +00
—T. LINE
BANK
TOM #3105
TOM15
ELEV. = 739.15
ro
POF�
SSE
°o
ssE I? O
STA. 43 +43.30 �¢
ROP. MANHOLE #19 pM
W W/ TYPE A -2 F/C
11836 Patterson Rd.
MARGARET C. HORTON
& HAZELINE C. Moss
DEED AEF: 18s1bsss TBM N3153
TAN AMQL No. Dn-1:fae TSM16
W ELEV.= 741.95
Perennial RPW Stream B
W - 4.9 If of utility crossing ( temporery)
I
47 +00
STA. 47 +72.34
PROP. MANHOLE
W/ TYPE A -2 F,
48 +00
11301 Mt. Holly- HUntersvllle Rd.
BURKERT S'YSTEMHAILS LLC
DEEDAEF: 19x90E10
TAN— ND..11.. as
49 +00
STA. 49 +66.44
PROP. MANHOLE #2
W/ TYPE A -2 F/C
50 +00 51 +00 52 +00 53 +08i
0
R.tI
XDRS:
p caxsrxurnox sxoLL u I n utnnogN[s wrtx CxAALOrrtanEOLExxugc armtt
IXWe1MENi STAXDPI'D SROFKATXWS.
T1 THElgRPACTgISIMLLVfPIFY IOCATpXANDDErINOf ALL UNOEAIiAWND IRIlR1I5
NXM RE a1X5npCf10X
I EPUT P.MWEEL AE w EXTE. N1[F roOW.ITAFN011NG SfAXDiflDS rglFF E9t4,
SU E1Mi r. AS M1 EXDEO TO DATE
XIPNY IMA ITYIAXEp05URESSNNL1 .1- GINpEIIxESauntXEDW INE MNNYlp
UNFOMTMFFKEDXIPOLMICESpXD C.o.DT.w011KM% MFFCMM
NANOBODE. 1.101
SI xm MOrOSfa SEWfRMNN BINSTgLL 11 IX n ^WNW ITING0NIVENICNIY M
H iI1]TIN1YIFR0MAfAS MM.TENTHECOETWITI MLLG WINFOAMTHE
,vmeMNTE aASCasgm.
MTHECOXT 9LMLL91EDMUMULGIATTHEENDDFEEODAY.
11 ND eGVATION WIiHW i M °EAP PECMEPY ME SMLL AE LEFT DrEN MI N
`�jNlllll���'
1�
• SEAL
= 033157 _
D y
Know what's below.
T�mmdxp °���•
Call before you dig.
h
CHARLOTTE —MECKLENBURG
UTILITIES
ENGINEERING DIVISION
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
fA -IiSI! 1t�
Job No. FneND. PROPOSED 15" SANITARY SEWER
Sales
PLAN 1 ^ =w• TO SERVE
PROFILE
Vert. 1' • A'
TORRENCE CREEK TRIBUTARY
A:sun1 DRIB Figure
_ _EKIJ ^ MFE _ _RAM MFE _ . _ _ _ 10
Perennial RPW Stream B
- 58.7 If of utility crossing (temporary)
SS E
�_...,
a
e
STA. 51+49.34
PROP. MANHOLE #22
rr
TBM #3521
TBM 19 .p °pf
SSE
SSE
ME W/ TYPE A -2 F/C
ELEV. = 748.13
/
�_.
s
sE
�e
Nr2'�S�:fOE
SSE
'
El
MARt —____
a
O
oe
0
R.tI
XDRS:
p caxsrxurnox sxoLL u I n utnnogN[s wrtx CxAALOrrtanEOLExxugc armtt
IXWe1MENi STAXDPI'D SROFKATXWS.
T1 THElgRPACTgISIMLLVfPIFY IOCATpXANDDErINOf ALL UNOEAIiAWND IRIlR1I5
NXM RE a1X5npCf10X
I EPUT P.MWEEL AE w EXTE. N1[F roOW.ITAFN011NG SfAXDiflDS rglFF E9t4,
SU E1Mi r. AS M1 EXDEO TO DATE
XIPNY IMA ITYIAXEp05URESSNNL1 .1- GINpEIIxESauntXEDW INE MNNYlp
UNFOMTMFFKEDXIPOLMICESpXD C.o.DT.w011KM% MFFCMM
NANOBODE. 1.101
SI xm MOrOSfa SEWfRMNN BINSTgLL 11 IX n ^WNW ITING0NIVENICNIY M
H iI1]TIN1YIFR0MAfAS MM.TENTHECOETWITI MLLG WINFOAMTHE
,vmeMNTE aASCasgm.
MTHECOXT 9LMLL91EDMUMULGIATTHEENDDFEEODAY.
11 ND eGVATION WIiHW i M °EAP PECMEPY ME SMLL AE LEFT DrEN MI N
`�jNlllll���'
1�
• SEAL
= 033157 _
D y
Know what's below.
T�mmdxp °���•
Call before you dig.
h
CHARLOTTE —MECKLENBURG
UTILITIES
ENGINEERING DIVISION
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
fA -IiSI! 1t�
Job No. FneND. PROPOSED 15" SANITARY SEWER
Sales
PLAN 1 ^ =w• TO SERVE
PROFILE
Vert. 1' • A'
TORRENCE CREEK TRIBUTARY
A:sun1 DRIB Figure
_ _EKIJ ^ MFE _ _RAM MFE _ . _ _ _ 10

i
I
W �
SID N �
I0.�n
O
mZQDO` WL
M� W^ �r110 N"3
a
C.1
In
r �" I I v►-i a 3
I I
I 1 I
I � I
1
- 96'PCV I
DE H =9.I6• I i PROP. 15"
_71 .. i PROP P15 DFPTH�ST D.I.P.
I
I I
- - - -
_ . - , _. .- _ . —_ —.- SANITARY SEWER
PROP. 15 Ely
DEP 9X 0.L P. I I
SANITARY SEWER 00.22N
I
L J
- PROP. IN = 704.69
PROP. OUT = 704.49
700
11 +00 12 +00
13+00
MWiP PA
WATERFORD AT THE E PARK RK PROPERTIES, lLC
DEED REf:lASl.AM
IAR PAMCI NO. 017 -19tH
STA. 13 +92.42
PROP. MANHOLE #:
W/ TYPE A -2 F/C
STA. 1 1 +57.38
WROP. MANHOLE J6
I
/ TYPE A -2 F/C
_ _ _I 00. f 5X I PROP. [ IN = 707.1
PROP. IN = 707.16 PROP. OUT = 70;
PROP. OUT = 706.96
14 +00 15 +00
11 \\ PED1D
P
IYN� �'INH' 1
su
,p4' f SSE 5
ss� 235
SSE NOrp1.55•E
SSC SSE SSE it.
ECH R
e TBM#1312 20' TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT /
T8M 4
ELEV. = 714.99
D
Reese Blvd.
BANK OF AMERICA (BY MERGE R)
C/O SUSAN MELTON
DEFDRFT.N-1X
TAR MRCFL NO.01I -191-01
16 +00 17 +00
0.018 ac clearing (permanent)
18 +00
I I
- -- 730
I
o l2 Q la
720
DEP.LT PROP. 15"
TH -0
D.I.P.
SANITARY SEWER
00.17X
PROP. [ IN = 708.50
PROP. [ OUT = 708.30
704
1 9 +00 20 +00 21 +2710
STA. 19 +02.95
PROP. MANHOLE #9
W/ TYPE A -2 F/C
ssE
SSE
29kE
ME
ssE
35L
SSE i
1 STA. 16 +06.33 POP AR
ROP. MANHOLE 18
/ TYPE A -2 F/C a a
\ TBM#1685 '
TBM 7 \e \
ptlar3d M ELEV. = 716.99
-0.014 ac clearing (temporary) \ SsF
� 1
2
5
11101 MT. Holly- Huntersville Rd.
NC STATE HIGHWAY &
4 PUBLIC WORKS COMMISSION
Reese Nd. DFFD RFF:9sTus
HUNTERSVILLE BUSINESS PROPERTY TAx PARCEL rro. olivaDl
OWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC.
DEED REF: N3M 347
14 PARCFI MO.OI)193NIi
Legend
3 ,
Permanent Impacts
Temporary Impacts
1 Nn. Dale By Pevlslon
NDas
11 COIAIAUCIIOX Y'NlN NN:EgO4K! WIINUPRSDiIf MNRIFNKADUiIJ1Y
gvARIMEXffIAXplRDSN(AKAIDNS
YI IIA [pFIAA[IDA9W I VIPoFM IOD.IIOfE 4YDpIIH a a11WDERDAgADU1R1!RS
PRDR rocoxrrNn+W.
ua I vla�w 93y1 N X xrnRDIIn rooswlpXENMD saaAOSwI* IAx
SVINA P, AS AMFNDF D !0 DA!E
Mart NFrfSWa UJe OORURfSfWII,D.,OW DIIIOCDNFROU'UNf0N1!K MalWt e
UX1aIM1RNfE WNrIIOLOFXIDSaAWACDO! VpNMFA!R.UFCnAn110.
N#NpOA. (WA'Dx
411 NPADgI SCWCR WlDIXSIa1EDW11 U•IX aWDNOgNWEMINkDA
NDUEO KAIt FWJMAfAS MAIN IHEX IM CUNIM CI0I151MLLfNlNDNIDARI IX!
APPPg1R41L W CONPNW.
NIXLWNFW1M9 W0MDWULCNAII4ERDDFEACRMI
rl Ip [NGVA!DN W�INIX INE CUAA A FDYlF AY ZLXIE SIIYC N IEn df II DIFAMI0N1
SN 'Mm ........
SEAL
033157 _
t
Know what's below.
Call before you dig.
CHARLOTTE —MECKLENBURG
"1„ UTILITIES
ENGINEERING DIVISION
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
91L
3Ala 3
bb N.. Ee N9. PROPOSED 15° SANITARY SEWER
Scales
PUN I'.n' TO SERVE
ROFIIE
HOr. 1• • p'
a'
TORRENCE CREEK TRIBUTARY
As B., ft Dm Figure
EKI MFE RAM MFE II
Su 'e BV D.M. F d By Drawn BV P,.N E., Arwrwad M Date

760
--
- -
760
750
^IOCA
r.2QN
o92QN
I
EiR3a
�
nlp
740
.f12
N "�
I h
0
xy2QN
+
a
M�EL ti I1
- --
En
a 3
[1-1
1137
PROP. 15"
DEPLN
-1965
"�
1) .1.P.
SANITARY SEWER
30
DEP
SDA'
- _�' _!- _
PROP 15"
_ p.I.P• yVfR
Sf
®0.97%
730
PROP. 15"
DEP
PROP. 15"
N; D.I.P.
SANITARY
OP. IN = 729.38
D.I.P.
SANITARY SEWER
PROP. F OUT = 729.18
SANITARY SEWER
�f,gOX
00.15%
00. 15%
PROP.
IN = 725.13
PROP. f IN = 723.98
PROP. f IN = 724.56
PROP.I
( OUT = 724.93
PROP. ( OUT = 723.78
j PROP. f OUT = 724.36
720
--
—�L—
� -- -
-- -
720.
+00
33+00 34 +00
35 +00 36 +00 37 +00
38 +00 39 +00
40 +00 41 +00
42 +00
42+
s�
N)hs.
IICON99TU .SIW1 hinAttpNAA9[F WNNE*kDnE M[UIEXNIX4 rm
arAFMNi SiAMWNISkCf[A1gX9
91LHXCar W7M99Al1 KXFr1W.ilD'1 AND arIxa ALL NND[AUIDIIDUfiM[5
IMHT OXS*PD[EiDN.
911�SXDINNG 9NALL N wXCpIaKE mOLM LRFNCXX49LAIpAPD {rNli 199Q
w erAat r, u ArnExao m w *[
w ANr Nt WIE ROVIIIES WAL1 �aEDW 4UaDNl9 W �CMEO iX IXk uANULLa
UNfalAf ixw EDNLAa DNICF9A'gbllCD0 t.wplFKUINAILILCDXIX01
NNlDlopt. IWAiCN1
S1Uiw wMY09r0 SFWFPAWx19 ix9iw HE CXN (wAw pPEL1 WFPIX.VE
NOXtoxAIEWwArx Awn. a[x THE EDIIENAaasNAU nauxDwrawixE
ArrWrNMh Gl9(ONPAXE.
6jLN[CvEXX•cia9NAD YEDAND NIwCNV THE EMOF U ar.
11%CXWAifxlMTI%N7S CUPxEM[fi MN[YWI X[ IEi 0r[x DI[AIxaN.
\ \\I1111NIIIlry ///
.� �gtNSEAL4�'i.�,-
3
03157
o y`
?�T
s /r IDFMiM``
Know what's below.
Call before you dig.

AGENT CERTIFICATION OF AUTHORIZATION
I, Mr. Arnold Jarrell, representing Charlotte Water, hereby certify that 1 have authorized
Kelly Thames of Carolina Wetland Services, Inc. to act on my behalf and take all actions
necessary to the processing, issuance, and acceptance of this request for wetlands
determination / permitting and any and all standard and special conditions attached.
We hereby certify that the above information submitted in this application is true and
accurate to the best of our knowledge.
r
Applicant's signature Agent's ignattn•e
05/04/2015
Date Date - -- - -- -
Completion of this form will allow the agent to sign all future application correspondence.

or %N A 7'S9
Q� G
� r
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.4 January 2009
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009
Pre - Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A.
Applicant Information
1.
Processing
1a.
Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
® Section 404 Permit ❑ Section 10 Permit
1b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 12 or General Permit (GP) number:
1c.
Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
❑ Yes ® No
1d.
Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
® 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular ❑ Non -404 Jurisdictional General Permit
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification — Express ❑ Riparian Buffer Authorization
1e.
Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWQ
401 Certification:
❑ Yes ® No
For the record only for Corps Permit:
❑ Yes ® No
1f.
Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for
mitigation of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank
or in -lieu fee program.
❑ Yes ® No
1g.
Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below.
E] Yes ®No
1h.
Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ Yes ® No
2.
Project Information
2a. Name of project:
Proposed 15" Sanitary Sewer to serve Torrence Creek Tributary
2b.
County:
Mecklenburg
2c.
Nearest municipality / town:
Huntersville
2d.
Subdivision name:
N/A
2e.
NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state project no:
N/A
3.
Owner Information
3a.
Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
See attachments for easement maps
3b.
Deed Book and Page No.
3c.
Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
3d.
Street address:
3e.
City, state, zip.
3f.
Telephone no.:
3g.
Fax no.:
3h
Email address:
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is:
• ❑ Agent ❑X Other, specify: Charlotte Water
4b. Name:
Mr. Arnold Jarrell
f
4c. Business name
(if applicable):
Charlotte Water
4d. Street address:
5100 Brookshire Boulevard
4e. City, state, zip:
Charlotte, NC 28216
4f. Telephone no.:
(704) 399 -2221
4g. Fax no.:
4h. Email address:
ajarrell @ci.charlotte.nc.us
5. Agent /Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name:
Kelly Thames
5b. Business name
(if applicable):
Carolina Wetland Services, Inc.
5c. Street address:
550 East Westinghouse Blvd.
5d. City, state, zip:
Charlotte, NC 28273
5e. Telephone no.:
(704) 527 -1177
5f. Fax no.:
(704) 527 -1133
5g. Email address:
kelly @cws- inc.net
Page 2 of 10

B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
See attachments for easement maps
1b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
Latitude: 35.249687 Longitude: 80.741637
1c. Property size:
46 acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water to proposed project:
Torrence Creek
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
WS -IV
2c. River basin:
Santee (HUC #: 03050101)
3. Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
The proposed sanitary sewer project begins north of Resse Blvd at the confluence of an unnamed tributary to Torrence Creek From here the project
follows the tributary south to Hambright Road for 1.3 miles, parallel and west of 1 -77 The project is partially located in a floodplain with wetlands, and
existing woodlands.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property: 1.71
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property: 7,103
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
The sanitary sewer line extension will provide service for a parcel located within Charlotte Water's service area but currently without accessible sewer.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
The project encompasses approximately 6,850 linear feet of 15 -inch diameter sewer. Construction will involve standard excavation and clearing equiprr
I
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
❑ Yes ❑X No ❑ Unknown
Comments:
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
of determination was made?
❑ Preliminary ❑ Final
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known):
Agency /Consultant Company:
Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
N/A
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
❑Yes ❑X No ❑ Unknown
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?
❑ Yes ® No
6b. If yes, explain.
Page 3 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
® Wetlands ❑ Streams — tributaries ❑ Buffers ❑ Open Waters ❑ Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a.
Wetland impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
2b.
Type of impact
2c.
Type of wetland
2d.
Forested
2e.
Type of jurisdiction
Corps (404,10) or
DWQ (401, other)
2f.
Area of
impact
(acres)
W1 P
Land Clearing
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Yes
Corps
0.018
W2 T
Land Clearing
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Yes /No
Corps
0.014
X1/3 T
Land Clearing
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
No
Corps
0.27
W4 T
Land Clearing
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
No
Corps
0.005
W5
Choose one
Choose one
Yes /No
-
W6
Choose one
Choose one
Yes /No
2g. Total Wetland Impacts:
0.31
2h. Comments:
Permanent wetland impacts include 0.018 acre and temporary impacts include 0.289 acre of temporary impacts.
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial-or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a. i
Stream impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
3b.
Type of impact
3c.
Stream name
3d.
Perennial (PER) or
intermittent (INT)?
3e.
Type of
jurisdiction
3f.
Average
stream
width
(feet)
3g.
Impact
length
(linear
feet)
S1 T
Utility Crossing
Torrence Creek
PER
Corps
5
45.96
S2 T
Utility Crossing
Torrence Creek Tributar
PER
Corps
4
66.9
S3 T
Utility Crossing
Torrence Creek Tributar
PER
Corps
4
58.7
S4
Choose one
I
S5
Choose one
S6
Choose one
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
171.56
3i. Comments:
Page 4 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

i
4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then indivii ually list all open water impacts below.
4a.
Open water
impact number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
4b.
Name of waterbody
(if applicable)
4c.
Type of impact
4d.
Waterbody
type
4e.
Area of impact (acres)
01
Choose one
Choose
02
Choose one
Choose
03
Choose one
Choose
04
Choose one
Choose
4f. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments:
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, the complete the chart below.
5a.
Pond ID number
5b.
Proposed use or
purpose of pond
5c.
Wetland Impacts (acres)
5d.
Stream Impacts (feet)
5e.
Upland
(acres)
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
P1
Choose one
P2
Choose one
5f. Total:
5g. Comments:
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
❑ Yes ❑ No if yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If any impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a. Project is in which protected basin?
❑ Neuse ❑ Tar - Pamlico ❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman ❑ Other:
6b.
Buffer Impact
number—
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Stream name
6e.
Buffer
mitigation
required?
6f.
Zone 1
impact
(square
feet )
6g.
Zone 2
impact
(square
feet
B 1
Yes /No
B2
Yes /No
B3
Yes /No
B4
Yes /No
85
Yes /No
B6
Yes /No
61h. Total Buffer Impacts:
6i. Comments:
Page 5 of 10

D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
The project alignment has been located to limit creek bank disturbances and minimize wetland impacts. Where practical clearing limits have been
reduced through wetlands to limit disturbances.
1b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
Best Management Practices, BMP, will be specified for construction by utilizing NCDENR erosion control standards, employing anti -seep collars, and
restoring wetlands.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters ,of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
❑ Yes ❑ No
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
❑ DWQ ❑ Corps
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project.
❑ Mitigation bank
❑ Payment to in -lieu fee program
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type: Choose one
Type: Choose one
Type: Choose one
Quantity:
Quantity:
Quantity:
3c. Comments:
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached.
❑ Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested:
linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
Choose one
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
square feet'
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4f. Non - riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4h. Comments:
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
Page 6 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

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

E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
❑ Yes X❑ No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
❑ Yes No
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why:
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
f
2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which local government's jurisdiction is this project?
Mecklenburg County
Phase II
3b. Which of the following locally - implemented stormwater management programs
❑ NSW
❑ USMP
apply (check all that apply):
❑ Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other:
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ® No
attached?
4. DWQ Stormwater Pro ram Review
❑Coastal counties
❑HOW
4a. Which of the following state - implemented stormwater management programs apply
❑ORW
(check all that apply):
[]Session Law 2006 -246
❑Other:
4b. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ❑ No
attached?
5. DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a. Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
❑ Yes ❑ No
5b. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
❑ Yes ❑ No
Page 8 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

F. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal /state /local) funds or the
® Yes ❑ No
use of public (federal/state) land?
1b. If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation.of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State
❑Yes ® No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1 c. If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
letter.)
❑ Yes ❑ No
Comments:
2. Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
E] Yes OX No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b. Is this an after - the -fact permit application?
❑Yes ® No
2c. If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s):
i
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in
El Yes ®No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b. If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
The proposed sewer line is located through mostly forested areas within a Mecklenburg County surface water buffer The area is predominantly
surrounded by land zoned for corporate businesses with most property currently developed to the north and west of the project. The buffer areas will
remain mostly unchanged due to protection rules Development that does occur will have to meet Phase II NPDES Stormwater Permit requirements.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a. Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non- discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
NA
Page 9of10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
❑Yes X❑ No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
Yes ❑ No
impacts?
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
Asheville
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
US Fish & Wildlife Service Critical Habitat Portal We have contacted US Fish & Wildlife Services Asheville Field office by email and are awaiting a
response.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
❑ Yes ® No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
NOAH Essential Fish Habitat Mapper
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
❑ Yes X❑ No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
North Carolina State Historic Preseervation Office HPO WEB GIs Service
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA- designated 100 -year floodplain?
® Yes ❑ No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements.
No rise in flood elevations will result with the construction of this project Pre - construction grades will be maintained and restored.
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?
FEMA Flood Map Service. FEMA Map #3710464000J
✓ Xn�t�f 1 f uvv�i.K�
Ms. Kelly Thames, WPIT
J
05/0412015
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
Date
Applicant/Agent's Signature
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization
letter from the applicant is provided
Page 10 of 10

NC DWO StCmn -.iv lld1ejfflflca,du n IFa:rm V rrsl;•on: 4?.i! 1
Date;
C�ea;ec"�i3lte: (UY1� TV '�
ll.a4t :aide: ,�'�,
/ /� .
EVBIUa W?i /IVV F, 6S
ice`'
County: �.tf3
LCTNEjlI:6,Ide: •' t7V. � 1
Total Pointa:
Steam is a1 r£3'J.S; �'niarrv�, °;tr. �,
Siira2rTt Determination lciicie
"Tii#fEn4 ';
Cther
t n6a : X' '33
"•-Ire
Ephemeral i1' }8; 8f8
e , Ozind Marn
� =;
A. Geomorphciogy Subtotal = —JI ) I AbsGnt
We :F s
Wi=era'te
Strong)
1" Continuity: of coannal bed and bank
0
1
'2
3'
I ?, Sinuosity of channel alcnp ts
I l
1
2
3
3. In•channsl structure: ex, riffle -pool, step -pocl.
ripple -pool seauericc
r 0
1
2
3
�. Parlicle size of siream suLStr3ie
U
l 1
2.
^.CliveireliCl fi -dplGin
0
S. Deoositionai bars or benches
0
1
�_3
?. Recent ailuvisl dleposita
0
_
1
3
S. Headcuts
; G
1
' 2
3
9. Grade convol
j u
O.E
j
1.5
19. Netural vallev
0
j 0.°
_
11. Seaond •:,r greater order channel
to = 0
Yes = 3
`atifidal diL•:hes are not rat-ad; see di=;ssiors In Manua,
B. Ht,droloov ' Subtotal = /0 1
12. Presence of Baseflc'v,
0
1
2
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0�
I 2
3
14. Leaf liter
l
i 0.5
G
15. Sediment on nlanis or debris j
0.5 1
20. fvldcro� ert io_s inve,iveysityan. abundan;s
15. Crganlc debris lines or piles
G,5 i 1
17. Soil -based eviden. -e of high water table? No = it 'f-es = 3
C. Bioloqv (Subtotal = to )
18. Fibnpvs roots in siresmbec
2
i
0
19 Roated upland plants in s`rearnbed
3 ,
2
1
0
20. fvldcro� ert io_s inve,iveysityan. abundan;s
0
2
3
21. Aquaiic V ollusks
22, Fish
0
1
1,5
23. C.raytsh
0
.0.5
!
1.5
24. amphibians
0
0.5
i
1,5 I
P 2E..M1gae
_
26. Uvletland plan:* in streambed
j
F.AVe,/ =
0.75; OBL = 1.5 Cther = 0 —
'pewniai streams ;;ay also be I.9eMiflac Using other meth :ds. See p. Sv
cf - nanual
Noises:
I Sketch:
I
I

x., ,t r trenin iewniificiiann w,)2- rr, `,'•errgid, d!_tl i
Date: 2.•91_SS
r,)IY&.e;(.
I_atltude: 35, 3alM
vale �i oa: Ak 14 `, f ✓ �
Lour zy: 1116 ,44, 4,
LDngitude: - � �}. 8 6 P,
TrsW Foittts:
Stream is a: lease "rrs�! z i
Stream Determination circle one)
Uitrer C tl
�r ar'e.�ntar s 30' ;� P'
Ephemeral srrr
i itten erannIF -1
F
e. ,
�' . Quad flame;
A. Geomor Bolo r fsubtotal = }
18' Continuity of channel bed and bank
; Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
2. Slnuoslty of channel along thalwet
-_I_
3
i 4
3. In•channal structurs: ex, riffle- pcao,, step -pool,
ripple-pool sequence
0
15. Sediment can planis o- 6ehris
2
{ 3
4. Parrticle8iZe of steam substrate
'15. Crganic debris lines or piles
- -��-
1. 0 '�
2
--h
5. ractiveirelic�. floc•dplain
0
;
S. Depositional bars or benches
1.5
24- Amphibians
G 0..5
;. Recent alluvial deposlis
211. Algae
;
2
3
8. Headouts
F +Cw = 0. 75: 08L = 1.5 Other =
1
2
3
9. Grade control
_
0
{�i per"
1
1.5
10. Natural valle,�
-_ 0
0.5
0
1.5
1'1. Saccnd or greater order channel
No =
Yes =3
us ur.wa, -1.1Ya -i I111 r--, -. Uai..uaa3�,rrs ire nl9nUaj1
8• H drolcgv (Subtt_al = }
12. Presence of Baselcvv
0
'2 3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
2
3
14, Leaf litter
1.e
u
0
15. Sediment can planis o- 6ehris
0 I l j
' l 1
1.5
'15. Crganic debris lines or piles
- -��-
1. 0 '�
-1
I I
1.5
17. Soil -bs$ec rvldance of high viatertable?
No = 0
( Yes - 3
1a. Fibrous roots in s- reambed
(31 2
1
q
18. Roote-d upland plants in sireamned
� �i f 2
1
p
2Q. lvlao'obenthns rncee diversity aria a ;urdance)
( 1
2
3
21. Aqua.ic Mollusks
' l 1
2
3
22. Fis h
-- X7.5
1
1.5
23, Crayt�sh
0.5
1
1.5
24- Amphibians
G 0..5
211. Algae
2F. 'Netland plants m sireoa-nhed
F +Cw = 0. 75: 08L = 1.5 Other =
' @ °rl ennlal str�,ms rra 61cC �e ir�etaiiti•9d vslt�� alhnr rn3'rr�d5. S °_a p. 3� Gf Ir,�nual.
N ates:
i
Sketch:

OFFICE USE ONLY: USACE AID# DWQ #
SCP1— Perennial RPW Stream B
t ; STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET 11
1. Applicant's Name: Charlotte Water 2. Evaluator's Name: AVH & ELBS
3. Date of Evaluation: 4/28/2015 4. Time of Evaluation: 10:00 am
5. Name of Stream: Perennial Stream B 6. River Basin: Santee (HUC #: 03050101)
7. Approximate Drainage Area: approx. 350 acres 8. Stream Order: 151
9. Length of Reach Evaluated: 440 If 10. County: Mecklenburg
11. Location of reach under evaluation (include nearby roads and landmarks): North of Reese Blvd. in Huntersville. NC
12. Site Coordinates (if known): N35.393596. W80.857699°
13. Proposed Channel Work (if any):
14. Recent Weather Conditions: clear. sunny. 70s
15. Site conditions at time of visit: clear, sunnv. 70s
16. Identify any special waterway classifications known: _Section 10 _Tidal Waters _Essential Fisheries Habitat
_Trout Waters _Outstanding Resource Waters _ Nutrient Sensitive Waters _Water Supply Watershed (I -N)
17. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES NO If yes, estimate the water surface area:
18. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? ES NO 19. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? ES NO
20. Estimated Watershed Land Use: 40 % Residential _% Commercial _% Industrial % Agricultural
30 % Forested % Cleared / Logged 30 % Other (Transportation /other)
21. Bankfull Width: 15' 22. Bank Height (from bed to top of bank): 10'
23. Channel slope down center of stream: _Flat (0 to 2 %) X Gentle (2 to 4 %) _Moderate (4 to 10 %) _Steep ( >10 %)
24. Channel Sinuosity: X Straight _Occasional Bends "_Frequent Meander _Very Sinuous _Braided Channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points to each
characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the characteristics identified in the
worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or
weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character
of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more
continuity, and a separate form used to 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.
Total Score (from reverse): 40 Comments:
Evaluator's Signature //'^'� ��' Date 4/28/15
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 Army Corps of Engineers in order to make a preliminary assessment of
stream quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change — version 05/03. To Comment, please call 919 - 876 -8441 x 26.

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
SCP1— Perennial RPW Stream B
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
°
ECOREGION POINT
RANGE
#
CHARACTERISTICS °
SCORE
° Coastal
° � Piedmont
. Mountain
°
°
Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream
°
0-5
0-4 °
0 5
4
1
no flow or saturation = 0; stron ° flow e max points)
—
Evidence of past human alteration
2
extensive alteration = 0; tio°alteration = max dints
0-6
0-5
0 — 5 °
0
3
Riparian zone
°
0— 6
0 04 -
° 0-5
0
no buffer = 0; conti ous, wide buffer = max points)
4
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
0-5
° 0 — 5
0 — 4
0-4.
4
extensive discharges = 0; no discharges = max points)'
Groundwater discharge °
0—
a °=
4°
5
no discharge = 0; springs, see s, wetlands, etc. = max points)
3°
0 4
0— °
3
6
Presence of adjacent floodplain °
0-4,-
0-4
0 = 2
0
no flood lain = 0; extensive flood lain = max dints
Entrenchment / floodplain' access
0 _ 50
—.4'
: 0 —,2.'
0
(deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding = mak p dints
Presence of adjacent wetlands° °
8
�0 °= 6
0-4 °
0-2
2
no wetlands = 0; large adjacent °wetlands = max points'),.
9
Channel °sinuosity - v
0' -5
'0 —;4
'^ 0 -3
1
extensive channelization = 0; natural meander = max dints
.
10
Sediment input
° extensive deposition= 0; little or no sediment, max dints)
, 0 -5
0 =4 t
;;0 °;= ,4;;;;,';
'.
2
Size & diversity of channel bed°substrate
° : "•; =;
;� �
4a.,
ri1°
° °
NA *. 9 -4,_',
p'_'4 , p„
° °.0 -5 .e �
1
fine, homogenous = 0; lar e,°diverse sizes = max, oints).
:. ; •
°, <'�'
Evidence of °channel incision or'widening
—'S°
0 = 4�'
0 :Srs
0
(deeply incised = 0; stable'bed &banks = max points),*
a .0
Presence of major bank failures °
0-5,
0 - -5
=� '
Ox — =S
0
severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = max points)
��A ®:x.�
(14
Root depth and density on banks
=4`'
°' =m "° 4,
`Om ==5 CAd
no visible °roots = 0; dense °roots throu out = maX, oints -
0 -3.
0;
2
Impact by agriculture or °livestock• production
`0'— 5 °
0
�
�,0 = �,.
4
substantial impact =0; no -evidence = max ointts
e4 d
16
Presence of riffle= poot/ripple -pool complexes_
•
°0 -3
q
'0 -5-° -,
° ,,
., �;�0; =6' °�;
2
no riffles/ripples les or pools = 0; well- develo ed = max oirits °'.
17
Habitat complexity
0 -6 °
� 6,, -6
=�0� =6 ° '
2
little or no habitat = 0• frequent, varied habitats = inax° oints
_
Canopy coverage over streambed
1 S
no hadin vegetation= 0; continuousscano ,= nid points .,
0; 5'
0-5
07—`
2
19
Substrate embeddedness°
NA *°
0 — 4
e 0'= 4 ; ` "`
1
deeply embedded = 0; loose structure = max)
.
Presence of stream invertebrates
20
0—, 4
0—,5 . ° -.
°
1
no evidence = 0° common, numerous- types = max points)'
° Presence of amphibians
21
no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max poi nts
0'— 4
0— 4
.
0-4 4
3
22
Presence of fish
0-4 °° -
0 = 4
0— 4w
1
no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max oints)
,
23'
Evidence of wildlife use °
A-6
0—S
5
no evidence- 0; abundant evidence = max° oints
a
_0-15'
-Total Points Possible°
° 100--
,100°'`1;00
as
TOT-AIL° SCORE (alsoe enter on first page),
40
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.

OFFICE USE ONLY: USACE AID# DWQ #
SCP2 — Seasonal RPW Stream E
M --A
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
L Applicant's Name: Charlotte Water 2. Evaluator's Name: AVH & ELBS
3. Date of Evaluation: 4/28/2015 4. Time of Evaluation: 2:00 pm
5. Name of Stream: Seasonal Stream E 6. River Basin: Santee (HUC #: 03050101)
7. Approximate Drainage Area: approx. 58 acres 8. Stream Order: l It
9. Length of Reach Evaluated: 167 If 10. County: Mecklenburg
11. Location of reach under evaluation (include nearby roads and landmarks): East of Patterson Rd. in Huntersville, NC
12. Site Coordinates (if known): N35.382785 W80.860104'
13. Proposed Channel Work (if any):
14. Recent Weather Conditions: clear, sunny, 70s
15. Site conditions at time of visit: clear, sunny, 70s
16. Identify any special waterway classifications known: _Section 10 _Tidal Waters _Essential Fisheries Habitat
_Trout Waters _Outstanding Resource Waters Nutrient Sensitive Waters _Water Supply Watershed (I -IV)
17. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point ?• YES NO If yes, estimate the water surface area:
18. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES NO
20. Estimated Watershed Land Use: 40 % Residential
30 % Forested
21. Bankfull Width: 8'
23. Channel slope down center of stream: _Flat (0 to 2%
24. Channel Sinuosity: X Straight _Occasional Bends
9. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES NO
_% Commercial % Industrial _% Agricultural
% Cleared / Logged 30 % Other (Transportation /other)
22. Bank Height (from bed to top of bank): 4'
X Gentle (2 to 4 %) _Moderate (4 to 10 %) _Steep (> 10 %)
_Frequent Meander _Very Sinuous _Braided Channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points to each
characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the characteristics identified in the
worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or
weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character
of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more
continuity, and a separate form used to 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.
Total Score (from reverse): 52 Comments:
Evaluator's Signature /�"`�'� Date 4/28/15
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 Army Corps of Engineers in order to make a preliminary assessment of
stream quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Forth subject to change — version 05/03. To Comment, please call 919- 876 -8441 x 26.

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
SCP2 — Perennial RPW Stream B
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
, °
E'COREGION POINT
RANGE
' '
#
CHARACTERISTICS
SCORE'
Coastal
Piedmont
Mountain
°
°
Presence of flow % persistent pools in stream °
1
no flow or saturation = 0; strong flow = max points
0-5
0 — 4'
0—.5
2
Evidence of past human alteration
°°
2
extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max ° oints
0 -6
0 -5
0 -5
4
3
Riparian zone
0— 6
0-4
0-5
4
no buffer = 0; contiguous, wide buffer= max points)
4
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
0-5
0 — 4
0 —`4
4
extensive discharges = 0; no discharges— max oints
a
5
Groundwater.discharge
0-3
0— 4
0-4
2
U
no discharge = 0; springs, see s, wetlands,,etc. = max points)
...
6
Presence of adjacent floodplain
0* 4
0-4
°
0 = 2
4
}
no flood lain = 0; extensive flood lain = max °oints
Entrenchment / floodplam access
°2
00
(deeply entrenched =`6; frequent floodin .= max points)
0-5
0 — 4°
0 —
4
8
Presence of adjacent wetlands
0—.6
0-4
0 °— 2
0
no wetlands= 0; large adjacent wetlands = max points)
9
Channel sinuosity
0-5
0-4
9-3
1
extensive channelization = 0; natural meander = max poifits)
10
Sediment input
0-5
0-4
0-4
4
extensive deposition= 0; little or no sediment = max points)
11
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
NA
0-4
0 - 5
1
fine, homo enous = 0; lar e, diverse sizes= max' Points)
°
Evidence of channel incision or widening
•
>0
12.
(deeply incised = 0; stable bed & banks = max poi nts
075
0 — 4 °
0-5
1
13
Presence of major bank failures ,
0 -5
0 -5
0 —°5
3
severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = max points)
Root depth and density on banks
`0-5
E„
• 14
°
(no visible roots = 0; dense roots throughout = max oihts)
0 — 3°
0-4. °
2
Impact by agriculture•or livestock, production
1'S
substantial impact =0; no evidence = °max points)'
0 -5
0 -4
0 -5
4
Presence of riffle - pool /ripple -pool complexes
:0
=
16
no riffles/ripples les or pools = 0; well-developed ==max Points)
— °3
0 - 5 ° e
O 6
2
1°
Habitat complexity
0-6
0-6
°
0-6
2
little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = max points)
Canopy coverage over streambed
x
18
no shading ve etation = 0; continuous cano _ = max oints)
0-5°
0 - 5
0 —5
5
19
a Substrate embeddedness
NA*
0 — 4°
0 — °4 `
1
d eeply embedd`e`d = °0; loose structure = max
°
0
20
Presence of stream invertebrates
°
0-5
1
no evidence = 0; common, numerous es = max points)
.0-4
°
21
Presence of amphibians
0-4
0 - 4
0-4
1
O
no evidence = 0; common; numerous es = max oints
22
Presence of fish
p
°
0-4
0-4
0 - 4
0
no evidence = 0; common, numerous es = max points).
Evidence -of wildlife use
23
(no evidence = 0; abundant °evidence = max, oints
0— 6
0— 5
0— 5
0
° 'Total Points Possible
100 °
100
100'
. ° TOTAL SCORE. (also enter on first page) °
52
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
r
Project/Site: �0 «@VA C.,- 1 rt �k- l� City /County: �f ( CO. Sampling Date: Z� �0 )
Applicant/Owner: CVWtL?t}e LJlxt Sta L y A
Sampling Point: L�"Lf
Investigator(s): 6vft t C L a Section, Township, Range: --ty n C 14,1L4
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): OP t6(40 C- Local relief (concave, convex, none): UNAW ve- Slope
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): M1-9 -A Lat: 35. 3 1 3 f-1k eA o Long: -!62. S)'�2711 "LA/ Datum: AAA 093
Soil Map Unit Name: - vy, ji alvi 14zd fl,061 D NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes T No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes --X-- No
Are Vegetation Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes _ Y No
IS 1 ff1f4& v'f- of A areA.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reouired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply) _
Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Surface Water (A1) _
True Aquatic Plants (1314) _
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (68)
X High Water Table (A2) _
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
Drainage Patterns (610)
Saturation (A3)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) _
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Water Marks (B1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) _
Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (62) _
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) i
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (63) _
Thin Muck Surface (C7) _
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (64) _
Other (Explain in Remarks) _
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_ Iron Deposits (135)
_
Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
_ Water- Stained Leaves (69)
_
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
& Aquatic Fauna (B13)
_
FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
I,
-
Surface Water Present? Yes No
Depth (inches): E i
Water Table Present? Yes �_ No
Depth (inches): (pK
Saturation Present? Yes X No
Depth (inches).
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
includes capillary 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 - Version 2.0

I
VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: D P_� - W A14
Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree ,Stratum (Plot size: ) % Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species
1. � r 1/1 S iVan 2 y % Ye5 tat That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
2. 41W d(A A 4A2 SfYaGrT WO— ­0 y <s Total Number of Dominant
3. Species Across All Strata:
7.
t Z1L =Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 1
1 At�,Am'lkA- :r, to 6,,— S _ Yfi LtC,
2. OA a bt v1S CA 69 bVLI e- � °L Yew
3.
4.
5.
6
7.
9.
10 i = Total Cover
50% of total cover: S %. 20% of total cover: z �,
Herr�b Stratum (Plot size: )
1. 1' 4 6 0 Y {1(Vr' 1 L11(%✓1 r� J_ CLI SAIL
2. L 0!n i &�Pyyl,ifA 07 . V . �
S (A)
(B)
Percent of Dominant Species +
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A /B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x 4 =
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals:
(A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is 553.0'
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric sod and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
5.
6 Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
7 height.
8.
Sapling /Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
9• than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1
10. m) tall.
11. Herb - All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, regardless
Total Cover of size, and woody plants less than 3 28 It tall.
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover: 5 /.
Wood Vine Stratum (Plot size: Woody vine -All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
Y ) hei ht.
1. r
3.
4. Hydrophytic
5• Vegetation
= Total Cover Present? Yes No
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
fAJtr �w col. -It­( cko1114A`A ,-l- v$��,•,
is TIC of -
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: D Z - In/�MA-
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) 'Color (moist) '/o Color (moist) % Tvpe Loc Texture Remarks
0 —L, 11 V t lZ W Abe/ -4,s- 1��' & ' X
0 !(A g111 vLQ b
'Type: C= Concentration, D= Depletion, RM= Reduced Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
_ Histosol (A1)
_ Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
_ Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147,148)
MLRA 136)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Type.
Depth (inches):
�[�d(I c Sb c l ��c s al"y
Hydric Soil Present? Yes _ < No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: ( Tf,OJ7, City /County: N't° / (�il/� Sampling Date: I 7W U I
Applicant/Owner: �f (� V tate: !� Sampling Point: 2 - ] 'Id
Investigator(s): A V V( i- CSI- SR Section, Township, Range:, tjIA y 1 ttV'Wi E (-e—
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.)- 144 llSt'c� Local relief (concave, convex, none): kICY14 Slope
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): AAL Lat: Long: . /S &'% °tA Datum: 3
Soil Map Unit Name: 0 jQ,9 aVJA t WWI 0 -Z Y. 51 OK S MO NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes /K 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: -
Dkfrk �9�f
HYDROLOGY
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Cs r ,(Y;&L,QA,+)w Of
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
_ Surface Water (A1)
_ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
_ Drainage Patterns (1310)
_ Saturation (A3)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living
Roots (C3) _ Moss Trim Lines (616)
_ Water Marks (B1)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (B2)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) _ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (133)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (134)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_ Iron Deposits (65)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
_ Water- Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (B13),
_ FAC- Neutral Test (05)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes - No
x Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No
Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
IU�>r`i aJ� NFU
w���Gt �7GL+'O�Ur��
iVt/ii1(G.o -�S(Y
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: 1' hv`i
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size:
+)� (
) % Cover specie L?( Status
Number of Dominant Species 2
1. j[ r S (�r�,
/1{� lr /, TL
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: i (A)
2 r viK S gP Z, +
''��AC
10y, e S
3.
T
.Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:_ (B)
4.
5.
Percent of Dominant Species t q Z °/
-L
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC. ( (A /B)
6.
7
Prevalence Index worksheet:
2S %• = Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50%
of total cover: �_ 20% of total cover:
OBL species x 1 =
Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
)
FACW species x 2 =
1. %HQ IV W f %6c ���l4LlGtalQrt
, f p�C�
FAC species x 3 =
2 � tt ? S
_
FACU species x 4 =
3 .
UPL species x 5 =
q
Column Totals: (A) (B)
5
Prevalence index = B/A =
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation indicators:
7
8.
— 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
_ 2 - Dominance Test Is >50%
CIO Total Cover
3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
o
50%
/o =
of total cover: //, 20 of total cover.
— 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
)
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
1. %l0a +i6
(7rVt ✓N gD /,_ r C (�t
— Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
2.1c> (� U 11 1 l �tS� 0 tlrLf
FPM S 1 b `'Q _
r
3. �. `S 1 Ill �{ f
1 —�� v 41
�
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
5.
6
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
7
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
8.
9.
Sapling /Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DSH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1
10.
m) tall.
11.
AZ4 = Total Cover
Herb - All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
50% of total cover: 12 •S` 20% of total cover._
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
)
Woody vine -All woody vines greater than 3 28 ft in
height.
1
2.
3.
4.
5.
Hydrophytic
= Total Cover
Vegetation >(
Present? Yes No
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover
Remarks: (include photo numbers here
or on a separate sheet.)
0\1 �
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: W
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc Texture Remarks
G—u '! 10 3Z 1E:.
, -1 3" IS' V ! 1W9. l v�
13T if IL9 M.
D= Deoletion. RM= Reduced Matrix. MS= Masked Sand
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_ Histosol (Al)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (Al 1)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Sc
_ Dark Surface (S7)
_ 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 Matnx (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbdc Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 31ndicators of hydrophyhc vegetation and
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
_ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147) unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes C No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: ��fC cf 11tr'.b � City /County: P1t*UW � Sampling De
at y �ZCIt
Applicant/Owner: t✓vw�t CDT" i,J State: Sampling Point: {J `Wa -t(j R
Investigator(s): /1``�yf- [. Q Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): { C C on �- Local relief (concave, convex, none): Q� W Slope ( %): �.
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): M Ge Lat: 3 C. 3 19 S "l% ° N Long: - ft. S ' .W Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: 4W i AM Lk NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes 4-1 No (if no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes -X— No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes �— No within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes _ No �t 1
Remarks: ' j1o�`e UT ` Vl C \Sttii�i�1�✓)wl
we'+(Gt ^ej A re 'g,
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators minimum of one is re uired• check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (86)
Surface Water (Al) _
True Aquatic Plants (1314)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2) _
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
_ Drainage Patterns (1310)
_ Saturation (A3) n
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living
Roots (03) _ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
_ Water Marks (61) _
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (132) _
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) _ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (133) _
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation ,Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat or Crust (134) _
Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_ Iron Deposits (B5)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
_ Water- Stained Leaves (B9)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
_ FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
u
Depth (inches):'(- ay
Water Table Present? Yes No
Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No
Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes _� No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
X31 (CA ✓�1 LJ l
�� I ! S l/1
�r�� -f/�/` .
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) % Cover Species? Status
1.
2.
6.
7.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2.
4.
5.
6.
7.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size. ) _
1. Ck I
2. l tt aet/15v(1/4 IA ! A-
3. Je S E-�. &LA.
4. l tM A,6Q A (flab2vtSt S '1 %
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
�S /t T U =Total Cover
'
50% of total cover- � 20% of total cover: z6
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
Sampling Point: D� 3-W 13
Dominance Test worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
Number of Dominant Species
OBLspecies
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
(A)
Total Number of Dominant
FAC species
Species Across All Strata:
(B)
Percent of Dominant Species
UPL species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
(AB)
Prevalence Index worksheet: '.
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
OBLspecies
x 1 =
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x 4 =
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals:
(A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is s3.0'
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree — Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub — Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1
M) tall.
Herb —All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 It tall.
Woody vine — All woody vines greater than 3.28 It in
h-ht t
3.
4 Hydrophytic
5• Vegetation 'C
= Total Cover Present? Yes No
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
C- c cv- vu_4 c
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: �O 1? 3
Profile Description: .(Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color moi t % Color (moist) % Type Loc Texture Remarks
6_� t0 'It z ion', a—AIZ
N 11/1 I� Imo _ ti &,L,
'A f_0aAA-
Hydric Soil Indicators:
RM= Reduced Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains ZLocation: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Sol
_ Histosol (Al)
_ 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 Surf ace (Al2)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (Si) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
j-c�dn c s�t1
_ Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (At 0) (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)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1719)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Iron- Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136,122)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
_ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes t No
I) pc t s A r`c- e M4_e .
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/site: ' 1 ilWtNl&'('"
Applicant/Owner: C i b ("
Investigator(s): LS t
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): J" t5l iJ12
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): M L i/� � Lat:15
Soil Map Unit Name: O A0 Cr vin ' • S
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for th
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology
_ City /County: M�C�Wr ` �- Sampling Date: L4 74�S �/
State: N�- Sampling Point: A�1a✓C�t
_ Section, Township, Range: Ll"fts-yki 14 _
Local relief (concave, convex, none): IR(1"i -Q— Slope ( %): Q�Z
Long: A L, T'%` Datum:
U NWI classification:
is timid of year? Yes —,)(_ No (if no, explain in Remarks.)
significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes __X_ No
naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks: i resle
I
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators: -
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (86)
_ Surface Water (Al)
_ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
_ High Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
_ Drainage Patterns (610)
_ Saturation (A3)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
_ Water Marks (B1)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (B2)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (B3)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (64)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_ Iron Deposits (B5)
_ Geomorphic Position (02)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
_ Water- Stained Leaves (B9)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
_ Aquatic Fauna (B13)
_ FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes
No )< Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes
No X Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes
No Depth (inches):
Wetland
Hydrology Present? Yes No
includes capillary fringe)
T
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point: IUI0Y
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size:
_ ) % Cover S ewes? Status
Number of Dominant Species �1
1. 1
I 11
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
2. us
}}
0' 20 / • Y�
Total Number of Dominant
3.
�A�,�
A. !! S %% GSk
Species Across All Strata- (B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
5.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
6.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7
Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover- Z. i 20% of total cover:_ �( �`
OBL species x 1 =
Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot
size: )
FACW species x 2 =
1
FAC species x 3 =
2
FACU species x 4 =
3
UPL species x 5 =
4
Column Totals: (A) (B)
5
Prevalence Index = B/A =
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
_ 1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
_ 2 - Dominance Testis >50%
g'
3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
= Total Cover
_
4 - Morphological Adaptations (Provide supporting
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
)
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
1._�SfCO?t�vt
%
f 0%. Yes w_
— Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
2. y �� S (-t> �'�l�`FZ�
�M�NJ}t'�fA•iM
(Aet C �• Y e f
'Indicators
3. S
S �-e ,�.1��
of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be disturbed
t�
4. NlM V �C G4
tM�f
present, unless or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
I rJ_Lt _
5.
6
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
7.
height.
8.
Sapling /Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
9.
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1
10.
m) tall.
11.
Herb - All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, regardless
less ft
Total Cover
of size, and woody plants than 3.28 tall.
50% of total cover. 12 • S 20% of total covert
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot
size )
Woody vine -All woody vines greater than 3.26 ft in
height.
1.
2.
3.
4'
Hydrophytic
5.
Vegetation
= Total Cover
Present? Yes No
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Le�5
4tv,,i
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL
(Describe
Sampling Point:
or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color moist % Color (moist) % Type Loc2 Texture Remarks
6 -`t " f 3 2 00 Jam�
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147,14a)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
�C Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Other (Explain in'Remarks)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
_ Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147,148)
MLRA 136)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136,122)
"Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Tvoe:
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes
No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

LT XF WA
4
OVA
N+CDENR
North Caiolina Gepaitment of Environment and Natural Resoltices
Office of Land and Water Stewardship
Pat Mcc,oy r {an Gc�y. anrald P., van car Vam
Gmei nii Dlrectol SEC[etdly
May 4, 2015
Erin Bradshaw Settevendemio
Carolina Wetland Services
550 E Westinghouse Blvd
Charlotte, NC 28273
erin @cws- inc.net
RE: Torrence , 2015 -3612
Dear Erin Bradshaw Settevendemlo-
NCNHDE -242
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) appreciates the opportunity to provide information
about natural heritage resources from our database that have been compiled for the project referenced
above.
A query of the NCNHP database, based on the project area mapped with your request, indicates that there
are no records for rare species, important natural communities, natural areas, or conservation /managed
areas within the proposed project boundary
The attached `Potential Occurrences' table summarizes rare species and natural communities that have
been documented within a one -mile radius of the property boundary. The proximity of these records
suggests that these natural heritage elements may potentially be present in the project area if suitable
habitat exists and is included for reference. Please note that although there may be no documentation of
natural heritage elements within the project boundary, it does not imply or confirm their absence; the area
may not have been surveyed. The results of this query should not be substituted for site - specific surveys
where suitable habitat exists.
In the event that rare species are found within the project area, please contact the NCNHP so that we may
update our records. Tables of natural areas and conservation /managed area within a one -mile radius of the
project area, if any, are also included in this report.
Please note that natural heritage element data are maintained for the purposes of conservation planning,
project review, and scientific research, and are not intended for use as the primary criteria for regulatory
decisions. Information provided by the NCNHP database may not be published without prior written
notification to the NCNHP, and the NCNHP must be credited as an information source In these publications.
Maps of NCNHP data may not be redistributed without permission
The NC Natural Heritage Program may follow this letter with additional correspondence if a Dedicated Nature
Preserve (DNP), Registered Heritage Area (RHA), or Federally - listed species are documented near the
project area.
Thank you for your inquiry. If you have questions regarding the information provided in this letter or need
additional assistance, please contact Allison Schwarz Weakley at allison weakleyea ncdenr.gov or
919.707.8629.
Sincerely,
NC Natural Heritage Program
Page 1 of 3

Natural Heritage Element Occurrences, Natural Areas, and Managed Areas Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
Torrence
Project No. 2015 -3612
May 4, 2015
NC N H DE -242
lement Occurrences Documented Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
axonomic EO ID Scientific Name Common Name Element Accuracy Federal State Global State
roup Observation • Occurrence ° ° Status Status Rank. Rank
Date Status
Vascular Nlant 4441 Acmispon helleri Carolina Birdfoot - trefoil 1978 -09 -21 °Historical 4 -Low
Vascular Plant 13743 Delphinium exaltatum Tall Larkspur 1800S Historical 5 -Very
Low
Vascular Plant 33285 Sceptridium jenmanii Alabama Grape -fern 1936 -09 Historical 4 -Low
No Natural Areas are Documented Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
Managed Areas Documented Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area_.
Species of,
Special G3 S3
Concern
Concern
Vulnerable
Species of
Endangered G3 S2
Concern
- --
Special G3G4 S2
Concern
Vulnerable
Managed Area Name Owner Owner Type
Mecklenburg County Open Space Mecklenburg County Local Government
Mecklenburg County Open Space Mecklenburg County Local Government
Mecklenburg County Open Space Mecklenburg County Local Government
Mecklenburg County Open Space Mecklenburg County Local Government
Definitions and an explanation of status designations and codes can be found at tamps.H ncnhde .natureserve.orQ /content/help Data query generated on May 4, 2015, source NCNHP, Q2 April 2015. Please resubmit your
information request if more than one year elapses before project initiation as new information is continually added to the NCNHP database.
Page 2 of 3

May 4, 2015
❑ Project Boundary
❑ Buffered Project Boundary
❑ Managed Area (MAREA)
NCNHDE -242: Torrence
i
LA IkAmau
"h.trt a
tlidt
1
t11. nt,.x
Page 3 of 3
1:33,423
0 0 275 055 1.1 ml
0 045 0.9 1.8 km
Spucea Ev, HERE CeL— Tp Tt 1mu p muement P Cap,
GEBCO. USGS FAO. NPS, NRCAN. Geaaa IGN Kawuv NL

Jurisdictional Determination Request
A. PARCEL INFORMATION
® Property Information
i
Address: located parallel to a tributary to Torrence Creek extending west of Mt. Holly -
Huntersville Road and north of Hambright Road in Huntersville, North Carolina
County: Mecklenburg County
Directions: from I -77 southbound, take exit 25 for Gilead Rd and head west for
approximately 0.6 miles. Take a left onto McCoy Rod and travel for
approximately 1.7 miles. Take a left onto Hambrigh Right and the beginning of
the project is approximately 1.5 miles down on the right.
Parcel Index Number (PIN): 01719102, 01719302, 01719301, 01722102, 01740105,
01722103, 01722104, 01740104 (easements through the above parcels)
B. REQUESTOR INFORMATION
® Name: Kelly Thames, WPIT
Mailing Address: 550 E. Westinghouse Blvd., Charlotte, NC 28273
Telephone Number: 704 -527 -1177;
Electronic Mail Address': kelly @cws- inc.net
Select one:
❑ I am the current property owner.
® I am an Authorized Agent or Environmental Consultant2
❑ interested Buyer or Under Contract to Purchase
❑ Other, please explain.
C. PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION
® Name: Charlotte Water
Mailing Address: 5100 Brookshire Boulevard, Charlotte, NC 28216
Telephone Number: 704- 399 -2221
Electronic Mail Address 3: ajarrell @ci.charlotte.nc.us
1 If available
z Must attach completed Agent Authorization Form
3 If available

Jurisdictional Determination Request
® Proof of Ownership Attached (e.g. a copy of Deed, County GIS/Parcel /Tax Record data)
D. PROPERTY.OWNER CERTIFICATION
I, the undersigned, a duly authorized owner of record of the property identified herein, do
authorize representatives of the Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) to
enter upon the property herein described for the purpose of conducting on -site investigations and
issuing a determination associated with Waters of the U.S. subject to Federal jurisdiction under
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and /or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899.
Property Owner (please print) Date
SEE ATTACHED SIGNED AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
Property Owner Signature
E. JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION TYPE
Select One:
® I am requesting that the Corps provide a preliminary JD for the property identified herein.
❑ I am requesting that the Corps investigate the property/project area for the presence or
absence of WoUS5 and provide an approved JD for the property identified herein. This
request does NOT include a request for a verified delineation. (proceed to F and G
below).
❑ I am requesting that the Corps delineate the boundaries of all WoUS on a property /project
area and provide an approved JD (this may or may not include a survey plat).
❑ I am requesting that the Corps evaluate and approve a delineation of WoUS (conducted
by others) on a property /project area and provide an approved JD (may or may not
include a survey plat).
4 For NCDOT requests following the current NCDOT /USACE protocols, skip to Part E.
5 Waters of the United States
4

Jurisdictional Determination Request
F. ALL REQUESTS
® Map of Property or Project Area (attached). This Map must clearly depict the boundaries
of the area of evaluation.
® Size of Property or Project Area 46 acres
® I verify that the property (or project) boundaries have recently been surveyed and marked
by a licensed land surveyor OR are otherwise clearly marked or distinguishable.
G. JD REQUESTS FROM CONSULTANTS OR AGENCIES
(1) Preliminary JD Requests:
® Completed and signed Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Form6.
® Project Coordinates: N35.249687° Latitude W80.741637° Longitude
Maps (no larger than 11x17) with Project Boundary Overlay:
® Large and small scale maps that depict, at minimum: streets, intersections, towns
® Aerial Photography of the project area
® USGS Topographic Map
® Soil Survey Map
❑ Other Maps, as appropriate (e.g. National Wetland Inventory Map, Proposed Site
Plan, previous delineation maps, LIDAR maps, FEMA floodplain maps)
Delineation Information (when applicable):
Wetlands:
® Wetland Data Sheets
® Upland Data Sheets
® Landscape Photos, if taken
Tributaries:
® US'ACE Assessment Forms
® Other Assessment Forms
(when appropriate)
® Field Sketch overlain on legible Map that includes:
All aquatic resources (for sites with multiple resources, label and identify)
Locations of wetland data points and /or tributary assessment reaches
Locations of photo stations
Approximate acreage /linear footage of aquatic resources
e See Appendix A of this Form. From Regulatory Guidance Letter No. 08 -02, dated June 26, 2008
Delineation information must include, at minimum, one wetland data sheet for each wetland /community type.
61

Jurisdictional Determination Request
(2) Approved JDs including Verification of a Delineation:
❑ Project Coordinates: Latitude Longitude
Maps (no larger than 11x17) with Project Boundary Overlay:
❑ Large and small scale maps that depict, at minimum: streets, intersections, towns
❑ Aerial Photography of the project area
❑ USGS Topographic Map
❑ Soil Survey Map
❑ Other Maps, as appropriate (e.g. National Wetland Inventory Map, Proposed Site
Plan, previous delineation maps)
Delineation Information (when applicable):
Wetlands:
❑ Wetland Data Sheets8
❑ Upland Data Sheets
❑ Landscape Photos, if taken
Tributaries:
❑ USACE Assessment Forms
❑ Other Assessment Forms
(when appropriate)
❑ Field Sketch overlain on legible Map that includes:
All aquatic resources (for sites with multiple resources, label and identify)
Locations of wetland data points and /or tributary assessment reaches
Locations of photo stations
Approximate acreage /linear footage of aquatic resources
Supporting Jurisdictional Information (for Approved JDs only)
❑ Approved Jurisdictional Determination Form(s) (also known as "Rapanos
Form(s)")
❑ Map(s) depicting the potential (or lack of potential) hydrologic connection(s),
adjacency, etc. to navigable waters.
S Delineation information must include, at minimum, one wetland data sheet for each wetland /community type.

Jurisdictional Determination Request
I. REQUESTS FOR CORPS APPROVAL OF SURVEY PLAT
Prior to final production of a Plat, the Wilmington District recommends that the Land
Surveyor electronically submit a draft of a Survey Plat to the Corps project manager for
review.
Due to storage limitations of our administrative records, the Corps requires that all hard -
copy submittals include at least one original Plat (to scale) that is no larger than 11 "x17"
(the use of match lines for larger tracts acceptable). Additional copies of a plat, including
those larger than 11 "x17 ", may also be submitted for Corps signature as needed. The
Corps also accepts electronic submittals of plats, such as those transmitted as a Portable
Document Format (PDF) file. Upon verification, the Corps can electronically sign these
plats and return them via e -mail to the requestor.
Plats submitted for approval must:
❑ be sealed and signed by a licensed professional land surveyor
❑ be to scale (all maps must include both a graphic scale and a verbal scale)
❑ be legible
❑ include a North Arrow, Scale(s), Title, Property Information
❑ include a legible WoUS Delineation Table of distances and bearings /metes and
bounds /GPS coordinates of all surveyed delineation points
❑ clearly depict surveyed property or project boundaries
❑ clearly identify the known surveyed point(s) used as reference (e.g. property
corner, USGS monument)
❑ when wetlands are depicted:
*include acreage (or square footage) of wetland polygons
*identify each wetland polygon using an alphanumeric system
❑ when tributaries are depicted:
*include either a surveyed, approximate centerline of tributary with
approximate width of tributary OR surveyed Ordinary High Water Marks
(OHWM) of tributary
*include linear footage of tributaries and calculated area (using
approximate widths or surveyed OHWM)
*include name of tributary (based on the most recent USGS topographic
map) or, when no USGS name exists, identify as "unnamed tributary"

Jurisdictional Determination Request
❑ all depicted WoUS (wetland polygons and tributary lines) must intersect or tie -to
surveyed project/property boundaries
❑ include the location of wetland data points and /or tributary assessment reaches
❑ include, label accordingly, and depict acreage of all waters not currently subject to
the requirements of the CWA (e.g. "isolated wetlands ", "non jurisdictional
waters "). NOTE: An approved JD must be conducted in order to make an official
Corps determination that a particular waterbody or wetland is not jurisdictional.
❑ include and survey all existing conveyances (pipes, culverts, etc.) that transport
WoUS
CERTIFICATION LANGUAGE
❑ When the entire actual Jurisdictional Boundary is depicted:
include the following Corps Certification language:
"This certifies that this copy of this plat accurately depicts the boundary of the jurisdiction
of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act as determined by the undersigned on this date.
Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, the determination of
Section 404 jurisdiction maybe relied upon for a period not to exceed five (5) years from
this date. The undersigned completed this determination utilizing the appropriate Regional
Supplement to the 1987 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual."
Regulatory Official:
Title:
Date:
USACE Action ID No.:
E3

Jurisdictional Determination Request
❑ When uplands may be within a depicted Jurisdictional Boundary:
include the following Corps Certification language:
"This certifies that this copy of this plat identifies all areas of waters of the United States
regulated pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act as determined by the
undersigned on this date. Unless there is change in the law or our published regulations,
this determination of Section 404 jurisdiction may be relied upon for a period not to exceed
five years from this date. The undersigned completed this determination utilizing the
appropriate Regional Supplement to the 1987 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands
Delineation Manual."
Regulatory Official:
Title:
Date:
USACE Action ID No.:
GPS SURVEYS
For Surveys prepared using a Global Positioning System (GPS), the Survey must include
all of the above, as well as:
❑ be at sub -meter accuracy at each survey point.
❑ include an accuracy verification:
One or more known points (property corner, monument) shall be located with the
GPS and cross - referenced with the existing traditional property survey (metes and
bounds).
❑' include a brief description of the GPS equipment utilized.
0

Torrence Tributary Sewer May 4, 2015
Nationwide Permit No. 12 CWS Project No. 2015 -3612
Photograph A. View of Perennial RPW B, facing upstream.
Photograph B. View of Seasonal RPW C. facing upstream.

Torrence Tributary Sewer May 4, 2015
Nationwide Permit No. 12 CNVS Proieet No. 2015 -3612
Photograph C. View of Seasonal RPW D, facing downstream.
Photograph D. View of Seasonal RPW E, facing upstream.

Torrence Tributary Sewer May 4, 201 S
Nationwide Permit No. 12 (IN'S Project No. 2015-3612
Photograph E. View of Seasonal RPW F and non jurisdictional ephemeral confluence, facing upstream.
Photograph F. View of Wetland AA, facing west.

Torrence Tributan SeN%er May 4, 2015
Nation-wide Permit \o. 12 (AN 'S Protect No. 2015 -3612
Photograph G. View of Wetland BB, facing east.
Photograph H. View of Wetland CC, facing southeast.