20231709 Ver 1_Lakeside Reserve epcn documents compressed_20231213

Angela Petros
From: Angela Petros
Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2022 7:34 AM
To: 401 PreFile
Subject: Lakeside Reserve NWP 29 Pre -Application
To Whom It May Concern,
Atlas will be submitting an NWP 29 application for Lakeside Reserve project. This project is in Concord
(Cabarrus County). This project is a Residential project. Niblock Homes is the applicant.
Angela Petros
ATLAS Environmental, Inc.
338 S. Sharon Amity Road #411
Charlotte, NC 28211
[phone] mobile
www.atiasenvi.com
Offices in Asheville and Charlotte
ENVIRONMENTAL

Preliminary ORM Data Entry Fields for New Actions
SAW-2022-02562 BEGIN DATE [Received Date]:
Prepare file folder ❑ Assign Action ID Number in ORM ❑
1. Project Name [PCN Form A2a]: Lakeside Reserve
2. Work Type: Private ❑ Institutional ❑ Government ❑ Commercial ❑✓
3. Project Description / Purpose [PCN Form 133d and 133e]:
The purpose of this project is for the construction of a residential development that includes 135
lots.
4. Property Owner / Applicant [PCN Form A3 or A41: Owner: Niblock Homes LLC
Applicant: Ken Foster and William Niblock of Niblock Homes
5. Agent / Consultant [PCN Form A5 — or ORM Consultant ID Number]: Atlas Environmental, Jennifer Robertson
6. Related Action ID Number(s) [PCN Form B5b]: SAW-2022-02562 (Krysta Stygar)
7. Project Location - Coordinates, Street Address, and/or Location Description [PCN Form 131b]:
2183 Heglar Road Concord, NC 28025
35.3866950 /-80.5271820
8. Project Location -Tax Parcel ID [PCN Form 131a]:
5549-69-0093, 5549-59-2272, 5640-70-5379, and 5549-49-9161
9. Project Location — County [PCN Form A2b]: Cabarrus
10. Project Location — Nearest Municipality or Town [PCN Form A2c]: Concord
11. Project Information — Nearest Waterbody [PCN Form 132a]: Cold Water Creek, Class C, Index # 13-17-9-4-(1.5)
12. Watershed / 8-Digit Hydrologic Unit Code [PCN Form 132c]: Rocky, 03040105
Authorization: Section 10 ❑ Section 404
Regulatory Action Type:
❑Standard Permit
✓ Nationwide Permit # 29
❑ Regional General Permit #
❑ Jurisdictional Determination Request
❑✓ Section 10 & 404 ❑
❑Pre -Application Request
Unauthorized Activity
0 Compliance
❑ No Permit Required
Revised 20150602

ATLAS
ENVIRONMENTAL
December 12, 2023
US Army Corps of Engineers NC Division of Water Resources
Charlotte Regulatory Field Office 401 and Buffer Permitting Unit
Attn: Krysta Stygar Attn: Stephanie Goss
8430 University Executive Park Drive, Suite 611 1617 Mail Service Center
Charlotte, NC 28262 Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
Re: Lakeside Reserve +/- 93.215 acres
2183 Heglar Road Concord, NC 28025
Nationwide Permit 29 Application
Action ID # SAW-2022-02562 / DWR Project #: unknown
Krysta/Stephanie:
Atlas Environmental Inc is submitting the enclosed package on behalf of Ken Foster and William
Niblock of Niblock Homes for approval of a Nationwide Permit 29 verification for unavoidable
impacts to Waters of the United States. Atlas Environmental completed a stream and wetland
delineation on November 04 and 07, 2022. The AJD was issued on March 09, 2023.
The purpose of this project is for the construction of a residential development that includes 135
lots. The project will have two unavoidable impacts to Waters of the United States, consisting of
one stream and one wetland impact. Both impacts are needed for the construction and grading of a
road. Impact S1 consists of —208 linear feet (0.009 acres) of intermittent stream impact for the
installation of a culvert pertaining to the construction of a road. Impact W1 consists of —0.017 acres
of wetland impact for fill pertaining to the construction/grading of a road.
The project does not exceed thresholds, so no mitigation is being proposed. Impacts have been
reduced by the proposed design and location of the buildings, positioning of parking, and the design
of stormwater basins and control measures. Approximately 77% of the stream features onsite are
not being impacted, along with 10.42 acres of impoundments. Three isolated wetlands are being
impacted, however 99.2% of jurisdictional wetlands have been preserved.
Enclosed are the necessary permit application documents and additional information. Thank you for
your attention to the enclosed request. Please contact me if you need any additional information.
Best regards,
Allyson Sinclair
[e-mail]
ATLAS Environmental, Inc.
338 S. Sharon Amity Road #411
Charlotte, North Carolina 28211
704-512-1206 (o) / 828-712-9205 (m)
www.atlasenvi.com / Offices in Asheville and Charlotte

A -
ENVIRONMENTAL
AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
U.S, Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District
Attn: Mr. Scott McLendon, Chief, Regulatory Division
PO Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
-and-
NC Division of Water Resources, Water Quality Program
Wetlands, Buffers, Streams — Compliance and Permitting Unit
Attn: Mr. Paul Wojoski, Supervisor
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
I, the current landowner, lessee, contract holder to purchase, right to purchase holder, or easement
holder of the property/properties identified below, hereby authorize Atlas Environmental Inc to act on my
behalf as my agent during the processing of permits to impact Wetlands and Waters of the U5 that are
regulated by the Clean Water Act and the Rivers and Harbors Act. Federal and State agents are
authorized to be on said property when accompanied by Atlas Environmental Inc staff for the purpose of
conducting on -site investigations and issuing a determination associated with Waters of the US subject to
Federal jurisdiction under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors
Act of 1899 and Waters of the State including 404 Wetlands, Isolated Wetlands, and other non-404
Wetlands subject to a permitting program administered by the State of North Carolina. Atlas
Environmental Inc is authorized to provide supplemental information needed for delineation approval
and/or permit processing at the request of the Corps or NC QWR Water Quality Program.
Project Name:
Lakeside Reserve
Property Owner of Record:
Niblock Homes, LLC
Contact Name:
William Niblock
Address:
759 Concord Pkwy N, Suite 20
Address:
Concord, NC 28027
Phone/Fax Number:
[phone]
Email Address:
[e-mail]
Project Address:
NC Hwy 49 S and Heglar Rd., Concord, NC
Project Address:
Tax PIN:
5549690093, 5549592272, 55494_99161 and 5640705379
Signature:
Date:
11 - 15 - 2022
ATLAS Environmental Inc.
338 S. Sharon Amity Road, #411
Charlotte, North Carolina 28211
704-512-1206 (o) / 828-712-9205 (m)
irobertson@atlasenvi. rom
www.atlasenvi.rom

��s�c�=/ �ois—�� \�:��
-
- _ -EEL._
m
- oEv£a�o
z m
a z N
� x z
EwF\Fw a
,.i
o z p"p w d
d� W fKF O
Z a F L 0 O
fn�N2m �
a Qz�0.wrr,.
w wzWo�F,Sroz
a z O w d W m
PAc�zw
OCIFm OdR1
A. pq W P. P4m.N. z
(_ I
3t_ i , A'
iij
I�
I
xz�T—
NI;ROMP P/ �.
f°1 T�
v
V v -Jv

a,> $
o z O
O

'-'OO`V(7i ahL`O,99(VOL)—d
��a a IV71=0N�„Now
� >_
818b-8 "0
W qxv� xzxf, snx�av� 'axo�uo�
N 3 SN'N AMN Qa dti�: 6� AVMH�IH �N
-
-
b
-d
•Y•d 'sale��ossy
s
X HAK3M 3QIS33IV'I
NDIM IMOWGMd
- � _CII -D�Icivu0
�a
�n\�\\I I
1'
- t
wok a
�amm
1 LLJJ �
O �i O o
w zSvH
O
�a = —
00
04
CL
�r
• • � O CO p -O
iii444"' a
W
y e
m-
`m
0
i o
6� o ,
686
r$ �
IJ 6iso
76 0
z
10
a 6 I
6i ✓,I,II _ � � I o -- w
m
o�
off. �t co � a Oo a
a a'���, 3� p -
b A m F�p c� ` voH
a o
i O a
a
�v
o

'-'e99Vvw i ah O,99(VOL) -a
a �Io71 NI„NZow
��a�i v s v �%°o er�e�m
818b-8 " 0
w �qxv� xzxo, snxxeav� 'a�o�uo�
LZ08Z �N 'Cla i
Od 3iS N I,MNd a e ii' dti�: 6� AVMH�IH �N
d"
•Y•d 'sale��ossy
4 HAK3M HISaNV'I
NDIM IMOWGMd
_CII -DT-zIcivu0
�
76'� o�.
LJ / IL'' Q.3'� W r. a�3°i E__ U�-pi� ,I I. `•I`, Ali ,.I`
"ate O ctS',O Q`,,W
� m� m m d$ � � 0.' Cs � ,�i��n „'� it �l ;;A�, �, I���I;I'••
�°'
75
N �I
d% � � /- J� \
1 l
-650-
�
i I i G
m
v
'i 15, o
16
zo
645
0
G _
3
6501
vo
Iq
of
v
hh
of
Y�G
i'

,'OOV(7 hL,99(VOL)—d
IV71=01IiNZ
1Z 3N 'Cl
N hS=2N AMNd 2
(n-�,—M
snx'
M'f,
61VMHDIH JN
-V-d 'saleMOssv
4
HAUM aGlSa)IV'l
DIM IMOWGMd
1 -a CII -D T-z I ci v u 0
2.z
C,4
0 76
6
'o i-
- -- ------- -- - ----- w
Zt
C)
0
0
6,>o
0
x 0',
670
U-
CO
� EuJ
0
00 ------
u
0
L
2 b
_0
U 0 LLJ
o
Ul) -CL
0
cn
elf
u
------- 665
U.
0
oto
R
LUZ
Ul)
OQ
qV
-0
------
0
rma
r) U0

0 0
0 0
0 0
i
a TZ'OS9
E/-,K9
I
0 0
0
0 0
L9'6E9
LU
J
i--i
LL
0

T((��� J�AI IIII 1�
(( \ / �) 1
'off

LL
o
o
0
Ln
o
OLr)
CV
O
CV
M
O
(B
7
o
7
LL
T
I=
O
0
�pb
�.
4 L
_
*i
U
m
m
E
L
C6
O
M
L
Q
U
m
Q
c
a)
� L-a)
m
m
o E m m
N
C:
�
�✓
vJ
U
O
c
Z
0
Y
V
O
Z
E
tp
LO
O
0
CV
C)
Z
m
N
�p
OU
4
LL
N
O
LO
o
�
0
0)
Y
co
Q
i°n
o,
(B
�
W
M
J
=
u}
�
=
M
CV
V
N
Z
�
O
�
+'�
O
U
J
i
O
U
a-
t°
L
a
LU
2
0
N

ARFARF
CV
O
CV
M
O
(B
7
O
LL
O
(B
0
0
z
E
0
CV
U
�
N
Z
L
CO
0
N
CD
U0)
co
Y
c
ku
Q
LLO
rn
W
M
J
=
LO
�
=
re)
�
Y
�
CV
V
N
O
+'
O
U
i
O
J
U
LOL
2)
IL
N
N
O
NT
N

ua
FTM
SE� .Fe
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
December 6, 2022
David Rabon
Atlas Environmental, Inc.
338 South Amity Road 9441
Charlotte, North Carolina 28211
drab on n, atl as envi . com
Subject: Lakeside Reserve Residential Development; Cabarrus County, North Carolina
Dear David Rabon:
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has reviewed the information provided in your
revised correspondence dated December 5, 2022, wherein you solicit our comments regarding
project -mediated impacts to federally protected species. We submit the following comments in
accordance with the provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, as amended
(16 U.S.C. 661-667e); the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. §4321 et seq.); and
section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543) (Act).
On July 5, 2022, the U.S. District Court of the Northern District Court of California vacated the
2019 regulations implementing section 7 of the Act. On September 21, 2022, the Ninth Circuit
Court of Appeals granted a request to stay the U.S. District Court of Northern California's July 5,
2022, order that vacated the 2019 Act regulations. As a result, the 2019 regulations are again in
effect, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has relied upon the 2019 regulations in
issuing our written concurrence on the action agency's "may affect, not likely to adversely
affect" determination. However, because the outcome of the legal challenges to the 2019 Act
regulations is still unknown, we considered whether our substantive analyses and conclusions
would have been different if the pre-2019 regulations were applied in this informal consultation.
Our analysis included the prior definition of "effects of the action." We considered all the "direct
and indirect effects" and the "interrelated and interdependent activities" when determining the
"effects of the action." We then considered whether any "effects of the action" that overlap with
applicable ranges of listed species would be wholly beneficial, insignificant, or discountable to
the species. As a result, we determined the substantive analysis and conclusions would have been
the same, irrespective of which regulations applied.
Project Description
According to the information provided, the Applicant proposes to construct a residential
development and appurtenances on approximately 93 partially forested acres in Concord, North
Carolina. The information provided suggests that the proposed project will require authorization
from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for unavoidable impacts to Waters of the United States.
Federally Listed Endangered and Threatened Species
Your correspondence indicates that suitable habitat is present within the action area (50CFR
402.02) for the federally endangered Schweintiz's sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii). However,

targeted botanical surveys during an acceptable timeframe detected no evidence for this species
at that time. Therefore, we believe that the probability for inadvertent loss of this plant is
insignificant and discountable and would concur with a "may affect, not likely to adversely
affect" determination from the action agency for this plant. Botanical survey results are valid for
two years for the purposes of consultation under the Act:
hllps://www.fws. gov/asheville/pdfs/Optimal%20Survey%20Windows%20for%20listed%20plant
s%202020.pdf
Suitable habitat for tricolored bat (Perimyotis subflavus) may be present within the proposed
action area. On September 14, 2022, the Service published a proposal in the Federal Register to
list the tricolored bat as endangered under the Act. The Service has up to 12 months from the
date the proposal published to make a final determination, either to list the tricolored bat under
the Act or to withdraw the proposal. The Service determined the bat faces extinction primarily
due to the range -wide impacts of WNS. Because tricolored bat populations have been greatly
reduced due to WNS, surviving bat populations are now more vulnerable to other stressors such
as human disturbance and habitat loss. Species proposed for listing are not afforded protection
under the Act; however, as soon as a listing becomes effective (typically 30 days after
publication of the final rule in the Federal Register), the prohibitions against jeopardizing its
continued existence and "take" will apply. Therefore, if you suspect your future or existing
project may affect tricolored bats after the potential new listing goes into effect, we recommend
analyzing possible effects of the project on tricolored bats and their habitat to determine whether
consultation under section 7 of the Act is necessary. Conferencing procedures can be followed
prior to listing to ensure the project does not jeopardize the existence of a species. Projects with
an existing section 7 biological opinion may require re -initiation of consultation to provide
uninterrupted authorization for covered activities. Please contact our office for additional
guidance or assistance.
Monarch butterfly is a candidate species, and we appreciate the project proponent's
consideration of monarch butterfly when evaluating the action area for impacts to federally listed
species and their habitats. The species is not subject to section 7 consultation, and an effects
determination is not necessary. General recommendations for pollinators can be provided and
would be protective of monarch butterfly should the project proponent like to implement them in
the future.
Your correspondence indicates that suitable habitat is not present within the action area for any
other federally protected species. Therefore, we require no further information and consider
consultation to be complete at this time. Please be aware that obligations under section 7 of the
Act must be reconsidered if. (1) new information reveals impacts of the identified action may
affect listed species or critical habitat in a manner not previously considered, (2) the identified
action is subsequently modified in a manner that was not considered in this review, or (3) a new
species is listed or critical habitat is determined that may be affected by the identified action.
We offer the following recommendations on behalf of natural resources:
K

Erosion and Sediment Control
Measures to control sediment and erosion should be installed before any ground -disturbing
activities occur. Grading and backfilling should be minimized, and existing native vegetation
should be retained (if possible) to maintain riparian cover for fish and wildlife. Disturbed areas
should be revegetated with native vegetation as soon as the project is completed. Ground
disturbance should be limited to what will be stabilized quickly, preferably by the end of the
workday. Natural fiber matting (coir) should be used for erosion control as synthetic
netting can trap animals and persist in the environment beyond its intended purpose.
Impervious Surfaces and Low -Impact Development
Increased storm -water runoff also degrades aquatic and riparian habitat, causing stream -bank and
stream -channel scouring. Impervious surfaces reduce groundwater recharge, resulting in even
lower than expected stream flows during drought periods, which can induce potentially
catastrophic effects for fish, mussels, and other aquatic life. Accordingly, we recommend that all
new development, regardless of the percentage of impervious surface area they will create,
implement storm -water -retention and -treatment measures designed to replicate and maintain the
hydrograph at the preconstruction condition to avoid any additional impacts to habitat quality
within the watershed.
We recommend the use of low -impact -development techniques, such as reduced road widths,
grassed swales in place of curb and gutter, rain gardens, and wetland retention areas, for
retaining and treating storm -water runoff rather than the more traditional measures, such as large
retention ponds, etc. These designs often cost less to install and significantly reduce
environmental impacts from development.
Where detention ponds are used, storm -water outlets should drain through a vegetated area prior
to reaching any natural stream or wetland area. Detention structures should be designed to allow
for the slow discharge of storm water, attenuating the potential adverse effects of storm -water
surges; thermal spikes; and sediment, nutrient, and chemical discharges. Also, because the
purpose of storm -water -control measures is to protect streams and wetlands, no
storm -water -control measures or best management practices should be installed within any
stream (perennial or intermittent) or wetland.
The Service appreciates the opportunity to provide these comments. Please contact Mr. Byron
Hamstead of our staff at [e-mail] if you have any questions. In any future
correspondence concerning this project, please reference our Log Number 4-2-23-440.
Sincerely,
- - original signed - -
Janet Mizzi
Field Supervisor

Firefox
about:blank
North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Ramona K Sartos, Admmstrator
Governor Ray Cooper
S.&ary D. Reid Wlson
December 31, 2022
Office of Archives and History
Deputy Secretazy, Darin]. Waters, PhD.
Jennifer Robertson, irobertsonAatlasenvi.com
Atlas Environmental Inc.
338 South Sharon Amity Road
Charlotte, NC 28211
Re: Construct Lakeside Reserve Residential Development, 2183 Heglar Road Concord,
Cabarrus County, ER 19-1045
Dear Ms. Robertson:
Thank you for transmitting the environmental review documentation for the above -referenced project, on
behalf of your client, Niblock Homes. We have reviewed the information provided and offer the following
comments.
Much of the proposed project area overlaps with another proposed subdivision project (Buffalo Ranch
Subdivision) that was reviewed by our office in 2019 and which was designated ER 19-1045. While this
current submission appears to be a separate development, we have retained the previous environmental
review number given the overlap.
One archaeological site has been recorded within the project area. Site 31CA22 was recorded by local
informant in 1970s and documented as having stone tools and flakes. The site was not subject to systematic
subsurface investigations, nor has it been assessed for listing in the National Register of Historic Places
(NRHP). Four additional archaeological sites are located within a 0.25-mile radius of the project area, none
of which have been systematically surveyed to determine the presence or significance of archaeological
resources.
Based on the topographic and hydrological setting of the area disturbance, and the presence of
archaeological sites in and around the project area, we recommend that prior to the initiation of any ground
disturbing activities, an archaeological survey be conducted by an experienced archaeologist that targets the
location of 31 CA22 as well as other high probability landforms within the project area. The purpose of this
survey will be to identify and evaluate the significance of archaeological sites that may be damaged or
destroyed by the proposed project.
The archaeological survey should be conducted by an experienced archaeologist that meets the Secretary of
the Interior's Professional Qualification Standards_ A list of archaeological consultants who have
conducted or expressed an interest in contract work in North Carolina is available at
Location 109 East ones Street Raleigh NC 27601 Maiii g Address: 4617 Mail Bernice Center, Raleigh'\ C 27699-4617 Telephone/Fare [phone]/814-6898
1 of 2 1/3/2023, 8:17 AM

Firefox
about:blank
ER 19-1045, December 31, Page 2 of 2
https://archaeology.ncdcr.gov/archaeolop,ical-consultant-list. The archaeologists listed, or any other
experienced archaeologist, may be contacted to conduct the recommended survey.
Our office requests consultation with the Office of State Archaeology Review Archaeologist to discuss
appropriate field methodologies prior to the archaeological field investigation. You can find the Review
Archaeologist for your region at https://archaeology.neder.gov/about/contact-0. OSA's Archaeological
Standards and Guidelinesfor Background Research, Field Methodologies, Technical Reports, and
Curation can be found online at: https://files.nc.gov/dncr-arch/OSA_Guidelines_Dec20l7.pdf.
We have determined that the project as proposed will not have an effect on any historic structures.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36
CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comments,
please contact Renee Gledhill -Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919-814-6579 or
environmental.reviewAncdcr.gov. In all future communication concerning this project, please cite the
above -referenced tracking number.
Sincerely,
Ramona Bartos, Deputy
State Historic Preservation Officer
Cc: Krysta Stygar, US Army Corps of Engineers krvMtynka.b.stygarfc-r�,usace.a=.rniJ
Location l09 East Jones Street, Raleigh VC 2-501 Mailing Addms: 4617 ILL2 StMee Ceatec, Raleigh tic 2 76994617 Telephone/Pax (919)81i-65?0/814-6898
2 of 2 1/3/2023, 8:17 AM

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action Id. SAW-2022-02562 County: Cabarrus U.S.G.S. Quad: NC -Concord
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
Requestor: Niblock Homes, LLC
Ken Foster
Address: 759 Concord Parkway Suite 20
Concord, NC 28027
Telephone Number: 704-634-9756
E-mail: wniblo ck&niblockhomes.com
Size (acres) 93.215 Nearest Town Concord
Nearest Waterway Cold Water Creek RiverBasin Upper Pee Dee
USGS HUC 03040105 Coordinates Latitude:35.386695
Longitude:-80.527182
Location description: Projectis located at2183 Heclar Road, near Concord, Cabarrus County,North Carolina. PIN(s): 5549-
69-0093 , 5549-59-2272, 5549-49-9161
Indicate Which of the Following Apply:
A. Preliminary Determination
❑ There appearto be waters, including wetlands on the above described project area/property, that maybe subject to Section404
of the Clean WaterAct (CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403). The
waters, including wetlands have been delineated, and the delineation has been verified by the Corps to be sufficiently accurate
and reliable. The approximate boundaries of these waters are shown on the enclosed delineation map dated DATE. Therefore
this preliminary jurisdiction detenninationmay be used in the permit evaluationprocess, including determining compensatory
mitigation. For purposes of computation of impacts, compensatory mitigation requirements, and other resource protection
measures, a permit decision made on the basis of a preliminary JD will treat allwaters and wetlands that would be affected in any
way by the permitted activity on the site as if they are jurisdictionalwa ters of the U.S. This preliminary determination is not an
appealable action under the Regulatory Program Administrative AppealProce ss (Reference 33 CFR Part 3 31). However, you may
request an approved JD, which is an appealable action, by contacting the Corps districtfor further instruction.
❑ There appear to be waters, including wetlands on the above described project area/property, that maybe subject to Section 404
of the Clean WaterAct (CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403).
However, since the waters, including wetlands have notbeen properly delineated, this preliminary jurisdiction determination
may not be used in the permit evaluation process. Without a verified wetland delineation, this preliminary determination is
merely an effective presumption of CWA/RHA jurisdiction over a llof the waters, including wetlands atthe project area, which
is not sufficiently accurate and reliable to support an enforceable permit decision. We recommend that you have the waters,
including wetlands on your project area/property delineated. As the Corps may not be able to accomplish this wetland
delineation in a timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conducta delineation that can be verified by the Corps.
B. Approved Determination
❑ There are Navigable Waters ofthe United States within the above describedproject area/property subjectto the permit
requirements of Section 10 of the Rivers andHarbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403) and Section 404 ofthe Clean WaterAct
(CWA)(33USC§ 1344). Unless there is a change in law or our published regulations, this determination maybe relied upon for
a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
® There are waters, including wetlandson the above described project area/property subject to the permit requirements of Section
404 of the Clean WaterAct (CWA) (33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this
determination maybe relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ We recommend you have the waters, including wetlands on your project area/property delineated. As the Corps may notbe
able to accomplish this wetland delineation in a timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultantto conduct a delineationthat
can be verifiedby the Corps.
❑ The waters, including wetlands on yourprojectarea/property have been delineated andthe delineationhas been verified by
the Corps. The approximate boundaries of these waters are shown on the enclosed delineation map dated DATE. We strongly
suggest you have this delineation surveyed. Upon completion, this survey should be reviewed and verified by the Corps. Once

SAW-2022-02562
verified, this survey will provide an accurate depiction of all areas subjectto CWAjurisdiction on your property which, provided
there is no change in the law or our published regulations, maybe relied upon fora period not to exceed five years.
❑ The waters, including wetlands have been delineated and surveyed and are accurately depicted on the plat signedby the
Corps Regulatory Official identified below onDATE. Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this
determination maybe relied upon for a periodnotto exceed five years from the date ofthis notification.
❑ There are no waters of the U.S., to include wetlands, present on the above described project area/property which are subjectto the
permit requirements of Section404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published
regulations, this determination maybe relied upon for a period notto exceed five years from the date ofthis notification.
❑ The property is located in one ofthe 20 Coastal Counties subject to regulation under the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA).
You should contact the Division of CoastalMa nagement in Morehead City, NC, at [phone] to determine their
requirements.
Placement of dredged or fillmaterialwithin waters of the US, including wetlands, without a Department ofthe Army permit may
constitute a violation of Section301 of the Clean WaterAct (33 USC § 1311). Placement of dredged or fill material, construction or
placement of structures, or work within navigable waters ofthe United States without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Sections 9 and/or 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (33 USC § 401 and/or 403). If you have any questions
rega rdin g this determination and/or the Corps regulatory program, please contact Krystynka B Stygar at 252-545-0507 or
krystynka.b.stygar&gsace.army.mil.
C. Basis For Determination: Seethe approved jurisdictional determination form dated 03/09/2023.
D. Remarks: See Aquatic features on map, "Lakeside Reserve 0210312023"
E. Attention USDA Program Participants
This delineation/determinationhas been conducted to identify the limits of Corps' Clean Water Act jurisdiction for the particular site
identified in this request. The delineation/determination may notbe valid for the wetland conservation provisions of the Food Security
Act of 1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation in USDA programs, you should request
a certified wetland determination from the local office of the Natural Resources Conservation Service, prior to starting work.
F. Appeals Information (This information applies only to approved jurisdictional determinations as indicated in B.
above)
If you object to this determination, you may requestanadministrative appealunder Corps regulations at33 CFR Part 331. Enclosed
you will find a Notification ofAppealProcess (NAP) fact sheet and Request for Appeal (RFA) form. Ifyourequest to appealthis
determination you must submit a completed RFA form to the following address:
US Army Corps of Engineers
South Atlantic Division
Attn: Mr. Philip A. Shannin
Administrative Appeal Review Officer
60 Forsyth StreetSW,FloorM9
Atlanta, Georgia 3 0303-8803
AND
PHI LIP.A. SHANNIN&USACE.ARMY.MIL
In order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps, the Corps must determine that it is complete, that it meets the criteria for appeal
under 33 CFR part 331.5, andthat it has been received by the Division Office within 60 days ofthe date ofthe NAP. Should you
decide to submit an RFA form, it must be received at the above address by 05/08/2023.
* * It is not necessary to submit anRFAform to the Division Office if you do notobject to the determination in this correspondence.**
Corps Regulatory Official: /�G ��q
Date of JD: 03/09/2023 Expiration Date of JD: 03/09/2028

SAW-2022-02562
The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure we
continue to do so, please complete the Customer Satisfaction Survey located at
http://corpsmapu.usace.army.mil/cm_apex/f?p=136:4:0
Copy furnished:
Agent: Atlas Environmental, Inc
Jennifer Robertson
Address: 338 S. Sharon Amity Road, # 411
Charlotte, NC 28211
Telephone Number: 704-512-1206
E-mail: jrobertson(a atlasenvi.com

NOTIFICATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL OPTIONS AND PROCESS AND
REQUEST FOR APPEAL
Applicant: NiblockHomes. LLC, Ken Foster File Number: SAW-2022-02562 I Date: 03/09/2023
Attached is:
See Section below
INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission)
A
PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission)
B
PERMITDENIAL
C
®
APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
D
PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
E
SECTION I - The following identifies yourrights and options regarding an administrative appealof the above decision.
Additional information may be found at orhttp://www.usace.army.miUMissions/CivilWorks/Regulatory Pro aamandPermits.aspx
or the Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331.
A: INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit.
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and yourwork is authorized. Your
signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all
rights to appealthe permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictionaldeterminations associated with the
permit.
• OBJECT: If you object to the permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain term sand conditions therein, you may request
that the permit be modified accordingly. You must complete Section II of this form and return the form to the district
engineer. Your objections must be received by the district engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice, or you will
forfeit yourright to appealthe permit in the future. Upon receipt of your letter, the district engineer will evaluate your
objections and may: (a)modify the permit to address allof your concerns, (b) modify the permit to address some of your
objections, or (c) not modify the permit having determined that the permit should be issued as previously written. After
evaluatingyour objections, the district engineer will send you a proffered permit for your reconsideration, as indicated in
Section B below.
B: PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or appealthe permit
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and yourwork is authorized. Your
signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all
rights to appealthe permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictionaldeterminations associated with the
permit.
• APPEAL: If you choose to decline the proffered permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein,
you may appealthe declined permit underthe Corps of Engineers Administrative AppealProcess by completing Section II of
this form and sendingthe form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days
of the date of this notice.
C: PERMIT DENIAL: You may appealthe denialof a permit underthe Corps of Engineers Administrative AppealProcess by
completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division
engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.
D: APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You may accept orappealthe approved JD or provide new
information.
• ACCEPT: You do not need to notify the Corps to accept an approved JD. Failure to notify the Corps within 60 days of the
date of this notice, means that you accept the approved JD in its entirety, and waive all rights to appealthe approved JD.
• APPEAL: If you disagree with the approved JD, you may appealthe approved JD under the Corps of Engineers
Administrative AppealProcess by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the district engineer. This form
must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.

E: PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You do not need to respond to the Corps regarding the
preliminary JD. The Preliminary JD is not appealable. If you wish, you may request an approved JD (which maybe appealed),
by contactingthe Corps district for further instruction. Also you may provide newinformation for further consideration by the
Corps to reevaluate the JD.
SECTION II - REQUEST FOR APPEAL or OBJECTIONS TO AN INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT
REASONS FORAPPEAL OROBJECTIONS: (Describe your reasons for appealing the decision or your objections to an initial
proffered permit in clear concise statements. You may attach additional information to this form to clarify where your reasons or
objections are addressed in the administrative record.)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The appealis limited to a review of the administrative record, the Corps memorandum forthe
record of the appealconference or meeting, and any supplemental information that the review officer has determined is needed to
clarify the administrative record. Neither the appellant northe Corps may add new information or analyses to the record.
However, you may provide additionalinformation to clarify the location of information that is already in the administrative
record.
POINT OF CONTACT FOR QUESTIONS OR INFORMATION:
If you have questions regarding this decision and/orthe
If you only have questions regarding the appealprocess you may
appealprocess you may contact:
also contact:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division
MR. PHILIP A. SHANNIN
Attn: Krystynka B Stygar
ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL REVIEW OFFICER
Charlotte Regulatory Office
CESAD-PDS-O
U.S Army Corps of Engineers
60 FORSYTH STREET SOUTHWEST, FLOOR M9
8430 University Executive Park Drive, Suite 615
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303-8803
Cha rlottc, No rth Carolina 28262
PHONE: [phone]; FAX[phone]
EMAIL: PHILIP.A.SHANNINna,USACE.ARMY.MIL
RIGHT OF ENTRY: Your signature below grants the right of entry to Corps of Engineers personnel, and any government
consultants, to conduct investigations of the project site during the course of the appealprocess. You will be provided a 15-day
notice of any site investigation, and will have the opportunity to participate m all site investi ations.
Date:
Telephone number:
Signature of appellant or agent.
For appeals on Initial Proffered Permits send this form to:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division, Attn: Krystynka B Stygar, 8430University Executive park Drive, suite
615, Charlotte, North Carolina, 28262
For Permit denials, Proffered Permits and Approved Jurisdictional Determinations send this form to:
Division Engineer, Commander, U.S. Army Engineer Division, South Atlantic, Attn: Mr. Philip Shannin, Administrative
Appeal Officer, CE SAD-PDO, 60 Forsyth Street, Room 10M15, Atla nta, Georgia 30303-8801
Phone: [phone]

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook
SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FORAPPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD): 03/09/2023
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Wilmington District, Lakeside Reserve, SAW-2022-02562
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Project is located at 2183 Heglar Road, near Concord, Cabarrus County,
North Carolina. PIN(s): 5549-69-0093 , 5549-59-227Z 5549-49-9161
State: NC County/parish/borough: Cabarrus City: Concord
Center coordinates of site (lat/longin degree decimal format): Lat. 35.386695 , Long.-80.527182
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearestwaterbody: Cold Water Creek
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows:
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 03040105
® Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
❑ Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc...) are associated with this action and are recorded on a different JD form
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
❑ Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
® Field Determination. Date(s): Initial Delineation: ll/03/2022,11/04/2022,11/07/2022,Site Visit 01/31/2023
SECTION H: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
,A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There are no "navigable waters ofthe U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the review area.
[Required]
❑ Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
❑ Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or maybe susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce. Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There are "waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply): t
El TNWs, including territorial seas
❑Wetlands adjacentto TNWs
❑X Relatively permanent waters 2 (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑Non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑X Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑X Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑X Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
❑Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non -wetland waters: 919 linear feet, 1-10 wide, and/or (10.290) including impoundment acres.
Wetlands:2.024 acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: Established OHWM
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
' Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
2 Forpurposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year-round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally" (e.g.,
typically 3 months).
Page 1 of 8 Form Version 10 June 2020

2. Non -regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable): 3
❑X Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional. Explain:
Isolated Wetlands WL 1200, WL 2100, and WL 3000. WL 1200, WL 2100, and WL 3000 have no hydrologic
connection to any jurisdictional features.
SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete Section
III.A.1 and Section IH.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections IILAA and 2 and Section
III.D.1.; otherwise, see Section III.B below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. WetlandadjacenttoTNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent':
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps determine
whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non -navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent waters"
(RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3 months). A wetland
that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year-round (perennial) flow, skip to
Section III.D.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow, skip to Section III.D.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and EPA
regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a relatively
permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even though a significant
nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbody4 is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting anRPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adj acent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must consider
the tributary in combination with all of its adj scent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for analytical purposes,
the tributary and all of its adj acent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is the tributary, or its adjacent
wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section IILBA for the tributary, Section III.B.2 for any
onsite wetlands, and Section III.B.3 for all wetlands adj acent to that tributary, both onsite and offsite. The determination whether a
significant nexus exists is determined in Section III.0 below.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: Choose an item.
Drainage area: Choose an item.
Average annual rainfall: inches
Average annual snowfall: inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
❑ Tributary flows directly into TNW.
❑ Tributary flows through Choose an item. tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are Choose an item. river miles from TNW.
Project waters are Choose an item. river miles from RPW.
Project waters are Choose an item. aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are Choose an item. aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
s Supporting documentation is presented in Section IILF.
Note that the histructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and West.
Page 2 of 8 Form Version 10 June 2020

Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flowrouteto TNW5:
Tributary stream order, if known:
(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apply):
Tributary is: ❑Natural
❑Artificial (man-made). Explain:
❑Manipulated (man -altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: feet
Average depth: feet
Average side slopes: Choose an item..
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
❑ Silts ❑ Sands ❑ Concrete
❑Cobbles ❑Gravel ❑Muck
❑Bedrock ❑Vegetation. Type/%cover:
El Other. Explain:
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain:
Presence of run/riffle/pool complexes. Explain:
Tributary geometry: Choose an item.
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: Choose an item.
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year: Choose an item.
Describe flow regime:
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: Choose an item.. Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Choose an item.. Explain findings:
❑Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
❑Bed and banks
❑OHWM6(check all indicators that apply):
❑ clear, natural line impressed on the bank El the presence of litter and debris
❑ changes in the character of soil ❑ destruction of terrestrial vegetation
❑ shelving El the presence of wrack line
❑ vegetation matted down, bent, orabsent ❑ sediment sorting
❑ leaf litter disturbed or washed away
❑ sediment deposition
El water staining
❑ other (list):
❑Discontinuous OHWM.7 Explain:
❑scour
❑multiple observed or predicted flow events
❑X abrupt change in plant community
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
❑High Tide Line indicated by: ❑ Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
'Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.
6A natural or man-made discontinuity in the OIIWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where the
OIIWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OIIWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow regime (e.g., flow
over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
')bid.
Page 3 of 8 Fonn Version 10 June 2020

❑ oil or scum line alongshore objects ❑ survey to available datum;
❑ fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore) ❑physical markings;
❑physical markings/characteristics ❑vegetation lines/changes in vegetation types.
❑tidal gauges
❑ other (list):
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.). Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
❑Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width):
❑Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
❑Habitat for:
El Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally -sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non-TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size: acres
Wetland type. Explain:
Wetland quality. Explain:
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non-TNW:
Flow is: Choose an item. Explain:
Surface flow is: Choose an item.
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Choose an item.. Explain findings:
❑Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non-TNW:
El Directly abutting
❑Not directly abutting
El Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
❑Ecological connection. Explain:
❑ Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are Choose an item. river miles from TNW.
Project waters are Choose an item. aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: Choose an item..
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the Choose an item. floodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general watershed characteristics;
etc.). Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
El Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
Page 4 of 8 Fonn Version 10 June 2020

❑Vegetation type/percent cover. Explain:
❑Habitat for:
❑Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally -sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis: Choose an item.
Approximately acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.
For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions beingperformed:
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed by any
wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of a TNW.
For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, has more
than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and/or biological integrity of a TNW. Considerations when
evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow of water in the tributary and
its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine
significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a
tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adj acent wetland lies within or outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of
significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and discussed in
the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to TNWs, or to
reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and other
species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearingyoung for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream food webs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or biological
integrity of the TNW?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented below:
1. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain findings
of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section IILD:
2. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non-RPW flows directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combinationwith all of its adjacent wetlands,
then go to Section IILD:
3. Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to Section IILD:
Wetland WL 1000 does not directly abut channel CH 100, but due to the proximity of the two features one may flood
into the other during heavy rain events. There is also a likely connection through groundwater..
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL THAT
APPLY):
TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
❑ TNWs: linear feet, wide, Or acres.
Page 5 of 8 Fonn Version 10 June 2020

❑Wetlands adjacentto TNWs: acres.
2. RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
❑ Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year-round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that tributary is
perennial:
0 Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year)are jurisdictional. Data
supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows seasonally: Channels CH
100, CH 2O0, CH 400, and CH 500 all scored above a 19 and below a 30 on the NC Stream ID form
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
0 Tributary waters: 919 linear 1-10feet wide.
NOther non -wetland waters: 10.452 acres.
Identify type(s) of waters: Pond 100 and Pond 400
Non-RPWss that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
❑ Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a TNW is
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section IILC.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
❑ Tributary waters: linear feet, wide.
El Other non -wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
4. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
0 Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
❑ Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year-round. Provide data and rationale indicating that tributary
is perennial in Section IILD.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly abutting an RPW:
❑X Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicatingthat tributary is seasonal in
Section III.B and rationale in Section IILD.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly abutting an RPW: Wetlands WL 1000 and
WL 1100 have a direct hydrologic connection to channel CH 100. Wetland WL 2000 has a direct hydrologic connection to channel CH 2O0. WL
5000 has a direct hydrological connection to channel CH 500.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
❑ Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and with
similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supportingthis conclusion is
provided at Section III.C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
6. Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
❑ Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and with
similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supportingthis conclusion is
provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
7 Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.9
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
❑ Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
❑ Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1-6), or
❑Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
$See Footnote # 3.
'To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III.D.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
Page 6 of 8 Fonn Version 10 June 2020

E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA-STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE, DEGRADATION
OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY SUCH WATERS (CHECK
ALL THAT APPLY): io
❑which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
❑ from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
❑which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
El Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
El Other factors. Explain:
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
❑ Tributary waters: linear feet, wide.
❑Other non -wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
❑Wetlands: acres.
F. NON -JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
❑ If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland
Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
❑Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
❑ Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the "Migratory
Bird Rule" (MBR).
0 Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain: Isolated with no
connection to downstream waters. No Nexus between Wetland WL 1200, WL 2100, or WL 3000 to jurisdictional waters.
El Other: (explain, if not covered above):
Provide acreage estimates for non -jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR factors (i.e.,
presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional judgment (check all
that apply):
❑Non -wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams):linear feet, wide.
❑Lakes/ponds: acres.
❑Other non -wetland waters: acres. Listtype of aquatic resource:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
Provide acreage estimates for non -jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a
finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
❑Non -wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams):linear feet, wide.
❑Lakes/ponds: acres.
El Other non -wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
❑ Wetlands: acres. Wetland WL 1200 (— 0.014 Ac), WL 2100 (-0.033 Ac) and WL 3000 (-0.222) totaling0.269 acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked and
requested, appropriately reference sources below):
❑X Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:
❑X Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
❑ Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
10Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for review
consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.
Page 7 of 8 Fonn Version 10 June 2020

0
El
El
El
❑X
Corps navigable waters' study:
U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑USGS NHD data.
0USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: Concord 1:24,000 Quadrangle.
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:
National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
FEMA/FIRM maps:
100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
Photographs: 0Aerial (Name & Date): Google Earth images.
Or ❑X Other (Name & Date): Date): Site photographs November 34 4rh, and 7ri, 2022.
Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
Applicable/supporting case law:
Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
Other information (please specify): Site Visit conducted 01/31/2023
B.ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:
Page 8 of 8 Fonn Version 10 June 2020

-'/ J� ��%I IIII� l 1
(( \ �) 1
'off �i>iii�`�

•mr�ra�?.�'
LL
C)
C)
C)
C)
Ln
C)
C)
Ln
oLn
U
m
m
o
9 - Z r _ pla a�ea3
�p21•-
�
Cn
.` a -
c� o `E
,`� • U
c
m �• a -0
L :
��► DDOZ 0
CY)
N
O
N
M
O
A
L
(B
7
L
Cll
LL
6
(B
0
Y
V
O
Z
E
tp
LO
O
00
CN
U
ra
N
Z
4
�p
N
fll
OV
LL
LO
C)�
U0)
co
Y
Q
LO
o,
C�
M
J
=
ui
(V
�
=
M
N
V
N
Z
O
+'
i
0
0
Z
O
U
i
O
JL2
U
a-
O
N

mmmovo
0000
co
N
O
N
M
O
i'
(B
7
O
LL
O
(B
0
0
z
L-
0
CV
�
U
fu
N
Z
L
4-
CO
LO
N
L2
o
ULO
0)
co
�
Y
c
ku
0
Q
(3)
i°n
rn
W
m
M
=
Lf )
C
=
re)
mCV
V
N
Z
O
+'
O
U
i
O
J
U
a-
t°
a
z
L1J
N
0
N
4-
O
4 �
(3)
CM