20240583 Ver 1_ePCN Application_20240417

DW R
DHlsloo of Water Resources
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
For Nationwide Permits and Regional General Permits
(along with corresponding Water Quality Certifications)
October 2, 2023 Ver 4.3
Initial Review
Has this project met the requirements for acceptance in to the review process?
Yes No
Is this project a public transportation project?*
Yes No
Change only If needed.
Does this project involve maintenance dredging funded by the Shallow Draft Navigation Channel Dredging and Aquatic Weed Fund or involve the distribution or transmission of energy or
fuel, including natural gas, diesel, petroleum, or electricity?
Yes No
BIMS # Assigned Version# *
20240583 1
Is a payment required for this project?*
No payment required
What amount is owed?*
Fee received
$240.00 $570.00
Fee needed - send electronic notification
$323.00 $767.00
Reviewing Office*
Select Project Reviewer*
Wilmington Regional Office - [phone]
Holley Snider: Holley.Snider
Information for Initial Review
1a. Name of project:
Ponder County Law Enforcement Center
la. Who is the Primary Contact?*
Rick Toone
1b. Primary Contact Email:*
[e-mail]
Date Submitted
4/17/2024
Nearest Body of Water
Burgaw Creek
Basin
Cape Fear
Water Classification
QSW
Site Coordinates
Latitude:
34.56361
A. Processing Information
Is this project connected with ARPA funding?
Yes No
County (or Counties) where the project is located:
Pender
Is this a NCDMS Project
Yes No
Longitude:
-77.94171
1c. Primary Contact Phone:*
[phone]
Is this project a public transportation project?*
Yes No

1a. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
Section 404 Permit (wetlands, streams and waters, Clean Water Act)
Section 10 Permit (navigable waters, tidal waters, Rivers and Harbors Act)
Has this PCN previously been submitted?*
Yes
No
1b. What type(s) of permit(s) do you wish to seek authorization?
Nationwide Permit (NWP)
Regional General Permit (RGP)
Standard (IP)
1c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
Yes No
Nationwide Permit (NWP) Number:
NWP Numbers (for multiple NWPS):
1d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWR:
401 Water Quality Certification - Regular
Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
Individual 401 Water Quality Certification
39 - Commercial/Institutional Developments
le. Is this notification solely for the record because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWR 401 Certification:
For the record only for Corps Permit:
401 Water Quality Certification - Express
Riparian Buffer Authorization
1f. Is this an after -the -fact permit application? *
Yes No
1g. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
Yes No
1g. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
Yes No
1h. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties?
Yes No
1i. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
Yes No Unknown
1j. Is the project located in a designated trout watershed?
Yes No
B. Applicant Information
1d. Who is applying for the permit?
Owner Applicant (other than owner)
1e. Is there an Agent/Consultant for this project?
Yes No
2. Owner Information
2a. Name(s) on recorded deed:
County of Pander
2b. Deed book and page no.:
4699/1680
2c. Contact Person:
Allen Vann
2d.Address
Street Address
PO BOX 5
Address Line 2
City
State / Province / Region
Burgaw
NC
Postal / Zip Code
Country
28425
USA
Yes No
Yes No

2e. Telephone Number:
[phone]
2g. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
4. Agent/Consultant (if applicable)
4a. Name:
Rick Trone
4b. Business Name:
WithersRavenel
4c.Address
Street Address
115 MacKenan Drive
Address Line 2
city
Cary
Postal / Zip Code
27511
4d. Telephone Number:
[phone]
4f. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
C. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Project Information
1b. Subdivision name:
(if appropriate)
1c. Nearest municipality / town:
Burgaw, NC
2. Project Identification
2a. Property Identification Number:
3219-87-6937-0000
2c. Project Address
Street Address
Old Savannah Road
Address Line 2
city
Burgaw
Postal / Zip Code
28425
3. Surface Waters
3a. Name of the nearest body of water to proposed project: "
Burgaw Creek
3b. Water Resources Classification of nearest receiving water:'
C;SW
3c. What river basin(s) is your project located in?*
Cape Fear
3d. Please provide the 12-digit HUC in which the project is located.
030300070801
4. Project Description and History
2f. Fax Number:
State / Province / Region
NC
Country
USA
4e. Fax Number:
2b. Property size:
98.81
State / Province / Region
NC
Country
USA
4a. 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 site is currently vacant and consists primarily of mowed/maintained agricultural land. General land use in the vicinity of the project is primarily residential with some light commercial
activity nearby.
O

4b. Have Corps permits or DWR certifications been obtained for this project (including all prior phases) in the past?"
Yes No Unknown
4f. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
4g. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams on the property:
4,440
4h. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:"
The purpose of the proposed project is to construct a new Detention Center to replace the existing dated and overcrowded facility. The project also proposes the construction of a new Law
Enforcement Center attached to the Detention Center.
4i. Describe the overall project in detail, including indirect impacts and the type of equipment to be used:
The existing Fender County Jail was designed and constructed in 1978, with expansion in 1994 and 1999. The Jail is rated at 92 beds according to the North Carolina Jail and Detention
Branch of the North Carolina Health and Human Services Division. The 1978 portion consists of a total of 30 beds. Fourteen additional beds were added in 1994 and a 48-bed dorm was
added in 1997. The Jail is mostly open dorms, consisting of a mix of 8-man dorms, a 14-man dorm, and a 40-man dorm. The facility has very limited segregation cells and only 2 holding
cells in Booking/Intake.
The existing facility is overcrowded, and inmate population projections indicate ever-increasing future overcrowding. Due to current jail overcrowding and lack of segregated/closed cells,
the County is spending money annually housing as many as 25 inmates/month in other counties and is prevented from gaining revenue for housing outside inmates. The correct cell type
rather than overcrowding is the driving force behind shipping inmates to other Counites as the current facility has mostly minimum -security beds which are inefficient for inmate
classification and separation.
During a Needs Assessment Study performed by Moseley Architects 2020 which studied the population trends from 2015 to 2019, the existing Pander County Jail was determined to have
an Average Daily Population (ADP) of 77.6 inmates. This is 14.4 under the current number of Rated Beds (92) but 4 over the determined Operational Capacity of 73.6 inmates. Operational
Capacity is typically determined by taking 75 %-80 % of the rated beds in a detention facility, in Pander County's case — 92 rated beds means the facilities Operational Capacity is 73.6
inmates.
This study provided population projections to 2045 which shows an ADP requirement of 153.47 beds (in 2045), an increase in ADP of 20 % . A Classified Population Projection was
determined to be 184.17 beds (ADP + 20 % ). Furthermore, a Peak Population Projection was determined to be 224.41 beds (Classified ADP x 1.22). The Classified Peak Population
represents a worst -case population scenario. The Classified Population Projection of 184.17 beds is more likely to reflect the typical day to day population requirements in the Pander
County Jail.
Based on the population projections, a total of 184.17 beds would be required to meet Population and Classification requirements through 2045. To meet the Peak Population
requirements, 224 beds would be needed through 2045. Based on the projected bed needs, the identified bed type aids in proper classification as required by state standards: 75 % of the
jail beds should be double occupancy, 20 % need for special needs beds, and the remaining 5 % should be restrictive housing.
In addition, there will be a Law Enforcement Center attached to the Detention Center. The Law Enforcement Center will contain a Sheriff's Office, 911 operations center, evidence storage
facility, and communications tower.
The project consists of three main components and impacts for all components are included in this submittal:
• Component 1 is the development of the Law Enforcement Center (LEC) Site. This site contains a planned detention center, a
sheriff's office, 911 operations center, evidence storage facility and supporting parking, driveways, communications tower, on -
site utilities, and stormwater conveyance and treatment.
• Component 2 comprises the development of offsite utilities to serve the LEC Site. These include water and sewer services and
electrical, natural gas, and communications services.
• Component 3 includes development of a new driveway to serve the western side of the LEC Site. Due to historical flooding
along Old Savannah Rd, the western access drive is necessary to allow access to the LEC during flooding events.
5. Jurisdictional Determinations
5a. Have the wetlands or streams been delineated on the property or proposed impact areas?"
Yes
No
Comments:
The project site was delineated by SEPI in September 2018 and by Davey Resource Group in 2023.
5b. If the Corps made a jurisdictional determination, what type of determination was made?
Preliminary Approved Not Verified Unknown N/A
Corps AID Number:
SAW-2024-00094
5c. If 5a is yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known):
Agency/Consultant Company: SEPI (2018), Davey Resource Group (2023)
Other:
'' Unknown
5d. List the dates of the Corp jurisdiction determination or State determination if a determination was made by the Corps or DWR
A Jurisdictional Determination request was sent to the USACE by Cape Fear Engineering in January 2024. A Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination was issued for the site on March 14,
2024 (AID: SAW-2024-00094). Please see attached Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination.
NC SHPO issued a comment letter for the project site on January 17, 2024, and indicated they were not aware of any historic resources on the site. A copy of the SHPO letter is attached.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?*
Yes ) No

Are any other NWP(s), regional general permit(s), or individual permits(s) used, or intended to be used, to authorize any part of the proposed project or related activity?
No
D. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1a. Where are the impacts associated with your project? (check all that apply):
Wetlands Streams -tributaries Buffers
Open Waters Pond Construction
3. Stream Impacts
3a. Reason for impact (?)
3b.lmpact type "
3c. Type of impact'" �3�name*
��3e.
Stream Type *
3f. Type of
3g. S. width
3h. Impact
❑
(?)
Jurisdiction*
length*
g1
Rip Rap Dissipator
Permanent
Rip Rap Fill
Ditch 1
Jurisdictional Ditch
Corps
47
Averege (feet)
(linear feet)
S2
Road Crossing
Permanent
Culvert
Stream 1
Intermittent
Both
10
73
Average (feet)
(linear feet)
S3
Rip Rap Dissipator
Permanent
Rip Rap Fill
Stream 1
Intermittent
Both
10
21
Averege (feet)
(linear feet)
3i. Total jurisdictional ditch impact in square feet:
376
31. Total permanent stream impacts:
141
3i. Total stream and ditch impacts:
141
3j. Comments:
E. Impact Justification and Mitigation
31. Total temporary stream impacts:
0
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing the project:
Prior to site plan design, the applicant requested that a detailed wetland delineation be conducted so that impacts to wetlands and "waters" could be
minimized.
Proposed permanent impacts for construction of the Pander County Law Enforcement Center and infrastructure have been minimized to only those
necessary for construction of the western access road and one SCM outfall. There are no impacts for buildings, parking, or utilities.
Feature S1 bisects the site west to east and therefore cannot be avoided in constructing the necessary western access drive. Due to historical flooding
along Old Savannah Rd, the western access drive is necessary to allow access to the LEC during flooding events. The western access drive is proposed
to cross Stream 1 perpendicularly to minimize impacts.
An additional impact is necessary for an ouffall from a proposed wet detention SCM. The SCM will outfall through a 36" RGRCP into a rip rap dissipator.
The dissipator was sized appropriately for the proposed SCM to prevent scouring and erosive flows within the jurisdictional ditch feature. Because the
proposed facility was designed to fit into the developable uplands it was not feasible to minimize jurisdictional ditch impacts by locating the SCM
elsewhere on the site.
1b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques:
Construction techniques used to avoid or minimize impacts include installation of erosion & sediment control devices prior to construction. Matting will be
used where necessary to minimize the extent of impacts within the construction corridor. Silt fencing will be installed around all disturbed areas to
prevent sediment from escaping into undisturbed waters, and access during construction will be within uplands.
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 this project DOES NOT require Compensatory Mitigation, explain why:
The proposed project will result in 0.019 acres of permanent stream impacts from construction of a road crossing. Because the proposed permanent wetland impacts requested are less
than the 0.10-acre mitigation threshold, the applicant does not propose to provide mitigation.
The applicant does not propose mitigation for the 0.009 acres of permanent impacts to jurisdictional ditches.
F. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWR)
8
1. Diffuse Flow Plan

1a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
Yes No
If no, explain why:
Project is located in a non -buffered area of the Cape Fear River basin.
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. Is this a NCDOT project subject to compliance with NCDOT's Individual NPDES permit NCS000250?
Yes No
2b. Does this project meet the requirements for low density projects as defined in 15A NCAC 02H .1003(2)?
Yes No
2c. Does this project have a stormwater management plan (SMP) reviewed and approved under a state stormwater program or state -approved local government stormwater program?
Yes No
N/A - project disturbs < 1 acre
2d. Which of the following stormwater management program(s) apply:
Local Government State
State Stormwater Programs
Phase II Coastal Counties
HWQ or ORW Other
Comments:
Most of the site drains southeast via man-made swales where a SCM is proposed to be located. A smaller portion of the site drains into an existing stormwater conveyance network along
the northern portion of Old Savannah Road.
G. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation
1a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the use of public (federal/state) land?
Yes No
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 (North Carolina)
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?*
Yes No
1c. If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the State Clearing House?
Yes No
Comments: *
An Environmental Assessment has been prepared and submitted to the USDA Rural Development as part of the NEPA process.
2. Violations (DWR Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWR Water Quality Certification Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), or DWR Surface Water or Wetland Standards or
Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)? *
Yes No
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWR Requirement)
3a. Will this project result in additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
Yes No
3b. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
The proposed project will not result in additional development that could impact nearby downstream water quality.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWR Requirement)
4a. Is sewage disposal required by DWR for this project?
Yes No N/A
4b. Describe, in detail, the treatment methods and dispositions (non -discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from the proposed project. If the wastewater will be treated at a
treatment plant, list the capacity available at that plant.
Wastewater will be conveyed via collection system to offsite treatment facility.
5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or habitat?*
Yes No

5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act impacts?"
Yes No
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
Raleigh
5d. Is another Federal agency involved?
Yes No
What Federal Agency is involved?
USDA
5e. Is this a DOT project located within Division's 1-8?
Yes No
5f. Will you cut any trees in order to conduct the work in waters of the U.S.?
Yes No
5g. Does this project involve bridge maintenance or removal?
Yes No
5h. Does this project involve the construction/installation of a wind turbine(s)?*
Yes No
Unknown
5i. Does this project involve (1) blasting, and/or (2) other percussive activities that will be conducted by machines, such as jackhammers, mechanized pile drivers, etc.?
Yes No
5j. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical Habitat?
WR generated the official species list prior to the site visit using USFWS' Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC), located at
https:/Iecos.fws.gov/ipac/. This species list identifies threatened, endangered, proposed and candidate species, as well as proposed and designated
critical habitat, that may occur within the boundary of the project and may be affected by the project. The IPaC list specified that there are fourteen
species (Northern Long-eared Bat, Tricolored Bat, Piping Plover, Red -cockaded Woodpecker, Rufa Red Knot, American Alligator, Green sea turtle,
Kemp's ridley sea turtle, Leatherback sea turtle, Loggerhead sea turtle, Cooley's Meadowrue, Golden Sedge, and Rough -leaved Loosestrife) that may
be within the project area or affected by the project. There is no designated critical habitat within the review area. The 1/31/2024 list has been provided
as an attachment.
WR submitted an updated project review request on 1/31/2024 to the NCNHP through their Data Explorer webpage, located at:
https://ncnhde.natureserve.org/, to identify known occurrences of federally listed threatened or endangered species within 1.0 mile of the review area.
The NCNHP project review listed Chaffseed (Endangered) within the review area or within 1.0 mile, as documented in the attached letter from NCNHP
dated 10/30/2023.
In November 2023, WR conducted a pedestrian survey to assess vegetative communities and identify potential habitat for, or occurrences of federally
listed species within or immediately adjacent to the review area.
The Northern long-eared Bat is a medium-sized bat about 3 to 3.7 inches in length but with a wingspan of 9 to 10 inches. During the summer, Northern
long-eared Bats roost singly or in colonies underneath bark, in cavities or in crevices of both live and dead trees, typically within the interior of large
blocks of mature forests. It has also been found, rarely, roosting in structures like barns and sheds. There has been no critical habitat designated for the
Northern long-eared Bat at this time. Based on the review of NCNHP GIS data, there are no known occurrences of Northern long-eared Bat within 1-mile
of the review area.
Targeted surveys were not conducted for Northern -long eared Bat. There are no known maternity roosts within 0.25 miles of the review area, as well as
no known occurrences within 1.0 mile.
On March 31, 2023, the USFWS reclassified NLEB from threatened to endangered and implemented an Interim Consultation Framework for NLEB.
Consultation tools include a NLEB Range wide Determination Key that is intended to streamline review of projects for potential effects to NLEB. Using
IPaC, the range wide determination key was completed, and a determination of May Affect— Not Likely to Adversely Affect was reached.
Based on the lack of potential suitable habitat, lack of nearby records, limited tree clearing, and the results of the determination key, WR concludes that
the proposed activities are not likely to adversely affect the Northern long-eared Bat.
Biological Determination — Not Likely to Adversely Affect
The Tricolored Bat is a small insectivorous bat. Tricolored Bats are typically 3 to 3.5 inches long
During the winter, Tricolored Bats are often found in caves and abandoned mines, although in the southern United States, where caves are sparse,
Tricolored Bats are often found roosting in road -associated culverts where they exhibit shorter torpor bouts and forage during warm nights. During the
spring, summer, and fall, Tricolored Bats are found in forested habitats where they roost in trees, primarily among leaves of live or recently dead
deciduous hardwood trees, but may also be found in Spanish moss, pine trees, and occasionally human structures.
The USFWS has no definitive guidance on Tricolored Bat but is working towards developing guidelines by the time the listing is finalized. The USFWS
proposed to list the Tricolored Bat as an endangered species under the ESA on September 13, 2022, largely because of white -nose syndrome, a
disease that affects cave -dwelling bats and is decimating hibernating bat species. There has been no critical habitat designated for the Tricolored Bat at
this time. Based on the review of the NCNHP GIS data there are no known occurrences of the Tricolored Bat within 1.0 mile of the review area.
The early successional and mowed maintained vegetative communities are not considered suitable habitat due to the lack of trees. The only potential
suitable habitat is the mixed hardwood/pine forests and the planted pine. There is no expected tree clearing along Old Savanah Road, as the project will
be contained within the existing ROW. Any potential tree clearing will be limited to a small area of the 2.5 acre planted pine. The project will not result in
demolition of any manmade structures.
Upon listing, USFWS is expected to provide habitat descriptions and an area of influence/distribution range for tricolored bat. When this information is
provided, it will help to inform determinations on habitat that could be impacted by proposed actions.
Based on the limited potential habitat, no demolition of manmade structures, and lack of nearby records, WR concludes that the proposed action is Not
Likely to Adversely Affect tricolored bat.
Biological Determination — Not Likely to Adversely Affect
The Red -cockaded Woodpecker (RCW) occurs in extensive tracts of open stands of mature pines, particularly longleaf pine (Pinus palustris), for

foraging and nesting/roosting habitat, typically 70 to 100 acres or more. The red -cockaded woodpecker is rarely found in deciduous or mixed/pine
hardwoods. The review of the NCNHP GIS data did not identify any known occurrences of RCW within 1-mile of the review area.
The review area consists of mostly of early successional and mowed/maintained and mixed hardwood/pine forest and does not contain potential RCW
nesting habitat. The area of planted pines is approximately 2.5 acres and is not considered potential habitat. Additionally, there are no large, mature pine
dominated areas within 0.5 miles of the review area. Therefore, the review area does not contain potential RCW foraging habitat.
Based on a lack of suitable nesting/foraging habitat within the review area, along with a lack of nearby records, WR concludes that proposed activities
will have No Effect on the red -cockaded woodpecker.
Biological Determination — No Effect
Cooley's Meadowrue is a perennial herb originating from an underground rhizome which usually grows up to 1 meter in height. In full sun, the stems are
erect, and when shaded, stems are lax and may trail on the ground or lean on other plants. Cooley's Meadowrue occurs on circumneutral soils in grass -
sedge bogs and wetland pine savannahs and savannah -like areas. It may also grow along fire flow lines, in roadside ditches, woodland clearings and
power line right of way, and needs some type of disturbance such as fire or mowing to maintain open habitat. A review of the NCNHP data did not
identify any known occurrences of Cooley's Meadowrue within 1-mile of the review area.
The review area consists mostly of dense early successional vegetation that do not have an open habitat that is required for Cooley's meadowrue and
was not considered suitable habitat. The mixed hardwood/pine forest was not considered suitable habitat due to the dense understory and dense tree
canopy. Additionally, the mowed/maintained vegetation is mowed frequently enough to maintain vegetation heights of 5 to 7 inches which prevents
growth and maturation of Cooley's meadowrue. Therefore, there is no potential habitat present in the review area.
Based on a lack of suitable habitat within the review area, along with a lack of nearby records, WR concludes that proposed activities will have No Effect
on the Cooley's meadowrue.
Biological Determination — No Effect
Golden Sedge is a very rare perennial member of the sedge family (Cyperaceae) endemic to the coastal plain of North Carolina. Stems may reach 1
meter or more in height but are typically 0.5 meters or less in length. Golden Sedge grows in sandy soils overlying calcareous deposits of coquina
limestone, where the soil pH, typically between 5.5 and 7.2, is unusually high for this region. Golden Sedge prefers ecotones between the pine savanna
and adjacent wet hardwood or hardwood/conifer forest. Most occur in partially shaded savanna/swamp where occasional frequent fires favor an
herbaceous ground layer and suppress shrub dominance. Soils supporting the species are very wet to periodically shallowly inundated. Other
occurrences may occur on disturbed areas such as roadside and drainage ditches or power line rights -of -way, where mowing and/or very wet conditions
suppress woody plants. Based on the review of the NCNHP GIS data, there are no known occurrences of Golden Sedge within 1-mile of the review
area.
The review area consists mostly of dense early successional vegetation that do not have an open habitat that is required for golden sedge and was not
considered suitable habitat. The mixed hardwood/pine forest was not considered suitable habitat due to the dense understory and dense tree canopy.
Additionally, the mowed/maintained vegetation is mowed frequently enough to maintain vegetation heights of 5 to 7 inches which prevents growth and
maturation of golden sedge. Therefore, there is no potential habitat present in the review area.
Based on a lack of potential habitat, and lack nearby record, WR concludes that the proposed activities will have No Effect on golden sedge.
Biological determination - No Effect
Rough -leaved Loosestrife is a plant with erect, rhizomatous, late spring- to early summer -flowering perennial herb which grows to 2 feet tall. Its leaves
are mostly 3-whorled, lanceolate to ovate -lanceolate, sessile, and 2-4 cm long. Rough -leaved Loosestrife occurs most often in ecotones between
longleaf pine uplands and pond pine pocosins in moist, sandy, or peaty soils with low vegetation that allows for abundant sunlight to the herb layer. Fire
is primarily responsible for maintaining low vegetation in these ecotones. A review of the NCNHP data did not identify any known occurrences of Rough -
leaved Loosestrife within 1-mile of the review area.
There are no pond pine pocosins/long leaf pine uplands within the review area and therefore there is no potential habitat onsite. The early successional
and mowed/maintaned communities provide low vegetation and abundant sunlight but are considered marginal habitat at best. The onsite vegetative
communities were not considered potential habitat due to these communities not being associated with ecotones between longleaf pine uplands and
pond pine pocosins, and a lack of fire disturbance needed to maintain a population.
The review area consists mostly of dense early successional vegetation that do not have an open habitat that is required for rough -leaved loosestrife
and was not considered suitable habitat. The mixed hardwood/pine forest was not considered suitable habitat due to the dense understory and dense
tree canopy. There are no pond pine pocosins with low vegetation that allows for the required sunlight adjacent to the review area. Additionally, the
mowed/maintained vegetation is mowed frequently enough to maintain vegetation heights of 5 to 7 inches which prevents growth of woody species,
including rough -leaved loosestrife. Therefore, there is no potential habitat present in the review area.
Based on a lack of potential habitat, and lack of nearby records, WR concludes that the proposed activities will have No Effect on rough -leaved
loosestrife.
Biological determination - No Effect
American Chaffseed is an erect perennial herb with mostly unbranched stems, usually 30 to 60 cm tall. Leaves are largest at the base of the plant and
gradually diminish in size towards the top of the stem. The 2-lipped flowers are yellow, suffused with purple. The entire plant is covered in soft hairs. This
species is parasitic on the roots of a wide variety of woody and herbaceous plants. It is in bloom from April through June. Its habitat consists of acidic,
sandy, or peaty soils in open pine flatwoods, seepage bogs, palustrine pine savannahs, and other grass- and sedge -dominated plant communities. It
frequently grows in ecotonal areas between peaty wetlands and xeric sandy soils. In these situations, individuals sometimes extend well into the drier
communities, but seldom into the areas that support species characteristic of wetter soils. Surrounding plant communities are typically species rich. The
plant is dependent on factors such as fire, mowing and fluctuating water tables to maintain is required open to partly open habitat. Most extant
occurrences are in areas subject to frequent fire.
Based on the review of the NCNHP GIS data, there is a documented occurrence of chaffseed within 1.0 mile of the review area as documented in the
attached project review letter from NCNHP dated 10/30/2023. This occurrence was last observed in 1953 and according to the NCNHP letter element
occurrence rank, which is an estimate of the viability of the occurrence, is listed as "X" which indicates that the occurrence has been destroyed.
The review area consists mostly of dense early successional vegetation that do not have an open habitat that is required for American Chaffseed and
was not considered suitable habitat. The mixed hardwood/pine forest was not considered suitable habitat due to the dense understory and dense tree
canopy. Additionally, the mowed/maintained vegetation is mowed frequently enough to maintain vegetation heights of 5 to 7 inches which prevents
growth and maturation of American Chaffseed. Therefore, there is no potential habitat present in the review area.
Based on a lack of potential habitat, and the historical/destroyed nature of the nearby record, WR concludes that the proposed activities will have No
Effect on American Chaffseed.
Biological determination - No Effect
The review area does not contain occurrences of, or potential habitat for the Red -cockaded Woodpecker, Cooley's Meadowrue, Golden Sedge, or

rcougn-ieave0 1_00sesune, 0r i.nanseea, an0 me prop05eu acuwues Will nave no enecr 0n ulese species
The review area does not contain potential habitat for the Northern long-eared Bat, and Tricolored Bat. Based on the lack of nearby known occurrences,
and the results of the NLEB determination key, WR concludes that the proposed activities are not likely to adversely affect the Northern long-eared Bat.
Based on the lack of nearby known occurrences, WR concludes that the proposed activities are not likely to adversely affect the Tricolored Bat.
No habitat exists within the project area for the other listed species and WR concludes the proposed activities will have no affect on Piping Plover, Rufa
Red Knot, American Alligator, or sea turtles.
Therefore, based on our findings and best professional judgement, the proposed project will not adversely affect federally listed threatened or
endangered species.
Please see the attached Federally Listed Threatened and Endangered Species Assessment for additional information
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as an Essential Fish Habitat?*
Yes No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact an Essential Fish Habitat? *
WR reviewed the NOAA Essential Fish Habitat online mapper, located at: http://www.habitat.noaa.gov/protection/efh/efhmapper/index.htmi. The EFH
mapper lists EFH for Windowpane Flounder and Clearnose Skate located approximately 17.4 miles southeast of the proposed project, as Essential Fish
Habitat. However, the project will not result in adverse impacts to Essential Fish Habitat within the mapped EFH areas.
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 status?
Yes No
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources? *
NC SHPO issued a comment letter for the project site on January 17, 2024, and indicated they were not aware of any historic resources on the site. A
copy of the SHPC letter is attached.
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain? *
Yes No
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?
FEMA flood maps.
Miscellaneous
Please use the space below to attach all required documentation or any additional information you feel is helpful for application review. Documents should be combined into one file when
possible, with a Cover Letter, Table of Contents, and a Cover Sheet for each Section preferred.
Click the upload button or drag and drop files here to attach document
Pender County LEC_Cover Letter and Attachments.pdf 16.72MB
20240131 NLAA Consistency NLEB_RW.pdf 331.83KB
Pander Co LEC self-certification-2-20-24.pdf 7.09MB
File must be PDF or KMZ
Comments
Please see the included Cover Letter and Attachments.
Signature
By checking the box and signing below, I certify that:
• The project proponent hereby certifies that all information contained herein is true, accurate, and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief'; and
• The project proponent hereby requests that the certifying authority review and take action on this CWA 401 certification request within the applicable reasonable period of time.
• I have given true, accurate, and complete information on this form;
• I agree that submission of this PCN form is a "transaction" subject to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
• I agree to conduct this transaction by electronic means pursuant to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
• I understand that an electronic signature has the same legal effect and can be enforced in the same way as a written signature; AND
• I intend to electronically sign and submit the PCN form.
Full Name:
Rick Trone
Signature
44 T"At
Date
4/17/2024
O