20160155 Ver 1_401 Application_20160216

lrommissioners
Frank E. Dickey
David C. Hilton
Barry R. McClure
February 11, 2016
Mr. David Brown, PG
ToWn of Aurpbp
William N. Hughes, Mayor
P.O. Box 130
Murphy, North Carolina 28906
[phone] • Fax [phone]
town_of murphy@frontierconc
Asheville Regulatory Field Office
US Army Corps of Engineers
151 Patton Avenue — Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801-5006
Dear Mr. Brown:
Commissioners
Sandra N. Sumpter
Barbara P. Vicknair
'Karen Watson
20160155
RE: Emergency Streambanlc Repair
Valley River
Town of Murphy
CherokeeCounty, North. Carolina
Please find enclosed one (1) copy of the Arany Corps of Engineers permit application for
the above referenced activity. This emergency repair became urgently necessary due to flooding
from excessive rains in late December which caused a portion of the streambanlc to erode,
thereby jeopardizing the Town's existing sanitary sewer line. By copy of this letter (with copy of
Army Corps application enclosed) to the North Carolina Division of Water Resources, North
Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, we
are, providing this application to these agencies for their respective actions.
Please advise if additional information is needed.
Sincerely,
Anna Payne
Town Manager
Enclosures
Cc: NC Division of Water Resources, WBSCP Unit, Raleigh office
Andrea Leslie, NCWRC Mountain Region Supervisor, Waynesville office
Byron Hamstead, US Fish and Wildlife Service, Asheville office
Anna A. Payne, Town Manager - Cowan & Cowan, Attorneys

Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.3 Dec 10 2008
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A. Applicant Information
1. Processing
1a. Type(s) of approval sought from the
Corps:
®Section 404 Permit ❑Section 10 Permit
1b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 13 or General Permit (GP) number:
1c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
❑ Yes
® No
1d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
® 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular ❑ Non -404 Jurisdictional General Permit
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification — Express ❑ Riparian Buffer Authorization
le. Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWQ 401
Certification:
❑ Yes ® No
For the record only for Corps Permit:
❑ Yes ® No
1f. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation
of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank or in -lieu
fee program.
❑ Yes
® No
1g. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below.
❑ Yes
® No
1h. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ Yes
® No
2. Project Information
2a. Name of project:
Valley River Bank Stabilization
2b. County:
Cherokee
2c. Nearest municipality / town:
Murphy
2d. Subdivision name:19
2e. NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state
project no:
3. Owner Information -
2016
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
Tennessee Valley Authority DE
3b. Deed Book and Page No.
Not listedam
-
p S
3c. Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
Project work was completed within the permanent sewer line easement.
3d. Street address:
400 W Summit Hill Dr
3e. City, state, zip:
Knoxville, TN 37902
3f. Telephone no.:
3g. Fax no.:
3h. Email address:
Page 1 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

Corp Submittal Cover Sheet
Please provide the following info:
1. Project Name: Valley River Bank Stabilization
2. Name of Property Owner/Applicant: Owner: TVA: applicant: Town of Murphy - project in sewer line easement
3. Name of Consultant/Agent: McGill Associates, P.A.
*Agent authorization needs to be attached.
4. Related/Previous Action ID numbers(s):
5. Site Address: Corner of Bulldog Drive and Andrews Road
6. Subdivision Name:
7. City: Town of Murphy
8. County: Cherokee
9. Lat: 35.1009°N - 84.0196°W
10. Quadrangle Name: Murphy. NC
11. Waterway: Valley River
12. Watershed: Hiwassee
13. Requested Action:
®Nationwide Permit # 13
❑ General Permit#
❑ Jurisdictional Determination Request
❑ Pre -Application Request
The following information will be completed by Corps office:
AID:
Prepare File Folder Assign number in ORM Begin Date
Authorization: Section 10 Section 404
Project Description/ Nature of Activity/ Project Purpose:
Site/Waters Name:
Keywords:

4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is:
❑ Agent ® Other, specify: Town of Murphy
4b. Name:
Mayor William N Hughes
4c. Business name
(if applicable):
Murphy City Hall
4d. Street address:
5 Wofford St
4e. City, state, zip:
Murphy, NC 28906
4f. Telephone no.:
[phone]
4g. Fax no.:
4h. Email address:
5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name:
John Vilas
5b. Business name
(if applicable):
McGill Associates, P.A.
5c. Street address:
468 New Market Blvd. Ste. B
5d. City, state, zip:
Boone, NC 28607
5e. Telephone no.:
[phone]
5f. Fax no.:
5g. Email address:
[e-mail]
Page 2 of 11

B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
459219616366000
1b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
Latitude: 35.1009 Longitude: - 84.0196
(DD.DDDDDD) (-DD.DDDDDD)
1c. Property size:
748.07 acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc.) to
proposed project:
Valley River i
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
C; Tr
2c. River basin: map is available at
hftp://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/admin/maps/
Hiwassee
3. Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land -use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
The Proiect is located in the Town of Murphy. Cherokee County, along the right bank of the Valley River (see USGS
Topographic Map). The Proiect is situated between Bulldog Drive bridge, on the west end, and an area of existing
riprap, on the east end of the project. The Project is a 120 linear foot section of moderate to severely eroded river
bank caused by a series of heavy rain events during Fall of 2015 (see Existing Conditions Map). Bank erosion
threatened portions of an existing 16" DIP sewer line (see Photo Sheet). Immediate surrounding areas include
commercial, institutional, and residential properties along Andrews Road. '
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
There are no wetlands on the Project Site.
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
Valley River: 120 -If (within the Project Site) - perennial =
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
The purpose of the proiect is to provide emergency stabilization on an eroded river bank and protect the sewer line.
1
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
The Project was completed as emergency bank stabilization repair work. Repair work was initiated by the Town
before New Years (2016). and bank stabilization work was finished during the first week of January 2016.
The Project reach was visited by John Vilas from McGill Associates following the heave rain events. A 120 -foot long
section of eroding river bank was identified with approximately 80 -feet of severe erosion and 40 -feet of moderate
erosion. Plans to permanently stabilize the Project reach were completed by McGill Associates. For the severely
eroded section, a boulder toe would be installed along the base of the bank, anchored below streambed, with riprap
armoring installed along the high bank (see Stabilization Detail A -A'). For the moderately eroded sections, riprap
armoring would be used to stabilize the eroded high bank (see Stabilization Detail B -BT the low bank would not be
disturbed because the low bank was identified as being stable with existing woody vegetation. Non -woven filter cloth
would be placed behind the boulder toe. High banks in all eroded sections would be shaped and compacted to a
uniform slope before riprap is installed. All disturbed areas would be covered with bio -degradable Erosion Control Mat
and seeded with an erosion control mix following work.
Work to be completed by track hoe and dump truck.
Page 3 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
Comments:
El Yes ®No El Unknown
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
of determination was made?
❑ Preliminary ❑ Final
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known): John Vilas. 12-28-15
Agency/Consultant Company: McGill Associates, P.A.
Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
❑ Yes ® No ❑ Unknown
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?
❑ Yes ® No
6b. If yes, explain.
Page 4 of 11

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
❑ Wetlands ® Streams - tributaries ❑ Buffers
❑ Open Waters ❑ Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a.
2b.
2c.
2d.
2e.
2f.
Wetland impact
Type of jurisdiction
number -
Type of impact
Type of wetland
Forested
(Corps - 404, 10
Area of impact
Permanent (P) or
(if known)
DWQ - non -404, other)
(acres)
Temporary T
W1 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
W2 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
W3 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
W4 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
W5 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
W6 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
2g. Total wetland impacts
2h. Comments:
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a.
3b.
3c.
3d.
3e.
3f.
3g•
Stream impact
Type of impact
Stream name
Perennial
Type of jurisdiction
Average
Impact
number -
(PER) or
(Corps - 404, 10
stream
length
Permanent (P) or
intermittent
DWQ - non -404,
width
(linear
Temporary (T)
(INT)?
other)
(feet)
feet)
S1 ®P ❑ T
- - -
Bank Stabilization
- -
Valley River
-- - -
® PER
-❑ INT -- --
® Corps
-❑ DWQ - - -
90
120
S2 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ PER
❑ Corps
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
S3 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ PER
❑ Corps
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
S4 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ PER
❑ Corps
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
S5 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ PER
❑ Corps
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
S6 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ PER
❑ Corps
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
120
3i. Comments: 120 -If permanent impacts for bank stabilization.
Page 5 of 11

4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then individually list all open water impacts below.
4a.
4b.
4c.
4d.
4e.
Open water
Name of waterbody
impact number -
(if applicable)
Type of impact
Waterbody type
Area of impact (acres)
Permanent (P) or
Tem ora T
01 ❑P❑T
02 ❑P❑T
03 ❑P❑T
04 ❑P❑T
4f. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments:
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, then complete the chart below.
5a.
5b.
5c.
5d.
5e.
Wetland Impacts (acres)
Stream Impacts (feet)
Upland
Pond ID
Proposed use or purpose
(acres)
number
of pond
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
P1
P2
5f. Total
5g. Comments:
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If any impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a. - - - - -
❑ Neuse ❑ Tar -Pamlico ❑ Other:
Project is in which protected basin?
❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman
6b.
6c.
6d.
6e.
6f.
6g.
Buffer impact
number -
Reason
Buffer
Zone 1 impact
Zone 2 impact
Permanent (P) or
for
Stream name
mitigation
(square feet)
(square feet)
Temporary T
impact
B1 ❑P❑T
-required?
El Yes
❑ No
132 ❑P❑T
El Yes
❑ No
63 ❑P❑T
El Yes
❑ No
6h. Total buffer impacts
6i. Comments:
Page 6 of 11

D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
The purpose of the Proiect was to stabilize sections of moderate to severely eroded river bank that were contributing
sediment to the river and threatening an existing sewer line This project achieved this purpose with minimal
permanent impacts.
b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
Project work was completed from the banks: no equipment operated within the river channel. Disturbed areas along
the river bank were stabilized immediately following construction activity.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
❑ Yes ® No
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
❑ DWQ ❑ Corps
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project?
❑ Mitigation bank
El Payment to in-lieu fee program
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type
Quantity
----- - -- - - -- -- -- ----- - - ---- - - - - -- - — -- --- - -- — ---
3c. Comments:
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In-lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in-lieu fee program is attached.
❑ Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested:
linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
❑ warm ❑ cool ❑cold
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4f. Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4h. Comments:
Page 7 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) — required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
buffer mitigation? If yes, you will have to fill out this entire form — please
contact the State for more information.
❑ Yes ® No
6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required.
Zone
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Total impact
(square feet)
Multiplier
6e.
Required mitigation
(square feet)
Zone 1
3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2
1.5
6f. Total buffer mitigation required:
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in -lieu fee fund).
6h. Comments:
Page 8 of 11

E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
la. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
El Yes ®No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1 b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
El Yes Yes ❑
Comments:
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
0% i
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
❑ Yes ® No J
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why: Stormwater rules are not applicable to
bank stabilization projects under a NWP #13.
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
❑ Certified Local Government
2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
❑ DWQ Stormwater Program,
❑ DWQ 401 Unit
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which local government's jurisdiction is this project?
Cherokee
❑ Phase II
3b. Which of the following locally -implemented stormwater management programs
❑ NSW
❑ USMP
apply (check all that apply):
❑ Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other: None
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ❑ No
attached?
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
❑ Coastal counties
❑ HQW
Aa. --Which of the following state -implemented stormwater management programs apply
❑ ORW-- -- , - -- ---- -- --
(check all that apply):
❑ Session Law 2006-246
❑ Other:
4b. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ❑ No
attached?
5. DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a. Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
❑ Yes ❑ No
5b. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
❑ Yes ❑ No
Page 9 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version'

F. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
la. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the
® Yes ❑ No
use of public (federal/state) land?
1b. If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State
❑ Yes ® No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1c. If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
letter.)
❑ Yes ❑ No
Comments:
2. Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
❑ Yes ® No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b. Is this an after -the -fact permit application?
® Yes ❑ No
2c. If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s):
Project was an emergency repair fob completed to prevent further erosion problems that threatened a main sewer
line. Bank erosion was caused by a series of heavy rain events during the Fall of 2015.
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in
❑ Yes ® No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b. If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
Proiect is a bank stabilization project with the goal of stopping erosion problems and improving water quality. No
facilities are proposed to be constructed which would enable future development.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a. Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non -discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
None
Page 10 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

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.
E3 Raleigh
❑ Asheville
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
http://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/cntylist/cherokee.htmi; North Carolina Natural Heritage Program database query
found occurrences for State Species of Concern within the Proiect Site: no listed occurrences for Federal species in
the Project Site. Federally listed species with the potential to occur in the Project include three species of invertebrate
mussels: Cumberland bean (pearlymussel): Little -wing pearlymussel: Tan riffleshell. No coordination with the USFWS
was performed prior to making emergency repairs. Project work was completed on banks that were previously
disturbed and experiencing degraded habitat conditions. It is the conclusion of McGill Associates that no occurrences
for Federally listed species are located in the Proiect reach or were Federally listed species impacted by the Proiect.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
❑ Yes ® No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
NOAA Essential Fish Habitat Mapper v3.0: http://www.habitat.noaa.gov/protection/efh/habitatmapper.html
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 (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
❑ Yes ® No
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
NC State Historic Preservation Office: http://gis.ncdcr.gov/hpoweb/
The nearest listed historical structure Robert Lafayette Cooper House. is 1 1/4 -miles southwest from the Project.
8, Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)__
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA -designated 100 -year floodplain?
® Yes ❑ No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements: The Project was completed in mapped AE (Floodway). Surface
elevations were not affected by Project work.
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? NC Flood Risk Information System:
hftp://fds.nc.gov/fds/Home.aspx
Town of Murpby
Anna A. Payne
Applicant/Agent's Printed NameDate
--------- _-------_----
2/11/16 --
Applicant/Agent's Signature
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant
is provided.
Page 11 of 11

&2'
i R��rtsmA�'
M X,
EN
aINSGS lopographicquadrangle:
Murphy, NG
J U 530 00
FEET
1 inch-= 2,000 feet
USGS TOPOGRAPHIC McGill VALLEY RIVER
LOCATION MAP Project No. BANK STABILIZATION McGi
JANUARY 28, 2016 12.00328 TOWN OF MURPHY A S S O C I A T E S
CHEROKEE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL -PLANNING •FINANCE
068%EN'MARKET BLVD STL B BOONE.%C21607 PH [phone]

cli f
C4 r
d
La
0 -
In
In
LL- cry A
, 4m
&
X <
co i
s—
z
sl
vtLu
IV
z L LU I
F= W
F6 w
V)0�1 CW).
Ld Zl%V j-
57< W0
LLI z
CD C-4
M til <
00 C'4 LLJ W-
04
n —Z ED 0 K -r ks
0)0 w
04
uj
cl --i
Z
L2 qq U D W t.lia'La
LLJ a
)ZWCX OD
w <
z V)
z
EnrZLnw) jX
am-
W CL
W
tLZWLJ
V) w
W Z
till
U) -i W t
0-J a-
0
of 0. <
v
C) w
Z
Al
LLJ
C O_If)
W O
0 CU
< CL _j :2
0 L-
a.:r OD Z> :3 N cCO)
LLJ C�
N 4— 0 1—
0 o cu
L OCO)
w OC)
V)-�d 0
0 z re)b) 0
cu (.) c
7)
0- � 0)
0
N19. V) 1 C14
< Lfo)
of R F
CL W V) :E l;j (>1) to
x
(D
cu
�K
k
Ma;AF
I OX,
z
V) co
LL.
W
0
cn LLJ
0 —1 a
a- < CIL
ir 0:
c6
N

7w, mum-
WommmaLmho-'W"
TF v �.
Va�Vl
7w, mum-
WommmaLmho-'W"
TF v �.

:?7t
46
G.-

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 FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
State: NC County/parish/borough: Cherokee City: Murphy
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 35.1009° N, Long. -84.0196° W.
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Valley River
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: Hiwassee River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 06020002
® Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
0 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):
0 Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
0 Field Determination. Date(s):
SECTION D: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There AreAre oo "navigable waters ojdte U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review area [Required]
0 Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
Q 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 kie "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
Q TNWs, including territorial seas
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
® Relatively permanent waters'' (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Q Non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Q --- Impoundments of jurisdictional waters -
Q Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non -wetland waters: 120 linear feet: 90 width (ft) and/or acres.
Wetlands: acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on:
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
2. Non-regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable):
�] Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain:
Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section Ill below.
For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TN W and that typically flows year-round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally'
(e.g., typically 3 months).
Supporting documentation is presented in Section 111.F.

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.I and Section III.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections III.A.1 and 2
and Section III.D.1.; otherwise, see Section IIIM below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
Wetland adjacent to TNW
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 IH.D.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section IH.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 waterbody° is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section III.B.1 for
the tributary, Section III.B.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section III.B.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section IH.0 below.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: tFWLLList
Drainage area: Pick'List
Average annual rainfall: inches
Average annual snowfall: _inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
❑ Tributary flows directly into TNW.
❑ Tributary flows through kick List tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are rick -List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are ick-Eist river miles from RPW.
Project waters are V ck-1-6 aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are jji k list aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNW5:
Tributary stream order, if known:
Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and
West.
5 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.

(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: Pick' List.
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
❑ Silts ❑ Sands ❑ Concrete
❑ Cobbles ❑ Gravel ❑ Muck
❑ Bedrock ❑ Vegetation. Type1% cover:
❑ Other. Explain:
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain:
Presence ofrun/riffle/poolcomplexes. Explain:
Tributary geometry: IF,,ick Ltst
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: Pick -List
Estimate average number of flow events in review arealyear: ,Fckk_ ;L_i 7t
Describe flow regime:
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is:.ickr ig. Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: kct Ltst. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
❑ Bed and banks
❑ OHWM6 (check all indicators that apply):
❑ clear, natural line impressed on the bank
❑
❑ changes in the character of soil
❑
❑ shelving
❑
❑ vegetation matted down, bent, or absent
❑
❑ leaf litter disturbed or washed away
❑
❑ sediment deposition
❑
❑ water staining
❑
❑ other (list):
❑ Discontinuous OHWM 7 Explain:
the presence of litter and debris
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
the presence of wrack line
sediment sorting
scour
multiple observed or predicted flow events
abrupt change in plant community
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
Q High Tide Line indicated by: Q Mean High Water Mark indicated by:- - - ---- - ----
❑ oil or scum line along shore objects ❑ survey to available datum;
❑ fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore) ❑ physical markings;
❑ physical markings/characteristics ❑ vegetation lines/changes in vegetation types.
❑ tidal gauges
❑ other (list):
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality, general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
6A natural or man-made discontinuity in the OH WM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OH WM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OH WM 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 mdicatorsof flow above and below the break.
'Ibid.

(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width):
❑ Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally -sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatidwildlife 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: YPick List. Explain:
Surface flow is: Pick List
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Ick:)( Ist. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adiacencv Determination with Non-TNW:
❑ Directly abutting
❑ Not directly abutting
❑ Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
❑ Ecological connection. Explain:
❑ Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are .ick-'Ust river miles from TNW.
Project waters are P,ickUst aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: - ick ist
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the �k Iiis[ 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):
❑ Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
❑ Vegetation typelpercent cover. Explain:.
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally -sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatidwildlife diversity. Explain findings:.
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any) T
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis: PfC70LIist
Approximately ( ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.

For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (YIN) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and/or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
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 III.D:
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 combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section 111.13:
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 III.D:
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
1. TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
Q TNWs: linear feet width (ft), Or, acres.
Wetlands adjacent to 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: Valley River is a wide perennial system with year round flow. The project reach is mapped AE
(Floodway) by FEMA. Strong evidence of annual over bank flow events; verywell sorted bed material; strong pregence of
fish, invertebrate and macro -invertebrate species, as well as amphibians.
p 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:

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
® Tributary waters:120 linear feet 90 width (ft).
® Other non -wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
3. Non-RPWsa 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 III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
❑ Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
❑ Other non -wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
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 III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW:
❑ Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section III.B and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW:
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 supporting this
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 supporting this
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.
Q 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).
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):10
❑ 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.
Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
Other factors. Explain:
sSee Footnote # 3.
9 To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section If I.D.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CIVA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.

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 width (ft).
_S_ 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).
+ Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
Q 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 width (ft).
❑Q Lakes/ponds: acres.
Other non -wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
Wetlands: acres.
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in 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, width (ft). a
ED Lakes/ponds: acres.
ED Other non -wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
rs Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
® Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:
® 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:
a Corps navigable waters' study:
U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:--
❑ USGS NHD data
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
® U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: Murphy, NC 1:24,000 (attached Topo Map).
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:
ED 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: ® Aerial (Name & Date): Existing Conditions Map. ;
or ® Other (Name & Date): 2015 -field inspection photos. ;
® Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
Applicabletsupporting case law:
- Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:
e

NC Y)WO Stream Identification Fnrm Version 4.11
Date: l� - 2 -' IS
Project/S1te:Tar..�n or-M`-�
V�.11e" . ;UC_(•�
Latitude: 35.Iooh
Evaluator: j.�" \Il jo-s
County: `. e:r tkaC
Longitude: -9
Total Points:
ne'
Stream Determination (cLereon.
Other
SStream is at /east intermittent t:
r a i i
�' "
Ephemeral Intermittentnial
e.g.Quad Name.
perennial if 2 30'
2
2
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 1 ✓ )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1°• Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
0 1 0.5 1.5
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
2
3. In -channel structure- ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
2
M
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
(25
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
6. Depositional bars or benches
D
1
FACW-=-0.75; OBL =1.5 Other T10`
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
3
8. Headcuts
Q>
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
�5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
Cl -5"}
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes t-_3'_
artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
R. Hvdroloov (Subtotal= S I
12. Presence of Baseflow
0 1 2 Q)
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
6N 1 2 3
14. Leaf litterfL
s 1 0.5 0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0 0.5 (il 1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0 1 0.5 1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0 Yes:f3')_
C. Bioloav (Subtotal = 12-
18.
2
18. Fibrous roots in streambed Qj
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance) 0
1
OD
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks 0
1
2
3
22. Fish D
0.5
1.5
23. Crayfish Cob 1
0.5- 1
1
1.5
24. Amphibians 0
1
1.5
25. Algae D
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in-streambed
FACW-=-0.75; OBL =1.5 Other T10`
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch: -w-- --- �•w- �-- ----� -~
L)et c e, tea:
-- `moi Z�