20041743 Ver 2_401 Application_20071219

i'
~~~ THE LPA GROUP of North Caroling, p.a.
Transportation Consultants
5000 FALLS OF NEUSE ROAD, SUITE 304 ^ RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27609 ^ 919-954-1244 ^ FAX [phone]
December 18, 2007

PAID
Ms. Cyndi Karoly
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
401 Certification Unit
2321 Crabtree Blvd., Suite 250
Raleigh NC, 27604
Ms. Karoly:
DEC 1 9 2007
UENR -WATER aUALITY
1Nl:IlAND3 AND 31"E>RIYMfATI:RBRANGH
On behalf of Martin County North Carolina, THE LPA GROUP of North Carolina, p.a. is requesting a
Jurisdictional Determination from the USAGE and applying for a Section 401 Water Quality Certification
(Major Application) for improvements at the Martin County Airport located north of Everetts, NC. The
Martin County Airport proposes the construction of three new taxilanes, (Taxilane A, Taxilane B, and
Taxilane C), two corporate hangars, (w/associated parking), an eight unit T-hangar, an apron for the
corporate hangars and T-hangar, and a new road for vehicle access to the hangar areas.
The development of the hangar area would permanently impact approximately 1.5 acres of jurisdictional
wetland and approximately 95 linear feet (0.01-acre) of a jurisdictional airport drainage ditch. Mr. Josh
Pelletier of the USAGE and Mr. Chris Pullinger of DWQ verified the wetland limits in the field on
September 7, 2006. The ditch was determined to be jurisdictional because it is provides a significant nexus
between the wetland area and downstream waters. This significant nexus analysis is attached in the request
for a Jurisdictional Determination package.
THE LPA GROUP of North Carolina, p.a. is requesting the approval of a 401 Water Quality Certification
for the above impacts associated with the proposed hangar area development.
Enclosed are seven (7) copies of the Preconstruction Notification Form (w/$570.00 processing fee attached)
and the request for Jurisdictional Determination package.
Please let me know if you would like to schedule a site visit, have any questions, or require additional
information.
Sincerely,
THE LPA GROUP INCORPORATED
~~~~-C-C1'4.~
Edward J. Smai
Environmental Scientist
Enclosures
Cc: LPA Project File
Member of THE LPA GROUP INCORPORATED
ATLANTA ^ BATON ROUGE ^ CHARLOTTE ^ COLUMBIA ^ GREENSBORO ^ JACKSONVILLE
KNOXVILLE ^ LITTLE ROCK ^ MOBILE ^ ORLANDO ^ RALEIGH ^ SARASOTA ^ TALLAHASSEE ^ TAMPA ^ WEST PALM BEACH

1 ti
Office Use Only: Form Version March OS
USACE Action ID No. DWQ No. ®~ - (1 ~' 3 y 2
(If any particular item is not applicable to this project, please enter "Not Applicable" or "N/A".)
I. Processing p ,~ I D
1. Check all of the a royal s re uested for this ro~ect:
pp () q p J
®Section 404 Permit ^ Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules
^ Section 10 Permit ^ Isolated Wetland Permit from DWQ
® 401 Water Quality Certification ^ Express 401 Water Quality Certification
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested: Nationwide 23 -For
Approved Categorical Exclusions (a copy of the CE approval letter from the North Carolina
Department of Transportation -Division of Aviation is attached in Appendix B).
3. If this notification is solely a courtesy copy because written approval for the 401 Certification
is not required, check here: ^
4. If payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) is proposed
for mitigation of impacts, attach the acceptance letter from NCEEP, complete section VIII,
and check here:
5. If your project is located in any of North Carolina's twenty coastal counties (listed on page
4), and the project is within a North Carolina Division of Coastal Management Area of
Environmental Concern (see the top of page 2 for further details), check here: ^
II. Applicant Information
Owner/Applicant Information ~ ~ L`j ~ ~~~
Name: Martin Count~Airport - Mr. Russell Overman D
Mailing Address: Martin County Airport Commission DEC 1 9 2007
305 East Main Street
Williamston, NC 27892 IhETw~~,,,,w~~
Telephone Number: 252-792-1901 Fax Number: 252-792-7477
E-mail Address: roverman(a~martincountyncg_ov.com
2. Agent/Consultant Information (A signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization letter
must be attached if the Agent has signatory authority for the owner/applicant.)
Name: Edward J. Smail
Company Affiliation: THE LPA GROUP of North Carolina, p.a.
Mailing Address: 5000 Falls of Neuse Road, Suite 304
Raleigh, NC 27609
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 5 of 15

J 1
Telephone Number: 919-954-1244 Fax Number: 919-954-1345
E-mail Address: esmail~a,lpa roup.com
III. Project Information
Attach a vicinity map clearly showing the location of the property with respect to local
landmarks such as towns, rivers, and roads. Also provide a detailed site plan showing property
boundaries and development plans in relation to surrounding properties. Both the vicinity map
and site plan must include a scale and north arrow. The specific footprints of all buildings,
impervious surfaces, or other facilities must be included. If possible, the maps and plans should
include the appropriate USGS Topographic Quad Map and NRCS Soil Survey with the property
boundaries outlined. Plan drawings, or other maps may be included at the applicant's discretion,
so long as the property is clearly defined. For administrative and distribution purposes, the
USACE requires information to be submitted on sheets no larger than 11 by 17-inch format;
however, DWQ may accept paperwork of any size. DWQ prefers full-size construction
drawings rather than a sequential sheet version of the full-size plans. If full-size plans are
reduced to a small scale such that the final version is illegible, the applicant will be informed that
the project has been placed on hold until decipherable maps are provided.
1. Name of project: New Hangar Area Development
2. T.LP. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only): N/A
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN): Parcel ID: 5737-71-4650
4. Location
County: Martin Nearest Town: Everetts, NC
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number):
Directions to site (include road numbers/names, landmarks, etc.):
From US 13/64 -Take exit 505 and head north on Flat Swamp Road (SR 1159). Travel
approximately 1.0 miles and make a right onto Wilson Chapel Road. Travel approximately
1.5 miles and make a left onto the Airport Access Road (the access road is located at the
intersection of Airport Road and Everetts Road). Follow the access road to the airport. The
project area is located in the forested area north of the existing han ag_r.
5. Site coordinates (For linear projects, such as a road or utility line, attach a sheet that
separately lists the coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody.)
Decimal Degrees (6 digits minimum): 35.8625°N 77.1763°W
6. Property size (acres): Existin airport property: 181.5 acres Aviation easement: 95.4 acres
7. Name of nearest receiving body of water: Huskanaw Swam
8. River Basin: Tar-Pamlico (HUC 03020102)
(Note -this must be one of North Carolina's seventeen designated major river basins. The
River Basin map is available at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/admin/maps/.)
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 6 of 15

9. Describe the existing conditions on the site and general land use in the vicinity of the project
at the time of this application: The area encompassingproposed project area is an
undeveloped forested area adjacent to the existing maintained areas of the Airport. The
location of the project site is shown on Figure 1
10. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
The Martin Count~rport proposes the construction of three new taxilanes, (Taxilane A,
Taxilane B, and Taxilane C), two corporate han ars, (w/associated parking, , an eight unit T-
han a~ apron for the corporate han;;ars and T-hangar, and a new road for vehicle access
to the hangar areas. The new taxilanes/apron would serve the new hangars allowin pg,~ lanes
parked in the hangar area access to the existing runway. The road and parking area would
provide vehicle access and parkin;; for use of the new hangars. The location of the proposed
construction is shown on Fi;;ure 1. Taxilane A would be situated parallel to the existing
runway and would consist of new pavement approximately 283 feet long by 35 feet wide.
Taxilane B and C would be situated perpendicular to Taxiway A and parallel to the proposed
hangar. Taxilane B would be approximately 325 feet long and 35 feet wide, while Taxilane
C would be approximately 325 feet long by 25 feet wide. Additionally, the area between
Taxilane B and C would be graded for the construction of the 8-unit T-hangLar which would
be approximately 210 feet long_by 60 feet wide. The 130-foot by 100-foot apron area would
be located between Taxilane B and the two 50-foot-by-50-foot corporate hangars. The
approximately 210-foot by 45-foot vehicle parking area would be located adjacent to the
corporate hangars. The access road would be approximately 350 feet long and connect to the
parking area and both taxilanes. The construction of these projects would occur in phases.
Phase 1 would consist of the construction of the Taxilanes and Phase 2 would consist of the
construction of the corporate han ars w/parking), the T-hangar, the apron, the han arg_ s, and
the access road. The project phasing is shown on Figure 3. The construction equipment used
for the project would consist of standard excavating equipment. The construction of the
proposed project is detailed on Figures 3 through 7.
11. Explain the purpose of the proposed work:
The purpose of the proposed project is to provide additional hangar space with access to the
runway. Currently the existing hangar is not lar eg enough to provide for the future volume
of aircraft at the Airport and new hangars are needed. The taxilanes/access road/parking area
are a necessarypart of the han armprovide connectivity to the existing runway
additional airport facilities, and to provide vehicle access and parkin.
IV. Prior Project History
If jurisdictional determinations and/or permits have been requested and/or obtained for this
project (including all prior phases of the same subdivision) in the past, please explain. Include
the USACE Action ID Number, DWQ Project Number, application date, and date permits and
certifications were issued or withdrawn. Provide photocopies of previously issued permits,
certifications or other useful information. Describe previously approved wetland, stream and
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 7 of 15

buffer impacts, along with associated mitigation (where applicable). If this is a NCDOT project,
list and describe permits issued for prior segments of the same T.I.P. project, along with
construction schedules.
A Jurisdictional Determination (Action ID 200510092, December 8, 2004), a Section 404
Nationwide 14 Permit (Action ID 200510092, December 8, 2004, and a Section 401 Water
Ouality Certification (DWQ Project Number 04-1743, January 5, 2005) were received for the
construction of the new Airport Access Road. This documentation was obtained for the impact
of 0.1-acre of wetlands associated with the construction of the new access road. Mitigation was
in the form a payment to the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program. Copies of the
Jurisdictional Determination the Section Nationwide 14 Permit and the Section 401 Water
Quality Certification are attached.
V. Future Project Plans
Are any future permit requests anticipated for this project? If so, describe the anticipated work,
and provide justification for the exclusion of this work from the current application.
No~ all of the planned development that is anticipated to occur over the next few years in
connection with the proposed project is included in this application.
VI. Proposed Impacts to Waters of the United States/Waters of the State
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
wetlands, open water, and stream channels associated with the project. Each impact must be
listed separately in the tables below (e.g., culvert installation should be listed separately from
riprap dissipater pads). Be sure to indicate if an impact is temporary. All proposed impacts,
permanent and temporary, must be listed, and must be labeled and clearly identifiable on an
accompanying site plan. All wetlands and waters, and all streams (intermittent and perennial)
should be shown on a delineation map, whether or not impacts are proposed to these systems.
Wetland and stream evaluation and delineation forms should be included as appropriate.
Photographs may be included at the applicant's discretion. If this proposed impact is strictly for
wetland or stream mitigation, list and describe the impact in Section VIII below. If additional
space is needed for listing or description, please attach a separate sheet.
1. Provide a written description of the proposed impacts:
Impacts to jurisdictional areas were determined by overla~~ the construction limits on the
limits of the jurisdictional determination. The construction of the proposed project would
permanently impact approximately 1.5 acres of wetland and approximately 95 linear feet (0.01
acres of a jurisdictional airport drainage ditch. Wetland A/B will be directly impacted b
placement of fill for construction (approximately 1.3 acres would be filled and approximately
0.2-acre would be impacted by isolation . The airport drainage ditch would be impacted by the
placement of culvert under Taxilane A. The drainage ditch was determined to be jurisdictional
because it provides a hydrologic connection between Wetland A/B and Traditional Navigable
Waters (TNWs) downstream. This connection to Wetland AB will be maintained via a pipe
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 8 of 15

under the proposed apron area. A significant nexus determination is included in the attached
Jurisdictional Determination Package. These impacts are detailed in the attached permit
2. Individually list wetland impacts. Types of impacts include, but are not limited to
mechanized clearing, grading, fill, excavation, flooding, ditching/drainage, etc. For dams,
separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding.
Wetland Impact
Site Number
(indicate on map)
Type of Impact Type of Wetland
(e.g., forested, marsh,
herbaceous, bog, etc.) Located within
100-year
Floodplain
es/no) Distance to
Nearest
Stream
(linear feet) Area of
Impact
(acres)
Wetland AB Fill Forested Wetland (PFO1) No 2,300* 1.3
Wetland AB Isolation Forested Wetland (PFO1) No 2,300* 0.2

Total Wetland Impact (acres) 1.5
*Excluding the airport drainage ditches.
3. List the total acreage (estimated) of all existing wetlands on the property: Unknown
4. Individually list all intermittent and perennial stream impacts. Be sure to identify temporary
impacts. Stream impacts include, but are not limited to placement of fill or culverts, dam
construction, flooding, relocation, stabilization activities (e.g., cement walls, rip-rap, crib
walls, gabions, etc.), excavation, ditching/straightening, etc. If stream relocation is proposed,
plans and profiles showing the linear footprint for both the original and relocated streams
must be included. To calculate acreage. multiply length X width. then divide by 43.560.
Stream Impact
Number
indicate on ma)
Stream Name
Type of Impact
Perennial or
Intermittent? Average
Stream Width
Before Im act Impact
Length
(linear feet Area of
Impact
(acres
1 Drainage Ditch Culvert Neither 2-3 feet 95 0.01

Total Stream Impact (by length and acreage) 95 0.01
Updated 1 I /1 /2005
Page 9 of 15

5. Individually list all open water impacts (including lakes, ponds, estuaries, sounds, Atlantic
Ocean and any other water of the U.S.). Open water impacts include, but are not limited to
fill, excavation, dredging, flooding, drainage, bulkheads, etc.
Open Water Impact
Site Number
indicate on ma
Name of Waterbody
(if applicable)
Type of Impact Type of Waterbody
(lake, pond, estuary, sound, bay,
ocean, etc. Area of
Impact
(acres
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Total Open Water Impact (acres) N/A
6. List the cumulative impact to all Waters of the U.S. resulting from the nroiect:
Stream Im act (acres): 0.01
Wetland Im act (acres): 1.5
O en Water Im act (acres): None
Total Im act to Waters of the U.S. (acres) 1.51
Total Stream Impact (linear feet): 95
7. Isolated Waters
Do any isolated waters exist on the property? ^ Yes ®No
Describe all impacts to isolated waters, and include the type of water (wetland or stream) and
the size of the proposed impact (acres or linear feet). Please note that this section only
applies to waters that have specifically been determined to be isolated by the USACE.
8. Pond Creation
If construction of a pond is proposed, associated wetland and stream impacts should be
included above in the wetland and stream impact sections. Also, the proposed pond should
be described here and illustrated on any maps included with this application.
Pond to be created in (check all that apply): ^ uplands ^ stream ^ wetlands
Describe the method of construction (e.g., dam/embankment, excavation, installation of
draw-down valve or spillway, etc.): N/A
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stormwater requirement, etc.): N/A
Current land use in the vicinity of the pond: N/A
Size of watershed draining to pond: N/A Expected pond surface area: N/A
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 10 of 15

VII. Impact Justification (Avoidance and Minimization)
Specifically describe measures taken to avoid the proposed impacts. It may be useful to provide
information related to site constraints such as topography, building ordinances, accessibility, and
financial viability of the project. The applicant may attach drawings of alternative, lower-impact
site layouts, and explain why these design options were not feasible. Also discuss how impacts
were minimized once the desired site plan was developed. If applicable, discuss construction
techniques to be followed during construction to reduce impacts.
Due to the nature of the project total avoidance of impacts to jurisdictional areas was not
possible. However, where possible, and where consistent with en in~g standards and FAA
safety standards, consideration was liven to design modifications and features to minimize
impacts to jurisdictional areas. Impacts to jurisdiction areas were reduced by the use of a 2:1 fill
slope on the access road where it crosses jurisdictional wetlands. Additionally, since the airport
drainage ditch provides a hydrologic connection to the wetlands on the project site, this
connection will be maintained with the wetlands outside of the proiect limits via a pipe
connecting the remaining system outside of the project area and the ditch. Therefore, impacts to
the system that would have occurred due to the loss of the h d~gic connection were
minimi~.ed_
Temporary impacts to water quality due to erosion and siltation during construction of the
proposed project will be minimized by the implementation of standard erosion and siltation
controlling measures as specified in FAA AC 150/5370-10, entitled Standards for Speci ing
Construction of Airports, and specifically Item P-156, Temporar;y Air and Water Pollution, Soil
Erosion, and Siltation Control. Temporary controls include the seedin o~pes, mulching,
slope drains, benches, dikes, dams, and sediment basins, as appropriate. Other best mana eg ment
practices would be required of the contractor to ensure compliance with the polices of the North
Carolina Department of Natural Resources. Selected controls and practices will be detailed in
the _construction documents. Necessary National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) permit modifications or other land clearing and construction related non-point source
permits will be obtained prior to construction of the project.
VIII. Mitigation
DWQ - In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0500, mitigation may be required by the NC
Division of Water Quality for projects involving greater than or equal to one acre of impacts to
freshwater wetlands or greater than or equal to 150 linear feet of total impacts to perennial
streams.
USACE - In accordance with the Final Notice of Issuance and Modification of Nationwide
Permits, published in the Federal Register on January 15, 2002, mitigation will be required when
necessary to ensure that adverse effects to the aquatic environment are minimal. Factors
including size and type of proposed impact and function and relative value of the impacted
aquatic resource will be considered in determining acceptability of appropriate and practicable
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 11 of 15

mitigation as proposed. Examples of mitigation that may be appropriate and practicable include,
but are not limited to: reducing the size of the project; establishing and maintaining wetland
and/or upland vegetated buffers to protect open waters such as streams; and replacing losses of
aquatic resource functions and values by creating, restoring, enhancing, or preserving similar
functions and values, preferable in the same watershed.
If mitigation is required for this project, a copy of the mitigation plan must be attached in order
for USACE or DWQ to consider the application complete for processing. Any application
lacking a required mitigation plan or NCEEP concurrence shall be placed on hold as incomplete.
An applicant may also choose to review the current guidelines for stream restoration in DWQ's
Draft Technical Guide for Stream Work in North Carolina (see DWQ website for most current
version.).
1. Provide a brief description of the proposed mitigation plan. The description should provide
as much information as possible, including, but not limited to: site location (attach directions
and/or map, if offsite), affected stream and river basin, type and amount (acreage/linear feet)
of mitigation proposed (restoration, enhancement, creation, or preservation), a plan view,
preservation mechanism (e.g., deed restrictions, conservation easement, etc.), and a
description of the current site conditions and proposed method of construction. Please attach
a separate sheet if more space is needed.
On-site miti ation opportunities for permanent impacts to jurisdictional areas are limited by
FAA restrictions on creating wildlife attracting habitat at airports. Due to these limitations, it
is proposed that mitigation for unavoidable impacts to Waters of the United States (wetlands)
would be the use of the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Pro ra~EEP) In-Lieu
Fee Program. It is anticipated that since the Airport drainage ditch only serves as a
h dy rolo~ic connection that mitigation would not be required for impacts to the ditch as long
as the hydrologic connection is maintained. A request to use the EEP's In-Lieu Fee Program
is being submitted concurrently with the permit application (a copy of the completed request
form is attached). The In-Lieu Fee Pro rgram payment would be at a ratio determined by the
USACE/DWQ that would ensure a 'no-net-loss' of aquatic resources from a functional
standpoint. A copYof the approval or denial to use the In-Lieu Fee Program will be provided
to the USACE/DWQ. If the request is denied, alternative methods of mitigation, such as the
use of an approved mitigation bank will be studied.
2. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (NCEEP). Please note it is the applicant's responsibility to contact the NCEEP at
[phone] to determine availability, and written approval from the NCEEP indicating
that they are will to accept payment for the mitigation must be attached to this form. For
additional information regarding the application process for the NCEEP, check the NCEEP
website at http://www.nceep.net/pages/inlieureplace.htm. If use of the NCEEP is proposed,
please check the appropriate box on page five and provide the following information:
Amount of stream mitigation requested (linear feet): N/A
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet): N/A
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 12 of 15

Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
Amount ofNon-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): 1.5 acres
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
IX. Environmental Documentation (required by DWQ)
1. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the use of
public (federal/state) land? Yes ® No ^
2. If yes, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the
requirements of the National or North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
Note: If you are not sure whether aNEPA/SEPA document is required, call the SEPA
coordinator at [phone] to review current thresholds for environmental documentation.
Yes ® No ^
3. If yes, has the document review been finalized by the State Clearinghouse? If so, please
attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval letter. Yes ^ No
X. Proposed Impacts on Riparian and Watershed Buffers (required by DWQ)
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
required state and local buffers associated with the project. The applicant must also provide
justification for these impacts in Section VII above. All proposed impacts must be listed herein,
and must be clearly identifiable on the accompanying site plan. All buffers must be shown on a
map, whether or not impacts are proposed to the buffers. Correspondence from the DWQ
Regional Office may be included as appropriate. Photographs may also be included at the
applicant's discretion.
L Will the project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233
(Neuse), 15A NCAC 2B .0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 02B .0243 (Catawba) 15A NCAC
2B .0250 (Randleman Rules and Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please
identify N/A )? Yes ^ No
2. If "yes", identify the square feet and acreage of impact to each zone of the riparian buffers.
If buffer mitigation is required calculate the required amount of mitigation by applying the
buffer multipliers.
Zone* Impact
(s uare feet) Multiplier Required
Miti ation
1 3 (2 for Catawba)
2 1.5
Total N/A N/A
* Zone 1 extends out 30 feet perpendicular from the top of the near bank of channel; Zone 2 extends an
additional 20 feet from the edge of Zone 1.
Updated 11/1/2005
Page l3 of 15

If buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e.,
Donation of Property, Riparian Buffer Restoration /Enhancement, or Payment into the
Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as identified
within 15A NCAC 2B .0242 or .0244, or .0260. N/A
XI. Stormwater (required by DWQ)
Describe impervious acreage (existing and proposed) versus total acreage on the site. Discuss
Stormwater controls proposed in order to protect surface waters and wetlands downstream from
the property. If percent impervious surface exceeds 20%, please provide calculations
demonstrating total proposed impervious level.
The total impervious area for both phases of the proposed project would include all of the
pavement associated with the taxilanes, access road, apron, and parking area, as well as the
footprint of the corporate hangars and the T-hangar. Controls to protect downstream waters will
include temporary sediment control traps, a temporary construction entrance pad, temporary silt
fencing, rock check dams, and pipe inlet/outlet protection. The calculations of the impervious
area is shown below:
Existing imperious surface = 0%
Proposed impervious surface = 47%
Total project area = 4.5 acres
T-hap ar impervious surface = 0.70 acres
Apron impervious surface = 0.30 acres
Auto pavement = 0.60 acres
Han ag_r impervious surface = 0.50 acre
TOTAL Impervious area = 2.10 acres
Percent Impervious area =total impervious area (2.10 acres) /total project area 4.5 acres)
= 47%
XII. Sewage Disposal (required by DWQ)
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.
The proposed project will not generate wastewater.
XIII. Violations (required by DWQ)
Is this site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500) or any Buffer Rules?
Yes ^ No
Is this an after-the-fact permit application? Yes ^ No
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 14 of 15

XIV. Cumulative Impacts (required by DWQ)
Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in additional
development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality? Yes ^ No
If yes, please submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with
the most recent North Carolina Division of Water Quality policy posted on our website at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands. If no, please provide a short narrative description:
The construction of the proposed project will not directly result in additional development that
would impact downstream water qualit~The project will improve the connectivity at the airport
and allow for greater hangar space. However, no major future development in relation to
proposed project would occur. There is future development planned at the airport but it is un-
related to the construction of the proposed project.
XV. Other Circumstances (Optional):
It is the applicant's responsibility to submit the application sufficiently in advance of desired
construction dates to allow processing time for these permits. However, an applicant may
choose to list constraints associated with construction or sequencing that may impose limits on
work schedules (e.g., draw-down schedules for lakes, dates associated with Endangered and
Threatened Species, accessibility problems, or other issues outside of the applicant's control).
None known.
~~ ~~~~G
Appl~it/Agent's Signature ~Date~
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)
Updated 11/1/2005
Page I S of 15

AGENT AUTHORIZATION LETTER

BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
TOMMY W. BOWEN, CHAIRMAN
BONNIE SMITH, VICE CHAIRMAN
ELMO 'BUTCH" LILLEY
ALPHONZO PERRY
C. MORT HURST
November 14, 2007
Mr. Edward J. Smail
THE LPA GROUP of North Carolina, p.a.
5000 Falls of Neuse Road, Suite 304
Raleigh, NC 27609
Re: Authorization
Martin County Airport Taxilane Construction
Dear Mr. Srnail:
W. RUSSELL OVERMAN
COUNTY MANAGER
LINDA G. HARDISON
CLERK TO THE BOARD
P.O. BOX 868
WILUAMSTON, NC 27892
[phone]
FAX [phone]
e-mail: martin®martincountyncgov.com
This letter is provided to acknowledge that THE LPA GROUP is hereby allowed to be
the Duly Authorized Representative for Martin County in regards to submitting
documents and applicable fees for permits, certifications, and/or approvals as applicable
for the obtaining the required federal and state permits for the above referenced project.
If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to contact me at 252-7$9-4300.
Sincerely,
W. Russell Overman
County Manager
. ..
. ~ :.~>,
.,-
_ ~ ~ .
.,_
,.
. .. { t 1 ~.

FIGURES

I,�, �� moo• 1� ,- _=��. `t-
. --- r
e
7t
f V7
0111,11 '511111,
--
MA
RTIN COUNTY ..:'�
AIRPORT
�I
l
PROJECT SITE
Gem.•`
f
N r'.6t'i15on
I pE4 ( 14 0
215
y
4
{
� zoo
st Marks
ch
Northtk-eretts
_ J
I i
JAY of the Va1tcv _
<l
Ch
64A
t
THEIL
MARTIN COUNTY AIRPORT Do te:
LPA Dec. 2007
GROUP — = Hangar Area Development - Section 404/401
TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS Figure No.
SooR-igh. th C..11— 27609 U SG S VICINITY MAP
Raleigh, NwN Carolina S]it,

/ ,-- ~
~ P \
I bl ~
1 I
~ ~
~ ~
--'
SEGEMENTED CIRCLE
w/ WIND SOCK
0 75' 150' 300'
GRAPHIC SCALE BAR
RUNWAY 3-21
_~ ®__
...T...
r--
FUEL
TANK
AUTO
PARKING ~ .T. -T .T. .T H,
r
BEACON
NDB
JURISDICTIONAL 1
AIRFIELD DRAINAGE
DITCH - .O1 AC.

i 1
!-,•
'. ~~
<4 ~sr DANIEL E. CLARK
~C! ~_ = ET ALS
~ j~
D.B. V-15 PG. 362
,~' 4~~ r~` FORESTED WETLANDS
~~` ~ APPROX. - 1.5 AC.
STUDY AREA
;' / ;~
LIMITS
THEL~ MARTIN COUNTY AIRPORT Date:
LPA _ _ ~ Dec. 2007
GROUP - = Han ar Area Develo ment -Section 404!401
TRnNSPORTATIONCONSULTANTS EXISTING CONDITIONS Figure No.
5000 Folls of Neuse Road, Suite .104 2
ftoleigM1, NortM1 Larolino 2J609
_ ~ ELEC.
VAULT
® TERMINAL

~~-'~~
~ P ~
i b ~
~ I
~ ,
SEGEMENTED CIRCLE
w/ WIND SOCK

yyytiyy
°o=~
~i>m
IIII~
g o IIII~
p = ~ 22' SHOULDER
~C
e ~
~_
N
r \ r ~~~y
Z \ a i `
~A TIE TO EXIST.
V• GRADE
TAXILANE C TAXILANE B
~ ~
12.5' 12.5' ~ 77.75' ~ 50.0' ~ 17.5' I 17.5'
~~~
---~-- -/
COMPACTED SUBGRADE
(P-152)
EXISTING GRADE 4" BIT. PAVEMENT (P-401)J
= 8" CRUSHED AGGREGATE
r1 d BASE COURSE (P-209)
~ 13 3
rn~~
d
'w ~ Z
V, <
O ~ Z
D
0~ v
~~
~ ~
~~°~
A
^~ G ~
• I
GF
rn n'
~_
O
'Z
~ ~ o
6D m
~ ..
o IV
O
O
V
T-HANGER TAXILANE SECTION
NTS
V ~ 6~ i
V ~ .
\\
~~ ~ ~~'~
EXIST. ~~ /
(~
4" BIT. PAVEMENT (P-401)
8" CRUSHED AGGREGATE
BASE COURSE (P-209)
CUT SECTION
ACCESS PARKING. TAXILANE & ACCESS ROAD
22' SHOULDER
0.5% 0 5°b
_.+ / 3
~~„~ ~ ~
't -,
,~~ ~
EXISTING GRADE
4" BIT. PAVEMENT (P-401)
8" CRUSHED AGGREGATE
BASE COURSE (P-209)
OMPACTED SUBGRADE
(P-152)
2.096
~.~ _... ~ 80$
~ ~` ~t„ ~r . 1 ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ^ ~ TIE TO EXIST
_~+- "`"~`-L~ . ~ -? ~ GRADE
- . F ~ a~
~- ` \
i -~. y
'"
6" LIME TREATMENT COMPACTED SUBGRADE EXISTING GRADE
(P-155) (P-152)
TYPICAL SECTION ROAD FILL SECTION
NTS
TO EXIST.
GRADE

yyytiy
°oZ~
-~~Or-i
'oA~Dm
= IIII~
soZ~~~~~
C
m yy
Ny~
'y
~_
r
Z=
~~
rn °'
cn °' n
T 1
W
..~.~
< (~
~ / ~ 0
~ 3 C
~~ T~
91 lA
~~; ~
O
A
'rn~
n
~_
O
'Z
m ~
C1
z
o N
O
O
V
_ FORESTED WETLAND LIMITS
NOTE: SEE TYPICAL SECTIONS (FIGURE 4) FOR TAXILANE SHOULDER SLOPEOF 3% AND TIE IN SLOPE OF 4:1
80
75
70
80
75
70
80
75
70
121+50 121+00 120+50 120+00 119+50 119+00 118+50 118+00 117+50 117+00 116+50 116+00 115+50 115+00 114+50 114+00
STA. 1+00
_ _..
O
r N
~ '.
I > r
~ ~
W y
80 __..._. ~ V-o, __ , M w.__M
... .....
N m.

p~j 'x ~ ro ~

O O
.... ~ ~ '.
~
> ~
N
~ ~ ~ r
i
~ ~ ~' T-HANGAR ~, ~
> -
m ~
>
~
~ ~ x
es w
___ ~ ~_~ -
~ F w '_ . __ _ _...... 75
~ U ~ I u^7 U u'l ,

r..._ _. _.x _ _.. -- ~-~_ 7
15" RCP T 8
48' RCP 24" R P
121+50 121+00 120+50 120+00 119+50 119+00 118+50 118+00 117+50 117+00 116+50 116+00 115+50 115+00 114+50 114+00
STA. 1+50

N
o~~
'~~Dm
~: = IIII~
~s~~~~~~
~~c~
y
P~
w
~""1
~_
r
Z=
rn~
Dl
7~" p Z
< (~
no O
^^ 3 C
`/
////V~~ N
V~ 7 ~
A
A
'w o ~
rn
C7
~_
0
Z
a
- o~
~~
~ o N
O
O
V
80
75
70
80
75
70
121+50 121+00 120+50 120+00 119+50 119+00 118+50 118+00 117+50 117+00 116+50 116+00 115+50 115+00 114+50 114+00
STA. 3+00

~
i I F
.. i ~ ~_
~ ,
~
I17 ~ ~ 'O

r
O ~ ~ ~
> i

80 >
_ [ll ,

~ ~
w
~ Y
80

I cD ~'c~
o m
~ ~
CORPORATE ~ as
N m
n ~ ~ T-HANGAR ~ ~ HANGAR ~ ~' °'

75 J
i w
w a ~ _ 4 75
a
a ~ U a
.
~ ~ ~
t1i
i U u ~ ',

70
I
e
~ ~ ~

!.....
->

~ ,

_
F I 3~ ~ _L _ _ L

_
- - L -; -I 1

70
P
121+50 121+00 120+50 120+00 119+50 119+00 118+50 118+00 117+50 117+00 116+50 116+00 115+50 115+00 114+50 114+00
STA. 2+50
~a
~~
~ ~'~
80 m
N
~

_,
C C
~.~i _

80
~
v v v `~ m RPORAT
C E a d

~
°_~ ~

i
T-HANGAR i ° ~ ~ O
HANGAR... ~
...
~ °' m
v
~- > -- > ._ _ ~ v
~Q
N X ~ -
;;;La
~ °-- v i i ~ U ~,
,
~ ~~~~ _w
70 ,. `.. _ ... .........
_ i
_ _
_ _ 70

121+50 121+00 120+50 120+00 119+50 119+00 118+50 118+00 117+5p 117+00 116+50 116+00 115+50 115+00 114+50 114+00
STA. 2+00
_ FORESTED WETLAND LIMITS
NOTE: SEE TYPICAL SECTIONS (FIGURE 4) FOR TAXILANE SHOULDER SLOPEOF 3% AND TIE IN SLOPE OF 4:1

ti
8~~
.ZI
"p~Dm
4 ~ i IIII~
_a=
%= o ~~~~~
~ N
~~
i
N
r
D
IZ=
rn~
ice„ $
m
QO o Z
L
C7 s o
^ 3 C
`/
N
O ~
o ~
A
O
m~
n
_~
Z//~
VI
*i o
,o ~ o_
m ~
V o N
O
0
80
75
70
80
75
70
121+50 121+00 120+50 120+00 119+50 119+00 118+50 118+00 117+50 117+00 116+50 116+00 115+50 115+00 114+50 114+00
STA. 4+00

(...

N ~ N N.
,q,q~~ ~ O O O
80 _..._ __. °r3_~-°c~. _ . Q ~Q _ ~_~ ~ __ 80

N a
C~
LO o_ o_ a
N y N
C
C
N - (
O
X
~ y N
U U U .

75
_Finished Grade (TYP.) ~~~ ~
~ ~ ~
__ _ _ ~~¢¢
¢~
U3U ul __ Q Q Q
,_ ~ ~ V ~. __ __
75

Existing Grade (NP ),
~
_

~

_ ~ ~_
~I
70
121+50 121+00 120+50 120+00 119+50 119+00 118+50 118+00 117+50 117+00 116+50 116+00 115+50 115+00 114+50 114+00
STA. 3+50
80
75
70
_ FORESTED WETLAND LIMITS
NOTE: SEE TYPICAL SECTIONS (FIGURE 4) FOR TAXILANE SHOULDER SLOPEOF 3% AND TIE IN SLOPE OF 4:1
121+50 121+00 120+50 120+00 119+50 119+00 118+50 118+00 117+50 117+00 116+50 116+00 115+50 115+00 114+50 114+00
STA. 3+25

APPENDIX A
NCEEP IN-LIEU FEE REQUEST FORM

NORTH CAROLINA ECOSYSTEM ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, NC~EP
IN-LIEU FEE REQUEST FORM
Revised 7/9/2007
Print this form, fill in requested information, sign and date, and either mail to NCEEP, 1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC
27699-1652, fax to 919-715-2219, or email to [e-mail]. Attachments are acceptable for clarification
purposes (location map is required).
CONTACT INFORMATION APPLICANT'S AGENT (optional) APPLICANT
1. Business or Individual Name THE LPA GROUP of NC, p.a. Martin County Airport _-~
2. Street AddreSS Or P O BOX 5000 Falls of Neuse Road, Suite 304 305 East Main Street
3. City, State, Zlp Ralei h, NC 27609 Williamston, NC 27892 __
4. Contact Person -
Ed Smail Russell Overman

5. Telephone Number
919-9541244 i
~ 252-792-1901
6. Fax Number 919-954-1345 252-792-7477
7. E-Mail Address (optional) emmail I a rou .com roverman martincountyncgov.com
PROJECT INFORMATION - ^ -
8. Project Name ~ -
Hangar Area_ Developmen
- t
9. Project Location (nearest town, city) ~ I
' *"ATTACH MAP SHOWING IMPACT LOCATION** ~ North of Everetts, NC. (Project Location M__a_p is attached) _
10. Lat-Long Coordinates (optional)
~
35.8625 Deg. N. 77.1763 Deg. W.
-
-~
-
-._.-_...------
11.Project County
I r ------....--
-
--
------
_ -
- -- ~-~ _i Martin
--- I
--- -----
i 12. River Basin ~
_ __ _ _ _ _
13. Cataloging Unit (8-digit) (See Note 1) ~

, Tar-Pamlico River Ba_s_in __ ___ _ __________ _
~ -~~- -
L- ---•-•-- -• - - 03020102 -._-- --- ----------_. _
-
14. Riparian Wetland Impact (ac.) (e.g., 0.13) ~
_ _ - '

~ 15. Non-Riparian Wetland Impact (ac.)
i -1 No Impact __

-1.5 acres ___-_--
i
___- _-
_______ _- __
16. Coastal Marsh Impact (ac.)

17. Stream Impact (ft.) (e.g. 1,234) No Impact
~ Warm I
Cool i Cold
(See Note 2) 95 LF of.draina~ge ditch.
Mitigation is not an cipated
to be required.

No Impact No Impact
18. Buffer Impact-Zone (sq. ft.) (e.g. 12,345)
(See Note 3) ~ ~ Zone 1: No Impact ~-
; --~-- I Zone 2' No Impact !
~
19. Regulatory Agency Staff Contacts _
,_,__,~..___..~.._,...,.__.._..,
DWQ
USACE
~ (Indicate names, if known) :Mr. Josh Pel
-~- letier
:Mr. Chris Putlinger
20.Other Regulatory ID Information ~
(e.g., USACE Action ID, if known) j
IMPORTANT -._....- ------- -------•---
Check (~) below if this request is a: Signature of Applicant or Agent:
Orevision to a current acceptance, or
Qre-submission of an expired acceptance Date: ~~, f ~~ 6 7 --
Note 1: For help in determining the Cataloging Unit, go to EPA's "Surf Your Watershed" web page:
http://cfpub.epa.oov/surf/locate/index.cfm Note (9) above: requirement to attach location map.
Note 2: For guidance on stream temperatures, go to:
http://www.saw. usace.armv. mil/WETLANDS/Mitioation/Documents/Stream/Appendices/Appendixl.pdf. .
Note 3: Buffer mitigation applicable only in the Neuse, Tar-Pamlico and Catawba river basins, and the Randleman Lake
Water Supply Watershed. Direct all questions to Kelly Williams at 919-716-1921 or [e-mail]

off-- i7 ~}3 ~2
APPENDIX B
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION APPROVAL LETTER

,7gy~~rr .. srAn
•• ~e~
w.
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
Memorandum:
To:
From:
Subject:
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
LYNDO TIPPETT'
SECRETARY
File
December 14, 2007
Richard W. Barkes, Manager of Airport Development

Programmatic Categorical Exclusion -Martin County Airport, New
Hangar Development Area.
An Environmental Review was done for the proposed project which consist of the
proposed construction of three new taxilanes, two associated corporate hangers, an 8- unit
t-hanger, associated apron and vehicle parking and a access road. This project will be
utilizing federal non-primary entitlement funds and potentially state rural airport
development funds along with local funding. The Airport's Consultant reviewed the
project and prepared the Programmatic Categorical Exclusion (PCE) documentation.
The PCE that was prepazed for the hangar development area project addressed the
required Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) topics as outlined in the FAA Advisory
Circular 5050-4b "The Airport Environmental Handbook". The topics addressed in this
PCE included the following: Noise, Compatible Land Use, Social Impacts, Induced
Socioeconomic Impacts, Air Quality, Water Quality, Department of Transportation
section 303/4(f), Historic, Architectural, Archeological, and Cultural Resources, Biotic
Communities, Federal listed Endangered and Threatened Species, Wetlands, Floodplains,
Coastal Zone Management program, Coastal Barriers, Wild and Scenic Rivers, Farmland,
Energy Supply and Natural Resources, Light Emissions, Solid Waste, Construction
Impacts, Hazardous Sites/Materials, Environmental Justice, Cumulative Impacts, and
Other Considerations. As a result of this PCE information that was gathered for the
construction, non-significant impacts will occur to biotic communities and wetlands.
Those impacts will consist of clearing of a forested area, 1.5 acres of wetlands impact and
approximately 95 linear feet of drainage ditch impact. Consultation with US Army Corps
of Engineers (COE) and the North Carolina Department of Natural Resources indicate
that the site with mitigation will be able to receive all necessary permits.
MAILING ADDRESS:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF AVIATION
1560 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699-1560
TELEPHONE: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
WEBSITE: WWW.pOT.STA7E.AIC.US
LOCATION:
RDU PURPORT
1050 MERIDIAN DRIVE
RDU NC 27623

PCE for Martin County Hangar Area Development Project
Page 2
December 14, 2007
Therefore, after careful review of the PCE information, and the facts contained herein, the
proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the national and state environmental
policies. The objectives and polices are set forth in the National Environmental Policy
Act and the North Carolina Environmental Policy Act, and the project will not
significantly affect the quality of human environment or otherwise include any significant
condition requiring further consultation with any federal, state, or local review agencies
with the following exceptions which shall be made a condition of the environmental
approval of this project:
1. The Martin County Airport, or its appointed representative shall obtain any and
all federal, state, or local permits (such as burning, sediment and erosion
control, NPDES general construction permit, 40I WQC, 404, etc.,) prior to
construction of this project.
2. To the extent practicable every effort will be made to avoid and minimize
environmental impacts in the development of this project. The development of
this project will utilize best management practices and good construction
techniques.
Therefore, the Hangar Area Development project at the Martin County Airport is
considered programmatically categorically excluded; no further environmental
documentation is required.

off- ~'I'~3 vZ
APPENDIX C
PERMITTING DOCUMENTS FROM ACCESS ROAD

~_
WA~~R
P~
--1
..~,. '~
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Duector
Division of Water Quality
January 5, 2005
(Replaces Approval Issued on December 23, 2004)
DWQ Project # 04-1743
Martin County
Mr. Jack Williford
Martin County
P.O. Box 668 '
Williamston,NC, 27892-0668
Subject Property: Martin County Airport
Ut Huskanaw Swamp, Class C Sw NSW
Approval of 401 Water Quality Certification and Authorization Certificate per the Tar-Pamlico
River Buffer Protection Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0259) with Additional Conditions
Dear Mr. Williford:
You have our approval, in accordance with the attached conditions and those listed below, to place fill
within or otherwise impact 0.1 acres of wetlands for the purpose of road crossing construction at the
subject property, as described within your application dated October 26, 2004 and received by the N.C.
Division of Water Quality (DWQ) on October 28, 2004. After reviewing your application, we have
decided that the impacts are covered by General Water Quality Certification Number(s) 3404 (GC3404).
The Certification(s) allows you to use Nationwide Permit(s) 14 when issued by the US Army Corps of
Engineers (USAGE). This letter shall also act as your approved Authorization Certificate for impacts to
the protected riparian buffers per 15A NCAC 2B .0259. In addition, you should obtain or otherwise
comply with any other required federal, state or local permits before you go ahead with your project
including (but not limited to) Erosion and Sediment Control, Non-discharge, and other regulations. Also,
this approval to proceed with your proposed impacts or to conduct impacts to waters as depicted in your
application shall expire upon expiration of the 404 or LAMA Permit.
This approval is for the purpose and design that you described in your application. ff you change your
project, you must notify us and you may be required to send us a new application. If the property is sold,
the new owner must be given a copy of this Certification and approval letter and is thereby responsible for
complying with all conditions. If total fills for this project (now or in the future) exceed one acre of
wetland or 1501inear feet of stream, compensatory mitigation may be required as described in 15A
NCAC 2H .0506 (h). This approval requires you to follow the conditions listed in the attached
certification and any additional conditions listed below.
,~::~rt~;
"'~ r
'JdN 2005 ~~
RECEIVED
a4ARTIN COUNTY
,: 3,ac~R ~, /
401 Wetlands Certification Unit
1850 Mail Servitx~ Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27899-1650
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone: [phone] /FAX [phone] / Internet: htta://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands
hio°` Caro a
~atura~
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Empbyer - 50% Recyded/10~o Post Consumer Paper

Mr. Jack Williford
Page 2 of 3
January 5, 2005
The Additional Conditions of the Certification are:
L Impacts Approved
The following impacts are hereby approved as long as all of the other specific and general
conditions of this Certification (or Isolated Wetland Permit) are met. No other impacts are
approved including incidental impacts:
Amount Approved
(Units) Plan Location or Reference
404/CAMA Wetlands 0.1 (acres) A lication materials
2. Erosion & Sediment Control Practices
Erosion and sediment control practices must be in full compliance with all specifications
governing the proper design, installation and operation and maintenance of such Best
Management Practices in order to protect surface waters standards:
a. The erosion and sediment control measures for the project must be designed, installed,
operated, and maintained in accordance with the most,recent version of the North Carolina
Sediment and Erosion Control Planning and Design Manual.
b. The design, installation, operation, and maintenance of the sediment and erosion control
measures must be such that they equal, or exceed, the requirements specified in the most
recent version of the North Carolina Sediment and Erosion Control Manual. The devices
shall be maintained on all construction sites, borrow sites, and waste pile (spoil) projects,
including contractor-owned or leased borrow pits associated with the project.
c. For borrow pit sites, the erosion and sediment control measures must be designed, installed,
operated, and maintained in accordance with the most recent version of the North Carolina
Surface Mining Manual.
d. The reclamation- measures and implementation must comply with the reclamation in
accordance with the requirements of the Sedimentation Pollution Control Act.
3. No Waste, Spoil, Solids, or Fill of Any Kind
No waste, spoil, solids, or fill of any kind shall occur in wetlands, waters, or riparian areas beyond
the footprint of the impacts depicted in the Pre-Construction Notification. All construction
activities, including the design, installation, operation, and maintenance of sediment and erosion
control Best Management Practices, shall be performed so that no violations of state water quality
standards, statutes, or rules occur.
4. No Sediment & Erosion Control Measures w/n Wetlands or Waters
Sediment and erosion control measures shall not be placed in wetlands or waters to the maximum
extent practicable. If placement of sediment and erosion control devices in wetlands and waters
is unavoidable, they shall be removed and the natural grade restored within six months of the date
that the Division of Land Resources has released the project.
5. Certificate of Completion
Upon completion of all work approved within the 401 Water Quality Certification or applicable
Buffer Rules, and any subsequent modifications, the applicant is required to return the attached

Mr. Jack Williford
Page 3 of 3
January 5, 2005
certificate of completion to the 401/Wetlands Unit, North Carolina Division of Water Quality,
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC, 27699-1650.
Violations of any condition herein set forth may result in revocation of this Certification and may result in
criminal and/or civil penalties. The authorization to proceed with your proposed impacts or to conduct
impacts to waters as depicted in your application and as authorized by this Certification, shall expire upon
expiration of the 404 or CAMA Permit.
If you do not accept any of the conditions of this Certification (associated with the approved wetland or
stream impacts), you may ask for an adjudicatory hearing. You must act within 60 days of the date that
you receive this letter. To ask for a hearing, send a written petition, which conforms to Chapter 150B of
the North Carolina General Statutes to the Office of Administrative Hearings, 6714 Mail Service Center,
Raleigh, N.C. 27699-6714. This certification and its conditions are final and binding unless you ask for a
hearing.
Any disputes over determinations regarding this Authorization Certificate (associated with the approved
buffer impacts) shall be referred in writing to the Director for a decision. The Director's decision is
subject to review as provided in Articles 3 and 4 of G.S. 150B.
This letter completes the review of the Division of Water Quality. under Section 401 of the Clean Water
Act and the Tar-Pamlico riparian buffer protection rule as described within 15A NCAC 2B .0259. If you
have any questions, please telephone Cyndi Karoly at [phone].
Sincerely,
,~
AWK/bz
Alan W. Klimek, P.E.
Enclosures:. GC 3404
Certificate of Completion
cc: Edward Smail ._. L ~~ ~~DVG~
USACE Washington Regulatory Field Office
DWQ Washington Regional Office
DLR Washington Regional Office
File Copy
Central Files
Filename: 041743Airport(Martin)401+TPBR

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action ID. 200510092 County: Martin USGS Quad: Robersonville East
GENERAL PERMIT (REGIONAL AND NATIONWIDE) VERIFICATION
Property Owner /Authorized Agent: Martin Countv c/o Edward Smail
Address: The LPA Group of North Carolina, P.A.
4904 Professional Court, Suite 201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27609
Telephone No.: [phone]
Size and location of property (water body, road name/number, town, etc.): Proiect area is located at the Martin Countv
Airport on North Carolina State Road 1404 north of the intersection with NCSR 1138 in wetlands adiacent to an
unnamed tributary to Beaverdam Creek north of Everetts in Martin Countv, North Carolina.
Description of projects area and activity: Applicant proposes to 6110.10 acres of US Army Corps of Engineers
jurisdictional wetlands to construct an access road.
Applicable Law: ® Section 404 (Clean Water Act, 33 USC 1344)
^ Section 10 (Rivers and Harbors Act, 33 USC 403)
Authorization: Regional General Permit Number:
Nationwide Permit Number: 14
Your work is authorized by the above referenced permit provided it is accomplished in strict accordance with the attached
conditions and your submitted plans. Any violation of the attached conditions or deviation from your submitted plans may subject the
permittee to a stop work order, a restoration order and/or appropriate legal action.
This verification will remain valid until the expiration date identified below unless the nationwide authorization is modified,
suspended or revoked. If, prior to the expiration date identified below, the nationwide pemvt authorization is reissued andlor
modified, this verification will remain valid until the expiration date identified below, provided it complies with all requirements of
the modified nationwide permit. If the nationwide permit authorization expires or is suspended, revoked, or is modified, such that the
activity would no longer comply with the terms and conditions of the nationwide permit, activities which have commenced (i.e., are
under construction) or are under contract to commence in reliance upon the nationwide permit, will remain authorized provided the
activity is completed within twelve months of the date of the nationwide permit's expiration, modification or revocation, unless
discretionary authority has been exercised on a case-by-case basis to modify, suspend or revoke the authorization.
Activities subject to Section 404 (as indicated above) may also require an individual Section 401 Water Quality Certification. You
should contact the NC Division of Water Quality (telephone [phone]) to determine Section 401 requirements.
For activities occurring within the twenty coastal counties subject to regulation under the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA),
prior to beginning work you must contact the N.C. Division of Coastal Management .
This Department of the Army verification does not relieve the permittee of the responsibility to obtain any other required Federal,
State or local approvals/permits.
If there are any questions regarding this verification, any of the conditions of the Permit, or the Corps of Engineers regulatory
program, please contact Tracey L. Wheeler [phone] ex 24.
Corps Regulatory Officia ~ Date: 12/08/2004
Expiration Date of Verification: 12/08/2006
Page 1 of 2

Determination of Jurisdiction:
^ Based on preliminary information, there appear to be waters of the US including wetlands within the above described project area.
This preliminary determination is not an appealable action under the Regulatory Program Administrative Appeal Process
( Reference 33 CFR Part 331).
^ There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described project area subject to the permit requirements of
Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Unless there is a change in the law or our
published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this
notification.
® There are waters of the US and/or wetlands within the above described project area subject to the permit requirements of Section
404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this
determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
^ The jurisdictional areas within the above described project area have been identified under a previous action. Please reference
jurisdictional determination issued .Action ID
Basis of Jurisdictional Determination: Wetlands are adiacent to an unnamed tributarv to Beaverdam Creek which flows into
Collie Swamp, a tributarv to Tranters Creek, which flows into the Tar River.
Corps Regulatory
Date 12/08/2004
SURVEY PLATS, FIELD SKETCH, WETLAND DELINEATION FORMS, PROJECT PLANS, ETC., MUST BE
ATTACHED TO THE FILE COPY OF THIS FORM, IF REQUIRED OR AVAILABLE.
Copy Furnished:
Page 2 of 2

JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION Revised 8/13/04
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
DISTRICT OFFICE: CESAW-RG-W
FILE NUMBER: 200510092
PROJECT LOCATION INFORMATION:
State: North Carolina
County: Martin
Center coordinates of site (latitude/longitude): 35.857994 -77.176997
Approximate size of area (parcel) reviewed, including uplands: 1.55 acres.
Name of nearest waterway: Beaverdam Creek
Name of watershed: Tar/Pamlico
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
Completed: Desktop determination [] Date:
Site visit(s) ~ Date(s): 04/15/2004
Jurisdictional Determination (JD):
^ Preliminary JD -Based on available information, ^ there appear to be (or) ^ there appear to be no "waters of the
United States" and/or "navigable waters of the United States" on the project site. A preliminary JD is not appealable
(Reference 33 CFR part 331).
Approved JD - An approved JD is an appealable action (Reference 33 CFR part 331).
Check all that apply:
^, There are "navigable waters of the United States" (as defined by 33 CFR part 329 and associated guidance) within
the reviewed area. Approximate size of jurisdictional area:
There are "waters of the United States" (as defined by 33 CFR part 328 and associated guidance) within the
reviewed area. Approximate size of jurisdictional area: 0.1 acres.
^! There are "isolated, non-navigable, intra-state waters or wetlands" within the reviewed area.
Decision supported by SWANCC/Migratory Bird Rule Information Sheet for Determination of No
Jurisdiction.
BASIS OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION:
A. Waters defined under 33 CFR part 329 as "navigable waters of the United States":
The presence of waters that are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide and/or are presently used, or have been used in
the past, or maybe susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
R. Waters defined under 33 CFR part 328.3(a) as "waters of the United States":
(1) The presence of waters, which are currently used, or were used in the past, or maybe susceptible to use in
interstate or foreign commerce, including all waters which are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
[] (2) The presence of interstate waters including interstate wetlands.
[] (3) The presence of other waters such as intrastate lakes, rivers, streams (including intermittent streams), mudflats,
sandflats, wetlands, sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, or natural ponds, the use, degradation or
destruction of which could affect interstate commerce including any such waters (check all that apply):
^ (i) which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
^ (ii) from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
^ (iii) which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
[] (4) Impoundments of waters otherwise defined as waters of the US.
~] (5) The presence of a tributary to a water identified in (1) - (4) above.
(6) The presence of territorial seas.
(7) The presence of wetlands adjacentz to other waters of the US, except for those wetlands adjacent to other wetlands.
Rationale for the Basis of Jurisdictional Determination (applies to any boxes checked above). If the jurisdictional
water or wetland is not itself a navigable water of the United States, describe connection(s) to the downstream navigable
waters. If B(I) or B(3) is used as the Basis of Jurisdiction, document navigability and/or interstate commerce connection
(i.e., discuss site conditions, including why the waterbody is navigable and/or how the destruction of the waterbody could
affect interstate or foreign commerce). If B(2, 4, 5 or 6) is used as the Basis of Jurisdiction, document the rationale used to
make the determination. IfB(7) is used as the Basis of Jurisdiction, document the rationale used to make adjacency
determination: Wetlands are adjacent to an unnamed tributary to Beaverdam Creek which flows into Collie Swamp, a
tributary to Tranters Creek, which flows into the Tar River.

Lateral Extent of Jurisdiction: (Reference: 33 CFR parts 328 and 329)
Ordinary High Water Mark indicated by: High Tide Line indicated by:
^ clear, natural line impressed on the bank ^ oil or scum line along shore objects
the presence of litter and debris ^ fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore)
a changes in the chazacter of soil ^ physical markings/characteristics
destruction of terrestrial vegetation ^ tidal gages
t shelving ^ other:
other:
Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
^ survey to available datum; ^ physical markings; ^ vegetation lines/changes in vegetation types.
Wetland boundaries, as shown on the attached wetland delineation map and/or in a delineation report prepared by:
Edward Smail
Basis For Not Asserting Jurisdiction:
The reviewed azea consists entirely of uplands.
Unable to confirm the presence of waters in 33 CFR part 328(a)(1, 2, or 4-7).
^ Headquarters declined to approve jurisdiction on the basis of 33 CFR part 328.3(a)(3).
^ The Corps has made acase-specific detemrination that the following waters present on the site aze not Waters of the
United States:
^ Waste treatment systems, including treatment ponds or lagoons, pursuant to 33 CFR part 328.3.
^ Artificially irrigated areas, which would revert to upland if the irrigation ceased.
^ Artificial lakes and ponds created by excavating and/or diking dry land to collect and
retain water and which are used exclusively for such purposes as stock watering, irrigation, settling basins, or
rice growing.
^ Artificial reflecting or swimming pools or other small ornamental bodies of water created
by excavating and/or diking dry land to retain water for primarily aesthetic reasons.
^ Water-filled depressions created in dry land incidental to construction activity and pits excavated in dry land for
the purpose of obtaining fill, sand, or gravel unless and until the construction or excavation operation is
abandoned and the resulting body of water meets the definition of waters of the United States found at 33 CFR
328.3(a).
^ Isolated, intrastate wetland with no nexus to interstate commerce.
^ Prior converted cropland, as detemuned by the Natural Resources Conservation Service. Explain rationale:
^ Non-tidal drainage or irrigation ditches excavated on dry land. Explain rationale:
^ Other (explain):
DATA REVIEWED FOR JURSIDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (mark all that apply):
Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant.
Data sheets prepazed/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant.
® This office concurs with the delineation report, dated 04/15/2004, prepared by (company): The LPA Group of
North Carolina
^ This office does not concur with the delineation report, dated , prepazed by (company):
^ Data sheets prepared by the Corps.
Corps' navigable waters' studies:
[] U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
® U.S. Geological Survey 7.5 Minute Topographic maps: Robersonville East
~] U.S. Geological Survey 7.5 Minute Historic quadrangles:
^ U.S. Geological Survey 15 Minute Historic quadrangles:
® USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey: Martin County
National wetlands inventory maps:
^ State/Local wetland inventory maps:
~] FEMA/FIRM maps (Map Name & Date):
100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (NGVD)
[] Aerial Photographs (Name & Date):
Other photographs (Date):
d Advanced Identification Wetland maps:
Site visit/detemvnation conducted on: 04/] 5/2004
Applicable/supporting case law:
Other information (please specify):
'Wetlands are identified and delineated using the methods and criteria established in the Corps Wetland Delineation Manual (87 Manual) (i.e.,
occurrence of hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils and wetland hydrology).
ZThe term "adjacent" means bordering, contiguous, or neighboring. Wetlands separated from other waters of the U.S. by man-made dikes or
barriers, natural river berms, beach dunes, and the like are also adjacent.

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): December 18, 2007
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:Wilmington; Martin County Airport Hangar Area Development
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
State:NC County/parish/borough: Martin City: Everetts
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 35.8625° N, Long. 77.1763° l~~_
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Natne of nearest waterbody: Huskanaw Swamp
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TN W) Into which the aquatic resource flows: Tranters Creek
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): Lower Tar River (HUC#03020103)
® 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 S[TE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Oftice(Desk) Determination. Date: ll/12/07
Field Determination. Date(s): Delineation: 6/23/06 USACE Site Visit: 9/7/2006
SECTION IL• SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Are ~q "navigable waters of the 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 Clow of the tide.
^ Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Ar-e "Haters o/'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): ~
^ TNWs, including territorial seas
^ Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
^ Relatively permanent waters'` (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
[~ 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
Impoundments ofjurisdictional 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: 95 linear feet: 2-3 width (ft) and/or 0.01 acres.
Wetlands: I.5 acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: I'Slts~ 1~~lte~t~ut: I~~d~~~
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):Unknown.
2. Non-regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable):3
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.
Z For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a T'NW and that typically flows year-round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally"
(e.g., typically 3 months).
' Supporting documentation is presented in Section I[[.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.1 and Section Il1.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 III.B below.
1. TNW
Identity TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. 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 III.D.2. if the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section IILD.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`t 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 IILB.I for
the tributary, Section 111.6.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section 111.6.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section III.C below.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: 958.bsquare eloile
Drainage area: Unknown ,F~k~L[s~
Average annual rainfall: Unknown inches
Average annual snowfall: Unknown inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
^ Tributary flows directly into TNW.
® Tributary flows through tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are ~ ~,I) river miles from TNW.
Project waters are 1;~: . ~ ~~ river miles from RPW.
Project waters are 5- ~~,rial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are l~f,~~~kesaj aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identity flow route to TNW': The unnamed drainage ditch at the Airport flows to a unnamed tributary (UT) to Huskanaw
Swamp, to Collie Swamp, to Tranters Creek (TNW).
'Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the arid
West.
s Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to Clow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.

Tributary stream order, if known: First Order.
(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apolyl:
Tributary is: ^ Natural
® Artiticial (man-made). Explain: The non-RPW within the project area serves as a drainage ditch
(excavated in uplands) for the Airport and appears to be a man-made drainage feature.
^ Manipulated (man-altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: 1-2 feet
Average depth: 0.5 feet
Average side slopes: l:l {pi• gret~ter).
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
^ Silts ®Sands ^ Concrete
^ Cobbles ^ Gravel ^ Muck
^ Bedrock ^ Vegetation. Type/% cover:
^ Other. Explain:
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain: The UT is not incised and does not have a
well defined bed and bank.
Presence of run/ritfle/pool complexes. Explain: Run/riffle/pool complexes are not present as the ditch appears to be an
man-made drainage feature.
Tributary geometry: Relatively straight
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): Unknown (very tlat)
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides tor: Ephemet•a1 flow
Estimate average number of tlow events in review area/year: l-S
Describe flow regime: UT appears to provide flow during/after heavy rain events.
Other information on duration and volume: The NCDWQ Stream Identification Forn (Ver. 3.1) was completed for the
non-RPW (attached in Appendix B). The non-RPW scored a 4.5. Based this score, the stream can be identified as ephemeral.
Surface tlow is: Canf[ned. Characteristics: Flow is contined to drainage ditch.
Subsurface tlow: Unknown. Explain tindings:
^ Dye (or other) test pertonned:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
^ Bed and banks
® OHWMe (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):
the presence of litter and debris
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
the presence of wrack line
sediment sorting
scour
multiple observed or predicted tlow events
abrupt change in plant cotntnunity
^ Discontinuous OHWM.' Explain
[f factors other than the OHWM were used to detenn
High Tide Line indicated by:
^ oil or scum line along shore objects
^ fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore)
^ physical markings/characteristics
^ tidal gauges
^ other (list):
ine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
^ survey to available datum;
^ physical markings;
^ vegetation lines/changes in vegetation types.
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
`'A natwal or man-made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily severjurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily tlows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e.g., tlow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
'Ibid.

Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain: Water appeared to be tannic. Addtionally, the USACE Stream Qualtiy Assessment Worksheet was completed
for the non-RPW (Appendix C). Using this form the non-RPW scored a 23 out of a possible 100 points, meaning that the
feature is oflow-quality.
Identify specific pollutants, if known: Unknown.

(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
^ Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width):
^ Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
^ Habitat tor:
^ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
^ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
^ Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
^ Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain tindings:
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:l.5 acres
Wetland type. Explain:Palustrine Forested Wetland.
Wetland quality. Explain: The wetland area is a low quality wetland consiting of an previously clear-cut area that is
in an early stage of succession. The NCDENR Wetland Rating Worksheet score for the wetland was 18 (a copy of the worksheet is
attached in Appendix D).
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non-TNW:
Flow is: Ephemeral flow. Explain: Wetland is indirectly connected to a TN W (Tranters Creek) via the Airport drainage
ditch (non-RPW).
Surface Clow is: Overland st-eBiflo»'
Characteristics: Water within the wetland eventually drains into the Aiport's drainage ditch system. There is not a
defined channel within the wetland area and the water sheet flows to the ditch.
Subsurface Clow: Pfr1: List. Explain tindings:
^ Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adiacency Determination with Non-TNW:
^ Directly abutting
® Not directly abutting
® Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain: Wetland flows into ditch which drains into the Airport
drainage ditch system, which eventually flows into Tranter's Creek.
^ Ecological connection. Explain:
^ Separated by been/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are 3.10 river miles from TNW.
Project waters arc S~t~FI .ierial (straiehtl miles from TNW.
Flow is from: V1'tutKmd #r+ nar~~able ti~ aters.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the SO0-yrrar atc gc'eAter tloodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain: Water appeared to be tannic during the field investigation.
Identity specific pollutants, if known: Unknown.
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
^ Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
® Vegetation type/percent cover. Explain: Wetland is palustrine and provides 100% vegetated coverage (a vegetation list
is provided in the attached wetland datasheets).
^ Habitat tor:
^ Federally Listed species. Explain tindings:
^ Fish/spawn areas. Explain tindings:
^ Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain tindings:
^ Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if an )
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis:
Approximately (1.5) acres in total are being considered in the cwmulative analysis.

For each wetland, specify the following:
Directlv abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directlv abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)
No 1.5
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed: Based on the NCDENR Wetland Rating
Worksheet (Appendix D) the subject wetland provides miminal value for the following functions, water storage, pollutant removal,
wildlife habitat, aquatic life habitat, and recreation/education. A copy of the worksheet is attached.
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
TN Ws, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or Hood waters reaching a TN W?
• 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
tindings of presence or absence of signiticant 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 combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section I[I.D: The non-RPW (drainage ditch) and its adjacent wetlands were detemined to flow
indirectly into Tranters Creek (TNW). The relavent reach for the signifcant nexus determination is shown on Figure 3. When
looking at the system as a whole that is encompassed by the relavent reach a signiticant nexus to TNW was detemined. The
determination was made based on the functions that the system would provide and how they effect the TNW and the watershed as a
whole. The areas adjjcent to (and draining into) the relavent reach contain the Airport, agricultural areas, and scattered rural
residential development. Being that the system is adjacent to agricultural areas and the Airport, both would discharge runoff into
the system. Therefore, the relavant reach would provide important functions relating to removal of nutirents from agricultural
runoff, sediment trapping from runotl' of developed areas, pollutant trapping/tiltration, and flood storage. These functions provided
by the system provide for an 'affect' on the TNW. Being that the system has an 'atfecP on a TNW, by detinition, the system
exhibits a significant nexus to a TNW (Tranters Creek).
3. Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain tindings of
presence or absence of signiticant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to
Section IILD:
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:
TN Ws: 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 tlow year-round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial:
Q Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous tlow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section ll1.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary tlows
seasonally:
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identity type(s) of waters:
3. 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 signiticant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section IILC.
Provide estimates forjurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
® Tributary waters: 95 linear feet 2-3 width (ft).
©~ Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
4. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Q Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus arejurisdictional 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:
Q Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically tlow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section I[LB and rationale in Section I[LD.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW:
Provide acreage estimates forjurisdictional 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 signiticant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section IILC.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
6. Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TN Ws.
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 signiticant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section IILC.
Provide estimates forjurisdictional wetlands in the revie}v area: 1.5 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.

E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA-STATES 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:
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).
(~ Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Q Wetlands: acres.
F. NON-JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Q 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 tinding is required forjurisdiction. Explain:
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).
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 tinding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
Lakes/ponds: acres.
Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
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: Figures 1 and 2 show the location of the
Jurisdictional Areas.
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:
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: Robersonville East 1:50,000.
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:
National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name: NWI Layer viewed on Google Earth.
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 CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.

State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
FEMA/F[RM maps:
100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
Photographs: ®Aerial (Name & Date): 1999 Color IR for NCDOT Website and Google Earth Images.
or ~ Other (Name & Date):
(~ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter: A JD was obtained for another project that impacted the same
wetland system. Action [D: 200510092 Date: 12/8/2004.
Applicable/supporting case law:
Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
Other information (please specify):Site Photos (Appendix A), NCDWQ Stream Identification Form (Appendix B), USACE Stream
Quality Assessment (Appendix C), and the NCDNR Wetland Rating Worksheet (Appendix D) are attached.
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD: Mr. Josh Pelletier of the USACE visited the site on September 7, 2006 and verified
the wetland limits in the field.

0~+-~7~+3 v~z
USACE WETLAND DATASHEETS

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DELINEATION MANUAL
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site' Martin County Airport - Taxilane Project Date• 23-Jun-06
Applicant/Owner: Martin County
Investigator: Edward Smaxl County• Martin
State' NC

Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? No Transact ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? No Plot ID:~e(etland ars
(If needed, explain on reverse.)
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species tratum Indicator Dominant Plant 3aecies Stratum Indicator
1, Smilax glauca Woody Vi ne FAC g,0amunda regalia Herb OBL
?, Persea borbonia Tree FACW 10Qsmunda cinnamomea Herb FACW+
3. Fraxinus caroUniana Tree OBL 11.
4. Quercus nigra Tree FAC 12.
5. Liquidambar styraciflua Tree FAC+ 13.
g• Acer rubrum Tree FAC 14.
?• Pinus taeda Tree FAC 15.
8• Arundinaria gigantea Herb FACW 16.
I Peresnt of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC
(excluding FAC-). 100
Remarks: Hydrophytic vegetation present.
HYt1R[~I A[~Y
No Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
No Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge Yes Inundated
No Aerial Photographs Yes Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
No Other N Water Marks
Yes No Recorded Data Available No Drift Lines
No Sediment Deposits
Ye Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Field Observations: Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
No Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12"
Depth of Surface Water: 4" (in.) No Water-stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 0" (in.) No Local Soil Survey Data
Depth to Saturated Soil: 0" (in.) No FAC-Neutral Test
No ~

Re~marlr@- Wetland hydrology present.
LPA Group, Inc., P.O. Box 5805, Columbia, SC 29250, Tel [phone] Fax [phone]-Nov-07 Page 1 of 2

SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Woodington Drainage Class: Poorly Drained
Typic Paleaq uults Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Confirm Mapped Typed No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color
Horizon Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(inches) (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0.12" 10YR 2N Sandy Loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
No Histosol No Concretions
No Histic Epipedon Yes High Organic Content in Surface Layer of Sandy Soils
No Sulfldic Odor No Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
No Aquic Moisture Regime No Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
No Reducing Conditions No Listed on National Hydric Soils List
N~ Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors ~_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Hydric soil is present.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydric Vegetation Present? Yes
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes
Hydric Soils Present? Yes
Remarks:
Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes
Approved by HQUSACOE 2192
LPA Group, Inc., P.O. Box 5805, Columbia, SC 29250, Tel [phone] Fax [phone]-Nov-07 Page 2 of 2

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DELINEATION MANUAL
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site• Martin County Airport - Taxilane Proiect Date: 23-Jun-06
Appiicant/Owner: Martin County County• Martin
Investigator: Edward Smail State• NC
Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation}? No Transact ID:
is the area a potential Problem Area? No Plot ID: uPt~ND
(If needed, explain on reverse.)
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1, Ilex opaca Tree FAC- g,
Prunus serotina Tree FACU 10.
3. Quercus stellate Tree FACU 11.
4 Liquidambar styraciflua Tree FAC+ 12•
5. Acer rubrum Tree FAC 13.
B. Plnus taeda Tree FAC 14.
7. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC
(excluding FAC-). 50
Remarks: Hydrophytic vegetation is present.
Wvniani nr:v
No Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
No Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge N Inundated
No Aerial Photographs No Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
No Other No Water Marks
Yes No Recorded Data Available No Drift Lines
No Sediment Deposits
No Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Field Observations: Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
No Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12"
Depth of Surface Water: - (in.) No Water-stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: - (in.) No Local Soil Survey Data
Depth to Saturated Soil: - - (in.) No FAC-Neutral Test
No Other I in in R m r
Remarks: Wetland hydrology is not present.
LPA Group, Inc., P.O. Box 5805, Columbia, SC 29250, Tel [phone] Fax [phone]-Nov-07 Page 1 of 2

SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Stallings Drainage Class: SmIVN Poorly Drained
Aeric Paleaquults Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Confirm Mapped Type? Np
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color
Horizon Mottle Colors Mottle Tsxture, Concretions,
(inches) (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structuro, etc.
0-8"" 10YR 3l3 Sandy Loam
8"+ 10YR 4/3 Sandy Loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
No Histosoi No Concretions
No Histic Epipedon No High Organic Content in Surface Layer of Sandy Soils
No Sulfidic Odor No Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
No Aqulc Moisture Regime No Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
No Reducing Conditions No Listed on National Hydric Soils List
~~ Gleyed or Low-Chrome Colors ~~ Other (Explain in Remarks-
Remarks: Hydric soil is not present.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydric Vegetation Present? Yes
Wetland Hydrology Present? No
Hydric Soils Present? No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? No
Remarks: All three wetland criteria are not present, area is upland.
Approved by HQUSACOE 2192
IPA Group, Inc., P.O. Box 5805, Columbia, SC 29250, Tel [phone] Fax [phone]-Nov-07 Page 2 of 2

~'~- 17}3 V2
FIGURES

1 ,\
~, darrove :- _ ~ ~ ,
~, ~ ~ ~~~ ,9~ch t ~' ~ ~ ~i
~ ~ O_' ~~~ c,-~
r,~ ~' "~~~ , -t`~ ~ ~ Cem~ ~ ~ ~zt0 ~~~
- ;~
:~
_;
~ ~ ~ ~ ,
,--
i ~., -- _ _- ~~
lan~l ,
,,
. .
~~
~~ ` _ _
t~ ~~ - ~ ~ s `i x..-19 ~ ~ - - --~ ~ .~ ~.
`~~'' n_
_ i~ U ~ ' -r-r_ ~
( 19,5'... ~ < ~/' \ ~ ~ ~ G ~~ - ~ ~~ ~ , _
~: ~ ~ / ~- l
i -~~ T
~ ,v
,c ll .. ,
,~~~ _._ -- % I ~-- ` ' ` ------ MARTIN COUNTY - _
- - ~ ~ ~, ~~~~~~~,~~~~' "~~' AIRPORT ,~" I
~ ~~
.~ I ~ ~ `~~ ~ ~~-~~ ~ PROJECT SITE
>~~ I ,
~; r~ ~ ~~, ~~~~-- ,~ - =
l . r;. .
/ i ~"'
i ~ -~ `~ /' / ~' + Wilson Cl~a 1 `
I
:;.=~ --
;,
___ '~:- S ;,/ ~ ~Z ~~ X20---.-...1 ~,,
r ~ ~- r
n.
r ~ ~,.~ '~. i so ,
,~ r , ~ ~~ ~ ~' r-
u, ,
_~ ~ ~-
__ `
~~ J _''`~ C\ ~ _
t ?i / ~ ~-n~''~.- ~~ ~;a+'SI Marks ~ . /~~ t
~ t ~ ~ t ~\ i Y~ ~~ ~r Ch J~! ~ '
1 _ 1
(;~ ''~. , ;~ -"% North YAeretts _
/ ~~
,~~ ~
i ~ _
_ ~
ii ~ ~~
_ ~-
~~ ~ - x1 5 ' ~ - Litt' of th! al~ev ,*,:~'' ern ~ ~;
~h ~:
~ ~ ; <~~
„- ~-
t ,, ~ ~ ~ _ ~. / - ~ l~~~ !~ u-~ ~r AA
- r!'v'- t ~ ~ ~~ ~~ CeM~ ~~
~ '~i' ~ - ~~ i ~ 't ~~ ~~ Y 1. _ - V.J. Tt`
_. . ~. ~ 1 -~-- 7i 20 o T n 6~ r
,~ ~
_. t
` L ~' `LC-- J , /,~, n~d~em ~I `~,
~_ ~.
- --- ~ -
'_- ~. a~r--= ` Iii ~-'1~,' •~i, LVC ~ _ _~ i
i
µ THEL~ MARTIN COUNTY AIRPORT Dole
LPA _ _ ~ -- - --- -- =- Dec. 2007
GROUP= = Han ar Area Develo ment -Section 404/401
TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS Figure No.
5ee° ~a~~= o, Neuse Ro~a s~~~e }°° U S G S VICINITY MAP ~
Raieign, Norlti Caroi'ina 2~e09

~/ \
~ P
/ bl ~
~ i 0 75' 150' 300'
. __~
SEGEMENTED CIRCLE GRAPHIC SCALE BAR
w/ WIND SOCK
RUNWAY 3-21

.l
t'~` '
I (/1
~l ~ /I
UV ~;
~, ~.
~ ~
t t O r~
rA
~ ;~
~.
%.
BEACON
NDB
r--
JURISDICTIONAL 1
AIRFIELD DRAINAGE
DITCH - .O1 AC.
HANGAR ,-~
-- ~ i
i.
'i.
'/. '/.
/. '/. '/.
- - - - =f.-=f-.-. = s~ . - - -
/.//.~'//./. ./.~"//.~'// I
/ / ~ / / ~ / I
/ ~ / ~ I
/ ~ / /
STUDY AREA
LIMITS
DANIEL E. CLARK
ET ALS
D.B. V-15 PG. 362
FORESTED WETLANDS
APPROX. - 1.5 AC.
LPAL~ MARTIN COUNTY AIRPORT ~Dec.2007
GROUP - - ~ Han ar Area Develo ment -Section 404/401
TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS Figure No.
5°°°Fall°u,N°°°eN°°a.5°~,°,°. EXISTING CONDITIONS Z
ftolelg~, Narlft Carolina 2]609

FIGURE 3
SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
RELEVANT REACH
The Relevant Reach that was used for the Significant Nexus Determination is shown above in red.

APPENDIX A
SITE PHOTOGRAPHS

MARTIN COUNTY AIRPORT
HANGAR AREA DEVELOPMENT
... ~. ,. ,
h~ }
~ ° ~~
h
> ~
~;.'h }~~ 'k; ..~~.
!a ~.
s t. 1~.
~ ~i

y ,'su
,a . z.,
: ~ . ~.
w +s
' ;
r r
~ •'9'
• °" edldu.~i..n~J~~ . .. ~ 1 .. N"... ',
r ~ ...~, ii aP p~':.~aezl+!' ~F~.. ~.. ~~~i'W'.~,1
..
Photo 1. Looking north at the project area.
lj ~. J "r T }~s ,c ~ C
.~~ _ ~v",
e ~~'
Photo 2. Wetland A/B.

1~ ,, .
... ~. .
.~ ,...
~ ~ .,
~..
I h L
~~~~
w,. * z e p. f 4 ~ 4
y~~{,/yam. .~1 1
'~ ~ r 4. ,
y'n FF r
4 ~ ~ ; ~h
Photo 3. Ditch flowing out of Wetland A/B.
~~.
d °~' i
`k'S SZr t7 II 5~~1, 1,(' - ~~.~ i/ `y+ ~ I,P~~, y+Q'.5~~yy •~..5 ~~, yY~ yr~,, *r ~$ ~
~'~'~ tia 1'r y~.d .v ~ dot ;~=,t ,,4 ~,+~ { ~, ~ ~ ! ~ 'i
.~
Photo 4. Where ditch connects to Wetland A/B (via pipe under grassed area).
. ~~ , ,
;~
?~
t''
+. ~ ,,.
k t L ~Y,
l

~,
~ ., f. ~:
F " ' '~~ _ ~ ~' '~'g
~ '~~~~. r - ~ ~ ~.
ar -` S
,.~
~~ s
Photo 5. Looking north at downstream portion of ditch (outside of project area).

off-- 1~~}3 V~
APPENDIX B
NCDWQ STREAM IDENTIFICATION FORM (V. 3.1)

North Carolina Division of Water Quality -Stream Identification Form; Version 3.1
Datr. 6/23/06 Project: Hangar Area DevelopmentLatitude:35.8625 Deg. N
Evaluator. Ed Smail 81t®~Martin Co. Airport Longitude: 77.1763 Deg. W
Total Points: OthK
Sdeamisatieastintem-ittent 4.5 County: Martin
ill 19 or rennial it a 30 e.g. Quad Name: Robersonville E.
A. Geomo hol Subtotal = 1 Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1'. Continuous bed and bank 0 1 2 3
2. Sinuosity 1 2 3
3. In-channel structure: riffle-pool sequence 0 1 2 3
4. Soil bxture or stream substrate sorting 0 1 2 3
5. Active/relic floodplain 0 1 2 3
6. Depositional bars or benches 0 1 2 3
7. Braided channel 0 1 2 3
8. Recent alluvial deposits 0 1 2 3
9' Natural levees 0 1 2 3
10. Headcuts 1 2 3
11. Grade controls 0 0.5 1 1.5
12. Natural valley or drainageway 0 0.5 1 1.5
13. Second or greater order channel on existing
USGS or NRCS map or other documented
evidence.
No = 0
Yes = 3
-Man-made ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B_ Hvdroloav (Subtotal = 3 ~
14. Groundwater flow/discharge 0 1 2 3
15. Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain, g~
Water in channel -- d or rowin season 0 1 2 3
16. Leaflitter 1.5 1 0.5 0
17. Sediment on plants or debris 0 0.5 1 1.5
18.Organic debris lines or piles (Wrack lines) 0 0.5 1 1.5
19. Hydric soils (redoximorphic features) present? No = 0 Yes = 1.5
C. Bioloav (Subtotal = 0.5 ~
2 .Fibrous roots in channel 3 2 1 0
21 . Rooted plants in channel 3 2 1 0
22. Crayfish 0 0.5 1 1.5
23. Bivalves 0 1 2 3
24. Fish 0 0.5 1 1.5
25. Amphibians ~, 0.5 1 1.5
26. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance) 0 0.5 1 1.5
27. Filamentous algae; periphyton 0 1 2 3
28. Iron oxidizing bacteria/fungus. _Q_ 0.5 1 1.5
29 . Wetland plants in streambed FAC = 0.5; FACW = 0.75; OBL =1.5 SAV = 2.0; Other = 0
items to and z ~ torus on the presence or upland plarrts, Item 29 focuses on the presence of aquatic or wetland plants.
Notes: (use back side of this form for additional notes.)
Feature is a drainage ditch at the Martin County Airport. It
Sketch:
provides a hydrologic connection between onsite wetlands
and traditional navigable waters downstream.

APPENDIX C
USACE STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

USACE AID# DWQ # Site # (indicate on attached map)
;,~,; STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET ,~:~
r..i: :'
Provide the following informstioa for the stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: Martin County Airport 2. Evaluator's name: Ed Smail
3. Date of evaluation: 6/23/06 4. Time of evaluation: AM
5. Name of stream: Unnamed 6. River basin: Tar River
7. Approximate drainage area: 8. Stream order: First
9. Length of reach evaluated: 10. County: Martin
11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees. 12. Subdivision name (if any):
Latitude (ex. 34.872312): 35.8625 Deg. N Longitude (ex. -77.55661 t): 77.1763 Deg. W
Method location determined (circle): GPS Topo Sheet Ortho (Aerial) Photo/GIS Other GIS Other
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
Reach is at the Martin County Airport, located approximately 750 feet north of the existing hangar building.
14. Proposed channel work (if any): Culvert
15. Recent weather conditions: Rain
16. Site conditions at time of visit: Flow was evident due to recent rain
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: -Section 10 -Tidal Waters -Essential Fisheries Habitat
-Trout Waters -Outstanding Resource Waters _ Nutrient Sensitive Waters -Water Supply Watershed (I-IV)
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES NO If yes, estimate the water surface azea:
19. Does channel appeaz on USGS quad map? YES NO 20. Does channel appeaz on USDA Soil Survey? YES NO
21. Estimated watershed land use: 5 % Residential 5 % Commercial _% Industrial ~ % Agricultural
~% Forested _% Cleared /Logged _% Other ( )
22. Bankfull width: 2-3 feet 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): Not evident
24. Channel slope down center of stream: X Flat (0 to 2%) -Gentle (2 to 4%) -Moderate (4 to 10%) -Steep (>10%)
25. Channel sinuosity: X Straight -Occasional bends -Frequent meander -Very sinuous _Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points
to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a
chazacteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section. Where there ate obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 23 Comments:
Evaluator's Signature / / Date ~ ~/~
This channel evaluation form is inten o ens n as a guide to assist landowners and envir menbl professionals in
gathering the data required by the Un ed States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
gaality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form i$ subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change -version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

o ~- - I'I ~} 3 V Z
APPENDIX D
NCDENR WETLAND RATING WORKSHEET

.A i
WETLAND RATING WORKSHEET Fourth Version
Project Name Martin Co. Airport Taxilane Construction Nearest Road Airport Road
County Martin Wetland area t.5 acres Wetland width 3so feet
Name of evaluator Ed Smail
Date 6/23/06
Wetland location
_ on pond or lake
_ on perennial stream
_ on intermittent stream
_ within interstream divide
X other: Forested non-riparian wetland
Soil series• Woodington
X predominantly organic -humus, muck, or
peat
predominantly mineral -non-sandy
predominantly sandy
Iiydranlic factors
_ steep topography
_ ditched or channelized
X total wetland width > 100 feet
Adjacent land use
(within % mile upstream, upslope, or radius)
_ forested/natural vegetation
_ agriculture, urban/suburban
-impervious surface
Dominant vegetation
(1) Pinus taeda
(2) Liquidambar styraciflua
(3) Acer rubrum
Flooding and wetness
_ semipermanently to permanently flooded or
inundated
X seasonally flooded or inundated
_ intermittently flooded or temporary surface water
no evidence of flooding or surface water
Wetland type (select one)"
_ Bottomland hardwood forest
_ Headwater forest
_ Swamp forest
_ Wet flat
_ Pocosin
_ Bog forest
_ Pine savanna
_ Freshwater marsh
_ Bog/fen
Ephemeral wetland
Cazolina bay
X Other: Palustrine forested wetland
' The rating system cannot be applied to salt or brackish marshes or stream channels
R Water storage 1 x 4.00 =
A Bank/Shoreline stabilization 0 x 4.00 = ~ W~~n°d
~ T Pollutant removal 1 #' x 5.00 = ~ - _ . ' s
I Wildlife habitat ~ x 2.00 = ® ~`
~ ::~
N Aquatic life value 1 x 4.00 = ® ,~ ~, :;
G Recreation/Education 1 x 1.00 =
* * Add 1 point if in sensitive watershed and > 10'/o nonpoint source disturbance within %s mile upstream, upslope, or radius